Geoinformatics, vol.16, no.1, pp.

27-34, 2005

SHORT ARTICLE

A CLASSIFICATION OF FOLDS :
ROLE OF AXIAL ANGLE AND THICKNESS RATIO
Ashok Ram BHATTACHARYA1
1

Department of Geology, University of Lucknow, Lucknow 226007, India. E. Mail : arb65k@rediffmail.com

(Received: 25 March 2004; Accepted: 29 January 2005)

Abstract : Geometric parameters/features of folds play a major role in classifying the folds in several ways as well as in
making any systematic and comparative study of the various fold types in a structurally deformed terrain. The following
parameters of fold geometry enable a simple classification of single-layer, symmetric, natural folds : thickness ratio (R), i.e.
the ratio existing between the hinge thickness and the limb thickness ; axial angle () which is the angle for a given (outer
or inner) trace or arc of a fold as subtended at the apex (hinge), and outer axial angle (o) and inner axial angle ( i) which
are the acute angles subtended by the outer and inner arcs respectively at the apex (hinge). Folds which are assumed to have
initiated by buckling and have undergone thickening at the hinges are thus considered here as T (thickened) folds. Folds
showing uniform layer thickness and with both the outer (o ) and inner ( i) axial angles of equal value constitute P (parallel) folds, while those in which the hinge thickness is less than the limb thickness - and therefore the inner axial angle (( i)
is smaller than the outer one (o ) - constitute S (supratenuous) folds. Folds which practically do not show any geometric
relation between the above parameters constitute F (flow) folds that may form from any of the above (T, P or S) fold types
at later/advanced stages of deformation. Each of these four types of folds thus show some definite values/conditions of the
above-mentioned geometric parameters : for P-folds, T = 1, o = i ; for T-folds, T > 1, o < i ; for S-folds, T < 1, o >
i , while for F-folds, no definite geometric relations amongst the above parameters exist.
Key words : Fold classification, Parallel fold, Thickened fold, Supratenuous fold, Flow fold.

INTRODUCTION

Donath and Parker (1964) identified two broad groups of

Folds display a variety of geometric shapes. Any structural

folds : (1) Flexural folds in which the fold shape is controlled by

study on folds thus requires identification or recognition of some

the layering in the rock, and (2) Passive folds in which layering

specific geometric attributes or parameters which not only help in

serves only as a displacement or strain marker during folding.

comparing the various fold types but also in classifying the folds

Ramsay (1967) presented a morphological classification of

in a systematic way. By using different parameters, folds have

folds by considering the following geometrical parameters: (i)

thus been classified in several ways by several workers as high-

Orthogonal thickness, (ii) Axial plane thickness, and (iii)

lighted below.

Inclination of the dip isogons. Ramsay identified three major

Van Hise (1896) classified folds into two groups on the basis
of the parallelism (parallel folds) or otherwise (similar folds) of

classes of folds : (1) Class 1 folds with three subclasses : 1A, 1B,
and 1C, (2) Class 2 folds (similar folds), and (3) Class 3 folds.

the folded surfaces. Billings (1954) classified folds into four dif-

Rickard (1971) classified folds on the basis of the dip of the

ferent, mainly genetic, types on the basis of the mechanics of

axial planes, and identified the following types of folds : (1)

Upright folds (80 to 90 ), (2) Inclined folds (80 to 10 ), (3)
Recumbent folds (10 to 0 ), and (4) Reclined folds (pitch of the

folding : (1) Flexure folds or true folds, (2) Flow folds or incompetent folds, (3) Shear folds or slip folds, (4) Folds resulting from
vertical movements.
Fleuty (1964) classified folds on the basis of interlimb angle,

fold hinge at the axial plane in between 80 to 180 ; the fold axes
thus have plunge at the same angle as that of the dip of the axial

and he identified the following types of folds : (1) Gentle fold

(180 to 120 ), (2) Open fold (120 to 70 ), (3) Close fold (70 to
30 ), (4) Tight fold (30 to 0 ), (5) Isoclinal fold with subparallel

surfaces).

limbs, and (6) Elasticas with negative values of interlimb angle,

in some of the existing schemes. Twiss (1988) described the

and as such the fold can usually be described as a fan fold.

geometry of a folded surface by specifying the styles of folding.

In addition to the above major schemes of fold classification,

several workers have made some modifications or advancements

Ashok Ram BHATTACHARYA

28

the tracings of the profile sections of folds, the two parameters T

and , as mentioned above and further explained below, have
been measured and plotted on a graph with T along the ordinate
and along the abscissa. The data source of the plots are the
direct measurement of natural folds published in standard text
books of the following workers: Whitten (1966), Ramsay (1967),
Weiss (1972), and Hobbs, Means and Williams (1976). The T-
plots for the folds studied show a typical curve (Fig. 3 of
Bhattacharya, 1992). The T - plot (Fig. 2 ; modified after
Bhattacharya, 1992) suggests that for values of - up to about
130 - R does not show significant variation and maintains the
value of unity. This is represented by AB in the curve. Obviously,
it is the field of parallel folds in which R maintains the constant
value of unity and also remains equal for both (inner and outer)
arcs. As the value of progressively decreases, the curve graduFig. 1. Fold section and parameters expressing the geometrical characteristics of a fold. DF = base line; GE = axial plane; o = axial angle
for the outer arc; i = axial angle for the inner arc; Tl = orthogonal
thickness (at D); Th = hinge thickness. The thickness ratio (R) and
the axial angle ( ) for the fold are given by R = Th / Tl and =
(o + i ) / 2 respectively. (After Bhattacharya, 1992).

ally rises above R = 1 line. Initially, the rise is gentle, up to about

50 (represented by the portion BC in the curve), beyond which but down to about 30 - it becomes relatively steeper (the portion
CD in the curve). With further decrease of - below 30 - the
graph becomes steep (the portion DE), so that even with a very
small decrease of , the R value increases very rapidly. The folds

Bastida (1993) extended Ramsay's (1967) geometrical classifica-

thus continue to thicken at the hinge at a relatively much faster

tion for large data sets of folds. Lisle (1997) proposed a fold clas-

rate and take up geometries as represented in Fig. 2. These folds

sification based on a polar plot of inverse layer thickness. Bastida

have thus been considered to constitute a specific class of folds (T

et al. (1999) made a geometrical analysis of folded surfaces and

- folds) (see Bhattacharya, 1992). For a T-fold, the value of the

identified several geometrical fold forms.

thickness ratio (R) > 1, and hence the outer axial angle ( o ) is

The present work incorporates the results of a study is based

smaller than the inner one ( i ), i.e. o < i . In contrast to the T-

on the geometry of the folded layer in the profile section that

folds, the other types of natural folds, in their profile sections,

constitutes a basic criterion for distinguishing various fold types.

thus take up specific values (Fig. 3), as given below.

This is a two-dimensional geometry on the section perpendicular

The true nature of the curve, as understood by an IBM-PC

to the axial plane. Since, the profile sections are usually seen in

compatible computer using direct optimization software package,

the field and can be studied and analyzed rather more easily -

has been described by Bhattacharya (1992). The curve has been

and so also the parameters considered here - the proposed study,

found to have a general form of the type :

and the geometrical parameters identified, thus seem to be of

y = 1 + ABx / x

(1)

great practical utility in classifying the folds in a specific way.

The parameters A and B and their standard deviation (S.D.) have

The application reasonably holds good for cylindrical, symmetric,

been found to be as follows :

folds on section normal to the fold axis. Oblique sections are

however not considered.

A = 234.55,

S.D. = 16.203

(2)

B = 0.98419,

S.D. = 0.0029

(3)

In an earlier study based on a geometrical analysis of natural

The graph shown in Fig. 2 represents the best-fit curve as given

folds showing thickened hinges, Bhattacharya (1992) recognized

by the computer. The nature of this graph and the implications

two new geometrical parameters of folds: (a) Axial angle (), i.e.

thereof in fold development have been discussed elsewhere

the angle for a given trace or arc as subtended at its apex (hinge),

(Bhattacharya, 1997). Replacing y by R and x by , the equation

and (b) Thickness ratio (T), i.e. the ratio between the hinge (Th )

(1) takes the form :

and limb (Tl ) thicknesses (Fig. 1). This study involves the use of

R = 1 + AB /

these two major parameters in classifying natural folds in a new

The above results appear to have a few significant implica-

way.

(4)

tions: (a) It helps identify two new geometrical parameters of

folds, i.e. axial angle ( ) and thickness ratio (R), (b) These two

THE PRESENT STUDY

parameters, in turn, help identify/consider various fold forms in a

The present study involves the use of two newly identified

way different from the other schemes of fold classification. These

geometrical parameters of folds (see Bhattacharya, 1992). From

two implications thus help us consider the various fold geometries

A CLASSIFICATION OF FOLDS : ROLE OF AXIAL ANGLE AND THICKNESS RATIO

29

Fig. 2. Deformation in kinetic terms showing the characteristic curve for natural folds with R - relations. The typical fold geometries successively
formed with the decrease of are shown. A represents any point on the graph along which R = 1 with progressive decrease of . B represents the
point from where the graph leaves the R = 1 trend and shows gentle rise. C represents the point up to which the rise of the curve, with progressive
decrease of , is gentle and beyond which the curve starts rising rapidly. D represents the point from where the curve starts rising very rapidly
with progressive decrease of . E represents a hypothetical point where the curve apparently follows an exponential path. Thickness ratio (R =
Th / Tl) and mean axial angle () are explained in Fig. 1. The basic data and derivation of the graph have been presented in Bhattacharya (1992).

into some specific types. The objective of the paper is thus to

their lowest (inflection) points. In Fig. 1, D represents the

identify some new fold types that automatically arise as a result of

lowest inflection point of the outer curve. A tangent is drawn

the recognition of the above two new geometrical parameters of

at D. Another tangent parallel to this one is traced up to the

fold. The basic idea behind identifying the new fold types, thus, is

inner curve and meets at A. In case this thickness is not equal

the fact that the parameters recognized here for fold geometry

for both the limbs, a mean thickness may be considered to

show specific geometric relationships - based on quantitative lines

- between any two specific parameters as discussed below.

represent the limb thickness in general.

(3) Thickness ratio (R) is the ratio existing between the hinge
thickness (Th ) and the limb thickness, i.e. R = Th / Tl. (It may

FOLD TYPES IDENTIFIED

be noted that in the earlier work, i.e. Bhattacharya, 1992, this

The following geometrical parameters of a fold lead us to con-

parameter was named as T, but in the present work, it has

sider (symmetric) folds into a few types. The orthogonal thick-

been changed to R mainly to distinguish it from the T -

ness BE represents the normal distance of two parallel tangents

folds).

drawn at the highest points of the outer (E) and inner (B) curves.

(4) Axial angle () is the angle for a given trace or arc (inner or

(1) Hinge thickness (Th ) : It is the orthogonal thickness of the

outer) of a fold as subtended at the apex (hinge). In Fig. 1,

fold along the hinge, i.e. along the axial line (BE in Fig. 1).

ABC ( i) and DEF ( o ) are the axial angles for the inner and

(2) Limb thickness (Tl ) is the orthogonal thickness of the limb at

outer arcs of the fold respectively. A mean has been consid-

Ashok Ram BHATTACHARYA

30

Fig. 3. The proposed classification of natural folds. The parameters are explained in the text.

ered to represent the axial angle of a thickened fold, and is

way in various parts of the fold, (iii) no visible (discrete) slip sur-

given by = ( o + i) / 2 (as the folds considered here are

faces, (iv) no systematic development of secondary surface(s)

single-layer symmetric folds).

(foliations) nor any secondary foliation(s) and (v) therefore the

Folds with thickened hinges have been grouped under T

flow folds usually do not show any systematic relationship

(thickened) folds (Bhattacharya, 1992). Assuming initiation of

between Th and Tl nor between i and o . As a matter of fact,

folding in a competent layer due to buckling, such (thickened)

flow folds can form from any (P-, T-, or S-) type of folds at

folds are commonly believed to have formed due to superimposi-

some later stages of deformation under some specific conditions.

tion of homogeneous ductile strain (cf. Ramsay, 1962, 1967 ;

Therefore, the F-folds seem to be better identified/considered as a

Ghosh, 1968; Hudleston, 1973 ; Latham, 1985, Watkinson and

genetic or mechanical type. Nevertheless, this type has been

Thiessen, 1988 ; Bhattacharya, 1986, 1987, 1992, 1997;

included here due to the fact these folds do not show any rela-

Bhattacharya and Siawal, 1985; Mancktelow and Abbassi, 1992,

tionship amongst the geometrical parameters considered in the

Lan and Hudleston, 1996).

proposed scheme.

In a parallel fold, the layer thickness remains unchanged

It may be noted that the parameter R changes with , espe-

throughout, and thus the value of the thickness ratio (R) remains

cially for the symmetrical folds considered here. This means that

unity and, considering a symmetric fold, both the axial angles

the two parameters R and are not independent of each other for

( o and i) are of equal value (Fig. 3).

such folds. Therefore, it is sometimes also possible to define and

In a supratenuous fold, on the other hand, the hinge thick-

express some of the fold types considered here by only one

ness (Th ) is less than the limb thickness (Tl ), i.e. the value of the

parameter, say , as shown in Fig. 4. But, at the same, when we

thickness ratio R < 1 and thus also the outer axial angle is greater

need to extend this generalization to include all the major natural

than the inner one, i.e. o > i (Figs. 3, 4).

folds (including S- and F-folds), then we also need to consider R

The flow folds, on the other hand, do not show any specific

to fully express all the fold types. With this in mind, both the

values as shown by the above mentioned types mainly because of

parameters, R and , have been used in the present work to fully

the following characteristic features of their geometry : (i) irregu-

define and express the various fold types.

lar shapes, (ii) zone of thickening and thinning occur in a random

For the sake of convenience, the above four major classes of

A CLASSIFICATION OF FOLDS : ROLE OF AXIAL ANGLE AND THICKNESS RATIO

31

Fig. 4. o - i graph showing the fields of P-, T- and S- folds. Representative profiles of each fold type are shown.

folds - i.e. (i) folds showing thickened hinge, (ii) parallel folds,

are subjected to progressive ductile deformation due to superim-

(iii) supratenuous folds and (iv) flow folds - have been designated

position of homogeneous ductile strain (cf. Ramsay, 1962, 1967 ;

here as T-, P-, S-, and F-folds respectively. Relations existing

Hudleston, 1973 ; Hudleston and Stephansson, 1973 ; Groshong,

between the outer ( o ) and inner ( i ) axial angles and the fields

1975 ; Bhattacharya, 1986, 1987, 1992, 1997 ; Bhattacharya and

of the above fold types have been shown in Fig. 4. The major dif-

Siawal, 1985 ; Latham, 1985 ; Seyfert, 1987). Temperature and

ferences between the proposed classification of folds and some

pressure also play a vital in this process, especially at advanced

other major schemes have been summarized in Table 1.

stages of hinge thickening. Development of T-folds thus takes

place due to superimposition of homogeneous ductile strain, and

MECHANICAL SIGNIFICANCE

the process seems to be dependent upon temperature and pres-

The proposed classification is based on the geometry of nat-

sure. The latter (i.e. new PT conditions) appear to constitute an

ural folds, mainly on the behaviour of the folded layer in profile

important controlling factor to give rise to progressive develop-

section and, as such, it is a geometric regrouping of folds. An

ment (or evolution) - and the progressive thickening of the hinge

attempt has however been made here to highlight the possible

- of T-folds in naturally deformed rocks.

mechanical significance of the fold types identified in this work.

The S-folds of the proposed classification are the same as

It is now well known that parallel folds develop by buckling

supratenuous folds. In the proposed classification, these folds

that results from an instability of layered materials subjected to

automatically fall in a special category because of the specific

compression parallel to layering (cf. Biot, 1964 ; Ramberg, 1964 ;

values/relations of their geometric parameters, i.e. T < 1 ; o > i .

Ghosh, 1968 ; Hudleston, 1973 ; Hudleston and Stephansson,

The supratenuous - and so also the S-folds - are formed

1973 ; Bhattacharya, 1992). The P-folds could thus be related to

.when folding and sedimentation are contemporaneous. The

their formation due to buckling caused by layer instability for

beds are thinnest on top of the anticline because it was rising dur-

which the viscosity contrasts of the surrounding layers constitute

ing sedimentation ; conversely, the beds are thickest in the syn-

an important factor.

cline because it was sinking during sedimentation (Billings,

Folds with thickened hinges (= T or thickened folds of the

proposed classification) form when early buckled (parallel) folds

1954, P. 59). Hills (1963, p. 251) considered that supratenuous

folds are analogous to compaction folds.

Ashok Ram BHATTACHARYA

32

Table 1 : Summary chart showing the major schemes of fold classification in a comparative way


Van Hise

    

Parallelism

or otherwise of the

(i) Parallel folds, and (ii) Similar folds

folded surfaces

(1896)

Billings

  

Mechanics of folding

(i) Flexure or True folding , (ii) Flow or Incompetent

folding , (iii) Shear or Slip folding, and (iv) Folds

(1954)

resulting from vertical movements

(i) Gentle (180 to 120), (ii) Open (120 to 70) (iii)

Fleuty

Interlimb angle, i.e angle between

(1964)

the surface inclinations measured

Close (70 to 30 ) (iv) Tight (30 to 0), (v) Isoclinal

at two inflexion points

(with subparallel limbs), and (vi) Elasticas (negative

value)

Donath and

Relationship of slip surfaces to the

(i) Flexural folds and (ii) Passive folds

original S-structure

Parker
(1964)

Ramsay
(1967)

(i)

Orthogonal

thickness,

(ii)

(i) Class 1 (1A, 1B and 1C), (ii) Class 2 and (iii) Class 3

Thickness parallel to the surface

and (iii) Inclination of the dip
isogons

Rickard

(i) Upright folds (80 to 90) , (ii) Inclined folds (10 to

Dip of the axial planes

80), Recumbent folds (0 to 10) and (iv) Reclined

(1971)

folds (pitch of the fold hinge in the axial plane in

between 80 and 180)

Present
author

(i) Thickness ratio (R), i. e. ratio

between

the

hinge

and

limb

(i) P (parallel) folds (T = 1 ;

folds (T > 1 ;

<

o),

>

o),

o)

, (ii) T (thickened)

(iii) S (supratenuous) folds (T

thickness and (ii) Axial angle for

< 1 ;

inner ( i) and outer ( o) arcs of

regular or well defined geometry)

and (iv) F (flow) folds (showing no

the fold

Folds showing no definite relationship amongst the various

be linked to the Weber's (1986) model of a three-layer continental

geometric parameters have been considered here as F-folds. With

crust. The rocks of the lower crust and those of the lower part of

these geometric features, the F-folds seem to be the same as flow

the middle crust - capable of sustaining high flow stresses (see

folds of Billings (1954, p. 59). Flow folds develop when the lay-

Weber, 1986) - appear to be the most favourable regions for the

ering does not play any mechanical or dynamic role and behaves

formation of F-folds. The T- and P-folds could, in turn, be zoned

as a passive marker only (Billings, 1954). During flow folding,

in successive higher layers of the middle and upper crusts where

the layers thus remain passive and as such no visible foliation

the mechanical (yield) strength of rocks shows a progressive

nor any preferred orientation (or fabric) of the components are

increase upwards.

developed. Such folds are usually developed at higher PT (higher

The geological significance of folds, as outlined above, are

metamorphic) conditions when the viscosity contrasts between

generalizations only. In nature, however, folds with some specific

the layers and the medium are highly reduced. F-folds are thus

geometry and/or geometrical relations formed under some specif-

formed under conditions much different from those of the T-, P-

ic conditions may also form under conditions in which other fold

and S-folds.

types also form.

Formation of the above fold types can also, in a general way,

A CLASSIFICATION OF FOLDS : ROLE OF AXIAL ANGLE AND THICKNESS RATIO

ADVANTAGES AND MERITS OF

THE PROPOSED CLASSIFICATION
One major advantage of the proposed classification is that

33

journal helped improve the quality of the paper. Prof. A.K. Jauhri
and Dr. K.K. Agarwal deserve thanks for their helpful suggestions.

the geometric parameters of a fold used in the regrouping

are relatively easier to measure, irrespective of the extreme

REFERENCES

tightness of the fold. One of the major parameters of the

Bastida, F. (1993) A new method for the geometrical classifica-

proposed classification, for example, is axial angle ()

tion of large data sets of folds. J. Struct. Geol. vol. 15, no. 1,

which can easily be measured for all range of fold geome-

pp. 69-78.

tries (open to tight). Likewise, the other parameter, i.e.

Bastida, F., Aller, J. and Bobillo-Ares, N. C. (1999) Geometrical

thickness ratio R, can also be measured easily for all types

analysis of folded surfaces using simple functions. J. Struct.

of folds.

Geol. vol. 21, no. 7, pp. 729-742.

Measurement of some other parameters, on the other hand,

Bhattacharya, A. R. (1986) Wavelength-amplitude characteris-

for example dip isogons as used in some other schemes,

tics of polyphase folds in the Precambrian Bundelkhand

becomes difficult and sometimes impossible if the folds

Complex, India. Tectonophysics, vol. 128, nos. 1-2, pp. 121-

are very tight when only one or two tangents can be drawn

125.

for the entire fold.

The proposed classification requires only a few (three)

Bhattacharya, A. R. (1987) A Ductile Thrust in the Himalaya.

Tectonophysics, vol. 135, nos. 1-3, pp. 37-45.

parameters to be measured for a fold in profile section, i.e.

Bhattacharya, A. R. (1992) A quantitative study of hinge thick-

thickness ratio (R), outer axial angle ( o ) and inner axial

ness of natural folds : some implications for fold development.

Tectonophysics, vol. 212, nos. 1-2, pp. 371-377.

angle ( i ).
The proposed classification provides an easy (or alterna-

Bhattacharya, A. R. (1997) Control of ductile strain and rheology

tive) discrimination amongst some common fold types

on the geometry of natural folds : A mathematical perspective.

such as class 1A (supratenuous folds), class 1B (parallel

Geoinformatics, vol.8, no. 3, pp. 143-148.

folds), 1C and class 3 fold types.

Bhattacharya, A. R. and Siawal, A. (1985) A phenomenon of

unusual flattening in folds associated with a Himalayan thrust.

CONCLUSIONS
(1) Recognition of a few new geometric parameters of folds viz., thickness ratio (R), i.e. the ratio existing between hinge
thickness (Th ) and the limb thickness (Tl ), outer axial angle
( o ) and inner axial angle ( i ), i.e. the acute angle subtended
by the outer and inner arcs respectively at the apex (hinge) automatically classify the natural folds into four types, viz.
P,- T-, S- and F- folds.
(2) Folds belonging to each type are characterized by their typical
geometric relations that are different from the other types.

Geol. Mijnbouw , vol. 64, pp. 159-165

Billings, M. P. (1954) Structural Geology. Prentice Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, N. J., 606 p.
Donath, F. A. and Parker, R. B. (1964) Folds and Folding. Geol.
Soc. Am. Bull., vol. 75, pp. 45-62.
Fleuty, M. J. (1964) The description of folds. Proc. Geol. Assoc.
Lond., vol. 75, pp. 461-492.
Ghosh, S. K. (1968) Experiments of buckling of multilayers
which permit interlayer gliding. Tectonophysics , vol. 6, no. 3,
pp. 207-250.

(3) P (parallel) folds show uniform layer thickness, so that R = 1

Hobbs, B. E., Means, W. D. and Williams, P. F. (1976) An

and o = i . T (thickened) folds are characterized by thickened

Outline of Structural Geology. John Wiley, New York, N. Y.,

hinges; for such folds, R > 1 and o < i . S (supratenuous)

571 p.

folds have hinge thickness less than the limb thickness, so that

Hudleston, P. J. (1973) Fold morphology and some geometrical

R < 1 and o > i . F (flow) folds, unlike the above three

implications of theories of fold development. Tectonophysics,

types, do not show any well-defined geometry / geometric

vol. 16, nos. 1-2, pp. 1-47.

Lan, L. and Hudleston, P. J. (1996) Rock rheology and sharp-

relations.

ness of folds in single layers. J. Struct. Geol., vol. 18, no. 7, pp.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

925-932.

I express my sincere thanks to Prof. M. P. Singh/Prof. I. B.

Latham, J. P. (1985). A numerical investigation and geological

Singh, present/former Head of the Department of Geology,

discussion of the relationship between folding, kinking and

University of Lucknow, Lucknow, for providing working facili-

faulting. J. Struct. Geol., vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 237-249.

ties. Dr. Axel Vollbrecht (Gottingen) is thanked for going through

Lisle, R. J. (1997) A fold classification scheme based on a polar

the manuscript and providing fruitful comments and suggestions.

plot of inverse layer thickness. In : Sengupta, S. (Ed.)

Comments and suggestions of the unknown reviewers of this

Evolution of Geological Structures in Micro- to Macro-Scales.

34

Ashok Ram BHATTACHARYA

Chapman & Hall, London, pp. 323-339.

Van Hise, C. R. (1896) Principles of North American

Mancktelow, N. S. and Abbassi, M. R. (1992) Single layer buck-

Precambrian Geology. U.S. Geol. Annu. Rep. 16th (1894-

le folding in non-linear materials II. Comparison between

1895), Pt. 1, p. 571-843. In : Dennis, J. G., (1987) Structural

theory and experiment. J. Struct. Geol., vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 105-

Geology : An Introduction. Wm. C. Brown Publishers,

120.
Ramsay, J. G. (1962) The geometry and mechanics of formation
of similar type folds. J. Geol., vol. 70, no. 3, pp. 309-327.
Ramsay, J. G. (1967) Folding and Fracturing of Rocks. Mc-Graw
Hill, New York, 568 p.
Rickard, M. J. (1971) A classification diagram for fold orientations. Geol. Mag., vol. 108, no. 1, pp. 23-26.
Twiss, R. J. (1988) Description and classification of folds in single surfaces. J. Struct. Geol., vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 607-626.

Dubuque, Iowa, 118 p.

Watkinson, A. J. and Thiessen, R. L. (1988) Geometric model of
folding at Loch Monar, Scotland, using computer simulation.
Tectonophysics, vol. 149, nos. 1-2, pp. 1-15.
Weiss, L. E. (1972) The Minor Structures of Deformed Rocks.
Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 431 p.
Whitten, E. T. H. (1966) Structural Geology of Folded Rocks.
Rand McNally, Chicago, Ill., 663 p.