Cite Article

Identification of Micro-Earthquake Hypocenters using Geiger and Coupled Velocity-Hypocenters Methods

Choose citation format

BibTeX

@article{IJASEIT10589,
   author = {Widya Utama and Dwa Desa Warnana and Sherly Ardhya Garini},
   title = {Identification of Micro-Earthquake Hypocenters using Geiger and Coupled Velocity-Hypocenters Methods},
   journal = {International Journal on Advanced Science, Engineering and Information Technology},
   volume = {11},
   number = {1},
   year = {2021},
   pages = {350--355},
   keywords = {Coupled velocity-hypocenters; geiger; geothermal; hypocenter; micro-earthquake},
   abstract = {

The accuracy location of hypocenter is needed to determine the subsurface character beneath a geothermal area. The study used 73 micro-earthquake events; each micro-earthquake event was classified based on the time difference between the P and S waves (ts-tp) that had values ≤ 3seconds, the magnitude of micro-earthquake ≤ 3SR and each micro-earthquake event was recorded at least by 3 observer stations. We inverted selected P and S travel times from 11-unit seismic stations on X geothermal area. The initial hypocenter location was determined using Geiger method. The result of the Geiger method's initial hypocenter location was then used as the input to determine the accurate hypocenter location in the following method, Coupled Velocity-Hypocenters method. Other parameters were also used on this second method, including hypocenter location, 1-D velocity model, origin time, vp/vs ratio, zshift and the station correction. The distribution of hypocenter locations of micro-earthquakes obtained using the second method was better than the results from Geiger method. This result is supported by the Coupled Velocity-Hypocenters average RMS error value, which was smaller, only 0.19 seconds, compared to the Geiger method, which had an average RMS error of 0.74 seconds. The hypocenter location of the relocation was more clustered in the reservoir area, precisely in the production well, and in the heat source area. The hypocenter location in the production well area indicates fluid flow through the fracture from the permeable zone.

},    issn = {2088-5334},    publisher = {INSIGHT - Indonesian Society for Knowledge and Human Development},    url = {http://ijaseit.insightsociety.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=9&Itemid=1&article_id=10589},    doi = {10.18517/ijaseit.11.1.10589} }

EndNote

%A Utama, Widya
%A Warnana, Dwa Desa
%A Garini, Sherly Ardhya
%D 2021
%T Identification of Micro-Earthquake Hypocenters using Geiger and Coupled Velocity-Hypocenters Methods
%B 2021
%9 Coupled velocity-hypocenters; geiger; geothermal; hypocenter; micro-earthquake
%! Identification of Micro-Earthquake Hypocenters using Geiger and Coupled Velocity-Hypocenters Methods
%K Coupled velocity-hypocenters; geiger; geothermal; hypocenter; micro-earthquake
%X 

The accuracy location of hypocenter is needed to determine the subsurface character beneath a geothermal area. The study used 73 micro-earthquake events; each micro-earthquake event was classified based on the time difference between the P and S waves (ts-tp) that had values ≤ 3seconds, the magnitude of micro-earthquake ≤ 3SR and each micro-earthquake event was recorded at least by 3 observer stations. We inverted selected P and S travel times from 11-unit seismic stations on X geothermal area. The initial hypocenter location was determined using Geiger method. The result of the Geiger method's initial hypocenter location was then used as the input to determine the accurate hypocenter location in the following method, Coupled Velocity-Hypocenters method. Other parameters were also used on this second method, including hypocenter location, 1-D velocity model, origin time, vp/vs ratio, zshift and the station correction. The distribution of hypocenter locations of micro-earthquakes obtained using the second method was better than the results from Geiger method. This result is supported by the Coupled Velocity-Hypocenters average RMS error value, which was smaller, only 0.19 seconds, compared to the Geiger method, which had an average RMS error of 0.74 seconds. The hypocenter location of the relocation was more clustered in the reservoir area, precisely in the production well, and in the heat source area. The hypocenter location in the production well area indicates fluid flow through the fracture from the permeable zone.

%U http://ijaseit.insightsociety.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=9&Itemid=1&article_id=10589 %R doi:10.18517/ijaseit.11.1.10589 %J International Journal on Advanced Science, Engineering and Information Technology %V 11 %N 1 %@ 2088-5334

IEEE

Widya Utama,Dwa Desa Warnana and Sherly Ardhya Garini,"Identification of Micro-Earthquake Hypocenters using Geiger and Coupled Velocity-Hypocenters Methods," International Journal on Advanced Science, Engineering and Information Technology, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 350-355, 2021. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.18517/ijaseit.11.1.10589.

