TÜRKİYE İÇ ANADOLU KRİSTALİN KOMPLEKSİ (KIRŞEHİR BLOK) İÇİN AEROMAGNETİK VERİLERLE YAPISAL TRENDLERİNİN İNCELENMESİ

Bu çalışmanın temel amacı, Türkiye'deki Orta Anadolu Kristalin Kompleksindeki (Kırşehir Bloğu), bozucu kaynakların yer altı yapısal özelliklerini ve derinliklerini aeromanyetik verilerden belirlemektir. Bu amaçla aeromanyetik verilere spektral analiz tekniği, analitik sinyal (AS) ve tilt açısı yöntemi uygulanmıştır. Bozucu kaynakların derinliklerinin 8,48 km ile 1,60 km arasında değiştiği tespit edilmiştir. AS ve tilt açısı yöntemi bölgesel anomalilere uygulanmış ve saha gözlemiyle tanımlanan jeolojik birimlerin yüzeyin altında daha derin bir köke sahip olduğunu görülmüştür. Ayrıca jeolojik haritanın merkezinde manyetik özelliklere sahip kayaçlar olmamasına rağmen tilt haritasında manyetize bir yapının varlığı tespit edilmiştir. Bu olgu, bölgede kıtasal kırıntılı kayaçlarla kaplanmış olabilecek yüksek oranda manyetize olmuş bir birimin varlığı olarak değerlendirilebilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler:

Analitik sinyal, Tilt- derinlik yöntemi, havadan manyetik veri

INVESTIGATION OF THE STRUCTURAL TRENDS THROUGH AEROMAGNETIC DATA FOR THE CENTRAL ANATOLIAN CRYSTALLINE COMPLEX (KIRSEHIR BLOCK), TURKEY

The main goal of this study is to delineate the subsurface structural features and depths of the causative sources in the Central Anatolian Crystalline Complex (Kirsehir Block), Turkey from aeromagnetic data. To this end, spectral analysis technique, analytic signal (AS) and tilt angle method were applied to the aeromagnetic data. The depths of causative sources were founded to vary between 8.48 km and 1.60 km. The AS and tilt angle method was implemented to regional anomalies and it was seen that the geological units defined by the field observation have a deeper root below the surface. In addition, although there are no rocks that have magnetic properties in the center of the geological map, the existence of a magnetized structure in the tilt map was determined. This phenomenon can be evaluated as the existence of a highly magnetized unit in the region that may have been covered by continental clastic rocks.

Keywords:

Analytic signal, tilt-depth method, aeromagnetic data Analytic signal, tilt-depth method, aeromagnetic data,

PDF

___

[1] Baranov V. A new method for interpretation of aeromagnetic maps: Pseudo-gravimetric anomalies. Geophysics 1957; 22: 359-383.
[2] Ansari AH, Alamdar K. Reduction to the pole of magnetic anomalies using analytic signal. World Applied Sciences Journal 2009; 7(4): 405-409.
[3] Reid AB, Allsop JM, Granser H, Millett AJ, Somerton IW. Magnetic interpretation in three dimensions using Euler Deconvolution. Geophysics 1990; 55: 80–90.
[4] Roest WR, Verhoef J, Pilkington M. Magnetic interpretation using the 3-D analytic signal. Geophysics 1992; 57(1): 116-125.
[5] Miller HG, Singh V. Potential field tilt-a new concept for location of potential field sources. Journal of Applied Geophysics 1994; 32: 213 – 217.
[6] Verduzco B, Fairhead JD, Green CM, MacKenzie C. New insights into magnetic derivatives for structural mapping. The Leading Edge 2004; 23: 116–119.
[7] Cooper GRJ, Cowan DR. Enhancing potential field data using filters based on the local phase. Computers & Geosciences 2006; 32: 1585–1591.
[8] Okay AI. High pressure/low temperature metamorphic rocks of Turkey. Geol. Soc. Amer. Mem. 1986; 164: 333–348.
[9] Dhont D, Chorowicz J, Yurur T, Froger JL, Kose O, Gundogdu N. Emplacement of volcanic vents and geodynamics of Central Anatolia, Turkey. J. Volcan. Geother. Res. 1998; 85: 33–55.
[10] Kadioglu, Y.K., Ates, A., and Gulec, N. Structural interpretation of gabbroic rocks in Agacoren Granitoid, central Turkey: field observations and aeromagnetic data. Geol. Mag. 1998; 135(2), 245-254.
[11] Akin U, Ciftci Y. Heat flow of the Kırşehir Massif and geological sources of the radiogenic heat production. Bulletin of the Mineral Research and Exploration 2011; 143: 53-72.
[12] Lefebvre C. The tectonics of the Central Anatolian Crystalline Complex: A structural, metamorphic and paleomagnetic study. in Utrecht Studies in Earth Sciences 2011; 3, 147 p., Utrecht Univ.
[13] Van Hinsbergen DJJ, Maffione M, Plunder A, Kaymakcı N, Ganerød M, Hendriks BWH, Corfu F, Gurer D, Gelder GINO, Peters K, Mcphee P, Brouwer F, Advokaat E, Vissers R. Tectonic evolution and paleogeography of the Kırşehir Block and the Central Anatolian Ophiolites, Turkey. Tectonics 2016; 35(4): 983–101.
[14] Cinku MC, Hisarli ZM, Yilmaz Y, Ulker B, Kaya, Oksum E, Orbay N, Ozbey ZU. The tectonic history of the Niğde-Kirşehirmassif and the Taurides since the Late Mesozoic: Paleomagnetic evidence for two-phase orogenic curvature in Central Anatolia. Tectonics 2016; 35, 772–811, doi:10.1002/2015TC003956.
[15] Okay AI, Tuysuz O. Tethyan sutures of northern Turkey. In: Durand B, Jolivet L, Horváth F, Séranne M. (Eds.), The Mediterranean Basins: Tertiary Extension Within the Alpine Orogen. Geological Society, London, Special Publications 1999; 156: 475–515.
[16] Sengor AMC. Cimmeriden orogenic system and tectonics of Eurasia. Geological Society of America, Special Publication 1984; 195: 82.
[17] Sengor AMC, Gorur N, Saroglu F. Strike-slip faulting and related basin formation in zones of tectonic escape: Turkey as a case study: in Biddle, K.T. and Christie-Blick, N., edts, Strike-slip Deformation, Basin Formation, and Sedimentation. Soc. Econ. Paleont. Min. Spec. Pub. 1985; 37: 227–264.
[18] Pasquare G, Poli S, Vezzoli L, Zanchi A. Continental arc volcanism and tectonic setting in Central Anatolia, Turkey. Tectonophysics 1988; 146: 217–230.
[19] Whitney DL, Dilek Y. Metamorphism during alpine crustal thickening and extension in central Anatolia, Turkey: The Nigde metamorphic core complex. Journal of Petrology 1998; 39 (7): 1385–1403.
[20] Lefebvre C, Peters K, Wehrens P, Brouwer FM, Van Roermund HLM. Thermal and extensional exhumation history of a high-temperature crystalline complex (Hırkadag Massif, Central Anatolia). Lithos 2015; 238:156–173.
[21] Goncuoglu MC. Geologic des westlichen Nigde massivs; PhD Thesis, Bonn University, 1977; 181 pp.
[22] MTA, 2002. 1/500000 digital geological maps database of Mineral Research and Exploration General Directorate, Ankara, Turkey.
[23] Canitez N. Structure of earth crust in North Anatolia by Gravity anomalies and seismology. PhD Thesis, Istanbul tecnical University 1962; 82 pp.
[24] Genc T, Tufan S, Sevinc A, Yemen H. Investigation of the crust structure of the North of Central Anatolia using Gravity and Magnetic Methods. 13th Geophysical Congress of Turkey, 1993; 110 pp.
[25] Ates A, Bilim F, Buyuksarac A. Curie Point Depth Investigation of Central Anatolia, Turkey. Pure appl. Geophys. 2005; 162: 357–371.
[26] Ates A, Bilim F, Buyuksarac A, Aydemir A, Bektas O, Aslan Y. Crustal Structure of Turkey from Aeromagnetic, Gravity and Deep Seismic Reflection Data. Surv Geophys 2012; 33: 869–885.
[27] Maus S, et al. EMAG2. A 2 arc min resolution Earth Magnetic Anomaly Grid compiled from satellite, airbone and marine magnetic measurements. Geochem, Geophys, Geosyst 2009; 10, Q08005. https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GC002471.
[28]Spector A, Grant FS. Statistical models for interpreting aeromagnetic data. Geophysics 1970; 35: 293–302.
[29]Shuey R, Schellinger D, Tripp A. Alley L. Curie depth determination from aeromagnetic spectra. Geophys. J. Int. 1977; 50 (1): 75–101.
[30]Nabighian MN. The analytic signal of two-dimensional magnetic bodies with polygonal cross-section: its properties and use for automated anomaly interpretation. Geophysics 1972; 37: 507-517.
[31]Nabighian MN. Toward a three dimensional automatic interpretation of potential field data via generalized Hilbert transforms: Fundamental relations. Geophysics 1984; 49(6): 780 -786.
[32]Salem A, Williams S, Fairhead JD, Ravat DJ, Smith R (2007) Tiltdepth method: a simple depth estimation method using first-order magnetic derivatives. Leading Edge, 26 (12), 1489–1624
[33]Wang YG, Zhang J, Ge KP, Chen X, Nie FJ. Improved tilt-depth method for fast estimation of top and bottom depths of magnetic bodies. Appl. Geophys. 2016; 13: 249–256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11770-016-0551-3.