The ANSS event ID is nn00574536 and the event page is at https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/nn00574536/executive.
2017/01/18 08:04:32 38.406 -118.927 9.6 3.7 Nevada
USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution
ENS 2017/01/18 08:04:32:0 38.41 -118.93 9.6 3.7 Nevada
Stations used:
IM.NV31 LB.TPH NC.MDPB NN.DSP NN.KVN NN.LCH NN.LHV NN.OMMB
NN.PNT NN.RYN NN.VCN NN.YER
Filtering commands used:
cut o DIST/3.3 -30 o DIST/3.3 +70
rtr
taper w 0.1
hp c 0.03 n 3
lp c 0.10 n 3
br c 0.12 0.25 n 4 p 2
Best Fitting Double Couple
Mo = 2.95e+21 dyne-cm
Mw = 3.58
Z = 10 km
Plane Strike Dip Rake
NP1 307 71 -159
NP2 210 70 -20
Principal Axes:
Axis Value Plunge Azimuth
T 2.95e+21 1 78
N 0.00e+00 62 347
P -2.95e+21 28 169
Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm)
Component Value
Mxx -2.09e+21
Mxy 1.02e+21
Mxz 1.21e+21
Myy 2.74e+21
Myz -1.95e+20
Mzz -6.49e+20
--------------
---------------------#
---------------------#######
-------------------###########
####----------------##############
##########---------#################
###############---####################
##################-#####################
#################-----#################
#################--------############### T
################-----------#############
###############--------------#############
##############-----------------###########
############--------------------########
###########----------------------#######
##########------------------------####
########--------------------------##
#######----------- ------------#
#####----------- P -----------
####----------- ----------
#---------------------
--------------
Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor:
R T P
-6.49e+20 1.21e+21 1.95e+20
1.21e+21 -2.09e+21 -1.02e+21
1.95e+20 -1.02e+21 2.74e+21
Details of the solution is found at
http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.NA/20170118080432/index.html
|
STK = 210
DIP = 70
RAKE = -20
MW = 3.58
HS = 10.0
The NDK file is 20170118080432.ndk The waveform inversion is preferred.
The following compares this source inversion to those provided by others. The purpose is to look for major differences and also to note slight differences that might be inherent to the processing procedure. For completeness the USGS/SLU solution is repeated from above.
USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution
ENS 2017/01/18 08:04:32:0 38.41 -118.93 9.6 3.7 Nevada
Stations used:
IM.NV31 LB.TPH NC.MDPB NN.DSP NN.KVN NN.LCH NN.LHV NN.OMMB
NN.PNT NN.RYN NN.VCN NN.YER
Filtering commands used:
cut o DIST/3.3 -30 o DIST/3.3 +70
rtr
taper w 0.1
hp c 0.03 n 3
lp c 0.10 n 3
br c 0.12 0.25 n 4 p 2
Best Fitting Double Couple
Mo = 2.95e+21 dyne-cm
Mw = 3.58
Z = 10 km
Plane Strike Dip Rake
NP1 307 71 -159
NP2 210 70 -20
Principal Axes:
Axis Value Plunge Azimuth
T 2.95e+21 1 78
N 0.00e+00 62 347
P -2.95e+21 28 169
Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm)
Component Value
Mxx -2.09e+21
Mxy 1.02e+21
Mxz 1.21e+21
Myy 2.74e+21
Myz -1.95e+20
Mzz -6.49e+20
--------------
---------------------#
---------------------#######
-------------------###########
####----------------##############
##########---------#################
###############---####################
##################-#####################
#################-----#################
#################--------############### T
################-----------#############
###############--------------#############
##############-----------------###########
############--------------------########
###########----------------------#######
##########------------------------####
########--------------------------##
#######----------- ------------#
#####----------- P -----------
####----------- ----------
#---------------------
--------------
Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor:
R T P
-6.49e+20 1.21e+21 1.95e+20
1.21e+21 -2.09e+21 -1.02e+21
1.95e+20 -1.02e+21 2.74e+21
Details of the solution is found at
http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.NA/20170118080432/index.html
|
Regional Moment Tensor (Mwr) Moment 2.296e+14 N-m Magnitude 3.5 Mwr Depth 8.0 km Percent DC 93 % Half Duration – Catalog NN Data Source NN2 Contributor NN2 Nodal Planes Plane Strike Dip Rake NP1 319 59 -156 NP2 216 69 -34 Principal Axes Axis Value Plunge Azimuth T 2.335e+14 N-m 7 270 N -0.080e+14 N-m 51 8 P -2.255e+14 N-m 38 175 |
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 -30 o DIST/3.3 +70 rtr taper w 0.1 hp c 0.03 n 3 lp c 0.10 n 3 br c 0.12 0.25 n 4 p 2The results of this grid search are as follow:
DEPTH STK DIP RAKE MW FIT
WVFGRD96 1.0 35 85 0 3.07 0.1812
WVFGRD96 2.0 35 90 0 3.30 0.3521
WVFGRD96 3.0 35 90 -5 3.37 0.4187
WVFGRD96 4.0 30 75 -15 3.43 0.4539
WVFGRD96 5.0 210 75 -20 3.47 0.4801
WVFGRD96 6.0 210 75 -20 3.49 0.4983
WVFGRD96 7.0 210 75 -20 3.52 0.5096
WVFGRD96 8.0 210 75 -25 3.55 0.5173
WVFGRD96 9.0 210 70 -20 3.57 0.5208
WVFGRD96 10.0 210 70 -20 3.58 0.5219
WVFGRD96 11.0 210 70 -20 3.59 0.5208
WVFGRD96 12.0 210 70 -15 3.60 0.5176
WVFGRD96 13.0 210 70 -15 3.61 0.5136
WVFGRD96 14.0 210 70 -15 3.63 0.5087
WVFGRD96 15.0 210 70 -15 3.63 0.5021
WVFGRD96 16.0 210 70 -15 3.64 0.4946
WVFGRD96 17.0 210 70 -15 3.65 0.4872
WVFGRD96 18.0 210 70 -15 3.66 0.4793
WVFGRD96 19.0 210 70 -15 3.67 0.4709
WVFGRD96 20.0 215 65 0 3.68 0.4636
WVFGRD96 21.0 215 65 0 3.68 0.4560
WVFGRD96 22.0 215 65 0 3.69 0.4490
WVFGRD96 23.0 215 65 0 3.70 0.4421
WVFGRD96 24.0 215 60 0 3.71 0.4352
WVFGRD96 25.0 215 60 0 3.72 0.4291
WVFGRD96 26.0 215 60 0 3.72 0.4227
WVFGRD96 27.0 215 60 0 3.73 0.4162
WVFGRD96 28.0 215 60 5 3.74 0.4105
WVFGRD96 29.0 215 60 5 3.74 0.4043
The best solution is
WVFGRD96 10.0 210 70 -20 3.58 0.5219
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 -30 o DIST/3.3 +70 rtr taper w 0.1 hp c 0.03 n 3 lp c 0.10 n 3 br c 0.12 0.25 n 4 p 2
|
| 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