RefMan/ProCite (RIS)

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Utama, Widya
AU  - Warnana, Dwa Desa
AU  - Garini, Sherly Ardhya
PY  - 2021
TI  - Identification of Micro-Earthquake Hypocenters using Geiger and Coupled Velocity-Hypocenters Methods
JF  - International Journal on Advanced Science, Engineering and Information Technology; Vol. 11 (2021) No. 1
Y2  - 2021
SP  - 350
EP  - 355
SN  - 2088-5334
PB  - INSIGHT - Indonesian Society for Knowledge and Human Development
KW  - Coupled velocity-hypocenters; geiger; geothermal; hypocenter; micro-earthquake
N2  - 

The accuracy location of hypocenter is needed to determine the subsurface character beneath a geothermal area. The study used 73 micro-earthquake events; each micro-earthquake event was classified based on the time difference between the P and S waves (ts-tp) that had values ≤ 3seconds, the magnitude of micro-earthquake ≤ 3SR and each micro-earthquake event was recorded at least by 3 observer stations. We inverted selected P and S travel times from 11-unit seismic stations on X geothermal area. The initial hypocenter location was determined using Geiger method. The result of the Geiger method's initial hypocenter location was then used as the input to determine the accurate hypocenter location in the following method, Coupled Velocity-Hypocenters method. Other parameters were also used on this second method, including hypocenter location, 1-D velocity model, origin time, vp/vs ratio, zshift and the station correction. The distribution of hypocenter locations of micro-earthquakes obtained using the second method was better than the results from Geiger method. This result is supported by the Coupled Velocity-Hypocenters average RMS error value, which was smaller, only 0.19 seconds, compared to the Geiger method, which had an average RMS error of 0.74 seconds. The hypocenter location of the relocation was more clustered in the reservoir area, precisely in the production well, and in the heat source area. The hypocenter location in the production well area indicates fluid flow through the fracture from the permeable zone.

UR - http://ijaseit.insightsociety.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=9&Itemid=1&article_id=10589 DO - 10.18517/ijaseit.11.1.10589

RefWorks

RT Journal Article
ID 10589
A1 Utama, Widya
A1 Warnana, Dwa Desa
A1 Garini, Sherly Ardhya
T1 Identification of Micro-Earthquake Hypocenters using Geiger and Coupled Velocity-Hypocenters Methods
JF International Journal on Advanced Science, Engineering and Information Technology
VO 11
IS 1
YR 2021
SP 350
OP 355
SN 2088-5334
PB INSIGHT - Indonesian Society for Knowledge and Human Development
K1 Coupled velocity-hypocenters; geiger; geothermal; hypocenter; micro-earthquake
AB 

The accuracy location of hypocenter is needed to determine the subsurface character beneath a geothermal area. The study used 73 micro-earthquake events; each micro-earthquake event was classified based on the time difference between the P and S waves (ts-tp) that had values ≤ 3seconds, the magnitude of micro-earthquake ≤ 3SR and each micro-earthquake event was recorded at least by 3 observer stations. We inverted selected P and S travel times from 11-unit seismic stations on X geothermal area. The initial hypocenter location was determined using Geiger method. The result of the Geiger method's initial hypocenter location was then used as the input to determine the accurate hypocenter location in the following method, Coupled Velocity-Hypocenters method. Other parameters were also used on this second method, including hypocenter location, 1-D velocity model, origin time, vp/vs ratio, zshift and the station correction. The distribution of hypocenter locations of micro-earthquakes obtained using the second method was better than the results from Geiger method. This result is supported by the Coupled Velocity-Hypocenters average RMS error value, which was smaller, only 0.19 seconds, compared to the Geiger method, which had an average RMS error of 0.74 seconds. The hypocenter location of the relocation was more clustered in the reservoir area, precisely in the production well, and in the heat source area. The hypocenter location in the production well area indicates fluid flow through the fracture from the permeable zone.

LK http://ijaseit.insightsociety.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=9&Itemid=1&article_id=10589 DO - 10.18517/ijaseit.11.1.10589