Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Part B Text
Part B Text
Chapter Six
PART B: SPECIALIZATION REPORT
Iwere-Ile is a town in Iwajowa LGA, Oyo state, south western Nigeria and it is
located within the southwestern Nigerian Basement Complex. The basement
geology is characterized by distinct lithologies and mineralization. The area
covers an aerial extent of about 198 km2 and is surrounded by basement
rocks. It is almost divided into two by the River Oyan which flows throughout
the mapped area from north to south forming the major drainage of the area.
The sediment load of the river is predominantly those derived from the
weathering of the surrounding basement rocks. As a requirement for
graduating from the department of Geology, University of Ibadan, it is
required that every student embark on a field school exercise where he/she
is exposed to the rudiments of geologic mapping. Also a specialization report
is required from each student, that incorporates his area of specialty into the
overall geology of the area mapped area and that constitutes this part of my
report.
The study area was mapped and the geologic map was produced by
petroleum group 2. Fifteen soil samples (surficial sediments) and eleven
stream sediments were collected with a good spread throughout the study
area (see figure 6.1). Not much has been done on the grain size analysis and
heavy mineral assemblages of Iwere-Ile and its environs. This part of my
report incorporates the use of grain size analysis and heavy mineral analysis
to determine the provenance (source) and the maturity index and to
categorize the mechanism and environment of deposition using statistical
parameters derived from the analysis.
sA
$m
y
d
n
c
S
h
a
p
o
F6
3
°'8
ve
R
T
$ 7 n
a
yle
.O
RV
ric
g
rw
Np
sa
-A
o
ik
Ijt
lu
b
O
d
n
g
e
Ly
trs
e
m
ilo
K
0
5
6.1.1 Methodology
The fifteen soil samples collected from the field were subjected to grain size
analysis after air-drying them, disaggregating and removing all the roots and
plant materials that may be included in the sample. 100g each of the sample
was weighed out using a weigh balance and the sample was emptied onto
the top sieve of a nest of sieves that ranged from very coarse sand size (-
1.0Φ) to very fine sand size (4.0Φ). The sieve was capped and the stack set
on an Endocotts sieve shaker for a constant time of 15 minutes. The weight
retained in each sieve and the pans were obtained by subtracting the weight
of the empty sieve/pan from that with sediments, then the weight was
recorded. The cumulative weight percentages were determined and
tabulated as shown in table 6.1.
The nest of sieves was held parallel to the base of the shaking
apparatus.
A constant sieving time of 15 minutes was used for all samples.
Sieve residues were checked for particle aggregation with the aid of a
hand lens.
TABLE 6.1: WEIGHT RETAINED IN THE RESPECTIVE SIEVES FOR ALL SOIL SAMPLES (IN GRAMS).
SIEVE SIZES
<75µ
SOIL 1mm 850µm 600µm 425µm 300µm 212µm 150µm 75µm
m
SAMPLES TOTAL
C001 42.0 9.0 16.0 12.0 7.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 1.0
C002 75.0 6.0 6.0 4.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
C003 21.0 7.0 15.0 17.0 20.0 9.0 6.0 3.0 2.0
C004 22.0 8.0 11.0 10.0 13.0 13.0 11.0 8.0 4.0
C005 17.0 4.0 7.0 14.0 24.0 15.0 12.0 5.0 2.0
C006 29.0 5.0 12.0 17.0 17.0 10.0 2.0 5.0 3.0
C007 3.0 3.0 2.0 6.0 30.0 35.0 15.0 4.0 2.0
C008 20.0 5.0 5.0 7.0 16.0 14.0 11.0 12.0 10.0
C009 6.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 5.0 18.0 34.0 23.0 4.0
C010 20.0 5.0 9.0 12.0 15.0 14.0 15.0 7.0 3.0
C011 27.0 6.0 14.0 14.0 5.0 10.0 8.0 4.0 2.0
C012 17.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 8.0 15.0 23.0 16.0 9.0
C013 43.0 4.0 7.0 7.0 9.0 11.0 11.0 7.0 2.0
C014 25.0 5.0 9.0 10.0 15.0 16.0 10.0 6.0 4.0
C015 35.0 4.0 7.0 11.0 12.0 11.0 10.0 7.0 3.0
where:
Φ= particle size in Φ units
d = diameter of particle in mm
Note: the negative sign is affixed so that commonly
encountered sand sized sediments can be described
using positive Φ values.
Cumulative frequency curves and histograms were plotted for sample. Grain
sizes corresponding to the 5th, 16th, 25th, 50th, 75th, 84th and 95th percentiles
were obtained and used to calculate the graphic mean, median, mean,
standard deviation (sorting), inclusive graphic skewness and graphic
kurtosis. The formulae proposed Folk and Ward (1957) were used for the
calculation). The phi values for the various percentiles are given below:
Table 6.2: Phi (Φ) Values obtained from the Cumulative Curves
SAMPLE NO
C001 -0.90 -0.65 -0.45 0.15 0.90 1.30 2.30
C002 -0.95 -0.80 -0.68 -0.35 -0.05 0.30 1.50
C003 -0.75 -0.20 0.15 0.95 1.60 1.90 2.75
C004 -0.75 -0.25 0.10 1.20 2.15 2.50 3.65
C005 -0.70 -0.05 0.58 1.43 2.03 2.35 3.00
C006 -0.83 -0.45 -0.15 0.90 1.60 1.90 2.35
C007 0.15 1.30 1.45 1.85 2.18 2.35 2.85
C008 -0.75 -0.20 0.25 1.65 2.55 3.25 4.05
C009 -0.10 1.25 1.90 2.40 2.80 3.15 3.70
C010 -0.75 -0.20 0.25 1.40 2.25 2.50 3.35
C011 -0.80 -0.40 -0.08 0.85 1.70 2.15 2.90
C012 -0.70 -0.05 0.75 2.20 2.75 3.25 4.00
C013 -0.88 -0.60 -0.40 0.50 2.00 2.40 3.20
C014 -0.80 -0.35 0.00 1.30 1.95 2.40 3.55
C015 -0.85 -0.55 -0.30 0.95 2.00 2.40 3.45
Mean (Mz): gives the best measure for determining the overall size, it is
calculated using the formula,
The verbal description for these values is given below in table 6.4:
Table 6.4: Verbal description for Skewness
Skewness Verbal Description
of Skewness
from +1.00 to +0.30 strongly fine skewed
from +0.30 to +0.10 fine skewed
from +0.10 to -0.10 near symmetrical
from -0.10 to -0.30 coarse skewed
from -0.30 to -1.00 strongly coarse
skewed
Gaussian Kurtosis (KG): this is a quantitative measure used to describe the
departure from the normal probability curve which should follow the
Gaussian formula:
The phi diameter interval between the 5 phi and 95 phi points should be
exactly 2.44 times the phi diameter interval between the 25 phi and 75 phi
points. If the sample curve plots as a straight line on probability paper (i.e., if
it follows the normal curve), this ratio will be obeyed and we say it has
normal kurtosis (1.00). Departure from a straight line will alter this ratio, and
kurtosis is the quantitative measure used to describe this departure from
normality.
for 5th percentile to 25th; the curves here were extrapolated to the size
corresponding to -1 phi which indicated the top of the coarse sand size scale.
This is a standard practice as has been used successfully by earlier workers
(Kelly and Baker, 1966).
6.2.1 Methodology
Although twenty-six samples were collected from the study area comprising
eleven stream sediments and fifteen soil samples; five stream sediments and
one soil sample were selected for heavy mineral analysis judging by their
distribution throughout the study area. The reason for selecting few samples
was based on the scarcity of analytical chemicals within our reach.
The selected samples were disaggregated and all roots and plant remains
were picked out. 50g was taken for washing with water and decanting all
clay – very fine silt (usually <0.01mm) materials after which the sample is
boiled for half an hour in dilute HCl to remove all carbonates and to set the
grains free and detached. The sample was again washed after acid digestion
Okon Emmanuel Etim: 148581 | M.Sc Petroleum Geology Group 2 57
[FIELD SCHOOL REPORT, UNIVERSITY OF
July 15, 2010 IBADAN]
with distilled water to neutralize the effect of the acid. The sample is dried
and screened through 4Φ sieve mesh and only 5g of the residue that passed
through the sieve was taken for the heavy mineral separation. Bromoform is
the only available heavy liquid that could be used (although it is a toxic liquid
and must be used with caution; a more environmental friendly and non-toxic
liquid, sodium and lithium poly tungstate is here recommended). The
bromoform was held up in a separating funnel which was already set-up on a
retort stand. A beaker was held below the separating funnel which had a
filter paper shaped in the form of a cone and held in a funnel to trap the
heavy mineral as they are let out of the separating funnel. The tap of the
separating funnel was initially closed, and the prepared sample was emptied
into the separating funnel and stirred vigorously with a stirring rod. The
quartz and other lighter minerals float while the minerals with SG greater
than 2.89g/cm3 sink to the bottom of the funnel near the tap. The whole
process follows the principle of gravity settling. After all the heavies have
settled, the tap is opened to allow the bromoform flush the heavy minerals
out through the tap and collect in the filter paper and the tap is closed again.
In this way, the bromoform can be recycled and used again. The residue in
the filter paper was wetted with acetone to remove the bromoform and to
quicken drying. The heavy mineral concentrates was then mounted on slides
using DPS mountant (or some may prefer Canada balsam). The prepared
slides was left on a hot plate for fifteen seconds and then viewed under the
microscope for mineral identification and counting.
