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.
The ANSS event ID is usp000jweu and the event page is at https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/usp000jweu/executive.
2012/12/04 15:15:26 37.033 -104.938 5.0 3.5 Colorado
USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution
ENS 2012/12/04 15:15:26:0 37.03 -104.94 5.0 3.5 Colorado
Stations used:
IU.ANMO IW.SMCO TA.KSCO TA.O20A TA.S22A TA.T25A US.CBKS
US.MVCO US.SDCO UU.BRPU
Filtering commands used:
hp c 0.02 n 3
lp c 0.06 n 3
Best Fitting Double Couple
Mo = 2.16e+21 dyne-cm
Mw = 3.49
Z = 1 km
Plane Strike Dip Rake
NP1 337 50 -113
NP2 190 45 -65
Principal Axes:
Axis Value Plunge Azimuth
T 2.16e+21 3 83
N 0.00e+00 17 352
P -2.16e+21 72 181
Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm)
Component Value
Mxx -1.62e+20
Mxy 2.72e+20
Mxz 6.36e+20
Myy 2.12e+21
Myz 1.12e+20
Mzz -1.96e+21
--------######
########-#############
##########----##############
#########--------#############
##########-----------#############
##########--------------############
##########----------------############
##########------------------############
##########-------------------##########
##########---------------------######### T
##########---------------------#########
##########----------------------##########
##########--------- ----------##########
#########--------- P ----------#########
#########--------- -----------########
########-----------------------#######
########----------------------######
#######---------------------######
######--------------------####
######------------------####
####----------------##
##------------
Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor:
R T P
-1.96e+21 6.36e+20 -1.12e+20
6.36e+20 -1.62e+20 -2.72e+20
-1.12e+20 -2.72e+20 2.12e+21
Details of the solution is found at
http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.NA/20121204151526/index.html
|
STK = 190
DIP = 45
RAKE = -65
MW = 3.49
HS = 1.0
The NDK file is 20121204151526.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 0.06 n 3The results of this grid search are as follow:
DEPTH STK DIP RAKE MW FIT
WVFGRD96 0.5 195 50 -60 3.47 0.5891
WVFGRD96 1.0 190 45 -65 3.49 0.6004
WVFGRD96 2.0 0 55 -80 3.56 0.5893
WVFGRD96 3.0 175 25 -85 3.62 0.5547
WVFGRD96 4.0 180 25 -80 3.62 0.5346
WVFGRD96 5.0 185 25 -70 3.61 0.5104
WVFGRD96 6.0 190 25 -60 3.60 0.4881
WVFGRD96 7.0 205 30 -35 3.58 0.4766
WVFGRD96 8.0 210 35 -20 3.58 0.4701
WVFGRD96 9.0 220 40 0 3.57 0.4632
WVFGRD96 10.0 215 35 -10 3.59 0.4611
WVFGRD96 11.0 215 35 -10 3.59 0.4532
WVFGRD96 12.0 220 40 0 3.59 0.4438
WVFGRD96 13.0 220 40 0 3.59 0.4352
WVFGRD96 14.0 220 45 10 3.60 0.4258
WVFGRD96 15.0 220 45 10 3.61 0.4165
WVFGRD96 16.0 220 45 10 3.61 0.4061
WVFGRD96 17.0 120 25 80 3.60 0.4075
WVFGRD96 18.0 125 25 85 3.61 0.4136
WVFGRD96 19.0 120 30 80 3.62 0.4200
WVFGRD96 20.0 125 25 85 3.64 0.4202
WVFGRD96 21.0 125 30 85 3.65 0.4246
WVFGRD96 22.0 125 30 85 3.66 0.4295
WVFGRD96 23.0 310 60 90 3.67 0.4325
WVFGRD96 24.0 135 30 95 3.68 0.4336
WVFGRD96 25.0 335 60 75 3.65 0.4352
WVFGRD96 26.0 335 60 75 3.65 0.4371
WVFGRD96 27.0 335 60 75 3.66 0.4363
WVFGRD96 28.0 310 55 85 3.70 0.4339
WVFGRD96 29.0 340 55 80 3.67 0.4337
The best solution is
WVFGRD96 1.0 190 45 -65 3.49 0.6004
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 0.06 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