Rose Diagram To Determine The Major Sediment Supply Direction MSSD

GEOPHYSICS
Downloaded 01/19/19 to 161.116.100.31. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
Use of seismic-based new rose diagram to determine the

major sediment-supply direction of progradational systems
Journal: Geophysics
Manuscript ID GEO-2018-0133.R2
Manuscript Type: Technical Paper
Keywords: seismic stratigraphy, sequence stratigraphy, interpretation, sediment
Area of Expertise: Interpretation Methods, Seismic Amplitude Interpretation
This paper presented here as accepted for publication in Geophysics prior to copyediting and composition.
© 2019 Society of Exploration Geophysicists.
Page 1 of 32 GEOPHYSICS
1
2
3
4 Use of seismic-based new rose diagram to determine the
5
6
7 major sediment-supply direction of progradational systems
8
9 Hongtao Zhu1,2*, Zhiwei Zeng1,2, Hongliu Zeng3, Changgui Xu4, Fan Xiao1,2
10
11
1 Key Laboratory of Tectonics and Petroleum Resources, China University of
12
13
14
Geosciences, Ministry of Education, Wuhan, China.
15
16
17 2 School of Earth Resources, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan, China.
18
19 3
20 Bureau of Economic Geology, Jackson School of Geosciences, The University of
21
22 Texas at Austin, Texas, U.S.A.
23
24
4 Tianjin Branch of China National Offshore Oil Corporation Ltd., Tianjin, China.
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33 * Corresponding author.
34
35 Key Laboratory of Tectonics and Petroleum Resources, China University of
36
37
38 Geosciences, Ministry of Education, Wuhan, Hubei, China.
39
40
E-mail address: htzhu@cug.edu.cn (H. Zhu).
41
42
43
44
45
46 Running head: Seismic-based new rose diagram for MSSD
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
GEOPHYSICS Page 2 of 32
1
2
3
4 ABSTRACT
5
6
7 A conventional method for identifying sediment-supply directions is to characterize the
8
9 seismic progradational reflection configuration, which is based mainly on qualitative
10
11
12 observation of numerous seismic profiles. Here, a more quantitative and practical way
13
14
to determine the major sediment-supply direction (MSSD) is proposed using a new type
15
16
17 of rose diagram based on seismic progradational sequence angles. In accordance with
18
19
20 similar principles of rose-diagram used in structural geology, we propose an analytical
21
22 method and a workflow for a new rose diagram of seismic-based progradational
23
24
25 sequence angles to determine MSSD. The Bozhong sag, a subbasin of the Bohai Bay
26
27
Basin with two typical progradational sequences (I and II), provides a suitable example
28
29
30 to analyze MSSD and test the new method. Our result shows that the MSSD of the two
31
32
33 progradational sequences (I and II) corresponds to azimuths of 10°–20° and 340°–350°,
34
35 respectively, intuitively indicating two sequences derived from different provenance-
36
37
38 transport systems. The new rose diagram of seismic progradational angles offers a
39
40
powerful and quantitative method for seismic-based sedimentary provenance and
41
42
43 paleocurrent analysis.
44
45
46 INTRODUCTION
47
48
49 The rose diagram has been a popular method for illustrating data with directionality
50
51
within Earth sciences for decades (Dott, 1973; Wells, 1999; Munro and Blenkinsop,
52
53
54 2012). It is one of the most widely used graphical means of indicating the frequency
55
56
57 distribution of two-dimensional data with directionality (Potter and Pettijohn, 1963).
58
59 By grouping the data in a satisfying manner，the diagram has high operability and is
60
1
2
3
4 easy to understand (Nemec, 1988). Accordingly, a large number of studies based on
5
6
7 rose diagrams have been published in the geoscience field that deal mainly with
8
9 directional statistical parameters, including strike, dip, and dip direction (e.g., Lunina,
10
11
12 2005; Worum et al., 2005; Lenhardt et al., 2013). These previous studies focused
13
14
largely on the application in structural and sedimentary geology, such as the fault strike
15
16
17 and dip identification based on seismic and outcrop statistical data (e.g., Tremblay et
18
19
20 al., 2003; Worum et al., 2005), as well as paleocurrent analysis based on directional
21
22 sedimentary features (such as ripple marks, crossbedding, channels, and scours)
23
24
25 measured in the outcrop study (e.g., Liu et al., 2001; Parés et al., 2007; Xie, 2016; Feng
26
27
et al., 2017).
28
29
30 Traditional methods for sedimentary provenance analysis include heavy minerals
31
32
33 (Blatt and Totten, 1981; Pan et al., 2016), detrital component analysis (Dickinson, 1985;
34
35 Roser and Korsch, 1988), palynology (Morton et al., 1991), fission-track
36
37
38 thermochronology (Brandon and Garver, 1994), and geochemical and isotopic methods
39
40
(Miller et al., 2010; Kimbrough et al., 2015; Wang et al., 2015; Benyon et al., 2016),
41
42
43 all of which require adequate samples from either outcrops or cores. The paleocurrent
44
45
46 analysis is also primarily outcrop (e.g., Miall, 2000; Parés et al., 2007; Boggs, 2009;
47
48 Xie, 2016), where an oriented core can be used but is rarely available. In petroleum-
49
50
51 exploration wells, an unoriented core could be oriented using a dip meter, but interwell
52
53
correlation is difficult (Davison and Haszeldine, 1984; Nelson et al., 1987; Miall, 2000).
54
55
56 Therefore, paleocurrent analysis is restricted significantly in petroleum exploration,
57
58
59
60
1
2
3
4 especially within deep-water sedimentary basins with an absence of outcrops and/or
5
6
7 sparse drilling data.
8
9 In study areas with no or limited samples, 3D seismic data is an alternative for
10
11
12 sedimentary provenance and facies analysis (Zhao and Liu, 2003; Xu et al., 2007;
13
14
Morley and Back, 2008). Classic seismic facies are groups of seismic reflection
15
16
17 characteristics including the reflection amplitude, apparent frequency, continuity,
18
19
20 external form, and internal reflection configuration that differ from those of the adjacent
21
22 areas (Mitchum et al., 1977; Vail et al., 1977). In recent decades, seismic-based
23
24
25 sedimentary provenance analysis has been widely used with the development of seismic
26
27
exploration technology (Zeng et al., 2013; Zhu et al., 2014; Liu et al., 2016; Zeng et al.,
28
29
30 2017). Widely recognized as among the most common seismic internal reflection
31
32
33 configurations, the progradational reflection configuration is one of the fundamental
34
35 types of seismic and sequence stratigraphy, and is indicative of the direction of
36
37
38 paleocurrent and the sedimentary provenance (Zhu et al., 2014; Zeng et al., 2017). Zeng
39
40
et al. (2013) separated the progradational reflection configuration into seismic
41
42
43 clinoform and nonclinoform (or subseismic clinoforms), and mainly evaluated the
44
45
46 definition and interpretation of progradational sequences that are not associated with
47
48 seismic clinoforms. The progradational reflection configuration shows the
49
50
51 progradational seismic events produced by lateral outbuilding or basinward prograding,
52
53
representing the sediments from source to sink, which is the basis for the determination
54
55
56 of major sediment-supply direction (MSSD). However, most of the sedimentary
57
58
59 provenance analysis based on progradational reflections focuses mainly on the
60
1
2
3
4 observation of a number of seismic profiles qualitatively (e.g., Zhu et al., 2014). An
5
6
7 operable quantitative method for paleocurrent and provenance analysis based on the
8
9 seismic progradational reflections is still not well developed.
10
11
12 Thus, the purpose of this paper is to propose a new rose diagram of seismic-based
13
14
progradational sequence angles for the quantitative identification of MSSD. In the
15
16
17 following, we introduce the methodology and workflow of this new method and provide
18
19
20 an example analysis from the Bohai Bay Basin, China. This study may provide an
21
22 effective analytical method and an intuitive display mode for a paleocurrent based on
23
24
25 3D seismic data. The benefits of this method may also expand the source of the datasets
26
27
(not limited by the outcrop and drilling data), provide useful information for the MSSD
28
29
30 of progradational sequences, and may serve as a useful tool for sedimentary provenance
31
32
33 analysis in sedimentary basins with available 3D seismic data.
34
35
36 METHODOLOGY
37
38 The 3D seismic data covering the entire study area (Bohai Bay Basin, China) provide
39
40
41 a high-resolution dataset for 3D sediment-provenance analysis. It is characterized by
42
43
an effective frequency range of 0–60 Hz, with a predominant frequency of
44
45
46 approximately 32 Hz. The signal-to-noise ratio of the data is relatively high. Landmark
47
48
49 software was used to interpret the 3D seismic volume, making it possible to conduct
50
51 seismic-facies and seismic-attribute analysis for the progradational sequences.
52
53
54 Comparison of rose diagram with different dataset
55
56
57
The rose diagram is a popular way to illustrate relative frequencies and is widely
58
59
60 used in visualizing directional data, which contributes significantly to the
1
2
3
4 reconstruction of geological history (Srivastava and Merriam, 1976). In tectonics, such
5
6
7 data generally consist of measurements of azimuth and inclination (Figure 1). For
8
9 example, in the structural interpretation, azimuth and inclination data for faults are
10
11
12 always displayed in the same rose diagram (e.g., Lunina, 2005). The diagrams can be
13
14
divided into groups according to the distribution of strike or dip azimuths with
15
16
17 directions from 0° to 360°. The radius of each sector of the rose diagram represents the
18
19
20 size of the dip angle. The larger the angle (ω) between the true and apparent dip, the
21
22 smaller the apparent dip angle (β and β′ ) will be. In particular, the apparent dip angle
23
24
25 will be zero when ω equals 90° (β=0) (Figure 1).
26
27
In contrast to the rose diagram in structural geology or paleocurrent analysis based
28
29
30 on outcrop data, in sedimentary basins, the basic azimuth and inclination data of the
31
32
33 underground progradational sequences can be easily obtained from the 3D seismic data.
34
35 The apparent progradational angles measured from different directions based on 3D
36
37
38 seismic data are supposed to be consistent with the apparent dip angle in the structural
39
40
interpretation. The apparent progradational angle will be smaller when the angle
41
42
43 between the apparent progradational azimuth and the maximum progradational azimuth
44
45
46 is larger. In particular, when the angle (ω) between the apparent and maximum
47
48 progradational azimuth is 90°, the measured apparent progradational angle (β) is also
49
50
51 equal to zero. Across the same progradational center, the variation among apparent
52
53
progradational angles from different seismic lines is limited when their azimuths are
54
55
56 relatively close. Therefore, instead of building the rose diagram by calculating the
57
58
59 average dip angle within a certain angle range in structural geology (e.g., Zhong et al.,
60
1
2
3
4 2011), we measured seismic profiles at 10° rotated intervals. The progradational angles
5
6
7 are measured at different seismic profiles with different azimuth directions (e.g., 0°,
8
9 10°, 20°, 30°, …, 170°), based on which the new rose diagram may finally be completed.
10
11
12 It is noteworthy that the azimuth of the maximum progradational angle is generally
13
14
close to the MSSD. The progradational angle rose diagram can intuitively reflect the
15
16
17 size and changes of different orientations of progradational angles and may have a
18
19
20 significant potential in paleocurrent and MSSD analysis.
21
22
23 Mapping procedure of the new rose diagram
24
25
26 According to the seismic facies analysis and identification, the progradational angles
27
28 (α1′, α2′, α3′, α4′, …, 𝛼𝑥′) between the progradational seismic reflection events and the
29
30
31 top interface of the progradational sequences are the present-day apparent
32
33
34 progradational angles (Figure 2a). In order to reduce the influence of the tectonic
35
36 subsidence or uplift that occurred after its deposition, the real and apparent
37
38
39 progradational angles (α1, α2, α3, α4, …𝛼𝑥) in this study are acquired from the seismic
40
41
sections by flattening the top boundary of the sequences (Figure 2b). Although the
42
43
44 angles (α1, α2, α3, α4, …𝛼𝑥) fail to represent the true dip angle, they do have a certain
45
46
47 correlation with the true dip angle. As a result，the measured angles (α1, α2, α3, α4, …,
48
49 𝛼𝑥) could reflect the relative angles of the progradational sequences at some scale,
50
51
52 which means the larger the relative angles of the progradational sequences, the greater
53
54
the true dip angle (Figure 2b).
