--> Abstract: Where Is The Footwall Flat? Answers From Sand Models, by H. A. Koyi; #90928 (1999).

Datapages, Inc.Print this page

KOYI, HEMIN A.1 and ANTONIO TEIXELL2
1Hans Ramberg Tectonic Laboratory, Department of Earth Sciences, Uppsala University, Sweden
2Departament de Geologia Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, Spain

Abstract: Where is the Footwall Flat? Answers from Sand Models

The ramp-flat kinematic model imposes a series of restrictions in interpreting and constructing cross-sections of deep, unexposed parts of thrust imbricate stacks. One of the principal geometric assumptions of the model is the necessity of a correspondence between hangingwall and footwall ramp and flat structure, the 'template constraints'. Since the ramp-flat model is essentially geometric, and natural strain states and kinematic effects of lithological and environmental variations are not considered, a straightforward application of the model may result in serious errors.

Evidence from sand models is added to emphasise the need for a reevaluation of the template constraints. During the analysis of sand models in terms of ramp-flat kinematics we were faced with hangingwall-footwall mismatches and departure from the ideal case. Therefore, in order to maintain compatibility in deformation between the hangingwall and footwall flats, the ramp-flat geometrical rules could not be obeyed.

In contrast to the template rules, in sand models, flats in hangingwall and footwall do not necessarily match; neither do they display the same length or amount of displacement. In many model imbricates, at a certain stratigraphic level, hangingwall flats do not have the correspondent footwall flat. Instead, footwall flat is represented by a wide zone, Of distributed deformation at deeper levels of the model. Even when a thrust may still be traced to the basal decollement of the system, it has a subplanar rather than a staircase-geometry, and shows much less offset at the deeper levels implying a decrease of slip with depth. There, the layers thicken by penetrative strain and folding. Hence, the potential space problems resulting from the ramp-flat mismatch are eliminated by the ductile deformation at deeper level.

It is emphasised here that the template constraints in-built in the rampflat kinematic model do not always account for the mechanics of internal deformation of thrust imbricates. Hence, the geometrical rules that follow cannot be applied indiscriminately in a self-similar way across nonexposed or poorly imaged parts of the crust without a consideration of the particular strain states.

AAPG Search and Discovery Article #90928©1999 AAPG Annual Convention, San Antonio, Texas