Impact Glasses from Zhamanshin Crater (USSR)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
80 Earth awl Plauelaty Science Leuers, 78 (1986) 80-88 Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., Amsterdam - Printed in The Netherlands IS1 Impact glassesfrom Zhamanshin crater (U.S.S.R.) : chemical composition and discussion of origin Christian Koeberl ’ and Kurt Fredriksson 2 ’ Insritrrre of Geochemisny, Uniuersiry oj Vienna, P.O. Box 73. A-1094 Viema (Arcsrriu) ’ Deparanettr of Mineral Scierrces, Snlithsotriatl Jrlstirurion, Washingron. DC 20560 (U.S.A.) Received October 12, 1985; revised version received February 17, 1986 Three silica-rich zhamanshinites and one irghizite from the Zhamanshin impact crater (northern Aral area, U.S.S.R.) have been analyzed for up to 40 major, minor, and trace elements. All data point to a clear distinction between these impact glasses and other tektites or impact glasses. e.g. from the Australasian strewn field. Halogens are generally enriched in the irghizites and zhamanshinites when compared to normal splash for tektites. with zhamanshinites enriched more than irghizites. The same holds also for the alkali metals and a number of other volatile elements like Sb and As. Nickel and cobalt are enriched in the irghizite sample IO a considerable degree, suggesting meteoritic contamination. This view is also supported by gold and selenium data, but for quantifications.other siderophile elements need to be considered. Chromium is not a valid indicator of meteoritic contamination. because small amounts of ultra-basic igneous material may completely alter the picture. The rare earth elements do show a sedimentary pattern, consistent with two or three different source materials and a variation which is probably mostly due to dilution with silica-rich materials. The peak pressure and temperature experienced by the irghizites was lower than for australites or other splash-form tektites, and even lower for zhamanshinites, which is revealed by the content of volatile elements and lesser homogeneity. 1. Introduction in size and of irregular shape (rope-form, wire- form). They contain lechatelierite particles and The Zhamanshin impact crater is situated near vesicles. Zhamanshinites are of much larger size the river Irghiz about 200 km north of Aralsk in and very often of irregular, blocky appearance. Khazakhstan in the U.S.S.R. and is the source of They are dark in colour and show schlieren, a very interesting varieties of impact glasses. De- layered structure, and numerous bubbles and in- scriptions of the geology of the crater can be clusions. found in the literature [l-6] and need not be Because these impact glasses (zhamanshinites) repeated here. Two principal types of impact and tektites (irghizites) are closely associated with glasses are abundant. The first are called irghizites a specific crater, important conclusions can be [l] and microirghizites [7] and resemble tektites in made concerning the formation process of tektites. composition with an average SiOz content of about However, because of the restricted occurrence of 74%. The second class is called zhamanshinite. the glasses it may, however, not be justified to The zhamanshinites are subdivided into three sub- refer to the irghizite-zhamanshinite area as a fifth groups according to their silica content: (a) the tektite strewn field. Besides a greater inhomogene- silica-rich zhamanshinites (about 70-80s SiO,) ity, there are some other features like higher (b) the zhamanshinites (about 52-57% SiO,), and Fe3+/Fe2+ ratios and water content *, which seem (c) the basic (or silica-poor) zhamanshinites (ca. to put the irghizites between tektites and other 40% SiO,) [5,8]. The irghizites are small, tektite-like impact glasses [9,10]. glasses, a few millimeters up to a few centimeters Chemical analyses of these glasses are of inter- est in providing a basis for deducing the origin of l One analysis by J. Barrows of a 0.6 g irghirite sample gave impactites and tektites in one event. Major ele- 0.20 wt.% H,O. ment determinations in a number of different 0012-821 X/86/%03.50 0 1986 Elsevier Science Publishers B.V. 81 samples have been performed by Ehmann et al. using the electronprobe at the Smithsonian In- [ll], Fredriksson et al. [9], Taylor and McLennan stitution. Results of homogeneity studies of the [12], Florenskij and Dabizha [5], Boubka et al. [S], 18201 sample have been reported by Koeberl et al. Shaw and Wasserburg [13], and Koeberl et al. [14], [14]. Standard correction methods [15,16] have showing a widespread compositional variation and been applied. Fluorine has been determined using inhomogeneity among the zhamanshinites but a F--sensitive electrode technique (which was in- limited in irghizites. Trace element studies have tercompared to a rapid instrumental neutron been more limited. Ehmann et al. [ll], Florenskij activation analysis method) as described by and Dabizha [5], and BouSka et al. [8] included Koeberl et al. [17,18]. Other trace elements have relatively small numbers of different trace ele- been analyzed using various neutron activation ments. The most complete data set [12] includes analysis procedures. Analytical techniques and data for up to 32 trace elements, but for only one some data for the rare earth elements in the three Si-rich zhamanshinite and two irghizites. To im- silica-rich zhamanshinite samples have been re- prove the data base, we have analyzed four ad- ported by Koeberl et al. [19]. The INAA proce- ditional samples for up to 40 elements. dures for the other elements follow the methods described previously [20]. Se, Ru, and Au in 18201 2. Samples and methods were determined after radiochemical separation, while Au in USNM 6200 was determined via Three silica-rich zhamanshinites (18201, USNM INAA. Ferric/ferrous ratios were determined 6014, and USNM 6015) and one irghizite (USNM wet-chemically. 6200) have been analyzed in the course of this study (see Figs. 1 and 2). One silica-rich 3. Results and discussion zhamanshinite (18201) was analyzed by using the fully automated five spectrometer ARL-SEMQ The results of the major element determina- electron microprobe at the University of Vienna, tions are given in Table 1. Comparison data from while the USNM samples have been analyzed the literature are given in Table 2. The irghizite Fig. 1. Silksrich zhnmanshinites USNM 6013 (right) and USNM 6014 (left). (Photo courtesy D. Fulrell.) 82 Fig. 2. Silica-rich zhamanshinite USNM 6015 (fragment). (Photo courtesy D. Futrell.) analysis fits well within the range reported by sample of the silica-rich zhamanshinites analyzed BouSka et al. [8] from 31 samples, except for by Taylor and McLennan [12], yielding the suspi- Al,O,, which is slightly lower. Thus our sample cion that we also have to expect slightly lower seems to represent a typical irghizite, at least with contents in many trace elements (especially the respect to major elements. The zhamanshinites are refractories) due to SiO, “dilution”. more inhomogeneous as clearly shown by elec- Trace element data for the samples are reported tronprobe work [14], but all samples fit within the in Table 3. Comparison data from Taylor and range given by Florenskij and Dabizha [5] as well McLennan [12] and BouSka et al. [8] are reported as the smaller major element ranges of BouSka et in Table 4. The agreement between our data and al. [8]. The zhamanshinite samples all have a higher the literature data is excellent especially for the SiO, content (and thus lower Al,O,, FeO, etc., irghizites which appear, relatively, homogeneous due to the inverse relation with SiO,) than the one indicating common parent materials. TABLE 1 Major element data for three silica-rich zhamanshinites (18201. USNM 6014, and USNM 6015) and one irghizite (USNM 6200). obtained by electron-microprobe analysis (all data in wt.%) SiO, TiO, Al 2’3 Fe0 * WO CaO Na,O KzO Silica-rich zhamanshinites 18201 16.5 0.65 12.5 4.67 0.90 0.66 1.14 3.06 USNM 6014 75.3 11.1 3.96 0.15 0.59 1.97 2.71 USNM 6015 16.4 11.2 4.65 0.91 0.60 1.87 2.56 lrghizire USNM 6200 73.1 0.75 9.35 6.50 3.40 2.47 1.07 1.75 * All Fe as FeO. 83 TABLE 2 3. I. Major elements Comparison data from the literature for %-rich zhamanshinites and irghizites (from Florenskij and Dabizha [S] and BouSka et Taylor and McLennan [12] claim that there is a al. [8]) (all data in WI.%) very close similarity between their irghizite and Irghizites Silica-rich zhamanshinite data and the three javanites they zhamanshinites analyzed. We can only support this similarity with SiO, 70.0 -79.4 62.9 -88.1 our irghizite analysis, although iron is rather high TiO 0.69- 0.99 0.23- 1.10 and the K,O/Na,O ratio is smaller. If compared Al ,h 9.45-13.6 4.80-21.2 to the large data set of Chapman and Scheiber Fe0 l 4.24- 6.81 1.98- 8.05 [21], the similarity to other tektites from the Md’ 2.16- 3.76 0.34- 1.16 CaO 1.75- 2.85 0.55- 2.16 Australasian strewn field is not entirely convinc- Na,O 0.85- 1.22 0.57- 1.84 ing-if the CaO/MgO ratio is about right, then K,O 1.58- 2.14 O.lO- 3.07 the Al,O, abundance is too high. In most cases, l All Fe as FeO. however, MgO is somewhat less than CaO. The similarity between the silica-rich zhamanshinites and other groups of tektites from the Australasian TABLE 3 Trace element data for three silica-rich zhamanshinites and one irghizite (data in ppm) Element Zhamanshinites Irghizite 18201 USNM 6014 USNM 6015 USNM 6200 F 67 72 81 61 Cl 171 128 SC 6.50 7.98 9.06 7.80 V 75 Cr 58 49 62 259 Mn 690 702 820 600 co 10.6 8.6 10.2 91.3 Ni 25 1720 Zn 11 As 4.7 8.7 0.5 Se 0.0018 Br 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.1 Rb 79 118 99 38 Zr 240 220 290 360 RU 0.21 Sb 0.73 0.50 0.51 0.26 CS 4.1 3.72 3.54 2.09 Ba 320 290 390 530 La 21.2 21.8 26.0 15.2 Ce 50.7 50.1 58.3 35.0 Nd 18.3 16.8 31.4 14.0 Sm 3.12 4.1 4.6 2.60 Eu 0.95 0.99 1.08 0.45 Tb 0.75 0.64 0.69 0.56 DY 4.31 3.8 3.0 2.25 Yb 2.20 2.30 2.29 1.75 Lu 0.35 0.35 0.41 0.26 HI 6.3 5.5 6.5 9.93 To 0.75 0.53 0.64 0.82 Au 0.0029 0.0083 Th 6.9 7.8 8.6 5.14 U 1.84 1.50 1.98 0.77 84 TABLE 4 Trace elemenls in zhamanshinites and irghizites-comparison data from Taylor and McLennan [12] (USNM 5932.