USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution ENS 2020/01/14 12:26:41:0 17.85 -66.87 10.0 4.6 Puerto Rico Stations used: GS.PR01 GS.PR02 GS.PR03 GS.PR04 GS.PR05 GS.PR06 IU.SJG PR.AGPR PR.AOPR PR.CELP PR.CRPR PR.ECPR PR.EMPR PR.GCPR PR.HUMP PR.MLPR PR.OBIP PR.PRSN PR.UUPR 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 0.10 n 3 Best Fitting Double Couple Mo = 1.86e+23 dyne-cm Mw = 4.78 Z = 13 km Plane Strike Dip Rake NP1 290 90 -15 NP2 20 75 -180 Principal Axes: Axis Value Plunge Azimuth T 1.86e+23 11 336 N 0.00e+00 75 110 P -1.86e+23 11 244 Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm) Component Value Mxx 1.16e+23 Mxy -1.38e+23 Mxz 4.53e+22 Myy -1.16e+23 Myz 1.65e+22 Mzz 4.21e+15 ############# ## T #############---- ##### #############------- ######################-------- ########################---------- #########################----------- #########################------------- --########################-------------- -------##################--------------- -------------#############---------------- ------------------#######----------------- ------------------------#----------------- ------------------------#####------------- ----------------------###########------- -- -----------------################-- - P ----------------################## ---------------################## ----------------################## -------------################# ----------################## ------################ ############## Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor: R T P 4.21e+15 4.53e+22 -1.65e+22 4.53e+22 1.16e+23 1.38e+23 -1.65e+22 1.38e+23 -1.16e+23 Details of the solution is found at http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.NA/20200114122641/index.html |
STK = 290 DIP = 90 RAKE = -15 MW = 4.78 HS = 13.0
The NDK file is 20200114122641.ndk The waveform inversion is preferred.
The following compares this source inversion to others
USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution ENS 2020/01/14 12:26:41:0 17.85 -66.87 10.0 4.6 Puerto Rico Stations used: GS.PR01 GS.PR02 GS.PR03 GS.PR04 GS.PR05 GS.PR06 IU.SJG PR.AGPR PR.AOPR PR.CELP PR.CRPR PR.ECPR PR.EMPR PR.GCPR PR.HUMP PR.MLPR PR.OBIP PR.PRSN PR.UUPR 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 0.10 n 3 Best Fitting Double Couple Mo = 1.86e+23 dyne-cm Mw = 4.78 Z = 13 km Plane Strike Dip Rake NP1 290 90 -15 NP2 20 75 -180 Principal Axes: Axis Value Plunge Azimuth T 1.86e+23 11 336 N 0.00e+00 75 110 P -1.86e+23 11 244 Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm) Component Value Mxx 1.16e+23 Mxy -1.38e+23 Mxz 4.53e+22 Myy -1.16e+23 Myz 1.65e+22 Mzz 4.21e+15 ############# ## T #############---- ##### #############------- ######################-------- ########################---------- #########################----------- #########################------------- --########################-------------- -------##################--------------- -------------#############---------------- ------------------#######----------------- ------------------------#----------------- ------------------------#####------------- ----------------------###########------- -- -----------------################-- - P ----------------################## ---------------################## ----------------################## -------------################# ----------################## ------################ ############## Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor: R T P 4.21e+15 4.53e+22 -1.65e+22 4.53e+22 1.16e+23 1.38e+23 -1.65e+22 1.38e+23 -1.16e+23 Details of the solution is found at http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.NA/20200114122641/index.html |
(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 0.10 n 3The results of this grid search from 0.5 to 19 km depth are as follow:
DEPTH STK DIP RAKE MW FIT WVFGRD96 1.0 290 80 0 4.20 0.2313 WVFGRD96 2.0 290 85 -5 4.37 0.3497 WVFGRD96 3.0 290 85 -15 4.45 0.4150 WVFGRD96 4.0 110 90 15 4.51 0.4657 WVFGRD96 5.0 290 90 -20 4.55 0.5121 WVFGRD96 6.0 110 90 20 4.59 0.5550 WVFGRD96 7.0 110 90 15 4.63 0.5946 WVFGRD96 8.0 290 90 -20 4.68 0.6332 WVFGRD96 9.0 110 90 20 4.70 0.6591 WVFGRD96 10.0 110 90 15 4.72 0.6802 WVFGRD96 11.0 110 90 15 4.74 0.6952 WVFGRD96 12.0 110 90 15 4.76 0.7031 WVFGRD96 13.0 290 90 -15 4.78 0.7073 WVFGRD96 14.0 290 90 -15 4.79 0.7072 WVFGRD96 15.0 295 90 -15 4.80 0.7046 WVFGRD96 16.0 295 90 -15 4.81 0.7012 WVFGRD96 17.0 295 90 -15 4.83 0.6950 WVFGRD96 18.0 295 85 -15 4.83 0.6886 WVFGRD96 19.0 295 85 -15 4.84 0.6806 WVFGRD96 20.0 295 85 -15 4.85 0.6719 WVFGRD96 21.0 295 85 -15 4.86 0.6623 WVFGRD96 22.0 295 80 -20 4.86 0.6534 WVFGRD96 23.0 295 80 -20 4.87 0.6437 WVFGRD96 24.0 295 80 -20 4.88 0.6344 WVFGRD96 25.0 295 80 -20 4.88 0.6254 WVFGRD96 26.0 295 80 -20 4.89 0.6162 WVFGRD96 27.0 295 80 -20 4.90 0.6072 WVFGRD96 28.0 295 75 -20 4.89 0.5995 WVFGRD96 29.0 295 75 -20 4.90 0.5910
The best solution is
WVFGRD96 13.0 290 90 -15 4.78 0.7073
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 0.10 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.
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: