The Role of Fault Interaction and Linkage in Controlling
Synrift Stratigraphic Sequences: Late Jurassic, Statfjord
East Area, Northern North Sea1
Nancye H. Dawers and John R. Underhill2
ABSTRACT
Examination of well-constrained three-dimen-
sional seismic data demonstrates the role of fault
interaction and linkage in controlling the nature of
synrift sequences on the hanging wall of the
Statfjord East fault, a typical Late Jurassic structure
in the northern North Sea Brent province. Al-
though now a single fault, the Statfjord East fault
originally consisted of several en echelon seg-
ments, each of which defined individual subbasins.
Structural and stratigraphic evidence, both along
and across fault strike, indicates that the fault
resulted from segment propagation, interaction,
and linkage. Facies architecture, thickness varia-
tions, and the internal character of synrift forma-
tions are temporally and spatially related to the sub-
basin geometry. Variations in displacement along
the fault segments exhibit characteristics of inter-
acting en echelon faults, including anomalous dis-
placement gradients in regions of segment overlap.
We attribute the observed shifts in depocenters to
local enhancement of displacement rates, resulting
from the interaction of neighboring fault segments.
The results have far-reaching consequences for syn-
rift plays in the northern North Sea because they
©Copyright 2000. The American Association of Petroleum Geologists. All
rights reserved.
1Manuscript received August 3, 1998; revised manuscript received April
22, 1999; final acceptance June 30, 1999.
2Department of Geology and Geophysics, University of Edinburgh, Grant
Institute, The King’s Buildings, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JW,
Scotland, United Kingdom; e-mail: Nancye.Dawers@glg.ed.ac.uk;
John.Underhill@glg.ed.ac.uk
This work was funded by the UK Natural Environment Research Council
(NERC), under the Realising Our Potential Award (ROPA) scheme (no.
GR3/R9521), and Norsk Hydro Research Centre. Seismic interpretation was
undertaken using Schlumberger™ GeoQuest IESX software at facilities in
Edinburgh supported by the Centre for Marine and Petroleum Technology, Norsk
Hydro, Shell Expro, and Esso (UK) Ltd. We thank Gunn Mangerud and Pål Skott
for their support and efforts in releasing data; Randi Jordan and Rolf Helland for
help with well data; and Anker Berge, Kjell-Owe Häger, Cai Puigdefàbregas, Arvid
Nøttvedt, Tom Dreyer, Roald Færseth, Anne Otelie Eide, Gunn Mangerud, Pål Skott,
Sarah Prosser, Paul Milner, Patience Cowie, Sarah Davies, Sanjeev Gupta, Aileen
McLeod, and Jon Turner for discussions. Bulletin reviewers Bruce Trudgill, Manuel
Willemse, and Al Lacazette provided very helpful reviews; Juan Contreras, Patience
Cowie, and Simon Kattenhorn provided additional helpful comments. Gerard White
assisted with figures and Chung-Lun Lau provided computer support.
AAPG Bulletin, V. 84, No. 1 (January 2000), P. 45–64.
imply that only from the perspective of fault
growth and linkage can the Late Jurassic structure
and stratigraphy be fully understood.
INTRODUCTION
Field studies show that en echelon arrangement
of normal fault segments and the nature of the dis-
placement distribution along them result from seg-
ment interaction and subsequent linkage (e.g.,
Peacock and Sanderson, 1991; Trudgill and
Cartwright, 1994; Dawers and Anders, 1995;
Cartwright et al., 1995, 1996). A number of model-
ing studies show that these spatial patterns result
from stress perturbations due to fault slip (Segall
and Pollard, 1980; Bürgmann et al., 1994; Willemse
et al., 1996; Willemse, 1997; Crider and Pollard,
1998). Recent modeling results also show that fault
interaction and linkage lead to marked temporal
variability within an evolving fault array (Cowie,
1998). Temporal variability in activity along seg-
mented normal faults has been well documented in
studies of neotectonic faults, i.e., faults active dur-
ing the Quaternary, such as the Wasatch fault in
Utah (Machette et al., 1991). The behavior of seg-
mented faults over longer time scales, however, is
less well known. Because normal faults control the
creation of accommodation space for syntectonic
deposition in rift basins (Leeder and Gawthorpe,
1987; Schlische, 1991; Gawthorpe et al., 1994), the
displacement history of normal faults should be
recorded in the synrift stratigraphy.
In many continental areas, synrift stratigraphy is
poorly preserved or incompletely exposed due to
burial. Subsurface data, especially three-dimensional
(3-D) seismic surveys, thus provide an important
source of detailed information on the long-term
structural evolution of normal fault systems and on
the development of rift basins; however, little atten-
tion has been given to integrating the synrift strati-
graphic patterns with data on displacement varia-
tions along the basin-bounding normal faults. A
number of subsurface studies in the Upper Jurassic
45
46 Faults and Synrift Sequences

of the central and northern North Sea have de- 1°E Hydrocarbon field
0 50 km
scribed stratigraphic patterns that indicate spatial 2°E ZETA
and temporal variability of activity on normal faults
(e.g., Underhill, 1991a, 1991b; Prosser, 1993; D

E N
SNORRE
T N
Nøttvedt et al., 1995; Ravnås et al., 1997; Ravnås and S
A Area Shown
A
Bondevik, 1997). In this paper, we discuss the rela- E L in Fig. 3

G R A B
tionship between synrift stratigraphic patterns and T
E
normal fault development observed in a 3-D subsur- H VISUND

S
face data set to better understand processes of nor- STATFJORD
EAST
mal fault growth and rift basin development in time GULLFAKS

and space. Our results have implications for tectonic- I N

STATFJORD

stratigraphic models of rift basins, and show that A

S
B
temporal variability of stratigraphy in rift zones on a

G
BRENT

time scale of a few million years can be explained by STRATHSPEY I N 61°N

processes of fault interaction and linkage. K

V I
Location
GEOLOGICAL SETTING

Norway

N O R T H
The study area is located in the Brent hydrocarbon
province of the East Shetland Basin, on the western
flank of the Late Jurassic Viking Graben of the north-
ern North Sea (Figure 1). The East Shetland Basin
formed as a result of distributed continental exten-

sion, which is estimated to be approximately 15%
(Yielding, 1990; Roberts et al., 1993a). The Middle
Jurassic (Bajocian) through Lower Cretaceous
(Ryazanian) extension is accommodated predomi-
nantly on large, east-dipping normal faults (e.g., Lee
and Hwang, 1993). Most of the significant hydrocar-
bon fields within the Brent province are situated in
the uplifted footwalls (Figure 1). The Statfjord East
area lies along an alignment of fault-controlled hydro-
carbon fields, including Strathspey, Brent, and
Statfjord (Figure 1). The Statfjord East area is some-
what unique in that the hanging wall also has been
explored. There are several exploration wells in
hanging-wall locations, and 3-D seismic coverage
extends across all of the hanging-wall basin.
STRATIGRAPHY
Figure 2 summarizes the relevant stratigraphy of
the East Shetland Basin. The Upper Triassic–Lower
Jurassic Banks Group (Richards et al., 1993) [or
Statfjord Formation of Deegan and Scull (1977) and
Vollset and Doré (1984)] and the Lower Jurassic
Dunlin Group were deposited in a thermally subsid-
ing basin following Permian–Triassic rifting (see
Underhill, 1998). The overlying Middle Jurassic Brent
Group, except for the Tarbert Formation, represents
a major deltaic complex, which advanced and
retreated in response to thermal doming and subse-
quent deflation (Underhill and Partington, 1993).
The onset of extension during the Middle Jurassic
(Bajocian) is marked by the drowning of the Brent
delta and subsequent deposition of the shallow-marine
U.K.
100 km
Figure 1—Location map of the East Shetland Basin and
study area. The Statfjord East fault lies along a large array,
including faults bounding the Brent and Statfjord fields.
Tarbert Formation and overlying Viking Group mud-
stones (Graue et al., 1987; Helland-Hansen et al.,
1992). Transgression continued with the deposition of
Bathonian–Oxfordian mudstones of the Heather
Formation and the subsequent shale-dominated
Draupne Formation (Vollset and Doré, 1984) [which is
synonymous with the Kimmeridge Clay Formation in
UK nomenclature of Deegan and Scull (1977)]. The
Draupne Formation is coeval with numerous late
Oxfordian–Ryazanian sedimentary wedges throughout
the North Sea. A thin carbonate at the base of the
Cromer Knoll Group marks the transition from active
extensional faulting to a phase of postrift thermal sub-
sidence (Glennie and Underhill, 1998). Transgression
during the Late Jurassic in the northern North Sea
enabled sea level to reach its maximum height region-
ally during the middle Kimmeridgian (sensu anglico)
and early Volgian (Hallam, 1969; Sneider et al., 1995).
Sea level then fell through the remainder of the
Volgian and Early Cretaceous (Hallam, 1969; Rawson
and Riley, 1982).
In this paper we focus on the seismic stratigra-
phy of the synrift interval extending from the top
of the Brent Group through the base of the Cromer
Knoll Group. The base of the Cromer Knoll Group
generally is referred to as the base Cretaceous

AGE
Cretac- Valanginian Cromer Knoll Group “BCE” Post-Rift Subsidence
eous Ryazanian
Banks Dunlin Brent Viking or Humber
Volgian
Late
Group
Kimmeridgian
Oxfordian
Callovian
Jurassic
Middle
Bathonian
Group Group Group
Bajocian
Aalenian
Toarcian
Pliensbachian
Early
Sinemurian
Hettangian
Triassic Rhaetian
Figure 2—Stratigraphic framework and tectonic events
of the East Shetland Basin. BCE = base Cretaceous event
(see text), MCU = middle Cimmerian unconformity.
unconformity despite its Early Cretaceous age and
the fact that in some structurally deep settings
there may be no stratigraphic omission (Rattey and
Hayward, 1993). This prominent, regional seismic
marker results from a sharp acoustic impedance
contrast between carbonates of the Lower Cre-
taceous Cromer Knoll Group and underlying forma-
tions. We refer to it here as the base Cretaceous
event (BCE) because no stratigraphy is missing in
the Statfjord East hanging wall.
The top of the Banks Group has been mapped as
a prerift marker horizon for fault displacement anal-
ysis. Although the Jurassic rifting may have reacti-
vated some earlier Permian–Triassic structures (see
Færseth 1996), the Statfjord East fault is interpreted
as being Late Jurassic–Early Cretaceous in age
(Nyberg, 1987; Dahl and Solli, 1993; Færseth,
1996).
DATA SETS
The data sets include four overlapping 3-D seis-
mic surveys and data from 32 exploration wells
located within Norwegian Block 34/7 and the adja-
cent part of Block 33/9 (Figure 3). Biostratigraphic
zonation, well correlation, and facies analysis of
cored intervals within the Statfjord East hanging
wall are described in Häger and Smelror (1997),
Nøttvedt et al. (in press), and Dawers et al. (1999),
and are used here to place temporal constraints on
the structural evolution of the area.
For the purposes of this paper, the seismic interpre-
tation has not been depth converted. Although veloci-
ty variations in detail may affect the patterns observed
in synrift thickness and fault throw, well control is suf-
ficiently closely spaced to suggest that these varia-
tions will not change our general observations and
Dawers and Underhill 47
STRATIGRAPHY TECTONIC EPISODE conclusions. Differential compaction between foot-
walls and hanging walls of large faults also may
effect throw patterns; however, the throws here
Draupne or
Kimmeridge are not large enough for this to be a cause of great
Clay Fm
Rifting concern.
Heather Formation
Tarbert Fm STATFJORD EAST FAULT
Ness Fm Thermal Doming
Rannoch Fm Etive Fm
Broom Fm & Deflation
“MCU”
Drake Fm The Statfjord East fault is an approximately
Cook Fm
18-km-long, north-northeast–striking fault (Figure
Burton Fm
Amundsen Fm Post-Rift Thermal
Nansen Formation
Subsidence 4). Figure 4 shows the geometry of several regional
Statfjord Formation layers that are offset by the fault. On the level of
the BCE, the fault has an overall continuous trace
with two left-stepping bends (Figure 4A). At the
northernmost bend, a fault splay extends basin-
ward from the principal fault, i.e., the fault surface
where most of the displacement is taken up (Figure
4A). On the deeper horizons, such as the top of the
Heather Formation (Figure 4B) and the top of the
Brent Group (Figure 4C), a series of northeast- to
north-northeast–striking intrabasinal splays extend
from the principal fault surface into the hanging-
wall basin. At a more regional scale, the Statfjord
East fault is partially overlapped by the Statfjord
fault (Figures 3, 4A), which becomes the more
dominant fault toward the south, outside our study
area (Figure 1).
Footwall
The uplifted footwall of the Statfjord East fault is
relatively simple in profile (Figure 5). A thin cap-
ping of Heather Formation occurs along the central
portion of the footwall. In well 33/9-12, the Tarbert
Formation also is present, as is a thin drape of
upper Volgian Draupne Formation shale. South of
this well, the Draupne Formation thickens across a
significantly eroded part of the Statfjord East foot-
wall, along which the entire Brent succession and
the upper part of the Dunlin Group are missing
(Figure 5B). The hanging-wall geometry, described
in the following paragraphs, is more complex.
Hanging-Wall Structure and Stratigraphy
The intrabasinal faults, which extend from the
principal fault surface into the hanging-wall basin
(Figure 4), define several subbasins within the over-
all half graben. The subbasins are evident in the
geometry of the horizons shown in Figure 4 and are
illustrated in the along-strike seismic section shown
in Figure 6. The along-strike section shows that the
subbasin bounding faults cut progressively younger
strata toward the north (Figure 6). Only the
southernmost intrabasinal fault is associated with
48 Faults and Synrift Sequences

Figure 3—Structural lt 61 30’

framework of the study 3-D Surveys au
o nf 34/7-4
area; faults shown are s
ge83 chi
Middle Jurassic and Mur re 34/7-1 N
younger. Sections AA′ sg8431
n or
S

Block 33/9
Block 34/7
and BB′ are shown in e86
Figures 5 and 6, and 34/7-7
sections aa′ and bb′ are sg9201 34/7-6

shown in Figure 7. 34/7-3

Also shown are the wells
used to constrain the
seismic interpretation, 34/7-10

Inner Snorre fault

outline of area shown in 34/7-15S
Area Shown 33/9-15 34/7-13
Figure 4, oil fields, and
in Fig. 4
outlines of three- A’
33/9-16 B’34/7-19
dimensional surveys.

lt
34/7-16

fau
Survey line, CDP (common Data
depth point) spacings are Gap

st
34/7-8
e86: 18.75 m, 12.5 m;

Ea
is
sg9201: 12.5 m, 12.5 m;
fjord 34/7-5 Vigd
sg8431: 25 m, 12.5 m; at
St
ge83: 50 m, 25 m. 33/9-5
Statfjord
34/7-17
East
tfjord
34/7-23A,S
Statfjord fault

33/9-4
b 33/9-7
Sta

33/9-12
34/7-24S 34/7-18
33/9-3
34/7-21 34/7-2

34/7-21A s
a b’ di
33/9-9 or
A 34/7-12 T 34/7-22
B
34/7-14
a’ 34/7-25

Hydrocarbon
Field
2 00’

61 15’

2 20’
0 5 10 km

substantial thickening in the Heather Formation, Formation (Dawers et al., 1999; Nøttvedt et al., in
suggesting that the intrabasinal faults to the north press). Several reflectors onlap the top Kimmer-
were much less active during the deposition of the idgian reflector (Figure 7A). The erosion of the
Heather Formation, or perhaps had not yet formed. Statfjord East footwall here (see also Figure 5) sug-
The geometry created by the intrabasinal faults pro- gests that these internal reflectors, observed only in
duces apparent fold structures transverse to the this part of the basin, are related to scarp degrada-
trend of the overall hanging-wall basin. tion. Overlying these are more continuous reflec-
Figure 7 shows two seismic sections across the tors that overstep the eroded footwall (Figure 7A).
basin. In the deepest part of the basin, adjacent to These, in turn, are overlain by discontinuous inter-
the southernmost part of the Statfjord East fault, nal reflections that are truncated by the BCE.
both the Heather Formation and Draupne Formation The thin drape of upper Volgian Draupne
are distinctly wedge shaped in cross section (Figure Formation shale in well 33/9-12, located just north
7A). The internal nature of the Draupne Formation of the most intensely eroded footwall area, suggests
consists of an upper shallow-marine sequence and a that this portion of the Statfjord East fault had
lower shale sequence separated by a prominent, become relatively inactive by the late Volgian.
top Kimmeridgian reflector that onlaps the Heather Note, however, that the Statfjord fault, which lies
 Dawers and Underhill 49

Figure 4—Map-view geometry (color-contoured in two-

way traveltime) of horizons offset by the Statfjord East
fault. (A) Base Cretaceous horizon, (B) top of the
Heather Formation, and (C) top of the Brent Group.

west of and overlaps the Statfjord East fault, shows a

small but clear displacement of the BCE (Figure 7A),
suggesting that displacement slowed or ceased on
this portion of the Statfjord East fault in the latest
Jurassic, and by the Early Cretaceous displacement
was being taken up on the main Statfjord fault.
Figure 7B is a traverse through wells 33/9-12,
34/7-24S, 34/7-21A, and 34/7-21 (see Figure 3).
Both the Heather Formation and Draupne For-
mation are wedge shaped (Figure 7B), although in
this subbasin the Heather Formation does not
thicken as drastically as it does farther south (see
Figure 7A). Shown in parentheses on Figure 7B is
the thickness of the Tarbert Formation encoun-
tered in wells 33/9-12, 33/9-21, and 33/9-21A but
not completely drilled through in well 33/9-24S.
The hanging-wall thickness of the Tarbert For-
mation is roughly double that of the footwall. This
ratio is consistent with previous observations sug-
gesting that the Tarbert is an initial synrift unit
(e.g., Yielding et al., 1992; Ravnås et al., 1997;
Underhill et al., 1997).

Overlaps Between the Statfjord East Fault and

Intrabasinal Splays

Figure 8 shows the cross sectional geometry of

the zones of overlap between the principal fault
surface, i.e., the fault with the greater displace-
ment, and the intrabasinal fault splays (Figure 8A).
Both the principal and intrabasinal faults clearly dis-
place the BCE at the northern overlap zone (Figure
8B). The middle intrabasinal splay does not dis-
place the BCE but does displace the top of the
Heather Formation (Figure 8C). The southern intra-
basinal does not displace the BCE and only locally
displaces the top of the Heather Formation (Figure
8D, also see Figure 4B). The southern and middle
intrabasinal faults appear to have been active early
relative to the principal fault surface, manifested by
synrift thickness variations. Across the southern
zone, thickening is observed in the Brent Group
and Heather Formation across the intrabasinal splay
(Figure 8D), whereas thickening is observed in the
Heather and Draupne formations across the middle
intrabasinal fault (Figure 8C). Note also that the
Heather Formation here is on average thinner than
that farther south, whereas the Draupne Formation
is overall of similar thickness here and toward the
south. Across the northern overlap zone, the only
synrift unit thickening toward the faults is the
 50
(A)
SSW NNE
A A’
Faults and Synrift Sequences

(B) 33/9-12 34/7-5

2250 Footwall Erosion Heather Fm

e taceous
ous Brent Group base Cr
ce
ta
2500 re Dunlin Group
base C
Draupne Fm Banks Group +
2750
older units

Depth (msec TWTT)

3000

0 2 km

Intersection with a-a’

(Figure 7a)
Intersection with b-b’
(Figure 7b)

3250

Figure 5—(A) Along-strike seismic traverse AA′ (see Figure 3 for location) and (B) line drawing of the seismic section of the Statfjord East
footwall. Note the simple footwall structure and area of footwall erosion in the south. TWTT = two-way traveltime.
 (A)
SSW NNE
B B’

(B) 34/7-24S 34/7-23A

-23S
2250 Draupne Fm
e Cr
bas et

Intersection with a-a’

(Figure 7a)
Intersection with b-b’
(Figure 7b)
aceous Heather Fm
2500 Draupne Fm Brent Group
ctor
fle
idgian re
m er
Kim
p
to Heather Fm
2750 Draupne Fm Brent Group Dunlin Group
Banks Group +
Heather Fm older units

Depth (msec TWTT)

3000 Dunlin Group
BanksGroup+
Brent Group older units
3250
Dawers and Underhill

Dunlin Group 0 2 km

Figure 6—(A) Along-strike hanging-wall traverse BB′ (see Figure 3 for location) and (B) line drawing of the seismic section. Intrabasi-
nal highs are associated with the hanging-wall splays. Thickness variations suggest the southernmost splay was most active during
51

Heather deposition, whereas those toward the north were more important during Draupne deposition. TWTT = two-way traveltime.
 52
W E
a a’
Faults and Synrift Sequences

2250

BCE
2500 BCE

Intersection with A- A’
(Figure 5)
Intersection with B-B’
(Figure 6)
top Kimmeridgian
reflector
t up
Bren Gro
nt
2750 Bre
Group Draupne Fm
Dunlin
p+ Fm
rou
n ther
a ks Gnits
B er u Hea
3000 old p+
ou
Gr
p a nks units
Statfjord rou B er
nlin G old

Depth (msec TWTT)

fault Statfjord Du
3250 East fault
0 2 km
(A)
Figure 7—(A) Seismic line aa′ (see Figure 3 for location) and line drawing of the seismic section across the southern part of the
Statfjord East fault showing the eroded footwall block between the Statfjord East fault and the main Statfjord fault to the west. (B)
Traverse bb′ (see Figure 3) and line drawing across wells 33/9-12, 34/7-24S, 34/7-21A, and 34/7-21. TWTT = two-way traveltime.
 W E
b b’

33/9-12 34/7-24S 34/7-21A 34/7-21

Intersection with A- A’
(Figure 5)
Thin Draupne &
2250 Heather;
Tarbert (~23 m)

Intersection with B-B’ (Figure 6)

Bend in Section
top Kimmeridgian
m reflector
BCE rF Fm )
e Fm the
2500 Draupn a Draupne 5m
He BCE (~5
er F m m)
Heath rt ~63
up (Tarbe
t Gro
Bren
2750 roup
lin G
Dun p oup
Statfjord rou n Gr
ntG Dunli
p+ Bre
rou East fault

Depth (msec TWTT)

a n ks Gnits p up +
B er u rou s Gro
3000 old lin G
Dawers and Underhill

Bankr units
Dun olde

0 2 km
(B)
53

Figure 7—Contiued.
54 Faults and Synrift Sequences

2000
0 2 km x x’
N
Northern Northern
x Overlap

Depth (msec TWTT)

2250 Overlap
Zone Zone Draupne Fm
BCE
la y e r Fm
Heath
e

sp 2500 up
p t Gro
fac

al rou Bren
sin in G
ba D unl
Sur

x’
ra
int

2750 Banks Group +

older units
y Middle
Overlap (B)
Zone 3000
y

2000
la

breaching
sp

y y’
ult

segments
l
ina

Middle
Fa

z
as

Overlap

Depth (msec TWTT)

2250
y’
rab

Zone
BCE
int

up
Southern nt Gro
Bre Draupne Fm m
pal

Overlap 2500
er F
splay Zone ath
asinal He
nci

b up
ra- Gro
int nlin
ri

2750
P Banks Group + Du
older units
z’ (A) (C)
3000
2000
z z’
0 1 km

Southern
Depth (msec TWTT)

2250

BCE Overlap
Zone
2500

Draupne Fm
Fm
ther
Hea
2750
Banks Group + oup
older units t Gr
Br e n
roup
3000
u n lin G
D
(D)
Figure 8—(A) Fault structure (at top of the Heather Formation) and section locations for parts B–D; (B) northern
overlap zone; (C) middle overlap zone; (D) southern overlap zone. The principal fault surface accommodates most
of the displacement across all three overlap zones. Intrabasinal fault activity youngs progressively from south to
north, as evidenced by thickness variations and lack of offset of top Heather (D) and top Draupne (C). TWTT = two-
way traveltime.

