共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 354 毫秒
1.
《地震地磁观测与研究》2016,(5)
北京时间2016年1月21日1时13分,在青海省门源县发生M_S 6.4地震。利用喜马拉雅台阵二期部分台站和青海地震台网震后2个月的震相观测数据,采用双差定位方法,对门源地震序列进行重定位研究。重定位结果表明,余震序列呈北西向分布,大致平行于冷龙岭断裂走向,余震展布长度约12 km,90%的余震发生在5—13 km深度范围内。结合震源机制,认为此次地震为向西南倾的高倾角逆冲地震,发震断层为冷龙岭北东侧的次级断裂,断层面走向约131°。震源深度剖面显示,门源地震的余震分布与常见的逆冲型地震余震分布存在差异,可能与该区域深部地质构造和介质结构异常复杂有关。 相似文献
2.
3.
2021年8月26日甘肃省酒泉市阿克塞县发生M5.5地震,这次地震是发生在祁连山地震构造带西段的一次显著地震。利用区域台网记录的宽频带地震波形数据,通过CAP方法反演阿克塞M5.5主震及其M3.7余震的震源机制解,进一步利用双差定位方法对研究区2021年1月1日—11月29日间的地震事件进行重定位,以此分析此次地震的发震构造及其意义。结果表明阿克塞M5.5地震是一次以逆冲性质为主的地震事件;重定位后,地震事件呈明显的集中分布特征,阿克塞M5.5主震震源深度为14.1 km,余震序列震源深度大多分布于15～25 km。综合分析震源机制解、重定位结果以及区域构造背景,认为阿克塞地震的发震断层为党河南山南缘断裂,未来应重点关注祁连山西段发生中强地震的危险。 相似文献
4.
本文采用云南测震台网的观测报告数据,利用双差定位方法对2014年鲁甸MS6.5地震及其强余震序列进行了重定位,获得了3 658个地震事件的震源参数。重定位后地震序列的震中分布显示,余震分布存在两个优势方向,分别为近EW向和SES向,呈共轭型分布,近EW向条带展布长度为30 km,SES 向条带展布长度为20 km;震源深度的分布显示,地震序列总体表现为主震附近震源较深,沿近EW向和SES向逐渐变浅,地震序列的震源深度主要分布在4—20 km范围内。截至2017年2月28日,鲁甸MS6.5地震震源区共发生（同一天发生的一组地震算一次）MS≥4.5强余震4次。重定位后的鲁甸4次强余震序列震中分布存在差异:2014年9月10日和10月27日两次强余震序列的展布特征与主震相同,而2016年和2017年另外两次强余震的后续余震仅分布在强余震的周边,与主震序列明显不同。综合重定位后余震序列分布、震源区地质调查资料以及前人研究认为,鲁甸地震的4次强余震序列是区域应力场和主震引发的震源区应力场共同作用的结果,2014年9月10日和10月27日的两次强余震序列主要受主震引发的震源区应力场的影响;而2016年和2017年两次强余震序列则主要受区域应力场的影响。 相似文献
5.
本文提出了时域多通道相关检测函数并用其计算波形互相关走时差数据,采用双差定位法对2012年9月7日云南彝良地震和余震序列共944个地震进行重定位,得到652个重定位事件,并与目录数据的结果进行了对比.本文采用了多个准则对走时差数据进行筛选,确保定位结果稳定可靠.得到MS5.7主震的震中为27.516°N,103.951°E,震源深度6.9km;MS5.6主震的震中为27.543°N,104.023°E,震源深度7.27km;重定位结果显示,地震序列紧缩为条带状并沿附近断裂走向分布,深度总体分布较重定位前变浅,集中分布在5~8km,地震群出现轻微倾斜.东西向、南北向、深度和发震时刻的平均相对误差分别为55.2 m,43.0 m,186.7 m和0.01s,走时残差16ms.研究表明:互相关数据的结果要优于目录数据;震源深度与速度模型存在较大的相关性;确定彝良—会泽断裂为本次彝良地震序列的发震构造. 相似文献
6.
7.
汶川8．0级大地震及其余震序列重定位研究 总被引：41，自引：0，他引：41
采用双差定位方法对汶川M8．0级破坏性地震及其震后的2706个M≥2．0级余震进行重新定位,获得2553个地震的重定位结果．为了减少龙门山断裂带附近地壳和上地幔速度结构巨大横向差异的影响,东西两侧采用了不同的速度模型．在重定位过程中,增加了流动地震台站近台数据,以便更好地控制震源深度．重定位后E-W,N-S和U—D三个方向大致的定位精度分别为0．6,0．7和2．5km．定位结果显示,汶川地震余震震中沿北东．南西向分布,总长度约330km．余震主要集中在龙门山断裂带主中央断裂的西侧,但在青川以北余震带明显偏离了地表断裂,并在北端横穿了平武-青川断裂．余震震源深度的优势分布在5～20km之间,平均震源深度为13．3km,主震震源深度重定位后为16．0km;深度剖面图像显示部分地区余震分布表现出高角度西倾的特点,并且在主震破裂过程中断层南段以逆冲为主,北段具有很强的走滑分量． 相似文献
8.
利用2022年9月5—12日震相报告中的P波和S波到时资料,采用双差定位方法对四川泸定MS6.8地震序列的主震和余震进行重定位。重新定位后地震序列较重新定位之前震中分布更加集中,线性趋势更加明显。余震主要分布在鲜水河断裂以西地区,总体沿着鲜水河断裂呈NW向展布,余震区长轴约为65km。根据重定位结果,发震断层为鲜水河断裂磨西—石棉段,该断裂走向为331°～340°,倾角较陡。受SW向海螺沟段断裂影响,余震区具有明显的分段特征,总体上呈现北浅南深的特征。随时间的演化,余震区中南段震源深度逐渐变浅,且地震频次逐渐衰减,而北段震源深度变化不大,频次也未明显减弱。不同时段的余震活动表明,本次地震的初始破裂方向为SE向,该破裂随后触发了与主断裂共轭的SW向分支断裂,余震沿这两个方向逐步扩展,最后达到稳定状态。 相似文献
9.
云南地区地震精确定位及其构造意义分析 总被引：3，自引：1，他引：3
运用双差定位法，对云南区域数字地震遥测台网记录的1999—2003年云南地区ML≥1.0地震进行重新定位，得到3000多个地震的精确定位结果。重定位结果显示，在东经100。和103。线附近存在两个震源深度较深的区域，最深达50km，刚好对应金沙江一红河断裂带的北段和小江断裂带。这一结果一方面揭示出这两条深大断裂与地震活动之间存在密切关系，另一方面也表明重定位结果在震源深度和空间分布上都较以前有明显改善。同时，姚安、大姚地震序列的重定位结果也说明双差定位法是一种比较好的地震定位方法。 相似文献
10.
基于新疆区域数字地震台网震相观测报告, 采用双差定位方法对2019年新疆疏附MS5.1地震序列ML≥1.0地震进行重定位, 采用CAP波形反演方法, 获得了主震的震源机制解和震源矩心深度, 进而综合分析了本次地震可能的发震构造。 结果表明, 疏附5.1级地震震源位置为39.59°N, 75.57°E, 初始破裂深度为18 km, 震源矩心深度为18 km。 重定位后的地震序列呈两个优势方向展布, 分别为NEE向和NE向分支, NEE向为主要的余震优势分布区域, 呈长约13 km窄带状分布在喀什断裂附近。 另一条优势分布为沿NE向长度约9 km, 这可能与喀什断裂阶区有关。 深度剖面显示, 地震震源深度主要集中分布在8~20 km。 沿NEE走向深度剖面显示, 疏附5.1级地震破裂于深部, 余震沿优势分布的震源深度自SWW向NEE呈现逐渐加深的变化特征。 垂直于震中优势分布的深度剖面显示, 本次地震发震断层面倾向为N倾。 震源机制解显示本次地震断错类型为逆冲型, 结合震源深度剖面特征推断节面Ⅰ为本次地震的发震断层面。 综合地震序列空间分布特征、 震源机制以及震源区地质资料, 推测此次地震的发震构造可能为喀什断裂, 余震向浅部扩展。 相似文献
11.
The 2018,Songyuan,Jilin M_S5. 7 earthquake occurred at the intersection of the FuyuZhaodong fault and the Second Songhua River fault. The moment magnitude of this earthquake is M_W5. 3,the centroid depth by the waveform fitting is 12 km,and it is a strike-slip type event. In this paper,with the seismic phase data provided by the China Earthquake Network, the double-difference location method is used to relocate the earthquake sequence,finally the relocation results of 60 earthquakes are obtained. The results show that the aftershock zone is about 4. 3km long and 3. 1km wide,which is distributed in the NE direction. The depth distribution of the seismic sequence is 9km-10 km. 1-2 days after the main shock,the aftershocks were scattered throughout the aftershock zone,and the largest aftershock occurred in the northeastern part of the aftershock zone. After 3-8 days,the aftershocks mainly occurred in the southwestern part of the aftershock zone. The profile distribution of the earthquake sequence shows that the fault plane dips to the southeast with the dip angle of about 75°. Combined with the regional tectonic setting,focal mechanism solution and intensity distribution,we conclude that the concealed fault of the Fuyu-Zhaodong fault is the seismogenic fault of the Songyuan M_S5. 7 earthquake. This paper also relocates the earthquake sequence of the previous magnitude 5. 0 earthquake in 2017. Combined with the results of the focal mechanism solution,we believe that the two earthquakes have the same seismogenic structure,and the earthquake sequence generally develops to the southwest. The historical seismic activity since 2009 shows that after the magnitude 5. 0 earthquake in 2017,the frequency and intensity of earthquakes in the earthquake zone are obviously enhanced,and attention should be paid to the development of seismic activity in the southwest direction of the earthquake zone. 相似文献
12.
采用CAP方法反演2010年玉树7.1级地震序列前震、主震及余震19个ML≥4.0事件的震源机制解,19个结果以走滑类型为主,前震、主震的震源机制解十分接近,反映出前震、主震之间密切的联系;震源深度集中在7~12 km,震源最浅（4.5 km）与最深（34 km）的两个余震事件具有明显的逆冲性质,表现出明显的边界特征;19个事件的震中分布在甘孜-玉树断裂北支玉树-隆宝断裂上,目前已经证明该断裂即为玉树地震的发震构造。自SE-NW沿玉树-隆宝断裂走向拉一剖面,观察震源深度沿剖面的变化情况,可看出玉树-隆宝断裂西北段震源深度要大于东南段,该段主要是余震活动的中后期,因此在地震活动的中后期,余震向地壳深部扩展,断裂累积的应变能得到更进一步的释放;P轴方位角优势分布集中在220°~230°,T轴方位优势分布集中在310°~320°,两个优势分布互相垂直性与单个事件的沙滩球应力轴一样,说明玉树地震的震源机制解类型较为简单;玉树周边地区应力场分布比较均匀,并不像汶川周边地区那么复杂,本次玉树地震为巴颜喀拉地块与羌塘块体边界处甘孜-玉树断裂应变能量的正常释放。 相似文献
13.
Relocation of the 1998 Zhangbei-Shangyi earthquake sequence using the double difference earthquake location algorithm 总被引：4，自引：0，他引：4
Introduction On January 10, 1998, at 11h50min Beijing Time (03h50min UTC), an earthquake of ML=6.2 occurred in the border region between the Zhangbei County and Shangyi County of Hebei Province. In total 87 events with ML3.0 were recorded by Beijing Telemetry Seismic Network (BTSN) before March of 1999. Before relocation the preliminary hypocenters determined by BTSN showed an epicentral distribution of 25 km long and 25 km wide without any predominate orientation. The epicentral a… 相似文献
14.
2017年8月9日的新疆精河MS6.6地震是近年来天山北缘发生的最大地震,震中位于由多条逆冲断层组成的库松木契克断裂带内.由于震源较深、构造形变复杂、区域地震台站相对稀疏,仅根据震源机制解、余震分布和InSAR观测结果等难以直接判定发震构造.本文针对倾滑型地震发展了一种基于区域地震波形的破裂方向性测定方法,利用余震作为参考地震进行路径校正,根据主震和参考地震的波形时移差和Pn-Pg到时差分别确定主震在水平方向和深度方向的破裂尺度,进而推断同震破裂的延展方向和延伸尺度.本文在反演了主震的点源参数后,应用新发展的方法测定了地震的破裂方向性.点源反演结果显示,精河地震是一个发生在中地壳的高角度逆冲地震,矩震级约6.2,质心深度21km,震源持续时间5.5s,两个双力偶节面分别为102°/45°/106°(NP1)和259°/47°/74°(NP2).破裂方向性分析结果显示,地震的破裂面为南倾的NP1节面,地震沿着破裂起始点向西南方向、向下破裂,总破裂长度约11.5km,其中,沿深度的破裂范围约7km,沿水平的破裂范围约9km,平均破裂速度约2.1km·s-1.综合区域地质资料、卫星影像等判定本次地震的发震断层为精河南断层,地震可能只破裂了断层的下段(17~25km),并未破出地表. 相似文献
15.
On July 20, 1995, an earthquake of M
L=4.1 occurred in Huailai basin, northwest of Beijing, with epicenter coordinates 40.326°N, 115.448°E and focal depth 5.5 km.
Following the main shock, seismicity sharply increased in the basin. This earthquake sequence was recorded by Sino-European
Cooperative Huailai Digital Seismograph Network (HDSN) and the hypocentres were precisely located. About 2 hours after the
occurrence of the main shock, a smaller event of M
L=2.0 took place at 40.323°N, 115.447°E with a focal depth of 5.0 km, which is very close to the main shock. Using the M
L=2.0 earthquake as an empirical Green’s function, a regularization method was applied to retrieve the far-field source-time
function (STF) of the main shock. Considering the records of HDSN are the type of velocity, to depress high frequency noise,
we removed instrument response from the records of the two events, then integrated them to get displacement seismogram before
applying the regularization method. From the 5 field stations, P phases in vertical direction which mostly are about 0.5 s
in length were used. The STFs obtained from each seismic phases are in good agreement, showing that the M
L=4.1 earthquake consisted of two events. STFs from each station demonstrate an obvious “seismic Doppler effect”. Assuming
the nodal plane striking 37° and dipping 40°, determined by using P wave first motion data and aftershock distribution, is
the fault plane, through a trial and error method, the following results were drawn: Both of the events lasted about 0.1 s,
the rupture length of the first one is 0.5 km, longer than the second one which is 0.3 km, and the rupture velocity of the
first event is 5.0 km/s, larger than that of the second one which is about 3.0 km/s; the second event took place 0.06 s later
than the first one; on the fault plane, the first event ruptured in the direction γ=140° measured clockwise from the strike
of the fault, while the second event ruptured at γ=80°, the initial point of the second one locates at γ=−100° and 0.52 km
from the beginning point of the first one. Using far-field ground displacement spectrum measurement method, the following
source parameters about the M
L=4.1 earthquake were also reached: the scalar earthquake moment is 3.3×1013 N·m, stress drop 4.6 MPa, rupture radius 0.16 km.
Contribution No. 99FE2022, Institute of Geophysics, China Seismological Bureau.
This study is supported by the Chinese Joint Seismological Science Foundation (95-07-411). 相似文献
16.
2017年9月4日河北临城发生M_L4.4地震,这是邢台地区自2003年以来发生的唯一一次M_L4以上地震。震后大量余震沿条带分布,揭示了一条前人未发现的隐伏断层(根据其经过的地点称之为齐家庄-东双井断裂)。为研究该隐伏断层的几何形状和滑动性质,首先基于河北数字地震台网资料对地震序列进行精定位,利用精定位地震数据拟合发震断层面,计算断层面的走向和倾角,并给出其标准差。然后搜集震中附近历史地震的震源机制解,利用网格搜索法反演区域构造应力场参数,根据构造应力场和断层面的几何形状确定齐家庄-东双井断裂的滑动性质。结果表明,临城M_L4.4地震的发震断层为一条近EW向的隐伏断层,产状为走向约92°,倾角约85°,滑动角约-12°,滑动角标准差约8°,为倾向南的高倾角左旋走滑型断层,延伸深度约10km。区域应力场在齐家庄-东双井断裂上产生的相对剪应力和正应力分别为0.650和0.691,此次地震不是在最大剪应力的断层方位发生,表明该断裂不是现今应力场作用下产生的,而是在复杂的历史地质活动中遗留的,该断裂在现今应力场作用下积累了一定的应力而导致了M_L4.4地震的发生。齐家庄-东双井断裂及其性质的发现为该地区的地质构造和地震孕育环境分析提供了基础。 相似文献
17.
从大尺度和小尺度两方面研究郯庐断裂带苏鲁段地壳介质非均匀性。使用地震波数据,研究了郯庐断裂带苏鲁段地壳速度结构的非均匀性,单位虚波Qmps的非均匀性,地壳介质泊松比的非均匀性,反映地壳介质小尺度非均匀性的分层κ值和y值。计算了1668年郯城8 1/2级地震震源区长度和沿断裂带的震源区边界,根据地震构造和地震活动性确定断裂的闭锁段,地震应力的积累单元和调整单元。对比1668年郯城8 1/2级地震的地壳介质状况,将各种非均匀性参数综合分析,结果表明,各种参数指向一致,未来大震的可能区域是33°-34.5°N,118°-118.8°E的北北东向区域,震级可达8级。 相似文献
18.
According to geological tectonics and seismic activites this paper devided North China (30°–45°N, 105°–130°E) into four areas.
We analyzed the North China earthquake catalogue from 1970 to 1986 (from 1965 to 1986 for Huabei, the North China, plain region)
and identified forty-two bursts of aftershock. Seven of them occurred in aftershock regions of strong earthquakes and seventeen
of them in the seismic swarm regions. The relation between strong earthquakes with the remaining eighteen bursts of aftershocks
has been studied and tested statistically in this paper. The result of statistical testing show that the random probabilityp of coincidence of bursts of aftershock with subsequent strong earthquakes is less than six percent. By Xu’sR scoring method the efficacy of predicting strong earthquake from bursts of aftershock is estimated greater than 39 percent.
Following the method proposed in the paper we analyzed the earthquake catalogue of China from 1987 to June, 1988. The results
show that there was only one burst of aftershock occurred on Jan. 6, 1988 withM=3.6 in Xiuyan of Northeast China. It implicates that a potential earthquake withM
S⩽5 might occur in one year afterwards in the region of Northeast China. Actually on Feb. 25, 1988 an earthquake withM
S=5.3 occurred in Zhangwu of Northeast China. Another example is Datong-Yanggao shock on October 18, 1989 which is a burst
of aftershock. Three hours after an expected shock withM =6.1 took place in the same area. Two examples above have been tested in practical prediction and this shows that bursts
of aftershocks are significant in predicting strong earthquakes.
The Chinese version of this paper appeared in the Chinese edition ofActa Seismologica Sinica,13, 273–280, 1991.
Part of earthquake catalogue is from Jinbiao Chen, Peiyan Chen and Quanlin Li. 相似文献
19.
