Earthquake prediction and monitoring are increasingly needed for humans because of their fatal effects. Given the unpredictable nature of these phenomena, early detection of possible damaging seismic waves is crucial and, therefore, has been an increasingly main focus of research. Timely detection of earthquakes comes through seismic stations in addition to algorithms. These stations contain extremely expensive instrumentation, which limits their widespread use. Nowadays, however, many sensors have been designed to be capable of making the same measurements as seismographs at a significantly lower price. In order to verify the applicability of MEMS accelerometers in structural building monitoring and earthquake prediction, it is mandatory to characterize their noise floor. Given the extensive comparison of the strengths and weaknesses of the two accelerometers already discussed by many authors, this paper will compare their performances for earthquake detection applications. A noise floor characterization of these sensors is presented. The objective is to perform a prior metrological evaluation of these instruments, comparing low-cost MEMS-based and analog accelerometers used to date. A comparison of noise floors using FFT and Allan Variance will be reported. The good results show these instruments' applicability in the field, paving the way for their more widespread distribution.

Noise Floor Characterization in Accelerometers for Earthquake Monitoring

Iacono, Salvatore Dello;
2023-01-01

Abstract

Earthquake prediction and monitoring are increasingly needed for humans because of their fatal effects. Given the unpredictable nature of these phenomena, early detection of possible damaging seismic waves is crucial and, therefore, has been an increasingly main focus of research. Timely detection of earthquakes comes through seismic stations in addition to algorithms. These stations contain extremely expensive instrumentation, which limits their widespread use. Nowadays, however, many sensors have been designed to be capable of making the same measurements as seismographs at a significantly lower price. In order to verify the applicability of MEMS accelerometers in structural building monitoring and earthquake prediction, it is mandatory to characterize their noise floor. Given the extensive comparison of the strengths and weaknesses of the two accelerometers already discussed by many authors, this paper will compare their performances for earthquake detection applications. A noise floor characterization of these sensors is presented. The objective is to perform a prior metrological evaluation of these instruments, comparing low-cost MEMS-based and analog accelerometers used to date. A comparison of noise floors using FFT and Allan Variance will be reported. The good results show these instruments' applicability in the field, paving the way for their more widespread distribution.
2023
Conference Record - IEEE Instrumentation and Measurement Technology Conference
Altra università italiana
Inglese
2023 IEEE International Instrumentation and Measurement Technology Conference, I2MTC 2023
2023
Kuala Lumpur, Malesia
Internazionale
ELETTRONICO
2023-May
1
6
6
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.
Accelerometers, Earthquake, Structural Monitoring
no
Goal 11: Sustainable cities and communities
none
Buonocore, Daniele; Carratú, Marco; Iacono, Salvatore Dello; Gallo, Vincenzo; Paciello, Vincenzo
273
info:eu-repo/semantics/conferenceObject
5
4 Contributo in Atti di Convegno (Proceeding)::4.1 Contributo in Atti di convegno
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11379/628614
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 7
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 5
social impact