Downloaded from http://qjegh.lyellcollection.

org/ by guest on September 3, 2021

Review article Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology

Published Online First https://doi.org/10.1144/qjegh2021-031

Chalk: all we need is a fracture log!

Rory N. Mortimore
ChalkRock Ltd, 32 Prince Edwards Road, Lewes BN7 1BE, UK
RNM, 0000-0002-0664-5294
rory.mortimore@btinternet.com

Abstract: Chalk fracture logging is reviewed in the context of the broader geology needed to build conceptual ground models.
Examples of drilling damaged core illustrate the many issues faced by core loggers including identification of marker beds
(marl seams, hardgrounds, flint bands, fossil shell beds) and the ‘interpretations’ necessary to complete a fracture log.
Stratabound fractures impart a special style of fracturing to each Chalk formation. Lithology is a key factor in development of
fracture style where marl seams control inclined conjugate fracture sets, development of listric growth faults and interbed slides.
Lateral changes in lithology and thickness and consequent controls on fracture evolution are related to intra-Chalk tectonic
episodes and tectonic setting with onshore interpretations supported by offshore seismic profiles. Strike-slip faults are
illustrated in the Chalk cliffs of the Sussex coast. Fracture log reports should highlight special features such as shear zones and
use annotated core photographs to illustrate issues requiring discussion.
Received 18 March 2021; revised 20 May 2021; accepted 24 May 2021

When asked to identify marl seams, flint bands and fossil shell beds
as part of Chalk core logging a response from some contractors has
been: ‘Should we be expected to recognize and log these features?
Surely all we need is a fracture log?’ Fracture logging is an
important part of a site investigation; however, the other aspects of
the geology are just as important to developing a ground model and
are identified as part of best practice in Chalk site investigation
(CIRIA 574, Lord et al. 2002). At its simplest, how can boreholes be
correlated on fracture logs alone and how can the location, scale and
sense of faulting be identified or presence of dissolution features be
recognized from fracture logs? How can geophysical logs and
seismic reflectors be interpreted from fracture logs? It is also quite
usual in site investigations to find features that are not common or
may not have been recorded before and these need highlighting.
Whilst sympathizing with the commercial issues of time and money,
such considerations should not override the science and engineer-
ing. Core logging should be about gaining the maximum geological
information possible, as the success of a construction project may
depend on recognizing all aspects of the geology across a site, not
just fractures.
Fracture logging chalk can be the bane of a site investigation
geologist’s life, time consuming, controversial, frequently requiring
‘interpretation’ where core is fragmented or fractures have been
induced during drilling. Clients usually demand a numerical figure
even in core intervals where drilling fragmentation has occurred and
such demands can seem unreasonable. How should such intervals
be recorded in terms of fracturing?
In the last three decades since the forerunners of the CIRIA
grades were first mooted during and after the Brighton 1989 Chalk
Symposium and then developed to become an industry standard
(Lord et al. 1994, 2002) there has been a continuous debate on how
to recognize the grades in drill cores and how they integrate with
‘standard’ fracture logging. In the hard-nosed business of site
investigations the time (and money) taken to complete fracture logs
and apply CIRIA grades has sometimes detracted from the value of
recording other aspects of the geology including details of the
stratigraphy (marl seams, flint bands, nodular chalk beds and fossil
bands). Part of the problem is the time allocated to core logging in
contracts and the absence in the specifications of the requirements to
log stratigraphical details. A further issue is what is expected from
the core log results by the client and consultant and frequent
differences of opinion between parties on the results especially with
fracture logs and CIRIA grades. Sometimes this has led to costly re-
logging or rewriting the core logs. Sometimes these requests and
revisions have come from ‘office-based’ staff who have not seen the
core and who have little experience of the real problems associated
with logging and are simply interpreting contract requirements
without reference to ‘field’ staff. Good attempts have been made to
overcome these difficulties on many contracts by running logging
courses and having experts help with the logging so that all parties
can agree with the results. Chalk is especially difficult as drill-core
is frequently disturbed during borehole drilling. Core disturbance is
most pronounced (1) in chalk with flints, (2) in nodular chalk beds
or hardgrounds and (3) in intervals with fracture zones. Drillers’
records such as rate of progress, loss of flushing medium and
interruptions caused by lithology are invaluable in helping to
recognize intervals where such disturbances have occurred and the
depth of potential fracture zones but are not always available. A
requirement to keep these records should be a mandatory part of any
contract (for some recent contracts there have been no drillers’ logs
or comments in situations where these would have been invaluable).
A concentration on the contractual side of core logging (and core
sampling and testing), although very necessary, can lead to a loss of
focus on the wider geological context and the requirement to log
other aspects of the geology. These aspects include the style of
fractures, which, in the Chalk, are characteristic of particular
lithologies and formations, and the tectonic and geomorphological
settings of the site being investigated. In addition, lithological
features such as marl seams play a critical role in the mechanical
behaviour of chalk including generation of fractures and fracture
styles, slope instability and short- and long-term deformation. Not
recognizing and logging even thin wispy marl seams reduces the
engineering value of the site investigation.
Other questions relating to fractures raised during major
construction projects include: ‘Is there evidence for strike-slip
faulting in the Chalk and how common is it?’ This paper attempts to
answer some of these questions and provide a geological context for
fractures, fracture logging and CIRIA grades to aid the extrapolation

© 2021 The Author(s). Published by The Geological Society of London. All rights reserved. For permissions: http://www.geolsoc.org.uk/permissions.
Publishing disclaimer: www.geolsoc.org.uk/pub_ethics
 Downloaded from http://qjegh.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 3, 2021

Rory N. Mortimore

marl seams, flint bands and fossil shells even in drilling damaged
core.
Unless otherwise stated, references to ‘vertical’ or ‘inclined’
fractures in this paper are relative to the borehole cores, which, in the
majority of cases, have been drilled vertically and are perpendicular
or nearly so to bedding.

Examples of drilling damaged core and fracture log

problems
Shallow depth, inclined conjugate fractures, Zig Zag Chalk
Formation
Drilling fragmentation of chalk core can occur at any depth and in
any style of fracturing (Figs 1–4). In the shallow depth Zig Zag
Chalk Formation (Fig. 1) and immediately overlying Plenus Marls
the primary inclined conjugate fractures are labelled on each core-
run, indicating a frequency of about five per metre. Core
fragmentation has occurred where the drill-bit has sheared the
thinner parts of the core along each inclined fracture and where
fractures meet. There are two intervals labelled N/A (not applicable)
where identification of fractures is not possible. The primary natural
fractures are black stained whereas the drilling-induced fractures are
not stained. Despite the shallow depth below ground surface there is
no obvious fill along the fractures and given the drilling disturbance
it is difficult to determine aperture of each fracture and, therefore,
apply a CIRIA grade.
Taking the core-run downwards below the Plenus Marls as being
all one stratum (Fig. 1) a fracture index could be given for the entire
core down to 9.62 m or an index could be given for each core run.
The core logger has a quandary. Should fractures in fragmented
intervals be included in the index or should we just count the

Fig. 1. Examples of drilling fragmentation of Chalk-core from the White

Bed in the topmost Zig Zag Chalk Formation (Grey Chalk Subgroup).
Drilling though structured Chalk with at least four steeply inclined
conjugate fractures per metre: core destruction is greatest where the open
(grade C) to slightly open (grade B) fractures meet. CIRIA grade does not
to improve with depth in this borehole. Numbers on the core-runs identify
the primary steeply inclined and generally black-stained conjugate
fractures. Annotating core photographs in this way helps with subsequent
interpretations of likely ground conditions.

of the borehole information to the level of the ground model. The

place of fracturing and fracture logging in the engineering geology
of the Chalk is reviewed and ways of enhancing fracture logging are
suggested as well as emphasizing the need to record other features.
Some of the causes and the timing of fractures in the Upper
Cretaceous Chalk and how this influences fracture distribution are
discussed in the broader geological context of stresses developed in
the European Platform. Fractures related to Quaternary weathering
processes have been comprehensively dealt with elsewhere (Lord
et al. 2002; Mortimore 2014) and are not considered here.
The key issues addressed are: (1) how to recognize and
distinguish natural fractures from drilling-induced fractures in Fig. 2. Core fragmented when drilling through clean, closed vertical and
chalk-core; (2) what evidence can be used to determine CIRIA horizontal joints (grade A). F, flint; sp i/s, iron-stained sponge bed; i/s jt,
grade, such as fracture fill and staining, and whether these are iron-stained joint; P, stained vertical joint surface with geological pick
always a reliable guide; (3) how to identify marker beds such as thin holes from density tests.
 Downloaded from http://qjegh.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 3, 2021

Chalk: all we need is a fracture log

Fig. 3. Core fragmentation through

moderately to heavily orange, iron-stained
and partly filled multiple vertical open
fractures (CIRIA grade C) in the Seaford
Chalk Formation. (b) is a close-up of (a)
and (d) is a close-up of (c).

Fig. 4. Core fragmentation in the

Holywell Nodular Chalk Formation.
Despite the depth of 90.50–93.50 m core
has fragmented where rough closed
fractures meet.

Fig. 5. Steeply inclined conjugate fractures in the Holywell Nodular Chalk Formation, CTRL North Downs Tunnel North Portal Drive at depths >80 m
below ground surface.

primary, stained fractures? In practice, the core should be described
first and the description should include an honest account of
fragmented intervals and then a description of the primary inclined
fractures (and subhorizontal fractures if present) including the
degree of staining and fill if any on the fractures. The predominant
style of fracture in this case is steeply inclined conjugate sets.
Recognition of style of fracture is a key part of the mechanical
stratigraphy of the Chalk (Mortimore 2001, fig. 19). The heavy
black staining and absence of fracture fill suggests that this is well-
structured chalk with slightly open fractures (i.e. grade B). Given
there are about five inclined fractures per metre the grade would be
B3 to locally B4. The completely disintegrated intervals are
excluded from the classification but would be highlighted in the
description and on the core log.
 Downloaded from http://qjegh.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 3, 2021
Rory N. Mortimore
Haven Brow Beds vertical fracture sets
In contrast to the Zig Zag Chalk Formation with inclined
conjugate fractures (Fig. 1), the Haven Brow Beds in the
Seaford Chalk Formation have typically vertical joint sets
(Fig. 2). The example shown here from a depth between 17.00
and 24.00 m (Fig. 2) has clean, very lightly orange stained
subparallel, stepped vertical joints that were probably closed
(grade A) and have opened readily during drilling and placing core
in the core boxes. The very weak, low-density chalk fragments
Fig. 6. Core recovery and fragmentation in
nodular chalks represented by the Lewes
Nodular Chalk Formation in the Chalk
Rock interval in two boreholes. (a–d)
Chalk Rock hardgrounds between 18.00
and 21.00 m depth below ground level in
borehole 1 (X, the same piece of core in (a)
and (c) close-up). (e–h) Chalk Rock
hardgrounds in a second borehole between
60.00 and 63.00 m depth. In both cases
despite the depth the driller noted issues
including the drill-bit ‘bouncing’ on the
hardgrounds and making a noise he called
‘chattering’. Should core loggers be
expected to identify these beds and how
can fracture logs be constructed in recovery
like this? In the deeper borehole the soft
sediment in burrows in the hardgrounds has
been washed away by the water flush,
leaving behind a rubble of very high-
density chalk pieces.
very easily during drilling and, in this example, has been
additionally disturbed during core logging. Nevertheless, the
vertical and subhorizontal joints can be seen with at least two
subparallel vertical joints passing through several core boxes in the
96 mm diameter core, giving a fracture spacing of 48 mm (CIRIA
grade A4 for vertical fractures). Clean, closed subhorizontal
fractures are more widely spaced with about five per metre (i.e.
>200 mm spacing; CIRIA grade A2). Describing both the
subhorizontal and vertical fractures and classifying them separ-
ately provides a full account of the fracturing in this core. An issue
Fig. 7. Typical, mineralized hardgrounds
in the Chalk. (a) The Fécamp
Hardground, Fécamp, Upper Normandy,
France. (b) Downhole camera image of
two hardground surfaces representing part
of the Chalk Rock interval, Berkshire
Downs. Modified from Mortimore (2014).
 Downloaded from http://qjegh.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 3, 2021
Chalk: all we need is a fracture log
that regularly arises between contractor and consultant or client is
what overall fracture index and CIRIA grade to apply. Consultants
or clients generally want only one grade. In this case the closest
fracture spacing (48 mm) and lowest grade (A4) would be applied.
As long as the grade used is accompanied by the full description
of all the fractures and the reasoning is explained then a single
grade can suffice. There is a need, however, for the consultant or
client and the contractor teams to discuss the method to use prior
to and during the contract and to have regular workshops on site
with the core to agree the classifications being used. Too often the
contractor’s core loggers, despite having relatively little experi-
ence, are left to make decisions that are then subsequently
questioned or have to be revisited, involving considerable time
and cost.
An overall grade may not be what the client or designer actually
wants or needs. Identifying fractures present at a specific depth may
be essential for interpreting field test results or, for example, for
deciding grouting strategies. This is where the full description on the
core log is vital, not just the overall classification.
Fig. 8. Examples of fracture zones
recovered in Newhaven Chalk Formation
cores. (a–c) A zone of subparallel or
conjugate steeply inclined 60–70° fractures
(1–8 in (b)) all mineralized with a very thin
layer of calcite, polished and striated
indicating sense of movement, and black
speckled with manganese or iron. (d)
Fracture zone between 56.20 and 95 m
depth: 1, 3, 4 and 6, steeply inclined partly
conjugate fractures; 2 and 5, possible
subhorizontal fractures that could be
drilling induced; 7, possible fractures in
drilling fragmented core. All the natural
fractures are clean (only black speckling on
surfaces), closed to slightly open CIRIA
grades A to B. Some of the closed fractures
have hairline traces across the core, which
have been emphasized by the dotted lines
drawn along them. O.p., thin-shelled
echinoid Offaster pilula.
Deeply weathered core fragmented by drilling
Determining a fracture index and CIRIA grade in deeply
weathered core that has also been fragmented by drilling can be
difficult (Fig. 3). Degree of weathering can be partly determined
by the intensity of staining on joints and internal discoloration in
the chalk core and the presence of chalk-fines or fragments as
fracture fill. The example here is from the Haven Brow Beds in the
Seaford Chalk Formation and, like the example in Figure 2 at a
similar stratigraphic level, the predominant fractures are vertical
joints with subsidiary subhorizontal fractures. Heavy to moderate
orange, iron-staining is present on both types of joint accompanied
by fracture fill brown sediment. In such loose chalk, drilling
fragmentation has been severe, especially where flints are also
present (Fig. 3c).
A key criterion for recognizing CIRIA grade C in core
(discontinuity aperture >3 mm) is fracture fill. This is often the
only criterion that consultants or clients will accept, as drilling
damage makes using direct measurement of aperture unreliable.
 Downloaded from http://qjegh.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 3, 2021

Rory N. Mortimore

Fig. 9. Simplified log for a borehole through part of the Newhaven Chalk Formation containing regular fracture zones of the type illustrated in Figure 8.
Highlighting the intervals with fracture zones provides a strategy for installing packer tests or other field testing such as depths to perform pressuremeter or
interpreting CPT results.

Downhole photographic logging, however, illustrates that open
fractures can be present at almost any depth (Mortimore 2014) and
open fractures are usually moderately to heavily stained and rarely
filled. How reliable, therefore, is fracture fill as the only way of
recognizing CIRIA grade C? Greater use of downhole camera logs
would help answer this question. Degree of staining should also be a
guide to the possibility of open fractures and grade C chalk, and
such intervals need highlighting on core logs.
Holywell Nodular Chalk inclined conjugate fractures
The final example of fracturing in the Chalk and issues related to
core logging a fracture index and CIRIA grade is from the Holywell
Nodular Chalk Formation (Fig. 4) at considerable depth below the
ground surface (90.50–93.50 m depth). Steeply inclined conjugate
fractures are a characteristic feature of this Chalk Formation. The
nodularity of the chalk creates rough, undulating fracture surfaces
that are moderately to heavily black stained, becoming orange iron-
stained in oxidizing conditions. These fractures in core are usually
closed and have to be pulled apart and are, therefore, closed CIRIA
grade A despite the heavy staining. In tunnels such fractures at
depths >80 m have been found to be open and sometimes filled
(Fig. 5a and b).
The Holywell Nodular Chalk Formation example (Fig. 4) also
illustrates core breaking up along thin marl seams and increased
drilling fragmentation where fractures meet.
 Downloaded from http://qjegh.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 3, 2021

Chalk: all we need is a fracture log

Fig. 10. Long, vertical fracture in the Seaford Chalk

Formation (Haven Brow Beds) between 94.50 and
107.00 m below ground surface, apparently filled
and, therefore, CIRIA grade C. The fill and
apparent grey staining is, however, artificial derived
from drilling fluid.

Nodular beds and hardgrounds

A further complication when core logging the Chalk is created by
nodular chalks and hardgrounds (Fig. 6). The change in strength or
density from low- or medium-density to high- and very high-density
chalks cannot always be identified immediately by the driller and, as
with coring through flints, core fragmentation is common. When
encountering the thicker hardgrounds, such as those associated with
the Chalk Rock (Figs 6 and 7), drillers have regularly recorded
the drill string ‘bouncing’ and making a ‘chattering’ noise.
Hardgrounds represent mineralized seafloors including calcite-
cemented layers up to 700 mm thick (more commonly 300–400 mm
thick) described as chalkstone (Fig. 7). Additional minerals include
orange iron staining, coatings of green glauconite and brown
phosphate. Hardgrounds also contain burrow networks filled with
soft low-density chalky sediment that washes out easily during
drilling leaving behind the high-density, nodular, chalkstone pieces
(Fig. 6).
In many cases producing a fracture log in fragmented nodular
chalk is not possible (e.g. Fig. 6e–g) and this needs to be understood
by all parties. A way forward would be to use annotated core
photographs like those in Figure 6. More use could be made of core
photographs generally by adding notes to aid explanations
supporting the descriptions and classifications. This would help
office-based checking engineers as well as designers and
contractors understand the reasons for classifications used or Fig. 11. Marl seams are easy to identify in good quality core, in this case
absence of classifications. in the topmost New Pit Chalk and basal Lewes Chalk formations.
 Downloaded from http://qjegh.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 3, 2021
Rory N. Mortimore
Fig. 12. Marl seams can be difficult to identify in drilling damaged or
disturbed core. In some cores marl seams, as weaker layers, can be ‘spun-
out’ and mixed with drilling degraded chalk putty. In these cases the core
needs cleaning with a paint scraper and the marl carefully exposed (e.g.
the thin, grey interwoven marly elements of the Belle Tout Marl in (a) and
close-up in (b) and the Shoreham Marl 1 in (d)). Very thin, concentrated
and conspicuous marl seams such as Shoreham Marl 2 (a bentonite) can
easily be lost during drilling and will not always be as well seen, as
shown in (c). Knowing that these marl seams should be present because of
the established stratigraphy in the area can focus the search for such
marker beds in degraded core.
Fig. 14. Gritty shelly chalk core in the Grit Beds of the Holywell Nodular
Chalk Formation from the Chiltern Hills. By cleaning core with a paint
scraper the ‘grit’ can be felt and heard and the thin shells can be seen in
section in the core. When the core splits along the shells these can then be
seen in plan view (Fig. 15b–h).
Fracture zones
In addition to standard fracture logs and CIRIA grades there are
places where the Chalk is characterized by zones of intense
fracturing (Figs 8 and 9). Such a case is in the Chalk on
Portsdown, Hampshire, first illustrated by White (1913) and
shown in more detail in Paulsgrove Quarry by Mortimore et al.
(2001). Cores through such fracture zones show that the primary
Fig. 13. Marl seams in the Holywell and
New Pit Chalk formations of the southern
North Sea, illustrating the continuity of
marker beds very great distances onshore
and offshore.
 Downloaded from http://qjegh.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 3, 2021
Chalk: all we need is a fracture log
inclined and subhorizontal fractures are all mineralized with
calcite, striated, polished and speckled with black manganese
(Fig. 8a). Drilling stress has opened some fractures whereas
others (dotted lines) remain closed. Fragmentation of the core has
occurred where fractures meet and where the core is thinnest
along the inclined fractures. All the fractures are clean (no fill or
heavy staining) probably closed to slightly open CIRIA grades A
to B.
Fracture logs frequently contain great detail and it can be difficult
to identify key features and extract critical information.
Highlighting fracture zones on the logs and core photographs
(e.g. Figs 8 and 9) provides an instant illustration of frequency and
location of such zones and assists with deciding a strategy for
downhole testing.
Fig. 15. Fossils in core from Holywell
Nodular Chalk and New Pit Chalk
formations, southern North Sea. The
composition of the gritty Holywell Chalk is
shown to comprise entire and fragmented
shells of inoceramid group of bivalve
fossils, various species of the genus
Mytiloides (a–h). The shell beds in the
New Pit Chalk contain abundant
Inoceramus cf. cuvieri with a key marker
bed containing Conulus subrotundus ( j, k)
towards the base of the New Pit Chalk
Formation.
Fracture fill, staining and mineralization and application
of CIRIA grades
Fracture fill and/or degree of fracture staining are critical to
determining CIRIA grade C. Fracture fill is not always a reliable
guide, as illustrated in Figure 10, where the fill has been artificially
introduced during drilling. The fluid used as a flushing medium in
this case has been recirculated, picking up sediment from the Thanet
Formation on its way and then flowing along the fractures in the
Chalk. The uncertainty about this fracture ‘fill’ was solved with
confidence only when the drillers’ logs were inspected. Given the
depth below ground surface (94.00–107.00 m) this quantity of
fracture fill and the material seemed unlikely but this supposition
needed to be proved, especially as open fractures within this
 Downloaded from http://qjegh.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 3, 2021
Rory N. Mortimore
engineering setting where a shaft was to be constructed were critical
to groundwater flow, pump sizes and extent and grade of grouting
required. Drillers’ logs proved to be essential.
The seven examples above illustrate that fracture logging in the
Chalk is not always straightforward and requires interpretation and
training. Ways of improving the presentation include annotating
core photographs (an under-used resource) and emphasizing special
features on the log. Specific training for core loggers and seeking
expert opinion should form part of a ground investigation strategy.
Identifying marker marl seams and shell beds in
destructured chalk-core
Identification of marker beds is essential to correlation of
boreholes, determination of tectonic structure and extrapolation
Fig. 16. Fossil inoceramid bivalve shells
typical of the Seaford Chalk Formation and
commonly found in core. (a) A fine
example of Cladoceramus
undulatoplicatus, the base Santonian
international index fossil in the marine
Cretaceous in the crown of a tunnel in
Langdon Cliffs, Dover, in the basal layers
of the Haven Brow Beds. (b, c) Fragments
of Cladoceramus undulatoplicatus in the
top core of a Wiltshire borehole. (d–f )
Fragments of the very large plate-like
bivalve Platyceramus sp. from core through
the basal Cuckmere Beds. (g) 1, 2, 3 and 4,
further fragments of Platyceramus sp.
shells in the Belle Tout Beds. 5, a fragment
of Volviceramus sp. shell. (h, i) A very fine
example of Volviceramus involutus from
the Belle Tout Beds in a Wiltshire
borehole.
of physical properties across a site. Despite the invaluable nature
of marker beds there is frequently resistance to identifying them.
This is partly related to the general ignorance about the Chalk (it
rarely forms part of any undergraduate study at university) unlike
many other parts of UK geology, and assumptions are frequently
made about the uniformity of the Chalk. Most marker beds in the
English Chalk are illustrated in the book Logging the Chalk
(Mortimore 2014). Some of the more important marker beds
include marl seams and flint bands. One group of marker beds,
the marl seams, have a special influence on the mechanical
properties, including the distribution and style of fracturing in the
Chalk. Flint bands also have an impact on mechanical properties
of chalk with respect to wear on machine cutters, tunnel spoil
removal belts, and rubber tyres on scrapers and trucks in
earthworks operations.
 Downloaded from http://qjegh.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 3, 2021
Chalk: all we need is a fracture log
Marl seams
Marl seams are the most visible and continuous layers representing
true bedding planes in the Chalk, having formed on the seafloor.
Hardgrounds can be discontinuous surfaces also formed on the
seafloor, whereas flint bands formed in the sediment parallel to but
below the seabed (i.e. diagenetic bands not primary bedding). Marl
seams in the Chalk fall into two groups; the first and more limited in
number are of proven volcanic ash-fall origin (bentonitic) and the
second are of clastic origin. Some formations contain abundant marl
seams (Holywell, New Pit, part of the Lewes Nodular Chalk, the
basal Belle Tout Beds of the Seaford Chalk, and the Newhaven and
Portsdown Chalk formations) and in the Northern Province, the
Welton and Flamborough Chalk formations. Other formations have
no or few marl seams (Cuckmere and Haven Brow Beds of the
Seaford Chalk, the Margate Chalk Member and the Culver Chalk
Formation). Before beginning a drilling programme it is useful to
identify the probable range of Chalk stratigraphy of the site so that
any expected marker beds can be looked for in the core (e.g. Figs
11–13). This is especially important where core has been degraded
by drilling (Figs 12 and 13).
Identifying shell beds
Gritty, shell beds can be readily identified when using a paint scraper
to clean the core. Concentrated shell beds are characteristic of the Grit
Beds in the Holywell Nodular Chalk Formation (Fig. 13) and in the
Belle Tout Beds of the Seaford Chalk Formation (Mortimore 2014).
Scraping shell-gritty core sounds and feels very different from
smooth chalks such as present in the New Pit and higher beds of the
Seaford Chalk formations. With a little palaeontological knowledge it
is possible for all core loggers to identify the shelly beds and many
find it rewarding to identify the shells as well (see key Chalk fossils
illustrated by Mortimore et al. 2001; Smith and Batten 2002;
Mortimore 2014, 2021). Some typical index shells from the most
commonly cored part of the Chalk, the Seaford Chalk Formation, are
the various forms of inoceramid bivalves (Figs 14–16). These fossils
Fig. 17. Flints in Chalk core from the
southern North Sea.illustrating the drilling
fragmentation of core typically associated
with flints, making a fracture log in such
intervals difficult if not impossible. (a)
Two closely spaced medium to large
tabular flints and fragmented Chalk-core.
(b, c, f and h) Very large tabular flints.
(g) Large tabular flint and Chalk core
degraded to putty by drilling. (i) A typical
large nodular flint. ( j) A carious tabular
flint. (k) Drilling degraded Chalk core and
hidden flint.
provide supporting evidence for the identification of key marker beds,
especially the Belle Tout Marls and flint bands including the Seven
Sisters Flint and Bedwell’s Columnar Flint.
Finding a key fossil in core can make the difference between
uncertainty and the exact stratigraphical position of a marl seam
or flint band. In the southern North Sea the small echinoid fossil
Conulus subrotundus, associated with small forms of the
inoceramid bivalve Inoceramus cuvieri (Fig. 15j and k), was
found in beds with conspicuous marl seams in the basal beds of
the New Pit Chalk Formation. These fossils helped identify the
lithological and physical property changes related to seismic
reflectors, making it possible to map the Chalk across the entire
wind farm area.
Similarly, the inoceramid bivalve fossil Cladoceramus undulato-
plicatus in the topmost, degraded core run of a Wiltshire borehole
(Fig. 16b) proved the base of the Haven Brow Beds in the Seaford
Chalk Formation. The next horizon below identified in core was the
horizon with abundant fragments of the inoceramid bivalve
Platyceramus and then below that the wonderful example of
another key inoceramid Volviceramus involutus (Fig. 16h and i).
Identifying these key marker fossils allowed the bed subdivisions of
the Seaford Chalk Formation to be identified with confidence and
provided the basis for correlations with similar shell beds in the many
boreholes in the area, which, in turn, formed the basis for a ground
model. Without these shells there would have been great uncertainty
about the stratigraphy and borehole correlations at this site.
Identifying flint bands
Flints have many shapes and sizes, which are consistent in a band
over very long distances (e.g. across the Paris Basin (Mortimore and
Pomerol 1987)) and from Sussex to Yorkshire (Mortimore and
Wood 1986; Mortimore 2019c, 2021). Recognizing flint shape and
size in core is frequently made difficult because of drilling damage
caused while coring through flint (e.g. core with flints from the
southern North Sea Fig. 17). A typical range of flint sizes, types and
bands has been illustrated by Mortimore (2014). One group of flints
 Downloaded from http://qjegh.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 3, 2021

