Professional Documents
Culture Documents
M. A. CHINNERY'
Department of Geophysics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia
Received June 25, 1965
Can. J. Earth Sci. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIV CALGARY on 04/15/13
ABSTRACT
A secondary fault is defined a s a fracture which arises a3 a direct result of
movement on a master transcurrent fault. Some previous approaches to the study
of secondarv faulting are discussed, and fallacies in the argirments of McIiinstry
(1953) and7M&y and Hill (ln5F) are pointed out. The effect c)f movement o n
a fault i s to reduce the initial shew stress everywhere except i n the vicinity of
the ends of the fault, where it causes complcv additional stresses (see first paper
i t ) this series on the theoretical aspects of secondary faulting). Thus it is proposed
that secondary faulting is an end effect of a master shear movement, and on this
basis six major modes of secondary faulting, labelled types A to F, are described.
'The uscfulriess of these results in the analysis of fault systems is illustrated by
applying them to the Alpine, San Andreas, and hlacrlanald faults. In each case it
is possible to predict or explain the curvature, location, and sense of the secondary
faults in t h e area. In addition, the development of the master fault may I,e traced
by locating the ends of the shear zone at v a r i o ~ times
~ s in the past.
INTRODUCTION
For personal use only.
FIG.1. Complementary shear directions, (a) for faulting under a pure shear stress, and (b)
for faulting under the action of a uniaxial compressive stress.
frictional effects are important, breakage tends to occur on planes that make an
angle 0 (less than 45") with the maximum principal axis of compression.
Estimates for 0 average about 30" (Anderson 1951; Hafner 1951), so that the
complementary directions of shearing are a t 60" t o one another (see Fig. lb).
I t seems that many geologists assume that all strike-slip faults occur under
the action of a uniaxial compression inclined a t 30" to the fault plane (see, for
example, Lensen 1960). Although this is almost certainly the mechanism of some
faults, i t is perhaps unreasonable to apply it in all cases. Strike-slip movement
will occur much more easily in regions of pure shear or tension, and recent
theories of orogenesis suggest that such regions may exist. In the discussion
that follows we shall consider two mechanisms for the formation of the master
fault, namely pure shear and uniaxial compression. I t turns out that these
give rise to slightly different fault patterns.
The third component of the typical fault system is a fairly large number of
smaller fractures that, because of their sense or direction, cannot be classed as
complementary faults, but which appear to be contemporaneous with the
master fault. Many of these fractures are curved and they usually have a
smaller movement and depth extent than the main fault. Since they cannot
have been formed under the action of the overall tectonic stress, they must be
supposed to be of a secondary nature, and in some way related to the movement
on the master fault. We shall call all such fractures "secondary faults". The
CHINNERY: GEOLOGY OF SECONDARY FAULTING 177
purpose of this paper is to analyze these faults, and to categorize the various
modes in which they occur, using the theoretical results described in the first
paper in this series.
FIG. 2. (a) "Splay faults" according to Anderson (1951), and (b) "second-order shears"
according to McKinstry (1953). In each case there are complementary shear directions which
are not shown.
178 CANADIAN JOURNAL OF EARTH SCIENCES. VOL. 3. I066
doing this is not clear, since the symmetry of his formulae suggest that they
should also occur in the remaining quadrants. Also he did not give any reason
why most faults of this type are found to be curved.
McKinstry (1953) attempted to account for a slightly different type of
secondary fault, which he called a "second-order shear". This is illustrated in
Fig. 2b, and has in fact the same sense of motion as Anderson's (1951) splay
Can. J. Earth Sci. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIV CALGARY on 04/15/13
fouit
FIG.3. Moody and Hill (1956) base their discussions o n the assumption that anJitlitial
compressive stress P at 30" to the fault line (a) is reoriented by strike-slip movement into a
new com~ressivestress P' at about 75" to the fault line (6). Simple calculation (see text)?shows
that, in iact, the strike-slip movement gives rise to a more complex stress distrihution whose
maximum axis of compression is a t an angle of less than 30" to the fault line. The diagrams c and
d show the new principal axes when the coefficient of friction is zero and one. respectively.
CHINNERY: GEOLOGY OF SECONDARY FAULTING 179
The principal axes of this distribution are parallel to the coordinate axes, and
For personal use only.
the maximum axis of compression is parallel to the fault plane (Fig. 36).
If, on the other hand, the coefficient of sliding friction is p, the stress opposing
motion will be p 7 2 2 = (L1/4)P.Hence the 7 1 2 component will be reduced by the
movement until it has the value - ( P / ~ ) Pand , the final stress distribution will
be
The principal axes of this distribution are inclined to the coordinate axes.
I n particular the maximum axis of compression has a magnitude
-
P
4 (2 +d m ) ,
and it makes an angle 4 with the fault plane where
tan 4 = (I - d-)/p.
The directions and magnitudes of the principal axes for the case p = 1
are shown in Fig. 3d.
Notice how completely these results differ from those of both McKinstry
(1953) and Moody and Hill (1956). These authors committed the cardinal sin
of resolving a principal axis of stress as if it were a force vector. I t can hardly
be emphasized enough that this is not possible. The stress distribution a t a point
in a solid is a tensor quantity, and cannot be discussed in terms of vectors. The
principal axes of stress, which are the eigenvectors of the stress tensor, are only
convenient representations of the state of stress, and are not true force vectors.
We can state, therefore, that there is no mechanical basis for the arguments of
Moody and Hill (1956). In fact it is easy to show that the shearing stress on
180 CANADIAN JOURNAL OF EARTH SCIENCES. VOL. 3. 1966
The calculations, then, allow us to locate those regions where the final
shear stress is high, and we may immediately determine the most likely direc-
tions for secondary faulting. In all a total of six different types or modes of
secondary faults can be separated out (three with left-lateral, and three with
right-lateral sense). These have been labelled alphabetically types A-F, and
typical examples of each mode are shown in Fig. 4. Notice the slight differences
Can. J. Earth Sci. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIV CALGARY on 04/15/13
between the secondary faults produced, when the master fault forms under
pure shear and under uniaxial compression. In this diagram, the master fault
is assumed to'be right-lateral, and only a portion of the master fault is shown.
If the main fracture is left-lateral, each type of secondary fault occurs on the
opposite side of the master fault. The extent of "influence" of the master
fault (i.e. the scale of these diagrams) is very dependent on the depth of the
fault. A deep fault gives stress changes a t much larger distances from the fault
plane than a shallow fault (see Chinnery 1961,1963).
The different modes of secondary faulting are shown, approximately, in
order of likelihood. Thus types A and B occur in regions of high shear stress,
and are commonly found in practice. On the other hand types E and F occur
.where the shear stress is quite high, but also where the hydrostatic compressive
stress is high, and we must expect frictional effects to inhibit their formation .
in many cases. Notice that types C and D faults occur in a region of overall
For personal use only.
tension, and are therefore much more likely than the E and F modes.
The type A mode represents the basic tendency for a strike-slip fault to
extend itself (compare Anderson 1951), and includes the "splay" or "horsetail"
faults commonly found. When the master fault occurs as a result of a uniaxial
compression there is a curious asymmetry in the maximum shear stress curves
(see first paper in this series) that indicate the A1 mode is more likely than the
A2 mode. This suggests that strike-slip faults formed in this way may tend to
extend themselves along curving paths, as shown in Fig. 5. There are some well-
known examples of this effect (see the discussion of the San Andreas fault in
the next section).
Type B fractures are complementary to type A, and occur quite frequently.
The ~nclinedfaults formed under the uniaxial compression arise from the com-
plementary directions of likely shearing associated with the initial stress
distribution (Fig. 1). The type C fracture is roughly equivalent to McKinstryls
(1953) "second-order shear" (Fig. 2). Geological examples of each mode of
secondary faulting are given in the next section.
I t should be noted a t this stage that the theoretical results assume that the
ground behaves as an elastic solid, and they are really only applicable on a
short time scale, i.e. to a single movement on a fault. On the other hand a real
fault system is the result of an accumulation of small movements over a long
period of time. When we compare the two together we are disregarding the
effects of plastic flow, which are poorly understood and difficult to estimate. In
all probability these effects will be largely limited t o reducing the stress where
i t is large, and giving rise t o folding in certain regions. However, our main
purpose a t present is to categorize secondary faults, and the theory of elasticity
should suffice to do this.
CANADIAN JOURNAL OF EARTH SCIENCES. VOL. 3. 1066
A
Can. J. Earth Sci. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIV CALGARY on 04/15/13
TYPE
I 'I I
I
'
TYPE B
For personal use only.
