2016
DOI: 10.1002/2016gc006436
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Automated paleomagnetic and rock magnetic data acquisition with an in-line horizontal “2G” system

Abstract: Today's paleomagnetic and magnetic proxy studies involve processing of large sample collections while simultaneously demanding high quality data and high reproducibility. Here we describe a fully automated interface based on a commercial horizontal pass-through ''2G'' DC-SQUID magnetometer. This system is operational at the universities of Bremen (Germany) and Utrecht (Netherlands) since 1998 and 2006, respectively, while a system is currently being built at NGU Trondheim (Norway). The magnetometers are equipp… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
65
0
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

3
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 75 publications
(67 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
1
65
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Demagnetization steps used were 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50, 60, and 80 mT for AF treatment and variable temperature increments up to 600 °C for thermal treatment. AF treatment demagnetization was performed on an in‐house developed robotized demagnetization device (Mullender et al, ). We plotted demagnetization diagrams on orthogonal vector diagrams (Zijderveld, ) and determined the magnetic components via principal component analysis (Kirschvink, ).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Demagnetization steps used were 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50, 60, and 80 mT for AF treatment and variable temperature increments up to 600 °C for thermal treatment. AF treatment demagnetization was performed on an in‐house developed robotized demagnetization device (Mullender et al, ). We plotted demagnetization diagrams on orthogonal vector diagrams (Zijderveld, ) and determined the magnetic components via principal component analysis (Kirschvink, ).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Five specimens per site were subjected to AF fields of 2. 5, 5, 7.5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90 and 100 mT, using a robotised 2G DC-SQUID magnetometer in a static 3-axes demagnetisation set-up (Mullender et al, 2016); all demagnetisation data were analysed using RemaSoft (Chadima and Hrouda, 2006). Thermal and AF NRM decay curves were obtained by plotting the NRM intensity as a function of temperature and AF field strength, respectively.…”
Section: Demagnetisation Of the Natural Remanent Magnetisationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Samples were thermally demagnetized in a magnetically shielded furnace (residual field <10 nT) with steps of 20 to 30°C up to a maximum of 450°C. Alternating field demagnetization was applied in a magnetically shielded room with an in-house built robot with steps of 3 to 10 mT to a maximum of 100 mT (Mullender et al, 2016). For both methods, the remanent magnetization was measured after each demagnetization step with a 2G Enterprises DC SQUID magnetometer (2G Enterprises, Sand City, CA, USA) with an instrumental noise level of ca 2*10 À12 Am 2 ; typical NRM intensities were at least two orders of magnitude higher.…”
Section: Palaeomagnetismmentioning
confidence: 99%