GTB program manual: Thermobarometry calculations

Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
Program Thermobarometry
Version 2.1 May, 1999
Frank S. Spear
Department of Geology, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, New York 12180
spearf@rpi.edu
and
Matthew J. Kohn
Department of Geology
University of South Carolina, Charlston, SC
mjk@geol.sc.edu
(Please report bugs and comments to F. Spear: spearf@rpi.edu)
Table of Contents
General Description of Program Thermobarometry...................................................... 2
General Program Notes
Installation ......................................................................................................... 2
The Macintosh Fortran interface ....................................................................... 3
Description of Files ....................................................................................................... 4
Configuration file (Thermobarometry 1.9.fig) .................................................. 4
Input of mineral data ..................................................................................................... 5
Keyboard input .................................................................................................. 5
Tab-delimited mineral data files (ASCII).......................................................... 6
3-line data files (old format) (ASCII) ................................................................ 8
Mineral selection using data files ...................................................................... 8
Running the program ................................................................................................... 10
Starting the program ........................................................................................ 10
Main menu options .......................................................................................... 10
Read mineral file ................................................................................. 10
Set plotting parameters ........................................................................ 10
Plot Keq lines ...................................................................................... 11
PostScript menu ................................................................................... 12
I/O switch ............................................................................................ 12
Plot digitized reaction curves .............................................................. 12
Thermobarometry exercises ........................................................................................ 16
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
Exercise 1: Mt. Moosilauke, New Hampshire................................................. 16

Exercise 2: Thermobarometry on granulite facies rocks ................................. 26
Exercise 3: P-T paths from thermobarometry on inclusion suites .................. 32
Table listing thermobarmeter calibrations ................................................................... 37
References to thermobarometers ................................................................................. 40
Appendix 1. PostScript graphics files ........................................................................ 43
Appendix 2. Fortran and Macintosh error messages .................................................. 43
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
General Description of Program Thermobarometry

The purpose of program Thermobarometry is to perform and plot the results of
thermobarometry calculations. The program was written by Matthew J. Kohn at
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (now at U. South Carolina) and has been modified for
the Macintosh by F. Spear. An attempt has been made to incorporate all reasonable
calibrations of thermobarometers for crustal rocks that have been published in the
literature. New code is being added frequently.
This manual contains a description of program Thermobarometry and exercises
on how to run it. The theoretical background is discussed at length in a set of short
course notes published by the American Geophysical Union and distributed at 28th
International Geological Congress, which was held in Washington, D.C. in July, 1989
(Spear, F.S. and Peacock, S.M. (1989) Metamorphic Pressure-Temperature-Time Paths,
102 p. American Geophysical Union, Washington.) and is also discussed in my text book
(Spear, F.S. (1993) Metamorphic Phase Equilibria and Pressure-Temperature-Time Paths,
799 p. Mineralogical Society of America, Washington, D. C.) among other places.
General Program Notes
Program Thermobarometry is coded in FORTRAN 77 and has been compiled using
Absoft's MacFortran II (MPW) compiler. The program requires 1.1 Mb and version 2.1
requires a Power Macintosh to run.
Installation
The program requires no special installation. All necessary files are in a folder named
GTB2.1(compile date)
GTB 2.0 manual
GTB2.1_ppc(compile date)
Thermobarometry 1.9.fig
MOOSE.Tab
STONGE3.tab
SC-160.Tab
Postscript.tmp
Digitize data
(this document- PDF format)

(the executable program)
(configuration file for program startup)
(Mt. Moosilauke data file, tab-delimited)
(Data file from St. Onge in tab-delimited format)
(Data file from Coolen, 1980, tab-delimited)
(Temporary file containing Postscript output of
graphics window)
(Folder containing digitized P-T information on
experimental and calculated reaction curves of
petrologic interest
Note that the executable program (GTB) and the configuration file (Thermobarom
1.9.fig) must be in the same folder for the program to run.
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
The Macintosh Fortran interface

An attempt has been made to make these programs as "user friendly" as possible, but
I have chosen to use a more standard Fortran I/O in many cases where the Macintosh
guidelines call for menus and dialog boxes.
Program Thermobarometry has a Command window, an Output window and a
Graphics window. Here are some important considerations when running the programs
(1) Input of user responses can only take place in the Command window (or a dialog
box, if implemented). The Command window must be the front (active) window for
keyboard I/O to occur. The Command window can be made active in the standard
Macintosh ways: clicking on the window, selecting it from the Windows menu, or using
the command-key equivalent (see menu).
(2) Text output is directed to the Output window, which may be scrolled, highlighted,
copied, pasted and saved (not printed directly from the program). For each P-T curve is
listed the reaction, the calibration, the analyses used and a list of the calculated
temperatures and pressures.
(3) Graphics output is directed to the Graphics window, which can be viewed while the
program is running. Graphics output is also directed to a temporary PostScript file
(PostScript.tmp) in a format compatible with Abobe Illustrator (version 3.0 - 8.0
compatible). The PostScript file can be permanently saved with a new name by selecting
the menu option save Postscript file and opened in the Illustrator for enhancement and
printing. For users of Canvas: the PostScript files can be opened in Canvas, but only
after first opening in Illustrator and saving in Illustrator 1.0 or Illustrator 88 formats,
which can then be read by Canvas.
Graphics output can also be obtained by screen dumps. The Macintosh system
provides a way to get a dump of the entire screen using the command:
shift 3 - capture entire screen
shift 4 - capture a user-specified rectangle (crosshair - select
rectangle)
Caps lock on + shift 4 - capture a user-specified window (bullet)
This command will generate a file in PICT format, which can be opened in TeachText or
any program that will handle PICT files. The file will be on the root folder labeled
Picture 1, Picture 2 etc. and will appear in the root directory of the start-up volume.
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
Description of Files
Configuration file (Thermobarometry 1.9.fig)
The configuration file contains a number of parameters that may be altered to
customize the start up of the program. The file contains the information:
Thermobarometry 1.7 configuration file
0
10 350 450 620 350
20
20
360
460
620
350
30
30
370
470
592
500
Thermobarometry 1.9
T C
70. 350.0 800.0 15.00
P kbar
50. .0 10.00 10.00
1
0
1
10
Window1:upL Y,X lowR Y,X maxY,X

Title for plot in graphics window
X-axis label
xor,xmin,xmax,xlen,nxtic,nxdec
Y-axis label
xor,xmin,xmax,xlen,nxtic,nxdec
1 = Plot the Al2SiO5 triple point (0 = no)
0 = input from data file, 1=keyboard
List manager window size
The configuration file may be modified in any text editor. Also, if you choose Save
Preferences from the file menu when the program is running, the current configuration
will be saved as the new configuration file.
Description of items in the configuration file:
(1) Title line - a header only
(2) Lines 2,3 and 4. The coordinates for the three windows used by the program in
screen pixels. The values of Ylow and Xlow are used for the upper left coordinates of
each window and the values of Yhigh and Xhigh are the lower right coordinates. A value
of 0 (zero) for Yhigh and Xhigh will force the program to fit the window to the maximum
dimensions of the screen you are using. The values of Ymax and Xmax give upper limits
to the window size, regardless of the size of the screen.
(3) Lines 5 - 10. Default plot specifications. The next 6 lines give information about the
default plot limits. The values of xor,xmin,xmax,xlen,nxtic,nxdec are defined as
xor, yor
Location of upper left of plot on graphics window (from upper left) in
pixels. Usually this value is not changed.
xmin, ymin Minimum values for X (T) and Y (P) axes (change if desired)
xmax, ymax Maximum values for X (T) and Y (P) axes (change if desired)
Note that Y is in kbar and T in C
Xlen, Ylen
Physical length (on the screen) of X and Y axes in cm
nxtic, nytic
Number of tics on X and Y axes. (Change if desired)
nxdec,nydec Number of decimal points for labels of X and Y axes. Usually 0 is fine for
thermobarometry applications.
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
The plotting information can be changed from within the program by selection of
main menu option 2 (Set Plotting Parameters), and then saved as a new preference file, or
the configuration file can be edited. If you do change the plotting parameters, here are
some helpful hints:
(a) If you change the lower and upper bounds for T and P (xmin, xmax, ymin, ymax),
be sure to also change the number of X and Y tics (nxtic and nytic) so that you have
integral tickmarks.
(b) You may find it very useful to use a constant ratio of T to P in my P-T plots,
so that the slopes on the paper are similar from plot to plot. This helps comparing
sets of data. In my text I used 30C/kbar for most of the plots.
(4) Line 11. Default data input switch. 0 = input from file, 1 = input from keyboard
(switchable from within the program also)
(5) Line 12 Default ListManager window size. The ListManager window comes in 4
sizes (1 = small, 2 = wide, 3 = tall, 4 = large). The best one to use depends
on the size of your screen. This switch sets the default size to use on
startup (also switchable in the program).
Note that all of these options can also be changed after the program starts, so if you are
confused, just ignore this file and proceed.
Input of mineral data
Mineral analyses may be input directly from the keyboard, or by a data file. The
program supports a generalized tab delimited data file format as described below. It is
recommended that your data be stored in this format.
Keyboard input
If keyboard input is selected (either by setting the switch in the configuration file
or by choosing option 5 from the main menu), then a dialog box appears every time a
mineral composition is required. The dialog box looks like this:
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
The name of the mineral requested is listed along with the elements to enter. Note that in
this example (garnet) the Si and Al contents are already specified. These values may not
correspond to the actual analysis, but they are never used in calculations, so their values
are irrelevent. They may be changed or left alone. Also note, that it is only necessary to
enter the values of cations that are used in the calculations. For example, the Ferry and
Spear (1978) calibration of the garnet-biotite Fe-Mg thermometry uses only Fe and Mg,
so it is not necessary to enter Mn or Ca values. However, the Hodges and Spear (1982)
calibration uses Fe, Mg and Ca so these values must all be entered. Other calibrations
use Mn as well, in which case Mn must also be specified. If in doubt, enter a full
analysis.
Tab-delimited (ASCII) mineral data files
Tab-delimited files can readily be made using spreadsheets, and if you already
have your mineral analyses in spreadsheet format, then making these files should be
simple. Here are guidelines for this data file format.
(1) The data file should be ASCII and the columns should be tab-delimited. Actually,
the implementation of the FORTRAN compiler will also allow the data to be space,
comma and slash delimited. This is both good and bad because it means that there must
be no spaces or commas or slashes n the title or any other data field. That is, tabs,
spaces, commas and slashes can only be used as field delimiters. (Dates sometimes are
written with slashes. Slashes in dates must be changed to something else (dashes,
underlines or backslashes).
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
(2) Rows of the data file are mineral analyses and there is one analysis per row.
(3) Columns of the data file (delimited by tabs, spaces or commas) represent specific
data fields as defined by key words (described below).
Appearance of data file:
Line 1: An integer (free format) giving the number of data fields
Line 2: Key words that define the identities of the columns of data (see list of keywords
below)
Line 3: Data for analysis 1
Line 4: Data for analysis 2
etc.
Creation of tab-delimited data files
Tab-delimited data files can easily be created from most spreadsheet programs.
To do this you must first arrange your data so that each analysis occupies a single row in
the spreadsheet. If your data are stored in columns, as most are, then you will have to use
a transpose function to transpose the data into rows. Add lines 1 (number of fields) and 2
(keywords). Then save your spreadsheet in TEXT format. In most spreadsheets (e.g.
Microsoft EXCEL) this will tab-delimited. You can examine and edit the file in any
ASCII editor or word processor such as MS WORD.
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
Key words recognized by the programs for tab-delimited data files:

Key word
Sample
Point
Min
Date
Oxnorm
Wt%tot
Xpos
Ypos
CSi
CAl
CFe3+
CFe2+
CMg
CTi
CMn
CZn
CCr
CCa
CNa
CK
CF
CCl
CNi
CCO2
CH2O
CBa
WSiO2
WAl2O3
WFe2O3
WFeO
WMgO
WTiO2
WMnO
WZnO
WCr2O3
WCaO
WNa2O
WK2O
WF
WCl
WNiO
WCO2
WH2O
WBaO
Comments
Sample number: Defines the sample number (i.e. thin section number)
Analysis number: Defines the analysis number for the sample or thin section, which
can be used for accessing the data record. Every analysis in a file must have a
unique point number.
Mineral name
Date analysis was made (note this must not contain a slash /
Numer of oxygens for normalization
Weight percent total: Defines the weight percent total for the analysis
X position: Defines the X coordinate for the analysis (e.g. for plotting traverses) in mm
Y position: Defines the Y coordinate for the analysis in mm
Cations of Si
Cations of Al
Cations of Fe3+
etc.
Cations of H (as H2O)

Cations of Ba
Weight percent of SiO2
Weight percent of Al2O3
Weight percent of Fe2O3
etc.
Weight percent of H2O

Weight percent of BaO
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
10
Notes:
(1) These are the only elements that the current version of the computer programs will
recognize. The letter C preceeding each element name signifies that it is molar units
(cations) whereas W signifies it is weight percent of the oxide.
(2) Input for program THERMOBAROMETRY must be in cations. If your data are
stored in weight percent, you must convert them before using in this program. Sorry.
(3) See the files named StOnge3.Tab, Moose.tab or SC-160.tab for examples of tabdelimited data files. You can use these as templates for creating your own input data file.
Mineral selection using data files
If you input data using mineral data files, then selection of the mineral from the
data file is done using a scrollable window and a dialog box:
The name of the mineral to pick is listed at the top. The numbers are the analysis
numbers from the data file. The first 20 characters of the title are shown and the Wt%
total is shown (there was no Wt% total in this file, so the word None is shown).
Selection is done by highlighting and clicking OK (or hiting return) or by double clicking
on the desired analysis.
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
11
Note that the size of the display window can be changed by selecting the
appropriate button. Selecting save preferences from the file menu will cause this size
to be the default in the configuration file.
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual

Running the Program
Start the program. You will see an initial citation.

The main menu of Thermobarometry looks like this:
COMMAND LEVEL
0=EXIT
1=Read Mineral File
2=Make a new plot
3=Plot Keq Lines on P-T Diagram
4=Save Postscript file
5=I/O switch (file or keyboard)
6=Plot digitized reaction curves
Description of Main Options:

Option 1 -- Read Mineral File
The user is prompted to open a tab-delimited data file.
The program is dimensioned to accept up to 1000 analyses. If you have more than this
number of analyses in a file, either split it up or contact me and Ill change the array
dimensions.
Option 2 -- Make a new plot
This option sets the scale on the plotting axis (plotter and screen) and draws the axes.
When you choose option 2 the dialog box appears:
12
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
13
Adjust any items you choose, depending on how you want the plot to appear. Note that
these are the default values from the configuration file. Hint: to make the tick marks fall
on integral numbers, be sure to have the correct number of ticks, depending on the
difference between the maximum and minimum values of T and P.
If you choose OK the program will ask if you want to plot the Al2SiO5 triple
point. After your response the plot will be drawn.
You will also be asked if you wish to save the old PostScript file. A new
PostScript file will automatically be opened, but will over write the old one unless the old
one is saved here.
Option 3 -- Plot Keq Lines on P-T Diagram
This option performs the calculations. There are two submenus under this option,
one for thermometers, and the other for barometers. Typing -1 toggles between the 2
menus.
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
14
Thermometer menu
CHOOSE 1 OF THE FOLLOWING REACTIONS
0=EXIT, -1=Next Menu
************************************
-----------------------------------1=Grt-Bt
(Fe-Mg) * 2=Grt-Chl (Fe-Mg)
3=Grt-Hbl (Fe-Mg) * 4=Grt-Cpx (Fe-Mg)
-----------------------------------5=Grt-Phen (Fe-Mg) * 6=Grt-Ilm (Fe-Mn)
7=Grt-Tur (Fe-Mg) * 8=Bt-Tur (Fe-Mg)
-----------------------------------9=Grt-Opx (Fe-Mg) * 10=Grt-Ol (Fe-Mg)
-----------------------------------11=Grt-Crd (Fe-Mg) * 12=Hb-Pl
-----------------------------------************************************
Barometer Menu
*********************************************
--------------------------------------------1=Grt-Pl-AlSi-Qtz
*
2=Grt-Pl-Ms-Bt
3=Grt-Pl-Ms-Qtz
*
--------------------------------------------4=Grt-Ms-Alsi-Qtz
*
5=Grt-Bt-Ms-Alsi
--------------------------------------------6=Grt-Pl-Cpx-Qtz
*
7=Grt-Pl-Opx-Qtz
8=Ab-Jd-Qtz
*
9=Grt-Opx
--------------------------------------------10=Grt-Pl-Hbl-Qtz
*
11-Grt-Pl-Bt-Qtz
--------------------------------------------12=GRIPS
*
13=GRAIL
14-GRAIP
*
15=Grt-Crd-Sil-Qtz
--------------------------------------------*********************************************
Each of these menu options has a number of different calibrations available, as is listed in
the accompanying table.
Option 4 -- Save PostScript file
This option promts the user for a file name to save the Postscript graphic. If you
do not save the PostScript file, it will be erased (actually, it is stored in a temporary file
named PostScript.tmp, if you forget to save it, but it is better to rename the file with this
option, or when you make a new plot).
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
15
Option 5 - I/O switch

This option permits toggling between input from a data file (option 1) or input
from the keyboard. See discussion above about input of mineral data for details.
Option 6 - Plot digitized reaction curves
This option provides the capability of plotting on the P-T diagram the P-T
locations of curves that have been previously digitized and stored in data files. The
program will plot generic files as well as data files generated by R. Bermans TWQ
program.
When this option is selected, the Digit Plot menu options appear:
Open file name
Digit Plot Main Options Menu
0 = Return to calling program
1 = Read T-P digitized data file
2 = Draw P-T curve
3 = Plot entire file
You must execute 1 before option 2
To open a new digitized data file, select option 1. Several files have been supplied with
this program:
There are 2 types of files supported by this option.
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
16
(1) Generic files look like this:

FSpear digitized data file
Kyanite=sillimanite Helgeson 1978
1
491.3673
3751.613
2
771.9552
8825.807
0
0
0
Sillimanite=andalusite Helgeson 1978
1
491.0406
3764.516
2
765.0957
-29.03226
0
0
0
Kyanite=andalusite Helgeson 1978
1
491.6939
3729.032
2
204.2464
241.9355
0
0
0
gross+2kyanite+qtz=3anorthite Helgeson 1978
1
900
19801
2
1246.766
28208.96
3
1497.513
34029.85
0
0
0
The first line is the header and must be included exactly as shown here:
FSpear digitized data file
The remaining sets of lines contain the digitized reaction curves.

