Structural Study of The Carboniferous Coals in The Gasswater Coalmine, Ayrshire.

Masters Thesis
Alexander James Monks, BSc (Hons) Geology

Structural Study
of the Carboniferous Coals
in the Gasswater Coalmine, Ayrshire.
School of Earth and Environment,
University of Leeds,
Leeds,
United Kingdom,
LS2 9JT
August 19, 2014
Word Count: 9930
Abstract
Data from the excavation of the Gasswater Coal Mine, Ayrshire in the Midland Valley was
studied to understand the structure and evolution of the Carboniferous Coals. The study found
evidence of three main tectonic events: (1) Namurian, East-West extension created regionally from
a sinistral transtension event (2) Mid Westphalian, North-South extension created by a regional
sinistral transtension event (3) Late Westphalian, (post Middle Coal Measure) Strike slip and folding
in response to a dextral transpression event and change in regional stress elds causing reactivation.
Regional stress elds are found in Caldwell and Young (2013), Ritchie et al. (2003) and Read et al.
(2002). During the rst event, E-W extensional fault were created, these are only seen in the older
Limestone Coal Formation. The second event created faults with down throw to the South as a result
of the sinistral transtension event, and then in places this allowed for the creation of depocentres above
the downthrown block. These were then later folded, rather than reactivated along the normal faults,
to be in a horizontal position seen in the data. The last event observed within the data is the folding
of the beds to dip North and then followed closely by a dextral strike slip event. This event is a result
of a dextral transpression.
Recommendations are then presented in order to update the pre-existing geological map of
the area, both adding new information and removing errors found in the area. Suggestions are
also made into recently published Oil and Gas report in the Midland Valley. The Limestone Coal
Formation is identied by the published report is a potential reservoir. This study recommends that
detailed analysis of small scale areas needs to be undertaken in order to avoid any underestimation
or overestimation in valuing hydrocarbon reserves.
University of Leeds
Department of Earth Sciences
Declaration of Academic Integrity
To be attached to any essay, Dissertation, or project work
submitted as part of a University examination.
I have read the University regulations on Cheating and Plagiarism, and I state that this
piece of work is my own, and it does not contain any unacknowledged work from any
other sources.
Name:
Signed:
Date:
Programme of Study:
Acknowledgments
I would like to express my very great appreciation for David Richardson from Kier, Dr Taija Torvela
and Dr Andrew McCaig from the University of Leeds who have added valuable and constructive
suggestions throughout the duration of this report. I would like to express my very great appreciation
to Ben Craven for his technical support in running the programs needed in the study. Time taken
by the sta at the BGS oce to show me their workplace and take us to working mines of the area
gave me the understanding needed to take the project on further.
I would like to thank Rose Garner and my family for their support and guidance over the duration
of this project. Lastly, my thanks to my peers on the MSc courses who have oered help and advice
as my thesis developed.
Contents
List of Figures 3
1 Introduction 7
1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1.2 Project Aims . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2 Literature Review 11
2.1 Plate Tectonics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.2 Deep Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.3 Geological History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.3.1 Ordovician . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.3.2 Silurian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.3.3 Devonian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.3.4 Carboniferous . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.4 Lithology Of The Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2.5 Fault Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2.5.1 Normal Faults . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2.5.2 Relay Ramps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.5.3 Strike Slip . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2.5.4 Coal Correlation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3 Methodology 26
3.1 Data collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
3.2 Model Building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
3.3 Attribute Creation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
4 Results 31
4.1 Final Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
4.2 Surfaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
4.2.1 1230 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
4.2.2 3930 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
4.2.3 6500 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
4.2.4 8300 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
4.3 Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
1
4.4 Thickness Maps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
4.5 Geological Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
5 Interpretation 55
5.1 Surface Interpretation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
5.1.1 1230 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
5.1.2 3930 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
5.1.3 6500 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
5.1.4 8300 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
5.2 Structural History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
5.3 Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
5.4 Thickness Maps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
5.5 Updates to the Geological Maps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
6 Discussion 65
6.1 Structural History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
6.2 Faults . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
6.3 Published Map Interpretation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
6.4 Oil and Gas Potential . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
7 Conclusion 72
References 75
A Surfaces 79
List of Figures
1.1 Map of the distribution of coal throughout the British Isles, yellow indicates coal that is not
from the Coal Measures. (Northern Mine Research Society, 2013) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1.2 Map showing the location of the Gasswater Coal Mine in Ayrshire, South West Scotland.
Inset is the location of the mine compared to rest of Scotland (Maps Modied after EDINA) 9
1.3 Location of the Midland Valley in relation to the Southern Highlands and Southern Uplands.
(Modied after Bluck (2013) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.1 Image showing the reconstructions of the plate tectonics from the Neoproterozoic to Late
arboniferous. (Oliver, 2002) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.2 Continuation of Figure 2.1. (Oliver, 2002) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.3 Image showing what the Midland Valley may of looked like during the Ordovician. This
potentially is the basement found by Dentith and Hall (1989). (Longman et al., 1979) . . . . 15
2.4 Figure A and B shows the plate tectonics conguration during the late Devonian and Carboniferous
respectivly, image C and D shows a N-S cross section over the same period. (Caldwell and
Young, 2013) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.5 Table showing all the dierent structural, deposition and environmental processes that occured
during the Carboniferous in the Midland Valley (Read et al., 2002) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.6 Table showing the main units in the Coal Measures and Limestone Coal Formation, with their
known lithologies. (Compiled using Browne et al. (1999) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2.7 Image showing the four stages of the evolution of normal faults. Note how the displacement
across the faults are not consistent. (Cowie et al., 2008) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
2.8 Figure after Morley et al. (1990) showing the dierent geometries of normal faults that can
develop as a result of fault interaction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.9 Image showing the evolution of a relay ramp from the interaction of two normal faults.
(Peacock and Sanderson, 1994) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2.10 Figure showing all the dierent styles of faulting that can result from strike slip. Notice how
strike slip can fold beds, increasing and decreasing topography. (Cunningham and Mann, 2007) 23
2.11 Correlation of the same coal seams with dierent names across dierent operators and their
ages, yellow indicates coal seams found in this study. LCM= Lower Coal Measures, MCM=
Middle Coal Measures, UCM= Upper Coal Measures. (Modied after Chrone (2000) . . . . 24
2.12 A table comparing the dierent names for the same time period in the Carboniferous. (Heckel
and Clayton, 2006) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3
List of Figures 4
3.1 Showing the main two data formats DXFs are the black lines and the point data are the blue
dots. Also shown is the surface that is created using the two formats. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
3.2 Image showing how the lower blue surface is protruding through the higher red surface. . . . 28
3.3 Image on the left, shows the DXF osetting the beds marking where fault was interpreted to
be by the engineers on site. To the right is an image showing the studies interpretation of the
fault using the Fault Model section in petrel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
3.4 Image showing maximum and minumum curvature, note how the minimum curvature is
perpendicular to the maximum. (Modied after Bergbauer and Pollard (2003) . . . . . . . . 30
4.1 The nal full scale model with all the faults interpreted overlain, interpretation done using
the DXF les and attibutes to aid in this process. Larger faults have been interpreted across
the surfaces. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
4.2 Showing the edge detection attribute on the surface, reds indicates detection of an edge, blues
shows a low detection of an edge. (Scale is in Meters) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
4.3 Image showing the inuential data attribute, reds and blue both indicate points which inuence
the 3D geometry of the surface. (Scale is in Meters) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
4.4 Image showing the dip angle attribute, this highlights any change in dip over the surface.
(Scale is in Meters) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
4.5 Image showing the azimuth of the dip direction and how this changes over the surface. (Scale
is in Meters) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
4.6 The nal surface with all the faults interpreted overlain, interpretation done using the DXF
les and attibutes to aid in this process. Larger faults have been interpreted across the
surfaces. (Scale is in Meters) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
is in Meters) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
is in Meters) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
List of Figures 5
is in Meters) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
4.22 N-S cross section through surfaces 7100, 7200, 7300, 7430, 7500 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
4.23 Cross section through surfaces 6600, 6800,7000, 7050. Showing how the horizontal faults were
justied when interpreting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
4.24 Two main faults that die out laterally, with smaller faults inbetween and surrounding the
area, on the 1230 surface. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
4.25 Image of the 1230 surface showing a fault with the downthrow to the West. . . . . . . . . . . 51
4.26 True vertical thickness between surfaces 8300 and 7900. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
4.27 True vertical thickness between surfaces 8400 and 8500. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
4.28 Image showing the published geological map of the area overlain on the studies geological model. 54
5.1 Annotated section of gure 4.22 showing the N-S cross section through surfaces 7100, 7200,
7300, 7430, 7500. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
5.2 Annotated image of gure 4.23 showing the cross section through surfaces 6600, 6800, 7000,
7050. Showing how the horizontal faults were justied when interpreting. . . . . . . . . . . . 59
5.3 Annotated thickness map of gure 4.26 showing the location of the faults that can be detected. 60
5.4 Annotated thickness map of gure 4.27 showing the location of the faults that can be detected.
Inset is a schematic Length Vs Displacement prole showing how displacement decreases
laterally. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
5.5 Geological map overlain on top of the model of this study with interpretation of which faults
are present (solid lines) and those that need to be moved or not in place (dashed lines) . . . . 63
5.6 Updated nal model of the Gasswater Coal Mine from the published Geological map of the
area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
6.1 Schematic 3D model of the structural evolution of the Gasswater Coal Mine in the Carboniferous,
Note that the true thickness of the Lower Coal Measures is not known from this studies data. 68
6.2 Image showing the critical factors needed for fault seal analysis, we can see that the resolution
is increasing in size as you move to the right. (Knipe et al., 1988) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
List of Figures 6
A.1 Interpreted surface showing the distribution of the faults. This surfaces is deposited in the
early Namurian known as the Limestone Coal Formation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
early Westphalian also called the Lower Coal Measures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
early Westphalian also called the Lower Coal Measures. The faults found in the west are
interpreted to be a result of the strike slip movement NOT the early Namurian E-W extension 86
Mid Westphalian also called the Middle Coal Measures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
Mid Westphalian also called the Middle Coal Measures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
1
Introduction
7
1. INTRODUCTION 8
1.1 Introduction
Coal has been found in excavations sites from the Roman era in Britain, however its use in written
accounts is sparse. Despite this there is strong evidence for it being used for metal work and cremation.
(Smith, 1997) Coal mining is one of the oldest major industries in Scotland and by the 1680s historians
estimate that one in every two ships was exporting coal to location abroad. Due to the high demand
for coal the National Coal Board was set up, which later became the British Coal Corporation (National
Archives of Scotland, 2006)
The distribution of coal throughout Britain is widespread as shown in gure 1.1 below, taken from
Northern Mine Research Society (2013). Each of the numbers represents the location of a coal basin. It
is possible to ascertain that coal is distributed mainly in South Wales, the Midlands and Scotland. In a
report on coal production in 2013 the Coal Authority estimated there was combined output of 12,673,154
tonnes of coal in the UK. Out of this number Scotland accounts for 2,829,154 tonnes, with all of this
output having been excavated from open cast mines mainly located in the Midland Valley. (The Coal
Authority, 2013)
Figure 1.1: Map of the distribution of coal throughout the British Isles, yellow indicates coal that is not from the
Coal Measures. (Northern Mine Research Society, 2013)
1. INTRODUCTION 9
Figure 1.2: Map showing the location of the Gasswater Coal Mine in Ayrshire, South West Scotland. Inset is the
location of the mine compared to rest of Scotland (Maps Modied after EDINA)
Gasswater Coal Mine is located in Ayrshire, in the South West of Scotland. Figure 1.2 is a map
depicting the seam extents of coal marked on with insets showing its relative position in Scotland.
Gasswater in geological terms is part of the Midland Valley Terrane which to the south has the Southern
Uplands accretionary prism and to the North the Southern Highlands also known as the Dalradian super
group. The faults that bound this terrane are to the Southern Upland fault to the south and the Highland
Boundary fault to the North, this can be seen in gure 1.3 modied after Bluck (2013)
Figure 1.3: Location of the Midland Valley in relation to the Southern Highlands and Southern Uplands. (Modied
after Bluck (2013)
1. INTRODUCTION 10
1.2 Project Aims
So far in the Gasswater mine, no attempt has been made to produce a 3D model of the area and
therefore no attempt has been made to explain the distribution of small scale faults that have been
recorded within the data. The area under study is below seismic resolution and if seen would only show
up as a few wavelets. Many of the larger scale areas lack the detail that smaller scale sites oer as a
proxy. Small fault networks can drastically aect where the minerals may be preferentially deposited or
migration of hydrocarbons, so large sites may want to ask what is the small scale distribution of faults?
as a result they may then turn to using a small scale analogue on an area to gather what information
that is relevant to hydrocarbon or mining industries.
In order to answer this question and address these problems this study will create a model that
shows the distribution of the faults and then observe how the relationships of smaller faults are related
to the literature. This will then enable recommendations to be made to parties who may have an interest
in the area when exploring for hydrocarbons and also give updates to the pre-existing geological map
of the area. Using dierent attributes analysis in petrel this study aims to use this feature to aid in
the interpretation of faults on the surfaces, aswells as this, during excavation the location of faults were
recorded and are included in the studies data.
To summarise, this projects main aims are:
Show the data in 3D
Understand the 3D distribution and geometry of the faults in the area
Link the structural history of the area to that already published in the literature
Make reccomendations that can be made to any industry interested in the Midland Valley
Assess whether the British Geological Society (BGS) published map of the area can be updated to
be more accurate
2
Literature Review
11
2. LITERATURE REVIEW 12
The aim of this chapter is to give a broad understanding of the complex Late-Carboniferous geological
history of Scotland. The area has undergone many dierent phases of deformation throughout its history,
using the literature already published this study will be able to link the deposition of sediments and local
geological structures to the ongoing main deformation phases at the time.
2.1 Plate Tectonics
The tectonic evolution of Scotland is summed up nicely by Oliver (2002), which is seen on the next
page in gure 2.1 and gure 2.2. Throughout its geological history, Scotland and the Midland Valley
have moved to dierent places due to this tectonic movement, starting o just south of the equator.
Image A: Around 750Ma Scotland then begins moving South, towards the South pole.
Image B: By 580MA the supercontinent Pannotia has formed
Image C: Plate movement then changes direction and moves in a Northwards direction from the
opening of the Iapetus Ocean at its greatest extent it has move Scotland around 40 South.
Image D: As the Iapetus closes there is formation of the Midland Valley Arc due to the subduction
of the ocean.
Image E: Avalonia breaks o and Rheic Ocean forms between it and Gondwana
Image F: During the Mid-Silurian, Avalonia containing the rest of Britain soft docks against
Scotland near the equator,
Image G: Shortly after this in the Mid Silurian the Baltic tectonic plate collides with Lauretia and
Avalonia.
Image H: The super continent of Pangea has formed and siberia breaking o.
2.2 Deep Structure
There is a lot of uncertainty regarding what lays underneath the Midland Valley and questions
have been raised by scholars as to the nature and conguration of this basement. Geophysical studies
have been undertaken to understand this basement. Freeman et al. (1988) studied a BIRPS seismic
survey through Scotland and identied four terranes. These were identied as The Midland Valley, Sub
Continental Subduction Complex, Lake District and The Southern Continent, and it was concluded that
the rst two listed were located to the north of the Iapetus Ocean and the last two were located to the
south. In-between these two blocks is the Iapetus suture and a study by Soper et al. (1992) identied
this suture as northward inclined showing that the the crust was subducted towards the North.
Further work by Dentith and Hall (1989) looked at the Midland Valley in more detail identifying
three reectors. The top two layers identied are the Carboniferous and Upper Old Red Sandstone
sediments and below this separated by a unconformity, is the Lower Old Red Sandstone plus the lower
Paleozoic sediments. Deeper reectors dont correlate with the tops of these and it was concluded that
this was an anomalously shallow zone and most likely one terrane of volcanic in origin possibly a result
of the Ordovician volcanic arc.
Figure 2.1: Image showing the reconstructions of the plate tectonics from the Neoproterozoic to Late arboniferous.
(Oliver, 2002)
Figure 2.2: Continuation of Figure 2.1. (Oliver, 2002)
2.3 Geological History
2.3.1 Ordovician
During the Ordovician period the main units deposited in the Midland Valley are a marine clastic
sequences overlaying the Ballentrae Ophiolite, an obducted oceanic crust (Longman et al., 1979). Although
the exposure of rocks in this period are poor and conned to the margins in the Midland Valley (Trewin
and Thirlwall, 2002). These conglomerates were thought to of been deposited at the toes of submarine
fans. Evidence that the source of these came from the North with the faults having a down throw to the
South is presented by Longman et al. (1979) citing Williams 1962. Nearby there was an volcanic arc in
the middle of the Midland Valley shown in gure 2.3. We can see that the uplift of the block was being
eroded and then deposited to the North and South in basins created by availability of accommodation
space.(Longman et al., 1979)
Figure 2.3: Image showing what the Midland Valley may of looked like during the Ordovician. This potentially
is the basement found by Dentith and Hall (1989). (Longman et al., 1979)
2.3.2 Silurian
During the Silurian two main phases of sediment deposition are recognised, the rst is the Llandovery-Early
Wenlock series which creates a marine dominated sequences and the second is a terrestrial dominated
sequence of units deposited by the Early Wenlock. (Bluck (2002); Smith (2009)) During these stages
the transgressive system tracts can be correlated across the basin by the sedimentary facies and fossil
assemblages (Hutton and Murphy, 1987). The source of the clasts in the area, causes problems when
studied they do not match nearby source area of the Southern Uplands, (Bluck, 2002). Leading to the
argument that the source has been faulted out by strike slip movement by Hutton and Murphy (1987)
from the docking of Avalonia.
In the Early Wenlock most of the basins switched to be predominantly terrestrial dominated sequences
(Bluck, 2002) this change has been postulated be due to the closure of the Iapetus Ocean. The dominant
regional forces created a sinistral transpression that caused uplift of the terranes leading to a terrestrial
source. (Hutton and Murphy, 1987)
2.3.3 Devonian
Devonian Old Red Sandstone in the Midland Valley is represented by two cycles of basin, commonly
known as the Lower Old Red Sandstone and the Upper Old Red Sandstone. Each of these units show
repeating ning upwards sequences initiated by faulting. The cycles show the gradual reduction in tectonic
inuence and erosion of source. Due to uplift and attachment of the Midland Valley and Dalradian blocks
caused by the Laurentian plate over thrusting the Baltic plate in the NE, this is thought to be the source
of the sediments for the Old Red Sandstone. (Bluck, 2000)
During the Mid-Devonian there is no deposition of units in the southern Midland Valley. However
during this time, units already deposited recorded folding and development of a cleavage just oblique to
the southern uplands faults. This hiatus possibly caused by a sinistral transpressional regime uplifting
the blocks (Smith (2009);Trewin and Thirlwall (2002))
The Upper Old Red Sandstone forms another ning upwards sequence (Bluck, 2000) comprised
mainly of uvial sandstone that has red and brown colour with localised conglomerate beds. The Upper
Old Red Sandstone rests unconformably on top of the Lower Old Red Sandstone which then progresses
conformably into the Carboniferous units above. (Trewin and Thirlwall, 2002)
2.3.4 Carboniferous
The Carboniferous is an important time for the Midland Valley, as this is where the main coal units
found throughout the Midland Valley are deposited. However the base of the carboniferous is not well
dened and is arbitrary in many places (Read et al. (2002); Timmerman et al. (2009)) The structural
evolution of the Midland Valley is best summarised in Read et al. (2002) and is shown in gure 2.5 on
the next page. We can see that throughout the carboniferous the structural processes have changed the
stress eld, thus resulting in changes in rock response and depositional environments.
In gure 2.4 from Caldwell and Young (2013) we see an important theory of the Midland Valley in
the late Devonian. Image A, shows the expulsion of the Midland Valley to the NE creating a sinistral
strike slip regime. This is then pushed back in the Carboniferous causing a dextral strike slip regime
shown by image B. In cross section C the Midland Valley is in the presence of a back arc basin causing
volcanism and tension. Then later in image D the thermal inuence ceases causing subsidence but also
compression and basin inversion.
