![]() ![]() |
|
|
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
In this model the apparent offsets are quite clear, although the results of section 2.2.5 show that the true offsets cannot actually be determined from this data. | ||||||
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
In this case the fault positions are still quite clear in the magnetic data | ||||||
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
In these images the fault positions and orientations start to become unclear, and the variations in dyke appearance along strike could be interpreted as thickness variations or rock property variations. | ||||||
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
This model re-emphasises the problem with reinterpreting true fault offsets from faults cutting a single marker horizon. (See section 2.2.5 for further examples.) |
|
|
|