Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T09:20:12.611Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Phase relations in the system anorthite–potassium-feldspar at 10 kbar with emphasis on their solid solutions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2018

Y. Ai  and
D. H. Green
Y. Ai
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, University of Tasmania, Australia
D. H. Green
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, University of Tasmania, Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Phase relations in the binary system anorthite-K-feldspar at 10 kbar were studied with a solid-media piston cylinder apparatus. The eutectic character of this system is confirmed, with the eutectic point located at An30Kf70 (± 3 mol%), and 1215 ± 15°C, 10 kbar. The mutual solubilities between anorthite and K-feldspar at the solidus are greatly increased at 10kbar compared with those at 1 atm. The maximum solubility of K-feldspar in anorthite is c. 5% at 1 atm, c. 18% at 10 kbar; and that of anorthite in K-feldspar is c. 3% at 1 atm, c. 7% at 10 kbar. The increased solubilities are attributed to the increase in the eutectic temperature at high isostatic pressures. The results imply increased ternary feldspar solid solutions at high pressures and support the existence of homogeneous feldspars with extensive ternary composition under high-P, T and anhydrous conditions.

Keywords

anorthiteK-feldsparphase relationssolid solutions
Type
Silicate Mineralogy
Information
Mineralogical Magazine , Volume 53 , Issue 371 , June 1989 , pp. 337 - 345
Copyright
Copyright © The Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bowen, N. L. (1913) Am. J. Sci. 35, 577-99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, F. R., and England, J. L. (1965) J. Geophys. Research, 65, 741-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, W. L., and Parsons, I. (1985) Am. Mineral. 70, 356-61.Google Scholar
Ford, R. J. (1983) The alkali rocks of Port Cygnet, Tasmania. PhD thesis, University of Tasmania.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, J. R. (1980) Am. Mineral. 65, 272-84.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, J. R. (1986) Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 80, 135-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamilton, D. L. (1969) Progress in Experimental Petrology. NERC publication First Report, 51-2.Google Scholar
Johannes, W. (1978) Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 66, 295–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johannes, W. (1979) Ibid. 68, 221-30.Google Scholar
Lindsley, D. H. (1966) Am. Mineral. 51, 1793-9.Google Scholar
Lindsley, D. H. (1968) New York State Museum and Sci. Service Memoir, 18, 39-46.Google Scholar
Norris, G. H. (1972) Progress in Experimental Petrology. NERC publication, series D, No. 2, 15–19.Google Scholar
Schairer, J. F., and Bowen, N. L. (1947) Geol. Soc. Finland Bull. 20, 67-87.Google Scholar
Seck, H. A. (1971) Neues Jahrb. Mineral. Abh. 115, 315-45.Google Scholar
Sen, S. K. (1959) J. Geol. 67, 479-95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spencer, E. (1937) Mineral. Mag. 24, 453-94.Google Scholar
Tuttle, O. F., and Bowen, N. L. (1958) Geol. Soc. Am. Memoir 74.Google Scholar
Viswanathan, K. (1971) Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 30, 332-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yoder, S. H. Jr., Steward, D. B., and Smith, J. R. (1957) Carnegie Inst. Washington Yearb. 56, 206-14.Google Scholar