Figure 2.4: Figure A and B shows the plate tectonics conguration during the late Devonian and Carboniferous
respectivly, image C and D shows a N-S cross section over the same period. (Caldwell and Young, 2013)
Figure 2.5: Table showing all the dierent structural, deposition and environmental processes that occured during
the Carboniferous in the Midland Valley (Read et al., 2002)
2.4 Lithology Of The Area
Browne et al. (1999) paper on the lithology of the carboniferous rocks in the Midland Valley, discusses
the observed features of each of the stratigraphic units. The units in the study, have been summarised
in the table below:
Figure 2.6: Table showing the main units in the Coal Measures and Limestone Coal Formation, with their known
lithologies. (Compiled using Browne et al. (1999)
We can see the main lithologies present in the area are comprised of similar units. These cycles
are indicative of a wide range of alluvial and lacustrine depositional settings. Environments such as
prograding deltas create the upwards coarsening sequences, wetland forest and soils creates environments
for seatearth and coal to form. (Browne et al., 1999).
2.5 Fault Types
2.5.1 Normal Faults
Dierent models have been put forward in order to explain the possible mechanisms for the growth
of normal faults, one such model is by Cowie et al. (2008) and shown in gure 2.7. We see that image one
the faults begin in isolation. In image two there is continued growth and some segment interaction with
depocentres forming in the centre. Following this, image three shows continued growth of the main faults
and how they interact and link. Lastly in image four there is full fault linkage producing a through going
fault system. This is just one model discussed, each model has its advantages and has places where it has
been simplied, leaving it to exclude certain important fault characteristics. Understanding the controls
of lithology on the geometry of faults is important in predicting the locations of potential hydrocarbons
or mineralization. Understanding these in an area can be used as an analogue to predict the structures
at depths (Peacock, 2002; Morley et al., 1990)
Figure 2.7: Image showing the four stages of the evolution of normal faults. Note how the displacement across
the faults are not consistent. (Cowie et al., 2008)
Dierent styles of faulting associated with these models is summarised in gure 2.8 from Morley et al.
(1990). Figure 2.8 shows the dierent types of geometries, with A, I and II demonstrating where faults
dip in dierent directions and are conjugate. The conjugates in B are then divided into two classications
on whether they dip towards each other (convergent) or away from each other (divergent). A III shows
faults dipping in the same direction, these are synthetic. Following this in B is each of the map views
of what the faults would look like if they were approaching, overlapping, collateral or co-linear. Further
to this, work by Peacock and Sanderson (1996); Cartwright et al. (1995) show that fault length and
displacement can be linked, with in general, the greatest displacement being located in the centre and
decreasing as you move toward the fault tips.
Figure 2.8: Figure after Morley et al. (1990) showing the dierent geometries of normal faults that can develop
as a result of fault interaction.
2.5.2 Relay Ramps
Common observations related to the dierent models of fault formation, are that more often than not
faults end up inuencing each other between these faults relay ramps are common. The main accepted
model is put forward by Peacock and Sanderson (1994) and Hus et al. (2005). These papers propose
that relay ramps form in four dierent steps, as demonstarted in gure 2.9 from Peacock and Sanderson
(1994). Initially in stage one isolated faults nucleate and grow outward. Which is followed by stage two
where a ramp which forms between where the faults start to overlap, resulting in a small relay ramp.
As the faults continue stage three creates fracturing on the inside of the ramps. Finally in stage four a
full breach of the faults occur where they connect. Hus et al. (2005) carried out sandbox modelling and
found that faults tend to link once they are eight times the length of the distance between the two faults.
Figure 2.9: Image showing the evolution of a relay ramp from the interaction of two normal faults. (Peacock and
Sanderson, 1994)
2.5.3 Strike Slip
Strike slip is the movement of two blocks laterally as a result of two forces pulling it. The evolution
of strike slip is described by Kelly et al. (1998) and is summarised below:
1. Initial random vein arrays (fractures)
2. Isolated development of unconnected conjugate arrays
3. Intersection of the larger faults and linkage of smaller faults
4. Breaching of the faults by the larger faults
5. Propagation toward oversteps that form the through-going fault
In some cases the forces deviate from pure strike slip and form transtension or transpression strike
slip. Dewey et al. (1998) describes this as strike slip deformation that deviate from simple shear because
of a component of, respectively shortening or extension orthogonal to the deformation zone. In other
words the forces are not parallel to the location of the fault. Below in gure 2.10 from Cunningham and
Mann (2007) show features associated with strike slip, we see extensional and tensional features in some
circumstances decreasing and increasing topography respectively.
Figure 2.10: Figure showing all the dierent styles of faulting that can result from strike slip. Notice how strike
slip can fold beds, increasing and decreasing topography. (Cunningham and Mann, 2007)
2.5.4 Coal Correlation
Figure 2.11 is a table modied after John Chrone (2000) from Crouch Mining Limited. This shows
all the main coal seams from the Lower Coal Measures, Middle Coal Measures and Upper Coal Measures.
Highlighted in yellow are the surfaces that are present in the study. You can see how each British Coal
(BC) code is correlated across to the Kier and ATH Resources (ATH) names of the same coal seams
along with their age. This table will be used to constrain the age of the surfaces that are created.
However it is known that some of the surfaces in the study are not on this table. Each of these that
have a lower BC code and are known to be older as the surfaces are below the other surfaces when created.
Due to numerous names being given to strata of the same age in dierent papers, this study will use
the table in gure 2.12 a table from Heckel and Clayton (2006) which shows the correlatable names for
units of the same age to compare times across dierent literature.
Figure 2.11: Correlation of the same coal seams with dierent names across dierent operators and their ages,
yellow indicates coal seams found in this study. LCM= Lower Coal Measures, MCM= Middle Coal Measures,
UCM= Upper Coal Measures. (Modied after Chrone (2000)
Figure 2.12: A table comparing the dierent names for the same time period in the Carboniferous. (Heckel and
Clayton, 2006)
3
Methodology
26
3. METHODOLOGY 27
3.1 Data collection
The data available to this study is XYZ point data. Each point has a unique position in space, on
a given co-ordinate system, each of these points mark the base of the given coal seam. Along with the
point data was DXF les which mark out the locations of the faults. These have been interpreted by
engineers as they mined out the data, where the lines are created and are the locations of where there
was no coal.
Collection of the data was done by the site engineers as a joint survey between Kier and Scottish Coal
(who contracted in Kier). The equipment initally used was Kiers total stations TC805, later moving on
to the TC905. Both of these are Lieca models and due to two dierent parties involved some of the data
was collected by Scottish Coal using a geodimeter. On the original survey there was data involving the
coal thickness, surface coding and lines showing when the cuts had occurred in the mine, meaning that
all was left, was data relevant to this study about the structure of the area.
The resolution of the data is on the meter scale, this is due to the engineers being able to get close
up to the face of the coal, recording where there is and isnt coal. As a result of this, apart from a few
spurious points the data is of a high quality. Some of the data points when a surface is made do create
what appear to be in a geological context unreasonable. As a result of this care must be taken when
analysing the accuracy of what has been recorded and awareness must be demonstated regarding errors
in the data collected.
3.2 Model Building
The data provided by Kier was sent over in two forms; a DXF le and an Microsoft Excel spread
sheet. The DXF (Drawing Interchange Format, or Drawing Exchange Format) les contain the points
and lines that join up the boundaries where there have been faults interpreted. This format of data is
advantageous as it maintains the distribution and correct connections between the points. In order to get
the DXF les into Petrel they were opened in Midland Valleys Move then exported as an Ascii le into
Petrel, this maintained the distribution and connections of the DXFs. The Excel spread sheet contains
the XYZ co-ordinates of the base of the coal measures as it was being excavated. This format was chosen
as it is the easiest format to send the data to the study. Once sent over this was then put into Notepad
so the points could be saved as a TXT le, to import into Petrel. Below is a screenshot (Figure 3.1) of
one of the surfaces showing the point data and DXF.
The study chose to use Petrel to create the surfaces, as there is an option of constraining the
converted DXF les to the surface in order to create the faults. When creating the surfaces Petrel has a
greater number of algorithms available, giving the ability to respect all the points recorded. An example
of this is shown below in gure 3.1. Petrel also allows for a greater exibility in creating curved and low
angled faults. Once imported and surfaces are created the datas quality and validity was checked to see
3. METHODOLOGY 28
if there were any spurious data points or places where the surfaces have un-natural peaks or troughs.
These were then deleted or smoothed using the peak and trough remover in Petrel. In places some of
the lower surfaces cut above the higher surfaces as seen in gure 3.2, when this occurred the Replace
Where function was used and this problem was removed.
Figure 3.1: Showing the main two data formats DXFs are the black lines and the point data are the blue dots.
Also shown is the surface that is created using the two formats.
Figure 3.2: Image showing how the lower blue surface is protruding through the higher red surface.
3. METHODOLOGY 29
The next step was to start to interpret where the faults are. Since the area had been excavated the
places where the faults are located have already been provided and these are shown in the left image
of gure 3.3 by the black lines that are on the surfaces (the DXF les). Using the model builder in
Petrel the faults would rest on the surfaces between the top and bottom of the faults (Right image of
gure 3.3) however taking care must be taken as the data was recorded by an engineer who interpreted
where the faults are, meaning some of the geometries of the faults may be unreasonable. If this is the
case evaluation into the location and the geometry of the fault will have to be considered using dierent
attributes to see if the fault is correct. This last statement cannot be emphasied enough in its key to
producing a valid model. Interpretation of small faults between the surfaces is dicult as they do not
line up or show on surfaces above, even though the throw is relatively large.
Figure 3.3: Image on the left, shows the DXF osetting the beds marking where fault was interpreted to be by
the engineers on site. To the right is an image showing the studies interpretation of the fault using the Fault
Model section in petrel.
Once all the faults are interpreted the project was exported to Midland Valleys Move in order to
compare it to the Edina geological map to check if anything new can be added to the 1:50,000 map of
the area. Exporting the surfaces from Petrel were done by choosing the save type as CPS-3 grid which
is an ASCII le and can be accepted by MOVE. The faults that were interpreted were converted to fault
surfaces in Petrel were then exported as the le type Earth Vision grid which is another form of ASCII
data. Both these export formats maintain the geo-referenced position of the les. Once imported to
Move, the geological map was downloaded from Edina and imported as a GIS Data Raster Inc. images.
Following this observations of the map could be made from this studies data.
