Line 20: |
Line 20: |
| | | |
| ==Classifying combination traps informally== | | ==Classifying combination traps informally== |
| + | <gallery> |
| + | file:classification-of-exploration-traps_fig2-3.png|l{{figure number|1}}Upper Valley field, Utah. Copyright: RMAG. |
| + | file:classification-of-exploration-traps_fig2-4.png|{{figure number|2}}Formal classification for Upper Valley field. |
| + | file:classification-of-exploration-traps_fig2-5.png|{{figure number|3}}Buck Peak field. Modified. Copyright: Vincelette and Foster, 1992; courtesy RMAG. |
| + | file:classification-of-exploration-traps_fig2-6.png|{{figure number|4}}Formal classification for the Buck Peak field. |
| + | </gallery> |
| | | |
− | [[file:classification-of-exploration-traps_fig2-3.png|left|thumb|{{figure number|1}}. Copyright: RMAG.]]
| + | To classify a combination trap informally, list the primary trap element first, followed by secondary and tertiary trap elements. You can classify a combination trap informally in at least two different formats. For example, Upper Valley field, Utah, shown in the map and cross section in [[:file:classification-of-exploration-traps_fig2-3.png|Figure 1]], could be classified informally as (1) a hydrodynamically modified anticlinal trap or as (2) a hydrodynamic/anticlinal trap. |
− | | |
− | To classify a combination trap informally, list the primary trap element first, followed by secondary and tertiary trap elements. You can classify a combination trap informally in at least two different formats. For example, Upper Valley field, Utah, shown in the map and cross section in [[:file:classification-of-exploration-traps_fig2-3.png|figure 1]], could be classified informally as (1) a hydrodynamically modified anticlinal trap or as (2) a hydrodynamic/anticlinal trap. | |
| | | |
| ==Classifying combination traps formally== | | ==Classifying combination traps formally== |
| | | |
− | [[file:classification-of-exploration-traps_fig2-4.png|thumb|{{figure number|2}}See text for explanation.]]
| + | We classify a trap formally by listing the regimes, classes, and families for the primary, secondary, and (if necessary) tertiary systems. For example, the diagram in [[:file:classification-of-exploration-traps_fig2-4.png|Figure 2]] shows the formal classification for Upper Valley field. |
− | | |
− | We classify a trap formally by listing the regimes, classes, and families for the primary, secondary, and (if necessary) tertiary systems. For example, the diagram in [[:file:classification-of-exploration-traps_fig2-4.png|figure 2]] shows the formal classification for Upper Valley field. | |
| | | |
| ==Combination structural traps== | | ==Combination structural traps== |
− |
| |
− | [[file:classification-of-exploration-traps_fig2-5.png|thumb|{{figure number|3}}Modified. Copyright: Vincelette and Foster, 1992; courtesy RMAG.]]
| |
| | | |
| Some structural traps are combinations of the three structural trap regimes: fold, fault, Structural traps and fracture. The Buck Peak field shown in [[:file:classification-of-exploration-traps_fig2-5.png|Figure 3]] is an example of a combination structural trap. | | Some structural traps are combinations of the three structural trap regimes: fold, fault, Structural traps and fracture. The Buck Peak field shown in [[:file:classification-of-exploration-traps_fig2-5.png|Figure 3]] is an example of a combination structural trap. |
| | | |
| ==Buck peak formal classification== | | ==Buck peak formal classification== |
− |
| |
− | [[file:classification-of-exploration-traps_fig2-6.png|thumb|{{figure number|4}}See text for explanation.]]
| |
| | | |
| The diagram in [[:file:classification-of-exploration-traps_fig2-6.png|Figure 4]] shows the formal classification for the Buck Peak field, which is a combination structural trap. | | The diagram in [[:file:classification-of-exploration-traps_fig2-6.png|Figure 4]] shows the formal classification for the Buck Peak field, which is a combination structural trap. |