X-Ray Diffraction Patterns for QuantitativeAnalysis of Coastal Sediments in BetweenMandapam And Vembar, Gulf of Mannar Coast, South India

Download Full-Text PDF Cite this Publication

Text Only Version

X-Ray Diffraction Patterns for QuantitativeAnalysis of Coastal Sediments in BetweenMandapam And Vembar, Gulf of Mannar Coast, South India

  1. R. Karikalan1, S. Bangaru Priyanga1, S. Rakkiannan2,

    1Department of Geology, Alagappa University, Karaikudi-630003, Tamilnadu, India.

    2Department of Geology, Periyar University, Salem-636011, Tamilnadu, India.

    Abstract- Quantitative analysis was carried out to determine the major and minor constituent minerals present in sediment samples collected at the coastal region between in Mandapam and Vembar, Gulf of Mannar coast, South India by XRD technique. The grain-size distributions of sediments are studied in the study of grain size in relation to mechanism of sediments deposition. The composition of the coastal sediment is dominated by medium to fine sand. The distribution pattern and textural parameters of sediments vary regionally in the Ramanathapuram coastal sediment distribution. Based on the texture of sediments it can be said that the beach consists of medium to fine sand was domains. Sedimentological studies reveal that depositional patterns in the beach are mostly controlled by fluvial and marine processes. The deposition of medium to fine sands in the extreme in our study area attributed to the discharge Vembar and Gundar Rivers. Further, the representative sediment samples were analyzed by XRD technique to yield more information about the minerals. X-ray diffraction methods were non-destructive and can be used in the identification of mineralogical composition. These results confirmed that the applied techniques are relatively quicker and more reliable in mineral analysis. The X-Ray diffraction sediments sample analysis proved that the minerals of calcite, quartz, orthoclase, microcline, biotite, hypersthene, hornblende, albite, anorthite sepiolite, illite, chlorite, halloysite Montmorillonite, halite and heavy mineral garnet, zircon, sillimanite, topaz, cobaltite, kyanite, magnetite, hornblende and ilmenite. The followed by minerals are derived from Recent Alluvium and Southern Granulite Terrain in India.

    Keywords Coastal sediments- XRD- Mandapam and Vember- Tamilnadu.

    and their provenance. The grain-size distributions of sediments are studied in the study of grain size in relation to mechanism of sediments deposition. The composition of the coastal sediment is dominated by coarse and medium sand. It is occur in group with the coarse sand and exhibit different shapes and varying roundness. The variation in shape and roundness of pebbles could be attributed to lithological variation but not to the competence and distance of transportation. The distribution pattern and textural parameters of sediments vary regionally in the Ramanathapuram Coastal sediment distribution (Karikalan et al., 2020 a, b, c; Karikalan, 2002, 2013; Kongeswaran and Karikalan, 2015). Based on the texture of sediments it can be said that the beach consists of coarse and medium sand was domains. The deposition of coarse and medium sands in the extreme in our study area attributed to the discharge Vembar and Gundar Rivers. The X-Ray diffraction sediments sample analysis proved that the minerals of calcite, quartz, orthoclase, microcline, biotite, hypersthene, hornblende, albite, anorthite sepiolite, illite, chlorite, halloysite Montmorillonite, halite and heavy mineral garnet, zircon, sillimanite, topaz, cobaltite, kyanite, magnetite, hornblende and ilmenite. The followed by minerals are derived from Recent Alluvium and Southern Granulite Terrain.

    2. STUDY AREA

    1. INTRODUCTION

Over the past century, X-ray diffraction (XRD) has gradually become one of the most important analytical approaches used in the qualitative and quantitative study of geological samples (Clark and Reynolds, 1936; Nagelschmidt, 1938; Taylor, 1978; Bish, 1994; Srodon, 2002; Chipera and Bish, 2013). XRD analysis is believed to be the most suitable method for routine quantitative analysis compared to any other single technique, such as Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), chemical analysis and electron microscopy (Bish and Post, 1993; Mumme et al., 1996). The study has been carried out from Mandapam to Vembar (latitudes 9°04' to 9° 16' N and longitudes 78°21 to 79°11' E) in the southern coastal tract of Tamilnadu. It is aimed to unearth the coastal sediments, nature of minerals

Figure 1. Location map of the study area.

