2009/04/12 09:48:59 42.352 13.386 9.6 3.5 Italy
USGS Felt map for this earthquake
USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution ENS 2009/04/12 09:48:59:6 42.35 13.39 9.6 3.5 Italy Stations used: IV.ARVD IV.CERT IV.CESI IV.CESX IV.CING IV.FAGN IV.FDMO IV.FIAM IV.GUAR IV.INTR IV.LPEL IV.MTCE IV.MURB IV.PIEI IV.POFI IV.TERO Filtering commands used: hp c 0.02 n 3 lp c 0.10 n 3 Best Fitting Double Couple Mo = 1.58e+21 dyne-cm Mw = 3.40 Z = 6 km Plane Strike Dip Rake NP1 133 61 -132 NP2 15 50 -40 Principal Axes: Axis Value Plunge Azimuth T 1.58e+21 6 252 N 0.00e+00 36 158 P -1.58e+21 53 350 Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm) Component Value Mxx -3.98e+20 Mxy 5.55e+20 Mxz -8.00e+20 Myy 1.40e+21 Myz -3.11e+19 Mzz -1.00e+21 -------------# ------------------#### ----------------------###### ------------------------###### ##-------------------------####### ###------------ ----------######## #####----------- P -----------######## ######----------- -----------######### #######------------------------######### #########-----------------------########## ##########---------------------########### ############-------------------########### #############------------------########### ###########---------------########### T #############------------############ ###############----------########### ###################------########### #####################-############ ###################------##### ################------------ ###########----------- ###----------- Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor: R T P -1.00e+21 -8.00e+20 3.11e+19 -8.00e+20 -3.98e+20 -5.55e+20 3.11e+19 -5.55e+20 1.40e+21 Details of the solution is found at http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.IT/20090412094859/index.html |
STK = 15 DIP = 50 RAKE = -40 MW = 3.40 HS = 6.0
The waveform inversion is preferred.
The following compares this source inversion to others
USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution ENS 2009/04/12 09:48:59:6 42.35 13.39 9.6 3.5 Italy Stations used: IV.ARVD IV.CERT IV.CESI IV.CESX IV.CING IV.FAGN IV.FDMO IV.FIAM IV.GUAR IV.INTR IV.LPEL IV.MTCE IV.MURB IV.PIEI IV.POFI IV.TERO Filtering commands used: hp c 0.02 n 3 lp c 0.10 n 3 Best Fitting Double Couple Mo = 1.58e+21 dyne-cm Mw = 3.40 Z = 6 km Plane Strike Dip Rake NP1 133 61 -132 NP2 15 50 -40 Principal Axes: Axis Value Plunge Azimuth T 1.58e+21 6 252 N 0.00e+00 36 158 P -1.58e+21 53 350 Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm) Component Value Mxx -3.98e+20 Mxy 5.55e+20 Mxz -8.00e+20 Myy 1.40e+21 Myz -3.11e+19 Mzz -1.00e+21 -------------# ------------------#### ----------------------###### ------------------------###### ##-------------------------####### ###------------ ----------######## #####----------- P -----------######## ######----------- -----------######### #######------------------------######### #########-----------------------########## ##########---------------------########### ############-------------------########### #############------------------########### ###########---------------########### T #############------------############ ###############----------########### ###################------########### #####################-############ ###################------##### ################------------ ###########----------- ###----------- Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor: R T P -1.00e+21 -8.00e+20 3.11e+19 -8.00e+20 -3.98e+20 -5.55e+20 3.11e+19 -5.55e+20 1.40e+21 Details of the solution is found at http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.IT/20090412094859/index.html |
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 1.0 230 55 15 3.15 0.3490 WVFGRD96 2.0 25 35 -25 3.28 0.3952 WVFGRD96 3.0 15 50 -35 3.29 0.4731 WVFGRD96 4.0 15 50 -40 3.32 0.5241 WVFGRD96 5.0 15 50 -40 3.39 0.5475 WVFGRD96 6.0 15 50 -40 3.40 0.5528 WVFGRD96 7.0 20 55 -35 3.40 0.5442 WVFGRD96 8.0 25 60 -25 3.38 0.5224 WVFGRD96 9.0 25 65 -25 3.38 0.5088 WVFGRD96 10.0 25 65 -20 3.39 0.4958 WVFGRD96 11.0 25 65 -20 3.40 0.4808 WVFGRD96 12.0 25 70 -20 3.40 0.4668 WVFGRD96 13.0 25 70 -20 3.41 0.4526 WVFGRD96 14.0 25 70 -20 3.42 0.4384 WVFGRD96 15.0 25 70 -20 3.44 0.4278 WVFGRD96 16.0 25 75 -20 3.45 0.4145 WVFGRD96 17.0 25 75 -20 3.45 0.4034 WVFGRD96 18.0 25 75 -20 3.46 0.3927 WVFGRD96 19.0 215 75 25 3.46 0.3829 WVFGRD96 20.0 215 75 25 3.47 0.3767 WVFGRD96 21.0 215 75 25 3.47 0.3697 WVFGRD96 22.0 215 70 25 3.48 0.3631 WVFGRD96 23.0 215 70 25 3.49 0.3581 WVFGRD96 24.0 215 70 25 3.50 0.3526 WVFGRD96 25.0 215 70 30 3.51 0.3485 WVFGRD96 26.0 220 65 30 3.52 0.3453 WVFGRD96 27.0 220 65 30 3.53 0.3426 WVFGRD96 28.0 215 70 30 3.54 0.3386 WVFGRD96 29.0 25 70 -15 3.56 0.3379
The best solution is
WVFGRD96 6.0 15 50 -40 3.40 0.5528
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. 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 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
Here we tabulate the reasons for not using certain digital data sets
The following stations did not have a valid response files:
DATE=Wed May 12 06:56:57 CDT 2010