Fluid Overpressures and Strength of the Sedimentary Upper Crust
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Journal of Structural Geology 69 (2014) 481e492 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Structural Geology journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jsg Fluid overpressures and strength of the sedimentary upper crust John Suppe Department of Geosciences, National Taiwan University, Taipei 106, Taiwan article info abstract Article history: The classic crustal strength-depth profile based on rock mechanics predicts a brittle strength s1 À s3 ¼ Available online 1 August 2014 kðr À Þ gz Pf that increases linearly with depth as a consequence of [1] the intrinsic brittle pressure dependence k plus [2] an assumption of hydrostatic pore-fluid pressure, Pf ¼ rwgz. Many deep borehole Keywords: stress data agree with a critical state of failure of this form. In contrast, fluid pressures greater than Crustal strength hydrostatic rgz > P > r gz are normally observed in clastic continental margins and shale-rich mountain fl f w Pore- uid overpressures belts. Therefore we explore the predicted shapes of strength-depth profiles using data from over- Fluid-retention depth pressured regions, especially those dominated by the widespread disequilibrium-compaction mecha- Critical-taper wedge mechanics fl fl Jointing nism, in which uid pressures are hydrostatic above the uid-retention depth zFRD and overpressured r Strength-depth profile below, increasing parallel to the lithostatic gradient gz. Both brittle crustal strength and frictional fault ðr À Þ strength below the zFRD must be constant with depth because effective stress gz Pf is constant, in contrast with the classic linearly increasing profile. Borehole stress and fluid-pressure measurements in several overpressured deforming continental margins agree with this constant-strength prediction, with the same pressure-dependence k as the overlying hydrostatic strata. The role of zFRD in critical-taper wedge mechanics and jointing is illustrated. The constant-strength approximation is more appropriate for overpressured crust than classic linearly increasing models. © 2014 The Author. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/). 1. Introduction 1.1. Classic brittle strength-depth relationship The classic Brace and Kohlstedt (1980) strength-depth graph, The predicted linear increase in brittle strength s1 À s3 with based on experimental rock mechanics, predicts an initial linear depth is a consequence of [1] the intrinsic pressure dependence k of increase in brittle frictional strength with increasing pressure, brittle strength, plus [2] an assumption that pore-fluid pressure is followed by an exponential decay in ductile strength with hydrostatic and therefore linearly increasing Pf ¼ rwgz. Ignoring increasing temperature (Fig. 1A). This first-order prediction has cohesion we approximate brittle crustal strength very simply as the r À k been remarkably successful, for example in predicting the tem- vertical effective stress gz Pf , times the pressure dependence . perature of the brittle-ductile transition in common rock types. s À s ¼ k r À ; The intricacies of this graph in the lower crust and upper mantle 1 3 gz Pf (1a) continue to be widely discussed and are even controversial in the case of the proposed “jelly sandwich” of weak lower continental (Suppe, 1985, p. 185), where r is the mean bulk density of the crust above a presumed stronger mantle (e.g. Chen and Molnar, overlying rock. Eq. (1) also can be written in terms of the classic fl l ¼ =r 1983; Suppe, 1985,p.188e189; Jackson, 2002; Burov and Hubbert-Rubey (1959) uid-pressure ratio Pf gz Watts, 2006; Bürgmann and Dresen, 2008). In contrast, the s À s ¼ kð1 À lÞrgz; (1b) predicted linear increase in brittle strength is generally assumed 1 3 without discussion and agrees with deep borehole stress data in where (1 À l) may be considered the fractional fluid-pressure crystalline rock, showing that the crust is commonly close to a weakening. In submarine cases l is measured with respect to the critical state of brittle failure (e.g. Townend and Zoback, 2000; sea bottom (Davis et al., 1983). For the hydrostatic case (1a) Zoback, 2007), for example the deep KTB borehole in Germany becomes. (Fig. 1B). s À s ¼ kðr À r Þ : 1 3 w gz (2) These crustal-strength equations express the fact that brittle E-mail address: [email protected]. pressure-dependent strength is a function of effective stress http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsg.2014.07.009 0191-8141/© 2014 The Author. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/). 482 J. Suppe / Journal of Structural Geology 69 (2014) 481e492 A.σ −σ B. in situ stress σ −σ faulting, off-fault fracturing, and folding processes, some of which strength 1 3 1 3 0 500MPa 0 200MPa may be coseismic and may be controlled by dynamic frictional 0 0 processes in earthquakes (e.g. Di Toro et al., 2011). possible stress states 4 2 2. Implications of fluid overpressures for regional strength hydrostatic In contrast with the classic view of linearly increasing crustal 8 brittle strength 4 strength dominated by hydrostatic pore-fluid pressures, it is well established from petroleum boreholes and seismic velocity analysis that fluids are overpressured in deeper parts of thick, fine-grained 12 6 clastic sedimentary basins and in deforming shale-rich plate- boundary mountain belts, largely due to disequilibrium compac- tion from stratigraphic and tectonic loading, but with additional 16 8 effects including vertical and lateral pressure redistribution and gas plastic strength Germany generation (Bredehoeft and Hanshaw, 1968; Fertl, 1976; Magara, KTB borehole 1978; Hart et al., 1995; Swarbrick and Osborne, 1996; Yardley and 20km 10km Swarbrick, 2000; Tingay et al., 2009a). The basins of most interest for crustal strength and large-scale tectonics are continental mar- Fig. 1. (A) The classic strength-depth graph with linearly increasing brittle strength, gins built on oceanic or highly-thinned continental crust that have which is based on the assumption of hydrostatic pore-fluid pressures (Eq. (2)). (B) This fi brittle-hydrostatic model agrees well with stress data from the deep KTB borehole in vast deforming clastic-rich volumes that approach a signi cant Germany where fluid pressures are hydrostatic (Brudy et al., 1997; Zoback and Harjes, fraction of crustal thickness, even spanning the brittle-ductile 1997; Grawinkel and Stockhert,€ 1997), as well as data elsewhere (see Townend and transition (e.g. Gulf of Mexico, Niger delta, Bangladesh/Myanmar, Zoback, 2000; Zoback, 2007). Sumatra, Makran, Gulf of Alaska, New Zealand, Nankai trough, Barbados/Trinidad, and offshore southwestern Taiwan). Here we illustrate typical observed fluid-pressure/depth relationships from r À r boreholes. We then compute the expected strength-depth profiles gz Pf and not the solid pressure gz or even depth, which is a distinction that becomes more important in the case of fluid (Eq. (1a)) and compare them with borehole stress data in actively overpressures. deforming regions, where stress is expected to be close to regional The pressure dependence k can be expressed in terms of the strength, or at least limited by Eq. (1a) as an upper bound. familiar Coulomb internal friction (m ¼ tan4) and varies between kc ¼ 2sin4 (1 À sin4) in pure-thrust compression and ke¼2sin4 2.1. Disequilibrium-compaction mechanism and crustal strength (1 þ sin4) in pure normal-fault extension, with strike-slip stress states (s2 vertical) lying between these limits, as can be shown from The fluid-pressure depth relationship for the Yinggehai basin the Mohr diagram. offshore south China (Fig. 2A) (Luo et al., 2003)istypicalofthe disequilibrium-compaction mechanism (e.g. Swarbrick and 1.2. Success of the classic brittle-hydrostatic assumption Osborne, 1996; Magara, 1978), which has also been called “leaky overpressure” (Crans and Mandl, 1980; Mandl and Crans, Brace and Kohlstedt (1980) assumed that brittle crustal strength 1981). Pressures are hydrostatic down to a critical depth of is controlled by an optimally oriented static fault friction of ~1.8 km, the fluid-retention depth z , below which fluid pres- m ¼ 0.6e0.85 based on lab static friction measurements from a wide FRD sures increase parallel to the lithostatic gradient (Fig. 2A), variety of rock types (Byerlee, 1978)(k ¼ 2.1e3.7, k ¼ 0.68e0.79). c e because permeability becomes sufficiently low that the incre- Townend and Zoback (2000) showed that deep borehole stresses mental increases in sedimentary or tectonic load are supported are typically close to a critical state of failure consistent with by the pore fluid, rather than by incremental compaction of the m ¼ 0.55e1(k ¼ 1.9e4.8, k ¼ 0.65e0.83) and an assumed hydro- c e solid-grain framework. Fluid pressures under the disequilibrium- static fluid pressure, implying that stress z regional strength in compaction mechanism are a simple function of the fluid- many regions (Zoback, 2007). Therefore the Brace and Kohlstedt retention depth, representing the sum of the hydrostatic and (1980) brittle-hydrostatic proposal (Eq. (2)) is in good agreement lithostatic contributions (Fig. 2A). with available observations, as is illustrated by stress data from the deep KTB borehole in Germany (Fig. 1B). ¼ r Pf wgz for z zFRD (3a) We have expressed brittle crustal strength (Eq. (1a)) in terms of the vertical effective stress because this quantity can be directly ¼ r þ r ð À Þ calculated from commonly available borehole data or estimated Pf wgzFRD g z zFRD for z zFRD (3b) from seismic velocities in clastic sedimentary sections that have not It follows that the Hubbert-Rubey fractional fluid-pressure undergone uplift and erosion (e.g. Fertl, 1976; Magara, 1978; weakening (1 À l) (see Eq. (1b)) is a simple function of the fluid- Swarbrick et al., 2002; Zoback, 2007).