Interpreting syndepositional sediment remobilization and deformation beneath submarine gravity flows

a kinematic boundary layer approach

Robert W H Butler, Joris T Eggenhuisen, Peter Haughton , William D McCaffrey

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

10 Citations (Scopus)
5 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Turbidite sandstones and related deposits commonly contain deformation structures and remobilized sediment that might have resulted from post-depositional modification such as downslope creep (e.g. slumping) or density-driven loading by overlying deposits. However, we consider that deformation can occur during the passage of turbidity currents that
exerted shear stress on their substrates (whether entirely pre-existing strata, sediment deposited by earlier parts of the flow itself or some combination of these). Criteria are outlined here, to avoid confusion with products of other mechanisms (e.g. slumping or later tectonics), which establish the synchronicity between the passage of overriding flows and deformation of their substrates. This underpins a new analytical framework for tracking the relationship between deformation, deposition and the transit of the causal turbidity current, through the concept of kinematic boundary layers. Case study examples are drawn from outcrop (Miocene of New Zealand, and Apennines of Italy) and subsurface examples (Britannia Sandstone, Cretaceous, UK Continental Shelf). Example structures include asymmetric flame structures, convolute lamination, some
debritic units and injection complexes, together with slurry and mixed slurry facies. These structures may provide insight into the rheology and dynamics of submarine flows and their substrates, and have implications for the development of subsurface turbidite reservoirs.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)46-58
Number of pages13
JournalJournal of the Geological Society
Volume173
Issue number1
Early online date22 Sep 2015
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jan 2016

Fingerprint

gravity flow
remobilization
boundary layer
kinematics
slumping
turbidity current
turbidite
substrate
sediment
slurry
sandstone
analytical framework
lamination
rheology
creep
shear stress
continental shelf
outcrop
Miocene
Cretaceous

Cite this

Interpreting syndepositional sediment remobilization and deformation beneath submarine gravity flows : a kinematic boundary layer approach. / Butler, Robert W H; Eggenhuisen, Joris T; Haughton , Peter ; McCaffrey, William D.

In: Journal of the Geological Society , Vol. 173, No. 1, 01.2016, p. 46-58.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{df70337a9d574b988b006842244844bf,
title = "Interpreting syndepositional sediment remobilization and deformation beneath submarine gravity flows: a kinematic boundary layer approach",
abstract = "Turbidite sandstones and related deposits commonly contain deformation structures and remobilized sediment that might have resulted from post-depositional modification such as downslope creep (e.g. slumping) or density-driven loading by overlying deposits. However, we consider that deformation can occur during the passage of turbidity currents thatexerted shear stress on their substrates (whether entirely pre-existing strata, sediment deposited by earlier parts of the flow itself or some combination of these). Criteria are outlined here, to avoid confusion with products of other mechanisms (e.g. slumping or later tectonics), which establish the synchronicity between the passage of overriding flows and deformation of their substrates. This underpins a new analytical framework for tracking the relationship between deformation, deposition and the transit of the causal turbidity current, through the concept of kinematic boundary layers. Case study examples are drawn from outcrop (Miocene of New Zealand, and Apennines of Italy) and subsurface examples (Britannia Sandstone, Cretaceous, UK Continental Shelf). Example structures include asymmetric flame structures, convolute lamination, somedebritic units and injection complexes, together with slurry and mixed slurry facies. These structures may provide insight into the rheology and dynamics of submarine flows and their substrates, and have implications for the development of subsurface turbidite reservoirs.",
author = "Butler, {Robert W H} and Eggenhuisen, {Joris T} and Peter Haughton and McCaffrey, {William D}",
note = "This research has arisen from extensive fieldwork initially within syntectonic turbidite basins of the French Alps, Italy and New Zealand. A. del Pino Sanchez, E. Tavarnelli, S. Mazzoli, L. Strachan and B. Sp{\"o}rli are thanked for discussions in the field and core-store. Fieldwork was funded by the Turbidites Research Group industry consortium (Anadarko, BG Group, BP, ConocoPhillips, Devon Energy, Marathon, Maersk Oil, Nexen, Petronas, Statoil and Woodside). Scientific editing by Stuart Jones",
year = "2016",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1144/jgs2014-150",
language = "English",
volume = "173",
pages = "46--58",
journal = "Journal of the Geological Society",
issn = "0016-7649",
publisher = "Geological Society of London",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Interpreting syndepositional sediment remobilization and deformation beneath submarine gravity flows

T2 - a kinematic boundary layer approach

AU - Butler, Robert W H

AU - Eggenhuisen, Joris T

AU - Haughton , Peter

AU - McCaffrey, William D

N1 - This research has arisen from extensive fieldwork initially within syntectonic turbidite basins of the French Alps, Italy and New Zealand. A. del Pino Sanchez, E. Tavarnelli, S. Mazzoli, L. Strachan and B. Spörli are thanked for discussions in the field and core-store. Fieldwork was funded by the Turbidites Research Group industry consortium (Anadarko, BG Group, BP, ConocoPhillips, Devon Energy, Marathon, Maersk Oil, Nexen, Petronas, Statoil and Woodside). Scientific editing by Stuart Jones

PY - 2016/1

Y1 - 2016/1

N2 - Turbidite sandstones and related deposits commonly contain deformation structures and remobilized sediment that might have resulted from post-depositional modification such as downslope creep (e.g. slumping) or density-driven loading by overlying deposits. However, we consider that deformation can occur during the passage of turbidity currents thatexerted shear stress on their substrates (whether entirely pre-existing strata, sediment deposited by earlier parts of the flow itself or some combination of these). Criteria are outlined here, to avoid confusion with products of other mechanisms (e.g. slumping or later tectonics), which establish the synchronicity between the passage of overriding flows and deformation of their substrates. This underpins a new analytical framework for tracking the relationship between deformation, deposition and the transit of the causal turbidity current, through the concept of kinematic boundary layers. Case study examples are drawn from outcrop (Miocene of New Zealand, and Apennines of Italy) and subsurface examples (Britannia Sandstone, Cretaceous, UK Continental Shelf). Example structures include asymmetric flame structures, convolute lamination, somedebritic units and injection complexes, together with slurry and mixed slurry facies. These structures may provide insight into the rheology and dynamics of submarine flows and their substrates, and have implications for the development of subsurface turbidite reservoirs.

AB - Turbidite sandstones and related deposits commonly contain deformation structures and remobilized sediment that might have resulted from post-depositional modification such as downslope creep (e.g. slumping) or density-driven loading by overlying deposits. However, we consider that deformation can occur during the passage of turbidity currents thatexerted shear stress on their substrates (whether entirely pre-existing strata, sediment deposited by earlier parts of the flow itself or some combination of these). Criteria are outlined here, to avoid confusion with products of other mechanisms (e.g. slumping or later tectonics), which establish the synchronicity between the passage of overriding flows and deformation of their substrates. This underpins a new analytical framework for tracking the relationship between deformation, deposition and the transit of the causal turbidity current, through the concept of kinematic boundary layers. Case study examples are drawn from outcrop (Miocene of New Zealand, and Apennines of Italy) and subsurface examples (Britannia Sandstone, Cretaceous, UK Continental Shelf). Example structures include asymmetric flame structures, convolute lamination, somedebritic units and injection complexes, together with slurry and mixed slurry facies. These structures may provide insight into the rheology and dynamics of submarine flows and their substrates, and have implications for the development of subsurface turbidite reservoirs.

U2 - 10.1144/jgs2014-150

DO - 10.1144/jgs2014-150

M3 - Article

VL - 173

SP - 46

EP - 58

JO - Journal of the Geological Society

JF - Journal of the Geological Society

SN - 0016-7649

IS - 1

ER -