Estimation of Kenigsberger ratio from the temporal

variation of the magnetic anomalies - part I

Estimativa da razo de Kenigsberger a partir da variao
temporal de anomalias magnticas - parte I

Abstract

Remanent magnetization is often overlooked for cientic communities due to their diculty on working
with this, which it presents at any direction in the exploration models, even it been particularly more
important on Brazilian anomalies, where magnetic latitudes are low, than another countries, due to
South Atlantic anomaly. Primarily, this article proposes to obtain the information about the remanent
magnetization of rocks in the subsurface from the dierence between the dynamics of remanent and
induced magnetization , which in decennial intervals , that provides dierenced magnetic data at
10-year intervals. This diferentiation is due to variation of the induced magnetization in accordance
to the secular variation of geomagnetic eld. While the remanent magnetization remains unchanged
in this intervals, which are small in scale. The approach considers that the geological and physical
parameters of rocks over the geological body does not change anything. The Discrete Fourier transform
was used as a mathematical tool for synthesizing the information total-eld anomaly in a product of
the independent factors, some of which can change over time. The relative importance between the
remanent magnetization and magnetic susceptibility , or even the reason Koenigsberger , Q, is extracted
from this temporal variation.
remanent magnetization, geomagnetic eld, Koenigsberger ratio, direction cosines,
prismatic bodies, magnetic inclination, magnetic declination, magnetic induction.
Keywords:

Resumo

Dada a diculdade em se lidar com a magnetizao remanente apresentando-se em qualquer direo

nos modelos de explorao atuais, o mais usual na comunidade cientca tem sido desprez-la, mesmo
sendo proporcionalmente mais importante no Brasil do que nos pases dos Trpicos devido anomalia
do Atlntico Sul. Este artigo prope a obteno, primariamente, de informaes sobre a magnetizao
remanente das rochas em subsuperfcie a partir da diferena entre as dinmicas das magnetizaes
remanente e induzida, que, em intervalos decenais, resulta em dados magnticos diferenciados. Essa
diferenciao deve-se ao fato da magnetizao induzida acompanhar a variao secular do campo geomagntico, enquanto a magnetizao remanente permanece inalterada nesses intervalos, pequenos
em escala geolgica. A abordagem considera que o corpo geolgico no se modica em nada quanto
aos parmetros geolgicos e da fsica das rochas. A transformada de Fourier foi utilizada como ferramenta matemtica para sintetizar as informaes da anomalia de campo total num produto de fatores
independentes, variantes ou no no decorrer do tempo. A partir da variao temporal, extrada a
importncia relativa entre as magnetizaes remanente e susceptibilidade magntica, ou ainda, a razo
de Kenigsberger, Q.
magnetizao remanente, campo geomagntico, razo de Kenigsberger, cossenos
diretores,corpos prismticos, inclinao magntica, declinao magntica, induo magntica.
Palavras-chave:

INTRODUCTION

The magnetic properties of geological bodies, such as the magnetic susceptibility and the remanent magnetization have fundamental importance in the magnetic methods. The magnetic susceptibility is a factor
that determinates the induced magnetization from the Earth's magnetic eld. Both the remanent and induced magnetizations compose and contribute for contrasts of intensity between the supercial magnaetic
eld and principal magnetic eld of the Earth.
Faced by ambient magnetic eld presence, the induced magnetization occurs in geological bodies
containing magnetic minerals, which in turn can show a remanent magnetization that results from natural
magnetic alignment, due to several geological processes. According to Telford et al. (1976), the remanent
magnetization can be predominant one in the contribution for the total magnetization in the rocks, as
intensity as direction, in some cases.
In Brazil, the magnetic anomalies caused by induced magnetization for a geological body, were smaller
than those ones located at high lattitude regions. It is due to South Atlantic anomaly phenomenon. In
this case, the induced component of magnetic eld is comparativily smaller than the remanent one, which
it can become the most important magnetization component in Brazil. Tehrefore, the suty of remanent
magnetization is fundamental for interpretation of magnetic anomalies, despite of its dicult estimation.
Lelivre and Oldenburg (2009), and others, relate that including both the magnetizations in the magnetic
data inversion, it improves signicatively the data interpretation.
The observed magnetization in the rocks as resulting of the magnetic minerals concentration can have
two tyoes of contribution for its total magnetization: (i) induced (MI ) and remanent (MR ) magnetization.
In addition, there are two reasons for modifying the magnetization intensity:

First, it is due to

geological phenomena, genesis amd methamorphism in the rocks, those are directly referenced to remanent
magnetization . Second one refers to the induced magnetization, which it depends on magnetic eld of
Earth; Nevertheless, the second reason has internal magnetic eld of Earth as principal component, which
it varies faster than rst ond. So the total magnetization will be written as:

MTt

s
=

X 

t
MR,i + c Hf,i

2

(1)

i=x,y,z
it supposed that

+ MR,y y + MR,z z
MR = MR,x x

and

+ Hf,y y + Hf,z z,
Hf = Hf,x x

where the

index

denotes the instant of time.

The Kenigsberger ratio

The relative importance between the remanent and induced magnetization on the rocks can be measured
by Koenigsberger ratio Q. This ratio is very important for the correct interpretation of the magnetic
signals.

Qt =
where

Hft

MR
MR
0 MR
=
t =
MI
c Hf
c Bft

is the ambient magnetic eld at the

instant.

Most constituents crustal rocks has a remanent magnetization,

MI ,

(2)

due to the Earth's magnetic eld presence.

MR

MR ,

in addition to the induced one,

is not related to the current magnetic eld, but

it accompanies the magnetic eld given at the time that the rock was formed. The intensity of
particularly high in igneous and metamorphic rocks, although far from being larger than

MI

MR

is

(Sharma,

1997). It can be seen that the ratio

for a given rock can be quite variable.

According to Nagata (1961), the following generalisations are valid:

1. For slowly crystallised igneous and termically metamorphosed rocks in continental areas,
2. For volcanic rocks

Q 10,

and for many rapidly quenched basaltic rocks

Q 30 50

Q 1,

(e.g., oceanic

basalts); e

Q < 1.

3. Generically, in sedimentary and metamorphic rocks,

METODOLOGY

According to Blakely (1996), it is possible to obtain, in Fourier domain, the general form for the relationship between magnetic anomalies measured over horizontal supercie and their causative sources
located into a nite part of the

X Z

plane by the equation

+ Z
+ Z
+
Z


0
0
F {f } =
s(x0 , y 0 , z 0 )F (x, y, z0 z 0 ) ei(kx x +ky y ) dx0 dy 0 dz 0

(3)

z0

2.1 The 2D magnetic case

It may be possible to consider the magnetic sources as completely invariant in the direction parallel to
the long linear direction. If the
of the

and

axis is directed parallel to the invariant direction, being a function only

dimensions; the body is said to be two-dimensional.

To use the Eq. (3) in the magnetic case study, we let

0 0
it is represented for total magnetization MT (x , z ), and

as total eld anomaly

T , s

as source, which

is the Green's function due to a horizontal line

of magnetic dipoles, which it has magnetic moment equal to one. Moreover, it has a Fourier transform
given by (Blakely, 1996):
0

F {T }2D = 2Cm m0 0m 0f |k| e|k|(z0 z ) , z 0 > z0

where

z0

z0

are the

observator and dipole coordinates, respectively,

Cm ,

(4)

a constant of proporcionality,

and

where

m = m
z + im
x sgn kx ,

(5)

m = fz + ifx sgn kx ,

(6)

(m
x, m
z ) e (fx , fz ) are, respectively, the direction cosines of the total magnetization and the ambient

eld, respectively.
Now, suppose that: (i)

(z 0

> z0 ),

MTt

is zero outside of a region with nite dimensions and especially, at all

(ii) the magnetization direction is constant in the body, and (iii) the ambient eld direction

(or Earth's eld) is constant in the free space, Eq.(7) provides general relationship in the Fourier domain
between arbitrary magnetization distributions and the anomalies that they produce.