Draupne Formation (Figure 8B), but it is possible In the case of the southern and middle splays, the
that the wedge-shaped character of the Draupne cessation of activity on the intrabasinal splay was
Formation here in part may be the result of erosion. coupled with displacement localization on the over-
The relationships described in this paper and lapping principal fault surface toward the west
illustrated in Figure 8 indicate that, initially, displace- (Figure 8B, C). This scenario is inferred from the syn-
ment occurred along the intrabasinal faults, first rift thickness variations and the lack of offset of the
along the southern fault (Figure 8D), then along the upper synrift layers on the southern and middle
middle fault (Figure 8C), and finally on the northern- splays, which were noted in the discussion of
most fault (Figure 8B). We observe a pattern of activ- Figures 4 and 6. These relationships suggest that the
ity and then cessation of activity on the intrabasinal principal fault surface evolved through the breach-
faults that progresses from south to north with time. ing of the overlap zones (Figure 8A).
 Dawers and Underhill 55

(A) Figure 9—(A) Along-strike throw

profile for the top of the (prerift)
Throw - top Banks Group Banks Group. (B) Map view of the
800
fault structure on this datum.
700 Principal Surface Summing in the throws of the
splays reduces the magnitude of
Hanging wall Splays
600 local throw minima along the
Throw (msec TWTT)

Footwall Splay principal fault surface, a finding

500
that is consistent with the
Summed Throw hanging-wall splays representing
400
remnants of en echelon segments
300 that became inactive as breaching
structures formed in the footwall.
200 TWTT = two-way traveltime.
100

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Distance (km)

(B)
rd
tfjo
Sta

Principal Fault Surface

East
Statfjord
Footwall
Splay

01
sg92

e86
N

Intrabasinal
Fault Splays
0 2 km

ALONG-STRIKE DISPLACEMENT PROFILES Figure 9B shows the map-view fault geometry on

the top Banks Group, which illustrates the varia-
Figures 9 and 10 show along-strike displacement tion in the horizontal component, or heave, along
profiles for the Statfjord East fault. Figure 10 also the fault segments. Throw along principal seg-
includes data from the overlapping portion of the ments of the fault, i.e., those segments with the
Statfjord fault to the west. Displacement data are greatest displacement, is plotted as filled squares
limited because of partial erosion of the Heather (Figure 9A). The maximum throw occurs about 2
Formation and Brent and Dunlin groups on the km north of the southern edge of the e86 survey
southern portion of the footwall; consequently, we and tapers off gradually northward. Note that local
show curves for the top Banks Group (Figures 9, displacement minima correlate to areas where
10) and BCE horizons (Figure 10). The displace- hanging-wall splays are observed in map view
ment measure used is throw, i.e., the vertical com- (Figure 9B). Throw across four hanging-wall splays
ponent of the total displacement vector. Throw and one footwall splay also is plotted in Figure 9A.
was measured on every tenth line in the e86 data Summing the throw across the splays with that
set, which has lines spaced every 18.75 m and ori- measured along the principal fault trace reduces
ented parallel to the east-southeast extension direc- the magnitude of the local throw minima, hence
tion. The northern tip of the Statfjord East fault lies producing a relatively smooth and continuous
north of the e86 survey; in the sg9201 survey throw profile (Figure 9A).
(Figure 10), throw was measured using similarly The pattern of displacement variation observed
spaced traverses parallel to the e86 lines. in Figure 9A is typical of faults that evolve from
Variation in the throw of the top Banks Group mechanically interacting en echelon segments
along the Statfjord East fault is shown in Figure 9A. (Dawers and Anders, 1995). For initially unlinked
56 Faults and Synrift Sequences
interacting fault segments, the throw profiles are
asymmetric with high displacement gradients
toward the region of fault overlap (e.g., Peacock
and Sanderson, 1991; Willemse et al., 1996).
Following the breaching of the overlap zone (typi-
cally across the part of the overlap zone closest to
the mutual footwall, as observed here), displace-
ment accrues on the developing fault surface,
whereas activity on the previously active overlap-
ping intrabasinal fault diminishes (Childs et al.,
1995; Cartwright et al., 1996). The observation that
throw on the intrabasinal splays spatially coincides
with throw anomalies of similar magnitude along
the principal segment indicates that the fault seg-
ments are geometrically coherent (Walsh and
Watterson, 1991). In other words, the intrabasinal
splays together with the principal fault surface
form a smoothly varying displacement profile, as
would be expected for a single fault (e.g., Dawers
and Anders, 1995), and thus act on the large scale
as a single fault.
Figure 10A compares the total throw profile of
the top Banks Group on the Statfjord East and
Statfjord faults (upper curves) with that observed
for the BCE (lower curves). The difference in the
character of the curves for top Banks Group and
the BCE horizons is that the BCE horizon repre-
sents the youngest synfaulting datum, and thus
records only a very small amount of displacement.
The important point in Figure 10A is that there is
less throw of the Banks Group on the Statfjord fault
relative to the Statfjord East fault, whereas the
reverse is true of the BCE. At BCE level, only the
northern part of the Statfjord East fault exhibits
throws significantly greater than seismic resolution
(approximately 15 ms). This pattern is consistent
with the stratigraphic interpretation that late in the
rifting displacement became localized on the
Statfjord fault and the overlapping portion of the
Statfjord East fault became relatively inactive
(whereas the northern part of the Statfjord East
remained active). The previously active hanging-
wall splays, particularly those in the south, do not
show clear displacement at the BCE level (Figure
10B, see also Figure 4A).
It is not feasible to construct throw profiles using
synrift horizons below the BCE for the principal
Statfjord East segments because of either erosion or
nondeposition on the footwall; however, sufficient
data are available for the two northern intrabasinal
splays and are shown in Figure 11. Note that for the
middle splay, the throw pattern for the top of the
Brent Group is similar to that for the prerift Banks
Group, whereas the throw profile for the top of the
Heather Formation records less accumulated dis-
placement, consistent with this being a synfaulting
horizon. Along the northern intrabasinal splay, the
throw gradient for the top of the Heather Formation
mimics that of the Banks and Brent groups, which
have throw patterns here consistent with that
expected for a prefaulting datum; however, the BCE
throw pattern along this splay is consistent with a
synfaulting interpretation. The conclusion drawn
from Figure 11 is that activity localized on the mid-
dle splay during Heather deposition, whereas signif-
icant activity did not localize on the northern splay
until during Draupne deposition. This pattern is
consistent with northward growth of the Statfjord
East fault by segment linkage; furthermore, this pat-
tern confirms the interpretation of northward
migration of activity on the intrabasinal faults based
on the cross sectional geometries of the fault over-
lap zones illustrated in Figure 8.
The data shown in Figure 11 do not rule out a
component of vertical propagation in addition to
lateral propagation through linkage. The basinward
dip of hanging-wall reflectors immediately adjacent
to the fault segments shown in Figures 7 and 8 is
consistent with vertical propagation from depth.
This geometry is similar to observations made
along synsedimentary normal faults in other parts
of the North Sea and in the Gulf of Suez rift, where
basinward-dipping strata have been shown to rep-
resent the limbs of monoclines formed initially by
vertical propagation of blind normal faults
(Withjack et al., 1990; Gawthorpe et al., 1997;
Gupta et al., 1999); however, vertical propagation
alone would not explain the difference in the
throw data shown in Figure 11.
DISCUSSION
The Statfjord East fault is similar to normal faults
described from other areas. Studies in the Neogene
Basin and Range province in the western United
States and Mesozoic rift basins in the eastern
United States illustrate hanging-wall subbasins
separated by intrabasinal highs or transverse folds
adjacent to fault segment overlaps (Anders and
Schlische, 1994; Schlische, 1995; Schlische and
Anders, 1996), similar to the structures observed here
(Figure 6). Along a Basin and Range fault in Utah,
Wu and Bruhn (1994) observed that segments step-
ping toward the footwall became progressively
linked from the center of the structure outward. In
east Africa, dated volcanic units along Lake Malawi
(Ebinger, 1989) and 2-D (two-dimensional) seismic
data (Contreras, 1999) indicate that segments along
the lake’s western fault system were initially individ-
ual subbasins. Sedimentological data from the Suez
rift system in Sinai, Egypt, demonstrate that segment
interaction controlled Miocene sedimentary disper-
sal systems there (Gupta et al., 1999). Although
these studies illustrated the importance of the fault
linkage process, the paucity of hanging-wall data
 Dawers and Underhill 57

(A) Figure 10—(A) Comparison of

800
Throw - top Banks Group throw profile for the base
Statfjord East fault
Cretaceous event (BCE) with top
700 Statfjord fault Banks Group for Statfjord East and
main Statfjord faults. Despite less
600 Throw - base Cretaceous throw of the top Banks Group on
Throw (msec TWTT)

500
Statfjord East fault the Statfjord fault relative to the
Statfjord fault Statfjord East fault, the throw of the
400 BCE is greater on the Statfjord fault
than on the Statfjord East fault.
300 At BCE level, only the northern
part of the Statfjord East fault
200
has throws greater than
100 Throw approximately 15 ms. Thus late
Resolution
ca. 15 msec in rifting deformation localized
0 onto the Statfjord fault with the
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 southern portion of the Statfjord
Distance (km) East fault becoming inactive; the
northern part of the fault remained
active. (B) Interpretation of faults
(B) from a BCE dip-magnitude map.
rd The previously active southern and
tfjo
Sta middle hanging-wall splays do not
show clear displacements at BCE
level. TWTT = two-way traveltime.
East
Statfjord

e86

horizon
taceous
base Cre
nt
poorly re
solved pme
e Escar
Snorr
N

0 2 km

01
s g 92

and the erosion of footwall marker horizons in (e.g., Peacock and Sanderson, 1991; Trudgill and
most subaerial settings limits our understanding of Cartwright, 1994; Cartwright et al., 1995, 1996; Dawers
the temporal evolution of faults. Because of the 3-D and Anders, 1995; Childs et al., 1995; Willemse et
nature of the subsurface data set and the submarine al., 1996; Crider and Pollard, 1998;). The relatively
setting, this study provides important insights into smooth throw profile, produced by summing the
the temporal and spatial evolution of normal faults Banks Group throws across the intrabasinal splays
over the time scale of the entire rifting episode and with that observed along the principal fault surface,
has implications for the tectonic-stratigraphic clearly demonstrates that the intrabasinal faults are
development of rift basins. associated with the evolution of the Statfjord East
fault. Structural and stratigraphic evidence suggests
an overall northward migration of fault activity,
Implications for Evolution of Normal Faults which is further illustrated in Figure 12. Figure 12
shows isopachs (in two-way traveltime) of the
Displacement variations observed along the Heather Formation and the upper Oxfordian–
Statfjord East fault (e.g., Figure 9) are consistent with Kimmeridgian Draupne Formation shale sequence.
previous studies of fault interaction and linkage During the Bathonian–late Oxfordian, sediment
58 Faults and Synrift Sequences

250
Throw (msec TWTT)

Middle Intrabasinal Fault

200
Northern Intrabasinal Fault
150

100

50
M ono
cline
0
400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800
e86 Inline Number

top Banks Group top Heather Formation 0 1 km

top Brent Group top Draupne Formation/BCE
Figure 11—Throw profiles for middle and northern intrabasinal faults. On the middle fault, the throw pattern for
top Brent is similar to that for (prerift) top Banks Group, whereas the top Heather profile records less accumulated
displacement, consistent with this being a synfaulting horizon. For the northern intrabasinal splay, all horizons
except for the BCE (base Cretaceous event) have gradients expected for a prefaulting datum. Activity occurred on
the middle splay during Heather deposition, but significant activity did not occur in the north until Draupne depo-
sition, consistent with northward growth of the Statfjord East fault by segment linkage. TWTT = two-way traveltime.

accumulation was most pronounced along the
southernmost part of the fault (Figure 12A). With
time, the locus of activity shifted toward the north-
east. Isopachs of the late Oxfordian–Kimmeridgian
lower Draupne Formation shale indicate that con-
tinued subsidence occurred along the southern
part of the fault and the development of a new
depocenter along a segment toward the northeast
(Figure 12B). We suggest that deposition of the
Heather Formation and the lower part of the
Draupne Formation occurred during a phase of
ongoing linkage of fault segments.
The structural relationships and the depocenter
patterns we observe are consistent with the pat-
tern of stress redistribution due to slip on a nearby
interacting fault (Segall and Pollard, 1980; Bürgmann
et al., 1994; Willemse et al., 1996; Willemse, 1997).
Fault segments in certain positions relative to
active segments develop increased displacement
rates as a result of frequent stress redistribution
following episodes of slip (Cowie, 1998; Gupta
et al., 1998). In the case of normal faults, en ech-
elon or co-planar segments experience enhanced
activity, whereas faults in the immediate hanging
wall and footwall are inhibited from further
activity. In the case discussed here, the data sug-
gest that the process of fault growth involved
increased activity on one or more segments in
the south. The northern segments, i.e., toward
the tip, experienced enhanced activity and even-
tually became incorporated into the growing
structure by linkage. The migration of the linkage
events is producing the overall northward propa-
gation of the fault.
This study has not attempted to address the early
patterns of fault initiation. A recent sedimentologi-
cal study of the earliest synrift unit in this area, the
Tarbert Formation, shows, however, that the intra-
basinal faults controlled small depocenters during
the Bajocian (Davies et al., 1998). Thus the intra-
basinal faults probably initiated early as a simple en
echelon array along which the segments later
became progressively more active and linked to
form the Statfjord East fault. Lateral growth of the
overall fault structure by linkage was on the order
of 5–10 km in approximately 20 m.y. The time
scale of activity increasing on an individual seg-
ment and that segment becoming incorporated
into the large fault structure probably is on the
order of 5 m.y. It is difficult to infer the slip rates for
the Statfjord East fault segments because of the
absence of synrift units on the footwall. In the case
of the intrabasinal faults, the data in Figure 11
imply slip rates on the order of a few millimeters
per 1000 yr (assuming reasonable interval veloci-
ties for the Viking Group).
 Dawers and Underhill 59

Heather Fm Lower Draupne Fm

Bathonian- Late Oxfordian -
Late Oxfordian Kimmeridgian

34/7-5 34/7-5

34/7-17 34/7-17

34/7-23A 34/7-23A
33/9-7 33/9-7
34/7-23S
34/7-23S
Limit of Seismically
100

33/9-12 Main 33/9-12

Main 34/7-24S Depo- 34/7-24S
Depo- 250
50 centers
centers
Re
so
lve

25
d Heather

34/7-21 34/7-21
250 50
300 200 60 40
30
350
34/7-21A 35 34/7-21A
S 400
S 25
10
15

er
150
ta

ta

40

h
t
tf

ea
tf

20
jo

jo

45
H
rd

s
rd

p
edg

la
fa

fa

e of

on
ul

stud
ul

y ar N
t

ea

(A) 0 2 km (B)
Figure 12—Thickness variation (in two-way traveltime) of shale successions. (A) Heather Formation and (B) lower
Draupne Formation. Fault segments that control thickness variation are shown as bold lines; faults that were much less
active or had not yet formed are shown as thinner lines. Modified from Dawers et al. (1999) and Gupta et al. (1998).

