Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-tn8tq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-29T01:48:20.424Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Facies architecture of heterolithic tidal deposits: the Holocene Holland Tidal Basin

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2016

M.E. Donselaar  and
C.R. Geel
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The size, shape and spatial position of lithofacies types (or facies architecture) in a tidal estuarine basin are complex and therefore difficult to model. The tidal currents in the basin concentrate sand-sized sediment in a branching pattern of tidal channels and fringing tidal flats. Away from the sandy tidal flats the sediment gradually changes to mud-dominated heterolithic deposits and clay. In this paper the facies analysis of a tidal estuarine basin, the Holocene Holland Tidal Basin (HHTB) is presented based on core data and Cone Penetration Tests (CPT). Four lithofacies associations are recognized: (1) tidal channel sand, (2) sand-dominated heterolithic inter-tidal flat, (3) mud-dominated heterolithic inter-channel and (4) fresh-water peat. The high data density allowed for the construction of a detailed facies architecture model in which the size, shape and spatial position of the tidal estuarine facies elements were established. The results can be used to improve the reservoir modelling in highly heterogeneous estuarine reservoir settings.

Keywords

Facies architecture modellingtidal estuaryheterolithic deposits
Type
Research Article
Information
Netherlands Journal of Geosciences , Volume 86 , Issue 4 , December 2007 , pp. 389 - 402
Copyright
Copyright © Stichting Netherlands Journal of Geosciences 2007

References

Archer, A.W. & Johnson, T.W., 1997. Modelling of cyclic tidal rhythmites (Carboniferous of Indiana and Kansas, Precambrian of Utah, USA) as a basis for reconstruction of inter-tidal positioning and palaeotidal regimes. Sedimentology 44: 991–1010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Banerjee, L, 1977. Experimental study on the effect of deceleration on the vertical sequence of sedimentary structures in silty sediments. Journal of sedimentary Petrology 47: 771–783.Google Scholar
Beets, D.J., De Groot, Th.A.M. & Davies, H.A., 2003. Holocene tidal back-barrier development at decelerating sea-level rise: a 5 millennia record, exposed in the western Netherlands. Sedimentary Geology 158: 117–144.Google Scholar
Beets, D.J., Roep, Th.B & Westerhoff, W.E., 1996. The Holocene Bergen Inlet: closing history and related barrier progradation. Mededelingen Rijks Geologische Dienst N.S. 57: 97–131.Google Scholar
Beets, D.J. & Van der Spek, A.J.F., 2000. The Holocene evolution of the barrier and the back-barrier basins of Belgium and the Netherlands as a function of late Weichselian morphology, relative sea-level rise and sediment supply. Netherlands Journal of Geosciences 79: 3–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choi, K.S., Dalrymple, R.G., Chun, S.S. & Kim, S.P., 2004. Sedimentology of modern inclined heterolithic stratification (IHS) in the macrotidal Han River Delta, Korea. Journal of sedimentary Research 74: 677–689.Google Scholar
Cleveringa, J. & Oost, A.P., 1999. The fractal geometry of tidal-channel systems in the Dutch Wadden Sea. Geologie en Mijnbouw 78: 21–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collinson, J.D. & Thompson, D.B., 1982. Sedimentary Structures. George Allen & Unwin (London): 194 p.Google Scholar
De Mulder, E.F.J. & Bosch, J.H.A., 1982. Holocene stratigraphy, radiocarbon datings and paleogeography of central and northern North-Holland (the Netherlands). Mededelingen Rijks Geologische Dienst 36: 113–160.Google Scholar
Donselaar, M.E., Dolman, R.A.F., Dreyer, T., Petersen, S.A., Thomassen, R.A.J. & Toxopeus, G., 2006. Reservoir Architecture Modeling of the Cook Formation, Oseberg Field, Offshore Norway: Integrated Analysis of Core, Well Log and Seismic Data. AAPG 2006 Annual Meeting, Houston, Texas, April 9–12, 2006.Google Scholar
Donselaar, M.E. & Geel, C.R., 2003. Reservoir architecture model for heterolithic tidal deposits. 65rd EAGE Conference 8. Technical Exhibition – Stavanger, Norway, 2 – 5 June 2003.Google Scholar
Dreyer, T., 1992. Significance of tidal cyclicity for modelling of reservoir heterogeneities in the lower Jurassic Tilje Formation, mid-Norwegian shelf. Norsk Geol. Tidsskrift 72: 159–170.Google Scholar
Ente, P.J., 1971. Sedimentary geology of the Holocene in Lake IJssel region. Geologie en Mijnbouw 50: 373–382.Google Scholar
Geel, C.R. & Donselaar, M.E., 2007. Reservoir modelling of heterolithic tidal deposits: sensitivity analysis of an object-based stochastic model. Netherlands Journal of Geosciences 86/4: 403–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jelgersma, S., 1979. Sea-level changes in the North Sea basin. In: Oele, E., Schüttenhelm, R.T.E., Wiggers, A.J. (eds): The Quaternary History of the North Sea. Acta Univ. Upsala Symp. Annum Quingentesimum Celebrantis 2: 233–248.Google Scholar
Kapsimalis, V., Massé, I. & Tastet, J.P., 2004. Tidal impact on modern sedimentary facies in the Gironde Estuary, southwestern France. Journal of Coastal Research SI41: 1–11.Google Scholar
Lunne, T., Robertson, P.K., & Powell, J.J.M., 1997. Cone penetration testing in geotechnical practice. Blackie Academic & Professional, London: 312p.Google Scholar
Martinius, A.W., Ringrose, P.S., Brostrem, C., Elfenbein, C., Næss, A. & Ringås, J.E., 2005. Reservoir challenges of heterolithic tidal sandstone reservoirs in the Halten Terrace, mid-Norway. Petroleum Geoscience 11: 3–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nio, S.D. & Yang, C.S., 1991. Diagnostic attributes of clastic tidal deposits: a review. In: Smith, D.G., Reinson, G.E., Zaitlin, B.A., Rahmani, R.A. (eds): Clastic Tidal Sedimentology. Can. Soc. Petrol. Geol. Mem., 16: 3–27.Google Scholar