400 composites. On the contrary, GMBM as proposed in this work, is very similar to Geological Resource Modelling. The difference being that, in addition to traditional variables like coordinates, assays, lithology and alterations, "critical" geometallurgical variables, like clays, acid consumers, cyanide consumers, minerals that contain penalizable elements, etc. should be also considered. There are two general ways to implement a Geo-Metallurgical Block Model (GMBM): (1) Based on the systematic geometallurgical logging of Mineralogical-Textural Assemblages (MTAs) and Geological Fragmentation Units (GFUs) and (2) Based on systematic quantitative analyses of critical variables. 5.1. GMBM from MTAs and GFUs Figure 4 outlines the general procedure for implementing a Geometallurgical Block Model, based on systematic logging of geometallurgical units called Mineralogical-Textural Assemblies (MTAs). The scheme corresponds to the modeling applied at the Pucamarca Mine in Tacna, Peru (Canchaya et al. 2019). The procedure has three phases. Phase 1 has three stages: in Stage 1 all historical data is used to perform the probabilistic characterization (statistical and geostatistical); as well as the geochemical characterization, which basically consists of obtaining the corresponding dendrogram, from a multi-element Cluster Analysis. Stage 2 consists of geometallurgical characterization (chemical, mineralogical, textural Figure 4 - Flowchart for the implementation of Mineralogical-Textural Assemblages (MTAs) from which, through the geometallurgical logging of diamond cores, the Geometallurgical Block Model (MGMB) is implemented. The chart corresponds to Pucamarca Au high sulfidation epithermal deposit (Tacna, Peru).
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM0Mzk2