Geophys. J. Int.

(2000) 142, 83–94

Statistical analysis and origin of the magnetic susceptibility of drill

cuttings from the 9.1-km-deep KTB drill hole

Armin Rauen, Heinrich C. Soffel and Helmuth Winter

Geophysical Institute, University of Munich, T heresienstrasse 41, D-80333 Munich, Germany. E-mail: rauen@geophysik.uni-muenchen.de

Accepted 2000 February 2. Received 2000 February 2; in original form 1999 July 31

SU M MA RY
Magnetic susceptibility was measured at 2 m depth intervals on drill cuttings from
the main drill hole of the German Deep Drilling Project KTB. Metamorphic rocks
(metabasites and gneisses) were the rock types most frequently found down to a depth
of 9101 m. Petrophysical (susceptibility, density), geochemical (element concentrations),
lithological and petrological data (ore mineral concentrations, lithological components,
alteration index) were used for a statistical analysis. The histograms of magnetic
susceptibility show nearly log-normal distributions with two distinct peaks depending
on the lithology. The most frequent susceptibility values are 0.266×10−3 SI for gneissic
rocks and 0.847×10−3 SI for metabasic rocks (mainly amphibolites). The higher level
of metabasite susceptibility is caused by higher contents of paramagnetic silicates
such as hornblende. A theoretical paramagnetic susceptibility was calculated from the
iron and manganese contents derived from X-ray fluorescence (XRF) measurements.
The ferrimagnetic susceptibility was determined by subtracting the theoretical para-
magnetic susceptibility from the measured susceptibility. Cross-plots of the ferrimagnetic
susceptibility versus density are used to discriminate between samples with predominantly
magnetite or pyrrhotite as the main ferrimagnetic mineral. Samples containing mostly
pyrrhotite show susceptibilities not exceeding 6×10−3 SI, whereas the highest measured
susceptibilities of 66.5×10−3 SI correspond to zones exclusively with magnetite. A
factor analysis was applied to investigate the background factors representing the data
variabilities. The factor analysis reduces 13 original variables from the complete depth
section to five independent initial factors. These explain in total 66.2 per cent of the
total data variance. The most significant factor, 1, correlates with metabasite content,
density and paramagnetic susceptibility and it anticorrelates with gneiss content. The
next significant factor, 2, correlates with ferrimagnetic susceptibility and magnetite
content. Factor 3 correlates with the amount of cataclastic rocks, factor 4 with
hornblende gneiss and factor 5 with pyrrhotite
Key words: continental crust, density, magnetic anomalies, magnetic susceptibility,
magnetite, statistical methods.

continental sedimentary and crystalline rocks (e.g. Soffel 1991;

1 I NT R O DU C TI O N
Anomalies of the static geomagnetic field are commonly
observed features in geophysical prospecting. These anomalies
are in general caused by increased amounts of ferrimagnetic
minerals in the rocks, mainly iron oxides of the solid-solution
series between magnetite and ulvöspinel (titanomagnetites) and,
less frequently, by members from the solid-solution series
between haematite and ilmenite (titanohaematites). In addition,
monoclinic pyrrhotite as an iron sulphide contributes signifi-
cantly to surface magnetic anomalies. Other ferrimagnetic or
ferromagnetic minerals play a minor role. Magnetite and titano-
magnetite are observed in ocean floor basalts and in many
Henkel 1994; Dunlop & Özdemir 1997). Pyrrhotite occurs in
some metamorphic rocks and sediments (Thompson & Oldfield
1986; Soffel 1991; Clark & Tonkin 1994; Henkel 1994; Pucher
1994; Schwarz & Broome 1994). Due to weathering and
oxidation, pyrrhotite is often altered to magnetite and is
therefore rare or even absent in surface outcrops, while it can
still be preserved in lower parts of geological bodies. Magnetic
anomalies of low amplitudes (<10 nT) can also be caused
exclusively by paramagnetic minerals.
The German Continental Deep Drilling Project KTB
(Kontinentales Tief bohrprogramm der Bundesrepublik
Deutschland) offered the unique chance to investigate the

© 2000 RAS 83

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article-abstract/142/1/83/593835

by guest
on 09 April 2018
 84 A. Rauen, H. C. SoVel and H. W inter
sources of magnetic anomalies in unweathered samples down
to a depth of 9.1 km. The KTB drill site is located at the
western margin of the Bohemian Massif in an area with a
prominent magnetic anomaly (Soffel et al. 1989; Bosum et al.
1997). The KTB pilot drill hole (KTB-VB) was completed in
1989 and reached a depth of 4.0 km. It was nearly completely
cored. The KTB main hole (KTB-HB) was completed in 1994
at a depth of 9101 m. The material extracted from the main
hole consists mostly of drill cuttings (sampled every 2 m) and
a few drill cores (80 m of core recovery in total ). Emmermann
& Lauterjung (1997) give an overview and a summary of the
major results of the KTB project.
Drill cores are the most valuable kind of drill samples,
because they can be attributed to an accurately determined
depth. Furthermore, they can be used to obtain structural
information on the rocks at depth. Drill cuttings, on the other
hand, are a mixture of all rock types from the section in the
vicinity of the drilling tool. They can be contaminated to some
extent by rock fragments that have fallen down from upper
parts of the open drill hole below the casing. There is an
uncertainty in the depth assignment of drill cuttings. The
original depth of cutting samples is calculated using the lag
time of the drill mud from the bottom of the hole to the
surface. Borehole depth and diameter, composition of the drill
mud and pump rate increase the uncertainty compared to
the true depth (Dietrich et al. 1992). A calibration made by
comparing gamma-ray measurements of drill cuttings and
by borehole logging shows a difference of both depths in the
range 0–10 m at a depth of 6000 m (Umsonst et al. 1995). In
addition, only poor structural information can be derived from
drill cuttings. However, drill cuttings are available in large
quantities and were sampled more or less continuously at 1 m
depth intervals.
In addition to measurements on drill hole samples, various
downhole logging measurements were performed. The results
of these investigations are given in Bosum et al. (1997),
ELEKTB Group (1997), Pechnig et al. (1997) and Bram &
Draxler (1994).
All samples from the two KTB drill holes were investigated
in the KTB field laboratory immediately after recovery of the
material (Emmermann et al. 1995). They were also studied
later in several laboratories in order to obtain a complete
set of petrophysical, geochemical and lithological properties
(Berckhemer et al. 1997). The processes leading to the formation
of the ore minerals at the KTB location were reported by
Kontny et al. (1997). The petrophysical analyses of the cores
from the 4 km deep pilot hole are given in Soffel et al. (1992)
and Huenges et al. (1997).
In this paper we present the results obtained exclusively
from drill cuttings sampled from the KTB main hole down to
the maximum depth of 9101 m. We show that drill cuttings,
despite the loss of data quality compared with drill cores,
are suitable for statistical investigations due to the high data
density. We will progress from univariate ( histograms) to
multivariate (factor analysis) statistics to describe the observed
data. Huenges (1997) applied factor analysis on non-magnetic
KTB data previously. Leonardi & Kümpel (1998) investigated
magnetic susceptibility and other data by spectral analysis,
quantified fractal terms and interpreted the results with respect
to crustal inhomogeneities.
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article-abstract/142/1/83/593835
by guest
on 09 April 2018
2 DATA B AS I S
The petrophysical, mineralogical and geochemical data from drill
cuttings used in this analysis were determined in the KTB field
laboratory (Emmermann et al. 1995). The data are stored at
the GeoForschungsZentrum (GFZ) in Potsdam (Germany)
and are available from http://icdp.gfz-potsdam.de/html/ktb/.
The cuttings were sampled every 2 m (on average) in the
depth interval 8–9101 m. Each sample was carefully washed
to remove drill mud and subsequently dried before the measure-
ments were started (Emmermann & Lauterjung 1997). In some
samples, metallic iron particles originating from the drill bits
occurred. These artefacts were removed by hand magnets.
Table 1 shows the petrophysical, geochemical and lithological
parameters, the sampling intervals, the range of the values and
the amount of data obtained.
Fig. 1 shows a plot of these data as depth logs together with
the simplified lithology. Some correlations are obvious. The high
densities correlate with metabasites, whereas the low densities
are mainly linked with gneisses. The magnetic susceptibility is
higher in metabasic regions than gneissic regions, but pyrrhotite
and magnetite increase the susceptibility more significantly.
Pyrrhotite is abundant in all depth intervals and in all litho-
logies. It occurs as a monoclinic, ferrimagnetic phase and also
as a hexagonal, antiferromagnetic phase. The relative abundance
of the hexagonal phase increases with depth; however, the
two pyrrhotite phases are not distinguished in the database.
Magnetite occurs rarely and is concentrated only in distinct
regions (Kontny et al. 1997). Increased magnetite concentrations
correlate clearly with high susceptibility peaks.
For the univariate and bivariate statistical analyses (Sections 3
and 5) and the calculations in Section 4, the original data con-
sisting of 13 variables as given in Table 1 were used. Due to
different sampling intervals, the amount of data available varies
from 572 to 5921. For cross-plots and factor analysis (Sections 5
and 6), only data measured on identical samples from the
same depth were chosen in order to avoid distortions of the
statistical analysis by interpolated data. This reduces the data
set to 446 cases (cross-plots) and 444 cases (factor analysis).
Each case of the data matrix consists of a complete set of
variables measured at the same depth. We used the complete
depth section (0–9101 m) for the analysis and did not separate
depth intervals.
3 UN IVA R IATE S TAT IS TI C S :
H IS TO G R A M S
The frequency distributions of the measured magnetic
susceptibilities of metabasites, gneisses and all data together
are plotted in Fig. 2. The histogram of all rock types displays
two maxima and is not symmetrical, with a tail towards
increased values. The two maxima can be assigned to the two
main lithologies. Separation into data from samples containing
exclusively gneiss and those containing exclusively metabasite
yields two approximate log-normal distributions. The number
of samples containing only gneisses (503) or only metabasites
(67) is low compared to the total data set (4621 samples). The
tale with increased values in the gneiss distribution is most
probably due to the enhanced contents of ferrimagnetic phases
such as pyrrhotite. Latham et al. (1989) explained the log-normal
© 2000 RAS, GJI 142, 83–94
 Magnetic susceptibility of drill cuttings 85

Table 1. Variables used for statistical analysis. The amount of cataclastic rocks is the sum of
cataclasites and cataclastically deformed rocks (cataclastic gneisses and cataclastic metabasites). The
ore mineral contents (pyrrhotite, magnetite, pyrite, ilmenite) were determined by optical analysis and
measured in an ordinal scale in five classes: 0 (0 volume per cent=‘none’), 1 (%1 volume per cent),
2 (<1 volume per cent), 3 (1–2 volume per cent) and 4 (>2 volume per cent=‘much’). The alteration
parameter used is defined as chlorite/(chlorite+biotite+hornblende+garnet+muscovite). A total of
49 000 data points were used (see Fig. 1).

Parameter Range of values Unit Sampling interval Number of data values

Petrophysics
magnetic susceptibility 0.1–66.5 10−3 SI 2m 4621
density 2.46–3.05 103 kg m−3 2m 4621
Lithology
gneiss 0–100 vol. % 1–4 m 5921
hornblende gneiss 0–97 vol. % 1–4 m 5921
metabasite 0–100 vol. % 1–4 m 5921
cataclastic rocks 0–100 vol. % 1–4 m 5921
Ore petrology
pyrrhotite 0–4 20 m 572
magnetite 0–4 20 m 572
pyrite 0–4 20 m 572
ilmenite 0–4 20 m 572
Geochemistry
iron (Fe O ) 2.4–15.2 weight % 2–4 m 4581
2 3
manganese (MnO) 0.05–0.31 weight % 2–4 m 4581
alteration parameter 0–1 2–4 m 4547

distribution of magnetic susceptibility by the similarly log-
normally distributed ore mineral concentration. We assume that
the distributions of paramagnetic and ferrimagnetic minerals
both contribute to the distribution function.
The maximum values of the histograms (the modes)
represent the most frequent or characteristic values, which
are 0.266×10−3 SI for the gneisses and 0.847×10−3 SI for
the metabasites. The most frequent gneiss value differs from the
geometric mean (0.381×10−3 SI) because of the asymmetrical
distribution (attempts of arithmetic averaging led to inadequate
results). The high values not belonging to a symmetric log-
normal distribution are regarded as susceptibility anomalies.
The highest measured susceptibilities, >10×10−3 SI, are not
displayed in the gneiss or in the metabasite data. These
susceptibility anomalies originate from mixed samples.
The susceptibility distribution of the metabasites is shifted
to increased values compared to the values for the gneisses.
The reason for this is the enhanced abundance of strongly
paramagnetic minerals such as hornblende in the metabasites,
which consist mostly of amphibolites (Bleil & Petersen 1982;
Friedrich 1995). This effect will be explained in the next section.
4 EVA LUATI O N O F TH E PA R A M A G NET IC
A N D FE R R IM A GN ET IC C O N TR I BU TIO N S
TO T HE M A G NET IC S U S CEP TI BI LIT Y
The effective paramagnetic moment of an ion depends on the
number of unpaired electrons in the 3-d atomic shell (Nagata
1961; Bleil & Petersen 1982). The expected maximum number
of unpaired 3-d electrons is five. Fe3+ and Mn2+ represent
this condition. Fe2+ ions contain four unpaired 3-d electrons.
These ions with an effective paramagnetic moment are most
frequent in rocks of the Earth’s crust. Other ions contain-
ing four (Mn3+, Co3+, Cr2+) or three (Mn4+, Co2+, V2+, Cr3+)
or fewer unpaired 3-d electrons are less important (see Table 2).

Table 2. Element analysis from XRF measurements performed in the KTB field laboratory on
drill cuttings (0–9101 m depth, Emmermann & Lauterjung 1997) and the number of unpaired
3-d electrons (Bleil & Petersen 1982).

Element Naturally Number of unpaired Contents (weight %) analysed as

occurring ions 3-d electrons min. av max.

Fe Fe3+, Fe2+ 5,4 2.4 8.1 15.2 FeO+Fe O

2 3
Mn Mn2+ 5 0.05 0.13 0.31 MnO
Cr Cr2+, Cr3+ 4,3 0.002 0.013 0.074 Cr
V V2+–V5+ 3–0 0.005 0.016 0.047 V
Ni Ni2+ 2 0.001 0.006 0.031 Ni
Ti Ti4+ 0 0.21 1.22 3.39 TiO
2

© 2000 RAS, GJI 142, 83–94

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article-abstract/142/1/83/593835

by guest
on 09 April 2018
 86
A. Rauen, H. C. SoVel and H. W inter
© 2000 RAS, GJI 142, 83–94

Figure 1. Depth logs of measured properties of drill cuttings from the KTB main hole (0–9101 m) used in this paper. Simplified lithology (G=gneiss, G/M=alternating layer, M=metabasite);
petrophysical investigations: magnetic susceptibility, density; components from binocular observations: gneiss, hornblende gneiss, metabasite, cataclastic rocks; ore microscopy observations:
pyrrhotite, magnetite, pyrite, ilmenite, data are given in an ordinal scale of 5 classes: 0 (0 per cent=‘none’), 1 (%1 per cent), 2 (<1 per cent), 3 (1 per cent to 2 per cent) and
4 (>2 per cent=‘much’), all contents in volume per cent; monoclinic and hexagonal pyrrhotite are not distinguished; XRF measurements: Fe O , MnO; alteration parameter: defined as
2 3
chlorite/(chlorite+biotite+hornblende+garnet+muscovite) from XRD measurements (for sampling intervals, see Table 1).

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article-abstract/142/1/83/593835

by guest
on 09 April 2018
 Magnetic susceptibility of drill cuttings 87

where k is the volume susceptibility, r is the density, L is

Figure 2. Frequency distributions of magnetic susceptibility. Data
from drill cutting measurements from the main drill hole (KTB-HB).
(a) All rock types—all available data including gneisses, metabasites,
other rock types and mixed samples (4621 values). (b) Gneisses—
data from samples containing 100 per cent gneiss (503 values).
(c) Metabasites—data from samples containing 100 per cent metabasites
(67 values). The logarithms of the measured volume susceptibilities
(in 10−3 SI units) are divided into 100 classes (metabasites: 50) between
−1 and +2 (33 classes per decade, corresponding to susceptibilities
from 0.1×10−3 to 100×10−3 SI). The modes of histograms (b) and
(c) are marked and quantified.
Curie’s law gives the relationship between the effective
paramagnetic moments of the components of a mixture and
the resulting magnetic volume susceptibility k:
k=r[L 2/(3RT )] ∑ n p2 , (1)
i i
Avogadro’s number, R is the gas constant, T is the absolute
temperature, n is the amount of component i (in mol per
i
gram), and p is the magnetic moment of component i (Curie’s
i
law in cgs units, see Bleil & Petersen 1982; Multiplication by
4p gives k in SI units). The paramagnetic volume susceptibility
can be derived from Curie’s law and can be calculated from
the known contents of Fe2+, Fe3+ and Mn2+ ions (FeO, Fe O
2 3
and MnO, respectively) using the simplified formula in SI units
k =r(2.096 FeO+2.258 Fe O +2.543 MnO) ,
paramagnetic 2 3
(2)
where k is the volume susceptibility (in SI units), r is the
density (in kg m−3) and FeO, Fe O and MnO contents are
2 3
in weight per cent (from Friedrich 1995). The XRF analyses
used measure only the total iron content, which is the sum of
FeO+Fe O . For further calculations, three assumptions are
2 3
made:
(1) an FeO/Fe O ratio of 4 : 1 (according to e.g.
2 3
Wedepohl 1969);
(2) the measured manganese content consists exclusively of
Mn2+ ions (MnO);
(3) none of the paramagnetic ions is present in the form of
ferrimagnetic minerals.
Therefore, the calculated paramagnetic susceptibility represents
the maximum value for the contribution of paramagnetic
minerals. All measured susceptibility values exceeding this
maximum represent a ferrimagnetic contribution. The ferri-
magnetic portion of the volume susceptibility was calculated from
the difference between measured and calculated paramagnetic
volume susceptibilities:
k =k −k . (3)
ferrimagnetic measured paramagnetic
The results of this calculation of the paramagnetic susceptibility
were verified by hysteresis measurements. Hysteresis curves of
magnetization as a function of applied magnetic field give
information about the paramagnetic portion from the slope at
high fields. The comparison was performed on seven samples
(Table 3); they are plotted together with calculated susceptibilities
in Fig. 3. The calculated paramagnetic susceptibilities are
slightly higher (9–47 per cent). This is due to the simplifying
assumption that all paramagnetic ions contribute exclusively
to the paramagnetic susceptibility (eq. 2). In reality, some of
these ions are incorporated in ferrimagnetic minerals as well.

Table 3. Comparison of calculated and measured paramagnetic susceptibilities. Calculated:

derived from low-field measurements of total susceptibility and element concentrations
(eq. 2); measured: from the high-field slope in hysteresis measurements (gns=gneisses;
amph=amphibolites; mob=mobilisates, hbl-gns=hornblende gneisses).

Depth (m) Main rock types Susceptibility (10−3 SI)

total calc. para. measured para.

648 gns. 95% 0.408 0.384 0.261

3302 amph. 90%, mob. 8% 0.578 0.565 0.476
4552 amph. 81%, hbl-gns. 12% 0.898 0.578 0.491
6000 amph. 95% 0.908 0.620 0.512
7160 amph. 91%, mob. 5% 1.518 0.571 0.395
7480 amph. 84%, mob. 10% 51.018 0.665 0.572
8300 gns. 80%, amph. 8% 1.179 0.401 0.367

© 2000 RAS, GJI 142, 83–94

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article-abstract/142/1/83/593835

by guest
on 09 April 2018
 88 A. Rauen, H. C. SoVel and H. W inter

Figure 3. Depth logs of measured volume susceptibility (same data as in Fig. 1), paramagnetic volume susceptibility as calculated from eq. (2)
(open squares) and derived from hysteresis data (stars; Table 3) and ferrimagnetic volume susceptibility as calculated from the difference between
measured and paramagnetic susceptibilities (eq. 3). Right: simplified lithology (for explanation see Fig. 1). Note the different susceptibility scales.

Fig. 3 presents the results of this separation of the para- versus volume susceptibility k of all available data (4243 values).
magnetic and ferrimagnetic contributions to the magnetic These data are separated into paramagnetic (Fig. 4b) and
susceptibility. The paramagnetic susceptibility reaches a maxi- ferrimagnetic (Fig. 4c) contributions of the susceptibility using
mum level of 1×10−3 SI and is clearly influenced by the eqs (2) and (3). The two lines in Fig. 4(b) represent the upper
lithology. High paramagnetic susceptibilities correspond to and lower limits of the paramagnetic susceptibility as a function
regions where metabasic rocks prevail, whereas low para- of density r according to the formulae
magnetic susceptibilities occur in gneissic sections. In the low-
susceptibility parts, all of the measured susceptibility can k =4p×10−6
upper
be explained exclusively by the paramagnetic contribution.
+[(r−2.55×103 kg m−3)×2×10−4]/0.75 , (4)
Susceptibility anomalies and increased values >1×10−3 SI
are caused by the ferrimagnetic portion in general.
k =4p×10−6
lower
+[(r−2.67×103 kg m−3)×6×10−5]/0.63 , (5)
5 B IVA RI AT E S TATI S TI C S : CR O SS - P LO T S
Bivariate distributions (cross-plots) of density and susceptibility where k is the volume susceptibility in SI units and r is the
are useful in analysing relationships between petrophysical and density in 103 kg m−3. Eqs (4) and (5) describing the boundary
lithological properties. Fig. 4(a) shows a plot of the density lines (Fig. 4b) have been calculated from the following equations,

© 2000 RAS, GJI 142, 83–94

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article-abstract/142/1/83/593835

by guest
on 09 April 2018

Figure 4. Cross-plots of volume susceptibility as a function of density (4243 cases). (a) Measured susceptibility versus density (same data as in
Fig. 1). (b) Paramagnetic susceptibility (calculated with eq. 2) versus density. Lines of upper and lower paramagnetic susceptibility limits (calculated
with eqs 4 and 5) have been added. (c) Ferrimagnetic susceptibility (calculated with eq. 3) versus density.
originally given by Henkel (1994) in cgs units:
upper curve:
r=(1−v)×2.55 g cm−3+v×3.3 g cm−3 ,
k=10−6+v×2×10−4 ; (6b)
lower curve:
r=(1−v)×2.67 g cm−3+v×3.3 g cm−3 ,
k=10−6+v×6×10−5 , (7b)
where v is the volume fraction of the paramagnetic minerals,
r is the density and k is the volume susceptibility (all parameters
in cgs units). Henkel (1994) made the following assumptions:
(1) the rocks are composed of non-magnetic and paramagnetic
minerals (volume fraction v);
(2) the densities of non-magnetic minerals vary from 2.55
to 2.67 g cm−3;
(3) the density of paramagnetic minerals is 3.3 g cm−3
(1 g cm−3=103 kg m−3);
(4) the susceptibilities of paramagnetic minerals vary from
6×10−5 to 2×10−4 cgs (7.5×10−4−2.5×10−3 SI).
Henkel (1994) derived these values from metasedimentary
rocks, amphibolites and eclogites containing biotite, amphibole,
pyroxene and garnet as the main paramagnetic minerals.
The most frequent paramagnetic minerals from X-ray
diffraction (XRD) analyses of KTB samples are amphibole,
biotite, garnet, clinopyroxene, orthopyroxene and olivine,
mainly in amphibolites and metagabbros. The calculated para-
magnetic susceptibilities using KTB data fit nearly completely
in the range of naturally occurring paramagnetic susceptibilities
originally given by Henkel (1994). No values occur below the
lower line in Fig. 4( b), which confirms the natural boundary
character of this lower susceptibility line (Henkel 1994).
Susceptibility anomalies are explained solely by the ferri-
magnetic contribution. The ferrimagnetic data of the KTB
range from low values typical of paramagnetic rocks to very
high values, which contribute to susceptibility anomalies (Fig. 4c).
A discrimination was also possible for pyrrhotite- and
magnetite-bearing rocks, as shown in Fig. 5. The amount of
© 2000 RAS, GJI 142, 83–94
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article-abstract/142/1/83/593835
by guest
on 09 April 2018
Magnetic susceptibility of drill cuttings 89
data available for these correlations is less because of the
increased sampling interval (up to 20 m) for the ore microscopy
data (446 samples). Nevertheless, some interesting trends are
(6a) apparent. All samples containing pyrrhotite show susceptibilities
not exceeding 6×10−3 SI, whereas magnetite-bearing samples
reach the highest measured values, of up to 66.5×10−3 SI.
The number of pyrrhotite samples exceeds that of magnetite
samples, although magnetite is responsible for the highest
(7a)
susceptibility values.
6 M ULTI VA R I AT E S TATI S TIC S: FA C T O R
A N A LY S I S
Correlations between susceptibility, different lithologies, ore
minerals and rock alteration indicators are investigated by
multivariate factor analysis of the data. In general, factor
analysis attempts to identify underlying factors that explain
the pattern of correlations within a data set of observed
variables (see e.g. Backhaus et al. 1996 or Cooley & Lohnes
1971). A set of data contains variables that are, in general, not
independent and may correlate with other variables. Each of
the extracted factors accounts for a certain portion of the
original variance and is not correlated with the other factors.
Thus, factor analysis reduces a set of input data containing i
variables in j cases to a set of f factors in the same j cases,
where f <i. In our analysis the j cases correspond to j
depth values.
The fundamental theorem of factor analysis is given by the
matrix equation
Z=AP , (8)
written in coefficients
z = ∑ a p . (8a)
ij ix xj
(x=1 to f)
Z is the matrix with coefficients z containing standardized
ij
original values x of i variables in j cases:
ij
z =(x −X )/s , (9)
ij ij i i
where z is the standardized value of variable i at depth j, x
ij ij
is the original value of variable i at depth j, X is the mean
i
 90 A. Rauen, H. C. SoVel and H. W inter
Figure 5. Cross-plots of the ferrimagnetic portion of susceptibility (eqs 2 and 3; see Fig. 4c) as functions of density. (a) All available data
(446 cases). (b) All samples containing only magnetite (i.e. pyrrhotite=0 and magnetite>0; 21 cases). (c) All samples containing only pyrrhotite
(i.e. pyrrhotite>0 and magnetite=0; 317 cases).
value (for all j) of variable i and s is the standard deviation
i
of variable i. The mean of the standardized values is zero.
Each case is a set of variables measured at the same depth. A
is the matrix with coefficients a containing factor loadings of
if
i variables and f factors. The factor loadings range from −1
to 1. Factor loadings near −1 or +1 mean a high loading of
the respective variable. P is the matrix with coefficients p of the
fj
factor values (also called factor scores) containing f factors in
j cases (depth points). The arithmetic mean of all j cases of
each factor p is zero and the standard deviation is 1.
fj
The calculation steps of factor analysis are standardization
of the given data, calculation of the correlation matrix, esti-
mation of the explained part of the variance of each variable
(communalities) and extraction of factors. We used principal
axis factoring and the so-called Kaiser criterion for determining
the number of factors. For an easier interpretation, the initial
factor loading matrix A is rotated into a suitable coordinate
system to obtain maximum loadings of as few variables as
possible. We applied the so-called Varimax rotation, which is
an orthogonal rotation of the factor loading matrix A (e.g.
Backhaus et al. 1996).
Huenges (1997) applied factor analysis to selected petro-
physical (not magnetic) and geochemical data from measure-
ments on cores of the 4-km-deep KTB pilot drill hole. Our
analysis is based on the abundant data from measurements on
drill cutting samples from the 9.1-km-deep KTB main drill
hole. This data set consists of 13 petrophysical, geochemical,
ore petrological and lithological variables (i=13) measured at
444 depth points ( j=444, see Table 4). We used the total
depth range of the KTB main hole (0–9101 m) for a common
analysis. Several distinct depth intervals were investigated with
respect to electrical properties by Winter et al. (1998).
For the calculations we used the  software package
( for Windows, version 6.1.3 and above). Factor analysis
of the data set described extracts five factors, explaining a total
of 66.23 per cent of the original variance. The resulting factor
values p (containing f =5 factors for j=444 cases or depth
fj
points) are shown in Fig. 6 as depth plots of the five factors.
Variables with high factor loadings (>0.5 or <−0.5) are
shown in Fig. 6. The high loading variables are plotted versus
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article-abstract/142/1/83/593835
by guest
on 09 April 2018
the respective factors in Fig. 7. Fig. 7 also displays the linear
correlation coefficients between one variable and the respective
factor, which equals the respective factor loading.
Factor 1 explains 27.21 per cent of the variance of the
data set and is therefore the most significant factor. The
contents of metabasites and the density have factor loadings
of 0.92 and 0.90, respectively. This is equal to a correlation
coefficient of 0.92 between factor 1 and metabasite content
and of 0.90 between factor 1 and density (Fig. 7). The gneiss
content anticorrelates strongly with a factor loading of −0.91.
The logarithm of the paramagnetic susceptibility also correlates
with factor 1 with a loading of 0.83. As the rock-forming
minerals create the paramagnetic susceptibility, this property
is closely connected to the lithology and contributes to the
factor 1 too. The correlation with lithology is obvious when
comparing factor 1 as a function of depth with the lithological
column of Fig. 6. The plots of factor 1 as a function of
metabasites, density, gneisses and logarithm of paramagnetic
susceptibility in Fig. 7 therefore display two clusters corre-
sponding to the two main lithological units. In general, factor 1
is loaded by variables that represent the lithology, so factor 1
can be called the lithology factor.
Factor 2 contains variables controlled by the content of
ferrimagnetic minerals and explains 19.92 per cent of the total
variance. The most important variables are the measured
susceptibility (loading 0.93), the extracted ferrimagnetic suscep-
tibility ( loading 0.92) and the magnetite content ( loading 0.81).
The most pronounced anomaly in the depth range 7300–8000 m
correlates with increased magnetite contents in that depth
range (see Fig. 1). Factors 1 and 2 together explain 47.13 per
cent of the observed data.
Factors 3, 4 and 5 contain only one variable each with
loadings >0.5 or <−0.5. Factor 3 includes only the content of
cataclastic rocks with a loading of 0.93 and explains 8.05 per
cent of the total variance. The content of hornblende gneiss
only loads factor 4 ( loading 0.88, variance 6.64 per cent) and
the pyrrhotite content only loads factor 5 ( loading 0.51) and
explains the smallest part (4.41 per cent) of the total variance.
These exclusive loadings also show the uniqueness of cataclastic
rocks, hornblende gneiss and pyrrhotite. Each of these variables
© 2000 RAS, GJI 142, 83–94
 Magnetic susceptibility of drill cuttings 91

Table 4. Input data set for the factor analysis. The ore mineral contents (pyrrhotite, magnetite, pyrite,
ilmenite) were determined by optical analysis and measured in an ordinal scale in five classes:
0 (0 volume per cent=‘none’), 1 (%1 volume per cent), 2 (<1 volume per cent), 3 (1–2 volume per
cent) and 4 (>2 volume per cent=‘much’). The amount of cataclastic rocks is the sum of cataclasites
and cataclastically deformed rocks (cataclastic gneisses and cataclastic metabasites). The alteration
parameter is defined as chlorite/(chlorite+biotite+hornblende+garnet+muscovite). The data
set contains 444 cases, i.e. depth points.

Variable Range of values Unit Sampling interval

Petrophysics
log. of measured susceptibility in 10−3 SI −1 to 1.82 2m
log. of paramagnetic susceptibility in 10−3 SI −0.9 to −0.02 2m
log. of ferrimagnetic susceptibility in 10−3 SI −1 to 1.82 2m
density 2.46 to 3.05 103 kg m−3 2m
Ore Petrology
pyrrhotite 0–4 20 m
magnetite 0–4 20 m
pyrite 0–4 20 m
ilmenite 0–4 20 m
Lithology
gneiss (all gneisses except hornblende-gneisses) 0–100 vol.% 2m
metabasite (amphibolites and metagabbros) 0–100 vol.% 2m
hornblende-gneiss 0–97 vol.% 2m
cataclastic rocks 0–100 vol.% 2m
Geochemistry
alteration parameter 0–1 2m

is necessary to explain the total variance of the data set. This
result documents also that pyrrhotite is abundant in all rock
types. Factor 5 describing mainly pyrrhotite tends to have
increased values with depth. This is also seen in the depth plot
of pyrrhotite (Fig. 1). Although magnetite and pyrrhotite
are the most important ferrimagnetic minerals, they are not
represented by a common factor. This is documented by their
low linear correlation coefficient of 0.32.
There are some distinct zones with increased contents of
cataclastic components in the drill cuttings, especially at 6900
and 7200 m, where the drill hole intersected prominent cata-
clastic fault zones (Fig. 1). Factor 3 represents these cataclastic
fault zones well, but no correlation with magnetic properties
was found, as suggested by Bosum et al. (1997). The most
probable explanation for the lack of correlation is that no
cataclasis is observed in the depth interval 7300 to 7800 m,
where the highest measured susceptibilities occurred. Future
investigations of several distinct depth intervals are planned
to verify these hypotheses.
All five factors together explain most (66.23 per cent) of the
total variance of the input data set.
7 CO N CLU S IO N S
Drill cuttings are often regarded as low-quality drill samples due
to possible mixing during sample recovery and due to reduced
depth information. In spite of this apparent disadvantage,
important results were obtained using data from drill cuttings.
Histograms, cross-plots and factor analysis lead to the following
conclusions.
(1) Two ferrimagnetic ore minerals (magnetite and mono-
clinic pyrrhotite) and some strongly paramagnetic minerals
( hornblende, biotite) contribute to the magnetic susceptibility.
The theoretically expected paramagnetic susceptibility, calcu-
lated from iron and manganese contents and the density,
correlates clearly with lithology. High values of the measured
volume susceptibility k are typical of metabasic rocks such as
metagabbros and amphibolites due to their contents of para-
magnetic minerals such as hornblende, while much lower values
have been found in gneissic rocks. The characteristic values for
metabasites and gneisses are derived from the modes of the
respective histograms as k=0.847×10−3 SI (metabasites) and
k=0.266×10–3 SI (gneisses).
(2) Pyrrhotite is abundant in all rock types of the KTB drill
holes. Magnetite is concentrated only in distinct regions in limited
depth intervals. Susceptibility anomalies up to k=6×10–3 SI
are caused by pyrrhotite, whereas the highest measured values
of up to k=67×10−3 SI are caused by magnetite.
(3) Factor analysis applied to KTB drill cutting data in
the total depth interval 0–9101 m reduces 13 input variables
to five independent factors. In order of their significance, these
five factors are controlled by (1) lithology and paramagnetic
susceptibility, (2) ferrimagnetic susceptibility and magnetite
content, (3) the amount of cataclastic rocks, (4) the amount of
hornblende gneiss and (5) the pyrrhotite content. 66 per cent
of the variance of the data set used is explained by these five
factors. The reported sequence of factors also demonstrates
the sequence of importance of geological and petrophysical
properties for the total variance of the observed data. The type
of lithology controls the greatest proportion of data variance
(27 per cent). The rock-forming minerals also create the para-
magnetic susceptibility, which is therefore closely connected to

© 2000 RAS, GJI 142, 83–94

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article-abstract/142/1/83/593835

by guest
on 09 April 2018
 92 A. Rauen, H. C. SoVel and H. W inter

Figure 6. Depth logs of factor values (=factor scores) p with factor number f ( f =1–5) and case number j ( j=1–444). This is the result of the
fj
factor analysis (eqs 8 and 9) of the input data set (Table 4). Below the depth logs, the percentage factor variances and the sum of all factor
variances are given. The factor loadings of all variables with loadings >0.5 or <−0.5 are also given. The maximum theoretical loading is ±1.
Left: simplified lithology (see Fig. 1).

the lithology. The next significant properties are ferrimagnetic
ores, most importantly the magnetite content (20 per cent).
These two factors explain in total 47 per cent of the total
variance. Of less importance are the amount of cataclastic
rocks (8 per cent), the amount of hornblende gneiss (7 per cent)
and the amount of pyrrhotite (4 per cent). Magnetite and
pyrrhotite are loaded by different factors. This demonstrates
the different characters of these two ferrimagnetic minerals.
The amount of cataclastic rocks, hornblende gneiss and
pyrrhotite control one factor each. This shows that these
three properties are necessary to explain the variance of the
data set.
(4) Bosum et al. (1997) suggested a correlation between
the observed anomalies in magnetic borehole log data and the
occurrence of cataclastic zones and faults in the deeper part of
the KTB borehole. This suggestion is not supported by the
statistical investigations on drill cutting data presented here.
The amount of cataclastic rocks loads factor 3 exclusively,
without any participation of magnetic properties or magnetic
minerals. This is also seen in 2-D linear regression: the corre-
lations between the susceptibility and the amount of cataclastic
rocks and the alteration index are very poor (Fig. 8, correlation
coefficients C=0.17 and C=−0.15). These results are derived
from statistical analyses of the total depth interval. Here, the
increased magnetite concentrations in the amphibolite section
between 7300 and 7800 m, where almost no cataclasis was
observed, dominate the variance of the complete depth section.
Future detailed investigations of distinct depth intervals are
planned in order to study the influence of cataclasis zones on
magnetic properties.
(5) Drilling through cataclastic fault zones in general results
in a lack of core material due to poor recovery of compact
cores in these mechanically unstable zones (Berckhemer et al.
1997). Nevertheless, in such difficult zones drill cuttings are
sampled. Therefore, the analysis of drill cutting data has the
advantage that the complete lithology is investigated.

© 2000 RAS, GJI 142, 83–94

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article-abstract/142/1/83/593835

by guest
on 09 April 2018
 Magnetic susceptibility of drill cuttings 93

Figure 7. Cross-plots of factors 1–5 versus all variables with loadings >0.5 or <−0.5. Linear regression lines and correlation coefficients C are
also given.

Figure 8. Cross-plots of (a) the amount of cataclastic rocks (3965 values) and (b) the alteration index (4180 values) versus the logarithm of
susceptibility. Cataclastic rocks and alteration index are defined in Table 4. Linear regression lines and correlation coefficients C are given.

© 2000 RAS, GJI 142, 83–94

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article-abstract/142/1/83/593835

