Seismological investigation of September 09 2016, North Korea underground nuclear test | ||
| NRIAG Journal of Astronomy and Geophysics | ||
| Volume 6, Issue 2, December 2017, Pages 278-286 PDF (3.09 M) | ||
| DOI: 10.1016/j.nrjag.2017.09.002 | ||
| Authors | ||
| H. Gaber; S. Elkholy; M. Abdelazim; I.H. Hamama; A.S. Othman | ||
| Abstract | ||
| On Sep. 9, 2016, a seismic event of m 5.3 took place in North Korea. This event was reported as a nuclear test. In this study, we applied a number of discriminant techniques that facilitate the ability to distinguish between explosions and earthquakes on the Korean Peninsula. The differences between explosions and earthquakes are due to variation in source dimension, epicenter depth and source mechanism, or a collection of them. There are many seismological differences between nuclear explosions and earthquakes, but not all of them are detectable at large distances or are appropriate to each earthquake and explosion. The discrimination methods used in the current study include the seismic source location, source depth, the differences in the frequency contents, complexity versus spectral ratio and Ms-mb differences for both earthquakes and explosions. Sep. 9, 2016, event is located in the region of North Korea nuclear test site at a zero depth, which is likely to be a nuclear explosion. Comparison between the P wave spectra of the nuclear test and the Sep. 8, 2000, North Korea earthquake, m 4.9 shows that the spectrum of both events is nearly the same. The results of applying the theoretical model of Brune to P wave spectra of both explosion and earthquake show that the explosion manifests larger corner frequency than the earthquake, reflecting the nature of the different sources. The complexity and spectral ratio were also calculated from the waveform data recorded at a number of stations in order to investigate the relation between them. The observed classification percentage of this method is about 81%. Finally, the m:M method is also investigated. We calculate m and M for the Sep. 9, 2016, explosion and compare the result with the m: M chart obtained from the previous studies. This method is working well with the explosion. | ||
| Keywords | ||
| Discrimination; Seismic source location; Brune model; Spectral parameters; Complexity method; M: M Method | ||
|
Statistics Article View: 4 PDF Download: 7 |
||
