I had analyzed my sediment sample by X ray diffraction for determining the mineralogy composition for each layer in my sediment core, and I had analyzed the granulometric distribution using grain size analyzer (Malvern, Mastersizer). And I want to etablish the relationship between mineralogy and sediment size fraction.
Dear Mrs.Mejjad please see the following link may be help you for this question
PDF]Chapter 7 - Quantitative Mineralogy and Particle-Size Distribution of ...
wwwbrr.cr.usgs.gov/projects/SWC_Boulder_Watershed/WRIR_Chapter7.pdf
Dear Mrs. Mejjad,
it is difficult to provide a general statement others than this. The content of phyllosilicates normally increases with decreasing particle size. Smectite group minerals used to be very fine-grained and often are abundant in the size fraction < 2 µm, a particle size falling outside the measuring range of the device indicated. The grain size fraction spreading the range 63 µm to 200/300 µm normally is abundant in heavy minerals. But there is also deviation from this rule. Zircon, e.g., used to concentrate in the finer fraction. This is also the case with PGMs. The coarser fraction is recommended to be studied by means of a petrographic microscope because of the increasing presence of lithoclasts which you will never properly address with XRD only. Your approach is an interesting one but it is influenced by a plethora of parameters such a distance of transport, source area, grain density and morphology, media of transport. I give a stark warning to all only trust in simple combinations of providing us with numerical data and read-outs from an analytical device, like XRD (you must investigate the grains themselves or at least grain size population). I used CAMSIZER data in combination with SEM/EDX and WDX for placer deposits and alluvial-fluvial stream sediment (some papers on heavy minerals of mine contain data; see RG server). XRD is like a hammer at the jeweler's shop. But I feel your way is nevertheless a good one.
Best regards
H.G.Dill
Dear Professor Harald G. Dill
I am very thankful that you're considering my problem. Thank you for your attention to my question.
for more detail about my samples and analytical methods, (The samples were dried in an oven at 80°C for 24h, And dried sediment was mechanically disaggregated. Particle size distributions were determined in the homogenized sub-samples using a wet.And the samples used for xrd analysis were homogenised before to be analyzed.
The samples used for xrd analysis were homogenised before to be analyzed (Powder X-Ray Diffraction)).
Yours sincerely
Dear professor Kenneth M Towe,
Thank you, I really appreciate your help. Thank you so much for the paper, i will read it this evening.
Yours sincerely
Dear Mrs.Mejjad,
I do not find fault with the temperature treatment which will not harm any of the minerals under consideration. What makes me a bit unhappy is the wording "mechanically disaggregated" in combination with a grain size analyzer. It is not all in vain but you deprive yourself of valuable information as to the granulometric and morphological investigations for which these devices are ideal tools. Try and exert as little as possible mechanical pressure on the sediments. If you see any chance to disintegrate your sample by wet mineral processing make an attempt, the data you will obtain from passing your sample through the grain size analyzer are worth the trouble.
Good luck!
Harald G. Dill
Dear Mrs.Mejjad please see the following link may be help you for this question
PDF]Chapter 7 - Quantitative Mineralogy and Particle-Size Distribution of ...
wwwbrr.cr.usgs.gov/projects/SWC_Boulder_Watershed/WRIR_Chapter7.pdf
Dear Professor Mohamed M. El Nady
Thank you for taking the time to help me. Thank you very much.
Best regards
N. MEJJAD
- Badges
- Science method
- Similar topics
- Methodology
- Crystallography
- X-ray Diffraction