You are on page 1of 19

Downloaded from gsabulletin.gsapubs.

org on July 14, 2012

Geological Society of America Bulletin

Throughgoing fractures in layered carbonate rocks


Michael R. Gross and Yehuda Eyal

Geological Society of America Bulletin 2007;119, no. 11-12;1387-1404


doi: 10.1130/0016-7606(2007)119[1387:TFILCR]2.0.CO;2

Email alerting services click www.gsapubs.org/cgi/alerts to receive free e-mail alerts when new
articles cite this article
Subscribe click www.gsapubs.org/subscriptions/ to subscribe to Geological Society of
America Bulletin
Permission request click http://www.geosociety.org/pubs/copyrt.htm#gsa to contact GSA
Copyright not claimed on content prepared wholly by U.S. government employees within scope of
their employment. Individual scientists are hereby granted permission, without fees or further
requests to GSA, to use a single figure, a single table, and/or a brief paragraph of text in subsequent
works and to make unlimited copies of items in GSA's journals for noncommercial use in classrooms
to further education and science. This file may not be posted to any Web site, but authors may post
the abstracts only of their articles on their own or their organization's Web site providing the posting
includes a reference to the article's full citation. GSA provides this and other forums for the
presentation of diverse opinions and positions by scientists worldwide, regardless of their race,
citizenship, gender, religion, or political viewpoint. Opinions presented in this publication do not reflect
official positions of the Society.

Notes

The Geological Society of America, Inc.


Downloaded from gsabulletin.gsapubs.org on July 14, 2012

Throughgoing fractures in layered carbonate rocks

Michael R. Gross*
Department of Earth Sciences, Florida International University, Miami, Florida 33199, USA
Yehuda Eyal
Department of Geological and Environmental Sciences, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva 84105, Israel

ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION medium-bedded rocks, where bed-confined


joints are closely spaced, throughgoing frac-
Fracture surveys were conducted across Stratigraphic layering often provides a mechan- tures commonly form by the coalescence (i.e.,
a broad anticline in southern Israel in order ical anisotropy that controls the distribution and linkage and preferential widening) of preexist-
to investigate the development and geom- geometry of fractures in sedimentary rocks. Bed ing joints (Finn et al., 2003). Throughgoing
etries of throughgoing fractures in layered boundaries may inhibit fracture growth, resulting fractures may be genetically related to, and
carbonate rocks. At Halukim anticline, in fracture tips residing at discrete stratigraphic form concurrently with, a set of bed-confined
throughgoing fractures form by the linkage interfaces and elliptical rather than circular frac- joints (Helgeson and Aydin, 1991; Becker and
and coalescence of preexisting, bed-confined ture shapes (e.g., Bahat and Engelder, 1984; Hel- Gross, 1996), or they may reflect an entirely
joints. Thus the internal morphology of these geson and Aydin, 1991; Gross et al., 1995; Pas- different phase of deformation (Gillespie et al.,
structures is highly segmented, often consist- cal et al., 1997; Rijken and Cooke, 2001; Cooke 2001; Finn et al., 2003; Shackleton et al., 2005).
ing of vertically aligned zones of subparallel and Underwood, 2001; Hoffmann et al., 2004). Thus the criteria we use to identify and classify
fractures and bed partings linked together For the specific case of interbedded sedimentary throughgoing fractures are based on their geom-
across the stratigraphy. The large popula- rocks of contrasting lithologies, there are two dis- etry and kinematics. We prefer to use the more
tion (n = 132) of throughgoing fractures rep- tinct groups of opening-mode fractures, based on general term throughgoing fracture to describe
resents a continuum of structures at various their relative dimensions: fractures confined to these multilayer brittle structures, because
stages of development that can be classified individual beds (i.e., joints if unmineralized) and (1) they are composed not only of joints but
into three main geometric categories corre- fractures that span multiple beds, herein referred may also incorporate veins, bed partings, and
sponding to increasing levels of brittle strain: to as throughgoing fractures. This combina- faults, and (2) they may have accrued shear dis-
incipient, linked, and linked with aperture. tion results in a fracture architecture commonly placement due to subsequent reactivation.
Despite the wide variety of internal mor- arranged in a multiscale hierarchy, with bed-con- Detailed structural analyses of throughgoing
phologies and geometries, the throughgoing fined fractures nested within the larger through- fractures will lead to a better understanding of
fractures display a consistent east-north- going fractures (Fig. 1) (Becker and Gross, 1996; fracture flow through layered rocks. Carbonate
eastwest-southwest orientation, parallel to a Cacas et al., 2001; Gillespie et al., 2001). rocks are especially worthy of attention because
set of bed-confined cross joints. The spatial Throughgoing fractures range in geometry an estimated 25% of the worlds groundwater
distribution of throughgoing fractures varies from single fracture planes (Becker and Gross, supply is derived from karst aquifers, many of
as a function of structural position, the high- 1996; Pascal et al., 1997; Shackleton et al., which are fractured (Ford and Williams, 1989).
est frequency and estimated strain intensity 2005) to narrow zones of closely spaced, sub- To this end, the main objective of this study is to
being located at the fold crest. Results sug- parallel fractures (Gillespie et al., 2001; Rogers provide a detailed and comprehensive analysis
gest that throughgoing fractures develop et al., 2004). Bahat (1988) introduced the term of throughgoing fractures in layered carbonate
only after a critical level of strain is achieved, multilayer joint to describe fractures that cut rocks. Specific objectives include the following.
as quantified by the density of bed-confined across numerous beds. Helgeson and Aydin (1) To describe the origin and development
joints. Throughgoing fractures are multi- (1991) defined a composite joint as an array of throughgoing fractures within the context of
layer structures that may greatly enhance the of vertically aligned but discontinuous joint seg- multiphase brittle deformation. In this regard,
connectivity of a fracture network; therefore, ments that propagated in sequence across layer bed-confined joints and regional stress play
understanding their formation, geometry, boundaries. Becker and Gross (1996) used the critical roles in controlling the internal structure
and distribution may contribute to efforts of more general term throughgoing fractures to and orientation of throughgoing fractures.
flow modeling in fractured carbonate rocks. describe a range of planar structures belonging (2) To provide a classification and morpho-
to the same population, including single multi- logic description of throughgoing fractures that
Keywords: fractures, fracture zones, brittle de- layer joint planes, linked zones of closely spaced span the range of structural development, from
formation, joints, connectivity, Israel. joints, and multilayer joints and joint zones that early incipient to advanced mature. Because
were subsequently reactivated to form faults. hydrologic properties of a throughgoing fracture
Field evidence suggests that many through- largely depend upon its geometry and dimen-
going fractures develop subsequent to the bed- sions, such a classification may contribute to
*grossm@fiu.edu confined joints (Bahat, 1988; Becker and Gross, modeling efforts of flow through fractured car-

eyal@bgu.ac.il 1996; Shackleton et al., 2005). For thin- to bonate aquifers and reservoirs.

GSA Bulletin; November/December 2007; v. 119; no. 11/12; p. 13871404; doi: 10.1130B26049.1; 13 figures; 3 tables.

For permission to copy, contact editing@geosociety.org


1387
2007 Geological Society of America
Downloaded from gsabulletin.gsapubs.org on July 14, 2012
Gross and Eyal

Fracture Architecture in Layered Rocks


Throughgoing
(Multilayer) Throughgoing
Fault Zone (Multilayer)
Fracture Zone Figure 1. General schematic
Systematic Joints Cross Joints representation of fracture dis-
tribution, geometry, and hier-
archy commonly observed in
layered sedimentary rocks. For
Jointing alternating beds of contrast-
Unit
ing lithologies, fractures (both
joints and faults) often appear
Faulting
Unit
as populations of bed-confined
(single layer) fractures and
Unfractured populations of throughgoing
Unit
(multilayer) fractures. Note
that for the specific case of
Halukim anticline, through-
Throughgoing going fractures preferentially
(Multilayer) utilize the population of bed-
Fault Zone confined cross joints.

Throughgoing Confined
(Multilayer) (Single layer)
Fracture Zone Joints

(3) To evaluate the spatial distribution of movement between the Israel-Sinai subplate in thickness from 3 to 35 cm. Limestone com-
throughgoing fractures with respect to their (part of the African plate) and the Arabian plate positions and textures are variable in terms of
structural position across a regional fold. since the middle Miocene (Quennell, 1959; fossil content, grain size, and degree of purity;
Freund et al., 1968; Garfunkel, 1981; Wdowin- the most common lithologies consist of chalky
TECTONIC SETTING ski et al., 2004). Structural analysis provides evi- limestone and microcrystalline limestone. A 60-
dence for two distinct stress regimes in southern cm-thick bed noteworthy for its hardness and
Halukim anticline is part of the Syrian Arc fold Israel since the Late Cretaceous: an early phase abundant Acteonella forms a prominent ledge in
belt, a system of folds that extends from northern (Late CretaceousMiocene) dominated by west- the middle and upper sections of roadcut B.
Sinai through Israel and across the Dead Sea northwesteast-southeasttrending maximum Bedding orientations were measured from
transform into Syria (Fig. 2A) (Krenkel, 1924; horizontal compressive stress (SHMAX) referred highway roadcuts and other outcrops along
Bentor and Vroman, 1954; Freund, 1965; Gar- to as the Syrian Arc stress field , and a late phase strike. Bedding is generally shallow dipping,
funkel and Bartov, 1977; Bosworth et al., 1999). (MioceneHolocene) corresponding to the Dead ranging from 2 t 28. A cylindrical best fit to
In southern Israel, the asymmetric folds assume Sea stress field dominated by an SHMAX trend- bedding poles yields a calculated fold axis of
a monoclinal geometry with generally north- ing north-northwestsouth-southeast (Fig. 2A) 037 trend and 0 plunge (Fig. 3 inset). A profile
east-southwesttrending axes, steeply dipping to (Eyal and Reches, 1983; Eyal, 1996). The inten- cross section of the exposed strata, constructed
slightly overturned southeast limbs, and shallow sity of tectonic deformation in southern Israel using the Busk method, portrays the broad and
to moderately dipping northwest limbs (Figs. 2B, has resulted in pervasive brittle deformation open surface expression of the Halukim anti-
2C) (Bentor and Vroman, 1954; Bruner, 1991; throughout the region, as manifested on the out- cline (Fig. 4A). Similar to other more promi-
Druckman et al., 1995; Shamir and Eyal, 1995). crop scale by multiple sets of joints (e.g., Reches, nent Syrian Arc folds in the northern Negev, the
Drilling and seismic surveys reveal high-angle 1976; Bahat, 1987; Bahat and Grossmann, 1988; southeast-verging Halukim anticline displays a
reverse faults beneath many of the folds exposed Becker and Gross, 1996; Eyal et al., 2001) and shallow-dipping backlimb and a more steeply
on the surface (Grader, 1957; Mimran, 1976; faults (e.g., Eyal and Reches, 1983; Eyal, 1996; dipping forelimb. The horizontal strata exposed
Druckman et al., 1995). Growth strata in hanging Katz et al., 2003; Sagy et al., 2003). at section B correspond to the fold crest (the
walls suggest that these faults initiated as normal point of highest elevation of the folded surface),
faults during TriassicJurassic extension, and METHODS OF ANALYSIS whereas the fold hinge (zone of maximum cur-
were subsequently reactivated in reverse motion vature) is likely found to the southeast of section
(i.e., structurally inverted) in response to regional The four roadcuts at Halukim anticline ame- A (Fig. 4). Despite their opposing dips, all four
compression that accompanied Syrian Arc fold- nable for fracture analysis, labeled AD in Fig- roadcuts apparently belong to the same north-
ing between the Late Cretaceous and Miocene ure 3, are through carbonate rocks of the Upper west limb of the anticline.
(Freund et al., 1975; Eyal and Reches, 1983; Nezer Formation of late Turonian (Cretaceous) On the basis of their relationship to strati-
Bruner, 1991; Druckman et al., 1995). age (Arkin and Braun, 1965; Zur et al., 1996; graphic layering, there are two main categories
The ~1000-km-long Dead Sea transform, Buchbinder et al., 2000). The dominantly thin- of fractures at Halukim anticline: bed-confined
~55 km east of the study area (Fig. 2B), to medium-bedded (~180 cm) limestones are joints restricted in vertical dimension to indi-
has accommodated ~105 km of left-lateral interlayered with occasional marlstones ranging vidual mechanical beds, and throughgoing

1388 Geological Society of America Bulletin, November/December 2007


000 34E 100 35E 200
0 50 100 km Figure 2. (A) Generalized tectonic
32N map of Israel and Sinai subplate
DSS Anticline a showing orientations of the maximum
Fault Se

lt
n horizontal stress directions for the
ea

Be
n Syrian Arc stress field (SAS) and the
rra

ld
Dead Sea stress field (DSS). (B) Map

ad Sea
ite

rm
100

Fo
De
SAS ed of regional folds belonging to the Syr-
M

c
Ar
ian Arc fold belt in southern Israel

ra n s fo
and northern Sinai. (C) Axes of major

an
ri
Dead Sea 31N anticlines in the northern Negev region

Sy
Transform of southern Israel superimposed on

Sea T
structural contour map of the top

d
Israel-Sinai

a
of the Judea Group. Contour values

e
000

D
subplate SAS represent depth in meters from mean
sea level. Star indicates study site at
Gulf of Halukim anticline. Based on Bentor
Gulf of Elat and Vroman (1954), and Shamir and
Suez C e n t ra l S i n a i - N e g ev Eyal (1995); structural contours were
30N
DSS Shear Zone provided by the Geophysical Institute
A 900
of Israel.
B
Downloaded from gsabulletin.gsapubs.org on July 14, 2012

3430' 3440' 3450' 3500' 3510'

00
0
3110' 3110'

-4
-2
Throughgoing fractures

-400
0 400
ur

r
00 60
o

-2
0 a

gu
rb

ay

A
200

0
00
Ba

D
r

10
-2
0

'a

0
400
20

0
on
ha

av
en -40 0
im
ha

Z
40 0 D
S

00
er

Geological Society of America Bulletin, November/December 2007


60
400

-4
Q
20

0
00

20
-6
era

3100' 3100'
e
z
0

ira

0 0
t
0

40
60

m
80

h
Ha

Ha 0

00
ek

-1
20

r
0
1

0
00

60

0
-2

60

qe
-R
0
00

o
400

0
60
10

40

20
0
im

600 0
luk

00
400

-4

00
-2
Ha

00
-4
3050' C 3050'
3430' 3440' 3450' 3500' 3510'

1389
Downloaded from gsabulletin.gsapubs.org on July 14, 2012
Gross and Eyal

129 130 131


036

eva
N
500 meters
h
Roadcuts
To Beer S 183
Scanline for throughgoing fractures
Nahal & faults, with numbered feature at
177 beginning and end of scanline
Noqed
Bed B2 Scanline for bed-confined joints

06
500

192
D
> 035
Bed D1
06

176 184

Bed C2 0
54
C 520

03

Bed C1 133

034
05
00 520 540
5

132
B
N
bedding Bed B2
Equal Area

Bed B1
Fold Axis 500
037T 0P 1
033
10
>
183 Line of cross-section
Bed A1 A in Figure 4

Halukim
n = 37
520

Junction
09 177

Figure 3. Map of roadcuts (labeled AD) with locations of scanline surveys. Inset is pi-diagram of poles to bed-
ding showing cylindrical best fit and calculated fold axis trending northeast-southwest.

1390 Geological Society of America Bulletin, November/December 2007


Sec C Sec B
NW Sec D Sec A SE
133 - 176 1 - 132 177 - 183
184 - 192
600

500
A 400

meters
B2 B1
300 D1 C2 C1 A1
200
0 meters 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500

N N N N N N
Bed D1 Bed C2 Bed C1 Bed B2 Bed B1 Bed A1

Joints
N = 70 N = 108 N = 41 N = 82 N = 84 N = 74

3 3 3 3 3 3
Downloaded from gsabulletin.gsapubs.org on July 14, 2012

2 2 2 2 2 2

FSR
FSR
FSR
FSR
FSR
FSR
Throughgoing fractures

1 1 1 1 1 1
C

FSR
0 0 0 0 0 0
Bed D1 Bed C2 Bed C1 Bed B2 Bed B1 Bed A1

N N N N
Section D Section C Section B Section A

Geological Society of America Bulletin, November/December 2007


TF
D

N=7 N = 36 N = 83 N=6

Figure 4. (A) Profile section across Halukim anticline (see Fig. 3 for section line) drawn at 1:1 horizontal to vertical scale using the Busk method. (B) Rose diagrams with ori-
entations of bed-confined joints (black petalssystematic joints, gray petalscross joints). (C) Fracture spacing ratios (FSR) calculated for bed-confined joints (black sys-
tematic joints; diagonallithology-controlled cross joints; grayjoint-controlled cross joints). (D) Rose diagrams with orientations of throughgoing fractures (TF).

1391
Downloaded from gsabulletin.gsapubs.org on July 14, 2012
Gross and Eyal

Figure 5. Overview photograph of a portion of section B showing throughgoing fractures indicated by white arrows and mechanical stratigraphy. Selected throughgoing
TF 84
fractures and faults that span multiple beds. All
S

Limestone, marly and/or chalky


of the studied fractures are unmineralized. Two

Limestone, medium bedded


sets of bed-confined joints, identified initially as

Limestone, thin bedded

Limestone, fossiliferous
sets I and II, are distinguished from each other
according to their geometries and crosscutting
relationships. The bed-confined joints are sub-
vertical and terminate in cross section against
bed partings or thin layers of marlstone (i.e.,
Marl

TF 85
lithology-controlled mechanical layer bound-
aries). Set I joints trend northwest-southeast to
north-south and are horizontally persistent, with
bed-parallel trace lengths typically in excess of
one to several meters where observed. In con-
trast, set II joints dominantly trend east-north-
eastwest-southwest and consistently abut (i.e.,

TF 88
terminate against) joints belonging to set I (i.e.,
joint-controlled mechanical layer boundaries),
resulting in horizontal trace lengths typically
<30 cm. Based on these temporal and geomet-
ric relationships, the preexisting set I joints are
referred to as systematic joints and the later set
II joints are classified as cross joints (Fig. 1)
Section B

(Hodgson, 1961; Rawnsley et al., 1992; Gross,


1993; Bai et al., 2002; Finn et al., 2003). Note
that mechanical boundaries for the systematic
joints are stratigraphic, whereas mechanical
boundaries for the cross joints are both strati-
graphic and structural.
Fracture surveys of bed-confined joints were
conducted in six beds (identified by roadcut
section as A1, B1, B2, C1, C2, and D1; Fig. 3).
These beds were selected by virtue of their high
quality of attainable data, their inclusion within
overlapping scanline surveys of throughgoing
fractures, and uniform mechanical layer thick-
nesses. The orientation (strike and dip) and dis-
tance along the scanline were measured for each
bed-confined joint that intersected the tape mea-
sure. The mechanical layer thickness was mea-
sured as joint height (i.e., trace length perpendic-
TF 96

ular to bedding), whereas spacing was measured


fractures are numbered (e.g., TF 88) on the photograph.

as the perpendicular distance between adjacent


joints belonging to the same set. In total, 446
bed-confined joints were measured along scan-
lines with a cumulative length of ~108 m.
Throughgoing fractures and multilayer faults
were mapped directly onto photomosaics of the
N

four roadcut exposures by assigning a num-


ber to each structure and marking its distance
along the survey line. In addition to measuring
J 66-145 cm
K 15-20 cm

H 155 cm
I 60 cm

orientations (strike and dip), the throughgoing


G 60 cm

D 39 cm
E 70 cm

B 50 cm
F 46 cm
L 60 cm

A 22cm
C 8 cm
Bed B1

fractures and multilayer faults were described in


terms of sense of displacement, geometry, mor-
Section B

phology, vertical persistence, aperture, and dip


separation. The best exposures of these struc-
tures, both in terms of quality and quantity, are
Bed B2
"Acteonella"

found in roadcut B on the crest of the anticline


7.0 m

6.0 m

5.0 m

4.0 m

2.0 m

1.0 m
3.0 m

(Figs. 3, 4, and 5). We measured 132 through-


going fractures and 59 multilayer normal faults
along a cumulative scanline length of 728 m.

1392 Geological Society of America Bulletin, November/December 2007


Downloaded from gsabulletin.gsapubs.org on July 14, 2012
Throughgoing fractures

TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF ORIENTATION AND SPACING DATA FOR BED-CONFINED FRACTURES MEASURED AT HALUKIM ANTICLINE
Scanline Joint set Orientation Spacing
Mean 95 Angle Mean spacing Median spacing MLT-LC MLT-JC FSR-LC# FSR-JC#
orientation* between sets (cm) (cm) (cm) (cm)
A1 Systematic 353/87E 2.1 87 34.1 31.0 42.9 1.38
Cross 079/87N 2.8 51.9 44.5 42.9 31.0 0.96 0.70
B1 Systematic 357/88W 2.4 79 14.8 14.4 31.8 2.20
Cross 076/85N 3.0 34.2 27.7 31.8 14.4 1.15 0.52
B2 Systematic 353/87W 1.9 73 19.8 17.0 46.3 2.72
Cross 066/85N 4.0 26.0 24.6 30.7 17.0 1.25 0.69
C1 Systematic 333/83E 2.9 86 16.2 16.0 29.0 1.81
Cross 067/89N 4.4 36.0 31.7 29.0 16.0 0.92 0.51
C2 Systematic 319/88N 2.4 71 19.2 19.6 34.6 1.77
Cross 061/88S 3.2 32.14 27.1 34.6 19.6 1.28 0.72
D1 Systematic 323/89W 2.9 62 33.8 34.5 43.5 1.26
Cross 025/88W 6.6 42.8 32.2 43.5 34.5 1.35 1.07
*Fracture orientations presented in NW and NE quadrants as strike/dip and dip direction.

95 refers to the 95% cone of confidence around the mean pole (Cox and Hart, 1986).

MLT-LC refers to lithology-controlled mechanical layer thickness; MLT-JC refers to joint-controlled mechanical layer thickness.
#
FSR-LC refers to lithology-controlled fracture spacing ratio; FSR-JC refers to joint-controlled fracture spacing ratio.

RESULTS
N N
All Systematic Mean 342 All Cross Mean 064
Bed-Confined Joints
Joints Joints
Orientations of bed-confined joints, summa-
rized in Table 1 according to location and joint A B
set, are compiled in rose diagrams in Figures 4
and 6. In general, the systematic joints trend
north-northwestsouth-southeast with a mean
strike of 342. However, the composite rose dia-
gram of all systematic joints reveals a bimodal
distribution, with a dominant north-south peak
at ~355 and a secondary northwest-southeast
peak at ~325 (Fig. 6A). The composite rose
diagram of all cross joints yields one major
peak trending east-northeastwest-southwest, N = 175 Max % = 33 N = 284 Max % = 25
reflecting a mean strike of 064 (Fig. 6B). At
each locality, orientations of systematic joints
35 40
are consistent and confined to narrow azimuthal
ranges (Fig. 4B). However, in the southeast- 30
C 35 D
dipping roadcuts (beds A1, B1, and B2), the sys- All Cross Joints
25
All Systematic Joints 30
tematic joints trend north-south, whereas in the Mean = 23.6 Mean = 34.6
No. of Joints

No. of Joints

25
northwest-dipping roadcuts (beds C1, C2, and 20 Median = 20 Median = 28.0
D1) they trend northwest-southeast (Fig. 4B), Stand Dev = 13.4 20 Stand Dev = 25.7
15 N = 164 N = 268
resulting in the bimodal peak in the composite 15
rose diagram (Fig. 6A). For the most part, cross 10
joints maintain an east-northeastwest-south- 10

west trend across the anticline, with a subtle 5 5


counterclockwise rotation from bed A1 (079) 0 0
to bed C2 (061). The one exception is bed D1, 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 0 20 40 60 80 100 120
where the cross joints are aligned north-north- Joint Spacing (cm) Joint Spacing
Range (cm)
eastsouth-southwest (025). The acute angle
Figure 6. Combined results for scanline surveys of bed-confined joints. (A) Rose diagram of
between the two sets of bed-confined joints
orientations for all systematic joints. (B) Rose diagram of orientations for all cross joints.
ranges from 62 to 87. The cross joints are
(C) Spacing histogram for all systematic joints. (D) Spacing histogram for all cross joints.
more widely scattered in orientation than the
systematic joints (Fig. 4B; Table 1).
Analysis of spacing measurements combined
from all localities yields the general result that are consistently lower for the systematic joints is slightly greater than the median spacing for
systematic joints (mean = 23.6 cm; median = (Table 1). This difference is especially notewor- cross joints.
20 cm) are considerably more closely spaced thy for scanlines B1 and C1, where the spacing The measured joint sets are confined to strati-
than cross joints (mean = 34.6 cm; median of systematic joints is about half the spacing of graphic intervals with average thicknesses rang-
= 28 cm) (Figs. 6C, 6D). In general, at each cross joints. The one exception is scanline D1, ing from 29 to 46 cm (Table 1). Because fracture
locality the mean and median spacing values where the median spacing of systematic joints spacing in layered rocks is often proportional

Geological Society of America Bulletin, November/December 2007 1393


Downloaded from gsabulletin.gsapubs.org on July 14, 2012
Gross and Eyal

to bed thickness (e.g., Narr and Suppe, 1991; 061100; Fig. 8B; Table 2). The second pair fracture consists of several elongated segments
Gross et al., 1995; Bai and Pollard, 2000), we of conjugate normal faults is aligned north- whose vertical alignments are nearly identical,
calculated the fracture spacing ratio (FSR) in east-southwest (mean 038, range 020060; resulting in only minor (<~2 cm) lateral shifts
each bed. The FSR is defined as the mechanical Fig. 8C; Table 2), parallel to the trend of the across mechanical boundaries (Fig. 7C). From
layer thickness divided by the median fracture regional fold axis (Fig. 3). a distance these structures appear as single frac-
spacing within a specific bed, and allows for the ture planes; however, their segmented nature is
meaningful comparison of spacing measure- Throughgoing Fractures apparent upon close inspection.
ments among beds with different thicknesses The third main category is referred to as
by normalizing for effects of bed thickness The 132 throughgoing fractures encountered throughgoing fractures with aperture. These
(Gross et al., 1995, 1997). In accordance with at Halukim anticline exhibit a wide range of are linked (vertically connected) structures that
the fracture spacing index (FSI) introduced by geometries and dimensions, yet share a num- have developed significant mechanical aperture
Narr and Suppe (1991), FSR values increase ber of important characteristics. First, they are (>0.5 cm) across the majority of opposing seg-
with increasing fracture density (i.e., the inverse multilayer structures that span at least several ment walls. The apertures reflect a dominantly
of spacing). The lithology-controlled FSR was mechanical beds, and in some cases, the entire opening mode of displacement. The maximum
calculated for both joint sets using a mechani- outcrop exposure. Second, all throughgoing aperture measured for this category of through-
cal layer thickness defined by vertical termina- fractures are steeply dipping to vertical (mean going fracture ranges from 1.0 to 6.0 cm with a
tions of the joints against upper and lower strati- strike and dip of 068/89S), and despite consid- mean of 3.3 cm. In many cases, these structures
graphic boundaries (i.e., the lithology-controlled erable scatter in orientation, reveal a dominant are vertical swaths of closely spaced, subparal-
mechanical layer thicknesses). Because cross east-northeastwest-southwest trend that paral- lel fractures that delineate a fracture zone com-
joint spacing may be controlled by the spacing lels the strike of the bed-confined cross joints posed of joint-bounded blocks (Fig. 7E). The
of preexisting joints rather than stratigraphic (Figs. 8D, 8E). Third, throughgoing fractures are segmented nature of throughgoing fractures in
bed thickness (Gross, 1993; Ruf et al., 1998), a not single planes, but rather consist of individual general, and those with aperture in particular,
joint-controlled FSR was also calculated for the fracture segments aligned within a narrow ver- may be observed in the close-up photograph
cross joints using the median systematic joint tical zone of brittle deformation. Fourth, many of TF 88 (Fig. 7F). Note that the fracture zone
spacing as the effective mechanical layer thick- segments belonging to the throughgoing frac- is composed of preferentially widened cross
ness (Table 1). tures are individual, bed-confined cross joints joints, linked together across bed boundaries in
With the exception of bed D1, the systematic that have been preferentially widened and/or an alternating zigzag geometry.
joints display higher FSR values than the cross linked together across bed boundaries. Fifth, the The three main descriptive categories provide
joints (Table 1; Fig. 4C). The difference is more throughgoing fractures occur at regular intervals a general classification for the population of
dramatic upon comparing lithology-controlled along the scanlines (e.g., Figs. 5 and 7G), sug- throughgoing fractures at Halukim anticline. In
FSR of systematic joints to joint-controlled gesting that they are a ubiquitous component of reality, the structures portray transitional geom-
FSR of cross joints. Whereas FSR values for the fracture architecture at Halukim anticline, etries between categories, and can be subdivided
cross joints do not show any consistent trends rather than isolated or localized structures. into different groups within each category based
as a function of structural position, the FSR val- Throughgoing fractures can be grouped into on their degree of development. For example, an
ues for systematic joints reveal low values on three main categories based on their geometries early incipient throughgoing fracture consists
opposing flanks of the fold crest (1.26 at locality observed in cross-sectional exposures. One of only several isolated segments separated by
D1 and 1.38 at locality A1) that increase updip group, referred to as incipient throughgoing large gaps, whereas a late incipient throughgo-
to a maximum of 2.72 at locality B2 on the crest fractures, typically consists of 310 isolated, ing fracture has more segments separated by
of the anticline (Table 1; Fig. 4C). steeply dipping, subparallel fracture segments narrower gaps, yet is not entirely linked to form
aligned in vertical sequence (Fig. 7B). Individ- a connected structure. Similarly, throughgoing
Normal Faults ual segments consist of slightly widened, bed- fractures with aperture may range from initially
confined cross joints that have either preserved formed fracture zones to structures resembling
The overwhelming majority of normal faults their dimensions or have grown beyond their breccia zones. In general, the vertical persistence
(49 of 59) were encountered in section B along original mechanical boundaries to span several (i.e., percentage of outcrop exposure cut by the
the crest of the anticline (Fig. 4A). Fault geom- beds. Incipient throughgoing fractures are not structure) of throughgoing fractures increases
etries vary from a series of short, isolated seg- vertically connected and are not vertically per- from incipient to linked to aperture catego-
ments (<1 m in cross-sectional trace length) sistent, but rather are often restricted to a sub- ries. Incipient and linked structures are mostly
to connected, multilayer features that span the section of the mechanical stratigraphy. restricted to the chalky intervals, and at section
entire exposure (>6 m in cross-sectional trace Fractures belonging to the second main B do not pass through the resistant (microcrys-
length) (Fig. 7A). Where observed, fault striae group, linked throughgoing fractures, are con- talline) Acteonella bed (e.g., Fig. 7C). In con-
indicate a dominantly dip-slip sense of move- tinuously connected from their lower to upper trast, throughgoing fractures with aperture often
ment with normal offset. Measured dip sepa- tips. In many cases, these brittle structures are span the entire outcrop exposure and typically
rations are relatively minor, ranging from a composed of numerous, vertically aligned cross pass through the Acteonella bed (e.g., Fig. 7E).
minimum of 0.5 cm to a maximum of 13 cm. joint segments linked together across strati- The vertical attitudes of throughgoing frac-
Normal faults cluster into two distinct popula- graphic intervals by short segments consisting tures (Figs. 8D, 8E) justify their presentation
tions based on orientation, each consisting of of bed-parallel fractures (locally widened bed- in two-dimensional rose diagrams, where azi-
conjugate pairs of moderately dipping (~40 ding contacts) and shallow-dipping fractures. muthal trends can be clearly recognized and
55) faults (Figs. 8A, 8B, 8C). Most normal The result is a highly segmented structure analyzed. Inspection of rose diagrams gener-
faults belong to conjugate sets that strike east- characterized by a zigzag geometry (Fig. 7D). ated for each main descriptive category reveals
northeastwest-southwest (mean 076, range Another common type of linked throughgoing a consistent east-northeastwest-southwest

1394 Geological Society of America Bulletin, November/December 2007


Downloaded from gsabulletin.gsapubs.org on July 14, 2012
Throughgoing fractures

A B

STF NF

60 cm

C D
Act

60 cm

Figure 7. Photographs of throughgoing fractures observed at Halukim anticline. (A) Intersection of a single (linked) throughgoing fracture
(TF 125, labeled STF in photo) and a low-angle normal fault (TF 123, labeled NF). (B) Incipient throughgoing fracture (TF 89). Arrows
point to vertically aligned, preferentially widened segments that are isolated from each other. (Continued on following page).

Geological Society of America Bulletin, November/December 2007 1395


Downloaded from gsabulletin.gsapubs.org on July 14, 2012
Gross and Eyal

Act E F

G
Act

1m TF 88 TF 86 TF 85

Figure 7 (continued). (C) Single linked throughgoing fracture (TF 86) in lower section of photo. Note the fracture is confined to unit H and
does not propagate across the base of the Acteonella bed (Act). (D) Linked throughgoing fracture (TF 49) with zigzag geometry. (E) Linked
throughgoing fracture with aperture (TF 88). Note the structure propagated across the Acteonella bed. (F) Close-up of TF 88, showing seg-
mented internal structure composed of numerous bed-confined cross joints. (G) View of three prominent throughgoing fractures at section
B. Hammer in A, D, E, and F is 28 cm long.

1396 Geological Society of America Bulletin, November/December 2007


Downloaded from gsabulletin.gsapubs.org on July 14, 2012
Throughgoing fractures

A B C
Normal
Faults

N = 59 N = 32 N = 24

D E
Figure 8. Stereoplots with orientations
of normal faults and throughgoing frac-
tures measured at Halukim anticline.
Throughgoing

(A) All normal fault planes. (B) Planes


and poles of normal faults belonging
Fractures

to the east-northeastwest-southwest
conjugate sets. (C) Planes and poles of
normal faults belonging to the north-
east-southwest conjugate sets. (D) All
throughgoing fractures. (E) Through-
going fractures belonging to the domi-
nant ENE-WSW set. Squares indicate
mean orientations (poles).
N = 132 N = 123

dominant trend for all types of throughgoing frequency of throughgoing fractures measured (LTF), and linked with aperture (ATF) catego-
fractures (Fig. 9), roughly parallel to the main from scanline surveys. Only throughgoing ries of throughgoing fractures.
cross joint trend (Fig. 6). Mean strikes are 069 fractures belonging to the northeast-southwest We then calculated an intensity value that
for incipient, 071 for linked, and 067 for fea- quadrants (n = 123) were used in the analysis. characterizes the relative strain accommodated
tures with aperture, in comparison to a mean Original scanline lengths were projected along by the entire population of throughgoing frac-
strike of 069 for the combined population of a trend perpendicular to the mean throughgoing tures in each section. Incipient, linked, and
all throughgoing fractures. A minor peak trend- fracture orientation at each section, which repre- linked with aperture structures were assigned
ing northeast-southwest is also visible in rose sents the trend of maximum extension for these multiplication factors of 1, 2, and 3, respectively,
diagrams classified by category (Fig. 9B, 9C, opening-mode features. At each locality, the to match their assumed relative degree of devel-
9D). Orientations of throughgoing fractures number of throughgoing fractures per 10 m of opment. The weighted sum was then divided by
plotted as a function of structural position may projected scanline length was calculated for the the projected scanline length to derive a measure
show a slight (~10) counterclockwise rotation three main descriptive categories, as well as for of strain intensity per unit length: 10 [((#ITF
in the main trend from section B to section C, all categories combined together. The results, 1) + (#LTF 2) + (#ATF 3))/(scanline length)]
where most of the data were collected (Fig. 4). compiled in Table 3 and graphically displayed = strain intensity per 10 m.
The secondary northeast-southwest trend in in Figure 10, show dramatic differences in the Thus for section C, the 18 incipient, 6 linked,
throughgoing fractures is visible in section frequency of throughgoing fractures between and 11 linked with aperture structures sum to
C, but much less prominent in section B. The the crest (section B) and the surrounding por- 63 (i.e., 18 1 + 6 2 + 11 3), that when
interpretation of rose diagrams from sections tions (sections A, C, D) of the anticlinal limb. normalized to the projected scanline length of
A and D is severely limited by the small num- For example, the frequency of all throughgoing 293 m results in a calculated strain intensity of
ber of throughgoing fractures observed at those fractures is <1.2 per 10 m for sections A, C, and 2.1/10 m (Table 3). In contrast to the unweighted
localities (Fig. 4D). D, in contrast to a frequency of 4.2 per 10 m frequency, this index incorporates the relative
The intensity of throughgoing fracture for section B. Similar differences in frequency abundance of each type of throughgoing frac-
development for each section across Halukim between the fold crest and opposing flanks were ture, and their relative degree of deformation
anticline was quantified by calculating the determined from the incipient (ITF), linked into the intensity calculation. The highest strain

Geological Society of America Bulletin, November/December 2007 1397


Downloaded from gsabulletin.gsapubs.org on July 14, 2012
Gross and Eyal

intensity value of 6.6/10 m was recorded for sec-


tion B, with values of 1.6, 2.1, and 0.4 per 10 m
calculated for sections A, C, and D, respectively TABLE 2. SUMMARY OF THROUGHGOING NORMAL FAULT SETS
MEASURED AT HALUKIM ANTICLINE
(Table 3; Fig. 10).
Fault set Number of Mean orientation 95*
data

DISCUSSION All normal faults 59 na na

Group 1 (ENE-WSW striking)


Origin of Throughgoing Fractures at North-dipping set 22 076/49N 5.8
Halukim Anticline South-dipping set 10 076/53S 4.9

