Here - Stuff

▲▲Figure 4. Convergence of inverted parameters for the fault plane described above after 7,600 models: A) rupture initiation locationalong strike (km), B) rupture initiation location along dip (km), C) ellipse starting point along strike (km), D) ellipse starting point alongdip (km), E) rake angle (degree), F) rupture velocity (km/s), G) and H) semi-axis lengths of the ellipse (km), I) maximum slip (m). They-axis is the parameter space range sampled during the inversion. The x-axis is the number of models run. The figure shows excellentconvergence of the parameters to their final values detailed in Table 1.and McVerry 2010). For central Christchurch stations this signalis even larger than the signal modeled from the main patch.This strongly suggests the presence of a large strike-slip sourceshortly following the main slip patch. Therefore preliminaryseismic observations indicate that at least three subevents wereinvolved in the overall rupture process. This is a subject ofongoing studies.SUMMARY AND FURTHER STUDIESThis model is based on a comprehensive kinematic inversionscheme: high-frequency velocity seismograms and well distributedvery-near-source stations. The results are consistent withother source models of the February earthquake and observedcharacteristics of a very energetic event. Simple waveformTABLE 1Source Parameters for the Final Source ModelMax Slip (m) 4.2Rake (degrees) 135Half-length of main axis (km) 8.86Half-length of secondary axis (km) 6.0Depth (km) @ max slip 4.2Min. depth (km) 0.5Max Depth (km) 9.7V r (km/s) 2.80M 0 (×10 18 Nm) 3.46M w 6.3786 Seismological Research Letters Volume 82, Number 6 November/December 2011