You are on page 1of 80

CHAPTER 1 1.

0 Introduction
Today there are numerous description indices for clastic shape and size each one trying to show the influence of dynamic conditions and clastic petrography that are mobilised in certain transportation or depositional environment and their shapes at certain moments. Particle morphometry or form (sieve analysis) refers to the sum of the surface characteristics of sedimentary grains. Processes of weathering, erosion, and transport may all leave distinctive imprints on particles, in the form of fractures, worn surfaces, and particular surface textures (Benn, 2010). Resolving the stratigraphic patterns along the spread of a geographical area entails an integrated approach of petrophysical analysis for the paleoenviromental events to be decrypted properly. The facie characterisation of the outcrop section has a lot to do with the deposition of sediments, the environment of deposition of the sediments and the mineral contents to some extent.

1.1 Aims and objectives The aim of this research is to describe the depositional environment of the sediments in the study area which lies on Niger delta basin. The objective on the other hand is to evaluate and analyse the petrophysical parameter of the
1

sediments of the Benin formation, interpreting the identified and observed patterns in other to evaluate and correlating them to some of the previously devised models. This is also aimed to give insight on the initial observation during this work.

1.2. Location and accessibility The study area is a remote village of Ikot Amama which lays within the range of longitude 0703050 and latitude 0501030 at Ibiono Ibom local government area of Akwa Ibom state south-eastern Nigeria. Accessibility is highest when most of the streams and marshy area are dried up. The high lands, elevations and stream are highly dense with concentrated vegetation especially the under growths causing limitation to accessibility of path connected area. 1.3 LIMITATIONS The limitations encountered during this study include inaccessible roads and uneasy walk paths. It was also quite difficult to get sample from the outcrops or litho unit because of the height of some of the litho-section of which some were about 8meters high and knowing that most exposed surface s were weathered, the need of hammer to dig in for unexposed unit to get un-3weathered deposits was required .the fear that some of the lithosections might cave in and have one buried.

1.4 Climate and Vegetation Because of the effects of the Maritime and the Continental Tropical air masses, the climate of this area is characterised by two seasons, namely, the wet or rainy season and the dry season. The wet or rainy season lasts for about eight months but towards the far north, it is slightly less. The rainy season begins about March-April and lasts until mid-November. Relatively, this area which is located in Akwa Ibom State receives relatively higher rainfall totals than most other parts of southern Nigeria. The total annual rainfall varies from 4000mm along the coast to 2000mm inland. The dry season begins in mid-November and ends in March. During this brief period, the whole Continental Tropical air mass and its accompanying northeasterly winds and their associated dry and dusty harmattan haze. However, as a result of the proximity of the area to the ocean, the harmattan dust haze, (locally known as "ekarika") is not usually too severe as in the Sahelian zone of northern Nigeria. Sometimes it lasts for only a few weeks between December and January. The harmattan period is usually advantageous to the farmers because it is congenial for harvesting and the storage of food crop. Temperature values are relatively high in throughout the year, with the mean annual temperatures varying between about 26C to 36C. The relative humidity of the study which varies between about 75 per cent to 95 per cent, with the highest and lowest values in July and January respectively. In January, areas which lie within 30 to 40 km from the coast experience mean relative humidities of more than 80 per
3

cent, while values in areas further north vary between about 70 per cent a to 80 per cent Vegetation And Fauna. The existing climatic factors in this area would have favoured luxuriant tropical rainforests with teeming populations of fauna and extremely high terrestrial and aquatic biomass. The vegetation of the area is still intact and concentrated with some of the native vegetation being almost replaced by secondary forests of predominantly wild oil palms, woody shrubs and various grass undergrowth. Mangroves cover extensive parts of the area.

1.5 Drainage, Topography and Soil The area under study is drained by two rivers; the north-eastern and southeastern are drained by the Cross River while the north-western is drained by the Kwa-Ibeo River. Most of other streams that are found in the area are seasonal that is; the dry up during that dry season. The flow direction of these streams and rivers are to the north-west and south. The streams are characterised by igneous intrusion and laminated shale as the bedrocks. In general, the topography of the area is flat with few steep and elevated areas. Weathering and erosion constitutes the major soil forming agents in the area. The debris derived from the weathering of the intrusive rocks are mainly lateritic while the erosion and weathering of the shale bed provides excellent humus due to incorporation of decayed organic materials. The soil in the area has colour ranging from black to dark reddish and they have high clay content.
4

Figure 1: Topographic map of study area

CHAPTER TWO 2.1 Literature Review With the general increasing interest of geologist to understand and describe the lithological facies of the sedimentary deposits in the south eastern Nigeria, a lot of works have been and is being done using different approaches. Most recent works focuses on the use of geophysical analysis like the well log, wire line logging, and electric soundings in combination with petrophysical analysis to interpret the lithological sequence and facies. While others include the use of paleo-environmental signatures analysed from the study area. Previous investigation on the Paleoenvironmental Interpretation of the Nkporo Formation Afikpo Sub-Basin, Nigeria by Okoro Anthony. U Onuigbo Evangeline N., Akpunonu Eliseus O and Obiadi Ignatius I.
Department of Geological Sciences, Nnamdi Azikiwe University of Nigeria also employed

this same technique of lithofacies analysis and pebble morphormetry. Pebble Morphometry and Particle Size Distribution as Signatures to Depositional Environment of Maestrichtian Ajali Sandstone 1977; Banerjee, 1979; Ladipo, 1985; Amajor, 1986a, 1989; Reijers and Nwajide, 1996; Awalla and Eze, 2004, and Nwajide, 2005). These studies which are now used as models to understand the geological structure of the Niger delta basin Wright, 1968; Murat, 1972; Olade, 1975; Whiteman, 1982 and Nwajide and Reijers, 1996 all studied the evolution of the Niger delta basin as a result of the regional folding and uplift of the Benue Trough during the Santonian to Early
6

Campanian. Describing the formation of the Anticlinorium (Abakaliki Anticlinorium) dislocated the depositional axis from the Benue Trough to the Anambra Basin which was indicated to be a stable platform before the tectonic event 2.2 Geologic study of the Area The study area lays in the Niger delta basin underlain by the Benin sedimentary formations of Late Tertiary and Holocene ages. Also, this area consists of coastal plain sands, now weathered into lateritic layers. The latter lithologies include the late abgada Formation at the base followed by akata Formation. Upwards, the geologic succession passes imperceptibly into thick sequences of clays, sands and gravel. Gravel beds and pebbly sands are commonly exposed on hillsides, road-cuts and stream channels. Generally, the sands in this area are mature, coarse and moderately sorted

Figure 2: geologic map of study area The Niger Delta is situated in the Gulf of Guinea and extends throughout the Niger Delta Province as defined by Klett and others (1997). From the Eocene to the present, the delta has prograded southwestward, forming depobelts that represent the most active portion of the delta at each stage of its development
8

(Doust and Omatsola, 1990). These depobelts form one of the largest regressive deltas in the world with an area of some 300,000km2(Kulke, 1995), a sediment volume of 500,000 km3 (Hospers, 1965), and a sediment thickness of over 10 km in the basin depocenter (Kaplan et al,1994).

Fig.3 Structural units of Niger Delta basin (Short and Stauble 1967)

The formations of the study area are mainly: 1. Benin Formation (Youngest) 2. Agbada Formation and 3. Akata Formation (Oldest)

2.2.1. The Benin formation This formation constitutes mainly of sand stones which make up of mainly 90% of it and it stretches from the west through the Niger delta and extends up north towards part of the Anambra basin where it transverses to the Mamu formation. The sandstone of this formation is also intercolated with shale units and there is poor sorting of the unit grains which include the fine sand, coarse sand, sub angular to well-rounded pebbles, gravels and the angular cobbles units. The presence of light streak and wood fragments suggests that they are mainly of continental deposit of upper deltaic environment
The variability of the shallow water deposition is indicated basically by most structural units that could be spoted within the benin formation. The thickness of this formation ranges from about 6000ft and above. Just little collection of hydrocarbon could be found within this formation.

In addition to a surface formation the Benin Formation crops out

widely at surface across the delta province. Its limits shows below (figure 4) based on Short and Stauble (1967) are much more extensive than those shown by Dessauvagre (1974).

