45 The Appalachians, from North to South, from Crust to Mantle (Posters)
Saturday, 21 March 2020
1:30 PM - 5:30 PM
Grand Ballroom A–D
USING GEOPHYSICAL METHODS TO DELINEATE LITHOLOGIC BOUNDARIES IN THE PENNSYLVANIA PIEDMONT
Paper number: 45-1
Program: Symposia Sessions
Time: 1:30 PM – 5:30 PM
Authors
-
Susan MaUniversity of Pittsburgh-Johnstown, Johnstown, PA
-
Ryan J. KerriganUniversity of Pittsburgh at Johnstown, Johnstown, PA
-
Neil ColemanUniversity of Pittsburgh at Johnstown, Johnstown, PA
Abstract
Eleven surveys were conducted at three separate sites using geophysical methods to perform both magnetic (Magnetometer) and induced conductivity (EM-31) surveys. The EM-31 was used in both horizontal and vertical dipole modes to obtain shallow (~3m) and deep (~6m) conductivity data respectively. Total magnetic data was obtained with a GeometricsⓇ proton precession magnetometer and drift corrections were provided. The lithologies present within the study sites were ultramafic, granodiorite, amphibolite, schist, and reaction rocks (ultramafic lithologies siliceously altered through contact metamorphism). The data obtained from surveys were consistent with values reviewed in literature and based on outcrops examined at the study sites was also consistent with expected lithologies. Conductance was observed to be highest in the amphibolite lithologies (3.70 mS/m) and lowest in the Wissahickon Schist (0.9 mS/m). Magnetic susceptibility was highest in the ultramafic bodies (~51767.1 nT) and again lowest in the Wissahickon Schist (~51262.9 nT). Most lithologies exhibited consistent signals with low variance (≥ 0.1%) from the mean; however, ultramafic rocks displayed variance up to 1% from the mean. Transition zones of high slope bridge regions of flat, consistent data signal. Transition zones were sharpest (~4m) where little contact metamorphism was observed. When evidence of contact metamorphism was present, wide transition zones (~30m) were observed. The information collected can be used to help locate concealed contacts, better define boundaries between lithologic zones, and form conclusions about the way these rock types interact with one another.
Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs. Vol. 52, No. 2
doi: 10.1130/abs/2020SE-345387
© Copyright 2020 The Geological Society of America (GSA), all rights reserved. Permission is hereby granted to the author(s) of this abstract to reproduce and distribute it freely, for noncommercial purposes. Permission is hereby granted to any individual scientist to download a single copy of this electronic file and reproduce up to 20 paper copies for noncommercial purposes advancing science and education, including classroom use, providing all reproductions include the complete content shown here, including the author information. All other forms of reproduction and/or transmittal are prohibited without written permission from GSA Copyright Permissions.