Location

Location ANSS

The ANSS event ID is us2000age2 and the event page is at https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/us2000age2/executive.

2017/09/05 22:32:47 42.582 -111.431 5.2 3.8 Idaho

Focal Mechanism

USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution ENS 2017/09/05 22:32:47:0 42.58 -111.43 5.2 3.8 Idaho Stations used: IW.FXWY IW.IMW IW.MOOW IW.REDW TA.H17A US.AHID US.BOZ US.BW06 US.DUG US.ELK US.HLID US.HWUT US.RLMT UU.BGU UU.CTU UU.HVU UU.NLU UU.SPU UU.SWUT UU.TCU WY.YHL WY.YNR Filtering commands used: cut o DIST/3.3 -20 o DIST/3.3 +60 rtr taper w 0.1 hp c 0.03 n 3 lp c 0.10 n 3 Best Fitting Double Couple Mo = 4.95e+21 dyne-cm Mw = 3.73 Z = 9 km Plane Strike Dip Rake NP1 334 76 -133 NP2 230 45 -20 Principal Axes: Axis Value Plunge Azimuth T 4.95e+21 19 95 N 0.00e+00 42 347 P -4.95e+21 42 204 Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm) Component Value Mxx -2.25e+21 Mxy -1.41e+21 Mxz 2.12e+21 Myy 3.94e+21 Myz 2.52e+21 Mzz -1.69e+21 -------------- ###------------------- ########-------------------- ###########------############# ##############-################### #############---#################### ###########--------################### ###########----------################### #########-------------################## #########---------------################## #######------------------########### ### ######-------------------########### T ### ######--------------------########## ### ####----------------------############## ####-----------------------############# ###---------- ----------############ ##---------- P -----------########## #---------- -----------######### ------------------------###### -----------------------##### --------------------## -------------- Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor: R T P -1.69e+21 2.12e+21 -2.52e+21 2.12e+21 -2.25e+21 1.41e+21 -2.52e+21 1.41e+21 3.94e+21 Details of the solution is found at http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.NA/20170905223247/index.html

Preferred Solution

      STK = 230
      DIP = 45
     RAKE = -20
       MW = 3.73
       HS = 9.0

The NDK file is 20170905223247.ndk The waveform inversion is preferred.

Magnitudes

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 M_L by application of the respective IASPEI formulae. As a research study, the linear distance term of the IASPEI formula for M_L is adjusted to remove a linear distance trend in residuals to give a regionally defined M_L. The defined M_L 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.

ML Magnitude

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.

Context

Waveform Inversion using wvfgrd96

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.

Location of broadband stations used for waveform inversion

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 -20 o DIST/3.3 +60
rtr
taper w 0.1
hp c 0.03 n 3 
lp c 0.10 n 3 

           DEPTH  STK   DIP  RAKE   MW    FIT
WVFGRD96    1.0    85    45    45   3.35 0.3486
WVFGRD96    2.0    85    40    50   3.51 0.4261
WVFGRD96    3.0   230    40   -20   3.58 0.4595
WVFGRD96    4.0   230    40   -20   3.60 0.5362
WVFGRD96    5.0   230    40   -20   3.62 0.5881
WVFGRD96    6.0   230    45   -20   3.64 0.6238
WVFGRD96    7.0   230    45   -20   3.64 0.6423
WVFGRD96    8.0   225    40   -30   3.72 0.6597
WVFGRD96    9.0   230    45   -20   3.73 0.6626
WVFGRD96   10.0   230    45   -20   3.74 0.6585
WVFGRD96   11.0   230    50   -20   3.76 0.6497
WVFGRD96   12.0   230    50   -15   3.76 0.6386
WVFGRD96   13.0   230    50   -15   3.77 0.6249
WVFGRD96   14.0   230    50   -15   3.78 0.6087
WVFGRD96   15.0   235    55    -5   3.80 0.5916
WVFGRD96   16.0   235    55     0   3.81 0.5743
WVFGRD96   17.0   235    55    -5   3.82 0.5560
WVFGRD96   18.0   235    50    -5   3.81 0.5368
WVFGRD96   19.0   235    50    -5   3.82 0.5184
WVFGRD96   20.0   235    50    -5   3.83 0.5005
WVFGRD96   21.0   230    50   -10   3.84 0.4830
WVFGRD96   22.0   160    80    50   3.87 0.4687
WVFGRD96   23.0   160    80    50   3.88 0.4567
WVFGRD96   24.0   160    80    50   3.89 0.4449
WVFGRD96   25.0   160    80    50   3.90 0.4326
WVFGRD96   26.0   160    80    50   3.90 0.4188
WVFGRD96   27.0   160    85    50   3.90 0.4048
WVFGRD96   28.0   160    85    50   3.91 0.3901
WVFGRD96   29.0   160    85    50   3.91 0.3738

The best solution is

WVFGRD96    9.0   230    45   -20   3.73 0.6626

The mechanism corresponding to the best fit is

Figure 1. Waveform inversion focal mechanism

The best fit as a function of depth is given in the following figure:

Figure 2. Depth sensitivity for waveform mechanism

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 -20 o DIST/3.3 +60
rtr
taper w 0.1
hp c 0.03 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:

• The origin time and epicentral distance are incorrect
• The velocity model used for the inversion is incorrect
• The velocity model used to define the P-arrival time is not the same as the velocity model used for the waveform inversion (assuming that the initial trace alignment is based on the P arrival time)

 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.

Velocity Model

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