共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 62 毫秒
1.
RELOCATION OF THE HUTUBI MS6.2 EARTHQUAKE SEQUENCE ON 8 DECEMBER 2016 AND ANALYSIS OF THE SEISMOGENIC STRUCTURE 
下载免费PDF全文
下载免费PDF全文 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
2.
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
3.
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
4.
2012年6月30日新疆维吾尔自治区新源-和静县交界发生MS6.6地震,该地震是2010年青海玉树7.1级地震和2013年4月20日四川芦山7.0级地震之间中国大陆发生的最大的地震.本文基于新疆数字地震台网记录的此次地震序列震相资料,分别用绝对和相对定位方法联合对其进行重新定位,重新定位后余震展布为NW向,主震位置为43.429°N,84.755°E,深度为21.8 km.基于新疆地震台网记录6.6级地震波形数据,本文用CAP方法反演了震源机制解和震源深度.结果显示：MS6.6地震震源机制解：节面Ⅰ走向39°,倾角46°,滑动角12°,节面Ⅱ走向301°,倾角81°,滑动角135°;震源深度为21 km,与利用地震震相到时确定的主震震源深度基本一致.主震震源机制解的节面Ⅱ与伊犁盆地北缘断裂走向和倾角基本一致,综合精确定位余震展布和伊犁盆地北缘断裂性质分析认为,新源-和静MS6.6地震发震构造是伊犁盆地北缘断裂,震源深度为21 km左右,是一个高角的内陆倾滑地震. 相似文献
5.
2014年11月22日在NW向鲜水河断裂带中南段四川康定县发生M6.3级地震,11月25日在该地震震中东南约10km处再次发生M5.8级地震.基于中国国家数字地震台网和四川区域数字地震台网资料,采用多阶段定位方法对本次康定M6.3级地震序列进行了重新定位;利用gCAP(generalized Cut And Paste)矩张量反演方法获得了M6.3和M5.8级地震的震源机制解与矩心深度,分析了本次地震序列的发震构造,并结合历史强震破裂时空分布和2001年以来小震重新定位结果,对鲜水河断裂带中段强震危险性进行了初步探讨.获得的主要结果如下:(1)M6.3级主震震中位于101.69°E、30.27°N,震源初始破裂深度约10km,矩心深度9km;M5.8级地震震中位于101.73°E、30.18°N,初始破裂深度约11km,矩心深度9km.gCAP矩张量反演结果揭示这两次地震双力偶分量占主导,M6.3级地震的最佳双力偶解节面Ⅰ走向143°/倾角82°/滑动角-9°,节面Ⅱ走向234°/倾角81°/滑动角-172°.M5.8级地震最佳双力偶解节面Ⅰ走向151°/倾角83°/滑动角-6°,节面Ⅱ走向242°/倾角84°/滑动角-173°.依据余震分布长轴展布与断裂走向,判定节面Ⅰ为发震断层面,M6.3和M5.8级地震均为带有微小正断分量的左旋走滑型地震.(2)序列中重新定位的459个地震平均震源深度约9km,地震主要集中分布在6~11km深度区间,余震基本发生在M6.3和M5.8级地震震源上部.依据余震密集区展布范围,推测本次康定地震的震源体尺度长约30km、宽约4km、深度范围约6km.M6.3级主震震源附近的余震稀疏区可能是一个较大的凹凸体(asperity),在主震中能量得以充分释放.(3)最初3天的余震主要分布在M6.3级地震NW侧;而M5.8级地震之后的余震主要集中在其震中附近.M6.3级地震以及最初3天的绝大部分余震发生在倾角约82°近直立的NW走向色拉哈断裂上;M5.8级地震与其后的多数余震发生在倾角约83°近直立的NW走向折多塘断裂北端走向向北偏转部位,M5.8级地震可能是M6.3级地震触发相邻的折多塘断裂活动所致.(4)康定M6.3与M5.8级地震发生在鲜水河断裂带乾宁与康定之间的色拉哈强震破裂空段,本次地震破裂尺度较小,尚不足以填补该强震空段.色拉哈段以及相邻的乾宁段7级地震平静时间均已超过其平均复发周期估值,未来几年存在发生7级地震的危险.康定M6.3级地震序列基本填补了震前存在于塔公与康定之间的深部小震空区,未来强震发生在塔公至松林口段深部小震稀疏区内的可能性很大. 相似文献
6.
