Book contents
- Glacially-Triggered Faulting
- Glacially-Triggered Faulting
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Preface
- Part I Introduction
- Part II Methods and Techniques for Fault Identification and Dating
- 3 Earthquake-Induced Landforms in the Context of Ice-Sheet Loading and Unloading
- 4 The Challenge to Distinguish Soft-Sediment Deformation Structures (SSDS) Formed by Glaciotectonic, Periglacial and Seismic Processes in a Formerly Glaciated Area
- 5 Glacially Induced Fault Identification with LiDAR, Based on Examples from Finland
- 6 Fault Identification from Seismology
- 7 Imaging and Characterization of Glacially Induced Faults Using Applied Geophysics
- 8 Dating of Postglacial Faults in Fennoscandia
- 9 Proposed Drilling into Postglacial Faults
- Part III Glacially Triggered Faulting in the Fennoscandian Shield
- Part IV Glacially Triggered Faulting at the Edge and in the Periphery of the Fennoscandian Shield
- Part V Glacially Triggered Faulting Outside Europe
- Part VI Modelling of Glacially Induced Faults and Stress
- Part VII Outlook
- Index
- References
7 - Imaging and Characterization of Glacially Induced Faults Using Applied Geophysics
from Part II - Methods and Techniques for Fault Identification and Dating
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 December 2021
Book contents
- Glacially-Triggered Faulting
- Glacially-Triggered Faulting
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Preface
- Part I Introduction
- Part II Methods and Techniques for Fault Identification and Dating
- 3 Earthquake-Induced Landforms in the Context of Ice-Sheet Loading and Unloading
- 4 The Challenge to Distinguish Soft-Sediment Deformation Structures (SSDS) Formed by Glaciotectonic, Periglacial and Seismic Processes in a Formerly Glaciated Area
- 5 Glacially Induced Fault Identification with LiDAR, Based on Examples from Finland
- 6 Fault Identification from Seismology
- 7 Imaging and Characterization of Glacially Induced Faults Using Applied Geophysics
- 8 Dating of Postglacial Faults in Fennoscandia
- 9 Proposed Drilling into Postglacial Faults
- Part III Glacially Triggered Faulting in the Fennoscandian Shield
- Part IV Glacially Triggered Faulting at the Edge and in the Periphery of the Fennoscandian Shield
- Part V Glacially Triggered Faulting Outside Europe
- Part VI Modelling of Glacially Induced Faults and Stress
- Part VII Outlook
- Index
- References
Summary
Geophysical methods have the potential to delineate and map the geometry of glacially induced faults (GIFs) in the hard rock environment of the Baltic Shield. Relevant geophysical methods include seismic, geoelectric, electromagnetic, magnetic and gravity ones. However, seismic methods have the greatest potential for determining the geometry at depth due to their higher resolving power. Seismic methods have even been used to identify a previously unknown GIF within the Pärvie Fault system. The other geophysical methods are usually employed to image the near-surface structure of GIFs. We provide a brief review of geophysical principles and how they apply to imaging of GIFs in the hard rock environment. The advantages and challenges associated with various geophysical methods are discussed through several case histories. Results to date show that it is possible to map GIFs dipping at 35–65° from the near-surface down to depths of 7–8 km. It is not clear if the limiting factor in their mapping at depth is the nature of the faults or the limitations in the seismic acquisition parameters since the mapping capacity is highly dependent upon the acquisition geometry and source type used.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Glacially-Triggered Faulting , pp. 118 - 132Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2021
References
Abdi, A., Heinonen, S., Juhlin, C. and Karinen, T. (2015). Constraints on the geometry of the Suasselkä post-glacial fault, northern Finland, based on reflection seismic imaging. Tectonophysics, 649, 130–138, doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2015.03.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ahmadi, O., Juhlin, C., Ask, M. V. S. and Lund, B. (2015). Revealing the deeper structure of the endglacial Pärvie fault system in northern Sweden by seismic reflection profiling. Solid Earth, 6, 621–632 doi.org/10.5194/se-6-621-2015.Google Scholar
Beckel, R. A. and Juhlin, C. (2019). The cross-dip correction as a tool to improve imaging of crooked-line seismic data: a case study from the post-glacial Burträsk fault, Sweden. Solid Earth, 10, 581–598, doi.org/10.5194/se-10-581-2019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dalsegg, E. and Olesen, O. (2014). Resistivitetsmålinger ved Masi, Fiednajohka og Riednajavre og implikasjoner for malmleting, Kautokeino kommune, Finnmark. Report 2014.021, Geological Survey of Norway, Trondheim, Norway.Google Scholar
Henkel, H. (1987). Tectonic Studies in the Lansjärv Region. SKB Technical Report TR 88-07, Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Co., Stockholm, 80 pp.Google Scholar
Henkel, H. and Guzmán, M. (1977). Magnetic features of fracture zones. Geoexploration, 15(3), 173–181.Google Scholar
Henkel, H., Hult, K., Eriksson, L. and Johansson, L. (1983). Neotectonics in Northern Sweden – Geophysical Investigations. SKB Technical Report TR 83-57, Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Co., Stockholm, Sweden.Google Scholar
Juhlin, C. (1995). Imaging of fracture zones in the Finnsjön area, central Sweden, using the seismic reflection method. Geophysics, 60(1), 66–75, doi.org/10.1190/1.1443764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Juhlin, C. and Lund, B. (2011). Reflection seismic studies over the end-glacial Burträsk fault, Skellefteå, Sweden. Solid Earth, 2, 9–16, doi.org/10.5194/se-2-9-2011.Google Scholar
Juhlin, C., Dehghannejad, M., Lund, B., Malehmir, A. and Pratt, G. (2010). Reflection seismic imaging of the end-glacial Pärvie Fault system, northern Sweden. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 70, 307–316, doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2009.06.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuivamäki, A., Vuorela, P. and Paananen, M. (1998). Indications of Postglacial and Recent Bedrock Movements in Finland and Russian Karelia. Geological Survey of Finland, Nuclear Waste Disposal Research Report YST-99, Espoo, Finland, 92 pp.Google Scholar
Kujansuu, R. (1964). Nuorista sirroksista Lapissa [English summary: Recent faults in Lapland]. Geologi, 16, 30–36 (in Finnish).Google Scholar
Kukkonen, I., Lahti, I., Heikkinen, P. et al. (2009). HIRE Seismic Reflection Survey in the Suurikuusikko Gold Mining and Exploration Area, North Finland. Report Q 23/2009/28, Geological Survey of Finland.Google Scholar
Lagerbäck, R. (1978). Neotectonic structures in northern Sweden. Geologiska Föreningen i Stockholm Förhandlingar, 100(3), 263–269, doi.org/10.1080/11035897809452533.Google Scholar
Lindblom, E., Lund, B., Tryggvason, A. et al. (2015). Microearthquakes illuminate the deep structure of the endglacial Pärvie fault, northern Sweden. Geophysical Journal International, 201, 1704–1716, doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggv112.Google Scholar
Mair, J. A. and Green, A. G. (1981). High-resolution seismic reflection profiles reveal fracture zones within a ‘homogeneous’ granite batholith. Nature, 294, 439–442, doi.org/10.1038/294439a0.Google Scholar
Malehmir, A., Andersson, M., Mehta, S. et al. (2016). Post-glacial reactivation of the Bollnäs fault, central Sweden – a multidisciplinary geophysical investigation. Solid Earth, 7, 509–527, doi.org/10.5194/se-7-509-2016.Google Scholar
Mauring, E., Olesen, O., Rønning, J. S. and Tønnesen, J. F. (1997). Ground-Penetrating Radar Profiles across Postglacial Fault at Kåfjord, Troms and Fidnajohka, Finnmark. Report 97.174, Geological Survey of Norway, Trondheim, Norway.Google Scholar
McDowell, P. W. (1979). Geophysical mapping of water-filled fracture zones in rocks. Bulletin of the International Association of Engineering Geology, 19(1), 258–264, doi.org/10.1007/BF02600485.Google Scholar
Mikko, H., Smith, C. A., Lund, B., Ask, M. V. S. and Munier, R. (2015). LiDAR-derived inventory of post-glacial fault scarps in Sweden. GFF, 137(4), 334–338, doi.org/10.1080/11035897.2015.1036360.Google Scholar
Moos, D. and Zoback, M. D. (1983). In situ studies of velocity in fractured crystalline rocks. Journal of Geophysical Research, 88(B3), 2345–2358, doi.org/10.1029/JB088iB03p02345.Google Scholar
Mrope, F. M., Becken, M., Ruud, B. O. et al. (2019). Magnetotelluric 2D Inversion and Joint Interpretation of MT, Seismic, Magnetic and Gravity Data from Masi, Kautokeino Municipality, Finnmark. Report 2019.009, Geological Survey of Norway, Trondheim, Norway.Google Scholar
Olesen, O., Henkel, H., Lile, O. B., Mauring, E. and Rønning, J. S. (1992). Geophysical investigations of the Stuoragurra postglacial fault, Finnmark, northern Norway. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 29, 95–118, doi.org/10.1016/0926-9851(92)90001-2.Google Scholar
Olsen, L., Olesen, O., Dehls, J. and Tassis, G. (2018). Late-/postglacial age and tectonic origin of the Nordmannvikdalen Fault, northern Norway. Norwegian Journal of Geology, 98, 483–500, doi.org/10.17850/njg98-3-09.Google Scholar
Roberts, D., Olesen, O. and Karpuz, M. R. (1997). Seismo- and neotectonics in Finnmark, Kola Peninsula and the southern Barents Sea. Part 1: geological and neotectonic framework. Tectonophysics, 270, 1–13, doi.org/10.1016/S0040-1951(96)00173-4.Google Scholar
Schön, J. H. (2011). Physical Properties of Rocks, Vol. VIII of Handbook of Petroleum Exploration and Production. Elsevier, Oxford.Google Scholar
Sheriff, R. E. and Geldart, L. P. (1995). Exploration Seismology, 2nd ed., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139168359.Google Scholar
Smith, C. A., Sundh, M. and Mikko, H. (2014). Surficial geology indicates early Holocene faulting and seismicity, central Sweden. International Journal of Earth Sciences, 103, 1711–1724, doi.org/10.1007/s00531-014-1025-6.Google Scholar