USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution ENS 2020/06/11 06:45:17:0 17.92 -66.58 6.0 3.7 Puerto Rico Stations used: GS.PR01 GS.PR02 GS.PR03 GS.PR05 IU.SJG PR.AGPR PR.AOPR PR.CELP PR.CRPR PR.ECPR PR.HUMP PR.MLPR PR.OBIP PR.PDPR PR.PRSN PR.UUPR Filtering commands used: cut o DIST/3.3 -40 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 = 2.95e+21 dyne-cm Mw = 3.58 Z = 5 km Plane Strike Dip Rake NP1 13 57 -130 NP2 250 50 -45 Principal Axes: Axis Value Plunge Azimuth T 2.95e+21 4 130 N 0.00e+00 33 37 P -2.95e+21 57 226 Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm) Component Value Mxx 7.87e+20 Mxy -1.89e+21 Mxz 7.99e+20 Myy 1.27e+21 Myz 1.14e+21 Mzz -2.06e+21 ############-- #################----- #####################------- #######################------- #########################--------- #################----------#####---- #############---------------#########- ###########------------------########### ########---------------------########### #######-----------------------############ #####-------------------------############ ####-------------------------############# ###--------------------------############# #----------- ------------############# #----------- P ------------############# ----------- -----------############# -----------------------############# ---------------------######### # ------------------########## T ---------------############ ----------############ ----########## Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor: R T P -2.06e+21 7.99e+20 -1.14e+21 7.99e+20 7.87e+20 1.89e+21 -1.14e+21 1.89e+21 1.27e+21 Details of the solution is found at http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.NA/20200611064517/index.html |
STK = 250 DIP = 50 RAKE = -45 MW = 3.58 HS = 5.0
The NDK file is 20200611064517.ndk The waveform inversion is preferred.
The following compares this source inversion to others
USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution ENS 2020/06/11 06:45:17:0 17.92 -66.58 6.0 3.7 Puerto Rico Stations used: GS.PR01 GS.PR02 GS.PR03 GS.PR05 IU.SJG PR.AGPR PR.AOPR PR.CELP PR.CRPR PR.ECPR PR.HUMP PR.MLPR PR.OBIP PR.PDPR PR.PRSN PR.UUPR Filtering commands used: cut o DIST/3.3 -40 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 = 2.95e+21 dyne-cm Mw = 3.58 Z = 5 km Plane Strike Dip Rake NP1 13 57 -130 NP2 250 50 -45 Principal Axes: Axis Value Plunge Azimuth T 2.95e+21 4 130 N 0.00e+00 33 37 P -2.95e+21 57 226 Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm) Component Value Mxx 7.87e+20 Mxy -1.89e+21 Mxz 7.99e+20 Myy 1.27e+21 Myz 1.14e+21 Mzz -2.06e+21 ############-- #################----- #####################------- #######################------- #########################--------- #################----------#####---- #############---------------#########- ###########------------------########### ########---------------------########### #######-----------------------############ #####-------------------------############ ####-------------------------############# ###--------------------------############# #----------- ------------############# #----------- P ------------############# ----------- -----------############# -----------------------############# ---------------------######### # ------------------########## T ---------------############ ----------############ ----########## Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor: R T P -2.06e+21 7.99e+20 -1.14e+21 7.99e+20 7.87e+20 1.89e+21 -1.14e+21 1.89e+21 1.27e+21 Details of the solution is found at http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.NA/20200611064517/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 -40 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 1.0 240 55 -15 3.22 0.2309 WVFGRD96 2.0 255 40 -25 3.42 0.3291 WVFGRD96 3.0 245 40 -40 3.52 0.4651 WVFGRD96 4.0 240 45 -55 3.57 0.5639 WVFGRD96 5.0 250 50 -45 3.58 0.5936 WVFGRD96 6.0 255 55 -35 3.59 0.5849 WVFGRD96 7.0 260 60 -25 3.59 0.5638 WVFGRD96 8.0 255 55 -35 3.65 0.5527 WVFGRD96 9.0 260 60 -25 3.65 0.5157 WVFGRD96 10.0 260 60 -20 3.65 0.4834 WVFGRD96 11.0 265 65 -15 3.66 0.4570 WVFGRD96 12.0 265 65 -15 3.67 0.4376 WVFGRD96 13.0 270 65 20 3.66 0.4182 WVFGRD96 14.0 270 70 20 3.67 0.4040 WVFGRD96 15.0 270 70 20 3.68 0.3913 WVFGRD96 16.0 270 70 20 3.68 0.3799 WVFGRD96 17.0 270 70 25 3.69 0.3723 WVFGRD96 18.0 270 70 25 3.70 0.3672 WVFGRD96 19.0 270 70 25 3.71 0.3625 WVFGRD96 20.0 270 70 25 3.72 0.3598 WVFGRD96 21.0 270 70 25 3.73 0.3580 WVFGRD96 22.0 270 65 30 3.73 0.3572 WVFGRD96 23.0 270 65 30 3.74 0.3562 WVFGRD96 24.0 270 65 35 3.75 0.3551 WVFGRD96 25.0 270 65 35 3.76 0.3538 WVFGRD96 26.0 190 65 50 3.82 0.3602 WVFGRD96 27.0 190 65 50 3.83 0.3645 WVFGRD96 28.0 190 65 50 3.84 0.3659 WVFGRD96 29.0 185 65 45 3.85 0.3681
The best solution is
WVFGRD96 5.0 250 50 -45 3.58 0.5936
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 -40 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 Bureau of Mines, UC Berkely, Caltech, UC San Diego, Saint Louis University, University of Memphis, Lamont Doherty Earth Observatory, the Oklahoma Geological Survey, TexNet, the Iris stations, the Transportable Array of EarthScope and other networks.
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: