Location

2007/11/28 12:58:18 66.19 -135.55 -- 4.5 Richardson Mountains, YT (NRCAN)
2007/11/28 12:58:18 66.16 -135.47 14.0 4.3 Canada (AEIC)

Arrival Times (from USGS)

Arrival time list

Felt Map

USGS Felt map for this earthquake

USGS Felt reports page for

Focal Mechanism

 SLU Moment Tensor Solution
 2007/11/28 12:58:18 66.19 -135.45 10.0 4.5 Canada
 
 Best Fitting Double Couple
    Mo = 1.45e+22 dyne-cm
    Mw = 4.04 
    Z  = 22 km
     Plane   Strike  Dip  Rake
      NP1       25    70   -45
      NP2      134    48   -153
 Principal Axes:
   Axis    Value   Plunge  Azimuth
     T   1.45e+22     13      84
     N   0.00e+00     42     186
     P  -1.45e+22     45     340



 Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm)
    Component  Value
       Mxx    -6.18e+21
       Mxy     3.66e+21
       Mxz    -6.48e+21
       Myy     1.28e+22
       Myz     5.62e+21
       Mzz    -6.57e+21
                                                     
                                                     
                                                     
                                                     
                     --------------                  
                 --------------------##              
              -----------------------#####           
             ------------------------######          
           ##----------   -----------########        
          ##----------- P -----------#########       
         ####----------   ----------###########      
        #####-----------------------############     
        #####----------------------#############     
       #######---------------------##########   #    
       ########-------------------########### T #    
       #########-----------------############   #    
       ##########---------------#################    
        ##########-------------#################     
        ############----------##################     
         #############-------##################      
          ##############----##################       
           ##################################        
             ############------############          
              #########-------------------           
                 ####------------------              
                     --------------                  
                                                     
                                                     
                                                     

 Harvard Convention
 Moment Tensor:
      R          T          F
 -6.57e+21  -6.48e+21  -5.62e+21 
 -6.48e+21  -6.18e+21  -3.66e+21 
 -5.62e+21  -3.66e+21   1.28e+22 


Details of the solution is found at

http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.NA/20071128125818/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 = 25
      DIP = 70
     RAKE = -45
       MW = 4.04
       HS = 22

Both solutions are similar. Not much depth control.

Moment Tensor Comparison

The following compares this source inversion to others
SLU
 SLU Moment Tensor Solution
 2007/11/28 12:58:18 66.19 -135.45 10.0 4.5 Canada
 
 Best Fitting Double Couple
    Mo = 1.45e+22 dyne-cm
    Mw = 4.04 
    Z  = 22 km
     Plane   Strike  Dip  Rake
      NP1       25    70   -45
      NP2      134    48   -153
 Principal Axes:
   Axis    Value   Plunge  Azimuth
     T   1.45e+22     13      84
     N   0.00e+00     42     186
     P  -1.45e+22     45     340



 Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm)
    Component  Value
       Mxx    -6.18e+21
       Mxy     3.66e+21
       Mxz    -6.48e+21
       Myy     1.28e+22
       Myz     5.62e+21
       Mzz    -6.57e+21
                                                     
                                                     
                                                     
                                                     
                     --------------                  
                 --------------------##              
              -----------------------#####           
             ------------------------######          
           ##----------   -----------########        
          ##----------- P -----------#########       
         ####----------   ----------###########      
        #####-----------------------############     
        #####----------------------#############     
       #######---------------------##########   #    
       ########-------------------########### T #    
       #########-----------------############   #    
       ##########---------------#################    
        ##########-------------#################     
        ############----------##################     
         #############-------##################      
          ##############----##################       
           ##################################        
             ############------############          
              #########-------------------           
                 ####------------------              
                     --------------                  
                                                     
                                                     
                                                     

 Harvard Convention
 Moment Tensor:
      R          T          F
 -6.57e+21  -6.48e+21  -5.62e+21 
 -6.48e+21  -6.18e+21  -3.66e+21 
 -5.62e+21  -3.66e+21   1.28e+22 


