阜阳M_S4.3地震震源深度的确定及地震成因分析

2015年3月14日在安徽阜阳地区发生了M_S4.3地震,随后发生3月23日M_s3.6余震.主震造成2人死亡13人受伤.房屋倒塌155间,受损1万多间.主震震级不大,而造成的灾害巨大.本文使用CAP方法反演了两次地震的震源机制解和震源深度,结果显示两次地震的震源机制解和深度一致.主震的机制解节面Ⅰ走向110°,倾角75°,滑动角—10°;节面Ⅱ走向202°,倾角80°,滑动角—164°;矩震级M_w4.3,余震矩震级M_w3.7,反演最佳深度均为3 km.最佳深度时波形拟合相关系数较高,表明反演结果是可靠的.使用sPn和sPL深度震相进一步分析了两次地震的震源深度.结果显示,选取的7个台站的sPn震相与Pn震相的平均到时差为1 s,对应的震源深度为3 km.震中距为36 km的利辛台的sPL震相与Pg震相到时差约为1.1 s,对应震源深度约3~4 km之间.两种深度震相分析的震源深度与CAP方法的结果一致,表明本文给出的阜阳地震震源深度为3 km左右基本是可靠的.本次地震造成较大灾害的原因很可能与地震震源较浅有关.阜阳地区地壳结构相对稳定,地质构造演化形成3 km厚的沉积层,本次地震可能是区域应力作用下发生在沉积层里的一次地震.     

单台sPL震相测定珊溪水库地震震源深度

稀疏台网下的传统走时定位难以确定中小地震的震源深度，而地震波深度震相蕴含着震源深度信息，为确定地震震源深度提供了新的途径。近震深度震相sPL和直达Pg波到时差与震源深度呈线性关系，可用以约束地震震源深度。本文以珊溪水库2014年震群事件为例，利用单台sPL震相测定了地震震源深度。结果表明:震源深度的测定结果与基于水库台网高密度台站下Pg和Sg走时定位Hyposat方法和全波形拟合CAP方法测定的震源深度高度一致，为4—6 km，与区域活动断层探测结果相符。sPL震相的优势震中距为30—50 km，区域台网范围内sPL与Pg的到时差与震源深度的线性关系相对固定，因此利用单台sPL震相即可快速获取可靠的地震震源深度，适用于稀疏台网下的中小地震震源深度的确定，且误差可控制在1—2 km范围内。      

多种方法综合测定河北昌黎ML4.5地震震源深度

利用CAP、TDMT、sPL深度震相等3种方法测定河北昌黎M_L4.5地震震源深度,利用CAP方法反演得到该地震的震源机制解,拟合得到最佳震源深度为4.5 km;利用TDMT方法反演得到拟合震源深度范围为5~6 km;在震中距20~80 km范围内的台站波形数据中,CHL、BDH两个台站识别到sPL震相,基于震源机制解,计算1~16 km深度范围对应的理论波形图,与观测波形比对后得到震源深度为5 km。结果显示,3种方法的深度研究结果基本一致,结合震源尺度以及昌黎M_L3.9地震CAP、sPL计算结果认为,昌黎M_L4.5地震的震源深度应为4~6 km。     

sPL震相在青海门源Ms6.4级地震序列震源深度测定中的应用

利用近震深度震相sPL的基本特征和门源地震台、铧尖地震台的波形资料,对2016年1月21日青海门源Ms6. 4级地震序列中的15个ML≥3. 0级地震进行了sPL震相分析,得到了该地震序列较为可靠的震源深度结果,并与Hyposat定位结果和CAP波形反演的结果进行对比,发现sPL震相测定的震源深度结果与Hyposat定位结果和CAP波形反演得到的结果有很好的一致性,表明sPL震相测定的震源深度是可信的。     

sPL震相在九江—瑞昌M_S5.7地震序列震源深度测定中的应用

利用近震深度震相sPL的基本特征和九江地震台的波形资料,对2005年11月26日九江—瑞昌MS5.7地震序列ML2.0地震进行了sPL震相分析,得到了该地震序列较为可靠的震源深度分布,并与CAP波形反演、双差定位、sPn震相、Hyposat等方法定位的结果进行了对比。结果表明,sPL震相测定的近震震源深度较为可信,该地震序列的震源深度分布在9~11km范围内。     

