泸县—荣昌地区地震活动时空演化与构造应力场特征

doi:10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2025.04.20240008

地震地质 ›› 2025, Vol. 47 ›› Issue (4): 1183-1203.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2025.04.20240008

泸县—荣昌地区地震活动时空演化与构造应力场特征

唐茂云¹^,²⁾(), 李翠平¹⁾^,^*(), 黄世源¹⁾, 董蕾¹⁾, 高见¹⁾, 李勇³⁾

1)重庆市地震局, 重庆 401147
2)成都理工大学, 地球科学学院, 成都 610059
3)成都理工大学, 油气藏地质及开发工程国家重点实验室, 成都 610059

收稿日期:2024-02-16 修回日期:2024-04-10 出版日期:2025-08-20 发布日期:2025-10-09
通讯作者: *李翠平, 女, 1989年生, 硕士, 高级工程师, 主要从事地震活动性与地震危险性研究, E-mail: wulicuiping@126.com。
作者简介:
唐茂云, 男, 1990年生, 2015年于中国地震局地质研究所获构造地质学专业硕士学位, 高级工程师, 主要从事构造地貌、微地震监测研究, E-mail: tmylzy@foxmail.com。
基金资助:
重庆市技术创新与应用发展专项重点项目(CSTB2022TIAD-KPX0197); 重庆市地震局地震创新科研课题(CQDZ202301); 地震科技星火计划青年课题(XH25026YA); 地震预测开放基金(XH25004D)

THE CHARACTERISTICS OF TECTONIC STRESS FIELD AND SPATIOTEMPORAL EVOLUTION OF SEISMIC ACTIVITY IN LUXIAN-RONGCHANG

TANG Mao-yun¹^,²⁾(), LI Cui-ping¹⁾^,^*(), HUANG Shi-yuan¹⁾, DONG Lei¹⁾, GAO Jian¹⁾, LI Yong³⁾

1)Chongqing Earthquake Agency, Chongqing 401147, China
2)College of Earth Science, Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu 610059, China
3)State Key Laboratory of Oil and Gas Reservoir Geology and Exploitation, Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu 610059, China

Received:2024-02-16 Revised:2024-04-10 Online:2025-08-20 Published:2025-10-09

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

文中基于重庆区域地震台网和四川区域地震台网记录的地震资料, 对2021年7月以来泸县—荣昌地区的地震进行重定位, 并利用CAP方法反演2009年以来记录的M_L≥3.0地震的震源机制解。再结合拟合的发震断层参数和反演的构造应力场探讨了地震活动的发震断层和不同时段地震的孕震机理。结果显示, 2021年以来泸县—荣昌的地震活动从螺观山背斜迁移至喻家寺和香炉山向斜内2个区域; 地震活动呈现出2条NE—NNE向展布的条带, 且深度集中在2~12km。震源破裂以逆冲挤压型为主, 震源矩心平均深度为3.8km, 与志留系龙马溪组页岩层深度吻合。其中喻家寺向斜地震带状活动随着时间的推移整体向NE迁移, 且西南末端分叉成为2支。香炉山向斜内的地震活动则呈NNE走向、 SE倾分布。2条地震条带地表无匹配断层, 根据小地震分布确定的断层面参数和震源机制解结果推测, 喻家寺向斜地震条带的发震断层为一条走向NNE、倾向NWW的逆冲隐伏断层; 香炉山向斜地震条带发震断层则为一条走向NNE、倾向SE的逆冲隐伏断层。研究区的构造应力环境相对简单, 以NWW-SEE向水平挤压作用为主, 区域内显著地震主要受区域构造应力场和隐伏断层控制。

关键词: 泸县—荣昌, 地震重定位, 震源机制解, 发震断层, 构造应力场

Abstract:

In recent years, seismic activity in the Luxian-Rongchang area has increased significantly and garnered widespread attention from researchers. Since the M_S6.0 earthquake in Luxian County in 2021, there has been a significant increase in small seismic activity and significant spatiotemporal migration distribution characteristics in the area, which has brought new challenges to the understanding of seismic risk in the region. The genetic mechanism and prevention and control behaviors for future risk have become a common concern for the public. This article relocated earthquakes using double-difference location since July 2021 and inverted the focal mechanism solutions of M_L≥3.0 earthquakes, employing the CAP method since 2009, in the Luxian-Rongchang area, based on seismic data from the Chongqing and Sichuan Regional Seismic Networks. Furthermore, it explored the seismogenic fault and the seismogenic mechanism of earthquakes in different periods by fitting parameters of the seismogenic fault and inverting the tectonic stress fields.

The results show that seismic activity in Luxian-Rongchang has migrated from the Luoguanshan anticline to two areas within the Yujiasi and Xianglushan synclines since 2021. The relocated seismic activity exhibits two NE-NNE-oriented bands, within an overall depth range of 2~12km. The rupture of the seismic source is mainly of the thrust type, with an average focal depth of 3.8km, which is consistent with the depth of the shale layer of the Silurian Longmaxi Formation. The seismic activity within the Yujiasi syncline exhibits migration towards the NE direction over time, and the southwestern end forks into two branches. The strike direction of the seismic activity band within the Xianglushan syncline is NNE and dip towards the SE direction. There are no matching faults on the surface of the two seismic bands. Based on the determination of fault plane parameters and the focal mechanism solutions for earthquakes, it is speculated that the seismogenic fault of the seismic band in Yujiasi syncline corresponds to a hidden thrust fault with a strike of NNE and dip of NWW; The Xianglushan seismic band is a hidden thrust fault with a strike of NNE and dip of SE. The tectonic stress environment in the study area is relatively simple, which is mainly dominated by NWW-oriented horizontal compression tectonic stress fields. Significant earthquakes in these two regions are primarily controlled by regional stress fields and hidden faults.

In addition, we argue that the mechanism of seismic activities in Luxian-Rongchang resulted from rupture along pre-existing hidden faults, driven by fluid pore pressure diffusion, as was the case before. The difference is that fluid pore pressure is probably raised by different sources, including the long-term injection of wastewater in Luoguanshan anticline by the former research and hydraulic fracturing within the Yujiasi and Xianglushan synclines. Due to the lack of detailed shale gas development data in this study, there are still shortcomings in revealing its seismogenic mechanism through spatiotemporal distribution characteristics and focal mechanism solution. Further comprehensive data collection is needed in the future. Furthermore, it is worth noting that the earthquake magnitude in the region is still dominated by small and medium-sized earthquakes. Post-earthquake risks still warrant attention.

Key words: Luxian-Rongchang, earthquake relocation, focal mechanism, seismogenic fault, tectonic stress field

唐茂云, 李翠平, 黄世源, 董蕾, 高见, 李勇. 泸县—荣昌地区地震活动时空演化与构造应力场特征[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(4): 1183-1203.

TANG Mao-yun, LI Cui-ping, HUANG Shi-yuan, DONG Lei, GAO Jian, LI Yong. THE CHARACTERISTICS OF TECTONIC STRESS FIELD AND SPATIOTEMPORAL EVOLUTION OF SEISMIC ACTIVITY IN LUXIAN-RONGCHANG[J]. SEISMOLOGY AND GEOLOGY, 2025, 47(4): 1183-1203.

图/表 13

图1 泸县—荣昌地区的构造与地震活动性概况图 a 泸县—荣昌地区构造与历史地震分布图; b 2021年以来A区域ML≥0.0地震月频度图(插图为1990年以来ML≥0.0地震年频度图); c 2021年以来B区域ML≥0.0地震月频度图。注水井1为螺4井, 2为螺2井, 3为包11井, 4为包24井, 5为包18井, 6为23井, 7为包46井

Fig. 1 Overview of structure and seismic activity in Luxian-Rongchang area.

图2 数据处理过程所采用的台站、走时曲线和速度模型 a 研究区台站分布图; b P波和S波走时曲线, 图中灰色圆圈代表剔除的震相数据; c 一维速度模型

Fig. 2 The stations, travel time curves, and velocity models used in the data processing procedure.

图3 地震重定位前后对比图 a 研究区2021年7月以来地震初始分布图; b 重定位地震分布图

Fig. 3 The comparison before and after earthquake relocation.

图4 喻家寺向斜(区域Ⅰ)的地震重定位及深度剖面图

Fig. 4 Seismic relocation results and depth profile of Yujiasi Syncline(Area Ⅰ).

图5 泸县奇峰镇(区域Ⅱ)的重定位及深度剖面图

Fig. 5 Relocation and depth profile map of earthquakes in Qifeng Town(Area Ⅱ), Luxian.

表1 泸县—荣昌地区ML≥3.0地震的震源机制解结果

Table1 Focal mechanism solutions for ML≥3.0 earthquakes in the Luxian-Rongchang region

