Interrelationships of Structure and Genesis in the Kaolinite Group

ANALYSIS of the chemical and structural differences in minerals often results in a better understanding of the differences in the geological conditions under which they were formed. The minerals in the kaolinite group differ in the amount of interlayer water and in the nature and amount of ordered and/or random shifting of each 1:1 layer with respect to those above and below it. This paper is a progress report resulting from research on the morphology, structure, and origin of fine-grained minerals, supported by Contract N6onr26914 with the Geophysics Branch of the Office of Naval Research. The purpose of the paper is to present data obtained in the laboratories at The Pennsylvania State College and elsewhere, which reveal some of the details of structure of the minerals in the kaolinite group, and to suggest a number of interpretations that bear upon the conditions of origin of these minerals. Be¬cause most of the work in this investigation thus far has been concerned with the relationships of kaolinite, halloysite (4H2O; endellite), and halloysite (2H2O), must of the discussion deals with these members of the group. The first step in the analysis of the differences in two sets of geological conditions is an evaluation of the differences in the minerals that result. Thus the chemical differences between the montmorillonite and the kaolinite clays corroborate other evidence in support of the view that the montmorillonites are commonly formed when solutions are alkaline and leaching poor, while kaolinite usually is associated with acid solutions and good drainage condi¬tions. It is obvious that the greater the differences in the minerals, the more divergent may be the conditions that give rise to them and the more readily one condition can be distinguished from the other. In the kaolinite group, differences between individual members are small, therefore the differences in condition of origin are presumably subtle and difficult to define. At the same time, the very fact that the minerals differ only slightly makes them more sensitive indicators of the exact conditions under which they and the minerals associated with them were formed. Since clay minerals are being used more and more to evaluate the nature, value, and mode of formation of economic mineral deposits, an attempt to define these subtle differences would appear worth while. For purposes of the present discussion, the minerals nacrite, dickite, kaolinite, the so-called "fireclay mineral," halloysite (4H2O), halloysite