Skip to main content
Log in

Seismic excitation by space shuttles

  • Published:
Shock Waves Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Shock waves generated by the space shuttles Columbia (August 13, 1989), Atlantis (April 11, 1991) and Discovery (September 18, 1991) on their return to Edwards Air Force Base, California, were recorded by TERRAscope (Caltech's broadband seismic network), the Caltech-U.S.G.S Southern California Seismic Network (SCSN), and the University of Southern California (USC) Los Angeles Basin Seismic Network. The spatial pattern of the arrival times exhibits hyperbolic shock fronts from which the path, velocity and altitude of the space shuttle could be determined. The shock wave was acoustically coupled to the ground, converted to a seismic wave, and recorded clearly at the broadband TERRAscope stations. The acoustic coupling occurred very differently depending on the conditions of the Earth's surface surrounding the station. For a seismic station located on hard bedrock, the shock wave (N wave) was clearly recorded with little distortion. Aside from the N wave, very little acoustic coupling of the shock wave energy to the ground occurred at these sites. The observed N wave record was used to estimate the overpressure of the shock wave accurately; a pressure change of 0.5 to 2.2 mbars was obtained. For a seismic station located close to the ocean or soft sedimentary basins, a significant amount of shock wave energy was transferred to the ground through acoustic coupling of the shock wave and the oceanic Rayleigh wave. A distinct topography such as a mountain range was found effective to couple the shock wave energy to the ground. Shock wave energy was also coupled to the ground very effectively through large man made structures such as high rise buildings and offshore oil drilling platforms. For the space shuttle Columbia, in particular, a distinct pulse having a period of about 2 to 3 seconds was observed, 12.5 s before the shock wave, with a broadband seismograph in Pasadena. This pulse was probably excited by the high rise buildings in downtown Los Angeles which were simultaneously hit by the space shuttle shock waves. The proximity of the natural periods of the high rise buildings and the modal periods of the Los Angeles basin enabled efficient energy transfer from shock wave to seismic wave.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ben Menachem A, Singh SJ (1981) Seismic waves and sources. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1:1108

    Google Scholar 

  • Borden F (1989) Private communication

  • Carlson HW, Maglieri DJ (1972) Review of sonic-boom generation theory and prediction methods. J Acoust Soc Am 51:675–685

    Google Scholar 

  • Cook JC, Goforth T (1972) Seismic and underwater responses to sonic boom. J Acoust Soc Am 51:729–741

    Google Scholar 

  • Garcia FJ, Jones JH, Henderson HR (1985) Correlation of predicted and measured sonic boom characteristics from the reentry of STS-1 orbiter. NASA Tech Paper 2475, pp 1–42

  • Haskell NA (1962) Crustal reflection of plane P and SV waves. J Geophys Res 67:4751–4767

    Google Scholar 

  • Hauksson E (1990) Earthquakes, faulting and stress in the Los Angeles basin. J Geophys Res 95:15365–15394

    Google Scholar 

  • Jennings PC (1970) Distant motions from building vibration test. Bull Seismo Soc Am 60:2037–2043

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanamori H, Mori J, Anderson DL, Heaton TH (1991) Seismic excitation by the space shuttle Columbia. Nature 349:781–782

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehner F (1990) Private communication

  • Liu HL, Heaton T (1984) Array analysis of the ground velocities and accelerations from the 1971 San Fernando, California earthquake. Bull Seismo Soc Am 74:1951–1968

    Google Scholar 

  • Mori J, Kanamori H (1991) Estimation of trajectories of supersonic objects using arrival times of sonic booms. U.S. Geo Survey Open File Rept 91-48

  • Vidale JE, Helmberger DV (1988) Elastic finite-difference modeling of the 1971 San Fernando, California, earthquake. Bull Seismo Soc Am 78:122–142

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitham GB (1974) Linear and nonlinear waves. John Wiley and Sons, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Working Group, CEP (1988) Probability of large earthquakes occurring in California on the San Andreas fault. U.S. Geo Survey Open File Rept 88-398

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

This article was processed using Springer-Verlag TEX Shock Waves macro package 1.0 and the AMS fonts, developed by the American Mathematical Society.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kanamori, H., Mori, J., Sturtevant, B. et al. Seismic excitation by space shuttles. Shock Waves 2, 89–96 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01415896

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01415896

Key words

Navigation