2022年门源MW6.7地震的同震破裂模型及应力研究

doi:10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2023.01.016

地震地质 ›› 2023, Vol. 45 ›› Issue (1): 286-303.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2023.01.016

• 研究论文 • 上一篇

2022年门源M_W6.7地震的同震破裂模型及应力研究

于书媛¹^,²⁾(), 黄显良¹^,²⁾^,^*(), 郑海刚¹^,²⁾, 李玲利¹^,²⁾, 骆佳骥¹^,²⁾, 丁娟¹^,²⁾, 范晓冉³⁾

1)安徽省地震局, 合肥 230031
2)安徽省地震局, 安徽蒙城地球物理国家野外科学观测研究站, 蒙城 233527
3)中国地震局地质研究所, 地震动力学国家重点实验室, 北京 100029

收稿日期:2022-03-31 修回日期:2022-09-16 出版日期:2023-02-20 发布日期:2023-03-24
通讯作者: * 黄显良, 男, 1972年生, 研究员, 主要从事地球物理学和空间物理学研究, E-mail: hxl818@sina.com。
作者简介:于书媛, 女, 1984年生, 2011年于中国矿业大学获地图学与地理信息系统专业硕士学位, 工程师, 主要研究方向为地震大地测量学的应用研究, E-mail: 819718728@qq.com。
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金(41802224);安徽蒙城地球物理国家野外科学观测研究站联合开放基金(MENGO-202114);安徽省青年基金(20220206)

THE COSEISMIC RUPTURE MODEL AND STRESS CHANGE OF THE 2022 MENYUAN M_W6.7 EARTHQUAKE

YU Shu-yuan¹^,²⁾(), HUANG Xian-liang¹^,²⁾^,^*(), ZHENG Hai-gang¹^,²⁾, LI Ling-li¹^,²⁾, LUO Jia-ji¹^,²⁾, DING Juan¹^,²⁾, FAN Xiao-ran³⁾

1)Anhui Earthquake Agency, Hefei 230031, China
2)Anhui Mengcheng National Geophysical Observatory, Anhui Earthquake Agency, Mengcheng 233527, China
3)State Key Laboratory of Earthquake Dynamics, Institute of Geology, China Earthquake Administration, Beijing 100029, China

Received:2022-03-31 Revised:2022-09-16 Online:2023-02-20 Published:2023-03-24

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

2022年1月8日, 青海省门源县发生 M_W6.7 地震。文中运用Sentinel-1A数据, 采用 InSAR 技术获取震区的LOS向形变场, 其中最大形变量分别为7.0cm和7.2cm, 结合升、降轨卫星的飞行方向, 判定发震断层的运动性质以左旋走滑为主, 其中最大形变量位于冷龙岭破裂段。此外, 以InSAR形变场数据为约束, 基于Okada弹性位错模型, 厘定了发震断层的几何结构及破裂面的精细滑动分布特征, 反演结果揭示出2个断层破裂面。冷龙岭破裂段是滑动主要集中的区域, 最大左旋滑动量为3.66m, 最大滑动深度为5km; 而托莱山断裂处存在1.95m的左旋滑动量, 位于5km深度处。判定发震断层为冷龙岭断裂西段, 地震同时使托莱山断裂发生破裂。在此基础上, 计算了库仑应力变化, 结果显示震中300km区域内的库仑应力变化图像呈现走滑型地震特有的四象限分布特征。同时, 震中破裂的NW-SE区域和NE-SW端的ΔCFS≥0.01MPa, 这些区域后续的地震危险性值得关注。最后, 相对于鄂尔多斯块体的GPS速度场显示冷龙岭地区存在一个显著的面应变高值区, 未来该区的地震活动性可能持续较强。此外, 文中还讨论了2016年和2022年2次门源地震的发震构造特征及发震关系, 2次地震整体都是该地区应力积累的一次局部调整, 它们都是青藏高原向NE推挤运动的表现。

关键词: 2022年门源地震, 哨兵InSAR, 同震反演, 发震断层, 青藏高原, 静态库仑应力变化

Abstract:

On January 8, 2022, an earthquake of M_W6.7 occurred in Menyuan County, Qinghai Province. The epicenter of the earthquake is located in the middle eastern section of the Qilian Mountains seismic belt on the northeast edge of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. Under the northward push by the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau plate, and the push and subduction in the northeast direction of the Qilian Mountains, and also blocked by the Alxa block and affected by the push in the southwest direction of the Longshou Mountains uplift area at its front edge, a ramp structural pattern of compressive depressions was formed in the Hexi Corridor basins area. As a result, most of the active faults in this area are mainly NW-trending, and the active features are mostly characterized by compressional thrusting and strike slip. This paper reconstructs the coseismic deformation field of Menyuan earthquake through the European Space Agency Sentinel-1A C-band radar satellite data and D-InSAR technology, determines the geometric characteristics of the seismogenic fault through the inversion method of optimum fault slip distribution, and determines the seismogenic fault of this earthquake. The results show that the deformation range of the radar line of sight is -0.42~0.7m for the ascending track deformation field and -0.63~0.72m for the descending track deformation field, and the maximum deformation locates in the Lenglongling section. The data of ascending and descending tracks show that there are two obvious deformation regions with a butterfly-like stripe pattern. The sign of LOS deformation variable observed in InSAR deformation field of ascending and descending orbits in the same area is opposite. Combined with the flight direction of ascending and descending satellites, it is determined that the motion of seismogenic fault is mainly left-lateral strike slip. Among them, the Lenglongling Fault and Tolaishan Fault pass through the fracture surface revealed by InSAR deformation field, which means that the above fault is highly likely to be the seismogenic fault of the Menyuan earthquake in 2022. At the same time, the SE-trending Lenglongling Fault on the east side passes through the fracture surface, with a surface fracture length of about 20km. The EW-trending Tolaishan Fault on the west side also passes through the fracture surface, with a fracture length of about 5km. And then, according to the field geological survey results of this earthquake, taking the InSAR coseismic deformation field data as constraints and based on Okada elastic dislocation model, the geometric structure of the seismogenic fault and the fine slip distribution characteristics of the fracture surface are determined. The inversion results reveal that there are two slip regions, of which the slip is mainly concentrated in the Lenglongling fault section, with a maximum left-lateral slip of 3.66m and a maximum slip depth of 5km. There is also a maximum sinistral slip of 1.95m occurring at a depth of 5km in the Tolaishan Fault. It is inferred that the seismogenic fault is the western section of Lenglongling Fault which also ruptured the Tolaishan Fault on its west.

On this basis, Coulomb33 software is used to calculate the static Coulomb stress changes generated by the Menyuan earthquake at different depths(5km, 10km, 15km and 20km). The Coulomb stress change image within 300km of the epicenter shows a typical four-quadrant distribution characteristic. There are four fan-shaped stress increase and decrease areas at 5km underground. The area with the largest increase in stress is near the Beiyuan Fault of Tuole Mountain in the west of the epicenter of Menyuan earthquake. The increase of stress is over 0.03MPa, greater than the trigger threshold of 0.01MPa. The stress increase coverage area in the south of the epicenter further expanded, with a stress increase of more than 0.03MPa, inducing many aftershocks distributed linearly in the NWW direction along the epicenter. According to the overall analysis, most of the subsequent earthquakes in Menyuan occur at a depth of 10~12km, which is in good agreement with the stress increase area at the corresponding depth. At the same time, for the NW-SE area and NE-SW end of the rupture in the epicenter, the area with ΔCFS≥0.01MPa is worthy of attention for the subsequent risk.

Finally, based on the GPS velocity field relative to the Ordos block, it is analyzed that the Lenglongling area moves in the NE direction relative to the Ordos block as a whole, the GPS velocity vector north of the Lenglongling Fault decreases, and the movement direction turns to NNW. Using GPS velocity field to calculate the principal strain rate, shear strain rate, surface strain rate and principal compressive stress in Lenglongling area, it is shown that there is a significant high value area of surface strain in Lenglongling area. The principal strain rate is NE compression, and the peak value of shear strain rate is located on the north side of Lenglongling Fault and the east section of Minle-Damaying Fault. Its strain accumulation indicates that the area is still in a high stress state, and the seismic activity may continue to be strong in the future. The regional surface strain rates show obvious compression characteristics, and the principal strain rates show NE-SW compression and NW-SE extension. Overall, the source area of the Menyuan earthquake is still under the push in the NNE direction of the eastern Himalaya syntaxis of the Indian plate. It can also be seen that the Menyuan earthquake occurred in the high value area of the maximum shear strain rate and the compression area of the surface strain. The occurrence of the Menyuan earthquake in the Lenglongling area of the North Qilian Mountains on the northeast edge of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau and its current high stress accumulation indicate that the Lenglongling Fault may still be active today.

On this basis, the seismogenic structural characteristics and seismogenic relationships of the two Menyuan earthquakes in 2016 and 2022 are further discussed. The 2016 Menyuan earthquake is located on the extension line of the Minle-Damaying Fault. The seismogenic fault is a SW-trending thrust fault. The fault extends in NW-SE direction on the surface along the front of the mountain, and its deep part may converge to the detachment layer at the bottom of the Qilian Mountains together with the Lenglongling Fault. The fault has the potential to generate destructive earthquakes. The 2016 M_W5.9 Menyuan earthquake and the 2022 M_W6.7 Menyuan earthquake have different seismogenic mechanisms, but the seismogenic faults all belong to the North Qilian Mountains active fault zone, most of which control the boundary of the Neogene basins. Both earthquakes are the local adjustment of stress accumulation in the region as a whole, and the expression of the northeastward pushing of the Qinghai Tibet Plateau. Some scholars believe that Lenglongling fault zone, Jinqianghe Fault, Maomaoshan fault zone and Laohushan Fault jointly constitute the “Tianzhu earthquake gap”. The occurrence of three Menyuan earthquakes in 1986, 2016 and 2022 has drawn continuous attention to the fault activity and seismic risk of this area.

Key words: Menyuan earthquake in 2022, Sentinel-1 InSAR, coseismic inversion, seismogenic fault, Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, static Coulomb stress change

中图分类号:

P315.725

于书媛, 黄显良, 郑海刚, 李玲利, 骆佳骥, 丁娟, 范晓冉. 2022年门源M_W6.7地震的同震破裂模型及应力研究[J]. 地震地质, 2023, 45(1): 286-303.

YU Shu-yuan, HUANG Xian-liang, ZHENG Hai-gang, LI Ling-li, LUO Jia-ji, DING Juan, FAN Xiao-ran. THE COSEISMIC RUPTURE MODEL AND STRESS CHANGE OF THE 2022 MENYUAN M_W6.7 EARTHQUAKE[J]. SEISMOLOGY AND GEOLOGY, 2023, 45(1): 286-303.

图/表 13

表1 不同机构给出的2022年1月8日门源地震的震源参数

Table1 Focal parameters of the 2022-01-08 Menyuan earthquake obtained by different institutions

来源	东经 /(°)	北纬 /(°)	D /km	节面Ⅰ/(°)			节面Ⅱ/(°)			震级
				走向	倾角	滑动角	走向	倾角	滑动角
GCMT^a	101.31	37.8	14.8	104	82	1	14	89	172	M_W6.7
USGS^b	101.278	37.815	13	13	75	178	104	88	15	M_W6.6
CENC^c	101.26	37.77	10	18	51	178	109	81	39	M_S6.9
IGCEA^d	101.275	38.811	4	192	69	172	284	82	21	M_W6.7
本研究冷龙岭段	101.23	37.8	5	126	80	6.97				M_W6.7
本研究托莱山段			5	109	60	5.8

图1 地震地质构造背景图 a 蓝色矩形从左至右分别代表T26和T128升轨覆盖范围, 红色矩形代表T33降轨覆盖范围。红色震源机制解分别由GCMT、 USGS提供; 黑色震源球表示部分历史地震的震源机制解(MW≥5), 来自USGS(19902022年); 红色五角星表示CENC提供的地表震中位置; 黑色实线表示活动断裂; 灰色实线表示二级构造块体(张国民等, 2005); 橘黄色箭头表示地表GPS速度场(Wang et al., 2020)。b 大尺度上的震中地理空间位置。c小比例尺的震中地理空间位置; 红色虚线为地表破裂带

Fig. 1 Seismic geological structure background map.

表2 升、降轨差分干涉影像参数

Table2 Parameters of ascending and descending scenes

轨道方向 (轨道号)	成像日期		极化方式	视线方位角α /(°)	视线入射角θ /(°)	空间基线 /m	时间基线 /d
	震前	震后
升轨(T26)	2021-12-29	2022-01-10	VV	-13.218	34.242	-110.341	12
升轨(T128)	2022-01-05	2022-01-17	VV	-13.237	34.096	38.432	12
降轨(T33)	2021-12-29	2022-01-10	VV	-166.776	34.003	55.852	12

图2 同震干涉条纹图和形变场图(靠近卫星视线向为正) a、 c 升轨干涉条纹图; b、 d 升轨干涉形变场; e 降轨干涉条纹图; f 降轨干涉形变场。图b、 d、 f中靠近卫星视线方向的位移场用暖色调表示, 远离卫星视线方向的位移场用冷色调表示; 红色五角星代表CENC发布的震中。MLDMYF 民乐-大马营断裂; SNQLF 肃南-祁连断裂俄堡段; TLSF 托勒山断裂; LLLF 冷龙岭断裂

Fig. 2 Coseismic interference fringe pattern and deformation field pattern(The LOS near the satellite is positive).

图3 不同观测模式下的2022年门源地震视线向形变场剖面图红色和黑色实线为图2d的升轨形变场剖面线AA'和BB'; 蓝色和灰色实线为图2f的降轨形变场剖面线CC'和DD'

Fig. 3 The line of sight(LOS)displacement profile of different observation modes of the 2022 Menyuan earthquake.

图4 InSAR升、降轨约束反演获得的观测值、模拟值和残差值图、 b、 c分别为T128升轨形变、模拟、残差值; 图d、 e、 f分别为T33降轨形变、模拟、残差值。图中靠近卫星视线方向的位移场(正值)用暖色调表示, 远离卫星视线方向的位移场(负值)用冷色调表示

图a Observed value, simulated value and residual value obtained by InSAR ascending orbit constraint inversion.

图5 2022年门源地震的同震滑动分布 a 三维精细滑动分布模型; b冷龙岭段精细滑动分布的地表投影; c 托莱山段精细滑动分布的地表投影

Fig. 5 Slip distributions of the 2022 Menyuan earthquake.

图6 门源地震引起的不同深度的库仑应力变化及后续地震分布活动断层分布参考文献(邓起东等, 2003)绘制。红色圆点表示M>5余震, 绿色圆点表示M4~5余震, 白色圆点表示M3~4余震。MLDMYF 民乐-大马营断裂; HCSTF 皇城-双塔断裂; SNQLF 肃南-祁连断裂俄堡段; TLSF 托勒山断裂; LLLF 冷龙岭断裂; RYSF 日月山断裂

Fig. 6 Coulomb stress variation at different depths and subsequent earthquake distribution caused by Menyuan earthquake.

表3 断层的几何参数

Table3 Fault geometric parameters

断层	东经/(°)	北纬/(°)	长/km	宽/km	走向/(°)	倾角/(°)	滑动角/(°)
托莱山断裂	101.27	37.8	100	30	109	58	21
肃南-祁连断裂俄堡段	101.22	37.81	70	30	290	58	21
冷龙岭断裂西段	101.30	37.8	140	30	125	50	21

图7 门源地震不同接收断层上的库仑应力变化

Fig. 7 Coulomb stress variation on different receiving faults associated with the Menyuan earthquake.