Implications for Tectonic-Stratigraphic shale-prone sequences with aggradational stratal

Models of Rifts geometries indicates high subsidence rates, i.e., dis-
placement rates on faults are creating accommoda-
Previous studies in the North Sea and elsewhere tion space faster than it can be filled with sediment.
illustrate several tectonic-stratigraphic features that Prosser (1993) referred to these patterns as the rift
are common to half-graben basins and that can be initiation, when displacement rates are relatively
linked to spatial and temporal variability of normal low, and the rift climax, when displacement rates
fault activity. The facies distribution in shallow- are relatively high. The rift-basin shale sequences
marine and lacustrine rift settings shows broadly commonly are overlain by a sand-prone sequence
similar patterns consisting of shallow-marine or flu- as faulting slows and eventually ceases.
vial sediments during the initiation of the basin The stratigraphic framework of the Statfjord East
overlain by deeper water shales (e.g., Schlische, area consists of a similar rift-basin succession, i.e.,
1991; Prosser, 1993). The frequent association of Tarbert Formation sandstone overlain by shales of
 60
Southern 2 Segments Segments Interact,
34/7-5
Most Active During Focusing
34/7-5
Heather Deposition Shale Deposition
New Depocenter
33/9-7 34/7-17
34/7-23A
Develops 34/7-17
33/9-7
34/7-23S
33/9-12 34/7-23A
34/7-23S
34/7-24S Slight Northward 33/9-12
Shift of Depocenter 34/7-24S

34/7-21 Bathonian - Late Oxfordian -

34/7-21A 34/7-21A
n its its Kimmeridgian
Late Oxfordian n
up e rU 34/7-21 e rU
ro ld up
tG +O Heather Fm
ro Old
en tG +
Br o up en up
Br o
Gr Gr
in in
nl (A) nl (B)
Du N Du N
0 0
2 km 2 km
Faults and Synrift Sequences

Activity Localizes on Further Northward Migration

Stafjord Fault & Diminishes of Faulting and
on Southernmost ? Shoreline Migration
Statfjord East Segment 34/7-5
?
33/9-5 34/7-5
34/7-17 33/9-5
33/9-7
? 34/7-23A
Continued Draupne 33/9-7
Shale Deposition 34/7-23S 34/7-17
Thin Draupne 33/9-12
34/7-23A
Shale Drape 34/7-23S
? 33/9-12
?
34/7-24S Inactive Portion
34/7-24S
e of En Echelon
f ac
34/7-21 re Segments
rp
ca 34/7-21A Volgian ho Ryazanian
S S
d
de
ra ce n its 34/7-21A 34/7-21
eg a ts
D r ef e rU ni
ld p U
ho up O (C) ou lder (D)
S ro p + Gr
Heather Fm tG u ent +O
Statfjord ren Gro Heather Fm Br roup
Fault B lin
n G
Du lin
D un
Statfjord East N N
0 0
2 km 2 km

Figure 13—Evolution for the Statfjord East area from the time of (A) Heather deposition, (B) lower Draupne shale deposition, (C) upper Draupne
deposition during the Volgian, and (D) earliest Cretaceous.

