Three-dimensional distinct element modelling of relay growth and breaching along normal faults

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsg.2004.02.010Get rights and content

Abstract

Three-dimensional numerical models of neutral (i.e. slip-parallel) relay zones on normal faults that cut massive sandstone host rocks have been constructed using the distinct element method code, Particle Flow Code in 3-D (PFC3D). The models successfully reproduce the geometries, displacement profiles and strains observed in natural relay zones. In contrast to boundary element method simulations, the modelled relay ramps dip towards the hanging wall, consistent with observations of most natural relay zones. The modelling shows that relay zones are stable structures that ‘grow’ by progressive rotation of an approximately planar relay ramp without significant propagation of the relay-bounding faults prior to breaching. Stable growth is terminated when a breaching fault propagates across the top or bottom of the relay ramp. Breaching fault propagation is not instantaneous and the ramp continues to rotate, and therefore transfer displacement between the relay-bounding faults, until they become fully hard linked. Following hard linkage, displacement is accommodated by slip on the through-going fault surface. The modelling results confirm previous conceptual models of relay growth and breaching based on geometric and kinematic analysis of natural relay zones.

Introduction

Displacements on normal faults are rarely accommodated on a single well-defined slip surface, but are partitioned between interacting fault segments (Walsh and Watterson, 1990, Walsh and Watterson, 1991, Peacock and Sanderson, 1991, Peacock and Sanderson, 1994, Cartwright et al., 1995, Cartwright et al., 1996, Childs et al., 1995, Childs et al., 1996, Willemse, 1997). Fault segmentation occurs across a wide range of length scales (Stewart and Hancock, 1991, Trudgill and Cartwright, 1994, Walsh et al., 2003).

The transfer of displacement from one fault segment to another segment that dips in the same direction most often occurs through relay structures (Chadwick, 1986, Ramsay and Huber, 1987, Larsen, 1988), which are zones of high fault-parallel shear strain that provide soft linkage (Walsh and Watterson, 1991) between two interacting fault segments (Fig. 1a–c). Breaching occurs when the fault segments are replaced by a single, through-going fault surface. Typically, breaching faults propagate across either the top or bottom of the relay ramp (e.g. Peacock and Sanderson, 1991, Peacock and Sanderson, 1994, Childs et al., 1995; Fig. 1a and d) though, in previously jointed rocks, breaching faults may reactivate pre-existing joint sets to cut across the centre of the relay zone (Peacock, 2001). Intact relay zones are suggested to be important sediment entry points into fault-bounded extensional basins (Gawthorpe and Leeder, 2000), and both intact and breached relays can influence the sealing capacities and/or flow properties of faults in hydrocarbon reservoirs (Morley et al., 1990, Childs et al., 1995). Thus, knowledge of relay growth and breaching is important to understand the kinematics of fault growth and segment linkage, fault zone development (Cartwright et al., 1995, Walsh et al., 2003) and has direct relevance to hydrocarbon exploration and production (Peacock, 2002).

Conceptual models of relay growth and breaching are most often based on detailed geometric analyses of outcrop- to seismic-scale relays (Peacock and Sanderson, 1991, Peacock and Sanderson, 1994, Trudgill and Cartwright, 1994, Childs et al., 1995, Huggins et al., 1995, Cartwright et al., 1996, Walsh et al., 1999). These models suggest that breaching occurs when strain can no longer be accommodated by continuous deformation within the relay zone (e.g. Fig. 1a). There are, however, few published kinematic (as opposed to purely geometric) studies of natural relays that provide direct observational support for such conceptual models. A notable exception is the work of Childs et al., 1993, Childs et al., 1995 who examined the growth and breaching of relay zones on syn-sedimentary normal faults from 3-D seismic datasets and analogue models. These authors applied displacement backstripping methods (Chapman and Meneilly, 1991, Petersen et al., 1992, Childs et al., 1993, Clausen and Korstgård, 1994) to reconstruct the pre-breaching fault displacements and relay ramp geometries. These kinematic studies support the simple geometric models in which relays are established, maintain a stable configuration and then eventually breach. The conditions required for accurate application of the displacement backstripping method (Childs et al., 1993, Childs et al., 1995) are rarely met and, even where they are, the lateral resolution of many seismic datasets does not permit kinematic analysis of relay zones where the fault separation is less than a few tens of metres. Similarly, the imperfect (i.e. <3-D) exposure of relays in outcrop and the absence of growth strata in most cases preclude kinematic analysis. Numerical models that capture the mechanics of fault segment interaction therefore provide a useful tool to examine growth and breaching of sub-seismic relays.