图8 2022年门源地震前的区域地壳应变率场 a 主应变率、剪应变率场; b 面应变率场、主压应力图

Fig. 8 Regional crustal strain rate field before the 2022 Menyuan earthquake.

图9 2022年门源地震前后的区域构造应变场反演结果、 b分别为历史和现今应力场反演的3个轴的水平投影; 红线代表主压应力轴, 绿线代表主张应力轴, 蓝线代表中间应力轴方向

图a Inversion results of regional tectonic strain field before and after the 2022 Menyuan earthquake.

图10 2022年与2016年门源地震的空间位置关系图白色箭头为青藏高原的推挤方向, 绿色实线是2022年门源地震的破裂区域, 黄色实线是2016年门源地震的破裂区域, 震源机制参数引自文献(郑博文, 2017)

Fig. 10 Map of spatial location of Menyuan earthquake in 2022 and 2016.

参考文献 32

[1]	陈文彬. 2003. 河西走廊及邻近地区最新构造变形基本特征及构造成因分析[D]. 北京: 中国地震局地质研究所:3545.
	CHEN Wen-bin. 2003. Principal features of tectonic deformation and their generation mechanism in the Hexi Corridor and its adjacent regions since Late Quaternary[D]. Institute of Geology, China Earthquake Administration, Beijing: 3545. (in Chinese)
[2]	邓起东, 张培震, 冉勇康, 等. 2003. 中国活动构造与地震活动[J]. 地学前缘, 10(S1): 6673.
	DENG Qi-dong, ZHANG Pei-zhen, RAN Yong-kang, et al. 2003. Active tectonics and seismicity in China[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 10(S1): 6673. (in Chinese)
[3]	何文贵, 刘百篪, 袁道阳, 等. 2000. 冷龙岭活动断裂的滑动速率研究[J]. 西北地震学报, 22(1): 9097.
	HE Wen-gui, LIU Bai-chi, YUAN Dao-yang, et al. 2000. Research on slip rates of the Lenglongling active fault zone[J]. Northwestern Seismological Journal, 22(1): 9097. (in Chinese)
[4]	何文贵, 刘百篪, 袁道阳, 等. 2001. 冷龙岭断裂古地震初步研究[G]∥《活动断裂研究》编委会. 活动断裂研究(8). 北京: 地震出版社: 6473.
	HE Wen-gui, LIU Bai-chi, YUAN Dao-yang, et al. 2001. Preliminary study on paleoearthquakes in Lenglongling Fault[G]∥ Editorial Committee of Active Faults Research(8). Seismological Press, Beijing: 6474. (in Chinese)
[5]	何文贵, 袁道阳, 葛伟鹏, 等. 2010. 祁连山活动断裂带中东段冷龙岭断裂滑动速率的精确厘定[J]. 地震, 30(1): 131137.
	HE Wen-gui, YUAN Dao-yang, GE Wei-peng, et al. 2010. Determination of the slip rate of the Lenglongling Fault in the middle and eastern segments of the Qilian Mountain active fault zone[J]. Earthquake, 30(1): 131137. (in Chinese)
[6]	侯康明. 1998. 皇城-双塔断裂带的几何分段及运动学特征[J]. 华南地震, 18(3): 2834.
	HOH Kang-ming. 1998. The geometric segmentation and kinematics characteristics of Huangcheng-Shuangta fault zone[J]. South China Journal of Seismology, 18(3): 2834. (in Chinese)
[7]	胡朝忠, 杨攀新, 李智敏, 等. 2016. 2016年1月21日青海门源6.4级地震的发震机制探讨[J]. 地球物理学报, 59(5): 16371646.
	HU Chao-zhong, YANG Pan-xin, LI Zhi-min, et al. 2016. Seismogenic mechanism of the 21 January 2016 Menyuan, Qinghai M_S6. 4 earthquake[J]. Chinses Journal of Geophysics, 59(5): 16371646. (in Chinese)
[8]	姜文亮. 2018. 冷龙岭断裂带全新世破裂模式、大震复发特征研究及其区域构造意义[D]. 北京: 中国地震局地质研究所:3540.
	JIANG Wen-liang. 2018. Holocene rupture pattern, seismic recurrence feature of the Lenglongling fault zone and its tectonic implication for the northeast Tibetan plateau[D]. Institute of Geology, China Earthquake Administration, Beijing: 3540. (in Chinese)
[9]	李振洪, 韩炳权, 刘振江, 等. 2022. InSAR数据约束下2016年和2022年青海门源地震震源参数及其滑动分布[J]. 武汉大学学报(信息科学版), 47(6): 887897.
