Location

2011/08/22 23:30:20 37.050 -104.774 5 4.60 Colorado

Arrival Times (from USGS)

Arrival time list

Felt Map

USGS Felt map for this earthquake

USGS Felt reports main page

Focal Mechanism

 USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution
 ENS  2011/08/22 23:30:20:0  37.05 -104.77   5.0 4.6 Colorado
 
 Stations used:
   AR.X18A IU.ANMO IW.PHWY IW.SMCO TA.121A TA.KSCO TA.MSTX 
   TA.O20A TA.Q24A TA.Q32A TA.R32A TA.S22A TA.S32A TA.T25A 
   TA.T32A TA.T33A TA.U32A TA.U33A TA.V32A TA.V33A TA.W18A 
   TA.W32A TA.X32A US.AMTX US.CBKS US.ISCO US.MNTX US.MVCO 
   US.OGNE US.SDCO US.WMOK UU.PNSU UU.RDMU UU.SRU 
 
 Filtering commands used:
   hp c 0.02 n 3
   lp c 0.06 n 3
 
 Best Fitting Double Couple
  Mo = 1.57e+23 dyne-cm
  Mw = 4.73 
  Z  = 3 km
  Plane   Strike  Dip  Rake
   NP1      171    46   -100
   NP2        5    45   -80
  Principal Axes:
   Axis    Value   Plunge  Azimuth
    T   1.57e+23      0     268
    N   0.00e+00      7     178
    P  -1.57e+23     83       1

 Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm)
    Component   Value
       Mxx    -2.17e+21
       Mxy     5.55e+21
       Mxz    -1.92e+22
       Myy     1.56e+23
       Myz    -1.68e+21
       Mzz    -1.54e+23
                                                     
                                                     
                                                     
                                                     
                     ##---------###                  
                 #####------------#####              
              ######---------------#######           
             ######-----------------#######          
           #######-------------------########        
          ########--------------------########       
         ########---------------------#########      
        #########----------------------#########     
        #########----------   ---------#########     
       ##########---------- P ---------##########    
         ########----------   ---------##########    
       T ########----------------------##########    
         ########----------------------##########    
        ##########---------------------#########     
        ##########--------------------##########     
         ##########-------------------#########      
          ##########-----------------#########       
           ##########---------------#########        
             #########-------------########          
              ##########---------#########           
                 #########-----########              
                     ##############                  
                                                     
                                                     
                                                     
 Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor:
      R          T          P
 -1.54e+23  -1.92e+22   1.68e+21 
 -1.92e+22  -2.17e+21  -5.55e+21 
  1.68e+21  -5.55e+21   1.56e+23 


Details of the solution is found at

http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.NA/20110822233020/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 = 5
      DIP = 45
     RAKE = -80
       MW = 4.73
       HS = 3.0

The NDK file is 20110822233020.ndk The waveform inversion is preferred.

Moment Tensor Comparison

The following compares this source inversion to others
SLU
 USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution
 ENS  2011/08/22 23:30:20:0  37.05 -104.77   5.0 4.6 Colorado
 
 Stations used:
   AR.X18A IU.ANMO IW.PHWY IW.SMCO TA.121A TA.KSCO TA.MSTX 
   TA.O20A TA.Q24A TA.Q32A TA.R32A TA.S22A TA.S32A TA.T25A 
   TA.T32A TA.T33A TA.U32A TA.U33A TA.V32A TA.V33A TA.W18A 
   TA.W32A TA.X32A US.AMTX US.CBKS US.ISCO US.MNTX US.MVCO 
   US.OGNE US.SDCO US.WMOK UU.PNSU UU.RDMU UU.SRU 
 
 Filtering commands used:
   hp c 0.02 n 3
   lp c 0.06 n 3
 
 Best Fitting Double Couple
  Mo = 1.57e+23 dyne-cm
  Mw = 4.73 
  Z  = 3 km
  Plane   Strike  Dip  Rake
   NP1      171    46   -100
   NP2        5    45   -80
  Principal Axes:
   Axis    Value   Plunge  Azimuth
    T   1.57e+23      0     268
    N   0.00e+00      7     178
    P  -1.57e+23     83       1

 Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm)
    Component   Value
       Mxx    -2.17e+21
       Mxy     5.55e+21
       Mxz    -1.92e+22
       Myy     1.56e+23
       Myz    -1.68e+21
       Mzz    -1.54e+23
                                                     
                                                     
                                                     
                                                     
                     ##---------###                  
                 #####------------#####              
              ######---------------#######           
             ######-----------------#######          
           #######-------------------########        
          ########--------------------########       
         ########---------------------#########      
        #########----------------------#########     
        #########----------   ---------#########     
       ##########---------- P ---------##########    
         ########----------   ---------##########    
       T ########----------------------##########    
         ########----------------------##########    
        ##########---------------------#########     
        ##########--------------------##########     
         ##########-------------------#########      
          ##########-----------------#########       
           ##########---------------#########        
             #########-------------########          
              ##########---------#########           
                 #########-----########              
                     ##############                  
                                                     
                                                     
                                                     
 Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor:
      R          T          P
 -1.54e+23  -1.92e+22   1.68e+21 
 -1.92e+22  -2.17e+21  -5.55e+21 
  1.68e+21  -5.55e+21   1.56e+23 


Details of the solution is found at

http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.NA/20110822233020/index.html
	

Magnitudes

mLg Magnitude


(a) mLg computed using the IASPEI formula; (b) mLg residuals ; the values used for the trimmed mean are indicated.

ML Magnitude


(a) ML computed using the IASPEI formula for Horizontal components; (b) ML residuals computed using a modified IASPEI formula that accounts for path specific attenuation; the values used for the trimmed mean are indicated. The ML relation used for each figure is given at the bottom of each plot.


(a) ML computed using the IASPEI formula for Vertical components (research); (b) ML residuals computed using a modified IASPEI formula that accounts for path specific attenuation; the values used for the trimmed mean are indicated. The ML relation used for each figure is given at the bottom of each plot.

Context

The next figure presents the focal mechanism for this earthquake (red) in the context of other events (blue) in the SLU Moment Tensor Catalog which are within ± 0.5 degrees of the new event. This comparison is shown in the left panel of the figure. The right panel shows the inferred direction of maximum compressive stress and the type of faulting (green is strike-slip, red is normal, blue is thrust; oblique is shown by a combination of colors).

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 0.06 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    0.5    30    40   -30   4.65 0.7146
WVFGRD96    1.0    30    45   -35   4.65 0.7489
WVFGRD96    2.0    20    45   -55   4.69 0.8040
WVFGRD96    3.0     5    45   -80   4.73 0.8103
WVFGRD96    4.0     5    50   -80   4.74 0.7525
WVFGRD96    5.0   205    50   -45   4.71 0.6705
WVFGRD96    6.0   210    50   -35   4.70 0.6412
WVFGRD96    7.0   220    70    10   4.67 0.6299
WVFGRD96    8.0   220    70    10   4.68 0.6258
WVFGRD96    9.0   220    75    10   4.68 0.6223
WVFGRD96   10.0   210    55   -30   4.71 0.6201
WVFGRD96   11.0   210    60   -35   4.70 0.6168
WVFGRD96   12.0   215    65   -25   4.70 0.6152
WVFGRD96   13.0    55    60    30   4.67 0.6158
WVFGRD96   14.0    60    55    30   4.68 0.6204
WVFGRD96   15.0    60    55    30   4.68 0.6239
WVFGRD96   16.0    60    60    30   4.69 0.6269
WVFGRD96   17.0    60    60    30   4.69 0.6296
WVFGRD96   18.0    50    70    25   4.69 0.6326
WVFGRD96   19.0    50    70    25   4.70 0.6363
WVFGRD96   20.0    50    70    25   4.72 0.6359
WVFGRD96   21.0    50    70    25   4.72 0.6381
WVFGRD96   22.0    50    70    25   4.73 0.6390
WVFGRD96   23.0    50    70    25   4.73 0.6398
WVFGRD96   24.0    50    70    25   4.74 0.6398
WVFGRD96   25.0    50    70    25   4.75 0.6390
WVFGRD96   26.0    50    70    25   4.75 0.6380
WVFGRD96   27.0    50    65    20   4.76 0.6364
WVFGRD96   28.0    50    65    20   4.77 0.6349
WVFGRD96   29.0    50    65    20   4.78 0.6336

The best solution is

WVFGRD96    3.0     5    45   -80   4.73 0.8103

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 0.06 n 3
Figure 3. Waveform comparison for selected depth. Red: observed; Blue - predicted. The time shift with respect to the model prediction is indicated. The percent of fit is also indicated.
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:

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

Acknowledgements

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

Velocity Model

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

MODEL.01
CUS Model with Q from simple gamma values
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
  1.0000  5.0000  2.8900  2.5000 0.172E-02 0.387E-02 0.00  0.00  1.00  1.00 
  9.0000  6.1000  3.5200  2.7300 0.160E-02 0.363E-02 0.00  0.00  1.00  1.00 
 10.0000  6.4000  3.7000  2.8200 0.149E-02 0.336E-02 0.00  0.00  1.00  1.00 
 20.0000  6.7000  3.8700  2.9020 0.000E-04 0.000E-04 0.00  0.00  1.00  1.00 
  0.0000  8.1500  4.7000  3.3640 0.194E-02 0.431E-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:

Last Changed Sun Dec 6 21:12:11 CST 2015