Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T07:57:48.571Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Progress in mineralogical quantitative analysis of rock samples: application to quartzites from Denali National Park, Alaska Range (USA)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 February 2016

Mărgărit M. Nistor ,
Nicolae Har ,
Simona Marchetti Dori ,
Simona Bigi  and
Alessandro F. Gualtieri
Mărgărit M. Nistor
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze Chimiche e Geologiche, Università di Modena e Reggio Emilia, Via S. Eufemia 19, I-41121 Modena, Italy
Nicolae Har
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, University of Babeş-Bolyai, Kogălniceanu Street 1, 400084 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
Simona Marchetti Dori
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze Chimiche e Geologiche, Università di Modena e Reggio Emilia, Via S. Eufemia 19, I-41121 Modena, Italy
Simona Bigi
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze Chimiche e Geologiche, Università di Modena e Reggio Emilia, Via S. Eufemia 19, I-41121 Modena, Italy
Alessandro F. Gualtieri
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze Chimiche e Geologiche, Università di Modena e Reggio Emilia, Via S. Eufemia 19, I-41121 Modena, Italy
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This work deals with the determination of the mineralogical composition of three quartzite samples, selected as case study to verify the viability and accuracy of various experimental techniques commonly used in geometallurgy and petrography for the determination of the mineralogical composition of rock samples. The investigated samples are from the North-Eastern side of the Denali National Park (Alaska Range, USA). The mineralogical phase abundance of the samples was determined by digitally assisted optical modal point counting, scanning electron microscopy (SEM) + energy dispersive spectroscopy (EDS) modal and digital image analysis, normative calculation from bulk chemistry calculation, and modal Rietveld X-ray powder diffraction. The results of our study indicate that the results provided by modal optical and SEM digitalized counting seem less accurate than the others. The determination with EDS mapping was found to be inaccurate only for one sample. Agreement was found between the X-ray diffraction estimates and bulk chemistry calculation. For both modal optical and SEM digitalized counting, the statistics was probably insufficient to provide accurate results. The estimates obtained from the various methods are compared with each other in the attempt to attain general indications on the precision, accuracy, advantages/disadvantages of each method.

Keywords

Rietveld methodDenali quartziteoptical countingSEMEDSbulk chemistry calculation
Type
Technical Articles
Information
Powder Diffraction , Volume 31 , Issue 1 , March 2016 , pp. 31 - 39
Copyright
Copyright © International Centre for Diffraction Data 2016 

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

Barth, T. F. W. (1959). “Principles of classification and norm calculations of metamorphic rocks,” J. Geol. 67(2), 135–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bish, D. L. and Howard, S. A. (1988). “Quantitative phase analysis using the Rietveld method,” J. Appl. Crystallogr. 21, 86–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bish, D. L. and Post, J. E. (1993). “Quantitative mineralogical analysis using the Rietveld full-pattern fitting method,” Am. Mineral. 78(9–10), 932–940.Google Scholar
Brown, B. E. and Bailey, S. W. (1963). “Chlorite polytypism: II. Crystal structure of a one-layer Cr-chlorite,” Am. Mineral. 48, 42–61.Google Scholar
Chayes, F. (1956). Petrographic Modal Analysis: an Elementary Statistical Appraisal (Wiley, New York), p. 113.Google Scholar
Csejtey, B. Jr., Cox, D. P., Evarts, R. C., Stricker, G. D., and Foster, H. L. (1982). “The Cenozoic Denali Fault System and the Cretaceous accretionary development of southern Alaska,” J. Geophys. Res. 87(B5), 3741–3754.Google Scholar
Cross, W., Iddings, J. P., Pirsson, L. V., and Washington, H. S. (1902). “A quantitative chemicomineralogical classification and nomenclature of igneous rocks,” J. Geol. 6, 555–690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Croce, A., Allegrina, M., Trivero, P., Rinaudo, C., Viani, A., Pollastri, S., and Gualtieri, A. F. (2014). “The concept of ‘end of waste’ and recycling of hazardous materials: in depth characterization of the product of thermal transformation of cement-asbestos,” Mineral. Mag. 78(5), 1177–1191.Google Scholar
ESRI (2011). ArcGIS Desktop: Release 10 (Environmental Systems Research Institute, Redlands, CA).Google Scholar
Gonzalez, R. M., Edwards, T. E., Lorbiecke, T. D., Winburn, R. S., and Webster, J. R. (2003). Analysis of geologic materials using Rietveld quantitative X-ray diffraction,” Adv. X-ray Anal. 46, 204–209.Google Scholar
Gu, Y. (2003). “Automated scanning electron microscope based mineral liberation analysis,” J. Miner. Mater. Charact. Eng. 2, 33–41.Google Scholar
Gualtieri, A. F. (2000). “Accuracy of XRPD QPA using the combined Rietveld-RIR method,” J. Appl. Crystallogr. 33, 267–278.Google Scholar
Guggenheim, S., Chang, Y. H., and Koster van Groos, A. F. (1987). “Muscovite dehydroxylation: High-temperature studies, Sample: T = 20 °C, from Diamond mine, Keystone, South Dakota,” Am. Mineral. 72, 537–550.Google Scholar
Hamilton, V. E. and Christensen, P. R. (2000). “Determining the modal mineralogy of mafic and ultramafic igneous rocks using thermal emission spectroscopy,” J. Geophys. Res. 105(E4), 9717–9733.Google Scholar
Hickman, R. G., Craddock, C. and Sherwood, K. W. (1978). “The Denali Fault systems and the tectonic development of Southern Alaska,” Tectonophysics 47, 247–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, R. J. and Howard, C. J. (1987). “Quantitative phase analysis from neutron powder diffraction data using the Rietveld method,” J. Appl. Crystallogr. 20, 467–474.Google Scholar
Hill, R. J., Tsambourakis, G., and Madsen, I. C. (1993). “Improved petrological modal analyses from X-ray powder diffraction data by use of the Rietveld Method I. Selected igneous, volcanic, and metamorphic rocks,” J. Petrol. 34(5), 867–900.Google Scholar
Kwitko-Ribeiro, R. (2011). “New sample preparation developments to minimize mineral segregation in process mineralogy,” In: Proc., 10th Int. Congress for Applied Mineralogy (ICAM), Trondheim, Norway, 1–5 August, 411–417.Google Scholar
Lamberg, P. (2011). “Particles – the bridge between geology and metallurgy,” In: Conf. in Mineral Engineering, Proc., Luleå, Sweden, 8–9 February, 1–16.Google Scholar
Larson, A. C. and Von Dreele, R. B. (1999). Report LAUR LANL 86–748 (USA, Los Alamos National Laboratory).Google Scholar
Le Saoût, G., Kocaba, V., and Scrivener, K. (2011). “Application of the Rietveld method to the analysis of anhydrous cement,” Cem. Concr. Res. 41, 133–148.Google Scholar
Liipo, J., Lang, C., Burgess, S., Otterstrom, H., Person, H., and Lamberg, P. (2012). “Automated mineral liberation analysis using INCAMineral,” In: Process Mineralogy ‘12, Proc., Vineyard Hotel, Cape Town, South Africa, 7–9 November, 1–7.Google Scholar
Lund, C., Lamberg, P., and Lindberg, T. (2013). “Practical way to quantify minerals from chemical assays at Malmberget iron ore operations – an important tool for the geometallurgical program,” Miner. Eng. 49, 7–16.Google Scholar
Madsen, I. C. and Scarlett, N. V. Y. (2008) “Quantitative phase analysis” Chapter 11 in “Powder diffraction: theory and practice,” RSC Publishing, 298–329.Google Scholar
McBirney, A. R. (1993). “Igneous Petrology (Jones and Bartlett, Boston, Mass), 2nd ed., 508 pp.Google Scholar
Moen, K. (2006). “Quantitative measurements of mineral microstructure,” Doctoral thesis. Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, 194 pp.Google Scholar
Rietveld, H. M. (1969). “A profile refinement method for nuclear and magnetic structures,” J. Appl. Crystallogr. 2, 65–71.Google Scholar
Schneider, C. A., Rasband, W. S., and Eliceiri, K. W. (2012). “NIH Image to ImageJ. 25 years of image analysis,” Nat. methods 9(7), 671–675.Google Scholar
Singh, R. P., Cervone, G., Singh, V. P., and Kafatos, M. (2007). “Generic precursors to coastal earthquakes: inferences from Denali fault earthquake,” Tectonophysics 431, 231–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Toby, B. H. (2000). “EXPGUI, a graphical user interface for GSAS,” J. Appl. Crystallogr. 34, 201–213.Google Scholar
Webster, J. R., Kight, R. P., Winburn, R. S., and Cool, C. A. (2003). “Heavy mineral analysis of sandstones by Rietveld analysis,” Adv. X-ray Anal. 46, 198–203.Google Scholar
Volk, G. W. (1939). “Optical and chemical studies of muscovite,” Am. Mineral. 24, 255–266.Google Scholar
Zanazzi, P. F., Comodi, P., Nazzareni, S., and Andreozzi, G. B. (2009). “Thermal behaviour of chlorite: an in situ single-crystal and powder diffraction study,” Eur. J. Mineral. 21, 581–589.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: Image

Nistor supplementary material

Nistor supplementary material 1

Download Nistor supplementary material(Image)
Image 974.6 KB
Supplementary material: Image

Nistor supplementary material

Nistor supplementary material 2

Download Nistor supplementary material(Image)
Image 974.6 KB
Supplementary material: Image

Nistor supplementary material

Nistor supplementary material 3

Download Nistor supplementary material(Image)
Image 48.3 KB
Supplementary material: File

Nistor supplementary material

Nistor supplementary material 4

Download Nistor supplementary material(File)
File 30.5 KB
Supplementary material: File

Nistor supplementary material

Nistor supplementary material 5

Download Nistor supplementary material(File)
File 31.8 KB
Supplementary material: File

Nistor supplementary material

Nistor supplementary material 6

Download Nistor supplementary material(File)
File 31.8 KB
Supplementary material: File

Nistor supplementary material

Nistor supplementary material 7

Download Nistor supplementary material(File)
File 10.2 KB