55
56
57 The mapping process of the seismic-based rose diagram in this study can be divided
58
59
60 into six steps (Figure 3), including (1) ascertaining the centerpoint of the progradational
1
2
3
4 sequence, (2) measuring the progradational angle of the North reference profile, (3)
5
6
7 measuring the progradational angles of the profiles parallel to the North reference
8
9 profile, (4) calculating the average progradational angle of the reference azimuth
10
11
12 profiles, (5) rotating the reference profile to obtain the progradational angles of profiles
13
14
with other azimuths through repeating steps 1 to 4, and (6) completing the "rose
15
16
17 diagrams" based on the progradational angle of profiles with different azimuths (from
18
19
20 0° to 170°).
21
22 Step 1: Ascertain the centerpoint of the progradational sequence. —
23
24
25 First of all, on the basic analysis of the progradational sequence boundary by seismic
26
27
facies and attributes will help us to determine the centerpoint of the sequence (Figure
28
29
30 3a). In general，this work can be done by means of characterizing the progradational
31
32
33 reflection based on seismic profiles. For example, we can analyze the progradational
34
35 reflection configuration, the change of the progradational angle, and the variation of the
36
37
38 progradational scale, etc. The centerpoint always corresponds to the turning point of
39
40
these variations (e.g., the configuration, angle, and the scale or thickness). Alternatively,
41
42
43 in this study, the total absolute amplitude (TAA) seismic attribute analysis can also be
44
45
46 used to determine the centerpoint, as the seismic attribute anomalies of progradational
47
48 sequences are normally represented as a fan- and a lobe-shaped distribution, with the
49
50
51 high attribute value weakening gradually from the center to the periphery (Zhu et al.,
52
53
2014).
54
55
56 However, in cases with the development of multiple-stage progradational sequences，
57
58
59 it is necessary to identify an individual progradational sequence through the observation
60
1
2
3
4 of the variation of the seismic events, the external form, and the stacked relationship of
5
6
7 the seismic reflection on different seismic profiles across the lobe complex, which is
8
9 restricted by the seismic resolution. For each progradational sequence, it is necessary
10
11
12 to interpret the top and bottom interfaces, then extract the attributes of the sequences
13
14
and follow the same process mentioned above.
15
16
17 Step 2: Measure the progradational angle of the North reference profile. — In the
18
19
20 study, the North azimuth seismic section is defined across the centerpoint as the North
21
22 reference profile of each progradational sequence (Figure 3b). Based on this profile,
23
24
25 progradational angles (α1, α2, α3, α4, …, 𝛼𝑥) are measured based on the seismic profile
26
27
flattened to the top interface of the progradational sequence (Figure 2). Then, the
28
29
30 average value (β1) of these angles is considered as the final measured angle of this
31
32
33 profile:
34
35
36
37
𝜶𝟏 + 𝜶𝟐 + 𝜶𝟑 + ⋯ + 𝜶𝒙
38 𝜷𝟏 = (1)
𝒙
39
40
41 Step 3: Measure the progradational angles of the parallel profiles. — Progradational
42
43
44
angles of a series of parallel profiles are measured based on Step 2 (Figure 3c). Finally,
45
46 n sections of the progradational angles (β1, β2, β3, β4, …, βn) can be obtained.
47
48
49 Step 4: Calculate the average progradational angle of the reference azimuth profiles.
50
51 — In this step, the average value (γ1) of the progradational angles (β1, β2, β3, β4, …,
52
53 βn) of a series of parallel sections is calculated. The average value (γ1) serves as the
54
55
final progradational angle of the North reference profile of the sequence.
56
57
58 𝛽1 + 𝛽2 + 𝛽3 + ⋯ + 𝛽𝑛
59 𝛾1 = 𝑛
(2)
60
1
2
3
4 Step 5: Rotate the North reference profile to obtain the progradational angles of
5
6
7 other profiles with different azimuths. — In this step, the North reference profile is
8
9 rotated on its centerpoint at 10° intervals in turn (Figure 3d), and the final
10
11
12 progradational angles (γ1, γ2, γ3, γ4, …, γn) of each profile with different azimuths (from
13
14
0° to 170°) are measured according to Steps 2 to 4 (Table 1).
15
16
17 Step 6: Map the "rose diagrams." — The final progradational angles (γ1, γ2, γ3, γ4, …,
18
19
20 γn) of profiles with different azimuths (0°, 10°, 20°, …,170°) are the basic data for the
21
22 rose diagrams (Table 1). The centerpoint of the circle represents the progradational
23
24
25 angle of 0°, and the points on the circumference represent the progradational angle of
26
27
90°. Each azimuth is converted into the length of the line from the center to the
28
29
30 circumference (Figure 3e). The angles of 180°, 190°, 200°, …, 350° are equal to the
31
32
33 angles 0°, 10°, 20°, …, 170°, respectively. After filling in the color, the azimuth of the
34
35 maximum progradational angle can be easily identified, corresponding to the MSSD of
36
37
38 the progradational sequence (Figure 3f).
39
40
41 AN EXAMPLE FROM THE BOHAI BAY BASIN, CHINA
42
43
The Bohai Bay Basin is a typical nonmarine rift basin located on the eastern coast of
44
45
46 northern China (Figure 4a). It has become a focal point of research due to intensive
47
48
49 petroleum exploration and a series of successful discoveries (Zhu et al., 2014). The
50
51 basin covers an area of more than 180,000 km2 and consists of seven subbasins,
52
53
54 including the Liaohe, Liaodong Bay, Bozhong, Jiyang, Huanghua, Jizhong, and
55
56
Linqing Depressions (Figure 4a) (Gong, 1997). Previous seismic- and well-based
57
58
59 investigations focused mainly on the onshore areas of the Bohai Bay Basin (Hou et al.,
60
1
2
3
4 2001; Deng et al., 2008), while the offshore part has had less attention. Therefore, the
5
6
7 geological evolution of the offshore depressions is poorly understood, especially the
8
9 Paleogene provenance and paleocurrent analysis, due to limited seismic and well data.
10
11
12 In this case, the southern part of the Bozhong sag developed two typical progradational
13
14
sequences (Figure 4b). The sequences can be used as an example to test the new rose
15
16
17 diagram and determine MSSD. The Bonan Uplift is considered the most important
18
19
20 source for the Bozhong sag since the Paleogene (Gong, 1997) (Figure 4b).
