2009/05/25 16:37:28 42.256 13.568 7.8 3.20 Italy
USGS Felt map for this earthquake
USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution
ENS 2009/05/25 16:37:28:0 42.26 13.57 7.8 3.2 Italy
Stations used:
IV.CAFR IV.CAMP IV.CESX IV.FDMO IV.FIAM IV.GUAR IV.GUMA
IV.LPEL IV.MTCE IV.OFFI IV.TERO MN.AQU
Filtering commands used:
hp c 0.02 n 3
lp c 0.10 n 3
Best Fitting Double Couple
Mo = 6.46e+20 dyne-cm
Mw = 3.14
Z = 1 km
Plane Strike Dip Rake
NP1 340 50 -75
NP2 137 42 -107
Principal Axes:
Axis Value Plunge Azimuth
T 6.46e+20 4 59
N 0.00e+00 11 150
P -6.46e+20 78 311
Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm)
Component Value
Mxx 1.54e+20
Mxy 2.95e+20
Mxz -6.39e+19
Myy 4.60e+20
Myz 1.39e+20
Mzz -6.14e+20
##############
---------#############
---------------#############
------------------############
##--------------------###########
###---------------------########## T
####----------------------#########
#####-----------------------############
#####---------- -----------###########
######---------- P ------------###########
#######--------- ------------###########
########------------------------##########
########------------------------##########
#########----------------------#########
##########---------------------#########
###########-------------------########
###########------------------#######
#############---------------######
##############-----------#####
##################-----###--
###################---
##############
Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor:
R T P
-6.14e+20 -6.39e+19 -1.39e+20
-6.39e+19 1.54e+20 -2.95e+20
-1.39e+20 -2.95e+20 4.60e+20
Details of the solution is found at
http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.IT/20090525163728/index.html
|
STK = 340
DIP = 50
RAKE = -75
MW = 3.14
HS = 1.0
The waveform inversion is preferred.
The following compares this source inversion to others
USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution
ENS 2009/05/25 16:37:28:0 42.26 13.57 7.8 3.2 Italy
Stations used:
IV.CAFR IV.CAMP IV.CESX IV.FDMO IV.FIAM IV.GUAR IV.GUMA
IV.LPEL IV.MTCE IV.OFFI IV.TERO MN.AQU
Filtering commands used:
hp c 0.02 n 3
lp c 0.10 n 3
Best Fitting Double Couple
Mo = 6.46e+20 dyne-cm
Mw = 3.14
Z = 1 km
Plane Strike Dip Rake
NP1 340 50 -75
NP2 137 42 -107
Principal Axes:
Axis Value Plunge Azimuth
T 6.46e+20 4 59
N 0.00e+00 11 150
P -6.46e+20 78 311
Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm)
Component Value
Mxx 1.54e+20
Mxy 2.95e+20
Mxz -6.39e+19
Myy 4.60e+20
Myz 1.39e+20
Mzz -6.14e+20
##############
---------#############
---------------#############
------------------############
##--------------------###########
###---------------------########## T
####----------------------#########
#####-----------------------############
#####---------- -----------###########
######---------- P ------------###########
#######--------- ------------###########
########------------------------##########
########------------------------##########
#########----------------------#########
##########---------------------#########
###########-------------------########
###########------------------#######
#############---------------######
##############-----------#####
##################-----###--
###################---
##############
Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor:
R T P
-6.14e+20 -6.39e+19 -1.39e+20
-6.39e+19 1.54e+20 -2.95e+20
-1.39e+20 -2.95e+20 4.60e+20
Details of the solution is found at
http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.IT/20090525163728/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 0.5 345 55 -70 3.10 0.3508
WVFGRD96 1.0 340 50 -75 3.14 0.3536
WVFGRD96 2.0 345 50 -70 3.19 0.3447
WVFGRD96 3.0 330 20 -90 3.21 0.3001
WVFGRD96 4.0 335 25 -85 3.21 0.2938
WVFGRD96 5.0 340 25 -80 3.30 0.2993
WVFGRD96 6.0 345 25 -70 3.29 0.2811
WVFGRD96 7.0 185 60 -50 3.21 0.2640
WVFGRD96 8.0 25 55 20 3.22 0.2654
WVFGRD96 9.0 25 55 20 3.23 0.2636
WVFGRD96 10.0 25 55 20 3.24 0.2622
WVFGRD96 11.0 25 55 20 3.25 0.2615
WVFGRD96 12.0 25 55 25 3.26 0.2592
WVFGRD96 13.0 25 60 20 3.27 0.2557
WVFGRD96 14.0 30 55 30 3.28 0.2517
WVFGRD96 15.0 30 55 30 3.31 0.2451
WVFGRD96 16.0 30 55 30 3.32 0.2401
WVFGRD96 17.0 200 65 35 3.29 0.2345
WVFGRD96 18.0 200 65 35 3.29 0.2330
WVFGRD96 19.0 200 60 40 3.30 0.2317
WVFGRD96 20.0 200 60 35 3.31 0.2302
WVFGRD96 21.0 200 60 35 3.32 0.2292
WVFGRD96 22.0 200 60 35 3.33 0.2275
WVFGRD96 23.0 200 55 35 3.34 0.2269
WVFGRD96 24.0 200 55 35 3.35 0.2243
WVFGRD96 25.0 200 55 40 3.36 0.2207
WVFGRD96 26.0 205 55 40 3.36 0.2175
WVFGRD96 27.0 210 60 40 3.37 0.2158
WVFGRD96 28.0 205 60 40 3.39 0.2158
WVFGRD96 29.0 125 70 60 3.45 0.2169
The best solution is
WVFGRD96 1.0 340 50 -75 3.14 0.3536
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=Mon May 25 17:34:01 CDT 2009