Advertisement

Mineralogy Recognition from In-Situ Elemental Concentration Log Data Using Factor Analysis

  • Ahmed Amara KonatéEmail author
  • Heping Pan
  • Nasir Khan
  • Oumar Keita
  • Mamady Cissé
  • Mory Kourouma
  • Daouda Keita
Chapter
Part of the Advances in Science, Technology & Innovation book series (ASTI)

Abstract

Understanding log response in crystalline rocks is one of the major challenges encountered by geoscientists in general, and well-log analysts in particular. Owing to the persistence of metamorphism process, log interpretation in crystalline rocks appears to be a challenging task. In this context, the present study is focused on reporting the results drawn from the interpretation of elemental concentration log data. For an effective elemental concentration interpretation to take place, an appeal is made to the factor analysis method. Hence, constructing a model whereby elemental concentrations could be associated with mineral abundances is investigated and discussed. The reached results appear to reveal that the elemental concentration logs turn out to provide enough information useful for an accurate lithological description of crystalline rocks to take place, especially with regard to UHPM rocks.

Keywords

Crystalline rocks Log interpretation Factor analysis Geochemical log 

References

  1. 1.
    Bigelow, E.L.: Introduction to Wireline Log Analysis. Western Atlas International, Houston, Texas (1992)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bartetzko, A., Delius, H., Pechnig, R.: Effect of compositional and structural variations on log responses of igneous and metamorphic rocks. I: mafic rocks. In: Harvey, P.K., Brewer, T.S., Pezard, P.A., Petrov, V.A., (eds.) Petrophysical Properties of Crystalline Rocks. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, pp. 255–278 (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Maiti, S., Tiwari, R.K.: A hybrid Monte Carlo method based artificial neural networks approach for rock boundaries identification: a case study from KTB Borehole. Pure. Appl. Geophys. 166, 2059–2090 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pechnig, R., Delius, H., Bartetzko, A.: Effect of compositional variations on log responses of igneous and metamorphic rocks. II: acid and intermediate rocks. In: Harvey, P.K., Brewer, T.S., Pezard, P.A., Petrov, V.A. (eds.) Petrophysical Properties of Crystalline Rocks. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, pp. 279–300(2005)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zhang, Z., Xu, Z., Xu, : Petrology of the non-mafic UHP metamorphic rocks from a drillhole in the southern Sulu orogenic belt, eastern central China. Acta Geol. Sin. 77(2), 173–186 (2003)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zhang, Z., Xiao, Y., Hoefs, J., Liou, J.G., Simon, K.: Ultrahigh pressure metamorphic rocks from the Chinese continental scientific drilling project: I. petrology and geochemistry of the main hole (0–2,050 m). Contrib. Mineral Petrol. 152, 421–441 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ahmed Amara Konaté
    • 1
    Email author
  • Heping Pan
    • 2
  • Nasir Khan
    • 2
  • Oumar Keita
    • 1
  • Mamady Cissé
    • 1
  • Mory Kourouma
    • 1
  • Daouda Keita
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut Supérieur des Mines et Géologie de Boké, BP: 84BokéGuinea
  2. 2.Institute of Geophysics and Geomatics, China University of Geosciences (Wuhan)WuhanChina

Personalised recommendations