the Heather and Draupne formations, followed by
discontinuous shoreface sandstones in the upper-
most part of the Draupne Formation (Figure 2) (see
also Dawers et al., 1999). The Tarbert Formation is
known from well data to be widespread in this part
of the East Shetland Basin and thickest in structural
lows (e.g., Underhill et al., 1997). These characteris-
tics are consistent with the Tarbert Formation hav-
ing been deposited across a region of distributed
faulting with little total strain early in the rifting
episode (Yielding et al., 1992). The deeper marine,
more focused nature and wedge-shaped geometry of
the Heather Formation and lower Draupne
Formation shale depocenters observed here (Figure
12), and on the larger scale as well (Lee and Hwang,
1993), may be attributed to the enhancement of dis-
placement rates, and hence hanging-wall subsidence
rates, as individual fault segments interacted. During
deposition of the sand-prone upper Draupne For-
mation (Figure 13C, D), despite the regional fall in
sea level, evidence for local shoreline retrogradation
suggests that fault growth led to a relative sea level
rise within our study area.
Our observations suggest that the structural char-
acter of the rift climax is that of a still highly seg-
mented fault (Figures 12; 13A, B). We interpret the
intrabasinal splays to represent the remnants of en
echelon segments that show a pattern of increased
activity and cessation that migrated northward with
time. This process of growth by segment interaction
and linkage encompasses the time periods recorded
by the wedge-shaped shale successions of the
Heather Formation and lower Draupne Formation
(Figures 12; 13A, B). This evolution contrasts with
the view that the border fault is a well-developed
throughgoing structure during the period of high
displacement rate (e.g., Prosser 1993). Rather than
rapid deepening and shale deposition occurring
mainly after segment linkage (due to the newly
linked fault being “underdisplaced” and inhibiting
propagation until a critical displacement-length ratio
is reached (see Schlische and Anders, 1996)), our
observations suggest that rift-climax shale deposi-
tion is closely associated with the interaction of fault
segments prior to the formation of a fully linked fault
array in the latest Jurassic–earliest Cretaceous
(Figure 13D).
An implication of this study is that diachroneity in
rifting might be best explained through the process-
es of fault propagation, interaction, and linkage. Our
results suggest that individual fault segments along
an array may show variable activity over a time scale
on the order of 5 m.y. For example, along the south-
ern part of the Statfjord East fault, most of the activi-
ty occurred in the early part of the rifting, whereas
at its northern tip it appears that fault activity was
confined mostly to the latest Jurassic–earliest
Cretaceous (see Figures 8, 10, 11). The cessation of
Dawers and Underhill 61
activity along the southern part of the Statfjord East
fault appears to be associated with the transfer of
activity onto the Statfjord fault, which overlaps the
Statfjord East structure. Structural evidence of inter-
action at this larger scale is the skewed nature of the
throw distribution on the Statfjord East fault seen in
Figure 9. If the Statfjord East structure as a whole
were to be considered a single isolated fault, then we
would expect the throw distribution to be symmetric
(e.g., Dawers and Anders, 1995). This view implies
that processes discussed here for the intrabasinal
faults, and hence temporal variability, should be
observed along the whole of the Strathspey-Brent-
Statfjord-Statfjord East fault system (Figure 1), and
probably on similar time scales. Some evidence of this
view exists. The Statfjord fault within our study area
appears to have been most active relatively late in the
rifting episode, whereas high rates of displacement
are inferred to have occurred earlier (approximately
late Oxfordian) for the part of the Statfjord segment
south of our study area (Roberts et al., 1993b; A. E.
McLeod, 1999, personal communication).
CONCLUSIONS
Results of integrating seismic stratigraphy with
fault analysis suggest that the Statfjord East fault of
the northern North Sea evolved by fault segment
linkage during Late Jurassic rifting. The intrabasinal
fault splays in the Statfjord East hanging wall repre-
sent inactive tips of earlier formed en echelon seg-
ments; thus they represent an integral part of over-
all fault development rather than being related to
other tectonic events or discrete phases of rifting.
The synrift stratigraphy of the Viking Group, in par-
ticular the thickness variation in the Heather
Formation and lower Draupne Formation shale
sequences, suggests that the subbasins controlled
by these splays young progressively toward the
north. This conclusion is consistent with the seg-
ments becoming progressively more active and
eventually linking in a south-to-north manner. We
attribute this pattern of fault activity and depocen-
ter development to the interaction of normal fault
segments.
The results of this study have several implica-
tions for stratigraphic studies and hydrocarbon
exploration in rift basins. Because the spatial
extent of the fault interaction is determined by the
scale of the fault segments, synrift sequences will
vary spatially along fault systems. For example,
high displacement rates near segment centers
may promote rift-climax stratal patterns and facies
associations, whereas shallow-marine conditions
may persist at fault tips and in overlap zones
between unlinked faults. Thus an improved under-
standing of patterns of fault activity may aid in
62 Faults and Synrift Sequences
reconstructing synrift paleogeographies and may
help to explain discrepancies between regional and
local sea level changes.
As a result of the temporal changes associated
with fault interaction, the apparent duration of the
rift episode may vary if observations are made
using a spatially limited data set. The duration of
the rifting thus may be significantly underrepre-
sented in the stratigraphic record. Moreover,
because stratal patterns are strongly influenced by
local fault interactions, variation in synrift stratal
geometry alone is not sufficient evidence of tempo-
ral variation in the regional strain rate or of multi-
ple rifting events.
REFERENCES CITED
Anders, M. H., and R. W. Schlische, 1994, Overlapping faults,
intrabasin highs, and the growth of normal faults: Journal of
Geology, v. 102, p. 165–179.
Bürgmann, R., D. D. Pollard, and S. J. Martel, 1994, Slip
distributions on faults: effects of stress gradients, inelastic
deformation, heterogeneous host-rock stiffness, and fault
interaction: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 16, p. 1675–1690.
Cartwright, J. A., B. D. Trudgill, and C. S. Mansfield, 1995, Fault
growth by segment linkage: an explanation for scatter in
maximum displacement and trace length data from the
Canyonlands Grabens of SE Utah: Journal of Structural
Geology, v. 17, p. 1319–1326.
Cartwright, J. A., C. Mansfield, and B. Trudgill, 1996, The growth
of faults by segment linkage, in P. G. Buchanan and D. A.
Nieuwland, eds., Modern developments in structural
interpretation, validation and modelling: London, Geological
Society Special Publication 99, p. 163–177.
Childs, C., J. Watterson, and J. J. Walsh, 1995, Fault overlap zones
within developing normal fault systems: Journal of the
Geological Society, London, v. 152, p. 535–549.
Contreras, J., 1999, Tectonic and stratigraphic modeling of the
evolution of continental rift basins: Ph.D. thesis, Columbia
University, New York, 109 p.
Cowie, P. A., 1998, A healing-reloading feedback control on the
growth rate of seismogenic faults: Journal of Structural
Geology, v. 20, p. 1075–1087.
Crider, J. G., and D. D. Pollard, 1998, Fault linkage: three-
dimensional mechanical interaction between echelon
normal faults: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 103,
p. 24,373–24,391.
Dahl, N., and T. Solli, 1993, The structural evolution of the Snorre
field and surrounding areas, in J. R. Parker, ed., Petroleum
geology of northwest Europe: Proceedings from the 4th
Conference, London, The Geological Society, p. 1159–1166.
Davies, S. J., J. R. Underhill, N. H. Dawers, and A. E. McLeod,
1998, The evolution of early syn-rift depositional systems
(abs.): AAPG Hedberg Research Conference Abstracts, p. 33.
Dawers, N. H., and M. H. Anders, 1995, Displacement-length
scaling and fault linkage: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 17,
p. 607–614.
Dawers, N. H., A. M. Berge, K.-O. Häger, C. Puigdefàbregas, and
J. R. Underhill, 1999, Controls on Late Jurassic, subtle sand
distribution in the Tampen Spur area, northern North Sea, in
A. J. Fleet and S. A. R. Boldy, eds., Petroleum geology of NW
Europe: Proceedings from the 5th Conference, London, The
Geological Society, p. 827–838.
Deegan, C. E., and B. J. Scull, 1977, A standard lithostratigraphic
nomenclature for the central and northern North Sea: Bulletin
of the Norwegian Petroleum Directorate, v. 1, 36 p.
Ebinger, C., 1989, Geometric and kinematic development of
border faults and accommodation zones, Kivu-Rusivi rift,
Africa: Tectonics, v. 8, p. 117–133.
Færseth, R. B., 1996, Interaction of Permo–Triassic and Jurassic
extensional fault-blocks during the development of the
northern North Sea: Journal of the Geological Society, London,
v. 153, p. 931–944.
Gawthorpe, R. L., A. J. Fraser, and R. E. Ll. Collier, 1994,
Sequence stratigraphy in active extensional basins:
implications for the interpretation of ancient basin fills: Marine
and Petroleum Geology, v. 11, p. 642–658.
Gawthorpe, R. L., I. Sharp, J. R. Underhill, and S. Gupta, 1997,
Linked sequence stratigraphic and structural evolution of
propagating normal faults: Geology, v. 25, p. 795–798.
Glennie, K. W., and J. R. Underhill, 1998, Origin, development
and evolution of structural styles, in K. W. Glennie, ed.,
Petroleum geology of the North Sea: London, Blackwell
Science, p. 42–84.
Graue, E., W. Helland-Hansen, J. R. Johnsen, L. Lømo, A. Nøttvedt,
K. Rønning, A. Ryseth, and R. J. Steel, 1987, Advance and
retreat of the Brent delta system, Norwegian North Sea, in
J. Brooks and K. Glennie, eds., Petroleum geology of
northwest Europe: London, Graham and Trotman, p. 915–937.
Gupta, S., P. A. Cowie, N. H. Dawers, and J. R. Underhill, 1998,
A mechanism to explain rift basin subsidence and stratigraphic
patterns through fault array evolution: Geology, v. 26,
p. 595–598.
Gupta, S., J. R. Underhill, R. L. Gawthorpe, and I. Sharp, 1999,
Role of fault interaction in controlling syn-rift sediment
dispersal patterns: Miocene, Abu Alaqa Group, Suez rift, Sinai,
Egypt: Basin Research, v. 11, p. 167–189.
Häger, K-O., and M. Smelror, 1997, Reworking of dinocysts as a
means of obtaining useful geological information: a study of
the Upper Jurassic Draupne Formation in the Tampen area,
Norwegian North Sea (abs.): American Association of
Stratigraphic Palynologists, Annual Meeting Abstracts, p. 20.
Hallam, A., 1969, Tectonism and eustasy in the Jurassic: Earth
Science Reviews, v. 5, p. 45–68.
Helland-Hansen, W., M. Ashton, L. Lømo, and R. J. Steel, 1992,
Advance and retreat of the Brent delta: recent contributions to
the depositional model, in A. C. Morton, R. S. Haszeldine,
M. R. Giles, and S. Brown, eds., Geology of the Brent Group:
London, Geological Society Special Publication 61,
p. 109–127.
Lee, M. J., and Y. J. Hwang, 1993, Tectonic evolution and
structural styles of the East Shetland Basin, in J. R. Parker, ed.,
Petroleum geology of northwest Europe: Proceedings of the
4th Conference, London, The Geological Society,
p. 1137–1149.
Leeder, M. R., and R. L. Gawthorpe, 1987, Sedimentary models for
extensional tilt-block/half-graben basins, in M. P. Coward, J. F.
Dewey, and P. L. Hancock, eds., Continental extensional
tectonics: London, Geological Society Special Publication 28,
p. 139–152.
Machette, M. N., S. F. Personius, A. R. Nelson, D. P. Schwartz, and
W. R. Lund, 1991, The Wasatch fault zone, Utah—
segmentation and history of Holocene earthquakes: Journal of
Structural Geology, v. 13, p. 137–149.
Nøttvedt, A., R. H. Gabrielsen, and R. J. Steel, 1995,
Tectonostratigraphy and sedimentary architecture of rift
basins, with reference to the northern North Sea: Marine and
Petroleum Geology, v. 12, p. 889–901.
Nøttvedt, A., A. Berge, N. H. Dawers, R. B. Færseth, K.-O. Häger,
G. Mangerud, and C. Puigdefàbregas, in press, Evaluation of
the syn-rift play potential of the Snorre fault block, in
A. Nøttvedt, ed., Integrated Basins Studies Special Publication:
London, The Geological Society.
Nyberg, I. T., 1987, Statfjord Øst, in A. M. Spencer et al., eds.,
Geology of the Norwegian oil and gas fields: London, Graham
and Trotman, p. 351–362.
Peacock, D. C. P., and D. J. Sanderson, 1991, Displacements,

segment linkage and relay ramps in normal fault zones: Journal
of Structural Geology, v. 13, p. 721–733.
Prosser, S., 1993, Rift-related linked depositional systems and their
seismic expression, in G. D. Williams and A. Dobbs, eds.,
Tectonics and seismic sequence stratigraphy: London,
Geological Society Special Publication 71, p. 35–66.
Rattey, R. P., and A. B. Hayward, 1993, Sequence stratigraphy of a
failed rift system: the Middle Jurassic to Early Cretaceous basin
evolution of the central and northern North Sea, in J. R.
Parker, ed., Petroleum geology of northwest Europe:
Proceedings of the 4th Conference, London, The Geological
Society, p. 215–249.
Ravnås, R., and K. Bondevik, 1997, Architecture and controls on
Bathonian–Kimmeridgian shallow-marine synrift wedges of the
Oseberg-Brage area, northern North Sea: Basin Research, v. 9,
p. 197–226.
Ravnås, R., K. Bondevik, W. Helland-Hansen, L. Lømo, A. Ryseth,
and R. J. Steel, 1997, Sedimentation history as an indicator of
rift initiation and development: the late Bajocian–Bathonian
evolution of the Oseberg-Brage area, northern North Sea:
Norsk Geologisk Tidsskrift, v. 77, p. 205–232.
Rawson, P. F., and L. A. Riley, 1982, Latest Jurassic–Early
Cretaceous events and the “late Cimmerian unconformity” in
the North Sea area: AAPG Bulletin, v. 66, p. 2628–2648.
Richards, P. C., G. K. Lott, H. Johnson, R. W. O’B. Knox, and J. B.
Riding, 1993, Jurassic of the central and northern North Sea,
in R. W. O’B. Knox and G. W. Cordey, eds., Lithostratigraphic
nomenclature of the UK North Sea: Nottingham, British
Geological Society, p. 219.
Roberts, A., G. Yielding, N. J. Kusznir, I. Walker, and D. Dorn-
Lopez, 1993a, Mesozoic extension in the North Sea:
constraints from flexural backstripping, forward modelling
and fault populations, in J. R. Parker ed., Petroleum geology of
northwest Europe: Proceedings of the 4th Conference,
London, The Geological Society, p. 1123–1136.
Roberts, A. M., G. Yielding, and M. E. Badley, 1993b, Tectonic and
bathymetric controls on stratigraphic sequences within
evolving half-graben, in G. D. Williams and A. Dobbs, eds.,
Tectonics and seismic sequence stratigraphy: London,
Geological Society Special Publication 71, p. 87–121.
Schlische, R., 1991, Half-graben basin filling models: new
constraints on continental extensional basin development:
Basin Research, v. 3, p. 123–141.
Schlische, R. W., 1995, Geometry and origin of fault-related folds
in extensional settings: AAPG Bulletin, v. 79, p. 1661–1678.
Schlische, R. W., and M. H. Anders, 1996, Stratigraphic effects and
tectonic implications of the growth of normal faults and
extensional basins, in K. K. Beratan, ed., Reconstructing the
history of Basin and Range extension using sedimentology and
stratigraphy: Boulder, Geological Society of America Special
Paper 303, p. 183–203.
Segall, P., and D. D. Pollard, 1980, Mechanics of discontinuous
faults: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 85, p. 4337–4350.
Sneider, J. S., P. de Clarens, and P. R. Vail, 1995, Sequence
Dawers and Underhill 63
stratigraphy of the Middle to Upper Jurassic, Viking Graben,
North Sea, in R. J. Steel, ed., Sequence stratigraphy on the
northwest European margin: Amsterdam, Elsevier, Norwegian
Petroleum Society Special Publication 5, p. 167–197.
Trudgill, B., and J. Cartwright, 1994, Relay-ramp forms and
normal-fault linkages, Canyonlands National Park, Utah:
Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 106, p. 1143–1157.
Underhill, J. R., 1991a, Implications of Mesozoic–Recent basin
development in the western Inner Moray Firth, UK: Marine
and Petroleum Geology, v. 8, p. 359–369.
Underhill, J. R., 1991b, Controls on Late Jurassic seismic
sequences, Inner Moray Firth, UK North Sea: a critical test of a
key segment of Exxon’s original global cycle chart: Basin
Research, v. 3, p. 79–98.
Underhill, J. R., 1998, Jurassic, in K. W. Glennie, ed., Petroleum
geology of the North Sea: London, Blackwell Science,
p. 245–293.
Underhill, J. R., and M. A. Partington, 1993, Jurassic thermal
doming and deflation in the North Sea: implications of the
sequence stratigraphic evidence, in J. R. Parker, ed., Petroleum
geology of northwest Europe: Proceedings from the 4th
Conference, London, The Geological Society, p. 337–345.
Underhill, J. R., M. J. Sawyer, P. Hodgson, M. D. Shallcross, and
R. L. Gawthorpe, 1997, Implications of fault scarp degradation
for Brent Group prospectivity, Ninian field, northern North
Sea: AAPG Bulletin, v. 81, p. 999–1022.
Vollset, J., and A. G. Doré, 1984, A revised Triassic and Jurassic
lithostratigraphic nomenclature for the Norwegian North Sea:
Norwegian Petroleum Directorate Bulletin no. 3, 53 p.
Walsh, J. J., and J. Watterson, 1991, Geometric and kinematic
coherence and scale effects in normal fault systems, in A. M.
Roberts, G. Yielding, and B. Freeman, eds., The geometry of
normal faults: London, Geological Society Special Publication
56, p. 193–203.
Willemse, E. J. M., 1997, Segmented normal faults: correspondence
between three-dimensional mechanical models and field data:
Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 102, p. 675–692.
Willemse, E. J. M., D. D. Pollard, and A. Aydin, 1996, 3D analyses
of slip distributions on normal fault arrays with consequen-
ces for fault scaling: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 18,
p. 295–309.
Withjack, M. O., J. Olson, and E. Peterson, 1990, Experimental models
of extensional forced folds: AAPG Bulletin, v. 74, p. 1038–1054.
Wu, D., and R. L. Bruhn, 1994, Geometry and kinematics of
active normal faults, South Oquirrh Mountains, Utah:
implications for fault growth: Journal of Structural Geology,
v. 16, p. 1061–1075.
Yielding, G., 1990, Footwall uplift associated with Late Jurassic
normal faulting in the northern North Sea: Journal of the
Geological Society, London, v. 147, p. 219–222.
Yielding, G., M. E. Badley, and A. M. Roberts, 1992, The structural
evolution of the Brent province, in R. S. Haszeldine, M. R.
Giles, and S. Brown, eds., Geology of the Brent Group:
London, Geological Society Special Publication 61, p. 27–43.
64 Faults and Synrift Sequences
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Nancye H. Dawers
Nancye Dawers holds a B.S.
degree from the University of Ken-
tucky, an M.S. degree from the
University of Illinois at Urbana-
Champaign, and an M.Ph. degree
and a Ph.D. from the Lamont-
Doherty Earth Observatory of
Columbia University. Since 1996 she
has been a research associate at the
University of Edinburgh. Nancye’s
research interests include fault
growth, displacement and length scaling in fault popula-
tions, neotectonics, and basin analysis.
John R. Underhill
John Underhill graduated from
Bristol University in 1982 and was
awarded his Ph.D. in 1985 from
the University of Wales. He subse-
quently worked for Shell before mov-
ing to Edinburgh, where he has
recently been promoted to the Chair
of Stratigraphy. John has been award-
ed the European Association of Petro-
leum Geoscientists’ Distinguished
Lecturer award twice, the AAPG
Matson Award once, and was one of AAPG’s 1999 Distin-
guished Lecturers.