RE: AnalysisSorry, had a divisor error in my kg for Beluga, and Stockhouse cut off the last few columns. My mistake.
Compares more in line with Tuktu-1 bulk with correction, but with larger diamonds included.
So here is a more accurate comparison with the Tuktu bulk, with correction for kg:
| Sample | Kgs | 0.60 mm | 0.85 mm | 1.18 mm | 1.7 | TOTAL |
| Tuktu Total | 21393.5 | 204 | 31 | 5 | 0 | 240 |
| | D/kg | 0.010 | 0.001 | 0.0002 | 0.0000 | 0.0112 |
| Beluga-3 | 6700 | 67 | 37 | 9 | 1 | 114 |
| | D/kg | 0.01 | 0.00552 | 0.00134 | 0.00015 | 0.0170 |
| comparison | B/T | 1.05 | 3.81 | 5.75 | n/a | 1.52 |
So it is better than the Tuktu bulk, but not to the extent of my last post. All diamond counts/kg are higher, and the fact that the larger stones are increasingly more prevalent (~9>5.75>3.81>1.05) is of especial importance.
The key here is if the diamonds are being fragmented, then the diamond counts on these sieves should go up dramatically with a larger bulk sample and non-percussion methods. If stones larger than 2 mm are found, which should be the case if the 1.7 mm stone was a 60% loss, then the total carats and $ value/stone starts to go up by the cubic.
So, not corvette material, but still very good results.
Cheers,
Ogre