2022年1月8日青海门源6.9级地震仪器烈度与宏观烈度对比分析

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS ON INSTRUMENT INTENSAITY AND MACROSCOPIC SURVEY INTENSITY OF THE MENYUAN M6.9 EARTHQUAKE ON JANUARY,8,2022

根据《中国地震烈度表》(GB17742-2020)中规定的仪器烈度计算方法处理门源M6.9地震强震动记录数据,得到测点仪器烈度值,将宏观烈度图Ⅵ度区以上站点与仪器测定烈度进行对比,发现44.44%站点测定的仪器烈度值与宏观烈度图中烈度区值完全吻合,88.89%站点的误差在±1度以内,说明《中国地震烈度表》建议方法获得的仪器烈度可以表征记录站点周边的震害程度;对比分析了基于PGA、PGV计算的仪器烈度值,发现在此次地震PGV中较PGA对于建筑物影响要明显,对震害的指示作用要优于PGA。基于仪器地震烈度值绘制了仪器地震烈度分布图,分布图整体上呈北西—南东方向展布,与宏观烈度走向基本一致。

Compared and analyzed the instrument seismic intensity values of the stations above the intensity VI area of the macro survey of the Menyuan M6.9 earthquake,the instrument intensity values measured by 44.44%of the stations can be completely consistent with the intensity area values in the seismic intensity map,and the error of 88.89%of the stations is within±1 degree.It is acceptable,The seismic instrument intensity calculated in the“China Seismic Intensity Scale”(GB17742-2020)can objectively reflect the degree of earthquake damage around strong earthquake stations to a certain extent;The instrument intensity values calculated based on PGA and PGV are compared and analyzed.It is found that the PGV in this earthquake has more obvious impact on buildings than PGA,and the indication of earthquake damage is better than PGA.The instrument seismic intensity distribution map is drawn based on the instrument seismic intensity value,which is distributed in NW-SE direction as a whole.The seismic intensity value measured by the instrument basically conforms to the seismic intensity value of the macro survey.