Rory N. Mortimore

Fig. 18. Borehole log from the southern North Sea through the upper part of the Grey Chalk Subgroup and basal White Chalk Subgroup (modified from
Mortimore and James 2015) showing the contrasting lithologies that create two of the seismic reflectors used to map an area of the southern North Sea for
wind turbine foundations.

that require further illustration are the tabular flints typical of the
Northern Province of Lincolnshire and Yorkshire and in the
southern North Sea. These flints are unlike the nodular flint bands
typical of southern England or sheet flints that form on
subhorizontal and inclined fractures. Tabular flints are stratigraph-
ically continuous solid flint bands with generally flat top and bottom
surfaces (bedding parallel) frequently with a thin cortex along
bottom and top contact surfaces. The examples of large to very large
continuous tabular flints (Fig. 17, using the size scale given by
Mortimore (2014) (>100 mm thick)) have implications for cable
trenching, pipe laying and small tunnel boring machine (TBM)
tunnelling onshore and offshore. Identifying these flint types during
core logging and establishing their stratigraphy allows the risks to
engineering to be assessed.
 Downloaded from http://qjegh.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 3, 2021
Chalk: all we need is a fracture log
Fig. 19. Two borehole logs illustrating marker marl seams and shell beds
in the top Holywell and lower New Pit Chalk formations in the southern
North Sea (modified from Mortimore and James 2015).
Applying Chalk marker beds to ground models in
engineering
Each type of marker bed (marl seam, shell bed and flint band) can
be represented graphically on borehole logs (e.g. Figs 18–20).
Plotting physical properties alongside such logs (Fig. 18) helps
identify how physical properties relate to lithology. This in turn
can be used to interpret field test data such as seismic velocity
profiles and cone penetration tests (CPTs). A windfarm area in the
southern North Sea provides one example of the application of this
marker bed stratigraphy linked to physical properties for the
identification of wind turbine foundation conditions in the Chalk.
Identification of seismic reflectors in relation to the Chalk
stratigraphy allows ground conditions to be extrapolated over a
much wider area than just the borehole location. An initial
interpretation of the seismic profiles shown (Figs 21 and 22)
placed the key marker bed, the Plenus Marls, at a different reflector
much higher in the profile. Only when the information from the
cored boreholes (e.g. Fig. 18) was available was the correct
interpretation possible, and these results completely changed the
ground model in terms of types of chalk at the various wind
turbine foundations (Mortimore and James 2015).
Two other examples of applying the marker beds to developing
ground models for tunnels are: (1) the Shoreham Harbour Siphon
Tunnel, where the presence of bands of large flints required the
modification of the 1.9 m diameter Iseki Unclemole TBM and a
supplementary ground investigation to correlate the flint bands
along the tunnel line (Mortimore 2012, pp. 291–297): (2) the
Brighton and Hove Stormwater Tunnel, which illustrated a detailed
link between marker beds, identification of tectonic structure,
fracturing and weathering of the Chalk and relation to TBM
tunnelling (Mortimore 2012, pp. 297–314). In open face tunnelling
the design zones in the CTRL North Downs Tunnel depended on
the depth of cover and the Chalk lithostratigraphy (Warren and
Mortimore 2003). Similarly, for the CTRL Thames Crossing,
London Tunnels, Crossrail and Tideway Tunnels flint band
correlations, flint band frequency and concentration of flints
required detailed logging of flint bands in cores. To aid this
process the stratigraphy of the flints was correlated with local Chalk
quarries where the same flint bands were present and could be
measured in detail. Other key marker beds for these tunnels included
the Shoreham and Belle Tout Marls (Mortimore et al. 2011;
Mortimore 2014).
A further key reason for identifying and logging marker beds,
especially marl seams, is their role in controlling the mechanical and
hydrogeological properties of the Chalk mass. A single thin marl
seam across a tunnel face can change the stress distribution and the
design of short- and long-term support. Marls act as local
décollement zones yielding to interbed sliding, as can be seen in
many palaeo-slides (Mortimore 2019a). Downhole camera logs
show groundwater flowing along marl seams in both the saturated
and unsaturated zones (Mortimore 2014, figs. 6.61–6.64).
Fracture distribution in the Chalk
Treating the Chalk as a homogeneous medium masks the many
types of fracture present and their possible origins. A typical model
used for illustrating fractures in the folded Chalk of southern
England is the general model for fractured, folded strata of Price
(1966) (Figs 23 and 24). Such a model does not take account of
polyphase deformation or Chalk formations with different layering
leading to stratabound fracture evolution.
Stratabound fractures: vertical joint sets and steeply
inclined conjugate fractures
A feature of the Upper Cretaceous Chalk is the style of fracturing
characteristic of each formation (stratabound fractures; e.g. Figs 22,
25 and 26a–c). A determining property of the Chalk that appears to
control fracture development is the presence or absence of marl
seams. Those formations with many marl seams, such as the
Holywell, New Pit and Newhaven Chalk formations in southern
England (Fig. 26a and b) and the Welton and Flamborough Chalk
formations in northern England (Fig. 26c), are characterized by
inclined conjugate fractures (Figs 1, 5, 8, 22, 25 and 26).
Subdivisions of other formations, such as the Belle Tout Beds in
the lower part of the Seaford Chalk Formation containing the Belle
Tout Marls, are also characterized by steeply inclined conjugate
fractures (frequently sheet flint filled) (Fig. 26b). The parts of the
Seaford Chalk Formation without marl seams (Cuckmere and
Haven Brow Beds) and other similarly marl-free formations (Culver
Chalk) contain predominantly nearly orthogonal vertical joint sets
(Figs 2, 10, 22 and 26b; Mortimore 1993, 2001) with fewer inclined
conjugate fractures. These fracture patterns shown in Figure 26a–c
illustrate that Chalk fracture evolution is related to lithology and
intra-Chalk events rather than later folding, indicating that the Price
(1966) model is inappropriate for the Chalk. A special feature of the
Belle Tout Beds, the Newhaven Chalk Formation and the
Flamborough Chalk Formation is the radial pattern of steeply
inclined conjugate fractures (Fig. 26b and c). As Hibsch et al. (1993,
1995) found, this radial pattern makes it difficult to identify regional
 Downloaded from http://qjegh.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 3, 2021

Rory N. Mortimore

Fig. 20. Borehole log from the southern North Sea through the locally developed Chalk Rock and the tabular flint succession at the boundary between the
Welton and Burnham Chalk formations (modified from Mortimore and James 2015). In contrast to low- and medium-density chalk areas, the high-density
Chalk Rock and tabular flints required pre-boring for wind turbine piled foundations.

trends in fracture orientation (see further discussion by Mortimore
2019a).
A pattern of fractures
Fracture orientations have been measured along the coastal cliffs
and inland quarries in the Chalk of southern England and part of this
dataset for the eastern South Downs of Sussex is shown as
stereogram and cyclographic plots (Fig. 26a, from Mortimore
1979). The stereograms show the steeply dipping inclined conjugate
patterns in the Holywell Chalk (Fig. 26a, D), Lewes Chalk
(Fig. 26a, C and K) and the Newhaven Chalk (Fig. 26a, A, B, E,
F, G, H and I). These patterns for inclined conjugate fractures
contrast with the near-vertical orthogonal pattern of joints in the
Cuckmere Beds of the Seaford Chalk (Fig. 26a, J). In all the
stereograms, regardless of fracture style, there are two predominant
fracture orientations, NW–SE and NE–SW, especially with the
major shears and faults, and this is a consistent pattern in the Chalk
of southern England. Rose diagrams for fracture orientations in each
 Downloaded from http://qjegh.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 3, 2021
Chalk: all we need is a fracture log
Chalk formation across southern England are shown (Fig. 26b).
Similar fracture patterns are present in the Chiltern Hills (e.g.
inclined conjugate fractures in the New Pit Chalk Formation,
Kensworth Pit, Mortimore et al. 2001; Mortimore 2011, 2014).
Cored boreholes beneath London for projects such as the Lee
Tunnel, Thames Tideway and Crossrail all illustrated the consistent
presence of similar strata-bound fracture styles (summarized by
Mortimore et al. 2011; Mortimore 2014, fig. 3.29).
Fracture style and orientation are consistent within formations
from the south coast of England (Fig. 26b) to the Yorkshire Wolds
(Fig. 26c) and across the Paris Basin. The exceptions are areas
where faulted blocks such as the Pays de Caux Block in Upper
Normandy, France, have a different sedimentary history and
consequently different fracture style (Mortimore 2011, 2019a).
Southwest of the Fécamp Fault on the ‘block’ the extraordinary
Chalk sediments with numerous synsedimentary seafloor channels
have few fractures. In contrast, NE of the Fécamp Fault ‘normal’
chalks return, which contain the stratabound fractures seen
everywhere else in the Paris Basin and in England (see discussion
by Mortimore 2011). Lateral variations in tectonic setting have to be
considered in any fracture model for the Chalk.
Interbed sliding and growth faults
The Late Santonian and Early Campanian Newhaven Chalk
Formation illustrates the interplay between bed sliding along marl
seams and the generation of listric growth faults, which bottom
out along thin interwoven marl seams (Figs 27–29). The listric
growth faults show increased displacement downwards and
displacement reducing upwards, eventually passing out and
Fig. 21. Identification of seismic reflectors
(marker beds) in the southern North Sea
from cored boreholes shown in Figures
18–20 and the marl seams, flint bands and
fossils (Figs 13–17). (Modified from
Mortimore and James 2015).
stopping in the overlying Culver Chalk Formation (Fig. 29a
and b), This suggests that there was a period of ‘growth’
tectonics generating shallow downslope faulting constrained, in
this case, to the Early Campanian Offaster pilula Zone. Many of
the early synsedimentary and penecontemporaneous fractures are
filled or replaced by early formed sheet flints, in turn offset by
interbed sliding along marl seams and subhorizontal shears
(Fig. 27c–f; see also Mortimore 2011). The generation of slopes
that created the environment for this interbed sliding and listric
faulting is discussed further below.
Strike-slip faults, slickensides, striae and palaeostress
studies
‘Are strike-slip faults likely in the Chalk?’ is a regular question
asked in relation to tunnelling, especially beneath London. Strike-
slip faults are common at some localities, with some of the best
examples occurring in the coastal cliffs of East Sussex at Beachy
Head (Fig. 28) and Newhaven (Fig. 29c and d). The deeply
grooved slickensides with pinnate shears (Fig. 29c and d) provide
the evidence for sense of movement and, alongside the less
deeply grooved striae on many fractures (e.g. Fig. 8), have been
used to identify the orientation of palaeostresses that caused them
(Fig. 29) following the method developed by Angelier and
Bergerat (1983), Bergerat (1987), Angelier (1990) and Vandycke
(2002). This method has subsequently been applied to the Mons
Basin (Belgium) and the Chalk of the Boulonnais and North
Kent (Vandycke and Bergerat 1989; Vandycke et al. 1991;
Vandycke 1992; Bergerat and Vandycke 1994) and to the Isle of
 Downloaded from http://qjegh.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 3, 2021

Rory N. Mortimore

Fig. 22. A fracture stratigraphy related to the standard lithostratigraphy for the Southern Province Chalk (modified from Mortimore 1993, 2001; Soley et al.
2012), showing some of the key horizons associated with enhanced groundwater fissure flow and spring lines from the Chalk of Hampshire and Dorset.

Fig. 23. The Price (1966) model (fig. 43, p. 114) of

fracture patterns in relation to an anticline. This model
has been used to explain fracture patterns in the Chalk
(e.g. Bloomfield et al. 1995; Bloomfield 1996). (i)
master joints; (ii) stereogram of master joints; (iii)
typical relationship of joints in the limbs of an
asymmetrical anticline; (iv) stereogram of joints in the
gently dipping limb; (v) stereogram of joints in the
steeply dipping limb.
 Downloaded from http://qjegh.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 3, 2021
Chalk: all we need is a fracture log
Fig. 24. Illustration of conjugate shear fractures in a competent rock unit
(Price 1966, fig. 1, p. 1) modified here with the horizontal planes A–A
and B–B identified as marl seams for the Chalk.
Wight (Vandycke and Bergerat 2001). Using the fracture
analyses of Mortimore (1979) and further records made for the
ROCC programme along the English and French Chalk coasts of
the eastern English Channel (Mortimore and Duperret 2004, and
papers therein) this same method of palaeostress analysis has
been applied to show phases of extension and compression
affecting the Chalk of the eastern English Channel coast
(Duperret et al. 2012; Figs 30 and 31).
Tectonics, fracturing and sedimentary history
Identifying the timing of palaeostress changes that led to fracturing
episodes (Figs 29–31) is one method of investigating tectonics that
affected the Chalk. Another way is to investigate lateral variations in
thickness and lithofacies with respect to tectonic structures. Broad-
scale patterns of Chalk sedimentation in relation to shelves and
basins are relatively well established (Drummond 1970; Mortimore
1983). More controversial has been the impact on Chalk
sedimentation of local-scale tectonic structures such as the en
echelon fold belts that cross the Chalk of southern England and
similar folds offshore in parts of the North Sea. Seismic profile
Fig. 25. Examples of stratabound fracture
sets in the Chalk: (a) Inclined conjugate
fracture sets in the Holywell Nodular
Chalk Formation typical of the Anglo-
Paris Basin (Southern Province). (b)
Nearly orthogonal vertical joint sets in the
Cuckmere and Haven Brow Beds, Seaford
Chalk Formation near Birling Gap,
Sussex, and (d) core from the Haven
Brow Beds beneath London showing the
same pattern of vertical joints. (c) A sheet
flint filled inclined fracture in the
Newhaven Chalk Formation offset along
marl seams, Saltdean Cliffs, Sussex. (E)
Inclined conjugate fractures in the
Flamborough Chalk Formation with
numerous thin marl seams, Danes Dyke,
East Yorkshire.
 Downloaded from http://qjegh.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 3, 2021

Rory N. Mortimore

Fig. 26 (a) Stereograms illustrating the fracture patterns in the different Chalk formations of the East Sussex South Downs. (C, D) Inclined conjugate
patterns typical of the Holywell and Lewes Nodular Chalk formations. (A, B, E, F, G, H and I) The consistent pattern of inclined conjugate ‘radial’
fracturing in the Newhaven Chalk Formation. In contrast, (J) illustrates the near-orthogonal pattern of vertical joint sets in the Seaford Chalk Formation
(Cuckmere and Haven Brow Beds) at Birling Gap. Faults in the Late Turonian Chalk at Beachy Head (K) have a very similar orientation to faults measured
in the Late Turonian inland Chalk Pits at Bridgewick, Lewes (C). The fracture patterns and orientations are significantly different in the Late Santonian–
Early Campanian Newhaven Chalk Formation (see also the same age Flamborough Chalk Formation (all data from Mortimore 1979)). OSA, Old Steine
Anticline; FBA, Friars’ Bay Anticline.

evidence shows that these folds are controlled by underlying faults
(e.g. Mortimore and Pomerol 1991, 1997; Butler 1998; Chadwick
and Evans 2005) and the folds are generally asymmetric anticlines
(periclines) with steeper north-facing limbs (e.g. Fig. 32, an offshore
structure). Resolution in the Chalk on the onshore vibroseis sections
is inadequate for identifying seismic reflectors related to marker
beds, formations and lithofacies and these seismic sections are,
therefore, of little help for investigating lateral variations. Ideas about
lateral variation onshore have been constructed from field sections
and boreholes (e.g. Mortimore 1983, 2011, 2012; Mortimore and
Pomerol 1991, 1997). Offshore, the relatively shallow depth seismic
profiling for wind farms has provided, for the first time, the detailed
evidence supporting the tentative and controversial onshore
interpretations (Mortimore and James 2015; Fig. 32).
As uplift and folding progressed in pulses through the Late
Cretaceous and into the Paleogene the early formed fractures,
including the steeply inclined conjugate fractures and bedding-slip
planes, were rotated in the folds and partly reactivated (e.g. Purbeck
Fold, Durdle Door, Fig. 33). House (1989) agreed with Bevan
(1985) that, using the original near-horizontal bedding surfaces as
datum, many of the slickensided fractures, classified and interpreted
as late-stage fractures caused by the latest phases of ‘Alpine’
Tertiary folding (Arkell 1938, 1947; Phillips 1964), can be
reinterpreted as early, pre-folding, conjugate fractures that have
been rotated into their present position by the monoclinal fold
(Ameen and Cosgrove 1990; Mortimore 2019b; Fig. 33). This latter
interpretation is also made for similar slickensided conjugate
fractures in the Chalk of Sussex and on the Isle of Wight Sandown
Pericline (e.g. Mortimore 2011, figs 67–70).
Ameen and Cosgrove (1990) produced schematic block models
illustrating the geometric–kinematic classification of meso-fractures
symmetrically oriented in relation to bedding in the Purbeck fold.
 Downloaded from http://qjegh.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 3, 2021

Chalk: all we need is a fracture log

Fig. 26 Continued. (b) Rose diagrams for fracture orientations in all the White Chalk Subgroup formations in southern England. Measurements were
obtained from coastal cliffs, road cuttings and inland quarries. (From Mortimore 2012, fig. 74.) A noteworthy feature is the radial steeply inclined fracture
patterns in the chalks with numerous marl seams (e.g. Belle Tout Beds in the Seaford Chalk Formation) in contrast to near-vertical fractures in the
Cuckmere and Haven Brow Beds in the Seaford Chalk Formation.

Ameen and Cosgrove (1990) also investigated the classic Ballard
Fault at the eastern end of the Jurassic Coast (Ballard Point),
interpreting it as a ramp developed with a north-moving thrust
subsequently rotated in the Purbeck monocline. These observations
suggest that significant pre-monocline (i.e. pre-Miocene) and
probably intra-Late Cretaceous tectonics affected the Chalk. Such
observations support the idea of intra-Chalk fracturing episodes
related to tectonic episodes (Figs 30 and 31).
The uplifts causing the folds are driven by major underlying
faults, which appear to show a reversal of movement between the
 Downloaded from http://qjegh.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 3, 2021

Rory N. Mortimore

Fig. 26 Continued. (c) Rose diagrams for fracture orientations and frequencies in the White Chalk Formations of the Yorkshire Wolds (modified from Foster
and Milton 1976 and Mortimore, 2019a). The results suggest that relatively simple fracture orientations in the older Chalk formations are replaced by more
complex ‘radial’ fractures in the younger Flamborough Chalk Formation. This same complex radial pattern is present in the Newhaven Chalk (the same age
and similar lithology with marl seams (Fig. 26b).

