PIMA™ and KIMBERLITES

(Much of the following is abstracted from Mitchell, 1993 and Kjarsgaard, 1995)

PIMA™ is used effectively, worldwide, by many major diamond companies, including DeBeers and Kennecott, for the exploration and characterization of kimberlites.

Kimberlites are a group of volatile(CO2) rich, potassic ultrabasic rocks with variable composition megacrysts in a fine grained groundmass. The megacrysts can contain ilmentite, pyrope garnet, olivine clinopyroxene, phlogopite, enstatite and chromite. The groundmass or matrix can contain olivine, phlogopite, perovskite, spinel and diopside.

There are two main compositional types of kimberlite. Type I has an inequigranular texture with macro and even megacrysts in a fine grained groundmass, is olivine rich with monticellite, serpentine and calcite. Type 2 is micaceous. Kimberlites are classified on their groundmass mineralogy.


Group 1  
Crysts OLIVINE Mg-ilmenite, Cr-poor Ti-pyrope, Cr-poor clinopyroxene, phlogopite, enstatite, Ti-poor chromite
   
Matrix olivine +/- phlogopite, perovskite, spinel (ti, Cr, Mg, chromite and magnetite), monticelliote, apatite, calcite Fe-serpentine.
   
Group 2  
Crysts olivine
   
Matrix phlogopite, diopside, spinel (Ti-Mg chromite, magnetite), perovskite, calcite

Kimberlites are restricted to continental shield areas within Archean cratons. They occur as clusters of pipes within fields within provinces, probably along major crustal fracture zones.

Kimberlite and diamond formation is still not well understood. It is currently hypothesized that the roots of continental cratons contain diamond bearing horizons. As Kimberlites are emplaced (some explosively) from the mantle, they pass through these zones and in so doing entrain diamonds, which remain in xenocrysts or eclogites of their original host rock. The development of the diatreme involves extreme brecciation. There is explosive decompression with accompanying fluidization of the magma and subsequent alteration from the downward percolating fluids

Kimberlite diatremes are roughly circular with a pipelike or cone shape (Figure 1) and appear to decrease in diameter with depth. Three textural genetic groups of kimberlites are recognized: 1) crater facies ( may have high concentrations of diamonds, but are not well preserved), 2) diatreme or tuffisitic facies (volcanoclastic breccias), which are the dominate phse and 3) hypabyssal facies, which may be the best characterized petrographically, although they are poor diamond sources.

Alteration of these pipes is a major guide for exploration, however, it is not widely discussed. The ultramafic minerals associated with kimberlite pipes are highly susceptible to weathering and in the breccia environment, fluid flow is not restricted. Olivine in the groundmass or crysts will alter to serpentine and this will show compositional effects of the weathering.

Calcite replacement also occurs. Phlogopite will weather. Products will be chlorites and vermiculites. Serpentine and calcite occur as deuteric replacement products of the montecellite and phlogopite.

The main types of alteration are serpentinization, calcification and chloritization.

At the surface, kimberlite weathers to a soft, oxidized rock, "yellow ground, which grades into "blue ground", towards the source or into the pipe. This occurs vertically but can also form haloes around a pipe. Olivine weathers to serpentine, which weathers to saponite and smectite, oxidizing iron in the process to produce the yellow coloration..

Exploration methods include geophysical surveys (magnetic, gravity), remote sensing first with Landsat and then with hyperspectral, airborne sensors, indicator mineral identification of associated heavy minerals(Cr-pyrope, garnet, high Cr-Mg chromite, high Na-Ti pyrope-almandine garnet and geochemical sampling.

Kimberlites are extremely complicated systems and much that is known about them is still proprietary to companies.

The following section summarizes the spectral signatures of some of the infrared active minerals found associated with kimberlites.

COMMON ALTERATION MINERALS - KIMBERLITES

The most common alteration minerals seen in kimberlites include [A] serpentine, [B] calcite, [C] magnesite, [D] phlogopite, [E] biotite, [F] chamesite, [G] clinochlore, [H] saponite, [I] Mg-silicate, [J] vermiculite, and [K] amphibole.

SERPENTINES

Serpentine is one of the most common and diagnostic alteration minerals associated with kimberlites. It shows compositional variations which can be contoured.

Figure 2 shows these different species of serpentine: [A] antigorite, [B] cernolite [C] chyrsotile, and [D] williamsite.

CHLORITES and VERMICULITE

Chlorite is also a common mineral associated with kimberlites and can be a product of weathering of serpentines. Chlorites will form alteration haloes around the kimberlite pipes. Vermiculite is a weathering product of chlorite. Note the large interlayer water feature with the vermiculite [A].

Figure 3. These spectra include [A] vermiculite, [B] chamesite - Fe-chlorite, [C] ripidolite - Fe>Mg chlorite, [D] chlinochlore = Mg-chlorite, [E] sheridanite - Mg>Fe chlorite.

BIOTITE, PHLOGOPITE, AMPHIBOLE, VERMICULITE and SAPONITE

These minerals are plotted together to show their similarities. Fe/Mg micas can be very common in kimberlite pipes.

Figure 4 includes [A] biotite, [B] phlogopite, [C] Fe-amphibole, [D] saponite, [E] Fe-saponite, and [F] vermiculite.

Figure 4A This expanded view is in the same order as Figure 4: [A] biotite, [B] phlogopite, [C] Fe-amphibole, [D] saponite, [E] Fe-saponite, and [F] vermiculite.




SELECTED REFERENCES

Atkinson, W.J. (1988): Diamond Exploration Philosophy, Practice, and Promises: a Review; in Proceedings of the Fourth International Kimberlite Conference, Kimberlites and related rocks, V.2, Their Mantle/crust Setting, Diamonds and Diamond Exploration, J. Ross, editor, Geological Society of Australia, Special Publication 14, pages 1075-1107.

Clement, C.R., Harris, J.W., Robinson, D.N., Hawthorne, J.B., 1986. The De Beers kimberlite pipe - a historic South African diamond mine. In: C.R. Anhaeusser, S. Maske (Editors), Mineral Deposits of South Africa. Geological Society of South Africa, Johannesburg, pp. 2193 -2214.

Clement C.R. & Reid A.M. 1989. The origin of kimberlite pipes: an interpretation based on a synthesis of geological features displayed by southern African occurrences. Geol. Soc. Australia Spec. Pub. 14, 1, p. 632-646.

Cox, D.P. (1986): Descriptive Model of Diamond Pipes; in Mineral Deposit Models, Cox, D.P. and Singer, D.A., Editors (1986), U.S. Geological Survey, Bulletin 1693, 379 pages. .

Dawson, J.B., 1971. The genesis of kimberlite. In: Diamond Research for 1971, pp. 2-7.

Eggler, D.H., 1989. Kimberlites: how do they form? In: J. Ross, (Editor), Kimberlites, Related Rocks, Vol. 1. Geological Society of Australia Special Publication, pp. 489-504. H

Fipke, C.E., Gurney, J.J. and Moore, R.O. (1995): Diamond Exploration Techniques Emphasizing Indicator Mineral Geochemistry and Canadian Examples; Geological Survey of Canada, Bulletin 423, 86 pages.

Garanin, V.K., Kudryavtseva, G.P., Janse, A.J.A., 1993. Vertical, horizontal zoning of kimberlites. In: Y.T. Maurice (Editor), Proceedings of the Eighth Quadrennial IAGOD Symposium, Ottawa, 1990. Schweizerbart'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, Stuttgart, pp. 435-443.

Geological Survey of Canada. 1989. The development of advanced technology to distinguish between productive diamondiferous and barren diatremes. Geological Survey of Canada, Open File 2124, 1183 p.

Harris, J.W.,1992. Diamond geology. In:Physical Properties of Natural, Synthetic Diamonds, pp. 345-392.

Hawthorne, J.B., 1975. Model of a kimberlite pipe. Phys. Chem. Earth, 9: 1-15.

Janse, A.J.A., Sheahan, P., 1995. Catalogue of world wide diamond, kimberlite occurrences: a selective, annotative approach. In: W.L. Griffin (Editor), Diamond Exploration: Into the 21st Century. J. Geochem. Explor., 53: 73-111.

Jennings, C.M.H. (1995): The Exploration Context for Diamonds; Journal of Geochemical Exploration, Volume 53, pages 113-124.

Kingston, M.J., 1989. Spectral reflectance properties of kimberlites, carbonatites: implications for remote sensing for exploration. In: J. Ross (Editor), Kimberlites, Related Rocks.Blackwell, Melbourne, pp. 1135-1145

Kjardgaard, B.A.,1995, Primary Diamond Deposits, in Geology of Canadian Mineral Deposit Types; Geological Survey of Canada, Geology of Canada No. 8, 559-568.

Meyer, H.O.A., 1976. Kimberlites of the continental United States. A review.J. Geol., 84: 377-403.

Michalski, T.C. and Modreski, P.J. (1991) Descriptive Model of Diamond-bearing Kimberlite Pipes; in Some Industrial Mineral Deposit Models: Descriptive Deposit Models, editors, Orris, G.J and Bliss, J.D., U.S. Geological Survey, Open-File Report 91-11a, pages 1-4.

Mitchell R.H.1986. Kimberlites- Mineralogy, geochemistry, petrology. Plenum, New York, 442 pp.

Mitchell, R.H., 1993, Ore Deposit Models, Vol II; Geoscience Canada Reprint Series 6, Geological Association of Canada, p 13-28.

Pieters, C.M. and Mustard, J.F., (1985). Spectroscopy of Moses Rock Kimberlite Diatreme, Proc. Airborne Imaging Spectrometer Data Analysis Workshop (G. Vane and A. Goetz Eds.), JPL publication 85-41, p. 106-110.

Skinner, E.W.S. 1989. Contrasting Group I and Group II kimberlite petrology: towards a genetic model for kimberlites. In Ross, J. et al., eds., Kimberlites and related Rocks, Vol. 1. Geol. Soc. Australia Spec. Pub. 14, pp. 528-544.

Sobolev, N.V., 1971. Mineralogical criteria for diamond prospecting in kimberlites. Geol. Geofiz., 3: 70 -79 (in Russian).