|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
| JOURNAL HOME | HELP | CONTACT PUBLISHER | SUBSCRIBE | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Traditionally, only translational ground motions are observed in seismology. However, we should also measure the three components of rotational motion and the six or more components of strain (Lee, Celebi et al. 2009). We will improve our understanding of the earthquake process (and the complex ground motions it generates) by developing new processing and inversion schemes including the new observables in rotations and strains. In this article we provide a summary of recent activities, some background information, and selected highlights of advances in rotational seismology and engineering applications.
| INTERNATIONAL WORKING GROUP ON ROTATIONAL SEISMOLOGY |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The IWGoRS organized a special session on rotational motions in seismology, convened by H. Igel, W. H. K. Lee, and M. Todorovska during the 2006 AGU Fall Meeting (Lee, Igel et al. 2007). The goal was to discuss rotational sensors, observations, modeling, theoretical issues, and potential applications of rotational ground motions. It became apparent that there is a need for a workshop dedicated specifically to rotational seismology so investigators from different countries and different fields can discuss their many issues of mutual interest and draft a research plan.
| FIRST INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOP |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In the plenary session, three lectures were presented for a general audience and the workshop participants. Five oral presentations were given in the afternoon on major areas of research on rotational seismology and engineering issues. The next morning's session was devoted to 30 posters covering a wide range of topics, including large block rotations in geological-scale time; rotations of monuments after earthquakes; and theories, instruments, observations, and analyses of rotational motions. That afternoon participants divided into five panels for in-depth discussions on theory, far-field observations, near-field monitoring, engineering applications, and instrument design and testing. These discussions were followed by general discussion in which the panel chairs summarized the group discussions, listing key issues and future research directions. The assembled workshop concluded that collaborative work is essential for nurturing this new field of inquiry. The panel reports and proposed future directions and research plans are described in detail by Lee, Celebi et al. (2007); the DVD in that report contains all presentation files and supporting materials.
|
| ROTATIONAL EFFECTS DUE TO EARTHQUAKES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
15° relative to the base. Rotation angles
are generally given in units of radians (1 rad = 57.3°). Since the
instrumentally observed rotations are very small, the units are often given in
milli-radians (mrad), or micro-radians (µrad). A few early authors proposed rotational waves or at least some "vortical" motions. Many different terms were used for the rotational motion components at this early stage of the field's development. For example, "rocking" is rotation around a horizontal axis, sometimes also referred to as tilt. Ferrari (2006) summarized two models of an electrical seismograph with sliding smoked paper, developed by P. Filippo Cecchi in 1876 to record three-component translation motions and also the torsion movements from earthquakes. Although these instruments operated for several years, no rotational motion could be recorded because of low transducer sensitivity. Mallet (1862) proposed that rotations of a body on the Earth's surface are due to a sequence of different seismic phases emerging at different angles. Reid (1910, 43–47.) studied rotational effects from the 1906 San Francisco earthquake and pointed out that the large observed angles of rotation could not be due to propagation of the rotational components of the seismic waves in the classical elasticity theory. A modern analysis of such rotational effects is presented in Todorovska and Trifunac (1990).
| ROTATIONS CAUSED BY RESPONSE OF STRUCTURES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Full-scale experiments of soil-structure interaction have provided data to
measure and to quantify the nature of the rotational motions at the interface
between the soil and the building foundations, but in the absence of recorded
rotational strong motion in the near field and in the buildings, engineering
studies had to use numerical modeling to assess and estimate the contribution
of the rotational motions to the response of structures. For example, Jalali
and Trifunac (2009) have shown
that the pseudo-relative velocity (PSV) spectral amplitudes for excitation by
horizontal, vertical, and rocking strong ground motion can be represented by
superposition of three mathematical terms. This new result emphasizes the
significance of rotational ground excitation and why it is necessary to
incorporate it into the response estimates in the design of very tall
buildings (Zembaty 2009). In
another numerical simulation study, Gi
ev and Trifunac
(2009) showed how large
seismic waves propagate through the structure and deform its members beyond
the linear range of response, and how the creation of nonlinear response zones
and their localization (plastic hinges) will give rise to the zones of large
local rotations. By placing small-aperture arrays of rotational transducers on
beams and columns, they showed how it will be possible to achieve the next
level in the resolution of point deformations, because from closely spaced
rotational sensors it will be possible to also record the point curvature
(Trifunac 1990). Thus, future
array measurements of rotational motions in important structures will make it
possible to reliably monitor the state of structural health in real time.
