GEOPHYSICS, VOL. 64, NO. 6 (NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 1999); E 1735-1739,2 FIGS.
Downloaded 09/08/15 to 132.239.1.230. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
Magnetic mapping of Majhgawan diamond pipe of central India
B. S. P. Sarma*, B. K. Verma*, and S. V. Satyanarayanal
ABSTRACT
Magnetic response over kimberlite/lamproite pipes
can be used to map their horizontal and vertical cross-
sections. A published ground magnetic vertical intensity
contour map is used to map the Majhgawan kimberlite
pipe near Panna in central India. Using Barnett's (1976)
method, we obtained a reasonable match between the
computed and observed fields with three separate bod-
ies. The model suggests a possible later intrusion into the
main pipe. Geological studies (using drill-hole data) im-
ply a nearly concentric vertical lithological zoning within
the pipe and thus support the hypothesis of multiple in-
trusions, indicated by magnetic data. The multiple in-
trusion hypothesis is of interest to exploration because
specific intrusions within one composite pipe may dif-
fer markedly in the incidence of diamonds. The higher
incidence of diamonds reported in the central part of
the Majhgawan pipe, as compared to the outer part, also
supports the possibility of a later intrusion into the main
pipe.
INTRODUCTION
Geophysical techniques are very effective not only in detect-
ing kimberlites/lamproites but also in mapping their area and
depth. Aeromagnetics or ground magnetics is almost invari-
ably used as a primary search tool for detecting and delineat-
ing kimberlites (Macnae, 1979, 1995; Nixon, 1981; Atkinson,
1989; Sarma and Verma, 1996). Macnae (1979) reports several
new pipes that give rise to magnetic anomalies in the Lesotho
region. Macnae (1995) also reports examples of aeromagnetic
anomalies from the Sheoak area of southern Australia which
contain several kimberlite responses within a highly variable
magnetic background. He mentions that the magnetic anoma-
lies usually show a large degree of complexity, indicating inho-
mogeneities within the pipes. While summarizing the physical
properties of kimberlites and lamproites, he shows that lam-
proites are less magnetic than kimberlites by an order of mag-
Manuscript received by the Editor January 15, 1997; revised manuscript received March 19, 1999.
*National Geophysical Research Institute, Uppal Road, Hyderabad-500 007, India. E-mail: postmast@csngri.ren.nic.in.
tGeological Survey of India, Bandlaguda, Hyderabad, India.
© 1999 Society of Exploration Geophysicists. All rights reserved.
1735
nitude. Nixon (1981) says that magnetic anomalies may occur
within individual pipes, as at Letsang-La-Terae, indicating sep-
arate diamondiferous intrusions. Atkinson (1989) states that
the variable and complex nature of magnetic responses found
over kimberlites is more likely to reflect the nature of the body
itself than the differential weathering of the pipe as stated by
some authors. On the other hand, Sarma and Verma (1996)
demonstrate how magnetics can be used to detect a weathered
kimberlite by assigning negative magnetization contrast to the
kimberlite.
Multiple intrusions and facies variations are common in kim-
berlite and lamproite pipes. Macnae (1995) states that it is pru-
dent to ensure that all major intrusions within a pipe are sepa-
rately identified because the diamond grades can vary notice-
ably between them. These variations manifest themselves in
the geophysical responses. The actual application of geophys-
ical methods to differentiate between individual intrusions in
a composite pipe is rare in the literature. This work attempts
to model the multiple intrusive phases of the Majhgawan di-
amond pipe of central India by using published magnetic and
geological data.
GEOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PIPE
The diamondiferous Majhgawan pipe, located about 15 km
southwest of the town of Panna in Madhya Pradesh, cen-
tral India, is the only producing diamond mine in the coun-
try (Figure 1). The pipe was discovered in 1827 before the
discovery of kimberlite pipes in South Africa. The pear-
shaped Majhgawan pipe, with surface dimensions of about
500 x 330 m, was emplaced into the Kaimur group of sediments
belonging to the Upper Proterozoic Vindhyan Supergroup of
rocks (Halder and Ghosh, 1978), comprised mostly of sand-
stone, conglomerate, shale, and limestone. The Vindhyan Su-
pergroup overlies the Bundelkhand granite, which comprises
older metamorphics—granites, gneisses, and basic and ultra-
basic dikes of varied composition. At the surface the pipe is
surrounded by horizontal to subhorizontal bedded Baghain
Sandstone of the Kaimur group (Chatterjee and Rao, 1995).
The pipe is dated at about 1140 million years ago (Ma) by
Crawford and Composton (1970) and at about 1067 Ma by

