Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-wxvwp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T06:32:48.342Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Is Obsidian Hydration Dating Affected by Relative Humidity?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Irving Friedman,
Fred W. Trembour,
George I. Smith and
Franklin L. Smith
Irving Friedman
Affiliation:
U.S. Department of the Interior, Branch of Isotope Geology, Box 25046, MS 963, Denver Federal Center, MS 963, Denver, Colorado 80225
Fred W. Trembour
Affiliation:
U.S. Department of the Interior, Branch of Isotope Geology, Box 25046, MS 963, Denver Federal Center, MS 963, Denver, Colorado 80225
George I. Smith
Affiliation:
U.S. Geological Survey, 345 Middlefield Road, MS 902, Menlo Park, California 94025
Franklin L. Smith
Affiliation:
U.S. Geological Survey, Denver Federal Center, MS 963, Denver, Colorado 80225
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Experiments carried out under temperatures and relative humidities that approximate ambient conditions show that the rate of hydration of obsidian is a function of the relative humidity, as well as of previously established variables of temperature and obsidian chemical composition. Measurements of the relative humidity of soil at 25 sites and at depths of between 0.01 and 2 m below ground show that in most soil environments, at depths below about 0.25 m, the relative humidity is constant at 100%. We have found that the thickness of the hydrated layer developed on obsidian outcrops exposed to the sun and to relative humidities of 30-90% is similar to that formed on other portions of the outcrop that were shielded from the sun and exposed to a relative humidity of approximately 100%. Surface samples of obsidian exposed to solar heating should hydrate more rapidly than samples buried in the ground. However, the effect of the lower mean relative humidity experiences by surface samples tends to compensate for the elevated temperature, which may explain why obsidian hydration ages of surface samples usually approximate those derived from buried samples.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Quaternary Research , Volume 41 , Issue 2 , March 1994, pp. 185 - 190
Copyright
University of Washington

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Ambrose, W. (1976). Intrinsic hydration rate dating of obsidian. In “Advances in Obsidian Glass Studies” (Taylor, R. E., Ed.), pp. 81–106. Noyes Press, NJ.Google Scholar
Ebert, W. L. Hoburg, R. F., and Bates, J. K. (1991). The sorption of water on obsidian and a nuclear waste glass. Physics and Chemistry of Glasses 32, 133–137.Google Scholar
Findlow, F. J. Bennett, V. Ericson, J., and DeAltley, S. (1975). A new obsidian hydration rate for certain obsidians in the American southwest. American Antiquity 40, 344–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, I., and Smith, R. L. (1960). A new dating method using obsidian. Part I. The development of the method. American Antiquity 25, 476–493.Google Scholar
Friedman, I., and Peterson, N, (1970). Obsidian hydration dating applied to dating of basaltic volcanic activity. Science 172, 1028–1029.Google Scholar
Friedman, I. (1977). Hydration dating of volcanism at Newberry Craters, Oregon. U.S. Geological Survey Journal of Research 5, 337–342.Google Scholar
Friedman, I. Pierce, K. L. Obradovich, J. D., and Long, W. D. (1973). Obsidian hydration dates glacial loading? Science 180, 733–734.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Friedman, I., and Long, W. L. (1976). Hydration rate of obsidian. Science, 191, 347–352.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Friedman, I., and Trembour, F. W. (1978). Obsidian: The Dating Stone. American Scientist 66, 44–52.Google Scholar
Friedman, I., and Obradovich, J. D. (1981). Obsidian hydration dating of volcanic events. Quaternary Research 17, 37–47.Google Scholar
Friedman, I. and Trembour, F. W. (1983). Obsidian hydration dating update. American Antiquity 48, 544–547.Google Scholar
Johnson, L. Jr., (1969). Obsidian hydration rate for the Klamath Basin of California and Oregon. Science 165, 1354–1356.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mazer, J. J. Bates, J. K., and Stevenson, C. (1989). The rate of hydration of obsidian as a function of relative humidity, temperature, and composition. “Abstracts with Programs, 1989 Annual Meeting, Geological Society of America,” Vol. 21, p. 5.Google Scholar
Mazer, J. J. Stevenson, C. M. Ebert, W. L., and Bates, J. K. (1991). The experimental hydration of obsidian as a function of relative humidity and temperature, American Antiquity 56, 504–513.Google Scholar
Michels, J, W. (1967). Archaeology and dating by obsidian hydration. Science 158, 211–214.Google Scholar
Newman, S. Stolper, E. M., and Epstein, S. (1986). Measurement of water in rhyolitic glasses: Calibration of an infrared spectroscopic technique. American Mineralogist 71, 1527–1541.Google Scholar
Pierce, K. L. Obradovich, J. D., and Friedman, I, (1976). Obsidian hydration dating and correlation of Bull Lake and Pinedale glaciations near West Yellowstone, Montana. Geological Society of America Bulletin 87, 703–710.Google Scholar
Trembour, F, W. (1981). Unpublished data.Google Scholar
Trembour, F. W. and Friedman, I. (1984), The present status of obsidian hydration dating. In “Quaternary Dating Methods” (Mahaney, W., Ed.). Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Trembour, F, W. Smith, F. L., and Friedman, I. (1988). Cells for integrating temperature and humidity over long periods of time. Materials Research Society Symposium Proceedings 125, 375–381.Google Scholar