21
22
23 Determination of the centerpoint of the progradational sequences
24
25
26 Based on the seismic facies and attribute analysis (Figures 5–7), it is obvious that
27
28
two Paleogene progradational sequences have been developed in the study area with
29
30
31 typical progradational seismic reflection characteristics (Figure 4b). Seismic facies
32
33
34 imaging is a basic tool in studying depositional processes (Zeng et al., 1998) and is
35
36 effective in ascertaining the centerpoint of the progradational sequences based on
37
38
39 seismic facies observation and analysis (Figures 5, 6a and 7a).
40
41
Figure 5 illustrates two seismic profiles across sequence-I. The vertical profile A–A´
42
43
44 along the southwest–northeast direction, shows the presence of moderate-frequency,
45
46
47 high-amplitude shingled progradational seismic reflections. The scale and angle of the
48
49 progradational seismic events are relatively large. The apparent progradational angle (β)
50
51
52 is about 30°–40° based on the flattened profile of A–A´ (Figure 5a). Combining the
53
54
characteristics of the progradational reflection configuration and the measured apparent
55
56
57 progradational angle, we can determine that the main sediment-supply and true
58
59
60 paleocurrent direction of sequence-II is relatively close to the azimuth of the profile A–
1
2
3
4 A´. The centerpoint is close to the middle of the progradational seismic reflections, with
5
6
7 a relatively large apparent angle (α´) and maximum thickness (Figure 5a).
8
9 The vertical profile B–B´ along the east–west direction (Figure 5b) shows the
10
11
12 lenticular, bidirectional downlap seismic reflections with much smaller progradational
13
14
angles (5°–10°). Compared with the overlying and underlying formations, the interval
15
16
17 of interest shows relatively low frequency and poor continuity, suggesting MSSD is
18
19
20 nearly perpendicular to the azimuth of profile B–B´. The centerpoint of this section is
21
22 close to the middle of the lenticular reflection configuration.
23
24
25 Seismic attributes are also helpful in determining the centerpoint of the sequence
26
27
(Zhu et al., 2014; Zeng et al., 2017). In this case, the total absolute amplitude (TAA)
28
29
30 attribute was extracted between the top and bottom interfaces (Figures 6b and 7b). The
31
32
33 amplitude anomalies show fan-shaped or lobate distributions, which decrease gradually
34
35 from the center to the periphery. Thus, a combination of the progradational and
36
37
38 lenticular seismic reflection configurations and the TAA attributes could determine the
39
40
centerpoints of the progradational sequences (I and II).
41
42
43
44
Characteristics and other mapping process of the rose diagram
45
46
47 After the centerpoint of the sequences is determined, we need to measure the
48
49 apparent progradational angles (α1, α2, α3, α4, …, 𝛼𝑥) of the North reference profile
50
51
52 across the centerpoint with the top boundary flattened profiles of each sequence. For
53
54 each profile, the measured angles (α1, α2, α3, α4, …, 𝛼𝑥) are used to calculate the
55
56
57 average angle (β1). Then, we selected other n-1 (n>10) seismic profiles parallel to the
58
59
60 North reference profile and measured the average progradational angles (β2, β3, β4, …,
1
2
3
4 βn) based on Step 2 and Step 3. After that, we obtained the final progradational angle
5
6
7 (γ1) of the North azimuth profiles through the average calculation of the values (β1, β2,
8
9 β3, β4, …, βn). The γ1 of sequence-I is 38.8°, and the γ1 of sequence-II is 38.1° (Table
10
11
12 1). Then, we rotated the North reference profile on its centerpoint at 10° intervals in
13
14
15
turn and measured another 17 final progradational angles (γ2, γ3, γ4, …, γ18) of each
16
17 azimuth profile (from 10° to 170°) following Steps 2 to 4 (Table 1). Finally, based on
18
19
20 the final data of different azimuth profiles (0°, 10°, 20°, …,170°) (Table 1), we
21
22 completed the rose diagrams of the two sequences according to Step 6 (Figures 6c and
23
24
25 7c).
26
27
As shown in the rose diagrams, the azimuths of the maximum progradational angles
28
29
30 of sequence-I and sequence-II are clearly illustrated, which correspond to 10°–20° and
31
32
33 340°–350°, respectively. Therefore, the MSSD of the two sequences also correspond to
34
35 azimuths of 10°–20° and 340°–350°, indicating the two sequences are derived from
36
37
38 different provenance-transport systems. This may exert an important significance for
39
40
the analysis of paleocurrent and reservoir properties of the sediment.
41
42
43
44
DISCUSSION
45
46 The new rose diagram of progradational sequence angles is comparable with the
47
48
49 theory of the rose diagram of structural geology, providing the quantitative and practical
50
51 method to determine MSSD using 3D seismic data. The new diagram provides a
52
53
54 powerful tool to determine the MSSD based on seismic data with a simple operating
55
56
process, especially for areas with no or limited cores. Compared with seismic dip
57
58
59 attributes (e.g., volumetric attributes—reflector convergence which is useful in the
60
1
2
3
4 interpretation of angular unconformities (Chopra and Marfurt, 2013)) or dip auto-track
5
6
7 methods (e.g., Yan et al., 2013), the rose diagram of progradational sequence angles
8
9 not only directly supplements the new evidence for the determination of MSSD, but
10
11
12 also exerts more geologic thinking in the prediction of MSSD. Also, it can be applied
13
14
conveniently to 2D seismic datasets. Although the application of the seismic-based rose
15
16
17 diagram of progradational sequence angles may be affected by the seismic data
18
19
20 resolution (e.g., subseismic clinoforms (Zent et al., 2013)), it is a more useful method
21
22 than other qualitative seismic interpretation methods.
