2011/09/28 06:31:21 37.895 -112.067 1 3.40 Utah
USGS Felt map for this earthquake
USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution ENS 2011/09/28 06:31:21:0 37.90 -112.07 1.0 3.4 Utah Stations used: AR.113A AR.U15A AR.X16A AR.X18A IU.ANMO IW.SMCO TA.R11A US.DUG US.HWUT US.TPNV US.WUAZ UU.BGU UU.CCUT UU.JLU UU.LCMT UU.MPU UU.PNSU UU.PSUT UU.SPU UU.SZCU UU.TCRU Filtering commands used: hp c 0.02 n 3 lp c 0.06 n 3 br c 0.12 0.25 n 4 p 2 Best Fitting Double Couple Mo = 3.63e+21 dyne-cm Mw = 3.64 Z = 15 km Plane Strike Dip Rake NP1 210 60 -80 NP2 11 31 -107 Principal Axes: Axis Value Plunge Azimuth T 3.63e+21 14 293 N 0.00e+00 9 25 P -3.63e+21 73 145 Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm) Component Value Mxx 3.01e+20 Mxy -1.07e+21 Mxz 1.17e+21 Myy 2.80e+21 Myz -1.39e+21 Mzz -3.10e+21 ############-- ###################-## ###################-----#### #################---------#### #################------------##### ################---------------##### # ###########------------------##### ## T ##########-------------------###### ## #########--------------------###### ##############---------------------####### #############-----------------------###### ############-----------------------####### ###########------------ ---------####### ##########------------ P ---------###### #########------------- --------####### ########-----------------------####### #######----------------------####### ######---------------------####### ####--------------------###### ###------------------####### ---------------####### -------####### Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor: R T P -3.10e+21 1.17e+21 1.39e+21 1.17e+21 3.01e+20 1.07e+21 1.39e+21 1.07e+21 2.80e+21 Details of the solution is found at http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.NA/20110928063121/index.html |
STK = 210 DIP = 60 RAKE = -80 MW = 3.64 HS = 15.0
The NDK file is 20110928063121.ndk The waveform inversion is preferred.
The following compares this source inversion to others
USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution ENS 2011/09/28 06:31:21:0 37.90 -112.07 1.0 3.4 Utah Stations used: AR.113A AR.U15A AR.X16A AR.X18A IU.ANMO IW.SMCO TA.R11A US.DUG US.HWUT US.TPNV US.WUAZ UU.BGU UU.CCUT UU.JLU UU.LCMT UU.MPU UU.PNSU UU.PSUT UU.SPU UU.SZCU UU.TCRU Filtering commands used: hp c 0.02 n 3 lp c 0.06 n 3 br c 0.12 0.25 n 4 p 2 Best Fitting Double Couple Mo = 3.63e+21 dyne-cm Mw = 3.64 Z = 15 km Plane Strike Dip Rake NP1 210 60 -80 NP2 11 31 -107 Principal Axes: Axis Value Plunge Azimuth T 3.63e+21 14 293 N 0.00e+00 9 25 P -3.63e+21 73 145 Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm) Component Value Mxx 3.01e+20 Mxy -1.07e+21 Mxz 1.17e+21 Myy 2.80e+21 Myz -1.39e+21 Mzz -3.10e+21 ############-- ###################-## ###################-----#### #################---------#### #################------------##### ################---------------##### # ###########------------------##### ## T ##########-------------------###### ## #########--------------------###### ##############---------------------####### #############-----------------------###### ############-----------------------####### ###########------------ ---------####### ##########------------ P ---------###### #########------------- --------####### ########-----------------------####### #######----------------------####### ######---------------------####### ####--------------------###### ###------------------####### ---------------####### -------####### Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor: R T P -3.10e+21 1.17e+21 1.39e+21 1.17e+21 3.01e+20 1.07e+21 1.39e+21 1.07e+21 2.80e+21 Details of the solution is found at http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.NA/20110928063121/index.html |
(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.
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 0.06 n 3 br c 0.12 0.25 n 4 p 2The 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 45 -85 3.35 0.3587 WVFGRD96 1.0 45 85 -5 3.31 0.3401 WVFGRD96 2.0 210 40 -85 3.45 0.3705 WVFGRD96 3.0 55 35 10 3.52 0.3600 WVFGRD96 4.0 60 25 15 3.57 0.4045 WVFGRD96 5.0 65 25 25 3.56 0.4329 WVFGRD96 6.0 15 10 -105 3.60 0.4696 WVFGRD96 7.0 20 15 -100 3.59 0.4967 WVFGRD96 8.0 210 75 -85 3.65 0.5073 WVFGRD96 9.0 210 70 -85 3.64 0.5302 WVFGRD96 10.0 205 65 -85 3.64 0.5505 WVFGRD96 11.0 205 65 -85 3.64 0.5682 WVFGRD96 12.0 205 60 -85 3.64 0.5816 WVFGRD96 13.0 210 60 -80 3.64 0.5909 WVFGRD96 14.0 210 60 -80 3.64 0.5961 WVFGRD96 15.0 210 60 -80 3.64 0.5976 WVFGRD96 16.0 210 60 -75 3.64 0.5964 WVFGRD96 17.0 210 60 -75 3.64 0.5939 WVFGRD96 18.0 210 60 -75 3.64 0.5888 WVFGRD96 19.0 210 60 -75 3.64 0.5828 WVFGRD96 20.0 210 60 -75 3.64 0.5752 WVFGRD96 21.0 215 60 -70 3.65 0.5704 WVFGRD96 22.0 215 60 -70 3.66 0.5612 WVFGRD96 23.0 215 60 -70 3.66 0.5509 WVFGRD96 24.0 215 60 -70 3.66 0.5395 WVFGRD96 25.0 215 60 -70 3.66 0.5273 WVFGRD96 26.0 215 60 -65 3.67 0.5148 WVFGRD96 27.0 220 65 -60 3.68 0.5030 WVFGRD96 28.0 220 65 -55 3.68 0.4907 WVFGRD96 29.0 220 65 -55 3.69 0.4783
The best solution is
WVFGRD96 15.0 210 60 -80 3.64 0.5976
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. 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 br c 0.12 0.25 n 4 p 2
|
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:
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.
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.
The WUS model used for the waveform synthetic seismograms and for the surface wave eigenfunctions and dispersion is as follows:
MODEL.01 Model after 8 iterations 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 1.9000 3.4065 2.0089 2.2150 0.302E-02 0.679E-02 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 6.1000 5.5445 3.2953 2.6089 0.349E-02 0.784E-02 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 13.0000 6.2708 3.7396 2.7812 0.212E-02 0.476E-02 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 19.0000 6.4075 3.7680 2.8223 0.111E-02 0.249E-02 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.0000 7.9000 4.6200 3.2760 0.164E-10 0.370E-10 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: