共查询到19条相似文献，搜索用时 296 毫秒
1.
基于首都圈数字地震台网的宽频带资料，首先采用CAP方法确定了永清MS4.3地震和廊坊MS3.0地震的震源机制解:永清地震节面Ⅰ的走向、倾角和滑动角分别为52°，62°和?140°，节面Ⅱ的走向、倾角和滑动角分别为300°，55°和?35°；廊坊地震节面I的走向、倾角和滑动角分别为48°，57°和?147°，节面Ⅱ的走向、倾角和滑动角分别为299°，63°和?38°。两次地震的震源机制解较为一致，推测它们可能具有相同的发震断层。利用近震转换波获得两次地震的震源深度，分别为19 km和13 km。利用双差法对两次地震的主余震进行重新定位，结果显示:两个地震序列的震中均呈NE向分布，余震震源深度均浅于主震震源深度，震源深度分别集中在17—20 km和12—13 km范围内，两个序列的短轴剖面揭示了震源分布均呈现倾向SE，倾角陡立的特点。将地震序列的分布与震源机制解的结果进行对比，认为两个序列的水平展布方向与其对应的主震震源机制解中节面Ⅰ的走向比较接近，深度分布的高倾角特征也与节面Ⅰ比较相似，因此认为发震断层面均为节面Ⅰ。通过将震源机制解中节面Ⅰ的参数和地震序列的分布与区域活动断层的产状性质进行比较，取得了一些关于发震构造和地震成因的重要认识:① 永清MS4.3地震和廊坊MS3.0地震的发震构造不是上地壳的先存正断裂?河西务断裂，不排除与中下地壳的新生构造或深大断裂有关；② 永清、廊坊地震发生在13—19 km深度上，结合地壳结构、断裂构造以及区域流变结构等资料，推测该深度范围可能是廊固凹陷的壳内脆性?韧性转换区域，是地震孕育和发生的有利构造部位。 相似文献
2.
继2008年汶川MS8.0地震和2013年芦山MS7.0地震后,2022年6月1日在龙门山断裂带南段又发生了一次MS6.1强震,距离2013年芦山MS7.0地震震中位置仅10 km.为研究此次地震的发震断层及两次芦山地震的关系,对震后60天的余震序列进行重定位,获得了933个高精度定位结果,EW,NS和UD方向上的定位误差分别为0.15 km,0.13 km和0.23 km.余震序列在水平分布上沿北东—南西向略长,在深度上主要分布在12—20 km,10 km以浅余震很少.余震震源深度剖面显示发震断层面倾向南东,与2013年芦山MS7.0地震发震断层结构中的反冲断层倾向一致,两次芦山地震的发震断层结构相交为复式Y型断裂结构,此次芦山地震的发震断层为其中一条深度更深的反冲断层.此次地震没有产生地表破裂,推测发震断层为一条埋深较深的隐伏断层.两次芦山地震的余震震中分布区跨过了该区域的一条大型逆冲型断裂带,即双石—大川断裂带.深度剖面显示芦山MS7.0地震的南东... 相似文献
3.
基于江苏地区测震台网记录，采用CAP方法反演了2016年10月20日射阳MS4.4地震的震源机制解和震源深度；利用HypoDD方法对射阳地震序列中ML≥1.5地震进行了重新定位.结果显示:射阳MS4.4地震的震源机制参数分别为节面Ⅰ:走向304°，倾角53°，滑动角0°；节面Ⅱ:走向214°，倾角90°，滑动角143°，震源深度约为14 km.双差定位结果显示:此次射阳地震序列分布于洪泽—沟墩断裂与盐城—南洋岸断裂之间，在水平空间内，其震中分布的优势方向为NW60°，由SE向NW迁移; 地震序列深度分布在6—23 km范围内.根据所反演的震源机制参数和地震序列精定位结果，本文推测射阳MS4.4地震的断层面解为震源机制解的节面Ⅰ, 该地震可能是在区域背景应力场的作用下，沿NW向剪切破裂产生的左旋走滑地震事件. 相似文献
4.
2022年1月2日云南省丽江市宁蒗县发生MS5.5地震。采用地震编目系统提供的此次地震的震相到时数据,使用双差定位方法对此次宁蒗MS5.5地震序列进行重新定位,获得了694次地震的高精度相对位置。重定位后的地震空间分布显示:此次地震序列呈NNE至近NS向分布,与震源机制解的节面Ⅱ走向（191°）一致,主震位于地震序列南段;地震序列主体活动区长约11 km,宽约6 km,余震主要分布在4—11 km的深度范围内;地震序列在深度剖面上呈现出两组倾向不同的活动分支,其中东侧分支与震源机制解节面Ⅱ的倾角（81°）一致。此外,本次地震还可能触发了邻区的局部断裂活动。综合分析认为,2022年宁蒗MS5.5地震的发震构造应该是NNE至近NS向兼具正断层分量的左旋走滑断层,倾向为WNW,倾角约为81°,其活动性质与震源区已知的活动断层均不一致。尽管本次宁蒗MS5.5地震序列发生在2012年宁蒗—盐源MS5.7地震序列的北侧,但是两次地震序列的发震断层并不相同。库仑应力反演结果显示,2012年宁蒗—盐源MS5.7地震对本次宁蒗MS5.5地震的发生具有促进作用。 相似文献
5.
6.
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
7.
利用双差定位方法对2018年松原MS5.7地震序列中ML≥1.0地震重新定位，之后使用CAP方法求解松原MS5.7地震序列中强地震的震源机制解，再借助MSATSI软件包反演得到松原地区的区域应力场。综合分析以上研究结果得到如下结论:① 松原MS5.7地震序列发生在NW走向的第二松花江断裂与NE走向的扶余—肇东断裂交会处，将地震精定位结果沿两条断层走向作剖面分析，NW向剖面主轴长度约为5 km，震中分布均匀，NE向剖面主轴长度亦约为5 km，震中呈倾向NE的高倾角分布；② 该序列中的4次ML≥3.7地震的震源机制解具有良好的一致性:节面Ⅰ走向为NE向，节面Ⅱ走向为NW向，均为高倾角走滑断层。中强地震的震源机制节面解与第二松花江断裂性质基本一致，由此推断第二松花江断裂是本次松原地震的发震断层；③ 松原地区的主压应力方位角为N86°E，倾角为7°，主张应力方位角为N24°E，倾角为71°。松原地区的区域应力场既受到大尺度的板块构造运动的控制，又受到区域构造运动的影响。在太平洋板块对北东亚板块向西俯冲作用下，东北地区产生了近EW向的主压应力，受周边地质构造控制，松辽盆地内NE向断裂与NW向断裂交会处易发生走滑型地震，2018年松原MS5.7地震正是在这种构造作用控制下发生的中强地震。 相似文献
8.
2022年6月1日在四川芦山发生了MS6.1地震。为厘清这次地震的发震构造与2013年4月20日芦山MS7.0地震是否相同,文中基于2013年4月20日—2022年7月1日四川地震台网记录到的芦山地区的震相数据,采用多阶段地震定位方法进行了精确定位,最终获得了6 992次ML≥1.0地震事件的精确定位结果,定位误差为：水平向0.5km,垂直向0.7km,走时残差0.18s。主震的精确位置为(30.382°N, 102.943°E),震源深度为15.6km。定位结果显示,2022年芦山MS6.1地震序列整体位于2013年芦山MS7.0地震序列北东端的西南侧,余震密集区NE-SW向长约10km, NW-SE向长约8km。整个芦山地震序列震中分布区域的长轴呈NE向,沿其走向的震源深度剖面显示,2022年6月1日芦山MS6.1主震和MS4.5最大余震的震源深度约为15km,与2013年芦山MS7.0主震的震源深度相当。M... 相似文献
9.
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
10.
2014年2月12日新疆于田发生MS7.3地震,该震前1天曾发生MS5.4前震,震后余震活动频繁.截止到2月20日12时,该地震序列记录到4000多次余震,最大余震为2月12日MS5.7地震,序列类型为前震—主震—余震型.该地震前震的b值明显低于该区域正常活动的b值和余震的b值.这次地震位于西昆仑断裂带与阿尔金断裂带的交汇区域的阿什库勒断裂北段,震源机制解为走滑型.余震区NE向长70 km、宽20 km,分为主余震分布区和次余震分布区,其中ML4.0以上强余震基本位于NE向主余震分布区,N--S向的次余震分布区则以ML3.0左右地震分布为主,显示该部分可能受到主震的触发作用.于田地区曾发生的2008年3月21日MS7.3地震的震源机制解为正断型,距这次地震约100 km;2012年8月12日发生的MS6.2地震的震源机制解为正断型,距这次地震约10 km.该地区的发震构造背景是:在NE向阿尔金断裂带尾端向SW方向延伸过程中,左旋走滑作用逐渐转换为拉张作用,形成多条左旋走滑兼具拉张作用的断裂. 2014年于田MS7.3地震的发震模式表现为:左旋走滑的阿什库勒断裂北段与南段因速率差异而产生的小型构造盆地,在区域拉张作用力下顺时针旋转;2008年MS7.3张性地震后区域的伸展作用增强,导致盆地南侧的苦牙克断裂发生2012年MS6.2张性地震,该地震引起2014年MS5.4前震,两者激发其后在盆地北侧阿什库勒断裂发生了2014年MS7.3主震. 相似文献
11.
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
12.
Based on the digital waveforms of Xinjiang Seismic Network, the Hutubi MS6.2 earthquake sequence (ML ≥ 1.0) was relocated precisely by HypoDD.The best double-couple focal mechanisms of the main shock and aftershocks of ML ≥ 4.0 were determined by the CAP method. We analyzed the characteristics of spatial distribution, focal mechanisms and the seismogenic structure of earthquake sequence. The results show that the main shock is located at 43.775 9°N, 86.363 4°E; the depth of the initial rupture and centriod is about 15.388km and 17km. The earthquake sequence extends unilaterally along NWW direction with an extension length of about 15km and a depth ranging 5~15km. The characteristics of the depth profiles show that the seismogenic fault plane dips northward and the faulting is dominated by thrusting. The nodal planes parameters of the best double-couple focal mechanisms are:strike 292°, dip 62° and rake 80° for nodal plane I, and strike 132°, dip 30° and rake 108° for nodal plane Ⅱ, indicating that the main shock is of thrust faulting. The dip of nodal planeⅠis consistent with the dip of the depth profile, which is inferred to be the fault plane of seismogenic fault of this earthquake. According to the comprehensive analysis of the relocation results, the focal mechanism and geological structure in the source region, it is preliminarily inferred that the seismogenic structure of the Hutubi MS6.2 earthquake may be a backthrust on the deeper concealed thrust slope at the south of Qigu anticline. The earthquake is a "folding" earthquake taking place under the stress field of Tianshan expanding towards the Junggar Basin. 相似文献
13.
A strong earthquake with magnitude MS6.2 hit Hutubi, Xinjiang at 13:15:03 on December 8th, 2016(Beijing Time). In order to better understand its mechanism, we performed centroid moment tensor inversion using the broadband waveform data recorded at stations from the Xinjiang regional seismic network by employing gCAP method. The best double couple solution of the MS6.2 mainshock on December 8th, 2016 estimated from local and near-regional waveforms is strike:271°, dip:64ånd rake:90° for nodal plane I, and strike:91°, dip:26ånd rake:90°for nodal plane Ⅱ; the centroid depth is about 21km and the moment magnitude(MW)is 5.9. ISO, CLVD and DC, the full moment tensor, of the earthquake accounted for 0.049%, 0.156% and 99.795%, respectively. The share of non-double couple component is merely 0.205%. This indicates that the earthquake is of double-couple fault mode, a typical tectonic earthquake featuring a thrust-type earthquake of squeezing property.The double difference(HypoDD)technique provided good opportunities for a comparative study of spatio-temporal properties and evolution of the aftershock sequences, and the earthquake relocation was done using HypoDD method. 486 aftershocks are relocated accurately and 327 events are obtained, whose residual of the RMS is 0.19, and the standard deviations along the direction of longitude, latitude and depth are 0.57km, 0.6km and 1.07km respectively. The result reveals that the aftershocks sequence is mainly distributed along the southern marginal fault of the Junggar Basin, extending about 35km to the NWW direction as a whole; the focal depths are above 20km for most of earthquakes, while the main shock and the biggest aftershock are deeper than others. The depth profile shows a relatively steep dip angle of the seismogenic fault plane, and the aftershocks dipping northward. Based on the spatial and temporal distribution features of the aftershocks, it is considered that the seismogenic fault plane may be the nodal plane I and the dip angle is about 271°. The structure of the Hutubi earthquake area is extremely complicated. The existing geological structure research results show that the combination zone between the northern Tianshan and the Junggar Basin presents typical intracontinental active tectonic features. There are numerous thrust fold structures, which are characterized by anticlines and reverse faults parallel to the mountains formed during the multi-stage Cenozoic period. The structural deformation shows the deformation characteristics of longitudinal zoning, lateral segmentation and vertical stratification. The ground geological survey and the tectonic interpretation of the seismic data show that the recoil faults are developed near the source area of the Hutubi earthquake, and the recoil faults related to the anticline are all blind thrust faults. The deep reflection seismic profile shows that there are several listric reverse faults dipping southward near the study area, corresponding to the active hidden reverse faults; At the leading edge of the nappe, there are complex fault and fold structures, which, in this area, are the compressional triangular zone, tilted structure and northward bedding backthrust formation. Integrating with geological survey and seismic deep soundings, the seismogenic fault of the MS6.2 earthquake is classified as a typical blind reverse fault with the opposite direction close to the southern marginal fault of the Junggar Basin, which is caused by the fact that the main fault is reversed by a strong push to the front during the process of thrust slip. Moreover, the Manas earthquake in 1906 also occurred near the southern marginal fault in Junggar, and the seismogenic mechanism was a blind fault. This suggests that there are some hidden thrust fault systems in the piedmont area of the northern Tianshan Mountains. These faults are controlled by active faults in the deep and contain multiple sets of active faults. 相似文献
14.
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
15.
16.
在印度洋板块与欧亚板块的碰撞-挤压作用下,不仅形成了喜马拉雅弧形山造山带,而且导致其东部弧顶—东构造结似一尖楔沿NNE方向插入青藏高原的东北缘.造成了巴颜喀拉块体和龙门山断裂系深、浅部构造强烈活动和变形,并导致高原腹地壳、幔物质以大型走滑断裂为通道边界向E-ES方向运移.2008年5月12日汶川—映秀MS8.0地震就发生在这相对活动的巴颜喀拉块体与相对稳定的四川盆地之间的龙门山断裂系辖区内.基于该区深部壳、幔结构和主震（MS8.0）与7万多次余震震中位置与震源深度的展布研究表明,汶川—映秀MS8.0地震的发震断裂不是震中在地表投影位置附近,而是龙门山断裂系3条以不同角度西倾、且向下在15±5 km深处汇聚的断裂带CF.该发震断裂带不是一条简单的线性断裂带,而是一半径为5 km左右的柱状震源体,沿NE向展布.在青藏高原东北缘深部物质向东与向东南运动过程中地壳各层整体逐渐抬升,且在龙门山断裂系地带为减薄的转折部位,而地壳低速层却在这里尖灭.在两陆-陆板块碰撞力系作用下,壳、幔介质以上地壳底部低速层（深20±5 km）为上滑移面,并与上地壳解耦,而在深处则以岩石圈底部漂曳的软流层顶部（深100±10 km）为下滑移,故下地壳和上地幔盖层物质才能同步运动.它们在四川盆地高速“刚性”壳、幔物质阻隔下,龙门山断裂系的3条向下汇聚的断裂带与下地壳和上地幔盖层物质同步沿龙门山断裂系的断层面向上逆冲,当向上与向下同步运动的固态壳、幔介质二者在15±5 km深处强烈碰撞时激发了这次MS8.0地震和一系列强余震的发生和发展.基于上述可见,对强烈地震孕育,发生和发展的深部介质与构造环境,深部物质与能量的交换、运移和深层动力过程的研究乃核心所在. 相似文献
17.
On July 31st, 2016, an earthquake of MS5.4 occurred in Cangwu County, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, which is the first MS ≥ 5.0 earthquake in coastal areas of southern China in the past 17a. The moderate earthquake activities have come into a comparatively quiet period in coastal areas of southern China for decades, so the study about the Cangwu MS5.4 earthquake is very important. However, differernt research institutions and scholars have got different results for the focal depth of the Cangwu MS5.4 earthquake. For this reason, we further measured the focal depth by using CAP method and sPL phase method.
sPL phase was first put forward by Chong in 2010. It is often observed between P and S wave of continental earthquakes with epicentral distance of about 30km to 50km. The energy of sPL phase is mainly concentrated on the radial component. Arrival time difference between sPL phase and direct P wave is insensitive to epicentral distancs, but increases almost linearly with the increase of focal depth. Based on these characteristics and advantages, sPL phase method is chosen to measure the focal depth of Cangwu MS5.4 earthquake in the paper.
First of all, we selected the broadband waveform data through seismic stations distributed mainly in Guangxi and adjacent provinces from Data Management Centre of China National Seismic Network and Guangxi Earthquake Networks Center. And an appropriate velocity model of Cangwu area was constructed by the teleseismic receiver function method. Then, the focal mechanism and focal depth of Cangwu MS5.4 earthquake were determined by using the CAP(Cut and Paste)method. Next, we compared the synthetic waveforms simulated by F-K forward method of different focal depth models with the actual observed waveforms. According to the difference of arrival times between sPL and Pg phases, we finally obtained the focal depth of Cangwu earthquake. The results show that the focal depth is 11km measured by CAP method and 9km by sPL phase method. Based on the focal mechanism solution, isoseismal shapes, aftershocks distributions and investigation on spot, we conclude that the Cangwu MS5.4 earthquake is a left-lateral strike-slip earthquake which occurred in the upper crust. Our preliminary analysis considers that the seismogenic structure of Cangwu earthquake is a north-northwest branch fault, and the control fault of this earthquake is the Hejie-Xiaying Fault. 相似文献
18.
利用1999—2007年和2009—2013年两期GPS速度场资料, 采用最小二乘配置方法分别计算了2008年和2014年新疆两次于田MS7.3地震前新疆及周边地区的主应变率、 面应变率及最大剪应变率, 分析了该区域的变形动态特征, 并结合速度剖面分析方法给出了震源区的构造变形特征. 速度场及应变率场动态结果表明: 新疆天山地区的地壳变形特征整体表现为由南向北缩短, 相对运动速率表现为由南向北、 由西向东逐渐减小; 震源区东侧的左旋剪切变形明显大于西侧; 2008年与2014年两次于田MS7.3地震的震源区均处于拉张与挤压变形的过渡地带, 易于强地震的发生; 2008年于田MS7.3地震的张性兼有少量剪性破裂的发生使得阿尔金断裂的左旋剪切变形增强. GPS速度场剖面分析结果表明, 2014年于田MS7.3地震前震源区西侧的变形宽度大于东侧, 剪切应变积累程度西侧高于东侧. 综合分析认为, 震源周边构造区应变积累的差异性有利于强震的孕育, 2008年于田MS7.3地震对2014年于田MS7.3地震可能有促进作用. 相似文献
19.
基于区域数字地震台网记录,采用HYPODD方法精确定位了2011年9月10日瑞昌—阳新地震序列的震源位置,采用CAP方法反演得到了4.6级主震的震源深度和震源机制解,并结合区域深度震相sPg、PmP和sPmP对主震震源深度进行了进一步确定,随后探讨了这次地震的震源破裂特征和所在区域的强震危险性.结果显示:瑞昌—阳新4.6级地震的震源深度为15±2 km,震源机制解为节面Ⅰ走向30°,倾角86°,滑动角-169°,节面Ⅱ走向299°,倾角79°,滑动角-4°,发震构造为郯城—庐江断裂带往震区延伸隐伏的瑞昌—武穴断裂;本次地震发生在长江中下游断块东部,所在区域的5.5级以上地震具有明显的成组活动特征,近期显著地震集中发生在郯城—庐江断裂带南段及其分支断裂上,地震能量有加速释放的趋势,未来十年左右该区域存在发生6级左右强震的可能性. 相似文献