Joints and fractures
- 554 Downloads
Joints and fractures are the most abundant signs of strain and deformation in rocks. They are ubiquitous and may part rocks in various regular or irregular sizes as small as a fraction of an inch. The term fracture is general and includes any break in rocks. There are four principal classes of fractures: joints, faults (including shears), cleavage, and small irregular breaks. Joints are the prime consideration herein, but other forms of fractures are considered to the extent that genetic, spatial, or transitional relationships exist. Fractures caused by weathering, such as exfoliation and spheroidal spalling, are not described.
Jointsare more or less regular groups of fractures paralleled by little or no movement or orientation of rock components. Fractures paralleled by movement are, of course, faults, and those paralleled by considerable or pervasive orientation of minerals or other rock components are cleavage of one sort or another. Small, irregular, and inconsistently oriented...
- Balk, R., 1937, Structural behavior of igneous rocks, Geol. Soc. America Mem. 5, 177p.Google Scholar
- Hodgson, R. A., 1961, Regional study of jointing in Comb Ridge—Navajo Mountain area, Arizona and Utah, Am. Assoc. Petroleum Geologists Bull. 5, 1–38.Google Scholar
- Jukes, J. B., 1862, The Student's Manual of Geology, 2nd ed. Edinburgh: Adams and Black, 764p.Google Scholar
- Leith, C. K., 1923, Structural Geology. New York: Holt & Co., 390p.Google Scholar
- Mollard, J. D., 1957, Aerial mosaics reveal fracture patterns on surface materials in southern Saskatchewan and Manitoba, Oil in Canada 9, (40), 26–36.Google Scholar
- Turner, F. J., 1948, Mineralogical and structural evolution of the metamorphic rocks, Geol. Soc. America Mem. 30, 342p.Google Scholar
- Turner, F. J., and Weiss, L. E., 1963, Structural Analysis of Metamorphic Tectonites. New York: McGraw-Hill, 545p.Google Scholar
- Woodworth, J. B., 1897, On the fracture system of joints, with remarks on certain great fractures, Boston Soc. Nat. Hist. Proc. 27, 163–181.Google Scholar