probablyLefty said:Some kind of botryoidal chalcedony maybe?
andradite garnet is probableLefty said:Has a "garnet" look about it at first glance.
Both composition and orientation variations in hardness can give the stated hardness range, For most minerals it is small, but kyanite and to a lesser extent tourmaline are examples that I know where it can be larger than most. The orientation variation is related to the different strength of atomic bonding in different directions, the composition variation is because composition can vary dramatically in the different types of a single mineral. I suspect orientation is the bigger issue of the two. Corundum and quartz have no cleavage and have conchoidal fracture, quartz being hexagonal and corundum trigonal. As you mention, corundum (sapphire, ruby) does have weak parting planes, despite having no real cleavage, and I am not surprised by what you have found (compositional variation is negligible in corundum). The length of oxygen bonds are not all the same. I see that "The toughness of corundum is sensitive to ..crystallographic orientation" - although toughness and hardness are not quite the same thing, this suggests bonding strength might also vary with orientation. One study of Knoop hardness of corundum found that hardness varied with orientation.Lefty said:A question for Goldirocks in relation to the variable hardness of some minerals - when they say that something varies between say 6 and 6.5 on Moh's, are they saying that different individual specimens of the same type can vary in overall hardness, or do they mean that the same specimen will be harder in some directions than in others?
The two stones I most commonly cut are sapphire and quartz. Sapphire is as hard as the hobbs of hell in general but there is a quite noticable difference in certain directions, some facets cutting much more quickly and easily than others. My assumption has been that the "easy" facets are being cut parallel to or at least close to the lamellar parting planes of the sapphire crystal, while the really hard ones are going across or close to the C axis where there is no parting. Quartz has no cleavage or parting of any kind and I have never noticed any particular difference when working around a stone the way I do with sapphire.
Cheers
Enter your email address to join: