Talk:3D fold evolution

Review from Vincent
1) Indeed, the fold grow 3 dimensionally. I think you may also add the diagram of 3D fold of the all the folds you present in your page, as it is hard to image how is the way that other folds grow 3 dimensionally. For example, the detachment fold. Do it grow in a dome shape like your animation or a lineation growth, like your video shown on the detachment fold.

2) You may also colour the diagram 2 so as to correlate your growing animation in figure one. Possibly, colouring them could also help to illustrate the elevation of the fold growing at different stages.

3) Could you also add the definition of fold growth and fold linkage. --Hk vincentlai (talk) 15:01, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Review from Jupiter
Halo \0.0/

Here are some minor suggestions for your page:

1. For the part "Identification of fold linkage", you have included the 3 types pf linkage with gif to present that, but you gave put all your images on the right side, which makes your image position mismatch with the content. In this part, you may use table form to present it clearly instead. For example,

2. You may want to add some example of places with the pattern your page is mentioning, which shows the 3D growth pattern. I know your FYP is working on that and you have read some readings on how people study different areas, so you may want to add on that later.

3. Besides, you may want to mention some more on how water gaps is forming to water gaps with 2 diagrams (first showing a water gaps and second becoming a new wind gaps and a new water gap, like the one you drew during the meeting maybe). Because these formation is important in your page, as it helps to trace the folding. In addition, the wiki page you linked for "wind gap" is very short and not able to present the above formation, so you may want to add that part on your page, so that more people may understand that

You page is full of diagrams and animations in presenting the folding :D

jupmira104 (talk) last modified on 21 October 2016, at 09:25

Review from Skylar
Hello Jeffery! Skylar from your class. It is interesting to read your page. I think it would be better if you include a few planar 3D diagrams to demonstrate the fold evolution. Here are some comments for you.

1. The classification and grouping of fold growth and linkage are nice and clear. You might also want to add some practical examples relevant to each type and provide brief description of the examples. This allows readers to compare the models with the practical examples.

2. The difference of hinge migration from limb rotation is important as you mentioned. The paragraphs are clear in comping the two. I think you also include diagrams showing the difference since it is quite hard for readers to imagine the two with only words.

3. You have add Wiki links to difficult terms used in the page. I think you can also trying adding links to some simple geological or scientific terms like geomorphological indicators and positive feedback. Those terms might be easy for readers with geology background but hard for beginners. I suggesting adding those links especially in the introduction part and the beginning of each parts. And you might link the terms which you would explained later in details to the associated section.

4. In the section Streams deflected around the nose of fold, I think it would be better if you can give further explanation on how the diagram works, like what the circles mean and add 2D diagrams which represent the patterns.

Add oil =]

Skylar - SkylYip (talk) 17:09, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Review from Lydia
Hi Jeffery. I have some comments for you. For the part of fold mechanism, you can add a link to the Wikipedia page “fold” to let readers have a more understanding of what buckled fold and forced fold are. Or images of buckled fold can also be included.

To distinguish hinge migration from limb rotation, you state four differences, but it is hard for readers to have you ideas in their head, so you may include some images to show what is hinge migration, limb rotation, wind gap and Knickpoint etc.

It is good that you have an animation on the evolution of fault-bend fold. But the position of this animation does not quite match with the section distinguishing hinge migration from limb rotation, you may put it upper to the forced fold section.

The table showing modes of fold linkage is also good. Very clear!

Lydia_yip (talk) 02:26, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Review from Beth
Hi Jeffry, I think you page is really informative and interesting. There are some things that I think would improve your page, all of which are minor adjustments but will make it read more easily as I found this quite difficult in places.

-Some words should be given a small description in the text so the reader can understand it clearly as they go through it. Such as what it means if a rock is competent, further description of monocline etc.

-Often you miss out ‘the’ and ‘a’ etc. Make sure you complete your sentences because although it may be correct without them, it is much more difficult to follow. For example “as shortening strain is concentrated at rock strata above [the] decollement”, “Folding occurs above [the] hanging wall of a fold ramp in a fault-bend fold”, “Shortening stress is usually at a high angle to [the] strata and is concentrated along [the] slipping plane and in the hanging wall of the thrust fault”, “[The/A] Fold acquires higher amplitude, longer wavelength and broader width as rock slips along [the] fault plane of underlying coeval thrust fault[…]. I'm not the best at this kind of thing but maybe you could take a look over them.

-I cannot understand this sentence, I'm not sure if it is just me or if it is not very clear. “The amount of fault displacement would control the amplitude of a fold, the lateral growth of fault would implies lateral growth of fold and fault linkage implies fold linkage on the surface”.

-You said: “Comparing to detachment fold, they mostly form in area with less contrasting competency across strata[17] and can be found in tectonic environment of more diversity,” I have written what I think you mean but in a way that is easier to understand. I think if you read it over you will find other sentences that could be reworded in a similar way. I hope this helps. ‘When compared to detachment folds, contrasting competency across strata is not as common and the tectonic environments that they are found in are often more complex.’ In addition, what are you referring to when you say ‘they’ in this sentence?

-For your section on ‘Streams deflected around the nose of fold’ could be broken up so scenario one and two are bullet points. This would mean it is not just one long paragraph. -In the case study, does your third point mean to say wind GAP. It just says wind at the moment but I don’t think this makes sense (if I understand it correctly).

-Under ‘Orientation of linkage’ you have written ‘Fault tip displacement gradients and process zone dimensions’ as one sentence. I am not sure if this makes sense.

-For the section on ‘Asymmetric forked drainage pattern’ I think it would be beneficial if you marked on the fold crest as it is key to understand because you refer to it a lot in the written part but the reader may have doubt in what you mean by this.

I hope this helps. Thanks, Beth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EHitchcock (talk • contribs) 07:48, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Review from Cloud
Hey Jeffry, I like the idea of your page on various methods to trace and identify a 3D fold. Here are some suggestions for you:
 * 1) I think that some of your diagrams lack proper labelling. For example, what do you mean within fig. 2? I think you may use contour lines and label North for maps to show the rise in elevation and E-W for cross-section, for better illustation.
 * 2) Similarly, I think you better add more explanation on fig. 8, how does the strata become like this? Is there any step-by-step evolution of the strata? And how does geologists identify this 'seemingly covered' structures in field?
 * 3) Is it possible to add the cross-section view of strata  in Fig. 12? As you mentioned the fold will grow in 3 dimension, what about the lateral strata? would it also become anti-formal?
 * 4) Why not group the identification of fold linkage into 'fold linkage' sub-part or put them into the table for clearer organization?
 * 5) I was wondering if the joint part of 2 folds would also be anti-formal in someway for Fig. 15 and 16. If so, you may want to label the final animated graph. Cross sections (cut through the joining part) from each case would also be a good thing to work on afterwards.

All the best. :) Cloudnstars (talk) 15:21, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

3D fold evolution
Saoud Alsaadi (talk) 10:52, 2 March 2020 (UTC)Are images well-captioned? The images have properly developed captions briefly describing the images.