Chromite Deposits

This text is based mostly on the chapter of J.M. Duke in Geoscience Canada (see the reference list).
This publication can be freely downloaded from internet. Other sources are given in the references.

Introduction: The ore deposits of chromite are the single source of this mineral. Chromite is a
mineral from the spinel group with the nominal chemical composition FeCr2O4. The mineral can be used
“as is”, if concentrated, for the manufacture of refractory bricks for furnace linings and as foundry sand.
At the same time, chromite is the only source of the element chromium which is an essential
component of many types of stainless steel, other types of steel, and some non-ferrous alloys. The
composition of chromite is variable because of extensive solid solutions with other minerals from the
spinel group, e.g., magnetite, Fe3O4, or hercynite, FeAl2O4. Although Cr-rich chromite was required for
many of its applications in the past, chromite with lower Cr/Fe ratios can be used today. There are other
minerals of chromium but all of them are exceedingly rare and find their place only at the shelves of
museums and private collections.

Classification: Chromite deposits can be broadly classified into two categories, bearing in mind that
some deposits may contain features from both types. The two categories are stratiform and podiform
deposits. Elluvial and alluvial deposits which originate by weathering of the rocks and transport of
chromite from the primary occurrences are relatively unimportant.

Stratiform deposits: Stratiform deposits are large, sheet-like bodies in layered mafic to ultramafic
igneous complexes. Stratiform deposits produce slightly less than a half of the globally mined chromite
but their chromite reserves are about 98 % of the total chromite reserves. Therefore, it is very likely that
they will place a major role for the chromite mining industry in the future.

General geology: Their age is typically Precambrian and they are found in within cratons, that is,
large, stable cores of the continents. The large mafic to ultramafic igneous provinces intruded the
continental crust which contained or may have contained more acidic rocks, such as granites or
gneisses. Morphology of these intrusions can be described either as flat and tabular or funnel-shaped.
The flat and tabular bodies were emplaced in the form of sills into the pre-existing rock complexes and
the layering in these intrusions is parallel throughout the intrusion body (of course, may be disrupted by
later tectonics). Examples of such intrusions are Stillwater, Kemi, and Bird River. The magmatic layering
in the funnel-shaped intrusions dips gently toward the center of the intrusion, giving the layers a
geological form of a syncline. Examples are Bushveld complex, Muskox, and Great Dyke.

Geometry and mineralogy: Stratiform chromite deposits consist of multiple layers (rarely one layer)
of chromitite, a rock made mostly of chromite. The layers are thin, with thickness of 1 cm to 1 m, but
laterally very extensive, with lateral length up to 70 km. The layers are parallel to the primary igneous
layering and the barren rocks between the layers contain a small amount of disseminated chromite.
Chromitites contain 50-95 % of chromite, the other minerals are olivine, orthopyroxene, plagioclase,
clinopyroxene, and their alteration products. A common but minor mineral is brown mica, indicating
that the magma contains some water. The chromite crystals are euhedral to subhedral, with the silicates
located in the interstitial space between the chromite crystals. Despite the apparent similarity and
simplicity of these deposits, the differences between the deposits or between the layers within a single
deposits may be “striking” (Duke 1983).
 Example: Bushveld Large Igneous Province (LIP): The Bushveld LIP is located in South Africa. It is a
massive complex of mafic to ultramafic rocks of Paleoproterozoic age. The amount of magma delivered
to the intrusion was estimated to 1.0-1.5 million km3 and this amount was intruded within 10 million
years. The Bushveld LIP was studied extensively, with a large focus of its potential as an ore deposit of
chromite, but also vanadium and platinum-group elements. The Bushveld LIP can be split into the
western and eastern lobes and a number of formations with local names which are of lesser interest for
the general understanding of the intrusion and the ores.
One of the locally recognized and important units is the Rustenburg Layered Suite (RLS). This suite
has been further subdivided into the marginal (lowermost), lower, critical, main, and upper (uppermost)
zone. The marginal zone is made mostly of norite. The lower zone consists of units with pyroxenite,
dunite, and harzburgite, but chromitites are missing. The critical zone is known for its spectacular
layering and enormous reserves of chromite. The lower part of the critical zone is entirely ultramafic
(rocks contain mostly orthopyroxene) and the upper part, which hosts the chromite ore deposits,
comprises harzburgite, pyroxenite, but also norite and anorthosite. The base of the upper critical zone is
defined by the first appearance of cumulus plagioclase. Two sets of layers in the critical zone represent
most of the chromite reserves. These sets of layers are also called “seams”. The LG6 seam has an
average thickness of 0.8 m and can be traced for over 70 km in the western lobe and a thickness of 0.6
to 1.3 m and lateral extent of 90 km in the eastern lobe. The F chromitite seam has a thickness of 1.3 m
and lateral extent of 35 km.
The main zone consists mostly of gabbronorites and host the Merensky Reef, a world-class platinum-
group element deposit. The upper zone contains mostly gabbros but the most important economic
feature of this zone are layers of Ti-V rich magnetite. They store almost a half of the global reserves of
vanadium. This sequence of zones, as well as the entire Bushveld LIP, shows an evolution from
ultramafic (orthopyroxenite, harzburgite) to mafic (gabbros, ferric diorites) rocks and eventually
granites. It is believed that the complex was formed as a series of pulses of magma from different
sources or feeders. This conclusion is also supported by Sr isotopic geochemistry of the rocks (see
Kinnaird, 2005). Given the lateral extent and the sill-like nature of the Bushveld LIP, the new batches of
magma had to spread laterally and were able to interact, chemically and physically, with the overlying
and underlying magmas.
A number of different models (the following text after Kinnaird, 2005, see that work for additional
references) have been put forward for the formation of thick chromitite seams, based on evidence not
only from the Bushveld Complex but also from Stillwater in particular. Previous models for chromitite
formation include:
(i) gravity-induced separation, crystal sorting and settling, has been discounted both on textural
evidence, on the basis of co-tectic proportions, and on the physics of processes in non-Newtonian
magmas;
(ii) immiscibility of Cr-rich liquid which has largely been discounted because of the high temperature
(c. 1700 °C) at which Cr2O3-SiO2 immiscibility occurs;
(iii) increases in oxygen fugacity by country rock degassing seems unlikely because of the difficulty of
controlling such changes over the area of the Bushveld and because oxygen fugacity appears to increase
systematically from the lowest LG chromitite layer to the uppermost chromitite layers.
(iv) contamination by a siliceous component;
(v) mixing between resident and new magma;
(vi) lateral growth within a stratified magma column;
(vii) pressure changes; changes in total pressure within a crystallising magma chamber could change
the equilibrium liquidus assemblage. The attraction of this model is that the effects of a pressure change
would be felt nearly simultaneously over the whole magma chamber although the magnitude of the
pressure change necessary to shift the magma composition from the cotectic into the field of chromite
alone is not clear. A pressure change in the order of >> 1kbar would be needed and the general effect of
pressure change on mineralogy has been shown to be trivial;
(viii) injection of a chromite-phyric magma still requires that chromite is precipitated somewhere else
at greater depth in order to be entrained in the ascending magma.

Podiform deposits: These deposits occur within ophiolite sequences, that is, fragments of oceanic
crust, found on continents mostly because the dense, oceanic crust was obducted onto the lighter
continental crust. The typical stratigraphy of an ophiolite sequence includes deep-ocean sediments
(uppermost), pillow lavas, sheeted dykes, gabbros, mafic cumulates, ultramafic cumulates, and
ultramafic tectonites (see Duke 1983). The contact between the ultramafic cumulates and ultramafic
tectonites defines the petrologic Moho.

General geology: The podiform chromite deposits are found in the ultramafic rocks, mostly in the
tectonites, less commonly in the cumulates. Some studies indicate that the abundance of the podiform
deposits increases towards the top of the tectonites. The chromite-rich bodies are hosted by dunite
embedded in harzburgite.

Geometry and mineralogy: The shape of the podiform deposits is described as irregular and
unpredictable. That is why geologists chose the uncertain word “pod” to express their morphology. The
pods may approach lenses or elongated bodies in their form and individual pods may carry from a few
kilograms to several million tons of ore, although the very large bodies are rare. The podiform deposits
may show foliation, mostly parallel to the foliation or layering of the host rocks. Some authors
attempted to describe the podiform deposits as discordant, subconcordant, and concordant.
Chromite in the podiform deposits forms often anhedral, cracked grains. A peculiar feature of these
ores is the nodular texture characterized by loosely-packed ellipsoidal chromite nodules with sizes
between 5 and 20 mm. Minerals other than chromite are olivine, orthopyroxene, clinopyroxene,
pargasite, Na-mica, albite, and jadeite. Aqueous inclusions are common in some deposits (Johan et al.
1982), documenting the role of the fluid phase in the ore formation.

Formation of the podiform deposits (after Uysal et al. 2009): Many genetic aspects are still not fully
understood, there are basically three hypotheses concerning the genesis of podiform chromitites:
i) podiform chromitites may represent part of the residuum after extensive extraction of melt
from their mantle host, based on their association with the residual mantle rocks such as dunite and
harzburgite,
ii) podiform chromitites have been interpreted as a cumulate filling of a magma conduit inside
the residual mantle, and
iii) more recently, it has been stressed that such deposits form as a result of melt/rock or
melt/melt interaction (i.e. “magma-mingling”). Furthermore, the presence of water in the melt is
thought to be necessary for the crystallization of chromium spinel (Edwards et al., 2000).

Chemical composition of chromite: As mentioned above, there are several extensive solid solutions
between the minerals of the spinel group, to which chromite belongs. Chromite from stratiform and
podiform deposits can be, in many cases, distinguishes based on its chemical composition. For some
discrimination diagrams, see the slides below.

Origin of chromite deposits: Chromitites, either in the stratiform or the podiform deposits, are
igneous cumulates. For a long time, it was assumed that they form simply by precipitation of chromite
inside a magma chamber and settling of these near the bottom of the chamber. This uncomplicated
view appears to be logical but ultramafic rocks usually contain and precipitate little chromite, perhaps
0.5 vol. %. The ultramafic rocks contain consistently small amount of disseminated spinel with variable
concentration of chromium. Then, what processes can collect such small amount and create the vast
deposits which we mine?
Current perception of this problem indicates that the crystallization happens in situ, at the bottom of
the magma chamber, and no gravitational settling is needed. Other processes are required instead and
these are illustrated in Figure 1 below.

Figure 1. Redrawn after Irvine (1975, 1977). For explanation, see text below.

Figure 1a shows a small portion of the triangular diagram where olivine, chromite, and SiO2 define
the apices. The small area shown in Fig. 1a is marked by light gray in Fig. 1b. Note that the area in Fig. 1a
represents compositions poor in chromite – the ultramafic rocks are usually poor in chromite, as
discussed above. An approximate composition of an ultramafic magma is shown in Fig. 1a, c, d by the
point A. Because this point is located within the field of olivine, crystallization begins with precipitation
olivine and the composition of magma moves along the join A-B. Once the magma composition reaches
point B, olivine and chromite will crystallize together but there will be much more olivine than chromite.
That is why, as written above, ultramafic rocks commonly contain a small amount of disseminated
chromite. The composition of magma moves further along the curve B-D; in the point D, orthopyroxene
will appear and the magma can evolve further. As you noticed, there is no massive chromite
precipitation event described here.

There is a simple way to precipitate only chromite from magma, if a partially evolved magmatic
reservoir with a composition in point C is contaminated by extraneous material. This material can be
either silica-rich, for example granite or gneiss (Fig. 1c) and can be mixed with the magma by simple
contamination from the wall rocks of the continental crust. The other possibility would be the mixing of
a primitive magma (point B) with a more evolved magma (Fig. 1d). In both case, mixing shifts the
magmatic composition into the chromite field and at the beginning of crystallization, chromite will be
the only phase to form. Hence, chromite-rich layers can be formed. This elegant and simple model is
supported by observations in the field, mineralogical, petrological, and geochemical work (see Kinnaird
2005, Spandler et al. 2005).

A remainder about the ultramafic igneous rocks (simplified, after IUGS classification):

References and literature to read

Duke, J.M., 1983: Ore Deposit Models 7. Magmatic Segregation Deposits of Chromite. Geoscience Canada, Journal
of the Geological Association of Canada 10, 15-24.
Edwards, S.J., Pearce, J.A., Freeman, J., 2000. New insights concerning the influence of water during the formation
of podiform chromite. In: Dilek, Y., Moores, E.M., Elthon, D., Nicolas, A. (eds.). Ophiolites and oceanic crust:
new insights from field studies and the ocean drilling program: Boulder, Colorado. Geological Society of
America Special Paper 349, 139-147.
Irvine, T.N., 1975: Crystallization sequences in the Muskox intrusion and other layered intrusions. II. Origin of
chromitite layers and similar deposits of other magmatic ores. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 39, 991-1020.
Irvine, T.N., 1977: Origin of chromitite layers in the Muskox intrusion and other stratiform intrusions: A new
interpretation. Geology 5, 273-277.
Johan, Z., Le Bel., L., Robert, J.L., Vollinger, M., 1982: Role of reducing fluids in the origin of chromite deposits from
ophiolitic complexes. Geological Association of Canada, Mineralogical Association of Canada Program with
Abstracts, volume 7, 58.
Kinnaird, J.A., 2005. The Bushveld Large Igneous Province. www.largeigneousprovinces. org/LOM.html [May 2005].
Spandler, C., Mavrogenes, J., Arculus, R., 2005: Origin of chromitites in layered intrusions: Evidence from chromite-
hosted melt inclusions from the Stillwater Complex. Geology 33, 893-896.
Uysal, I., Zaccarini, F., Sadiklar, M.B., Tarkian, M., Thalhammer, O.A.R., Garuti, G., 2009: The podiform chromitites
in the Dağküplü and Kavak mines, Eskişehir ophiolite (NW-Turkey): Genetic implications of mineralogical and
geochemical data. Geologica Acta 7, 351-362.