by guest
on 09 April 2018
 94 A. Rauen, H. C. SoVel and H. W inter
AC KN O WL ED GM E NTS
These investigations were supported by the Deutsche
Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, reference number So72/59
and 60). We thank H. Küchenhoff for advice in statistical
details and J. Pohl for making hysteresis data available. We
also thank F. Heider and the two reviewers, D. Eberle and
E. Huenges, for substantial improvements to the manuscript.
RE FE R ENC ES
Backhaus, K., Erichson, B., Plinke, W. & Weiber, R., 1996. Multivariate
Analysemethoden, Springer, Berlin.
Berckhemer, H. et al., 1997. Petrophysical properties of the
9-km-deep crustal section at KTB, J. geophys. Res., 102 (B8),
18 337–18 361.
Bleil, U. & Petersen, N., 1982. Magnetic properties, in Landolt-
Börnstein: Numerical Data and Functional Relationships in Science
and T echnology, New Series, Group V, Vol. 1b, Physical Properties
of Rocks, pp. 308–365, ed. Hellwege, K.H., Springer, Heidelberg.
Bosum, W., Casten, U., Fieberg, F.C., Heyde, I. & Soffel, H.C., 1997.
Three-dimensional interpretation of the KTB gravity and magnetic
anomalies, J. geophys. Res., 102 (B8), 18 307–18 321.
Bram, K. & Draxler, J.K., eds., 1994. KT B-Report 94–1, Basic
Research and Borehole geophysics (Final Report), Niedersächsisches
Landesamt für Bodenforschung, Hannover.
Clark, D.A. & Tonkin, C., 1994. Magnetic anomalies due to pyrrhotite:
examples from the Cobar area, N.S.W., Australia, J. appl. Geophys.,
32, 11–32.
Cooley, W.W. & Lohnes, P.R., 1971. Multivariate Data Analysis, John
Wiley, New York.
Dietrich, H.-G., Lauterjung, J. & Wöhrl, T., 1992. Introduction, in
KT B-Report 92–2, KT B Hauptbohrung, Results of Geoscientific
Investigation in the KT B Field L aboratory, 0–6000 m, pp. A1–A26,
eds Emmermann, R., Dietrich, H.-G. Lauterjung, J. & Wöhrl, T.,
Project Management of the Continental Deep Drilling Programme
of the Federal Republic of Germany in the Geological Survey of
Lower Saxonia, Hannover.
Dunlop, D.J. & Özdemir, Ö., 1997. Rock Magnetism, Fundamentals
and Frontiers, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
ELEKTB Group, 1997. KTB and the electrical conductivity of the
crust, J. geophys. Res., 102 (B8), 18 289–18 305.
Emmermann, R. & Lauterjung, J., 1997. The German Continental
Deep Drilling Program KTB: overview and major results, J. geophys.
Res., 102 (B8), 18 179–18 202.
Emmermann, R., Althaus, E., Giese, P. & Stöckhert, B., eds, 1995.
KT B-Report 95–2, KT B Hauptbohrung. Results of geoscientific
investigation in the KT B field laboratory, Final report: 0–9101 m,
Schweizerbart’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, Stuttgart.
Friedrich, D., 1995. Gefügeuntersuchungen an Amphiboliten der
Böhmischen Masse unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Anisotropie
der magnetischen Suszeptibilität, Geotektonische Forschungen, 82,
1–118, Stuttgart, Germany.
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article-abstract/142/1/83/593835
by guest
on 09 April 2018
Henkel, H., 1994. Standard diagrams of magnetic properties and
density—a tool for understanding magnetic petrology, J. appl.
Geophys., 32, 43–53.
Huenges, E., 1997. Factors controlling the variances of seismic velocity,
density, thermal conductivity and heat production of cores from the
KTB pilot hole, Geophys. Res. L ett., 24, 341–344.
Huenges, E., Lauterjung, J., Bücker, Ch., Lippmann, E. & Kern, H.,
1997. Seismic velocity, density, thermal conductivity and heat
production of cores from the KTB pilot hole, Geophys. Res. L ett.,
24, 345–348.
Kontny, A., Friedrich, G., Behr, H.J., de Wall, H., Horn, E.E., Möller, P.
& Zulauf, G., 1997. Ore mineral forming processes in the meta-
morphic rocks of the German continental deep drilling site (KTB),
J. geophys. Res., 102 (B8), 18 323–18 336.
Latham, A.G., Harding, K.L., Lapointe, P., Morris, W.A. & Balch, S.J.,
1989. On the lognormal distribution of oxides in igneous rocks, using
magnetic susceptibility as a proxy for oxide mineral concentration,
Geophys. J., 96, 179–184.
Leonardi, S. & Kümpel, H.J., 1998. Variability of geophysical log data
and the signature of crustal heterogeneities at the KTB, Geophys.
J. Int., 135, 964–974.
Nagata, T., 1961. Rock Magnetism, Maruzen Company Ltd., Tokyo.
Pechnig, R., Haverkamp, S., Wohlenberg, J., Zimmermann, G. &
Burkhardt, H., 1997. Integrated log interpretation in the German
Continental Deep Drilling Program: lithology, porosity and fracture
zones, J. geophys. Res., 102 (B8), 18 362–18 390.
Pucher, R., 1994. Pyrrhotite-induced aeromagnetic anomalies in
western Germany, J. appl. Geophys., 32, 33–42.
Schwarz, E.J. & Broome, J., 1994. Magnetic anomalies due to
pyrrhotite in Paleozoic metasediments in Nova Scotia, eastern
Canada, J. appl. Geophys., 32, 1–10.
Soffel, H., Plaumann, S., Pucher, R., Bücker, C., Götze, H.J.,
Wagener, M. & Haak, V., 1989. Gravity and magnetic investigations
at the KTB locations Schwarzwald and Oberpfalz, in T he German
Continental Deep Drilling Program (KT B), pp. 409–431, eds
Emmermann, R. & Wohlenberg, J., Springer, Heidelberg.
Soffel, H.C., 1991. Paläomagnetismus und Archäomagnetismus, Springer,
Heidelberg.
Soffel, H.C. et al., 1992. Physical parameters measured on cores
and cuttings from the pilot well (0 m–4000.1 m) of the German
Continental Deep Drilling Program (KTB) in the Oberpfalz area,
Bavaria, Federal Republic of Germany, Surv. Geophys., 13, 1–34.
Thompson, R. & Oldfield, F., 1986. Environmental Magnetism, Allen
& Unwin, London.
Umsonst, T., Lauterjung, J., Tran Viet, T. & Wöhrl, T., 1995. Technical
aspects and sampling procedures at the KTB -Hauptbohrung, in
KT B-Report 95–2, KT B Hauptbohrung. Results of Geoscientific
Investigation in the KT B Field L aboratory. Final Report: 0–9101 m,
pp. A1–A11, eds Emmermann, R., Althaus, E., Giese, P. &
Stöckhert, B., Schweizerbart’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, Stuttgart.
Wedepohl, K.H., ed., 1969. Handbook of Geochemistry, Springer,
Heidelberg.
Winter, H., Rauen, A. & Soffel, H., 1998. Die Ursachen elektrischer
Leitfähigkeitsanomalien in der KTB, eine Analyse mit multivariater
Statistik, in Protokoll über das Kolloquium Elektromagnetische
T iefenforschung, pp. 12–20, eds Junge, A. & Bahr, K., Deutsche
Geophysikalische Gesellschaft, Frankfurt.
© 2000 RAS, GJI 142, 83–94