2009/04/07 21:39:06 42.361 13.363 10.4 3.70 Italy
USGS Felt map for this earthquake
USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution
ENS 2009/04/07 21:39:06:0 42.36 13.36 10.4 3.7 Italy
Stations used:
IV.CAMP IV.INTR IV.LNSS IV.MTCE
Filtering commands used:
hp c 0.02 n 3
lp c 0.10 n 3
Best Fitting Double Couple
Mo = 2.66e+21 dyne-cm
Mw = 3.55
Z = 8 km
Plane Strike Dip Rake
NP1 146 52 -117
NP2 5 45 -60
Principal Axes:
Axis Value Plunge Azimuth
T 2.66e+21 4 254
N 0.00e+00 21 163
P -2.66e+21 69 354
Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm)
Component Value
Mxx -1.46e+20
Mxy 7.26e+20
Mxz -9.37e+20
Myy 2.45e+21
Myz -8.20e+19
Mzz -2.30e+21
-----------###
-----------------#####
##-------------------#######
##---------------------#######
####----------------------########
#####-----------------------########
######-----------------------#########
#######----------- ----------#########
########---------- P ----------#########
#########---------- ----------##########
##########----------------------##########
###########---------------------##########
#########--------------------##########
T ##########-------------------#########
###########-----------------##########
#############----------------#########
##############-------------#########
###############----------#########
################------########
##################-#########
##############--------
########------
Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor:
R T P
-2.30e+21 -9.37e+20 8.20e+19
-9.37e+20 -1.46e+20 -7.26e+20
8.20e+19 -7.26e+20 2.45e+21
Details of the solution is found at
http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.IT/20090407213906/index.html
|
STK = 5
DIP = 45
RAKE = -60
MW = 3.55
HS = 8.0
The waveform inversion is preferred.
The following compares this source inversion to others
USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution
ENS 2009/04/07 21:39:06:0 42.36 13.36 10.4 3.7 Italy
Stations used:
IV.CAMP IV.INTR IV.LNSS IV.MTCE
Filtering commands used:
hp c 0.02 n 3
lp c 0.10 n 3
Best Fitting Double Couple
Mo = 2.66e+21 dyne-cm
Mw = 3.55
Z = 8 km
Plane Strike Dip Rake
NP1 146 52 -117
NP2 5 45 -60
Principal Axes:
Axis Value Plunge Azimuth
T 2.66e+21 4 254
N 0.00e+00 21 163
P -2.66e+21 69 354
Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm)
Component Value
Mxx -1.46e+20
Mxy 7.26e+20
Mxz -9.37e+20
Myy 2.45e+21
Myz -8.20e+19
Mzz -2.30e+21
-----------###
-----------------#####
##-------------------#######
##---------------------#######
####----------------------########
#####-----------------------########
######-----------------------#########
#######----------- ----------#########
########---------- P ----------#########
#########---------- ----------##########
##########----------------------##########
###########---------------------##########
#########--------------------##########
T ##########-------------------#########
###########-----------------##########
#############----------------#########
##############-------------#########
###############----------#########
################------########
##################-#########
##############--------
########------
Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor:
R T P
-2.30e+21 -9.37e+20 8.20e+19
-9.37e+20 -1.46e+20 -7.26e+20
8.20e+19 -7.26e+20 2.45e+21
Details of the solution is found at
http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.IT/20090407213906/index.html
|
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.
|
|
|
|
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:
hp c 0.02 n 3 lp c 0.10 n 3The results of this grid search from 0.5 to 19 km depth are as follow:
DEPTH STK DIP RAKE MW FIT
WVFGRD96 0.5 105 85 15 3.31 0.3775
WVFGRD96 1.0 105 85 10 3.36 0.3677
WVFGRD96 2.0 270 45 0 3.44 0.3181
WVFGRD96 3.0 265 40 0 3.45 0.3318
WVFGRD96 4.0 85 30 -5 3.40 0.3517
WVFGRD96 5.0 55 15 -35 3.48 0.3673
WVFGRD96 6.0 -10 20 -95 3.52 0.3868
WVFGRD96 7.0 5 45 -65 3.60 0.4299
WVFGRD96 8.0 5 45 -60 3.55 0.4334
WVFGRD96 9.0 5 45 -60 3.56 0.4283
WVFGRD96 10.0 10 50 -55 3.56 0.4178
WVFGRD96 11.0 15 50 -50 3.58 0.4039
WVFGRD96 12.0 15 90 15 3.75 0.4015
WVFGRD96 13.0 195 90 -15 3.77 0.3919
WVFGRD96 14.0 195 90 -15 3.78 0.3736
WVFGRD96 15.0 10 90 20 3.78 0.3510
WVFGRD96 16.0 15 65 -25 3.68 0.3523
WVFGRD96 17.0 20 70 -25 3.71 0.3508
WVFGRD96 18.0 20 70 -25 3.72 0.3502
WVFGRD96 19.0 20 70 -25 3.74 0.3481
WVFGRD96 20.0 20 70 -25 3.75 0.3444
WVFGRD96 21.0 20 75 -25 3.75 0.3399
WVFGRD96 22.0 20 75 -20 3.79 0.3343
WVFGRD96 23.0 20 75 -25 3.78 0.3286
WVFGRD96 24.0 15 75 -25 3.77 0.3217
WVFGRD96 25.0 20 80 -20 3.81 0.3177
WVFGRD96 26.0 175 65 65 3.68 0.3239
WVFGRD96 27.0 185 80 30 3.76 0.3241
WVFGRD96 28.0 190 80 35 3.75 0.3275
WVFGRD96 29.0 190 85 35 3.77 0.3285
The best solution is
WVFGRD96 8.0 5 45 -60 3.55 0.4334
The mechanism correspond to the best fit is
|
|
|
The best fit as a function of depth is given in the following figure:
|
|
|
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. The number in black at the rightr of each predicted traces 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 bandpass filter used in the processing and for the display was
hp c 0.02 n 3 lp c 0.10 n 3
|
|
|
|
| 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. |
The nnCIA used for the waveform synthetic seismograms and for the surface wave eigenfunctions and dispersion is as follows:
MODEL.01
C.It. A. Di Luzio et al Earth Plan Lettrs 280 (2009) 1-12 Fig 5. 7-8 MODEL/SURF3
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
1.5000 3.7497 2.1436 2.2753 0.500E-02 0.100E-01 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
3.0000 4.9399 2.8210 2.4858 0.500E-02 0.100E-01 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
3.0000 6.0129 3.4336 2.7058 0.500E-02 0.100E-01 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
7.0000 5.5516 3.1475 2.6093 0.167E-02 0.333E-02 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
15.0000 5.8805 3.3583 2.6770 0.167E-02 0.333E-02 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
6.0000 7.1059 4.0081 3.0002 0.167E-02 0.333E-02 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
8.0000 7.1000 3.9864 3.0120 0.167E-02 0.333E-02 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
0.0000 7.9000 4.4036 3.2760 0.167E-02 0.333E-02 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Here we tabulate the reasons for not using certain digital data sets
The following stations did not have a valid response files:
DATE=Sun Apr 19 20:21:30 CDT 2009