F {T }2D =

2Cm 0m 0f

|k| e

|k|z0

+
Z


0
Fx MT (x0 , z 0 ) e|k|z dz 0
z0

(7)

Particular case
Nevertheless, require the total magnetization intensity to be constant for the entire body, Eq. (7) is
rewritten as

F {T }2D = 2Cm 0m 0f |k| e|k|z0 MT C2D (kx )

where

C2D (kx ) =

ZZ

(8)

e|k|z eikx x dx0 dz 0 ,

R
and

is the region occupied by source material.

It is supposed that the sutdied region

z1 z z 2 ,

the expression

C3D

corresponds to the limited rectangle by

x1 x x2

and

is calculated as it being

C2D =

Zz2 Zx2

e|k|z eikx x dx0 dz 0

z 1 x1

eikx x1 eikx x2
ikx

e|k|z1 e|k|z2
|k|

!
,

(9)

and, therefore, Eq. (8) is rewriteen as

eikx x1 eikx x2
ikx

F {T }2D = 2Cm 0m 0f MT



e|k|z0 e|k|z1 e|k|z2

(10)

2.2 Equations for calculating the remanent magnetization

The proposed method attempts to use the Earh's geomagnetic eld variation, and to extract the physical
propriety of interest (in this case,

z = z0
body

MR /c ).

It is required that the body is limited in a region above to

plane, and it does not change its shape over time. For a given instant t, the direction cosines of the

m
x ,m
y

and

m
z

vary over time. Considering that the body volume

is constante, these direction

cosines depend on total magnetization and their components in the x, y and z directions, respecively, that
is


m
ti =

where

MTt

Mit
MTt



t
MR,i + c H0,i


t

MT


i=x,z

is the total magnetization at a given instant t.

Let two magnetic anomalies data set be taken at

and

(11)

T (x, t2 ).

t1

t2

instants, at same points, that is:

T (x, t1 )

Considering the simplied model of the two-dimensional geological body, the Fourier

transform, denoted for

T(kx ) = F {T (x)},

is given by:

T(kx , t) = 2Cm MTt tm tf C2D (kx ),

where, (i)

tm

tf

tively; and (ii) the

t2

(12)

are directions cosines funtions for the total magnetization and Earth's eld, respec-

MTt

parameter is the total magnetization. The

instants.

indexes will be to distinguish

t1

and

The complex functions tm and tf

Considering the direction cosines of the total magnetization (Eq.

(11)), the

tm

function is expanded as:

tm = m (kx , t) = m
tz + im
tx sgn kx





1 
t
t
= t MR,z + c Hf,z
+ i MR,x + c Hf,x
sgn kx
MT
with

MTt

(13)

described earlier.

Similarly, the

tf

function may be writeen as:

tf = f (kx , t)
= sin Tt + i cos Tt sgn kx
where

Tt

is the geomagnetic eld inclination, which is measured in the

(14)

X Z

plane.

The MR equations
t1 and t2 instants, it

T (kx , t2 ) = F {T (x, t2 )},

Admitting that, at same points, to be taken two magnetic data set at

there are the following data:
occur variations only along to

T(kx , t1 ) = F {T (x, t1 )}
x

and

can be said
if there are

direction.

From Eq. (12), it can be brought the following ratio:

MTt1 tm1 tf1

T(kx , t1 )
= t2 t2 t2 ,
MT m f
T(kx , t2 )

(15)

tf2 T(kx , t1 )
MTt1 tm1
.
=
tf1 T(kx , t2 )
MTt2 tm2

(16)

rearranging terms,

t2 instants to be known, using the IGRF/DGRF models will dene direction cosines
t1
t2
values of the f and f functions. So, dening the complex function
Since the

t1

and

tf2 T(kx , t1 )
(kx , t1 , t2 ) = a + ib = t1
,
f T(kx , t2 )