1736 Sarma et al.

A. Kumar et al. (1993) by using the rubidium-strontium (Rb-
Sr) method.
Haider and Ghosh (1978) and Mathur and Singh (1971) give
the different physical characteristics of the pipe. The pear-
shaped body, with a small protuberance toward the west, is
a typical funnel/carrot-shaped diatreme dipping 70 -75 (Fig-
ure 1). Weathered rock (yellow ground) is found up to a depth
Downloaded 09/08/15 to 132.239.1.230. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
phorus pentoxide content, high titanian phlogopites, and a
low content of indicator minerals such as pyrope, chromite,
and ilmenite. Chatterjee and Rao (1995) observe several over-
lapping morphological, petrological, and geochemical features
and suggest that the Majhgawan pipe is intermediate between
0 0 typical kimberlites and lamproites. W. L. Griffin in Chatterjee
and Rao (1993) suggests that the Majhgawan pipe is somewhat

of 15 m, beyond which the rock grades into semiweathered
rock (blue ground). Fresh rock (hardebank) is normally found
30-35 m below the surface. The peripheral zone of the pipe has
more xenoliths of Vindhyan rocks and is traversed by shear
planes filled with calcite veins. Based on the textural and min-
eralogical variations, the pipe is classified into massive, mica-
ceous, and brecciated units. Boreholes drilled as deep as 350 m
indicate that these units exhibit a roughly concentric zoning
pattern.
Sinor (1930), Mathur and Singh (1971), and Haider and
Ghosh (1978), describe the Majhgawan pipe, reported by Capt.
J. Franklin in 1827, as kimberlite. Based on certain petrological
and chemical characteristics—such as the presence of glassy
ground mass with juvenile lapilli, complex shapes of olivine
macrocrysts, high titanian phlogopites, high concentrations of
some of the incompatible elements, and the absence of tuff-
isic intrusive breccia and ilmenite—Scott Smith (1989; 1992)
reclassifies the pipe rock as glassy olivine lamproite. Kharkiv
et al. (1991) also classify the rock as olivine lamproite, based
on chemical and mineralogical characteristics such as the ab-
sence of carbonate material, high titanium oxide and phos-
unusual in containing predominantly lherzolitic garnets and a
good population of depleted calcic harzburgitic garnets, which
suggests unusual processes involved in the generation of the
magma.
MAGNETIC MAP OF THE MAJHGAWAN PIPE
Sharma and Nandi (1964) of the Geological Survey of India
conducted ground magnetic and electrical surveys over the
known Majhgawan pipe. They published a magnetic map of the
Majhgawan pipe, shown in Figure 2a. For magnetic measure-
ments, they used Watt's Vertical Variometers of the Schmidt
type. Traverses are N30°W across the general strike of the
Parma diamond belt. The traverse interval is 100 ft (30.48 m),
and it is reduced to 50 ft (15.24 m) in the central part of the
pipe. Individual stations along the traverse are typically 100 ft
(30.48 m) apart.
The magnetic map shows the vertical intensity magnetic con-
tours at 40-nT contour intervals over the pipe, as well as the
probable boundary of the pipe, based on boreholes, pits, and
a trench. The map has a complex magnetic pattern with nega-
tive closures to the north, positive closures to the south, and a

