山西裂谷构造应力场特征及其动力学意义

doi:10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.20240030

地震地质 ›› 2026, Vol. 48 ›› Issue (1): 257-277.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.20240030

• 研究论文 • 上一篇

山西裂谷构造应力场特征及其动力学意义

王霞¹^,²⁾(), 宋美卿¹^,²⁾^,^*(), 吴昊昱¹^,²⁾, 梁向军¹^,²⁾, 吕睿¹^,²⁾, 郭文峰¹^,²⁾, 张娜¹^,²⁾, 李金³⁾

¹⁾ 山西省地震局, 太原 030021
²⁾ 太原大陆裂谷动力学国家野外科学观测研究站, 太原 030025
³⁾ 唐山地震监测中心站, 唐山 063003

收稿日期:2025-03-12 修回日期:2025-10-10 出版日期:2026-02-20 发布日期:2026-03-14
通讯作者: * 宋美卿, 女, 1968年生, 研究员, 主要从事地震综合预报研究, E-mail: smq28@126.com。
作者简介:
王霞, 女, 1987年生, 硕士, 高级工程师, 主要从事地震活动性和综合预测研究, E-mail: 365372858@qq.com。
基金资助:
太原大陆裂谷国家野外科学观测研究站研究课题(NORSTY2021-01); 太原大陆裂谷国家野外科学观测研究站研究课题(NORSTY2023-07); 太原大陆裂谷国家野外科学观测研究站研究课题(NORSTY2023-08); 地震预测开放基金(XH24004D); 山西省基础研究计划(产业发展类)联合项目(202503011281001); 中国地震局地震科技星火计划项目(XH200403Y); 山西省科技厅面上青年基金(201901D211548); 北京市自然科学基金(8232053); 河北省地震科技星火计划项目(DZ2023120900011)

STRESS FIELD IN SHANXI RIFT AND ITS DYNAMIC SIGNIFICANCE

WANG Xia¹^,²⁾(), SONG Mei-qing¹^,²⁾^,^*(), WU Hao-yu¹^,²⁾, LIANG Xiang-jun¹^,²⁾, LÜ Rui¹^,²⁾, GUO Wen-feng¹^,²⁾, ZHANG Na¹^,²⁾, LI Jin³⁾

¹⁾ Shanxi Earthquake Agency, Taiyuan 030021, China
²⁾ Shanxi Taiyuan National Continental Rift Valley Dynamics Observation and Research Station, Taiyuan 030025, China
³⁾ Tangshan Seismic Monitoring Central Station, Tangshan 063003, China

Received:2025-03-12 Revised:2025-10-10 Online:2026-02-20 Published:2026-03-14

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为了开展山西裂谷更精细的构造应力场及其形成机制研究, 文中主要利用山西裂谷自观测以来至今较为丰富的中小地震的震源机制解, 采用阻尼应力反演方法对山西裂谷分别进行全域、分盆地、 0.5° 网格等划分并反演构造应力场, 得到应力场参数和应力形因子(R值)。结果表明, 山西裂谷全域的构造应力场总体为NW-SE向拉张型应力场, 局部存在走滑型应力场; 分盆地结果也显示山西裂谷呈现非均匀的应力场特征, 南、北两端盆地(运城盆地和大同盆地)为走滑型应力场, 中部忻定、太原、临汾盆地为拉张型应力场。0.5° 网格的应力场结果表明, σ₃的方位以NW-SE向为主, 倾伏角近水平, 与山西断陷盆地主控断裂的走向大体垂直, 而σ₁的方位则大体平行于主控断裂走向, 倾伏角空间变化不均匀。此外, GPS速度剖面结果也显示山西裂谷现今存在约0.5mm/a的拉张运动, 且局部有走滑运动。从相对定量的角度, 二者都反映出山西裂谷拉张剪切变形的特征。这与太平洋板块俯冲和印欧大陆碰撞挤压的远程作用相关。

关键词: 震源机制解, 应力场反演, 断陷盆地, 山西裂谷

Abstract:

To carry out the more refined structural stress field and its formation mechanism, we mainly use the focal mechanism solution of small-moderate earthquakes since the observation in the Shanxi rift. The statistical results of focal mechanism solution classification show that the main types are strike-slip and normal faulting mechanism, and the percentage of strike-slip faulting, normal faulting and normal with strike-slip component is about 77%, which conforms to the transtensional deformation characteristics in the Shanxi rift. We adopt the damping stress inversion methodand invert stress fieldof the whole domain, 5 Basins, 0.5° grid of spatial distribution. We obtain the stress field parameters and stress shape factor(R value).

This study indicates that the Shanxi rift region is characterized by a NW-SE extensional stress field with localized strike-slip stress regimes, reflecting its heterogeneous nature The inversion result of 724 M_L<3.0 focal mechanisms is normal faulting regime, and the results of 301 M_L≥3.0 focal mechanisms is strike-slip faulting regime. Although there are slight differences in the results of subseismic magnitude categories, the azimuth and plunge angle of σ₃ are mostly similar, which can still reflect the stable NW-SE tensional stress environment. The results also indicate that the Shanxi rift exhibits heterogeneous stress field characteristics, with the northern and southern basins(Yuncheng Basin and Datong Basin) in a strike-slip faulting regime, while the Xinding, Taiyuan, and Linfen Basins are in a normal faulting regime. Generally, this reflects that the stress environment of the Shanxi rift is dominated by tensile forces, accompanied by a shear component.

The 0.5° grid of stress field results show that the azimuth angle of the most tension principal stress σ₃ in the entire area of Shanxi rift is dominated by the NW-SE direction and the plunge of σ₃ is nearly horizontal, which is generally perpendicular to the direction of the main control fault in Shanxi depression basins. While the azimuth angle of σ₁ is roughly parallel to the direction of the main control fault, and the spatial change of the plungeangle is not uniform. The spatial distribution results of stress field generally reflect the stable and horizontal tension, and the local heterogeneous stress field is caused by the changes of the most compressive principalstress σ₁ and the intermediate principal stress σ₂. The spatial distribution of stress field results show that the value of R is mostly less than 0.5, which reflects that intermediate principal stress σ₂ is compressive stress, according with the stress state of Shanxi rift that is dominated by tension accompanied of a shear component.

In addition, the GPS velocity profile results also show that there is a extension movement of about 0.5mm/a in Shanxi rift, and there is local strike-slipping movement. The main crustal deformation of Datong Basin is the NW-SE extension with the a rate of 0.5-1mm/a, including minimal shear or strike-slip component. The main crustal deformation of Taiyuan Basin exhibits the NW-SE extension with 0.3-0.7mm/a, showing weak shear or strike-slip component. The Yuncheng Basin demonstrates both extensional and strike-slip deformation, with an extensional rate of about 0.6mm/a and a dextral strike-sliping rate of about 0.7mm/a. From a relative quantitative perspective, GPS data and other measurement techniques have shown that the Shanxi rift exhibits both extensional and shear deformation characteristics. The Shanxi rift serves as the boundary of a secondary block within the North China block, and its formation and dynamic source are related to the remote action of Pacific plate subduction and Indo-Europe collision extrusion.

Key words: focal mechanism solution, stress field inversion, the depression basin, the Shanxi rift

王霞, 宋美卿, 吴昊昱, 梁向军, 吕睿, 郭文峰, 张娜, 李金. 山西裂谷构造应力场特征及其动力学意义[J]. 地震地质, 2026, 48(1): 257-277.

WANG Xia, SONG Mei-qing, WU Hao-yu, LIANG Xiang-jun, LÜ Rui, GUO Wen-feng, ZHANG Na, LI Jin. STRESS FIELD IN SHANXI RIFT AND ITS DYNAMIC SIGNIFICANCE[J]. SEISMOLOGY AND GEOLOGY, 2026, 48(1): 257-277.

图/表 18

图1 山西裂谷震源机制解的空间分布图 a 正断和正走滑型; b 走滑型; c 逆冲和逆走滑型; d 过渡型

Fig. 1 The spatial distribution of focal mechanism solutions of earthquakes in Shanxi rift.

表1 山西地区中小地震的震源机制解分类统计表

Table1 The classification of focal mechanism solutions of small-moderate earthquakes in Shanxi rift

类别	正断型	正走滑型	走滑型	逆走滑型	逆断型	合计	数据
次数/次	300	130	363	95	137	1025	山西全部数据
比例	29.27%	12.68%	35.41%	9.27%	13.37%	100%
次数/次	230	93	229	59	113	724	山西地区M_L<3.0
比例	31.77%	12.85%	31.63%	8.15%	15.61%	100%
次数/次	70	37	134	36	24	301	山西地区M_L≥3.0
比例	23.26%	12.29%	44.52%	11.96%	7.97%	100%

图2 山西地区中小地震的震源机制解分类统计图 a 全部数据; b 山西地区ML<3.0地震的分类统计结果; c 山西地区ML≥3.0地震的分类统计结果

Fig. 2 The focal mechanism solution classification of small-moderate earthquakes in Shanxi rift.

图3 阻尼曲线黑色十字是最优阻尼系数

Fig. 3 The damping curve.

表2 山西裂谷和5个盆地反演的构造应力场参数

Table2 The parameters of tectonic stress field in Shanxi rift and 5 basins

区域	R	σ₁		σ₂		σ₃		类型
区域	R	方位角/(°)	倾伏角/(°)	方位角/(°)	倾伏角/(°)	方位角/(°)	倾伏角/(°)	类型
山西地区所有数据	0.11	143.56	-89.08	58.96	0.09	148.96	0.92	NF
山西地区M_L≥3.0	0.10	58.83	14.88	64.67	-75.05	149.22	1.45	SS
山西地区M_L<3.0	0.21	65.89	-82.34	56.95	7.57	147.11	1.18	NF
大同盆地	0.32	51.13	-34.12	54.30	55.84	142.13	-1.47	SS
忻定盆地	0.28	73.24	76.78	46.47	-11.84	137.69	-5.78	NF
太原盆地	0.34	56.55	77.80	72.39	-11.75	161.72	3.24	NF
临汾盆地	0.06	59.62	-53.26	53.83	36.60	145.89	2.78	NF
运城盆地	0.68	64.8	38.73	44.81	-49.52	146.70	-9.97	SS

图4 山西裂谷构造应力场主轴方位和R值频度(所有数据)

Fig. 4 The main axis of stress field and R frequency in Shanxi rift(all data).

图5 山西裂谷构造应力场主轴方位和R值频度(ML<3.0地震)

Fig. 5 The main axis of stress field and R frequency in Shanxi rift(ML<3.0 earthquakes).

图6 山西裂谷构造应力场主轴方位和R值频度(ML≥3.0地震)

Fig. 6 The main axis of stress field and R frequency in Shanxi rift(ML≥3.0 earthquakes).

图7 大同盆地构造应力场主轴方位和R值频度

Fig. 7 The main axis of stress field and R frequency in Datong Basin, Shanxi rift.

图8 忻定盆地构造应力场主轴方位和R值频度

Fig. 8 The main axis of stress field and R frequency in Xinding Basin, Shanxi rift.

图9 太原盆地构造应力场主轴方位和R值频度

Fig. 9 The main axis of stress field and R frequency in Taiyuan Basin, Shanxi rift.

图10 临汾盆地构造应力场主轴方位和R值频度

Fig. 10 The main axis of stress field and R frequency in Linfen Basin, Shanxi rift.

图11 运城盆地构造应力场主轴方位和R值频度

Fig. 11 The main axis of stress field and R frequency in Yuncheng Basin, Shanxi rift.

图12 山西裂谷构造应力场σ1轴、 σ3轴和R值空间分布图 ①大同盆地; ②忻定盆地; ③太原盆地; ④临汾盆地; ⑤运城盆地。F1 恒山北麓断裂; F2口泉断裂; F3系舟山山前断裂; F4交城断裂; F5中条山断裂。蓝色箭头为σ1轴, 黑色箭头为σ3轴; 线段长短代表倾伏角大小, 线段越短表示倾伏角越大

Fig. 13 The spatial distribution of stress field (σ1 and σ3)and R in Shanxi rift.

图13 山西裂谷GPS速度剖面位置图 ①大同盆地; ②太原盆地; ③运城盆地。蓝色框中间的蓝色线条, 从北到南依次为口泉断裂、交城断裂、中条山断裂

Fig. 13 The location of GPS velocity profile in the Shanxi rift.

图14 大同盆地口泉断裂的GPS速度剖面

Fig. 14 The GPS velocity profile of Kouquan Fault in Datong Basin.

图15 太原盆地交城断裂的GPS速度剖面

Fig. 15 The GPS velocity profile of Jiaocheng Fault in Taiyuan Basin.

图16 运城盆地中条山断裂的GPS速度剖面

Fig. 16 The GPS velocity profile of Zhongtiaoshan Fault in Yuncheng Basin.

参考文献 48

[1]	安美建, 李方全. 1998. 山西地堑系现今构造应力场[J]. 地震学报, 20(5): 461—465.
	AN Mei-jian, LI Fang-quan. 1998. The current stress field in Shanxi graben[J]. Acta Seismologica Sinica, 20(5): 461—465 (in Chinese).
[2]	崔华伟, 万永革, 黄骥超, 等. 2017. 2015年3月新不列颠 M_S7.4 地震震源及邻区构造应力场特征[J]. 地球物理学报, 60(3): 985—998.
	CUI Hua-wei, WAN Yong-ge, HUANG Ji-chao, et al. 2017. The tectonic stress field in the source of the New Britain M_S7.4 earthquake of March 2015 and adjacent areas[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 60(3): 985—998 (in Chinese).
[3]	崔华伟, 万永革, 黄骥超, 等. 2019. 帕米尔—兴都库什地区构造应力场反演及拆离板片应力形因子特征研究[J]. 地球物理学报, 62(5): 1633—1649.
	CUI Hua-wei, WAN Yong-ge, HUANG Ji-chao, et al. 2019. Inversion for the tectonic stress field and the characteristics of the stress shape factor of the detachment slab in the Pamir-Hindu Kush area[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 62(5): 1633—1649 (in Chinese).
[4]	邓起东, 程绍平, 闵伟, 等. 1999. 鄂尔多斯块体新生代构造活动和动力学的讨论[J]. 地质力学学报, 5(3): 13—21.
	DENG Qi-dong, CHENG Shao-ping, MIN Wei, et al. 1999. Discussion on Cenozoic tectonics and dynamics of Ordos block[J]. Journal of Geomechanics, 5(3): 13—21 (in Chinese).
[5]	关鹏虎. 2021. 基于地震震源机制解的山西裂谷带区域构造应力场研究[D]. 太原: 太原理工大学.
	GUAN Peng-hu. 2021. Study on regional tectonic stress field in Shanxi rift zone based on focal mechanism solutions[D]. Taiyuan University of Technology, Taiyuan (in Chinese).
[6]	国家地震局“鄂尔多斯周缘活动断裂系”课题组. 1988. 鄂尔多斯周缘活动断裂系[M]. 北京: 地震出版社.
	The Research Group on “Active Fault System around Ordos Massif”, State Seismological Bureau. 1988. Active Fault System around Ordos Massif[M]. Seismological Press, Beijing (in Chinese).
[7]	李惠玲, 李冬梅, 李颖, 等. 2023. 山西活动断陷带主要断层垂直形变分段特征[J]. 中国地震, 39(4): 821—831.
	LI Hui-ling, LI Dong-mei, LI Ying, et al. 2023. Segmentation characteristics of vertical deformation of main faults in Shanxi fault depression zone[J]. Earthquake Research in China, 39(4): 821—831 (in Chinese).
[8]	李丽, 宋美琴, 刘素珍, 等. 2015. 山西地区震源机制一致性参数时空特征分析[J]. 地震, 35(2): 43—50.
	LI Li, SONG Mei-qin, LIU Su-zhen, et al. 2015. Spatial-temporal characteristics of the consistency parameter of focal mechanisms in Shanxi area[J]. Earthquake, 35(2): 43—50 (in Chinese).
[9]	李平恩, 廖力, 刘盼. 2017. 太原盆地应力场演化与强震关系的数值模拟研究[J]. 地球科学, 42(9): 1623—1636.
	LI Ping-en, LIAO Li, LIU Pan. 2017. Numerical simulation of relationship between stress field evolution and historical strong earthquakes in Taiyuan Basin[J]. Earth Science, 42(9): 1623—1636 (in Chinese).
[10]	李钦祖. 1980. 华北地壳应力场的基本特征[J]. 地球物理学报, 23(4): 377—387.
	LI Qin-zu. 1980. General features of the stress field in the crust of North China[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 23(4): 377—387 (in Chinese).
[11]	李祥. 2016. 晋冀蒙交界地区一维速度模型及构造应力场研究[D]. 三河: 防灾科技学院:1—42.
	LI Xiang. 2016. Study on 1D velocity model and stress field of the boundary zone of Shanxi, Hebei and Inner Mongolia[D]. Institute of Disaster Prevention, Sanhe: 1—42 (in Chinese).
[12]	李祥, 万永革, 崔华伟, 等. 2016. 2015年智利 M_W8.3 地震震源区构造应力场分析[J]. 地震学报, 38(6): 847—853.
	LI Xiang, WAN Yong-ge, CUI Hua-wei, et al. 2016. Tectonic stress field analysis on the source region of the 2015 M_W8.3 Chile earthquake[J]. Acta Seismologica Sinica, 38(6): 847—853 (in Chinese).
[13]	李泽潇, 万永革, 崔华伟, 等. 2020. 2018年9月8日墨江地震及周边地区构造应力场特征分析[J]. 地球物理学报, 63(4): 1431—1443.
	LI Ze-xiao, WAN Yong-ge, CUI Hua-wei, et al. 2020. Characteristic analysis of tectonic stress field around the Mojiang earthquake and its adjacent areas on September 8, 2018[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 63(4): 1431—1443 (in Chinese).
[14]	梁光河. 2023. 贝加尔裂谷和汾渭地堑成因与印度—欧亚碰撞的远程效应[J]. 地学前缘, 30(3): 282—293.
	LIANG Guang-he. 2023. Genesis of the Baikal Rift and the Fenwei Graben and the remote effects of the Indo-Eurasian collision[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 30(3): 282—293 (in Chinese).