| TRANSLATIONAL AND ROTATIONAL MOTIONS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Since the recurrence interval of a large earthquake at a given active fault
can be
100 to
10,000 years, seismologists have been optimizing
their observations for either 1) studying large earthquakes at great distances
or 2) studying small local earthquakes nearby
(Lee 2002). Consequently,
traditional seismographs are designed to have high sensitivity at the expense
of being able to record large motions on scale. Until recent decades,
monitoring strong motion from damaging earthquakes has been left to earthquake
engineers and their colleagues, generally using accelerometers
(Trifunac 2009). In addition,
observational seismology is based mainly on measuring translational
motions because of a widespread belief that rotational motions are
insignificant. For example, Richter
(1958, 213, footnote) states
that "theory indicates, and observation confirms, that such rotations
are negligible." Richter did not provide any references, and there were
no instruments sensitive enough to measure rotation motions at the level of
microradians (µrad) at that time.
| EARLY ATTEMPTS TO STUDY ROTATIONAL MOTIONS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
x by
![]() | (1) |
is the strain tensor and
![]() | (2) |
![]() | (3) |
Pioneers in several countries attempted to measure rotational motions induced by earthquakes. Nearly a century ago, Galitzin (1912) suggested using two identical pendulums installed on different sides of the same axis of rotation for separate measurement of rotational and translational motion. This was later implemented, for example, by Kharin and Simonov (1969) in an instrument designed to record strong ground motion. Using an azimuthal array of seismographs, Droste and Teisseyre (1976) derived rotational seismograms for rock bursts in a nearby mine. Inspired by Walter Munk, Farrell (1969) constructed a gyroscopic seismometer and obtained a static displacement of < 1 cm and a tilt of < 0.5 µrad at La Jolla, California, during the Borrego Mountain earthquake of 9 April 1968 (magnitude 6.5) at an epicentral distance of 115 km.
Early efforts also included studies of explosions. For example, Graizer (1991) recorded tilts and translational motions in the near field of two nuclear explosions, using seismological observatory sensors to measure point rotations directly. Nigbor (1994) measured rotational and translational point ground motions directly with a commercial rotational MEMS sensor and found significant near-field rotational motions (660 µrad at 1 km distance) from a one-kiloton explosion.
Rotations and strains in the ground (Trifunac 1979, 1982) have been deduced indirectly from accelerometer arrays using methods valid for seismic waves with long wavelengths compared to the distances between sensors (e.g., Spudich and Fletcher 2008). The rotational components of ground motion have also been estimated theoretically, using kinematic source models (Bouchon and Aki 1982) and the linear elastodynamic theory of wave propagation in elastic solids (Lee and Trifunac 1985, 1987).
In the past decade, rotational motions—from small local earthquakes
to large teleseisms—were successfully recorded by sensitive rotational
sensors in several countries (e.g.,
Takeo 1998;
McLeod et al. 1998;
Igel et al. 2005;
Suryanto et al.
2006). In particular, the application of Sagnac interferometry
provided greatly improved sensitivity to rotation. Observations in Japan and
Taiwan showed that the amplitudes of rotations can be one to two orders of
magnitude greater than expected from the classical elasticity theory, as first
noted by Takeo (1998).
Theoretical work suggests that in granular materials or cracked continua,
asymmetries of the stress and strain fields can create rotations separate from
those predicted by classical elastodynamic theory (e.g.,
Teisseyre and Boraty
ski
2003). These rotations naturally generate rotational seismic waves
and seismic spin and twist solitons
(Majewski 2006).
| LARGE RING LASER GYROS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Ring lasers detect the Sagnac beat frequency of two counter-propagating
laser beams (Stedman 1997; and
see Figure 2C). These active
interferometers are realized by triangular or square closed evacuated cavities
in which the light beams interfere. If this instrument is rotating on a
platform with respect to inertial space, the effective cavity length between
the co-rotating and the counter-rotating laser cavity differs, and one
observes frequency splitting, thus a beat frequency. This beat frequency
f is directly proportional to the rotation rate
around
the surface normal n of the ring laser system, as given by the Sagnac
equation:
![]() | (4) |
the laser wavelength. This equation has three contributions
that influence the beat frequency
f: 1) variations in the
scale factor (4A/
P) have to be avoided by making the
instrument mechanically as rigid and stable as possible; 2) changes in
orientation n enter the beat frequency via the inner product; and 3)
variations in
(e.g., due to changes in Earth's rotation rate
or seismically induced rotations), the most dominant contribution to
f. Note that translations do not contribute to the Sagnac
frequency unless they affect P or A in some indirect manner.
