List of nuclear weapons tests of North Korea

Table columns:
Sequence
Date time (UT)
Local time zone[note 1][6]
Location
Elevation, depth
Delivery
Yield [note 2]
Fallout [note 3]
References

Table rows:
cells: (1)
000000002006-10-09-00009 October 2006 01:35:27
KST (+9 hrs)
Punggye-ri Test Site, North Korea 41°17′06″N 129°06′30″E﻿ / ﻿41.28505°N 129.1084°E
001030 !1,340 m (4,400 ft), 310 m (1,020 ft)
underground
000010000 !0.7 - 2 kt
[7]
cells: (1)
Possibly a fizzle. East Tunnel approximately 1 km NE from the entrance. The Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources, a state-run geology research institute in Germany, estimated the yield at 2 kilotons back in 2013[8] but has since revised to 0.7 kt.[9] The International Seismological Centre has a bibliography and authoritative data for this event.
Possibly a fizzle. East Tunnel approximately 1 km NE from the entrance. The Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources, a state-run geology research institute in Germany, estimated the yield at 2 kilotons back in 2013[8] but has since revised to 0.7 kt.[9] The International Seismological Centre has a bibliography and authoritative data for this event.
Possibly a fizzle. East Tunnel approximately 1 km NE from the entrance. The Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources, a state-run geology research institute in Germany, estimated the yield at 2 kilotons back in 2013[8] but has since revised to 0.7 kt.[9] The International Seismological Centre has a bibliography and authoritative data for this event.
Possibly a fizzle. East Tunnel approximately 1 km NE from the entrance. The Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources, a state-run geology research institute in Germany, estimated the yield at 2 kilotons back in 2013[8] but has since revised to 0.7 kt.[9] The International Seismological Centre has a bibliography and authoritative data for this event.
Possibly a fizzle. East Tunnel approximately 1 km NE from the entrance. The Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources, a state-run geology research institute in Germany, estimated the yield at 2 kilotons back in 2013[8] but has since revised to 0.7 kt.[9] The International Seismological Centre has a bibliography and authoritative data for this event.
Possibly a fizzle. East Tunnel approximately 1 km NE from the entrance. The Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources, a state-run geology research institute in Germany, estimated the yield at 2 kilotons back in 2013[8] but has since revised to 0.7 kt.[9] The International Seismological Centre has a bibliography and authoritative data for this event.
Possibly a fizzle. East Tunnel approximately 1 km NE from the entrance. The Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources, a state-run geology research institute in Germany, estimated the yield at 2 kilotons back in 2013[8] but has since revised to 0.7 kt.[9] The International Seismological Centre has a bibliography and authoritative data for this event.
Possibly a fizzle. East Tunnel approximately 1 km NE from the entrance. The Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources, a state-run geology research institute in Germany, estimated the yield at 2 kilotons back in 2013[8] but has since revised to 0.7 kt.[9] The International Seismological Centre has a bibliography and authoritative data for this event.
cells: (2)
000000002009-05-25-000025 May 2009 00:54:43
KST (+9 hrs)
Punggye-ri Test Site, North Korea 41°17′29″N 129°04′54″E﻿ / ﻿41.29142°N 129.08167°E
000850 !1,340 m (4,400 ft), 490 m (1,610 ft)
underground
000040000 !2 - 5.4 kt
[10][11]
cells: (2)
West Tunnel at about 1.2 km NW from the tunnel entrance. The Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources, a state-run geology research institute in Germany, estimated the yield at 13 kt back in 2013[8] but has since revised to 5.4 kt.[9] The International Seismological Centre has a bibliography and authoritative data for this event.
West Tunnel at about 1.2 km NW from the tunnel entrance. The Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources, a state-run geology research institute in Germany, estimated the yield at 13 kt back in 2013[8] but has since revised to 5.4 kt.[9] The International Seismological Centre has a bibliography and authoritative data for this event.