Lower and Upper Cretaceous (i.e. inversion faults; e.g. Fig. 32).
Ameen (1990) agreed with Stoneley (1982), and all subsequent
interpretations based on seismic section evidence (e.g. Underhill
and Patterson 1998), that the Purbeck and Isle of Wight monoclines
result from the sedimentary cover (Late Cretaceous to Miocene)
draping over reversed movements on the underlying ‘basement’
Purbeck Fault. In relation to these monoclinal folds a consistent
pattern of sedimentation emerges. The ‘draping’ was not a passive
process in the Chalk, as tectonic pulses uplifted the seafloor,
creating axes of sedimentation with crestal areas of condensed
 Downloaded from http://qjegh.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 3, 2021

Chalk: all we need is a fracture log

Fig. 27. The Newhaven Chalk Formation in the Newhaven to Brighton coastal cliffs contains a suite of fractures related to bedding slip along thin grey marl
seams. (a, b) Listric growth faults that illustrate increased displacement downwards (faults die out in the overlying Culver Chalk). (c, d, f ) Offsets of early
formed, sheet-flint filled fractures along marl seams. (e) One of the many anastomosing bedding slip shears in soft low-density chalk and associated vein
network. (g) A schematic field log illustrating bedding slip along thin interwoven grey marl seams.

successions and basinal areas with thicker successions. Downslope
space was also created for bed sliding and slumping (Fig. 32).
In the Grey Chalk Subgroup (West Melbury Marly Chalk and Zig
Zag Chalk formations), with clay mineral content between 12 and
70%, the sedimentary cyclicity between carbonate and clay-rich
bands is more obvious than in the purer (>95% carbonate) White
Chalk Subgroup. In the Grey Chalk Subgroup formations the beds
are referred to as marl–limestone cycles (e.g. Mortimore 2014,
pp. 1–15, figs 1.13–1.16). In the purer carbonate White Chalk
Subgroup the harder beds are referred to as nodular beds,
hardgrounds and/or chalkstone. Marl seams (and marly beds) tend
to become occluded towards the crests of anticlines and increase in
number into the thicker, synclinal successions. Conversely,
limestone bands and hardgrounds or nodular chalks tend to coalesce
towards the axes of uplift. These lateral lithological changes also
affect the style and frequency of fractures. For example, the
coalescence of more brittle limestone bands in the Cenomanian
Grey Chalk Subgroup (Chalk Marl) over a local anticline along the
line of the Channel Tunnel led to increased fracturing and the ‘wet
zone’ at kilometre 21 on the UK side (Warren et al. 1996;
Mortimore and Pomerol 1996; Mortimore et al., 1996). Similarly,
lateral changes involving occlusion of marl seams and condensed
sections over the Hollingbury Dome in the Late Santonian–Early
Campanian Newhaven Chalk Formation along the route of the A27
Brighton Bypass led to marked changes in lithology and fracturing,
affecting cutting slope stability (Mortimore et al., 1996; Mortimore
2012).
Discussion
Chalk engineering geology has to consider all aspects of the rock
including the various geological processes that have produced the
range of sediments as well as fractures. One continuing problem
with the Chalk is perception of uniformity. Chalk is frequently still
treated as a blanket of coccolith limestone containing some marker
beds and not much in the way of structure. This misconception
extends to physical properties and engineering behaviour.
Formations such as the Seaford and Culver Chalks can appear to
 Downloaded from http://qjegh.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 3, 2021
Rory N. Mortimore
be very homogeneous, and the Seaford Chalk in particular is the part
of the stratigraphy most frequently encountered in engineering and
hydrogeology, compounding this view. A further issue has been an
inability to correlate boreholes in settings where marker beds have
been difficult to identify, also giving the impression of uniformity.
In reality, the Chalk of southern England in particular is underlain
by a complex tectonic picture of reverse inversion faults, in turn
driving the evolution of monoclinal folds or domes over which
sediments and fractures have evolved (Figs 34 and 35). The
inversion faults are considered by many to be driven by a strike-slip
fault regime (Fig. 34; Lake & Karner 1987; Ziegler 1990, 1993;
Hibsch et al. 1995; Mortimore 2011).
Studies of orientations of fractures in the Chalk (Cawsey 1977;
Bevan and Hancock 1986) have recognized general NW–SE and
NE–SW trends. These trends have been broadly confirmed by later
studies (Mortimore and Duperret 2004; Duperret et al. 2012);
however, the fracture patterns are much more complex than these
trends suggest, especially as each formation has its own stratabound
sets of fractures. Evolution of the inclined conjugate fractures is
closely related to lithology, especially the marl seams and interbed
Fig. 28. (a) The Seven Sisters Flint Band
is brought to the top of the cliff at Beachy
Head on the crest of the Beachy Head
Anticline. A fault zone is present to the
west of the Lighthouse, shown in more
detail in (b) and (c). (b) Faults in the
higher part of the cliff. (c) Faults in the
lower part of the cliff, where
measurements were made at beach level.
The Beachy Head fault zone is a
combination of NW- (310°) and NE-
trending (030–050°) strike-slip faults. (d)
Orientation of the faults in the Beachy
Head fracture zone (also shown in
(Fig. 26a, K)). Data from Mortimore
(1979).
slides. Marl seams control the pore fluid pressure distribution in the
rock mass, as seen in many contexts (e.g. fracturing and
glacitectonics; Mortimore 2019a).
Distribution of Chalk lithologies and thicknesses are strongly
controlled by tectonic setting (Fig. 32); in turn this potentially
influences properties such as density, porosity and hardness of the
Chalk, as well as fracturing. It has been suggested that lateral
variation in physical properties is partly controlled by position
within a fold in relation to the hanging wall or footwall of the
underlying regional fault(s) (Jones et al. 1984; Ameen and
Cosgrove 1990; Mortimore 2019a, b). There is also evidence for
intact dry density values being marginally greater in units with marl
seams; for example, the Belle Tout Beds with marl seams compared
with the overlying Cuckmere and Haven Brow Beds without marl
seams in the Seaford Chalk Formation in East London (Mortimore
et al. 2011).
Having a geological context for core logs and results from
laboratory, field and borehole tests including geophysics enhances
the possibility of extrapolating these results widely. A similar
geological context needs to be developed for training core logging
 Downloaded from http://qjegh.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 3, 2021

Chalk: all we need is a fracture log

Fig. 29. (a, b) Listric growth faults in the Newhaven Chalk Formation, Newhaven with increased displacement downwards as lateral slip develops along
marl seams (bedding planes). (c, d) One of the many strike-slip faults along the coast of Sussex especially in the Newhaven Chalk Formation. The fault is
also the locus of collapsed and weathered Paleogene sediments. Modified from Mortimore, (2011, 2014, 2021). The orientation of striae (slickensides)
provides the basis for the palaeostress analyses (Figs 29c, d and 30).

teams so that everyone involved in a project can see how their site
investigation information can be used. This will encourage core
loggers to use their wider geological knowledge. Workshops run
during the site investigation with the logging teams and engineers
have proved especially useful.
Conclusions
Fracture logging is a vital part of any site investigation. Questions
that have arisen during core logging with respect to fractures have
included the following. (1) Is a fracture index an adequate
representation of all the fractures? (2) Over what intervals should
fracture frequency or index be calculated in core with no obvious
strata changes? In these latter cases it is suggested that the fracture
index should be measured by core-run. If summaries for longer
intervals of core are required these core-run records can be
combined by those who need the information. A fracture index
should not be used on its own without reference to the log
descriptions, where fracture style should also have been recorded.
Producing a fracture log in the Chalk can, however, be fraught
with issues requiring ‘interpretation’ and ‘experience’ for which
adequate training and guidance is vital. A standard fracture log
 Downloaded from http://qjegh.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 3, 2021

Rory N. Mortimore

Fig. 30. Palaeostress analyses of the coastal Chalk cliffs

of East Sussex from the Cenomanian to Campanian
deduced from sense of movement provided by striae or
slickensides on normal and strike-slip faults. Vertical
exaggeration of the cliffs is ×50. III–V represent the
chronological order of palaeostress events (see also
Fig. 31). Modified from Duperret et al. (2012).

