Rock Glacier Development in the San Juan Mountains

University of Denver Digital Commons @ DU

Electronic Theses and Dissertations Graduate Studies

2020

Rock Glacier Development in the San Juan Mountains

Brandon K. Bailey

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.du.edu/etd

Part of the Glaciology Commons, and the Physical and Environmental Geography Commons

Rock Glacier Development in the San Juan Mountains

______

A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the College of Natural Sciences and Mathematics University of Denver

______

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts

______

by Brandon K. Bailey June 2020 Advisor: J. M. Daniels

Author: Brandon K. Bailey Title: Rock Glacier Development in the San Juan Mountains Advisor: J. M. Daniels Degree Date: June 2020

ABSTRACT

Rock glaciers are common landform features found in deglaciated alpine areas. They are commonly used in the study of climatic changes throughout the Holocene and the reconstruction of neoglacial chronologies. For this research, Schmidt hammer rebound values, weathering rind thicknesses, and the length of lichen thalli diameters found on rock glacier surfaces are used to investigate their effectiveness as field-based relative age determination techniques. Additionally, the ability to identify periods of neoglacial activity using these methods is assessed in two neighboring cirque basins in the San Juan

Mountains of Colorado. 41 field sites across three rock glaciers are established with approximately 2,050 Schmidt hammer measurements and 300 weathering rind thicknesses collected in total. The Schmidt hammer proved to be the most effective of the three relative age indicators in distinguishing between surfaces of different relative age.

The R-values collected indicate three periods of neoglacial activity, which aligns with the neoglacial history of the area. Values derived by the Schmidt hammer in combination with morphological analysis conducted using Google Earth Pro and ArcGIS are then used to model how each rock glacier may have developed over time. This research demonstrates that Schmidt hammer exposure dating is an efficient and robust field method for determining the relative ages of rock glaciers in the San Juan Mountains.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter 1: Introduction ...... 1

Chapter 2: Background ...... 3 2.1 Origin and Formation ...... 4 2.2 Development ...... 5 2.3 Movement ...... 6

Chapter 3: Research Questions ...... 9

Chapter 4: Study Area - The San Juan Mountains ...... 11 4.1 Neoglacial Activity ...... 11

Chapter 5: Methods ...... 13 5.1 Schmidt hammer method ...... 13 5.2 Weathering Rind Thickness ...... 15 5.3 Lichenometry ...... 16

Chapter 6: Results...... 19 6.1 Blaine Basin ...... 19 6.2 Cirque Basin ...... 21

Chapter 7: Discussion ...... 23 7.1 Schmidt Hammer ...... 23 7.2 Weathering Rind Measurements ...... 24 7.3 Lichens ...... 26 7.4 Summary of Methods ...... 27 7.5 Rock Glacier Development...... 27 7.5.1 Blaine Basin East ...... 27 7.5.2 Blaine Basin West...... 29 7.5.3 Cirque Basin ...... 29 7.5 Neoglacial Activity ...... 35 7.6 Water Resources and Climate Change ...... 35 7.7 Schmidt Hammer Potential ...... 36

Chapter 8: Conclusion ...... 38

Chapter 9: Bibliography...... 40

Chapter 10: Appendix ...... 43 10.1 Raw Schmidt Hammer Data ...... 43 10.2 Raw Weathering Rind Thickness Data ...... 63 10.3 K-means Clustering (4 Groups) ...... 64 iii

LIST OF TABLES

4.1: Glacial and Neoglacial Chronology of The San Juan Mountains ...... 12

5.1: R-Value Angle of Inclination Correction Chart ...... 14

6.1: Mean R-Values Collected From Blaine Basin...... 20 6.2: Mean Weathering Rind Thickness of Field Sites in Blaine Basin...... 21 6.3: Mean R-Values Collected From Each Field Site in Cirque Basin...... 22 6.4: Mean Rind Thicknesses Collected From Field Sites in Cirque Basin...... 22

10.1: Raw Schmidt Hammer Data ...... 43 10.2: Raw Weathering Rind Data...... 63

LIST OF FIGURES

2.1: Ridge and Furrow Structures on Cirque Basin ...... 3 2.2: Morphological Features Associated with Rock Glaciers ...... 8

7.1: Mean R-Values From All Field Sites ...... 23 7.2: Comparing Rind Thicknesses and R-Values ...... 25 7.3: Mean R-Values and Field Site Locations in Blaine Basin ...... 28 7.4: Mean R-Values and Field Site Locations in Cirque Basin ...... 30 7.5: Movement Rates of Lobes in the Upper Section of Cirque Basin ...... 33 7.6: Movement Rates of Lobes in the Lower Section of Cirque Basin ...... 34

10.1: R-Values From All Field Sites Clustered Into Four Groups ...... 64

Chapter 1: Introduction

Rock glaciers are alpine landforms made up of rock debris and ice. As mountain glaciers retreat due to the effects of climate change, these features are expected to become more common (Knight et al., 2019). Like glaciers, rock glaciers may serve as potential reservoirs of fresh water (Janke, 2007). The coarse rocky debris that covers them insulates the ice underneath, allowing rock glaciers to withstand warmer temperatures and extend to lower elevations. Rock glaciers have also been used to study changes in climate throughout the Holocene. Rock glacier activity has been correlated with neoglacial expansion and has been used to determine past equilibrium line altitudes

(ELAs) and the lower limits of permafrost in alpine areas (Refsnider and Brugger, 2007).

Continued study of rock glaciers will allow researchers to better understand their potential as a natural resource and tool for understanding the impacts on mountainous landscapes from a warming planet.

Relative age determination techniques have been useful in paleoclimate studies involving rock glaciers. This research investigates rock glacier development in the San

Juan Mountains of Colorado. Schmidt hammer exposure dating, and the thickness of weathering rinds are used to identify periods of advancement on large multi-lobed rock glaciers. By using relative age determination methods, this research also examines their effectiveness in differentiating between different neoglacial periods. The overall goal of

1 this research is to investigate how large complex rock glaciers may have developed over time in the San Juan Mountains by identifying the relative ages of several lobes and rock surfaces.

Chapter 2: Background

In 1910, Stephen Capps coined the term rock glacier, describing them as accumulations of coarse rock debris and ice (Capps, 1910). Rock glacier research has varied considerably since and has included the study of their formational processes, their regional distribution and movement, as well as the environmental controls that influence their development (Outcult and Benedict, 1965). Early rock glacier research focused primarily on their origin, specifically as to their relationship to glaciers (White, 1973).

Figure 2.1: Ridge and Furrow structures on Cirque Basin rock glacier.

The ridge and furrow characteristics commonly found in glaciers are also present in rock glaciers, suggesting that they might form and behave similarly (Figure 2.1). Because observing ice underneath the rock debris is difficult, research had generally been restricted to observations of surface morphology using aerial photography and comparing that to the existing research on glaciers and landslides. However, with coring and the introduction of geophysical techniques such as GPR, ice has been found underneath many rock glaciers, suggesting ice is a fundamental component of rock glacier development (Skidmore et al, 2014; Kinnard and Monnier, 2015). However, additional research has shown that rock glaciers do not require glacial ice, nor mass wasting events to develop (White, 1973). Therefore, the debate on the origin of rock glaciers continues.

2.1 Origin and Formation

Generally, rock glaciers are believed to form from either glacial, periglacial, or paraglacial processes (Knight et al., 2019). Glaciogenic, or ice-cored rock glaciers form as rock debris accumulates on top of remnant glacial ice, insulating it from warmer temperatures and exposure to direct solar radiation. Periglacial rock glaciers form from the seasonal melting and freezing of the active layer of permafrost, where melt from glaciers up-valley or accumulations of snowfall can collect and freeze within an accumulation of rock debris, thereby forming a rock glacier. Paraglacial rock glaciers originate from sudden mass movement processes such as rockfalls that accumulate debris at the base of steep slopes. In-situ water and snow accumulation within the debris can then form a rock glacier (Knight et al., 2019).

2.2 Development

Multiple factors have been shown to have a range of influences on rock glacier development. Topographical controls such as slope, aspect, and debris supply are commonly studied and found to influence rock glacier formation. However, research shows that the amount of influence a specific control has on development can vary, even between rock glaciers of neighboring cirque basins (Knight et al., 2019). Active rock glaciers depend on an ongoing debris supply (Kenner and Magnusson, 2017). Without a constant supply of debris, rock glaciers slowly become inactive as they move away from their source (Janke, 2007). The combination of the size of a rock glacier’s head wall and its rate of erosion determine the intensity of the debris supply (Kenner and Magnusson,

2017). The intensity of an ongoing debris supply is a limiting factor for the size of the overall rock glacier, and therefore controlling how far from the source of debris a rock glacier can extend (Kenner and Magnusson, 2017; Janke, 2007). Generally, rock glaciers made of larger clasts, such as those made of resistant rock like granite tend to be larger in area allowing them to travel farther from their origin. Commonly, the headwalls of smaller rock glaciers are comprised of less weather-resistant sedimentary rock, and tend to be more densely fractured, resulting in a rock glacier of finer rock debris (Ikeda and

Matsuoka, 2006).

Climatic factors such as temperature and precipitation also influence rock glacier development. As rock glaciers advance downslope to lower elevations, air temperatures warm, melting the internal ice and making the rock glacier relict, or no longer containing any ice. In addition to air temperature, the amount of direct solar radiation can influence

5 where rock glaciers form. Slopes receive different amounts of solar radiation depending on aspect. Northern slopes in North America typically host more rock glaciers, because north-faced slopes generally tend to receive less direct solar radiation (White, 1973;

Mateo and Daniels, 2019). Precipitation can promote and hinder rock glacier development. Too much precipitation in the form of snowfall causes glaciation. However, more precipitation and weathering, increases erosion rates and accumulation of talus debris. Snowfall can also provide the internal ice needed for periglacial and paraglacial rock glaciers.

2.3 Movement

Large tongue-shaped rock glaciers move downslope through the process of permafrost creep and will continue to do so until the permafrost layer melts, which is associated with a lack of debris supply from the headwall (Matsuoka et al., 2005). The movement of the permafrost beneath the rock debris results in rocks at the surface remaining relatively untouched during movement as they are carried upon the permafrost layer (Ikeda and Matsuoka, 2002) Common features of active rock glaciers are steep frontal slopes and ridge and furrow topography (Figure 2.2). Active rock glaciers will have steep frontal slopes several meters high at the angle of repose and are indicative of active permafrost creep. Transverse ridges and furrows are associated with longitudinal shortening and compressive flow as a response to a decrease in slope angle, while longitudinal extension can result from increases in slope angle (Leonard et al, 2005). The study of lobe morphology has uncovered relationships between lobe dimensions and rock glacier movement (Matsuoka et al., 2005). The height of a rock glacier lobe has been

6 found to be approximately equivalent to the depth of movement in the active permafrost layer underneath it (Matsuoka et al, 2005). This suggests that enough build-up of rock debris may be required to promote creep in the permafrost layer. The height of a lobe also is dependent on slope angle with lower slopes producing higher frontal lobes (Arenson et al., 2002). Studying lobe dynamics of large complex rock glaciers can provide a better understanding of their development over time.

Figure 2.2: This figure highlights the morphological features that are commonly associated with rock glaciers. (A) image of the Blain Basin East rock glacier. (B) The headwall of the BBE rock glacier showing longitudinal ridge and furrow structures with younger ridges overriding older ones. (C) The snout of the BBE rock glacier displaying transverse ridge and furrow structures and the steep frontal slopes of individual lobes with younger lobes overriding older ones. Credit: ESRI

Chapter 3: Research Questions

Relative age determination of the rocky debris covering rock glaciers has been a method that researchers have used for paleoclimate studies (Refsnider and Brugger,

2007). Many larger rock glaciers show multiple lobes which may indicate separate periods of neoglacial activity. Common methods used to study rock glacier activity are

Schmidt hammer exposure dating, weathering rind thickness, and lichen thalli diameters.

Each method has its own sensitivities to environmental factors and the use of multiple methods has shown to be more effective than a single method on its own and can help normalize the ages derived from each method (Nicholas and Butler, 1996).

This research attempts to answer the following questions:

1. How effective are Schmidt hammer exposure dating, weathering rind thickness,

and lichenometry as relative age determination techniques of rock glacier surfaces

in the San Juan Mountains?

2. Can periods of rock glacier activity be identified by using the relative age

determination techniques used in this study?

3. Is it possible to model rock glacier development using a combination of relative

age determination techniques and analysis of rock glacier morphology?

Using relative age determination techniques, multiple lobes of large tongue-shaped rock glaciers were measured. The assumption is that larger rock glaciers are more active than smaller ones, and that each lobe represents a period of activity during which the rock glacier advanced (Refsnider and Brugger, 2007). Therefore, lobes are expected to increase in age as they move downslope from their source. Evidence of rock glacier activity is assumed to be a response to climatic cooling or an increase in debris supply

(Refsnider and Brugger, 2007). By comparing the activity of rock glaciers with their morphological characteristics, a model of their development and advancement can be proposed.

Chapter 4: Study Area - The San Juan Mountains

The San Juan Mountains are a unique section of the Rocky Mountains that stretches from southwest Colorado into northern New Mexico. The majority of the surface lithology is relatively young, composed of volcanic ash-flow tuff formed from repeated late-Tertiary volcanic activity. Pockets of granite and metamorphic rock are scattered throughout the range but tend to be more abundant in the southwest corner, east of highway 550. Sedimentary rock such as sandstone, limestone, and shale are also found predominately in more Western regions of the mountain range. Glacial advances during the Quaternary carved the valleys of the San Juan Mountains, giving them their steep relief and the many cirque basins where rock glaciers are commonly found today (White,

1973). Glaciers retreated during the early Holocene and possibly even earlier in the San

Juan Mountains than other areas in North America (Guido et al., 2007).

4.1 Neoglacial Activity

Rock glaciers have been used to study periods of cooling throughout the Holocene.

Neoglaciations represent periods of glacial advance or reactivation following the

Holocene Climatic Optimum, or period of maximum glacial shrinkage (Miller, 1973,

White 1973). Several studies have identified three separate periods of significant rock glacier activity in the Rocky Mountains using a variety of relative and absolute age

11 determination techniques (Refsnider and Brugger, 2007; White (1971); White, (1973);

Outcalt and Benedict, 1965).

Nomenclature used to identify these neoglacial stades varies and can be confusing but generally represent the same neoglacial period. They have been identified as the Temple

Lake (Early Neoglacial) (4,500 - 2,700 BP), Audubon (Arikaree) (1,750 – 900 BP), and the most recent Gannett Peak stade (300 – 100 BP) (Outcalt and Benedict, 1965). Glacial readvancement occurred in cirque basins during these periods in some areas in Colorado.

However, there is no evidence of any reappearance of glacial ice in the San Juan

Mountains since the last glacial retreat (Guido et al., 2007). White (1973) summarized three neoglacial periods of rock glacier activity in the San Juan Mountains as follows:

Table 4.1: Glacial and neoglacial chronology of the San Juan Mountains summarized by White (1973).

Glacial Event Dates [Years B.P. (1950)] Rock Glacier Activity Wisconsin Stage 25,000 – 6,500 Pinedale Stade (Pleistocene) ------Holocene Epoch ------Holocene Climatic 6,500 – 4,500 Warming Period Optimum ------Neoglacial Period ------Development of rock glaciers, many at lower Temple Lake Stade 4,500 – 2,700 elevations

Maximum development of Arikaree Stade 1,750 – 900 rock glaciers (Audubon)

Little new development of Gannett Peak Stade 300 – 100 rock glaciers; some reactivation

Chapter 5: Methods

5.1 Schmidt hammer method

Schmidt hammer exposure dating has successfully been used as low cost and quick relative age determination technique for Holocene deposits, such as moraines and rock glaciers (Shakesby et al., 2006; Winkler and Lambiel, 2018). It is conducted using a

Schmidt hammer, a tool originally intended for use in measuring the compressive strength of concrete. The hammer contains a steel rod that is held perpendicular to the surface to be measured, and a spring-loaded hammer that impacts the end of the steel rod.

The distance of the rebounding steel rod is measured as a percentage of the forward movement and is commonly referred to as the Rebound (R) value (Day and Goudie,

1977; Shakesby et al., 2006). R-values are a measure of the structural weakening and increased roughness of weathered rock surfaces and can be used to estimate the length of exposure of the rock debris. The assumption is that R-values will decrease with increasing distance from the headwall (Shakesby et al., 2006). R-values can be converted to units of compressive strength (N/m²) but is considered to be unnecessary for the comparison of the relative ages of rock surfaces (Day and Goudie, 1977). Therefore, the values obtained for this research will remain as rebound value percentages.

Caution must be used in the use of the Schmidt hammer and the interpretation and comparison of R-values. McCarroll (1989), commented extensively on the pitfalls and limits of its use, as well as outlying precautions that should be adopted to limit the effects 13 of these potential errors (Nicholas and Butler, 1996; Winkler and Lambiel, 2018,

Shakesby et al., 2006). It is generally accepted that R-values are strongly affected by lithologic variations, lichen and vegetative cover, wet surfaces, and the angle that the hammer is held (McCarroll, 1989; Shakesby et al., 2006). To avoid these errors for this research, the hammer’s plunger is struck perpendicular to the tested surface. The hammer ideally should be held horizontally when performing measurements. Deviating from the horizontal introduces influence from gravity that can affect R-values. However, in the field it is not always possible to record measurements from the horizontal position, therefore a correction can be applied to counter the effects of gravity. Day and Goudie

(1977) developed a correction table to account for changes in deviations in inclination

(Table 5.1).

Table 5.1: R-value angle of inclination correction chart developed by Day and Goudie (1977) Rebound Value Upward Impact Downward Impact R +90° +45° -45° -90° 10 +2.4 +3.2 20 -5.4 -3.5 +2.5 +3.4 30 -4.7 -3.1 +2.3 +3.1 40 -3.9 -2.6 +2.0 +2.7 50 -3.1 -2.1 +1.6 +2.2 60 -2.3 -1.6 +1.3 +1.7

For this research, every measurement of the Schmidt hammer recorded included the angle in which the hammer was held, from an upright vertical position of 90 degrees to a horizontal position of 0 degrees. Surface moisture, lichen cover, and surficial fractures

14 were avoided as much as possible, and field sites were generally of uniform rock composition. McCarroll (1989) also attributed differences in R-values to operator bias, original surface roughness, hammer maintenance, and larger sample sizes. However, later research has shown that these attributes had little influence (Shakesby et al., 2006).

Regardless, steps were taken to avoid these potential errors. For this research, an analog

SADT N-type hammer, model HT225A by Sino Age Development Technology was used and calibrated to a value of 79.5. The calibration of the Schmidt hammer was checked three times during field collection using a calibration anvil to ensure the hammer was working properly. Sampling strategies vary and suggest sampling 50 random boulders at each sampling site in order to compensate for a larger standard deviation (Shakesby et al.,

2006; McCarroll, 1989).

5.2 Weathering Rind Thickness

Another relative age determination technique used was the measuring of weathering rind thicknesses. Over time exposed talus debris will develop a weathered ring-like rind near the surface that increases in thickness the longer that it is exposed (Birkeland, 1973).

By breaking a rock and measuring the thickness of the rind, researchers have been able to determine the relative age of rock glacier debris. Generally, the rind is measured in millimeters with calipers. Methods do vary with some using mean thickness and others using the thickest measured ring as representative of the site’s age. Using the maximum ring thickness is cautioned, as it is believed that some rock types are more susceptible to weathering than others allowing possible overestimation of the age of the rock glacier

(Chinn 1981). Other factors are believed to influence rind thickness. Thicknesses have

15 been found to decrease in rocks with finer grain size, higher degrees of metamorphism, being near corners of angular rocks, rocks that have been buried in soil, and surfaces that face downward (Chinn, 1981). However, rind thickness seems to not be affected by aspect or local climate differences (Chinn, 1981).

Rocks at each site were chipped or broken with a rock hammer to expose the weathering rind of a fresh rock surface. The thickest part of the rind was measured with digital calipers and recorded. Rinds of 30 rocks were measured at specific field sites.

Rocks selected for measurement were those that were more exposed to the surface and representative of the rock glacier as a whole. This included a consistency in grain size and metamorphic grade. To avoid overestimations of weathering from variations in rock type, the mean of all measurements made at each site were used to represent the site’s relative age.

5.3 Lichenometry

Lichenometry has been widely used as a low-cost method of deriving the relative ages of exposed rock surfaces (Rosenwinkel et al., 2015). In the field, the diameter of lichen thalli is measured, and larger lichens are associated with longer intervals of surface exposure. Sampling strategies differ among studies concerning which lichens should be measured. Traditionally, the largest lichens on a rock surface have been measured as representatives of early colonizers closest to when the rock debris last moved. However, other research has shown that this approach can produce misleading results from small sample sizes by not considering lichens that may have survived from previous advances

(Rosenwinkel et al., 2015). Sample sizes have varied as well between researchers. Most

16 studies have used around 25-50 measured lichen to establish the relative age of a surface.

In addition to thalli diameters, the proportion of lichen cover has also been used to differentiate between deposits of differing neoglacial advances (Miller, 1973). Older deposits are assumed to have had more time to develop an abundance of lichen and therefore older (Nicholas and Butler, 1996).

Ages derived from lichenometric techniques are known to be problematic due to issues such as misidentifying lichen species, environmental effects, and errors related to calibration. Several varieties of lichen exist, each having different growth rates. The most common lichen used in rock glacier research is Rhizocarpon geographicum. This subgenus is more easily identifiable by its yellow-green appearance and commonly grows slowly in high alpine regions (Sass, 2010). Lichen growth is like other similar biological organisms and sensitive to temperature, moisture, and sunlight (Beschel, 1973).

Measuring lichen in areas of shade, or disproportionate amounts of snow (snowkill) may result in data unrepresentative of the sample area, resulting in underestimations of age as lichen are found to grow slower in these areas (Nicholas and Butler, 1996).

The lichen species, Rhizocarpon geographicum, which has commonly been used in similar research, will be used for this research as well. This subgenus is abundant in the

San Juan region and is generally one of the earliest colonizers on fresh talus (Carrara and

Andrews, 1973). Prior to measurement, a 30-minute survey of the lobe to be measured will be conducted to locate areas with the largest lichen, and sampling sites of a 5-meter radius will be established at these areas. At each sampling site, thalli diameters of the 30 largest circular, or nearly circular lichen specimens will be measured with calipers. Each

17 rock glacier will be measured at multiple lobes, with 2-3 sampling sites being measured per lobe. Lobes with larger means of thalli diameters will be assumed to have been established longer and represent older lobes.

Chapter 6: Results

Approximately 2,050 Schmidt hammer measurements were recorded across 41 individual field sites. At each site 50 randomly selected boulders were struck with a single impact from the Schmidt hammer and their corresponding rebound values (R- values) were recorded. Random selection was obtained by approximately dividing the field site area in half and selecting 25 suitable boulders from each side. The mean R- value was derived for each site to represent that site’s relative rock hardness. The inclination angle of the Schmidt hammer was recorded for every impact, from 90 degrees upright to 0 degrees horizontally. Majority of measurements taken were from a 90-degree angle as it was difficult many times to strike a boulder from a horizontal position.

Regardless of the inclination angle of which the hammer was held, the flip rod of the hammer (the part that strikes the tested surface) struck perpendicular to the surface of the boulder to ensure an even impact. The weathering rinds of 300 boulders were measured across 11 individual field sites from the CB and BBE rock glaciers. The mean thickness was derived to represent each field site’s relative weathering rind thickness. Lichen measurements were not collected.

6.1 Blaine Basin

19 individual field sites were established across the BBE rock glacier and 3 were established at the BBW rock glacier. Mean R-values at each field site are listed in Table

6.1. At four of the BBE field sites, 30 randomly selected boulders were struck with a rock hammer to reveal the weathering rind, and the thickness of the rind was measured at its- widest location (Table 6.2). No weathering rind measurements were taken from the BBW rock glacier.

Table 6.1: Mean R-values collected from Blaine basin.

Field Site Mean R-Value σ²* SE** Blaine Basin East BBE 01 36.8 8.2 1.1 BBE 02 32.8 7.7 1.1 BBE 03 46.0 9.1 1.3 BBE 04 45.4 9.8 1.4 BBE 05 44.1 6.2 0.9 BBE 06 47.1 6.7 0.9 BBE 07 52.4 6.4 0.9 BBE 08 49.1 6.0 0.8 BBE 09 53.4 6.3 0.9 BBE 10 57.5 5.9 0.8 BBE 11 50.7 6.5 0.9 BBE 12 48.7 7.4 1.0 BBE 13 43.5 7.4 1.0 BBE 14 46.9 6.3 0.9 BBE 15 43.9 6.3 0.9 BBE 16 43.5 8.1 1.2 BBE 17 45.2 5.7 0.8 BBE 18 46.6 6.3 0.9 BBE 19 51.9 6.6 0.9 Blaine Basin West BBW 01 61.5 5.2 0.7 BBW 02 56.5 6.1 0.9 BBW 03 58.1 5.5 0.8 (*) Standard deviation calculated at 95% confidence interval. (**) Standard Error.

Table 6.2: Mean weathering rind thickness of field sites in Blaine basin.

Mean Rind Field Site n Thickness σ²* SE** (mm) Blaine Basin BBE 01 49 3.56 1.52 0.51 BBE 02 32 4.66 1.11 0.82 BBE 03 30 4.78 1.29 0.87 BBE 04 30 4.81 1.02 0.88 (*) Standard deviation calculated at 95% confidence interval. (**) Standard Error. 6.2 Cirque Basin

19 individual field sites were established across the Cirque Basin rock glacier. The mean R-values of each site are listed in Table 6.3. At seven of the field sites 30 randomly selected boulders were struck with a rock hammer to reveal the weathering rinds and the thicknesses measured at their widest location (Table 6.4).

Table 6.3: Mean R-values collected from each field site in Cirque basin.

Field Site Mean R-Value σ²* SE** Cirque Basin CB 01 36.3 8.7 1.2 CB 02 39.6 8.1 1.2 CB 03 42.2 8.1 1.1 CB 04 44.5 8.5 1.2 CB 05 43.9 9.0 1.3 CB 06 38.6 9.0 1.3 CB 07 44.8 6.8 1.0 CB 08 41.3 7.7 1.1 CB 09 37.5 9.2 1.3 CB 10 45.6 6.7 0.9 CB 11 43.1 5.9 0.8 CB 12 45.1 7.0 1.0 CB 13 47.5 6.0 0.8 CB 14 45.2 7.2 1.0 CB 15 34.9 8.4 1.2 CB 16 39.6 7.0 1.0 CB 17 43.8 5.0 0.7 CB 18 46.9 6.3 0.9 CB 19 48.0 6.4 0.9 (*) Standard deviation calculated at 95% confidence interval. (**) Standard Error.

Table 6.4: Mean rind thicknesses collected from field sites in Cirque basin.

Mean Rind Field Site n Thickness σ²* SE** (mm) Cirque Basin CB 01 31 7.42 2.8 0.5 CB 02 30 5.92 1.29 0.24 CB 03 30 7.16 1.69 0.31 CB 04 31 5.52 1.23 0.22 CB 05 30 5.44 1.46 0.27 CB 06 30 6.09 1.15 0.21 CB 07 30 5.84 1.05 0.19 (*) Standard deviation calculated at 95% confidence interval. (**) Standard Error.

