Earthquake P- and S-waves, why does their speed matter?

Earthquakes, one of nature’s most formidable phenomena, can cause widespread destruction within seconds. However, advancements in seismology have led to the development of Earthquake Early Warning (EEW) systems, providing precious seconds to minutes of warning before the shaking starts. The key to these warnings lies in the understanding of P-waves and S-waves generated by earthquakes and their speeds.

The Speed of P-waves and S-waves

When an earthquake occurs, it releases energy in the form of seismic waves, primarily P-waves (Primary waves) and S-waves (Secondary waves). P-waves, being the fastest, travel through both solid and liquid layers of the Earth at speeds ranging from about 5 to 7 kilometers per second (km/s) in the Earth’s crust, and 8 to 13 km/s in the mantle. S-waves, on the other hand, only move through solids and are slower, with speeds of about 3 to 4 km/s in the crust and 4.5 to 7.5 km/s in the mantle.

The Importance of Speed Difference

The speed difference between P-waves and S-waves is crucial for Earthquake Early Warning systems. P-waves, although less destructive, reach sensors first, providing a brief window of time before the more damaging S-waves arrive. This time gap can vary depending on the distance from the earthquake’s epicenter. The closer one is to the epicenter, the shorter the warning time, due to the smaller gap between the arrival times of P-waves and S-waves.

Proximity to the Epicenter and Warning Time

For those located very close to the earthquake epicenter, the warning time may be minimal or non-existent. This is because the S-waves, responsible for most of the shaking and damage, follow closely behind the P-waves. In such scenarios, every second of warning can be critical for taking protective actions, such as dropping to the ground, taking cover under a sturdy piece of furniture, and holding on until the shaking stops.

The Blind Zone Challenge

A significant challenge for regional seismic network-based EEW systems is the “blind zone.” This area, typically within 10 to 20 kilometers of the epicenter, may receive little to no warning before shaking starts. The reason is that it takes time for the seismic waves to be detected by the network, processed, and then relayed as a warning to the affected area.

On-site Earthquake Early Warning Systems

To address the blind zone issue, on-site EEW systems have been developed. These systems are installed at individual locations, such as buildings or infrastructure facilities, and can detect P-waves directly, providing immediate local warnings. While they may not offer extensive lead times, they can be especially effective in near-epicenter areas where regional EEW systems struggle to provide timely alerts.

Conclusion

Understanding the dynamics of P-waves and S-waves and their implications for early warning systems is essential in mitigating earthquake risks. While the difference in speed between these waves offers a crucial, albeit brief, window for action, challenges such as the blind zone necessitate innovative solutions like on-site EEW systems. As technology advances, the goal is to extend the warning times and reduce the impact of earthquakes, safeguarding communities and saving lives in the process.

Electro Servo Motors or Linear Motors for Shake Tables: Choosing the Right Technology

In the realm of shake tables, used predominantly for vibration testing and simulations, two main types of electric motors come into play: servo motors and linear motors. A servo motor is a rotary actuator that allows for precise control of angular position, velocity, and acceleration. It consists of a suitable motor coupled to a sensor for position feedback. Servo motors are well-suited to a wide range of automation applications.

On the other hand, linear motors stand out due to their ability to directly convert electrical energy into linear motion without requiring any intermediate conversion from rotational motion. This direct-drive mechanism results in a plethora of advantages, particularly for shake tables which demand high fidelity and precision.

Linear motors are heralded as the most advanced technology in shake table systems due to their exceptional performance characteristics:

  1. Unmatched Acceleration and Velocity: With their direct-drive design, linear motors achieve unparalleled acceleration and velocity, surpassing that of servo motors. This capability is crucial for tests necessitating rapid motion or high-frequency vibrations.
  2. Minimal Maintenance Demands: The design of linear motors inherently involves fewer moving components compared to servo motors, translating to reduced maintenance needs and an extended operational lifespan.
  3. Quieter, Smoother Operation: Linear motors operate with significantly less noise and vibration. This is especially advantageous for tests where external noise or vibration could contaminate results.
  4. Supreme Precision and Accuracy: The precision control afforded by linear motors is essential for high-precision testing scenarios, offering superior repeatability and accuracy over servo motors.
  5. Enhanced Energy Efficiency: By eliminating the need for gearboxes and other mechanical components, linear motors are not only less complex but also more energy-efficient, reducing energy loss during operation.

Despite these advantages, there are considerations to keep in mind when opting for linear motors, such as initial costs, installation complexity, and the typically lower torque capabilities relative to servo motors. However, when advanced technology and performance are paramount, the investment in linear motors can be justified.

At the forefront of this technological revolution is QuakeLogic, which proudly offers state-of-the-art ironcore shake tables powered by linear motors. These tables represent the zenith of testing precision and reliability. A testament to their superiority, QuakeLogic’s latest installation at CALTECH underscores the confidence that leading research institutions place in linear motor technology for their complex and critical testing needs.

For detailed information on the iron-core shake table equipped with linear motors, please click HERE.

Reach us at sales@quakelogic.net for questions or queries.

Unveiling the Seismic Shadows: Which District of Istanbul Will Shake the Most?

Istanbul, straddling two continents, is not just a city of unparalleled historical and cultural wealth but also one that lives in the shadow of a significant seismic threat. The North Anatolian Fault (NAF), a major source of earthquakes in the region, skirts to the south and east of this vibrant metropolis, placing it at a heightened risk of seismic activity. But in a city so vast, the question arises: which district of Istanbul will bear the brunt of such an inevitable shake?

The sequence of westerly propagating ten large (M>6.7) earthquakes on the North Anatolian Fault Zone and the seismic gap in the Sea of Marmara close to Istanbul is an indication of a large earthquake.

The Epicenter of Concern: The Riskiest Districts

Historical data and seismic studies indicate that the districts closest to the North Anatolian Fault zone beneath the Marmara Sea, especially those on the city’s European side, are more vulnerable. Our most recent study (Kalkan and Gulkan, 2024) indicates that Istanbul’s western shoreline faces heightened risk, with median spectral accelerations at 0.3 s approaching 1 g, signifying intense shaking potential. Among these, Adalar, Bakırköy, Avcılar, and Zeytinburnu stand out as areas that might experience the most intense shaking. These districts, with their dense populations and structures, many of which were built before modern seismic standards were implemented, could face significant impacts in the event of a major earthquake.

The figure above shows close-up to peak ground acceleration (PGA) estimates for the Istanbul metropolitan area considering six earthquake scenarios. The median computed PGA­­ is 0.65 g along the shoreline to the west of Istanbul (Bakırkoy district) and at Marmara Islands (Adalar district) as a result of multiple rupturing of Off-Tekirdağ, Mid-Marmara, and Islands faults.

The Science of Shaking: Understanding the Risk

Seismic risk is not only about proximity to the fault line but also about the ground beneath. Areas built on softer, sedimentary layers, such as parts of Avcilar, Atakoy, and Bakırköy amplify seismic waves, leading to more intense shaking compared to those on more solid rock. This geological variability across Istanbul means that the impact of an earthquake can differ dramatically, even within short distances.

Preparedness: The Key to Resilience

While the threat is significant, the focus now is on resilience and preparedness. Istanbul’s government and various organizations are working tirelessly to retrofit vulnerable buildings, improve emergency response systems, and educate the public about earthquake preparedness. Efforts are particularly concentrated in the high-risk districts, aiming to minimize the impact when the inevitable occurs.

Conclusion: A City Bracing for Its Future

As Istanbul faces its seismic future, understanding the areas at greatest risk is crucial for safeguarding its residents and heritage. While many districts along its shoreline may be more vulnerable, city-wide efforts to enhance resilience are a testament to Istanbul’s determination to protect its people and preserve its legacy against the forces of nature.

Engage with Us

Are you from Istanbul or have experiences related to earthquakes in the city? Reach us at info@quakelogic.net