Journal of Structural Geology 118 (2019) 104–113

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Structural Geology

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jsg

Measurement of geometry and linkage in vein arrays T

a,∗ b
David J. Sanderson , David CP. Peacock
a
Ocean and Earth Science, University of Southampton, National Oceanography Centre, Southampton, SO14 3ZH, UK
b
Department of Earth Science, University of Bergen, P.O. Box 7800, 5020 Bergen, Norway

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Veins in an array are characterised by measurement of their length (L), width (W) and orientation (θ), and by the
Vein number (0, 1 or 2) of adjacent veins to which they are linked. Data from a single array (129 veins), and two
Array regions (comprising 146 and 64 arrays) have been measured and analysed. The system for measurement pro-
en echelon vides a sound basis for the quantitative assessment of both the array geometry and the effects of interaction of
Linkage
adjacent veins.
Transtension
Transpression
Linkage is achieved by a breaching of the bridges of wall rock between veins, either by extension fractures,
shear failure or the development of stylolites. It is primarily controlled by the strain, as measured by vein width.
The size and shape of the veins is found to be controlled by two factors: the degree of linkage and the kinematics
of the array (transtension/transpression). Interplay of these produces variability both within and between arrays,
and this is examined for two large datasets from the Lower Jurassic of Somerset and the Lower Carboniferous of
the Gower Peninsula, South Wales.

1. Introduction statistical techniques. The geometrical and topological data may be

Many types of fractures occur in arrays, i.e. as a set of stepping or en
echelon fractures arranged in a tabular volume that forms a relatively
straight trace or band on an exposure surface (Fig. 1a; see Peacock
et al., 2016). Arrays are common geometries for faults (e.g., Segall and
Pollard, 1980), joints (e.g., La Pointe and Hudson, 1985) and veins
(e.g., Beach, 1975; Rothery, 1988).
In this paper we develop a simple scheme to measure and quantify
the shape and pattern of veins and vein arrays. We use measurements of
length, width, aspect ratio and orientation, together with a simple
measure of linkage, to systematically evaluate the geometry and to-
pology of vein arrays. This provides a basis for discussion of (a) the
variability within populations of such arrays; (b) the kinematics of the
arrays in terms of the transpression/transtension model (Sanderson and
Marchini, 1984) and (c) the degree linkage between adjacent veins in
the array.
We focus on simple, brittle arrays in which the veins have not been
rotated and folded due to ductile shearing (e.g. Ramsay and Graham,
1970). The measurement scheme is designed in a way that will allow
evaluation of (a) measurement errors, (b) relationships amongst para-
meters, and (c) sources of variation within and between arrays. The
methods provide quantification of both the geometry and the topology
of the arrays, thus, facilitating hypothesis testing through application of
collected simply by measurement from scaled and oriented photo-
graphs.
We apply the methods to examples of vein arrays exposed on bed-
ding surfaces and analyse three different datasets:
1. A single array of length 6 m at Lilstock, Somerset, UK containing 129
measured vein segments;
2. 2255 veins from 146 photographs from the same region; and
3. 658 veins from 64 photographs from Three Cliffs Bay, Gower
Peninsula, South Wales.
The veins are orthogonal to the bedding surfaces in all cases, and
can be analysed in two-dimensions. All veins are filled by granular or
fibrous calcite, whose geometry and texture (e.g. Bons et al., 2012;
Alzayer et al., 2015) indicate simple opening at a high angle to the vein
walls, with little rotation or other modification by ductile shearing. The
dominant kinematic development involves minor deformation of
bridges between veins and their subsequent breakage to produce linked
veins of various types (discussed later in section 5.1).
2. Measurement methods
In all cases, a series of veins were measured from part of an array,

∗
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: d.j.sanderson@soton.ac.uk (D.J. Sanderson).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsg.2018.10.001
Received 31 May 2018; Received in revised form 1 October 2018; Accepted 2 October 2018
Available online 03 October 2018
0191-8141/ © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
D.J. Sanderson, D.C. Peacock
Fig. 1. Vein array measurement and linkage geometry. (a) Basic explanation of
measurement of length (L), width (W) and angle between vein and array (θ).
(b–d) Linkage of veins: (b) Unconnected, 0-linked; (c) singly, 1-linked; (d)
doubly 2-linked veins. (e) Diagram of an array with linked veins shown by small
double arrows, with the linkage number is indicated for each vein. (f) A tri-
angular plot of the proportions of the three types of linkage; the diamond
(green) would represent an array dominated by isolated veins, with the triangle
(blue) and square (red) representing arrays with increasing linkage. (For in-
terpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is re-
ferred to the Web version of this article.)
with the number varying from two to over thirty per photograph. Fig. 1
shows what was measured:
1) Vein length (L): the distance between the tips of individual veins,
measured parallel to the vein.
2) Width (W): maximum width (aperture) of a vein.
3) Aspect ratio: the ratio L/W.
4) Angle of vein to array boundary trend (θ).
5) Linkage: the number of adjacent veins to which a vein is linked, with
0 – no linkage (Fig. 1b), 1 – linkage to one vein (Fig 1c) and 2 -
linkage to both veins (Fig. 1d).
Measurements were made from photographs, each of which shows a
compass clinometer to enable the measurements to be oriented and
scaled.
2.1. Vein segment lengths and widths
The length was measured as the tip-to-tip length (L) using a ruler
(Fig. 1a). Lengths between the tips were measured in a straight line. The
accuracy of measurement of each vein segment length was affected by:
1) low apertures towards the end of most veins meaning that it was
often difficult to identify the exact locations of the tips; 2) some veins
splay near tips, so it can be difficult to decide which splay to measure;
3) it can be difficult to match up the two original tips of veins that have
developed into pull-aparts and fault zones. Due to these effects, vein
tips may not be located precisely and we consider segment lengths have
a measurement precision of ± 3 mm, but this may tend to be system-
atically underestimated.
Maximum vein segment widths (W) were also measured from pho-
tographs. All photographs were taken normal to the surface and there is
negligible perspective distortion, and only minor radial distortion due
105
Journal of Structural Geology 118 (2019) 104–113
to the focal length of the lens. At Three Cliffs Bay, measurements were
made using a standard ruler (accuracy ± 0.5 mm), whilst veins from
Lilstock were measured using a graticule magnifier, with an accuracy of
approximately ± 0.1 mm. Exact widths can be difficult to measure ac-
curately from photographs taken using a digital camera, as the mag-
nified images showing pixilation. Also, it can be difficult to identify the
boundaries of many veins, especially where the size of the veins is very
variable.
The length (L) and width (W) of each vein are used to generate the
aspect ratio (L/W). This measure compounds the errors in the in-
dividual measurements, and the precision is about ± 5% for the
Lilstock data, and somewhat worse for the data from Three Cliffs Bay.
There are also systematic errors introduced through underestimation of
length and overestimation of thickness.
2.2. Angle of each vein to the shear zone boundary
The angle (θ) between the vein and the trend of the array was
measured from photographs with a protractor (Fig. 1). The edges of
shear zone boundaries can be ambiguous and the trend of the zone was
taken from a straight line placed as close to the edges of the vein seg-
ments as possible. Where the vein is slightly curved or offset by a pull-
apart, the orientation at the vein tip(s) was measured. The zone or-
ientation can usually be determined to within 1–2° and the protractor
measurements are to an accuracy of approximately ± 1°, so the angles
are accurate to about ± 2°.
2.3. The degree of linkage of adjacent veins
The veins may occur as discrete, approximately ellipsoidal traces on
the exposure surface, with the overlapping veins producing bridges
(Fig. 1a). Other veins are linked together by smaller veins, faults or
stylolites. On the exposure surface, we characterised each vein as being
0-, 1- or 2-linked, based on the presence or absence of any structure(s)
traversing the bridges between veins. Thus an unconnected vein
(Fig. 1b) is 0-linked, a pair of veins connected through the intervening
bridge are each 1-linked (Fig. 1c) and a vein linked to both its neigh-
bours is termed 2-linked (Fig. 1d). Note that the linkage can be
achieved by opening of small extensional veins (e.g., Nicholson and
Pollard, 1985), shearing to produce small faults (Willemse et al., 1997)
or by stylolites (Seyum and Pollard, 2016) that transform the opening of
the adjacent veins (e.g., Peacock and Sanderson, 1995). Linkage may
occur by the development of multiple fractures. The arrays appear to be
segmented at a range of scales, but in this study we discuss only linkage
between veins that span the width of the array (as Fig. 1a). The vein
segments in any array interact through the bridges, but it is often dif-
ficult to see if these contain smaller fractures, so a qualitative decision
has to be made about whether or not these vein segments are connected
(e.g. Laubach et al., 2018).
If we assign a linkage value to each vein in an array (as Fig. 1e), we
can calculate the average of these to characterise the linkage in the
array. Alternatively, the proportions of each linkage value, which sum
to 1 (or 100%), can be plotted on a triangular diagram to illustrate the
linkage of the array (Fig. 1f).
3. Analysis of a single array
In this section we analyse a single array of calcite veins that was
chosen because it shows a transition from unlinked, en echelon veins to a
more continuous vein formed from local extensional pull-aparts linked
by small faults (Fig. 2). To the west, the array can be mapped into a
small normal fault and, hence, represents the lateral tip of the fault
where the throw has dropped to zero but there is still a component of
layer-parallel extension. This type of vein/fault array is common on the
Somerset coast and has been described in detail by Willemse et al.
(1997). Note that these changes are commonly seen along the length of
D.J. Sanderson, D.C. Peacock
Fig. 2. Photographic montage of an E-W vein array to east of Lilstock Beach (51°12′7.34″N, 3°10′19.03″W), Somerset, UK, showing transition from unlinked en
echelon veins to veins linked by faults. The numbers refer to photographs used in the analysis of this array.
an array that is exposed on a bedding plane, but are also known to occur
at different levels within a single bed (Nicholson and Ejiofor, 1987).
The array is located on the upper surface of a Lower Liassic lime-
stone bed (∼0.3 m thick), exposed at the base of low cliffs to the east of
Lilstock (51°12′7.34″N, 3°10′19.03″W). It has an exposed length of
∼6 m and 129 vein segments were measured. The vein is oriented
approximately E-W (N100°E) and is formed during the early phase of
normal faulting associated with N-S basin extension accompanied by
some left-lateral reactivation of the normal faults (Peacock and
Sanderson, 1998).
106
Journal of Structural Geology 118 (2019) 104–113
Fig. 3 shows details of three parts of the vein array, within which
the individual veins are normal to bedding. We use the texture and
geometry of the different elements of the array to infer the general
opening direction, using the method of McCoss (1986). This considers a
displacement that can be oblique to the trend of the array (transpres-
sion or transtension in sense of Sanderson and Marchini, 1984). In
Fig. 3a we assume that the unconnected vein segments formed as ex-
tension fractures, whose tips (mode 1) were oriented normal to the
minimum principal stress (σ3). This is supported by occasional fibres
and the matching of wall rock features (Fig. 3c). If the angle that a vein
Fig. 3. Details of different parts of the array in Fig. 2: (a)
Photograph 3, (b) Photograph 8 and (c) Photograph 10.
Each photograph has a transtensional analysis (based on
McCoss, 1986) to the right, with minimum principal
stress σ3 (red), σ1/2 plane (blue), and inferred opening
vector (green arrow). Note the similar opening direction
for the three photographs and progressive increase in
vein width from (a) to (c). (For interpretation of the re-
ferences to colour in this figure legend, the reader is re-
ferred to the Web version of this article.)
D.J. Sanderson, D.C. Peacock
Fig. 4. Plots of data for individual veins from photographs 1–8; (a) length (L) against width (W); (b) aspect ratio (L/W) against angle of vein to array (θ). Red squares
are from the main array in photographs 7 and 8, blue triangles from photographs 4 and 5, and green diamonds from photographs 1–3. (For interpretation of the
references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article.)
makes with the array trend is θ, then for transpression/transtension the
opening direction is at 2θ to the array. This is a generalisation of the
situation for simple shear where the vein would form at θ = 45° for a
displacement at 2θ = 90° or parallel to the array boundary. In Fig. 3b
we have both extension fractures (veins) and small transform faults that
are sub-parallel to the opening direction (c.f. transform faults and
oceanic spreading axes, e.g. Tuckwell et al., 1996). In Fig. 3c the
transform faults and oblique opening of veins dominate, with some
extensional (mode 1) crack tips developing as ‘horns’ from the pull-
aparts.
The array shows a variation in geometry and linkage of vein seg-
ments ranging from en echelon arrays on unlinked veins to linked seg-
ments of oblique opening pull-aparts. We use a series of photographs
(1–8 in Fig. 2) to see how the length (L), width (W) and orientation (θ)
of the veins, together with the linkage, change systematically along the
array. Fig. 4a is a plot of the length and width of individual veins and
Fig. 4b plots aspect ratio (L/W) against angle (θ). The green diamonds
are from photographs 1–3, where the array is represented by en echelon
veins with width of 1–3 mm and an aspect ratio of ∼100. The red
squares show veins from photographs 7 and 8 that are much thicker
(∼10 mm) and have much lower aspect ratio (generally < 10). The rest
of the data plot between these two groups and represent the inter-
mediate parts of the array (blue triangles - photographs 4 and 5) and
smaller veins clustered around the thicker linked veins (dots in pho-
tographs 6–8).
The veins show no clear relationship between length and width,
with aspect ratios varying between 2 and 200 (Fig. 4a). The vein angle
(θ) is generally between 5 and 35°, consistent with transtensional dis-
placement along the array, and the aspect ratio does not appear to
correlate with vein angle (Fig. 4b). Figs. 3 and 4(a) illustrate that the
thickness of the veins increases from ∼2 mm in the E (Fig. 3a) to
∼10 mm in the W (Fig. 3c), accompanying the change in array geo-
metry. This reflects an increase in strain, which is accompanied by a
greater linkage of the veins, as shown by plotting the proportions of 0, 1
and 2 linked veins (Fig. 5a). The linkage (range 0–2) in different parts
of the array can be quantified using the average linkage value, which is
seen to increase with increasing vein width (Fig. 5b) and, hence, strain.
4. Populations of vein arrays
In this section, we look at two large datasets from vein arrays col-
lected using the methods outlined in Section 2.
107
Journal of Structural Geology 118 (2019) 104–113
4.1. Lower Liassic, Somerset
In this section we extend the study outlined in section 3 to the
measurement of 2255 veins from 146 photographs of arrays in Som-
erset. The veins were measured from bedding planes of fine-grained
(micritic) Liassic limestones at Lilstock (around 51°12′7.68″N,
3°10′11.38″W). Many of the veins are from blocks that were not in situ.
Limestone bed thicknesses range from ∼0.2 to 0.4 m, these being se-
parated by shale beds up to ∼6 m thick. The calcite veins at Lilstock
appear to be related to several deformation events (Peacock and
Sanderson, 1998). There appear to be several generations of veins, in-
cluding: (1) 060° striking veins that indicate ∼ 150°–330° extension; (2)
095° calcite veins related to normal faults that developed during N-S
opening of the Bristol Channel Basin; (3) 095° striking veins related to
left-lateral shear on some of the normal faults; (4) veins related to
strike-slip faults conjugate about ∼ N-S compression that are related to
basin inversion (Dart et al., 1995). The vein arrays from both the early
extensional phase and the later strike-slip phase have a similar range of
geometries and, hence, we will discuss the geometry of all the veins
together.
The arrays mostly comprise veins of 1–10 mm thickness, with length
varying from 10 to 200 mm (Fig. 6a). There is no correlation between
vein length and thickness, with the aspect ratio (L/W) varying from 2 to
200 (c.f. Vermilye and Scholz, 1995). The angles of the veins to the
trend of the arrays (θ) are general less than 45° (average ∼ 20°), with
only 3 arrays (2%) having angles > 45° (Fig. 6b). Hence, the arrays are
dominantly transtensional and there is no correlation between aspect
ratio and angle (θ).
The veins show a great deal of variation in their connectivity, with
the average linkage being fairly evenly spread between the extreme
values of 0 and 2 (Fig. 6 c-f). This occurs both within arrays (as in the
example in Section 3) and between arrays. There is a correlation be-
tween linkage and vein width (Fig. 6c), with the wider veins showing a
greater degree of linkage. There is also a tendency for veins with lower
aspect ratio (L/W) to be more linked (Fig. 6d). Both of these relation-
ships indicate a correlation between linkage and strain, as seen in
Section 3.
Although the veins are mainly transtensional, they show a range of
angles from a few degrees, up to the 45° angles of simple shear zones
(Ramsay and Graham, 1970), but there is no obvious correlation be-
tween linkage and vein angle (Fig. 6f). At first this is a somewhat sur-
prising result, as one might expect to find more breaching of the long,
thin bridges between arrays with low θ-angles. Fig. 7 shows examples of
D.J. Sanderson, D.C. Peacock Journal of Structural Geology 118 (2019) 104–113

Fig. 5. Plots to summarise changes in linkage within array shown in Fig. 2. (a) Triangular plot of linkage with red squares from photographs 7 and 8 where most veins
doubly linked; blue triangles from photographs 4 and 5; green diamonds from photographs 1–3 where veins are mostly unlinked. (b) Plot of average linkage against
average width in each photograph (numbered) showing progressive increase in linkage from 1 to 8. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure
legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article.)

arrays of linked veins. At low θ-angles and for narrow vein widths, the
dominant mode of linkage is by bridge breaching, usually by the de-
velopment of cross-fractures that are short and orthogonal to the main
veins and that initiate as extension fractures controlled by the shape of
the bridge (Fig. 7a). At higher θ-angles, the bridges fail by shear
fractures with the same sense of shear as the array (Fig. 7b). This mode
of failure can develop into arrays of pull-apart veins linked by small
synthetic faults (Fig. 7c). Thus the combination of bridge failure at low
θ-angles and faulting at high θ-angles may explain the lack of correla-
tion between linkage and θ-angle (Fig. 6f), with both failure modes

Fig. 6. Analysis of measurements from 146 photographs from Somerset. (a) Length (L) v width (W) and (b) aspect ratio (L/W) v angle (θ); note most veins are
transtensional (θ < 45°) and there is no correlation between L and W, with aspect ratio varying between 2 and 200. The average linkage (c) increases with width
(proxy for strain), decreases with increasing aspect ratio (d) and has no correlation with length (e) and θ-angle (f).

