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

doi:10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2021.04.007

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

2021年5月21日云南省大理白族自治州漾濞县发生6.4级强烈地震。为了深入研究漾濞6.4级地震序列的时空分布、震源特性以及发震构造等, 文中利用双差法对漾濞地震序列中约2 000个地震进行重新定位, 并且利用MTINV程序包反演了地震序列中31个地震的震源机制解。结果显示: 漾濞6.4级地震是一次右旋走滑型地震事件, 发震断层走向NW, 倾角近直立; 序列震源机制与主震的一致性较好, 以走滑型为主, 存在少量混合类型; 精定位结果显示序列呈明显的NW向展布特征, 震源深度主要集中在10km以浅; 与走向垂直的深度剖面显示, 南、北段断层倾向均为SW, 但倾角不同; P轴的优势方位为SN向, 倾俯角近水平, 与区域应力场特征一致。综合重定位和矩张量反演结果推测, 漾濞地震的发震断层是一条整体呈NW走向、倾向SW、倾角可能具有分段性的右旋走滑活动断裂, 震源区断裂破裂可能存在分段现象, 且局部小区域构造形态可能较为复杂。

关键词: 漾濞6.4级地震, 震源机制解, 双差定位, 矩张量反演

Abstract:

On May 21, 2021, a strong earthquake of magnitude 6.4 occurred in Yangbi County, Dali Prefecture, Yunnan Province. The focal depth of this earthquake is 8km. The earthquake broke the calm of magnitude 6 earthquake that had lasted for more than 6 years in Yunnan, and is a significant strong earthquake in the northwestern Yunnan region. Before the M_S6.4 Yangbi earthquake, the foreshock activity near the epicenter was frequent, and the maximum magnitude of foreshock is 5.6. After the M_S6.4 earthquake, another M_S5.2 earthquake, and many aftershocks of magnitude 3 and 4 occurred. The earthquake sequence was very rich. In order to further study the spatio-temporal distribution, source characteristics and seismogenic structure of the magnitude 6.4 earthquake sequence in Yangbi, in this paper more than 2 800 seismic events of the Yangbi earthquake sequence were relocated using the double-difference relative positioning method based on the seismic phase data from the Seismic Cataloging System of China Earthquake Networks Center, and finally 2 116 precise location results were obtained. At the same time, based on the broadband digital waveform data provided by the China Earthquake Networks Center, focal mechanism solutions 31 earthquakes of the sequence were obtained by MTINV program.

The results of the moment tensor inversion show that the moment magnitude of the Yangbi M_S6.4 earthquake is M_W6.0, the centroid depth is 10km, and the optimal double-couple solution is strike 135°, dip 81° and rake 176° for nodal plane I, and strike 226°, dip 86° and rake 9° for nodal plane Ⅱ. It is a strike-slip earthquake. Combining the strike of the fault in the earthquake source area and the distribution of aftershocks, it is inferred that the seismogenic fault is the nodal plane Ⅰ which strikes NW. Focal mechanism solutions of other 30 earthquakes of the sequence are mainly strike-slip type, which are consistent with the main shock. There are also a few events with mixed types. The focal mechanisms of several earthquakes close to the occurrence time of the M_S6.4 main earthquake are in good agreement with the main earthquake. The relocation results show obvious linear distribution characteristics of the sequence. The overall strike is in the NW direction and the dip to the SW direction. The depth profile sequence is horizontally linear along the strike. The dip angles of the fault planes in the south and north sections are different. The dip angles of the northern section are approximately vertical, and that of the southern section is about 45° or so. However, the sequence of the northern section is more concentrated along the fault plane than southern section. The dominant strike of the Yangbi earthquake sequence is NW-SE, the dip angles are concentrated between 70° and 90°, and the rakes are distributed around 180°, indicating that the Yangbi earthquake sequence is mainly characterized by strike-slip faulting. The dominant azimuth of the P-axis is SN and that of the T-axis is EW. The plunge of P-axis and T-axis are near horizontal. This indicates that the activities of the Yangbi earthquake sequence are mainly controlled by the regional SN-direction horizontal compression stress field. The dominant directions of the sequence’s fault planes and P-axis parameters are single, indicating that it is less likely that complex fault activity and large-scale stress adjustment will occur in the source area of this earthquake.

Integrating the results of relocations and focal mechanisms, it suggests that the seismogenic fault of Yangbi earthquake is a right-handed strike-slip active fault, striking northwest and dipping to the southwest, and the dip distribution is segmented. The dip angle of the northern segment is nearly vertical, and the dip angle of the southern segment is lower than that of the northern segment. There may exist rupture segmentation in the fault in the earthquake source area, and the structure morphology of local small areas may be more complicated.