3.3 Attribute Creation
To aid with fault interpretation this paper will use dierent attributes. Each of these is available
in either the structural analysis or operations tab. Once the surface was created and quality controlled
and the attributes were created at rst the default setting was used, however in some cases these were
changed. The attributes used are listed below with an explanation of what they show. This is taken from
petrels help menu.
3. METHODOLOGY 30
Maximum curvature. Which measures the maximum curvature (positive or negative) of a surface
at a specied point (See gure 3.4)
Minimum curvature. Which measures the curve perpendicular to the maximum curvature (see
gure 3.4)
Edge detection. This algorithm highlights areas where there are discrete areas on a surface where
there may be relatively low throws on faults.
Inuential data. This has the aim to give the operator an indication which points of the surface
eect the 3D distribution of the surface.
Thickness maps. Which measure the distance between two surfaces changes in thickness and may
indicate the presence of faults.
Dip Angle. This measures the dip of the surface a certain point and ranges from 0-90 degrees.
Dip Azimuth. This measures the orientation from North that the dip is orientated. Ranging from
0-360 degrees.
Upon completion of these attributes an assessment will be made into how well each of these algorithms
are at detecting faults to see if they can aid with interpretation.
Figure 3.4: Image showing maximum and minumum curvature, note how the minimum curvature is perpendicular
to the maximum. (Modied after Bergbauer and Pollard (2003)
4
Results
31
4. RESULTS 32
4
.
1
F
i
n
a
l
M
o
d
e
l
F
i
g
u
r
e
4
.
1
:
T
h
e
n
a
l
f
u
l
l
s
c
a
l
e
m
o
d
e
l
w
i
t
h
a
l
l
t
h
e
f
a
u
l
t
s
i
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
e
d
o
v
e
r
l
a
i
n
,
i
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
a
t
i
o
n
d
o
n
e
u
s
i
n
g
t
h
e
D
X
F
l
e
s
a
n
d
a
t
t
i
b
u
t
e
s
t
o
a
i
d
i
n
t
h
i
s
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
.
L
a
r
g
e
r
f
a
u
l
t
s
h
a
v
e
b
e
e
n
i
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
e
d
a
c
r
o
s
s
t
h
e
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
s
.
4. RESULTS 33
4.2 Surfaces
In the following sections are surfaces that show o the dierent structural elements that are present
in the area, along with these are dierent surface attributes that were run to aid in interpreting the
faults, the last picture shown will be the surface with all the fault interpretation on it. At the end of each
surface will be a summary of the observations on each surface. An interpretation of what is happening
will then be presented in the interpretation chapter later.
4.2.1 1230
When computing the attributes for the 1230 surface the settings that were selected for this attribute
are shown below.
Edge detect algorithm (Figure 4.2):
Pre smooth was ticked on, which smooths the surface before any calculations are done.
The smoothing method chosen was the combo smooth which initially passes a median smooth
on the surface then the mean smooth is applied.
Inuential data attribute (Figure 4.3):
A search region of two nodes is selected, this setting eects the region that is searched to nd
the inuence the node has on the surface.
Clamp to P5 and P95 is on which ignores the data out of the top and bottom fth percentile.
4. RESULTS 34
Figure 4.2: Showing the edge detection attribute on the surface, reds indicates detection of an edge, blues shows
a low detection of an edge. (Scale is in Meters)
Figure 4.3: Image showing the inuential data attribute, reds and blue both indicate points which inuence the
3D geometry of the surface. (Scale is in Meters)
4. RESULTS 35
Figure 4.4: Image showing the dip angle attribute, this highlights any change in dip over the surface. (Scale is in
Meters)
Figure 4.5: Image showing the azimuth of the dip direction and how this changes over the surface. (Scale is in
Meters)
4. RESULTS 36
F
i
g
u
r
e
4
.
6
:
T
h
e
n
a
l
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
w
i
t
h
a
l
l
t
h
e
f
a
u
l
t
s
i
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
e
d
o
v
e
r
l
a
i
n
,
i
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
a
t
i
o
n
d
o
n
e
u
s
i
n
g
t
h
e
D
X
F
l
e
s
a
n
d
a
t
t
i
b
u
t
e
s
t
o
a
i
d
i
n
t
h
i
s
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
.
L
a
r
g
e
r
f
a
u
l
t
s
h
a
v
e
b
e
e
n
i
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
e
d
a
c
r
o
s
s
t
h
e
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
s
.
(
S
c
a
l
e
i
s
i
n
M
e
t
e
r
s
)
4. RESULTS 37
Figure 4.2 shows the edge detection attribute calculated on the 1230 surface from this we can see
that the reds are highlighting the main horizontal faults (labelled A) to the west of this is also marked
by red colours is a vertical feature marked B. Around these big areas of red are the smaller faults that
show up as patches of red (C), these smaller faults have down throw to the west.
Figure 4.3 showing the inuential data, picks out the main horizontal features detected in gure 4.2
(A) The inuential data is also picking out the vertical fault (B), but in this area the inuential data
shows up as disrupted. Overall this attribute appears to pick out the smaller faults better than the edge
detection which can aid in picking out more of the faults that are present in the area around the arrow
marked C.
Figure 4.4 shows that the coal beds dip at around 30and where there are the steeper the vertical
fault is picked out, the horizontal faults are picked out by the purple colour showing a shallower dip,
using gure 4.5 we can see the azimuth of the dip shows the beds mainly have an azimuth of about 300
4.2.2 3930
When computing the attributes for the 3930 the settings that were selected for this attribute are
shown below.
4. RESULTS 38
4. RESULTS 39
Figure 4.9: Image showing the dip angle attribute, this highlights any change in dip over the surface. (Scale is in
Meters)
Meters)
4. RESULTS 40
F
i
g
u
r
e
4
.
1
1
:
T
h
e
n
a
l
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
w
i
t
h
a
l
l
t
h
e
f
a
u
l
t
s
i
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
e
d
o
v
e
r
l
a
i
n
,
i
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
a
t
i
o
n
d
o
n
e
u
s
i
n
g
t
h
e
D
X
F
l
e
s
a
n
d
a
t
t
i
b
u
t
e
s
t
o
a
i
d
i
n
t
h
i
s
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
.
L
a
r
g
e
r
f
a
u
l
t
s
h
a
v
e
b
e
e
n
i
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
e
d
a
c
r
o
s
s
t
h
e
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
s
.
(
S
c
a
l
e
i
s
i
n
M
e
t
e
r
s
)
4. RESULTS 41
Figure 4.7 showing the edge detection attribute on the 3930 surface shows the vertical faults up in
the red colours (A), the 2 main horizontal faults are also detected, although there is not a very clear
image of where the large fault begins and ends (B). Around these main faults the smaller faults are also
very hard to constrain using this attribute; the surface shows up as disrupted in the area.
Figure 4.8 showing the inuential data, although disrupted in picking out some of the smaller faults
picks both the larger horizontal faults out (B), we can see that one of the fault begins to splay o in a
downwards direction (C). The area of the vertical fault (Marked A) is seen in the data but varies a lot
between the blue and red values of the algorithm.
Running the dip angle attribute on the 3930 surface and shown in gure 4.9 we can see the dip
around the horizontal faults show up as low angles (B) on the surface compared to the average dip of 30.
Elsewhere on the surface, we can see the steep vertical fault (A) this correlates with the other attributes
that have detected the fault in this area. Smaller throws of faults are just visible in places where they
show up as yellow colours with dips of around 65. The azimuth of dip direction seen in gure 4.10 is
around 300 for the surfaces, at the location of smaller faults the azimuth tends to change to a darker
blue as it changes to a more Northwards direction, the larger horizontal faults (B) are detected mainly in
the east of the surface, but we can make out the two large horizontal faults, with the smaller fault being
picked out in the middle of these two. The large vertical fault that would be at A is not really picked
out by this attribute, but is detected in other attributes.
4.2.3 6500
are shown below.
4. RESULTS 42
4. RESULTS 43
Figure 4.14: Image showing the dip angle attribute, this highlights any change in dip over the surface. (Scale is
in Meters)
Meters)
4. RESULTS 44
F
i
g
u
r
e
4
.
1
6
:
T
h
e
n
a
l
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
w
i
t
h
a
l
l
t
h
e
f
a
u
l
t
s
i
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
e
d
o
v
e
r
l
a
i
n
,
i
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
a
t
i
o
n
d
o
n
e
u
s
i
n
g
t
h
e
D
X
F
l
e
s
a
n
d
a
t
t
i
b
u
t
e
s
t
o
a
i
d
i
n
t
h
i
s
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
.
L
a
r
g
e
r
f
a
u
l
t
s
h
a
v
e
b
e
e
n
i
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
e
d
a
c
r
o
s
s
t
h
e
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
s
.
(
S
c
a
l
e
i
s
i
n
M
e
t
e
r
s
)
4. RESULTS 45
Running the edge detection attribute on the 6500 surface seen in gure 4.12 we can see that two
horizontal faults that are running parallel to each other (A), but this appears mainly to be seen in the
attribute due to the shape of the surface, rather than the attribute detecting it convincingly.
However running the inuential data seen in gure 4.13 picks out in a straight line, the fault surface
of both the horizontal faults (A), due to the points around the area inuencing the 3D geometry the
most in the area. We can also see the attribute picking out the smaller faults (B) towards the top some
of the surface shows up as messy circular spots, these are just artifacts.
Running the dip angle surface attribute in gure 4.14, the average dip of the surface is 30-35 except
in the location of faults where the horizontal faults change the surface dip to around 0 (A). Where the
dips are steeper this is picking out smaller faults (B).
Running the azimuth of the dip over the surface and shown in gure 4.15 we can see that the surface
curves round slightly from around 300 to 325 on the surface. The large horizontal faults are marked
out by the azimuth direction changing from the values above and almost 180 dierence (A).
4.2.4 8300
are shown below.
4. RESULTS 46
4. RESULTS 47
Figure 4.19: Image showing the dip angle attribute, this highlights any change in dip over the surface. (Scale is
in Meters)
Meters)
4. RESULTS 48
F
i
g
u
r
e
4
.
2
1
:
T
h
e
n
a
l
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
w
i
t
h
a
l
l
t
h
e
f
a
u
l
t
s
i
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
e
d
o
v
e
r
l
a
i
n
,
i
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
a
t
i
o
n
d
o
n
e
u
s
i
n
g
t
h
e
D
X
F
l
e
s
a
n
d
a
t
t
i
b
u
t
e
s
t
o
a
i
d
i
n
t
h
i
s
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
.
