| X射线荧光光谱-电子探针在中酸性火山岩鉴定中的应用 |
| |
| 引用本文： | 徐翠,李林庆,张洁,何丽,张桂凤,王艳龙.X射线荧光光谱-电子探针在中酸性火山岩鉴定中的应用[J].岩矿测试,2016,35(6):626-633. |
| |
| 作者姓名： | 徐翠 李林庆 张洁 何丽 张桂凤 王艳龙 |
| |
| 作者单位： | 河北省区域地质矿产调查研究所, 河北 廊坊 065000,河北省区域地质矿产调查研究所, 河北 廊坊 065000,河北省区域地质矿产调查研究所, 河北 廊坊 065000,河北省区域地质矿产调查研究所, 河北 廊坊 065000,河北省区域地质矿产调查研究所, 河北 廊坊 065000,河北省区域地质矿产调查研究所, 河北 廊坊 065000 |
| |
| 基金项目： | 中国地质调查局地质调查工作项目（12120114011301） |
| |
| 摘 要： | 中酸性火山岩多具斑状结构,基质可见微晶状结构、隐晶状结构、玻璃质结构等,由于基质矿物颗粒多细小,常用的偏光显微镜受放大倍数的限制,很难准确鉴定矿物种属及含量,这类岩石仅依靠偏光显微镜分类命名会存在误差。本文采用X射线荧光光谱(XRF)、电子探针(EMPA)和偏光显微镜下观察相结合的方法,对中酸性火山岩进行鉴定。结果表明:对于基质呈隐晶质、显微晶质的中酸性火山岩,基质特征相似,偏光显微镜下无法确定长石、石英的含量,因此无法对岩石准确命名;再通过XRF进行主量元素分析,并对分析结果进行标准矿物QAPF双三角图解分类、TAS图解分类及李氏火山岩定量分类,对比结果显示三种分类命名方法存在差异;通过电子探针对矿物进行校验显示,QAPF及李氏火山岩定量分类图解与显微镜下鉴定相符,TAS图解与其他分析结果存在一定偏差。因此,对于中酸性火山岩准确命名,应采用多种分析方法相结合的方式,避免测试单一引起的误差。
|
| 关 键 词： | 中酸性火山岩 矿物鉴定 偏光显微镜 X射线荧光光谱 电子探针 |
| 收稿时间： | 8/2/2016 12:00:00 AM |
| 修稿时间： | 2016/10/15 0:00:00 |
Application of X-ray Fluorescence Spectrometry and Electron Microprobe in the Identification of Intermediate-Felsic Volcanic Rocks |
| |
| XU Cui,LI Lin-qing,ZHANG Jie,HE Li,ZHANG Gui-feng and WANG Yan-long.Application of X-ray Fluorescence Spectrometry and Electron Microprobe in the Identification of Intermediate-Felsic Volcanic Rocks[J].Rock and Mineral Analysis,2016,35(6):626-633. |
| |
| Authors: | XU Cui LI Lin-qing ZHANG Jie HE Li ZHANG Gui-feng and WANG Yan-long |
| |
| Institution: | Hebei Institute of Geology and Mineral Resources Survey, Langfang 065000, China,Hebei Institute of Geology and Mineral Resources Survey, Langfang 065000, China,Hebei Institute of Geology and Mineral Resources Survey, Langfang 065000, China,Hebei Institute of Geology and Mineral Resources Survey, Langfang 065000, China,Hebei Institute of Geology and Mineral Resources Survey, Langfang 065000, China and Hebei Institute of Geology and Mineral Resources Survey, Langfang 065000, China |
| |
| Abstract: | Intermediate-felsic volcanic rock has porphyritic texture and the matrix is characterized by microlitic, cryptocrystalline and vitreous textures. There will be errors when identifying and classifying the rocks using only a polarizing microscope because it is difficult to accurately identify the mineral species and content due to the small grains of matrix mineral species and the limited magnification of the standard polarizing microscope. Identification of the intermediate-felsic volcanic rock by using combined X-ray Fluorescence Spectrometry, Electron Microprobe and the Polarizing Microscope is introduced in this article. Results show that the method cannot be used to accurately identify the microlitic and microcrystalline intermediate-felsic volcanic rocks which have similar matrix features because the Polarizing Microscope cannot accurately identify the contents of feldspar and quartz. X-ray Fluorescence Spectrometry was used to analyze the major elements of the rocks. The rocks were identified by standard minerals QAPF double triangle graphic classification, TAS diagram classification and Li''s volcanic rock quantitative classification. There are errors among these three methods. Minerals were checked by Electron Microprobe. The results show that the QAPF double triangle graphic classification and the Li''s volcanic rock quantitative classification give the same results as identification analysis under the microscope, but the TAS graphic classification results are different from the others. Therefore, multiple classification methods should be used when identifying intermediate-felsic volcanic rock, avoiding the errors caused by the single test method. |
| |
| Keywords: | intermediate-felsic volcanic rock mineral structure Polarizing Microscope X-ray Fluorescence Spectrometry Electron Microprobe Analysis |
| 本文献已被 CNKI 等数据库收录！ |
| 点击此处可从《岩矿测试》浏览原始摘要信息 |
| 点击此处可从《岩矿测试》下载免费的PDF全文 |
|
