IUGG Volumes
Maurice Ewing Volumes
Mineral Physics Volumes
GEOPHYSICAL MONOGRAPH SERIES
Steven R. Taylor
Howard J. Patton
Paul G. Richards
Editors
Figures, tables, and short excerpts may be reprinted in scientific books and
journals if the source is properly cited.
The Explosion Seismic Source Function: Models and Scaling Laws Reviewed 1
M. D. Denny and L. R. Johnson
FreeField and Free Surface Ground Motions from Nuclear Explosions, Their Spatial Variations,
and the Constraint of Physical Source Mechanisms 47
B. W. Stump and R. E. Reinke
Broad Band Estimates of the Seismic Source Functions of Nevada Explosions from FarField Observations of P Waves 127
A. Douglas
The Effects of Spall on Teleseismic /'Waves: An Investigation with Theoretical Seismograms 141
J. Schlittenhardt
NearSource Scattering of Rayleigh to P in Teleseismic Arrivals from Pahute Mesa (NTS) Shots 151
I. N. Gupta, T. W. McElfresh, and R. A. Wagner
Seismic Moment Estimation and the Scaling of the LongPeriod Explosion Source Spectrum 171
H. J. Patton
The Transition to the Elastic Regime in the Vicinity of an Underground Explosion 229
J. B. Minster, S. M. Day, and P. M. Shearer
Simulation of Teleseismic Body Waves, Regional Seismograms, and Rayleigh Wave Phase Shifts
Using TwoDimensional Nonlinear Models of Explosion Sources 239
J. L. Stevens, T. G. Barker, S. M. Day, K. L. McLaughlin, N. Rimer, and B. Shkoller
In March 1989, the Department of Energy (DOE) and the Lawrence The nearfield working group, chaired by Jack Murphy and Brian
Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) sponsored a symposium on Stump, recommended development of an archive of existing nearfield
Explosion Source Phenomenology at Lake Tahoe, California. The data, and field experiments to improve understanding of the seismic source
purpose was to summarize the state of knowledge of the underground function. The various DOE laboratories (Los Alamos National
explosion source, based on U.S. experience at the Nevada Test Site Laboratory, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Sandia National
(NTS). Specifically, the goals were to summarize knowledge of the Laboratory) involved in the testing of underground nuclear explosions
explosion source, to identify limits of that knowledge and existing routinely collect nearfield data in support of containment programs and
problems, and to propose directions of future research and datacollection for the evaluation and documentation of test effects. Such data could be of
efforts. great value for the study of specific source phenomenology. What is
The symposium was organized around three topics: (1) nearfield needed is a coordinated effort between these laboratories to ensure that the
observations and modeling, which included freefield and surface historical data are reduced and cataloged in a standardized way, and then
measurements, smallscale laboratory measurements, and source region made available to the research community.
phenomenology; (2) farfield observations and modeling, which included Future datacollection efforts to understand the explosion source should
regional and teleseismic measurements; and (3) forward modeling from consider both nuclear and high explosive (HE) tests. The most valuable
code calculations using constitutive material relations. Chairmen for each experiments would be (1) to field instruments below shot level and
topic had the responsibility for running their technical session, conducting document the character of the downgoing wavefield and its transition to a
a workshop on their topical areas, summarizing the results of the seismic (linear) signal and (2) to field instruments in a dense surface array
workshop, and making recommendations for future efforts. Participants, over the shot point to delineate the spall zone characteristics. Both
both technical experts and observers, were invited from universities, experiments should be supplemented with adequate teleseismic and
industry, government laboratories, and various government agencies with regional seismic data to permit testing of source models constrained by
interest in nuclear testing issues. the nearfield data collected on these experiments. In the case of (1) for
Although an improved understanding of the explosion source aids in nuclear tests, the experiments would be enormously expensive and risky
our ability to monitor underground nuclear test ban treaties, we chose to with respect to data recovery, and they could not be recommended. HE
emphasize source physics rather than verification issues. A significant experiments offer alternatives at far more reasonable cost. Also, data from
amount of research has been directed toward understanding the explosion HE experiments could document the effects of amplitudedependent strain
source over the past 30 years or more, and the research results are spread at peak strain levels in the range 10~3 to 10~ 6 . Such field experiments
out through volumes of articles published in the open literature or in the should be coordinated with laboratory measurements and numerical
"grey" literature (i.e., government reports). No single reference or simulations to ascertain whether amplitudedependent strain is truly
synthesis of our knowledge of the explosion source currently exists. important for seismic source coupling.
Thus, the purpose of this monograph is to convey the findings of the The farfield workshop, chaired by Don Helmberger, identified various
meeting through summary articles by participants, supplemented with factors affecting the measurements of teleseismic magnitude, m^; seismic
recent studies on related source topics submitted by researchers who moment, M 0 \ and magnitude based on the amplitude of Lg waves,
responded to our call for papers. In addition to including current results, mb(Lg) . These factors include the effects of depth of burial, material
we asked the authors to review the state of knowledge in their research properties, and contamination by secondary sources (i.e., spall, block
area and to make their articles somewhat tutorial so that this volume motions, tectonic release) on the excitation of various teleseismic and
could serve as a reference for firstyear graduate students in geophysics and regional phases. Improved understanding of these effects is important for
experienced researchers alike. yield estimation and nuclear test monitoring at reduced yield levels.
Because of large nonlinear motions associated with the nuclear Broadband seismic data offer the potential for obtaining more accurate M0
explosion and the close proximity of the free surface, the explosion source estimates and better M0yield scaling relationships. Also, studies
is immensely more complicated than the sudden pressurization of a utilizing recently available broadband regional data from the Soviet Union
spherical cavity in a homogeneous medium. As is evident from this have indicated remarkable stability of Lg amplitudes from Soviet nuclear
monograph, further understanding of the explosion source can be obtained explosions. More work is needed to understand the excitation of Lg for
only through multidisciplinary efforts involving researchers from many hard rock environments in light of what is known about nearsource
different branches of geophysics. What follows is a brief summary of the phenomenology.
working group reports and their recommendations for future efforts, as The main problems identified in the forwardmodeling workshop,
submitted by the chairmen of the three workshops. chaired by Steve Day, were in the areas of hydrodynamic yield estimation,
inelastic zone response, effects of secondary sources, and variations caused based on excitation of regional phases and propagation through low
by differences in test geometry and the testing medium. Problems in the attenuation media that our best opportunity for resolving some of the
hydrodynamic area are related to the interpretation of shockwave arrivals most difficult problems about the explosion source rests in the analysis of
at reduced yield thresholds. At strains of 10~3 to 10" 6 , the rock response broadband data collected on Soviet explosions. Improvements in the
is nonlinear, but stresses are insufficient to cause macroscopic failure, knowledge of source region phenomenology, and of geology of Soviet
which raises questions about the proper treatment in model calculations of test sites and propagation paths, need to keep pace with seismic data
the inelastic zone response. The effects of spall were brought up, and it acquisition if we are to use the new data to its full potential.
was pointed out that calculations suggest a stronger contribution from We acknowledge the assistance and cooperation of the technical
geophysical environments similar to those in the Soviet Union (i.e., hard chairmen in running the symposium, in the reporting of the workshop
rock sites). This emphasized the need for an improved understanding of results, and in their encouragement to publish a monograph based on the
spall and its effects on various seismic signals. The effects of testing meeting. We thank the authors for their patience and tolerance of the
geometry could also have an effect on monitoring capabilities, particularly process bringing this volume to fruition, and all reviewers for their
at reduced yield levels where the potential for evasion increases. (usually) timely and constructive criticisms of contributed manuscripts.
Understanding the causes of seismic coupling variations will require not Cynthia Talaber was the copy editor at LLNL working with the technical
only laboratory experiments and calculations, but also data from fullscale editors and authors on this project, and we appreciate the conscientious
field experiments. Data from nuclear tests provide the most directly and thorough qualities she brought to her work. Jean Miracle and Carol
useful observations and constitute the most effective benchmarks for a Corallo assisted with the correspondence to authors and reviewers and
quantitative evaluation of our forwardmodeling capabilities. attended to numerous administrative details associated with this volume.
In summary, the theme reiterated throughout the conference was the We thank them, and also Katie Young for her assistance in organizing the
need for databases of broadband seismic data at all distances and the meeting at the Granlibakken Lodge. Finally, we thank Dr. Max Koontz
availability of reliable nearfield data both for NTS explosions and of the DOE Office of Arms Control for establishing and supporting the
explosions in hard rock media. Broadband data offer the greatest hope of annual verification symposium from which this volume evolved.
tying source region phenomenology to observations made in the far field.
Not to be overlooked is the importance of broadband data now becoming Steven R. Taylor, Los Alamos National Laboratory
available in the Soviet Union, and the value these data have not only to Howard J. Patton, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
pure science but also to nuclear test verification. Arguments can be made Paul G. Richards, Columbia University
9/6/91
THE EXPLOSION SEISMI C SOURCE FUNCTION: MODEL S AN D SCALIN G LAWS REVIEWE D
Marvin D. Denn y
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, California 9455 0
Lane R. Johnson
Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley, California 9472 0
Abstract. Th e explosio n seismi c sourc e functio n i s th e potentia l This review begin s wit h a discussion o f the analyti c model s for th e
which satisfie s th e spherica l Pwav e equation . I t i s completel y de  seismic sourc e functio n o f a n undergroun d explosion ; considere d ar e
scribed b y fou r properties . The y ar e th e steadystat e value , rolloff , those wit h a n instantaneous risetime , wit h a finite risetime, wit h n o
overshoot, an d corne r frequency . I n on e approac h t o describin g th e steadystate value , an d with a steadystate value . Next , th e propose d
potential, th e spectra l rollof f is specified an d the other propertie s ar e scaling law s ar e discussed . I t conclude s wit h a regressio n analysi s o f
determined b y fittin g th e dat a a t prescribe d times . I n a variatio n o f the relationship s o f th e seismi c momen t an d corner frequenc y param 
this approach , th e rollof f is specified by assumin g a radial stres s o f a eters t o th e cavit y size .
known for m i s applie d uniforml y over a spherica l surface , locate d a t
a rang e wher e th e motio n i s assume d t o b e linear . I n thi s review , i t II. Th e Vibratin g Spher e Problem : Assumption s an d Definition s
was foun d tha t o f th e fou r properties , les s uncertaint y exist s abou t
the steadystat e valu e an d th e corne r frequenc y tha n abou t th e othe r In th e vibratin g spher e problem , a n explosio n i s modelle d a t an d
two. A majo r proble m ha s bee n scalin g th e result s fro m on e yiel d beyond som e critica l distanc e wher e th e materia l behave s elasticall y
to another . Ne w result s ar e presente d tha t sho w that , whe n th e geo  by a radia l stres s applie d uniforml y ove r a spherica l surface . Th e
physical propertie s o f th e sho t poin t ar e take n i n account , cuberoo t spherical surfac e whic h separate s inelasti c fro m elasti c respons e ha s
scaling o f th e yiel d i s appropriat e fo r th e steadystat e valu e an d th e been calle d th e equivalen t cavit y b y Sharp e [1942 ] an d th e equiva 
corner frequency , i.e. , yiel d t o th e firs t an d onethir d powers , respec  lent radiato r b y O'Brie n [1960] , whil e th e rang e t o thi s surfac e ha s
tively. Th e ne w result s als o sugges t tha t previou s assumption s abou t been calle d th e elasti c radiu s b y Tokso z e t al . [1964] . Th e solutio n
the for m o f th e applie d radia l stres s ar e probabl y no t appropriate . of thi s proble m i s give n belo w i n term s o f a potentia l whic h satis 
Finally, chemica l an d nuclea r explosion s appea r i n th e ne w result s fies th e Pwav e equation . Th e descriptio n o f th e Pwav e potentia l
to b e indistinguishable , suggestin g tha t experiment s usin g chemica l is th e basi c goa l o f th e propose d explosio n sourc e model s (Tabl e 1) .
explosions coul d ai d i n reducin g th e remainin g uncertaint y i n th e Two approache s hav e bee n take n t o describ e thi s Pwav e potential .
seismic sourc e functio n properties . In one , th e potentia l i s describe d b y approximatin g it s tim e histor y
with a parametri c mode l evaluate d a t ke y times . I n th e other , th e
I. Introductio n form o f th e radia l stres s i s assume d t o b e know n an d it s parameter s
are determine d fro m ke y aspect s o f spectra l data . Whil e thes e ap 
In his review o f seismic sourc e model s for underground nuclea r ex  proaches ar e equivalent , th e secon d require s a more detaile d physica l
plosions, Mass e [1981 ] list s fou r unanswere d question s an d conclude s knowledge. I t i s worthwhile , therefore , t o begi n wit h a revie w o f th e
from these tha t th e seismi c sourc e for a n undergroun d nuclea r explo  vibrating spher e problem .
sion remain s poorl y define d afte r tw o decade s o f study . Th e thir d The solutio n fo r thi s proble m ha s bee n give n b y severa l authors :
of Masse' s questions , "Wha t i s th e seismi c sourcetim e functio n fo r Jeffreys [1931 , 1971 , 1976] ; Sharp e [1942] ; Blak e [1952] ; Latte r e t al .
an undergroun d nuclea r explosion? " i s th e subjec t o f thi s review . [1959]; Cagniar d (translate d b y Flin n an d Di x [1962]) ; an d Gran t
Rodean [1981 ] als o found n o consensu s regardin g th e sourc e functio n and Wes t [1965] . Cagniard' s derivatio n usin g Laplac e transform s t o
among seve n paper s tha t h e reviewe d an d state d tha t ther e i s dis  simplify th e notatio n wil l b e followe d here . I n spherica l coordinate s
agreement abou t th e farfiel d highfrequenc y displacemen t spectru m the radia l displacemen t an d stres s ar e give n b y
and abou t th e overshoo t i n th e sourc e function . Therefore , a s th e
fourth decad e o f undergroun d nuclea r testin g begins , i t i s appropri  d<t>
ate t o revisi t som e o f thi s earl y work , t o reevaluat e th e conclusion s (i)
of a decad e ago , an d t o discus s som e promisin g recen t result s tha t
and
may lea d t o a consensus . (A + 2/i ) d 2<f> 4/xcty
a 2 dt 2
r dr'
(2)
respectively, wher e A and / i ar e th e Lame' s constants , a i s th e com 
pressional wav e speed , an d<j > i s th e potentia l tha t satisfie s the spher 
ical wav e equatio n
1 8
^ fo (3)\
Explosion Sourc e Phenomenolog y
Geophysical Monograp h 6 5 The genera l solutio n o f the wav e equation fo r an expanding spher 
Copyright 199 1 America n Geophysica l Unio n ically symmetri c disturbanc e i s give n b y
i
2 EXPLOSIO N SEISMIC SOURCE FUNCTION
High
frequency Initia l Fina l Radial
Reference Data sy asymptote motio n valu e stress
1. Toksoz , Regiona l
sRP n
" pC? 2 + 2tco e.s + C0 2)(^ + Tl) 2 r3 Li(0) = 0 0 a rr = P 0 te £ V(t)
BenMenaham, Rayleig h waves
and Harkrider [1964]
as + b 5 ,, N
2. Haskel l [1967 ] Freefield r4 =0 Not specified (4)
V  c J W (1 )
sRPn
3. Muelle r [1969] Nearregional
2
r2 H(0) = 0 0 a rr = P 0 e a i n(t)
P (S' + 2^co e5 + co £)(s + a )
^(J+^Pcd!)
4. Muelle r and Nearregional r2 n(0 ) = 0
Murphy [1971] ; p(j 2 + 2 ^ g v + w 2 )(5 + [(P  P0)e®it + />0]u(t)
Murphy [1977 ]
r2
3
as + b
5. vo n Seggern and Teleseismic short (2) n(0) = 0 Not specified (4)
Blandford [1972] period Pwave
j*
jy0r(S + 1 )
6. Helmberge r and Longperiod P and depends on £ 0 Not specified (4)
Harkrider [1972] Rayleigh waves (3)
3
, P 0R n We _ T is, i n general , no t th e sam e a s th e corne r frequency . Fo r example ,
sin(br + 9)), (9)
Denny an d Goodma n [1990 ] hav e show n tha t fo r th e nuclea r explo 
sion SALMON , (/ e ) r _ft e < / c , wher e R e i s the elasti c radius . I n thi s
where a = rjw e, b = u ey/l — rj 2, an d 0 = tan~ l(b/a) an d th e initial  case, th e corne r frequenc y wa s determine d b y th e radia l stress .
and steadystat e value s ar e a s expected . Rodea n [1971 ] illustrate s The fac t tha t th e displacemen t i s proportiona l t o th e RV P a t suf 
the result s fo r thi s an d thre e othe r case s o f radia l stress . ficiently larg e range s (calle d th e farfield) i s readily show n a s follows .
Equations (8 ) an d (9 ) ar e wel l know n i n th e engineerin g fields . From (1 ) an d (4) , th e transforme d radia l displacement , u r , i s give n
In mechanica l engineering , the y describ e a simpl e mas s suspende d by
on a spring: u; e i s th e undampe d circula r frequenc y (27r/ ) o f oscilla 
tion, 6 is the dampe d circula r frequency , an d r j i s the dampin g factor . Ur = ( « +  ) • (12)
a rr
Gurvich [1965 ] described (6) , (8 ) an d (9) i n terms of a resonance filter.
In fac t i n electrical engineering , the y describ e a lowpass filte r whos e
The contributio n o f th e term , ( s + i n (12 ) i s importan t onl y fo r
order i s determine d b y th e numbe r o f th e root s o f th e numerato r o r
ranges (calle d th e nearfield) wher e r i s not muc h greate r tha n a/u c,
denominator o f the rationa l polynomia l (8) , whicheve r i s larger. Th e
where uj c = 2wf c. A s th e rang e increases , a/r become s negligibl e
poles ar e th e root s o f th e denominato r an d th e zeroes ar e th e root s
compared t o u> c an d s  f a / r ~ s s o tha t th e farfiel d transforme d
of th e numerator . I n general , th e RD P (6 ) i s th e resul t o f applyin g
displacement, ujf , become s
a secondorde r lowpas s filte r t o th e radia l stress . Thus , th e orde r o f
(6) i s th e numbe r o f pole s o f th e radia l stres s plu s two . I n th e cas e sip
of a ste p i n radia l stres s (8) , fo r example , th e RD P i s a thirdorde r Uff
JJ ~ —. (13)
ar
lowpass filte r wit h 3 pole s an d n o zeroes .
In th e seismi c sourc e problem , th e dampin g facto r i n term s o f
Thus, th e spectru m o f th e farfiel d displacemen t i s proportiona l t o
Poisson's ratio , v , i s
the transfor m o f th e derivativ e o f th e sourc e function .
121/ Finally, th e farfiel d transformed kineti c energ y radiate d pe r uni t
T] = (10)
2(10' surface are a by th e vibratin g sphere , Ea , i s [Ak i an d Richards , 1980 ,
page 127 ]
As Poisson' s ratio ranges between zer o and one half ,77 ranges betwee n SEA = ipm; 2 , (14 )
y/2/2 an d zero . Thi s rang e o f dampin g mean s tha t (9) , beginnin g a t
zero, rise s t o a pea k a t T — 7r/ 6 an d the n die s ou t t o a stead y stat e
value o f ipoo . I n othe r words , i t overshoot s th e fina l valu e an d the n where v i s th e transforme d particl e velocity . Th e tota l energ y radi 
oscillates wit h decreasin g amplitud e abou t it . Th e amoun t o f over ated, Et , i s then , b y Parseval' s theore m
shoot, i.e . th e ratio of the peak t o the final value, i s determined b y th e
damping and increases as 77 decreases. I n mechanical engineering, thi s = p* r v(iu>)v(iu)* df, (15)
ET
response i s describe d a s underdampe d and , i n electrica l engineerin g 2w_c
terms, a s a goodtopoor oscillato r dependin g o n th e damping . where the asterisk denote s the comple x conjugate. Fo r a step function
The derivativ e o f t/> i s calle d th e reduced velocity potential (RVP ) in radia l stres s (15 ) become s wit h th e us e o f (13) , (8) , an d (11 )
and i s a mor e convenien t functio n t o wor k wit h tha n i s th e RDP .
This i s du e t o th e propertie s o f it s spectru m an d t o th e fac t tha t i t
is proportiona l t o th e farfiel d displacement . Thes e feature s ar e dis  (16)
2rjpa5
cussed below . I n spit e o f thes e mor e convenien t feature s o f the RVP ,
the RD P i s commonl y calle d th e seismic source function. It can also be shown, i n other cases where the transformed RVP's roll
For an RDP wit h a nonzero final value such as (8), th e modulus of off is steepe r tha n 2 , tha t th e energ y i s stil l proportiona l t o / C3M02.
the spectrum of the transforme d RDP (  \j > ,=,2*/) i s infinite at / = 0
but tha t o f th e transforme d RV P (sV> a= ,2ir/) finite a t / = 0 an d III. Th e RDP : Revie w o f Experimenta l Result s
is equa l t o V\do  Th e modulu s o f th e transforme d RV P is , therefore , There ha s neve r bee n a clea r relationshi p establishe d betwee n
commonly plotte d instea d o f tha t o f th e RDP . Fro m suc h a plo t source function s determine d fro m th e closein ( < 1 0 km ) dat a an d
four basi c sourc e functio n characteristic s ( seismic moment, comer the sourc e functio n fo r teleseismi c data . Th e concer n ha s bee n tha t
frequency, overshoot , an d rolloff) can , i n principle , b e estimated . the teleseismi c observation s depen d o n th e mediu m propertie s be 
The seismi c momen t fo r explosions, introduce d b y Miille r [1973 ] an d low th e sourc e volum e an d withi n perhap s several wavelength s o f th e
Aki e t al . [1974] , i s working point (i.e. , th e detonatio n point) , whil e th e closei n observa 
tions sometime s onl y sampl e a ver y narro w apertur e abov e o r t o on e
Mo = 47T/0C* 2V'oo (11) side o f th e workin g poin t an d withi n a range comparabl e t o perhap s
one teleseismi c wavelength . Effort s t o establis h suc h a relationshi p
The corne r frequency , / c , i s th e frequenc y wher e th e transforme d will b e reviewe d i n thi s section . Thre e o f th e fou r sourc e functio n
RVP's lowfrequenc y asymptot e intersect s it s highfrequenc y asymp  characteristics identifie d abov e wil l b e reviewe d i n thi s section ; th e
tote. Fro m (6) , i t ca n b e see n tha t th e RD P alway s ha s a corne r fourth (corne r frequency ) wil l b e addresse d i n th e nex t section . Th e
frequency, eve n i n th e simpl e cas e o f a n impulse i n radia l stress . Th e question o f th e steadystat e valu e o f the sourc e functio n wil l b e deal t
rolloff i s th e exponen t o f th e hig h frequenc y asymptot e (/—»oo ) o f with first , followe d b y th e rollof f an d th e overshoot . O f th e three ,
the transforme d RV P or , equivalently , o f th e farfiel d displacemen t the steadystat e issu e seem s t o b e th e bes t an d th e overshoo t th e
spectrum. Th e rollof f i s equa l t o th e differenc e betwee n th e numbe r least wel l understood .
of zeroes an d the numbe r o f poles. I n (8) , th e corne r frequenc y i s th e
same a s the boundary condition eigenfrequency , i.e . th e magnitud e o f A. SteadyState Value
the comple x pai r of poles specified by the boundary conditio n divide d
by 27r , / e = w e /2ir. Th e rolloff , in thi s case , i s 2. As pointe d ou t above , (6 ) show s tha t th e sourc e functio n i s a
It shoul d b e note d tha t th e boundar y conditio n eigenfrequenc y lowpass versio n o f th e applie d radia l stress . Therefore , i f th e radia l
4 EXPLOSIO N SEISMIC SOURCE FUNCTION
stress ha s a steadystat e value , th e sourc e functio n als o ha s one . I n volume samplin g proble m describe d above , th e relationshi p o f free 
the followin g th e observation s recorde d i n th e literatur e ar e summa  field estimate s o f th e sourc e function' s steadystat e componen t t o
rized. Som e author s refe r t o radia l stres s whil e other s writ e o f th e teleseismic an d surfacewav e signal s becam e a cause fo r concern .
source function . Liebermann an d Pomero y [1969 ] an d Molna r e t al . [1969] , study 
Brune an d Pomero y [1963 ] wer e th e firs t t o infe r th e characte r ing th e Ms/mi , discriminant , conclude d tha t a plausibl e explanatio n
of th e explosio n sourc e functio n fro m regional seismi c dat a (10 0 t o for the discriminant' s succes s i s that th e source function for an earth
1000 km) . The y studie d th e radiatio n pattern s an d th e phas e spec  quake ha s a steadystat e valu e whil e tha t fo r a n explosio n doe s not ,
tra of Rayleigh waves . Explosion s i n alluviu m an d tuf f were found t o implying tha t th e radia l stres s fo r a n explosion i s a decaying puls e o f
have a characteristic explosio n radiatio n patter n an d to be consisten t the for m given b y Tokso z e t al . [1964] . Savin o e t al . [1971] , studyin g
with th e phas e o f a ste p i n radia l stress . Unfortunately , a differen t Rayleigh wave s fro m earthquake s an d explosion s fro m th e Wester n
conclusion wa s reache d b y Tokso z e t al . [1964 ] wh o analyze d long  US, th e Aleutians , Novay a Zemlya , an d Centra l Asia , cam e t o th e
period Rayleig h wav e dat a als o take n a t regiona l distances . Afte r same conclusion . Muelle r [1969 ] modelled th e spectr a of seismic dat a
removing fro m th e dat a th e contributio n o f th e pat h an d recordin g taken at nearregional distance s (<20 0 km ) from several explosions a t
instrumentation, Tokso z e t al . conclude d tha t a radia l stres s o f th e the Nevad a Test Sit e (NTS ) usin g a simple exponentially decayin g ra
form <r rr = —Pote'^U^t) , wher e £ i s a n arbitrar y parameter , fi t th e dial stres s mode l wit h seemingl y satisfactor y results . Afte r studyin g
data bette r tha n di d a ste p function . Thus , a controvers y began . both short  an d longperio d data , Helmberge r an d Harkride r [1972 ]
found that th e Haskel l mode l wa s adequat e fo r shortperiod dat a bu t
7000 not fo r predictin g th e longperio d observations . T o overcom e thi s
deficiency, the y propose d a mode l (Tabl e 1 ) wit h n o steadystat e
component. Thus , unti l 1972 , man y investigator s clearl y favore d n o
steadystate value .
6000
Others wer e unsur e abou t th e natur e o f th e longperio d behavio r
of the sourc e function . Molna r [1971] , thoug h finding th e spectr a for
teleseismic P waves fro m the explosion s JORU M an d HANDLE Y t o
  500 0 decrease rapidl y wit h perio d (o c T~ 2 ) i n the range of 1 to 2 0 sec, con 
£ cluded tha t thi s coul d b e du e eithe r t o th e modulatin g effec t o f th e
surface reflection , pP, o r t o th e explosio n sourc e function . H e als o
•g 400 0 found tha t th e dat a wer e no t o f sufficien t qualit y o r quantit y t o rul e
4>
E out an y linea r combinatio n o f impulse an d ste p functio n component s
0 in th e sourc e function , unles s othe r dat a demonstrat e tha t th e sur 
« 300 0 face reflection does not hav e a major effect on the observe d spectrum .
a
(0 If thi s wer e true , h e conclude d th e dat a woul d the n prov e tha t th e
'S source function is primarily a n impulse. Wys s et al . [1971 ] undertook
g 2000 a study simila r t o that o f Molnar usin g teleseismi c P wave dat a from
3 the Amchitka explosions, MILRO W an d LONGSHOT, an d four shal
"O
tt>
DC
low earthquake s i n th e Aleutia n Island s an d came , essentially , t o th e
1000 same conclusions . Miille r [1973] , introducin g th e ide a o f th e seismi c
moment fo r explosions, foun d tha t strai n measurement s mad e o n th e
explosion BENHA M a t loca l distance s (282 9 km ) wer e consisten t
with a step function, bu t h e was puzzled b y th e apparen t longperio d
Pwave explosio n spectra behavior tha t appear s to be consistent wit h
Time (s) an impulsiv e sourc e note d b y othe r investigators .
While th e cas e agains t a steadystat e valu e becam e increasingl y
Fig. 1 . Reduce d displacemen t potentials . Th e dat a i n thi s figure
clouded, th e argumen t fo r a steadystat e valu e slowl y becam e mor e
are fro m Wert h an d Herbs t [1963] , Fig . 2 . Al l hav e a n overshoo t
convincing. Haskel l [1961 ] solve d th e quasistati c proble m o f a n
except tuff . Murph y [1979 ] show s th e result s fro m anothe r gage ,
expanding cavit y i n a plasti c medium . Thi s solutio n showe d tha t
where a surface reflection was not a problem, o n the sam e experimen t
the farfiel d permanen t displacemen t and , hence , th e steadystat e
(RAINIER) wit h a significant overshoot .
value o f th e sourc e functio n ar e dependen t o n th e final cavit y size .
Von Segger n an d Lambert [1970] , studying spectral ratio s of Rayleigh
The firs t experimenta l data , i n th e for m of RDP's , wer e reporte d waves o f both earthquake s an d explosion s betwee n period s o f 1 0 an d
by Wert h an d Herbs t [1963] . Th e data , reproduce d i n Figur e 1 , were 50 sec , foun d the m t o b e consisten t wit h Haskell' s model . Tsa i an d
taken i n th e freefield fro m nuclea r explosion s i n tuf f (RAINIER) , Aki [1971 ] studie d th e Rayleig h wave s fro m 1 0 smal l an d 3 larg e
alluvium (FISHER) , granit e (HARDHAT) , an d sal t (GNOME) . T o underground explosion s a t NT S recorde d a t farregional distance s
be i n th e freefield , th e gage s mus t b e burie d i n th e mediu m dee p (940 an d 240 5 km) . The y foun d th e result s t o b e i n excellen t agree 
enough s o tha t th e compressiona l wav e i s recorde d withou t interfer  ment wit h Haskell' s model . Muelle r an d Murph y [1971 ] use d th e
ence o f surfac e reflections . A s show n i n Figur e 1 , al l fou r RDP' s ris e quasistatic ide a o f computing th e final displacemen t and , hence , th e
to a maximu m (overshoot ) an d the n deca y t o a steadystat e value . RDP unde r th e assumptio n o f incompressibilit y fro m th e cavit y siz e
Berg an d Papageorg e [1964 ] fit th e RD P a t 398 m o n GNOM E wit h in thei r propose d sourc e mode l (Tabl e 1) . Ak i e t al . [1974 ] als o en 
a ste p i n radia l stress , obtainin g onl y a fai r fi t t o th e data . Haskel l dorsed this line of reasoning and argued that a nuclear explosion mus t
[1967] propose d a general mode l (Tabl e 1 ) t o describ e th e overshoo t have a steadystate value . The y als o considere d a spherical shel l sur 
and steadystat e valu e o f al l fou r RDP's . Unfortunately , th e dura  rounding th e nonelasti c zon e o f a n explosion , explainin g tha t thi s
tion o f th e freefiel d dat a i s shor t a s see n i n Figur e 1 an d nois e i n shell stretche s durin g th e passag e o f th e shoc k wave s an d remain s
the signa l make s computatio n o f th e steadystat e valu e difficul t an d stretched becaus e par t o f th e strai n i s plastic . Th e sourc e functio n
introduces uncertaint y i n th e result . Fo r thi s reaso n an d th e sourc e for explosion s mus t the n b e a ste p functio n fo r lon g period s sinc e
DENNY AN D JOHNSON 5
TO19
the relaxatio n tim e fo r plasti c deformatio n i s muc h longe r tha n th e
seismic periods ; indeed , sinc e explosion s creat e permanen t cavities , (a)
it i s infinite . Burdic k an d Helmberge r [1979] , i n modellin g teleseis  From v>
mic short  an d longperio d bod y waves , chos e no t t o us e th e mode l 10 18
longperiod o
of Toksoz e t al . [1964] , Muelle r [1969] , o r Helmberge r an d Harkride r TO
Rayleigh 3
[1972] since thes e model s d o not hav e a step componen t and , i n thei r
17 waves / T C
words, "Som e d c componen t shoul d realisticall y b e expected i f a cav 10 o>
fn CQ
ity i s forme d b y th e explosion. " A s see n i n Tabl e 1 , thi s argumen t —
E
apparently wa s powerful enoug h fo r two investigators t o chang e thei r c RO o Rn ' O
o r a
opinion; se e Muelle r [1969] , Muelle r an d Murph y [1971] , Helmberge r E 10 16 CO
o 3
and Harkride r [1972] , an d Helmberge r an d Hadle y [1981] . And , fi  Tr CP
nally, Patto n [1982 ] applie d th e metho d o f Brun e e t al . [1960 ] t o
E
o D /SH t°£
T
.C
t:
CO
4 NT S explosion s an d showe d clearl y tha t th e spectra l phase s o f th e 15 0)
 10 S
Rayleigh wave s ar e consisten t wit h a step function . 0) / c
c/> <D
Having give n a very persuasiv e argumen t fo r a steadystate value , T.
Aki e t al . [1974 ] the n argue d tha t th e seismi c momen t a s estimate d
10 14  A , From 3
o
from freefiel d dat a i s hig h b y a facto r o f 3 a s show n i n Figur e 2a , LU
closein
the underlyin g assumptio n bein g tha t th e seismi c momen t shoul d b e
data
independent o f th e sourc e media . However , thi s assumptio n i s no t I I
necessarily tru e an d th e apparen t discrepanc y ma y no t b e a s ba d a s 10 13
5
Figure 2 a shows . Murph y [1974 ] explaine d som e o f th e varianc e a s
being du e t o difference s i n th e sourc e properties . Assumin g tha t th e mb
higher yiel d explosion s ar e generally a t Pahut e Mes a whil e th e lowe r
yield one s ar e a t Yucc a Valley , h e derive d a momentmagnitud e re  Shot medium mb
lationship, Figur e 2b , fo r each regio n base d o n typica l Pwav e soun d A: Alluvium ° LRSM
speeds an d densities , usin g th e incompressibilit y relationshi p T: Tuff ° Basham
A
G: Granite Evernden
*l>oo = R 3c/i, (17 ) S: Salt • PDE
SH: Shale • Others
where R c i s th e cavit y radius . I n addition , Denn y an d Goodma n
D: Dolomite x Revised Salmon
[1990] have show n tha t th e SALMO N momen t (th e large r magnitud e
R: Rhyolite
of th e tw o sal t dat a points ) shoul d b e lowe r b y 40% , bringin g i t rea 
L: Limestone
sonably clos e t o th e surfac e wav e lin e i n Figur e 2a . Th e SALMO N
datum wa s overestimated becaus e th e estimat e wa s mad e fro m dat a 10 19  l I
taken i n th e nonlinea r zon e whic h i s easil y identifie d b y a peak par  I I  I I I II I  I I "
ticle velocit y spatia l rat e o f deca y exceedin g tha t expecte d fro m (13 ) = (b)
for linea r motion , i.e. , r  1 . A s show n b y Denn y an d Goodman , es 
10 1 8 ^ From
timates mad e i n thi s regio n ar e to o larg e du e t o larg e permanen t longperiod T.
displacements associate d wit h plasti c yielding . Thi s i s probabl y th e Rayleigh
case for the other explosions in hardrock (e.g . granite , salt , dolomite ,
1017U
shale, etc. ) a s well . Thi s sam e conclusio n wa s als o reache d b y Bach e
[1982]. Furthermore , Wert h an d Herbst [1963 ] do not provid e an y ev 
idence tha t th e measurement s fo r th e fou r explosion s the y reporte d o
E 1 0 16
are i n th e linea r region . A cursor y perusa l o f th e pea k particl e ve 
locity dat a give n b y Perre t an d Bas s [1975 ] suggests, tha t o f th e ex  E
o
plosions i n Aki' s table , th e measurement s fo r GNOME, HARDHAT , E 10 15
HANDCAR, an d GASBUGG Y wer e probably i n the nonlinea r zone , w
<D
while th e RAINIE R an d FISHE R measurement s ma y hav e bee n i n C/>
the linea r zone .
10 14 =• From
From th e foregoin g i t seem s possibl e tha t difference s betwee n
closein
closein an d regiona l surfac e wav e observation s ca n b e resolved . An  data
other indicatio n tha t thi s migh t b e true is given b y Murph y (thi s vol  'l l I ' l l I I ' l I I I ' '
ume; se e Figur e 5. ) I n Murphy' s Figur e 5, th e rati o o f th e regiona l 10>13
6
surface wav e moment s o f Ak i e t al . [1974 ] t o th e momen t compute d
from (17 ) i s shown . Th e explosion s i n Yucca Valle y see m t o b e mor e
consistent tha n thos e a t Pahut e Mesa . A s suggeste d b y Patto n (thi s Fig. 2 . Seismi c moment s v s magnitude , (a ) Thi s i s Fig . 1 o f Ak i
volume), thi s apparent discrepanc y ma y be due to a systematic differ et al . Th e moment s o n th e lefthan d sid e wer e compute d fro m free
ence i n th e releas e o f tectoni c energ y b y th e highe r yiel d explosions , field dat a whil e thos e o n th e righthan d sid e wer e compute d fro m
typically locate d a t Pahut e Mesa . longperiod surfac e wave data. Base d on this figure Aki et al . though t
B. Rolloff that th e freefiel d dat a wer e hig h b y a factor o f 3 . (b ) Thi s i s Fig . 1
of Murph y [1974] . Som e o f th e varianc e ca n b e accounte d fo r b y dif 
The asymptoti c behavio r o f the RV P a t hig h frequencie s depend s ferences in th e sourc e media . Th e uppe r lin e i s for Pahut e Mes a an d
on th e for m o f th e radia l stress . Fro m (6) , i t ca n b e see n tha t th e the lowe r on e i s for Yucca Flats . Som e o f the discrepanc y i s probabl y
rolloff wil l b e steepe r tha n  2 i f th e transfor m o f th e derivativ e o f also du e t o dat a take n i n th e inelasti c region . Suc h estimate s fro m
the radia l stres s ha s mor e pole s tha n zeroes . these dat a ar e expecte d t o b e high .
6 EXPLOSIO N SEISMIC SOURCE FUNCTION
In th e relativel y simpl e cas e o f a ste p functio n radia l stress , th e Of th e model s o f Tabl e 1 , fou r o f th e si x earlies t one s (1 , 3 , 4 ,
order o f th e mode l give n b y (8 ) i s 2 and th e rollof f i s  2 sinc e i t ha s and 6 ) wer e obtained b y specifyin g the radia l stress. Th e other s wer e
no zeroes . Mor e complicate d radia l stresses , requirin g highe r orde r determined b y approximatin g th e shap e o f eithe r th e reduce d dis 
models, ca n als o hav e a rollof f of2 . Model s 3 an d 4 i n Tabl e 1 are placement potentia l (model s 2, 5, an d 7 ) o r th e reduce d acceleratio n
examples o f thir d orde r model s wit h  2 rolloffs . I n mode l 3 , Muelle r potential (mode l 8) . Th e radia l stres s implied b y these models can be
[1969] assume d a n exponentiall y decayin g radia l stress , determined fro m (5) fo r any specified range. Th e rang e of most inter 
aT est, o f course , i s th e on e wher e th e motio n firs t becomes linear ; thus ,
crrr = P 0e U(r), (18) equating (6 ) t o mode l 8 (Tabl e 1) , th e radia l stres s fo r SALMO N a t
while i n model 4 , Muelle r an d Murph y [1971 ] assumed tha t th e radia l the elasti c radiu s ca n b e estimate d b y
stress i s a combination o f a Heaviside ste p functio n an d a n exponen  p(s2 + 2rj eujes i
tially decayin g term , = 2
(22)
R E ( S + 2TJCLJCS + w  ) ( a+ w i ) '
u T
<rrr = (P 0 + Pie * )U(r). (19)
where Vo o = 220 0 m 3 , rj e = 0.55 , tj c = 0.6 , p = 220 0 kg/m 3 , an d
The transforme d derivative s o f the radia l stresse s o f (18 ) an d o f (19 ) u>c, lji, an d tj e ar e 36.4 , 29. 4 6. 3 rad/sec , respectively , a s determine d
are by Denn y an d Goodma n [1990] . T o estimat e th e elasti c radiu s som e
Po (20) independent informatio n mus t b e used . Fo r th e SALMO N explo 
s+ a ' sion, Denn y an d Goodma n estimate d th e locatio n o f th e elasti c ra 
and dius b y extrapolatin g th e pea k particl e velocit y dat a fo r bot h th e
(l + P 1/P0)8 + LJ 1 SALMON an d th e STERLIN G explosion s t o th e rang e wher e th e
s<yrr = P 0 (21)
S + U) 1 linearity threshol d i s crossed . I n thi s case , threshol d i s base d o n th e
respectively. Bot h (20 ) an d (21 ) hav e on e pol e an d on e zero . There  amplitude o f the elastic precursor. (Th e elasti c precurso r i s thought ,
fore, eve n thoug h th e orde r fo r bot h RVP' s i s three , th e rollof f i s Glenn [1990] , t o b e th e resul t o f strai n hardenin g an d i t propagates ,
2. Thi s i s tru e sinc e th e highfrequenc y asymptote s o f the modul i o f in thi s case , i n th e inelasti c regio n wit h a n amplitud e equa l t o th e
(20) an d (21 ) ar e constants , P Q an d P Q + Pi , respectively . threshold valu e o f abou t 0. 3 m/ s an d a t Pwav e speed , ahea d o f a
Haskell's mode l (2 , Tabl e 1 ) i s a n exampl e o f a mode l where th e larger, slowe r plastic wave . Th e elastic precurso r an d the plastic wav e
implied radia l stres s ha s mor e pole s tha n zeroes . Thi s mode l wa s ultimately becom e a single wav e travellin g a t Pwav e speed whe n th e
derived b y requirin g acceleratio n t o b e continuou s a t r = 0 . Ap  particle velocit y fall s belo w th e threshold. ) Usin g thi s procedure , a n
plication o f (13 ) an d th e initialvalu e theore m t o thi s mode l show s elastic radiu s o f abou t 80 0 m wa s found . Th e correspondin g radia l
that i t is , i n fact, continuou s t o acceleratio n an d tha t it s rollof f is 4. stress compute d fro m (22 ) i s a s show n i n Figur e 3 an d look s lik e a
Similarly, model s wit h rolloff s of  3 an d  2 ar e continuou s a t r = 0 damped sinewav e superimpose d o n a small ste p function .
to velocit y an d displacement , respectively .
Von Segger n an d Blandfor d [1972 ] note d tha t Haskell' s model ,
when scale d u p i n yield , faile d t o satisf y th e spectra l ratio s o f short  G> 2 0~
«
period teleseismic dat a from the three nuclear explosions at Amchitka .
1 5 10
They wer e able to obtain a better fit of the spectral ratios using mode l 03  O _
=5 ~ 0
5 (Tabl e 1 ) with a rolloff of 2. Thi s model wa s obtained by reducin g (0
the orde r o f Haskell' s mode l b y two .
0 0.0 5 0.1 0 0.1 5 0.2 0 0.2 5
Peppin [1976 ] compute d 14 0 P wave spectr a o f explosions , earth 
quakes, an d explosioninduce d aftershocks , al l withi n th e NT S an d Reduced time (s)
all fro m wideban d seismi c dat a a t loca l (<3 0 km ) an d nearregiona l
Fig. 3 . Radia l stress . Thi s i s Fig . 2 2 fro m Denn y an d
distances (20 0 t o 30 0 km). Fro m these h e concluded tha t th e farfield
Goodman [1990 ] showin g th e estimate d radia l stres s a t th e elasti c
source spectr a deca y a t leas t a s fas t a s frequenc y cubed ; a rolloff o f
radius fo r SALMON . Not e tha t th e fina l steady stat e valu e o f abou t
3 o r steeper .
2 bars occurs outsid e th e tim e fram e shown an d fro m (6) th e RD P i s
Helmberger an d Hadle y [1981 ) showe d tha t a mode l continuou s
a lowpas s versio n ( / c ~ l H z ) o f thi s signal .
only t o displacemen t produce s a n unrealisti c discontinuit y i n syn 
thetic seismogram s and , therefore , i s unsatisfactory . Thei r mode l (7 , An interesting , worthwhil e exercis e woul d b e t o deriv e th e equiv 
Table 1 ) i s continuou s t o particl e velocit y an d wa s obtaine d b y re  alent radia l stres s for those fe w explosions where freefield radial par 
ducing th e orde r o f Haskell' s b y one , fo r a rollof f o f 3 . Usin g thi s ticle velocit y measurement s wer e mad e a t severa l ranges . Fo r thos e
model, La y e t al . [1984 ] satisfactoril y modelle d th e teleseismi c dat a explosions whos e dat a ar e onl y i n th e nonlinea r zone , th e result s
from the Amchitk a nuclea r explosions . Th e model' s rollof f o f 3 di d would obviousl y b e fictitiou s bu t thei r progressiv e chang e i n shap e
not caus e an y problem s i n th e 0.5  t o 3H z rang e a s foun d b y vo n with rang e shoul d b e enlightening .
Seggern an d Blandfor d [1972 ] with Haskell' s origina l model . Th e dif 
ference wa s no t i n th e chang e o f th e rolloff , but i n th e fac t tha t La y C. Overshoot
et al . use d th e empiricall y obtaine d corne r frequencie s of Helmberge r
and Hadle y [1981] ; whereas, vo n Segger n an d Blandfor d simply cube  The freefiel d dat a o f Wert h an d Herbs t [1963] , Figur e 1 , sho w
root scale d thos e obtaine d b y Haskel l fo r granite . a significan t overshoo t fo r bot h hardrocks , granit e an d salt ; how 
Denny an d Goodma n [1990] , borrowin g electrica l engineerin g sys  ever, fo r th e porou s rock s th e dat a sho w a significan t overshoo t fo r
tem identificatio n techniques , modelle d th e freefiel d dat a an d th e alluvium bu t no t fo r tuff . Subsequen t studie s hav e produce d con 
spectral ratio s o f local (10 t o 11 1 km ) seismi c dat a fro m th e nuclea r tradictory result s wit h th e onl y poin t o f agreemen t bein g th e resul t
explosions, SALMO N an d STERLING , i n sal t wit h a rationa l poly  for alluvium . Th e alluviu m dat a o f Wert h an d Herbs t i s consisten t
nomial. The y foun d tha t a thirdorde r mode l (Tabl e 1 ) wa s require d with tha t o f Perre t [1971 ] fo r th e MERLI N explosio n an d o f Mur 
to adequatel y describ e th e risetim e observe d i n th e freefiel d dat a phy an d Bennet t [1979 ] fo r th e FISHE R an d th e MERLI N explo 
and th e highfrequenc y rollof f of 3 observed i n the spectra l ratio s o f sions. Murph y an d Bennet t als o studie d freefiel d dat a fo r th e ex 
the tw o explosions . plosions RAINIER , MUDPACK , an d DISCU S THROWE R i n tuff .
DENNY AN D JOHNSON 7
The DISCU S THROWE R dat a were taken clos e to the tuff/paleozoic effect of spall coul d mimi c overshoo t i n farfield spectral observation s
interface makin g th e signal s to o comple x t o use . Fo r RAINIER , the y (c.f. Taylo r an d Randal l [1989]) .
found, fo r a gag e mos t likel y i n th e linea r zon e an d als o les s likel y
to b e affecte d b y a surfac e reflectio n tha n th e on e use d b y Wert h IV. Scaling : Theor y an d Observation s
and Herbst , a n overshoot o f abou t 2 to 1 . MUDPAC K als o showed a
A. Theory
significant overshoot . Finally , Denn y an d Goodma n [1990 ] studyin g
SALMON foun d n o significan t overshoo t fo r salt . Therefore , i f th e Cuberoot scalin g come s fro m a simpl e energy , volum e relation 
salt an d granit e data , give n b y Wert h an d Herbst , ar e i n erro r an d ship. Fo r a give n chemica l explosive , it s specific energy , i.e. , energ y
this i s a stron g possibilit y becaus e th e dat a i n questio n wer e take n per uni t mas s o f a n explosion, i s a constant s o tha t it s energ y releas e
in th e nonlinea r region , the n on e migh t conclud e tha t porou s medi a is simpl y dependen t o n th e mass , o r volume , o f th e explosive . Fo r a
have a significan t overshoo t whil e nonporou s medi a d o not . Th e nuclear explosion , th e volum e o f th e firebal l i n ai r o r o f th e vapor 
conclusion fo r th e porou s medi a seem s wel l establishe d bu t th e on e ized zon e i n th e eart h i s proportiona l t o th e energy . Th e energ y re 
for hardroc k i s mor e speculative . leased by a nuclear explosion i s called it s yield an d is given in kilotons
Other contradictor y observation s hav e bee n made . Ak i e t al . (1 k t = 4. 2 x 10 12 J) whil e th e energ y o r yield o f a chemical explosio n
[1974] compare d loca l dat a take n a t NT S wit h longperio d Rayleig h is usuall y quote d i n kilograms eve n thoug h al l chemica l explosion s
wave dat a an d conclude d tha t a larg e overshoo t i n th e sourc e func  do no t hav e th e sam e specifi c energy . Sinc e th e unit s o f volum e ar e
tion, 4 o r 5 times th e residua l value , i s require d t o explai n bot h set s length cubed , th e yiel d i s proportional t o length cubed, o r conversely ,
of data . Peppi n [1976 ] conclude d fro m hi s stud y o f 14 0 explosion s length (/ ) i s proportiona l t o th e cuberoo t o f th e yiel d ( / o c W 1^3).
and earthquakes tha t sourc e spectra of explosions i n tuff are flat from Specific energ y ha s th e unit s o f lengt h divide d b y time , al l square d
0.2 t o 1. 0 H z (n o overshoot) . ((l/t) 2 ). Therefore , i n orde r fo r th e unit s o f th e specifi c energ y t o
Burdick an d Helmberge r [1979 ] modelle d teleseismi c short  an d be consistent , tim e mus t als o b e proportiona l t o th e cuberoo t o f th e
longperiod bod y wave s usin g syntheti c seismogram s an d conclude d yield ( t o c W 1 / 3 ), wher e tim e refer s to fireball or cavity growth. Fro m
that th e sourc e functio n mus t hav e a substantia l overshoot . (8), th e RD P i s see n t o hav e th e unit s o f volum e whil e thos e o f th e
Helmberger an d Hadle y [1981 ] trie d t o deduc e th e overshoo t param  seismic momen t ar e th e sam e a s energy . Therefore , bot h quantitie s
eter (controlle d b y th e zer o in th e RDP ) i n their mode l fro m closei n should scale as (i.e. , b e proportiona l to ) th e yiel d t o th e firs t power .
data recorde d a t 8 k m o n JORUM . Th e frequenc y paramete r ( k i n Frequency, obviously , shoul d b e inversel y proportiona l t o th e cube 
ref. 7 , Table 1 ) was readily determined b y the dominan t perio d of the root o f th e yield .
data, bu t th e overshoo t parameter , B , coul d no t b e uniquel y deter  Care mus t b e take n whe n scalin g data . Amplitude s fro m narrow 
mined fo r tw o reasons . First , th e arriva l time s o f pP and/o r relate d and wideban d dat a d o no t scal e i n th e sam e way s an d tim e ca n
slapdown phenomena are such that they arriv e during the later half of not b e scale d whe n recorde d o n narrowban d systems . Onl y tim e i n
the direc t Pwav e an d ar e superimposed o n it ; an d second , th e band  the sourc e functio n ca n b e scaled . Arriva l time s obviousl y ca n no t
width o f th e dat a i s suc h tha t th e zer o i n th e HelmbergerHadle y be scaled . Therefore , onl y reduce d tim e fro m signal s recorde d b y
model make s a n importan t contributio n an d canno t b e separate d wideband instrumentation , i.e. , bandwidt h greate r tha n th e corne r
from ipo o • frequency o f th e signal , an d i n th e freefiel d can b e scaled .
Douglas an d Hudso n [1983 ] demonstrate d tha t th e mai n feature s Insight int o ho w groun d motio n scale s wit h yiel d ca n b e gaine d
of the WWSSN seismograms shown by Burdick an d Helmberger [1979 ] from th e proble m o f th e vibratin g sphere . Fo r a ste p i n applie d
and Helmberger an d Hadley [1981 ] can be accounted for , with a source pressure, th e farfiel d transforme d displacemen t i s obtaine d b y sub 
with n o significan t overshoot . Reverberation s i n th e crus t a t th e stituting (8 ) int o (13) ,
source an d th e receive r ca n accoun t fo r mos t o f the variation s i n th e
observed Novaya Zemlya WWSSN L P seismograms shown by Burdick
and Helmberge r [1979] , makin g i t impossibl e t o dra w an y fir m con  !S
" ar(s 2  f 2r)u es + w e 2 ) {Z6)
clusions abou t th e overshoot . Burdic k e t al . [1984 ] did essentially th e
same analysi s a s Helmberge r an d Hadle y [1981 ] but o n th e Amchitk a At a fixe d range , th e onl y quantitie s i n (23 ) tha t scal e ar e V'o o an d
explosions, MILRO W an d CANNIKIN , usin g local dat a (recorde d a t uje. Therefore , fo r lo w frequencie s ( / < u e /27t), th e groun d motio n
7 t o 2 0 km) . Th e HelmbergerHadle y [1981 ] mode l parameter s wer e in al l o f it s form s (displacement , velocity , an d acceleration ) i s the n
evaluated fo r bot h explosions . The y found , a s other s had , tha t th e proportional t o V'o o whil e fo r hig h frequencie s ( / > o; e/27r) the y ar e
overshoot paramete r coul d no t b e resolved . proportional t o ipoo^e  Thus , fo r lo w frequencie s th e groun d motio n
In th e MuellerMurph y mode l th e zer o i s yiel d dependent , mak  scales a s th e firstpowe r o f th e yiel d whil e fo r hig h frequencies , i t
ing th e overshoo t als o dependen t o n yield . I n th e previou s section , scales a s th e cuberoo t o f th e yield . Thi s resul t ha s bee n derive d b y
the low  an d highfrequenc y asymptote s fo r thi s mode l wer e show n several investigators , e.g. , O'Brie n [1957,1960] , Latte r e t al . [1959] ,
to b e Po an d P Q + P\, respectively . Th e rati o o f high  t o th e low  and Carpente r e t al . [1962] .
frequency asymptot e control s th e overshoot ; th e highe r th e ratio , th e Broadband displacement s an d velocities , however , d o no t scal e i n
larger th e overshoot . I n th e MuellerMurph y mode l thi s rati o i s a the sam e way . Fro m (9 ) an d (13) , th e broadban d farfiel d displace 
proportional t o h° 07 W°13 wher e h i s th e dept h o f buria l an d W i s ment i s
the yield . Thi s featur e i s contrar y t o tha t foun d b y La y e t al . [1984 ] V'oo^e o r • / » \ /o>i \
who determine d tha t th e HelmbergerHadle y [1981 ] sourc e mode l i s
best fi t i f the amoun t o f overshoot decrease s wit h increasin g yiel d o r and th e velocit y i s
depth o f burial .
These contradictor y result s ope n th e fiel d fo r othe r interpreta 
tions. On e possibilit y i s tha t th e overshoo t i s controlle d b y neithe r
the dept h no r th e yield . Dept h o f burial i n al l thes e model s coul d b e
^ a K ^ V ' ' ' " " ' ™ ^ ' ' ' ^ (25 )
just a surrogat e variabl e fo r som e workin g poin t materia l property . where 0 = tan~ 1(a/b). Fro m (24 ) an d (25) , i t ca n b e see n tha t a t
Then th e overshoo t coul d b e independen t o f yield an d dept h an d de a fixe d rang e displacement s woul d b e expecte d t o scal e a s th e two 
pendent onl y o n th e workin g point' s materia l properties . Also , th e thirds powe r o f yiel d an d velocitie s a s th e onethir d powe r o f yield .
8 EXPLOSIO N SEISMIC SOURCE FUNCTION
This may seem like a contradiction, sinc e the unit s of particle velocit y 1/3 o r 1/4 , respectively .
and displacemen t woul d indicat e tha t th e forme r should b e indepen  Yield i s not th e onl y importan t propert y tha t determine s th e cor 
dent o f yiel d an d th e latte r shoul d b e proportiona l t o th e cuberoo t ner frequency . I f th e energ y deposite d b y a n explosio n int o th e sur 
of th e yield . Whe n viewe d i n term s o f th e scaled range, R/W 1^3, rounding materia l i s a given fractio n o f the yiel d fo r a given materia l
however, ther e i s n o contradiction . Particl e velocit y i s the n see n t o then, b y (16 )
be independen t o f yiel d an d displacemen t i s see n t o b e proportiona l f3 o c pa*E/M2. (28 )
to yiel d t o th e onethir d powe r whil e bot h ar e inversel y proportiona l
As discusse d above , Muelle r an d Murph y [1971 ] hypothesize d tha t
to th e scale d range . Freefiel d dat a ar e typicall y presente d i n thi s
the elasti c radius , whic h b y thei r definition s i s proportiona l t o a / f c ,
form, e.g. , Perre t an d Bas s [1975] . is inversel y dependen t o n th e overburde n a s i n (26) . Thus , th e cor 
Carpenter e t al . [1962 ] use d cuberoo t scalin g o f freefiel d dat a ner frequenc y woul d b e expecte d t o b e directl y dependen t o n th e
from th e RAINIE R explosio n t o stud y th e amplitudeyiel d scalin g overburden an d inversel y dependen t o n th e cuberoo t o f th e yiel d
question. The y conclude d tha t for most practica l application s (mean 
ing narrowban d recordings ) i t appear s tha t a power la w ca n b e used , /, 3 ( X a3(pghfl"/W. (29 )
although fo r ver y larg e charge s (o r hig h frequencies ) th e amplitud e
will increas e les s rapidl y tha n charg e siz e an d ma y eve n decrease . In th e rea l eart h bot h densit y an d wav e spee d ten d t o increas e wit h
This effec t i s du e t o th e bandwidt h o f th e recordin g instrument . Fo r depth. Furthermore , th e dept h o f burial o f a given devic e i s dictate d
small explosion s th e corne r frequenc y woul d b e abov e th e frequenc y by containmen t requirement s t o b e proportiona l t o th e cuberoo t o f
of the peak response of the seismograph, bu t for larger ones the corner the expecte d yield . Thus , bot h (28 ) an d (29 ) predic t tha t th e cor 
would mov e close r unti l finall y i t woul d b e belo w th e pea k response . ner frequenc y wil l decreas e les s rapidl y wit h yiel d tha n predicte d b y
Similar result s wer e obtaine d b y Wert h an d Herbs t [1963 ] an d b y simple cuberoo t scaling .
Berg an d Papageorg e [1964] . Thus , th e amplitud e measure d o n a
narrowband seismograp h coul d b e expecte d t o b e A o c W b, wher e 6 B. Observations
ranges fro m 1. 0 t o 1/3 . Sinc e th e seismi c magnitud e i s proportiona l 1. Amplitude Scaling. Earl y experimenta l result s seeme d t o sup 
to th e lo g o f th e amplitude , m o c log A, the n th e seismi c magnitud e port simpl e cuberoo t scaling . Gaskel l [1956 ] performe d severa l ex 
is proportiona l t o th e lo g o f th e yield , m o c 6 lo g W. I f th e corne r periments i n cla y usin g smal l chemica l explosives . Th e cavit y siz e
frequency o f th e signal s ar e alway s greate r tha n th e frequenc y o f th e was foun d t o b e consisten t wit h cuberoo t scaling , an d th e ampli 
peak respons e of the seismograph, a s it is for the longperiod WWSS N tudes o f refracte d wave s wer e found t o be proportiona l t o th e weigh t
seismograph, the n th e slop e o r exponen t 6 would b e expecte d t o b e of th e charge . O'Brie n [1957 , 1960 ] performe d a regressio n analysi s
unity. on three set s o f data taken o n smal l chemica l explosion s t o determin e
Mueller [1969 ] assume d tha t th e mediu m "o n th e large " ha s lo w the scalin g exponent . Th e rang e o f result s wa s 0.8 8 t o 1.1 2 wit h th e
tensile strengt h an d tha t th e limitin g pressur e i s therefor e i n th e mean valu e o f 0.99±.18 . Latte r e t al . [1959 ] found tha t a t a Caltec h
neighborhood o f the overburden pressure in order to keep the mediu m seismic statio n locate d 18 0 k m fro m NT S th e recorde d amplitude s
from going into tension an d propagating cracks . Muelle r an d Murph y were proportiona l t o th e firstpowe r o f yield .
[1971, Tabl e 1 ] used thi s logi c t o infe r fro m analysis o f nearregiona l Then th e pictur e bega n t o ge t clouded . O'Brie n [1969 ] performed
and freefield data that th e peak pressure, P p, i s 1. 5 times overburden , many experiment s i n sandston e an d cla y usin g chemica l explosive s
i.e., P p = P Q + P I = 1.5 pgh, where P o an d P\ ar e the same a s in (19) , with charg e weight s o f 0.0 8 t o 9. 5 kg . Broadban d measurement s o f
h i s th e dept h o f buria l an d g i s gravity . The y als o assume d tha t radial stres s wer e foun d t o b e dependen t o n yiel d t o th e 0.5 5 powe r
the pea k pressur e follow s a powe r la w i n th e inelasti c region , P p o c in bot h materials , an d a significan t dependenc e o n dept h wa s als o
{r/W1f3)~n. Equatin g thes e tw o relationships fo r the pea k pressure , found. I n cla y th e pea k stres s wa s foun d t o deca y a s h~° 38 an d
they determine d th e elasti c radiu s t o b e relate d t o overburden a s the halfperio d a s h~ 0 8 . I n sandstone , pea k displacement s wer e
follows ^ ^ found t o deca y a s / i  0 5 1 an d halfperiod s a s /i~ 0 6 1 . Basha m an d
Horner [1973 ] studyin g abou t 6 0 explosions , foun d Rayleig h wave s
W»73 a (pghy/"' (26)
to b e proportiona l t o th e 1.2powe r o f yiel d fro m lo w yield s t o ove r
Invoking th e incompressibilit y argument , the y foun d 3 megatons . Springe r an d Hanno n [1973 ] foun d th e slop e i n th e
magnitudeyield relationshi p fo r bod y wave s t o b e slightl y greate r
p than 0. 6 a t regiona l distance s bu t t o b e almos t 1. 0 a t teleseismi c
° = T(f ) 3
' (27)
distances, whil e fo r Rayleighwav e dat a the y foun d th e slop e t o b e
where th e cavit y radius , R c, fro m empirical studie s i s give n b y R c = about 1.1 . Murph y [1977 ] showe d tha t th e MuellerMurph y mode l
cW°29h~011. A t lo w frequencie s th e MuellerMurph y mode l pre  with it s dept h dependencie s i s consisten t with : 1 ) th e observe d yiel d
dicts tha t V'o o and, therefore , amplitude s shoul d scal e a s W° 87 /h0 33 , scaling exponent s fo r large sample s o f NT S explosion s belo w th e wa 
while a t hig h frequencie s the y scal e a s W l ^ 3 h 0 f>S3 . Assumin g tha t ter tabl e usin g nearregiona l broadban d spectra , 2 ) th e broadban d
the dept h o f burial scale s a s th e cuberoo t o f th e yield , thes e scalin g Rulison/Gasbuggy spectra l rati o representativ e o f explosions a t ver y
laws becom e W° 7 6 an d W° 527 , respectively . different scale d depth s i n hardrock , 3 ) regional P n amplitude s fro m
It i s wort h notin g tha t groun d motio n scalin g a t hig h frequencie s NTS explosion s an d 4 ) bot h shortperio d an d longperio d teleseis 
(/ > f c) proportiona l t o th e cuberoo t o f th e yiel d applie s onl y t o mic P wav e spectr a observe d fro m a larg e sampl e o f Pahut e Mes a
a mode l whos e rollof f i s 2 . Whe n applyin g cuberoo t scalin g t o a explosions coverin g th e yiel d rang e fro m 15 5 t o 130 0 kt . Murph y
model whos e rollof f is 3, th e spectral amplitude s a t hig h frequencie s also note d tha t th e observe d longperio d surfac e wav e dat a ar e in 
are found t o b e independen t o f yield; while fo r a model whos e rollof f consistent wit h th e MuellerMurph y mode l an d suggeste d tha t ther e
is  4 suc h a s Haskell's , the y decreas e wit h yield . Fo r a model wit h a are factors contributin g t o th e longperiod , teleseismi c surfac e wave s
rolloff of 3 o r 4 t o hav e highfrequenc y amplitude s increasin g wit h which ar e no t accounte d fo r b y th e simpl e sphericall y symmetri c
yield th e corne r frequenc y mus t someho w b e modifie d either throug h source (o r isotropic) models .
some inheren t dept h dependenc e o r throug h som e materia l propert y Marshall e t al . [1979 ] studie d a tota l o f 4 6 explosion s an d foun d
which change s uniforml y wit h dept h s o tha t th e corne r frequenc y the slop e fo r rag, a teleseismi c bodywav e magnitude , t o b e abou t
would ultimatel y depen d inversel y o n yiel d t o som e powe r les s tha n 0.8 fo r U S explosion s belo w th e wate r tabl e i n porous , saturate d me 
DENNY AN D JOHNSON 9
dia an d t o b e abou t 1. 0 fo r U S an d USS R explosion s i n hardrock . for th e isotropi c componen t gav e reduce d varianc e i n th e momen t
The slop e fo r the sur f acewave magnitud e wa s found t o b e abou t 1.0 . versus yield plot s over thos e mad e withou t removin g th e spal l contri 
Larson [1982 ] found tha t th e pea k particl e velocitie s measure d i n th e bution. I n addition , th e yiel d scalin g exponen t fo r explosion s belo w
laboratory fro m smal l chemica l explosion s i n sal t model s coul d b e the wate r tabl e wa s reduce d fro m abou t 1 to 0.84 , i.e. , close r t o tha t
cuberoot scale d ove r 1 0 order s o f magnitud e o f energ y t o thos e ob  expected fro m MuellerMurph y model .
tained fro m the SALMO N experiment . From the foregoing, ther e seem s t o b e some reaso n t o believe tha t
Lay e t al . [1984 ] studie d th e Amchitk a explosions , whic h wer e the sam e scalin g shoul d appl y t o bot h long  an d shortperio d data .
thought t o hav e littl e tectoni c release , s o tha t longperio d Rayleig h There als o seem s t o b e a consensu s buildin g tha t simpl e cuberoo t
waves coul d b e use d withou t bias . The y foun d tha t th e Helmberger  scaling is not adequat e i n the real earth, thoug h i n the idealized worl d
Hadley [1981 ] sourc e mode l i s bes t fi t i f th e longperio d leve l o f th e of laborator y models , i t probabl y applies . Thus , som e dept h depen 
explosion potential , ^oo , increase s wit h yield , W , b y V'o o oc W° 90 , o r dence suc h a s i n th e MuellerMurph y mode l i s needed , bu t i t i s no t
with yiel d an d dept h b y V>o o oc W/h 1/3. clear whethe r som e sourc e materia l propert y o r propertie s coul d b e
Nuttli [1986 ] foun d tha t th e magnitudeyiel d relationshi p ha d a used t o replac e depth . An d lastly , ther e seems t o be a consensus tha t
plope o f abou t 0. 7 fo r L g waves . Patto n [1988] , applyin g Nuttli' s there is no curvature i n the magnitudeyiel d relationshi p a s predicte d
method t o a differen t dat a set , foun d tha t th e slop e wa s 0.95±0.0 3 by Carpente r e t al . an d others. Non e of the investigation s mentione d
for explosion s i n dry , porou s materia l an d 0.80±0.0 2 i n saturated , above foun d a nee d fo r anythin g bu t a straigh t line .
porous material . Vergin o [1989 ] found th e slop e t o b e 0.7 1 fo r 1 9 an 2. Corner frequency scaling. T o ai d i n characterizatio n o f th e
nounced Sovie t explosions . Vergin o an d Mensin g [1990 ] found , afte r source, Wys s e t al . [1971 ] introduce d th e ide a o f source dimension
correcting for gas porosity , th e slop e i n the magnitudeyiel d relation  (source radius ) t o explosions , r s = cv/f c wher e c i s a constan t ex 
ship to be 0. 9 for a very large set of regional dat a for NTS explosions . pected t o b e nea r unit y an d v i s one of the elasti c wav e velocities. B y
Finally, Patto n (thi s volume ) attempte d t o explai n som e o f th e introducing a constant o f proportionality betwee n th e deca y constan t
differences i n th e scaling . H e studie d tw o classe s o f nonisotropic (u>i i n (19) ) an d th e boundar y conditio n eigenfrequency , Muelle r
sources fo r NT S explosions : tectoni c releas e an d explosiondrive n and Murph y [1971 ] obtained estimate s o f th e elasti c radiu s show n i n
block motion . A nonisotropi c sourc e i s on e du e t o som e non  Figure 4a . I n th e cas e o f SALMON , th e MuellerMurph y estimat e
spherically symmetri c explosioninduce d phenomenon . Th e mai n differs b y abou t a facto r o f tw o fro m a recen t estimat e b y a differ 
characteristic of tectonic release i s that of strikeslip motions on faults ent procedure . Th e elasti c radiu s estimated b y Denn y an d Goodma n
at sho t leve l o r deepe r whil e tha t o f blockdrive n motio n i s mainl y [1990] i s 46052 0 m/kt 1 / 3 whil e th e MuellerMurph y valu e i s abou t
of vertica l motio n abov e th e sho t level , ofte n i n direction s opposit e 270 m/kt 1 / 3 . I n contrast, th e DennyGoodma n estimat e o f the sourc e
to th e naturall y occurrin g faultin g i n th e Basi n an d Range . I n thi s radius ( c = 1 an d v = a ) compare s wel l wit h th e MuellerMurph y
analysis, h e use d fundamenta l an d highermod e surfacewav e dat a estimate a s show n i n Figur e 4b . Thes e result s wer e obtaine d b y
recorded a t regiona l distance s an d estimates o f the spal l sourc e t o in  removing th e MuellerMurph y constant s o f proportionalit y fo r tuff ,
vert th e dat a int o isotropi c an d nonisotropi c components . Fro m th e rhyolite, shal e an d sal t (1.5 , 2.0 , 2.4 , an d 4.5 , respectively) . Th e
estimates o f th e nonisotropi c components , h e tentativel y concluded , variance i n th e MuellerMurph y scale d elasti c radiu s plo t i s see n t o
pending furthe r study , tha t ther e ar e tw o "fields " o f explosions char  be considerabl y greate r tha n tha t i n th e scale d sourc e radiu s plot .
acterized b y differen t nonisotropi c mechanism s s o tha t ther e i s a The scale d sourc e radiu s plo t als o show s remarkabl e agreemen t be 
reason fo r difference s i n scaling . Fo r explosion s abov e 30 0 kt , tec  tween differen t materials . Th e significanc e o f thi s ma y b e tha t th e
tonic releas e wit h strikesli p faultin g i s a major contributo r whil e for mechanism tha t control s th e generatio n o f th e corne r frequenc y i s
explosions belo w 30 0 k t blockdrive n faultin g wit h revers e dipsli p nearly materialindependen t bu t tha t th e on e tha t control s th e elas 
motions i s the majo r contributor . Th e resul t o f th e inversio n proces s tic radiu s i s highl y materialdependent . I n either case , however , i t i s
10 11 1 1 1 ii , 1 i1 1—T—i— r 10
8 : (a ) 8 : (b)
6 6
<
4
5? 
SALMON
 5? 4
• L
It 2  •  jt2
=3
Hd 0
1 0 ',2 — •
D o £1 0
8
• •dB • —
o8
SALMON
6 ye / D
B
4 cn
o
^4
MM71.tuff
•

q> MM71.tuff
A M—M71 .salt o
u M—M71 .salt
o MM71.shale  "2 M—M71 .shale
o DG90.salt DG90.salt
10' ii i i i ., , 1 ii i i i i 10 1
6 8 2 6 8 2 68
10' 10° 10 ' 10°
Overburden (Pa) Overburden (Pa )
Fig. 4 . Scale d radiu s v s overburden, (a ) Elasti c radius , (b ) Sourc e radius , (a ) i s Fig . 2 from Muelle r an d Murph y [1971 ]
and show s tha t dept h o r depthrelate d change s i n shotpoin t materia l propertie s ar e important . Muelle r an d Murph y
presented thei r dat a a s th e elasti c radiu s base d o n assume d constant s o f proportionalit y betwee n th e elasti c radiu s an d
the corne r frequency . Removin g assume d constan t fro m thei r dat a result s i n (b ) a reductio n i n th e variance ; th e tw o
SALMON value s ar e the n nearly th e same .
10 EXPLOSIO N SEISMIC SOURCE FUNCTION
apparent tha t dept h o r som e depthrelate d propert y play s a signifi  frequencies would be expected t o be proportional t o the threefourth s
cant role . power o f yiel d an d a t hig h frequencie s woul d b e proportiona l t o th e
As suggeste d above , th e apparen t dept h dependenc e see n i n onefourth power .
Figure 4 a an d 4 b ma y b e du e t o som e othe r paramete r an d dept h It wa s found experimentally tha t neithe r scalin g la w fit the crate r
is jus t a surrogate . Larso n [1984 ] foun d i n Nugge t sandston e tha t data. Chaba i di d a regressio n analysi s o n chemica l explosion s rang 
the particl e motio n wa s alway s outwar d an d di d no t retur n whe n ing fro m 10 0 t o 1,000,00 0 l b o f TNT . H e foun d tha t th e dat a wer e
the sampl e wa s unconfine d bu t tha t i t di d retur n whe n confined . I n fit bes t whe n scale d b y 0.3±0.0 2 powe r o f energy. Bake r e t al . [1973 ;
other words , i n th e unconfine d cas e th e particl e velocit y wa s alway s chapter 11 ] studie d Chabai' s dat a b y combinin g th e tw o basi c di 
positive an d neve r negativ e a s expecte d fro m (25) . I n salt , o n th e mensionless terms , W 1 / 3 / ^ 1 / 3 ^ an d W 1^4/I<llAd wher e W i s a n en 
other hand , n o difference was observed; th e motio n behave d basicall y ergy dimension , d i s th e depth , K represent s th e dea d weigh t o f
as expected unde r bot h conditions . Clearl y th e corne r frequency, on e the material , bes t measure d b y pg, an d a represent s th e materia l
of th e parameter s whic h control s th e respons e i n (25) , i s dependen t strength. The y foun d tha t th e craterradius , R c, dat a wer e fit ver y
on th e confinin g pressure fo r explosions i n sandstone bu t no t fo r salt. well b y
Figure 5 a show s tha t th e shear strength (i.e. , hal f th e differenc e i n
principal stresses ) o f sal t i s virtuall y independen t o f confinin g pres  d Vi/ 3
d' W
sure while that o f Nugget sandstone (Figur e 5b ) varies nearly linearl y
They sugges t tha t th e materia l strengt h i s bes t measure d b y pc 2, a n
with confinin g pressure, suggestin g tha t shea r strength , no t th e con 
easily determine d quantity , bu t i t coul d jus t a s wel l b e som e othe r
fining pressure , i s th e rea l controllin g parameter . On e can , therefore ,
measure. Fro m thi s analysis , th e author s conclude d tha t neithe r th e
see tha t th e corne r frequenc y an d th e correspondin g sourc e radiu s
gravitational effect s no r th e constitutiv e effect s ca n b e ignored . Fo r
could appea r t o b e depthdependen t fo r som e materials .
the seismi c sourc e function , thi s i s a n interestin g result . I t ca n b e
The sourc e radiu s i s als o dependen t o n th e wavespee d which , seen fro m (30 ) tha t dept h cancel s ou t an d tha t th e volum e scale s a s
in general , increase s wit h depth . Therefore , som e o f th e trend , an d yield t o th e 7/ 8 power . Thus , th e volum e ha s n o explici t dept h de
perhaps som e o f th e varianc e i n Figur e 4 a an d 4b , ma y b e du e t o pendence an d th e yiel d scalin g i s remarkably clos e t o that commonl y
the wav e speed . Thes e observation s ar e no t t o sa y tha t dept h de observed fo r seismi c amplitudes !
pendence i s no t important . I n fact , La y e t al . [1984 ] found tha t th e Working with smal l model s i n the laboratory , Larso n [1984 ] found
Helmberger an d Hadle y [1981 ] sourc e mode l i s bes t fit i f th e corne r
that cavit y volume s produce d b y explosions vary inversely wit h shea r
frequency parameter , K , scale s a s predicte d b y th e MuellerMurph y
strength an d ar e dependen t o n confinin g pressur e onl y t o th e exten t
[1971] model. Clearly , th e factor s which contro l th e corne r frequenc y
that th e shear strength depend s o n confining pressure. I n salt, fo r ex
are no t wel l understoo d an d mor e wor k i s needed .
ample, th e shear strength i s independent o f confining pressure, bu t i n
Nugget sandston e i t i s nearl y linearl y dependen t o n i t a s shown pre 
C. Inferences from Dimensional Analysis and Other Considerations
viously i n Figur e 5 . Thus , instea d o f pc 2 fo r a i n (27) , Larson' s wor k
As indicate d above , th e cavit y volum e shoul d b e a n importan t would sugges t tha t shea r strengt h b e used. Larso n further conclude d
scaling consideration . Th e sam e consideration s tha t appl y t o cavit y that relationship s suc h a s tha t o f Orpha l [1970 ] whic h ar e explicitl y
size shoul d als o appl y t o crate r volume . Therefore , th e dimensiona l dependent upo n dept h o f burial ma y work wel l in certain medi a (e.g. ,
analysis result s o f Chaba i [1965 ] an d other s ar e wort h reviewing . very wea k fluidlik e medi a o r in medi a where shea r strengt h increase s
Chabai identifie d fou r differen t set s o f scalin g laws . I f th e gravita  proportional t o depth) ; bu t extrapolatio n o f suc h a relation t o othe r
tional field strengt h i s not include d i n th e dimensiona l analyses , the n materials, an d i n particula r t o salt , woul d b e extremel y dangerous .
cuberoot scalin g i s obtaine d whe n a n explosio n i s characterize d b y It i s also worth notin g tha t accordin g t o Crowle y [1970 ] cuberoo t
either a mas s dimensio n o r b y a n energ y dimension . I f gravit y i s in  scaling only applie s if , in additio n t o gravity , radiatio n effect s are no t
cluded in the dimensiona l analysis , the n cuberoo t scalin g i s obtaine d an importan t consideration . I f eithe r i s a significan t consideration ,
for crate r dimension s i f th e explosio n i s describe d b y a mas s dimen  then accordin g t o Crowle y scalin g i s n o longe r possible . I n addition ,
sion, bu t fourthroo t scalin g i s obtaine d i f th e explosio n i s describe d Glenn [1990 ] show s tha t cuberoo t scalin g i s strictl y vali d onl y i f a
by a n energy dimension . Thus , i n the las t case , groun d motio n a t lo w point sourc e explosio n i s considered . Fo r a finite source , tw o addi 
Q.
CD
si
(/>
Fig. 5 . Shea r strengt h versu s confinin g pressur e [Larson , 1984] : (a ) sal t an d (b ) Nugge t
sandstone. I n sal t th e shea r strengt h i s independen t o f confinin g pressur e whil e i n Nugge t
sandstone shea r strengt h i s nearl y linearl y dependen t o n it .
DENNY AN D JOHNSON 1 1
tional parameters , th e mas s an d energ y pe r uni t volume , ente r th e original units , i n term s o f a n Fvalue correspondin g th e 2< r leve l o f
problem vi a th e initia l conditions . Glen n the n point s ou t tha t wit h variation i n lo g space , i.e. ,
nuclear explosives , th e experimental emplacemen t canniste r generall y 1 96<7
bears littl e relatio n t o th e yiel d an d show s ho w thi s manifest s itsel f F2a = 10 , (31 )
in th e amoun t o f interna l energ y deposite d i n a material . Holdin g
the sourc e volum e fixed , while varyin g th e yield , Glenn' s calculation s where cr is th e standar d deviatio n derive d fro m th e regressio n anal 
showed tha t cuberoo t scalin g i s onl y a crud e approximation . Thus , ysis. Th e Fvalu e coul d jus t a s wel l b e define d a t th e lc r leve l b y
there ar e reason s wh y cuberoo t scalin g ma y no t b e appropriat e t o omitting th e 1.9 6 facto r i n (31) . Th e Fvalu e i s frequentl y use d t o
the seismi c sourc e function . construct confidenc e interva l estimate s o f th e 'true ' valu e o f th e re 
sponse (e.g. , cavit y radius , seismi c moment , o r sourc e radius ) give n
a fixe d yiel d an d fixe d value s o f th e othe r parameter s i n th e model .
V. Ne w Directions : Chemical/Nuclea r Equivalenc e For example , i f F 2a = 1. 3 an d x i s th e predicte d valu e o f th e cavit y
radius, the n th e tru e cavit y radiu s ca n b e expecte d wit h 95 % confi 
There ha s lon g bee n a concer n tha t chemica l an d nuclea r explo  dence t o b e betwee n 1.3a r an d x/ 1.3.
sions can not b e scaled t o each other and that freefield measurements la. Cavity Size—Theory. Unde r th e assumptio n tha t th e mate 
are als o someho w differen t fro m measurement s mad e a t greate r dis  rial's shea r strengt h i s negligible , Nuckoll s [1959 ] derive d a solutio n
tances. Thes e concern s ar e addresse d i n this section . Ne w regressio n for th e cavit y radiu s
analysis results ar e reported fo r cavity size , seismi c moment , an d cor  l 3
ner frequency . Th e compilatio n o f dat a includ e previousl y publishe d Rc = CW l /Pl0l3\ (32)
and unpublishe d dat a from both nuclea r an d chemica l explosion s an d
where 7 i s th e adiabati c expansio n coefficien t o f th e cavit y gas , P o
from al l measuremen t regimes . Th e data , whethe r measure d i n th e
is th e overburde n pressur e (P o = pgh), an d C i s a functio n o f 7,
freefield o r a t teleseismi c distances , di d no t revea l an y difference s
the vaporizatio n pressure , an d o f a proportionalit y constan t relatin g
between chemica l an d nuclea r explosive s fo r th e basi c sourc e func 
energy t o th e produc t o f cavit y ga s pressur e an d volum e ( P V ~ E ) .
tion parameters .
Each of these parameters i s materialdependent. Haskel l [1961 ] found
A. New Regression Results an implicit , quasistati c solutio n t o th e cavit y proble m fo r a n elas 
tic, plasti c materia l whic h behave s accordin g t o th e CoulombMoh r
As described above , Muelle r and Murphy [1971 ] and Murphy [197 4 criterion, i.e. , th e shea r strengt h i s a linea r functio n o f th e confinin g
and thi s volume ] hav e presente d a theoretica l relationshi p o f seismi c pressure plu s a constant . Th e parameter s i n thi s solutio n ar e initia l
moment t o cavit y siz e an d hav e demonstrate d som e experimenta l cavity radius , elasti c radius , Lam e constants , overburden , 7, yield ,
evidence i n suppor t o f it . The y hav e als o show n tha t th e scale d cor  and shea r strengt h quantities . I n bot h cases , dept h enter s th e prob 
ner frequenc y i s depthdependent . I n th e following , th e relationshi p lem b y wa y o f th e overburde n pressure .
of cavit y siz e t o seismi c momen t i s expande d t o includ e corne r fre  Boardman e t al . [1964 ] an d Higgin s an d Butkovic h [1967 ] esti 
quency. Th e analysi s consist s o f tw o phases . Initially , a n empirica l mated th e materia l dependen t constant , C , i n (32 ) fo r several mate 
model i s fi t t o th e dat a (cavit y radius , seismi c moment , an d sourc e rials. Boardma n e t al . assume d tha t 7 = 4/ 3 an d ha d dat a fro m 3 5
radius) t o determin e i f th e dat a ar e consisten t wit h th e theoretica l explosions availabl e whil e Higgin s an d Butkovic h evaluate d 7 a s wel l
yield scaling . Sinc e the data d o not contradic t th e theoretica l scaling , as C fo r several material s usin g 4 6 explosions . Bot h group s reporte d
the yiel d exponen t (coefficien t in log space) i s fixed at th e theoretica l excellent result s fo r thes e smal l dat a sets ; Boardma n e t al . ha d a 2(7
value. Ha d th e empirica l coefficien t bee n significantl y differen t fro m Fvalue o f abou t 1.1 5 t o 1.4 7 dependin g o n materia l whil e Higgin s
the theoretica l value , th e empirica l valu e woul d hav e bee n adopted . and Butkovic h ha d less tha n 1.22 , wit h 7 rangin g fro m 1.01 3 t o 1.14 2
The second phase of the analysis is to select the most parsimoniou s depending on source material. Higgin s an d Butkovic h conclude d tha t
model whic h include s th e effect s o f parameters , othe r tha n yield , cavity siz e i s independen t o f th e material' s shea r strength .
which explai n th e variatio n i n th e observe d data . Coefficient s for th e Closmann [1969 ] performe d a regressio n analysi s o n th e sam e 4 6
parameters include d i n th e mode l ar e estimate d usin g th e standar d nuclear explosions an d estimated th e coefficient s in the empirical cav 
regression techniqu e o f minimizing th e su m of squared difference s be ity radius , yield , an d materia l propertie s relationship ,
tween th e observed dat a and the model. I n addition t o estimating th e
coefficients, two other output s of the regressio n analyse s wer e used t o
compare alternat e models . One , th e estimated standar d deviation , a , l o g ( R c / h ) = z 0 + \og(W l/3
/h*1/3) + z 2 log( H/K) + z 3 log(/i/Po) ,
of th e measure d variable s wa s use d t o compar e tw o model s wit h th e (33)
same numbe r o f parameters . Th e mode l wit h th e lowes t valu e o f <r
is preferred . Th e secon d output , th e significanc e level , p , associate d to b e 0.131 , 0.918±0.037 , 0.820±0.674 , an d 0.244±0.03 7 fo r x 0
with eac h parameter, wa s used t o test th e importanc e o f each param  through a? 3, respectively , wher e n i s Young' s modulus . Afte r col 
eter. I f the significanc e leve l i s low, e.g. , p < 0.05 , th e paramete r wa s lecting term s (33 ) become s R c o c W° 306 /h°161. H e di d no t repor t
considered t o explai n a significant amoun t o f th e observe d variatio n on th e statistica l significanc e o f thes e coefficient s bu t di d recogniz e
in th e measure d variabl e an d i s retaine d i n th e model . O n th e othe r that th e larg e standar d deviatio n o n x 2 di d indicat e a larg e uncer 
hand, i f the significanc e leve l i s large , e.g. , p > 0.05 , th e paramete r i s tainty i n its use . Ha d h e droppe d thi s pai r o f term s an d recalculate d
not considere d t o explain a significant amount o f variation abov e tha t the remainin g coefficients , h e ma y hav e foun d somewha t differen t
explained b y th e othe r parameter s i n th e mode l an d i s droppe d fro m yield an d dept h exponents . H e neithe r di d thi s no r di d h e offe r an y
the model . Th e fina l mode l consist s onl y o f statisticall y significan t justification fo r retainin g thi s term .
parameters. Other investigator s [Michaud , 1968 , Orphal , 1970 , Terhun e an d
All o f th e model s considere d belo w consis t o f product s o f param  Glenn, 197 7 an d Glenn , 1991 ] hav e attempte d t o includ e th e mate 
eters raise d t o som e power . Whe n writte n i n logarithmi c form , al l rial's shea r strength . Michau d simpl y modifie d (32) ,
but on e o f thes e model s becom e linea r wit h th e origina l exponent s
52 C
as coefficients . Th e rando m variatio n associate d wit h th e measure d Ftc (34)
variables, afte r fittin g th e mode l i n lo g space , i s expressed , i n it s (Po + C s ) 1 / 3 T
12 EXPLOSION SEISMIC SOURCE FUNCTION
where C refer s t o th e emplacemen t geometr y ( C = 1 for a tampe d different fo r eac h materia l the n (32) , (34) , an d (35 ) predic t differen t
explosion) an d Cs i s a strengt h term . Orpha l derive d th e cavit y depth dependencies . Therefore , on e issu e t o b e addressed , i n addi 
size fo r a n elastic , plasti c materia l usin g th e CoulombMoh r yiel d tion t o whethe r th e dat a suppor t cuberoo t scaling , i s th e correc t
criterion an d a simplifie d cavit y pressur e assumptio n t o obtai n a n functional for m t o includ e shea r strength . Anothe r i s whethe r th e
explicit solutio n fo r th e cavit y radius , data suppor t differen t dept h dependencie s fo r eac h material . T o ad 
dress thes e issues , th e U S cavit y dat a an d geophysica l parameter s i n
Ci 1/3 the LLN L Nuclea r Tes t databas e [Howard , 1983 ] wer e used , supple 
Rc = w 1 (35)
((C 2 + P 0 ) "  C 2 ) 1 / : * mented wit h dat a fro m 4 Frenc h test s i n granit e an d 1 USSR tes t i n
salt [Lin , 1978 ] an d wit h dat a fro m laborator y experiment s i n sal t
where C\ i s a function o f vaporizatio n radiu s an d pressure , whil e C2 and sandston e [Larson , 1984] .
and n ar e differen t function s o f th e shea r strengt h parameter s an d As shea r strengt h i s no t on e o f th e parameter s i n th e database ,
Young's modulus . the secon d o f th e abov e question s canno t b e full y addressed . How 
Terhune an d Glen n [1977 ] performe d a paramete r stud y usin g 1  ever, relationship s o f th e quasistati c for m (34 , 35 , an d 37a ) ca n
and 2dimensiona l finit e difference s code s t o determin e a functiona l probably b e rule d out . Th e parameter s 7 an d Y o f (37a ) wer e
relationship o f cavit y siz e t o overburden , shea r strength , an d yield . found b y nonlinea r regressio n analysis . Whil e th e valu e foun d for Y
They assume d tha t th e material' s shea r strengt h ca n b e modelle d b y (10 MPa ) wa s reasonable , th e on e fo r 7 (0.2 ) wa s not . Thi s shoul d
a combination o f the CoulombMohr an d the von Mise's yield criteria , not b e to o surprisin g sinc e Glen n [1991 ] als o foun d tha t th e quasi 
i.e., th e shea r strengt h i s linearl y proportiona l t o confinin g pressur e
(CoulombMohr) u p t o som e poin t bu t beyon d tha t i t i s constan t TABLE 2. Cavit y Radius
(von Mise's) . Th e result s indicate d tha t cavit y radiu s i s determine d
2.1 a = 0.073 4
by
N = 35 8
63 W7/24
F2 a = 1393
where Y i s the shea r strength . Th e yiel d exponen t o f 7/24 wa s deter  Parameter Coeff. Std. error P
mined b y plottin g th e differenc e betwee n th e fina l an d initia l cavit y Intercept 3.9906 0.3819 0.0000
sizes versu s yield . Fro m this , the y conclude d tha t th e yiel d scalin g W 0.3397 0.0021 0.0000
(7/24) o f Bake r e t al . [1973 ] applies . P 0.2433 0.1395 0.0820
Following Haskel l [1961] , Glen n [1991 ] foun d a quasistati c solu  H 0.1807 0.0273 0.0000
tion usin g vo n Mise' s yiel d criterion . Thi s solutio n i s als o a n implici t PO 0.2787 0.0295 0.0000
one. However , a n explici t solutio n i s possibl e i n th e cas e wher e th e GP 0.0020 0.0008 0.0188
cavity's fina l siz e i s muc h large r tha n it s initia l size , a s i n a nuclea r
explosion. Th e cavit y radiu s i s the n 2.2 a = 0.074 2
N = 35 8
Rc — C (37a) F2a = 1393
L47r(p0 + f y F ) J
Parameter Coeff. Std. error P
where Intercept 4.1028 0.3843 0.0000
F = 1 + In
[1KB)].
and C depend s o n th e initia l cavit y size .
(376) P
H
0.2185
0.1950
0.2621
0.1408
0.0272
0.0293
0.1216
0.0000
0.0000
Po
Using (35) , Orpha l [1970 ] analyze d 17 2 explosion s bu t h e ha d GP 0.0024 0.0008 0.0041
estimates o f th e require d materia l properties , includin g 7, onl y fo r
broad categorie s o f materials . H e foun d tha t cuberoo t scalin g wa s 2.3 a = 0.115 1
not significantl y differen t fro m th e 0.2 9 obtaine d b y Hear d [reporte d N = 358
and used b y Muelle r an d Murphy , 1971 ] and tha t th e dept h exponen t F 2 a = 1.67 9
ranged fro m 0.0 8 t o 0.1 4 dependin g o n media .
Yield an d dept h exponent s ar e important quantitie s i n the seismi c Parameter Coeff. Std. error P
moment versu s yiel d (o r cavit y size ) relationshi p an d th e differenc e Intercept 4.8407 0.5959 0.0000
between 0.2 9 o r 0.30 6 an d 1/ 3 ca n b e important . Fo r example , th e P 0.0554 0.2183 0.7998
use o f Heard' s cavit y radiu s yiel d exponen t b y Muelle r an d Mur  H 0.2890 0.0422 0.0000
phy [1971 ] result s i n a n amplitude , yiel d scalin g exponen t o f 0.87 , 0.1527 0.0455 0.0009
PO
considerably les s tha n th e theoretica l valu e o f 1 . Therefore , thes e GP 0.0053 0.0013 0.0001
exponents shoul d b e a s wel l determine d a s possible . Sinc e Orphal' s
work wa s published , cavit y dat a an d som e correspondin g materia l
2.4 a = 0.074 1
properties dat a (bu t unfortunatel y no t shea r strength ) hav e becom e
N = 35 8
available o n nearl y twic e a s many explosions , therefore , th e empirica l
F 2 a = 1.39 7
cavity siz e versu s yiel d relationshi p wa s reevaluated , incorporatin g
available materia l properties . Parameter Coeff. Std. error
lb. Cavity Size—Regression Analysis. Th e theoretica l relation  0.1793
Intercept 4.1667 0.0000
ships (32) , (34) , (35) , an d (37a ) al l predic t a cuberoo t yiel d depen 
dency. Onl y th e finit e differenc e paramete r stud y o f Terhun e an d P 0.3848 0.0467 0.0000
P0 0.2625 0.0292 0.0009
Glenn [1977 ] predict s a differen t yiel d dependency . O f thos e tha t
GP 0.0025 0.0008 0.0016
incorporate shea r strength , onl y (36 ) ha s i t a s a standalon e term ;
the other s al l hav e i t combine d wit h overburden . I f 7 i s significantl y
DENNY AN D JOHNSON 1 3
o"
C\i
d"
SB
CO
2wo
o
CM
o"
o"
Fig. 6 . Cavit y radiu s residual s versu s overburden . Th e sandston e an d th e unflagge d sal t dat a are from very small
laboratory chemica l explosion s [Larson , 1984] . N o clea r evidence i s seen t o suppor t a different dept h dependenc e for each
material an d n o clea r evidenc e i s see n tha t chemica l explosion s ar e differen t tha n nuclea r ones . A shea r strengt h and a
tamping facto r ar e probabl y require d t o explai n th e remainin g variance .
static solutio n approximate d th e dynami c on e only whe n th e cavity' s troduction t o thi s section , th e significanc e level s indicat e tha t al l th e
final radius was not muc h larger than it s initial radius . Thi s i s clearl y variables excep t densit y mak e a significan t contribution . Th e esti 
not the cas e for a fully tamped nuclea r explosion and , therefore , (37a ) mated yiel d coefficien t clearly suggest s cuberoo t a s oppose d t o 7/2 4
does not apply . A relationshi p incorporatin g shear strength a s in (36 ) scaling o f Bake r e t al . Nevertheles s bot h scalin g law s wer e teste d b y
is mor e likel y t o b e appropriate . running tw o additiona l models . Th e yiel d coefficien t wa s se t t o 1/ 3
To addres s th e yiel d scalin g issue , a loglinea r mode l simila r t o and 7/24 i n model 2. 2 and 2.3, respectively , an d th e other coefficients
(30) an d (33 ) wa s used : were reevaluated. Th e results are shown in Table 2 . O f the two mod
els. 2. 2 ha s a muc h smalle r standar d deviatio n an d correspondin g
log Rc = x 0 + xi lo g W + x 2 lo g p + x 3 lo g fi + x 4 log Po 4 x*GP, (38 ) Fvalue. Therefore , th e dat a d o support cuberoo t rathe r tha n Bake r
et al . scaling .
where GP i s the gasfilled porosity, i.e. , tha t portion, give n in percent, While th e significanc e leve l i n mode l 2. 2 suggest s tha t th e den 
of th e tota l volum e fille d wit h gas . Th e ga s porosit y wa s include d sity doe s no t mak e a s significant contributio n t o th e reductio n o f th e
because Butkovic h [1976 ] found , whe n investigatin g th e dispositio n variance ove r tha t o f th e othe r variables , it s coefficien t an d tha t o f
of the forme r cavit y material , tha t eve n 1 % gas porosit y ca n accoun t the shea r modulu s ar e nearl y th e sam e valu e bu t o f opposit e sign ,
for th e tota l cavit y volum e i n jus t a fe w cavit y radi i i f th e pore s suggesting tha t bot h o f the m coul d b e replace d wit h shea r wav e
are completel y crushed . Th e densit y an d shea r modulu s wer e in  velocity. Thi s possibilit y wa s teste d i n mode l 2. 4 an d wa s foun d
cluded becaus e a preliminary investigatio n o f cuberoot scale d cavit y to fi t th e dat a equall y well . Sinc e 2. 4 i s a smalle r model , i t i s pre 
radii showe d tha t bot h i t an d ga s porosity coul d explai n muc h o f th e ferred ove r 2.2 .
variance. The residual s o f mode l 2.4 , show n i n Figur e 6 versus overburden ,
The intercept , an d coefficients , o f (38 ) wer e found an d ar e address th e dept h dependenc e an d chemica l versu s nuclear questions .
given i n Tabl e 2 a s mode l 2.1 . Base d o n th e criteri a give n i n th e in  If th e variou s material s hav e differen t dept h dependencie s i t i s no t
14 EXPLOSION SEISMIC SOURCE FUNCTION
T3
Q)
•a
03
E
CO
111
Yield (kt)
Fig. 7 . Estimate d yiel d fro m (39 ) v s actua l yield . Th e ver y smal l chemica l explosion s (W < l x l O  7 kt) are as well
estimated a s th e nuclea r ones . Th e reductio n i n th e varianc e du e t o (39 ) i s larg e a t nuclea r yield s greate r tha n about
1 k t bu t no t a t lowe r ones . Thi s i s probabl y du e t o measuremen t error . Th e hardroc k explosion s randoml y overla y the
ones i n porou s roc k a s see n i n th e offse t wher e th e highl y porou s rock s ar e no t differentiated .
clearly evident . Th e hardroc k material s exhibi t a s muc h varianc e comm.). Th e mos t significan t aspec t o f Figure 7 , however, i s that th e
as th e porou s ones . No r i s i t clea r tha t chemica l explosion s ar e dif  hardrock explosion s randoml y overla y th e porou s ones .
ferent fro m nuclea r one s sinc e th e chemica l explosion s i n sal t appea r 2. Seismic Moments. I n Figur e 8 seismi c moment s ar e plotte d
to merg e wit h th e nuclea r one s a t hig h overburde n (take n t o b e th e against yield . Th e measurement s wer e mad e i n al l distanc e regimes ,
same a s confinin g pressur e i n thi s figure). Apparentl y t o explai n th e for both type s o f explosions, an d i n many differen t types of materials .
remaining varianc e i n Figur e 6, shea r strength , an d possibl y initia l No distinction i s made between th e different types of data and it is not
cavity size , mus t b e take n int o account . A s Glen n [1990 ] point s out , clear tha t the y ar e consistent wit h eac h othe r o r with yiel d scalin g t o
the emplacemen t canniste r siz e bear s littl e relatio n t o yield . There  the first power . T o unify the data , th e rati o of the measure d momen t
fore, a tampin g facto r a s wel l a s a shea r strengt h ter m ma y b e re  to th e theoretica l momen t wa s modelle d wit h
quired i n (38) . I f suc h informatio n coul d b e mad e available , (38 )
should b e appropriatel y modifie d an d reevaluated . \og(Mo/Mt)= x 0 + xi lo g W + x 2 \ogfi + x 3 lo g P0 + x AGP, (40 )
Given mode l 2.4 , th e cavit y radius , yiel d relatio n i s 2
where M t = 7r pa R%. Th e coefficient s i n (40 ) wer e evaluate d wit h
o  1.47x10 ' W l" and withou t th e dat a o f Ak i e t al . Thi s wa s don e becaus e o f th e
^~ ^ 0 . 3 8 4 8 p 0 . 2 6 2 5 ^Q0.0025G P ' concerns state d abov e tha t th e freefiel d moment s ma y hav e bee n
estimated fro m dat a take n i n th e nonlinea r regio n an d tha t th e
Several interestin g result s o f (39 ) ca n be see n i n Figur e 7 . Th e yield s other moment s ma y includ e effect s due t o nonisotropi c mechanisms ,
of the laborator y chemica l explosions ar e as well estimated a s those of e.g., tectoni c releas e o r drive n bloc k motions . Usin g th e sam e pro 
the nuclea r ones . Als o see n i s tha t th e varianc e abou t (39 ) i s larges t cedure outline d above , virtuall y identica l result s wer e foun d fo r th e
for the lo w nuclea r explosions . Thi s ma y b e du e t o th e measuremen t two cases . Th e shea r modulu s wa s no t foun d t o contribut e t o th e
error, estimate d t o b e abou t 1. 5 meters (N . R . Burkhard , LLNL , per . reduction i n varianc e whil e overburde n an d ga s porosit y were . I t
DENNY A N D JOHNSO N 1 5
00
o Aki
V Denny <®>
A Johnson
• McGarr
o Patton
ID
+ Stevens
^ o o / o
ID
Tf
"q5
E
CO
2 "a>
<D C
M
E
o
2
£
•
o
I I " T
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
e6 e5 e4 e3 e2 e1 eO e1 e2 e3 ©4
Yield (kt)
Fig. 8 . Momen t v s yield . Th e smal l explosion s ( W < 0.00 1 kt ) ar e chemica l an d th e other s ar e nuclear . Th e dat a o f
Aki e t al . [1974 ] an d Patto n (thi s volume ) wer e previousl y described . Th e dat a o f Johnso n ar e fro m momen t tenso r
inversions o f surfac e dat a take n closei n o n (1 ) th e smal l chemica l explosion s a t NT S [Johnso n an d McEvilly , 1990] ,
(2) chemica l explosion s fire d b y th e USG S i n a limeston e quarr y [McEvill y an d Johnson , 1989] , an d (3 ) tw o nuclea r
explosions a t NT S [Johnson , 1988] . McGar r an d Bicknel l [1990 ] too k thei r dat a bot h i n th e freefiel d an d closei n o n
the surfac e fro m chemica l explosion s i n tw o Sout h Africa n gol d mines . Th e dat a o f Denn y [1990 ] includ e SALMO N an d
freefield measurements o f chemica l explosion s a t NT S (unpublished) . Th e dat a o f Steven s [1986 ] ar e fro m measurement s
of teleseismi c surfac e waves .
was als o foun d tha t n o additiona l yiel d ter m i s required . Th e yiel d the differen t types , i t i s no t eviden t i n thes e figures . I n Figur e 9 ,
dependency containe d i n M t, firs t powe r fro m (39) , i s sufficient . Th e the chemica l explosion s ar e a s evenl y distribute d abou t th e simpl e
model obtaine d fo r th e seismi c momen t i s moment, yiel d regressio n lin e a s th e nuclea r ones , an d i n Figur e 1 0
the measuremen t regimes , likewise , see m t o b e compatibl e wit h eac h
1 0.3490 j Q—0.0269G P
M o= M M T P T (41) other.
It i s importan t t o bea r i n min d that , althoug h th e tota l numbe r o f
The reductio n i n varianc e du e t o (41 ) ove r a simple moment , yiel d measurements i s 86 , th e dat a se t i s no t larg e considerin g it s diversity .
relationship ca n b e see n b y comparin g Figur e 9 wit h Figur e 8 . Thi s It i s wel l know n tha t statistica l result s o n smal l dat a set s ca n b e mis 
comparison show s a ver y larg e reduction , especiall y a t th e ver y lo w leading an d th e Fvalue , i n thi s case , i s no t small . Therefore , thes e
yields wher e th e rang e i n ga s porosit y i s th e greatest . A larg e reduc  results shoul d no t b e take n a s a n unequivoca l demonstratio n o f th e
tion i s als o seen i n Aki' s dat a set . Figur e 9 demonstrates tha t ther e i s compatibility o f th e differen t dat a types . Mor e dat a ma y chang e th e
probably n o nee d t o trea t th e differen t kind s o f material s separately , picture. Nevertheless , ther e i s n o indicatio n o f a differenc e betwee n
as th e hardroc k explosion s overla y th e porou s ones . the variou s type s o f data . Effort s should b e mad e t o enlarg e th e dat a
That th e differen t type s o f data , i.e. , chemical , nuclear , freefield , set and , especially , t o fil l i n th e hug e ga p nea r 1 kt .
closein, regional , an d teleseismic , appea r t o b e consisten t ca n be see n 3. Corner Frequency/Source Radius. Th e dat a use d i n th e corne r
in Figure s 9 an d 10 . I f ther e wer e a n importan t differenc e betwee n frequency analysi s ar e show n i n Figur e 11 , wher e instea d o f corne r
16 EXPLOSION SEISMI C SOURC E FUNCTIO N
o Alluvium
A Tuff
O Rhyolite
X Shale
A Limestone
• Salt
• Dolomite
• Granite
CD
<D
ca
E
CO
LU
Yield (kt)
Fig. 9 . Yiel d estimate d fro m (41 ) versu s actua l yiel d b y material . A s wit h th e cavit y radiu s results , th e hardroc k
moments randoml y overla y thos e fo r porou s rocks . Als o th e chemica l explosion s ar e see n t o b e consisten t wit h th e
nuclear ones . Th e reductio n o f varianc e du e t o (41 ) ove r a simpl e moment , yiel d relationshi p ca n b e see n b y comparin g
this figur e wit h Fig . 8 . Th e 95 % confidenc e leve l Fvalu e i s 6.3 4 fo r Fig . 8 whil e i n thi s figur e i t i s 2.34 .
frequency, sourc e radius , R s = /3/irf c, ha s bee n plotted . Thi s figur e with th e momen t data , th e fe w hardroc k (Figur e 12 ) explosion s ran 
shows tha t th e differen t type s o f dat a appea r t o b e consisten t wit h domly overla y th e porou s one s wit h th e exceptio n o f th e on e i n sal t
each othe r an d wit h cuberoo t scaling . Thi s woul d no t b e th e cas e i f (SALMON). Also , a s wit h th e momen t dat a th e differen t dat a type s
attenuation ha d a n importan t effec t o n th e data . T o confir m cube  (Figure 13 ) appea r t o b e consistent . Finally , ther e ha s bee n con 
root scaling , th e rati o o f th e measure d sourc e radiu s t o th e cavit y cern tha t corne r frequenc y estimate s fro m dat a take n outsid e o f th e
radius wa s modelle d wit h freefield ar e contaminate d b y spal l [Vergin o e t al. , 1988] . Whil e thi s
phenomenon undoubtedl y occurs , i t doe s no t appea r t o b e a seriou s
\og(Rs/R=
c) xo + x 1\ogW + x 2\ogp + x 3fi + x 4\ogPo + x 5GP (42 ) problem, give n th e varianc e i n th e data .
This dat a se t i s hal f agai n large r tha n th e seismi c momen t se t
where R c i s give n b y (39) . N o additiona l yiel d ter m wa s foun d t o and, therefore , i t ma y provid e somewha t greate r confidenc e tha t n o
be required . Th e yiel d dependenc y containe d i n R c, cuberoot , i s significant difference s betwee n th e variou s type s o f dat a exist . How 
sufficient. Bot h th e shea r modulu s an d th e overburde n wer e foun d t o ever, effort s shoul d stil l b e mad e t o enlarg e th e dat a se t an d t o fil l i n
make significan t contribution s t o (42 ) bu t densit y an d ga s porosit y the hug e ga p nea r 1 kt .
were not . Th e mode l fo r sourc e radiu s i s
k = 0 7245
B. Conclusions
' ^ ^ P „  ° 2 8 9 7 . (43 )
Of th e sourc e mode l parameters , th e seismi c momen t an d th e cor 
The reductio n i n varianc e du e t o (43 ) ove r a simpl e sourc e ra  ner frequenc y ar e bette r know n tha n th e rollof f o r th e overshoot .
dius, yiel d relationshi p ca n b e see n b y comparin g Figur e 1 2 wit h The empirica l cavit y radiu s formula , (39) , foun d i n thi s stud y i s
Figure 11 . Thi s compariso n show s tha t (43 ) reduce s th e varianc e significantly differen t fro m tha t use d i n th e MuellerMurph y sourc e
considerably bu t no t a s dramaticall y a s i n th e momen t case . A s model an d lead s t o differen t yiel d scaling . Th e sourc e function' s mo 
DENNY AN D JOHNSON 1 7
Fig. 10 . Yiel d estimate d fro m (41) versu s actua l yiel d b y measurement regime . Th e variou s regimes are indistinguishable
as the y ar e randoml y interspersed .
ment an d corne r frequenc y ar e both dependen t o n th e cavit y radius , reality, the n som e interestin g consequence s ca n be derived. I f the ma 
but i n differen t ways , an d ar e consistent wit h cuberoo t scalin g whe n terial propertie s ar e independen t o f dept h an d th e containmen t rule
the materia l propertie s ar e take n int o account . Al l thre e o f thes e requires that dept h be proportional t o the cuberoot o f the yield, the n
source propertie s ar e see n fro m (39) , (41 ) an d (43 ) t o b e dependen t cavity radius , moment , an d corne r frequenc y woul d scal e a s W° 246 ,
on dept h o f burial . Unfortunatel y th e questio n o f whethe r dept h i s W 0 8 4 9 , an d W  0 1 4 8 , respectively . A mor e realisti c pictur e fo r NT S
a surrogat e fo r shear strength , a s suggeste d b y Larson' s [1984 ] work , can b e forme d b y calculatin g th e sourc e functio n propertie s fo r al l
could no t b e addresse d a s shea r strengt h dat a i s no t availabl e o n the explosion s havin g th e require d materia l properties . Th e result s
a cas e b y cas e basis . However , Schoc k [1981 ] ha s presente d dat a of this samplin g o f NT S sugges t that , give n onl y th e yield , cavit y ra 
that sho w a rough correlatio n betwee n yiel d strengt h an d shea r wav e dius ca n b e estimate d t o withi n a factor o f 1. 6 wit h 95 % confidence .
speed, suggestin g tha t perhap s shea r wav e spee d i s a surrogat e an d Similarly, seismi c moment , corne r frequency , an d energ y ca n b e esti 
depth i s not . mated withi n a facto r o f 4.9 , 1.7 , an d 6.4 , respectively . T o obtai n a
No evidenc e wa s foun d i n thi s stud y t o sugges t tha t chemica l smaller Fvalue , th e materia l propertie s mus t b e tightl y controlled .
and nuclea r explosion s ar e significantl y different . I n fact , th e dat a The result s o f th e abov e calculatio n ar e show n fo r seismi c mo 
support th e conclusio n o f Killian e t al . [1987 ] who found from a com ment an d corne r frequenc y i n Figure s 1 4 an d 15 , respectively . Th e
prehensive finit e differenc e stud y o f nuclea r an d chemica l explosion s slope i s seen t o chang e significantl y wit h increasin g yiel d i n bot h fig 
in a variety o f geologi c material s tha t n o difference s between th e tw o ures. Thi s i s due to th e material propert y change s with dept h (yield) .
sources exist s beyon d a rang e equa l t o twic e th e origina l siz e o f th e Given thi s larg e varianc e an d characte r o f the momen t plot , i t i s no t
chemical explosive . difficult t o se e ho w repeate d rando m sampling s o f thes e result s fo r
C. Implications a smal l numbe r o f explosion s coul d produc e greatl y differen t slopes .
The man y differen t observations , documente d above , ar e the n no t
Assuming tha t (39) , (41) , an d (43 ) ar e a perfect representatio n o f surprising.
18 EXPLOSION SEISMIC SOURCE FUNCTION
Yield (kt)
Fig. 11 . Sourc e radiu s versu s yield . Th e smal l explosion s ar e chemica l one s whil e th e remainde r ar e fro m nuclea r
explosions. Th e dat a o f Bocharo v e t al . [1989 ] ar e fro m a singl e broadband , teleseismi c statio n an d wer e estimate d
from th e pea k o f th e particl e velocit y spectra . Th e dat a o f Denn y ar e fro m (1 ) freefiel d an d closei n measurement s o f
chemical explosion s a t NT S (unpublished ) an d (2 ) fro m peak s o f statio n average d particl e velocit y spectr a o f regiona l
measurements (unpublished) . Th e dat a o f Dowl a (per . comm. ) ar e fro m regiona l measurement s mad e b y fittin g th e P g
displacement spectr a wit h a second orde r model . McGar r an d Bicknel l [1990 ] estimated th e corne r frequencie s fro m th e
particle velocit y spectr a fro m freefiel d an d closei n surfac e measurement s describe d above . Thei r surfac e datu m wa s
omitted becaus e i t apparentl y suffere d a grea t dea l o f attenuatio n travelin g upwar d i n th e crust . Th e dat a o f Vergin o
et al . [1988 ] wer e fro m regiona l measurement s reduce d b y th e transfe r functio n technique , e.g . se e Denn y an d Goodma n
[1990].
Yield (kt)
Fig. 12 . Yiel d estimate d fro m (43) versu s actua l yiel d b y material . A s wit h th e cavit y radiu s and moment results, the
hardrock sourc e radi i randoml y overla y thos e fo r porou s rocks . Als o th e chemica l explosion s ( W < l x l O  4 kt) are
seen t o b e consisten t wit h th e nuclea r ones . Th e reductio n o f varianc e du e t o (43) ove r a simpl e source radius, yield
relationship ca n be seen b y comparin g thi s figure with Fig . 11 . Th e 95 % confidence level Fvalu e is 1.93 for Fig. 11 while
in thi s figur e i t i s 1.65 .
be acquire d t o improv e confidence . A n effor t should als o b e mad e t o sives suggest s tha t experiment s employin g chemica l explosive s coul d
better understan d ho w shea r strengt h shoul d b e factore d int o thes e be a n effectiv e mean s o f resolvin g th e remainin g sourc e functio n un 
empirical relationships , t o understan d th e tradeoff s betwee n shea r certainties. Th e result s fro m chemica l explosion s are , i n fact , ver y
strength an d depth , an d to acquire shear strength information . Som e encouraging an d furthe r us e shoul d b e mad e o f suc h experiment s t o
of th e varianc e i n eac h o f th e empirica l relationship s could , also , b e gain experienc e i n a wider variet y o f materials. A n experimenta l pro 
due t o th e initia l sourc e volum e a s suggeste d b y Glen n [1990 ] an d gram designe d aroun d chemica l explosion s coul d remov e man y o f th e
information o n i t shoul d b e collecte d t o determin e it s impact . uncertainties an d answe r man y questions , includin g th e behavio r o f
What wa s no t foun d i n thi s stud y wa s als o significant . N o sig  different roc k type s a t lo w stresses .
nificant difference s betwee n hardrock s an d porou s one s wer e foun d Acknowledgements. Howar d Patto n an d Pau l Richard s deserv e
beyond wha t i s accounted fo r by the shea r modulu s an d ga s porosity . special thank s fo r thei r suggestion s fo r improvin g th e organizatio n
Nor was any evidence found that chemica l explosions ar e significantly and content o f this paper. Jane t Ricc a created th e database, Amand a
different from nuclear explosions , i n agreemen t wit h th e finit e differ Goldner helpe d ou t wit h th e regressio n analysi s an d Dic k Mensin g
ence calculation s o f Killia n e t al . [1987] . An d n o difference s wer e helped interpre t th e results . Th e man y suggestion s o f th e reviewer s
found i n eithe r th e momen t o r corne r frequenc y du e t o th e measure  were appreciate d an d man y wer e incorporated . On e anonymou s re 
ment realm , nearfiel d versu s farfield . However , th e hardroc k dat a viewer especiall y prodde d th e author s t o d o a better job . Thi s wor k
set i s ver y smal l s o that th e possibilit y ma y stil l exis t tha t hardrock s was don e unde r th e auspice s o f th e U.S . Departmen t o f Energ y b y
should b e treate d differentl y tha n porou s ones . Lawrence Livermor e Nationa l Laborator y unde r contrac t W7405 
The lac k o f significant difference s between th e tw o types o f explo  Eng48. Fundin g wa s provide d b y th e DO E Offic e of Arm s Control .
20 EXPLOSIO N SEISMIC SOURCE FUNCTIO N
Yield (kt)
Fig. 13 . Yiel d estimate d fro m (43 ) versu s actua l yiel d b y measuremen t regime . A s wit h th e momen t data , th e variou s
regimes ar e randoml y mixed .
DENNY AN D JOHNSON 2 1
Fig. 14 . Simulate d seismi c moment . (41 ) wa s evaluate d fo r al l th e event s i n th e databas e wit h th e require d materia l
parameters. Considerabl e variatio n acros s NT S shoul d b e expected . I t i s eas y t o se e ho w a smal l se t o f event s coul d
appear t o hav e a slope differen t tha n th e tru e slope .
22 EXPLOSIO N SEISMIC SOURCE FUNCTION
Fig. 15 . Simulate d corne r frequency . (43 ) wa s evaluate d fo r al l th e event s i n th e databas e with the required material
parameters. A systemati c chang e i n slop e shoul d b e expecte d wit h increasin g dept h (yield) .
DENNY AND JOHNSON 2 3
John R. Murphy
Abstract. This paper presents a review of some of the characteristics Moreover, for a variety of reasons which will be illustrated in the
of the ground motion measurements which have been made in the near following discussion, the interpretation of the recorded data in terns of
field of U.S. underground nuclear tests dating back to the RAINIER seismic source characteristics has often been ambiguous. For these
explosion in 1957. In particular, the complications involved in inter reasons, the number of subsurface instrumentation programs has been
 
re tine such data in terms of the seismic source characteristics of
underground explosions are addressed and examples are presented which
limited and, in fact, their frequency and sophistication have declined in
recent years. In this paper, an attempt will be made to provide an

illustrate the confounding effects introduced bv nonlinear medium overview of some of the available freefield data relevant to seismic source
response, source medium heterogeneity and interaction of the primary estimation for underground nuclear explosions and selected samples of
shock wave with the free surface above the shot wint. On the other hand, these data will be used to illustrate the variety of phenomena which
examples are also presented which demonstrate that, despite these influence the interpretationof these data.
difficulties, the source characteristicswhich have been inferred from these
nearfield ground motion data have been shown to correlate remarkably Definitions
well with the regional and teleseismic observations in some cases.
Therefore, it is concluded that, although the available freefield seismic Consider the onedimensional problem of a spherically symmetric
data are often incomplete and difficult to interpret, they can provide a explosive source acting in an infinite, homogeneous, elastic medium. If
valuable foundation for the development of seismic source models which the detonation point is taken as the origin of a spherical coordinate
can account for some important characteristicsof the ground motion data system and it is assumed that there exists a spherical surface of radius rel
observed from underground nuclear explosions. surrounding the detonation point outside of which infinitesimal strain
theory is applicable, then for r > re1 the equation of motion reduces to the
Introduction familiar onedimensional wave equation in the reduced displacement
potential (RDP) 4:
Ever since the U.S. underground nuclear testing program was initiated
with the RAINIER explosion at the Nevada Test Site (NTS) on
September 19, 1957, repeated attempts have been made to infer the
seismic source functions corresponding to such events through analyses of
measured nearfield ground motion data. In principle, this would seem to where a is the compressional wave velocity of the medium. Now, for
be a relatively simple problem in that since both the locations and times outgoing spherical waves, equation (1) has a solution of the form $ =
of the explosions are known in advance, it is possible to design Nz) where z is the retarded time given by
instrumentation pl ,ns to measure any specific ground motion data which
might be required to establish or validate the seismic source models.
However, despite some early progress such as that reported by Werth et al.
119621 and Werth and Herbst [19631, it has now come to be recognized
that the practical problem of defining a generally applicable nuclear Furthermore, for r > re], the radial displacement Z is related to $ by
seismic source function and associated scaling laws from analyses of near
field ground motion recordings is a complicated process which is still not
fully resolved.
One complicating factor which was recognized early in the testing
program is that surface measurements are usually complicated by
nonlinear free surface interaction effects and thus are not well suited to the
task of infemng seismic source characteristics. Consequently, programs
were initiated to make subsurface measurements near source depth, where
the influence of the free surface is less prominent These have &me to be
Thus, given a measurement of the radial displacement at any distance r >
known as "freefield" measurements and are the subject of the analyses
re1 in such a medium, the RDP can be found by integrating the differential
described in this paper. It should be noted that such measurements are
equation (4). which, under the homogeneous initial condition $(0) = 0,
very expensive and difficult to make and are not always successful.
leads to the solution
Z
Explosion Source Phenomenology a a
Geophysical Monograph 65
Copyright 1991 American Geophysical Union = r a e" I Z ( q ) eTTldq
0
It follows from (5) that if the displacement at r approaches a permanent, Estimation of Explosion Seismic Source Functions
constant value, Zp, as TS, then the corresponding static value of the From Measured FreeField Ground Motion Data
RDP, $(), will be given by
$() = r2 zP (6)
In terms of equation (5). it would appear to be a straightforward matter
with a corresponding seismic moment defined as to estimate the explosion seismic source, or RDP, from ground motion
measurements taken at ranges lying beyond the transition to linear
material response (i.e., r > rel). This has not proved to be the case,
however, because the actual environments in which the explosions take
Now, by conservation of mass, the permanent radial displacement at a place are not infinite in extent, homogeneous, or perfectly elastic. While
distance r in an incompressible medium due to the creation of an it is difficult to generalize about the effects of these departures from the
explosively generated cavity which grows from a small initial simplifying model assumptions used in deriving equation (5).
vaporization radius to a final radius, rc, is given approximately by examination of selected freefield data does provide some insight into their
characteristics and relative importance. For example, Figure 1 shows the
locations of the subsurface instruments in relation to the local geologic
structure for the 5.3 kt SALMON explosion which was detonated at a
depth of 828 m in the Tatum salt dome in Mississippi on October 22,
1964. It can be seen from this figure that although all the instruments
from which it follows that were emplaced in salt, the medium is not even approximately
homogeneous, as evidenced by thc fact that a salt/anhydrite boundary lies
only a few hundred meters above the shot point. An obvious question
then is whether such a strongly layered source medium can be expected to
significantly modify the observations relative to those which would be
anticipated at the same ranges in a homogeneous medium. Some evidence
relevant to this issue is provided in Figure 2 which shows a comparison
of the vertical acceleration data measured at source depth at ranges of 318
and 744 m Ferret, 19681. Now for a spherically symmetric source in a
homogeneous medium, these components of motion would be expected
to be identically zero and, in fact, their amplitudes are quite small relative
Thus, under the assumption of incompressibility,equation (9b) provides a to those associated with the corresponding radial component motions.
relationship between the seismic moment, as inferred, for example, from However, the point of interest here is that the apparent duration and
analyses of longperiod surface waves, and the measurable final radius of complexity of the signal clearly increases with increasing distance. This
the cavity produced by the explosion. is typical of measurements taken at depth and is an indication that
Considering the relationship between displacement atd RDP i q the reflections of the primary pulse from nearby inhomogeneities are indeed
frequency domain, it follows from equation (4) that if @ ( a )and Z(w) contributing noticeably to the observed motions. That is, at the longer
denote the Fourier transforms of @(T)and Z(T) respectively, then ranges the travel paths associated with the indirect, reflected arrivals are
more nearly equal to those associated with the directly induced motion and
consequently their amplitudes are comparable, giving rise to an
increasing complexity with range such as that illus~ratedin Figure 2.
Thus, there is a fundamental experimental design conflict in that, while it
is necessary to place the instruments at large enough range that they
and, consequently, the farfield displacement spectrum is given simply by provide data representative of linear material response, it is also required,
at the same time, that they be close enough to the source that the directly
induced component of the motion can be unambiguously resolved.
A more direct indication of the possible effect of reflected anivals on
the inferred RDP is provided in Figure 3 which shows the radial
4 components of acceleration measured from SALMON 200 m above (El l
where @(o)is the Fourier transform of the reduced velocity potential, 20) and below (Ell34) the shot elevation at a range of about 650 m
d @ ( ~ ) / d Thus,
~. the teleseismic P wave displacement is proportional to Ferret, 19681. It can be seen from this figure that the initial arrival is
the reduced velocity potential. Moreover, since by the initial value remarkably consistent on the two recordings with regard to both amplitude
theorem level and shape, indicating the symmetric nature of the primary radiation
from this explosion. However, on the record from station E l 120 there
lim iw $(w) = lim @(T) (12) is clear indication of a secondary arrival which appears to have no
w t o ~ t m counterpart on the record from the deeper station E l 134. Murphy [I9781
has identified this arrival as a rcflcction from the overlying salt/anhydrite
it follows that boundary and demonstrated that the relative amplitudes at these two
stations are consistent with this hypothesis. In any case, the amplitudes
b
lim @(o) = I$() (13) of the secondary arrivals at these stations appear to be small relative to
o+o those of the direct signals and it can be concluded that their effects on the
corresponding RDP estimates are not particularly significant for this
Thus, in the low frequency limit, the farfield P wave displacement explosion.
spectrum will approach a constant value which is proportional to the More dramatic evidence of the effects of medium heterogeneity is
static value of the RDP. provided by the data recorded from explosions in granite. For example, for
MURPHY 27
SALT
Fig. 1. Vertical section through the SALMON detonation point showing the relationship between the instrument locations and
the subsurface geology at the site.
15 
12  I El 120 

9
C"
6 
g
i= 0
3

v 

2 3 

cu 6 4
a REFLECTED ARRIVAL
15 d
12 I
El 134

9 
6 
3 
0 I 
3 
I' 6 I I
0.0 .1 .2 .3 .4
0.0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 TIME (SEC)
T, S E C O N D S
Fig. 3. Comparison of SALMON radial component acceleration
Fig. 2. Comparison of SALMON vertical component acceleration recordings measured 200 m above (Ell20) and below (Ell34) shot depth
recordings measured at source depth at ranges of 3 18 and 744 m. at a range of 650 m.
the 12 kt SHOAL (10/26/63) explosion in granite, ground motion data
were recorded at shot depth along three different azimuths at a common
range of about 590 m. Although the observed motions were clearly not
even approximately radial at these stations, the radial component
displacements were integrated to obtain the three approximations to the
RDP shown in Figure 4 [Weart, 19651. It can be seen that these three
estimates are wildly inconsistent, with the peak values of the potentials
varying by more than a factor of three and the steady state values of the
potentials indicating permanent radial displacements ranging from 0.3 cm
inward at station PMl to 4.0 cm outward at station PM3. Similarly
inconsistent observations were obtained from the PILE DRIVER
(06102166) and HARD HAT (02115162) explosions in granite at NTS
[Murphy, 19781 and probably are related to local block motion along pre
existing zones of weakness in these highly fractured granitic masses. In
any case, it is clear that such data can provide little constraint on the
explosive seismic source function, and they provide a cautionary note
regarding the interpretation of data recorded along any one azimuth from
the source.
In spite of the various experimental difficulties, such as those briefly
illustrated above, much valuable freefield ground motion data has been
recorded during the course of the U.S. underground testing program.
Table 1 lists explosions conducted prior to about 1970 for which RDP
estimates have been estimated from subsurface recordings and published in
various postshot reports and summary documents [e.g., Perret and Bass,
1975; Murphy, 1978; Murphy and Bennett, 19791. It can be seen that a
variety of different source media are represented, including salt, granite,
dolomite, sandstonelshale, wet and dry tuff and wet and dry alluvium.
Although additional data have been recorded since 1970, the great expense I I I I I I I 1
associated with fielding subsurface instrumentation arrays has generally 0 036 0.60 0.76 1.00 1.26 1.60 1.76
resulted in less complete data sets which typically do not extend to source 7 , SECONDS
depth and below. Thus, despite their limitations, the data of Table 1
represent a unique resource for evaluating the dependence of seismic source Fig. 4. Comparison of SHOAL reduced displacement potential estimates
coupling on emplacement medium and for the calibration of theoretical obtained from freefield data recorded at a common range along three
models of the explosion source. different azimuths.
TABLE 1. U.S. Nuclear Explosions For Which Reduced Displacement Potentials (RDPs) Have Bcen Reported
Event (Date) Medium Yield (kt) Depth No. of RDPs
(m)
RAINIER (09119/57) Tuff 1.7 274 3
FISHER (09119157) Alluvium 12.4 363 3
GNOME (12110161) Salt 3.1 366 1
HARD HAT (02/15/62) Granite 5.9 290 4
HOGNOSE (03115162) Alluvium L* 239 3
HAYMAKER (06/27/62) Alluvium 46 408 1
SHOAL (101'26163) Granite 12.5 367 3
SALMON (10122164) Salt 5.3 828 12
HANDCAR (1 1/05/64) Dolomite 12 402 11
MUD PACK (12116164) Tuff 2.7 156 3
MERLIN (02116165) Alluvium 10 296 5
DISCUS THROWER (05/27/66) Tuff (dry) 21 338 18
PILE DRIVER (06/02/66) Granite 61 457 5
GASBUGGY (12110167) SandstoneIShale 29 1292 4
HUPMOBJLE (01118168) Alluvium (dry) 7.4 247 1
PACKARD (01115169) Alluvium (dry) 10 247 1
* L indicates yield in the range from 0 to 20 kt
MURPHY 29
ALLUVIUM
100  (1 9 1 7 0 0 Y/SEC
p 1.6 G Y / c u 3
200 
TUFF
or (1 . 2 1 0 0 Y/SEC
p . 1.9 o u / c u 3
98
400 
 SD
DOLOMITE
500
Fig. 8. Vertical section through the DISCUS THROWER detonation point showing the relationship between the
selected instrument locations and the subsurface geology at the site.
with the teleseismic observations of Murphy [I9891 and others for
explosions at NTS. This apparently unique clear observation of pP on
the shot depth stations for DISCUS THROWER may be related to the
fact that the spall radius reported for this event is anomalously small
[Perret and Kimball, 19711. That is, the surface reflected phase may have
been less perturbed than usual by spall in this case.
Another aspect of the spall phenomenon which has the potential to
influence the distant seismic observations is the delayed slapdown of the
spalled off plate of material. Estimates of the impulse delivered to the
surface by this spall closure are large enough that they led Viecelli [I9731
and later Murphy [I9771 to speculate that it might make a significant
contribution to the longperiod surface waves observed from underground
nuclear explosions. Although Day et al. [I9831 subsequently showed that
the longperiod contribution of spall is in fact negligible, questions
remain concerning its relative importance at shorter periods. As with pP,
Fig. 9. Comparison of the average observed (stations 9A and 9B) it would seem natural to look for direct evidence of spall closure induced
DISCUS THROWER reduced displacement potential with the analytic seismic waves in the observed freefield data. However, because they
approximation used for wave propagation simulations. share the same 0bse~ationalliabilities as pP (i.e., low relative amplitude,
late anival time), conclusive identification of spallinduced, shortperiod
seismic arrivals at shot depth stations has only been achieved for the 10
kt MERLIN explosion, which was detonated at a depth of 296 m in
alluvium at NTS on February 16,1965 [Murphy and Bennett, 19791.
The locations of the MERLIN shotpoint and selected shot depth
instruments with respect to the subsurface geology at the site are shown
in Figure 11, where it can be seen that the propagation medium is
essentially homogeneous in this case. The radial component
displacements observed at these four shot depth stations are displayed in
Figure 12 [Perret, 19711, where it is indicated that they show evidence of
an unusual secondary signal (vertical dashed lines) which increases in
prominence relative to the direct signal with increasing distance from the
source. The diagnostic characteristics of this pulse are: (a) late arrival
time (1.5 seconds), (b) relatively low frequency (1 Hz), (c) moderate
horizontal phase velocity (1800 m/s) and (d) nearly constant amplitude
over the range of observation. Murphy and Bennett [I9791considered and
rejected the possibilities that this amval might be a surface reflection or a
reflection from a deep interface. That is, the arrival times were shown to
RANGE. M
ALLUVIUM
20 1 I a= $ 5 0 0 M/sEC
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.6 1.0 1.2 1.4 1 1.1) 2.0
T. SECONDS P= 1.7 GMICMa
path. Positive values in this figure correspond to motion out along the
ray path and, thus, the anival indicated by the vertical arrow is a Fig. 11. Vertical section through the MERLIN detonation point showing
dilitation. It can be seen from this figure that the predicted and observed the relationship between selected instrument locations and the subsurface
motions agree quite well with respect to arrival time, dominant frequency geology at the site.
and phase. Moreover, Murphy and Bennett [I9791 have found similar
agreement between the predicted and observed ground motions at a be too late to be correlated with a surface reflection and the observed
second, more distant DISCUS THROWER shot depth station, which horizontal phase velocity was shown to be too low to be consistent with
would appear to confum the fact that the identified arrival is pP. In fact, a deep reflection. However, an examination of the surface recordings from
similar projections of the recorded data from stations 9A and 9B also this explosion revealed a spall closure event which seems to satisfy many
show evidence of this arrival, which suggests that the RDP estimate of of the source constraints. These vertical acceleration time histories, which
Figure 9 is influenced to some extent by pP. However, due to differences were recorded on the surface at ranges of 30 to 152 m from ground zero,
in propagation path length and angle of incidence, the expected amplitudes are displayed in Figure 13 [Perret, 19711. It can be seen that these
of pP on the radii component recordings used to infer the RDP are less records are complex, showing evidence of multiple spall events. In
than 25 percent that of direct P, which suggests that any such effects general, there appear to be two prominent rejoin phases, the later of which
should be of second order. Note also from Figure 10 that the predicted becomes more dominant with increasing range. Murphy and Bennett
amplitude for this phase is somewhat larger than the observed, consistent [I9791 interpreted this phase as the time of closure at the greatest depth of
32 FREEFIELD SEISMIC OBSERVATIONS
TlME (SEC)
significant spall and determined the closure times indicated by the dashed
vertical lines on this figure. It is evident that these closure times are
fairly constant over this distance range, averaging about 1.15 seconds,
and a simple calculation indicates that a P wave originating at this time
from a surface source would be expected to arrive at the shot level stations
at times very close to the observed arrival times of the phase under
investigation. Moreover, Steve Day has performed a series of
elastodynamic finite element simulations of this spall closure event and
demonstrated that it can account for some other important features of the
observations,including dominant frequency and horizontal phase velocity
[Murphy and Bennett, 19791. Thus, the evidence is strong that the
anomalous arrival observed on the MERLIN shot depth inslruments is due
to spall closure. This suggests that spall closure can indecd contribute
significantly to the shortperiod seismic signal, at least in some cases.
Discussion
TlME (SEC)
Subsurface and surface ground motion measurements have been made
in the nearfield of U.S. underground nuclear tests dating back to the Fig. 13. Vertical component acceleration time histories recorded at the
RAINIER test in 1957. Moreover, some of these instrumentation plans surface above the MERLIN event. Dashed vertical lines indicate the
have been quite sophisticated and have included attempts to directly inferred times of spall closure.
MURPHY 33
recovery from these complex, expensive experiments has often been nuclear detonations, Part I. Seismic spectrum scaling, Bull. Seism.
disappointing and, consequently, the stated objectives have usually been Soc. Am., 61, 16751692, 1971.
only partially fulfilled. For example, on the PILE DRIVER test, only a Murphy, J. R., A review of available freefield seismic data from
handful of the nearly 100 deployed gauges provided useful data and none of underground nuclear explosions in salt and granite, Computer Sciences
these were from locations below shot depth [Hoffman and Sauer, 19691. Corporation, CSCTR780003, 1978.
Nevertheless, despite these difficulties, much valuable freefield data has Murphy, J. R., Networkaveraged teleseismic P wave spectra for
been recorded during the c o m e of the U.S. testing program. In fact, as underground explosions. Part 11. Source characteristics of Pahute Mesa
has been indicated in this paper, in some cases, estimates of the source explosions, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 79, 156171, 1989.
parameters determined from the observed freefield data have k n found to Murphy, J. R., Seismic source functions and magnitude determinations
correlate remarkably well with the distant seismic observations. Thus, for underground nuclear detonations, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 67, 135
these data represent a unique resource for evaluating the dependence of 158, 1977.
source coupling on emplacement conditions and for the calibration of Murphy, J. R. and C. B. Archambeau, Variability in explosion body
theoretical models of the explosion seismic source. wave magnitudes: An analysis of the Rulison/Gasbuggy anomaly,
Bull. Seism. Soc. Am.! 76, 10871113, 1986.
Acknowledgment. This research was sponsored by the Defense Murphy, J. R. and T. J. Bennett, A review of available freefield seismic
Advanced Research Projects Agency and was monitored by the Geophysics data from underground nuclear explosions in alluvium, t G , dolomite.
Laboratory under Contract F1%2889C0026. sandstoneshale and interbedded lava flows, Systems, Science and
Software, SSSR804216. 1979.
References Patton, H. J., Seismic moment estimation and the scaling of the long
period explosion source spectrum, this volume, 1991.
Aki, K., M. Bouchon, and P. Reasenberg, Seismic source function for an Perret, W. R., Freefield and surface motion from a nuclear explosion in
underground nuclear explosion, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 64, 131148, alluvium: Merlin event, Sandia Corporation, SCRR69334, 1971.
1974. Perret, W. R., Freefield particle motion from a nuclear eqlosion in salt.
Burdick, L. J., T. Wallace, and T. Lay, Modeling the near field and Part I , Project Dribble, Salmon event, Sandia Corporation, VUF
teleseismic observations from the Amchitka test site, J. Geophys. 3012, 1968.
Res., 89,43734388, 1984. Perret, W. R. and R. C. Bass, Freefield ground motion induced by
Day, S. M., N. Rimer, and J. T. Cheny, Surface waves from underground underground explosions, Sandia Corporation, SAND740252.1975.
explosions with spall: Analysis of elastic and nonlinear source models, Perret, W. R. and K. B. Kimball, Ground motion induced by a contained
Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 73, 247264, 1983. nuclear explosion, Project 1 .la/1.2a, Operation Flint Lock, Discus
Der, Z. A., R. H. Shumway, and A. C. Lees, Multichannel Thrower event, Sandia Corporation, POR6400,1971.
deconvolution of P waves at seismic arrays, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., Springer, D. L., Secondary sources of seismic waves from underground
77, 195211, 1987. nuclear explosions, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 64, 581594, 1974.
Haskell, N. A., Analytic approximation for the elastic radiation from a Tsai, Y. B. and K. Aki, Amplitude spectra of surface waves from small
contained underground explosion, J. Geophys. Res., 72, 25832587, earthquakes and underground nuclear explosions,J. Geophys. Res., 76,
1967. 3940, 1971.
Helmberger, D. V. and D. M. Hadley, Seismic source functions and Viecelli, J. A., Spallation and the generation of surface waves by an
attenuation from local and teleseismic observations of the NTS events underground explosion, J. Geophys. Res., 78,2475, 1973.
JORUM and HANDLEY, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 71.5167, 1981. von Seggem, D. and R. Blandford, Source time functions and spectra for
Hoffman, H. V. and F. M. Sauer, Shot Pile Driver: Freefield and surface underground nuclear explosions, Geophys. J., 31.8397.1972.
motions, Stanford Research Institute, POR4000.1969. Weart, W. D., Project Shoal: Freefield earth motion and spalling
Howard, N. W., The Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Nuclear measurements in granite, Sandia Corporation, W  2 0 0 1 , 1965.
Test Effects and Geologic Data Bank, Lawrence Livermore National Werth, G. C. and R. F. Herbst, Comparison of amplitudes of seismic
Laboratory, Livermore, CA, UCRL78799,1976. waves from nuclear explosions in four mediums, J. Geophys. Res.,
Lay, T., The teleseismic manifestation of pP: Problems and paradoxes, 68, 1463, 1963.
this volume, 1991. Werth, G. C., R. F. Herbst, and D. L. Springer, Amplitudes of seismic
Mueller, R. A. and J. R. Murphy, Seismic characteristics of underground anivals from the Mdiscontinuity, J. Geophys. Res., 67, 1587, 1962.
MODELING NEARFIELD DATA AT NTS AND AMCHITKA
Geological and Planetary Sciences, Seismological Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California 91 125
Abslracl. The rcccnt JVE (Joint Verification Experiment), involving from instability causcd by block motions, data scarcity, and assorted non
shots of roughly the same yield at test sites in the US and USSR, showed linear effects. A third class of data discussed here is commonly rcfcrred to
an offset in tclcscismic mcasurcd mb. This is gcncrally bclieved to bc as ncarficld data and consists of observations madc at the surface near the
causcd by diffcrcntial attenuation bcncath thc two test sites. However, epicenter, zero to 20 km.
part of this difference could bc caused by other factors such as variations Unfortunately, the ncarin wavcform data are not simple and show
in the effective sourcc excitation or reduced displacement potential (RDP). widcly different characteristics from rcgion to rcgion, see Figure 1. The
In this review nearfield seismograms from Amchitka and NTS arc two columns on the Icft are observations from two largc explosions at
investigated to determine their source characteristics where the yields are Amchitka. Note the obvious Raylcigh wave phase shifts expected
known indcpendently. To retrieve these RDP's requires separating out bctwccn the vertical and radial componcnts displayed in this data. The
wavcform distortions caused by complex local structures. Aftcr dcaling tangcntial motions arc gencrally weak for Amchitka shots indicating the
with thcsc crustal modeling problems we find distinct differences bctwcen apparcnl lack of strong tectonic release.
thcsc two test sites. Using a modified Haskcll source rcprcsentation given In contrast, the motions observed from BOXCAR displayed on the
by right indicate strong tangential motions and distorted Rayleigh waves.
cp(t) = %[l  e k t ( 1 + k t + (kt)2 / 2  ~ ( k t ) ~ ) ] Although these records in the time domain suggest distinct differences
bctwcen thc two test sites. thc s~ectralurowrties of the radial comvoncnts
wc rcvicw estimates o r k, B, and cp, for both tcst sites rcquircd to model of MILROW and BOXCAR are quitesimilar. Orphal [1971], concludes
the P waveform data. that the Amchitka source functions follow the NTS scaling laws based on
this similarity. Another rather obvious observational difference between
If wc assumc that B = 1 we find comer frcqucncy (k)to bc 20% smaller
Amchitka and NTS events occurs in thc ratio of peak acceleration to
at Amchitka than at Pahutc. This implies a larger effective source
vclocity as indicated in Figure 2. Although BOXCAR is slightly larger
volumc at Pahute for thc same yicld. The scaling of cp, to yield indicates
in size it has peak accelerations considerably smaller than does MILROW.
about 30% strongcr coupling at Amchilka relative to Pahute. Assuming
However, their peak velocity measurements are quite close as can be seen
othcr source descriptions would not changc thcsc rcsults appreciably in the
by eyeball integrating the two accclcration records displayed. The origin
frcqucncy range (0.5 to 5 Hz). Allowing the overshoot factor B to vary
timcs are also included with the obscrvcd records displaying a clear
and modcling broadband information indicate that B for largcr events
indication of differences in uppercrustal structure. Thc apparent vclocity
(dccp) tcnds to drop relative to small events (shallow). This effect is
cxplaincd physically by allowing the explosion cavity to change shape, at Amchitka is roughly 15 to 20% highcr than at Pahute [Burdick et a].,
3 984bl.
going from oblate (pancakc) to prolatc with increased dcpth. This
phenomenon could have important implications considering that the BOXCAR vs AMCHITKA DATA
Soviets tend to use a rcduccd depthtoyicld scale relative to that employcd CANNlKlN MILROW BOX CAR
by the U.S. 15.8 km 11.5 krn 16.2 km
Introduction
I
Fig. 1. Comparison of the vertical, radial, and transverse components of
Explosion Source Phenomenology velocity for BOXCAR (Pahute, NTS) with CANNIKIN and MILROW
Geophysical Monograph 65 (Amchitka Island). Note that the BOXCAR waveforms are significantly
Ccpyright 1991 American Geophysical Union more complex especially on the tangential component.
In this review we will discuss some forward modeling studies of near 6.0 I I I I I 5.5
field waveform data in relationship to teleseismic data for the same events.
We find that NTS and Amchitka have different source function properties
for Pwaves. The excitation of other crustal phases is not so clear but we 5.5 
will examine some of the difficulties encountered in modeling whole
records in terms of crustal complexity. We will, also, address some of the
corresponding complications in teleseismic Pwaveforms associated with 5.0  x MILROW  4.5
specific sites. A BOXCAR
VEL
The number of terms in the bracket indicates the sharpness of the
solution and rate of dropoff in the spectral domain. The displacement 2.5 
X
x
A X
 2.0
potential for a wholespace is given by $(R,t) = cp(~)/Rand displacement A
by
2.0   1.5
x
xx A
1.5 I I I I I X
1 .o
where T = t  R/a,retarded time.
Velocity is proportional to (d2 cp/dt2). Since Haskell was interested in
deriving an analytical expression for energy he placed the B factor
(controls overshoot) in the fourth term in the power series, thus, Fig. 2. Comparison of the strong motion data from MILROW and
allowing (d2 cp/dt2) to be continuous. His solution decays like f4. Von BOXCAR. The two observed accelerations start at the shot times
Seggrn and Blandford [I9721 proposed a source with only two terms and indicating the difference in travel time. The curves through the
a f2 falloff. Note that this produces a discontinuous velocity and acceleration points are the best fitting quadratic.
requires some small addition of attenuation to consmct near field velocity displayed in Figure 6.
synthetics. Equation (1) is the form used in a number of modeling studies In summary, the synthetic seismograms presented in Figure 5 show
involving nearfield and corresponding teleseismic Pwaves [Helmberger reasonable agreement with data at ranges greater than about 3 km where
and Hadley, 1981; Burdick et al., 1984b and others]. the material behaves elastically. At shorter ranges, spall develops and our
The objective of these studies is to compare the P and pP arrivals in idealized synthetics based on the waveequation fail after the initial pulse,
nearfield records such as displayed in Figure 1 with teleseismic Pwaves. see Figure 4. Essentially, the material near the free surface is pulled apart
If q(t) can be determined locally, we can determine the effective by the downgoing tensional pulse (pP) and the surface layer enters a
attenuation by correcting the teleseismic Pwaves for geometric spreading ballistic trajectory until it rcimpacts. The accelerations in Figure 4 show
and pP interference. Accuracy in this computation is controlled by our clear evidence of spall with its characteristic 1 g free fall. The socalled
ability to correct local data for propagational distortions caused by Nwave is apparent in the velocity traces. It is rather surprising that the
complex sttucture. material when it is under compression remains elastic as suggested by the
Figure 3 displays the construction of the local Pwave in terms of the peak velocity results displayed in Figure 6. We will address the spall
direct P, diving P, and pP appropriate for the Amchitka structure. The
phenomenon later in terms of a kinematic cavity model.
first column displays the direct upgoing P wave; the second contains the
Pfield that started initially downward and then turned upward by the Scaling Relationships and Results
uppercrustal gradient. The third column contains their sum and the
fourth the sum after adding in pP. At the nearest distance the upgoing ray
The studies by Mueller and Murphy [I9711 and subsequent works by
dominates and pP has virtually no effect. At greater ranges the amplitude Murphy and his colleagues have established the basic scaling
of the diving P becomes stronger producing a change in overall Pwave relationships. This formalism is simply adapted to the RDP
shape. The pP phase begins to emerge at 7 km and becomes more parameterization expressed in (1).
pronounced with distance. At 7 km, pP reflects at nearly the halfway The basic argument is that Y (yield) is proportional ta cavity volume
distance of 3 km which is near the edge of the spa11 zone, see Figure 4. A
and, therefore, the cavity radius, rc, is related to Y by cuberoot scaling:
profile of the early portion of MILROW 0bse~ationsis given in Figure
5(a) along with corresponding synthetics. A similar comparison for
CANNIKIN is displayed in Figure 5(b). These fits are not very
impressive, but given the intensity of these signals and the obvious
idealizations (linear and elastic theory), it is rather remarkable. Even more A slightly larger radius associated with the effective elastic radius is
remarkable are the fits to peak velocity predicted by this simple model as determined by re = C Y . /h.42
~ ~ where the exponent of h, the depth, is
HELMBERGER ET AL. 37
P  UPGOlkG P  DOWNGOING P P + pP
MlLROW SURFACE  STRONG MOTIONS
Velocity (21 I
3.5 k m
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
1,me. i.ec1 Tome. l u c l
2.5 a e c
v~
(km sl)
vs
(km sl)
P
(g cm3)
Layer thickness
(m)
Fig. 3. This figure displays the interaction of rays which make up the
nearfield Pwaveform as it develops with distance. The first column on
the left is just the upgoing generalized ray, direct arrival. The next
column displays the diving path contribution. The third column contains
the sum. The results after adding in the phase pP is given on the right.
The traces in each row have the same start time.
determined by empirical means, see Mueller and Murphy [1971], and
depends on material properties. Assuming that cp,is directly related to (rc)
cubed yields
The COrner frequency k depends on .wurce strength such that the larger The results after Hartzell et al. [1984], and Burdick et al. [1984b] are:
the event the longer the source duration. Thus, k is inversely related to
re, Or C2 = 4.7 and C1 = 9.5 x lo8 (Amchitka)
(5)
C2 = 4.0 and C1 = 6.7 x lo8 (Pahute)
The two constants C1 and C2 can be determined by modeling nearfield Thus, MILROW has a k of 9 and BOXCAR a lower k of 7. A
data. The other parameter in equation (1) is B which increases with depth comparison of these results for two yield levels is given in Figure 7 along
according to Von Seggern and Blandford [1972]. By restricting the with the Murphy [I9771 standard "wet tuff' for both Pahute and
modeling to the (P and pP) combination we lose the longperiod Amchitka.
information. Essentially B and cp, tradeoff such that it is not possible to The nearfield modeling results suggest that the effective elastic cavity
distinguish between a large B, small cp, combination and a small B, large is larger for softer rocks by about 15% and that the seismic coupling is
cp,,see Burdick et al. [1984b]. Teleseismic shortperiod body wave data larger by about 30% for harder rocks. These results are compatible with
suffer from the same bandlimitation problem [see Helmberger and the material constants discussed by Mueller and Murphy [I9711 when
Hadley, 19811. Thus, B has been fixed at one in comparing the source applied at the Amchitka site, see Stead [1989]. The difficulty is in
differences between Pahute and Amchitka. defining the material constants applicable to the effective cavity volume
j,$%4
CANNIKIN
(b)
~....&
A. km
rl5.8 +
2.5 s e c
SYN. 00s.
Fig. 5. A comparison of synthetics and MILROW observations is given on the left (a). The source parameters are: B = 1, k = 9,
cp, = 1.4 x 10" cm3, and depth of 1.2 km. The seismic parameters are given in Table 1. The CANNIKIN results on the right
(b) assume the same layered model with source parameters: B = 1, k = 6, cp,= 4.5 x lo1 cm3, and depth of 1.8 km.
PEAK VELOCITIES IN
THE SPALL ZONE
MI LROW

1 1 1 1 , 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0
Distance (km)
Fig. 6. The decay of the amplitude of the first velocity peak with horizontal range. The theoretical curves are the values predicted

by the ex~losionalone. The close ameement imvlies that nonlinear absorption is confined to d e e ~ within the earth while the
material is under compression.
1000 KT
I
Fig. 7. A comparison of the MuellerMurphy and HelmbergerHadley yield scaled RDP spectra at 1000 and 100 k t Helmberger
Hadley spectra are shown for both Pahute Mesa and Amchitka.
40 MODELING NEARFIELD DATA AT NTS AND AMCHITKA
a1 P Velocity ( k m / s )
Depth
1 I CANNIKIN MILROW
b) Density ( g cm3)
2.0 2.4 2.8 3.2 3.6
Fig. 8. (a) Pvelocity profiles showing welllog data from Perret [1973].
The heavy solid line is the sharpboundary model listed in Table 1. The
light lines are the observed profiles for CANNIKIN and MILROW, shifted
2.0 and 5.0 km/s, respectively. (b) Corresponding density profiles.
Dashed line and light line are shifted 0.4 and 0.75 g cmP3, respectively.
Only the CANNIKIN density log is available.
1.0 km/s, and density (p) = 1.8 g/cm3; the hard material has a =
4.6 km/s, P = 2.3 km/s, and p = 2.3 g/cm3; and the rest of the layer,
which is 200 meters thick, has a = 3.4 km/s, P = 1.7 km/s, and p =
2.3 g/cm3. The amplitude at the soft site is a factor of 1.45 larger than
at the receiver in the same position in the planelayered model. The
particle motion is also more vertical than in the flatlayered case for the
receiver at 7 km as the ray is refracted more toward the vertical due to the
greater velocity contrast. Reverberations and conversions in the slow
media may be seen 1 to 2 s after the initial pulse.
These experiments yield some variations that explain the magnitude of
misfits between synthetic and observations displayed earlier in Figure 5
but we do not know the hue upper crustal structure well enough to apply
such detailed site responses. However, the distortionscaused by the types Fig. 9. The upper map displays the location of stations relative to shot
of crustal complexities displayed in Figure 10, while significant, are not point. The lower panel displays the comparisons of synthetics with data,
nearly as severe as those at NTS where shots are fired in basins filled with after Barker et al. [1985].
volcanic tuffs and semiconsolidatedalluvium. The upper panel of Figure
11 displays a crosssection of Yucca Flat from easttowest along with a cases where the geometry is appropriate for various shots in Yucca
profile of finitedifference synthetics showing the strong effects on the Valley, see Stead and Helmberger [19891.
Rayleigh waves as they approach the edge of the basin. The angle of It appears that the coda occurring in many Yucca Flat events originated
basin termination has a strong attenuating effect on strong motions, from such effects, see Lynnes and Lay [1989]. The situation for Pahute
especially at shallow dips of thirty degrees or less. At Yucca Flat, the Mesa events is less clear but disturbed Rayleigh waves are generally
basin terminates in the west at a low angle which reduces Rayleigh wave apparent. Because of these complexities much of the source modeling of
amplitude about fifty percent (in periods roughly 0.5 to 2.0 s) as the nearin explosion data has been limited to the initial Pwaves, as discussed
waves enter hard rock. The responses in Figure 11 ranging from 2 to earlier.
6 km display this effect where the locally trapped surface wave energy
leaks out the bottom of the model since the rays are nolonger beyond
critical angle. More Realistic Source Complexity
The dashed boundary at the bottom of the finitedifferencebox forms an
interface to a Kirchoff integral technique allowing for teleseismic Seismic radiation from nuclear explosions can be described in terms of
calculations, see Figure 12. Sources near the middle of the basin produce at least three physical processes. These are radiation from the explosion
the most scattered Rayleigh wave energy. The lower panel compares itself, radiation from tectonic release, and radiation from spall. The
HELMBERGER ET AL. 41
w . ..
Receivers Rece~vers
Blast 8
2k m L
2 krn
Vertical
16
Radial
7
woVertical
9
7k
Radial
5 sec 5 sec
Fig. 10. FD simulation of the effect of a fault with 1km offset is given on the right. Synthetic velocity seismograms at ranges
of 7, 8, 10 and 12 km (heavy lines) are compared with those from the flatlayered model (light lines). Amplitudes are given in
cm/s. FD simulation of the effect of a soft rock site next to a hard rock site is displayed on the left. Synthetic velocity
seismograms at ranges of 7.8.10 and 12 km (heavy lines) are compared with those from the flatlayered model (light lines). The
soft and hard rock sites are at ranges of 7 and 8 km, respectively. Soft site material has a of 2.0 km/s, P of 1.0 km/s, and p of
1.8 g/cm3,and hard site material has a of 4.6 km/s, P of 2.3 krnls, and p of 2.3 g/cm3.
explosion part is usually expressed as an isotropic point, as discussed vertically, this quadruple should be wellapproximated by a 4S0 dipslip
earlier, the tectonic release as a superimposed double couple Wallace et doublecouple. We say quadrupolelike because in 3D the pattern is
al., 19831, and spa11 as a system of distributed forces [Day et al., 19831. radially symmetric, yet this is ideal for 2D simulations. Doublecouple
We will briefly comment on the first and third contributions in this sources are derived and discussed in Helmberger and Vidale 119881. When
section. scaled for RDP instead of moment, the doublecouple may be added
linearly to the explosion result to produce the response from any
Asymmetric Sources ellipsoidal cavity in a radially symmetric medium, cavities ranging from
pancakes to pencils. The top trace at each station is appropriate for the H
A variation on the simple explosion source description discussed earlier H source with our most realistic crustal model, see Figure 14. The next
is the inclusion of possible source asymmetry. The motivation for trace contains the observed waveforms for CANNIKIN and the bottom
investigating this effect is the large variation in the ratio of firstarrival two traces display a 40% correction for prolate and oblate asymmetries.
amplitude to Rayleighwave amplitude seen in the data, and evidence for Adding the prolate correction seems to greatly enhance the fit to the latter
variation in the B factor. Physical conditions that would lead to the portions of these observations. The MILROW observations displayed in
formation of asymmetrical cavities are readily postulated, for example, Figure 15 on the other hand look more symmetrical. We do not know at
bedding plane control or rapid vertical changes in material strength. The present if adding a 20 to 40% prolate correction will explain the Ms
correction for an ellipsoidal cavity requires the introduction of Swave differential for these two events but this appears promising. Previous
radiation at the source, see Rial and Moran [1986]. Figure 13 is the attempts at explaining the Ms problem suggested changing B in the HH
basis for the development of such a correction. The correction is model, B = 1.6 for longshot; B = 1 for MILROW: B = .6 for CANNIKIN
quadrupolelike,and for ellipsoidal cavities with a principal axis oriented [Lay et al., 1984al.
L,;
42 MODELING NEARFIELD DATA AT NTS AND AMCHITKA
sources 0 1 2 3
0
Radial Vertical
W F
I++"
15'
2
TX +" 3 4 $ 5 + v Y A 0 86
Fig. 11. Synthetic strong motion records appropriate for the model at the
top. These were records generated by the finitedifference method, and
include an RDP source with K = 12. B = 1 and TOO = 10l0. These are source 1 , 20°
only for source position 2 (of 0 to 3 displayed in Figure 12). and for the
stations shown. It is important to note that the peak amplitude drops
sharply across the boundary, that the duration of the Rayleigh wave is
reduced, and that the Rayleigh wave appears to lose relatively more of the PORTMANTEAU
lower frequencies as it crosses the basin boundary. This effect on local
Rayleigh waves is well documented by the many shots in various
locations across Yucca Flats, after Stead [1989].
Spall Effects
Cavity Displacements these recordings we can compare P and pP observations from both sites
and obtain differences in source characteristics. Amchitka events have
higher comer frequencies or sharper rise times relative to Pahute events by
Explosion Quadrupole about 20%. Seismic coupling is better at the harder rock Amchitka site
,
as well, roughly 30%. These results were obtained from the (f3)
HelmbergerHadley model but the (f2) models of MuellerMurphy or
Von SeggemBlandford work just as well, see Stead [1989]. A local
attenuation factor is required in the latter two models to remove the source
discontinuity in velocity; Q's of the order of 20 for NTS and 100 for
Amchitka will suffice.
Experiments in kinematic modeling of nonspherical explosions
suggests that large events (or deep) behave differentlythan do small events
(or shallow). Large events tend to have weaker teleseismic Pwaves
caused by prolate cavities (pencil) while smaller events may have oblate
cavities (pancake). This may explain why mb's for small events appear to
Fig. 13. Development of a quadruple correction for cavity asphericity. be too large relative to their Ms, or physically for the reduction of
Cavity on left is ellipsoidal, with the long axis vertical. The arrow on overshoot (Bfactor) with increasing yield Lay et al., 1984bl. Broadband
the inside of the cavity represents the pressure acting on the cavity wall. nearfield data and corresponding modeling is needed to resolve these
This pressure will radiate both P and Swave energy, as partitioned along issues.
and normal to the propagation direction. The resultant radiation patterns
are shown immediately to the right of the cavity. The Pwave pattern is In conclusion, it would appear that no RDP formalism is adequate for
elongate horizontally, because the increased radius of cavity curvature will explaining many explosions in a broadband sense given the complex
amplify the Pwave energy, while decreased radius of curvature will spall interaction etc. Perhaps, every explosion needs to be modeled
diminish it. This result is further partitioned into an explosion and a separately as are recent earthquakes. For example, most modem studies of
quadruple. The size of the explosion should be that for a spherical cavity earthquakes discuss asperity distributionsrather than f2 scaling.
of the same net volume as the ellipsoidal cavity. The quadruple is added
to this in varying amounts, depending on the amount of asphericity.
Fig. 14. Comparison of synthetic radial components against the CANNIKIN data. The upper trace is appropriate for a pure
spherical source. The second trace contains the observed waveforms. The lower two traces contain 40% prolate and oblate
contributions. Numbers indicate peak amplitude in cm/s.
44 MODELING NEARFIELD DATA AT NTS AND AMCHITKA
MOI
V R
n
10 krn
M03
Fig. 15. Comparison of synthetics for a spherical and aspherical cavity explosions (labeled Explosion, Prolate and Oblate) to data
from MILROW. The prolate and oblate cavity synthetics are made with a quadrupole correction for asphericity, both fixed at a
40% contribution. Peak amplitudes are in cm/s as displayed above each trace. Both radial (R) and vertical (V) components are
shown. The synthetics have been filtered with a T* = 0.05 operator and deuended to remove an exponential with time artifact of
the higherorder terms of the asymptotic source expansion, see Stead [1989].
J,p