Details of the solution is found at

http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.NA/20071128125818/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 0.025 n 3
lp c 0.06 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    0.5   225    80    20   3.78 0.3972
WVFGRD96    1.0    45    80    15   3.79 0.4060
WVFGRD96    2.0   225    90     0   3.80 0.4142
WVFGRD96    3.0   235    60    40   3.89 0.4135
WVFGRD96    4.0    40    70   -25   3.86 0.4178
WVFGRD96    5.0    40    70   -25   3.87 0.4201
WVFGRD96    6.0   230    75    55   3.96 0.4249
WVFGRD96    7.0   230    75    55   3.96 0.4326
WVFGRD96    8.0   230    75    55   3.96 0.4392
WVFGRD96    9.0   225    80    50   3.95 0.4459
WVFGRD96   10.0    30    75   -55   3.98 0.4525
WVFGRD96   11.0    30    75   -55   3.99 0.4640
WVFGRD96   12.0    25    70   -55   3.99 0.4739
WVFGRD96   13.0    25    70   -55   3.99 0.4817
WVFGRD96   14.0    25    70   -50   3.99 0.4882
WVFGRD96   15.0    25    70   -50   3.99 0.4934
WVFGRD96   16.0    25    70   -50   4.00 0.4973
WVFGRD96   17.0    25    70   -50   4.00 0.5000
WVFGRD96   18.0    25    70   -45   4.00 0.5022
WVFGRD96   19.0    25    70   -45   4.01 0.5043
WVFGRD96   20.0    25    70   -50   4.03 0.5070
WVFGRD96   21.0    25    70   -45   4.03 0.5080
WVFGRD96   22.0    25    70   -45   4.04 0.5080
WVFGRD96   23.0    25    70   -45   4.04 0.5069
WVFGRD96   24.0    25    70   -45   4.05 0.5050
WVFGRD96   25.0    25    70   -40   4.05 0.5025
WVFGRD96   26.0    30    75   -40   4.06 0.4998
WVFGRD96   27.0    30    75   -40   4.07 0.4964
WVFGRD96   28.0    25    75   -40   4.08 0.4923
WVFGRD96   29.0    25    75   -40   4.08 0.4884

The best solution is

WVFGRD96   22.0    25    70   -45   4.04 0.5080

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 componnet 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 0.025 n 3
lp c 0.06 n 3
Figure 3. Waveform comparison for depth of 8 km
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.

Surface-Wave Focal Mechanism

The following figure shows the stations used in the grid search for the best focal mechanism to fit the surface-wave spectral amplitudes of the Love and Rayleigh waves.
Location of broadband stations used to obtain focal mechanism from surface-wave spectral amplitudes

The surface-wave determined focal mechanism is shown here.


  NODAL PLANES 

  
  STK=     224.99
  DIP=      75.00
 RAKE=      50.00
  
             OR
  
  STK=     117.84
  DIP=      42.28
 RAKE=     157.37
 
 
DEPTH = 13.0 km
 
Mw = 4.08
Best Fit 0.8111 - P-T axis plot gives solutions with FIT greater than FIT90

First motion data

The P-wave first motion data for focal mechanism studies are as follow:

Sta Az(deg)    Dist(km)   First motion
INK        18  254 -12345
DAWY      220  297 -12345
EGAK      242  305 -12345
COLA      262  589 -12345
WHY       177  614 -12345
COLD      287  660 -12345

Surface-wave analysis

Surface wave analysis was performed using codes from Computer Programs in Seismology, specifically the multiple filter analysis program do_mft and the surface-wave radiation pattern search program srfgrd96.

Data preparation

Digital data were collected, instrument response removed and traces converted to Z, R an T components. Multiple filter analysis was applied to the Z and T traces to obtain the Rayleigh- and Love-wave spectral amplitudes, respectively. These were input to the search program which examined all depths between 1 and 25 km and all possible mechanisms.
Best mechanism fit as a function of depth. The preferred depth is given above. Lower hemisphere projection

Pressure-tension axis trends. Since the surface-wave spectra search does not distinguish between P and T axes and since there is a 180 ambiguity in strike, all possible P and T axes are plotted. First motion data and waveforms will be used to select the preferred mechanism. The purpose of this plot is to provide an idea of the possible range of solutions. The P and T-axes for all mechanisms with goodness of fit greater than 0.9 FITMAX (above) are plotted here.


Focal mechanism sensitivity at the preferred depth. The red color indicates a very good fit to the Love and Rayleigh wave radiation patterns. 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. Because of the symmetry of the spectral amplitude rediation patterns, only strikes from 0-180 degrees are sampled.