N. N.W 100 M
SCALE Lillil
0 40 GMD —22
370 m GMD-I
350k- L S.E.
OPEN CAST MINE 5 Majhgawan
8
14 53/ DeIhl
300 Hs 11 21^ '0 2 n I NDIA Ar:
5 1 2(
1 4
t ^
250 1 / 3 \1 Madras
7 1 t 7
3/ -- -- --
8
INDEX
200 L) 2 ) Sip 1 T1 Zone of Barvte veinlets
I v► I
4 f a Micaceous kimberlite breccia (Autolithic)
150 Z =3 Massive kimberlite with xenoliths
1 }3t 1 7
SJ
® kimberlite breccia (Autolithic)
100 1 I 1 ) 1
1 1 j J Baghain sandstone.
181 L7
Pipertala conglomerate
l l j r t,^
4 Q Palkawan shale
50
1 Xenoliths of country rocks

0
^i 3 t ) Ea o1 Drill hole
Fig. 1. Geological cross-section of Majhgawan pipe and location; GMD-1 and GMD-22 are drill holes (after Chatterjee and
Rao, 1995).

Magnetic Mapping of Diamond Pipe 1737
pair of northeast-trending contour protrusions in the middle. negative closure of —280 nT, lying to the extreme south of the
The relief of the anomaly is 440 nT, and it varies from —200 map, appears to be an incomplete anomaly that may not be
to +240. The contours in the northern and western part of the connected with the main anomaly.
magnetic map are sparsely spaced and incomplete. Some parts A closer look at the magnetic map suggests the presence of
of the magnetic contours are shown in dashed lines, which indi- more than one body in the subsurface. The large magnetic bipo-
cate some uncertainty in contour shape and value. The isolated lar anomaly varying from —200 nT to +240 nT suggests that
Downloaded 09/08/15 to 132.239.1.230. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

WI 6 4 P,P 0 E2 E4 E6 N
16 E BO UNDARY
4'
\
/
-.
" .. 'To
w I 2x N o
x
o x0a °o
8 Joo/o •. ^^^o•
N^ N^ 0'•
V. 00 ?
+ is ^\ ^^
i
4 ' •.

r'^ J lV 0 Z Q•......
^

` RE V. - ••
i•

^4 .^ ^o X eo 6,
o
Contour Interval . a
'0o x/ 2O
40nT) Z.-^^
0 I00m .''r c?F o
`I
I 4 o ^^;\^ / (a) ^m a (b )
TRAVERSES (Contour Interval 40 nT)
S16

11/ N.N.W.
0
Soil/Sediments
S.S.E
--

x
::. -80 X x
x
xx
Body No.1 X x X X x x xx
x x xxx - 160 xx
X X x x xX
x x Body No.2
XX
Body No.3
xX x
- 240 xx 0 loom
1 x ^^
X
0 100m W x
Lm C61 (C) -320m. xx (d)
X

FIG. 2. (a) Observed magnetic vertical intensity contour map over the Majhgawan pipe, along with station and traverse markings
(after Sharma and Nandi, 1964). (b) Computed magnetic vertical intensity contour map over Majhgawan pipe for the three assumed
bodies (dotted lines outline the bodies). (c) Map view of the modeled pipe. The cross-section of the model is shown with dashed
markings (north-northwest to south-southeast). This location is the same as the geological cross-section shown in Figure 1. (d)
Vertical cross-section of the modeled pipe. Legend is the same as in Figure 2c. Body No. 1 approximately represents units 2 and 3
from Figure 1; Body No. 2 represents unit 4 from Figure 1; Body No. 3 may represent ejecta.

1738 Sarma et al.
it may be associated with the main body. The pair of contour
protrusions in the middle of the anomaly indicates the possi-
bility of a secondary body. The outer sparsely spaced contours
and the north-northwest side of geological unit 8 of Figure 1
suggest a thin layer (maybe the ejecta) surrounding the main
body on the northern and northwestern side.
Downloaded 09/08/15 to 132.239.1.230. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
MODELING AND DISCUSSION
The geophysical response of a pipe in which multiple in-
trusions or facies variations occur is complex because of the
widely varying physical properties. Macnae (1995) writes that
the complex variations of geophysical responses over a pipe
make computer modeling very difficult or impossible in many
cases. However, an attempt is made here to construct a 3-
D model of the Majhgawan pipe using available magnetic
data.
For modeling the pattern of the magnetic contours (Fig-
ure 2a), three geologically reasonable bodies (Figure 2c) were
assumed. The composite response of these bodies was calcu-
lated with the magnetization induced by the geomagnetic field
of the region (inclination = 35°, declination = 0 ) and com-
0
pared to the observed magnetic map. The main body (Body
No. 1) and the secondary body (Body No. 2) were taken as
vertical cylinder-like bodies with polygonal cross-sections ex-
tending to a depth of 350 m. The third body (Body No. 3)
was assumed to be a thin layer about 20 m thick with some
variations following the magnetic contours. Following the re-
lief of the magnetic contour map (Figure 2a), a susceptibility
value of 0.02 SI units was assigned to the main body, a value of
0.005 SI units was assigned to the second body, and a value of
0.01 SI units was assigned to the third body. The susceptibility
values of kimberlites, however, vary widely (Atkinson, 1989;
Kamara, 1981). The top was fixed at around 10 m for all three
bodies, and the magnetic vertical intensity field was calculated
for them. The corners of the bodies were varied until a rea-
sonable agreement between the calculated and the observed
magnetic field was achieved. The mathematical formulation
and the algorithms used for these calculations were based on
Barnett's (1976) method. The computed composite contour
map of the magnetic field from the three bodies is shown in
Figure 2b.
The observed and the computed maps (Figures 2a-b) show
good agreement, suggesting that the Majhgawan pipe is ac-
tually a complex combination of three bodies. The modeling
suggests a later intrusion into the main pipe (Figure 2d). Nixon
(1995) shows a few examples of multiple intrusions. Macnae
(1995) mentions a case where, on the basis of magnetic and
conductive properties, three separate major intrusive phases
were identified in a kimberlite. The nearly concentric litholog-
ical zoning (Figure 1), which shows massive medium-grained
rock toward the center compared to the overall fine-grained
nature of the pipe (Chatterjee and Rao, 1995), also suggests
a possible later intrusion into the main pipe. This model so-
lution is not unique because the susceptibility, geometry, and
depths of the bodies are not fully constrained. However, we
can reasonably conclude from this model that the Majhgawan
intrusion is most probably a complex of three or more sep-
arate bodies. It might be argued that the observed complex
magnetic field results from differential weathering of a single
pipe. However, weathering zonation is typically vertical in dia-
mond pipes, unlike the horizontal zonation that seems to pre-
vail at Majhgawan. Improved data would better resolve this
issue.
The incidence of diamonds is higher in the central part of
the pipe than in the outer part (Chatterjee and Rao, 1995). This
suggests that the later body intruded into the main pipe is more
diamondiferous. Atkinson (1989) mentions that less magnetic
pipes are often the most prospective. This work of magnetic
modeling demonstrates the efficacy and utility of magnetics in
providing at least a first-order model of a diamond pipe.
CONCLUSIONS
Magnetics plays a useful role in detecting and providing pos-
sible models describing the areal and vertical extent of diamond
pipes. The available magnetic vertical intensity contour map of
the Majhgawan pipe was studied, and a geologically reason-
able 3-D model satisfying the contour map was obtained. This
model suggests a later intrusive-like body in the middle of the
pipe. The nearly concentric lithological zoning and the higher
incidence of diamond occurrences in the central part of the
pipe also indicate a possible later intrusion. This study demon-
strates the utility of magnetic maps in expedient mapping of
kimberlite/lamproite pipes, despite the ambiguity limitations
in interpreting magnetic data.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors are thankful to Prof. Harsh K. Gupta, Direc-
tor of the National Geophysical Research Institute, Hyder-
abad, India, for his constant encouragement. B. S. is grateful
to V. Babu Rao for valuable suggestions during the course of
this work. The authors are very grateful to Harold L. Yarger
for his critical review and valuable suggestions to this paper.
REFERENCES
Atkinson, W. J., 1989, Diamond exploration philosophy, practice and
promises: A review, in Ross, J., Ed., Kimberlites and related rocks 2:
Geol. Soc. Austral. Spec. Publ. 14, 1075-1107.
Barnett, C. T., 1976, Theoretical modeling of magnetic and gravita-
tional fields of an arbitrarily shaped three-dimensional body: Geo-
physics, 41, 1353-1364.
Chatterjee, A. K., and Rao, K. S., 1995, Majhgawan diamondiferous
pipe, Madhya Pradesh, India—A review: J. Geol. Soc. Ind., 45, No. 2,
175-189.
Crawford, A. R., and Composton, W., 1970, The age of the Vindhyan
system of peninsular India: J. Geol. Soc. London, 125, 351-371.
Haider, D., and Ghosh, D. B.,1978, Tectonics of the kimberlites around
Majhgawan, Madhya Pradesh, India, in Murthy, M. V. N., Ed., Inter-
national seminar on tectonics and metallogeny of South East Asia
and Far East: Geol. Surv. Ind. Misc. Pub. 34, part III, 1-12.
Kamara, A. Y. S., 1981, Review: Geophysical methods for kimberlite
prospecting: Bull. Austral. Soc. Expl. Geophys., 12, No. 3, 43-51.
Kharkiv, A. D., Zherdev, P. Y., Makhotkin, I. L., and Shermeyev,
V. E, 1991, Composition of the diamond-bearing rocks of the Majh-
gawan pipe, central India: Izvestia ANSSR, Seriya Geologicheskaya,
3,123-132.
Kumar, A., Kumari, P., Dayal, A. M., Murthy, D. S. N., and Gopalan, K.,
1993, Rb-Sr ages of Proterozoic kimberlites of India: Evidence for
contemporaneous emplacements: Precambrian Res., 62, 227-237.
Macnae, C. J., 1979, Kimberlite and exploration geophysics: Geo-
physics, 44, 1395-1416.
1995, Applications of geophysics for the detection of kimber-
lites and lamproites: J. Geochem. Expl., 53, 213-243.
Mathur, S. M., and Singh, K. N. B., 1971, Petrology of the Majhgawan
pipe rock: Geol. Surv. India Misc. Publ. 19, 78-85.
Nixon, P. H., 1981, Regional diamond exploration—Theory and prac-
tice, in Glover, J. E., and Groves, D. I., Eds., Kimberlites and dia-
monds: Univ. West Austral. Ext. Service, Publ. 5, 64-80.
1995, The morphology and nature of primary diamondiferous
occurrences: J. Geochem. Expl., 53,41-71.

Magnetic Mapping of Diamond Pipe 1739

Sarma, B. S. E, and Verma, B. K.,1996, Negative magnetization contrast
in kimberlite search, Expl. Geophys., 26, 31-34.
Scott Smith, B. H., 1989, Lamproites and kimberlites in India: Neues
Jarbuch Mineral Abh., 161, 193-225.
1992, Kimberlites and lamproites compared and contrasted:
Presented at the Internat. Conf. on Diamond Exploration and Min-
ing: National Mineral Development Corp.
Downloaded 09/08/15 to 132.239.1.230. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
Sharma, K., and Nandi, S. C., 1964, Magnetic and electrical surveys for
locating additional hidden pipes in the Panna diamond belt, Madhya
Pradesh, India, in Kailasam, L. N., and Roy, A., Eds., Geological
results of applied geophysics: Report of the 22nd Internat. Geol.
Congress, 91-105.
Sinor, K. P., 1930, The diamond mines of Panna State in central India:
Times of India Press.