Advertisement

Pure and Applied Geophysics

, Volume 170, Issue 4, pp 547–560 | Cite as

Underwater Explosion (UWE) Analysis of the ROKS Cheonan Incident

  • So Gu Kim
  • Yefim Gitterman
Article

Abstract

The underwater explosion (UWE) resulting in the sinking of the South Korean warship, ROKS Cheonan occurred on March 26 2010. Raw data was analyzed from several 3-component stations—Baengyeong-do Korea Meteorological Administration (KMA) station (BAR), Ganghwa KMA station (GAHB), Incheon Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology (IRIS) station (INCN), the short-period station—Deokjeok-do KMA station (DEI), as well as from the seismo-acoustic array Baengyeong-do Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources (KIGAM) station (BRDAR). The ROKS Cheonan incident has been investigated by both the Multinational Civilian-Military Joint Investigation Group (Ministry of National Defense, 2010) and Hong (Bull Seism Soc Am 101:1554–1562, 2011). Their respective methods and conclusions are also presented in this study. One of the main differences between their findings and ours is that we deducted that the fundamental bubble frequency was 1.01 Hz with a subsequent oscillation of 1.72 Hz. Also, in contrast to findings by the MCMJIG and Hong, our analysis shows the first reverberation frequency to be 8.5 Hz and the subsequent one to be ≈25 Hz. The TNT-equivalent charge weight (seismic yield) and seismic magnitude were estimated from an observed bubble frequency of 1.01 Hz and the analytical model of a bubble pulse. From the data analyzed, we deducted that the seismic yield would be about 136 kg of TNT, which is equivalent to the individual yield of a large number of land control mines (LCM) which were abandoned in the vicinity of the ROKS Cheonan incident by the Republic of Korea (ROK) Navy in the 1970s (Ministry of National Defense 2010). Also, whereas both the MCMJIG and HONG estimated the local magnitude at 1.5, our findings came to the conclusion of a local magnitude of approximately 2.04 based on the bubble frequency of 1.01 Hz measured on the vertical component of BAR station data considering the empirical relationship between charge weight (TNT yield) and underwater explosion magnitude. Strong high-frequency signals collected at the 3-component BAR station approximately 30 s after P-wave arrivals and infrasound records at BRDAR clearly indicate powerful acoustic phases and N-waves caused by a relatively shallow UWE. T-phases are also observed on seismograms and spectra at 15–17 Hz on the DEI, GAHB, and INCN stations.

Keywords

Bubble pulse bubble collapse toroidal bubble whipping T-phase N-wave 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Boo Cheong Khoo (National University of Singapore), and Aman Zhang (Harbin Engineering University) for the insightful and informative discussions regarding this work. The bubble pulse periods by a boundary element method were calculated by Aman Zhang, Harbin Engineering University. Special appreciation is expressed to Aman Zhang for his contribution concerning a boundary element method and the bubble shape simulation.

