Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

Alexandria Minerals Corp ALXDF

Alexandria Minerals Corp is a Canadian based gold exploration and development company. Its project consists of Orenada, Akasaba, Sleepy, Manitoba and Ontario properties together with the Other Quebec properties. It is mainly focused on exploring the cadillac break property which is located in Val-d'Or, Quebec. The cadillac break property consists of approximately 21 contiguous projects of over 460 claims, located in Bourlamaque, Louvincourt and Vaquelin Townships. The manitoba properties include


GREY:ALXDF - Post by User

Comment by goldhunter11on Feb 20, 2018 6:13pm
83 Views
Post# 27590569

RE:RE:RE:RE:Visualizing Where AZX is Drilling at Zone 4

RE:RE:RE:RE:Visualizing Where AZX is Drilling at Zone 4NP,
In my previous post I forgot to mention the following:
- Your "Visualizing Drill Results at Zone 4" is essentially the plan view from a CoreBox visualiztion, link below (use Probe, and rotate the presentation until you can look straight down from above). But, your information is better since it has thevalue-added info (colour and the size of the circles). So you could see where the concentration of the "resource" is located.
https://www.corebox.net/
- It would be a good tool to locate the "good hits" over the entire area (at least for Zones 4 & 2) and this could be used to determine the deposit boundary, and perhaps detect the data gaps and potential extension.
- A similar chart could be produced (if the drill data have been imported in the tool that you are using) for ooking at a cross section. So, I am trying to get minic a view from CoreBox, so that your tool could show the depth profile of the deposit. Raw data of the drill hole using colour coding for grade would be good, or some kind of a weighted information with the intercepts factored in. But raw data would be the best. Some company would provide this kind of information, AZX has not done this for us. EO would provide piece meal information, not something that would give curious investors who want to do addition DD themselves. In general, I seek an overall impression of the entire deposit, the potential location(s) for an open pit, location of a ramp which could be used for UG exploration, bulk sample extraction, and production. Use of an existing shaft is also relevant, since that would reduce the CapEx.

Hope the above comments are useful. Thanks again for your willingness to share your information.
Cheers,
GH

--------------------
goldhunter11 wrote: Thanks NP.
Yes, I saw that you concentrate only in Zone 4 (the first 3 fences on the insert, blow up of the area, shown in Figure 8 of the 2009 Technical Report). The show the drill hole numbers, but they could provide what you show here by adding the colour (=grade) and size of the circle (= intercept). Presumably the results are projected to the surface, so the location of the high grade/intercept depth is not accurately represented. But, it would be asking too much, unless you have an actual 3D model (like CoreBox).

Just to be sure that I understand your chart correctly:  The 2009 RE data (you call it 2008) the one you just add the red circle are located on same actual plan view of the terrain (not an insert)? If so, it would be informative if you could include all features (the old pit, the headframe, the ultramafic, the Sch-Tuff, Sediment, Diorite like what they show in Figure 18 of the Tech Report). 

There are 2 potential conclusion, but I kinda hesitate to commit myself:
-  Even thought hole 12 showsgood grade and intercepts, most of the old results (on the 3 fences) does not seem to contribute much to the 2009 RE. The distance from hole 12 is too far to other high grades to permit interpolation (Ref. Tech Report Fig 8). The cluster on the east side of the insert has a much tighter distance between holes.
- The 2009 RE comes mainly from Zone 2?
GH
----------------------------------------------
NextPhase wrote:
goldhunter11 wrote: NP,
- Question: Your plot for 2009 seems to contain only lower grades (max 1.5-2 gpt). This chart is not finished presmably.


GH,

I only focused on Zone 4 and the OAX drill numbers for this study. Saying this, I realize now I should have included one more hole number, AAX-07-12. This is the only AAX drill location within the Zone 4 area. It's results were released on May 29, 2007 with the following details.

Date Hole Order From To Length Width Au g/t Grade Times Length
3/29/2007 AAX-07-12 1 100 103.5 3.5   2.09 7.315
3/29/2007 AAX-07-12 2 208.9 212.1 3.2   1.91 6.112
3/29/2007 AAX-07-12 3 255.75 268.3 12.55   7.48 93.874
3/29/2007 AAX-07-12 4 275.6 280.85 5.25   3.13 16.4325

This is by far the best results for that program in Zone 4. Despite this inclusion, my information indicates Alexandria had drill only 22 holes in Zone 4 between 2007 and 2008. Only 12 of these samples, or 54%, had one or more intercepts of gold. Adding intercept lengths together for Zone 4, it appears only 189.7m of combined intercept length was captured from what looks like around 8,000m drilled.

In my opinion, this small number of samples with even a fewer number of intercepts meant that Zone 4 did not contribute nearly as much to the original resource estimate when compared to the work conducted in Zone 2. Only the three drill results (see the table below) had a length times grade above 25  Zone 4. From the original resource estimate, the average results meant for every 1,000 meters drilled at Zone 4 only 6.8m had an intercept length by gold grade above 25. This is a far worse ratio when compared to a similar analysis on the results from 2016 and 2017.

Date Hole From To Length Au g/t Grade Times Length
3/29/2007 AAX-07-12 255.75 268.3 12.55 7.48 93.874 0.494855
8/15/2007 OAX-07-13A 485.5 506.65 21.15 1.98 41.877 0.220754
9/5/2007 OAX-07-06 401.45 421.9 20.45 1.89 38.6505 0.203745

In comparison, Alexandria appears to have drilled another 41 holes in 2007 and 2008 within the Zone 2 area, and 28 of these assays had intercepts reported, or 68%, with a combined intercept length of 874.34. This combined intercept length from Zone 2 is 4.6x larger compared to the 189.7 combined length reported from Zone Four. Although the overall grade was much lower at 0.98 g/t, it had seven intercepts (see the table below) with a combined length and grade above 25.

Date Hole From To Length Width Au g/t Grade Times Length
10/16/2007 OAX-07-16 102.9 151.35 48.45 27.08 2.19 106.1
1/9/2008 OAX-07-32 113.05 151.5 38.45 12.58 2.32 89.2
7/17/2008 OAX-08-43     27.08   2.19 59.3
3/29/2007 AAX-07-11 134.4 160 25.6 18.32 2.89 52.9
10/31/2007 OAX-07-19 388.85 410.2 21.35 13.72 1.59 33.9
9/20/2007 OAX-07-08 26.8 80.8 54 41.37 0.62 33.5
7/30/2007 OAX-07-03 19.5 59.9 40.4 32.32 0.76 30.7

Again from the original resource estimate, a much better ratio was achieved, where for every 1,000 meters drilled in Zone 2 19.6m had a 25 intercept length multiplied by its gold grade.

So, if the upcoming resource estimate not only improves the overall grade within Zone 4, but also significantly increases combined intercepts lengths, then I expect this will likely be a significant reason why the upcoming resource estimate will beat market expectations.

Following the inclusion of AAX-07-12, I have updated the graphic that I designed yesterday. Stay tuned for more updates.

User image

As previously mentioned, I do not have all of the locations for the 2015-2017 drill programs, I'm especially missing data from any results that were released after May 2017. In addition, I have a good, but not perfect process in finding these locations, but I will slowly improve this information over time. If I make mistakes, then I will correct these in future posts. So far, I have only focused on Zone 4 locations, and I have yet to study or develop any specific insights from drilling in Zone 2.

NP

Disclosure: I own AZX




<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>