West Tunnel at about 1.2 km NW from the tunnel entrance. The Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources, a state-run geology research institute in Germany, estimated the yield at 13 kt back in 2013[8] but has since revised to 5.4 kt.[9] The International Seismological Centre has a bibliography and authoritative data for this event.
West Tunnel at about 1.2 km NW from the tunnel entrance. The Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources, a state-run geology research institute in Germany, estimated the yield at 13 kt back in 2013[8] but has since revised to 5.4 kt.[9] The International Seismological Centre has a bibliography and authoritative data for this event.
West Tunnel at about 1.2 km NW from the tunnel entrance. The Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources, a state-run geology research institute in Germany, estimated the yield at 13 kt back in 2013[8] but has since revised to 5.4 kt.[9] The International Seismological Centre has a bibliography and authoritative data for this event.
West Tunnel at about 1.2 km NW from the tunnel entrance. The Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources, a state-run geology research institute in Germany, estimated the yield at 13 kt back in 2013[8] but has since revised to 5.4 kt.[9] The International Seismological Centre has a bibliography and authoritative data for this event.
West Tunnel at about 1.2 km NW from the tunnel entrance. The Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources, a state-run geology research institute in Germany, estimated the yield at 13 kt back in 2013[8] but has since revised to 5.4 kt.[9] The International Seismological Centre has a bibliography and authoritative data for this event.
West Tunnel at about 1.2 km NW from the tunnel entrance. The Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources, a state-run geology research institute in Germany, estimated the yield at 13 kt back in 2013[8] but has since revised to 5.4 kt.[9] The International Seismological Centre has a bibliography and authoritative data for this event.
cells: (3)
000000002013-02-12-000012 February 2013 02:57:51
KST (+9 hrs)
Punggye-ri Test Site, North Korea 41°16′05″N 129°04′51″E﻿ / ﻿41.26809°N 129.08076°E
000340 !1,340 m (4,400 ft), 1,000 m (3,300 ft)
underground
000070000 !6 - 16 kt
[10][12]
cells: (3)
Likely the test took place in the West Tunnel. South tunnel damaged by flooding in 2012. The Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources, a state-run geology research institute in Germany, estimated the yield at 40 kilotons back in 2013[8] but has since revised the yield as 14 kT.[9] The University of Science and Technology of China estimates the yield at around 12.2 kt, with a margin of error of 3.8 kt.[13] Hence the max yield could be 16kT for this test. The International Seismological Centre has a bibliography and authoritative data for this event.
Likely the test took place in the West Tunnel. South tunnel damaged by flooding in 2012. The Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources, a state-run geology research institute in Germany, estimated the yield at 40 kilotons back in 2013[8] but has since revised the yield as 14 kT.[9] The University of Science and Technology of China estimates the yield at around 12.2 kt, with a margin of error of 3.8 kt.[13] Hence the max yield could be 16kT for this test. The International Seismological Centre has a bibliography and authoritative data for this event.
Likely the test took place in the West Tunnel. South tunnel damaged by flooding in 2012. The Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources, a state-run geology research institute in Germany, estimated the yield at 40 kilotons back in 2013[8] but has since revised the yield as 14 kT.[9] The University of Science and Technology of China estimates the yield at around 12.2 kt, with a margin of error of 3.8 kt.[13] Hence the max yield could be 16kT for this test. The International Seismological Centre has a bibliography and authoritative data for this event.
Likely the test took place in the West Tunnel. South tunnel damaged by flooding in 2012. The Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources, a state-run geology research institute in Germany, estimated the yield at 40 kilotons back in 2013[8] but has since revised the yield as 14 kT.[9] The University of Science and Technology of China estimates the yield at around 12.2 kt, with a margin of error of 3.8 kt.[13] Hence the max yield could be 16kT for this test. The International Seismological Centre has a bibliography and authoritative data for this event.
