Changes

===Relationship of folding and faulting===

===Relationship of folding and faulting===

Modern theories of structural geology generally relate the formation of folds to accommodation on irregular fault surfaces (Hamblin, 1965<ref name=Hamblin_1965>Hamblin, W. K., 1965, Origin of "reverse drag" on the downthrown side of normal faults: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 76, p. 1145-1164.</ref>; Dahlstrom, 1970<ref name=Dahlstrom_1970 />). Generally, the folds are more obvious on seismic sections than faults, but fortunately there are geometric rules that allow us to predict one shape from the other (Suppe, 1983<ref name=Suppe_1983>Suppe, J., 1983, Geometry and kinematics of fault-bend folding: American Journal of Science, v. 283, p. 684-721.</ref>; Verrall, 1982<ref name=Verrall_1982>Verrall, P., 1982, Structural interpretation with applications to North Sea problems: Geological Society of London.Course Notes No 3, JAPEC (UK).</ref>; Gibbs, 1983<ref name=Gibbs_1983 />; Williams and Vann, 1987<ref name=Williams_etal_1987>Williams, G., and I. Vann, 1987, The geometry of listric normal faults and deformation in their hanging walls: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 9, p. 789-795.</ref>; Groshong, 1989a<ref name=Groshong_1989a />) in both extensional and compressional examples. An example of a cross section solution explaining the relationship between extensional rollover and listric faults is shown in Figure 4.  

Modern theories of structural geology generally relate the formation of folds to accommodation on irregular fault surfaces.<ref name=Hamblin_1965>Hamblin, W. K., 1965, Origin of "reverse drag" on the downthrown side of normal faults: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 76, p. 1145-1164.</ref> <ref name=Dahlstrom_1970 />) Generally, the folds are more obvious on seismic sections than faults, but fortunately there are geometric rules that allow us to predict one shape from the other<ref name=Suppe_1983>Suppe, J., 1983, Geometry and kinematics of fault-bend folding: American Journal of Science, v. 283, p. 684-721.</ref> <ref name=Verrall_1982>Verrall, P., 1982, Structural interpretation with applications to North Sea problems: Geological Society of London.Course Notes No 3, JAPEC (UK).</ref> <ref name=Gibbs_1983 />; Williams and Vann, 1987<ref name=Williams_etal_1987>Williams, G., and I. Vann, 1987, The geometry of listric normal faults and deformation in their hanging walls: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 9, p. 789-795.</ref> <ref name=Groshong_1989a /> in both extensional and compressional examples. An example of a cross section solution explaining the relationship between extensional rollover and listric faults is shown in [[:Image:Drive-mechanisms-and-recovery_fig1.png|Figure 4]].  

[[File:Hossack_etal__evaluating-structurally-complex-reservoirs__Fig_1.png|thumb|{{figure_number|1}}Scat plots used to define the complex structure seen in the discovery well of the rail road gap oil field, California. The five plot types are (from left to right) azimuth versus depth (A plot), dip versus depth (D plot), dip versus depth in the direction of greatest curvature (T plot), dip versus depth in the direction of least curvature (L plot), and dip versus azimuth (DVA plot). (From Bengtsen, 1982)<ref>Bengtson, C. A., 1982, Structural and stratigraphic uses of dip profiles, in M. T Halbouty, ed., Deliberate Search for the Subtle Trap: AAPG Memoir 32, p. 31-45.</ref>. ]]

[[File:Drive-mechanisms-and-recovery fig1.png|thumbnail|left|'''Figure 4.''']]

 

[[File:Hossack_etal__evaluating-structurally-complex-reservoirs__Fig_2.png|thumb|{{figure_number|2}}Predicted transverse and longitudinal cross sections and contour map derived from scat plots. Depths are subsea depths. (From Bengtsen, 1982)<ref>Bengtson, C. A., 1982, Structural and stratigraphic uses of dip profiles, in M. T Halbouty, ed., Deliberate Search for the Subtle Trap: AAPG Memoir 32, p. 31-45.</ref>. ]]  

===Balanced cross sections===

===Balanced cross sections===