Hey Cheer Squad and Shills
pXRF results can be pretty dodgy but don't let that cruel the story.
Any of you done any research into the accuracy of pXRF when testing for low concentrations of cobalt in rocks with a relatively high iron content?
It would be useful if we were told which pXRF analyser was used so that its appropriateness for the job could be checked. Probably something that should have been put in the JORCTable 1 by the CP or the person who did the work.
Anyone wondered why there were no original assays for zinc from the sections of BH1 core where the pXRF returned 4.3% Zn and 9.6% Zn? Now at those grades any bloody idiot could see it in the core. There were Zn assays for other intervals of the BH1 core. With grades like that why isn't there a core photo showing the chunks of sphalerite? After all there were photos of heaps of invisible cobalt at 1000 ppm, just ask
@gosh.
Any of you thought to compare the original assays for holes BH1 and BH2 with the tripe returned by the pXRF?
Here are a few comparisons of the original assays and the new pXRF for your delectation, all grades in ppm...
cu co zn
BH1 21 - 22m assay 183 185 22
BH1 21 - 22m pXRF 0 0 1545
BH1 125 - 127m assay 19200 890 29
BH1 125 - 128m pXRF 6907 123 7230
BH2 88 - 90m assay 60 17 0
BH2 89 - 90m pXRF 0 245 18900
BH2 91 - 93m assay 65 26 0
BH2 92.5 - 93.6m pXRF 0 350 19400
BH2 137 - 140m assay 83 133 53
BH2 137 - 140m pXRF 0 525 22100
