Galperin vs Orthogonal Seismometer Configurations: What’s the Difference and Why It Matters?

In seismic monitoring, triaxial seismometers are essential tools that capture ground motion in three dimensions. But not all triaxial sensors are designed the same way. Two dominant configurations exist: the orthogonal layout and the Galperin symmetric design. Understanding the difference between them is key when deciding how to choose a broadband seismometer or designing your seismic network.

Orthogonal Configuration: The Traditional Layout

Orthogonal seismometers use three sensing elements aligned at right angles:

  • X-axis (East-West)
  • Y-axis (North-South)
  • Z-axis (Vertical)

This configuration provides direct and intuitive measurements of ground motion along geographic axes. It is commonly found in strong-motion sensors and legacy seismic stations.

Pros:

  • Simple and direct mapping to geographic directions
  • Standard format for data processing
  • Useful in structural monitoring when orientation is controlled

Cons:

  • Requires precise alignment to true North and level installation
  • Uneven horizontal sensitivity
  • Prone to increased cross-axis coupling due to asymmetry

Galperin Configuration: The Modern Symmetric Design

First introduced by Evgeny Galperin, this configuration uses three identical sensors, each spaced 120° apart and tilted equally from vertical (typically ~35.26°). Rather than directly measuring along X, Y, and Z, these sensors capture intermediate components. Standard vertical and horizontal motion is then reconstructed through a simple mathematical transformation.

Galperin geometry forms the basis of modern broadband seismometers, including all broadband seismometers offered by QuakeLogic.

Pros:

  • Isotropic azimuthal sensitivity for uniform horizontal response
  • Mechanically balanced and compact design
  • Easier installation — no need for precise geographic orientation
  • Ideal for low-noise, high-fidelity broadband recording
  • Often includes self-leveling mechanisms

Cons:

  • Requires post-processing to derive standard components (Z, N, E)
  • May be unfamiliar to users expecting direct XYZ outputs

Coordinate Transformation in Galperin Systems

The raw sensor outputs (V1, V2, V3) from a Galperin layout are converted into vertical (Z) and orthogonal horizontal (X, Y or N, E) components through a transformation matrix. The result is functionally identical to orthogonal output — but with superior mechanical and dynamic performance.

To obtain standard seismic components — vertical (Z), north (N), and east (E) — from a Galperin-configured broadband seismometer, a mathematical transformation is applied to the raw outputs of the three equally tilted sensors.

Galperin sensors are mounted 120° apart in azimuth and tilted at approximately 35.26° from vertical. This symmetric geometry ensures equal sensitivity in all horizontal directions, making it ideal for high-fidelity broadband seismic recording.

The transformation to orthogonal components is handled by a fixed matrix derived from the Galperin geometry. Here’s a practical example in Python that demonstrates how to convert the raw Galperin outputs (V1, V2, V3) into Z, N, and E components:

import numpy as np

def galperin_to_orthogonal(V1, V2, V3):
    """
    Transforms Galperin outputs (V1, V2, V3) into orthogonal components (Z, N, E).
    
    Assumes Galperin sensors are tilted 35.26 degrees from vertical and 120 degrees apart in azimuth.
    """

    # Galperin angle in degrees and radians
    alpha_deg = 35.2643897  # approximately arccos(1/sqrt(3))
    alpha_rad = np.radians(alpha_deg)

    # Transformation matrix based on Galperin geometry
    # Source: Galperin 1985; commonly used form
    T = np.array([
        [np.cos(alpha_rad), np.cos(alpha_rad), np.cos(alpha_rad)],  # Z (vertical)
        [np.sin(alpha_rad), -0.5 * np.sin(alpha_rad), -0.5 * np.sin(alpha_rad)],  # N (North)
        [0, np.sqrt(3)/2 * np.sin(alpha_rad), -np.sqrt(3)/2 * np.sin(alpha_rad)]  # E (East)
    ])

    # Stack Galperin outputs into column vector
    V = np.array([V1, V2, V3])

    # Perform transformation
    Z, N, E = T @ V

    return Z, N, E

# Example usage
V1, V2, V3 = 0.1, 0.2, 0.15  # Example raw sensor outputs
Z, N, E = galperin_to_orthogonal(V1, V2, V3)

print("Vertical (Z):", Z)
print("North (N):", N)
print("East (E):", E)

This code is useful for researchers, engineers, or software developers integrating Galperin seismometers into their own data acquisition systems or post-processing pipelines.

