28.12.2013 Views

sgr ms thesis - University of Maine

sgr ms thesis - University of Maine

sgr ms thesis - University of Maine

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Zone experienced a relatively weaker thermal pulse and therefore would have<br />

experienced less melt as compared to Type 3. It is likely that Type 3 Shatter<br />

Zone initially had a lower matrix volume percent, but continued melt and<br />

disaggregation <strong>of</strong> clasts allowed greater accommodation <strong>of</strong> granitic magma. Type<br />

3 Shatter Zone may originally have looked similar to Type 2 because <strong>of</strong> this, and<br />

clast melt may have followed the conditions used for Figure 7.4.B. For a Type 2<br />

geometry, small clasts entrained in the magma channels surrounding larger<br />

clasts would also experience a greater than average exposure to magma. Melt <strong>of</strong><br />

small clasts in these channels would be preferred, while the surrounding larger<br />

clasts could not melt under the conditions.<br />

The characteristics <strong>of</strong> CSD evolution with partial clast melt are visible in<br />

figure 7.5. D s decreases over time with the loss <strong>of</strong> small clasts and generally no<br />

change in large clast populations. Starting with a fractal distribution at time zero,<br />

as small clasts quickly disaggregate, a bifractal trend appears to develop.<br />

Eventually, the slope changes completely to a trend that can be better defined by<br />

an exponential size distribution. This model can explain the progression <strong>of</strong> D s<br />

from Type 2 to Type 3 in Bar Harbor Formation clasts. Type 3 Bar Harbor<br />

Formation size distributions have the most evolved slope and the greatest<br />

thermal exposure. I cannot assume that the Bar Harbor Formation clasts<br />

completely followed this migrating CSD trend because <strong>of</strong> the compositional<br />

differences between layers. CSD for Bar Harbor Formation clasts therefore<br />

reflect the trend <strong>of</strong> partial melt in most <strong>of</strong> the clasts and the remnant clasts that<br />

did not attain melting temperatures.<br />

106

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!