In the southern coastal tract of Tamilnadu covering about 360km the study area has covered from Mandapam to

Vembar (latitudes 9°04' to 9° 16' N and longitudes 78°21 to 79°11' E), has been undertaken for this study. It has covered the districts of Ramanathapuram and Tuticorin coastal area of 101 km. The area falls in the Survey of India, Toposheet number 58K/16 and 58O. It is bounded in the North Eastern side by foot shaped Rameshwaram Island, in the East by the Bay of Bengal, in the west by Western Ghats and in the south by Kanyakumari which is being the southernmost tip of India. The location map of the study area is shown in Fig. 1.

  1. MATERIALS AND METHODS

    The selected representative of 10 beach sediment samples from the study area was subjected to X-Ray diffraction analysis through XRD instrument X PertPro installed in the laboratory of the department of physics, Alagappa University, Karaikudi. The powdered beach sediment samples were directly analysed for general mineralogical studies by setting 2 position values from 0- 80º in the XRD instrument. The XRD patterns or X-Ray diffraction of the mineral were identified through respective D spacing values and their intensity (Sachinath Mitra 1989) and also from other published literatures. The D spacing values, 2 theta values, relative intensity and name of the minerals are given in the table.

  2. RESULT AND DISCUSSION

    4.1. X Ray Diffraction Analysis

    Over the past century, X-ray diffraction (XRD) has gradually become one of the most important analytical approaches used in the qualitative and quantitative study of geological samples (Srodon, 2002; Chipera and Bish, 2013). Many important theoretical works have been published for the application of qualitative and quantitative work (Chipera and Bish, 2013 and Perumal Velmayil, 2017). XRD analysis is believed to be the most suitable method for routine quantitative analysis compared to any other single technique, such as Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), chemical analysis and electron microscopy (Bish and Post, 1993). This chapter discussed the mineral identification through the X-ray diffraction analysis. The X Ray Diffraction analysis is based on Braggs law. Tamilnadu coast is the second largest coastal region in India after Gujarat coast. The present study area covers a total length of about 100 km covering coastal districts of Ramanathapuram and Tuticorin. The selected representative of 10 beach sediment samples from the study area was subjected to X-Ray diffraction analysis through XRD instrument X PertPro installed in the laboratory of department of physics, Alagappa University, Karaikudi. The powdered beach sediment samples were directly analysed for general mineralogical studies by setting 2 position values from 0-80º in the XRD instrument. The mineralogy of the collected ten samples of beach sediments (Table 1- 8) of the coastal area was determined through X ray diffraction analysis. The sample is powdered, mounted on a glass slide and then bombarded with X-rays. Planes of atoms in the crystal structure diffract the X rays and a pattern is produced on a paper chart. When a powdered sample is analyzed, diffractin occurs for each angle of incidence that satisfies the Bragg equation-ray diffraction produces a unique series of reflections on the strip chart, which is known as

    diffractogram. In X-ray diffraction minerals are identified throughd spacing values and their respective intensities (Table 1 to 10). The X-ray diffraction patterns of the beach sediment are shown in Fig. 1 to 10. The x ray diffractogram are identified with the help of the book (sachinath Mitra) and other published literatures. The D spacing values, 2 theta values and name of the minerals are given in the table. The diffraction patterns of the minerals are given in figure.