10

The sequence encountered in Elele-1 contains more than 90% sand and a few shaley intercalations. Shale content increases towards the base as shown in (figure 4) below.The sand and sandstone are coarse to fine grained and commonly granular in texture. The sand and sandstone are poorly sorted, and partly unconsolidated. The sands and sandstones are white or yellowish brown because of limonitic coats. Lignite occurs in thin streaks or a finely dispersed fragment. Heamatite and feldspar grain are common. The members of the formation shales are grayish brown, sandy and silty and contain plant remains and dispersed lignite. Shales constitute only a very small part of the sequence.

2.2.2 Agbada formation This formation is intermediate in age and position of the three formation found in the study area (Use Ikot Amama) and is a sequence of sandstone and shale Unit i.e. an interfingering of sandstone and shale at the bottom. The shale unit that underlies the sand is quite thicker than the sand unit. It has high microfauna content at the bottom which decreases upwards, indicating an increased rate of deposition at the deltaic point. The Agbada formation is not exposed in the Niger-delta region rather they occur as subsurface rock between the Benin formation and the Akata formation. The agbada formation is a replica of what is seen at ogwasi, Asaba and Ameki formations which are Eocene and Oligocene the thickness of this rock unit ranges from 1000ft (304.8 m) and above.
11

The ages of this formation ranges from Eocene in the northern part to Pliocene/ Pleistocene in the south. 2.2.3 Akata Formation This formation underlies the two formation mentioned above and its the oldest amongst them in age. This formation is uniform clay with dark sandy, silt clay with scanty plants remains occurring at the top especially close to the contact of the overlying Agbada formation. The Akata Formation is thought to be the main source rock for Niger Delta complex oil and gas. The formation probably underlies the whole of the Niger Delta complex south of the Imo shale outcrop which itself probably deposited under similar condition of deposition and may be considered an up-dip equivalent of Akatafacies The top of the Akata Formation is taken arbitrarily at the deepest development of deltaic sandstone at 7810Ft in the type section. The base of the formation was not reached at a depth of 11121Ft in Akata-1 but the base has been penetrated in wells situated on the Delta Flanks. The age of the formation ranges from Eocene to present day but conceptually deep water Paleocene Imo shale and even late CetaceousNkporo Shale (Late cretaceous) could be classed as AkataFacies. The Akata Fauna is rich in planktonic foraminifera which indicate deposition on a shallow marine shelf. Akatafacies extends into deep water and must contain deep water assemblages. Akata also must be graded laterally and vertically into

12

the deep water turbidities of the Avon-Mahin Fan, the Niger Fan, and the Calabar Fan. The arbitrary nature of the boundary between the Agbada and Akatafacies has been commented upon. At the present day, Akatafacies are being deposited on the continental shelf and slope and perhaps on the lower part of the pro-delta slope, the present day outcrop of the Akata then is completely submarine. The upper boundary is markedly time transgressive and has been deformed structurally (synsedimentary) on large scale. The Imo Shale (Palaeocene) represents up-dip subaerial outcrops of AkataFacies (Short &Stauble). We do not have much data on the Akata Formation depth beneath the delta. Diapirs and high pressure tones are developed on a grand scale but details are limited.

13

Figure 4: extent of erosional truncation

14

2.3 THE NIGER DELTA TECTONICS

Rapid sedimentation along the edge of the Niger delta resulted in faulting contemporaneous with sedimentation, thus producing an abrupt thickness of sediments across the fault line on the down thrown block. This is the wellknown growth fault line on the down thrown block. This is the well-known growth fault structure. If sufficient movement occurs, an elongate anticline (roll-over anticline) may form in front of the fault. Stoneley (1966) ascribed the structures in the offshore areas to salt movement at depth. There appears to be no doubt that the diapiric structures off the Niger delta are of the same origin as those farther south and are possibly of Aptian Alpian age.

The tectonic framework of the continental margin along the West Coast of equatorial Africa is controlled by Cretaceous fracture zones expressed as trenches and ridges in the deep Atlantic. The fracture zone ridges subdivide the margin into individual basins, and, in Nigeria, form the boundary faults of the Cretaceous Benue-Abakaliki trough, which cuts far into the West African shield. The trough represents a failed arm of a rift triple junction associated with the opening of the South Atlantic. In this region, rifting started in the Late Jurassic and persisted into the Middle Cretaceous (Lehner and De Ruiter, 1977). In the region of the Niger Delta, rifting diminished altogether in the Late Cretaceous. Figure 3 shows the gross Paleogeography of the region as well as the relative position of the African and South American plates since rifting
15

began. After rifting ceased, gravity tectonism became the primary deformational process. Shale mobility induced internal deformation and occurred in response to two processes (Kulke, 1995). First, shale diapirs formed from loading of poorly compacted, over-pressured, prodelta and delta-slope clays (Akata Fm.) by the higher density delta-front sands (Agbada Fm.). Second, slope instability occurred due to a lack of lateral, basinward, and support for the undercompacted delta-slope clays (AkataFm). For any given depobelt, gravity tectonics were completed before deposition of the Benin

Formation and are expressed in complex structures, including shale diapirs, rollover anticlines, collapsed growth fault crests, back-to-back features, and steeply dipping, closely spaced flank faults (Evamy and others, 1978; Xiao and Suppe, 1992). These faults mostly offset different parts of the Agbada Formation and flatten into detachment planes near the top of the Akata Formation.

2.3.1 Lithology

The Cretaceous section has not been penetrated beneath the Niger Delta Basin, the youngest and southernmost sub-basin in the Benue-Abakaliki trough (Reijers and others, 1997). Lithologies of Cretaceous rocks deposited in what is now the Niger Delta basin can only be extrapolated from the exposed Cretaceous section in the next basin to the northeast--the Anambra basin. From the Campanian through the Paleocene, the shoreline was concave into the
16

Anambra basin (Hospers, 1965)

(see fig. 3 in this paper), resulting in

convergent longshore drift cells that produced tide-dominated deltaicn sedimentation during transgressions and river-dominated sedimentation during regressions (Reijers and others, 1997). Shallow marine clastics were deposited farther offshore and, in the Anambra basin, are represented by the AlbianCenomanianAsu River shale, Cenomanian-SantonianEze-Uku and Awgushales, and Campanian/MaastrichtianNkporo shale, among others (Nwachukwu, 1972; Reijers and others, 1997). The distribution of Late Cretaceous shale beneath the Niger Delta is unknown in the Paleocene, a major transgression (referred to as the Sokoto transgression by Reijers and others, 1997) began with the Imo shale being deposited in the Anambra Basin to the northeast and the Akata shale in the Niger Delta Basin area to the southwest.

Deposition of the three formations occurred in each of the five off lapping siliciclastic sedimentation cycles that comprise the Niger Delta. These cycles (depobelts) are 30-60 kilometers wide, prograde southwestward 250kilometers over oceanic crust into the Gulf of Guinea (Stacher, 1995), and are defined by synsedimentary faulting that occurred in response to variable rates of subsidence3 and sediment supply (Doust and Omatsola, 1990). The interplay of subsidence and supply rates resulted in deposition of discrete depobelts, when further crustal subsidence of the basin could no longer be accommodated, the focus of sediment deposition shifted seaward, forming a new depobelt (Doust
17

and Omatsola, 1990). Each depobelt is a separate unit that corresponds to a break in regional dip of the delta and is bounded landward by growth faults and seaward by large counter-regional faults or the growth fault of the next seaward belt (Evamy and others, 1978; Doust and Omatsola, 1990). Five major depobelts are generally recognized, each with its own sedimentation, deformation, and petroleum history. Doust and Omatsola (1990) describe three depobelt provinces based on structure. The northern delta province, which overlies relatively shallow basement, has the oldest growth faults that are generally rotational, evenly spaced, and increases their steepness seaward. The central delta province has depobelts with well-defined structures such as successively deeper rollover crests that shift seaward for any given growth fault. Last, the distal delta province is the most structurally complex due to internal gravity tectonics on the modern continental slope.

18

Figure 5: tectonic frame work of Niger delta

19

CHAPTER THREE
3.1 Method of Study The method of study applied in this work ranges from field-work which involves working on the field to laboratory practical work and finally the data analysis of which include the sieve and pebble morphometric analysis . 3.2Field work This involves the study of the geology of the area and gathering information from all observable geologic activities in the area. The data gathered in the field depends on the following. First is the scope of work which was predetermined before the field work. The scope of work revolves around understanding the geologic as well as physical processes of deposition in the area. Other points put in place included the weathering activity, the relief, soil type, soil colour, soil texture, topography, vegetation. The data gathered also depended on the students level of involvement and ability to see, visualise and take notes of the thing that he observes. Finally is the materials used in the field observation. The following materials were used for the field work - Sample bags and small polythene bags for sample collection and storage - The clinometers - The GPS - Steel tapes for mapping and analogue outcrop logging
20

- Cameras for photography and digital logging - Hammers for breaking rock and digging out rock sections. - Pen, pencils and notes for recording observations - Paper cello tapes for labelling the samples - Field bags for carrying the samples.

3.3 Particle-Size analysis Particle-size analysis comprises the measurement and analysis of the three particle axes that define the three-dimensional shape of a particle. For many applications, it is much more convenient to characterize particle size by only one variable, such as the length of the intermediate particle axes or the size of the sieve on which a particle was retained. Once the sizes of particles are determined, they are statistically analysed, so that particle size distributions and statistical parameters characterizing them can be compared between streams or over time. The mean particle size on a streambed, a particular particle-size percentile, a characteristic large particle size, as well as the entire spectrum of particle sizes all affect the hydraulics of flow as well as bedload transport rates. Studies concerned with the mechanics of particle entrainment, particle transport and deposition need to include the description and comparison of particle shapes.

21

Pebble morphometric studies involves measurement (using vernier calliper) of the long (L), intermediate (I), and short (S) axes of pebbles from pebbly sandstones. The three mutually perpendicular axes of each pebble were measured and the roundness estimate with the aid of a roundness image set. Morphometric parameters such as size, flatness ratio, elongation

ratio, elongation ratio, maximum projection sphericity, form geometry and oblate index were computed.

Figure 6: pebble geometric axis The three mutually perpendicular axes (S, I and L) of each of the 90 pebbles were measured using some set of instruments which include: The venier callipers
22

G cramp The rulres Table 3.1 Morphometric parameters Indices Formulae


elongation ratio Maximum projection sphericity index (MPS) Disc-Rod Index (DRI) [ Oblate-Prolate Index (OPI) ] Sneed & Folk (1958)

Author
Sneed &Folk (1958) Zingg (1935) Zingg (1935) Sneed and Folk, 1958

Dobkins & Folk (1970)

Elongation index (IE) The percentage by weight of particles whose long dimension is greater than 1.8 times the mean dimension measured with a standard gauge. The elongation, n, is length divided by breadth and the elongation ratio is 1/n Roundness index The average radius of curvature of the corners of a particle, divided by the radius of the maximum inscribed circle for a two-dimensional image of the particle, i.e. (r/N)/R, where r is the average radius of curvature at the corners, N is the number of corners, and R is the radius of the largest inscribed circle. In practice, it is used empirically and other techniques are also used. For example, a pebble may be compared with a set of standard silhouettes.

23

The resulting index figure allows inferences to be made about the nature of the depositing process. Sphericity An expression of how closely the shape of a grain resembles the shape of a sphere. Sphericity can be determined by examining the relation between the long (L), intermediate (I), and short (S) axes of the particle, the maximum projection sphericity, , being given by the expression = 3(S2/LI). For a perfect sphere, = 1. Values less than one relate to increasingly less spherical shapes. The bivariate plots of M.P.S. vs. OP Index, The sphericity form diagrams were very useful in the environmental discrimination of the pebbles.

24

3.4 Sieving of particle size The size of sand particles was measured manually by sieving. The different equipment used in both approaches can affect the results. This makes it necessary to compare different methods of particle-size The primary purpose of sieve analysis is to determine particle size distribution in sands which directly relates to; Availability of different sizes of particles in parent material. Processes operating where sediments are deposited, particularly competency of the flow. Concentration of particles in suspension and source rocks (Friedman, 1979; Lewis and McConchie, 1994). Equipment 1. Sample splitters, 2. Plexiglas plate and 18 inch steel rulers, 3. shaker. 4. Miscellaneous pans, brushes, scoops, etc. 5. Sieves. Eighteen samples from the exposure were analysed according to the technique of Friedman (1979). The nests of sieve were arranged with the coarsest at the top and the pan at the bottom. The disaggregated and weighed samples of each of the sands were poured in to the uppermost sieve and shook for 15minutes. The frequency curves of the samples were plotted and critical percentiles (5,
25

16, 25, 50, 75, 84 and 95) were obtained and the textural parameters of the sands which include the graphic mean, median, graphic standard deviation, inclusive graphic skewness and graphic kurtosis were calculated using the following McManus(1995) statistical parameters Table 3.2 McManus statistical parameters Graphic mean Mcmanus, 1995

Median Graphic standard deviation (1) Inclusive graphic skewness (SKI)

50

+
+

Graphic kurtosis (KG)

The bivariate plots of Skewness vs. standard deviation, Mean vs. standard deviation, Simple skewness vs. simple sorting (after Friedman, 1979) was used in the environmental discrimination. These results are plotted on graph of which the sieve scale is logarithmic. To find the percentage of aggregate passing through each sieve, first the percentage retained in each sieve was found using the following equation: %retained =

26

Where = weight of aggregate in the sieve = total weight of aggregate The next step was finding the cumulative percentage of aggregate retained in each sieve which was done by adding the total amount of aggregate that is retained in each sieve to the amount retained in the previous sieves. The cumulative percentage passing was found by subtracting the percentage retained from 100% %cumulative passing = 100% - %cumulative retained The values were plotted on a graph with cumulative percentage passing on the y-axis and the logarithmic sieve size on the x axis (the semi-log graphic sheet).

27

CHAPTER FOUR
4.1 Results and Interpretation 4.2 Field observations The lithostratigraphic descriptions of the six outcrop sections studied are presented in figures below. The lithofacies in most consists of repeated cyclic deposition of fine sand, medium sand and pebbly sand. The fine sands are not characterized by any form current ripples and parallel laminations or other features associated with sand medium in the area.

28

Table 4.1: Location 1 section 1

Three different facies (A-C) have been identified in the above chart. Also from the stratigraphic sequence it can be seen that there is a sequence of repetition (memory) of facie A and B until 1.6m were C come in and then at 2.0m the memory sequence is continued.

29

Table 4.2 Location1 section 2

Here, only two facies are identified and only little can be deduced form this outcrop model.

Table 4.3 Location1 section3

Two different facies have been identified in the above chart. it can also be seen that there is a sequence repetition of facies A.

30

Table 4.4 Location3 section1

Table 4.5 Location3 section2

31

Table 4.6 Location3 section3

32

4.2.1 Facie association Facie type A [para-conglomeratc bed] is a matrix-supported rock that contains more than 15% of sand and restly pebbles (para-conglomerates). This facie has colour ranging from white to light brownish clast. This is the most prominent facie occurrences; it is a massive bed with evidence of bioturbation. The poorly sorted pebbles (randomly packed clast of different sizes) and sandstone showing that the pebbles and sandstone were deposited by a highly flowing channel giving no time for the sediments to properly settle in therefore indicative of a fluvial environment of deposition. The members of this bed includes; L1S1U1, L1S1U3, L1S3U1, L1S3U3, L3S1U2, L3S2U3. Represented as A in the lithologs above

Figure 7 Facie type A [para-conglomeratc bed]

33

Facies type B massive sandstone This facies is a massive brown medium to coarse grained sand. There are little occurrences of fringinised sand in this facies sections as a result of the iron-IIIoxide content of the sand

Figure 8: Facies type B massive brown sandstone

Facies type c [massive sandstone] This is a massive reddish brown sandstone facies. This is a fine sand bed with no evidence of bioturbation. The members of this facies include; L1S1U2, L1S3U2, L3S1U5, L3S3U2. This facie is indicated as B in the lithology.
34

Figure 9: Facies type c [massive sandstone]

Facie type D [ ortho-conglomeratic beds] It is a clast (pebble)-supported sedimentary bed with sand as matrix with 15% or less in any mass of the bed. This is a massive brown colour bed with no evidence of bioturbation or imbrication. The deficiency of the matrix was probably caused by a fast flowing channel not giving in for the settlement of debris of very less density. There is only a single occurrence of this facies in the bed unit L3S3U1. This bed has an approximate thickness of about 2.5m occurring from the 0m ground point. Represented as D in the litholog

35

Figure 10: Facie type D [ ortho-conglomeratic beds]

Facies type E [massive intercalation of breccia debris] This is a dark brown massive intercalation of breccia debris, pebble and fine sand matrix with bioturbation. This bed has a thickness of approximately a meter thick. The bed unit L1S2U2 falls into this type. The dark colour is as a result of bio activities. Represented as E in the litholog

Figure 11: Facies type E [massive intercalation of breccia debris]


36

4.3 Sieve Analysis Results The sieve analysis for a select number of the sample recovered in the field was carried out in other to assess the particle size distribution across each bed unit. The picking of this sample was made base on the sections logged in the field.

