Scott Halley, 28/06/2016

An example of Mineralogical Modelling from Assay data.

This is an example from an intermediate sulfidation epithermal gold deposit. In this system, dioritic
intrusions were emplaced into siliciclastic sediment, beneath a limestone cap. Gold mineralization is
associated with disseminated pyrite near the limestone contact, particularly around the margins of the
diorite bodies. Gangue mineralogy varies from illite to montmorillonite to kaolinite, overprinting earlier
relict potsassic alteration that formed with a weak porphyry Cu event. In this deposit, every meter of
drill cuttings was assayed using a 4 acid digest, with ICP-AES analysis.

This is a section through the gangue mineralogy model of the deposit. For every meter of drilling, the
gangue mineralogy has been classified from the assays. This section shows a cross section with drill
traces coloured by mineralogy; carbonate-rich, feldspar-rich or complete feldspar replacement by illite,
montmorillonite or kaolinite. The diorite stocks are in translucent pink.

Consider the ways in which a model like this can benefit a mining operation. What is the relative
hardness, BWi and mill throughput rates of ore with a feldspathic matrix versus ore in a phyllosilicate
matrix? If the sulfides were pre-concentrated in a flotation circuit, we need to know how kaolinite and
montmorillonite behave in this part of the processing. If the ore goes to a heap leach, we need to know
how kaolinite and montmorillonite behave on the leach pads. This model shows where zones of intense
clay alteration will be located on pit walls. What are the pit wall stability implications, and how will pit
wall angles have to be designed to allow for those clay-rich domains? Having a model like this allows us
to predict possible mining, processing and geotechnical problems, design tests to quantify the risks and
then spatially map problematic zones in orebodies.

Methodology for estimating Mineralogy

Plot Ca versus Mg. This shows a node

of pure calcite at 40% Ca, with a
replacement trend towards dolomite.

One of the most useful plots is K/Al versus Na/Al, calculated on a molar basis. Consider a rock that is
totally sericitized. The mineralogy of the rock might be muscovite-quartz-carbonate-pyrite. All of the K
and Al in that rock will be within sericite. Muscovite has a composition of KAl3Si3 O10(OH)2. Therefore the
ratio of K:Al in the sericitized rock is 1:3. Similarly, a totally K feldspar (KAlSi3 O8 ) altered rock will have a
K:Al ratio of 1:1. Advanced argillic alteration plots at the origin (0,0).

This plot shows trends towards

alteration mineral compositions
relative to the projected position of
the least altered host rocks. Note the
very high percentage of strongly Na-
depleted samples. These are rocks in
which all of the feldspar is destroyed.
The mineralogy in these rocks varied
from illite to illite + clay, to intense
clay alteration. The clay mineral could
be either montmorillonite or kaolinite.
 Each point can be assigned to a
mineralogy group based on where it
plots relative to least-altered
samples.

The clay mineralogy can be estimated by

plotting Al-K-Ca and Al-K-Mg ternary plots.
Where the clays are dominantly kaolinite, Ca
and Mg are depleted from the rock. Where
the clays are dominantly montmorillonite, Ca
and Mg are retained.

This has been verified by measuring SWIR

spectra. The SWIR measurements are more or
less point measurements, but the assays are
entire meter intervals, so are more reliable.