2012/11/20 10:32:13 44.974 8.230 29.7 3.3 Italy
USGS Felt map for this earthquake
SLU Moment Tensor Solution
ENS 2012/11/20 10:32:13:0 44.97 8.23 29.7 3.3 Italy
Stations used:
GU.BHB GU.ENR GU.PCP GU.STV IV.DOI IV.MONC
Filtering commands used:
hp c 0.02 n 3
lp c 0.10 n 3
Best Fitting Double Couple
Mo = 1.53e+21 dyne-cm
Mw = 3.39
Z = 25 km
Plane Strike Dip Rake
NP1 138 74 143
NP2 240 55 20
Principal Axes:
Axis Value Plunge Azimuth
T 1.53e+21 37 94
N 0.00e+00 50 298
P -1.53e+21 12 193
Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm)
Component Value
Mxx -1.39e+21
Mxy -3.76e+20
Mxz 2.58e+20
Myy 8.98e+20
Myz 8.04e+20
Mzz 4.92e+20
--------------
----------------------
----------------------------
##----------------------------
####------------------------------
######-------------#################
########--------######################
##########----##########################
########################################
##########---#############################
########-------################## ######
#######---------################# T ######
######------------############### ######
####---------------#####################
###-----------------####################
#--------------------#################
-----------------------#############
------------------------##########
-------------------------#####
-------- -----------------
----- P --------------
- ----------
Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor:
R T P
4.92e+20 2.58e+20 -8.04e+20
2.58e+20 -1.39e+21 3.76e+20
-8.04e+20 3.76e+20 8.98e+20
Details of the solution is found at
http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.IT/20121120103213/index.html
|
STK = 240
DIP = 55
RAKE = 20
MW = 3.39
HS = 25.0
The waveform inversion is preferred.
The following compares this source inversion to others
SLU Moment Tensor Solution
ENS 2012/11/20 10:32:13:0 44.97 8.23 29.7 3.3 Italy
Stations used:
GU.BHB GU.ENR GU.PCP GU.STV IV.DOI IV.MONC
Filtering commands used:
hp c 0.02 n 3
lp c 0.10 n 3
Best Fitting Double Couple
Mo = 1.53e+21 dyne-cm
Mw = 3.39
Z = 25 km
Plane Strike Dip Rake
NP1 138 74 143
NP2 240 55 20
Principal Axes:
Axis Value Plunge Azimuth
T 1.53e+21 37 94
N 0.00e+00 50 298
P -1.53e+21 12 193
Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm)
Component Value
Mxx -1.39e+21
Mxy -3.76e+20
Mxz 2.58e+20
Myy 8.98e+20
Myz 8.04e+20
Mzz 4.92e+20
--------------
----------------------
----------------------------
##----------------------------
####------------------------------
######-------------#################
########--------######################
##########----##########################
########################################
##########---#############################
########-------################## ######
#######---------################# T ######
######------------############### ######
####---------------#####################
###-----------------####################
#--------------------#################
-----------------------#############
------------------------##########
-------------------------#####
-------- -----------------
----- P --------------
- ----------
Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor:
R T P
4.92e+20 2.58e+20 -8.04e+20
2.58e+20 -1.39e+21 3.76e+20
-8.04e+20 3.76e+20 8.98e+20
Details of the solution is found at
http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.IT/20121120103213/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 1.0 120 45 -55 2.99 0.2260
WVFGRD96 2.0 120 30 -45 3.09 0.2499
WVFGRD96 3.0 340 65 55 3.08 0.2805
WVFGRD96 4.0 345 55 60 3.13 0.3027
WVFGRD96 5.0 345 55 60 3.18 0.3161
WVFGRD96 6.0 70 75 -75 3.29 0.3289
WVFGRD96 7.0 80 80 -70 3.32 0.3305
WVFGRD96 8.0 245 65 55 3.21 0.3321
WVFGRD96 9.0 245 60 50 3.22 0.3402
WVFGRD96 10.0 240 60 45 3.23 0.3461
WVFGRD96 11.0 240 60 45 3.24 0.3491
WVFGRD96 12.0 240 60 40 3.24 0.3503
WVFGRD96 13.0 240 55 40 3.26 0.3514
WVFGRD96 14.0 240 55 35 3.27 0.3534
WVFGRD96 15.0 230 40 -10 3.30 0.3567
WVFGRD96 16.0 235 45 0 3.30 0.3640
WVFGRD96 17.0 235 45 5 3.32 0.3706
WVFGRD96 18.0 235 40 0 3.34 0.3780
WVFGRD96 19.0 240 45 10 3.34 0.3839
WVFGRD96 20.0 240 45 10 3.35 0.3893
WVFGRD96 21.0 240 45 10 3.36 0.3944
WVFGRD96 22.0 240 50 15 3.37 0.3975
WVFGRD96 23.0 240 50 15 3.38 0.3987
WVFGRD96 24.0 240 50 15 3.39 0.3984
WVFGRD96 25.0 240 55 20 3.39 0.3989
WVFGRD96 26.0 240 55 25 3.41 0.3984
WVFGRD96 27.0 240 55 25 3.42 0.3967
WVFGRD96 28.0 235 65 25 3.43 0.3947
WVFGRD96 29.0 235 65 25 3.45 0.3932
The best solution is
WVFGRD96 25.0 240 55 20 3.39 0.3989
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. 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
|
|
|
|
| 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:
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.
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=Mon Dec 17 08:08:10 CST 2012