References

  1. Barger, J. E. and Hamblen, W. R. (1980), The air gun impulsive underwater transducer, J. Acoust. Soc. Am, 68, 1038-1045.Google Scholar
  2. Baumgardt, D. R, (2003), Seismic characterization of underwater explosions and undersea earthquakes using spectral/cepstral modeling and inversion, in Proc. 21st Seismic Res. Symp. Technologies for Monitoring the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty, Sep. 2003, Available: http://www.rdss.info.
  3. Booth, D. C. (2009), The relation between seismic local magnitude M L and charge weight for UK explosions, British Geological Survey, Earth Hazards Programme, Open Report OR/09/062, 21 pp.Google Scholar
  4. Bowers, D. and Selby, N. D. (2009), Forensic seismology and the Comprehensive-nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty, Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, 37, 209-236.Google Scholar
  5. Brocher, T. M. (2003), Detonation charge size versus coda magnitude relations in California and Nevada, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 93, 2089-2105.Google Scholar
  6. Chapman, N. R. (1985), Waveform parameters of explosive charges, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 78, 672-681.Google Scholar
  7. Cole, R. H. (1948), Underwater Explosions, Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, New Jersey.Google Scholar
  8. Gitterman, Y. (2002), Implications of the Dead Sea experiment results for analysis of seismic recordings of the submarine “Kursk” explosions, Seism. Res. Lett., 73, 14-24.Google Scholar
  9. Gitterman, Y. and Kim, S. G. (2010), Interpretation of seismic and acoustic observations from underwater explosion accidents, The 8th General Assembly of the Asian Seismological Commission, Hanoi, Vietnam, 8-10 November, 2010.Google Scholar
  10. Gitterman, Y. and Shapira, A. (2001), Dead Sea seismic calibration experiment contributes to CTBT monitoring, Seism. Res. Lett., 72, 159-170.Google Scholar
  11. Gong, S. W., Ohl, S. W., and Klaseboer, E. (2010), Scaling law for bubbles induced by different external sources: theoretical and experimental study, Physical Review E 81, 056317, 1-11.Google Scholar
  12. Hong, T. (2011), Seismic Investigation of the 26 March 2010 Sinking of the South Korean Naval Vessel Cheonanham, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 101, 1554-1562.Google Scholar
  13. Jacob, A. W. (1975), Dispersed shots at optimum depth- an efficient seismic source for lithospheric studies, J. Geophysics 41, 63-71.Google Scholar
  14. Jacob, A. W. B. and Neilson, G. (1977), Magnitude Determination on LOWNET, GSU, Report 86, Institute of Geological Sciences, Edinburgh, Scotland, U.K., 40 pp.Google Scholar
  15. Khalturin, V. I., Rautian, T. G., and Richards, P. G. (1998), The seismic signal strength of chemical explosions, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 88, 1511-1524.Google Scholar
  16. Khoo, B. C. (2010), Personal communication with B. C. Khoo, Fluid Mechanics Group, Department of Mechanical Engineering, National University of Singapore, Singapore.Google Scholar
  17. Klaseboer, E., Khoo, B. C., and Hung, K. C. (2005), Dynamics of an oscillating bubble near a floating structure, J. of Fluids and Structure, 21, 395-412.Google Scholar
  18. Koper, K. D., Wallace, T. C., Taylor, S. R., and Hartse, H. E. (2001), Forensic seismology and the sinking of the Kursk, EOS 92, no. 4.Google Scholar
  19. Lee, S. and Suh, J. J. (2010), Rush Judgment: Inconsistencies in South Korea’s Cheonan Report, The Asia-Pacific Journal, 28-1-10, July 12, 2010.Google Scholar
  20. MCMJIG (Multinational Civilian-Military Joint Investigation Group) (2010), Joint Investigation Report: On the Attack against ROKS Cheonan, Ministry of National Defense, Seoul, 313 pp.Google Scholar
  21. Medwin, H. (1975), Speed of sound in water for realistic parameters, J. of Acoust. Soc. Am., 58, 1318-1319.Google Scholar
  22. Northrop, J. (1962), Evidence of dispersion in earthquake T- phases, J. Geophys. Res., 67, 2823-2830.Google Scholar
  23. Officer, C. B. (1958), Introduction to the theory of sound transmission, with application to the ocean, McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, 284 pp.Google Scholar
  24. Plesset, M. S. and Chapman, R. B. (1971), Collapse of an initially spherical cavity in the neighbourhood of solid boundary, J. of Fluid Mechanics, 47, 283-290.Google Scholar
  25. Pritchett, J. W. (1966), Explosion product redistribution mechanisms for scaled migrating underwater explosion bubbles, USNRDL-TR-1044, 23 May 1966.Google Scholar
  26. Rayleigh, J. W. S. (1917), On the pressure developed in a liquid during the collapse of a spherical cavity, Philos. Mag., 34, 94-98.Google Scholar
  27. Reymond, D., Hyvernaud, O., Talandier, J., and Okal, E. A. (2003), T-wave detection of two underwater explosions off Hawaii on 13 April 2003, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 93, 804-816.Google Scholar
  28. Savage, B and Helmberger, V. (2001), Kursk Explosion, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 91, 753-759.Google Scholar
  29. Sorrels, G., Bonner, J., and Herrin, E. T. (2002), Seismic precursors to space shuttle shock fronts, Pure Appl. Geophys., 159, 1153-1181.Google Scholar
  30. Swisdak, M. M. (1978), Explosion effects and properties: part IIexplosion effects in water, NSWC/WOL TR 76-116, 22 Feb 1978.Google Scholar
  31. Weinstein, M. S. (1968), Spectra of acoustic and seismic signals generated by underwater explosions during Chase experiment, J. Geophys. Res., 73, 5473–5476.Google Scholar
  32. Wielandt, E. (1975), Generation of seismic waves by underwater explosions, Geophys. J. R. astr. Soc., 40, 421-439.Google Scholar
  33. Willis, D. E. (1963), Seismic measurements of large underwater shots, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 53, 789-809.Google Scholar
  34. Zhang, A. (2012), Personal communication with A. Zhang, College of Shipbuilding Engineering, Harbin Engineering University, Harbin, China.Google Scholar
  35. Zhang, A. M., Yao, X. I., and Li, J. (2008), The interaction of an underwater explosion bubble and an elastic-plastic structure, Applied Ocean Research, 30, 159-171.Google Scholar
  36. Zhang, N. and Zong, Z. (2011), The effect of rigid-body motions on the whipping response of a ship hull subjected to an underwater bubble, J. of Fluids and Structures, 27, 1326-1336.Google Scholar
  37. Ziolkowski, A., Hanssen, P., Gatliff, R., Akubowicz, H., Dobson, A., Hampson, G., Li, X., and Liu, E., (2003), Use of low frequencies for sub-basalt imaging Geophys. Prospect. 51, 169-182.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Basel AG 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Korea Seismological InstituteGoyangSouth Korea
  2. 2.Geophysical Institute of IsraelLodIsrael

Personalised recommendations