2017年九寨沟7.0级地震序列震源机制解和构造应力场特征

九寨沟余震序列的震源机制和构造应力场有助于认识本次地震的发震构造和孕震机理。本文基于四川区域地震台网的波形资料, 采用波形拟合(CAP)方法和P波初动+振幅比(HASH)方法反演得到2017年8月8日九寨沟7.0级地震序列中59次ML≥3.0地震的震源机制解, 并基于该结果采用阻尼线性逆推法(DRSSI), 计算研究区域的平均构造应力场, 给出该区域的应力场特征。结果显示, 利用CAP方法反演得到的本次主震的最佳双力偶机制解节面I: 走向248°/倾角86°/滑动角–169°, 节面II: 走向157°/倾角79°/滑动角–4°, 矩震级为Mw6.31, 矩心深度5 km, 属走滑型地震事件; 大部分余震的震源机制解错动类型与主震一致, 矩心深度集中在3~10 km; 应力场反演结果显示, 该区域周边的应力性质为走滑型, 最大主应力方向呈NWW–SEE向, 与该区域的应力场方向一致, 表明本次地震主要受区域应力的控制。结合该区域的地震地质构造等已有研究成果, 分析认为此次地震的发震断层为走向NW–SE、倾向SW的左旋走滑断裂——树正断裂, 巴颜喀拉块体向E-SE向的水平运动受到华南块体的强烈阻挡导致此次地震的发生, 汶川地震的发生对本次地震具有一定的促进作用。     

龙门山活动断裂带运动学特征及其构造意义

2008年青藏高原东缘龙门山地区发生的MS8.0级地震,致使龙门山断裂带的后山断裂、中央断裂和前山断裂也发生了构造活动,产生了不同规模的同震地表破裂带,同时在活动断裂面上保留了最新擦痕和正反阶步。根据断裂面阶步及最新擦痕测量分析,后山断裂的耿达—草坡段为逆冲断层,汶川—茂县段为逆-走滑断层,由擦痕反演的最大主压应力为近水平的NW—NWW向;平武—青川段为走滑-逆断层,由擦痕反演的最大主压应力为近水平的SWW—W向。中央断裂的映秀—小鱼洞段为逆冲断层,小鱼洞北—北川段为逆-走滑断层,由擦痕反演的最大主压应力为近水平的NW—NWW向;北川县北—南坝段为走滑-逆断层,由擦痕反演的最大主压应力为近水平的SWW—W向。前山断裂的都江堰—蓥华段为逆冲断裂,蓥华—西坪段为逆-走滑断层,由擦痕反演的最大主压应力均为近水平的NW—NWW向。对比分析表明,擦痕反演最大主压应力方向变化过程与地震资料反演最大主压应力方向变化过程相吻合。     

九寨沟7.0级地震的地震断裂及震源破裂的构造动力学机理研究

本文针对九寨沟7.0级地震的发震构造及震源破裂的构造动力学问题,从地质调查、测试与震源构造动力学理论分析相结合的角度阐明:此次地震发生在处于高法向应力左旋剪切受力状态的岷山隆起带北端与西秦岭地槽褶皱带之南缘文县-玛沁断裂相交汇部位;沿"九寨天堂"-震中-五花海以及上四寨村-中查-比芒一线发育的两条具有构造破裂特征的NW向地裂缝带,是"隐伏状"地震断裂错动造成的地表同震破裂,前者是本次地震的控震构造,后者是NW向断层的次级同震复活及扩展;此次地震的震源断层错动过程受NW331°走向的陡倾角（∠87°）断层节面控制的走滑型剪切破裂,断裂两端的剪切破裂表现出持续扩展趋势;震源构造动力学过程实质上是地壳深部沿NW方向左旋剪断"凸出体";地震断裂带两端破裂扩展的持续发展,将导致地壳"凸出体"逐步剪断贯通。     

映秀 北川断裂带中垂直断裂带走向的NW SE向构造和汶川地震

通过汶川科学钻探钻孔地质实体(岩芯)的构造研究、非弹性应变恢复法(ASR法)地应力测试,结合区域构造和汶川地震NW向余震带的综合分析,提出沿映秀-北川断裂走向的狭窄范围内存在一组NW-SE向构造,其总体产状为:走向N48°W,倾角中等,与映秀-北川断裂带的总体走向和ASR地应力测试获得的一组最大主应力方位(侧伏方向224°)和最大水平应力方位(44°)接近垂直。NW-SE向构造,除少数发育为宏观的断裂构造外,多数表现为密集的裂隙系(或隐断裂)和隐伏断裂,以逆冲性质为主,局部略具左行走滑特征。映秀-北川断裂两侧相向倾斜的NW-SE向裂隙系表明其两侧存在有方向相反的运动,映秀-北川断裂属两侧具有不同形成机制和相向位移的双侧走滑型断裂。映秀-北川断裂的同震垂向位移受NE-SW向构造和NW-SE向构造双重因素制约,在汶川地震的主震带与NW向余震带叠置部位具最大的垂向位移量。从时间尺度分析,在汶川地震的全过程中,仅开始时刻表现为自NW→SE方向的强烈逆冲作用,随后的主要时间段内均表现为沿断裂带方向的运动和自SW→NE方向的逆冲。NW-SE向构造的形成是龙门山深部应力和能量长期积聚的结果,强震发生时,初始时刻的自NW向SE方向的强烈挤压,瞬即转换成自SW向NE方向的运动和强烈挤压。NE-SW向挤压构造应力场,是由NW-SE向挤压作用长期积累和诱导,并叠置在区域NW-SE向主导的挤压构造应力场之上的局部构造应力场,但在发震后,它主导了地震能量自震源区沿断裂走向向NE方向的快速传递和扩展及NW向强余震的发生,地震能量在NE-SW向强烈挤压过程中得到最终释放。因此,映秀-北川断裂在地震的不同阶段,其性质存在差异,在地震宁静期或弱震期(应力积累和闭锁期)以自NW往SE方向的逆冲性质为主,兼有右行走滑特征,但在强震期(应力释放和解锁期),除发震时表现为强烈的继承性逆冲作用,随后即转化为以平行断裂带走向自SW向NE方向的快速运动和扩展及自SW往NE方向的逆冲作用为主。     

2022年9月17日中国台湾地震序列的触发机制及其动力学成因

2022年9月17—18日，中国台湾先后发生台东县M_S6.5和花莲县M_S6.9两次强震及多次余震。两次强震均为逆走滑型地震，且震中都位于台湾纵谷断裂带，该地区构造复杂，为晚中生代古太平洋板块朝东亚陆缘的消减带，具有逆冲型构造应力背景。对纵谷断裂带周围地区历史上发生过的地震进行统计发现，大部分地震为逆断型。为探究该地区此次发生逆走滑型地震的原因及其与构造应力场的关系，首先通过搜集研究区相关的地震震源机制，反演该地区的构造应力场，明确其是以走向为北西西向的压应力为主的应力场；然后将应力场投影到走向、倾角不同的断层面上，发现一些节面上表现出较大的相对剪应力和较小的相对正应力，说明这些节面上具有较强的剪切作用和较小的摩擦力，容易发生错动而产生逆断型、逆走滑型和走滑型的地震。同时，为明确短时间内两次强震间的触发关系，通过计算M_S6.5地震在M_S6.9地震破裂面和滑动方向上产生的库伦破裂应力变化发现，M_S6.9地震约在0.02MPa的库伦破裂应力触发下发生。相关结论对研究台湾纵谷带地震的发...     

