Structural Superimposing Halo Practical Modeling and Deep Prospecting Prediction of Zhaishang Gold Deposit in the Gansu Province

doi:10.19657/j.geoscience.1000-8527.2021.112

Abstract

Abstract:

To investigate the concealed law of Zhaishang gold ore-bodies and deep prospecting, we discuss the exploration potential based on the structural superimposing halo practical model. The results from nine metal elements (Au,Ag,As,Bi,Cu,Pb,Sb,W,Zn) in No.32 Vein of the Southern Ore Belt show good Au vs. As correlation, which are the indicator elements for prospecting. The correlation coefficients of As, Sb, and Cu, Bi are 0.586 and 0.945, respectively, which may indicate that they are related to the head and tail of the ore-body during the hydrothermal fluid ascent. Based on the mathematical statistical analysis of the nine elements at the mine and comparing the integrated vertical zoning sequence of the primary halo in Chinese gold deposits, the ideal primary halo zoning sequence at Zhaishang is As-Sb (front halo) → Pb-Ag-Au-Zn-W (near mine halo) → Cu-Bi (tail halo). According to the modified Grigorian zoning index method, the axial zoning sequence of each exploration line is obtained. The occurrence of “anti-zoning” phenomena, such as the coexistence of front and tail halos indicates multiple superimpositions. The Kriging interpolation method was used to obtain the lining halo zoning map, which shows that the ore-body is overturned to the east. The ore-forming fluid may have migrated from southeast to northwest, and the denudation degree increases from east to west. Based on the fieldwork, geological characteristics and spatial distribution of elements at the mine, we have established a practical model of structural superimposing halo in this ore belt. According to the primary halo prospecting cha-racteristics, ore-bodies are likely present at the depth of Exploration Line 67 in the southeastern part of No.32 Vein, which is proven by the ZK67-0 drill hole. This further shows the feasibility of the structural superimposing halo practical modeling for prospecting of the Zhaishang gold deposit.

Key words: structural superimposing halo, practical model, deep prospecting prediction, Zhaishang gold deposit,Gansu

CLC Number:

P618.51

WANG Bin, SONG Yiwei, SUN Biao, YANG Ke, MA Zhenyu, KANG Chengxin, ZHANG Wang, JIANG Dongxiang, TANG Yuanhe, YANG Yang, JI Shengjun, NIU Qiusheng. Structural Superimposing Halo Practical Modeling and Deep Prospecting Prediction of Zhaishang Gold Deposit in the Gansu Province[J]. Geoscience, 2021, 35(06): 1504-1514.

Figures/Tables 13

References 47

[1]	谢学锦, 欧阳宗昕. 中国的勘查地球化学的回顾与展望[J]. 地质论评, 1982, 28(6):598-602.
[2]	刘崇民. 金属矿床原生晕研究进展[J]. 地质学报, 2006, 80(10):1528-1538.
[3]	HOSSEINI S T, ASGHART O, HARONI H A. Multivariate anomaly modeling of primary geochemical halos by U-spatial statistic algorithm development: A case study from the Sari Gunay epithermal gold deposit, Iran[J]. Ore Geology Reviews, 2020, 127:1-23.
[4]	ZHENG C J, LUO X R, WEN M L, et al. Axial primary halo characterization and deep orebody prediction in the Ashele copper-zinc deposit, Xinjiang, NW China[J]. Journal of Geochemical Exploration, 2020, 213:1-16.
[5]	李惠, 张国义, 王支农, 等. 构造叠加晕法在预测金矿区深部盲矿中的应用效果[J]. 物探与化探, 2003, 27(6):438-440.
[6]	李惠, 禹斌, 李德亮. 构造叠加晕找盲矿法及找矿效果[M]. 北京: 地质出版社, 2011: 12-30.
[7]	刘旭光, 吕军, 李惠, 等. 黑龙江三道湾子金矿床构造叠加晕模式及找矿靶区预测[J]. 矿产勘查, 2019, 10(10):2645-2653.
[8]	温佳伟, 史鹏亮, 刘彦兵, 等. 辽宁二道沟金矿构造叠加晕特征及深部找矿预测[J]. 现代地质, 2020, 34(6):1291-1302.
[9]	李惠, 禹斌, 马久菊, 等. 构造叠加晕预测侧伏矿体深部盲矿的方法及实用模型[J]. 矿产勘查, 2016, 7(6):971-977.
[10]	禹斌, 李惠, 李永才, 等. 典型矿床深部盲矿预测的构造叠加晕实用模式[J]. 黄金科学技术, 2017, 25(2):1-6.
[11]	李惠, 禹斌, 魏江, 等. 热液型矿床深部盲矿预测的构造叠加晕实用理想模型及其意义[J]. 地质与勘探, 2020, 56(5):889-897.
[12]	LIU J J, DAI H Z, ZHAI D G, et al. Geological and geochemical characteristics and formation mechanisms of the Zhaishang Carlin-like type gold deposit, western Qinling Mountains, China[J]. Ore Geology Reviews, 2015, 64:273-298. DOI URL
[13]	刘家军, 刘冲昊, 王建平, 等. 西秦岭地区金矿类型及其成矿作用[J]. 地学前缘, 2019, 26(5):1-16.
[14]	朱赖民, 张国伟, 刘家军, 等. 西秦岭—松潘构造结中的卡林型-类卡林型金矿床:成矿构造背景、存在问题和研究趋势[J]. 矿物学报, 2009, 29(增):201-204.
[15]	刘新会, 陈彩华, 赵天心, 等. 西秦岭寨上金矿原生晕地球化学特征及成矿预测[J]. 黄金科学技术, 2012, 20(4):7-15.
[16]	张沛. 甘肃寨上金矿原生晕分带与深部矿体预测模型[D]. 北京:中国地质大学(北京), 2018: 35-59.
[17]	张沛, 蒋东祥, 宋伊圩, 等. 甘肃寨上金矿北矿带原生晕分带与深部矿体预测模型[J]. 地质论评, 2021, 67(增):212-214.
[18]	薛仲凯. 甘肃寨上金矿南矿段地质-地球物理-地球化学特征与综合找矿模型[D]. 北京:中国地质大学(北京), 2019: 35-44.
[19]	张国伟, 孟庆任, 于在平, 等. 秦岭造山带的造山过程及其动力学特征[J]. 中国科学(D辑:地球科学), 1996, 26(3):193-200.
[20]	陈衍景, 张静, 张复新, 等. 西秦岭地区卡林-类卡林型金矿床及其成矿时间、构造背景和模式[J]. 地质论评, 2004, 50(2):134-152.
[21]	MAO J W, QIU Y M, GOLDFARB R J, et al. Geology, distribution, and classification of gold deposits in the western Qinling belt, central China[J]. Mineralium Deposita, 2002, 37:352-377. DOI URL
[22]	丑永魁, 余君鹏, 朱永新. 甘肃矿产地质[M]. 北京: 地质出版社, 2019: 94-99.
[23]	张翔, 戴霜, 刘建宏. 甘肃西秦岭金矿成矿与找矿研究[M]. 北京: 地质出版社, 2017: 7-26.
[24]	杜子图, 吴淦国. 西秦岭地区构造体系及金成矿构造动力学[M]. 北京: 地质出版社, 1998: 6-9.
[25]	冯益民, 曹宣铎, 张二朋, 等. 西秦岭造山带的演化、构造格局和性质[J]. 西北地质, 2003, 36(1):1-10.
[26]	张国伟, 郭安林, 姚安平. 中国大陆构造中的西秦岭—松潘大陆构造结[J]. 地学前缘, 2004, 11(3):23-32.
[27]	甘肃省地质矿产局. 中华人民共和国地质矿产部地质专报:区域地质 19.甘肃省区域地质志[M]. 北京: 地质出版社, 1989: 5-320.
[28]	张斌, 刘家军. 西秦岭寨上金矿床构造控矿特征与成矿规律[J]. 黄金科学技术, 2020, 28(6):825-836.
[29]	杨瀚文, 王建中, 魏立勇, 等. 甘肃寨上超大型钨、金(锑)多金属矿床成因研究[J]. 西北地质, 2021, 54(1):125-138.
[30]	赵福德, 黄菲, 高尚, 等. 甘肃寨上金矿黄铁矿特征与成因[J]. 矿物学报, 2019, 39(6):637-648.
[31]	刘家军, 毛光剑, 吴胜华, 等. 甘肃礼县—岷县成矿带西段寨上金矿床中自然金的发现及成因意义[J]. 地质通报, 2010, 29(1):115-123.
[32]	赵鹏大. 地质勘探中的统计分析[M]. 武汉: 中国地质大学出版社, 1990: 71-77.
[33]	张英帅, 顾雪祥, 章永梅, 等. 山东蓬莱石家金矿原生晕地球化学特征及深部找矿预测[J]. 现代地质, 2021, 35(1):258-269.
[34]	王学仁. 地质数据的多变量统计分析[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 1982: 207-248.
[35]	刘新会, 于岚, 张复新, 等. 甘肃岷县寨上金矿床地质特征及成因初探[J]. 西北地质, 2005, 38(4):45-53.
[36]	李彦伟, 罗先熔, 黄学强, 等. 因子分析在青海尕大阪矿区找矿中的应用[J]. 地质找矿论丛, 2012, 27(3):361-365.
[37]	刘如英, 李同军, 童霆. 区域化探中应用因子分析方法的探讨[J]. 物探与化探, 1988, 12(3):182-192.
[38]	杨德平, 于学峰, 王林钢, 等. 山东莱州曲家金矿原生晕地球化学分带性研究及地质意义[J]. 地球学报, 2020, 41(3):337-356.
[39]	余金生, 李裕伟. 地质因子分析[M]. 北京: 地质出版社, 1985: 1-194.
[40]	刘家军, 毛光剑, 吴胜华, 等. 甘肃寨上金矿床成矿特征与形成机理[J]. 矿床地质, 2010, 29(1):85-100.
[41]	姚建斌, 刘兴忠. 阿尔金古尔嘎地区化探数据异常下限确定方法的对比研究[J]. 世界有色金属, 2017(4):118-119.
[42]	戴慧敏, 宫传东, 鲍庆中, 等. 区域化探数据处理中几种异常下限确定方法的对比——以内蒙古查巴奇地区水系沉积物为例[J]. 物探与化探, 2010, 34(6):782-786.
[43]	徐东, 刘建宏, 赵彦庆. 甘肃西秦岭地区金矿控矿因素及找矿方向[J]. 西北地质, 2014, 47(3):83-90.
[44]	肖力, 赵玉锁, 张文钊, 等. 西秦岭成矿带中东段金(铅锌)多金属矿成矿规律及资源潜力评价[M]. 北京: 地质出版社, 2009: 41-45.
[45]	李惠, 张文华, 刘宝林, 等. 中国主要类型金矿床的原生晕轴向分带序列研究及其应用准则[J]. 地质与勘探, 1999, 35(1):32-35.
[46]	王建新, 臧兴运, 郭秀峰, 等. 格里戈良分带指数法的改良[J]. 吉林大学学报(地球科学版), 2007, 37(5):884-888.
[47]	刘家军, 毛光剑, 吴胜华, 等. 甘肃寨上金矿床的矿石建造特征及成因[J]. 黄金科学技术, 2010, 18(1):11-15.

勘探线	钻孔号	年代	开孔标高/m	方位/(°)	倾角/(°)	构造带标高/m	样品数
43	ZK43-7	2017	2 737.3	205	80	2 231.7	6
	ZK43-1	2013	2 722.0	19	80	2 399.3	11
	ZK43-4	2012	2 685.3	22	81	2 395.0	13
	ZK43-6	2016	2 663.4	32	78	2 505.5	21
49	ZK49-0	2019	2 678.3	20	78	2 290.6	97
	ZK49-2	2017	2 671.7	22	73	2 422.9	57
	ZK49-4	2017	2 664.6	23	71	2 482.3	42
55	ZK55-4	2012	2 685.2	208	74	2 538.7	17
	ZK55-6	2015	2 656.2	203	80	2 341.8	23
	ZK55-8	2016	2 670.9	197	79	2 220.7	18
61	ZK61-0	2019	2 732.4	20	80	2 237.7	23
	ZK61-2	2017	2 703.0	14	80	2 432.9	50
	ZK61-4	2017	2 693.3	25	60	2 514.4	30
67	ZK67-4	2009	2 710.2	24	76	2 411.9	10
	ZK67-5	2019	2 693.6	24	73	2 494.8	19
	ZK67-6	2015	2 663.1	21	76	2 633.3	4

勘探线	钻孔号	年代	开孔标高/m	方位/(°)	倾角/(°)	构造带标高/m	样品数
43	ZK43-7	2017	2 737.3	205	80	2 231.7	6
	ZK43-1	2013	2 722.0	19	80	2 399.3	11
	ZK43-4	2012	2 685.3	22	81	2 395.0	13
	ZK43-6	2016	2 663.4	32	78	2 505.5	21
49	ZK49-0	2019	2 678.3	20	78	2 290.6	97
	ZK49-2	2017	2 671.7	22	73	2 422.9	57
	ZK49-4	2017	2 664.6	23	71	2 482.3	42
55	ZK55-4	2012	2 685.2	208	74	2 538.7	17
	ZK55-6	2015	2 656.2	203	80	2 341.8	23
	ZK55-8	2016	2 670.9	197	79	2 220.7	18
61	ZK61-0	2019	2 732.4	20	80	2 237.7	23
	ZK61-2	2017	2 703.0	14	80	2 432.9	50
	ZK61-4	2017	2 693.3	25	60	2 514.4	30
67	ZK67-4	2009	2 710.2	24	76	2 411.9	10
	ZK67-5	2019	2 693.6	24	73	2 494.8	19
	ZK67-6	2015	2 663.1	21	76	2 633.3	4

元素	Au	Ag	As	Bi	Cu	Pb	Sb	W	Zn
Au	1.000
Ag	0.540	1.000
As	0.645	0.563	1.000
Bi	0.237	0.520	0.372	1.000
Cu	0.161	0.468	0.274	0.945	1.000
Pb	0.334	0.540	0.158	0.085	0.100	1.000
Sb	0.545	0.689	0.586	0.254	0.205	0.462	1.000
W	0.463	0.262	0.319	0.017	-0.007	0.372	0.372	1.000
Zn	0.207	0.393	0.136	0.335	0.337	0.623	0.172	0.295	1.000

元素	Au	Ag	As	Bi	Cu	Pb	Sb	W	Zn
Au	1.000
Ag	0.540	1.000
As	0.645	0.563	1.000
Bi	0.237	0.520	0.372	1.000
Cu	0.161	0.468	0.274	0.945	1.000
Pb	0.334	0.540	0.158	0.085	0.100	1.000
Sb	0.545	0.689	0.586	0.254	0.205	0.462	1.000
W	0.463	0.262	0.319	0.017	-0.007	0.372	0.372	1.000
Zn	0.207	0.393	0.136	0.335	0.337	0.623	0.172	0.295	1.000

元素	F₁	F₂	F₃	公因子方差
Cu	0.968	0.064	0.112	0.965
Bi	0.958	0.175	0.093	0.971
As	0.217	0.845	-0.033	0.847
Au	0.041	0.839	0.168	0.840
Zn	0.266	0.091	0.906	0.917
Pb	-0.070	0.040	0.788	0.900
Sb	0.095	0.369	0.058	0.902
Ag	0.376	0.391	0.324	0.854
W	-0.038	0.237	0.191	0.917
特征值	3.971	1.735	1.286
方差贡献率	23.684	20.079	18.198
累计贡献率	23.684	43.763	61.961