[15]	林向东, 袁怀玉, 徐平, 等. 2017. 华北地区地震震源机制分区特征[J]. 地球物理学报, 60(12): 4589—4622.
	LIN Xiang-dong, YUAN Huai-yu, XU Ping, et al. 2017. Zonational characteristics of earthquake focal mechanism solutions in North China[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 60(12): 4589—4622 (in Chinese).
[16]	刘巍, 赵新平, 安卫平, 等. 1993. 山西地区的地壳应力场[J]. 山西地震, (3): 3—11.
	LIU Wei, ZHAO Xin-ping, AN Wei-ping, et al. 1993. The crustal stress field in Shanxi Province[J]. Earthquake Research in Shanxi, (3): 3—11 (in Chinese).
[17]	罗艳, 赵里, 曾祥方, 等. 2015. 芦山地震序列震源机制及其构造应力场空间变化[J]. 中国科学(地球科学), 45(4): 538—550.
	LUO Yan, ZHAO Li, ZENG Xiang-fang, et al. 2015. Focal mechanisms of the Lushan earthquake sequence and spatial variation of the stress field[J]. Scientia Sinica(Terrae), 45(4): 538—550 (in Chinese).
[18]	盛书中, 胡晓辉, 王晓山, 等. 2022. 云南及邻区地壳应力场研究[J]. 地球物理学报, 65(9): 3252—3267.
	SHENG Shu-zhong, HU Xiao-hui, WANG Xiao-shan, et al. 2022. Study on the crustal stress field of Yunnan and its adjacent areas[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 65(9): 3252—3267 (in Chinese).
[19]	盛书中, 万永革, 黄骥超, 等. 2015. 应用综合震源机制解法推断鄂尔多斯块体周缘现今地壳应力场的初步结果[J]. 地球物理学报, 58(2): 436—452.
	SHENG Shu-zhong, WAN Yong-ge, HUANG Ji-chao, et al. 2015. Present tectonic stress field in the Circum-Ordos region deduced from composite focal mechanism method[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 58(2): 436—452 (in Chinese).
[20]	万永革. 2024. 震源机制水平应变花面应变的地震震源机制分类方法及序列震源机制总体特征分析[J]. 地球科学, 49(7): 2675—2684.
	WAN Yong-ge. 2024. Focal mechanism classification based on areal strain of horizontal strain rosette of focal mechanism and characteristic analysis of overall focal mechanism of earthquake sequence[J]. Earth Science, 49(7): 2675—2684 (in Chinese).
[21]	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).
[22]	武敏捷, 林向东, 徐平. 2011. 华北北部地区震源机制解及构造应力场特征分析[J]. 大地测量与地球动力学, 31(5): 39—43.
	WU Min-jie, LIN Xiang-dong, XU Ping. 2011. Analysis of focal mechanism and tectonic stress field features in northern part of North China[J]. Journal of Geodesy and Geodynamics, 31(5): 39—43 (in Chinese).
[23]	吴奇, 许立青, 李三忠, 等. 2013. 华北地块中部活动构造特征及汾渭地堑成因探讨[J]. 地学前缘, 20(4): 104—114.
	WU Qi, XU Li-qing, LI San-zhong, et al. 2013. Active tectonics in the Central North China Block and the cause of the formation of the Fenwei Graben[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 20(4): 104—114 (in Chinese).
[24]	许忠淮. 2001. 东亚地区现今构造应力图的编制[J]. 地震学报, 23(5): 492—501.
	XU Zhong-huai. 2001. A present-day tectonic stress map for eastern Asia region[J]. Acta Seismologica Sinica, 23(5): 492—501 (in Chinese).
[25]	许忠淮, 阎明, 赵仲和. 1983. 由多个小地震推断的华北地区构造应力场的方向[J]. 地震学报, 5(3): 268—279.
	XU Zhong-huai, YAN Ming, ZHAO Zhong-he. 1983. Evaluation of the direction of tectonic stress in North China from recorded data of a large number of small earthquakes[J]. Acta Seismologica Sinica, 5(3): 268—279 (in Chinese).
[26]	薛宏运, 鄢家全. 1984. 鄂尔多斯地块周围的现代地壳应力场[J]. 地球物理学报, 27(2): 144—151.
	XUE Hong-yun, YAN Jia-quan. 1984. The contemporary crustal stress field around the Ordos block[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 27(2): 144—151 (in Chinese).
[27]	易桂喜, 龙锋, Vallage A, 等. 2016. 2013年芦山地震序列震源机制与震源区构造变形特征分析[J]. 地球物理学报, 59(10): 3711—3731.
	YI Gui-xi, LONG Feng, Vallage A, et al. 2016. Focal mechanism and tectonic deformation in the seismogenic area of the 2013 Lushan earthquake sequence, southwestern China[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 59(10): 3711—3731 (in Chinese).
[28]	余占洋, 沈旭章, 梁浩, 等. 2022. 基于地震活动性和震源机制解研究渭河-运城盆地主要断裂带的特征及应力场分布[J]. 地震地质, 44(2): 395—413. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2022.02.008.
	YU Zhan-yang, SHEN Xu-zhang, LIANG Hao, et al. 2022. The characteristics of major faults and stress field in Weihe-Yuncheng Basin constrained by seismic activity and focal mechanism solutions[J]. Seismology and Geology, 44(2): 395—413 (in Chinese).