两淮矿区震源机制解反演区域构造应力场特征

通过分析两淮矿区中小型地震的震源机制,以及该区构造应力场的分布特征,对矿区中小震震源机制解进行统计分析并反演其构造应力场。结果表明:两淮矿区构造应力场的最大主应力方向和最小主应力方向基本沿东西方向和南北方向分布;构造应力场现今主要表现为近水平作用力,同时存在部分构造应力场表现为近垂直方向;地震震源断层的破裂类型主要表现为近走滑型断层,同时也有一定比例的走滑型断层;矿区震源发震断层主要为走滑断层,逆断层占比较少,正断层最少。     

用区域地震面波谱反演洛马普列塔地震余震的震源参数

用区域范围内记录的面波研究1989年10月18日加利福尼亚州洛马普列塔(Loma Prieta)地震的3个较大余震的震源参数。短周期尸波初动震源机制显示为一个震源机制变化较大的复杂的余震序列。许多地震对远震体波分析来说震级太小；因此，区域面波提供了很重要的震源参数长周期信息。在给定的深度上，用中周期瑞利波和勒大波反演地震矩张量分量，并对不同的深度重复反演，寻找与观测谱拟合最好的震源深度。10月19日10：14：35(md=4．2)的余震为走滑震源机制，伴有NW向垂直断层上的右旋运动，这与当地的断层迹线一致。对10月18日10：22：04(md=4．4)的余震，面波结果表明属于节面走向为NWW的纯逆断层机制。对10月19日09：53：50(md=4．4)的余震，面波结果表明为走滑机制，有一个与圣安德烈斯断层在该处的走向一致的NW向垂直节面。对所分析的余震，面波震源机制解和短周期尸波初动机制解间存在差异。这种差异或许反应了两种观测波带宽不同引起的真实差异。然而，差异也可以归因于：(1)由不正确的近场速度结构引起的初动机制的误差；(2)由不充分的传播路径改正引起的面波机制的误差。     

芦山地震发震构造及其与汶川地震关系讨论

芦山地震发生在巴彦喀拉块体与华南块体之间龙门山推覆构造带南段。野外考察表明,芦山地震在震中区没有形成具有构造地质意义的地震地表破裂带,仅在各山前陡坡地带出现平行于山麓陡坡的张性地裂缝、山地基岩崩塌、滑坡等边坡震动失稳现象和震动引起的砂土液化现象。重新定位的芦山地震余震分布、震源机制解和地表构造地质等分析表明,芦山地震的发震断层为一条现今尚未出露地表、其上断点仍埋藏在地下9 km以下地壳中的一条盲逆断层,走向212°,倾向NW,倾角38°±2°,上断点以上至地表的构造变形符合断层扩展背斜模型。根据汶川地震和芦山地震的余震空间分布、地震破裂过程、深浅构造关系等差异反映出它们是分别发生在龙门山推覆构造带中段和南段的两次独立地震破裂事件。     

芦山地震发震构造及其与汶川地震关系讨论

芦山地震发生在巴彦喀拉块体与华南块体之间龙门山推覆构造带南段。野外考察表明,芦山地震在震中区没有形成具有构造地质意义的地震地表破裂带,仅在各山前陡坡地带出现平行于山麓陡坡的张性地裂缝、山地基岩崩塌、滑坡等边坡震动失稳现象和震动引起的砂土液化现象。重新定位的芦山地震余震分布、震源机制解和地表构造地质等分析表明,芦山地震的发震断层为一条现今尚未出露地表、其上断点仍埋藏在地下9 km以下地壳中的一条盲逆断层,走向212°,倾向NW,倾角38°±2°,上断点以上至地表的构造变形符合断层扩展背斜模型。根据汶川地震和芦山地震的余震空间分布、地震破裂过程、深浅构造关系等差异反映出它们是分别发生在龙门山推覆构造带中段和南段的两次独立地震破裂事件。     

汶川8.0级大地震震源机制与构造运动特征

根据地震震源机制、断层参数结果,结合GPS测定的同震位移场与构造研究的最新结果,综合分析研究了2008年汶川8级大地震汶川地震发生的地震活动背景、震源应力场、断层构造运动特征及其动力学机制。地震活动性分析研究结果表明,2008年汶川8级大地震是在青藏高原与其周边地域构造运动剧烈,2001年起始的地震活动高潮期的背景下发生的。其长达300km的地震震源断层填补了青藏高原东缘1900年以来存在的8级地震活动的空区。震源机制与区域应力场特征及其动力学机制研究表明,汶川8级地震震源处于南北地震带中南段东部,青藏高原东向扩张与四川盆地的抵抗是该区构造运动的主要特征。汶川地震及其强余震是在一个稳定的、主压应力P轴以北西西-东南东方向为主的震源应力场控制下发生的。说明汶川地震震源区域主要受到四川盆地、华南块体区域应力场的控制并发震的。龙门山断裂带西侧的青藏高原相对于四川盆地发生的东向上升;而东侧的四川盆地相对于青藏高原发生的西向下降构造运动是2008年汶川8级地震发生的主要地震成因即地震发生机制。     

以精定位背景地震活动与震源机制解研究郯庐断裂带中南段现今活动习性

郯庐断裂带是中国东部板内一条规模最大的强构造变形带与地震活动断裂带,其断裂结构与历史地震活动性具明显的分段活动性。文中通过沿郯庐断裂带中南段的历史地震活动性、精定位背景地震活动性与震源机制解分析,讨论了断裂带的深部几何结构与现今活动习性。现今地震活动在中段主要沿1668年郯城MS 8地震破裂带线性分布,线性条带在泗洪-诸城间延伸约340 km长,为1668年地震长期缓慢衰减的余震序列活动。大震地表破裂遗迹与精定位地震分布都揭示出郯庐断裂带中段的两条全新世活动断裂昌邑-大店断裂与安丘-莒县断裂以右阶斜列的形式共同参与了1668年郯城MS 8地震破裂。精定位震源剖面刻画出两条断裂结构面呈高角度相背而倾,其中昌邑-大店断裂倾向SE,安丘-莒县断裂倾向NW,两条断裂在深部没有合并汇聚。余震活动所代表的1668年地震震源破裂带是郯庐断裂带中现今尚未闭锁的安全段落,对应于高b值段。而未发生破裂的安丘以北段,小震活动不活跃,b值低,现今可能已成为应力积累的闭锁段。震源机制解揭示的断裂应力状态在中段以NE向主压应力为主,表现为右旋走滑活动性质,且存在少量正断分量,南段转为以NEE至近EW向为主,存在少量的逆冲分量。在中段与南段的转折处宿迁-嘉山段,主压应力方向垂直断裂带走向呈NWW向,反映出局部以挤压为主的应力特征,其中泗洪-嘉山段也是历史地震未破裂段,现今小震活动不活跃,因此该段可能更易于应力积累。精定位小震活动在郯庐断裂与北西向断裂相交汇处聚集,反映出北西向断裂的新活动性,以及郯庐断裂带现今的逆冲作用。在断裂带南端,精定位背景地震活动沿与其相交汇的襄樊-广济断裂带东段呈北西向线性分布,表明了该段的现今活动性。     

Seismogenic Structure of the April 20, 2013, Lushan Ms7 Earthquake in Sichuan

At 08:02 on April 20, 2013, a Ms7.0 earthquake occurred in Lushan, Ya'an, in the Longmenshan fault zone, Sichuan. The epicenter was located between Taiping Town and Shuangshi Town, Lushan County and the maximum earthquake intensity at the epicenter reached class IX. Field investigations in the epicenter area found that, although buildings were seriously damaged, no obvious surface rupture structure was produced, only some ground fissures and sand blows and water ejection phenomena being seen. An integrated analysis of high-resolution remote sensing image interpretation, mainshock and aftershock distribution, and focal mechanism solutions indicated that this earthquake was an independent rupturing event in the southwestern segment of the Longmenshan fault zone, belonging to the thrust-type earthquake. Ruptures occurred along the south-central segment of the Shuangshi-Dachuan fault and the principal rupture plane dipped SW at 33-43°. It is inferred that the Lushan earthquake might be related to the ramp activity of the basal detachment zone (13-19 km) of the Longmenshan fault zone. Historically, there occurred at least two Ms6-6.5 earthquakes along the Shuangshi-Dachuan fault zone; thus it is thought that the Lushan earthquake, different from the Wenchuan earthquake, was a characteristic one in the southwestern segment of the Longmenshan fault zone. In-situ stress measurements indicated the Lushan earthquake was the result of stress release of the southwestern segment of the Longmenshan fault zone after the Wenchuan earthquake. This paper analyzes the tectonic setting of the seismogenic structure of this earthquake.     