Group #2 (NE-SW striking)


Structural geometries indicate a clear tem- Northwest-dipping set 8 035/46NW 5.8
poral order in the formation of the three main Southeast-dipping set 16 040/42SE 8.4
fracture populations. The systematic joints Note: Fault orientations are presented in NW and NE quadrants as strike/dip and dip
direction.
formed first and served as mechanical boundar- *95 refers to the 95% cone of confidence around the mean pole (Cox and Hart, 1986).

ies to constrain the subsequent development of na = not applicable.
the cross joints. Throughgoing fractures then
formed by the coalescence and linkage of selec-
tive zones of vertically aligned, preexisting,
bed-confined joints. As brittle deformation pro-
gressed at Halukim anticline, it was more effi-
cient for throughgoing fractures to utilize (i.e., All Throughgoing Fractures All Incipient Throughgoing Fractures
reactivate) preexisting fractures rather than to N N
propagate new fracture surfaces in intact rock.
Evidence supporting this scenario is provided Mean = 069 Mean = 069
by the internal structure of mature throughgo- Max% = 31 Max% = 32
ing fracture zones, which consists of numerous A N = 132 N = 80 B
individual fracture segments (Figs. 7E, 7F, 7G).
Based on their orientations, dimensions, and
restriction to discrete stratigraphic beds, most of
these segments are cross joints that have been
incorporated into a multilayer zone of deforma-
tion. New fracture segments propagated in order
to link the preferentially widened cross joints,
often resulting in a vertically continuous struc-
ture with a zigzag geometry. The throughgoing
fractures are not aligned parallel to the domi-
nant preexisting north-northwestsouth-south-
east fracture fabric. Rather, they preferentially
utilized the cross joints, although the systematic All Linked Throughgoing Fractures All Throughgoing Fractures with Aperture
joints are considerably more pervasive, with N N

greater horizontal trace lengths and a higher fre-


quency of occurrence (lower spacings) than the Mean = 071 Mean = 067
cross joints (Figs. 6C, 6D). Max% = 30 Max% = 28
N = 27 N = 25
Critical Strain for Throughgoing Fractures
C D
at Fracture Saturation

The correlation between FSR of systematic


joints (x axis) and frequency (or intensity) of
throughgoing fractures (y axis) may provide
additional insight into the sequence of brittle
deformation at Halukim anticline (see plot
in Fig. 11). Extrapolating the best-fit line to
intersect the y axis at zero yields an FSR of
1.17, which corresponds to the degree of bed-
confined fracturing prior to development of Figure 9. Rose diagrams of throughgoing fractures by category. (A) All throughgoing
throughgoing fractures. The FSR of ~1.2, in fractures. (B) All incipient throughgoing fractures. (C) All linked throughgoing fractures.
turn, is in agreement with values reported in the (D) All linked throughgoing fractures with aperture.
literature for fracture saturation, i.e., the mini-
mum average spacing of bed-confined fractures

1398 Geological Society of America Bulletin, November/December 2007


Downloaded from gsabulletin.gsapubs.org on July 14, 2012
Throughgoing fractures

7.0

intensity
Strain

Number (or intensity) of Throughgoing


0.43
1.64
6.60
2.15

2.90
All TF per 10m
6.0 ITF per 10m

Fractures per 10 meters


LTF per 10m
0.21
0.71
0.37

0.36
ATF

5.0 ATF per 10m

0
TF Intensity per 10m
Frequency per 10 m

4.0
0.41
0.98
0.20

0.38
LTF

3.0
ITF

2.0
0.21
2.51
0.61
0.43
1.05
TABLE 3. SUMMARY OF FREQUENCIES AND STRAIN ESTIMATES DERIVED FROM SCANLINE SURVEYS

1.0
Note: TFthroughgoing fracture; ITFincipient throughgoing fracture; LTFlinked throughgoing fracture; ATFthroughgoing fracture with aperture.
0.82
4.20
1.19

1.79
0.43
All TF

0.0
Section A Section B Section C Section D Average
OF NE-SWTRENDING THROUGHGOING FRACTURES AT HALUKIM ANTICLINE

Outcrop Section
Figure 10. Plot of frequencies and intensity of throughgoing frac-
intensity
Strain

tures at Halukim anticline as a function of location (section) and type


63
121

199
7
8

(TFthroughgoing fracture; ITFincipient; LTFlinked (single);


ATFwith aperture). Note that the highest frequencies and intensity
are found at section B, which is at the fold crest.
Number of fractures
ATF

25
11
13

0
1
LTF

26
6
0
18
2

5 7
ITF

72
18
7

Intensity of Throughgoing Fractures per 10m


46
1

FSR = 1.17
6
Throughgoing Fractures per 10m
All TF

123
35
7
77
4

4
No Throughgoing

5
Cumulative
projected
length

686.16
293.16
161.03
183.36
48.62

Fractures
(m)

3
4

3
2
Projected
scanline
trend

331
319
344
358
()

1 Number TF / 10 m
y = -3.6 + 3.1x, r 2 = 0.93 1
Cumulative
scanline

TF Intensity / 10 m
length

728.0
300.0
164.2
190.3
73.5
(m)

y = -5.6 + 4.8x, r 2 = 0.94


0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Fracture Spacing Ratio (FSR) of Systematic Joints
Totals/Averages

Figure 11. Plot of fracture spacing ratio of systematic joints versus frequency
Section C
Section D
Section A
Section B

and intensity of throughgoing fractures (TF). Extrapolation of the best-fit lines


Section

to zero throughgoing fractures yields an FSR of ~1.2, corresponding to the


critical strain (density of bed-confined joints) required for the development of
throughgoing fractures at Halukim anticline.

Geological Society of America Bulletin, November/December 2007 1399


Downloaded from gsabulletin.gsapubs.org on July 14, 2012
Gross and Eyal

commonly observed in layered rocks (e.g., Narr porate many of these smaller fractures within the of central California, where we observed the
and Suppe, 1991; Gross, 1993; Wu and Pollard, larger structures. In contrast, one would expect development of throughgoing fractures on bed-
1995; Becker and Gross, 1996; Bai and Pollard, markedly different geometries for throughgo- ding surfaces (Finn et al., 2003). In both cases
2000; Sagy et al., 2001). This result implies that ing fractures that develop in a thick-bedded the throughgoing fractures formed by the prefer-
throughgoing fractures develop only after a criti- sequence with a higher percentage of incompe- ential widening and linkage of preexisting bed-
cal density of bed-confined fractures is achieved tent lithologies, where bed-confined joints are confined joints, suggesting a common process
(i.e., a critical strain as measured by FSR), and taller, more widely spaced, and less likely to be for the development of throughgoing fractures
that throughgoing fractures are absent in rocks vertically aligned across bed boundaries. in jointed sedimentary rocks.
where beds are below fracture saturation (FSR In order to facilitate quantitative comparisons,
<~1.2). This intriguing result provides a quanti- the throughgoing fractures were grouped into Relation to Folding and Regional Stress Fields
tative means to predict both the occurrence and three broad categories: isolated vertically aligned
intensity of throughgoing fractures based on the segments (incipient), linked vertically continu- The north-northwestsouth-southeast system-
FSR of bed-confined joints. ous segments (intermediate), and linked frac- atic joints belong to a regional joint set observed
ture zones with significant aperture (advanced). to the south in Late Cretaceous limestones
Classification of Throughgoing Fractures The gradational nature of geometries, as well as around the Ramon erosional cirque (Eyal et al.,
similar orientations for the three main categories 2001) and to the north in Eocene chalks in the
Geometries and physical properties of (Fig. 9), implies that the population of through- Beer Sheva syncline (Bahat, 1987; Bahat and
throughgoing fractures in sedimentary rocks going fractures at Halukim anticline represents Grossmann, 1988). This regional joint set most
are controlled by a variety of factors, including a continuum of structures at varying degrees likely formed within the MioceneHolocene
lithology, bed thickness, interface boundaries, of development, with more advanced geom- Dead Sea stress field (Fig. 2A). Because the
stress concentrations, propagation mechanisms, etries reflecting a greater amount of localized cross joints and throughgoing fractures post-
applied strain, and preexisting fractures (Bahat, strain. We present a generalized classification date the systematic joints, all of the measured
1988; Helgeson and Aydin, 1991; Becker and of throughgoing fractures in layered carbonate fracture sets must be Miocene or younger. Cross
Gross, 1996; Cooke and Underwood, 2001; rocks in Figure 12. We illustrate the progression joints may develop in response to changes in
Rijken and Cooke, 2001; Finn et al., 2003; Hoff- from incipient to linked with aperture (lower orientation of the regional stress field (Dyer,
mann et al., 2004). For the specific case of a stra- strain to higher strain), as well as other sce- 1988; Rawnsley et al., 1992; Eyal et al., 2001),
tigraphy composed of thin to medium beds of narios that may arise from mechanical barriers or alternatively to a local reorientation of princi-
competent limestone (e.g., Halukim anticline), and shear reactivation. Our analysis of fractures pal stresses between closely spaced systematic
initial phases of brittle deformation may result at Halukim anticline is admittedly limited by joints (Bai et al., 2002). The latter is a form of
in numerous closely spaced fractures confined cross-sectional exposures. However, it comple- stress relaxation (e.g., Engelder, 1985, 1993;
to individual beds. This provides the opportunity ments a companion study of carbonate and sili- Dunne and North, 1990) due to the propagation
for subsequent throughgoing fractures to incor- ceous lithologies in the Monterey Formation of the systematic joints, whereby an effective
No throughgoing
(bed-confined only)

Early Incipient

Late Incipient

Single Linked

Single Straight

Throughgoing
with Aperture

Reactivated
(Faulted) TF

Restricted by
mechanical barrier

Unrestricted by
mechanical barrier
Fracture Zone
Linked

Lower main types Higher


specific geometries
Strain increasing aperture, width of fracture zone, connectivity, Strain
vertical persistence, hydraulic conductivity

Figure 12. Generalized classification of throughgoing fractures (TF) in layered carbonate rocks based on observa-
tions at Halukim anticline. The progression from early incipient to throughgoing with aperture may be interpreted
as stages of increasing strain.

1400 Geological Society of America Bulletin, November/December 2007


Downloaded from gsabulletin.gsapubs.org on July 14, 2012
Throughgoing fractures

tensile stress generated parallel to the systematic shortening at the fold crest. The frequency of in the fracture network. They also may dramati-
joints results in the development of orthogonal throughgoing fractures, whether considered by cally increase the hydraulic conductivity of lay-
cross joints (Bai et al., 2002). type or as a combined index, reveals a similar ered rocks with low matrix permeability. The
The three main fracture sets observed in this pattern of high intensity, and hence high strain, permeability of throughgoing fracture zones can
study are aligned neither parallel nor perpendic- at the fold crest in comparison to the surround- be assessed according to their internal composi-
ular to the calculated 037 fold axis (Fig. 13). ing sections (Fig. 10). Further, the east-north- tions, geometries, and diagenetic history (e.g.,
This noncoaxial strain between the regional fold eastwest-southwestoriented normal faults block size, tortuosity, mineralization, fracture
and fracture sets may represent two phases of (Fig. 8B) along the crest provide independent and/or segment orientation, density, and aper-
deformation; an early Syrian Arc stress field evidence for the phase of extension recorded ture) in a manner similar to fault zones (e.g.,
phase of folding in response to west-north- by the throughgoing fractures. Tsang, 1984; Caine et al., 1996; Eichhubl and
westeast-southeastdirected SHMAX (Fig. 2A), One possible scenario for these observa- Boles, 2000; Odling, 2001; Caine and Tomu-
followed by MioceneHolocene fracturing. tions is the presence of a blind thrust fault(s) siak, 2003; Laubach, 2003; Gudmundsson et
Alternatively, coeval folding and fracturing directly beneath the fold crest, which may al., 2003; Gale et al., 2004). Further, important
could have occurred within the same Miocene have splayed off the larger fault that cores the hydrologic properties are expected to track in
Holocene deformation phase, resulting in a sig- anticline during MioceneHolocene regional parallel with the sequential development of
nificant component of left-lateral shear along the shortening (Fig. 13). This would initially lead throughgoing fractures. For example, fracture
basement fault. In both scenarios, the regional to the localization of strain along the crest in connectivity, aperture, and hydraulic conductiv-
fold geometry is controlled by the orientation the form of high FSR for the systematic joints ity will increase systematically as a throughgo-
of the inherited basement fault, which predated (Fig. 13A). We hypothesize that the cross ing fracture transitions from incipient to linked
both the Syrian Arc and Dead Sea stress fields joints and throughgoing fractures developed to linked with aperture (Fig. 12).
(Eyal and Reches, 1983). in response and proportionally to relaxation of
At Halukim anticline there is evidence for a the north-northwestsouth-southeastdirected CONCLUSIONS
minor component of outer arc extension among SHMAX during exhumation of the section, hence
brittle mesostructures, as manifested by the pair their orthogonal orientation with respect to the Throughgoing fractures at Halukim anti-
of northeast-southwest conjugate normal faults systematic joints and the higher frequency of cline form by the linkage and coalescence of
at stations B and C (Fig. 8C) and a secondary throughgoing fractures at the crest (Figs. 13B, preexisting, bed-confined fractures. A thin- to
peak in some throughgoing fracture populations 13C). Note how dominant trends in through- medium-bedded mechanical stratigraphy results
(e.g., Fig. 4D, section C), whose strikes paral- going fractures at sections B and C track with in abundant, closely spaced fractures confined
lel the trend of the regional fold axis. However, changes in orientations for bed-confined frac- to individual beds during initial phases of
based on their orientations and spatial distribu- tures (Fig. 4). The cross joints and throughgo- deformation. Subsequent throughgoing frac-
tion, one cannot attribute a bending origin to the ing fractures may therefore represent two stages tures incorporate numerous bed-confined joints
overwhelming majority of bed-confined joints of the brittle response to Dead Sea stress field into vertically persistent zones of deformation,
and throughgoing fractures at Halukim anti- relaxation, with the initial formation of east- and thus represent an advanced stage of brittle
cline. First, most systematic cross and through- northeastwest-southwest cross joints followed deformation in sedimentary rocks whereby
going fractures are oriented at high angles, and by their coalescence and linkage across bed fracture development transitions in scale from
not parallel to the regional fold axis. Second, boundaries to form east-northeastwest-south- single layer to multilayer structures. Through-
fold curvature, thought to reflect degree of outer west throughgoing fractures. going fractures at Halukim anticline display a
arc extension and thus fracturing (Lisle, 1994; wide variety of geometries, which can be clas-
Fischer and Wilkerson, 2000; Bergbauer et Implications for Fluid Flow sified into three main categories: incipient struc-
al., 2003), is extremely low along the shallow- tures consisting of vertically aligned, isolated
dipping surface exposures. Third, fracture inten- Throughgoing fractures link clusters of segments; linked structures whose segments
sity is highest along the fold crest (section B), bed-confined fractures into multilayer frac- are connected across stratigraphic layering,
rather than closer to the fold hinge (section A) ture networks that are hydraulically connected often in a zigzag geometry; and structures with
Most intriguing is the correlation between across bed boundaries. As a consequence, this aperture, where segments of linked zones have
FSR for systematic joints and intensity of enhanced connectivity (e.g., LaPointe, 1988; been preferentially widened. Field observa-
throughgoing fractures across the anticline. Berkowitz, 1995; Odling, 1997; Renshaw, tions suggest that the population of throughgo-
Laboratory studies and numerical models point 1999) increases the likelihood of a percolat- ing fractures represents a continuum of brittle
to a decrease in bed-confined fracture spacing ing backbone at the aquifer or reservoir scale, structures at varying stages of development
in response to increasing strain (Garrett and and provides vertical communication among from early (incipient) to intermediate (linked)
Bailey, 1977; Rives et al., 1992; Wu and Pol- numerous beds that would otherwise remain to advanced (with aperture). Because progres-
lard, 1995; Bai et al., 2000). A similar relation- hydraulically isolated from each other (Finn sive development of a throughgoing fracture is a
ship observed in outcrop suggests that FSR et al., 2003; Tipping et al., 2006; Cooke et al., manifestation of increasing brittle strain, the fre-
can serve as a proxy for strain in layered rocks 2006). Volumetric flow through a fracture is quency and type of throughgoing fractures may
(Becker and Gross, 1996; Gross et al., 1997; approximately proportional to the cube of its be used as relative strain indicators. The highest
Engelder et al., 1997; Eyal et al., 2001; Fischer hydraulic aperture (Witherspoon et al., 1980; frequency of systematic joints and throughgoing
and Christensen, 2004). The FSR for systematic Priest, 1993; Oron and Berkowitz, 1998). Thus fractures occurs at the fold crest, suggesting that
joints is twice as high along the crest than along throughgoing fractures, whose lengths and this locality has undergone higher strain than
the oppositely dipping sections of the limb mechanical apertures are at least one order of adjacent sections of the fold limb. Moreover,
(Fig. 4C), suggesting a local intensification magnitude greater than for bed-confined frac- the correlation between frequencies of bed-
of north-northwestsouth-southeastdirected tures, may serve as the primary flow conduits confined joints and throughgoing fractures can

Geological Society of America Bulletin, November/December 2007 1401


1402
N
S Hmax Late (DSS)
throughgoing fractures
hig
A N B hF
systematic
fold crest SR
S Hmax Early (SAS) joints

Possible Fault Splay


(Miocene-Holocene) fold hinge

Fault
Thrust
alukim
Main H

cross joints
systematic hig
joints hT
Downloaded from gsabulletin.gsapubs.org on July 14, 2012

F in
ten
Gross and Eyal

sity
C D

ITF

Geological Society of America Bulletin, November/December 2007


ATF
throughgoing LTF
fractures ITF
ATF

LTF

Figure 13. Scenario proposed for fracture development at Halukim anticline (not drawn to scale for schematic purposes). (A) Blind fault splay responsible for localizing strain
along fold crest. (B) Development of systematic joints with higher fracture spacing ratio (FSR; lower spacing) along the fold crest. SHMAXmaximum horizontal compressive
stress; DSSDead Sea stress field; SASSyrian Arc stress field. (C) Formation of cross joints. (D) Development of throughgoing fractures (TF) with higher intensity along
the fold crest. ITFincipient throughgoing fractures; LTFlinked throughgoing fractures; ATF throughgoing fractures with aperture.
Downloaded from gsabulletin.gsapubs.org on July 14, 2012
Throughgoing fractures

Israel: Cretaceous Research, v. 21, p. 813843, doi: Freund, R., 1965, A model for the development of Israel and
be used to estimate the critical strain at the onset 10.1006/cres.2000.0228. the adjacent areas since Upper Cretaceous times: Geo-
of throughgoing fracture development. Our Cacas, M.C., Daniel, J.M., and Letouzey, J., 2001, Nested logical Magazine, v. 102, p. 189205.
geological modelling of naturally fractured reservoirs: Freund, R., Zak, I., and Garfunkel, Z., 1968, Age and rate of
recommendations for future research include Petroleum Geoscience, v. 7, p. S43S52. the sinistral movement along the Dead Sea rift: Nature,
(1) investigating throughgoing fractures in other Caine, J.S., and Tomusiak, S.R.A., 2003, Brittle structures v. 220, p. 253255, doi: 10.1038/220253a0.
lithologies and arrangements of mechanical and their role in controlling porosity and permeabil- Freund, R., Goldberg, M., Weissbrod, T., Druckman, Y., and
ity in a complex Precambrian crystalline-rock aquifer Derin, B., 1975, The Triassic-Jurassic structure of Israel
stratigraphy, and (2) hydrologic modeling of system in the Colorado Rocky Mountain Front Range: and its relation to the origin of the eastern Mediterra-
discrete throughgoing fractures based on their Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 115, nean: Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin no. 65, 27 p.
specific geometries. p. 14101424, doi: 10.1130/B25088.1. Gale, J.F.W., Laubach, S.E., Marrett, R.A., Olson, J.E.,
Caine, J.S., Evans, J.P., and Forster, C.B., 1996, Fault zone Holder, J., and Reed, R.M., 2004, Predicting and char-
architecture and permeability structure: Geology, acterizing fractures in dolostone reservoirs: Using the
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS v. 24, p. 10251028, doi: 10.1130/0091-7613(1996)024 link between diagenesis and fracturing, in Braithwaite,
<1025:FZAAPS>2.3.CO;2. C.J.R., et al., eds., The geometry and petrogenesis of
We are grateful to Terry Engelder and two anony- Cooke, M.L., and Underwood, C.A., 2001, Fracture ter- dolomite hydrocarbon reservoirs: Geological Society
mous reviewers whose comments and suggestions mination and step-over at bedding interfaces due to [London] Special Publication 235, p. 177192.
frictional slip and interface opening: Journal of Struc- Garfunkel, Z., 1981, Internal structure of the Dead Sea
greatly improved the paper. Funding for this research
tural Geology, v. 23, p. 223238, doi: 10.1016/S0191- leaky transform (rift) in relation to plate kinematics:
was generously provided by the United StatesIsrael 8141(00)00092-4. Tectonophysics, v. 80, p. 81108, doi: 10.1016/0040-
Binational Science Foundation grant 94-00396. Cooke, M.L., Simo, J.A., Underwood, C.A., and Rijken, P., 1951(81)90143-8.
2006, Mechanical stratigraphic controls on fracture Garfunkel, Z., and Bartov, Y., 1977, The tectonics of the Suez
REFERENCES CITED patterns within carbonates and implications for ground- Rift: Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 71, 44 p.
water flow: Sedimentary Geology, v. 184, p. 225239, Garrett, K.W., and Bailey, J.E., 1977, Multiple transverse
doi: 10.1016/j.sedgeo.2005.11.004. fracture in 90 cross-ply laminates of a glass fibre-
Arkin, Y., and Braun, M., 1965, Type sections of Upper Cre-
Cox, A., and Hart, B.H., 1986, Plate tectonicsHow it reinforced polyester: Journal of Materials Science,
taceous formations in the northern Negev (southern
works: Boston, Massachusetts, Blackwell Scientific v. 12, p. 157168, doi: 10.1007/BF00738481.
Israel). Stratigraphic sections No. 2a: Jerusalem, Geo-
Publications, 392 p. Gillespie, P.A., Walsh, J.J., Watterson, J., Bonson, C.G., and
logical Survey of Israel, 19 p.
Druckman, Y., Gill, D., Fleischer, L., Gelbermann, E., and Manzocchi, T., 2001, Scaling relationships of joint
Bahat, D., 1987, Jointing and fracture interactions in middle
Wolff, O., 1995, Subsurface geology and structural and vein arrays from The Burren, Co. Clare, Ireland:
Eocene chalks near Beer Sheva, Israel: Tectonophysics,
evolution of the northwestern Negev, southern Israel: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 23, p. 183201, doi:
v. 136, p. 299321, doi: 10.1016/0040-1951(87)90031-X.
Israel Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 44, p. 115135. 10.1016/S0191-8141(00)00090-0.
Bahat, D., 1988, Early single-layer and late multi-layer
Dunne, W.M., and North, C.P., 1990, Orthogonal fracture sys- Grader, P., 1957, New geological data on the Rekhme anti-
joints in the Lower Eocene chalks near Beer Sheva,
tems at the limits of thrusting: An example from south- clinal crest: Research Council of Israel Bulletin, v. 63,
Israel: Annales Tectonicae, v. 2, p. 311.
western Wales: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 12, p. 245250.
Bahat, D., and Engelder, T., 1984, Surface morphology on
p. 207215, doi: 10.1016/0191-8141(90)90005-J. Gross, M.R., 1993, The origin and spacing of cross joints
cross-fold joints of the Appalachian Plateau, New York
Dyer, R., 1988, Using joint interactions to estimate paleo- Examples from the Monterey Formation, Santa Barbara
and Pennsylvania: Tectonophysics, v. 104, p. 299313,
stress ratios: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 10, coastline, California: Journal of Structural Geology,
doi: 10.1016/0040-1951(84)90128-8.
p. 685699, doi: 10.1016/0191-8141(88)90076-4. v. 15, p. 737751, doi: 10.1016/0191-8141(93)90059-J.
Bahat, D., and Grossmann, N.F., 1988, Regional jointing
Eichhubl, P., and Boles, J.R., 2000, Focused fluid flow Gross, M.R., Fischer, M.P., Engelder, T., and Greenfield, R.J.,
and paleostresses in Eocene chalks around Beer Sheva:
along faults in the Monterey Formation, coastal 1995, Factors controlling joint spacing in interbedded
Israel Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 37, p. 181191.
California: Geological Society of America Bulletin, sedimentary rocks: Integrating numerical models with
Bai, T.X., and Pollard, D.D., 2000, Fracture spacing in lay-
v. 112, p. 16671679, doi: 10.1130/0016-7606(2000) field observations from the Monterey Formation, USA,
ered rocks: A new explanation based on the stress tran-
112<1667:FFFAFI>2.0.CO;2. in Ameen, M.S., ed., Fractography: Fracture topogra-
sition: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 22, p. 4357,
Engelder, T., 1985, Loading paths to joint propagation dur- phy as a tool in fracture mechanics and stress analysis:
doi: 10.1016/S0191-8141(99)00137-6.
ing a tectonic cycle: An example from the Appalachian Geological Society [London] Special Publication 92,
Bai, T.X., Pollard, D.D., and Gross, M.R., 2000, Mechanical
Plateau, U.S.A: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 7, p. 215233.
prediction of fracture aperture in layered rocks: Journal
p. 459476, doi: 10.1016/0191-8141(85)90049-5. Gross, M.R., Bahat, D., and Becker, A., 1997, Relations
of Geophysical Research, Solid Earth, v. 105, p. 707
Engelder, T., 1993, Stress regimes in the lithosphere: Princeton, between jointing and faulting based on fracture-
721, doi: 10.1029/1999JB900303.
New Jersey, Princeton University Press, 457 p. spacing ratios and fault-slip profiles: A new method
Bai, T.X., Maerten, L., Gross, M.R., and Aydin, A., 2002,
Engelder, T., Gross, M.R., and Pinkerton, P., 1997, Joint devel- to estimate strain in layered rocks: Geology, v. 25,
Orthogonal cross joints: Do they imply a regional
opment in clastic rocks of the Elk Basin anticline, Mon- p. 887890, doi: 10.1130/0091-7613(1997)025<0887:
stress rotation?: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 24,
tana-Wyoming: An analysis of fracture spacing versus RBJAFB>2.3.CO;2.
p. 7788, doi: 10.1016/S0191-8141(01)00050-5.
bed thickness in a basement-involved Laramide struc- Gudmundsson, A., Gjesdal, O., Brenner, S.L., and Fjelds-
Becker, A., and Gross, M.R., 1996, Mechanism for joint
ture, in Hoak, T., et al., eds., Rocky Mountain Associa- kaar, I., 2003, Effects of linking up of discontinuities
saturation in mechanically layered rocks: An example
tion of Geologists 1997 Guidebook: Denver, Colorado, on fracture growth and groundwater transport: Hydro-
from southern Israel: Tectonophysics, v. 257, p. 223
Rocky Mountain Association of Geologists, p. 118. geology Journal, v. 11, p. 8499.
237, doi: 10.1016/0040-1951(95)00142-5.
Eyal, Y., 1996, Stress field fluctuations along the Dead Sea Helgeson, D.E., and Aydin, A., 1991, Characteristics of joint
Bentor, Y., and Vroman, A., 1954, A structural contour map
rift since the middle Miocene: Tectonics, v. 15, p. 157 propagation across layer interfaces in sedimentary
of Israel (1:250,000) with remarks on its dynamical
170, doi: 10.1029/95TC02619. rocks: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 13, p. 897911,
interpretation: Bulletin of the Research Council of
Eyal, Y., and Reches, Z., 1983, Tectonic analysis of the Dead doi: 10.1016/0191-8141(91)90085-W.
Israel, v. 4, p. 125135.
Sea rift region since the Late Cretaceous based on Hodgson, R.A., 1961, Regional study of jointing in Comb
Bergbauer, S., Mukerji, T., and Hennings, P., 2003, Improv-
mesostructures: Tectonics, v. 2, p. 167185. Ridge-Navajo Mountain area, Arizona and Utah:
ing curvature analyses of deformed horizons using
Eyal, Y., Gross, M.R., Engelder, T., and Becker, A., 2001, Joint American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bul-
scale-dependent filtering techniques: American
development during fluctuation of the regional stress letin, v. 45, p. 138.
Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 87,
field in southern Israel: Journal of Structural Geology, Hoffmann, W., Dunne, W.M., and Mauldon, M., 2004, Prob-
p. 12551272, doi: 10.1306/0319032001101.
v. 23, p. 279296, doi: 10.1016/S0191-8141(00)00096-1. abilistic-mechanistic simulation of bed-normal joint
Berkowitz, B., 1995, Analysis of fracture network connec-
Finn, M.D., Gross, M.R., Eyal, Y., and Draper, G., 2003, patterns, in Cosgrove, J.W., and Engelder, T., eds., The
tivity using percolation theory: Mathematical Geology,
Kinematics of throughgoing fractures in jointed rocks: initiation, propagation, and arrest of joints and other
v. 27, p. 467483, doi: 10.1007/BF02084422.
Tectonophysics, v. 376, p. 151166, doi: 10.1016/ fractures: Geological Society [London] Special Publi-
Bosworth, W., Guiraud, R., and Kessler, L.G., 1999, Late
j.tecto.2003.10.001. cation 231, p. 269284.
Cretaceous (ca. 84 Ma) compressive deformation of
Fischer, M.P., and Christensen, R.D., 2004, Insights into Katz, O., Reches, Z., and Baer, G., 2003, Faults and their
the stable platform of northeast Africa (Egypt): Far-
the growth of basement uplifts deduced from a study associated host rock deformation: Part I. Structure of
field stress effects of the Santonian event and origin
of fracture systems in the San Rafael monocline, small faults in a quartz-syenite body, southern Israel:
of the Syrian arc deformation belt: Geology, v. 27,
east central Utah: Tectonics, v. 23, p. TC1018, doi: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 25, p. 16751689,
p. 633636, doi: 10.1130/0091-7613(1999)027<0633:
10.1029/2002TC001470. doi: 10.1016/S0191-8141(03)00011-7.
LCCMCD>2.3.CO;2.
Fischer, M.P., and Wilkerson, M.S., 2000, Predicting the Krenkel, E., 1924, Der Syrische bogen: Zentralblatt Minera-
Bruner, I., 1991, Investigation of the subsurface in the northern
orientation of joints from fold shape: Results of logie, v. 9, p. 274281.
Negev, Israel, using seismic reflection techniques [Ph.D.
pseudo-three-dimensional modeling and curvature La Pointe, P.R., 1988, A method to characterize fracture den-
thesis]: Tel Aviv, Israel, Tel Aviv University, 105 p.
analysis: Geology, v. 28, p. 1518, doi: 10.1130/0091- sity and connectivity through fractal geometry: Inter-
Buchbinder, B., Benjamini, C., and Lipson-Benitah, S.,
7613(2000)28<15:PTOOJF>2.0.CO;2. national Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sci-
2000, Sequence development of late Cenomanian
Ford, D.C., and Williams, P.W., 1989, Karst geomorphology ences and Geomechanics Abstracts, v. 25, p. 421429,
Turonian carbonate ramps, platforms and basins in
and hydrology: London, Unwin Hyman, 601 p. doi: 10.1016/0148-9062(88)90982-5.

Geological Society of America Bulletin, November/December 2007 1403


Downloaded from gsabulletin.gsapubs.org on July 14, 2012
Gross and Eyal

Laubach, S.E., 2003, Practical approaches to identifying fields near faults: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 14, and effects on joint-network architecture: Geology,
sealed and open fractures: American Association of p. 939951, doi: 10.1016/0191-8141(92)90025-R. v. 33, p. 101104, doi: 10.1130/G20930.1.
Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 87, p. 561579, doi: Reches, Z., 1976, Analysis of joints in two monoclines in Shamir, G., and Eyal, Y., 1995, Elastic modeling of fault-
10.1306/11060201106. Israel: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 87, driven monoclinal fold patterns: Tectonophysics, v. 245,
Lisle, R.J., 1994, Detection of zones of abnormal strains in p. 16541662, doi: 10.1130/0016-7606(1976)87<1654: p. 1324, doi: 10.1016/0040-1951(94)00250-D.
structures using Gaussian curvature analysis: Ameri- AOJITM>2.0.CO;2. Tipping, R.G., Runkel, A.C., Alexander, E.C., Jr., Alexander,
can Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, Renshaw, C.E., 1999, Connectivity of joint net- S.C., and Green, J.A., 2006, Evidence for hydraulic
v. 78, p. 18111819. works with power law length distributions: Water heterogeneity and anisotropy in the mostly carbon-
Mimran, Y., 1976, Deep-seated faulting and the structures Resources Research, v. 35, p. 26612670, doi: ate Praire du Chien Group, southeastern Minnesota,
of the northern Negev (Israel); an analytic and experi- 10.1029/1999WR900170. USA: Sedimentary Geology, v. 184, p. 305330, doi:
mental study: Israel Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 25, Rijken, P., and Cooke, M.L., 2001, Role of shale thickness 10.1016/j.sedgeo.2005.11.007.
p. 111126. on vertical connectivity of fractures: Application of Tsang, Y.W., 1984, The effect of tortuosity on fluid flow
Narr, W., and Suppe, J., 1991, Joint spacing in sedimentary crack-bridging theory to the Austin Chalk, Texas: Tec- through a single fracture: Water Resources Research,
rocks: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 13, p. 1037 tonophysics, v. 337, p. 117133, doi: 10.1016/S0040- v. 20, p. 12091215.
1048, doi: 10.1016/0191-8141(91)90055-N. 1951(01)00107-X. Wdowinski, S., Bock, Y., Baer, G., Prawirodirdjo, L.,
Odling, N.E., 1997, Scaling and connectivity of joint sys- Rives, T., Razack, M., Petit, J.-P., and Rawnsley, K.D., 1992, Bechor, N., Naaman, S., Knafo, R., Forrai, Y., and
tems in sandstones from western Norway: Journal of Joint spacing: Analogue and numerical simulations: Melzer, Y., 2004, GPS measurements of current crustal
Structural Geology, v. 19, p. 12571271, doi: 10.1016/ Journal of Structural Geology, v. 14, p. 925937, doi: movements along the Dead Sea Fault: Journal of Geo-
S0191-8141(97)00041-2. 10.1016/0191-8141(92)90024-Q. physical Research, Solid Earth, v. 109, B05403, doi:
Odling, N.E., 2001, The scaling of hydraulic conductivity Rogers, C.M., Myers, D.A., and Engelder, T., 2004, Kine- 10.1029/2003JB002640.
in rock fracture zones: Geophysical Research Letters, matic implications of joint zones and isolated joints Witherspoon, P.A., Wang, J.S.Y., Iwai, K., and Gale, J.E.,
v. 28, p. 30193022, doi: 10.1029/2000GL011863. in the Navajo Sandstone at Zion National Park, Utah: 1980, Validity of cubic law for fluid flow in a deform-
Oron, A.P., and Berkowitz, B., 1998, Flow in rock frac- Evidence for Cordilleran relaxation: Tectonics, v. 23, able rock fracture: Water Resources Research, v. 16,
tures: The local cubic law assumption reexamined: TC1007, doi: 10.1029/2001TC001329,. p. 10161024.
Water Resources Research, v. 34, p. 28112825, doi: Ruf, J.C., Rust, K.A., and Engelder, T., 1998, Investigating Wu, H.Q., and Pollard, D.D., 1995, An experimental study of
10.1029/98WR02285. the effect of mechanical discontinuities on joint spac- the relationship between joint spacing and layer thick-
Pascal, C., Angelier, J., Cacas, M.C., and Hancock, P.L., ing: Tectonophysics, v. 295, p. 245257, doi: 10.1016/ ness: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 17, p. 887905,
1997, Distribution of joints: Probabilistic modelling S0040-1951(98)00123-1. doi: 10.1016/0191-8141(94)00099-L.
and case study near Cardiff (Wales, UK): Journal of Sagy, A., Reches, Z., and Roman, I., 2001, Dynamic frac- Zur, Y., Almogi-Labin, A., Shamir, G., and Eyal, Y., 1996,
Structural Geology, v. 19, p. 12731284, doi: 10.1016/ turing: Field and experimental observations: Journal of Thinning of the Menuha Formation at the Afran flex-
S0191-8141(97)00047-3. Structural Geology, v. 23, p. 12231239, doi: 10.1016/ ure, Hatira monoclineImplication for the monocline
Priest, S.D., 1993, Discontinuity analysis for rock engineer- S0191-8141(00)00190-5. formation: Israel Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 45,
ing: London, Chapman & Hall, 473 p. Sagy, A., Reches, Z., and Agnon, A., 2003, Hierarchic three- p. 211216.
Quennell, A.M., 1959, The structural and geomorphic evolu- dimensional structure and slip partitioning in the west-
tion of the Dead Sea rift: Geological Society [London] ern Dead Sea pull-apart: Tectonics, v. 22, 1004, doi: MANUSCRIPT RECEIVED 31 MAY 2006
Quarterly Journal, v. 114, p. 124. 10.1029/2001TC001323. REVISED MANUSCRIPT RECEIVED 16 MAY 07
MANUSCRIPT ACCEPTED 28 MAY 07
Rawnsley, K.D., Rives, T., Petit, J.-P., Hencher, S.R., and Lums- Shackleton, J.R., Cooke, M.L., and Sussman, A.J., 2005, Evi-
den, A.C., 1992, Joint development in perturbed stress dence for temporally changing mechanical stratigraphy Printed in the USA

1404 Geological Society of America Bulletin, November/December 2007