The aims of this study are twofold. The first is to show that three-dimensional (3-D) numerical simulations based on the distinct element method (DEM; Cundall and Strack, 1979) can be used to model the kinematics of a small, neutral (i.e. ‘slip-parallel’) relay zone (Peacock and Sanderson, 1991, Walsh et al., 1999; Fig. 1a) in a massive, intact sandstone from the time the overlapping faults first become geometrically coherent (i.e. conserving and transferring displacements between the segments; see Walsh and Watterson, 1991), to the point of relay breaching and beyond. The second aim is to understand better the stability and breaching of relay ramps. Crucially, the DEM as implemented in the program ‘Particle Flow Code in 3-D’ (PFC3D; Itasca Consulting Group, 1999a) allows realistic modelling of fracture propagation and accumulation of large fault displacements and inelastic strains (e.g. Strayer and Suppe, 2002), difficult feats using continuum numerical schemes (Morgan and Boettcher, 1999). Our work therefore complements previous studies into the mechanics of fault segment interaction using boundary element method simulations based on the theory of linear elasticity (Section 2). We should emphasize, however, that the question of how relay zones initiate was not addressed by our modelling. Relay zones can form through bifurcation of a propagating fault tip-line, propagation of a segmented fault array or through lateral propagation and subsequent interaction of previously independent structures (Mandl, 1987, Peacock and Sanderson, 1991, Peacock and Sanderson, 1994, Childs et al., 1995, Childs et al., 1996, Huggins et al., 1995, Cartwright et al., 1996; see Walsh et al., 2003 for discussion). Though a distinction between these mechanisms is not always clear from natural data (Childs et al., 1995) our modelling results are believed to be valid for all neutral relay zones regardless of how they initiated.

Section snippets

Previous work

The boundary element method (BEM) treats a faulted rock volume as a homogeneous, linear elastic material cut by displacement discontinuities. Fault surfaces are discretized as arbitrarily shaped arrays of polygonal elements and the displacement is assumed to be constant across each element (e.g. Willemse, 1997, Crider and Pollard, 1998). In the boundary element method code ‘Poly3d’ (Thomas, 1993), the model is loaded by prescribing tractions or displacements at the centre of each element and/or

Distinct element method

The distinct element method simulates the behaviour of elastic particles that interact at point contacts under the effect of specified force or displacement boundary conditions (Cundall and Strack, 1979; Fig. 2a). In PFC3D, interactions between spherical particles (‘balls’) are controlled by their normal and shear stiffnesses and, in the case of non-bonded particles, by a Coulomb friction law applied at ball–ball interfaces (Fig. 2). The stiffnesses are scaled according to particle size. An

Relay zone geometry and displacement transfer

Fig. 5a is a horizon map from the centre of a typical PFC3D simulation after 0.27 units (ca. 0.13 m) of boundary displacement (boundary displacement ca. 3.2% of the fault separation). The horizon, which was originally planar, has been offset across the two faults. The structure contour pattern shows that the horizon is gently inclined within the footwall and hanging wall blocks indicating that most of the displacement (ca. 90%) has been accommodated by slip on the faults rather than by

Comparison with natural relays

An important test of the ‘validity’ of the numerical modelling results is how closely the models reproduce features seen in natural relay zones (cf. Crider and Pollard, 1998). In the following section, we compare the geometries, displacement transfer characteristics and strains obtained from the numerical simulations with those from natural relay zones.

Fig. 10a shows a relay ramp on a normal fault that cuts well-bedded sandstones and shales (Huggins et al., 1995). This relay zone, which is

Discussion

Distinct element models are capable of reproducing many of the geometric and kinematic features of relay zones embodied in existing conceptual models (e.g. Peacock and Sanderson, 1994, Childs et al., 1995). Early stage growth is characterized by a stable relay ramp configuration with progressive ramp rotation as displacement accumulates. Ramp rotation is eventually followed by ramp breaching along the hinges of the relay ramp, with subsequent displacement localizing on the through-going fault

Conclusions

  • 1.

    Relay zone models based on bonded particle simulations using the distinct element method code PFC3D successfully reproduce the geometries, displacement profiles and strains recorded in neutral (i.e. slip-parallel) relay zones on normal faults that cut homogeneous sandstone host rocks.

  • 2.

    Relay zones are stable structures that ‘grow’ by progressive rotation of an approximately planar ramp with limited fault tip propagation.

  • 3.

    Stable growth ends when a breaching fault propagates across the top or bottom

Acknowledgements

This work was funded through an Industry Technology Facilitator (ITF) Joint Industry Project sponsored by ExxonMobil, Norsk Hydro, JNOC and Statoil (1999–2001). We are very grateful to Jim Hazzard for providing his Springwell sandstone calibrations. Thanks to Phil Hall, Elizabeth Sweeney and Adriaan van Herk of the Fault Analysis Group for assistance with data analysis. Chris Dart, Hugh Kerr, Dave Reynolds, Martin Schöpfer, Bill Shea, Øyvind Steen, Uko Suzuki, Jon Vold and especially Peter

References (55)

  • A. Nicol et al.

    The shapes, major axis orientations and displacement patterns of fault surfaces

    Journal of Structural Geology

    (1996)
  • D.C.P. Peacock

    The temporal relationship between joints and faults

    Journal of Structural Geology

    (2001)
  • D.C.P. Peacock

    Propagation, interaction and linkage in normal fault systems

    Earth-Science Reviews

    (2002)
  • D.C.P. Peacock et al.

    Displacements, segment linkage and relay ramps in normal fault zones

    Journal of Structural Geology

    (1991)
  • D.C.P. Peacock et al.

    Field examples and numerical modelling of oversteps and bends along normal faults in cross-section

    Tectonophysics

    (1994)
  • K. Petersen et al.

    Evolution of a salt-related listric growth fault near the D-1 well, block 5605, Danish North Sea: displacement history and salt kinematics

    Journal of Structural Geology

    (1992)
  • I.S. Stewart et al.

    Scales of structural heterogeneity within neotectonic normal fault zones in the Aegean region

    Journal of Structural Geology

    (1991)
  • L.M. Strayer et al.

    Out-of-plane motion of a thrust sheet during along-strike propagation of a thrust ramp: a distinct element approach

    Journal of Structural Geology

    (2002)
  • J.J. Walsh et al.

    Fault relays, bends and branch-lines

    Journal of Structural Geology

    (1999)
  • J.J. Walsh et al.

    Formation of segmented normal fault: a 3-D perspective

    Journal of Structural Geology

    (2003)
  • E.J.M. Willemse et al.

    Three-dimensional analyses of slip distributions on normal fault arrays with consequences for fault scaling

    Journal of Structural Geology

    (1996)
  • B. Wu et al.

    Stress-induced ultrasonic wave velocity anisotropy in a sandstone

    International Journal of Rock Mechanics, Mining Sciences and Geomechanical Abstracts

    (1991)
  • J.A. Cartwright et al.

    The growth of normal faults by segment linkage

  • R.A. Chadwick

    Extension tectonics in the Wessex Basin, southern England

    Journal of the Geological Society of London

    (1986)
  • T.J. Chapman et al.

    The displacement patterns associated with a reverse reactivated normal fault

  • C. Childs et al.

    Fault overlap zones within developing normal fault systems

    Journal of the Geological Society of London

    (1995)
  • C. Childs et al.

    A model for the structure and development of fault zones

    Journal of the Geological Society of London

    (1996)
  • Cited by (76)

    • Conjugate relay zones: geometry of displacement transfer between opposed-dipping normal faults

      2019, Journal of Structural Geology
      Citation Excerpt :

      Overlapping fault segments that form the boundaries of relay ramps are characterised by displacement gradients that are higher than those outside of the ramp (Peacock and Sanderson, 1991, 1994, Fig. 1a). The complementarity of displacement and elevated displacement gradients at relay ramps has been described many times and the strain within ramps is generally described as shearing or rotation with localised extension of the ramp (Peacock and Sanderson, 1994; Childs et al., 1995; Huggins et al., 1995; Ferrill et al., 1999; Ferrill and Morris, 2001; Imber et al., 2004; Soliva and Benedicto, 2004). Less well understood is what happens when two overlapping faults have opposed dip directions.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    1

    Present address: Reactivation Research Group, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Durham, Science Laboratories, South Road, Durham DH1 3LE, UK

    2

    Present address: STATS Geophysical, Porterswood House, Porterswood, St. Albans, AL3 6PQ, UK

    View full text