4.7 Article

Elastic geothermobarometry: Corrections for the geometry of the host-inclusion system

期刊

GEOLOGY
卷 46, 期 3, 页码 231-234

出版社

GEOLOGICAL SOC AMER, INC
DOI: 10.1130/G39807.1

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. European Research Council under European Union [714936, 307322]
  2. MIUR-SIR (Ministry of Education, University and Research-Scientific Independence of Young Researchers, Italy) grant MILE DEEp (Mineral Inclusion Elasticity for a New Deep Subduction Geobarometer) [RBSI140351]
  3. U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration under Stewardship Science Academic Alliances program through U.S. Department of Energy [DE-NA0001982]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Elastic geothermobarometry on inclusions is a method to determine pressure-temperature conditions of mineral growth independent of chemical equilibrium. Because of the difference in their elastic properties, an inclusion completely entrapped inside a host mineral will develop a residual stress upon exhumation, from which one can back-calculate the entrapment pressure. Current elastic geobarometric models assume that both host and inclusion are elastically isotropic and have an ideal geometry (the inclusion is spherical and isolated at the center of an infinite host). These conditions do not commonly occur in natural rocks, and the consequences for inclusion pressures can only be quantified with numerical approaches. In this paper, we report the results of numerical simulations of inclusions with the finite element method on elastically isotropic systems. We define and determine a geometrical factor (G) that allows measured residual pressures to be corrected for the effects of non-ideal geometry. We provide simple guidelines as to which geometries can safely be used for elastic geobarometry without correcting for the geometry. We also show that the discrepancies between elastic and conventional geobarometry reported in literature are not due to geometrical effects, and therefore result from other factors not yet included in current models.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据