L
a
r
g
e
r
f
a
u
l
t
s
h
a
v
e
b
e
e
n
i
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
e
d
a
c
r
o
s
s
t
h
e
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
s
.
(
S
c
a
l
e
i
s
i
n
M
e
t
e
r
s
)
4. RESULTS 49
Figure 4.17 shows the edge detection attribute overlain on the 8300 surface we can see that in the
center of the image there are red areas that mark out a vertical faults that osets the bed (A). Marked
out as well is the horizontal faults which appear as and orange to yellow strip on the surface (B) which
does not appear across to cross the vertical fault.
Running the inuential data shown in gure 4.18 we can see that the two horizontal fault edges
are picked out by this attribute (B). In the center we can pick out a red and blue striped zone which
indicates a vertical fault going through the area (A). To the west of this, the surface is a lot more dotted
this means that the beds show quite a variation in geometry in this area potentially this is an artefact of
the surface creation (C).
Figure 4.19 showing the dip of the surface we can see that the average dip of the surface is 30 except
in the location of the faults where the horizontal faults show a dip of 0 and the vertical faults show a
steeper dip of 60, we also pick out in this attribute a fault that dies out as you move to the east (top
arrow of B).
The dip azimuth attribute seen in gure 4.20 shows that the direction of the azimuth chances as
you move from east to west along the surface from around 300 to 330, the higher horizontal fault is not
picked out convincingly by the attribute but the lower one is picked out by this (B).
4.3 Structures
Figure 4.22: N-S cross section through surfaces 7100, 7200, 7300, 7430, 7500
4. RESULTS 50
Figure 4.23: Cross section through surfaces 6600, 6800,7000, 7050. Showing how the horizontal faults were
justied when interpreting.
Figure 4.24: Two main faults that die out laterally, with smaller faults inbetween and surrounding the area, on
the 1230 surface.
4. RESULTS 51
Figure 4.25: Image of the 1230 surface showing a fault with the downthrow to the West.
4. RESULTS 52
4
.
4
T
h
i
c
k
n
e
s
s
M
a
p
s
F
i
g
u
r
e
4
.
2
6
:
T
r
u
e
v
e
r
t
i
c
a
l
t
h
i
c
k
n
e
s
s
b
e
t
w
e
e
n
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
s
8
3
0
0
a
n
d
7
9
0
0
.
4. RESULTS 53
F
i
g
u
r
e
4
.
2
7
:
T
r
u
e
v
e
r
t
i
c
a
l
t
h
i
c
k
n
e
s
s
b
e
t
w
e
e
n
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
s
8
4
0
0
a
n
d
8
5
0
0
.
4. RESULTS 54
4.5 Geological Map
Below is an image of this studies model of Gasswater with the Edina 1:10,000 Map overlaid on top.
Figure 4.28: Image showing the published geological map of the area overlain on the studies geological model.
5
Interpretation
55
5. INTERPRETATION 56
In the following sections are the interpretations of the results presented in the previous section, each
gure will then be explained as to what we are seeing, then in the an interpretation as to how these
features may of formed.
5.1 Surface Interpretation
5.1.1 1230
Using all the dierent attributes to constrain the validity of the faults interpreted by the site
engineers, a nal interpreted surface is presented as shown in gure 4.6. The results indicated horizontal
faults, since horizontal fault are hard to form naturally these faults were originally normal faults that
have been rotated. Justication for this rotation comes from the dip data of the coal beds (gure 4.4).
If restoring the beds back to horizontal the faults return to more of a reasonable angle of formation
around 60. The two horizontal faults marked A, appear to be in some form of relay structure that has
not breached. The strike slip zone (B) picked out by the attributes is a late dextral shear zone with
displacement of around 90M. The smaller normal faults that are around the surface, show down throw to
the West, giving a stress eld of around E-W. These are potentially the earliest structures in the surface
due to them not cross cutting any other faults in the area.
5.1.2 3930
Figure 4.11 shows the nal interpreted 3930 surface with all the faults on it, we can see the two main
horizontal faults which do not quite form a breach (B). These faults are interpreted to have formed at an
angle of around 60 and then rotated to their present positions by the folding of the beds, this is worked
out by the dip angle attribute. There is the large vertical fault (A) which shows a dextral sense of oset
across it; this cross cuts the horizontal faults indicating that the fault is younger. The surface also has
smaller faults which down throw to the West, these faults are sporadic and are hard to discern beacuse
their relative age to other faults is not quantiable, but using the other surfaces it is assumed that these
are oldest features on the surface.
5.1.3 6500
Figure 4.16 shows the surface with all the faults interpreted on it, you can clearly see two larger
horizontal faults that bisect the section (A) that have been rotated, justication for these come from the
dip map, when restoring the beds back to horizontal the faults return to a more realistic dip of formation
around 60. There are small normal faults located in the East of the surface (B) these potentially formed
in response to E-W extension or some form of strike-slip tension. The smaller faults appear to be cut by
the larger faults indicating that the smaller faults are older in age.
5.1.4 8300
Figure 4.21 shows the nal interpreted surface; we can see three horizontal faults using the dip
attribute of the surface when the beds are returned to horizontal give a normal angle of dip for the fault
(B). The lower fault at B, changes direction to become deeper as you move across it, this could be part
of a breach system between other faults not seen in the surface however, there is no strong evidence to
support this theory. There is one large vertical fault that has a dextral sense of oset (A), this stops
the main horizontal fault from passing through, indicating that this fault is younger than the others.
Potentially the horizontal fault located in the West is linked to the one in the East but the fault tips
have not been preserved due to a later deformation event. Smaller faults are located across the surface,
the number of these faults is smaller than those on other surfaces indicating that this area is not subject
to as much stress in an E-W direction but rather the strike slip event.
5.2 Structural History
The earliest structures found in this study are the small faults that trend North-South and have a
down throw to the East or West. This event is dated around the deposition of Limestone Coal Formation
and is prior to the Lower Coal Measure. After this is the deposition of the Lower Coal Measures, creation
of accommodation space is intiated by normal fault activity (see gure 5.1). After this event continuation
of deposition occured till the end of the Middle Coal Measures, this is then all faulted downward to the
South potentially with fault interaction as seen in 1230 surface. Lastly is a period of dextral strike slip,
this cross cuts the normal faults created during the Lower and Middle Coal Measures. During this time
the beds were folded to dip at around 30 prior to full breach strike slip this strike slip rotated rather than
reactivated, the South dipping faults Northwards to the sub horizontal position seen today. Potential
reasons for the faults not being reactivated could be due to the stress orientations not being preferential
for reactivation or the fault plane friction being too great to overcome, this then causing the faults to
lock up and rotate. The dip angle of strike slip is not known but can be estimated to be dipping to the
NE from the orientation of the surfaces; this is the only direction the fault plane can go through without
disagreeing with the data.
5.3 Structures
Figure 4.22 shows a North South cross section through surfaces 7100 to 7500. Figure 5.1 is the
interpreted section of 4.22 we can see a fault with throw of about 50M to the South creating a local
depocenter, inlling this area are beds 7200 and 7300, these beds are not seen anywhere else in the
section. Once the entire depositional centre is lled, surfaces 7430 and 7500 over ll the basin and
overlay the fault. This is an example of a fault creating accommodation space then sediment inlling the
area till it is full. Once full the sediment has over lled the basin and continued to deposit material on
top.
Figure 5.1: Annotated section of gure 4.22 showing the N-S cross section through surfaces 7100, 7200, 7300,
7430, 7500.
Justication for the faults being horizontal comes from gure 4.23. Below is the interpreted gure
of the same image showing how the faults were dened. On the gure 5.2 you can see beds 6600 to 7050
which are oset by 50M when working out the direction of the fault and its orientation, the tops of the
beds were selected. These points were joined up to give an orientation for the fault, care was needed as
it was realised that as the engineers got closer to the fault. Recording data may pose a health and safety
risk due to the slope stability. Using this technique of picking the tops of the beds and looking at the
model as a whole, most of the surfaces showed the fault dipping at a near horizontal angle. This leads to
the conclusion that these are normal faults that have been created then rotated as the beds were folded
to their present day positions.
Figure 4.24 is a close up on surface 1230 and denes the relationship between the two horizontal
faults (1 and 2) we can see that they pass over each other forming a relay ramp. The smaller faults
in-between these are connecting faults that link the two segments (A). These are however hard to tell
apart from the earlier normal faults that are seen elsewhere on the surface. At location B the fault
displacement seems to decrease then increase again, this could potentially be two small faults that are
parallel and linked up to each other as they evolved. Figure 4.25 shows up close the oldest features that
are in the model they are N-S orientated normal faults which have been downthrown to the West. These
small faults, with throws of about 5M, are quite extensive and maintain their throw for quite a distance
till the ending in a fault tip or geting cut by a later feature.
Figure 5.2: Annotated image of gure 4.23 showing the cross section through surfaces 6600, 6800, 7000, 7050.
Showing how the horizontal faults were justied when interpreting.
5.4 Thickness Maps
Figure 4.26 shows the true vertical thickness between surfaces 7900 and 8300. An interpreted version
can be seen in gure 5.3, here we can see that there is an average thickness of about 18m, this is a good
indicator that there has been no mistake by the site engineer in picking the correct bed over the faults
(as the thickness is constant). Where the horizontal fault is present there is a decrease in the thickness to
about 13m (marked A). Where there is strike slip the surface thickness goes to 0m (B). The fault marked
A does not reappear on the other side of the fault, this shows that the strike slip is a later event. Other
smaller faults can be picked out by the thickness maps at C. For example we can see lineations marking
out faults on the surface. At D there is just an indication of another fault coming through the section,
the thickness decreases before slightly increasing to about 8m again.
Figure 5.4 shows an annotated thickness map of gure 4.27 between 8400 and 8500 we can see
that the average thickness between the surfaces is around 10m. Arrow A points towards an interesting
feature located in the West. There is zero bed thickness and as you move East the thickness gradually
increases. This feature shows how the horizontal normal fault loses displacement laterally and supports
the interpretation that these are normal faults with recognisable displacement proles. Arrow B points
to a zone where the average thickness (green) has been displaced to the right; this indicates that there is
a dextral strike slip movement present. The location of the faults is around the area where the thickness
reduces to around 4m (yellow colours).
F
i
g
u
r
e
5
.
