SEISMOLOGY AND GEOLOGY ›› 2022, Vol. 44 ›› Issue (3): 753-770.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2022.03.012
• Special topic on extremely low-frequency seismo-electromagnetic phenomena • Previous Articles Next Articles
HAN Bing1)(), TANG Ji1),*(
), ZHAO Guo-ze1), WANG Li-feng1), DONG Ze-yi1), FAN Ye1), SUN Gui-cheng2)
Received:
2021-05-11
Revised:
2021-09-29
Online:
2022-06-20
Published:
2022-08-02
Contact:
TANG Ji
韩冰1)(), 汤吉1),*(
), 赵国泽1), 王立凤1), 董泽义1), 范晔1), 孙贵成2)
通讯作者:
汤吉
作者简介:
韩冰, 女, 1988年生, 2014年于中国地震局地质研究所获地球物理专业硕士学位, 工程师, 主要从事极低频电磁台网运维与数据分析, E-mail: zddhb@163.com。
基金资助:
CLC Number:
HAN Bing, TANG Ji, ZHAO Guo-ze, WANG Li-feng, DONG Ze-yi, FAN Ye, SUN Gui-cheng. ANALYSIS OF ELECTROMAGNETIC CO-SEISMIC PHENOMENA OBSERVED IN CSELF STATIONS[J]. SEISMOLOGY AND GEOLOGY, 2022, 44(3): 753-770.
韩冰, 汤吉, 赵国泽, 王立凤, 董泽义, 范晔, 孙贵成. 极低频台站同震电磁信号特征分析[J]. 地震地质, 2022, 44(3): 753-770.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: https://www.dzdz.ac.cn/EN/10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2022.03.012
发震时刻(UTC) | 震级 /M | 北纬 /(°) | 东经 /(°) | 深度 /km | 参考位置 | 震中距 /km |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2014-10-07 13:49:39 | 6.6 | 23.39 | 100.46 | 5 | 云南景谷 | 31 |
2014-10-11 06:05:12 | 4.7 | 23.50 | 100.40 | 8 | 云南景谷 | 34.2 |
2014-12-05 18:43:44 | 5.8 | 23.31 | 100.50 | 9 | 云南景谷 | 32.7 |
2014-12-06 10:20:00 | 5.9 | 23.32 | 100.50 | 10 | 云南景谷 | 32.7 |
2014-12-07 09:23:04 | 4.7 | 23.30 | 100.50 | 15.4 | 云南景谷 | 33.2 |
2015-11-13 16:55:06 | 4.6 | 23.33 | 100.52 | 5.3 | 云南景谷 | 29.4 |
2018-09-08 02:31:29 | 5.9 | 23.28 | 101.53 | 11 | 云南墨江 | 85 |
Table 1 General information of earthquakes
发震时刻(UTC) | 震级 /M | 北纬 /(°) | 东经 /(°) | 深度 /km | 参考位置 | 震中距 /km |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2014-10-07 13:49:39 | 6.6 | 23.39 | 100.46 | 5 | 云南景谷 | 31 |
2014-10-11 06:05:12 | 4.7 | 23.50 | 100.40 | 8 | 云南景谷 | 34.2 |
2014-12-05 18:43:44 | 5.8 | 23.31 | 100.50 | 9 | 云南景谷 | 32.7 |
2014-12-06 10:20:00 | 5.9 | 23.32 | 100.50 | 10 | 云南景谷 | 32.7 |
2014-12-07 09:23:04 | 4.7 | 23.30 | 100.50 | 15.4 | 云南景谷 | 33.2 |
2015-11-13 16:55:06 | 4.6 | 23.33 | 100.52 | 5.3 | 云南景谷 | 29.4 |
2018-09-08 02:31:29 | 5.9 | 23.28 | 101.53 | 11 | 云南墨江 | 85 |
震级/M | Ex | Ey | Hx | Hy | Hz |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
6.6 | 210.490 5 | 0 | 49.553 44 | 110.139 6 | 2 091.949 |
4.6 | 6.349 204 | 2.023 256 | 1.173 469 | 2.151 22 | 15.351 94 |
振幅比值 | 33.152 27 | 0 | 42.228 15 | 51.198 69 | 136.266 1 |
能量比值 | 1 099.073 | 0 | 1 783.217 | 2 621.306 | 18 568.45 |
Table 2 Comparison of enhanced amplitude between the M6.6 and M4.6 earthquakes
震级/M | Ex | Ey | Hx | Hy | Hz |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
6.6 | 210.490 5 | 0 | 49.553 44 | 110.139 6 | 2 091.949 |
4.6 | 6.349 204 | 2.023 256 | 1.173 469 | 2.151 22 | 15.351 94 |
振幅比值 | 33.152 27 | 0 | 42.228 15 | 51.198 69 | 136.266 1 |
能量比值 | 1 099.073 | 0 | 1 783.217 | 2 621.306 | 18 568.45 |
地震名称 | 台站及震中距 |
---|---|
景谷5.9级地震 | 景谷台(32.7km)、 牟定台(254km)、 大理台(272km) |
景谷6.6级地震 | 景谷台(32km)、 牟定台(242km)、 大理台(262km)、 新平台(175km) |
Table 3 Information of earthquake and stations
地震名称 | 台站及震中距 |
---|---|
景谷5.9级地震 | 景谷台(32.7km)、 牟定台(254km)、 大理台(272km) |
景谷6.6级地震 | 景谷台(32km)、 牟定台(242km)、 大理台(262km)、 新平台(175km) |
[1] | 高永新. 2010. 地震电磁场: 基于动电效应的波场模拟[D]. 哈尔滨: 哈尔滨工业大学. |
GAO Yong-xin. 2010. Simulation of earthquake-induced electromagnetic wave field due to the electrokinetic effect[D]. Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin (in Chinese). | |
[2] | 江鹏. 2021. 磁棒旋转诱导的同震磁场研究[D]. 合肥: 合肥工业大学. |
JIANG Peng. 2021. Study on coseismic magnetic field induced by rotation of coil-type magnetometer[D]. Hefei University of Technology, Hefei (in Chinese). | |
[3] | 汤吉, 詹艳, 王立凤, 等. 2008. 5月12日汶川8.0级地震强余震观测的电磁同震效应[J]. 地震地质, 30(3): 739—745. |
TANG Ji, ZHAN Yan, WANG Li-feng, et al. 2008. Coseismic signal associated with aftershock of the MS8.0 Wenchuan earthquake[J]. Seismology and Geology, 30(3): 739—748 (in Chinese). | |
[4] | 汤吉, 詹艳, 王立凤, 等. 2010. 汶川地震强余震的电磁同震效应[J]. 地球物理学报, 53(3): 526—534. |
TANG Ji, ZHAN Yan, WANG Li-feng, et al. 2010. Electromagnetic coseismic effect associated with aftershock of Wenchuan MS8.0 earthquake[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 53(3): 526—534 (in Chinese). | |
[5] | 王立凤, 朱学会, 赵国泽, 等. 2016. GMS -07电磁观测系统测量注意事项及故障检测[J]. 物探与化探, 40(2): 385—389. |
WANG Li-feng, ZHU Xue-hui, ZHAO Guo-ze, et al. 2016. The operation cautions and troubleshooting of the GMS -07 system in MT survey[J]. Geophysical and Geochemical Exploration, 40(2): 385—389 (in Chinese). | |
[6] | 谢小碧. 1999. 地震波在盆地中的传播特点及其对盆地中震害的影响[J]. 山西地震, 96(1): 1—5. |
XIE Xiao-bi. 1999. Propagation characters of seismic wave in basin and its impact on earthquake disaster[J]Earthquake Research in Shanxi, 96(1): 1—5 (in Chinese). | |
[7] |
徐光晶, 汤吉, 陈小斌, 等. 2009. 云南宁洱 MS6.4 地震震后电磁效应[J]. 地震地质, 31(2): 305—312. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2009.02.011.
DOI |
XU Guang-jing, TANG Ji, CHEN Xiao-bin, et al. 2009. Electromagnetic effects associated with aftershocks of the MS6.4 Ning’er earthquake[J]. Seismology and Geology, 31(2): 305—312 (in Chinese). | |
[8] | 赵国泽, 陆建勋. 2003. 利用人工源超低频电磁波监测地震的试验与分析[J]. 中国工程科学, 5(10): 27—33. |
ZHAO Guo-ze, LU Jian-xun. 2003. Monitoring and analysis of earthquake phenomena by artificial SLF waves[J]. Engineering Science, 5(10): 27—33 (in Chinese).
DOI URL |
|
[9] | 赵国泽, 王立凤, 汤吉, 等. 2010. 地震监测人工源极低频电磁技术(CSELF)新试验[J]. 地球物理学报, 53(3): 479—486. |
ZHAO Guo-ze, WANG Li-feng, TANG Ji, et al. 2010. New experiments of CSELF electromagnetic method for earthquake monitoring[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 53(3): 479—486 (in Chinese). | |
[10] |
赵国泽, 王立凤, 詹艳, 等. 2012. 地震预测人工源极低频电磁新技术(CSELF)和第一个观测台网[J]. 地震地质, 34(4): 576—585. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2012.04.004.
DOI |
ZHAO Guo-ze, WANG Li-feng, ZHAN Yan, et al. 2012. A new electromagnetic technique for earthquake monitoring-CSELF and the first observational network[J]. Seismology and Geology, 34(4): 576—585 (in Chinese). | |
[11] |
Gao Y X, Zhao G Z, Chong J J, et al. 2020. Coseismic electric and magnetic signals observed during 2017 Jiuzhaigou MW6.5 earthquake and explained by electrokinetics and magnetometer rotation[J]. Geophysical Journal International, 223(2): 1130—1143.
