JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 103, NO.

B8, PAGES 18,119-18,136, AUGUST 10, 1998

Growth fault/rollover systems' Birth, growth, and decay

Thomas Mauduit I and Jean Pierre Brun
G6osciences Rennes, UPR-CNRS 4661, Universite Rennes I, Rennes, France

Abstract. Growth fault/rollover systemsare extremelycommonstructuresof thin-skinned

extensional systemsresultingfromgravityglidingabovesalt.Their development is studiedusing
laboratoryexperiments basedon brittle-ductilemodelswherethesedimentary coverand
synkinematic sediments aresimulatedusingbrittlesandandtheunderlyingdtcollementlayerby
viscoussiliconeputty.The experimentsare comparedto naturalexamplesfrom seismiclines.The
experimental resultsareusedto presenttheevolutionof growthfault rolloversystems,thesebeing
the resultof a finite amplitudeinstabilitywith threedistinctstages:birth, growth,anddecay.Each
of thesestagesis identifiedwith typicalstructures whichcanbe recognizedon seismicsections.A
discussion is presentedon the interactionsin time andspacebetweensyntheticandantitheticlistric
faultsparallelandtransverse to thedirectionof displacement.

1. Introduction However, in most situations, growth fault/rollover (GF/R)

systems result from a complex interaction between brittle
Growth fault/rollover systems are common structuresof (sediments) and ductile (e.g., salt, clays)deforming layers,
sedimentarybasins and, in particular, of deltas and passive which also involve interactions between deformation and
margins[e.g., Terzaghi, 1945; Cloos, 1968; Edwards,1976; sedimentation [Vendeville, 1987; Vendeville and Cobbold,
Rider, 1978; Crans et al., 1980; Mandl and Crans, 1981; Bally 1988; Cobbold and Szatmari, 1991; Vendeville and Jackson,
et al., 1981; Shelton, 1984; Xiao and Suppe, 1989, 1992; 1992a, b].
Nelson, 1991; Rouby and Cobbold, 1996]. They often In the present paper, we use laboratory experiments on
developwhereincompetentrock layers (e.g., salt, anhydrite, small-scale models to analyze the development of growth _

undercompacted clays)are presentat depthoffering potential
zonesof dtcollement and allowing gravity driven deformation
to occur with or without differential sedimentaryloading (e.g.,
deltas). Extensiveseismicexplorationby the oil industryhas
provideda large numberof imagesof growth fault in various
geologicalenvironments.
Consequently, and not leastbecause
of their economic interest, these structures have stimulated
numerousstudiesranging from purely academicto entirely
practical applications.
Normal growth faults. associated with rollovers are
generally called "listric faults" [Suess, 1904]. This term The physicalmodelsdescribedhere are scaled-downreplicas
impliesthat the fault is an upwardconcavemovementsurface of natural examples having simplified rheological and
that transformssteeply plunging displacementsat the surface mechanicalproperties.The dtcollement layer is modeledusing
to nearly horizontalones at depth.The layersdepositedduring
displacementon the hanging wall block are progressively
bent downward,thus giving rise to so-calledrollovers. Listric
faults are commonly assumedto have a constant geometry in
time. The geometryof the rollover is regardedas a recordof
the history of synchronousdeformationand sedimentation.
This type of approachhas been very fruitful in producing
various quantitative models of listric fault and rollover
geometry(see review by Dula [1991]) or analoguemodels of
rollover deformationfor given shapesof listric fault [Ellis and
McClay, 1988; McClay, 1989; McClay et al., 1991,
Buchananand McClay, 1991; McClay and Ellis, 1987a, b;
McClay and Scott, 1991].
'Now at Shell InternationalExplorationandProductionBV, Rijswijjk,
Netherlands.
Copyright1998 by the AmericanGeophysicalUnion.
Papernumber97JB02484.
0148-0227/98/97JB-02484509.00
fault/rollover systems.Models weredesignedto simulate the
gravity gliding of brittle sedimentarycover above a viscous
basalsalt layer. Section3 analysesthe modeof birth, growth,
and decay of growth fault/rollover systems. Section 4
discusses the interactionbetweengrowth faults with opposite
vergence.
2. Modeling Techniques
silicone putties. A well-sorted fine-grained dry quartzsand is
used to represent the sedimentary cover. Experiments are
designed to respect the conditions of dynamic similarity
between the model and the natural example prototype as
definedby Hubbert [1937] andRamberg [1967].
Models are built in a rectangularbox and generally consist
of a 1-cm-thick silicone layer simulating the ductile
dtcollement layer overlain by sand layers representingbrittle
sedimentaryrocks. The brittle cover is composedof a 1-cm-
thick "prekinematic" layer which correspondsto sediments
depositedabove the basal silicone layer before the onset of
extension. The box is then inclined with a variable basal
slope angle, which is kept constant during a given
experiment,and the downslopeendwall of the box is removed
to allow free gliding. Synkinematic layers are simulated
through the sequential deposition of sand layers a few
millimeters thick with contrastingcolors but having identical
isotropic mechanicalproperties.A sketchof the experimental
equipmentand procedureis presentedby Mauduit et al. [ 1997,
Figure 5]. The basal silicone layer is built up with bands of
two alternating colors to provide vertical passive markers

18,119
 18,120 MAUDU1T AND BRUN: GROWTH FAULT/ROLLOVER SYSTEMS
whose later deformation helps reveal the progressive strain
resultingfrom gravity gliding within the ductile layer.
For the interpretation of experiments, we refer to the
coupling that the ductile layers exerts between brittle cover
and basement.This coupling dependson the strength of the
ductilelayer involved. For the NewtonJansilicone putty used
in the experimentsat constanttemperature,the strengthof the
silicone (S) is the productof the viscosity (/•) and the shear
strain, which itself corresponds to the velocity of
displacement(V) parallel to the brittle-ductileinterfacedivided
by the thickness (t) of the silicone layer. Therefore, since
S=V/tla and viscosity is constant,the strength dependsonly
on the displacementvelocity and the thickness. At constant
displacementvelocity, a decreasein thickness of the silicone
layer increasesits strength.In gravity gliding experimentsat
constant basal slope angle and with synkinematic
sedimentation, the velocity of displacementdecreasesless
rapidly than the silicone layer thickness. This leads to a
constant increasein the silicone layer strength and therefore
alsoin the coupling.In addition,sincethe velocityof gliding
increaseswith the basal slope, the coupling also increases
with the basal slope.
3. ProgressiveDevelopmentof Growth
Fault/RolloverSystems
Classicalmodelsof listric faulting generally refer to a
relative displacementbetweenan undeformablefootwall and a
rollover hangingwall. In somerespects,thesemodelscould
apply to synthetic growth faults which dip in the senseof
displacement with respect to the basement (Figure l a).
However, it should be noted that such listric faults would, in
fact, be a short and steeplydipping frictional fault that passes
downwardinto a flat lying d6collement (i.e., ductile shear
zone). Alternatively, suchmodelscannot apply to antithetic
growth faults whose dip is opposite to the sense of
displacement (Figure lb). In this case, there is no single
listric movement surface or zone from the
d6collement, and the sensesof shear are opposite along the
fault and the ductile shear zone situated beneath
rollover. This demonstratesthat such a listric fault (1) is not a
long curved fault instantaneously active along its whole
length and (2) doesnot simply separatea hanging wall from a
footwall.
-.•.................................................
Rollover ........................
Downslop
....
•i',i .•:., . -.:,..½..... Upslope
block
Fault
a trace
Oppositesense
b ofshear
Figure1. Comparison
between
(a) synthetic
and(b)antithetic
The kinematic picture involves two blocks (upslope and
downslope) moving with respect to an underlying basement.
The fault proper is limited to the upper brittle layer (i.e. the
contactbetweenthe downslopeand the upslopeblock, one of
them carrying the rollover). The basal limit of the rollover is
not an active fault but the ghostor trace of a fault.
During gliding and sedimentation, the overburden
lengthens and thickens, while reciprocally, the ductile
d6collementlayer thins. This leads to continuouschangesin
the interaction between brittle and ductile layers.
Consequently,GF/R systemsthat develop between separating
blocks can be regarded as resulting from mechanical
instability with three characteristicstages:birth, growth, and
decay.
3.1. Birth
During gravity gliding, deformation of the overburden
alwaysstartswith symmetricgrabens.Figure2a showspart of
an experimentalmodel with no basal slope (i.e., low viscous
coupling), which displaysa series of symmetricor nearly
symmetric grabens separating tabular rafts. Two relievers
startto developin the middle of the section.Figure2b shows
part of a model with a 2ø basal slope (i.e., initial viscous
coupling stronger than in the previous model). The model
displaysboth tabularrafts and tilted blocks.Tabular rafts have
aspectsratios (length/thickness)higher than those of tilted
blocks. The initial grabensgive way to starting relievers
where the synthetic fault of a graben is preferentially
activated.A comparisonwith Figure 2a showsthat an increase
in couplingfavorsblock rotation and enhancedisplacement
on synthetic faults. This is in agreementwith previous
experimentsby Vendeville and Cobbold [1988] and Allemand
[1990].
The analysis of more than 50 experiments demonstrates
that relievers generally initiate within a grabenbetweentwo
tabular rafts (Figure 3a). They can, however, also initiate as
fault to the half grabensbetweentiltedblocks(Figure 3d). Figures3b and
3c illustrate intermediatesituationswhereonly one of the
of the boundingblockswastilted. Thes•four initial modeshave
direct consequenceson the further development of the
structure.If the growth fault footwall is a tilted block, the fault
progressivelyflattensout (Figures3b and3c). Conversely,if
the growth fault hanging wall is tilted block (Figure3c), the
Fault
block
' ...•.•.,...•}•.
',•..... . •. .•,,.:•'•:•...
•'•.'
•,•:':•& •. • .......
:•?•-c""•;•'•"•%•.
..................
.. Undefarmed
basement
growth
•ault/rollover
systems.
 MAUDUIT AND BRUN: GROWTH FAULT/ROLLOVER SYSTEMS 18,121

