�ձ�9.0�������������ݶȵ�ʱ�շֲ�

????????????????????????????2003??1????2012??11?μ?112????GRACE??????????????2011?????9.0???????????6??????????????????????????Щ?????????????????????????仯????????????:??T_λλ????T_rr????T_θλ???? ??????????????н???????????????9.0???????????????????????6?????????????????????????仯????????????仯?????     

���ڼ�ȨԼ����������ƽ��

?????ü???????????????????????????????????????????????????????χ²???????λ?????t??????????????????????????????t??????????????????????仯????????????????????????鷽??????1.05??????χ²???飻δ???????????????±13.6×10^-8ms^-2??17???????????????????仯??     

�������編ʱ��InSAR�������У�������о�

????????λ???????????????3????????????????????編???н??????????????????????????????????2007~2010?????20??ENVISAT ASAR?????÷????????????????????Э??????????У?????????????????й????????????Э?????????????????????3.1 mm²??????0.6mm²????????80%??e-folding???????????1.5 km?????0.21 km????????86%????????編??????Ч??У????????е??????λ?????     

�й��غ���ͬ����ģ�͵���б���ɷ���

???????????????????6???????????CSR4.0??EOT11a??FES2004??GOT4.7??NAO99b??TPXO7.2?????й????????????????????????????????????????б????Ч????????????????RMS???????RSS????????????????????б????????10^-8??rad??????????10^-7??rad?????????й??????????????????????????????????????????????     

½̬�����ڳ�̨���������۲���������

????????????2012-07-01~2013-06-30?????????????????д????????????????????????????????????1~100??s????????9×10^-8ms^-2???????100??s~100??min????????0.3×10^-8ms^-2????????????????0.509×10^-8ms^-2??????O₁????M₂??????????????????????????SG-053???????????????????????M₂?????????????????????0.000 18????????????????????????????????????????仯??????о??????????????????????????????     

��GPS������ɽ�ֽ�ؿDZ�����Ӧ���ʳ�

?????й??????????????1999~2013????й?????????????????2009~2013???GPS????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????1????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????й????????????????????????????????????????????????Σ?77°E?????????45×10^-9/a???????????Σ?86°E?????????10×10^-9/a;2)???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????50~60??×10^-9/a??????????????40~50??×10^-9/a????????GPS?????????????10~15??mm/a??????????????????;3)?????????????????????????????????38°N?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????к?????????????????????????????????????????????Σ??????????????10~20??×10^-9/a???????????????;4)??????????????????????????????????б??Σ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????40×10^-9/a??5)????????????????λ???????????78°E??????????????30×10^-9/a??     

��ͬ����ֽ�ؿ��α估Ӧ��ֲ�����

?????й?????????????繤?????2006-2010??GPS??????????????????????????α??????????????ε??????????????????????????鷽????????????????????????????????????????????????????е??????????????????????о????????????????????????????????????????????????3?????????????????????NW-SE????????????????????????????????????????1.9×10^-6/a?????????????????????????????????????????????????NE???????????     

�Ͷ�Ms5.1�����𺦷ֲ�����

????????????????????Ms5.1????????????з????????????????????????????????????????????????μ????????????NW-SE????????????3.9 km???????2.4 km??????7.7 km²?????????????????????????21.4 km???????13.6 km?????251 km²???????????????????н?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????й??     

����GPS��GRACE�������ݷ��ݱ����޵ı����������ģʽ

????????GPS??GRACE??????????????????????????????????????е????????ICE-5G and ICE-3G???????????????????????????????????????????е??????????????????????????????????????????????????仯????????????GRACE?????????????????ICE-5G????????????????????????????????????????????С~20%??????????????????????~40%?????????????????????α???????仯??GPS??GRACE???????????????????????????????????????????????????????Ч??? (~150 km??80%?????) ?????????????????????????~90 km); ????μ?????Ч??????????3.7 × 10²⁰?? Pas ??1.9 × 10²¹?? Pas (90%?????)???????????????????????????С~20%??     