DOI URL |
[12] |
Grossman A, Morlet J. 1984. Decomposition of Hardy functions into square integrable wavelets of constant shape[J]. SIAM Journal on Mathematical Analysis, 15(4): 723—736.
DOI URL |
[13] |
Hayakawa M, Hobara Y. 2010. Current status of seismo-electromagnetics for short-term earthquake prediction[J]. Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk, 1(2): 115—155.
DOI URL |
[14] |
Honkura Y, Isikara A M, Oshiman N. 2000. Preliminary results of multidisciplinary observations before, during and after the Kocaeli(Izmit)earthquake in the western part of the north Anatolian fault zone[J]. Earth, Planets and Space, 52(4): 293—298.
DOI URL |
[15] |
Honkura Y, Satoh H, Ujihara N. 2004. Seismic dynamo effects associated with the M7.1 earthquake of 26 May 2003 off Miyagi Prefecture and the M6.4 earthquake of 26 July 2003 in northern Miyagi Prefecture, NE Japan[J]. Earth, Planets and Space, 56: 109—114.
DOI URL |
[16] | Huang Q, Ren H, Zhang D, et al. 2015. Medium effect on the characteristics of the coupled seismic and electromagnetic signals[J]. Proceedings of the Japan Academy, 91(1): 17—24. |
[17] |
Johnston M, Mueller R. 1987. Seismomagnetic observation with the July 8, 1986, ML5.9 North Palm Springs earthquake[J]. Science, 237(4819): 1201—1203.
PMID |
[18] |
Johnston M, Mueller R, Sasai Y. 1994. Magnetic field observations in the near-field of the 28 June 1992 MW7.3 Landers, California, earthquake[J]. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 84(3): 792—798.
DOI URL |
[19] | Johnston M, Sasai Y, Egbert G, et al. 2006. Seismomagnetic effects from the long-awaited 28 September 2004 M6.0 Parkfield earthquake[J]. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 96(4B): 206—220. |
[20] |
Kumar P, Rawat V S, Patro P K, et al. 2020. Assessment and recognition of pre- and co-seismic electromagnetic signatures from magnetotelluric data: A case study from Koyna-Warna seismoactive region, India[J]. Acta Geophysica, 69:1—15.
DOI URL |
[21] | Matsushima M, Honkura Y, Oshiman N. et al. 2002. Seismo-electromagnetic effect associated with the İzmit earthquake and its aftershocks [J]. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 92(1): 350—360. |
[22] | Morlet J, Arens G, Fourgeau E, et al. 1982. Wave propagation and sampling theory(Part Ⅱ): Sampling theory and complex waves[J]. Geophysics, 47(2): 801—813. |
[23] |
Okubo K, Takeuchi N, Utsugi M, et al. 2011. Direct magnetic signals from earthquake rupturing: Iwate-Miyagi earthquake of M7.2, Japan[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 35: 65—72.
DOI URL |
[24] | Ren H, Wen J, Huang Q, et al. 2015. Electrokinetic effect combined with surface-charge assumption: A possible generation mechanism of coseismic EM signals[J]. Geophysical Journal International, 200(2): 835—848. |
[25] |
Sun Y C, Uyeshima M, Ren H X, et al. 2019. Numerical simulations to explain the coseismic electromagnetic signals: A case study for a M5.4 aftershock of the 2016 Kumamoto earthquake[J]. Earth, Planets and Space, 71(1): 1—24.
DOI URL |
[1] | DONG Ze-yi, TANG Ji, ZHAO Guo-ze, CHEN Xiao-bin, CUI Teng-fa, HAN Bing, JIANG Feng, WANG Li-feng. PROBING THE SUBSURFACE ELECTRIC STRUCTURE FOR CSELF NETWORK IN CAPITAL CIRCLE REGION [J]. SEISMOLOGY AND GEOLOGY, 2022, 44(3): 649-668. |
[2] | TAN Hong-bo, SHEN Chong-yang, XUAN Song-bai, WU Gui-ju, YANG Guang-liang, WANG Jian. THE SEISMOGENIC ENVIRONMENT ANALYSIS OF LUDIAN MS6.5 EARTHQUAKE USING GRAVITY DATA [J]. SEISMOLOGY AND GEOLOGY, 2017, 39(2): 356-373. |
[3] | HAN Bing, TANG Ji, ZHAO Guo-ze, BI Ya-xin, WANG Li-feng, CHENG Yuan-zhi. WAVELET MAXIMA METHOD IN IDENTIFYING SINGULARITIES IN ELECTROMAGNETIC SIGNAL [J]. SEISMOLOGY AND GEOLOGY, 2015, 37(3): 765-779. |
[4] | XIE Tao, ZHENG Xiao-dong, KANG Chun-li, MA Wei-yu, LU Jun. POSSIBLE THERMAL BRIGHTNESS TEMPERATURE ANOMALIES ASSOCIATED WITH THE LUSHAN(CHINA) M7.0 EARTHQUAKE ON 20 APRIL 2013 [J]. SEISMOLOGY AND GEOLOGY, 2015, 37(1): 149-161. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||