Location

2011/07/12 19:20:57 43.930 11.859 7.5 3.6 Italy

Arrival Times (from USGS)

Arrival time list

Felt Map

USGS Felt map for this earthquake

USGS Felt reports page for

Focal Mechanism

USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution ENS 2011/07/12 19:20:57:0 43.93 11.86 7.5 3.6 Italy Stations used: GU.MAIM IV.ARCI IV.ARVD IV.ATPC IV.ATTE IV.ATVO IV.BDI IV.CAFI IV.CASP IV.CESX IV.CING IV.CRMI IV.CSNT IV.FDMO IV.FNVD IV.LATE IV.MAON IV.MCIV IV.MGAB IV.MSSA IV.MTRZ IV.MURB IV.OFFI IV.PARC IV.SACS IV.SASS IV.SNTG IV.TERO IV.TRTR MN.AQU Filtering commands used: hp c 0.02 n 3 lp c 0.10 n 3 Best Fitting Double Couple Mo = 5.69e+21 dyne-cm Mw = 3.77 Z = 5 km Plane Strike Dip Rake NP1 295 60 -85 NP2 105 30 -99 Principal Axes: Axis Value Plunge Azimuth T 5.69e+21 15 21 N 0.00e+00 4 112 P -5.69e+21 74 218 Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm) Component Value Mxx 4.36e+21 Mxy 1.60e+21 Mxz 2.46e+21 Myy 5.48e+20 Myz 1.42e+21 Mzz -4.91e+21 ############ ################ T ### ################### ###### ############################## ################################## #####----########################### -------------------################### ------------------------################ ---------------------------############# #------------------------------########### ##-------------------------------######### ##--------------- ---------------####### ###-------------- P -----------------##### ###------------- ------------------### ####----------------------------------#- #####--------------------------------# ######----------------------------## ########----------------------#### ##########--------------###### ############################ ###################### ############## Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor: R T P -4.91e+21 2.46e+21 -1.42e+21 2.46e+21 4.36e+21 -1.60e+21 -1.42e+21 -1.60e+21 5.48e+20 Details of the solution is found at http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.IT/20110712192057/index.html

Preferred Solution

      STK = 295
      DIP = 60
     RAKE = -85
       MW = 3.77
       HS = 5.0

The waveform inversion is preferred.

Moment Tensor Comparison

The following compares this source inversion to others

SLU	INGVTDMT
USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution ENS 2011/07/12 19:20:57:0 43.93 11.86 7.5 3.6 Italy Stations used: GU.MAIM IV.ARCI IV.ARVD IV.ATPC IV.ATTE IV.ATVO IV.BDI IV.CAFI IV.CASP IV.CESX IV.CING IV.CRMI IV.CSNT IV.FDMO IV.FNVD IV.LATE IV.MAON IV.MCIV IV.MGAB IV.MSSA IV.MTRZ IV.MURB IV.OFFI IV.PARC IV.SACS IV.SASS IV.SNTG IV.TERO IV.TRTR MN.AQU Filtering commands used: hp c 0.02 n 3 lp c 0.10 n 3 Best Fitting Double Couple Mo = 5.69e+21 dyne-cm Mw = 3.77 Z = 5 km Plane Strike Dip Rake NP1 295 60 -85 NP2 105 30 -99 Principal Axes: Axis Value Plunge Azimuth T 5.69e+21 15 21 N 0.00e+00 4 112 P -5.69e+21 74 218 Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm) Component Value Mxx 4.36e+21 Mxy 1.60e+21 Mxz 2.46e+21 Myy 5.48e+20 Myz 1.42e+21 Mzz -4.91e+21 ############ ################ T ### ################### ###### ############################## ################################## #####----########################### -------------------################### ------------------------################ ---------------------------############# #------------------------------########### ##-------------------------------######### ##--------------- ---------------####### ###-------------- P -----------------##### ###------------- ------------------### ####----------------------------------#- #####--------------------------------# ######----------------------------## ########----------------------#### ##########--------------###### ############################ ###################### ############## Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor: R T P -4.91e+21 2.46e+21 -1.42e+21 2.46e+21 4.36e+21 -1.60e+21 -1.42e+21 -1.60e+21 5.48e+20 Details of the solution is found at http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.IT/20110712192057/index.html

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 0.10 n 3

           DEPTH  STK   DIP  RAKE   MW    FIT
WVFGRD96    1.0   300    55   -80   3.59 0.4489
WVFGRD96    2.0   115    25   -90   3.69 0.4697
WVFGRD96    3.0   110    25   -95   3.69 0.4776
WVFGRD96    4.0   105    30  -100   3.69 0.4662
WVFGRD96    5.0   295    60   -85   3.77 0.4879
WVFGRD96    6.0   300    65   -75   3.75 0.4374
WVFGRD96    7.0   165    60    30   3.69 0.4342
WVFGRD96    8.0   160    65    30   3.69 0.4457
WVFGRD96    9.0   160    65    30   3.70 0.4410
WVFGRD96   10.0   160    65    30   3.71 0.4329
WVFGRD96   11.0   160    70    30   3.72 0.4235
WVFGRD96   12.0   160    70    30   3.73 0.4130
WVFGRD96   13.0   160    70    30   3.74 0.4019
WVFGRD96   14.0   160    65    30   3.75 0.3910
WVFGRD96   15.0   160    65    30   3.77 0.3746
WVFGRD96   16.0   160    65    30   3.78 0.3631
WVFGRD96   17.0   160    65    35   3.78 0.3518
WVFGRD96   18.0   255    40    45   3.79 0.3417
WVFGRD96   19.0   255    40    45   3.81 0.3428
WVFGRD96   20.0   260    40    50   3.82 0.3445
WVFGRD96   21.0   260    45    50   3.82 0.3456
WVFGRD96   22.0   260    45    50   3.84 0.3459
WVFGRD96   23.0   260    45    50   3.85 0.3446
WVFGRD96   24.0   260    45    50   3.85 0.3404
WVFGRD96   25.0   260    50    50   3.86 0.3342
WVFGRD96   26.0   255    50    40   3.87 0.3277
WVFGRD96   27.0   255    55    40   3.88 0.3197
WVFGRD96   28.0    70    80   -25   3.90 0.3185
WVFGRD96   29.0    70    75   -25   3.92 0.3182

The best solution is

WVFGRD96    5.0   295    60   -85   3.77 0.4879

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 0.10 n 3

Figure 3. Waveform comparison for selected depth

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:

• The origin time and epicentral distance are incorrect
• The velocity model used for the inversion is incorrect
• The velocity model used to define the P-arrival time is not the same as the velocity model used for the waveform inversion (assuming that the initial trace alignment is based on the P arrival time)

 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

Velocity Model

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    

Quality Control

Here we tabulate the reasons for not using certain digital data sets

The following stations did not have a valid response files:

DATE=Wed Jul 13 09:09:04 CDT 2011