Key words: Yangbi M6.4 earthquake, focal mechanism solutions, double-difference relocation, moment tensor inversion

中图分类号:

P315.2

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.

WANG Ying, ZHAO Tao, HU Jing, LIU Chun. RELOCATION AND FOCAL MECHANISM SOLUTIONS OF THE 2021 YANGBI, YUNNAN M_S6.4 EARTHQUAKE SEQUENCE[J]. SEISMOLOGY AND EGOLOGY, 2021, 43(4): 847-863.

图/表 10

参考文献 38

[1]	常祖峰, 常昊, 臧阳, 等. 2016. 维西-乔后断裂新活动特征及其与红河断裂的关系[J]. 地质力学学报, 22(3): 517-530.
	CHANG Zu-feng, CHANG Hao, ZANG Yang, et al. 2016. Recent active features of Weixi-Qiaohou Fault and its relationship with the Honghe Fault[J]. Journal of Geomechanics, 22(3): 517-530. (in Chinese)
[2]	邓起东, 张培震, 冉勇康, 等. 2002. 中国活动构造基本特征[J]. 中国科学(D辑), 32(12): 1020-1030.
	DENG Qi-dong, ZHANG Pei-zhen, RAN Yong-kang, et al. 2003. Basic characteristics of active tectonics in China[J]. Science in China (Ser D), 32(12): 1020-1030. (in Chinese)
[3]	房立华, 吴建平, 王长在, 等. 2013. 2012年新疆新源M_S6.6地震余震序列精定位研究[J]. 中国科学(D辑), 43(12): 1929-1933.
	FANG Li-hua, WU Jian-ping, WANG Chang-zai, et al. 2013. Relocation of the 2012 M_S6.6 Xinjiang Xinyuan earthquake sequence[J]. Science in China, 43(12): 1929-1933. (in Chinese)
[4]	房立华, 吴建平, 王未来, 等. 2015. 2014年新疆于田M_S7.3地震序列重定位[J]. 地球物理学报, 58(3): 802-808.
	FANG Li-hua, WU Jian-ping, WANG Wei-lai, et al. 2015. Relocation of the 2014 M_S7.3 earthquake sequence in Yutian, Xinjiang[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 58(3): 802-808. (in Chinese)
[5]	高原, 周蕙兰, 郑斯华, 等. 1997. 测定震源深度的意义的初步讨论[J]. 中国地震, 13(4): 321-329.
	GAO Yuan, ZHOU Hui-lan, ZHENG Si-hua, et al. 1997. Preliminary discussion on implication of determination on source depth of earthquake[J]. Earthquake Research in China, 13(4): 321-329. (in Chinese)
[6]	李金, 王琼, 吴传勇, 等. 2016. 2015年7月3日皮山6.5级地震发震构造初步研究[J]. 地球物理学报, 59(8): 2859-2870.
	LI Jin, WANG Qiong, WU Chuan-yong, et al. 2016. Preliminary study for seismogenic structure of the Pishan M_S6.5 earthquake of July 3, 2015[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 59(8): 2859-2870. (in Chinese)
[7]	李通, 郭志, 高星. 2020. 云南通海2018年8月地震序列重定位及震源机制[J]. 地震地质, 42(4): 111-122. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2020.04.007. DOI
	LI Tong, GUO Zhi, GAO Xing. 2020. Relocation and focal mechanisms of Yunnan Tonghai earthquake sequence of August 2018 [J]. Seismology and Geology, 42(4): 111-122. (in Chinese)
[8]	刘自凤, 龙锋, 彭关灵, 等. 2019. 滇西北地区强震危险性分析[J]. 地震研究, 42(3): 330-337.
	LIU Zi-feng, LONG Feng, PENG Guan-ling, et al. 2019. Analysis on strong earthquake risk in northwestern Ynnnan[J]Journal of Seismological Research, 42(3): 330-337. (in Chinese)
[9]	吕坚, 郑秀芬, 肖健, 等. 2013. 2012年9月7日云南彝良M_S5.7、 M_S5.6地震震源破裂特征与发震构造研究[J]. 地球物理学报, 56(8): 2645-2654.
	LÜ Jian, ZHENG Xiu-feng, XIAO Jian, et al. 2013. Rupture characteristics and seismogenic structures of the M_S5.7 and M_S5.6 Yiliang earthquake of Sep.7, 2012[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 56(8): 2645-2654. (in Chinese)
[10]	冉勇康, 陈立春, 程建武, 等. 2008. 安宁河断裂冕宁以北晚第四纪地表变形与强震破裂行为[J]. 中国科学(D辑), 38(5): 543-554.
	RAN Yong-kang, CHEN Li-chun, CHENG Jian-wu, et al. 2008. Late Quaternary surface deformation and rupture behavior of strong earthquake on the segment north of Mianning of the Anninghe Fault[J]. Science in China (Ser D), 38(5): 543-554. (in Chinese)
[11]	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.
	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)
[12]	王琪, 张培震, 牛之俊, 等. 2001. 中国大陆现今地壳运动和构造变形[J]. 中国科学(D辑), 31(7): 529-536.
	WANG Qi, ZHANG Pei-zhen, NIU Zhi-jun, et al. 2001. Crustal movement and tectonic deformation of continental China[J]. Science in China (Ser D), 31(7): 529-536. (in Chinese)
[13]	王绍晋, 张建国, 余庆坤, 等. 2010. 红河断裂带的震源机制与现代构造应力场[J]. 地震研究, 33(2): 200-207.
	WANG Shao-jin, ZHANG Jian-guo, YU Qing-kun, et al. 2010. Focal mechanism of strong and medium-small earthquakes and modern tectonic stress-field of the Red-River fault zone[J]. Journal of Seismological Research, 33(2): 200-207. (in Chinese)
[14]	王未来, 吴建平, 房立华, 等. 2014. 2014年云南鲁甸M_S6.5地震序列的双差定位[J]. 地球物理学报, 57(9): 3042-3051.
	WANG Wei-lai, WU Jian-ping, FANG Li-hua, et al. 2014. Double difference location of the Ludian M_S6.5 earthquake sequences in Yunnan Province in 2014[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 57(9): 3042-3051. (in Chinese)
[15]	王阎昭, 王恩宁, 沈正康, 等. 2008. 基于GPS资料约束反演川滇地区主要断裂现今活动速率[J]. 中国科学(D辑), 38(5): 582-597.
	WANG Yan-zhao, WANG En-ning, SHEN Zheng-kang, et al. 2008. GPS-constrained inversion of present-day slip rates along major faults of the Sichuan-Yunnan region, China[J]. Science in China (Ser D), 38(5): 582-597. (in Chinese)
[16]	王莹, 赵韬, 李陈侠, 等. 2019. 2017年四川九寨沟7.0级地震序列重定位和震源机制特征分析[J]. 地球物理学进展, 34(2): 469-478.
	WANG Ying, ZHAO Tao, LI Chen-xia, et al. 2019. Relocations and focal mechanism solutions of the 2017 Jiuzhaigou, Sichuan M_S7.0 earthquake sequence[J]. Progress in Geophysics, 34(2): 469-478. (in Chinese)
[17]	向宏发, 虢顺民, 张晚霞, 等. 2007. 红河断裂带南段中新世以来大型右旋位错量的定量研究[J]. 地震地质, 29(1): 34-50.
	XIANG Hong-fa, GUO Shun-min, ZHANG Wan-xia, et al. 2007. Quantitative study on the large scale dextral strike slip offset in the southern segment of the Red River Fault since Miocene[J]. Seismology and Geology, 29(1): 34-50. (in Chinese)
[18]	向宏发, 韩竹军, 虢顺民, 等. 2004. 红河断裂带大型右旋走滑运动与伴生构造地貌变形[J]. 地震地质, 26(4): 597-610.
	XIANG Hong-fa, HAN Zhu-jun, GUO Shun-min, et al. 2004. Large-scale dextral strike-slip movement and associated tectonic deformation along the Red-River fault zone[J]. Seismology and Geology, 26(4): 597-610. (in Chinese)
[19]	熊探宇, 姚鑫, 张永双. 2010. 鲜水河断裂带全新世活动性研究进展综述[J]. 地质力学学报, 16(2): 176-188.
	XIONG Tan-yu, YAO Xin, ZHANG Yong-shuang. 2010. A review on study of activity of Xianshuihe fault zone since the Holocene[J]. Journal of Geomechanics, 16(2): 176-188. (in Chinese)
[20]	徐锡伟, 闻学泽, 郑荣章, 等. 2003. 川滇地区活动块体最新构造变动样式及其动力来源[J]. 中国科学(D辑), 33(S1): 151-162.
	XU Xi-wei, WEN Xue-ze, ZHENG Rong-zhang, et al. 2003. Pattern of latest tectonic motion and its dynamics for active blocks in Sichuan-Yunnan region, China[J]. Science in China (Ser D), 33(S1): 151-162. (in Chinese)
[21]	徐晓雪, 季灵运, 蒋锋云, 等. 2020. 基于GPS和小震研究金沙江断裂带现今活动特征[J]. 大地测量与地球动力学, 40(10): 1062-1067.
	XU Xiao-xue, JI Ling-yun, JIANG Feng-yun, et al. 2020. Study on current activity features of Jinshajiang fault zone based on GPS and small earthquakes[J]. Journal of Geodesy and Geodynamics, 40(10): 1062-1067. (in Chinese)
[22]	徐志国, 梁姗姗, 盛书中, 等. 2020. 2019年四川长宁M_S6.0地震序列重定位和震源特征分析[J]. 地震学报, 42(4): 377-397.
	XU Zhi-guo, LIANG Shan-shan, SHENG Shu-zhong, et al. 2020. Relocation and source characteristics of the 2019 Changning M_S6.0 earthquake sequence[J]. Acta Seismologica Sinica, 42(4): 377-397. (in Chinese)
[23]	易桂喜, 龙锋, 梁明剑, 等. 2017. 2017年8月8日九寨沟M7.0地震及余震震源机制解与发震构造分析[J]. 地球物理学报, 60(10): 4083-4097.
	YI Gui-xi, LONG Feng, LIANG Ming-jian, et al. 2017. Focal mechanism solutions and seismogenic structure of the 8 August 2017 M70 Jiuzhaigou earthquake and its aftershocks, northern Sichuan[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 60(10): 4083-4097. (in Chinese)
[24]	易桂喜, 龙锋, 闻学泽, 等. 2015. 2014年11月22日康定M6.3地震序列发震构造分析[J]. 地球物理学报, 58(4): 1205-1219.
	YI Gui-xi, LONG Feng, WEN Xue-ze, et al. 2015. Seismogenic structure of the M6.3 Kangding earthquake sequence on 22 Nov. 2014, southwestern China[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 58(4): 1205-1219. (in Chinese)
[25]	易桂喜, 龙锋, 赵敏, 等. 2016. 2014年10月1日越西M5.0地震震源机制与发震构造分析[J]. 地震地质, 38(4): 1124-1136. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2016.04.025. DOI
	YI Gui-xi, LONG Feng, ZHAO Min, et al. 2016. Focal mechanism and seismogenic structure of the M5.0 Yuexi earthquake on 1 Oct. 2014, southwestern China[J]. Seismology and Geology, 38(4): 1124-1136. (in Chinese)
[26]	张广伟, 雷建设, 梁姗姗, 等. 2014. 2014年8月3日云南鲁甸M_S6.5地震序列重定位与震源机制研究[J]. 地球物理学报, 57(9): 3018-3027.
	ZHANG Guang-wei, LEI Jian-she, LIANG Shan-shan, et al. 2014. Relocations and focal mechanism solutions of the 3 August 2014 Ludian, Yunnan M_S6.5 earthquake sequence[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 57(9): 3018-3027. (in Chinese)
[27]	张广伟, 张洪艳, 孙长青. 2016. 2015年新疆皮山M_S6.5地震震源机制及余震序列定位[J]. 地震地质, 38(3): 711-720. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2016.03.016. DOI
	ZHANG Guang-wei, ZHANG Hong-yan, SUN Chang-qing. 2016. Mechanism of the 2015 Pishan, Xinjiang, M_S6.5 mainshock and relocation of its aftershock sequences[J]. Seismology and Geology, 38(3): 711-720. (in Chinese)
[28]	赵韬, 赵曦, 王莹, 等. 2016. 区域台网地震矩张量快速反演系统研究[J]. 地震学报, 38(6): 889-897.
	ZHAO Tao, ZHAO Xi, WANG Ying, et al. 2016. Study on the fast seismic moment tensor inversion system using regional seismic network data[J]. Acta Seismologica Sinica, 38(6): 889-897. (in Chinese)
[29]	Ichinose G A, Anderson J G, Smith K D, et al. 2003. Source parameters of eastern California and western Nevada earthquakes from regional moment tensor Iiversion[J]. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 93(1): 61-84. DOI URL
[30]	Jost M L, Herrmann R B. 1989. A student’s guide to and review of moment tensor[J]. Seismological Research Letters, 60(2): 37-57. DOI URL
[31]	Kawakatsu H. 1998. On the realtime monitoring of the long-period seismic wavefield[J]. Bulletin of the Earthquake Research Institute, University of Tokyo, 73(3-4): 267-274.
[32]	Liu Y, Yao H J, Zhang H J, et al. 2021. The community velocity model V.1.0 of southwest China, constructed from joint body- and surface-wave travel-time tomography[J/OL]. Seismological Research Letters. doi: org/10.1785/0220200318. DOI
[33]	Long F, Yi G X, Wang S W, et al. 2019. Geometry and tectonic deformation of the seismogenic structure for the 8 August 2017 M_S70 Jiuzhaigou earthquake sequence, northern Sichuan, China[J]. Earth and Planetary Physics, 3(3): 253-267. doi.org/ 10.26464/epp2019027. DOI URL
[34]	Tajima F, Megnin C, Dreger D S, et al. 2002. Feasibility of real-time broadband waveform inversion for simultaneous moment tensor and centroid location determination[J]. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 92(2): 739-750. DOI URL
[35]	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. DOI URL
[36]	Xie Z J, Zheng Y, Liu C, et al. 2015. Source parameters of the 2014 M_S6.5 Ludian earthquake sequence and their implications on the seismogenic structure[J]. Seismological Research Letters, 86(6): 1614-1621. doi: 10.1785/0220150085. DOI URL
[37]	Xu Z, Huang Z, Wang L, et al. 2016. Crustal stress field in Yunnan: Implication for crust-mantle coupling[J]. Earthquake Science, 29(2): 47-57. doi: 10.1007/s11589-016-0146-3. DOI
[38]	Zoback M L. 1992. First- and second-order patterns of stress in the lithosphere: The World Stress Map Project[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research Solid Earth, 97(B8): 11703-11728.

数据来源	节面Ⅰ			节面Ⅱ			矩心深度 /km	矩震级 M_W
	走向 /(°)	倾角 /(°)	滑动角 /(°)	走向 /(°)	倾角 /(°)	滑动角 /(°)
USGS^①（①http://www.globalcmt.org。）	135	82	-165	43	75	-9	17.5	6.1
GCMT^②（②https://earthquake.usgs.gov。）	315	86	168	46	78	4	15	6.1
中国地震局地球物理研究所^③（③http://www.cea-igp.ac.cn。）	138	82	-161	45	71	-8	5	6.0
本文结果	135	80	176	226	86	10	10	6.0

数据来源	节面Ⅰ			节面Ⅱ			矩心深度 /km	矩震级 M_W
	走向 /(°)	倾角 /(°)	滑动角 /(°)	走向 /(°)	倾角 /(°)	滑动角 /(°)
USGS^①（①http://www.globalcmt.org。）	135	82	-165	43	75	-9	17.5	6.1
GCMT^②（②https://earthquake.usgs.gov。）	315	86	168	46	78	4	15	6.1
中国地震局地球物理研究所^③（③http://www.cea-igp.ac.cn。）	138	82	-161	45	71	-8	5	6.0
本文结果	135	80	176	226	86	10	10	6.0

来源	震源机制解			作为初始解得到的中心震源机制解			作为初始解得到的标准差S /(°)	以标准差最小的解作为初始解的中心震源机制与其他震源机制的最小空间旋转角/(°)
	走向 /(°)	倾角 /(°)	滑动角 /(°)	走向 /(°)	倾角 /(°)	滑动角 /(°)
USGS	135	82	-165	135.85	84.45	-169.53	10.343 502	5.29
GCMT	315	86	168	135.84	84.49	-10.51	91.404 601	9.74
CEA-IGP	138	82	-161	135.84	84.43	-169.52	10.343 496	8.87
本文	135	80	176	135.85	84.42	-169.52	10.343 468	15.05

来源	震源机制解			作为初始解得到的中心震源机制解			作为初始解得到的标准差S /(°)	以标准差最小的解作为初始解的中心震源机制与其他震源机制的最小空间旋转角/(°)
	走向 /(°)	倾角 /(°)	滑动角 /(°)	走向 /(°)	倾角 /(°)	滑动角 /(°)
USGS	135	82	-165	135.85	84.45	-169.53	10.343 502	5.29
GCMT	315	86	168	135.84	84.49	-10.51	91.404 601	9.74
CEA-IGP	138	82	-161	135.84	84.43	-169.52	10.343 496	8.87
本文	135	80	176	135.85	84.42	-169.52	10.343 468	15.05