Journals / Maden Tetkik ve Arama Dergisi / 2002 / Cilt: 125 - Sayı: 125

GEOTHERMOMETRIC STUDIES ON THE ATTEPE IRON DEPOSITS

Pages
1–11
Publication Date
2002-06-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

According to the macro observations in the mineralization area and the homogenization temperature measurements made in laboratory whatever the origin of the fluids, the deposits were formed in the hydrothermal stage conditions and hypothermal, mesothermal and epithermal stages were active in these hydrothermal stages.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study was carried out in the Attepe (Yahyalı) iron mineralization zone of Kayseri province.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The main mineralization zone is 500 m long and lies approximately in the NNW/SSE direction.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:According to the macro observations in the mineralization area and the homogenization temperature measurements made in laboratory whatever the origin of the fluids, the deposits were formed in the hydrothermal stage conditions and hypothermal, mesothermal and epithermal stages were active in these hydrothermal stages.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

This study was carried out in the Attepe (Yahyalı) iron mineralization zone of Kayseri province. The main mineralization zone is 500 m long and lies approximately in the NNW/SSE direction. The study covers the geothermometric analyses which were carried out on the fluid inclusions of siderite, quartz, and barites in relation within the iron mineralization. In this study, samples were taken from five different rock groups observed in the field and were evaluated as a, b, c, d, e. Four different fluid inclusion types were determined in the siderite, quartz, and barites of these rock groups (type I, type II, type III and type IV fluid inclusions). As a result of these studies three different formation processes were determined within the ore mineralization zone, namely (1) early stage, (2) late stage and (3) final late stage. Homogenization temperatures were 300-350°C in the early stage, 180-270°C in the late stage and 170-250°C in the final late stage. Early stage first group quartzes have in average 43 % NaCI in the early stage, the late stage quartzes of the first group on average have 35 % NaCI and the final stage barites have 3 % NaCI equivalent salinity. According to the macro observations in the mineralization area and the homogenization temperature measurements made in laboratory whatever the origin of the fluids, the deposits were formed in the hydrothermal stage conditions and hypothermal, mesothermal and epithermal stages were active in these hydrothermal stages.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÇOLAKOĞLU, A. R., KURU, G. S. (2002). GEOTHERMOMETRIC STUDIES ON THE ATTEPE IRON DEPOSITS. Maden Tetkik ve Arama Dergisi, Cilt: 125 - Sayı: 125, 1–11. https://ajindex.com/articles/54186

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Abdusselamogiu, Ş., 1958, Yukarı Seyhan Bölgesinde Doğu Toroslar'ın jeolojik etüdü: MTA Rep. 2668, Ankara, 38s (unpublished), Ankara.
  2. Akıncı, Ö.T., 1976, Bulancak guneyindeki sülfid damarlarında sıvı kapanım çalışması. TJK Bülteni, 19, 45-52.
  3. Ayhan, A. and İplikçi, E., 1980, Adana iline bağlı Kozan-Feke-Saimbeyli dolayının jeoloji Raporu. MTA Derleme No: 6737., Küpeli, Ş. and Amstutz. G.C., 1992, Attepe (Feke-Adana) demir yatağının bitişiğindeki pirit oluşumları. MTA Dergisi 111, s. 85-94.
  4. Blumenthal, M. M., 1944, Kayseri-Malatya arasındaki Toros'un Permo Karboniferi: MTA Dergisi, 31, 1, 105-133.
  5. DağlıoğIu, C., 1990, Mansurlu yöresi TDÇl sahalarında yapılan etüt ve arama çalışmaları raporu. MTA Rep. 8910 (unpublished), Ankara. and Bahçeci, A., 1992, Adana-Feke-Mansurlu TDÇl ruhsat sahalarının (Attepe, Koruyeri (Mağrabeli) değerlendirme raporu: MTA Genel Müdürlüğü Derleme No: 9339 (unpublished), Ankara.; and Akça, I. 1998,
  6. Attepe, Koruyeri (Mağrabeli), Hanyeri batısı (TDÇl Genel Müdürlüğüne ait) demir madenlerinin değerlendirme raporu: MTA Genel Müdürlüğü Rep. 2823 (unpublished), Ankara.
  7. Dean, WT., and Monod, O., 1970, The Lower Paleozic stratigraphy and faunas of the Taurus Mountains near Beyşehir, Turkey: I. Stratigraphy Bull. Brit. Mus. (Nat. Hist.) Geol., 19, 8, 411-426.
  8. Henden, I.; Önder, E.; and Yurt, M.Z., 1978, AdanaKayseri-Mansurlu-Karköy-Attepe-Elmadağbeli-Kizilmevkii - Menteşdere-Uyuzpınarı demir madenleri jeoloji ve rezerv raporu: MTA Genel Müdürlüğü,Rep. 6394 (unpublished), Ankara. and, 1980, Attepe (mansurlu) demir madeninin Jeolojisi,T.J.K Bülteni,23, 153-163.
  9. Küpeli, S., 1986, Attepe (Mansurlu) yöresinin demir yatakları:Selçuk Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Konya, 111s. (unpublished)., 1991, Attepe (Mansurlu-Feke) yöresi ve demir yataklarının jeolojik-petrografik ve jenetik incelenmesi: Selçuk Üniversitesi,
  10. Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Doktora Tezi, 227s. (unpublished)., 1999, Attepe (Mansurlu-Feke-Adana) demir yatağı ile yakın çevresindeki cevher oluşum tipleri ve bazı jeokimyasal özellikleri: Yerbilimleri Geosound, sayı: 34, s. 247-271.
  11. Lindgren, W., 1933, Mineral deposits.4th edition New York:Mc Graw-Hill. 930p. Lucius, M., 1972, Antitoros silsilesinde Zamanti suyu ve Göksu arasında Faraş demir madeni zuhurunda yapılan jeolojik rapor. MTA Genel Müdürlüğü Rep. 421 (unpublished), Ankara.
  12. Mondadori, A., 1990, The Mcdonald encyclopedia of rocks and minerals: Mcdonald and Co (Publishers) Ltd., Spain, 607 s. Metin, S