108
D.J. Sanderson, D.C. Peacock
Fig. 7. Photographs of veins from Somerset showing different types of linkage: (a) transtensional vein array (θ ≈ 5°) with breaching of bridges, (b) transtensional
vein array (θ ≈ 15°) with shearing of bridges, and (c) well-developed pull-aparts linked by small faults (θ ≈ 30°). The sequence (a–c) is accompanied by increasing
vein width (d) and θ-angle (e), with a small decrease in aspect ratio (e).
producing greater linkage with greater strain and vein thickness, as
observed in Fig. 6c.
4.2. Lower Carboniferous, Gower Peninsula
In this section we analyse data for 658 veins from 64 photographs
from Three Cliffs Bay, Gower Peninsula, South Wales (51°34′13.21″N,
4°7′4.67″W). The veins were photographed on Lower Carboniferous
Limestone bedding planes that dip ∼80° south. The limestone beds are
up to ∼0.5 m thick and separated by shale parting or stylolites. The
British Geological Survey Geology of Britain Viewer (http://mapapps.
bgs.ac.uk/geologyofbritain/home.html) shows that the veins are in the
Hunts Bay Oolite Subgroup, which are shallow marine carbonates
containing coral and shell fragments. The calcite veins are probably
related to Variscan deformation (e.g., Gillespie et al., 1999).
The arrays mostly comprise veins of 1–15 mm thickness, with length
varying from 10 to 200 mm (Fig. 8a), which are very similar in size to
those from Somerset (section 4.1). There is a correlation between vein
length and thickness (R2 = 0.38). The aspect ratio (L/W) varies from 3
to 30, and represents a narrower range than that seen in Somerset. The
angles of the veins to the trend of the arrays (θ) are in the range 0–70°
(average ∼ 20°), with ∼16% of the arrays having angles > 45°
(Fig. 8b), i.e. transpressional. There is a tendency for the more trans-
tensional arrays to have a higher aspect ratio (Fig. 8b).
The veins show a great deal of variation in their connectivity, with
109
Journal of Structural Geology 118 (2019) 104–113
the average linkage being fairly evenly spread between the extreme
values of 0 and 2 (Fig. 8c, d, e, f). There is little correlation between
linkage and vein width (Fig. 8c) and aspect ratio (L/W) (Fig. 8d). These
relationships indicate no correlation between linkage and strain, con-
trasting with that seen in Somerset (Section 4.1), and there is also no
obvious correlation between linkage and vein angle (Fig. 8f).
We recognise a range of different linking structures. The trans-
pressional arrays commonly have pressure solution seams in the form of
stylolites, that serve to link individual low aspect ratio veins, as in
Fig. 9a. These closing mode discontinuities (e.g., Fletcher and Pollard,
1981) are more common that the faults with pressure solution seen in
Somerset and the arrays rarely developed into clearly defined pull-apart
systems (as Fig. 7c). In the transtensional arrays, long, thin bridges
occur between veins with low θ-angles (Fig. 9c), with associated cross-
fractures breaching the bridges. At higher θ-angles, the bridges fail by
shear fractures (Fig. 9b). The stylolites in the transpressional veins at
Three Cliffs Bay represent an additional failure mode (e.g., Lisle, 2014),
in part replacing the pull-aparts seen in Somerset. Whilst the style of
linkage was largely controlled by the amount of extension (and, hence,
vein thickness) as in Somerset, but the role of transpression and the θ-
angle is more dominant at Three Cliffs Bay.
Fig. 9 shows three typical vein arrays ranging from transtensional
(a), with θ of ∼15°, to simple shear (b), with θ of ∼40°, to transpres-
sional (c), with θ of ∼67°. The vein width (2–8 mm) does not vary
greatly (Fig. 9d), but there is a systematic decrease in aspect ratio, from
D.J. Sanderson, D.C. Peacock Journal of Structural Geology 118 (2019) 104–113

Fig. 8. Analysis of measurements from 64 photographs from Carboniferous Limestone of Three Cliffs Bay, Gower, south Wales. (a) Length (L) v width (W) and (b)
aspect ratio (L/W) v angle (θ); note veins range from transtensional (θ ≪ 45°), through simple shear (θ ≈ 45°), to transpressional (θ > 45°), there is a correlation
between L and W, with aspect ratio varying between 3 and 30. The average linkage has no correlation with vein width (c), aspect ratio (d), length (e) or θ-angle (f); c.
f. results from Lilstock (Fig. 6) that showed a good correlation of linkage with vein width (strain).

∼20 to ∼3, with increasing θ-angle (Fig. 9e). The degree of linkage is
highest in the transpressional array (Fig. 9c) where all the veins are
doubly linked by stylolites (average linkage = 2), whereas it is lowest
in the simple shear array (Fig. 9b, average linkage = 0.22), with the
transtensional array (Fig. 9a) having average linkage = 1.14. Although
the degree of linkage is very variable in the arrays at Three Cliffs Bay, it
is common for the unlinked veins to form in arrays with moderate θ-
angle (20° < θ < 60°), with most of the transtensional arrays
(θ < 20°) being moderately well-connected (Fig. 8f).
5. Discussion
5.1. Summary of linkage mechanisms
Single, unconnected veins develop by a combination of progressive
widening (increasing W) and propagation (increasing L), and are
characterised by fairly constant aspect ratios (L/W) (Fig. 10b). Where
the en echelon veins overlap, there are ‘bridges’ of wall rock that will
strain as the veins open. This leads to bridge breaching, either through
fracturing of the bridge or by one or both tips linking to the adjacent
vein (Nicholson and Pollard, 1985). In transtensional arrays, bridge
breaching is typically through extension fractures at a high angle to the
length of the bridge (Figs. 7a and 10c), or by shear failure (Figs. 7b and
10d). In simple shear or transpression, faults (Willemse et al., 1997) and
stylolites (e.g. Seyum and Pollard, 2016) become the dominant failure
mechanism (Fig. 9a). The development of en echelon faults leads to
development of wing cracks at their tips (Fig. 10e), or to pull-aparts
(Figs. 9b and 10f). The last two features can occur together, producing
the characteristic structures seen in Figs. 7c and 10g.
The processes involved in linkage tend to influence the measured
parameters in several ways. Whilst the bridges are largely intact and
recognisable, the individual veins are easily identified and tend to have
a high aspect ratio (as Fig. 10b). At an early stage of breaching, the
linking fracture tends to divide the vein into two parts, each consisting
of two tips and arranged in an en echelon pattern (Fig. 10c and d). At
this stage, opening is transferred across the linking fracture and pro-
pagation at the tips closer to this fracture is inhibited, leading to the
development of asymmetric veins with a lower aspect ratio. L/W thus
tends to decrease as linkage increases, as seen in the vein arrays from
Somerset (Fig. 6d).
5.2. Relationships between kinematics, strain and linkage
The shape of the veins, expressed as their aspect ratio L/W, can be
analysed in terms of three controlling factors:
1. Kinematics. We model the kinematics of the arrays in terms of the
transpression/transtension model of Sanderson and Marchini
(1984). When the strains are low, this is applied through the con-
struction of McCoss (1986), as in Fig. 3. Thus the variable θ defines
the kinematics of the arrays.
2. Strain. Due to the varying geometry and size of the arrays, it is

110
D.J. Sanderson, D.C. Peacock Journal of Structural Geology 118 (2019) 104–113

Fig. 9. Photographs of veins from Three Cliffs Bay showing different types of linkage: (a) well-developed transtensional array (10° < θ < 25°), (b) transtensional to
simple shear array (30° < θ < 50°) with pressure solution and shearing of bridges, and (c) transpressional array (θ > 45°) of relatively short veins (L ≈ 10 mm)
linked by stylolites,. The transition from transtensional to transpressional deformation is associated with a change from bridge breaching by extension and shear (a)
to pressure solution and shear (b, c).

difficult to derive a single measure of strain. Inspection of Fig. 3, and
similar constructions for other arrays, shows that the maximum
width of a vein is usually sub-parallel to the inferred opening di-
rection and usually occurs where there is minimal overlap with
other veins. For this reason, we will use the maximum vein width
(W) as a proxy for the extension across the array.
3. Linkage. Each vein is assigned a linkage number (0, 1 or 2) and
the arithmetic mean calculated for each array. This provides a
measure of the degree to which the elements of the array are linked
to one another.
Fig. 11 shows plots of vein shape (L against W), broken down in
terms of the two study regions (a, c – Lilstock, Somerset; b, d – Three
Cliffs Bay, south Wales). Fig. 11a, b shows that the transpressional veins
(θ > 45°) are shorter than the strongly transtensional veins (θ < 20°),
dots indicate vein measurements in range 20° < θ < 45°. This

Fig. 10. Conceptual diagrams showing the development

of transtensional veins. (a) the transtensional geometry/
kinematics, with veins forming as opening mode fractures
normal to σ3. A typical unconnected vein (b) grows by
increasing length and width. Two overlapping veins form
a bridge of wall-rock that may fail orthogonally (c) or
obliquely (d), with continued opening leading to opening
and or shear of the bridge fracture (c.f. Fig. 7 a, b). The
development of shear on surfaces at a low angle to the
array produces wing cracks (e) and pull-aparts (f), often
with both developed (g) (c.f. Fig. 7c).

111
D.J. Sanderson, D.C. Peacock Journal of Structural Geology 118 (2019) 104–113

Fig. 11. Comparison of plots of length (L) v width (W) for individual veins from Lilstock, Somerset (a, c) and Three Cliffs Bay, south Wales (b, d). (a, b) shows the
difference between strongly transtensional (θ < 20°) and transpressional (θ > 45°) veins is related to vein length, with longer veins characterising the transten-
sional arrays with low θ-angle. (c, d) shows difference in relation to linkage, with the 2-linked veins being to be wider (greater extension) that the 0-linked veins;
large symbols indicate averages for different linkage classes. The data from Somerset (c) show the linked veins are about four times wider that the unlinked veins; at
Three Cliffs Bay the effect is similar, but less obvious (d).

difference occurs across the entire range of vein widths. In Somerset,
the transpressional veins also have a lower aspect ratio (L/W), but this
is not so marked for the Three Cliffs Bay data.
Fig. 11c, d shows all the data divided into the three linkage classes
(0, 1 or 2). In Somerset, the average lengths of the veins in each linkage
class is equal, but there is a progressive increase in width for the more
linked veins (as discussed in Section 4.1). The average width approxi-
mately doubles with each linkage value and produces a corresponding
decrease in the resulting aspect ratios. At Three Cliffs Bay, the data
show a similar pattern, but the effects are much less pronounced.
5.3. Extending the methodology
In this paper we develop a systematic set of measurements to
characterise arrays of (en echelon) veins, which include geometrical
parameters (L, W, L/W, θ), as well as a measure of linkage that is es-
sentially a topological measure (c.f. Sanderson and Nixon, 2015) de-
scribing the relationship between adjacent veins. The number of para-
meters measured could be increased, for example by measuring the
spacing between veins in the array or the aspect ratios of the bridges,
and this could easily be added to the methodology. Another useful
parameter might be the breadth or width of the array (B), although for a
simple en echelon geometry of the type shown in Fig. 1a, this is ap-
proximately B = L sin θ (see Fig. 1a). The methods could be extended to
other types of fractures, e.g., en echelon arrays of faults or dykes.
6. Conclusions
We develop a systematic approach to the characterisation of the
geometries and kinematics of vein arrays that involves measurement of
the vein geometry in terms of length (L), width (W) and orientation (θ).
In an array, the individual veins occur along the array (Fig. 1e) and we
propose a simple measure of linkage of each vein based on the number
of adjacent veins to which it is connected (i.e. 0, 1 or 2). This is a
topological measure (c.f. Sanderson and Nixon, 2015) describing one
aspect of the relationship between the veins.
The linkage of the veins is primarily controlled by the strain, as
measured by vein width. This can be seen within individual arrays (as
in Section 3) and in the variability between arrays (Section 4). Linkage
is achieved by a breaching of the bridges of wall rock between veins,
either by extension fractures, shear failure or the development of sty-
lolites. Extension fractures, with subsequent shear, are more common in
transtensional arrays, whilst stylolites are more common in simple
shear and transpressional arrays.

112
D.J. Sanderson, D.C. Peacock
The aspect ratios of the veins are controlled by two factors: 1) the
linkage, with wider, lower aspect ratio veins tending to be more linked,
and 2) the kinematics of the array, with shorter, low aspect ratio veins
being more common in transpressional arrays. Linkage dominated the
variation in the vein sets from Somerset, whereas the kinematics is
more important at Three Cliffs Bay.
We suggest that the system for measurement proposed in this study
can provide a sound basis for the quantitative assessment of vein arrays,
allowing assessment of the conditions for linkage in terms of both vein
parameters and array geometry. The techniques could be extended to
other structures that occur in en echelon arrays, for example to test what
factors control length/width or length/displacement ratios of faults and
dykes.
Acknowledgements
Sanderson was supported by a Leverhulme Emeritus Fellowship.
Peacock was supported through a grant in context of the BKK-UiB
agreement and also acknowledges financial support for the ANIGMA
project from the Research Council of Norway (project no. 244129/E20)
through the ENERGIX program. We thank the journal reviewers
(Fernando Bastida and an anonymous reviewer) and editor for their
useful and considered reviews that have helped improve the manu-
script.
References
Alzayer, Y., Eichhubl, P., Laubach, S.E., 2015. Non-linear growth kinematics of opening-
mode fractures. J. Struct. Geol. 74, 31–44.
Beach, A., 1975. The geometry of en-echelon vein arrays. Tectonophysics 28, 245–263.
Bons, P.D., Elburg, M.A., Gomez-Rivas, E., 2012. A review of the formation of tectonic
veins and their microstructures. J. Struct. Geol. 43, 33–62.
Dart, C.J., McClay, K., Hollings, P.N., 1995. 3D analysis of inverted extensional fault
systems, southern Bristol Channel basin, U.K. In: In: Buchanan, J.G., Buchanan, P.G.
(Eds.), Basin Inversion, vol. 88. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, pp.
393–413.
Fletcher, R.C., Pollard, D.D., 1981. Anticrack model for pressure solution surfaces.
113
Journal of Structural Geology 118 (2019) 104–113
Geology 9, 419–424.
Gillespie, P.A., Johnston, J.D., Loriga, M.A., McCaffrey, K.J.W., Walsh, J.J., Watterson, J.,
1999. Influence of layering on vein systematics in line samples. In: In: McCaffrey,
K.J.W., Lonergan, L., Wilkinson, J.J. (Eds.), Fractures, Fluid Flow and Mineralization,
vol. 155. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, pp. 35–56.
La Pointe, P.R., Hudson, J.A., 1985. Characterization and interpretation of rock mass joint
patterns. Geol. Soc. Am. Spec. Pap. 199, 1–38.
Laubach, S.E., Lamarche, J., Gauthier, B.D.M., Dunne, W.M., Sanderson, D.J., 2018.
Spatial arrangement of faults and opening-mode fractures. J. Struct. Geol. 108, 2–15.
Lisle, R.J., 2014. Strain analysis in dilatational shear zones, with examples from Marloes,
SW Wales. In: In: Llana-Fúnez, S., Marcos, A., Bastida, F. (Eds.), Deformation
Structures and Processes within the Continental Crust, vol. 394. Geological Society,
London, Special Publications, pp. 7–20.
McCoss, A.M., 1986. Simple constructions for deformation in transpression/transtension
zones. J. Struct. Geol. 8, 715–718.
Nicholson, R., Ejiofor, I.B., 1987. The three-dimensional morphology of arrays of echelon
and sigmoidal, mineral-filled fractures: data from north Cornwall. J. Geol. Soc. Lond.
144, 79–83.
Nicholson, R., Pollard, D.D., 1985. Dilation and linkage of echelon cracks. J. Struct. Geol.
7, 583–590.
Peacock, D.C.P., Sanderson, D.J., 1995. Pull-aparts, shear fractures and pressure solution.
Tectonophysics 241, 1–13.
Peacock, D.C.P., Sanderson, D.J., 1998. Deformation history and basin-controlling faults
in the Mesozoic sedimentary rocks of the Somerset coast. Proc. Geol. Assoc. 110,
41–52.
Peacock, D.C.P., Nixon, C.W., Rotevatn, A., Sanderson, D.J., Zuluaga, L.F., 2016. Glossary
of fault and other fracture networks. J. Struct. Geol. 92, 12–29.
Ramsay, J.G., Graham, R.H., 1970. Strain variation in shear belts. Can. J. Earth Sci. 7,
786–813.
Rothery, E., 1988. En echelon vein array development in extension and shear. J. Struct.
Geol. 10, 63–71.
Sanderson, D.J., Marchini, W.R.D., 1984. Transpression. J. Struct. Geol. 6, 449–458.
Sanderson, D.J., Nixon, C.W., 2015. The use of topology in fracture network character-
ization. J. Struct. Geol. 72, 55–66.
Segall, P., Pollard, D.D., 1980. Mechanics of discontinuous faults. J. Geophys. Res. 85,
4337–4350.
Seyum, S., Pollard, D.D., 2016. The mechanics of intersecting echelon veins and pressure
solution seams in limestone. J. Struct. Geol. 89, 250–263.
Tuckwell, G.W., Bull, J.M., Sanderson, D.J., 1996. Models of fracture orientation at ob-
lique spreading centres. J. Geol. Soc. Lond. 153, 185–189.
Vermilye, J.M., Scholz, C.H., 1995. Relation between vein length and aperture. J. Struct.
Geol. 17, 423–434.
Willemse, E.J.M., Peacock, D.C.P., Aydin, A., 1997. Nucleation and growth of strike-slip
faults in limestone. J. Struct. Geol. 19, 1461–1477.