序号	发震日期	发震时刻	震级 /M_L	深度 /km	节面Ⅰ/(°)			节面Ⅱ/(°)			P轴/(°)		T轴/(°)		B轴/(°)
序号	发震日期	发震时刻	震级 /M_L	深度 /km	走向	倾角	滑动角	走向	倾角	滑动角	方位角	倾伏角	方位角	倾伏角	方位角	倾伏角
1^*	2009-01-24	16:00:53	3.9	2.7	78	41	85	264	49	94	352	4	210	85	82	3
2^*	2009-08-08	21:26:18	4.8	2.3	60	49	93	235	41	86	148	4	1	85	238	3
3^*	2009-07-06	05:39:14	4.2	2.5	9	43	83	199	47	97	284	2	169	85	14	5
4^*	2010-02-22	21:32:23	4.7	3.2	38	37	103	201	54	80	298	8	74	78	207	8
5	2010-09-10	21:21:43	4.9	3.0	340	47	100	146	44	80	63	1	321	83	153	7
6	2010-11-05	22:09:52	3.7	5.0	90	58	85	279	32	98	184	13	345	76	93	4
7	2013-03-27	00:14:01	3.7	3.0	339	54	109	129	40	66	56	7	301	73	148	15
8	2014-02-23	16:58:02	3.8	3.0	34	49	70	243	45	111	138	2	236	75	47	15
9	2016-12-27	08:17:33	5.3	3.0	71	64	125	193	43	40	136	12	28	56	234	31
10	2016-12-28	06:20:28	3.8	4.0	66	55	94	239	35	84	153	10	352	79	244	3
11	2016-12-28	12:43:52	4.5	2.1	71	43	80	265	48	99	348	2	239	83	78	7
12^*	2017-10-05	07:48:05	3.1	8.4	300	40	100	107	51	82	203	6	335	82	112	6
13	2018-04-15	22:46:33	3.8	4.0	340	49	109	132	44	69	57	2	318	76	147	14
14	2021-07-10	19:38:03	3.7	2.9	0	56	71	212	38	116	103	9	223	72	11	16
15	2021-07-23	20:55:22	4.7	3.0	24	40	106	183	52	77	283	6	43	78	192	10
16	2021-08-24	19:06:36	3.6	2.0	15	42	90	195	48	90	285	3	105	87	15	0
17	2021-09-16	04:33:30	6.3	5.0	321	44	104	122	48	77	221	2	322	80	131	10
18	2021-09-25	02:16:34	3.8	5.0	5	23	94	181	67	88	272	22	87	68	181	2
19	2021-09-27	11:19:18	3.6	3.0	25	35	94	200	55	87	292	10	98	80	202	2
20	2021-12-12	14:06:18	3.9	5.0	350	25	79	182	65	95	268	20	102	70	360	5
21	2021-12-12	14:11:22	3.6	6.0	9	29	99	179	61	85	273	16	76	74	181	4
22	2022-03-26	04:34:09	3.3	3.0	20	40	113	171	54	72	274	7	29	74	182	15
23	2022-03-31	18:16:03	3.9	3.0	23	30	101	191	61	84	285	16	86	73	194	5
24	2022-04-01	17:27:56	3.8	2.1	5	46	68	215	48	111	290	1	197	75	21	15
25	2022-05-17	21:05:07	3.5	5.8	0	31	84	187	59	94	274	14	108	76	5	3
26	2022-08-02	23:05:46	3.6	6.0	345	28	80	176	62	95	262	17	98	72	354	5
27	2022-08-19	15:07:36	3.3	3.0	342	30	97	154	60	86	247	15	53	75	156	3
28	2022-08-25	08:00:10	4.4	5.0	17	57	83	210	34	101	112	11	263	77	21	6
29	2022-11-08	15:49:57	3.3	5.0	9	37	80	201	54	97	286	8	142	80	17	6
30	2022-12-15	07:18:23	4.5	5.0	11	30	84	198	60	93	285	15	117	75	16	3
31	2023-05-06	13:01:57	4.4	2.0	6	49	94	180	41	85	93	4	311	85	183	3

表1 泸县—荣昌地区ML≥3.0地震的震源机制解结果

Table1 Focal mechanism solutions for ML≥3.0 earthquakes in the Luxian-Rongchang region

序号	发震日期	发震时刻	震级 /M_L	深度 /km	节面Ⅰ/(°)			节面Ⅱ/(°)			P轴/(°)		T轴/(°)		B轴/(°)
序号	发震日期	发震时刻	震级 /M_L	深度 /km	走向	倾角	滑动角	走向	倾角	滑动角	方位角	倾伏角	方位角	倾伏角	方位角	倾伏角
1^*	2009-01-24	16:00:53	3.9	2.7	78	41	85	264	49	94	352	4	210	85	82	3
2^*	2009-08-08	21:26:18	4.8	2.3	60	49	93	235	41	86	148	4	1	85	238	3
3^*	2009-07-06	05:39:14	4.2	2.5	9	43	83	199	47	97	284	2	169	85	14	5
4^*	2010-02-22	21:32:23	4.7	3.2	38	37	103	201	54	80	298	8	74	78	207	8
5	2010-09-10	21:21:43	4.9	3.0	340	47	100	146	44	80	63	1	321	83	153	7
6	2010-11-05	22:09:52	3.7	5.0	90	58	85	279	32	98	184	13	345	76	93	4
7	2013-03-27	00:14:01	3.7	3.0	339	54	109	129	40	66	56	7	301	73	148	15
8	2014-02-23	16:58:02	3.8	3.0	34	49	70	243	45	111	138	2	236	75	47	15
9	2016-12-27	08:17:33	5.3	3.0	71	64	125	193	43	40	136	12	28	56	234	31
10	2016-12-28	06:20:28	3.8	4.0	66	55	94	239	35	84	153	10	352	79	244	3
11	2016-12-28	12:43:52	4.5	2.1	71	43	80	265	48	99	348	2	239	83	78	7
12^*	2017-10-05	07:48:05	3.1	8.4	300	40	100	107	51	82	203	6	335	82	112	6
13	2018-04-15	22:46:33	3.8	4.0	340	49	109	132	44	69	57	2	318	76	147	14
14	2021-07-10	19:38:03	3.7	2.9	0	56	71	212	38	116	103	9	223	72	11	16
15	2021-07-23	20:55:22	4.7	3.0	24	40	106	183	52	77	283	6	43	78	192	10
16	2021-08-24	19:06:36	3.6	2.0	15	42	90	195	48	90	285	3	105	87	15	0
17	2021-09-16	04:33:30	6.3	5.0	321	44	104	122	48	77	221	2	322	80	131	10
18	2021-09-25	02:16:34	3.8	5.0	5	23	94	181	67	88	272	22	87	68	181	2
19	2021-09-27	11:19:18	3.6	3.0	25	35	94	200	55	87	292	10	98	80	202	2
20	2021-12-12	14:06:18	3.9	5.0	350	25	79	182	65	95	268	20	102	70	360	5
21	2021-12-12	14:11:22	3.6	6.0	9	29	99	179	61	85	273	16	76	74	181	4
22	2022-03-26	04:34:09	3.3	3.0	20	40	113	171	54	72	274	7	29	74	182	15
23	2022-03-31	18:16:03	3.9	3.0	23	30	101	191	61	84	285	16	86	73	194	5
24	2022-04-01	17:27:56	3.8	2.1	5	46	68	215	48	111	290	1	197	75	21	15
25	2022-05-17	21:05:07	3.5	5.8	0	31	84	187	59	94	274	14	108	76	5	3
26	2022-08-02	23:05:46	3.6	6.0	345	28	80	176	62	95	262	17	98	72	354	5
27	2022-08-19	15:07:36	3.3	3.0	342	30	97	154	60	86	247	15	53	75	156	3
28	2022-08-25	08:00:10	4.4	5.0	17	57	83	210	34	101	112	11	263	77	21	6
29	2022-11-08	15:49:57	3.3	5.0	9	37	80	201	54	97	286	8	142	80	17	6
30	2022-12-15	07:18:23	4.5	5.0	11	30	84	198	60	93	285	15	117	75	16	3
31	2023-05-06	13:01:57	4.4	2.0	6	49	94	180	41	85	93	4	311	85	183	3

