Multi-scale classification of fluvial architecture: an example from the Palaeocene-Eocene Bighorn Basin, Wyoming

Amanda Owen (Corresponding Author), Alena Ebinghaus, Adrian J. Hartley, Maurício G.M. Santos, Gary Weissmann

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

9 Citations (Scopus)
6 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Fluvial channel geometry classification schemes are commonly restricted in relation to the scale at which the study took place, often due to outcrop limitations or need to conduct small-scale detailed studies. A number of classification schemes are present in the literature; however there is often limited consistency between them, making application difficult. The aim of this study is to address this key problem by describing channel body geometries across a depositional basin to ensure that a wide range of architectures are documented. This was achieved by studying 28 locations over 4000 m of vertical succession in Palaeocene and Early-Eocene aged deposits within the Bighorn Basin, Wyoming, USA. Five different channel body geometries have been defined based on the external geometric form, and internal arrangement and nature of storey contacts. These include the massive channel body geometry, semi-amalgamated channel body geometry, internally amalgamated channel body sheet geometry and offset stacked channel body geometry, which are considered to be subdivisions of the sheet geometry of many other classifications. An isolated channel body geometry has also been recognised alongside channel and sheet sandstone geometries in the floodplain facies associations. Field evidence, including the stacking style of storey surfaces, suggests that the different geometries form a continuum. The nature and degree of amalgamation at the storey scale is important in producing the different geometries, and is related to the degree of channel migration. It is speculated that this is the result of differences in sediment supply and available accommodation. In contrast to previous schemes, the classification scheme presented here recognises the importance of transitional geometries. This geometrical range has been recognised because of the basin-scale nature of the study.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1572-1596
Number of pages25
JournalSedimentology
Volume64
Issue number6
Early online date18 Apr 2017
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Oct 2017

Fingerprint

Paleocene
Eocene
geometry
basin
stacking
floodplain
outcrop
sandstone

Keywords

  • Bighorn Basin
  • channel
  • fluvial architecture
  • Fort Union formation
  • geometry
  • sandstone body
  • Willwood formation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Earth and Planetary Sciences(all)

Cite this

Multi-scale classification of fluvial architecture : an example from the Palaeocene-Eocene Bighorn Basin, Wyoming. / Owen, Amanda (Corresponding Author); Ebinghaus, Alena; Hartley, Adrian J.; Santos, Maurício G.M.; Weissmann, Gary.

In: Sedimentology, Vol. 64, No. 6, 10.2017, p. 1572-1596.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{7b63f04795b743129aca8e13eb05e6fb,
title = "Multi-scale classification of fluvial architecture: an example from the Palaeocene-Eocene Bighorn Basin, Wyoming",
abstract = "Fluvial channel geometry classification schemes are commonly restricted in relation to the scale at which the study took place, often due to outcrop limitations or need to conduct small-scale detailed studies. A number of classification schemes are present in the literature; however there is often limited consistency between them, making application difficult. The aim of this study is to address this key problem by describing channel body geometries across a depositional basin to ensure that a wide range of architectures are documented. This was achieved by studying 28 locations over 4000 m of vertical succession in Palaeocene and Early-Eocene aged deposits within the Bighorn Basin, Wyoming, USA. Five different channel body geometries have been defined based on the external geometric form, and internal arrangement and nature of storey contacts. These include the massive channel body geometry, semi-amalgamated channel body geometry, internally amalgamated channel body sheet geometry and offset stacked channel body geometry, which are considered to be subdivisions of the sheet geometry of many other classifications. An isolated channel body geometry has also been recognised alongside channel and sheet sandstone geometries in the floodplain facies associations. Field evidence, including the stacking style of storey surfaces, suggests that the different geometries form a continuum. The nature and degree of amalgamation at the storey scale is important in producing the different geometries, and is related to the degree of channel migration. It is speculated that this is the result of differences in sediment supply and available accommodation. In contrast to previous schemes, the classification scheme presented here recognises the importance of transitional geometries. This geometrical range has been recognised because of the basin-scale nature of the study.",
keywords = "Bighorn Basin, channel , fluvial architecture, Fort Union formation, geometry, sandstone body, Willwood formation",
author = "Amanda Owen and Alena Ebinghaus and Hartley, {Adrian J.} and Santos, {Maur{\'i}cio G.M.} and Gary Weissmann",
note = "This work was supported by Phase 2 of the Fluvial Systems Research Group (BP, BG, Chevron, ConocoPhillips and Total). MGMS thanks the S{\~a}o Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP 2014/13937-3). The authors also wish to thank numerous residents of the Bighorn Basin for their kind hospitality and access to land. We also thank John Howell for discussions on fluvial geometries and nomenclature, and Isobel Buchanan and Alistair Swan for assistance in the field. Comments from reviewers Andrew Miall, Luca Colombera and an anonymous reviewer greatly improved this manuscript.",
year = "2017",
month = "10",
doi = "10.1111/sed.12364",
language = "English",
volume = "64",
pages = "1572--1596",
journal = "Sedimentology",
issn = "0037-0746",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Multi-scale classification of fluvial architecture