Chapter 7: Discussion

7.1 Schmidt Hammer

Mean R-values from all three rock glaciers are plotted in descending value in Figure

7.1. R-value means were grouped into three dominant periods of activity by K-means cluster analysis using SPSS software. Three clusters were found to better represent significant differences between the ages of the rock debris sampled. The only difference between clusters of three and clusters of four was a division of the late neoglacial period

(Figure 10.1). Three of the four field sites in the additional fourth cluster group are from

Figure 7.1: Mean R-values from all field sites arranged in descending order. Groups are formed using K-means cluster analysis using SPSS software. Groups represent different neoglacial periods: (Blue) late period, (Green) intermediate period, (Red) early period. 23

the BBW rock glacier. R-values suggest that the BBW rock glacier is advancing at a faster rate than the other rock glaciers. It is likely that the rock debris in the fourth group is of a similar age but has traveled further downslope than the recent debris from the other two rock glaciers. Therefore, a division of the late neoglacial period was determined to be unnecessary.

Schmidt hammer measurements have been shown to be sensitive to moisture, clast size, and rock type. Measurements were taken during summer after an abnormally wet winter and late summer snowmelt. Additionally, frequent periods of rain were common during field collection. Measurements were taken on dry surfaces, however there is a possibility that internal moisture may have affected measurements. Lichen cover was very prominent, especially on older surfaces. Lichen free areas were at times difficult to find and may have influenced measurements. Boulders sampled were of consistent lithology with minor variations that could have also affected rebound values. While there may have been some minor errors obtained during the collection of R-values, the results strongly indicate three separate groups of neoglacial activity. This correlates with other neoglacial chronologies of the Rocky Mountains (Nicholas and Butler, 1996; Birkeland,

1973; Refsnider and Brugger, 2007)

7.2 Weathering Rind Measurements

Rocks with thinner rinds are assumed to have had less surface exposure time and therefore should have been exposed in the rock glacier for a shorter period of time than rocks with thicker rinds. The data collected show inconsistencies in the relationship between rind thickness and approximate relative age and have been found to be

24 inconclusive. Figure 7.2, shows descending R-values compared with the weathering rind thicknesses collected from the same field site. The rind thickness line should mirror the

R-value line, since rind thickness should increase with exposure time and therefore age.

However, the line zigzags significantly and an established trend is not clearly observed.

More field sites with a larger sample size per site could potentially show more conclusive results. The use of weathering rinds as relative age indicators has been a popular method in the area and for andesitic rocks. One possible explanation for the difficulty identifying weathering rinds might be that the rocks are relatively too young and have not had an appropriate time to develop a clear rind. Rinds from andesitic lithologies have been found to develop at a slower rate (Colman and Pierce, 1977). Therefore, it is likely that the lack of rinds was due to the younger age of the volcanic rock.

Figure 7.2: Chart comparing rind thickness and R-values collected at the same field site. Sites are arranged from left to right by descending R-value (young to old).

7.3 Lichens

Lichen growth is extensive across rock glacier surfaces in the study area. Multiple species are prevalent in addition to the Rhizocarpon geographicum species intended for measurement in this study. Furthermore, Rhizocarpon geographicum lichens were not distinct in their shapes to allow for suitable measurement of thalli diameters but grew in string-like patterns. Lichens were commonly found growing beneath or on top of others.

Because of these factors, lichen measurements were not collected. Studies using lichens

as relative age indicators

have been successful in

other parts of Colorado

such as the Front range.

However, the success of its

use in the San Juan

Mountains has been less

established. Carrara and

Figure 7.3: Lichen cover at a field site. Lichen cover is Andrews (1973) have nearly 100% on the face of the large boulder. encountered problems with lichen measurements in the San Juan Mountains as well. They contribute inconsistencies to variations in rock type, the weathering susceptibility of the volcanic rock, and finding that the rock glaciers surfaces may be older than the effective range of lichenometry.

7.4 Summary of Methods

Schmidt hammer exposure dating proved to be the most effective method for deriving the relative ages of multiple locations on rock glaciers. The collection of weathering rinds and lichen thalli diameters proved to be less useful. The problems associated with both weathering rinds and lichens may be related to the volcanic lithology of the study area.

The slower rind development associated with andesitic rocks could indicate the rocks are too young to properly develop an adequate rind. The abundance of lichen cover suggests that the rocks are older than the effective range of lichen growth. This demonstrates the value of the Schmidt hammer as a tool for the study of rock glaciers in the San Juan

Mountains and possibly other areas of volcanic lithology.

7.5 Rock Glacier Development

7.5.1 Blaine Basin East

In Figure 7.3, the mean R-values at each field site are displayed. With exception to field site CB-17 (46.9), there is an overall increase in R-value from the snout upslope in a southeast direction. Rock debris from CB-17 (46.9) is likely to have been intermixed with rock debris from the multiple debris flow channels that can be seen to the southwest of the site and may have contributed to the higher R-value. There is a succession of lobes that are being overridden by younger lobes in a northwest – southeast direction indicating an increase in movement rates toward the center of the rock glacier. This is supported by

R-values increasing in that direction while decreasing in elevation. Field sites located on the longitudinal edges of the rock glacier had R-values slightly higher than those closer to

Figure 7.3: Image of mean R-values and their accompanying field site locations in Blaine basin. R-values are color-coded to the neoglacial period: (blue) late neoglacial period, (green) intermediate neoglacial period, (red) early neoglacial period. Credit: ESRI

28 the center. This is likely from additional rock debris sources downslope contributing younger rock debris and increasing the overall mean in R-values at these sites.

7.5.2 Blaine Basin West

R-values on the BBW rock glacier are all relatively young compared to those from the other two rock glaciers. Lobes show little height development and longitudinal extension indicating relatively quick advancement downslope. The center of the rock glacier has higher R-values and appears to be overriding the outer edges indicating that the center of the rock glacier is advancing quicker than the edges. The rock debris is also large and angular indicating little weathering, supporting the belief that it is relatively the youngest and most active rock glacier of the three.

7.5.3 Cirque Basin

In Figure 7.4, the mean R-values at each field site are displayed. R-values collected range from 34.9 – 48.0, showing no evidence of the more recent rock debris found in

Blaine Basin. R-values do not increase with elevation as they do with the other two rock glaciers but display more complex development. The R-values of the rock debris indicate two significant advances from the early and intermediate neoglacial periods. It is important to note that R-values were not collected from the upper catchment area of the rock glacier and may (likely) contain debris from more recent activity. The rock glacier displays a series of lobes being overrun by others and lobes advancing at different rates and makes understanding its development difficult based on R-values alone. However, combined with a closer inspection of its morphology in sections, it is possible to hypothesize how the rock glacier might have developed as a whole.

Figure 7.4: Image of mean R-values and their accompanying field site locations in Cirque basin. R-values are color-coded to their neoglacial period: (blue) late neoglacial period, (green) intermediate neoglacial period, (red) early neoglacial period. Credit: ESRI

The center portion of the rock glacier is much thicker and appears to be moving slower than the outside edges (Figure 7.5). The outside lobes appear to be moving around the center suggesting advancement has stalled there. The western edge seems to be advancing the quickest and there is evidence that the western edge is pulling part of the lobe near field site CB-18 (46.9) around the center. The eastern edge containing site CB-

13 (47.5) has an R-value similar to site CB-19 (48.0) but appears to be intruded by older debris. This could suggest that the lobe was in place prior to the advancement of the lower section downslope. The upper-center, field sites CB-11 (43.1) and CB-14 (45.2) are older than the rock they sit upon, suggesting a later advancement from the catchment area. Similarly, the northeast lobe [CB-16 (39.6) and CB-15 (34.9)] have low R-values, which also suggests a later advancement.

In contrast to the upper section, the lower center lobe appears to be moving quicker than the lower edges (Figure 7.6). Field site CB-06 (38.6) and site CB-09 (37.5) have lower R-values suggesting they have moved little since being in place, with site CB-06

(38.6) likely moving more than site CB-09 (37.5), mimicking the quicker advancement of site CB-19 (48.0). The boundary between the upper and lower center shows evidence of a transition in movement rates likely due in part by an increase in slope, with longitudinal furrows forming from longitudinal extension. Additionally, the transition between the two sections is marked by a deflated appearance, which may suggest a collapse of the overlying rock debris from the upper center as the debris below advanced further downslope. R-values decrease further downslope from site CB-07 (44.8) with a shift to a northwesterly direction. Numerous transverse ridges also form suggesting a decrease in

31 movement rates and possibly encouraging more lateral spreading. This may explain why site CB-05 (43.9) is younger than site CB-06 (38.6). The northwestern section also has a deflated appearance similar to that of the transition between the upper and lower sections, which may be linked to a nearby stream. The deflated appearance could indicate the melting of internal ice and subsequent collapse of the overlying rock debris.

As demonstrated above, one can develop a model of rock glacier development utilizing the R-values collected from individual sections of the rock glacier. It is hypothesized that there was an early advance downslope that likely ended somewhere around where site CB-06 (38.6) and CB-09 (37.5) now reside. This was followed by a larger advance causing the center of the rock glacier to build up on itself, with the outer edges wrapping around the center, followed by the advance of the snout of the rock glacier to where it is today. This may have resulted from the build up of rock debris to a point where the rock glacier was finally able to deform under its own weight.

Additionally, the northeast section advanced sometime after the second large advance.

Figure 7.5: Relative movement rates of lobes in the upper section of Cirque basin rock glacier. Movement rates range from (green) quick to (red) slow. Credit: ESRI

Figure 7.6: Relative movement rates of lobes in the lower section of Cirque Basin rock glacier. Movement rates range from (green) quick to (red) slow. Credit: ESRI

7.5 Neoglacial Activity

The models developed in this research are strictly based on relative age indicators and morphological analysis. Without using absolute dating methods, age estimations of rock surfaces cannot be confirmed. In addition, the direct comparison of R-values collected in this research with those collected outside of the study area should be used cautiously due to variations in rock type. However, the three neoglacial periods derived in this study do correlate with the existing research discussed earlier of the San Juan Mountains and surrounding areas. The activity descriptions summarized by White also fit well with the models proposed. Rock glaciers from both basins show an early advance that has extended to lower elevations. The majority of the rock debris is from the intermediate period, or the Audubon stade. Debris from the Gannet Peak stade is only observed in

Blaine basin. BBE shows limited activity from that period, however the BBW rock glacier appears to be entirely composed of Gannett Peak debris. The lack of transverse ridges, a large steep frontal slope, and large angular debris support the hypothesis that the

BBW rock glacier is young and active. Debris from the Gannett Peak stade is not present on the Cirque basin rock glacier, which appears to be older and less active. However, the re-advance of the lower section and the advance of the upper southeast corner may have been during this most recent stade, although it is impossible to ascertain without additional data.

7.6 Water Resources and Climate Change

The rapid effects that human induced climate change bring are of great concern to communities in already arid regions, such as those found in Southwest Colorado. The San

Juan Mountains are expected to warm and possibly become drier, having huge impacts on the water supply (Seager et al., 2007). Research has shown that rock glaciers can serve as potential reservoirs of fresh water and have direct impacts on stream discharge during summer months after snowmelt has been exhausted (Janke, 2007; Mateo and Daniels,

2019). Determining the impacts that rock glaciers have on basin hydrology are of great importance to mountainous communities that rely on snowmelt for their water supply.

However, the controls that determine the melting regimes of rock glaciers can be complex and locally unique. Research by Mateo and Daniels (2019), showed that internal melting of ice in rock glaciers of neighboring basins in the San Juan Mountains can vary, and show influences from slope aspect and temperature. They hypothesize that the volcanic lithology of the area may contribute to a larger role of groundwater than other areas. At even smaller scales, large multi-lobed rock glaciers may have more complex melting regimes contributing from their larger areas and more diverse range of topographical characteristics. Therefore, more research on rock glaciers at a finer resolution is important in order to understand how rock glaciers may respond differently to changes in climate.

7.7 Schmidt Hammer Potential

This research demonstrates the utility of Schmidt hammer exposure dating as a high- resolution field mapping method of rock glacier dynamics. The method is both efficient and effective in its ability to collect large amounts of data in a relatively short period of time. It is portable, easy to master, and relatively cheap compared to other methods. On average, I was able to collect 50 R-values in approximately 20 – 30 minutes at each field

36 site. The importance of this cannot be overstated when it comes to collecting data in high alpine environments. The field season can be short, areas be hard to access, and weather can be sudden and unpredictable. The ability to collect data quickly and consistently is of great value to field research in these environments.

Furthermore, this research indicates that the Schmidt hammer may be uniquely effective in the Sans Juan Mountains and with other areas of similar lithologies. More traditional relative dating methods, such as lichenometry and weathering rinds, show sensitivities to the volcanic lithology that they do not appear to have with other rock types. However, the method does have its own sensitivities that should not be overlooked.

Moisture, surface roughness, and the angle of inclination can all distort R-values collected. However, these vulnerabilities are relatively easy to avoid with a little practice and experience.

As was already mentioned, being able to collect large amounts of data quickly is of great importance in these types of remote locations. This allows for a more detailed micro-analysis of rock glacier morphology and development. Having more field sites permits a more finite investigation of the subtleties of individual lobes and a possibly better understanding of how rock glaciers may react to the continued effects of climate change. More research should incorporate the use of the Schmidt hammer and may eventually be used to derive movement rates and the amount of water being stored or discharged.

