1997/05/16 01:23:20 40.58N 114.99W 5 4.4 Nevada
USGS Felt map for this earthquake
USGS Felt reports page for Intermountain Western US
SLU Moment Tensor Solution
1997/05/16 01:23:20 40.58N 114.99W 5 4.4 Nevada
Best Fitting Double Couple
Mo = 1.22e+22 dyne-cm
Mw = 3.99
Z = 11 km
Plane Strike Dip Rake
NP1 30 50 -100
NP2 225 41 -78
Principal Axes:
Axis Value Plunge Azimuth
T 1.22e+22 5 127
N 0.00e+00 8 36
P -1.22e+22 81 247
Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm)
Component Value
Mxx 4.35e+21
Mxy -5.92e+21
Mxz 1.36e+20
Myy 7.45e+21
Myz 2.48e+21
Mzz -1.18e+22
##############
######################
####################----#---
##############-------------###
#############----------------#####
###########--------------------#####
##########----------------------######
#########-----------------------########
########------------------------########
########-------------------------#########
#######---------- ------------##########
######----------- P ------------##########
######----------- -----------###########
####-------------------------###########
####------------------------############
###----------------------#############
##---------------------######### #
#-------------------########### T
----------------#############
------------################
----##################
##############
Harvard Convention
Moment Tensor:
R T F
-1.18e+22 1.36e+20 -2.48e+21
1.36e+20 4.35e+21 5.92e+21
-2.48e+21 5.92e+21 7.45e+21
Details of the solution is found at
http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.NA/19970516012320/index.html
|
Stations used: BW06(Z), HWUT(T,R), DUG, KNB,
LDS, CMB, ORV, BMN(Z), MIN(Z),
WDC, YBH, WVOR(Z), ELK(R,Z)
OSU MOMENT TENSOR SOLUTION
http://quakes.oce.orst.edu/moment-tensor/1997/solutions/970516_0123.ap.20_30s9km
Event: northern Nevada
Date/Time: 97/ 5/16 1:23:20
Lat./Lon.: 40.580 -114.990
mb/Ms: 4.4 0.0
Depth (km): 9.0 Stations Used: 13
Moment Tensor: Scale = 10**21 dyn cm
Component Value Component Value
Mxx 2.275 Myy 7.516
Mxy -5.819 Myz 0.043
Mxz -1.258 Mzz -9.791
Source Composition:
(Type/%) DC/ 76 CLVD/ 24 Iso/ 0
Principal Axes:
Axis Value Plunge Azimuth
T 11.302 2 123
N -1.360 7 213
P -9.942 83 17
Best Fitting Double-Couple:
Mo = 1.06E+22 dyn cm Mw = 3.98
Plane Strike Rake Dip
NP1 40 -81 47
NP2 206 -100 43
#######
##################-
###############----------
#############---------------#
#############-----------------###
############-------------------####
############--------------------#####
###########----------------------######
##########-----------------------######
##########--------- -----------########
##########--------- P -----------########
#########---------- ----------#########
#########----------------------##########
########----------------------###########
#######---------------------###########
#######-------------------#############
######-----------------###########
######--------------############# T
#####-----------################
####------###################
--#######################
###################
#######
Lower Hemisphere Equal Area Projection
|
STK = 30
DIP = 50
RAKE = -100
MW = 3.99
HS = 11.0
The surface-wave is preferred because of its fit to waveforms.
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 0.5 235 35 -90 3.44 0.3010
WVFGRD96 1.0 275 65 10 3.48 0.3012
WVFGRD96 2.0 275 55 10 3.62 0.3894
WVFGRD96 3.0 275 50 5 3.67 0.4946
WVFGRD96 4.0 270 50 -10 3.70 0.5647
WVFGRD96 5.0 270 50 -15 3.71 0.6105
WVFGRD96 6.0 270 55 -20 3.74 0.6378
WVFGRD96 7.0 260 45 -50 3.77 0.6684
WVFGRD96 8.0 260 45 -55 3.81 0.7032
WVFGRD96 9.0 250 45 -70 3.85 0.7367
WVFGRD96 10.0 250 45 -70 3.86 0.7564
WVFGRD96 11.0 260 45 -60 3.86 0.7654
WVFGRD96 12.0 230 40 -55 3.87 0.7699
WVFGRD96 13.0 230 40 -55 3.88 0.7664
WVFGRD96 14.0 235 40 -45 3.89 0.7543
WVFGRD96 15.0 235 40 -50 3.90 0.7408
WVFGRD96 16.0 240 40 -40 3.90 0.7217
WVFGRD96 17.0 45 60 -55 3.91 0.7015
WVFGRD96 18.0 45 65 -55 3.90 0.6841
WVFGRD96 19.0 45 65 -50 3.92 0.6681
WVFGRD96 20.0 45 70 -50 3.91 0.6552
WVFGRD96 21.0 40 70 -60 3.95 0.6423
WVFGRD96 22.0 45 75 -55 3.95 0.6324
WVFGRD96 23.0 45 75 -55 3.96 0.6251
WVFGRD96 24.0 40 75 -60 3.97 0.6167
WVFGRD96 25.0 40 75 -65 3.98 0.6066
WVFGRD96 26.0 45 80 -60 3.98 0.5981
WVFGRD96 27.0 45 80 -60 3.99 0.5875
WVFGRD96 28.0 50 90 -60 3.98 0.5775
WVFGRD96 29.0 230 85 60 3.98 0.5692
The best solution is
WVFGRD96 12.0 230 40 -55 3.87 0.7699
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 componnet 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 following figure shows the stations used in the grid search for the best focal mechanism to fit the surface-wave spectral amplitudes of the Love and Rayleigh waves.
|
|
|
The surface-wave determined focal mechanism is shown here.
NODAL PLANES
STK= 30.00
DIP= 49.99
RAKE= -100.00
OR
STK= 225.34
DIP= 41.03
RAKE= -78.31
DEPTH = 11.0 km
Mw = 3.99
Best Fit 0.9180 - P-T axis plot gives solutions with FIT greater than FIT90
 |
The P-wave first motion data for focal mechanism studies are as follow:
Sta Az(deg) Dist(km) First motion ELK 311 28 iP_C BMN 266 190 eP_+ DUG 102 190 eP_+ HWUT 67 310 eP_X TPH 215 338 iP_D MNV 230 362 iP_D WVOR 305 368 eP_X LDS 158 397 eP_X TPNV 196 418 iP_D KNB 154 438 iP_+ BW06 60 513 eP_X WDC 272 639 -12345 YBH 284 661 -12345
Surface wave analysis was performed using codes from Computer Programs in Seismology, specifically the multiple filter analysis program do_mft and the surface-wave radiation pattern search program srfgrd96.
The velocity model used for the search is a modified Utah model .
Digital data were collected, instrument response removed and traces converted
to Z, R an T components. Multiple filter analysis was applied to the Z and T traces to obtain the Rayleigh- and Love-wave spectral amplitudes, respectively.
These were input to the search program which examined all depths between 1 and 25 km
and all possible mechanisms.
|
|
|
|
| Pressure-tension axis trends. Since the surface-wave spectra search does not distinguish between P and T axes and since there is a 180 ambiguity in strike, all possible P and T axes are plotted. First motion data and waveforms will be used to select the preferred mechanism. The purpose of this plot is to provide an idea of the possible range of solutions. The P and T-axes for all mechanisms with goodness of fit greater than 0.9 FITMAX (above) are plotted here. |
|
| Focal mechanism sensitivity at the preferred depth. The red color indicates a very good fit to the Love and Rayleigh wave radiation patterns. 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. Because of the symmetry of the spectral amplitude rediation patterns, only strikes from 0-180 degrees are sampled. |
Sta Az(deg) Dist(km) BMN 266 190 DUG 102 190 HWUT 67 310 TPH 215 338 MNV 230 362 WVOR 305 368 LDS 158 397 TPNV 196 418 KNB 154 438 MLAC 227 467 BW06 60 513 DAC 206 529 CWC 211 533 CMB 240 544 SCZ 234 712 OSI 208 740 KNW 192 777 RDM 193 789 DGR 194 790 SND 191 793 CRY 192 794 FRD 191 799 ISCO 93 803 COR 306 814 LVA2 190 814 NEW 350 871 ANMO 127 977 TUC 156 992 CCM 90 2061 SLM 88 2130 WVT 93 2415
Since the analysis of the surface-wave radiation patterns uses only spectral amplitudes and because the surfave-wave radiation patterns have a 180 degree symmetry, each surface-wave solution consists of four possible focal mechanisms corresponding to the interchange of the P- and T-axes and a roation of the mechanism by 180 degrees. To select one mechanism, P-wave first motion can be used. This was not possible in this case because all the P-wave first motions were emergent ( a feature of the P-wave wave takeoff angle, the station location and the mechanism). The other way to select among the mechanisms is to compute forward synthetics and compare the observed and predicted waveforms.
The velocity model used for the waveform fit is a modified Utah model .
The fits to the waveforms with the given mechanism are show below:
|
This figure shows the fit to the three components of motion (Z - vertical, R-radial and T - transverse). For each station and component, the observed traces is shown in red and the model predicted trace in blue. The traces represent filtered ground velocity in units of meters/sec (the peak value is printed adjacent to each trace; each pair of traces to plotted to the same scale to emphasize the difference in levels). Both synthetic and observed traces have been filtered using the SAC commands:
hp c 0.02 n 3 lp c 0.10 n 3
|
|
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.
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
The figures below show the observed spectral amplitudes (units of cm-sec) at each station and the
theoretical predictions as a function of period for the mechanism given above. The modified Utah model earth model
was used to define the Green's functions. For each station, the Love and Rayleigh wave spectrail amplitudes are plotted with the same scaling so that one can get a sense fo the effects of the effects of the focal mechanism and depth on the excitation of each.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Here we tabulate the reasons for not using certain digital data sets
The following stations did not have a valid response files:
