共查询到15条相似文献，搜索用时 108 毫秒
1.
基于河北数字地震台网宽频带地震记录，采用CAP波形反演法，计算得到2016年6月23日河北尚义M 4.0地震的震源机制和深度，并利用sPL震相进一步测定震源深度。计算结果显示：采用CAP方法反演，得到此次地震震源深度为11 km，采用sPL震相进行测定，得到震源深度为13 km，可见采用2种方法确定的震源深度基本一致，分布范围为11—13 km，表明此次地震发生在上地壳。 相似文献
2.
应用CAP和深度震相方法,对2018年3月20日发生在广东阳西的M 3.7级地震震源深度进行了测定。首先通过CAP方法反演获得震源机制解,拟合最佳震源深度为12 km。然后在震中距100 km以内的近台识别出清晰的sPL和PmP、 sPmP震相,利用频率-波数(F-K)方法,计算出深度震相在不同深度下的理论地震图,与实际观测波形对比测定震源深度为12 km。再利用250～400 km震中距范围内台站上识别出的sPn与Pn震相的走时差,测得震源深度12.6 km。多种方法的研究结果一致,表明该地震震源深度为12 km比较可靠。 相似文献
3.
4.
2017年9月4日河北临城地区发生ML 4.4地震，为得到准确的震源深度，根据sPL震相基本特征，对震中距20-70 km范围内8个地震台站波形数据进行处理，在其中4个地震台观测到明显的sPL震相，利用频率-波数（F-K）方法，计算其理论波形图，与处理后的观测波形拟合对比，得到震源深度范围，与TDMT-INV方法、PTD方法及河北测震台网编目等结果基本一致，表明利用sPL震相测定河北临城ML 4.4地震震源深度可靠，其深度范围为10-11 km。 相似文献
5.
利用近震深度震相sPL的基本特征和门源地震台、铧尖地震台的波形资料,对2016年1月21日青海门源Ms6. 4级地震序列中的15个ML≥3. 0级地震进行了sPL震相分析,得到了该地震序列较为可靠的震源深度结果,并与Hyposat定位结果和CAP波形反演的结果进行对比,发现sPL震相测定的震源深度结果与Hyposat定位结果和CAP波形反演得到的结果有很好的一致性,表明sPL震相测定的震源深度是可信的。 相似文献
6.
单台sPL震相测定珊溪水库地震震源深度 总被引：2，自引：0，他引：2
稀疏台网下的传统走时定位难以确定中小地震的震源深度，而地震波深度震相蕴含着震源深度信息，为确定地震震源深度提供了新的途径。近震深度震相sPL和直达Pg波到时差与震源深度呈线性关系，可用以约束地震震源深度。本文以珊溪水库2014年震群事件为例，利用单台sPL震相测定了地震震源深度。结果表明:震源深度的测定结果与基于水库台网高密度台站下Pg和Sg走时定位Hyposat方法和全波形拟合CAP方法测定的震源深度高度一致，为4—6 km，与区域活动断层探测结果相符。sPL震相的优势震中距为30—50 km，区域台网范围内sPL与Pg的到时差与震源深度的线性关系相对固定，因此利用单台sPL震相即可快速获取可靠的地震震源深度，适用于稀疏台网下的中小地震震源深度的确定，且误差可控制在1—2 km范围内。 相似文献
7.
应用CAP方法、sPL深度震相方法和双差定位方法,对2019年M2.5以上皎口水库地区地震震源深度进行测定。通过CAP方法进行反演,计算出最佳震源机制解及震源深度;在震中距50 km左右的近台识别出清晰的sPL震相,运用频率—波速（F-K）方法画出各种震源深度的理论波形,与实际波形进行拟合确定震源深度;建立地震事件对,利用走时差观测值与理论值的残差确定其相对位置及深度。结果发现,上述多种方法测定的结果基本一致;相对而言,双差定位方法更适合皎口水库地区地震震源深度的测定。 相似文献
8.
选用福建数字地震台网宽频带记录,利用sPL震相测定仙游2013年9月4日M 4.6地震震源深度.基于此次地震的震源机制解,结合本地区的速度模型,利用频率-波数法(F-K方法),先计算出相应震中距上不同深度的格林函数,再进一步得到sPL震相在不同深度上的理论波形;之后根据sPL震相的特点,选用震中距30～50 km范围的宽频带台站记录,经过去仪器响应、滤波、旋转至传播路径后,将其和理论波形进行比对,找出波形最为相似的对应深度.测定结果显示,此次地震深度为12 km左右. 相似文献
9.
利用云南东川地区10个宽频带流动台站的连续波形数据,采用基于深度学习的自动震相拾取方法和震相关联技术,对2020年东川ML4.2地震序列分别进行绝对定位和相对定位,获得了该地震序列的高精度地震定位结果,得到东川ML4.2地震序列的212个余震事件,约为中国地震台网目录给出的余震数目的5倍,丰富了ML≤3.0余震;精定位结果表明东川ML4.2主震震源深度为5.19 km,余震震源深度集中在3~6 km,余震序列分布长轴呈NNE向展布;此次地震发生在小江断裂带西支,发震构造与乌龙拉分盆地的构造演化有关。 相似文献
10.
选用福建数字地震台网宽频带记录,利用sPL震相测定顺昌地区2007年至2017年间M_L≥3.5地震的震源深度。基于地震的震源机制解,结合本地区的速度模型,利用频率-波数法(F-K方法),先计算出相应震中距上不同深度的格林函数,再进一步得到sPL震相在不同深度上的理论波形;根据sPL震相的特点,选用震中距30～50 km范围的宽频带台站记录,经过去仪器响应、滤波、旋转至传播路径后,将其和理论波形进行比对,找出波形最为相似的对应深度。结果显示顺昌地区地震深度为7 km左右。 相似文献
11.
