Condensation in Dust-enriched Systems, by D.S. Ebel and L. Grossman,
Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 1999

Technique: Test of MELTS: Peridotite KLB-1

Anticipating that condensate liquids will be poor in non-CMAS components and will thus violate caveat (a), we tested MELTS calculations against quenched partial melting experiments of peridotite KLB-1, whose non-CMAS components consist of only 8.1 wt% FeO, and (> or =) 0.3% of all other oxides. Takahashi (1986) and Takahashi et al. (1993) reported the temperature intervals between the observed absence and presence of phases, as well as phase compositions and melt fractions for KLB-1 at 1 bar at the Ni-NiO oxygen buffer. Note that only one of their seven data points used here is used in the MELTS calibration database.

Melt Fraction: MELTS vs. KLB1

-------------------

Figure 1: Comparison of melt fractions measured in peridotite melting experiments of Takahashi (1986) and Takahashi et al. (1993) with those calculated at 1 bar using MELTS. (enlarge)
It can be seen in Fig. 1 that the MELTS model reproduces the observed volume fractions of liquids well, except at low melt fractions where there may be significant measurement error in the experiments. The solidus temperature and appearance temperatures of olivine, Ca-pyroxene, and feldspar agree nearly within experimental error, but the model underpredicts the crystallization temperature of orthopyroxene and overpredicts that of spinel (Table 5). Hirschmann et al. (1998) observed that the MELTS model overpredicted the crystallization temperature of orthopyroxene at 10 kbar. These differences reflect compromises made by Sack and Ghiorso (1994c) to best satisfy both high- and low-pressure pyroxene-liquid phase relations.
SiAlMgFe oxides: MELTS vs. KLB1 (thumbnail) In Fig. 2, the 1 bar liquid compositions are compared with MELTS results, with all Fe2O3 recalculated to FeO. The good agreement of the results for melt fraction and composition suggests that the MELTS model will yield reasonably accurate results in the condensation calculation, particularly because olivine dominates the distribution of mass in condensation sequences. Because spinel is a minor phase, overstabilization of spinel will not have a significant effect on liquid stability.
CaTiNa oxides: MELTS vs. KLB1 (thumbnail) The understabilization of orthopyroxene, relative to liquid, suggests that liquid stability might be slightly overpredicted when orthopyroxene condenses with it, and that the temperature of appearance of the latter phase in the condensation calculation may be too low.
Figure 2: Comparison of measured compositions of KLB-1 liquids (Takahashi, 1986; Takahashi et al., 1993) with those calculated from MELTS, all at one bar. Asterisks indicate starting compositions in the experiments. (enlarge 2a) (enlarge 2b)

In addition to MELTS, Berman's (1983) model for CaO-MgO-Al2O3-SiO2(CMAS) liquids is included in the present work. Yoneda and Grossman (1995) used this model, and explained in detail its advantages and drawbacks. The CMAS liquid model works well at high temperatures, where these four oxides are the only major ones condensed, but it is inadequate under conditions where FeO, Na2O and other non-CMAS components condense in appreciable quantities. Therefore, the MELTS model must be used at lower temperatures where non-CMAS oxides are important constituents of the liquid. The purely CMAS liquid region is very far outside the composition range over which MELTS is calibrated, and contains too few components for reliable application of the MELTS liquid model. Furthermore, because the MELTS liquid uses mostly silicate components, not pure oxides, as end-members, it cannot be applied to some especially Ca- and Al-rich regions of composition space that are treated adequately by the CMAS liquid model. For example, CaSiO3 is the major Ca-containing component employed by MELTS; yet, early high temperature condensate liquids never contain as much SiO2 as CaO. For these reasons, both models are required to completely describe condensation of silicate liquids over the temperature ranges where liquids may be stable.




CONDENSATION
in
DUST-ENRICHED SYSTEMS


Denton S. Ebel (1)

Lawrence Grossman(1,2)

(1) Department of The Geophysical Sciences
The University of Chicago
5734 South Ellis Ave.
Chicago, IL 60637

(2) Enrico Fermi Institute
The University of Chicago
5640 South Ellis Ave.
Chicago, IL 60637

Submitted December 22, 1998 to

Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta

Revised version submitted June 30, 1999
Abstract Introduction
Technique

Bulk Composition
Method of Calculation
Data for Elements and Gas Species
Data and Models for Solids
Data and Models for Silicate Liquids
Test of MELTS: Peridotite KLB-1
Transition Between Liquid Models
Results

Vapor of Solar Composition
General Effects of Dust Enrichment and Total Pressure
Oxygen Fugacity
Condensation Temperatures and Liquid Stability
Condensation at 100x Dust Enrichment, Ptot=10-3bar
Condensation at 1000x Dust Enrichment, Ptot=10-3bar
Condensation of Oxidized Iron at High Temperature
Bulk Chemical Composition of Condensates
Composition of Silicate Liquid
Composition of Spinel
Composition of Clinopyroxene
Composition of Feldspar
Composition of Metallic Nickel-Iron
Metal-Sulfide Condensate Assemblages
Discussion

Stability of Silicate Liquid in Solar Gas
Chondrules in Dust-enriched Systems
Conclusions References