Skip to main content

Abstract

A seismic sensor is an instrument to measure the ground motion when it is moved by a perturbation. This motion is dynamic and the seismic sensor or seismometer also has to give a dynamic physical variable related to this motion.

The motion of the ground is generally measured in the xyz directions so three sensors are needed. The theoretical description is the same for the three sensors while the construction methods might be different. For special applications, ground rotation is also measured.

Our objective is to measure the ground motion at a point with respect to this same point undisturbed. The main difficulties of this are:

  1. 1.

    The measurement is done in a moving reference frame, in other words, the sensor is moving with the ground and there is not any fixed undisturbed reference available. According to the inertia principle, we can only observe the motion if it has an acceleration.

  2. 2.

    The amplitude and frequency range of seismic signals is very large. The smallest motion of interest is the ground noise, which carries information and might be as small as 0.1 nm, and the largest motion near a causing fault could be 10 m. This represents a dynamic range of (10/10−10) = 1011. Similarly, the frequency band starts as low as 0.00002 Hz (earth tides) and could go to 1000 Hz. These values are of course the extremes, but a good quality all round seismic station for local and global studies should at least cover the frequency band 0.01–100 Hz and ground motions from 1 nm to 10 mm.

It is not possible to make one single instrument covering this range of values in both frequency and amplitude and instruments with different gain and frequency response are used for different ranges of frequency and amplitude.

Sensors are divided into passive and active sensors. A passive seismometer essentially consists of a swinging system with a signal coil that outputs a voltage linearly proportional to the ground velocity at frequencies above the natural frequency f 0 . No electronics is involved, however there is a lower limit to f 0 of about 0.03 Hz so a passive sensor cannot be used for very low frequencies. Passive low frequency sensors are large, heavy and expensive. Most modern sensors are active. They also have a swinging system but different kinds of electronic feedback makes it possible to make smaller sensors covering a large frequency band (typically 0.01–100 Hz) with the output linearly proportional to velocity, the so-called broad band sensors. An accelerometer works with a similar electronic feedback principle but has an output linearly proportional to acceleration in a frequency band of typically 0–100 Hz. The MEMS sensor (Micro Electro-Mechanical systems) is an accelerometer using the same principle but built into an integrated circuit so the sensor is very small. There is now a tendency for all sensors to be of the active type since the cost has come down, however passive sensors with f 0  > 1 Hz (geophones) are still produced in large numbers.

The theory for passive sensors is relatively simple, while active sensors can use very sophisticated feedback and filter techniques making the theory correspondingly complex. However, the basic response of the two types of sensors is quite similar.

All sensors will generate electronic noise, particularly active sensors, and an important aspect of sensor design is to achieve as low a noise as possible.

Different sensors are used for different purposes. The broad band sensor is used for regional and global seismology, accelerometers for strong motion networks and geophones are used for recording micro-earthquakes.

Different kinds of sensors on the market will be discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Aki K, Richards PG (1980) Quantitative seismology – theory and methods. In: Chapter 10: Principles of seismometry, vol 1. W. H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco, pp 477–524

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson JA, Wood HO (1925) Description and theory of the torsion seismometer. Bull Seismol Soc Am 15:1–76

    Google Scholar 

  • ANSS Working Group on Instrumentation, Siting, Installation, and Site Metadata of the Advanced National Seismic System Technical Integration Committee (2008) Instrumentation guidelines for the Advanced National Seismic System, U.S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 2008–1262, 41 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Barzilai A (2000) Improving a geophone to produce an affordable, broadband seismometer. Ph. D. thesis, Stanford University. http://micromachine.stanford.edu/projects/geophones/DefenseBarzilaiFinalCopyWeb/DefenseBarzilaiFinalCopy.pdf

  • Barzilai A, Zandt TV, Kerry T (1998) Technique for measurement of the noise of a sensor in the presence of large background signals. Rev Sci Instrum 69:2767–2772

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bormann P (ed) (2002) IASPEI New manual of seismological observatory practice (NMSOP). Geo Forchungs Zentrum Potsdam, Potsdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Brokešová J, Málek J (2013) Rotaphone, a self-calibrated six-degree-of-freedom seismic sensor and its strong-motion records. Seismol Res Lett 84:737–744

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byrne CJ (1961) Instrument noise in seismometers. Bull Seismol Soc Am 51:69–84

    Google Scholar 

  • Clinton JF, Heaton TH (2002a) Potential advantages of a strong-motion velocity meter over a strong-motion accelerometer. Seismol Res Lett 73:333–342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clinton JF, Heaton TH (2002b) Performance of the VSE-355G2 strong-motion velocity seismometer. Report to the IRIS-GSN Sub-Committee. Department of Civil Engineering, Division of Engineering and Applied Science, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125. www.ecf.caltech.edu/~jclinton/publications/IRISREV.pdf, 30 pp