Rodooted S,mlklc
E~plorion
I Spoll
* ll,,p
Jlr +Y&l.
.
2 uc
A& fi
2.5 sec
Fig. 16 A comparison of teleseismic results are given in the bottom panel. The lower row displays the intercorrelation results for
MILROW and CANNIKIN, essentially the best fitting teleseismic picture of P, pP+ spall. Predictions from models A ( 100%
efficiency) and B (33% efficiency)are given for comparison. Theoretical predictions for model B are given in the upper panel,
after Burdick et al. [1989].
HELMBERGER ET AL. 45
Acknowledgments. This research was supported by the Advanced Lay, T., D. V. Helmberger, and D. Harkrider, Source models and yield
Research Projects Agency of the Department of Defense and was scaling relations for underground nuclear explosions at Amchitka
monitored by the Air Force Geophysics Laboratory under the contract Island, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 74, 843862, 1984b.
F1962889K0028. Contribution No. 4903, Division of Geological and Lynnes, C. S. and T. Lay, Inversion of P Coda for Isotopic Scatterers at
Planetary Sciences, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, Yucca Flat Test Site, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 79, 790804, 1989.
California. Masse, R. P., Review of seismic source models for underground nuclear
explosions, BUN. Seism. Soc. Am.. 71, 12491268, 1981.
References Mueller, Richard A. and John R. Murphy, Seismic characteristics of
underground nuclear dztonations; Part I, Seismic scaling law of
Bache, T. C., P. D. Marshall, and L. B. Bache, Q for teleseismic P waves underground detonations, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 61, 16751692,
from central Asia, J. Geophys. Res., 90, 35753587, 1985. 1971.
Barker, J. S., S. H. Hartzell, L. J. Burdick, and D. V. Helmberger, Murphy, Seismic source functions and magnitude determinations for
Effective sourcefunctions for underground nuclear tests at Pahute Mesa underground nuclear detonations, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 67, 135158,
from nearfield modeling, WoodwardClyde Consultants, Pasadena, 1977.
CA, WCCPR8502, 1985. Murphy, J. R., Networkaveraged Teleseismic Pwave Spectra for
Burdick, L. J., T. Lay, and D. G. Harkrider, A convenient source Underground Explosions. Part 11.. Source Characteristic of Pahute
representation for spall, WoodwardClyde Consultants, Pasadena, CA, Mesa Explosions. Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 79, 156171, 1989.
WCCPR8403,1984a. Murphy, Freefield seismic observations from underground nuclear
Burdick, L. J., T. Wallace, and T. Lay, Modeling the nearfield and explosions, this volume, 1991.
teleseismic observations from the Amchitka test site. J. Geophys. Orphal, D. L., Seismic motion recorded from the MILROW detonation in
Res., 39, 43734388, 1984b. the distance range 7 to 377 km, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 61, 1467
Burger, R. W., T. Lay and L. J. Burdick, Average Q and yield estimates 1471, 1971.
from Pahute Mesa Test Site, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 77, 12741294, Patton, H. J., Seismic moment estimation of underground nuclear
1987. explosions: A review of surface wave results and implications for the
Day, S. M., N. Rimer, and J. T. Cherry, Surface waves from underground source, this volume, 1990.
explosions with spall: analysis of elastic and nonlinear source models, Perret, W., Ground motion in the vicinity of the CANNIKIN nuclear
Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 34, 247264, 1983. explosion, Sandia Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, SLA73 0043, 79
Given, J. W. and G. R. Mellman, Source parameters for nuclear pp., 1973.
explosion at NTS and Shagan River from observations of Rayleigh and Rial, J. A. and B. Moran, Radiation patterns for explosivelyloaded
Love waves, Proceedings of the 7th Annual DARPAIAFGL Seismic axisymme@ic cavities in an elastic medium: analytic approximations
Research Symposium, May 68,1985 at the U.S. Air Force Academy, and numerical results, Geophy. J. R. astr. Soc., 86, 855862, 1986.
Colorado Springs, CO, 1985. Stead, R., Finite differences and a coupled anlaytic technique with
Hartzell, S. H., L. J. Burdick, and T. Lay, Effective source functions for applications to explosions and earthquakes, PhD thesis, Caltech,
Pahute Mesa nuclear tests, WoodwardClyde Consultants, Pasadena, Pasadena, Calif., 1989.
CA, WCCPR833, 1984. Stead, R. J., and D. V. Helmberger, Numericalanalytical interfacing in
Haskell, N. V., Analytic approximation for the elastic reduction from a two dimensions with applications to modeling NTS seismograms,
contained underground explosion, J. Geophys. Res., 72, 25832587, Pure Appl. Geophys., 128, 157193, 1989.
1967. Stump, B. W., Constraints on explosive sources with spa11 from near
Helmberger, D. V. and D. M. Hadley, Seismic source functions and source waveforms, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 75, 361377, 1987.
attenuation from local and teleseismic observations of the NTS events Vidale, J. E. and D. V. Helmberger, Path effects in strong motion
JORUM and HANDLEY, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 71, 5167, 1981. seismology, in Methods of Computational Physics, Bruce Bolt, Ed.,
Helmberger, D. V., and J. E. Vidale, Modeling strong motions produced Academic Press, NY,267319.1987.
by earthquakes with twodimensional numerical codes, Bull. Seism. Von Seggern, D., Seismic surface waves from Amchitka Island test site
Soc. Am., 78, 109121, 1988. events and their relation to source mechanisms, J. Geophys. Res., 78,
Johnson, L., Source characteristics of two underground Nuclear 24672474, 1973.
explosions, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 1990. Von Seggern, D., and R. Blandford, Source time functions and spectra for
Lay, T., The teleseismic manifestation of pP: problems and paradoxes, underground nuclear explosions, Geophys. J. R. Astr. Soc., 31.8397,
this volume, 1991. 1972.
Lay, Thorne, L. J. Burdick, and D. V. Helmberger, Estimating the yields Wallace, T. C., D. V. Helmberger, and G. R. Engen, Evidence of tectonic
of the Amchitka tests by waveform intercorrelation, Geophys. J. R. release from underground nuclear explosions in longperiod P waves,
astr. Soc., 78, 181208, 1984a. Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 73, 593613, 1983.
FREEFIELD AND FREE SURFACE GROUND MOTIONS FROM NUCLEAR EXPLOSIONS, THEIR SPATIAL VARIATIONS,
AND THE CONSTRAINT OF PHYSICAL SOURCE MECHANISMS
Brian W. Stump
Department of Geological Sciences, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas 75275
Robert E. Reinke
Geodynamics Section, Phillips Laboratory, Kirtland Air Force Base, Albuquerque, New Mexico 871176008
Abstract. Nearsource waveforms from explosions detonated at the physical model allows prediction and extrapolation to new environments
Nevada Test Site (NTS) are reviewed. Data are separated into four types: where experimental data may not exist [Murphy, 19771. It provides
freefield strong (FFS), representative of the region where material correlation between data observed at different ranges such as nearsource,
strength dominates; freefield weak (FFW), the region where weakly regional, and teleseismic [Taylor and Rambo, 19901. An empirical
nonlinear properties and transition from plastic to elastic response are approach to problems of discrimination and yield determination may be
important; free surface spall (FSS), where material tensile strength is adequate for limited conditions, but is not acceptable for the wide range of
important; and free surface elastic (FSE), where most seismic environments and distances that exist on the earth. The focus of this
observations begin. Data from Pahute Mesa (FSS & FSE), Rainier Mesa study is nearsource data sets and their utility in physical source model
(FFW & FSE), and Yucca Flats (FSS & FSE) are specifically considered. resolution [Stump and Johnson, 1984; Johnson, 19881. Emphasis will
Each of the data types is explored as to its resolution of important be placed on the successes and failures in separating source and
physical processes in the source region and resultant seismic radiation. propagation path effects. Nearsource is loosely defined for this study as
Specific attention is paid to the variability of these motions. Single and sourcereceiver separations of hundreds of meters to tens of kilometers.
scaled multiple explosion peak accelerations from Pahute Mesa and Yucca Explosions, unlike natural events, can be controlled. Time of
Flats show as much as a factor of 68 scatter with range. Large scatter in occurrence and location are determined by the experimenter, which allows
single explosion data suggests a propagation path effect while large for design of ground motion experiments whose expressed purpose is the
amplitudes for a scaled explosion from below the water table supports a characterization of seismic source properties [Stump and Reinke, 19871.
coupling difference between explosions. Data scatter decreases at long Not only can the elastic field be determined, but development of this field
periods as exemplified by long period moments which have a from the nearsource region where the material is nonlinear can be
multiplicative error of 1.49 for Pahute Mesa. Numerical models of body documented. Quantification of the motion field in this environment
and surface wave propagation in realistic onedimensional Pahute Mesa allows the linkage of seismic observations to measurements of pressure,
models indicate strong effects of velocity structure near the shot point for stress, and shock front propagation in the hydrodynamic, strongly
body waves traveling to the free surface at short offset (<2 depths of nonlinear, and weakly nonlinear regions. Each motion environment is
burial). Synthetic waveform difference between a site specific model and related to the yield of the explosion and material in which the explosion is
an average model decrease with increasing sourcereceiver offset or detonated. Comparison of yield estimates made from data within each
increasing period where nearsource surface waves are emphasized. region is dependent upon a physical understanding of appropriate
Comparison of freefield and free surface data from the same explosion at cumulative physical processes.
Rainier Mesa supports significantly reduced scatter in freefield data. Seismic discrimination and yield determination studies rely upon
Removal of the weathered layer as a dominant effect in the freefield data regional and teleseismic data since most monitoring scenarios are limited
can explain the reduced scatter. Analysis of data spanning the transition to such data [Bache, 1982; Pomeroy et al., 1982; U.S. Congress, 19881.
from FSS to FSE regions indicates that explosion geometry plays a Physical source constraints provided by nearsource data can be used as
strong role in the decay of free surface data. These data and extended consistency checks against models developed from regional and
reflectivity calculations appropriate for Pahute Mesa predict that strong teleseismic data where propagation path effects may be more severe
spall zone motions come from a region out to a free surface range just [Taylor and Rambo, 19901.
beyond one depth of burial for explosions with standard scaled depths of Nearsource data sets discussed in this paper are from the Nevada Test
burial. Site (NTS) where materials such as loosely consolidated alluvium,
volcanic tuffs and rhyolites, granites, and other sedimentary rocks can be
Introduction found. Particular attention will be paid to the documentation of free
surface and subsurface ground motions recorded from a variety of
A physically based understanding of the nuclear explosion source explosions at NTS. These motions will be used to constrain the
function is necessary for improving discrimination between earthquakes equivalent elastic source function and size of the explosion. Special
and explosions as well as refining yield estimates for explosions. The attention will be paid to the spatial variability of such motions and
resulting errors in source strength estimates.
This paper begins with a division of the nearsource motion fields
Explosion Source Phenomenology around the explosion followed by a review of previous work.
Geophysical Monograph 65 Observational data sets from Pahute Mesa, Yucca Flats, and Rainier Mesa
Copyright 1991 American Geophysical Union are introduced and explored. Wavefield modeling and source inversion are
48 FREEFIELD AND FREE SURFACE GROUND MOTIONS
presented as the observational data are used to constrain physical processes [Patton, 19901and are useful in characterizing motions designated as FSS.
around the explosion. Implications and conclusions are given as Freefield decay rates are not strictly applicable since these motions
developed from data analysis. involve interaction with the free surface. Bernreuter et al. [I9701
developed a set of decay curves for free surface data. Patton [I9901 has
NearSourceWaves discussed the utilization of these spall waveforms and their decay rates in
constraining the secondary seismic source from spall.
Ground motion around nuclear explosions can be observed at the free A second set of common free surface data involves measurements
surface where instrumentation is relatively inexpensive or at depth (free designed to quantify effects on populated areas surrounding NTS [Hays,
field) where the effects of the free surface are a minimum. Both freefield 1974; O'Brien and Lahoud, 19821. These observations and models
(FF)and free surface (FS) data will be discussed in this paper. involve propagation distances of tens to hundreds of kilometers. A final,
For the purposes of our discussion the motion field around the small data set exists for free surface ground motion from just outside the
explosion is divided into five regions [Rodean, 1971, 19811. The spall zone to tens of kilometers [Stump and Johnson, 1984; Johnson,
strongest motions from contained explosions are found in the freefield 19881. These data sets have been used to constrain the equivalent seismic
hydrodynamic (FFH)region where shock waves propagate. The velocity source [Helmberger and Hadley, 19811. Such measurements are less
of this shock front is used to make yield estimates utilizing the expensive and easier to field than freefield measurements.
CORRTEX methodology [King et al., 19891. Moving farther from the This work is designed to compare and contrast the FFW, FSS, and
explosion one encounters a region of strongly nonlinear motions where FFE data sets for purposes of constraining different parts of the explosive
material strength dominates the response. This region is given the source function. Data sets, which have been separately studied in the
nomenclature FFS (freefield strong). Pressure and stress measurements past, are investigated as an integrated set. Each contains different
are typically used to characterize this region. A weakly nonlinear region information; for example FSS is dominated by interaction of the upgoing
is encountered as the motion field decays further. More subtle material stress wave with the free surface. An important part of this discussion is
properties such as the transition from plastic to elastic response become the identification of the variability of each data set. The goal is to
important. For freefield data we designate this region as FFW with the quantify how each different type of nearsource data constrains the seismic
W for weak. source function.
As the motion field interacts with the free surface, tensile failure of
nearsurface layers can result in ballistic motions or spall. This motion Observational Data
environment is designated as FSS (free surface spall). The spall process
extends to depth as the reflected tensile wave propagates back into the Data from three areas of NTS are reviewed including Pahute Mesa,
material. The cost of fielding subsurface gauges is often prohibitive, so Yucca Flats, and Rainier Mesa. In an attempt to emphasize the different
most spall data has been taken at the free surface [Patton, 19901. As physical processes leading to these motions the data is divided into that
waves propagate further, they transition to purely elastic/anelastic representcd by weakly nonlinear motions in the freefield (FFW), spall
motions which are designated as freesurface elastic (FSE). motions at the free surface (FSS) and elastic motions from the free surface
This paper will document motions within the FFW, FSS, and FSE (FSE).
regions from NTS explosions. Each of the motion fields will be
illustrated with specific examples from Pahute Mesa (FSS & FSE), Pahute Mesa (FSS & FSE)
Rainier Mesa (FFW & FSE), and Yucca Flats (FSS & FSE).
Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) routinely makes three
Previous Work component, free surface digital acceleration measurements within the spa11
zone of contained nuclear explosions. A typical array of accelerometers
Freefield and free surface ground motions and stresses have been for the AMARILLO explosion with accompanying acceleration records is
measured since the inception of underground testing. Freefield motions given in Figure 1. Spall zone accelcrograms are characterized by an initial
(FFS & FFW) have been used to assess the importance of material compressive wave bositive acceleration), 1 g dwell during freefall
properties on strong ground motions. Such assessments are particularly (ballistic motion) following tensile failure, and a large spall closure signal
important when large engineering structures are placed close to the (positive acceleration). Dwell times for multiple kiloton explosions are
explosion. The tunnel shots in Rainier Mesa are an example of this type near 1 s as illustrated by the AMARILLO ground zero (GZ) record with a
of test. Measurements are often associated with these structures which dwell time of 0.65 s. The spatial effects of spall are illustrated in Figure
might bias freefield motions. Some of the earliest estimates of freefield 1 where acceleration records at free surface ranges of 15 m, 258 m, and
decay rates in alluvium, tuff, granite, and salt were summarized by 640 m are reproduced. Spall initiation time, identified by the start of 1 g
Wheeler and Preston [1%8]. Perret and Bass [I9751 extended the data sets dwell, increases with range while spall rejoin, designated by the impulsive
to include nuclear detonations in dry alluvium, dry tuff, wet tuff, and hard rejoin signal, decreases with range. Dwell time decreases from 0.65 to
rock (granite, salt, dolomite, and other sedimentary rocks). These studies 0.25 s over the observational range. As a result of the temporal and
focused upon attenuation of waveforms with slant range scaled by the spatial finiteness of the spall secondary source, its equivalent source
cube root of explosive yield. Germain [I9861 has reworked the Perret and function is peaked in the frequency domain [Day et al., 1983; Stump,
Bass analysis including more recent data. 19851.
Application of freefield data to calculation of seismic source functions Free surface, peak velocity measurements from FSS are summarized in
in the form of reduced displacement potentials for a number of materials Figure 2 where they are plotted against scaled free surface range (r =
was made by Werth and Herbst [I9631 followed by the analytic modeling ~ t k t l * ) . The data are derived through numerical integration from the
of Haskell [1967]. Murphy and Bennett [I9791 review freefield seismic original accelerograms. Six nuclear explosions (Table 1) from Pahute
data for alluvium, tuff, dolomite, sandstoneshale, and interbedded lava Mesa are represented in the plot. Data such as that displayed in Figure 2
flows. can be plotted against free surface range as done in the figure or slant
Nearsource, free surface ground motion gauges have typically been range as suggested by Perret and Bass [I9751 or Patton [1990]. If
placed at ranges within 2 depths of burial (DOB) where recording propagation path effects dominate the motion field, then slant range is the
 
equipment is located. The primary purpose of these gages is in assessing more appropriate variable. If free surface interaction is more important,
equipment survivability. These gages are usually within the spa11 zone thenfree swface range may be more appropriate. As sourcereceiver range
STUMP AND REINKE 49
.

cn

Y GM1  640m(15m)
%,. 0 . 3 0 1. ... 1.. z._o. =..
TIME (s)
Free Surface Range (m)
Fig. 2. Peak vertical velocity from the Pahute Mesa spall zone data
(Table 1) is plotted against scaled free surface range. The free surface
range is scaled by the cube root of the explosion yield while the peak
velocity values are unscaled. Power law models were fit to the data for
ranges less than and greater than 100 m/kt1I3. This free surface range
corresponds to approximately one scaled depth of burial, 122 m/kt113, for
NTS explosions.
emphasizes the strong impact geometry has on spall zone data. From GZ
to a free surface range of approximate1 1 DOB, velocity (acceleration and
displacement also) decays little ( I  O . ~ for velocity data) followed by a
faster decay at farther ranges This central region with little
spatial decay indicates that out to a free surface range equal to one DOB
there is little change in slant range. The implication of such decay
patterns is that the central portion of the spall zone will have nearly
constant escape velocities or momentum contribution to a free surface
Fig. 1. Three, freesurface vertical acceleration records from the nuclear range equal to 1 DOB. Beyond this range to the edge of the spall zone,
explosion AMARILLO. The slant ranges (GM49121% GM2696111, motions decay rapidly, thus rcducing the spall contribution from this area.
GM1640111) and free surface ranges from ground zero (GM415m, GM2 A second implication of this decay pattern is that strong variations or
258m, GM6640111) are given. The horizontal time scale is 2.87 s. The asymmetries in the edge of the spall zone found from overhead
initial compressive wave reaches each successive station at greater time photography of the process may not be as important in the central region
while spall rejoin, indicated by the impulsive secondary signal, occurs at where motions decay little [Walker, 19821. This velocity data shows
earlier times for the farther stations. The surface geometry of the scatter of betwccn a factor of 3 and 5 for the explosionsrepresented.
accelerometer anay is given at the bottom of the figure. Moving outside the spall zone, a typical FSE anay for characterizing a
nuclear explosion is given in Figure 3a. The dimension of the array is on
increases relative to source depth, the two distance measures converge. the order of 10 km. Careful attention is paid to coverage in both range
The data are displayed as a function of free swface range in this case since and azimuth. Most gages are accelerometers although velocity transducers
this form emphasizes the s all zone which commonly extends to 23 are sometimes used at more distant ranges. Peak vertical accelerations
DOE3 range (244366 m h ~ t on ~ the
~ ~scaled
) plot. This representation from a single explosion observed at a number of azimuths and ranges are
50 FREEFIELD AND FREE SURFACE GROUND MOTIONS
ABoVE WATER T A B U
the highest accelerations. The physical mechanism for the scatter in these
data could either be different wave propagation effects (depth of burial,
proximity to interfaces, different sourcereceiver structures) or source
coupling effects. Large amplitudes for the source below the water table
loo0 10000
support a coupling effect. On the other hand, large scatter in the single
RANGE (m) explosion data (Figure 3b) suggests propagation path effects.
Scatter in observational data is freauency  de~endent.
 The
Fig. 3. (a) A typical free surface instrument array for characterization of accelerograms used for the peak amplitude study (Figure 3b) are Fourier
the explosion source function. The accelerometers are all outside the spa11 transformed and long period spectral estimates are made and converted to
zone (FSE region) and designed to give good azimuthal coverage of the moment:
source. (b) Peak vertical accelerations are plotted against free surface
range (unscaled) for a single nuclear explosion. The large scatter ( 6 8 ) in
these observations with range is evident.
given in Figure 3b. Accelerations span over an order of magnitude in where p is density, R is slant range, a is compressional velocity, and QJ
amplitude and slightly less than an order of magnitude in range. A is the long period displacement spectral level. Since the data is from the
distinct amplitude decay with range is observed although it is obscured by free surface, a simple factor of two is introduced into the Ro estimate.
a factor of 6 8 scatter in peak accelerations. Problems with this simple interpretation of the free surface data include
The single explosion data can be compared to scaled peak accelerations the inability to separate body and surface waves in these data sets.
(FSE) from a number of Pahute Mesa explosions, one of which was Isotropic moments interpreted from vertical (Z), radial (It), and transverse
detonated below the water table (Figure 4). The same characteristics (T) data are given in Figure 5 (strictly speaking only Z and R should be
observed in the single explosion data are replicated in the multiple used). The scatter in moments from this single explosion is a factor of
explosion data set. There is an approximate order of magnitude scatter in 23, reduced from variations in peak acceleration. The fact that Z, R, and
peak acceleration data with the shot from below the water table exhibiting T moments all follow the same spatial pattern argues that the variation
STUMP AND REINKE 51
zl
symmetry in the source function. Transverse components in comparison
ns are much shorter in duration, delayed in time, and exhibit significant
std dev (log (Mo)) = [(&) {log ~ o  ilog ( M O ) I ~ fluctuations with azimuth including changes in first motion.
Displacement spectra are estimated from these records (Figure 9).
Envelope functions are fit to each spectrum which include a long period
The multiplicative error is defined according to: level, comer frequency, and highfrequency decay (Table 2). These data
show little variation in radial and vertical long period levels and a factor of
EM, = antilog [std dev (log (Mo))] (4) two increase in corner frequency for the transverse component
accompanied by reduced long period levels. Source spectral interpretation
The average moment for the vertical data in Figure 6 is 3.8 x dyne of the above data supplemented by additional nearsource gauges gives an
cm with a multiplicative error of 1.49. isotropic moment (R, Z) of 1.95 x 1021 dynescm (multiplicativeerror of
Z CORNER FREQ (I)
ZCORNERFREQ(2)
RANGE (km)
Fig. 6. Comer frequency interpretation from acceleration spectra of the same data used in Fig. 5. As shown in the
inset, two comer frequencies were measured. The first represents the transition from the rise in acceleration spectra at low
frequency to the flattening at intermediate frequencies. The second comer frequency marks the transition from the flat,
intermediate frequency region to the decay at high frequencies. The fist comer frequency (1 Hz) which is attributed to the
source is insensitive to range while the second comer decreases with range from 9 to 3 Hz. The flat spectra between the
two comers supports a f2 s o m e model. The second comer frequency is attributed to attenuation.
1.36) and a deviatoric moment (T) of 3.97 x 1020 dynescm with the announced yield of less than 20 kt. The high frequencies decay
(multiplicative error of 1.44). The accompanying corner frequency as f2, like the Pahute Mesa data and the MuellerMurphy source model.
estimates are 1.82 for the isotropic spectra (1.12 multiplicative error) and A simple Brune's model is used for comparative purposes to interpret
3.28 for the deviatoric spectra (1.13 multiplicative error). As found for the transverse spectra in terms of stress drop and source dimension. These
Pahute Mesa spectral data, comer frequencies show less variation than estimates are applicable only for earthquake sources and may not be
moments. strictly applied to tectonically driven motions triggered by the explosion.
The isotropic comer frequency lies between a MuellerMurphy model The parameters predicted by this model are given for comparison. The
prediction of 2.5 Hz for 1 kt and 1.7 Hz for 10 kt which is in agreement mean source radius is 124 m with a stress drop of 89 bars and an average
STUMPANDREINKE 53
\ '
\\A
\
\
19.830
'\ \ &
\ , 1 2.24 g SPALL
 IS
\ 7
0
0 NO SPALL I I
3.96 g 0 100 m
Fig. 7. Vertical crosssection displaying accelerograms from downhole and surface gauges within a range equal to two depths of
burial which constrains the spall zone. Solid circles represent vertical accelerometer records that show characteristic 1g dwell
indicative of spall. Solid and long dashed lines are two dimensional bounds on the spall zone.
.
10
wavefield are similar in size to displacements observed on faults and
bedding planes found upon reentering tunnels surrounding nuclear
ZAcC'g's'
explosions at Rainier Mesa [Kennedy. 19841. The equivalent elastic radii
RAcC'g's'
¤ for 1 and 10 kt explosions are predicted to be between 133 and 202 m.
The deviatoric source radius falls near the lower bound of the equivalent
 '1
C elastic source radius.
As seismic waves propagate within Yucca Flat valley, differences
8
brJ
2
N
3
v
!."
" 1
H 0
between radial, vertical, and transverse waveforms and spectra disappear.
Displacement records and spectra at the 5.16 km distance are given in
Figure 10. The duration of ground motion has grown from 12 s at 549
m to nearly 20 s at 5.16 km. The transverse motion is the largest of the
three components and comparable in frequency to the other two
d components. Spectral differences found at the closest ranges and attributed
."
1
to deviatoric/isotropic source processes have disappeared at this distance.
u
Rainier Mesa (FFW & FSE)
0.
Fig. 9. Vertical (Z) and transverse (T) displacements spectra along with the displacement waveforms from the COALORA
explosion. The three stations (GM7, GM8, GM9) are all at a free surface range of 549 m. Peak displacements for each waveform
are given in cm. A simple spectral model consisting of a constant long period level, high frequency decay (f"), and a comer
frequency (fc) is fit to the spectral data.
Rainicr Mesa explosion using freefield (FFW) and free surface (FSS & [I9751 for wet tuff, R  ~ (acceleration).
. ~ ~ Waveforms show an azimuthal
FSE) gauges (Figure lla). Freefield measurements were made with effect in wave shape with two accelerometers to the NE having longer
threecomponentaccelemmetcrs located to minimize geological effects as durations than gauges to the NW. Duration of motion also increases with
well as document the transition of the motion field into the elastic range as noted by Murphy [1989]. Another mcasure of propagation
rcgime. Freesurface gauges were fielded so that comparisons between the complexity is the ratio of radial to vertical peak accelcration (freefield)
two data sets could be made. The radial, freefield data is reproduced in which is 5.1 for the closest gauge (193 m) and decreases to 1.8 for the
Figure I l c with absolute amplitudes compared to the freesurface data in farthest gauge (887 m).
Figure I lb. Amplitude data indicates a smoothly decaying acceleration Comparison of freefield, radial, peak acceleration (open square) and
and velocity field which follows model predictions by Pcrrct and Bass freesurface, peak acceleration (solid square) indicates increased scattcr for
STUMP AND REINKE 55
Table 2. COALORA Spectral Interpretation freesurface data. The single source scatter in freesurface data is similar to
Station Range DC f, Slope that from Pahute Mesa. Freefield scatter is much reduced which might be
(m) (cms) W) a reflection of the fact that receivers have been moved away from the
weathered zone. At approximately 800900 m, freefield and free surface
GM7Z 612 0.30 1.8 2
data merge with no factor of two amplification at the freesurface. This
GM7R 612 0.36 2.1 2+ observation is only an apparent discrepancy since free surface data
GM7T 612 0.09 4.0 4 displayed in Figure 1l b are gauges from outside the spall zone (triangles
GM8Z 614 0.30 1.6 2 in Figure 13a) and as such represent oblique rather than normal free
GMIR 614 0.36 1.8 2 surface incident angles.
GMIT 614 0.10 3.5 2+
Wavefield Modeling and Inversion
GM9Z 612 0.34 1.8 2+
GM9T 612 0.30 3.5 3+
FSS to FSE transition
Fig. 10. Vertical (Z), radial (R) and transverse (T) displacements and Peak displacement is plotted against velocity at failure (spall initiation) in
displacement spectra at the 5.16 km sourcereceiver range for COALORA Figure 14. The relationship predicted by equation 6 is designated by open
are displayed. The Z and R spectra are arbitrarily scaled by factors of 100 squares. Observational data follow the slope of predictions but
and 10 so that all three can be compared. Where the Z and T spectra displacements are as much as a factor of two bigger than predictions
showed significantly different spectral levels (Qz > QT) and comer throughout the data set
frequency ( f c >~ fez) at 549 m (Fig. 9). at 5.16 km both spectral levels Although large displacements may be a result of bias introduced in the
and comer frequencies for all components are identical. integration procedure in deriving these values, the consistency of large
56 FREEFIELD AND FREE SURFACE GROUND MOTIONS
(b)
Iml 3
Im:
.
UaUAUtrs.
I
uau~ c c n
 .

O D .
U
D
% 10:
c)
B3 ;
I
:

...I.
I 
1m lml 1 m
SLANT RANGE (m)
I I I I I I
0.00 0.12 023 0.35 0.46 0.58 0.70
Time (s)
Fig. 11. (a) Plan view of the instrument array for a combined freefield (solid circles) and free surface (open circles and all
triangles) ground motion experiment at Rainier Mesa, NTS. (b) Comparison of the peak radial accelerations in the freefield
(open squares) and at the free surface (solid squares). A marked increase in data scatter is noted for the free surface data.
(c) Normalized freefield radial velocity waveforms from the experiment.
displacements for a number of shots at a variety of motion levels argues scatter in the nearsource region is a result of lateral variations in the
against this interpretation. Alternatively, departure from a purely geological structure at NTS. There are strong vertical variations in
gravitational spall model may be explained by viewing spall as a velocity in addition to lateral variations. Figure 12a displays the velocity
continuous rather than a simple, discontinuous process. Even though log developed from an emplacement hole at Pahute Mesa (HOLE) and
peak velocity indicates failure, spalled material may still receive long contrasts it with an average model developed by Leonard and Johnson
period input from material below thus boosting displacements over those [I9871 from inversion of nearsource traveltime data (LJ). The site
predicted by a simple ballistic model. More data supplemented with specific velocity model shows strong low velocity zones (LVZ)
numerical modeling is needed to investigate this point representative of poorly welded tuff units. Differences in synthetics
developed from the average and site specific velocity models are
Velocity Model EffecrslData Scatter investigated to determine how much detail must be included in the
velocity model. A set of numerical trials will be discussed using the site
Scaled acceleration and velocity data from Pahute Mesa (Figure 5) specific velocity model with sources just above, in, and below a LVZ
show considerable scatter. A number of authors have argued that such such as that which exists below 616 m (HOLE) in Figure 12a. This
STUMP AND RE 57
(a)
PAHUTE MESA P VELOCITIES
DEPTH (km)
Fig. 12. (a) The P wave velocity model interpreted from emplacement hole data at Pahute Mesa (solid squares,
Table 3) contrasted against an average Pahute Mesa velocity model (open circles) developed by Leonard and
Johnson (1987). (b) Vertical and radial synthetic velocity records developed from the site specific velocity model
using the extended reflectivity modeling technique. The synthetics calculated for the free surface ranges of 0.1 to
3.0 lan have all been scaled by free surface range (rl) to balance amplitudes for display.
numerical experiment will help determine the effect of material properties in these calculations have a constant moment with a source time function
around the explosion on nearsource wavefields. appropriate for a 150kt explosion. A simple separation of dominant
A number of researchers [Vidale and Helmberger, 1987; Johnson, body and surface wave contributions is found by lowpass filtering the
1988; Stump and Johnson, 19841 have noted the importance of both body data at 1 Hz to emphasize surface waves and highpass filtering the data at
and surface waves in nearsource waveforms. Although distances over 1 Hz to focus on body waves. Peak velocities are picked from synthetics
which observations are made in this study are relatively short ( G I 0 km), for comparison between the various models.
the shallow source depths (2001000 m) lead to these effects. The The site specific velocity model (HOLE) is first investigated with
modified reflectivity method [Muller, 19851 is employed in seismogram sources above the LVZ (616 m), in the LVZ (665 m), and below the LVZ
synthesis to include both body and surface wave contributions. Sources (750 m) (Figure 12a). The body wave data (Figure 15) shows strong
58 FREEFIELD AND FREE SURFACE GROUND MOTIONS
1 First Z Peak
0 Z VEL HP (hole7E*hn)
Z VEL HP(LJdl6m)
Velocity ( m / s )
where Un(f) are the frequency domain representation of the observations,
Fig. 14. Peak displacements and velocities from a number of spall zone Gnij(f) are the Green's functions or wave propagation effects accounted
observations of different explosionsare plotted against one another. For a for with extended reflectivity solutions, and Mij(f) are the components of
gravitationally controlled process peak displacement is related to velocity the moment tensor.
according to equation 6. This relation is displayed as open squares in the Many different stations are utilized simultaneously in these studies in
figure. On average for a given peak velocity the observed peak an attempt to minimize the effect of data scatter. Both absolute
displacements are greater by a factor of two than that predicted by the amplitudes and wave shapes are modeled with fits completed in the
gmvitational model. frequency domain. Characteristic comparisons between observed and
STUMPANDREINKE 59
modeled ground motions give correlation coefficients that range from 0.7 MOMENT RATE TENSOR (M)
to 0.9 in the time domain. The moment tensor that was determined in
this inversion is given in Figure 16. The source is dominated by the 
isotropic component. The initial pulse is symmemc and is followed by a
secondary, long period contribution, largest on the M j j component, the
M:2 M!31 4.39~!0~'d~necrn/s
data argues that lateral variations in the velocity structure (weathered Fletcher, J., J. Boatwright, L. Harr, T. Hanks, and A. McGarr, Source
zone), not taken into account by the synthetics, may have a strong parameters for aftershocks of the Oroville, California, Earthquake,
contribution to the ground motions. Bull. Seis. Soc. Am., 74, 11011123, 1984.
The scatter in the free surface data from Pahute Mesa is apparently Germain, L. S., Perret and Bass Revisited: IHard Rocks; 11Wet Tuff,
frequency dependent as exemplified by the determination of longperiod Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, DC, DNATR86407, 1
October 1986.
moment Spectral moment estimates showed greatly reduced variation for
Haskell, N. A., Analytic approximation for the elastic radiation from a
a single explosion, a factor of 23. Freesurface data document the contained underground explosion, J. Geophys. Res., 72,2583,1967.
stability of the source comer frequency followed by a second higher Hays, W. W., Prediction of Ground Motion Characteristics of
frequency comer which decreases in frequency with increasing source Underground Nuclear Detonations, Environmental Research
receiver offset. This second comer is attributed to attenuation and gives Corporation, Las Vegas, NV, NVO1163239, 1974.
an average Q value for Pahute Mesa between 20 and 30. At small, near Helmberger, D. V. and D. M. Hadley, Seismic source functions and
source ranges where the source and attenuation comers separate the data attenuation from local and teleseismic observations of NTS events
indicates a f2 highfrequency source model. At greater sourcereceiver JORUM and HANDLEY, Bull. Seis. Soc. Am., 71, 5167, 1981.
ranges source and attenuation comers are difficult to separate and cloud the Johnson, L. R., Source characteristics of two underground nuclear
f2 source interpretation. explosions, Geophys. J.,95, 1530, 1988.
Data fmm Yucca Flats were used to illustrate the relative deviatoric and Kennedy, R. P., Mighty EpicDiablo Hawk block motion program, in
DARPAIAFOSR Symposium on the Physics of Nonisotropic Source
isotropic source contributions. Simple spectral interpretations of Effects from Underground Nuclear Explosions, Defense Advanced
obse~ationsat sourcereceiver distances of 2 km or less give deviatoric Research Projects Agency, Arlington, VA, DARPAGSD
source estimates from transverse motions that are 510 times smaller than 8203lAFOSRNP8201, 1984.
isotropic source estimates from vertical and radial motions. Transverse King, D. S., B. E. Freeman, D. D. Eilers, and J. D. Johnson, The
spectra interpreted as a Brune type model give a deviatoric source radius effective yield of a nuclear explosion in a small cavity in geologic
which is at the lower bound of the equivalent elastic source radius for the 
material: Enhanced cou~lingrevisited. J. Geoohvs.
A . . Res.. 94. 12375
explosion. As found for the Pahute'Mesa data, spectral differences 12385, 1989.
between the radial, vertical and transverse spectra decrease with range. At Leonard. M. A.. and L. R. Johnson. Velocitv structure of Silent Canvon .
5 km all three components of motion give spectra that are identical in caldera, ~ e v a d aTest Site, ~ u l l . . ~ e iS s~. C Am.,
. 77, 597, 1987.
shape and strength, indicating the strong effects of scattering and Miiller, G., The reflectivity method: A tutorial, J. Geophys., 58, 153
attenuation. 174, 1985.
Full wave modeling via moment tensor inversion are compared to Murphy, J. R., and T. J. BennettJ Review of Available FreeField
Seismic Data from Underground Nuclear Explosions in Alluvium.
simple spectral interpretation of free surface, nearsource data. These
Tuff, Dolomite, SandstoneShale, and Interbedded Lava Flows,
results indicate that the scalar spectral interpretation for isotropic moment System, Science, and Software, La Jolla, CA, SSSR804216, 1979.
may be biased high by as much as a factor of 3. This bias is a result of Murphy, J. R., Freefield observations from underground nuclear
the free surface interaction and the generation of surface waves not taken explosions, in Proceedings of the DOElLLNL Symposium on
into account in the scalar moment estimates. ExplosionSource Phenomenology, Lake Tahoe, California, 1416
Data from the freefield and free surface have been used to constrain the March, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA,
explosion source function. Contributions from the isotropic explosion, CONF890398, pp. 7591, 1989.
tectonic stress release or driven motions and spall have been documented. Murphy, J. R., Seismic source functions and magnitude determinations
Data from Rainier Mesa indicate the superiority of freefield data in for undermound nuclear detonations. Bull. Seis. Soc. Am... 67.. 135
making source estimates. Spa11 zone motions offer opportunity for 158, 1977:
O'Brien, L. J., and J. A. Lahoud, Analysis of Ground Motions Recorded
constraining this secondary, seismic source and indicate a strong
from Underground Nuclear Explosions on Pahute Mesa, Adaptronics,
geometrical effect At nearsource distances strong tradeoffs can develop Inc., McLean, VA, DOE/NV/1005 21, 1982.
between source estimates and the effects of attenuation and scattering. Patton, H. J., Characterization of spall from observed strong ground
The advantage of nearsource data sets is the ease at which experiments motions on Pahute Mesa, Bull. Seis. Soc. Am., 80,, 13261345,
can be designed to separate these source and propagation effects as 1990.
documented by this review. Perret, W. R. and R. C. Bass, FreeField Ground Motion Induced by
Underground Explosions, Sandia Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM,
Acknowledgments. This work was done under support from Defense SAND740252, 1975.
Advanced Research Projects Agency under contract F1962889K0025 to Pomeroy, P. W., W. J. Best, and T. V. McEvilly, Test ban treaty
Southern Methodist University (BWS), Department of Energy Source verification with regional dataA review, Bull. Seis. Soc. Am., 72B.
Region Program at Los Alamos National Laboratory (BWS), and Air S89S129, 1982.
Rodean, H. C., Inelastic processes in seismic wave generation, in
Force Geophysics Laboratory (RER). Identification of Seismic SourcesEarthquakes or Underground
Explosion, E. S. Husebye and S. Mykkeltveit, Eds., D. Reidel
Publishing Co., 1981.
Archuleta, R. J., E. Cranswick, C. Mueller, and P. Spudich, Source Rodean, H. C., Nuclear Explosion Seismology, U.S. Atomic Energy
parameters of the 1980 Mammoth Lakes, California, earthquake Commission, 1971.
sequence, J. Geophys. Res., 87,45954607, 1982. Stump, B. W., and L. R. Johnson, Nearfield source characterization of
Bache, T. C., Estimating the yield of underground nuclear explosions, contained nuclear explosions in tuff, Bull. Seis. Soc. Am., 74, 126,
Bull. Seis. Soc. Am., 72B, S131S168, 1982. 1984.
B e r ~ e u t e r ,D. L., E. C. Jackson, and A. B. Miller, Control of the Stump, B. W., and R. E. Reinke, Experimental seismology: In Situ
dynamic environment produced by underground nuclear explosions, in source experiments, Bull. Seis. Soc. Am., 77, 12951311, 1987.
Proceedings of Symposium on Underground Explosions, 1416 Jan Stump, B. W., Constraints on explosive sources with spall from near
1970, Las Vegas, Nevada, Report Conf700101, Vol 2, 979993, source waveforms, Bull. Seis. Soc. Am., 75, 361377, 1985.
1970. Taylor, S. R., and J. T. Rambo, Nearsource effects on regional
Day, S. M., N. Rimer, and J. T. Cheny, Surface waves from underground seismograms: An analysis of the NTS explosions PERA and QUESA,
explosions with spall: Analysis of elastic and nonlinear source models, submitted to J. Geophys. Res., 1990.
Bull. Seis. Soc. Am., 73, 247264, 1983. U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, Seismic Verification
STUMP AND REINKE 61
of Nuclear Testing Treaties, OTAISC361 (U.S. Government Printing 8203lAFOSRNP8201, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency,
Office, Washington, DC, May 1988) Arlington, VA, 1982.
Vidale, J. E., and D. V. Helmberger, Path effects in strong motion Werth, G. C., and R. F. Herbst, Comparison of amplitudes of seismic
seismology, in Seismic Strong Motion Synthetics, Bruce A. Bolt, waves from nuclear explosions in four mediums, J. Ceophys. Res..
Ed., Academic Press, Orlando, FL, 1987. 68, 14631474, 1963.
Walker, J. J., Analysis of TV records for ground motion characterization, Wheeler, V. E., and R. G. Preston, Scaled FreeField Particle Motions
in DARPAIAFOSR Symposium on the Physics of Nonisofropic from Underground Nuclear Explosions, Lawrence Livermore Radiation
Source Effects from Underground Nuclear Explosions, DARPAGSD Laboratory, Livermore, CA, UCRL50563, 1968.
EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES OF STOCHASTIC GEOLOGIC INFLUENCES ON NEARSOURCE GROUND MOTIONS
Robert E. Reinke
Geodynamics Section, Phillips Laboratory, Kirtland Air Force Base, Albuquerque, New Mexico 871176008
Brian W. Stump
Department of Geological Sciences, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas 75275
Abstract. Analysis of accelerograms recorded at the same ranges but study the effects of random geologic inhomogeneity upon smallscale
multiple azimuths from smallscale (5100 Ibs) high explosive spatial variability in ground motion. This paper will discuss the results
experimentsrevealed wide (as large as 20 dB in the amplitude modulus of of these tests, which were conducted in a dry alluvial geology, and the
the Fourier transform) variations in response for frequencies higher than implications of random geologic variability for the interpretation of near
3 M Hz. Additional experiments were performed which ruled out source source ground motions.
asymmetry or instrumental irregularity as the cause of these variations. This paper deals specifically with small explosive experiments, with
The observations suggest that scattering by geologic inhomogeneity is travel paths a few tens of meters in length, and random media scale
responsible for the frequencydependent spatial variability in ground lengths on the order of a fraction of a meter to a few meters in length.
motion. Modeling of the physical processes responsible for this Several recent discussions in the literature, however, suggest that random
variability requires a statistical description of the subsurface heterogeneity. geologic variability exerts a significant influence on the complete
One set of experiments was designed to accomplish this. Cone spectrum of seismic wave propagation from the nearsource to teleseismic
penetrometer testing was employed to directly probe the subsurface where ranges and frequencies. A quantitative understanding of the influence of
a set of high explosive experiments was performed. Highresolution geologic heterogeneity on wave propagation is necessary for users of
surface seismic surveys were performed at the site to characterize the seismic data in both the explosive source and earthquakecommunities.
deterministic and stochastic wave propagation effects. A statistical
description of the subsurface is being developed from this data set and will Initial Experiments
be used in a simulation of wave propagation in random media. Although
this paper deals specifically with travel paths a few tens of meters in One of the early experiments which we performed was the m y Test
length and random media scale lengths on the order of a fraction of a meter Series (ARTS). The objective of these 5pound tests was to study the
to a few meters in length, other examples in the literature suggest that ground motion effects of superposition of multiple charges in various
random geologic variability exerts a sig"ificant influence on thecomplete spatial patterns [Stump and Reinke, 19881. The plan was to analyze the
spectrum of wave propagation from the nearfield to teleseismic ranges data in a totally deterministic fashioni.e., assume that the difference in
and frequencies. waveforms from one azimuth to another would be relatively small. A
single charge experiment, ART 2 (Figure I), which included
Introduction measurements at multiple azimuths at the same range, was performed as a
test of this assumption. When the data were compared from one azimuth
Small, wellcontrolled, in situ explosive experiments provide an to another, variations as large as a factor of 10 were found at frequencies
opportunity to isolate and study individual aspects of the source above 30 Hz (Figure 2). A "Huddle Test" in which the accelerometers
propagation problem. Over the course of the past few years the Air Force were placed in a closely spaced group was conducted to verify that the
Phillips Laboratory has conducted a number of smallscale high explosive instrumentation was not a problem. An additional set of experiments in
experiments in an effort to better understand the physics involved in the which five 5pound charges were detonated in sequence on the same test
generation of ground motions by explosive sources. One of the lessons bed utilizing the same gage array provided convincing evidence that
learned from these ground motion experiments is that random geologic scattering by geologic heterogeneity and not source asymmetry was
variations have a significant influence on experimental results and that responsible for a significant portion of the variability [Reinke and Stump,
any attempt to model these small explosive events must take into account 19881. Analysis of data from these tests showed that the degree of
these stochastic effects. The goal of these experiments is an increased variability in the ground motion data as a function of frequency was very
understanding of the explosive source. This requires a separation of similar for all five detonations, confirming that geologic heterogeneity
propagation path effects from source effects. Neglect of the effects of was the source of the spatial variability in ground motion. Another
random spatial variability in propagation paths may lead one to draw experiment in the series was aimed at defining the dependence of variation
incorrect conclusions regarding the results of experiments. Several of the in the seismic wavefield with range. This test included accelerometers at
tests, ranging in size from 5 to 100 pounds, were designed specifically to 10 and 30m ranges. The results indicated an increase of variability with
range [Reinke and Stump, 19881.
Craps Experiments
Explosion Source Phenomenology
Geophysical Monograph 65 Additional tests were conducted to further constrain the relationship
Copyright 1991 American Geophysical Union between stochastic variations in geologic material properties and ground
motions. This test series, designated CRAPS for coherence for Range
and Array Farameters, consisted of four 100pound detonations fired in
sequence on the same test bed using the same gage array (Figure 3). In
order to investigate the linkage between subsurface heterogeneity and
spatial variability in ground motions, an extensive subsurface exploration
effort was conducted in conjunction with this test series. This work
source included highresolution seismic surveys, cone penetrometer testing, and
drilling and sampling. In particular, the cone penetrometer investigation
was designed to directly probe the subsurface material throughout the
testbed. The site characterization effort, which will be discussed in more
detail later, revealed extensive random spatial variability in material
properties.
Ground motions from the CRAPS tests were recorded at ranges of 10,
source A receiver 20, and 30 m (Figure 3). A 100pound explosive charge covered by a
sand berm (the berm served to suppress the airblast) was detonated in a
Fig. 1. Experimental layout for the ART 2 test event. A crosssectional surface tangent configuration. The first charge was detonated on the
view of the explosive charge emplacement is shown at left. To the right surface of in situ material. The resulting crater was then excavated,
is a plan view of the test bed. leaving a pit which was filled with uniform sand for the remaining three
detonations of the test series (Figure 4).
VERTICAL
ACCELEROMETERS
GROUND ZERO
 SEISMIC SURVEY
0 20 40 60 80 100 LINE (1 m interval)
FREOUENCY (HZ)
Fig. 3. Plan view of the CRAPS experiment. Each seismic refraction
survey line was composed of 72 geophones spaced at Im intervals. The
seismic source was located at the ground zero point
I
Sand
, ,m
. reB
100 Ibs. C4
 oO
RADIAL
 90' 
10 meters

760
5 ........ 180'
Sand~lt/ 2m
+
10 meters
 accelerometers
(3 component)
Fig. 4. Crosssectional view of the CRAPS experimental layout.
Accelerometers were located at 10, 20, and 30m ranges.
1./ +
we
,I . ......... ..." ,I
',,'
1 #
I,
( 1
,,,,
1 , ' t
,'
:.', :.' 4
', . ?
: I
.. ... ... ... . . . . . . .
1 : . :.. . .
.... . . .. . ... . . . . . . . . . .180"
+.
... . : .: ;. .... ....:.
. .. . .. . .
216"
j,216~
:j 'i 4 I ,,'., $
'0 1:
: !$
\f I '
"
I I
0 ohs
Fig. 5. Vertical and radial waveform sets from the various azimuths at the 20m range. Low and highpass filtered waveforms
are shown in addition to the unfiltered waveforms.
z
750
67.5 .
m 600'

U 525.
7.5 . ;I
I
10 20 ?sO 40 50 60 70 80 90 IOOIHERTLI
FREQUENCY
FREOUENCY
228im,
lw
U
o
0.0
0 50
Frequency
100 Hz
FREOUENCY
Fig. 6. Mean (solid lines) and standard deviation (dashed lines) of the
ART 2 spectra.
Frequency (Hz)
Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 9. Comparison of coefficient of variation curves for the CRAPS I,
CRAPS 11, and CRAPS 111 experiments. The curves shown here were
obtained from the 10m range, 1m depth, vertical velocity spectra, and 1 Fig. 10. Comparison of mean vertical velocity spectra for the 10m range
m depth. and 1m depth for the CRAPS I, CRAPS 11, and CRAPS I11 test events.
at 75 Hz. The CVs are remarkably similar for the three events although Soviet Union, for example), it will never be possible to directly probe the
there are some highfrequency (>SO Hz) differences between the in situ earth's crust to depths of tens of kilometers to obtain first hand
experiment and the two following detonations which occurred on the information regarding the appropriate statistical distribution governing the
surface of the backfill pit. This similarity in scatter for the three events geologic media through which regional waves propagate. The situation is
supports the interpretation that random geologic heterogeneity and not quite different, however, for shallow, smallscaleexplosive experiments in
some other influence is the dominant factor responsible for the observed alluvium. Experiments of this sort provide a test of wave propagation
azimuthal variability in ground motion spectra from the 10m range on the theory in random media not possible in most areas of seismology or
first CRAPS experiment. geophysics.
After a glance at the data scatter in Figure 8 one might be led to the A primitive attempt at correlating subsurface information with
conclusion that it would be very difficult to learn anything about the observed variability in the wavefield was made for the Art 2 experiment
source at frequencies higher than 20 to 30 Hz. In contrast, however, discussed previously. In an effort to quantify the nature of the subsurface
Figure 10 presents a comparison of the mean vertical acceleration spectra heterogeneity at the test site, 18 boreholes were drilled within the confines
for the first three CRAPS experiments. These spectra are remarkably of the test bed. Standard penetration tests were performed in each hole.
similar. Observed at the 10m range there is less than a 20% variation for The SPT involves determining the number of hammer blows required to
the two backfill shots out to frequencies of 400 Hz. Subtle variations do drive a sampling tube a unit distance. This blow count is related to the in
exist between the first test (detonated in situ material) and the following situ density and compressive strength of the subsurface material [Terzaghi
tests (fired in the backfilled crater pits). At the 10m range, the first test and Peck, 19671. The set of SPT data suggested a scale length of about
has 40% higher amplitudes at the long ( ~ 2 0Hz) periods. The high 2.0 m. These data were obtained, however, with a sampling interval of
(>20 Hz) frequency amplitudes for the in situ detonation are reduced by as about 0.6 m so that shorter wavelength variations are obviously aliased.
much as a factor of 2 over the following tests. These differences may An extensive subsurface site characterization effort was part of the
result from the in situ cratering process although the exact physical CRAPS test series. This investigation employed a variety of techniques
mechanisms remain to be identified. Overall, this spectral comparison including highresolution surface refraction surveys, cone penetrometer
shows that the variations in the mean spectra from shot to shot are much testing, and drilling and sampling.
smaller than the azimuthal variability for a single shot which is as high Cone penetrometer testing, a technique often used by the Civil
as a factor of 5. Engineering community for the estimation of subsurface parameters,
offers a method by which unconsolidated materials may be directly probed
Site Characterization Tools to obtain an estimate of the appropriate statistical classification of the
subsurface. The cone penetrometer is a slender conetipped rod which is
The ARTS and CRAPS experiments established that the observed forced into the soil. A strain gage in the cone tip measures the force on
scatter in ground motion data is the result of geologic inhomogeneity. A the cone as a function of depth. The frictional force on the cone sleeve is
physical understanding of the observed spatial variation in ground motion also measured as a function of depth (Figure 1I). Cone penetrometers are
requires a quantitative relationship between subsurface material properties often used to obtain estimates of the in situ density and degree of
and observed ground motion characteristics. Any ground motion model compaction [Holtz and Kovacs, 19811. Rohani and Baladi [I9811 describe
which incorporates scattering, whether it be the simple Born techniques for relating cone penetrometer data to a full geologic material
approximation [Aki and Richards, 1980, pp. 722796; Reinke and model. The cone offers the opportunity to obtain a spatial sampling of
Stump, 19881 or an elaborate finite difference simulation [Frankel and subsurface materials at smallscale lengths. This data can then be used to
Clayton, 1986; Toksoz et al., 19891 requires a statistical description of produce experimental autocorrelation functions for the material. For the
subsurface material properties. Most wave propagation studies provide no CRAPS experiment, two types of cone penetrometer devices were used, a
alternate method for characterizing these statistical distributions. Except fullsized cone, which was utilized to make measurements to depths of 6
in very limited instances (the deep drill hole on the Kola Peninsula in the or 7 meters with data sampling intervals of 3.05 cm, and a minicone
ELECTRIC CABLE
DIGITAL LANALW
WID R I M
I
FRICTION SLEEVE,
\ WADR I M
I?."
."eJEcT "0.
XIRTL*HOAFB
.z30
CCUt FENETRATION
TFSTINGS€RVICES
Fig. 11. Drawings of the cone penetrometer truck and cone pe:metrometer tool. (Courtesy of the Earth Technology Corporation).
which was utilized to make measurements at intervals of 1.27 cm to An extensive highresolution surface seismic survey was performed on
depths of 2 meters. The test bed sampling pattern is shown in Figure 12. the CRAPS test bed [Bogaards, 19891. The intent of the survey was to
Some of the cone holes were closely spaced in linear and rectangular aid in defining the limits of the deterministic and stochastic wave
arrays in order to obtain a statistical characterization of the variability in propagation regimes at the site. The simplest deterministic model usually
the horizontal direction; other arrays were designed to obtain the average assumes that velocities change only in the vertical direction. Our initial
gross geologic layering across the extent of the entire test bed. The cone stochastic model is classified as a distribution of inhomogeneities
penetrometer holds great promise as a tool for quantifying the vertical superimposed upon this velocitydepth profile and is characterized in terms
variability in the statistical sense but estimation of the horizontal of heterogeneity scale length and velocity contrast [Aki and Richards,
variability is more difficult since movement of the cone through the soil 19801. A set of surface seismic surveys were designed and implemented
disturbs a region about 10 cone diameters (the large cone diameter is 4.37 for the resolution of both the onedimensional deterministic model as well
cm; the minicone, 1.90 cm) in radius. The cone hole spacing, therefore. as the stochastic effects. The field technique involves the retrieval of full
must be larger than these distances in order to obtain unbiased wave seismogramsat closely spaced intervals.
measurements. Figure 3 shows the layout of the full wave refraction survey performed
A subsurface crosssection constructed from 19 cone holes along the at the CRAPS test site prior to detonation of the fullscale test. The goal
1801360radial (Figure 12) is shown in Figure 13. The contours indicate of this particular experiment was the characterization of the top 20 m of
cone tip pressure as a function of depth and range while the solid vertical the site which resulted in spreads of 72 m in length with geophones
lines denote the locations of cone test holes. A gross layering system is spaced at 1m increments. Eight radial refraction lines emanating from a
visible in the cross section. Superimposed on this layering is a central source were recorded. The deterministic velocity model was
significant amount of random spatial variability in material properties. constrained by each onedimensional arm of the survey. High resolution
The cone data is used to produce an experimental material autocorrelation fk analysis, first amval time inversion, as well as surface wave analysis
function which is compared to theoretical curves in Figure 14. An effort were all used to construct a layered deterministicmodel.
is underway to use the complete set of cone data to develop a statistical The stochastic portion of the interpretation was performed by treating
model of the subsurface variability at the CRAPS test site. This involves the eight observations at each range as a statistical ensemble. Frequency
the comparison of theoretical autocorrelation functions with domain mean and variance estimates were made. The mean normalized
autocomlations of the data. For purposes of illustration, Figure 14 variance or CV was then used as a measure of lateral variability in
compares autocorrelations of the data from several cone holes with waveforms (Figure 15). At low frequencies (<30 Hz) the CV values are
theoretical curves for the exponential distribution. For the limited data set small (c.4) reflecting little spatial variation in the wavefield. As either
shown here, the experimental autocorrelations are bounded by the 0.1m frequency or range increase, the CV increases approaching 1 at the longer
and 0.5m scale length curves. Other distributions such as the Von ranges and higher frequencies. In Figure 15 it is evident that the frequency
Karman and Gaussian distributions have also been used to describe at which a given CV level occurs decreases exponentially with range.
geologic heterogeneity. [Frankel and Clayton, 19861. Several exponentially shaped striations can be seen in the CV range
REINKE AND STUMP 69
k"
N
13 deg
SCALE
0 5 15 25 meters
u
LEGEND
CONVENTIONAL CPT
SEISMIC CPT
0 DRILL HOLE
135
MINIATURE CPT 5x5 ARRAY
34 deq 57' N. 106 deg 34' 30' Y ll80 ' MINIATURE CPT 8x8 ARRAY
Fig. 12. Plan view showing the relationship of the cone penetrometer test holes to the CRAPS experiment testbed.
frequency plot. This information can then be utilized in constraining the km from a ML = 5.6 nuclear explosion, strong incoherent signals were
stochastic site model. found above 5 Hz on all components. Vernon et al. [I9851 discuss
The results of the stochastic interpretation of the high resolution earthquake seismogram cohercnce for a ninestation array with an
seismic survey can aid in predicting the behavior of the fullscale interstation spacing of 50 m located near the Pinion Flat observatory in
explosive experiment. This point is validated in Figure 16 which California. Several events with magnitudes between 3.0 and 4.2 and
compares the CV obtained at the 20m range from the full wave seismic hypocentral distances ranging from 10 to 50 km were analyzed. For this
survey and that determined from data recorded al the same range in the full data set, P waves were found to be coherent to 25 to 35 Hz, with S waves
scale CRAPS explosive event. The correlation between the seismic coherent to 15 Hz. Mcnke et al. [I9901 discuss the cohcrcncc of regional
results and the CV from the fullscale test is good. The stochastic site signals recorded at small (96200 m spacing) scale arrays on hard rock
characterization technique can be uscd to estimate the variability in the sitcs in New England. They found that the spatial cohercnce at these array
fullscale explosive test. sites was on the order of onesixth to onehalf of a wavelength. Strong
scattering occurred near the arrays even though they were placed in sites
Modeling and Implications which appeared to be quite homogeneous. Vidale ct al. [I9901 found a
lack of azimuthal symmetry and a large degree of incoherence in small
The results of these ground motion experiments and the site scale array observations of aftershocks of the Loma Prieta earthquake.
characterization demonstrate the need for the separation of stochastic and The results of our small field experiments, together with the very
deterministic wave propagation effects when interpreting the results of limited discussion of similar efforts found in the literature, demonstrate
smallscale field tests. Similar degrees of spatial variability in ground that these stochastic geologic effects pose a potentially serious problem
motion have been found at other sites. McLaughlin ct al. [I9831 discuss for our current methods of analyzing and modeling ground motion data.
the stationtostation waveform cohercnce for nearsource explosion For the purposes of illustration let us suppose that CRAPS had been a
accc.lcrogr;~rnsrecorded on a nineelement m a y at Palrute Mesa, Nevada smallscalehigh explosive test conducted in the conventional manner with
Test Site. For this away (100m interclement spacing), at a range of 6 the intent of validating a p'articular calculational model of explosively
STUDIES OF STOCHASTIC GEOLOGICAL INFLUENCES
Fig. 13. Cross section of cone tip pressure as a function of depth and range for a northsouth line through the center of the
CRAPS experiment testbed. The solid vertical lines indicate the locations of cone penetrometer holes. The plot gives an idea of
the heterogeneity present beneath the CRAPS testbed. (The depth scale is exaggerated.)
GOEFFZCIENT ar wt~xarro~
WHEEL f5
CRAPS 
SEISMIC 

Frequency (Hz)
75 100
Fig. 17. Plots of the vertical accelerograms recorded at the 10m range
and 1m depth for the CRAPS I experiment
72 STUDIES OF STOCHASTIC GEOLOGICAL INFLUENCES
Discussion and Conclusions and Scientists, Marcel Dekker, Inc., 698 pp., 1983.
Bogaards, M., Characterization of Whole Wave Seismograms in the
The results of these smallscale experiments have demonstrated that Shallow Weathered Zone, Masters Thesis, Southern Methodist
heterogeneity in geologic materials exerts a significant influence on the University, Dallas, Texas, 1989.
results of smallscale high explosive experiments, at least for the dry Cramer, H., Mathematical Methods of Statistics, Princeton University
alluvial site where the experiments were conducted. Considering that this Press, Princeton, 575 pp.,1961.
particular site in general is thought to have a fairly uniform nearsurface Flatte, S. and R. Wu, Smallscale structure in the lithosphere and
geologic composition, the degree of azimuthal variation observed from asthenosphere deduced from anival time and amplitude fluctuations at
these small tests is remarkable. It is clear that for this site, deterministic NORSAR, J. Geophys. Res.. 93,66016614, 1988.
interpretations of the data cannot be made above 35 Hz. Effective Foster, M. and N. Guinzy, The coefficient of coherence: its estimation
techniques for dealing with the data above this spectral region are still and use in geophysical data processing, Geophysics, 32, 602616,
under development. Attempts are being made to include the results of a 1967.
stochasticldeterministic site characterization Drocess in finite difference Frankel, A. and R. Clayton, Finite difference simulations of seismic
models of explosive experiments. Future experiments of this type will scattering: Implicationsfor the propagation of shortperiod seismic

rauire that stochastic site characterization and modeling considerations be waves in the crust and models of crustal heterogeneity, J. of Geophys.
incorporated into the experimental plan. Res.. 91,64656489, 1986.
Although this paper has dealt specifically with smallscale events, it Holtz, R., and W. Kovacs, An Introduction to Geotechnical Engineering,
seems likely that the same phenomenology is at work for large events PrenticeHall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 733 pp., 1981.
with longer travel paths and lower frequencies. A number of recent array Jenkins, G. and D. Watts, Spectral Analysis and Its Applications, Holden
studies in the literature report observations of similar phenomena at a Day, San Francisco, 525 pp., 1968.
variety of sites and geologies. In a qualitative sense all of these Mclaughlin, K., L. Johnson, and T. McEvily, Twodimensional array
observations have roughly equivalent coherenceseparation distance measurements of near source ground accelerations, Bull. Seismol.
relationships. The upper hequency threshold for coherence of waveforms Soc. Am., 73, 349376, 1983.
recorded by elements separated by a few tens of meters is 1530 Hz; for Menke, W., A. LemerLam, B. Dubendorff, and J. Pachecho, Polarization
separation distances of a few hundreds of meters the coherence threshold and coherence of 530 Hz wavefields at a hard rock site and their
drops to 510 Hz. Some of the stochastic site characterization techniques relevance to velocity heterogeneities in the crust, Bull. Seismol. Soc.
described in this paper could be useful in defining nearsurface stochastic Am., 80,430449, 1990.
site response effects for smallscale arrays. Reinke, R. and B. Stump, Stochastic geologic effects on nearfield ground
motions in alluvium, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 78, 10371058, 1988.
Acknowledgments. Funding for these projects was provided by the Air Rohani, B. and G. Baladi, Correlation of Mobility Cone Index with
Force Weapons Laboratory Independent Research Program. Additional Fundamental Engineering Properties of Soil, Miscellaneous Paper SL
support was provided by the Air Force Office of Scientific Research under 814, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, 1981.
Grant AFOSR840016 to Southern Methodist University. We are Stump, B., and R. Reinke, Experimental confirmation of superposition
indebted to Dr. Art Guenther, former Chief Scientist of the Weapons from smallscale explosions, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 78, 1059
Laboratory, for his support and encouragement. Mark Bogaards performed 1073, 1988.
the highresolution seismic survey analysis as part of his Masters Thesis Terzaghi, K., and R. Peck, Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice, John
at SMU. The work could not have been accomplished without Al Wiley and Sons, New York, 729 pp., 1967.
Leverette's field instrumentation efforts. Robert Goerke directed the cone Toksoz, M., A. BenMenahem, E. Charrette, A. Dainty, and R. Gibson,
penetrometer field testing. Kent Anderson assisted in analysis of data Seismic Wave Propagation, Attenuation and Scattering over Regional
from the CRAPS experiments. Kerim Martinez constructed the cone Distances, Air Force Geophysics Laboratory Technical Report, GL
penetrometer cross section. Audrey Martinez prepared some of the figures TR89.0329, 1989.
and provided helpful discussion. Constructive suggestions were received Vernon, F., J. Fletcher, L. Haar, T. Bolswick, E.Sembera, and J. Brune,
from two anonymous reviewers. Spatial coherence of bodywaves from local earthquakes recorded on a
small aperture array, EOS Trans. Am. Geophys. Union, 66, 954,
References 1985.
Vidale, J., 0. Bonamassa, and S. Schwartz, Array studies of ground
Aki, K., and P. Richards, Quantitative Seismo1ogy:Theory and Methods, motions using aftershocks from the Loma Prieta Earthquake, Seismol.
W.H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco, 2 vols., 932 pp., 1980. Res. Letters. 61, 24, 1990.
Bethea, R., B. Duran, and T. Boullian, Statistical Methods for Engineers
YIELD ES'I'IMATION USING SHOCK WAVE METIIODS
Department of Physics and I'rogram in Arm Control, Disarmarnent,, and Intcrnat,ional Sccurily
University of Illinois at UrbanaChampaign, Urt~ana,Illinois 61801
Abstract. The yields of underground nuclear explosions can be es explosion can therefore be estimated by comparing rrleastirements of
timated using shock wave methods. These methods make use of the these quantities with a model of the evolution of the shock wave in
fact that the strength of the expanding shock wave produced by an the ambient geologic medium. Allhough in principle the yield can
underground explosion increases with the yield. We first discuss the be estimated from measurements of the postshock particle speed or
basis of shock wave yield estimation methods, including the proper pressure, in practice constructing and emplacing transducers t o mea
ties of shock waves in rock, the evolution of the shock waves produced sure these quantities and obtaining reliable measurements has proved
by underground nuclear explosions, and the dependence of the e v e difficult. For this reason, U. S. efforts to develop shock wave yield
lution on the properties of the ambient medium. We then describe estimation methods have for the past 15 years emphasized techniques
several techniques that have been developed in the United States for sensing the posztzon of the shock front as a function of time and
t o measure the shock front position as a function of time, including for analyzing such position measurements t o obtain a yield estimate.
the socalled CORRTEX technique. Finally, we consider several of Hence, in the present review we focus primarily on this approach.
the algorithms that have been used to derive yield estimates from We begin in $2 by summarizing some of the relevant properties of
measurements of the shock front position as a function of time, the shock waves in rock and reviewing the phases of an underground nu
application of these algorithms t o lowyield explosions, and the ex clear explosion. We then introduce a simplified model and use it to
~ e c t e daccuracy of shock wave methods. illustrate how the shock wave produced by a sphericallysymmetric
point explosion would evolve. Finally, we discuss the more complex
evolution of the shock waves produced by actual underground nu
1. Introduction clear tests. In $ 3 we explain the CORRTEX technique currently used
by the United States to measure the position of the shock front as
Shock wave methods have long been used to estimat,e the yields a function of time. In $ 4 we describe several of the algorithms that
of nuclear explosions, both in the atmosphere (see, for example, Se have been used t o derive yield estimates from shock front position
dov [1946, 19591 and Taylor [1950a, 1950bl) and underground (see, measurements, the application of these algorithms to lowyield e x p l e
for example, Johnson, Iliggins, and Violet [1959]; Nuckolls [1959]; sions, and the expected accuracy of shock wave methods. Our con
Butkovich [1965]). Shock wave methods were introduced as a treaty clusions are summarized in 56. For a discussion of the implications
monitoring tool in the original 1976 Protocol of the Peaceful Nu of using shock wave methods to monitor present and possible future
clear Explosions Treaty (PNET), which explicitly established such limitations on underground nuclear testing, see Lamb [1988].
methods as among those that could be used to monitor the yield of
any salvo of underground explosions with a planned aggregate yield 2. Shock Waves from Underground Nuclear Explosions
greater than 150 kilotons (kt) [U. S. Arms Conlrol and Disarmarnent
Agency, 1990al. T h e United States and the Soviet Union have re In this section, we summarize briefly the general properties of shock
cently ratified new verification protocols for both the P N E T and waves in rock, describe the phases of an underground nuclear e x p l e
the Threshold Test Ban Treaty (TTBT) that allow the use of shock sion, and discuss the evolution of the spherical shock wave produced
wave yield estimat,ion methods for explosions having a planned yield by a point explosion in a uniform solid medium. Finally, we describe
greater than 50 kt (the texts of these protocols may be found in U. S. the sometimes quite complex shock waves in rock produced by actual
Arms Control and Disarmament Agency [1990b]). nuclear tests.
In this article, we review shock wave yield estimation methods and
their application t o nuclear test monitoring. Such methods make Shock Waves i n Rock
use of the fact t h a t the strength of the shock wave produced by an
underground nuclear explosion increases with the yield of the e x p b Shock waves in rock behave differently from shock waves in air,
sion, other things being equal. As a result, the speed of the shock primarily because the atoms in rock are close together and interact
front and the particle speed and pressure just behind it are greater strongly (see Zel'dovich and Raizer [1967], pp. 685705), that is, the
at a given radius for explosions of greater yield. The yield of the equation of state is fundamentally different.
Elastic and plastic waves.The strength of a shock wave can be
characterized by the peak pressure that it produces. Weak shock
'Also, Deparlrnrnt of Astronomy waves and acoustic waves in rock propagate at a constant speed,
the socalled elastic wave speed (see Zel'dovich and Raizer [1967],
Explosion Source Pl~enomeuology pp. 741746)
Geophysical Monograph 65
Copyright 1991 American Geophysical Union
74 YIELD ESTIMATION USING SHOCK WAVE METHODS
Here K O and Go are the bulk and shear moduli, respectively, of the This relation is called the IIugoniot. I t is not the thermodynamic
rock in its standard state, and po is the mass density. The speed cl path followed by a fluid element during shock compression, but rather
is also sometimes called the longitudinal sound speed. For granite, the locus of all final states (p, V) that can be reached by shock com
I<o x 36 G P a and Go % 32 G P a [Holzer, 19651 giving cr % 5.5 kms' pression from a given initial state (PO,Vo). The final thermodynamic
for po = 2.65 Mgm3. state depends on the strength of the shock wave.
Shock waves that are strong enough t o produce a peak radial stress By analogy with the equation that relates the pressure of a fluid
p l greater than the critical shear stress p,,jt of the rock cause the after adiabatic compression t o the specific volume after compression
rock t o become plastic (for granite, p,,it is about 4 G P a for high and the pressure and specific volume before compression, relation (4)
strain rates [Holzer, 19651). Such waves are called plastic waves. The is sometimes called the "shock adiabat". However, the "shock adia
speed of a plastic wave increases with its strength. The weakest such bat" is not an isentrope, since shock compression of a fluid increases
waves propagate at the lowpressure plastic wave speed [Zel'dovich its entropy (the stronger the shock wave, the greater the increase in
and Raizer, 1967, pp. 7417461 the entropy). Thus, the Hugoniot curve crosses isentropes, as shown
in Figure 1. The final pressure pl produced by shock compression is
a function of two parameters, such as po and Vo, as well as the final
specific volume Vl, whereas the pressure p along an isentrope is a
function only of the specific volume and the entropy (see Zel'dovich
which is determined by the compressibility of the rock in its standard and Raizer [1967], pp. 4950 and 705710).
state. T h e speed co is also sometimes called the bulk sound speed. The Hugoniot may also be expressed as a relation between D and
Since only the bulk modulus contributes t o co, it is necessarily less u l , that is
than cf. For solid granite, co % 4kms'. D = D(ul). (5)
If a plastic shock wave is strong enough that the shear strength of
the rock can be neglected, it is called a hydrodynamic shock wave. If, To see that this implies a relation of the form (4), note that in the
further, a shock wave is s o strong that the speed of the wave front frame in which the undisturbed rock is a t rest conservation of mo
is much greater than the acoustic wave speed in the undisturbed mentum across the front of a hydrodynamic shock wave implies
rock, the pressure behind the wave front is predominantly thermal
pressure, and the ratio of the density just behind the wave front t o
the density just ahead of the front is close t o its limiting value, it is
called a strong shock wave (see Zel'dovich and Raizer [1967], pp. 685 Using relation (5), D can be eliminated from equation (6) in favor
705). As discussed below, shock waves in hard rocks such as granite of u l , p l , PO, and Vo. The postshock particle speed ul can then
are strong only when the peak pressure pl is 2 1 T P a . be eliminated from equation (3), giving a relation of the form (4).
Shock compression.The equation of state of a rock may be writ Figure 2 shows a Hugoniot for solid quartz expressed in this way. The
ten as a relation between the pressure p, the specific volume V = l l p , step in the curve at ul % 2 kms' reflects a phase transformation that
and the specific internal energy E . Before the shock front arrives, the occurs a t about 40 GPa. Hugoniots for granite are generally similar
rock is a t rest with specific volume Vo, specific internal energy € 0 , t o this quartz Hugoniot, although they differ in detail. In general,
and pressure po. As the shock front arrives, the pressure rises rapidly the Hi~goniotof rock in the field depends on the bulk density, grain
and the rock is severely compressed. We denote .e specific volume, density, chemical composition, fracture pattern, porosity, and water
specific internal energy, and pressure just after the shock front has
passed by Vl, €1, and p l , respectively. The changes in these t h e r m e
dynamic variables occur over such a small distance that the shock
front often may be approximated as a mathematical discontinuity.
Henceforth we shall assume, unless otherwise stat,ed, that the shock
wave is strong e n c ~ g hthat i t is hydrodynamic.
The curve on the equation of state surface p = p(V, t ) that is rel
evant for determining the thermodynamic state of rock subjected t o
shock compression may be seen as follows. Although the shock wave
produced by an underground nuclear explosion evolves with time,
the time scale of this evolution is much longer than the time required
for the shock front t o pass through a given fluid element. Thus,
the change in the thermodynamic state of a given element as the
shock front passes through it may be found by considering a steady
shock wave with the instantaneous speed of the actual shock wave.
In t h e frame in which the unshocked material is at rest, conservation L I I I
of mass, momentum, and energy across the front of a steady shock "0
wave give (see Zel'dovich and Raizer [1967], pp. 4550 and 705710) Specific Volume
Fig. 1. Hugoniot (labeled H ) for a hypothetical nonporous material
initially in the state (po, Vo) (dot) and several isentropes (labeled by
their entropies S1 < S:! < S3) for the same material. All final states (pl,
where D and ul are, respectively, the speed of the shock front and VI) that can be reached via shock compression from (po, Vo) lie along
the particle speed just behind the shock front. When combined with H. The stronger the shock wave, the smaller the final specific volume
the equation of state t = t(p, V), equation (3) gives the pressure just and the higher the final pressure. The Hugoniot crosses isentropes of
behind the shock front in terms of the specific volume just behind the increasing entropy as the final specific volume decreases, showing that
front and the pressure and specific volume just ahead of the front, the entropy of the final state increases with the strength of the shock
that is, wave. The vertical dashed line indicates the limiting specific volume
P1 = P H ( ~ ~ , Pv0).
O, (4) for a strong shock wave in this material.
LAMBETAL. 75
"The parameters p a , A, and B are from Moss [I9881 and were obtained by
fitting a MieGriineisen equation of state to tabulated equations of state
[King et al., 19891 for quartz and wet tuff at high pressures. L, and Llso
are characteristic shock wave transition radii (see eq. [12]) for 1 kt and
150 kt explosions.
speed co. However, the largeul relation usually is not valid for small
u l , and hence A usually does not equal co. In granite, for example,
A is about 3kms' whereas co is about 4 k m s  I .
Even if the IIugoniot is not linear over the range of ul that is of in
terest, a curve consisting of piecewiselinear segments of the form (7)
may serve as a practical approximation t o H ( u l ) for many purposes.
Postshock particle speed (km s1) Release.After the shock front has passed, the pressure falls and
the fluid expands. This is often referred t o as "release". For a shock
Fig. 2. Re1at)ion between shock speed D and particle speed ul just front of given strength, the curve on the equation of state surface that
behind the shock front for solid quart,z. The curve is a piecewiselinear describes the evolution of the thermodynamic state of the material
approximation by Lamb, Callen, and Sullival~[1990] to Hugoniot data during release is very nearly an isentrope, since heat conduction is
compiled by King e t al. [1989] from Al'tshnler el al. [1977], Chung and almost always negligible. This curve is therefore frequently called the
Simmons [1969], McQueen, Fritz, and Hopsou [1977], Wackerl~[1962], release adiabat (see, for example, Murri e t al. [1974]).
and Ragan [1984]. Note thc approximat,e linearity of the IIugoniot at,
large 1 1 1 . Thc st,ep in the curve at ul % 2 krn s' rcflects a phase Phases of an Underground Nuclear Explosion
transforma.tio~~ that occurs at about 40 GPa.
For present purposes, the time development of an underground
content, and may differ from the Hugoniots of the small samples that nuclear explosion may be divided into three phases (see Glasstone
can be tested in laboratories. and Dolan [I9771 or Germain and Kahn [1968]):
For some rocks, the Hugoniot a t high particle speeds (high pres Initial phase.The energy released by a nuclear explosion initially
sures) may be adequately represented by a linear relation of the form emerges as nuclear radiation, fission fragments, and thermal elec
(see Zel'dovich and Raizer [1967], pp. 705710) tromagnetic radiation. The temperature in the nuclear charge rises
steeply, reaching l o 7 K within a microsecond or so. At the very earli
est times, energy is carried outward by the expanding weapon debris
and radiation. As a result, the vaporized nuclear charge and nearby
for some constants A and B. As shown below, the ambient pressure rock form a bubble of hot gas in which the initial pressure is of order
po is negligible compared t o pl for all depths and times of interest 1 0 T P a . The enormous pressure in the bubble causes it to expand
here. Relation (7) then implies that rapidly, creating a cavity and driving a shock wave into the rock sur
rounding the emplacement canister. The radial stress produced by
the shock wave greatly exceeds the critical stress a t which the rock
becomes plastic. Thus, t o a good approximation the strength of the
rock can be neglected and the rock can be treated as a fluid. During
the initial phase the evolution of the explosion can be followed using
(see Zel'dovich and Raizer [1967], pp. 705710). Table 1 lists values
of A , B, and po for granite and wet tuff that were derived by fitting
a Hugoniot of the form (8) t o highpressure equations of state for
Hydrodynamic phase.Within 
the equations of hydrodynamics and radiation transport.
10loops, depending on the de
sign and yield of the nuclear charge and the composition and distri
similar materials. bution of the matter surrounding it, the outward flow of energy via
For Hugoniots of the form (a), the ratio pllpo of the material den radiation becomes unimportant and the explosion can be described
sity immediately behind the shock front to the material density ahead by the equations of hydrodynamics alone. At this point the explosion
of the shock front increases with the strength of the shock wave until enters the (purely) hydrodynamic phase. As the shock wave expands,
it reaches a certain value ( p l p ~ ) , , , =
~ ~(VolV),,, = B / ( B  1). Once it weakens. Eventually, the radial stress produced by the shock wave
the shock has become this strong, any further increase in its strength is not much greater than the critical stress of the rock. At this point
does not produce any increase in the ratio plpo. For this reason, the the rock can no longer be treated as a fluid and the hydrodynamic
densit.y ratio (p/po),, is referred t o as the limiting density ratio. For phase of the explosion ends.
 
the granite IIugoniot listed in Table 1, the limiting density ratio is
3. Peak pressures 110TPa are required to achieve density ratios
near the limiting value. For extremely strong shock waves, changes
Final phase.The final radius R, of the cavity produced by an
underground nuclear explosion depends somewhat on the depth of
the explosion and the composition of the surrounding rock, as well
in material properties caused by ionization, relativistic corrections to as the yield. For a burst of yield W, a useful approximate expression
the electron pressure, and radiation affect the Hugoniot and alter the is [Terhune et al., 19791
limiting density.
If a single linear D vs. ul relation adequately describes the Hugo
niot at large ul and if this relation could be extrapolated t o small
u l , the constant A would correspond to the lowpressure plastic wave The cavity reaches its final radius in about 90 (W/1 kt)'I3ms [Ter
76 YIELD ESTIMATION USING SHOCK WAVE METHODS
hune e t al., 19791. the Hugoniot. This requirement is sidestepped in the model by as
Even after the compression wave is no longer hydrodynamic, the suming that f is independent of R.
The factor f is independent of R for selfsimilar shock waves (see

rarefaction wave that follows is still strong enough t o fracture rock.
Intense fracturing typically occurs out t o a radius 3R, [Terhune
e t al., 19791. Beyond this point, the degree of fracturing caused by the
below) but need not be independent of R for shock waves produced by
actual underground nuclear explosions [Lamb, 1987; Lamb, Callen,
expanding shock wave drops dramatically until, at  5R,, fracturing and Sullivan, 19901. Nevertheless, shock wave radius and particle
essentially stops. (Rarefaction waves caused by reflection of the shock speed d a t a from actual underground nuclear tests as well as from
wave from the surface or collapse of the roof of the cavity may cause computer simulations of such tests indicate that relation (10) with f
fracturing beyond this radius.) The shock wave then continues t o constant is fairly well satisfied for explosions in quartz and wet tuff
expand nearly elastically, eventually evolving into the leading wave until relatively late times [Lamb, 1987; Moss, 1988; Lamb, Callen,
of a train of elastic (seismic) waves. and Sullivan, 19901. T h e best value o f f t o use for explosions in a
In the remainder of this section we focus on the evolution of the given rock can be determined by fitting the postshock particlespeed
shock wave during the hydrodynamic phase and somewhat beyond. relation (10) (or the relations for the shock speed, shock front radius,
and postshock pressure that follow from it) t o data from numerical
Approzimate Model simulations or actual underground explosions in that rock. For shock
waves in quartz and wet tuff, f =0.53 provides a relatively accu
For pedagogical purposes, it is useful t o consider the shock wave rate description of the evolution during the hydrodynamic phase and
that would b e produced by a sphericallysymmetric explosion in a somewhat beyond [Moss, 1988; Lamb, Callen, and Sullivan, 19901.
uniform medium before confronting the full complexity of the shock For simplicity, let us assume that the Hugoniot of the medium can
waves produced by actual underground nuclear tests. The shock wave be adequately represented by a single linear relation of the form (7)
produced by such an idealized explosion is sphericallysymmetric at over the whole range of ul of interest. Then co = A. Therefore, in
all times. Even so, tracking accurately the change in the thermody the following discussion we refer t o A as the lowpressure plastic wave
namic state of an element of rock as it undergoes shock compression speed. Given the ansatz (lo), the Hugoniot (7) can be rewritten as
and release requires knowledge of the equation of state of the rock [Lamb, 1987, 19881
over a wide range of densities and internal energies. Such an equa
tion of state is usually quite complicated, and often can be presented
only in tabular form. Hence, for pedagogical purposes it is also use
ful t o consider first a simpler, more approximate description of the
behavior of rock subjected t o a shock wave. where
In fact, the basic features of the evolution of the shock wave
produced by a sphericallysymmetric explosion in a uniform solid
medium are illustrated by a simple analytical model. This model was
proposed by Lamb [1987], who showed that it is exact for strong, self is a characteristic length that separates the region where D oc
similar shock waves and that the shockfront radius vs. time curves =
from the region where D A. Typical values of L for 1kt and 150kt
it predicts agree fairly well with d a t a from several underground explosions in granite and wet tuff are listed in Table 1 for the values
nuclear tests and numerical simulations of underground nuclear of A and B given there.
explosions. The model was proposed independently by Moss [1988], Given the shockfront radius & at the time to at which the e x p l e
who showed that the particlespeed vs. radius relationship it predicts sion becomes purely hydrodynamic, the firstorder differential equa
agrees fairly well with d a t a from underground nuclear explosions tion (11) can be integrated t o obtain a simple, closed expression
and numerical simulations. A detailed description and assessment of for R(t), from which one can calculate D(t), ul(t), pl(t), and pl(t)
the model has been given by Lamb, Callen, and Sullivan [1990], who [Lamb, 1987; Moss, 1988; Lamb, Callen, and Sullivan, 19901. This
find that the model provides a remarkably accurate description of model shows in a qualitative way how the evolution of the shock wave
the motion of the shock front throughout the hydrodynamic phase. depends on the yield of the explosion and the Hugoniot of the rock.
Without loss of generality, the particle speed ul just behind the As an example, the peak pressure, peak density, and radius of the
shock front can be related t o the hydrodynamic yield W of the ex shock front at various times are listed in Table 2. for 1 kt and 150kt
plosion and the radius R of the front via the expression
TABLE 2. Shock Wave Evolution in Granitea
Pressure Density 1 kt Explosion 150 kt Explosion
(GPa) p ) Time (ps) R (m) Time (ps) R (m)
where f is a dimensionless factor that generally depends on the equa
tion of state of the ambient medium and the radius of the shock front.
An important assumption of the model is that f is independent of
the shock front radius R for all shock front radii of interest.
In this model, the compression of the ambient medium at the shock
front is treated exactly, via the RankineHugoniot jump conditions
and the Hugoniot of the medium. In contrast, the rarefaction that
occurs as a shocked fluid element is left behind is treated only approx
imately, via the parameter f . The value of this parameter depends on
the density, velocity, and specific internal energy distributions within "For the model of a sphericallysymmetric, point explosion described in
the shocked volume. These distributions, and thus f , could be deter the text. The Hugoniot (7) was used, with the values of A and B given
mined from a full hydrodynamic simulation of the shock wave evolu
tion. However, such a simulation requires knowledge of the equation

in Table 1. The phase transformation that occurs when the postshock
pressure pl is 3040 GPa (see Fig. 2) has been neglected. The postshock
density pl is expressed in terms of the limiting density p,,, of granite (see
of state for substantial ranges of pressure and density, not just along text), which is 9.4 Mgm3 for this Hugoniot. From Lamb [1988].
LAMBETAL. 77
point explosions in granite. (A point explosion is one in which a (see Table 2). We denote the shock front radius at which this occurs
large amount of energy is released instantaneously in an infinitesimal
volume.) For simplicity we have assumed that both explosions are  
by &. For a 1 kt explosion in granite & is l m , whereas for a
150 kt explosion R, is 5 m.
purely hydrodynamic after the initial energy release at time t = 0. Over most of the transition interval, the thermal pressure just be
The corresponding initial condition for equation (11) is R = 0 at hind the shock front is not much greater than the cold pressure of
t = 0. As discussed below, the hydrodynamic phase ends in granite the compressed rock, although the speed D of the shock front is still
when the postshock pressure pl has fallen to about 4GPa. Thus, the much larger than the lowpressure plastic wave speed A. In this inter
pressure po of the overburden, which is 20 MPa at the depths that val, the motion of the shock wave is more sensitive to the properties
are relevant here (51 km), is negligible compared to pl throughout of the medium than it is in the strong shock interval. For example,
the hydrodynamic phase of the explosion. the motion of the shock front in the simplified model discussed above
More generally, the model can be used to obtain a closedform depends on A as well as B and po during the transition interval. Con
expression for R(t) for any piecewiselinear Hugoniot D(u). Thus, sequently, more knowledge of the ambient rock is required in order
the model can be used with more realistic Hugoniots like that shown to make accurate yield estimates using data from this interval.
in Figure 2. When currently available Hugoniot data is used, the As the shock wave expands and weakens, the minerals in the rock
model predicts postshock particle speeds and pressures, shockfront behind the shock front may undergo polymorphic transitions. For
speeds, and shockfront radii that agree quite well with data from example, the mineral constituents of granitic rocks appear to undergo
underground nuclear explosions and with numerical simulations of
such explosions [Lamb, Callen, and Sullivan, 19901. 
several polymorphic transitions when the peak postshock pressure
falls below 3040GPa (see Fig. 2).
When the shock speed falls below the elastic wave speed cc, the
Characteristic Intervals shock wave splits into an elastic wave followed by a plastic wave
(see Zel'dovich and Raizer [1967], pp. 741746). In granites, this is
During the hydrodynamic phase, the shock wave produced by a
sphericallysymmetric point explosion in a uniform medium evolves

expected t o occur when the peak pressure has fallen to 2030 GPa
(see Butkovich [1965], Holzer [1965], and Fig. 2). Since the plastic
differently in the strongshock, transition, and lowpressure plastic wave slows as it weakens whereas the elastic wave travels at the nearly
wave intervals. constant speed cc, the plastic wave falls further and further behind
Strongshock interval.Initially, the speed of the shock front is the elastic wave. This twewave structure is clearly seen in laboratory
much greater than the speed of sound in the undisturbed rock, the experiments on small samples of granite and other rocks. Whether
pressure behind the shock front is predominantly thermal pressure, it persists in rock in the field is not as certain.
and the ratio of the density immediately behind the shock front to The elastic precursor raises the pressure of the rock t o p,,.it, which is
the density ahead of the front is close to its limiting value. Thus, the % 4GPa for granite [Holzer, 19651, and accelerates it. The following
shock wave is strong.
The shock wave produced by a point explosion in a uniform
medium is selfsimilar as long as it remains strong (see Zel'dovich
moving at 
plastic shock wave therefore propagates through rock that is already
1lOmsl. However, the speed of the plastic shock
wave is at least co, which is several kms' (see above). Thus, even
and Raizer [1967], Chap. I and XII; Sedov [1959]; Barenblatt [1979]). after the shock wave has split, the acceleration of the rock by the
In such a motion, the distributions with radius of the pressure, elastic precursor can usually be neglected and lowpressure plastic
density, and particle velocity evolve with time in such a way that wave taken to propagate at the plastic wave speed relative to the
only the scales of the distributions change, while their shapes remain undisturbed ambient medium, as was done in writing eq. (6).
unaltered. For such a strong, selfsimilar shock wave, the radius as Lowpressure plastic wave interval.As the shock wave expands
a function of time depends in a simple way on the properties of the and weakens further, the thermal pressure behind the shock front
medium and the yield of the explosion. This simple radius vs. time becomes a small fraction of the total pressure and the shock speed D
curve could be used to estimate the yield of actual underground approaches the lowpressure plastic wave speed A. At a certain radius
nuclear explosions, if there were an interval of strong, selfsimilar Rpw ( L), the shock speed has fallen t o 1.2 times the lowpressure
motion and if data from this interval could be obtained. plastic wave speed and we say that the shock wave has entered the
lowpressure plastic wave intervaL2 For an explosion in granite, this
For example, the simplified model described above predicts that
the radius of the shock front produced by a point explosion satisfies
[Lamb, 1987, 19881   
occurs when the peak pressure has fallen t o 15 GPa, corresponding
to a peak density ratio 0.4 times the maximum (see Table 2). For a
1 kt explosion in granite Rpw is 5 m, whereas for a 150 kt explosion

Rpw is 30 m.
For the simplified Hugoniot of equation ( l l ) , the lowpressure plas
tic wave interval corresponds to R 2 3 L. In this interval,
during the strongshock interval (R << L). This expression illustrates
the more general result that the radius of a strong, selfsimilar shock
wave varies as the twofifths power of the time since the beginning of
the explosion, independent of the properties of the medium. In the where the constant is determined by the motion in the strong shock
simplified model, the radius of the shock front depends only on po and transition intervals.
and B, for a given choice of f . When the peak pressure in the plastic wave is no longer much
Unfortunately, as explained below, strong, selfsimilar motion does greater than the critical shear stress p,,it, the shear strength of the
not develop in actual underground nuclear tests, given current testing rock can no longer be neglected in treating the evolution of the plastic
practices and the yields permitted by the TTBT. shock wave. In granite, for example, p,,;, is % 4GPa, and hence the
Thansition interval.As the shock wave expands, it weakens and hydrodynamic approximation begins to fail when the peak pressure
slows, and the peak pressure and density drop. When the the peak behind the plastic wave falls below about 15 GPa, which occurs soon
density ratio has fallen to 0.8 times the limiting value, we say that after the shock wave has split. For granite, the hydrodynamic zone
the shock wave has entered the transition interval.' For an explosion extends about 5 (W/l kt)'I3 meters from the center of the explosion

in granite, this occurs when the peak pressure has fallen to 1T P a (see Table 2).
Underground Nuclear Tests Agency, 1990bl. The T T B T protocol also requires that any pipe or
cableway connected to an explosive canister pass through a "choke
The evolution of the shock wave produced by an actual under section" designed to restrict the flow of energy out of the canister.
ground nuclear test is generally more complex than the evolution The distortion of the shock front caused by a canister, open pipe,
just described. For one thing, the shock wave is produced by an as or cableway of a given size is less for higheryield than for lower
pherical source of finite size rather than a sphericallysymmetric point yield explosions, since the hydrodynamic zone extends further from
source. For another, natural or manmade geological or geophysical the canister and emplacement hole for a higheryield explosion (re
structures near the emplacement point may significantly distort the call that the hydrodynamic zone extends about 5 (W/l kt)'I3 meters
evolution. from the center of the explosion). Moreover, higheryield charges
Test geometries.In preparation for a nuclear test, one or more nu usually are not exploded in tunnels.
clear explosives are customarily placed in each container or covering. The shock wave produced by a test involving multiple explosive
These containers are called explosive canisters. Explosive canisters as canisters could be very complex, creating a daunting verification
long as 1 2 m with diameters as large as 3 m a r e permitted in the stan problem. For this reason the T T B T protocol specifies that a test
dard test geometries defined in the recently adopted T T B T verifica involving multiple explosives can be considered to have a standard
tion protocol [U. S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, 1990bl. geometry only if the explosives are placed in a single canister or the
Larger canisters may be used in nonstandard tests. positions of the explosive canisters and their detonation times are
Any drillhole, shaft, adit, or tunnel in which one or more explosive arranged so that a shockwave yield estimate can be made for each
canisters, associated cables, and other equipment have been installed canister separately.
is called an emplacement hole. Emplacement holes may be vertical Even the shock wave from a test having a standard geometry and
shafts drilled deep into the ground, horizontal tunnels carved into the conducted in a uniform medium may not be completely spherical
sides of mesas or mountains, or large underground cavities (see U. S. at the relatively small distances where hydrodynamic measurements
Congress [1989], pp. 1518).3 The standard vertical and horizontal must be made. For example, the hydrodynamic zone of a 150 kt ex
geometries defined by the T T B T verification protocol allow the use of plosion in granite extends only about 20m from the center of the ex
vertical emplacement holes with diameters up to 4 m and horizontal plosion. Shock front position measurements must therefore be made
emplacement holes with cross sections as large as 5 m by 5 m. Tests
with planned aggregate yields less than 35 kt may be conducted in
 1020m from the center of the explosion in order to be usable in
hydrodynamic yield estimation algorithms. These distances are com
cavities as large as 20,000 cubic meters (the radius of a hemispheri parable to the dimensions of the largest explosive canisters allowed in
cal cavity with this volume is about 20m). Nonstandard tests may standard test geometries. Thus, even the shock wave from astandard
be carried out in larger emplacement holes or cavities if the parties test may be somewhat aspherical in the region where hydrodynamic
agree on verification measures [U. S. Arms Control and Disarmament measurements are made.
Agency, 1990bl. Historically, about 90% of U. S. nuclear tests have The shock wave from an underground nuclear explosion cannot be
been conducted in vertical shafts; the remainder have been conducted come selfsimilar until it has enveloped a mass of rock much greater
in tunnels or cavities. than the mass of the nuclear explosive and canister, and energy trans
Cableways and cables as well as open or partiallyopen pipes are port by radiation is negligible [Barenblatt, 1979, Ch. 21. The radius
typically installed in the emplacement hole to carry signals or radia Ro at which this occurs is necessarily larger than the radius of the
tion away from the explosive canister or canisters. There have been emplacement hole or cavity and depends on the design of the nuclear
as many as 250 or more such cables and pipes in recent U. S. nuclear charge and surrounding equipment. Unless there is a range of radii
weapon tests. Once the explosive canister, diagnostic equipment, satisfying Ro << R << Rd, where & is the radius at which the tran
pipes, and cables have been positioned in the emplacment hole, the sition interval begins, the shock wave will not have time to become
emplacement hole is stemmed with sand, gravel, and plugs (if it is selfsimilar before entering the transition interval. Since Ro is 2 2 m
vertical) or grout (if it is horizontal) in order to prevent escape of for current U. S. practices and allowed yields, no such range exists in
radioactive gases (for an example of a stemming plan for a vertical granite even for explosions as large as 150 kt, as shown by the data
shaft, see Glenn et al. [I9831 or Glenn et al. [1986]; for an example in Table 2. Thus, the simplicity of estimating yields from an interval
of a filling plan for a horizontal tunnel, see U. S. Congress [1989], of selfsimilar motion cannot be realized. Furthermore, the structure
p. 43). For tests conducted in tunnels, an ancillary tunnel (called of the shock wave in the hydrodynamic measurement zone is more
the bypass drift) is constructed parallel to the emplacment tunnel sensitive to the properties of the source than it would be if it were
to allow access to the room in which the nuclear explosive is to be evolving from a selfsimilar wave.
placed and to other parts of the tunnel system close to the time of For example, even if the shock waves produced by two nuclear
the test. After the nuclear explosive has been positioned, the bypass tests with the same yield were spherically symmetric at all radii,
drift is filled with grout. they could have different speeds at a given radius, because the ef
Source effects.Unless impeded, vaporized weapon debris and ra fective site of the shock wave source could differ from one explosion
diation would fill many meters of the emplacement hole soon after to another. Moreover, the design and composition of the nuclear
the nuclear charge is detonated, producing a shock wave that would explosive and canister affects the equation of state of the effective
be highly aspherical initially (see Lamb [1988]). As such a shock hydrodynamic source, which is different from the equation of state
wave expands, it tends to become more spherical if the surrounding of the surrounding rock. As a result, the fraction of the total device
medium is uniform. However, the shock wave will remain significantly energy that couples to the shock wave can vary from one device t o
aspherical until it has propagated a distance from the center of the another. Indeed, Moran and Goldwire [I9901 have shown that the
explosion greater than the length of the source. Such an aspherical yields of sphericallysymmetric explosions inferred from data taken
shock wave would make accurate yield estimation much more difficult in the hydrodynamic measurement zone may differ from the actual
than for a spherical shock wave, particularly if shock front position yields by 20%, for hydrodynamic sources that they present as models
data were obtained from only one set of sensing cables (see below). of the hydrodynamic sources produced by nuclear explosions. Similar
For this reason, the T T B T verification p r o t o c o l ~ ~ s t r i cthe
t s di results have been obtained by Callen, Fiedler, Lamb, and Sullivan [in
mensions of explosive canisters and any attached canisters contain preparation].
ing diagnostic equipment [U. S. Arms Control and Disarmament Inhomogeneities in the ambient medium.In addition to its depen
LAMBETAL. 79
dence on the properties of the source, the evolution of the shock wave satellite hole requires sophisticated drilling capabilities in order to
produced by an underground nuclear explosion will be affected by any make sure that the satellite hole maintains the proper separation
natural or manmade structures in the surrounding medium. In or from the nuclear charge emplacement hole at the depth of the nuclear
der to identify potentially disturbing structures, the TTBT protocol charge (see below and $4). Conversion of the uncrushed cable length
requires that the testing party provide a geological and geophysical to the position of the shock front is more complicated if the cable is
description of the test location, including the depth of the water table, placed in a satellite hole than if it is positioned in the emplacement
lithographic descriptions of each formation, and any known geological hole. On the other hand, the satellitehole geometry reduces the
or geophysical discontinuities within the hydrodynamic measurement intrusiveness of the method and "jetting" and other phenomena that
zone. The protocol also requires the testing party to make available can crush or short sensing cables ahead of the hydrodynamic shock
the planned crosssectional dimensions of each emplacement hole in front. In the discussion that follows, we shall assume that the sensing
each hydrodynamic measurement zone as well as a description of the cables have been placed in a satellite hole unless otherwise stated.
materials that will be used to stem each such emplacement hole. In The satellitehole geometry is shown in Figure 3a.
order t o minimize the effects of voids on the evolution of the shock If a sensing cable is strong enough that it is not crushed by the
wave, the protocol requires that the locations and volumes of all voids elastic precursor (if present) or other unwanted signals, but weak
within the hydrodynamic measurement zone be determined, using enough that it is crushed by the pressure peak at the hydrodynamic
methods such as electromagnetic measurements, radar, and acous shock front, the cable will be electrically shorted or its impedance
tic sounding; any voids within the hydrodynamic measurement zone substantially changed near the point where the hydrodynamic shock
with volumes greater than ten cubic meters and any voids near the front intersects it. As the shock front expands with time, the length
emplacement hole with volumes greater than one cubic meter must of cable from the electrical equipment to the nearest point at which it
then be filled with dense stemming material. has been crushed is measured, as shown in Figure 3b. If the path of
Explosions of nuclear charges in vertical shaft or tunnel complexes the sensing cable relative to the center of the explosion is known and
or in cavities may be accompanied by complicated (and unantici the time at which the explosion began can be determined, then the
pated) energy flows and complex shock wave patterns. In order to length of the uncrushed cable can be used to determine the position
minimize these effects, the T T B T protocol specifies that if a test in of the shock front along the path traced by the sensing cable, as a
volves explosions in more than one emplacement hole, no more than function of the elapsed time since the beginning of the explosion.
one such hole may depart from the standard vertical or horizontal In order to sample a substantial portion of the hydrodynamic mea
configuration. If a test is to be conducted in a cavity, the protocol surement zone for explosions with yields near the 150 kt limit of the
gives the verifying party the right to measure the shape and volume TTBT, the sensing cable must pass within 10m of the center of
of the cavity. the explosion. For this reason, the T T B T protocol requires that for
standard tests, the axis of any satellite hole must be located 1 1 53 me
3. Measuring Shock Waves ters from the axis of its associated emplacment hole throughout the
hydrodynamic measurement zone. For standard vertical tests with
As noted in the Introduction, the evolution of the shock wave pro yields near 150kt, this requires drilling the emplacement and satel
duced by an underground nuclear explosion can in principle be mea lite holes t o depths 2 650 m while maintaining a lateral separation of
sured using either sensing elements or transducers (see Holzer [1965]). about 10m.
In the present context a sensing element is any switch, cable, or cable Voids or excavations near the satellite hole can distort the shock
segment that provides data on the position of the shock front as a front, causing the sensing cables to be crushed in complex patterns.
function of time, whereas a transducer is a device that converts a For this reason, the T T B T protocol requires that for standard tests,
physical property of the shock wave, such as the radial stress, strain, any void that is near a satellite hole and that has a volume greater
or particle speed, into a recordable signal. In practice, constructing, than one cubic meter must be filled with dense stemming material.
emplacing, and obtaining reliable data from transducers has proved
Experimental CORRTEX Experimental CORRTEX
difficult. equipment recorder equipment reandex
For this reason, U. S. efforts to develop shockwave yield estima
tion methods have for the past 15 years emphasized sensing elements.
This approach is also the one that the TTBT protocol allows for
shockwave monitoring of nuclear tests with standard vertical or hor
izontal geometries. Hence, in the present section we focus primarily
on shockfront sensing techniques. The TTBT protocol allows the
use of transducers as well as sensing elements for monitoring tests
with nonstandard geometries [U. S. Arms Control and Disarmament
Agency, 1990bl.
Also, a satellite hole must be at least as close to its associated em to the crushing point or about 0.05m in the distance t o the crushing
placement hole as t o any other holes or excavations. For standard point.
horizontal tests, the axis of a satellite hole must be at least 6 m from
any other drilled or excavated cavities or holes, in order to minimize Determining the Shock Front Position us. Time
the disturbing effects of such holes. Moreover, if drilled, a satellite
hole must have a diameter of no less than 0.3m and no more than In order to understand how the evolution of the shock front pro
0.5 m; if excavated, it must have a cross section no greater than 2.5 m duced by an underground explosion can be followed using OORRTEX
by 2.5 m. Similar restrictions apply to satellite holes for nonstandard or SLIFER measurements, it is helpful to consider first an idealized,
tests [U. S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, 1990bl. sphericallysymmetric explosion in a uniform medium and a single

If hydrodynamic methods are to be used to monitor a lOkt low
threshold test ban, the sensing cable will have t o pass within 4 m of
the center of the explosion in order to sample a substantial portion of
sensing cable in a satellite hole that is relatively straight within the
hydrodynamic measurement zone.
After the nuclear charge is detonated, the spherical shock front
the hydrodynamic measurement zone. For a standard vertical test ge produced by the explosion expands away from the center of the ex
ometry, this would require drilling vertical emplacement and satellite plosion (see Fig. 3b). Some time elapses before the shock front begins
holes to depths 2200 m while maintaining a 4 m lateral separation to crush the sensing cable. This time depends on the distance be
between them. tween the center of the explosion and the point where the cable is
Sensing cables with crushing strengths ranging from as little as closest to the center of the explosion.
3 MPa to as much as 3 GPa have been used [Schmitt and Dick, 19851. At the instant of first crush, the length of uncrushed cable decreases

