Syed Ali Turab M.phil Thesis

8/10/2019 Syed Ali Turab M.phil Thesis

1/116


2/116

DEDICATION

edicated to my beloved Family members

Syed Ali Turab


3/116

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS i

LIST OF FIGURES iv

LIST OF TABLES ixACKNOWLEDGEMENTS x

ABSTRACT xi

CHAPTER 1 (INTRODUCTION) (1-10)

1.1. BACKGROUND 1

1.2. LOCATION OF THE STUDY AREA 2

1.3. ACCESSIBILITY 3

1.4. METHODOLOGY 3

1.4.1. Field Work 4

1.4.2. Lab Work 4

1.4.2.1. Preparation of the Geological Map 5

1.4.2.2. Preparation of Geological cross-section 5

1.5 LITERATURE REVIEW 6

CHAPTER 2 (REGIONAL TECTONICS) (11-28)

2.1. INTRODUCTION 11

2.2. NORTHWEST HIMALAYAS 12

2.3. TECTONIC SUBDIVISIONS 13

2.4. BOUNDARY FAULTS 18

2.5. HAZARA-KASHMIR SYNTAXIS (HKS) 19

2.5.1. The Hazara-Kashmir Syntaxis; Core Structures 21

2.5.1.1. The Muzaffarabad Anticline 21

2.5.1.2. Muzaffarabad Thrust (The Jhelum Thrust) 22

2.5.1.3. NE-SW Refolding Structures 22

2.5.2. Structures Defining the Margins of the Hazara-Kashmir Syntaxis 25

2.5.2.1. Northern and Eastern Limb 25

2.5.2.2. Western Limb 25


4/116

ii

2.5.2.2.1. Jhelum Fault 26

2.5.3. Tectonic Models for the Origin of the Hazara-Kashmir Syntaxis 27

CHAPTER 3 (STRATIGRAPHIC SETUP) (29-41)

STRATIGRAPHY 29

3.1. PRECAMBRIAN 30

3.1.1. Hazara Formation 30

3.2. PALEOZOIC 31

3.2.1. Muzaffarabad Formation 32

3.3. MESOZOIC 34

3.3.1. Rara Formation 34

3.4. TERTIARY 35

3.4.1. Paleocene Rocks (Undivided) 35

3.4.2. Murree Formation 37

3.4.3. Kamlial Formation 40

CHAPTER 4 (STRUCTURAL GEOLOGY) (42-60)

INTRODUCTION 42

4.1. MAJOR STRUCTURES 42

4.1.1. Jhelum Fault 42

4.1.2. Muzaffarabad Thrust 46

4.1.3. Nathiagali Thrust 48

4.1.4. Muzaffarabad Anticline 49

4.2 OTHER TECTONIC STRUCTURES 50

4.3 CROSS SECTION AB (SUBSURFACE STRUCTURES) 56

CHAPTER 5 (NEOTECTONICS) (61-84)

NEOTECTONICS 61

5.1. NEOTECTONIC FEATURES ASSOCIATED WITH JHELUM AND

ASSOCIATED FAULTS (MUZAFFARABAD-KOHALA SEGMENT) 62


5/116

iii

5.2. NEOTECTONIC FEATURES ASSOCIATED WITH THE

MUZAFFARABAD THRUST 69

5.2.1. Sar Pain area, locations 5 and 6 71

5.2.2. Locations 7 and 8 78

5.2.3. Chikar Kas, location 9 795.2.4. Awan Pati, location 10 and Butlian village, location 11 80

5.2.5. Nisar Camp Muzaffarabad, location 12 81

5.2.6. Hattian Bala Landslide 83

CHAPTER 6 (DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS) (85-92)

6.1. DISCUSSION 85

6.2. CONCLUSIONS 91

REFERENCES 93


6/116

iv

LIST OF FIGURES

Fig. 1.1 Map showing regional geology and tectonics of the area (Treloar et

al., 2000). Box shows location of the project area.

JF = Jhelum Fault, MBT = Main Boundary Thrust, MT =

Muzaffarabad Thrust, NT = Nathiagali Thrust, PT = Panjal Thrust.

2

Fig. 2.1 Regional geological map of the Northwestern Himalayas, North

Pakistan showing location of the study area (boxed area). Nathiagalli

Thrust illustrates the boundary between the metamorphic (Internal)

and the non-metamorphic (External) zones (After Coward et al.,

1988).

14

Fig. 2.2 Geological map of Northwestern Himalayas in North Pakistan

(Hazara, Kaghan, Kashmir). Hazara Kashmir Syntaxis refolds all themajor thrusts except Indus Suture zone (MMT) (After Greco, 1989).

15

Fig. 2.3 Tectonic map showing refolding of the major Himalayan thrusts by

the Hazara Kashmir Syntaxis. MMT = Main Mantle Thrust; MCT =

Main Central Thrust; PT = Panjal Thrust; MBT = Main Boundary

Thrust; MT = Muzaffarabad Thrust; JF = Jhelum Fault; NT =

Nathiagali Thrust (Modified after Latif, 1970; Calkins et al., 1975;

Greco and Spencer, 1993; and this study).

20

Fig. 2.4 Map showing the refolding of first phase structures of HKS, orientedalmost at right angle to each other (After Greco, 1989).

23

Fig. 2.5 Map showing the continuation of refolding structures of HKS in

Kaghan area (After Greco, 1989).

24

Fig. 2.6 Steeply dipping Jhelum Fault exposed along River Jhelum between

Muzaffarabad and Kohala.

27

Fig. 3.1 Murree sandstone exposed along gorge sides near location 6. 38

Fig. 3.2 Cross beds in Murree sandstone near Kunhar-Jhelum Rivers Junction.

Stratigraphic younging direction is indicated by word Up. Photo

taken looking towards S60E.

38

Fig. 3.3 (a) Grey jointed sandstone of Murree Formation exposed along road

side. (b) Sole marks in Murree sandstone present at the lower face of

the exposed bed.

39


7/116

v

Fig. 3.4 Channel lag breccia and overlying grey sandstone of Murree

Formation.

39

Fig. 4.1 Difference in relief across Jhelum Fault; Murree Formation (left)

forming low relief while Hazara Formation (right) forming high relief

topography.

43

Fig. 4.2 Steeply dipping fault plane of Jhelum Fault exposed along the left

bank of Jhelum River between Muzaffarabad and Kohala and its equal

area stereographic projection (Location 4, Fig. 4.6).

44

Fig. 4.3 Sharp contact (Jhelum Fault) between Murree Formation and Hazara

Formation exposed along the Muzaffarabad-Kohala road at location 1

(Fig. 4.6).

45

Fig. 4.4 Jhelum Fault crossing the Kunhar River, close to its junction with the

Jhelum River near the Rara village and its stereographic projection

(Location 2, Fig. 4.6).

45

Fig. 4.5 Jhelum Fault exposed at left bank of Jhelum River due to low level of

water flow in winter. For scale, arrow shows two persons standing on

outcrop of Hazara Formation.

45

Fig. 4.6 Geological map of the study area with location of section line (AB,

Fig. 4.12). White dots indicating different Locations.

47

Fig. 4.7 Structural map of the study area showing two phases of structures

formation. Structural trend of the area is determined from results of

this study, Greco (1989) and Published GSP maps.

52

Fig. 4.8 Fold and Thrust fault in Hazara Formation at Location 3. Equal area,

great circle plots of both bedding plane and fault plane are given at the

top corners.

53

Fig. 4.9 Stereoplots showing poles to the bedding planes and Great circles of

Domain 1.

54

Fig. 4.10 Stereoplots showing poles to the bedding planes and Great circles of

Domain 2.

54

Fig. 4.11 Satellite image of 2.5 m resolution and various structures and features

identified on it using Erdas Imagine 8.4. Black lines show different

structural features including bedding and fold axes, Blue lines indicate

stream offsets, Red lines indicate Faults while Green lines show

57


8/116

vi

Rivers and streams.

Fig 4.12 Cross section of the study area showing different subsurface structures

and detachement at depth.

58

Fig. 4.13 Bedding parallel striations on the bedding plane of sandstone in

Murree formation indicating flexural flow mechanism of folding.

59

Fig. 5.1 Google Earth Image of the study area showing major bends in the

flow pattern of Jhelum River near Muzaffarabad and Kunhar River

near Rara village signifying neotectonic effects of the Muzaffarabad

Thrust, Jhelum Fault and the inferred Rara Fault.

63

Fig. 5.2 Close-up view of the bends in Kunhar River Flow direction (Yellow

lines) in relation with the strike slip faults (Red lines). Dashed line

shows probable strike slip fault.

65

Fig 5.3 Google Earth Image showing trace of Jhelum Fault passing through

the Jhelum river bend, the PM Secretariate and the Parliament lodges

at Lower Chattar. a shows the location from where the Photo of

Figure 5.4 was taken and b shows location of the Figure 4.3.

66

Fig. 5.4 Field photograph of steeply cut fluvial terrace near lower chattar,

Muzaffarabad. Photo taken (from point a in Fig. 5.3 and point 1 in

Fig. 5.5), looking roughly towards South.

66

Fig. 5.5 Close-up view showing sharp bend in River Jhelum flow direction and

truncation of associated fluvial terrace. 1 shows the location from

where the Photo of Figure 5.4 was taken and 2 shows location of the

Figure 4.3.

68

Fig. 5.6 A satellite-image view showing tributary stream avulsion by the

Jhelum Fault in the Lower Jhelum Valley. Note Jhelum Fault (dashed

line) coinciding with faceted spurs-fluvial terrace interface (After Ali,

2011).

68

Fig. 5.7 Surface fault trace map of Muzaffarabad Thrust by Avouac et al.

