On the same tack, whereas I have always taken "reverse fault" and "thrust fault" to be interchangeable, I see now some people objecting to the use of these terms as if they were synonymous.
As for transform faults, I would normally only use this term in the sense given below for spreading centres. Otherwise I would normally use "strike-slip".
Roger Musson
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tectonics & structural geology discussion list
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Malcolm McClure
> Sent: 09 June 2006 12:23
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Transform and transcurrent faults
>
>
> There used to be a clear distinction between the application of the
> terms 'transcurrent fault' and 'transform fault'. The former, also
> called a 'wrench' or 'strike slip' fault implied physical offset in
> either dextral or sinistral sense, of terrain across the fault. The
> latter term used to be confined to the apparent offset of spreading
> centers and related magnetic lineations across a linear
> boundary, the
> nature of which was problematical. However the term
> 'Transform Fault'
> now seems to be applied to any so-called 'conservative' plate
> boundary across which lateral displacement can be established; for
> example, the San Andreas Fault, which used to be considered a wrench
> fault.
> Can someone please clarify modern accepted usage of the term
> 'transform fault'? Are there many examples of transform faults (in
> the original sense) offsetting continental crust?
>
> Malcolm
>
*********************************************************************
This message (and any attachments) is for the recipient only. NERC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the contents of this email and any reply you make may be disclosed by NERC unless it is exempt from release under the Act. Any material supplied to NERC may be stored in an electronic records management system.
*********************************************************************
|