共查询到19条相似文献，搜索用时 140 毫秒
1.
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
2.
利用双差定位方法对西藏比如MS6.1地震序列141次ML≥2.0地震进行重新定位,采用CAP波形反演方法获得主震的震源机制解,并运用最小空间旋转角方法比较不同机构发布的震源机制解的差异。重新定位后主震震中位置为(31.924°N,92.824°E),靠近余震区中心,震源深度为12.8 km;余震分布沿NE向展布,长约18 km。沿NE向深度剖面结果显示,在主震右上方存在5 km×10 km的近椭圆形地震破裂空区。主震的震源机制解为正断兼走滑型,最佳矩心深度为9.3 km,矩震级为5.98。结合重新定位后余震分布、主震与历史地震震源机制解及地质构造背景等分析,认为具有左旋运动性质的安多南缘断裂可能是该次地震序列的主要发震构造。 相似文献
3.
本文基于云南地震台网数据,对2021年6月10日云南双柏地震序列进行重新定位,并对序列中4次MS≥3.5地震的震源机制解和震源区构造应力场进行了反演,研究了双柏地震序列时空分布特征和发震构造.地震重定位结果显示,双柏地震序列空间上呈NNE-SSW向优势分布,发震断层较为陡立,震源深度集中分布于5～15 km范围内,震源深度表现为南浅北深的特征.MS5.1地震后余震序列在时空上呈现出不对称的双侧发展模式,MS4.6地震前后余震沿SSW向存在往返迁移现象.反演得到的序列震源机制解类型均为走滑型,都具有与序列优势分布一致的NNE走向、高倾角SEE倾向节面.构造应力场反演表明震源区受到NNW向水平挤压和NEE向水平拉张的构造应力作用.结合重定位结果和序列震源机制分析认为,双柏地震序列与附近的楚雄—建水断裂等无关,其发震构造为一条NNE走向、SEE倾向的高倾角左旋走滑断裂,构造形成受控于川滇菱形块体SSE向整体运动产生的NNW向挤压构造应力作用. 相似文献
4.
利用西藏地震台网记录到的2017年11月18日西藏米林6.9级地震及其余震序列资料,研究此次地震的发震机制断层。双差定位结果显示,余震沿着主震的NW和SE方向往两侧扩展分布,震源深度主要集中在2～12 km,同时从短轴剖面上地震分布推断,此次米林地震的发震断层倾角约为45°。对ML3.5以上的余震采用CAP方法进行波形拟合震源机制反演,其结果显示,此次米林地震序列震源错动类型以逆冲和走滑为主,比较符合该区域的构造动力环境。应力场反演结果显示,米林地震序列主压应力轴（S1轴）方向为NNE-NS向,主张应力轴（S3轴）方向为SEE-SE向;反映的断层错动方式为逆冲兼走滑类型。地震余震序列展布以及震源机制分布显示断层走向和断层特性与帕隆—旁辛断裂的特征较为吻合,推测米林地震的发震断裂为帕隆—旁辛断裂。 相似文献
5.
利用匹配定位方法对2020年5月18日云南巧家M_S5.0地震震后24h震源附近台站记录的连续波形进行遗漏地震扫描和定位,共识别出327个地震事件,约为台网目录的2.4倍,最小完整震级由最初的M_L1.9降至M_L1.1。随后,依据最新目录计算了震后震源区的b值,并结合余震展布形态,初步分析此次地震发震构造。研究结果显示,余震序列在平面上显示出NNW-SSE优势展布方向,长度约14km,震源优势深度集中在3～15km;深度剖面展示出主震的发震断层面较陡,并且具有向西倾的趋势。综合主震震源机制解、余震展布形态和周边地质构造背景,认为巧家M_S5.0地震发震断层可能为NNW-SSE向走滑性质的断裂,与2014年鲁甸MS6.5地震的发震构造密切相关。 相似文献
6.
7.
精确的余震序列定位及震源机制反演能够提供强震破裂尺度、发震断层面和区域应力场等信息,为震后应急决策和分析发震构造提供科学依据.本研究采用双差定位方法对2021年5月22日 青海玛多Ms7.4地震序列进行精定位,得到震后9天内共1055个事件的精定位结果;同时,利用青海、西藏、四川和甘肃台网记录的波形数据,采用近震全波形矩张量反演方法得到了玛多Ms7.4地震15次中等余震(Ms≥4.0)震源机制解,并进一步反演得到震源区构造应力场.地震定位结果显示,玛多主震位于玛多—甘德断裂与甘德南缘断裂之间,发震断层面较为陡立,余震序列在时间上呈现出不对称的双侧破裂模式,且沿主破裂面的两端均表现出分支破裂特征,说明本次地震触发了分支断层;震源机制结果显示15次中等余震包含12次走滑型和3次逆冲型地震,暗示主断层破裂受到局部异常结构的影响;另外,应力场反演表明震源区为近EW向挤压特征,与该区域最大水平主压应力优势取向一致.结合上述结果以及周边地质构造背景,我们认为玛多地震发震构造为位于巴颜喀拉地块内部一条NWW向的高倾角左旋走滑断裂,主破裂触发了东西两端分支断层活动,断层面的非均匀性控制了余震序列时空分布的差异性. 相似文献
8.
本文利用云南区域地震台网提供的震相报告,采用"多阶段定位"方法,对2021年5月21日云南漾濞Ms6.4地震序列的震源位置进行了重新定位.选取序列中13次具有高信噪比宽频带波形记录的Ms≥4.0地震事件,应用CAP波形反演方法,获取了这些事件的震源机制解和震源矩心深度.结果显示,漾濞地震序列震中距离NE侧的维西—乔后断裂约3～10 km,余震区长轴呈NW-SE向展布,长约22 km,震源优势分布深度为4～8 km,反映本次地震发生在上地壳浅部.地震分布北西窄、南东宽的分段特征明显,北西段地震更浅、更密集,南东段事件更深、更分散且存在向S偏转的现象.余震区不同位置的短轴剖面分析表明,发震构造倾向SW,南东段倾角缓于北西段.北西段还存在规模较小的NE向共轭断裂,长度约5 km.5月18日开始的前震自余震区中段向NW逐级迁移扩展,前震序列密集且存在相互触发,符合前震发生的级联模式.主震位于余震密集区的NW端,表明其具备SE向单侧破裂特征.多数4级以上地震的震源机制解都具有与序列长轴走向一致的NW-SE走向、高倾角SW倾向节面;基于震源机制解反演获得的区域构造应力场显示,发震构造受NNW-SSE向近水平主压应力作用发生右旋走滑运动,揭示主发震断层产状和错动类型与维西—乔后断裂基本一致.因此,可初步判定发震构造为维西—乔后断裂的平行伴生断裂,这一构造的形成可能与川滇块体SE向滑移和滇西南块体的顺时针旋转有关. 相似文献
9.
针对2012年6月24日宁蒗—盐源MS 5.7地震序列,基于云南地震台网及部分四川地震台网宽频带数据,采用CAP方法反演该序列主震及ML≥3.5余震的震源机制解。结果显示:主震主应力方位角为148°,俯角58°,节面Ⅰ走向:179°、倾角55°、滑动角-43°;节面Ⅱ走向:297°、倾角26°、滑动角-136°,矩心深度4 km,矩震级5.36,表现为正断层兼走滑型地震,判定节面Ⅱ为其发震断层面,永宁断裂为其发震构造。 相似文献
10.
《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
11.
2014年新疆于田7.3级地震发震构造和震前地震活动过程讨论 总被引：1，自引：1，他引：0
2014年2月12日在新疆于田发生7.3级地震,震中位于阿尔金断裂西段,这是继2008年3月21日于田7.3级地震后在塔里木盆地南侧发生的第2次7级地震。这次于田7.3级地震的余震主体沿NE向分布,余震区的西南段呈近SN向分布;绝大部分余震与前震在余震区西南密集分布,强余震(全部的5级以上地震和81%的4级地震)绝大多数都分布在这个区域,第1天的余震主要在这个区域呈近SN向分布,余震由西向东扩展。在这次于田地震的近SN方向上曾在1982、2011以及2012年先后发生过几次6级左右的地震,而这次地震填补了其中的空段。文中从区域构造环境、地震震源机制解和余震分布特征等方面,分析这次地震的发震过程,认为地震发生在硝尔库勒盆地南缘的分支断裂,受阿尔金断裂带构造应力影响,硝尔库勒盆地受到局部近EW向的拉张作用力,首先沿近SN向破裂,这个构造部位的解锁,促进阿尔金断裂左旋错动,产生NE向破裂,应力向东传递;文中还对有历史记录以来,阿尔金断裂上7级地震的发震构造及其对阿尔金断裂带的影响进行了讨论。 相似文献
12.
RESTUDY ON HYPOCENTRAL LOCATION AND SEISMOGENIC TECTONIC OF THE JIUJIANG-RUICHANG MS5.7 EARTHQUAKE SEQUENCE,JIANGXI PROVINCE 
下载免费PDF全文
下载免费PDF全文 We collected seismic records of 228 ML≥1.0 Jiujiang-Ruichang MS5.7 earthquake sequence from Dec.26, 2005 to Jun. 30, 2006. By using double-difference method combined with waveform cross-correlation, those earthquakes were relocated and finally the accurate source parameters of 224 earthquakes were obtained. The errors are about 0. 5km in horizontal and less than 2km in vertical direction, respectively. It was found that the depth of earthquake sequence concentrates in 8~14km range, and the epicenters are distributed along both NW and NE direction, and dominantly along NW direction. Combined with the focal mechanism, the distribution direction and the tectonic setting, we infer that the rupture of the NW-trending fault caused the MS5. 7 main shock, and then the rupture probably encountered an asperity and triggered the MS4. 8 strong aftershock. The NE-trending fault came into a seismically quiet period by stress adjustment in a short time, while the NW-trending fault released stress for a long time which caused a series of aftershocks. The MS5. 7 main shock is caused by the NW striking Yangjisshan-Wushan-Tongjiangling Fault and the MS4. 8 aftershock occurred on the NE striking Liujia-Fanjiapu-Chengmenshan Fault. 相似文献
13.
STUDY ON THE SEISMOGENIC FAULT AND DYNAMICS PARAME-TERS OF THE 2014 MS6.6 JINGGU EARTHQUAKE IN YUNNAN 下载免费PDF全文
下载免费PDF全文 On October 17, 2014, a MS6.6 earthquake occurred in Jinggu, Yunnan. The epicenter was located in the western branch of Wuliang Mountain, the northwest extension line of Puwen Fault. There are 2 faults in the surrounding area, one is a sinistral strike-slip and the other is the dextral. Two faults have mutual intersection with conjugate joints property to form a checkerboard faulting structure. The structure of the area of the focal region is complex. The present-day tectonic movement is strong, and the aftershock distribution indicates the faulting surface trending NNW. There is no obvious surface rupture related to the known fault in the epicenter, and there is a certain distance from the surface of the Puwen fault zone. Regional seismic activity is strong. In 1941, there were two over magnitude 7.0 earthquakes in the south of the epicenter of Jinggu County and Mengzhe Town. In 1988, two mainshock-aftershock type earthquakes occurred in Canglan-Gengma Counties, the principal stress axes of the whole seismic area is in the direction of NNE. Geological method can be adopted to clarify the distribution of surficial fracture caused by active faults, and high-precision seismic positioning and spatial distribution characteristics of seismic sequences can contribute to understand deep seismogenic faults and geometric features. Thus, we can better analyze the three-dimensional spatial distribution characteristics of seismotectonics and the deep and shallow tectonic relationship. The focal mechanism reveals the property and faulting process to a certain extent, which can help us understand not only the active property of faults, but also the important basis for deep tectonic stress and seismogenic mechanism. In order to study the fault characteristic of the Jinggu earthquake, the stress field characteristics of the source area and the geometric parameters of the fault plane, this paper firstly uses the 15 days aftershock data of the Jingsuo MS6.6 earthquake, to precisely locate the main shock and aftershock sequences using double-difference location method. The results show that the aftershock sequences have clustering characteristics along the NW direction, with a depth mainly of 5~15km. Based on the precise location, calculations are made to the focal mechanisms of a total of 46 earthquakes including the main shock and aftershocks with ML ≥ 3.0 of the Jinggu earthquake. The double-couple(DC)component of the focal mechanism of the main shock shows that nodal plane Ⅰ:The strike is 239°, the dip 81°, and the rake -22°; nodal plane Ⅱ, the strike is 333°, the dip 68°, and the rake -170.31°. According to focal mechanism solutions, there are 42 earthquakes with a focal mechanism of strike-slip type, accounting for 91.3%. According to the distribution of the aftershock sequence, it can be inferred that the nodal plane Ⅱ is the seismogenic fault. The obtained focal mechanism is used to invert the stress field in the source region. The distribution of horizontal maximum principal stress orienation is concentrated. The main features of the regional tectonic stress field are under the NNE-SSW compression(P axis)and the NW-SE extension(T axis)and are also affected by NNW direction stress fields in the central region of Yunnan, which indicates that Jinggu earthquake fault, like Gengma earthquake, is a new NW-trending fault which is under domination of large-scale tectonic stress and effected by local tectonic stress environment. In order to define more accurately the occurrence of the fault plane of the Jinggu earthquake, with the precise location results and the stress field in the source region, the global optimal solution of the fault plane parameters and its error are obtained by using both global searching simulated annealing algorithm and local searching Gauss-Newton method. Since the parameters of the fault plane fitting process use the stress parameters obtained by the focal mechanism inversion, the data obtained by the fault plane fitting is more representative of the rupture plane, that is, the strike 332.75°, the dip 89.53°, and the rake -167.12°. The buried depth of the rupture plane is 2.746km, indicating that the source fault has not cut through the surface. Based on the stress field characteristics and the inversion results of the fault plane, it is preliminarily believed that the seismogenic structure of the Jinggu earthquake is a newly generated nearly vertical right-lateral strike-slip fault with normal component. The rupture plane length is about 17.2km, which does not extend to the Puwen fault zone. Jinggu earthquake occurred in Simao-Puer seismic region in the south of Sichuan-Yunnan plate. Its focal mechanism solution is similar to that of the three sub-events of the Gengma earthquake in November 1988. The seismogenic structure of both of them is NW-trending and the principal stress is NE-SW. The rupture plane of the Jinggu main shock(NW direction)is significantly different from the known near NS direction Lancang Fault and the near NE direction Jinggu Fault in the study area. It is preliminarily inferred that the seismogenic structure of this earthquake has a neogenetic feature. 相似文献
14.
Based on the phase report of Xinjiang Seismic Network, the Hutubi MS6.2 earthquake sequence ML ≥ 1.0 was relocated by the HypoDD method. The results show that the aftershocks were distributed along NE and NW direction. The aftershocks were in the depths of 5~15km. In addition, by using the digital waveforms of Xinjiang Seismic Network, the best double-couple focal mechanism of the main shock and some aftershocks of MS ≥ 3.8 were determined by the CAP method. Based on the above studies, the source depth, focal mechanism and aftershock distribution of the Hutubi MS6.2 earthquake were analyzed and the seismogenic structure was discussed. The nodal plane parameters of the best double-couple focal mechanism are strike 144°, dip 26°, rake 118°, and strike 293°, dip 67°, rake 77°, respectively. The moment magnitude MW is about 5.9, with centroid depth of 15.2km. These show that the main shock was a thrust type. Most focal mechanism solutions of the aftershocks were shown as a thrust type, which are similar to the main shock. It is speculated that the possible seismogenic fault of this earthquake is the Huorgosi-Manas-Tugulu Fault. 相似文献
15.
We select the Xiluodu-Wudongde reservoir area in the downstream of Jinsha River as the research area, and use the CAP and GPAT method to obtain focal mechanisms of ML ≥ 2.0 earthquakes from 2016 to 2017 in this region. Then, we analyze the spatial distribution characteristics of focal mechanism solutions in each local region and investigate the relationship between seismicity and regional structures. According to 414 focal mechanism solutions we get following conclusions:1)The Xiluodu dam began to impound water on May 4, 2013, and seismicity increased significantly after impoundment. We get 49 focal mechanisms in the Xiluodu dam and its adjacent area which are dominated by thrust faulting and next by strike-slip faulting, which are mainly distributed near the middle section of the Ebian-Jinyang fault zone. The distribution of nodal planes striking in NNW to NE direction is consistent with that of regional faults, and some large earthquakes are controlled by regional structures. 2)There are 39 and 24 focal mechanisms obtained in the unimpounded Baihetan and Wudongde dams and adjacent areas, and the spatial distribution of focal mechanism solutions are relatively consistent, dominated by strike-slip faulting with a small amount of thrust and normal faulting. The sinistral strike-slip earthquakes are consistent with the activity of Xiaojiang fault zone and Puduhe-Xishan Fault. The strikes of the nodal planes are distributed discretely, and many groups of faults intersect with each other in the area, suggesting that the seismogenic environment is relatively complex. 3)The seismicity in Ludian continues to be active after the Ludian M6.5 earthquake. By the end of 2017, we got 260 focal mechanism solutions in the aftershock area of the Ludian MS6.5 earthquake of Aug 3rd, 2014, which show an "L-shape" in distribution and are dominated by thrust and strike-slip faulting. The long axis is distributed in EW direction, and the short axis is distributed in near NNW direction. The strikes of nodal planes are mainly near EW and near NE, and the nodal planes in the NW direction are less. According to characteristics of a large number of focal mechanism solutions, we deduce that there may exist a buried structure in the EW direction, the seismicity is controlled by different types of faults and the seismogenic structure is very complex. 4)The centroid depth in each region is concentrated in the range of 5~15km, indicating that the seismogenic layer in the study area is 5~15km deep in the middle and upper crust. 相似文献
16.
采用Hypo2000和双差定位方法对2013年云南洱源MS5.5和MS5.0地震序列进行了重新定位. 结果显示: 精定位后洱源地震序列分布优势方向集中在160°; 用CAP方法反演了两次5级地震震源机制, 节面Ⅱ的走向158°和157°与余震优势分布方向一致; 现场考察MS5.5和MS5.0地震极震区的长轴方向也是NW向. 上述结果与维西—乔后断裂NNW走向一致, 据此判定该断裂为洱源MS5.5和MS5.0地震的发震构造. 序列震源机制解显示, 洱源地震序列表现出不同的错断性质以及不同方向主压应力, 可能与维西—乔后断裂所处区域复杂构造应力场有关. 相似文献
17.
FOCAL MECHANISM SOLUTIONS AND STRESS FIELD OF THE 2019 CHANGNING,SICHUAN MAINSHOCK AND ITS MODERATE-STRONG AFTERSHOCKS(MS≥4.0) 下载免费PDF全文
下载免费PDF全文 LIANG Shan-shan XU Zhi-guo SHENG Shu-zhong ZHANG Guang-wei ZHAO-Bo ZOU Li-ye 《地震地质》1979,42(3):547-561
A MS6.0 earthquake with shallow focal depth of 16km struck Changning County, Yibin City, Sichuan Province at 22:55: 43(Beijing Time)on 17 June 2019. Although the magnitude of the earthquake is moderate, it caused heavy casualties and property losses to Changning County and its surrounding areas. In the following week, a series of aftershocks with MS≥4.0 occurred in the epicentral area successively. In order to better understand and analyze the seismotectonic structure and generation mechanism of these earthquakes, in this paper, absolute earthquake location by HYPOINVERSE 2000 method is conducted to relocate the main shock of MS6.0 in Changning using the seismic phase observation data provided by Sichuan Earthquake Administration, and focal mechanism solutions for Changning MS6.0 main shock and MS≥4.0 aftershocks are inferred using the gCAP method with the local and regional broadband station waveforms recorded by the regional seismic networks of Sichuan Province, Yunnan Province, Chongqing Municipality, and Guizhou Province. The absolute relocation results show that the epicenter of the main shock is located at 28.35°N, 104.88°E, and it occurred at an unusual shallow depth about only 6.98km, which could be one of the most significant reasons for the heavier damage in the Changning and adjoining areas. The focal plane solution of the Changning MS6.0 earthquake indicates that the main shock occurred at a thrust fault with a left-lateral strike-slip component. The full moment tensor solution provided by gCAP shows that it contains a certain percentage of non-double couple components. After the occurrence of the main shock, a series of medium and strong aftershocks with MS≥4.0 occurred continuously along the northwestern direction, the fault plane solutions for those aftershocks show mostly strike-slip and thrust fault-type. It is found that the mode of focal mechanism has an obvious characteristic of segmentation in space, which reflects the complexity of the dislocation process of the seismogenic fault. It also shows that the Changning earthquake sequences occurred in the shallow part of the upper crust. Combining with the results from the seismic sounding profile in Changning anticline, which is the main structure in the focal area, this study finds that the existence of several steep secondary faults in the core of Changning anticline is an important reason for the diversity of focal mechanism of aftershock sequences. The characteristics of regional stress field is estimated using the STRESSINVERSE method by the information of focal mechanism solutions from our study, and the results show that the Changning area is subject to a NEE oriented maximum principal stress field with a very shallow dipping and near-vertical minimum principal stress, which is not associated with the results derived from other stress indicators. Compared with the direction of the maximum principal compressive stress axis in the whole region, the direction of the stress field in the focal area rotates from the NWW direction to the NEE direction. The Changning MS6.0 earthquake locates in the area with complex geological structure, where there are a large number of small staggered fault zones with unstable geological structure. Combining with the direction of aftershocks distribution in Changning area, we infer that the Changning MS6.0 earthquake is generated by rupturing of the pre-existing fault in the Changning anticline under the action of the overall large stress field, and the seismogenic fault is a high dip-angle thrust fault with left-lateral strike-slip component, trending NW. 相似文献
18.
2022年1月8日青海省海北州门源县发生MS6.9地震,震后产生了长约22 km的地表破裂带,青海、甘肃和宁夏等多地震感强烈。本文基于区域地震台网资料,通过多阶段定位方法对门源MS6.9地震早期序列（2022年1月8日至12日）进行了重定位,并利用gCAP方法反演了主震和MS≥3.4余震的震源机制和震源矩心深度,计算了现今应力场体系在门源MS6.9地震震源机制两个节面产生的相对剪应力和正应力。结果表明:门源MS6.9地震的初始破裂深度为7.8 km,震源矩心深度为4 km,地震序列的优势初始破裂深度主要介于7—8 km之间,而MS≥3.4余震的震源矩心深度为3—7 km;该地震序列的震源深度剖面显示震后24个小时内的地震序列长度约为25 km,与地表破裂带的长度大体一致,整体地震序列长度约为30 km,其中1月8日MS6.9主震和MS5.1余震位于余震区西段,1月12日MS5.2余震位于余震区东段。2022年1月8日门源MS6.9主震的震源机制解节面Ⅰ为走向290°、倾角81°、滑动角16°,节面Ⅱ为走向197°、倾角74°、滑动角171°,根据余震展布的总体趋势估计断层面走向为290°,表明此次地震为近乎直立断层面上的一次左旋走滑型事件;MS≥3.4余震的震源机制解显示这些地震主要为走滑型地震,P轴走向从余震区西段到东段之间大体呈现NE向到EW向的变化。现今应力场体系在门源MS6.9主震震源机制解节面Ⅰ上产生的相对剪应力为0.638,而在节面Ⅱ上的相对剪应力为0.522,表明这两个节面均非构造应力场的最大释放节面,这与2016年门源MS6.4地震逆冲型震源机制为构造应力场的最优释放节面有着明显差异。结合地质构造、震源机制和余震展布,2022年1月8日门源MS6.9主震的发震构造可能为冷龙岭断裂西段,其地震断层错动方式为左旋走滑。根据重定位结果、震级-破裂关系以及剪应力结果,本文认为门源地区存在一定的应力积累且应力未得到充分释放,该地区仍存在发生强震的危险。 相似文献
19.
2014年4月20日安徽省霍山发生MS4.3地震,是霍山地区41年以来发生的最大地震. 本文首先基于安徽省及周边省份的地震台站资料,采用Hypo2000、 CAP和PTD方法反演得到该地震的震源深度为8 km; 然后采用Hypo2000和HypoDD方法联合对主震和余震序列进行重新定位,结果显示该地震序列呈北东向分布,绝大部分余震分布在主震的西南侧; 最后分别采用FOCMEC方法和CAP方法反演该地震的震源机制解,获得的反演结果非常接近,节面Ⅰ与节面Ⅱ的走向、 倾角、 滑动角分别为135°/70°/-30°与230°/60°/-160°. 此外该地震的椭圆等烈度线呈北东向展布,结合该地区的历史地震和地震构造,认为该地震与北东向的落儿岭—土地岭断裂活动有关. 已有震源机制解资料表明该地区构造应力场最大主压应力轴的方位角为267°,倾角为5°,最小主压应力轴的方位角为358°,倾角为4°,结合震源机制解和发震构造,认为该地震是在区域应力场作用下,落儿岭—土地岭断裂发生的一次右旋张性地震. 相似文献