    SB 1

    S.No

    Pos. [°2Th.]

    d-spacing [Ã…]

    Minerals

    1

    20.6817

    4.290

    Quartz

    2

    23.4062

    3.800

    Carnalite

    3

    26.4737

    3.366

    Quartz

    4

    27.3928

    3.256

    Leucite

    5

    27.8564

    3.203

    Reinerite

    6

    30.827

    2.901

    Epidote

    7

    32.3913

    2.764

    Ilmenite

    8

    34.6236

    2.591

    Sphene

    9

    36.3837

    2.469

    Quartz

    10

    40.1525

    2.246

    Stishovite

    11

    42.2438

    2.139

    Monazite

    12

    45.653

    1.987

    Quartz

    13

    48.6108

    1.873

    Calcite

    14

    53.0672

    1.726

    Ilmenite

    15

    54.9387

    1.672

    Biotite

    16

    59.7926

    1.547

    Quartz

    Table 1. X-Ray Diffraction values in Vembar Beach sediment

    Counts

    800 SB-1

    600

    400

    200

    0

    20 30 40 50 60 70 80

    Position [°2Theta] (Copper (Cu))

    Figure 1. XRD pattern in the Vembar Beach sediment Beach sediment

    SB2

    S.No

    Pos. [°2Th.]

    d-spacing [Ã…]

    Minerals

    1

    20.6014

    4.311

    Riebeckite

    2

    26.3843

    3.378

    Kaolinite

    3

    26.8655

    3.318

    Quartz

    4

    27.3054

    3.266

    Terlinguaite

    5

    27.7805

    3.211

    Bismuth-sulphur

    6

    29.6307

    3.013

    Labradorite

    7

    30.1696

    2.963

    Wollastonite

    8

    36.3341

    2.472

    Enstatite

    9

    45.5776

    1.990

    Halite

    10

    49.9371

    1.826

    Azurite

    11

    59.694

    1.549

    Quartz

    12

    68.071

    1.378

    Hubnerite

    13

    75.4262

    1.259

    Halite

    Table 2. X-Ray Diffraction values in Vembar River North- Beach sediment

    Counts

    SB-2

    Counts

    2000 SB-4

    1000

    500

    1000

    0

    20 30 40 50 60 70 80

    Position [°2Theta] (Copper (Cu))

    SB3

    S.No

    Pos. [°2Th.]

    d-spacing [Ã…]

    Minerals

    1

    20.6766

    4.296

    Sepiolite

    2

    24.1604

    3.680

    Sodalite

    3

    26.47

    3.367

    Muscovite

    4

    27.3703

    3.258

    Crocoite

    5

    29.6392

    3.013

    Quartz

    6

    36.384

    2.469

    Calciotale

    7

    39.3019

    2.292

    Cobaltite

    8

    45.64

    1.987

    Wavellite

    9

    50.0014

    1.825

    Azurite

    10

    59.765

    1.547

    Quartz

    11

    67.9817

    1.379

    Hubnerite

    SB3

    S.No

    Pos. [°2Th.]

    d-spacing [Ã…]

    Minerals

    1

    20.6766

    4.296

    Sepiolite

    2

    24.1604

    3.680

    Sodalite

    3

    26.47

    3.367

    Muscovite

    4

    27.3703

    3.258

    Crocoite

    5

    29.6392

    3.013

    Quartz

    6

    36.384

    2.469

    Calciotale

    7

    39.3019

    2.292

    Cobaltite

    8

    45.64

    1.987

    Wavellite

    9

    50.0014

    1.825

    Azurite

    10

    59.765

    1.547

    Quartz

    11

    67.9817

    1.379

    Hubnerite

    Figure 2.XRD pattern in the Vembar River North – Beach sediment

    0

    20 30 40 50 60 70 80

    Position [°2Theta] (Copper (Cu))

    Figure 4. XRD pattern in the Mukaiyur Beach sediment

    Table 3. X-Ray Diffraction values in Narippaiyur Beach sediment

    Counts

    SB-3

    SB 5

    S.No

    Pos. [°2Th.]

    d-spacing [Ã…]

