Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-cx56b Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-20T13:29:30.614Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The origin of myrmekitic intergrowths and a comparison with rod-eutectics in metals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2018

D. Shelley
D. Shelley*
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

A review is given of the metallurgical literature relating to the formation of metal rodeutectics, which are texturally similar to myrmekite. Since no satisfactory explanation for rodeutectics has been advanced, a comparison is made with myrmekite. It is proposed that this intergrowth develops as a result of the constriction of quartz during its recrystallization and inclusion in an expanding blastic growth of plagioclase, and the forces involved lead to the prolongation along the growth directions of quartz in the form of rods with a relatively small surface area (i.e. with circular cross-sections). Possible forces that could produce the same geometry in metal intergrowths are those that result from the relative contractions of the two components during freezing; in all cases for which quantitative data are known, the metallic rods have a greater contraction on freezing than the host substance. Examples of myrmekite and myrmekite-like intergrowths in the Constant Gneiss are described in relation to their particular origin. Two factors, the lack of proportionality of qtartz to feldspar and the intimate association of myrmekite with myrmekite-like intergrowths, support the proposed mechanism of constriction of pre-existing quartz.

Type
Research Article
Information
Mineralogical Magazine , Volume 37 , Issue 290 , June 1970 , pp. 674 - 681
Copyright
Copyright © The Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland 1970

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aronson, (J. L.), 1968. Geochimica Acta, 32, 669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowen, (F. E.), 1964. Sheet 15; Buller, ‘Geological Maps of New Zealand, I : 250,000’. (N.Z.D.S.I.R., Wellington).Google Scholar
Chadwick, (G. A.), 1963. Journ. Inst. Metals, 91, 298.Google Scholar
Cooksey, (O. J. S.), Munson, (O.), Wilkinson, (M. P.), and Hellawell, (A.), 1964. Phil. Mag. 10, 745.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooksey, (O. J. S.), Day, (M. G.), and Hellawell, (A.), 1967. The control of eutectic microstructures in Crysta Growth. London (Pergamon).Google Scholar
Hubbard, (F. H.), 1966. Amer. Min. 51, 762.Google Scholar
Hunt, (J. D.) and Chilton, (J. P.), 1963. Journ. Inst. Metals, 91, 338.Google Scholar
Hunt, (J. D.) and Jackson, (K. A.), 1966. Trans. Metal. Soc. A.I.M.E. 236, 843.Google Scholar
Hunt, (J. D.), 1966. Journ. Inst. Metals. 94, 125.Google Scholar
Jackson, (K. A.) and Hunt, (J. D.), 1965. Acta Met. 13, 1212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, (A. J.), 1954. Non-Ferrous Foundry Metallurgy. London (Pergamon).Google Scholar
Phillips, (E. R.) and Ransom, (D. M.), 1968. Amer. Min. 53, 1411.Google Scholar
Phillips, (E. R.) and Ransom, (D. M.), 1969. Ibid. 54, 984.Google Scholar
Schwantke, (A.), 1909. Centr. Min. 311.Google Scholar
Sederholm, (J. J.), 1916. Bull. Comm. Géol. Finlande, no. 48.Google Scholar
Shelley, (D.), 1964. Amer. Min. 49, 41.Google Scholar
Shelley, (D.), 1967. Min. Mag. 36, 491.Google Scholar
Shelley, (D.), 1969. Amer. Min. 54, 982.Google Scholar
Shelley, (D.), 1970. New Zealand Journ. Geok Geophys. 13.Google Scholar
Smithells, (C. J.), 1967. Metals Reference Book, 4th edn. London (Butterworths).Google Scholar