Prantik Mandal R. K. Chadha N. Kumar I. P. Raju C. Satyamurty 《Pure and Applied Geophysics》2007,164(10):1963-1983
During the last six years, National Geophysical Research Institute, Hyderabad has established a semi-permanent seismological
network of 5–8 broadband seismographs and 10–20 accelerographs in the Kachchh seismic zone, Gujarat with a prime objective
to monitor the continued aftershock activity of the 2001 Mw 7.7 Bhuj mainshock. The reliable and accurate broadband data for the 8 October Mw 7.6 2005 Kashmir earthquake and its aftershocks from this network as well as Hyderabad Geoscope station enabled us to estimate
the group velocity dispersion characteristics and one-dimensional regional shear velocity structure of the Peninsular India.
Firstly, we measure Rayleigh-and Love-wave group velocity dispersion curves in the period range of 8 to 35 sec and invert
these curves to estimate the crustal and upper mantle structure below the western part of Peninsular India. Our best model
suggests a two-layered crust: The upper crust is 13.8 km thick with a shear velocity (Vs) of 3.2 km/s; the corresponding values
for the lower crust are 24.9 km and 3.7 km/sec. The shear velocity for the upper mantle is found to be 4.65 km/sec. Based
on this structure, we perform a moment tensor (MT) inversion of the bandpass (0.05–0.02 Hz) filtered seismograms of the Kashmir
earthquake. The best fit is obtained for a source located at a depth of 30 km, with a seismic moment, Mo, of 1.6 × 1027 dyne-cm, and a focal mechanism with strike 19.5°, dip 42°, and rake 167°. The long-period magnitude (MA ~ Mw) of this earthquake is estimated to be 7.31. An analysis of well-developed sPn and sSn regional crustal phases from the bandpassed
(0.02–0.25 Hz) seismograms of this earthquake at four stations in Kachchh suggests a focal depth of 30.8 km. 相似文献
20.
Zujun Xie Yong Zheng Huajian Yao Lihua Fang Yong Zhang Chengli Liu Maomao Wang Bin Shan Huiping Zhang Junjie Ren Lingyun Ji Meiqin Song 《中国科学:地球科学(英文版)》2018,61(3):339-352
At GMT time 13:19, August 8, 2017, an Ms7.0 earthquake struck the Jiuzhaigou region in Sichuan Province, China, causing severe damages and casualties. To investigate the source properties, seismogenic structures, and seismic hazards, we systematically analyzed the tectonic environment, crustal velocity structure in the source region, source parameters and rupture process, Coulomb failure stress changes, and 3-D features of the rupture plane of the Jiuzhaigou earthquake. Our results indicate the following: (1) The Jiuzhaigou earthquake occurred on an unmarked fault belonging to the transition zone of the east Kunlun fault system and is located northwest of the Huya fault. (2) Both the mainshock and aftershock rupture zones are located in a region where crustal seismic velocity changes dramatically. Southeast to the source region, shear wave velocity at the middle to lower crust is significantly low, but it rapidly increases northeastward and lies close to the background velocity across the rupture fault. (3) The aftershock zone is narrow and distributes along the northwest-southeast trend, and most aftershocks occur within a depth range of 5–20 km. (4) The focal mechanism of the Jiuzhaigou earthquake indicates a left-lateral strike-slip fault, with strike, dip, and rake angles of 152°, 74° and 8°, respectively. The hypocenter depth measures 20 km, whereas the centroid depth is about 6 km. The co-seismic rupture mainly concentrates at depths of 3–13 km, with a moment magnitude (Mw) of 6.5. (5) The co-seismic rupture also strengthens the Coulomb failure stress at the two ends of the rupture fault and the east segment of the Tazang fault. Aftershocks relocation results together with geological surveys indicate that the causative fault is a near vertical fault with notable spatial variations: dip angle varies within 66°–89° from northwest to southeast and the average dip angle measures ~84°. The results of this work are of fundamental importance for further studies on the source characteristics, tectonic environment, and seismic hazard evaluation of the Jiuzhaigou earthquake. 相似文献