GEOMAGNETIC EFFECT OF THE EARTHQUAKES Mw = 7.5–7.8 IN TURKEY ON FEBRUARY 6, 2023

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription Access

Abstract

We study the response in geomagnetic field variations caused by a series of earthquakes with magnitudes Mw = 7.5–7.8 in Turkey on 6 February 2023. Initial data represent high-precision observations of the geomagnetic field with a 1-s sampling rate recorded at magnetic observatories of Russia and neighboring countries from middle to high latitudes. The paper analyzes the morphology of the geomagnetic signal, its amplitude-frequency characteristics, pulses in the rate of change and delays of the geomagnetic field response to earthquakes with magnitudes Mw = 7–8 depending on the distance to the source. The results suggest that the geomagnetic effect is best detected in the rate of change recordings, reaching anomalous amplitudes of 10 nT/s. The signal delay is from 221 to 592 s depending on the magnetic field component and the distance to the epicenter, which for the selected observatories falls in the range from 765 to 2650 km.

About the authors

A. A. Soloviev

Geophysical Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences; Schmidt Institute of Physics of the Earth of the Russian Academy of Sciences

Author for correspondence.
Email: a.soloviev@gcras.ru
Russia, Moscow; Russia, Moscow

References

  1. Akkar S., Azak T., Çan T., et al. Evolution of seismic hazard maps in Turkey // Bull Earthquake Eng. 2018. 16. 3197–3228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-018-0349-1
  2. Alver F., Kılıçarslan Ö., Kuterdem K., Türkoğlu M., Şentürk M.D. Seismic Monitoring at the Turkish National Seismic Network (TNSN) // Summ. Bull. Internatl. Seismol. Cent., July-December 2017. 53(II). P. 41–58. https://doi.org/10.31905/D9GRP8RD
  3. Güvercin S.E., Karabulut H., Konca A.O., Doğan U., Ergintav S. Active seismotectonics of the East Anatolian Fault // Geophysical Journal International. 2022. 230(1). P. 50–69. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggac045
  4. Rosakis A.J., Abdelmeguid M., Elbanna A. Evidence of Early Supershear Transition in the Mw 7.8 Kahramanmaraş // Earthquake From Near-Field Records. https://doi.org/10.31223/X5W95G
  5. Molchanov O.A., Hayakawa M. Seismo-Electromagnetics and Related Phenomena: History and Latest Results. TERRAPUB, Tokyo. 2008. 189 p.
  6. Schekotov A., Chebrov D., Hayakawa M., et al. Short-term earthquake prediction in Kamchatka using low-frequency magnetic fields // Nat Hazards. 2020. 100. 735–755https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-019-03839-2
  7. Гульельми А.В., Клайн Б.И., Куражковская Н.А. О связи землетрясений с геомагнитными бурями // Физика Земли. 2021. № 6. С. 131‒136. https://doi.org/10.31857/S0002333721060028
  8. Hayakawa M., Kasahara Y., Nakamura T., Muto F., Horie T., Maekawa S., Hobara Y., Rozhnoi A.A., Solovieva M., Molchanov O.A. A statistical study on the correlation between lower ionospheric perturbations as seen by subionospheric VLF/LF propagation and earthquakes // J. Geophys. Res. 2010. 115. A09305, https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JA015143
  9. Masci F. On claimed ULF seismogenic fractal signatures in the geomagnetic field // J. Geophys. Res. 2010. 115. A10236. https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JA015311
  10. Love J.J., Thomas J.N. Insignificant solar-terrestrial triggering of earthquakes // Geophys. Res. Lett. 2013. 40. 1165–1170. https://doi.org/10.1002/grl.50211
  11. Козырева О.В., Пилипенко В.А. О взаимосвязи геомагнитной возмущенности и сейсмической активности для региона Аляски // Геофизические исследования. 2020. Т. 21. № 1. С. 33‒49. https://doi.org/10.21455/gr2020.1-3
  12. Гвишиани А.Д., Соловьев А.А., Сидоров Р.В., Красноперов Р.И., Груднев А.А., Кудин Д.В., Карапетян Д.К., Симонян А.О. Успехи организации геомагнитного мониторинга в России и ближнем зарубежье // Вестник ОНЗ РАН. 2018. 10. NZ4001, https://doi.org/10.2205/2018NZ000357
  13. Кудин Д.В., Соловьев А.А., Сидоров Р.В., Старостенко В.И., Сумарук Ю.П., Легостаева О.В. Система ускоренной подготовки квазиокончательных данных стандарта ИНТЕРМАГНЕТ // Геомагнетизм и аэрономия. 2021. Т. 61. № 1. С. 46‒59. https://doi.org/10.31857/S0016794021010090
  14. Solovie A., Dobrovolsky M., Kudin D., Sidorov R. Minute values of X, Y, Z components and total intensity F of the Earth’s magnetic field from Geomagnetic Observatory Klimovskaya (IAGA code: KLI). ESDB repository. Geophysical Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 2015. https://doi.org/10.2205/kli2011min
  15. Soloviev A., Dobrovolsky M., Kudin D., Sidorov R. Minute values of X, Y, Z components and total intensity F of the Earth’s magnetic field from Geomagnetic Observatory Saint Petersburg (IAGA code: SPG). ESDB repository. Geophysical Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 2016. https://doi.org/10.2205/SPG2012min
  16. Soloviev A., Dzeboev B., Karapetyan J., Grudnev A., Kudin D., Sidorov R., Nisilevich M., Krasnoperov R. Minute values of X, Y, Z components and total intensity F of the Earth’s magnetic field from Geomagnetic Observatory Gyulagarak (IAGA code: GLK). ESDB repository. Geophysical Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 2020. https://doi.org/10.2205/GLK2020min
  17. INTERMAGNET Operations Committee and Executive Council. St-Louis B. (Ed.). 2020. INTERMAGNET Technical Reference Manual, Version 5.0.0.
  18. Зелинский Н.Р., Клейменова Н.Г., Козырева О.В., Агаян С.М., Богоутдинов Ш.Р., Соловьев А.А. Алгоритм распознавания геомагнитных пульсаций Pc3 на секундных данных экваториальных обсерваторий сети ИНТЕРМАГНЕТ // Физика Земли. 2014. № 2. С. 91‒99.
  19. Канониди Х.Д. Об источнике особого вида геомагнитных пульсаций во время землетрясений // Известия ВУЗов. Северо-кавказский регион. Естественные науки. № 2. 2014. С. 29‒44.
  20. Соловьев А.А. Некоторые задачи геомагнетизма, решаемые по данным наземных и спутниковых наблюдений // Геология и геофизика. 2023. https://doi.org/10.15372/GiG2023112

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
2.

Download (2MB)
3.

Download (303KB)
4.

Download (610KB)
5.

Download (629KB)

Copyright (c) 2023 А.А. Соловьев