Structural Geology: Solutions to

problems
On these pages you will find solutions to the extra problem set prepared for several
of the book chapters.

Version date: 01 Feb. 2011

Structural Geology/Fossen

Deformation (Chapter 2)

Solution to problem 2-1

a) To calculate the extension or elongation, simply measure the present length (l) from one tip to the other, using a ruler, and
then estimate the original length (l0) of the belemnite. This can be done by restoration (Figure SP2.1) or by adding the lengths
of individual belemnite segments.

Elongation = (l-l0)/ l0 = (11.56 6.22)/6.22 0.86 = 86%.

86% extension means that the belemnite has been stretched by a factor (stretch s) of 1.46.

Note that some of the boudins are barrel shaped, which introduces an uncertainty. If we assume that this shape is an expression
of ductile deformation along the margins or corners of the boudins, then restoring a line through the center of the boudinaged
belemnite would be the way to go. In the restoration shown here (Figure SP2.1a) I have chosen to balance the gaps and over-
laps.

6.22 cm

2 cm 11.56 cm
Figure SP2.1a Restored and stretched belemnite of Problem 2-1.

b) This one is similar to what we did above: Measure the current length (l) and then the restored length (l0Tr and l0B) and cal-
culate the extension (=elongation) as above.

Top Triassic extension: (l-l0Tr)/ l0Tr = (236.6 210)/210 0.127 = 12.7%.

Top Basement extension: (l-l0B)/ l0B = (236.6 178.5)/178.5 0.326 = 32.6%

Is the extension evenly distributed in the two cases? For the Top Triassic marker, there is clearly more extension (gaps) be-
tween the Gullfaks Field and the Viking Graben then elsewhere. For the Top Basement marker the extension is more evenly
distributed in the central eastern part of the section, and lower in the western part (Shetland Platform).

For the North Sea section, how do the two extension estimates compare? Basement is stretched more than the Top Triassic
marker. The difference (~20% or 31.5 km extension) is a strain estimate for the late Permianmid Triassic phase of rifting in
this part of the North Sea rift. It tells us that this first phase of rifting involved considerably more extension than the second
(Jurassic) and last phase.

How much extension is taken up by the largest 4-5 faults? To answer this question, restore only the largest 4-5 faults and do
the same calculation over again. This shows that the 5 largest faults take up 11/26.6 = 41% of the post-Triassic stretching, and
37.6/58.1 = 65% of the total basement extension estimated above (Figure SP2.1c). This tells us that small faults play a role
in extension estimates. Since there must be small faults that are not shown in the interpretation (because of limited seismic
resolution), there is a component of fault extension that is missing. Hence all of our results underestimate the real extension.

2
 Problem Set: Solutions

Top Triassic
A Gullfaks Viking A
Shetland Platform Field Graben Top Basement Horda Platform

20 km
l = 236.6 km
(a)

(b) l0Tr = 210 km (26.6 km extension)

(c) l0B =178.5 km (58.1 km extension)

Figure P2.1b (a) Cross-section through the northern North Sea, where post-Triassic strata have been removed. Based on deep seismic line NSDP84-1.
(b) Top Triassic restored (fault offsets removed without any rotation of the layering). (c) Top Basement restored.

1 2 3 5
4
(a)
l = 236.6 km
20 km

(b) l0Tr = 225.6 km (11 km extension)

(c) l0B =199 km (37.6 km extension)

Figure P2.1c Restoration of 5 of the largest fault displacements only.

Is there any other way that we could estimate the extension along the North Sea section? If we knew top MOHO, we could
do a constant area restoration, assuming that the prerift crustal thickness was constant and equal to the present thickness at
the rift margins.

A comment on uncertainties: The restored line should ideally be more or less planar and horizontal, since this is how sedi-
mentary layers are deposited. We will see from Chapter 20 that this can be fixed, but it requires a choice of deformation such
as vertical shear (which does not change our estimate of l0) or rigid rotation of dipping line segments or fault blocks (which
increases l0).

3
Structural Geology/Fossen

Problem 2-2.
Bedding is horizontal, and we trace the orientation of the two fossils and measure their angle to bedding (bedding is taken to
represent the shear plane). It appears that the two trace fossils have somewhat different orientations, so we get two estimates
for the angular shear (38.5 and 53). The shear strains (g) are tan 38.5 0.8 and tan 531.3.

The difference in strain estimates may be due to different original orientations. However, the skolitos tend to have a fairly
consistent bedding-perpendicular initial orientation. Hence it is likely that the shear strain is heterogeneous at the scale of
observation. The fact that the lower fossil seems to be tighter may support this interpretation. However, we need to analyze
more strain markers in this rock to see if there is a systematic variation in the orientations and thus in strain.

38.5

Angular shear

53

Figure SP2.2 Drawing of the essential features of the pictire and angular observations.

Problem 2-3.
To find the new positions of the four points we have to use the deformation matrix. This easy for simple shear and pure shear
(use Equations 2.15 and 2.16 in the textbook), but more difficult for subsimple shear. We then have to calculate G from Equa-
tion 2.17 (note that the general formula for G has a printing error, so use the one for no area change), which in this case (g=2
and kx=2) becomes:

G = g(kx-1/kx)/2(lnkx) = 2(2-0.5)/2ln(0.5) = 3/(-1.386)=-2.164.

The deformation matrices and calculations of new points are shown in Figure SP2.3.

4
 Problem Set: Solutions

y Simple shear, =2 y Subsimple shear, kx=2, =2

1 2 x x+2y 2 2.164 x 2x+2.164y
= =
0 1 y y 0 0.5 y 0.5y
3 3

for x=1, y=2:

for x=1, y=2:
2 2.164 1 6.328
1 2 1 5 =
= 0 0.5 2 1
0 1 2 2
1 1
i.e., x=5, y=2
i.e., x=6.328, y=1.
x x
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
for x=2, y=1:
x=(4+2.164)=6.164
y=0.5
y Pure shear, kx=2
2 0 x 2x for x=0, y=1:
=
0 0.5 y 0.5y x=2.164
3
y=0.5
for x=1, y=2:
2 0 1 2
= Figure SP2.3 Graphical illustration of the three deformations. An ellipse
0 0.5 2 1
1 has been added for clarity.
i.e., x=2, y=1.

x
1 2 3 4 5 6

Problem 2-4.
The matrix

3 0 0.25

0 0.5 0
0 0 0.5

describes a three-dimensional deformation where the off-diagonal term 0.25 reoates to a simple shear strain and the diago-
nal terms (3, 0.5, 0.5) describe a three-dimensional coaxial strain. The pure shear involves extension along the x-axis of the
coordinate system, and shortening in the plane orthogonal to x (i.e. along the y- and z-axes of the coordinate system). The
simple shear affects the z-value The fact that the simple shear and coaxial strain are contained in a single matrix tells us that,
mathematically, they are applied simultaneously.

The determinant of this matrix equals the product of the diagonal elements, which represent the pure shear components (geo-
logically this is consistent with the fact that simple shear preserves volume or area): Det D=3x0.5x0.5= 0.75. The 3x extension
along the x-axis is less than the combined shortening along y and z, which causes a reduction in volume by 25%, all caused
by the coaxial component.

z z

x
x

y Simple shear
y Coaxial strain

Figure SP2.4 The two components of deformation represented by the deformation matrix in Problem 2-4 in a specified coordinate system.

5
Structural Geology/Fossen

Problem 2-5.
Since the deformation is taking place in the x-y plane, this is the section we want to study. To write the deformation matrices,
we need to remember the premultiplication thing about matrices, which means that the last deformation is represented by the
first matrix:

k k (1 + )
k 0 1 1 0
0 1 / k 0 1 0 1 + = 1+
0
k

Problem 2-6
All cases except case (e) are homogeneous, because we see from Figure P2.6 that straight lines remain straight and parallel
lines remain parallel. Case (b) does not involve strain, because all the displacement are of equal length and parallel (transla-
tion). Neither does (a) involve strain, although this is a little harder to see. It becomes obvious once we realize that the dis-
placement is that of rigid rotation. Remember: Deformation = Rigid rotation + Translation + Strain. The deformation matrix
for each of the deformations are shown in Figure SP2-6.

y y
Rotation Translation 2.25 0
6 =-22.5 cos -sin 6 0 2.25
sin cos

4 4

(a) (b)
x x
2 4 6 2 4 6

y y
Pure shear 1.5 0 Simple shear 1 0.41
6 kx=1.5, ky=0.667 0 0.67 6 Angular shear=22.5 0 1

4 4

(c) x (d) x
2 4 6 2 4 6

y y
Simple shear (tan22.5), then
Heterogeneous strain: rotation (11.25). Equal to rotating grid 11.25, then
6 nonlinear transformation 6 performing ss along the line dipping 11.25

4 4

(e) x (f) x
2 4 6 2 4 6

Figure SP2.6 Displacement fields and information about the deformation for Problem 2-6.

6
 Problem Set: Solutions

Problem 2-7
a) A rock with vertical foliation (strike/dip= 000/90) and vertical lineation (000/90):

z z

l0=1 l1
x x
45
y Undeformed y Simple shear (=1)

Figure SP2.7 The initial situation and the effect of a shear strain of 1.

b) Because of the special orientation of this lineation (parallel to the z-axis) its angle to z will always be the angular shear
strain, which for g=1 is 45, and for g=10 becomes tan-110= 84.3, which means that it makes an acute angle of 5.7 to the
horizontal shear plane.

To use the deformation matrix D to find the line rotation, we first need to find D. It is a matrix with no coaxial strain or volume
change, which means that the diagonal elements are unity. Then there is one simple shear element, which we denote g. This
element is off-diagonal, and we have to place it where it affects the x-value of any vector that D is applied to. Trying and
failing shows that this is the upper right-hand corner. We then need to multiply a unit vector l representing the undeformed
lineation with the deformation matrix D (see Appendix A.4). l=(001) and the calculation is simple:

1 0 0
0 1 0 0 = 0

0 0 1 1 1

With g=1 and 10 we get the new vectors (1,0,1) and (10,0,1). We find the angles that these vectors make with the x-axis by
using the tangent relationship. For g=1 we get tan-1(1/1)=45, and for g=10 we get tan-1(10/1)=5.7.

c) To find the elongation of a line of unit length parallel to the lineation, we use what we found in b) above, which was that the
unit vector (0,0,1) changes to (1,0,1) and (10,0,1) for the two deformations. Since we started out with a vector of unit length
the new lengths give us the elongation. For g=1, the length becomes:

12 + 0 2 + 12 = 2

and for g=10, we get a new length that is close to 10 times the original one:

10 2 + 0 2 + 12 = 101 10

7
Structural Geology/Fossen

d) Nothing happens to the orientation of the foliation during these deformations: It remains vertical and parallel to the x-z
plane. You can use Equation A.16 to check this. The pole to the plane is represented by the normal vector p=(0,1,0), and we
get the new orientation by multiplying this vector with the inverse of the matrix D:

1
1 0 1 0 0
[ 0 1 0 ] 0 1 0 = [ 0 1 0 ] 0 1 0 = 1

0 0 1 0 0 1 0

The vector p does not change, hence there is no change in the orientation of the plane.

Problem 2-8
a) For subsimple shear with Wk=0.5 (with g being 1 and 10) we are looking at more complicated calculations. The general
matrix for this type of deformation is:

k 0
D = 0 1 0
0 0 1 / k

But how do we find k and G? We have to pull k out of the expression for Wk given by Equation 2.29 or A.22. This is a two-
dimensional formula, which is fine since we can exclude the y-direction (we have a case of plane strain in the x-z plane). For
g=1 and Wk=0.5 we get :

0.5 = cos[tan-1(2lnk)]
cos-10.5 = tan-1(2lnk)
60 = tan-1(2lnk)
tan60 = 2lnk
0.866 = lnk
k=e0.866
k2.377

Similarly, for g=10 we get k 5769. We can get these k-values from the downloadable Excel-file as well, in which case we
would use the sheet called Wk-based 2D-Strain and set Wk=0.5 and check the k-values calculated for g=1 and 10. Now we
can calculate G like we did for Problem 2.3:

For g =1:
G = g(k-1/k)/[2(lnk)] = 1(2.377-1/2.377)/[2(ln2.377)] = 1.956/1.7317 = 1.13

For g =10:
G = g(k-1/k)/2(lnk) = 10(5769-1/5769)/2[8.66] = 57690/17.32= 3330.8

The new line orientation and length for the two cases can now be calculated by multiplying l and D. For g =1:
z
2.377 0 1.13 0 1.13

Dl = 0 1 0 0 = 0
tan = 0.421/1.13 length of l1= 0.4212+1.132 = 1.206
= 20.43

0 0 1 / 2.377 1 0.421
l1 0.421

1.13
x

8
 Problem Set: Solutions

For g =10:
z

5769 0 3331 0 3331 tan = 0.00017/3331 length of l1= 33312+0.000172 = 3331

0 0 = = 0.000003
Dl = 0 1 0
0 0 1 / 5769 1 0.0001733 l1 0.00017
x
3331

Why does the last case give such a long low-angle lineation (almost parallel with the coordinate axis x)? Because for g =10
requires a huge coaxial component to fulfill Wk=0.5. In this sense, the coaxial component accumulates faster than the simple
shear component for a constant-Wk deformation.

As for plane rotations, multiplying the deformation matrices with the pole p to the foliation plane has no effect, so the folia-
tion remains vertical:

k 0 0 0
pD = [ 0 1 0 ] 0 1 0 0 = 1
0 0 1 / k 1 0

.
b) The angle a between the flow apophyses in this subsimple shear is governed by Wk and therefore the same for any strain
value (it is a flow parameter, not a strain parameter). We can use Equation 2.25:

a = cos-1 Wk = cos-1 0.5 = 60

or we can use Figure 2.24 for Wk = 0.5 and read off a = 60.

The angle q between the long axis (X) of the strain ellipsoid and the x-axis (and shear direction) can be found from Figure
5.12b for g=1 and k=2.377, which gives us an angle close to 5. g =10 is outside the range of this graph. We then have to use
the Excel spread sheet called Wk-based 2D-Strain (which also gives us more precise values for g=1) and read off q, which
for g=1 and 10 becomes 4.0 and 7.4x10-7.

X =0, Wk=0.5
Oblique
flow apophysis
z

= X =1, Wk=0.5
60
X =10 x

Figure SP2-8 Illustration of flow apophyses (blue lines) and the orientation of the finite strain ellipse (X, red lines) for Wk=0.5 and g=0, 1, and 10.

9
Structural Geology/Fossen

Problem 2-9
a) The amount of compaction is 20% (porosity is reduced by 50%, while the total volume is reduced by 20%, from 100% to
80%). The vertical elongation D therefore becomes -0.2, and the deformation matrix is:

1 0 0 1 0 0

D = 0 1 0 = 0 1 0
0 0 1 + 0 0 0.8

b) The strain ellipsoid has two horizontal axes of equal length (X=Y) and a vertical axis (Z) that is 0.8 times the length of the
other two. R is the ratio between two principal axes, and there is one R-value for each section containing these axes:

Rxy=X/Y=1/1=1, Ryz=X/Y=1/0.8=1.25, Rxy=X/Z=1/0.8=1.25.

c) The strain ellipsoid is oblate (hamburger-shaped) and plot in the lower part of the Flinn diagram (Figure SP2.9)

X/Y

0
1.25
0 Y/Z 1

Figure SP2.9 Plot of the compactional strain in the Flinn diagram (linear).

10
 Problem Set: Solutions

Stress (Chapter 4-5)

Problem 4-1
a) Planes 1 and 2 in the Mohr diagram both have q = 60, q being the angle between s1 and the poles to the two planes. We
dont know if the two planes cross. We dont even know their actual dips, only their angular relation to the principal stress
axes. This is really a two-dimensional problem, but a three-dimensional interpretation is given in Figure SP4.1a, showing the
orientations of the planes for a vertical s1 (extensional tectonic regime).