    Minerals

    1

    20.6499

    4.301

    Clinoclase

    2

    26.4536

    3.370

    Quartz

    3

    26.8348

    3.322

    Sillimanite

    4

    27.3755

    3.258

    Crocoite

    5

    27.8106

    3.200

    Topaz

    6

    39.2841

    2.290

    Cobaltite

    7

    49.9933

    1.825

    Azurite

    8

    59.733

    1.548

    Lepidomelane

    9

    67.9573

    1.378

    Hubnerite

    SB 5

    S.No

    Pos. [°2Th.]

    d-spacing [Ã…]

    Minerals

    1

    20.6499

    4.301

    Clinoclase

    2

    26.4536

    3.370

    Quartz

    3

    26.8348

    3.322

    Sillimanite

    4

    27.3755

    3.258

    Crocoite

    5

    27.8106

    3.200

    Topaz

    6

    39.2841

    2.290

    Cobaltite

    7

    49.9933

    1.825

    Azurite

    8

    59.733

    1.548

    Lepidomelane

    9

    67.9573

    1.378

    Hubnerite

    Table 5. X-Ray Diffraction values in Oppilan Beach sediment

    1500

    Counts

    SB-5

    1000

    1500

    500 1000

    0

    20 30 40 50 60 70 80

    Position [°2Theta] (Copper (Cu))

    Figure 3. XRD pattern in the Narippaiyur Beach sediment

    500

    SB4

    S.No

    Pos. [°2Th.]

    d-spacing [Ã…]

    Minerals

    1

    20.6581

    4.299

    Sepiolite

    2

    23.3793

    3.805

    Carnallite

    3

    26.4469

    3.370

    Quartz

    5

    27.8232

    3.206

    Albite

    6

    28.2219

    3.142

    Kyanite

    7

    42.2798

    2.138

    Chamosite

    8

    49.9722

    1.825

    Azurite

    9

    50.5177

    1.806

    Copper

    10

    59.7494

    1.547

    Tungstenite

    11

    75.4737

    1.259

    Tenorite

    SB4

    S.No

    Pos. [°2Th.]

    d-spacing [Ã…]

    Minerals

    1

    20.6581

    4.299

    Sepiolite

    2

    23.3793

    3.805

    Carnallite

    3

    26.4469

    3.370

    Quartz

    5

    27.8232

    3.206

    Albite

    6

    28.2219

    3.142

    Kyanite

    7

    42.2798

    2.138

    Chamosite

    8

    49.9722

    1.825

    Azurite

    9

    50.5177

    1.806

    Copper

    10

    59.7494

    1.547

    Tungstenite

    11

    75.4737

    1.259

    Tenorite

    0

    20 30 40 50 60 70 80

    Position [°2Theta] (Copper (Cu))

    Figure 5. XRD pattern in the Oppilan Beach sediment

    SB 6

    S.No

    Pos. [°2Th.]

    d-spacing [Ã…]

    Minerals

    1

    20.5297

    4.320

    Metavauxite

    2

    24.0529

    3.700

    Fayalite

    3

    26.3307

    3.380

    Manganite

    4

    27.253

    3.270

    Zircon

    5

    27.6902

    3.222

    Labradorite

    6

    35.093

    2.557

    Quartz

    7

    35.8002

    2.508

    Hematite

    8

    42.1474

    2.145

    Cryptomelane

    9

    59.6608

    1.381

    Kyanite

    10

    73.2094

    1.291

    Garnet

    SB 6

    S.No

    Pos. [°2Th.]

    d-spacing [Ã…]

    Minerals

    1

    20.5297

    4.320

    Metavauxite

    2

    24.0529

    3.700

    Fayalite

    3

    26.3307

    3.380

    Manganite

    4

    27.253

    3.270

    Zircon

    5

    27.6902

    3.222

    Labradorite

    6

    35.093

    2.557

    Quartz

    7

    35.8002

    2.508

    Hematite

    8

    42.1474

    2.145

    Cryptomelane

    9

    59.6608

    1.381

    Kyanite

    10

    73.2094

    1.291

    Garnet

    Table 4. X-Ray Diffraction values in Mukaiyur Beach sediment

    Table 6. X-Ray Diffraction values in Melmunthal Beach

    Counts

    1000

    500

    0

    sediment

    SB-6

    SB-6

    20 30 40 50 60 70 80

    Position [°2Theta] (Copper (Cu))

    SB 7

    S.No

    Pos. [°2Th.]

    d-spacing [Ã…]

    Minerals

    1

    20.6646

    4.298

    Papagoite

    2

    26.4519

    3.370

    Quartz

    3

    27.3526

    3.261

    Terlinguaite

    4

    27.8445

    3.204

    Reinerite

    5

    35.1932

    2.550

    Montmorillonite

    6

    36.3524

    2.471

    Talc

    7

    42.2829

    2.138

    Chamosite

    8

    49.9871

    1.825

    Azurite

    9

    59.7615

    1.547

    Tungstenite

    10

    68.1226

    1.436

    Hornblende

    SB 7

    S.No

    Pos. [°2Th.]

    d-spacing [Ã…]

    Minerals

    1

    20.6646

    4.298

    Papagoite

    2

    26.4519

    3.370

    Quartz

    3

    27.3526

    3.261

    Terlinguaite

    4

    27.8445

    3.204

    Reinerite

    5

    35.1932

    2.550

    Montmorillonite

    6

    36.3524

    2.471

    Talc

    7

    42.2829

    2.138

    Chamosite

    8

    49.9871

    1.825

    Azurite

    9

    59.7615

    1.547

    Tungstenite

    10

    68.1226

    1.436

    Hornblende

    Figure 6. XRD pattern in the Melmunthal Beach sediment

    Counts

    2000

    1000

    0

    SB-8

    20 30 40 50 60 70 80

    Position [°2Theta] (Copper (Cu))

    Figure 8. XRD pattern in the Periyapattinam Beach sediment

    SB 9

    S.No

    Pos. [°2Th.]

    d-spacing [Ã…]

    Minerals

    1

    20.6864

    4.294

    Sepiolite

    2

    26.4871

    3.365

    Quartz

    3

    27.4297

    3.252

    Leucite

    4

    27.8491

    3.203

    Reinerite

    5

    36.4129

    2.467

    Lepidocrocite

    6

    39.3121

    2.290

    Cobaltite

    7

    50.0162

    1.823

    Quartz

    8

    59.8486

    1.545

    Azurite

    9

    67.599

    1.385

    Aegirine

    10

    68.1537

    1.362

    Rutile

    SB 9

    S.No

    Pos. [°2Th.]

    d-spacing [Ã…]

    Minerals

    1

    20.6864

    4.294

    Sepiolite

    2

    26.4871

    3.365

    Quartz

    3

    27.4297

    3.252

    Leucite

    4

    27.8491

    3.203

    Reinerite

    5

    36.4129

    2.467

    Lepidocrocite

    6

    39.3121

    2.290

    Cobaltite

    7

    50.0162

    1.823

    Quartz

    8

    59.8486

    1.545

    Azurite

    9

    67.599

    1.385

    Aegirine

    10

    68.1537

    1.362

    Rutile

    Table 7. X-Ray Diffraction values in Valinokkam Beach sediment

    SB-7

    SB-7

    Counts

    1500

    1000

    500

    Table 9. X-Ray Diffraction values in Mandapam Beach sediment

    0

    20 30 40 50 60 70 80

    Position [°2Theta] (Copper (Cu))

    Figure 7. XRD pattern in the Valinokkam Beach sediment

    Figure 9. XRD pattern in the Mandapam Beach sediment

    SB 10

    S.No

    Pos. [°2Th.]

    d-spacing [Ã…]

    Minerals

    1

    20.7364

    4.284

    Quartz

    2

    23.5254

    3.790

    Pumpellyite

    3

    25.5196

    3.490

    Anhydrite

    4

    26.5217

    3.361

    Muscovite

    5

    27.4456

    3.250

    Anorthite

    6

    27.9092

    3.197

    Anorthite

    7

    29.7337

    3.005

    Staurolite

    8

    39.3585

    2.289

    Quartz

    9

    50.0581

    1.822

    Heazlewoodite

    10

    59.8221

    1.436

    Hornblende

    11

    68.0172

    1.378

    Hubnerite

    SB 8

    S.No

    Pos. [°2Th.]

    d-spacing [Ã…]

    Minerals

    1

    20.6609

    4.299

    Papagoite

    2

    23.6608

    3.760

    Albite

    3

    26.4454

    3.370

    Quartz

    4

    27.3531

    3.260

    Terlinguaite

    5

    27.8248

    3.206

    Albite

    6

    36.358

    2.471

    Talc

    7

    39.2715

    2.294

    Cobaltite

    8

    42.2989

    2.74

    Ilmenite

    9

    49.9812

    1.825

    Azurite

    10

    59.7379

    1.548

    Lepidomelane

    11

    75.4547

    1.259

    Quartz

    SB 8

    S.No

    Pos. [°2Th.]

    d-spacing [Ã…]

    Minerals

    1

    20.6609

    4.299

    Papagoite

    2

    23.6608

    3.760

    Albite

    3

    26.4454

    3.370

    Quartz

    4

    27.3531

    3.260

    Terlinguaite

    5

    27.8248

    3.206

    Albite

    6

    36.358

    2.471

    Talc

    7

    39.2715

    2.294

    Cobaltite

    8

    42.2989

    2.74

    Ilmenite

    9

    49.9812

    1.825

    Azurite

    10

    59.7379

    1.548

    Lepidomelane

    11

    75.4547

    1.259

    Quartz

    Table 8.X-Ray Diffraction values in Periyapattinam Beach sediment

    Table 10. X-Ray Diffraction values in Ervadi Beach sediment

    Counts

    1000

    500

    0

    SB-10

    20 30 40 50 60 70 80

    Position [°2Theta] (Copper (Cu))

    REFERENCES

    1. Bish, D.L., Post, J.E., 1993. Quantitative mineralogical analysis using the Rietveld full-pattern fitting method. Am. Mineral. 78, 932- 940.

    2. Bish, D.L., 1994. Quantitative X-ray diffraction analysis of soils. In: Amonette, J.E., Zelazny, L.W. (Eds.), Quantitative Methods in Soil Mineralogy: Soil Science Society of America. Madisen, pp. 267e295 (Chapter 9).

    3. Chipera, S.J., Bish, D.L., 2013. Fitting full x-ray diffraction patterns for quantitative analysis: a method for readily quantifying crystalline and disordered phases. Adv. Mater. Phys. Chem. 03, 47-53.

    4. Clark, G.L., Reynolds, D.H., 1936. Quantitative analysis of mine Dusts. Ind. Eng. Chem. Anal. Ed 8, 36e40.

    5. Karikalan, R., Bangaru Priyanga, S., Rakkiannan, S., (2020). Depositional Environments of coastal Sediments from Mandapam and Vembar region, Gulf of Mannar Coast, Tamilnadu, India. Aegaeum Journal, Volume 8, Issue 3, Page No. 1225- 1235.

    6. Karikalan, R., Bangaru Priyanga, S., Rakkiannan, S., (2020).

      Figure 10. XRD pattern in the Ervadi Beach sediment

      The important groups of minerals identified through XRD analysis are quartz group, feldspar, mica, Zn-Cu-Pb association, wollastonite group, leucite group, olivine group and minerals. The Beach sediments are predominantly observed from the samples along with calcite, quartz, orthoclase, microcline, biotite, hypersthene, hornblende, albite, anorthite sepiolite, illite, chlorite, halloysite Montmorillonite, halite and heavy mineral zircon, sillimanite, garnet, topaz, cobaltite, kyanite, magnetite, hornblende and ilmenite from the study area.

  3. CONCLUSION

  • The grain-size distributions of sediments are studied in the study of grain size in relation to mechanism of sediments deposition.

  • The distribution pattern and textural parameters of sediments vary regionally in the Ramanathapuram Coastal sediment distribution. Based on the texture of sediments it can be said that the beach consists of coarse and medium sand was domains.

  • Sedimentological studies reveal that depositional patterns in the beach are mostly controlled by fluvial and marine processes. The deposition of coarse and medium sands in the extreme in our study area attributed to the discharge Vembar and Gundar Rivers.

  • The X-Ray diffraction sediments sample analysis proved that the minerals of calcite, quartz, orthoclase, microcline, biotite, hypersthene, hornblende, albite, anorthite sepiolite, illite, chlorite, halloysite Montmorillonite, halite and heavy mineral garnet, zircon, sillimanite, topaz, cobaltite, kyanite, magnetite, hornblende and ilmenite. The followed by minerals are derived from Recent Alluvium and Southern Granulite Terrain.

Textural Analysis of Coastal Sediments in Mandapam area, Gulf of Mannar Coast, Tamilnadu, India. Infokara Research, Volume 9, Issue 3, Page No. 780-790.

  1. Karikalan, R., Bangaru Priyanga, S., Rakkiannan, S., (2020). Mineral Identification of Coastal Sediments in between Mandapam and Vembar, Gulf of Mannar Coast, Tamilnadu, India. Infokara Research, Volume 9, Issue 3, Page No. 835-841.

  2. Karikalan (2013). Studies on Remote Sensing and GIS Applications on Coastal Geomorphological Landforms between Thondi and Muthupettai, Tamilnadu, India.

  3. Karikalan, R, (2002). A study of Quaternary sediments between Coleroon river and Cuddalore, Tamilnadu, India. PhD thesis which was awarded on December 2002.

  4. Kongeswaran T, Karikalan R., (2015). Studies on Remotesensing and Geographical Information System Applications on Coastal Geomorphological Landforms from Portonova To Coleroon River Mouth, SouthArcot, Tamilnadu, East Coast of India.International Journal of Geomatics and Geosciences, 2015,volume 5, no 4, pp544

    -554.

  5. Mumme, W., Tsambourakis, G., Madsen, I., Hill, R., 1996. Improved petrological modal analyses from X-ray powder diffraction data by use of the Rietveld method; Part II, Selected sedimentary rocks. J. Sediment. Res. 66, 132-138.

  6. Nagelschmidt, G., 1938. On the atomic arrangement and variability of the members of montmorillonite group. Mineral. Mag. 25, 140- 155.

  7. Perumal Velmayil 2017. Petrography and Geochemistry of Calcrete Deposit in and around Sathankulam Region, Southern Tamilnadu, India manonmaniam Sundaranar University, Tirunelveli, (Http://Hdl.Handle.Net/10603/207324).

  8. Ramasamy, P & Karikalan, R. (2010). Distribution and percentage of heavy minerals in coastal geomorphological landforms in Palk Strait. Southeast Coast of India. Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research, 5, 49 53.

  9. Srodo_n, J., 2002. Quantitative mineralogy of sedimentary rocks with emphasis on clays and with applications to K-Ar dating. Mineral. Mag. 66, 677-687.

  10. Taylor, J.C., 1978. Report AAEC/E436. Lucas Heights Research Laboratories, Menai, NSW, Australia.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This research paper published under the RUSA Phase 2.0 (MHRD), in the head of curriculum development fund for the infrastructure facilities and utilized by the research student in the Department of Geology, Alagappa University, Karaikudi.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *