基于地震和InSAR联合反演2018年ML5.7兴文地震破裂过程

doi:10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2024.02.009

地震地质 ›› 2024, Vol. 46 ›› Issue (2): 397-413.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2024.02.009

基于地震和InSAR联合反演2018年M_L5.7兴文地震破裂过程

缪思钰¹⁾(), 张海江¹⁾^,^*(), 古宁²⁾^,^*(), 李俊伦¹⁾, 谭玉阳³⁾, 华思博⁴⁾, 张勇⁴⁾

¹⁾ 中国科学技术大学, 地球和空间科学学院, 合肥 230026
²⁾ 南方科技大学, 地球与空间科学系, 深圳 518055
³⁾ 中国海洋大学海洋地球科学学院, 青岛深海圈层与地球系统教育部前沿科学中心,海底科学与探测技术教育部重点实验室, 青岛 266100
⁴⁾ 北京大学, 地球与空间科学学院, 北京 100871

收稿日期:2022-12-04 修回日期:2023-08-24 出版日期:2024-04-20 发布日期:2024-05-29
通讯作者: *张海江, 男, 1973年生, 博士, 教授, 主要从事地震成像和微地震研究, E-mail: zhang11@ustc.edu.cn。古宁, 男, 1993年生, 博士后, 主要从事地震干涉成像研究, E-mail: guning@sustech.edu.cn。
作者简介:
缪思钰, 女, 1994年生, 2022年于中国科学技术大学获地球物理学博士学位, 主要研究方向为微地震定位和地震破裂过程研究, E-mail: miaosy@mail.ustc.edu.cn。
基金资助:
国家重点研发计划项目(2022YFF0800701)

JOINT INVERSION OF THE RUPTURE PROCESS OF 2018 M_L5.7 XINGWEN EARTHQUAKE BASED ON SEISMIC AND INSAR OBSERVATIONS

MIAO Si-yu¹⁾(), ZHANG Hai-jiang¹⁾^,^*(), GU Ning²⁾^,^*(), LI Jun-lun¹⁾, TAN Yu-yang³⁾, HUA Si-bo⁴⁾, ZHANG Yong⁴⁾

¹⁾ School of Earth and Space Sciences, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, China
²⁾ Department of Earth and Space Sciences, Southern University of Sciences and Technology, Shenzhen 518055, China
³⁾ Frontiers Science Center for Deep Ocean Multispheres and Earth System, Key Lab of Submarine Geosciences and Prospecting Techniques, MOE and College of Marine Geosciences, Ocean University of China, Qingdao 266100, China
⁴⁾ School of Earth and Space Sciences, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China

Received:2022-12-04 Revised:2023-08-24 Online:2024-04-20 Published:2024-05-29

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

2018年12月16日发生的M_L5.7兴文地震很可能是由页岩气水力压裂所诱发, 确定此类震级较大的诱发地震的震源破裂过程具有重要意义。文中利用近震数据和InSAR数据联合反演, 获得了兴文地震的破裂过程。与单独使用地震数据或InSAR数据进行反演相比, 联合反演得到的地震破裂过程可同时拟合2种类型数据, 因此具有更高的时空分辨率。联合反演结果显示该地震为典型的单侧破裂, 破裂方向近N向。破裂过程的持续时间为6s, 能量释放主要集中在前5s, 呈分段式破裂。主震破裂过程分为2个阶段: 沿着断裂的走向, 紧挨着震中的0~5km范围内为破裂的第1阶段(1~3s); 距震中6~8km处为破裂的第2阶段(3~5s)。同震滑移主要集中在5km以浅的区域, 峰值滑移约为0.27m, 这可以解释为何M_L5.7兴文地震造成了较为严重的破坏。结合前震和余震分布可以看出, 前震主要集中在滑移区的东部, 说明该区域在主震发生之前就已发生破裂, 意味着该区域可能存在注入的流体。余震主要分布在滑移区周围, 是由主震破裂后的余滑引起的。对比单独反演结果, 联合反演克服了台站分布不均匀的影响, 提高了破裂分布的分辨率, 所得结果更加符合真实物理过程。文中联合反演得到的破裂模型为进一步研究诱发地震机理、地震灾害评估和震后防灾减灾奠定了基础。

关键词: 兴文地震, 地震破裂过程, 诱发地震, 有限断层反演, InSAR联合反演

Abstract:

The M_L5.7 Xingwen earthquake on December 16, 2018 is very likely induced by shale gas hydraulic fracturing, which caused not only massive landslides and rock collapse, but also some casualties in the surrounding area, with the direct economic loss of about 50 million CNY. It is of great significance to determine the source rupturing process of such an induced earthquake with large magnitude.

Finite fault inversion is one of the commonly adopted methods to determine coseismic slip displacement distribution. For finite fault inversion, various data have different sensitivities to various aspects of the rupture process. The seismic data can provide the historical information about the earthquake rupture process because it contains the Doppler effect of the space-time rupture behavior on the fault. In comparison, the near-field geodetic data(such as InSAR and GPS)can constrain the fault parameters and the static slip distribution well because they contain the surface motion information. Therefore, the reliability of the inversion for the complex seismic rupture process can greatly be improved by combined use of seismicdata and InSAR data.

In this study, strong-motion seismic data recorded at 8 near-field stations are chosen and filtered by a band-pass of 0.15-0.60Hz. The same InSAR data used in Wang et al.(2022)is adopted in this joint study. For inversion, a sufficiently large potential fault plane of 15km long and 10km wide is chosen and divided into 15×10 subfaults. Finally, the rupture process is obtained by joint inversion of strong-motion seismic data and InSAR data. The results show that the earthquake is characterzied by a typical unilateral rupture with the rupturing direction nearly towards the north. The duration of the rupture process was 6s, and the energy release was mainly concentrated in the first 5s. The rupture process is segmented and can be divided into two stages. The first stage is distributed from 1-3s and is located in the range of 0~5km from the source; and the 2nd stage is distributed from 3-5s and is located between 6 and 8km from the source. The coseismic slip is mainly concentrated in areas shallower than 5km, with a peak slip of approximately 0.27m. This can be used to explain why the Xingwen earthquake with a magnitude of M_L5.7 caused relatively serious damages.

Combined with the distribution of foreshocks and aftershocks, it can be seen that the foreshocks were mainly concentrated to the eastern edge of the major coseismicslip zone, which are close to some hydraulic fracturing wells. This suggests that these foreshocks occuring at the edge of the main rupture zone has a certain correlation with fluids, and the presence of fluids further leads to the fault weakening of the mainshock due to the increase of pore pressure and the decrease of effective compressive stress, which plays a triggering role in the occurrence of the Xingwen earthquake. The aftershocks are mainly distributed around the main slip zone, which are caused by after slips after the mainshock. The results from seismic inversion, InSAR inversion and joint inversion of the two data types reveal that the Xingwen earthquake is a northward unilateral rupture. The rupture propagation direction and coseismic slip distribution may be related to the physical property changes along the fault plane.

Compared with the two single inversion results, the joint inversion overcomes the influence of uneven distribution of seismic stations, improves the resolution of slip distribution, and produces results that are more consistent with the real physical process. The slip model obtained by joint inversion in this study can be helpful for further understanding the mechanisms of induced earthquake, the correlation between induced earthquake and geological structure, earthquake disaster assessment and post-earthquake disaster prevention and hazard mitigation.

Key words: Xingwen earthquake, earthquake rupture process, induced earthquake, finite fault inversion, joint inversion of seismic and InSAR data

缪思钰, 张海江, 古宁, 李俊伦, 谭玉阳, 华思博, 张勇. 基于地震和InSAR联合反演2018年M_L5.7兴文地震破裂过程[J]. 地震地质, 2024, 46(2): 397-413.

MIAO Si-yu, ZHANG Hai-jiang, GU Ning, LI Jun-lun, TAN Yu-yang, HUA Si-bo, ZHANG Yong. JOINT INVERSION OF THE RUPTURE PROCESS OF 2018 M_L5.7 XINGWEN EARTHQUAKE BASED ON SEISMIC AND INSAR OBSERVATIONS[J]. SEISMOLOGY AND GEOLOGY, 2024, 46(2): 397-413.

图/表 10

图1 兴文地震破裂过程反演使用的地震近场台站及地震分布图黄色星号为2018年12月16日兴文地震主震的震中。红色圆点为震前15d的前震, 黑色圆点为震后15d的余震。蓝色三角形为地震台站, 白色矩形为页岩气开采井。沙滩球为本文所使用的兴文主震的震源机制解: 走向为345°,倾角为90°, 滑动角为0°

Fig. 1 The distribution of local seismic stations and earthquakes used in the Xingwen earthquake rupture process inversion.

图2 限幅恢复后的波形(以XWJ、 CJW台站为例) 紫色实线为限幅波形, 黑色实线为恢复后的波形

Fig. 2 The restored waveforms for the clipped waveforms recorded at stations XWJ and CJW.

图3 用于计算兴文地震强震动台站格林函数的一维速度模型红色实线为P波速度模型, 蓝色实线为S波速度模型

Fig. 3 One-dimensional velocity models used in the calculation of Green’s functions of the Xingwen earthquake for the strong-motion stations.

图4 2018年兴文地震破裂过程的地震数据单独反演结果 a 断层平面上的静态滑移分布, 白色星号为主震震源, 箭头指示滑移方向, 长度表示滑移量大小; b 震源时间函数; c 观测(黑色实线)和合成(红色实线)强震动波形的拟合情况, 零点是地震的发震时间

Fig. 4 The rupture process for the 2018 Xingwen earthquake inverted using only strong motion data.

图5 单独使用InSAR数据反演得到的2018年兴文地震的破裂过程白色星号为主震震源, 箭头指示滑移方向, 长度表示滑移量大小

Fig. 5 The rupture process for the 2018 Xingwen earthquake inverted using only InSAR data.

图6 仅使用InSAR数据反演中的观测和合成的干涉图白色星号代表主震位置。a 采样后的观测干涉图; b 正演合成的理论干涉图

Fig. 6 Observed and synthetic interferograms by InSAR data inversion only.

图7 强震动数据与InSAR数据均方根残差的权重分析

Fig. 7 Trade-off analysis between RMS residuals of strong-motion and InSAR data.

图8 利用地震数据和InSAR数据联合反演2018年兴文地震的破裂过程 a 断层平面上的静态滑移分布, 白色星号为主震震源, 箭头指示滑移方向, 长度表示滑移量大小; b 震源时间函数; c 地震数据拟合结果, 观测(黑色实线)和合成(红色实线)强震动波形的对比, 零点为地震的发震时间; d InSAR数据拟合结果,观测(左侧)和合成(右侧)的干涉图, 白色星号为主震震源

Fig. 8 The rupture process inversion results for the 2018 Xingwen earthquake jointly inverted by strong motion data and InSAR data.

图9 兴文地震断层面上滑移的时空分布左上角为快照时间, 白色五角星表示断层面上的震源。箭头指示滑移方向, 长度表示滑移量大小

Fig. 9 Spatial-temporal distribution of slips on the fault plane of Xingwen earthquake.

图10 兴文地震断层面上同震滑移及前震和余震分布白色星号为兴文地震主震, 红色星号为前震, 黑色星号为余震

Fig. 10 Spatial distribution of coseismicslips, foreshocks(within 15 days)and aftershocks(within 15 days) on the fault plane of Xingwen earthquake.

参考文献 41

[1]	戴坤, 郑勇, 郭汝梦, 等. 2023. 2019年长宁地震序列的震源性质: 来自流体的影响[J]. 中国科学(地球科学), 53(6): 1328—1341.
	DAI Kun, ZHENG Yong, GUO Ru-meng, et al. 2023. Source characteristics of the mainshock and aftershocks of the 2019 Changning earthquake sequence: Implications for fluid effects[J]. Scientia Sinica(Terrae), 53(6): 1328—1341(in Chinese).
[2]	宫悦, 赵敏, 龙锋, 等. 2019. 2018年12月16日兴文5.7级地震序列定位[J]. 四川地震, (3): 1—4.
	GONG Yue, ZHAO Min, LONG Feng, et al. 2019. Precise relocation of aftershock sequence of Xingwen M5.7 earthquakes on December 16, 2018[J]. Earthquake Research in Sichuan, (3): 1—4(in Chinese).
[3]	雷兴林, 苏金蓉, 王志伟. 2020. 四川盆地南部持续增长的地震活动及其与工业注水活动的关联[J]. 中国科学(地球科学), 50(11): 1505—1532.
	LEI Xing-lin, SU Jin-rong, WANG Zhi-wei. 2020. Growing seismicity in the Sichuan Basin and its association with industrial activities[J]. Scientia Sinica(Terrae), 50(11): 1505—1532(in Chinese).
[4]	孟令媛, 周龙泉, 刘杰. 2014. 2013年四川芦山 M_S7.0 地震近断层强地面运动模拟及烈度分布估计[J]. 地球物理学报, 57(2): 441—448.
	MENG Ling-yuan, ZHOU Long-quan, LIU Jie. 2014. Estimation of the near-fault strong ground motion and intensity distribution of the 2013 Lushan, Sichuan, M_S7.0 earthquake[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 57(2): 441—448(in Chinese).
[5]	王卫民, 李丽, 赵连锋, 等. 2005. 2003年2月24日新疆伽师 M_S6.5 地震震源破裂过程研究[J]. 地球物理学报, 48(2): 343—351.
	WANG Wei-min, LI Li, ZHAO Lian-feng, et al. 2005. Rupture process of Jiashi, Xinjiang earthquake(M_S6.5)of Feb. 24, 2003[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 48(2): 343—351(in Chinese).
[6]	姚振兴, 纪晨. 1997. 时间域内有限地震断层的反演问题[J]. 地球物理学报, 40(5): 691—701.
	YAO Zhen-xing, JI Chen. 1997. The inversion problem of finite fault study in time domain[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 40(5): 691—701(in Chinese).
[7]	易桂喜, 龙锋, 梁明剑, 等. 2019. 2019年6月17日四川长宁 M_S6.0 地震序列震源机制解与发震构造分析[J]. 地球物理学报, 62(9): 3432—3447. DOI
	YI Gui-xi, LONG Feng, LIANG Ming-jian, et al. 2019. Focal mechanism solution and seismogenic structure of the 17 June 2019 M_S6.0 Sichuan Changning earthquake sequence[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 62(9): 3432—3447(in Chinese).
[8]	岳汉. 2023. 大地震破裂过程反演中的灵活性需求: 现状及探讨[J]. 地球与行星物理论评, 54(1): 1—11.
	YUE Han. 2023. Advances and perspectives of flexibile inversion for earthquake rupture processes[J]. Reviews of Geophysics and Planetary Physics, 54(1): 1—11(in Chinese).
[9]	张毫生, 王世元, 赵德军, 等. 2020. 川南中强震地震构造环境分析: 以四川兴文 M_S5.7 地震为例[J]. 大地测量与地球动力学, 40(5): 529—533.
	ZHANG Hao-sheng, WANG Shi-yuan, ZHAO De-jun, et al. 2020. Seismotectonics environment analysis of moderate-strong earthquakes in Southern Sichuan Basin: A case of Sichuan Xingwen M_S5.7 earthquake[J]. Journal of Geodesy and Geodynamics, 40(5): 529—533(in Chinese).
[10]	张勇, 许力生, 陈运泰. 2015. 2015年尼泊尔 M_W7.9 地震破裂过程: 快速反演与初步联合反演[J]. 地球物理学报, 58(5): 1804—1811. DOI
	ZHANG Yong, XU Li-sheng, CHEN Yun-tai. 2015. Rupture process of the 2015 Nepal M_W7.9 earthquake: Fast inversion and preliminary joint inversion[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 58(5): 1804—1811(in Chinese).
[11]	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).
[12]	Andrews D J, Ben-Zion Y. 1997. Wrinklelike slip pulse on a fault between different materials[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research, 102(B1): 553—571.
[13]	Billings S D, Sambridge M S, Kennett B L N. 1994. Errors in hypocenter location: picking, model, and magnitude dependence[J]. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 84(6): 1978—1990.
[14]	Delouis B, Giardini D, Lundgren P, et al. 2002. Joint inversion of InSAR, GPS, teleseismic, and strong-motion data for the spatial and temporal distribution of earthquake slip: Application to the 1999 Izmit mainshock[J]. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 92(1): 278—299.
[15]	Harris R A, Day S M. 2005. Material contrast does not predict earthquake rupture propagation direction[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 32(23): L23301.
[16]	Kaverina A, Dreger D, Price E. 2002. The combined inversion of seismic and geodetic data for the source process of the 16 October 1999 M_W7.1 Hector Mine, California, earthquake[J]. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 92(4): 1266—1280.
[17]	Kim A, Dreger D S. 2008. Rupture process of the 2004 Parkfield earthquake from near-fault seismic waveform and geodetic records[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 113(B7): B07308.
[18]	Lay T, Kanamori H. 1981. An asperity model of large earthquake sequences[G]// David W S, Paul G R. Earthquake Prediction: An International Review. American Geophysical Union, Washington D C: 579—592.
[19]	Lei X L, Huang D J, Su J R, et al. 2017. Fault reactivation and earthquakes with magnitudes of up to M_W4.7 induced by shale-gas hydraulic fracturing in Sichuan Basin, China[J]. Scientific Reports, 7(1): 1—12.
[20]	Lei X L, Wang Z W, Su J R. 2019. The December 2018 M_L5.7 and January 2019 M_L5.3 earthquakes in South Sichuan Basin induced by shale gas hydraulic fracturing[J]. Seismological Research Letters, 90(3): 1099—1110.
[21]	Li J L, Xu J, Zhang H J, et al. 2023. High seismic velocity structures control moderate to strong induced earthquake behaviors by shale gas development[J]. Communications Earth & Environment, 4(1): 1—12.
[22]	Lin Y, Zhang H J. 2016. Imaging hydraulic fractures by microseismic migration for downhole monitoring system[J]. Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors, 261: 88—97.
[23]	Liu Y, Zhang H J, Zhang X, et al. 2015. Anisotropic upper crust above the aftershock zone of the 2013 M_S7.0 Lushan earthquake from the shear wave splitting analysis[J]. Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems, 16(10): 3679—3696.
[24]	Lomax A, Virieux J, Volant P, et al. 2000. Probabilistic earthquake location in 3D and layered models[G]// Clifford H T, Nitzan R. Advances in Seismic Event Location. Dordrecht, Springer: 101—134.
[25]	Massonnet D, Rossi M, Carmona C, et al. 1993. The displacement field of the Landers earthquake mapped by radar interferometry[J]. Nature, 364(6433): 138—142.
[26]	Mishra O P, Zhao D. 2003. Crack density, saturation rate and porosity at the 2001 Bhuj, India, earthquake hypocenter: A fluid-driven earthquake?[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 212(3-4): 393—405.
[27]	Peltzer G, Rosen P. 1995. Surface displacement of the 17 May 1993 Eureka Valley, California, earthquake observed by SAR interferometry[J]. Science, 268(5215): 1333—1336. PMID
[28]	Tan Y Y, Hu J, Zhang H J, et al. 2020. Hydraulic fracturing induced seismicity in the Southern Sichuan Basin due to fluid diffusion inferred from seismic and injection data analysis[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 47(4): e2019GL084885.
[29]	Tan Y Y, Zhang H J, Li J L, et al. 2018. Focal mechanism determination for induced seismicity using the neighbourhood algorithm[J]. Geophysical Journal International, 214(3): 1715—1731.
[30]	Tilmann F, Zhang Y, Moreno M, et al. 2016. The 2015 Illapel earthquake, central Chile: A type case for a characteristic earthquake?[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 43(2): 574—583.
[31]	Trifunac M D. 1974. A three-dimensional dislocation model for the San Fernando, California, earthquake of February 9, 1971[J]. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 64(1): 149—172.
[32]	Wang R J. 1999. A simple orthonormalization method for stable and efficient computation of Green’s functions[J]. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 89(3): 733—741.
[33]	Wang S, Jiang G Y, Lei X L, et al. 2022. Three M_W≥4.7 earthquakes within the Changning(China)shale gas field ruptured shallow faults intersecting with hydraulic fracturing wells[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 127(2): e2021JB022946.
[34]	Wang Z, Wang J, Yang X Q. 2021. The role of fluids in the 2008 M_S8.0 Wenchuan earthquake, China[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 126(2): e2020JB019959.
[35]	Wei S J, Graves R, Helmberger D, et al. 2012. Sources of shaking and flooding during the Tohoku-Oki earthquake: A mixture of rupture styles[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 333-334: 91—100.
[36]	Yang Z Q, Zhao D P, Dong Y P, et al. 2022. Crustal flow and fluids affected the 2021 M7.4 Maduo earthquake in Northeast Tibet[J]. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, 225: 105050.
[37]	Yue H, Zhang Y, Ge Z X, et al. 2020. Resolving rupture processes of great earthquakes: Reviews and perspective from fast response to joint inversion[J]. Science in China(Earth Sciences), 63(4): 492—511.
[38]	Zhang J H, Hao J L, Zhao X, et al. 2016. Restoration of clipped seismic waveforms using projection onto convex sets method[J]. Scientific Reports, 6(1): 1—10.
[39]	Zhang Y, Feng W F, Chen Y T, et al. 2012. The 2009 L'Aquila M_W6.3 earthquake: A new technique to locate the hypocentre in the joint inversion of earthquake rupture process[J]. Geophysical Journal International, 191(3): 1417—1426.
[40]	Zhang Y, Wang R J, Zschau J, et al. 2014. Automatic imaging of earthquake rupture processes by iterative deconvolution and stacking of high-rate GPS and strong motion seismograms[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 119(7): 5633—5650.
[41]	Zhao D P, Kanamori H, Negishi H, et al. 1996. Tomography of the source area of the 1995 Kobe earthquake: Evidence for fluids at the hypocenter?[J]. Science, 274(5294): 1891—1894. PMID

基于地震和InSAR联合反演2018年M_L5.7兴文地震破裂过程

JOINT INVERSION OF THE RUPTURE PROCESS OF 2018 M_L5.7 XINGWEN EARTHQUAKE BASED ON SEISMIC AND INSAR OBSERVATIONS

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 10

参考文献 41

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	姜丛, 蒋长胜, 尹欣欣, 王蕊嘉, 翟鸿宇, 张延保, 来贵娟, 尹凤玲. 水力压裂诱发地震活动中的b值时空异质性及其应用[J]. 地震地质, 2022, 44(5): 1333-1349.
[2]	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.
[3]	王志伟, 王小龙, 马胜利, 雷兴林, 刘培洵. 重庆荣昌地区注水诱发地震的时空分布特征[J]. 地震地质, 2018, 40(3): 523-538.
[4]	魏海, 杨华舒, 王铭明, 王琳, 廖敏. 基于可靠度理论的水库诱发地震分析[J]. 地震地质, 2016, 38(4): 885-896.
[5]	冯向东, 岳秀霞, 王曰风, 王晓山, 刁桂苓, 张洪智, 程万正, 李悦, 冯志仁. 由向家坝水库震源机制探讨诱发地震的成因[J]. 地震地质, 2015, 37(2): 565-575.
[6]	雷兴林, 李霞颖, 李琦, 马胜利, 付碧宏, 崔银祥. 沉积岩储藏系统小断层在油气田注水诱发地震中的作用——以四川盆地为例[J]. 地震地质, 2014, 36(3): 625-643.
[7]	刁桂苓, 王曰风, 冯向东, 王晓山, 冯志仁, 张洪智, 程万正, 李悦, 王利兵. 溪洛渡库首区蓄水后震源机制分析[J]. 地震地质, 2014, 36(3): 644-657.
[8]	马文涛, 蔺永, 苑京立, 李海鸥, 徐长朋, 罗佳宏. 水库诱发地震的震例比较与分析[J]. 地震地质, 2013, 35(4): 914-929.
[9]	马文涛, 徐锡伟, 于贵华, 苑京立, 徐长朋, 蔺永. 使用灰色聚类方法评估长江三峡水库湖北不同库段水库诱发地震的震级上限[J]. 地震地质, 2012, (4): 726-738.
[10]	王小龙, 马胜利, 雷兴林, 郭欣, 王强, 于国政, 勾宪斌, 桑原保人, 今西和俊, 蒋霞东. 重庆荣昌诱发地震区精细速度结构及2010年M_L5.1地震序列精确定位[J]. 地震地质, 2012, (2): 348-358.
[11]	王小龙, 马胜利, 雷兴林, 余国政, 王强, 郭欣, 桑原保人, 今西和俊. 重庆荣昌地区注水诱发地震加密观测[J]. 地震地质, 2011, 33(1): 151-156.
[12]	马文涛, 徐长朋, 张新东, 徐锡伟, 李海鸥, 苑京立. 紫坪铺水库与汶川地震关系的讨论[J]. 地震地质, 2011, 33(1): 175-190.
[13]	邹乐乐, 金菊良, 周玉良. 基于遗传模糊层次分析法的水库诱发地震综合风险评价指标体系筛选模型[J]. 地震地质, 2010, 32(4): 628-637.
[14]	李海鸥, 马文涛, 徐锡伟, 苑京立, 徐长鹏. 三峡水库泄滩西地区地震双差定位及成因分析[J]. 地震地质, 2010, 32(4): 564-569.
[15]	马文涛, 徐长朋, 李海鸥, 苑京立, 徐锡伟, 张新东, 张兰凤. 长江三峡水库诱发地震加密观测及地震成因初步分析[J]. 地震地质, 2010, 32(4): 552-563.

基于地震和InSAR联合反演2018年ML5.7兴文地震破裂过程

JOINT INVERSION OF THE RUPTURE PROCESS OF 2018 ML5.7 XINGWEN EARTHQUAKE BASED ON SEISMIC AND INSAR OBSERVATIONS

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 10

参考文献 41

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

基于地震和InSAR联合反演2018年M_L5.7兴文地震破裂过程

JOINT INVERSION OF THE RUPTURE PROCESS OF 2018 M_L5.7 XINGWEN EARTHQUAKE BASED ON SEISMIC AND INSAR OBSERVATIONS