极化方法在成都地磁台的应用研究

何畅, 冯志生

何畅, 冯志生. 2017: 极化方法在成都地磁台的应用研究. 地震学报, 39(4): 558-564. DOI: 10.11939/jass.2017.04.010
引用本文: 何畅, 冯志生. 2017: 极化方法在成都地磁台的应用研究. 地震学报, 39(4): 558-564. DOI: 10.11939/jass.2017.04.010
He Chang, Feng Zhisheng. 2017: Application of polarization method to geomagnetic data from the station Chengdu. Acta Seismologica Sinica, 39(4): 558-564. DOI: 10.11939/jass.2017.04.010
Citation: He Chang, Feng Zhisheng. 2017: Application of polarization method to geomagnetic data from the station Chengdu. Acta Seismologica Sinica, 39(4): 558-564. DOI: 10.11939/jass.2017.04.010

极化方法在成都地磁台的应用研究

基金项目: 

川滇国家地震监测预报实验场项目(2016CESE0102) 和震情跟踪定向工作任务(2016010405) 联合资助

震情跟踪定向工作任务 2016010405

川滇国家地震监测预报实验场项目 2016CESE0102

详细信息
    作者简介:

    何畅   四川省地震局预报研究中心工程师. 2009年中国石油大学(华东)应用物理学专业毕业,获理学学士学位;2012年中国石油大学(华东)地球探测与信息技术专业毕业,获工学硕士学位.现主要从事震磁关系和地震预测研究.四川省地震学会会员

    通讯作者:

    冯志生, e-mail: fengzs2001@sina.com

  • 中图分类号: P315.72+1

Application of polarization method to geomagnetic data from the station Chengdu

  • 摘要: 以成都台FHDZ-M15地磁组合观测系统产出的秒采样观测数据为研究对象,应用极化方法提取该台站附近几次中强震前的超低频(ULF)磁异常信号.成都台极化值长期曲线具有一定的年变化特征,利用傅里叶拟合消除周期变化后,对残差进行分析.结果显示,极化值增高现象与其后2个月内台站周边区域的ML≥5.0地震有很好的对应关系,高值异常持续3—5日,与外空场活动无关,且逆冲型地震前的极化值异常幅值高于走滑型地震.
    Abstract: Based on the 1-second sampling data derived from FHDZ-M15 digital recording geometry of the station Chengdu, we applied polarization method to analyzing the possible ultra-low frequency electromagnetic phenomena associated with ML≥5.0 earthquakes surrounding the station. It was shown that the long-term curve of the polarization value of the station Chengdu exhibits annual variations. By applying the Fourier fitting, the periodic annual variations were eliminated, and the analysis results on residuals between polarization values and fitting ones indicate that the increasing of the polarization value has a close relationship with ML≥5.0 earthquakes which would happen in two months, and the appearance duration of the high value was one day to five days. Meanwhile, there was no correlation between the ultra-low frequency electromagnetic phenomena and the space current activity; the abnormal amplitude of polarization value before the thrust earthquake is higher than that of the strike-slip type.
  • 图  1   2010—2015年成都台周边满足式(1) 的ML≥5.0地震震中分布图

    F1:灌县—安县断裂;F2:映秀—北川断裂;F3:汶川—茂汶断裂;F4:龙泉山断裂

    Figure  1.   Epicentral distribution of ML≥5.0 earth-quakes satisfying equation (1) around the station Chengdu from 2010 to 2015

    F1: Guanxian-Anxian fault; F2: Yingxiu-Beichuan fault; F3: Wenchuan-Maowen fault; F4: Longquanshan fault

    图  2   成都台地磁极化值变化

    (a)极化值5日滑动平均值;(b)极化值傅里叶拟合; (c)极化值与傅里叶拟合残差5日滑动平均值

    Figure  2.   The variations of polarization value of the station Chengdu

    (a) Five days moving average of polarization value; (b) The Fourier fitting values of polarization value; (c) Five days moving average of residuals between polarization value and Fourier fitting

    图  3   2010—2015年成都台极化值傅里叶拟合残差(上)和Ap指数(下)的逐年变化

    (a) 2010年;(b) 2011年;(c) 2012年;(d) 2013年;(e) 2014年;(f) 2015年

    Figure  3.   The Fourier fitting residual of polarization values (upper) and the Ap index (lower) from 2010 to 2015

    (a) 2010; (b) 2011; (c) 2012; (d) 2013; (e) 2014; (f) 2015

    图  4   极化异常幅值与震中距关系

    Figure  4.   Scatter diagram for the polarization value anomaly with epicentral distance

    表  1   成都台磁场极化值高值异常与ML≥5.0地震对应情况统计

    Table  1   Statistics of corresponding relation between the high value of polarization anomaly at the station Chengdu and ML≥5.0 earthquakes

    异常出现时间 异常持续时间/d 异常幅值 对应地震 发震时间间隔/d 震中距
    /km
    震源深度
    /km
    震源机制
    2010-01-04 3 0.83 虚报
    2010-05-13 5 0.60 汶川ML5.2 12 38.7 20.5 逆冲
    2010-07-09 4 0.47 虚报
    2011-10-26 4 0.36 青川ML5.6 6 230 21.5 逆冲
    彭州ML5.2 61 51 25.5 逆冲
    2012-06-19 3 0.37 虚报
    2013-01-02 3 0.39 三台ML5.1 49 141 29.5 走滑
    2013-04-02 4 0.45 芦山MS7.0 18 100 17.5 逆冲
    漏报 理县MS4.9 104 22.5 走滑
    漏报 梓潼ML5.2 150 21.5 走滑
    2014-11-16 5 0.33 康定MS6.3 6 211 20.5 走滑
    下载: 导出CSV
  • 丁鉴海, 卢振业, 黄雪香. 1994.地震电磁学[M].北京:地震出版社: 30-42.