LI Cui-ping TANG Mao-yun GUO Wei-ying HUANG Shi-yuan WANG Xiao-long GAO Jian 《地震地质》2019,41(3):603-618
The Wulong MS5.0 earthquake on 23 November 2017, located in the Wolong sap between Wenfu, Furong and Mawu faults, is the biggest instrumentally recorded earthquake in the southeastern Chongqing. It occurred unexpectedly in a weak earthquake background with no knowledge of dramatically active faults. The complete earthquake sequences offered a significant source information example for focal mechanism solution, seismotectonics and seismogenic mechanism, which is helpful for the estimation of potential seismic sources and level of the future seismic risk in the region. In this study, we firstly calculated the focal mechanism solutions of the main shock using CAP waveform inversion method and then relocated the main shock and aftershocks by the method of double-difference algorithm. Secondly, we determined the seismogenic fault responsible for the MS5.0 Wulong earthquake based on these calculated results. Finally, we explored the seismogenic mechanism of the Wulong earthquake and future potential seismic risk level of the region.
The results show the parameters of the focal mechanism solution, which are:strike24°, dip 16°, and rake -108° for the nodal plane Ⅰ, and strike223°, dip 75°, and rake -85° for the nodal plane Ⅱ. The calculations are supported by the results of different agencies and other methods. Additionally, the relocated results show that the Wulong MS5.0 earthquake sequence is within a rectangular strip with 4.7km in length and 2.4km in width, which is approximately consistent with the scales by empirical relationship of Wells and Coppersmith(1994). Most of the relocated aftershocks are distributed in the southwest of the mainshock. The NW-SE cross sections show that the predominant focal depth is 5~8km. The earthquake sequences suggest the occurrence features of the fault that dips northwest with dip angle of 63° by the least square method, which is largely consistent with nodal planeⅡof the focal mechanism solution. Coincidentally, the field outcrop survey results show that the Wenfu Fault is a normal fault striking southwest and dipping 60°~73° by previous studies. According to the above data, we infer that the Wenfu Fault is the seismogenic structure responsible for Wulong MS5.0 earthquake.
We also propose two preliminary genetic mechanisms of "local stress adjustment" and "fluid activation effect". The "local stress adjustment" model is that several strong earthquakes in Sichuan, such as M8.0 Wenchuan earthquake, M7.0 Luzhou earthquake and M7.0 Jiuzhaigou earthquake, have changed the stress regime of the eastern margin of the Sichuan Basin by stress transference. Within the changed stress regime, a minor local stress adjustment has the possibility of making a notable earthquake event. In contract, the "fluid activation effect" model is mainly supported by the three evidences as follows:1)the maximum principle stress axial azimuth is against the regional stress field, which reflects NWW-SEE direction thrusting type; 2)the Wujiang River crosscuts the pre-existing Wenfu normal fault and offers the fluid source; and 3)fractures along the Wenfu Fault formed by karst dissolution offer the important fluid flow channels. 相似文献
7.
本研究采用基于贝叶斯理论的绝对定位方法对2014年2月12日新疆于田MS7.3级地震进行绝对定位,得到震中位置为82.56°E、36.04°N、震源深度为12.3 km;采用双差定位法对254个地震序列进行相对定位,得到101个重定位事件.结果显示,主震位于阿尔金断裂带西南端多个分支断裂的交汇处.余震震源主要分布范围在5~10 km深度之间,主震处余震代表的断层面较为陡立,且余震序列呈现出明显的西南向纯单侧扩展模式.沿阿尔金断裂带主震的北东向民丰震区本次地震后显示一个明显的地震丛集,说明本次主震对该震区具有触发作用. 相似文献
8.
