Abstract Faults have complicated shapes. Non-planarity of faults can be caused by variations in failure modes, which in turn are dictated by mechanical stratigraphy interacting with the ambient stress field, as well as by linkage of fault segments. Different portions of a fault or fault zone may experience volume gain, volume conservation and volume loss simultaneously depending on the position along a fault's surface, the stresses resolved on the fault and the associated deformation mechanisms. This variation in deformation style and associated volume change has a profound effect on the ability of a fault to transmit (or impede) fluid both along and across the fault. In this paper we explore interrelated concepts of failure mode and resolved stress analysis, and provide examples of fault geometry in normal faulting and reverse faulting stress regimes that illustrate the effects of fault geometry on failure behaviour and related importance to fluid transmission. In particular, we emphasize the utility of using relative dilation tendency v. slip tendency on fault patches as a predictor of deformation behaviour, and suggest this parameter space as a new tool for evaluating conduit v. seal behaviour of faults.

Abstract A valid structural geologic interpretation should simultaneously honor available surface and subsurface data (e.g., well and seismic) to constrain structural geometry; ideally be restorable to an original unstrained condition – taking into account the possibility of three-dimensional (3-D) movement, volume loss, or volume gain; and incorporate structural styles known or expected for the mechanical stratigraphy and deformation conditions in the region. Incorporating what is known about the mechanical stratigraphy can provide crucial constraints on viable structural styles, for example, where faults are likely to cut across stratigraphy vs. where fault displacement is likely to be accommodated by alternative mechanisms (e.g., ductile flow or folding). Conversely, the structural style can often help to understand the mechanical stratigraphy, including the recognition of dominant competent or incompetent mechanical stratigraphic units. Using this approach provides the interpreter another set of constraints toward improving interpretations, testing hypotheses, and developing valid structural interpretations. Outcrop characterization provides insights into the influence of mechanical stratigraphy and structural position on seismic- and subseismic-scale deformation in the layers. Examples of extensional deformation in Cretaceous carbonate strata in central and west Texas illustrate the utility of considering how mechanical stratigraphy influences the development of different deformation styles, even where deformation conditions are otherwise similar.