刘金龙, 孙丰月, 吴琼, 周永恒, 刘凯, 沈鑫, 刘国栋. 吉林官地和朝鲜茂山硅铁建造对比研究[J]. 中国矿业, 2018, 27(5): 94-98. DOI: 10.12075/j.issn.1004-4051.2018.05.029
    引用本文: 刘金龙, 孙丰月, 吴琼, 周永恒, 刘凯, 沈鑫, 刘国栋. 吉林官地和朝鲜茂山硅铁建造对比研究[J]. 中国矿业, 2018, 27(5): 94-98. DOI: 10.12075/j.issn.1004-4051.2018.05.029
    LIU Jinlong, SUN Fengyue, WU Qiong, ZHOU Yongheng, LIU Kai, SHEN Xin, LIU Guodong. Comparative study for the Guandi of Jilin province and the Maoshan of North Korea banded iron formations[J]. CHINA MINING MAGAZINE, 2018, 27(5): 94-98. DOI: 10.12075/j.issn.1004-4051.2018.05.029
    Citation: LIU Jinlong, SUN Fengyue, WU Qiong, ZHOU Yongheng, LIU Kai, SHEN Xin, LIU Guodong. Comparative study for the Guandi of Jilin province and the Maoshan of North Korea banded iron formations[J]. CHINA MINING MAGAZINE, 2018, 27(5): 94-98. DOI: 10.12075/j.issn.1004-4051.2018.05.029

    吉林官地和朝鲜茂山硅铁建造对比研究

    Comparative study for the Guandi of Jilin province and the Maoshan of North Korea banded iron formations

    • 摘要: 对吉林和龙官地铁矿床和朝鲜茂山铁矿床进行研究,认为两个矿床为阿尔戈马型铁矿床。对比发现二者除在储量上有明显差异之外,其余方面十分相似。二者含矿岩系原岩均为基性-超基性火山岩和火山碎屑岩,沉积时间为新太古代,在古元古代早期发生变质作用。今后工作中应集中于表壳岩分布区,考虑断裂错断矿体和褶皱转折处矿体的富集。

       

      Abstract: The study of the Guandi iron deposit of Jilin province and the Maoshan iron deposit of Jilin province North Korea, indicate both of them are Algoma-type banded iron formations (BIFs).By comparing, they have obvious differences in reserves, the rest are comparable.Their ore-bearing series of the original rocks are the basic-ultrabasic volcanic rocks and volcanic clastic rocks, sedimentation occurred in the Neoarchean, and metamorphism occurred in the early Paleoproterozoic.In the future prospecting work, we should concentrate on the distribution area of supracrustal rocks, consider faults offset ore body and the enrichment of the ore body at the turn of folds.

       

    /

    返回文章
    返回