Soft Rock Exercise
||Download the FMS images for these intervals: 100 to 140 mbsf; 150 to 190 mbsf; 250 to 290 mbsf (available from http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/BRG/ODP/DATABASE/DATA/search.html )
||Download the following core photos for Hole 1194. Cores: 1194A-13H, 14X
||Plot the following data sets against depth:
- C1 Caliper (1194B-cali-fms2
- RHOM Density (1194B-hlds)
- APLC Porosity (1194B-aps)
- SFLU Shallow resistivity (1194B-dit)
- PEFL Photoelectric effect (1194B-hlds)
- HSGR Total Gamma-ray (1194B-hngs)
- HFK Potassium (1194B-hngs)
- HTHO Thorium (1194B-hngs)
- HURA Uranium (1194B-hngs)
||Physical history of the sedimentary pile.
- How do density, porosity and resistivity vary with depth?
- What is causing the major trend downhole in each of these data sets?
- What does the caliper tell you about the quality of the hole and, in particular, the quality of the density and porosity data?
- Divide the sedimentary pile into discrete units.
||Lithological composition of the sedimentary pile.
- Using PEFL, total gamma ray, density, porosity and resistivity data suggest which major lithologies are present at this site. Based on the list provided to you, can you determine whether any lithologies are not present?
- If you look at the PEFL and gamma ray data do they change the position of the logging units?
||K, Th, U
- What do the K, Th and U logs indicate about the lithology downhole in general?
- What do you think the features at 120, 160 and 235 mbsf represent and why? What geological/oceanic process (es) may these features be related to?
- Look at the FMS from 120 to 140; 150 to 190 and 250 to 290 mbsf. Do these images confirm your interpretations? Are there any processes or features that can be seen in these images that may not have been observed in the other data sets?