Al. Bent, A COMPLEX DOUBLE-COUPLE SOURCE MECHANISM FOR THE M(S)-7.2 1929 GRAND-BANKS EARTHQUAKE, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 85(4), 1995, pp. 1003-1020
The M(s) 7.2 Grand Banks earthquake of 1929 was one of the largest and
the most fatal earthquakes to have occurred in Canada, with most of t
he death and destruction having been caused by a tsunami and submarine
landslide associated with the earthquake. It has been suggested (Hase
gawa and Kanamori, 1987) that a single-force (landslide) mechanism was
more consistent with the data than was a double-couple source and tha
t therefore the event was not an earthquake. However, that particular
study considered only four double-couple solutions and left many unans
wered questions, in particular with respect to the source time functio
n and sediment volume involved. Here, a larger number of seismograms a
re used to examine the full range of double-couple solutions to determ
ine more definitively the nature of the event. Waveform modeling using
both forward and inverse methods indicates that this event was an ear
thquake, with a complex source mechanism. The first and largest subeve
nt was a strike-slip double-couple event occurring on a northwest-stri
king plane. Two later subevents were probably strike-slip double coupl
es on northeast-striking planes, but other mechanisms cannot be comple
tely ruled out. The first subevent has a well-constrained focal depth
of 20 +/- 2 km. The second and third subevents also appear to have occ
urred at 20 km, but are constrained only to within +/- 5 km. These dep
ths provide further evidence that the event was not a landslide. The s
um of the subevent moments corresponds to an M(W) of 7.2 +/- 0.3, whic
h is in close agreement with the M(W) of 7.1 +/- 0.1 obtained by the C
MT method using long-period data. These M(W)'s are also consistent wit
h the M(s) of 7.2 (+/-0.3) and m(B) of 7.1 (+/- 0.2) calculated direct
ly from the seismograms. Modeling of the seafloor displacement for thi
s mechanism indicates that the tsunami was generated by the landslide
and not directly by the earthquake.