[29]	张岳桥, 施炜, 董树文. 2019. 华北新构造: 印欧碰撞远场效应与太平洋俯冲地幔上涌之间的相互作用[J]. 地质学报, 93(5): 971—1001.
	ZHANG Yue-qiao, SHI Wei, DONG Shu-wen. 2019. Neotectonics of North China: Interplay between far-field effect of India-Eurasia collision and Pacific subduction related deep-seated mantle upwelling[J]. Acta Geologica Sinica, 93(5): 971—1001 (in Chinese).
[30]	郑建常, 王鹏, 李冬梅, 等. 2013. 使用小震震源机制解研究山东地区背景应力场[J]. 地震学报, 35(6): 773—784.
	ZHENG Jian-chang, WANG Peng, LI Dong-mei, et al. 2013. Tectonic stress field in Shandong region inferred from small earthquake focal mechanism solutions[J]. Acta Seismologica Sinica, 35(6): 773—784 (in Chinese).
[31]	Gephart J W, Forsyth D W. 1984. An improved method for determining the regional stress tensor using earthquake focal mechanism data: Application to the San Fernando earthquake sequence[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research, 89(B11): 9305—9320.
[32]	Guiraud M, Laborde O, Philip H. 1989. Characterization of various types of deformation and their corresponding deviatoric stress tensors using microfault analysis[J]. Tectonophysics, 170(3-4): 289—316.
[33]	Hardebeck J L. 2015. Stress orientations in subduction zones and the strength of subduction megathrust faults[J]. Science, 349(6253): 1213—1216.
[34]	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, 111(B11310): 1—11.
[35]	Li B, Kuvvet A, Bøttger M S, et al. 2015. Stress pattern of the Shanxi rift system, North China, inferred from the inversion of new focal mechanisms[J]. Geophysical Journal International(Seismology), 21: 505—527.
[36]	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.
[37]	Michael A J. 1984. Determination of stress from slip data: Faults and folds[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research, 89(B13): 11517—11526.
[38]	Michael A J. 1987. Use of focal mechanisms to determine stress: A control study[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: solid Earth, 92(B1): 357—368.
[39]	Northrup C J, Royden L H, Burchfiel B C. 1995. Motion of the Pacific plate relative to Eurasia and its potential relation to Cenozoic extension along the eastern margin of Eurasia[J]. Geology, 23(8): 719—722.
[40]	Shen F, Wang L, Barbot S, et al. 2023. North China as a mechanical bridge linking Pacific subduction and extrusion of the Tibetan plateau[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 622:118407.
[41]	Vallage A, Devès M H, Klinger Y, et al. 2014. Localized slip and distributed deformation in oblique settings: The example of the Denali fault system, Alaska[J]. Geophysical Journal International, 197(3): 1284—1298.
[42]	Wang M, Shen Z K. 2020. Present-day crustal deformation of continental China derived from GPS and its tectonic implications[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 125(2): B018774.
[43]	Wu W N, Kao H, Hsu S K, et al. 2010. Spatial variation of the crustal stress field along the Ryukyu-Taiwan-Luzon convergent boundary[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 115(B11): B11401.
[44]	Xu Z G, Huang Z C, Wang L S, et al. 2016. Crustal stress field in Yunnan: Implication for crust-mantle coupling[J]. Earthquake Science, 29(2): 105—115.
[45]	Zhang Y G, Zheng W J, Wang Y J, et al. 2018. Contemporary deformation of the North China plain from Global Positioning System data[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 45(4): 1851—1859.
[46]	Zhang Y Q, Mercier J L, Vergély P. 1998. Extension in the graben systems around the Ordos(China), and its contribution to the extrusion tectonics of south China with respect to Gobi-Mongolia[J]. Tectonophysics, 285(1-2): 41—75.
[47]	Zhu S B, Chen J, Shi Y L. 2022. Earthquake potential in the peripheral zones of the Ordos Block based on contemporary GPS strain rates and seismicity[J]. Tectonophysics, 824:229224.
[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.

