4.6 Article

The 1996 Mw 6.6 Lijiang earthquake: Application of JERS-1 SAR interferometry on a typical normal-faulting event in the northwestern Yunnan rift zone, SW China

期刊

JOURNAL OF ASIAN EARTH SCIENCES
卷 146, 期 -, 页码 221-232

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jseaes.2017.05.029

关键词

InSAR; JERS-1; 1996 Lijiang earthquake; Crustal deformation; Normal faulting; Source modeling

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41604015]
  2. Spark Programs of Earthquake Sciences - China Earthquake Administration [XH17059]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The northwestern Yunnan rift zone in the Yunnan Province of China is a seismically active region located along the western boundary of the Sichuan-Yunnan Block on the eastern margin of the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau. An earthquake with a magnitude of 6.6 (Mw) occurred in this region on February 3, 1996. The Lijiang earthquake was the largest normal-faulting event to occur along the western boundary of the Sichuan-Yunnan Block in the last 40 years. In this study, we used L-band JERS-1 (Japanese Earth Resources Satellite-1) SAR. data sets from two descending orbits to detect surface deformation signals surrounding the epicentral region in order to estimate the source parameters through an inversion of the displacement fields. The results indicated that the earthquake can be explained by slip along two segments of the similar to N-S trending listric normal fault, named the Lijiang-Daju fault. Coseismic deformation patterns and slip distributions revealed that the earthquake consisted of two sub-events, which were also suggested by seismological results. Based on an analysis of the static Coulomb stress change, the second sub-event was likely triggered by the first sub-event. The central segment of the Lijiang-Daju fault, which has an eastward-convex geometry, did not rupture during the earthquake. This phenomenon was probably related to a geometrical discontinuity at the fault-bend area of the Lijiang-Daju fault.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据