The role of fluid- and sediment-gravity flow processes during deposition of deltaic conglomerates (Cardium Formation, Upper Cretaceous), west-central Alberta
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Research Article| December 01, 2003 The role of fluid- and sediment-gravity flow processes during deposition of deltaic conglomerates (Cardium Formation, Upper Cretaceous), west-central Alberta R.W.C. Arnott R.W.C. Arnott Dept. of Earth Sciences, and Ottawa-Carleton Geosciences Centre, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5 Search for other works by this author on: GSW Google Scholar Bulletin of Canadian Petroleum Geology (2003) 51 (4): 426–436. https://doi.org/10.2113/51.4.426 Article history received: 15 Apr 2002 accepted: 03 Jun 2003 first online: 02 Mar 2017 Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Search Site Citation R.W.C. Arnott; The role of fluid- and sediment-gravity flow processes during deposition of deltaic conglomerates (Cardium Formation, Upper Cretaceous), west-central Alberta. Bulletin of Canadian Petroleum Geology 2003;; 51 (4): 426–436. doi: https://doi.org/10.2113/51.4.426 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Refmanager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentBy SocietyBulletin of Canadian Petroleum Geology Search Advanced Search Abstract Most previous studies on conglomerates of the Carrot Creek Member (Cardium Formation) in the Cyn-Pem/Carrot Creek area of west-central Alberta have focused on understanding the stratigraphic context of these informally termed conglomerate "bars". However, a detailed understanding of the depositional mechanisms that controlled the spatial distribution of conglomerate facies, which in turn control reservoir quality and related production characteristics within and between different pools, is presently lacking. As a result, a number of important questions still remain. However, many of these issues can be resolved by differentiating distributary-channel from delta-front conglomerates, and also appreciating the sedimentological importance of the steep depositional gradient (>15°) on the delta front. Distributary-channel and delta-front conglomerates commonly consist of interstratified, matrix-rich and matrix-poor conglomerate. In distributary-channel conglomerates, this bipartite texture is most likely related to the spatial variability of gravel and sand deposition on the leeside of gravel-bed, subaqueous dunes and/or bars. Reservoir quality in these conglomerates was significantly reduced by a later infiltrated sand matrix. Marine conglomerates, on the other hand, were deposited on a steep delta-front by sediment-gravity processes. Planar-based, ungraded, matrix-supported conglomerate overlain abruptly by better-sorted, very coarse sandstone or granule/fine pebble conglomerate represent, respectively, en masse deposition from high-concentration sediment-gravity-flow dispersions and grain-by-grain gravity-driven transport and deposition. Most dispersions collapsed on the delta slope, but others flowed to the base of the slope and deposited their sediment in a granular jump. Much of the sand-sized sediment deposited at the mouths of the distributary-channel network was winnowed and remobilized by waves and transported alongshore and away from the delta front and, as a consequence, preserved the high-reservoir quality that characterizes delta front conglomerates. You do not have access to this content, please speak to your institutional administrator if you feel you should have access.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».