山西裂谷构造应力场特征及其动力学意义

STRESS FIELD IN SHANXI RIFT AND ITS DYNAMIC SIGNIFICANCE

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 18

参考文献 48

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	常金龙, 甘卫军, 周晨, 朱成林, 刘长生, 姚程越. 依兰-伊通断裂北段应变状态及发震机制讨论[J]. 地震地质, 2026, 48(1): 200-216.
[2]	邹俊杰, 何宏林, 邵志刚, 魏占玉, 石峰, 张波, 耿爽, 赵家豪. 山西地堑系蔚广盆地南缘断裂带平行正断层的晚第四纪活动及其地震地质意义[J]. 地震地质, 2026, 48(1): 64-80.
[3]	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.
[4]	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.
[5]	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.
[6]	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.
[7]	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.
[8]	花春雨, 苏鹏, 石峰, 席茜, 郭钊吾. 正断层阶区现今连接模式综合研究——以山西裂谷系口泉断裂禅房阶区为例[J]. 地震地质, 2024, 46(4): 837-855.
[9]	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.
[10]	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.
[11]	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.
[12]	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.
[13]	邓文泽, 刘杰, 杨志高, 孙丽, 张雪梅. 青海玛多M_S7.4地震震源破裂过程反演结果的初步分析[J]. 地震地质, 2022, 44(4): 1059-1070.
[14]	余占洋, 沈旭章, 梁浩, 郑文俊, 刘旭宙. 基于地震活动性和震源机制解研究渭河-运城盆地主要断裂带的特征及应力场分布[J]. 地震地质, 2022, 44(2): 395-413.
[15]	张致伟, 龙锋, 赵小艳, 王迪. 川滇地区的震源机制解及应力场特征[J]. 地震地质, 2022, 44(1): 170-187.