Location
SLU Location
To check the ANSS location or to compare the observed P-wave first motions to the moment tensor solution, P- and S-wave first arrival times were manually read together with the P-wave first motions. The subsequent output of the program elocate is given in the file elocate.txt. The first motion plot is shown below.
Location SLU
The moment tensor inversion using the ANSS location was significantly offset from the location of other events in the region. P- and S-wave first arrivals and p-wave first motions were manually read, and the event was located using the WUs model woth the program elocate. The results are in the file elocate.txt. The manual location is about 30 km to the SSW of the posted ANSS solution. Interestingly, there is a much better waveforms fit and the azimuthal plot indicates that the location is good.
The SLU relocation is used to document this event. The ANSS solution is provided for reference. Note the companion first motion plot shown below is not very informative because of the paucity of data.
2025/03/17 05:25:58 69.505 -144.608 4.1 4.1 Alaska
Location ANSS
The ANSS event ID is ak0253hrz0l8 and the event page is at
https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/ak0253hrz0l8/executive.
2025/03/17 05:25:54 69.858 -143.840 14.9 4.1 Alaska
Focal Mechanism
USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution
ENS 2025/03/17 05:25:58:0 69.50 -144.61 4.1 4.1 Alaska
Stations used:
AK.C26K AK.C27K AK.COLD AK.D25K AK.E24K AK.E25K AK.E27K
AK.FYU AK.G23K
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 0.07 n 3
Best Fitting Double Couple
Mo = 8.61e+21 dyne-cm
Mw = 3.89
Z = 10 km
Plane Strike Dip Rake
NP1 190 80 20
NP2 96 70 169
Principal Axes:
Axis Value Plunge Azimuth
T 8.61e+21 21 55
N 0.00e+00 68 216
P -8.61e+21 7 322
Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm)
Component Value
Mxx -2.76e+21
Mxy 7.66e+21
Mxz 9.03e+20
Myy 1.75e+21
Myz 2.97e+21
Mzz 1.01e+21
----------####
------------#########
- P -----------#############
-- -----------##############
-----------------############ ##
------------------############ T ###
------------------############# ####
-------------------#####################
------------------######################
-------------------#######################
##-----------------#######################
#####-------------########################
##########--------#######################-
##################################------
################------------------------
###############-----------------------
##############----------------------
#############---------------------
###########-------------------
##########------------------
#######---------------
###-----------
Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor:
R T P
1.01e+21 9.03e+20 -2.97e+21
9.03e+20 -2.76e+21 -7.66e+21
-2.97e+21 -7.66e+21 1.75e+21
Details of the solution is found at
http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.NA/20250317052558/index.html
|
Preferred Solution
The preferred solution from an analysis of the surface-wave spectral amplitude radiation pattern, waveform inversion or first motion observations is
STK = 190
DIP = 80
RAKE = 20
MW = 3.89
HS = 10.0
The NDK file is 20250317052558.ndk
The waveform inversion is preferred.
Moment Tensor Comparison
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.
| SLU |
SLUFM |
USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution
ENS 2025/03/17 05:25:58:0 69.50 -144.61 4.1 4.1 Alaska
Stations used:
AK.C26K AK.C27K AK.COLD AK.D25K AK.E24K AK.E25K AK.E27K
AK.FYU AK.G23K
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 0.07 n 3
Best Fitting Double Couple
Mo = 8.61e+21 dyne-cm
Mw = 3.89
Z = 10 km
Plane Strike Dip Rake
NP1 190 80 20
NP2 96 70 169
Principal Axes:
Axis Value Plunge Azimuth
T 8.61e+21 21 55
N 0.00e+00 68 216
P -8.61e+21 7 322
Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm)
Component Value
Mxx -2.76e+21
Mxy 7.66e+21
Mxz 9.03e+20
Myy 1.75e+21
Myz 2.97e+21
Mzz 1.01e+21
----------####
------------#########
- P -----------#############
-- -----------##############
-----------------############ ##
------------------############ T ###
------------------############# ####
-------------------#####################
------------------######################
-------------------#######################
##-----------------#######################
#####-------------########################
##########--------#######################-
##################################------
################------------------------
###############-----------------------
##############----------------------
#############---------------------
###########-------------------
##########------------------
#######---------------
###-----------
Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor:
R T P
1.01e+21 9.03e+20 -2.97e+21
9.03e+20 -2.76e+21 -7.66e+21
-2.97e+21 -7.66e+21 1.75e+21
Details of the solution is found at
http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.NA/20250317052558/index.html
|
First motions and takeoff angles from an elocate run.
|
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 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.
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
The left panel of the next figure presents the focal mechanism for this earthquake (red) in the context of other nearby events (blue) in the SLU Moment Tensor Catalog. The right panel shows the inferred direction of maximum compressive stress and the type of faulting (green is strike-slip, red is normal, blue is thrust; oblique is shown by a combination of colors). Thus context plot is useful for assessing the appropriateness of the moment tensor of this event.
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 -40 o DIST/3.3 +50
rtr
taper w 0.1
hp c 0.03 n 3
lp c 0.07 n 3
The results of this grid search are as follow:
DEPTH STK DIP RAKE MW FIT
WVFGRD96 1.0 10 85 0 3.51 0.3975
WVFGRD96 2.0 10 75 10 3.63 0.5059
WVFGRD96 3.0 10 70 15 3.69 0.5460
WVFGRD96 4.0 190 75 10 3.73 0.5842
WVFGRD96 5.0 190 75 15 3.76 0.6297
WVFGRD96 6.0 190 80 15 3.80 0.6695
WVFGRD96 7.0 190 80 15 3.82 0.7032
WVFGRD96 8.0 190 80 20 3.86 0.7289
WVFGRD96 9.0 190 80 20 3.88 0.7443
WVFGRD96 10.0 190 80 20 3.89 0.7497
WVFGRD96 11.0 190 85 20 3.91 0.7495
WVFGRD96 12.0 190 85 20 3.92 0.7453
WVFGRD96 13.0 190 85 15 3.93 0.7363
WVFGRD96 14.0 10 90 -20 3.94 0.7195
WVFGRD96 15.0 190 80 15 3.94 0.7145
WVFGRD96 16.0 190 80 15 3.95 0.7041
WVFGRD96 17.0 190 80 15 3.95 0.6918
WVFGRD96 18.0 190 90 15 3.96 0.6794
WVFGRD96 19.0 190 90 15 3.97 0.6666
WVFGRD96 20.0 190 90 15 3.98 0.6537
WVFGRD96 21.0 190 90 15 3.98 0.6414
WVFGRD96 22.0 190 90 15 3.99 0.6286
WVFGRD96 23.0 190 90 15 3.99 0.6159
WVFGRD96 24.0 190 85 15 3.99 0.6056
WVFGRD96 25.0 190 85 15 4.00 0.5958
WVFGRD96 26.0 10 90 -10 4.00 0.5857
WVFGRD96 27.0 190 85 10 4.01 0.5797
WVFGRD96 28.0 190 85 10 4.01 0.5729
WVFGRD96 29.0 190 85 10 4.02 0.5659
The best solution is
WVFGRD96 10.0 190 80 20 3.89 0.7497
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 -40 o DIST/3.3 +50
rtr
taper w 0.1
hp c 0.03 n 3
lp c 0.07 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)
Assuming only a mislocation, the time shifts are fit to a functional form:
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
Last Changed Tue Mar 18 09:02:43 CDT 2025