图6 CAP反演的2022年12月15日ML4.5(a)和2022年3月26日ML3.3(b)地震最佳深度的理论和实际部分波形拟合图红色表示理论波形, 黑色表示实际波形, 绿线表示该震相不参与反演

Fig. 6 Theoretical and practical waveform fitting diagrams at the best fitting depth of the ML4.5 earthquake on December 15, 2022(a)and the ML3.3 earthquake on March 26, 2022(b)from CAP inversion.

表2 不同来源得到的显著地震的震源机制解结果对比

Table2 Comparison of focal mechanism solutions of significant earthquakes obtained from different sources

序号	发震日期	震级 /M_L	震级 /M_W	深度 /km	节面Ⅰ/(°)			节面Ⅱ/(°)			震源机制解图示	最小空间旋转角/(°)	来源
序号	发震日期	震级 /M_L	震级 /M_W	深度 /km	走向	倾角	滑动角	走向	倾角	滑动角	震源机制解图示	最小空间旋转角/(°)	来源
1	2010-09-10	4.9	4.1	3.0	152	65	90	332	25	90		22.48	孟庆君等,2014
			4.2	3.0	146	44	80	340	47	100			本文
2	2016-12-27	5.3	4.6	3.0	246	54	100	49	37	77		45.75	Wang et al., 2020
			4.5	3.0	193	43	40	71	64	125			本文
3	2016-12-28	4.5	4.0	2.2	238	31	-80	46	60	-95		80.76	Wang et al., 2020
			3.8	2.0	265	48	99	71	43	80			本文
4	2021-07-23	4.7	4.1	3.0	198	57	89	19	33	91		13.57	易桂喜等,2021
			4.0	3.0	183	52	77	24	40	106			本文
5	2021-08-24	3.6	3.5	3.0	208	55	92	24	35	87		13.76	易桂喜等,2021
			3.4	2.0	195	48	90	15	42	90			本文
6	2021-09-16	6.3	5.4	3.5	286	45	103	88	46	77		34.06	易桂喜等,2021
			5.3	5.0	321	44	104	122	48	77			本文

图7 a 2022年12月15日ML4.5地震反演误差随深度的变化; b 2022年3月26日ML3.3地震反演误差随深度的变化; c 所有的地震矩心深度直方图

Fig. 7 The variation of inversion error with depth of the ML4.5 earthquake on December 15, 2022(a), the variation of inversion error with depth of the ML3.3 earthquake on March 26, 2022(b), All seismic centroid depth histograms obtained from CAP inversion(c).

图8 2009年以来泸县—荣昌地区ML3.0以上地震的震源机制解

Fig. 8 Focal mechanism solution of earthquakes above ML3.0 in the Luxian-Rongchang area since 2009.

图9 研究区P轴(a)和T(b)轴的方位分布

Fig. 9 Azimuth distribution of P(a) and T(b) axes in the study area.

图10 喻家寺向斜和香炉山向斜(a—c)以及螺观山背斜(d—f)的应力场反演结果加号代表应力场反演的最优值, 红色、绿色和蓝色点示意1 000次抽样给出的最大、中间和最小主应力轴的95%置信区间

Fig. 10 Stress field inversion results of Yujiasi syncline, Xianglushan syncline(a—c), and Luoguanshan anticline(d—f).

