Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America; December 1990; v. 80; no. 6B; p. 1987-1998
© 1990 Seismological Society of America
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by SUTEAU-HENSON, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content

Estimating azimuth and slowness from three-component and array stations

ANNE SUTEAU-HENSON

CENTER FOR SEISMIC STUDIES, 1300 N. 17TH STREET, SUITE 1450, ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA 22209

Abstract

The capabilities of three-component (3-C) and array stations for estimating azimuth and slowness are compared for short-period P-type phases recorded at the NORESS array. For vertical array data, azimuth and slowness estimates are obtained from broadband frequency-wavenumber (f-k) analysis. For 3-C data, polarization analysis is performed. The data processing is automated, using arrival time and dominant frequency information from the NORESS Bulletin. Independent determinations of azimuth and/or slowness, obtained from locations in the NEIS or regional network bulletins, are used as reference estimates. Over 100 events are analyzed, both teleseismic and regional. They were selected from a variety of distances and azimuths, and cover a wide range of signal-to-noise ratios (SNR).

The capability of 3-C stations for azimuth and slowness estimation critically depends on SNR. For SNR below a threshold of ~2, the scatter in the estimates is very large for both parameters, and the slowness of teleseismic events tends to be overestimated. Also, the results are site-dependent within the NORESS array. The array measurements obtained with the broadband f-k method are not significantly affected by noise at the levels of SNR considered. For events with sufficient SNR, both methods compare well, and only a slightly better performance is observed with the f-k method.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1990 by the Seismological Society of America.