Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-9pm4c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T04:49:22.911Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On conventional calculations of amphibole formulae from chemical analyses with inaccurate H2O(+) and F determinations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2018

I. Y. Borg
I. Y. Borg*
Affiliation:
Lawrence Radiation Laboratory, University of California, Livermore, California
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

For chemical analyses with inaccurately reported H2O(+) or F, calculation of an amphibole formula on the basis of 23(O) after discarding the reported H2O(+) is in most cases as unsatisfactory as a standard calculation including H2O(+) based on 24(O, OH, F). The sum of the cations in X, Y, and Z groups most closely approaches theoretical values in a 23(O) calculation, but only by virtue of compensating and compounded errors of opposite sign. Realization of the ideal formula by either method without additional data is not an infallible criterion of accuracy of the analysis or the correct site occupation. These conclusions stem from the observation that although H2O(+) may be incorrect, most analyses add up to 100.00 or greater; thus compensating errors in metallic oxides are implicit.

Type
Research Article
Information
Mineralogical magazine and journal of the Mineralogical Society , Volume 36 , Issue 280 , December 1967 , pp. 583 - 590
Copyright
Copyright © The Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland 1967

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

Binns, (R. A.), 1965. The mineralogy of metamorphosed basic rocks from the Willyama Complex, Broken Hill District, New South Wales. Part I. Horn-blendes. Min. Mag., vol. 35, pp. 306–325.Google Scholar
Coblentz, (W.), 1911. The role of water in minerals. Franklin Inst. Journ., vol. 172, p. 334.Google Scholar
Filby|(R. H.) and Leininger, (R. K.), 1960. Spectrographic determinations of the major constituents of granite G-1 and diabase W-1. U.S. Geol. Surv. Bull. 113, pp. 57–82.Google Scholar
Hey, (M. H.), 1939. On the presentation of chemical analyses. Min. Mag., vol. 25, pp. 407–411.Google Scholar
HeY, (M. H.), 1954. A further note on the presentation of chemical analyses of minerals. Ibid., vol. 30, pp. 481–497.Google Scholar
Leake, (B. E.), 1965a. The relationship between composition of calciferous amphiboles and grade of metamorphism. Chap. 17 in Controls of Metamorphism by Pitcher, (W. S.) and Flinn, (G.). Boyd and Oliver, pp. 299–318.Google Scholar
Leake, (B. E.), 1965b. The relationship between tetrahedral aluminum and the maximum possible octahedral aluminum in natural calciferous and subcalciferous amphiboles. Amer. Min., vol. 50, pp. 843–851.Google Scholar
Miyashiro, (A.), 1957. The chemistry, optics and genesis of alkali-amphiboles. Journ. Fac. Sci. Univ. Tokyo Ser. 2, vol. 11, pp. 57–83.Google Scholar
Nockolds, (S. R.), 1954. Average chemical compositions of some igneous rocks. Bull. Geol. Soc. Amer., vol. 65, pp. 1007–1032.Google Scholar
Phillips, (R.), 1963. The recalculation of amphibole analyses. Min. Mag., vol. 33, pp. 701–711.Google Scholar
Schaller, (W. T.), 1916. The chemical composition of tremolite in Mineralogic notes, Series 3, U.S. Geol. Serv. Bull. 610, pp. 133–136.Google Scholar
Stevens, (R. E.) and Niles, (W. W.), 1960. Part I: Chemical analyses of the granite and the diabase. Ibid., no. 1113, pp. 3–44.Google Scholar
Stevens, (R. E.) and Chodos, (A. A.), 1960. Part II: Special study of the silica content of G-1 and diabase W-1. Ibid., pp. 45–56.Google Scholar