Free Boundary

Synkinematic
sandlayers
Prekinematic
.' . ' •.- ,'•-•'.'•..•-•..-
....... .•..•.,•,,,•
.......
"-'..•-?•'.".-•i!•'•'"
•'•'•••:i•i•.
•'"' •' /•'•.......•:••••'"
"•'•••••'•.":'"'"•'•'•-'..•-
layers ............................
...• . • :• .....-•-,•.:•.•:•
.•:••.•..:•:::
.• ........
•.•.•:
•
•:..:.•
:•,..:
•::•:•.•:•.•..•:::.•:.•:•.•:.•...•....•:•,:•
•
........
•..•.•..,•:•:•.,,:•::.•.:..,•.•:
•
•..•...•.,:•:•,.:•.•
•
.....
•..:•:..,•.•
a

DownSlope Incipientrollovers

...

. ..

:::•:•-"
••:•:..--......:
:'•:i .....
:i'.".
.. ,.•.•.
-'.:::--:'•'•:•-?-':•::•'::"•"•'•.•'•'""
:::•:•""'"•""•
.................
"¾:;.•:'.--:':"•--.
..:.
........ "-----"'."-?"..'
,.-:-:=:•.•:...•......"•.-
.....
'. o:::..*...•-:..•
............
'":i".....
':::'?•"'•'::"•:•?::"::•:•';•':::•,:--:
'....:-:"'"•..'•!,:.:?....
'.........
•:':%F.-:'.-..-
.........
•.:•.... ::•..
-'-.'..:.'"-.:•'"•:•'•i•.
"":":"::':"":'---'""":-:
.... '::'
:::" I: i::.:":,•i'""i""..
:. .'..'71'i
i:i.'11•i:-:'
';.,.':•.i•
ii;•111:i;
'"'"-•'-"-.
•..:.:.•.::;•'.
:'"--"-.:::.:::.I
•:..•,,..•..•.:-.•:.....
i,- ..:
• :.: ..":" '::.,
:".?.-'
.•........"."i'!
.............
'•--•-
•:'-'•'":"'-'"'"•
"'•'"ß'""•"•'•'
..
••--'
:'.
. .... :...•.'
.. ß
........
:::'.-.
......
'.'-:.:-...-:-:.::'-
...........
.-•:.::-.t-:'=•:'::•:::•:.•..
:..-•
.......'•...........
:::' "' ""
O
b
5 cm

Figure 2. Experimentalmodelsshowingthe birth of growth fault/rollover systems. (a) horizontal basal limit
and, (b) 2ø basal slope angle.

Rollover
between
two tabular
rafts

Rollover
between
a tabular raft
and a
tilted block ....
-:..:
.....
;..
::,..•:.•:.??..:•--::.....::.............
::;.::.:•:•
• .....
..:•:.:'::-:.
.............................................................

Rollover
between
two tilted
blocks

;2 crn
...

Figure 3. Four types of rollovers, developedaccordingto the natureof boundingblocks. (a) Betweentwo
tabularrafts,(b) betweena downslopetabularraft andan upslopetiltedblock,(c) betweenan upslopetabularraft
and a downslope tilted block, and (d) between two tilted blocks. R, rollers.
18,122 MAUDU1T
ANDBRUN:GROfNTH
FAULT/ROLLOVER
SYSTEMS

progressiverotation of layerswithin the rollover is directly against the basal salt d6collement.This example compares
accommodated by the block tilting without faulting inside the fairly well with experimentalmodels(e.g., Figure 3a).
rollover.

As soon as faulting startsin the brittle layer, the ductile

3.2. Growth
layerreactsin producingvarioustypesof diapiricresponses.
Beneath the graben, the silicone layers rise up almost Onceinitiated,a GF/R systemundergoesa secondstageof
vertically to a level which dependson the rate of sedimentary developmentduring which sedimentsregularly accumulatein
infilling (for a detailed analysis, see experiments by the accommodationspace, thus contributing to the rollover
Vendeville and Jackson [1992a]). Beneath tilted blocks and growth. Even thoughrollovers generallydisplay evidenceof
growth faults associatedwith rollovers, the brittle-ductile continuousgrowth, the main growth fault is not necessarily
interface is affected by triangular-shaped deflections called permanentin spaceand time. Figure 5 showstwo examplesof
rollers whose limbs can be either planar or upwardconcave rollovers that do not result from a single and permanent
(Figures. 1 and 3). The term salt roller was introducedby Bally growth fault. The rollover A was initiated against block B,
[1981] to describesimilar featuresin salt layers on seismic which was then strongly rotated. Three faults can be
sections.It is demonstratedin the followings that rollers play recognizedthat contributed successivelyto the growth of
an importantrole in the developmentof GF/R systems. rollover A. Faults I and 2 were rotated with block B. At fault
Rolloversobservedon seismiclines are very often bounded dipsof around30ø, the faultsstoppedmovingandwerecapped
by horizontal rafts. In the example shown on Figure 4, the by new sedimentarylayers.Displacementwasthen transferred
conjugate faults bounding the initial graben in the to the next fault. Rollover C was initiated against the nearly
prekinematic layer are easily identified. The triangular block horizontal raft D. Here again, even if block D exhibits no
initially located within the graben is subsequentlyrotated significant rotation, three faults are observed instead of a

SW (Seaward) (Landward)NE
a

.1

2-... .. •,•......... . • _2
.....

3' '""
?"':••
:-:::"
'•:'l 'i -3

TWT (s)
b Sequenceof fault development
_ . i i JlLltl•
II•
0---!
................................................................................................................................................
.l--0
- , ...;.•:..
........ __=•
,.,•-•::-v::•;:-:v::•,-•-½,,•;;--=•;;•:::•
:,;•::•----•.................:......:...•.....:.:....•
..:<...:.:..
....... • .........
..•
•.•:•.7••
••. ..... ' "••"
• '•• ...'•••••••
,•,•.;.
:'-•"•".•
• • '••;•"-'
•.• ?[•c• • ..• '•• . •'••••*-'••<'•:•'
• ........ •,, , '•:•A'::•;
........ ½• '••
• ..........

= -- .=:. ;.. ...............

.:.=:,...•.•:½%.:••-"•••-••••••,.•,½..- •

.•-½•"••.."•'• ':• ......:.' . :•..:"'•'E•. .••••'-••:-.•.: .... "•*' '•*.•;3

,-• .• ,. • •.,' .•.......• '•

•-.e,.•t,E•7:
.... .• ß .•;...:......•.½•.• ..... ...•.••-•-.-:.-:.-½., .:..,•-,•• • .- ..•• .•

Figure 4. (a) Uninterpreted

and(b) interpretedversionof a seismicprofile displayinga growthfault/rollover
systemfrom the Gulf of Guineawherethestructuresrelatedto the original grabenare alreadyobservable.White
shading is for the salt; light gray shading is for the prekinematic layer. Seismic da• are used with the
permissionof Elf Angola.
 MAUDU1TAND BRUN:GROWTHFAULT/ROLLOVERSYSTEMS
Downslope
Bssement
Figure 5. Sectionof a model showingtwo typesof growthfault sequence.Numbersand lettersare referredto in
text.
single one. Each of these faults has a limited lifetime during
which it controls the deposition of new layers and their
downward displacement and rotation. When each of these
faults stops moving, it is cappedby new sedimentary layers
and a new steeperfault formed. In both of these examples of
rollovers, the sediment accumulation in the rollover
continuousbut controlled by a sequenceof growth faults. In
both types of sequence,the successivefaults are initially steep
but with increasing extension they rotate and become more
flat. Others examplesshowing similar growth fault sequence
are illustrated on Figures 3a to 3d and 6b and 6d. Some
experiments, however, provide evidence of a single growth
fault accommodatinga large amplituderotation of the rollover
(e.g., Figures 6a and 6c), but these examples are far less
common.
Figure 6 shows the basic modesof deformationwithin
rollovers duringtheir growth stage. When the rollover starts
growing on a tilted block, the rotation of successivelayers
does not require any additional faulting within the rollover
(Figures3c, 3d and 6a). When the rollovertakesplacewithin a
graben between two tabular rafts, the rotation of layers is
dominantly accommodatedwithin the rollover by faults
dipping oppositeto the main growth fault plane (i.e.,
antithetic, Figure 6b)or by conjugate patterns of synthetic
and antitheticfaults (Figure 6c) called "keystone grabens"by
previous authors(as definedby McClay and Ellis [1987a, b]
and Vendeville and Jackson [1992a, b]). In both of the above
cases,the sequenceof antitheticfaulting is directedtowardthe
main growth fault. The antithetic faults are planar or slightly
upwardconvex and have steep dips which are not modified
during progressivedeformation. The synthetic faults undergo
rotation togetherwith the sedimentarylayers so that the older
the fault, the lower is the dip (Figures 6b and 6c). The rotation
of syntheticfaults is also responsiblefor their upwardconvex
shape. The intersection points of synthetic and antithetic
faults migrate towardsthe main growth fault during rollover
widening(compareFigure 6c and 6d). This fundamentaltype of
geometrywas recognizedin previousmodelsof listric faults
[e.g., Mc Clay and Ellis 1987a, b; Vendeville and Jackson
1992a, b]. In Figure 6d, where rollover width is larger than in
Figure 6c, the conjugatefault systemdisplaysa fish backbone
pattern.When the main growth fault flattens out, the rollover
18,123
Sequenceof growth
Sequenceof growth faultagainst
fault associated a tabular raft
with a tilted block
2 cm
widens more rapidly and, conversely,the rate of layer rotation
decreases.In this context, Figures 5 and 6d show examples
where the rotation of the growth fault and the widening of
rollover are controlled by the tilting of the upslope block.
This contrasts with Figures 6b and 6c, where the upslope
is block is a tabular raft. Another consequenceis an increasein
the migration rate of conjugatefault intersectionswithin the
rollover.
The seismic lines of Figures 4 and 7 display conjugate
faults systems within rollovers where, as in the above
experimentalmodels, the antithetic faults dominate. In both
examples,the sequenceof antitheticfaulting is directedtoward
the main growth fault. .
In many experiments, rollovers display three types of
geometric anomaly which reflect the unsteadinessof growth
faults (Plate la and lc): (1) irregular limit of the rollover base,
(2) presenceof local drag folds, and (3) variations of the
dihedral angle between layers and the rollover basal limit.
Drag folds are often recognized, and are also observedon the
seismiclinesin Figures4 and7. In contrast,the irregularlimit
of the rollover base is difficult to identify on seismicsections.
However, the example shown in Figure 8 clearly displays an
irregular limit of the rollover base.
Plate I presentsan analysis of two GF/R systemswhere o•
is the angle betweenthe top of one layer and the fault trace,
and • is the dip of the rollover basal limit (Plate la and 1c).
Both plots present the same characteristics. The mean
variation of a lies between 70ø and 45ø, and curve displays a
single minimum which correspondsto a changeof slopeof the
curveof mean• values.However,this minimum occursearlier
in Plate lb (layer 5) than in Plate 1d (layer 9). The decreasein
a correspondsto a flattening of the growth fault toward the
surface at the time of layer deposition. Conversely, an
increasein a correspondsto a steepeningof the fault. In Plate
l d the decreasein a, i.e., fault flattening, is slower than in
Plate lb. This could be due to the fact that the fault rotates
along with the upslopeblocks (on the right of Plate l c). The
rapid decreasein o• in Plate lb occursduring the progressive
growthof a crushedwedgewhoseupperboundaryfinally dips
at 45ø. This boundary remains active during the subsequent
stageof fault steepening.Similar crushedwedgesalso formed
18,124 MAUDUIT AND BRUN: GROWTH FAULT/ROLLOVER SYSTEMS

High rotation

:':5(';
..........
.:•:•:•.?.-.•:,:..:.•..:.!•!:•!•!•:•!•!!:•.....-'...m".g•
.....
::::-:-.;:..-•'fi•:11!::
....................
Low rotation

Sequenceof
antitheticfault Sequenceand rotation
• of the syntheticfault
.................................
•:::•::.•:.•.-•::•:•
.....................
:.•.!•,.)........•'.
......:• .................................
:i'.
........
.. . ,.._,,.•..,•,:'-:'-•:•5::::::.i•.:•::•'.:..•:•¾•:?•::.::.::::•:•:...,•
:.•:•,.,, _ .
....
•...,.,,.;:.".'•'•"'•'•'•' ',li• •..•.-:. ....':::"
'•l•'"'.-'.•:.-:..':•.'•a•,.:..',•..•,•
, .: .":,•t' .

..........
"11 ß
:...:':.::.-.::...
.....
'.:l•:.•t'•....•,%
.....""-':.•:....•
....
i:.;:•.•:•'•'?.•i::•!!:'!!•?-??•::•!:?i'•.'.•;:.
"'
.....
•-•'
.'•-:;•:,,::.:-.-..:.•'-,
.......
..•';?.ii:??•:"
No rotation

Sequenceof conjugatefaulting

.....
:::":':•::::":'•'-:z:i':•;'":':•:"•'":•::'•"•:•
:::..;:::...'.,•
..:.:...:.:.:.::'
::;;::...0.:::,
,::::•
..................................
......½,:.:,:::::::.:.:?.?.::'"
'•'•:•:.'""'.'"""/..i'.'-.'"'"",•:•"•"•
:::.,
..............
: _ ,4
...........
•---,O:•:•:•.:....•:•/•!.!•!•
.........
. ..........
/-•""
.........
•!i!!!•!!!!i•...:•.•....`:•:?.:i!•?.`::..•.•!•.:....:T.•.;".;.:.•:...•:;.:C•..•..•..•
• .•.. •...• ...-..........
i"..."'.::::-•:.•.-
No ro;ation

FishBackbone 5 crn
pattern

Figure 6. Sectionof modelsshowing the basic modesof layer rotation and faulting within rollovers. (a)
rollover growing on a tilted block. The rotation of successive layers doesnot requireany additional faulting
within the rollover. (b) Rollover growing betweentwo tabular rafts, rotation of layers is accommodatedby
faultsdippingoppositeto the main growthfault plane.(c) An increasein rotationof layersis accommodated by
a keystonegrabens(conjugatepatternsof synthetic and antithetic faults). Antithetic faults have steep dips
which are not modifiedduringprogressivedeformation.Synthetic faults undergorotation together with the
sedimentary layersso that the olderthe fault, the lower is the dip. (d) Rotationof syntheticfaultsis responsible
for their upward convex shape.R, rollers.

in several other experimental models (Figures 3 and 6b). A
comparablewedgeis seenon the seismicline in Figure 4. The
sequencesof fault growth illustratedin Figure 5 also document
the early effect of flatteningduring growth fault development.
During fault steepening, second-orderoscillations of a
occur. They correspond to the irregularities observed in the
rollover basal limit and are due to faulting instabilities.A first
fault F• initiatesat steepangle(600-70ø) and then rotates down
to a critical dip of 45ø F'• (Figure 9a). A crushedwedgeis
createdbetweenF• andF'• if the footwallblock doesnot rotate
(Figure 9a). Then a new steep fault F• initiates in the rollover
whosetip is connectedto the baseof the crushedwedge(Figure
9a). MovementalongF•createsa dragfold in the hangingwall
(Figure 9b). The overburdenwedge between F• and F'• is
internally deformed,allowing F• to rotate and flatten until a
new steep fault F_,initiates and the cycle starts again (Figure
9b). Each cycle is responsiblefor a drag fold in the rollover
and for a hump in the rollover basal contact (Figure 9c).
However, the mean dihedral angle increases, from cycle to
cycle, so that the tz and• valuesconvergetowarda common
value of about 650-70ø. The experiment on Plate l d was
stoppedjust before this stagewas reached.
3.3. Decay
The growthof a GF/R systemcontinuesas long as gliding
of the rollover above the ductilelayer is possible. Figure 10
 MAUDLIlTANDBRUN:GROWTHFAULT/ROLLOVER
SYSTEMS 18,125

SW (Seaward) (Landward)NE
a

TWT
b Sequence
ofantithetic
faulting Sequence
ofsynthetic
faut•mg
ß---;...•=•
:•.',*:.
,.:*',•-'"•-"-.• .. •*"•'-'•"':'•'•':?7Y.'" "'.T.•:•
7'.'..•;.7:.7".':":.....::.:::.
'...•:•;..::<:•.•:'•..-•:'•:,•'-:
:5
-:•'
'-..........
:'•'?.'-.: •.....:•'::':?•'
'•<-•'• "•) -••'•
'•..:'.. :..•:.-•..'.•
'..-:•:
.;'• .:•.'...........
'; -..'
.......
'-.';
.•'•&•:"•.'.'•. • :" '•;.-•.:-'
.....•.........
'•'•-•.::•:...z.:',
•..•.'
.;'•.'."'5'•'
:•"=•..........
•'•-'.:
.......
•'"• • ............
•;'•:;•'•.5•-•
•
..•.=.•"e
>'...... • ..•'•.-.-.-•.
•:.:7•-•-.:...•
.• .:•-•:•;..•....•:'•:•.:.-,
'•;•-•::•='-;,'•:
:•,•.•.-•"' •' ..•:;;........... •"•.• •:.'• •.;;•.•.•.: :.•,•

•'•...• ".•.... ; ........

•.;'•,'• •-'•-=•.=•'•> .;..•:.-'
"7'
.'• ;=...-.-.:
•-•::•
......
ß..>•=<-.•.•.:
•'• ......:•'•,.'--:;.:•'>:=-=-•
.•'•.' ........
: ;•-. •'•

•::::.-•'---'-'--':'---•
ß =-/• ...........
.• '•":•7
::• • '•'.• '-':."-'
";•"•...•'•'-'=•
'•).• '"•:: •'=;..<
:"."
'"•" "•;•.:;-•-
• "'"•
•• •..,?-•-•:';-•:'
..-:•'-:'•-•..,:...'.:.7:.

•.-•.•,.,••,.•:..:.,•...?=•:.....:.. -.•
•..:.:.:;• :.....• :.•--..•:. :.::•. :.-•.•.•.:;•. :........:.----=-•
...............
'"'•••:'•%..:..• "'• '•%•"•..--;•..•.•" -"'•,.7.-;"•; '.•:•-;.--.:
.........
•.•::;;::..•-
.'5;.... '
.....
-•.•-..•,••,•••••.••••••••••.,•....•.•.•••;;•.. ;:>..:....•.•...
.....
.•••
•......• .........................

;:.-..•....:..
......
....-..:
.........
:..?:::.?
.....
....•...:.•.-..-...•--.-.
......
•., .:.-
...•'........•...---..•:•:...
:.•,-?•=•.:.:•:•.•=.•:=.•:•=•%]•i•=•.•<•....•..-..
.......
:.':.'.....
..... •..........
. ...'..:-.,.'
...........
•=...•
..:.•...•.

:'"•':.:¾::•'•"•.•":;=.:;:;'•'•',••.•:
_•"•-"•.-".:.?
-;;;;•7";;.•:./:
=•'...;
........
;:;-;.;=:;;;•:;.:.'.::,-...::."7::.:.-::•'"
"•••7"<..
"• --.
;;7..,-.
:;.•:..-'=.•==*•="':'•=•7'"'•'";;';;•;;•;;•
•='"•='•'?•':•
..........
• •"=..'::.'•-•: .-'ßß..---..:•-"-'-
'*-;•......,2:.-
..............
: "="•.-...'"•
.........
'--'-T•-•
"...-.'
.... --':":
":'7'-=•'C•
<"•".:"•-"•?
.... '?;'•"•""'..•.:.
ß.-;";'
.•":"
'.':"• 4 I•-• "•
,•.•-•...•.':??:.'..':-.":'.:?•>•:•:.'•'•'::.' =:::•.?•;•.;':'.:.'.'....':•:.:
:.-:•-';:;•,=;.-':'<"'"'"'T.'::'.'..-.:
:':;=•'..:.: ......
:':.::.2"'.
.............
5•=.:'?;=•';.•¾....•:•.?.;
......
••J '."•
:•.•z.•....:;•..--'.:.:
..,.......... ••..-'-..•j•
.........
•:...•..
.......• ,•-----. .....• -........:-..":;••..•-.... .......•.. :•.....-•....
.............................................................. ......
ß.-.':-
....................
;..... ..•.•.•-•.:.:: . ....•..•;;.;/-,,,
2.2.,.'" ..•= .•.•?;;••-. ' -:
..................................
....
%..=•.•.-..-:•.•=.•?,=:.:?;;-;;:;;
ß
•-.;........•
...-...:•
..........
,< -.•..•.•:;./•="•...•'' ...';.
•;=.;•..,•=:**:•.,.•.:
' .......-.;....:
•'•.•==:::;::'=.;•
....;. "............
•=.=•.=.•,
.-..:T•
•......
.¾.;;.;..
....... ..;>.•.
:..-:-;.
?: 7:..•;;,
• .•:,.'..-'•:•=
:.::'.:
.:.•:';....•..•-..•=:=.•=•.•=:
'................
••..•••••.••••=•::
.... •,......:.?'•'? ...... . .........:•, .•. •. •.••• , .-......=.•....•=:
........• :.

TWT(s)

Figure 7. (a) Uninterpretedand (b) interpretedversion of a seismicprofile displaying a growth fault/rollover

systemfrom Gulf of Guineashowing one of the most typical patternsof conjugatefaulting within rollovers.
White shadingis for the salt, light gray shadingis for the prekinematiclayer. Seismic data are usedwith the
permissionof Elf Angola.

illustrates the three modes of decay which can interrupt the main listric fault is replacedby a-graben.The rollover is then
growth of a GF/R system. cappedby the layerswhich laterallyfill the graben. This type
From left to right on Figure 10a, growth faults I and 2 are of graben developmentcorrespondsto a falling diapir, as
successivelyabandonedand capped, thus demonstrating a describedby Vendeville and Jackson [ 1992b]. In our models,
seawardsequenceof growth faulting. No particular structure it is the roller locatedbeneath the growth fault that falls. As
develops when these GF/R systems cease growing. previously seen, the growth fault can stop moving, to be
Displacementis transferred seawardto the next growth fault. abandonedand then capped. The underlying roller is then
This mode of decay is specificto syntheticGF/R systems. preservedat a late stageof evolution with a basementblock
Figures10band 10c showa very commonmode of decayof coupledat its extremities (Figure 10a). When the roller falls,
both synthetic and antithetic GF/R systems, in which the conjugate normal faults develop at the roller top and the
18,126 MAUDU1TAND BRUN:GROWTHFAULT/ROLLOVER
SYSTEMS

SW(Seaward) (Landward)
NE

1
1

ß •'

ß•.,•,•.......
• ..........
. ...:..-..,.•.-
. •.......• _,.•.... ;•
•.•.•••..,•:•..•-,•'•-'•
.....
•.:.•, •,..-.,•:• ,•.,...,.•..•
..... .......•.... .•,,,•.•.•..;•: ß ..•
.,•-:.•.,•;•.•.,•:•...•:.• ..• •.,
•.,,-•.•'•:
•.•..•.?•...-•.-...;
.,•....:.•
..•-•,:.•..... . :,•.•.•:...•?:•'"'•.•.•.•
.....•....•'....•..-•;.'-•:•:'•:•..-.,.•.•..•.•:•.:.•:-'•.•- ,•..-..•,.•:-.2•
•'••.•'•[•' ,....,:•.•;.:.
•':'.-.•

•..•......•.•.,•
.....•, .",•%,'
:•'•"• '-•::.•,•-• •"2•.•.
:.•½•.:.'
'•. ".•;:•.'•-%..•,•.•.:•-•,•:.•:,•-.
'•'-'=•:"-i':'•;-'•:•'
f•..-.-••.:•'•..•' .2.•*•.*'•:•..•*";• .:.'•,;•:'-..'•,?•' •.•..•;:• •'•'•'•::.
•2•'.3.•......

•.../•.•. :.•...• • ........ • ...... • ....... ..v.. ..- . -•. ........................... • ..... .: - ........... • ..... • ....• ................. • .........

(s)
.,,,.,
,,,.,.,.,.,.,.
.... .. .. : ...• . •: .......... •.....:,,.
......... ,_,:.,.,.
....... .,.,..... _....

Figure 8. (a) Uninterpreted

and(b) interpreted versionof a seismicprofiledisplayingan antitheticgrowth
fault/rollover
systemfromtheCampos basin(Brazil)[afterDemercian et al., 1993].Notetheirregular
limit of
the rolloverbase.Whiteshadingis for the salt. Seismicdataare usedwith the permissionof Petrobrasand
Tectonophysics.

growthfault is replaced by a graben.In Figure10b, the and is cappedby new layers. This can only happen in
experiment washaltedduringfall of theroller.In Figure10c, synthetic GF/R systems. Under some circumstances,an
the roller hastotally disappearedandthe baseof the graben antitheticgrowthfault candevelopinsteadof a graben.The
fill is nearlygrounded to the basement.This modeof decay diachronouscombination of a synthetic growth fault which
occursin both syntheticand antitheticGF/R systems. developfirst, and then an antithetic growth fault which
The seismicline shownon FigureI I showsan exampleof a interactswith the syntheticfault, gives rise to a turtle-back
roller that is startingto fall. The main growthfault, in this growthanticlinewith an asymmetric internalstructure[e.g.,
case antithetic, is cappedby a synclinal depocentre.A Demercianet al., 1993,Figure10]. A moredetailedanalysisof
conjugate patternof incipientfaultsforeshadows a future turtle-backanticlinesis presentedelsewhere[Mauduitet al.,
graben.Insteadof creatinga grabenwhichoffsetsthe main 1998].Figure13 illustrates thismodeof decayon a morethan
growthfault,rollerfall caninitiatea newgrowthfaulttowards 3 km longrolloverlatercutby a graben.The geometryof the
the front(Figure12). Duringits fall, the salt roller is split in reflectorsindicatesthat the rollover and the main growth fault
two: a relict salt pillow is trappedat the baseof the rollover arecappedby the UpperCenomanian sediments.
and a new, smaller salt roller is forms below the new growth
fault. However, because such a configuration does not 4. Interaction Between Synthetic
representdecayof the GF/R systems,rollover growth is and Antithetic Listric Faults
uninterrupted.
The last modeof decayoccurswhen the back part of the Thin-skinned extensional systemsdue to gravity gliding
rollover is cut by a graben (Figure 10d). As the graben above salt typically involve both synthetic and antithetic
initiates andamplifies the main growth fault stops moving GF/R systems. Bothtypesareseento occurin the directionof
 MAUDUIT AND BRUN:GROWTHFAULT/ROLLOVERSYSTEMS 18,127

