2002
DOI: 10.1016/s1342-937x(05)70635-3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Analogue Sandbox Models of Thrust Wedges with Variable Basal Frictions

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
16
0

Year Published

2004
2004
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
1
16
0
Order By: Relevance
“…6) confirmed the results of the physical models of critical sand wedges that were described in the literature (e.g., Schreurs et al 2006, Teixell and Koyi 2003, liu et al 1992, Agarwal and Agrawal 2002. Similarly to the sand, the slope angles in the microbeads models increased during progressive deformation and when a new thrust nucleated, the slope angle decreased and then resumed growing (Fig.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 85%
“…6) confirmed the results of the physical models of critical sand wedges that were described in the literature (e.g., Schreurs et al 2006, Teixell and Koyi 2003, liu et al 1992, Agarwal and Agrawal 2002. Similarly to the sand, the slope angles in the microbeads models increased during progressive deformation and when a new thrust nucleated, the slope angle decreased and then resumed growing (Fig.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 85%
“…Another option is that the orientation of the basal detachment is uniform along strike and that the critical taper values are different due to along‐strike variation in the basal friction of the detachment, most likely due to pre‐tectonic basin heterogeneity [e.g., Agarwal and Agarwal , ]. This particular hypothesis is potentially supported by the observation that in many other fold‐thrust belts, surface slopes less than 1°, as observed in the Akharbakhar‐Qäbälä region are often diagnostic of extremely weak detachments, exploiting either evaporite horizons or overpressured shales [e.g., Davis and Engelder , ; Ford , ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The mechanical conditions under which these systems develop are also of critical importance, influencing the gross wedge geometries [ Davis et al ., ; Davis and Engelder , ; DeCelles and Mitra , ; Adam and Reuther , ], fault spacing [ Marshak and Wilkerson , ; Mandal et al ., ; Schott and Koyi , ; Agarwal and Agrawal , ; Bose et al ., ], and small‐scale features responsible for fluid transport and storage (e.g., fracture distributions, porosity, and permeability) [e.g., Sanz et al ., ]. However, mechanical constraints are difficult to obtain in the field and are less than reliable in ancient fold and thrust belts [ Gray et al ., ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%