Quick
Search: 
 
advanced search
 GSW Home    GeoRef Home    My GSW Alerts    Contact GSW    About GSW    Journals List    Help 
AAPG Bulletin SEARCH
JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT PUBLISHER SUBSCRIBE ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

AAPG Bulletin; August 2002; v. 86; no. 8; p. 1367-1381; DOI: 10.1306/61EEDC9C-173E-11D7-8645000102C1865D
© 2002 American Association of Petroleum Geologists (AAPG)
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (12)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Aydin, A.
Right arrow Articles by Eyal, Y.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation

Anatomy of a Normal Fault with Shale Smear: Implications for Fault Seal

Atilla Aydin1 and Yehuda Eyal2

1 Shale Smear Project, Department of Geological and Environmental Sciences, Stanford University, California; aydin{at}pangea.stanford.edu
2 Department of Geology and Mineralogy, Ben Gurion University, Beer Sheva, Israel

Atilla Aydin received his B.S. degree in geological engineering from Istanbul Technical University (Turkey) and his M.S. degree and Ph.D. in geology from Stanford University. After three years of teaching at Istanbul Technical University and ten years of teaching at Purdue University, he moved to Stanford University in 1991 as a research professor of structural geology and geomechanics. He is codirector of the Rock Fracture Project and director of the Shale Smear Project at Stanford. His research interest includes how rocks break and fluids flow through fractures and faults with a primary application to hydrocarbon entrapment, migration, and recovery.Yehuda Eyal is currently a professor of structural geology in the Department of Geological and Environmental Sciences at the Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel. He received his B.S. degree (1965), M.S. degree (1967), and Ph.D. (1976) from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel. His current research interests are focused on development of the Syrian Arc and the relationships between the Syrian Arc and the Dead Sea stress fields in the Middle East; fractures and other mesostructures as strain and stress indicators; and kinematic analysis of shear zones, such as the eastern Sinai and central Sinai-Negev shear zones.

We describe the geometry and structural attributes of an exceptionally well-exposed normal fault with shale smear in southern Israel. We discuss the mechanism by which the shale was emplaced into the fault zone and compare and contrast it with other shale emplacement mechanisms. The shaly unit, the Ora formation, is about 110 m thick in normal stratigraphic position and is composed of a lower shale member of approximately 60 m and an upper shale member of approximately 30 m, separated by a middle carbonate-bearing unit approximately 20 m thick. One or both of these shale units occur along the entire 2 km length of the fault, although with a drastically reduced thickness. The upper shale member vanishes along a large part of the fault, but the lower shale appears to survive in the fault rock with less than 0.5 m thickness. Both shale units have been stretched for more than 250 m (the fault throw) between nearly planar discontinuities defined by the footwall or hanging-wall cutoff planes (duplex). Thus, the fault geometry, position, and distribution of the remaining shale rocks reveal a smearing process by which the shale units reduce their thickness or vanish by thinning perpendicular to the fault and stretching parallel to the fault. The continuity of the lower shale unit as a fault rock appears to be barely maintained for a throw/thickness ratio of approximately 4 but not for the upper shale unit, which has a throw/thickness ratio of approximately 8. The brittle carbonate-bearing rocks within the shaly rocks are fractured and faulted and show boudinage at various scales, which result in significant variation in the lithological and mechanical character of the fault zone along the throw interval. The faults and joints, however, do not appear to degrade the integrity of the smeared shale as a lateral barrier along the fault zone.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Geological Society of America BulletinHome page
J. S. Caine and S. A. Minor
Structural and geochemical characteristics of faulted sediments and inferences on the role of water in deformation, Rio Grande Rift, New Mexico
Geological Society of America Bulletin, September 1, 2009; 121(9-10): 1325 - 1340.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Geological Society, London, Special PublicationsHome page
C. A. J. Wibberley, G. Yielding, and G. Di Toro
Recent advances in the understanding of fault zone internal structure: a review
Geological Society, London, Special Publications, January 1, 2008; 299(1): 5 - 33.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Petroleum GeoscienceHome page
S. J. Jolley, H. Dijk, J. H. Lamens, Q. J. Fisher, T. Manzocchi, H. Eikmans, and Y. Huang
Faulting and fault sealing in production simulation models: Brent Province, northern North Sea
Petroleum Geoscience, November 1, 2007; 13(4): 321 - 340.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
AAPG BulletinHome page
R. B. Faerseth, E. Johnsen, and S. Sperrevik
Methodology for risking fault seal capacity: Implications of fault zone architecture
AAPG Bulletin, September 1, 2007; 91(9): 1231 - 1246.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Geological Society, London, Special PublicationsHome page
S. J. Jolley, D. Barr, J. J. Walsh, and R. J. Knipe
Structurally complex reservoirs: an introduction
Geological Society, London, Special Publications, January 1, 2007; 292(1): 1 - 24.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Geological Society, London, Special PublicationsHome page
D. A. Ferrill, A. P. Morris, and K. J. Smart
Stratigraphic control on extensional fault propagation folding: Big Brushy Canyon monocline, Sierra Del Carmen, Texas
Geological Society, London, Special Publications, January 1, 2007; 292(1): 203 - 217.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Geological Society, London, Special PublicationsHome page
S. J. Dee, G. Yielding, B. Freeman, and P. Bretan
A comparison between deterministic and stochastic fault seal techniques
Geological Society, London, Special Publications, January 1, 2007; 292(1): 259 - 270.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of the Geological SocietyHome page
R. B. Faerseth
Shale smear along large faults: continuity of smear and the fault seal capacity
Journal of the Geological Society, September 1, 2006; 163(5): 741 - 751.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
AAPG BulletinHome page
P. Eichhubl, P. S. D'Onfro, A. Aydin, J. Waters, and D. K. McCarty
Structure, petrophysics, and diagenesis of shale entrained along a normal fault at Black Diamond Mines, California--Implications for fault seal
AAPG Bulletin, September 1, 2005; 89(9): 1113 - 1137.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
AAPG BulletinHome page
A new process-based methodology for analysis of shale smear along normal faults in the Niger Delta
AAPG Bulletin, March 1, 2003; 87(3): 445 - 463.





JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT PUBLISHER SUBSCRIBE ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2009 by American Association of Petroleum Geologists (AAPG)