Location

2010/01/10 08:33:35 43.119 13.445 16.9 4 Italy

Arrival Times (from USGS)

Felt Map

Focal Mechanism

USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution ENS 2010/01/10 08:33:35:6 43.12 13.44 16.9 4.0 Italy Stations used: IV.AOI IV.CAMP IV.CESI IV.CESX IV.CRE IV.CSNT IV.FAGN IV.FDMO IV.FSSB IV.GUAR IV.INTR IV.MTCE IV.OFFI IV.PESA IV.RSM IV.TERO IV.TRTR MN.AQU Filtering commands used: hp c 0.02 n 3 lp c 0.10 n 3 br c 0.12 0.25 n 4 p 2 Best Fitting Double Couple Mo = 6.53e+21 dyne-cm Mw = 3.81 Z = 15 km Plane Strike Dip Rake NP1 165 65 70 NP2 26 32 126 Principal Axes: Axis Value Plunge Azimuth T 6.53e+21 64 41 N 0.00e+00 18 174 P -6.53e+21 18 270 Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm) Component Value Mxx 6.97e+20 Mxy 5.78e+20 Mxz 1.93e+21 Myy -5.40e+21 Myz 3.57e+21 Mzz 4.70e+21 -############# -----################- -------###################-- --------####################-- ---------######################--- ----------######################---- -----------#######################---- ------------########### #########----- -------------########## T #########----- --------------########## #########------ -- ---------######################------ -- P ----------#####################------ -- ----------####################------- ---------------###################------ ---------------##################------- ---------------################------- ---------------#############-------- ---------------###########-------- --------------########-------- ---------------####--------- ------------#--------- ###########--- Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor: R T P 4.70e+21 1.93e+21 -3.57e+21 1.93e+21 6.97e+20 -5.78e+20 -3.57e+21 -5.78e+20 -5.40e+21 Details of the solution is found at http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.IT/20100110083335/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 = 165
      DIP = 65
     RAKE = 70
       MW = 3.81
       HS = 15.0

The waveform inversion is preferred.

Moment Tensor Comparison

The following compares this source inversion to others

SLU

USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution ENS 2010/01/10 08:33:35:6 43.12 13.44 16.9 4.0 Italy Stations used: IV.AOI IV.CAMP IV.CESI IV.CESX IV.CRE IV.CSNT IV.FAGN IV.FDMO IV.FSSB IV.GUAR IV.INTR IV.MTCE IV.OFFI IV.PESA IV.RSM IV.TERO IV.TRTR MN.AQU Filtering commands used: hp c 0.02 n 3 lp c 0.10 n 3 br c 0.12 0.25 n 4 p 2 Best Fitting Double Couple Mo = 6.53e+21 dyne-cm Mw = 3.81 Z = 15 km Plane Strike Dip Rake NP1 165 65 70 NP2 26 32 126 Principal Axes: Axis Value Plunge Azimuth T 6.53e+21 64 41 N 0.00e+00 18 174 P -6.53e+21 18 270 Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm) Component Value Mxx 6.97e+20 Mxy 5.78e+20 Mxz 1.93e+21 Myy -5.40e+21 Myz 3.57e+21 Mzz 4.70e+21 -############# -----################- -------###################-- --------####################-- ---------######################--- ----------######################---- -----------#######################---- ------------########### #########----- -------------########## T #########----- --------------########## #########------ -- ---------######################------ -- P ----------#####################------ -- ----------####################------- ---------------###################------ ---------------##################------- ---------------################------- ---------------#############-------- ---------------###########-------- --------------########-------- ---------------####--------- ------------#--------- ###########--- Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor: R T P 4.70e+21 1.93e+21 -3.57e+21 1.93e+21 6.97e+20 -5.78e+20 -3.57e+21 -5.78e+20 -5.40e+21 Details of the solution is found at http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.IT/20100110083335/index.html

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:

hp c 0.02 n 3
lp c 0.10 n 3
br c 0.12 0.25 n 4 p 2

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   125    80     0   3.47 0.3620
WVFGRD96    2.0   125    75     0   3.55 0.4081
WVFGRD96    3.0   130    60    10   3.61 0.4249
WVFGRD96    4.0   310    50     0   3.65 0.4556
WVFGRD96    5.0   315    40    10   3.73 0.4843
WVFGRD96    6.0   310    40     0   3.74 0.4992
WVFGRD96    7.0   315    40    15   3.74 0.5084
WVFGRD96    8.0   165    65    70   3.75 0.5192
WVFGRD96    9.0   165    65    65   3.75 0.5322
WVFGRD96   10.0   165    65    65   3.75 0.5399
WVFGRD96   11.0   165    65    65   3.75 0.5451
WVFGRD96   12.0   165    65    65   3.76 0.5475
WVFGRD96   13.0   165    65    65   3.76 0.5483
WVFGRD96   14.0   165    65    65   3.77 0.5482
WVFGRD96   15.0   165    65    70   3.81 0.5513
WVFGRD96   16.0   165    70    70   3.81 0.5493
WVFGRD96   17.0   165    70    70   3.82 0.5467
WVFGRD96   18.0   165    70    70   3.83 0.5427
WVFGRD96   19.0   165    70    70   3.84 0.5371
WVFGRD96   20.0   170    65    75   3.84 0.5299
WVFGRD96   21.0   170    65    75   3.85 0.5218
WVFGRD96   22.0   170    65    75   3.86 0.5124
WVFGRD96   23.0   320    35    40   3.88 0.5013
WVFGRD96   24.0   145    65    60   3.87 0.4971
WVFGRD96   25.0   145    65    60   3.87 0.4903
WVFGRD96   26.0   155    60    65   3.88 0.4822
WVFGRD96   27.0   155    60    65   3.89 0.4746
WVFGRD96   28.0   155    60    65   3.90 0.4645
WVFGRD96   29.0   160    55    70   3.92 0.4539

The best solution is

WVFGRD96   15.0   165    65    70   3.81 0.5513

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

hp c 0.02 n 3
lp c 0.10 n 3
br c 0.12 0.25 n 4 p 2

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

Velocity Model

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

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=Thu Jun 23 12:09:33 CDT 2011

Last Changed 2010/01/10