Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Montoro - Serpent River, Ontario Ni Cu PGE project 2D Geotech ZTEM survey report. Sept.2018

760 views

Published on

Montoro (IMT.v) (IMTFF) Receives Encouraging Final Results from Completed ZTEM Helicopter Survey Over Serpent River- Pecors (Ni-Cu-PGE), Elliot Lake-Ontario PropertyMontoro - Serpent River, Ontario Ni Cu PGE project.2D Geotewch ZTEM survey report. Sept.2018

Published in: Investor Relations
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Montoro - Serpent River, Ontario Ni Cu PGE project 2D Geotech ZTEM survey report. Sept.2018

  1. 1. Intl Montoro Resources Inc. Serpent River Project, Elliott Lake ON ZTEM Natural field Helicoper EM & Magnetic Survey – GL160353 Summary of Final Results 28-September, 2018
  2. 2. FINAL RESULTS Digital Elevation Model Existing Drill holes (P15-22, P15-23) Major Powerline Previous VTEM Survey (white lines) • Job 7112 • 266 line-km • 12-15 Jan, 2008 ZTEM Survey (yellow lines) • 280 line-km flown • 200m EW lines ? 1-2km NS ties • 22-May to 9-Jun-18 survey period 0 1km
  3. 3. FINAL RESULTS Total Magnetic Intensity Known Mafic Intrusive Body below Cover Existing Drill holes (P15-22, P15-23) 0 1km
  4. 4. FINAL RESULTS In Phase Total Phase Rotated (TPR) – 90 Hz Approx. Outline of Magnetic HighPowerline Artifacts, noise Buried App. Conductivity High? Near surface App. Conductivity High? Existing Drill holes (P15-22, P15-23) 0 1km
  5. 5. FINAL RESULTS IP-TPR 360Hz IP-TPR 180Hz IP-TPR-45Hz IP-TPR 90Hz Conductive Zones closer to surface – coincide with lakes (acidic or lake bottom?) Deeper Conductive zone becoming stronger than surficial features ZTEM response is dominated by noise except on northeast edge of coverage Deeper Conductive Zone is visible now below Magnetic High Open to NW 0 2km 0 2km 0 2km0 2km
  6. 6. FINAL RESULTS ZTEM IP-TPR 180Hz VTEM Bz-Field (ch22 /1.15 msec) Good correlation between Shallow ZTEM and VTEM conductive anomalies No correlation between Deeper ZTEM and VTEM conductive anomalies (ZTEM is seeing deeper than VTEM) or Intrusive Magnetic High ZTEM and VTEM conductive lineaments along Powerline 0 2km 0 2km
  7. 7. 2D ZTEM INVERSION 0 metre Depth Slice -500 metre Depth Slice -1500 metre Depth-Slice-1000 metre Depth-Slice Near-surface Conductive Zones – coincide with lakes (acid Water or Lake bottom Seds ?) Deeper Low Resistivity zone now clearly visible at -1000 metre Depth Deep Low Resistivity Layer extends from North of DDH’s and remains Open to Northwest. Near-surface Low Resistivity Zone is still felt at -500 metres Depth. But Deeper zone is not Visible yet. 0 2km 0 2km 0 2km0 2km
  8. 8. 2D ZTEM INVERSION Buried (~750m), East Dipping Low Resistivity Body, slightly Offset with Strongly Magnetic Body Resistive Near Surface Layer (>250m thick) Near Surface Conductor (Lake)
  9. 9. 2D ZTEM INVERSION Buried (~750m), East Dipping Low Resistivity Body, slightly Offset with Strongly Magnetic Body Resistive Near Surface Layer (>250m thick) Near Surface Conductor (Lake) Near Surface Conductor (Lake)
  10. 10. 2D ZTEM INVERSION Buried (~750m), East Dipping Low Resistivity Body, slightly Offset with Strongly Magnetic Body Resistive Near Surface Layer >500m thick) Near Surface Conductor (Lake) Near Surface Conductor (Swamp) DDH P-15-23
  11. 11. 2D ZTEM INVERSION Buried (~750m), East Low Resistivity Body, Centred with Strongly Magnetic Body Resistive Near Surface Layer (>500m thick)Near Surface Conductor (Lake) DDH P-15-22 Near Surface Conductor (Swamp)
  12. 12. 2D ZTEM INVERSION Buried (~750m), North Dipping Low Resistivty Body, Offset with Strongly Magnetic Body Resistive Near Surface Layer >500m thick) Near Surface Conductor (Lake) DDH P-15-22 DDH P-15-23
  13. 13. 2D ZTEM INVERSION Buried (~750m), North Dipping Low Resistivity Body, Offset with Strongly Magnetic Body Resistive Near Surface Layer (>500m thick) Near Surface Conductor (Lake) DDH P-15-22 DDH P-15-23
  14. 14. 2D ZTEM INVERSION TOTAL MAGNETIC FIELDZTEM 2D RESISTIVITY–DEPTH SLICE (Z=-1500m) 2D ZTEM Inversions suggest Deep Low Resistivity Layer is offset towards western side of Serpent River magnetic/ mafic intrusion. Also suggest that DDH P15- 23 & P15-22 both lie off southern edge of main conductive body. Approx. Outline of ZTEM Low Resistivity Body Approx. Outline of Magnetic Anomaly 0 1km0 1km
  15. 15. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMENDATIONS • ZTEM final results appear to largely confirm the Initial analysis of preliminary data on 31-July-18. • ZTEM results appear to define a deep, gently east dip & north plunging weakly Low Resistivity layer (~1.5k ohm-m in ~15k ohm-m host rock) whose top is at ~750m depth that is slightly offset but generally coincides with magnetic Serpent River Intrusion. • Deep layer is Less conductive than originally estimated (~300 vs 1.5k Ωm), likely due to 5k Ωm start model &/or only 90-720Hz data used in 2D inversion (vs. 3k Ωm & 30-720Hz used in prelim 2D models). • Possibly a porous breccia zone, or else a thin mineralized zone/layer at the base of the Serpent River Intrusive? Similar to ZTEM results at East Bull Lake intrusion near Massey or to Voisey’s Bay Nickel? • Influence of powerline on results also can’t be overlooked (i.e., strong noise influence below 90Hz) but results appear to argue against a possible galvanic overprint causing a false conductor artifact. • Zone appears to extend from ~750m to +2000m depth, but could also be much thinner and/or more conductive (Equivalent conductivity -thickness). Zone appears to plunge and remain Open to northwest, as suggested in earlier findings. • 2D inversions along EW lines suggest drill hole P-15-23 intersects ZTEM body, however, 2D inversions along NS tie-lines suggest that existing drill-holes (P-15-22/23) could have both missed northern edge of conductive layer. Corroborated in plan view depth-slice results. • Therefore recommend 2D/3D modeling to determine range of conductivity-thickness for low resis layer. • Also recommend 3D ZTEM inversion & analysis to validate size, depth and location of body. • Ground follow-up with deep MT sounding and/or IP survey should precede follow-up drill testing. Jean M Legault, M.Sc.A., P.Eng, P.Geo Chief geophysicist – Geotech td. Aurora, ON – 28 Sept, 2018
  16. 16. VOISEY’S BAY NICKEL (Jansen and Cristall (2017): in Proceedings of Exploration ’17) 2D ZTEM Inversion Results – Voisey’s Bay (2008 Powerline Powerline Eastern Deeps

×