USE OF SEISMIC WAVEFORMS AND INSAR DATA FOR DETERMINATION OF THE SEISMOTECTONICS OF THE MAINLING MS6.9 EARTHQUAKE ON NOV.18, 2017 下载免费PDF全文
下载免费PDF全文 On November 18, 2017, a MS6.9 earthquake struck Mainling County, Tibet, with a depth of 10km. The earthquake occurred at the eastern Himalaya syntaxis. The Namche Barwan moved northward relative to the Himalayan terrane and was subducted deeply beneath the Lhasa terrane, forming the eastern syntaxis after the collision of the Indian plate and Asian plates. Firstly, this paper uses the far and near field broadband seismic waveform for joint inversion (CAPJoint method)of the earthquake focal mechanism. Two groups of nodal planes are obtained after 1000 times Bootstrap test. The strike, dip and rake of the best solution are calculated to be 302°, 76° and 84° (the nodal plane Ⅰ)and 138°, 27° and 104° (the nodal plane Ⅱ), respectively. This event was captured by interferometric synthetic aperture radar (InSAR)measurements from the Sentinel-1A radar satellite, which provide the opportunity to determine the fault plane, as well as the co-seismic slip distribution, and assess the seismic hazards. The overall trend of the deformation field revealed by InSAR is consistent with the GPS displacement field released by the Gan Wei-Jun's team. Geodesy (InSAR and GPS)observation of the earthquake deformation field shows the northeastern side of the epicenter uplifting and the southwestern side sinking. According to geodetic measurements and the thrust characteristics of fault deformation field, we speculate that the nodal plane Ⅰ is the true rupture plane. Secondly, based on the focal mechanism, we use InSAR data as the constraint to invert for the fine slip distribution on the fault plane. Our best model suggests that the seismogenic fault is a NW-SE striking thrust fault with a high angle. Combined with the slip distribution and aftershocks, we suggest that the earthquake is a high-angle thrust event, which is caused by the NE-dipping thrust beneath the Namche Barwa syntaxis subducted deeply beneath the Lhasa terrane. 相似文献
9.
基于新疆区域数字地震台网记录,采用CAP（Cut and Paste）方法反演了2015年7月3日皮山6.5级主震和部分MS3.6以上余震的震源机制解和震源深度;采用HypoDD方法重新定位了序列中ML2.5以上地震序列的震源位置,并利用小震分布和区域应力场拟合了可能存在的发震断层面参数.基于上述研究,综合分析了皮山6.5级地震序列的震源深度、震源机制和震源破裂面特征,探讨可能的发震构造.结果显示,利用CAP方法得到的最佳双力偶机制解节面I：走向280°/倾角60°/滑动角90°;节面Ⅱ：走向100°/倾角30°/滑动角90°,矩心深度19 km,表明该地震为一次逆冲型地震事件.大部分MS3.6以上余震震源机制与主震具有一定的相似性.双差定位结果显示,ML2.5以上的余震序列主要分布在主震的西南方向,深度主要分布在0～15 km范围内,余震分布显示出与发震构造泽普隐伏断裂一致的倾向南西的特征.利用小震分布和区域应力场拟合得到发震断层参数为走向104°/倾角34°/滑动角94°,该结果与主震震源机制解中节面Ⅱ的滑动角较为接近,绝大多数余震发生在断层面附近10 km左右的区域.根据本研究得到的震源机制、精定位结果以及利用小震分布和区域应力场拟合得到的断层面的参数,结合震源区地质构造情况,初步给出了此次皮山6.5级地震的发震模式. 相似文献
10.
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
11.
利用地震科学探测台阵在云南、 贵州地区的17个流动台站的地震记录, 采用双差定位法对2012年9月7日云南彝良MS5.7和MS5.6地震及其余震序列(ML≥1.0)进行重定位． 在获得精确的震源位置后, 采用CAP法反演了MS≥4.0地震的震源机制解． 结果显示, 彝良MS5.7主震位于(27.509°N, 103.971°E), 震源深度为9.7 km, 震源机制解节面Ⅰ走向251°、 倾角66°、 滑动角150°, 节面Ⅱ走向354°、 倾角63°、 滑动角27°; 彝良MS5.6主震位于(27.563°N, 104.034°E), 震源深度为10.0 km, 震源机制解节面Ⅰ走向235°、 倾角39°、 滑动角147°, 节面Ⅱ走向352°、 倾角70°、 滑动角56°． 反演结果显示断层的几何形态、 余震分布特征、 震源机制解特征及构造应力场等均有很好的一致性． 综合断层的运动学特征、 地震活动规律和地质构造背景, 推测彝良地震的发震断裂为昭通断裂带的前缘断裂, 即NE走向的石门断裂． 导致震区受灾严重的主要原因是由于彝良地震震源深度较浅, 能量释放多发生在地壳浅部所致． 相似文献
12.
本研究采用双差定位法对2013年4月20日发生在龙门山断裂带上的四川芦山7.0级强震及主震后48小时内504次余震序列进行重新定位,最终得到328个精定位地震事件.结果表明,余震在水平方向上主要沿龙门山断裂带的山前断裂西南段的大川-双石断裂发生,扩展模式以西南向为主(约23 km)兼有弱东北向(约12 km),并非简单的单侧扩展.在深度方向上,余震主要以铲状结构分布在18～22 km之间.通过拟合精定位后的小震空间分布特征,显示本次地震断层面倾角在15～25 km深度范围内由主震处约44°逐渐向西南向扩展增大至约73°,可能表明断层往西南破裂过程中走滑分量逐渐增强,与2008年汶川地震引起中央断裂倾角由西南向东北变化相类似. 相似文献
13.
2015年7月3日09时07分,在新疆皮山县发生M_(S)6.5地震,震源深度约10 km,主震后一段时间内陆续发生一系列大小不等的余震。使用新疆测震台网原始波形数据和中国地震台网编目数据库震相数据,采用CAP方法反演皮山M_(S)6.5地震及M_(S)3.5以上余震序列震源机制解,得到震源机制解参数,其中:节面Ⅰ走向为136°,倾角为34°,滑动角为94°;节面Ⅱ走向为311°,倾角为56°,滑动角为87°;最佳震源深度为21.3 km;矩震级为M_(W)6.3。据皮山地区地质构造和余震序列展布,基本确定节面Ⅰ为发震断层面;通过震源球判定本次地震的断层活动主要表现为逆冲型特征,破裂优势方向SE,倾角以20°—40°居多,滑动角以70°—120°居多。 相似文献
14.
本文采用双差定位法对2017年8月8日至10月31日期间四川九寨沟MS7.0主震及5200个余震序列进行相对定位,得到4036个重定位地震事件.采用中国区域地震台网观测到的宽频带垂直分向波形数据和W震相反演方法,得到了主震震源机制解.重定位结果显示,余震序列分别沿NNW和SSE两个方向扩展,展布长度约58 km,且这些余震主要集中在22 km深度之上.余震分布的另一个重要特点是具有分区特性,即在主震NNW方向约5 km处存在明显的西北和东南两区余震活动分界线;西北区的余震由深至浅具有较好连续性,而东南区却在约10 km深度处存在不连续性.余震分布的这种分区特征,说明九寨沟地震震源区的地壳结构存在强烈的不均匀性.余震分布与主震破裂特征的一致性,证实了我们定位结果的可靠性.主震的震源机制解展示出节面Ⅰ的走向/倾角/滑动角分别为246°/83.7°/-177°,而节面Ⅱ的走向/倾角/滑动角为155.7°/87.1°/-6.3°,最佳质心深度为15.5 km,矩震级MW为6.5.根据余震分布较为垂直和主震震源机制解两节面的倾角均在80°以上,并结合野外地质调查结果,推测此次九寨沟地震为与节面Ⅱ参数相近的一次高角度的左旋走滑型事件. 相似文献
15.
