2022. Inside Cover. Journal of Geomechanics, 28 (3): 315-315.
Citation: 2022. Inside Cover. Journal of Geomechanics, 28 (3): 315-315.

Inside Cover

More Information
  • Relative Articles

    2023: Inside Back Cover. Journal of Geomechanics, 29(3): 454-454.
    2022: Chief Editor’s Address. Journal of Geomechanics, 28(3): 318-318.
    2021: Inside Cover. Journal of Geomechanics, 27(2): 封三-封三.
    2019: Chief Editor’s Address. Journal of Geomechanics, 25(1): 1-2.
    WANG Zhi-hua, DU Ming-liang, GUO Zhao-cheng, JIA Wei-jie. 2012: STUDY ON THE GEOMECHANICAL MODEL OF LANDSLIDE WITH LOW DIP ANGLE STRATA STRUCTURE:TAKING FENGDIAN LANDSLIDE AS AN EXAMPLE. Journal of Geomechanics, 18(2): 97-109, 186.
    CHEN Xuan-hua, CHEN Zheng-le, YANG Nong. 2009: STUDY ON REGIONAL MINERALIZATIONS AND ORE-FIELD STRUCTURES:BUILDING OF MINERALIZING TECTONIC SYSTEMS. Journal of Geomechanics, 15(1): 1-19.
    LI Shu-jing, ZHENG Da-xing. 2006: STRUCTURAL INTERPRETATION OF REMOTE SENSING DATA AND STRUCTURAL PATTERNS OF THE CRUST SURFACE——ONE ASPECT OF EXTENDED GEOMECHANICAL RESEARCH. Journal of Geomechanics, 12(3): 279-286.
    Zhang Da, Li Dongxu. 1998: MODELING OF STRESS FIELD OF FENGHUANGSHAN OREFIELD DURING MINERALIZATION. Journal of Geomechanics, 4(2): 91-96.
    Yi Shunhua, Li Zhen. 1997: A STUDY OF INTRUSIVE CONTACT STRUCTURES. Journal of Geomechanics, 3(2): 61-65.
    Liu Xun. 1996: ADVANCE OF APPLICATION OF GEOMECHANICS TO THE RESEARCH OF ORE-FIELD STRUCTURES. Journal of Geomechanics, 2(1): 25-33.
    Wang Jianping. 1995: TECHNICAL OF METHODOLOGY IN THE ORE FIELD TECTONICS. Journal of Geomechanics, 1(2): 59-65.
  • Created with Highcharts 5.0.7Amount of accessChart context menuAbstract Views, HTML Views, PDF Downloads StatisticsAbstract ViewsHTML ViewsPDF Downloads2024-042024-052024-062024-072024-082024-092024-102024-112024-122025-012025-022025-0305101520
    Created with Highcharts 5.0.7Chart context menuAccess Class DistributionFULLTEXT: 13.5 %FULLTEXT: 13.5 %META: 52.1 %META: 52.1 %PDF: 34.4 %PDF: 34.4 %FULLTEXTMETAPDF
    Created with Highcharts 5.0.7Chart context menuAccess Area Distribution其他: 15.9 %其他: 15.9 %China: 0.3 %China: 0.3 %Japan: 0.2 %Japan: 0.2 %Seattle: 0.2 %Seattle: 0.2 %Tiruchi: 0.2 %Tiruchi: 0.2 %United States: 7.7 %United States: 7.7 %万象: 0.5 %万象: 0.5 %上海: 1.1 %上海: 1.1 %上饶: 0.2 %上饶: 0.2 %临沂: 0.2 %临沂: 0.2 %乌鲁木齐: 1.0 %乌鲁木齐: 1.0 %乐山: 0.2 %乐山: 0.2 %保山: 0.2 %保山: 0.2 %兰州: 0.2 %兰州: 0.2 %凉山: 0.3 %凉山: 0.3 %北京: 12.7 %北京: 12.7 %南宁: 0.8 %南宁: 0.8 %南昌: 0.2 %南昌: 0.2 %合肥: 1.0 %合肥: 1.0 %呼和浩特: 0.2 %呼和浩特: 0.2 %哈里亚纳: 0.3 %哈里亚纳: 0.3 %塔城: 0.5 %塔城: 0.5 %大同: 0.2 %大同: 0.2 %大连: 0.2 %大连: 0.2 %太原: 0.3 %太原: 0.3 %安康: 0.8 %安康: 0.8 %巴音郭楞: 0.2 %巴音郭楞: 0.2 %巴音郭楞蒙古自治州: 0.3 %巴音郭楞蒙古自治州: 0.3 %广州: 0.2 %广州: 0.2 %张家口: 2.4 %张家口: 2.4 %恩施: 0.3 %恩施: 0.3 %成都: 1.6 %成都: 1.6 %拉萨: 0.5 %拉萨: 0.5 %拉贾斯坦邦: 0.3 %拉贾斯坦邦: 0.3 %昆明: 1.1 %昆明: 1.1 %普洱: 0.2 %普洱: 0.2 %杭州: 0.3 %杭州: 0.3 %武汉: 2.4 %武汉: 2.4 %毕节: 0.3 %毕节: 0.3 %河源: 0.3 %河源: 0.3 %洛阳: 0.3 %洛阳: 0.3 %济南: 0.5 %济南: 0.5 %济宁: 0.5 %济宁: 0.5 %海南藏族自治州: 0.5 %海南藏族自治州: 0.5 %海口: 0.3 %海口: 0.3 %湖州: 0.8 %湖州: 0.8 %漯河: 0.2 %漯河: 0.2 %焦作: 0.5 %焦作: 0.5 %纽约: 0.3 %纽约: 0.3 %芒廷维尤: 9.2 %芒廷维尤: 9.2 %芝加哥: 0.2 %芝加哥: 0.2 %西宁: 23.5 %西宁: 23.5 %西安: 0.8 %西安: 0.8 %诺沃克: 0.2 %诺沃克: 0.2 %贵阳: 1.3 %贵阳: 1.3 %赣州: 0.3 %赣州: 0.3 %达州: 0.3 %达州: 0.3 %运城: 0.6 %运城: 0.6 %迪庆藏族自治州: 0.3 %迪庆藏族自治州: 0.3 %邯郸: 0.2 %邯郸: 0.2 %郑州: 0.6 %郑州: 0.6 %长沙: 1.4 %长沙: 1.4 %长治: 0.3 %长治: 0.3 %阿克苏地区: 0.3 %阿克苏地区: 0.3 %阿勒泰: 0.2 %阿勒泰: 0.2 %阿勒泰地区: 0.3 %阿勒泰地区: 0.3 %陇南: 0.2 %陇南: 0.2 %青岛: 0.2 %青岛: 0.2 %黄石: 0.2 %黄石: 0.2 %其他ChinaJapanSeattleTiruchiUnited States万象上海上饶临沂乌鲁木齐乐山保山兰州凉山北京南宁南昌合肥呼和浩特哈里亚纳塔城大同大连太原安康巴音郭楞巴音郭楞蒙古自治州广州张家口恩施成都拉萨拉贾斯坦邦昆明普洱杭州武汉毕节河源洛阳济南济宁海南藏族自治州海口湖州漯河焦作纽约芒廷维尤芝加哥西宁西安诺沃克贵阳赣州达州运城迪庆藏族自治州邯郸郑州长沙长治阿克苏地区阿勒泰阿勒泰地区陇南青岛黄石

Catalog

    Article Metrics

    Article views (321) PDF downloads(214) Cited by()
    Proportional views
    Related

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return