The values of sn and ss are found directly from the Mohr diagram:
sN 2.17 MPa, sS 2.05 MPa.

b) A force of 100 N (Newtons) acts normal to a 0.1 m2 plane. sN = 100N/0.1m2 =1000N/m2 = 1 kPa. sS = 0 on the plane (since
the force is acting normal to the plane).

c) A plane that makes 45 degrees to sN is represented by the star at the top of the Mohr circle in Figure SP4.1b, and the normal
stress and shear stress across the plane becomes 0.5 kPa. Using Equation 4.2 gives:

sN = 1 kPa cos245 = 0.5 kPa

sS = (1 kPa sin90)/2=0.5 kPa

=60 1 s
1

kPa

0.5

3 2=90
3 1
2 1
60
=60 kPa

Figure SP4.1b Mohr circle for problem 4-1c.

Figure SP4.1a Geometric interpretation of the two

planes and their relation to the principal stress axes for
Problem 4-1.

11
Structural Geology/Fossen

Problem 4-2
a) The states of stress are presented in Figure SP4.2a.

b) We know from Box 7.2 that even though a plane oriented at 45 to s1 has the largest resolved shear stress of any plane
orientation, a somewhat more steeply dipping plane (i.e. one that makes a smaller angle to s1, meaning that q>45) is more
easily reactivated. This is so because even if the shear stress is a bit smaller, the normal stress across that plane is considerably
smaller. We can calculate this by means of Equation 4.2 if we wish.

These relationships depend on the frictional properties of the material (rock or soil). Consider the Mohr diagram. The critical
angle of failure is given by the tangent point between the Mohr circle and the line representing the Mohr-Coulomb criterion.
This line has the slope m = tanf, so that f is the angle of that line with the horizontal axis (see Figure 7.10). Further, the ori-
entation of the critical shear fracture is given by 2q. Remember that the radius to the tangent point has to be perpendicular to
the line representing the Mohr-Coulomb criterion. This tells us that:

2q = (90+f),
q = (45+f/2)

Since for most rocks, f 30 (or m tan30 0.6), we can expect q (45 + 15)= 60. Hence, it is likely that the weak
planes dipping 60 will more easily activated in all three cases. The sense of slip will be normal since the largest principal
stress is vertical.

100 100 100

s s s

75 75 Mean stress: 75 Mean stress:

Mean stress: 100/2 MPa =50 MPa (100+50)/2 MPa =75 MPa
25/2 MPa =12.5 MPa Deviatoric stress: 100 MPa Deviatoric stress: 50 MPa
50 50 50
Deviatoric stress: 25 MPa
MPa MPa MPa

25 25 25
2=90
3
2=120 3 3
n n n
i) 25 50 75 100 ii) 25 50 75 100 iii) 25 50 75 100
MPa MPa MPa

60 45 60 45 60

=45

Figure SP4.2a Mohr circle illustrations of the three stress states, mean and deviatoric stress, and illustration of the two weak plane orientations (bottom)
for Problem 4-2.

12
 Problem Set: Solutions

Problem 4-3
a) The stress ellipse contains information about the three-dimensional state of stress (magnitudes of s1, s2 and s3) and the
orientations of the principal stress axes (s1, s2 and s3). That means that we can find the normal and shear stresses across/
along any plane orientation that goes through the point or volume to which the ellipse applies. We can also find the maximum
normal and shear stress that can occur and the planes for which these stresses occur (which we already know are the vertical
and 45 inclined planes). All principal stress axes must be either positive (compressive) or negative (tensile).

The Mohr circle tells us the magnitudes (not the orientations) of the principal stresses, whether they are compressive or ten-
sile. From that information we can find the mean stress (center of the Mohr circle) and the differential stress (the radius). Any
point on the circle represents a plane orientation, and using the Mohr diagram we can find the shear and normal stress across
that plane.

b) See Figure SP4.3(a). This is a triaxial state of stress.

c) See Figure SP4.3(b). This is a case of plane stress since one of the principal stresses is zero.

50
3 25 2
s 150 s 50
1 1
100 50
2 100

MPa MPa
50 25

n 3
n
50 100 150 200 25 50 75
(a) 3 2 1 MPa (b) 2 1 MPa

Figure SP4.3 Mohr circle illustrations of the two stress states, and drawing of the stress ellipsoids. Because the second case is one of plane stress, the
ellipsoid degenerates into an ellipse.

13
Structural Geology/Fossen

Problem 4-4
a) For 1 km depth:
sv = rgh=2.7g/cm3 x 9.8m/s2 x 1000m = 26.46 MPa. If we have a lithostatic state of stress, then by definition s1 = s2 = s3 =
26.46 MPa, and the Mohr diagram presentation becomes a single point on the horizontal axis at this value (leftmost red filled
circle in Figure SP4.4).

