Geology of Maran-Belimbing Area with Emphasis of Structural Deformation

by

Miguel Venâncio Nhassavele

20557

Dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of

the requirement for the

Bachelor Technology (Hons) Petroleum Geoscience

DECEMBER 2018

Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS

Bandar Seri Iskandar

32610 Tronoh

Perak Darul Ridzuan

 ABSTRACT

Structures are of important application in many fields of Geological studies. In

petroleum geology they are responsible for providing adequate conditions to trap
hydrocarbons; in mining it is applied to evaluate the stability of the rock or soil
beneath or besides structures such as mines, dams, buildings and many more.
Tembeling Group consists of four different formations, the Manking Sandstone, the
Termulus Shale, the Lanis Conglomerate and the Kerum Volcaniclastics. The current
morphological features found in Mangking Sandstone Formation are folds, faults,
tilted beds and mountain ranges; thus, suggesting that major stresses from tectonic
events have contributed to their deformation. Poor description of strain in Mangking
Sandstone Formation calls for reassessment of its morphology. A systematic field
investigation supported with laboratory experiments resulted in the interpretation of
structural deformation of Mangking Sandstones. Two major compressional events
marked and changed the morphology of Peninsula Malaysia: the orogeny in the late
Permian, and the less severe deformation in the middle to late Cretaceous. The major
tectonic compressional forces (stress) resulted from NW and SE directions whereas
the least stress came from NE and SW.

i
 AKNOWLEDGEMENT

Firstly, I would like to thank the Almighty God for the gift of life surrounded by
marvellous family, friends, colleagues and the society in general. He has given me
opportunities in life and in the same way He gives me strength to grab them and
motivation to follow my dreams.

Secondly, I would like to express my deep gratitude to my Supervisor Mr. Jasmi Bin
AB Talib, who relentlessly has supported the execution of this project in the technical
aspect since the beginning. I am thankful for his patient guidance, enthusiastic
encouragement and useful critics; from which I have learnt new many things. My
appreciation also goes to Mr. Haikal for discussing with me the important details of
the research. Additionally, I appreciate my colleagues who have provided the needed
transportation to visit the outcrops.

Finally, I also wish to direct my gratitude to my family, who have motivated me daily
to keep moving forward. They provided emotional support which was the crucial
conditioner of daily mood. Last but not least, I want to address my appreciation to all
who have contributed direct or indirectly to the accomplishment of this project.

ii
Table of Contents
ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................ i
AKNOWLEDGEMENT ....................................................................................................... ii
CHAPTER 1 .......................................................................................................................... 1
1. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 1
1.1. Project Background .............................................................................................. 1
1.2. Problem Statement ................................................................................................ 1
1.3. Aims ........................................................................................................................ 2
1.4. Objectives ............................................................................................................... 2
1.5. Scope of Study........................................................................................................ 2
1.6. Area of Study ......................................................................................................... 3
CHAPTER 2 .......................................................................................................................... 4
2. LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................. 4
2.1. Introduction ........................................................................................................... 4
2.2. Lithostratigraphy of Tembeling Formation ........................................................ 4
2.3. Tectonic Evolution of Peninsular Malaysia ........................................................ 6
2.4. Paleomagnetic Indications .................................................................................... 7
2.5. Structural History ................................................................................................. 8
2.5.1. Pre-Middle Triassic Pan-Peninsular Orogeny ............................................ 9
2.5.2. Middle to Upper Cretaceous......................................................................... 9
CHAPTER 3 ........................................................................................................................ 10
3. METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................................... 10
3.1. Introduction ......................................................................................................... 10
3.2. Project Workflow ................................................................................................ 10
3.3. Structural Studies ................................................................................................ 11
3.4. Gantt Chart .......................................................................................................... 12
3.5. Project Milestones ............................................................................................... 14
CHAPTER 4 ........................................................................................................................ 15
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION.................................................................................. 15
4.1. Introduction ......................................................................................................... 15
4.2. Map Study Area .................................................................................................. 15
4.2.1. Base Map ...................................................................................................... 16
4.2.2. Topographic Map ........................................................................................ 17
4.2.3. Geologic Map ............................................................................................... 18
 4.2.4. Cross-section ................................................................................................ 20
4.2.5. Field Analog ................................................................................................. 21
4.3. Sedimentology Analysis ...................................................................................... 22
4.3. Depositional Environment .............................................................................. 23
4.4. Outcrop Description ............................................................................................ 23
4.5. Structural Studies ................................................................................................ 30
4.5.1. Lineament Studies for River....................................................................... 33
CHAPTER 5 ........................................................................................................................ 35
5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION ......................................................... 35
REFERENCES .................................................................................................................... 36
APPENDICES ..................................................................................................................... 38
List of Figures

Figure 1: Map of Peninsula Malaysia – Pahang………………………………….…3

Figure 2: Tectonic evolution of Sundaland and Sukhothai Arc System……………7
Figure 3: Tectonic sketch of crustal structure ……………..…………….…...……..9
Figure 4: Illustration of step-by-step workflow of the project activities…………....11
Figure 5: Map of the study area………..…………………………………….….…15
Figure 6: Base map of the study area showing five outcrops…………………….…16
Figure 7: Topographic map on of the study area………………………….…….…..17
Figure 8: Representation of the geologic map with lithology, faults and rivers….....18
Figure 9: Illustration of cross-section in the study area……………….………….…20
Figure 10: Outcrop 1, illustration of field analogue……………………….………..21
Figure 11: Thin section of massive muddy sandstone. ……………………………..22
Figure 12: Thin section of massive muddy sandstone in magnification X4 XPL .....22
Figure 13: Outcrop 1 showing folding in the bed rocks…………..……….……….24
Figure 14: Outcrop 1 showing fractures & fault cutting through horizontal beds......25
Figure 15: Outcrop 1 showing normal fault at figure, folding and tilted bed rocks...26
Figure 16: Showing outcrop 2 – anticline and syncline structures ………….…..….27
Figure 17: Illustration of messy bed deformation in outcrop 3…….….……..….….28
Figure 18: Outcrop 4 showing massive beds of hard sandstone …………..…….….29
Figure 19: Outcrop 5 showing tilted bed and syncline configuration. ……..…...…..30
Figure 20: A plot of bedding planes and rose diagram of outcrop 1…….……..…...31
Figure 21: A plot of bed planes and rose diagram for the outcrop 2………....……..31
Figure 22: A plot of bed planes and rose diagram for the outcrop 3………………..32
Figure 23: A plot of bed planes for outcrop 4……………………………………….32
Figure 24: Illustration of the rose diagram for river analysis……………………….33
 CHAPTER 1

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1.Project Background
Geology is the search of knowledge about the Earth, how it formed, evolved, and how
it functions. Structural Geology is an important discipline that aims to characterize
deformed structures (geometry), to determine flow paths of particles during
deformation (kinematics), and to infer direction and magnitude of the forces involved
in driving deformation (dynamics).

The study will be conducted at Kampung Sungai Belimbing,in Maran (Pahang), where
the Tembeling Group is found divided into four formations: Kerum Volcaniclastics
Formation, Lanis Conglomerate, Mangking Sandstone and the Termus Shale. The
focus is Mangking Sandstone Formation which morphology consists of folds, faults,
joints, mountain ranges and tilted bed rocks.

By applying structural geology principles, it will be possible to reconstruct the past

and understand the event that contributed to shape the area.

1.2.Problem Statement
The literature suggests that the deformation of Jurassic – Cretaceous rocks of the
Tembeling Group resulted from the compressional orogenic event. However, due to
difficulties in obtaining research papers many lithological and structural features have
not been fully understood. The main reason why this area has not fully been studied
might be because of the complexity to access the outcrops. Therefore, the main
purpose of this study is to produce a detailed description of structural deformation of
Mangking Sandstone in Maran area.

1
 1.3.Aims
This study is conducted with the aim of describing the structural configuration of
Maran area (Mangking Sandstone) during Mesozoic Era through geologic properties,
lithologies analysis and correlation with lineament interpretation.

1.4.Objectives
In order to achieve the aims of this study, three objectives were scoped as per below:

I. To synthesize the general Geology of Maran and produce the respective

geological and topographical maps.

II. To analyse the tectonic evolution of Peninsula including Maran.

III. To evaluate the structural deformation observed in Mesozoic rocks in

Belimbing, Maran.

1.5.Scope of Study
In chapter 1, the project starts with a basic theory of structural geology and explains
the reason why the study is conducted supported by problem statement and objectives.
Followed by chapter 2 which is the literature review, begins with a lithostratigraphic
interpretation of Tembeling Group and then a short description of the tectonic
evolution of Malaysia Peninsula with respective paleomagnetic evidences are brought
to the readers. Toward the end of this chapter two periods of major events are
described (Pre-Middle Triassic Pan-Peninsular Orogeny and Middle to Upper
Cretaceous). The next chapter (3) explains about the methodology and systematic
workflow carefully designed for the project. Chapter 4 brings the description of
Geology of Maran which includes geologic and topographic maps. The models
presented in this section were obtained from land satellite and field data. Finally, a
detailed sedimentology analysis for five selected outcrops is presented and structural
geology is interpreted. Towards the end of the paper is found a chapter 5 which brings
a conclusion and recommendations.

2
 1.6.Area of Study
The study area is located in Pahang in the East Malaysia in the Central Belt. It
comprises approximately an area of 12 Km2. Several outcrops are exposed in the
Tembeling Group but are not of easy access thus the chosen outcrops for this study
are marginally more accessible. The map in the figure below illustrates the
geographical location of the study area.

100 Km

Figure 1: Map of Peninsula Malaysia, highlighted Pahang state in red line and study
area in red dot.

Alongside the Sungai Pahang (Pahang River) is the Sungai Belimbing road that cuts
through the study area. The road is about 2.17 kilometres in length with 20 metres
wide road that can accommodate two carriage way. In one side of the road is are
commonly found undulated terrain with about 100 metres of height and the other side
is the river. Throughout the road the elevation varies, starts from 19 metres and goes
up to 67 metres above the mean sea level.

3
 CHAPTER 2

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1.Introduction
A compressional orogenic event that took place in the Triassic period is believed to
have shaped the Peninsular Malaysia land (Burton 1973, Khoo 1983, and Khoo & Tan
1983). In fact, the current geologic relief of the Peninsular shows clear evidences of
these events such as the three not connected lines. The first represents wide area of
strongly folded Triassic rocks, the second line represents parts of Tembeling and
Gagau Groups aged Upper Jurassic to Lower Cretaceous which are gently folded or
flat lying over the Triassic rocks (Rishworth 1974, Khoo 1983, and Metcalfe 1988).
Lastly, is the third line which Sengor 1984, and Sengor at al. 1988; concluded that it
represents regional compressive event in areas adjacent to Indochina and Thailand.

According to Metcalfe (1987) suturing of the Gondwanaland occurred during the

Earlier Carboniferous. After that, a rift took place between Australian Gondwanaland
and mainland Asia, during the Middle Permian, and next, the Peninsula Malaysia,
Burma, and western Thailand collided with maninland Asia during the Late Triassic
(Metcalfe 1988, Mitchell 1981, and Sengor 1986). On the other hand, Audley-Charles
(1983, 1984) came out with a different interpretation of the tectonic history based on
regional stratigraphy and without any field observations. He suggested that Peninsula
Malaysia, western Thailand, Burma and South Tibet formed part of Australian
Gondwana from where they were rifted during the Jurassic. He also believes that this
block did not collide with mainland Asia until the Cretaceous Period.

2.2.Lithostratigraphy of Tembeling Formation

Tembeling formation is dated Late Triassic - Jurassic Periods, and it refers to the
fluvialtile-deltaic-lacustrine sediments of post-orogenic origin found in Penisnular
Malaysia, as stated by Koopmans 1968. He also suggests that its thickness is about
3,000 metres, and it overlies rocks of variety of composition and age such as
4
metasediments of Carbonifeous age and westwards Triassic rocks are underlying and
is unconformably overlain by flat-lying beds of the late Jurassic to Early Cretaceous
Gagau Group.

The lithology of this group consists mainly in sandstones, conglomerates and shales
which were deposited in a predominantly continental environment (Khoo, 1983). He
also divided the Tembeling Group into four formations: Kerum Volcaniclastics
Formation, Lanis Conglomerate, Mangking Sandstone and the Termus Shale. Harbury
(1990) stated that in the field were observed crossbedding and the strata thickness is
between 1400 – 2000 metres. Whereas previous worker such as Khoo (1983) and
Koopmans (1968) suggested 4800 metres and 3000 metres respectively.

a) Kerum Volcaniclastics Formation

Lee et al. (2004) defined that this is the oldest formation in the Tembeling Group and
it is of Upper Triassic age. They also stated that Kerum Volcaniclastic is the base of
the Tembeling Group, its lithology is characterized by volcanic-sedimentary suit with
intermixed varieties. Moreover, they suggested shallow marine paralic depositional
environment and about 2000 metres of thickness.

b) Lanis Conglomerate Formation

Habury believed that Lanis Formation lies conformably on the Kerum Volcaniclastics
Formation, although an erosional disconformity may be present. This formation
consists predominately of polymictic conglomerate beds, white to grey sandstones,
clast schist, arenite, red chert, quartz vein, and volcaniclastics materials (Lee et
al.,2004).

c) Mangking Sandstones Formation

Cross-bedded sandstones are abundantly found within the formation (Khoo, 1983).
He also observed that the grain sizes vary from pebbly sandstones down to fine sands.

5
 d) Termus Shale Formation

According to Lee et al. (2004) this the younger formation in the Tembeling Group
aged Lower Cretaceous, the estimated thickness is in between 300-500 m. They added
that the formation consists of red siltstones and shales with few quartz arenites and
poorly sorted breccias.

2.3.Tectonic Evolution of Peninsular Malaysia

The Late Palaeozoic compressional event was a major orogenic event mountain
building phase with associated emplacement of major Permo-Triassic granite plutons
that form the eastern ranges. (Metcalfe, 2002)

No indications were found of the widely reported Triassic orogenic compression. The
palaeotectonic and paleogeographic implications of these discoveries are important
for interpreting the evolution of eastern Gondwana and Tethys (Metcalfe, 2011).

The Raub-Bentong line was an important fault zone active during the Mesozoic but
does not appear to have been a major tectonic suture since the Late Palaeozoic. He
also postulate that the Permo-Triassic granites of the eastern belt and those presently
exposed in the main range were originally about 30-50 kilometres apart, and that
Triassic and Jurassic crustal attenuation and subsidence led to the separation of these
two granitic belts by more than 100 kilometres.

6
Figure 2: Cartoon showing the tectonic evolution of Sundaland (Thailand–Malay
Peninsula) and evolution of the Sukhothai Arc System during Late Carboniferous–
Early Jurassic times (after Metcalfe 2002; Sone & Metcalfe 2008).

Palaeozoic and Mesozoic evolution involved the rifting and separation of three
collages of continental terranes from eastern Gondwana and the opening and closure
of three successive ocean basins, the Palaeo-Tethys (Devonian–Triassic), Meso-
Tethys (Permian–Cretaceous) and Ceno-Tethys (Late Triassic–Cenozoic).

2.4.Paleomagnetic Indications
To mention that two methods were adopted to study the paleomagnetic properties of
the rocks from Peninsular Malaysia which are fold test and thermal and deformational
effects (Metcalfe, 1988). After several tests he concluded that Peninsular Malaysia
rotated anticlockwise and moved about 8o since the Cretaceous and eastern Thailand

7
and the Indo-China plate have remained at nearly the same latitude but rotated
clockwise 37o + 7o since late Triassic.

2.5.Structural History
Tembeling Group is of Jurassic - Cretaceous age and it is reported to be undeformed
except for minor folding and tilting (Rishworth 1974, Mitchell 1981, Sengor 1984).
Therefore, based on their interpretation these rocks are younger than all compressional
events that affected the Peninsula Malaysia. On the other hand, Mitchell and Sengor
(1981, 1984) agreed that the exposed Triassic rocks are folded, faulted and cleaved
due to orogenic compression. Additionally, Harbury (1990) observed that these strata
are steeply dipping and folding in two scales, larger and smaller scales. He grouped
on the larger scale the folds with about 7 kilometres of wavelength and an upright
axial plane which strike ranges from 150o to 160o. Then he grouped the smaller scale
all the superimposed structures with a consistent trend (160o) plus, monoclinal to
symmetrical displays are found. On his work he mentions that the wavelength ranges
from 10 metres to 2 kilometres which is well observed in Mangking Sandstone, and
foliation is best developed in Termus shale where it forms various cleavage types such
as closely spaced, pencil and slaty cleavages.

The trending of the vertical mineralized joint set is approximately 45o azimuth, and it
indicates the elongation of sediments towards NW-SE and shortening towards SW-
NE (Harbury,1990). He concluded that the deformation of the Tembeling Group is of
pre-Tertiary (mid- to late Cretaceous) age, deduced from evidences of the Panti
Formation.

8
Figure 3: Tectonic sketch to illustrate interpretation of crustal structure related to
Permo-Triassic volcanics and granites of Peninsular Malaysia. (Harbury, 1990)

2.5.1. Pre-Middle Triassic Pan-Peninsular Orogeny

Multiple deformation resulted from the orogeny event namely, intense slaty cleavage,
quartz veins, multiple crenulation, complex refolded structures (Hutchison, 2009).
Hutchison also suggested that the Central Belt was deformed into westward- to
eastward-verging thrust, to N-S dextral-verging reverse dextral to dextral reverse
faults, NNW-SSE gently- to steeply-plunging, tight to isoclinal overturned to
recumbent first phase folds. Moreover, he believes that Jurassic-Cretaceous sediments
were deposited in a basin undergoing extension because of the presence of numerous
slump folds with relate thrusts, syn-sedimentary normal, strike-slip faults, and
intraformational unconformities.

2.5.2. Middle to Upper Cretaceous

According to Hutchison (2009), this period was an important time of faulting and
folding. Based in radiometric dating and structural disposition, Harbury et al. (1990)
determined that the deformation in the Tembeling Group is pre -Tertiary (Late
Cretaceous). The evidences are found in northern Johor, where folded Triassic
volcaniclastic Semantan Formation strata are overlain by sub-horizontal largely
undeformed Tertiary Segamat Basalt.

9
 CHAPTER 3

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1.Introduction
To accomplish the objectives designed for this study, a workflow was carefully
planned as illustrated in point 3.2. Basically, it consists of doing a preliminary
research about the topic to have an idea about the type of project (secondary source
of data). Then, a series of field trips were conducted, and their purpose were to
recognize and be acquainted with the area, sketches, collection of readings and
samples for further analysis. In fact, hand specimen samples were used to perform
sedimentological description in a real scale (hand lens) and microscopic (thin section)
scale. And to identify the type of sandstone, Pettijohn System of classification was
used (see Appendix 3). Data collected (primary and secondary) was also used to
generate base, topographic and geologic maps. Lastly, interpretation of the lineament
was performed.

3.2.Project Workflow
Here, a step by step process was designed with the main objective of better estimating
the length of this project. At the very beginning of the project is the preliminary study
(literature review). This stage basically consists in data collection and reading
materials that constitutes the foundation needed for projected understanding. Its
purpose is to know about the job done in the study area and compare and contrast the
findings. Additionally, the existing topographic map is used to trace the rivers which
are considered as faults to do lineament interpretation.

The second step is the fieldwork, where equipment such as compass for strike and dip
measurements as well as direction indication was used; was also used a measuring
tape, for bed thickness measurement and also outcrop width and height measurements;
a GPS, for indications of location, elevation and mapping; hammer to be used to
collect fresh samples from the outcrops; hand-lens, to support lithological description;

10
and notebook to record all the data. During the fieldwork readings were collected for
bed, fractures, faults, fold cleavage and outcrops orientation to later plot in the
stereonet and interpret. In the same way hand samples were collected to prepare a thin
section which was used to perform petrographic analysis. Bellow in diagram is
presented a working flow for the present project.

Figure 4: A diagram illustrating a step-by-step workflow of the project activities.

3.3.Structural Studies
The methods of structural geology studies are diverse. In this project the smallest
scale, lattice defects and dislocations in crystals were studied in images (thin sections)
enlarged several times with transmission electron microscopes. Some structures were
studied in hand specimens, which were preferably oriented when collected in the field.
Whereas, on a large scale, the techniques of field geology are employed. These include

11
the preparation of geologic maps that show the areal distribution of geologic units
selected for representation on the map. They also include the plotting of the
orientation of such structural features as faults, joints, small folds. A common
objective is to also interpret the structure at some depth below the surface. But
unfortunately, it is possible to infer with some degree of accuracy the structure
beneath the surface by using information available at the surface.

3.4.Gantt Chart
By definition Gantt Chart is a chart that illustrates a series of horizontal lines to
represent the amount of work done in relation to the amount planned for those periods.
Similarly, to make sure that the project could be completed on time and all the tasks
were completed was prepared a Gantt chart to this project. And it facilitated to keep
track on the progress of the project. Bellow, is shown two Gantt Charts in tables 1 and
2 for a period of 14 weeks each with the respective activities and progress.

12
 C
WEEKS
NO.
ACTIVITIES PROGRESS START END FYP 1 FYP 2
WEEKS
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 25 27 28
Literature review 99% 14th May 14th Dec 28
Project planning 100% 21st May 25th May 1
First Field Work 100% 1st Jun 3rd Jun 1
Sample Preparation 100% 4th Jun 22nd Jun 3
Extended Proposal Research and
100% 11th Jun 22nd Jun 2
Submission
Proposal Defense Week 100% 25th Jun 29th Jun 1 *
Topographic & Geologic Maps Creation 100% 25th Jun 20th Jul 4
Lineament Studies 100% 2nd Jul 13th jul 2
Main Field Work 100% 16th Jul 20th Jul 1
Data processing (Stereonet plot) 100% 9th jul 3rd Ago 4 *

13
Laboratory Work (Thin Section) 100% 11th Jun 10th Ago 9 *
Interim Report Submission 100% 6th Ago 17th Ago 2
Results Interpretation 100% 10th Sep 19th Oct 6 *
Additional Field Works 100% 17th Sep 19th Oct 5
Draft Report Submission 100% 8th Oct 9th Nov 5
Submission of Dissertation (Soft Bound) 100% 5th Nov 29th Nov 4 *
VIVA-Oral Presentation 0% 26th Nov 30th Nov 1 *
Submission of Dissertation (Hard
60% 26th Nov 14th Dec 3
Bound) *
Indicator
* Milestones
Plan
Completed
 3.5.Project Milestones
There are several milestones identified in this project as follows:

• Proposal Defense

At this stage, the main objective will be to get the project approval. That was only
possible with a proper research, identification of a strong problem statement and clear
objectives of the entire project.

• Data Processing (Stereonet plot)

In here, a good understanding of maps is needed. And this stage is challenging because
it requires a special attention to the units and accuracy in the measurements.

• Laboratory work

What makes the main field work so important step in this project, is the fact that it
will provide real data that will allow to proceed to further stages such as petrographic
studies.

• Results Interpretation

One of the most important stages, where the thesis will be generated from all the work
that will be done and the objectives will be accomplished.

• Submission of Dissertation

Formal reports (soft and hard bound) will be written and submitted for certification.

13
 CHAPTER 4

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1.Introduction
This chapter deals with the outcomes of all activities done so far and their
interpretation. After the field work several data was collected and interpreted to match
them with the existing literature so that it could facilitate the new analysis and
evaluation of the structural deformation of the area in study. As form of results, maps
such as base, topographic and geological were modelled and interpreted based in the
acquired data supported by land satellite data. Additionally, a cross-section was
developed and on it was also included a possible morphology before erosion took
place.

4.2.Map Study Area

Below is illustrated the map of the satellite view of the road where the black dots
represent the targeted outcrops location.

Figure 5: Map of the study area illustrating the road with the outcrops location in
red pins.

15
 4.2.1. Base Map

Figure 6: Base map of the study area showing five outcrops.

The above figure illustrates the base map in the study area. The purpose of this map
is basically to locate geographically the area of interest in an exact way. In Addition
to that, it used to plot geologic and geographic features from other maps through a
technique called overlay. Therefore, this map is also known as reference map, because
it contains grid of equally spaced lines. The map shows the Sungai Belimbing road
which length is 2.17 km. The road starts at outcrop 1 in NW region down to SE region
at outcrop 5.

16
4.2.2. Topographic Map

Figure 7: Topographic map on of the study area.

17
 4.2.3. Geologic Map

Figure 8: Representation of the geologic map with illustrations of lithology, faults

and rivers.

Figure 8 shows a geologic map of part of Maran - Belimbing including the study area
(yellow rectangle). The map is dominated by green colour with approximately 37%
coverage, that is representing the Cretaceous-Jurassic rocks (sandstones,
conglomerate and shale). The yellow colour at the left side represents Tertiary rocks

18
(Sandstone, Siltstone, Conglomerate, Shale, Chert and Limestone); it covers an area
of approximately 19% of the total map. Whereas the blue coloured region are
representing Permian rocks (Phyllite, Slate, Sandstone, Schist, Limestone, Volcanic,
Conglomerate and Shale) covering approximately 41% of the total area. Lastly, 2% is
covered by Acid Intrusive (undifferentiated) in red. The sandstone found in the study
area comes from Mangking Formation and is characterized for being medium to
coarse grains, moderately weathered, the colours vary from grey to brown reddish due
to oxidation. Additionally, at some zones it is quartz arenite; and also the hardness
vary from soft to very hard (compacted).

The grain sizes of the conglomeritic Sandstone vary from gravel to very coarse, and
it is fining upwards.

19
4.2.4. Cross-section

Figure 9: Illustration of study area cross section.

20
Figure 12 illustrates a cross section on the study area. According to the model, these
rocks have been subjected to tectonic activities (compressional forces). This can be
justified by the abundance of tilted and folded beds and fractures. Interbedded
sandstone and mud compose the folds in the outcrop 1. Moreover, normal fault which
is oriented 273/50 is found located more the NW part of this outcrop. A curious thing
in here is the unlevel surface at the top. After a deep study, the results indicate that
these rocks have been weathered and that was confirmed in the field through direct
observation. Nonetheless, a reconstruction of some parts of the eroded sandstone and
mud are exposed.

The highest peak is found in the outcrop 5 with approximately 65 m of height and the
shallow zone is at about 350 m SE of outcrop 3 measuring 19 m of height.

4.2.5. Field Analog

Figure 10: Outcrop 1, illustration of field analogue.

21
 4.3.Sedimentology Analysis

The Tembeling Group

Figure 11: Thin section of massive quartz arenite in magnifications X4 PPL on the
left and X4 XPL on the right side (from outcrop 1)

Figure 12: Thin section of massive quartz arenite in magnification X4 XPL (from
Outcrop 5)

The above images in figures 11 and 12 are the thin section obtained from the hand
specimen collected from the outcrops 1 and 5 respectively. The mineral composition
in the image in figure 11 is 95% of quartz (white colour) with some iron stain (black
colour). Thus, by using the Pettijohn Classification System (appendix 3) this
22
sandstone is named arenaceous sandstone. The grains are well sorted, in touch with
one another and the empty spaces were filled with clay minerals, which indicated
considerable compaction stage and lower porosity.

The second image on the other hand, shows more than 90% of quartz and the grains
are in contact and have sob-rounded edges. This type of sediments is generally found
in the beach environment. There were not found fossils, but the literature suggests
existence of a few types. Due to the quantity of Quartz and Fragments the in relation
to feldspar the tectonic is termed orogenic.

4.3.Depositional Environment
Mangking Sandstone Formation which is composed by medium to coarse sediments
was deposited in a transitional environment (beach, lagoonal). The succession
comprises fining-upward channel fill sands, intercalated with brown reddish and grey
overbank. There are four major sand bodies, three of which represent fining upward
channel/ channel margin sands (>2 m thick), while the fourth consists of at least four
tabular/sheet-like sandstones (1.5 m thick) interpreted as crevasse-splay sheet sand
deposits.

4.4.Outcrop Description
• Outcrop 1

Location: N 03030’03.6’’
E 102050’39.5’’
Elevation: 46m

The first outcrop is the largest outcrop, it reaches approximately 350m of length and
10m height and it is found in one side of the road. Its beds are younging towards NE
and is composed mainly by Mangking Sandstone and less percentage of
Conglomeritic Sandstone and a few muds. The outcrop is stuffed with geological
features such as folds, faults, joints and beds. In fact, it counts with two major faults
that serve as boundaries to separate the fault zone from the rest of the outcrop. The
fault zone consists of the normal faults itself and sets of conjugate joints. The
sandstone found in this location is very brittle and has undergone major tectonic
stresses (compressional forces) which resulted in their deformation post-deposition.

23
 Figure 13: Outcrop 1 with tilted beds and major normal fault.

The beds in this outcrop varies from horizontal to vertically tilted. It is clearly
illustrated in the picture below that these rocks have been deformed and most probable
is due to tectonic forces. The idea of existence of igneous body underneath pushing
up the sedimentary rock is discarded because if so then the sedimentary rock could
have some evidences such as metamorphism or appearance in the surface next to the
900 tilted beds. The thickness of these beds varies from a few centimetres (10cm) to 6
metres, yet massive sandstones are also observed. Beds are decreasing tilting angles
when moving away from the fault zone (major faults). Some sandstone beds are full
of cracks and are very hard, while other beds of the same lithology are soft and easy
to break. Moreover, there are found lots of fractures relatively younger then the bed
because they cut through them.

24
 The weathering effect are very clear in some points of the outcrop. The
conglomeratic sand is the most affected by physical weathering, being the water, the
main factor contributing to the shaping of the outcrop.

(a)

(b)

Figure 14: Outcrop 1 illustrating fractures in (a) and fault cutting through horizontal
beds in (b).

Furthermore, toward the other end of the outcrop is found a clear evidence of
compressional stress event causing a very tight fold which resulted in limbs nearly
parallel meaning that the beds are overturned (about 120 degrees anticlockwise) as
shown in the figure below. Only compressional forces cause this type of geological
features and the event should have happened after the Mesozoic era after the

25
deposition of this rocks. The lithologies found here are soft to hard sandstone
interbedded with tinny mudstones. The grains of the sandstones vary from very fine
to coarse in the entire outcrop and they are fining upwards.

(a)

(b)

Figure 15: Outcrop 1 illustrating a normal fault in figure (a), folding and tilted bed
rocks in (b). The triangle in red colour represents the location of sample collection
for thin section analysis (see figure 11).

• Outcrop 2

Location: N 3°29'29.10"

26
 E 102°50'57.67"
Elevation: 32m

Figure 16: Showing outcrop 2 – anticline and syncline structures

The outcrop is found in one side of the Sungai Belimbing road, and it is 5.5 metres of
height and 15 metres in length. The sedimentary features found are beds with average
70 centimetres of thickness, folded forming an anticline and younging upwards. The
lithology found here is soft sandstone. A curious structure is observed in NW part of
the outcrop where beds are forcedly folded against underlying beds. This might be
because the compressional and normal forces are of almost same magnitude.
Resulting in termination of the layer beneath the folded rock.

Another observation made in this outcrop is regarding porosity. The sandstone has
good to very good porosity, and perfect structure (anticline) to accumulate
hydrocarbons and water. Unfortunately, it is missing a sealing rock to trap these
resources.

• Outcrop 3

Location: N 3°29'23.37"

27
 E 102°51'1.73"
Elevation: 31m

(a)

(b)

Figure 17: Illustration of messy bed deformation in outcrop 3

Outcrop number 3 is challenging and that is what makes it even more interesting. The
morphology suggests many different events at different time intervals. Starting from
the bottom-left its observed concordant sets of folded bed plunging to East; the fold
here is monoclinal to symmetrical in type. In here, the major stress came from SE and
folded and overturned (almost 1500) de previously horizontal beds. Moving to the
right side, a mixture of folded and cracked rocks is found. Although its chaotic
scenario, some beds are still visible and can be traced. Plus, these events (changes)
are believed to have happened before the strata at the top be deposited.

28
Bed continuation is not found between the bottom and upper part of the outcrop. A
line (in red) divides both sides, and clearly represents a gape in the deposition od
sediments (unconformity). Besides, the top rocks are softer compared to the rocks
found at the bottom and the bed thickness increased from 15 centimetres (bottom) to
30 centimetres at the top. Furthermore, the bed layers at the upper part have not
suffered much deformation, they are still horizontal.

• Outcrop 4 and 5

Location: N 030 29’ 01.13’’

E 1020 51’ 11.23’’
Elevation: 64m

Figure 18: Outcrop 4 showing massive beds of hard sandstone

Location: N 030 29’ 01.56’’

E 1020 51’ 08.86’’
Elevation: 65m

29
Figure 19: Outcrop 5 showing tilted bed and syncline configuration. The triangle in
red is the location where the sample was collect to prepare a thin section (see figure
12).

These two outcrops are very similar, both have the same lithologies (conglomeritic
sandstones and sandstones). The unconformity line found in outcrop 3 three is also
found here. And here also the bottom strata have been subjected to major stresses
tilting the rocks and a reverse fault is also found. Massive sandstone is common all
over the both outcrops. The unconformity line (in red) disappears as moving towards
the younging direction S and bed continuation is observed, a connection between the
lower and the top parts. Fracture is a common characteristic in the rocks.

In stop 5, a syncline is found, and also vertical beds are present. Stress and dense
loading (material) are inferred to be the main reasons why the outcrop is presented
this way.

4.5.Structural Studies
Stereonet

30
Figure 20: A plot of fractures to the left and bedding planes to the right for outcrop
1

Figure 21: A plot of bed planes on the left side and rose diagram on the right for the
outcrop 2

31
 σ1

σ1

Figure 22: A plot of bed planes on the left side and rose diagram on the right for the
outcrop 3

Figure 23: A plot of bed planes for outcrop 4

As is seen from the above plots of fractures (faults and joints) and bed, sigma 1 (σ1)
that represents the major compressional forces are oriented NW-SE. While the sigma
3 (σ3) that is representation of extensional stresses are mainly oriented NE – SW.

32
 4.5.1. Lineament Studies for River

Figure 24: Illustration river traced in the map and the respective rose diagram for
regional analysis

33
In the present map of the area of, rivers are traced back and considered as cracks and
then their strike is plotted to obtain the trending directions. For this case the same
procedure was done and was observed that the trends are dominantly NW to NNW.
Therefore, the major compressional stresses (sigma 1) are interpreted to have come
from NW and SE directions and the extension happened in SW and NE. To conclude,
the strong lineament orientation suggested that these strata may have been deposited
in grabens.

34
 CHAPTER 5

5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

Structural deformation plays an important role in many fields of applied geology such
as construction, mining and oil and gas explorations, and many more.

Tembeling Group is found in Maran and is composed of four formations (Kerum

Volcaniclastics, Lanis Conglomerate, Mangking Sandstone and Termus Shale) from
the Mesozoic Era. Mangking Sandstone, being the focus of this research, is
characterized by fine to coarse grain size, its colour is grey to light brown, show a
moderate weathering effect, beds thicken from 10 centimetres to a few metres.
Moreover, the texture varies, it is found interbedded with some mud at certain places.
An angular unconformity was identified in outcrops 3 and 4, and this is an evidence
that both outcrops belong to same strata (Mangking Sandstone).

And these rocks have been subjected to tectonic compressional orogenic stresses that
had a major impact in its shaping. The effects are printed in the outcrops such as,
tight to isoclinal folds, overturned bed (1200) and faults are present; the major faults
(normal) are N-S and NNW-striking at the boundaries of the study area (Maran). The
major vertical forces come from NW and SE while the least forces come from NE and
SW.

Based on the lineament analysis, was observed that the rivers in the map that represent
the cracks have a strong alignment, and the sediments found here are interpreted to be
deposited in grabens. The major compressional stresses originated from NW- SE.

It is recommended to perform more detailed studies on the tectonic evolution of this

area based on advanced paleomagnetic technology so that a better correlation can be
made between structural deformation, time and amount of stresses.

35
REFERENCES
1. AUDLEY-CHARLESM, G. 1983. Reconstruction of eastern Gondwanaland.
Nature, 306, 48-50.
2. AUDLEY-CHARLESM, G. 1984. Cold Gondwana, warm Tethys and the
Tibetan Lhasa block. Nature, 310, 165-166.
3. BURTON, C. K. (1973). Mesozoic. In: GoBBETT, D. J. & Ht ITCHISONC.
s. (eds). Geology of the Malay Peninsula, New York, Wiley-lnterscience, 97-
141.
4. HARBURY, N. A.; JONES, M. E.; AUDLEY-CHARLES, M. G.;
METCALFE, I. & MOHAMED, K. R. (1990). Structural evolution of
Mesozoic Peninsular Malaysia. Journal of the Geological Society. London,
147, 11-26.
5. HUTCHISON, C. S. & TAN, D. N. K. (2009). Geology of Peninsular
Malaysia. University of Malaya and the Geologogical Society of Malaysia. Ed.
1. Malaysia
6. KHOO, H. P. (1983). Mesozoic stratigraphy in Peninsula Malaya. In:
Proceedings of the Workshop on stratigraphic correlation of Thailand and
Malaysia. Geologic al Society of Thailand and Geological Society of
Malaysia, 1, 370-383.
7. KHOO, H. P. & TAN, B. K. (1983). Geological evolution of Peninsula
Malaya. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Stratigraphic Correlation of
Thailand and Malaysia. Geological Society of Thailand and Geological
Society of Malaysia, 1, 253-283.
8. KOOPMANS, B. N. 1968. The Tembeling Formation-a lithostratigraphic
description. Bulletin of the Geological Society of Malaysia, 1, 22-43.
9. LEE, C. P.; LEMAN, M. S.; HASSAN, K.; NASIB, B. M. & KARIM, R.
(2004). Stratigraphic Lexicon of Malaysia. Geological Society of Malaysia.
10. METCALFE, I. 1987. Gondwana, Tethys and Peninsular Malaysia (Abstract).
Geological Society of Malaysia Annual Conference.
11. METCALFE, I. (1988). Origin and assembly of south- east Asian continental
terrane. In: AUDLEY-CHARLES, M. G. & HALLAM, A. (eds) Gondwana
and Tethys. Geological Society, Special Public action London, 37, 79-100.

36
12. METCALFE, I., 2002. Permian tectonic framework and palaeogeography of
SE Asia. J. Asian Earth Sci. 20, 551–566.
13. METCALFE, I., 2011. Tectonic framework and Phanerozoic evolution of
Sundaland. International Association for Gondwana Research, Australia,
.2351.
14. MITCHELL, A. H. G. 1981. Phanerozoic plate boundaries in mainland S. E.
Asia, the Himalayas and Tibet. Journal of the Geological Society, London,
138, 109-122.
15. RISHWORTH, D. E. H. 1974. The Upper Mesozoic Terrigenous Gagau
Group of Peninsula Malaysia. Geological Survey of Malaysia, Special Paper
l.
16. SENGOR, A. M. C. 1984. The Cimmerides of eastern Asia: history of the
eastern end of Palaeo-Tethys. Memoires de la Societe Geologique de France,
147, 139-167.
17. SENGOR, A. M. C. 1986. The dual nature of the Alpine-Himalayan system;
progress, problems and prospects. Tectonophysics, 127, 177-195.
18. SENGOR, A. M., ALTINER, D., ON, A., USTAOMER, T. & Hsu, K. J. 1988.
Origin and assembly of the Tethy side orogenic collage at the expense of
Gondwanaland. In: AuDLEY-CHARLES, M. G. & HALLAM, A. (eds)
Gondwana and Tethys. Geological Society Special Publication, London, 37,
119- 181.
19. SONE, M. and Metcalfe, I. 2008. Parallel Tethyan sutures in mainland SE
Asia: New insights for Palaeo-Tethys closure. Compte Rendus Geoscience
340, 166-179.

37
APPENDICES

38
APPENDIX 1: Readings (Strike & Dip) for faults, beds and fractures
OUTCROP 1

39
OUTCROP 4

40
 RIVER TRACE
No. Strike Dip Dip Quad No. Strike Dip Dip Quad
1 96 90 S 94 180 90 W
2 126 90 S 95 104 90 S
3 120 90 S 96 90 90 S
4 120 90 S 97 97 90 S
5 115 90 S 98 156 90 W
6 142 90 W 99 120 90 S
7 170 90 W 100 137 90 W
8 147 90 W 101 112 90 S
9 152 90 W 102 153 90 W
10 100 90 S 103 105 90 S
11 121 90 S 104 118 90 S
12 94 90 S 105 95 90 S
13 120 90 S 106 107 90 S
14 116 90 S 107 131 90 S
15 119 90 S 108 99 90 S
16 140 90 W 109 136 90 W
17 151 90 W 110 109 90 S
18 117 90 S 111 178 90 W
19 116 90 S 112 171 90 W
20 103 90 S 113 129 90 S
21 109 90 S 114 103 90 S
22 171 90 W 115 120 90 S
23 120 90 S 116 60 90 S
24 170 90 W 117 5 90 E
25 145 90 W 118 76 90 S
26 169 90 W 119 50 90 S
27 90 90 S 120 75 90 S
28 130 90 S 121 68 90 S
29 120 90 S 122 54 90 S
30 118 90 S 123 75 90 S
31 95 90 S 124 20 90 E
32 100 90 S 125 70 90 S
33 135 90 S 126 70 90 S
34 90 90 S 127 30 90 E
35 130 90 S 128 55 90 S
36 162 90 W 129 71 90 S
37 113 90 S 130 87 90 S
38 116 90 S 131 58 90 S
39 116 90 S 132 42 90 E
40 132 90 S 133 63 90 S
41 126 90 S 134 17 90 E
42 121 90 S 135 48 90 S
43 124 90 S 136 54 90 S
44 169 90 W 137 57 90 S
45 103 90 S 138 62 90 S
46 180 90 W 139 50 90 S

41
No. Strike Dip Dip Quad
140 58 90 S
47 111 90 S
48 119 90 S
49 111 90 S
50 92 90 S
51 90 90 S
52 93 90 S
53 131 90 S
54 174 90 W
55 126 90 S
56 177 90 W
57 118 90 S
58 120 90 S
59 146 90 W
60 110 90 S
61 170 90 W
62 135 90 S
63 161 90 W
64 122 90 S
65 117 90 S
66 167 90 W
67 130 90 S
68 141 90 W
69 152 90 W
70 162 90 W
71 143 90 W
72 134 90 S
73 106 90 S
74 180 90 W
75 110 90 S
76 145 90 W
77 161 90 W
78 111 90 S
79 177 90 W
80 96 90 S
81 114 90 S
82 122 90 S
83 150 90 W
84 98 90 S
85 120 90 S
86 91 90 S
87 131 90 S
88 123 90 S
89 90 90 S
90 180 90 W
91 146 90 W
92 162 90 W
93 123 90 S

42
APPENDIX 2: Data points used to construct TOPOGRAPHIC MAP
LATITUDE LONGITUDE ELEVATION LATITUDE LONGITUDE ELEVATION
3.510772 102.823782 37 3.510695 102.849717 97
3.510774 102.824352 37 3.510713 102.850185 97
3.510778 102.825585 42 3.510745 102.850651 65
3.51078 102.82606 42 3.510699 102.851399 48
3.51079 102.826812 42 3.510758 102.852243 38
3.510794 102.828045 37 3.510767 102.853187 47
3.510795 102.82814 37 3.510748 102.853754 47
3.510704 102.828804 37 3.510711 102.854886 69
3.510706 102.830229 39 3.510708 102.85498 69
3.510706 102.830419 39 3.510689 102.855544 71
3.510707 102.830798 39 3.510664 102.856295 71
3.510709 102.831367 42 3.510636 102.857139 86
3.510749 102.832667 46 3.510534 102.857514 106
3.510766 102.833034 25 3.510497 102.857978 106
3.510894 102.833865 14 3.510441 102.85872 142
3.510992 102.834338 14 3.510371 102.859456 157
3.511075 102.834821 20 3.510093 102.860463 185
3.51104 102.835509 20 3.510078 102.860646 215
3.511023 102.83609 40 3.510066 102.861477 222
3.510932 102.837094 63 3.509968 102.861662 222
3.510877 102.837599 93 3.509792 102.862499 218
3.510819 102.838199 135 3.509499 102.862775 233
3.510797 102.838399 135 3.509103 102.862954 238
3.510841 102.839128 132 3.508727 102.862493 214
3.510877 102.839486 132 3.508691 102.861305 199
3.510964 102.840291 84 3.508703 102.86103 184
3.510981 102.840849 61 3.508726 102.860478 184
3.510983 102.840943 61 3.508854 102.859648 183
3.510896 102.841318 54 3.508968 102.859092 172
3.510913 102.841973 54 3.509259 102.858533 164
3.510843 102.843193 61 3.509323 102.857233 136
3.510741 102.843953 59 3.509331 102.85714 111
3.510619 102.844814 72 3.509384 102.856489 111
3.510553 102.845778 106 3.509468 102.855459 71
3.510523 102.846164 106 3.509583 102.854612 53
3.510509 102.846544 116 3.509594 102.854141 53
3.510557 102.847282 92 3.50959 102.852632 49
3.510566 102.847468 92 3.509553 102.85207 73
3.510684 102.847838 92 3.509499 102.851229 94
3.510708 102.848303 73 3.509439 102.850298 113
3.505952 102.856986 69 3.507105 102.821348 33
3.505912 102.858293 85 3.506778 102.863831 187
3.505878 102.859222 121 3.506817 102.862545 152
3.505792 102.86088 132 3.506849 102.861625 134
3.505765 102.861894 141 3.506899 102.86024 106
3.505737 102.862719 158 3.506912 102.859869 106
3.505742 102.863739 169 3.506938 102.858191 88

43
LATITUDE LONGITUDE ELEVATION LATITUDE LONGITUDE ELEVATION
3.509632 102.849168 101 3.507862 102.819525 34
3.509631 102.848416 88 3.507579 102.819719 37
3.509848 102.847208 117 3.507303 102.819904 37
3.509801 102.846471 140 3.506712 102.820709 41
3.510161 102.845599 130 3.506421 102.821104 41
3.510448 102.843487 69 3.506145 102.821765 41
3.510447 102.843204 69 3.505973 102.822697 38
3.510537 102.842543 58 3.505891 102.823443 31
3.51052 102.841889 54 3.505708 102.824867 33
3.510395 102.840865 78 3.505436 102.826284 30
3.510148 102.839953 101 3.505352 102.827224 33
3.51001 102.839412 120 3.505353 102.827508 33
3.509959 102.838593 134 3.50536 102.82883 31
3.51001 102.837527 105 3.505366 102.829678 31
3.510292 102.836522 78 3.505371 102.830338 31
3.510394 102.835126 19 3.505469 102.830712 32
3.510415 102.83435 15 3.505474 102.831372 30
3.510407 102.83369 36 3.505479 102.832506 29
3.510358 102.832681 46 3.505488 102.833446 27
3.510342 102.832313 46 3.505593 102.834385 25
3.510233 102.831946 41 3.50599 102.835881 29
3.510136 102.831664 41 3.506098 102.836723 23
3.510038 102.831097 36 3.506265 102.837684 33
3.510036 102.830624 36 3.506519 102.838268 66
3.509937 102.829963 32 3.506689 102.838845 71
3.509839 102.829303 32 3.506693 102.839976 65
3.509738 102.828168 36 3.506704 102.840818 66
3.509736 102.827695 40 3.506715 102.841568 61
3.509733 102.827032 37 3.50671 102.841948 62
3.509728 102.826466 37 3.506697 102.842614 67
3.509916 102.825608 38 3.506677 102.843283 80
3.509914 102.825039 36 3.506652 102.843859 96
3.509912 102.824565 36 3.506618 102.844624 96
3.509909 102.8239 36 3.506468 102.846146 146
3.509905 102.823238 35 3.506475 102.84764 141
3.509898 102.822198 39 3.506274 102.849306 95
3.5098 102.821917 34 3.505916 102.852106 75
3.509318 102.821077 31 3.505991 102.853604 45
3.508929 102.820142 30 3.505982 102.854733 62
3.508638 102.819868 31 3.505966 102.855955 72
3.507607 102.848727 128 3.508514 102.830936 39
3.507458 102.846989 169 3.508512 102.830273 32
3.507734 102.844523 108 3.508506 102.829138 31
3.507911 102.842606 79 3.508501 102.828097 31
3.50791 102.841381 64 3.508299 102.826876 35
3.5079 102.840537 66 3.508097 102.825371 33
3.507882 102.838661 73 3.507806 102.824337 30
3.508591 102.834674 16 3.50761 102.823586 31
3.508542 102.832717 37 3.507511 102.823116 31
3.508515 102.832075 45 3.507314 102.821986 33
44
APPENDIX 3: Pettijohn sandstone classification system

45