However, even cables with crushing strengths as high as 3 G P a can
be crushed by the elastic precursor in granite, since pc,it is 4 GPa.
Thus, once the shock wave has split, the length of uncrushed cable
discontinuously from its original length to the length to the point of
first crush (see Fig. 4). As the shock front continues to expand,
the crushing point nearest the electrical recording equipment moves
may indicate the position of the elastic precursor rather than the po steadily along the cable, reducing its uncrushed length. If the time
sition of the trailing hydrodynamic shock front [Virchow et al., 1980; at which the explosion began and the path of the cable relative to
Deupree et al., 19801. If so, the sensing cable will not provide data the center of the explosion are both known, the radius of the shock
about the position of the hydrodynamic shock front [Holzer, 19651. front as a function of the time since the beginning of the explosion
If the data is incorrectly interpreted as showing the position of the can be calculated from the recorded change in the length of the cable
hydrodynamic shock front, the estimated yield of the explosion will as a function of time.
be erroneously high. In some cases the cable may be crushed by the Accurate knowledge of the time at which the nuclear charge was
elastic precursor in some regions and by the plastic wave in others. detonated is required in order to determine accurately the shock front

Thus, use of sensing cable data from regions where the peak pressure
of the shock front has fallen below 20 GPa requires special care.
Further information on the use of sensing cables may be found in
radius as a function of time. For this reason, the T T B T protocol re
quires the testing party to provide the verifying party with an electri
During the 1960s and 1970s, the position of the crushing point
was measured in the United States using a technique called S L I F E R ~
[Heusinkveld and Holzer, 1964; Holzer, 19651. In this approach, the
cable is used as the inductive element of a resonant oscillator. As the
cable is progressively crushed, the frequency of the oscillator changes.
By knowing the propagation velocity of electromagnetic signals in the
cable and the frequencies of the oscillator that correspond to at least
two cable lengths, one can convert measurements of the change in
oscillator frequency during the explosion to estimates of the change
in the length of the cable.
In the late 1970s, an improved technique for measuring the
length of sensing cables, called CORRTEX~, was developed [Virchow
et al., 1980; Deupree et al., 1980; Storey et al., 1982; Los Alamos
Natl. Lab., 19861. In this approach, a sequence of electrical pulses looI I I I I I
is sent along the cable at preselected time intervals. At the crushing 0 2 4 6 8 10
point, these pulses are reflected back along the cable to the recording T i e (ms)
equipment. By knowing the speed at which the pulses propagate Fig. 4. Curve of uncrushed cable length vs. time derived from
along the cable, the roundtrip travel time of each pulse can be CORRTEX satellitehole data collected during an underground nuclear
converted into an estimate of the length of uncrushed cable at the explosion. The cable length remains constant until the shock front ar
time the pulse was reflected. rives at the satellite hole at about 1.7 ms, at which time the cable is
Current (CORRTEX 111) equipment can store up t o 4,000 data crushed about 30 m from its original end. The cable length then de
points. Pulse separations from 10 ps to 90 ps can be selected in 10 ps creases steadily as the crushing point moves along the cable, except for
steps, giving a record of the changing cable length that is 40ms to discontinuous downward jumps at the point labeled 1, 2, and 3, which
360ms in length. The pulses typically propagate down and up the are produced by fiducial loops in the cable (see text). The feature in
sensing cable at about 2 x lo5 kms'. A typical uncertainty in the the curve at about 2.7 rns is not expected for a spherically symmetric
roundtrip travel time during a nuclear explosion is 500ps, corre shock front; its cause is not known to the present authors. The curve
sponding to an uncertainty of about 0.1 m in the roundtrip distance was kindly supplied by the Los Alamos CORRTEX group.
LAMB ET AL. 81
cal pulse corresponding to the time of detonation, with an accuracy crush by the time the crushing is detected. An error of this magnitude
of & l ps, for each explosion. If this electrical pulse is not received, in determining the point of first crush could introduce an error of 50 kt
the time of detonation can still be estimated from the time at which in estimating the yield of a 150 kt explosion. This uncertainty can
the electromagnetic pulse (EMP) caused by the nuclear explosion ar be reduced by using the SLIFER technique to determine the point
rives at the CORRTEX recorder. The CORRTEX technique is less of first crush, or by placing many CORRTEX cables in each satellite
affected by electromagnetic signals produced by the explosion than hole and staggering the times at which pulses are transmitted down
were earlier techniques. In order to prevent the pickup and recording the cables.
of electromagnetic signals that could reveal sensitive nuclear design If the explosion is not spherically symmetric, due to the test ge
information t o the verifying party, the TTBT protocol provides for ometry or the presence of natural or manmade inhomogeneities in
installation of "antiintrusiveness" devices in each cable running from the surrounding medium, reconstruction of the evolving shape of the
a satellite hole t o any recording facility of the verifying party. shock front becomes more complicated and can be quite difficult, es
As discussed in $4, an error of 1 m in the measured radius of the pecially if there is only one satellite hole, since there will then be
shock front will cause an error of about 50 kt in the yield estimate, for data only about the motion of the crushing point nearest the record
yields near 150 kt. Thus, accurate knowledge of the path of the sens ing equipment along asingle path in threedimensional space (no data
ing cable relative t o the center of the explosion is required in order can be collected from the cable beyond the point of first crush, where
to make an accurate yield estimate. The paths of the emplacement the behavior of the shock wave may be significantly different). The
and satellite holes can be determined by directional surveys, geode reconstruction problem is particularly difficult for nuclear explosions
tic measurements, depth measurements, and distance measurements. in vertical shaft or tunnel complexes or in cavities, which may be
The paths of sensing cables within the satellite hole must also be accompanied by complicated (and unanticipated) energy flows and
known accurately. If, for example, the cable wanders within the hole complex shock wave patterns.
and this is not taken into account, the length of the cable crushed by In the context of treatymonitoring, problems of this kind can
the shock wave will be greater than the distance along the satellite be reduced by cooperative agreements. Thus, for example, the
hole traveled by the shock front, causing the the speed of the shock T T B T verification protocol [U. S. Arms Control and Disarmament
wave and therefore the yield of the explosion to be overestimated. Agency, 1990bl allows the verifying party to use up to six sensing
The path of a cable within the satellite hole can be fixed by creating cables in each of three satellite holes drilled or excavated at different
fiducial loops in the cable at predetermined points; such loops will azimuths, in order t o monitor a nonstandard test. In addition, the
cause the length of uncrushed cable to decrease discontinuously as verifying party may use transducers to measure the peak pressure
the shock front passes over them (see Fig. 4). Using these jumps, the or other properties of the shock front, in addition to its position as
cable length measurements can be adjusted for systematic errors. a function of time. The verifying party may also request a reference
Although the paths of the satellite and emplacement holes can be test carried out in accordance with a variety of yield, canister,
determined relatively accurately, the position of the center of the and placement requirements, in order t o calibrate seismic yield
explosion within the explosive canister usually will not be accurately estimation methods. Finally, an explosion with a planned aggregate
known t o the verifying party in advance of the test. In principle, the yield greater than 35 kt can be carried out in a cavity only if both
center of the explosion could be offset from the axis of the explosive parties agree on verification measures.
canister by a substantial fraction of the 11.5m canister radius and
could be located either near the top or near the bottom of a 12m 4. Yield Estimation Algorithms
long canister. Such a large uncertainty in the position of the center of
the explosion would lead t o a very large uncertainty in the estimated Once measurements of the length of the sensing cable have been
yield of the explosion. converted to estimates of the position of the shock front as a function
In practice, the position of the center of the explosion relative to of time, the yield of the explosion can be estimated by applying an
the axis of the explosive canister can often be determined from the algorithm, by which we mean a particular procedure for comparing
shock front position data, if the explosion is spherically symmetric. the shock front position data with a particular model of the motion
Furthermore, if the satellite hole is essentially straight and parallel of the shock front. Because shock wave yield estimation methods are
to the emplacement hole and extends well past the nuclear charge evolving as research continues, the description of yield estimation
emplacement point, the position of the center of the explosion along algorithms given here should be viewed as a status report.
the axis of the explosive canister can be determined from cable length We first describe the components of a yieldestimation algorithm
measurements, since its position is the same as the position of first and then discuss the weighting of shockfrontposition data, includ
crush on the sensing cable (see Fig. 4). In part to make sure that the ing heavier weighting of data in the socalled "insensitive interval".
location of first crush can be determined, the TTBT protocol requires Next we summarize the conditions under which explosions satisfy
that for a test configuration to be standard, each satellite hole must "cuberoot scaling" and describe yield estimation algorithms that
extend beyond the end of the associated emplacement hole by at least are based on this scaling. These include the powerlaw algorithm,
30 and 15m, respectively, for vertical and horizontal emplacement similarexplosion scaling, algorithms based on analytical models, and
geometries. simulatedexplosion scaling. All assume that the explosion is spheri
The discrete character of CORRTEX cablelength measurements cally symmetric and that the ambient medium is uniform. When this
can lead to a significant uncertainty in determining the point of first is the case, the shock wave is spherically symmetric and the propa
crush, since the cable crushing point moves along the cable at very gation of the shock front can be described by a radius vs. time curve.
high speed just after the shock front first reaches the cable. For If the explosion is aspherical or the ambient medium is nonuniform,
example, if the satellite hole is 10m away from the emplacement the evolution is more complicated and detailed numerical modeling
hole and the yield of the explosion is 100 kt, the shock front will be may be required, as discussed at the end of this section.
moving at about 10 kmsI when it reaches the sensing cable. Hence,
even if the CORRTEX equipment is set to make measurements every General Features
l o p s , the radius of the shock front will increase by 0.1 m between one
CORRTEX pulse and the next. IIowever, in the most unfavorable case A yield estimation algorithm consists of (1) a model of the motion
the shock front will have moved 1.4m away from the point of first of the shock front that depends on the yield and (2) a procedure
82 YIELD ESTIMATION USING SHOCK WAVE METHODS
for comparing the model with shockfrontposition data t o derive a another similar rock, s o that the insensitive interval is not sharply
yield estimate. The procedure normally includes a prescription for defined.
weighting the d a t a when comparing it with the model. For example, The existence of an insensitive interval for this collection of media
if the model describes the shock wave evolution more accurately at is not well understood from a fundamental physical point of view.
some times than a t others, d a t a taken during the time when it is However, work by Lamb, Callen, and Sullivan [1989, and in prepa
more accurate should be weighted higher than d a t a taken a t other ration; see also Callen, Lamb, and Sullivan, 19901 indicates that the
times. A simple weighting procedure would be t o assign unit weight existence of an insensitive interval for this collection of silicates is a
t o d a t a collected during a certain interval and zero weight to data consequence of a particular correlation among the physical proper
collected outside it. A more sophisticated procedure would be to ties of these rocks. Lamb e t al. have also described a procedure for
assign weights that gradually increase and then decrease with time determining in advance whether an insensitive interval exists for a
in an optimal way. At a minimum, weights should be chosen t o given collection of media. Previously, whether such an interval exists
eliminate d a t a corrupted by nonhydrodynamic effects of the kind could be determined only from nuclear test experience or numerical
discussed in $3. simulations of the evolution of shock waves in all the media in the
Given the uncertainties in the ambient medium of nuclear weapon collection.
tests that are typically encountered, it is usually appropriate to give Knowledge of whether an insensitive interval exists and, if so, its
a higher weight t o d a t a collected during the swcalled "insensitive position and extent is especially important when attempting t o use
interval" (see Lamb [1988]). This interval is sonamed because ob the powerlaw algorithm, since this algorithm gives relatively accu
servations have shown that the radius of the shock front produced rate yields only if such an interval exists and only if the d a t a used
by a nuclear explosion of given yield is relatively insensitive to the come from this interval. IIowever, exploitation of any insensitive in
medium in which the explosion occurs during a certain interval in terval is also important for optimal use of other algorithms. Given
time and radius toward the end of the transition interval, for e x p b typical uncertainties about the physical properties of the geologic
sions in the particular geologic media for which the United States has medium surrounding the nuclear explosive, assigning more weight to
good experimental d a t a or theoretical models [Bass and Larsen, 1977; data taken during the insensitive interval will improve the precision
Lamb, 1988; Lamb, Callen, and Sullivan, 1989, and in preparation; of any yieldestimation algorithm, even if the model employed in the
Callen, Lamb, and Sullivan, 19901. These media include the dry al algorithm provides a relatively good description of the evolution of a
luvium, partially saturated tuff, saturated tuff, granite, basalt, and shock wave in rock outside as well as within the insensitive interval.
rhyolite a t the nuclear test sites the United States has used. These
media are mostly silicates and almost all are located a t the Nevada Scaling Algorilhrns
Test Site. For explosions in these media, the radius of the shock front
appears t o depend only weakly on the medium during the insensitive A11 scaling algorithms assume that the explosion is spherically sym
interval, despite the fact that phase transitions and shock wave split metric and that the ambient medium is uniform. As noted above, the
ting occur in some of these media within the insensitive interval. As shock front is then spherical and its evolution can be described by
shown in Figure 5, the radius of the shock front in one rock grad a shockfront radius vs. time (RVT) curve. Scaling algorithms as
ually approaches, crosses, and then gradually deviates from that in sume further that the RVT curve scales with the cube root of the
yield. In addition to the central role of cuberoot scaling in scaling
algorithms, most of the very limited quantity of RVT data from un
derground nuclear explosions that have been made publicly available
have been scaled so that the apparent yield is 1 kt, on the assumption
that cuberoot scaling is valid, in order t o protect the confidentiality
of the original data. We therefore begin our description of yield
estimation algorithms with a brief discussion of cuberoot scaling.
Cuberoot scaling.In its usual form, cuberoot scaling assumes
that if R = g ( t ) is the RVT curve produced by a 1 kt explosion in a
given medium during the hydrodynamic phase, the curve produced
by an explosion with a yield of W kt in the same medium is given by
estimates given by the powerlaw algorithm range from 0.30 to 0.82 kt Simulatedexplosion scaling.The basis of secalled simulated
and do not form a Ushaped distribution. The average of the yield explosion scaling is the same as that of similarexplosion scaling,
estimates that lie within the algorithmic interval is about 0.6 kt. The namely, the fact that the RVT curves of shock waves produced by
overall appearance of the yield vs. time curve shows that the assump different nuclear tests in the same medium frequently are quite
tions of the algorithm are not satisfied. similar during the hydrodynamic interval, once they have been
Similarezplosion scaling.As noted in the discussion of cuberoot scaled using equation (15).
scaling, the RVT curves of shock waves produced by point explosions In simulatedexplosion scaling, the yield of an explosion of un
with different yields but in the same uniform medium will coincide known yield is estimated by scaling the RVT curve from a numerical
during the hydrodynamic interval, once they have been scaled using simulation of an explosion in a similar medium so that it follows the
equation (15) (see, for example, Fig. 10 of Holzer [1965]). Even for RVT data measured during the explosion of interest (see, for example,
nuclear testswhich certainly are not point explosionsthe scaled Figs. 10, 11, and 13 of Holzer [1965]). Thus, the simulatedexplosion
RVT curves frequently agree closely for events in similar media. This scaling algorithm is identical to the similarexplosionscaling a l g e
is the basis of the "similarexplosion" scaling algorithm. In this al rithm, except that data from a computer simulation is used in place
gorithm, the yield of an explosion of interest is estimated by scaling of data from a reference explosion. This has the advantage, from a
RVT measurements from a reference explosion of known yield in a treatymonitoring viewpoint, of allowing the verifying party to con
similar medium so that they agree with the RVT measurements made struct a reference explosion via numerical simulation if it does not
during the explosion of interest. Unlike the powerlaw algorithm, the have access to field data from a similar explosion but does have a
similarexplosionscaling algorithm can make good use of data taken good model of the equation of state of the ambient medium.
outside the insensitive interval, since the ambient media of the ex A potential difficulty with simulatedexplosion scaling is that the
plosion of interest and the reference explosion are assumed to be equation of state of the ambient medium constructed from laboratory
identical. measurements made on small samples may not accurately reflect the
Similarexplosion scaling generally works well if the ambient me equation of state of the rock in the field. In part for this reason,
dia of the two explosions are very similar. Occasionally, applica computer simulations that generate reference explosions for use in
tion of this algorithm has led t o an unexpectedly large error in the simulatedexplosion scaling algorithms often make use of "generic"
derived yield, presumably because the ambient media were not as equations of state, which are based both on laboratory measurements
similar as had been thought (see Holzer [1965]). Usually, however, and shock wave data from actual underground nuclear explosions.
similarexplosion scaling provides an accurate yield estimate. Its For example, a "quartz" equation of state may be used to simulate
main disadvantage from a treatymonitoring viewpoint is that the explosions in hard silicate rocks, such as granites, while a "wet tuff"
verifying party may not have access to data from nuclear explosions equation of state may be used to simulate explosions conducted below
in a medium similar to that in which the test in question is being the water table in a variety of tuffs.
conducted. Like the similarexplosion scaling algorithm, the simulated
Analytical modeling.Another possible approach to yield estima explosion scaling algorithm can make use of data taken outside the
tion uses analytical models of the shock wave evolution, such as insensitive interval.
those proposed by Heusinkveld [1979, 19821, Lamb [1987, 19881 and
Moss [1988], and Axford and Holm [1987]. Detailed numerical modeling
The analytical model of Lamb and Moss (see $2) treats the prop
erties of the ambient medium and the motion of the shock front in a All the algorithms discussed up to this point assume that cuberoot
simplified way that nevertheless includes the most important effects. scaling is accurate. However, as we have previously noted, nuclear
The result is a relatively simple analytical expression for the radius tests typically violate the conditions required for cuberoot scaling to
of the shock front as a function of time. The model also gives simple hold exactly. This is particularly true for those tests defined as non
expressions for the postshock pressure, particle speed, and density. standard by the T T B T protocol. Such tests may have large explosive
Such a model is a useful tool for studying the evolution of shock canisters or lines of sight without choke sections, may be conducted
waves in geologic media and the dependence of the evolution on the in vertical shaft or tunnel complexes or in large cavities, and may
ambient medium. lead to significant transport of energy via radiation even at relatively
The model of $2 can also be used to derive relatively accurate large distances from the center of the explosion (see, for example,
yield estimates from RVT data, if the required physical properties King et al. [1989]). Even if a test has a standard vertical or horizon
of the ambient medium are known. For example, Lamb, Callen, tal geometry, the presence of a geological or geophysical discontinuity
and Sullivan [1990] have shown that the model gives yield estimates in the hydrodynamic measurement zone may cause a deviation of the
for U. S. underground nuclear tests conducted in granite, basalt, shock wave from spherical symmetry (see Lamb [1988]); violations of
and saturated wet tuff that are within 10% of the official yields of the other conditions that are required for cuberoot scaling t o be an
these events, when realistic Hugoniots and RVT data from only the accurate approximation may occur as well.
hydrodynamic interval are used. At present, detailed numerical simulations using t w e and three
Like the similarexplosionscaling algorithm but unlike the power dimensional finitedifference or finiteelement hydrodynamic codes
law algorithm, yieldestimation algorithms based on the model of $2 are the only way one can model nuclear tests in which transport
can make use of data taken outside as well as inside the insensitive of energy via radiation is important in the shockfront measurement
interval, since the model describes the evolution of the shock wave zone, in which shock wave evolution in this zone is significantly af
throughout the hydrodynamic phase. The model can also be used to fected by the physical properties of the hydrodynamic source, or in
estimate the uncertainty in the yield caused by lack of knowledge of which the ambient medium is significantly inhomogeneous. Numer
the properties of the ambient medium, and is more convenient than ical simulations are also the only way one can model shock wave
numerical simulations for analyzing how shock wave evolution is af evolution beyond the hydrodynamic zone, although in this zone the
fected by changes in the physical properties of the ambient medium. predictive power of present constitutive relations for geologic media
For this reason, the model was used by Lamb, Callen, and Sulli and present computer codes is limited.
van [1989, and in preparation; see also Callen, Lamb, and Sullivan, In addition t o the difficulties sometimes encountered in modeling
19901 in their investigation of the physical origins of the insensitive accurately the equation of state of the ambient medium, which have
interval. already been discussed, numerical simulations of explosions in shaft
or tunnel complexes, in media with voids or geophysical discontinu Accuracy of Shock Wave Methods
ities, or in cavities also have t o confront the difficulties involved in
treating accurately the interaction of a shock wave with sharp bound What accuracy can be expected from routine monitoring of the
aries between different rocks or between rocks and air. yields of underground nuclear tests using shockwave methods? In
In algorithms based on detailed numerical modeling, a new simu our judgment, shockwave methods have not yet been studied in the
lation must be run for each yield considered. Hence, estimating the United States as widely or as thoroughly as seismic methods. Fur
yield of even a single nuclear test can be computationally intensive. thermore, very few of the studies that have been carried out have
It may he possible to use d a t a taken within a shaft or tunnel com been published in the open literature. For example, the results of the
plex or cavity, if radiation transport and shock wave propagation 1988 Joint Verification Experiment carried out by the United States
within the complex or cavity can be accurately simulated. It may and the Soviet Union have still not been made available to the public,
also be possible t o use data from beyond the hydrodynamic zone, if even though they are fully available t o both governments. The status
reliable constitutive relations are available for the ambient medium. of shockwave methods in the Soviet Union is even less clear, with
Obviously, algorithms that make use of such data are not purely hy essentially n o information available in the open literature. Given the
drodynamic. very limited information available in the open literature, it is all but
impossible t o present here a meaningful assessment of the probable
Low Yield Explosions accuracy of shockwave methods when used as a treatymonitoring
tool. Nevertheless, the most likely sources of systematic and random
Tamped underground nuclear explosions as small as a few kilotons error can be identified.
produce shock waves that evolve in the same way as those produced Variations in the contents of the explosive canister can cause sys
by largeryield explosions. However, because the hydrodynamic zone tematic errors in yield estimates based on shockwave methods. For
for such lowyield explosions ends much closer to the explosive canis example, Moran and Goldwire [I9901 have shown, as noted earlier,
ter than it does for tests with yields 2 50 kt, the effects of the canister, that the yields of sphericallysymmetric explosions inferred from data
cableways, and open lines of sight on the evolution of the shock front taken in the hydrodynamic measurement zone may differ from the
are generally more important. Moreover, lowyield tests can be and actual yields by 20%, for the hydrodynamic sources they present as
often are set off a t shallow depths in softer material, such as alluvium, models of the sources produced by different nuclear explosives and
or in tunnels or cavities. T h e shock waves produced hy such explo test geometries. T h e conclusions of Moran and Goldwire [1990] are
sions can differ markedly from the models of sphericallysymmetric supported by the numerical simulations of Callen, Fiedler, Lamb, and
shock waves in hard rock that are used in mcst hydrodynamic yield Sullivan [in preparation], who also find that the characteristics of the
estimation algorithms. Moreover, the shock waves produced by such source can affect yield estimates based on hydrodynamic algorithms.
explosions have been observed to differ from test to test. These dif Since the contents of the explosive canister are unlikely t o be known
ferences are potential sources of error in the yield estimate. t o the verifying party, such differences are a source of uncertainty for
Serious practical, operational, and engineering problems also arise hydrodynamic yield estimates made under treatymonitoring condi
in trying t o use hydrodynamic methods to estimate the yields of tions.
explosions with yields of a few kilotons. For one thing, the sensing In addition t o systematic errors caused by differences between the
cable must be placed very close to the nuclear charge in order to assumed and actual properties of the hydrodynamic source, any dif
sample the hydrodynamic zone. Drilling emplacement and satellite ferences between the actual and assumed geological and geophysical
holes 4 meters from one another t o the depth a t which the explosive properties of the surrounding medium will cause systematic or ran
canister is emplaced (2200 m), which would he required in order t o dom errors in the yield estimate. For example, incorrect assumptions
use hydrodynamic methods t o monitor a lOkt test in a standard about the average properties of the ambient medium, including the
vertical geometry, is a t or beyond the capabilities of current drilling equation of state of the rock, would bias the yield estimate, decreas
t e ~ h n i ~ u eIn
s.~
horizontal tunnel geometries, the need t o take d a t a ing its accuracy, whereas variations in the properties of the medium
so close t o the center of the explosion would force placement of the on small scales would cause scatter in shockfront position measure
sensing cable so close t o the tunnel wall that the motion of the shock ments, decreasing the precision of the yield estimate [Lamb, 19881.
front along the sensing cable would probably be significantly distorted Largescale geological or geophysical structures within the hydro
by the tunnel. dynamic measurement zone can also affect the yield estimate. For
The need t o make measurements close t o the center of the explosion example, the alluvial deposits a t the NevadaTest Site are weakly con
would also necessitate more stringent restrictions on the dimensions solidated erosion products of the surrounding mountains with phys
of explosive canisters, cahleways, and open lines of sight, in order t o ical properties that vary widely. Layers of gravel, the residues of
assure accuracy. Such restrictions might be deemed an unacceptable ancient stream beds, are often encountered in drilled holes. While
interference with test programs. Finally, because the shock front most shockfront position measurements a t NTS behave as expected,
must be measured a t much smaller radii, any errors in surveying the an occasional test has produced irregular data that defy simple ex
emplacement and satellite holes or in determining the time of the planation. Such results have been attributed to spatial variations in
explosion and the point of first crush are more important than for the ambient medium [Holzer, 19651. As another example, dissolution
largeryield explosions. cavities may be present in the carbonate rocks of the Soviet Northern
I t is possible that some of these difficulties could be alleviated by Test Site on the island of Novaya Zemlya. Such cavities, if located
developing models and algorithms that would allow routine use of within the hydrodynamic measurement zone and unrecognized or un
shock wave position d a t a taken a t distances beyond the hydrody filled, could significantly distort the shock front, thereby biasing the
namic interval, although current experience with such data is not yield estimate.
very encouraging. In any case, these and other potential solutions Manmade structures within the hydrodynamic measurement zone
t o t h e problems that would be encountered in monitoring lowyield can also cause systematic errors in the yield estimate, if they are
tests using hydrodynamic methods have not yet been carefully and not adequately filled or modeled. Such structures may include ver
thoroughly studied. Thus, a t the present time hydrodynamic yield tical shafts or horizontal tunnels as well as cavities. Other potential
estimation methods could not be used with confidence to monitor sources of bias include errors in determining the time of detonation
compliance with threshold test bans in which the threshold is less and the position of the center of the explmion and in determining
than several tens of kilotons. the paths of the sensing cables relative t o the center of the explosion.
LAMBETAL. 87
SLIFER data have been collected from sensing cables positioned produced by an underground explosion increases with the yield of
in the nuclear explosive emplacement hole for many tens of under the explosion. At present, the most accurate yields are given by
ground nuclear tests, and from sensing cables positioned in satellite algorithms that use only data collected within the hydrodynamic
holes for several tens of tests [U. S. Congress, 19881. CORRTEX data zone, which extends 5 (W/l kt)'I3 meters from the center of the
has reportedly been collected from sensing cables positioned in the explosion.

emplacement hole for 100 nuclear tests, and from sensing cables
positioned in one or more satellite holes for a dozen or so tests [U. S.
" .
The evolution of the shock wave within the hvdrodvnamic zone
depends on the properties of the source and the nature of the sur
Department of State, 1986a; 1986b; U. S. Congress, 19881. A very rounding geologic medium. When hydrodynamic methods are used
small fraction of the SLIFER data has been released publicly, most of under treatymonitoring conditions, the verifying party's lack of in
it only after having been scaled (assuming the validity of cuberoot formation about the contents of the explosive canister introduces an
scaling) so that the apparent yield is 1 kt (see Heusinkveld [I9791 and uncertainty in the derived yield that may be about 20% for tests
Heusinkveld [1982]). At present, all CORRTEX data remain classi conducted in standard geometries. Any errors or uncertainties in de
fied. termining the time of the explosion or the position of the shock front
According to the U. S. Department of State [1986a, 1986b1, hy relative to the center of the explosion or in modeling the equation
drodynamic yield estimates have fallen within 15% of radiochemi of state of the ambient medium and the effects of any natural or
cal yield estimates (at the 95% confidence level), for historic tests manmade geological or geophysical structures will increase the un
with yields greater than 50 kt conducted in the geologic media of the certainty of the yield estimate. For standard tests with yields greater
Nevada Test Site. According to these same reports, hydrodynamic than several tens of kilotons conducted in ambient geologic media for
methods are expected to have an uncertainty of a factor of 1.3 at the which the verifying party has direct experience or good theoretical
95% confidence level when used under treatymonitoring conditions models, the uncertainty in yield estimates may be as small as 30%.
at the Soviet test sites near Shagan River to monitor explosions with Nuclear tests conducted in cavities or in vertical shaft or horizontal
yields greater than 50 kt. However, some scientists familiar with hy tunnel complexes typically produce more complicated shock waves.
drodynamic methods believe that the uncertainty could be somewhat Hence the uncertainty in the estimated yield of such a nonstandard
larger (see U. S. Congress [1988], appendix on CORRTEX). test is likely to be greater than for a test conducted in a standard
While one may hope that the uncertainties will turn out to be as vertical or horizontal geometry.
small as 30%, only time and experience will show what the uncer .,
The aleorithms that have been used to extract vield estimates from
tainties actually are. This is especially so because the U. S. nuclear shockwave measurements within the hydrodynamic zone vary in ac
community does not yet have experience with monitoring tests in ge curacy and reliability. Even the best hydrodynamic algorithms may
ologic media such as the frozen carbonate and silicate rocks at the not always be more precise than seismic algorithms, especially if re
Soviet Northern Test Site on Novaya Zemlya Island, or in monitoring gional as well as teleseismic phases are used in constructing the seis
nuclear tests involving complex geometries, substantial cavities, or mic yield estimate [Hansen, Ringdal, and Richards, 19901. Shock
multiple explosions at Soviet test sites. wave yield estimation algorithms are not affected by the largescale
It has been claimed in Congressional hearings on T T B T and features of the test site or the geophysical properties of the earth
PNET verification and elsewhere7 that hydrodynamic methods beneath it, as seismic algorithms are, but shockwave algorithms are
are "direct" whereas seismic methods are not. In fact, both hy more affected than seismic algorithms by local structures that disturb
drodynamic and seismic methods estimate the yield indirectly, by the evolution of the shock wave, such as tunnels, shafts, and voids,
measuring the ground motion produced by the explosion. In both and geological and geophysical discontinuities. Thus, for explosions
methods, the important events are: (1) production of a signal by with yields greater than several tens of kilotons, shockwave methods
the exploding nuclear charge, (2) propagation of the signal t o points can complement seismic methods. The yields of such underground
more or less remote from the detonation point, and (3) detection nuclear explosions can therefore be estimated more accurately by
of the signal by sensors at the remote points. Relevant questions combining the two methods than by using either method alone.
for both methods include how the size of the signal varies with Acknow1edgemenls.It is a pleasure to thank T . Ahrens, D. Eilers,
yield, how well the propagation of the signal is understood, and how R. Geil, M. Heusinkveld, R. Hill, B. Leith, and G. Miller for helpful
accurately and precisely the signal can be measured. discussions of shock wave propagation and yield estimation. The
It has also been asserted that use of hydrodynamic methods in and authors are also grateful to T. Ahrens and W. Moss for carefully
of itself eliminates the possibility of systematic error or "bias" (see, reading a draft of this review and suggesting numerous improvements.
for example, the testimony of J . H. McNally in U. S. Senate [1987], This work was supported in part by DARPA through the Geophysics
pp. 27 and 99101). If what was meant is that hydrodynamic meth Laboratory under contract F1962888K0040.
ods do not suffer from "regional seismic bias", the statement is true
but trivial, since regional seismic bias obviously is not relevant to
nonseismic yieldestimation methods. On the other hand, if what Notes
was meant is that hydrodynamic methods do not suffer from bias in
lThe motion of the shock wave changes only gradually and so the
the sense of systematic error, the statement is obviously false. Both
point at which it is said to enter the transition interval is purely
hydrodynamic and seismic yield estimation methods are subject to
systematic as well as random errors. Relevant questions are the ex conventional. Throughout the present article we use the convention
that the transition interval begins when the peak density ratio falls
pected sizes of the errors, and whether they are so large as to be of
to 80% of its limiting value.
concern.
2Again, the motion of the shock wave changes only gradually and
5. Conclusions so the point a t which it is said t o enter the lowpressure plastic wave
interval is purely conventional. Throughout the present article we
Shockwave yield estimation methods were developed by the use the convention that the lowpressure plastic wave interval begins
United States and the Soviet Union primarily as tools for estimating when the shock speed falls to 1.2 times the lowpressure plastic wave
the yields of their respective nuclear tests. These methods make speed.
use of the fact that the strength of the expanding shock wave 31n order t o prevent seepage of radioactive gases to the surface, the
depth of burial (DOB) of U. S. tests is at least 120(W/1 kt)'f3m. Condensed Matter, Y. M. Gupta, ed., pp. 639644, Plenum, New
This requires a DOB of at least 650m for a 150 kt explosion. When York, 1986.
the DOB given by this relation would be relatively small, or in media Hansen, R. A,, F. Ringdal, and P. G. Richards, The stability ofrms
with a substantial water content, the actual DOB is increased in Lg measurements, and their potential for accurate estimation of
order to assure containment of radioactive gases. The actual DOB of the yields of soviet underground nuclear explosions, Geophysics
an explosion at the Nevada Test Site is normally not less than 200m. Laboratory (Hanscom Air Force Base, Mass.), Rep. GLTR90
See U. S. Congress [1989], pp. 3537. 0061, February 1990.
4~~~~~~ is an acronym for Shorted Location Indicator by Fre Heusinkveld, M., and F. Holzer, Method of continuous shock front
quency of Electrical Resonance. position measurement, Rev. Sci. Inst., 35, 11051107, 1964.
5~~~~~~~ is an acronym for Continuous Reflectometry for Radius Heusinkveld, M., Analysis ofSLIFER data from underground nuclear
versus Time Experiments. It is a misnomer, since the sampling in explosions, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Rep. UCRL
time is discrete. 52648, 1979.
Heusinkveld, M., Analysis of shock wave arrival time from under
'During preparations for the 1988 U. S.Soviet Joint Verification ground explosions, J . Geophys. Res., 87, 18911898, 1982.
Experiment (see U. S. Department of State [1988]), the Soviets stated Holzer, F., Measurements and calculations of peak shockwave pa
that they did not have the technology to drill satellite and emplace

ment holes to the required depth (presumably 650 m) while main
taining a horizontal displacement within the tolerance (presumably
rameters from underground nuclear detonations, J. Geophys. Res.,
70, 893905, 1965.
 10 m) required by the United States. As a result, the United States
flew its drill rig and crew to the Soviet test site. See C. P. Fbbinson,
Johnson, G. W., G. H. Higgins, and C. E. Violet, Underground nu
clear detonations, J. Geophys. Res., 64, 14571470, 1959.
King, D. S., B. E. Freeman, D. D. Eilers, and J . D. Johnson, The
Testimony before the Subcommittee on Arms Control, International effective yield of a nuclear explosion in a small cavity in geologic
Security, and Science, House Committee on Foreign Affairs, June 28, material, J. Geophys. Res., 94, 1237512385, 1989.
1988. Lamb, F. K., An approximate solution for ground shock propagation,
7See U. S. Senate [1987]; R. B. Barker, at pp. 8, 19, and 8990; University of Illinois Program in Arms Control, Disarmament, and
D. A. Vesser, at p. 94; S. R. Foley, at p. 11; J . H. McNally, at pp. 27 International Security, Rep. WP2872, February 1987.
and 99101; H. A. Holmes, at pp. 5 and 108. See also Robinson [1990]. Lamb, F. K., Monitoring yields of underground nuclear tests using hy
drodynamic methods, in Nuclear Arms Technologies in the 1990s,
References D. Schroeer and D. IIafemeister, eds., pp. 109148, American In
stitute of Physics, New York, 1988.
Al'tshuler, L. V., N. N. Kalinin, L. V. Kuz'mina, and B. S. Chekiu, Lamb, F. K., B. W. Callen, and J. D. Sullivan, Insensitive interval in
Shock adiabats for ultrahigh pressures, Sov. Phys.JETP 45, 161 the evolution of shock waves from underground nuclear explosions,
171, 1977. Rep. prepared for 11th Annual AFGLIDARPA Seismic Research
Axford, R. A. and D. D. Holm, in Proc. Nuclear Explosion Design Symposium, San Antonio, Tex., May 1989; University of Illinois
Conference, Los Alamos National Laboratory, October 1987. Physics Dept. Rep. P89577, May 1989.
Barenblatt, G. I., Similarity, Selfsimilarity, and Intermediate Asymp Lamb, F. K., B. W. Callen, and J . D. Sullivan, An approximate ana
t o t i c ~Consultants
, Bureau, New York, 1979 [English Translation]. lytical model of shock waves from underground nuclear explosions,
Bass, R. C., and Larsen, G. E., Shock propagation in several geologic submitted to J. Geophys. Res., December 1990.
materials of interest in hydrodynamic yield determinations, Sandia Los Alamos National Laboratory, Public information sheet on CORR
Laboratory, Rep. SAND770402, 1977. TEX, April 1986.
Brode, H. L., Review of nuclear weapons effects, Ann. Rev. Nuclear McQueen, R., J . N. Fritz, and J . W. Hopson, Highpressure equation
Sci., 18, 153202, 1968. ofstate of S O z , M6 Prog. Rep. M6200, pp. 78136, Los Alamos
Butkovich, T . R., Calculation of the shock wave from an underground National Laboratory, Los Alamcs, N. M., Jan.March 1977.
nuclear explosion in granite, J. Geophys. Res., 70, 885892, 1965. Moran, B., and H. C. Goldwire, Jr., Effect of source modelling
Callen, B. W., F. K. Lamb, and J . D. Sullivan, Insensitive interval in on the inferred yield from an underground nuclear explosion, in
the evolution of shock waves from explosions, in Shock Compres Shock Compression of Condensed Matter1989, S. C. Schmidt,
sion ofcondensed Matter1989, S. C. Schmidt, J . N. Johnson, and J . N. Johnson, and L. W. Davison, eds., pp. 645648, Elsevier
L. W. Davison, eds., pp. 241244, Elsevier Science Pubs., Amster Science Pubs., Amsterdam, 1990.
dam, 1990. Murri, W. J., D. R. Curran, C. F. Petersen, and R. C. Crewdson,
Chung, D. H., and G. Simmons, Pressure derivatives of the elastic Response of solids to shock waves, in Advances in HighPressure
properties of polycrystalline quartz and rutile, Earth Planet. Sci. Research, Vol. 4, R. H. Hentorf, Jr., ed., 1163, Academic Press,
Lett., 6, 134138, 1969. London, 1974.
Deupree, R. G., D. D. Eilers, T . 0 . McKown, and W. H. Storey, Moss, W. C., A method to estimate the yield of an underground
CORRTEX: a compact and versatile system for time domain rellec nuclear explosion, J. Appl. Phys., 63, 47714773, 1988.
tometry, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Rep. LAUR803382, Nuckolls, J . H., A computer calculation of Rainier (the first 100
1980. milliseconds), in Proc. Second Plowshare Symposium, May 1315,
Germain, L. S., and Kahn, J . S., Phenomenology and containment of 1959, San Francisco, California. Part I. Phenomenology of Un
underground nuclear explosions, Lawrence Radiation Laboratory, derground Nuclear Explosions, University of California Radiation
Rep. UCRL50482, November 1968. Laboratory, Rep. UCRL5675, pp. 120134, 1959.
Glasstone, S., and P. Dolan, Effects of Nuclear Weapons, U. S. Gov Ragan, C. E., 111, Shock wave experiments at threefold compression,
ernment Printing Office, Washington, 1977. Phys. Rev. A29, 13911402, 1984.
Glenn, H. D., T . F. Stubbs, J . A. Kalinowski, and E. C. Woodward, Robinson, C. P., Verifying testing treatiesold and new (interview),
Containment analysis for the Queso event, Lawrence Livermore Arms Control Today, 20, 37, 1990.
National Laboratory, Rep. UCRL89410, August 1983. Schmitt, G. G., and R. D. Dick, Use of CORRTEX to measure ex
Glenn, H. D., T . F. Stubbs, and J. A. Kalinowski, in Shock Waves in plosive performance and stem behavior in oil shale fragmentation
LAMBETAL. 89
tests, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Rep. LAUR85231, 1985. U. S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, The Containment
Sedov, L. I., The motion of air in a strong explosion [in Russian], of Underground Nuclear Explosions, OTAISC414, U. S. Govern
Akademiya nauk SSSR, Doklady, 52, 1720, 1946. ment Printing Office, Washington, D.C., October 1989.
Sedov, L. I., Similarity and Dimensional Methods in Mechanics, Aca U. S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, Seismic Verifica
demic Press, New York, 1959 [English translation]. tion of Nuclear Testing Tkeaties, OTAISC361, U. S. Government
Storey, W. H., Jr., D. D. Eilers, T. 0 . McKown, D. M. IIolt, and G. C. Printing Office, Washington, D.C., May 1988.
Conrad, CORRTEX 11: a dual microprocessor controlled instrument U. S. Department of State, Bureau of Public Affairs, U. S. policy
for dynamic shock position measurements, Los Alamos National regarding limitations on nuclear testing, Special Report No. 150,
Laboratory, Rep. LAUR82558, 1982. August 1986 (a).
Taylor, G. I., The formation of a blast wave by a very intense ex U. S. Department of State, Bureau of Public Affairs, Verifying nu
plosion. I. Theoretical discussion, Proc. Roy. Soc. (London), A201, clear testing limitations: possible U. S.Soviet cooperation, Special
159174, 1950 (a). Report No. 152, August 1986 (b).
Taylor, G. I., The formation of a blast wave by a very intense explo U. S. Department of State, Agreement Between the United States
sion. 11. The atomic explosion of 1945, Proc. Roy. Soc. (London), of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on the
A201, 175186, 1950 (b). Conduct of a Joint Verification Experiment, May 1988.
Terhune, R. W., H. D. Glenn, D. E. Burton, H. L. McKague, and U. S. Senate, Threshold Test Ban Treaty and Peaceful Nuclear E x p l e
J. T . Rambo, Numerical simulation of the Baneberry event, Nucl. sions Tkeaty, Hearings Before the Committee on Foreign Relations,
Tech., 46, 159169, 1979. U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C., 1987.
U. S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, Arms Control Agree Virchow, C. F., G. E. Conrad, D. M. Holt, and E. K. Hodson,
ments, 1990 (a). Microprocessorcontrolled time domain reflectometer for dynamic
U. S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, Tkeaty Between the shock position measurements, Rev. Sci. Inst., 51, 642646, 1980.
United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Re Wackerle, J., Shock wave compression of quartz, J . Appl. Phys., 33,
publics on the Limitation of Underground Nuclear Weapons Tests 922937, 1962.
and Tkeaty Between the United States of America and the Union Zel'dovich, Ya. B., and Yu. P. Raizer, Physics of Shock Waves and
of Soviet Socialist Republics on Underground Nuclear Explosions HighTemperature Hydrodynamic Phenomena, Academic Press,
for Peaceful Purposes: Text of Tkeaties and Protocols, 1990 (b). New York, 1967 [English translation].
NONLINEAR ATTENUATION EFFECTS OUTSIDE THE ZONE OF MACROSCOPIC FAILURE
Abstract. Laboratory evidence unambiguously shows that the power between 2 and 8 Hz, greater than expected for secondorder models
mechanical response of rock at low confining pressure is nonlinear, with reasonable attenuation corrections for the travel path [Taylor et al.,
meaning that attenuation is strainamplitudedependent, for strains 19881. Attenuation of wavefields in dome salt requires strong attenuation
between 106 and those sufficient to cause permanent damage, 1&3 to (QI = 0.05) in the nearsource region [Trulio, 19851. Both reversible
102. We compare the magnitude of nonlinear attenuation for soils, nonlinear attenuation due to frictional sliding and irreversible attenuation
microscopically cracked granite, and macroscopically fractured granite. A caused by plasticity of the salt may contribute to the observed strong
compilation of data for attenuation in soils from the civil engineering attenuation. Credible alternative explanations for each of these
literature documents the strong nonlinear response in these materials over observations have been proposed. High frequencies can also be removed
the strain range 106 to 103. Nonlinear soil response would be most at the source, usually by requiring finite source rise times or important
important in near surface layers. We show direct evidence that fatigue spallrelated effects. However, amplitudedependent attenuation is
microcracking resulting from highfrequency and ultrasonic measurement observed without ambiguity in laboratory experiments [Gordon and Rader,
techniques may lead to systematic overestimatesof nonlinear attenuation. 19711 and must be considered in evaluating seismic signals from
New data for attenuation due to sliding on a single macrofracture in explosion sources.
granite shows that large attenuation (up to Q1 = 0.1) can occur at strains The main goal of this paper is to collect and summarize laboratory
of 5 x 1 0 4 at low normal stress. Measurable nonlinear response results which demonstrate the existence and magnitude of the nonlinear
attributable to the fracture persists to strains near 106 and to normal response for intact rocks, soils, and fractured rock. New results for granite
stresses corresponding to overburden pressures at typical burial depths for damaged by fatigue microcracking and for macroscopically fractured
underground explosions. granite are also included. These data are useful for determining the relative
importance of various competing effects which contribute to pulse
Introduction broadening and attenuation near explosion sources.
As an outgoing stress pulse travels away from an explosive source, the Nonlinear Effects in Rocks
material response changes with range. Amplitude decays more rapidly
near the source, until finally at some distance the stress pulse attenuates at The StressStrain Relation
a constant rate appropriate for small strains less than 106. The region
in which "reversible" nonlinear response (mainly frictional sliding) occurs The strength of nonlinear effects can be evaluated for rocks by
is loosely defined by strains between 1 w 3 to 106 and is farther away approximating the stressstrain relation by a polynomial in strain:
from the source than the region in which irreversible macroscopic damage
(e.g., brittle failure and pore collapse) occurs. 0 = M ~ +E M ~+E
. . . MnEn
~ (1)
Both field observations and laboratory experiments are consistent with
the existence of a nearsource region of strainamplitudedependent where o is the stress, E is strain, and Mn is a generalized modulus. For
(nonlinear) attenuation. For example, source comer frequencies computed small strains the resmnse is dominated by the first tern and Hooke's Law
from finitedifference simulations of material response are systematically is adequate. As the strain increases, higherorder terms become more
higher than those inferred from teleseismic observations [Rimer and important. By evaluating successive derivatives with respect to strain (or
Cherry, 1982; Archambeau, 19851. The simulations include only equivalently, pressure or stress), values can be assigned to the "higher
hydrodynamic and irreversible effects of compaction and failure, neglecting order elastic constants," which provide a quantitative measure of nonlinear
the region of reversible amplitudedependent attenuation. Attempts to effects. The strain sensitivity of the moduli for earth materials can be
include amplitude dependence in modeling closein source effects in dome two orders of magnitude higher than for other solids such as metals, so
salt require dramatic nonlinear attenuation to match observations over the nonlinear effects can be relatively important. However, strain sensitivity
strain range down to [Minster and Day, 19861. Evidence for the diminishes as confining pressure is applied. Pressure dependence of the
importance of amplitudedependent effects is also seen in field data. strain sensitivity suggests that the primary underlying causes of the
Spectral discriminants for lowyield events at the Nevada Test Site (NTS) strongest nonlinear response are material imperfections such as fractures,
show that explosions are deficient in high frequencies relative to microfractures, and open grain boundaries. Nonlinear processes associated
earthquakes. For example, small explosions show excessive rolloff of with movement of dislocations may also play a significant role when
effects due to cracks are not important.
l ~ o wat Department of Geology and Geophysics, University of
Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455 Laboratory Evidence of Nonlinearityfor Rocks
sandstone
.(Winkler. et 81.. 1979)
anorthosite
(Gordon 8 Davis. 1968)
pyroxenite
(Gordon 8 Davis, 1968)
,,
,,
,
,
,
,,,
0.005  , granite
/
, (Gordon 8 Rader, 1971)
... quartzite
. .    (Gordon 8 Davis, 1968)
+...
_.   . .. : I
L  : L I.
. : : :. 1:. 1.:. :
:~
0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .limestone
. . . . . (Peselnick . . . . . . 1961)
. . . . . 8 . Outerbridge, . . .
E (microstrains)
Fig. 1. Attenuation as a function of strain amplitude for several rock types. The slope of each line is the
strain sensitivity y. y varies from 4 for limestone up to lo3 for sandstone and is a function of rock
type, microstructure, confining pressure, and volatile content.
BONNER AND WANAMAKER 93
medium sands
i ,T
_ _,  _ .
 ,  T
, ,  ,
, . , , , , , , , , , , , ,
E (microstrains)
Fig. 2. Attenuation as a function of strain for soils, clay, and salt. Data for sandstone (ss) from Fig. 1 is
shown for comparison. Confining pressure suppresses the nonlinearity of the unconsolidated materials.
using ground vibrator sources for paths of up to 2 km. Higher harmonics inherently nonlinear loss mechanism [Stacey et al., 19751. Mavko [I9791
increase in relative magnitude up to several tenths of the fundamental for generalized the sliding model to include arbitrary crack morphologies and
the longest paths. They also report transfer of power from high to low showed that sliding could, in general, explain the observed strain
frequencies when their source was amplitudemodulated. They attribute dependence of attenuation (Figure 1). Stewart et al. [I9831 proposed a
these observations to nonlinear response of the nearsurface, lowvelocity variation on the sliding model based on Hertzian contact theory to explain
layer. Transfer of energy to higher frequencies by harmonic generation the decrease in nonlinear attenuation that occurs with increasing confining
would result in higher nearsource attenuation, assuming that spatial pressure. Agreement with experiments at ultrasonic frequencies was
attenuation increases linearly with frequency (Q is frequencyindependent). acce table, predicting that attenuation decreases with pressure (p) as
Amplitude modulation of a seismic source may also directly deplete high P4l5 
frequencies by wave interactions in the nonlinear region. Other models based on dislocation dynamics have been proposed to
Andrews and Shilien [I9721 computed finitedifference forward explain nonlinear response observed in metals and other materials. Mason
simulations of explosions in various rocks to estimate the consequences [I9691 proposed that the motion of dislocation kinks produced losses
of lowamplitude nonlinear effects. Their results predict that radiated consistent with experiments on crustal rocks with reasonable dislocation
energy shifts to lower frequencies when passing through the nonlinear densities. Furthermore, Mason's model fits the frequency dependence of
region, changing the apparent spectral characteristics of the source. Sear's [I9801 salt data, although the magnitude of the observed
Subharmonic generation is consistent with the theory of nonlinear attenuation requires dislocation densities inconsistent with independent
vibrations. These calculations assumed a nonlinear attenuation of QI = measurements. Dislocation models generally predict smaller nonlinear
0.01, appropriate for a relatively modest nonlinear effect. Assuming a effects than those associated with cracked solids, but might be significant
linear background attenuation (QOl) of 0.003 at strains of and for materials, such as salt, in which crack healing due to plastic flow and
smaller, equation (2) predicts y = 60 for calculated strains of l(r4. The precipitaton are important.
data in Figures 1 and 2 show that much stronger effects than those
modeled by Andrews and Shilien are possible and simulations using New Results
currently available numerical methods (see Minster and Day [I9861 for a
good discussion) would be appropriate to estimate the consequences for
inversion for source parameters.
In this section, we report a series of new experiments using a torsional
Mechanisms oscillator (Figure 3) to investigate amplitudedependent effects in fractured
and intact rocks. Oscillators of this type have been used to determine
Sliding on microcracks and open grain boundaries has long been attenuation for rocks [Brennan, 1981; Berckhemer et al., 19821 and are
recognized as a possible source of observed seismic attenuation [Ide, similar conceptually to devices commonly used in polymer rheology
19371. Quantitative models which described attenuation due to sliding Ferry, 19801. Our apparatus differs from others in that it allows the
a ~ ~ e a r eindthe 1960s Walsh, 1966, Gordon and Davis, 19681. These application of uniaxial loads along the symmetry axis of the sample to
models accounted for the apparent frequencyindependence of attenuation in investigate the effect of normal stress. In a more conventional apparatus,
laboratory observations and also demonstrated that sliding on cracks is an specimens must be jacketed to exclude the pressure medium in order to
94 NONLINEAR ATENUATION EFFECTS
Electromagnetlc proximity detectors which determine the motion of arms extending from
Driver the torsion column both above and below the sample. Displacements
nearer to the fixed end depend only on the elastic deformation of the
Collets aluminum torsion bar and are proportional to torque. Displacements
measured above the sample are proportional to sample strain. By taking
the complex ratio of displacement time histories for the two sensor
positions along the torsion rod assembly, we can compute both the shear
modulus and shear attenuation as a function of frequency and amplitude.
Bas Base The shear attenuation is proportional to the phase lag between torque and
shear strain and the shear modulus is proportional to the ratio of the
maximum torque and shear strain. The apparent contribution of the
apparatus to background attenuation is determined by measuring the phase
I
Compression
Eddy Current
Proximity Detectors lag for an aluminum alloy sample with Q ~  105. ~
Features particular to the torsional geometry of the experiment should
Nut
be considered during interpretation of the data. Shear strain is nonuniform
for torsion, increasing linearly with radius. Strains reported here are the
mean for the entire sample. Nonlinear effects occur preferentially in the
TORSIONAL OSCILLATOR high strain region, which is nearest to the outside surface. The low
Fig. 3. Schematic diagram of the torsional oscillator. The oscillator frequency forced oscillation method avoids the ambiguous attenuation
operates at frequencies between 0.01 and 100 Hz, at strains between measurements resulting from asymmehical displacement peaks that occur
and 1 6 , and allows the application of uniaxial loads. in resonant bar experiments at high strains Winkler et al., 19791.
increase the confining pressure above ambient. Therefore, measurements Fatigue Damage of Granite
cannot be made at pressures lower than that required to "seat" the jacket to
the specimen, typically 10 MPa for metal jackets. We are able to Figure 4 shows the shear attenuation (cp = Q ~  ~at )1 Hz as a function
measure attenuation at much lower normal stresses because we can apply of strain amplitude for Sierra White granite before and after about 12 days
stress without confining the specimen. of continuous cycling at first 1 and hen 10 Hz at an average strain of 3 x
The oscillator operates at fre uencies between 0.01 and 100 Hz at
o%
No resolvable change in attenuation occurs while the sample is
strains ranging from to 1 . Samples are solid right cylinders (9 cycled at 1 Hz during the first two days. After cycling at 10 Hz for the
by 20 mm) which are twisted by supplying a sinusoidal voltage to the following 10 days, an increase of about 50% in attenuation is discemable
electromagnetic assembly which drives a permanent magnet attached to at a strain of 3 x The strain sensitivity y after the total lo7 cycles
the sample column. Displacements are measured by eddy current has increased by a factor of 3 to 5 as a result of fatigue damage. The
Sierra White granite 1 Hz
0.01 4
0 BEFORE CYCLING
AFTER CYCLING /
/
/
/
1 y = 240
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
. /* /
 0
/.
/ /
/

/
6 y = 70
/ 0
,
0
. /O
.< 0
Fig. 4. The nonlinear component of attenuation for Siena White granite at 1 Hz before and after lo7 cycles
at strains of 3 x l r 5 . The strain sensitivity y has increased by a factor of 3 to 5 as a result of fatigue
damage during cycling.
BONNER AND WANAMAKER 95
increase in y is not accompanied by large increases in the background cores of Sierra White granite, and then fractured them by bending to
lowstrain linear attenuation. There is no evidence in the data for inherent produce tensile surfaces. All fractures are approximately perpendicular to
frequency dependence of the attenuation, before or after cycling. We the core axis, and are "mated" for best fit before measuring modulus and
therefore attribute the increase in y to increased crack porosity resulting attenuation, although the faces shift under low loads. Several features of
from fatigue. the testing procedure are important for interpreting the experimental
All data was collected under room humidity conditions. Increases in results. First, the sample must be preloaded with some normal force
atmospheric moisture can lead to increases in observed phase angle at high (0.10.2 MPa) to limit displacements to within the range of the
audio frequencies [Tittmann et al., 19751 and we see evidence for this at proximity detectors. Second, the current in the driving coils never
low frequencies in our experiments. Attenuation after cycling plotted in reverses direction, but only varies in magnitude with time so that the
Figure 4 has been corrected for changes in humidity relative to the torque applied to the specimen oscillates about a positive value. The bias
conditions before cycling by matching attenuation values at low strains. on the torque causes a small average displacement from the starting
We have not investigated the effect of humidity or of average stress level "mated" position of the joint. Further experiments are necessary to
on the growth of fatigue cracks. If stress corrosion cracking is an determine the effect of joint displacement on sliding attenuation.
important mechanism for crack extension, humidity would have an Although the twist of the assembly is concentrated in the fractured region,
important effect. Measurements of fatigue at higher stresses near failure we assume that twist is distributed uniformly through the sample for
indicate that stress level and humidity can be important, depending on the calculations of the shear strain.
relative contributions of static and cyclic fatigue [Martin and Durham, Both the shear modulus and attenuation are dramatically affected by the
1975; Scholz and Koczynski, 19791. fracture when compared to the properties of the intact rock. The changes
Most laboratory determinationsof attenuation had been made with the are largest for low normal loads and high shear strains. Reductions in the
resonant bar method at high audio or ultrasonic frequencies. Comparable shear modulus are plotted in Figure 5. Modulus decreases of 40% occur
numbers of cycles can be applied in the first few minutes of a with the minimum normal stress, 0.2 MPa. For the highest normal
measurement, leading to systematic overestimates of the nonlinear stress (17 MPa), the shear modulus is comparable to that for the intact
component of attenuation for materials susceptible to fatigue damage. rock at the lowest shear strains (5 x
modulus by 5% for shear strains of 5 x 10 .2 while the joint lowers the
The Effect of Macroscopic Fractures The attenuation as a function of shear strain for a range of normal
loads is plotted in Figure 6. Damping by sliding on the fracture is highly
Frictional loss has been proposed as a plausible attenuation nonlinear and is a function of normal stress. For low values of normal
mechanism for rocks with microcracks [Walsh, 19661. Intuition suggests stress, y can approach values comparable to those for soils (see Figure 2).
that motion along macroscopic fracture surfaces is also highly dissipative. Loads of 17 MPa are sufficient to reduce y to values comparable to those
Recent Hopkinson bar results for highrate deformation of intact and we measured for intact Sierra White granite prior to fatigue cycling. Even
fractured Berea sandstone by Brown et al. [I9901 confirm this suggestion, at average strains of 5 x 1 w 7 we were not able to detect the transition to
although the attenuation of the porous matrix is also very high. In order the amplitudeindependentmechanism that usually dominates attenuation
to determine the attenuation due to a single fracture, we first prepared in rocks exposed to ambient atmosphere.
Fractured Sierra White granite 1 Hz
1 .oo < .
.0
,
 4 load=17 MPa
15
. ., *
.
k
\
\
\
\
  * 3.0 MPa
kL.
,
\\
d m
Q
, .
\ '
\ ' ....   
\
1
\
o 2.0 MPa
\
\
. _ .. \     /
a 1.0 MPa 
A
+ .
..
.... A 0.2 MPa
E (microstrains)
Fig. 5. Shear modulus for fractured Sierra White granite for a range of uniaxial stresses as a function of
shear strain measured at a frequency of 1 Hz.
Fractured Sierra White granite 1 Hz
0.080
load =0.5 MPa
(y = 820)
.
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/. 1.0 MPa 
/
/ /
/ / a 2.0 MPa
/ /
/ /
/ '  /
/
/
' /
/
" /
/
4
"
'/
/,
,
/
/
/
,
, . 3.0 MPa
/ /Y , /
65' ,. ,
 _ _  s 17MPa
(Y = 70)
& (microstrains)
Fig. 6. Nonlinear attenuation for fractured Sierra White granite for a range of uniaxial stresses as a function
of shear strain at a driving frequency of 1 Hz. Strain sensitivity y varies between 70 and 820 depending on
the uniaxial stress.
Discussion lo3. It may be that part of the discrepancy between the Minster and Day
model and field observations may be due to attenuation resulting from
Nonlinear attenuation can be as large as 0.1 (Q = 10) for strains in the block motion caused or triggered by the Cowboy event, although our data
range of 105 to in unconsolidated soils and fractured rock. Because suggest that this offers only a partial explanation. Strong effects of
of the large volume of nearsource material subjected to strains between plastic deformation, attributed to material failure or work hardening near
1(r3 and nonlinear effects should be considered in evaluating source the shot point, may also contribute to anomalies observed for explosions
properties at regional and teleseismic distances. The new laboratory data in salt [Wortman and McCartor, 1991; Glenn, 19901.
which we have presented for fractured rock, as well as data for soils from It should be possible in principle to design field experiments capable
the literature, can be used in forward modeling efforts to evaluate the of detecting nonlinear effects. Measurements of the decaying wavefield in
relative importanceof nonlinear material response. the region of strain from 1 e 2 to could detect rangedependent
Laboratory experiments must be evaluated with caution. Fatigue attenuation, which is direct evidence of nonlinearity. In practice, it is
damage that occurs during the measurement can increase the strain difficult to obtain unambiguous evidence by this method because
sensitivity of attenuation by a factor of 35 for Sierra White granite. It is heterogeneities and multipathing become important at these distances.
likely that the nonlinear component of attenuation may often have been Observations of effects predicted by the theory of nonlinear wave
overestimated by highfrequency measurements as reported in the propagation such as transfer of energy to lower frequencies, or harmonic
literature. We also note that the strain field is nonuniform for our generation, would be the most convincing evidence of nonlinear response.
experimental geometry. Peak attenuation can be underestimated by a Observations should be designed to detect upgoing rays, which would be
factor of 35 for torsion [Minster and Day, 19861. affected most by a nonlinear response because of the decreasing overburden
The overburden pressures for typical contained explosions at NTS pressure above the source. Waves leaving the source region during spall,
range from 2 to 15 MPa. For this pressure range, nonlinear response is when overburden stress is reduced by the reflected wave, might show
possible for explosioninduced strains in the range of 1 e 3 to strong effects. Because overall effects of nonlinearity on seismic wave
particularly along prexisting planes of weakness or joints. Our data for propagation accumulate with distance [Beresnev and Nikolaev, 19881, the
fractured granite suggest that pressures of 20 MPa are necessary to strongest effects may occur at some distance from the source.
suppress the nonlinear component of attenuation for strains down to
lo4. There is strong direct evidence that block motion occurs in the
vicinity of underground explosions [Bedsun et al., 19871. When relative Acknowledgments. The authors would like to thank Steve Taylor and
motion occurs between blocks, nonlinear attenuation can occur. In Marvin Denny for many helpful discussions. A careful review by an
attempts to model the effect of nonlinear attenuation on wave propagation anonymous reviewer improved the manuscript. Support from the Office
in salt, Minster and Day [I9861 found that high values of y, 3 x lo3, of Basic Energy Sciences of the U. S. Department of Energy is gratefully
were required to match the field data for the Cowboy event Laboratory acknowledged. This work was performed under the auspices of the U. S.
data for unfractured salt indicate much lowery. The highest values of y Department of Energy by Lawrence Livermore Laboratory under Contract
which we observe for fractured granite at the lowest normal load is only W7405Eng48.
BONNER AND WANAMAKER 97
Mission Research Corporation, P.O. Dr,awer 719, Santa Barbara, California 93102
Explosive S o u r c e d u c l e a r
101
1 10 100
Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 3. Salmon Q estimated from the 166 and 660 m sensor pair
[McCartor and Woman, 19901.
McCartor and Wortman [I9901 by a partial shear failure which
permanently reduces the shear modulus when the strain ex& a threshold
of about lo4. Rimer and Cherry [I9821 have shown that it is possible
to reproduce much of the Salmon data, including the precursor, using a
shear strength limit which is variable.
Gupta and McLaughlin [I9891 analyzed Salmon and Sterling data and
concluded that the effective Q at Salmon strains appears to be mildly
strain dependent and strongly frequency dependent. The mean apparent Q
in the 125 Hz range is about 7 and it appears to increase mildly with
increasing range. The result for attenuatign is reflected in modified Q
function called Q. This is defined as Q = Q + f dQ/df which is a
measure of the spectral slope change. The behavior found is shown in
Figure 5. Gupta and McLaughlin argue that the decrease in attenuation
with range is significant and this indicates that the behavior is nonlinear.
The attenuation decreases sharply with increasing frequency. Denny
[I9901 reports that the source spectra characteristics of Salmon and
Sterling indicate that the Salmon pulses are nonlinear to beyond 700 m.
Sterling. The nuclear explosion Sterling (0.38kt) event took place in
1966 in the Salmon cavity, which was approximately spherical with a
radius of 17 meters. This was the second half of the decoupling test and
the same instrumentation was used. The waveforms observed are
generally noisy and less cohesive than for Salmon. Sterling data
[Sisemore et al., 19691 are at lower strains than Salmon due both to lower
yield and decoupling. Sterling peak velocities indicate a strain range of
3x to 7 x Some analysis of these data by Springer et al.
[I9681 suggested that there was significant nearfield attenuation. A more
recent analysis by Glenn et al. [I9871 corrects some errors in the previous
work and indicates that the observed Sterling nearfield pulses are in good
agreement with elastic theory. Gupta and McLaughlin [I9891 used a
spectral ratio method to determine the attenuation over sensor pairs. They
find that the average Q is approximately 200 to 400 and shows no evident
dependence on frequency or range. These last two papers suggest that the
Sterling strains have reached a transition to a linear low attenuation at I
small strains, near 1w5. Langston [I9831 has noted that SV waves 100
generated by Sterling, apparently due to induced normal faulting rather Frequency (Hz)
than cavity asymmetry, showed attenuation with range which was Fig. 4. Salmon Q's estimated from adjacent sensor pairs between 166 and
significantly different from l/r. He finds that Q of 35 is indicated at 660 m [McCartor and Woman, 19901.
strains of about lop5 and there is a mild tendency or Q to increase with
[ !
range, and so with decreasing strain. If it is assume that there is no
contribution to attenuaticw from compression, the corresponding Pwave refraction in a polyhalite layer below the shot, the normal moderate speed
Q will be approximately 70, although there is no direct evidence to tie the signal then appears followed by a plastic wave with a speed which
two modes together for this particular case. diminishes with decreasing strain. Some of the acceleration records are
Gnome. The Gnome explosion (3 kt) took place in the Salado salt clipped so it is difficult to use the details of the waveform to characterize
layer at a depth of 360 meters [Weart, 19621. Above the salt there were the attenuation. Weart indicates that the peak velocity falls off like range
strata to a depth of about 200 meters consisting of diverse lithology. to the 3.56 power out to 100 meters and then like the power 1.36 out
Analysis of the data from eight sensors sites located horizontally from the to the last sensor at 477 meters. It is suggested that the elastic 7mne has
shot point at ranges of 62 to 477 meters indicates that there are three been reached at this extreme range but no evidence beyond the amplitude
distinct arrival times. The high speed initial signal appears to be from variation with range is given.
102 REVIEW OF ATTENUATION IN SALT
4
pulses in dome salt remain inelastic though not necessarily nonlinear)
out to scaled ranges of 11.3 km/ktl/ . The exponent of peak velocity
power law decay with range is 1.46 f .05 which is somewhat slower
than that seen in the Cowboy data (which were for higher strains). An
analysis by Trulio (private communication) suggests that the scaled
Fig. 5. Salmon Q estimates with range [Gupta and McLaughlin, 19891. Cowboy Trails data show a decreased attenuation with range and frequency
Vertical bars show a standard deviation. Horizontal bars indicate the which is not inconsistent with scaled Salmon and Co;.boy results. The
separation of the sensors used for that estimate. scatter of the data is fairly large so it is difficult to draw stronger
conclusions.
Explosive S o u r c e M h e m i c a l Livermore 1982 Smallscale Experiments. The experiments of Larson
119821 for small chemical explosions, yields of 0.63 to 291 kJ, in pressed
Cowboy. The Cowboy series of chemical explosions took place in a salt have provided pulses over scaled ranges from approximately 10 to
salt dome in Louisiana in 1 9 5 9 4 0 [Murphey, 19611. The explosions had 250 ~ n / k t l / ~The
. dominant range of frequencies covered was from about
a range of yields from 10 to 2000 pounds of TNT,some of which were 104 to lo5 Hz and the ratio of peak particle velocities to compressional
carried out in cavities for decoupling tests. Each shot was sampled by sound speed (which is comparable with the strain) went from about 10I
from two to seven particle velocity sensors. The scaled ranges for the to less than 1 v 3 . Data from thrce sensors at increasing ranges for a
coupled or tamped experiments wcre from about 200 to 3000 m/kt1l3 and single shot, taken in pairs, indicate increasing values of from 12 to 25
the corresponding peak strains were from a few times 1 e to about 1 v 5 . with increasing range for ranges from 30 to 70 m/kt 1 2. This would
The dominant frequencies were 10 to 100 hertz. Murphey observed that suggest that the response was nonlinear. Another experiment consisting
the peak velocity with scaled range (ran e ~ ~ i e l d ldata
/ ~ ) all lie near a of a simultaneous pairs of shots, was used as a direct superposition
smooth curve and they fall off like r1.6f, as shown in Figure 6. This experiment. It was found that the resulting response was consistent with
indicates first that the data scale and second that the material behavior is that determined by linear addition of the two pulses at a range of
not elastic.
Minster and Day [1986] examined the Cowboy tamped data and
investigated the attenuation required to reproduce the observed variation of
peak velocity and displacement with scaled range. They conclude that an
effective Q which is strain dependent with the frequencyindependent form
can satisfactorily reproduce the both peak velocity and displacement. Here
Qo = 100 is the small strain Q, E is the peak strain and y = 3 x 103 is
an empirical constant. This form was chosen to be consistent with somc
theoretical nonlinear mechanisms at high strains while reducing to modest
anelastic attenuation at small strains. The resulting attenuation is
consistent with scaling since it dcpends only on strain which scales. Note
that the effective Q at the largest strains from Cowboy is then less than
10.
Trulio [private communication] has examined somc scalcd Cowboy
data and concluded that the attenuation is frequency dependent, decrcasing
with increasing frequency. Q values of 12.5 and 32 are found at Salmon
equivalent frequencies of loll2 and 10 Hz, found by scaling thc Cowboy
data. The frequency dependence is roughly Q = l/f. He observes that
this dependence is inconsistent with linearity and scaling indicating that
Cowboy attenuation is nonlinear.
Wortman and McCartor [I9891 have used tamped Cowboy records to
attempt to determine the character of the attenuation. Thcy chose record Fig. 6. Cowboy peak particle velocity data versus scaled range [Murphey,
pairs from the same shot and applied the spectral ratio method to 19611.
WORTMAN AND MCCARTOR 103
' 8 "
Cheniical explos~ve
LX04 and PETN
Chemical explosive
low density TNT
o Nuclear explosive
1
Scaled Range (rn/ktit3)
Fig. 8. Salt peak particle velocity data versus scaled range [Larson,
19821.
$ 70

0 5
z torsion
E3  0
SO  LOAD
LOAD
n

1 MPa
. I MPo
P WAE
.
.I  
20  LOAD  1. MPo s WAE
m
10  LOAD  L
. 1 MPo
a
0
7 8 5 4 3
LOG STRAIN AMPLITUDE
I
period of adjustment of hours suggesting that crack healing strengthens
the samples under pressure. An illustration of the strain dependence is
shown in Figure 10.
Tittmann points out that the attenuation in these multicycle
experiments after the hundreds of cycles required, especially for high
strains, may reflect changes or damage in the material resulting from
s t r a i n amplitude
previous cycles. Measurements made then may then not correspond to
behavior for a single pulse. Tittmann gives no data on this subject but it Fig. 11. Variation of attenuation with strain for cycling in Sierra white
has been investigated experimentally by Bonner et al. [I9891 although not granite [Bonner et a]., 19891.
with salt. The difference in attenuation between uncycled granite and
samples with lo7 cycles, attributed to fatigue damage, is shown in It is perhaps not so remarkable that this scaling should hold near the
Figure 11. This suggests the possibility that Tittmann's experimental explosions since the initial pulse character is not determined by
strain dependence may actually be the result of damage from cycling. In attenuation. Rather the scale of the explosively generated cavity is fixed
any case, Tittmann's attenuation for salt is significantly less than that by the cube root of ratio of the density to the yield. Given the
suggested by the other experimentsdescribed in this article. propagation velocity, this spatial scale will determine a temporal scale,
both varying as the cube root of the yield.
Summary Of Salt Attenuation The more interesting result is that the pulses continue to scale as they
propagate out into the medium at strain levels, less than 1w3, for which
While there is a substantial body of data for attenuation of signals in there are no gross changes in the medium. If the attenuation suffered is
salt, the results are rather diverse. It appears that attenuation is a function intrinsic to the medium, or linear, the associated Q must be independent
of many factors including strain, frequency, humidity, number of cycles, of frequency in order for the results to obey cube root scaling. This is
source of salt samples and character of experiment. It is difficult, if not clear from the form shown in (1) for the attenuation operator. If scaling
impossible, to combine the various experimental results into a cohesive holds, the expression orIcQ must scale. The combination o r has units
pattern, let alone a constitutive relation. However, there is some degree of velocity which scales while c is constant. Therefore Q must scale but
of consistency which we shall now attempt to define. it can only a function of frequency since the medium is assumed uniform
It is most striking that the data from explosive sources roughly satisfy and linear and the only function of frequency which scales is a constant.
simple cube root scaling for peak velocities, if not for all details of the In general, for either linear or nonlinear effects, the fact that the
waveforms. This means that if the lengths and times are all scaled by the experimental results cube root scale indicates that the medium must have
cube root of the yield then, to a remarkable degree, all tamped explosive no inherent scales of length or time (in the range of scales of the
source experiments give approximately the same pulses at any scaled experiments)so any constitutive relation must be rate independent.
range. Salmon, Cowboy and smallscale laboratory velocity pulses all scale
WORTMAN AND MCCARTOR 105
well but they also all indicate that the effective Q extracted is strongly
frequency dependent. To illustrate this clearly, consider Figure 12 which
shows unscaled estimates of Q as a function of frequency for pairs of
records from Salmon and Cowboy at approximately the same peak strain.
Note that the two functions of frequency are quite distinct but they are
quite similar when scaled relative to their respective comer frequencies.
The comer frequency, of course, scales with the cube root of the yield \ COWBOY
which says that the scaled effective Q's are nearly the same. This has
been observed both by Trulio (private communication) and by Wortman
and McCartor [1989]. This clearly says that the attenuation is not just a
function of the medium but it must depend on amplitude or shape of the
pulse. In other words, the attenuation must be nonlinear, at strains above
Since the behavior is nonlinear, there is no benefit in using a Q
description. In fact, the use of Q often serves to confuse the fundamental
problem of finding a physically meaningful constitutive relation at
moderate strains. I I # I 1 I I I l l I I I l l
In spite of the fact that moderate strain attenuation is almost certainly 10 1W 1WO
FREQUENCY (Hz)
nonlinear, it is possible to use effective Q estimates to combine data by
taking the effective Q at the dominant frequency. This effective Q gives a Fig. 12. Unscaled Salmon and Cowboy Q estimates as a function of
measure of the magnitude of attenuation. It is much more difficult to frequency [Wortman and McCartor, 19891.
combine attenuation information from explosive pulses and multicycle
experiments since the effective Q will generally be a function of the
details of the experiment. If a proper constitutive relation were known, a
comparison could be made. However, no such relation is known.
Ignoring this substantial problem, the data from all the experiments
discussed in the text of this paper can be expressed as effective Q and
0
compared as a function of peak strain. Figure 13 gives all these data on a
/
I
show lower attenuation than other experiments) have Q's of several _._
___
, "   
A. 
hundred but show an increase as strains auuroach 1 c 5 . The New England ___.._ * * _
RESONANT B e  ;::"
 .
Research ultrasonic pulse experiments are the exception as they give a Q _
____
_ _..
 .
_     
< ,
(which also is consistent with cube root scaling), strongly suggest that
shear failure plays a strong role in the nonlinear behavior of salt at
moderate strains. While these models hint at the character which is
required for a robust constitutive relation for salt at moderate strains, the
issue is clearly not resolved.
Murphy, J. R., A review of available freefield seismic data from J. Ceophys. Res., 73, 5995, 1968.
underground nuclear explosions in salt and granite, Computer Sciences Tittmann, B. R., Nonlinear wave propagation study, Rockwell
Corp., Falls Church, VA, CSCTR780003, 1978. International Science Center, Thousand Oaks, CA, SC5361.3SAR.
Perret, W. R., Freefield particle motion from a nuclear explosion in salt. 1983.
Part I.Project Dribble, Salmon Event, Sandia Laboratory, Albuquerque, Trulio, J., Simple scaling and nuclear monitoring, Applied Theory, Inc.,
NM, W  3 0 1 2 , 1967. Los Angeles, CA, ATR78451, 1978.
Rimer, N. and J. T. Cherry, Ground motion predictions for the Grand Weart, W. D., Particle motion near a nuclear detonation in halite, Bull.
Saline experiment, SCubed Corp., La Jolla, CA, USCTR8325, Seis. Soc. Am., 54, 981, 1962.
1982. Workman, J. W. and J. G. Tmlio, Cowboy Trails: Analysis of gauge
Rogers, L. A., Freefield motion near a nuclear explosion in salt: Project records for peak velocity and wavespeed, Physics Applications, Inc.,
Salmon, J. Geophys. Res., 71, 3415, 1966. Los Angeles, CA, PAIFR01192, 1985.
Sisemore, C. J., L. A. Rogers, and W. R. Perret, Project Sterling: Wortman, W. R. and G. D. McCartor, Nonlinear seismic attenuation
Subsurface phenomenology measurements near a decoupled nuclear from Cowboy and other explosive sources, Seismic Coupling of
event, J. Geophys. Res., 74,6623, 1969. Nuclear Explosions, D. B. Larson, ed., Defense Advanced Research
Springer, D., M. Denny, J. Healy, and W. Mickey, The Sterling Projects Agency, Arlington, VA, UCRL21086, Vol. 2, 1989.
experiment: Decoupling of seismic waves by a shotgenerated cavity,
TKE TELESEISMIC MANIFESTATION OF pP: PROBLEMS AND PARADOXES
Thorne Lay
Institute of Tectonics and C. F. Richter Seismological Laboratory, University of California, Santa Cruz, California 95064
Abstract. Energy radiated upward from underground nuclear explosions nuclear explosion can produce rcmarkablc accelerations and ground
has a coniplex interaction with thc free surface that strongly influences the velocities at the free surracc. For example, the <5Mt explosion
seismic wavefields rccorded at teleseismic and regional distances. This CANNIKIN produced surfacc vcrtical accelerations varying from 17 to
interaction, differing from that for earthquakes primarily due to the much 3.2 g at horizontal ranges of 0.3 to 3.4 km from the shotpoint, and
higher strains and strain rates involved, is essential to understand for both corresponding peak ground velocitics of from 946 to 233 cm/s [Burdick et
explosion yield estimation and for discriminating earthquakes from al., 1984bl. The initial compressional pulse of acceleration in these
explosions. Reflection of explosion P wave energy from the free surface, closein recordings (Figure la) is followed by a ballistic interval
which produces the pP phase, involves frequencydependent. nonlincar characterized by 1 g accclcration (corresponding to the surface rock
processes that are intimately linked to surface spallation. Attempts to breaking and flying into thc air). This terminates with highfrequency
characterize the teleseismic DP arrival using a variety of time series pulses as the airborne material impacts (i.e. slapdown). This complex
analysis procedures have yielded seemingly inconsistent results, which can surface interaction involves a lenticular zone of spallation, in which rock
be attributed lo a combination of limited bandwidth, neglected
 frequency
  failure occurs at depth whcn the downgoing tensional stress wave
dependence, and unresolved tradeoffs with source time function, receiver resulting from rcflection at the free surface @P) exceeds the sum of the
and attenuation effects. Recovery of broadband ground displaccmcnt, now upward compressional stress, the lithostatic stress, and the tensile strength
viable with modern inslrumcntation, is resulting in more robust of the rock. Spallation is commonly obscrved [Springer, 19741, and may
characterizations of the pP and spallation arrivals; however, the intrinsic involve several discrete surfaces of parting at depth Eisler et al., 19661.
tradeoffs with source parameters and attenuation remain. Numerical The initial vertical peak ground velocitics within the spall zone can
procedures to account for the nonlinear interactions, surhce topographic actually be well explained by elastic theory [Burdick et al., 19851, which
effects, and shallow crusval heterogeneity are enabling a more complctc implies the existence of significant rock strength under compression;
modeling of the free surface interaction. however, the subsequent tensional spallation phenomena clearly involve
inelastic and nonlinear processes. At distances slightly beyond the spall
Introduction zone, the surface vertical velocity recordings have much smaller peak
velocities, and the entire P waveform can be well modeled using elastic
Seismic waves from undcrground nuclear explosions provide a reliable wave propagation theory (Figure lb). In these signals the major arrivals
means for identifying and cstimating the yield of such tests, which is are the P wave turning below the source and the pP reflection from the
critical for nuclca test treaty monitoring. The precise knowledge of free surface (the downward spike in the synthetic and obscrved wave~orms
explosion timing and location has also allowed explosion seismic waves in Figure lb). For these rccords the pP rcflection point is several
to play a major role in imaging the dccp interior structure of Earth. The kilometers horizontally from the shotpoint, and the distributed spall
characteristics of undcrground tests that are most distinctive relative to source does not appear to produce a coherent highfrequency arrival, which
natural earthquakes are thc shallow burial depths of explosions and the allows the successful elastic modeling. At regional distances, there is
(ideally) spherical symmetry of the initial radiation from the source. The evidence for corresponding pPn arrivals [Burdick et al., 19891, and it does
proximity to the surface and symmetry of radiation lead to strong appear that spall contributes to Pn and Lg phases [Taylor and Randall,
intcrfwence between the downgoing P wave energy and the compressional 19891. At teleseismic distances, the pP arrival will more directly sample
wave reflected off of the surface (pP), which arrivcs within a second after the zone just above the shotpoint, where the downgoing pP will
the direct P. The free surface reflection reverses thc scnsc of motion of pP encounter the disturbed medium around the explosion cavity, and where
relative to P, producing deslructive inlcrfcrcncc between these signals for spallation is most pronounced and can potentially constructively interfere
frequencies less than about 0.5 Hz and modulation of the higher frequency to give coherent teleseismic arrivals.
spe.ctrum, which in turn provide inany of the distinguishing characteristics The upgoing P energy from a nuclear explosion is partitioned into pP,
of explosion seismic signals. However, this interference is complicated pS, spallatiort and slapdown phases, as well as surface wave excitation and
by nonlinear surface effects on the pP reflection. It has thus been a long anelastic losses. The upgoing radiation itself may deviate from an
standing problem to fully characterize the pP reflection and its isotropic wavefront if there is significant prestress in the vicinity of the
complexity. source, or if an earthquake is triggered by the explosioneffects which are
Understanding the pP surface reflection from nuclear explosions requires considered elsewhere in this monograph. Understanding the pP phase is
consideralion of seismic wave interaction with the free surface above the required for constraining the source depth, for appraising any bias on the
source. The upgoing compressional wave produced by an underground body wave magnitude resulting from constructive or destructive
interference, and for assessing how upgoing energy is partitioned in the
Explosion Source Phenomenology seismic wavefield, which may reveal source region properties [e.g. Gupta
Geophysical Monograph 65 and Blandford, 19871. Systematic differences in pP delay times between
Copyright 1991 American Geophysical Union source regions may also provide a means for characterizing the source
110 TELESEISMIC MANIFESTATION OF pP
 OTRONO UOTIONS
laI CANNIKIN SURFACE
I
++
SYN. 06s.
2.5 a e c
I
Fig. 1. (a) Surface vertical accelerations and velocity recordings from the spall zone for CANNIKIN. (b) Surface vertical velocity
synthetics and observations for CANNIKIN from distances beyond the spall zone. From Burdick et al., 1984bl.
medium, which is critical for yield estimation. The question that thus domain spike trains for teleseismic distances, to the extent that crustal
arises is what is the telcseismic manifestation of pP? This article will structure can be approximated by a set of horizontal layers. Of course,
review the seismological investigations of teleseismic pP for underground some distortion due to frequency dependent reflection coefficients
explosions to synthesize our understanding of this complex free surface accompanying nonlinear effects or complex scattering structures may
interaction. actually be required. It is critical to recognize the complete tradeoff that
Throughout the following discussion of teleseismic investigations of exists between the multiplicative filters. Any attempt to estimate S(w) is
the pP phase, it is useful to keep in mind the linear filter representation of subject to limitations in our knowledge of E(w), R(o) and Q(w). All
a teleseismic signal spectrum: existing methodologies for estimating pP behavior, whether frequency
domain or time domain, involve assumptions about one or more of these
parameters, and much of the inconsistency in published pP characteristics
reflects differing assumptions underlying, and sometimes obscured by, the
where w is angular frcqucncy, U(w) is the far field P wave displacement processing.
spectrum, E(w) is the farfield explosion source spectrum (generally
assumed to not vary with takeoff angle from the source, although LongPeriod Constraintson pP Characteristics
departure from spherically symmetric radiation has sometimes been
suggested), I(w) is the instrument response, Q(w) is the attenuation There have been twenty years of extensive research on teleseismic P
operator, and G(w) is the total Earth propagation response. The Earth waves from underground explosions directed at quantifying the pP anival,
response for teleseismic signaIs is often approximated by: but unlike the situation for earthquakes, relatively little progress has been
made by analyzing longperiod body waves. Usually, when considering
longperiod body waves, simple assumptions about propagation effects are
adequate to determine gross properties of the source. Ideally, a purely
where S(w) is the source region transfer function, including the direct P isotropic explosion should produce a teleseismic P wave comprised of
arrival, pP, crustal reverberations near the source, and any secondary only a direct compressional P phase, and a slightly delayed dilatational
arrivals associated with spall; R(o) is the receiver region transfer function pP phase. Given the shallow burial depths of all explosions, the time
including crustal reverberations beneath the receiver; and ro is a geometric between pP and direct P, TO,should be only 1 s or less, and at teleseismic
spreading term. The transfer functions are expected to correspond to time distances the elastic pP surface reflection coefficient, a,should be close to
1.0. In this ideal case, we can assume S(t) = 6(t) + a 6(t  zo). The However, peaking of thc tcleseismic explosion P wave spectra may also
destructive interference of thcse two arrivals should greatly reduce the be attributed to overshoot of the source time function, which requires the
amplitude and increase the dominant frcqucncy contcnt of the P waves pressure on the boundary of the elastic zone surrounding the explosion
recorded on longperiod instruments (1015 s pendulum periods) relative cavity to be more impulsive than steplike [Molnar, 1971; Wyss et al.,
to earthquake signals, which tend to have deeper sources and strong 1971; Miillcr, 19731. Overshoot of the source function has been
additional sP arrivals. suggested in many studies of ncarfield and even teleseismic data, and
P arrivals on longperiod WWSSN instruments for large explosions cannot be dismissed as a possibility. This remains a fundamental tradeoff
(Figure 2) are in fact very distinctive from P waves from earthquakes with between S(w) and E(o). Some progress has been made by combining
comparable mb (mea~urcdncar 1 s period). The explosion arrivals are low body wave and surface wavc constraints on the broadband source spectral
amplitude, resemble diffcrcntiatcd instrument responses, and are depleted content, but difficulties rcmain in independently determining overshoot of
in lowfrequency contcnt rclative to earthquake signals, which serves as the source function [Lay ct al., 1984bl. It is likely that both overshoot
the basis for some discrimination procedures for large events [Molnar, and pP interference contribute to the depletion of longperiod energy in
1971; Wyss et a]., 1971; Hascgawa, 1972; Helmberger and Harkrider, teleseismic P waves. Rcgardless of the precise mechanisms for the drop
1972; Shumway and Blandford, 1978; Burdick and Helmberger, 1979; off in longperiod spectral levels, the net result is that most explosion P
Burdick et al, 1984al. In the frequency domain this is manifested as a wave observations are made using highfrequency instrumentation. Thus,
peaking of the explosion P wave spectra at periods near 23 s for megaton the rest of this review will concentrate on pP results obtained using short
size shots, with a rapid dccrcase in spcctral levels at longer periods. period and broadband seismograms.
Peaking of the explosion spccua is readily explained by interference
with a strong pP arrival, if we assume that the source time function (the
time history of pressure applied on the source elastic radius) for long HighFrcqucncy pP Analysis Procedures
period radiation is essentially a stepfunction. If the pP anival has an
elastic reflection, the lelcscismic P spectrum will be modulated by a factor This review of teleseismic shortperiod P wave analyses is organized to
of (1 + a2 + 2a c o ~ o z ~ ) 'where
/ ~ , o is angular frequency. For a = 1, roughly parallel the history of technique development and application.
and zo = 1.0 s this modulation factor will have a maximum value at a We will first consider proccdurcs that utilize only the amplitude or power
period of about 2 s. For a step source time function, the far field spectra, then timedomain waveform and differential waveform modeling
spectrum (given by the dcrivative of the source time function convolved procedures, and finally the variety of deconvolution techniques which are
with the modulation term) is directly proportional to this modulating presently giving the most uscful results. At their core, all methodologies
factor, and hence, proportional to w at low frequencies. The spectrum is exploit the spectral intcrfcrcnce produced by multiple arrivals in the
thus expected to drop off at long periods from the peak near 2 s, as is signal, but they vary widcly with respect to assumptions about the source
observed. radiation, attenuation, and Earth transfer functions.
Explosions
Fault less Rpr Car
SHA OGO
COL
Greeley
OXF
Fig. 2. Comparison of WWSSN longperiod P recordings for three NTS events: GREELEY, BOXCAR, and
FAULTLESS, and three earthquakes: Borrego Mountain, California (April 9, 1968). Peru (April 13, 1963). and
Seattle (April 29, 1965), all having mb = 6.26.5. Arrows indicate minute marks. Note the highfrequency
character of the P arrivals for the explosions relative to the earthquakes. [From Molnar, 19711.
112 TELESEISMIC MANIFESTATION OF pP
Power Spectrum Techniques amplitude spectrum requires a parameterization of the source time function
and attenuation filter. These spectra were fit with pP arrival values of a
The underlying assumption for most amplitude or power spectrum ranging from 0.4 to 4 . 7 1 and z values from 1.12 to 1.18 s, and
procedures is that the pP and any other secondary arrivals are delayed, slapdown arrival values of a ranging from 0.67 to 0.85 with delays of
undistorted echos of the direct P arrival with relative arrival times and 1.92 to 1.94 s. Time domain comparisons based on the spectral fitting
amplitudes to be determined. For the two arrival approximation described are shown on the right, indicating that omission of the phase spectra in
in the previous section, the displacement power spectrum will have the the modeling has not led to significant loss of timing information. Note
modulation factor [ l + a2+ 2 a cos(a.ro)], which for negative values of that the primary spectral scallop is well matched, but even the three
a (as expected for pP) predicts that spectral nulls will occur at frequencies source model provides a marginal fit to the higher frequency spectra.
of fn = n/.ro, n = 0,1,2,3, ..., while positive values of a (as might be This, in part, stems from the simplified version of S(t) used, in which
associated with slapdown) predict spectral nulls at frequencies fn = crustal reverberations near the source are ignored, as well as from ignoring
[(2n + 1)/2]/.r0. Identification of spectral nulls and their frequency receiver complexity.
spacing is thus an obvious procedure by which to attempt to characterize An extension of the direct power spectral modeling technique that
the pP arrival. reduces the potential error from incorrect attenuation assumptions and
For some events, such as CANNIKIN (Figure 3) the strong spectral unknown receiver complexity, involves ratioing the spectra from two
scalloping can be well matched by a three arrival spike train, where the nearby events recorded at a common station (Figure 4). and stacking the
third spike has the same polarity as direct P and can be attributed to a ratios from various stations to enhance the signal to noise ratio [King et
slapdown arrival [Bakun and Johnson, 19731. This modeling of the al., 19721. Assuming perfect cancellation of the attenuation, instrument,
and receiver effects, the stacked ratios for events i and j give the
following:
The ratios can then be modclcd assuming spike trains for the two events
simultaneously, with diffcrences in the source functions explicitly being
inverted for as well. The procedure clearly works best if the source
functions and depths are very different, otherwise the information about
each parameter is lost in the ratioing procedure. Any common attributes
of the source such as overshoot tend to be lost as well.
Numerous applications of these power spectrum techniques have been
performed [e.g. Cohen, 1970, 1975; King et al., 1972, 1974; Kulhanck,
FREQUENCY (Hz)
Fig. 3. Observed spectral modulus (solid line) and leastsquares fit of a Fig. 4. Average spectral ratio of MILROW/LONGSHOT using stations
three spike model (dashed line) for CANNIKIN are shown on the left. KNUT, RKON, LCNM, and HNME. The dashed lines indicate the
The corresponding time domain traces are shown on the right. [From standard deviation of the average. The time window was 5 s. [From King
Bakun and Johnson, 19731. et al., 19721.
LAY 113
1971; Bakun and Johnson, 1973; Flinn et al, 1973; Shumway and problems arising from tradeoffs between the assumed attenuation and
Blandford, 19781, with it being quickly recognized that the implied pP source models, but does help to statistically remove the station influence.
delay times and amplitudcs were inconsistent with the known overburden Assuming that the station terms sum to zero projects any common effects
velocities and elastic free surface reflection coefficients. Systematically, onto the source model, so a large number of observations must be used in
the pP delay time is longcr than expected and the amplitude is smaller. this technique. If pP does not have the same time dependence as P, or if
The presence of a clear third arrival for the two large Amchitka explosions other phases arrive within the time interval encompassed by P and pP,
(MILROW and CANNIKIN) led to the idea that the missing pP energy both the timing and amplitude estimates for pP can be biased, as is true of
was being converted into the even more delayed "slapdown" arrival. all modeling procedures. If there is significant variation in the pP timing
The most recent amplitude spectrum procedure is that of Murphy et al. between stations the spectral nulls in the network averaged spectra could
[I9891 and Murphy [1989], which attempts to achieve a separation of be smeared out, leading to an underestimate of true pP amplitude, and
E(w) and R(w) by using a suite of events recorded by a suite of stations. further smoothing of the nulls results from using multiple narrow band
A linear regression model is used to simultaneously determine average filters to estimate the spectra.
station correction factors and stationcorrected,network averaged P wave Given the tendency for spectral modeling procedures to result in
spectra, under the constraint that the station correction factors at each anomalously low amplitude pP phases which are delayed beyond the
frequency sum to zero. The procedure is to compute the spectral elastic predictions, one must qucstion the model assumptions used in the
amplitude in a sequence of frequency bands, o k , by using narrowband various spectral scalloping proccdures. While it is quite reasonable to
filters for station j from event i. Then the regression models minimizes anticipate that some pP energy has bcen lost to the spallation process, and
residual error, eij(wk), in a least squares sense for the instrument corrected the downgoing pP reflection will encounter a very disrupted medium,
spectra: which may have lower average P velocities than the initial overburden, it
is certainly not clear that the resultant pP waveform will any longer
resemble a simple echo of the direct P arrival. Remember that this is a
fundamental assumption in all of the spectral fitting procedures. While
where the station correction factors, R j ( ~ k ) describe
, the systematic, we will return repeatedly to this question, it is instructive to consider
frequencydependentdepartures at station j from the average propagation Figure 6. Twodimensional finite difference calculations that attempt to
effects (such as average Q(wk)) of the network. Once the receiver effects account for nonlinear pP reflcction processes consistently predict a
are separated, corrections for attenuation and modulation effects associated frequency dependent pP reflection coefficient that is significantly smaller
with Si(ok) are removed to obtain Ei(mk). Examples of this procedure than the elastic value [Bache 19821. Even small departures from elastic
for NTS events are shown in Figure 5, and it is again apparent that low theory will obscure spectral nulls that the techniques described above are
pP amplitudes (A) are obtained, along with large pP delay times relative designed to find. The resulting time domain waveforms for the two
to the expected values of 0.60.9 s. This procedure does not eliminate the calculations in Figure 6 are virtually identical, which suggests the
difficulties to be encountered in the next section where waveform
modeling procedures are dcscribcd.
CHESHIRE
C 3.5 I Y / S L C
".
A . 0.1.
q.00 "
ESTUARY
c...Km/ = /"J
.
I 0.31
TO. t.W S I C
1 1 10
Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 6. Farfield displacement spectra for a onedimensional finite
difference model with elastic pP reflection processes, and a two
Fig. 5. Comparison of normalized observed (solid) and theoretical (dotted) dimensional (axisymmetric) model with nonlinear pP reflection process.
networkaveraged P wave spectra for Pahute Mesa explosions. The The source was a 20 kt explosion at a depth of 1000 m in a geology like
spectra on the left are corrected for pP and attenuation, while those on the that at the PILEDRIVER site. Note that the scalloping of the spectra is
right show the fitting of optimum pP amplitude (A) and relative delay very different, with the elastic pP arrival producing strong spectral nulls,
time ( T ~ )The
. theoretical source spectra involve a yield and source depth while the nonlinear model does not. The synthetic teleseismic P wave
scaled model which uses the indicates source velocity, c. [From Murphy, (including a KS36000 instrument response) is virtually identical for the
19891. two sources, and is shown at the right. [Bache, 19821.
114 TELESEISMIC MANIFESTATION OF pP
.
'G
.
JG 'G
?:F33 .I+
'

0 5
"I.$
I0 sec
Fig. 9. Comparison of observed short and longperiod P waves for
CANNIKIN with synthetics for a range of attenuation parameters (t*).
The synthetics were generated using a nearfield source model, a = .9,
and TO = 1.15 s. From Burdick et a]., 1984al.
SP
WWSSN
LRSM
7 F 
fl
+
q/12
a) Pahute Mesa c) N. Novaya Zemlya
10/21/67
5.65
Id\ ALMENDRO
5.96 .
0.1 I 10
sec I b Frequency (Hz.)
Fig. 8. Stacked envelopes of WWSSN shortperiod recordings for Fig. 10. Synthetic seismograms and amplitude spectra for two models for
explosions in several different test sites. The complexity of the main event MILROW, which illustrate the tradeoffs between parameters. The
peak for Pahute Mesa events indicates the delayed pP and strong spa11 synthetics on the left and the solid line spectra are for an wP2 source
arrivals for this test site relative to the Novaya Zemlya sites. Detailed model, with t* = 0.7 s, and a pP reflection coefficient modified from the
consideration of the individual seismograms can ideally quantify the elastic model by a factor F = 0.5 + 0.5 exp [(w/21r)~].The synthetics
associated pP parameters, which then reflect the emplacement medium. on the right, and the dashed spectra are for an w3 source model, with
[Lay and Welc, 19871. t* = 1.0 s, and an elastic pP reflection coefficient. [From Cornier, 19821.
time domain waveforms directly, exploiting the phase information to Carpenter, 1966, Hasegawa and Whitham, 1969; Hasegawa, 1971; Bache
emphasize the early time window of the signal containing the pP arrival. et al., 1975; Bache et al, 1979; Burdick and Helmberger, 1979; Lundquist
The synthetics in Figure 7 suggest the potential time domain resolution et al., 1980; Helmberger and Hadley, 1981; Burdick et al, 1984a;
of pP parameters that could be obtained by comparison with observations, Mellman et al., 19851.
while Figure 8 demonstrates that time domain information does clearly These waveform modeling studies differ primarily in the degree to
contain gross information about different test site pP properties. which they utilize indcpcndcnt constraints on one or more of the various
Complete waveform modeling comes with the cost of having to specify filters required to synthesize the time domain waveform. For example,
many parameters including the transfer functions at the source and Hasegawa [I9711 and Mcllman ct al. [I9851 utilize dctailed crusd transfer
receiver, the source model, and the attenuation model, as well as requiring functions to account for R(w), while Hclmbcrger and Hadley [I9811 and
a measure of waveform fit that is sensitive to the pP parameters 1e.g. Burdick et al. [1984a] constrain the source spectrum, E(o), by modeling
nearfield records, and constrain Q(o) by matching absolute amplitudes of
teleseismic signals. Figure 9 shows synthetic and observed waveforms
ADEOBSERVED SOURCE INTERCORRELATION for event CANNIKIN from Burdick et al. [1984a], where the pP
parameters were selected by matching the general shape of the P
waveforms for a large set of stations, allowing for variation in attenuation
between stations. No explicit accounting for receiver effects was involved
in this analysis since a global sct of stations was utilized. The pP delay
times inferred from this modeling are very compatible with spectral
analysis results; howevcr, the pP amplitudes are closer to the elastic
prediction for this time domain modeling. It is not clear whether this
inconsistency is a result of inadequate parameterization of the time domain
modeling or biases in the spcctral carpentry procedures.
Time domain modeling of the entire waveform is, of course, also
subject to many tradeoffs in the pP parameterization. Figure 10 shows a
calculation by Cormier [1982], in which virtually identical waveforms are

0
sec
5 10
produced by trading off frequency dcpcndence of the source model, the
attenuation operator, and the pP reflection coefficient. In this noisefree
example, only spectral analysis could differcntiate between the models.
Recognition of these strong tradeoffs led to the development of higher
Fig. 11. Example of intercorrelation of seismograms recorded at resolution time domain tcchniqucs, which strive to remove receiver and
WWSSN station ADE for Amchitka events MILROW and LONGSHOT. propagation effects from the problcm by determining interevent transfer
The observations are each convolved with E(t)*S(t) for the other event to functions that exploit the differential waveform information [Filson and
equalize the waveforms. S(t) in this case involves just the P and pP Frasier, 1972; Mellman and Kaufman, 19811.
arrivals, with the pP parameters being adjusted to optimize the equalized The most extensively dcvclopcd of thc rclative waveform procedures is
waveform agreement [From Lay et al., 1984al. called intercorrelation [Lay et al., 1984a. 1985; Lay, 1985; Burger et al.,
cs+
sec
0 5 10
Fig. 12. Equalized waveforms for the optimal MILR0W:CANNIKIN intercorrelation for S(t) with three spikes for
each event. In this case the source functions were determined by modeling nearfield records. The top trace in each
pair is a MILROW observation convolved with the CANNIKIN E(t)*S(t), which is shown below (Cs), and the
lower trace is the CANNIIUN observation at the same station convolved with the MILROW E(t)*S(t), which is also
shown below (Ms) From Lay et al., 1984al.
MASTIKASSERI INLETIKASSERI 19861. In this procedure, seismograms from a given station for two
a events at the same test site are equalized by parameterizing S(t) for each
event as a spike & i n , and correcting for differences in the source functions
arising from yield scaling. Figure 11 illustrates the convolution of each
observed trace with E(t)*S(t) for the other event. The propagation effects
in the mantle and near the receiver, abng with the instrument response,
NAO
are intrinsically accounted for by this procedure. The principal parameters
are the spike train sequence, here chosen to involve only the P and pP
anivals, with the pP amplitude and delay time to be determined by
making the intercorrelated seismograms as similar as possible. The
choice of source function is not as important as for direct forward
modeling, because it is the difference in mrce function between events
which influences the equalization. The major limitation of this procedure
 is again in the specification of a spike train for the source region transfer
function, along with the fact that the optimization of spike parameters is
NB4
. only viable with thrce or fewer spikes in each S(t).
/kfi,\::!
In practice, the intercorrelation procedure is applied to a large set of
stations simultaneously for two or more events. Typic. results are
NB5 shown in Figure 12, where three spike versions of S(t) have been used to
equalize MILROW and CANNIKIN waveforms. These spike trains are
, ,
FREQUENCY (1171
I ,
rREQUFNcY (11')
 shown after convolution with the respective source functions in the traces
labeled Ms and Cs. Note that the second spike, pP is comparable in size
to the thud, upward, spike, which corresponds to the 'slapdown' anival.
Fig. 13. Comparison of spectral ratios for pairs of Pahute Mesa events at In this study b a y ct al., 1984a1, the source functions were independently
several NORSAR channels with predicted ratios using pP parameters from constrained by nearficld modcling, to hy to minimize the tradeoffs with
intercorrelation [Der et al., 1979bl. Note the poor agreement at pP parameters. While the preferred pP delay times are in very close
frequencies above 1 Hz. agreement with spectral rcsults, especially those obtained by the network
4/+*
J, pP 0
u
5 10s
P
PP
"
\&,+*7%w
'9
Fig. 14. Shortperiod and derived broadband recordings for MILROW and CANNIKIN, from four UK array
beams. In each case the top trace is the shortperiod event beam, the second trace is deconvolved ground
motion, and the thud trace is the ground motion corrected for attenuation assuming t* = 0.15. As
corresponds to the third anival which has positive polarity. [From Douglas et al., 19871.
LAY 117
YKA 8/4/79 averaging techniques such as the spectral magnitude method of Murphy et
al. [1989], the amplitudes tend to be closer to elastic than in other
methods. Unfortunately, there is a tradeoff with the third spike
amplitude. The intercorrelation technique is intrinsically most sensitive
to differences in pP parameters between the events, so it is possible that
the baseline pP amplitudes are biased high; however, the resulting source
models do provide good matches to the observed waveforms.
An im~ortantcharacteristic of the intercorrelation method for
determining pP parameters is that it intrinsically emphasizes the lower
freauencies in the waveforms, because of the convolutional smoothing.
~h;s, it is reasonable to interpret the resulting pP parameters as being
appropriate for the longer periods, with frequency dependence of the pP
reflection coefficient likely to give smaller pP amplitudes in procedures
which emphasize the higher frequencies. This is supported by Figure 13,
which compares spectral ratios of source models obtained by
intercorrelation with spectral ratios of actual data [Der et a]., 1987bl.
While the lowest frequency spectral peak and null are in reasonable
0.00 1.00 agreement, the higher frequency observations do not show the regular
Time (sec) beating predicted by the results obtained for spike trains. This particular
comparison is somewhat misleading, because it compares event averaged
Fig. 15. An example of L1 deconvolution of YKA broadband displace results with single sensor results, and because a long window of 25.6 s
ment data for a Shagan River event of August 4, 1979. The deconvolved was used to compute the spectral ratios. The intercorrelation results only
wavelet used has a t* = 0.35 and a von SeggemBlandford time function. apply to the first 5 s of the waveform, and it is well known that later P
The resulting spike train is shown in the middle, and a reconstituted coda shows less scalloping [Lynnes and Lay, 19881 than the early P
waveform is shown at the bottom. m m Mellman et a]., 19851. waveform. Nonetheless, it appears that the spiketrain approximation is
simply too restrictive to adequately model the pP phase at high frequency
by either time or frequency domain techniques.
Deconvohtion Procedures
Fig. 16. Mean impulse trains (solid lines) and standard deviation (dashed
lines) obtained by averaging 4 impulse trains deconvolved from LRSM
I
0
I I
I
I
2
I
Seconds
I
3 .
I I
5 recordings for MILROW (top) and CANNIKIN (bottom). From Bakun
and Johnson, 19731.
118 TELESEISMIC MANIFESTATION OF pP
u
4.0 SEC
Fig. 17. Source functions obtained by combined and individual array multichannel deconvolutions for events at the
Degelen test site [Der et al., 1987al These functions should represent E(t)*S(t) alone.
have some complexities, notably broadening, which suggest a frequency and matched filtering are other procedures for characterizing the source and
dependent arrival. receiver spike trains [Cohcn, 1970; Flinn et al, 1973, Douglas et al,
To further characterize the details of S(o), the broadband seismogram 19721. Another procedure for extracting the propagational impulse train
can be deconvolved by an assumed source model, E(w). Extracting the is homomorphic deconvolution [Cohen, 1970; Bakun and Johnson,
source wavelet can be done by a variety of procedures, one of which is 19731. Results of applying this procedure to remove instrument, source
shown in Figure 15, where L1 deconvolution of the source wavelet (along and attenuation effects for MILROW and CANNIKIN are shown in Figure
with instrument and attenuation) has been performed by linear 16. Note that the pP and 'slapdown' phases are very similar to the results
programming, with the constraint that the resulting S(w) has a minimum in Figures 12 and 14.
number of spikes [Mellman et al., 19851. Note the complex transfer The latest deconvolutional approach, which involves few assumptions
function which is obtained, which is a combination of source and receiver about S(o), and explicitly strives to eliminate R(o) involves multi
effects. This procedure is only as reliable as the choice of E(w) and Q(o), channel maximum likelihood iterative deconvolution of a suite of events
and assumes intrinsic spikiness of the transfer functions. Autocorrelation recorded at an array of stations [Der et a]., 1983, 1987a,b, 1989;
4

t* = 0.45
VSB removed VSB not removed
qF 780611 KASSERI
S(t) (left), and when it is not removed, leaving E(t)*S(t) [Der et a]., Fig. 19. Source functions obtained by multichannel deconvolution of
1987al. The arrows indicate the P and pP arrivals. The question marks Pahute Mesa (NTS) events for frequency independent attenuation (left) and
indicate the lack of a clear pP anival for the presumed cratering event frequency dependent attenuation (right) models [Der et al., 1987al.
119

*
LAY
4b.." HANDLEY
Fig. 20. Comparison of source functions [E(t)*S(t)] obtained by the ground motion restitution method of
Lyman et al. [I9861 (left) and the multichannel deconvolution method of Der et al. [1987a] for four Pahute
Mesa events recorded by the EKA array. The former method places greater weight on recovering the long
period component, and does not factor out frequency dependent receiver effects. Note that the pP arrival is
more apparent in the longer period deconvolutions, and at higher frequencies is low amplitude (marked by
the question marks).
Degelen (U.S.S.R.) test site (Figure 17) illustrates the resulting source
functions for joint and separate analysis of several arrays. No E(o) was
deconvolved in this case. Thus, these functions presumably represent
E(w) S(o) alone, to the degree the receiver effects have been successfully
removed. Note that the joint array deconvolutions are greatly simplified
relative to the individual array results. This requires either variations in
the source radiation with takeoff angle and azimuth or incomplete
suppression of receiver effects in the separate deconvolutions. If one
accepts the technique assumptions, one can infer that these events have
very small pP arrivals, unless they are in some way obscured by the
source function and interference with the direct P arrival. The small
amplitude of pP may be associated with cratering of the surface for these
events. Deconvolution procedures of this type are essential for
investigation of events that may involve cratering, which will have a
particularly complex surface interaction [Gupta et al., 19881.
Figure 18 illustrates the effect of specifying a source model for E(o),
and deconvolving it in the multichannel procedure. The Von Seggem
Blandford (VSB) source model is only one of several parameterized models
H that can be used, so there is still a direct tradeoff with the source model.
1 sec Overshoot of the source model can strongly affect the ground displacement
Fig. 21. Bandpass filtered synthetic seismograms for a explosion signal overshoot, which is used to estimate the parameters of the pP arrival.
with P and pP arrivals, with a frequencydependent pP reflection coef Figure 19 illustrates the effect of using a frequency independent
ficient. Note how the apparent pP amplitude, indicated by the overshoot, attenuation model (constant t*) versus a frequency dependent attenuation
differs depending on the frequency band of the trace. [Der et al., 19891. model (t*(f)). While the effects can be subtle, as for INLET, they can
also be significant for the pP parameters as for STILTON.
The deconvolutions for Pahute Mesa events in Figure 19 indicate little
overshoot of the ground motion (small pP arrivals), and indeed Der et al.
Shumway and Der, 19851. This procedure initiates by estimating each [I9891 assign pP an amplitude of zero for these events. Intercorrelation
source term E(w)S(o) by stacking over the suite of observations for an for these events has suggested nearly elastic pP amplitudes [Lay, 19851,
event, then using the average source terms to deconvolve each observation and the spectral stacking results of Murphy [I9891 give intermediate
and stack the various observations for a given station. The estimated values for pP amplitudes, but almost the same delay times as for
station terms are then deconvolved from the data, and the procedure is intercorrelation. Can frequency dependence of pP reconcile these
repeated until convergence. In most applications Q(o) and E(o) are inconsistencies? The situation actually becomes more confused when
specified. The effective separation of source and receiver terms hinges Figure 20 is considered. This shows determinations of the broadband
upon variations in the source terms from event to event. Any common source functions [E(t)*S(t)] for four large Pahute Mesa events determined
features in the spectra between events can be placed either at the source or by the separate deconvolution procedures of Lyman et al. [1986], and Der
at the receivers, with this procedure tending to attribute common terms et al. [1987a]. The results are from the same data at the EKA array, but
(predominantly longer period components) to the receiver functions. the deconvolutions of Lyman et al. [I9861 exhibit strong overshoots,
Application of the iterative deconvolution to several events from the consistent with significant pP arrivals, whereas the multichannel
120 TELESEISMIC MANIFESTATION OF pP
deconvolutions suggest no pP arrival at all. The latter results have higher differences in source function and burial depth. It appears that these
frequency content as well. common features between events have been assigned to the receivers in
The path from NTS to EKA is known to be in a direction of strong the multistation deconvolutions, which may or may not be correct. In
defocussing Lynnes and Lay, 19881, and the bandwidth of the signals is addition, the two deconvolution techniques emphasize the longer period
further limited by attenuation. As a consequence of the limited content in very different ways, with the multichannel procedure placing
bandwidth, many of the ground displacements are very similar, despite the greater weight on the higher frequency spectra. Truly reliable separation
of the receiver functions appears to require more dramatic differences
between the depths and source functions in the population of sources than
are commonly observed for a set of explosions at a given test site.
It is also possible that the difference in passband of the deconvolutions
combined with a frequency dependent pP arrival is primarily responsible
for the inconsistent results for NTS events. Figure 21 shows several
bandpass filtered versions of a synthetic ground displacement which has a
pP reflection that depends on frequency [Der et al., 19891. Note that the
bandwidth influences the strength of the apparent pP arrival. Thus, it
may actually be possible to reconcile all of the pP determinations for the
Pahute Mesa events by recognizing the varying frequency sensitivity of
the techniques, and invoking a physically reasonable frequency dependence
for the pP reflection process.
Even when very broadband source functions are available, care must be
taken in interpreting the pP parameters due to the uncertainty in the
source time function, as well as the interference effect between P and pP.
This is illustrated in Figure 22, which shows errors in pP lag time
resulting from the limited bandwidth of the synthetic pulses. Also note
how very short time delays can lead to a rapid variation in peak to peak
amplitude, which could bias magnitude measurements for small, shallow
events.
TRUE DELAY TIh4E (SEC)
a ) Nuclear Event
b) Spa l I Even1
Opening P Closing pP
I I
Opening p P
I Emergent
ClosingP
C) Sum
Canceling Spoll
Arrivols Phase
Rod~oted Synthetic
Explosion in an
Elastic Medium
Fig. 24. Application of the spa11 model in Figure 23 to the MILROW and CANNIKIN events. The predicted source
functions and synthetic shortperiod seismograms for the model are compared with the results of intercorrelation
analysis of the actual data by Lay et al. [1984]. [From Burdick et al., 1984bl.
77 x
x s R:Refl. C o e f f . = ~ o s ( ~ )  I SK=.25krn2
x > R : RefI. Coeff: I
1000 krn (Y source I . 2 0 "
Max. Amp
L = 0.193 x flat layers
~=0.437~10~
Fig. 26. Results of a hybrid finitedifferenceKirchhoff method used to
model explosions in the complex crustal structure at the Yucca Flat test
site, compared with teleseismic observations at station MAT. Complex
ity of the basic interactions strongly affect the early part of the waveform
where pP arrives, as well as the later coda. [From Stead and Helmberger,
19881.
pP And Spall Representations computational purposes. Utilizing a model of this type, synthetic
seismograms can be constructed which are quite consistent with the
Thus far, we have emphasized the empirical analyses of pP parameters, results of intercorrelation, deconvolution, and spectral methods for the
and found frequent indication of additional arrivals that appear to be from Amchitka events, as shown in Figure 24. While clearly a simplification
the source region. What is the precise physics by which pP and spall of the nonlinear spallation process, this approach provides a
processes are linked, and how does it affect the teleseismic manifestation parameterization of the complete free surface interaction that can be used
of pP? This is a poorly understood topic, perhaps because of the many to synthesize signals at all distance ranges [Burdick et a]., 19WbI.
difficulties encountered in quantifying the pP arrival alone, as described Further development of parameterized free surface interaction models is
above. Nonetheless, it is well recognized on physical grounds that spall required to enable a more complete interpretation of the source functions
and pP must be intimately linked, and a simple threespike model is that are being obtained by deconvolution procedures.
inadequate to represent the process [Day et a]., 19831. Burdick et al.
[19Wbl proposed a phenomenological model for the coupled pP and spall Current Numerical Modeling Procedures
process which can explain some of the anomalous properties of pP, such
as its apparent delay and additional arrivals. Their model, constructed to Along with the many developments in pP waveform analysis, there
conserve momentum, is shown in Figure 23, where the spall process is have been substantial advances in numerical modeling procedures that are
initiated by the pP arrival, and produces both downgoing and upgoing revealing the physics of the free surface interaction and its teleseismic
waves during both spall opening and closing. The initial downgoing manifestation. An informative example is provided by the
spa11 arrival will destructively interfere with the pP arrival, resulting in an im~lementationof the KirchhoffHelmholtz wave theorv to assess sim~le
apparent delay of the surface interaction. The spall source can be viewed mddels of frequency dependent pP reflection from the f;ee surface [~cbtt
as a tensional crack or a distributed source over a conical surface, for and Helmberger, 19831. Figure 25 shows the result of a spatially varying
pP reflection coefficient, decreasing in amplitude just above the shot
point. The threedimensional wave theory predicts a pP reflection which
will be delayed and decreased in amplitude in proportion to the size of the
anomalous zone of low reflection, which physically may correspond to
the spall zone. This model can qualitatively account for the anomalous
delay, decreased amplitude and frequency dependence of the actual pP
observations. Accounting for the missing energy requires more complete
modeling procedures, such as the twodimensional nonlinear finite
difference calculations of McLaughlin et al. [1988], in which an attempt
is made to include much of the physics of the actual spallation and pP
reflection process. These axisymmetric calculations tend to actually
underpredict the pP arrival, so it is clear that all of the pertinent physics
has not yet been included, and possibly the assumption of axisymmetry is
inadequate to explain actual pP reflection processes. The common
observation of offset of collapse craters from the shotpoint suggests that
asymmetry may be an important factor in pP radiation.
Numerical modeling procedures are also useful for addressing
heterogeneity in the shallow crustal velocity structure in the vicinity of
the shotpoint. Even purely elastic finite difference calculations for
complex regions such as the Yucca Flat Test Site at NTS exhibit very
complex P coda, initiating with the pP arrival (Figure 26) [Stead and
Helmberger, 1988; McLaughlin et al, 19861. In this calculation [Stead
and Helmberger, 19881 of teleseismic waveforms, a hybrid two
dimensional finite difference and KirchhoffHelmholtz procedure was used
to account for the shallow crustal reflections and wave conversions near
the source. This level of modeling is critical for appraising the
complexity apparent in source function deconvolutions like those in
Figure 20. When the source coda is as strong as in Figure 26, methods
invoking simple assumptions of 2 or 3 spike source functions will clearly
give erroneous results for pP. Another situation in which numerical
modeling is necessary is when there is significant surface topography near
the test site (a common occurrence). Figure 27 shows two dimensional
finitedifference calculations for a line source [McLaughlin et al., 19871,
that illustrate how the upgoing explosive wavefield can be disrupted by
topography. Future evaluation of three dimensional effects and broadband
data will help to assess whether the pP phase actually has significant
azimuthal variations, as suggested by Figure 17.
Fig. 27. Twodimensional finite difference calculations in different time The current level of understanding of the teleseismic pP phase from
windows for the explosion wavefield produced in a region of significant underground nuclear explosions is far from complete. This review has
surface topography. Note the complexity of the pP reflection. [From illushated the diversity of procedures and results which have been obtained
McLaughlin et al., 19871. over the past twenty years of seismological investigations. A summary
LAY 123
TABLE 1. Comparison of pP and Ps Parameters Determined by Different Procedures for the Amchitka Tests
LONGSHOT
Near Field 0.44.41 Overburdefllastic Prediction
0.45 Springer [I9741
Spectral Methods 0.55 Cohcn [I9701
0.55 0.6 King et al. [I9721
0.43 Marshall [I9721
0.49 0.3 0.3 King et al. [I9741
Intercorrelation 0.55 0.81.0 Lay et al. [1984a]
Deconvolutions O.M.5 Bakun and Johnson [I9731
0.55 0.81.0 Douglas et al. [I9871
of the current state of pP parameter estimation is provided by Table 1, teleseismic signals, especially when frequency dependence is involved, it
which lists published pP characteristics from a variety of methodologies appears that the most reasonable approach to analyzing the pP phase is
for the three Amchitka explosions. This table demonstrates the relative simple broadband ground motion restitution. This involves removing the
consistency in pP timing, and the variability of pP amplitude estimates instrument response effects to extend the bandwidth of the signal. The
between different techniques. The parameters for a systematic 'spall' resulting signals can then be interpreted for a variety of assumed
arrival, Ps, are also tabulated. While the discrepancy in pP delay times attenuation and source models, and stacked to suppress receiver effects.
relative to elastic predictions is actually not very large for this test site, The latter processing should always acknowledge the direct tradeoffs that
there is much greater variation in delay time estimates for source regions exist, and should fully explore assumptions about the source model and
with shallow burial depths such as Novaya Zemlya. In such cases, only attenuation model before placing any weight on the resulting
the highfrequency multichannel deconvolution procedures obtain realistic interpretations of the pP parameters, depth, coupling, etc. Current
pP delays, while other spectral and time domain techniques give much spectral factoring techniques that separate source and receiver transfer
larger delays requiring acute frequency dependenceof the pP arrival. functions tend to emphasize highfrequency content, and appear to be
There is general agreement that the actual pP phase is influenced by unstable with respect to partitioning of common spectral characteristics.
frequency dependent reflection, with longer period energy having higher A suite of sources spanning a wide range of burial depths and yield is
reflection coefficients and a tendency toward longer delay times. The required to stabilize these procedures.
estimated delay of a pP phase may be biased late when the phase is There is a need for more numerical analysis of the pPspall process, as
assumed to be a reflected impulse. All estimates of pP parameters are interpretation of the broadband ground motions requires a parametric
influenced by the bandwidth of the technique being used as well as the description of this energy partitioning. In addition, continued
assumptions about the frequency content. As a general rule, many of the development of numerical models to elucidate the complexity of pP and
contradictory pP parameters in the literature could be reconciled by subsequent coda arising from complex nearsource structure and surface
specifying the frequency band most emphasized in the processing. The topography is very important. The numerical studies performed to date
greatest stability appears to accompany the largest bandwidth procedures. suggest that even the elastic processes accompanying the pP reflection are
Given the direct tradeoffs between source and propagation effects for very complex, and possibly azimuthally variable.
124 TELESEISMIC MANIFESTATION OF pP
Acknowledgments. Thanks to Steve Taylor and Howard Patton for deconvolution of P waves at seismic arrays, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am.,
organizing a very stimulating symposium on nuclear explosions 77, 195211, 1987b.
processes. John Vidale and two reviewers provided helpful comments on Der, Z. A., R. H. Shumway, L. M. Anderson, T. W. McElfresh, and J.
the manuscript. This research was supported by the W. M. Keck A. Burnetti, Analysis of estimators of pP times and amplitudes,
Foundation and the Defcnse Advanced Research Projects Agency and was Teledyne Geotech, Alexandria, VA, TGALTR838.1983.
monitored by the Geophysical Laboratory undcr Contract F1962889K Douglas, A., P. D. Marshall, and J. B. Young, The P waves from the
0011. This is contribution No. 99 of the Institute of Tectonics and C. F. Amchitka Island explosions, Geophys. J. R. astr. Soc., 90, 101117,
Richter Seismological Laboratory. 1987.
Douglas, A., D. J. Corbishley, C. Blarney, and P. D. Marshall,
Rcfcrences Estimating the firing depth of underground explosions,Nature, 237.26
28, 1972.
Bache, T. C., Estimating the yield of underground nuclear explosions, Eisler, J. D., F. Chilton, and F. M. Saucr, Multiple subsurface spalling
Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 72, S131S168, 1982. by underground nuclear explosions, J. Geophys. Res., 71, 39233927,
Bache, T. C., T. R. Blake, J. T. Cherry, T. G. Barker, D. G. Lambert, J. 1966.
M. Savino, and N. Rimer, An explanation of the relative amplitudes of Filson, J., and C. W. Frasier, Multisite estimation of explosive source
the teleseismic body waves generated by explosions in different test parameters, J. Geophys. Res., 77, 20452061, 1972.
areas at NTS, SCubed, La Jolla, CA, DNA 3958F, 1975. Flinn, E. A., T. J. Cohen, and D. W. McCowan, Detection and analysis
Bache, T. C., S. M. Day, and J. M. Savino, Automated magnitude of multiple seismic events, Bull. Seism Soc. Am., 63, 19211936,
measures, earthquake source monitoring. VFM discriminant testing and 1973.
summary of current research, SCubed, La Jolla, CA, SSSR793933, Frasier, C. W., Observations of pP in the shortperiod phases of NTS
1979. explosions recorded at Norway, Geophys. J. R. astr. Soc., 31.99109,
Bakun, W. H., and L. R. Johnson, The deconvolution of teleseismic P 1972.
waves from explosions MILROW and CANNIKIN, Geophys. J. R. Gupta, I. N., and R. R. Blandford, A study of P waves from Nevada test
astr. Soc., 34, 321342, 1973. site explosions: nearsource information from teleseismic
Burdick, L. J., and D. V. Helmbcrger, Time functions appropriate for observations?, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 77, 10411056, 1987.
nuclear explosions, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 69, 957973, 1979. Gupta, I. N., K. L. McLaughlin, and R. A. Wagner, Analysis of regional
Burdick, L. J., J. S. Barker, D. V. Helmberger, and D. G. Harkrider, data from cratering and noncratering nuclear explosions, Teledyne
Linear elastic waveform modeling in the inelastic region of underground Geotech, Alexandria, VA ,TGAL855.1988.
nuclear explosions, in The Vela Program, A. Kerr, Ed., Executive Hasegawa, H. S., Analysis of teleseismic signals from underground
Graphic Services, Washington, DC, pp. 130138, 1985. nuclear explosions originating in four geological environments,
Burdick. L. J., T. Lay, D. V. Helmberger, and D. G. Harkrider, Geophys. J. R. asrr. Soc., 24, 365381, 1971.
Implications of records from the spall zone of the Amchitka tests to Hasegawa, H. S., Analysis of amplitude spectra of P waves from
nonlinear losses in the source region and to elastic radiation by spall, earthquakes and underground explosions, J. Geophys. Res., 77, 3081
WoodwardClyde Consultants, Pasadena, CA, WCCPR8403,1984b. 3096, 1972.
Burdick, L. J., C. K. Saikia, and D. V. Helmberger, Deterministic Hasegawa, H. S., and K. Whitham, Theoretical response of a seismograph
modeling of regional waveforms from the Nevada test site, Geophysics at Yellowknife, Northwest Territories, to an underground explosion at
Laboratory, Hanscom AFB, MA, GLTR890196,1989. Nevada test site, Canadian J. Earth Sci., 6,517520, 1969,
Burdick, L. J., T. Wallace, and T. Lay, Modeling nearfield and Helmberger, D. V., and D. M. Hadley, Seismic source functions and
teleseismic observations from the Amchitka test site, J. Geophys. Res., attenuation from local and teleseismic observations of the NTS events
89,43734388, 1984a. JORUM and HANDLEY, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 71, 5167, 1981.
Burger, R. W., T. Lay and L. J. Burdick, Estimating the relative yields of Helmberger, D. V., and D. G. Harkrider, Seismic source description of
the Novaya Zcmlya tests by waveform intercorrelation. Geophys. J. R. underground explosions and a depth discriminate, Geophys. J. R. astr.
astr. Soc., 87, 775800, 1986. SOC.,31, 4566, 1972.
Carpenter, E. W., A quantitative evaluation of teleseismic explosion King, C.Y., A. M. AboZcna, and J. N. Murdock, Teleseismic source
records, Proc. R. Soc.. A, 290, 396407, 1966. parameters of the LONGSHOT, MILROW and CANNIKIN nuclear
Cohen, T. J., Sourcc depth determinations using spectral, pseudo explosions, J. Geophys. Res., 79, 712718, 1974.
autocorrelation and ccpstral analysis, Geophys. J. R. astr. Soc., 20, King, C.Y., W. H. Bakun, and J. N. Murdock, Source parameters of
223231, 1970. nuclear explosions MILROW and LONGSHOT from teleseismic P
Cohen, T. J., Ps and pP phases from seven Pahute Mesa events, Bull. waves, Geophys. J. R. astr. Soc., 31, 2744, 1972.
Seism. Soc. Am., 65, 10291032, 1975. Kulhanek, O., P wave amplitude spectra of Nevada underground nuclear
Cormier, V. F., The effect of attenuation on seismic body waves, Bull. explosions, Pure Appl. Geophys., 88, 121136, 1971.
Seism. Soc. Am., 72, S169S200, 1982. Lay, T., Estimating explosion yield by analytical waveform comparison,
Day, S. M., N. Rimer, and J. T. Cheny, Surface waves from underground Geophys. J. R. astr. Soc., 82, 131, 1985.
explosions with spall: analysis of elastic and nonlinear source models, Lay, T. , L. J. Burdick, and D. V. Helmberger, Estimating the yields of
Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 73, 247264, 1983. the Amchitka tests by waveform intercorrelation, Geophys. J. R. astr.
Der, Z. A., A. C. Lees, W. W. Chan, R. H. Shumway, K. L. Soc., 78, 181207, 1984a.
McLaughlin, E. Smart, T. W. McElfresh, and M. E. Marshall, Lay, T., L. J. Burdick, D. V. Helmberger, and C. G. Arvesen, Estimating
Maximum likelihood multichannel deconvolution of P waves at seismic yield and defining distinct test sites using complete waveform
seismic arrays, Teledyne Geotech, Alexandria, VA, TGAL873,1987~1. information, in The Vela Program, A. Kerr, Ed., Executive Graphic
Der, Z. A., A. C. Lees, K. L. McLaughlin, and R. H. Shumway, Services, Washington, DC, pp. 597610, 1985.
Multichannel deconvolution of teleseismic shortperiod P waves at Lay, T., D. V. Helmberger, and D. G. Harkrider, Source models and yield
seismic arrays and three component stations, Geophys. J. R. astr. Soc., scaling relations for underground nuclear explosions at Amchitka Island,
submitted, 1989. Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 74, 843862, 1984b.
Der, Z. A., R. H. Shumway, and A. C. Lees, Multichannel Lay, T., and J. L. Welc, Analysis of nearsource contributions to early P
LAY 125
wave coda for underground explosions. I. Waveform complexity, Bull. Miiller, G., Seismic moment and longperiod radiation of underground
Seism. Soc. Am., 77, 10171040, 1987. nuclear explosions, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 63, 847857, 1973.
Lundquist, G. M., G. R. Mellman, and D. M. Hadley, Relative receiver Murphy, J. R., Networkaveraged teleseismic P wave spectra for
functions for three different array concepts, Sierra Geophysics, Inc., underground explosions, Part 11. Source characteristics of Pahute Mesa
Redmond, WA, SGIR80021.1980. explosions, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 79, 156171, 1989.
Lyman, N. S., A. Douglas, P. D. Marshall, and J. B. Young, P Murphy, J.R., and A. O'Donnell, Further analysis of network averaged
seismograms recorded at Eskdalemuir, Scotland from explosions in teleseismic P wave spectra with applications to yield estimation of
Nevada, USA, AWRE, Report No. 0 10186, 1986. Novaya Zemlya explosions, Scubed, Reston, VA, SSSCR889766,
Lynnes, C. S., and T. Lay, Observations of teleseismic P wave coda for 1988.
underground explosions, Pure Appl. Geophys., 128,231249, 1988. Murphy, J. R., B. W. Barker, and A. O'Donnell, Network averaged
Marshall, P. D., Some seismic results from a worldwide sample of large teleseismic P wave spectra for underground explosions, Part I.
underground explosions, United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority, Definitions and examples, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 79, 141155, 1989.
A.W.R.E., Report No. 049172, 1972. Scott, P., and D. Helmberger, Applications of the KirchhoffHelmholtz
McLaughlin, K. L., L. M. Anderson, and A. C. Lees, Effects of local integral to problems in seismology, Geophys. J. R. astr. Soc., 72,
geologic structure for Yucca Flats. NTS, explosion waveforms: 2 237254, 1983.
dimensional linear finite difference simulations, Geophysics Lab, Shumway, R. H., and R. R. Blandford, On detecting and estimating
Hanscom AFB, MA, AFGLTR860220.1986. multiple arrivals from underground nuclear explosions, Teledyne
McLaughlin, K. L., Z. A. Der, R.S. Jih, A. C. Lees, and L. M. Geotech, Alexandria, VA, SDACTR778, 1978.
Anderson, Finitedifference modeling of seismological problems in Shumway, R. H., and Z. A. Der, Deconvolution of multiple time series,
magnitude estimation using body waves, surface waves and seismic Technometrics, 27, 385393, 1985.
source imaging, AFGL, Hanscom AFB, MA, AFGLTR870106, Springer, D. L., Secondary sources of seismic waves from underground
1987. nuclear explosions, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 64, 581594, 1974.
McLaughlin, K. L, T. G. Barker, S. M. Day, B. Shkoller, and J. L. Stead, R. J., and D. V. Helmberger, Numericalanalytical interfacing in
Stevens, Effects of depths of burial and tectonic strain release on two dimensions with applications to modeling NTS seismograms, Pure
regional and teleseismic explosions waveforms, SCubed, La Jolla, CA, Appl. Geophys., 128, 157193, 1988.
SSSR889844, 1988. Stewart, R. C., P wave seismograms from underground explosions at the
Mellman, G. R., and S. K. Kaufman, Relative waveform inversion, Shagan River test site recorded at four arrays, AWRE, Report No. 0
Sierra Geophysics, Redmond, WA, SGIR81048.1981. 4/88, 1988.
Mellman, G. R., S. K. Kaufman, and W. C. Tucker, Depth corrections Taylor, S. R., and G. E. Randall, The effects of spa11 on regional
for yield estimation of underground nuclear explosions, in The Vela seismograms, Geophys. Res. Lett., 16, 211214, 1989.
Program, A. Kerr, Ed., Executive Graphics Services, Washington, DC, Wyss, M., T. C. Hanks, and R. C. Liebermann, Comparison of Pwave
pp. 741747, 1985. spectra of underground explosions and earthquakes, J. Geophys. Res.,
Molnar, P., Pwave spectra from underground nuclear explosions, 76,27162729, 1971.
Geophys. J. R. astr. Soc., 23, 273287, 1971.
BROAD BAND ESTIMATES OF THE SEISMIC SOURCE FUNCTIONS OF NEVADA EXPLOSIONS
FROM FARFIELD OBSERVATIONS OF P WAVES
Alan Douglas
Ministry of Defence (Procurement Executive), Blacknest, Brimpton, Reading, Berkshire, UK, RG7 4RS
Abstract. One widely used method of obtaining information on the Introduction
seismic source functions of underground explosions is to compute
seismograms using models of the earth, source and seismograph and try When P waves propagate through the earth the high frequencies are
and match these to the observed. This process is essentially one of preferentially attenuated so that individual pulses (principally P and pP)
testing the compatibility of the models with observations. An alternative are smeared out and may overlap. Also, as most recording systems have
method of obtaining source information is to analyse broad band P limited pass bands, signals are further distorted on recording. Analysis
seismograms corrected for anelastic attenuation. The main pulses and interpretation of shortperiod (SP) explosion seismograms may thus
contributing to the signal can be observed on such seismograms and the be difficult. One aid to interpreting SP explosion recordings is to
parameters of the pulses measured. In this paper examples are shown of compute seismograms using models of the earth, source and seismograph
broad band P seismograms for Nevada explosions. The data are from 39 and try and match these to the observed. An alternative method is to
Nevada explosions (38 fired at the Nevada Test Site proper and one, obtain broad band (BB) seismograms, if possible corrected for attenuation,
FAULTLESS, fired at Hot Creek Valley to the north of the test site) so that individual pulses P and p P can be more easily identified and
recorded at Eskdalemuir, Scotland, supplemented for a few of the parameters of the source pulses measured.
explosions with seismograms recorded at stations of the Long Range Ideally BB seismograms would be recorded on systems specifically
Seismic Measurements network. designed for the purpose. In the past there have been few such systems in
To correct for anelastic attenuation requires an estimate of the variation operation. The USSR has operated for many years BB systems recording
oft* with frequency, t* being the ratio of travel time to specific quality on paper and in the early 1970's, a few BB systems recording on tape were
factor. Two models are investigated: for one, t* = 0.35 s and is installed in the West [see for example Marshall, Burch, and Douglas,
independent of frequency; for the other t* is frequencydependent. The 19721. For most explosions the only recordings available on magnetic
frequencydependentmodel, however, is rejected as it appears to result in tape are from narrow band systems. It has been shown however that for
overcorrection of freuuencies around 2 Hz. some explosions at least, BB seismograms can be derived by filtering
The deconvolved seismogramsderived using the frequencyindependent from SP seismograms recorded on magnetic tape. It is also possible to
t* show significant variability between ex~losions. However, most of correct to some extent for the effects of anelastic attenuation.
the explosi&s at the Pahute Mesa fired at depths greater than 819 m are One of the earliest methods used to obtain BB signals from SP
broadly similar and show a roughly systematic move to longer duration seismograms was filtering with a "spiking" filter. Such a filter is one
with increasing depthwhich presumably correlates with increasing yield which when convolved with a given impulse response produces a spike,
(ignoring the explosion SCOTCH which was overburied). The that is a delta function, at the output. Douglas et al. [I9721 took as the
shallowest explosion of this sequence, HALFBEAK, has a yield of 365 kt impulse response the SP seismometer response convolved with that of an
and the largest yield of the deeper explosions is greater than 1000 kt. attenuation operator, and computed filters to convert this to a spike. The
From this yield information it would appear that the duration scales procedure in effect corrects for anelastic attenuation and instrument
roughly as (yield)115 which is the scaling law predicted by the Mueller filtering and works well for some explosions in that P and pP are
Murphy (MM) model. The rise times of the P pulses are, however, separated and can be identified. Frasier [I9721 used a similar method to
larger than those predicted by the MM model and scale roughly as that of Douglas et al. [I9721 and applied this to Nevada Test Site (NTS)
(yield)1/3 although the scatter in the observations is large. explosions recorded in Norway. Der et al. [1986,1987] use an iterative
Most of the seismograms show P closely followed by an arrival (App) scheme for deconvolution of multichannel array and 3component
of negative polarity which might be interpreted as pP. Following App recordings. In this method the effect of recording instrument, attenuation
there is usually a positive anival which may be larger than P and which and source function are divided out (in the frequency domain) from the
has been attributed to the effects of spalling at the free surface above the recorded signals. An iterative scheme is then applied to the multichannel
source. The AppP time for most explosions is significantly longer than data to separate out station effects without reducing the signaltonoise
predicted from the known depth of firing. The deconvolved seismograms ratio. This process, it is hoped, will produce the response for an impulse
show that the P radiation from explosions is not well described by at the explosion depth in the crustal structure at source. To apply the
idealised point compressional source models and that a dynamic model of procedure it is necessary to make assumptions about the source function
the explosion source needs to be developed that takes account of the as well as the anelastic attenuation between source and receiver, the
obse~ationsfrom such seismograms. instrument response being known.
The deconvolution procedure used here to obtain BB estimates of P
seismograms of NTS explosions is that described by Douglas et al.
Explosion Source Phenomenology [1987]. This procedure is simpler than that of Der et al. [1986,1987] in
Geophysical Monograph 65 that no attempt is made to remove the effect of the source function or to
Copyright 1991 American Geophysical Union correct for the effects of station structure, the effect of the station being
assumed to be small. BB seismograms are derived by dividing out the given by:
response of the SP instrument and substituting a BB response. BB
seismograms corrected for attenuation (referred to here as deconvolved
seismograms) are derived by dividing out the effect of some attenuation
operator. To apply the method requires estimates of the anelastic The longperiod sourcestrength of the explosion, however, is usually
attenuation on the path from source to the recording stations. Two specified by ry(=). The direct Ppulse after correction for anelastic
models of anelastic attenuation have been proposed for paths out of the attenuation should be an estimate of fp(t,A); thus if the P pulse can be
NTS: for one, t* is frequencyindependent; for the other it is frequency isolated an estimate of H I ) and, hence, W(m) can be made. The biggest
dependent in the SP band (say 18 Hz). t* is the ratio of travel time to practical difficulty in estimating HI) from recordings made at long range
specific quality factor. It has been shown [A. Douglas, unpublished arises from the interference of pP and P.
manuscript, 19901 that from the form of the seismograms corrected for Expressions similar to (1) can be written for other body wave phases
attenuation obtained with the two different models, it is possible to decide such as P P and P C P : these require simply the substitution of the
which one is the better description of the anelastic attenuation on paths appropriate function for geometrical spreading and factors for additional
out of the NTS. This tums out to be the frequencyindependent I* model. losses at boundaries on the path. In this paper, however, apart from one
Some of the evidence for this is presented here. PCPrecording, all the results presented are from P seismograms.
Examples are presented of BB seismograms and seismograms Several authors [Bakun and Johnson, 1973, and Frasier, 1972, for
deconvolved using the frequencyindependent I* model. Such example] have noted later arrivals in explosion seismograms that are
seismograms when corrected for geometrical spreading and losses at unexplained by simple theory and it has been suggested that these arrivals
discontinuities are estimates of the radiation in the vicinity of the are due to spalling. Because of the intense tensional stress that develops
explosion source. The examples are chosen to show that from the due to reflection at the free surface, part of the near surface material above
deconvolved seismograms, P and later phases can be identified and the source may be thrown upwards against gravity [Chilton, Eisler, and
parameters of the source pulses determined. How these parameters vary Heubach, 19661. The subsequent impact of the material is usually referred
with magnitude is shown and what the BB observations imply for the to as slapdown and is believed to act as a secondary source and radiate a
source functions of NTS explosions is discussed. Before considering the pulse of positive polarity.
observationsa simplified model of the explosion source is presented.
TABLE 1. Distances, Backbearings and Azimuths of Stations from the I* for the ray paths to the stations. However, for explosions it is usual to
PILE DRIVER Epicentre. assume that the source spectrum is as specified by some source model
Distance Azimuth Backbearing usually the MM model for which the seismic source spectrum fallsoff
as m2 at high frequencies. Ideally t* would be estimated under the
("1 (") (")
assumption that it varies with frequency but because of the scatter in
Eskdalemuir, Scotland 71.5 33.7 309.2 observed spectra the effect of frequency dependence in the SP band would
Houlton, Maine, USA 36.5 60.4 273.4 only be seen if the variation is strong (see below). Weak frequency
North Pole, Northwest 39.1 358.7 175.8 dependencecannot be distinguished from frequencyindependentr*.
Territories,Canada Estimates of attenuation were first used in the studies of P waves from
Schefferville, Quebec, 37.6 46.0 262.9 nuclear explosions, in the computation of SP P seismograms using
Canada explosion source functions derived from closein observations. For P
seismograms recorded at teleseismic distances it was found that an
Usually the principal effect of widening the pass band from SP to BB acceptable match between observed and computed signals could be
is to amplify the lowfrequency noise (both system and seismic) so that obtained if I* was assumed to be about 1.0 s and independent of frequency.
the signaltonoise ratio is much reduced compared to that on the SP With such a value oft*, anelastic attenuation at 1 Hz is about a factor of
seismogram. Verylowfrequency noise can be removed without 20 whereas at 5 Hz the factor is over lo6. With this value of t* there is
significant distortion to the signal by simple highpass filtering. High no possibility that frequencies much above 1 Hz will be seen at long
frequency noise can also be a problem particularly on the deconvolved range.
seismograms where corrections are applied for attenuation. All the BB However, frequencies well above 1 Hz are detected in explosion P
seismograms have therefore been filtered with a lowpass filter cutting off waves from most test sites, including the NTS [Der et al., 19851 so if t*
at 4.5 Hz. To suppress the noise at frequencies around the signal is independent of frequency then its value must be much less than 1.0 s.
frequency we use Wiener frequency filtering [for further discussion see From the work of Lay and Helmberger [I9811 and Der et al. [I9851 it
Douglas and Young, 19811. The filters are designed using the noise appears that if t* is independent of frequency then for paths from sources
amplitude spectrum measured ahead of the onset of the signal and a in the western US (which includes the NTS) to stations in regions of low
theoretical signal spectrum derived by making some simple assumptions. attenuation t* is 0.354.44 s. This, however, leads to a difficulty because
Applying these filters gives a leastsquares estimate of the BB ground the amplitudes predicted from explosion source models are now much
displacement. larger than observed. The difficulties of matching observed and computed
Figure 2 shows an example oE a BB seismogram; the BB seismogram amplitudes while still preserving the high frequencies have been taken as
corrected for attenuation (that is the deconvolved seismogram); and the SP evidence that t* is indeed a function of frequency. Burger et al. [I9871
seismogram from which they are derived. The seismograms are for the
Pahute Mesa explosion HALFBEAK. The deconvolved seismogram is
typical of those obtained by Lyman et al. [I9861 using a t* of 0.35 s and
independent of frequency. Principally the deconvolved seismogram shows
P, seen as a clear positive pulse, followed by an apparent pP (A P) with
negative polarity which in turn is followed by a positive pulse PA,). As
is taken to be the arrival usually attributed to the effects of slapdown.
Assuming that p P and P do not interfere then the pPP time can be
estimated as the time between the maximum positive deflection of P and
maximum negative deflection of App. Y() (and hence seismic
moment) can be dervied from the area of the P pulse (shown shaded).
Another parameter of the source pulse that can be measured is the rise
time of P ; rise time being, following Gladwin and Stacey [1974],
~ ~ ~ ~ / ( d u lwhere
dt)~ umax
~ , is the maximum height of the pulse and
(d~ldt),,~ the maximum gradient of the leading edge.
Attenuation Models
1 od
, , . ,
1 oi'
about the source spectrum may be incorrect; and t* may not be Frequency (Hz)
independent of frequency. If the source radiation is assumed to be
isotropic then the effect of the source spectrum can be cancelled out by Fig. 1. Amplitude responses of the Eskdalemuir and LRSM short period
taking ratios of signals recorded at pairs of stations. From the slope of systems and of the displacement broad band. The responses have been
such ratios of spectra 6r* can be determined, where 61* is the difference in nonnalised to unity at 1 Hz.
TABLE 2. Hypocentres, Magnitudes and Other Data f o r the Faultless, P i l e Driver and the Yucca Flat Explosions together u i t h observations from broad band seismograms
P uave
speed Apparent Predicted Rise Rise
i n over pPp pPp time time
Date Name Lat No Long W4 Depth Origin nbnL Yield Firing burden#4 Station t(~)#5 time timeK3 obs. corr.
(m) Time #I Mediun#2 (km/s) (S) (S) (S) (s)
P uave
Speed Apparent Predicted Rise Rise
i n over Pp Ppp time time
Date Name Lat No Long W4 Depth Origin nbML Yield Firing burden#4 Station t(m)U5 time t i d obs. corr.
(m) Time #1 Medid2 (km/s) (S) (8) (S) (S)

with t* = 0.35 s, this value of t* being within the range of estimates
found by Lay and Helmberger [I9811 and Der et al. [1985]. The phase
spectrum of this operator is specified using the theory of Futterman
119621. To specify the frequencydependent t* derived by Burger et al.
[I9871 (which is based on the absorption band model) requires three
Fig. 2. P seismograms for the Nevada Test Site explosion HALFBEAK parameters: 1 5 , the lowfrequency value of I * ; 7,. a highfrequency
recorded at Eskdalemuir, Scotland: (a) Short period seismogram; (b) Broad relaxation time; and w, a lowfrequency relaxation time. Burger et al.
band seismogram; (c) Broad band seismogram corrected for attenuation [I9871 specify a range of possible values for these parameters. Here it is
assuming t* = 0.35 s. App and As indicate a possible surface reflection assumed 1% = 1.0 s, 7, = 0.044 s, and = 1000 s, these being values
and spa11 anival respectively. that lie within the range specified by Burger et al. 119871. In what
follows we refer to this frequencydependentmodel as the Burger model.
give such a frequencydependent model for paths out of the NTS. In these Figure 3a shows the variation of I* with frequency for the Burger
models t* decreases with frequency so that at around 1 Hz, the model. Figure 3b shows the ratio of the amplitude response of the
predominant frequency of SP seismograms, the attenuation is sufficient to attenuation operator for the Burger model to that of the frequency
bring the observed and computed amplitudes into agreement but the high independent t* model. This shows that the principal difference in
frequencies are little attenuated. corrections applied by the two models is that between 0 and 6 Hz the
The data used by Burger et al. [I9871 to derive thcir frequency Burger model applies a larger correction than the frequencyindependent
dependent t* model are World Wide Standard Station Network (WWSSN) model with the maximum difference being a factor of about 8 at 2.5 Hz.
SP recordings of P waves from explosions at the NTS. Burger et al. Figure 4 shows P seismograms for four Pahute Mesa explosions
119871 obtain estimates of t* at around 1 Hz by varying the attenuation recorded at EKA, deconvolved for each of the two attenuation models.
until an acceptable fit is obtained between amplitudes computed from The seismograms are arranged in order of depth of firing. HANDLEY and
source models and observed amplitudes for explosions of known yield. GREELEY have yields around a megaton: the other two explosions
As the WWSSN SP system is very narrow band it is not possible to HALFBEAK and CHESHIRE have yields less than half this.
distinguish between models that are frequencydependentand those that are Looking first at the seismograms deconvolved with the Burger model
not. However, by combining the estimates of t* made at around 1 Hz it can be seen that there is significant variability in shape. Had the Burger
with evidence from Der et al. [I9851 of the rate of falloff of the spectra at model been a reliable estimate of attenuation it would be expected that the
frequencies up to about 4 Hz, Burger et al. 119871 conclude that I* must deconvolved seismograms for the loweryield explosion would be scaled
be frequencydependent. The attenuation model of Burger et al. [I9871 versions of those from highyield explosions. However, CHESHIRE in
gives the value oft* at 1 Hz as 0.8 s or greater. particular is a complex signal. For I* = 0.35 s the seismograms do show
Der and Lees [I9851 review the evidence for the frequency dependence similar shapes and some evidence of scaling, with the P pulse for the
of I* over a wide band of frequencies and conclude that although there is higheryield explosions having a duration of around 1.1 s and the lower
strong evidence that t* is significantlygreater in the long period band than yield explosions 0.9 s.
in the SP any variation oft* with frequency in the SP band is so slow as The differences between the deconvolved seismograms for the two
to be indistinguishable from frequencyindependentt*. Further, Der and attenuation models can be understood on the assumption that the
Lees [I9851 argue that for the southwestern United States (SWUS) (which frequencyindependent model is the better estimate of attenuation and that
includes the NTS) I* at 1 Hz must be significantly less than 1 s. This by using the frequencydependent model the amplitude at some frequencies
conclusion is derived indirectly from a comparison of attenuation models are overcorrected. Thus Figure 3b shows that if t* is independent of
of the SWUS with those for the central United States (CUS). The frequency then it would be expected that where there is significant energy
evidence from P amplitudes and spectra for earthquakes recorded in the two above 1 Hz in the leading (and trailing) edges of the pulse these
regions implies a I* difference in the upper mantle of the two areas of frequencies would be overcorrected by the Burger model, and this is what
0.2 s. Thus if t* for the SWUS is 1.0 s that for CUS is 0.8 s and this is seen with 2 Hz oscillations riding on the main pulse of CHESHIRE
implies that I* for S waves is about 3.2 s for the CUS and 4.0 s for the and HANDLEY. (The results obtained for CHESHIRE using the
I 2 4 6
Frequency (Hz)
8 10 2 4 6
Frequency (Hz)
8 10
Fig. 3. (a) t* variation with frequency for the Burger model. @) Ratio of amplitude response of the frequencydependent
attenuation operator to that of the frequencyindependent model. The ratio is the amplitude response of the filter to convert
seismogramsdeconvolved with t* = 0.35 s and independent of frequency to seismogramsdeconvolved with the Burger model.
frequencyindependent t* of 0.35 s suggest that even for this attenuation observed at three stations. The seismograms are typical of NTS
model the energy at 23 Hz may be overcomted). Only for GREELEY, explosions in the megaton range. Note that whereas the SP seismograms
which is a lowfrequency signal with predominant frequency around show significant differences between stations and no obvious way of
0.5 Hz and with no sharp front, is the 2 Hz energy so low that there is estimating such basic parameters as the pPP time, the BB seismograms
little difference in shape between the seismograms deconvolved using the are simple and similar and the apparentppP time is evident.
two models. Figure 7 shows SP and BB seismograms for the NTS explosion PILE
Figure 5 shows a comparison of the deconvolved seismograms for DRIVER. For North Pole, Canada (NPNT)both P and PCPseismograms
PILE DRIVER for the two different attenuation models. Again it can be are shown: for EKA only P is shown. Looking first at the SP
seen that whereas the seismogram derived using t* independent of seismograms it is clear that the EKA and NPNT P seismograms are very
frequency appears to show individual pulses, when the Burger model is similar at least for the first 1.7 s. The NPNT PCP seismogram, however,
used the resulting seismogram is highly oscillatory, suggesting again that is of significantly lower frequency than the P seismograms, suggesting
the use of frequencydependentt* o v e m m t s at around 2 Hz. that the attenuation on the P C P path is greater than on the P path. The
Most of the evidence on attenuation on paths out of the NTS thus deconvolved P seismograms for EKA and NPNT are also very similar
indicates that t* at 1 Hz lies between 0.35 and 0.5 s and if there is a whereas the PCP seismogram again seems to have less highfrequency
variation with frequency in the SP band it is a slow decrease in t* as energy than P when all the seismograms are deconvolved using a t* of
frequency increases. In what follows the attenuation model of Lyman et 0.35 s. When the PCP seismogram is deconvolved using a t* of 0.50 s
al. [I9861 is assumed to be the best estimate of the attenuation on paths the first second of the P C P and P seismograms are now similar,
out of the NTS. This model lies at the lower end of the range of t* suggesting that the extra attenuation on the PCPpath compared to the P
estimates. From deconvolution studies it seems that t* is unlikely to be paths has been corrected for.
much larger than this because using values oft* much above 0.35 s leads All three deconvolved seismograms (EKA and NPNT P and NPNT
to the generation of differences in pulse shapes on the deconvolved PCP)now show the direct phase and an apparent surfacereflection arriving
seismograms similar to those seen when the Burger model is used. about 0.7 s after onset but the predicted pPP time is only about 0.2 s,
In introducing frequencydependent t* to try and reconcile observed and the depth of firing of PILE DRIVER being about 0.5 km and the
computed amplitudes from explosions Burger et al. [I9871 are making the measured Pwave speed in the material overlying the explosion being
assumption that source models of explosions (such as the MM model) around 5 km sl. However, if thepPP time is short then P and p P will
derived from closein observations are substantially correct. However, interfere and so the timedelay between P and the surface reflection will be
there are uncertainties in the estimates of the source functions [see for an overestimate [Z.A. Der et al., unpublished manuscript, 19891. Thus
example Archambeau, 19851, and as the attenuation model of Burger et al. true pP may be obscured by interference with P. If this is true then App
[I9871 seems to be inconsistent with other estimates, then presumably it and Asp are left unexplained. Similar but smaller discrepancies between
is errors in the source function and not the attenuation model that account observed A p p P times and times predicted from the known depth of firing
for the discrepancy between the observed and computed amplitudes for are seen for most NTS explosions. This is shown in Figure 8 where
explosions. observed A p P times taken from the EKA BB seismograms are plotted
against preiicied times. The observed and predicted times are listed in
Examples and Observations Tables 2 and 3. Note, however, that for most of the explosions studied
here (apart from PILE DRIVER) the AppP time is greater than 0.4 s so
Figure 6 shows the SP, BB, and deconvolved seismograms for t* = that any effect of interference should be small. Further, comparison of the
0.35 s and independent of frequency for the NTS explosion BOXCAR pPP times estimated here with those measured at the NTS (where these
134 BROAD BAND ESTIMATES OF SEISMIC SOURCE FUNCTIONS
Fig. 4. Deconvolved P seismograms for four Nevada Test Site explosions (HALFBEAK, CHESHIRE,
HANDLEY, and GREELEY) recorded at Eskdalemuir, Scotland for the two attenuation models: frequency
independent I* (left) and the Burger model (right).
are available) are not widely different (see Tablcs 2 and 3). EKA all the estimates are over a factor of two less than predicted.
The deconvolved EKA and NPNT P seismograms show a second Howcvcr, P amplitudes obscrvcd at EKA from NTS explosions appear to
negative arrival following App. Taking A p to be pP then this second be 23 times below average [Douglas and Rivers, 19881 probably due to
P
anival (marked Asp) comes in close to the ume prcdicted for sP. Such an dcfocussing Kynnes and Lay, 19881 so perhaps it is not surprising that
arrival could not of course be generated by a pure explosive source. On the EKA estimates are low. Obviously much more data is required before
the PCP seismogram Aspcp appears to be absent and a lowfrequency firm conclusions can be drawn on the relationship between W() estimatcs
positivepulse is seen similar to the pulses attributed to spalling on many made at long range and yield, and H) predicted from source models.
of the P seismograms seen from other NTS explosions. In the ideal case the deconvolved seismograms would be expectcd to
Figures 9 and 10 show the deconvolved seismograms for EKA (with show some systematic variation in duration with depth of firing,
I* = 0.35 s and independent of frequency) for all the explosions. Figure 9 assuming that depth correlates roughly with yicld (and ignoring the
shows the seismograms for FAULTLESS, PILE DRIVER, and the Yucca explosion SCOTCH which was overburicd). Some systematic variation
Flat explosions and Figure 10 the Pahute Mesa explosions. For the in duration is seen for the explosions at the Pahutc Mesa fired at depths of
Yucca Flat and Pahute Mesa explosions the seismograms are ordered by 819 m or greater. The shallowest explosion in this scquence,
dcpth of firing. HALFBEAK, has a yield of 365 kt and a P pulse with a duration of
Figure 11 shows thc Hm) estimates against the values predicted for around 0.9 s. The deepest explosions have yields of around 1000 kt or
the MM model for those explosions with announced yields. All greater and pulse durations of about 1.I s. Thus duration for scaled depth
estimates are less than the predicted values but for the LRSM stations of firing appears to scale at about (yicld)1/5 in agreement with the
only one value is more than a factor of two below the predicted. For prediction of the MM model. For explosions fired at depths shallower
DOUGLAS 135
(a) Frequency independent t* than those of the Pahute Mesa sequence the pulse durations and pulse
shapes are less regular. Thus the Yucca Flat explosions all have roughly
the same firing depth and magnitude, suggesting they do not differ greatly
in yield. The deconvolved seismograms would then be expected to have
very similar shapes. Examination of Figure 9, however, shows that the
relative amplitudes of P, App, and As differ significantly and the duration
of P is also highly variable. Similarly the shallow Pahute Mesa
explosion PANIR (depth of firing 681 m: yield 20150 kt) shows a
seismogram that is very similar to that of GREELEY (depth of firing
(b) Frequency dependent t * 1215 m; yield 870 kt).
Figure 12 shows the rise times measured by Lyman ct al. 119861 for
the 39 Nevada explosions against maximumlikelihood magnitude
(mbML). Rise times measured from the BB seismograms both before and
after correction for attenuation are shown. Because the BB seismograms
have been lowpass filtered the estimated risetime will in general be
larger than the true value. Also because the seismograms are digitised at
20 samples/s there is obviously a lower limit to the estimated rise time of
0.05 s. But most of the observed risetimes are 0.2 s or greater so the
effect of these measurement errors is perhaps not important.
As can be seen from Tables 2 and 3 the effect on the rise time of
correcting for attenuation varies from explosion to explosion; in general
applying the correction reduces the rise time, but the amount by which
o the rise time changes varies with mb (and hence presumably yield) and
, 5 10s
pulse shape.
Fig. 5. Dcconvolved P seismograms for the PILE DRIVER explosion The changes in rise time can be roughly understood using the results
recorded at Eskdalcmuir, Scotland. (a) Corrected for t* = 0.35 s and of Stewart [1984]. By convolving an attenuation operator with some
independent of frequency. (b) Corrected for the Burger attenuation model. simple pulseshapes, Stewart [I9841 shows how the rise time of the pulse
Fig. 6.