Likely the test took place in the West Tunnel. South tunnel damaged by flooding in 2012. The Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources, a state-run geology research institute in Germany, estimated the yield at 40 kilotons back in 2013[8] but has since revised the yield as 14 kT.[9] The University of Science and Technology of China estimates the yield at around 12.2 kt, with a margin of error of 3.8 kt.[13] Hence the max yield could be 16kT for this test. The International Seismological Centre has a bibliography and authoritative data for this event.
Likely the test took place in the West Tunnel. South tunnel damaged by flooding in 2012. The Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources, a state-run geology research institute in Germany, estimated the yield at 40 kilotons back in 2013[8] but has since revised the yield as 14 kT.[9] The University of Science and Technology of China estimates the yield at around 12.2 kt, with a margin of error of 3.8 kt.[13] Hence the max yield could be 16kT for this test. The International Seismological Centre has a bibliography and authoritative data for this event.
Likely the test took place in the West Tunnel. South tunnel damaged by flooding in 2012. The Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources, a state-run geology research institute in Germany, estimated the yield at 40 kilotons back in 2013[8] but has since revised the yield as 14 kT.[9] The University of Science and Technology of China estimates the yield at around 12.2 kt, with a margin of error of 3.8 kt.[13] Hence the max yield could be 16kT for this test. The International Seismological Centre has a bibliography and authoritative data for this event.
Likely the test took place in the West Tunnel. South tunnel damaged by flooding in 2012. The Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources, a state-run geology research institute in Germany, estimated the yield at 40 kilotons back in 2013[8] but has since revised the yield as 14 kT.[9] The University of Science and Technology of China estimates the yield at around 12.2 kt, with a margin of error of 3.8 kt.[13] Hence the max yield could be 16kT for this test. The International Seismological Centre has a bibliography and authoritative data for this event.
cells: (4)
000000002016-01-06-00006 January 2016 01:30:01
PYT (+8:30 hrs)
Punggye-ri Test Site, North Korea 41°18′32″N 129°02′02″E﻿ / ﻿41.30900°N 129.03399°E
1,340 m (4,400 ft), 1,000 m (3,300 ft)
underground
000100000 !7 - 16.5 kt
[14][15]
cells: (4)
Claimed to be a hydrogen bomb. Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources has originally estimated the yield as 14kT[9] but has since revised to 10kT.[16] The University of Science and Technology of China estimates the yield at around 11.3 kt, with a margin of error of 4.2 kt.[17] Hence the max yield could be 16.5kT for this test. The International Seismological Centre has a bibliography and authoritative data for this event.
Claimed to be a hydrogen bomb. Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources has originally estimated the yield as 14kT[9] but has since revised to 10kT.[16] The University of Science and Technology of China estimates the yield at around 11.3 kt, with a margin of error of 4.2 kt.[17] Hence the max yield could be 16.5kT for this test. The International Seismological Centre has a bibliography and authoritative data for this event.
Claimed to be a hydrogen bomb. Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources has originally estimated the yield as 14kT[9] but has since revised to 10kT.[16] The University of Science and Technology of China estimates the yield at around 11.3 kt, with a margin of error of 4.2 kt.[17] Hence the max yield could be 16.5kT for this test. The International Seismological Centre has a bibliography and authoritative data for this event.
Claimed to be a hydrogen bomb. Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources has originally estimated the yield as 14kT[9] but has since revised to 10kT.[16] The University of Science and Technology of China estimates the yield at around 11.3 kt, with a margin of error of 4.2 kt.[17] Hence the max yield could be 16.5kT for this test. The International Seismological Centre has a bibliography and authoritative data for this event.
Claimed to be a hydrogen bomb. Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources has originally estimated the yield as 14kT[9] but has since revised to 10kT.[16] The University of Science and Technology of China estimates the yield at around 11.3 kt, with a margin of error of 4.2 kt.[17] Hence the max yield could be 16.5kT for this test. The International Seismological Centre has a bibliography and authoritative data for this event.