, I . ! I
O O O
Ig • 81 8 o
016u¾ oiõu¾
18,128 MAUDUIT AND BRUN: GROWTH FAULT/ROLLOVER SYSTEMS

Initialsystem

Secondsystem Crushed'wedge

Thirdsystem Dragfoldassociated
to F•

Figure 9. General model deducedfrom experimentswhich summarizesthe progressivedevelopment of

structuresrelatedto the unsteadiness
of growthfaulting.(a) Initial system;a first fault F• initiates at steep angle
(60o-70ø) and thenrotatesdown to a critical dip of 45ø F'• . A crushedwedgeis createdbetweenF• and F'•. (b)
Secondsystem;a new steepfault F 2 initiatesin the rollover. The tip of F 2 is connectedto the baseof the crushed
wedge.MovementalongF2createsa dragfold in the hanging wall. The overburdenwedgebetweenF2and F'• is
internally deformed,allowing F2 to rotate and flatten until a new steep fault F., initiates and leads to a third
system.(c) the cycle startsagain.Each cycle is responsiblefor a drag fold in the rollover and for a hump in the
rollover basal contact.

gliding (e.g., Figure 2) and can be observedon dip lines on 4.1. Transition Parallel to the Displacement
seismicdata [e.g., Duval et al., 1992]. Fault maps also show
along-striketransitionsfrom syntheticto antithetic systems. Figure 14a showstwo nearly symmetricrollers boundedby
Thesetwo types of transitions give rise to structuresthat are
diverging rollovers. The rollovers comprise small normal
sometimesextremely complicatedin three dimensions. faults dipping towardsthe roller, indicatingthat divergenceon
In someparticular areas, antithetic growth faults may betop of rollers is accommodatedby a nearly symmetrical small
initiated at early stages of gliding and can even be the graben.During divergence,faults are cappedby new layers and
dominant style of faulting over wide areas (e.g., Gabon passively transportedand rotatedon the roller limbs (Figure
margin; [Liro and Coen, 1995]. Antithetic GF/R systemscan 14a, also left side on Figure 14b). This type of structure,
also be vast extent (e.g., more than 50 km wide, Brazilian which is made of two neighboring rollovers in mirror
margin [Mohriak et al., 1995; Szatrnariet al., 1996]). These
symmetry, results from the fall of a symmetrical roller. A
early antithetic growth faults likely correspondto particular
syntheticgrowth fault developedat a later stage on top of the
type of initial and boundary conditions such as salt basin left-hand roller. The late developmentof a synthetic growth
geometry,' thicknessof salt layer or depositionaldynamics. fault corresponds to a change from symmetrical to
This typeof antitheticgrowthfault is beyondthe scopeof the asymmetrical accommodation of extension above the rollers.
present paper, which concentratesonly on the more general We infer that this is due to the progressive thinning of the
casein which syntheticgrowthfaultsdominateat a early stage ductilelayer which increases the brittle-ductile coupling.
and antitheticgrowth faults develop later. When coupling increases,horizontal shearing of the ductile
 MAUDUIT AND BRUN:GROWTHFAULT/ROLLOVERSYSTEMS 18,129

Stillactivesystem Sealedsystems

Abandonment
a
and capping
of the
growthfault

synt.hetic---.syste
m
Sealed rollover Late graben

':....•*:%::.:'!.•'•:•
'•. :--::'
'"::•.•"'i-•;•
.... ...•.:...,.•.
•"•;•
.•..... .::•
•...•.....
:'"•"½•. .?•::.•'•' •.. ..
'"'**,•;::•¾•" ...:•:::•.•::.•.......•
..............
,•:::•:•:• .:...•
.•.•.?•'•.t:.' .....
..:,:.•:.':-.-:::,::...• •.:•?,.. •k•.•;t-...•.•-•;. ;:.•:•::'
........
-..:.•
Replacement
of the growth Falli• r•ler
fault
Antitheticsystem
by a graben
c .

'•'.•,:;:•:• .'•{• •-: .•: ::•::'•. ";•'•:}:

"•:•;;:..•:.
"•,•' ',•,•½•::;•½•:."
.,:-'•:•;;:•
......
%.•i,%.:' '

F•I.• r•ler
:::::::: :::: :.•.,•,•,•:-• ::::. -.... :._:.:: - • •- --:u--:%- : • ::::::: =========================================================================:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Late gra• S•I• •1over

,• ,,,,,,•m• • :2•-:::-:::::
•- • .... •:

Rollover ?*.':%•;•.½:½;•:•:½•'•::7•
"•'"'•'-•••• ....Z .............................
.•;•'•;'•
....%' ",.......
. . ..........
½:.•..ß.... ....... . . •{•;..:•.•:•t½.
ß.::•--.•½•:•,;::.•:;•.•.
•... .-.....• .......

cut by :..--•?":'"•½j•'•,;?&-,
." ß %½
:-•%.,7•.,
*' ............ ';½ "%::.a:-:::;';::•½4:•.%?•:5,
-
a graben

5 cm

Figure 10. Various models showingthe three modesof decay observedin experiments.(a) seawardsequenceof
growth faulting. Growth faults 1 and 2 are successivelyabandonedand capped. Displacement is transferred
seawardto the next growth fault. (b) Main fault replacedby a grabenon a syntheticGF/R systems.(c) Main fault
replacedby a grabenon an antithetic GF/R systems.When the roller falls, conjugatenormal faults develop at
the roller top and the growth fault is replacedby a graben. Note that in Figure 10c, the roller has totally
disappearedand the baseof the grabenfill is nearlygroundedto the basement.(d) back part of a rollover cut by a
graben.As the grabeninitiatesand amplifiesthe main growth fault stops moving and is cappedby new layers.
This can only happenin syntheticGF/R systems.

layer (herewith a top-to-left senseof shear)is transmittedto was dominated by block tilting. Therefore fault I was
the brittle layer, thus enhancingthe developmentof synthetic developed first and accommodatedlandward tilting of fault
faults (whose senseof shear,is also top-to-le•. blocks A and B. Then, fault 2 starts to cut through the
The next two examples(Figures 15a and 15b) illustrate how synkinematiclayers depositedabove block A prior to layer L.
synthetic and antithetic faults often develop diachronously. The wedgingof post layer (L) depositstoward fault 2 indicates
Figure 15a shows a graben delimited by two nearly planar that slip on fault 2 was faster than on fault 1. This example of
faults whose displacementhistory is diachronous.The seaward diachronous interaction between synthetic and antithetic
thinning of strata up to layer L indicatesthat the first stage faults was controlledby the fall of roller R located beneath the
18,130 MAUDU1TAND BRUN:GROWTHFAULT/ROLLOVER
SYSTEMS

SW (Seaward) (Landward)NE
a

0 ' .-.-.•.--•::-•••i..--•,•:•.,,.....•i.
..- •:i
.-•...•..-•-:-..••:•.•
...••:•
........
-........................................................................................
'...............................................................
•.......................................
-•*•,•.---•-•,•:•"0
' ......
•:--'-•:.:•-•-•:-•:,.•.--'•,,•--,
...................
'• '.':•*::-':*'"•.*•':'.•..•:•::'..•'•:
..'•...... •-. •--•. ..•..•::: '.-'-'.,•.:..-;.;:..-.-......,
'..".::--.:'..'::'-"'::'..-...,:.-.:...•.•t•?c•-:-.-•;•.:-•..'•.
....... ?-• ......
"'"•".-."•::---
•--. - .".':
'-"•'.'-'."-':.•.:',..•:.**:•*•:"-•'""•"'"'•"'•'•'••••5:•4•'
•:•.'•'•'•'•.':" c,.:::•.:.-'.-:..::'•*
¾'-•::-'..... :•:''

':: '•-'•
••..• .•;'•., .• .:.;s:'.•
:2:'•••••••Sc
• - '• - '•• '•'- ' ;.':.*
•.:';;;..........
• • •'**•••* >•*''•"•••••••'*:"• '•••;*•'*'•z.';;•?;;-..'.••

:'•;,:'v.:,.'"':
•;S•:;*."
:'*
•-':-•*.•*
•':.:,:.-:.r'
*"
."•,•;'.****-•?•.•<.,:.•?•?;a,-'
•'/•/•?•..*>'**'•';.
f/*•3_.•"'-
'..;'.
4?.,.,- '*,
....... •- ..• •, .... ß . . •.2•.• ..-•:'•. ß., .......,. .. • .,• ...... .. .. .,• ............ :.:...•.
.......-**-

•.•.;•%.,......•,.•.
,. ,.•;•--;• .........
••c•d• .•.•*• ....... ,.• ;..•
..... ..,......•<
•.:•...* ;,•':.....,-'.•;•
..... '* •..,.,..• .-.,..,•; ;•- ......
..-,..'•*'••'*'*••••S•-•-••%•:*•'• .........--**:;•,.......-
.......
-:::
..:.:..***...?:.--•,..:...**;.:.......•
"• "••••'••••'••:••.7•... •:,.. •-;--.....:...
......................
*.,.....-,.-:.:•
......
•,. ;•-. • • .•: .• •••,. ****•-•.:.• •..,............• ..,....;•...,•..,,••, .•.•.•; .. , ,• •:• •-.. •;,: .,• • .:,... . ..... .: ß . , ........... . .•....•.

(s)
b

ß., - ............. .-.:

....,.
..... -.-.
-.•:w
...... ,......
•e.• ..............
........,.**:,.:.:,:.....,
.:..
..........
, ...-...5
.....
...... • •-

I 1

ß
•....:. ....-.*'
.'. .. .j..•
...... _-•

2 -2

...
';..•-..:.•;,::..
:-.,::....%;;'...j.:.}
'.,?.:?
..•;.;:...•:*-••

Figure 11. (a) Uninterpretedand, (b) interpretedversion of a seismic profile displaying an antithetic growth
fault/rollover system,from the Gulf of Guinea, undergoinga roller fall. White shading is for the salt. Seismic
data are usedwith the permissionof SchlumbergerGeco-Prakla.

block A. Fault 2 was initiated when the lower corner of block
B groundedonto the basement.Figure 15b shows, on a larger
scale, how similar interaction between the synthetic and
antitheticfaults 1 and 2 can producea turtle-backanticline.
4.2. Transitions Transverse to the
Mapping of growth faults show that synthetic and
antithetic faults often coexist along strike. To explain such
situations, it is tempting to searchfor transfer faults parallel
to the displacementdirection which would accommodatethe
change in asymmetry. However, such transfer faults rarely
exist between neighboring synthetic and antithetic GF/R
systemsand are neverobservedin experiments.The transition
is more often accommodatedby complex patterns of normal
faults. Two types of along strike transition were observedin
the experimentsillustratedby serial sectionsin Figure 16.
The sectionon Figure 16a showsa synthetic GF/R system.
In the upslope block, the presenceof a residual antithetic
rollover indicates that the system underwent an initial
symmetric stage before becoming dominantly asymmetric
along a main synthetic fault (FI)(Figure 16a). The section of
Figure 16c displaysa totally different pattern wherethe major
fault (F2) is antitheticbut whosemajor displacementis in fact
youngerthan (FI). The displacementaccumulated on (FI) was
Displacement partitioned along strike among a set of conjugate faults
defining a nearly symmetricalgraben (Figure 16c). Later fault
slip was preferentiallylocalized along a singleantitheticfault
(F2) in this graben. The overall developmentis suchthat the
two transitions from symmetric to asymmetric and from
synthetic to antithetic took place in a three-dimensional
structureof iimited extent.
5. Discussion
Classical models of listric faults and associated rollovers
assume(1) that the fault separatesa footwall from a hanging
wall, (2) that its shapedoesnot changewith time, and (3) that
rollover geometryand internaldeformationdirectly dependon
fault shape.The analysis presentedhere, which is at variance
 MAUDU1TAND BRUN:GROWTHFAULT/ROLLOVERSYSTEMS 18,131

SW (Seaward) (Landward)NE
a

-1

b •
TWT (s)

(s)

Figure12.(a)Uninterpreted and,(b)interpreted
versionofa seismic profiledisplayinganantitheticgrowth
fault/rollover
system,
fromtheGulfofGuinea, showinga saltpillowtrappedin therollover.(1) traceof initial
growth faultand(2)secondgrowthfault.
Thejumpfrom! to2 occurs duringtherollerfall.Whiteshading isfor
thesalt,darkgrayshadingisfortheprekinematic
layer,andlightgrayshadingisa marker. Seismic dataareused
with the permission
of Schlumberger
Geco-Prakla.

withprevious
concepts,
considers of growth ductilelayerincreases
theassociation
fault and rollovers as the result of instability which is
governedby the brittle-ductilecoupling.Figure 17
summarizesthe main listric developmentof growth fault
rollovers systems.
Initial couplingis mainlycontrolled by the thickness
of
theductilelayerandthebasalslopeangle.If thethickness of
theductilelayeris high andthebasalslopeangleis low, the
couplingis weak,whereas it is strongwherethethickness
of
theductilelayeris smallandthebasalslopeangleis high.
Whateverthe initial coupling, becausethe ductilelayer
thins duringextensionand gliding, the couplingincreases
thecouplingbetweenbrittle andductile
layers.With mediuminitial coupling,the ductilelayercannot
rise up to very shallowlevels, whichpreventssymmetrical
divergence on topof the ductilerollers.The transitionfrom a
symmetricgrabento an asymmetric,syntheticgrowthfault
occursearlier andgives rise to synthetic GF/R systems(see
Figure 2b). In other terms, dominantsynthetic faulting
follows an early stage of symmetric faulting. For strong
initial coupling,the development
of tilted blocksis favored.
Block tilting rapidlycontributesto a segmentation of the
ductilelayerasthelowercornerof tilted blocksgroundsonto
the basement.

continuously.When gliding starts, symmetricgrabensare As the ductilelayerthins,couplingincreases

leadingto the
initiatedwhichcutthe prekinematic layerinto a seriesof rafts. decayof theGF/Rsystems. If thedownslopeblockbounding
Beneaththe grabens,the ductilelayer risesup to compensate the systemis alreadyableto glide,diapirsand/orrollersare
the brittle layer thinning. With weakinitial coupling,the free to fall leadingto a grabenreplacingthe growth fault.
ductilelayerrisesupto thesurface andraftseparation Alternatively,a grabenor an antitheticfault can develop
is nearly
symmetricalgiving nearlysymmetrical divergingrollovers within the rollover.If the downslopeblock is no longer able
(Figure14).Theasymmetry, i.e., dominant faulting, to move, the GF/R systemis abandonedand capped.It is
synthetic
only appearsat a laterstagewhenthe bulk thinningof the likely that systemswith initial mediumto strongcoupling
18,132 MAUDUIT AND BRUN:GROWTHFAULT/ROLLOVERSYSTEMS

SW (Seaward) (Landward)
NE

• •.•.!•'
-•..-'•
•'........
•'•'
'.';•:'t•
'-•'."'"""•-"
....
'"•"
ß
•:•-!:½!
-"-"•'
''--
'•"'"
'••"•"::'"
1 ..........

TWT (s)

;•;'z':
ß ;-•:--•••,-•z' ::'.'.-
--..:•:
.......
'.....
•,••••••.•••,.:•z"-:...
?:':.:.•½?•.
• :'.'..,•,
:•• :½•,:•
••;:
b •:•;',--•;.•*•,%.'•-.
*•::
'•'•
.:-.'-"
•'"'•••••••::'•:':•-;:•"-•-'"":-:•.'•:•*:'
' .-:;•"..•.•'•':"•'•?•'•*"•:•:..-•
:;•'5:'•".:.•,?;:
......
..•'•":•;;.%:•'
': •'•.•'•..•.•--'-::';:•.
• .....
""
:'•'•,-4.,...'--'::;.
:'.'.'
•'"••'•••••'•'••••••::.• ""•'•••'"••Y•;.:;•.•:•.'•':;•: :-::..:.::?•?.'•:.•:":.::.,:::•.•?•-•,;'•?'"
:-.'.:-:•:•:::
'-:•:•'.•::*:."-'.•;.••
.:•,,:,•..½•,:•,:'•.=...;-'½"=•.:•:'"
--•'*•.•?•;•"•½,• :,•..:'•"X;
:•½•,.:•.:•:,.-.,½':;.(:;.•?..'•.'
,:.....
:.:..;..:--:._:,--•-.;=:•.....-..:•
..::...;:-•..-•,?.,-.-:"•.
............
.•...r•.½.....-...;...•.,.;•½:.•%..•..•.7,...
I •:;'•
':*'•';'"•'
T•:•(2'"½•½4"•:'•'•5:•'•:
..............
•":':"'"'"'"':'"':':'•":"•"•"•'•=*;
:""•':'•':•:'•'"•
.......
'•''"'":""•'•;'"'""
•:;"'?•'
"•½"'•'
'=•:""
.......
'.......
:"'""'
';"2•:•"
..............
'.........
-::•:•.,:"_•,...•
•.'•.•.,;•. .• .......½,.-•,:...½,,•'•:•:•.•½;•,•,,••'••'•.•••.•..'•:•""'•
'% ..--• •-....•,......•=::.•:•
½.-..•
.....
:,.:..T½.-...•%•.'•..•,..•,:•
......
...?..-v
:.......;.•.... .-- .• ...... •.• :'•..:--..,..,•'
....•½"•••.:'••,.
..½., ;:......-...
:'-.%.:;:•,.•.•,.-:.•
...... - -•.:.:.•..•
.•,.-..•..:•. -.........
½
;½ .....
½..,-•-•½,..•.......;4
.... -•..- •:•;• •:•..•.....
•.• :.,=
,.•....-<..
•... :'.'.
::•'•.•%•.,:.......
'••••'•:•••••••:•--:,•:
'••• '•' :.:.:•%-%:".::.'-•-.::?.:?-?•.,:'•,.,:•,..:T;;::-...'•--;..
•::':L

•,.;:;;..•;..
-::.::.-.•;' ---½-••.•..-••
.••..•••.•7......•.....:.;.•.:.:..•
.......
-:.•,......½.:....:.
,:.?:•..•
...,:•••..• ....... •.• •...?;•.....;.•,:,.•;:::::..:.½.:•-•,:.•..,,&=•.,
• •.-.
.? .•, .':•.... :.........
':"-½•,,."•"
½•••••'•'••••••••••'•::'••..:: ....
'...":.:;.:'r
..,-:-:....-..,:,•.--•;.:•,•,:-;•:.:•.t::•.-•:•.%%.:.:?.-::,..•':.'.'...-•:---'
. •.•...;.......•
2 ?'•"'"':"'•:-*' .... ::':'-'--::"'•:•;"'"•':•':"•':'•'•:•;;"•:':""'71'•::;•½';'½•":':
.....................
- '- ,.:• '-........ ' ........
"'•
•..•
'•' '•••'• ----.•....."* .<.'-.-..'?
.......
-:;.!:
•"''"•'"'.............
...... ......................
........
":"::';*:*'-'%"'•'"'-
......:•.
,•":'......,:
:•½;•........
-• ...... -.. • .....
.'.,.:.:'-•-'-..4•;'•,•
:,½•:::.-.
. ......... -.•..•,. .

-..•?,. ?......•--,,;::•.'.:-'
;•.,"-'•-"?'••'•-?:--'.
.,."?.-..:::::...:•:..:'•.•:•.•%••:...½?½?.'•'..:,;.:,•
• -".•.•::.•:
½'•.:'..::.
,- . .... '..'
"":•: :'.,..::.•.,.•'.½*.½'..'.'.•;'....t:':"::'=.:.
"'.-•:'•
..........
::;
'•-'-.,-
..............
-•..--.,•,:.;•.•.".::•.•'.::•;:;*-'•:.:•;'•::::---.•.•":'•
.::..½;•.•' ..-.-----....:,j...
:•½.T;'""r ":½"
E-M
:'.:•"-• • ' --'--'.-
.AIb•an.t:.
-•'.-':"•'•• •.•
.....•:. '•.•'.'::.:•'•'•:-*-•'
':•½•-'%: 7::-•½;.T'";:"?
'.-.::::'*":-,..•.
' I I •!•i• • :-..'•. -':':
....:-' '.'"%':•::•::•-:'"'•'*=%,...•½'::•--*'-..%,•:½.•...%%•-..-'."
ß
..• ;:?..';;.':,-:--,:•?:-.•..-::.,•.•.
.........
•'??•%•:;::;::::':•;.: ,..:.:'.
.....
y...'2:-•t: .... :...•.,;...;
.......
'.:':&..'•
..... •,••½.• ........
.•;•:•':':-:-"•.•;'.•:'-•:::%•;•
. ß
.••. ..½•,......•:•, :.:::.:.:...•::•.•.•.•.,;,---.,
-,:,..:..-.......:.,. :;...:.•--•
•,--.:•,..:. :•..½ -.:,..:.,.:.-.
::...-
',.ß
.- ....• •.•
.. - ..-::•;--
--- .,• -....?--•,..•..:
-- .:••-, ;-.•:.;.......--
.•:.....• .'.,•.:..
:::.•....
:..,•.:-•.'•%7z;½•-•...•.;•''•-:•½•,..•;/:;:
....:.":'• .... •%".%½.,-.-:':'"'
-'"-"•'-'"-
'••.•••..•...• ' '' ' ' "• ' "'•••'•'••'•••" ....•:;'-.•-.•
............
....... . *....................
.. •'-••••••.••, -••••:•:.•:..-:%,..:,:;.._•-'.-?••-½•,• ..
"•...•.:..:?•----•:...•
'••-••••':•
'---
.... '••'•"• '•••'•••••••••=... • m "•
, •-M AlD.ian..:
....
......'..-.......
•'••:--•••:%'-•-'- ½ "--½--....,..•,-....---,-.".:-<
....•-• '•,.••••'½•• '• • :-:.•"
'•'• • - '.-.. -... ••.•.:•.:•.:.=...' • --' • ,• '•...•-• .- . :.•.",. -:..::-.•.-..:. ...-.,.•...•..,....,•½-•. ....•:.. ß%½•½ +...:•,.•

TWT (s)

Figure 13. (a) Uninterpreted

and,(b) interpreted
versionof a seismicprofiledisplayinga largesynthetic
growthfault/rollover
system,
fromtheGulfof Guinea.Therolloveris cutby a younger graben.Whiteshading
for thesalt,darkgrayshadingis for theprekinematic
layer,andlight grayshadingis for the UpperAlbian
series.Seismicdataareusedwith thepermission
of Elf Congo.

tendto evolve towardsthe abandonment modeof decay.By instability that is controlledby the coupling that the basal
contrast, it is likely that systems with weak to medium ductile layer exerts betweenthe sedimentarycover and the
couplingtend to evolve towardsdiapir or rollover fall. basement.Weak initial couplingoccurswhen the ductilelayer
It is alsoworthnotingthat extensionalfaultingin a brittle- is thick and/orthe basal slope angle is low. Stronginitial
ductilesystemundergoinggravity gliding can display two couplingoccurswhenthe ductilelayer is thin and/orthe basal
successivetransitions in terms of symmetry, first, from slopeangleis steep.Weak couplingfavors a segmentationof
symmetrictO asymmetric,with dominantlysynthetic fault, the coverinto largeblocks (with high aspectratios), giving
duringthe early stage,andsecondfrom syntheticto antithetic rafts separated by diapirs. Strong coupling favors
faults duringthe late stage. segmentation of the cover into small blocks as well as their
rotation (i.e., tilted blocks).
6. Conclusions 2. The developmentof a growth fault/rollover system
during gliding comprisesthree stages(birth, growth, and
Our experimentalstudyleadsto the followingconclusions: decay)whosedurationandmodedependon the progressive
1. A growth fault/rolloversystemresultsfrom a mechanical increasein coupling during gliding. These three stages
 a 2 cm

Synthetic

Downslope • growth
fault
"c•'•'"•m•'";•-;•;•"•'•'•-
.......
•, .... -C•:..,•;;.•.•A-•JJ•
•"

b ,,...•-- y
FallingRollers----'

Figure14.(a)(right)
Symmetrical
and(left)slightly
asymmetrical
rollerbounded
bydiverging
rollovers.
(b)
Rollerswhichunderwent
anearlystageof symmetrical
divergence.
Thesecond
stageis asymmetric,
withthe
development
of synthetic
growthfaults.

Downslope
2 cm

b 2 cm

Figure15.(a)Grabenresulting
fromthesuperposition
of aninitialstage
of blocktiltingalongthesynthetic
fault1anda second
stagewheretheantithetic
fault2 newlydeveloped playeda dominant role.(b)Turtleback
anticline
structure
resulting
fromthediachronic
development
of a synthetic
fault1 andanantithetic
fault2.
 18,134 MAUDUIT AND BRUN:GROWTHFAULT/ROLLOVER
SYSTEMS

syntheticlistricfault

LATERAL TRANSITION

Late antithetic fault

,.

,' 2 cm t
t

Downslope ,' •" t

t

.•---•.-
---.••-••• •

....

2 cm • •

Syntheticlistricfault/
rolloversystem Residualrolloverfroman early
symmetricalstage
Figure16. (b)Three-dimensional
diagram of a structure
showingthesuperposition
in timeandspace
of an
antithetic
faultora synthetic
growth
faultrolloversystem.(a)Themaingrowth
faultpasses(c)backward
to a
systemof planarfault defininga graben.

characterize
thecriticallifetimeof a GF/R system.In all cases, curvedbasal limit of the rollover is not a fault but the trace of a
birth correspondsto the developmentof a symmetricgraben
which later evolves asymmetrically.During growth, the
initial grabensbecomeasymmetric.A single fault of the
graben becomesthe main growth fault producingeither
syntheticor antitheticsystems.Rollovergrowthrecordsthe
progressive separation between the blocks.
3. Layers depositedon the hanging wall block of the
growth fault undergoa rotation on one limb of the ductile
roller whichoccursat the lowertip of the growthfault. The
fault passivelytransportedon top of a ductiled6collement.
Layerrotation in the rollover is accommodated either by a
conjugatefaultsystem,in whichthefaultsdippingopposite
to themaingrowthfaultdominate,or by tilting of the growth
fault hanging wall block.
4. The main growth fault which controls the rollover
growthis often temporaryand generallycorresponds to a
sequenceof faults. The unsteadinessof growth faults is
recordedwithin the rolloverthroughvariationsin the dihedral
 MAUDUIT AND BRUN: GROWTH FAULT/ROLLOVER SYSTEMS 18,135

8ymetri½
grabon
INIITIAL COUPLING

LOW MEDIUM STRONG

Possiblesymmetricrollovers

Tilted blocks
O Syntheticrollover
between two rafts

System
dominantly
synthetic ABANDON
DIAPIR/ROLLER FALL

Antitheticfault Graben
or graben

Figure 17. Summaryof the evolution of growth/rolloversystemsas a function of initial and evolving brittle-
ductile coupling. See text for further explanation.

angle betweenthe layers and the rollover basallimit as well as
irregularities in the rollover basal limit.
5. The decay of GF/R systems occurs according to three
modes:abandonmentwhen the system stops growing and is
cappedby new deposits, a graben replacing the main growth
fault, and grabensor antitheticfaults cutting the rollover. The
two last modes occur when diapirs or rollers fall due to an
increasein ductile coupling.
6. Interactions
between
synthetic
andantithetic
growth
faults can occur in the directionof displacement,giving rise to
so-called turtle back anticlines, or transverse to the direction
of displacementgiving lateral transitions from growth faults
to grabens.Lateral transitions of this type do not requirethe
presenceof transferfaults parallel to the displacement.
7. From the above conclusions, it appears that the term
"listric fault" is ambiguous. At a given time during
deformation the active fault is actually limited to the part of
the rollover base in contact with a sedimentarycover block.
The re,st of the rollover basal contour is in contact with
underlyingd6collementand is passivelytransportedon top of Allemand, P., Approche exp6rimentale de la m6canique du rifting
it. Therefore the resulting listric fault is composedof two
parts, one active and one inactive which cannot be considered Bally, A.W., Thoughtson the tectonics of folded belts, in Thrust and
as a single fault surface separating two moving blocks. It
should be recalled that in antithetic GF/R systems, the sense
of ductile shear in the d6collement below the rollover is
opposite to the senseof shear along the main growth fault.
This conclusionsuggeststhat the classical conceptof listric
fault, would be better avoided when applied to growth
fault/rollover systems,even if the term itself can be retained.
Acknowledgments.This work was financed by Elf Aquitaine.The
modelspresentedhere are part of the MARGES projects(Modelisation
Analogique des Relations entre la Gravit6 Et la S6dimentation)
performedat Geosciences-Rennes, which studythe interactionbetween
sedimentationand faultingduringgravitationaldeformation.The authors
acknowledgeElf Angola,Elf Congo,Petrobras,and Tectonophysicsfor
permissionto usesomeseismicdataand to Elf Aquitaine for permission
to publishthispaper.We thank J.J. Kermarrec for technical assistance
in the Experimental Tectonics Laboratory and M. Carpenter for
improvementof the English.Thanksare due to the referees K. McClay
and B.C. Vendeville and the AssociateEditor J. McBride, who helped
clarify severalpoints.
References
the
continental, th•se d'universit6, Univ. de Rennes I, Rennes, France,
1990.
NappesTectonics,editedby McClay K.R. and Price N.J., Geol. Sec.
Spec.Publ. London,9, 13-32. 1981.
18,136 MAUDU1T AND BRUN: GROWTH FAULT/ROLLOVER
Bally, A.W., D. Bernouilli, G.A Davis, and L. Montadert, Listric normal
faults,Oceanol.Acta, Spec.Publ., 87-101, 1981.
Buchanan, P.G. and K.R. McClay, Sandbox experimentsof inverted
listric and planarfault systems,Tectonophysics,
188, 97-115, 1991.
Clots, E.,. Experimentalanalysisof Gulf Coastfracture patterns,AAPG
Bull., 52,420-444. 1968.
Cobbold,P.R., and P. Szatmari,Radial gravitationalgliding on passive
margins,Tectonophysics, 18,: 249-289, 1991.
Crans, W., G.Mandl, and J. Haremboure, On the theory of growth
faulting, a geometricalmodel basedon gravity sliding,J. Pet. Geol.,
2,265-307, 1980.
Demercian,S., P. Szatzmari,andP.R. Cobbold, Style and pattern of salt
diapirsdue to thin-skinnedgravitationalgliding, Camposand Santos
basins:Offshore Brazil, Tectonophysics,
228, 393-433, 1993.
Dula, W.F., Geometric models of listric normal faults and rollovers
folds, AAPG Bull., 75, 1609-1625, 1991.
Duval, B., C. Cramez, and M.P.A. Jackson,Raft tectonicsin the Kwanza
(Cuenza)Basin,Angola,Mar. Pet. Geol., 9, 389-404, 1992.
Edwards, M.B., Growth faults in upper Triassic deltaic sediments,
Swalbard, AAPG Bull., 60, 341-355, 1976.
Ellis, P.G., andK.R. McClay, Listricextensionalfaultsystems.Resultsof
analoguemodelexperiments,BasinRes.,1, 55-70, 1988.
Hubbert, M.K., Theory of scales models as applied to the study of
geologicalstructures,Geol. Soc.Am. Bull., 48, 1459-1520, 1937.
Liro, L.M., and R. Coen, Salt deformation history and postsaltstructural
trends, offshore southern Gabon, West Africa, in Salt Tectonics, A
Global Perspective,editedby M.P.A. Jackson,D.G. Roberts,and S.
Snelson, AAPG Mem., 65, 323-331, 1995.
Mandl, G., and W.Crans, Gravitationalglidingin deltas,in Thrustand
NappesTectonics,editedby K.C. McClay and N.J. Price, Geol. Soc.
Spec.Publ. London,9, 41-54, 1981.
Mauduit, T., G. Gu6rin, J.P. Brun, and H. Lecanu, Raft tectonics: The
effect of basal slope angle and sedimentationrate on progressive
extension, J. Struct. Geol., 19, 1219-1230, 1997.
Mauduit T., V. Gaullier, G. Gu6rin,andJ.P. Brun,On the asymmetryof
turtle backgrowthanticlines,Mar. Pet. Geol., 14,763-771, 1998.
McClay, K.R., Physicalmodelsof structuralstylesduring extension,in
ExtensionalTectonicsand Stratigraphyof theNorth Atlantic Margins,
editedby A.J. Tankardand H.R. Balkwill, AAPG Mem., 46, 95-110.
1989.
McClay, K.R., and P.G. Ellis, Analogue modelsof extensionalfault
geometries,in ContinentalExtensional Tectonics, edited by M.P.
Cowards,J.P. Dewey, and P.L. Handcock, Geol. Soc. Spec. Publ.
London, 28, 109-125, 1987a.
McClay, K.R., and P.G. Ellis, Geometriesof extensionalfault systems
developedin modelexperiments,Geology,15,341-344, 1987b.
McClay, K.R., and A.D. Scott, Experimental modelsof hangingwall
deformation in ramp-flat listric extensional fault systems,
Tectonophysics, 188, 85-96, 1991.
McClay, K.R., D.A.Waltham, A.D. Scott,and A.A. Abousetta,Physical
and seismic modelling of listric normal fault geometries, in The
Geometryof Normal./•aults, editedby A.M. Roberts,G. Yielding, and
B. Freeman,Geol. Soc.Spec.Publ.,London,56, 231-239, 1991.
SYSTEMS
Mohriak, W.U., J.M. Macedo, R.T. Castellani,H.D. Rangel, A.Z.N.
Barros, M.A. Latg6, J.A. Ricci, A.M. Mizusaki, P. Szatmari, L. S.
Demercian, J.G. Rizzo, and J.R. Aires, Salt tectonics and structural
stylesin the deep water province of the Cabo Frio Region, Rio de
Janeiro,Brazil, in Salt Tectonics:A Global Perspective,editedby
M.P.A. Jackson,D.G. Roberts, and S. Snelson,AAPG Mem., 65, 305-
321, 1995.
Nelson, T.H., Salt tectonicsand listric-normalfaulting, in The Gulf of
Mexico Basin, edited by A. Salvador,.Geol. Soc. of Am., Boulder,
Colo. 73-89, 1991.
Ramberg,H., Gravity,De]brmationand the EarthlyCrustas Studiedby
CentrO•)geModels.214 pp, AcademicSanDiego,Calif., 1967.
Rider, M.H., Growth faults in Carboniferous of western Ireland, AAPG
Bull., 62, 2191-2213, 1978.
Rouby, D., and P.R. Cobbold,Kinematicanalysisof a growth fault
systemin the Niger Delta from restaurationin map view, Mar. Pet.
Geol., 13, 565-580, 1996.
Shelton,J.W., Listricnormalfault:An illustratedsummary,AAPG Bull.,
68, 801-815, 1984.
Suess,E., The Face of the Earth, Oxford Univ. Press.New York, 1904.
Szatmari,P., M.C.M. Guerra and, M.A.Pequeno,.Genesisof large
counter regional fault by flow of Cretaceaous salt in the South
AtlanticSantosBasin,Brazil,in Salt Tectonics,editedby G.I. Alsop,
D.J. Blundell,andI. Davison,Geol. Soc. Spec. Publ., 100, 259-264,
1996.
Terzaghi, K., Stresscondition for the failure of satured concrete and
rocks,Am. Test.Mater. Proc., 45, 777-801, 1945.
Vendeville, B., Champs de failles et tectonique en extension:
Modelisationexp6rimentale,Mem. Doc. CAESS,15, 1987.
Vendeville,B., and P.R. Cobbold,.How normalfaultingand sediments
interactto producelistricfaultsprofilesand stratigraphic
wedges,J.
Struct. Geol., 10, 649-659, 1988.
Vendeville,B., and M.P.A. Jackson,The fall of diapirsduring thin
skinnedextension.Mar. Pet. Geol., 9, 354-371, 1992a.
Vendeville,B., and M.P.A. Jackson,The rise of diapirsduringthin
skinnedextension,Mar. Pet. Geol., 9, 331-353, 1992b.
Xiao, H.B., andJ. Suppe,Role of compaction
in listricshapeof growth
normal faults,AAPG Bull., 73,777-786, 1989.
Xiao, H.B., and J. Suppe,Origin of rollover,AAPG Bull., 76, 509-529,
1992.
J.P. Brun, G6osciencesRennes, UPR-CNRS 4661, Universite Rennes
I, Campus de Beaulieu, 35042 Rennes Cedex, France. (e-mail:
brun@univ-rennes1.fr)
T. Mauduit, Shell InternationalExplorationand ProductionB.V.,
Volmerlaan8, P.O. Box 60, 2280 AB Rijswijjk,Nederland.(e-mail:
t.p.o.mauduit@
siep.shell.com).
(ReceivedFebruary11, 1997;revisedAugust26, 1997;
acceptedSeptember2, 1997.)