Location

2011/10/29 04:13:34 45.706 10.923 9.1 4.2 Italy

Arrival Times (from USGS)

Felt Map

Focal Mechanism

SLU Moment Tensor Solution ENS 2011/10/29 04:13:34:0 45.71 10.92 9.1 4.2 Italy Stations used: CH.BNALP GU.CIRO GU.SATI IV.BRMO IV.FNVD IV.GROG IV.MABI IV.MAGA IV.MONC IV.MRGE IV.MTRZ IV.PARC IV.PIEI IV.PTCC IV.QLNO IV.SALO IV.SASS IV.STAL MN.TUE NI.ACOM NI.AGOR NI.CGRP Filtering commands used: hp c 0.02 n 3 lp c 0.10 n 3 Best Fitting Double Couple Mo = 6.31e+21 dyne-cm Mw = 3.80 Z = 12 km Plane Strike Dip Rake NP1 89 46 100 NP2 255 45 80 Principal Axes: Axis Value Plunge Azimuth T 6.31e+21 83 79 N 0.00e+00 7 262 P -6.31e+21 0 172 Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm) Component Value Mxx -6.18e+21 Mxy 8.82e+20 Mxz 2.01e+20 Myy -2.89e+19 Myz 7.48e+20 Mzz 6.21e+21 -------------- ---------------------- ---------------------------- ------------------------------ ---------------------------------- -------------##################----- ----------##########################-- --------###############################- ------################################## -----################## ################ ----################### T ################ #--#################### ###############- ########################################-- --###################################--- -----##############################----- -------########################------- -----------##############----------- ---------------------------------- ------------------------------ ---------------------------- ------------ ------- -------- P --- Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor: R T P 6.21e+21 2.01e+20 -7.48e+20 2.01e+20 -6.18e+21 -8.82e+20 -7.48e+20 -8.82e+20 -2.89e+19 Details of the solution is found at http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.IT/20111029041334/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 = 255
      DIP = 45
     RAKE = 80
       MW = 3.80
       HS = 12.0

The waveform inversion is preferred.

Moment Tensor Comparison

The following compares this source inversion to others

SLU

SLU Moment Tensor Solution ENS 2011/10/29 04:13:34:0 45.71 10.92 9.1 4.2 Italy Stations used: CH.BNALP GU.CIRO GU.SATI IV.BRMO IV.FNVD IV.GROG IV.MABI IV.MAGA IV.MONC IV.MRGE IV.MTRZ IV.PARC IV.PIEI IV.PTCC IV.QLNO IV.SALO IV.SASS IV.STAL MN.TUE NI.ACOM NI.AGOR NI.CGRP Filtering commands used: hp c 0.02 n 3 lp c 0.10 n 3 Best Fitting Double Couple Mo = 6.31e+21 dyne-cm Mw = 3.80 Z = 12 km Plane Strike Dip Rake NP1 89 46 100 NP2 255 45 80 Principal Axes: Axis Value Plunge Azimuth T 6.31e+21 83 79 N 0.00e+00 7 262 P -6.31e+21 0 172 Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm) Component Value Mxx -6.18e+21 Mxy 8.82e+20 Mxz 2.01e+20 Myy -2.89e+19 Myz 7.48e+20 Mzz 6.21e+21 -------------- ---------------------- ---------------------------- ------------------------------ ---------------------------------- -------------##################----- ----------##########################-- --------###############################- ------################################## -----################## ################ ----################### T ################ #--#################### ###############- ########################################-- --###################################--- -----##############################----- -------########################------- -----------##############----------- ---------------------------------- ------------------------------ ---------------------------- ------------ ------- -------- P --- Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor: R T P 6.21e+21 2.01e+20 -7.48e+20 2.01e+20 -6.18e+21 -8.82e+20 -7.48e+20 -8.82e+20 -2.89e+19 Details of the solution is found at http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.IT/20111029041334/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

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    75    45   -80   3.56 0.2879
WVFGRD96    2.0    95    55   -35   3.61 0.2588
WVFGRD96    3.0   200    75   -60   3.60 0.2771
WVFGRD96    4.0   210    80   -65   3.58 0.3014
WVFGRD96    5.0   210    80   -70   3.68 0.3269
WVFGRD96    6.0   270    10    80   3.75 0.3550
WVFGRD96    7.0   260    20    70   3.77 0.3895
WVFGRD96    8.0   245    45    70   3.76 0.4473
WVFGRD96    9.0   250    45    75   3.77 0.4770
WVFGRD96   10.0   250    45    75   3.78 0.4936
WVFGRD96   11.0   255    45    80   3.79 0.5011
WVFGRD96   12.0   255    45    80   3.80 0.5017
WVFGRD96   13.0   260    45    85   3.81 0.4975
WVFGRD96   14.0    85    45    95   3.82 0.4887
WVFGRD96   15.0    85    45    95   3.85 0.4756
WVFGRD96   16.0    80    45    85   3.85 0.4628
WVFGRD96   17.0    80    45    85   3.86 0.4477
WVFGRD96   18.0    80    45    85   3.86 0.4302
WVFGRD96   19.0   265    40    90   3.86 0.4123
WVFGRD96   20.0   250    35    70   3.87 0.3957
WVFGRD96   21.0   250    35    70   3.87 0.3800
WVFGRD96   22.0   245    35    65   3.88 0.3642
WVFGRD96   23.0   250    30    65   3.89 0.3484
WVFGRD96   24.0   255    30    70   3.89 0.3322
WVFGRD96   25.0   250    30    65   3.90 0.3153
WVFGRD96   26.0   255    25    70   3.90 0.2985
WVFGRD96   27.0   255    25    70   3.91 0.2834
WVFGRD96   28.0   260    20    75   3.91 0.2699
WVFGRD96   29.0    20    70   -55   3.90 0.2652

The best solution is

WVFGRD96   12.0   255    45    80   3.80 0.5017

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)

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

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 Nov 2 19:28:19 CDT 2011

Last Changed 2011/10/29