37

Table 4.7 Sample 1: Location 1, Section 1, Unit 1 W1 grain size in phi -1 0 1 2 3 4 PAN 106.9g cumulative %retained 21.23 45.37 73.25 88.12 96.16 99.35 99.53 cumulative %passing 78.77 54.63 26.75 11.88 3.84 0.65 0.47

sieve size 2 1 0.5 0.25 0.125 0.063 pan

wt. retained 22.7 25.8 29.8 15.9 8.6 3.4 0.2 106.4

%retained 21.23 24.13 27.88 14.87 8.04 3.18 0.19

Table 4.8 Sample: Location 1, Section 1, Unit 2 W1 grain size in phi -1 0 1 2 3 4 PAN sieve size 2 1 0.5 0.25 0.125 0.063 pan wt. retained 5.4 11.7 27.6 17.6 7.5 2.9 1.7 74.4 74.8g %retained 7.22 15.64 36.90 23.53 10.03 3.88 2.27 cumulative %retained 7.22 22.86 59.76 83.29 93.32 97.19 99.47 cumulative %passing 92.78 77.14 40.24 16.71 6.68 2.81 0.53

Table 4.9 Sample: Location 1, Section 1, Unit 3 W1 grain size in phi -1 0 1 2 3 4 PAN 66.7g cumulative %retained 24.59 44.68 69.27 89.81 96.25 98.80 99.70 cumulative %passing 75.41 55.32 30.73 10.19 3.75 1.20 0.30

sieve size 2 1 0.5 0.25 0.125 0.063 pan

wt. retained 16.4 13.4 16.4 13.7 4.3 1.7 0.6 66.5

%retained 24.59 20.09 24.59 20.54 6.45 2.55 0.90

38

100.00

cumulative %retained

10.00

L1S1U1 L1S1U2 L1S1U3

1.00 -1 0 1 2 3 4 PAN

Grain size in phi

Chart 1

39

Table 4.10 Location 1, Section 1, Unit 4 W1 grain size in phi -1 0 1 2 3 4 PAN 97.8g cumulative %retained 16.871 37.321 60.020 77.710 91.207 96.115 99.796

sieve size 2 1 0.5 0.25 0.125 0.063 pan

wt. retained 16.5 20 22.2 17.3 13.2 4.8 3.6 97.6

%retained 16.871 20.450 22.699 17.689 13.497 4.908 3.681

83.129 62.679 39.980 22.290 8.793 3.885 0.204

Table 4.11 Location 1, Section 1, Unit 5 W1 grain size in phi -1 0 1 2 3 4 PAN 89.5g cumulative %retained 27.15 60.56 82.46 92.07 96.20 98.10 99.55 cumulative %passing 72.85 39.44 17.54 7.93 3.80 1.90 0.45

sieve size 2 1 0.5 0.25 0.125 0.063 pan

wt. retained 24.3 29.9 19.6 8.6 3.7 1.7 1.3 89.1

%retained 27.15 33.41 21.90 9.61 4.13 1.90 1.45

Table 4.12 Location 1, Section 1, Unit 6 W1 grain size in phi -1 0 1 2 3 4 PAN 97.6g cumulative %retained 25.512 46.107 73.258 90.779 96.414 99.283 99.693 cumulative %passing 74.488 53.893 26.742 9.221 3.586 0.717 0.307

sieve size 2 1 0.5 0.25 0.125 0.063 pan

wt. retained 24.9 20.1 26.5 17.1 5.5 2.8 0.4 97.3

%retained 25.512 20.594 27.152 17.520 5.635 2.869 0.410

40

100.000

cumulative %retained

10.000

L1S1U4 L1S1U5 LIS1U6

1.000 -1 0 1 2 grain size in phi 3 4 PAN

Chart 2
41

Table 4.13 Location 2, Section 1, Unit 1 W1 grain size in phi -1 0 1 2 3 4 PAN 114.9g cumulative %retained 39.164 60.400 75.544 88.860 95.474 99.478 100.000 cumulative %passing 60.836 39.600 24.456 11.140 4.526 0.522 0.000

sieve size 2 1 0.5 0.25 0.125 0.063 pan

wt. retained 45 24.4 17.4 15.3 7.6 4.6 0.6 114.9

%retained 39.164 21.236 15.144 13.316 6.614 4.003 0.522

Table 4.14 Location 2, Section 1, Unit 2 W1 grain size in phi -1 0 1 2 3 4 PAN sieve size 2 1 0.5 0.25 0.125 0.063 pan wt. retained 12.6 19.7 23.4 20.7 9.5 4.3 1.9 92.1

92.6g %retained 13.607 21.274 25.270 22.354 10.259 4.644 2.052 cumulative %retained 13.607 34.881 60.151 82.505 92.765 97.408 99.460 cumulative %passing 86.393 65.119 39.849 17.495 7.235 2.592 0.540

Table 4.15 Location 2, Section 1, Unit 3 W1 grain size in phi -1 0 1 2 3 4 PAN

65.8g cumulative %retained 33.89 56.84 76.44 90.27 96.81 99.39 99.70 cumulative %passing 66.11 43.16 23.56 9.73 3.19 0.61 0.30

sieve size 2 1 0.5 0.25 0.125 0.063 pan

wt. retained 22.3 15.1 12.9 9.1 4.3 1.7 0.2 65.6

%retained 33.89 22.95 19.60 13.83 6.53 2.58 0.30

42

100.000

cumulatitive %retained

10.000

L2S1U1 L2S1U2 L2S1U3

1.000 -1 0 1 2 3 4 PAN grain size in phi

Chart 3

43

Table 4.16 Location 2, Section 2, Unit 1 W1 grain size in phi -1 0 1 2 3 4 PAN 160.7g cumulative %retained 45.49 65.90 83.57 93.03 97.26 99.32 99.50 cumulative %passing 54.51 34.10 16.43 6.97 2.74 0.68 0.50

sieve size 2 1 0.5 0.25 0.125 0.063 pan

wt. retained 73.1 32.8 28.4 15.2 6.8 3.3 0.3 159.9

%retained 45.49 20.41 17.67 9.46 4.23 2.05 0.19

Table 4.17 Location 2, Section 2, Unit 2 W1 grain size in phi -1 0 1 2 3 4 PAN

168.6g cumulative %retained 23.37 47.92 73.37 90.98 98.28 99.70 99.88 cumulative %passing 76.63 52.08 26.63 9.02 1.72 0.30 0.12

sieve size 2 1 0.5 0.25 0.125 0.063 pan

wt. retained 39.4 41.4 42.9 29.7 12.3 2.4 0.3 168.4

%retained 23.37 24.56 25.44 17.62 7.30 1.42 0.18

Table 4.18 Location 2, Section 2, Unit 3 W1 grain size in phi -1 0 1 2 3 4 PAN 92.4g cumulative %retained 20.13 42.21 68.61 83.23 93.72 96.21 97.29 cumulative %passing 79.87 57.79 31.39 16.77 6.28 3.79 2.71

sieve size 2 1 0.5 0.25 0.125 0.063 pan

wt. retained 18.6 20.4 24.4 13.5 9.7 2.3 1 89.9

%retained 20.13 22.08 26.41 14.61 10.50 2.49 1.08

44

100.00

cumulative %retained

10.00

L2S2U1 L2S2U2 L2S2U3

1.00 -1 0 1 2 grain size in phi 3 4 PAN

Chart 4
45

Table 4.19 Location 2, Section 3, Unit 1 W1 grain size in phi -1 0 1 2 3 4 PAN

165.4g cumulative %retained 39.60 65.48 83.31 93.23 97.04 99.46 99.58 cumulative %passing 60.40 34.52 16.69 6.77 2.96 0.54 0.42

sieve size 2 1 0.5 0.25 0.125 0.063 pan

wt. retained 65.5 42.8 29.5 16.4 6.3 4 0.2 164.7

%retained 39.60 25.88 17.84 9.92 3.81 2.42 0.12

Table 4.20 Location 2, Section 3, Unit 2 W1 grain size in phi -1 0 1 2 3 4 PAN 92.9g cumulative %retained 17.76 39.29 63.19 81.81 88.81 93.97 97.63 cumulative %passing 82.24 60.71 36.81 18.19 11.19 6.03 2.37

sieve size 2 1 0.5 0.25 0.125 0.063 pan

wt. retained 16.5 20 22.2 17.3 6.5 4.8 3.4 90.7

%retained 17.76 21.53 23.90 18.62 7.00 5.17 3.66

Table 4.21 Location 2, Section 3, Unit 3 W1 grain size in phi -1 0 1 2 3 4 PAN 70.0g cumulative %retained 22.86 43.86 65.00 84.86 93.29 98.43 99.86 cumulative %passing 77.14 56.14 35.00 15.14 6.71 1.57 0.14

sieve size 2 1 0.5 0.25 0.125 0.063 pan

wt. retained 16 14.7 14.8 13.9 5.9 3.6 1 69.9

%retained 22.86 21.00 21.14 19.86 8.43 5.14 1.43

46

100.00

cumulative %retained

10.00

L2S3U1 L2S3U2 L2S3U3

1.00 -1 0 1 2 grain size in phi 3 4 PAN

Chart 5
47

Table 4.22 summaries of various percentile values of the analysed samples.


UNITS L1S1U1 L1S1U2 L1S1U3 L1SS1U4 L1S1U5 L1s1u6 L2S1U1 L2S1U2 L2S1U3 L2S2U1 L2S2U2 L2S2U3 L2S3U1 L2S3U2 L2S3U3 5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 16 0.00 -0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1.13 0.00 -1.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 25 -1.70 -1.75 -1.63 -1.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1.68 0.00 -1.60 -1.10 -1.25 0.00 -1.40 -1.10 50 0.20 0.30 0.28 0.65 -1.50 -0.30 -1.60 0.70 -0.40 0.40 0.15 0.36 -1.48 0.50 0.10 75 1.10 1.50 1.25 1.90 -0.70 -0.65 1.00 1.75 0.60 1.13 1.15 1.45 0.51 1.65 1.13 80 1.45 1.27 1.10 2.40 0.90 0.83 1.43 1.90 0.80 1.35 1.40 1.80 0.80 1.90 1.40 84 1.74 2.00 1.74 2.90 1.25 1.30 1.76 2.20 1.00 1.60 1.65 2.20 1.20 2.30 1.70 95 2.74 3.00 2.75 4.40 2.68 2.49 2.20 3.30 3.70 2.25 2.59 3.25 2.20 4.00 2.55

48

Table 4.23 description of the various sieve analysis parameters


standard deviation 0.85

UNITS L1S1U1

MEAN -0.08

KURTOSIS SKEWNESS 0.40 0.81

SORTING 0.87

REMARKS poorly sorted, very positively skewed, Very platy kurtic, very coarse sand

L1S1U2

-0.16

0.38

0.75

1.00

0.95 Very Poorly sorted, very positively skewed, Very platy kurtic, very coarse sand

L1S1U3

-0.18

0.39

0.74

0.87

0.85 Poorly sorted, very positively skewed, Very platy kurtic, very coarse sand

L1SS1U4

0.33

0.55

0.63

1.45

1.39 Very poorly sorted, very positively skewed, Very platy kurtic, coarse sand

L1S1U5

0.30

-1.57

2.76

0.63

0.72 Moderately well sorted, very positively skewed, Very platy kurtic, coarse sand

L1s1u6

0.28

-1.57

1.35

0.65

0.70 Moderately well sorted, positively skewed, Very platy kurtic, coarse sand

L2S1U1

0.48

0.90

2.64

0.88

0.77 poorly sorted, very positively skewed, platy kurtic, coarse sand

L2S1U2

0.07

0.39

0.24

1.67

1.33

Very Poorly sorted, positively skewed, Very platy kurtic, coarse sand

49

L2S1U3

0.27

2.53

1.51

0.50

0.81 Moderately well sorted, very positively skewed, Very lepto kurtic, coarse sand

L2S2U1

-0.08

0.34

0.25

1.40

1.04 Very Poorly sorted, positively skewed, Very platy kurtic, very coarse sand

L2S2U2

0.10

0.47

0.85

0.83

0.80 Poorly sorted, positively skewed, Very platy kurtic, coarse sand

L2S2U3

0.18

0.49

0.73

1.10

1.04 Very Poorly sorted, very positively skewed, Very platy kurtic, coarse sand

L2S3U1

0.27

1.77

2.91

0.60

0.63 Moderately well sorted, very positively skewed, Very lepto kurtic, coarse sand

L2S3U2

0.17

0.54

0.66

1.15

1.18 Very Poorly sorted, very positively skewed, Very platy kurtic, coarse sand

L2S3U3

0.10

0.47

0.90

0.85

0.81

Poorly sorted sorted, very positively skewed, Very platy kurtic, coarse sand

50

4.3.1 The bivariate plots of the sieve analysis parameters


3.50 3.00

2.50
SKEWNESS

RIVER
2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 STANDARD DEVIATION

BEACH

Chart 6: bivariate plot of skewness vs. Standard deviation After Friedman, (1961)

51

0.60

0.50
0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0.00 -0.10 -0.20 -0.30

MEAN

RIVER

BEACH
0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60

STANDARD DEVIATION

Chart 7 bivariate plot of mean vs. Standard deviation

3.50 3.00 2.50 SKEWNESS

RIVER
2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.20

0.40

BEACH

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

1.40

1.60

1.80

SORTING

Chart 8: bivariate plot of skewness vs. simple sorting after friedman, (1979)

52

4.3.2 Sieve analysis interpretation The cumulative graph which is self-explanatory has pictorially shown using the cumulative curves the grain size proportions. When trending along the horizontal axis from Phi -1 to 2.0, the curve tend to have a very steep upward Shows the high content of coarse to medium grained particles. But moving from 2.0 up to pan the curve slope becomes gentle indicating reduction in fine particle contents. The sieve analysis data for all sample has indicated that modal particle size occurrence is the particle size of -1 having an average percentage retained value of 25.9% which is the gravel sized particle followed by the 1coarse grained particles of average percentage retained 21.56% while others are 0(21.56), 2(16.70), 3(7.74), 4(3.38) pan(1.21). In the bivariate plot, most of the samples are located within the river sediment zone( the upper right sections of the thre plots.

53

4.4 Pebble morphometric results and interpretation 4.4.1 Results The pebble morphometric also was carried out on a set of sample collected from the initially mentioned lithology sections. The samples which include ten pebbles used for the morphometric analysis were collected from pebble containing units.
Table 4.24 Sample 17: Location 1, Section 1, Unit 1 s/n L(cm) I(cm) S(cm) S/L I/L (L-I)/(L-S) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 4.0 3.4 3.3 3.1 2.5 3.6 2.5 2.3 2.0 2.3 2.6 2.2 1.8 1.7 2.0 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.1 1.4 1.8 1.8 0.9 0.9 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.0 0.450 0.529 0.273 0.290 0.480 0.389 0.600 0.652 0.750 0.435 0.650 0.647 0.545 0.548 0.800 0.472 0.720 0.826 1.050 0.609 0.636 0.750 0.625 0.636 0.385 0.864 0.700 0.500 -0.200 0.692

3S/LI 0.825 0.920 0.497 0.517 0.702 0.765 0.909 0.917 0.930 0.677

10[(L-1-0.5)]/(S/L) 3.030 4.722 4.583 4.697 -2.404 9.351 3.333 0.000 -9.333 4.423

Table 4.25 Sample 18: Location 1, Section 1, Unit 2 s/n L(cm) I(cm) S(cm) S/L I/L (L-I)/(L-S) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 3.3 3.8 3.9 3.0 2.3 3.8 2.6 2.7 2.3 1.8 1.9 2.7 2.9 2.2 1.7 2.8 2.4 2.2 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.8 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.8 1.5 1.4 0.7 1.0 0.364 0.474 0.308 0.400 0.522 0.474 0.577 0.519 0.304 0.556 0.576 0.711 0.744 0.733 0.739 0.737 0.923 0.815 0.696 0.778 0.667 0.550 0.370 0.444 0.545 0.500 0.182 0.385 0.438 0.500

