2004
DOI: 10.1016/j.pepi.2004.01.009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Multidomain behavior during Thellier paleointensity experiments: a phenomenological model

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
78
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 58 publications
(81 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
3
78
0
Order By: Relevance
“…MT2 experiments enable one to identify components of magnetization acquired during the field-on step which are not removed by thermal demagnetization to the same temperature, either due to alteration or multidomain (MD)-tails. All other paleointensity determinations were performed with the modified Thellier-technique MT4, which is a zero-field first method incorporating pTRM checks, additivity checks (Krá sa et al 2003) and pTRM-tail checks (Riisager and Riisager 2001) evaluated with respect to the directional difference between applied field and NRM according to Leonhardt et al (2004b). pTRM checks were conducted for all methods in-field after the demagnetization step.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…MT2 experiments enable one to identify components of magnetization acquired during the field-on step which are not removed by thermal demagnetization to the same temperature, either due to alteration or multidomain (MD)-tails. All other paleointensity determinations were performed with the modified Thellier-technique MT4, which is a zero-field first method incorporating pTRM checks, additivity checks (Krá sa et al 2003) and pTRM-tail checks (Riisager and Riisager 2001) evaluated with respect to the directional difference between applied field and NRM according to Leonhardt et al (2004b). pTRM checks were conducted for all methods in-field after the demagnetization step.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The standard means to detect pTRM tails is to vector subtract the measurement made after the demagnetisation treatment from that made after the pTRM tail check treatment. However, this must then be corrected for intensity and angular differences between the natural and laboratory field (Leonhardt et al, 2004) to become a meaningful parameter. In Fig.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Consequently it is also not relevant to the present study. Leonhardt et al (2004) and Biggin (2006) modified Fabian's model so that pTRM tails as observed in this study were included. Both of their models predict that the pTRM tails occupy a portion of the blocking temperature spectrum in a manner similar to a conventional pTRM in SD grains.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The experiments followed the modified Thellier-technique MT4 by Leonhardt et al (2004b), which is a zero-field first method that incorporates pTRM checks (Coe, 1967), additivity checks (Krása et al, 2003), and pTRM tail checks (Riisager and Riisager, 2001). Directional differences between the applied field and the NRM of the pTRM-tail check are taken into account according to Leonhardt et al (2004a). All determinations were analyzed using the ThellierTool4.21 software (Leonhardt et al, 2004b).…”
Section: Thellier-type Experimentsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…During the conduction of paleointensity experiments, one must be aware of potential problems such as alteration during geological time or even during the laboratory experiment itself (Valet et al, 1996), anisotropy of thermoremanence (Veitch et al, 1984), Correspondence to: A. Ferk (annika.ferk@geophysik.uni-muenchen.de) magnetic domain state bias (Leonhardt et al, 2004a), and different cooling histories in laboratory and nature (Fox and Aitken, 1980;Papusoi, 1972;Leonhardt et al, 2006). Especially during the last few years, several studies have tried to deal with these problems and to improve the quality of paleointensity determination either by introducing new methods (Dekkers and Böhnel, 2006;Fabian and Leonhardt, 2010;Muxworthy and Heslop, 2011) or by using samples that have remanence carriers in the SD range and for which corrections of some of the biasing effects are possible.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%