多种方法测定广东阳西3.7级地震震源深度

应用CAP和深度震相方法,对2018年3月20日发生在广东阳西的M 3.7级地震震源深度进行了测定。首先通过CAP方法反演获得震源机制解,拟合最佳震源深度为12 km。然后在震中距100 km以内的近台识别出清晰的sPL和PmP、 sPmP震相,利用频率-波数(F-K)方法,计算出深度震相在不同深度下的理论地震图,与实际观测波形对比测定震源深度为12 km。再利用250～400 km震中距范围内台站上识别出的sPn与Pn震相的走时差,测得震源深度12.6 km。多种方法的研究结果一致,表明该地震震源深度为12 km比较可靠。     

广西苍梧MS5.4地震震源深度

2016年7月31日广西苍梧发生的M_S5. 4地震是广西测震台网自建立以来所记录到的区域内最强地震。不同机构对于此次事件给出的震源深度结果相差较大,例如美国地质调查局(USGS)地震目录显示其深度为24. 5km,而全球矩心矩张量研究中心(Global CMT)测定的深度为15. 6km。为了进一步准确确定广西苍梧地震的震源深度,文中基于区域速度模型,首先利用走时残差全局搜索法初步得到此次地震震源深度及误差范围,然后使用CAP(Cut and Paste)方法反演苍梧地震震源机制,在此基础上,采用Rayleigh波振幅谱和s PL震相方法进一步约束了此次地震的震源深度。研究结果显示:利用走时残差全局搜索法获得的苍梧M_S5. 4地震震源深度及误差范围为(13±3) km,CAP方法反演的深度为10km,Rayleigh波振幅谱测定深度结果为9～10km,s PL震相测定深度结果为10km,最终确定广西苍梧M_S5. 4地震的震源深度约10km,这表明此次事件仍为发生于上地壳的地震。本文结果同时表明,USGS地震目录在研究区的震源深度精度有待提高。     

2016年河北尚义M 4.0地震震源深度分析

基于河北数字地震台网宽频带地震记录，采用CAP波形反演法，计算得到2016年6月23日河北尚义M 4.0地震的震源机制和深度，并利用sPL震相进一步测定震源深度。计算结果显示：采用CAP方法反演，得到此次地震震源深度为11 km，采用sPL震相进行测定，得到震源深度为13 km，可见采用2种方法确定的震源深度基本一致，分布范围为11—13 km，表明此次地震发生在上地壳。     

sPL,一个近距离确定震源深度的震相

实际地震波形观测表明,对于大陆结构相对简单的地壳中的地震而言,有一震相出现在P 波和S波之间.一般在30~50 km附近发育得较好,其能量主要集中在径向分量,而垂向分量的振幅相对径向要小,切向分量上的振幅很弱,且波形以低频为主,通常没有P波尖锐.在利用FK方法计算合成地震图的基础上,发现该震相是由S波入射到自由地表形成水平传播的P波(文献称为surface P wave,自由地表P波)或者包括S波入射到地表后形成的多次P波或其散射震相.由于该震相是由S波和P波之间耦合而形成,本文将其定义为sPL(s coupled into P) 震相.理论波形研究表明,sPL相对直达P波的到时差对震中距离不敏感,而随着震源深度的增加几乎呈线性增加,因此可以很好的约束震源深度.本文以2005年江西九江地震为例,证实了sPL确定震源深度的可行性和可靠性.在观测到sPL震相的情况下,离震源50 km以内的一个三分量地震台站的波形就可以帮助获得可靠的震源深度,而不需要精确的震中距离.由于sPL震相出现距离较近,对于较小(三级以上)的地震也可以应用,因此在稀疏台网布局情形下sPL对于确定中小地震深度应该具有很好的应用意义.     

利用CAP方法和瑞利面波振幅谱联合反演宁强5.3级地震震源深度

2018年9月12日19时6分,陕西省汉中市宁强县发生5.3级地震,不同机构给出的震源深度结果相差较大。为进一步确定宁强5.3级地震的震源深度,基于区域速度模型,首先利用CAP方法反演得到该地震的震源机制解,然后采用瑞利面波振幅谱和CAP深度误差函数联合反演,进一步测定了此次地震的矩心深度。结果显示:CAP方法得到的陕西宁强5.3级地震矩心深度约为12km,瑞利面波振幅谱测定的矩心深度为13km,结合引入的误差函数联合反演,最终确定陕西宁强5.3级地震的矩心深度为13km左右,表明此次地震仍属于发生于上地壳的地震。     

STUDY ON FOCAL DEPTH OF THE MS5.4 CANGWU EARTHQUAKE IN GUANGXI

On July 31th, 2016, a magnitude 5.4 earthquake struck Cangwu Country, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, it was the largest earthquake recorded by Guangxi Seismological Network since it set up. The number of people affected by the earthquake had reached 20 000, and the direct economic losses caused by the earthquake were nearly 100 million Yuan. After the earthquake, USGS provided a global earthquake catalog showing that the focal depth of Cangwu earthquake was about 24.5km. However, the result given by the Global Centroid Moment Tensor showed the focal depth of this earthquake was 15.6km. However, the result obtained by Xu Xiaofeng et al. using CAP method was 5.1km. It was clear that the focal depths of Cangwu earthquake given by different institutions were quite different from each other. However, accurate focal depth of the earthquake has important significance for exploring the tectonic mechanism near the epicenter, so it is necessary to further determine the more accurate depth of the Cangwu earthquake. In order to further accurately determine the focal depth of Cangwu earthquake, we used the global search method for travel-time residual to calculate the focal depth of this earthquake and its error range, based on the regional velocity model, which is a one-dimensional velocity model of the Xianggui tectonic belt produced by the comprehensive geophysical profile. Then, we inverted the focal mechanism of this earthquake with the CAP method. Based on this, the focal depth of Cangwu M_S5.4 earthquake was further determined by the method of the Rayleigh surface wave amplitude spectrum and the sPL phase, respectively. Computed results reveal that the focal depth of this earthquake and its error range from the travel-time residual global search method is about(13±3)km, the focal depth inverted by CAP method is about 10km, the focal depth from sPL phase is about 10km, and the focal depth from Rayleigh surface wave amplitude spectrum is about 9~10km. Finally, we confirmed that the focal depth of Cangwu M_S5.4 earthquake is about 10km, which indicates that this earthquake still occurred in the upper crust. In the case of low network density, the sPL phase and Rayleigh wave amplitude spectrum recorded by only 1 or 2 broadband stations could be used to obtain more accurate focal depth. The focal depth's accuracy of Cangwu M_S5.4 earthquake in the USGS global earthquake catalog has yet to be improved. In the future, we should consider the error of the source parameters when using the USGS global earthquake catalog for other related research.     

SOURCE PARAMETERS OF THE CANGWU MS5.4 EARTHQUAKE, 31 JULY, 2016

On July 31^st, 2016, an earthquake of M_S5.4 occurred in Cangwu County, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, which is the first M_S ≥ 5.0 earthquake in coastal areas of southern China in the past 17a. The moderate earthquake activities have come into a comparatively quiet period in coastal areas of southern China for decades, so the study about the Cangwu M_S5.4 earthquake is very important. However, differernt research institutions and scholars have got different results for the focal depth of the Cangwu M_S5.4 earthquake. For this reason, we further measured the focal depth by using CAP method and sPL phase method. sPL phase was first put forward by Chong in 2010. It is often observed between P and S wave of continental earthquakes with epicentral distance of about 30km to 50km. The energy of sPL phase is mainly concentrated on the radial component. Arrival time difference between sPL phase and direct P wave is insensitive to epicentral distancs, but increases almost linearly with the increase of focal depth. Based on these characteristics and advantages, sPL phase method is chosen to measure the focal depth of Cangwu M_S5.4 earthquake in the paper. First of all, we selected the broadband waveform data through seismic stations distributed mainly in Guangxi and adjacent provinces from Data Management Centre of China National Seismic Network and Guangxi Earthquake Networks Center. And an appropriate velocity model of Cangwu area was constructed by the teleseismic receiver function method. Then, the focal mechanism and focal depth of Cangwu M_S5.4 earthquake were determined by using the CAP(Cut and Paste)method. Next, we compared the synthetic waveforms simulated by F-K forward method of different focal depth models with the actual observed waveforms. According to the difference of arrival times between sPL and Pg phases, we finally obtained the focal depth of Cangwu earthquake. The results show that the focal depth is 11km measured by CAP method and 9km by sPL phase method. Based on the focal mechanism solution, isoseismal shapes, aftershocks distributions and investigation on spot, we conclude that the Cangwu M_S5.4 earthquake is a left-lateral strike-slip earthquake which occurred in the upper crust. Our preliminary analysis considers that the seismogenic structure of Cangwu earthquake is a north-northwest branch fault, and the control fault of this earthquake is the Hejie-Xiaying Fault.     

利用sPL震相确定海南儋州2.6级地震震源深度

对海南测震台网记录的2014年7月28日海南儋州2.6级地震波形数据进行预处理,发现松林岭(SLL)地震台记录到sPL震相,运用频率—波速(F—K)方法,合成在不同震源深度模型下的理论波形。通过该台记录的实际波形和理论波形拟合对比,确定海南儋州2.6级地震震源深度约14 km。     

多种方法测定2019年皎口水库地区2.5级以上地震震源深度

应用CAP方法、sPL深度震相方法和双差定位方法，对2019年M2.5以上皎口水库地区地震震源深度进行测定。通过CAP方法进行反演，计算出最佳震源机制解及震源深度；在震中距50 km左右的近台识别出清晰的sPL震相，运用频率—波速（F-K）方法画出各种震源深度的理论波形，与实际波形进行拟合确定震源深度；建立地震事件对，利用走时差观测值与理论值的残差确定其相对位置及深度。结果发现，上述多种方法测定的结果基本一致；相对而言，双差定位方法更适合皎口水库地区地震震源深度的测定。      

利用sPL震相测定2017年河北临城ML 4.4地震震源深度

2017年9月4日河北临城地区发生M_L 4.4地震，为得到准确的震源深度，根据sPL震相基本特征，对震中距20-70 km范围内8个地震台站波形数据进行处理，在其中4个地震台观测到明显的sPL震相，利用频率-波数（F-K）方法，计算其理论波形图，与处理后的观测波形拟合对比，得到震源深度范围，与TDMT-INV方法、PTD方法及河北测震台网编目等结果基本一致，表明利用sPL震相测定河北临城M_L 4.4地震震源深度可靠，其深度范围为10-11 km。     

Determination of Focal Depths of the MS5.8 Alxa Left Banner, Inner Mongolia Earthquake Sequence

Using the double-difference earthquake location algorithm, the deterministic method (PTD method) and the CAP seismic moment tensor inversion method, the paper selects the primary waveform data of 78 earthquakes recorded by the "China Earthquake Science Array Probe Project in the Northern Part of North South Seismic Belt", the "China Earthquake Scientific Exploration Array Data Center" of Institute of Geophysics, China Earthquake Administration, and the Inner Mongolia Digital Seismic Network to calculate the focal depths of the mainshock and the seismic sequence of the M_S5.8 Alxa Left Banner earthquake in Inner Mongolia. The results show that the focal depth of the main shock is 20.6km, determined by the double-difference earthquake location method, 18.1km by the PTD method, and 19.2km by the CAP method. The focal depth of the earthquake sequence calculated by the double-difference location method is larger. The deterministic method (PTD method) and double-difference location method are the methods that fit the tectonic characteristics of the seismic source area, and the CAP method is suitable for larger earthquakes.