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