Choosing the Right Seismometer: Why One Size Doesn’t Fit All

Seismology and geophysical monitoring cover an enormous frequency spectrum — from the fast, high-frequency vibrations of a blast or building resonance to the slow “hum” of Earth itself. No single seismic sensor can capture this entire range with equal fidelity. That’s why different instruments exist, each optimized for a specific corner frequency, bandwidth, and application.

In this article, we explore when to use sensors with response corners at 4.5 Hz, 1 s, 2 s, 10 s, 30 s, 60 s, 120 s, and ultra-long 360 s, highlighting their strengths, weaknesses, and specific use cases. We also explain why one sensor cannot be used universally across all monitoring needs.


Quick Comparison of Seismic Sensors

Sensor TypeFrequency Range (Approx.)ProsConsTypical Applications
4.5 Hz Geophone4.5 Hz – 100+ HzLow cost, rugged, portable, sensitive to high frequenciesPoor at long-period (>1 s), limited dynamic rangeEarthquake engineering, structural monitoring, induced seismicity, aftershocks, MASW/ReMi, site surveys
1 s Sensor1 Hz – 50 HzGood compromise between local & regional coverage, handles ambient noiseLimited for very long-period (>30 s)Regional seismicity, volcano monitoring, EEW, ambient noise tomography, extended ReMi
2 s Sensor0.5 Hz – 50 HzCaptures regional & surface waves up to ~50 s, cost-effectiveInsufficient for very long-period (>100 s)Regional networks, subduction monitoring, passive seismic surveys
10 s Broadband0.1 Hz – 50 HzVersatile, reliable for most teleseismic and regional studiesCannot resolve very long-period oscillations (>120 s)National seismic networks, crustal/mantle imaging, hazard assessment
30 s Broadband0.03 Hz – 50 HzExtends into long-period surface wavesMore noise-sensitive, higher costGlobal seismology, tomography, moment tensor inversions
60 s Broadband0.016 Hz – 50 HzExcellent for large earthquake teleseisms, free oscillationsOverkill for regional/local studies, needs quiet vaultsGlobal networks, nuclear test monitoring
120 s Broadband0.008 Hz – 50 HzFull-spectrum coverage, ideal for global networksExpensive, requires special installationGSN stations, large earthquake research, planetary seismology
360 s Ultra-Broadband0.003 Hz – 50 HzCaptures Earth’s hum, seismic tides, geodynamicsNiche, very noise-sensitive, costlyGeodynamic observatories, tidal studies, climate-related mass transport

4.5 Hz Sensors (Short-Period Geophones)

When to use:

  • Local earthquake detection (within tens of kilometers).
  • Engineering and structural health monitoring.
  • Microseismicity, quarry or mine blasts.
  • Geophysical testing (MASW, ReMi, refraction/reflection).

Pros:

  • Rugged, portable, and low cost.
  • High sensitivity to high-frequency ground motions (>5 Hz).
  • Excellent for near-field strong-motion recording.

Cons/Limitations:

  • Poor sensitivity below ~1 Hz, cannot capture long-period seismic waves.
  • Unsuitable for regional and global/teleseismic events.
  • Limited dynamic range compared to broadband instruments.

Typical Applications:

  • Earthquake engineering, dam or bridge monitoring, induced seismicity, aftershock arrays.
  • Geophysical surveys such as MASW (Multichannel Analysis of Surface Waves for shallow Vs profiles), ReMi (Refraction Microtremor passive site characterization), and seismic refraction/reflection studies.

1 s Sensors

When to use:

  • Regional seismicity (hundreds of kilometers).
  • Strong-motion networks where both local and regional signals matter.
  • Volcano and microseismic monitoring.
  • Urban geophysical studies using ambient noise.

Pros:

  • Balanced response between short-period and moderate-period signals.
  • Captures both body waves and surface waves up to ~20–30 s.
  • Suitable for passive array surveys (extended ReMi, microtremor analysis).

Cons/Limitations:

  • Insufficient for very long-period (>30 s) surface waves.
  • Less sensitive to teleseisms than true broadband sensors.

Typical Applications:

  • Regional earthquake catalogs, EEW systems, volcano observatories.
  • Ambient noise tomography, urban microzonation, extended ReMi studies for deeper shear-wave velocity profiling.

2 s Sensors

When to use:

  • Regional to teleseismic earthquakes.
  • Arrays where both body and surface waves are important.
  • Cost-sensitive networks needing extended bandwidth.

Pros:

  • Wider bandwidth than 1 s, capable of recording surface waves up to ~50 s.
  • Good compromise between cost and performance.

Cons/Limitations:

  • Not sufficient for very long-period (>100 s) phenomena.
  • Still more noise-sensitive than longer-period broadband sensors.

Typical Applications:

  • Regional seismic monitoring, tectonic studies, subduction zone networks.
  • Passive seismic surveys requiring both regional and long-period information.