在南北地震带地区,USGS全球地震目录中存在一些震源深度大于30km的地震.这些地震的震源深度是否可靠,对于研究这一地区的孕震机制、岩石圈强度和构造演化等科学问题具有重要意义.本文以南北地震带2012年发生的5个4~5级地震为例,利用区域地震台网的波形数据,基于sPL深度震相、短周期瑞利面波以及CAP等独立方法测定了其震源深度.结果表明:sPL深度震相和CAP方法给出的震源深度比较一致,差别小于2~3km,能够得到比较可靠的震源深度;短周期瑞利面波及其与P波振幅比也确定了地震震源深度较浅的特征.本文研究结果显示:宁夏会宁4.7级、云南富民4.8级和四川会东4.7级地震的震源深度约为8~12km左右,仍为发生于上地壳的地震,USGS地震目录给出的30km甚至更深的震源深度存在明显偏差;对于四川隆昌4.6和4.9级地震,本文给出的震源深度为1~2km,属于极浅源地震,USGS地震目录给出的10km和35km的震源深度结果尚需进一步改进. 相似文献
12.
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
13.
2015年3月14日在安徽阜阳地区发生了M_S4.3地震,随后发生3月23日M_s3.6余震.主震造成2人死亡13人受伤.房屋倒塌155间,受损1万多间.主震震级不大,而造成的灾害巨大.本文使用CAP方法反演了两次地震的震源机制解和震源深度,结果显示两次地震的震源机制解和深度一致.主震的机制解节面Ⅰ走向110°,倾角75°,滑动角—10°;节面Ⅱ走向202°,倾角80°,滑动角—164°;矩震级M_w4.3,余震矩震级M_w3.7,反演最佳深度均为3 km.最佳深度时波形拟合相关系数较高,表明反演结果是可靠的.使用sPn和sPL深度震相进一步分析了两次地震的震源深度.结果显示,选取的7个台站的sPn震相与Pn震相的平均到时差为1 s,对应的震源深度为3 km.震中距为36 km的利辛台的sPL震相与Pg震相到时差约为1.1 s,对应震源深度约3~4 km之间.两种深度震相分析的震源深度与CAP方法的结果一致,表明本文给出的阜阳地震震源深度为3 km左右基本是可靠的.本次地震造成较大灾害的原因很可能与地震震源较浅有关.阜阳地区地壳结构相对稳定,地质构造演化形成3 km厚的沉积层,本次地震可能是区域应力作用下发生在沉积层里的一次地震. 相似文献
14.
On July 31th, 2016, a magnitude 5.4 earthquake struck Cangwu Country, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, it was the largest earthquake recorded by Guangxi Seismological Network since it set up. The number of people affected by the earthquake had reached 20 000, and the direct economic losses caused by the earthquake were nearly 100 million Yuan.
After the earthquake, USGS provided a global earthquake catalog showing that the focal depth of Cangwu earthquake was about 24.5km. However, the result given by the Global Centroid Moment Tensor showed the focal depth of this earthquake was 15.6km. However, the result obtained by Xu Xiaofeng et al. using CAP method was 5.1km. It was clear that the focal depths of Cangwu earthquake given by different institutions were quite different from each other. However, accurate focal depth of the earthquake has important significance for exploring the tectonic mechanism near the epicenter, so it is necessary to further determine the more accurate depth of the Cangwu earthquake.
In order to further accurately determine the focal depth of Cangwu earthquake, we used the global search method for travel-time residual to calculate the focal depth of this earthquake and its error range, based on the regional velocity model, which is a one-dimensional velocity model of the Xianggui tectonic belt produced by the comprehensive geophysical profile. Then, we inverted the focal mechanism of this earthquake with the CAP method. Based on this, the focal depth of Cangwu MS5.4 earthquake was further determined by the method of the Rayleigh surface wave amplitude spectrum and the sPL phase, respectively.
Computed results reveal that the focal depth of this earthquake and its error range from the travel-time residual global search method is about(13±3)km, the focal depth inverted by CAP method is about 10km, the focal depth from sPL phase is about 10km, and the focal depth from Rayleigh surface wave amplitude spectrum is about 9~10km. Finally, we confirmed that the focal depth of Cangwu MS5.4 earthquake is about 10km, which indicates that this earthquake still occurred in the upper crust. In the case of low network density, the sPL phase and Rayleigh wave amplitude spectrum recorded by only 1 or 2 broadband stations could be used to obtain more accurate focal depth.
The focal depth's accuracy of Cangwu MS5.4 earthquake in the USGS global earthquake catalog has yet to be improved. In the future, we should consider the error of the source parameters when using the USGS global earthquake catalog for other related research. 相似文献
15.
Determination of focal depth by two waveformbased methods: A case study for the 2008Panzhihua earthquake 
下载免费PDF全文
下载免费PDF全文 With the 2008 MS6.1 Panzhihua earthquake as a case study, we demonstrate that the focal depth of the main shock can be well constrained with two approaches: (1) using the depth phase sPL and (2) using full waveform inversion of local and teleseismic data. We also show that focal depths can be well constrained using the depth phase sPL with single broadband seismic station. Our study indicates that the main shock is located at a depth of 11 km, much shallower than those from other studies, confirming that the earthquake occurs in upper crust. Aftershocks are located in the depth range of 11-16 km, which is consistent with a ruptured near vertical fault whose width is about 10 km, as expected for an MS6.1 earthquake. 相似文献