图11 喻家寺向斜内地震发震断层模式图

Fig. 11 Seismic fault pattern map of earthquakes within Yujiasi Syncline.

参考文献 48

[1]	陈成锋, 张瑞青, 强正阳, 等. 2022. 川南泸州地区地震重定位与地壳三维速度结构研究[J]. 地球物理学报, 65(12): 4672—4684.
	CHEN Cheng-feng, ZHANG Rui-qing, QIANG Zheng-yang, et al. 2022. Seismicity and three-dimensional crustal structure of the Luzhou region in the southern Sichuan Basin, China[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 65(12): 4672—4684 (in Chinese).
[2]	樊文杰, 左可桢, 赵翠萍, 等. 2023. 2021年6月10日云南双柏地震序列发震构造分析[J]. 地球物理学报, 66(5): 1991—2006.
	FAN Wen-jie, ZUO Ke-zhen, ZHAO Cui-ping, et al. 2023. Analysis of seismogenic structure of Yunnan Shuangbai earthquake sequence on June 10, 2021[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 66(5): 1991—2006 (in Chinese).
[3]	房立华, 吴建平, 苏金蓉, 等. 2018. 四川九寨沟 M_S7.0 地震主震及其余震序列精定位[J]. 科学通报, 63: 649—662.
	FANG Li-hua, WU Jian-ping, SU Jin-rong, et al. 2018. Relocation of mainshock and aftershock sequence of the M_S7.0 Sichuan Jiuzhaigou earthquake[J]. Chinese Science Bulletin, 63:649—662. (in Chinese).
[4]	冯梅, 安美建, 吴中海, 等. 2019. 重庆地区地震震源机制解及动力环境分析[J]. 地球学报, 40(2): 319—328.
	FENG Mei, AN Mei-jian, WU Zhong-hai, et al. 2019. Focal mechanisms of earthquakes in Chongqing and geodynamical implications[J]. Acta Geoscientica Sinica, 40(2): 319—328 (in Chinese).
[5]	黄骥超, 万永革, 盛书中, 等. 2016. 汤加-克马德克俯冲带现今非均匀应力场特征及其动力学意义[J]. 地球物理学报, 59(2): 578—592. DOI
	HUANG Ji-chao, WAN Yong-ge, SHENG Shu-zhong, et al. 2016. Heterogeneity of present-day stress field in the Tonga-Kermadec subduction zone and its geodynamic significance[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 59(2): 578—592 (in Chinese).
[6]	黄世源, 魏红梅, 朱丽霞. 2007. 2006年荣昌地震活动与注水关系[J]. 高原地震, 19(2): 8—11.
	HUANG Shi-yuan, WEI Hong-mei, ZHU Li-xia. 2007. Relationship between the Rongchang earthquake 2006 and water injection[J]. Plateau Earthquake Research, 19(2): 8—11 (in Chinese).
[7]	李翠平, 唐茂云, 郭卫英, 等. 2019. 2017年11月23日重庆武隆 M_S5.0 地震序列重定位及发震断层分析[J]. 地震地质, 41(3): 603—618. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2019.03.005.
	LI Cui-ping, TANG Mao-yun, GUO Wei-ying, et al. 2019. Relocation of the 23 November 2017 wulong M_S5.0 earthquake sequence and analysis of its seismogenic fault[J]. Seismology and Geology, 41(3): 603—618 (in Chinese).
[8]	李翠平, 唐茂云, 郭卫英, 等. 2022. 荣昌及周边三维速度结构初步研究[J]. 地震地质, 44(1): 205—219. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2022.01.013.
	LI Cui-ping, TANG Mao-yun, GUO Wei-ying, et al. 2022. A preliminary study on 3D velocity structure of Rongchang and its adjacent area[J]. Seismology and Geology, 44(1): 205—219 (in Chinese).
[9]	李峰, 张效亮, 刘华国. 2013. 重庆市主要构造地震危险性评价[J]. 地震地质, 35(3): 518—531. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2013.03.006.
	LI Feng, ZHANG Xiao-liang, LIU Hua-guo. 2013. Seismic hazard analysis of the main faults in Chongqing urban area[J]. Seismology and Geology, 35(3): 518—531 (in Chinese).
[10]	李欣蔚, 张广伟, 谢卓娟, 等. 2022. 2021年四川泸县M6.0地震发震机理及地震活动时空演化特征[J]. 地球物理学报, 65(11): 4284—4298.
	LI Xin-wei, ZHANG Guang-wei, XIE Zhuo-juan, et al. 2022. Seismogenic mechanism of the 2021 M6.0 Luxian earthquake and seismicity spatio-temporal characteristics around the source region[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 65(11): 4284—4298 (in Chinese).
[11]	龙锋, 祁玉萍, 易桂喜, 等. 2021. 2021年5月21日云南漾濞 M_S6.4 地震序列重新定位与发震构造分析[J]. 地球物理学报, 64(8): 2631—2646. DOI
	LONG Feng, QI Yu-ping, YI Gui-xi, et al. 2021. Relocation of the M_S6.4 Yangbi earthquake sequence on May 21, 2021 in Yunnan Province and its seismogenic structure analysis[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 64(8): 2631—2646 (in Chinese).
[12]	罗艳, 曾祥方, 倪四道. 2013. 震源深度测定方法研究进展[J]. 地球物理学进展, 28(5): 2309—2321.
	LUO Yang, ZENG Xiang-fang, NI Si-dao. 2013. Progress on the determination of focal depth[J]. Progress in Geophysics, 28(5): 2309—2321 (in Chinese).
[13]	孟庆君, 倪四道, 韩立波, 等. 2014. 地壳速度结构对极浅源地震深度反演的影响——以荣昌地震为例[J]. 中国地震, 30(4): 490—500.
	MENG Qing-jun, NI Si-dao, HAN Li-bo, et al. 2014. Inverting effect of crustal velocity structure on focal depth of very shallow earthquakes: Case study of the Rongchang earthquake[J]. Earthquake research in China, 30(4): 490—500 (in Chinese).
[14]	万永革, 沈正康, 刁桂苓, 等. 2008. 利用小震分布和区域应力场确定大震断层面参数方法及其在唐山地震序列中的应用[J]. 地球物理学报, 51(3): 793—804.
	WAN Yong-ge, SHEN Zheng-kang, DIAO Gui-lin, et al. 2008. An algorithm of fault parameter determination using distribution of small earthquakes and parameters of regional stress field and its application to Tangshan earthquake sequence[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 51(3): 793—804 (in Chinese).
[15]	万永革, 盛书中, 许雅儒, 等. 2011. 不同应力状态和摩擦系数对综合P波辐射花样影响的模拟研究[J]. 地球物理学报, 54(4): 994—1001.
	WAN Yong-ge, SHENG Shu-zhong, XU Ya-ru, et al. 2011. Effect of stress ratio and friction coefficient on composite P wave radiation patterns[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 54(4): 994—1001 (in Chinese).
[16]	万永革. 2019. 同一地震多个震源机制中心解的确定[J]. 地球物理学报, 62(12): 4718—4728. DOI
	WAN Yong-ge. 2019. Determination of center of several focal mechanisms of the same earthquake[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 62(12): 4718—4728.
[17]	汪素云. 1999. 中国近代地震目录[M]. 北京: 中国科学技术出版社.
	WANG Su-yun. 1999. The Catalogue of Chinese Modern Earthquakes[M]. China Science and Technology Press, Beijing (in Chinese).
[18]	王清东, 朱良保, 苏有锦, 等. 2015. 2012年9月7日彝良地震及余震序列双差定位研究[J]. 地球物理学报, 58(9): 3205—3221. DOI
	WANG Qing-dong, ZHU Liang-bao, SU You-jin, et al. 2015. Double-difference relocation of the 7 September 2012 Yiliang earthquake and its aftershock sequence[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 58(9): 3205—3221 (in Chinese).
[19]	王小龙, 雷兴林, 勾宪斌, 等. 2015. 用CAP方法研究重庆荣昌2014年2月23日M_L3.8地震震源机制[J]. 中国地震, 31(2): 290—296.
	WANG Xiao-long, LEI Xing-lin, GOU Xian-bin, et al. 2015. Focal mechanism solution of the February 23, 2014, M_L3.8 Rongchang earthquake with the CAP(Cut and Paste)method[J]. Earthquake Research in China, 31(2): 290—296 (in Chinese).
[20]	王小龙, 马胜利, 雷兴林, 等. 2012. 重庆荣昌诱发地震区精细速度结构及2010年M_L5.1地震序列精确定位[J]. 地震地质, 34(2): 348—358. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2012.02.013.
	WANG Xiao-long, MA Sheng-li, LEI Xing-lin, et al. 2012. Fine velocity structure and relocation of the 2010 M_L5.1 earthquake sequence in Rongchang gas field[J]. Seismology and Geology, 34(2): 348—358 (in Chinese).
[21]	王晓山, 吕坚, 谢祖军, 等. 2015. 南北地震带震源机制解与构造应力场特征[J]. 地球物理学报, 58(11): 4149—4162.
	WANG Xiao-shan, LÜ Jian, XIE Zu-jun, et al. 2015. Focal mechanisms and tectonic stress field in the North-South Seismic Belt of China[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 58(11): 4149—4162 (in Chinese).
[22]	王志伟, 王小龙, 马胜利, 等. 2018. 重庆荣昌地区注水诱发地震的时空分布特征[J]. 地震地质, 40(3): 523—538. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2018.03.002.
	WANG Zhi-wei, WANG Xiao-long, MA Sheng-li, et al. 2018. Detailed temporal-spatial distribution of induced earthquakes by water injection in Rongchang, Chongqing[J]. Seismology and Geology, 40(3): 523—538 (in Chinese).
[23]	吴萍萍, 李大虎, 詹艳, 等. 2023. 2021年9月16日四川泸县 M_S6.0 地震震区三维S波精细速度结构[J]. 地球物理学报, 66(6): 2386—2403.
	WU Ping-ping, LI Da-hu, ZHAN Yan, et al. 2023. Three-dimensional fine S-wave velocity structure around the source area of the Sichuan Luxian M_S6.0 earthquake on September 16, 2021[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 66(6): 2386—2403 (in Chinese).
[24]	易桂喜, 龙锋, 梁明剑, 等. 2020. 四川盆地荣县—威远—资中地区发震构造几何结构与构造变形特征: 基于震源机制解的认识和启示[J]. 地球物理学报, 63(9): 3275—3291. DOI
	YI Gui-xi, LONG Feng, LIANG Ming-jian, et al. 2020. Geometry and tectonic deformation of seismogenic structures in the Rongxian-Weiyuan-Zizhong region, Sichuan Basin: Insights from focal mechanism solutions[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 63(9): 3275—3291 (in Chinese).
[25]	易桂喜, 龙锋, 梁明剑, 等. 2019. 2019年6月17日四川长宁 M_S6.0 地震序列震源机制解与发震构造分析[J]. 地球物理学报, 62(9): 3432—3447. DOI
	YI Gui-xi, LONG Feng, LIANG Ming-jian, et al. 2019. Focal mechanism solutions and seismogenic structure of the 17 June 2019 M_S6.0 Sichuan Changning earthquake sequence[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 62(9): 3432—3447 (in Chinese).
[26]	易桂喜, 龙锋, 赵敏, 等. 2016. 2014年10月1日越西M5.0地震震源机制与发震构造分析[J]. 地震地质, 38(4): 1124—1136. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2016.04.025.
	YI Gui-xi, LONG Feng, ZHAO Min, et al. 2016. Focal mechanism and seismogenic structure of the M5.0 Yuexi earthquake on 1th October 2014, southwestern China[J]. Seismology and Geology, 38(4): 1124—1136 (in Chinese).
[27]	易桂喜, 赵敏, 龙锋, 等. 2021. 2021年9月16日四川泸县 M_S6.0 地震序列特征及孕震构造环境[J]. 地球物理报, 64(12): 4449—4461.
	YI Gui-xi, ZHAO Min, LONG Feng, et al. 2021. Characteristics of the seismic sequence and seismogenic environment of the M_S6.0 Sichuan Luxian earthquake on September 16, 2021[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 64(12): 4449—4461 (in Chinese).
[28]	张建勇, 王新, 陈凌, 等. 2022. 基于余震重定位和震源机制解研究青海玛多 M_S7.4 地震序列的发震构造和断裂形态[J]. 地球物理学报, 65(2): 552—562.
	ZHANG Jian-yong, WANG Xin, CHEN Ling, et al. 2022. Seismotectonics and fault geometries of the Qinghai Madoi M_S7.4 earthquake sequence: Insight from aftershock relocations and focal mechanism solutions[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 65(2): 552—562 (in Chinese).
[29]	Ellsworth W L. 2013. Injection-induced earthquakes[J]. Science, 341(6142): 1225942.
[30]	Gephart J W, Forsyth D W. 1984. An improved method for determining the regional stress tensor using focal mechanism data: Application to the San Fernando earthquake sequence[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research, 89(B11): 9305—9320.
[31]	Hardebeck J L, Michael A J. 2006. Damped regional-scale stress inversions: Methodology and examples for southern California and the Coalinga aftershock sequence[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 111(B11): B11310.
[32]	Lai G J, Jiang C S, Wang W L, et al. 2023. Spatial-temporal distribution and focal mechanisms for the shallow earthquakes in the Rongchang-Luxian region in southern Sichuan Basin, China[J]. Seismological Research Letters, 94: 1860—1876.
[33]	Lei X L, Huang D J, Su J R, et al. 2017. Fault reactivation and earthquakes with magnitudes of up to M_W4.7 induced by shale-gas hydraulic fracturing in Sichuan Basin, China[J]. Scientific Reports, 7(1): 7971.
[34]	Lei X L, Wang Z W, Su J R. 2019. Possible link between long-term and short-term water injections and earthquakes in salt mine and shale gas site in Changning, south Sichuan Basin, China[J]. Earth and Planetary Physics, 3(6): 510—525.
[35]	Lei X L, Su J R, Wang Z W. 2020. Growing seismicity in the Sichuan Basin and its association with industrial activities[J]. Science China Earth Sciences, 63(11): 1633—1660.
[36]	Lei X L, Yu G Z, Ma S L, et al. 2008. Earthquakes induced by water injection at -3km depth within the Rongchang gas field, Chongqing, China[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 113(B10): B10310.
[37]	Lu R Q, Jiang C S, He D F, et al. 2024. Seismogenic fault of the 2021 M_S6.0 Luxian induced earthquake in the Sichuan Basin, China constrained by high-resolution seismic reflection and dense seismic array[J]. Journal of Structural Geology, 179:105050.
[38]	Luo Y, Li Z, Zeng X F, et al. 2015. Focal mechanisms of the Lushan earthquake sequence and spatial variation of the stress field[J]. Science China Earth Sciences, 58(7): 1148—1158.
[39]	Martínez-Garzón P, Kwiatek G, Ickrath M, et al. 2014. MSATSI: A MATLAB package for stress inversion combining solid classic methodology, a new simplified user-handling, and a visualization tool[J]. Seismological Research Letters, 85(4): 896—904.
[40]	Tan Y, Zhu L P, Helmberger D V, et al. 2006. Locating and modeling regional earthquakes with two stations[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research Solid Earth, 111: B01306.
[41]	Waldhauser F, Ellsworth W L. 2000. A Double-difference earthquake location algorithm: Method and application to the Northern Hayward Fault[J]. California. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 90(90): 1353—1368.
[42]	Waldhauser F, Schaff D P. 2008. Large-scale relocation of two decades of Northern California seismicity using cross-correlation and double-difference methods[J]. Translated World Seismology, 113(B8): 4177—4183.
[43]	Wang Z W, Lei X L, Ma S L, et al. 2020. Induced earthquakes before and after cessation of long-term injections in Rongchang gas field[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 47(22). https://doi.org/10.1002/grl.59084.
[44]	Yang H F, Zhou P C, Fang N, et al. 2020. A shallow shock: The 25 February 2019 M_L4.9 earthquake in the Weiyuan shale gas field in Sichuan, China[J]. Seismological Research Letters, 91(6): 3182—3194.
[45]	Zhao L S, Helmberger D V. 1994. Source estimation from broadband regional seismograms[J]. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 84(1): 91—104.
[46]	Zhao Y W, Jiang G Y, Lei X L, et al. 2023. The 2021 M_S6.0 Luxian(China)earthquake: Blind reverse-fault rupture in deep sedimentary formations likely induced by pressure perturbation from hydraulic fracturing[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 50: e2023GL103209.
[47]	Zhu L P, Helmberger D V. 1996. Advancement in source estimation techniques using broadband regional seismograms[J]. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 86(5): 1634—1641.
[48]	Zoback M L. 1992. First- and second-order patterns of stress in the lithosphere: The world stress map project[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research, 97(B8): 11703—11728.

泸县—荣昌地区地震活动时空演化与构造应力场特征

THE CHARACTERISTICS OF TECTONIC STRESS FIELD AND SPATIOTEMPORAL EVOLUTION OF SEISMIC ACTIVITY IN LUXIAN-RONGCHANG

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 13

参考文献 48

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	宫猛, 邹献昆, 王晓山, 李广, 盛书中, 李红星, 徐荣华, 路昌胜. 京西北地区地壳速度结构与地震重新定位联合反演[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(4): 1132-1151.
[2]	董春丽, 郭文峰, 刘瑞春, 丁大业. 山西中南部中小地震震源机制应力特征和地震活动相关性分析[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(4): 1222-1243.
[3]	许月怡, 徐贝贝, 徐晨雨, 邵志刚, 胡朝忠. 基于远震P波、强震波形和InSAR联合反演2025年西藏定日M_S6.8地震破裂过程[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(3): 734-746.
[4]	李金, 邓明文, 张治广, 孙业君, 姚远, 徐凯驰. 2024年塔里木盆地尉犁5级震群发震构造[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(2): 463-487.
[5]	杨文心, 李涛, 陈杰, 姚远. 2015年西昆仑山前皮山M_W6.4地震的构造背景及意义[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(2): 507-532.
[6]	崔华伟, 尹昕忠, 陈九辉, 郭飚, 李涛, 姚远, 李世莹, 贾震. 帕米尔高原东北部地震活动及构造应力场特征[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(2): 577-596.
[7]	盛书中, 王倩茹, 李振月, 李红星, 张小娟, 葛坤朋, 宫猛. 基于构造应力场研究2025年西藏定日6.8级地震的发震构造[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(1): 49-63.
[8]	许永强, 雷建设, 胡晓辉. 2021年5月21日云南漾濞M_S6.4地震序列双差重定位及其构造意义[J]. 地震地质, 2024, 46(5): 1066-1090.
[9]	曹筠, 周依, 高晨, 刘书峰, 陈安, 张素欣, 冯向东, 吴鹏, 陈肇东. 2020年7月12日河北唐山5.1级地震发震断层判定及其区域构造意义[J]. 地震地质, 2024, 46(5): 993-1011.
[10]	许永强, 雷建设. 大同火山群及邻区中小地震重定位[J]. 地震地质, 2024, 46(2): 336-356.
[11]	董春丽, 张广伟, 李欣蔚, 王跃杰, 丁大业, 宫卓宏. 基于震源机制和地震定位研究2022年山西古交M_L4.1地震的发震构造[J]. 地震地质, 2024, 46(2): 414-432.
[12]	许英才, 郭祥云. 2022年四川马尔康M_S6.0强震群重定位及发震断层探讨[J]. 地震地质, 2023, 45(4): 1006-1024.
[13]	万永革, 王昱茹, 靳志同. 2021年云南漾濞6.4级地震震源区地壳应力不均匀性研究[J]. 地震地质, 2023, 45(4): 1025-1040.
[14]	傅莺, 胡斌, 赵敏, 龙锋. 2022年芦山M_S6.1地震序列的精确定位及发震构造[J]. 地震地质, 2023, 45(4): 987-1005.
[15]	樊文杰. 2021年5月21日漾濞M_S6.4地震及周边的构造应力场特征和动力学意义[J]. 地震地质, 2023, 45(1): 208-230.