Thanks @afawcett. My concern is that the mineralisation seen in...

First 3 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
phillop

558 Posts.

79

15/03/21

09:47

Post #: 51763740
Share

Originally posted by afawcett: ↑

Normally a combination of gravity and magnetic anomaly is wanted with IOCG, this results in a 50% cos. I’m thinking that the company is looking at magnetics to vector in on an IOCG system. The 1st pass program has obviously found a few vectors but not one that is economic at the hole. Given that 2/3 holes had sulphides at varying degrees is pleasing given the locations of the holes.

Magnetics indicate the rock types are correct and the gravity obviously determines the density of the rocks. Hence the combination is compelling but not 100% full proof and exceptions do exist. Another point is that there are a few small gravity anomalies to the south of the survey. These will likely be targets or maybe further up the magnetic anomalies. Remember that bhp/wmc took the best areas and dropped some they couldn’t access at the time.

Expand

Thanks @afawcett. My concern is that the mineralisation seen in the drilling done to date is from the Oak Dam deposit and not from a IOCG within the CHK tenement. From 'Geophysical vectors to IOCG mineralisation in the Gawler Craton':

The only economic IOCG deposits discovered to date in the
Gawler Craton have an association with hematite; as a result
gravity is the premier discovery tool. Olympic Dam was
discovered while testing a gravity and magnetic anomaly
considered as a basement high in regional data (Esdale et al.,
2003). Prominent Hill was discovered by the drilling a gravity
high with an offset magnetic anomaly, to test the model of a
higher level hematite system with a transition to magnetite at
depth (H Freeman, pers. comm.).

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1071/ASEG2013ab242

CHK Price at posting: 1.8¢ Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
Upvote

0 Great analysis

Reply