Claimed to be a hydrogen bomb. Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources has originally estimated the yield as 14kT[9] but has since revised to 10kT.[16] The University of Science and Technology of China estimates the yield at around 11.3 kt, with a margin of error of 4.2 kt.[17] Hence the max yield could be 16.5kT for this test. The International Seismological Centre has a bibliography and authoritative data for this event.
Claimed to be a hydrogen bomb. Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources has originally estimated the yield as 14kT[9] but has since revised to 10kT.[16] The University of Science and Technology of China estimates the yield at around 11.3 kt, with a margin of error of 4.2 kt.[17] Hence the max yield could be 16.5kT for this test. The International Seismological Centre has a bibliography and authoritative data for this event.
Claimed to be a hydrogen bomb. Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources has originally estimated the yield as 14kT[9] but has since revised to 10kT.[16] The University of Science and Technology of China estimates the yield at around 11.3 kt, with a margin of error of 4.2 kt.[17] Hence the max yield could be 16.5kT for this test. The International Seismological Centre has a bibliography and authoritative data for this event.
cells: (5)
000000002016-09-09-00009 September 2016 00:30:01
PYT (+8:30 hrs)
Punggye-ri Test Site, North Korea 41°17′53″N 129°00′54″E﻿ / ﻿41.298°N 129.015°E[note 4]
1,340 m (4,400 ft), 1,000 m (3,300 ft)
underground
000150000 !15 - 25 kt
[18][19][20]
cells: (5)
North Korea announced that this is a successful test of a warhead that can be mounted onto a rocket.[21] Siegfried S. Hecker, former director of the Los Alamos National Laboratory, estimated yield at 15 to 25 kt[22] Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources has initially estimated the yield as 25 kt[16] The University of Science and Technology of China estimates the yield at around 17.8 kt, with a margin of error of 5.9 kt.[23] The International Seismological Centre will have authoritative data for this event in due course.
North Korea announced that this is a successful test of a warhead that can be mounted onto a rocket.[21] Siegfried S. Hecker, former director of the Los Alamos National Laboratory, estimated yield at 15 to 25 kt[22] Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources has initially estimated the yield as 25 kt[16] The University of Science and Technology of China estimates the yield at around 17.8 kt, with a margin of error of 5.9 kt.[23] The International Seismological Centre will have authoritative data for this event in due course.
North Korea announced that this is a successful test of a warhead that can be mounted onto a rocket.[21] Siegfried S. Hecker, former director of the Los Alamos National Laboratory, estimated yield at 15 to 25 kt[22] Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources has initially estimated the yield as 25 kt[16] The University of Science and Technology of China estimates the yield at around 17.8 kt, with a margin of error of 5.9 kt.[23] The International Seismological Centre will have authoritative data for this event in due course.
North Korea announced that this is a successful test of a warhead that can be mounted onto a rocket.[21] Siegfried S. Hecker, former director of the Los Alamos National Laboratory, estimated yield at 15 to 25 kt[22] Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources has initially estimated the yield as 25 kt[16] The University of Science and Technology of China estimates the yield at around 17.8 kt, with a margin of error of 5.9 kt.[23] The International Seismological Centre will have authoritative data for this event in due course.
North Korea announced that this is a successful test of a warhead that can be mounted onto a rocket.[21] Siegfried S. Hecker, former director of the Los Alamos National Laboratory, estimated yield at 15 to 25 kt[22] Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources has initially estimated the yield as 25 kt[16] The University of Science and Technology of China estimates the yield at around 17.8 kt, with a margin of error of 5.9 kt.[23] The International Seismological Centre will have authoritative data for this event in due course.
North Korea announced that this is a successful test of a warhead that can be mounted onto a rocket.[21] Siegfried S. Hecker, former director of the Los Alamos National Laboratory, estimated yield at 15 to 25 kt[22] Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources has initially estimated the yield as 25 kt[16] The University of Science and Technology of China estimates the yield at around 17.8 kt, with a margin of error of 5.9 kt.[23] The International Seismological Centre will have authoritative data for this event in due course.
North Korea announced that this is a successful test of a warhead that can be mounted onto a rocket.[21] Siegfried S. Hecker, former director of the Los Alamos National Laboratory, estimated yield at 15 to 25 kt[22] Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources has initially estimated the yield as 25 kt[16] The University of Science and Technology of China estimates the yield at around 17.8 kt, with a margin of error of 5.9 kt.[23] The International Seismological Centre will have authoritative data for this event in due course.
North Korea announced that this is a successful test of a warhead that can be mounted onto a rocket.[21] Siegfried S. Hecker, former director of the Los Alamos National Laboratory, estimated yield at 15 to 25 kt[22] Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources has initially estimated the yield as 25 kt[16] The University of Science and Technology of China estimates the yield at around 17.8 kt, with a margin of error of 5.9 kt.[23] The International Seismological Centre will have authoritative data for this event in due course.
cells: (6)
000000002017-09-03-00003 September 2017 03:30:01.940
PYT (+8:30 hrs)
Punggye-ri Test Site, North Korea 41°20′35″N 129°02′10″E﻿ / ﻿41.343°N 129.036°E
000000 !1,340 m (4,400 ft), 0 m (0 ft)
underground
000100000 !70 - 280 kt
[24][25][26][27][28][29]
cells: (6)
Claimed to be a hydrogen bomb (but may only be a boosted fission weapon rather than an actual staged Teller–Ulam thermonuclear weapon).[30] On 3 September, South Korea’s weather agency, the Korea Meteorological Administration, estimated that the nuclear weapons blast yield of the presumed test was between 50 and 60 kilotons based on a magnitude 5.6 detection.[31] South Korean Government's initial yield estimate is 100 kt,[26] and it detected a 5.7 magnitude earthquake,[32] NORSAR Seismology Center initial estimate is 120 kt,[27] based on a magnitude 5.8 tremor. On 12 Sept 2017, this was revised to an estimate of 250 kt based on a magnitude 6.1 instead.[4] The German Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources estimate is "a few hundred kt",[28] based on a 6.1 detected tremor. The Japan Meteorological Agency also detected a 6.1 magnitude tremor.[33] from USGS: "[Magnitude] 6.3 Explosion ... Possible explosion, located near the site where North Korea has detonated nuclear explosions in the past. If this event was an explosion, the USGS National Earthquake Information Center cannot determine its type, whether nuclear or any other possible type." Depth and lat/lon location approximate. The China Earthquake Administration also detected a 6.3 magnitude earthquake.[34] The University of Science and Technology of China[35] estimated the yield at 108.1 ± 48.1 kt. The Geophysical Service of the Russian Academy of Sciences registered a 6.4 magnitude earthquake.[36] The Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory estimated 250 kilotons.[29] Japanese Government: 160 kt[2] U.S. Intelligence/Air Force Technical Applications Center: 70 to 280 kilotons.[24] Earlier U.S. Intelligence had given an estimate of 140 kt with unspecified margin of error.[1] The International Seismological Centre will have authoritative data for this event in due course.
