The ANSS event ID is nm608790 and the event page is at https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/nm608790/executive.
2011/04/08 14:56:32 35.261 -92.362 6.2 3.9 Arkansas
USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution ENS 2011/04/08 14:56:32:0 35.26 -92.36 6.2 3.9 Arkansas Stations used: AG.FCAR AG.HHAR AG.LCAR AG.WHAR AG.WLAR NM.MGMO NM.MPH NM.OLIL NM.PLAL NM.SLM NM.UALR NM.USIN NM.X201 TA.O36A TA.O38A TA.TUL1 TA.U34A TA.V34A TA.W34A TA.W40A TA.Z37A TA.Z38A TA.Z39A US.KSU1 US.MIAR Filtering commands used: hp c 0.02 n 3 lp c 0.10 n 3 Best Fitting Double Couple Mo = 7.76e+21 dyne-cm Mw = 3.86 Z = 4 km Plane Strike Dip Rake NP1 211 85 -165 NP2 120 75 -5 Principal Axes: Axis Value Plunge Azimuth T 7.76e+21 7 345 N 0.00e+00 74 229 P -7.76e+21 14 77 Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm) Component Value Mxx 6.72e+21 Mxy -3.59e+21 Mxz 4.93e+20 Myy -6.38e+21 Myz -2.03e+21 Mzz -3.38e+20 T ########### #### ############### #######################----- #######################------- #######################----------- #######################------------- --#####################--------------- -----##################------------- - -------##############--------------- P - ----------###########---------------- -- -------------#######---------------------- ---------------####----------------------- ------------------------------------------ ----------------####-------------------- ---------------#########---------------- -------------###############---------- -----------#######################-- ---------######################### ------######################## ----######################## ###################### ############## Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor: R T P -3.38e+20 4.93e+20 2.03e+21 4.93e+20 6.72e+21 3.59e+21 2.03e+21 3.59e+21 -6.38e+21 Details of the solution is found at http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.NA/20110408145632/index.html |
STK = 120 DIP = 75 RAKE = -5 MW = 3.86 HS = 4.0
The NDK file is 20110408145632.ndk The waveform inversion is preferred.
Given the availability of digital waveforms for determination of the moment tensor, this section documents the added processing leading to mLg, if appropriate to the region, and ML by application of the respective IASPEI formulae. As a research study, the linear distance term of the IASPEI formula for ML is adjusted to remove a linear distance trend in residuals to give a regionally defined ML. The defined ML uses horizontal component recordings, but the same procedure is applied to the vertical components since there may be some interest in vertical component ground motions. Residual plots versus distance may indicate interesting features of ground motion scaling in some distance ranges. A residual plot of the regionalized magnitude is given as a function of distance and azimuth, since data sets may transcend different wave propagation provinces.
Left: mLg computed using the IASPEI formula. Center: mLg residuals versus epicentral distance ; the values used for the trimmed mean magnitude estimate are indicated.
Right: residuals as a function of distance and azimuth.
Left: ML computed using the IASPEI formula for Horizontal components. Center: 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.
Right: Residuals from new relation as a function of distance and azimuth.
Left: ML computed using the IASPEI formula for Vertical components (research). Center: 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.
Right: Residuals from new relation as a function of distance and azimuth.
![]() |
The focal mechanism was determined using broadband seismic waveforms. The location of the event (star) and the stations used for (red) 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's 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 are as follow:
DEPTH STK DIP RAKE MW FIT WVFGRD96 0.5 260 10 -20 3.97 0.4334 WVFGRD96 1.0 295 90 -30 3.60 0.4626 WVFGRD96 2.0 120 60 5 3.74 0.5619 WVFGRD96 3.0 120 70 0 3.79 0.6209 WVFGRD96 4.0 120 75 -5 3.86 0.6439 WVFGRD96 5.0 120 85 -5 3.88 0.6382 WVFGRD96 6.0 300 85 5 3.90 0.6151 WVFGRD96 7.0 300 75 10 3.91 0.5859 WVFGRD96 8.0 300 70 10 3.94 0.5604 WVFGRD96 9.0 300 65 10 3.96 0.5322 WVFGRD96 10.0 300 60 10 3.99 0.5076 WVFGRD96 11.0 300 60 10 4.00 0.4805 WVFGRD96 12.0 300 60 10 4.01 0.4552 WVFGRD96 13.0 300 55 10 4.02 0.4332 WVFGRD96 14.0 300 55 10 4.03 0.4153 WVFGRD96 15.0 300 55 10 4.04 0.4012 WVFGRD96 16.0 300 55 10 4.05 0.3898 WVFGRD96 17.0 300 55 10 4.05 0.3802 WVFGRD96 18.0 300 55 10 4.06 0.3717 WVFGRD96 19.0 300 55 10 4.07 0.3640 WVFGRD96 20.0 300 50 10 4.09 0.3576 WVFGRD96 21.0 300 50 10 4.09 0.3504 WVFGRD96 22.0 300 50 10 4.10 0.3439 WVFGRD96 23.0 300 45 10 4.11 0.3381 WVFGRD96 24.0 300 45 10 4.11 0.3327 WVFGRD96 25.0 300 45 10 4.12 0.3280 WVFGRD96 26.0 305 45 25 4.12 0.3244 WVFGRD96 27.0 305 45 25 4.13 0.3220 WVFGRD96 28.0 305 45 25 4.13 0.3196 WVFGRD96 29.0 305 45 25 4.14 0.3173
The best solution is
WVFGRD96 4.0 120 75 -5 3.86 0.6439
The mechanism corresponding 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, the velocity model used in the predictions may not be perfect and the epicentral parameters may be be off. 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
![]() |
Figure 3. Waveform comparison for selected depth. Red: observed; Blue - predicted. The time shift with respect to the model prediction is indicated. The percent of fit is also indicated. The time scale is relative to the first trace sample. |
![]() |
Focal mechanism sensitivity at the preferred depth. The red color indicates a very good fit to the waveforms. 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 CUS.model used for the waveform synthetic seismograms and for the surface wave eigenfunctions and dispersion is as follows (The format is in the model96 format of Computer Programs in Seismology).
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