The ANSS event ID is usp000j19e and the event page is at https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/usp000j19e/executive.
2011/05/09 23:28:54 37.021 -104.783 5.0 3.7 Colorado
USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution ENS 2011/05/09 23:28:54:0 37.02 -104.78 5.0 3.7 Colorado Stations used: AR.X18A IU.ANMO IW.SMCO TA.KSCO TA.MSTX TA.O20A TA.O31A TA.Q32A TA.R32A TA.S22A TA.S32A TA.S33A TA.T25A TA.T32A TA.T33A TA.U32A TA.U33A TA.V32A TA.V33A TA.W18A TA.W32A US.AMTX US.CBKS US.ISCO US.MVCO US.SDCO US.WMOK UU.BRPU UU.CVRU UU.PNSU UU.SRU 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 0.06 n 3 Best Fitting Double Couple Mo = 5.13e+21 dyne-cm Mw = 3.74 Z = 3 km Plane Strike Dip Rake NP1 1 52 -117 NP2 220 45 -60 Principal Axes: Axis Value Plunge Azimuth T 5.13e+21 4 109 N 0.00e+00 21 18 P -5.13e+21 69 209 Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm) Component Value Mxx 4.94e+19 Mxy -1.87e+21 Mxz 1.39e+21 Myy 4.39e+21 Myz 1.17e+21 Mzz -4.44e+21 #########----- ###############------- ##################-######### ###############------######### ##############----------########## ############--------------########## ###########----------------########### ###########------------------########### #########--------------------########### #########---------------------############ ########----------------------############ ########----------------------############ #######---------- ----------############ ######---------- P ----------######## #####----------- ----------######## T ####-----------------------######### ###-----------------------########## ##----------------------########## #--------------------######### #------------------######### --------------######## ---------##### Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor: R T P -4.44e+21 1.39e+21 -1.17e+21 1.39e+21 4.94e+19 1.87e+21 -1.17e+21 1.87e+21 4.39e+21 Details of the solution is found at http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.NA/20110509232854/index.html |
STK = 220 DIP = 45 RAKE = -60 MW = 3.74 HS = 3.0
The NDK file is 20110509232854.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: 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:
cut o DIST/3.3 -40 o DIST/3.3 +50 rtr taper w 0.1 hp c 0.03 n 3 lp c 0.06 n 3The results of this grid search are as follow:
DEPTH STK DIP RAKE MW FIT WVFGRD96 0.5 225 50 -45 3.54 0.5024 WVFGRD96 1.0 220 45 -50 3.59 0.5559 WVFGRD96 2.0 220 40 -55 3.69 0.6486 WVFGRD96 3.0 220 45 -60 3.74 0.6863 WVFGRD96 4.0 230 55 -45 3.75 0.6060 WVFGRD96 5.0 240 65 -25 3.74 0.5256 WVFGRD96 6.0 240 70 -15 3.75 0.4762 WVFGRD96 7.0 245 75 15 3.78 0.4574 WVFGRD96 8.0 245 75 20 3.81 0.4544 WVFGRD96 9.0 245 75 20 3.83 0.4506 WVFGRD96 10.0 95 40 0 3.74 0.4422 WVFGRD96 11.0 95 40 5 3.75 0.4602 WVFGRD96 12.0 100 40 10 3.76 0.4762 WVFGRD96 13.0 100 45 15 3.78 0.4906 WVFGRD96 14.0 100 45 15 3.78 0.5027 WVFGRD96 15.0 105 45 20 3.80 0.5129 WVFGRD96 16.0 105 45 15 3.81 0.5222 WVFGRD96 17.0 105 45 20 3.81 0.5289 WVFGRD96 18.0 240 80 -40 3.85 0.5366 WVFGRD96 19.0 240 80 -40 3.86 0.5459 WVFGRD96 20.0 240 85 -35 3.87 0.5537 WVFGRD96 21.0 240 85 -40 3.87 0.5619 WVFGRD96 22.0 240 85 -35 3.89 0.5678 WVFGRD96 23.0 65 90 35 3.90 0.5673 WVFGRD96 24.0 60 90 35 3.90 0.5705 WVFGRD96 25.0 60 90 35 3.91 0.5740 WVFGRD96 26.0 60 90 35 3.92 0.5760 WVFGRD96 27.0 60 90 35 3.93 0.5771 WVFGRD96 28.0 60 90 35 3.94 0.5760 WVFGRD96 29.0 60 90 35 3.95 0.5731
The best solution is
WVFGRD96 3.0 220 45 -60 3.74 0.6863
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
cut o DIST/3.3 -40 o DIST/3.3 +50 rtr taper w 0.1 hp c 0.03 n 3 lp c 0.06 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 WUS.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 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