GRAVITY RESULTS AND INTERPRETATION
SCHURZ, NV
BY: DREW JONES AND MARLON RAMOS GPH 492/692, SPRING 2013
𝐹 𝑔=−𝐺𝑚1𝑚2
𝑟 12𝑟
𝐹 𝑔=−𝐺𝑚1𝑚2
𝑟 12𝑟
CORRECTION METHODS- Elevation- Lattitude- Instrument Drift- Free Air- Bouguer Slab- Inner and Outer Terrain
Used to Calculate Simple and Complete Bouguer Anomalies
SIMPLE BOUGUER ANOMALY
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
-200
-198
-196
-194
-192
-190
-188
-186
-184
f(x) = − 0.00340370341206729 x − 189.652268611883
Line 1 - Simple Bouguer Anomaly
Line 1 - Simple Bouguer AnomalyLinear (Line 1 - Simple Bouguer Anomaly)Linear (Line 1 - Simple Bouguer Anomaly)
RELATIVE TOTAL HORIZONTAL FAULT OFFSET FROM SEDIMENT THICKNESSES
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
-700
-600
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
Relative sediment Thickness vs. Distance, Line 1
Distance, m
Sedi
men
t thi
ckne
ss, m
Using relative vertical sediment offset obtained from bouguer slab inversion and simple trigonometry, a rough estimate of total horizontal offset was calculated by assuming a dipping fault plane.
Calculated vertical offset = 105 m
Some models for fault geometry
Dip Angle Horizontal Offset, m
45 105
70 38
80 18.5
89 1.5
POSSIBLE MODELS FOR BASIN THICKNESS
POSSIBLE MODELS FOR BASIN THICKNESS
COMPLETE BOUGUER ANOMALY
WHAT WE THINK IS HAPPENING: A SIMPLE MODEL OF RIGHT-LATERAL FAULT TO EXPLAIN OBSERVED GRAVITY ANOMALY
COMMENTS, QUESTIONS, CRITICISMS, AND PROVERBIAL REMARKS ARE WELCOME