基于中国国家和四川区域数字地震台网记录,采用HypoDD方法精确定位了四川芦山ML2.0级以上地震序列的震源位置,采用CAP方法反演了36次ML4.0级以上地震的最佳双力偶震源机制解,并利用小震分布和区域应力场拟合了可能存在的发震断层面参数,从而综合分析了芦山地震序列的震源深度、震源机制和震源破裂面特征,探讨可能的发震构造.结果显示,7.0级主震的震源位置为30.30°N、102.97°E,初始破裂深度为15 km左右,震源矩心深度为14 km左右,最佳双力偶震源机制解的两组节面分别为走向209°/倾角46°/滑动角94°和走向23°/倾角44°/滑动角86°,可视为纯逆冲型地震破裂,绝大多数ML4.0级以上余震的震源机制也表现出与主震类似的逆冲破裂特征.ML2.0级以上余震序列发生在主震两侧,集中分布的长轴为30 km左右,震源深度主要集中在5～27 km,ML3.5级以上较大余震则集中分布在9～25 km的深度上,并揭示出发震断层倾向北西的特征.利用小震分布和区域应力场拟合得到发震断层参数为走向207°/倾角50°/滑动角92°,绝大多数余震发生在断层面附近10 km左右的区域.综合地震序列分布特征、主震震源深度和已有破裂过程研究结果,可以推测主震破裂过程自初始点沿断层的两侧扩展破裂,南侧破裂比北侧稍长,滑动量主要集中在初始破裂点附近,可能没有破裂到地表.综合本文研究成果、地震烈度分布和现有的科学考察结果,初步推测发震构造为龙门山山前断裂,也不排除主震震中东侧还存在一条未知的基底断裂发震的可能性. 相似文献
16.
THE SOURCE PARAMETERS AND SEISMOTECTONIC IMPLICATIONS OF THE SEPTEMBER 4, 2017 ML4.4 LINCHENG EARTHQUAKE 下载免费PDF全文
下载免费PDF全文 LI He XIE Zu-jun WANG Yi-xi WANG Xiao-shan DONG Yi-bing ZHANG Hui PENG Zhao LIU Wen-bing GAO Ye WANG Li-xia 《地震地质》2019,41(3):670-689
At 3:05, September 4, 2017, an ML4.4 earthquake occurred in Lincheng County, Xingtai City, Hebei Province, which was felt obviously by surrounding areas. Approximately 60km away from the hypocenter of Xingtai MS7.2 earthquake in 1966, this event is the most noticeable earthquake in this area in recent years. On the one hand, people are still shocked by the 1966 Xingtai earthquake that caused huge disaster, on the other hand, Lincheng County is lack of strong earthquakes. Therefore, this quake has aroused widespread concerns by the government, society and seismologists. It is necessary to clarify whether the seismogenic structure of this event is consistent with the previous seismicity and whether it has any new implications for the seismic activity and seismic hazard in this region. Therefore, it is of great significance to study its seismogenic mechanism for understanding the earthquake activity in Xingtai region where a MS7.2 earthquake had occurred in 1966.
In this study, the Lincheng earthquake and its aftershocks are relocated using the multi-step locating method, and the focal mechanism and focal depth are determined by the "generalized Cut and Paste"(gCAP)method. The reliability of the results is analyzed based on the data of Hebei regional seismic network. In order to better constrain the focal depth, the depth phase sPL fitting method is applied to the relocation of focal depth. The inversion and constraint results show that aftershocks are mainly distributed along NE direction and dip to SE direction as revealed by depth profiles. Focal depths of aftershocks are concentrated in the depths of 6.5~8.2km with an average of about 7km. The best double-couple solution of the mainshock is 276°, 69° and -40° for strike, dip and slip angle for nodal plane I and 23°, 53° and -153° for nodal plane Ⅱ, respectively, revealing that it is a strike-slip event with a small amount of normal-fault component. The initial rupture depth of mainshock is about 7.5km obtained by the relocation while the centroid depth is 6km derived from gCAP method which was also verified by the seismic depth phase sPL observed by several stations, indicating the earthquake is ruptured from deep to shallow. Combined with the research results on regional geological structure and the seismic sequence relocation results, it is concluded that the nodal plane Ⅱ is the seismogenic fault plane of this earthquake.
There are several active faults around the hypocenter of Lincheng earthquake sequence, however, none of the known faults on the current understanding is completely consistent with the seismogenic fault. To determine the seismogenic mechanism, the lucubrated research of the MS7.2 Xingtai earthquake in 1966 could provide a powerful reference. The seismic tectonic characteristics of the 1966 Xingtai earthquake sequence could be summarized as follows:There are tensional fault in the shallow crust and steep dip hidden fault in the middle and lower crust, however, the two faults are not connected but separated by the shear slip surfaces which are widely distributed in the middle crust; the seismic source is located between the hidden fault in the lower crust and the extensional fault in the upper crust; the earthquake began to rupture in the deep dip fault in the mid-lower crust and then ruptured upward to the extensional fault in the shallow crust, and the two fault systems were broken successively. From the earthquake rupture revealed by the seismic sequence location, the Lincheng earthquake also has the semblable feature of rupturing from deep to shallow. However, due to the much smaller magnitude of this event than that of the 1966 earthquake, the accumulated stress was not high enough to tear the fracture of the detachment surface whose existence in Lincheng region was confirmed clearly by the results of Lincheng-Julu deep reflection seismology and reach to the shallower fault. Therefore, by the revelation of the seismogenic mechanism of the 1966 Xingtai earthquake, the seismogenic fault of Lincheng earthquake is presumed to be a concealed fault possessing a potential of both strike-slip and small normal faulting component and located below the detachment surface in Lincheng area. The tectonic significance indicated by this earthquake is that the event was a stress adjustment of the deep fault and did not lead to the rupture of the shallow fault. Therefore, this area still has potential seismic hazard to a certain extent. 相似文献
17.
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
18.
北京时间2020年7月23日04时07分,西藏自治区那曲市尼玛县发生MS6.6地震,震源深度10 km,震中位置为（33.19°N,86.81°E）。主震发生当日18时50分,发生一次MS4.8强余震,震源深度为10 km。本文基于西藏、青海、新疆区域波形资料,采用ISOLA近震全波形方法对这两次地震进行震源机制反演。结果显示,尼玛MS6.6主震的最佳断层面解为:节面Ⅰ走向8°/倾角46°/滑动角?93°,节面Ⅱ走向191°/倾角44°/滑动角?87°;矩震级MW6.4,最佳矩心深度7 km。震源区应力主轴的空间取向为:主压力轴P的方位角220°、倾伏角88°,主张力轴T方位角99°、倾伏角1°。MS4.8强余震的最佳断层面解为:节面Ⅰ走向12°/倾角47°/滑动角?106°,节面Ⅱ走向214°/倾角45°/滑动角?74°;矩震级MW5.0,最佳矩心深度6 km。震源区应力主轴的空间取向为:主压力轴P的方位角207°、倾伏角78°,主张力轴T方位角113°、倾伏角1°。震源机制反演结果表明,这两次地震均为以正断型为主的地震事件,与震源区附近先前地震的震源机制有较好的一致性。结合周边地质构造和余震分布,我们认为尼玛MS6.6地震可能是由位于日干配错断裂和依布茶卡盆地西缘断裂之间的一条正断层活动所引发的。 相似文献
19.
20.
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