DOCSLIB.ORG

Cat Herding on a Global Scale

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

OneGeology-Europe – an INSPIRE testbed for semantic harmonisation of „geology“ data across Europe (WP 3) Kristine Asch and John Laxton Project deliverables • Interoperable on- shore geology spatial dataset • with ”progress • Mutilingual metadata for towards discovery harmonisation” • View services • Forerunner and “guinea • Geological pig” for the vocabulary and data implementation of specifications for INSPIRE Directive Europe • Use case studies Fact Vast amount of data hidden in the archives and hard disks in governmental organisations across Europe … Kristine Asch ©BGR.de And they are all different.. Edge matching at national boundaries? Î National boundary Î geological terms and classifications (age, lithology, tectonics ..) Î age of data (mapping campaign) Î choice of units to be mapped Î level of detail / scale Î topographical base (projection, spheroid, drainage system, ...) Î Portrayal (colours and symbols) Î Mapped border of the units Interoperability and harmonisation • Interoperability – when the data model/structure and properties to describe its parts (what GeoSciML does) is agreed – E.g. agreeing a data model will have the feature of “GeologicUnit” with properties of “age” and “lithology” • Semantic harmonisation – when the use of the same definitions and classifications to describe a concept/term is agreed – E.g. ‘clay’. The same concept can be labelled with several terms (“argilla” in Italian, “Ton” in German), but needs to have the same definition, in this case of “clay/Ton/argilla, …”): > 50% particles < 0,004 mm (Wentworth grade scale), or: > 50% particles < 0,002 mm (ISO 14688) • Geometric harmonisation – edge-matching at national boundaries Harmonized? BasaltBasaltBasaltBasalt Harmonized! national boundary Alkali interoperable olivineBasaltBasalt basalt BasaltBasalt BasaltBasalt BasaltBasalt AlkaliAlkali olivineolivine basaltbasalt Geometric Semantic harmonisation harmonisation 5050 kmkm The 1G-E Geology Vocabulary • 516 agreed defined terms, definitions and parent/child relations: – lithology (sedimentary, magmatic, metamorphic) – geological age – genesis – faults and structures • Taken on board: 532 review comments from 20 national data + 2 global NGOs • > 100 new terms and definitions fed into the global geoscience vocabulary of the IUGS Commission of Geoscience Information • Portrayal rules for age, lithology and structures • Explanatory Notes how to encode in GeoSciencel ML ►THE base for semantic harmonisation ►Enables comparability of the information ►Basis for cross-boundary planning Portrayal Rules visualizing the content – and its lack of harmonisation … Vocabulary Building 1GEurope Global CGI scientific Vocabulary require- ments Extract Particularily DRAFT European (e.g. orogenies) Review 1GE-core Team 1G-E Vocabulary Vocabulary Challenges • Agreement: 10 individual country representatives defining the vocabulary (terms and definitions) • 20 national representatives reviewing • The (English) project Language – a neverending source for misunderstanding • Integration with the global CGI vocabulary group – many heated discussions via e-mail, phone and in meetings • Short time available • Acceptance …. The need for a common denominator was not seen by all project participants from the start Harmonisation Workshop, Slovenia WP 3 Geology • 26 experts • 18 nations (EC) • 2 days Tasks: • Define generic harmonisationBase: use of issues the 1G-E vocabulary • Solve these individually • Develop a workflow/method how to tackle this Our 1st obstacle Data gaps – no content National boundary mismatches Harmonisation Workshop issues • Hardly any country has harmonised its boundaries semantically and/or geometrically • Political issues… who provides Gibraltar, Northern Ireland? • Base problem: the difference of scales; target scale 1/1000.000 includes 1/250.000, 1/300.000, 1/400.000, 1/500 000, 1/625 000, 1/1 000 000 –> our advise: define the scale if there is a strong necessity for data harmonisation • Many mismatches solvable by bilateral negotiation, by use of more detailed data sets/maps and publications • However, there will mismatches remain that can only be solved with additional field work ! Geological harmonisation: Draft of a general workflow process Condition: parties use same conceptual model and vocabulary Define properties to be harmonized Expert group Define level of harmonisation Expert group Identify and classify mismatches minor Tools: Mismatch matrix major Generalize semantic Tools /snap boundaries Inform neighbours and Mediator start negotiating process no Solvable by negotiation? yes Neighbours Mark feature Modify just identified Modify general unit border polygones Summary and Conclusions • The work on the OneG-E data vocabulary enriched and improved the global CGI