Ring lasers are sensitive to rotations only, assuming stable ring geometry and
lasing. The second effect implies that for coseismic observations at the
Earth's surface the horizontal components of rotation (i.e., tilts)
will contribute to the vertical component of rotation rate. As recently shown
by Pham et al.
(2009), this tilt-coupling
effect is several orders of magnitude below the level of the actual rotational
signal unless one is very close to the source (where sensitive ring lasers
would not be the right technology). At present, there are ring laser gyros capable of measuring rotation (induced by small local earthquakes or distant large teleseisms) at four sites: 1) Cashmere Caverns, Christchurch, New Zealand (McLeod et al. 1998); 2) Wettzell, Germany (Schreiber et al. 2006); 3) Conway, Arkansas (Dunn et al. 2009); and 4) Piñon Flat, California (Schreiber, Hautmann et al. 2009).
| THE G RING LASER AT WETTZELL |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
|
| SMALL INERTIAL ANGULAR SENSORS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
3 km away. However, such sensors do not
have the sensitivity to record rotations from small (M
4) local
earthquakes at distances of tens of kilometers.
The eentec model R-1 rotational seismometer is the first modestly priced
sensor capable of recording small M
4 earthquakes at distances up to
several tens of kilometers. It uses electrochemical technology in which the
motion of an electrolytic fluid inside a torus is sensed electronically,
yielding a voltage signal proportional to rotational velocity. Nigbor et
al. (2009) carried out
extensive tests of commercial rotational sensors and concluded that the R-1
sensor generally meets the specifications given by the manufacturer, but that
clip level and frequency response vary from those specifications and between
individual channels enough that more detailed calibrations are warranted for
each unit. A typical transfer function for the R-1 sensor can be found at the
manufacturer's website
(http://www.eentec.com/).
The instrument response is roughly "flat" from 0.1 to 20 Hz, and
its self noise is < 10 µrad/s rms over the same frequency band.
|
The largest peak rotational rate recorded in Taiwan to date is from an MW 5.1 earthquake at a hypocentral distance of 51 km; it occurred at 13:40 UTC on 23 July 2007. Figure 4(C) shows the amplitudes and spectra of translational acceleration recorded by the K2's internal accelerometer for this earthquake. The peak ground acceleration recorded is 0.47 m/s2, and the two horizontal components have much higher amplitude than the vertical. Figure 4(D) shows the amplitudes and spectra of rotational rate from its external R-1 rotational seismometer for the same earthquake. The peak rotational rate recorded is 0.63 mrad/s for the vertical component, much more than for the horizontal components. The spectra in Figure 4(C) show that the dominant frequency band in ground acceleration is about 2–5 Hz for the two horizontal components; the spectra in Figure 4(D) show that the dominant frequency band in ground rotational rate is about 2.5–5.5 Hz for the vertical.
Other studies report observations with the R-1 sensor and compare the direct, point measurements of rotations with array-derived area rotations (e.g., Wassermann et al. 2009). It is important to note that further studies are needed to fully understand the instrument response of rotational sensors and their broadband accuracy in phase and amplitude in comparison to standard seismometers.
| BSSA SPECIAL ISSUE |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Classical Elasticity versus Other Theories
Real materials of the Earth are heterogeneous, anisotropic, and nonlinear,
especially in the damage zone surrounding faults and in poorly consolidated
sediments and soil just beneath seismic instruments. In the presence of large
nonlinearities, we are forced to consider the mechanics of chaos
(Trifunac, forthcoming), and
to interpret such complexities we must record the rotational components of
strong motion in addition to the translational components.
Seismology is primarily based on the linear elasticity theory of simple homogeneous materials under infinitesimal strain. This theory was mostly developed in the early nineteenth century. Since then, linear elasticity theory has been embedded in seismology. "Cord" rotation is defined as the curl of the displacement field in Equation 2, and in linear elasticity theory, the rotational components of motion are contained in the S waves. Meanwhile, modern continuum mechanics in the past century has advanced far beyond the classical linear elastic theory. In particular, the elasticity theory of the Cosserat brothers (Cosserat and Cosserat 1909) incorporates 1) a local rotation of continuum particles as well as the translational motion assumed in classical theory, and 2) a couple stress (a torque per unit area) as well as the force stress (force per unit area). In the constitutive equation of classical elasticity theory there are two independent elastic constants; in Cosserat elastic theory there are six or more elastic constants. Pujol (2009) provides a tutorial on rotations in the theories of finite deformation and micropolar (Cosserat) elasticity. Twiss (2009) derives an objective asymmetric micropolar moment tensor from a discrete-block model for a deforming granular material. He also investigates seismogenic deformation associated with volumes of distributed seismicity in three different areas and finds support of the micropolar model for the effects of a granular substructure on the characteristics of seismic focal mechanisms.
Near-Field Seismology
Seismology has been very successful in the far field because large
earthquakes occur every week somewhere on Earth and because classical
elasticity theory works very well for interpreting the recorded
translational motions at large distances. Because of this success and
limited instrumentation options, most funding for earthquake monitoring
historically has gone into global and regional seismic networks using only
translational seismometers. However, to improve our understanding of damaging
earthquakes we must also deploy appropriate instruments in the near
field of active faults where large earthquakes (M > 6.5) occur
infrequently. As is true for all strong-motion seismology and engineering,
this is a risky business because a large earthquake on any given fault may not
take place for hundreds of years—many times longer than the carrier span
of any scientist. Therefore, seismologists and earthquake engineers must
accumulate data over centuries and must be willing to invest substantial
resources in order to observe earthquakes in the near field.
Recording ground motions in the near field would require extensive seismic instrumentation along some well-chosen active faults—and luck. Several seismologists have been advocating such instrumentation. A current deployment in south-western Taiwan by that nation's Central Weather Bureau is designed to "capture" a repeat of the 1906 Meishan earthquake (M 7.1) with both translational and rotational instruments (Wu et al. 2009).
Processing Collocated Measurements of Translations and Rotations
Processing collocated observations of rotation and translation is routinely
performed in the inertial navigation units of aircraft and space vehicles. A
similar analysis should be possible for various combinations of strain
components, rotations, and translations. With the exception of velocity-strain
combinations (e.g., Gomberg and
Agnew 1996) this terrain is largely unexplored.
Phase velocities and propagation directions.
A simple calculation for linear-elastic plane (not dispersed) waves with
transverse polarization shows that the ratio of transverse acceleration to
rotation rate is proportional to phase velocity. This implies that information
on subsurface velocity structure (otherwise only accessible through seismic
array measurements and combined analyses) is contained in a single point
measurement. It has been shown that the ratio-derived phase velocities agree
with the velocities predicted by calculation
(Igel et al. 2005).
In a recent theoretical study based on full ray theory for Love waves, using
normal mode summation, it has been demonstrated that the Love wave dispersion
relation can be obtained simply by taking the spectral ratio of transverse
acceleration to rotation rate (vertical axis;
Ferreira and Igel 2009). This
result implies that seismic shear wave tomography can be possible without
relating seismic observations from different stations, that is, without
averaging over subarrays used to compute local mean phase velocities.
Information on the direction of propagation also is contained in the
azimuth-dependent phase fit between rotations and translations. This fit is
optimal in the direction of propagation, from which back azimuths can be
estimated to within a few degrees (Igel
et al. 2007). Linking observational translations,
strains, and rotations together can yield a snapshot of the wavefield where
wave direction, slownesses, and radial/azimuthal amplitude gradients can be
directly inferred from the data; Langston
(2007) has also advocated this
approach.
Toward a new kind of tomography.
The possibility of deriving local dispersion relations from single stations
leads to the question of which subsurface volume one actually
"sees" and down to what depth velocity perturbations can be
recovered. The method of choice to answer this type of question is the adjoint
method, with which sensitivity kernels can be calculated to indicate the
volume in which the observable (mostly travel times) is sensitive to
structural perturbations. Fichtner and Igel
(2009) introduced a new
observable quantity—apparent shear wave velocity—which is a
time-windowed ratio of the moduli of velocity and rotation angle. It turns out
that the sensitivity near the source vanishes, leading to a new type of kernel
that shows high sensitivity in the vicinity of the receiver only. This result
implies that a tomographic inversion scheme for near-receiver structures based
on rotations and translations is possible and further highlights the potential
of rotation measurements. Preliminary synthetic tomographic inversions are
given in Bernauer et al.
(2008).
Scattering properties of the crust: Partitioning of P and S waves.
The partitioning of P and S energy and the stabilization
of the ratio between the two is an important constraint on the scattering
properties of a medium. It was a surprise to discover considerable rotational
energy in a time window containing the P coda in the teleseismic
seismometer records of Igel et al.
(2007). Detailed analysis of
the signals and modeling of wave propagation through three-dimensional random
media demonstrated that the observed signals can be explained with
P–SH scattering in the crust with scatterers of
roughly 5-km correlation length (not well-constrained) and rms perturbation
amplitude of 5% (well-constrained). This result further illustrates the
efficacy of rotation measurements, for example, as a filter for
SH-type motion. Similar processing steps will be possible for the
horizontal components of rotation and the corresponding components of
translation. It is conceivable that the combination of these various
components might lead to tight constraints on near-receiver structure, results
otherwise only available from array measurements.
| CONCLUSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Theoretical work in modern rotational seismology began in the 1970s, and attempts to deduce rotational motion from accelerometer arrays began in the 1980s. However, modern direct measurements of rotational ground motions began only about a decade ago when affordable commercial angular inertial sensors became sensitive enough to detect microradian rotations while large ring laser gyros (intended for studying the Earth's rotation) became capable of detecting nanoradian rotations.
Ring laser observations at Wettzell, Germany, and Piñon Flat,
California, demonstrated consistent measurements of rotational ground motions
in the far field. So far this success can only be demonstrated with one
component of rotation. The high cost of present high-precision ring laser
gyros makes widespread deployment unlikely. Less expensive and/or less
sensitive alternatives are now being pursued by five academic groups
(Cowsik et al. 2009;
Dunn et al. 2009;
Jedli
ka et al.
2009; Schreiber, Velikoseltsev
et al. 2009; Takamori
et al. 2009). At present, only Taiwan has a modest
program to monitor both translational and rotational ground motions from local
and regional earthquakes at several free-field sites, as well as two arrays
equipped with both accelerometers and rotational seismometers in a building
and a nearby site (Wu et al.
2009). The goal is to record both translational and rotational
ground motions in the near field of damaging earthquakes.
Based on the developments described in the BSSA special issue, we
believe that observation, analysis, and interpretations of both rotational and
translational ground motions will soon play a significant role in seismology
and earthquake engineering.
|
|
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
1 U.S. Geological Survey (retired) ![]()
2 Ludwig Maximilian University Munich, Germany ![]()
3 University of Southern California, Los Angeles ![]()
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Bernauer, M., A. Fichtner, and H. Igel (2008). Inferring near-receiver structure from combined measurements of rotational and translational ground motion. Eos, Transactions, American Geophysical Union 89 (53), Fall Meeting Supplement, Abstract S43B-1888.
Bouchon, M., and K. Aki (1982). Strain, tilt, and
rotation associated with strong ground motion in the vicinity of earthquake
faults. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of
America 72,1,717
-1,738.
Cochard, A., H. Igel, B. Schuberth, W. Suryanto, A. Velikoseltsev, U. Schreiber, J. Wassermann, F. Scherbaum, and D. Vollmer (2006). Rotational motions in seismology: Theory, observation, simulation. In Earthquake Source Asymmetry, Structural Media and Rotation Effects, ed. R. Teisseyre, M. Takeo, and E. Majewski391 -411. Berlin: Springer.
Cosserat, E., and F. Cosserat (1909). Théorie des Corps Déformables. Paris: Hermann (available from the Cornell University Library Digital Collections).
Cowsik, R., T. Madziwa-Nussinov, K. Wagoner, D. Wiens, and M.
Wysession (2009). Performance characteristics of a rotational
seismometer for near-field and engineering applications. Bulletin
of the Seismological Society of America
99 (2B),1,181
-1,189.
Droste, Z., and R. Teisseyre (1976). Rotational and displacemental components of ground motion as deduced from data of the azimuth system of seismograph. Publications of the Institute of Geophysics, Polish Academy of Sciences 97,157 -167.
Dunn, R. W., H. H. Mahdi, and H. J. Al-Shukri (2009).
Design of a relatively inexpensive ring laser seismic detector.
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America
99 (2B),1,437
-1,442.
Evans, J. R., A. Cochard, V. Graizer, B. S. Huang, K. W. Hudnut, C. R. Hutt, H. Igel, W. H. K. Lee, C. C. Liu, E. Majewski, R. Nigbor, E. Safak, W. U. Savage, U. Schreiber, R. Teisseyre, M. D. Trifunac, J. Wassermann, and C. F. Wu (2007). Report of a Workshop on Rotational Ground Motion. USGS Open-File Report 2007-1145, 20 pps; http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2007/1145/.
Farrell, W. E. (1969). A gyroscope seismometer:
Measurements during the Borrego earthquake. Bulletin of the
Seismological Society of America
59,1,239
-1,245.
Ferrari, G. (2006). Note on the historical rotation seismographs. In Earthquake Source Asymmetry, Structural Media and Rotation Effects, ed. R. Teisseyre, M. Takeo, and E. Majewski,367 -376. Berlin: Springer.
Ferreira, A., and H. Igel (2009). Rotational motions
of seismic surface waves in a laterally heterogeneous Earth.
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America
99 (2B),1,429
-1,436.
Fichtner, A., and H. Igel (2009). Sensitivity
densities for rotational ground-motion measurements. Bulletin of
the Seismological Society of America
99 (2B),1,302
-1,314.
Galitzin, B. B. (1912). Lectures on Seismometry. St. Petersburg: Russian Academy of Sciences (in Russian).
Gi
ev, V., and M. D. Trifunac (2009). Transient
and permanent rotations in a shear layer excited by strong earthquake pulses.
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America
99 (2B),1,391
-1,403.
Gomberg, J., and D. Agnew (1996). The accuracy of
seismic estimates of dynamic strains: An evaluation using strainmeter and
seismometer data from Piñon Flat Observatory, California.
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America
86,212
-220.
Graizer, V. M. (1991). Inertial seismometry methods. Izvestiya, Academy of Sciences, USSR, Physics of the Solid Earth, 27 (1),51 -61.
Grekova, E. F., and W. H. K. Lee, comps. (2009).
Suggested readings in continuum mechanics and earthquake seismology.
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America
99 (2B),1,076
-1.081.
Hudnut, K. W. (2005). Fault slip sensors: GPS and gyros in earthquake warning for engineering purposes. Earthquake Early Warning Workshop, July 13–15, 2005, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA; presentation file archived at ftp://pipeline.gps.caltech.edu/pub/hudnut/Talks/EEW_Hudnut_7-15-05.ppt.
Igel, H., A. Cochard, J. Wassermann, U. Schreiber, A. Velikoseltsev, and N. D. Pham (2007). Broadband observations of rotational ground motions. Geophysical Journal International 168,182 -197.[CrossRef][Web of Science][GeoRef]
Igel, H., U. Schreiber, A. Flaws, B. Schuberth, A. Velikoseltsev, and A. Cochard (2005). Rotational motions induced by the M 8.1 Tokachi-oki earthquake, September 25, 2003. Geophysical Research Letters 32,L08309; doi:10.1029/2004GL022336.[CrossRef]
Jalali, R. S. and M. D. Trifunac (2009). Response
spectra for near-source, differential and rotational strong motion.
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America
99 (2B),1,404
-1,415.
Jedli
ka, P., J. Buben, and J. Kozák
(2009). Strong motion fluid rotation seismograph.
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America
99 (2B),1,443
-1,448.
Kharin, D. A., and L. I. Simonov (1969). VBPP seismometer for separate registration of translational motion and rotations. Seismic Instruments 5,51 -66 (in Russian).
Langston, C.A. (2007). Wave gradiometry in two
dimensions. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of
America 97,401
-416;
doi:10.1785/0120060138.
Lantz, B., R. Schofield, B. O'Reilly, D. E. Clark, and D. DeBra
(2009). Review: Requirements for a ground rotation sensor to
improve Advanced LIGO. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of
America 99 (2B),980
-989.
Lee, V. W., and M. D. Trifunac (1985). Torsional accelerograms. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 4 (3),132 -139.[CrossRef][GeoRef]
Lee, V. W., and M. D. Trifunac (1987). Rocking strong earthquake accelerations. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 6 (2),75 -89.[CrossRef][GeoRef]
Lee, W. H. K. (2002). Challenges in observational seismology. In International Handbook of Earthquake and Engineering Seismology, Part A, ed. W. H. K. Lee, H. Kanamori, P. C. Jennings, and C. Kisslinger, 269-281. Amsterdam: Academic Press.
Lee, W. H. K., comp. (2009). A glossary for rotational
seismology. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of
America 99 (2B),1,082
-1,090.
Lee, W. H. K., M. Celebi, M. I. Todorovska, and H. Igel, guest
editors (2009). Introduction to the special issue on rotational
seismology and engineering applications. Bulletin of the
Seismological Society of America 99
(2B), 945-957.
Lee, W. H. K., M. Celebi, M. I. Todorovska, and M. F. Diggles, eds. (2007). Rotational Seismology and Engineering Applications: Proceedings for the First International Workshop, Menlo Park, California, U.S.A.—September 18 to 19, 2007. USGS Open-File Report 2007-1144, version 2.0, 46 pps.; http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2007/1144/.