could be improved by annotating the core photographs to show the

actual fractures being logged, with notes identifying style of
fractures and illustrating uncertainties. A second improvement to
fracture logs would be the identification of fracture zones (Fig. 9).
All parties in a contract need to recognize the difficulties of fracture
logging and appreciate where it is not possible to provide definitive
numbers (annotated core photographs greatly assist this process of
evaluation). There will be intervals of core destruction, which
require an honest account without over-interpretation.
In the context of fracture evolution in the Chalk part of this
review has focused on formation of early, stratabound ’primary’
conjugate inclined fractures associated with subhorizontal slides
and listric growth faults. This ‘package’ of early fractures is
closely integrated with ‘growth’ tectonic movements caused by
inversion faults beneath the folds that form en echelon ‘belts’
across southern England. Episodes of synsedimentary tectonic
uplift along these fold belts led to lateral facies and thickness
changes in the Chalk. Such changes included thickening of
deposits into local ‘synclinal’ basins with increased marl seams
and increased development of inclined conjugate fractures with
interbed sliding. Conversely, thinning of Chalk successions over
anticlinal domes led to occlusion of marl seams, development of Fig. 31. Summary of palaeostress conditions recorded in the Late
Cretaceous Chalk coastal cliffs of the English Channel in Sussex, England
hardgrounds and predominantly vertical joint sets (Fig. 35). Any
and Normandy, France. Events: (i) NE–SW extension in Normandy; (ii)
model for Chalk fracture evolution and distribution has to NW–SE extension in Normandy (iii) NNE–SSW extension in Normandy
recognize lateral variations in lithology in relation to tectonics. and Sussex with additional ESE–WNW compression in Sussex; (iv)
Early formed fractures have been rotated into their present north–south compression and east–west extension in Sussex; (v) east–west
positions by later folding in the Cenozoic that over-steepened the extension in Sussex. (Modified from Duperret et al. 2012.)
 Downloaded from http://qjegh.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 3, 2021
Chalk: all we need is a fracture log
north-dipping limbs of early folds to produce the north-facing
monoclines seen today.
Following best practice in Chalk engineering recommended in
CIRIA 574 (Lord et al. 2002), a further part of this review has re-
emphasized the need to record marker beds as well as fractures and
how this can be achieved in drilling degraded core. A marker bed
stratigraphy is needed if the correct ground interpretations are to be
made. Core logging cannot simply focus on producing a fracture
Fig. 32. A rare seismic line with sufficient
resolution in the Chalk to identify lateral
variation in thickness and lithology in
relation to tectonic structure. A fault-
controlled asymmetric anticline with a
more steeply dipping northern limb is
typical of folding in the Chalk onshore in
southern England. In this offshore case (to
the NE of the Norfolk coast), the Early
Turonian Holywell Grit Beds expand
northwards into the complementary
syncline, suggesting that the tectonic
structure was active and growing during
the Turonian. There is also the hint of
reversal of displacement along the
regional fault between the Lower and
Upper Cretaceous. This could not have
been interpreted without carefully logged
fully cored boreholes (e.g. Figs 18–20).
This seismic section is similar to others in
this part of southern North Sea and
provides a model for onshore asymmetric
anticlines with similar lateral changes in
thickness of Chalk sediments. (Modified
from Mortimore and James 2015.)
log, however important that might be. For example, recent offshore
seismic profiles could be correctly interpreted only by recognizing
marker beds in cored boreholes. These offshore seismic profiles
have also supported the onshore model of Chalk sedimentation in
relation to tectonic growth movements on inversion faults (Figs 32
and 35). The consultant or designer is the only party who
understands the potential project impact of this broader geology.
Ideally, specifications should identify Chalk sub-units that the
Fig. 33. Looking west from Durdle Door
across Durdle Bay to Bat’s Head, Dorset
coast onto vertical and partly overturned
strata. The steeply dipping bedding is in
the northern steep limb of the Purbeck
Fold. Structures in the Chalk at Bat’s
Head include post-depositional and
penecontemporaneous inclined conjugate
fractures formed pre-monoclinal folding
(i.e. when beds were near horizontal) now
rotated in the later monocline and partly
re-mobilized during folding as thrust
planes (modified from Mortimore 2019b).
 Downloaded from http://qjegh.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 3, 2021
Rory N. Mortimore
ground investigation contractor is expected to encounter and should
provide the detailed guidance on how logging this ‘extra’ detail
should be done. This should also reduce the consultant’s checking
time.
It is hoped that by providing a geological context for Chalk
sediments and fractures curiosity will flourish and enhance the core
and field logging process, which will improve the quality of
information gained from a Chalk site investigation. For Chalk
engineering we need much more than just a fracture log!
Stratigraphy, especially the lithostratigraphy, forms the skeleton
onto which all geotechnical, geophysical and groundwater data can
be attached. Regular workshops and training during a ground
investigation will ensure the successful development of the
stratigraphic skeleton.
Fig. 34. Results from palaeostress studies
(modified from Hibsch et al. 1995) and
regional geological studies (Lake and
Karner 1987; Ziegler 1990, 1993;
Mortimore 2011) support the idea of
strike-slip fault-controlled local basins in
the Late Cretaceous and Paleocene.
Fig. 35. Regional tectonics, local structure
of the Chalk, lateral facies changes and
fracture distribution. Schematic profile
across the Hollingbury Dome, Brighton,
showing lateral change in the Late
Santonian–Early Campanian Newhaven
Chalk Formation from complete succession
of marls on margins to absence of marls
and thinner succession over crest of dome.
(Modified from Mortimore 1979, 1983,
2012; Mortimore and Pomerol 1996, 1998.)
Acknowledgements This paper stems from a talk given to the Engineering
Group of the Geological Society in March 2020 and a request to write it up
afterwards. It could not have been written without the discussions, support and co-
operation of many clients, consultants and contractors across a wide spectrum of
engineering projects onshore and offshore. These include Highways England,
Crossrail, Thames Tideway, HS2, GCG, AECOM, ARUP, Mott MacDonald, Dong
Energy, Statoil, Shell, Scottish Power, GEO (Denmark) FUGRO, Structural Soils
Ltd, Southern Testing and many more. Colleagues in France (B. Pomerol,
A. Duperret, A. Genter, and the ROCC and FLOOD1 teams from BRGM Orléans
and Amiens), Belgium (S. Vandycke and the University of Mons Team) and
Denmark (the Copenhagen GEO team and GEUS Protect team) have all contributed
through many discussions. Similarly, research teams at the University of Brighton
and Imperial College London (led by J. Lawrence) have made many contributions
through discussions and fieldwork. The reviewers are thanked for their very positive
and useful comments, which have helped improve the paper.
A special thank you goes to the late Leo James for her work on marine seismic
sections in the North Sea. Working together changed the original model in relation
 Downloaded from http://qjegh.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 3, 2021
Chalk: all we need is a fracture log
to the Chalk in a large area of the southern North Sea and made it possible to map
lithofacies and structure in the Chalk in a way previously not possible (e.g. Figs 20
and 21). Hers is a very sad loss, and far too early.
Author contributions RNM: writing – original draft (lead), writing –
review & editing (lead)
Funding This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in
the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Data availability Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no
datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.
Scientific editing by Cherith Moses; Ursula Lawrence
References
Ameen, M.S. 1990. Macrofaulting in the Purbeck–Isle of Wight Monocline.
Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association, 101, 31–46, https://doi.org/10.
1016/S0016-7878(08)80204-0
Ameen, M.S. and Cosgrove, J.W. 1990. A kinematic analysis of meso-fractures
from Studland Bay, Dorset. Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association, 101,
315–314, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-7878(08)80165-4
Angelier, J. 1990. Inversion of field data in fault tectonics to obtain regional stress
III. A new rapid direct inversion method by analytical means. Geophysics
Journal International, 103, 363–376, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.
1990.tb01777.x
Angelier, J. and Bergerat, F. 1983. Systèmes de contraintes et extension
intracontinentale. Bulletin des Centres de Recherches Exploration–Production
Elf Aquitaine, 7, 137–147.
Arkell, W.J. 1938. Three tectonic problems in the Lulworth district: studies in the
middle limb of the Purbeck fold. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society,
94, 1–54, https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.JGS.1938.094.01-04.03
Arkell, W.J. 1947. The Geology of the Country around Weymouth, Swanage,
Corfe and Lulworth with contributions by Wright, C.W., Osborne White, H.J.
Memoirs of the Geological Survey of Great Britain, England and Wales.
HMSO, London (reprinted 1953).
Bergerat, F. 1987. Stress fields in European platform at the time of Africa–Eurasia
collision. Tectonics, 6, 99–132, https://doi.org/10.1029/TC006i002p00099
Bergerat, F. and Vandycke, S. 1994. Cretaceous and Tertiary fault systems in the
Boulonnais and Kent areas: paleostress analysis and geodynamical implica-
tions. Journal of the Geological Society, London, 151, 439–448, https://doi.
org/10.1144/gsjgs.151.3.0439
Bevan, T.G. 1985. A reinterpretation of fault systems in the Upper Cretaceous
rocks of the Dorset coast, England. Proceedings of the Geologists’
Association, 96, 337–342, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-7878(85)80022-5
Bevan, T.G. and Hancock, P.L. 1986. A late Cenozoic regional mesofracture
system in southern England and northern France. Journal of the Geological
Society, London, 143, 355–362 https://doi.org/10.1144/gsjgs.143.2.0355
Bloomfield, J. 1996. Characterisation of hydrogeologically significant fracture
distributions in the Chalk: an example from the Upper Chalk of southern
England. Journal of Hydrology, 184, 355–379, https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-