(2006) using remote sensing image analysis.

69

Fig. 5.8 Geological map prepared by Kaneda et al. (2008) based on field

mapping techniques showing trace of Muzaffarabad Thrust that

ruptured in 2005 earthquake.

70

Fig. 5.9 A Google Earth view of the active tectonic feature (2005 Erathquake 70


9/116

vii

Rupture-dashed line) and geomorphic features like fluvial terraces,

faceted spurs and hanging valleys along the northern slopes of the

Upper Jhelum River (Muzafarabad-Siran Segment; Muzafarabad

towards the lower left corner of the photograph) (After Ali, 2011).

Fig. 5.10 (a) Vertical separation of 3.3 meters observed in the field along thefracture R8.

(b) View of the Earthquake Pond produced after 2005 Kashmir

earthquake when the ground to the right side of the fault trace

(hanging wall) was uplifted relatively to left side (foot wall). Photo

taken looking towards NW.

(c) Change in the Tree Line observed from a distance indicating

uplift. Houses visible are of Sar Pain village (Photo taken looking

towards west).

72

Fig. 5.11 This photograph shows the tilting of the ground surface after 2005

earthquake. Distant newer graves (at the top of photo) are of the

victims of Kashmir earthquake devastation, unquestionably built after

the earthquake, are positioned horizontally where as the older graves

at the fore front of this photo are tilted to the right side (Photo taken

looking towards SE).

72

Fig. 5.12 (a) Block diagram showing different data parameters recorded along

key rupture surfaces. d: displacement; dp: depth; l: length; w: width.

(b) An example showing typical rupture surface observed on a fluvial

terrace. Note, the data parameters described in a fit into the surface

geometry of the rupture.

73

Fig. 5.13 (a and b) photographs showing ground rupture features with vertical

displacements (d). These rupture zones were observed on fluvial

terrace on the left bank of the Jhelum River, location 5. Top

photograph shows at least four levels of scarp-lets within ~12m.

Arrows show normal shear sense.

75

Fig.5.14 (a) Photograph and (b) sketch showing fracture pattern associated with

the rupture, close to the survey point 15, photo taken looking towards

southwest. (c) En-echelon pattern with small rhombohedral grabens.

76

Fig. 5.15 Detailed map and a cross section of the fractures observed at location 77


10/116

viii

5 near Sar Pain area. Density diagram is also provided (See text for

details).

Fig. 5.16 Detailed map and a cross section of the fractures observed at location

6 near Sar Pain area. Density diagram is also provided (See text for

details).

78

Fig. 5.17 (a) Location 7 shows fracture pattern along the metalled road.

Negligible vertical displacement was observed on the road with few

centimeters of opening or extension. Inset shows cracks in the brick

wall. The orientation of these cracks follows the rupture trend. (b)

Location 8, photograph showing the trace of rupture zone from

location 5. Note the fracture pattern is very similar as observed at

locations 5 and 6. Inset shows details of the fracture pattern. (c)

Location 9, Chikar Kas, where ground rupture is trending NW-SE and

is manifested as complete collapse of semi-concrete houses and tilting

of trees.

79

Fig. 5.18 (a) Reverse fault observed on the way to Awan Pati town, Location

10. The fault is observed in the bed rock. The attitude of the fault is

close to the main rupture trend. Note, 1) washing out of the road due

to fracturing and sinking, and 2) fault displaces recent colluvium and

vegetation. (b) Location 11, unusual bulge on terrace near Butlian

village as a consequence of 2005 Kashmir earthquake.

81

Fig. 5.19 Field photograph showing the Failure surface of landslide near Nisar

camp in the background and the bulging due to Muzaffarabad Thrust

in the foreground, complimented by tilting of trees and localization of

destruction along the crest of bulging.

83

Fig. 5.20 (a and b) Satellite images (2.5metre resolution) showing location of

the areas (5 to 11), where surface rupture, caused by the 2005 Kashmir

earthquake, was studied in detailed.

84

Fig. 5.21 Photograph showing the south eastern face of Dana Hill which slided

down and blocked Karli River forming Karli lake. Photo taken from

the high point on Landslide deposit and looking towards northwest.

Vehicles are shown for scale (Modified after Dunning et al., 2007).

84

Fig. 6.1 Bedding-Cleavage relationship as observed in outcrops of Murree 88


11/116

ix

Formation along Muzaffarabad-Srinagar road near location 6.

Stereographic projection shows the orientation of intersection

lineation formed.

Fig. 6.2 Very steep foliation developed in shales of Murree Formation near

location 7 showing NE-SW directed stresses. Axial plane of smallkink folding is also visible (marker for scale).

90

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1.1 Table showing formation thicknesses used to construct cross-section

(Fig. 4.12).

6

Table 3.1 Table showing the composite stratigraphy of the study area (from

Calkins et al., 1975; Greco, 1989; Greco and Spencer, 1993; Kazmiand Jan, 1997; Hussain et al., 2004; Kazmi and Abbasi, 2008; Shah,

2009).

29

Table 3.2 Table showing the stratigraphic comparison of Muzaffarabad with

Abbottabad and Kotli areas.

33

Table 4.1 Attitude data of the study area used for structural analysis. 55


12/116


13/116

xi

ABSTRACT

The disastrous earthquake of 8 th October, 2005 in Kashmir and surrounding regions produced excellent neotectonic features on mesoscopic to regional scale henceresulting in drawing attention of the global geoscientific community. The study areaof this research is defined by rocks of two tectonic realms i.e. Lesser Himalayas andSub Himalayas separated by Jhelum Fault (JF) / Main Boundary Thrust (MBT). Theserocks are folded on a regional scale around antiformal structure called HazaraKashmir Syntaxis (HKS) with rocks of lesser Himalayas exposed along the limbs andapex where as that of sub Himalayas covering its core.

This earthquake ruptured Muzaffarabad Thrust between Balakot city in the NW andSudhan Gali in the SE. Detailed rupture mapping was carried out on 1:100 scale attwo small hillocks near Sar Pain area on Muzaffarabad-Srinagar road. Here the faulttrace is characterized by broad zone of fractures running through lose sediments offluvial terraces. Maximum vertical displacement recorded along these fractures is

3.3m. Other neotectonic features associated with 2005 earthquake, and henceMuzaffarabad Thrust, include convex bulging of cultivated land close to its trace;tilting of man-made features / structures; ponds formation on the footwall as hangingwall was uplifted along Muzaffarabad Thrust and blocked the flow of streams runningacross its trace; and change in a pre-earthquake straight tree-line across MuzaffarabadThrust indicating uplift. There were many associated landslides distributed along thetrace of Muzaffarabad Thrust but those at Nisar Camp and Hattian Bala locations arenote worthy.

Neotectonic features of the Jhelum Fault were studied using satellite image analysisand field observations. Stream flow pattern was used as a major indicator ofneotectonic activity along Jhelum Fault on satellite images. A 140 bend in flow

pattern of Jhelum River near Muzaffarabad city is due to neotetonic activity alongJhelum Fault. Stream avulsion of the western tributaries of lower Jhelum River is alsoidentified on satellite images. Field evidences of neotectonic activity along JhelumFault include stream offset and dissected sedimentation bars. Another characteristicfeature is the change in topographic relief across the trace of Jhelum Fault.

Satellite image analysis was also used for identification of different lithologies andstructures exposed in the study area. The results displayed a good match with fieldobservations and previously published literature. Two distinct structural domains wereidentified based on the strike data. Most of the structures lying in Domain 1 areoriented more or less in NNE direction indicating that this area has taken up effect ofJhelum Fault. Whereas Domain 2 is affected by NE-SW shortening, resulting information of NW oriented structures almost parallel to Muzaffarabad Thrust.


14/116

1

CHAPTER 1 (INTRODUCTION)

1.1. BACKGROUND

This study was carried out in Azad Jammu and Kashmir and parts of Hazara division,

Pakistan. The area captured special attention of the global geoscientific community

after the 8 October, 2005, Kashmir earthquake which almost wiped out an entire

generation of human being in Balakot, Bagh, Muzaffarabad and the adjoining areas.

Thousands of people lost their lives in a few seconds with many more left behind as

injured and homeless, thus reinforcing the need to better understand earthquakes, their

significance and processes of their occurrences and mitigating the risks. Therefore,

the surroundings of Muzaffarabad were selected for the structural and neotectonic

studies because it was worst affected by October 8, 2005 earthquake.

The city of Muzaffarabad lies close to the junction of two active faults, the

Muzaffarabad Thrust and the Jhelum Fault. The former is responsible for the deadly

earthquake of October 08, 2005; whereas the Jhelum Fault has been relatively inactive

in the recent past. It forms a part of the western limb of Hazara-Kashmir Syntaxis

which is a major fold structure in Pakistani Himalayas (Fig. 1.1). This spectacular

structural feature of the Himalayas was first discussed in detail by Wadia (1931) who

referred to it as the Syntaxis of the Northwest Himalaya.

This research work was focused on identifying structural and neotectonic features

associated with Muzaffarabad Thrust and the western limb of Hazara-Kashmir

Syntaxis (HKS) which comprises of Jhelum Fault and Nathiagali Thrust, and finally

correlating these features with the regional structural trend of the area. Special focus

was on recording both mesostructures as well as mega structures.


15/116


16/116

3

1.3. ACCESSIBILITY

The study area is mostly mountainous, increasing in height towards north and

contains good network of roads to major settlements as well as far-flung villages.

Muzaffarabad city, capital of Azad Jammu and Kashmir, is connected to Islamabad by

air and road. Its distance from Rawalpindi is 138 kilometers and is at about 76

kilometers from Abbottabad. Muzaffarabad can also be reached by road from

Mansehra via Balakot and then Garhi Habibullah. There are also few narrow roads

which lead to the western parts of the study area from the eastern parts of Abbottabad

e.g. Nathiagali and Thandiani etc.

Good cross-sectional exposures and traverse sites are accessible along the rivers and

streams flowing across the general strike of the area. The study area is crossed by

numerous such streams in addition to three major rivers which are having perennial

flow including Kunhar River, Jhelum River and Neelum River.

1.4. METHODOLOGY

Reconnaissance study of the area was done by studying satellite images using

computer softwares like Erdas Imagine 8.4 and ArcGIS 9.2. Combined with published

geological maps, satellite image analysis was used to delineate the major fold and

fault structures, and stratigraphic units prior to undertaking the field studies.

Neotectonic studies of the area were carried out, with focus on recording neotectonic

activities in Quaternary terrace deposits in the field and studying drainage patterns

and recognizing stream offsets using both satellite image analysis as well as field

checks.


17/116

4

1.4.1. Field Work

Field work was carried out in the area from Hatian to Muzaffarabad along the

Muzaffarabad Thrust, from Muzaffarabad to Kohala along the western limb of

Hazara-Kashmir Syntaxis and along Agar Nala to cover the area between the Jhelum

Fault and Muzaffarabad Thrust (Fig. 1.1). Traverses were also made to document

structural and neotectonic features along streams and gorges which provide good

exposures across the regional strike.

Two separate field visits were made to the area. First field work was carried out from

1st to 3 rd February, 2008. This visit was intended to identify the vital areas for

comprehensive studies. Second field work was designed after a month from 29 th

February to 3 rd March 2008. In this field excursion, thorough study of Muzaffarabad

Thrust trace was done with meter-scale rupture mapping at Sar Pain. Attention was

also paid to record other features which evidenced the neotectonic nature of the fault

i.e. uplifting, bulging and tilting of the surface and their effects e.g. blocking of water

flow in stream(s) etc.

1.4.2. Lab Work

After collecting data in the field, it was transferred to computer and various

components were selected for further work. Following is a general procedure that was

adopted in the lab work:

i. Prior to the commencement of field work, Satellite images were first studied in the

lab to delineate the regional scale structural trend of the area.

ii. The data collected in the field was assembled in the lab.

iii. Data was then converted to acceptable formats for use in computer software for

stereographic projections


18/116

5

iv. Stereonet plots of the data were prepared in the lower hemisphere using Rick

Allmendingers StereoWin 1.2 software.

v. Based on stereographic projections various sub-groups of data set were

recognized, analyzed and used for interpretation.

vi. Geological map and a cross-section were then prepared from field observations.

vii. All maps, stereographic projections, cross-sectional profile and diagrams were

used in writing the final report and interpreting the results.

1.4.2.1. Preparation of Geological Map

Detailed geological map of the area was prepared using published geological maps of

Geological Survey of Pakistan as base maps. The study area is covered by Survey of

Pakistan toposheet Numbers 43 F/7, 43 F/8, 43 F/11 and 43 F/12. All the geological

maps are present in National Library of Earth Sciences (NLES), National Centre of

Excellence in Geology (NCEG), University of Peshawar, except the 43 F/8. Therefore

the geological map of Latif (1970) was used as base map to cover for the area of 43

F/8. Final layout of geological map with proper scale and legend was prepared in

ArcMap 9.2 software by integrating the field observations and satellite image

analysis.

1.4.2.2. Preparation of Geological cross-section

Geological cross-section was constructed across the structures in mapped area to

understand the subsurface geometry. Following are the general steps that were

followed for the construction of cross-section.

i. A section line was selected on the map that crossed maximum of lithologies and

structures at about right angle. A jog was thus inserted in the section line to

incorporate the southwestern syncline in the section.


19/116

6

ii. Profile was constructed from SRTM DEM file by using the computer software

Global Mapper 8.03.

iii. Cross section was finally constructed using 2DMove 5.0 software. Kink method

was followed for cross-section construction. Thicknesses of different formations

were taken from the published work of the study area (Table 1.1).

iv. Dip data used for the construction of cross-section shows an integration of data

from GSP maps and the field observations.

Table 1.1. Table showing formation thicknesses used to construct cross-section (Fig.

4.12).

S. No. Formation NameThickness

(in meters)Reference

1 Kamlial Formation about 1500Measured from cross-section

(this study)

2 Murree Formation 1524 Calkins et al. (1975)

3Paleocene Rocks

(Undivided)200

Greco (1989), Greco and Spencer

(1993)

4Muzaffarabad

Formation 762 Calkins et al. (1975)

1.5. LITERATURE REVIEW

The earliest work on geology of Hazara Kashmir region dates back to the 2 nd half of

ninteenth century and continued into the first half of previous century. This work is

concentrated on the age determination, stratigraphic correlation and structural and

tectonic work. Examples of prominent work in this area include Verchre (1866 and

1867), Wynne (1873), Lyddekar (1883), Middlemiss (1896), Wadia (1928, 1931, and

1934).


20/116

7

Wadia (1931) worked in detail on the Tectonics, Orogeny and stratigraphy of the

Hazara-Kashmir Syntaxis. He referred to it as Syntaxis of the Northwest Himalaya

and presented the earliest model for its formation. He inferred an original horst or a

triangular promontory of Gondwanaland (which he termed The Foreland) to be the

main reason of formation of the syntaxis. According to him, the foreland is

tectonically overlain by The Autochthonous Fold Belt which itself is lying below the

The Nappe Zone. Wadia (1931) divided the area into eight major mappable

stratigraphic units, thus established the broad structural-stratigraphic relationships in

the area.

Latif (1970) mapped the southeastern Hazara and adjoining parts of Rawalpindi and

Muzaffarabad in great detail. He presented completely new stratigraphic

nomenclature for the rocks exposed in the area and recognized eight major

lithostratigraphic groups which were further classified into 21 different lithologic

subunits. Latifs map thus provides great structural and stratigraphic details.

Calkins et al. (1975) had mapped the area in detail and explained the stratigraphy and

structure of a sequence of rocks that range in age from Precambrian to Miocene. They

reported that the structural pattern of western limb of Hazara-Kashmir Syntaxis

developed in two phases of deformation. In the first phase, the tectonic transport was

towards south having strong east and southeast wards pressure while the second phase

demonstrates the west and southwest wards countermovement of rocks in the

compressed axial zone in response to the continued south and southwest wards

movement of rocks on the longer eastern limb. The major structural terminologies

used in this thesis are taken from Calkins et al. (1975) e.g. Muzaffarabad Anticline


21/116

8

and Hazara-Kashmir Synaxis. This work was done jointly by the Geological survey of

Pakistan and U.S. Geological Survey.

Bossart et al. (1984 and 1988) studied the tectonic structure of the Hazara-Kashmir

Syntaxis by integrating the rock deformation and regional scale tectonics. They

reported two sets of superimposed major folds with related minor structures. Hence

they presented a tectonic model for the formation of Hazara-Kashmir Syntaxis that the

syntaxis is formed as a result of early nappe formation by southwest ward thrusting of

metamorphosed Himalayan rocks, proceeded by development of large shear zone

structure and lastly by the overthrusting of rock units from northwest to southeast.

Greco (1989) and Greco and Spencer (1993) discussed the stratigraphical, tectonic

and metamorphic features of the area. They divided the area into four main tectonic

elements (i.e. Subhimalaya, Lesser Himalaya, Higher Himalaya and Kohistan

sequence) and correlated it with the Indian Kashmir Himalayas to the east. A tectonic

model is proposed based on detailed superficial structures including small scale

structures (stretching lineation, schistosity and crenulation cleavage), rock distribution

and petrographic studies. Geometrical superposition of deformational phases detected

by small and large scale structures and by pressure-temperature history of the

collected samples is also in accordance with this model. Greco (1989) gave the name

Rara Formation to a NS oriented, fault bounded package of rocks lying between

Murree Formation in the east and Hazara Formation in the west.

Bossart and Ottiger (1990) carried out paleomagnetic and structural analyses of three

sections of Murree Formation along the core of the Hazara-Kashmir Syntaxis. These

sections are located in Jhelum, Neelum and Kaghan valleys. Thus he reported 45 of


22/116

9

clockwise rotation of the axial zone of Hazara-Kashmir Syntaxis relative to the Indian

craton.

Treloar et al. (1992) worked on the large scale tectonic geometries of Northwest

Himalaya. Taking the dominant transport direction throughout the Himalayan history

as towards S or SSE, He came up with a model that the Hazara-Kashmir Syntaxis has

been formed by the mechanical impediment by the interference and thus pinning of

two converging Pakistani and Kashmir thrust sheets. This pinning resulted in the

rotation of these sheets forming the present geometry of Hazara-Kashmir Syntaxis.

Arbab and Shah (1996) of Geological Survey of Pakistan published a detailed

geological map of Azad Jammu and Kashmir. Their map portrays good details and

explanatory notes on the stratigraphy, structure and economic geology of the area.

Avouac et al. (2006) determined displacement along Muzaffarabad Thrust based on

remote sensing analyses using sub-pixel correlation of ASTER images. According to

them, average displacement is around 4m with maximum value of 7 m northeast of

Muzaffarabad.

Kaneda et al. (2008) mapped in detail the surface rupture of causative fault of

Kashmir earthquake 2005. Vertical separation of ~ 7 m was recorded by them and

declared that this fault is not accommodating the main Himalayan contraction because

they calculated the shortening rate and recurrence interval for this fault to be 1.4-4.1

mm/yr and 1000-3300 years, respectively.