vocabulary • It has been reviewed and agreed by 20+4 countries (subsidiarity principle) • Provides a solid base, easy-to-use vocabulary to describe the geology of Europe • Explanation notes are written to help the implementation • Provides a geology vocabulary and basis for semantic harmonisation of geology in Europe • Reference material for the INSPIRE Geology and Mineral Resources Data TWG GE-MR Specification TWG GE- MR…. • “progress-towards-harmonisation” report provides guidance for future cross-border consistency and harmonisation Thanks to: • Ian Jackson • Francois Robida • Jolanta Cylene • Steve Richard, CGI • Luca DeMicheli • Chris Schubert • Garry Baker • Claudia Delfini • Sybille Hennings • Robert Tomas • Aleksandra Kuczerawy • Kathryn Bull • Jean-Jacques Serrano • Alexander Tschistiakow • Dominique Janjou • Agnès Tellez-Arenas • Stephan Gruijters • Milos Bavec • Marco Klicker • Mary Carter • Alan Smith • Horst Troppenhagen • Marco Pantaloni • Pierre-Yves Declerq • Mikko Nironen • Fernando Perez • Monika • Urzula Stepien • Stefan Bergman • and many more of the 1G-E Team … • Pjotr Czupek • Stefan Kacer • Pavla Guertlerova Invitation to the IUGS-CGI GeoScience Language Workshop + Open GeoSciML Day 25.-27. August 2010 Berlin Topics: Ontologies, vocabularies and terms: Developments and implemention Registration: [email protected] [email protected] Lessons learned WP 3 Harmonisation Workshop in Slovenia Ouch, yes, I will do anything, I will even HARMONIZE !! Aaaargh!! “The classification of the sedimentary rocks is a problem on which much thought has been expended and one for which no mutually satisfactory or complete solution has yet been found" !!!!! F. J. Pettijohn (1975) More information on OneGeology-Europe http://onegeology-Europe.org More information on OneGeology (global) http://onegeology.org The 1G-E vocabulary in numbers • 532 Review comments to the Scientific Data Specification D3.1 V1, 2009 • 6 Metamorphic Grade terms • 6 Proportion terms Revised vocabulary 2010 • 163 Lithology terms • 6 Geologic unit part role terms • 197 age terms • 5 Contact type terms • 82 Genesis terms (42 environments + 40 processes) • 4 Geologic unit Type terms • 15 Orogenic Events • 3 Geologic unit Morphology • 12 Fault type terms terms • 11 Metamorphic Facies terms • 2 Feature Observation Method terms • 1 Mapped Feature Observation Method term agenda • One Geology – Europe • Discrepancies • The vocabulary • The vocabulary by numbers • Building the vocabulary: - develop requirements independently - scrutinizing global standards, extract - recognition and defining of gaps -merge • The stony way to a global herd … examples • CGI multihierarchie contra single • Challenges • Products 1G-E WP3 Vocabulary Sources Bates, R.L. & Jackson, J.A. (1987): Glossary of Geology (3rd ed.). American Geological Institute; 788 p.; Alexandria, Virginia. Bingen, B., et al. (2008): The Mesoproterozoic in the Nordic Countries.-Episodes, Vol. 31, 29-34; Journal of International Geoscience (Beijing) Bucher & Frey (1994): Petrogenesis of Metamorphic Rocks; -7th ed.; Edition. – Springer (Heidelberg) CGI IWG (in review 2008): Simple Lithology vocabulary - Draft vocabularies for GeoSciML Web services.; Available at https://www.seegrid.csiro.au/twiki/bin/view/CGIModel/ConceptDefinitionsTG CGI IWG (in review 2010): Draft vocabularies for GeoSciML Web services.; Available at https://www.seegrid.csiro.au/subversion/GeoSciML/vocabulary/trunk/2010LithologyRevisions/SimpleLithology2010_rc.rdf Faure Maure, et al. in press: Devonian Geodynamic Evolution of the Variscan Belt, Insights from the French Massif Central and Massif Armoricain. Tectonics (Washington DC), in press. Fettes, D. & Desmons, J. (2007): Metamorphic Rocks – A Classification and Glossary of Terms – Recommendations of the International Union of Geological Sciences, Subcommission on the Systematics of Metamorphic Rocks; Cambridge University Press (Cambridge). Fry, N. (1984): The Field Description of Metamorphic Rocks.- John Wiley & Son Ltd (London) Gillespie, M.R. & Styles, M.T. (1999): BGS Rock Classification Scheme, Volume 1, Classification of igneous rocks.; British Geological Survey (Nottingham) Hallsworth, C.R. & Know, R. W, 'B (1999):BGS Rock Classification Scheme. Volume 3: Classification of sediments and sedimentary rocks.- British Geological Survey; Keyworth, Nottingham. Koistinen, T., Stephens, M.B., Bogatchev, V., Nordgulen, O., Wennerström, M., Korhonen, J., 2001. Geological map of Fennoscandian Shield, scale 1:2 000 000. Geological Surveys of Finland, Norway and Sweden and the North-West Department of Natural Resources of Russia LeMaitre, R.W. et al. (2002): Igneous Rocks – A Classification and Glossary of Terms – Recommendations of the International Union of Geological Sciences, Subcommission
Recommended publications
  • User Guide: Soil Parent Material 1 Kilometre Dataset

    User Guide: Soil Parent Material 1 Kilometre Dataset

    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by NERC Open Research Archive User Guide: Soil Parent Material 1 kilometre dataset. Environmental Modelling Internal Report OR/14/025 BRITISH GEOLOGICAL SURVEY ENVIRONMENTAL Modelling INTERNAL REPORT OR/14/025 User Guide: Soil Parent Material 1 kilometre dataset. The National Grid and other Ordnance Survey data © Crown Copyright and database rights 2012. Ordnance Survey Licence R. Lawley. No. 100021290. Keywords Contributor/editor Parent Material, Soil,UKSO. B. Rawlins. National Grid Reference SW corner 999999,999999 Centre point 999999,999999 NE corner 999999,999999 Map Sheet 999, 1:99 000 scale, Map name Front cover Soil Parent Material 1km dataset. Bibliographical reference LAWLEY., R. USER GUIDE: SOIL PARENT Material 1 Kilometre dataset. 2012. User Guide: Soil Parent Material 1km dataset.. British Geological Survey Internal Report, OR/14/025. 20pp. Copyright in materials derived from the British Geological Survey’s work is owned by the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) and/or the authority that commissioned the work. You may not copy or adapt this publication without first obtaining permission. Contact the BGS Intellectual Property Rights Section, British Geological Survey, Keyworth, email [email protected]. You may quote extracts of a reasonable length without prior permission, provided a full acknowledgement is given of the source of the extract. Maps and diagrams in this book use topography based on Ordnance Survey mapping. © NERC 2014. All rights reserved Keyworth, Nottingham British Geological Survey 2012 BRITISH GEOLOGICAL SURVEY The full range of our publications is available from BGS shops at British Geological Survey offices Nottingham, Edinburgh, London and Cardiff (Welsh publications only) see contact details below or shop online at www.geologyshop.com BGS Central Enquiries Desk Tel 0115 936 3143 Fax 0115 936 3276 The London Information Office also maintains a reference collection of BGS publications, including maps, for consultation.
  • Technical Report 08-05 Skb-Tr-98-05

    Technical Report 08-05 Skb-Tr-98-05

    SE9900011 TECHNICAL REPORT 08-05 SKB-TR-98-05 The Very Deep Hole Concept - Geoscientific appraisal of conditions at great depth C Juhlin1, T Wallroth2, J Smellie3, T Eliasson4, C Ljunggren5, B Leijon3, J Beswick6 1 Christopher Juhlin Consulting 2 Bergab Consulting Geologists 3 ConterraAB 4 Geological Survey of Sweden 5 Vattenfall Hydropower AB 6 EDECO Petroleum Services Ltd June 1998 30- 07 SVENSK KARNBRANSLEHANTERING AB SWEDISH NUCLEAR FUEL AND WASTE MANAGEMENT CO P.O.BOX 5864 S-102 40 STOCKHOLM SWEDEN PHONE +46 8 459 84 00 FAX+46 8 661 57 19 THE VERY DEEP HOLE CONCEPT • GEOSCIENTIFIC APPRAISAL OF CONDITIONS AT GREAT DEPTH CJuhlin1, T Wai froth2, J Smeflie3, TEIiasson4, C Ljunggren5, B Leijon3, J Beswick6 1 Christopher Juhlin Consulting 2 Bergab Consulting Geologists 3 Conterra AB 4 Geological Survey of Sweden 5 Vattenfall Hydropower AB 6 EDECO Petroleum Services Ltd. June 1998 This report concerns a study which was conducted for SKB. The conclusions and viewpoints presented in the report are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily coincide with those of the client. Information on SKB technical reports froml 977-1978 (TR 121), 1979 (TR 79-28), 1980 (TR 80-26), 1981 (TR 81-17), 1982 (TR 82-28), 1983 (TR 83-77), 1984 (TR 85-01), 1985 (TR 85-20), 1986 (TR 86-31), 1987 (TR 87-33), 1988 (TR 88-32), 1989 (TR 89-40), 1990 (TR 90-46), 1991 (TR 91-64), 1992 (TR 92-46), 1993 (TR 93-34), 1994 (TR 94-33), 1995 (TR 95-37) and 1996 (TR 96-25) is available through SKB.
  • A Multilingual Metadata Catalog for the ILTER: Issues and Approaches

    A Multilingual Metadata Catalog for the ILTER: Issues and Approaches

    Ecological Informatics 5 (2010) 187–193 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Ecological Informatics journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolinf A multilingual metadata catalog for the ILTER: Issues and approaches Kristin L. Vanderbilt a,⁎, David Blankman b, Xuebing Guo c, Honglin He c, Chau-Chin Lin d, Sheng-Shan Lu d, Akiko Ogawa e, Éamonn Ó Tuama f, Herbert Schentz g, Wen Su c a Sevilleta LTER, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87131 USA b LTER-Israel, Ben Gurion University, Midreshet Ben Gurion, Israel c Chinese Ecological Research Network, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China d Taiwan Ecological Research Network, Taiwan Forest Research Institute, Taipei, Taiwan e JaLTER, National Institute for Environmental Studies, Tokyo, Japan f GBIF Secretariat, Copenhagen, Denmark g Umweltbundesamt GmbH, Vienna, Austria article info abstract Keywords: The International Long-Term Ecological Research (ILTER) Network's strategic plan calls for widespread data Challenges exchange among member networks to support broad scale synthetic studies of ecological systems. However, Language natural language differences are common among ILTER country networks and seriously inhibit the exchange, Translation interpretation and proper use of ecological data. As a first step toward building a multilingual metadata Ecology catalog, the ILTER has adopted Ecological Metadata Language (EML) as its standard, and ILTER members are Ontology asked to share discovery level metadata in English. Presently, the burden of translation is on the data providers, who frequently have few resources for information management. Tools to assist with metadata capture and translation, such as localized metadata editors and a multilingual environmental thesaurus, are needed and will be developed in the near future.
  • A Brief History of Till Research and Developing Nomenclature

    A Brief History of Till Research and Developing Nomenclature

    k 7 2 A Brief History of Till Research and Developing Nomenclature With relief one remembers that, after all, the facts gathered with such infinite care, over so many years, are in no ways affected: their permanency is untouched, their value as high as ever. It is the interpretation which has gone astray. Carruthers (1953, p. 36) A benchmark publication in the development of till nomenclature was contained in the final report by the INQUA Commission on Genesis and Lithology of Glacial Quaternary Deposits, entitled ‘Genetic Classification of Glacigenic Deposits’ (Goldthwait and Matsch, 1989; Figure 2.1). Most significant in this report was the paper by Aleksis Dreimanis (Figure 2.2), entitled ‘Tills: Their Genetic Terminology k k and Classification’, a summary of the findings of the Till Work Group, which operated over the period 1974–1986. It was a synthesis of knowledge and a rationale for a unified process-based nomenclature but at the same time afforded the presentation of alternative standpoints on till classification, and hence delivered a selection of frameworks containing complex and overlapping genetic terms. More broadly, ‘till’ at this juncture was defined as: a sediment that has been transported and is subsequently deposited by or from glacier ice, with little or no sorting by water. (Dreimanis and Lundqvist, 1984, p. 9) As a way forward, the Till Work Group, through Dreimanis (1989), arrived at a series of nomencla- ture diagrams (Figure 2.3), which aimed at an inclusive but at the same time simplified and unambigu- ous, process-based till classification scheme. More specifically, Dreimanis (1989), within the same volume, compiled a table of diagnostic characteristics for differentiating what he termed ‘lodgement till’, ‘melt-out till’ and ‘gravity flowtill’.
  • Style, Scale and Significance of Sand Bodies in the Northern and Central Belts, Southwest Southern Uplands

    Style, Scale and Significance of Sand Bodies in the Northern and Central Belts, Southwest Southern Uplands

    Journal ofthe Geological Society, London, Vol. 144, 1987, pp. 787-805, 13 figs, 3 tables, Printed in Northern Ireland Style, scale and significance of sand bodies in the Northern and Central Belts, southwest Southern Uplands G.KELLINGl, P. DAVIES' & J. HOLROYD2 1 Geology Department, University of Keele, Staffs. ST5 5BG, UK 21 Blythe Road, Forsbrook, Blythe Bridge, Staffs., UK Abstract: Sedimentological and biostratigraphical data fromthe Rhinns of Galloway andadjacent areas in SW Scotland confirm that deep-water depositional systems consistently operated along, and were sourced from, the northwestern margin of an asymmetrical basin during the late Ordovician and earlySilurian, while pelagic facies accumulated simultaneously tothe SE, providing ascenario analogous to many modern trench systems. Most of the observedsedimentological anomalies, with regard to thisgeneral model, can be explained within the context of the varied styles of trench-filling depositional systems, briefly reviewed here, and the major stratigraphic and sedimentologic features can be best explained in terms of a geotectonically evolving fore-arcregion. Two main phases of development are recognized: (a) Llandeilo-late Ashgill: during this time interval the fore-arc trench region was tectonically juxtaposed against an active continental margin arc. Small- to medium-scale, SE-prograding sand-rich fans were formed within a relatively narrow trench, leading to axial diversion of the fans, initially to NE but later mainly to SW. Simultaneously a coarse volcanilithic sediment apron, flanking the arc, migrated gradually northeastwards, probably in response to relative fault displacement of the arc and trench; (b) Llandovery: during this time interval the fore-arc trench region was dominated by a variety of mainly fan-typedepositional systems which were exclusively sourced(at least until theuppermost Llandovery) from the northwestern margin.
  • Generalized Pan-European Geological Database for Shallow Geothermal Installations

    Generalized Pan-European Geological Database for Shallow Geothermal Installations

    geosciences Article Generalized Pan-European Geological Database for Shallow Geothermal Installations Johannes Müller 1, Antonio Galgaro 2, Giorgia Dalla Santa 2, Matteo Cultrera 2, Constantine Karytsas 3, Dimitrios Mendrinos 3, Sebastian Pera 4, Rodolfo Perego 4, Nick O’Neill 5, Riccardo Pasquali 5, Jacques Vercruysse 6, Leonardo Rossi 7, Adriana Bernardi 8 and David Bertermann 1,* ID 1 GeoZentrum Nordbayern, Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Schlossgarten 5, 91054 Erlangen, Germany; [email protected] 2 Department of Geosciences, Universita degli Studi di Padova, Via Gradenigo 635131 Padova, Italy; [email protected] (A.G.); [email protected] (G.D.S.); [email protected] (M.C.) 3 Centre for Renewable Energy Sources and Saving, 19th km Marathonos Ave, 19009 Pikermi Attiki, Greece; [email protected] (C.K.); [email protected] (D.M.) 4 SUPSI, Stabile Le Gerre, Manno 6928, Switzerland; [email protected] (S.P.); [email protected] (R.P.) 5 SLR Environmental Consulting (Ireland) Limited (SLR), 7 Dundrum Business Park, Windy Arbour 14, D14 N2Y7 Dublin, Ireland; [email protected] (N.O.N.); [email protected] (R.P.) 6 GEO-GREEN sprl, Rue de Priesmont 63, 1495 Marbais, Belgium; [email protected] 7 Pietre Edil, Strada Slănic nr.2, 030242 Bucures, ti, Romania; [email protected] 8 CNR-ISAC, Corso Stati Uniti 435127 Padova, Italy; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +49-9131-85-25824 Received: 18 December 2017; Accepted: 17 January 2018; Published: 22 January 2018 Abstract: The relatively high installation costs for different types of shallow geothermal energy systems are obstacles that have lowered the impact of geothermal solutions in the renewable energy market.
  • SABRINA TIMES December 2018

    SABRINA TIMES December 2018

    SABRINA TIMES December 2018 Open University Geological Society Severnside Branch Branch Organiser’s Report Hello everyone, Our last event of 2018, the annual Day of Lectures at the National Museum in Cardiff was very successful with four excellent talks, including one from OUGS President Dr Susanne Schwenzer describing the Curiosity Rover on Mars and her scientific work as a mission team member. Prof. Philip Donoghue introduced us to the emerging field of molecular palaeontology now being used to establish evolutionary timescales. Cyclic caldera eruptions was the theme of Dr Wim Degruyter’s talk which included a fascinating description of the volcanic eruptions on Santorini. Also, Dr Ian Skilling’s talk showed us that all sorts of interesting things happen when eruptions of basaltic lava come into contact with bodies of water. Fortuitously the Soyuz space capsule that brought UK astronaut Tim Peake back to Earth from the International Space Station was on display at the National Museum while we were there, and was a bonus attraction. The capsule can be seen at the museum in Cardiff until 10th February 2019. There are some spaces still available at our annual geology workshop being held at Aberystwyth in February. This is always a golden opportunity to learn new aspects of geology in a friendly environment, so please contact organiser Janet Hellen if you wish to attend – details are on the website at: https://ougs.org/severnside/events/ You may remember that our first field trip of 2018, the Introductory Day at Portishead, coincided with a heavy snowfall the night before that prevented many members from reaching Portishead on the day.
  • Africa Soil Profiles Database Version 1.1

    Africa Soil Profiles Database Version 1.1

    Africa Soil Profiles Database Version 1.1 A compilation of georeferenced and standardised legacy soil profile data for Sub-Saharan Africa (with dataset) ISRIC Report 2013/03 ISRIC – World Soil Information has a mandate to serve the international community as custodian of global soil information and to increase awareness and understanding of soils in major global issues. More information: www.isric.org J.G.B. Leenaars ISRIC – World soil Information has a strategic association with Wageningen UR (University & Research centre) Africa Soil Profiles Database Version 1.1 A compilation of georeferenced and standardised legacy soil profile data for Sub-Saharan Africa (with dataset) J.G.B. Leenaars ISRIC Report 2013/03 Wageningen, 2013 © 2013, ISRIC – World Soil Information, Wageningen, Netherlands All rights reserved. Reproduction and dissemination for educational or non-commercial purposes are permitted without any prior written permission provided the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction of materials for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without prior written permission from ISRIC. Applications for such permission should be addressed to: Director, ISRIC – World Soil Information PO B0X 353 6700 AJ Wageningen The Netherlands E-mail: [email protected] The designations employed and the presentation of materials do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of ISRIC concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Despite the fact that this publication is created with utmost care, the authors(s) and/or publisher(s) and/or ISRIC cannot be held liable for any damage caused by the use of this publication or any content therein in whatever form, whether or not caused by possible errors or faults nor for any consequences thereof.
  • A Systematic Nomenclature for Metamorphic Rocks

    A Systematic Nomenclature for Metamorphic Rocks

    A systematic nomenclature for metamorphic rocks: 1. HOW TO NAME A METAMORPHIC ROCK Recommendations by the IUGS Subcommission on the Systematics of Metamorphic Rocks: Web version 1/4/04. Rolf Schmid1, Douglas Fettes2, Ben Harte3, Eleutheria Davis4, Jacqueline Desmons5, Hans- Joachim Meyer-Marsilius† and Jaakko Siivola6 1 Institut für Mineralogie und Petrographie, ETH-Centre, CH-8092, Zürich, Switzerland, [email protected] 2 British Geological Survey, Murchison House, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, United Kingdom, [email protected] 3 Grant Institute of Geology, Edinburgh, United Kingdom, [email protected] 4 Patission 339A, 11144 Athens, Greece 5 3, rue de Houdemont 54500, Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy, France, [email protected] 6 Tasakalliontie 12c, 02760 Espoo, Finland ABSTRACT The usage of some common terms in metamorphic petrology has developed differently in different countries and a range of specialised rock names have been applied locally. The Subcommission on the Systematics of Metamorphic Rocks (SCMR) aims to provide systematic schemes for terminology and rock definitions that are widely acceptable and suitable for international use. This first paper explains the basic classification scheme for common metamorphic rocks proposed by the SCMR, and lays out the general principles which were used by the SCMR when defining terms for metamorphic rocks, their features, conditions of formation and processes. Subsequent papers discuss and present more detailed terminology for particular metamorphic rock groups and processes. The SCMR recognises the very wide usage of some rock names (for example, amphibolite, marble, hornfels) and the existence of many name sets related to specific types of metamorphism (for example, high P/T rocks, migmatites, impactites).
  • A Textural Classification of Argillaceous Rocks and Their Durability

    A Textural Classification of Argillaceous Rocks and Their Durability

    1 2 A textural classification of argillaceous rocks and their durability 3 4 Jordi Corominas1, Joan Martínez-Bofill1,2, Albert Soler3 5 6 (1) Department of Geotechnical Engineering and Geosciences. UPC-BarcelonaTech 7 (2)Geomar. Enginyeria del Terreny. SLP 8 (3) Grup de Mineralogia Aplicada i Medi Ambient, Department de Cristal·lografia, Mineralogia i Dipòstis Minerals, 9 Universitat de Barcelona. 10 11 e-mail: [email protected] ph. +(34).93.401.6861 12 13 ABSTRACT 14 15 Argillaceous rocks can display a wide range of durability behaviour after excavation and in cut slopes. In 16 this paper we propose a classification of argillaceous rocks based on their textural characteristics. Three 17 main components of the classification scheme are: the clastic framework, the fine-grained matrix and the 18 cementing agent. Unlike other schemes, the unlithified argillaceous sediments are included as well. The 19 names proposed for the rocks broadly follow the existing nomenclature used in petrographic 20 classifications. The durability of some argillaceous rock types has been assessed by taking into account a 21 set of degradation features of the excavated slopes. It has been observed that the ratios of these textural 22 components exert a strong control on the long-term durability of slopes. 23 24 Key words: argillaceous rock, durability, slope deterioration, classification 25 26 27 INTRODUCTION 28 29 Argillaceous rocks are frequent in the nature. They form around two thirds of the stratigraphic column 30 (Blatt, 1982) and about one third of all rocks exposed at the earth surface (Franklin, 1983). Although 31 strictly speaking an argillaceous rock is a rock made of clay, in its practical usage it has a broader 32 meaning and it is equivalent to terms such as lutite or mudrock.
  • 資源開発環境調査 ロシア連邦 Russian Federation

    資源開発環境調査 ロシア連邦 Russian Federation

    資源開発環境調査 ロシア連邦 Russian Federation 目 次 第 1 部 資源開発環境調査 1. 一般事情 ········································································· 1 2. 政治・経済概要 ··································································· 2 3. 鉱業概要 ········································································· 3 4. 鉱業行政 ········································································ 12 5. 鉱業関係機関 ···································································· 13 6. 投資環境 ········································································ 14 7. 地質・鉱床概要 ·································································· 20 8. 鉱山概要 ········································································ 21 9. 新規鉱山開発状況 ································································ 30 10. 探査状況 ······································································· 32 11. 製錬所概要 ····································································· 32 12. わが国のこれまでの鉱業関係プロジェクト実施状況 ·································· 46 第 2 部 地質解析 1. 地質・地質構造 ·································································· 47 2. 鉱床············································································ 70 3. 鉱床有望地域 ···································································· 73 資料（統計、法律、文献名、URL 等） ·················································· 75 第 1 部 資源開発環境調査 1. 一般事情 1-1. 面積 1,707 万㎢（日本の 45 倍） 1-2. 人口 1 億 4,550 万人（2002 年 10 月国勢調査） 1-3. 首都 モスクワ 1-4. 人種 ロシア人（総人口の 81.5％）、タタール人（3.8％）、ウクライナ人（2.9％）、 チュバシ人（1.2％）等 1-5. 公用語 ロシア語（その他にも 100 以上の言語がある）
  • BCGS IC1997-03.Pdf

    BCGS IC1997-03.Pdf

    For information on the contents of this document contact: Ministry of Employment and Investment Energy and Minerals Division British Columbia Geological Survey Branch 5 - 1810 Blanshard Street PO Box 9320, Stn Prov Gov't Victoria, BC, V8W 9N3 Attn: W.J. McMillan, Manager, Map ing Section Fax: 250-952-0381 [mail: [email protected] or; B. Grant, Editor, GSB Fax: 250-952-0451 E-mail : [email protected]. bc.ca Canadian Cataloguing in Publication Data I Main entry under title: Specifications and guidelines for bedrock mapping in British Columbia Includes bibliographical references: p. ISBN 0-7726-2950-1 1. Geological mapping - British Columbia. 2. Geology, Structural - British Columbia. 3. Geology - Maps - Symbols. I. British Columbia. Geological Survey Branch. Victoria British Columbia May 1997 October, 1996 TaMb Off GmQmQs Introduction . 3 Fission Track Dating Technique . 36 Part 1: Fundamental Bedrock Mapping Concepts 5 Usual Application of Geochronology . 36 Part 2: Mapping and Field Survey Procedures. 7 Materials Suitable for Dating. 36 2-1 Overview. 7 Rubidium-strontium Dating . 38 2-2 Bedrock Field Survey Databases . 10 Uranium-Lead Dating . 3 8 2-3 Quality Control, Correlation, and Map Lead Isotope Analysis . 38 Reliability . 11 Fission Track Dating . 38 Part 3: Data Representation On Bedrock Maps 13 Analytical Procedure . 39 3-1 Title Block . 13 Quaternary Dating Methods . 39 3-2 Base Map Specifications . 15 Radiocarbon Dating . 39 3-3 Reliability Diagrams . 15 Potassium-Argon Dating of Quaternary 3-4 Legend . 16 Volcanic Rocks. 40 3-5 Map Attributes . 17 Fission Track Dating . 40 3-6 Symbols. 17 Sampling . 41 3-7 Map-unit Designations .