Seismometer Health Diagnosis Based on Cross Spectral Density Coherence Method in Indonesia Seismic Networks

Miftahul Jannah; Risa Annisa; Adhi Harmoko Saputro; Titik Lestari

doi:10.21009/SPEKTRA.093.05

Authors

Miftahul Jannah Department of Physics, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Universitas Indonesia, Depok 16424, Indonesia
Risa Annisa Department of Physics, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Universitas Indonesia, Depok 16424, Indonesia
Adhi Harmoko Saputro Department of Physics, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Universitas Indonesia, Depok 16424, Indonesia
Titik Lestari Meteorological, Climatology and Geophysics Agency of Indonesia, Jakarta 10720, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21009/SPEKTRA.093.05

Keywords:

seismic instrumentation health, broadband seismometer, teleseismic earthquake, coherence cross-spectral density

Abstract

Evaluation of seismometer health is crucial in accurately detecting earthquake and tsunami events. Currently, seismometer health evaluation is based solely on data quality unrelated to seismometer sensor performance. While seismometers are essential for tracking seismic activity, environmental factors, aging components, and external interference can cause seismometers to function worse over time. This study presents a seismometer health diagnosis technique based on seismic signal analysis, including signal truncation, signal resampling, filtering, and deconvolution of instrument response. Then the proposed method of cross-spectral density coherence to extract seismometer sensor health indicators performed on two adjacent broadband seismic stations by analyzing the frequency domain with a maximum inter-station distance of 100 km. The data used are seismic signals recorded on three-component seismometers (North-South, East-West, Z-Vertical). The coherence value of cross-spectral density is used as an indicator to diagnose seismometer health. The proposed method was evaluated on a seismic network in Indonesia consisting of 88 stations and a teleseismic earthquake event in Honshu, Japan. The coherence values of almost all tested stations are above 0.8, which means good performance. The proposed method is suitable for analyzing the health of seismometers, especially in Indonesia.

References

L. Yang et al., “Preventive maintenance strategy optimization in manufacturing system considering energy efficiency and quality cost,” Energies, vol.15, no.21, p. 8237, 2022, DOI: 10.3390/en15218237.

H. Erbiyik, “Definition of maintenance and maintenance types with due care on preventive maintenance,” in Maintenance Management-Current Challenges, New Developments, and Future Directions, IntechOpen, 2022, DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.106346.

Z. M. Çınar et al., “Machine learning in predictive maintenance towards sustainable smart manufacturing in industry 4.0,” Sustainability, vol.12, no.19, p.8211, 2020, DOI: 10.3390/su12198211.

J. G. Batista et al., “Discrete Event System Decision: an Approach to the Maintenance Based on Colored Petri Net,” Journal of Mechatronics Engineering, vol.6, no.1, pp.10-22, 2023, DOI: 10.21439/jme.v6i1.113.

P. Guo et al., “Roboads: Anomaly detection against sensor and actuator misbehaviors in mobile robots,” in 2018 48th Annual IEEE/IFIP international conference on dependable systems and networks (DSN), pp. 574-585, IEEE, 2018, DOI: 10.1109/DSN.2018.00065.

A. S. Aji, J. A. Sashiomarda, and D. Handoko, “Predictive maintenance magnetic sensor using random forest method,” in Journal of Physics: Conference Series, vol.1528, no.1, p. 012030, IOP Publishing, 2020, DOI: 10.1088/1742-6596/1528/1/012030.

L. Bo, L. Chengyu, and L. Guoyi, “Research on the management of seismic data quality assessment methods,” in E3S Web of Conferences, vol.253, p.01072, EDP Sciences, 2021, DOI: 10.1051/e3sconf/202125301072.

X. Liu et al., “Remaining Useful Life Prediction for Turbofan Engine Using SAE-TCN Model. Aerospace,” vol.10, no.8, p.715, 2023, DOI: 10.3390/aerospace10080715.

L. Zhao et al., “A MLP-Mixer and mixture of expert model for remaining useful life prediction of lithium-ion batteries,” Frontiers of Computer Science, vol.18, no.5, p.185329, 2024, DOI: 10.1007/s11704-023-3277-4.

Y. Bouabdallaoui et al., “Predictive maintenance in building facilities: A machine learning-based approach,” Sensors, vol.21, no.4, p.1044, 2021, DOI: 10.3390/s21041044.

A. Bakdi, N. B. Kristensen, and M. Stakkeland, “Multiple instance learning with random forest for event logs analysis and predictive maintenance in ship electric propulsion system,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol.18, no.11, pp.7718-7728, 2022, DOI: 10.1109/TII.2022.3144177.

A. T. Ringler et al., “Why do my squiggles look funny? A gallery of compromised seismic signals,” Seismological Research Letters, vol.92, no.6, pp.3873-3886, 2021, DOI: 10.1785/0220210094.

T. Kimura, H. Murakami, and T. Matsumoto, “Systematic monitoring of instrumentation health in high-density broadband seismic networks,” Earth, Planets and Space, vol.67, pp.1-15, 2015, DOI: 10.1186/s40623-015-0226-y.

G. Pang et al., “The comparison and analysis of the signals from two instrumentation types of digital seismic recorders,” Optoelectronics, Instrumentation and Data Processing, vol.59, no.1, pp.124-136, 2023, DOI: 10.3103/s8756699023010144.

L. Krischer et al., “ObsPy: A bridge for seismology into the scientific Python ecosystem,” Computational Science & Discovery, vol.8, no.1, p.014003, 2015, DOI: 10.1088/1749-4699/8/1/014003.

M. Beyreuther et al., “ObsPy: A Python toolbox for seismology,” Seismological Research Letters, vol.81, no.3, pp.530-533, 2010, DOI: 10.1785/gssrl.81.3.530.

T. Megies et al., “ObsPy–What can it do for data centers and observatories?” Annals of Geophysics, vol.54, no.1, pp.47-58, 2011, DOI: 10.4401/ag-4838.

E. Löberich and M. D. Long, “Follow the Trace: Becoming a Seismo‐Detective with a Campus‐Based Raspberry Shake Seismometer,” Seismological Research Letters, vol.95, no.4, pp.2538-2553, 2024, DOI: 10.1785/0220230365.

R. A. Azdy and F. Darnis, “Use of haversine formula in finding distance between temporary shelter and waste end processing sites,” in Journal of Physics: Conference Series, vol.1500, no.1, p.012104, IOP Publishing, 2020, DOI: 10.1088/1742-6596/1500/1/012104.

P. Welch, “The use of fast Fourier transform for the estimation of power spectra: a method based on time averaging over short, modified periodograms,” IEEE Transactions on audio and electroacoustics, vol.15, no.2, pp.70-73, 1967, DOI: 10.1109/TAU.1967.1161901.

L. Colley, “Scipy.signal.coherence,” SciPy v1.12.0 Manual, [Online] Available: https://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/reference/generated/scipy.signal.coherence.html [Accessed: January 26 2024].

P. Stoica and R. L. Moses, “Spectral analysis of signals.” Pearson/Prentice Hall, 2005.

P. Virtanen et al., “SciPy 1.0: fundamental algorithms for scientific computing in Python,” Nature methods, vol.17, no.3, pp.261-272, 2020.

A. M. Amaral, K. Laadjal, and A. J. M. Cardoso, “Advanced fault-detection technique for dc-link aluminum electrolytic capacitors based on a random forest classifier.,”Electronics, vol. 12, no.12, p. 2572, 2023, DOI: 10.3390/electronics12122572.

C. Stoll, “What is the Cross Spectral Density (CSD)?”, Vibration Research, [Online] Available: https://vibrationresearch.com/blog/what-is-cross-spectral-density-csd/ [Accessed: November 23 2024].