## 4 Results and Discussion
### Time-Domain Electromagnetic (TDEM) Method  
The TDEM campaign was designed after detecting fault 2 in the seismic profile and calculating the depths of the different units in both fault blocks. Three stations were positioned on each block of the fault (Figure 2). In the football block, loops of 100 \(\times\) 100 m were used (stations 1, 2 and 3 in Figure 2); in the hanging wall block it was necessary to increase the size to 200 \(\times\) 200 to be able to detect the Palaeozoic basement, since it is located at a greater depth (stations 4, 5 and 6 in Figure 2). Figure 4 shows the curves generated at the six TDEM stations carried out in this study. The induced voltage curve measured in the field and that generated by the ZONDTEM1D version 1.1 software model are represented in blue. The red line represents the apparent resistivity curve obtained as a function of time and, likewise, that generated according to the software model. In addition, the resistivity model generated by the inversion software is represented by a thick red line. According to a comparison of the induced voltage curves at the different stations, a better fit is obtained for Stations 4, 5 and 6, where both curves coincide (the one generated with the field data and the one from the model proposed by the software). This is also the case for the apparent resistivity curves obtained with measured data and modelled data. The fit is worse for Stations 1, 2 and 3, where the two voltage curves coincide poorly, especially in the final part. This is reflected in the root-mean-square (RMS) error, with values of 0.5%, 0.7% and 0.3% for the measurements made at Stations 4, 5 and 6, respectively. In contrast, for Stations 1, 2 and 3, the RMS error values are high, on the order of 8%, 17% and 9%, respectively. For Stations 1, 2 and 3, several sections are differentiated in the resistivity curves obtained after the inversion. These first measurements are associated with the M2 section, where the marly facies generate decreasing resistivity values. Occasionally, within this section, abrupt increases in resistivity are associated with calcarenitic intercalations in this unit. This is detected, for example, at Station 3 at a depth of about 50 m (Figure 4). The contact between the marly facies of M2 and calcarenites, brecias or polygenic conglomerates (M1) is very well evidenced in all curves by a sharp increase in resistivity at depths of 78 m, 79 m and 116 m at Stations 1, 2 and 3, respectively (Figure 4). The basal detrital section of the Miocene and the Triassic levels cannot be differentiated, so the set is represented as M1 + T in Figure 4. The last section of the curves corresponds to the Palaeozoic basement. In this case, the contact between the sedimentary cover and the basement is detected at all stations as a sudden increase in resistivity, at depths of 228 m, 232 m and 228 m at Stations 1, 2 and 3, respectively (Figure 4). If the elevation of the ground surface at each station and the depth measurements are taken into account, the elevations above sea level of this contact are 145 m, 140 m and 141 m at Stations 1, 2 and 3, respectively (Figure 5). These results are very similar to the elevation of this same contact in borehole 1 (165 m asl). If these values are compared with the elevation of the Triassic base in the uplifted block (430 m asl), a vertical displacement of about 285 m is deduced for the Banos de la Encina fault. This value is similar to that calculated with the data from borehole 1 (265 m). Figure 4: Induced voltage curves (blue lines) and apparent resistivity (red lines) as a function of time at the six TDEM stations (1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6). Two voltage lines are represented: one defined by circles filled in blue (field measured values) and the other by unfilled circles (model proposed by the software). In turn, two red lines are represented for apparent resistivity: one with circles filled (field measured values) and the other with unfilled circles (model proposed by the software).