3
:
A
n
n
o
t
a
t
e
d
t
h
i
c
k
n
e
s
s
m
a
p
o
f
g
u
r
e
4
.
2
6
s
h
o
w
i
n
g
t
h
e
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
f
a
u
l
t
s
t
h
a
t
c
a
n
b
e
d
e
t
e
c
t
e
d
.
F
i
g
u
r
e
5
.
4
:
A
n
n
o
t
a
t
e
d
t
h
i
c
k
n
e
s
s
m
a
p
o
f
g
u
r
e
4
.
2
7
s
h
o
w
i
n
g
t
h
e
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
f
a
u
l
t
s
t
h
a
t
c
a
n
b
e
d
e
t
e
c
t
e
d
.
I
n
s
e
t
i
s
a
s
c
h
e
m
a
t
i
c
L
e
n
g
t
h
V
s
D
i
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
p
r
o
l
e
s
h
o
w
i
n
g
h
o
w
d
i
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
d
e
c
r
e
a
s
e
s
l
a
t
e
r
a
l
l
y
.
5.5 Updates to the Geological Maps
Figure 5.5 shows an updated map, this annotated map shows additional features produced in this
study not seen in published map. From the gure we can see that at A there are faults that are present
but not in the right position according to this studies data. Estimating the oset of these faults is not
known as there is no correlatable beds across them. Notice at B a previously unmapped fault has a dextral
oset orientated NW-SE. The new fault osets the beds dexturally and has displacement of around 30m.
The dashed red lines in the image represent those that are not seen from the data study, they may be
present in the area but their exact location is not correct, an example of this is C on the map. Notice the
beds here overlap the area where the fault occurs. The subsurface horizontal faults are also not marked
on the map but this is understandable as they do not have a clear outcrop place or indeed a symbol.
Following this study into the geological map it was realised that some of the faults were not identied
from the data, it was realised that from the ages of the coal seams juxtaposed next to each other. That
there was indeed the faults that dextrally oset the beds these fault are then marked out in gure 5.6 by
the dashed black lines.
F
i
g
u
r
e
5
.
5
:
G
e
o
l
o
g
i
c
a
l
m
a
p
o
v
e
r
l
a
i
n
o
n
t
o
p
o
f
t
h
e
m
o
d
e
l
o
f
t
h
i
s
s
t
u
d
y
w
i
t
h
i
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
w
h
i
c
h
f
a
u
l
t
s
a
r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
(
s
o
l
i
d
l
i
n
e
s
)
a
n
d
t
h
o
s
e
t
h
a
t
n
e
e
d
t
o
b
e
m
o
v
e
d
o
r
n
o
t
i
n
p
l
a
c
e
(
d
a
s
h
e
d
l
i
n
e
s
)
F
i
g
u
r
e
5
.
6
:
U
p
d
a
t
e
d
n
a
l
m
o
d
e
l
o
f
t
h
e
G
a
s
s
w
a
t
e
r
C
o
a
l
M
i
n
e
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
p
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
d
G
e
o
l
o
g
i
c
a
l
m
a
p
o
f
t
h
e
a
r
e
a
.
6
Discussion
65
6. DISCUSSION 66
6.1 Structural History
Dierent structural evolution models of the Midland Valley have been put forward in the literature
below are some of the published ideas of the evolution in the area and following this, see if this studys
ndings can be applied to them. Three models have been put forward in the literature,
1. The rst is a North South extensional model proposed by Leeder (1982) he considered that the
Midland Valley area had undergone N-S extension by subduction of the lithosphere towards the
South. Extension and subduction in the area is caused by the Midland Valley being located in a
subsiding fore arc basin.
2. The second model was put forward by Dewey (1982) who suggested that the dextral strike slip
happening in Canada continued NE into Britain creating the pull apart basins with Silesian thermal
subsidence superimposed on top of this movement. Further work done by Read (1988) adds to
this that in the Silesian there was thermal subsidence with dextral strike slip which created the
transtension and transpression.
3. The last model is put forward by Coward (1993) with further work done by Rippon et al. (1996)
and shown in gure 2.4 they proposed that the lateral escape of the Midland Valley and associated
terranes caused a sinistral strike slip and development of pull apart basins during the Devonian
to early Carboniferous. After this there was dextral transpression caused by closure of the Urals.
This then caused basin inversion and growth folding. Rippon et al. (1996) then added to this an
early Namurian period of E-W tension along NE trending faults.
Comparing this studys structural history to that of the larger scaled models proposed above can
only be tentatively linked, there is without a doubt a match between what is seen in the Gasswater
Coal Mine and the regional context. A schematic diagram showing this studies structural history can
be seen in gure 6.1 notice that the timings of the events and the stress elds of both local and regional
scales have changed throughout time. The evolution put forward by this study is early Namurain E-W
extension seen in the rst image of gure 6.1 followed by N-S extension then lastly an strike slip event
folding and dexturally osetting the units.
While the model proposed by Leeder (1982) can account for the development of the normal faults
with down throw to the south (horizontal faults in this study) it does not count for the N-S orientated
faults seen in the earliest extension Limestone coal Formation (gure 4.25, the latest dextral strike slip
seen in the area or the rotation of the beds.
The second model put forward by Dewey (1982) agrees partly with the dextral strike slip put forward.
We see that the beds are all dexturally oset and there are obvious normal fault activity creating pull apart
basins. However it does not explain how the continued dextral movement creates both the extensional
faults and then the later folding. But further work done by Read (1988) added that in the Silesian (Coal
Measures and Limestone Coal Formation) there was thermal subsidence and dextral strike slip that causes
transtension, transpression and folding, this means that during this time period the model proposed ts
6. DISCUSSION 67
with what this study observations. However, Ritchie et al. (2003) points out that a continuous dextral
strike slip doesnt account for the change of tectonic style that they nd. Also strain ellipses analysis
produced by Ritchie et al. (2003) suggest that in a dextral regime normal fault would cause WNW trending
faults, this study nds faults that form in N-S extension, re-inforcing the ndings by Ritchie et al. (2003).
The last model put forward by Coward (1993) and then further developed by Rippon et al. (1996)
explains nearly all the observations that are seen in the Gasswater Coal Mine, the earliest extension seen
in gure 4.25 is not explained in the other models. It is explained by an East West tension event in the
Namurian times, in the study these fault are only found in units of this age. Following this, a sinistral
strike slip created the basins through transtension orientated NE-SW orientations. This deposited the
Lower Coal Measures and the Upper Coal Measures which were then later reactivated in a reverse sense
by a dextral strike slip regime. This reactivation period did not move the faults in the study area but
rather the faults were locked and folded, causing them to rotate to horizontal and the beds to dip at
30 to the North. Results from Ritchie et al. (2003) also nd that folding is occurring locally in basins
around this time.
This leads to the conclusion that the beds were folded just prior or during the beds being dextrally
oset by the strike slip, work done backing this statement on timing comes from Caldwell and Young
(2013) who showed that folds can be generated by strike slip and that in the Midland Valley formed in
response to NE orientated dextral strike slip during the Namurian-Westphalian times.
6. DISCUSSION 68
Figure 6.1: Schematic 3D model of the structural evolution of the Gasswater Coal Mine in the Carboniferous,
Note that the true thickness of the Lower Coal Measures is not known from this studies data.
6. DISCUSSION 69
6.2 Faults
Figure 4.24 shows the fault structure on the 1230 surface, arrow B points to a fault displacement that
is low in the middle and then increasing outwards. Using Cowie et al. (2008) in gure 2.7 shows in the 4th
stage of fault linkage. Displacement decreases as two faults join and interact leading to the possibility
that the faults here have interacted by joining up together. Continuing on with fault displacement,
gure 5.4 of the thickness map shows the fault displacement gradually losing its displacement; linking
the fault displacement at Gasswater to those that are recorded in other papers and shows similarity in
displacement curves published by Cartwright et al. (1995) and Gupta and Scholz (2000) (page 876 gure
14) when fault grow and interact in the case of gure 4.24.
Regarding fault geometry and interaction, gure 4.24 is compared to gure 2.8 from Morley et al.
(1990) we can see that the faults observed are all dipping the same direction and are synthetic faults that
overlap. This synthetic geometry also gives an explanation to the faults marked B on gure 4.15 and the
faults marked A and D on gure 5.3 the thickness maps, these faults showing a synthetic geometry dip
in the same direction so when the beds are rotated the faults are rotated to become horizontal.
Reasons for why the faults are rotated and not reactivated is potentially due to the orientation of
the NE-SW strike slip faults, work by Coreld et al. (1996) who mention faults orientated NE-SW show
strong inversion and movement along the main bounding faults. During this the Silesian post rift ll
(Coal Measures) has been expelled. Whereas those orientated N-S or NW-SE underwent an oblique slip
creating en-echelon periclines and positive ower structures but no movement along them (movement
still happened along the main bounding faults) while retaining the Silesian ll (Coal Measures). This
potentially shows evidence for the beds being rotated rather than reactivated due to the orientation of
the strike slip (NW-SE).
The strike slip at Gasswater mine is around stage ve from Kelly et al. (1998) model of strike slip
evolution. The strike slip at Gasswater is forming a through-going fault that displaces the beds dexturally,
placing the Coal Measures right next to the older Limestone Coal Formation. From Ritchie et al. (2003))
who nds that this area has undergone Silesian dextral strike slip the results of this studys ndings
agrees with this. When the strike slip episode is compared to gure 2.10 from Cunningham and Mann
(2007) it is most likely a transpressional zone, potentially forming a positive ower structure.
6.3 Published Map Interpretation
When the model is compared to the BGS map there are few errors in the published map that need to
be rectied. Overall most of the map is correct adding certainty to the model. The published map added
the faults between the 3930 and 6500 (Limestone Coal Formation and Lower Coal Measures) surfaces and
the 7500 and 7900 between the Lower Coal Measures and Middle Coal Measures. However no evidence
6. DISCUSSION 70
for the faults are seen in the surfaces this study has created. Evidence comes from the age gap between
two surfaces and that they line up side by side. This leads to the conclusion that the faults at this
location are there, however no clear evidence for this in the data itself, except for the ages of the seams.
As well as this, there are the small faults in the surfaces these are not seen in the geological map;
however this is understandable as the faults are very small and not that laterally extensive so the scale
of the published maps is too large for the faults to show up and would add no value to a map if marked on.
The horizontal faults that are picked up in the data are not seen on the map, these faults are denitely
present in the area as shown by the previous gures. On the published map there are no symbols for the
horizontal normal faults that are seen in the area, potentially a new symbol for these needs to be agreed
upon. The solid lines on the BGS map in 5.5 can be updated to show the correct type of fault and also
its sense of movement. In the SW of the study there is also an extra fault (marked C on gure 5.5) this
fault is not seen in the data so it is recommended that it is removed from the map. The main bounding
faults to the NW are most likely present in the area but are where the data sets ends, due to the extents
of the mines license.
6.4 Oil and Gas Potential
A recent report by Andrews et al. (2014) into the extent of oil and gas resources in the Carboniferous
shales of the Midland Valley as a potentially exploitable resource, nds that the Limestone Coal Formation
is a potential reservoir for oil and gas. The Coal Measures are not included in the report by Andrews
et al. (2014) but the Limestone Coal Formation is included which are found in this study. While this
report is not focused on oil and gas reserves, this study can be used as a basic small scale analogue for any
oil and gas companies, we can recommend that care be taken in estimating the recovery and potential
factor of the resource.
The Limestone Coal formation has undergone many dierent phases of deformation, so any migration
routes could be aected by the small E-W and large N-S horizontal extensional faults observed in the
surface. The amount of deformation phases in the area may have created good and bad reservoirs
depending on the later stage re-activation, the units here have been shielded from complete reactivation
due to the orientation of the NW-SE bounding faults.
Gasswater is at scale that ts the fault zone analysis in gure 6.2 from Knipe et al. (1988) meaning you
can assess the damage zone of the area. From the meter scale resolution of this study only just detecting
the smallest faults any larger scale resolution study will lead to an inaccurate fault seal analysis, this is
caused by the very complex nature of these small fault interactions and linkages. Discussed by Knipe
et al. (1988) is the importance of a good study into the fault zone structure and fault transmissibility,
these factors can have a huge eect on the economic viability of a reservoir. He recommends that there is
a need to integrate dierent scales into one fault seal analysis of the area. This study oers a good rst
6. DISCUSSION 71
look into a small scale area of the Midland Valley, presenting a method for interpretation and leading to
fault analysis of this site other excavated mines in the area.
Figure 6.2: Image showing the critical factors needed for fault seal analysis, we can see that the resolution is
increasing in size as you move to the right. (Knipe et al., 1988)
7
Conclusion
72
7. CONCLUSION 73
To summarise, the tectonic evolution of the Gasswater Coal Mine in the Carboniferous has been
analysed, using the coal seam data acquired when the coal was extracted. A number of structural features
have been identied, including; the folding of the beds to around 30 dip, small E-W extension faults,
large horizontal normal faults with small growth structures and a dextral strike slip episode. From these
structural identications, three phases of tectonic evolution have been identied; (1) Namurian East-West
extension created regionally from a sinistral transtension event. (2) Mid Westphalian North-South
extension created by a regional sinistral transtension event. (3) Late Westphalian (post Middle Coal
Measure) folding then strike slip in response to a dextral transpression event and change in regional
stress elds. Regional stress elds are found from Caldwell and Young (2013), Ritchie et al. (2003) and
Read et al. (2002). The observations of this study t best with the model proposed by Coward (1993)
with the additional work of Rippon et al. (1996), who proposed an earlier E-W extension seen in the
Limestone Coal Formation. A schematic summary diagram of the structural evolution of the Gasswater
Coal Mine can be seen in gure 6.1
The small E-W extensional faults have formed in response to a locally orientated E-W stress eld,
with the regional area being in a sinistral transtension stresseld. The large horizontal faults are
understood to be normal faults, rotated by a later event. Prior to rotation, these faults would have
been orientated NE-SW. These normal faults were created by responding approximately to N-S tension
and regional sinistral transtension stress eld. Later a dextral strike slip caused folding of the beds
responding to a later but still the same orientated stress eld. This local N-S compression folded the
beds and a dextrally osets these. This transpression event rotates the faults to their horizontal position.
The dip of the strike slip cannot be accurately plotted due to the lack of information to constrain it
however it can be estimated that it is dipping towards the NE as this is the only orientation it can dip
without disagreeing with the data in the study.
The Mid Westphalian rotated horizontal faults show clear evidence for the displacement of these
faults gradually decreasing as you move along the fault. This showed, even though the whole fault is not
observed, how the displacement decreases with the length of the fault. During these events there is also
the creation of accommodation space. The deposition of new coal and sediment beds were focused in the
depocenter created by the movement of the faults. Evidence is shown that between normal faults, relay
ramps have formed. These show an overlap, synthetic geometry and dipping in the same direction.
Updates to the existing Geological map are needed. This study suggests removing some of the faults
that are not seen in the data and dening the type of faults that are present (i.e Dextral strike slip).
This paper recommends is adding new symbols to the map that represent faults that are horizontal in
the area but may not outcrop at the surface. Recent reports on the oil and gas potential of the Midland
Valley found that the Limestone Coal Formation is a potential reservoir, using data collected it can be
seen that the unit has undergone numerous deformation events and has metre scale fault displacements.
This may disrupt any migration routes that are thought to be in the unit or cause miscalculations into
the amount of hydrocarbons present in the area. This study is benecial to be used as a quick rst look
into the complexities of the surrounding areas when exploring for hydrocarbon potential.
7. CONCLUSION 74
The Gasswater coal mine in Ayrshire is only a small part of the Midland Valley, observations of
the area can be linked to published literature. Linking these observations to a bigger scale (i.e. inside
and outside the Midland Valley) needs to be done, to give better understanding of the Midland Valley
structural evolution. The addition of borehole data that were drilled prior to excavation, seismic data
and data from other coal mines would add to this studies observation and give a greater understanding
to the complex history of the Midland Valley.
References
Andrews, I.J., A.A Monaghan, . and M.J. Sankey. 2014. The Carbonifeous Shales of the Midland Valley
of Scotland: Geology and Resource Estimation. Technical report.
URL: https:// www.gov.uk/ government/ uploads/ system/ uploads/ attachment data/ le/ 324548/
BGS DECC MVS 2014 APPENDICESABDEF.pdf
Bergbauer, S. and D. Pollard. 2003. How to calculate normal curvatures of sampled geological surfaces.
Journal of Structural Geology 25(2):277289.
URL: http:// www.sciencedirect.com/ science/ article/ pii/ S0191814102000196
Bluck, B. J. 2000. Old Red Sandstone basins and alluvial systems of Midland Scotland. Geological
Society, London, Special Publications 180(1):417437.
URL: http:// sp.lyellcollection.org/ cgi/ doi/ 10.1144/ GSL.SP.2000.180.01.22
Bluck, B. J. 2013. Geotectonic evolution of Midland Scotland from Cambrian to Silurian: a review.
Scottish Journal of Geology 49(2):105116.
URL: http:// sjg.lyellcollection.org/ content/ 49/ 2/ 105.abstract
Bluck, B.J. 2002. The Geology of Scotland. 4th ed. The Geological Society.
Browne, Michael A.E., Mark Dean, I H S Hall, A D McAdam, S K Monro and J I Chisholm. 1999. A
lithostratigraphical framework for the Carboniferous rocks of the Midland Valley of Scotland. Version
2..
URL: http:// nora.nerc.ac.uk/ 3229/ 1/ RR99007.pdf
Caldwell, W. G. E. and G. M. Young. 2013. Structural controls in the western oshore Midland Valley of
Scotland: implications for Late Palaeozoic regional tectonics. Geological Magazine 150(04):673698.
URL: http:// www.journals.cambridge.org/ abstract S0016756812000878
Cartwright, J. A., B. D. Trudgill, . and C.S. Manseld. 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 17(9):13191326.
URL: http:// www.sciencedirect.com/ science/ article/ pii/ 019181419500033A
Coreld, S. M., R. L. Gawthorpe, M. Gage, A. J. Fraser and B. M. Besly. 1996. Inversion tectonics of
the Variscan foreland of the British Isles. Journal of the Geological Society 153(1):1732.
URL: http:// jgs.geoscienceworld.org/ content/ 153/ 1/ 17.abstract
Coward, M. P. 1993. Petroleum Geology of Northwest Europe: Proceedings of the 4th Conference. Vol. 4
Geological Society of London.
URL: http:// pgc.lyellcollection.org/ content/ 4/ 1095.abstract
Cowie, P. A., ., S. Gupta and N. H. Dawers. 2008. Implications of fault array evolution for
synrift depocentre development: insights from a numerical fault growth model. Basin Research
12(3-4):241261.
URL: http:// doi.wiley.com/ 10.1111/ j.1365-2117.2000.00126.x
75
REFERENCES 76
Cunningham, W. D. and P. Mann. 2007. Tectonics of strike-slip restraining and releasing bends.
Geological Society, London, Special Publications 290(1):112.
URL: http:// sp.lyellcollection.org/ content/ 290/ 1/ 1
Dentith, M. C. and J. Hall. 1989. MAVIS-an upper crustal seismic refraction experiment in the Midland
Valley of Scotland. Geophysical Journal International 99(3):627643.
URL: http:// gji.oxfordjournals.org/ cgi/ doi/ 10.1111/ j.1365-246X.1989.tb02047.x
Dewey, J. F. 1982. Plate tectonics and the evolution of the British Isles: Thirty-fth William Smith
Lecture. Journal of the Geological Society 139(4):371412.
Dewey, J. F., ., R. E. Holdsworth and R. A. Strachan. 1998. Transpression and transtension zones.
Geological Society, London, Special Publications 135(1):114.
URL: http:// sp.lyellcollection.org/ cgi/ doi/ 10.1144/ GSL.SP.1998.135.01.01
Freeman, B., ., S. L. Klemper and R. W. Hobbs. 1988. The deep structure of northern England and
the Iapetus Suture zone from BIRPS deep seismic reection proles. Journal of the Geological Society
145(5):727740.
Gupta, Anupma and Christopher H. Scholz. 2000. A model of normal fault interaction based on
observations and theory. Journal of Structural Geology 22(7):865879.
Heckel, P H and G Clayton. 2006. The Carboniferous System . Use of the new ocial names for the
subsystems , series , and stages . pp. 403407.
Hus, R., V. Acocella, R. Funiciello and M. De Batist. 2005. Sandbox models of relay ramp structure
and evolution. Journal of Structural Geology 27(3):459473.
Hutton, D. H. W. and F. C. Murphy. 1987. The Silurian of the Southern Uplands and Ireland
as a successor basin to the end-Ordovician closure of Iapetus. Journal of the Geological Society
144(5):765772.
URL: http:// jgs.lyellcollection.org/ cgi/ doi/ 10.1144/ gsjgs.144.5.0765
Kelly, P.G., D.J. Sanderson, . and D.C.P. Peacock. 1998. Linkage and evolution of conjugate
strike-slip fault zones in limestones of Somerset and Northumbria. Journal of Structural Geology
20(11):14771493.
Knipe, R. J., M. I. Chamberlain, a. Page and D. T. Needham. 1988. Structural histories in the SW
Southern Uplands, Scotland. Journal of the Geological Society 145(4):679684.
REFERENCES 77
Leeder, M. R. 1982. Upper Palaeozoic basins of the British IslesCaledonide inheritance versus Hercynian
plate margin processes. Journal of the Geological Society 139(4):479491.
Longman, C. D., B.J Bluck, . and O Van Breenmen. 1979. Ordovician conglomerates and the evolution
of the Midland Valley. Nature 280(5723):578581.
URL: http:// dx.doi.org/ 10.1038/ 280578a0
Morley, C. K., R. A. Nelson, T. L. Patton and S. G. Munn. 1990. Transfer Zones in the East
African Rift System and Their Relevance to Hydrocarbon Exploration in Rifts (1). AAPG Bulletin
74(8):12341253.
URL: http:// archives.datapages.com/ data/ bulletns/ 1990-91/ data/ pg/ 0074/ 0008/ 0000/ 1234.htm
National Archives of Scotland. 2006. National Archives of Scotland..
URL: http:// www.nas.gov.uk/ guides/ coalmining.asp
Northern Mine Research Society. 2013.
URL: http:// www.nmrs.org.uk/ mines/ coal/ index.html
Oliver, G.J.H. 2002. The Geology of Scotland. 4th ed. The Geological Society.
Peacock, D.C.P. 2002. Propagation, interaction and linkage in normal fault systems. Earth-Science
Reviews 58(1-2):121142.
URL: http:// www.sciencedirect.com/ science/ article/ pii/ S001282520100085X
Peacock, D.C.P. and D.J. Sanderson. 1994. Geometry and Development of Relay Ramps in Normal
Fault Systems. AAPG Bulletin 78(2):147165.
URL: http:// archives.datapages.com/ data/ bulletns/ 1994-96/ data/ pg/ 0078/ 0002/ 0100/ 0147.htm
Peacock, D.C.P. and D.J. Sanderson. 1996. Eects of propagation rate on displacement variations along
faults. Journal of Structural Geology 18(2-3):311320.
Read, W.A. 1988. Controls on sedimentation in the Midland Valley of Scotland. In In Besly B. M., Kelling
G. (eds.) Sedimentation in a Synorogenic Basin Complex: the Upper Carboniferous of Northwest
Europe,. Glasgow: Blackie pp. 222241.
Read, W.A, M. A. E. Browne, D Stephenson and B.J.G Upton. 2002. The Geology of Scotland. 4th ed.
The Geological Society.
Rippon, J., ., W. A. Read and R. G. Park. 1996. The Ochil Fault and the Kincardine basin: key
structures in the tectonic evolution of the Midland Valley of Scotland. Journal of the Geological
Society 153(4):573587.
Ritchie, J. D., H. Johnson, M. A. E. Browne and A. A. Monaghan. 2003. Late Devonian-Carboniferous
tectonic evolution within the Firth of Forth, Midland Valley; as revealed from 2D seismic reection
data. Scottish Journal of Geology 39(2):121134.
URL: http:// sjg.lyellcollection.org/ cgi/ doi/ 10.1144/ sjg39020121
Smith, A. H. V. 1997. Provenance of Coals from Roman Sites in England and Wales. Britannia 28:297.
URL: http:// journals.cambridge.org/ abstract S0068113X00005535
Smith, R. A. 2009. The Siluro-Devonian evolution of the southern Midland Valley of Scotland.
Geological Magazine 132(05):503.
URL: http:// journals.cambridge.org/ abstract S0016756800021166
Soper, N. J., R. W. England, D. B. Snyder and P. D. Ryan. 1992. The Iapetus suture zone in England,
Scotland and eastern Ireland: a reconciliation of geological and deep seismic data. Journal of the
Geological Society 149(5):697700.
The Coal Authority. 2013.
URL: http:// coal.decc.gov.uk/ en/ coal/ cms/ publications/ mining/ mining.aspx
Timmerman, M. J, M. Heeremans, L. A Kirstein, B .T Larsen, E. Spencer-Dunworth and B. Sundvoll.
2009. Linking changes in tectonic style with magmatism in northern Europe during the late
Carboniferous to latest Permian. Tectonophysics 473(3-4):375390.
URL: http:// linkinghub.elsevier.com/ retrieve/ pii/ S0040195109001632
Trewin, N.H and M.F Thirlwall. 2002. The Geology of Scotland. 4th ed. The Geological Society.
Appendix A
Surfaces
79
APPENDIX A. SURFACES 80
F
i
g
u
r
e
A
.
1
:
I
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
e
d
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
s
h
o
w
i
n
g
t
h
e
d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
f
a
u
l
t
s
.
T
h
i
s
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
s
i
s
d
e
p
o
s
i
t
e
d
i
n
t
h
e
e
a
r
l
y
N
a
m
u
r
i
a
n
k
n
o
w
n
a
s
t
h
e
L
i
m
e
s
t
o
n
e
C
o
a
l
F
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
F
i
g
u
r
e
A
.
2
:
I
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
e
d
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
s
h
o
w
i
n
g
t
h
e
d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
f
a
u
l
t
s
.
T
h
i
s
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
s
i
s
d
e
p
o
s
i
t
e
d
i
n
t
h
e
e
a
r
l
y
N
a
m
u
r
i
a
n
k
n
o
w
n
a
s
t
h
e
L
i
m
e
s
t
o
n
e
C
o
a
l
F
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
F
i
g
u
r
e
A
.
3
:
I
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
e
d
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
s
h
o
w
i
n
g
t
h
e
d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
f
a
u
l
t
s
.
T
h
i
s
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
s
i
s
d
e
p
o
s
i
t
e
d
i
n
t
h
e
e
a
r
l
y
N
a
m
u
r
i
a
n
k
n
o
w
n
a
s
t
h
e
L
i
m
e
s
t
o
n
e
C
o
a
l
F
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
F
i
g
u
r
e
A
.
4
:
I
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
e
d
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
s
h
o
w
i
n
g
t
h
e
d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
f
a
u
l
t
s
.
T
h
i
s
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
s
i
s
d
e
p
o
s
i
t
e
d
i
n
t
h
e
e
a
r
l
y
W
e
s
t
p
h
a
l
i
a
n
a
l
s
o
c
a
l
l
e
d
t
h
e
L
o
w
e
r
C
o
a
l
M
e
a
s
u
r
e
s
.
F
i
g
u
r
e
A
.
5
:
I
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
e
d
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
s
h
o
w
i
n
g
t
h
e
d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
f
a
u
l
t
s
.
T
h
i
s
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
s
i
s
d
e
p
o
s
i
t
e
d
i
n
t
h
e
e
a
r
l
y
W
e
s
t
p
h
a
l
i
a
n
a
l
s
o
c
a
l
l
e
d
t
h
e
L
o
w
e
r
C
o
a
l
M
e
a
s
u
r
e
s
.
F
i
g
u
r
e
A
.
6
:
I
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
e
d
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
s
h
o
w
i
n
g
t
h
e
d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
f
a
u
l
t
s
.
T
h
i
s
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
s
i
s
d
e
p
o
s
i
t
e
d
i
n
t
h
e
e
a
r
l
y
W
e
s
t
p
h
a
l
i
a
n
a
l
s
o
c
a
l
l
e
d
t
h
e
L
o
w
e
r
C
o
a
l
M
e
a
s
u
r
e
s
.
F
i
g
u
r
e
A
.
7
:
I
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
e
d
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
s
h
o
w
i
n
g
t
h
e
d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
f
a
u
l
t
s
.
T
h
i
s
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
s
i
s
d
e
p
o
s
i
t
e
d
i
n
t
h
e
e
a
r
l
y
W
e
s
t
p
h
a
l
i
a
n
a
l
s
o
c
a
l
l
e
d
t
h
e
L
o
w
e
r
C
o
a
l
M
e
a
s
u
r
e
s
.
T
h
e
f
a
u
l
t
s
f
o
u
n
d
i
n
t
h
e
w
e
s
t
a
r
e
i
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
e
d
t
o
b
e
a
r
e
s
u
l
t
o
f
t
h
e
s
t
r
i
k
e
s
l
i
p
m
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
N
O
T
t
h
e
e
a
r
l
y
N
a
m
u
r
i
a
n
E
-
W
e
x
t
e
n
s
i
o
n
F
i
g
u
r
e
A
.
8
:
I
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
e
d
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
s
h
o
w
i
n
g
t
h
e
d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
f
a
u
l
t
s
.
T
h
i
s
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
s
i
s
d
e
p
o
s
i
t
e
d
i
n
t
h
e
M
i
d
W
e
s
t
p
h
a
l
i
a
n
a
l
s
o
c
a
l
l
e
d
t
h
e
M
i
d
d
l
e
C
o
a
l
M
e
a
s
u
r
e
s
.
F
i
g
u
r
e
A
.
9
:
I
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
e
d
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
s
h
o
w
i
n
g
t
h
e
d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
f
a
u
l
t
s
.
T
h
i
s
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
s
i
s
d
e
p
o
s
i
t
e
d
i
n
t
h
e
M
i
d
W
e
s
t
p
h
a
l
i
a
n
a
l
s
o
c
a
l
l
e
d
t
h
e
M
i
d
d
l
e
C
o
a
l
M
e
a
s
u
r
e
s
.

Structural Study of The Carboniferous Coals in The Gasswater Coalmine, Ayrshire.

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Structural Study of The Carboniferous Coals in The Gasswater Coalmine, Ayrshire.

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Masters Thesis

Alexander James Monks, BSc (Hons) Geology

Potrebbero piacerti anche