Line 1
Title of reaction curve
Line 2 - n
point number, T (C), P (bars)
Line n+1
0 0 0
(signifies the end of a data stream)
These files were created by myself from plots in the literature using a digitizing pad and a
small basic program.
(2) R Berman (TWQ) data files look like this:
RBerman (TWQ) output
Temperature (C)
Pressure (bars)
100.000 1300.000
2
15
0
0
1125.26618 15000.00
8982.50 2 822.78298
810.19906
7750.00
7445.50 2 759.70646
517.69634
500.00
777.949 7459.018
804.625 6566.701
2
19
0
0
967.71726 15000.00
8982.50 2 804.48786
file
500.000 15000.000
20.000
20.000 0
0
0
31071.06647 13815.83 2 964.20711 11399.17
8054.50 2 813.19527
7822.50 2 810.80224
2 809.60630
7735.50 2 807.21557
7677.50
6517.50 2 662.27918
4100.83 2 565.34486
2
0.3500000
87.6179
Ky
0.3500000
87.6179
aQz + Co
0
0
3 940.50465 13815.83 2 885.68890 11399.17
8054.50 2 798.39995
7822.50 2 796.87262
0
2 861.39553
7764.50 2
2 797.66775
1684.17 2
2 828.52020
7764.50 2
Spear and Kohn

796.49046
7750.00
7445.50 2 763.46094
613.54222
1684.17
626.88 2 549.01292
768.415 7401.512
795.417 6156.289
GTB program manual
17
2 796.10813
7735.50 2 794.57749
7677.50 2 788.43244
6517.50 2 694.48316
4100.83 2 656.53002
2892.50 2
2 587.32948
1080.00 2 570.67722
777.92 2 560.13555
500.00 2
0.3500000
88.4903
Ms
0.3500000
88.4903
W + Kfs + Co
Again, line 1 is a header and must be included exactly as shown. TWQ does not create
this line, so it must be added to the data file that is created by TWQ. The remaining lines
are those created by TWQ.
Note: These are the TWQ plot.dat files that the program creates. There have
been minor changes in the format of these files. I believe that the most recent version of
TWQ may add 1 or 2 lines at the top of each plot.dat file. If you see these, then you must
remove them yourself before using in program Thermobarometry. Try and make your
TWQ file look exactly like the examples here.
To plot the curves, select option 2 or 3. If option 2 is selected, the user will be
asked to select the specific reaction to be plotted and then asked what symbol to use for
plotting points (0 for no symbol).
Note that the curves are NOT labeled, so you must keep track of what you have
plotted. A request has been made to add labeling, and this may be done in the future.
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
18
Thermobarometry exercises
There are three different exercises described for program Thermobarometry. The
purpose of the first two exercises is to examine two important factors in
thermobarometry: (1) The range of P-T calibrations for individual thermometers and
barometers and (2) The internal consistency of selected sets of calibrations on a single,
well equilibrated sample. Exercise 1 will examine these two factors using data from
garnet + biotite + sillimanite + plagioclase + muscovite + quartz assemblages from Mt.
Moosilauke, New Hampshire (Hodges and Spear, 1982). Exercise 2 will examine these
two factors from a granulite facies assemblage from the Furua complex of southern
Tanzania (Coolen, 1980). Exercise 3 reexamines a P-T path calculation of St-Onge
(1987), using different calibrations of a single thermometer and barometer.
Exercise 1: Thermobarometry on samples from Mt. Moosilauke, New Hampshire
Exercise 1, Part 1: Examine the range P-T results using garnet+biotite thermometry
and GASP barometry.
The purpose of the first part of this exercise is to examine the differences between
different calibrations of the garnet-biotite geothermometer and the garnet-plagioclaseAl2SiO5-quartz geobarometer. Both of these thermobarometers enjoy considerable
application in rocks of the amphibolite facies and it is important to understand the
range of results expected from different calibrations.
The data we will use for this comparison are those from Hodges and Spear
(1982, Am. Mineral., v. 67, pp 1118-1134) from Mt. Moosilauke in northern New
Hampshire. These rocks were thought to have crystallized at conditions near the
Al2SiO5 triple point so the P-T conditions recorded by these rocks provide an
independent check of the accuracy of calibrations.
(1) Start program THERMOBAROMETRY by double clicking on the program
icon. The following menu should appear:
COMMAND LEVEL
0=EXIT
1=Read Mineral File
2=Make a new plot
3=Plot Keq Lines on P-T Diagram
4=Save Postscript file
5=I/O switch (file or keyboard)
6=Plot digitized reaction curves
(2) Select option 1, Select option 1 (again) and open the 1-line, tab delimited
ASCII file named MOOSE.tab.
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
This file contains data from pelitic schists from the Mt. Moosilauke, New Hampshire
region that were published by Hodges and Spear (1982, Am. Mineral., v. 67, pp 11181134). The list of analyses is:
19
Spear and Kohn

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
78B
80D
90A
92D
145E
146B
146D
78B
90A
92D
146B
78B
80D
90A
92D
145E
146B
146D
78B
80D
90A
92D
145E
146B
146D
78B
80D
90A
92D
145E
146B
146D
Garnet
Garnet
Garnet
Garnet
Garnet
Garnet
Garnet
Staurolite
Staurolite
Staurolite
Staurolite
Biotite
Biotite
Biotite
Biotite
Biotite
Biotite
Biotite
Muscovite
Muscovite
Muscovite
Muscovite
Muscovite
Muscovite
Muscovite
Plagioclase
Plagioclase
Plagioclase
Plagioclase
Plagioclase
Plagioclase
Plagioclase
Sillimanite
GTB program manual

Hodges
Hodges
Hodges
Hodges
Hodges
Hodges
Hodges
Hodges
Hodges
Hodges
Hodges
Hodges
Hodges
Hodges
Hodges
Hodges
Hodges
Hodges
Hodges
Hodges
Hodges
Hodges
Hodges
Hodges
Hodges
Hodges
Hodges
Hodges
Hodges
Hodges
Hodges
Hodges
(pure)
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
Spear
Spear
Spear
Spear
Spear
Spear
Spear
Spear
Spear
Spear
Spear
Spear
Spear
Spear
Spear
Spear
Spear
Spear
Spear
Spear
Spear
Spear
Spear
Spear
Spear
Spear
Spear
Spear
Spear
Spear
Spear
Spear
(1982)
(1982)
(1982)
(1982)
(1982)
(1982)
(1982)
(1982)
(1982)
(1982)
(1982)
(1982)
(1982)
(1982)
(1982)
(1982)
(1982)
(1982)
(1982)
(1982)
(1982)
(1982)
(1982)
(1982)
(1982)
(1982)
(1982)
(1982)
(1982)
(1982)
(1982)
(1982)
20
Mt.
Mt.
Mt.
Mt.
Mt.
Mt.
Mt.
Mt.
Mt.
Mt.
Mt.
Mt.
Mt.
Mt.
Mt.
Mt.
Mt.
Mt.
Mt.
Mt.
Mt.
Mt.
Mt.
Mt.
Mt.
Mt.
Mt.
Mt.
Mt.
Mt.
Mt.
Mt.
Moosilauke
Moosilauke
Moosilauke
Moosilauke
Moosilauke
Moosilauke
Moosilauke
Moosilauke
Moosilauke
Moosilauke
Moosilauke
Moosilauke
Moosilauke
Moosilauke
Moosilauke
Moosilauke
Moosilauke
Moosilauke
Moosilauke
Moosilauke
Moosilauke
Moosilauke
Moosilauke
Moosilauke
Moosilauke
Moosilauke
Moosilauke
Moosilauke
Moosilauke
Moosilauke
Moosilauke
Moosilauke
In this exercise we will use only one sample (90A), so the mineral numbers of interest
are:
3
14
21
28
90A
90A
90A
90A
Garnet
Biotite
Muscovite
Plagioclase
Hodges
Hodges
Hodges
Hodges
and
and
and
and
Spear
Spear
Spear
Spear
(1982)
(1982)
(1982)
(1982)
Mt.
Mt.
Mt.
Mt.
Moosilauke
Moosilauke
Moosilauke
Moosilauke
The garnet in this sample contains 6.08 wt % MnO (Xsps = 0.139) and 1.03 wt % CaO
(Xgrs = 0.03). The plagioclase is An14. The interested thermobarometrist is
encouraged to try this exercise with other samples from the suite.
Hit <Return> to return to the main menu, then
(3) The default plot should be plotted correctly for this exercise, unless the
configuration file has been changed. If you want to replot the axes (not necessary) go
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
to menu option 2 and check to make sure that the range on the axes is 350-800 C, 010 kbar and that the Al2SiO5 triple point is plotted:
(4) Select menu option 3 (Plot Keq lines on P-T diagram). This option performs and
plots the geothermobarometric calculations. There are several sub-menus here, each
for different thermobarometers and calibrations of those thermobarometers. The first
sub-menu to appear is the thermometer menu:
Thermometer menu
************************************
-----------------------------------1=Grt-Bt
(Fe-Mg) * 2=Grt-Chl (Fe-Mg)
3=Grt-Hbl (Fe-Mg) * 4=Grt-Cpx (Fe-Mg)
-----------------------------------5=Grt-Phen (Fe-Mg) * 6=Grt-Ilm (Fe-Mn)
7=Grt-Tur (Fe-Mg) * 8=Bt-Tur (Fe-Mg)
-----------------------------------9=Grt-Opx (Fe-Mg) * 10=Grt-Ol (Fe-Mg)
-----------------------------------11=Grt-Crd (Fe-Mg) *
-----------------------------------************************************
21
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
Choose number 1 (Grt-Bt thermometer). The following list of calibrations will