For 5 km depth:
sv = 26.46 x 5 = 132.3 MPa

For 10 km depth:
sv = 26.46 x 10 = 264.6 MPa

b) The uniaxial-strain model gives the same value for sv as the lithostatic model, but sH becomes less (Figure SP4.4(b)). For
a Poissons ration of 0.3 we get:

sH =[ 0.3/ (10.3)] x 26.46 MPa = 0.43 x 26.46 MPa = 11.4 MPa

sH =[ 0.3/ (10.3)] x 132.3 MPa = 0.43 x 132.3 MPa = 56.8 MPa

sH =[ 0.3/ (10.3)] x 264.6MPa = 0.43 x 264.6 MPa = 113.8 MPa

The mean stress becomes considerably less than the corresponding lithostatic stress, and we have plane stress.

s
100

MPa
50

V V V
n
10 30
50 100 150 200 250
(a) MPa

s
100

MPa
50

H H H
V 150 V
n
10

30 50 100 200 250
(b) V
MPa

Figure SP4.4 Mohr circle illustrations of the lithostatic cases (a) and uniaxial-strain stress models (Mohr circles) (b) for Problem 4.4.

14
 Problem Set: Solutions

Fracture (Chapter 7)

Problem 7-1
The stress data are plotted in the Mohr diagram by plotting corresponding values for sS and sN, shown as points in Figure
SP7.1. Since we know the confining pressure in each case we can also construct a Mohr circle for each of the 8 experiments,
where the lower intercept with the sN-axis represents the confining pressure. The data points can be fitted to a straight line
with slope m around 0.67, making an angle f with the horizontal axis of 33.7. The intersection C is close to 10.7 MPa, and
the Coulomb fracture criterion becomes sS = 10.7 + 0.67sN.

For a confining pressure of 250 MPa (which is very high) we utilize the graphical representation of the Coulomb fracture
criterion that we have drawn in Figure SP7.1 and construct the Mohr circle for the given confining pressure. That is a circle
whose left side intersects the sN-axis at 250 MPa. The top of the circle should touch the failure criterion, because this gives us
the stress conditions at which a plane inclined at 45 would fail. From this point we read off sN 730 MPa and sS 495 MPa.

s
500

=33.7
450
=tan 33.7=0.667

400

350

300

250

200

MPa
150

100

50
C10.7
MPa
n
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750

MPa
Figure SP7.1 Experimental results from Problem 7.1 plotted in Mohr space. A straight line defines a fracture criterion that seems to fit the data very well.

15
Structural Geology/Fossen

Faults (Chapter 8)

Problem 8-1
The data are plotted as poles to planes in Figure SP8.1a. They plot along a great circle whose pole is 080/30. This means
that the fault measurements fit with a cylindri-
cal model. Think of the fault surface as being
curved, just like a fold or a corrugated metal N
roof plate: the pole represents the fold axis
or the direction of the corrugations (Figure
SP8.1b). This direction is the direction that the
hanging wall can move without geometrical
complications and is therefore the most likely
slip direction, which gives us the extension
direction when projected onto the horizontal
plane, since they are normal faults from the
North Sea Rift system.

080/30

Figure SP8.1a Measurements of fault orientations plotted in an equal-area stereonet. The

best fit great circle is shown.

080/30

Figure SP8.1b Geometric interpretation of the fault orientation data: Cylindrical fault surfaces.

16
 Problem Set: Solutions

Folds and folding (Chapter 11)

Problem 11-1
a) The clue here is that the non-folded vein is cross-cut by the folded one. This means that only the folded vein was in the
field of finite shortening. Since the two veins are more or less perpendicular, and since the folds are quite symmetric, we can
assume that the folded vein is oriented along the principal shortening direction (the Z-axis of the strain ellipse). The amount
of shortening can be estimated by assuming constant length (our second assumption), which gives about 45% shortening (see
Figure SP11.1). To construct the strain ellipse, deform a circle so that it its horizontal axis is 0.55 times its original length, and
the vertical axis is 1/0.55=1.82 times its original length.

e=(l-l0)/l0=-0.45=-45%, which means 45% shortening

L0=79.29 cm
A A

X L=43.4 cm ?
1 cm

1 cm
Z 20 cm

Figure SP11.1a Solution to Problem 11-1a).

b) There are two things we can do that give us a quick idea about the class of fold. One is to measure the hinge thickness and
move it around the hinge. If it is a class 2 fold, this thickness measured parallel to the axial trace should be constant. It is not
for our fold. Then lets check if it is a Class 1B fold, in which case the orthogonal thickness should be constant. It is not quite
constant, and for the most part it seems that the limbs are thinner than the hinges. Hence the folds are Class 1C. It is likely that
this is a Class 1B fold that has been modified, which happens when shortening exceeds something like 36%.

1 cm
Figure SP11.1b Checking the layer thickness around the folds. In general, the layer seems to have thinner limbs.

c) To find the dominant wavelength Ld we measure a number of wavelengths. The average is around 6.24 cm (Figure SP11.1c),
but the distribution is somewhat bimodal with peaks at 2.5-5 and 4-4.5. Ideally we would like to see one peak: in this case
some parts of the layer has been more tightly folded than other parts.

17
Structural Geology/Fossen

Interval cm
0-1 7.75
1-2 4.59
2-3 6.1
3-4 3.53 2 5 6
0
4-5 7.1 1 3
5-6 6,37 4 8 9
7
6-7
7-8
7.43
7,81
l=43.4 cm ? 10
11
12
9-10 6.43
6 1 cm 13
10-11 5.18 5
11-12 2.55 14
12-13 8.73 4
13-14 8.1 15
14-15 5.72 3
Average: 6.24 cm
2

0
2.5-3
3-3.5
3.5-4
4-4.5
4.5-5
5-5.5
5.5-6
6-6.5
6.5-7
7-7.5
7.5-8
8-8.5
8.5-9
Figure SP11.1c Measuring wavelength between red points (numbered). Table and histogram shown. Note that you have to convert to cm.

