Location

2015/03/08 20:47:27 44.10 19.90 10 4.4 Serbia (webdc3)

Arrival Times (from USGS)

Felt Map

Focal Mechanism

USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution ENS 2015/03/08 20:47:27:0 44.10 19.90 10.0 4.4 Serbia (webdc3) Stations used: BS.PLD CL.AGRP HT.GRG HT.HORT HT.LIT HT.LKD2 HT.PAIG HT.SOH HT.SRS HT.XOR HU.BEHE HU.MORH HU.MPLH IV.FVI IV.PTCC MN.BLY MN.PDG MN.TRI MN.VTS OE.MYKA SJ.BBLS SJ.FRGS SL.BOJS SL.CADS SL.CEY SL.CRES SL.CRNS SL.GBAS SL.GBRS SL.GCIS SL.GORS SL.JAVS SL.KNDS SL.LJU SL.MOZS SL.PERS SL.ROBS Filtering commands used: cut o DIST/3.3 -30 o DIST/3.3 +70 rtr taper w 0.1 hp c 0.02 n 3 lp c 0.06 n 3 Best Fitting Double Couple Mo = 4.52e+22 dyne-cm Mw = 4.37 Z = 9 km Plane Strike Dip Rake NP1 80 85 10 NP2 349 80 175 Principal Axes: Axis Value Plunge Azimuth T 4.52e+22 11 305 N 0.00e+00 79 106 P -4.52e+22 3 214 Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm) Component Value Mxx -1.65e+22 Mxy -4.14e+22 Mxz 6.94e+21 Myy 1.51e+22 Myz -5.16e+21 Mzz 1.36e+21 ####---------- #########------------- ############---------------- ##############---------------- ##############----------------- # T ##############------------------ ## ###############------------------ #####################------------------- ######################------------------ #######################----------------### #######################---------########## #######################-################## ###########-------------################## -----------------------################# ------------------------################ -----------------------############### ----------------------############## ---------------------############# - ---------------########### P ---------------########## ---------------####### -----------### Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor: R T P 1.36e+21 6.94e+21 5.16e+21 6.94e+21 -1.65e+22 4.14e+22 5.16e+21 4.14e+22 1.51e+22 Details of the solution is found at http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.EU/20150308204727/index.html

Preferred Solution

The preferred solution from an analysis of the surface-wave spectral amplitude radiation pattern, waveform inversion and first motion observations is

      STK = 80
      DIP = 85
     RAKE = 10
       MW = 4.37
       HS = 9.0

The NDK file is 20150308204727.ndk The waveform inversion is preferred.

Moment Tensor Comparison

The following compares this source inversion to others

SLU OTHER

USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution ENS 2015/03/08 20:47:27:0 44.10 19.90 10.0 4.4 Serbia (webdc3) Stations used: BS.PLD CL.AGRP HT.GRG HT.HORT HT.LIT HT.LKD2 HT.PAIG HT.SOH HT.SRS HT.XOR HU.BEHE HU.MORH HU.MPLH IV.FVI IV.PTCC MN.BLY MN.PDG MN.TRI MN.VTS OE.MYKA SJ.BBLS SJ.FRGS SL.BOJS SL.CADS SL.CEY SL.CRES SL.CRNS SL.GBAS SL.GBRS SL.GCIS SL.GORS SL.JAVS SL.KNDS SL.LJU SL.MOZS SL.PERS SL.ROBS Filtering commands used: cut o DIST/3.3 -30 o DIST/3.3 +70 rtr taper w 0.1 hp c 0.02 n 3 lp c 0.06 n 3 Best Fitting Double Couple Mo = 4.52e+22 dyne-cm Mw = 4.37 Z = 9 km Plane Strike Dip Rake NP1 80 85 10 NP2 349 80 175 Principal Axes: Axis Value Plunge Azimuth T 4.52e+22 11 305 N 0.00e+00 79 106 P -4.52e+22 3 214 Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm) Component Value Mxx -1.65e+22 Mxy -4.14e+22 Mxz 6.94e+21 Myy 1.51e+22 Myz -5.16e+21 Mzz 1.36e+21 ####---------- #########------------- ############---------------- ##############---------------- ##############----------------- # T ##############------------------ ## ###############------------------ #####################------------------- ######################------------------ #######################----------------### #######################---------########## #######################-################## ###########-------------################## -----------------------################# ------------------------################ -----------------------############### ----------------------############## ---------------------############# - ---------------########### P ---------------########## ---------------####### -----------### Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor: R T P 1.36e+21 6.94e+21 5.16e+21 6.94e+21 -1.65e+22 4.14e+22 5.16e+21 4.14e+22 1.51e+22 Details of the solution is found at http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.EU/20150308204727/index.html

GFZ Event gfz2015esej 15/03/08 20:47:27.81 NW Balkan Region Epicenter: 44.10 19.90 MW 4.4 GFZ MOMENT TENSOR SOLUTION Depth 10 No. of sta: 96 Moment Tensor; Scale 10**15 Nm Mrr=-0.54 Mtt=-0.69 Mpp= 1.23 Mrt= 0.29 Mrp=-0.03 Mtp= 4.50 Principal axes: T Val= 4.88 Plg= 2 Azm=309 N -0.52 86 64 P -4.35 4 219 Best Double Couple:Mo=4.6*10**15 NP1:Strike=354 Dip=86 Slip=-178 NP2: 264 89 -3 ####------- #######---------- ###########------------ ############------------- ##############--------------- ##############--------------- ################--------------- #################---------------- #################---------------- ##############---################ -----------------################ ------------------############### -----------------############## ----------------############# ----------------############# --------------########### -------------########## ----------####### -------####

Waveform Inversion

The focal mechanism was determined using broadband seismic waveforms. The location of the event and the and stations used for the waveform inversion are shown in the next figure.

Location of broadband stations used for waveform inversion

The program wvfgrd96 was used with good traces observed at short distance to determine the focal mechanism, depth and seismic moment. This technique requires a high quality signal and well determined velocity model for the Green functions. To the extent that these are the quality data, this type of mechanism should be preferred over the radiation pattern technique which requires the separate step of defining the pressure and tension quadrants and the correct strike.

The observed and predicted traces are filtered using the following gsac commands:

cut o DIST/3.3 -30 o DIST/3.3 +70
rtr
taper w 0.1
hp c 0.02 n 3 
lp c 0.06 n 3

The results of this grid search from 0.5 to 19 km depth are as follow:

           DEPTH  STK   DIP  RAKE   MW    FIT
WVFGRD96    1.0   260    90     0   4.04 0.3825
WVFGRD96    2.0    80    80    -5   4.15 0.4976
WVFGRD96    3.0    80    80   -10   4.21 0.5611
WVFGRD96    4.0    80    80     5   4.24 0.6050
WVFGRD96    5.0    80    85     5   4.27 0.6355
WVFGRD96    6.0    80    85     5   4.30 0.6574
WVFGRD96    7.0    80    85     5   4.33 0.6746
WVFGRD96    8.0    80    85    10   4.35 0.6895
WVFGRD96    9.0    80    85    10   4.37 0.6930
WVFGRD96   10.0   260    90   -10   4.39 0.6901
WVFGRD96   11.0    80    85    15   4.40 0.6874
WVFGRD96   12.0   260    90   -10   4.41 0.6823
WVFGRD96   13.0   260    90   -10   4.42 0.6766
WVFGRD96   14.0    80    90    10   4.43 0.6711
WVFGRD96   15.0   260    80     0   4.44 0.6712
WVFGRD96   16.0   260    80     0   4.45 0.6699
WVFGRD96   17.0   260    80    -5   4.46 0.6672
WVFGRD96   18.0   260    80    -5   4.47 0.6629
WVFGRD96   19.0   260    80    -5   4.48 0.6572
WVFGRD96   20.0   260    80    -5   4.48 0.6513
WVFGRD96   21.0   260    85    -5   4.48 0.6454
WVFGRD96   22.0   260    85    -5   4.49 0.6388
WVFGRD96   23.0   260    85    -5   4.50 0.6321
WVFGRD96   24.0    80    90    10   4.50 0.6222
WVFGRD96   25.0   260    85    -5   4.51 0.6168
WVFGRD96   26.0    80    90     5   4.51 0.6087
WVFGRD96   27.0   260    90    -5   4.51 0.6011
WVFGRD96   28.0    80    90     5   4.52 0.5937
WVFGRD96   29.0   260    90    -5   4.53 0.5861

The best solution is

WVFGRD96    9.0    80    85    10   4.37 0.6930

The mechanism correspond to the best fit is

Figure 1. Waveform inversion focal mechanism

The best fit as a function of depth is given in the following figure:

Figure 2. Depth sensitivity for waveform mechanism

The comparison of the observed and predicted waveforms is given in the next figure. The red traces are the observed and the blue are the predicted. Each observed-predicted component is plotted to the same scale and peak amplitudes are indicated by the numbers to the left of each trace. A pair of numbers is given in black at the right of each predicted traces. The upper number it the time shift required for maximum correlation between the observed and predicted traces. This time shift is required because the synthetics are not computed at exactly the same distance as the observed and because the velocity model used in the predictions may not be perfect. A positive time shift indicates that the prediction is too fast and should be delayed to match the observed trace (shift to the right in this figure). A negative value indicates that the prediction is too slow. The lower number gives the percentage of variance reduction to characterize the individual goodness of fit (100% indicates a perfect fit).

The bandpass filter used in the processing and for the display was

cut o DIST/3.3 -30 o DIST/3.3 +70
rtr
taper w 0.1
hp c 0.02 n 3 
lp c 0.06 n 3

Figure 3. Waveform comparison for selected depth

Focal mechanism sensitivity at the preferred depth. The red color indicates a very good fit to thewavefroms. Each solution is plotted as a vector at a given value of strike and dip with the angle of the vector representing the rake angle, measured, with respect to the upward vertical (N) in the figure.

A check on the assumed source location is possible by looking at the time shifts between the observed and predicted traces. The time shifts for waveform matching arise for several reasons:

The origin time and epicentral distance are incorrect
The velocity model used for the inversion is incorrect
The velocity model used to define the P-arrival time is not the same as the velocity model used for the waveform inversion (assuming that the initial trace alignment is based on the P arrival time)

Assuming only a mislocation, the time shifts are fit to a functional form:

 Time_shift = A + B cos Azimuth + C Sin Azimuth

The time shifts for this inversion lead to the next figure:

The derived shift in origin time and epicentral coordinates are given at the bottom of the figure.

Discussion

The Future

Should the national backbone of the USGS Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS) be implemented with an interstation separation of 300 km, it is very likely that an earthquake such as this would have been recorded at distances on the order of 100-200 km. This means that the closest station would have information on source depth and mechanism that was lacking here.

Acknowledgements

Dr. Harley Benz, USGS, provided the USGS USNSN digital data. The digital data used in this study were provided by Natural Resources Canada through their AUTODRM site http://www.seismo.nrcan.gc.ca/nwfa/autodrm/autodrm_req_e.php, and IRIS using their BUD interface.

Thanks also to the many seismic network operators whose dedication make this effort possible: University of Alaska, University of Washington, Oregon State University, University of Utah, Montana Bureas of Mines, UC Berkely, Caltech, UC San Diego, Saint L ouis University, Universityof Memphis, Lamont Doehrty Earth Observatory, Boston College, the Iris stations and the Transportable Array of EarthScope.

Velocity Model

The WUS used for the waveform synthetic seismograms and for the surface wave eigenfunctions and dispersion is as follows:

MODEL.01
Model after     8 iterations
ISOTROPIC
KGS
FLAT EARTH
1-D
CONSTANT VELOCITY
LINE08
LINE09
LINE10
LINE11
      H(KM)   VP(KM/S)   VS(KM/S) RHO(GM/CC)         QP         QS       ETAP       ETAS      FREFP      FREFS
     1.9000     3.4065     2.0089     2.2150  0.302E-02  0.679E-02   0.00       0.00       1.00       1.00    
     6.1000     5.5445     3.2953     2.6089  0.349E-02  0.784E-02   0.00       0.00       1.00       1.00    
    13.0000     6.2708     3.7396     2.7812  0.212E-02  0.476E-02   0.00       0.00       1.00       1.00    
    19.0000     6.4075     3.7680     2.8223  0.111E-02  0.249E-02   0.00       0.00       1.00       1.00    
     0.0000     7.9000     4.6200     3.2760  0.164E-10  0.370E-10   0.00       0.00       1.00       1.00

Quality Control

Here we tabulate the reasons for not using certain digital data sets

The following stations did not have a valid response files:

DATE=Sun Mar 8 19:13:26 CDT 2015

Last Changed 2015/03/08