Lee, W. H. K., B. S. Huang, C. A. Langston, C. J. Lin, C. C. Liu,
T. C. Shin, T. L. Teng, and C. F. Wu (2009). Review: Progress in
rotational ground-motion observations from explosions and local earthquakes in
Taiwan. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of
America 99 (2B),958
-967.
Lee, W. H. K., H. Igel, M. I. Todorovska, and J. R. Evans (2007). Rotational Seismology: AGU Session, Working Group, and Website. USGS Open-File Report 2007-1263,6 pps.; http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2007/1263/.
Majewski, E. (2006). Seismic rotation waves: Spin and twist solitons. In Earthquake Source Asymmetry, Structural Media and Rotation Effects, ed. R. Teisseyre, M. Takeo, and E. Majewski, 255-272. Berlin: Springer.
Mallet, R. (1862). Great Neapolitan Earthquake of 1857. Vols. 1 and 2. London: Chapman and Hall.
McLeod, D. P., G. E. Stedman, T. H. Webb, and U. Schreiber
(1998). Comparison of standard and ring laser rotational
seismograms. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of
America 88,1,495
-1,503.
Nigbor, R. L. (1994). Six-degree-of-freedom ground
motion measurement. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of
America 84,1,665
-1,669.
Nigbor, R. L., J. R. Evans, and C. R. Hutt (2009).
Laboratory and field testing of commercial rotational seismometers.
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America
99 (2B),1,215
-1,227.
Oldham, R. D. (1899). Report on the great earthquake of 12h June 1897. Memoirs of the Geological Survey of India 29,379 pps.
Pham, D. N., H. Igel, J. Wassermann, A. Cochard, and U. Schreiber
(2009). The effects of tilt on interferometric rotation sensors.
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America
99 (2B),1,352
-1,365.
Pujol, J. (2009). Tutorial on rotations in the
theories of finite deformation and micropolar (Cosserat) elasticity.
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America
99 (2B),1,011
-1,027.
Reid, H. F. (1910). The Mechanics of the Earthquake. The California Earthquake of April 18, 1906, Report of the State Earthquake Investigation Commission. Vol. 2. Washington, DC: Carnegie Institution of Washington.
Richter, C. F. (1958). Elementary Seismology. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman & Co.
Schreiber, K. U., J. N. Hautmann, A. Velikoseltsev, J. Wassermann,
H. Igel, J. Otero, F. Vernon, and J.-P. R. Wells (2009). Ring
laser measurements of ground rotations for seismology. Bulletin of
the Seismological Society of America
99 (2B),1,190
-1,198.
Schreiber, K. U., H. Igel, A. Cochard, A. Velikoseltsev, A. Flaws, B. Schuberth, W. Drewitz, and F. Müller (2006). The GEOsensor project: Rotations—a new observable for seismology. In Observation of the Earth System from Space, ed. J. Flury, R. Rummel, C. Reigber, and M. Rothacher. Heidelberg: Springer Verlag.
Schreiber, K. U., A. Velikoseltsev, A. J. Carr, and R. Franco-Anaya
(2009). The application of fiber optic gyroscopes for the
measurement of rotations in structural engineering. Bulletin of the
Seismological Society of America 99
(2B), 1,207-1,214.
Spudich, P., and J. B. Fletcher (2008). Observation
and prediction of dynamic ground strains, tilts, and torsions caused by the
Mw 6.0 2004 Parkfield, California, earthquake and aftershocks,
derived from UPSAR Array observations. Bulletin of the
Seismological Society of America
98, 1,898-1,914;
doi:10.1785/0120070157.
Spudich, P., L. K. Steck, M. Hellweg, J. B. Fletcher, and L. M. Baker (1995). Transient stresses at Parkfield, California, produced by the M 7.4 Landers earthquake of June 28, 1992: Observations from the UPSAR dense seismograph array. Journal of Geophysical Research 100 (B1),675 -690.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
Stedman, G. E. (1997). Ring laser tests of fundamental physics and geophysics. Reports on Progress in Physics 60,615 -688.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
Suryanto, W., H. Igel, J. Wassermann, A. Cochard, B. Schuberth, D.
Vollmer, F. Scherbaum, U. Schreiber, and A. Velikoseltsev (2006).
First comparison of array-derived rotational ground motions with direct ring
laser measurements. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of
America 96,2,059
-2,071;
doi:10.1785/0120060004.
Takamori, A., A. Araya, Y. Otake, K. Ishidoshiro, and M. Ando
(2009). Research and development status of a new rotational
seismometer based on the flux pinning effect of a superconductor.