The dominant wavelength is calculated in Figure SP11.1c. What can we say about viscosity at the time of deformation, using
Equation 11.2 in the textbook? We know the thickness (1 cm) and the wavelength (about 6.24 cm), and we solve for mL/mM to
get mL/mM = 6(6.24/2p)3 6. Hence the viscosity contrast is around 6:1, i.e. the vein being six times as viscous as the matrix.
This is not a very high contrast, but obviously enough to cause buckling of the layer.

18
 Problem Set: Solutions

Problem 11-2
a) The dominant wavelength (Ld) is found as for Problem 11-1, and plotted against the estimated layer thickness (h). The
results, shown in Figure SP11-2, nicely illustrates how thicker layers show longer dominant wavelengths. In this case we can
define a linear relationship (straight line in the graph) where the wavelength is approximately 1.5 times the layer thickness.

b) I estimated the amount of shortening by measuring the upper boundary of each folded layer, where l is the distance from
each end point (straight line) and l0 is the distance measured along the folded boundary (which I did on a computer, but it can
also be done by means of a thread of cotton. Using e=(l-l0)/ l0 I got the values shown in Figure SP11-2.

The amount of shortening is very similar for layer A, C and D, but is somewhat higher for layer E (layer B is too short and to
close to C to be considered). We usually expect to find this kind of shortening estimates to be lower for thicker layers because
they tend to start to fold at a later stage than thin layers. In this case we must look for another explanation, probably that strain
is heterogeneous and higher in the lowermost part of the sample.

.19 shortening: 44.5%

.27
.3
.28 .28 .22 .28 Ld=1.71 cm, h=0.24
A .21 .19
.21
.12 .28
shortening: 38.9%, Ld=0.46 , h=0.09 .24
.19
B .09 .24
.24
.14 .2
.13 .14 .24
.22 shortening: 47.7%
C Ld=1.50, h=0.19 cm
.25

.13 .11
.11
D .17 .16 .17

.17
shortening: 44.6%
Ld=0.86, h=0.14 cm

.29
.22
.27
.41 .44 .31
.22
E
.22 shortening: 51.6%
Ld=1.70, h=0.29
1 cm
0.3
E
Ld=1.5h A
h (cm)

0.2
C
D
0.1
B

0
0 1 2
Ld (cm)

Figure SP11.2 Measuring wavelength between red points (numbered). Table and histogram shown. Note that you have to convert to cm.

19
Structural Geology/Fossen

Problem 11-3
Analyze folds that have fairly regular limb shapes. When plotted in the diagram (Figure SP11.3) it appears that the folds are
close to Class 2 (similar) folds. This is typical for strongly sheared quartzites. I chose layers 1, 2 and 3, and I rotated the image
to make the axial traces vertical. I then drew lines dipping 20, 40, 60 and 80 in pairs that touched the inner and outer arcs of
the fold, respectively. The perpendicular distance ta between these pairs of parallel lines were measured and normalized. The
results are shown in Figure SP11.3. These layers seem to have had uneven thickness before folding, which accounts for at least
some of the deviation from the Class 2 trend in the t'a- a plot.

Do the results give us information about the mechanical properties of the layers during folding? Yes, if the viscosity contrast
had been great we would expect some degree of buckling, which would have produced alternating Class 1B and Class 3 folds.
Class 2 folds indicate that viscosity contrast is low or zero.

Class 1A

Layer 2

1.0 1B

Layer 1
Class 1C Layer 2
t' Layer 2
Cl
as
s2

0.5

Class 3

t t0
La

0.0 t'=t/t0
yer
1

Layer 3 0 45 90
Local dip of layer ()

Figure SP11.3 Answer to Problem 11.3.

20
 Problem Set: Solutions

Problem 11-4
The black layers, particularly layer B, show collapsed hinge zones, which gives Class 3 folds when plotted in a ta- a plot
(Figure SP11.4). The white layers are Class 1C folds, i.e. they show some hinge thickening, but less so than the black layers.
The white layers are more competent, and developed local reverse faults in a couple of the hinge zones during the shortening.

F H

E I
B C D
G

Competent
Class 1A
Layer C
1.0 1B
Layer A
Layer A
Class 1C Incompetent

t' Layer B
Layer B
Layer B

0.5
Cl
as

Class 3
s2

0.0
0 45 90
Local dip of layer ()

Figure SP11.4 Answer to Problem 11.4. Symbols on drawing indicate where the measurements were taken.

21
Structural Geology/Fossen

Shear zones and mylonites (Chapter 15)

Problem 15-1
a) Shear strain profiles are shown in Figure SP15.1a, assuming simple shear (g). g is found by rearranging Equation 15.4:
g=2/(tan2q).

A
34.6 B
35.4 45
25 31.5
27.2 31.2
19.2 10
5.4 4
20 9.4
21.8 25.7
33.7 37
34.6 43

1 cm

4.0

3.5

3.0

2.5
cm

2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

A, B
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

Figure SP15.1a Measurements of the orientations of the foliation (q) at various locations across the zone. Bottom: shear strain graphs found by
calculating g from q.

22
 Problem Set: Solutions

b) Offset across the zone can be found by calculating the area under the shear strain graph, as shown in Figure SP15.1b
(graphs). They show fairly consistent results. One of the curves (A) has a lower peak, which is compensated for by a some-
what wider zone.

An alternative way of finding the offset is to calculate y from g using the relationship g =tany. This gives angles that tell us the
local displacement, and if we add these displacements we can construct how a line perpendicular to the zone would change
orientation, as shown in Figure SP15-1b (bottom).

c) The maximum shear strain value is difficult to constrain, because it occurs in the central part of the shear zone where the
foliation is difficult to estimate. If we use the graphs in Figure SP15.1a, we get gmax of 10-14, which from Figure 15.11 implies
a R around 200-275, i.e. very high ellipticities.

4.0 4.0
1/2
3.5 3.5
3/4 1/4

3.0 3.0
1/2 Sum: 16 units=8 cm 1/2
Sum: 16.75 units=8.4 cm
2.5 2.5
3/4 3/4
cm

cm
1/2 1/2 1/2 1/4 1/4 1/4 1/4 1/2 1/2 1/2 1/2 1/2 1/2 1/4 1/4 1/4
2.0 1/2 1/2 1/2 1/4 1/4 1/4 1/4 1/4 2.0 3/4 3/4 1/2 1/2 1/2 1/2 1/2 1/2 1/4 1/4 1/4

1.5 1.5
1/2

1.0 1/2
1.0
1/2

0.5 0.5

A B
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

8 cm

Figure SP15.1b Finding offset from the area under the shear strain graph (profile B), and by using offset across discrete element based on y, which is
found from the measured orientations of the foliation (q) at various locations across the zone.

23
Structural Geology/Fossen

Problem 15-2
a) A shear strain profile from A to B is shown in Figure SP15.2. b) The area covered by the graph gives a displacement of ca.
60 cm, which is close (but not identical) to the 55 cm offset of the marker. c) This may indicate a deviation from simple shear,
as can the variations in shear zone orientation and thickness.

10 cm

60 B
40 cm
55
36
51
49.2 32
45.3 30
39.9 28
41.1
26
15.5
6.2
10.7 22
13.2 20
12.8
16
15
15.5 14
26.3 12
42
53.8
53.8
4
6 Outer
=55 shear
=60A 2
0 cm zone
Inner
shear
zone

=60 D 55 cm
Outer
shear
zone

' =cot '-cot cm

60 0 1
40 B
55 0.122857269 2
53.8 0.154539092 4
35 53.8 0.154539092 6
1.25 42 0.533262246 8
30 26.3 1.445995976 9.7
15.5 3.02853324 9.8
2.5
15 3.154700538 10
25
12.8 3.82416617 12
cm

3.75
13.2 3.686171487 14
20 10.7 4.715000187 16
5 5 5 5 5 2.5 2.5 1.25
6.2 8.627806164 18
15 15.5 3.02853324 20
5 5 5 3.75 41.1 0.568971253 22
10 2.5 39.9 0.618636312 24
45.3 0.412232206 26
5 49.2 0.285826576 28
Sum: 60 cm 51 0.232433764 31
0 A 55 0.122857269 35
0 2 4 6 8 60 0 37

Figure SP12.1 Analysis of the shear zone (Problem 15-2).

24
 Problem Set: Solutions

Strike-slip, transpression and transtension (Chapter 18)

N Direction of
rotation
Problem 18-1
a) The stereoplot is shown in Figure SP18.1a. ISA3
ISA1

b) The orientation of the various structures are consistent with

sinistral sense of shear, based on the information that the zone Direction of
rotation

is N-S striking and the relative orientations of contractional

and extensional structures.

The type of deformation: A simple shear deformation would

have ISA at 45 to the zone. When we look at the orientations
of the axial planes, we see that they have a lower angle to the
shear zone, more like 35 for axial planes of open folds and
25 for tight folds. This could indicate a component of short-
ening (pure shear) across the shear zone. However, the rea-
son why open and tight folds have different orientations can
Direction
of rotation

be explained by the longer history of rotation for tight folds:

they formed earlier and have experienced more rotation. Any ISA1

fold in a simple shear-dominated system rotates from the very

ISA3

moment it forms, so we dont know the initial orientation of Direction of

the axial planes, only that they made a higher angle to the
rotation

shear zone. A similar argument could be made for the faults Axial planes, open folds

(small faults having experienced less rotation). This all fits Contraction/extension direction, Axial planes, tight folds
Normal faults, small
with a deformation type that is close to simple shear. Whether
from small structures/open folds
Normal faults, large

there was a small component of shortening across the zone Contraction/extension direction,
from large structures/tight folds
Reverse faults, small
Reverse faults, large
we dont know. Strike-slip surfaces

c) The ISA are oriented at 45 to the shear zone for simple

shear. Figure SP18.1a Plot of the structures in Problem 18-1. Very approximate
contraction and extension directions are added, based on the orientations
d) Figure SP18.1b shows small-scale structures that could be of the structures. ISA for simple shear are shown as blue arrows.
found in the shear zone.

Shear zone

Veins R Cr Stylolite
en
R ula
tio
P ns Vein systems
Stylolite
N

Figure SP18.1b Structures in a fictive strike-slip shear zone (map scale).

25
Structural Geology/Fossen

Balancing and restoration (Chapter 20)

Problem 20-1
To construct the hanging-wall roll-over we must figure out how the lower part of the pulled-out hanging wall will move. For
vertical shear it will move straight down as far as it can, that is to the detachment fault. The material above will follow the
same path (vertical paths for vertical shear, 45 paths antithetic to the fault in the other case). Think of the hanging wall as
consisting of piles of sand grains, vertical or inclined, depending on the angle of shear.

The resulting hanging-wall geometry is different for the two cases. The rollover is wider and dips are shallower for antithetic
shear. Note that the heave (horizontal component of fault displacement) is smaller for the case of antithetic shear, although the
total extension applied is the same. This makes extension estimates more difficult or uncertain than if everything was vertical
shear. Similarly the throw is different for the two cases.

Vertical shear extension (e)

e
heave = e

throw

Antithetic shear (45)

e

e
heave < e

throw

Figure SP20.1 Solution to Problem 20-1. Vertical shear at the top, antithetic shear below.

26
 Problem Set: Solutions

Problem 20-2
Rigid block restoration means that blocks can rotate and translate. It is not possible to do a perfect restoration of this section
unless ductile deformation is accounted for, but we can get a rough result that can be useful for some purposes.

a) Extension is 17 and 13% for top Statfjord and top Teist, respectively, according to Figure SP20.2.

b) When restoring to top Statfjord Fm. time, there seems to be a residual fault displacement on the leftmost major fault. This
may be evidence for pre-Statfjord activity on this fault. True, fault displacement changes along faults, and many faults in rift
basins have propagated upward (causing upward-decreasing fault displacement), but the displacement gradient would be un-
usually steep to explain the difference in this way.

There is a clear stratigraphic westward thickening of the Lunde Fm. that bevomes obvious after restoration. This may indicate
that a major fault is located to the west of our cross-section that was active during deposition of the Lunde Fm. (late Triassic).

c) The restored versions have some problems. There are some bumps in the restored top Statfjord Formation that should not
be there, and the graben area where E and W-dipping faults interact is problematic. In that area we have reverse offsets at Teist
level when the Statfjord Fm. is restored. This results in a lower extension estimate for the Teist Fm., and it is possible that the
interpretation should be revised in this structurally challenging area.

d) The restorations indicate that the initial dip of the western domino-style faults was around 43. This is a very low initial dip,
which is commonly around 60 or a bit more for normal faults. In contrast, the eastern horst-bounding faults have restored
dips around 60. This may suggest that soft deformation (such as vertical shear) has taken place in the western domino area.

e) An indirect indication of ductile or soft deformation was mentioned in d). In addition, the fact that it is impossible to
restore the layering to a perfectly horizontal layer indicates the presence of such deformation.

27
 l, Statfjord Fm. 1000

involved. .
r. 2000
Brent G

j. Fm
Statf

e Fm 3000
Lund

m
Structural Geology/Fossen

eist F 4000
er T
Upp

1 km l, Upper Teist Fm.

Line 736
5000
960 1040 1120 1200 1280 1360 mbsl

e = (l-l0)/l0 =0.172=17.2%
l0, Statfjord Fm.

28
?

Top Statfjord

e = (l-l0)/l0 =0.127=12.7%
l0, Upper Teist Fm.
Upper Teist Fm
Top Teist

Figure SP20.2 Gullfaks cross-section, showing present and restored lengths of the top Statfjord and Upper Teist formations, and the extensions
 Problem Set: Solutions

Problem 20-3
The answer to this exercise is given in Figure 20.13 in the textbook. The displacement field (Figure 20.13c), which is found
by connecting points that can be identified in the present and restored maps, is close to plane strain in the northern part of the
area and shows the extension direction.

The extension varies somewhat locally, and it can be found from the map as shown in b) in Figure SP20.3.

Any balanced section must be parallel to the displacement vectors.

In general the restoration looks reasonable, but there are some areas of overlap/gaps that need local attention.

l l0 e=0.36

Gullfaks Field
a) b)
Restored
1km
42% area difference

Orientation of lines for restoration

Displacement
field
c)

Figure SP20.3 Original (a) and restored (b) map. The displacement field is shown in c).

29
Structural Geology/Fossen

Problem 20-4.
a) An interpretation is shown in Figure SP20.4a. The first

Ramp
thing to note is irregularities in the stratigraphy encountered
in two of the wells. In the middle well, the Cambro-Ordovi-
cian section is repeated, and we can put in a thrust fault at
the base of the upper Cambrian unit. In the leftmost well the
Silurian is repeated, and we have another instance of a thrust
fault. Then we use the geometric relations between the kink-
folds and ramps, as shown in Figure 16.17 etc. to construct

anticline (fault-
the section.

Hanging-wall

bend fold)

Pc
b) A balancd version is shown in Figure SP20.4b. The loose

O
D
C

C
S

S
ends on the left-hand side line up reasonably well. The res-
toration exercise made me realize that there was a horizontal

Ramp
fault at the base of the Cambrian that was later affected by a
deeper flat fault (lower left-hand part of the section).

c) From the balanced section we calculate shortening to be

around 11% .

Flat
Fore-
anticline (fault-

limb
Hanging-wall

bend fold)

Pc
O

O
D
C

C
S

Ramp
Back-
limb

Flat
Hanging-wall

Ramp
Fault-bend

Figure SP20.4a Interpretation of the cross-section in Problem 20-4.

anticline

fold

2 km
Pc
O
D
C

C
S

30
 Eroded

l
l0
e = (l-l0)/l0 =-0.11=11% shortening

Figure SP20.4b Restored section.

31
Problem Set: Solutions