Kampfer ein Rauschgift für Fische

Ohne Zusammenfassung     

Soil bentonite wall protects foundation from thrust faulting: analyses and experiment

When seismic thrust faults emerge on the ground surface,they are particularly damaging to buildings,bridges and lifelines that lie on the rupture path.To protect a structure founded on a rigid raft,a thick diaphragm-type soil bentonite wall(SBW) is installed in front of and near the foundation,at sufficient depth to intercept the propagating fault rupture.Extensive numerical analyses,verified against reduced–scale(1 g) split box physical model tests,reveal that such a wall,thanks to its high deformability and low shear resistance,"absorbs" the compressive thrust of the fault and forces the rupture to deviate upwards along its length.As a consequence,the foundation is left essentially intact.The effectiveness of SBW is demonstrated to depend on the exact location of the emerging fault and the magnitude of the fault offset.When the latter is large,the unprotected foundation experiences intolerable rigid-body rotation even if the foundation structural distress is not substantial.     

Star counts in M15 onU,B andV plates

We present new counts of stars in M15, using plates inB, V andU. We are able to explore relatively close to the central parts of the cluster (0.1 pc) and we derive the best fitting parameters for the star distribution.     

An inter-comparison of tidal solutions computed with a range of unstructured grid models of the Irish and Celtic Sea Regions

Three finite element codes, namely TELEMAC, ADCIRC and QUODDY, are used to compute the spatial distributions of the M₂, M₄ and M₆ components of the tide in the sea region off the west coast of Britain. This region is chosen because there is an accurate topographic dataset in the area and detailed open boundary M₂ tidal forcing for driving the model. In addition, accurate solutions (based upon comparisons with extensive observations) using uniform grid finite difference models forced with these open boundary data exist for comparison purposes. By using boundary forcing, bottom topography and bottom drag coefficients identical to those used in an earlier finite difference model, there is no danger of comparing finite element solutions for “untuned unoptimised solutions” with those from a “tuned optimised solution”. In addition, by placing the open boundary in all finite element calculations at the same location as that used in a previous finite difference model and using the same M₂ tidal boundary forcing and water depths, a like with like comparison of solutions derived with the various finite element models was possible. In addition, this open boundary was well removed from the shallow water region, namely the eastern Irish Sea where the higher harmonics were generated. Since these are not included in the open boundary, forcing their generation was determined by physical processes within the models. Consequently, an inter-comparison of these higher harmonics generated by the various finite element codes gives some indication of the degree of variability in the solution particularly in coastal regions from one finite element model to another. Initial calculations using high-resolution near-shore topography in the eastern Irish Sea and including “wetting and drying” showed that M₂ tidal amplitudes and phases in the region computed with TELEMAC were in good agreement with observations. The ADCIRC code gave amplitudes about 30 cm lower and phases about 8° higher. For the M₄ tide, in the eastern Irish Sea amplitudes computed with TELEMAC were about 4 cm higher than ADCIRC on average, with phase differences of order 5°. For the M₆ component, amplitudes and phases showed significant small-scale variability in the eastern Irish Sea, and no clear bias between the models could be found. Although setting a minimum water depth of 5 m in the near-shore region, hence removing wetting and drying, reduced the small-scale variability in the models, the differences in M₂ and M₄ tide between models remained. For M₆, a significant reduction in variability occurred in the eastern Irish Sea when a minimum 5-m water depth was specified. In this case, TELEMAC gave amplitudes that were 1 cm higher and phases 30° lower than ADCIRC on average. For QUODDY in the eastern Irish Sea, average M₂ tidal amplitudes were about 10 cm higher and phase 8° higher than those computed with TELEMAC. For M₄, amplitudes were approximately 2 cm higher with phases of order 15° higher in the northern part of the region and 15° lower in the southern part. For M₆ in the north of the region, amplitudes were 2 cm higher and about 2 cm lower in the south. Very rapid M₆ tidal-phase changes occurred in the near-shore regions. The lessons learned from this model inter-comparison study are summarised in the final section of the paper. In addition, the problems of performing a detailed model–model inter-comparison are discussed, as are the enormous difficulties of conducting a true model skill assessment that would require detailed measurements of tidal boundary forcing, near-shore topography and precise knowledge of bed types and bed forms. Such data are at present not available.     

Amplitudes of long-period PcP and the core-mantle boundary

The amplitudes of the core reflection PcP are sensitive to the wave velocities and densities in the neighborhood of the core-mantle boundary (CMB). We study the amplitude ratio of the long-period phases PcP and P from two South American deep-focus earthquakes with favorable fault-plane solution, depth and magnitude, as recorded by WWNSS and CSN stations in North America.Comparison is made with long-period PcP/P amplitude ratios, derived from theoretical seismograms for a variety of CMB models. Models from previous studies, which were mainly derived from short-period PcP observations and which are characterized by discrete layers above the CMB, are almost all inconsistent with the long-period data. The data also discriminate against low nonzero S velocities below the CMB. Simple first-order-discontinuity models of the CMB, for instance according to the Jeffreys-Bullen earth model or according to recent models based mainly on free oscillations, explain the data reasonably well.Model improvements are attempted by varying the P-velocity gradient above the CMB. The best amplitude fit is obtained for a rather strong decrease in P velocity with depth in this zone which, however, gives no acceptable traveltime fit for PcP. The scatter in body-wave amplitudes is considerable even for long-period waves and may prevent the correct assessment of that part of the amplitude variation of a phase with distance that is due to the variation of velocities and densities with depth alone.     

Evolution and observational signature of diffused antiworld

The existence of macroscopic regions with antibaryon excess in the baryon asymmetric Universe with general baryon excess is the possible consequence of practically all models of baryosynthesis. Diffusion of matter and antimatter to the border of antimatter domains defines the minimal scale of the antimatter domains surviving to the present time. A model of diffused antiworld is considered, in which the density within the surviving antimatter domains is too low to form gravitationally bound objects. The possibility to test this model by measurements of cosmic gamma ray fluxes is discussed. The expected gamma ray flux is found to be acceptable for modern cosmic gamma ray detectors and for those planned for the near future.