4.5 Article

A linkage criterion for segmented normal faults

Journal

JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL GEOLOGY
Volume 26, Issue 12, Pages 2251-2267

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jsg.2004.06.008

Keywords

normal fault; segment; relay ramp; linkage; prediction

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A detailed field study of 39 centimetre- to metre-scale relay ramps from two outcrops was performed to investigate the development of a linkage criterion for segmented normal faults. We analysed the displacement distribution and the geometry of fault arrays containing three types of relay ramp: open, linked, and fully breached, in order to identify which parameters are relevant to fault linkage, and to establish a linkage criterion. Each relay ramp geometry has a specific graphical field on a relay displacement-separation diagram. The field including all the linked geometries (initiation of linkage) separates open and fully breached relay ramps and is interpreted as a value of relay displacement to separation ratio for which faults link during their overlap. A 'linkage threshold', in each studied fault system, is defined as the best-fit linear trend of linked relays. We discuss the scaling and the variability of the linkage criterion using published datasets from a wide variety of settings and scales. The observed linkage threshold is linear, with a slope value varying less than one order of magnitude. This suggests that linking relay ramps have self-similar geometries from centimetre- to kilometre-scale and that normal fault linkage is governed by similar fault interaction across a broad range of scales. The linkage criterion, which can be an effective tool to estimate relay ramp geometry at depth or at the earth surface, could therefore be used to improve investigations in determining fluid entrapment or in the evaluation of potential surface of seismic ruptures. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available