You are on page 1of 35

This article was downloaded by: [190.223.41.

102]
On: 16 December 2014, At: 06:37
Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954
Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,
UK

New Zealand Journal of


Geology and Geophysics
Publication details, including instructions for
authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tnzg20

Detrital sedimentary
rock classification and
nomenclature for use in New
Zealand
a b c
R. L. Folk , Peter B. Andrews & D. W. Lewis
a
Department of Geological Sciences , University of
Texas at Austin , Austin, Texas, 78712, USA
b
Sedimentation Laboratory , New Zealand
Geological Survey , Christchurch
c
Department of Geology , University of Canterbury ,
Christchurch
Published online: 21 Dec 2011.

To cite this article: R. L. Folk , Peter B. Andrews & D. W. Lewis (1970)


Detrital sedimentary rock classification and nomenclature for use in New
Zealand, New Zealand Journal of Geology and Geophysics, 13:4, 937-968, DOI:
10.1080/00288306.1970.10418211

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00288306.1970.10418211

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the
information (the Content) contained in the publications on our platform.
However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,
or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views
expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the
Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with
primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any
losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,
and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or
indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the
Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.
Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,
sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is
expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Downloaded by [190.223.41.102] at 06:37 16 December 2014
No.4 937

DETRITAL SEDIMENTARY ROCK CLASSIFICATION


AND NOMENCLATURE FOR USE IN
NEW ZEALAND
R. L. FOLK

Department of Geological Sciences, University of Texas at Austin, Austin,


Texas 78712

PETER B. ANDREWS

Sedimentation Laboratory, New Zealand Geological Survey, Christchurch


Downloaded by [190.223.41.102] at 06:37 16 December 2014

and

D. W. LEWIS

Department of Geology, University of Canterbury, Christchurch

(Received for publication 4 March 1970)

ABSTRACT

Grain-size distribution and mineralogical composition are independent variables


in most detrital sediments. Separate classifications are necessary to describe these
sediment attributes. Essential characteristics are given when the following format is
used:
(sorting term) (size term): (cement) (prominent nondetritaI) (detrital com-
position). This polynomial evokes a clear mental image of the sediment.
Descriptive nomenclature and procedure are modified from earlier Folk publica-
tions. The resultant classification system is objective and practical. Gravel, sand, silt,
and clay are end members of triangular diagrams that are divided into named textural
categories in accord with apparent natural groupings. Modal size and sorting terms
supplement the names of some categories. Rudite, arenite, and lutite are used in a
compositional sense for detrital sediments whose texture is respectively indicated by
the terms gravel (conglomerate or breccia), sand (sandstone), and mud (mudstone,
siltstone, or claystone). Predominant mineral or rock fragment components prefix
these compositional terms to provide unequivocal names (e.g., feldsarenite, schist-
rudite, quartz illite-lutite). Triangular diagrams are suggested for quantitative plotting
of compositional data.
The classification is designed for use in the field and in the laboratory. It is
flexible in that the user can select the level of detailed description applicable to his
needs. Adoption of this classification by New Zealand geologists would result in com-
pilation of comparable data and would simplify communication.

INTRODUCTION

Systematic description of rocks is necessary both for the orderly study of


a rock suite and for the communication of observations and deductions to
others. At present, no one of the many existing systems of sedimentary rock
description and nomenclature is widely used within New Zealand. Because
of the diversity of systems in use, various criteria or class limits are fre-
quently applied to the same term. So many redefinitions exist that many

N.z. Jl Geol. Geophys. 13: 937-68


938 N.z. JOURNAL OF GEOLOGY AND GEOPHYSICS VOL. 13

individual terms mean different things to different people. In each paper


dealing in detail with sedimentary rocks, the system of terminology used
must be presented, else confusion reigns! While presentation of data is an
investigator's own prerogative, accord on one classification and its accompany-
ing terminology would greatly ease communication among geologists.
In this publication we present a classification for detrital (terrigenous)
sediments in the hope that it will be accepted as a standard in New Zealand.
It is realised that the classification is not perfect, but none is, nor is likely
to be; it is more flexible, obj ective, and practical than most others. The
classification is essentially that of Folk (1954, 1968a), but incorporates
many small modifications. It represents current views elucidated during
correspondence amongst the three of us.
Downloaded by [190.223.41.102] at 06:37 16 December 2014

Part I presents a system for textural description of all types of detrital


sediments. It was prepared primarily by Andrews. Part II presents a system
for compositional description of detrital sediments. Discussion centres on
sands and sandstones; parallel but tentative systems for mudrocks and con-
glomerates are also outlined. Part II was prepared primarily by Lewis.

Concepts in Classification

The purpose of a rock classification is to provide a form of shorthand


(including a set of terms) " ... that will convey from one geological mind
to another an adequate conception of the physical character of a given
rock" (Rodgers, 1950, p. 298). For this purpose " ... the terms should be
descriptive, objective, and precise" (ibid.), rather than genetic. A descriptive
classification is necessary because a geologist does not know the origin and
history of a rock. He can only infer it, and then only when the rock has been
examined and described in detail.
While the approach to classification must be basically descriptive, it
frequently is not possible, nor even desirable, to completely eliminate genetic
implications (see discussion by Rodgers, op. cit.). It is convenient and often
valuable to emphasise natural associations by grouping like and separating
unlike objects in the classification. For example, in a classification of sedi-
mentary rock compositions, it is useful to separate rocks that consist almost
entirely of quartz grains from those containing grains of a variety of
minerals. The former can originate as the result of one of several geological
settings: most grains were recycled from other quartz-rich sedimentary rocks;
and/or prolonged and intense chemical weathering in the source area
eliminated all grains less resistant than quartz; and/or the sediment experi-
enced an extremely long abrasion history during which softer constituents
were eliminated. Which explanation applies may be indicated by other
features of the sediment or the stratigraphic setting.
As well as being descriptive, any classification must be practical and easy
to apply. The limits of the rock categories must be easy to remember and
the names must be self-explanatory, that is, meaningful when they stand
alone. Also of importance, the categories of a new classification should be
given names that have not been used widely in other contexts by earlier
workers.
No.4 FOLK et al. - DETRITAL SEDIMENTARY ROCKS 939

BASIS OF THE CLASSIFICATION: RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SEDIMENT


TEXTURE AND COMPOSITION

As first stressed by Krynine (1948), thr,ee aspects of a sediment or sedi-


mentary rock are most important in providing information on its geological
history: sedimentary structures, t(xture, and composition. Each is useful in
a different way to the others. Procedures and terms for describing sedi-
mentary structures are beyond the scope of this paper; the books by Potter
and Pettijohn (1963), and Conybeare and Crook (1968) provide a good
introduction to them. Herein we concentrate on sediment texture and com-
position.
Texture and composition of detrital sediments are largely independent
variables, both in concept and in nature. A few textural and compositional
Downloaded by [190.223.41.102] at 06:37 16 December 2014

combinations are more common than others; for example, coarse sediments
usually contain abundant rock fragments. Apart from them, texture and
composition are controlled by quite independent processes, a thesis that is
supported by Gilbert (in Williams et al., 1954), Van Andel (1958), Klein
(1963), McBride (1963), Huckenholz (1963b), Dott (1964), Chen (1968),
and many others.
The texture* of a sediment is largely a reflection of the conditions in the
environment of deposition at the time of sediment accumulation and burial.
(It may also reflect post-depositional reworking by organisms, but this is
commonly of secondary importance.) For example, a sandy beach is almost
always composed of clean, well-sorted sand regardless of whether the beach
is exposed or protected, whether it is a lake or a coast beach, and whether
the waves that break on it are large or small. The sand will be clean and
well-sorted no matter if it consists of olivine and basalt grains (Tahiti),
largely of K-fe1dspar grains (south-west Mexico), largely of ilmenite grains
(parts of West Coast, South Island), or purely of quartz (Parengarenga,
Northland). Similarly, a floodplain almost always consists of muddy sedi-
ments regardless of the dominant grain size or mineral composition of the
sediment that is being carried by the alluvial system of which the floodplain
is a part.
Of course, the pre-depositional history of a sediment can significantly
affect its texture. For example, the mud fraction may be winnowed from the
sand fraction by subaerial deflation before either is finally deposited. Or,
no matter how great the competency and capacity of the transporting agent,
if no gravel is available, no gravel will be deposited. But if we assume equal
availability of all grain sizes, the statement that conditions in the deposi-
tional environment control the size distribution of the accumulating sediment
is correct.
On the other hand, the composition of sediments reflects the interplay of
rock-type, tectonism, and climate in the source area. In many areas, the
nature and intensity of earth deformation and the length of time since it
occurred determine both the rock types that are exposed to erosion and the

*Texture is used here in a restricted sense to mean grain size distribution, but not
grain morphology and grain surface features.
940 N.Z. JOURNAL OF GEOLOGY AND GEOPHYSICS VOL. 13

relief of the landscape. The relief and the type of climate determine whether
rock and mineral disintegration or rock and mineral decomposition is pre-
dominant. With one combination of these factors, minerals that are suscept-
ible to decomposition will persist and will accumulate in the environment
of deposition; with another they will be preferentially eliminated. Of course,
composition also reflects the effect of selective abrasion and sorting during
transport and, in some instances, selective destruction during diagenesis.
Minerals of diagenetic origin commonly also occur, but they usually are
readily distinguished from the detrital minerals.

THE CLASSIFICATION
Downloaded by [190.223.41.102] at 06:37 16 December 2014

The classification presented herein emphasises the separate importance


of texture and composition. As a consequence it is organised in two parts.
The first part describes the texture of the rock in terms of both grain-size
range and size sorting, and the second part describes the composition in
terms of cementing mineral, nondetrital grains, and detrital grains. The
combination of terms follows this format: (sorting term) (size term):
(cement) (prominent nondetrital) composition.
For example:
well-sorted medium sandstone: calcite-cemented glauconitic felds/detrital
arenite. The descriptive polynomial cannot be avoided, even if the minimum
amount of important information about a sedimentary rock is to be taken into
account. The alternative is to provide many separate names, each applicable
to a distinctive texture and composition combination. However, separate
names are imprecise and can lead to confusion. Imprecision and confusion
have been the cause of recent attempts to relegate the term "greywacke"
to the scrap-heap. To many geologists greywacke has connotations of
texture and composition, or even worse, of texture and composition and
induration, a result of diagenetic or metamorphic processes. (Repeated re-
definition of the term has destroyed the possibility of usefully restricting its
meaning-see Pettijohn, 1943; Boswell, 1960; Cummins, 1962; Hucken-
holz, 1963b; Klein, 1963; McBride, 1963; Dott, 1964). We feel that the
single-name type of classification has retarded progress in sedimentary rock
description and likewise has retarded the interpretation of geologic history
from sedimentary rocks. In contrast, we consider that the descriptive poly-
nomial is most suitable for maximum accuracy and minimum confusion.
The classification presented herein is practical. It commonly can be
applied in the field. It is essentially descriptive. From it, genetic interpreta-
tions can be made as the individual worker wishes, and it is so structured
that it can evolve at the worker's discretion. The two parts will stand
alone, so that if a geologist wishes to describe rock texture only, he can
do so without modifying the full classification. Thus the classification is
flexible. It is also flexible in that the basic structure can be expanded so that
the geologist can use whatever level of detail in rock description that he
deems appropriate to his study. Most important of all, use of the complete
classification, in the field and in the laboratory, will highlight significant
local or regional lithologic changes, either stratigraphic or geographic.
No.4 FOLK et al. - DETRITAL SEDIMENTARY ROCKS 941

PART I-TEXTURE OF DETRITAL SEDIMENTS

Introduction
Texture in the broad sense covers grain size (size distribution and
statistical expressions thereof), grain morphology (form, sphericity, round-
ness, surface texture), and spatial relationships between grains (packing and
fabric). While all these parameters of texture usually would be measured in
a detailed study of the sedimentology of a rock unit or sequence, simple
expressions of grain-size distribution commonly are adequate for distinguish-
ing one mappable rock unit from another (Griffiths, 1958; Andrews, 1968)
and for distinguishing one hand specimen from another. Henee it is useful
to base a classification of sedimentary rocks, which is to be used both in the
field and in the laboratory, solely on simple measures of grain-s.ize distribu-
Downloaded by [190.223.41.102] at 06:37 16 December 2014

tion.
It is widespread practice to subdivide the range of detrital grain sizes
into three groups: gravel, sand, and mud. These closely approximate natural
detrital populations (see Pettijohn, 1957; Spencer, 1963; Folk, 1966). It is
logical that a s~dimentary rock classification based on grain size be organised
around these three groups. Where appropriate, it is reasonable to also make
a distinction between silt and clay. Silt largely represents the finest products
of disintegration and in many ways behaves differently from clay, which
largely represents the finest products of decomposition.
The grain-size distribution of any detrital sediment can be represented on
one of two triangular diagrams. Use of triangles permits graphical plotting
of data for the purpose of sample-to-sample comparison. The relative pro-
portions of gravel, sand, and mud are plotted on one triangle, which is
subdivided into named textural categories. Sediment without gravel is plotted
on the other, which is subdivided into named categories according to the
relative proportions of sand, silt, and clay. By providing additional informa-
tion, such as the "average" size of gravel and sand, samples within one
textural category can be distinguished. The mode (most abundant size class)
is the measure of average size most readily determined in the field. Modal
size should be determined where appropriate and be appended to the name of
the textural category into which a sample falls. Similarly, standard deviation
(a measure of sorting) will further characterise individual size distributions.
A simple sorting measure that is applicable in the field should be applied
where appropriate.
It is important that organisation of the textural classification be related
to, and expressed in terms of, a generally accepted grain-size scale. The
scale most commonly used for sediments by English-speaking geologists is
the Udden (1898) grade scale as slightly modified by Wentworth (1922).
That grade scale, and its terminology (Table 1), are used throughout this
paper.
Size Nomenclature
Gravel-bearing Sediments
Gravel-bearing sediments consist of gravel (grains more than 2 mm in
diameter), with or without sand (grains 2'0-0'0625 mm in diameter) and/or
mud (grains less than 0'0625 mm in diameter). The ratio of gravel :sand :
942 NZ. JOURNAL OF GEOLOGY AND GEOPHYSICS VOL. 13

TABLE 1-Grainsize Scale (after Wentworth, 1922) Showing the Millimetre and
Equivalent Phi () Unit Limits to Each Size Class

General Terms
Millimetres Phi () Wentworth Size Class I for Size
Fractions as Used
in This Paper
I
I
I BOULDER
256 -8 ----------
Downloaded by [190.223.41.102] at 06:37 16 December 2014

COBBLE
1
64 -6 ----------- - - - - - 1I GRAVEL
PEBBLE
I
4 -2
--- I
I GRANULE
2 - , - -1 ,

very coarse sand


1 0 ---
coarse sand
05 1 ----

medium sand SAND


025 2 ----

fine sand
0125 3
very fine sand
1),0625 4 -
I
I I

coarse silt
0'031 5
medium silt
u'0156 6 SILT MUD
fine silt
0'0078 7
very fine silt
0'0039-\ 8
I! \ CLAY
,
--
No.4 FOLK et at. - DETRITAL SEDIMENTARY ROCKS 943

Gravel G - crilvel
1> 2mm) ~G = sandy crave:!
lp."'y modI,1 me ot Ir,"-"cl t~, ou.no"'l
miG 10& muddy nndy zr.ivel
$JoK", moOebl Ill. ot Ulld onl, .",
IlfM, -h,uc.h.c:I Ir.. mG - muddy !travel
'WIlli'. ,rKuuble ujo bUlt UI C ... " IS = cr.i .... elly nnd
., -,IIYI:," (or "mudd,- .". u.p,led Ir~1

t~ a_ampl., of uUlfI ,.,. Tabl. 1


EmS .. cr.lvell)' muddy und
1M - ,rlvelly mud
(, )S _ .hlhtly ,ra lly nnd

..
IllmS .h,h,ly , .... lIy muddy nnd
~ (, )M = .hlh,ly gra lly mud
,-'" S = nnd
(j mS ..... muddy sand
sM - nndy mud
M __ mud

...
Downloaded by [190.223.41.102] at 06:37 16 December 2014


,-v
Q.,1lJ

gM

(g) M': :":;:: :.:1' (g)mS'


X "_! sM ' '.;;;- -r-:,
I I
m'S
I
\
9
~ \
Sand
Mud : Sand Ratio (0 062S - 2 Omm)

FIG, I-Textural classification of gravel-bearing sediments and sedimentary rocks.


Classes are defined by the percentage of gravel and the ratio of sand to mud.

mud in a sample is plotted on a triangular diagram (Fig. 1), the apices of


which represent 100% gravel, 100% sand, and 100% mud respectively.
The triangle is subdivided to' give 14 textural classes.
It is a simple procedure to determine the textural class to which a sample
belongs. First determine the percentage of gravel. Five categories are repre-
sented by tiers in the triangle: more than 80%, 30-80%, 5-30%, trace
(0'01%)-5% gravel, and gravel-free.* The last category is provided so that
the small number of gravel-free samples in a suite O'f gravelly sediments
may be presented on the same plot.
Next determine the ratio of sand to mud. Boundaries at 9:1 and 1:1
sand to mud subdivide each of the middle tiers O'f the triangle into three
classes; the upper tier consists of one class only, the gravel class. The
bottom (gravel-free) tier is subdivided at 9 :1, 1 :1, 1:9 sand to mud to
give four textural classes.
In any type of study, the textural class should be determined in the field.
It is difficult to collect representative samples of gravelly sediment for
laboratory analysis.

*A somewhat similar subdivision (and nomenclature) was briefly outlined by Willman


(in Willman and Payne, 1942, pp. 343-4).

Gco1a~-;
944 N.Z. JOURNAL OF GEOLOGY AND GEOPHYSICS VOL. 13

Gravel-free Sediments
Size distributions of gravel-free sediments and sedimentary rocks are
plotted on a triangular diagram (Fig. 2) according to the proportions of
sand (2'0-0'0625 mm), silt (0'0625-0'0039 mm), and clay (less than
0'0039 mm). The apices of the triangle are then 100% sand, 100% silt,
and 100% clay respectively. The triangle is subdivided to give 10 textural
classes.
This triangular diagram is a direct expansion of the bottom tier of Fig. 1.
Again the procedure for determining the class to which a sample belongs is
simple. First determine the percentage of sand in the sample. Four categories
are represented by tiers on the triangle: more than 90%, 50-90%, 10-50%,
and less than 10% sand. Next determine the ratio of silt to clay. Boundaries
Downloaded by [190.223.41.102] at 06:37 16 December 2014

at 2:1 and 1:2 silt to clay subdivide each of the three lower tiers of the
triangle into three classes. The upper tier consists of one class only, the
sand class.
The above procedure can be carried out in the field. The only problem
that will sometimes arise is that of determining the proportion of silt to
clay. Where this problem occurs the sample is best described as "muddy"

Sand
(0' 0625-:-2' Omm) S = sand
Modal size of sand to be specified zS = silty sand
for cross-hatched area.
For examples of usage see Table 3.
mS = muddy sand
cS = clayey sand
sZ = sandy silt
sM = sandy mud
sC = sandy clay
Z = silt
M = mud
C = clay
~
",""

...
~
l",v
Q..'lJ

10%1 ( (fll! ( I If
(I / ( (/(/( ( \
(\ ( / ( ( ( ( ( ( ( \
C M z
Clay 2: I Silt
00039mm) Clay: Silt (0 0039 - 0 0625mm)

FIG. 2-Textural classification of gravel-free sediments and sedimentary rocks. This


diagram is an expansion of the bottom tier of Fig. 1. Classes are defined by the
percentage of sand and the ratio of silt to clay.
No.4 FOLK et al. - DETRITAL SEDIMENTARY ROCKS 945

(used in the general sense, as in muddy sand), rather than "silty" or


"clayey". The precise silt to clay ratio can be determined by laboratory
analysis.

Usage
From the preceding discussion it is readily seen that cne only need deter-
mine the percentage range of a size fraction and not the precise percentage to
assign a sample to its textural class. Thus the nomenclature may be applied
in the field by using nothing more sophisticated than a hand lens and a
grain-size comparator (see Lewis et al., 1970). The use of comparison
charts for percentage estimation (Fig. 3) helps to overcome the ever-present
Downloaded by [190.223.41.102] at 06:37 16 December 2014

problem of estimating the proportions of one grain-size fraction against a


background of other fractions. Nevertheless, in the field it is still impossible
to precisely assign samples that fall close to class boundary lines. Only
sieve plus pipette on thin section analysis in the laboratory can givs the
exact proportions for each size fraction and enable boundary line samples to
be precisely assigned. With respect to thin section analysis, it must be
emphasised that problems exist in obtaining meaningful size data (see dis-
cussion by Griffiths, 1967, pp. 64-6) and data so obtained cannot easily be
ccmpared with sieve and pipette data (Rosenfeld et al., 1953: Friedman,
1958).

Auxiliary Information
One may stop at simply assigning each sample its textural name according
to the procedure outlined above. In field studies, many geologists may not
desire to obtain more detailed textural information. Nevertheless, with little
extra effort very useful additional information can be obtained by specifying
the modal size in the gravel-, sand-, and mud-size fractions. This information
should be obtained wherever pra,ctica:ble because it is valuable in determining
gross depositional trends in a rock unit or sediment body. Use of the mode
is also valuable because it serves to distinguish among the wide range of
sediment types represented in anyone textural class. For example, a granular
coarse sandstone and cobbly fine sandstone both belong to the gravelly sand-
stone class, yet they are distinctly different and have quite different geologic
significance.
In specifying the modal size, the gravel, sand, and mud fractions are
considered independently of each other. The modal grain diameter of each
is expressed in terms of the equivalent Udden-Wentworth size grade, for
example boulder as in boulder conglomerate, or fine sand as in granular
fine sand. The diameter of the modal size in the gravel fraction is always
determined regardless of the proportion of gravel in the sediment. The
modal size of the sand fraction is determined only for the very sandy gravel-
bearing sediments (cross-hatched area of Fig. 1). It is determined for the
sand fraction of all gravel-free sediments (cross-hatched area of Fig. 2).
For the muddy gravel-bearing sediments (stippled area of Fig. 1) one
should specify whether the mud is dominantly silt, dominantly clay, or an
946 N.2. JOURNAL OF GEOLOGY AND GEOPHYSICS VOL. 13

i..-
1% 5%

~ ~
r: ..
I ....

- I . .: ,. '

.. --
~
~
I
Downloaded by [190.223.41.102] at 06:37 16 December 2014

10%
.
.
IT

.,
.-.
t;J~

~ ""

.. I~_.

25%
.....
.. :.=-. -
30%


: I .1

FIG. 3-Comparison charts to aid visual estimation of percentage. Reproduced from


Folk (1951) and Terry and Chilingar (1955).
No.4 FOLK et al. - DETRITAL SEDIMENTARY ROCKS 947

equal to sub-equal mixture of silt and clay. In the first instance, for example,
one would then specify silty gravel rather than muddy gravel, in the second
instance clayey gravel rather than muddy gravel, and in the third instance
the term muddy (sensu stricto) gravel would be retained. In the field when
it is not practicable to specify the dominant size of the mud fraction, the
unmodified term muddy gravel would be used. Confusion can arise in the
usage of "mud" (i.e., sensu lato or sensu stricto), therefore "mud (s.s.)" or
"true mud" could perhaps be used when referring to the restricted usage.
At this level of description then, the name for each sediment sample gives
a very good idea of its grain-size distribution. For example, instead of the
class name "gravelly sand" (gS), we now have the more precise information
that our sample is a "granular very fine sand".
Downloaded by [190.223.41.102] at 06:37 16 December 2014

The sand fraction in many sediments consists not of one dominant grain
size, but of two dominant grain sizes, with very few grains of intermediate
size. Bimodality provides important clues to the history of a sand. Its
presence can be emphasised by inserting the word "bimodal" before the
term "sand" and specifying the two modes in terms of the equivalent
Udden-Wentworth size grades. Thus, instead of "silty sand" (zS), the
name may be, for example, "silty bimodal medium and very fine sand";
instead of "gravelly sand" (gS), "pebbly bimodal medium and very fine
sand". The grain-size name is modified where bimodality is marked, but
only in the textural classes included in the cross-hatched areas of Figs. 1 and
2. Bimodality in the gravel or the mud fraction does not have the same
significance as in the sand fraction and does not need to be specified.
Descriptive naming of a sediment or sedimentary rock could well stop at
this point. Nevertheless, for samples falling in the two sand classes Sand
zS of Fig. 2, it is useful to specify the size sorting of the sand plus coarse
silt fraction. The degree of sorting is a reflection of the energy level in the
environment of deposition. Three classes of sorting are readily determinable
in the field: well sorted, moderately sorted, and poorly sorted. The procedure
is as follows: if the central two-thirds of the grain-size range falls within
less than the equivalent of one Udden-Wentworth size grade, the sample is
well sorted; if it ranges over the equivalent of 1-2 Wentworth size grades
the sample is moderately sorted; if it ranges over more than the equivalent
of 2 Wentworth size grades, the sample is poorly sorted. These three sorting
classes are consistent with detailed classifications that sedimentologists would
use in studies involving laboratory analysis (e.g., Folk and Ward, 1957;
as reproduced by Van der Lingen, 1968).
In determining the size sorting of sand, there is one exception to the
above procedure. Some bimodal sands that would be considered poorly sorted
as a whole consist of two well sorted modes; for example, the desert floor
sand described by Folk (1968b). Such sands should be called "well-sorted
bimodal" sand; for example "well-sorted bimodal medium and very fine
sand".
Examples of usage of the textural classification are given in Tables 2 and 3.
Downloaded by [190.223.41.102] at 06:37 16 December 2014

\Q
~
TABLE 2-Names .. Appliedto the Textural Classes Delinem:edin' Fig. 1. Modal size is specified.for the italicised terms, as shown in the 00
list of examples. If pebbles, etc., are predominantly irregular, "breccia" should be substituted for "conglomerate" and "gravel"

Major Textural Class


Examples of Usage-
Consolidated Equivalents Only
Unconsolidated Consolidated
--~-------------------------------------------------------------------------.-----
z
~
G gravel conglomerate granule conglomerate Q<
sG sandy gravel sandy cOllglomerate medium sandy boulder conglomerate
c::.;
z
msG muddy sandy gravel muddy sandy conglomerate muddy coarse sandy pebble conglomerate >
t'"
o
mG muddy gravel muddy cOllglomerate clayey pebble conglomerate "l

gS gravelly sand conglomeratic sands/olle granular very fine sandstone


o
tri
o
t'"
gmS gravelly muddy sand r.Gllglomeratic muddy salldstone bouldery muddy coarse sandstone o
pebbly siltstone
~
gM gravelly mud collglomeratic muds/aile
>
Z
(g)S slightly gravelly salld slightly conglomeratic sandstone slightly pebbly coarse sandstone t:I

(g)mS slightly gravelly muddy salld slightly cOllglomeratic muddy salldstolle slightly cobbly silty fine sandstone o
tri
o'1:1
(g)M slightly gravelly mud slightly cOllglomera.tic mudstone slightly cobbly siltstone
well-sorted fine sandstone
~
S salld sands/olle n
[/)

mS muddy sand muddy salldstont? moderately well-sorted silty very fine sandstone

sM salldy mud salldy mudstolle fine sandy claystone

M mud muds/olle siltstone ~


t'"
------
,.....
UJ
No.4 FOLK et al. - DETRITAL SEDIMENTARY ROCKS 949

TABLE 3-Names Applied to the Textural Classes Delineated in Fig 2. Modal size is
specified for the italicised terms as shown on the list of examples. Sorting
category is specified for textural classes Sand zS only

Major Textural Class Examples of Usage---


Consolidated Equivalents Only
I Unconsolidated Consolidated

S I sand J(wdstone wellsorted fine sandstone

zS I silty sand silty sandstone poorly sorted silty medium sandstone

mS I muddy sand muddy sandstone muddy bimodal fine and very fine
sandstone
Downloaded by [190.223.41.102] at 06:37 16 December 2014

cS clayey sand clayey sandstone clayey medium sandstone

s2 sandy silt sandy siltstone fine sandy siltstone

sM sandy mud sandy mudstone coarse sandy mudstone

sC sandy clay sandy claystone fine sandy claystone

2 silt siltstone siltstone


M I mud mudstone mudstone
C I clay claystone claystone

Justification for Textural Class Boundaries


The given textural class boundaries were originally adopted by Folk
(1954) as "reasonable", without supporting evidence that they coincided
with natural breaks in the gravel :sand :mud ratio. Subsequent study of
mites of sediments suggests that natural breaks do occur very close to most
)f the given boundaries.
':;ravel-bearing Sediments
Published analyses indicate that alluvial gravel consists largely either of
10%-80% gravel, with a mode at 60% (Folk and Ward, 1957), or of
50%-80% gravel (Potter, 1955). Similarly, alluvial flood gravel consists
)f 50%-80% gravel (Krumbein, 1940; 1942). The 80% level therefore
lppears to separate purely openwork (matrix-free) gravel, such as typifies
leach gravel (Krumbein and Griffith, 1938), from alluvial sandy gravel.
Tho work of Folk and Ward also suggests that a natural break occurs at
lpproximately 30% gravel, while Wolff (1964) in a summary of lake, till,
md beach sediments, shows that the most common proportions are 1 %-5%
md 10%-20% gravel. McKee et al. (1967) found that sediments bearing
)'1 %-5% gravel are dominant in a suite of floodplain sands and pebbly
;ands; a very small proportion of samples contains 5%-30% gravel and
lOne contains more than 30% graveL Natural breaks thus appear to be
)resent at about 5% and 30% gravel.
950 N.Z. JOURNAL OF GEOLOGY AND GEOPHYSICS VOL. 13

ro. A i

60
]1
>-

11 gravelly Sand sandy Gravel Gravel

II>
41
Q..
E
'"
VI
50
:\
....0
Downloaded by [190.223.41.102] at 06:37 16 December 2014

...41
.0
E
::>
Z

Percent Gravel in Suite of Gravel and Sand-Bearing Sediments


50
B
II>
.!!
c.. 40 gravelly Sand sandy Gravel Gravel
E
VI'"
15

...
41
.0
E
::>
Z

Percent Gravel in Suite of Gravel-Bearing Sediments.


FIG. 4-Frequency distribution of the proportion of gravel in gravel-bearing sediment
samples. A. 245 beach samples (gravel and sand mixtures). Unpublished data
supplied by McLean (see text). B. 104 samples (gravel, sand, mud mixtures)
from a wide variety of sedimentary environments. Data abstracted from Udden
(1914) Chosen textural class boundaries are shown as dashed lines.
(1),;, t'I III. n i l KII ',\I ~''II 1>1\11 .... 1 \K\ R oc).;. ....
H","",,~ .. e "u.,.\. ,!'Ie t) ..... "'1., ."n.
C~t' ...,I""',O"'
... - 1 1.... ,
,I ' ........ 11 ,.7
n Ulllptft: Gravel
HoIot~. "11,, .&1
"'_ btoac.h
"
.. J ,"'.
HoIoce"" b." de1u
JI..,.","-Y cotl", &1
Q.r..at",,,,ry Ilu ....,~,'i.l(, .. 1 ~"'I'" ......,............
T.n.,,-, ",\C.h 'Y," ............... ~

~
.."
~

(j
mG msG

'.

~L- ~ (
\
.\
Downloaded by [190.223.41.102] at 06:37 16 December 2014

,M emS '"S\
.\

(,)M

sM mS
Mud O
I
,II ,II I', 'Sand
Mud Sind II.UIO

FIG. 5- (Top) Plot of N ew Zealand gravel-b earing sedimen t samples. Based on published
a nd unpublished laboratory analyses. The class boundary at I : 9 mud: sand separates

... .
b eac h and river gravels from most others.

'-
HokK~",.

Holocene
Ny
l.Mu
" 9tl9\\,

.,.... tim,
HQlo(ene ml' int .helf ,
........'-..IIIfl'
............ ~ ....
,...........
..
"'
41 u",plt\ Sand ., HoIoI:enf' nuury
",.
,,,
~ . ,,_
A1If'._~ "",...bll'l"-"
Hotoc:e-nt M.I<.h ........, ' It ....... L

Hotcxtnt dune
HoIocrnt r ..,.'

Holocene bh
o Q"attrn<lrf UUWKJIIUi.l1

Ttfll.l'f "".I'-,M ,totll ,7 ....... ~ tt "'~

T(',11JI'1 tr,uh,," .. ..,. ....... u.-'III. " ................


",'"
J>

,"f
ll.'"

Clay ( I' 1 'S ill

Clay Sill II.U IO


FIG. 6- .. (Bottom) Plol of New Zealand gravel-free sed iment sa mples. Based on published
a nd unpublished laboratory a na lyses. Sand a nd silt mixtures are common in na ture,
but sand and cla y mixtures arc rare .
v.Z. ]1 G'eo /. (,' e ()p/~)'s. 13( 4j , 1970
No.4 FOLK et al. - DETRITAL SEDIMENTARY ROCKS 951

A study by Dr R. McLean (GeDgraphy Department, University Df Canter-


bury) Df a suite of beach sediments covering the complete range Df sand and
gravel mixtures suppDrts the choice of boundaries made by Folk. McLean
provided unpublished grain-size analyses Df 245 samples from two beaches
on the east coast Df the South Island, New Zealand. The sample> group into
three natural populations (Fig. 4a). The three pDpulations centre around
3%, 60%, and 95% gravel, with boundaries between populations occurring
at 37% and 82%. Forty-five percent of the samples in the "gravelly sand"
population fall in the range "trace to 5% gravel". McLean's data thus
provide additional support for class boundaries at approximately 5%, 30%,
and 80% gravel. Similarly, data from a suite of 104 samples that represent
eight depositional environments (ranging from till to marine gravel) have
been abstracted from Udden (1914). They group in a similar way to
Downloaded by [190.223.41.102] at 06:37 16 December 2014

McLean's data (Fig. 4b).


In addition to bDundaries at 5%, 30%, and 80% gravel, it is meaningful
to establish a lowermDst boundary at a trace (0'01 %) of gravel. A minute
amount Df gravel in a sediment is highly significant, since the presence
of gravel is in part a function of the highest current velDcity at the time
of deposition.
The four tiers thus established are subdivided according to the mud :sand
ratio (Fig. 1). The 1 : 1 mud :sand bDundary was adopted by Folk as an
arbitrary, easy-to remember division. It also serves tD separate muddy gravel
(e.g., till) from the more common sandy gravels. The boundary at 1 : 9
mud :sand separates the mud-free sand and gravel mixtures (characteristic
of river and beach sediments) from the muddy sediments (characteristic of
many marine gravels). A plot of 213 samples of gravel-bearing sediment
from New Zealand (Fig. 5) illustrates the last point. Folk (1954) also
placed a boundary at 9 : 1 mud :sand for both the slightly gravelly and
gravel-free tiers. Andrews sees little merit in such fine suhdivisiDn in tho
slightly gravelly tier and does not persist with it here. The class that remains
is named the "slightly gravelly mud" class, thereby conforming with other
classes on the mud side of the triangle. The 9: 1 mud :sand boundary in the
gravel-free tier is retained. It separates off an important category as shown
by Fig. 2.
All sediments containing more than 30% gravel are named "gravel"
(conglDmerate for the consolidated equivalents), while those containing less
are named "sand" or "mud". The justificatiDn for this restriction of the
name "gravel" is that reviews of the literature and surveys of early geologic
opinion both showed that most geologists called anything with more than
30o/;,gravel a "conglomerate" and anything with less than 30% a "gravelly
sand.

Gravel-free Sediments
As described above, the triangular diagram on which mixtures of sand,
silt, and clay are plotted (Fig. 2) is simply an expansion of the bottom tier
of Fig. 1. The major class boundaries at 90%, 50%, and 10% sand separate
four major textural types: relatively mud-free sand, muddy sand, sandy mud,
and relatively sand-free mud. Figs. 6 and 7 are plots Df more than 300

GC01o.~-6
952 N.Z. JOURNAL OF GEOLOGY AND GEOPHYSICS VOL. 13

published and unpublished size analyses of New Zealand gravel-free sedi-


ments and sedimentary rocks. They show that mixtures of sand and mud tend
to cluster in four groups, and that natural breaks in the sand :mud ratio
exist at approximately the boundaries chosen. Near-shore marine (strong
wave influence), beach, dune, and river sediments tend to contain
97%-100% sand. That is, they are mud-free. A second group (largely of
Holocene estuary, Tertiary marine shelf, and Tertiary flysch-type) mostly
consists of sediments containing 60%-85% sand. The 90% sand boundary
therefore separates the matrix-free sand from muddy sand. A third group
(largely of Holocene bay, Holocene estuary, Tertiary marine shelf, and
Tertiary flysch-type) includes sediments that contain 35%-55% sand. This
group is clearly separated from sediments containing 60%-85% sand by a
break at about 55% sand. The 50% sand level is therefore justified as an
Downloaded by [190.223.41.102] at 06:37 16 December 2014

easy-to-remember boundary close to a natural boundary.


Fig. 7 suggests that a "natural" boundary between sandy mud and mud
occurs at 35% sand. However, it seems reasonable to establish a mud
category that is relatively sand-free, and since 42% of the samples containing
less than 35% sand fall in the less-than-lO% sand range, the 10% level is
justified as an arbitrary but convenient boundary between mud and muddy
sand. The subdivision of the triangle is thus symmetrical, "sand" being
material with less than 10% mud, and "mud" being material with less than
10% sand.
The three lower tiers of Fig. 2 are subdivided into three classes accord-
ing to the silt :clay ratio as stated previously. The divisions are arbitrary but
convenient and practical. Silts are those sediments that consist dominantly
of silt-size particles (silt :clay ratio greater than 2: 1 ); clays are those sedi-
ments that consist dominantly of clay-size particles (clay :silt ratio greater
than 2:1), and muds (sensu stricto) those sediments that consist of inter-
mediate mixtures of silt and clay.

PART II-COMPOSITION OF DETRITAL SEDIMENTS

Sandstones
Introduction
Klein (1963) and McBride (1963) have reviewed some of the existing
classifications for describing sandstone composition and have pointed out
deficiencies in many of them. Convergent trends are apparent in the organ-
isation of the modern classifications, both in these reviews and in more
recent papers dealing with sandstones. However, no single classification is
in general use. Many re-define older terms, each of which therefore varies
widely in connotation. The classification for detrital sandstone composition
presented herein is in accord with recent trends and employs terminology
that is sufficiently new to cause no confusion with previous usage.

Frame of Reference
A sandstone is "any stone which is composed of an agglutination of
grains of sand, whether calcareous, siliceous, or of any other mineral nature"
(Lyell, 1837, pp. 456-7). In that definition, classification of a rock as a
No.4 FOLK et al. - DETRITAL SEDIMENTARY ROCKS 953

Mud sandy Mud muddy Sand I Sand

70
1/1
QI
0.. 60
E
t<I 50
VI

.....0 "10

...
QI
30
Downloaded by [190.223.41.102] at 06:37 16 December 2014

.l 20
E
:::I 10
Z
0

Percent Sand in Non-Gravelly Sediments Plotted on Figure 6


F1G. 7-Frequency distribution of the proportion of sand in samples plotted in Fig. 6.
Chosen textural class boundaries are shown as dashed lines.

"sandstone" is independent of the composition of its grains. It is con-


venient to have a nomenclature that distinguishes between the texture of a
rock and the composition of its grains. Thus, while sandstone is applicable
to texture, the term "arenite" (from arena, Latill for "Sand") is used to refer
to' the compO'sition Df a detrital sandstDne. Arenite is used in this way nO'
matter whether the sample is loose (sand) or indurated (sandstone); nO'
confusion will result because this property will be expressed in the "texture"
part Df the name.
The use of "arenite" should be restricted essentially to sand-size grains
(2'0-0'06 mm diameter). However, for purposes of compositional classifica-
tion, extension of the limits through coarse silt at one end and granules at
the other is both convenient and practical. Special techniques are generally
necessary to determine the composition of grains less than about 0'03 mm
in size (the lower limit of coarse silt). Thus detrital materials less than this
size are convenient! y relegated to the status of "matrix". There are additional
cogent reasons for choosing this size boundary for matrix (see Spencer,
1963; Dott, 1964). However, numerous other limits have been SEt and care
must be taken to verify the usage in any publication. Matrix is accounted
for in the textural classification and is ignored in the compositional classifica-
tion. The composition of particles of pebble or larger sizes cannDt be evaluated
representatively in thin section analysis, the mDst common technique used in
studying arenites. Thus grains larger than 4 mm (the upper limit for
granules) are best excluded from an arenite classification.
"Armite" refers only to the detrital fractiDn of a sandstone. Sand grains
of biogenic, biochemical, and chemical origin are not included. Rocks that
contain more than 50% non detrital grains by volume are included in quite
954 N.z. JOURNAL OF GEOLOGY AND GEOPHYSICS VOL. 13

separate classifications that are beyond the scope of this paper (for
example, the limestone classification of Folk, 1959). The presence of smaller
quantities of non detrital grains may be indicated by adding the name of the
grain-type as an adjectival modifier (e.g., fossiliferous) to the arenite name.
Post-depositional precipitates that act as cements must be ignored when
determining the basic arenite name. Their presence and character relate to
the diagenetic history of the rock. They should Ce noted as another modifier
of the arenite name, for example, carbonate-oemented, calcite-cemented,
iron-oxide-cemented, pyrite-cemented.
Numerous individual minerals or combinations of minerals and rock frag-
ments could be used as the fundamental criteria (end-members) of an
arenite classification. Choice of end-members is often dictated by the genetic
bias given to a classification. There are fewer problems in biasing a classifica-
Downloaded by [190.223.41.102] at 06:37 16 December 2014

tion towards source-rock inferences than towalds depositional, tectonic,


climatic, or other inferences. However, even while attempting, albeit imper-
fectly, a source rock bias, there are a variety of end members that could be
chosen. For example, micas have been lumped with metamorphic rock frag-
ments because most micas were thought to come from metamorphic rocks;
granite rock fragments were lumped with feldspars because most feldspars
were thought to come from acidic plutonic rocks. There are dangers in such
generalised combinations. It is less problematical to establish compositional
categories based on individual mineral and rock fragment types. The
categories are then basically descriptive; the geologist is not b;ased by pre-
conceived inferential relationships and can interpret for himself.
The procedure followed herein, and the adopted end-members and
categories, reflect many ideas presented in the geological literature and con-
sidered in discussion with numerous geologists. In particular one source
should be mentioned: an attempt to attain general agreement on classifica-
tion among some North American and Australian sedimentologists that was
instigated by Folk in 1966 and continued by K. A. W. Crook in 1968*. The
classification propos,ed in this paper is essentially that which Folk presented
for informal discussion in 1966 and somewhat more formally in 1968.
Minor modifications have been made.

Proposed Classification
Most detrital sand grains are composed of the essential minerals quartz
(Q), feldspar (F), and rock fragments (R). It is thus reasonable to establish
a triangular (QFR) diagram with these three end-members (Fig. 8). Con-
cise, self-explanatory, and unequivocal names for arenites rich in these end
members are: quartzarenite, feldsarenite, and litharenite (from lithos, Greek
for "rock"). Quartzarenite and litharenite are McBride' 5 (1963) contrac-
tions of Gilbert's (in Williams et al., 1964) terms "quartz arenite" and

*The unpublished manuscripts Systems Analysis and Arenite Classification and


Analysis of Responses to Questionnai"e on Arenite Classification may be obtained
on request from Dr Keith A. W. Crook, Geology Department, Australian National
University, Canberra, 2600. We have tried to avoid pre-empting a more comprehen-
sive publication involving Crook and the results of his analysis and literature review.
No.4 FOLK et al. - DETRITAL SEDIMENTARY ROCKS 955

"lithic arenite"; usage here does not conflict significantly with their usage
(see also Chen, 1968). Feldsarenite is a term preferred by K. A. W. Crook
(pers. comm.) and by Lewis because of the existing diversity in both
descriptive and genetic connotations of the commonly-used term "arkose"
(Oriel, 1949; Klein, 1963; Huckenholz, 1963a; Dott, 1964). It is also con-
sistent with other names (,,--arenite" ending) and does not have conno-
tations of granitic source rocks as does the term "arkose".
Standardisation is necessary in assigning mineral grains to the poles of the
QFR triangle. At the Q pole are grouped all monocrystalline and poly-
crystalline quartz grains excluding chert (a rock fragment). While all poly-
crystalline grains might be considered rock fragments, practical difficulties
at present preclude consistent distinction between plutonic polycrystalline
quartz, sedimentary quartzite, and metaquartzite fragments (Blatt and
Downloaded by [190.223.41.102] at 06:37 16 December 2014

Christie, 1963; Blatt, 1967a and b). In addition, it is generally impossible


to distinguish monocrystalline quartz grains from these different sources.
Thus it is unreasonable to assign monomineralic quartz grains to different

Q
QUARTZARENITE

SUBFELDSARENITE SUBLITHARENITE

r-
~
:t
U
~
~
-.J
'Z~
rn
FI L
':1-1 1:1
l
1':1
\R
to scale
Q = monocrystalline and polycrystalline quartz (excluding chert)
F = monocrystalline feldspar
R = rock fragments (igneous, metamorphiC, and sedimentary, including chert.)

FIG. 8-Primary arenite triangle. The example given in the text is located by *.
956 N.Z. JOURNAL OF GEOLOGY AND GEOPHYSICS VOL. 13

poles of the triangle. (Quartzite grains with mica are polymineralic and may
be assigned to the R pole.) At the F pole are grouped all monocrystalline
f~dspars. At the R pole are grouped all recognisable rock fragments
(Igneous, metamorphic, and sedimentary). Granite plus gneiss grains ar':':
assigned to the R pole in this classification, an innovation on most previous
systems, including that of Folk (1968a) who placed them at the F pole.
Lewis urged the change because:
(1) The genetic bias of the classification leans towards source-rock
identification. Many New Zealand arenites contain feldspar grains that were
not derived from "granitic" rocks. It would be inconsistent to group at one
pole indicators of different source rock types.
(2) Boggs (1968) has shown that granite plus gneiss grains can be
Downloaded by [190.223.41.102] at 06:37 16 December 2014

distinguished from other rock fragments in thin section.


Subdivision of the QFR triangle is largely arbitrary. The chosen class
limits are easy to remember and they delineate fields which can be simply
and meaningfully named. Classes also reflect attempts to group arenites with
similar souroe rock lithologies (or genetic history) and to separate arenites
with dissimilar source rock lithologies (or genetic history). In addition,
grouping is attempted, at least partly, according to the most common
geological occurrence of arenite varieties. For example, many arenites,
especially in continental regions, are predominantly composed of quartz,
either because of prolonged weathering that results in elimination of un-
stable minerals prior to deposition, or because most of the grains are
recycled from other quartz-rich sedimentary (or metasedimentary) rocks
(see Blatt, 1967a). Up to 5% non-quartz grains are probably insignificant in
respect to the geological history of the quartzarenites; thus a boundary at
95% Q is suitable to delimit the field of quartzarenite itself (Fig. 8).
It is useful to report whether rock fragments are more or less common
than feldspars; thus the remainder of the triangle is divided into two equal
parts at a ratio of 1 : 1 F to R grains. It is again useful to distinguish arenites
with intermediate abundances of the relatively unstable F and R grains;
many arenites are quartz-rich but also contain more than 5% F and/or R.
Previous petrological studies of arenites have shown that a boundary of
25% F grains is a reasonable limit for these rocks of intermediate composi-
tion; the lower limit of "arkose" has commonly been set here (Oriel, 1949;
Klein, 1963). It is both reasonable in relation to apparent natural groupings
and consistent with previous usage to maintain this limit in a new classifica-
tion. Although there is no apparent "natural" grouping of intermediate-R
arenites, it is convenient to take the same limit for these arenites as for the
intermediate-F arenites. Thus we establish two fields subordinate to quartz-
arenite with a lower boundary at 75% Q-one named subfeldsarenite, the
other subIitharenite (Fig. 8).
The QFR triangle now has five fields; the fieIds for feldsarenite and
litharenite are still rather large. We have too little data on which to sub-
divide these two fields into "natural" groups. Yet subdivision would be
useful in attempts to describe compositions more precisely. Purely as a choice
of convenience, they are split into equal halves-that is, at ratios of 3 : 1
No, 4 FOLK et ai, - DETRITAL SEDIMENTARY ROCKS 957

and 1 : 3 F to R. The two subdivisions intermediate in their compositions


of F and R ccmpcnents are named "feldspathic litharenite" and "lithic
feldsarenite" (Fig. 8).
The geologically less common arenites which have a predominance of
other types of detrital mineral grains are best treated as "(mineral)-
arenites", for example, magnetite-arenite, mica-arenite. The QFR triangle is
bypassed in naming these arenites. If these non-essential minerals (i.e.,
minerals not Q, F, or R) comprise less than 50% by volume of the arenite,
they are ignored in compiling a QFR name but appear as a pl'eceding term;
e.g., mica quartzarenite. (Prominent nondetrital grains of sand size, such as
glauconite and fossil fragments, are treated in the same way, but adjectival
modifiers should be used. Thus one may find glauconitic quartzarenites or
Downloaded by [190.223.41.102] at 06:37 16 December 2014

fossiliferous mica quartzarenites.) We define no limits to the percentage


at which these non-essential minerals should be included in the name; the
worker may decide for himself.
In naming arenites in which QFR constituents pre-
dominate the percentage of the Q, F, and R components alone are re-
calculated to 100% for plotting on the Q F R triangle. (Total
percentages of all materials are best determined by point-counting in the
laboratory, but they can also be estimated with the aid of a comparison
chart, such as Fig. 3.) For example, the grains of a sandstone may be found
to comprise by volume 45% quartz, 18% feldspar, 5% rock fragments,
3% mica, and 15% glauconite; the remainder of the rock consists of car-
bonate cement. To name the sample, the Q component is 100 times the
quotient: (quartz percentage) divided by (sum of quartz plus feldspar plus
rock fragment percentages). Thus Q is (100) ( 45) /68, or 66'2 %. The point
reflecting the composition of this arenite would thus lie on the line of
66'2% Q (parallel to the base of the triangle and approximately two-thirds
of the way towards the Q apex). The ratio F : R is 3'6 : 1; thus the point
lies in the "feldsarenite" field. For quantitative plotting, the precise posi-
tion of the point can be found by recalculating the F or R components.
The F component is (100)(18)/68 or 26'5%, and the R component is
(100) (5)/68 or 7'3%. The sample point lies at the intersection of the
7'3% R line (paraUel to the QF side of the triangle) or 26'5% F line
with the 66'2% Q line. An asterisk marks the location of the example on
Fig. 8.

Refinement of Nomenclature
Names obtained from the primary triangle (Fig. 8) can be variously re-
fined, hence the primary triangle prmTides considerable flexibility for more
detailed nomenclature. In fact, the possibilities for detailed subdivision or
additional nomenclature are dependent only upon the ingenuity of the
worker and the demands of the particular suite of arenites on which he
is working. While we press for standardisation only in the use of the
primary triangle, we next present subdivisions that we feel are both
practical and useful.
958 N.z. JOURNAL OF GEOLOGY AND GEOPHYSICS VOL. 13

Because there are many types of rock fragments, and because these com-
ponents are the best guides to source rock lithology, it is ~seful to refi~e
the nomenclature of the "lith-" arenites (i.e., sublitharemte, feldspathlC
litharenite, and litharenite). Refinement is easily achieved by appending
the name of the most common rock fragment type to "-litharenite" or
"-sublitharenite" (or substituting a contraction for "lith-"). (In the case
of "lithic feldsarenite", replacement of the word "lithic"' by the appropriate
name appears r,easonable.) If sedimentary rock fragments predQminate, the
name used would be "sedimentary-litharenite" (or "sedarenite"). "IgneQus-
litharenites" could be named either "volcanic-litharenite" ("volcarenite") or
"plutonic-lith arenite" ("plutarenite"), depending on which class of com-
ponents predominates. Because of the difficulty in distinguishing between
gneiss and granite fragments in thin section (Boggs, 1968), it must be
Downloaded by [190.223.41.102] at 06:37 16 December 2014

realised that plutonic-litharenites would include rock fragments derived


frQm gneisses as well as deep-seated igneous rocks. If the phyllitic Qr
micaceous metamorphic rock fragments predominat,e, "phyllarenite" is
probably the most unequivocal name.*
For convenience in plotting quantitative data or in comparing rock suites,
second and even third order triangles may be derived as in Fig. 9. For
example, at the sedimentary-litharenite pole Qf a secQndary triangle, the
third order poles might be sandstone and/Qr shale, chert, and carbon-
ate rock fragments. Note that in a situation where carbonate rock frag-
ments predominate, "carbonate-litharenite" or "calclitharenite" ("calclith-
ite", Folk, 1959) must be used instead of "calcarenite". Calcarenite has the
pre-emptive connotation of a rock composed mainly of carbonate sand
particles which have been derived from within the basin of deposition and
not from the erosion of pre-existing carbonate rocks.
At the F pole of the primary triangle, a second order triangle could be
devised with a 50% division between "K-feldsarenite" and "plagioclase-
feldsarenite" C'plagarenite") as shown in Fig. 9. At the Q pole, it may
ultimately be useful to devise a second order triangle with poles for mono-
crystalline quartz of undulatory extinction, monocrystalline quartz of straight
extinction, and polycrystalline quartz. This latter suggestion arises from the
work of Greensmith (1963), Blatt and Christie (1963), Conolly (1965),
Moss (1966), and Blatt (1967b). Their work indicates that polycry:;talline
quartz, then quartz of undulatory extinction, may be preferentially eliminated
relative to quartz of straight extinction by sedimentary processes.
In all cases of plotting Qn a second or third order triangle, the con-
stituents represented by the poles of the triangle are recalculated to 100%
befQre plotting. The main problem that arises is that points appear on two

*K. A. W. Crook, in his unpublished manuscript, Systems Analysis and Arenite


Classification, propased a system af cantractions tOo express the campasitional
name--i.e., alang the lines af the Folk (1959) limestane classification. The
Crook system carries the cantractians further than we favaur at the present
time. We prefer tOo use, for example, "sedlitharenite" rather than Crook's "sedlithite",
simply because by so doing we maintain a consistent terminalagy whereby all names
end in "-arenite".
No.4 FOLK et al. - DETRITAL SEDIMENTARY ROCKS 959

Q M.R.F. = metamorphic rock fragments


I. R. F. = igneous rock fragments
S.R.F. = sedimentary rock fragments
C.R.F. = carbonate rock fragments

AbL.(-----~
Downloaded by [190.223.41.102] at 06:37 16 December 2014

CHERTARENITE
I \ I \
(,., Chert
(VOLCARENITE or PLUTARENITE) CARBONATE - LlTHARENITE
(CALCL/THARENITE)

FIG. 9-Examples of second and third order arenite triangles that may be devised to
refine the nomenclature given in the primary triangle.

(the primary and secondary) or more triangles for anyone arenite sample.
Such multiple plots become cumbersome with a multitude of samples, and
the worker may choose to devise some other form of comparing suites or
representing composition in the detailed subdivisions.
Let us repeat-it is not necessary to use these or any other type of second-
or third-order triangle; their use may prove practical for certain studies. In
the main, use of the primary triangle (with addition of the predominant
R-type before "-litharenite") suffices for general descriptive purposes.
With regard to the outlined arenite scheme, a problem of particular
relevance to New Zealand, but also to other tectonically superactive areas,
lies in the abundance of arenites with a great paucity of quartz. Crook
(pers. comm., 1970) and D. S. Coombs (pers. comm., 1969 Conference
of the Geological Society of New Zealand), favour setting up formal
categories for these rocks. Although quantitative plotting of data on the
primary triangle adequately locates quartz-poor arenites, a worker may find
it useful to give them a name. For this essentially qualitative purpose, we
suggest that "quartz-poor litharenite" or "hyper-litharenite" be used. Until
sufficient data accumulate to define the most useful boundary for formal
categories, the individual should note at what Q-percentage he begins to
apply these names.
Examples of the application of the terminology to some New Zealand
arenites are given in Figs. 10 to 14. Thin sections were chosen from the
University of Canterbury collection to show examples of both "coal-
measure" and "greywacke" lithologies. Samples were selected for clarity
in photomicrography as well as lithologic variability. Many "greywackes"
were rejected because photomicrographs would be obscure.
960 N.Z. JOURNAL OF GEOLOGY AND GEOPHYSICS VOL. 13
Downloaded by [190.223.41.102] at 06:37 16 December 2014

FIG. lO- Well sorted fine sandstone: calcitecemented glauconitic quartzarenite.


Oligocene. Reddiff Gully, Rakaia Gorge (NZGS 1 : 250,000. Sheet 17, S45-9874).
UC4620. Plane polarised light. (The dark grains are glauconite; white grains are
quartz; remainder is carbonate cement.)

Mudrocks and Conglomerates

The separation of textural and compositional nomenclature should apply


equally to all detrital sediments. To parallel the sandstone : arenite nomen-
clature, the compositional suffix for detrital mudrocks and muds (in the
general textural sense) can be "-lutite" (from lutum, Latin for mud). For
detrital conglomerates and gravels it can be "-rudite" (from rudus, Latin
for rubble). Grabau (1924) used rudyte, arenyte, lutyte for the textural
groups of gravel, sand, mud. Because these terms are rarely used today in
this sense, their anglicised equivalents should not be confusing in the
suggested new usage.)
Insufficient detailed studies of lutites and rudites have been made to
permit construction of a classification as detailed as for arenites. Only
tentative suggestions can be made with respect to a systematic classification
of them . For purposes of qualitative description, it seems best to append
the most common mineral (in the case of lutites and some rudites) or rock
fragment name (in the case of most rudites) to the suffix. A number of
names may be presented, with the convention that the one nearest the
suffix is the most common. For example, clay quartz-Iutite; quartz mont-
morillonite-lutite; quartz granite-rudite. Cements and nondetrital grains can
be treated as with arenites.
No.4 FOLK et at. - DETRITAL SEDIMENTARY ROCKS 961
Downloaded by [190.223.41.102] at 06:37 16 December 2014

FIG. 11--P oorly sorted coarse sandstone: mica feldsarenite (mica plagioclase-felds-
arenite or mica plagarenite). Lower Tertiary coal measures; Gates of Fiordland.
UC4512. Under crossed nicols. (In other views within the thin-section are
plutonic igneous rock fragments; a representative classification of the whole
arenite would be mica lithic feldsarenite. White and some grey grains are quartz;
black patches are mainly holes in the slide. Feldspars a re twinned; obscure grains
are mica.)

For quantitative plots, triangular diagrams again seem best as they are
easiest to construct.
Lutites are predominantly composed of quartz, feldspar,
and clay minerals. (Shaw and Weaver, 1965, have shown this to be true
even for claystones.) A primary triangle with these three poles can be
subdivided into three fields with boundaries at ratios of 1 : 1 between each
component. (c. S. Nelson, University of Auckland, has used this triangle
and found it satisfactory.) Secondary, even tertiary, triangles may be derived
from each apex to suit the requirements of the individual worker; for
example, at the clay lutite apex a secondary triangle could be formed with
end-members of illite, montmorillonite, kaolinite, or whatever proves useful.
Rudites are predominantly composed of quartz and sedimentary, igneous,
and metamorphic rock fragments . Because there are four common "end-
members", simple diagrams for quantitative plotting are difficult to devise.
A tetrahedron could be imagined, from which triangular "slices" could be
taken at stated values of one component. In this case, class boundaries at
ratios of 1 : 1 between end-members are probably best until sufficient data
are obtained to delimit more practical boundaries. Second- and third-order
triangles could be constructed from the poles of the triangular slices.
962 N .Z. JOURNAL OF GEOLOGY AND GEOPHYSICS VOL. 13

Alternatively, the arenite system of triangles could be used, simply specify-


ing "rudite" instead of "arenite". Folk prefers this approach, though
realising that practically no rudites will ever appear on the feldspar half
of the primary triangle, and that second-order triangles at the rock fragment
apex of the primary triangle will generally have to be used. A number of
detailed field studies of rudites using either approach are necessary; final
standardisation in classification must await future analysis of results.
The simplest rudite nomenclature could be of the form: (predominant
rock fragment type) -rudite; for example, granite-rudite. This format would
be unsuitable where many different igneous metamorphic, or sedimentary
rock fragments are present, and in such instances names such as "ignirudite",
"plutarudite", "vo1corudite", "phyllarudite", and "sedrudite" would be
better. The simpler alternatives "igneous-rudite", "metamorphic-rudite",
Downloaded by [190.223.41.102] at 06:37 16 December 2014

etc., are not applicable because they imply a mode of origin rather than
clast composition. Contractions for other compositions may be useful. (Note:
the term "calcirudite" should be avoided for detrital carbonate rocks; as
with "calcarenite" and "calcilutite", it is widely used for rocks whose
particles have been formed within the basin of deposition. "Calclithrudite",
a K. A. W. Crook term (pers. comm.) 1970), is acceptable.)

FIG. 12-Moderately sorted medium sandstone: feldsarenite. Torlesse Group "grey-


wacke". Triassic. Castle Hill Basin (566/ 209924 ) . UC6109. Plane polarised
light. (White g rains are quartz; the rest are a ltered feldspars with one or two
rock fragments. M ost feldspars appear to be altered plagioclase, thus the arenite
could be named a plagioclase felds aren ite or plagarenite.)
No.4 FOLK et al. - DETRITAL SEDIMENTARY ROCKS 963

The auxiliary term "polymictic" (see Pettijohn, 1957) will prove useful
if clasts of more than one lithologic type are present. The connotation of
the term would be dependent on the final "-rudite" name. For example.
"polymictic ignirudite" would imply that various igneous rock types pre-
dominate among the clasts, but that clasts of metamorphic and/or sedi-
mentary rocks are also present.
Gravel-size fragments of muddy sediment are commonly generated
within a basin of deposition by the erosion of existing deposits. These
fragments may be practically indistinguishable from detrital clasts of sedi-
mentary rock, as in many New Zealand "greywackes". Because of the prob-
lems involved in recognising the genesis of some clasts, and because
"rudite" has already been widely used for some nondetrital gravels (e.g.,
calcirudite), it would seem best not to restrict "rudite" to detrital gravels
Downloaded by [190.223.41.102] at 06:37 16 December 2014

alone. Insertion of the term "penecontemporaneous" or "perigenic" (Lewis,


1962) before the final "-rudite" name will emphasise that most clasts are
inferred to have been formed at about the same time as the enclosing
sediment was deposited, and will distinguish them from detrital clasts.

FIG. 13-Moderately sorted coarse sandstone: lithic feldsarenite. Waipapa Group


"greywacke". Jurassic. Motutapu Island, Hauraki Gulf (NZGS 1: 250,000.
Sheet 3, N26-43 73). UC6073. Plane polarised light. (Three white grains of quartz
lie near the margins of the photomicrograph. Other grains are altered feldspars
and volcanic rock fragments; there are sedimentary rock fragments in the thin-
section.)
964 N.z. J'OURNAL 'OF GE'OLOGY AND GE'OPHYSICS VOL. 13
Downloaded by [190.223.41.102] at 06:37 16 December 2014

FIG. 14-Poorly sorted muddy medium sandstone: litharenite. Waitemata Group.


Lower Miocene. Orewa Beach, North Auckland (NZGS 1: 250,000. Sheet 3,
N26-2392, approx.). UC6076. Plane polarised light. (White grains are quartz.
Both vo'canic and sedimentary rock fragments are present; volcanic fragments
predominate in the thinsection, thus from the secondary triangle the name
volcanic-litharenite or volcarenite may be applied.)

(The widely used term "intraformational" is unacceptable because it implies


mass movement rather than fluid flow. Similarly inapplicable is the term
"allochem" (Folk, 1959), which is used to refer to particles formed
chemically within the basin, then transported physically.)

C'ONCLUSIONS

The classification consists of two complementary parts; one for sediment


texture and one for sediment composition. They can be used separately.
Both are practical and flexible; they can be applied in the field or can be
refined to discriminate any level of detail based on laboratory analysis.
Both are objective, and the name given to any sample by one geologist
should be reproduced by another. The only potential problem is that of
estimating percentages when classifying samples qualitatively. The operator
error inherent in various estimation procedures can be reduced with practice
and by making use of standard comparison charts.
Both systems of classification are essentially descriptive; genetic interpre-
tations are left to the investigator, as indeed they must be. But the systems
are not purely arbitrary. In the textural classification the chosen boundaries
No.4 FOLK et at. - DETRITAL SEDIMENTARY ROCKS 965

delimit textural classes that are common in nature. Each compositional


classification has a framework based on common mineral and rock fragment
types; relative proportions of these constituents delimit classes that indicate
the probable source rocks of the assemblage of grains. The textural and
compositional classes are assigned names that are unequivocal and have not
been overworked.
The system of textural classification is fully applicable in the field. In a
comparative survey of six systems for the classification of sediment texture,
Pettijohn (1957, p. 25), concluded that the Folk (1954) system (on which
this is based) was probably the only one that could be applied without
recourse to laboratory grain-size analysis. This conclusion does not mean
that the system is ridiculously easy to apply in the fidd, but if the geologist
Downloaded by [190.223.41.102] at 06:37 16 December 2014

applies the same amount of care in determining the proportions of each


size fraction in a sample as he does to measuring features such as schistosity,
fracture cleavage, or strike and dip, then most samples can be readily assigned
to their proper textural category.
The system of compositional classification sometimes can be applied in the
field and always can be applied precisely after detailed study in the labora-
tory. For rocks whose compositions are indeterminate in the field, it is best
simply to classify them texturally.
A general sequence to describe the texture and composition of a detrital
sandstone is as follows-( sorting term) (size term) : (cement) (prominent
non detrital grain-type) (prominent detrital grain type, other than quartz,
feldspar, or rock fragment) (named arenite). Additional sediment charac-
teristics such as colour, induration, and sedimentary structures would also
commonly be given before the textural terms. Each of the terms portrays an
essentially independent property. The terms not only evoke a mental image
of the particular rock, but also are guides in the interpretation of the
geological history repr'esented by the rock. Whether the sequence is sufficient
depends on the purpose of the study and on the suite of rocks involved.
Clearly not all of the important properties of detrital sediments are given
in this format; for example, grain roundness may provide significant
interpretative data or even s,erve to distinguish between lithological units.
Two examples of sandstone name that might result from the combination
of terms given above follow:
(1) Pale greenish-grey, indurated, cross-laminated, well sorted, bimodal,
medium and fine sandstone: calcite-cemented, glauconitic, quartz-
arenite.
(2) Dark grey, well indurated, graded-bedded, poorly sorted, muddy,
fine sandstone: lithic feldsarenite.
The basic framework of the classification is sufficiently broad, and the
rules of nomenclature sufficiently self-explanatory, that standardisation of
usage is practicable. The goal of standardisation within New Zealand is
important for the purpose of communication and is even more important in
view of the growing emphasis on retrieval of computerised data.
966 N.z. JOURNAL OF GEOLOGY AND GEOPHYSICS VOL. 13

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We wish to acknowledge the assistance generously provided by various colleagues


and associates. Dr R. F. McLean, Geography Department, University of Canterbury,
and Dr G. J. van der Lingen and Mr K. M. Swanson, New Zealand Geological Survey,
Christchurch, permitted us to use much of their unpublished grain-size data from
New Zealand sediments. Mr E. T. Annear, New Zealand Geological Survey, Christ-
church, drafted the figures. Mr D. J. Jones, Geology Department, University of
Canterbury, provided photographic assistance. Dr K. A. W. Crook, Geology Depart-
ment, Australian National University, Mr G. D. Mansergh and Dr G. J. van der
Lingen, New Zealand Geological Survey, Christchurch, and Dr 1. G. Speden, New
Zealand Geological Survey, Lower Hutt, all critically read the manuscript. Their
collective comments led to many material improvements in it. Discussion with New
Zealand sedimentologists at the 1969 Geological Society of New Zealand Conference
resulted in the addition of the experimental classifications for lutites and rudites.
Downloaded by [190.223.41.102] at 06:37 16 December 2014

REFERENCES

ANDREWS, P. B. 1968: Patterns of sedimentation during Early Otaian (Early Miocene)


time in North Canterbury, New Zealand. N.z. II Geol. Geophys. 11 (3):
711-52.
ANDREWS, P. B.; VAN DER LINGEN, G. J. 1969: Environmentally significant sedi-
mentologic characteristics of beach sands. N.z. II Geol. Geophys. 12 (1):
119-37.
BLATT, H. 1967a: Provenance determinations and recycling of sediments. I. sedim.
Petrol. 37 (4): 1031-44.
1967b: Original characteristics of clastic quartz grains. J. sedim. Petrol.
37 (2) : 401-24.
BLATT, H.; CHRISTIE, J. M. 1963: Undulatory extinction in quartz of igneous and
metamorphic rocks and its significance in provenance studies of sediment-
ary rocks. I. sedim. Petrol. 33 (3) : 559-79.
BOGGs, S. Jr. 1968: Experimental study of rock fragments. I. sedim. Petrol. 38 (4):
1326-39.
BOSWELL, P. G. H. 1960: The term graywacke. J. sedim. Petrol. 30 (1): 154-7.
BRODIE, J. W. 1955: Sedimentation in Lyttelton Harbour, South Island, New Zealand.
N.Z. II Sci. Technol. 36 (6): 603-21.
CHEN, P. Y. 1968: A modification of sandstone classification. J. sedim. Petrol. 38 (1):
54-60.
CONOLLY, J. R. 1965: The occurrence of polycrystallinity and undulatory extinction
in quartz of sandstones. J. sedim. Petrol. 35 (1) : 116-35.
CONYBEARE, C. E. B.; CROOK, K. A. W. 1968: "Manual of Sedimentary Structures".
Bull. Bur. Miner. Resour. Geol. Geuphys. Aust. 102. 327 pp.
CULLEN, D. J. 1967: The submarine geology of Foveaux Strait. Mem. N.z. Oceanogr.
Inst. 33. 67 pp.
CUMMINS, W. A. 1962: The greywacke problem. Lpool Manch. geol. J. 3: 51-72.
DOTT, R. H. 1964: Wacke, greywacke and matrix-what approach to immature sand-
stone classification? J. sedim. Petrol. 34 (3) : 625-32.
FOLK, R. L. 1951: A comparison chart for visual percentage estimation. J. sedim.
Petrol. 21 (1): 32-3.
1954: The distinction between grain size and mineral composition in sedi-
mentary-rock nomenclature. I. Geol. 62 (4) : 344-59.
1959: Practical petrographic classification of limestones. Bull. Am. Ass.
Petrol. Geol. 43 (1): 1-38.
1966: A review of grain-oize parameters. Sedimentology 6 (2): 73-94.
No.4 FOLK et at. - DETRITAL SEDIMENTARY ROCKS 967
1968a: "Petrology of Sedimentary Rocks". Hemphill's, Austin, Texas.
170 pp.
1968b: Bimodal supermature sandstones: product of the desert floor. Proc.
XXIII Int. geol. Congr. Prague, 8: 9-32.
FOLK, R. L.; WARD, W. C. 1957: Brazos River bar; a study in the significance of
grain size parameters. J. sedim. Petrol. 27 (1) : 3-26.
FRIEDMAN, G. M. 1958: Determinations of sieve-size distribution from thin-section
data for sedimentary petrological studies. J. Geol. 66 (4) : 394-416.
GRABAU, A. W. 1924: "Principles of Stratigraphy". 1960 Dover Publications, Inc.,
New York. Vol. 1. 581 pp.
GREENSMITH, J. T. 1963: Clastic quartz, provenance and sedimentation. Nature 197
(4865): 345-7.
GRIFFITHS, J. C. 1958: Petrography and porosity of the Cow Run Sand, St Mary's,
West Virginia. J. sedim. Petro!. 28 (1): 15-30.
Downloaded by [190.223.41.102] at 06:37 16 December 2014

1967: "Scientific Method in Analysis of Sediments". McGraw Hill, New


York. 508 pp.
HUCKENHOLZ, H. G. i963a: Mineral composition and texture in graywackes from
the Harz Mountains (Germany) and in arkoses from the Auvergne
(France). J. sedim. Petrol. 33 (4): 914-8.
1963b: A contribution to the classification of sandstones. Geol. For. Stockh.
Forh. 85 (1) : 156-72.
KLEIN, G. DE V. 1963: Analysis and review of s1ndstone classifications in the North
American geological literature, 1940-1960. Bull. geol. Soc. Am. 74 (5):
555-75.
KRUMBEIN, W. C. 1940: Flood gravel of San Gabriel Canyon, California. Bull. geol.
Soc. Am. 51 (5): 639-76.
1942: Flood deposits of Arroyo Seco, Los Angeles County, California.
Bull. geol. Soc. Am. 53 (9) : 1355-402.
KRUMBEIN, W. c.; GRIFFITH, J. S. 1938: Beach environment in Little Sister Bay,
Wisconsin. Bull. geol. Soc. Am. 49 (4) : 629-52.
KRYNINE, P. D. 1948: The megascopic study and field classification of sedimentary
rocks. J. Geol. 56 (2) : 130-65.
LEWIS, D. W. 1962: "Perigenic"; a new term. J. sedim. Petrol. 34 (4): 875-6.
LEWIS, D. W.; VAN DER LINGEN, G. J.; JONES, D. J. 1970: The construction of a
transparent grain-size comparator. J. sedim. Petrol. 40 (1): 472-4.
LYELL, C. 1837: "Principles of Geology". Vol. 1, Fifth edition. John Murray, London.
462 pp.
McBRIDE, E. F. 1963: A classification of common sandstones. J. sedim. Petrol. 33
(3): 664-9.
McDOUGALL, J. c.; BRODIE, J. W. 1967: Sediments of the Western Shelf, North
Island, New Zealand. N.z. Oceanogr. Inst. Mem. 40: 54 pp.
McKEE, E. D.; CROSBY, E. J.; BERRYHILL, H. L. Jr. 1967: Flood deposits, Bijou
Creek, Colorado, June 1965. J. sedim. Petrol. 37 (3): 829-51.
Moss, A. J. 1966: Origin, shaping and significance of quartz sand grains. J. geol.
Soc. Aust. 13 (1): 97-136.
O'LOUGHLIN, C. 1968: Geomorphology of a small mountain catchment. (M.Sc. Thesis
lodged in University of Canterbury Library, Christchurch.)
ORIEL, S. S. 1949: Definitions of arkose. Am. J. Sci. 247 (11): 824-9.
PANTIN, H. M. 1966: Sedimentation in Hawke Bay. Mem. N.Z. Oceanogr. Inst. 28:
70 pp.
PETTIJOHN, F. J. 1943: Archean sedimentation. Bull. geol. Soc. Am. 54 (7): 925-72.
1957: "Sedimentary Rocks". Second edition. Harper & Bros., N.Y. 718 pp.

Geo1ogy-7
968 N.Z. JOURNAL OF GEOLOGY AND GEOPHYSICS VOL. 13

POTTER, P. E. 1955: The petrology and ongm of the Lafayette Gravel. Part 1.
Mineralogy and petrology. J. geol. 63 (1) : 1-38.
POTTER, P. E.; PETTIJOHN, F. J. 1963: "Paleocurrents and Basin Analysis". Springer-
Verlag, Berlin. 296 Pp.
REED, J. J. 1951: Marine sediments near Sumner, Canterbury, New Zealand. N.Z. JI
Sci. Technol. B33 (2): 129-37.
1952: Sediments from the Chatham Rise. Part 1: Petrology. N.z. JI. Sci.
T echnol. B34 (3): 173-84.
RODGERS, J. 1950: The nomenclature and classification of sedimentary rocks. Am. J.
Sci. 248 (5): 297-311.
ROSENFELD, M. A.; JACOBSEN, L.; FERM, J. C. 1953: A comparison of sieve and thin
section technique for size analysis. J. Geol. 61 (2): 114-32.
SHAW, D. B.; WEAVER, C. E. 1965: The mineralogical composition of shales. J. sedim.
Petrol. 35 (1): 213-22.
Downloaded by [190.223.41.102] at 06:37 16 December 2014

SPENCER, D. W. 1963: The interpretation of grain size distribution curves of clastic


sediments. J. sedim. Petrol. 33 (1): 180-90.
TERRY, R. D.; CHlLlNGAR, G. V. 1955: Summary of "Concerning some additional aids
in studying sedimentary formations" by M S. Shvetsov. J. sedim. Petrol.
25 (3): 229-34.
UDDEN, J. A. 1898: Mechanical composition of wind deposits. Augustana Library Pub-
lications 1: 69 pp.
1914: Mechanical composition of clastic sediments. Bull. geol. Soc. Am.
25: 655-744.
VAN ANDEL, TJ. H. 1958: Origin and classification of Cretaceous. Paleocene and
Eocene sandstones of Western Venezuela. Bull. Am. Ass. Petrol. Geol.
42 (4): 734-63.
VAN DER LINGEN, G. J. 1968: Preliminary sedimentological evaluation of some
flysch-like deposits from the Makara Basin, Central Hawke's Bay, New
Zealand. N.Z. Jl Geol. Geophys. 11 (2): 455-77.
WENTWORTH, C. K. 1922: A scale of grade and class terms for clastic sediments.
J. Geol. 30 (5): 377-92.
WILLIAMS, H.; TURNER, F. J.; GILBERT, C. M. 1954: "Petrography". W. H. Freeman
& Co., San Francisco. 406 pp.
WILLMAN, H. B.; PAYNE, J. N. 1942: Geology and mineral resources of the Mar-
seilles, Ottawa, and Streator quadrangles. Bull. Ill. St. geol. Surv. 66.
388 pp.
WOLFF, R. G. 1964: The dearth of certain sizes of materials in sediments. J. sedim.
Petrol. 34 (2) : 320-7.

ADDENDUM

Since the completion of this paper, Mr Campbell S. Nelson (Department


of Geology, University of Auckland) has provided us with the following
relevant publication:
NELSON, C. S.; COCHRANE, R. H. A. 1970: A rapid X-ray method for the quantitative
determination of selected minerals in fine-grained and altered rocks. Tane
16: 151-62.
The paper presents details of a technique which will prove most useful
in compositional classification of lutites. Gridded enlargements of intensity-
concentration graphs for quartz, plagioclase, K-fe1dspar, calcite, and clay
minerals can be obtained from Nelson or Cochrane on request.

You might also like