(17)

and, using Eqs. (13) and (14), Eq. 17 becomes

a + ib =
which it can be written in terms of

t1
t1
(MR,z + c Hf,z
) + i(MR,x + c Hf,x
) sgn (kx )
t2
t2
(MR,z + c Hf,z
) + i(MR,x + c Hf,x
) sgn (kx )

MR,z

and

(18)

MR,x ,

[(a 1) + ib ] MR,z + [b + i (a 1)] MR,x sgn (kx ) =

nh
i
t2
t2
t1
+
= c kb x sgn (kx ) Hf,x
kax Hf,z
+ Hf,z
h
io
t2
t2
t1
+i kax sgn (kx ) Hf,x
kb x Hf,z
+ Hf,x
sgn (kx ) .

(19)

Earlier equation can be shown as product between

(1 2)

(E + iF ) (F + iE) sgn (kx )

"

(2 1)

and

MR,z /c

matrices, as follows:

#
= J + iL

MR,x /c

(20)

where

E = a 1,

(21)

F = b ,

(22)

t1
t2
t2
,
+ Hf,z
a Hf,z
J = b sgn (kx ) Hf,x

(23)

t1
t2
t2
sgn (kx ) .
+ Hf,x
b Hf,z
L = a sgn (kx ) Hf,x

(24)

Assuming that the gridded magnetic data are transformed to the Fourier wavenumber domain (DFT 
Discrete Fourier Transform ), using Eq. (17) let to obtain the

using Eq. (20) for each

(a , b )

(a , b )

values for each point

kx .

After,

pair can be built the overdetermined linear system.

Rx = s

(25)

and its solution is given by

x = RT R
where

RT

is the conjugate transpose of the

1

RT s

matrix and

(26)

(.)1

is the inversion operation of a matrix.

The Kenigsberger ratio

The

vector contains the

susceptibility

c .

(x, z)

component values of the remanent magnetization, divided by magnetic

Using the denition of the Kenigsberger ratio (Eq. (2)), it can be calculated

s
t

Q =

MR,x
c

2


+

Hft

MR,z
c

2
=

MR
.
c Hft

In fact, the Kenigsberger ratio can be estimated at a given instant

(27)

t.

Kenigsberger ratio mapping

The method proposed divide all the magnetic anomaly data into subsets, which are contained here in a
sliding window, and in this way, improving the lateral resolution with regards to
On the basis of these data for each sliding window, it is obtained a

value.

Q value, which it shall be positioned

at the center point of the respective window. Figure 1 is an example for the two-dimensional case.

Sintetic models

Equation developted by Bhattacharyya (1965), has been adapted for simulating the sintetic data. This
formula is used for describing the total eld magnetic anomaly (in Tesla) at a popint

(x, y, z),

t
rectangular prism with MT (in A/m) magnetization, whose edges are parallel to

axes.

x, y, z

due to a

Figura 1: Example for sliding window 2D

It was calculated the magnetic eld along to

they extend the prisms along to

axis (y

= z = 0),

with the

y1

and

y2

values, such that

y and +y directions, that is, it is simulated a innite horizontal cyllinder

model with rectangular crosssection.

From these considerations, the magnetic eld of the rectangular

prism is given by

T (x, y, z, t) =






r y0
r x0
0
+
c
log

c
log
r
+
z

c23 log
13
12
r + x0
r + y0




x0 y 0
x0 y 0

c
arctan
+
c11 arctan
22
x02 + rz 0 + z 02
r2 + rz 0 + x02
 0 0  x2 x
xy

+c33 arctan

0
0
 0
xz

Cm MTt

y2 y



 0

zt z



0

x =x1 x y =y1 y z =zb z

(28)

c23 = (m
y fz + m
z fy )/2, c13 = (m
x fz + m
z fx )/2, c12 = (m
x fy + m
y fx ), c11 = m
x fx , c22 = m
y fy ,
p
=m
z fz , Cm = 107 , and r = x02 + y 02 + z 02 .

where

c33

Three models are analysed: (i) unique body, (ii) two identical bodies at the same depth, and (iii) two
separated bodies at dierent depths.
For each model, the crossection for each body is rectangular, with the following dimensions: Width=
m and heigth=
(a) the

30 m, and these bodies are identical with regards to their magnetic proprieties.

c = 0,0002

c =

In addition,

value (SI system), and

(b) for the remanent magnetization, its intensity

inclination

40

MR =

0,05 A/m, its declination

c = 0 ,

and its

70 .

