1992年四川力马地震序列期间激发的孕震结构

对小震序列的深入研究或许可以作为对大震序列震后趋势研究的替代，本文将地震模拟量已转化为数字记录的马力小震序列来尝试这种替代。。     

四川二滩水库库区蓄水前地震序列揭示的水库诱震结构

四川二滩水库地震遥测台网自运行以来,记录了库区发生的力马,田湾－金河和马鹿塘三次地震序列,主震震级分别为３．２,４．０和２．６级,利用工业爆破和天然地震资料,计算了该区域的Ｐ波和Ｓ波地壳分层速度模型,以此模型为基础,采用参考时间平均值法和数值性能极好的单纯形空间迭代寻优定位方法,修定为了这三个序列的震源位置,得到精度一般小于０．３ｋｍ,最大不超过０．５ｋｍ的精确解,最后,利用定位结果,求解了田湾序     

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

2017年8月8日在青藏高原东缘四川省九寨沟县发生M7.0级强烈地震,极震区烈度达Ⅸ度,但无明显地表破裂,一定程度上限制了发震构造的确定和后续地震危险性判定.本文基于截止至2017年8月14日的地震资料,采用多阶段定位方法,对主震及余震进行了重新定位,同时,利用CAP波形反演方法,获得了M7.0主震与13次M_L ≥ 4.0级余震的震源机制解和震源矩心深度,进而初步分析了本次地震的发震构造.结果显示,九寨沟M7.0地震的矩震级M_W6.4,震源矩心深度5 km,表明主震发生在上地壳浅部,与2003年伊朗巴姆（Bam）M_W6.5地震特征极为相似;12次M_L ≥ 4.0级余震的震源矩心深度6~12 km,显示这些余震发生在主震下部,仅1次例外.重新定位后的余震震中呈NW-SE向窄带展布,位于近NS向的岷江断裂与近EW向的东昆仑断裂带东端分支塔藏断裂所夹持的区域,余震带长轴长约38 km,主震位于余震带中部.根据余震震中分布、主震及余震震源机制解等,推测本次九寨沟M7.0地震及其余震的主发震构造为位于岷江断裂与塔藏断裂之间的树正断裂.震源机制解揭示,树正断裂呈左旋走滑,走向约152°,近SE,倾向SW,倾角约70°,该断裂应属于东昆仑断裂东端的分支断裂之一,或与东南侧的虎牙断裂构成统一断裂系.     

西南太平洋地区地震序列的特征

共搜集到１９８４￣１９９０年西南太平洋地区１２个板缘地震序列。多数地震序列的特征是：震中分布区域的长轴较长并且随主震震级和序列中强震次数而增加;震中分布区域的长、短轴长度的比值较高;地震序列的余震震源机制和主震的差异不大;震源深度下限超过地壳,可达７０ｋｍ以上。走滑型主震占的比例低,高倾角滑动面的走向既有与俯冲带走向平行的也有横切的,个别逆冲型地震的断层面走向横切俯冲带。它们显示出与板块俯冲带主体     

2010年4月玉树M_S7.3地震序列的断层结构

利用双差定位方法对玉树地震序列2010年4月14日至10月31日间发生的ML≥1.0地震进行双差定位,得到1545个地震的重定位结果.综合分析地震双差定位结果和玉树地震序列中强地震震源机制解,发现玉树MS7.3地震发震构造由北西向和北东东向两条相交断层组成,主震发生在北西走向的甘孜—玉树断裂带上,5月29日的MS5.9余震序列发生在北东东走向的一条隐伏断裂上,两条断裂均接近直立.甘孜—玉树断裂是羌塘地块和巴彦喀拉地块的构造边界,由于羌塘地块和巴颜喀拉地块的差异运动使甘孜—玉树断裂强耦合段应力高度积累,在应变能超过岩石强度时破裂失稳发生了MS7.3地震.主震断层的左旋滑动导致北东东向断层的正应力减小,库伦应力增加,45天后触发了MS5.9余震序列的活动.     

2013年芦山地震序列震源机制与震源区构造变形特征分析

基于四川区域地震台网记录的波形资料,利用CAP波形反演方法,同时获取了2013年4月20日芦山M7.0级地震序列中88个M≥3.0级地震的震源机制解、震源矩心深度与矩震级,进而利用应变花（strain rosette）和面应变（areal strain）As值,分析了芦山地震序列震源机制和震源区构造运动与变形特征.获得的主要结果有：（1）芦山M7.0级主震破裂面参数为走向219°/倾角43°/滑动角101°,矩震级为M_W6.55,震源矩心深度15 km.芦山地震余震区沿龙门山断裂带走向长约37 km、垂直断裂带走向宽约16 km.主震两侧余震呈不对称分布,主震南西侧余震区长约27 km、北东侧长约10 km.余震分布在7~22 km深度区间,优势分布深度为9~14 km,序列平均深度约13 km,多数余震分布在主震上部.粗略估计的芦山地震震源体体积为37 km×16 km×16 km.（2）面应变As值统计显示,芦山地震序列以逆冲型地震占绝对优势,所占比例超过93%.序列主要受倾向NW、倾角约45°的近NE-SW向逆冲断层控制;部分余震发生在与上述主发震断层近乎垂直的倾向SE的反冲断层上;龙门山断裂带前山断裂可能参与了部分余震活动.P轴近水平且优势方位单一,呈NW-SE向,与龙门山断裂带南段所处区域构造应力场方向一致,反映芦山地震震源区主要受区域构造应力场控制,芦山地震是近NE-SW向断层在近水平的NW-SE向主压应力挤压作用下发生逆冲运动的结果.序列中6次非逆冲型地震均发生在主震震中附近,且主震震中附近P轴仰角变化明显,表明主震对其震中附近局部区域存在明显的应力扰动.（3）序列整体及不同震级段的应变花均呈NW向挤压白瓣形态,显示芦山地震震源区深部构造呈逆冲运动、NW向纯挤压变形.各震级段的应变花方位与形状一致,具有震级自相似性特征,揭示震源区深部构造运动和变形模式与震级无关.（4）不同深度的应变花形态以NW-NWW向挤压白瓣为优势,显示震源区构造无论是总体还是分段均以NW-NWW向挤压变形为特征.但应变花方位与形状随深度仍具有较明显的变化,可能反映了震源区构造变形在深度方向上存在分段差异.（5）芦山地震震源体尺度较小,且主震未发生在龙门山断裂带南段主干断裂上,南段长期积累的应变能未能得到充分释放,南段仍存在发生强震的危险.     

中亚地区地震序列特征

共搜集到１９７０－１９８４年中亚地区８个地震序列。通过分析这些板块内部地震序列的震源分布,震源机制,归纳出它们的特征是：震中分布的长轴部比较短,震中分布长轴和短轴的比值小;长轴的方向受当地地震带的走向控制。和碰撞带走向无关。地震序列中各地震的震源深度都比较浅。其中有震源机制资料的３个地震序列表明：主震的震源机制如果是逆冲滑动,倾角则比较低;主要的震源机制如果是走向滑动,倾角则比较高。     

由初至P震相重新定位2017年九寨沟地震序列的主震与ML≥3.0余震并分析发震构造

综合利用区域台站和流动台站(近台)的记录,基于初至P震相重新测定了2017年九寨沟序列M_S7.0主震和M_L≥3.0余震的震源位置,并利用较高精度的定位结果分析余震分布与地震构造的关系,解释发震断裂带的结构.获得的新认识有:(1)九寨沟主震震源深度为16km,位于余震带中段的南缘;余震主要分布深度为4～17km.(2)沿余震带的走向,余震分布与主震同震位错大小的分布明显相关.余震带中段8～16km深度存在的余震稀疏区与同震位错的高值区相吻合,应是发震断裂带主凹凸体的部位,也是主震时应变释放较充分的部位;余震带南东段10～18km深度的余震密集区对应了同震位错的亏损区之一,三次M_L≥5.0余震都发生于此;余震带西北段在5～10km之下既缺少余震,又属同震位错的亏损区,可能与那里多条断裂的交汇或合并造成的构造复杂性有关;余震带中-北西段3～5km深度的也缺少余震,也对应了浅部的同震位错亏损区.(3)证实了九寨沟地震的发震构造为虎牙断裂带北段,同时新揭示出发震断裂带表现为由主断裂和分支断裂构成的、向上分叉的花状结构,尺度约为4.5km宽(最大)、35km长,主断裂朝SW陡倾.这些反映主震破裂可能不只受控于单一的断裂,而有可能是沿主断裂发生主破裂,而沿分支断裂发生次要破裂.另外,本文对发震断裂带结构的分段解释,是遵循构造地质学原理去综合震源排列、震源机制解、地表断层已知位置、相邻剖面断层解释结果等信息的分析结果,而不仅仅依据余震的密集分布进行推断.     

1999年山西大同Ms 5.6地震的震源断层

大同震区先后在 1989、1991和 1999年发生MS >5地震 ,利用大同遥测地震台网的记录资料进行比较精确的地震序列震源定位 ,结合宏观烈度分布和震源机制解资料 ,详细地分析对比了 3次子序列的异同。结果显示 ,1999年MS5 .6地震的震源断层是走向NWW、长 16km、宽12km、埋深 5km以下、倾角近直立的左旋走滑断层。而前 2个子序列是NNE为主的右旋走滑断层活动所致 ,表明地震破裂方向发生了变化。这种 2个以上方向先后出现、并且强弱有别的地震破裂是普遍存在的 ,表明震源环境的复杂程度与地震序列的类型有关。虽然震区存在NE向的大王村断裂和NW向的团堡断裂 ,但目前没有证据说明震源断层和 2条构造断层连通。 3次子序列的震源断层都是走滑断层 ,也和 2条构造正断层有别。 1999年的子序列可能属于新破裂。     

2008年8月30日攀枝花-会理6.1级地震序列 ML≥4.0事件的震源机制解

针对2008年8月30日在四川攀枝花-会理发生的M_s6.1地震序列,本研究基于四川和云南两省数字地震台网的宽频带波形记录,采用CAP方法反演了该序列主震及M_L≥4.0余震的震源机制解.结果显示:主震震源机制解的两个主应力轴仰角小于10°,其中,主压力轴方位为140°;节面之一走向185°、西倾83°、滑动角5°,显示左旋走滑略兼逆冲分量的断层作用性质.结合余震、烈度分布以及震区的活动构造,判定该节面代表了主震的发震断层面,相应的发震断层应是穿越震区的近南北向红格断裂(南段).本研究还获得主震震源机制解的最佳拟合误差深度为10 km,与该事件的定位结果相一致.该序列中6次M_L≥4.0余震也具有与主震类似的震源机制解.分析初步表明:空间上,2008年攀枝花-会理M_s6.1地震序列的震源机制解与研究区内更早地震的震源机制解具有良好的协调性,反映了该序列是在川滇地块SE-SSE向水平运动的背景下、沿近S-N向红格断裂发生左旋走滑略兼逆冲运动的结果.     

2014年11月22日康定M6.3级地震序列发震构造分析

2014年11月22日在NW向鲜水河断裂带中南段四川康定县发生M6.3级地震,11月25日在该地震震中东南约10km处再次发生M5.8级地震.基于中国国家数字地震台网和四川区域数字地震台网资料,采用多阶段定位方法对本次康定M6.3级地震序列进行了重新定位;利用gCAP(generalized Cut And Paste)矩张量反演方法获得了M6.3和M5.8级地震的震源机制解与矩心深度,分析了本次地震序列的发震构造,并结合历史强震破裂时空分布和2001年以来小震重新定位结果,对鲜水河断裂带中段强震危险性进行了初步探讨.获得的主要结果如下:(1)M6.3级主震震中位于101.69°E、30.27°N,震源初始破裂深度约10km,矩心深度9km;M5.8级地震震中位于101.73°E、30.18°N,初始破裂深度约11km,矩心深度9km.gCAP矩张量反演结果揭示这两次地震双力偶分量占主导,M6.3级地震的最佳双力偶解节面Ⅰ走向143°/倾角82°/滑动角-9°,节面Ⅱ走向234°/倾角81°/滑动角-172°.M5.8级地震最佳双力偶解节面Ⅰ走向151°/倾角83°/滑动角-6°,节面Ⅱ走向242°/倾角84°/滑动角-173°.依据余震分布长轴展布与断裂走向,判定节面Ⅰ为发震断层面,M6.3和M5.8级地震均为带有微小正断分量的左旋走滑型地震.(2)序列中重新定位的459个地震平均震源深度约9km,地震主要集中分布在6~11km深度区间,余震基本发生在M6.3和M5.8级地震震源上部.依据余震密集区展布范围,推测本次康定地震的震源体尺度长约30km、宽约4km、深度范围约6km.M6.3级主震震源附近的余震稀疏区可能是一个较大的凹凸体(asperity),在主震中能量得以充分释放.(3)最初3天的余震主要分布在M6.3级地震NW侧;而M5.8级地震之后的余震主要集中在其震中附近.M6.3级地震以及最初3天的绝大部分余震发生在倾角约82°近直立的NW走向色拉哈断裂上;M5.8级地震与其后的多数余震发生在倾角约83°近直立的NW走向折多塘断裂北端走向向北偏转部位,M5.8级地震可能是M6.3级地震触发相邻的折多塘断裂活动所致.(4)康定M6.3与M5.8级地震发生在鲜水河断裂带乾宁与康定之间的色拉哈强震破裂空段,本次地震破裂尺度较小,尚不足以填补该强震空段.色拉哈段以及相邻的乾宁段7级地震平静时间均已超过其平均复发周期估值,未来几年存在发生7级地震的危险.康定M6.3级地震序列基本填补了震前存在于塔公与康定之间的深部小震空区,未来强震发生在塔公至松林口段深部小震稀疏区内的可能性很大.     

2020年新疆于田MS6.4地震断层面快速测定及发震构造研究

本文基于新疆、 西藏区域数字地震台网波形数据, 利用gCAP反演方法和空间格点搜索算法获得2020年6月26日于田M_S6.4地震矩心的空间位置为35.649°N, 82.339°E, 深度为5 km。 最佳震源机制解节面Ⅰ走向166°, 倾角59°, 滑动角-144°; 节面Ⅱ走向26°, 倾角38°, 滑动角-55°, 矩震级为M_W6.21。 根据不同震源机制解结果, 获得中心震源机制解和标准差, 表明震源机制解较为稳定和可靠。 使用H-C方法进行地震发震断层的快速判断, 显示节面Ⅱ为发震断层面。 综合震源区地质构造特征、 余震序列的空间分布和区域构造应力场特征, 最终推断此次地震断层面为节面Ⅱ, 阿尔金断裂西段是发震断层, 震源机制解显示以正滑为主, 是一次张性破裂地震事件, 属于阿尔金断裂西段强烈活动的响应。     

ANALYSIS ON THE 2013 BADONG M5.1 EARTHQUAKE SEQUENCE AND THE SEISMOGENIC STRUCTURE

On 16^th September 2013, an M5.1 earthquake occurred in Badong County, Hubei Province, which is the biggest one since the first water impounding in 2003 in the head region of the Three Gorges Reservoir area. The crustal velocity information is needed to determine the earthquake location and focal mechanism. By comparison, the 1-D velocity structure model from Zhao was adopted in this study. Double difference location method was applied to determine the precise locations of the M5.1 earthquake sequence. Relocation results show that the dominant distribution of this sequence is along NEE direction. In order to understand its seismogenic structure, focal depth profiles were made. Profile AA' was along the sequence distribution, and the earthquake sequence extended about 12km. Focal depth of mainshock is deeper than that of aftershocks, and earthquake rupture propagated laterally southwestward. The seismic profile BB' and CC' were perpendicular to profile AA', which represent the dip direction. Both profiles show that the focal depth becomes deeper toward southeast, and dip angle is about 50°. It means that the possible seismogenic fault strikes NEE and dips southeast. Focal mechanism could provide more information for judging the seismogenic structures. Many methods could obtain the focal mechanism, such as P-wave first motion method, CAP method, and some other moment tensor methods. In this paper, moment tensor inversion program made by Yagi Y is adopted. 12 regional seismic stations ranging from 100~400km are picked up, and before the inversion, we removed the mean and trend. The seismic waveforms were band pass filtered between 0.05 and 0.2Hz, and then integrated into displacement. Green's functions were calculated using the discrete wavenumber method developed by Kohketsu. The focal mechanism of the M5.1 mainshock manifests that the NEE-striking fault plane probably is the possible seismogenic fault, which is consistent with the analysis of focal depth profiles. The focal mechanisms of the M_L≥2.0 aftershocks are retrieved by P-wave first motion method, and the nodal plane I is in accordance with the earthquake sequence distribution and the fault plane of the mainshock. FMSI program was adopted to inverse the stress field in the earthquake area, and the results show that the earthquake sequence is under the control of the regional stress field. The earthquake sequence occurred on the stage of slow water unloading, and ETAS model was introduced to testify the influences of water level fluctuations on earthquakes. The results denote that the reservoir played a triggering role in the earthquake, however, the NEE-striking seismogenic fault is the controlling factor.     

用接收函数建立区域模型的震源机制反演及其在芦山地震序列研究中的应用

本文提出并试验了一种基于接收函数建立区域模型进行震源机制反演的方法.选取四川地震台网记录的M≥3且信噪比高的近震波形资料,反演得到了芦山地震序列中74个地震的震源机制.通过对震源深度和震源机制的综合分析,探讨了芦山地震的发震构造和区域应力场状态.采用接收函数方法反演获取了26个台站下方的S波速度结构,对不同区域的台站反演结果进行叠加平均,以此区域平均S波速度作为本文震源机制反演使用的区域模型的S波速度;区域模型的P波速度由经验公式给出.反演稳定性测试表明,使用不同模型或对原始波形记录加入随机噪声的反演结果与原始反演相比,震源深度最大误差为1km,断层面各参数误差水平也很低,且显示的发震类型是一致的,其中随机噪声带来的误差小于模型带来的误差.主震反演得到的震源机制解为:震源深度17km,矩震级6.47;节面Ⅰ走向213°,倾角51°,滑动角98°;节面Ⅱ走向20°,倾角40°,滑动角80°;显示芦山主震可视为纯逆冲型地震,发震构造可能是某个具有较大倾角的逆冲断层,而不是低缓的推覆构造的基底滑脱面.同时本文反演获取的73个M≥3余震的震源机制绝大多数也显示了类似的发震类型,逆冲型地震为67个,占92%,具有绝对优势;走滑型地震为5个,正断型地震为1个.其中5个走滑型地震中的4个均分布在震源区的东北端.整个芦山地震序列深度集中在12~20km,且沿震源区短轴的余震深度剖面有自西向东呈逐步变浅的趋势,呈现清晰的铲形断面结构,结合本地地质构造,可以推断芦山地震序列主要发生在龙门山前山断裂以东的逆冲推覆体内的一个隐伏断裂上.P轴方位角优势方位与区域应力场及汶川震源区南段的相一致,表明芦山序列地震活动主要受区域应力场控制,且汶川震后该区应该不存在应力场变化.P轴仰角随深度分布则显示了孕震层在浅部为脆性上地壳,而深部已经进入了中地壳低速层.断层面的几何形态简单,倾角均值在不同深度保持稳定在55°左右,与主震倾角接近,这与汶川震源区南段的研究结果明显不同,揭示了龙门山断裂带南段与此次芦山发震断裂在断层面几何形态上的明显差异.     