����CR-InSAR�������е��ѷ����о�

?????????????????????CR-InSAR?????????е?????о??????LAMBDA??λ??????f ₃??f ₁₁?????2009??2010????α???????У??????????????????????ú?????????????????????е??????     

Characteristics of earthquake-triggered landslides and post-earthquake debris flows in Beichuan County

Field investigations and aerial photography after the earthquake of May 12,2008 show a large number of geo-hazards in the zone of extreme earthquake effects.In particular,landslides and debris flows,the geo-hazards that most threaten post-disaster reconstruction,are widely distributed.We describe the characteristics of these geo-hazards in Beichuan County using high-resolution remote sensing of landslide distribution,and the relationships between the area and volume of landslides and the peak-discharges of debris flows both pre-and post-earthquake.The results show:1) The concentration(defined as the number of landslide sources per unit area:Lc) of earthquaketriggered landslides is inversely correlated with distance from the earthquake(DF) fault.The relationship is described by the following equation:Lc = 3.2264exp(-0.0831DF)(R2 = 0.9246);2) 87 % of the earthquake-triggered landslides were less than 15×104 m2 in area,and these accounted only for 50% of the total area;84% of the landslide volumes were less than 60×104 m3,and these accounted only for 50% of the total volume.The probability densities of the area and volume distributions are correlated:landslide abundance increases with landslide area and volume up to maximum values of 5 × 104 m2 and 30 × 104 m3,respectively,and then decreases exponentially.3) The area(AL) and volume(VL) of earthquake-triggered landslides are correlated as described with the following equation:VL=6.5138AL1.0227(R2 = 0.9131);4) Characteristics of the debris flows changed after the earthquake because of the large amount of landslide material deposited in the gullies.Consequently,debris flow peak-discharge increased following the earthquake as described with the following equation:Vpost = 0.8421Vpre1.0972(R2 = 0.9821)(Vpre is the peak discharge of pre-earthquake flows and the Vpost is the peak discharge of post-earthquake flows).We obtained the distribution of the landslides based on the above analyses,as well as the magnitude of both the landslides and the post-earthquake debris flows.The results can be useful for guiding post-disaster reconstruction and recovery efforts,and for the future mitigation of these geo-hazards.However,the equations presented are not recommended for use in site-specific designs.Rather,we recommend their use for mapping regional seismic landslide hazards or for the preliminary,rapid screening of sites.     

���-����6.6������ǰ���������仯

????????2010~2013???????????????????о?????????2013-07-22????????6.6?????????????????仯???????????????????仯????????????????????????????1?????м????????????????????仯????????????????70×10^-8ms^-2??2??????????????????仯????????????????????????????????????з????????????????仯?????????仯?????????????     

Identification of potential sites of debris flows in the upper Min River drainage,following environmental changes caused by the Wenchuan earthquake

The Wenchuan earthquake caused numerous landslides and collapses that provide abundant unconsolidated material for future mobilization as debris flows.Debris flows will be very active and cause considerable damage for some time in the affected area.Because of environmental changes related to the earthquake,many potentially dangerous debris flow gullies have yet to be identified.This paper selects the upper Min River from Yinxiu to Wenchuan as the study area,interprets the unconsolidated deposits,and discusses their relationship to distance from the fault.Then,applying that information and the values of other factors relating to debris flow occurrence,the locations of potential debris flows are analyzed by multi-factor comprehensive identification and rapid identification.The multi-factor comprehensive identification employs fuzzy matter-element extension theory.The volume of unconsolidated material in the study area is about 3.28 × 108 m3.According to the analysis by multi-factor comprehensive identification,47 gullies have a high probability for potential debris flow,8 gullies have a moderate probability,and 1 gully has a low probability.     