1694(95)02954-0
Bloomfield, J.P., Brewerton, L.J. and Allen, D.J. 1995. Regional trends in matrix
porosity and bulk density of the Chalk of England. Quarterly Journal of
Engineering Geology, 28, 131–142, https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.QJEGH.
1995.028.S2.04
Butler, M. 1998. The geological history of the southern Wessex Basin—a review
of new information from oil exploration. Geological Society, London, Special
Publications, 133, 67–86, http://doi.org/1144/GSL.SP.1998.133.01.04
Cawsey, D.C. 1977. The measurement of fracture patterns in the chalk of
Southern England. Engineering Geology, 11, 201–215, https://doi.org/10.
1016/0013-7952(77)90002-3
Chadwick, R.A. and Evans, D.J. 2005. A Seismic Atlas of Southern Britain.
British Geological Survey Occasional Publication, 7. British Geological
Survey, Keyworth, Nottingham.
Drummond, P.V.O. 1970. The Mid-Dorset Swell. Evidence of Albian –
Cenomanian movements in Wessex. Proceedings of the Geologists'
Association, 81, 679–714.
Duperret, A., Vandycke, S. Mortimore, R.N. and Genter, A. 2012. How plate
tectonics is recorded in chalk deposits along the eastern English Channel in
Normandy (France) and Sussex (UK). Tectonophysics, 581, 163–181, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2012.01.021
Foster, S.S.D. and Milton, V.A., 1976. Hydrological Basis for Large
Development of Groundwater Storage Capacity in East Yorkshire Chalk.
Report Institute of Geological Sciences, no. 76/3.
Hibsch, C., Cushing, E.M., Cabrera, J., Mercier, J., Prasil, P. and Jarrige, J.-J.
1993. Paleostress evolution in Great Britain from Permian to Cenozoic: a
microtectonic approach to the geodynamic evolution of the southern U.K.
basins. Bulletin des Centres de Recherches Exploration–Production Elf
Aquitaine, 17, 303–330.
Hibsch, C., Jarrige, J.-J., Cushing, E.M. and Mercier, J. 1995. Paleostress
analysis, a contribution to the understanding of basin tectonics and
geodynamic evolution. Example of the Permian/Cenozoic tectonics of Great
Britain and geodynamic implications in western Europe. Tectonophysics, 252,
103–136, https://doi.org/10.1016/0040-1951(95)00100-X
House, M.R. 1989. Geology of the Dorset Coast, 1st edn. Geologists’ Association
Field Guide, 22. Geologists’ Association, London.
Jones, M.E., Bedford, J. and Clayton, C. 1984. On natural deformation
mechanisms in the Chalk. Journal of the Geological Society, London, 141,
675–683, https://doi.org/10.1144/gsjgs.141.4.0675
Lake, S.D. and Karner, G.D. 1987. The structure and evolution of the Wessex
Basin, southern England: an example of inversion tectonics. Tectonophysics,
137, 347–378.
Lord, J.A. Twine, D. and Yeow, H. 1994. Foundations in chalk. Funders Report/
CP/13 Project Report 11. Construction Industry Research and Information
Association, London.
Lord, A.J., Clayton, C.R.I. and Mortimore, R.N. 2002. Engineering in chalk.
Report C574. Construction Industry Research and Information Association,
London.
Mortimore, R.N. 1979. The Relationship of Stratigraphy and Tectonofacies to the
Physical Properties of the White Chalk of Sussex. PhD thesis, CNAA,
Brighton University.
Mortimore, R.N. 1983. The stratigraphy and sedimentation of the Turonian–
Campanian in the Southern Province of England. Zitteliana, 10, 27–41.
Mortimore, R.N. 1993. Chalk water and engineering geology. In: Downing, R.A.,
Price, M., Jones, G.P. (eds) The Hydrogeology of the Chalk of North-West
Europe. Oxford Science, Oxford, 67–92.
Mortimore, R.N. 2001. Chalk: A stratigraphy for all reasons. Geosciences in
South-West England, 10, 105–122.
Mortimore, R.N. 2011. A chalk revolution: what have we done to the Chalk of
England? Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association, 122, 232–297, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.pgeola.2010.09.001
Mortimore, R.N. 2012. Making Sense of Chalk. The 11th Glossop Lecture.
Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology, 45, 251–334,
https://doi.org/10.1144/1470-9236/11-052
Mortimore, R.N. 2014. Logging the Chalk. The Definitive Chalk Handbook.
Whittles, Caithness, http://www.whittlespublishing.com
Mortimore, R.N. 2019a. Late Cretaceous to Miocene and Quaternary
deformation history of the Chalk: channels, slumps, faults, folds and
glacitectonics. Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association, 130, 27–65,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pgeola.2018.01.004
Mortimore, R.N. 2019b. Late Cretaceous stratigraphy, sediments and structure:
gems of the Jurassic Coast of Devon and Dorset, England. Proceedings of the
Geologists’ Association, 130, 406–450, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pgeola.
2018.05.008
Mortimore, R.N. 2019c. Flints in the Late Cretaceous Chalk of NW Europe.
Deposits Magazine, 58, 36–45.
Mortimore, R.N. 2021. Chalk of the South Downs of Sussex and Hampshire and
the North Downs of Kent (2 Vols). Geologists’ Association Guide, 74.
Geologists’ Association, London.
Mortimore, R.N. and Duperret, A. (eds) 2004. Coastal Chalk Cliff Instability.
Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publications, 20,
http://doi.org/1144/GSL.ENG.2004.020.01.13
Mortimore, R.N. and James, L. 2015. The search for onshore analogues for the
offshore Upper Cretaceous Chalk of the North Sea. Proceedings of the
Geologists’ Association, 126, 188–210, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pgeola.
2015.01.008
Mortimore, R.N. and Pomerol, B. 1987. Correlation of the Upper Cretaceous
White Chalk (Turonian to Campanian) in the Anglo-Paris Basin. Proceedings
of the Geologists’ Association, 98, 97–143, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-
7878(87)80001-9
Mortimore, R.N. and Pomerol, B. 1991. Upper Cretaceous tectonic disruptions in
a placid Chalk sequence in the Anglo-Paris Basin. Journal of the Geologica
Society, London, 148, 391–404, https://doi.org/10.1144/gsjgs.148.2.0391
Mortimore, R.N. and Pomerol, B. 1996. Chalk Marl: geoframeworks and
engineering appraisal. In: Harris, C.S., Hart, M.B., Varley, P.M. and Warren,
C.D. (eds) Engineering Geology of the Channel Tunnel. Thomas Telford,
London, 455–466.
Mortimore, R.N. and Pomerol, B. 1997. Upper Cretaceous tectonic phases and
end Cretaceous inversion in the Chalk of the Anglo-Paris Basin. Proceedings
of the Geologists’ Association, 108, 231–255, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-
7878(97)80031-4
Mortimore, R.N. and Pomerol, B. 1998. Basin analysis in engineering geology:
Chalk of the Anglo-Paris Basin. In: Moore, D. and Hungr. O. (eds)
Proceedings Eighth International Congress, International Association of
Engineering Geology and the Environment 21–25 September 1998 Vancouver
Canada. A.A. Balkema Rotterdam, pp. 3249–3268.
Mortimore, R.N. and Wood, C.J. 1986. The distribution of flint in the English
Chalk, with particular reference to the 'Brandon Flint Series' and the high
Turonian flint maximum. In: de Sieveking, G. and Hart, M.B. (eds) The
scientific study of flint and chert. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 7–20.
Mortimore, R.N., Pomerol, B. and Lamont-Black, J. 1996. Examples of structural
and sedimentological controls on chalk engineering behaviour. In: Harris,
C.S., Hart, M.B., Varley, P.M. and Warren, C.D. (eds) Engineering Geology of
the Channel Tunnel. Thomas Telford, London, 436–443.
 Downloaded from http://qjegh.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 3, 2021
Rory N. Mortimore
Mortimore, R.N., Wood, C.J. and Gallois, R.W. 2001. British Upper Cretaceous
Stratigraphy. Geological Conservation Review Series, 23. Joint Nature
Conservation Committee, Peterborough.
Mortimore, R.N., Newman, T., Royce, K., Scholes, H. and Lawrence, U. 2011.
Chalk: its stratigraphy, structure and engineering geology in east London and
the Thames Gateway. Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and
Hydrogeology, 44, 419–444, https://doi.org/10.1144/1470-9236/10-013
Phillips, W.J. 1964. The Structures in the Jurassic and Cretaceous Rocks on the
Dorset Coast between White Nothe and Mupe Bay. Proceedings of the
Geologists’ Association, 75, 373–405, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-7878
(64)80019-5
Price, N.J. 1966. Fault and Joint Development in Brittle and Semi-Brittle Rock.
Pergamon, Oxford.
Smith, A.B. and Batten, D.J. 2002. Fossils of the Chalk, 2nd edn.
Palaeontological Association, London.
Soley, R., Power, T., Mortimore, R., Shaw, P., Dottridge, J., Bryan, G. and Colley,
I. 2012. Modelling the hydrogeology and managed aquifer system of the
Chalk across Southern England. Geological Society, London, Special
Publications, 364, 129–154, https://doi.org/10.1144/SP364.10
Stoneley, R., 1982. The structural development of the Wessex Basin. Journal of
the Geological Society, London, 139, 543–554.
Underhill, J.R. and Patterson, S. 1998. Genesis of tectonic inversion structures:
seismic evidence for the development of key structures along the Purbeck–Isle
of Wight Disturbance. Journal of the Geological Society, London, 155,
975–992, https://doi.org/10.1144/gsjgs.155.6.0975
Vandycke, S. 1992. Tectonique Cassante et Paléocontraintes dans les
Formations Crétacées du Nord-Ouest Européen. Implications
Géodynamiques. Thèse de doctorat, Université de Paris VI.
Vandycke, S. 2002. Paleostress records in Cretaceous formations in NW Europe:
extensional and strike-slip events in relationships with Cretaceous–Tertiary
inversion tectonics. Tectonophysics, 357, 119–136, https://doi.org/10.1016/
S0040-1951(02)00365-7
Vandycke, S. and Bergerat, F. 1989. Analyse microtectonique des déformations
cassantes dans le Bassin de Mons. Reconstitution des paléo-champs de
contrainte au Crétacé–Tertiaire. Annales de la Société Géologique de
Belgique, 112, 479–487.
Vandycke, S. and Bergerat, F. 2001. Brittle tectonic structures and paleostress
analysis in the Isle of Wight, Wessex Basin southern UK. Journal of Structural
Geology, 23, 393–406, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8141(00)00125-5
Vandycke, S., Bergerat, F. and Dupuis, C. 1991. Meso-Cenozoic faulting and
inferred paleostresses of the Mons Basin (Belgium). Tectonophysics, 137,
171–219.
Warren, C.D. and Mortimore, R.N. 2003. Chalk engineering geology – Channel
Tunnel Rail Link and North Downs Tunnel. Quarterly Journal of Engineering
Geology and Hydrogeology, 36, 17–34.
Warren, C.D., Varley, P.M. and Parkin, R. 1996. UK tunnels: geotechnical
monitoring and encountered conditions. In: Harris, C.S., Hart, M.B., Varley,
P.M. and Warren, C.D. (eds) Engineering Geology of the Channel Tunnel.
Thomas Telford, London, 219–243.
White, H.G.O. 1913. The Geology of the Country Around Fareham. Memoir of
the Geological Survey (England and Wales). HMSO, London.
Ziegler, P.A. 1990. Geological Atlas of Western and Central Europe. Shell
Internationale Petroleum, Maatschappij B.V.
Ziegler, P.A. 1993. Plate moving mechanisms: their relative importance. William
Smith Lecture 1992. Journal of the Geological Society, London, 150,
927–940.