23
24
25 Because of the distinct change in reflector dip and/or terminations, progradational
26
27
seismic reflection can be relatively easy to recognize on vertical seismic sections.
28
29
30 Potentially, apart from the prediction of MSSD, this rose diagram of progradational
31
32
33 sequence angles could also be an effective tool for the identification of sedimentary
34
35 units and of stage analysis for overlapped compound sedimentary units. The method is
36
37
38 highly effective for distinctive progradational sequences having significant thickness
39
40
(high tens to hundreds of meters). Our method integrated with the seismic stratigraphy
41
42
43 pattern analysis of the configuration, termination of seismic reflection events, and
44
45
46 packages (e.g., toplap, onlap, downlap, hummocky clinoforms, and so forth) may have
47
48 more effective value in imaging the progradational stages (Zhu et al., 2014) and
49
50
51 representing the architectural elements of a depositional environment (Chopra and
52
53
Marfurt, 2013). In fact, except for those distinctive progradational sequences that can
54
55
56 be easily recognized, many thin progradational sequences (only several meters to low
57
58
59 tens of meters thick) are especially hard to identify using seismic data, which can be
60
1
2
3
4 imaged by high-frequency enhancement processing to change the invisible to visible
5
6
7 progradational seismic reflections before the use of this method. In the study areas with
8
9 obvious tectonics affect, the zone with relatively weak structural activities between the
10
11
12 faults can be used to develop the application of this method.
13
14
However, as 3D seismic is the main tool of what we are utilizing for our proposed
15
16
17 method, it also has some limitations on the application. Firstly, we must restate the main
18
19
20 assumption in this study is the azimuth of the maximum progradational angle may
21
22 generally be closed to the MSSD. The assumption will be true for a progradational
23
24
25 sequence only with single sediment source such as the example used in this research.
26
27
Secondly, the assumption may cause a confusion for progradational sequence with two
28
29
30 or multiple different sediment sources. To a certain extent, the rose diagram might
31
32
33 exhibit two or multiple peak directions by our method which may help us to identify
34
35 the complicated sediment-supply directions. Thirdly, compared with the drilling or core
36
37
38 data, the resolution of seismic data is relatively low, and it will be difficult to recognize
39
40
the frequent interbedding of thin sandstone and mudstone. Therefore, our method will
41
42
43 be most suitable for areas with high quality 3D seismic data, obvious progradational
44
45
46 reflection and relatively stable regional structural activities.
47
48
49 CONCLUSION
50
51 A new type of rose diagram based on the seismic progradational sequence angles is
52
53
54 proposed to determine the major sediment-supply direction (MSSD). Application of the
55
56
seismic-based new rose diagram from the Bohai Bay Basin, China, provides a suitable
57
58
59 example with six detail mapping steps of the new rose diagram to analyze the MSSD
60
1
2
3
4 and test the new method, quantifying the main sediment transport direction of the
5
6
7 sedimentary system. Despite it is still a conventional seismic based method, the new
8
9 rose diagram of progradational angles is suitable than the traditional seismic facies
10
11
12 analysis for identify the MSSD.
13
14
The advantages of our proposed method mainly include a quick, visual and
15
16
17 quantitative provenance prediction without any test analysis and the workflow of the
18
19
20 method is easy to operate. Disadvantages include the method may be affected by the
21
22 resolution of the seismic data, tectonic events and the seismic progradational sequence
23
24
25 angles may change while tectonic subsidence or uplift occur after its deposition, even
26
27
though we have re-established the paleo-topography by flattening the top boundary of
28
29
30 the sequence before we measured the angles.
31
32
33 The new rose diagram of progradational angles illustrated in this study is best for the
34
35 progradational sequence with single sediment source supply and the area with relatively
36
37
38 weak structural activities, even though it also can be work with different sediment
39
40
sources. This conventional seismic based method integrated with other provenance
41
42
43 analysis skills (e.g., detrital zircon dating) might take it possible to solve the problem
44
45
46 of identifying the source direction of sand bodies in the basin more effectively.
47
48
49 REFERENCES
50
51 Benyon, C., A. L. Leier, D. A. Leckie, S. M. Hubbard, G. E. Gehrels, 2016, Sandstone
52
53
54 provenance and insights into the paleogeography of the McMurray Formation from
55
56
detrital zircon geochronology, Athabasca Oil Sands, Canada: AAPG Bulletin, 100,
57
58
59 269–287.
60
1
2
3
4 Blatt, H., and M. W. Totten, 1981, Detrital quartz as an indicator of distance from shore
5
6
7 in marine mudrocks: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, 51, 1259–1266.
8
9 Boggs, J. R., 2009, Petrology of sedimentary rocks (second edition). Cambridge
10
11
12 University Press, 80–81.
13
14
Brandon, M. T., and J. I. Garver, 1994, Provenance studies of Columbia–England by
15
16
17 fission tracks analysis: Chemical Geology, 89, 37–52.
18
19
20 Chopra, S., and K. J. Marfurt, 2013, Volumetric estimates of seismic reflector rotation
21
22 and convergence—tools for mapping rotation about faults and seismic stratigraphy:
23
24
25 The Leading Edge, 32, 402–408.
26
27
Davison, I., and R. S. Haszeldine, 1984, Orienting conventional cores for geological
28
29
30 purposes: a review of methods: Journal of Petroleum Geology, 7, 461–466.
31
32
33 Deng, H. W., R. J. Wang, Y. Xiao, J. Y. Guo, and X. J. Xie, 2008, Tectono–sequence
34
35 stratigraphic analysis in continental faulted basins (in Chinese with English abstract):
36
37
38 Earth Science Frontiers (China University of Geosciences, Beijing; Peking
39
40
University), 15, 1–7.
41
42
43 Dickinson, W. R., 1985, Interpreting provenance relations from detrital modes of
44
45
46 sandstones, in Zuffa, G. G., ed., Provenance of Arenites, Nato ASI (Series C:
47
48 Mathematical and Physical Sciences), 148: Springer, 333–361.
49
50
51 Dott, R. H., 1973, Paleocurrent analysis of trough cross stratification: Journal of
52
53
Sedimentary Petrology, 43, 779–783.
54
55
56 Feng, X. D., H. B. Lv, H. C. Zhang, Y. X. Zhang, X. P. Dong, K. Tang, G. F. Zhu, D.
57
58
59 R. Zheng, S. Li, Q. Zhang, J. Wang, J. H. E. Jing, K. L. Chen, and B. B. Qin, 2017,
60
1
2
3
4 An analysis on the early Cretaceous paleocurrent direction in the Celaomiao
5
6
7 Depression, Urad Rear Banner, Inner Mongolia, China (in Chinese with English
8
9 abstract): Geological Review, 63, 277–286.
10
11
12 Gong, Z. S., 1997, Giant offshore oil and gas fields in China (in Chinese): Petroleum
13
14
Industry Press.
15
16
17 Hou, G. T., X. L. Qian, and D. S. Cai, 2001, The tectonic evolution of Bohai Basin in
18
19
20 Mesozoic and Cenozoic time (in Chinese with English abstract): Acta Scientiarum
21
22 Naturalium Universitatis Pekinensis, 37, 845–851.
23
24
25 Kimbrough, D. L., M. Grove, G. E. Gehrels, R. J. Dorsey, K. A. Howard, O. Lovera,
26
27
A. Aslan, P. K. House, and P. A. Pearthree, 2015, Detrital zircon U-Pb provenance
28
29
30 of the Colorado River: A 5 m.y. record of incision into cover strata overlying the
31
32
33 Colorado Plateau and adjacent regions: Geosphere, 11, 1719–1748.
34
35 Lenhardt, N., H. Böhnel, M. Hinderer, and J. Hornung, 2013, Paleocurrent direction
36
37
38 measurements in a volcanic setting by means of anisotropy of magnetic susceptibility:
39
40
A case study from the Lower Miocene Tepoztlán Formation (Transmexican Volcanic
41
42
43 Belt, Central Mexico): Sedimentary Geology, 290: 1–14.
44
45
46 Liu, B. Z., Y. Saito, T. Yamazaki, A. Abdeldayem, H. Oda, K. Hori, and Q. H. Zhao,
47
48 2001, Paleocurrent analysis for the Late Pleistocene–Holocene incised-valley fill of
49
50
51 the Yangtze delta, China by using anisotropy of magnetic susceptibility data: Marine
52
53
Geology, 176, 175–189.
54
55
56 Liu, Q. H., H. T. Zhu, Y. Shu, X. M. Zhu, X. H. Yang, L. Chen, M. X. Tan, and M. Y.
57
58
59 Geng, 2016, Provenance identification and sedimentary analysis of the beach and bar
60
1
2
3
4 systems in the Palaeogene of the Enping Sag, Pearl River Mouth Basin, South China
5
6
7 Sea: Marine and Petroleum Geology, 70, 251–272.
8
9 Lunina, O. V., 2005, Fault systems and stress fields in the Southern Dead Sea Rift:
10
11
12 Geotectonics, 39, 143–155.
13
14
Miall, A. D., 2000, Principles of sedimentary basin analysis (third edition): Springer-
15
16
17 Verlag GmbH, 283–288.
18
19
20 Miller, E. L., G. E. Gehrels, V. Pease, and S. Sokolov, 2010, Stratigraphy and U-Pb
21
22 detrital zircon geochronology of Wrangel Island, Russia: Implications for Arctic
23
24
25 paleogeography: AAPG Bulletin, 94, 665–692.
26
27
Mitchum, R. M., Jr., P. R. Vail, and J. B. Sangree, 1977, Seismic stratigraphy and global
28
29
30 changes of sea level: Part 6. Stratigraphic interpretation of seismic reflection patterns
31
32
33 in depositional sequences, in C. E. Payton, ed., Seismic Stratigraphy: AAPG Memoir
34
35 26, 117–133.
36
37
38 Morley, C. K., and S. Back, 2008, Estimating hinterland exhumation from late orogenic
39
40
basin volume, NW Borneo: Journal of the Geological Society of London, 165, 353–
41
42
43 366.
44
45
46 Morton, A. C., S. P. Todd, and P. D. W. Haughton, 1991, Developments in Sedimentary
47
48 Provenance Studies: Geological Society, London, Special Publication 57, 370.
49
50
51 Munro, M. A., and T. G. Blenkinsop, 2012, MARD—A moving average rose diagram
52
53
application for the geosciences: Computers & Geosciences, 49, 112–120.
54
55
56 Nelson, R. A., L. C. Lenox, and B. J., Jr., Ward, 1987, Oriented core: Its use, error and
57
58
59 uncertainty: Ameriean Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, 71, 357–367.
60
1
2
3
4 Nemec, W., 1988, The shape of the rose: Sedimentary Geology, 59, 149–152.
5
6
7 Pan, B. T., H. L. Pang, H. S. Gao, E. Garzanti, Y. Zou, X. P. Liu, F. Q. Li, and Y. X.
8
9 Jia, 2016, Heavy-mineral analysis and provenance of Yellow River sediments around
10
11
12 the China Loess Plateau: Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, 127, 1–11.
13
14
Parés, J. M., N. J. C. Hassold, D. K. Rea, and B. A. van der Pluijm, 2007, Paleocurrent
15
16
17 directions from paleomagnetic reorientation of magnetic fabrics in deep-sea
18
19
20 sediments at the Antarctic Peninsula Pacific margin (ODP Sites 1095, 1101): Marine
21
22 Geology, 242, 261–269.
23
24
25 Potter, P. E., and F. J. Pettijohn, 1963, Paleocurrents and Basin Analysis: Academic
26
27
Press Inc.
28
29
30 Roser, B. P., and R. J. Korsch, 1988, Provenance signatures of sandstone-mudstone
31
32
33 suites determined using discriminant function analysis of major element data:
34
35 Chemical Geology, 67, 119–139.
36
37
38 Srivastava, G. S., and D. F. Merriam, 1976, Computer constructed optical-rose
39
40
diagrams: Computers & Geosciences, 1, 179–186.
41
42
43 Tremblay, A., B. Long, and M. Massé, 2003, Supracrustal faults of the St. Lawrence
44
45
46 rift system, Québec: kinematics and geometry as revealed by field mapping and
47
48 marine seismic reflection data: Tectonophysics, 369, 231–252.
49
50
51 Vail, P. R., R. M., Jr., Mitchum, R. G. Todd, J. M. Widmier, S. Thompson, III, J. B.
52
53
Sangree, J. N. Bubb, and W. G. Hatlelid, 1977, Seismic stratigraphy and global
54
55
56 changes of sea level, in C. E. Payton, ed., Seismic Stratigraphy—Applications to
57
58
59 Hydrocarbon Exploration: AAPG Memoir 26, 49–212.
60
1
2
3
4 Wang, W., J. R. Ye, X. H. Yang, H. S. Shi, Y. Shu, and J. Wu, 2015, Sediment
5
6
7 provenance and depositional response to multistage rifting, Paleogene, Huizhou
8
9 Depression, Pearl River Mouth Basin (in Chinese with English abstract): Earth
10
11
12 Science–Journal of China University of Geosciences, 40, 1061–1071.
13
14
Wells, N. A., 1999, ASTRA.BAS: a program in QuickBasic 4.5 for exploring rose
15
16
17 diagrams, circular histograms and some alternatives: Computers & Geosciences, 25,
18
19
20 641–654.
21
22 Worum, G., L. Michon, R. T. van Balen, J.-D. van Wees, S. Cloetingh, and H. Pagnier,
23
24
25 2005, Pre-Neogene controls on present-day fault activity in the West Netherlands
26
27
Basin and Roer Valley Rift System (southern Netherlands): role of variations in fault
28
29
30 orientation in a uniform low-stress regime: Quaternary Science Reviews, 24, 473–
31
32
33 488.
34
35 Xie, X. Y., 2016, Provenance and sediment dispersal of the Triassic Yanchang
36
37
38 Formation, southwest Ordos Basin, China, and its implications: Sedimentary
39
40
Geology, 335, 1–16.
41
42
43 Xu, Y. J., Y. S. Du, and J. H. Yang, 2007, Prospects of sediment provenance analysis
44
45
46 (in Chinese with English abstract): Geological Science and Technology Information,
47
48 26, 26–32.
49
50
51 Yan, Z., H. M. Gu, and C. G. Cai, 2013, Automatic fault tracking based on ant colony
52
53
algorithms: Computers & Geosciences, 51, 269–281.
54
55
56 Zeng, H. L., S. C. Henry, and J. P. Riola, 1998, Stratal slicing, Part II: Real 3-D seismic
57
58
59 data: Geophysics, 63, 514–522.
60
1
2
3
4 Zeng, H. L., X. M. Zhu, and R. K. Zhu, 2013, New insights into seismic stratigraphy of
5
6
7 shallow-water progradational sequences: Subseismic clinoforms: Interpretation, 1(1),
8
9 SA35–SA51.
10
11
12 Zeng, Z. W., X. H. Yang, H. T. Zhu, C. C. Xia, X. Niu, Y. Chen, and Y. X. Han, 2017,
13
14
Development characteristics and significance of large delta of Upper Enping
15
16
17 Formation, Baiyun Sag (in Chinese with English abstract): Earth Science, 42, 78–92.
18
19
20 Zhao, H. G., and C. Y. Liu, 2003, Approaches and prospects of provenance analysis (in
21
22 Chinese with English abstract): Acta Sedimentologica Sinica, 21, 409–415.
23
24
25 Zhong, W., Z. Y. Tan, and L. Qiao, 2011, Stability analysis of rock slope based on
26
27
preferred structural plane: Advanced Materials Research, 243–249, 2254–2258.
28
29
30 Zhu, H. T., X. H. Yang, K. Y. Liu, and X. H. Zhou, 2014, Seismic-based sediment
31
32
33 provenance analysis in continental lacustrine rift basins: An example from the Bohai
34
35 Bay Basin, China: AAPG Bulletin, 98, 1995–2018.
36
37
38
39
40
41 Figure list
42
43
44 Figure 1. Relationship between the true and apparent dip angle. α is the true dip angle,
45
46
47 β and β′ are the apparent dip angles, and ω is the angle between the true and apparent
48
49
50 dip angles.
51
52
53 Figure 2. Diagram of apparent progradational-angle measurement. (a) The original
54
55
seismic profile, showing the present-day apparent progradational angles. (b) The
56
57
58 seismic profile flattened to the top interface of the progradational sequence, showing
59
60
1
2
3
4 the real apparent progradational angles. Abbreviations: TWT= two-way travel time,
5
6
7 CDP= common depth point.
8
9
10 Figure 3. Mapping procedure of the seismic-based rose diagram of progradational angle.

11
12
13
(a) Ascertain the centerpoint of the progradational sequence. (b) Measure the
14
15 progradational angle of the North reference profile. (c) Measure the progradational
16
17
18 angles of the parallel profiles and calculate the average progradational angle of the
19
20 reference azimuth profiles. (d) Rotate the North reference profile to obtain the
21
22
23 progradational angles of other profiles with different azimuths. (e) The final
24
25
26
progradational angles with different azimuths (0°, 10°, 20°, …,170°) are converted into
27
28 the length of the line from the center (progradational angle=0°) to the circumference
29
30
31 (progradational angle=90°). (f) External boundary filling color and then the azimuth of
32
33 the maximum progradational angle can be easily identified.
34
35
36
37 Figure 4. Map of the southern slope of the Bozhong sag, Bohai Bay Basin, showing two
38
39 typical progradational sequences (I and II) and their distributions. Black lines A–A′
40
41
42 through D–D′indicate the locations of the seismic lines used in this study.
43
44
45 Figure 5. Seismic vertical profiles A–Aánd B–B´ across sequence-II, showing (a) the
46
47
48 presence of large-scale progradational seismic reflections along the southwest–
49
50 northeast direction, and (b) the lenticular seismic reflections near the east–west
51
52
53 direction. See Figure 4b for the locations of the seismic cross sections. Abbreviations:
54
55
TWT= two-way travel time.
56
57
58
59
60
1
2
3
4 Figure 6. Typical oblique-shingled progradation configuration of sequence-I as seen on
5
6
7 (a) the seismic profile C–Cálong the southwest–northeast direction, (b) TAA attribute
8
9 with relatively high value, and (c) the seismic-based rose diagram for the identification
10
11
12 of progradational direction. See Figure 4b for the location of the seismic cross section.
13
14
Abbreviations: TWT= two-way travel time, TAA= total absolute amplitude.
15
16
17
18 Figure 7. Typical shingled progradation configuration of sequence-II as seen on (a) the
19
20 seismic profile D–D ´ along the southeast–northwest direction, (b) the total absolute
21
22
23 amplitude (TAA) attribute, and (c) the seismic-based rose diagram for the identification
24
25
26
of progradational direction. See Figure 4b for the location of the seismic cross section.
27
28 Abbreviations: TWT= two-way travel time, TAA= total absolute amplitude.
29
30
31
32
33
34 Table list
35
36
37
38 Table 1. Database of the rose diagram of two progradational sequences.
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24 Figure 1. Relationship between the true and apparent dip angle. α is the true dip angle, β and β′ are the
25 apparent dip angles, and ω is the angle between the true and apparent dip angles.
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
Figure 2. Diagram of apparent progradational-angle measurement. (a) The original seismic profile, showing
24
the present-day apparent progradational angles. (b) The seismic profile flattened to the top interface of the
25 progradational sequence, showing the real apparent progradational angles. Abbreviations: TWT= two-way
26 travel time, CDP= common depth point.
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33 Figure 3. Mapping procedure of the seismic-based rose diagram of progradational angle. (a) Ascertain the
34 centerpoint of the progradational sequence. (b) Measure the progradational angle of the North reference
35 profile. (c) Measure the progradational angles of the parallel profiles and calculate the average
36 progradational angle of the reference azimuth profiles. (d) Rotate the North reference profile to obtain the
progradational angles of other profiles with different azimuths. (e) The final progradational angles with
37
different azimuths (0°, 10°, 20°, …,170°) are converted into the length of the line from the center
38 (progradational angle=0°) to the circumference (progradational angle=90°). (f) External boundary filling
39 color and then the azimuth of the maximum progradational angle can be easily identified.
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23 Figure 4. Map of the southern slope of the Bozhong sag, Bohai Bay Basin, showing two typical
24 progradational sequences (I and II) and their distributions. Black lines A–A′through D–D′indicate the
25 locations of the seismic lines used in this study.
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
Figure 5. Seismic vertical profiles A–Aánd B–B´ across sequence-II, showing (a) the presence of large-
28
scale progradational seismic reflections along the southwest–northeast direction, and (b) the lenticular
29 seismic reflections near the east–west direction. See Figure 4b for the locations of the seismic cross
30 sections. Abbreviations: TWT= two-way travel time.
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34 Figure 6. Typical oblique-shingled progradation configuration of sequence-I as seen on (a) the seismic profile
C–Cálong the southwest–northeast direction, (b) TAA attribute with relatively high value, and (c) the
35
seismic-based rose diagram for the identification of progradational direction. See Figure 4b for the location
36 of the seismic cross section. Abbreviations: TWT= two-way travel time, TAA= total absolute amplitude.
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34 Figure 7. Typical shingled progradation configuration of sequence-II as seen on (a) the seismic profile D–
35 Dálong the southeast–northwest direction, (b) the total absolute amplitude (TAA) attribute, and (c) the
36 seismic-based rose diagram for the identification of progradational direction. See Figure 4b for the location
37 of the seismic cross section. Abbreviations: TWT= two-way travel time, TAA= total absolute amplitude.
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
1
2
3 Table 1. Database of the rose diagram of two progradational sequences.
4
5 The diagram of Sequence-I in Figure 6 The diagram of Sequence-II in Figure 7
6
7 Progradational Length Progradational Length
Azimuth Azimuth
8 Angle (γ) (radius=1) Angle (γ) (radius=1)
9 0° 38.8° 0.431 0° 38.1° 0.423
10
11 10° 48.1° 0.534 10° 36.0° 0.401
12 20° 52.9° 0.588 20° 29.4° 0.326
13 30° 47.7° 0.530 30° 25.7° 0.286
14
15
40° 34.8° 0.387 40° 12.1° 0.134
16 50° 25.3° 0.281 50° 8.7° 0.096
17 60° 24.1° 0.268 60° 8.3° 0.093
18
70° 20.5° 0.228 70° 5.7° 0.063
19
20 80° 18.6° 0.207 80° 2.0° 0.022
21 90° 5.9° 0.066 90° 8.0° 0.089
22 100° 4.2° 0.046 100° 12.0° 0.134
23
24 110° 13.5° 0.150 110° 14.7° 0.163
25 120° 21.3° 0.236 120° 25.4° 0.282
26 130° 21.9° 0.243 130° 18.7° 0.208
27
28
140° 21.3° 0.236 140° 20.0° 0.223
29 150° 24.5° 0.272 150° 23.4° 0.259
30 160° 24.2° 0.269 160° 55.1° 0.612
31
170° 22.8° 0.253 170° 60.1° 0.668
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
DATA AND MATERIALS AVAILABILITY
Data associated with this research are available and can be obtained by contacting the corresponding
author.

Rose Diagram To Determine The Major Sediment Supply Direction MSSD

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

Rose Diagram To Determine The Major Sediment Supply Direction MSSD

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

GEOPHYSICS

Use of seismic-based new rose diagram to determine the

Manuscript Type: Technical Paper

Keywords: seismic stratigraphy, sequence stratigraphy, interpretation, sediment

Area of Expertise: Interpretation Methods, Seismic Amplitude Interpretation

10 Figure 3. Mapping procedure of the seismic-based rose diagram of progradational angle.

Potrebbero piacerti anche