Acta Geophysica

, Volume 65, Issue 1, pp 237–242 | Cite as

A different method for interpretation of magnetic anomalies due to 2-D dipping dikes

  • İbrahim Kara
  • Oya Tarhan Bal
  • Anisya B. Tekkeli
  • Gökhan Karcioğlu
Research Article


In this study a new method is presented to determine model parameters from magnetic anomalies caused by dipping dikes. The proposed method is applied by employing only the even component of the anomaly. First, the maximum of the even component is divided to its value at any distance x in order to obtain S1. Then, theoretical even component values are computed for the minimal depth (h) and half-width (b) values. S2 is obtained by dividing their maximum to the value computed for the same distance x. A set of S2 values is calculated by slowly increasing the half-width, and h and b for the S2 closest to S1 are determined. The same procedure is repeated by increasing the depth. The determined b values are plotted against the corresponding values of h. After repeating the process and plotting curves for different distances, it is possible to determine the actual depth and half-width values.


Magnetic interpretation Dikes Even component 


  1. Abdelrahman EM, Essa KS (2005) Magnetic interpretation using a least-squares, depth-shape curves method. Geophysics 70(3):L23–L30. doi: 10.1190/1.1926575 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abdelrahman EM, Essa KS (2015) A new method for depth and shape determinations from magnetic data. Pure appl Geophys 172(2):439–460. doi: 10.1007/s00024-014-0885-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Abdelrahman EM, Abo-Ezz ER, Soliman KS, El-Araby TM, Essa KS (2007) A least-squares window curves method for interpretation of magnetic anomalies caused by dipping dikes. Pure appl Geophys 164(5):1027–1044. doi: 10.1007/s00024-007-0205-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Abo-Ezz ER, Essa KS (2016) A least-squares minimization approach for model parameters estimate by using a new magnetic anomaly formula. Pure appl Geophys 173(4):1265–1278. doi: 10.1007/s00024-015-1168-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Atchuta Rao D, Ram Babu HV (1981) Nomograms for rapid evaluation of magnetic anomalies over long tabular bodies. Pure appl Geophys 119(5):1037–1050. doi: 10.1007/BF00878968 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Atchuta Rao D, Ram Babu HV, Sanker Narayan PV (1981) Interpretation of magnetic anomalies due to dikes: the complex gradient method. Geophysics 46(11):1572–1578. doi: 10.1190/1.1441164 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bhimasankaram VLS, Mohan NL, Seshagiri Rao SV (1978) Interpretation of magnetic anomalies of dikes using Fourier transforms. Geoexploration 16(4):259–266. doi: 10.1016/0016-7142(78)90015-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Essa KS (2007) A simple formula for shape and depth determination from residual gravity anomalies. Acta Geophys 55(2):182–190. doi: 10.2478/s11600-007-0003-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Essa KS, Elhussein M (2017) A new approach for the interpretation of magnetic data by a 2-D dipping dike. J Appl Geophys 136:431–433. doi: 10.1016/j.jappgeo.2016.11.022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hutchison RD (1958) Magnetic analysis by logarithmic curves. Geophysics 23(4):749–769. doi: 10.1190/1.1438525 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kara İ (1997) Magnetic interpretation of two-dimensional dikes using integration- nomograms. J Appl Geophys 36(4):175–180. doi: 10.1016/S0926-9851(96)00054-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kara İ, Özdemir M, Yüksel FA (1996) Interpretation of magnetic anomalies of dikes using correlation factors. Pure appl Geophys 147(4):777–788. doi: 10.1007/BF01089702 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Koulomzine T, Lamontagne Y, Nadeau A (1970) New methods for the direct interpretation of magnetic anomalies caused by inclined dikes of infinite length. Geophysics 35(5):812–830. doi: 10.1190/1.1440131 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Mohan NL, Sundararajan N, Seshagiri Rao SV (1982) Interpretation of some two-dimensional magnetic bodies using Hilbert transforms. Geophysics 47(3):376–387. doi: 10.1190/1.1441342 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Murthy IVR (1985) The midpoint method: magnetic interpretation of dikes and faults. Geophysics 50(5):834–839. doi: 10.1190/1.1441958 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Parker Gay S (1963) Standard curves for interpretation of magnetic anomalies over long tabular bodies. Geophysics 28(2):161–200. doi: 10.1190/1.1439164 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Powell DW (1967) Fitting observed profiles to a magnetized dike or fault-step model. Geophys Prospect 15(2):208–220. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2478.1967.tb01784.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ram Babu HV, Atchuta Rao D (1991) Application of the Hilbert transform for gravity and magnetic interpretation. Pure appl Geophys 135(4):589–599. doi: 10.1007/BF01772408 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ram Babu HV, Subrahmanyam AS, Atchuta Rao D (1982) A comparative study of the relation figures of magnetic anomalies due to two-dimensional dike and vertical step models. Geophysics 47(6):926–931. doi: 10.1190/1.1441359 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rao BSR, Murthy IVR, Visweswara Rao C (1973) Two methods for computer interpretation of magnetic anomalies of dikes. Geophysics 38(4):710–718. doi: 10.1190/1.1440370 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Institute of Geophysics, Polish Academy of Sciences & Polish Academy of Sciences 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • İbrahim Kara
    • 1
  • Oya Tarhan Bal
    • 1
  • Anisya B. Tekkeli
    • 1
  • Gökhan Karcioğlu
    • 1
  1. 1.Istanbul UniversityIstanbulTurkey

Personalised recommendations