    Ding J H, Lu Z Y, Huang X X. 1994. Seismo-Electromagnetism[M]. Beijing: Seismological Press: 30-42 (in Chinese).

    杜爱民, 周志坚, 徐文耀, 杨少峰. 2004.新疆和田ML7.1地震前ULF电磁辐射的激发机理[J].地球物理学报, 47(5): 832-837. http://kns.cnki.net/KCMS/detail/detail.aspx?filename=dqwx200405013&dbname=CJFD&dbcode=CJFQ

    Du A M, Zhou Z J, Xu W Y, Yang S F. 2004. Generation mechanisms of ULF electromagnetic emissions before the ML=7.1 earthquake at Hotan of Xinjiang[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 47(5): 832-837. http://kns.cnki.net/KCMS/detail/detail.aspx?filename=dqwx200405013&dbname=CJFD&dbcode=CJFQ

    冯志生, 李琪, 卢军, 李鸿宇, 居海华, 孙海军, 杨福喜, 张翼. 2010.基于磁通门秒值数据的地震ULF磁场可靠信息提取研究[J].华南地震, 30(2): 1-7. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-HNDI201002002.htm

    Feng Z S, Li Q, Lu J, Li H Y, Ju H H, Sun H J, Yang F X, Zhang Y. 2010. The seismic ULF geomagnetic reliable information exaction based on fluxgate magnetometer data of second value[J]. South China Journal of Seismology, 30(2): 1-7 (in Chinese). http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-HNDI201002002.htm

    李琪, 杨星, 蔡绍平. 2015.极化方法应用于地磁台阵的震例分析[J].震灾防御技术, 10(2): 412-417. doi: 10.11899/zzfy20150222

    Li Q, Yang X, Cai S P. 2015. Case study of applying polarization method to geomagnetic array data[J]. Technology for Earthquake Disaster Prevention, 10(2): 412-417 (in Chinese). doi: 10.11899/zzfy20150222

    杨少峰, 陈宝生, 杜爱民, 宁学荣, 肖福辉, 洪福元. 1998.新疆喀什地区地震前地磁脉动异常分析[J].地球物理学报, 41(3): 332-341. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-DQWX199803005.htm

    Yang S F, Chen B S, Du A M, Ning X R, Xiao F H, Hong F Y. 1998. Abnormality of geomagnetic pulsations before earthquakes at Kashi region in Xinjiang[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 41(3): 332-341 (in Chinese). http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-DQWX199803005.htm

    张国民, 傅征祥, 桂燮泰. 2001.地震预报引论[M].北京:科学出版社: 390-396.

    Zhang G M, Fu Z X, Gui X T. 2001. Introduction to Earthquake Prediction[M]. Beijing: Science Press: 390-396 (in Chinese).

    Fraser-Smith A C, Bernardi A, McGill P R, Ladd M E, Helliwell R A, Villard Jr O G. 1990. Low frequency magnetic field measurements near the epicenter of the MS7.1 Loma Prieta earthquake[J]. Geophys Res Lett, 17(9): 1465-1468. doi: 10.1029/GL017i009p01465

    Hattori K. 2004. ULF geomagnetic changes associated with large earthquakes[J]. Terr Atmos Oceanic Sci, 15(3): 329-360. doi: 10.3319/TAO.2004.15.3.329(EP)

    Hayakawa M, Kawate R, Molchanov O A, Yumoto K. 1996. Results of ultra-low-frequency magnetic field measurements during the Guam earthquake of 8 August 1993[J]. Geophys Res Lett, 23(3): 241-244. doi: 10.1029/95GL02863

    Li Q, Zhu P Y, Mamatemin A, Xu X G. 2011. Detection of ULF electromagnetic emissions as a precursor to two earthquakes in China[J]. Earthquake Science, 24(6): 601-607. doi: 10.1007/s11589-011-0822-2

    Molchanov O A, Kopytenko Y A, Voronov P M, Kopytenko E A, Matiashvili T G, Fraser-Smith A C, Bernardi A. 1992. Results of ULF magnetic field measurements near the epicenters of the Spitak (MS=6.9) and Loma Prieta (MS=7.1) earthquakes: Comparative analysis[J]. Geophys Res Lett, 19(14): 1495-1498. doi: 10.1029/92GL01152

    Molchanov O A, Hayakawa M. 1995. Generation of ULF electromagnetic emissions by microfracturing[J]. Geophys Res Lett, 22(22): 3091-3094. doi: 10.1029/95GL00781

    Rikitake T. 1997. Nature of electromagnetic emission precursory to an earthquake[J]. J Geomag Geoel, 49(9): 1153-1163. doi: 10.5636/jgg.49.1153

    Thomas J N, Love J J, Johnston M J S, Yumoto K. 2009. On the reported magnetic precursor of the 1993 Guam earthquake[J]. Geophys Res Lett, 36(16): 16301. doi: 10.1029/2009GL039020

图(4)  /  表(1)
计量
  • 文章访问数:  664
  • HTML全文浏览量:  284
  • PDF下载量:  24
  • 被引次数: 0
出版历程
  • 收稿日期:  2017-02-03
  • 修回日期:  2017-06-19
  • 发布日期:  2017-06-30

目录

    /

    返回文章
    返回