We used teleseismic P and S waves recorded in the course of the 2016 Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology (IRIS) community‐planned experiment in northern Oklahoma, to estimate amplitude correction factors (ACFs) and orientation correction factors (OCFs) for the gradiometer’s three‐component Fairfield nodal sensors and two other gradiometer‐styled subarray nodal sensors. These subarrays were embedded in the 13 km aperture nodal array that was also fielded during the 2016 IRIS experiment. The array calibration method we used in this study is based on the premise that a common wavefield should be recorded over a small‐aperture array using teleseismic observation. In situ estimates of ACF for the gradiometer vary by 2.3% (standard deviation) for the vertical components and, typically, variability is less than 4.3% for the horizontal components; associated OCFs generally dispersed by 3°. For the two subarrays, the vertical‐component ACF usually vary up to 2.4%; their horizontal‐component ACFs largely spread up to 3.6%. OCFs for the subarrays generally disperse by 6.5°. ACF and OCF estimates for the gradiometer are seen to be stable across frequency bands having high signal coherence and/or signal‐to‐noise ratio. Gradiometry analyses of calibrated and uncalibrated gradiometer records from a local event revealed notable improvements in accuracy of attributes obtained from analyzing the calibrated horizontal‐component waveforms in the light of catalog epicenter‐derived azimuth. The improved waveform relative amplitudes after calibration, coupled with the enhanced wave attribute accuracy, suggests that instrument calibration for amplitude statics and orientation errors should be encouraged prior to doing gradiometry analysis in future studies.

You do not currently have access to this article.