Chapter 8: Conclusion

The Schmidt hammer has proved to be a quick and effective way to determine the relative age of rock glacier surfaces of three complex rock glaciers in the San Juan

Mountains of Colorado. Lichens and the weathering rind thickness of sampled boulders proved to be less useful due to the volcanic lithology. Values derived from the Schmidt hammer indicate three periods of neoglacial activity which comports with the existing neoglacial history of the area and other neighboring mountainous areas. Using the R- values derived from the Schmidt hammer, a model is proposed of how each rock glacier may have developed over time.

The rock glaciers in Blaine basin show evidence of all three neoglacial periods and R- values generally tend to increase upslope from the snout. The eastern rock glacier consists of a series of younger lobes overlapping older ones in an easterly direction probably due to increased movement rates. The western rock glacier appears to be the youngest and most active rock glacier of the three. High R-values, a lack of transverse ridges, and a steep frontal slope all indicate significant activity. The large and expansive rock glacier in the neighboring “Cirque Basin” shows more complex development than the others. R-values indicate rock debris from only the first two neoglacial periods, suggesting that its overall movement is slower. There appears to have been an advance

38 during the early neoglacial period, followed by a large advance during the intermediate period. The center portion of the rock glacier may have stalled, while the outer edges continued to advance around the center. Build-up of the center eventually allowed the center to move downslope, where decreased R-values toward the snout indicate that the center moved more quickly. An older lobe in the upper northeast section of the rock glacier has advanced slowly downslope overriding younger debris from the intermediate period.

All three rock glaciers show a strong dependency on slope and debris supply. The quicker movement rates of the rock glaciers in Blaine basin correspond with higher slope values and narrower valleys, forcing younger lobes further downslope. The rock glacier in Cirque basin has much more area to collect rock debris with an overall lower slope value than the other two rock glaciers. The ability to spread out introduces more development complexity with different sections of the rock glacier moving at different rates. The models developed by this research are limited in their robustness and more evidence is needed to confirm their plausibility. However, this research demonstrates the value of the Schmidt hammer as a quick field-based method of deriving relative ages of rock surfaces that can give insight into the developmental history of large complex rock glaciers, such as those found in the San Juan Mountains.

Chapter 9: Bibliography

Arenson, L., M. Hoelzle, and S. Springman. 2002. Borehole deformation measurements and internal structure of some rock glaciers in Switzerland. Permafrost and Periglacial Processes 13:117-135. Beschel, R. E. 1973. Lichens as a measure of the age of recent moraines. Arctic and Alpine Research. 303-309. Birkeland, P. W. 1973. Use of Relative Age-Dating Methods in A Stratigraphic Study of Rock Glacier Deposits, Mt. Sopris, Colorado. Arctic and Alpine Research 5:401- 416. Capps, S. R. 1910. Rock glaciers in Alaska. Journal of Geology 18:359-375. Carrara, P. E., and J. T. Andrews. 1973. Problems and Application of Lichenometry to Geomorphic Studies, San Juan Mountains, Colorado. Arctic and Alpine Research 5:373-384. Chinn, T. J. H. 1981. Use of Rock Weathering-Rind Thickness for Holocene Absolute Age-Dating in New Zealand. Arctic and Alpine Research 13:33-45. Day, M. J. and A.S. Goudie. 1977. Field assesment of rock hardness using the schmidt test hammer. British Geomorphological Research Group 18:19-29. Guido, Z. S., D. J. Ward, and R. S. Anderson. 2007. Pacing the post–Last Glacial Maximum demise of the Animas Valley glacier and the San Juan Mountain ice cap, Colorado. Geology 35:739. Ikeda, A., and N. Matsuoka. 2006. Pebbly versus bouldery rock glaciers: Morphology, structure and processes. Geomorphology 73:279-296. Ikeda, A., and N. Matsuoka. 2002. Degradation of talus‐derived rock glaciers in the Upper Engadin, Swiss Alps. Permafrost and Periglacial Processes 13:145-161. Jason R. Janke. 2007. Colorado Front Range Rock Glaciers: Distribution and Topographic Characteristics. Arctic, Antarctic, and Alpine Research 39:74-83. Kenner, R., and J. Magnusson. 2017. Estimating the Effect of Different Influencing Factors on Rock Glacier Development in Two Regions in the Swiss Alps. Permafrost and Periglacial Processes 28:767.

Kinnard, C., and S. Monnier. 2015. Internal Structure and Composition of a Rock Glacier in the Dry Andes, Inferred from Ground-penetrating Radar Data and its Artefacts. Permafrost and Periglacial Processes 26:335-346. Knight, J., S. Harrison, and D. B. Jones. 2019. Rock glaciers and the geomorphological evolution of deglacierizing mountains. Geomorphology; Geomorphology 324:14-24. Leonard, E., P. Staab, and S. Weaver. 2005. Kinematics of Spruce Creek rock glacier, Colorado, USA. Journal of Glaciology 51:259-268. Mateo, E. I., and J. M. Daniels. 2019. Surface hydrological processes of rock glaciated basins in the San Juan Mountains, Colorado. Physical Geography 40:275-293. Matsuoka, N., A. Ikeda, and T. Date. 2005. Morphometric analysis of solifluction lobes and rock glaciers in the Swiss Alps. Permafrost and Periglacial Processes 16:99- 113. McCarroll, D. 1994. A new approach to lichenometry: dating single-age and diachronous surfaces. The Holocene 4:383-396. ———1989. Potential and Limitations of the Schmidt Hammer for Relative-Age Dating: Field Tests on Neoglacial Moraines, Jotunheimen, Southern Norway. Arctic and Alpine Research 21:268-275. Miller, C. D. 1973. Chronology of Neoglacial Deposits in the Northern Sawatch Range, Colorado. Arctic and Alpine Research 5:385-400. Nicholas, J. W., and D. R. Butler. 1996. Application of Relative-Age Dating Techniques on Rock Glaciers of the La Sal Mountains, Utah: An Interpretation of Holocene Paleoclimates. Geografiska Annaler.Series A, Physical Geography 78:1-18. Outcalt, S. I., and J. B. Benedict. 1965. Photo-Interpretation of two Types of Rock Glacier in the Colorado Front Range, U.S.A. Journal of Glaciology 5:849-856. Refsnider, K. A., and K. A. Brugger. 2007. Rock Glaciers in Central Colorado, U.S.A., as Indicators of Holocene Climate Change. Arctic, Antarctic, and Alpine Research 39:127-136. Rosenwinkel, S., O. Korup, A. Landgraf, and A. Dzhumabaeva. 2015. Limits to lichenometry. Quaternary Science Reviews; Quat.Sci.Rev. 129:229-238. Sass, O. 2010. Spatial and temporal patterns of talus activity – a lichenometric approach in the stubaier alps, austria. Geografiska Annaler: Series A, Physical Geography 92:375-391. Seager, R., M. Ting, I. Held, Y. Kushnir, J. Lu, G. Vecchi, H. Huang, N. Harnik, A. Leetmaa, N. Lau, C. Li, J. Velez, and N. Naik. 2007. Model projections of an imminent transition to a more arid climate in southwestern North America. Science (New York, N.Y.) 316:1181-1184.

Shakesby, R. A., J. A. Matthews, and G. Owen. 2006. The Schmidt hammer as a relative- age dating tool and its potential for calibrated-age dating in Holocene glaciated environments. Quaternary Science Reviews 25:2846-2867. Skidmore, M., M. Speece, C. Link, C. A. Shaw, C. Florentine, and C. A. Shaw. 2014. Geophysical analysis of transverse ridges and internal structure at Lone Peak Rock Glacier, Big Sky, Montana, USA. The journal of glaciology. 60:453-462. White, P. G. 1973. Rock glaciers in the San Juan Mountains, Colorado by Paul Gary White. Ph.D. dissertation, Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Denver, 1973. White, S. E. 1971. Rock Glacier Studies in the Colorado Front Range, 1961 to 1968. Arctic and Alpine Research 3:43-64. Winkler, S., and C. Lambiel. 2018. Age constraints of rock glaciers in the Southern Alps/New Zealand – Exploring their palaeoclimatic potential. The Holocene 28:778- 790.

Chapter 10: Appendix

10.1 Raw Schmidt Hammer Data

Table 10.1: Raw Schmidt hammer data

BBE 01 BBE 02 BBE 03

Hammer Field R- Calibrated Hammer Field R- Calibrated Hammer Field R- Calibrated n Inclination value R-value Inclination value R-value Inclination value R-value 1 90 16.5 19.8 90 13.0 16.3 90 24.0 27.2 2 90 18 21.3 90 18.0 21.3 90 27.0 30.1 3 90 20 23.2 90 19.0 22.3 90 30.0 33.1 4 90 20 23.2 90 20.0 23.2 90 30.0 33.1 5 90 20.5 23.7 90 20.5 23.7 90 30.5 33.5 6 90 21 24.2 90 21.5 24.7 90 31.0 34.0 7 90 22 25.2 90 21.5 24.7 90 34.0 36.9 8 90 23 26.2 90 22.5 25.7 90 36.0 38.9 9 90 27 30.1 90 23.5 26.7 90 36.5 39.3 10 90 29 32.1 90 23.5 26.7 90 37.0 39.8 11 90 29.5 32.6 90 24.0 27.2 90 39.0 41.7 12 90 29.5 32.6 90 26.5 29.6 90 39.5 42.2 13 90 31 34 90 27.0 30.1 90 40.0 42.7 14 90 31.5 34.5 90 27.5 30.6 90 40.5 43.2 15 90 31.5 34.5 90 28.0 31.1 90 42.0 44.6 16 90 31.5 34.5 90 28.5 31.6 90 42.5 45.1 17 90 31.5 34.5 90 29.0 32.1 90 43.5 46.0 18 90 32 35 90 29.5 32.6 90 45.0 47.5 19 90 32.5 35.5 90 31.0 34.0 90 46.0 48.4 20 90 33 36 90 31.0 34.0 90 46.0 48.4 21 90 34 36.9 90 31.5 34.5 90 46.0 48.4 22 90 34 36.9 90 31.5 34.5 90 46.5 48.9 23 90 34 36.9 90 33.0 36.0 90 49.0 51.3 24 90 34.5 37.4 90 33.5 36.5 90 50.5 52.7 25 90 34.5 37.4 90 33.5 36.5 90 51.0 53.1

26 90 35.5 38.4 90 34.0 36.9 90 51.0 53.1 27 90 36 38.9 90 34.0 36.9 90 51.5 53.6 28 90 36.5 39.3 90 36.0 38.9 90 53.5 55.5 29 90 37.5 40.3 90 36.0 38.9 90 54.5 56.4 30 90 38 40.8 90 37.0 39.8 90 55.0 56.9 31 90 38 40.8 90 37.0 39.8 90 56.5 58.3 32 90 38.5 41.3 90 41.0 43.7 90 57.0 58.7 33 90 39 41.7 90 43.5 46.0 90 57.0 58.7 34 90 39.5 42.2 90 46.0 48.4 45 30.0 32.3 35 90 40 42.7 90 48.5 50.8 45 33.5 35.7 36 90 41 43.7 45 17.0 19.4 45 36.0 38.1 37 90 42 44.6 45 20.5 22.9 45 38.0 40.1 38 90 43 45.6 45 26.0 28.3 45 40.0 42.0 39 90 43.5 46 45 27.0 29.3 45 40.5 42.5 40 90 44 46.5 45 27.0 29.3 45 45.5 47.4 41 90 45 47.5 45 29.5 31.8 45 46.5 48.3 42 90 46.5 48.9 45 32.0 34.2 45 48.5 50.2 43 90 48.5 50.8 45 32.0 34.2 45 49.0 50.7 44 90 51 53.1 45 32.0 34.2 45 51.0 52.6 45 45 22.5 24.9 45 33.0 35.2 45 52.0 53.6 46 45 27 29.3 45 35.5 37.6 45 52.5 54.1 47 45 32.5 34.7 45 40.5 42.5 45 56.0 57.4 48 45 38 40.1 45 42.0 44.0 45 60.0 61.2 49 45 41 43 45 42.5 44.5 45 61.0 62.2 50 45 45 46.9 0 25.5 25.5 0 30.0 30.0 51 45 47 48.8

BBE 04 BBE 05 BBE 06

Hammer Field R- Calibrated Hammer Field R- Calibrated Hammer Field R- Calibrated n Inclination value R-value Inclination value R-value Inclination value R-value 1 90 16.0 19.3 90 30.0 33.1 90 27.5 30.6 2 90 20.0 23.2 90 31.0 34.0 90 32.0 35.0 3 90 25.0 28.2 90 32.0 35.0 90 34.0 36.9 4 90 25.5 28.7 90 34.0 36.9 90 35.0 37.9 5 90 27.0 30.1 90 34.0 36.9 90 37.0 39.8 6 90 27.0 30.1 90 35.0 37.9 90 38.0 40.8 7 90 33.5 36.5 90 35.0 37.9 90 38.0 40.8 8 90 34.5 37.4 90 36.0 38.9 90 39.0 41.7

9 90 36.0 38.9 90 36.0 38.9 90 39.0 41.7 10 90 36.0 38.9 90 37.0 39.8 90 40.0 42.7 11 90 37.0 39.8 90 37.0 39.8 90 40.5 43.2 12 90 38.5 41.3 90 37.0 39.8 90 41.0 43.7 13 90 38.5 41.3 90 37.5 40.3 90 41.5 44.1 14 90 39.0 41.7 90 38.0 40.8 90 42.0 44.6 15 90 41.0 43.7 90 38.5 41.3 90 42.0 44.6 16 90 42.5 45.1 90 39.0 41.7 90 42.0 44.6 17 90 44.0 46.5 90 39.5 42.2 90 43.0 45.6 18 90 44.0 46.5 90 40.0 42.7 90 43.0 45.6 19 90 44.5 47.0 90 40.0 42.7 90 44.0 46.5 20 90 44.5 47.0 90 41.0 43.7 90 47.0 49.4 21 90 45.0 47.5 90 41.0 43.7 90 47.5 49.8 22 90 45.0 47.5 90 42.0 44.6 90 48.5 50.8 23 90 45.0 47.5 90 43.0 45.6 90 49.0 51.3 24 90 46.0 48.4 90 43.0 45.6 90 49.0 51.3 25 90 46.5 48.9 90 43.5 46.0 90 49.5 51.7 26 90 47.5 49.8 90 43.5 46.0 90 50.0 52.2 27 90 48.0 50.3 90 44.5 47.0 90 51.0 53.1 28 90 48.5 50.8 90 45.0 47.5 90 51.0 53.1 29 90 50.5 52.7 90 45.5 47.9 90 51.0 53.1 30 90 51.5 53.6 90 46.0 48.4 90 51.5 53.6 31 90 53.0 55.0 90 47.5 49.8 90 52.0 54.1 32 90 53.5 55.5 90 48.0 50.3 90 52.5 54.5 33 90 53.5 55.5 90 49.0 51.3 90 56.0 57.8 34 90 60.5 62.0 90 50.5 52.7 90 58.0 59.7 35 90 61.5 62.9 90 50.5 52.7 45 32.5 34.7 36 90 62.0 63.4 90 51.0 53.1 45 36.0 38.1 37 45 33.5 35.7 90 52.5 54.5 45 39.0 41.1 38 45 37.0 39.1 90 52.5 54.5 45 40.0 42.0 39 45 37.5 39.6 90 54.0 55.9 45 41.0 43.0 40 45 41.0 43.0 45 30.0 32.3 45 44.0 45.9 41 45 42.0 44.0 45 35.0 37.2 45 45.5 47.4 42 45 43.0 44.9 45 35.5 37.6 45 48.0 49.8 43 45 43.0 44.9 45 38.5 40.6 45 49.0 50.7 44 45 44.0 45.9 45 40.5 42.5 45 49.0 50.7 45 45 48.0 49.8 45 41.5 43.5 45 50.0 51.7 46 45 51.5 53.1 45 45.5 47.4 45 51.0 52.6 47 45 53.0 54.6 45 47.5 49.3 45 52.0 53.6 48 45 56.0 57.4 45 47.5 49.3 45 52.5 54.1 49 45 58.0 59.3 45 49.0 50.7 45 53.5 55.0 45

50 0 54.0 54.0 45 52.5 54.1 45 56.0 57.4

BBE 07 BBE 08 BBE 09 Field Field Field Hammer R- Calibrated Hammer R- Calibrated Hammer R- Calibrated n Inclination value R-value Inclination value R-value Inclination value R-value 1 90 38.0 40.8 90 38.0 40.8 90 34.0 36.9 2 90 38.0 40.8 90 39.0 41.7 90 40.5 43.2 3 90 40.0 42.7 90 39.0 41.7 90 41.5 44.1 4 90 40.5 43.2 90 39.0 41.7 90 42.0 44.6 5 90 42.0 44.6 90 39.0 41.7 90 43.0 45.6 6 90 42.0 44.6 90 39.0 41.7 90 43.5 46.0 7 90 42.5 45.1 90 41.0 43.7 90 44.0 46.5 8 90 44.5 47.0 90 41.0 43.7 90 45.5 47.9 9 90 45.0 47.5 90 41.5 44.1 90 45.5 47.9 10 90 45.5 47.9 90 41.5 44.1 90 46.0 48.4 11 90 46.0 48.4 90 42.0 44.6 90 47.0 49.4 12 90 46.0 48.4 90 42.0 44.6 90 47.0 49.4 13 90 46.5 48.9 90 42.5 45.1 90 47.5 49.8 14 90 47.5 49.8 90 43.0 45.6 90 49.0 51.3 15 90 48.5 50.8 90 43.0 45.6 90 49.0 51.3 16 90 49.0 51.3 90 43.5 46.0 90 49.0 51.3 17 90 50.0 52.2 90 43.5 46.0 90 50.0 52.2 18 90 51.0 53.1 90 44.0 46.5 90 51.5 53.6 19 90 51.5 53.6 90 44.0 46.5 90 52.5 54.5 20 90 52.0 54.1 90 44.0 46.5 90 53.0 55.0 21 90 54.0 55.9 90 44.0 46.5 90 53.0 55.0 22 90 54.0 55.9 90 44.5 47.0 90 53.0 55.0 23 90 54.5 56.4 90 45.0 47.5 90 54.0 55.9 24 90 56.0 57.8 90 45.0 47.5 90 54.0 55.9 25 90 58.5 60.1 90 45.5 47.9 90 55.0 56.9 26 90 59.5 61.1 90 46.0 48.4 90 55.0 56.9 27 90 61.0 62.4 90 46.0 48.4 90 56.0 57.8 28 90 61.0 62.4 90 48.5 50.8 90 56.5 58.3 29 45 37.0 39.1 90 48.5 50.8 90 57.0 58.7 30 45 43.5 45.4 90 49.0 51.3 90 58.0 59.7 31 45 46.0 47.8 90 49.0 51.3 90 58.5 60.1 32 45 46.5 48.3 90 49.5 51.7 90 59.0 60.6 33 45 48.0 49.8 90 52.0 54.1 90 60.0 61.5

34 45 48.0 49.8 90 52.0 54.1 90 63.0 64.3 35 45 49.0 50.7 90 52.5 54.5 45 41.0 43.0 36 45 49.0 50.7 90 52.5 54.5 45 45.5 47.4 37 45 51.0 52.6 90 53.5 55.5 45 45.5 47.4 38 45 52.0 53.6 90 54.0 55.9 45 47.5 49.3 39 45 53.5 55.0 90 54.5 56.4 45 49.0 50.7 40 45 54.0 55.5 90 56.5 58.3 45 49.0 50.7 41 45 54.0 55.5 90 57.0 58.7 45 55.0 56.5 42 45 56.0 57.4 90 57.0 58.7 45 56.0 57.4 43 45 57.0 58.4 90 58.0 59.7 45 56.0 57.4 44 45 57.0 58.4 90 62.0 63.4 45 57.0 58.4 45 45 57.0 58.4 45 40.0 42.0 45 58.0 59.3 46 45 57.5 58.9 45 42.0 44.0 45 59.0 60.3 47 45 58.5 59.8 45 42.0 44.0 45 59.0 60.3 48 45 58.5 59.8 45 47.5 49.3 45 59.5 60.8 49 45 59.5 60.8 45 56.0 57.4 45 61.0 62.2 50 45 65.0 66.0 45 60.0 61.2 45 62.0 63.1

BBE 10 BBE 11 BBE 12 Field Field Field Hammer R- Calibrated Hammer R- Calibrated Hammer R- Calibrated n Inclination value R-value Inclination value R-value Inclination value R-value 1 90 40.0 42.7 90 36.0 38.9 90 35.5 38.4 2 90 46.0 48.4 90 38.0 40.8 90 36.0 38.9 3 90 48.0 50.3 90 39.0 41.7 90 37.0 39.8 4 90 48.0 50.3 90 40.0 42.7 90 38.0 40.8 5 90 49.0 51.3 90 40.5 43.2 90 39.0 41.7 6 90 50.0 52.2 90 42.0 44.6 90 40.0 42.7 7 90 51.0 53.1 90 43.0 45.6 90 40.0 42.7 8 90 52.0 54.1 90 43.5 46.0 90 41.0 43.7 9 90 52.0 54.1 90 43.5 46.0 90 41.0 43.7 10 90 52.0 54.1 90 43.5 46.0 90 41.5 44.1 11 90 53.5 55.5 90 44.0 46.5 90 41.5 44.1 12 90 54.5 56.4 90 45.0 47.5 90 42.0 44.6 13 90 54.5 56.4 90 45.5 47.9 90 43.0 45.6 14 90 55.0 56.9 90 47.0 49.4 90 43.5 46.0 15 90 55.0 56.9 90 47.5 49.8 90 44.0 46.5 16 90 55.0 56.9 90 47.5 49.8 90 44.0 46.5 17 90 55.5 57.3 90 48.0 50.3 90 44.5 47.0

18 90 56.0 57.8 90 48.5 50.8 90 45.0 47.5 19 90 56.0 57.8 90 49.0 51.3 90 45.5 47.9 20 90 56.5 58.3 90 49.0 51.3 90 46.0 48.4 21 90 57.0 58.7 90 49.0 51.3 90 46.5 48.9 22 90 57.5 59.2 90 50.0 52.2 90 47.0 49.4 23 90 57.5 59.2 90 50.0 52.2 90 47.0 49.4 24 90 57.5 59.2 90 50.0 52.2 90 47.0 49.4 25 90 58.0 59.7 90 51.0 53.1 90 47.5 49.8 26 90 59.0 60.6 90 51.0 53.1 90 48.0 50.3 27 90 59.5 61.1 90 52.0 54.1 90 51.0 53.1 28 90 60.0 61.5 90 52.5 54.5 90 52.0 54.1 29 90 61.0 62.4 90 53.0 55.0 90 52.5 54.5 30 90 61.0 62.4 90 56.0 57.8 90 54.5 56.4 31 90 62.0 63.4 90 57.0 58.7 90 55.0 56.9 32 90 62.0 63.4 90 57.0 58.7 90 59.0 60.6 33 90 63.0 64.3 90 59.0 60.6 90 62.5 63.8 34 90 63.0 64.3 90 59.5 61.1 90 65.5 66.6 35 90 63.0 64.3 90 59.5 61.1 45 34.0 36.2 36 90 63.5 64.8 90 62.5 63.8 45 34.0 36.2 37 90 64.0 65.2 45 39.5 41.5 45 39.0 41.1 38 90 64.0 65.2 45 40.0 42.0 45 41.0 43.0 39 90 65.0 66.1 45 41.0 43.0 45 43.0 44.9 40 90 65.5 66.6 45 41.0 43.0 45 43.5 45.4 41 45 43.5 45.4 45 45.5 47.4 45 44.5 46.4 42 45 44.0 45.9 45 46.0 47.8 45 45.5 47.4 43 45 47.0 48.8 45 47.0 48.8 45 47.0 48.8 44 45 48.0 49.8 45 49.0 50.7 45 48.0 49.8 45 45 52.0 53.6 45 50.0 51.7 45 52.0 53.6 46 45 53.0 54.6 45 50.5 52.2 45 53.0 54.6 47 45 54.5 56.0 45 52.0 53.6 45 56.5 57.9 48 45 57.0 58.4 45 52.0 53.6 45 59.5 60.8 49 45 63.0 64.1 45 60.0 61.2 45 61.0 62.2 50 45 64.5 65.5 45 68.0 68.8 45 64.0 65.0

BBE 13 BBE 14 BBE 15 Field Field Field Hammer R- Calibrated Hammer R- Calibrated Hammer R- Calibrated n Inclination value R-value Inclination value R-value Inclination value R-value 1 90 24.0 27.2 90 30.0 33.1 90 29.0 32.1 2 90 29.5 32.6 90 32.0 35.0 90 29.5 32.6 3 90 31.0 34.0 90 32.5 35.5 90 33.0 36.0 4 90 32.0 35.0 90 33.5 36.5 90 33.5 36.5 5 90 32.0 35.0 90 34.0 36.9 90 34.0 36.9 6 90 34.0 36.9 90 36.0 38.9 90 35.0 37.9 7 90 34.5 37.4 90 38.0 40.8 90 38.5 41.3 8 90 35.5 38.4 90 38.5 41.3 90 39.0 41.7 9 90 37.0 39.8 90 39.0 41.7 90 39.0 41.7 10 90 37.0 39.8 90 40.0 42.7 90 39.0 41.7 11 90 37.5 40.3 90 41.5 44.1 90 40.0 42.7 12 90 38.0 40.8 90 42.0 44.6 90 40.0 42.7 13 90 38.0 40.8 90 42.0 44.6 90 40.0 42.7 14 90 38.0 40.8 90 42.0 44.6 90 40.5 43.2 15 90 39.0 41.7 90 42.0 44.6 90 41.0 43.7 16 90 40.0 42.7 90 42.0 44.6 90 42.5 45.1 17 90 41.0 43.7 90 42.0 44.6 90 43.0 45.6 18 90 42.0 44.6 90 43.0 45.6 90 44.0 46.5 19 90 42.0 44.6 90 43.0 45.6 90 44.0 46.5 20 90 43.5 46.0 90 43.5 46.0 90 44.5 47.0 21 90 43.5 46.0 90 43.5 46.0 90 44.5 47.0 22 90 44.5 47.0 90 43.5 46.0 90 44.5 47.0 23 90 44.5 47.0 90 44.0 46.5 90 45.5 47.9 24 90 44.5 47.0 90 45.0 47.5 90 46.5 48.9 25 90 44.5 47.0 90 45.5 47.9 90 47.0 49.4 26 90 45.0 47.5 90 45.5 47.9 90 48.0 50.3 27 90 45.0 47.5 90 45.5 47.9 90 51.0 53.1 28 90 45.0 47.5 90 45.5 47.9 90 51.5 53.6 29 90 45.5 47.9 90 46.5 48.9 90 55.0 56.9 30 90 47.0 49.4 90 47.0 49.4 90 57.5 59.2 31 90 48.0 50.3 90 48.0 50.3 45 30.0 32.3 32 90 48.5 50.8 90 49.0 51.3 45 35.0 37.2 33 90 51.5 53.6 90 50.0 52.2 45 35.5 37.6 34 45 25.5 27.8 90 51.5 53.6 45 35.5 37.6 35 45 33.0 35.2 90 52.0 54.1 45 36.5 38.6 36 45 34.0 36.2 90 53.0 55.0 45 36.5 38.6 37 45 34.5 36.7 90 54.0 55.9 45 37.0 39.1 49

38 45 35.0 37.2 90 54.0 55.9 45 37.0 39.1 39 45 37.5 39.6 90 55.0 56.9 45 37.5 39.6 40 45 37.5 39.6 90 56.5 58.3 45 38.5 40.6 41 45 40.5 42.5 90 57.5 59.2 45 39.5 41.5 42 45 41.0 43.0 45 40.0 42.0 45 42.5 44.5 43 45 41.5 43.5 45 41.0 43.0 45 43.0 44.9 44 45 48.0 49.8 45 41.0 43.0 45 43.5 45.4 45 45 49.5 51.2 45 43.5 45.4 45 45.0 46.9 46 45 53.0 54.6 45 44.5 46.4 45 46.0 47.8 47 45 54.0 55.5 45 48.5 50.2 45 47.0 48.8 48 45 54.5 56.0 45 53.0 54.6 45 49.5 51.2 49 45 57.5 58.9 45 53.5 55.0 45 51.5 53.1 50 45 58.0 59.3 45 54.0 55.5 45 52.5 54.1

BBE 16 BBE 17 BBE 18 Field Field Field Hammer R- Calibrated Hammer R- Calibrated Hammer R- Calibrated n Inclination value R-value Inclination value R-value Inclination value R-value 1 90 26.0 29.2 90 30.5 33.5 90 31.0 34.0 2 90 27.0 30.1 90 31.0 34.0 90 33.0 36.0 3 90 28.5 31.6 90 32.5 35.5 90 35.0 37.9 4 90 30.0 33.1 90 33.0 36.0 90 36.5 39.3 5 90 31.0 34.0 90 34.0 36.9 90 37.0 39.8 6 90 31.5 34.5 90 34.5 37.4 90 37.5 40.3 7 90 32.0 35.0 90 35.0 37.9 90 38.0 40.8 8 90 33.0 36.0 90 35.0 37.9 90 39.0 41.7 9 90 33.5 36.5 90 36.5 39.3 90 39.0 41.7 10 90 34.0 36.9 90 37.0 39.8 90 39.5 42.2 11 90 34.0 36.9 90 37.5 40.3 90 40.0 42.7 12 90 37.0 39.8 90 37.5 40.3 90 40.5 43.2 13 90 37.5 40.3 90 38.5 41.3 90 41.0 43.7 14 90 38.0 40.8 90 41.5 44.1 90 41.5 44.1 15 90 38.5 41.3 90 42.0 44.6 90 41.5 44.1 16 90 38.5 41.3 90 42.5 45.1 90 42.5 45.1 17 90 38.5 41.3 90 42.5 45.1 90 42.5 45.1 18 90 41.0 43.7 90 43.0 45.6 90 43.0 45.6 19 90 42.5 45.1 90 43.0 45.6 90 43.5 46.0 20 90 42.5 45.1 90 43.0 45.6 90 44.0 46.5 21 90 43.0 45.6 90 43.0 45.6 90 44.0 46.5

22 90 43.0 45.6 90 43.5 46.0 90 44.5 47.0 23 90 43.5 46.0 90 43.5 46.0 90 45.0 47.5 24 90 44.5 47.0 90 43.5 46.0 90 45.0 47.5 25 90 46.5 48.9 90 44.0 46.5 90 45.5 47.9 26 90 46.5 48.9 90 45.0 47.5 90 46.5 48.9 27 90 47.5 49.8 90 45.0 47.5 90 47.0 49.4 28 90 48.0 50.3 90 47.0 49.4 90 47.0 49.4 29 90 48.0 50.3 90 47.0 49.4 90 47.5 49.8 30 90 49.0 51.3 90 47.5 49.8 90 49.0 51.3 31 90 52.0 54.1 90 47.5 49.8 90 49.0 51.3 32 90 52.0 54.1 90 48.5 50.8 90 49.0 51.3 33 90 53.5 55.5 90 49.0 51.3 90 49.0 51.3 34 90 55.0 56.9 90 50.5 52.7 90 50.0 52.2 35 45 34.0 36.2 90 53.5 55.5 90 50.5 52.7 36 45 34.0 36.2 90 54.0 55.9 90 52.0 54.1 37 45 34.0 36.2 45 36.5 38.6 90 52.5 54.5 38 45 35.0 37.2 45 40.5 42.5 90 53.0 55.0 39 45 36.0 38.1 45 41.0 43.0 90 53.5 55.5 40 45 36.5 38.6 45 41.0 43.0 90 55.0 56.9 41 45 38.0 40.1 45 44.5 46.4 90 56.0 57.8 42 45 39.0 41.1 45 46.0 47.8 90 57.0 58.7 43 45 41.5 43.5 45 46.0 47.8 45 34.0 36.2 44 45 42.5 44.5 45 47.0 48.8 45 35.0 37.2 45 45 43.0 44.9 45 47.0 48.8 45 35.0 37.2 46 45 47.5 49.3 45 47.0 48.8 45 37.0 39.1 47 45 51.0 52.6 45 48.0 49.8 45 45.5 47.4 48 45 54.5 56.0 45 51.5 53.1 45 49.0 50.7 49 45 59.5 60.8 45 51.5 53.1 45 51.0 52.6 50 45 64.0 65.0 45 52.5 54.1 45 54.0 55.5

BBE 19 BBW 01 BBW 02 Field Field Field Hammer R- Calibrated Hammer R- Calibrated Hammer R- Calibrated n Inclination value R-value Inclination value R-value Inclination value R-value 1 90 36.0 38.9 90 49.5 51.7 90 44.0 46.5 2 90 41.0 43.7 90 50.0 52.2 90 44.5 47.0 3 90 42.0 44.6 90 50.0 52.2 90 44.5 47.0 4 90 42.0 44.6 90 51.0 53.1 90 45.0 47.5 5 90 42.5 45.1 90 51.5 53.6 90 46.0 48.4

6 90 42.5 45.1 90 52.0 54.1 90 48.0 50.3 7 90 42.5 45.1 90 53.0 55.0 90 48.0 50.3 8 90 43.0 45.6 90 53.0 55.0 90 49.0 51.3 9 90 44.0 46.5 90 54.0 55.9 90 49.0 51.3 10 90 44.0 46.5 90 55.5 57.3 90 49.5 51.7 11 90 45.0 47.5 90 55.5 57.3 90 51.0 53.1 12 90 45.5 47.9 90 56.5 58.3 90 51.0 53.1 13 90 45.5 47.9 90 57.5 59.2 90 51.0 53.1 14 90 47.0 49.4 90 58.0 59.7 90 51.5 53.6 15 90 47.0 49.4 90 58.0 59.7 90 53.0 55.0 16 90 47.5 49.8 90 59.0 60.6 90 53.0 55.0 17 90 47.5 49.8 90 59.0 60.6 90 53.5 55.5 18 90 49.0 51.3 90 59.0 60.6 90 54.0 55.9 19 90 49.0 51.3 90 60.5 62.0 90 54.0 55.9 20 90 49.5 51.7 90 61.0 62.4 90 54.5 56.4 21 90 51.0 53.1 90 61.0 62.4 90 54.5 56.4 22 90 51.5 53.6 90 61.5 62.9 90 56.0 57.8 23 90 52.0 54.1 90 61.5 62.9 90 56.0 57.8 24 90 53.0 55.0 90 62.0 63.4 90 57.0 58.7 25 90 53.0 55.0 90 62.5 63.8 90 58.5 60.1 26 90 56.0 57.8 90 63.0 64.3 90 59.5 61.1 27 90 57.0 58.7 90 63.0 64.3 90 60.5 62.0 28 90 60.0 61.5 90 63.5 64.8 90 61.5 62.9 29 90 62.0 63.4 90 63.5 64.8 90 61.5 62.9 30 90 63.0 64.3 90 64.5 65.7 90 62.0 63.4 31 90 64.0 65.2 90 64.5 65.7 90 63.0 64.3 32 90 65.5 66.6 90 64.5 65.7 90 63.5 64.8 33 45 40.0 42.0 90 65.0 66.1 90 67.5 68.4 34 45 42.0 44.0 90 65.5 66.6 45 42.0 44.0 35 45 43.5 45.4 90 65.5 66.6 45 46.0 47.8 36 45 45.0 46.9 90 66.0 67.0 45 47.0 48.8 37 45 45.5 47.4 90 66.0 67.0 45 53.5 55.0 38 45 48.5 50.2 90 66.0 67.0 45 54.0 55.5 39 45 49.0 50.7 90 67.0 68.0 45 54.5 56.0 40 45 50.0 51.7 90 67.5 68.4 45 55.0 56.5 41 45 50.0 51.7 90 68.0 68.9 45 55.0 56.5 42 45 50.5 52.2 90 68.0 68.9 45 60.0 61.2 43 45 51.0 52.6 45 50.0 51.7 45 60.0 61.2 44 45 53.5 55.0 45 55.0 56.5 45 61.0 62.2 45 45 55.0 56.5 45 56.5 57.9 45 61.0 62.2 46 45 56.0 57.4 45 62.5 63.6 45 62.5 63.6 52

47 45 56.5 57.9 45 63.5 64.6 45 62.5 63.6 48 45 57.5 58.9 45 64.0 65.0 45 62.5 63.6 49 45 59.0 60.3 45 64.5 65.5 45 63.0 64.1 50 45 63.0 64.1 45 66.0 66.9 45 65.5 66.5

BBW 03 CB 01 CB 02 Field Field Field Hammer R- Calibrated Hammer R- Calibrated Hammer R- Calibrated n Inclination value R-value Inclination value R-value Inclination value R-value 1 90 43.0 45.6 90 14.0 17.3 90 20.5 23.7 2 90 46.0 48.4 90 18.0 21.3 90 25.0 28.2 3 90 46.0 48.4 90 20.0 23.2 90 27.0 30.1 4 90 48.5 50.8 90 22.5 25.7 90 29.0 32.1 5 90 48.5 50.8 90 22.5 25.7 90 29.0 32.1 6 90 49.0 51.3 90 23.0 26.2 90 30.5 33.5 7 90 49.0 51.3 90 25.5 28.7 90 31.0 34.0 8 90 50.0 52.2 90 26.5 29.6 90 31.0 34.0 9 90 51.0 53.1 90 27.0 30.1 90 31.0 34.0 10 90 51.0 53.1 90 27.5 30.6 90 31.5 34.5 11 90 54.0 55.9 90 28.5 31.6 90 32.0 35.0 12 90 54.5 56.4 90 29.0 32.1 90 33.0 36.0 13 90 55.0 56.9 90 29.0 32.1 90 34.0 36.9 14 90 56.0 57.8 90 30.0 33.1 90 35.0 37.9 15 90 57.5 59.2 90 30.0 33.1 90 37.0 39.8 16 90 57.5 59.2 90 30.0 33.1 90 37.0 39.8 17 90 57.5 59.2 90 31.0 34.0 90 37.5 40.3 18 90 58.0 59.7 90 31.5 34.5 90 38.0 40.8 19 90 58.0 59.7 90 31.5 34.5 90 38.0 40.8 20 90 58.0 59.7 90 32.0 35.0 90 38.5 41.3 21 90 59.5 61.1 90 32.5 35.5 90 39.0 41.7 22 90 60.5 62.0 90 33.0 36.0 90 39.0 41.7 23 90 60.5 62.0 90 33.5 36.5 90 39.0 41.7 24 90 60.5 62.0 90 34.0 36.9 90 40.0 42.7 25 90 61.0 62.4 90 36.0 38.9 90 42.0 44.6 26 90 61.5 62.9 90 36.0 38.9 90 42.5 45.1 27 90 62.0 63.4 90 36.5 39.3 90 43.5 46.0 28 90 64.0 65.2 90 39.0 41.7 90 44.0 46.5 29 90 64.5 65.7 90 40.0 42.7 90 45.0 47.5 30 90 66.0 67.0 90 40.5 43.2 90 45.0 47.5

31 90 68.5 69.3 90 41.0 43.7 90 45.5 47.9 32 45 47.5 49.3 90 41.0 43.7 90 48.0 50.3 33 45 50.5 52.2 90 41.0 43.7 90 48.0 50.3 34 45 51.0 52.6 90 42.5 45.1 90 56.0 57.8 35 45 51.5 53.1 90 44.0 46.5 90 56.0 57.8 36 45 53.5 55.0 90 44.0 46.5 45 24.5 26.9 37 45 53.5 55.0 90 47.0 49.4 45 27.0 29.3 38 45 55.5 57.0 90 48.0 50.3 45 27.0 29.3 39 45 56.5 57.9 90 58.0 59.7 45 27.0 29.3 40 45 57.0 58.4 45 15.5 17.9 45 29.0 31.3 41 45 57.5 58.9 45 25.0 27.4 45 30.5 32.8 42 45 58.0 59.3 45 29.0 31.3 45 34.0 36.2 43 45 59.0 60.3 45 29.5 31.8 45 35.0 37.2 44 45 59.0 60.3 45 34.5 36.7 45 35.5 37.6 45 45 59.5 60.8 45 38.0 40.1 45 36.0 38.1 46 45 60.5 61.7 45 38.0 40.1 45 37.5 39.6 47 45 61.0 62.2 45 41.0 43.0 45 38.5 40.6 48 45 62.0 63.1 45 41.5 43.5 45 45.0 46.9 49 45 65.0 66.0 45 45.5 47.4 45 48.0 49.8 50 45 67.0 67.9 45 46.0 47.8 45 59.0 60.3

CB 03 CB 04 CB 05 Field Field Field Hammer R- Calibrated Hammer R- Calibrated Hammer R- Calibrated n Inclination value R-value Inclination value R-value Inclination value R-value 1 90 23.5 26.7 90 27.0 30.1 90 23.0 26.2 2 90 24.0 27.2 90 27.0 30.1 90 24.0 27.2 3 90 24.0 27.2 90 28.0 31.1 90 26.0 29.2 4 90 25.5 28.7 90 29.0 32.1 90 27.0 30.1 5 90 26.5 29.6 90 29.0 32.1 90 29.0 32.1 6 90 31.0 34.0 90 31.0 34.0 90 29.5 32.6 7 90 31.0 34.0 90 31.0 34.0 90 30.0 33.1 8 90 32.0 35.0 90 33.0 36.0 90 31.0 34.0 9 90 32.5 35.5 90 33.0 36.0 90 32.0 35.0 10 90 34.0 36.9 90 34.0 36.9 90 32.0 35.0 11 90 35.5 38.4 90 34.0 36.9 90 32.5 35.5 12 90 36.0 38.9 90 35.0 37.9 90 33.0 36.0 13 90 37.5 40.3 90 35.5 38.4 90 34.0 36.9 14 90 37.5 40.3 90 37.0 39.8 90 34.0 36.9

15 90 38.0 40.8 90 38.0 40.8 90 35.5 38.4 16 90 38.5 41.3 90 38.0 40.8 90 37.0 39.8 17 90 38.5 41.3 90 38.0 40.8 90 37.5 40.3 18 90 38.5 41.3 90 39.5 42.2 90 38.0 40.8 19 90 39.0 41.7 90 39.5 42.2 90 38.0 40.8 20 90 39.0 41.7 90 40.0 42.7 90 38.5 41.3 21 90 39.5 42.2 90 40.5 43.2 90 40.0 42.7 22 90 40.0 42.7 90 40.5 43.2 90 41.0 43.7 23 90 42.0 44.6 90 41.0 43.7 90 42.0 44.6 24 90 42.5 45.1 90 41.5 44.1 90 42.0 44.6 25 90 43.0 45.6 90 42.0 44.6 90 42.0 44.6 26 90 43.5 46.0 90 42.5 45.1 90 43.5 46.0 27 90 44.0 46.5 90 43.0 45.6 90 44.0 46.5 28 90 44.0 46.5 90 43.0 45.6 90 45.5 47.9 29 90 44.0 46.5 90 44.5 47.0 90 46.0 48.4 30 90 44.0 46.5 90 45.0 47.5 90 46.0 48.4 31 90 45.5 47.9 90 45.5 47.9 90 48.5 50.8 32 90 46.0 48.4 90 46.0 48.4 90 49.0 51.3 33 90 46.0 48.4 90 46.0 48.4 90 51.0 53.1 34 90 46.5 48.9 90 46.0 48.4 90 51.0 53.1 35 90 48.5 50.8 90 46.0 48.4 90 52.5 54.5 36 90 49.0 51.3 90 47.5 49.8 90 54.0 55.9 37 90 52.0 54.1 90 48.0 50.3 90 54.0 55.9 38 90 52.5 54.5 90 52.0 54.1 90 55.0 56.9 39 90 57.5 59.2 90 53.5 55.5 90 59.5 61.1 40 90 61.5 62.9 90 54.0 55.9 45 33.5 35.7 41 45 29.5 31.8 90 54.0 55.9 45 42.0 44.0 42 45 30.0 32.3 90 55.5 57.3 45 42.0 44.0 43 45 34.0 36.2 90 57.0 58.7 45 45.5 47.4 44 45 34.5 36.7 90 58.0 59.7 45 47.0 48.8 45 45 36.0 38.1 45 29.0 31.3 45 47.5 49.3 46 45 38.0 40.1 45 47.5 49.3 45 48.0 49.8 47 45 39.0 41.1 45 50.0 51.7 45 49.5 51.2 48 45 44.0 45.9 45 51.0 52.6 45 52.5 54.1 49 45 44.5 46.4 45 54.0 55.5 45 55.5 57.0 50 45 47.0 48.8 45 62.0 63.1 45 60.0 61.2

CB 06 CB 07 CB 08 Field Field Field Hammer R- Calibrated Hammer R- Calibrated Hammer R- Calibrated n Inclination value R-value Inclination value R-value Inclination value R-value 1 90 21.5 24.7 90 26.0 29.2 90 27.0 30.1 2 90 22.0 25.2 90 26.0 29.2 90 27.0 30.1 3 90 22.5 25.7 90 31.0 34.0 90 28.0 31.1 4 90 23.0 26.2 90 34.0 36.9 90 29.0 32.1 5 90 23.5 26.7 90 34.0 36.9 90 29.0 32.1 6 90 25.5 28.7 90 36.0 38.9 90 29.0 32.1 7 90 25.5 28.7 90 36.5 39.3 90 29.0 32.1 8 90 26.0 29.2 90 36.5 39.3 90 30.0 33.1 9 90 26.5 29.6 90 37.5 40.3 90 32.0 35.0 10 90 27.5 30.6 90 37.5 40.3 90 32.0 35.0 11 90 28.0 31.1 90 38.0 40.8 90 33.0 36.0 12 90 29.5 32.6 90 38.5 41.3 90 33.0 36.0 13 90 30.5 33.5 90 38.5 41.3 90 33.5 36.5 14 90 31.0 34.0 90 39.0 41.7 90 34.0 36.9 15 90 31.5 34.5 90 39.0 41.7 90 34.0 36.9 16 90 32.0 35.0 90 39.0 41.7 90 34.0 36.9 17 90 32.0 35.0 90 40.5 43.2 90 35.5 38.4 18 90 32.5 35.5 90 41.0 43.7 90 36.0 38.9 19 90 32.5 35.5 90 41.5 44.1 90 36.0 38.9 20 90 32.5 35.5 90 42.0 44.6 90 37.0 39.8 21 90 33.5 36.5 90 43.5 46.0 90 37.5 40.3 22 90 34.0 36.9 90 44.0 46.5 90 37.5 40.3 23 90 34.0 36.9 90 44.0 46.5 90 38.0 40.8 24 90 35.0 37.9 90 45.0 47.5 90 39.0 41.7 25 90 39.0 41.7 90 46.5 48.9 90 39.0 41.7 26 90 39.5 42.2 90 46.5 48.9 90 39.5 42.2 27 90 41.0 43.7 90 47.0 49.4 90 39.5 42.2 28 90 43.0 45.6 90 47.5 49.8 90 39.5 42.2 29 90 43.0 45.6 90 48.0 50.3 90 40.0 42.7 30 90 44.0 46.5 90 49.5 51.7 90 40.0 42.7 31 90 46.0 48.4 90 50.0 52.2 90 41.5 44.1 32 90 47.5 49.8 90 50.5 52.7 90 42.5 45.1 33 90 47.5 49.8 90 50.5 52.7 90 43.0 45.6 34 90 53.5 55.5 90 51.5 53.6 90 43.5 46.0 35 45 23.5 25.9 90 51.5 53.6 90 44.5 47.0 36 45 26.0 28.3 90 52.0 54.1 90 45.0 47.5 37 45 33.5 35.7 90 52.0 54.1 90 52.0 54.1 56

38 45 36.0 38.1 90 53.0 55.0 90 54.0 55.9 39 45 37.0 39.1 45 32.0 34.2 90 54.5 56.4 40 45 38.0 40.1 45 35.0 37.2 90 56.0 57.8 41 45 39.0 41.1 45 37.5 39.6 90 61.0 62.4 42 45 40.0 42.0 45 38.0 40.1 45 30.5 32.8 43 45 42.0 44.0 45 41.0 43.0 45 31.0 33.3 44 45 44.0 45.9 45 42.0 44.0 45 37.5 39.6 45 45 44.0 45.9 45 42.0 44.0 45 40.0 42.0 46 45 48.5 50.2 45 43.5 45.4 45 42.0 44.0 47 45 48.5 50.2 45 46.0 47.8 45 43.0 44.9 48 45 54.0 55.5 45 47.0 48.8 45 48.5 50.2 49 45 54.5 56.0 45 53.5 55.0 45 48.5 50.2 50 45 55.5 57.0 45 56.0 57.4 45 50.0 51.7

CB 09 CB 10 CB 11 Field Field Field Hammer R- Calibrated Hammer R- Calibrated Hammer R- Calibrated n Inclination value R-value Inclination value R-value Inclination value R-value 1 90 19.0 22.3 90 29.0 32.1 90 26.0 29.2 2 90 20.0 23.2 90 30.0 33.1 90 30.0 33.1 3 90 22.0 25.2 90 34.0 36.9 90 31.0 34.0 4 90 22.0 25.2 90 36.0 38.9 90 33.0 36.0 5 90 22.0 25.2 90 36.0 38.9 90 34.0 36.9 6 90 22.5 25.7 90 37.0 39.8 90 34.0 36.9 7 90 22.5 25.7 90 37.0 39.8 90 34.5 37.4 8 90 23.0 26.2 90 37.0 39.8 90 35.0 37.9 9 90 25.0 28.2 90 38.0 40.8 90 36.0 38.9 10 90 25.0 28.2 90 38.5 41.3 90 37.0 39.8 11 90 26.0 29.2 90 40.0 42.7 90 37.0 39.8 12 90 27.0 30.1 90 41.0 43.7 90 37.5 40.3 13 90 27.5 30.6 90 42.0 44.6 90 38.0 40.8 14 90 28.0 31.1 90 42.0 44.6 90 38.0 40.8 15 90 28.0 31.1 90 44.0 46.5 90 38.5 41.3 16 90 29.0 32.1 90 44.0 46.5 90 38.5 41.3 17 90 29.0 32.1 90 44.0 46.5 90 39.0 41.7 18 90 30.0 33.1 90 44.0 46.5 90 39.0 41.7 19 90 30.0 33.1 90 44.5 47.0 90 40.0 42.7 20 90 33.0 36.0 90 45.0 47.5 90 40.0 42.7 21 90 34.0 36.9 90 45.0 47.5 90 41.0 43.7

22 90 34.0 36.9 90 45.0 47.5 90 41.5 44.1 23 90 35.0 37.9 90 45.0 47.5 90 42.0 44.6 24 90 36.0 38.9 90 45.5 47.9 90 42.0 44.6 25 90 36.5 39.3 90 47.0 49.4 90 42.0 44.6 26 90 37.0 39.8 90 48.0 50.3 90 42.5 45.1 27 90 37.5 40.3 90 48.0 50.3 90 43.0 45.6 28 90 38.0 40.8 90 48.0 50.3 90 43.5 46.0 29 90 42.0 44.6 90 49.0 51.3 90 43.5 46.0 30 90 43.0 45.6 90 50.0 52.2 90 43.5 46.0 31 90 43.5 46.0 90 50.0 52.2 90 44.0 46.5 32 90 44.0 46.5 90 50.5 52.7 90 44.0 46.5 33 90 45.0 47.5 90 51.0 53.1 90 45.0 47.5 34 90 46.0 48.4 90 52.0 54.1 90 45.5 47.9 35 90 47.0 49.4 90 52.0 54.1 90 45.5 47.9 36 90 48.0 50.3 90 54.5 56.4 90 46.0 48.4 37 90 49.0 51.3 90 55.0 56.9 90 47.5 49.8 38 90 52.0 54.1 45 27.0 29.3 90 48.0 50.3 39 45 23.0 25.4 45 30.0 32.3 90 48.5 50.8 40 45 31.0 33.3 45 36.0 38.1 90 49.0 51.3 41 45 36.0 38.1 45 37.0 39.1 90 49.5 51.7 42 45 36.0 38.1 45 37.0 39.1 90 52.0 54.1 43 45 37.0 39.1 45 37.0 39.1 90 52.0 54.1 44 45 40.0 42.0 45 44.0 45.9 45 30.0 32.3 45 45 40.5 42.5 45 45.5 47.4 45 34.5 36.7 46 45 43.5 45.4 45 46.0 47.8 45 37.0 39.1 47 45 43.5 45.4 45 47.5 49.3 45 37.5 39.6 48 45 44.5 46.4 45 50.0 51.7 45 38.0 40.1 49 45 50.0 51.7 45 52.0 53.6 45 38.5 40.6 50 45 57.0 58.4 45 53.0 54.6 45 54.0 55.5

CB 12 CB 13 CB 14 Field Field Field Hammer R- Calibrated Hammer R- Calibrated Hammer R- Calibrated n Inclination value R-value Inclination value R-value Inclination value R-value 1 90 24.5 27.7 90 30.5 33.5 90 18.0 21.3 2 90 27.0 30.1 90 31.5 34.5 90 29.5 32.6 3 90 29.0 32.1 90 33.0 36.0 90 30.5 33.5 4 90 30.0 33.1 90 34.0 36.9 90 32.0 35.0 5 90 33.5 36.5 90 37.0 39.8 90 32.0 35.0

6 90 35.5 38.4 90 38.0 40.8 90 34.5 37.4 7 90 35.5 38.4 90 38.0 40.8 90 35.0 37.9 8 90 36.0 38.9 90 39.0 41.7 90 36.0 38.9 9 90 36.0 38.9 90 41.0 43.7 90 38.0 40.8 10 90 37.0 39.8 90 41.5 44.1 90 39.0 41.7 11 90 38.5 41.3 90 41.5 44.1 90 40.5 43.2 12 90 38.5 41.3 90 42.0 44.6 90 40.5 43.2 13 90 39.0 41.7 90 42.0 44.6 90 41.0 43.7 14 90 39.5 42.2 90 42.0 44.6 90 41.0 43.7 15 90 40.5 43.2 90 42.5 45.1 90 41.5 44.1 16 90 41.0 43.7 90 43.0 45.6 90 42.0 44.6 17 90 41.0 43.7 90 43.5 46.0 90 43.0 45.6 18 90 41.5 44.1 90 44.0 46.5 90 44.0 46.5 19 90 41.5 44.1 90 44.5 47.0 90 44.0 46.5 20 90 42.0 44.6 90 46.0 48.4 90 44.0 46.5 21 90 42.0 44.6 90 46.0 48.4 90 44.0 46.5 22 90 42.0 44.6 90 46.5 48.9 90 44.0 46.5 23 90 42.0 44.6 90 46.5 48.9 90 44.5 47.0 24 90 43.5 46.0 90 47.0 49.4 90 44.5 47.0 25 90 44.0 46.5 90 47.0 49.4 90 45.0 47.5 26 90 44.0 46.5 90 47.0 49.4 90 45.0 47.5 27 90 45.0 47.5 90 47.0 49.4 90 46.5 48.9 28 90 45.5 47.9 90 47.5 49.8 90 47.0 49.4 29 90 46.5 48.9 90 47.5 49.8 90 47.0 49.4 30 90 47.0 49.4 90 47.5 49.8 90 50.0 52.2 31 90 48.0 50.3 90 48.0 50.3 90 50.0 52.2 32 90 48.0 50.3 90 48.0 50.3 90 51.0 53.1 33 90 49.0 51.3 90 48.5 50.8 90 51.0 53.1 34 90 49.0 51.3 90 49.0 51.3 90 52.0 54.1 35 90 49.5 51.7 90 49.0 51.3 90 54.0 55.9 36 90 50.5 52.7 90 50.0 52.2 90 54.0 55.9 37 90 51.0 53.1 90 50.0 52.2 90 54.0 55.9 38 90 51.5 53.6 90 50.5 52.7 90 55.0 56.9 39 90 54.0 55.9 90 52.0 54.1 45 32.0 34.2 40 90 54.0 55.9 90 53.0 55.0 45 36.5 38.6 41 90 55.0 56.9 90 53.0 55.0 45 37.5 39.6 42 45 34.0 36.2 90 59.0 60.6 45 40.0 42.0 43 45 34.0 36.2 90 59.5 61.1 45 43.5 45.4 44 45 42.5 44.5 45 37.0 39.1 45 44.0 45.9 45 45 42.5 44.5 45 39.0 41.1 45 45.5 47.4 46 45 45.0 46.9 45 47.0 48.8 45 46.5 48.3 59

47 45 46.0 47.8 45 47.0 48.8 45 48.0 49.8 48 45 51.0 52.6 45 48.0 49.8 45 52.0 53.6 49 45 51.5 53.1 45 53.0 54.6 45 52.0 53.6 50 45 56.5 57.9 45 53.0 54.6 0 39.0 39.0

CB 15 CB 16 CB 17 Field Field Field Hammer R- Calibrated Hammer R- Calibrated Hammer R- Calibrated n Inclination value R-value Inclination value R-value Inclination value R-value 1 90 17.0 20.3 90 22.0 25.2 90 33.0 36.0 2 90 19.0 22.3 90 23.0 26.2 90 33.0 36.0 3 90 19.0 22.3 90 23.0 26.2 90 34.0 36.9 4 90 20.0 23.2 90 24.0 27.2 90 35.0 37.9 5 90 21.0 24.2 90 28.0 31.1 90 36.0 38.9 6 90 22.0 25.2 90 30.0 33.1 90 36.0 38.9 7 90 22.0 25.2 90 31.0 34.0 90 36.5 39.3 8 90 23.0 26.2 90 31.0 34.0 90 36.5 39.3 9 90 23.0 26.2 90 32.0 35.0 90 37.0 39.8 10 90 25.0 28.2 90 32.0 35.0 90 37.0 39.8 11 90 25.0 28.2 90 32.5 35.5 90 38.0 40.8 12 90 26.0 29.2 90 33.0 36.0 90 39.0 41.7 13 90 26.0 29.2 90 33.0 36.0 90 39.0 41.7 14 90 26.0 29.2 90 33.5 36.5 90 40.0 42.7 15 90 27.5 30.6 90 34.0 36.9 90 40.0 42.7 16 90 28.0 31.1 90 34.0 36.9 90 40.5 43.2 17 90 28.0 31.1 90 34.5 37.4 90 40.5 43.2 18 90 28.0 31.1 90 35.0 37.9 90 41.0 43.7 19 90 28.0 31.1 90 35.5 38.4 90 41.0 43.7 20 90 29.5 32.6 90 36.0 38.9 90 41.0 43.7 21 90 30.0 33.1 90 36.5 39.3 90 41.0 43.7 22 90 31.0 34.0 90 36.5 39.3 90 41.5 44.1 23 90 31.5 34.5 90 36.5 39.3 90 41.5 44.1 24 90 32.0 35.0 90 37.0 39.8 90 41.5 44.1 25 90 34.0 36.9 90 37.5 40.3 90 41.5 44.1 26 90 34.0 36.9 90 39.0 41.7 90 42.5 45.1 27 90 35.5 38.4 90 39.0 41.7 90 43.0 45.6 28 90 36.5 39.3 90 39.5 42.2 90 43.0 45.6 60

29 90 37.0 39.8 90 40.0 42.7 90 44.0 46.5 30 90 37.0 39.8 90 40.5 43.2 90 44.0 46.5 31 90 38.0 40.8 90 42.5 45.1 90 44.0 46.5 32 90 39.0 41.7 90 43.0 45.6 90 44.5 47.0 33 90 39.0 41.7 90 43.5 46.0 90 44.5 47.0 34 90 40.0 42.7 90 45.0 47.5 90 45.0 47.5 35 90 40.0 42.7 90 45.5 47.9 90 46.5 48.9 36 90 40.5 43.2 90 47.5 49.8 90 49.0 51.3 37 90 41.0 43.7 90 48.0 50.3 90 49.0 51.3 38 90 42.0 44.6 90 50.0 52.2 90 49.5 51.7 39 90 43.0 45.6 90 53.5 55.5 45 27.0 29.3 40 90 43.5 46.0 45 28.5 30.8 45 35.0 37.2 41 90 44.0 46.5 45 31.0 33.3 45 36.5 38.6 42 90 46.0 48.4 45 31.5 33.7 45 42.0 44.0 43 90 48.0 50.3 45 35.0 37.2 45 42.0 44.0 44 45 21.0 23.4 45 39.0 41.1 45 43.5 45.4 45 45 26.5 28.8 45 39.5 41.5 45 44.0 45.9 46 45 31.0 33.3 45 41.0 43.0 45 45.0 46.9 47 45 33.0 35.2 45 42.0 44.0 45 46.0 47.8 48 45 35.0 37.2 45 47.0 48.8 45 49.0 50.7 49 45 36.5 38.6 45 48.0 49.8 45 50.5 52.2 50 45 55.0 56.5 45 49.0 50.7 45 55.0 56.5

CB 18 CB 19 Hammer Hammer Inclinatio Field R- Calibrate Inclinatio Field R- Calibrate n n value d R-value n value d R-value 1 90 29.0 32.1 90 35.0 37.9 2 90 31.0 34.0 90 36.5 39.3 3 90 35.0 37.9 90 37.0 39.8 4 90 39.0 41.7 90 38.0 40.8 5 90 39.0 41.7 90 38.5 41.3 6 90 39.5 42.2 90 39.0 41.7 7 90 40.0 42.7 90 39.5 42.2 8 90 40.0 42.7 90 41.0 43.7 9 90 42.5 45.1 90 41.0 43.7 10 90 43.0 45.6 90 41.0 43.7 11 90 43.5 46.0 90 42.5 45.1 12 90 44.0 46.5 90 42.5 45.1

13 90 44.5 47.0 90 43.0 45.6 14 90 44.5 47.0 90 43.0 45.6 15 90 44.5 47.0 90 43.0 45.6 16 90 45.0 47.5 90 43.5 46.0 17 90 45.5 47.9 90 44.0 46.5 18 90 45.5 47.9 90 44.0 46.5 19 90 45.5 47.9 90 44.0 46.5 20 90 46.0 48.4 90 44.0 46.5 21 90 46.5 48.9 90 44.5 47.0 22 90 46.5 48.9 90 45.0 47.5 23 90 47.5 49.8 90 46.0 48.4 24 90 47.5 49.8 90 46.0 48.4 25 90 49.0 51.3 90 47.0 49.4 26 90 49.0 51.3 90 47.0 49.4 27 90 49.0 51.3 90 48.0 50.3 28 90 49.5 51.7 90 48.5 50.8 29 90 51.0 53.1 90 48.5 50.8 30 90 51.0 53.1 90 49.5 51.7 31 90 53.0 55.0 90 50.5 52.7 32 90 53.0 55.0 90 51.0 53.1 33 90 53.0 55.0 90 52.5 54.5 34 90 53.5 55.5 90 53.0 55.0 35 90 53.5 55.5 90 53.5 55.5 36 90 57.0 58.7 90 55.0 56.9 37 45 29.0 31.3 90 55.0 56.9 38 45 34.0 36.2 90 55.5 57.3 39 45 38.0 40.1 90 58.5 60.1 40 45 39.5 41.5 90 68.5 69.3 41 45 40.0 42.0 45 37.0 39.1 42 45 40.0 42.0 45 37.5 39.6 43 45 41.0 43.0 45 38.0 40.1 44 45 41.0 43.0 45 41.0 43.0 45 45 41.0 43.0 45 42.5 44.5 46 45 48.0 49.8 45 44.0 45.9 47 45 49.0 50.7 45 45.5 47.4 48 45 51.0 52.6 45 51.0 52.6 49 45 52.0 53.6 45 53.5 55.0 50 45 52.0 53.6 45 54.0 55.5

10.2 Raw Weathering Rind Thickness Data

Table 10.2: Raw weathering rind data

Thickness (mm) BBE BBE BBE BBE n 01 02 03 04 CB 01 CB 02 CB 03 CB 04 CB 05 CB 06 CB 07 1 6.59 7.23 7.37 6.95 15.99 8.58 10.50 9.49 8.57 8.39 8.16 2 6.42 7.09 6.89 6.93 15.54 8.38 10.20 7.28 8.39 7.97 7.90 3 6.33 6.40 6.86 6.35 10.02 7.91 10.19 7.06 8.31 7.82 7.30 4 5.90 6.00 6.31 6.12 9.43 7.66 9.82 6.96 7.53 7.81 7.24 5 5.83 5.41 6.21 5.74 8.84 7.46 9.18 6.82 7.48 7.59 7.06 6 5.79 5.33 5.88 5.59 8.82 7.13 8.88 6.71 7.19 7.44 6.98 7 5.60 5.31 5.76 5.58 8.60 7.00 8.80 6.46 5.99 7.08 6.61 8 5.58 5.22 5.69 5.45 8.60 6.85 8.27 6.31 5.81 7.00 6.49 9 5.26 5.11 5.65 5.41 8.37 6.78 7.89 6.29 5.74 6.90 6.46 10 5.21 5.09 5.47 5.15 8.31 6.24 7.58 5.91 5.72 6.50 6.41 11 5.07 5.01 5.38 5.07 8.08 6.16 7.27 5.68 5.52 6.48 6.17 12 4.72 5.01 5.26 4.92 8.03 6.15 7.15 5.55 5.45 6.39 6.12 13 4.64 4.98 5.12 4.91 7.86 6.07 7.12 5.49 5.37 6.38 5.92 14 4.53 4.88 5.11 4.76 7.66 5.84 6.81 5.42 5.31 6.08 5.76 15 4.48 4.82 4.54 4.75 7.51 5.75 6.80 5.42 5.27 5.95 5.54 16 4.18 4.79 4.34 4.68 7.13 5.63 6.79 5.24 5.24 5.76 5.52 17 4.15 4.78 4.29 4.57 7.09 5.55 6.74 5.17 5.23 5.65 5.43 18 4.04 4.73 4.24 4.57 6.79 5.52 6.69 5.08 4.98 5.59 5.43 19 3.83 4.60 4.21 4.48 6.53 5.48 6.66 5.07 4.93 5.43 5.36 20 3.53 4.46 4.18 4.32 6.50 5.39 6.43 5.00 4.73 5.35 5.30 21 3.48 4.38 4.17 4.29 5.78 5.37 6.43 4.94 4.62 5.32 5.28 22 3.47 4.18 4.06 4.23 5.72 5.30 6.30 4.93 4.51 5.27 5.24 23 3.44 4.04 3.89 4.19 5.56 5.15 6.02 4.91 4.40 5.11 5.16 24 3.36 3.93 3.88 4.17 5.51 4.82 5.84 4.73 4.31 5.07 5.09 25 3.32 3.89 3.83 4.15 5.41 4.72 5.71 4.71 4.28 5.04 4.91 26 3.31 3.86 3.53 3.94 5.27 4.68 5.50 4.44 4.10 4.90 4.80 27 3.16 3.73 3.32 3.78 4.43 4.26 5.23 4.42 3.90 4.88 4.79 28 3.08 3.31 3.29 3.68 4.35 4.14 4.84 4.35 3.77 4.65 4.60 29 3.06 3.17 2.34 3.25 4.19 4.02 4.82 4.02 3.36 4.38 4.39 30 3.02 2.92 2.22 2.36 4.06 3.62 4.21 3.73 3.10 4.38 3.81 31 3.02 2.90 3.92 3.53 32 3.00 2.47 33 2.93 34 2.72

35 2.53 36 2.53 37 2.46 38 2.42 39 2.36 40 2.23 41 2.23 42 2.11 43 1.98 44 1.88 45 1.39 46 1.36 47 1.17 48 0.97 49 0.80

10.3 K-means Clustering (4 Groups)

Figure 10.1: R-values from all field sites clustered into 4 groups using K-means cluster