基于震源机制和地震定位研究2022年山西古交ML4.1地震的发震构造

doi:10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2024.02.010

地震地质 ›› 2024, Vol. 46 ›› Issue (2): 414-432.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2024.02.010

基于震源机制和地震定位研究2022年山西古交M_L4.1地震的发震构造

董春丽¹^,²⁾(), 张广伟³⁾^,^*(), 李欣蔚⁴⁾, 王跃杰¹^,²⁾, 丁大业¹^,²⁾, 宫卓宏¹^,²⁾

¹⁾ 太原大陆裂谷动力学国家野外科学观测研究站, 太原 030025
²⁾ 山西省地震局, 太原 030021
³⁾ 应急管理部国家自然灾害防治研究院, 北京 100085
⁴⁾ 四川省地震局, 成都 610000

收稿日期:2023-03-29 修回日期:2023-06-02 出版日期:2024-04-20 发布日期:2024-05-29
通讯作者: *张广伟, 男, 1985年生, 副研究员, 主要从事小震精定位及震源机制反演研究, E-mail: zhanggw@mail.ustc.edu.cn。
作者简介:
董春丽, 女, 1974年生, 2001年于山西大学获计算机科学技术与应用专业学士学位, 高级工程师, 现主要从事地震监测和数字应用方面的研究, E-mail: nzy2001@126.com。
基金资助:
山西太原大陆裂谷动力学国家野外科学观测研究站项目(NORSTY2021-06); 山西省地震局科研项目(SBK-2220)

STUDY ON THE SEISMOGENIC STRUCTURE OF THE 2022 GUJIAO M_L4.1 EARTHQUAKE IN SHANXI PROVINCE BASED ON FOCAL MECHANISM AND SEISMIC LOCATION

DONG Chun-li¹^,²⁾(), ZHANG Guang-wei³⁾^,^*(), LI Xin-wei⁴⁾, WANG Yue-jie¹^,²⁾, DING Da-ye¹^,²⁾, GONG Zhuo-hong¹^,²⁾

¹⁾ Shangxi Taiyuan National Continental Rift Valley Dynamics Observation and Research Station, Taiyuan 030025, China
²⁾ Shanxi Earthquake Agency, Taiyuan 030021, China
³⁾ National Institute of Natural Hazards, Ministry of Emergency Management of China, Beijing 100085, China
⁴⁾ Sichuan Earthquake Agency, Chengdu 610000, China

Received:2023-03-29 Revised:2023-06-02 Online:2024-04-20 Published:2024-05-29

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

2022年2月20日山西太原古交市发生了M_L4.1地震, 古交及周边县市震感强烈。此次地震的震中位于历史地震相对稀少、煤矿资源丰富的吕梁隆起区, 其发震断裂尚不明确。为了更好地认识这次地震的发震构造, 文中利用山西省测震台网的近震波形资料反演了地震的震源机制解, 并获得最佳矩心深度。反演结果显示, 古交地震是一次左旋走滑型地震事件, 矩震级为 M_W3.96, 最佳双力偶解为: 节面Ⅰ, 走向90°、倾角86°、滑动角-19°; 节面Ⅱ, 走向182°、倾角70°、滑动角-175°; 最佳矩心深度为3km, 属于极浅源地震。地震序列重定位结果显示震中的优势展布方向近EW, 与区域内断层基本为NE走向的分布格局差异显著。利用聚类分析方法得到古交地震的发震断层面中心解, 结果显示断层的走向为91°, 倾角为70°。另外, 古交地震序列的应力降显著偏小, 低于同区域背景地震至少1个数量级。结合实地调研的矿区生产情况和区域地质构造, 认为古交地震序列的发震机制可能与震源区附近的煤田开采活动有关, 开采活动致使局部应力改变, 从而导致先存隐伏断层活化, 进而触发此次地震。

关键词: 古交地震, 震源机制解, 隐伏断层, gCAP方法, 地震应力降

Abstract:

Understanding the mechanism of earthquake sequence in the mining area is important for the time-dependent hazard assessment. An earthquake of M_L4.1 occurred in Gujiao, Taiyuan, Shanxi on February 20th, 2022, which caused strong ground motion in Gujiao and surrounding counties. The epicenter of this earthquake is located in the area of Lvliang uplift, where historical earthquakes are relatively rare. In addition, the coal resources are well developed in the earthquake source area which has attracted much attention from society and local governments.

To investigate the mechanism and the seismogenic fault of Gujiao M_L4.1 earthquake, we first apply the double-difference location method to retrieve highly accurate hypocenter locations. The results show that the earthquakes mainly occur at a depth range of 3~5km, and display a dominant distribution direction nearly EW-trending, which differs significantly from the NE-trending fault distribution pattern in this region. We further collect the broad-band seismic waveforms from the regional network of Shanxi province to perform focal mechanism inversion. The inversion results show that the Gujiao earthquake is a left-slip seismic event with a moment magnitude of M_W3.96. The optimal double-couple solution is characterized by a strike of 90°, dip of 80°, and a rake angle of -21° for fault plane Ⅰ, while for the fault plane Ⅱ, the strike is 184°, dip is 69°, and rake angle is -169°. The best centroid depth is estimated to be at 3km. This earthquake shows an extremely shallow focal depth. Moreover, By using cluster analysis method, we obtained the central solution for the seismogenic fault plane of the GuJiao earthquake, with a fault strike of 91°and a dip angle of 70°. The focal solutions show that the earthquake exhibit a strike-slip type, and the orientations of earthquake sequence coincide well with the focal mechanisms.

In addition, to discuss the effect of Gujiao M_L4.1 earthquake on regional stress, we calculate the stress drop of this seismic sequence. The results show that the stress drop is significantly smaller than that of the regional earthquakes, exhibiting at least one order of magnitude lower than that of the background earthquakes in the same region. This phenomenon reflects that the stress level in the focal area of the GuJiao earthquake is not high, suggesting that the background stress enhancement in the focal area is not obvious.

Based on regional geological structure, we found that the known faults in the region are all high-angle normal faults, and the strike of these faults are inconsistent with the focal mechanism solution of Gujiao earthquake sequence, which suggests that the existing faults are not the seismogenic fault. Taking the regional mining activities into account, we speculated that mining may cause strong disturbance to the stress field, and lead to stress redistribution within the rock mass. Such coal mining activity may generate a high stress disturbance on the hidden fault plane, and then the fault become the carrier of stress transfer. So we conclude that the seismogenic mechanism of the Gujiao-seismic sequence may be related to coal mining activities near the focal area, which leads to local stress changes, thus resulting in the activation of preexisting hidden faults and triggering the occurrence of the Gujiao earthquake.

Key words: Gujiao earthquake, focal mechanism solution, hidden fault, gCAP method, seismic stress drop

董春丽, 张广伟, 李欣蔚, 王跃杰, 丁大业, 宫卓宏. 基于震源机制和地震定位研究2022年山西古交M_L4.1地震的发震构造[J]. 地震地质, 2024, 46(2): 414-432.

DONG Chun-li, ZHANG Guang-wei, LI Xin-wei, WANG Yue-jie, DING Da-ye, GONG Zhuo-hong. STUDY ON THE SEISMOGENIC STRUCTURE OF THE 2022 GUJIAO M_L4.1 EARTHQUAKE IN SHANXI PROVINCE BASED ON FOCAL MECHANISM AND SEISMIC LOCATION[J]. SEISMOLOGY AND GEOLOGY, 2024, 46(2): 414-432.

图/表 13

图1 研究区的地质构造和本研究所用子台分布图 a 区域台网部分子台和古交地震震中的分布图, 其中黑色五角星为震中, 黑色三角形为台站, 大三角形为本文使用gCAP方法反演所用的台站; b 研究区域的地质构造图

Fig. 1 Geological structure of the research area and location of earthquake stations in this study.

图2 古交地震区及周边断层分布(据古交矿区水文地质补勘报告修改) 1 向斜; 2 背斜; 3 正断层; 4 逆断层; 5 平移断层; 6 推测断层; 7 上升泉和下降泉; 8 火成岩

Fig. 2 Distribution of regional and local faults in Gujiao area(modified after Hydrogeology survey report of Gujiao Ordovician Limestone).

表1 重定位使用的速度模型

Table1 Velocity model used for earthquake relocation

上界面深度/km	0	4	14	23	40	80
P波速度/km·s^-1	4.80	5.90	6.30	6.75	7.90	8.10

图3 古交地震序列精定位前(a)、后(b)对比图

Fig. 3 Comparison of the Gujiao earthquake sequence before(a)and after(b)precise localization.

图4 2022年2月20日古交ML4.1地震最优解的理论波形(灰)与观测波形(黑) 左上角震源球采用下半球投影, 灰色区域代表压缩区, 白色区代表拉张区, 震源球上标注的加号和减号表示反演使用台站的P波初动方向。波形图左侧字母为台网代码和台站名, 其下左侧数字为台站震中距(km), 右侧数字为P波初至理论值与观测值的拟合偏移(s)。波形图下方2行数字, 第1行为对应段地震波形理论相对实际观测的移动时间(s), 正值表示理论波形相对观测波形超前; 第2行为理论与观测的波形相关系数(%)

Fig. 4 Comparison between synthetics(grey)and observed(black)seismograms of Feb.20, 2022 Gujiao ML4.1 event.

图5 利用gCAP方法得到的不同深度的震源机制分布图

Fig. 5 Distribution of seismic mechanisms at different depths with the gCAP method.

表2 2022年2月20日古交ML4.1地震及6次ML≥2.0余震

Table2 The Gujiao ML4.1 earthquake and six ML≥2.0 aftershocks on 20 February 2022

序号	日期	发震时刻	北纬/(°)	东经/(°)	震级/M_L	深度/km
主震①	2022-02-20	08:27:27.4	37.954	112.108	4.1	4
余震②	2022-02-21	08:49:11.3	37.942	112.114	2.2	5
余震③	2022-02-22	04:31:01.7	37.953	112.115	2.9	3
余震④	2022-02-22	18:36:07.0	37.952	112.102	2.9	5
余震⑤	2022-02-22	22:28:53.5	37.950	112.106	2.5	5
余震⑥	2022-02-26	21:42:20.3	37.951	112.109	2.6	5
余震⑦	2022-03-21	01:30:01.9	37.952	112.118	2.8	4

表3 古交序列中ML≥2.0地震的震源机制解参数

Table3 Parameters of the ML≥2.0 source mechanism solution in the Gujiao earthquake sequence

使用方法	节面Ⅰ/(°)			节面Ⅱ/(°)			P轴/(°)		T轴/(°)		B轴/(°)		矩震级 /M_W	矩心深度 /km
使用方法	走向	倾角	滑动角	走向	倾角	滑动角	走向	倾角	走向	倾角	走向	倾角	矩震级 /M_W	矩心深度 /km
gCAP	90	86	-19	182	70	-175	45	18	138	10	256	69	4.0	3.2
Snoke①	94	52	-12	192	80	-141	60	34	317	19	203	50
Snoke②	92	66	51	334	45	144	208	12	315	52	109	35
Snoke③	267	81	-65	16	27	-160	204	48	337	31	83	25
Snoke④	92	63	-14	188	78	-152	53	28	317	10	210	60
Snoke⑤	92	66	33	348	61	152	219	3	312	40	125	50
Snoke⑥	94	52	-12	192	80	-141	60	34	317	19	203	50
Snoke⑦	89	74	-12	183	79	-163	47	20	315	4	216	70

图6 基于Snoke方法的古交序列中7次ML≥2.0地震的震源机制解图及震中位置展布

Fig. 6 The epicenter location distribution and source mechanism solution of the seven ML≥2.0 earthquakes in the Gujiao sequence by using the Snoke method.

图7 古交地震序列与区域地震应力降的对比图

Fig. 7 Comparison of the Gujiao earthquake sequence with the regional seismic stress drop.

图8 主震及一周内余震活动空间分布图

Fig. 8 Spatial distribution of mainshock and aftershock activity within one week.

图9 古交地震序列震源机制聚类1和聚类2的结果图其中红色弧线表示聚类中心节面, 绿色弧线表示不同地震的震源机制节面

Fig. 9 The results of clustering of the nodal planes in the Gujiao earthquake sequence.

图10 震中区断层分布和开采区块分布图 a 震中区的断层分布与开采区分布图(资料来源于矿区地质生产报告); b 古交地震发震机制示意图

Fig. 10 Distribution of fault and mining block in central earthquake area.

参考文献 44

[1]	陈俊磊, 周青云, 刘峰, 等. 2021. 近震波形反演震源机制解方法对比研究[J]. 大地测量与地球动力学, 41(1): 79—82.
	CHEN Jun-lei, ZHOU Qing-yun, LIU Feng, et al. 2021. Comparison of mechanism inversion methods using regional waveform[J]. Journal of Geodesy and Geodynamics, 41(1): 79—82(in Chinese).
[2]	董春丽, 胡玉良, 张玲, 等. 2011. 山西地区非弹性衰减系数、场地响应和震源参数的初步研究[J]. 华北地震科学, 29(4): 8—14.
	DONG Chun-li, HU Yu-liang, ZHANG Ling, et al. 2011. North China Earthquake Sciences, 29(4): 8—14(in Chinese).
[3]	董春丽, 苗春兰, 吕睿, 等. 2014. 山西地区震源新参数间关系初探[J]. 地震地磁观测与研究, 35(3-4): 63—70.
	DONG Chun-li, MIAO Chun-lan, LÜ Rui, et al. 2014. Primary discussion on relationship of new source parameters in Shanxi area[J]. Seismological and Geomagnetic Observation and Research, 35(3-4): 63—70(in Chinese).
[4]	窦立婷, 姚华建, 房立华, 等. 2021. 山西断陷带地区高分辨率地壳速度结构及其构造演化意义[J]. 中国科学(地球科学), 51(5): 709—724.
	DOU Li-ting, YAO Hua-jian, FANG Li-hua, et al. 2021. High-resolution crustal velocity structure in the Shanxi rift zone and its tectonic implications[J]. Scientia Sinica(Terrae), 51(5): 709—724(in Chinese).
[5]	房立华, 吴建平, 苏金蓉, 等. 2018. 四川九寨沟 M_S7.0 地震主震及其余震序列精定位[J]. 科学通报, 63(7): 649—662.
	FANG Li-hua, WU Jian-ping, SU Jin-rong, et al. 2018. Relocaton of mainshock and aftershock sequence of the M_S7.0 Sichuan Jiuzhaigou earthquake[J]. Chinese Science Bulletin, 63(7): 649—662(in Chinese).
[6]	关鹏虎, 李斌, 李自红, 等. 2022. 多方法求解中小地震震源机制解的可靠性分析——以山西地震带3次中小地震为例[J]. 太原理工大学学报, 53(2): 289—298.
	GUAN Peng-hu, LI Bin, LI Zi-hong, et al. 2022. Reliability of focal mechanism solutions for small and medium earthquakes based on different methods: Taking three events in Shanxi seismic belt as examples[J]. Journal of Taiyuan University of Technology, 53(2): 289—298(in Chinese).
[7]	洪德全, 王行舟, 倪红玉, 等. 2013. 多种方法研究2012年7月20日江苏高邮 M_S4.9 地震震源机制解和震源深度[J]. 地球物理学进展, 28(4): 1757—1765.
	HONG De-quan, WANG Xing-zhou, NI Hong-yu, et al. 2013. Focal mechanism and focal depth of July 20, 2012 Jiangsu Gaoyou M_S4.9 earthquake. Progress in Geophysics, 28(4): 1757—1765(in Chinese).
[8]	韩贝贝, 秦勇, 张志军, 等. 2015. 太原西山煤田现代构造应力场综合模拟[J]. 石油学报, 36(11): 1392—1401. DOI
	HAN Bei-bei, QIN Yong, ZHANG Zhi-jun, et al. 2015. Comprehensive simulation on modern tectonic stress field of Xishan coalfield in Taiyuan[J]. Acta Petrolei Sinica, 36(11): 1392—1401(in Chinese). DOI
[9]	韩和平, 马佳, 张广莉, 等. 2018. 地震应力降研究进展[J]. 地震地磁观测与研究, 39(3): 59—68.
	HAN He-ping, MA Jia, ZHANG Guang-li, et al. 2018. Review of the earthquake stress drop[J]. Seismological and Geomagnetic Observation and Research, 39(3): 59—68(in Chinese).
[10]	胡晓辉, 盛书中, 万永革, 等. 2020. 2019年6月17日四川长宁地震序列震源机制与震源区震后构造应力场研究[J]. 地球物理学进展, 35(5): 1675—1681.
	HU Xiao-hui, SHENG Shu-zhong, WAN Yong-ge, et al. 2020. Study on focal mechanism and post-seismic tectonic stress field of the Changning, Sichuan, earthquake on June 17th 2019[J]. Progress in Geophysics, 35(5): 1675—1681(in Chinese).
[11]	胡幸平, 俞春泉, 陶开, 等. 2008. 利用P波初动资料求解汶川地震及其强余震震源机制解[J]. 地球物理学报, 51(6): 1711—1718.
	HU Xing-ping, YU Chun-quan, TAO Kai, et al. 2008. Focal mechanism solutions of Wenchuan earthquake and its strong aftershocks obtained from initial P-wave polarity analysis[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 51(6): 1711—1718(in Chinese).
[12]	黄波, 秦勇, 张万红. 2017. 古交区块8号煤层构造煤分布及成因分析[J]. 煤炭工程, 49(12): 153—157.
	HUANG Bo, QIN Yong, ZHANG Wan-hong. 2017. Distributional characteristics and its geneses analysis of tectonic coals in No.8 coal seam of Gujiao Block[J]. Coal Engineering, 49(12): 153—157(in Chinese).
[13]	李赫, 谢祖军, 王熠熙, 等. 2019. 2017年9月4日临城M_L4.4地震震源参数及其揭示的构造意义[J]. 地震地质, 41(3): 670—689. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2019.03.009.
	LI He, XIE Zu-jun, WANG Yi-xi, et al. 2019. The Source parameters and seismotectonic implications of the September 4, 2017 M_L4.4 Lincheng earthquake[J]. Seismology and Geology, 41(3): 670—689(in Chinese). DOI
[14]	李欣蔚, 张广伟, 谢卓娟, 等. 2022. 2021年四川泸县M6.0地震发震机理及地震活动时空演化特征[J]. 地球物理学报, 65(11): 4282—4298.
	LI Xin-wei, ZHANG Guang-wei, XIE Zhuo-juan, et al. 2022. Seismogenic mechanism of the M6.0 Luxian earthquake and seismicity spatio-temporal characteristics around the source region[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 65(11): 4284—4298(in Chinese).
[15]	梁姗姗, 雷建设, 徐志国, 等. 2017. 2016年1月21日青海门源 M_S6.4 余震序列重定位和主震震源机制解[J]. 地球物理学报, 60(6): 2091—2103. DOI
	LIANG Shan-shan, LEI Jian-she, XU Zhi-guo, et al. 2017. Relocation of the aftershock sequence and focal mechanism solutions of the 21 January 2016 Menyuan, Qinghai, M_S6.4 earthquake[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 60(6): 2091—2103(in Chinese).
[16]	刘洪林, 王红岩, 赵国良, 等. 2005. 燕山期构造热事件对太原西山煤层气高产富集影响[J]. 天然气工业, 25(1): 29—32.
	LIU Hong-lin, WANG Hong-yan, ZHAO Guo-liang, et al. 2005. Influence of Yanshanian tectonic thermal events on the high yield and enrichment of coalbed methane in the Western Mountains of Taiyuan[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 25(1): 29—32(in Chinese).
[17]	刘巍, 赵新平, 安卫平. 1994. 太原盆地的应力场特征[J]. 山西地震, (1): 18—24.
	LIU Wei, ZHAO Xin-ping, AN Wei-ping, 1994. Characteristics of stress field in Taiyuan Basin[J]. Earthquake Research in Shanxi, (1): 18—24(in Chinese).
[18]	吕坚, 王晓山, 苏金蓉, 等. 2013. 庐山7.0级地震序列的震源位置与震源机制解特征[J]. 地球物理学报, 56(5): 1753—1763.
	LÜ Jian, WANG Xiao-shan, SU Jin-rong, et al. 2013. Hypocentral location and source mechanism of the M_S7.0 Lushan earthquake sequence[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 56(5): 1753—1763(in Chinese).
[19]	罗艳, 曾祥方, 倪四道. 2013. 震源深度测定方法研究进展[J]. 地球物理学进展, 28(5): 2309—2321.
	LUO Yan, ZENG Xiang-fang, NI Si-dao. 2013. Progress on the determination of focal depth[J]. Progress in Geophysics, 28(5): 2309—2321(in Chinese).
[20]	罗艳, 赵里, 田建慧. 2020. 2008年8月30日攀枝花 M_S6.1 地震序列深度及震源区应力特征[J]. 中国科学(地球科学), 50(3): 404—417.
	LUO Yan, ZHAO Li, TIAN Jian-hui. 2020. The focal depths of the 2008 Panzhihua earthquake sequence and the stress field in the source region[J]. Scientia Sinica(Terrae), 50(3): 404—417(in Chinese).
[21]	苗小虎, 姜福兴, 王存文, 等. 2011. 微地震监测揭示的矿震诱发冲击地压机理研究[J]. 岩土工程学报, 33(6): 971—976.
	MIAO Xiao-hu, JIANG Fu-xing, WANG Cun-wen, et al. Mechanism of microseism-inducdrock burst revealed by microseismic monitoring[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 33(6): 971—976(in Chinese).
[22]	沈明荣, 陈建峰. 2006. 岩体力学[M]. 上海: 同济大学出版社.
	SHEN Ming-rong, CHEN Jian-feng. 2006. Rock Mass Mechanics[M]. Tongji University Press, Shanghai.
[23]	唐子波. 2011. 兖州矿区某矿矿震活动规律研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 30(S2): 4143—4152.
	TANG Zi-bo. 2011. Research on law of mining earthquakes in coal mine of Yanzhou[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 30(S2): 4143—4152(in Chinese).
[24]	万永革, 沈正康, 刁桂苓, 等. 2008. 利用小震分布和区域应力场确定大震断层面参数方法及其在唐山地震序列中的应用[J]. 地球物理学报, 51(3): 793—804.
	WAN Yong-ge, SHEN Zheng-kang, DIAO Gui-ling, et al. 2008. An algorithm of fault parameter determination using distribution of small earthquakes and parameters of regional stress field and its application to Tangshan earthquake sequence[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 51(3): 793—804(in Chinese).
[25]	万永革. 2019. 同一地震多个震源机制中心解的确定[J]. 地球物理学报, 62(12): 4718—4728. DOI
	WAN Yong-ge. 2019. Determination of center of several focal mechanisms of the same earthquake[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 62(12): 4718—4728(in Chinese).
[26]	万永革. 2020. 震源机制与应力体系关系模拟研究[J]. 地球物理学报, 63(6): 2281—2296. DOI
	WAN Yong-ge. 2020. Simulation on relationship between stress regimes and focal mechanisms of earthquakes[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 63(6): 2281—2296(in Chinese).
[27]	万永革. 2022. 断裂带震源机制节面聚类确定断裂带产状方法及在2021年漾濞地震序列中的应用[J]. 地球物理学报, 65(2): 637—648.
	WAN Yong-ge. 2022. Method of active fault geometry determination by clustering nodal planes of focal mechanisms occurred on the fault belt and its application to the 2021 Yangbi earthquake sequence[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 65(2): 637—648(in Chinese).
[28]	王秋良, 张丽芬, 廖武林, 等. 2016. 2014年3月湖北省秭归县M4.2、 M4.5地震成因分析[J]. 地震地质, 38(1): 121—130. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2016.01.009.
	WANG Qiu-liang, ZHANG Li-fen, LIAO Wu-lin, et al. 2016. Research on genesis of M4.2 and M4.5 earthquake sequences in March 2014 in Zigui County, Hubei Province[J]. Seismology and Geology, 38(1): 121—130(in Chinese).
[29]	吴顺川, 黄小庆, 陈钒, 等. 2016. 岩体破裂矩张量反演方法及其应用[J]. 岩土力学, 37(S1): 1—18.
	WU Shun-chuan, HUANG Xiao-qing, CHEN Fan, et al. 2016. Moment tensor inversion of rock failure and its application[J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 37(S1): 1—18(in Chinese).
[30]	谢富仁, 陈群策, 崔效锋, 等. 2007. 中国大陆地壳应力环境基础数据库[J]. 地物理学进展, 22(1): 131—136.
	XIE Fu-ren, CHEN Qun-ce, CUI Xiao-feng, et al. 2007. Fundamental database of crustal stress environment in continental China[J]. Progress in Geophysics, 22(1): 131—136(in Chinese).
[31]	许英才, 郭祥云, 冯丽丽. 2022. 2022年1月8日青海门源 M_S6.9 地震序列重定位和震源机制解研究[J]. 地震学报, 44(2): 195—210.
	XU Ying-cai, GUO Xiang-yun, FENG Li-li. 2022. Relocation and focal mechanism solutions of the M_S6.9 Menyuan earthquake sequence on January 8, 2022 in Qinghai Province[J]. Acta Seismologica Sinica, 44(2): 195—210(in Chinese).
[32]	杨靖. 2017. 山西古交矿区断裂构造发育特征研究[J]. 西部资源, (3): 5—6.
	YANG Jing. 2017. Development characteristics of fault structures in Gujiao mining area, Shanxi Province[J]. Western Resources, (3): 5—6(in Chinese).
[33]	杨松霖, 杨靖. 2013. 山西古交矿区断裂构造复杂程度评价[J]. 能源技术与管理, 38(4): 118—120.
	YANG Song-lin, YANG Jing. 2013. Complexity evaluation of fault structure in Gujiao mining area, Shanxi Province[J]. Energy Technology and Management, 38(4): 118—120(in Chinese).
[34]	姚刚. 2017. 兖州矿区多尺度矿震规律监测研究[J]. 科技视界, (26): 70—73.
	YAO Gang. 2017. Research on multi-scale mine earthquake monitoring in Yanzhoumining area[J]. Science & Technology Vision, (26): 70—73(in Chinese).
[35]	易桂喜, 龙锋, 张致伟. 2012. 汶川 M_S8.0 地震余震震源机制时空分布特征[J]. 地球物理学报, 55(4): 1213—1227.
	YI Gui-xi, LONG Feng, ZHANG Zhi-wei. 2012. Spatial and temporal variation of focal mechanisms of aftershocks of the 2008 M_S8.0 Wenchuan earthquake[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 55(4): 1213—1227(in Chinese).
[36]	张广伟, 雷建设, 谢富仁, 等. 2011. 华北地区小震精定位及构造意义[J]. 地震学报, 33(6): 699—714.
	ZHANG Guang-wei, LEI Jian-she, XIE Fu-ren, et al. 2011. Precise relocation of small earthquakes occurred in North China and its tectonic implication[J]. Acta Seismologica Sinica, 33(6): 699—714(in Chinese).
[37]	张淑亮, 刘瑞春, 王霞. 2017. 汶川地震前后太原盆地应力场变化特征研究[J]. 中国地震, 33(1): 46—55.
	ZHANG Shu-liang, LIU Rui-chun, WANG Xia. 2017. The variation characteristics of stress field of the Taiyuan Basin before and after the Wenchuan earthquake[J]. Earthquake Research in China, 33(1): 46—55(in Chinese).
[38]	左可桢, 赵翠萍. 2021. 四川长宁地区地震震源参数的时空分布特征[J]. 中国地震, 37(2): 472—482.
	ZUO Ke-zhen, ZHAO Cui-ping. 2021. The spatial and temporal distribution of source parameters of earthquakes in Changning area, Sichuan Province[J]. Earthquake Research in China, 37(2): 472—482(in Chinese).
[39]	Hu X, Zang A, Heidbach O, et al. 2017. Crustal stress pattern in China and its adjacent areas[J]. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, 149: 20—28.
[40]	Mori J. 1991. Estimates of velocity structure and source depth using multiple P waves from aftershocks of the 1987 Elmore Ranch and Superstition Hills, California, earthquakes[J]. Bulletin of the Seismological Society America, 81(2): 508—523.
[41]	Stein S, Wiens D A. 1986. Depth determination for shallow teleseismic earthquakes: Methods and results[J]. Reviews of Geophysics, 24(4): 806—832.
[42]	Waldhauser F, Ellsworth W L. 2000. A double-difference earthquake location algorithm: Method and application to the northern Hayward Fault, California[J]. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 90(6): 1353—1368.
[43]	Zhu L P, Ben-Zion Y. 2013. Parametrization of general seismic potency and moment tensors for source inversion of seismic waveform data[J]. Geophysical Journal International, 194(2): 839—843.
[44]	Zhu L P, Rivera L A. 2002. A note on the dynamic and static displacements from a point source in multilayered media[J]. Geophysical Journal International, 148(3): 619—627. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-246X.2002.01610.x.

基于震源机制和地震定位研究2022年山西古交M_L4.1地震的发震构造

STUDY ON THE SEISMOGENIC STRUCTURE OF THE 2022 GUJIAO M_L4.1 EARTHQUAKE IN SHANXI PROVINCE BASED ON FOCAL MECHANISM AND SEISMIC LOCATION

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 13

参考文献 44

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	万永革, 王昱茹, 靳志同. 2021年云南漾濞6.4级地震震源区地壳应力不均匀性研究[J]. 地震地质, 2023, 45(4): 1025-1040.
[2]	傅莺, 胡斌, 赵敏, 龙锋. 2022年芦山M_S6.1地震序列的精确定位及发震构造[J]. 地震地质, 2023, 45(4): 987-1005.
[3]	邓文泽, 刘杰, 杨志高, 孙丽, 张雪梅. 青海玛多M_S7.4地震震源破裂过程反演结果的初步分析[J]. 地震地质, 2022, 44(4): 1059-1070.
[4]	余占洋, 沈旭章, 梁浩, 郑文俊, 刘旭宙. 基于地震活动性和震源机制解研究渭河-运城盆地主要断裂带的特征及应力场分布[J]. 地震地质, 2022, 44(2): 395-413.
[5]	张致伟, 龙锋, 赵小艳, 王迪. 川滇地区的震源机制解及应力场特征[J]. 地震地质, 2022, 44(1): 170-187.
[6]	李春果, 王宏伟, 温瑞智, 强生银, 任叶飞. 2021年青海玛多M_S7.4地震随机有限断层三维地震动模拟[J]. 地震地质, 2021, 43(5): 1085-1100.
[7]	赵韬, 王莹, 马冀, 邵若潼, 徐一斐, 胡景. 2021年青海玛多7.4级地震序列重定位和震源机制特征[J]. 地震地质, 2021, 43(4): 790-805.
[8]	王莹, 赵韬, 胡景, 刘春. 2021年云南漾濞6.4级地震序列重定位及震源机制解特征分析[J]. 地震地质, 2021, 43(4): 847-863.
[9]	崔仁胜, 赵翠萍, 周连庆, 陈阳. 2020年1月19日新疆伽师M_S6.4地震序列的活动特征和发震构造[J]. 地震地质, 2021, 43(2): 329-344.
[10]	李金, 蒋海昆, 魏芸芸, 孙昭杰. 2020年1月19日伽师6.4级地震发震构造的初步研究[J]. 地震地质, 2021, 43(2): 357-376.
[11]	刘旭宙, 沈旭章, 何骁慧, 蒲举. 2019年夏河M5.7地震的余震序列重定位及发震构造[J]. 地震地质, 2021, 43(1): 197-208.
[12]	崔华伟, 郑建常, 张正帅, 李冬梅, 柴光斌. 长岛地区小地震断层面参数拟合及应力场特征[J]. 地震地质, 2020, 42(6): 1432-1445.
[13]	梁姗姗, 徐志国, 盛书中, 张广伟, 赵博, 邹立晔. 2019年四川长宁6.0级地震主震及中强余震(M_S≥4.0)的震源机制及其应力场[J]. 地震地质, 2020, 42(3): 547-561.
[14]	阎春恒, 周斌, 李莎, 向巍, 郭培兰. 利用小震分布和区域应力场确定龙滩库区地震断层面参数[J]. 地震地质, 2020, 42(3): 562-580.
[15]	张志斌, 赵晓成, 任林. 新疆天山中段的震源机制解与构造应力场特征分析[J]. 地震地质, 2020, 42(3): 595-611.

基于震源机制和地震定位研究2022年山西古交ML4.1地震的发震构造

STUDY ON THE SEISMOGENIC STRUCTURE OF THE 2022 GUJIAO ML4.1 EARTHQUAKE IN SHANXI PROVINCE BASED ON FOCAL MECHANISM AND SEISMIC LOCATION

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 13

参考文献 44

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

基于震源机制和地震定位研究2022年山西古交M_L4.1地震的发震构造

STUDY ON THE SEISMOGENIC STRUCTURE OF THE 2022 GUJIAO M_L4.1 EARTHQUAKE IN SHANXI PROVINCE BASED ON FOCAL MECHANISM AND SEISMIC LOCATION