| Name |
Format |
Description |
Link |
|
57 |
This is a probability map of heat flow in the Cascades in Oregon where a threshold of 80 wM/m squared was used. Probability was calculated using simple kriging with declustering. The data used for this statistical surface were down-loaded from the Southern Methodist University Geothermal Laboratory. |
https://gdr.openei.org/files/646/Oregon_Cascades_Heat_Flow_Probability.zip |
|
21 |
Link to the project page for the Southern Methodist University node of the National Geothermal Data System from which the data used for the heat flow probability map were downloaded. |
https://www.smu.edu/dedman/academics/departments/earth-sciences/research/geothermallab |
|
57 |
This fault density probability surface was created using simple probability kriging, with a log-normal transformation of the data. The following density parameters were used: probability >= 0.5 km length/area considering a search radius of 5 km and a cell size of 1 km. The input faults were from the USGS Quaternary fault and fold database of the United States and faults mapped by team members at Oregon State University. |
https://gdr.openei.org/files/646/Oregon_Cascades_flt_density_probability.zip |
|
57 |
Faults are characterized as: (1) Highest Confidence: Clear offset of previously mapped geologic units. Previously mapped on published sources (labeled in attribute table). Clear topographic expression of fault scarp. Admissible with regional structure trends. (2) No clear offset of previously mapped geologic units (many units are very broadly defined and internally complex) Probable intra-unit offset. Previously mapped on published sources (labeled in attribute table). Clear topographic expression of fault scarp. Admissible with regional structure trends. (3) Intermediate Confidence/New Fault: These are interpretations of faults never mapped before. No offset of previously mapped geologic units. Probable intra-unit offset. Not previously mapped on published maps. Clear topographic expression of fault scarp. Admissible with regional structure trends. Interpreter is very confident that this is a fault revealed by LiDAR that has not been previously recognized. (4) No offset of previously mapped geologic units. Not previously mapped on published sources. Moderate topographic expression of scarp. Admissible with regional structure trends. Interpreter is moderately confident that this is a fault revealed by LiDAR that has not been previously recognized. (5) Lowest Confidence: No offset of previously mapped geologic units. Not previously mapped on published sources. Weak topographic expression of scarp. Interpreter has low confidence that this is a fault revealed by LiDAR that has not been previously recognized. These are sublinear trends that have potential to be faults, but are unclear. These features are mapped so that they are not ignored, and so that future reviewers do not suspect them to be features overlooked during interpretation. |
https://gdr.openei.org/files/646/Oregon_faults_Trimble.zip |