My initial solution with the CUS or WUS model wanted a surce depth of 2 km but with a mechansim with nodal planes below, but the P- and T-axes reversed. So P-wave first motions were read as well as P and S times and the program elocate was used to locate the event. The free depth was 21 km for the WUS model and 13 km forthe CUS model. The location for a fixed depth of 12 for the WUS model gives agreement between the MT solution and the first motions. The output of the relocation run with fixed depth is in the file elocate.txt.
Because of the dispersion measurements, the WUS model was used for the moment tensor solution. In addition only lower frequencies were used, e.g., the 0.03 - 0.06 Hz band, because the true model seems to be intermediate between the WUS and CUS models.
USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution ENS 2019/03/21 16:33:03:0 66.69 -130.44 2.6 4.6 Northwest Territories Stations used: CN.DAWY CN.INK NY.FARO NY.MAYO NY.WGLY TA.C36M TA.D28M TA.E27K TA.E28M TA.E29M TA.EPYK TA.F30M TA.F31M TA.G27K TA.G29M TA.G30M TA.G31M TA.H27K TA.H29M TA.H31M TA.I27K TA.I28M TA.I29M TA.I30M TA.J29N TA.J30M TA.L29M TA.M30M TA.M31M Filtering commands used: cut o DIST/3.3 -30 o DIST/3.3 +50 rtr taper w 0.1 hp c 0.03 n 3 lp c 0.06 n 3 Best Fitting Double Couple Mo = 1.26e+22 dyne-cm Mw = 4.00 Z = 12 km Plane Strike Dip Rake NP1 245 80 88 NP2 75 10 100 Principal Axes: Axis Value Plunge Azimuth T 1.26e+22 55 153 N 0.00e+00 2 245 P -1.26e+22 35 336 Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm) Component Value Mxx -3.77e+21 Mxy 1.39e+21 Mxz -1.07e+22 Myy -4.74e+20 Myz 5.09e+21 Mzz 4.24e+21 -------------- ---------------------- ---------------------------- -------- ------------------- ---------- P --------------------- ----------- ---------------------- -----------------------------------### -----------------------------########### ------------------------################ ---------------------####################- -----------------########################- --------------###########################- ----------###############################- -------################################- ----################### #############- -##################### T ############- ##################### ###########- -###############################-- -###########################-- --#######################--- ---###############---- -------------- Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor: R T P 4.24e+21 -1.07e+22 -5.09e+21 -1.07e+22 -3.77e+21 -1.39e+21 -5.09e+21 -1.39e+21 -4.74e+20 Details of the solution is found at http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.NA/20190321163303/index.html |
STK = 75 DIP = 10 RAKE = 100 MW = 4.00 HS = 12.0
The NDK file is 20190321163303.ndk The waveform inversion is preferred.
The following compares this source inversion to others
USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution ENS 2019/03/21 16:33:03:0 66.69 -130.44 2.6 4.6 Northwest Territories Stations used: CN.DAWY CN.INK NY.FARO NY.MAYO NY.WGLY TA.C36M TA.D28M TA.E27K TA.E28M TA.E29M TA.EPYK TA.F30M TA.F31M TA.G27K TA.G29M TA.G30M TA.G31M TA.H27K TA.H29M TA.H31M TA.I27K TA.I28M TA.I29M TA.I30M TA.J29N TA.J30M TA.L29M TA.M30M TA.M31M Filtering commands used: cut o DIST/3.3 -30 o DIST/3.3 +50 rtr taper w 0.1 hp c 0.03 n 3 lp c 0.06 n 3 Best Fitting Double Couple Mo = 1.26e+22 dyne-cm Mw = 4.00 Z = 12 km Plane Strike Dip Rake NP1 245 80 88 NP2 75 10 100 Principal Axes: Axis Value Plunge Azimuth T 1.26e+22 55 153 N 0.00e+00 2 245 P -1.26e+22 35 336 Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm) Component Value Mxx -3.77e+21 Mxy 1.39e+21 Mxz -1.07e+22 Myy -4.74e+20 Myz 5.09e+21 Mzz 4.24e+21 -------------- ---------------------- ---------------------------- -------- ------------------- ---------- P --------------------- ----------- ---------------------- -----------------------------------### -----------------------------########### ------------------------################ ---------------------####################- -----------------########################- --------------###########################- ----------###############################- -------################################- ----################### #############- -##################### T ############- ##################### ###########- -###############################-- -###########################-- --#######################--- ---###############---- -------------- Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor: R T P 4.24e+21 -1.07e+22 -5.09e+21 -1.07e+22 -3.77e+21 -1.39e+21 -5.09e+21 -1.39e+21 -4.74e+20 Details of the solution is found at http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.NA/20190321163303/index.html |
|
(a) mLg computed using the IASPEI formula; (b) mLg residuals ; the values used for the trimmed mean are indicated.
(a) ML computed using the IASPEI formula for Horizontal components; (b) ML residuals computed using a modified IASPEI formula that accounts for path specific attenuation; the values used for the trimmed mean are indicated. The ML relation used for each figure is given at the bottom of each plot.
(a) ML computed using the IASPEI formula for Vertical components (research); (b) ML residuals computed using a modified IASPEI formula that accounts for path specific attenuation; the values used for the trimmed mean are indicated. The ML relation used for each figure is given at the bottom of each plot.
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:
cut o DIST/3.3 -30 o DIST/3.3 +50 rtr taper w 0.1 hp c 0.03 n 3 lp c 0.06 n 3The results of this grid search from 0.5 to 19 km depth are as follow:
DEPTH STK DIP RAKE MW FIT WVFGRD96 1.0 225 45 -85 3.73 0.2914 WVFGRD96 2.0 225 40 -90 3.79 0.2881 WVFGRD96 3.0 210 35 70 3.85 0.2567 WVFGRD96 4.0 75 15 -65 3.95 0.2931 WVFGRD96 5.0 235 75 -90 3.94 0.3189 WVFGRD96 6.0 65 90 -85 3.93 0.3401 WVFGRD96 7.0 245 85 85 3.92 0.3632 WVFGRD96 8.0 10 0 35 4.00 0.3752 WVFGRD96 9.0 310 -5 -25 4.00 0.3928 WVFGRD96 10.0 85 10 110 4.00 0.4032 WVFGRD96 11.0 245 80 85 4.00 0.4076 WVFGRD96 12.0 75 10 100 4.00 0.4078 WVFGRD96 13.0 70 10 95 4.00 0.4040 WVFGRD96 14.0 245 80 90 4.00 0.3976 WVFGRD96 15.0 90 10 110 4.01 0.3892 WVFGRD96 16.0 90 10 110 4.01 0.3796 WVFGRD96 17.0 90 10 110 4.01 0.3690 WVFGRD96 18.0 250 85 85 4.01 0.3578 WVFGRD96 19.0 250 85 85 4.01 0.3467 WVFGRD96 20.0 250 85 85 4.01 0.3354 WVFGRD96 21.0 90 5 110 4.03 0.3242 WVFGRD96 22.0 90 5 110 4.03 0.3123 WVFGRD96 23.0 330 -5 -10 4.03 0.2998 WVFGRD96 24.0 290 -5 -50 4.03 0.2888 WVFGRD96 25.0 300 -5 -40 4.04 0.2768 WVFGRD96 26.0 70 90 -85 4.04 0.2646 WVFGRD96 27.0 315 -5 -25 4.04 0.2533 WVFGRD96 28.0 315 -5 -25 4.04 0.2418 WVFGRD96 29.0 60 0 80 4.04 0.2296
The best solution is
WVFGRD96 12.0 75 10 100 4.00 0.4078
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
cut o DIST/3.3 -30 o DIST/3.3 +50 rtr taper w 0.1 hp c 0.03 n 3 lp c 0.06 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.
Thanks also to the many seismic network operators whose dedication make this effort possible: University of Nevada Reno, University of Alaska, University of Washington, Oregon State University, University of Utah, Montana Bureas of Mines, UC Berkely, Caltech, UC San Diego, Saint Louis University, University of Memphis, Lamont Doherty Earth Observatory, the Iris stations and the Transportable Array of EarthScope.
The WUS.model used for the waveform synthetic seismograms and for the surface wave eigenfunctions and dispersion is as follows:
MODEL.01 Model after 8 iterations 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 1.9000 3.4065 2.0089 2.2150 0.302E-02 0.679E-02 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 6.1000 5.5445 3.2953 2.6089 0.349E-02 0.784E-02 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 13.0000 6.2708 3.7396 2.7812 0.212E-02 0.476E-02 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 19.0000 6.4075 3.7680 2.8223 0.111E-02 0.249E-02 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.0000 7.9000 4.6200 3.2760 0.164E-10 0.370E-10 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: