Why do the best instructors seem to be found on TH-cam? You effectively explained in less than 20 minutes what my professor was unable to do in several lectures. And I'm confident those sentiments would be echoed by many in my structural geology class.Thank you for such a lucid explanation!
Thank you for the kind words, Steven! I think one of the inherent problems with academia is that the professors we all end up with are professors for one of two reasons: Either they are exceptionally good teachers, or they are exceptionally good researchers. Very seldom do you find someone that is phenomenal at both (at least in my experiences). Best of luck in your structure class!
my structural teacher... lets not talk about him. he explained what i saw on this video but failed to make us understand in a way is easy for us. this sir did it in such a way i got it...
my lecturer drew the whole graph in silent first time in 5 minutes and if you blink you've already missed 3 steps loool. even after asking for a slower, descriptive instruction, it all went over my head
As a TA teaching Structure it really useful both for relearning it, as well as a way to effectively teach this. And use as a resource for my students. Many thanks!
Good explanation and straight forward development of the problem. I just want to say on some of the negative students comments about their professors is that some three point problems are not as straight forward as this example and many instructors try to cover all variations. I did like very much the physical model with clay, I think it illustrates the difficulty in the field well.
i couldnt attend class for two weeks straight and they were doing this three point problem system and i was told it was a lot of work....but you sir have managed to explain it within 20 minutes thank you a lot sir........you are awesome
I am thankful for your videos - they are significantly better than the ones I have for my structural geology lab and you answered questions my TA could not!
at last some geology teacher that doesn't suck,no offence. (some don't have knowledge,some voice,some camera,some don't know how to use camera etc ) but you sir,your an all in package :)
You are my hero. Can we get some kind of international geology instructor convention happening so we can geek out and share our enthusiasm for helping students understand these concepts and exercises?
Sir, you truly are a life saver. You cleared the problems which I was encountering all these years...thank you so much..!! Would be really obliged if you could help me out with explanation of the rule of V's...can't clear my concepts in this.
Hello Sir, I didn't get that how you have selected and drawn a point on 60feet contour after joining all the blue points (which we got from the strike lines)?
hi - thank you so much for the video! just one question - at 8:06, i see you found a point between the 40 and 30 contour lines to represent a point at a height of 30'. Why can't we just use the 30 contour line? Thanks!!
Hi Neil. Thanks for the question. I think part of your question can be answered at 4:07. The goal is to find 2 points with the same elevation *on the plane*. The 30' contour line represents the surface of the earth, not necessarily the plane of interest. So we still must find a point with elevation of 30' on our plane.
Sorry for the late reply. No, you would need to measure that 1/3 distance from the lower point to the higher point because 30 is 1/3 of the way from 10 to 70.
THANKS, YOUR LESSON REALLY HELPED ME. CAN U PLEASE DO ANOTHER VIDEO WERE IN EXPLAIN MORE DETAILS ON HOW TO DRAW TRACE THE PLANE IF YOU HAVE ANOTHER BEDDING PLANE BELOW THE ACTUAL PLANE
I really like my structures professor, but she just simply doesn't get into the nitty gritty details of the lab work like you do, and so you're really saving my lab grade.
If I was asked to then determine the thickness of the bed, which I have been, how would you recommend I answer that question? Would I simply measure and take the average? Great explanation by the way. You helped me out!
Hi, I apologize for the late response, but I misspoke in the video. The top layer of the bedding plane is the green one, and the lower layer of the bedding plane is the purple one.
I don't understand how a top layer and a bottom layer can be at the same elevation. are we actually assuming an actual geometric plane of zero thickness or am I missing something?
Best explanation of 3 point problem. Can you add more videos on some theory topics like stress and strain ellipsoid? That would really be helpful for many. And can you suggest a good book for theory portions of structural geology.?
Actually I have a question. How can we suppose that the length of line perpendicular to strike line passing from point at 10 (red one) which gives the dip direction represents the horizontal distance? Won't it give the overall distance both vertical and horizontal one since it represents dip like a line at slope or something?
"The triangle you see on the map is not the same one as below the map. The triangle below the map is a vertical cross section. In other words, the triangle below the map lies beneath that 20' line on the map. Look at the side labelled 20' on the map. That 20' is the horizontal distance which corresponds to the bottom side of the triangle below the map. Since the triangle below the map is the vertical cross section, we need to find its height. The height of the triangle is the difference between the two elevations. Once again, look at the side labelled 20' on the map. the upper left side of the line has a height of 30'. The bottom right part of the line has a height of 10'. The difference is 20', which corresponds to the left side of the triangle below the map. I hope that helps some!" its so hard to imagine!!!
i think i started to visualize it better, the hypotenuse of the triangle (10' to 30' line) is coming out of the paper. the angle "s" will tell us how much the plane dips from the horizontal which is the line labelled 20'
what if there arnt 3 points ? I am a student and in my case , we conducted a field recently near HUB dam , karachi. During our travers we got two points , i.e. starting of the formations member and its end. Now how would i draw the member along its strike upto 3 km long in our assigned area ? kindly do let me know
the sclae that i'm using is in meters. do i have to convert it to feets in order to be able to use the equation for the spacing distance or it would still apply the same way?
I have not yet made a video on calculating thickness of a bed, but I will point you this one: th-cam.com/video/LJC-vC0LSlM/w-d-xo.html. I think it does a pretty good job of answering this question. Note that α in that video is the same as the 𝛿 in this video (notably, it is the dip angle). One thing the video does not answer, however, is what to do if you are not given the vertical thickness. In this case, you should try to measure the Horizontal Thickness (HT). Then you can use the following equation: sin(𝛿) = T/HT Hope this helps!
Hi Mr. Splitter! Just to add to your comment, for those who are confused. To measure the HT, you need to look at the intersection of both the top and bottom layer on a single contour line. Project one of the intersections along a line parallel to the STRIKE such that both points are in a line parallel to the DIP DIRECTION. Their distance along the line parallel to the dip direction is the horizontal distance.
nice explanationreally helps. however, u said towards the end when you was drawing your dipping plane, "let's assume the point was here", and then you continued to draw the line whixh was parallel to the first set of points which you had connected. my question Is, what was your reason for your assumption that the point would be where you placed it? I hope any1 can answer this thank you
Are you talking about the point I placed at 15:30? If so, I should first note that as I mentioned in someone else's comment, the top layer of the bedding plane should be the green line, and the bottom layer of the bedding plane should be the purple line. Essentially, the reason that I'm even placing another dot on the map is because I know that the bed has a thickness. So it cannot be just one line on my map (i.e. the green curve is only the EDGE of the plane). So if I found the other edge of my plane, I would repeat the process with my tracing paper, to figure out how the plane intersects with the ground surface. Does that make sense? Long story short, I chose the point randomly for demonstration, but in the field, you'd have to find it.
Firstly i want to thank you for your quick response. And yes thank you again it makes perfect sense. What you did was, using 3 points/3 pre-exposed surfaces for your first, top layer of the bedding plane, after calculating the dip direction and angle, you systematically obtained then drew on the strike lines, equally spaced and parallel to 1 another, right onto your tracing paper, Then you marked the points of intersection between the strike lines and the contour lines using a sharpie, which once connected, gave you the shape and orientation of the outcrop. The second point which you drew was based on a very reasonable and logical assumption that another pre-exposed or identified point would be given as your bottom edge of the exposed bedding (in purple). Then using your strike lines from your tracing paper, you ultimately repeated the process, ensuring that it remained parallel and of equal elevation to the bottom point drawn, but throughout the whole process, resulting in the what we know to be called as the complete bedding surface, from your topographic map !! :)
Hello 👋, may I ask how to determine where the three points located? Do we just need to randomly pick three points that easy to draw lines( but in this situation the strike line direction and distance in between will be uncertain 😣) thanks! (Btw, your video is really helpful!)
I got confused where you drew the triangle to get dip angle (@10 min). That triangle doesn't look like the one on the map so I don't know what sides & angles correspond. Is it rotated? Perhaps color coding the sides may help?! This is challenging for me so it really threw me off!!
Sorry for the confusion! Actually, the triangle you see on the map is not the same one as below the map. The triangle below the map is a *vertical* cross section. In other words, the triangle below the map lies *beneath* that 20' line on the map. Look at the side labelled 20' on the map. That 20' is the horizontal distance which corresponds to the bottom side of the triangle below the map. Since the triangle below the map is the vertical cross section, we need to find its height. The height of the triangle is the difference between the two elevations. Once again, look at the side labelled 20' on the map. the upper left side of the line has a height of 30'. The bottom right part of the line has a height of 10'. The difference is 20', which corresponds to the left side of the triangle below the map. I hope that helps some!
Are you available for structural geology lab questions? I followed your video, my lab exam states different depths for points a,b, and c and I'm not sure how to use them
I do have a map. I have to calculate the dip direction and attitude. I have no idea why I struggle so much with this! It is a contour map with 3 points, contoured at 100 m and the scale is 1000m. Point A( depth to lava flow) is 550 B -650 C- 300 I appreciate any insight, I'm desperate! Thank you!
Okay, it's fairly difficult to explain over TH-cam comments, but essentially, you'll be doing exactly what I do at around the 5:00 mark in my video. You'll need to draw a line between your 300 and 650 point. Then divide that line into 7 equal segments. Each of these segments represents a 50 meter height difference. So the tick mark 2 segments away from 650 will have a height of 550. Draw another line from this tick mark to your 550 point (point A). This is your strike. Your dip direction is perpendicular to this strike. Does this make sense at all?
Yes, it does! I am going to watch your video again when i can have the sound on (in the library now of course) That gives me a really good place to go. Thank you so much
No, not quite. It's important to differentiate between the plane we're worried about and the surface itself. Imagine putting a piece of cardboard at an angle (this is our plane) and covering it with dirt (this is the surface). We are interested in where the plane has a height of 30', as opposed to where the surface has a height of 30'.
When constructing the triangle, i get how you choose 30 as a height, but you are giving the right angle a height of 10. As i see it, we don't know the height of that point, but we know the height of the acute angle - being 10. Am i missing something here?
Hi Top - Dollar! Your question seems fairly similar to the one posed by Jessica Garate below. I will copy my answer from her question. Let me know if it is still confusing. The triangle you see on the map is not the same one as below the map. The triangle below the map is a *vertical* cross section. In other words, the triangle below the map lies *beneath* that 20' line on the map. Look at the side labelled 20' on the map. That 20' is the horizontal distance which corresponds to the bottom side of the triangle below the map. Since the triangle below the map is the vertical cross section, we need to find its height. The height of the triangle is the difference between the two elevations. Once again, look at the side labelled 20' on the map. the upper left side of the line has a height of 30'. The bottom right part of the line has a height of 10'. The difference is 20', which corresponds to the left side of the triangle below the map. I hope that helps some!
All of the points chosen at 4:05 were arbitrary. I could have done this same exercise if I found 3 points on my plane at 20, 40, and 60 feet. I also don't necessarily need the heights to be different. I could do this exercise for points on the plane with heights of 30, 30, and 70, but finding the strike line would be trivial, since the strike line would be the line connecting the two 30 heights. Hopefully that makes sense.
Hi Sir do you have any documents concerning the lithofacies maping using conventionnal facies triangle , i will be very grateful if you help me , i need to understand how to represente the ratios in the map ... please i am ready to give you my email at any time .best regards (my formations are : diatomits, limestone and marles .
Good question! The contour map relates to the surface of the ground, NOT the plane. The 3 points that are highlighted are points on the plane. We need to find another point on our plane with elevation of 30. That does not necessarily coincide with the ground contours.
A response that I gave to another person with a similar question was this: It's important to differentiate between the plane we're worried about and the surface itself. Imagine putting a piece of cardboard at an angle (this is our plane) and covering it with dirt (this is the surface). We are interested in where the plane has a height of 30', as opposed to where the surface has a height of 30'.