2018年11月26日台湾海峡M_S6.2地震发震构造研究

本文利用福建省地震台网、广东省地震台网和台湾"中央"气象局17个台的宽频带记录,使用CAP方法反演了2018年11月26日台湾海峡M_S6.2地震震源机制解,得到节面1走向/倾角/滑动角为89°/82°/-173°,节面2走向/倾角/滑动角为358°/84°/-7°,最佳拟合深度14km,矩震级5.8.使用双差定位获取了94个M_L2.0以上地震的精定位结果,结果显示,主震位于北纬23.36°,东经118.62°,震源深度10.43km.根据小震分布和构造应力场反演得到余震断层面走向和倾角分别为88°和60°.研究认为,台湾海峡6.2级地震发震构造为近EW向的台湾浅滩断裂,受南海板块张裂拉伸发育而成,孕震过程中有东山隆起东缘断裂的参与,推测在菲律宾板块对欧亚板块NW-SE向挤压碰撞背景下,近EW向的台湾浅滩断裂与近NS向的东山隆起东缘断裂交接部位属于强度薄弱区,最终产生高倾角右旋走滑错动而引发地震,余震主要沿台湾浅滩断裂分布.     

Is clustered seismicity an indicator of regional stress? Insights from earthquake sequences in Yongning-Luguhu faulted basin,Southwest China

Using hypocenter relocation, moment tensor inversion, stress field inversion, and fault slip tendency analysis, this study systematically investigated three M5.5–5.8 earthquake sequences that occurred after 2000 in the Yongning-Luguhu faulted basin in the middle of the Lijiang-Xiaojinhe fault zone within the Sichuan-Yunnan block, Southwest China. Our results show that since the 2008 Wenchuan Earthquake, the tectonic stress pattern in this area may have changed and that b-values estimated for the earthquake sequences show evidence of an increasing trend in stress in the study area. Seismicity in the small-scale faulted basin adjacent to the large-scale fault zone is a possible indicator of regional stress. We also note that the aftershocks of the M5.7 earthquake sequence in 2012 and the M5.5 earthquake sequence in 2022 show relatively clear fluid diffusion-triggering characteristics. Overpressure of deep fluids is still the main factor driving seismic activity in the region, and we propose that the background tectonic stresses have not yet reached critical levels.     

Preliminary analysis on the source properties and seismogenic structure of the 2017 <Emphasis Type="Italic">M</Emphasis><Subscript>s</Subscript>7.0 Jiuzhaigou earthquake

At GMT time 13:19, August 8, 2017, an M_s7.0 earthquake struck the Jiuzhaigou region in Sichuan Province, China, causing severe damages and casualties. To investigate the source properties, seismogenic structures, and seismic hazards, we systematically analyzed the tectonic environment, crustal velocity structure in the source region, source parameters and rupture process, Coulomb failure stress changes, and 3-D features of the rupture plane of the Jiuzhaigou earthquake. Our results indicate the following: (1) The Jiuzhaigou earthquake occurred on an unmarked fault belonging to the transition zone of the east Kunlun fault system and is located northwest of the Huya fault. (2) Both the mainshock and aftershock rupture zones are located in a region where crustal seismic velocity changes dramatically. Southeast to the source region, shear wave velocity at the middle to lower crust is significantly low, but it rapidly increases northeastward and lies close to the background velocity across the rupture fault. (3) The aftershock zone is narrow and distributes along the northwest-southeast trend, and most aftershocks occur within a depth range of 5–20 km. (4) The focal mechanism of the Jiuzhaigou earthquake indicates a left-lateral strike-slip fault, with strike, dip, and rake angles of 152°, 74° and 8°, respectively. The hypocenter depth measures 20 km, whereas the centroid depth is about 6 km. The co-seismic rupture mainly concentrates at depths of 3–13 km, with a moment magnitude (M_w) of 6.5. (5) The co-seismic rupture also strengthens the Coulomb failure stress at the two ends of the rupture fault and the east segment of the Tazang fault. Aftershocks relocation results together with geological surveys indicate that the causative fault is a near vertical fault with notable spatial variations: dip angle varies within 66°–89° from northwest to southeast and the average dip angle measures ~84°. The results of this work are of fundamental importance for further studies on the source characteristics, tectonic environment, and seismic hazard evaluation of the Jiuzhaigou earthquake.     

THE SOURCE PARAMETERS AND SEISMOTECTONIC IMPLICATIONS OF THE SEPTEMBER 4, 2017 ML4.4 LINCHENG EARTHQUAKE

At 3:05, September 4, 2017, an M_L4.4 earthquake occurred in Lincheng County, Xingtai City, Hebei Province, which was felt obviously by surrounding areas. Approximately 60km away from the hypocenter of Xingtai M_S7.2 earthquake in 1966, this event is the most noticeable earthquake in this area in recent years. On the one hand, people are still shocked by the 1966 Xingtai earthquake that caused huge disaster, on the other hand, Lincheng County is lack of strong earthquakes. Therefore, this quake has aroused widespread concerns by the government, society and seismologists. It is necessary to clarify whether the seismogenic structure of this event is consistent with the previous seismicity and whether it has any new implications for the seismic activity and seismic hazard in this region. Therefore, it is of great significance to study its seismogenic mechanism for understanding the earthquake activity in Xingtai region where a M_S7.2 earthquake had occurred in 1966. In this study, the Lincheng earthquake and its aftershocks are relocated using the multi-step locating method, and the focal mechanism and focal depth are determined by the "generalized Cut and Paste"(gCAP)method. The reliability of the results is analyzed based on the data of Hebei regional seismic network. In order to better constrain the focal depth, the depth phase sPL fitting method is applied to the relocation of focal depth. The inversion and constraint results show that aftershocks are mainly distributed along NE direction and dip to SE direction as revealed by depth profiles. Focal depths of aftershocks are concentrated in the depths of 6.5~8.2km with an average of about 7km. The best double-couple solution of the mainshock is 276°, 69° and -40° for strike, dip and slip angle for nodal plane I and 23°, 53° and -153° for nodal plane Ⅱ, respectively, revealing that it is a strike-slip event with a small amount of normal-fault component. The initial rupture depth of mainshock is about 7.5km obtained by the relocation while the centroid depth is 6km derived from gCAP method which was also verified by the seismic depth phase sPL observed by several stations, indicating the earthquake is ruptured from deep to shallow. Combined with the research results on regional geological structure and the seismic sequence relocation results, it is concluded that the nodal plane Ⅱ is the seismogenic fault plane of this earthquake. There are several active faults around the hypocenter of Lincheng earthquake sequence, however, none of the known faults on the current understanding is completely consistent with the seismogenic fault. To determine the seismogenic mechanism, the lucubrated research of the M_S7.2 Xingtai earthquake in 1966 could provide a powerful reference. The seismic tectonic characteristics of the 1966 Xingtai earthquake sequence could be summarized as follows:There are tensional fault in the shallow crust and steep dip hidden fault in the middle and lower crust, however, the two faults are not connected but separated by the shear slip surfaces which are widely distributed in the middle crust; the seismic source is located between the hidden fault in the lower crust and the extensional fault in the upper crust; the earthquake began to rupture in the deep dip fault in the mid-lower crust and then ruptured upward to the extensional fault in the shallow crust, and the two fault systems were broken successively. From the earthquake rupture revealed by the seismic sequence location, the Lincheng earthquake also has the semblable feature of rupturing from deep to shallow. However, due to the much smaller magnitude of this event than that of the 1966 earthquake, the accumulated stress was not high enough to tear the fracture of the detachment surface whose existence in Lincheng region was confirmed clearly by the results of Lincheng-Julu deep reflection seismology and reach to the shallower fault. Therefore, by the revelation of the seismogenic mechanism of the 1966 Xingtai earthquake, the seismogenic fault of Lincheng earthquake is presumed to be a concealed fault possessing a potential of both strike-slip and small normal faulting component and located below the detachment surface in Lincheng area. The tectonic significance indicated by this earthquake is that the event was a stress adjustment of the deep fault and did not lead to the rupture of the shallow fault. Therefore, this area still has potential seismic hazard to a certain extent.     

2014年新疆于田MS7.3地震序列重定位及其发震构造初步研究

2014年2月12日在新疆于田县发生了M_S7.3地震,主震前一天在震区发生了M_S5.4前震,震后余震活动频繁,由于震区台站十分稀疏和不均匀、地壳速度结构复杂,台网常规定位结果精度有限,很难从中获得序列的空间分布特征和活动趋势的正确认识.本文首先利用位于震区附近的于田地震台5年记录的远震波形数据,采用接收函数方法研究了震区附近的地壳结构,建立了震源区的地壳速度模型.在此基础上,联合震相到时和方位角对2014年于田M_S7.3地震序列(从2014年02月11日-2014年04月30日,共计577次地震)进行了重新绝对定位.结果显示,(1) 重定位后的前震和主震震中位置明显向地表破裂带及其附近的阿尔金分支断裂(南肖尔库勒断裂和阿什库勒-肖尔库勒断裂)靠近,两者相距5.4 km,主震位置为36.076°N、82.576°E,震源深度为22 km, 前震位置为36.055°N、82.522°E,震源深度为19 km;(2) 本文重定位结果显示,余震序列沿NEE-SWW展布,优势分布长度约73 km、宽度约16 km,平均震源深度为14.8 km,其中77%的余震分布在地表破裂带的西南端,这部分余震中少数沿阿什库勒-肖尔库勒断裂分布,绝大多数沿北东东向的南肖尔库勒断裂分布,位于地表破裂带东北端的余震沿阿什库勒-肖尔库勒断裂分布,但发生在地表破裂带的余震极少;重定位后,位于地表破裂带西南侧的震中分布由台网目录的近南北向变为北东向,与地表破裂带、南肖尔库勒断裂和阿什库勒-肖尔库勒断裂走向一致;(3) 沿重定位剖面的地震分布,可推断位于地表破裂带西南段的南肖尔库勒断裂与位于北东段的阿什库勒-肖尔库勒断裂倾向反向,南肖尔库勒断裂的倾向为SE,阿什库勒-肖尔库勒断裂的倾向为NW,这与本次地震野外考察得到的断裂性质一致.综合重定位结果、地表破裂带分布、震源机制解、南肖尔库勒断裂和阿什库勒-肖尔库勒断裂的性质认为,2014年于田M_S7.3地震的发震构造为阿尔金断裂西南尾段的两条分支断裂——南肖尔库勒断裂和阿什库勒-肖尔库勒断裂.     

日本海沟俯冲带MW9.0地震震源区应力场演化分析

于2011年3月11日发生在日本东北部的M_W9.0级逆冲型板间地震是日本有地震记录以来震级最大的一次地震.本研究基于NIED F-net矩张量解目录中的震源机制解,选取两个长轴相互垂直的矩形区域进行应力场2D反演,获取了日本海沟俯冲带地区应力场的空间及时间分布图像.结果表明：主震前,俯冲带地区应力状态在空间上大体趋于一致,即应力轴（P轴、σ₁轴及S_Hmax轴）系统性地倾向板块汇聚方向,P轴、σ₁轴倾角整体偏缓（<30°）,且远离震源区及日本海沟东侧区域内的应力轴倾角普遍大于主震震源区内应力轴倾角;主震前,受2003年5月26日在宫城县北部发生的M_W7.0地震影响,位于M_W9.0地震震源区西北侧的应力场出现明显扰动,σ₁轴倾向顺时针偏转150°~180°,并于之后大体恢复至震前状态,同期其他地区没有明显变化,这种情况可能和主震断层局部（深部）的前兆性滑动有关;主震后,距离震源区较远处应力场变化不大,主震震源区内应力场发生显著改变,P轴及σ₁轴均以大角度（>60°）倾伏于板块汇聚方向,S_Hmax轴顺时针偏转60°~90°且在日本海沟附近普遍平行于海沟轴.这项研究以时空图像的方式展示了大地震前应力场变化的特点,反映了大地震孕震过程中构造与地震的相互作用,对于理解大地震孕震过程有重要意义.