Linear programming and the Simplex Method

A method of calculating the modal mineralogy from chemical analyses suggested by Berry et al. (2011) was
linear programming using the Simplex method (Press et al., 1986). For the results reported here, the
calculations were carried out using the linear routine in “Solver” with EXCEL®. It can calculate mineral modes
from an extended mineral list and additional linear constraints can be added as required.

Different mineral assemblages can be formed from the same bulk rock composition depending on the P,T
conditions, so the results are non-unique. Extra constraints in the form of QXRD or QEMSCAN are needed.

To get around the non-uniqueness, in his latest version of the Linear Programming method, Ron Berry has
included a Gibbs Free Energy function; select the estimated temperature conditions, look up a table of Gibbs
Free Energy for the mineral species involved in the calculations at those temperatures, and the program
estimates the mineralogy in such a way to minimise Gibbs Free Energy.

Poor solutions can arise with overprinting, eg supergene mineralogy superimposed on high Temperature
hydrothermal assemblages.
Input
The input for the Linear programming looks like this; all of the major elements plus significant trace elements
expressed as % values. Rest = 100-(sum of everything else)
Set-up
The set-up for the Linear programming looks like this; feldspars were calculated as percentages of the K, Na
and Ca endmembers. Similarly Fe and Mg end-memebers were calculated for chlorite and biotite, then
summed to give total chlorite and total biotite. Stoichiometric hornblende was included as the amphibole
phase. Everything else was included as “Other”.
Results
Estimated weight percent of minerals are calculated for each of the specified suite of minerals.
 K feldspar
Results can be checked by plotting calculated weight percent of minerals on standard mineralogy plots.

K/Al vs Na/Al molar ratio plot Al-K-Mg ternary plot

 Albite

K/Al vs Na/Al molar ratio plot Al-K-Mg ternary plot

 White Mica

K/Al vs Na/Al molar ratio plot Al-K-Mg ternary plot

 Chlorite

K/Al vs Na/Al molar ratio plot Al-K-Mg ternary plot

 Biotite

K/Al vs Na/Al molar ratio plot Al-K-Mg ternary plot

Quantitative Calculated Mineralogy; Conclusions
Four acid ICP-AES data can be recalculated as weight percent of minerals.
The mineralogy can then be plotted in the same way as assay variables.
This is a very effect way of making robust 3D alteration models of mineral deposits.