2019 SSA SIG Survey Results on Rapid Response

On April 26, 2019, IRIS hosted a special interest group (SIG) meeting to survey the community on their scientific interests and instrumentation needs related to responding rapidly to geohazards (large earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, landslides, etc.).  An interactive polling tool (VoxVote) was used at the SIG to allow participants to respond to questions using their wifi-enabled devices.  We have tabulated the results of the survey, and present them here for public review.

Survey Statistics

• Our SIG survey had 108 unique participants
• A total of 2,410 votes were submitted across 17 science questions
• Only 3 questions were single choice, all others were multiple choice

Survey Findings (high-level)

• Earthquakes/aftershocks remain the most popular rapid response target.
• Only 1/3 of participants say that the current PASSCAL inventory is meeting their current rapid response needs.  The remainder want some combination of more instruments, different instruments, or faster delivery of instruments.
• When asked about desired seismic instrumentation, 33% asked for broadbands, followed by 25% each for strong motion and nodes.  Short periods were requested by 15%.
• About 40% of participants said they'd like to deploy between 10-25 seismic stations for their rapid deployment.  33% said they'd like to deploy 100 or more.
• The most popular deployment durations were: months (35%), years (28.7%), and weeks (22.4%)
• The most requested non-seismic instrumentation for rapid response deployments was geodetic, followed by fiber optics, LiDAR, and infrasound.
• Respondents were equally split on whether the facility should prioritize: 1. aadding more instruments, 2. minimizing deployment logistics, or 3. lowering power requirements.
• More than half of participants said they only wanted field support during deployment, and nearly a third said they needed no field support at all.
• Telemetry was required by 37% of participants, but even more (49%) said they'd consider it if the cost was reasonable.  Of those wanting telemetry, about half wanted real-time data monitoring capabilities opposed to just state of health or triggered events.
• 82% of participants say they wanted to deploy within the first few days after a geohazard event occurs (30% within hours)
• The largest limiting factor for rapid deployments was access to funding (42.5%) followed by access to the right instrumentation (31%).

Survey Results by Question

• Q3: What geohazards would you like to be able to monitor/observe with instruments?
  • 19.2% Earthquakes/aftershocks
  • 13.4% Volcanoes
  • 12.9% Induced seismicity
  • 10.7% Landslides/avalanches
  • 7.7% Tsunami
  • 7.5% Submarine events
  • 5.5% Liquefaction
  • 5.2% Flooding/lahar
  • 5.2% Weather
  • 4.7% Cryospheric phenomena
  • 4.2% Sinkholes
  • 2.2% Other
  • 1.5% Geomagnetic
• Q4: How many of you have done a rapid response deployment before?
  • 42.7% Yes
  • 39.5% No, but I want to
  • 17.7% No, just here for free lunch
• Q5: If you haven't done a rapid deployment, what's the limiting factor?
  • 42.5% Access to funding
  • 31.0% Access to right instrumentation
  • 26.5% Access to field support
• Q6: Does the PASSCAL facility meet your needs to observe and respond to geohazards?
  • 29.3% Yes
  • 25.6% No, need different types of instruments
  • 24.4% No, need more instruments
  • 20.7% No, need instruments in a more timely manner
• Q7: What seismic instrumentation do you require to respond to and observe geohazards?
  • 34.5% Broadbands
  • 27.1% Strong motion
  • 22.7% Nodes
  • 15.8% Short periods
• Q8: What other instruments do you use or require?
  • 18.1% GNSS / Geodetics
  • 14.1% Fiber optics / DAS
  • 12.3% LiDAR
  • 11.6% Infrasound
  • 10.9% Cameras
  • 9.4% Strainmeters / LVDT
  • 8.7% Weather
  • 4.7% Tide gauges
  • 4.3% Magnetometers
  • 4.0% Magnetotellurics
  • 1.8% Other
• Q9: How many instruments would you like deploy?
  • 23.7% 20-25
  • 19.1% 10-20
  • 17.6% 100+
  • 15.3% 1000+
  • 13.7% 50-100
  • 10.7% <10
• Q10: What is the duration of a typical deployment?
  • 35.% Months
  • 28.7% Years
  • 22.4% Weeks
  • 7.7% Decadal scale
  • 6.3% Days
• Q11: What is your preferred response time (i.e. what is "rapid response")?
  • 52.0% Days
  • 30.1% Hours
  • 8.9% Weeks
  • 8.9% Scheduled or recurring event
  • 0% Months
• Q12: How quickly can you commit funding for a geohazard response?
  • 32.0% Days
  • 27.2% Immediately
  • 21.4% Weeks
  • 19.4% Months
• Q13: What geodetic equipment support do you require?
  • 50.5% GNSS
  • 26.7% LiDAR
  • 13.3% RTK
  • 9.5% Other
• Q14: How important is the minimization of SWaP (size, weight, and power)?
  • 35.0% Moderate (logistics limit capacity - helicopter, mules, etc.)
  • 29.2% Critical (we carry everything for miles)
  • 27.5% To some extent (road access - minimal footprint)
  • 8.3% Not at all (permanent, large-scale observations)
• Q15: Where would you like us to point our engineering/development/procurement energy?
  • 35.0% Add more instruments
  • 32.8% Minimized deployment logistics
  • 32.1% Lower power systems
• Q16: Do you require IRIS field engineering support?
  • 53.8% Just to get us started on deployment
  • 28.8% Not at all
  • 17.5% Full deployment support (duration of mobilization and de-mobilization)
• Q17: Do you require telemetry?
  • 48.7% Depends - how much does it cost?
  • 37.2% Yes
  • 14.1% No
• Q18: If you require telemetry - what is the purpose?
  • 48.5% Real-time monitoring
  • 35.3% State of health monitoring
  • 16.2% Triggered events
• Q19: What telemetry topologies are most important?
  • 52.4% Station to your institute
  • 30.5% Station to hub
  • 17.1% Meshed-networks to a central hub