2009/04/20 02:22:15 42.376 13.318 10.5 3.0 Italy
USGS Felt map for this earthquake
USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution
ENS 2009/04/20 02:22:15:0 42.38 13.32 10.5 3.0 Italy
Stations used:
IV.CAMP IV.CERT IV.FAGN IV.FDMO IV.FIAM IV.MNS IV.TERO
Filtering commands used:
hp c 0.02 n 3
lp c 0.10 n 3
Best Fitting Double Couple
Mo = 4.12e+20 dyne-cm
Mw = 3.01
Z = 9 km
Plane Strike Dip Rake
NP1 156 52 -102
NP2 355 40 -75
Principal Axes:
Axis Value Plunge Azimuth
T 4.12e+20 6 254
N 0.00e+00 10 163
P -4.12e+20 79 16
Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm)
Component Value
Mxx 1.49e+19
Mxy 1.02e+20
Mxz -8.74e+19
Myy 3.77e+20
Myz -6.17e+19
Mzz -3.92e+20
--------######
##-------------#######
####----------------########
####-------------------#######
######--------------------########
#######---------------------########
#######-----------------------########
#########----------------------#########
#########---------- ----------########
##########---------- P ----------#########
##########---------- ----------#########
###########----------------------#########
############---------------------#########
#########--------------------########
T #########--------------------########
###########-----------------########
#############----------------#######
#############--------------#######
#############-----------######
###############-------######
###############--#####
###########---
Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor:
R T P
-3.92e+20 -8.74e+19 6.17e+19
-8.74e+19 1.49e+19 -1.02e+20
6.17e+19 -1.02e+20 3.77e+20
Details of the solution is found at
http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.IT/20090420022215/index.html
|
STK = -5
DIP = 40
RAKE = -75
MW = 3.01
HS = 9.0
The waveform inversion is preferred.
The following compares this source inversion to others
USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution
ENS 2009/04/20 02:22:15:0 42.38 13.32 10.5 3.0 Italy
Stations used:
IV.CAMP IV.CERT IV.FAGN IV.FDMO IV.FIAM IV.MNS IV.TERO
Filtering commands used:
hp c 0.02 n 3
lp c 0.10 n 3
Best Fitting Double Couple
Mo = 4.12e+20 dyne-cm
Mw = 3.01
Z = 9 km
Plane Strike Dip Rake
NP1 156 52 -102
NP2 355 40 -75
Principal Axes:
Axis Value Plunge Azimuth
T 4.12e+20 6 254
N 0.00e+00 10 163
P -4.12e+20 79 16
Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm)
Component Value
Mxx 1.49e+19
Mxy 1.02e+20
Mxz -8.74e+19
Myy 3.77e+20
Myz -6.17e+19
Mzz -3.92e+20
--------######
##-------------#######
####----------------########
####-------------------#######
######--------------------########
#######---------------------########
#######-----------------------########
#########----------------------#########
#########---------- ----------########
##########---------- P ----------#########
##########---------- ----------#########
###########----------------------#########
############---------------------#########
#########--------------------########
T #########--------------------########
###########-----------------########
#############----------------#######
#############--------------#######
#############-----------######
###############-------######
###############--#####
###########---
Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor:
R T P
-3.92e+20 -8.74e+19 6.17e+19
-8.74e+19 1.49e+19 -1.02e+20
6.17e+19 -1.02e+20 3.77e+20
Details of the solution is found at
http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.IT/20090420022215/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 0.5 135 50 90 2.68 0.2844
WVFGRD96 1.0 95 45 75 2.75 0.2441
WVFGRD96 2.0 100 5 45 2.87 0.2538
WVFGRD96 3.0 55 15 0 2.84 0.3287
WVFGRD96 4.0 30 20 -30 2.83 0.3735
WVFGRD96 5.0 25 20 -35 2.94 0.4025
WVFGRD96 6.0 15 30 -55 2.98 0.4432
WVFGRD96 7.0 10 35 -60 3.01 0.4822
WVFGRD96 8.0 5 40 -70 3.01 0.5177
WVFGRD96 9.0 -5 40 -75 3.01 0.5230
WVFGRD96 10.0 355 40 -75 3.02 0.5181
WVFGRD96 11.0 360 45 -70 3.04 0.5032
WVFGRD96 12.0 -10 45 -85 3.04 0.4879
WVFGRD96 13.0 345 45 -85 3.05 0.4668
WVFGRD96 14.0 35 50 -45 3.07 0.4499
WVFGRD96 15.0 35 50 -40 3.09 0.4335
WVFGRD96 16.0 40 55 -35 3.11 0.4208
WVFGRD96 17.0 40 55 -35 3.11 0.4080
WVFGRD96 18.0 40 50 -30 3.10 0.3941
WVFGRD96 19.0 35 35 -25 3.05 0.3819
WVFGRD96 20.0 30 30 -30 3.05 0.3783
WVFGRD96 21.0 30 30 -30 3.06 0.3745
WVFGRD96 22.0 30 30 -30 3.07 0.3681
WVFGRD96 23.0 35 35 -30 3.09 0.3603
WVFGRD96 24.0 35 35 -30 3.10 0.3542
WVFGRD96 25.0 20 5 -35 3.07 0.3499
WVFGRD96 26.0 60 -5 10 3.07 0.3462
WVFGRD96 27.0 320 90 85 3.08 0.3427
WVFGRD96 28.0 140 90 -80 3.08 0.3437
WVFGRD96 29.0 320 90 80 3.09 0.3442
The best solution is
WVFGRD96 9.0 -5 40 -75 3.01 0.5230
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 Sep 2 08:00:21 CDT 2009