An alternative to the ‘clastic trap’ interpretation of oolitic ironstone facies
- 1 May 1971
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in Geological Magazine
- Vol. 108 (2) , 137-143
- https://doi.org/10.1017/s0016756800051165
Abstract
Summary: The rarity or absence of clastic grains in oolitic ironstones is often explained by the hypothesis of a ‘clastic trap’ in which the clastic grains are deposited before reaching the zone of iron oolith formation. If the hydrodynamic behaviour of the iron ooliths and clastic grains is considered, this is unnecessary. The two components are spatially separated due to their different densities and different behaviour, depending on whether they are in suspension or saltating, or rolling. Iron ooliths can be rolled more easily than the equivalent clastic grain size, whereas clastic grains are more easily saltated or moved in suspension than the equivalent size of iron oolith. These differences cause spatial separation of the two facies.Keywords
This publication has 6 references indexed in Scilit:
- Glauconite and chamosite as depth indicators in the marine environmentMarine Geology, 1967
- An environmental study of the Upper Domerian and Lower Toarcian in Great BritainPhilosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. B, Biological Sciences, 1967
- Depositional Environment of the Cleveland Ironstone SeriesNature, 1966
- Depositional Environment of British Liassic Ironstones Considered in the Context of their Facies RelationshipsNature, 1966
- Shallow-Water Origin of Early Paleozoic Oolitic Iron OresPublished by Elsevier ,1964
- Relation of pH and oxidation potential to sedimentary iron mineral formationEconomic Geology, 1953