The slides were viewed under the microscope and each of the non-opaque
minerals was counted using the ribbon technique of Galehouse, (1971). The
following minerals were identified and are presented on table 6.7.
Figure 6.5 Pie charts illustrating the distribution of heavy minerals per slide.
Z=Zircon,T=Tourmaline,R=Rutile,H=Hornblende,B=Biotite,G=Garnet,Gl=Glaucoph
ane,
St=Staurolite,A=Apatite,Ky=Kyanite,ZTR index in %.
Slide a: showing the provenance Slide b: showing a large staurolite grain Slide c: showing a collection of zircon,
diagnostic tourmaline (green variety) with zircon grain close to it. garnet, tourmaline, apatite and opaque
and zircon grains grains
Slide d: showing provenance diagnostic Slide e: showing grains of zircon Slide f: showing typical deep red garnet
tourmaline, apatite, kyanite and opaque (colourless), tourmaline (green and pink crystal with etched dodecahedron
grains varieties), hornblende, kyanite, and outline.
opaque grains
poorly sorted (1.65) to moderately well sorted (0.64). Thus the size
distribution of the source material also to a certain extent control the
sorting of the sediments.
➢ Skewness measures the degree of asymmetry of the frequency
distribution and marks the position of the mean with respect to the
median. If the skewness is negative, the sample is coarse skewed (the
mean is towards the coarse side of the median) and the reverse is the
case for fine skewed samples. In the study area our samples ranges
from strongly fine skewed (0.52) to near symmetrical (-0.03) in nature.
The average being near symmetrical (0.033).
➢ Kurtosis is conventionally considered as a measure of the peakedness
of the frequency curve, however, Kendall and Stuart (1958) believes
that it is not necessarily so and that the kurtosis should not be
interpreted as describing the shape of the frequency curve. By
definition, kurtosis measures the sorting ratio and not the peakedness
of the frequency curve. For normal distributions, kurtosis is unity,
values greater than unity indicates that the velocity fluctuations were
restricted within the central 50% of the average velocity for a greater
length of the time than normal. Although this was the case for about
four of our samples (C002, C004, C005 and C009), the rest fall below
unity except sample C003 which attained unity (normal distribution).
On the average the samples are describes as mesokurtic, while they
range from very platykurtic to very leptokurtic.
The table below summarizes the univariate analysis for the individual
samples from the study area.
0.8
0.6
# C001
# C013
0.4
# C002
RIVER SANDS
# C011
0.2
# C004
0.0 # C003 C014 # C015
#
# C008
BEACH C006# # C005 # C010
SANDS # C007
-0.2
# C009
C012
#
-0.4
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6
EXPLANATION
Discriminant
Figure 6.6:
#
A Soil
bivariate
sample point
plot of Skewness (SKI) vs Sorting (σ), after Friedman
(1967)
Notice that all the plot fell on the river sands field of the plot, this goes to
confirm the Univariate analysis that the sediment are from a fluvial
environment. From the field relationship, within the Basement Complex the
only medium of transportation of the sediments weathered from the rocks is
the river and surface run-offs predominantly, less of wind and dune
mechanism maybe nil.
#
2.50 9
2.00
#
#
7 #
6 12
1.50 #
8
10
# #
5 ## 14
1.00 4
#
# #
3 11 15
#
13
0.50 #
1
#
2
-0.50
0
0.25
Figure 6.7: A bivariate plot0.50 0.75
of Mean (Mz) 1.00
vs Sorting 1.25 1969.1.50
(σ), Friedman 1.75
This plot of the mean sizes against the sorting shows the point all clustering
in a particular area except samples 2 and 9. This shows that the same
mechanism of deposition was common to all the samples for them to plot in
like fields.
ZTR index=Z+T+RNon-Opaque
Z100
Ro To
S03
#
C06
#
S05
# S04
#
# #S10
S02
T100 R 100
Zo
Figure 6.8: A ternary diagram of Zircon, Tourmaline and Rutile from the
1 0 1 2 Kilometers
study area.
REFERENCES
Folk, R.L., And Ward, W.L.1957. Brazus River Bar: A Study of the Significance
of Grain Size Parameters. J. Sed. Petrology. Vol 27, pp 3-27.
Kelly T E and baker C H 1966. Color Variations within Glacial Till, East-Central
North Dakota – a Preliminary Investigation. Jour. Sed. Petrology. Vol
36/1.pp 75 – 80.
SATO, Y (1966). Heavy Minerals In The Sandstone Geology Monthly No. 141
Pp 34-38.
Appendices
C002
C003
C004 C005
C006
C007
C008
C009
C010
C011
C012
C013
C014
C015