Soviet Seismographic Stations and Seismic Instruments, Part II
ResearchPublished 1975
ResearchPublished 1975
Second in a series on Soviet seismographic stations and seismic instruments, this report deals mainly with instruments and components developed since 1960, summarizing all the useful information published in Soviet scientific literature through June 1975. Among the conclusions: (1) Short-period seismometer design is constrained by massiveness. (2) Long-period seismometers are not as mechanically and geometrically precise as modern U.S. types. (3) Mechanical gain/attenuation is widely obtained by varying the coil position. (4) Response curves are more heavily damped. (5) Short-period galvanometers are well developed. (6) Older solid-state amplifiers are 1-2 orders of magnitude noisier than American ones. (7) FM tape recording is reasonably well developed. (8) Digital systems are few and rather primitive. (9) FM telemetry is little used. (10) Photo-optical technology is well developed. (11) Recording is narrow-band, emphasizing the response needed in analysis. Appendixes give the main parameters of the computers used and list new seismographic stations. (See also R-1204 and R-1652.)
This publication is part of the RAND report series. The report series, a product of RAND from 1948 to 1993, represented the principal publication documenting and transmitting RAND's major research findings and final research.
This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.
RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.