Quick Search:    advanced search

GSW Home   GeoRef Home   My GSW Alerts   Contact GSW   About GSW   Journals List   Help

This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted 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 Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by SPENCE, W. Search for Related Content GeoRef GeoRef Citation

Relative epicenter determination using P-wave arrival-time differences

US GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OFFICE OF EARTHQUAKE STUDIES, BOX 25046, STOP 967, DENVER, COLORADO 80225

Abstract

A precise model for relocation of earthquakes of a region or the multiple ruptures of a large earthquake, using P-wave arrival-time difference data, is given by the equation of condition of the standard single-event location model (Geiger model). The use of P-wave arrival-time differences provides ray path redundancies from earthquakes in a limited source region to a given station set. Thus, this relocation model implicitly compensates certain time anomalies caused by lateral velocity heterogeneities, leading to good relative locations without the requirement of a set of master residuals. Because the solution vector of the arrival-time difference model may be significantly nonzero at convergence, the second-order terms of the Geiger model are derived and used to determine the size of the neighborhood in which this arrival-time difference formulation will give acceptable location resolution. Evaluation of these second-order terms shows that accurate, teleseismically-determined relative locations are possible with the arrival-time difference method for events within distance of a reference earthquake's epicenter. The use of this relocation method with teleseismic data requires independent depth information. The cosine term relative location model, often used with arrival-time difference data to graphically locate multiple ruptures, is an approximation to the Geiger model as it is used here.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C. J. Langer and W. Spence The 1974 Peru earthquake series Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, June 1, 1995; 85(3): 665 - 687. [Abstract] [PDF]

				G. L. CHOY and R. KIND Rupture complexity of a moderate-sized (mb 6.0) earthquake: Broadband body-wave analysis of the North Yemen earthquake of 13 December 1982 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, February 1, 1987; 77(1): 28 - 46. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. CACCAMO and G. NERI A new analytic procedure to determine hypocentral parameters of local seismic events Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, April 1, 1984; 74(2): 655 - 667. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K. FUJITA, E. R. ENGDAHL, and N. H. SLEEP Subduction zone Calibration and teleseismic relocation of thrust zone events in the central Aleutian Islands Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, December 1, 1981; 71(6): 1805 - 1828. [Abstract] [PDF]

				T. H. JORDAN and K. A. SVERDRUP Teleseismic location techniques and their application to earthquake clusters in the South-Central Pacific Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, August 1, 1981; 71(4): 1105 - 1130. [Abstract] [PDF]