Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 3654-Article Text-6697-2-10-20070529 - Uso y Abuso de Tecnicas en La Exploracion

    Uploaded by

    ajreateguic
    7 views11 pages

    Original Title

    3654-Article Text-6697-2-10-20070529_ uso y abuso de tecnicas en la exploracion

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    7 views11 pages

    3654-Article Text-6697-2-10-20070529 - Uso y Abuso de Tecnicas en La Exploracion

    Uploaded by

    ajreateguic

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 11
    Geoscience Canada Volume 17 Number 2 Uses (and Abuses) of Ore Deposit Models in Mineral Exploration C.J. Hodgson Dopertment of Geologicel Sclonces ‘Queen’ University ‘Kingston, Ontario K7L 3N6 Eaditors Note: The folowing attic orignally appeared in Exploration '87 Proceedings: The Role of Exploration in Resource De- velopment. t's reprinted here withthe per- mission of the Oector, Ontario Geological ‘Survey. Abstract [An ore deposit model's a conceptual andior ‘empirical standard, embodying both the de- scriptve features ofthe deposit type, and an explanation of these features in terms of geological processes. The descriptive fear tures of models serve as criteria for explora Uonareaselection (ares selectioncritera’ How they are used in this function depends onthe scale of ther spatial association with 0F@, on our confidence that they are reliable Indicators of ore, and on the extent to which they are preferentially associated with eco- rnomically better deposits. The geological, geochemical, and geophysical techniques Usedin explotation. and exploration strategy depend on area selection ertera. The rea- tive importance ofarea selection eritriacan be dotermined from their relative Requency of aesociation with ore in a representative ‘samplecthe deposit population, resuiting in an empiical model. A genetic model is de- rived by considering the geneticrelationship of area selection criteria to ore. The weak Inks in model bullding are the lack of effort which goes into systematically assembling the data on the known population of depos- its, and the weak scinific underpinnings of the geneticirterpretation. Both ofthese fac- tors influence exploration by leading toinap- propriate assessments ofthe relative impor- tance of area selection criteria In addition, there are a number of human foibles which ccommonty lead to shortcomings In the de- velopment and use of models. The mast sig nificant of these is our tendency to rely 0 much on too simple models. We do this to {avoid the discomfort of uncertainty and con- {fusion which inevitably comes when we are called on to assess exploration sitions. The history of exploration for messive base-metal sulphide deposits and gold e- posits inthe Canadian Shield provides @ good iMystration oftpeinniuence of models on area. selection criteria, and thereby, on explora ‘ton strategy and techniques. Introduction ‘A madel in geology Is @ conceptual andior ‘empirical standard which embodies the es- sential features of some population of natu ralgeciogical phenomena. Athough a model ‘can be strictly descriptive, most contain in- terpretive elements that explain the relation- ships among the vorious descriptive fea- tures in terms of geological processes. Mod- ‘ets of ore deposits are widely used in mineral ‘exploration as a basis for predicting the ex ploraton potential of areas which may range in scale rom largo regions down toindlvidual ‘ore zones. Everyone uses models, but often Ite thoughtis given to how models are bit, how they influonce exploration programs, and how they ean be improved, The objective ofthis paper Is to examine the structure ofore deposit models and their roleinthe mineral exploration process. nis, amous book, The Structure of Scent Rov. ‘lutions, Kunn (1962) argued that macels are ‘used, consciously oF not, to predict in vi- ‘ualy allot our everycay interactions with our ‘environment, cluding in scientiicresearch, this view is accepted, then models should represent as close an approximation as pos- sible to realty if they are lo properly guide ‘us. However, t should be emphasized that ‘models are a two-edged sword. On the one hand, they are @ powerful means of organiz- Ing datain a form that enhances understand- Ing and prediction. Buton the other hand, by ‘operating to exclude perception of di whieh does not fit the model, they have 9 ‘oporitic effect, that may lead to unjustified ‘confidence in the application of the model LARGE AREA GEOLOGICAL CRITERIA FOR EXPLORATION AREA SELECTION EXPLORATION TECHNIQUES ‘SMALL AREA) Figure 1 The exploration process: exploration techniques (ge0'0g¢a. geophysical. and geo ‘chemical are used fo measure the detnbution of ‘rea zaiectioncmerissothalthe most prospect Darts of laze exploration aoe can be selected Tortutber exploration cry ‘These concepts are ilustrated by describing the infuence on exploration strategy and techniques of historical changes in models for base-metal, volcanogenic massive su hide, and for gtd deposits. Mineral Exploration Mineral exploration Involves the progressive reduction in the size of the area being ex- ‘lored until @ mine is found (Figure 1). The slarting polnt may be a region the size of 8 continent, or simply one level in @ rine. ‘Whatever its size, the objective of explora tions to focus attention progressively on the ‘most favourable ports of the area so that as exploration proceeds, the chances of an ‘economic mineral deposit being found con- tinwously increase. Area reduction normally takes place in steps which ore seperated by ‘2r0a selection “dacision points (Figure 2) For example, in 8 regional reconnaissance ‘program, the frst decision point might follow the completion of large-scale geochemical ‘and geophysical surveys, at which time a ‘number of claim groups might be staked or optioned. ‘Area selection in mineral exploration is based on the presence or absence of spec. le geological features, or alternatively. geo Physical and geochemical features which Foflect geological features. These features (Gee Figure 1). Area selection criteria are concrete, measurable features, not con ‘cepts, For example, it might be considered thal volcanic centres are an important re- ‘glonal-scale area selection criterion for vol ‘canogenic massive sulphide deposits. How ‘ever, “volcanic centre" is nota feature which shows on the legend of most geological ‘mape. Rather, tis an interpretation based on the distribution and configuration of specific Ithologies and structures in on area. The ‘map patterns which indicate “voleanic cen- {te are the concrete realy, and itis these ‘map pattorns that comprise the area selec- tion enteria, ‘Mucho! the werk of exploration consists of tiring the distribution of area selection criteria in the exploration area. The term “exploration strategy” can be used toreterto the sequence of activites which resuits in the progressive reduction inthe size of the ‘exploration area, The best exploration strat egy optimizes he balance between cost and effectiveness inthe area selection process {see Figure 2). Two factors are citical 10 ‘good exploration strategy: (1) optimizing on the cost, in relation to the ellectiveness, of methods used to determine the presence or absence offeatures oa which the area selection process 's based, and {2)using the appropriate criteria for explora- tion area selection, and correctly assessing the relative importance of these. Most of the papers given at Exploration '87 wore con- ‘corned withthe first factor. tis the second aspect of exploration strategy that is the ‘main concern ofthis paper. Models as Systems Which “Rate” ‘Area Selection Criteria ‘Area selection erteria must not only be fea- tures which ore spatiaty associated with ore, bulthey must aloo be gonot'cally related 10.re in some way. Without this gonetic ink the spatial association would be fortuitous or accidental, and therefore not arable guide tore. In adéition, area selection criteria, to bbe elu, must be relatively easily identified, rormally by field techniques. For examole the type of gold deposit which occurs in greenstone Delis ‘s commonly associated with certain types of felsic hypabyssal intrusions. and therefore the presence of these intrusions is a useful area selection Criterion, readily applied in a field situation (Hodgeon eta, 1982). Incontrast, the obser- vation that Fuld incusions in Archean gold deposits are CO;ich, while genetically sig rifleant (Wood et al, 1986), Is nol, at our present level of geological understanding. 