EarthRef.org Reference Database (ERR)
Development and Maintenance by the EarthRef.org Database Team

Detailed Reference Information
Axen et al. 1995
Axen, G.J., Bartley, J.M. and Selverstone, J. (1995). Structural expression of a rolling hinge in the footwall of the Brenner Line normal fault, eastern Alps. Tectonics 14. doi: 10.1029/95TC02406. issn: 0278-7407.

The kinematic and temporal sequence of structures observed to overprint mylonites along the Brenner Line low-angle normal fault may record passage of the footwall through two rolling hinges, at the top and bottom of a ramp in the shear zone. The structures comprise west down brittle and brittle-ductile structures and east down brittle structures. PT conditions of formation (250¿ to >400 ¿C and 2--23 km depth), obtained from analysis of oriented fluid inclusion planes, indicate that west down structures were formed at greater depths and temperatures, and therefore earlier, than the east down structures. These data suggest that the brittle structures formed under conditions that permit crystal-plastic deformation at long-term geologic strain rates and therefore probably reflect transient rapid strain rates and/or high fluid pressure. Structures inferred to have formed at a lower hinge are consistent with viscous flow models of rolling-hinge deformation and support the concept of a crustal asthenosphere. Such high temperatures at shallow crustal depth also suggest significant upward advection of heat by extensional unroofing of warm rocks, which may have reduced the flexural rigidity of the footwall and thus affected mechanical behavior at the upper rolling hinge. Exposed mylonitic foliation within a few hundred meters of the Brenner line and on top of the east-west trending anticlines in the footwall dips ~15¿ west. Our data favor a ramp dip of ~25¿ but permit a dip as great as 45¿. Fluid inclusion data suggest that structures related to the hinge at the base of the ramp formed at depths of 12--25 km. If the average dip of the Brenner shear zone to those depths was 20¿, intermediate between the favored ramp dip and the dip of exposed foliation, then the horizontal component of slip could be as high as 33--63 km. The two discrete sets of structures with opposite shear senses, formed in the temporal sequence indicated by PT data, are consistent with subvertical simple shear models of rolling-hinge strain. This kinematic pattern is not predicted by the flexural-failure model for rolling hinges. However, the predominance of normal slip at the upper hinge, which extends rather than shortens the mylonitic foliation, fails to match the subvertical simple shear model, which predicts shortening of the foliation there. One possible solution is that superposition of regional extension upon hinge-related stresses modified the rolling-hinge kinematics. Such a modified subvertical shear model can account for the observed small foliation-parallel extensional strains if the foliation was bent <5¿--10¿ passing through the upper hinge. If more bending than that occurred, the data suggest rolling-hinge kinematics in which deformation is achieved by uniform-sense simple shear across the shear zone as in the subvertical simple shear model but in which material lines parallel to the shear-zone foliation and the detachment fault undergo very small length changes, presumably indicating that footwall rocks retained significant resistance to shear and underwent minimal permanent strain. The mechanics that would generate such a rolling hinge are uncertain but may incorporate aspects of both subvertical simple shear and flexural failure. An important kinematic consequence of such a rolling hinge is that all of the net slip across a normal fault, not only its horizontal component, is converted into horizontal extension. This implies a significantly larger magnitude of crustal extension across dipping normal faults whose footwalls passed through a rolling hinge than for those that did not develop along with a hinge. ¿ American Geophysical Union 1995

BACKGROUND DATA FILES

Abstract

Keywords
Tectonophysics, Continental tectonics—extensional, Structural Geology, Fractures and faults, Structural Geology, Mechanics, Tectonophysics, Rheology—crust and lithosphere
Journal
Tectonics
Publisher
American Geophysical Union
2000 Florida Avenue N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20009-1277
USA
1-202-462-6900
1-202-328-0566
service@agu.org
Click to clear formClick to return to previous pageClick to submit