Changes

The second approach is similar to the fault trace method in that it alters the use of a data point on the opposite side of a fault. However, instead of not using the point, it adjusts the point's z value by the vertical separation of the faults that lie between the point and the node being calculated ([[:file:using-and-improving-surface-models-built-by-computer_fig17.png|Figure 17]]).

The second approach is similar to the fault trace method in that it alters the use of a data point on the opposite side of a fault. However, instead of not using the point, it adjusts the point's z value by the vertical separation of the faults that lie between the point and the node being calculated ([[:file:using-and-improving-surface-models-built-by-computer_fig17.png|Figure 17]]).

Once constructed, cross sections, contour maps, volumes, and so on are commonly generated from these models using algorithms similar to those used for fault trace models. There are other methods for modeling with vertical separation, but regardless of which method is used, they all require significantly more information about faults than other fault-modeling methods. Often much of this information is not available. When this happens, most of these programs will “degenerate” to working as the fault trace method does.

Once constructed, [[cross section]]s, contour maps, volumes, and so on are commonly generated from these models using algorithms similar to those used for fault trace models. There are other methods for modeling with vertical separation, but regardless of which method is used, they all require significantly more information about faults than other fault-modeling methods. Often much of this information is not available. When this happens, most of these programs will “degenerate” to working as the fault trace method does.

===Combined methods===

===Combined methods===