The ANSS event ID is ak0247kxj8pd and the event page is at https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/ak0247kxj8pd/executive.
2024/06/13 03:12:49 63.591 -150.806 8.3 3.5 Alaska
USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution ENS 2024/06/13 03:12:49:0 63.59 -150.81 8.3 3.5 Alaska Stations used: AK.BMR AK.BPAW AK.CAST AK.CCB AK.COLD AK.CUT AK.DHY AK.DIV AK.DOT AK.F21K AK.FID AK.G19K AK.G23K AK.G24K AK.GHO AK.GLB AK.H21K AK.H22K AK.H24K AK.HARP AK.HDA AK.HIN AK.I21K AK.I23K AK.J17K AK.J19K AK.J20K AK.K20K AK.KLU AK.KNK AK.L17K AK.L19K AK.L20K AK.L22K AK.M19K AK.M20K AK.MCK AK.MLY AK.N18K AK.NEA2 AK.PAX AK.POKR AK.PPD AK.RND AK.SAW AK.SCM AK.SCRK AK.WAT6 AK.WRH AT.MENT AT.PMR AV.STLK IM.IL31 IU.COLA 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 0.10 n 3 Best Fitting Double Couple Mo = 2.48e+21 dyne-cm Mw = 3.53 Z = 13 km Plane Strike Dip Rake NP1 247 50 94 NP2 60 40 85 Principal Axes: Axis Value Plunge Azimuth T 2.48e+21 84 186 N 0.00e+00 3 64 P -2.48e+21 5 334 Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm) Component Value Mxx -1.95e+21 Mxy 9.85e+20 Mxz -4.55e+20 Myy -4.89e+20 Myz 7.12e+19 Mzz 2.44e+21 -------------- - P ------------------ ---- --------------------- ------------------------------ ---------------------------------- -----------------#################-- -------------########################- -----------###########################-- ---------#############################-- --------##############################---- ------################################---- -----############## ###############----- ----############### T ##############------ --################ ############------- -###############################-------- #############################--------- #########################----------- --###################------------- -----#######------------------ ---------------------------- ---------------------- -------------- Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor: R T P 2.44e+21 -4.55e+20 -7.12e+19 -4.55e+20 -1.95e+21 -9.85e+20 -7.12e+19 -9.85e+20 -4.89e+20 Details of the solution is found at http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.NA/20240613031249/index.html |
STK = 60 DIP = 40 RAKE = 85 MW = 3.53 HS = 13.0
The NDK file is 20240613031249.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 0.10 n 3The results of this grid search are as follow:
DEPTH STK DIP RAKE MW FIT WVFGRD96 1.0 300 90 0 3.08 0.2852 WVFGRD96 2.0 70 45 -90 3.27 0.3101 WVFGRD96 3.0 195 55 -30 3.26 0.2775 WVFGRD96 4.0 185 20 5 3.31 0.3364 WVFGRD96 5.0 185 20 35 3.33 0.3899 WVFGRD96 6.0 205 25 30 3.33 0.4309 WVFGRD96 7.0 210 30 45 3.35 0.4640 WVFGRD96 8.0 225 30 60 3.45 0.4851 WVFGRD96 9.0 55 30 80 3.48 0.5148 WVFGRD96 10.0 55 35 80 3.50 0.5520 WVFGRD96 11.0 60 40 85 3.51 0.5775 WVFGRD96 12.0 60 40 85 3.53 0.5931 WVFGRD96 13.0 60 40 85 3.53 0.5986 WVFGRD96 14.0 60 40 85 3.54 0.5958 WVFGRD96 15.0 55 40 80 3.55 0.5868 WVFGRD96 16.0 55 40 80 3.56 0.5728 WVFGRD96 17.0 55 40 80 3.56 0.5556 WVFGRD96 18.0 50 40 70 3.57 0.5361 WVFGRD96 19.0 45 40 65 3.58 0.5145 WVFGRD96 20.0 40 45 60 3.58 0.4919 WVFGRD96 21.0 40 45 55 3.60 0.4692 WVFGRD96 22.0 40 45 55 3.60 0.4450 WVFGRD96 23.0 25 35 30 3.61 0.4290 WVFGRD96 24.0 350 30 -20 3.60 0.4123 WVFGRD96 25.0 350 30 -20 3.61 0.3987 WVFGRD96 26.0 345 25 -25 3.61 0.3855 WVFGRD96 27.0 345 25 -25 3.62 0.3736 WVFGRD96 28.0 345 25 -25 3.63 0.3618 WVFGRD96 29.0 350 25 -20 3.64 0.3497
The best solution is
WVFGRD96 13.0 60 40 85 3.53 0.5986
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 0.10 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:
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