Why Galperin Excels in Broadband Performance

Galperin-configured sensors offer lower cross-axis sensitivity, reduced internal noise, and azimuthal symmetry. This makes them particularly suited for high-precision seismological research.

Optimizing Your Network Design

Because Galperin-based instruments don’t require precise geographic orientation, they simplify field deployments and reduce installation error. This is especially helpful in large-scale projects and remote installations.

✅ QuakeLogic’s Seismometer Solution

At QuakeLogic, we exclusively offer Galperin-type broadband seismometers, engineered for superior sensitivity, symmetrical mechanical design, and fast, easy deployment. Our systems are:

  • Fully turnkey, with no licensing or calibration fees
  • Designed for broadband performance with low self-noise
  • Delivered with user-friendly software and optional remote monitoring tools
  • Compatible with standard seismic analysis workflows

Whether you’re deploying a temporary station or building out a national seismic network, Galperin configuration delivers the performance you need with the reliability you trust.

📞 Contact Us

Ready to upgrade your monitoring system? Reach out to our team at sales@quakelogic.net or browse our product line at products.quakelogic.net to explore QuakeLogic’s advanced broadband solutions.

Why does Japan frequently experience earthquakes?

Japan, a country renowned for its rich cultural heritage and technological advancements, also faces a unique natural challenge: it is one of the most earthquake-prone regions in the world. The reason behind this frequent seismic activity is deeply rooted in the country’s geographical positioning.

Situated on the Pacific Ring of Fire

Japan is located atop the Pacific Ring of Fire, a zone teeming with tectonic activity. This region is where four major tectonic plates – the Pacific, North American, Eurasian, and Filipino – converge. These colossal rock formations serve as the unstable foundation upon which Japan rests. The constant shifting and colliding of these plates lead to frequent earthquakes, some of which have the potential to trigger devastating tsunamis, especially if the disturbances occur underwater.

Japan’s Ingenious Adaptation

In response to this volatile environment, Japan has become a world leader in earthquake preparedness and building resilience. Homes, hospitals, schools, and other critical infrastructure in Japan are constructed to endure the tremors, adhering to strict regulations regarding design and materials. Earthquake drills are a regular practice in schools and workplaces, reflecting the nation’s commitment to preparedness. While earthquakes are inherently unpredictable, Japan’s proactive stance on disaster readiness is commendable and consistent.

The Contrast: Japan vs. Other Earthquake-Prone Regions

A stark contrast to Japan’s preparedness was observed in last year’s tragedy in Turkey, where a 7.8 magnitude earthquake led to catastrophic destruction and loss of life. In comparison, Japan’s resilience was evident during a recent 7.6 magnitude earthquake, which resulted in minimal damage. This disparity highlights the effectiveness of Japan’s disaster readiness and building standards. However, challenges like tsunamis remain, posing significant threats that require continuous vigilance and innovation.

The Role of Early Warning Systems and Structural Health Monitoring

In light of Japan’s seismic vulnerability, the importance of earthquake early warning systems cannot be overstated. These systems provide crucial seconds to minutes of advance notice, enabling people to seek safety and shut down critical operations, thereby mitigating the impact.

Similarly, structural health monitoring is vital for assessing the integrity of buildings and infrastructure. Continuous monitoring can detect potential weaknesses or damages early, allowing for timely repairs and reinforcement, which is essential in earthquake-prone regions.

QuakeLogic: A Pioneer in Earthquake Preparedness

In the realm of earthquake early warning and structural health monitoring, QuakeLogic stands out with nearly two decades of experience. QuakeLogic’s expertise in these fields is not just about technology; it’s about saving lives, protecting properties, and enhancing resilience against nature’s fury.

As Japan continues to navigate its challenging geological landscape, the lessons learned and technologies developed there are invaluable to the rest of the world. QuakeLogic remains committed to contributing to this field, providing state-of-the-art solutions for disaster readiness and structural integrity.


Connect with us for more insights on earthquake preparedness and innovative solutions. Follow our journey as we continue to support earthquake-prone regions like Japan in their quest for safety and resilience.

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