2 iter thatcanbe practically applied nthe area selection process in most instances. In the case of epithermaltype gold deposits, fon the other hand, the gas content of fui BENEFIT ——o> inclusions Is a eriteion for area selection (Norman ofa, 1988) ‘Area selection critoria canbe orderedin a three-dimonsional bierarchy, according to: (1) the scale at which they are associates With mineralization, and thus the scaie of ‘area selection for which they are used. (2) the confidence one has that a feature Is an ‘essential (nt fortuitous) part ofthe ore en- ‘vironment, and (3) their relation (if any) tothe ‘economic quay ofa deposit ‘Area selection oiteria ave scale-specifc: whats important atone scale may be rrele- ant at another. For exemple, there is an ‘association of Archean gold mining camps ‘withthe contacts of mafic + ultramafic vol- ‘canic sequences with sedimentary rock se ‘quences, but this feature is ofite or no use In selecting dil targets within mining camps. (Figure 3) Large-scale area selection cnt Fiaare moreimportantthansmal-scale crit fia, since even the most technically song program cannot sueceed fits carried out in AREA SELECTION CRITERIA MAFIC » ULTRAMAFIC Vocac oe [ARV ROCK CONTACT FELSIC INTAUBION MAJOR CARBONATE [ALTERATION ZONE MAJOR FAULT Loca srmucTuRES ‘20LD on INDICATOR. ELEMENT/MINERAL ‘SHOWING the wrong general area. However, the scale at which an area solection criterion is appl ‘cable, and the confidence that one has that the feature Is related to ore, tend 0 be In vverselyrelated— itgenerallyis more oifficult to characterize, and determine the genetic, relations among large-scale phenomena than it's among small-scale phenomena. ‘The larger scale ares selection criteria ore ‘commarly considered te define the goologi- ‘cal environment whichis favourable for min tralzation, whereas the smaller scale fea- tures define the depost (Figure 4). ‘One ofthe major prablams in expioration's assessing the roliabilty of criteria for area selection the second dimension ofthe ating Hierarchy above. Thore are basicaly two ap- proaches to the problem. in the first ap- proach, the distribution of features in the known natural population of deposit is re- corded. Features are rated or theirreliabibty ‘2ccording to thelr relative requency of asso- lation with ore, and their absence in areas, TARGET sanana cua one came ‘@RoUP Bopy ‘Figure 2 Diagrmmetic representation ofthe exploration sequence intrms of Conlbenett ata, Theoptinal exploration step shat succession of expo- fation ectivtes wtih in eggregeta has the lowest fte cost. relative fo the fecanomic retin Exch ie of exploration actly ges diminishing retumon investment oss pureve, ands replaced by th nex most cast-afkce! pe of ectty athe docson pons war te sizeof he aoa boing explored is duced epost ENVIRONMENT Figure 3 Are selection rte fr god capostsinthe Suprir Province ofthe ‘Ganectan Shield, showing how We relive importance of diferent eerie ‘changes 8 largot size decreases during the exploration process (From Heagsen ot al, 1982). LTHOGEOCHEMICAL ‘ANOMALY Figure 4 Diagrammatic stration shoring how the dtnction Between gec- legal caractonie oh “aepout”: and to geological characteristics of he “depos envronman” depends on the sca of ie geological feu assoc tod wan minaratzation PorsTOn (OF EPOETS eee co OIL FEATURES 8 zm Figure § ideatzed method for bung @gonelic modlfor an ore depos ye, ‘and wang Hf ae ares selection extra Geoscience Cenade volume 17. Number 2 without ore, Thus, afesture which occurs in rine out of ten deposits, but is otherwise rare, would be considered a much more sig- nificant area selection criterion than @ fea ture which occurs in only half the deposits ‘and also occurs in areas without mineraliza- tion, A model generated in this manner {termed an “emprical moder”. To construct an ‘empirical model, the presence or absence of ‘each feature must be recorded for a statis- {ically significant and unbiased sampie of he ‘entre population. Hereinlies the mein week- ress of the purely empirical approach: deta {or only a small part ofthe population cannot 'be used to formulate the model. For exam- le, uid incision orisotope data ona single ‘deposit cannot be used as empirical area ‘selection criteria, because without applying Interpretive, genetic arguments, isnot pos- ‘sible to say thatthe data wil be cherecteris~ tic of other deposits ofthe total population. However, these data may be ciilical to un-

    You might also like