Thanks to Tom Kaye, and Shutter, for getting the full data from the SEM work up on Tom's site.
So let's look
from You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
LoginTom notes that Nickel counts should be ignored due to equipment issues.
Looking at Summary 1 Excel
Sample 559 sorted by %
Sample 560 and 566 are in there too, but distribution is roughly similar to my eye.
Hmm no Yttrium? I guess maybe in the next file
THis gives a different feel to me.
Sample 559
Class Number %
7 Silicon-rich 2459 58.7%
9 Calcium-rich 561 13.4%
33 #Unclassified# 218 5.2%
19 Salts 184 4.4%
6 Iron-rich 163 3.9%
22 Bismuth Chloride 152 3.6%
5 Aluminum-rich 108 2.6%
10 Titanium-rich 86 2.1%
11 Zinc-rich 52 1.2%
31 Antimony-rich 43 1.0%
27 Chlorine-rich 38 0.9%
16 Nickel-rich 34 0.8%
30 Magnesium-rich 30 0.7%
20 Gold 12 0.3%
12 Copper-rich 11 0.3%
23 Barium Sulfate 8 0.2%
18 Zirconium-rich 6 0.1%
28 Phosphorus-rich 6 0.1%
24 Sodium, Sulfur-rich 5 0.1%
4 Brass 4 0.1%
8 Calcium-Phosphorus 3 0.1%
3 400 Series S.S. 2 0.0%
2 300 Series S.S. 1 0.0%
17 Tin-rich 1 0.0%
25 Sodium-rich 1 0.0%
1 Fluorine-rich 0 -
13 Tungsten-rich 0 -
14 Molybdenum-rich 0 -
15 Chromium-rich 0 -
21 Corrosion 0 -
26 Sulfur-rich 0 -
29 Bromine-rich 0 -
32 Platinum-rich 0 -
TOTAL 4188 100.0%