Dimitri Komatitsch komatitsch at lma.cnrs-mrs.fr
Mon Jul 20 04:58:09 PDT 2015

Hi Jieming,

That is weird because SPECFEM (both 2D and 3D) solves the full wave 
equation and thus does not distinguish between the near field and the 
far field, it computes everything. Thus yes the near field is included 
in SPECFEM2D results

(however 2D sources are line sources in the third direction and we solve 
for the plane-strain P-SV wave equation, thus source decay can look a 
bit unusual compared to 3D; you can see a detailed explanation of that 
in file 
doc/discussion_of_2D_sources_and_approximations_from_Pilant_1979.pdf )

Best regards,

On 07/15/2015 07:23 PM, Niu, Jieming wrote:
> Hi! Guys,
> I am now running a simple example with the specfem2d. But no matter what source time functions and source types I used, it seems impossible to generate the near-field static displacement in the seismograms. Not like specfem3d, it can generate the same seismograms as FK does. Do anyone know how to use specfem2d to generate seismograms with the clear near-field terms?
> Regards,
> Jieming Niu
> Seismological Laboratory
> Department of Earth Science
> University College London
> Gower Street, London, UK
> WC1E 6BT
> School of Geodesy and Geomatics
> Wuhan Universtiy
> No. 129, Luoyu Road
> Wuhan, Hubei, China
> 430079
> _______________________________________________
> CIG-SEISMO mailing list
> CIG-SEISMO at geodynamics.org
> http://lists.geodynamics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cig-seismo

Dimitri Komatitsch
CNRS Research Director (DR CNRS), Laboratory of Mechanics and Acoustics,
UPR 7051, Marseille, France    http://komatitsch.free.fr

More information about the CIG-SEISMO mailing list