Visualize and interpret the geometry, heterogeneity and lateral ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

1.5 Previous work at HopenThe Swedish polar explorer and geologist Alfred Gabriel Nathorst published in 1894 the firstpaper with a geological map of Hopen. He interpreted the deposits to be of Triassic age, butthe paper did not include any explanation. As Nathorst never got the chance to go on land onHopen, all his observations were done from offshore meaning that his interpretations, mostlikely, are based on the cliff sections seen from the sea.Several expeditions from the beginning of 1920- 1960's tried to establish the geological age ofHopen. Publication by Iversen (1926), Werenskiold (1926) and Bodylewsky (1926) suggestedearly Cretaceous age based on their topographical map, geological notes and notes on fossilplants. An expedition in 1930 also suggested early Cretaceous age based on the occurrence ofloose pieces of coal.Norwegian Polar Institute collected in 1969, plants, bivalves and ammonites that wereexamined and in 1971, Flood, Nagy and Winsnes published an article suggesting a lateTriassic age and a possible correlation to the De Geerdalen Formation of Edgeøya andBarentsøya. Pčelina participated on two Russian expeditions (1966 and 1971) and publishedin 1972 a paper with a complex stratigraphic section with lithological details of the sequenceexposed in the southern parts of the island. She divided the island into Carnian and Norianage, mostly grounded on lithological division, but also based on evidence from fossil plantsand bivalves. She claimed that the lowest part was of Carnian age while the top was of Norianage. Without visiting the northern part of the island, Pčelina suggested that the island had agentle dip towards the north and therefore would contain younger rocks, perhaps even ofJurassic age. Worsley (1973) based on his work in the northern part of Hopen and suggestedlike Pčelina that the rocks in the northern part was younger, but instead of explaining it with aregional gentle dip he explained it with faulting. The paper by Smith et al. (1975) states thatseveral of the faults found at Hopen do not have a dip direction to the NE and thereby they donot believe that the sediments situated at the northern part of the island is younger than theones in south strictly because of faulting, but that there might be a combination of gentle dipand to some extent faulting.During the last 40 years several expeditions has taken place, but in general little work hasbeen published.10
Because of regenerated belief in the Barents Sea as a petroleum play, Norwegian PetroleumDirectorate (NPD) and SINTEF Petroleum Research organized studies from 2007-2012 withthe aim to reconstruct the palaeoenvironment of the Upper Triassic as an analogue to theBarents Sea Region. Several logs shown in this thesis were also collected on an expedition toHopen in 1995, organized by NPD and Norwegian oil companies.11
Page 1: Visualize and interpret the geometr
Page 5 and 6: SammendragEn digital 3D-modell av H
Page 7: 4.2.3 Channel body 8 (SW of Lyngefj
Page 10 and 11: Secondly, I wish to thank my co-sup
Page 12 and 13: 1.3 Regional geological settingThe
Page 14 and 15: The Triassic of Svalbard consists o
Page 16 and 17: Geerdalen Formation is overlain by
Page 21 and 22: 2. MethodsThe work of this thesis i
Page 23 and 24: 2.2 PhotoModeler-modelThe program P
Page 25 and 26: 2.3 Sources of errorThere are no kn
Page 27 and 28: 3. Lateral distribution of possible
Page 29 and 30: Figure 3.2: This photo and drawing
Page 31 and 32: 3.2 Lateral distribution of Slottet
Page 33 and 34: Hopen member and the top of the mou
Page 35 and 36: 4. Channel bodiesIn this chapter ob
Page 37 and 38: 4.1.1 Channel body 1 (Northern chan
Page 39 and 40: Figure 4.2: Photos and illustration
Page 41 and 42: 4.1.2 Channel body 2 (Binnedalen)Ch
Page 43 and 44: Figure 4.4: This figure illustrates
Page 45 and 46: (1) DiscussionFacies occurring in t
Page 51 and 52: 4.1.4 Channel Body 4 (Johan Hjortfj
Page 53 and 54: Figure 4.10: Photos and illustratio
Page 55 and 56: The log shows that the channel body
Page 57 and 58: 4.2.1 Channel body 5 (SW of Nørste
Page 59 and 60: (1) DiscussionOne of the interestin
Page 61 and 62: Another explanation of the apparent
Page 63 and 64: Figure 4.14: This figure illustrate
Page 65 and 66: 4.2.4 Channel body 9 (Blåfjellet,
Page 67 and 68: Figure 4.16: Illustrates Channel bo
Page 69 and 70:
The outcrop orientations and/or a n
Page 71 and 72:
Unfortunately the stratigraphic int
Page 73 and 74:
Figure 4.22: An illustration of the
Page 75 and 76:
2006). Flaser bedding is characteri
Page 77 and 78:
elow the stratigraphical level of C
Page 79 and 80:
indications on the logs from the st
Page 81 and 82:
Figure 4.27: This figure illustrate
Page 83 and 84:
Figure 4.28: This Figure illustrate
Page 85 and 86:
is perhaps the best indication of a
Page 87 and 88:
4.31: This figure illustrates the w
Page 89 and 90:
Figure 4.32:Interpretation offault
Page 91 and 92:
4.3.1 Channel body 15 (NW of Braast
Page 93 and 94:
4.3.2 Channel body 16 (Blåfjellet
Page 95 and 96:
4.3.3 Channel body 17 (Djupskaret)C
Page 98 and 99:
Figure 4.36: This figureillustrates
Page 101 and 102:
5. Discussion5.1 Map relevant featu
Page 103 and 104:
Geerdalen Formation of no more than
Page 105 and 106:
ase of Hopen member. Going further
Page 107 and 108:
6. Conclusions18 channel bodies are
Page 109 and 110:
ReferencesAinsworth, R. B., Vakarel
Page 111:
Knarud, R. 1980. En sedimentologisk
Page 114 and 115:
AppendixAppendix 1: The measured se
Page 116 and 117:
108
Page 118 and 119:
Appendix 2: Legend of the measured
Page 120 and 121:
Appendix 4: Illustrations of the Ph
Page 122:
Figure 6: Illustration of the Photo
show all

Visualize and interpret the geometry, heterogeneity and lateral ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?