The Quake-Catcher Network Rapid Aftershock Mobilization Program Following the 2010 M 8.8 Maule, Chile Earthquake

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America

Kaiser

et al. 2015

Immediately following the M w 7.2 Darfield, New Zealand, earthquake, over 180 Quake-Catcher Network (QCN) low-cost micro-electro-mechanical systems accelerometers were deployed in the Canterbury region. Using data recorded by this dense network from 2010 to 2013, we significantly improved the QCN rapid magnitude estimation relationship. The previous scaling relationship (Lawrence et al., 2014) did not accurately estimate the magnitudes of nearby (< 35 km) events. The new scaling relationship estimates earthquake magnitudes within 1 magnitude unit of the GNS Science GeoNet earthquake catalog magnitudes for 99% of the events tested, within 0.5 magnitude units for 90% of the events, and within 0.25 magnitude units for 57% of the events. These magnitudes are reliably estimated within 3 s of the initial trigger recorded on at least seven stations. In this report, we present the methods used to calculate a new scaling relationship and demonstrate the accuracy of the revised magnitude estimates using a program that is able to retrospectively estimate event magnitudes using archived data.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improved Rapid Magnitude Estimation for a Community‐Based, Low‐Cost MEMS Accelerometer Network

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America

Kaiser

et al. 2015

show abstract

“…Further details of the earthquake location algorithm are available in Chung et al (2011). Figure 3 shows the correlation between the estimated travel times and the observed travel times for the 21 February 2011 M 6.3 earthquake.…”

Section: Rapid Earthquake Detectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…New sensor technology and computational techniques provide an avenue for creating very large cyber-social-seismic networks by reducing instrument costs, minimizing needed infrastructure, and harnessing public interest. Small low-cost ($30-$3000) microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) triaxial sensors provide ground-acceleration measurements of moderate to large earthquakes (Cochran, Lawrence, Christensen, and Chung, 2009;Cochran, Lawrence, Christensen, and Jakka, 2009;Chung et al, 2011;Cochran et al, 2011). Data from these low-cost sensors are transmitted to a central server either through an Internetconnected computer or via any available wireless connection (Luetgert et al, 2009;Cochran, Lawrence, Christensen, and Chung, 2009;Cochran, Lawrence, Christensen, and Jakka, 2009;Clayton et al, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rapid Earthquake Characterization Using MEMS Accelerometers and Volunteer Hosts Following the M 7.2 Darfield, New Zealand, Earthquake

Lawrence

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America

et al. 2014

Self Cite

We test the feasibility of rapidly detecting and characterizing earthquakes with the Quake-Catcher Network (QCN) that connects low-cost microelectromechanical systems accelerometers to a network of volunteer-owned, Internet-connected computers. Following the 3 September 2010 M 7.2 Darfield, New Zealand, earthquake we installed over 180 QCN sensors in the Christchurch region to record the aftershock sequence. The sensors are monitored continuously by the host computer and send trigger reports to the central server. The central server correlates incoming triggers to detect when an earthquake has occurred. The location and magnitude are then rapidly estimated from a minimal set of received ground-motion parameters. Full seismic time series are typically not retrieved for tens of minutes or even hours after an event. We benchmark the QCN real-time detection performance against the GNS Science GeoNet earthquake catalog. Under normal network operations, QCN detects and characterizes earthquakes within 9.1 s of the earthquake rupture and determines the magnitude within 1 magnitude unit of that reported in the GNS catalog for 90% of the detections. IntroductionOver the past decade, several cyber-social-seismic networks have been developed, including the Personal Seismic Network (Cranswick et al., 1993), NetQuakes (Luetgert et al., 2009), the Quake-Catcher Network (QCN; Cochran, Lawrence, Christensen, and Chung, 2009;Cochran, Lawrence, Christensen, and Jakka, 2009), and the Community Seismic Network (Clayton et al., 2011). New sensor technology and computational techniques provide an avenue for creating very large cyber-social-seismic networks by reducing instrument costs, minimizing needed infrastructure, and harnessing public interest. Small low-cost ($30-$3000) microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) triaxial sensors provide ground-acceleration measurements of moderate to large earthquakes (Cochran, Lawrence, Christensen, and Chung, 2009;Cochran, Lawrence, Christensen, and Jakka, 2009;Chung et al., 2011;Cochran et al., 2011). Data from these low-cost sensors are transmitted to a central server either through an Internetconnected computer or via any available wireless connection (Luetgert et al., 2009;Cochran, Lawrence, Christensen, and Chung, 2009;Cochran, Lawrence, Christensen, and Jakka, 2009;Clayton et al., 2011). These networks minimize the costs associated with monitoring the sensors by utilizing the host's computing resources, A/C power, Internet, and shelter (Luetgert et al., 2009;Cochran, Lawrence, Christensen, and Chung, 2009;Cochran, Lawrence, Christensen, and Jakka, 2009;Clayton et al., 2011).The QCN represents one type of cyber-social-seismic network. In the QCN architecture, MEMS sensors are connected directly to Universal Serial Bus (USB) ports on a host's computer; the computer monitors the sensor and sends time series and ground-motion parameters to a central server. This is a low-cost paradigm compared to traditional sensor networks and even other cyber-social-seismic networks such as the NetQ...

show abstract

“…1a) that are installed and hosted by volunteers. In addition, several targeted rapid aftershock deployments have been initiated by QCN including the 2010 M w 8.8 Maule, Chile, earthquake (Chung et al, 2011) and the M w 7.1 Darfield, New Zealand, earthquake (Cochran et al, 2012;Lawrence et al, 2014). Following the 3 September 2010, M w 7.1 Darfield earthquake, the QCN real-time detection system was quickly implemented and began to detect earthquakes beginning on 25 September 2010 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the Reliability of Quake-Catcher Network Earthquake Detections

Yildirim

Seismological Research Letters

et al. 2015

Self Cite