3S/LI 0.651 0.828 0.535 0.640 0.762 0.818 0.815 0.773 0.453 0.735

10[(L-1-0.5)]/(S/L) 4.583 1.056 -4.213 -1.389 0.871 0.000 -5.515 -2.225 -2.054 0.000

54

Table 4.26 Sample 19: Location 1, Section 1, Unit 3 s/n 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 L(cm) 3.3 3.7 3.9 3.0 2.3 3.8 2.6 2.7 2.3 1.9 I(cm) 1.9 2.7 2.9 2.2 1.7 2.8 2.4 2.2 1.6 1.4 S(cm) 1.2 1.8 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.8 1.5 1.4 0.7 1.0 S/L 0.364 0.486 0.308 0.400 0.522 0.474 0.577 0.519 0.304 0.526 I/L 0.576 0.730 0.744 0.733 0.739 0.737 0.923 0.815 0.696 0.737 (L-I)/(L-S) 0.667 0.526 0.370 0.444 0.545 0.500 0.182 0.385 0.438 0.556 3S/LI 0.651 0.836 0.535 0.640 0.762 0.818 0.815 0.773 0.453 0.722 10[(L-1-0.5)]/(S/L) 4.583 0.541 -4.213 -1.389 0.871 0.000 -5.515 -2.225 -2.054 1.056

Table 4.27 Sample 20: Location 1, Section 2, Unit 1 s/n 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 L(cm) 4.1 6.5 5.3 4.5 3.1 3.6 3.1 2.6 2.5 2.1 I(cm) 2.5 3.7 2.7 2.6 2.5 2.7 2.0 2.1 1.8 1.7 S(cm) 1.9 2.8 1.6 1.9 2.0 1.5 1.4 1.6 1.3 1.3 S/L 0.463 0.431 0.302 0.422 0.645 0.417 0.452 0.615 0.520 0.619 I/L 0.610 0.569 0.509 0.578 0.806 0.750 0.645 0.808 0.720 0.810 (L-I)/(L-S) 0.727 0.757 0.703 0.731 0.545 0.429 0.647 0.500 0.583 0.500 3S/LI 0.875 0.970 0.659 0.837 1.011 0.703 0.762 0.909 0.787 0.851 10[(L-1-0.5)]/(S/L) 4.904 5.960 6.715 5.466 0.705 -1.714 3.256 0.000 1.603 0.000

55

Table 4.28 Sample 21: Location 1, Section 3, Unit 1 s/n 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 L(cm) 6.4 8.3 4.0 4.7 4.2 5.2 5.8 4.1 5.7 5.3 I(cm) 3.7 4.7 2.7 3.7 2.0 4.4 4.3 2.7 2.9 3.5 S(cm) 3.3 3.3 2.5 3.0 1.7 2.5 2.5 1.6 2.0 2.5 S/L 0.516 0.398 0.625 0.638 0.405 0.481 0.431 0.390 0.351 0.472 I/L 0.578 0.566 0.675 0.787 0.476 0.846 0.741 0.659 0.509 0.660 (L-I)/(L-S) 0.871 0.720 0.867 0.588 0.880 0.296 0.455 0.560 0.757 0.643 3S/LI 1.149 0.973 1.131 1.158 0.836 0.881 0.856 0.718 0.785 0.944 10[(L-1-0.5)]/(S/L) 7.195 5.533 5.867 1.382 9.388 -4.237 -1.055 1.538 7.318 3.029

Table 4.29 Sample 22: Location3, Section 3, Unit 1 s/n 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 L(cm) 3.0 4.5 3.3 3.9 2.5 4.1 3.3 2.7 3.8 4.5 I(cm) 2.4 2.8 1.4 2.0 2.0 2.9 2.3 2.0 1.5 2.0 S(cm) 1.8 2.6 1.5 1.4 1.4 2.0 1.5 1.9 0.9 1.8 S/L 0.600 0.578 0.455 0.359 0.560 0.488 0.455 0.704 0.237 0.400 I/L 0.800 0.622 0.424 0.513 0.800 0.707 0.697 0.741 0.395 0.444 (L-I)/(L-S) 0.500 0.895 0.778 0.737 0.455 0.571 0.556 0.875 0.793 0.926 3S/LI 0.932 1.117 0.538 0.706 0.8I9 0.876 0.763 1.083 0.504 0.865 10[(L-1-0.5)]/(S/L) 0.000 6.829 6.105 7.242 -1.266 1.464 1.222 5.327 12.367 10.648

56

Table 4.30 Sample 23: Location 3, Section 1, Unit 1 s/n 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 L(cm) 5.6 3.2 3.4 3.8 3.2 5.2 5.2 3.9 3.5 3.2 I(cm) 3.7 2.3 2.8 2.5 2.8 3.9 3.1 2.9 2.9 1.8 S(cm) 3.1 1.9 2.0 1.7 2.0 2.5 2.0 2.4 1.6 11.0 S/L 0.554 0.594 0.588 0.447 0.625 0.481 0.385 0.615 0.457 3.438 I/L 0.661 0.719 0.824 0.658 0.875 0.750 0.596 0.744 0.829 0.563 (L-I)/(L-S) 0.760 0.692 0.429 0.619 0.333 0.481 0.656 0.667 0.316 -0.179 3S/LI 1.129 0.977 0.944 0.803 0.963 0.917 0.792 1.069 0.739 6.136 10[(L-1-0.5)]/(S/L) 4.697 3.239 -1.214 2.661 -2.667 -0.385 4.063 2.708 -4.030 -1.977

Table 4.31 Sample 24: Location 3, Section 1, Unit 2 s/n 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 L(cm) 8.6 5.8 4.6 4.0 4.7 5.4 7.0 4.3 4.4 4.6 I(cm) 5.1 4.1 3.1 2.9 2.8 4.1 4.3 2.8 3.3 2.9 S(cm) 4.1 3.1 2.2 2.4 2.3 2.9 3.4 1.8 2.7 2.3 S/L 0.477 0.534 0.478 0.600 0.489 0.537 0.486 0.419 0.614 0.500 I/L 0.593 0.707 0.674 0.725 0.596 0.759 0.614 0.651 0.750 0.630 (L-I)/(L-S) 0.778 0.630 0.625 0.688 0.792 0.520 0.750 0.600 0.647 0.739 3S/LI 1.163 1.078 0.907 1.060 0.974 1.033 1.093 0.785 1.107 0.970 10[(L-1-0.5)]/(S/L) 5.827 2.425 2.614 3.125 5.960 0.372 5.147 2.389 2.397 4.783

57

Table 4.32 Sample 25: Location 3, Section 2, Unit 3 s/n 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 L(cm) 3.9 3.5 2.4 3.5 2.5 2.5 3.0 2.7 2.1 2.6 I(cm) 2.9 1.9 1.8 2.3 1.4 1.8 2.2 1.8 1.4 1.5 S(cm) 1.5 1.3 1.2 2.0 1.1 1.3 1.4 1.6 1.2 1.0 S/L 0.385 0.371 0.500 0.571 0.440 0.520 0.467 0.593 0.571 0.385 I/L 0.744 0.543 0.750 0.657 0.560 0.720 0.733 0.667 0.667 0.577 (L-I)/(L-S) 0.417 0.727 0.500 0.800 0.786 0.583 0.500 0.818 0.778 0.688 3S/LI 0.668 0.691 0.737 0.998 0.724 0.787 0.746 0.945 0.838 0.635 10[(L-1-0.5)]/(S/L) -2.167 6.119 0.000 5.250 6.494 1.603 0.000 5.369 4.861 4.875

4.4.2 Pebble Morphometry Interpretation In pebble morphometric interpretation, the dominant forms of the sample were obtained from the available data. The mean value of 10 pebbles was taken from the result obtained. According to Hubert (1968), the elongation ratio values for fluvial environments range from 0.6 to 0.9. most values gotten from the morphometric data for ratio of elongation falls within this range. The maximum projection sphericity of pebbles ( beaches. From the result, the maximum value for the projection sphericity falls above 0.65 which indicates fluvial activity. In terms of geometric which describe the
58

) is generally high for fluvial environment than for

three dimensional aspects of a pebble proposed by folk,(1974) , which include compact, compact bladed, compact elongated, compact platy, bladed elongated, platy, very platy, very bladed and very elongated. Since dominant forms for river pebbles are compact, bladed, compact bladed and compact elongated, it can be deduced from the above data results that the pebbles are of fluvial environmental deposits.

Table 4.33 total mean values for all pebbles. Parameters Oblate-Prolate Index (OPI) Maximum projection sphericity index (MPS) Disc-Rod Index (DRI) Flatness ratio Elongation ratio mean count 2.14 1.04 0.59 0.69 0.52

59

4.4.3 Bivariate plots. SCATTER PLOT OF MPSI VS OPI


1.4

1.2

RIVER

RIVER

0.8

0.6

0.4

BEACH
0.2

BEACH

0 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15

Chart 9: scatter plot of maximum projection sphericity index versus oblate index (dobkins and folk 1970)

60

BLOCK 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7

0.9

0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5


S LI

0.6 0.5 0.4

CP

CB

CE

0.4 0.3 0.2

0.3 0.2 0.1 0

VP
0.2

VB

VE

0.1 0

0.1

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

SLAB

1.0 ROD

Chart 10 sneed and folk form diagram Table 4.34 sphericity form diagram counts all pebbles.
Sneed & Folk classes
Count
Compact Compact-Platy Compact-Bladed Compact-Elongate Platy Bladed Elongate Very-Platy Very-Bladed Very-Elongate

Percent 7.78 3.33 20.00 14.44 1.11 28.89 21.11 0.00 2.22 1.11

7 3 18 13 1 26 19 0 2 1

61

4.5 Discussion The area under study is a sedimentary terrain. While sedimentary environment are parts of the earth surface physically, chemically and biologically distinct from its adjacent areas. This work has emphasised thoroughly that a lot of processes come into play in the sedimentary environment. The depositional process is a product of the environment, which in turn is controlled by: Climate Geography Tectonic setting Sediment supply. Although earlier works have already modelled these processes categorizing them into three basically distinct processes; physical chemical and biological. Sedimentary grains are formed when the rocks at the Earth's surface are slowly broken up physically by exposure to wind and frost, and decomposed (chemically) by rainwater or biological action. These processes are collectively termed weathering. Once a rock has been broken up by weathering, the small rock fragments and individual mineral grains can be eroded from their place of origin by water, wind or glaciers and transported to be deposited elsewhere as roughly horizontal layers of sediment. The resulting sediment reflects the original rock types that were weathered, the efficiency of erosion and transport, the extents of chemical and physical degradation of the sediment grains during transport, and the conditions under which the grains were deposited from the transporting water, wind or ice. For example, sand-sized grains of quartz are one of the main constituents of sandstone, but those grains may have been transported by water in a river,
62

carried by waves on a sea-shore, or blown around in hot desert sandstorms (to give just three possibilities). In this study work, we distinguish which of the many possibilities was the most likely to have perpetuated the sedimentary deposit at Use Ikot Amama and the Agali sandstone of the Benin formation not the less. Some of the identified beds boosted intercalation of both fine and coarse grained sandstone indicating either a deltaic or sudden change in the channel velocity allowing for fine grained sediments to settle. As earlier noted in the study that the coarse poorly sorted grains indicated a fluvial environment and also that the particle are channel bed load, the presence of the high occurrence of the pebbles in the study area conclude the fact that is a fluvial environment. The observable paraconglomerates and the

orthoconglomerated in the field give the idea of the channel velocity. The paraconglomerates with indicates high matrix shows a low stream velocity allowing for the settlement of matrix. The primary purpose of this study is to understand the facie characterisation of various outcrop sections at Use Ikot Amama. This means, that the study described each bed characteristics in terms of texture, geometry, grain to matrix ratio, and lithological resemblance and repetition so as to track back to the environment of deposition, the conditions under which the grains were deposited from the transporting water.

63

The field observation shows that the bed consists of fine grain sand, coarse grain sand, paraconglomerats, orthoconlomerates, breccia and the lithological sections shows some repetitive geological patterns. The laboratory analysis revealed more in the characterisation most precisely the pebble mophometry describing the pebble shape using the elongation ratio, the oblate prolate index. The mean values of Flatness ratio for the pebbles is 0.69, Elongation ratio is 0.52, M.P.S.I. is 1.04(river), Oblate Prolate index is 2.14(river). The bivariate plot of M.P.S.I. vs OP Index (Dobkins and Folk, 1970) is based on the proposition that the 0.66 sphericity (M.P.S.I) line best separate beach and river pebbles while values less than 0.66 are typical of beachs, higher values above 0.66 suggest fluvial origin. An OP index value greater than -1.5 generally indicates fluvial conditions. The bivariate plot of Roundness vs. Elongation ratio (after Same, 1966) show that roundness has the greatest influence in determination of the depositional environment of the pebbles i.e the lower the roundness, the higher the probability that the depositional environment would be fluvial(Olugbemiro and Nwajide, 1997). It is important to note that roundness alone is not particularly indicative of depositional environment, rather the extent of abrasion that the grains or pebbles have undergone, it reflect overall transport history(Lewis and McConchie, 1994) and does not necessarily reflect the distance grains have travelled from their source. Sphericity is more reliable than roundness because it illustrates the departure of the body from equidimensionality.
64

OP index expresses the relationship of the change in form of pebbles ( platy, elongate and compact) with environment. The plot of M.P.S.I vs OP index is more diagnostic for environmental discrimination of pebbles than the plot of same, 1966 (Roundness vs Elongation ratio). Moreover, with prolong transport, sphericity and op index become increasingly divergent for fluvial and beaches and thus provide better discrimination (Dobkins and Folk, 1970). The bivariate plot of Coefficient of Flatness vs M.P.S.I. show that over 97% of the pebbles are of fluvial origin. According to Dobkins and Folk (1970) and Gale (1990), certain form classes occur much more frequently in one environment than they do in another. Thus, the three shape classes that are most diagnostic of beach action are platy, very platy and very bladed. While bladed and platy predominate in high energy beaches, bladed are most common on low energy beaches. On the other hand, compact, compact bladed, and compact elongate are most indicative of fluvial action. While beach pebbles plot toward the left and bottom parts of the sphericity form diagram, fluvial pebbles plot near the upper part. The sphericity form diagram of the pebbles sets from Sandstone also point to fluvial origin (7.6% are compact, 14.4% compact elongate, 20.0% compact bladed, 21.11% are elongate and 28.89% are bladed). As for grain size distribution, the mean grain size in a deposit is largely a function of energy of the processes controlling transport and deposition i.e particles are segregated according to their hydrodynamic behaviour, which
65

depends on size, specific gravity and shape. In contrast, the degree of sorting grains in a deposit is a function of the persistence and stability of energy condition except where constrained by availability of grains that can be deposited in the environment (Olugbemiro and Nwajide, 1997). From the sieve analysis various parameters were calculated with include the mean, median, degree of sorting, skewness and kurtosis. Most of the sample gave a result revealed poor sorted when correlated to the deduced observation from the field it scores a pass mark. The approach used the size and shape of the grains in the sediment or sedimentary rock sample acquired to reveal quite a lot about the origin of the sediment. Because a vigorous river transports much larger grains than a gentle current in a lake, so the modal size of the grains which is the 1 grain size gives an indication that strong currents could have transported and deposited the grains. In other words, the grain size depends on the energy of the environment in which the sediment was deposited. The general shape of the grains will tell you about the nature of the transporting medium. The degree of sorting in sediment is another useful method that was used in distinguishing the different types of depositional situation. Sorting is a measure of the range of grain sizes present in a sediment or sedimentary rock. Poorlysorted sediment as in the case of the studied sediments has a wide range of grain sizes as a result of rapid deposition, such as occurs during a storm. On the other hand, well-sorted sediment has a narrow range of grain sizes, and is the result of
66

extensive reworking of sediment by wind action in deserts, or wave action on beaches and in shallow shelf seas. Also, the coarse grained particles show that the sediments were of bed load i.e. they were carried along the channel beds.

67

CHAPTER FIVE 5.1 summary and conclusions Detailed sedimentological and lithofacies analyses show that the sediments deposited at the study area Use Ikot Amama were likely deposited by two sedimentary environment, the fluvial and the deltaic. A typical sequence begins with accumulation of coarse fluvial channel and/or tidally influenced fluvial channel deposits. The study of the pebble morphometry and grain size distribution has shown that Sandstone is likely a product of fluvial deposition though certain sieve analysis suggest near marine condition. This is in line with the earlier conclusions of fluvial or fluvial deltaic.

68

5.3 recommendations The outcrop logging that was done is the field was able to provide a vague model as a result of the analogue tools and methods. Further work should be carried out using modern tool precisely the laser scanners and digital remote photographic tools to get a clearer, more detail and information from any lithology model.

69

References Adegoke, O.S., 1969. Eocene stratigraphy of southern Nigeria. Colloque sur l_ Eocene, III. Bureau de Recherches Geologiques et Minieres 69, 22 48. Adegoke, O.S., Arua, I., Oyegoke, O., 1980. Two new nautiloids from the Imo Shale, (Paleocene) and Ameki Formation (Middle Eocene), Anambra State, Nigeria. Journal of Mining and Geology 17, 8589. Agagu, O.K., Fayose, E.A., Petters, S.W., 1985. Stratigraphy and sedimentation in the Senonian Anambra Basin of Eastern Nigeria. Journal of Mining and Geology 22, 2536.

Amajor, L.C., 1987. Paleocurrent, petrography and provenance analyses of the Ajali Sandstone (Upper Cretaceous), Southeastern Benue Trough, Nigeria. Sedimentary Geology 54, 4760.

Arua, I., 1986. Paleoenvironment of Eocene deposits in the Afikpo syncline, southern Nigeria. Journal of African Earth Sciences 5, 279284.

Avbovbo, A.A., 1978. Tertiary lithostratigraphy of the Niger Delta. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin 62, 295 306.

70

Boersma, J.R., Terwindt, J.H.J., 1981. Neap-spring tide sequences of intertidal shoal deposits in a mesotidal estuary. Sedimentology 28, 151170.

Ekweozor, C.M., Daukoru, E.M., 1994. The northern delta depobelt portion of the Akata-Agbada (!) petroleum system, Niger Delta, Nigeria. In: Magoon, L.B., Dow, W.G. (Eds.), The Petroleum Systems; From Source to Trap. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Memoir, vol. 60, pp. 599613.

Evamy, B.D., Haremboure, J., Kamerling, P., Knaap, W.A., Molloy, F.A., Rowlands, P.H., 1978. Hydrocarbon habitat of Tertiary Niger delta. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin 62, 139.

Hooper, R.J., Fitzsimmons, R.J., Grant, N., Vendeville, B.C., 2002. The role of deformation in controlling depositional patterns in the south-central Niger Delta, West Africa. Journal of Structural Geology 24, 847859.

Hoque, M., 1977. Petrographic differentiation of tectonically controlled Cretaceous sedimentary cycles, southeastern Nigeria. Sedimentary Geology 17, 235245.

71

Murat, R.C., 1972. Stratigraphy and paleogeography of the Cretaceous and Lower Tertiary in southern Nigeria. In: Dessauvagie, T.F.J., Whiteman, A.J. (Eds.), African Geology. University of Ibadan Press, Nigeria, pp. 251266.

Nwajide, C.S., 1979. A lithostratigraphic analysis of the Nanka Sands, southeastern Nigeria. Journal of Mining and Geology 16, 103109.

Nwajide, C.S., and Reijers, T.J.A., 1996. Geology of the southern Anambra basin. In: Selected chapters on Geology (edited by Reijers, T.J.A.).

Nwajide, C.S., 2005. Anambra Basin of Nigeria: Synoptic Basin Analysis as a Basis for Evaluating its Hydrocarbon Prospectivity. In: Hydrocarbon Potentials of the Anambra Basin (edited by C.O. Okogbue), Great Ap Express, 2006, 1-46. Oboh, F.E., 1992. Middle Miocene palaeoenvironments of the Niger Delta. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 92, 55 84.

Olade, M.A., 1975. Evolution of Nigeria Benue Trough (aulocogen): a tectonic model. Geo. Mag., vol. 112, 575- 583.

72

Oomkens, E., 1974. Lithofacies relations in the Quaternary Niger delta complex. Sedimentology 21, 195222.

Olugbemiro, R, and Nwajide, C.S., 1997. Grain size distribution and particle morphogenesis as signatures of depositional environments of Cretaceous (Nonferruginous) facies in the Bida Basin, Nigeria. Journ. Min and Geol. Vol. 33, 89- 101.

Reijers, T.J.A., Petters, S.W., Nwajide, C.S., 1997. The Niger Delta Basin. In: Selley, R.C. (Ed.), African Basins. Elsiever, Amsterdam, pp. 151 172.

Reyment, R.A., 1965. Aspect of the Geology of Nigeria. Ibadan Univ. press, Ibadan, 145p. Same, C.W., 1966. Morphometric data of some recent pebble associations and their application to ancient deposits. Journ. Sed. Petr. 36, 126- 142.

Sneed, E.D, and Folk, R.L., 1958. Pebbles in the lower Colorado Rivers. A study in particle morphogenesis. In: Practical sedimentology (eds. Douglas, W. Lewis and David McConchie) Chapman and Hall, 1993, p123.
73

Stratten,T., 1974. Notes on the application of shape parameters to differentiate between beach and river deposits in southern Africa. In: Pebble morphology of Ancient conglomerate. The middlevlei Gold placer, Wit Water sand, South Africa (ed. B.G. Els). Journ. Of Sedimentary Petr. Vol. 58, No5, 1988, 10- 21.

Whiteman, A.J., 1982. Nigeria. Its Petroleum Geology, Resources and potentials, vol. 1 and 2. Graham and Trotman ltd. London.

74

APPENDIX A Abbreviations and symbols B= bladed C= compact CB= compact bladed CE= compact elongated CP= compact platy E= elongated L= location S= section U= unit VB= very bladed VE= very elongated VP= very platy MPS = Maximum projection sphericity index DRI= Disc-Rod Index OPI = Oblate-Prolate Index IE = Elongation index = weight of aggregate in the sieve = total weight of aggregate L= long I= intermediate S= short

75

APPENDIX B Formula Elongation ratio= ,

Flatness ratio =

Maximum projection sphericity index (MPS) =

Disc-Rod Index (DRI) =

Oblate-Prolate Index (OPI) =

Graphic mean = Median = 50 Graphic standard deviation (1) = Inclusive graphic skewness (SKI) = Graphic kurtosis (KG) = Degree of sorting =

76

APPENDIX C Verbal limits folk (1974) SORTING <0.35 0.35-0.50 0.50-0.70 0.71-1.00 1.00-2.00 2.00-4.00 >4.00 INTERPRETATION Very well sorted well sorted Moderately well sorted Poorly sorted Very Poorly sorted Extremely Poorly sorted

SKEWNESS -1.0 -0.3 - (-0.1) -0.1 - 0.1 0.1 - 0.3 0.3-1.0 KURTOSIS <0.67 0.67-0.90 0.90-1.11 1.11-1.50 1.50-3.00 >3.00

INTERPRETAION Very Negatively skewed Negatively skewed Symmetrical Positively skewed Very positively skewed

INTERPRETAION Very platy kurtic Platy kurtic Meso kurtic Lepto kurtic Very lepto kurtic Extremely lepto kurtic

77

MEAN -1.00-0.00 0.00-1.00 1.00-2.00 2.00-3.00 3.00-4.00 4.00-5.00

INTERPRETAION Very coarse sand Coarse sand Medium sand Fine sand Very fine sand Coarse silt

78

APPENDIX D Sand sorting classification based on standard deviation Standard deviation <0.35 sorting Very well sorted environment Coastal, lakes , dunes many beaches common in shallow marine shelf 0.35-0.50 Well sorted Most beaches, shallow marine shelf, many inland dunes, most rivers, most lagoons, distal marine shelf 0.50-0.70 Moderately Well sorted Most inland dunes, most rivers, most lagoons, distal marine shelf 0.70-1.00 Moderately well sorted Mainly geofluvial settings, many rivers, some lagoons, some distal marine shelf. 1.00-2.00 Poorly sorted Mainly geofluvial settings >4.00 Extremely poorly sorted Mainly geofluvial settings

79

Appendix E The Sneed & Folk (1958) diagram

80