HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Electronic Supplement Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (1) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Kilb, D. Articles by Hardebeck, J. L. Search for Related Content GeoRef GeoRef Citation

Fault Parameter Constraints Using Relocated Earthquakes: A Validation of First-Motion Focal-Mechanism Data

¹ Cecil H. and Ida M. Green Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics
IGPP/University of California, San Diego
La Jolla, California 92093
 (D.K.)
² U.S. Geological Survey
345 Middlefield Rd.
Menlo Park, California 94025
 (J.L.H.)

We estimate the strike and dip of three California fault segments (Calaveras, Sargent, and a portion of the San Andreas near San Jaun Bautistia) based on principle component analysis of accurately located microearthquakes. We compare these fault orientations with two different first-motion focal mechanism catalogs: the Northern California Earthquake Data Center (NCEDC) catalog, calculated using the FPFIT algorithm (Reasenberg and Oppenheimer, 1985), and a catalog created using the HASH algorithm that tests mechanism stability relative to seismic velocity model variations and earthquake location (Hardebeck and Shearer, 2002). We assume any disagreement (misfit >30° in strike, dip, or rake) indicates inaccurate focal mechanisms in the catalogs. With this assumption, we can quantify the parameters that identify the most optimally constrained focal mechanisms. For the NCEDC/FPFIT catalogs, we find that the best quantitative discriminator of quality focal mechanisms is the station distribution ratio (STDR) parameter, an indicator of how the stations are distributed about the focal sphere. Requiring STDR > 0.65 increases the acceptable mechanisms from 34%–37% to 63%–68%. This suggests stations should be uniformly distributed surrounding, rather than aligning, known fault traces. For the HASH catalogs, the fault plane uncertainty (FPU) parameter is the best discriminator, increasing the percent of acceptable mechanisms from 63%–78% to 81%–83% when FPU 35°. The overall higher percentage of acceptable mechanisms and the usefulness of the formal uncertainty in identifying quality mechanisms validate the HASH approach of testing for mechanism stability.

Online material: 3D visualization of relocated earthquakes and accuracy of focal mechanisms.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				E. Carmona, D. Stich, J. M. Ibanez, and G. Saccorotti Multiplet Focal Mechanisms from Polarities and Relative Locations: The Iznajar Swarm in Southern Spain Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, December 1, 2009; 99(6): 3421 - 3429. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Hu, Y. Zhou, Y. Cai, and C.-Y. Wang Study of Earthquake Triggering in a Heterogeneous Crust Using a New Finite Element Model Seismological Research Letters, September 1, 2009; 80(5): 799 - 807. [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. M. Jacobs, D. Kilb, and G. Kent 3-D Interdisciplinary Visualization: Tools for Scientific Analysis and Communication Seismological Research Letters, November 1, 2008; 79(6): 867 - 876. [Full Text] [PDF]