A bit late for weekend consumption but here are some compilations and comments on data provided by AZS on Opasura.
Rationale: to try and understand what the data provided means in a 3D sense.
Method and some assumptions.
I converted the announced drill data into an excel spread sheet and played with various numbers:
- intercept length converted to vertical thickness depending on hole dip (assuming horizontal mineralisation) which may be closer to true thickness than down hole length
- the RL of the mid point of the intercept using the collar of the hole which gives an idea of where an intercept sits in 3D.
- calculated a strip ratio based on the formula [(base of intercept vertical depth + 1m) divided by the length of intercept (not corrected very well)]
- Zn+Pb multiplied by down hole intercept %M - done previously but plotted differently.
- Ratio of Zn/Pb surprised me by showing there may be some significant zonation.
PDF of the spread sheet which is sorted by Zn+Pb% grade from high to low. [Note there are probably some transposition and other
errors so DYOR and make comments/corrections as necessary]
View attachment 972922
This second PDF contains the plots of massaged data before any interpretation.
View attachment 972994
"INTERPRETATIONS"
Not easy as there are stacked zones of mineralisation locally which are somewhat difficult to separate given the available data and scale used.
Grade/thickness
My original plot was this.
View attachment 973012
this creates possible misconceptions as it is controlled by grade AND thickness plus multiple horizons are present.
This image is effectively the same data but presented with both grade and thickness visible.
View attachment 973033
Still not too helpful but the central corridor (along historical UG workings) stands out. Away from this drill density decreases and results are more variable. Will leave it to AZS to say more.
What could be open pit vs UG?
View attachment 973027
View attachment 973066
Two ways of looking at it. The first is strip ratio and the second related image is depth to base of mineralised intercept.
Strip ratio as used above is simply a thickness of mineralisation to depth of possible mining without consideration for economics. The more valuable the ore the higher the strip ratio can be sustained. The 7 and 15 contours are pretty close and probably represent the maximum scallop AZS could take if all else align.
Stacked mineralisation is going to impact on mining. Some areas do seem to have two distinct layers (at least) but beyond me to split out easily or meaningfully.
How continuous is mineralisation?
AZS gave this NS section showing some continuity.
View attachment 973015
View attachment 973018
This NW/SE section suggests continuity but hints at probable structural or stratigraphic issues.
The location of this section line is on here:
View attachment 973135
Zn/Pb Ratios
View attachment 973036
The ratios show a distinct area of higher zinc and perhaps one of Lead - Real? No idea.
This week's Opasura announcement showed high Pxrf lead ratios at surface to the north west of previously known exposures.
View attachment 973144
View attachment 973153
The announcement also hinted that further assays should be coming out fairly soon. Be interesting to see.
One final comment on Opasura is the lack of information about Candelaria and the subsequent addition of more land.
Original tenement:
View attachment 973150
View attachment 973147
Interesting to see if AZS acquire more land to the SE of Candelaria.
GLTAH