  • Deng T, Chen D, Wang J, Chen J, He W (2014) A MEMS based electrochemical vibration sensor for seismic motion monitoring. J Microelectromech Syst 23:92–99

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans JR, Allen RM, Chung AI, Cochran ES, Guye R, Hellweg M, Lawrence JF (2014) Performance of several low-cost accelerometers. Seismol Res Lett 85:147–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Homeijer B, Lazaroff D, Milligan D, Alley R, Wu J, Szepesi M, Bicknell B (2011) Hewlett Packard’s seismic grade MEMS accelerometer. In: Proc. IEEE 24th international conference on micro electro mechanical systems (MEMS), 2011, 23–27 Jan, Cancun, Mexico, pp 585–588. doi: 10.1109/MEMSYS.2011.5734492

  • Huang H, Agafonov V, Yu H (2013) Molecular electrical transducers as motion sensors: a review. Sensors 13:4581–4597

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Igel HJ, Brokesova JE, Zembaty Z (2012) Preface to the special issue on “Advances in rotational seismology: instrumentation, theory, observations, and engineering”. J Seismol 16:571–572

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LaCoste LJB (1934) A new type long period seismograph. Physics 5:178–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee WHK, Çelebi M, Todorovska MI, Igel H (2009) Introduction to the special issue on rotational seismology and engineering applications. Bull Seismol Soc Am 99:945–947

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levchenko DG, Kuzin IP, Safonov MV, Sychikov VN, Ulomov IV, Kholopov BV (2010) Experience in seismic signal recording using broadband electrochemical seismic sensors. Seism Instrum 46:250–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li B, Lu D, Wang W (2001) Micromachined accelerometer with area-changed capacitance. Mechatronics 11:811–819

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu CH, Kenny TW (2001) A high-precision, wide bandwidth micromachined tunneling accelerometer. J Electromech Syst 10:425–433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacArthur A (1985) Geophone frequency calibration and laser verification. Geophysics 50:49–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milligan DJ, Homeijer B (2011) An ultra-low noise MEMS accelerometer for seismic imaging. In: Sensors 2011 IEEE, 28–31 Oct 2011, Limerick, pp 1281–1284. doi: 10.1109/ICSENS.2011.6127185

  • Millman J (1987) Microelectronics: digital & analog circuits & systems. McGraw-Hill Education, New York, 996 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Nigbor RL, Evans JR, Hutt CR (2009) Laboratory and field testing of commercial rotational seismometers. Bull Seismol Soc Am 99:1215–1227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson J (1993) Observations and modeling of seismic background noise. U. S. Geol. Survey Open-File Report 93–322, 95 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Preumont A (2006) Mechatronics, dynamics of electromechanical and piezoelectric systems. Springer, Dordrecht, 207 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Riedesel M, Moore RD, Orcutt JA (1990) Limits of sensitivity of inertial seismometers with velocity transducers and electronic amplifiers. Bull Seismol Soc Am 80:1725–1752

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodgers PW (1992a) Frequency limits for seismometers as determined from signal-to-noise ratios. Part 2. Feedback seismometers. Bull Seismol Soc Am 82:1071–1098

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodgers PW (1992b) Frequency limits for seismometers as determined from signal-to-noise ratios. Part 1. The electromagnetic seismometer. Bull Seismol Soc Am 82:1071–1098

    Google Scholar 

  • Scherbaum F (2001) Of poles and zeros, fundamentals of digital seismology, 2nd edn. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Scherbaum F (2007) Of poles and zeros, fundamentals of digital seismology, revised second edn. Springer, Dordrecht, 271 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Steim JM, Wielandt E (1985) Report on the very broad band seismograph. Harvard University, Cambridge, MA. 34 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Urhammer RA, Collins ER (1990) Synthesis of Wood-Anderson seismograms from broadband digital records. Bull Seismol Soc Am 80:702–716

    Google Scholar 

  • Usher MJ, Buckner IW, Burch RF (1977) A miniature wideband horizontal-component feedback seismometer. J Phys E Sci Instrum 10:1253–1260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Usher MJ, Burch RF, Guralp C (1979) Wide-band feedback seismometers. Phys Earth Planet Inter 18:38–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wielandt E (2011) Seismic sensors and their calibration. In: Bormann P (ed) (2012) New manual of seismological observatory practice (NMSOP-2), IASPEI, GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences, Potsdam; hnmsop.gfz-potsdam.de; doi:10.2312/GFZ.NMSOP-2_ch5

  • Wielandt E, Streckeisen G (1982) The leaf-spring seismometer: design and performance. Bull Seismol Soc Am 72:2349–2367

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Havskov, J., Alguacil, G. (2016). Seismic Sensors. In: Instrumentation in Earthquake Seismology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21314-9_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics