塩ノ平断層と車断層の破砕帯における断層スリップ試験時の水圧応答解析

Transient analyses of hydraulic head in the fault slip experiments in fracture zones of Shionohira and Kuruma Faults

若濱 洋*; 能城 悠*; 青木 和弘 ; 今井 宏太朗; Guglielmi, Y.*; Cook, P.*; Soom, F.*

Wakahama, Hiroshi*; Nojo, Haruka*; Aoki, Kazuhiro; Imai, Hirotaro; Guglielmi, Y.*; Cook, P.*; Soom, F.*

2011年4月11日の福島県浜通りの地震(Mw6.7)時、福島県南東部に北北西から南南東に伸びる約14kmの地表変状が生じ塩ノ平断層と命名された。その南方延長上の車断層では地表変状は認められなかった。両断層の活動性評価のため、前者の活動域上の塩ノ平地点と後者の非活動域上の水上北地点で、SIMFIP法による断層スリップ試験を実施した。両地点の断層破砕部への注水に対する水圧モニタリング孔での水圧応答から、断層部を挟む領域の水理特性をGRFモデル(Barker, 1988)により評価し、透水係数、比貯留量、及び流れ次元を明らかにした。これらの水理パラメーターは国内外の文献値と整合的で、透水係数及び比貯留量は塩ノ平が水上北よりも大きく、流れ次元は塩ノ平が概ね三次元流であり、水上北が二次元フラクショナル流となる。また計測変位から算定される一軸膨張係数と水理解析での比貯留量の対比から、体積膨張は、前者が三軸、後者が一軸方向で生じると把握された。両地点の相違は、当該断層破砕部に賦存する「水みち」の空間的な発達状況の相違と密接に対応し、両地点の断層活動度に差異を生む要因と水理パラメーター等との関連性が示唆された。

Upon the Hamadori earthquake (Mw 6.7) of 11 April 2011, coseismic surface deformation of 14 km running NNW to SSE in southeast Fukushima Prefecture occurred and was newly named the Shionohira Fault. However, no surface deformation was observed along the Kuruma Fault which is a southern extension of the Shionohira Fault. Fault injection tests using SIMFIP method at the Shionohira site on the former active segment and the Minakamikita site on the latter inactive segment were conducted to evaluate the activity of the two faults. Based on hydraulic responses to water injection into the fault rupture zone in the monitoring boreholes at the two sites, hydraulic properties of the area across the fault zone were estimated using the GRF model (Barker, 1988). The results obtained on hydraulic conductivity, specific storage and flow dimension were consistent with those in the domestic and international literature. The hydraulic conductivity and specific storage were larger in Shionohira than in Minakamikita. The flow dimension of Shionohira was three-dimensional, while that of Minakamikita was found to be a two-dimensional fractional flow. In addition, it is understood that the volumetric expansion occurs in the former site in the triaxial direction and the latter in the uniaxial with the comparison between the uniaxial expansion coefficient calculated from the results of SIMFIP displacement measurements and the specific storage in the hydraulic analysis. The difference in the hydraulic parameters between the two sites corresponded to the difference in the spatial development of fractures considered to be the "water passway," indicating the possibility of a correlation between the parameters and the different possible causes for fault activity at the two sites.