Claimed to be a hydrogen bomb (but may only be a boosted fission weapon rather than an actual staged Teller–Ulam thermonuclear weapon).[30] On 3 September, South Korea’s weather agency, the Korea Meteorological Administration, estimated that the nuclear weapons blast yield of the presumed test was between 50 and 60 kilotons based on a magnitude 5.6 detection.[31] South Korean Government's initial yield estimate is 100 kt,[26] and it detected a 5.7 magnitude earthquake,[32] NORSAR Seismology Center initial estimate is 120 kt,[27] based on a magnitude 5.8 tremor. On 12 Sept 2017, this was revised to an estimate of 250 kt based on a magnitude 6.1 instead.[4] The German Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources estimate is "a few hundred kt",[28] based on a 6.1 detected tremor. The Japan Meteorological Agency also detected a 6.1 magnitude tremor.[33] from USGS: "[Magnitude] 6.3 Explosion ... Possible explosion, located near the site where North Korea has detonated nuclear explosions in the past. If this event was an explosion, the USGS National Earthquake Information Center cannot determine its type, whether nuclear or any other possible type." Depth and lat/lon location approximate. The China Earthquake Administration also detected a 6.3 magnitude earthquake.[34] The University of Science and Technology of China[35] estimated the yield at 108.1 ± 48.1 kt. The Geophysical Service of the Russian Academy of Sciences registered a 6.4 magnitude earthquake.[36] The Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory estimated 250 kilotons.[29] Japanese Government: 160 kt[2] U.S. Intelligence/Air Force Technical Applications Center: 70 to 280 kilotons.[24] Earlier U.S. Intelligence had given an estimate of 140 kt with unspecified margin of error.[1] The International Seismological Centre will have authoritative data for this event in due course.
Claimed to be a hydrogen bomb (but may only be a boosted fission weapon rather than an actual staged Teller–Ulam thermonuclear weapon).[30] On 3 September, South Korea’s weather agency, the Korea Meteorological Administration, estimated that the nuclear weapons blast yield of the presumed test was between 50 and 60 kilotons based on a magnitude 5.6 detection.[31] South Korean Government's initial yield estimate is 100 kt,[26] and it detected a 5.7 magnitude earthquake,[32] NORSAR Seismology Center initial estimate is 120 kt,[27] based on a magnitude 5.8 tremor. On 12 Sept 2017, this was revised to an estimate of 250 kt based on a magnitude 6.1 instead.[4] The German Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources estimate is "a few hundred kt",[28] based on a 6.1 detected tremor. The Japan Meteorological Agency also detected a 6.1 magnitude tremor.[33] from USGS: "[Magnitude] 6.3 Explosion ... Possible explosion, located near the site where North Korea has detonated nuclear explosions in the past. If this event was an explosion, the USGS National Earthquake Information Center cannot determine its type, whether nuclear or any other possible type." Depth and lat/lon location approximate. The China Earthquake Administration also detected a 6.3 magnitude earthquake.[34] The University of Science and Technology of China[35] estimated the yield at 108.1 ± 48.1 kt. The Geophysical Service of the Russian Academy of Sciences registered a 6.4 magnitude earthquake.[36] The Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory estimated 250 kilotons.[29] Japanese Government: 160 kt[2] U.S. Intelligence/Air Force Technical Applications Center: 70 to 280 kilotons.[24] Earlier U.S. Intelligence had given an estimate of 140 kt with unspecified margin of error.[1] The International Seismological Centre will have authoritative data for this event in due course.
Claimed to be a hydrogen bomb (but may only be a boosted fission weapon rather than an actual staged Teller–Ulam thermonuclear weapon).[30] On 3 September, South Korea’s weather agency, the Korea Meteorological Administration, estimated that the nuclear weapons blast yield of the presumed test was between 50 and 60 kilotons based on a magnitude 5.6 detection.[31] South Korean Government's initial yield estimate is 100 kt,[26] and it detected a 5.7 magnitude earthquake,[32] NORSAR Seismology Center initial estimate is 120 kt,[27] based on a magnitude 5.8 tremor. On 12 Sept 2017, this was revised to an estimate of 250 kt based on a magnitude 6.1 instead.[4] The German Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources estimate is "a few hundred kt",[28] based on a 6.1 detected tremor. The Japan Meteorological Agency also detected a 6.1 magnitude tremor.[33] from USGS: "[Magnitude] 6.3 Explosion ... Possible explosion, located near the site where North Korea has detonated nuclear explosions in the past. If this event was an explosion, the USGS National Earthquake Information Center cannot determine its type, whether nuclear or any other possible type." Depth and lat/lon location approximate. The China Earthquake Administration also detected a 6.3 magnitude earthquake.[34] The University of Science and Technology of China[35] estimated the yield at 108.1 ± 48.1 kt. The Geophysical Service of the Russian Academy of Sciences registered a 6.4 magnitude earthquake.[36] The Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory estimated 250 kilotons.[29] Japanese Government: 160 kt[2] U.S. Intelligence/Air Force Technical Applications Center: 70 to 280 kilotons.[24] Earlier U.S. Intelligence had given an estimate of 140 kt with unspecified margin of error.[1] The International Seismological Centre will have authoritative data for this event in due course.
Claimed to be a hydrogen bomb (but may only be a boosted fission weapon rather than an actual staged Teller–Ulam thermonuclear weapon).[30] On 3 September, South Korea’s weather agency, the Korea Meteorological Administration, estimated that the nuclear weapons blast yield of the presumed test was between 50 and 60 kilotons based on a magnitude 5.6 detection.[31] South Korean Government's initial yield estimate is 100 kt,[26] and it detected a 5.7 magnitude earthquake,[32] NORSAR Seismology Center initial estimate is 120 kt,[27] based on a magnitude 5.8 tremor. On 12 Sept 2017, this was revised to an estimate of 250 kt based on a magnitude 6.1 instead.[4] The German Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources estimate is "a few hundred kt",[28] based on a 6.1 detected tremor. The Japan Meteorological Agency also detected a 6.1 magnitude tremor.[33] from USGS: "[Magnitude] 6.3 Explosion ... Possible explosion, located near the site where North Korea has detonated nuclear explosions in the past. If this event was an explosion, the USGS National Earthquake Information Center cannot determine its type, whether nuclear or any other possible type." Depth and lat/lon location approximate. The China Earthquake Administration also detected a 6.3 magnitude earthquake.[34] The University of Science and Technology of China[35] estimated the yield at 108.1 ± 48.1 kt. The Geophysical Service of the Russian Academy of Sciences registered a 6.4 magnitude earthquake.[36] The Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory estimated 250 kilotons.[29] Japanese Government: 160 kt[2] U.S. Intelligence/Air Force Technical Applications Center: 70 to 280 kilotons.[24] Earlier U.S. Intelligence had given an estimate of 140 kt with unspecified margin of error.[1] The International Seismological Centre will have authoritative data for this event in due course.
Claimed to be a hydrogen bomb (but may only be a boosted fission weapon rather than an actual staged Teller–Ulam thermonuclear weapon).[30] On 3 September, South Korea’s weather agency, the Korea Meteorological Administration, estimated that the nuclear weapons blast yield of the presumed test was between 50 and 60 kilotons based on a magnitude 5.6 detection.[31] South Korean Government's initial yield estimate is 100 kt,[26] and it detected a 5.7 magnitude earthquake,[32] NORSAR Seismology Center initial estimate is 120 kt,[27] based on a magnitude 5.8 tremor. On 12 Sept 2017, this was revised to an estimate of 250 kt based on a magnitude 6.1 instead.[4] The German Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources estimate is "a few hundred kt",[28] based on a 6.1 detected tremor. The Japan Meteorological Agency also detected a 6.1 magnitude tremor.[33] from USGS: "[Magnitude] 6.3 Explosion ... Possible explosion, located near the site where North Korea has detonated nuclear explosions in the past. If this event was an explosion, the USGS National Earthquake Information Center cannot determine its type, whether nuclear or any other possible type." Depth and lat/lon location approximate. The China Earthquake Administration also detected a 6.3 magnitude earthquake.[34] The University of Science and Technology of China[35] estimated the yield at 108.1 ± 48.1 kt. The Geophysical Service of the Russian Academy of Sciences registered a 6.4 magnitude earthquake.[36] The Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory estimated 250 kilotons.[29] Japanese Government: 160 kt[2] U.S. Intelligence/Air Force Technical Applications Center: 70 to 280 kilotons.[24] Earlier U.S. Intelligence had given an estimate of 140 kt with unspecified margin of error.[1] The International Seismological Centre will have authoritative data for this event in due course.
Claimed to be a hydrogen bomb (but may only be a boosted fission weapon rather than an actual staged Teller–Ulam thermonuclear weapon).[30] On 3 September, South Korea’s weather agency, the Korea Meteorological Administration, estimated that the nuclear weapons blast yield of the presumed test was between 50 and 60 kilotons based on a magnitude 5.6 detection.[31] South Korean Government's initial yield estimate is 100 kt,[26] and it detected a 5.7 magnitude earthquake,[32] NORSAR Seismology Center initial estimate is 120 kt,[27] based on a magnitude 5.8 tremor. On 12 Sept 2017, this was revised to an estimate of 250 kt based on a magnitude 6.1 instead.[4] The German Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources estimate is "a few hundred kt",[28] based on a 6.1 detected tremor. The Japan Meteorological Agency also detected a 6.1 magnitude tremor.[33] from USGS: "[Magnitude] 6.3 Explosion ... Possible explosion, located near the site where North Korea has detonated nuclear explosions in the past. If this event was an explosion, the USGS National Earthquake Information Center cannot determine its type, whether nuclear or any other possible type." Depth and lat/lon location approximate. The China Earthquake Administration also detected a 6.3 magnitude earthquake.[34] The University of Science and Technology of China[35] estimated the yield at 108.1 ± 48.1 kt. The Geophysical Service of the Russian Academy of Sciences registered a 6.4 magnitude earthquake.[36] The Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory estimated 250 kilotons.[29] Japanese Government: 160 kt[2] U.S. Intelligence/Air Force Technical Applications Center: 70 to 280 kilotons.[24] Earlier U.S. Intelligence had given an estimate of 140 kt with unspecified margin of error.[1] The International Seismological Centre will have authoritative data for this event in due course.
Claimed to be a hydrogen bomb (but may only be a boosted fission weapon rather than an actual staged Teller–Ulam thermonuclear weapon).[30] On 3 September, South Korea’s weather agency, the Korea Meteorological Administration, estimated that the nuclear weapons blast yield of the presumed test was between 50 and 60 kilotons based on a magnitude 5.6 detection.[31] South Korean Government's initial yield estimate is 100 kt,[26] and it detected a 5.7 magnitude earthquake,[32] NORSAR Seismology Center initial estimate is 120 kt,[27] based on a magnitude 5.8 tremor. On 12 Sept 2017, this was revised to an estimate of 250 kt based on a magnitude 6.1 instead.[4] The German Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources estimate is "a few hundred kt",[28] based on a 6.1 detected tremor. The Japan Meteorological Agency also detected a 6.1 magnitude tremor.[33] from USGS: "[Magnitude] 6.3 Explosion ... Possible explosion, located near the site where North Korea has detonated nuclear explosions in the past. If this event was an explosion, the USGS National Earthquake Information Center cannot determine its type, whether nuclear or any other possible type." Depth and lat/lon location approximate. The China Earthquake Administration also detected a 6.3 magnitude earthquake.[34] The University of Science and Technology of China[35] estimated the yield at 108.1 ± 48.1 kt. The Geophysical Service of the Russian Academy of Sciences registered a 6.4 magnitude earthquake.[36] The Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory estimated 250 kilotons.[29] Japanese Government: 160 kt[2] U.S. Intelligence/Air Force Technical Applications Center: 70 to 280 kilotons.[24] Earlier U.S. Intelligence had given an estimate of 140 kt with unspecified margin of error.[1] The International Seismological Centre will have authoritative data for this event in due course.

Questions about this table:
originalText: where did north korea test its nuclear weapons
answer: answerTexts: Punggye-ri Test Site