10 s Sensors

When to use:

  • General-purpose broadband seismic networks.
  • Regional and teleseismic earthquake detection.

Pros:

  • Industry standard broadband response.
  • Sensitive to both surface and body waves.
  • Reliable and versatile for many applications.

Cons/Limitations:

  • Cannot resolve very long-period (>120 s) free oscillations.

Typical Applications:

  • National networks, crustal imaging, mantle tomography.
  • Earthquake source characterization and hazard assessment.

30 s Sensors

When to use:

  • Long-period surface wave studies.
  • Subduction and mantle structure investigations.
  • Broadband observatories.

Pros:

  • Extends useful response to long-period surface waves.
  • Stable in low-noise environments.

Cons/Limitations:

  • Higher cost and more complex installation.
  • Susceptible to cultural and wind noise.

Typical Applications:

  • Tomography, global seismology, moment tensor inversion.

60 s Sensors

When to use:

  • Large earthquake teleseisms.
  • Long-period mantle and core phase recordings.

Pros:

  • Excellent for large-magnitude earthquakes.
  • Sensitive to Earth’s free oscillations.

Cons/Limitations:

  • Over-engineered for local or regional seismic monitoring.
  • Requires very quiet installation sites.

Typical Applications:

  • Global seismic networks, nuclear test monitoring, Earth structure studies.

120 s Sensors

When to use:

  • Global seismology, full spectrum earthquake monitoring.
  • Earth’s free oscillations and tidal studies.

Pros:

  • Covers almost the entire seismological band (0.008–50 Hz).
  • Critical for large, distant earthquakes.

Cons/Limitations:

  • Expensive, complex, vault installation needed.
  • Not practical for engineering-scale or high-frequency studies.

Typical Applications:

  • GSN (Global Seismographic Network), Earth structure research, planetary seismology.

360 s Sensors (Ultra-Long-Period Broadband)

When to use:

  • Recording Earth’s “hum” and seismic tides.
  • Geodynamic monitoring of slow, long-period processes.

Pros:

  • Extends response into tidal and ultra-long-period bands.
  • Captures signals invisible to conventional broadband sensors.

Cons/Limitations:

  • Highly sensitive to environmental noise.
  • Costly and niche, requiring ultra-quiet observatory conditions.

Typical Applications:

  • Geodynamics, glacial isostatic adjustment, climate-related mass transport studies.

Why One Sensor Can’t Do It All

  1. Frequency Trade-Offs: A sensor tuned for high-frequency microseismic signals cannot also detect Earth tides and free oscillations.
  2. Dynamic Range: Instruments designed for small ambient noise may clip during strong shaking.
  3. Installation & Cost: Ultra-broadband sensors need expensive vaults and isolation, while geophones are portable and inexpensive.
  4. Application-Specific Needs: Engineering, geophysics, regional monitoring, and global seismology each demand different spectral coverage.

Conclusion

The “best” seismic sensor depends on what you want to measure.

  • 4.5 Hz geophones dominate in engineering seismology, structural monitoring, MASW, ReMi, and site investigations.
  • 1–2 s sensors bridge the gap for regional seismicity and passive geophysical surveys.
  • 10–120 s broadband sensors are the backbone of national and global seismic networks.
  • 360 s ultra-broadband sensors are specialized tools for studying Earth’s slowest processes.

Seismology is broadband by nature, but practice demands choosing the right tool for the job.

At QuakeLogic, our experts can help you for selecting the right seismometer for your application.

To explore our range of seismometers, visit us at https://products.quakelogic.net/seismometers/

AGING DAMS, CLIMATE CHANGE AND EARTHQUAKES – HOW CAN MONITORING HELP TO PREVENT DISASTERS?

Devastating climate change, including killer heat waves and severe flooding, adversely affects the infrastructures our communities rely on. Dams in particular become increasingly more vulnerable to climate change due to aging. Rapidly rising water levels and frequent floods add extra stress to dams, reservoirs and waterways, pushing them to their design limits. A failure to upgrade dams in response to deterioration in structural health may result in a catastrophic impact on the people and environment.

The most recent examples are the failed Edenville and Sanford Dams in Midland, Michigan due to rapidly rising waters after days of heavy rain. The collapsed Edenville Dam, constructed in 1924, was rated in unsatisfactory condition in 2018, while the Sanford Dam, which was built in 1925, was given a fair condition rating by the State.

In 2017, major flooding from the damaged Oroville Dam in Northern California forced the evacuation of nearly 200,000 Californians. The Oroville Dam was completed in 1968, toward the end of the golden era of dam construction. This was a wakeup call for owners of aging dams across the country, as climate change continues to add stress to these structures.

California has additional challenges due to active earthquake faults, including the Hayward and San Andreas faults, which scientists predict are due for a large earthquake. Among the dams now considered to be at risk are the Anderson Dam and the Calaveras Dam, both close to fault lines in Silicon Valley. According to the NY Times, California’s most troubled large dam is at Lake Isabella. This dam was built on the Kern River near Bakersfield by the Army Corps of Engineers in the 1950’s on what was thought to be an inactive fault. However, this fault has been active since then.

