RE:RE:Visualizing Zone 2 Drill ResultsGH,
I am lost (sorry for being so dense, at least this morning). I need more instruction for reading the chart.
No worries. I would assume this "new RE" means your "expected new RE based on the post 2009 RE data"?
Yes, I assumed the new RE will include all Zone 2 drill results released between 2015 and 2018.
thickness of the colour bars = length as measured along the x-axis, what lenth are we talking about, intercept length or some length measure from a reference point (zero)
The chart is labeled correctly. The length indicates the total length of intercepts only, while the color communicates the grade for that interecept. Length is simply the combined length of all reported intercepts in meters.
a length of 900m is long (measyred on the surface?)
No, 900m would be the total length of all intercepts if aggregated. I didn't acount for other factors, e.g. dip. You said in the text that "the data were sorted by grade x intercept (= gpt-m). How is this plotted in the 2 coulorful bars, e.g. how was the first (thick) red bar created (~60m thickness/length, compared to a very thin red line for the Original RE. That's why you concluded "similar grade improvement"?)
No, I meant the table below the chart was sorted by grade times length. This makes the table easier to see how the recent intercepts compare with the previously reported ones. The chart does not use this metric. Actually, the main question is what are you plotting, the grade? (or gpt x m, or gpt-m).Your legend shows the Au grade from 0-4 gpt (blue to red in the Legend bar).
The length of the bars is intercept length in meters, while color indicates grade. The chart is simply showing recent intercepts have been reporting higher grades. So, in the 2 large bars, red simply mean high grade with the cut-off at 4gpt?
The color legend is for grade only, 0-4 g/t. I used 0 and 4 for the color anchors with eight steps. This allows the user to see each color difference as a 0.5 g/t step. I could have included more, but academic research recommends limiting groups to 4-8. Every additional visual cue presented to an audience creates more mental effort and complexity, which may hinder visual communication. I saw a grade of 8.88gpt in the table, so presumably this was truncated to 4.00 gpt
Yes, I figured anything higher than 4 g/t is "high-grade", which I hoped would simplify the main message.
NP