2022年9月5日中国四川泸定6.8级地震的快速评估

Dengjie Kang , Wenkai Chen , Huaiqun Zhao , Dun Wang
{"title":"2022年9月5日中国四川泸定6.8级地震的快速评估","authors":"Dengjie Kang ,&nbsp;Wenkai Chen ,&nbsp;Huaiqun Zhao ,&nbsp;Dun Wang","doi":"10.1016/j.eqrea.2023.100214","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>At 12:52, September 5, 2022, an <em>M</em><sub>S</sub> 6.8 earthquake occurred in Luding, Sichuan. The earthquake caused serious casualties and property loss, and was determined to have an epicenter intensity of IX degree. In this study, we used three earthquake intensity rapid assessment methods (i.e. WFM, BPM and ASM) to evaluate the intensity of this earthquake. Then, we comparatively analyzed the three methods based on strong ground motion observation data and actual intensity maps. The results show that: (1) The earthquake is associated with a southeast-oriented single-sided rupture. The WFM method can only evaluate earthquakes with two-sided ruptures, which has some limitations; (2) The intensity of BPM and ASM was overestimated on the southwest and north sides of the epicenter, but other high-intensity zones were similar to the intensities measured by actual surveys; (3) The residuals of the three intensity assessment methods were all between −0.5 and 1. Although a small number of stations were underestimated, the overall residuals were good, and the residuals gradually approached 0 with the increase of distance; (4) The number of towns and villages evaluated by the three methods in the earthquake area was almost all lower than the field survey results. One exception is the area of VIII degree, where the BPM and ASM were higher than the survey results; (5) The area of the earthquake area evaluated by the three methods was low in VI and VII degree, moderate in VIII degree, and low in IX degree (the area from ASM is similar to the area measured by actual survey). Overall, ASM is applicable to this earthquake intensity assessment.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100384,"journal":{"name":"Earthquake Research Advances","volume":"3 2","pages":"Article 100214"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rapid assessment of the September 5, 2022 ​MS 6.8 Luding earthquake in Sichuan, China\",\"authors\":\"Dengjie Kang ,&nbsp;Wenkai Chen ,&nbsp;Huaiqun Zhao ,&nbsp;Dun Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.eqrea.2023.100214\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>At 12:52, September 5, 2022, an <em>M</em><sub>S</sub> 6.8 earthquake occurred in Luding, Sichuan. The earthquake caused serious casualties and property loss, and was determined to have an epicenter intensity of IX degree. In this study, we used three earthquake intensity rapid assessment methods (i.e. WFM, BPM and ASM) to evaluate the intensity of this earthquake. Then, we comparatively analyzed the three methods based on strong ground motion observation data and actual intensity maps. The results show that: (1) The earthquake is associated with a southeast-oriented single-sided rupture. The WFM method can only evaluate earthquakes with two-sided ruptures, which has some limitations; (2) The intensity of BPM and ASM was overestimated on the southwest and north sides of the epicenter, but other high-intensity zones were similar to the intensities measured by actual surveys; (3) The residuals of the three intensity assessment methods were all between −0.5 and 1. Although a small number of stations were underestimated, the overall residuals were good, and the residuals gradually approached 0 with the increase of distance; (4) The number of towns and villages evaluated by the three methods in the earthquake area was almost all lower than the field survey results. One exception is the area of VIII degree, where the BPM and ASM were higher than the survey results; (5) The area of the earthquake area evaluated by the three methods was low in VI and VII degree, moderate in VIII degree, and low in IX degree (the area from ASM is similar to the area measured by actual survey). Overall, ASM is applicable to this earthquake intensity assessment.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100384,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Earthquake Research Advances\",\"volume\":\"3 2\",\"pages\":\"Article 100214\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Earthquake Research Advances\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772467023000118\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Earthquake Research Advances","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772467023000118","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

2022年9月5日12时52分,四川泸定发生里氏6.8级地震。地震造成严重人员伤亡和财产损失,确定震中烈度为九度。在本研究中,我们使用了三种地震烈度快速评估方法(WFM、BPM和ASM)来评估本次地震的烈度。然后,基于强地震动观测数据和实际强度图,对三种方法进行了比较分析。结果表明:(1)本次地震为东南向单侧破裂。WFM方法只能评估具有双侧破裂的地震,这有一定的局限性;(2) 震中西南侧和北侧的BPM和ASM强度被高估,但其他高强度区与实际测量的强度相似;(3) 三种强度评估方法的残差均在−0.5和1之间。尽管低估了少量站点,但总体残差良好,并且随着距离的增加,残差逐渐接近0;(4) 三种方法评估的震区乡镇数量几乎都低于现场调查结果。一个例外是VIII度地区,BPM和ASM高于调查结果;(5) 三种方法评价的震区面积分别为VI度和VII度低、VIII度中等、IX度低(ASM测得的面积与实测面积相似)。总体而言,ASM适用于本次地震烈度评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Rapid assessment of the September 5, 2022 ​MS 6.8 Luding earthquake in Sichuan, China

At 12:52, September 5, 2022, an MS 6.8 earthquake occurred in Luding, Sichuan. The earthquake caused serious casualties and property loss, and was determined to have an epicenter intensity of IX degree. In this study, we used three earthquake intensity rapid assessment methods (i.e. WFM, BPM and ASM) to evaluate the intensity of this earthquake. Then, we comparatively analyzed the three methods based on strong ground motion observation data and actual intensity maps. The results show that: (1) The earthquake is associated with a southeast-oriented single-sided rupture. The WFM method can only evaluate earthquakes with two-sided ruptures, which has some limitations; (2) The intensity of BPM and ASM was overestimated on the southwest and north sides of the epicenter, but other high-intensity zones were similar to the intensities measured by actual surveys; (3) The residuals of the three intensity assessment methods were all between −0.5 and 1. Although a small number of stations were underestimated, the overall residuals were good, and the residuals gradually approached 0 with the increase of distance; (4) The number of towns and villages evaluated by the three methods in the earthquake area was almost all lower than the field survey results. One exception is the area of VIII degree, where the BPM and ASM were higher than the survey results; (5) The area of the earthquake area evaluated by the three methods was low in VI and VII degree, moderate in VIII degree, and low in IX degree (the area from ASM is similar to the area measured by actual survey). Overall, ASM is applicable to this earthquake intensity assessment.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Site classification methodology using support vector machine: A study Improving image accuracy of ambient noise data by temporary seismic arrays at different observation periods Data merging methods for S-wave velocity and azimuthal anisotropy from different regions Characterization and application of submarine seismic ambient noise in the Bohai Sea and Yellow Sea Rapid determination of source parameters of the M6.2 Jishishan earthquake in Gansu Province and its application in emergency response
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1