We selected 17 teleseismic P and 16 SH body waveforms, which were first converted to displacement by removing the instrument response and then bandpass filtered from 2 sec to 330 sec. The time window used in this study is about 160 sec. We also included 15 long period Rayleigh waves and 12 long period Love waves into inversions. We defined the fault plane using the hypocenter location of the USGS (Lat.=-8.45 deg.; Lon.=156.96 deg. ), the moment tensor solution of the Quick CMT (Dr. Polet), and trench axis. We constrained its rupture process using a finite fault inverse algorithm in wavelet domain (Ji et al, 2002, 2003).
We selected the low angle nodal plane (dip =25 deg., strike=305 deg.) as preferred fault plane based upon aftershock distribution. Its dimension is 300 km (along strike) by 90 km, which is further divided into 180 subfaults (15 km by 10 km). The seismic moment release of this model is 1.8x1021 N.m and its peak slip is about 4 m using the Crust2.0 Model.
Caption: A big black arrow indicates the strike of the fault plane. The color shows the amplitude of dislocations and white arrows represent the motion of the hanging wall relative to the footwall. Contours show the rupture initiation time in sec and the red star indicates the hypocenter location.
Caption: Moment rate function.
Caption: The Data are shown in black and the synthetic seismograms are plotted in red. Both of them are aligned on the P or SH arrivals. The number at the end of each trace is the peak amplitude of the observation in micro-meter. The number above the beginning of each trace is the azimuth and that below is the epicentral distance.
Caption: Comparison of long period Rayleigh (UD) and Love (SH) waves (3 mHz to 6 mHz). The number at the end of each trace is the peak amplitude of the observation in millimeter.
Figure: Comparison of long period Rayleigh (UD) or Love (SH) waves (3 mHz to 6 mHz). The number at the end of each trace is the peak amplitude of the observation in millimeter.
Figure: Surface projection of the slip distribution superimposed on topography and bathymetric map ETOPO2.
|COULOMB INPUT FORMAT||
Ji, C., D.J. Wald, and D.V. Helmberger, Source description of the 1999
Bassin, C., Laske, G. and Masters, G., The Current Limits of Resolution for Surface Wave Tomography in North America, EOS Trans AGU, 81, F897, 2000.
This work is supported by