positive experiences with the earthquakes predictability

Positive Experiences with Positive Experiences with the Earthquakes the Earthquakes PredictabilityPredictability

Special presentation at the Symposium Hornická Special presentation at the Symposium Hornická Příbram 2013Příbram 2013

PříbramPříbram 16.10.201316.10.2013

Pavel KalendaPavel Kalenda11, Libor Neumann, Libor Neumann22, Dimitar , Dimitar OuzounovOuzounov33, Václav Procházka, Václav Procházka44

11 ÚSMH AV ČR, v.v.i. ÚSMH AV ČR, v.v.i. 22 ANECT Praha a.s. ANECT Praha a.s.

33 Chapman University, Chapman University, Orange, CA 92866, USA,

44 Česká geologie, o.s. Česká geologie, o.s.

ContentContent

1) Introduction1) Introduction2) Prediction of the time window2) Prediction of the time window33) ) Prediction of the focal areaPrediction of the focal area4) Prediction of the magnitude4) Prediction of the magnitude

5) Conclusion5) Conclusion

Chapter 1Chapter 1

Introduction Introduction

Earthquake (EQ) prediction hasEarthquake (EQ) prediction has

6 (5) independent parameters:6 (5) independent parameters:

1)1) Time of the mainshockTime of the mainshock

2)2) The length of time windowThe length of time window

3)3) CenterCenter of the focal areaof the focal area

4)4) Radius of the focal areaRadius of the focal area

5)5) Minimum of magnitudeMinimum of magnitude

6)6) Magnitude range (not necessary if 10)Magnitude range (not necessary if 10)

Chapter 2Chapter 2

Prediction of time Prediction of time

Chapter 2Chapter 2Prediction of time Prediction of time - asperity model- asperity model

a – proportional limita – proportional limit

b – upper yield limitb – upper yield limit

c – lower yield limitc – lower yield limit

d – failure limitd – failure limit

(σ(σyy, ε, ε

yy) – deformation on the ) – deformation on the

proportional limitproportional limit

σσdd – tensile strength – tensile strength

εεdd - tensibility - tensibility

Chapter 2Chapter 2Prediction of time and its Prediction of time and its window - asperity modelwindow - asperity model

Anomalous periods and Anomalous periods and predicted windows of possible predicted windows of possible magnitudemagnitude before Okhotsk Sea M 7.7 EQ, before Okhotsk Sea M 7.7 EQ, Aug.12,2012Aug.12,2012

What is the length What is the length of the nucleation of the nucleation phase for M 7.7 phase for M 7.7 EQ?EQ?

Anomalous periods and Anomalous periods and predicted windows of possible predicted windows of possible magnitudemagnitude before Okhotsk Sea M 7.7 EQ, before Okhotsk Sea M 7.7 EQ, Aug.12,2012Aug.12,2012

What is the length What is the length of the nucleation of the nucleation phase for M 7.7 phase for M 7.7 EQ?EQ?

All of anomalies All of anomalies since June 2012 since June 2012 could be could be connected with connected with Okhotsk Sea EQOkhotsk Sea EQ

Anomalous periods and Anomalous periods and predicted windows of possible predicted windows of possible magnitudemagnitude before Okhotsk Sea M 7.7 EQ, before Okhotsk Sea M 7.7 EQ, Aug.12,2012Aug.12,2012

Indonesian EQ M 7.2 Indonesian EQ M 7.2 could be called could be called „foreshock“ of „foreshock“ of Sumatra M 8.6 Sumatra M 8.6 mainshockmainshock

Chapter 3Chapter 3

Prediction of focal areaPrediction of focal area

Typical anomaly at pendulum in Typical anomaly at pendulum in cave No.13C in Moravian Karstcave No.13C in Moravian Karstbefore Kurily EQ M 7.3, Nov.24, 2008before Kurily EQ M 7.3, Nov.24, 2008

Diurnal period of a noise

Beginning of nucleation period sensus stricto

Prediction based on the Prediction based on the detection of anomalous stress – detection of anomalous stress – Okhotsk Sea Okhotsk Sea August 14, 2012 mb=7.7 – August 14, 2012 mb=7.7 – oficially predictedoficially predicted

Diurnal period ofnoise

Beginning of nucleation phase s.s.

Typical anomalies of the tilt at Typical anomalies of the tilt at pendulum in Ida minependulum in Ida minebefore Chile EQ, February 27, 2010, before Chile EQ, February 27, 2010, M=8.8 and „Indonesian“ EQsM=8.8 and „Indonesian“ EQs

Main shock

Beginning of nucleation phase s.l.

Temporal and spatial characteristics for the earthquake alert before M7.3 Honshu 2012

(Ouzounov et al, 2013)

Spatial allocation

Temporal allocation

12.07.2012M7.3 Honshu

12.07.2012M7.3 Honshu

14 days

ALERT12.11.2012

-14 days

ALERT12.11.2012

-14 days

Temporal and spatial characteristics for the earthquake alert before M7.1 Banda sea 2012

(Ouzounov et al, 2013)

Spatial allocation

Temporal allocation

Earthquake

12.10.2012M7.1 Banda Sea

12.10.2012M7.1 Banda Sea

7 days

ALERT12.03.2012

-7 days

ALERT12.03.2012

-7 days

Chapter 4Chapter 4

Prediction of magnitudePrediction of magnitude

Chapter 4Chapter 4Prediction of time and its Prediction of time and its window - asperity modelwindow - asperity model

ConclusionConclusion The correct and full prediction of EQs The correct and full prediction of EQs

(area, time window and magnitude) is not (area, time window and magnitude) is not an an easy task. For this prediction easy task. For this prediction aas many s many different different methods covered the whole Earthmethods covered the whole Earth as possible must be used .as possible must be used .

NoNone of thesene of these method method should bshould be used e used alone.alone.

The prediction of the strongest EQs is The prediction of the strongest EQs is a a global task. The precursors could be global task. The precursors could be observed everywhere and many days observed everywhere and many days (M7) (M7) or even months or even months (M9) (M9) before before the mainshockthe mainshock..

The EQ prediction is POSSIBLE. It is The EQ prediction is POSSIBLE. It is aa real real scientific task.scientific task.

Thank you for your attentionThank you for your attention