Doesn't appear they have sampled at conventional 0.5m or 1 m interval, but we can extrapolate the min. grade we can expect over 0.5m or 1m assuming the worst grade in the core above/below is blank (0g/t)
To calculate the average assay in the 28cm they have sampled:
(11.5cm x 11.5/gt sample 1 + 7cm x >12000 g/t sample 2 + 9.5cm x 0 g/t sample 3)/28cm = 3004 g/t over 28cm
To calculate the min. average assay in a 0.5m or 1 m assay length assuming the core sample above 28cm to 0.5m and 1m is blank:
- Assume 22cm @0g/t as worst case to form a sample at 0.5m interval, (0x0.22 cm+3004x0.28)/0.5 m = 1682 g/t over 0.5m as minimum grade to report
- Assume 78cm @0g/t in remaining interval as worst case to form a sample at 1m interval, (0x0.78 cm+3004x0.28)/1 m = 841 g/t over 1m as minimum grade to report
This is still pretty good as a minimum expectation
This changes should the 2nd assay comes back much higher when they test assay past the assay limit of 12000g/t.
E.g. if the grade in the sample came back at 20000g/t would expect this result to increase significantly over conventional 0.5m or 1 m sample length.
(11.5cm x 11.5/gt sample 1 + 7cm x 20000 g/t sample 2 + 9.5cm x 0 g/t sample 3)/28cm = 5004g/t over 28cm
Assume 22cm @0g/t as worst case then over 0.5m interval, (0x0.22 cm+5004x0.28)/0.5 m = 2802 g/t over 0.5m as minimum grade to reportAssume 78cm @0g/t in remaining interval as worst case then over 1m interval, (0x0.78 cm+5004x0.28)/1 m = 1401 g/t over 1m as minimum grade to report.