玉树地震地表破裂特征及其破裂方式

北京时间2010年4月14日玉树Ms7.1级地震产生了长约50km的地表破裂带,地表破裂系统非常典型。本文通过对果庆益荣松多村附近河滩与结古镇西南河道两岸2个地表破裂点的野外观测和地表破裂的力学分析,探讨玉树地震地表破裂特征和方式。在果庆益荣松多村附近河滩地表破裂与地震陡坎呈间隔式左行右阶排列,具转换压缩性质;在结古镇西南河道北岸主地表破裂带中地表破裂非常发育,出露一处古断层面。地表破裂的野外调查与应力分析结果表明,玉树地震同震地表破裂带总体走向为125°,属于典型的左行走滑破裂带,最大左行走滑位移量1.75m,主压应力为近东西向,这一结果与美国地质调查局和中国地震局地震地球物理研究所公布的结果基本一致。     

Relocation of aftershocks, focal mechanisms and stress inversion: Implications toward the seismo-tectonics of the causative fault zone of Mw7.6 2001 Bhuj earthquake (India)

The HYPODD relocation of 1172 aftershocks, recorded on 8–17 three-component digital seismographs, delineate a distinct south dipping E–W trending aftershock zone extending up to 35 km depth, which involves a crustal volume of 40 km × 60 km × 35 km. The relocated focal depths delineate the presence of three fault segments and variation in the brittle–ductile transition depths amongst the individual faults as the earthquake foci in the both western and eastern ends are confined up to 28 km depth whilst in the central aftershock zone they are limited up to 35 km depth. The FPFIT focal mechanism solutions of 444 aftershocks (using 8–12 first motions) suggest that the focal mechanisms ranged between pure reverse and pure strike slip except some pure dip slip solutions. Stress inversion performed using the P and T axes of the selected focal mechanisms reveals an N181°E oriented maximum principal stress with a very shallow dip (= 14°). The stress inversions of different depth bins of the P and T axes of selected aftershocks suggest a heterogeneous stress regime at 0–30 km depth range with a dominant consistent N–S orientation of the P-axes over the aftershock zone, which could be attributed to the existence of varied nature and orientation of fractures and faults as revealed by the relocated aftershocks.     

河套地震带的震源机制类型时空分布特征

基于地质构造背景分析,收集2000年以来发生在河套地震带的M_L≥2.8级地震作为研究对象,综合运用基于P波初动的振幅比方法(APAS)和基于波形拟合的CAP反演方法求出256次地震事件的震源机制解。以断层节面滑动角作为判定指标,分区域给出了河套地震带的震源机制类型空间和时间分布图像,从断层滑动角度呈现河套地震带应力场时空变化过程。结果显示:临河盆地断层节面滑动角主要在水平±20°方向存在优势分布,走滑型特征显著;具体来讲,狼山-色尔腾山山前断裂带、临河断裂、乌拉山山前断裂等主要以纯走滑型地震为主,巴彦乌拉山断裂与磴口-本井断裂之间的区域多分布正走滑型地震。呼包盆地断层节面解虽然也呈现出走滑型为主的特征,但滑动角分布较为离散,优势分布方向不明显;呼包盆地西侧的包头至西山咀凸起一带表现出以走滑为主的小范围震源应力场特征,呼包盆地内部及东侧由于显著的区域垂直差异运动,正断层和逆冲型地震所占比例较大,震源机制类型整体呈现出与构造相依的分布特点。分析认为,2000年以来,河套地震带的应力场存在一定的时空非均匀性变化,研究结果更多表现了河套地震带的震源应力场变化过程,而研究资料时间不够长和震级不够大是引起这种应力场非均匀性暂态特征的主要因素。     

The Bishop's Castle (UK) Earthquake of 2 April 1990

A large earthquake, by British standards, occurred near Bishop's Castle in the Welsh Borders on 2 April 1990 at 13:46 GMT. This magnitude 5.1 ML event was felt over a wide area of Britain, from Ayrshire in the north to Cornwall in the south, Kent in the east and Dublin in the west. The epicentre was near the village of Clun, 7 km SSW of Bishop's Castle. Damage was minor and limited to the epicentral area, north to Wrexham and in particular Shrewsbury, which suffered most. Results from a macroseismic survey by BGS revealed that the maximum intensity in the epicentral area was 6 MSK. The mainshock had a focal depth of 14.3±4.7 km; however, better located aftershocks further constrained the mid-crustal seismicity to 15±0.2 km in the best cases. The marked lack of aftershocks contrasts with some previous similar magnitude events for intraplate earthquakes in Britain and throughout the world and may represent a large stress drop due to almost total relief of strain energy by the mainshock. The aftershock epicentral distribution shows a preference for an approximately N-S orientation which is consistent with one of the focal planes of the mainshock focal mechanism and suggests that this is the fault plane. Movement on this plane was predominantly strike-slip with a component of thrust and was consistent with a maximum compressive stress axis orientated NW-SE. The NE striking Welsh Borderland Fault System dominates the epicentral area; however, there is no surface fault which can clearly be related to the seismicity.     

The 2002 Molise earthquake sequence: What can we learn about the tectonics of southern Italy?

On October 31, 2002 a M_L = 5.4 earthquake occurred in southern Italy, at the margin between the Apenninic thrust belt (to the west) and the Adriatic plate (to the east). In this area, neither historical event nor seismogenic fault is reported in the literature. In spite of its moderate magnitude, the earthquake caused severe damage in cities close to the epicenter and 27 people, out of a total of 29 casualties, were killed by the collapse of a primary school in S. Giuliano di Puglia. By inverting broadband regional waveforms, we computed moment tensor solutions for 15 events, as small as M_L = 3.5 (M_w = 3.7). The obtained focal mechanisms show pure strike-slip geometry, mainly with focal planes oriented to NS (sinistral) and EW (dextral). In several solutions focal planes are rotated counterclockwise, in particular for later events, occurring west of the mainshock. From the relocated aftershock distribution, we found that the mainshock ruptured along an EW plane, and the fault mechanisms of some aftershocks were not consistent with the mainshock fault plane. The observed stress field, resulting from the stress tensor inversion, shows a maximum principal stress axis with an east–west trend (N83°W), whereas the minimum stress direction is almost N–S. Considering both the aftershock distribution and moment tensor solutions, it appears that several pre-existing faults were activated rather than a single planar fault associated with the mainshock. The finite fault analysis shows a very simple slip distribution with a slow rupture velocity of 1.1 km/s, that could explain the occurrence of a second mainshock about 30 h after. Finally, we attempt to interpret how the Molise sequence is related to the normal faulting system to the west (along the Apennines) and the dextral strike-slip Mattinata fault to the east.     

Active tectonism in the central Alps: contrasting stress regimes north and south of the Rhone Valley

An integrated interpretation of seismicity, fault plane solutions and deep seismic reflection data suggests that the NE–SW to NW–SE trending Rhone–Simplon fault zone and the gently S-dipping basal Penninic thrust separate fundamentally different stress regimes in the western Swiss Alps. North of the Rhone-Simplon fault zone, strike-slip earthquakes on steep-dipping faults within the Helvetic nappes are a consequence of regional NW–SE compression and NE–SW extension. To the south, vertical maximum stress and N–S extension are responsible for normal mechanism earthquakes that occur entirely within the Penninic nappes above the basal Penninic thrust. Such normal faulting likely results from extension associated with southward movements (collapse) of the Penninic nappes and/or continued uplift and relative northward displacements of the underlying Alpine massifs. Geological mapping and fission-track dating suggest that the two distinct stress regimes have controlled tectonism in the western Swiss Alps since at least the Neogene.