With regards to ambient eld, they are considered the magnetic data around Salvador, BA, in 2003 and

t2 instants, which are calculated from IGRF model. Then, the parameters
t1
t1
t1

are: (i) in 2003, inclination T = 28 , declination T = 23 , total eld intensity Hf = 24650 nT, e (ii)
t2
t2
t2

in 2013, inclination T = 31,5 , declination T = 23,5 , total eld intensity Hf = 24720 nT.

2013, representing the

t1

and

For illustrating, Figures 2, 3 and 4 show these models and respective magnetic anomalies at given
instants. It can be observed that there are subtle dierences between each other.

Figura 2: Magnetic anomalies at given instants, due to a unique body.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Using the sintetic data for the described models, the procedure for calculating the Kenigsberger ratio,

Q,

from magnetic anomalies at given instants, which are contained into sliding window, will be repeated for

Figura 3: Magnetic anomalies at given instants, due to two identical bodies at same depth.

Figura 4: Magnetic anomalies at given instants, due to two identical bodies at dierent depths.

each position of the respective window. In the Figures, this ratio is normalized to the during theoretical
value

for the respective model, denoted for

Qteo .

In addition, for each sliding window, it is calculated the sum

P
(T )2

that is proportional to their

energy.
On the graphics, the magnetic anomalies are shown duplicated, because they have been obtained at

t1

t2

instants, alternatively.

5.1 Unique body

Figure 5 show the model, its magnetic anomalies at two given instants and the results of
according to center position of the sliding window, with three widths,

Q determination

xjan , for the window widths:

150,

500 e 1000 m.
Faced by to be a model has already seen in Figure 2 on a much smaller vertical scale, the magnetic
anomalies

T (x, t1 )

and

T (x, t2 )

share almost teh same views on the graphic. In the narrower window

width case, 150 m, it was observed that the maximum value of the

xjan

increases, the

Q/Qteo

Q/Qteo

is well below the one.

As

curve be approximately symmetric and bell-shaped, and its maximum value

aproximates to one, exceeding this one when

Despite the substancial dierences of the

xjan = 1000
Q/Qteo

m.

ratios for three windows widths, on the graphics, it

can be concluded that this method: (i) is sensible to small variations of the magnetics anomalies, and it
simulates the natural drift of the Earth's magnetic eld at a ten years interval, (ii) depends on the sliding
window width, and (iii) underestimate in the case of 500 m window or overestimate in the case of 1000 m
window.
Referring to the graphics of the
of

xjan = 1000

functions, their behaviour shows a extended step in the case

m. The step width is approximately equal to window one. This behaviour has been

repeated for graphics related to

present for

P
(T )2

xjan = 150

xjan = 500

m, and, although there is no step, the window width is

m case.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

Figura 5: Application of sliding windows in unique body"model.

It can be estimated qualitatively that the anomaly width"is on the order of 500 m, when observing
the graphics of

T (x, t1 )

and

T (x, t2 )

on the graphic of the energy function,

in Figure 5 (a). Therefore, it is justied the presence of the step

(T )2 ,

for

10

xjan = 1000

m, since several successive positions

for the 1000 m window includes, substancially, the anomalies

T (x, ti ).

variation interval of the center window, that includes the anomalies

In the

xjan = 500

T (x, ti ),

m case, the

decreases substancially

xjan = 150 m, the window becomes much

P
narrower, so that it will never include all the anomaly and, for that, the
(T )2 value will not achieve the
and, because of this, the step is narrower than ealier one. For

maximum values that were veried in the

xjan = 500

or 1000 m cases, which are qualitatively identical.

Based on these ndings, it is justied the inecient behaviour of the

Q/Qteo

ratio for

xjan = 150

case.

5.2 Two identical bodies at same depth

Figures 6, 7 and 8 show the simulations for identical bodies that are separated by 540 m, center to center,
with

xjan = 200,

500, 550, 590, 1000 and 2000 m cases. For the

xjan = 200

and 500 m cases, the

graphics of the Figure 6 show a duplication of the earlier model shifted from 540 m, with respect to

Q/Qteo

ratio and

P
(T )2

behaviours.

Figure 7 show results for

xjan = 550

e 590 m. In the

xjan = 550

m case, the

Q/Qteo

curve shows

that alocating the center window around bodies center it achieves a discrete peak, which suggests that
there are two bodies. It desappears in the
As

xjan

xjan = 590

m case.

increases beyond bodies separation distance, the bell-shaped cams accompanishes the limits

of the windos on the

Q/Qteo

curve and a third one appear between bodies. The

(T )2

behaviour is

similar to earlier, and the center step suggests to indicate a separation between the lateral cams on the

Q/Qteo

curve. Thereafter, the cams started to follow the increased window width.

5.3 Two identical bodies at dierent depths

Following tests propose to verify the

Q/Qteo

behaviour, especially the bell-shaped cams associated to

bodies with dierent depth: the centre of the left-hand body has 45 m depth and the right-hand one has
75 m depth. Let them to have the same magnetic and geometric proprieties, the shape of the magnetic
anomalies are dierents: the deeper body anomaly is smaller, and relatively, larger than the shallower
one.
Figures 9, 10 and 11 show the respective model, its magnetic anomaly, the

P
(T )2

curves, for dierent

xjan

cases. The cams of the

that is, they have small amplitude in the

gradually up to unitary value when

xjan d

xjan

Q/Qteo

Q/Qteo

curves and the

curves are similars to studied cases,

cases, according to Figure 9 (b), but they increase

increases. In addition, these cams separate and a third one

appears between the bodies and increase its width since window width increases, as shown in Figures 10 (c)
and 11.

5.4 Performance review for c variation

In studied two-dimensional cases, the following parameters were constants: (i) the intensity and direction
for remanent magnetization and the magnetic susceptibility of the body, (ii) a the directions and intensity
of the Earth's magnetic eld at given instants. In this study, it was changed the remanent magnetization
inclination between extremes, which represents the parallel and perpendicular cases to Earth's magnetic
eld, according to several window widths.
Figure 12 shows the

Qmax /Qteo

values, remembering that

observed Kenigsberger ratio along to prole.

11

Qmax

represents the maximum value of the

(a)

(b)

(c)

Figura 6: Application of sliding windows in two identical bodies at same depth"model for

xjan = 200

and 500 m.

It is important to observe that metodology for determinig

Q/Qteo

results in values greather than one ,

if the remanent magnetization direction to approximate to mean direction of the Earth's eld. Moreover,
these values depend heavily on window width.

12

(a)

(b)

(c)

Figura 7: Application of sliding windows in two identical bodies at same depth"model for

xjan = 550

and 590 m

5.5 Performance Review for Qteo variation

Evidently , if remanent magnetization intensity to be zero,

Qteo = 0,

the method proposed aord to fail.

Again, using the unique body"model, that is shown in Figure 2, it were changed the

13

Qteo

values to

(a)

(b)

(c)

Figura 8: Application of sliding windows in two identical bodies at same depth"model for

xjan = 1000

and 2000 m.

0,5, 1, 2, 6, 10, 15, 20, 30 e 50, and

xjan

between 300 and 3000 m. Figure 13 shows

Qmax /Qteo

versus

xjan .
The metodology for estimating
mates to 1, for higher values of

Q/Qteo

Qteo ,

ratio is more ecient, that is, the calculated values approxi-

but it depends also on window width,

14

xjan .

In addition, for lower

(a)

(b)

(c)

Figura 9: Application of sliding windows in two identical bodies at dierent depths"model for

300

xjan =

and 500 m.

values of

Qteo ,

even greater than one, tend to estimate

enough overestimated in the

Qteo = 6

Qmax /Qteo

values much larger than one, and it is

case, what suggest an instability for this method.

15

(a)

(b)

(c)

Figura 10: Application of sliding windows in two identical bodies at dierent depths"model for

590

xjan =

and 1000 m.

Conclusion

In this work, it was proposed that, at two instants, the shape, the remanent magnetization, and the
magnetic susceptibility of the a geolocial body do not change over time. It has been demonstrated that

16

(a)

(b)

(c)

Figura 11: Application of sliding windows in two identical bodies at dierent depths"model for

1500

xjan =

and 2000 m.

Kenigsberger ratio,

Q,

can be obtained from magnetic elds values,

T (x, y, t1 )

and

T (x, y, t2 ),

in

the Fourier domain. These anomalies are measured at two distinct instants, in a ideal situation that the
proles are obtained at same points from an area.
It can be used all the magnetic data for calculating

17

Q.

If an unique body to be causative source

Figura 12: Method performance for

Figura 13: Method performance for

and

Qteo

xjan

and

variations.

xjan

variations.

for anomaly, this ratio will be the its one. But, if there are many others bodie with dierent ratios
certainly the calculated value will be a sort of average for

Q,

Q.

Despite to be very unlikely to identify an anomaly caused by isolated body in the map or magnetic
prole in practical cases; the knowledge about anomalies caused by any fundamental models is necessary
for understanding the magnetic mapping complexity according to resolution aspect, discrimination and

18

type of magnetization of the bodies.

This method allows you to adjust the magnetic anomaly to dened model without any information a
priori. The method introduce the irrelevance with regards to geometry of the body, because it is admitted

its invariance over time, what shows its potentiality about physical proprieties mapping of the geological
bodies.

References
(2013) NOOA - "magnetic eld calculatos - estimated values of magnetic eld", Site

http://www.

ngdc.noaa.gov/geomag-web/#igrfwmm.
Bhattacharyya, B. (1965) Two-dimensional harmonic analysis as a tool for magnetic interpretation,
Geophysics,

30(5):829857.

Blakely, R. (1996) Potential theory in gravity and magnetic applications, Cambridge Univ. Press, New
York.
Buddington, A. F. and Balsley, J. R. (1958) Iron-titanium oxide minerals, rocks, and aeromagnetic
anomalies of the adirondack area. new york, Economic Geology,

53(7):777805.

Cordani, R. and Shukowsky, W. (2009a) Magnetizao remanescente: um parmetro crucial para a

interpretao e modelamento de anomalias magnticas em territrio brasileiro, Revista Brasileira
de Geofsica,

27:659  667.

Lelivre, P. and Oldenburg, D. (2009) A 3d total magnetization inversion applicable when signicant,
complicated remanence is present, Geophysics,

74(3):L21L30.

Nabighian, M. (1972) The analytic signal of two-dimensional magnetic bodies with polygonal crosssection: its properties and use for automated anomaly interpretation, Geophysics,

37(3):507517.

Nagata, T. (1961) Rock Magnetism, Maruzen Limited, Tokyo.

Newitt, L. R.; Mandea, M.; McKee, L. A. and Orgeval, J.-J. (2002) Recent acceleration of the
north magnetic pole linked to magnetic jerks, Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union,

83(35):381389.
Schn, J. (1998) Physics Properties of rocks: Fundamentals and principles of petrophysics, vol. 18,
Pergamon, Austria.
Sharma, P. V. (1997) Environmental and Engineering Geophysics, Cambridge University Press.
Telford, W.; Geldart, L.; Sheri, R. and Keys, D. (1976) Applied Geophysics, Cambridge Univ. Press,
New York, 1st edn..

19