ML19345C479
| ML19345C479 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vallecitos File:GEH Hitachi icon.png |
| Issue date: | 12/31/1980 |
| From: | Meehan R, Traubenik M EARTH SCIENCES ASSOCIATES |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19345C478 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8012050151 | |
| Download: ML19345C479 (26) | |
Text
"-
j,.,
.v
+
4 ANALYSIS OF THE SUBGRADE RUPTURE MECHANISM AT THE GENERAL. ELECTRIC TEST REACTOR 3
R. Meehan M. Traubenik Earth Sciences Associates, Inc.
. December,1980 e
'8 012050 ib Earth Sciences Associates u.
-. ~.
Sum mary.
Further studies of' the behavior of the General Electric Test Reactor subgrade during thrust. faulting have been carried out in response to questions
~
raised by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff. Results of stability analyses of the faulting process show that a previously hypothesized cantilever condition does not develop, but that fault failure planes are deflected in the soil beneath the reactor in such a way that ground movements occur outside the perimeter. of the reactor foundation.
T b
o l
INTRODUCTION This report has been prepared in response to questions by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff regarding the-behavior of the General Electric Test Reactor (GETR) subgrade in the event of a thrust fault beneath the reactor and simultaneous occurrence of strong earthquake shaking. Structural analyses were previously performed for a hypothetical condition shown on Figure 1, plane A, in which a thrust fault is assumed to lift the reactor foundation to create a cantilever span. However, it was shown (references 1 and 2) that the structural cantilever condition is unrealistic from a geotechnical standpoint, because it neglects' certain restraining and stabilizing effects of the soil on the west (left) side of the reactor foundation, and also because the sand and gravel soil beneath the foundation could not sustain the high load concentrations (Figure 1, point F) which accompany the development of the hypothesized cantilever span. It also has been shown (reference 2), that the development of the cantilever case is unlikely, considering the behavior of the foundation soil under the combined action of thrust faulting and a heavy surcharge. Following formation of an incipient fault, Figure 1, plane A, the new load distribution would stimulate shifting of the fault either to plane B, causing tilting of the reactor or to planes C or D, thereby bypassing the reactor altogether.
Questions have been raised by the NRC staff regarding the sensitivity of analyses supportive of this " fault shifting" phenomenon to various parameters and methods of analysis. More detailed studies have, accordingly, been performed and the results are presented in this report.
1 Earth Sciences Associates
o SOIL CONDITIONS BENEATH GETR Knowledge of soil characteristics beneath GETR comes from the following sources:
1.
General knowledge of the characteristics of Livermore Formation soils, known from recent trenches, and geologic mapping in the general vicinity of GETR.
2.
The following reports:
a.
Shannon-and Wilson, Inc.,1973, reference 3.
This investigation included two 70-foot borings drilled next to 'the " reactor, vsrious laboratory tests including triaxial strength tests, and an evalua-tion of bearing capacity under cyclic loading.
b.
Dames and Moore,1960, reference 4. This report presents results of borings and tests for a different facility near the GETR site.
Earth Sciences Associates' geologists believe that geological foundation conditions are similar at this other site, and that test data should be generally applicable to the GETR foundation.
c.
Earth Sciences Associates,1980, reference 5.
This study was performed to determine the stability of a possible landslide uphill from GETR, and contains test data on soils similar to those beneath GETR.
2 Earth Sciences Associates
The base of the GETR foundation mat is located about 20 feet below grade, and rests on clayey sand and gravel with the following typical properties:
water content:
13% -
dry density:
120 pef standard penetration resistance N:
50-100 blows / feet.
Below a depth of about 50 feet below grade, gravelly clay is encountered.
4 Standard penetration test results in this clay stratum are also 50-100 blows / feet, i.e., comparable to the overlying sand and gravel, indicating comparable strength for the two strata. Water content of the clay is typically 15 percent, and dry density 119 pcf.
~
~
The Shannon and Wilson borings extend to a depth of 70 feet below ground surface, and other indirect geologic evidence must be sought for conditions in the Livermore Formation below that depth.
Of potential significance is a hard, cemented stratum known as the, middle conglomerate unit of the Livermore 1
Gravels, which crops out in hills to the west and south of the site. However, projection of this stratum beneath the GETR places it at a depth of 200 feet or more, which is below the level considered as subgrade in this report.
Shear strength parameters appropriate for soils beneath GETR have been discussed in reference 2.
It is judged that drained ' strength parameters of c' = 0,
&' = 36 are appropriate for sand and gravel soils in the subgrade above the water
~
table. For conditions of instantaneous.or very rapid loading, undrained strength parameters are appropriate for both coarse-and fine-grained soils that are fully J
3 Earth Sciences Associates
o saturated (i.e., below the water table). Based on' two tests performed by Shannon and Wilson on gravel samples obtained from the GETR subgrade, undrained shear strength (S ) of 3000 ' psf for the sand and gravel have been used in previous u
4 analyses. Per purposes of conservatism in the present analysis, a value of S u
4000 psf v. i used for the subgrade under undrained conditions. However, results of the current analysis do not appear to be highly sensitive to the value of S used in u
the analysis.
Measurements show groundwater level at GETR from 20 feet below the ground surface (reference 3, measurement after wet season) to 28 feet below ground level (November 1980 measurement).
For purposes of design evaluation, General Electric Company has assumed that the GETR site is geologically capable of thrust faulting, with thrust fault angles dipping from 10 to 45 degrees, dip being measured at or near ground surface.
In fact, there should be a distinct relation between fault dip and shear strength of the subsurface soils on the site. Under thrust fault conditions, minor and major principal stress planes are, respectively, parallel and normal to the ground surface, i.e., the major principal stress acts in the direction of thrust and is parallel to the ground surface. This stress is consiCered in this study as the source of, and as an indicator of, thrust faulting.
For drained loading conditions (above the water table), the optimum failure plane is the pl'ane of maximum obliquity and should be inclined at an angle a = 45 -
&'/2 from the. plane of minor principal stress, i.e., the ground surface.
With 0
0
$' = 36,a is equal to 27 _ for a sand and gravel subgrade. For undrained loading l
1 l
4 Earth Sciences Associates
^o conditions, below the water table or in finer-grained soils, a should be equal to 45. IIence, one should expect to see a thrust fault plane inclined at about 27 in the upper 20-30 feet of unsaturated, coarse-grained soils, and at 4" in the deeper, saturated fine-grained soils.
Flattening would occur near the ground surface, where the low confining pressure makes the value -of $' relatively unpredictable and generally higher than 36 (e.g., steepening of the Mohr envelope near the point of origin). Referring to trench log B-2 in reference 6, this is exactly the trend 0
which one sees: an erratic fault plane at the surface, with a dip from 26 to 29,
and steepening beneath the water table at about 35 feet to the bottom of the trench at 45 feet. Continued steepening of a fault plane to an angle of 45 could be expected in the deeper saturated fine-grained soils. The observed conditions in
- the field are, accordingly, in good agreement with the strength conditions assumed in the analysis.
I METHOD OF ANALYSIS The method of analysis is to determine the comparative stability of two-dimensional soil wedges of various configurations beneath the reactor. As shown on Figure 2a, the hypothetical thrust fault is visualized as a passive Rankine wedge 1.
being thrust to the left by a major principal stress P. The soil in the figure is a p
dry sand with c' = 0. The optimum failure surface is inclined at an angle a = 45 -
$/2. This condition could be altered by placement of a surcharge S, Figure 2b, which impairs movement along the optimum failure plane A.
Depending on the magnitude and distribution of S, planes B or C may then become optimum planes l
(e.g., planes requiring the minimum value of P ).
The vector diagram, Figure 2c, p
resolv n the forces acting on the soil wedge. Given any failure plane A, B, or C, the quantities S and W can be computed.
The direction of R is known, s
I 5
Earth Sciences Associates
0 and therefore the. magnitude of the horizontal force P can be determined. If P is p
p determined by trial and error for many failure planes, the most probable failure plane will correspond to the minimum value of P. The plane on which P acts may p
p also be varied for comparison. Hence, given certain assumptions with respect to the geometric constraints of the failure along with soil and surcharge character-istics, the most likely failure can be determined by trial and error computer solutions of the equations governing the vector diagram, Figure 2c. Derivation of the equations for low water table-drained (c' = 0,
$') and high water table-undrained (c, & = 0) conditions is presented in the appendix.
RESULTS OF ANALYSIS Figure 3 presents a' comparison of the thrust ' force P necessary to cause p
failure at various locations near and under the reactor for a low water table condition. The thrust P acts on a vertical plane of principal stress 70 feet deep.
p The 70-foot depth and the failbre plane inclination a = 45 - $/2 = 27 may be considered arbitrarily fixed for the present analysis.
The value of P can be p
computed for any location of the wedge using the equation given in the appendix.
Wedges A and B are given as examples. Wedge A lies just to the let't of the reactor foundation and is unaffected by the reactor surcharge. A thrust force of 2050 kip is required to move this wedge, all wedges to _the left of A, and all wedges in which point m lies to the right of the reactor. Hence, assuming that P is uniform from p
left to right (that is, there were no shear forces beneath the subgrade) point m might lie with equal probability anywhere to the left or right of the reactor. If any part of the wedge is beneath the reactor, then failure of the wedge will require lifting all or part of the reactor, requiring a larger P. From the plot of P as a p
p function of m, P is several hundred kip greater for any wedge beneath p
l
~
l 6
Earth Sciences Associates'
o the reactor. Given an equal potential for fault displacement anywhere on Figure 3, the fault will naturally avoid a more heavily surcharged area.
In reality, faults (or toes of landslides) do not occur throughout the landscape at random, but rather tend to occur repeatedly in particular areas. This is due both to material inhomogeneities - local zones of weakness, often caused by past
. faulting - and to stress concentrations. In fact, we should not expect to find P to p
be locally uniform. Typically, its location would be defined by deeper faulting in the bedrock. However, the geometry of the fault in a soil subgrade immediately beneath the reactor should be affected by the soil properties and magnitude and distribution of surcharge, i.e., the fault might choose a steeper or flatter plane as
'shown on Figure 2b. We may select some point, such as point D on Figure 2b, which we consider fixed by geologic conditions (say by bedrock), so that shifting of the failure plane is not allowed below this depth. Clearly, if point D were assumed to beonly a foot or two beneath the reactor, then the fault would have little room for shifting and the hypothetical cantilever case, Figure 1 A, could - develop.
However, the soil beneath the reactor has relatively uniform strength to depths of at least 70 feet (the boring depth) and probably to 200 feet or more, as was previously discussed. For the purpose of analyses, point D was fixed at a depth of 70 feet, to be conservative.
Figure 4 presents results of comparative solutions for P in which the p
location of P is fixed at the outset, and the failure plane inclination is allowed to p
vary. The results shown are for a low water table condition with c' = 0 and $'
= 36. Considering first Figure 4b, we note that a fault originating fcom point D should choose to rupture along plane C and v.ll surface at the left side of tr 7
Earth Sciences Associates e
=
-.-.w
n reactor. A much higher P is required for failure on planes B and A. It shows that p
this fault would move along plane C and lift the entire reactor. Figure 4a shows a condition where the fault is assumed to originate a little farther to the right of the reactor mat. ~In this case, the minimum P is for plane A, with a s5condary p
minimum at plane C and a tertiary minimum at plane B. Plane A is the most likely fault plane for this case, although it seems possible that secondary movements might occur on planes C or B.
In this manner, different locations of P may be p
tested, with the objective of trying to find a particular location which would cause faulting to occur under the reactor (or more specifically, to create a cantilever span of reactor mat within the area of structural concern). The results of several hundred such trial analyses are summarized on Figure 5.
In no case does the minimum P, e.g., 'the' preferred failure wedge, surface beneath the reactor.
p Preferred failure planes surface on either the right or left side of the reactor foundation.
i Figure 6 shows a comparable study assuming undrained strength parameters of c = 4000 psf and # = 0, which would be appropriate for very rapid loading of a saturated subgrade for a high water table condition. Wedges uninfluenced by the reactor surcharge have preferred failure planes of 45, as expected. However,as for the drained case, P values are higher when the plane tries to surface beneath p
the reactor mat. Greater detail, for this case, in the immediate vicinity of the reactor mat is shown on Figure 7.
As before, none of the minima of P,p corresponding to preferred failure planes, falls beneath the reactor, or more notably, within the zone creating a cantilever span of the reactor mat which is of pctential structural concern.
i 8
Earth Sciences Associates
O THREE DIMENSIONAL EFFECT Some curvature of the surface expression of the thrust fault could be necessary to cause the fault to deflect around the perimeter of the GETR foundation. However, even on level ground the' surface expression of thrust faults is usually highly erratic, due to inhomogeneities of material strength (see Figures 8 and 9). Hence, deflection of the fault by the 15-35 feet necessary to bypass the inhomogeneity of the GETR foundation would be normal behavior for such a fault.
O CONCLUSIONS, These analyses demonstrate that fault ground displacements, which would ordinarily offset the ground at the GETR site if the reactor were not present, are affected by the presence of the surcharge load acting on the 'GETR foundation.
Results show that given the GETR foundation loads and dimensions, and the soil conditions known to exist to depths of 70 feet or more beneath the structure, faults
~
beneath the GETR will be deflected in such a way that ground movement would occur outside of the perimeter of the reactor.
4 f
I e
9 9
Earth Sciences Associates
l i
i REFERENCES 1.
Engineering Decision Analysis Company, Inc., " Additional Investigations to Determine the Effects of Combined Vibratory Motions and Surface Rupture Offset Due to an Earthquake on the Postulated Verona Fault,"'EDAC-117-253.01, Revision 1, prepared for General Electric Company,8 May 1980.
~
2.
1 Earth Sciences Associates, " Review of GETR Soil Property Effects", for GETR, October 10,1980.
3.
Shannon and Wilson, Inc. " Investigation of Foundation Conditions, G.E. Test Reactor", June 19#3.
4.
Dames and Moore, " Report:
Foundation Investigation, Proposed Boiling Water Reactor, Vallecitos Atomic Laboratory" for General Electric Company, August 8,1960.
5.
Earth Sciences Associates, "GETR Landslide Stability Analysis" for General Electrie Compariy,' August 1980.
6.
Earth Sciences Associates, " Geologic Investigation Phase II, GETR Site, Vallecitos, California" for General Electric Company, February 1979.
5 6
9 I
10-Earth Sciences Associates
l e
e O
T e
B GETR en*
- e N.
/
\\
y s a,,,og
- \\.
N-x 3.
N:
sx
.N' ru ~e N
A '\\ s
}
9 N
s x
\\
,v x
N 'N
\\
\\-
N N
NN\\
Po/vr p
3 e
Facueg l Yh ttn ET EC 0F S069eADE 05sAvrom DOE io Faversus
'w w
h/f 4c>;'fr V/ o
'/
/
TEST TARGET (MT-3) l.0
,'! Eli 5233 t EE n;ll2.2
?! nt U" l,l_
l "2 E2A 1.8 1.25 IA i 1.6 I
6" J
\\W4
%y@%
si,
dr
+%49
/
/,
x
\\
IMAGE EVALUATION
\\
TEST TARGET (MT-3) i I.o W M M E !!! ILE u-i l.l l"3 O!!lle ll 1.25 1.4 1.6 Ill 6"
i
.cf,)+,
.+ A;s#b v$
If
.;R th((&sg*
O
A M.
/ W,20 s-- Faut r : No SvacsSe.Ge_
s
\\
4 5- $
~
~
Z..
DEY SAND 19A70e Pa, KiPAL STusss
~
Py O
- 8. THe usT-FAv e,
tekF&14
'5 - E '
em%
@ l'
~
6 e
\\
-s
' -po,4 r o 6
e B
C.
Vecre e D r A G E. A M Pe 6
u R
~#
h n
f Fic. vee 2 Memoc or Aro Atys i s
,-v,
..-yg.--
--,wy
- - < ~, -
y,
,g p,p
1 3o00--
f E (kip)
P 2500- -
I l
m r.o op T
g 1
MT2 gl I
ese suecsaese 4.I ts4 Ssa.w Aa.cg 2. 8 rs4:.
[
[ 'S o,t.
I u,
d.
4.
,'">"f'+
6 ** 1 L L '
+b
' ' 4
'2 a A *
. 1 e, 2 1 A *
~
~
_ e.
e, g,,,,. m JI
/r MINT D 400 300 200 400 0
foo
-200 til (4e.et3 800 "F O C MO 500 400 300 200 M (4e.<:0
,, m g CoupAcisou Op: Tuevsr F s.cc O
To Causs FA vmuc, A,-
YAG,ious Loc gn ops 64 = 36 Cs O.0 ess e-I~t G U2 6.
t
@ oo < -
d 4
P
'Jc,
o 2500 l
A l
l l
- 2. coo
, i i. ie i... F r e i's i
- e = '. * * * ' I ge 200 10 0 l
O
~ 100 M ( #c e.nl l
l l
C G.
l l
x.3co' I
v l
l 4oo l
1
,,s,
,,,,/,is/,ua G.co Son A.
raver cesc.,u,ws zoo Ferr a
Fecu escar HAao sees On mar
_p,.
/
, PoiM I f
'A Scoo ~'~
l Pe (e A
- 4.,to -
l e
2500-l l
c I
2cco-i i i i i i.., e i
. i i 1. r l
i iiit i i i t t aco
^
M (4e.e.Q l
l 100 c
l l
CG l l
l Av7oo' L,i,,,,/ / u, w,.3400
\\ s.
\\
'co soc 0.
FAUGT 021(., o M AT6S 00 FEET
'C N
p" Feou % *r /-IAMD $sDC OF NAT NN s'
j
,' \\q R.c D F,evec 4
j
~
m an j 1 100 *
'7.700 s
Na-4 R..
p s_
E, O.
e soo.
h(hi, A
p 24o0-W. goo '
e a
4 s,,
4
ci w
210C
- x a
E Qt w
s
(%
gI W
2700
- _x=tGO 2 t CQ r =
N O'
CG
- x. au. '-
'l s 7 f.sO' V/#/(#/HHHHHH///Mn ioo So Go 40 Zo o
-20 m (f*.srh 02AsMEo Cass p '= a s c-o.oes+
e f t (.p l.)2.6 0
W
.O 3
e
[
C N
W O
~?
4 D
a 0 2
] *6 tt 0
8 o
,~
e l'
3*
<o i
4 o
h h D-
,O
!t i
r l
0 8
%\\i 4
v\\
lC
_ _ be
- y
- o d
L8-x g
s N
b 4
o
- S
- f O
- m i
o i
e,
/
R
_4 p'
4 0
o i
b h
O
($-
e g
w
a'%
4, i'50 } "
1400" "
t 1300" "
^
g
2%.
itco- -
Nw Sor poo - -
g 4
y, s
4, 9
3 ga of
? lW' f
O00" ~
e 9co - -
800 - -
7oo - -
CG
%I V
I o
i I00 80 Go 40 20 0
-20 m ( Cse t)
UNoe.A,go CAsg w:.ryr ao r[ r I
Lu ub g$,. o C = 4. O esc
=
F some 7^
l
C f :a g c;-
h., A YQ%v z ste w.ve yi--
=... -
x it y w m.
4
...:: q% N QiC+k"Qg4g m*
.' :- WM.S
~
'f:'y%n g W 4'*
9=='~%+%q a ;.T&Yw
% :w
~' -
uTlf?Qrf.vy..+,125$ ~3,Q jaw
==,
wo 4
,. A.,Js>:we. 5hp.,"n.: 1 gm; m.W^&y er.~t,p['+g-% p;-w., d.,,(>@e+g%,g%W ;; "*""
- .)
- + w-. ~
g w -1 xng.,y.,,;-Wx
.. <g A c
'- &&YQp"}1 & Q,')
m.~,';,h 's
~
l m te w a.
NN;'
'[* [,4f }ny/W qg' j
l Wi.
vm m.
- T'[ f gC.,
- ~g Zh
.g 1 M.r.=sen
-.,.,iMb -
p nsk ~,
- O *'
I phpi :6r Ar
.E
~ f y,.
- = g,
?
Q.
'9'**
Q 3
~M D.. n: _ --- :
... -- _ r n
- =.. ~
sA
@lGW.o u rd,,.,. s.
',f4 --
T-b, - -M+*@m rssisestis. ny:.ys',w;,, y&,.;,.ikhna,
.,g, fA _ w;.,~y. 1. n~,r.,~e.x.. o.. n <; n.
.+-n y-(
.9 m-
~. ;..;=.-
r.4
- k. -
y,?_.,___, y===,c
_,)
m.
.,,,s-.
- n.*
-- ~,,x;,<
,s n.
m-, w;._._.
,'~;. t r:: m.
l,,M-}.4..,;.J@Y'S ', ~
r- *
.--___-m-
~'-- W at 1
g.-.~ _ _
- '..., ?g '* h$-
hh l
,A
.4
~
.n
- 2
- W ~~' c{=:-m,tm
. n. mn,, ^ R ka
..,g ;.
-t.
. _ f.q ' c y 4,Rl Q
.y.png;gg g
.n a.
_. a
,...A,,.s
^ ^ '
~%
,,;~.,"t-r ^ -
...,,,4
..-], _
e
._. : - Q*i~hy
~%'%;.. _.,Y _...a' h h [ - f.& W f '. g,,.
~
~
4
,,... ; ~ ;- r - s,s
., c:x?..
[_
p r
wa w -
<-rf T
_f.
-a a s, 3, r,.
y. ~ 4 z,,
a.g ' g T- ~
>..y--
,p.9.; f. f.
s
.- f-f L j A -
g'.,-
l
-,^.4 j
. ' ' V %jc'Q..
e
- m..s.,
D A '* 4. w d.*~* & '.A
', c <...- 4,3,,:.-; - G,. ::,,
-+ - :
s
. o.: % ", e -
fL, q,g,
g
, 4r egiry.- O - 78
'.{Qbr-;g f
3'
, - -L
.'...y.
r
% A ;? Q f.: g, y.
.f.
"'X.it Ci'*~% ? -*-
2: - _ _,
ASu ff -
..W' '
.. :~ g.... " ' ;*_-.!
l.'
~
Q-[
's y - a tz:zm Gf y _
-~
.e a.
,,eI d 8-gg~ipirW
< $,,, :) t." 7,. '. "y;.~ ;.' R.,Z '. # ^'
2
' ' - ~ ~
~
>. 'L [.p?r,;<f, f"^
.& $l&' "~j.:.,dW(n ?.*
~
- .. h
.; r.
- ,=, m-
. ~, ; ; w". :-.,,-.P Y Mf)f. -
~~Y.
g.-
gg~f
- A.,;a
- - s x2r,c...t ^ - M f.s p-
~
g ".[_Y
- l f.*x rh - - f
...h*-],
-4
- f o d. ~ seme r l.
.,,. j'T
'~
- 's W -
- - o'='-49~
' s,.,, ; 7.
[
~,,, ' -
J
~ 3, f 'A"%l,i rp,-v ', *4.l*f. f -
4 g.Q-
.. 4,; ?
L
. "r4
~: r.
- c.,v. g* ('***g',;rr j
Y
=c,e4,- e.4F g$s=.m '.: ;., G;g;ryf/.y3 7 f 4,9
.g.
~ Q.,,
j
}
~~ T4
- L. - 4
~:
,. -gp.. _, b. 3,,
. ~;<,;.
.. b#
- , a.m>
Surface effects of underlying thnnt f.uiltine in the Meekering eartlutuale #
October 14, IOM, Western Australia.
(Courtesy of West Australian Lwspapers Limited.]
Figure 8.
From Bolt, " Earthquakes, A Primer", W. H. Freeman Co., 1978.
- 3 ' ey, c, a E,.ii K g A
~
j
l s
..,m
- t#v M9.13 E?pW4.R--
h.g?.--V>[:ppx;$'f%
W"* " L
- idw
- .:s L%.em&w.x :.
- &Q
- p. y:.h;..
, w ty,,;~, %}@y %.,,
w. l T S)? n( [.:.h r< %w:N k L R W f*- ^ --;-
?
.~~
W_ Jh0
- qu z.,.,
.n
.. c.~r%.
- &m '
. w 4 4.m %.@s = -
l u-k wll$X**W;;;;gC'&h'%'".
- $$n Y d-" N 7 *' '
- $
- n %gA&Jty..
, &, %g w,.
@31st\\*
Q M4
..so.m., te %y e.
[.T.- -.a
[ h. h.a"*."*
~N 5
,kj. 3 p
.,2 6Q ejN'-Q!!g&. :C n,. S T-
- _ N.
- >.s v.c
. K.h n'):,g g, a w&sy ~ h k C
.m 3.?
l
'% Y Z
-f
=~?
& LC,'Y4eig g M &,
- M*ig
&.2 4%g
- w p&
yN 5 %e s,; n > j. m n ?f.ww$~.hW
. P W.
D
&pW c
!q
.Wf
- N&gf~m -
.u_taseh
,h.
Fic. t4. The humped up, compressional features and wedges of the Tabas earthquake wie fault south of Tabas. The Neogene foothius are on the rurht. Tabas plain in the left, and the paa. trees of the Tabas-e-Golshan town are vmble on the homon. Note the systematic S. shaped overthrusta in the Quaternary alluvial deposits along the edge of the Neogene foothills. Looking north.
Eh. >%-%. -,,,1maa. 9-f,'2v.s.
' ff-f _ ' }
/.'? z _Q g
.*."h;,.m y
- u ep
~ '
l
. = (.&'2h%i Nhk 3:;..,.-,nf ~
!4$ &kh$sw&h.9.glgg{Q:sh
.;".-;s :~ld C.. -;gga.e}??Qf; f-C:
A EW$$gYEN?
,w b ',2- ?.j, 0l
':&.,lQ~m%,,Cg7 s o p e
- >2.;n*y*w, 4,y W~7a"h ' -
(. f.3, h& %s4&&
?5 a
%.Q w*ze,y-n.
4.; :
m..
^
r-
'~"Ta J.rwy&. ~
?-
' -. Y f}
' w.J.J
~
- f.$Qf,,Q Ky & 'L f
^Q
. < d&*WC Q 'iW
_ -4:
~=
.~w"
~
' ~ __ - ::v v Q ' ugm.
~
'w*
' ~.
b
~
Y q. ' M y y& q t -
j T *t : [s,',% '
v.~ Q. (+'.5." W. h.'y~.
4 8 N *."
-b s
,A*s
%w.
.~m I
. n.
vW
+ ;.x
.. % %?a-
. r 7.,m >, g s. a,4, W--
g
- a. -
- e..:-.e e.h.YS[Ih.7 *$' f)P.;;e7.py@tM.-
...W J.Q..
.,. A. :... Wt.,
3>-
y-NM.I,i"/4.- 4
- ^
- d. b. 5s.y42.Jv:D., 3.i h a
'A.
T. 4 a f a.gepKG ', <
- s,".
8 g s
Fm.15. Thrusting m the alluvial deposts along the eroded foothdIn of the Neogene day deposita,4 km south of Tabas. Ia>kmg NE.
Figure 9.
SS A Bulletin, December 1979.
l
a
% ')
e h
=
W O
e e
O APPENDIX 4
3 f
f
~, _ _..,.
.,_..r__.
y, I s t u c. r 1 6Hii m il/ M n/24/ao u t. i Uw;euu e uuubauuuuue VA t t < 1M &&bG6 D6t= r M 6Q 04 foVGC D6m+
4 V A ea A 6 t.6 W6De r W s Dd+ (D3 v3o~?,,
{ 04 Q A %tL-l A e.,t f.
O Y
Eb+ >.
h
-2 0 '
C.G 40, 400' S c.i ' 2 / *. s' m =zid v
11 li {i 4 Qi di 4, lo l///////////////bl h fi 4 4 & 4 4 N' u ma y Me-n, s e. Av e 4s W
p p
,to,
^
p = 3co
- Eij Y = c ai r w ei m,-
g gmg pj
".I 'E 5 g c r.
,/
e i
Fo a.
Aw cA s s.:. - Low wN m 8 t.,6
( foa Mu Pw.ousw
<e w..t.u.@
S c2.3 ba ( d eg l
/
.Pp
( W s + W,. + 5 et
+
=
' 46Ms W g LO 4r r G AT OF S O' L W 6 D G G-2 W
(. 7 03 x 'D 1
z Thlg.
t.4 6 L G HT O F-Q.6 Arc To12.
=
6c g W 6tG *7-~
o f-SO 9 C,WAQ G 6 OM EGW AAND S t D re O r-.
f2.-6A cTe#_
t s cw.cEa.cs
[
Scz e w Gicivr ce coa L,ee y-. m o sice-os. Q.<,#crec
/T is M &< 6cs AR.y 'To 6V A1.,o tvr6 i t-Mr VAtO6% OF W a.
Set 4 S c 2.
Foe.
Aav g.a 5c e s e 4.c y &7 tty 3
d>i V 6M 6'/
% "C) 3
'e/ 4 I'2.6Ac ron.
ygic cer-teoQ ~
4C O ' '.< x.* D <. '+ + 0 '
- 3 I ED W a.
(v..P ')
-566 N 6 c:-
pac 6
(.x - B - 47oN e o.
c + c.i A m O N 470' foe 4 +0'4 x*C A9b x <
W c.
- 30 4If.iP)
F o g.
4 co ' > x 4 B og
. x > 470 '
W E.
O (iciP)
~
an6 Gsn sl%
! i /< a /eo H L Y.
D esw + o M Oc-N a_
w e :6.o 1 4 c o '
W 60c,(o D (risTH = 7O '
c
<*t y
304 r lf ED '
40
<c o '
t
/
/
l
~
I l _ _ __
/l AN m
F, i F~ \\
N E Fy - o N
l
=u y
ini r
- f~ t - S o +
=l j
F, = so 4 - rs i
4 5tA.~~o.6
- y > c )Fe
( 3 0 +. 4+oT -
p, < 4, o = 0 0 t
+o s s n-u n u c %g. re, C x +n)Fs (a o 4- - f=uh 47 o r3376 o.
(%
- O T F s 1 + 24r8 o - 7 7 o g, i s 37c,o t
O* D -41o) j-
- q t :. o F,
r 9 1 7-o
=
(X "D 70) ib l.
l i
i
188 6 C,6Te 3/zi
~
/ / /2.+ / e o M L.T-~
~
( Il c." '4N t E ssT 56, G u c.c. e e.c 6 m e s7-i w
Foe.
%% 4400' (2 l x $
b(f-sP)
Son
=
I
~
T oe.
4c o - x. >o g
5,=
(.4c o - x3 ( si w (3 (4. e )
0 i
j%
Poe 400~K <O k
S c, g 5 0.0 (f ie )
EEi
""Of S V G-C MG-Gb
'A ErtG W
( L4=w AerN O %tD &h i
6c3 i
Poe.
x<.4,o'
{ x - b - 4 7 0') ( 8 x 2d fu)
Sc. s
=
/
Ok
]O 1
Se v
(. 2,1 x YI D (2i4) f=o n.
x+t <4,o/
~
ku ' O. o Qssp) 4 I
~
4c
~l!l -+l S o M1 GT~~
O M i6e
($ PoO 9O UQ A rfe 4 6A% Or-T2.t.Acie Q. M - r
A-data,AiubQ (,o AQm c, W iTu CO N@ M-'- $w we CG D
X
!/
j J oe.r-7/
p.,
g7 w
an.-
- s. - z, w.
s_. - <. z,
4 vbbsLLLbb
//// ///////////)l 4. L 4 L L L h 4> hh y
A 4 - m
.za Fii 1 %
.t.
9 Pe
,o' p-o
~
jii.
- c. e +.O r s+
NA S*
iij 6 =, t5 5 - o. ec r 4 - o.07% er.,c a
/
o Eli!
wo A, =. L w sw op *A 6' =
'70- /s i o x
=_l g
h ui 4s G HT O f-So e s,
..W &D G 6 05i N G 60c w gr w &ic r+r-gb (,o) w o W.s
=
z.
t 4
Z F s. = O
-Pe+ s c_oc. 2 y 3,e x =
o m
P
=Sw%x W s.w =<
(, q 4
p r F., - c
$ c, i ~ b c,,.
-W4s Q 6w $gN cl
-Ng N c,eg, t-oc M Cet Wg * $
- 5 e N el
- 3 c, s 5 c,.2,
- Wl (t, o.
Ws 4 Tw 5tuu *bcn M
$ c a. ? M
-=-
2 Ce4. M soss m n o c C21
, e, c (J. )
9 p.
3 ~ c <- %
\\N s - S w g,9 x - E:.1
- Sf,fQ
%N '
e 1 weu Le t
s C oe.vx a.. n a=,.
wa i e
%ge N O. g 6c, t S c.t As P A6vi o o s s 7 B 47' N tb l