Effect of a low-velocity sedimentary cover on the 3-D velocity models derived from inversion of local arrival times. An example from the New Madrid seismic zone.

Abstract:

When applying seismic tomography to local arrival times from an area with a low-velocity sedimentary cover, the effect of the sediments on travel times should be taken into account. If that is not done, the resulting velocity model(s) cannot be assumed to be correct. This fairly obvious statement has been challenged recently by Powell et al. (JGR, 2010), who claimed that the sediments that cover the New Madrid seismic zone (NMSZ, central United States) can be ignored. This claim is examined here and shown to be incorrect. The NMSZ is covered by low-velocity, poorly consolidated sediments (Vp=1.8 km/s, Vs=3), which are underlain by Paleozoic rocks of much higher velocity. In  the central NMSZ the sediment thickness varies between about 0.1 and 0.7 km. The JHD analysis of the data collected in that area by a portable network (PANDA) showed that the P- and S-wave station corrections spanned large ranges (0.35 and 0.63 s, respectively, Pujol et al., Eng. Geol., 1997). This study also showed that a Vp/Vs of 3 for the sediments would be too high if the lateral velocity variations were confined to the sedimentary cover. Here we generate synthetic traveltimes for a model with a sedimentary cover having variable depth (as determined from boreholes) underlain by the high-velocity layers in the 1-D model used for the JHD analysis. The synthetic data were generated for the station and event distributions corresponding to the Panda data. The tomographic inversion of the synthetic times produces spurious anomalies in Vp, Vs, and Vp/Vs, from the surface to a depth of 10 km. In addition, the events are mislocated in depth, with errors between 0 and 1 km for most of them. These results should dispel the notion that the effect of the unconsolidated sediments can be ignored. On the other hand, the inversion of the actual Panda data results in velocity anomalies similar to the synthetic anomalies, although larger, which is consistent with the conclusions of Pujol et al. (1997). Unfortunately, extricating the effects of the sediments from those of deeper velocity anomalies will not be possible with seismic tomography unless in-situ determinations of Vp/Vs for the sediments in the network area become available. Alternatively, analysis techniques that make use of more than just P- and S-wave arrivals (such as S-to-P converted waves) may have to be designed.