Another major threat to dams is scouring. Numerous aging dams have experienced severe erosion of their unlined spillways. This erosion can lead to damage and even failure of dams and consequently can threaten public safety, properties, infrastructure and the wider local environment.

There are a number of unfortunate examples of dams failing due to earthquakes, flooding or scouring where early signs of deficiencies might have been detected if a proper structural health monitoring (SHM) system had been in place.

Introducing SMARTDAM

QuakeLogic is the only company using a cloud-based, AI-powered technology platform to perform continuous, autonomous assessments using data from sensors on the dam structure.

QuakeLogic’s Sensor data Management, Assessment and Repository Technology (SMART) platform transforms a dangerous, aging dam into a SMART dam able to alert officials to critical deterioration. It also significantly reduces needed search and inspection efforts following any seismic or other impact event such as settlement, scouring, etc.

The SMART platform integrates manually and digitally read sensor recordings into a fully automated unified monitoring system. It facilitates the acquisition and analysis of critical sensor data needed by the dam operators for proper operation and maintenance, and most importantly, for the safety assessment of the dam. It routinely collects, organizes and evaluates sensor data, and sends immediate notifications with ACTION PLANS upon exceedance of programmed thresholds, generating PDF reports regularly and on-demand.

The SMART platform is a cutting-edge system that works with various types of sensors such as accelerometers, tiltmeters, potentiometers, strain gauges, thermocouples, weather stations, piezometers and seepage monitors. Comprehensive analytic information is visible in real-time on the mobile-friendly dashboard, providing proof and PEACE OF MIND that a dam is performing as expected.

In addition to our SMART platform, our proprietary earthquake early warning (EEW) alerts provide a window of opportunity for action before earthquake shaking begins at the site. It can even trigger automated actions such as opening spillways, closing roads, etc. – when every second counts.

QuakeLogic’s monitoring system instantly detects any issue that could impact the structural integrity of the dam, allowing corrective measures to be implemented and avoiding a potential future disaster.

For details, contact us at info@quakelogic.net

DAM FAILURES IN MIDLAND, MICHIGAN – WHEN A DISASTER HITS, WILL YOU BE PREPARED?

When disaster strikes, we are all at risk! But the unprepared ones get hit the hardest.

The Edenville Dam collapsed and the Sanford Dam was breached in Midland, Michigan on last Tuesday (May 19) after days of heavy rain. In the midst of the Coronavirus pandemic, residents were ordered to evacuate because of rising waters. The collapsed Edenville Dam, built-in 1924, was rated in unsatisfactory condition while the Sanford Dam, which was built in 1925, was given a fair condition rating by the state.

Are other dams safe in the US?

On average, the nation’s dams are over 50 years old. At least 1,680 dams across the U.S. are currently rated in poor or unsatisfactory condition. These all pose potential risk according to this Associated Press article. Without urgent action, aging dams may not be able to adequately handle the intense rainfall and floods of a changing climate, as happened in the case of the Michigan dams. They may fail to protect people and property in cities and towns located nearby and downstream.

Introducing SMART DAMS

QUAKELOGIC is the only company using a cloud-based, AI-powered technology platform to perform continuous, autonomous structural assessments using data from sensors on the dam structure.

Deploying the QuakeLogic’s SENSOR DATA MANAGEMENT, ASSESSMENT, AND REPOSITORY TECHNOLOGY (SMART) on dams would significantly reduce needed search and inspection efforts in future events.

The SMART integrates manually and digitally read sensor recordings into a fully-automated unified monitoring system. It facilitates the acquisition and analysis of critical sensor data needed by the dam operators for proper operations and maintenance, and most importantly for the safety assessment of the dam.

The SMART helps to collect, organize, and evaluates sensor data routinely, sends immediate notifications upon exceedance of thresholds, and generate PDF reports regularly and on-demand.

The SMART is a cutting-edge system works with various types of sensors such as accelerometers, tiltmeters, potentiometers, strain gauges, thermocouples, weather stations, piezometers and seepage monitors. Comprehensive analytic information is visible in real-time on the mobile-friendly dashboard, providing proof and peace of mind that a dam is performing as expected.

In addition to SMART, our proprietary earthquake early warning (EEW) alerts provide a window of opportunity for action before earthquake shaking begins at the site. It can also trigger automated actions such as opening spillways, closing roads, etc. when every second counts.

Easy-to-understand, engineering-quality information about the real-time health of the dam supports operators to make informed decisions. Whether planning maintenance activities, or prioritizing critical response actions, QUAKELOGIC has you covered.

“Dams are vital in all communities. As we move toward recovery from COVID-19, it’s important to support the resiliency of dams by realtime monitoring and ensure that the dam owners have the support, tools, and resources to outsmart disasters.”