	LI Zhen-hong, HAN Bing-quan, LIU Zhen-jiang, et al. 2022. Source parameters and slip distributions of the 2016 and 2022 Menyuan, Qinghai earthquakes constrained by InSAR observations[J]. Geomatics and Information Science of Wuhan University, 47(6): 887897. (in Chinese)
[10]	李智敏, 盖海龙, 李鑫, 等. 2022. 2022年青海门源 M_S6.9 地震发震构造和地表破裂初步调查[J]. 地质学报, 96(1): 330335.
	LI Zhi-min, GAI Hai-long, LI Xin, et al. 2022. Seismogenic fault and coseismic surface deformation of the Menyuan M_S6.9 earthquake in Qinghai, China[J]. Acta Geologica Sinica, 96(1): 330335. (in Chinese)
[11]	潘家伟, 李海兵, Chevalier M, 等. 2022. 2022年青海门源 M_S6.9 地震地表破裂带及发震构造研究[J]. 地质学报, 96(1): 215231.
	PAN Jia-wei, LI Hai-bing, Chevalierr M, et al. 2022. Coseismic surface rupture and seismogenic structure of the 2022 M_S6.9 Menyuan earthquake, Qinghai Province, China[J]. Acta Geologica Sinica, 96(1): 215231. (in Chinese)
[12]	万永革. 2001. “地震静态应力触发”问题的研究[D]. 北京: 中国地震局地球物理研究所:710.
	WAN Yong-ge. 2001. Study on seismic static stress triggering problem[D]. Institute of Geophysics, China Earthquake Administration, Beijing: 710. (in Chinese)
[13]	王琼, 肖卓, 武粤, 等. 2022. 2022年1月8日青海门源 M_S6.9 地震深部构造背景浅析[J]. 地震学报, 44(2): 211222.
	WANG Qiong, XIAO Zhuo, WU Yue, et al. 2022. The deep tectonic background of the M_S6.9 Menyuan earthquake on January 8, 2022 in Qinghai Province[J]. Acta Seismologica Sinica, 44(2): 211222. (in Chinese)
[14]	张国民, 马宏生, 王辉, 等. 2005. 中国大陆活动地块边界带与强震活动. 地球物理学报, 48(3): 602610.
	ZHANG Guo-min, MA Hong-sheng, WANG hui, et al. 2005. Boundaries between active tectonic blocks and strong earthquakes in the China mainland[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 48(3): 602610. (in Chinese) DOI URL
[15]	颜丙囤, 季灵运, 蒋锋云, 等. 2022. InSAR数据约束的2022年1月8日青海门源 M_S6.9 地震发震构造研究[J]. 地震工程学报, 44(2): 450457.
	YAN Bing-tun, JI Ling-yun, JIANG Feng-yun, et al. 2022. Seismogenic structure of Menyuan, Qinghai M_S6.9 earthquake on January 8, 2022 constrained by InSAR data[J]. China Earthquake Engineering Journal, 44(2): 450457. (in Chinese)
[16]	余鹏飞, 陈威, 乔学军, 等. 2022. 基于多源SAR数据的2022年门源 M_S6.9 地震同震破裂模型反演研究[J]. 武汉大学学报(信息科学版), 47(6): 898906.
	YU Peng-fei, CHEN Wei, QIAO Xue-jun, et al. 2022. Slip model of the 2022 Menyuan M_S6.9 earthquake constrained by multi-source SAR data[J]. Geomatics and Information Science of Wuhan University, 47(6): 898906. (in Chinese)
[17]	郑博文. 2017. 2016年门源地震InSAR形变场及发震断层参数反演[D]. 北京: 中国地震局地质研究所:2630.
	ZHENG Bo-wen. 2017. InSAR deformation field and inversion of causative fault parameters for the 2016 Menyuan earthquake[D]. Institute of Geology, China Earthquake Administration, Beijing: 2630. (in Chinese)
[18]	Daout S, Jolivet R, Lasserre C, et al. 2016. Along-strike variations of the partitioning of convergence across the Haiyuan fault system detected by InSAR[J]. Geophysical Journal International, 205(1): 536547. DOI URL
