Structural Analysis of the Troms-Finnmark Fault Complex, SW Barents Sea Waqas Ahmed

143 Pages·2012·12.12 MB·English

by  Waqas Ahmed

Master Thesis in Geosciences

Structural Analysis of the Troms-Finnmark Fault
Complex, SW Barents Sea

Waqas Ahmed

Structural Analysis of the Troms-Finnmark Fault
Complex, SW Barents Sea

Waqas Ahmed

Master Thesis in Geosciences
Discipline: Petroleum Geology and Geophysics
Department of Geosciences
Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences
UNIVERSITY OF OSLO
February, 2012
© Waqas Ahmed, 2012
Tutor(s): Roy H. Gabrielsen, Jan Inge Faleide and Michel Heeremans, UiO
This work is published digitally through DUO – Digitale Utgivelser ved UiO
http://www.duo.uio.no
It is also catalogued in BIBSYS (http://www.bibsys.no/english)
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted, in any form or by
any means, without permission.
Abstract
Detailed structural analysis of the Troms-Finnmark Fault Complex is implemented in order to
understand the associated structural configuration and the stress apparatus responsible for the
present day architecture of the area under investigation. The en-echelon array of the fault
complex is composed of three constituent, softly-linked fault strands named as MF1, MF2 &
MF3. This fault complex registers repeated episodes of reactivation since its inception in the late
Paleozoic. Late Paleozoic fault dating is constrained by making use of “Expansion Index”
analysis which indicates growth of strata belonging to this age. Stratigraphic dating provides
control on the age-bracketing of the fault movement during the middle-late Mesozoic. The
master fault strands MF2 and MF3, on the basis of stratigraphic age dating reveals a bicyclic
kinematic behavior.
The profile view of these fault strands (MF1, MF2 & MF3) display a wide variety of the master
fault geometries which range from the planar through the slightly curved to the typical listric
normal fault, which all show a down-to-the-North displacement. On the basis of the basement-
involvement and degree of reactivation, the three fault strands are termed as “First-Class” faults.
The maximum fault displacement is associated with the central fault strand MF2 where the
displacement values surpass 2.7 km towards the central part, while the greatest displacement
values for the fault segment MF3 are slightly above 1.5 km at the intra Permian level.
Several instances of positive structural inversion are documented in the study area. The analysis
of kinematic indicators of such features suggests that the compressive stress system acting
perpendicular to the master faults is responsible for their development. Their analysis further
yields information on the age of inversion structures and this episodic event is placed in the mid-
late Jurassic to the late Cretaceous.
The first order estimate of the paleo-stress orientations is carried out. During the Permian, the
WNW-ESE oriented σ is interpreted to have influenced the study area. The stress regime shifted
3
to the NE-SW oriented σ during the mid-Jurassic and the orientation of minimum principal
3
stress direction is interpreted to be NW-SE for the early Cretaceous. These local stress vectors do
not conform to the regional stress orientations determined by previous workers, however, the
NW-SE oriented σ during the Tertiary, shows agreement with the regional interpretations.
3
i
ii
Acknowledgements
I express special appreciation to my supervisor Professor Roy Helge Gabrielsen for his
invaluable input and thought-provoking discussions during the course of this study. He has been
tremendously supportive in shaping my thoughts to carry out this work within the time frame. I
am also grateful to Professor Jan Inge Faleide for his significant input in this study especially,
while improving the manuscript. His comments and suggestions were very constructive and
useful. I owe special thanks to Dr. Michel Heeremans, co-supervisor, who helped in data
management.
I particularly want to acknowledge TGS-Nopec for providing the seismic data for this study.
I thank my entire family for their patience, support and love throughout my stay in Oslo. Finally,
I would like to extend gratitude to my friends, who made the stay in Norway worth-
remembering.
W.A

iii
iv
Contents

Chapter 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 1
Chapter 2 Regional Tectonics & Stratigraphic Framework .......................................................................... 5
2.1 Regional Tectonics .............................................................................................................................. 5
2.2 Stratigraphic Framework .................................................................................................................... 8
2.3 Troms-Finnmark Fault Complex – A Review .................................................................................... 9
2.4 Finnmark Platform ............................................................................................................................ 15
2.5 Hammerfest Basin ............................................................................................................................. 16
2.6 Tromsø Basin .................................................................................................................................... 18
2.7 Harstad Basin .................................................................................................................................... 19
Chapter 3 Descriptive Analysis ................................................................................................................... 21
3.1 Data ................................................................................................................................................... 22
3.2 Interpretation Tool ............................................................................................................................ 24
3.3 Interpretation Procedure .................................................................................................................... 26
3.4 Rationale for the selection of Interpreted Reflections....................................................................... 28
3.5 Comments on lithostratigraphy of the Interpreted Reflections ......................................................... 29
3.6 Description of Key Profiles – Structural Architecture & Fault Plane Geometries ........................... 33
3.6.1 Key Profile 1 .............................................................................................................................. 39
3.6.2 Key Profile 2 .............................................................................................................................. 42
3.6.3 Key Profile 3 .............................................................................................................................. 45
3.6.4 Key Profile 4 .............................................................................................................................. 48
3.6.5 Key Profile 5 .............................................................................................................................. 51
3.6.6 Key Profile 6 .............................................................................................................................. 54
3.6.7 Key Profile 7 .............................................................................................................................. 57
3.6.8 Key Profile 8 .............................................................................................................................. 61
3.7 Time-Structure (twt) Maps and Fault Maps ...................................................................................... 64
3.7.1 Intra Triassic .............................................................................................................................. 64
3.7.2 Middle Jurassic .......................................................................................................................... 66
3.7.3 Base Cretaceous ......................................................................................................................... 70
3.7.4 Early Cretaceous ........................................................................................................................ 72
3.7.5 Base Tertiary .............................................................................................................................. 73
3.8 Time-Thickness Maps ....................................................................................................................... 75
v
3.8.1 Intra Triassic – Intra Permian ..................................................................................................... 75
3.8.2 Middle Jurassic – Intra Triassic ................................................................................................. 76
3.8.3 Base Cretaceous – Middle Jurassic ............................................................................................ 77
3.8.4 Base Tertiary – Base Cretaceous................................................................................................ 77
Chapter 4 Kinematic & Dynamic Analysis ................................................................................................. 81
4.1 Fault Classification ........................................................................................................................... 81
4.2 Relationship of the hanging-wall geometries with the fault plane .................................................... 87
4.2.1 The Compaction problem ........................................................................................................... 92
4.3 Comments on the fault’s strike-wise length and displacement ......................................................... 94
4.4 Fault Dating ...................................................................................................................................... 98
4.5 Analyses of the hanging-wall geometries ....................................................................................... 103
4.5.1 Review of the structural inversion ........................................................................................... 104
4.6 Genesis of the Troms-Finnmark Fault Complex ............................................................................. 110
4.7 Paleo-stress Analysis ...................................................................................................................... 116
Chapter 5 Highlights of the study ............................................................................................................. 121
5.1 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................................... 121
5.2 Recommendations for relevant future work .................................................................................... 123
References ................................................................................................................................................. 127

vi