Love-wave radiation patterns

Rayleigh-wave radiation patterns

Broadband station distribution

The distribution of broadband stations with azimuth and distance is

Sta Az(deg)    Dist(km)   
INK	   18	  254
DAWY	  220	  297
EGAK	  242	  305
DOT	  239	  493
COLA	  262	  589
PAX	  238	  596
WHY	  177	  614
COLD	  287	  660
MCK	  253	  690
SKAG	  179	  747
PNL	  197	  750
BPAW	  260	  761
TRF	  254	  764
KTH	  256	  786
EYAK	  224	  808
PMR	  239	  840
BESE	  178	  845
PPLA	  253	  878
DLBC	  159	  905
CTLN	   93	  924
SIT	  180	 1014
FNBB	  136	 1030
JERN	   80	 1079
WRAK	  170	 1098
COWN	   84	 1112
CRAG	  173	 1198
BMBC	  141	 1331
MOBC	  171	 1463
TNA	  282	 1467
BBB	  162	 1610
RES	   40	 1739
PHC	  161	 1781
BULN	   70	 1865
EDB	  161	 1876
EDM	  129	 1884
CBB	  157	 1887
LLLB	  149	 1896
SLEB	  141	 1935
SHB	  154	 1962
PNT	  146	 2086
NLWA	  156	 2199
ILON	   57	 2219
NEW	  143	 2261
WALA	  136	 2274
COR	  157	 2512
EGMT	  131	 2513
DGMT	  122	 2671
HLID	  142	 2824
ULM	  109	 2846
FRB	   63	 3022
EYMN	  107	 3241
ECSD	  117	 3423
KAPO	   96	 3505
JFWS	  111	 3763
KSU1	  121	 3876
ANMO	  137	 3956
AAM	  104	 4105
SLM	  114	 4176
CCM	  116	 4192
USIN	  112	 4349

Waveform comparison for this mechanism

Since the analysis of the surface-wave radiation patterns uses only spectral amplitudes and because the surfave-wave radiation patterns have a 180 degree symmetry, each surface-wave solution consists of four possible focal mechanisms corresponding to the interchange of the P- and T-axes and a roation of the mechanism by 180 degrees. To select one mechanism, P-wave first motion can be used. This was not possible in this case because all the P-wave first motions were emergent ( a feature of the P-wave wave takeoff angle, the station location and the mechanism). The other way to select among the mechanisms is to compute forward synthetics and compare the observed and predicted waveforms.

The fits to the waveforms with the given mechanism are show below:

This figure shows the fit to the three components of motion (Z - vertical, R-radial and T - transverse). For each station and component, the observed traces is shown in red and the model predicted trace in blue. The traces represent filtered ground velocity in units of meters/sec (the peak value is printed adjacent to each trace; each pair of traces to plotted to the same scale to emphasize the difference in levels). Both synthetic and observed traces have been filtered using the SAC commands:

hp c 0.025 n 3
lp c 0.06 n 3

Discussion

The Future

Should the national backbone of the USGS Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS) be implemented with an interstation separation of 300 km, it is very likely that an earthquake such as this would have been recorded at distances on the order of 100-200 km. This means that the closest station would have information on source depth and mechanism that was lacking here.

Acknowledgements

Dr. Harley Benz, USGS, provided the USGS USNSN digital data. The digital data used in this study were provided by Natural Resources Canada through their AUTODRM site http://www.seismo.nrcan.gc.ca/nwfa/autodrm/autodrm_req_e.php, and IRIS using their BUD interface.

Thanks also to the many seismic network operators whose dedication make this effort possible: University of Alaska, University of Washington, Oregon State University, University of Utah, Montana Bureas of Mines, UC Berkely, Caltech, UC San Diego, Saint L ouis University, Universityof Memphis, Lamont Doehrty Earth Observatory, Boston College, the Iris stations and the Transportable Array of EarthScope.

Appendix A


Spectra fit plots to each station

Velocity Model

The CUS used for the waveform synthetic seismograms and for the surface wave eigenfunctions and dispersion is as follows:

MODEL.01
CUS Model with Q from simple gamma values
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
  1.0000  5.0000  2.8900  2.5000 0.172E-02 0.387E-02 0.00  0.00  1.00  1.00 
  9.0000  6.1000  3.5200  2.7300 0.160E-02 0.363E-02 0.00  0.00  1.00  1.00 
 10.0000  6.4000  3.7000  2.8200 0.149E-02 0.336E-02 0.00  0.00  1.00  1.00 
 20.0000  6.7000  3.8700  2.9020 0.000E-04 0.000E-04 0.00  0.00  1.00  1.00 
  0.0000  8.1500  4.7000  3.3640 0.194E-02 0.431E-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=Fri Nov 30 14:52:35 CST 2007

Last Changed 2007/11/28