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America
99 (2B),1,174
-1,180.
Takeo, M. (1998). Ground rotational motions recorded in near-source region. Geophysical Research Letters 25 (6),789 -792.[CrossRef][Web of Science][GeoRef]
Takeo, M., and H. M. Ito (1997). What can be learned from rotational motions excited by earthquakes? Geophysical Journal International 129,319 -329.[CrossRef][Web of Science][GeoRef]
Teisseyre, R., and W. Boraty
ski (2003).
Continua with self-rotation nuclei: Evolution of asymmetric fields.
Mechanics Research Communications
30,235
-240.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
Teisseyre, R., H. Nagahama, and E. Majewski, eds. (2008). Physics of Asymmetric Continua: Extreme and Fracture Processes: Earthquake Rotation and Soliton Waves. Berlin & Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.
Teisseyre, R., M. Takeo, and E. Majewski, eds. (2006). Earthquake Source Asymmetry, Structural Media and Rotation Effects. Berlin: Springer.
Todorovska, M. I., H. Igel, M. D. Trifunac, and W. H. K. Lee (2008). Rotational earthquake motions—international working group and its activities. In Proceedings of the 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, October 12–17, Beijing, China, paper ID: S03-02-0031. Beijing and Tokyo, International Association for Earthquake Engineering.
Todorovska, M. I., and M. D. Trifunac (1990). Note on excitation of long structures by ground waves. Journal of Engineering Mechanics (ASCE) 116 (4), 952-964.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
Trifunac, M. D. (1979). A note on surface strains associated with incident body waves. Bulletin of the European Association of Earthquake Engineering 5, 85-95.
Trifunac, M. D. (1982). A note on rotational components of earthquake motions on ground surface for incident body waves. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 1, 11-19.[CrossRef][GeoRef]
Trifunac, M. D. (1990). Curvograms of strong ground motion. Journal of Engineering Mechanics (ASCE) 116 (6),1,426 -1,432.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
Trifunac, M. D. (2006). Effects of torsional and rocking excitations on the response of structures. In Earthquake Source Asymmetry, Structural Media and Rotation Effects, ed. R. Teisseyre, M Takeo, and E. Majewski, 569-582. Berlin: Springer.
Trifunac, M. D. (2008). Buildings as sources of rotational waves. In Physics of Asymmetric Continua: Extreme and Fracture Processes, ed. R. Teisseyre, H. Nagahama, and E. Majewski, chapter I.5. Berlin & Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.
Trifunac, M. D. (2009). 75th anniversary of strong motion observation— a historical review. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 29 (4),591 -606.[GeoRef]
Trifunac, M. D. (forthcoming). Nonlinear problems in earthquake engineering. In Encyclopedia of Complexity and Systems Science, ed. R. A. Meyers. New York: Springer.
Twiss, R. J. (2009). An asymmetric micropolar moment
tensor derived from a discrete-block model for a rotating granular
substructure. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of
America 99 (2B),1,103
-1,131.
Twiss, R., B. Souter, and J. Unruh (1993). The effect of block rotations on the global seismic moment tensor and patterns of seismic P and T axes. Journal of Geophysical Research 98,645 -674.[CrossRef]
Wassermann, J., S. Lehndorfer, H. Igel, U. Schreiber
(2009). Performance test of a commercial rotational motions
sensor. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of
America 99 (2B),1,449
-1,456.
Wu, C. F., W. H. K. Lee, and H. C. Huang (2009). Array
deployment to observe rotational and translational ground motions along the
Meishan fault, Taiwan: A progress report. Bulletin of the
Seismological Society of America 99
(2B), 1,468-1,474.
Zembaty, Z. (2009). Rotational seismic load definition
in Eurocode 8, Part 6 for slender, tower-shaped structures.
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America
99 (2B),1,483
-1,485.
862 Richardson Court
Palo Alto, California 94303 U.SA.
lee{at}usgs.gov
(W. H. K. L.)
Ludwig Maximilian University
Department of Earth and
Environmental Sciences
Geophysics Section
LMU Munich, Theresienstr.
41, 80333
Munich, Germany
igel{at}geophysik.uni-muenchen.de
(H. I.)
University of Southern California
Department of Civil
Engineering
Los Angeles, California 90089-2531 U.S.A.
trifunac{at}usc.edu
(M. D. T.)
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| JOURNAL HOME | HELP | CONTACT PUBLISHER | SUBSCRIBE | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |