See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/301694737

Stress field modelling from digital geological map data

Conference Paper · April 2016

CITATION READS

1 423

3 authors:

Gáspár Albert Ádám Barancsuk

Eötvös Loránd University Eötvös Loránd University
76 PUBLICATIONS   107 CITATIONS    6 PUBLICATIONS   6 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Krisztian Szentpeteri
J Resouces Nusantara
19 PUBLICATIONS   64 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Cu-Ni-PGE ores in the footwall of the Sudbury Igneous Complex View project

Regional Mineral Deposit Tartegting by Stress Fiedl Modeling View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Gáspár Albert on 07 September 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Stress Field Modelling From Digital Geological Map Data
Gáspár Albert (1), Ádám Barancsuk (2), and Krisztián Szentpéteri (3)
(albert@ludens.elte.hu)
The stress field modelling app is free! Try it on your
(1) Dpt. of Cartography and Geoinformatics - Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary
map and send us feedback so we can improve it!
http://geonucleus.elte.hu:8800/ (2) Doctorate School of Earth Sciences - Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary
(3) PT J Resources Nusantara, Indonesia, Jakarta

1. Abstract
To create a model for the lithospheric stress a functional geodatabase is required which contains spatial and The paleostress model of a Miocene sedimentary basin - a case study in NE Hungary based on Pertik et al. (2016)
geodynamic parameters. A digital structural-geological map is a geodatabase, which usually contains enough
attributes to create a stress-field model. Such a model is not accurate enough for engineering-geological
purposes because simplifications are always present in a map, but in many cases maps are the only sources for a
tectonic analysis. The method presented herein is designed for field geologists, who are interested in seeing a
possible realization of the stress field over the area on which they are working.

This study presents an application which can produce a map of 3D stress vectors from a .KML file. The core
application logic is implemented on top of a spatially aware relational database management system. This allows
rapid and geographically accurate analysis of the imported geological features, taking advantage of
standardized spatial algorithms and indexing. After pre-processing the imported features, according to the
Type-Property-Orientation naming system, which was described in a previous study (Albert et al. 2014), the first
stage of the algorithm generates an irregularly spaced point cloud by emitting a pattern of points within a user-
defined buffer zone around each feature. For each point generated, a component-wise approximation of the
tensor field at the point's position is computed, derived from the original feature's geodynamic properties. In a
second stage a weighted moving average method calculates the stress vectors in a regular grid. Results can be
exported as geospatial data for further analysis or cartographic visualization.

2. Geodatabase structure
H. stress [bar]

5
1
A KML-type geodatabase is used to store structural Vertical stress [bar]

lines and their attributes. A KML database is like a tree:

main types of data are grouped into tags composing a
hierarchical structure. In the presented method the
important tags of the file format are the <name>,
where the attributes of each structural lines are Figure 5. Pattern map of the generated points Figure 6. Interpolated vector map of the
Figure 4. Fault traces (red lines) digitized as a
stored, and the <coordinates> which contains the kml geodatabase showing the name tags (red showing the vertical component of the tectonic horizontal (red arrows) and vertical (blue-brown
position of the control points (see part of a .KML): texts along the lines). The geodynamical stress (σt ). In the database structure each point colouring) component of the minimum tectonic
properties are assigned to lines on the base of contains all the calculated tensor parameters as stress (σt ). The nominal scale is 1 : 50 000 the
<description>Fault</description> Petrik et al. (2016). attributes. grid resolution is 250 m and the buffer radius of
<name>FT1s_N_E</name> the intepolating kernel is 1.5 km.
<LineString>
<coordinates>
19.6416797755,47.5161430293,0 Figure 3. The original structural map of Petrik et al. (2016). showing the D5-D6 tectonic phase (Middle 6. The modelling application
19.8497933117,47.5864798612,0 Miocene). The geological map is based on Less et al. (2005). A web application is developed to test our
Figure 1. The descriptive TPO (Type-Property-
</coordinates> modeling algorithms. The application implements
Orientation) naming system, which is the base of the
data processing method. </LineString> an interactive, three-stage workflow to guide the
user through the modeling process:
3. Overview of the modelling method 4. Creating the point cloud 1. Pre-processing
Ÿ To begin processing, the user uploads a .KML
The fault traces are linear features on a digital geological map. Each line is represented by several The fault’s dip orientation is automatically detected from the feature’s name filed in the KML file. To geodatbase.
control points which are connected to compose polylines. If we provide geodynamical data to these create the point cloud, the following parameters are needed as variables: Ÿ After checking the syntax of the Type-
linear features as attributes, we can process the control points similarly to observed point-like data (i.e. 1. fault type-property-orientation; Property-Orientation naming scheme on the KML
the line section orientation provide the azimuth, and the type determines the optimal dip-angle). In the 2. coordinates of the trace line; file’s features, they are pre-processed into a
process, the basic Andersonian-type fault geometries and a Coulomb fracture criterion for compressive 3. nominal scale of the model; spatially aware database.
tectonic regime was used (Anderson 1951, Twiss and Moores 2006). 4. width of the point distribution buffer zone. Ÿ Assessing the model’s spatial extents and
The first and the second ones are queried from the KML file, and the third is defined from the size feature density allows the application to offer sane
choices for the model’s processing parameters
The modelling method is designed to calculate the minimum of the absolute tectonic stress and data density (p0 = km2 / vertices) of the processed area (M = sqrt(1010 / p0)). The width of the zone Figure 7. The web application’s user interface after
(Figure 7).
(σt), which can break the rock body from an initial state using an uniaxial compressive stress modell (σ1 around each structural element is a function of the length of the given element (i.e. the longer the Ÿ These parameters (sediment thickness, the uploading and pre-processing the .KML
> σ2 = σ3) and a depth of the brittle structure developement. In the Mohr-Coulomb equations the fault is, the wider the buffer zone will be). The point-cloud density in the zone depends on the nominal geodatabase.
dataset’s nominal scale, the interpolation grid’s
2
following values are used to find the minimum: scale (M) of the model. The required number of points (p) per km for a given nominal scale is resolution and the kernel’s buffer radius) can be
ŸThe coefficient of friction is based on the Andersonian model: µ = -1 / tan(2θ) = 0.58; calculated: manually overriden on the user interface.
10
ŸThe fracture angle from the normal of the fault plane: θ = 60°; p = 10 / M
2 2. Point cloud generation and interpolation
Ÿ
ŸThe cohesion is calculated for atmospheric pressure: C = 1 / (2 * (µ + sqrt(1 + µ ))) = 0.29; ŸGiven the model’s parameters, the application first creates the inhomogeneous point cloud then
This defines how much point will be created for the whole area. The resulting number is performs a weighted moving average-based interpolation to produce the homogeneous 2D grid.
Based on data from Burdy et al. (1997) and Hergert and Heidbach (2011), the initial horizontal distributed between the faults based on the size of their buffer zones. 3. Data export
stress is assumed to be the same as the vertical one (k = 1), thus, the fracturing occurs if the ŸAfter the interpolation process has finished, the user is prompted to download the results. Both the
differencial stress (σ1-σ3) reaches the Coulomb fracture stress (CFS). If the CFS is reached by the drop 5. Interpolating the point cloud
inhomogeneous and homogeneous point cloud are provided as zipped ESRI Shapefiles, with the
of pressure (e.g. Gahalaut & Gahalaut 2008) the σ1 will be the vertical stress (σV). The generated point cloud is inhomo- elements of the stress vectors included as attribute data.
σv = ρgh geneous. Very different values can be found
7. Conclusions
very close to each other because of the The model creates a spatially contiuous representation of the lithospheric stresses using only the 2D
3 2 intersecting buffer zones (Figure 5). To homo- lines of a tectonic map turning the discretum to continuum. The results can be visualized in GIS and
where ρ = 2700 kg/m ; g = 9.822 m/s ; and h is the sediment thickness over the developing fault.
genize the stress field, a weighted moving analysed from tectonostratigraphic aspect (subsiding/uplifting regions; unknown faults, etc.).
The critical normal stress σnc and subsequently, using the equation of Twiss and Moores (2006), the
average interpolation was applied in the References
tectonic stress is calculated from the σ1,, the coefficient of friction and the cohesion. Albert, G., Ungvári, Z. & Szentpéteri, K. (2014). Stress field modeling of the Carpathian Basin based on compiled tectonic maps. Geophysical Research Abstracts. 16.
processed regions (Albert et al. 2014). The Anderson E. M. (1951). The dynamics of faulting and dyke formation with application to Britain. 2nd edition. Oliver & Boyd, Edinborough, 1—206.
σt = σnc - σ3
result is a 2D grid, where the values of the grid Angelier, J. (1979). Determination of the mean principal directions of stresses for a given fault population., Tectonophysics, 56, pp. 17-26.
Brudy, M., Zoback, M. D., Fuchs, F., Rummel, F. & Baumgärtner, J. (1997). Estimation of the complete stress tensor to 8 km depth in the KTB scientific drill holes: implications for crustal strength.
nodes are the interpolated stress vectors Journal of Geophysical Research, 102(B8), 18453-18457.
In the case of larger than 5 km depth (~1327 bar sediment pressure) the model works with Gahalaut, K., & Gahalaut, V. K. (2008). Stress triggering of normal aftershocks due to strike slip earthquakes in compressive regime. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, 33(5-6), 379-382. doi:
different fracture criterion where θ = 45° and µ = 0. The forces are assumed positives in the direction of (Figure 6). 10.1016/j.jseaes.2008.03.001
Hergert, T. & Heidbach, O. (2011). Geomechanical model of the Marmara Sea region-II. 3-D contemporary background stress field. Geophysical Journal International, 185(3), 1090-1102. doi:
fault slip. Figure 2. The Mohr-Coulomb settings of the model. 10.1111/j.1365-246X.2011.04992.x
The σ1 has a minimum at 1 bar and the and σ1 at 0 Less Gy., Gulácsi Z., Kovács S., Pelikán P., Pentelényi L., Rezessy A. & Sásdi L. (2005). Geological map of the Bükk Mountains 1:50.000. Geol. Inst. of Hungary.
Petrik A., Beke B., Fodor L. & Lukács R. (2016). Cenozoic structural evolution of the southwestern Bükk Mts. and the southern part of the Darnó Deformation Belt (NE Hungary), Geologica
bar. Carpathica v 67, 1, pp. 83-104.
Twiss, R. J. & Moores, E. M. (2006). Structural Geology, W. H. Freeman and Company, New York.

View publication stats