T2 - an example from the Palaeocene-Eocene Bighorn Basin, Wyoming

AU - Owen, Amanda

AU - Ebinghaus, Alena

AU - Hartley, Adrian J.

AU - Santos, Maurício G.M.

AU - Weissmann, Gary

N1 - This work was supported by Phase 2 of the Fluvial Systems Research Group (BP, BG, Chevron, ConocoPhillips and Total). MGMS thanks the São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP 2014/13937-3). The authors also wish to thank numerous residents of the Bighorn Basin for their kind hospitality and access to land. We also thank John Howell for discussions on fluvial geometries and nomenclature, and Isobel Buchanan and Alistair Swan for assistance in the field. Comments from reviewers Andrew Miall, Luca Colombera and an anonymous reviewer greatly improved this manuscript.

PY - 2017/10

Y1 - 2017/10

N2 - Fluvial channel geometry classification schemes are commonly restricted in relation to the scale at which the study took place, often due to outcrop limitations or need to conduct small-scale detailed studies. A number of classification schemes are present in the literature; however there is often limited consistency between them, making application difficult. The aim of this study is to address this key problem by describing channel body geometries across a depositional basin to ensure that a wide range of architectures are documented. This was achieved by studying 28 locations over 4000 m of vertical succession in Palaeocene and Early-Eocene aged deposits within the Bighorn Basin, Wyoming, USA. Five different channel body geometries have been defined based on the external geometric form, and internal arrangement and nature of storey contacts. These include the massive channel body geometry, semi-amalgamated channel body geometry, internally amalgamated channel body sheet geometry and offset stacked channel body geometry, which are considered to be subdivisions of the sheet geometry of many other classifications. An isolated channel body geometry has also been recognised alongside channel and sheet sandstone geometries in the floodplain facies associations. Field evidence, including the stacking style of storey surfaces, suggests that the different geometries form a continuum. The nature and degree of amalgamation at the storey scale is important in producing the different geometries, and is related to the degree of channel migration. It is speculated that this is the result of differences in sediment supply and available accommodation. In contrast to previous schemes, the classification scheme presented here recognises the importance of transitional geometries. This geometrical range has been recognised because of the basin-scale nature of the study.

AB - Fluvial channel geometry classification schemes are commonly restricted in relation to the scale at which the study took place, often due to outcrop limitations or need to conduct small-scale detailed studies. A number of classification schemes are present in the literature; however there is often limited consistency between them, making application difficult. The aim of this study is to address this key problem by describing channel body geometries across a depositional basin to ensure that a wide range of architectures are documented. This was achieved by studying 28 locations over 4000 m of vertical succession in Palaeocene and Early-Eocene aged deposits within the Bighorn Basin, Wyoming, USA. Five different channel body geometries have been defined based on the external geometric form, and internal arrangement and nature of storey contacts. These include the massive channel body geometry, semi-amalgamated channel body geometry, internally amalgamated channel body sheet geometry and offset stacked channel body geometry, which are considered to be subdivisions of the sheet geometry of many other classifications. An isolated channel body geometry has also been recognised alongside channel and sheet sandstone geometries in the floodplain facies associations. Field evidence, including the stacking style of storey surfaces, suggests that the different geometries form a continuum. The nature and degree of amalgamation at the storey scale is important in producing the different geometries, and is related to the degree of channel migration. It is speculated that this is the result of differences in sediment supply and available accommodation. In contrast to previous schemes, the classification scheme presented here recognises the importance of transitional geometries. This geometrical range has been recognised because of the basin-scale nature of the study.

KW - Bighorn Basin

KW - channel

KW - fluvial architecture

KW - Fort Union formation

KW - geometry

KW - sandstone body

KW - Willwood formation

U2 - 10.1111/sed.12364

DO - 10.1111/sed.12364

M3 - Article

VL - 64

SP - 1572

EP - 1596

JO - Sedimentology

JF - Sedimentology

SN - 0037-0746

IS - 6

ER -