appear:
Please choose which calibration
You wish to apply
0 = Return to Rxn menu
1 = Ferry and Spear (1978)
2 = Hodges and Spear (1982)
3 = Ganguly and Saxena 1 (1984; sym)
4 = Ganguly and Saxena 2 (1984; asym)
5 = Perchuk and Lavrent''eva (1984)
6 = Indares and Martignole (1985)
7 = Ferry and Spear with Berman (1990) Grt
8 = Patino Douce et al.
(6) Choose the Ferry and Spear calibration (option 1). Choose garnet analysis 3:
and then biotite analysis 14. The Keq line plots on the graphics screen, and the
temperature and pressure conditions calculated for the plot are printed on the console.
Hit <Return> to return to the mineral selection query, and hit cancel to return to the
calibration menu.
(7) Choose the Hodges and Spear calibration (option 2). Again choose garnet
analysis 3 and biotite analysis 14. The resulting T is slightly higher ( 12C) than for
the Ferry-Spear calibration. This is because Hodges-Spear incorporates a correction
22
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
for Ca-Mg non ideal mixing in the garnet that the Ferry-Spear calibration does not; as
a rough rule of thumb, the Hodges and Spear correction contributes approximately 4
oC for each .01 increase in the mole fraction of grossular. The garnet in sample 90A
has Xgrs of only 0.03, and so the increase in temperature is only 3*4 degrees higher
than the Ferry and Spear estimate. However, amphibolite grade garnets with Xgrs =
0.15 - 0.25 are not uncommon in calcic metapelites and metavolcanics, and in these
bulk compositions, the difference in temperature inferred from the Ferry-Spear
calibration versus the Hodges-Spear calibration may be 50-100C, with the HodgesSpear calibration yielding the higher temperature.
(8) Hit cancel to return to the calibrations menu, and choose the Ganguly and
Saxena 1 calibration (option 3). This is a symmetrical mixing model for garnet.
Choose garnet analysis 3 and biotite analysis 14. You will then be asked to choose
a value for WMn. Ganguly and Saxena suggested 3000 cal and Holdaway et al.
(1988) suggested 2500 cal. Try both values and compare the results (noting that you
do not have to return to the calibration menu in order to do so). A value of 3000 cal
for WMn gives a temperature of 513C whereas the value of 2500 cal gives a T of
503C.
(9) Repeat number (8) using Ganguly and Saxena 2 calibration (option 4). This is
an asymmetrical mixing model for garnet.
The difference between the Ganguly and Saxena calibration and the Hodges and Spear
calibration is in the way the garnet is modelled. Hodges and Spear assume the only
non zero terms in the garnet mixing model are those for Ca-Mg exchange. Ganguly
and Saxena assume non zero terms for Ca-Mg, Ca-Fe, Mn-Mg and Fe-Mg. For the
samples from Mt. Moosilauke both mixing models give very similar results, but the
results diverge as the Mn content of the garnet increases.
It is certain from comparison of thermometric results with other estimates of
temperature as well as from experimental data that a correction for Ca-Mg mixing in
garnet is necessary. It is not clear, however, whether a correction for Mn or Fe-Mg
exchange is necessary. For most typical pelitic schist assemblages, the quantities Xsps
and Fe/(Fe+Mg) are highly (negatively) correlated (see, for example, Fig. 13A of
Short Course notes). This is a simple consequence of the partitioning of Fe, Mg and
Mn among garnet, biotite, and other Fe-Mg-Mn silicates. As a result, it is not possible
using natural data sets to separate the effect of Mn unambiguously from that of Fe/Mg
on the mixing properties of garnet. The calibration of Ganguly and Saxena makes a
positive adjustment to the temperature based on the Mn content and a negative
adjustment to temperature based on the Fe/Mg (actually, it is based on Fe minus Mg).
Because of the strong correlation between these parameters, the corrections largely,
but not entirely, cancel. Experimental determinations will be needed to resolve the
uncertainty in garnet mixing models.
(10) Repeat number (8) using the calibration of Perchuk and Lavrenteva (option
5). Note that for this example this calibration gives a temperature of 530C,
23
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
approximately 20C higher than any of the others but this is not true for all samples.
This calibration does not incorporate any explicit corrections for garnet non ideality,
but is based on experiments conducted with natural garnet, so some measure of non
ideality is implicit.
(11) Repeat number (8) using the calibration of Indares and Martingole (option
6). These authors give two different equations, and both are plotted here. (Note that
you will have to hit return once to see the second model). Equation 1 gives results
very similar to the other calibrations whereas equation 2 gives a temperature of
457C. The difference between model 1 and model 2 is the garnet mixing model;
model 1 uses the Ganguly and Saxena mixing model whereas model 2 uses Hodges
and Spear.
The Indares and Martingole calibration corrects for AlVI and Ti in biotite and
gives temperatures lower than those that would be obtained without correction. In low
grade rocks (with little AlVI or Ti in biotite) the correction is small. In high grade
rocks the correction can be as large as 100C.
Conclusion. The results of the comparative thermometry indicate that the Hodges and
Spear (1982) and Ganguly and Saxena (1984) calibrations give similar temperatures.
These two calibrations will also give results similar to the Ferry and Spear calibration
if the Ca and Mn contents of the garnet are low. Corrections for AlVI and Ti in biotite
are probably necessary, but the magnitude of the correction is not certain.
(12) Return to Reaction menu by entering 0 from the calibration menu. Type -1
(next menu) to get the barometer menu.
Barometer Menu
*********************************************
--------------------------------------------1=Grt-Pl-AlSi-Qtz
*
2=Grt-Pl-Ms-Bt
3=Grt-Pl-Ms-Qtz
*
--------------------------------------------4=Grt-Ms-Alsi-Qtz
*
5=Grt-Bt-Ms-Alsi
--------------------------------------------6=Grt-Pl-Cpx-Qtz
*
7=Grt-Pl-Opx-Qtz
8=Ab-Jd-Qtz
*
9=Grt-Opx
--------------------------------------------10=Grt-Pl-Hbl-Qtz
*
11-Grt-Pl-Bt-Qtz
--------------------------------------------12=GRIPS
*
13=GRAIL
14-GRAIP
*
15=Grt-Crd-Sil-Qtz
--------------------------------------------*********************************************
Select barometer reaction #1 (1=Grt-Pl-AlSi-Qtz). The following menu should

appear:
24
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
Please choose which Reaction you

wish to use:
0
1
2
3
=
=
=
=
Return to main Rxn menu

Garnet-Plag-Sill-Qtz
Garnet-Plag-Anda-Qtz
Garnet-Plag-Kyan-Qtz
Choose 1 because the assemblages contain sillimanite. The following menu will
appear:
Please choose the Calibration
you wish to apply
0
1
2
3
4
5
=
=
=
=
=
=
Return to Alsi Menu

Newton and Haselton (1981)
Hodges and Spear (1982)
Ganguly and Saxena (1984)
Hodges and Crowley (1985)
Koziol (1989)
Plot the Keq lines for sample 90A for each of the calibrations 1-5, using garnet #3
and plagioclase #28.
Examination of the results reveals that the pressures recorded by the Newton
and Haselton, Hodges and Spear, and Hodges and Crowley calibrations are all very
similar (3860-4140 bars) and cluster around the Holdaway (1971) triple point pressure.
It is not at all surprising that the Hodges and Spear (1982) and Hodges and Crowley
(1985) calibrations reproduce the Holdaway triple point pressure inasmuch as the Mt.
Moosilauke data were used in the calibration of these barometers. The pressure from
the Ganguly and Saxena calibration is lower by 1 kbar and that from the Koziol
calibration higher by 1 kbar.
Which calibration is best? That is impossible to say. The Koziol calibration
uses the most recent, and best reversed, experimental data. At higher grossular
contents the Koziol calibration tends to converge with that of Hodges and Spear, but at
low grossular contents as in this example, they differ by 1 kbar because of the
different values for the activity coefficient of grossular that are used. The Ganguly
and Saxena calibration gives lower pressures at low grossular contents because of the
activity coefficient of grossular in garnet; it converges with the others at higher
grossular contents. There are also systematic pressure differences introduced because
of the different sets of experimental data used in calculating the endmember reaction
position for the calibrations.
Here is a summary of the plotted results:
25
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
26
Description of curves (all equilibria calculated with garnet #3, biotite #14 and
plagioclase #28):
Thermometer calibrations in figure
3 = Ganguly and Saxena 1 (1984; sym)
4 = Ganguly and Saxena 2 (1984; asym)
5 = Perchuk and Lavrent''eva (1984)
6 = Indares and Martignole (1985) (Calibration One (G&S garnet model))
7 = Indares and Martignole (1985) (Calibration Two (H&S garnet model))
Barometer calibrations in figure
8 = Newton and Haselton (1981)
10 = Ganguly and Saxena (1984)
11 = Hodges and Crowley (1985)
12 = Koziol (1989)
Conclusion:
If one were to assume that the above calibrations were completely independent
(which they most certainly are not) then the range of pressure-temperature conditions
shown in the plot would reflect the accuracy of the P-T estimates. Note that this range is
T = 35 C and P = 1 kbar. This is a considerably larger error than the precision of
the measurements.
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
Exercise 1, Part 2: Examination of internal consistency of thermobarometer

calibrations
In this exercise we will examine whether sets of calibrations are internally
consistent. (Clearly, they are not all consistent with one another). One of the reasons
for checking for internal consistency is that it can be a very good test of how well
equilibrated the sample is. That is, if the sample has suffered various different
retrograde processes, then the compositions do not likely reflect those of the peak
metamorphic conditions. If this is the case then it is very unlikely that a set of
thermobarometers will give a very similar set of P-T conditions. Of course, to perform
this exercise on a natural sample, one must have a consistent set of calibrations to start
with, and it is not always easy to tell if calibrations are mutually consistent. Berman
(1988, 1990) and Powell and Holland (1988, 1990) have advocated this approach
using their respective data bases. As will be shown below, some of the published
thermobarometer calibrations are also fairly consistent with one another because they
use similar data sets for calibration, and can be used can be used to check for internal
consistency on natural samples as well.
(1) Start program Thermobarometry. Open the 1-line, tab-delimited data file
named Moose.tab. From the main menu, choose option 3 (plot Keq lines).
(2) Choose the Garnet-Biotite thermometer (#1) and the Hodges and Spear
calibration (#2). Plot the Keq line for garnet #3 and biotite #14.
(3) Go to the barometer menu and choose reaction 1 (GASP). Select the
sillimanite reaction (#1), and plot the Keq line for the Hodges and Spear
calibration (#2) using garnet #3 and plagioclase #28.
(4) Return to the calibrations menu, and this time plot the Hodges and Crowley
calibration (#4) for the same minerals. The result is very similar to that obtained
using the Hodges and Spear calibration because the calibration data sets are very
similar and the garnet solution model is the same.
(5) Return to the barometer menu and select reaction 2 (Grt-Pl-Ms-Bt). Choose
the Hodges and Crowley calibration (# 2), and plot the Keq line using garnet #3,
plagioclase #28, biotite #14 and muscovite #21.
(6) Return to the calibration menu, and choose calibration 3 (the Powell and
Holland calibration with the Hodges and Spear garnet model). Plot the Keq line
using garnet #3, plagioclase #28, biotite #14 and muscovite #21. Note that this
reaction has a different slope, but it gives a similar pressure at 500 C.
27
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
(7) Return to the barometer menu, and select reaction 3 (Grt-Pl-Ms-Qtz). Choose
the Hodges and Crowley calibration (#1). Plot the Keq line using garnet #3,
plagioclase #28, and muscovite #21.
The plot you have generated should look something like this:
The reactions used in this plot are:

Thermometers
1 = Garnet + biotite -- Hodges and Spear calibration
Barometers
2 = Grt-Pl-AlSi-Qtz -- Hodges and Spear calibration
3 = Grt-Pl-AlSi-Qtz -- Hodges and Crowley calibration
4 = Grt-Pl-Ms-Bt -- Hodges and Crowley calibration
5 = Grt-Pl-Ms-Bt -- Powell and Holland calibration with H&S garnet model
6 = Grt-Pl-Ms-Qtz -- Hodges and Crowley calibration
Conclusion:
The above set of thermometer calibrations gives a reasonably consistent set of
P-T conditions for different pelite equilibria. Note that many of the other calibrations
are also internally consistent (such as the Powell and Holland ones) and can be used to
examine the quality of data. Note, however, that just because a set of calibrations
gives a well defined P-T point, it does not mean that that P-T point is correct because
there may be systematic errors in the calibrations and these may be quite large. Also,
28
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
just because a set of calibrations gives a tight P-T cluster does not mean that the
sample is well equilibrated because there can be some factors that cancel. In
summary, the above test is a necessary, but not sufficient, test of equilibration of a
sample.
29
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
Exercise 2: Thermobarometry on granulite facies rocks

In this exercise we will examine the internal consistency of several different
thermobarometers on a mafic granulite sample from southern Tanzania studied by
Coolen (1980).
(1) Start program Thermobarometry. Select menu option 1 and open the 1-line,
tab-delimited file named SC-160.tab. The list of minerals in the file looks like:
1
2
3
4
5
6
SC-160
SC-160
SC-160
SC-160
SC-160
SC-160
OPX (Integrated)
CPX (Integrated)
Garnet
Hbl
PLAG
Ilmn (pure)
All analyses are of matrix minerals and are believed to be representative of the peak
metamorphic conditions. Pyroxenes in retrogressed or slowly cooled granulites often
exhibit exsolution textures, and in his study Coolen used an electron beam raster
technique across pyroxene exsolution lamellae in order to obtain the integrated
orthopyroxene and clinopyroxene compositions used in the data file. Unfortunately,
he did not probe all plagioclases, and the composition of the SC-160 plagioclase was
determined optically.
(2) Select menu option 2 ("Set plotting parameters") and adjust the temperature range
to 450-900 and the pressure range to 5-15 kbar:
30
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
Select OK and answer 1 to plot the Al2SiO5 triple point. Note that with the above P-T
axes, you will only see the kyanite - sillimanite boundary plotted.
The thermobarometers that can be applied to this sample are:
(A) Garnet-clinopyroxene thermometry
(B) Garnet-orthopyroxene thermometry
(C) Garnet-hornblende thermometry
(D) Garnet-plagioclase-clinopyroxene-quartz barometry
(E) Garnet-plagioclase-orthopyroxene-quartz barometry
(F) Garnet-plagioclase-hornblende-quartz barometry
(G) Garnet-orthopyroxene barometry
(H) GRIPS barometry
Examine the P-T conditions for mineral pairs for as many different calibrations of the
same equilibria as you care to test. Two possible problems to test are presented below.
Exercise 2, Part 1: Examine the range of P-T results using Grt-Cpx thermometry and
Grt-Pl-Cpx-Qtz barometry: effects of ferric iron calculations and activity models.
(3) Go to the thermometer menu (option 3: plot Keq lines), and select the garnetclinopyroxene reaction (reaction 4).
31
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
(4) Select calibration #1 (Ellis and Green); first calculate the temperature without the
recalculation for ferric iron (i.e. input a 0 for the ferric iron query). Input 3 for
garnet and 2 for clinopyroxene. The calculated temperature is about 880 oC at 7
kbar.
(5) Return to the calibration menu, and select calibration 1 again. This time,
however, input a 1 for the ferric iron query (i.e. do renormalize for ferric iron), and
recalculate the temperature. After each phase is chosen, the ferric iron to total iron
ratio is printed on the screen while the program pauses. Note that the ratio for the
pyroxene is much larger than for the garnet. The new temperature is about 740 oC.
Ferric iron is calculated using stoichiometric and charge balance constraints.
For example, for the pyroxene, the number of cations is forced to be equal to 4 (e.g.
CaMgSi2O6) while maintaining a charge of 12. Obviously, for phases that can contain
vacancies (e.g. mica, chlorite, and amphibole), there is no way of knowing beforehand
what the number of cations is supposed to be; so, if you want to recalculate these
phases for ferric iron, this recalculation must be done before the input file is read into
the program.
The ferric iron recalculations indicate very little ferric iron in the garnet, but a
lot of ferric iron in the pyroxene. This means that, relative to the uncorrected
compositions, the Mg# of the garnet [Mg/(Fe+2+Mg)Grt] is not changed much,
whereas the Mg# of the pyroxene is substantially increased (because some of the
original Fe+2 has been converted to Fe+3). The more dissimilar the Mg#'s of the two
phases involved in an Fe-Mg exchange equilibrium, the lower the temperature.
Because pyroxene is the more magnesian of the two phases, increasing its Mg#
increases the disparity with the garnet Mg#, and so the recalculated temperature
becomes much lower than the non-recalculated temperature. Usually garnet has less
ferric iron in it relative to other ferromagnesian phases, so that ferric iron
recalculations will tend to lower temperature estimates based on Fe-Mg exchange
equilibria involving garnet.
(6) Repeat steps 4 and 5 using calibration #2 (Powell, 1985), and compare with the
Ellis and Green temperatures. The Powell temperatures are about 865 and 730 oC at 7
kbar; these results are not surprising because Powell used virtually the same data set as
did Ellis and Green for calibrating the thermometer. Typically, the results of the two
calibrations are quite similar.
(7) Repeat steps 4 and 5 with the Pattison and Newton calibration (#3). The
temperatures are approximately 810 and 610 oC. The slope of the reaction is a bit less
steep as well. The Pattison and Newton calibration is based on a more recent set of
experimental data, and is generally more highly regarded because of the quality of the
procedure and materials used.
32
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
(8) Go to the geobarometer menu and select the Grt-Pl-Cpx-Qtz reaction (#6).
Choose the Newton and Perkins calibration (#1). Do not renormalize for ferric
iron (enter 0), and calculate the pressure using mineral #'s 3 (Grt), 5 (Plag), and 2
(Cpx). At a reference temperature of 750 oC, the pressure is about 9 kbar.
(9) Repeat step 8 using the Powell and Holland calibration (#2). Two Keq lines are
plotted; the first uses the Hodges and Spear garnet activity model, and indicates a
pressure of about 8.3 kbar at 750 oC. The second line uses the Ganguly and Saxena
activity model and indicates a pressure about 1.5 kbar higher. Most of the difference
in pressure is due to the pyrope activity coefficient, which is substantially larger when
the Ganguly and Saxena model is used.
(10) Repeat step 8 using the Moecher et al. calibration (#4).
(11) Repeat step 8 using the Moecher et al. calibration (#5). Again, two lines are
plotted that correspond to the Mg and Fe endmember reactions. The Mg reaction
indicates pressures of about 10 kbar at 750 oC, while the Fe reaction suggests
pressures of 8.8 kbar. The Fe reaction also has a steeper slope; this is common in
geobarometric reactions because the S of reaction is often much larger for the Feendmember than for the Mg-endmember, while the V's are rather similar.
If you feel ambitious, you can try reestimating all the pressures with the ferric iron
renormalization. You will find that plagioclase is not recalculated, however, as this
does not affect its anorthite content. These ferric iron recalculations affect the
pressures for a variety of reasons, including (1) grossular contents are reduced because
the ferric iron in garnet is assigned as an andradite component, (2) the changes in the
garnet composition affect the activity models, and (3) the composition of the pyroxene
is significantly altered, raising the pressure for the Fe-endmember reaction and
lowering it for the Mg-endmember.
Here is a summary of the plotted results, including ferric iron recalculations for all
equilibria:
33
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
The calibrations plotted in this figure are:

Garnet-Clinopyroxene Thermometers:
1 Ellis and Green (1979) without Fe+3 recalculation.
2 Ellis and Green (1979) with Fe+3 recalculation.
3 Powell (1985) without Fe+3.
4 Powell (1985) with Fe+3.
5 Pattison and Newton (1989) without Fe+3.
6 Pattison and Newton (1989) with Fe+3.
Garnet-Plagioclase-Clinopyroxene-Quartz Barometers:
7 Newton and Perkins (1982) without Fe+3.
8 Powell and Holland (1988) with Hodges and Spear garnet, without Fe+3.
9 Powell and Holland (1988) with Ganguly and Saxena garnet, without Fe+3.
10 Moecher et al. (1988); Mg endmember, without Fe+3.
11 Moecher et al. (1988); Fe endmember, without Fe+3.
12 Newton and Perkins (1982) with Fe+3.
13 Powell and Holland (1988) with Hodges and Spear garnet, with Fe+3.
14 Powell and Holland (1988) with Ganguly and Saxena garnet, with Fe+3.
15 Moecher et al. (1988); Mg endmember, with Fe+3.
16. Moecher et al. (1988); Fe endmember, with Fe+3.
Discussion
34
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
Using only garnet - plagioclase - clinopyroxene - quartz thermobarometry, the

estimated temperatures range from nearly 600 to 900 oC, and the pressures from 6 to
12 kbar. There are three primary causes of the range of P-T estimates, including (1)
thermochemical data, (2) activity models, and (3) ferric iron calculations. It is worth
noting that ferric iron calculations are directly dependent on the quality of the
composition data, and in the case of reintegrated pyroxenes may be highly suspect.
Recently published internally consistent data bases (e.g. Powell and Holland, 1988,
1990; Berman, 1988) often predict rather similar positions for endmember reactions,
so that much of the current disparity between and uncertainty in recent calibrations
probably lies in activity models.
Exercise 2, Part 2: Examination of internal consistency of thermobarometer
calibrations
For this exercise, because of the uncertainties inherent in ferric iron
recalculations, we will not recalculate any of the phases.
(1) Repeat steps 1 and 2 of the previous exercise, in order to redraw the P-T axes.
(2) Go to the geothermometer menu and select the garnet-clinopyroxene reaction
(#4). Choose the Pattison and Newton calibration, answer 0 to the ferric iron
query and calculate the temperature using the garnet (#3) and clinopyroxene
(#2). As above, the temperature is approximately 810 oC at 8 kbar, and 825 oC at 10
kbar.
(3) Return to the geothermometer menu and select the garnet-hornblende
reaction (#3). Choose the Graham and Powell calibration (#1) and calculate the
temperature using the garnet (#3) and hornblende (#4). The calculated
temperature is about 800 oC. In this calibration, ferric iron recalculations are
explicitly not to be made (Graham and Powell, 1984). Graham and Powell crosscalibrated the garnet-hornblende thermometer against the Ellis and Green garnetclinopyroxene thermometer. Usually results are more similar, and the difference in
temperature compared with the unrecalculated garnet-clinopyroxene temperature (880
oC) could simply be a result of the uncertainty in the ferric iron content of the
clinopyroxene.
(4) Return to the geothermometer menu and select reaction #9 (garnetorthopyroxene). Select calibration #2 (Harley, 1985), input 0 for the ferric iron
query (do not recalculate for ferric iron), and calculate the temperature using garnet
#3 and orthopyroxene #1. This temperature is about ten degrees higher than the
garnet-clinopyroxene temperature.
(5) Go to the geobarometer menu and select reaction #6 (garnet-plagioclaseclinopyroxene-quartz). Choose the Newton and Perkins calibration, enter 0 for the
ferric iron query, and calculate the pressure.
35
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
(6) Return to the geobarometer menu and choose reaction #7 (garnet-plagioclaseorthopyroxene-quartz). Again choose the Newton and Perkins calibration, enter 0
for the renormalization question (do not recalculate for ferric iron), and calculate
the pressure using minerals 3 (garnet), 5 (plagioclase), and 1 (orthopyroxene).
(7) Go back to the geobarometer menu and select reaction #10 (garnet-plagioclasehornblende-quartz). Select calibration #5 (Kohn and Spear, 1990, with tschermakite
reaction- Fe model). Kohn and Spear (1989) differs from Kohn and Spear (1990) in
the amphibole activity models and in the geobarometric reaction (1989 calibrations
involve pargasite, whereas 1990 calibrations involve tschermakite). Enter 0 so that
ferric iron is not calculated, and select numbers 3 (garnet), 5 (plagioclase), and 4
(hornblende). Repeat with calibration #6 (the Mg model). Two lines will be
plotted for the Fe and Mg endmember reactions.
(8) Return to the geobarometer menu and select reaction #12 (GRIPS). Choose
the Bohlen and Liotta calibration (#1), enter 0 to avoid ferric iron renormalizations,
and enter 3 (garnet), 6 (for pure ilmenite), and 5 (plagioclase) (ilmenite + rutile are
reported for this rock, but no analyses are presented). The second calibration option is
based on the original experimental work of Bohlen and Liotta (1986), but uses the
Hodges and Spear garnet activity model instead of the Ganguly and Saxena model
preferred by Bohlen and Liotta.
Here is a summary of the results:
Thermometer calibrations in figure:

1 = Grt-Cpx --Pattison and Newton (1989) (parallel to 3)
36
Spear and Kohn

2 = Grt-Hbl
3 = Grt Opx
GTB program manual
37
--Graham and Powell (1984) (vertical line)

--Harley (1985)
Barometer calibrations in figure:

4 = Grt-Pl-Cpx-Qtz --Newton and Perkins (1982)
5 = Grt-Pl-Opx-Qtz --Newton and Perkins (1982)
6 = Grt-Pl-Hbl-Qtz --Kohn and Spear (1990); Fe-Endmember
7 = Grt-Pl-Hbl-Qtz --Kohn and Spear (1990); Mg-Endmember
8 = GRIPS
--Bohlen and Liotta (1986)
Discussion
These different thermobarometers all produce a reasonably consistent estimate
of the peak P-T conditions of about 10 + 1 kbar at 825 + 25oC. However, in light of
the previous exercise how confident are you about these results? Two reasons for the
internal consistency of the barometers are because Grt-Pl-Hbl-Qtz was crosscalibrated against calibrations 1-5 and 8, and because calibrations 4-7 all use the same
garnet activity model. It is worth noting that the GRIPS reaction is insensitive to the
choice of garnet solution model because of the components involved in the reaction
(almandine and grossular). Can you see why the presence or absence of an
aluminosilicate in granulite grade rocks is so important for thermobarometric studies?
Exercise 3: Calculation of P-T paths from thermobarometry on inclusion
suites
For this exercise, we will reconstruct one of the P-T paths of St. Onge (1987,
Jour. Petrology, v. 28, pp1-22). The samples examined in that study consisted of garnet
+ biotite + quartz + plagioclase + Al2SiO5 assemblages in which the garnets contained
numerous inclusions of biotite and plagioclase. If it is assumed that the included biotite
and plagioclase and host garnet have not changed composition since garnet growth, and it
is further assumed that these compositions reflect equilibrium at the time of inclusion,
then thermobarometry may be applied to the inclusions to obtain a P-T path during garnet
growth.
(1) Start program Thermobarometry. Open the 1-line, tab-delimited ASCII data
file named STONGE3.tab. This file contains analyses for garnet, biotite and
plagioclase for sample #3 of St. Onge (1987). The mineral analysis numbers in this file
are:
Spear and Kohn

Garnet
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Garnet
Garnet
Garnet
Garnet
Garnet
Garnet
Garnet
Garnet
Garnet
GTB program manual

Biotite
#1
#2
#3
#4
#5
#6
#7
#8
#9
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
38
Plagioclase
Biotite
Biotite
Biotite
Biotite
Biotite
Biotite
Biotite
Biotite
Biotite
#1
#2
#3
#4
#5
#6
#7
#8
#9
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
Plagioclase
Plagioclase
Plagioclase
Plagioclase
Plagioclase
Plagioclase
Plagioclase
Plagioclase
Plagioclase
#1
#2
#3
#4
#5
#6
#7
#8
#9
Each trio of analyses represents a particular radial position in the garnet. Garnet, biotite
and plagioclase #1 (analyses 1,11 and 21) are from the rim. Garnet, biotite and
plagioclase #9 (analyses 9, 19, and 29) are from the core of the garnet.
The two thermobarometers that St. Onge (1987) applied to these rocks are the
garnet-biotite thermometer and the garnet-plagioclase-kyanite-quartz barometer. In his
paper, St. Onge apparently used a calibration very similar to that given by Hodges and
Spear (1982).
(2) Choose menu option 2 and change the pressure scale to 0-10 kbar and the
temperature scale to 400-800 C. Draw axes and the Al2SiO5 triple point.
(3) Construct P-T curves for 3 of the 9 core-rim points. If you calculate the P-T
conditions for all 9 core-rim points you will find that interior points 3-8 cluster about the
same P-T conditions. Therefore we recommend that you use only the rim point (#1), an
interior point (#5) and the core point (#9).
It is an interesting exercise to use different calibrations of the thermometer and
barometer to see how this affects the P-T path that is calculated. First use the Hodges
and Spear calibration for each P and T estimate; then repeat the exercise using
different calibrations for the thermometers and barometers. It is also possible to
repeat the exercise using different equilibria as a barometer. For example, other
barometers that can be applied to this rock are garnet-plagioclase-muscovite-biotite
(reaction 2), garnet-muscovite-AlSi-quartz (reaction 4) and garnet-biotite-muscovite-AlSi
(reaction 5). However, because St.-Onge did not present muscovite analyses, you will
have to assume a pure muscovite composition (just enter a -5 for the muscovite analysis
number when prompted).
To calculate the path, go through the following steps:
(4) Choose main menu option 3.
(5) At the thermometer menu choose the garnet-biotite calibration. Select the Hodges
and Spear calibration.
(6) Plot the Keq line for garnet-biotite point 1 (i.e. garnet #1 and biotite #11).
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
39
(9) Go to the barometer menu, choose the reaction 1 (Grt-Pl-AlSi-Qtz = GASP), and
then choose the reaction with kyanite (option 3). Select the Hodges and Spear
calibration.
(10) Plot the Keq line for garnet-plagioclase point 1 (i.e. garnet #1 and plagioclase
#21).
#25).
#29).
The screen should look like this (without the circles and arrow):
The curves are all garnet-biotite thermometry and garnet-plagioclase-kyanite-quartz

barometry using the Hodges and Spear calibrations.
1+4 -- Rim thermobarometry point (point 1: Grt #1, Bt #11, Pl #21)
2+5 -- Intermediate point in the garnet (point 5: Grt #5, Bt #15, Pl#25)
3+6 -- Core thermobarometry (point 9: Grt #9, Bt #19, Pl #29)
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
40
Discussion. The P-T path determined from the core-rim points shows
decompression with heating. It is a useful exercise to redo the P-T path using different
calibrations of thermometers and barometers. If you do this you will find that the shape
of the P-T path is fairly robust, but that the absolute P-T conditions shift somewhat (as
much as several kbar and tens of degrees). For example, using the Ganguly and Saxena
calibrations of the above two reactions (Grt-Bt calibration #3 with WMn=3000 cals and
Grt-Pl-Alsi-Qtz calibration #3) the results appear as:
The curves are all garnet-biotite thermometry and garnet-plagioclase-kyanite-quartz

barometry using the Ganguly and Saxena calibrations.
17+20 -- Rim thermobarometry point (point 1: Grt #1, Bt #11, Pl #21)
18+21 -- Intermediate point in the garnet (point 5: Grt #5, Bt #15, Pl#25)
19+22 -- Core thermobarometry (point 9: Grt #9, Bt #19, Pl #29)
Note that the dramatic decrease in pressure is still evident using these calibrations, but
here there is an implied decrease in temperature during garnet growth.
Whether the P-T paths are correct is another matter and requires that the initial
assumptions are correct. Close examination of the petrology of these rocks using the
Gibbs method and diffusion calculations reveals some interesting paradoxes. (1) In the
assemblage garnet + biotite + kyanite + muscovite + plagioclase + quartz garnet does not
grow over the calculated P-T path in a closed system but should be consumed, unless the
system is open to garnet components. (2) The growth of garnet in the specified
assemblage should result in the consumption of plagioclase and the remaining plagioclase
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
41
should become more albitic. In these rocks the plagioclase becomes more anorthitic from
the core to the rim. (3) The P-T conditions are such that diffusional modification of the
garnet is a distinct possibility. Note that the garnet is not strongly zoned, suggesting
perhaps some diffusional reequilibration. On the other hand, diffusion halos around
biotite inclusions are not reported, suggesting little diffusion during cooling and perhaps
a rapid cooling rate.
It is very difficult to assess the significance of these observations. It is certainly
possible that the P-T path is correct and these observations have some simple, if
unknown, explanation. However, it is a truism that equilibrium is impossible to prove
and to compute a P-T path, one must assume a set of successive equilibrium states that
have been preserved during the entire post-garnet growth history. A process such as
diffusional homogenization does not typically leave tell-tale tracks and it is impossible to
evaluate the magnitude of reequilibration due to diffusion without a degree of circularity.
For example, the argument "the P-T conditions are sufficiently low so that diffusion is
not likely to have been a major factor" is clearly circular because if diffusion has
occurred, then the P-T conditions are erroneous and cannot be used as a constraint. We
feel that the best approach is to see if all of the petrologic observations can be fit into a
coherent picture using all available phase equilibria and kinetic arguments.
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
42
Table listing thermometer and barometer calibrations in program

Thermobarometry
Geothermometer calibrations
(1) Garnet-biotite Fe-Mg exchange
3 = Ganguly and Saxena 1 (1984; symmetric Garnet solution model)
4 = Ganguly and Saxena 2 (1984; asymmetric Garnet solution model)
5 = Perchuk and Lavrent'eva (1984)
6 = Indares and Martignole (1985)
7 = Ferry and Spear w/ Berman (1990) Garnet solution model
8 = Patino Douce et al. (1993)
9 = Holdaway et al. (1997)
10 = Gessmann et al. (1997)
11 = Kleemann and Reinhardt (1994)
(2) Garnet-chlorite Fe-Mg exchange
1 = Dickenson + Hewitt (1986) Modified in
2 = Dickenson + Hewitt (1986) as in Laird
Laird (1988)
(1988) w/Hodges + Spear (1982) Grt
(1988) w/Ganguly + Saxena (1984) Grt
(1988) w/Berman (1990) Grt
(3) Garnet-hornblende Fe-Mg exchange

1 = Graham and Powell (1984)
2 = Perchuk et al. (1985)
(4) Garnet-Clinopyroxene Fe-Mg exchange
1 = Ellis and Green (1979)
2 = Powell (1985)
3 = Pattison and Newton (1989) (XGrs>0.15)
(5) Garnet-phengite Fe-Mg exchange
1 = Krogh and Raheim (1978)
2 = Green and Hellman (1982)
3 = Hynes and Forest (1988)
(6) Garnet-ilmenite Fe-Mn exchange
1 = Pownceby et al. (1987)
2 = Pownceby et al. (1987) w/ Ganguly + Saxena (1984) Garnet
(7) Garnet-tourmaline Fe-Mg exchange
1 = Kohn: Colopietro + Friberg (1987) and Ferry + Spear (1978) garnet
2 = Kohn with Hodges and Spear (1982) garnet activity model
3 = Kohn with Ganguly and Saxena (1984) garnet activity model
(8) Biotite-tourmaline Fe-Mg exchange
1 = Colopietro and Friberg (1987)
2 = Colopietro and Friberg (1987) + Delta V of reaction
(9) Garnet-orthopyroxene Fe-Mg exchange
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
1 = Sen and Bhattacharya (1984)

2 = Harley (1985)
3 = Lee and Ganguly (1988) Eq'n 11.2 (w/Cp)
(10) Garnet-olivine Fe-Mg exchange
1 = O'Neil and Wood (1979)
(11) Garnet-cordierite Fe-Mg exchange
1 = Nochols, Berry and Green (1992)
(12) Hornblende - plagioclase
1 = Holland and Blundy (1994)
Geobarometer calibrations
(1) Garnet-plagioclase-Al2SiO5 (kyanite,sillimanite or andalusite)-quartz
1 = Newton and Haselton (1981)
3 = Ganguly and Saxena (1984)
5 = Koziol (1989)
(2) Garnet-plagioclase-muscovite-biotite
1 = Ghent + Stout (1981) - Fe end member
2 = Ghent + Stout (1981) - Mg end member
3 = Hodges + Crowley (1985)
4 = Powell + Holland (1988) w/Hodges + Spear (1982) garnet
5 = Powell + Holland (1988) w/Ganguly + Saxena (1984) garnet
6 = Hoisch (1990) - Fe end member (R6)
7 = Hoisch (1990) - Mg end member (R5)
(3) Garnet-plagioclase-muscovite-quartz
1 = Hodges and Crowley (1985) (Fe)
2 = Hoisch (1990) Mg end member (R3)
(4) Garnet-muscovite-Al2SiO5 (sillimanite or kyanite)-quartz
(5) Garnet-muscovite-biotite-Al2SiO5 (kyanite or sillimanite)-quartz
2 = Holdaway et al. (1988)
(6) Garnet-plagioclase-clinopyroxene-quartz
1 = Newton and Perkins (1982)
2 = Powell and Holland (1988)
3 = Moecher et al. (1988)
(7) Garnet-plagioclase-orthopyroxene-quartz
1 = Newton and Perkins (1982)
(Mg)
2 = Bohlen et al. (1983)
(Fe)
3 = Perkins and Chipera (1985)
(Mg+Fe)
4 = Powell and Holland (1987)
(Mg)
5 = Moecher et al. (1988)
(Fe)
43
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
(8) Albite-jadeite-quartz
1 = Holland (1980)
2 = Gasparik and Lindsley (1980)
(9) Garnet-orthopyroxene
1 = Harley and Green (1982)
2 = Harley (1984)
(10)
1 =
2 =
3 =
4 =
5 =
6 =
Garnet-plagioclase-hornblende-quartz
Kohn + Spear (1989) (Pargarsite-Fe Model I)
Kohn + Spear (1989) (Pargarsite-Mg Model I)
Kohn + Spear (1989) (Pargarsite-Fe Model II)
Kohn + Spear (1989) (Pargarsite-Mg Model II)
Kohn + Spear (1990) (Tschermakite-Fe Model)
Kohn + Spear (1990) (Tschermakite-Mg Model)
(11) Garnet-plagioclase-biotite-quartz
1 = Hoisch (1990) Mg end member (R1)
2 = Hoisch (1990) Fe end member (R2)
(12) GRIPS
1 = Bohlen and Liotta (1986)
2 = Bohlen and Liotta with CaMg Grt interaction only
(13) GRAIL
1 = Bohlen et al. (1983)
2 = Bohlen et al. with CaMg Grt interaction only
(14) GRAIP
1 = Sum of Bohlen's work on GRIPS + GRAIL
(15) Garnet-cordierite-sillimanite-quartz
1 = Nichols, Berry and Green (1992) - Fe endmember
2 = Nichols, Berry and Green (1992) - Mg endmember
44
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
45
REFERENCES
Berman, R.G. (1990) Mixing properties of Ca-Mg-Fe-Mn garnets. American
Mineralogist, 75, 328-344.
Bohlen, S. R and Liotta, J. J. (1986) A barometer for garnet amphibolites and garnet
granulites. Journal of Petrology, v. 27, pp. 1025-1034.
Bohlen, S. R., Wall, V. J. and Boettcher, A. L. (1983a) Experimental investigation and
application of garnet granulite equilibria. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology,
v. 83, pp. 52-61.
Bohlen, S. R., Wall, V. J. and Boettcher, A. L. (1983b) Experimental investigations and
geological applications of equilibria in the system FeO-TiO2-Al2O3-SiO2-H2O.
American Mineralogist, v. 68, pp. 1049-1058.
Colopietro, M. R. and Friberg, L. M. (1987) Tourmaline-biotite as a potential
geothermometer for metapelites, Black Hills, South Dakota. Geological Society of
America Abstracts with Programs, v. 19, p. 624.
Coolen, J. J. M. M. M. (1980) Chemical petrology of the Furua granulite complex,
southern Tanzania. GUA Papers of Geology, Series 1, No. 13. 257 pages,
Amsterdam. (Available from SUNY Stonybrook or UC Davis through interlibrary
loan).
Dickenson, M. P. and Hewitt, D. (1986) A garnet-chlorite geothermometer. Geological
Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 18, p. 584.
Eckert, J.O.J., Newton, R.C., and Kleppa, O.J. (1991) The H of reaction and
recalibration of garnet-pyroxene-plagioclase-quartz geobarometers in the CMAS
system by solution calorimetry. American Mineralogist, 76, 148-160.
Ellis, D. J., and Green, E. H. (1979) An experimental study of the effect of Ca upon
garnet-clinopyroxene Fe - Mg exchange equilibria. Contributions to Mineralogy and
Petrology, v. 71, pp. 13-22.
Ferry, J. M. and Spear, F. S. (1978) Experimental calibration of the partitioning of Fe and
Mg between biotite and garnet. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology, v. 66, pp.
113-117.
Ganguly, J. and Saxena, S. K. (1984) Mixing properties of aluminosilicate garnets:
constraints from natural and experimental data, and applications to geothermobarometry. American Mineralogist, v. 69, pp. 88-97.
Ghent, E. D. (1976) Plagioclase-garnet-Al2O5 quartz: a potential geobarometergeothermometer. American Mineralogist, v. 61, pp. 710-714.
Ghent, E. D., Robbins, D. B., and Stout, M. Z. (1979) Geothermometry, geobarometry
and fluid compositions of metamorphosed calc-silicates and pelites, Mica Creek,
British Columbia. American Mineralogist, v. 64, pp. 874-885.
Ghent, E. D. and Stout, M. Z. (1981) Geobarometry and geothermometry of plagioclasebiotite-garnet-muscovite assemblages. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology, v.
76, pp. 92-97.
Graham, C. M., and Powell, R. (1984) A garnet-hornblende geothermometer: calibration,
testing, and application to the Pelona Schist, Southern California. Journal of
Metamorphic Geology, v. 2, pp. 13-21
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
46
Green, T. H. and Hellman, P. L. (1982) Fe-Mg partitioning between coexisting garnet

and phengite at high pressure, and comments on a garnet-phengite geothermometer.
Lithos, v. 15, pp. 253-266.
Harley, S. L. (1984) An experimental study of the partitioning of Fe and Mg between
garnet and orthopyroxene. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology, 86, 359-373.
Harley, S. L., and Green, D. H. (1982) Garnet-orthopyroxene barometry for granulites
and peridotites. Nature, v. 300, pp. 697-701.
Hodges, K. V. and Crowley, P. D. (1985) Error estimation and empirical
geothermobarometry for pelitic systems. American Mineralogist, v. 70, pp. 702-709.
Hodges, K. V. and Spear, F. S. (1982) Geothermometry, geobarometry and the Al2SiO5
triple point at Mt. Moosilauke, New Hampshire. American Mineralogist, v. 67, pp.
1118-1134.
Hoisch, T. D. (1990) Empirical calibration of six geobarometers for the mineral
assemblage quartz + muscovite + biotite + plagioclase + garnet. Contributions to
Mineralogy and Petrology, 104, 225-234
Holdaway, M. J. (1971) Stability of andalusite and the aluminum silicate phase diagram:
American Journal of Science, V. 271, pp. 97-131.
Holdaway, M. J., Dutrow, B. L., and Hinton, R. W. (1988) Devonian and Carboniferous
metamorphism in west-central Maine: The muscovite-almandine geobarometer and
the staurolite problem revisited. American Mineralogist, v. 73, pp. 20-47.
Holland, T. J. B. (1980) The reaction albite = jadeite + quartz determined experimentally
in the range 600-1200 oC. American Mineralogist, v. 65, pp. 129-134.
Hynes, A. and Forest, R. C. (1988) Empirical garnet-muscovite geothermometry in lowgrade metapelites, Selwyn Range (Canadian Rockies). Journal of Metamorphic
Geology, v. 6, pp 297-309.
Indares, A. and Martignole, J. (1985) Biotite-garnet geothermometry in the granulite
facies: the influence of Ti and Al in biotite. American Mineralogist, v. 70, pp. 272278.
Kleeman, U., and Reinhardt, J. (1994) Garnet-biotite thermometry revisited: The effect of
AlVI and Ti in biotite. European Journal of Mineralogy, 6, 925-941.
Kohn, M. J., and Spear, F. S. (1989) Empirical calibration of geobarometers for the
assemblage garnet - hornblende - plagioclase - quartz. American Mineralogist, 74, 7784.
Kohn, M. J., and Spear, F. S. (1990) Two new barometers for garnet amphibolites with
applications to eastern Vermont. American Mineralogist, 75, 89-96.
Koziol, A. M. (1989) Recalibration of the garnet - plagioclase - Al2SiO5 - quartz (GASP)
geobarometer and applications to natural parageneses. EOS, 70, 493.
Koziol, A. M. and Newton, R. C. (1988) Redetermination of the anorthite breakdown
reaction and improvement of the plagioclase - garnet - Al2SiO5 - quartz barometer.
American Mineralogist, 73, 216-223.
Krogh, E. J. and Raheim, A. (1978) Temperature and pressure dependence of Fe-Mg
partitioning between garnet and phengite, with particular reference to eclogites.
Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology, v. 66, pp. 75-80.
Laird, J. (1989) Chlorites: Metamorphic petrology. In Hydrous phyllosilicates (exclusive
of micas), MSA reviews in mineralogy, 19, 405-453.
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
47
Moecher D. P., Essene, E. J., and Anovitz, L. M. (1988) Calculation and application of
clinopyroxene - garnet - plagioclase - quartz geobarometers. Contributions to
Mineralogy and Petrology, 100, 92-106.
Newton, R. C. and Haselton, H. T. (1981) Thermodynamics of the garnet- plagioclaseAl2SiO5-quartz geobarometer. In R. C. Newton, et al. Eds., Thermodynamics of
Minerals and Melts, pp. 131-147, Springer-Verlag, New York.
Newton, R. C. and Perkins, D. III (1982) Thermodynamic calibration of geobarometers
based on the assemblages garnet - plagioclase - orthopyroxene (clinopyroxene) quartz. American Mineralogist, v. 67, pp. 203-222.
Nichols, G.I., Berry, R.F., and Green, D.H. (1992) Internally consistent gahnitic spinelcordierite-garnet equilibria in the FMASHZn system: geothermobarometry and
applications. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology, 111, 362-377.
O'Neill, H. St. C. (1980) An experimental study of Fe - Mg partitioning between garnet
and olivine and its calibration as a geothermometer: corrections. Contributions to
Mineralogy and Petrology, 72, 337.
O'Neill, H. St. C., and Wood, B. J. (1979) An experimental study of Fe-Mg partitioning
between garnet and olivine and its calibration as a geothermometer. Contributions to
Mineralogy and Petrology, v. 70, pp. 59-70.
Patio Douce, A.E., Johnston, A.D., and Rice, J.M. (1993) Octahedral excess mixing
properties in biotite: A working model with applications to geobarometry and
geothermometry. American Mineralogist, 78, 113-131.
Perchuk, L. L. and Lavrent'eva, I. V. (1981) Experimental investigation of exchange
equilibria in the system cordierite-garnet-biotite. In Saxena, S. K., ed. Kinetics and
Equilibrium in Mineral Reactions. Springer Verlag, pp. 199-240.
Perchuk, L. L., Aranovich, L. Y., Podlesskii, K. K., Lavrant'eva, I. V., Gerasimov, V. Y.,
Fed'Kin, V. V., Kitsul, V. I., Karasakov, L. P., and Berdnikov, N. V. (1985)
Precambrian granulites of the Aldan shield, eastern Siberia, USSR. Journal of
Metamorphic Geology, v. 3, pp. 265-310.
Perkins D. III and Chipera S. J. (1985) Garnet - orthopyroxene - plagioclase - quartz
barometry: refinement and application to the English River subprovince and the
Minnesota River valley. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology, 89, 69-80.
Perkins D. III and Newton R. C. (1981) Charnockite geobarometers based on coexisting
garnet - plagioclase - pyroxene - quartz. Nature, 292, 144-146.
Powell, R. (1985) Regression diagnostics and robust regression in
geothermometer/geobarometer calibration: the garnet-clinopyroxene geothermometer
revisited. Journal of Metamorphic Geology, v. 3, pp 231-243.
Powell, R. and Holland, T. J. B. (1988) An internally consistent thermodynamic dataset
with uncertainties and correlations: 3. Applications to geobarometry, worked
examples and a computer program. Journal of Metamorphic Geology, v. 6, pp. 173204.
Pownceby, M. I., Wall, V. J., and O'Neill, H. St. C., (1987) Fe-Mn partitioning between
garnet and ilmenite: experimental calibration and applications. Contributions to
Mineralogy and Petrology, v. 97, pp. 116-126.
Sen, S. K., and Bhattacharya, A. (1984) An orthopyroxene-garnet thermometer and its
application to the Madras charnockites. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology,
v. 88, pp. 64-71.
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
48
Spear and Kohn
GTB program manual
49
Appendix 1: Notes on PostScript graphics files

A note about PostScript files:
PostScript files are ASCII and can be examined and edited using any text editor or
word processor. Occasionally, errors are encountered in PostScript files so that the
Adobe Illustrator will not open them. Illustrator v 3.0 is nice because it gives you the
offending command and the context so that you can edit the mistake out of your
PostScript file. Illustrator v 5.0 is even better because it will go ahead and open the file
up to the point where the error is encountered.
I have found that the most common error occurs because the "end of a line"
command (which is a small "s") is incorrectly placed. Here is a bit of PostScript code
that generates a line. If you find an error, you can try to edit the file so it looks more like
this one. If that still doesn't work, please let me know and I'll try to fix the bug.
Sample PostScript output to draw a few lines.
Note that there should be only one m (move) command before the l (line) command and
that each group must be ended by one and only one "s" command.
.
.
337.5054
165.5054
302.5054
472.5054
337.5054
s
165.5054
472.5054
s
.
470.0207
606.0207
737.0207
622.0207
470.0207
m
l
l
l
l
(moves to a point)
(draws a line to next point)
(signals the end of the line)
(moves to a new point)
(draws a line to the next point)
(end of the line)
606.0207 m
622.0207 l
A note to users of CANVAS

Our programs do not support output files that can be drafted in Canvas, but I have
been told that it is possible to open Adobe Illustrator files in Canvas. If this is true (I
have never tried it) then it should be possible to create a PostScript file, open it in
Illustrator, save it (the Illustrator program adds a lot of additional information that we do
not put in the file) and open the saved file in Canvas. Good luck.
49

GTB program manual: Thermobarometry calculations

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

GTB program manual: Thermobarometry calculations

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Spear and Kohn