Prediction of debris-flow danger area by combining hydrological and inundation simulation methods

Debris flows have caused serious human casualties and economic losses in the regions strongly affected by the Ms8.0 Wenchuan earthquake of 2008. Debris flow mitigation and risk assessment is a key issue for reconstruction.The existing methods of inundation simulation are based on historical disasters and have no power of prediction.The rain-flood method can not yield detailed flow hydrograph and does not meet the need of inundation simulation. In this paper,the process of water flow was studied by using the Arc-SCS model combined with hydraulic method,and then the debris flow runoff process was calculated using the empirical formula combining the result from Arc-SCS.The peak discharge and runoff duration served as input of inundation simulation. Then,the dangerous area is predicted using kinematic wave method and Manning equation.Taking the debris flow in Huashiban gully in Beichuan County,Sichuan Province,China on 24 Sep.2008 as example,the peak discharge of water flow and debris flow were calculated as 35.52 m3·s-1 and 215.66 m3·s-,with error of 4.15%compared to the measured values.The simulated area of debris-flow deposition was 161,500 m2,vs.the measured area of 144,097 m2,in error of 81.75%.The simulated maximum depth was 12.3 m,consistent with the real maximum depth between 10 and 15 m according to the field survey.The minor error is mainly due to the flow impact on buildings and variations in cross-section configuration.The present methodology can be applied to predict debris flow magnitude and evaluate its risk in other watersheds inthe earthquake area.     

�½���Դ���;�����6.6������ǰ�������仯

?????й??????????????1998-2010???????????????????????????????????????????????????????仯???????????о???2012??6??30?????????????????6.6?????????????????????????????????????????????????1???????仯????????????????????п????????????仯??????????????????????????????????????????仯Ч???2????????????????????????????????????????????????г????????????????????3??????????????????仯?????????80×10^-8ms^-2,????????6.6??????????????????????????仯???????????????仯??????????Ρ?     

平果4.5级地震前MODIS卫星热红外异常分析

收集2012-12～2013-03 广西平果Ms4.5地震震区连续的MODIS/Terra卫星遥感热红外资料,经去云等数据处理,选取观测质量最佳的北京时间凌晨5：00～7:00之间的热红外数据进行地表温度反演,分析地震前、后地表温度异常时间演化过程及其异常空间分布与活动断裂的关系,并讨论了震区地形地貌、季节性气候等非构造因子对地温异常的影响。结果表明：1）在平果Ms4.5地震发生前2个月震中附近出现热红外异常增温现象,异常增温与发震时间有一定对应性。显著增温主要表现在震前半个月左右,震前7 d异常增温幅度达到峰值,震后温度逐步降低。2）与地形地貌、季节性气候等非构造因子相关分析表明,平果Ms4.5地震反映出震前构造“增温”信息。3）异常升温由震中沿北西向发育,与此次平果地震北西向发震构造较为一致。充分考虑地形地貌、季节性气候等非构造因素对异常升温的影响,认为此次平果Ms4.5地震前热红外升温可能为震前短临异常现象。 
〖HT5”H〗关键词〖HT5”K〗： 平果Ms4.5地震| 地表温度| 地形地貌| 季节变化| 前兆异常     

�봨�����ǰ�������Ŷ�

??1997??5?2???LacosteET-21?????????й?????????????South of Kermadec Islands 7.1??????????????????????????2008??5???????人???????????????????LacosteET-20??????????????з???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????0.8??10 ^-8 ms^-2??????????????????????μ????????????????????????ET-21??ET-20?????????ü???????????????????????????????Щ??????????????????????????????????????????????????(1~2)??10 ^-8 ms ^-2????????????4??8 s??     

绝对重力仪中几种隔振系统的对比测试

介绍目前绝对重力仪中几种常用的隔振系统及其研究进展,并利用FG5-112绝对重力仪中的Super Spring以及现有的几种隔振系统,在相同的环境下进行对比测试。通过对测试结果的分析,给出各种隔振系统的隔振效果。该项工作的开展为下步自主研制隔振系统、提高隔振性能积累经验。     

�����Ͷ�Ms5.1����ǰ�˲�̨����Ӧ��۲����ϱ仯ԭ�����

???ó????????????С???任????????Ms5.1????????????????????????仯??????з???????????????????2????????????????????????????????????????????????????к??????????????????????????仯???????????????????????????????С??????????????????仯???????????????????????????仯?????????????????????????????仯??