Location

Location ANSS

2017/10/12 19:04:20 46.157 -120.550 11.4 3.4 Washington

Focal Mechanism

 USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution
 ENS  2017/10/12 19:04:20:0  46.16 -120.55  11.4 3.4 Washington
 
 Stations used:
   IW.PLID UO.FHAC UO.JESE UO.MINN UO.PINE UO.RAIN US.BMO 
   US.HAWA US.NEW US.NLWA UW.BLOW UW.CCRK UW.DAVN UW.DDRF 
   UW.GNW UW.HOOD UW.IRON UW.IZEE UW.LON UW.LRIV UW.LTY 
   UW.MRBL UW.PHIN UW.RADR UW.STOR UW.TUCA UW.UMAT UW.WOLL 
   UW.YACT 
 
 Filtering commands used:
   cut o DIST/3.3 -30 o DIST/3.3 +50
   rtr
   taper w 0.1
   hp c 0.03 n 3 
   lp c 0.10 n 3 
   br c 0.12 0.25 n 4 p 2
 
 Best Fitting Double Couple
  Mo = 3.27e+21 dyne-cm
  Mw = 3.61 
  Z  = 10 km
  Plane   Strike  Dip  Rake
   NP1      232    61    99
   NP2       35    30    75
  Principal Axes:
   Axis    Value   Plunge  Azimuth
    T   3.27e+21     73     163
    N   0.00e+00      7      48
    P  -3.27e+21     16     316

 Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm)
    Component   Value
       Mxx    -1.30e+21
       Mxy     1.43e+21
       Mxz    -1.51e+21
       Myy    -1.44e+21
       Myz     8.74e+20
       Mzz     2.74e+21
                                                     
                                                     
                                                     
                                                     
                     --------------                  
                 ----------------------              
              ---------------------------#           
             -   -------------------------#          
           --- P ------------------########--        
          ----   --------------############---       
         ------------------#################---      
        ----------------####################----     
        --------------######################----     
       -------------########################-----    
       -----------##########################-----    
       ----------##########################------    
       --------#############   ############------    
        ------############## T ###########------     
        -----###############   ##########-------     
         ----###########################-------      
          --###########################-------       
           -#########################--------        
             ######################--------          
              ##################----------           
                 -#########------------              
                     --------------                  
                                                     
                                                     
                                                     
 Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor:
      R          T          P
  2.74e+21  -1.51e+21  -8.74e+20 
 -1.51e+21  -1.30e+21  -1.43e+21 
 -8.74e+20  -1.43e+21  -1.44e+21 


Details of the solution is found at

http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.NA/20171012190420/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 = 35
      DIP = 30
     RAKE = 75
       MW = 3.61
       HS = 10.0

The NDK file is 20171012190420.ndk The waveform inversion is preferred.

Moment Tensor Comparison

The following compares this source inversion to others
SLU
 USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution
 ENS  2017/10/12 19:04:20:0  46.16 -120.55  11.4 3.4 Washington
 
 Stations used:
   IW.PLID UO.FHAC UO.JESE UO.MINN UO.PINE UO.RAIN US.BMO 
   US.HAWA US.NEW US.NLWA UW.BLOW UW.CCRK UW.DAVN UW.DDRF 
   UW.GNW UW.HOOD UW.IRON UW.IZEE UW.LON UW.LRIV UW.LTY 
   UW.MRBL UW.PHIN UW.RADR UW.STOR UW.TUCA UW.UMAT UW.WOLL 
   UW.YACT 
 
 Filtering commands used:
   cut o DIST/3.3 -30 o DIST/3.3 +50
   rtr
   taper w 0.1
   hp c 0.03 n 3 
   lp c 0.10 n 3 
   br c 0.12 0.25 n 4 p 2
 
 Best Fitting Double Couple
  Mo = 3.27e+21 dyne-cm
  Mw = 3.61 
  Z  = 10 km
  Plane   Strike  Dip  Rake
   NP1      232    61    99
   NP2       35    30    75
  Principal Axes:
   Axis    Value   Plunge  Azimuth
    T   3.27e+21     73     163
    N   0.00e+00      7      48
    P  -3.27e+21     16     316

 Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm)
    Component   Value
       Mxx    -1.30e+21
       Mxy     1.43e+21
       Mxz    -1.51e+21
       Myy    -1.44e+21
       Myz     8.74e+20
       Mzz     2.74e+21
                                                     
                                                     
                                                     
                                                     
                     --------------                  
                 ----------------------              
              ---------------------------#           
             -   -------------------------#          
           --- P ------------------########--        
          ----   --------------############---       
         ------------------#################---      
        ----------------####################----     
        --------------######################----     
       -------------########################-----    
       -----------##########################-----    
       ----------##########################------    
       --------#############   ############------    
        ------############## T ###########------     
        -----###############   ##########-------     
         ----###########################-------      
          --###########################-------       
           -#########################--------        
             ######################--------          
              ##################----------           
                 -#########------------              
                     --------------                  
                                                     
                                                     
                                                     
 Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor:
      R          T          P
  2.74e+21  -1.51e+21  -8.74e+20 
 -1.51e+21  -1.30e+21  -1.43e+21 
 -8.74e+20  -1.43e+21  -1.44e+21 


Details of the solution is found at

http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.NA/20171012190420/index.html
	

Magnitudes

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 using wvfgrd96

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:

cut o DIST/3.3 -30 o DIST/3.3 +50
rtr
taper w 0.1
hp c 0.03 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   180    85     5   3.11 0.2729
WVFGRD96    2.0    45    45    90   3.37 0.4240
WVFGRD96    3.0   180    80    15   3.32 0.3956
WVFGRD96    4.0     5    30    20   3.46 0.4242
WVFGRD96    5.0     5    15    35   3.52 0.5172
WVFGRD96    6.0    30    15    60   3.54 0.5967
WVFGRD96    7.0    30    20    65   3.54 0.6452
WVFGRD96    8.0    30    20    65   3.61 0.6682
WVFGRD96    9.0    30    25    65   3.61 0.6875
WVFGRD96   10.0    35    30    75   3.61 0.6922
WVFGRD96   11.0    30    30    70   3.60 0.6894
WVFGRD96   12.0    25    30    60   3.60 0.6807
WVFGRD96   13.0    20    30    55   3.59 0.6706
WVFGRD96   14.0    -5    35    40   3.58 0.6600
WVFGRD96   15.0    -5    35    40   3.59 0.6506
WVFGRD96   16.0   350    35    25   3.59 0.6401
WVFGRD96   17.0   330    40   -20   3.60 0.6293
WVFGRD96   18.0   330    40   -20   3.61 0.6215
WVFGRD96   19.0   325    40   -25   3.62 0.6129
WVFGRD96   20.0   325    40   -25   3.62 0.6040
WVFGRD96   21.0   325    40   -25   3.64 0.5938
WVFGRD96   22.0   325    40   -25   3.64 0.5833
WVFGRD96   23.0   325    40   -25   3.65 0.5722
WVFGRD96   24.0   325    40   -25   3.66 0.5601
WVFGRD96   25.0   325    40   -25   3.66 0.5472
WVFGRD96   26.0   325    40   -25   3.67 0.5335
WVFGRD96   27.0   325    40   -25   3.67 0.5190
WVFGRD96   28.0   325    35   -25   3.68 0.5045
WVFGRD96   29.0   325    35   -25   3.69 0.4893

The best solution is

WVFGRD96   10.0    35    30    75   3.61 0.6922

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

cut o DIST/3.3 -30 o DIST/3.3 +50
rtr
taper w 0.1
hp c 0.03 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. 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 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    

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 Thu Oct 12 17:32:18 CDT 2017