[19]	Farr T G, Rosen P A, Caro E, et al. 2007. The shuttle radar topography mission[J]. Reviews of Geophysics. 45(2): 133.
[20]	Gaudemer Y, Tapponnier P, Meyer B, et al. 1995. Partitioning of crustal slip between linked, active faults in the eastern Qilian Shan, and evidence for a major seismic gap, the “Tianzhu gap”, on the western Haiyuan Fault, Gansu(China)[J]. Geophysical Journal International, 120(3): 599645. DOI URL
[21]	Goldstein R M, Werner C L. 1998. Radar interferogram filtering for geophysical applications[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 25(21): 40354038. DOI URL
[22]	Lasserre C, Gaudmer Y, Tapponnier P, et al. 2002. Fast late Pleistocene slip rate on the Leng Long Ling segment of the Haiyuan Fault, Qinghai, China[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research, 107(B11): 115.
[23]	Lin J, Ross S. 2004. Stress triggering in thrust and subduction earthquakes and stress interaction between the southern San Andreas and nearby thrust and strike-slip faults[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 109(B2): 119.
[24]	Lohman R B, Simons M. 2005. Some thoughts on the use of InSAR data to constrain models of surface deformation: Noise structure and data downsampling[J]. Geochem Geophys Geosystems, 6(1): 359361.
[25]	Okada Y. 1985. Surface deformation due to shear and tensile faults in a half-space[J]. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 75(4): 11351154. DOI URL
[26]	Savage J C, Gan W, Svarc J L. 2001. Strain accumulation and rotation in the eastern California shear zone[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research, 106(B10): 2199522007. DOI URL
[27]	Toda S, Stein R S, Richards-Dinger K, et al. 2005. Forecasting the evolution of seismicity in southern California: Animations built on earthquake stress transfer[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 110(B5): B05S16.
[28]	Wang M, Shen Z K. 2020. Present-day crustal deformation of continental China derived from GPS and its tectonic implications[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 125(2): e2019JB018774.
[29]	Wang R, Parolai S, Ge M, et al. 2013. The 2011 M_W9.0 Tohoku earthquake: Comparison of GPS and strong-motion data[J]. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 103(2B): 13361347. DOI URL
[30]	Werner C, Wegmüller U, Strozzi T, et al. 2002. Processing strategies for phase unwrapping for InSAR applications[J]. Proceedings EUSAR 2002, Cologne, 1: 46.
[31]	Wu Y, Jiang Z, Yang G, et al. 2011. Comparison of GPS strain rate computing methods and their reliability[J]. Geophysical Journal International, 185(2): 703717. DOI URL
[32]	Ziv A, Rubin A M. 2000. Static stress transfer and earthquake triggering: No lower threshold in sight[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research(Solid Earth), 105(B6): 1363113642.

2022年门源M_W6.7地震的同震破裂模型及应力研究

THE COSEISMIC RUPTURE MODEL AND STRESS CHANGE OF THE 2022 MENYUAN M_W6.7 EARTHQUAKE

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 13

参考文献 32

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	王辽, 谢虹, 袁道阳, 李智敏, 薛善余, 苏瑞欢, 文亚猛, 苏琦. 结合野外考察的2022年门源M_S6.9地震地表破裂带的高分七号影像特征[J]. 地震地质, 2023, 45(2): 401-421.
[2]	吴中海, 白玛多吉, 叶强, 韩帅, 史亚然, 尼玛次仁, 高扬. 西藏阿里阿鲁错地堑系的第四纪活动性、最新同震地表破裂及其地震地质意义[J]. 地震地质, 2023, 45(1): 67-91.
[3]	宋婷, 沈旭章, 梅秀苹, 焦煜媛, 李敏娟, 苏小芸, 季婉婧. 利用接收函数频率特征研究青藏高原东北缘地区的莫霍面性质[J]. 地震地质, 2022, 44(5): 1290-1312.
[4]	李宗旭, 贺日政, 冀战波, 李娱兰, 牛潇. 2009年7月24日西藏尼玛M_S5.6地震的震源机制及其构造意义[J]. 地震地质, 2022, 44(4): 992-1010.
[5]	张驰, 李智敏, 任治坤, 刘金瑞, 张志亮, 武登云. 日月山断裂南段晚第四纪活动特征[J]. 地震地质, 2022, 44(1): 1-19.
[6]	盖海龙, 李智敏, 姚生海, 李鑫. 2022年青海门源M_S6.9地震地表破裂特征的初步调查研究[J]. 地震地质, 2022, 44(1): 238-255.
[7]	何翔, 杜星星, 刘健, 李艺豪, 李群. 武威盆地第四纪沉积过程及其构造意义[J]. 地震地质, 2022, 44(1): 76-97.
[8]	李佳妮, 韩竹军, 罗佳宏, 郭鹏. 青藏高原东缘岷山活动地块周缘的地震活动特征与启示[J]. 地震地质, 2021, 43(6): 1459-1484.
[9]	臧阳, 俞言祥, 孟令媛, 韩颜颜. 青藏高原东北缘地震波衰减特征及地震震源参数研究[J]. 地震地质, 2021, 43(6): 1638-1656.
[10]	方东, 胡敏章, 郝洪涛. 青藏高原东南缘重力场多尺度分析及其构造含义[J]. 地震地质, 2021, 43(5): 1208-1232.
[11]	唐茂云, 刘静, 李翠平, 王伟, 张金玉, 许强. 青藏高原东南缘的新生代盆地古高度重建研究与进展[J]. 地震地质, 2021, 43(3): 576-599.
[12]	哈广浩, 任治坤, 刘金瑞, 李智敏, 李正芳, 闵伟, 周本刚. 青海都兰地区夏日哈活动断裂带的发现及其构造意义[J]. 地震地质, 2021, 43(3): 614-629.
[13]	李智敏, 李文巧, 李涛, 徐岳仁, 苏鹏, 郭鹏, 孙浩越, 哈广浩, 陈桂华, 袁兆德, 李忠武, 李鑫, 杨理臣, 马震, 姚生海, 熊仁伟, 张彦博, 盖海龙, 殷翔, 徐玮阳, 董金元. 2021年5月22日青海玛多M_S7.4地震的发震构造和地表破裂初步调查[J]. 地震地质, 2021, 43(3): 722-737.
[14]	马骏, 周本刚, 王明明, 安力科. 鲜水河断裂带折多塘断裂西北段全新世活动的地质地貌依据[J]. 地震地质, 2020, 42(5): 1021-1038.
[15]	张波, 何文贵, 刘炳旭, 高效东, 庞炜, 王爱国, 袁道阳. 甘肃北山南缘俄博庙断裂的新活动特征及活动速率[J]. 地震地质, 2020, 42(2): 455-471.

2022年门源MW6.7地震的同震破裂模型及应力研究

THE COSEISMIC RUPTURE MODEL AND STRESS CHANGE OF THE 2022 MENYUAN MW6.7 EARTHQUAKE

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 13

参考文献 32

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

2022年门源M_W6.7地震的同震破裂模型及应力研究

THE COSEISMIC RUPTURE MODEL AND STRESS CHANGE OF THE 2022 MENYUAN M_W6.7 EARTHQUAKE