Advertisement

Electrokinetic Effect in Fractal Pore Media as Seismoelectric Phenomena

  • V.V. Surkov
  • H. Tanaka

Summary

In this chapter the theory of electrokinetic effect on fractal is developed. Inhomogeneous water-saturated medium with fractal structure of pore space is a subject of investigation. The fluid migration along the percolation clusters is accompanied by the electrokinetic effect caused by contact potential difference at phase bounds. The electrokinetic current density is found to depend on both the transport critical exponent and correlation length critical exponent. Two different models of the inhomogeneity embedded in rock are considered. In the first model a fractal core with high pore fluid pressure is surrounded by weak permeable rock. In the second one a non-fractal core composed of high permeable broken rock is surrounded by a fractal periphery. The electrokinetic current in the fractal regions results in the appearance of electric currents in conductive layers under the ground. Amplitude of the electric signal versus the size of fractal structure and distance from the source is estimated. This dependence is applied for seismic electric signals (SES) occasionally observed prior to great crustal earthquakes. Interestingly enough the empirical dependence of the SES amplitude on earthquake magnitude can be explained solely by accounting for the scaling arguments. A special credit is paid to study the duration of the SES. The fluid migration is described by a generalized diffusion type equation in Euclidean spaces to fractal spaces. The use of this equation makes it possible to consider the envelope of the fluid pressure, which is, in fact, a non-analytic function. The SES duration is found to be the same order of magnitude as the time of fluid diffusion on fractal that is much greater than the duration of the electric current propagation in conductive medium.

Keywords

Percolation Threshold Contact Potential Difference Fluid Migration Fractal Pore Medium Effective Dipole Moment 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bernard P (1992) Plausibility of long electrotelluric precursors to earthquakes. J Geophys Res 97: 17531–17546Google Scholar
  2. Bustingorry S, Reyes ER (2000) Biased diffusion in anisotropic disordered systems, Phys Rev E 62: 7664–7669CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Fedorov EN, Pilipenko VA, Vellante M, Uyeda S (2001) Electric and magnetic fields generated by electrokinetic processes in a conductive crust. Phys Chem Earth C 26:793–799Google Scholar
  4. Fenoglio MA, Johnston MJS, Byerlee JD (1995) Magnetic and electric fields associated with changes in high pore pressure in fault zones: Application to the Loma Prieta ULF emissions. J Geophys Res 100:12.951–12.958CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Feder E (1988) Fractals. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. Frenkel Ya I (1944) On the theory of seismic and seismoelectric phenomena in moist soil. Proc Academy of Sciences USSR series of geography and geophysics 8: 133–150Google Scholar
  7. Ivanov AG (1940) Seismoelectric effect of the second kind. Proc Academy of Sciences USSR series of geography and geophysics 4: 699–726Google Scholar
  8. Jouniaux L, Pozzi JP (1999) Streaming potential measurements in laboratory: a precursory measurement of the rupture and anomalous 0.1–0.5 Hz measurements under geochemical changes. In: Hayakawa M(ed) Atmospheric and ionospheric phenomena associated with earthquakes TERRAPUB, Tokyo, pp. 873–880Google Scholar
  9. Kanamori H, Anderson DL (1975) Theoretical basis of some empirical relations in seismology. Bull Seism Soc Amer 65:1073–1095Google Scholar
  10. Martner ST, Sparks NR (1959) The electroseismic effect. Geophysics 24: 297–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Mizutani H, Ishido T (1976) A new interpretation of magnetic field variation associated with the Matsushita earthquakes. J Geomagn Geoelectr 28:179–188Google Scholar
  12. Nikolaevskiy VN (1996) Geomechanics and Fluidodynamics. Dordecht Boston, LondonGoogle Scholar
  13. Parks GA (1965) The isoelectric points of solid oxides, solid hydroxides, and aqueous hydroxo complex systems. Chem Rev 65:177–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Parks GA (1984) Surface and interfacial free energies of quartz. J. Geophys. Res. 89:3997–4008Google Scholar
  15. O’Shaughnessy B, Procaccia I (1985a) Analytical solutions for the diffusion on fractal objects. Phys Rev Lett 54:455–458Google Scholar
  16. O’Shaughnessy B, Procaccia I (1985b) Diffusion on fractals. Phys Rev 32A: 3073–2083Google Scholar
  17. Scholz CH (1990) The Mechanics of earthquakes and faulting. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge UKGoogle Scholar
  18. Stauffer D, Sornette D (1998) Log-periodic oscillations for biased diffusion on random lattice. Physica A 252: 271–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Surkov VV (1996) Front structure of the Alfven wave radiated into the magnetosphere due to excitation of the ionospheric E layer. J Geophys Res 101:15403–15409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Surkov VV (1997) The nature of electromagnetic forerunners of earthquakes, Trans (Doklady) Russian Acad Sci. Earth Science Sections 355:945–947Google Scholar
  21. Surkov VV (1999) ULF electromagnetic perturbations resulting from the fracture and dilatancy in the earthquake preparation zone. In: Hayakawa M (ed) Atmospheric and Ionospheric Phenomena Associated with Earthquakes TERRAPUB, Tokyo, pp. 357–370Google Scholar
  22. Surkov VV (2000) Electromagnetic effects caused by earthquakes and explosions. MEPhI, MoscowGoogle Scholar
  23. Surkov VV, Uyeda S, Tanaka H, Hayakawa M (2002) Fractal properties of medium and seismoelectric phenomena. J Geodynamics 33: 477–487CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Surkov VV, Molchanov OA, Hayakawa M (2003) Pre-earthquake ULF electromagnetic perturbations as a result of inductive seismomagnetic phenomena during microfracturing. J Atmosphere and Solar-Terrestrial Physics 65:31–46Google Scholar
  25. Uyeda S, Nagao T, Orihara Y, Yamaguchi T, Takahashi I (2000) Geoelectric potential changes: Possible precursors to earthquakes in Japan. Proc Natl Acad Sci 97: 4561–4566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Varotsos P, Alexopoulos K (1984a) Physical properties of the variations of the electric field of the earth preceding earthquakes, I. Tectonophysics 110:73–98Google Scholar
  27. Varotsos P, Alexopoulos K (1984b) Physical properties of the variations of the electric field of the earth preceding earthquakes, II Determination of epicenter and magnitude. Tectonophysics 110:99–125Google Scholar
  28. Varotsos P, Lazaridou M, Eftaxias K., Antonopoulos G, Makris J, Kopanas J (1996) Short term earthquake prediction in Greece by seismic electric signals. In: Lighthill S J (ed) A Critical Review of VAN, World Scientific, Singapore. pp 29–76Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • V.V. Surkov
    • 1
  • H. Tanaka
    • 2
  1. 1.Moscow State Engineering Physics InstituteMoscowRussia
  2. 2.RIKEN, International Frontier Research Group on Earthquakesc/o Tokai UniversityShimizuJapan

Personalised recommendations