Lyell Collection

Journal of the Geological Society

Lyell Centre  |   Lyell Collection  |   Subscriptions   |   Geological Society  |   Email alerts  |   Online bookshop  |   Help


Keywords:
Author:
Advanced search>>
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by ALLEN, J. R. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation
Journal of the Geological Society; 1973; v. 129; issue.5; p. 537-541;
DOI: 10.1144/gsjgs.129.5.0537
© 1973 Geological Society of London

A classification of climbing-ripple cross-lamination

JOHN R. L. ALLEN

CLIMBING-RIPPLE CROSS-LAMINATION, Sorby’s (1859, 1908) ripple-drift bedding, is an important and significant sedimentary structure resulting from the action of unidirectional currents. The importance of the structure lies in its worldwide distribution and frequent occurrence in such diverse sediments as river channel and levee sands and in turbidity current deposits. Its significance is that, of all sedimentary structure, it stands alone in giving information on short-term rates of sediment deposition (Sorby 1908; Kuenen 1967; Walker 1969; Allen 1970, 1971, 1972). Hence the study of this structure may lead to a deeper understanding of aspects of the character of past events—river floods and turbidity currents—of an intrinsically brief and catastrophic nature.

This goal will not however be achieved until the nature of climbing-ripple cross-lamination is clearly perceived and defined within the framework of an unambiguous field classification. The most widely used existing classification of the structure is now recognized to be confused, because some of the criteria adopted for the definition of its categories relate to the individual cross-laminated set (and the set with its immediate neighbours) perceived at some station in a coset, whereas others properly describe the coset of which the individual cross-laminated set is generally a very subordinate part. Set and coset are here used in the well-known sense of McKee & Weir (I953). The consequence is that aspects of the structure at the level of the set and its immediate neighbours are not sharply enough distinguished from aspects of the structure at the level of the

...

This 250-word extract was created in the absence of an abstract.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Geological Society, London, Special PublicationsHome page
F. Guillocheau, J.-M. Quemener, C. Robin, P. Joseph, and O. Broucke
Genetic units/parasequences of the Annot turbidite system, SE France
Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 2004; 221: 181 - 202.
[Abstract] [PDF]