-------
---+
TYPE C
I I
I
TYPE D
TYPE E
TYPE F
FIG.4. Modes of secondary faulting, deduced from the results described in the first paper in
this series. For each mode, the left-hand pattern corresponds to formation of the master fault
under conditions of pure shear, and the right-hand pattern results from a uniaxial compression. .
I CHINNERY: GEOLOGY OF SECONDARY FAULTING 183
FIG.5. The asymmetry of the maximum shear stress curves for the case of uniaxial com-
pression suggests that the A1 mode is more likely than the A2 mode. Hence a fault that once
ended a t the point marked by a cross will tend to extend itself along a curve as shown.
Can. J. Earth Sci. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIV CALGARY on 04/15/13
questionable value. However, in the next section we shall try where possible
to locate previous ends to a fault since this will suggest a temporal relationship
between the various components of the fault system.
Finally, we must remember that we are dealing only with the initiation of
secondary faulting. Once a secondary fault has occurred the stress distribution
in its vicinity will be changed into a rather complex form. A l a r ~ esecondary
fault may well give rise to new subsidiary faults, though there are very few
cases where these are clear. Usually it seems that when a secondary fault
propagates out of the region of influence of the master fault it is controlled
by the initial stress distribution, and curves around until it is parallel to the
appropriate complementary shear direction.
-
O 40 80
Miles
FIG.6. The Alpine fault system, New Zealand (after Lensen 1960).
CHINNERY: GEOLOGY OF SECONDARY FAULTING 185
northwest coast of the South Island, and may be traced as a moderately active
seismic belt southwestward a t least to the vicinity of Macquarie Island
(Richter 1958). Toward the north end of the South Island the fault splays out
into a series of curving fractures that extend well into the North Island. These
I fractures are clearly secondary to the master fault, and we therefore suggest
that the Alpine fault "ends" in some sense where they occur. Presumably
Can. J. Earth Sci. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIV CALGARY on 04/15/13
there was some resistance to the propagation of the master fault, and stresses
were accumulated that gave rise to the splay faults. Notice how these faults
have the predicted shape for types A and C fractures (see Fig. 4: the distinction
between the two types is not too clear in this case), and also how the fracturing
occurs principally in the tension region to the southeast of the main fault. This
is to be expected from the calculations in the first paper of this series.
In the southern part of the South Island are a number of smaller left-lateral
faults that are very good examples of the type D secondary fault. Again these
fractures have the curvature to be expected for this type.
There is a noticeable lack of the type B fracture in this system. This may well
be because the type A fractures have succeeded in relieving the accumulated
stress a t the end of the fault zone. The only possible location for the B mode is
in Cook Strait, between the North and South Islands, and a t first sight the
shape of the Islands in this region suggests right-lateral movement along a
For personal use only.
FIG.7. The San Andreas fault system, California in simplified form (after Hill and Dibblee
1953).
CHINNERY: GEOLOGY OF SECONDARY FAULTING 187
movements in the Jurassic and Cretaceous on the northern section (Hill and
Dibblee 1953).
This suggestion is consistent with the large number of faults, clearly of a
secondary nature, that are found near each of the end points, particularly on
the tension side of the fault (to the east). The Garlock fault was probably
initiated as a type B fracture for the first section of the master fault. More
Can. J. Earth Sci. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIV CALGARY on 04/15/13
recent movements on the Garlock and neighboring faults have probably arisen
as a result of stresses created a t the bend in the San Andreas. The Big Pine
fault, for example, may be a very recent extension of the Garlock fault under
the action of these stresses, as Hill and Dibblee (1953) suggested.
I t is worth remarking that this model implies that there were obstructions
to the progress of the main fault close to the postulated end points. These may
have been due to particularly strong rock types, or to increased frictional
stresses, or to other mechanisms. However, although the master fault eventu-
ally overcame these barriers, they may still be partially effective, and it would
not be surprising if the overall displacements on the fault were quite small in
these regions.
A great number of the lesser faults in California may be categorized into
the various modes of secondary faulting shown in Fig. 4, if we accept the above
starting point, though the justification for doing this a t the present time is not
For personal use only.
-KNOWN
----- WSSlsCE
mar
FAULT
___-------
II
For personal use only.
FIG.8. The MacDonald fault system, Northwest Territories. Compiled from the reports of
Brown (1955) and Douglas (1959) and the tectonic map of Canada, 1950.
If the smaller faults shown in Fig. 8 are indeed secondary effects that are due
to movement on the MacDonald fault they should be contemporaneous with it.
Geological evidence, while not conclusive, suggests this may be so (J. V. Ross,
personal communication). With the exception of the fault (marked by a broken
line a t the left edge of Fig. 8) that crosses the mouth of the Slave River, which
appears to displace Devonian strata (Douglas and Duffell 1962), all of the
faults shown are of late Precambrian age.
Our model therefore leads to the following interpretation for this area: the
MacDonald fault, having extended itself westward to the vicinity of the East
Arm of the Great Slave Lake, reached some kind of barrier to its progress.
Further movements on the fault built up stresses in this region that were
relieved by the formation of secondary faults. At its western end a series of
splay faults were formed, which are associated with a series of elongated
islands. These are clearly typical type A fractures. In all probability these
were not able to relieve much of the accumulated stress, and the well-known
West Bay and Hay Duck faults were formed. These are very good examples of
type B faults, and probably extend out into the main body of the Lake. Notice
how the theoretical results predict both the curvature and the sense (left-
lateral) of these faults.
The remaining faults to the east of the Lake are clearly explainable as
CHINNERY: GEOLOGY OF SECONDARY FAULTING 189
movement on the master fault, or more likely from a reactivation of the area.
Further west. faults with a similar trend appear to have been active until the
Lower Cretaceous or later (Douglas and Duffel1 1962).
CONCLUSIONS
The three systems described above are typical examples of situations where
the location of the "end" of a fault zone can suggest new relationships between
the various components of the system. This is a new concept and one worthy
of some attention. In the past the implicit assumption seems to have been
made that the displacement along a transcurrent fault does not die out rapidly,
hut slowly fades away. This may be so in some instances, but the conclusions
of the first paper in this series make it very difficult to see why any secondary
faulting should occur in this case. bC7e have reversed this argument, and assume
that the presence of numerous secondary faults must indicate a region of
For personal use only.
REFERENCES
ANDERSON,E. M. 1951. Thedynamics of faultin .2od ed. Oliver and Boyd, Ltd., Edinburgh.
BROW, I. C. 1955. Late faults in the yellowknifearea. P m . MI..4swc. Can. 7, 123.
BYERLY,P. and D E ~ O Y E R . 1958. Energy in earthquakes as computed from geodetic
observations. In Contri utions in geophysics in honor of Beno Gutenberg. The Pergamon
Press, Ltd., New York.
C ~ K YM. ,A. 1961. The deformation of the ground around strrface faults. BuII. Seismol.
Sac. Am. 51,355.
1963. The stress changes that accompany strike-slip faulting. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am.
Can. J. Earth Sci. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIV CALGARY on 04/15/13
-- .
-53- , Q21
-Res.1064. The strength of the earth's crust under horizontal shear stress. J. Geophys.
69,2085.
CROWELL,J. C. 1962. Displacement along t h e San Andreas fault, California. Geol. Soc.
Am. Spec. Paper 71.
DOUGLAS,
R. J. W. 1959. Great Slave and Trout River map-areas, Northwest Territories.
Can. Dept. Mines Tech. Surv. Geol. Surv. Can. Paper W l l .
DOUGLAS,
R. J. W. and DUFFFLL,S. 1962. Some aspects of phanerozoic epeirogenic and
orogenic events that involve Precambrian rocks. I n The tectonics of the Cariadian
Shield. E~%ted by J. S. Stevensori. I!niv. of Toronto Press, Toronto.
HAPNER.\V. 19.41. Stress distribtitions and faulting. Bull. Geol. Soc. Am. 62,373,
HILL, M. L. and DIBBLEE,T. 13'. 1953. San ~lndreas,Garlock, and Big Pine faults, Cali-
fornia. Bull. Geol. Soc. Am. 64, a 3 .
INGLIS, C. E. 1913. Stresses in a plate due t o the presence of cracks and sharp corners.
Proc. Inst. Naval~lrch.55,210.
KASAHARA, K. 19aW. Physical conditions of earthquake faults a s deduced from geodetic
data. Bull. Earthquake Res. Inst. Tokyo Univ. 36,455.
KNOPOFF, L. 1958. Energy release id earthquakes. k p h y s . J. 1,M.
LENSEN, G. J. 1960. Principal horizontal stress directtons as a n aid t o the study of crustal
For personal use only.