Why do the best instructors seem to be found on TH-cam? You effectively explained in less than 20 minutes what my professor was unable to do in several lectures. And I'm confident those sentiments would be echoed by many in my structural geology class.Thank you for such a lucid explanation!
Thank you for the kind words, Steven! I think one of the inherent problems with academia is that the professors we all end up with are professors for one of two reasons: Either they are exceptionally good teachers, or they are exceptionally good researchers. Very seldom do you find someone that is phenomenal at both (at least in my experiences). Best of luck in your structure class!
my structural teacher... lets not talk about him. he explained what i saw on this video but failed to make us understand in a way is easy for us. this sir did it in such a way i got it...
my lecturer drew the whole graph in silent first time in 5 minutes and if you blink you've already missed 3 steps loool. even after asking for a slower, descriptive instruction, it all went over my head
As a TA teaching Structure it really useful both for relearning it, as well as a way to effectively teach this. And use as a resource for my students. Many thanks!
Really appreciate your effort. Geology is one of the most abstract sciences...specially Structural and you are GREAT!!
Really need more people like you out here for geology
Thank you, this was very helpful! My professor didnt even bother teaching this and basically made us learn it on our own lol
Good explanation and straight forward development of the problem. I just want to say on some of the negative students comments about their professors is that some three point problems are not as straight forward as this example and many instructors try to cover all variations. I did like very much the physical model with clay, I think it illustrates the difficulty in the field well.
i couldnt attend class for two weeks straight and they were doing this three point problem system and i was told it was a lot of work....but you sir have managed to explain it within 20 minutes thank you a lot sir........you are awesome
Glad I could help!
I am thankful for your videos - they are significantly better than the ones I have for my structural geology lab and you answered questions my TA could not!
Best three point problem I have seen so far
it was best tutorial l have came cross so far (about Structural Contours ) . l would like to say thanks a lot.
at last some geology teacher that doesn't suck,no offence.
(some don't have knowledge,some voice,some camera,some don't know how to use camera etc )
but you sir,your an all in package :)
Thank you so much sir ,it really help me a lot ! Love from Malaysia
This is very well done; nice work Mr. Splitter! We appreciate your time:)
just what i was looking for! THANK YOU ,THUMBS UP
You are my hero. Can we get some kind of international geology instructor convention happening so we can geek out and share our enthusiasm for helping students understand these concepts and exercises?
ahahaha you are the best mannn!!!!!!!!!!!!! really need more people like you for geology man you are the best,
Sir, you truly are a life saver. You cleared the problems which I was encountering all these years...thank you so much..!! Would be really obliged if you could help me out with explanation of the rule of V's...can't clear my concepts in this.
You are the best so far!
This is so helpful!! Thank you, please do more!
Your video is great! It's easy to understand. Thank you!
Hello Sir,
I didn't get that how you have selected and drawn a point on 60feet contour after joining all the blue points (which we got from the strike lines)?
hi - thank you so much for the video! just one question - at 8:06, i see you found a point between the 40 and 30 contour lines to represent a point at a height of 30'. Why can't we just use the 30 contour line? Thanks!!
Hi Neil. Thanks for the question. I think part of your question can be answered at 4:07. The goal is to find 2 points with the same elevation *on the plane*. The 30' contour line represents the surface of the earth, not necessarily the plane of interest. So we still must find a point with elevation of 30' on our plane.
Blake Splitter Thank you do much!!!
thanks!! this helped me a lot during freshman year in high school.
You're studying structural geology your freshman year... of high school?!? :O
At 5:50, how did you decide to mark the point 2/6 of the way on the line connecting the two points?
Never mind, it was answered a few seconds later. Thanks for the video!
Thank you for your video, it really helped me to understand!
When you’re measuring the 1/3 distance at about 8:00, can you measure that 1/3 distance from the higher elevation down to the lower elevation?
Sorry for the late reply. No, you would need to measure that 1/3 distance from the lower point to the higher point because 30 is 1/3 of the way from 10 to 70.
great job sir ...
THANKS, YOUR LESSON REALLY HELPED ME. CAN U PLEASE DO ANOTHER VIDEO WERE IN EXPLAIN MORE DETAILS ON HOW TO DRAW TRACE THE PLANE IF YOU HAVE ANOTHER BEDDING PLANE BELOW THE ACTUAL PLANE
I really like my structures professor, but she just simply doesn't get into the nitty gritty details of the lab work like you do, and so you're really saving my lab grade.
genius i will share it with class mate thanks alot you made my day ❤🌹🌹🌹
nice video,,, :) Can you tell me a resource link to see how sinformal anitcline is formed?
If I was asked to then determine the thickness of the bed, which I have been, how would you recommend I answer that question? Would I simply measure and take the average? Great explanation by the way. You helped me out!
Very good explanation..
Thanks, just a quick question: Why does the top layer of the bedding plane seem to be at a lower elevation than the bottom?
Hi, I apologize for the late response, but I misspoke in the video. The top layer of the bedding plane is the green one, and the lower layer of the bedding plane is the purple one.
I don't understand how a top layer and a bottom layer can be at the same elevation. are we actually assuming an actual geometric plane of zero thickness or am I missing something?
Since the layer is inclined, both the top plane and the bottom plane of the layer will intersect all of the elevation levels.
Best explanation of 3 point problem. Can you add more videos on some theory topics like stress and strain ellipsoid? That would really be helpful for many. And can you suggest a good book for theory portions of structural geology.?
Actually I have a question. How can we suppose that the length of line perpendicular to strike line passing from point at 10 (red one) which gives the dip direction represents the horizontal distance? Won't it give the overall distance both vertical and horizontal one since it represents dip like a line at slope or something?
You explained this so well? Do you think you could help me with a well version of this problem?
at 10:08 how did you know that the elevation was 10?
"The triangle you see on the map is not the same one as below the map. The triangle below the map is a vertical cross section. In other words, the triangle below the map lies beneath that 20' line on the map. Look at the side labelled 20' on the map. That 20' is the horizontal distance which corresponds to the bottom side of the triangle below the map. Since the triangle below the map is the vertical cross section, we need to find its height. The height of the triangle is the difference between the two elevations. Once again, look at the side labelled 20' on the map. the upper left side of the line has a height of 30'. The bottom right part of the line has a height of 10'. The difference is 20', which corresponds to the left side of the triangle below the map. I hope that helps some!"
its so hard to imagine!!!
i think i started to visualize it better, the hypotenuse of the triangle (10' to 30' line) is coming out of the paper. the angle "s" will tell us how much the plane dips from the horizontal which is the line labelled 20'
what if there arnt 3 points ?
I am a student and in my case , we conducted a field recently near HUB dam , karachi.
During our travers we got two points , i.e. starting of the formations member and its end.
Now how would i draw the member along its strike upto 3 km long in our assigned area ?
kindly do let me know
thanks for the lesson. I have got a question: how do we use geological map to create a cross-section?
What sort of geological map?
Blake Splitter Any type of geological map, I suppose we can draw a cross section of any geological map, can't we?
the sclae that i'm using is in meters. do i have to convert it to feets in order to be able to use the equation for the spacing distance or it would still apply the same way?
It applies with any scale!
Do we have to use ten as our contour interval on the formula for finding the spacing?
Not at all! Use any number you like.
Really useful,, thanks
Great.......Thanks a lot
Thank you very much sir.👏
thank you for the vedeo
will you please let me know that how can I draw profile of a fault on profile plane of map
please help
How would you determine the thickness of your bed?
I have not yet made a video on calculating thickness of a bed, but I will point you this one: th-cam.com/video/LJC-vC0LSlM/w-d-xo.html. I think it does a pretty good job of answering this question. Note that α in that video is the same as the 𝛿 in this video (notably, it is the dip angle).
One thing the video does not answer, however, is what to do if you are not given the vertical thickness. In this case, you should try to measure the Horizontal Thickness (HT). Then you can use the following equation:
sin(𝛿) = T/HT
Hope this helps!
Hi Mr. Splitter! Just to add to your comment, for those who are confused.
To measure the HT, you need to look at the intersection of both the top and bottom layer on a single contour line. Project one of the intersections along a line parallel to the STRIKE such that both points are in a line parallel to the DIP DIRECTION. Their distance along the line parallel to the dip direction is the horizontal distance.
nice explanationreally helps. however, u said towards the end when you was drawing your dipping plane, "let's assume the point was here", and then you continued to draw the line whixh was parallel to the first set of points which you had connected. my question Is, what was your reason for your assumption that the point would be where you placed it? I hope any1 can answer this thank you
Are you talking about the point I placed at 15:30? If so, I should first note that as I mentioned in someone else's comment, the top layer of the bedding plane should be the green line, and the bottom layer of the bedding plane should be the purple line. Essentially, the reason that I'm even placing another dot on the map is because I know that the bed has a thickness. So it cannot be just one line on my map (i.e. the green curve is only the EDGE of the plane). So if I found the other edge of my plane, I would repeat the process with my tracing paper, to figure out how the plane intersects with the ground surface. Does that make sense? Long story short, I chose the point randomly for demonstration, but in the field, you'd have to find it.
Firstly i want to thank you for your quick response. And yes thank you again it makes perfect sense. What you did was, using 3 points/3 pre-exposed surfaces for your first, top layer of the bedding plane, after calculating the dip direction and angle, you systematically obtained then drew on the strike lines, equally spaced and parallel to 1 another, right onto your tracing paper, Then you marked the points of intersection between the strike lines and the contour lines using a sharpie, which once connected, gave you the shape and orientation of the outcrop. The second point which you drew was based on a very reasonable and logical assumption that another pre-exposed or identified point would be given as your bottom edge of the exposed bedding (in purple). Then using your strike lines from your tracing paper, you ultimately repeated the process, ensuring that it remained parallel and of equal elevation to the bottom point drawn, but throughout the whole process, resulting in the what we know to be called as the complete bedding surface, from your topographic map !! :)
Yup! Sounds right to me!
Hello 👋, may I ask how to determine where the three points located? Do we just need to randomly pick three points that easy to draw lines( but in this situation the strike line direction and distance in between will be uncertain 😣) thanks! (Btw, your video is really helpful!)
Any 3 points that are not colinear (3 points that are not all in a line) will work!
@@BSplitt thanks😁!
I got confused where you drew the triangle to get dip angle (@10 min). That triangle doesn't look like the one on the map so I don't know what sides & angles correspond. Is it rotated?
Perhaps color coding the sides may help?! This is challenging for me so it really threw me off!!
Sorry for the confusion! Actually, the triangle you see on the map is not the same one as below the map. The triangle below the map is a *vertical* cross section. In other words, the triangle below the map lies *beneath* that 20' line on the map. Look at the side labelled 20' on the map. That 20' is the horizontal distance which corresponds to the bottom side of the triangle below the map. Since the triangle below the map is the vertical cross section, we need to find its height. The height of the triangle is the difference between the two elevations. Once again, look at the side labelled 20' on the map. the upper left side of the line has a height of 30'. The bottom right part of the line has a height of 10'. The difference is 20', which corresponds to the left side of the triangle below the map. I hope that helps some!
This really helped a lot
Are you available for structural geology lab questions? I followed your video, my lab exam states different depths for points a,b, and c and I'm not sure how to use them
I can try to answer, but no guarantee. Are you given a contour map at all? And what exactly are you tasked with doing?
I do have a map. I have to calculate the dip direction and attitude. I have no idea why I struggle so much with this!
It is a contour map with 3 points, contoured at 100 m and the scale is 1000m.
Point A( depth to lava flow) is 550
B -650
C- 300
I appreciate any insight, I'm desperate! Thank you!
Okay, it's fairly difficult to explain over TH-cam comments, but essentially, you'll be doing exactly what I do at around the 5:00 mark in my video. You'll need to draw a line between your 300 and 650 point. Then divide that line into 7 equal segments. Each of these segments represents a 50 meter height difference. So the tick mark 2 segments away from 650 will have a height of 550. Draw another line from this tick mark to your 550 point (point A). This is your strike. Your dip direction is perpendicular to this strike.
Does this make sense at all?
Yes, it does! I am going to watch your video again when i can have the sound on (in the library now of course) That gives me a really good place to go. Thank you so much
Good one
Wouldn’t the second point with an elevation of 30 be along the contour line corresponding to 30?
No, not quite. It's important to differentiate between the plane we're worried about and the surface itself. Imagine putting a piece of cardboard at an angle (this is our plane) and covering it with dirt (this is the surface). We are interested in where the plane has a height of 30', as opposed to where the surface has a height of 30'.
thank you so much its very useful
useful info Thanks
When constructing the triangle, i get how you choose 30 as a height, but you are giving the right angle a height of 10. As i see it, we don't know the height of that point, but we know the height of the acute angle - being 10. Am i missing something here?
Hi Top - Dollar! Your question seems fairly similar to the one posed by Jessica Garate below. I will copy my answer from her question. Let me know if it is still confusing.
The triangle you see on the map is not the same one as below the map. The triangle below the map is a *vertical* cross section. In other words, the triangle below the map lies *beneath* that 20' line on the map. Look at the side labelled 20' on the map. That 20' is the horizontal distance which corresponds to the bottom side of the triangle below the map. Since the triangle below the map is the vertical cross section, we need to find its height. The height of the triangle is the difference between the two elevations. Once again, look at the side labelled 20' on the map. the upper left side of the line has a height of 30'. The bottom right part of the line has a height of 10'. The difference is 20', which corresponds to the left side of the triangle below the map. I hope that helps some!
Ah of course. thanks man, great lesson(s) btw!
Thanks
Why do you choose 30 as the third point?
At what point in the video? Can you give a timestamp?
Blake Splitter 4:05
All of the points chosen at 4:05 were arbitrary. I could have done this same exercise if I found 3 points on my plane at 20, 40, and 60 feet. I also don't necessarily need the heights to be different. I could do this exercise for points on the plane with heights of 30, 30, and 70, but finding the strike line would be trivial, since the strike line would be the line connecting the two 30 heights. Hopefully that makes sense.
Blake Splitter Absolutely, thanks a lot
HI, i did not understand how u draw the triangle
Hi Ashok, can you give a timestamp? At what point do you get confused? Also, can you explain what you're confused about? Thanks.
Has anyone else had the unfortunate displeasure of being introduced to the Bree creek quadrangle?
Is this the V rule sir?
It is indeed. However, I always found it confusing when I learned about it, so I omitted that idea.
at last some geology teacher that doesn't suck,no offence.
(some don't have knowledge,some voice,some camera,some don't know how to use camera etc )
All clear now
Hi Sir do you have any documents concerning the lithofacies maping using conventionnal facies triangle , i will be very grateful if you help me , i need to understand how to represente the ratios in the map ... please i am ready to give you my email at any time .best regards (my formations are : diatomits, limestone and marles .
why couldn't you just use the 30ft contour line to find the 30 ft?
Good question! The contour map relates to the surface of the ground, NOT the plane. The 3 points that are highlighted are points on the plane. We need to find another point on our plane with elevation of 30. That does not necessarily coincide with the ground contours.
A response that I gave to another person with a similar question was this: It's important to differentiate between the plane we're worried about and the surface itself. Imagine putting a piece of cardboard at an angle (this is our plane) and covering it with dirt (this is the surface). We are interested in where the plane has a height of 30', as opposed to where the surface has a height of 30'.
Blake Splitter thank you so much!!! I love these videos, they help a ton! :)
Great! ..,
Good
Thank you very much
💪❤
Me here searching for outcrop pattern and somehow watched this video. I'm confused af lmao.
do you have a skype? or whatsapp?
All I see is a smiley face
im going to fucking fail
What was the basis or measurement for your imagined point you used to draw the 2nd line
at last some geology teacher that doesn't suck,no offence.
(some don't have knowledge,some voice,some camera,some don't know how to use camera etc )