[meteorite-list] Chelyabinsk - IMB or SMB? The nomenclature of Melts.

From: Jim Wooddell <jimwooddell_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 19:11:06 -0700
Message-ID: <CAH_zgwGfBR=CUE7oVBSH0B_buRjL-cuKuQjyDO3e5yV=SWejKA_at_mail.gmail.com>

 Hi Mendy,
I read it in Meteoritics & Planetary Science, Volume 48 Number 3 2013 March.

Jim


On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Mendy Ouzillou <ouzillou at yahoo.com> wrote:
> where can one read this paper?
>
> Best,
>
>
> Mendy
>
> ________________________________
> From: Jim Wooddell <jimwooddell at gmail.com>
> To: Meteorite List <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
> Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2013 5:29 PM
> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Chelyabinsk - IMB or SMB? The nomenclature of
> Melts.
>
> Hi All!
> Just a point of information. I just read Dr. Rubin's paper, Multiple
> melting in a four-layered barred-olivine chondrule with
> compositionally heterogeneous glass from LL3.0 Semarkona
> Whew! That's a title for a paper!
> While we are on the subject of melts, I thought I'd point out this
> paper. Enjoyed reading it the first time....actually understood some
> of it and will read it once again after thinking about it for a while.
> You folks might enjoy reading it when you get a chance!
> Thanks Alan!!
>
>
>
> Jim Wooddell
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 8:24 PM, Jim Wooddell <jimwooddell at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Jeff!
>>
>> To me, Impact Melt should mean total melt to liquid...no fragments of any
>> kind. In the case of the classified S4, partial melting occurred,
>> confirmed by fragments. Still, various flavors understandable especially
>> at
>> boundaries.
>> Yep, I think nodules is the keyword that is questionable. Graphite
>> "nodules"
>> are found in Canyon Diablo, for example. Once they find large enough
>> pieces
>> of this meteorite, they might confirm nodules but they would not be
>> abnormal
>> or a special anomaly if they are impact melt.
>>
>> Jim
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 7:53 PM, Jeff Kuyken <info at meteorites.com.au>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Definitely IMB although you will find variations within different stones.
>>> Some will be shocked to the point of melt and others will not quite get
>>> there. Personally I think IMB and SMB are the exact same terms as both
>>> are
>>> "melt breccias" and shock is derived from impact.
>>>
>>> The official classification of Chely states: "A significant portion (1/3)
>>> of
>>> the stones consist of a dark, fine-grained impact melt containing mineral
>>> and chondrule fragments."
>>>
>>> http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meteor/metbull.php?code=57165
>>>
>>> I personally don't think "nodules" is really the correct terminology
>>> either.
>>> They are just individuals / fragments of the same material shocked to a
>>> higher degree in the parent body. For example... compare it to Gao. We
>>> don't
>>> call the IMB pieces, nodules. They are IMB individuals. The term
>>> "nodules"
>>> would seem to me to be better reserved for things like "iron nodules" in
>>> a
>>> stony Mesosiderite or a "Troilite nodule" in an iron meteorite.
>>>
>>> Good question Mike.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Jeff
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com
>>> [mailto:meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com] On Behalf Of
>>> Galactic
>>> Stone & Ironworks
>>> Sent: Thursday, 25 April 2013 10:42 AM
>>> To: Meteorite List
>>> Subject: [meteorite-list] Chelyabinsk - IMB or SMB? The nomenclature of
>>> Melts.
>>>
>>> Hi List,
>>>
>>> We keep hearing about the "IMB nodules" that have been recovered -
>>> these have an all-black lithology with no chondrules, shock veins, or
>>> grey matrix material.
>>>
>>> However, these nodules were not created on impact. Had there been
>>> such an impact, we would have a visible crater and the nodules would
>>> be located in a radius directly adjacent to the crater amidst the
>>> ejecta. Instead, these nodules were apparently created during the
>>> fragmentation events that took place while the body was still in
>>> atmospheric flight.
>>>
>>> If this is true, shouldn't these nodules be called "shock melt" and
>>> not "impact melt" ?
>>>
>>> Is there any distinction in the official nomenclature between an
>>> impact melt and a shock melt?
>>>
>>> Is it correct to continue using IMB in reference to these Chelyabinsk
>>> specimens?
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> MikeG
>>>
>>> --
>>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Web - http://www.galactic-stone.com
>>> Facebook - http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone
>>> Twitter - http://twitter.com/GalacticStone
>>> Pinterest - http://pinterest.com/galacticstone
>>> RSS - http://www.galactic-stone.com/rss/126516
>>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>>> ______________________________________________
>>>
>>> Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
>>> Meteorite-list mailing list
>>> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>>>
>>>
>>> ______________________________________________
>>>
>>> Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
>>> Meteorite-list mailing list
>>> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jim Wooddell
>> jimwooddell at gmail.com
>> 928-247-2675
>
>
>
> --
> Jim Wooddell
> jimwooddell at gmail.com
> 928-247-2675
> ______________________________________________
>
> Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
>

-- 
Jim Wooddell
jimwooddell at gmail.com
928-247-2675

Received on Thu 25 Apr 2013 10:11:06 PM PDT