The ANSS event ID is ak019bkxfcuh and the event page is at https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/ak019bkxfcuh/executive.
2019/09/09 10:07:30 69.012 -146.737 6.8 3.1 Alaska
USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution ENS 2019/09/09 10:07:30:0 69.01 -146.74 6.8 3.1 Alaska Stations used: AK.COLD AK.FYU AK.PPD TA.C24K TA.C26K TA.C27K TA.D22K TA.D23K TA.D24K TA.D25K TA.D27M TA.E23K TA.E24K TA.E25K TA.E27K TA.E28M TA.E29M TA.F20K TA.F24K TA.F25K TA.F26K TA.F28M TA.G22K TA.G23K TA.G24K TA.G26K TA.H21K TA.H23K TA.H24K TA.POKR TA.TOLK 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 0.08 n 3 Best Fitting Double Couple Mo = 1.95e+21 dyne-cm Mw = 3.46 Z = 13 km Plane Strike Dip Rake NP1 74 67 153 NP2 175 65 25 Principal Axes: Axis Value Plunge Azimuth T 1.95e+21 35 34 N 0.00e+00 55 217 P -1.95e+21 2 125 Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm) Component Value Mxx 2.73e+20 Mxy 1.52e+21 Mxz 7.90e+20 Myy -9.05e+20 Myz 4.63e+20 Mzz 6.31e+20 ----########## -------############### ---------################### ----------########### ###### -----------############ T ######## ------------############ ######### -------------######################### --------------########################## --------------#########################- --------------########################---- ---------------#####################------ ---------------##################--------- ---------------###############------------ --------------##########---------------- ##-------------###---------------------- ##############------------------------ ##############------------------- #############------------------- P ############------------------ ############---------------- ##########------------ ########------ Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor: R T P 6.31e+20 7.90e+20 -4.63e+20 7.90e+20 2.73e+20 -1.52e+21 -4.63e+20 -1.52e+21 -9.05e+20 Details of the solution is found at http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.NA/20190909100730/index.html |
STK = 175 DIP = 65 RAKE = 25 MW = 3.46 HS = 13.0
The NDK file is 20190909100730.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 0.08 n 3The results of this grid search are as follow:
DEPTH STK DIP RAKE MW FIT WVFGRD96 1.0 350 70 -20 3.07 0.2894 WVFGRD96 2.0 135 50 -70 3.25 0.3656 WVFGRD96 3.0 150 55 -55 3.30 0.3829 WVFGRD96 4.0 160 65 -40 3.28 0.3706 WVFGRD96 5.0 170 85 35 3.28 0.3762 WVFGRD96 6.0 170 85 35 3.30 0.3876 WVFGRD96 7.0 355 65 20 3.33 0.4030 WVFGRD96 8.0 175 75 40 3.38 0.4086 WVFGRD96 9.0 175 60 30 3.40 0.4164 WVFGRD96 10.0 175 60 30 3.42 0.4288 WVFGRD96 11.0 175 60 30 3.43 0.4360 WVFGRD96 12.0 175 60 30 3.45 0.4395 WVFGRD96 13.0 175 65 25 3.46 0.4405 WVFGRD96 14.0 175 65 25 3.47 0.4391 WVFGRD96 15.0 175 65 25 3.48 0.4362 WVFGRD96 16.0 175 65 25 3.49 0.4316 WVFGRD96 17.0 175 65 25 3.50 0.4254 WVFGRD96 18.0 175 65 25 3.51 0.4184 WVFGRD96 19.0 175 70 25 3.52 0.4105 WVFGRD96 20.0 175 70 25 3.53 0.4025 WVFGRD96 21.0 340 70 -35 3.54 0.3923 WVFGRD96 22.0 340 70 -35 3.54 0.3854 WVFGRD96 23.0 340 70 -35 3.55 0.3782 WVFGRD96 24.0 340 75 -35 3.56 0.3711 WVFGRD96 25.0 340 75 -35 3.56 0.3642 WVFGRD96 26.0 340 75 -35 3.57 0.3569 WVFGRD96 27.0 340 70 -35 3.58 0.3501 WVFGRD96 28.0 340 70 -35 3.58 0.3436 WVFGRD96 29.0 340 70 -35 3.59 0.3372
The best solution is
WVFGRD96 13.0 175 65 25 3.46 0.4405
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 0.08 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