Gahalaut (2006) classified the October 08, 2005 Kashmir earthquake as either entirely

occurring in the updip part of Indus Kohistan Seismic Zone (IKSZ) or involving some

part of detachment under Kashmir Himalayas but definitely not occurring in the


23/116

10

Kashmir gap. Rather, he feared that this earthquake may have increased the stresses in

Kashmir Himalayas.

Owen et al. (2008) studied the landslides triggered by October 08, 2005 Kashmir

earthquake. Based on different geomorphic-geologic-anthropogenic settings, they

divided these landslides into six different types and concluded that the earthquake-

triggered landslides are mostly restricted to particular zones related with lithology,

structure, geomorphology, topography and human presence.

Dunning et al. (2007) studied in detail the Hattian Bala Landslide, the largest

landslide triggered by October 08, 2005 earthquake. They classified the landslide as

Rock Avalanche, measured various parameters and gave their quantitative data such

as length, width, area and volumes of landslide deposit and dammed lakes

respectively.

Khan et al. (2003) mainly contributed on the structure, tectonics and stratigraphy of

the area. Based on residual gravity data in the area, they studied shallow geological

structure in the core of Hazara Kashmir Syntaxis.

Munir and Mirza (2007) worked on the stratigraphic aspects of the 2005 earthquake

and concluded that the decollement is marked by the under lying shales of Kuldana

Formation. He also identified two unconformities during this study.


24/116

11

CHAPTER 2 (REGIONAL TECTONICS)

2.1. INTRODUCTION

The project is located in a part of the western Himalayas, which marks a major bend

in the Himalayan trend termed as the Western Syntaxis (Wadia, 1957). East of this

syntaxis, the Himalayas have a NW-SE trend compared to the part of the Himalayas

west of the syntaxis which have a WSW-ENE trend. The western syntaxis, comprises

two syntaxial bends. One in the north, involving Higher Himalayas and the Kohistan

Block, is termed the Nanga Parbat Syntaxis, while southern bend involving the Lesser

and the Sub-Himalayas is termed Hazara-Kashmir Syntaxis (Calkins et al., 1975). It is

the Hazara-Kashmir Syntaxis, which marks the junction between the Kashmir

Himalayas in the east and the Hazara-Pothowar Himalayas in the west and most

significant to tectonic setting of the study area.

Himalayas owe their origin to plate tectonics and have resulted from the continent-

continent collision during Cretaceous-Early Tertiary between the Indian and Eurasian

plates, which sandwiched the Kohistan Island arc in collision between the two. This

era of collision tectonics and mountain-building is named as the Himalayan orogeny.

There are several regional scale faults which control the overall geology and

geomorphology of the Himalayas.

Deformation in Himalayas is propagating towards south. From north towards south,

the tectonic elements are: a) Main Karakoram Thrust (MKT) or Shyok suture zonewhich separates the rocks of Eurasian plate from the rocks of Kohistan Island Arc

(KIA), b) Main Mantle Thrust (MMT) or Indus suture zone which brings the rocks of

Kohistan Island Arc (Kohistan sequence) on top of the Higher Himalayan rocks

belonging to the Indian Plate, c) Main Central Thrust (MCT); separating rocks of the


25/116

12

higher Himalayas from lesser Himalayas and d) Main Boundary Thrust (MBT) is

present between rocks of lesser Himalayas and sub Himalayas.

The study area occupies the west-central part of the Hazara-Kashmir Syntaxis, which

comprises tectonic units belonging to the Lesser Himalayas in the limbs and those of

the Sub Himalayas in the core. Neotectonic activity is prominent along the western

limb of Hazara Kashmir Syntaxis, where several faults merge into one another. This

part of western limb lies between Muzaffarabad and Balakot and is termed the

Balakot Shear Zone. This shear zone continues with the Jhelum Fault to the south of

Muzaffarabad, while the Muzaffarabad Thrust joins the shear zone to the northwest of

Muzaffarabad. The Hazara Kashmir Syntaxis is younger than MCT, MBT and PT, as

it folds these fault structures; however, the Muzaffarabad Thrust and the Jhelum Fault

are suspected to have reactivated several times after the formation of the syntaxis,

including the recent-most neotectonics associated with Kashmir Earthquake 2005.

In this chapter, the regional tectonic setting of the NW Himalayas will be analyzed

with special emphasis to the Hazara-Kashmir Syntaxis (HKS). Since the Kashmir

Earthquake 2005 epicentred in the vicinity of the project site, it is felt pertinent to

fully analyze the tectonic models which explain the formation of this syntaxial bend.

It is noteworthy that Pakistan has about half a dozen of oroclinal bends (syntaxis), of

which at least three are distinctly related with active faulting and recent earthquakes

e.g., Nanga Parbat Syntaxis, Hazara-Kashmir Syntaxis, and Quetta Syntaxis.

2.2. NORTHWEST HIMALAYAS

Since the Himalayas have formed from the collision of Indian plate with Eurasian

plate, thus it represents the deformed northern part of the Indian plate and shows that

the region to the south of the Main Mantle Thrust (MMT) is included in the


26/116

13

Himalayas. The Nanga Parbat-Haramosh Syntaxis represents the most northern part

of the Himalayas in north Pakistan. In general, the northern parts of the Himalayas are

demarcated by the mountain ranges of Kashmir, Upper Kaghan (south of Babusar),

Upper Hazara (Allai Kohistan and to the south), Besham and Indus Syntaxis, lower

Swat (south of Mingora), Chakdara, and Bajaur-Mohmand with the Salt Ranges and

the Trans-Indus Ranges delineating its southern limits in north Pakistan.

2.3. TECTONIC SUBDIVISIONS

Coward et al. (1988) divided the northwestern Himalayas into internal (or hinterland)

and external (or foreland) zones. The internal zone is comprised of crystalline rocks of

Naran, Upper Kashmir, Upper Hazara, Besham and Swat lying immediately to the

south of the MMT (Fig. 2.1). Whereas the external zone is considered to be a type of

foreland thrust-fold belt, comprising of successions of sedimentary rocks of Hill

Ranges (e.g., Kohat, Kalachitta, and Margala), the Salt Ranges-Trans-Indus Ranges,

and Potwar-Kohat plateau. The tectonic boundary between the internal and external

zones is marked by the Nathiagalli-Khairabad Thrust.

Gansser (1964) divided the rocks of central and eastern Himalayas into Tethyan

Himalayas, Higher Himalayas, Lesser Himalayas and Sub Himalayas (Fig. 2.2). The

Tethyan Himalayas are best developed in eastern and central Himalayas but are absent

from the western Himalayas of north Pakistan. It is comprised of unmetamorphosed

stratified rocks of Precambrian- Eocene age. The rocks of Higher Himalayas are

abundantly exposed just to the south of the MMT in Kaghan, upper Kashmir, Hazara,

and Swat areas. These rocks are comprised of Proterozoic aged crystalline rocks

which are metamorphosed during Himalayan orogeny. The MCT shows the southern

boundary of the Higher Himalayas and distinguishes it from the Lesser Himalayas.


27/116

14

The segregation of Higher and Lesser Himalayas is uncertain in north Pakistan

because MCT is only well developed in eastern and central Himalayas and its

extension beyond Kaghan is controversial. In northern Pakistan, the counterparts of

the Lesser Himalayas are considered to be consisting of an inner (or Abbottabad) zone

and an outer (or Kalachitta) zone. The latter includes Kohat, Kalachitta, and Margala

Hill Ranges and comprises of unmetamorphosed sedimentary rocks of Triassic to

Eocene age.

Fig. 2.1. Regional geological map of the Northwestern Himalayas, North Pakistan

showing location of the study area (boxed area). Nathiagalli Thrust

illustrates the boundary between the metamorphic (Internal) and the non-

metamorphic (External) zones (After Coward et al., 1988).


28/116


29/116


30/116


31/116

18

2.4. BOUNDARY FAULTS

The Himalayas of northern Pakistan are the structural expression of the continent-

continent collision and thus exhibit a variety of major structures. The internal zone of

northern Pakistan contains five main thrust sheets (Treloar et al., 1989). From east to

west they are Upper Kaghan, lower Kaghan, Hazara, Besham and Swat. All these

thrust sheets are bordered by fault structures and their emplacement is considered to

have been taken place in the last 45 Ma. (post-peak metamorphism).

A traverse in the Kaghan valley along the Kaghan River offers a symbolic

representation of the major structures in the Himalayas of northern Pakistan.Various

major boundary faults separating the aforementioned thrust sheets of markedly

diverse tectono-stratigraphic framework can be identified here in this region (Fig.

2.2).

A younger phase of N-S oriented folding have folded all the major thrusts in the

Internal Zone of the Himalaya producing the N-S oriented regional scale fold

structures such as the Nanga Parbat Syntaxis, Besham-Darband Syntaxis and Hazara

Kashmir Syntaxis. This phase of N-S folding is younger than the MBT and thus it

took place in the last < 8 Ma. Hence the Quaternary fault structures are mostly

oriented N-S and are commonly associated with the limbs of these N-S oriented fold

structures for instance the Balakot Fault at the western limb of the Hazara-Kashmir

Syntaxis and the Raikot-Sassi Fault at the western limb of the Nanga Parbat Syntaxis.

Similarly, the Besham Syntaxis is also cut across by numerous N-S faults including

the Puran, Chakesar and Darband faults.


32/116

19

To the south of the Main Boundary Thrust, the Kohat-Pothowar Plateau and the Salt

ranges are bounded at their southern margin by a major boundary fault termed the

Main Frontal Thrust, which is the youngest boundary fault in Himalayas.

2.5. HAZARA-KASHMIR SYNTAXIS (HKS)

The Hazara-Kashmir Syntaxis is a NNW trending regional-scale antiform that folds

the Lesser- and Sub-Himalayas and also the Higher Himalayas to some extent. Unlike

the classical anticlines, where the core is occupied by the oldest rocks and the limbs

comprise successively younger rocks, the Hazara-Kashmir Syntaxis exposes the

youngest rocks (i.e., Mid Tertiary and younger molasses sediments of Rawalpindi-

Siwalik Group) in the core, and successively older rocks in the limbs. This owes to

crustal stacking due to thrusting prior to the development of the Hazara-Kashmir

syntaxial structure. This N-S oriented mega-fold structure is the youngest of the

tectonic features in the region. Except for the Himalayan Frontal Thrust, all the major

thrusts including MBT, Panjal Thrust and MCT are refolded by this structure. Like

Nanga Parbat syntaxis, the western margin of the HKS is characterized by strong

neotectonic activity manifested in the form of Kashmir Earthquake 2005. Several

boundary thrusts, some of which are off course equivalent to the PT and the MBT are

involved in folding related with the HKS. These include the Mansehra Thrust, Oghi

Shear, Murree Thrust, Nathiagali Thrust, Muzaffarabad Thrust and the Jhelum Fault

(Fig. 2.3). Because of varying nomenclature, and looping together of several fault

structures, it is at time confusing to fully appreciate the tectonics of the HKS.

Therefore, an attempt is made below to clarify this tectonic set up.


33/116

20

Fig. 2.3. Tectonic map showing refolding of the major Himalayan thrusts by the

Hazara Kashmir Syntaxis. MMT = Main Mantle Thrust; MCT = MainCentral Thrust; PT = Panjal Thrust; MBT = Main Boundary Thrust; MT =

Muzaffarabad Thrust; JF = Jhelum Fault; NT = Nathiagali Thrust (Modified

after Latif, 1970; Calkins et al., 1975; Greco and Spencer, 1993; and this

study).


34/116

21

The structures in the HKS are divided into two groups for the sake of description: the

core structures and the limb structures.

2.5.1. The Hazara Kashmir Syntaxis: Core Structures

There are three structures in the core of the HKS that are most significant. 1)

Muzaffarabad Anticline, and 2) Jhelum Thrust, 3) NE Trending Refold Structures. In

the following these three structures will be elaborated in detail.

2.5.1.1. The Muzaffarabad Anticline

The overall structure in the HKS, especially in its northern part, north of the Jhelum

River can be visualized as a large doubly plunging southwest-verging anticline, with a

well developed NE limb and a highly tectonized and attenuated SW limb. The core of

this structure is exposed near Muzaffarabad, and hence the structure is appropriately

termed as the Muzaffarabad Anticline (Calkins et al., 1975; Bossart et al., 1984;

Hussain et al., 2004).

The doubly plunging anticline exposes the deepest stratigraphic levels in a 30 km long

stretch between Muzaffarabad and Balakot, where the core is occupied by carbonates

of Muzaffarabad Formation. In the eastern outer limbs of the anticline, immediately

overlying the Muzaffarabad Formation, there is another set of carbonate rocks of

Paleocene-Eocene age. It is marked by unconformable lower contact with the

Muzaffarabad Formation and unconformable upper contact with the Murree

Formation. The Murree Formation occupies the entire eastern limb of the

Muzaffarabad Anticline as well as the northern apex of the syntaxis.

The western limb of the Muzaffarabad anticline is highly attenuated because of

involvement in and reworking by the faults marking the western limb of the HKS.


35/116

22

2.5.1.2. Muzaffarabad Thrust (The Jhelum Thrust)

The Muzaffarabad Thrust marks contact of the Muzaffarabad Formation with the

Murree Formation at the western limb of the Muzaffarabad anticline (Calkins et al.,

1975). It is a steep thrust (25o-50

o) exposed immediately east of Muzaffarabad. The

thrust is refolded along the Neelum River, before it stretches NW towards the

Balakot, where it merges with Panjal Thrust and MBT at the western margin of the

Hazara-Kashmir Syntaxis (Fig. 2.3). The 2005 Kashmir Earthquake ruptured the

Muzaffarabad Thrust as well as its southeastern extension (Tanda Fault of Nakata et

al., 1991) in an over 100 km stretch between Balakot in the north to Bagh in the SE,

that established existence of a major thrust along this stretch.

2.5.1.3. NE-SW Refolding Structures

The Muzaffarabad Anticline and related structures, including the Muzaffarabad

Thrust, which mark the first phase of structures in the Hazara Kashmir Syntaxis, are

refolded through a subsequent phase of deformation. The structures related with this

folding are oriented ENE-WSW, almost at right angle to first-phase structures and

thus result in their refolding. About three such folds refold the core of the

Muzaffarabad Anticline in the vicinity of Muzaffarabad (Fig. 2.4). The largest of

these refold structure is defined by the Neelum reentrant, whereby the axis of the

Muzaffarabad Anticline as well as the Muzaffarabad Thrust form a NE trending fold

structure around the Neelum River as it enters Muzaffarabad (Fig. 2.3). Greco (1989)

have shown that this phase of folding is widespread in the Hazara Kashmir Syntaxis

as well as in the Lesser and Higher Himalayas in the Kaghan area (Fig. 2.5).


36/116

23

Fig. 2.4. Map showing the refolding of first phase structures of HKS, oriented almost

at right angle to each other (After Greco, 1989).


37/116

24

Fig. 2.5. Map showing the continuation of refolding structures of HKS in Kaghan

area (After Greco, 1989).


38/116

25

2.5.2. Structures Defining the Margins of the Hazara Kashmir Syntaxis

The Hazara Kashmir Syntaxis is a half-window structure which is typically exposed

through erosion of the overlying thrust sheets. The remnants of these thrusts are now

confined to the margins of the syntaxis in the form of a NNW oriented loop. As

mentioned above, the western margin of the Hazara Kashmir Syntaxis is more

tectonized than its northern apex or eastern limb. In the following, the margins of the

syntaxis will therefore be described in two separate sections.

2.5.2.1. Northern and Eastern Limb

The margin of the Hazara Kashmir Syntaxis north of Balakot and its further extension

towards the SE is primarily bounded by the Main Boundary Thrust (MBT). Although

the MBT is classically defined as the thrust contact between the Mesozoic-Eocene

carbonate platform and the Miocene molasse sediments of the Murree Formation, this

condition is met only locally in the Kaghan valley near Paras. In this part of the

Hazara Kashmir Syntaxis, a tectonic sliver (~ 2 km thick) containing carbonates from

Jurassic to Eocene age, is in contact with the Murree Formation in the Hazara

Kashmir Syntaxis core. Elsewhere the Murree Formation is in direct tectonic contact

with the Permian-Triassic aged Panjal Formation. The Panjal Thrust, in this part of

the syntaxis is a separate entity following the outer part of the syntaxial margin

defining a tectonic boundary between the Panjal Formation and overlying

Precambrian Salkhala Formation.

2.5.2.2. Western Limb

The western margin of the Hazara Kashmir Syntaxis is far more complex than the

eastern margin. The MBT and the Panjal Thrust, which remain as separate entities on

the eastern margin as well as the northern apex of the syntaxis, merge with each other


39/116

26

some five kilometers north of Balakot and continue southwards as a single fault. The

rock units on the either side of the fault are also variable. In the vicinity of Balakot,

the fault separates the Murree Formation occupying the syntaxis core from the

Precambrian Salkhala Formation in the west. The Salkhala Formation pinches out to

the south of Balakot and is replaced by the Precambrian Hazara Formation. On the

inner side in the syntaxis, although the fault is predominantly lined by the Murree

Formation, but at places, especially between Garhi Habibullah and Balakot, it is the

Muzaffarabad Formation which occupies the faulted contact. Minor slivers of

Paleocene-Eocene carbonate rocks locally intervene between the fault and the

Muzaffarabad Formation.

To the south of Muzaffarabad, much of the continuity of the fault marking the western

margin of the syntaxis runs along the Jhelum River as an upright strike-slip fault.

2.5.2.2.1. Jhelum Fault

Jhelum Fault is a NS oriented upright strike slip fault, marking the southern

continuation of western limb of Hazara Kashmir Syntaxis from Muzaffarabad (Fig.

2.6). As mentioned earlier, it almost runs along the Jhelum River from Muzaffarabad

to Kohala. It separates Precambrian Hazara Formation in the west from the Miocene

molasse sediments of Murree Formation in the east in an area between Muzaffarabad

and Rara, a small village situated near the junction of Kunhar River and Jhelum River.

Further south of Rara village, it demarcates Murree Formation from the dolomites,

quartzites and limestones belonging to Mesozoic Rara Formation (Greco, 1989).


40/116

27

Fig. 2.6. Steeply dipping Jhelum Fault exposed along River Jhelum between

Muzaffarabad and Kohala.

2.5.3. Tectonic Models for the Origin of the Hazara-Kashmir Syntaxis

1. Wadia (1931) stated that the horst on the Indian plate is responsible for the

formation of the Hazara-Kashmir Syntaxis (HKS). He identified a SSE-ward

transport direction on the western side of the HKS contradicting with a

southwest-ward transport direction on the eastern limb.

2. Calkins et al. (1975) also recognized different transport directions on each

limb of Hazara-Kashmir Syntaxis and mentioned that a second, west-directed,

movement direction resulted in the west-vergent shape of the anticlinal

syntaxis.

3. Bossart et al. (1984, 1988) proposed that the Hazara-Kashmir Syntaxis

developed in response to anticlockwise rotation of the Indian Plate during the

Late Tertiary. According to this model the foreland thrust-fold belt in Pakistan


41/116

28

Himalayas developed kink structures with sinisterly slip. Continued rotation

and contraction associated with the Indian-plate underthrusting resulted in

development of the kink-structures into the crustal-scale antiformal fold

structure.

4. Bossart and Ottiger (1990) based on the paleomagnetic studies reviewed

Bossart et al. (1988) model. Their findings suggested that whereas the western

limb did rotate anticlockwise in Tertiary, the eastern limb rather rotated

clockwise, opposite to the rotation of the western limb.

5. Treloar et al. (1992) suggested that Hazara Kashmir Syntaxis developed as a

consequence of interference between two active and converging thrust sheets;

Kashmir Himalayas in the east and Hazara-Pothowar Himalayas in the west.


42/116

29

CHAPTER 3 (STRATIGRAPHIC SETUP)

STRATIGRAPHY

The study area falls in the domain of the Hazara-Kashmir Syntaxis (HKS) and

exposes rocks of Precambrian age to Recent fluvial deposits. A larger part of the

study area occupies core of the Hazara-Kashmir Syntaxis while a lesser portion

includes area at the western limb of the Syntaxis. The stratigraphy of the area has long

been established by many workers and following is the age-wise division of the

exposed stratigraphy (Table 3.1).

Table 3.1. Table showing the composite stratigraphy of the study area (from Calkins

et al., 1975; Greco, 1989; Greco and Spencer, 1993; Kazmi and Jan, 1997;

Hussain et al., 2004; Kazmi and Abbasi, 2008; Shah, 2009).

Age Formation Lithological Description

Miocene

Kamlial FormationMedium to coarse grained sandstone

interbeded with hard shale andintraformational conglomerate

Murree FormationThick monotonous fluvial sequence ofclay and sandstone with subordinate

intraformational conglomerate

PaleocenePaleocene rocks

(Undivided)

Nodular limestones and calcareousshales with intercalations of marls. 4 mthick coal bed accompanied by Bauxite

soil at the base

Jurassic Rara Formation

Mainly composed of dolomites,quartzites and limestones with

alternating carbonaceous slates and fewsandstone and siltstone layers

Cambrian Muzaffarabad Formation

Stromatolitic limestone and dolomitewith minor conglomerate bed near the base and shale horizon in the middle

part

Precambrian Hazara Formation

Highly deformed Slate, Phyllite andShale with minor occurrences of

Limestone, Graphite, Gypsum andSandstone


43/116

30

3.1. PRECAMBRIAN

There is one formation exposed in the study area that belongs to Precambrian age.

3.1.1. Hazara Formation

In the western part of the study area, highly deformed argillaceous rocks, with

intercalations of carbonaceous rocks, are exposed. These rocks belong to Precambrian

Hazara Formation.

Hazara Formation represents Hazara Slate Formation of Marks and Ali (1961),

Slate Series of Hazara of Middlemiss (1896), Hazara Group of Latif (1970) and

Hazara Formation of Calkins et al. (1975) and Greco and Spencer (1993). As the

formation also includes rocks other than slates, the name Hazara Formation is thus

adopted by many workers and is therefore used here in this thesis.

Hazara Formation consists primarily of slate, phyllite and shale. Some minor

occurrences of limestone, graphite, gypsum and sandstone are also found at few

places. Slates and phyllite are rusty brown and dark green on weathered surfaces

while grey to greenish grey or black on the fresh surfaces. Bedding in slate and

phyllite is identifiable at few places and are thin to medium bedded whereas intense

deformation has obliterated the depositional features at most places and hence

bedding is not clear. Shale layers, few centimeters to few feet thick, are present as

precursor lithology where degree of metamorphism is low. Fine to medium grained

and thick bedded Sandstone is also present at some places. Limestone observed near

Charhkapora chowk on Muzaffarabad-Kohala road is thin bedded, internally

laminated, jointed and fractured, yellowish black in color with almost vertical

bedding. Minor folding is also developed and bedding parallel calcite veins are found.

This limestone is non-fossiliferous and micritic. Gypsum is found in a 100 to 400 feet


44/116

31

thick zone along with calcareous phyllite (Calkins et al., 1975). The contact of this

zone with the surrounding slates is sharp and probably tectonic in origin (Greco,

1989).

Thickness of the Hazara Formation is not established yet due to two reasons; i)

Hazara Formation is strongly deformed and forms many isoclinals folds., and ii) the

base of the Hazara Formation is not exposed. However, its broad outcrop exposure

means large thickness. Contact of the Hazara Formation in the study area is faulted

with Rara Formation and Murree Formation.

Marks and Ali (1961) categorized the Formation as turbidite deposit but Calkins et al.

(1975) opposed their concept and emphasized that occurrence of limestone, gypsum

and graphite in turbidite sequence is uncertain. According to Calkins et al. (1975),

most of the rock units of Hazara Formation were possibly deposited as shallow-water

argillaceous sequence. Due to the presence of evaporites, Latif (1973) correlated

Hazara Formation with the Salt Range Formation whereas Calkins et al. (1975)

correlated it with Dogra Slates of Kashmir which are overlain by fossiliferous

Cambrian rocks. For this reason, Calkins et al. (1975) gave Precambrian age to the

Hazara Formation. Crawford and Davies (1975), using Rb/Sr method, analyzed three

samples from the Hazara Formation for age determination. Results of the two samples

gave the age of 765 20 million years, while the third one showed the age of 950

20 million years, therefore both these results confirm the age of Hazara Formation as

Precambrian.

3.2. PALEOZOIC

There is one formation exposed in the study area that belongs to Paleozoic age.


45/116


46/116

33

In the eastern limb of Muzaffarabad anticline, Muzaffarabad Formation is overlain by

Paleocene rocks and the contact is unconformable. Whereas in the western limb,

Muzaffarabad Formation has unconformable contact with Paleocene rocks at some

places, and where Paleocene rocks are missing, it has faulted contact with Murree

Formation. Similarly, where both the Paleocene rocks and Murree Formation are

absent, the Muzaffarabad Formation has faulted contact with the Precambrian Hazara

Formation.

Table 3.2. Table showing the stratigraphic comparison of Muzafarrabad with

Abbottabad and Kotli areas.

Group Formation Member

Quaternary Havelian (Alluvium) (Alluvium) Alluvium

Kamlial Formation SiwalikMurree Formation Murree

KuldanaLora

Margala Hill Limestone

Margalla Hill Limestone

Kuzagali Shale

Paleocene Mari

Limestone Paleocene Rocks

Undivided Patala Formation

chanali limestone

Giumal sandstoneSpiti shale

Sikhar Limestone

Maira

MurreeMiocene

Eocene

Rawalpindi

P e r m

i a n T r

i a s s

i c

Cretaceous

Tarnawai

Muzaffarabad (This Study)

Kotli (Choudhry & Ashraf, 1981)

Thandiani

Hothla

Galis

Rara FormationJurassicJurassic

Abbottabad (Latif 1970 & 1974)Age

Hazira

Galdanian

Muzaffarabad Formation

Abbottabad Group

A b b o

t t a b a

d

Cambrian

P e r m

i a n T r

i a s s

i c

Tarnawai

SirbanMirpur

Mahmda Gali

Sangar GaliTanakki

Precambrian Hazara Hazara Formation Dogra Slates

Muzaffarabad Formation

Abbottabad Group

A b b o

t t a b a

d

CambrianKakul

MBT-Panjal Thrust

Hiatus

Hiatus

Hiatus


47/116

34

3.3. MESOZOIC

Mesozoic in the study area is represented by a narrow extension of rocks in a north-

south orientation along Jhelum River. These rocks belong to Rara Formation.

3.3.1. Rara Formation

Greco (1989) used the name Rara Formation for a fault bounded package of rocks

that is sandwiched between Murree Formation and Hazara Formation. He suggested

this new name because of the easily distinguishable nature of constituent lithologies

i.e. the presence of in situ fossiliferous limestone associated with the quartzites,

dolomites and carbonaceous slates near the village of Rara. Wadia (1928) called this

package of rocks as Giumal Series and gave it cretaceous age. Other workers have

classified it as part of the Precambrian Hazara Formation (e.g. Latif, 1970 and Calkins

et al., 1975) or Miocene Murree Formation (e.g. Hussain et al., 2004).

This rock sequence is mainly composed of dolomites, quartzites and limestones with

alternating carbonaceous slates. According to Greco (1989), Rara formation has a

total thickness of 100 m. The lower 50 m of which, separated from the Murree

Formation in the east by Jhelum Fault, is dominantly dolomite and alternating layers

of quartzite with few slates, sandstone and siltstone beds. Dolomite is thickly bedded,

fine grained, light grey on fresh surface and rusty brown on weathered surface where

as quartzite is pure, thinly bedded and white in colour. Similarly, the overlying 50 m

of Rara Formation are composed of thinly bedded, bioclasts-bearing, grey limestone

with alternating carbonaceous slates. These slates exhibit black colour on fresh

surfaces whereas brown on weathered surfaces and are found near the top along with

white quartzites. This upper contact with the Hazara Formation in the west is defined


48/116


49/116

36

formations but no one has been able to divide it into individual formations e.g.

Calkins et al. (1975) called these rocks as Kala Chitta Group, Greco (1989) termed

these Paleocene to Eocene Formations, Greco and Spencer (1993) described them

as Paleocene Formations, Arbab and Shah (1996) considered these as Paleocene

and Eocene rocks and called them Patala Formation and Margalla Hills Limestone

(Undifferentiated), Hussain et al. (2004) grouped these rocks as Paleocene Rocks

(Undivided) whereas Iqbal et al. (2004) considered them Early Eocene to

Paleocene and gave the name Patala Formation and Lockhart Limestone

(Undifferentiated). The name Paleocene Rocks (Undivided) of Hussain et al.

(2004) is preferred in this report because most of the people have correlated these

rocks to the Paleocene Lockhart and Patala Formations.

In the investigated area, Paleocene Rocks (Undivided) is represented by a sequence

of grey to dark grey and black limestone and dark-grey shales with intercalations of

marls. The limestone is generally bedded and nodular while shales are calcareous and

the sequence contains abundant Foraminifera (Calkins et al., 1975; Greco and

Spencer, 1993; Hussain et al., 2004). Greco (1989) reported that a 4 meters thick layer

of black, graphitic, coal beds accompanied by bauxite soils is present at the base of

these Paleocene rocks. He also gave a 200 m thickness for this sequence of alternating

silty marls and limestones. In the overturned southwestern limb of Muzaffarabad

anticline, Paleocene nodular limestone is found in patches between Muzaffarabad and

Murree Formations (Greco, 1989). Bossart (1986) gave upper Paleocene age to this

sequence on the basis of abundant macrofossil fauna. He correlated these rocks with

the Lockhart Limestone and Patala Formation of the Kala Chitta Zone (Tahirkheli,

1982).


50/116

37

These rocks are marked by an unconformable lower contact with the Cambrian

Muzafarabad Formation and unconformable upper contact with the Murree Formation

(Table 3.2).

3.4.2. Murree Formation

Murree Formation represents the basal part of the Rawalpindi Group of Pinfold

(1918) (Cheema et al., 1977). According to Shah (2009), Murree Formation is the

formal name given by Stratigraphic Committee of Pakistan to Mari Group of

Wynne (1874), Murree Beds of Lydekker (1876) and Murree Series of Pilgrim

(1910).

The Murree Formation is comprised of a thick monotonous fluvial sequence of dark

red and purple clay and red, brown to greenish grey sandstone with subordinate

intraformational conglomerate (Kazmi and Jan, 1997; Kazmi and Abbasi, 2008; Shah,

2009). Beds of calcareous sandy conglomerate in places are intercalated with the

sandstone (Calkins et al., 1975) especially in the basal part of the formation (Shah,

2009). In the mapped area the Murree Formation is exposed to the east of Jhelum

Fault (Fig. 4.6) and is found only in the axial zone of the Hazara Kashmir Syntaxis.

Good exposures of Murree Formation can be found along the road cuts and steep

gorges (Fig. 3.1). The Formation is composed of a large number of fining upward

cycles of deposition, containing sandstones, shales and siltstones. Siltstone is the chief

constituent of the formation and is composed of red and green argillaceous silts. The

sandstone is green, grey and red, moderately sorted, medium to coarse grained, often

cross-and graded-bedded. West dipping sandstone beds of the Murree Formation,

exposed near the junction of Kunhar and Jhelum Rivers, show cross bedding (Fig.

3.2). Younging direction determined from these cross beds indicate that the beds have


51/116

38

been overturned at this location. At some places, the sandstone is jointed (Fig. 3.3a)

and containing sole marks (Fig. 3.3b). The sandstone beds are characterized by

channel lag breccia (Fig. 3.4) usually at the base of sandstone bodies. (Kazmi and

Abbasi, 2008).

Fig. 3.1. Murree sandstone exposed along gorge sides near location 6.

Fig. 3.2. Cross beds in Murree sandstone near Kunhar-Jhelum Rivers Junction.

Stratigraphic younging direction is indicated by word Up. Photo taken

looking towards S60E.


52/116

39

Fig. 3.3. (a) Grey jointed sandstone of Murree Formation exposed along road side. (b)

Sole marks in Murree sandstone present at the lower face of the exposed

bed.

Fig. 3.4. Channel lag breccia and overlying grey sandstone of Murree Formation.

The exact thickness of the Murree Formation at the study area is undecided because of

intense folding (Fig. 3.1). East of Lachi Khan, some 8 miles north of Muzaffarabad,


53/116

40

5,000 feet (1524 m) thick, undisturbed section of Murree Formation is exposed

(Calkins et al., 1975). In the study area, the formation is lying unconformably on top

of Peleocene rocks (Undivided). Its upper contact is transitional with the Kamlial

Formation.

Based on the presence of nummulitic-bearing limestone as intercalation with the

sandstone and shale, Bossart and Ottiger (1989) have assigned Eocene age to these

sediments and named them Balakot Formation. Najman et al. (2001, 2002)

however, showed that the molasses sediments had detrital micas with K/Ar ages as

young as Miocene, which annulled the possibility of Eocene age for these sediments.

They also showed that the limestone bands are not depositional intercalations but are

tectonically incorporated with the molasses sediments. Murree Formation is poorly

fossiliferous and only few plant remains, silicified wood, fish remains, frog and

mammalian bones have been recorded (Kazmi and Jan, 1997; Shah, 2009). This fauna

indicates an Early Miocene age for the Murree Formation.

3.4.3. Kamlial Formation

Stratigraphic Committee of Pakistan has given the name Kamlial Formation to the

Kamlial beds of Pinfold (1918) and Kamlial stage of Pascoe (1964). Wynne

(1874, 1877) described the Kamlial Formation as part of the Mari Group which is

now days called Murree Formation. Several people have shown the Kamlial

Formation as a part of Murree Formation including Wadia (1928), Calkins et al.

(1975), Greco (1989), Greco and Spencer (1993) and Arbab and Shah (1996).

However, Iqbal et al. (2004) and Akhtar et al. (2004) have differentiated it from the

Murree Formation in geological maps of the area prepared for the Geological Survey

of Pakistan.


54/116

41

The Formation is comprised of medium to coarse grained purple-grey and dark brick-

red sandstone interbeded with hard purple shale and yellow and purple

intraformational conglomerate (Iqbal et al., 2004; Shah, 2009). Kazmi and Abbasi

(2008) have classified the Kamlial Formation as 75% of the formation is sandstone,

20% is siltstone and 5% is intraformational conglomerate. It contains high amount of

intraformational conglomerate usually at the base of large sandstone bodies. The

sandstone is fine to medium grained, cross-bedded and intercalated with lenses of

intraformational conglomerate or thin layers of clay. Sandstone of Kamlial Formation

is distinguished from the sandstone of underlying Murree Formation by its usually

spheroidal weathering, abundance of tourmaline and lack of epidote which is

abundantly present in Murree sandstone (Shah, 2009).

The thickness of the Kamlial Formation is not exactly known in the study area. It is

650 m thick at Soan Gorge, 580 m at Khaur, 90 m at Kamlial, and 60 m at Ling River

near Rawalpindi whereas its thickness in the subsurface is 150 m at Pamal Domeli,

100 m at Balkasar and 180 m at Jhatla (Shah, 2009). Lower contact of the Kamlial

Formation with Murree Formation is broadly transitional whereas its upper contact in

the study area is not exposed but elsewhere with the Chinji Formation, of Siwalik

Group, is conformable. A number of mammalian fossils have been reported from the

Kamlial Formation and on the basis of this fauna the formation is given the middle

Miocene age (Kazmi and Abbasi, 2008; Shah, 2009). Johnson et al. (1985) also

reported middle Miocene age for the Kamlial Formation when he carried out the

Paleomagnetic dating of a section in Gabir River near Chinji Village in Talagang

District. His results gave 18.3 million years to 14.3 million years age for the Kamlial

Formation which means middle Miocene age.


55/116

42

CHAPTER 4 (STRUCTURAL GEOLOGY)

INTRODUCTION

Structure of the study area shows variations in size and style. It is dominated by the

HazaraKashmir Syntaxis, which is a fold structure formed by the Main Boundary

Thrust (MBT) having Tertiary clastics of Murree Formation in its footwall (Calkins et

al., 1975; Greco and Spencer, 1993; Arbab and Shah, 1996). Other rocks exposed

within the syntaxis include dolomites and siliclastics of the Cambrian Muzaffarabad

Formation, Paleocene Lockhart Limestone and shales of the Paleocene aged Patala

Formation. Structurally, the Precambrian metasedimentary rock sequence of the

Hazara and Tanawal Formations and the Cambrian Mansehra Granite form the

hanging wall of MBT (Owen et al., 2008).

4.1. MAJOR STRUCTURES

There are numerous faults and folds in the study area ranging in size from centimeter

scale to tens of kilometers. It is very difficult to describe every single structure, so

here only major structures are discussed in details.

4.1.1. Jhelum Fault

To the south of Muzaffarabad, two major fault structures bifurcate from the Balakot

Shear Zone; 1) the Jhelum Fault, which marks the southern continuation of the

western limb of the Hazara-Kashmir Syntaxis and 2) the Muzaffarabad Thrust, which

traverses obliquely through the core of the Hazara-Kashmir Syntaxis along the Upper

Jhelum River. As far as the Jhelum Fault is concerned, it mostly follows the western

bank of the Jhelum River between Muzaffarabad and Kohala.


56/116

43

The Jhelum Fault has a general N-S orientation from Muzaffarabad to Kohala running

almost parallel to the Jhelum River, where it separates the Murree Formation in east

from the Hazara and Rara Formations in the west. Another notable feature of the

Jhelum Fault is the topographic difference across its strike. Murree Formation

consisting of sandstones, shales and clays is susceptible to erosion as compared to the

metasediments of Hazara Formation which are harder. Hence slates of the Hazara

Formation form high relief mountains on the western side of the Jhelum Fault as

compared to the Murree Formation forming low relief topography on the eastern side

(Fig. 4.1). It exhibits a left-lateral strike slip sense of motion and is upright to steeply

dipping towards East (Fig. 4.2).

Fig. 4.1. Difference in relief across Jhelum Fault (JF); Murree Formation (left)

forming low relief while Hazara Formation (right) forming high relief

topography.


57/116

44

Fig. 4.2. Steeply dipping fault plane of Jhelum Fault exposed along the left bank of

Jhelum River between Muzaffarabad and Kohala and its equal area

stereographic projection (Location 4, Fig. 4.6).

After crossing Chathar area in Muzaffarabad, Jhelum Fault runs parallel to the JhelumRiver in N-S direction and exhibits a sharp contact at most of its exposures (Fig. 4.3,

Location 1). At Location 2 (Fig. 4.6), it crosses the Kunhar River near the Rara

village where the fault plane is almost vertical (Fig. 4.4). To the further south, for

about 1-2 Kilometres, Jhelum Fault runs through channel of the River Jhelum in

summer season and may get exposed at its left bank in winters due to low level of

water flow (Fig. 4.5). Southward it runs on the right bank of River Jhelum.


58/116

45

Fig. 4.3. Sharp contact (Jhelum Fault)

between Murree Formation

and Hazara Formation

exposed along the

Muzaffarabad-Kohala road at

location 1 (Fig. 4.6).

Fig. 4.4. Jhelum Fault crossing the

Kunhar River, close to its

junction with the Jhelum River

near the Rara village and its

stereographic projection

(Location 2, Fig. 4.6).

Fig. 4.5. Jhelum Fault exposed at left bank of Jhelum River due to low level of water

flow in winter. For scale, arrow shows two persons standing on outcrop of

Hazara Formation.


59/116

46

4.1.2. Muzaffarabad Thrust

After separation from the western limb of Hazara-Kashmir Syntaxis, Muzaffarabad

Thrust passes through interior of the Hazara-Kashmir Syntaxis having NW-SE

orientation along the Upper Jhelum River (Fig. 4.6). The Muzaffarabad Thrust has

emerged at the surface over a distance of ~100 km with an earthquake of 7.6

magnitude in 2005 proving its seismically active nature (Singh et al., 2006). The trace

of the thrust occupies northern bank of the Upper Jhelum River from Muzaffarabad

up to the village Naushahra. The trace crosses the river at Dhallian, passes through the

Siran village and follows the Baghsar Katha towards Chikar.

The vergence of the anticline towards southwest suggests an inherited steepness of the

upright to overturned western limb, which in essence is a thrust fault, most

appropriately can be termed as the Muzaffarabad Thrust (Calkins et al., 1975). It

marks the western contact of the Muzaffarabad Formation with the Murree Formation

at the western limb of the Muzaffarabad anticline. It dips at 25 o-50 o towards NE and is

exposed immediately east of Muzaffarabad. Muzaffarabad Thrust is refolded along

the Neelum River near Nisar camp area, before it extends towards the Balakot in the

NW, where it joins MBT and Panjal Thrust at the western limb of the Hazara-

Kashmir Syntaxis.

To the southeast, the Muzaffarabad Thrust was previously not mapped beyond the

termination of exposures of the Muzaffarabad Formation. Nakata et al. (1991) did

show an active fault along the upper Jhelum River between Muzaffarabad and Garhi

Dopatta, which he termed as the Tanda Fault. The 2005 Kashmir Earthquake ruptured

the Muzaffarabad Thrust along with its southeastern extension (Tanda Fault) between

Balakot in the NW to Bagh in the SE, thus establishing the existence of a major thrust


60/116


61/116

48

Indian Kashmir. In doing so, these authors named this fault as the Kashmir Boundary

Thrust. In some regional maps, the Himalayan Frontal Thrust exposed in Indian

Himalayas (Kashmir and to the east) has been tentatively extended to NW and is

joined with the Muzaffarabad Thrust. A careful survey of the literature shows that

neither the Raisi Thrust joins the Muzaffarabad Thrust nor does the Main Himalayan

Thrust. Tapponier et al. (2006) used the name Jhelum Thrust for Muzaffarabad

Thrust, but it confuses with Jhelum Fault which is altogether a different structure.

Since the name Muzaffarabad Thrust is previously used for this structure in literature

(e.g., Calkins et al., 1975), and the Muzaffarabad city was most devastated by

rupturing of this thrust in 2005 Kashmir Earthquake, I preferred to retain the name

Muzaffarabad Thrust for this structure.

4.1.3. Nathiagali Thrust

On a regional scale, the Himalayas have been divided into internal (or hinterland) and

external (or foreland) zones (Coward et al., 1988). MMT marks the northern limit of

the internal zone which comprises of crystalline rocks of Naran, Upper Kashmir,

Upper Hazara, Besham and Swat (Fig. 2.1). The external zone, which is a type of

foreland thrust-fold belt, is comprised of successions of stratified rocks of Hill Ranges

(e.g., Kohat, Kalachitta, and Margala), the Salt Ranges-Trans-Indus Ranges and

Potwar-Kohat plateau. The tectonic boundary between the northern internal and

southern external zones is demarcated by The Nathiagalli-Khairabad Thrust.

Nathiagali Thrust branches off towards the western side from the Jhelum Fault near

the village of Rara which is situated some 5 kilometers south of Muzaffarabad along

Muzaffarabad-Kohala road (Greco and Spencer, 1993). From Rara it almost runs

parallel to the Jhelum Fault in North-South direction separating Hazara Formation


62/116

49

from the Rara Formation. The Rara-Kohala segment of the Nathiagali Thrust exhibits

strike slip behavior. Near Kohala, Nathiagali Thrust takes turn along the Bakot Nala

and runs towards southwest direction where it thrusts the Precambrian slates over the

Mesozoic formations and upto Tertiary Kuldana Formation (Burg et al., 2005).

4.1.4. Muzaffarabad Anticline

The Muzaffarabad Anticline can be visualized as a large doubly plunging southwest-

verging anticline covering the overall core area of HKS, especially in its northern

part, north of the Jhelum River. Muzaffarabad Anticline is characterized by a well

developed NE limb and a highly tectonized and attenuated SW limb. The core of this

structure is exposed near Muzaffarabad, and hence the structure is appropriately

named as the Muzaffarabad Anticline (Calkins et al., 1975; Bossart et al., 1984;

Hussain et al., 2004). Bossart et al. (1984) showed that the fold axis of the

Muzaffarabad anticline passes NE of Muzaffarabad and plunges to the NW near

Balakot. To the south, the fold axis runs parallel to the upper Jhelum River through

Garhi Dopatta towards Chikar and Bagh further to the southeast. As mentioned above,

the mega anticlinal structure is highly tectonized at its SW limb due to its involvement

in the active faulting including the Panjal Thrust and the MBT, marking the western

limb of the syntaxis. Especially between Muzaffarabad and Balakot, the SW limb of

this anticline is truncated obliquely by the Panjal-MBT faults resulting in the

beheading of the NW plunging axis of the Muzaffarabad anticline.

Core of this doubly plunging anticline exposes the Cambrian carbonates in a 30 km

long stretch between Muzaffarabad and Balakot. In the eastern limb of the anticline,

there is another set of carbonate rocks of Paleocene age immediately overlying the

Muzaffarabad Formation. These carbonates are marked by unconformable lower


63/116


64/116

51

northwestern parts of the study area, close to Jhelum Fault in the west and its junction

with Muzaffarabad anticline in the north, have experienced two phases of fold

formation (Fig. 4.7).

There is a large syncline present in the lower core area of the Hazara-Kashmir

Syntaxis (Fig. 4.6), having its axis parallel to both upper Jhelum river and

Muzaffarabad Thrust i.e. SE-NW. It is an open syncline with its limbs dipping at

about 30-55 towards each other. Its eastern limb is cut by Muzaffarabad Thrust near

Chikar khas area. This syncline exposes the younger rocks of Kamlial Formation in its

core. There is another syncline in the southern parts of the study area near Kohala,

where too, Kamlial Formation is exposed in the core. Its axis is oriented in N-NNW

direction, parallel to lower Jhelum River and Jhelum Fault.

There are several other small scale anticlines and synclines exposed alternatively

throughout the study area. One such series of small scale anticlines and synclines is

exposed along a tributary of Agar Nala near Nurpur village having their fold axis

oriented in NW-SE direction. Hence it shows that these folds are formed due to the

effect of NE-SW shortening. Such folds are also present in an area between

Muzaffarabad and Rara village to the east of and adjacent to Jhelum Fault which are

oriented in NS and NE direction. Some outcrop scale faults were also observed in the

area (Fig. 4.8). Figure 4.8 shows a low angle thrust fault, observed at Location 3,

cutting through the limb of a fold in Hazara formation. Attitude of both this fold and

fault is in complete accordance with the stresses direction responsible for the

movement of Jhelum Fault, left lateral strike slip fault, because Hazara formation

would have moved southwards relative to core of HKS, thus resulting in north-

dipping low angle thrust fault and the associated fold.


65/116

52

Fig. 4.7. Structural map of the study area showing two phases of structures

formation. Structural trend of the area is determined from results of this

study, Greco (1989) and Published GSP maps.


66/116

53

Fig. 4.8. Fold and Thrust fault in Hazara Formation at Location 3. Equal area, great

circle plots of both bedding plane and fault plane are given at the top

corners.

Two different structural domains are identified in the study area based on the

published data of Geological Survey of Pakistan (GSP) which was analyzed in

StereoWin 1.2, a software by Richard W. Allmendinger for plotting and analyzing

structural data. For this purpose, only the data lying between Muzaffarabad Thrust

and Jhelum Fault was taken to study the effect of both these structures on this data. A

total of 109 Strike orientations of beddings were first calculated using Global Mapper

8.03 software from the published GSP maps (43 F/7, 43 F/11 and 43 F/12). These

orientations were then plotted on stereonet for further analysis and hence two domains

were recognized.

Domain 1 shows less concentrated data and bedding planes are of wide range of strike

and dip values (Fig. 4.9).

Syed Ali Turab M.phil Thesis

Documents

Transcript of Syed Ali Turab M.phil Thesis