1988
DOI: 10.1029/gl015i009p01069
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Paleomagnetic results from granitic basement rocks in the Cajon Pass Scientific Drillhole

Abstract: Natural remanent magnetizations in granitic rocks intersected by the Cajon Pass scientific drillhole are a composite of two superimposed magnetizations. One magnetization is a primary TRM acquired in late Cretaceous times upon initial cooling, while the other is an IRM induced by the coring device. Coring‐induced IRM has obscured any pre‐coring VRM, and thus core orientation using recent VRM was not possible. Primary inclinations are internally consistent and agree with expected values derived from the adjacen… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

1989
1989
1995
1995

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The process that produces the DIRMs appears to affect many rock types; both igneous and sedimentary, and so is unlikely to be a chemical effect. Some authors (Audunsson andLevi, 1989, Me Williams andPinto, 1988) have suggested an IRM origin for this component, resulting from magnetic contamination from the drill string, although they also recognize that piezoremanent magnetism (PRM) and shock effects may also contribute (e.g., Kodama, 1984). AF demagnetization of cores from Leg 148, again to Hole 504B (Alt, Kinoshita, Stokking, et al, 1993) has not identified any consistent drilling-induced component.…”
Section: Drilling-induced Remanent Magnetization (Dirm)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The process that produces the DIRMs appears to affect many rock types; both igneous and sedimentary, and so is unlikely to be a chemical effect. Some authors (Audunsson andLevi, 1989, Me Williams andPinto, 1988) have suggested an IRM origin for this component, resulting from magnetic contamination from the drill string, although they also recognize that piezoremanent magnetism (PRM) and shock effects may also contribute (e.g., Kodama, 1984). AF demagnetization of cores from Leg 148, again to Hole 504B (Alt, Kinoshita, Stokking, et al, 1993) has not identified any consistent drilling-induced component.…”
Section: Drilling-induced Remanent Magnetization (Dirm)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Kodama (1984) noted high intensity and steep DIRM in drill cores from granites and concluded that it was similar to isothermal remanent magnetization (IRM), but had an even closer resemblance to piezo remanent magnetization (PRM). McWilliams & Pinto (1988) identified DIRM in a granite drill core, which they associated with higher fields near the tip of the drill string, and Ozdemir et al (1988) suggested that hightemperature IRM/VRM might have produced the DIRM they observed in a predominantly granodiorite drill core.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Ideally, the horizontal components of the stable remanent magnetization vectors of samples taken from borehole cores can be assumed to indicate north at the time of formation if the magnetization was acquired during a period of normal geomagnetic field polarity (south if during a reversed polarity period), and structures may therefore be oriented relative to this direction (e.g., McWilliams and Pinto, 1988;Dick, Erzinger, Stokking, et al, 1992). Several problems, however, are inherent in using Paleomagnetism in this way, not least that a strong magnetic field emanating from the drill string frequently has the effect of partially remagnetizing the samples, giving rise to a steeply inclined magnetic component in the core.…”
Section: Paleomagnetismmentioning
confidence: 99%