Jökull


Jökull - 01.12.1976, Page 14

Jökull - 01.12.1976, Page 14
the blasts it is possible to calculate the thickness of layer 0. This thickness was found not to be significantly different from Pálmason’s results on the profile east of Hekla. A significant dif- ference was found, however, for the thickness of layer 1. Since apparent velocity correspond- ing to the velocity in layer 1 was measured across the array the cross-over distance between the head wave arrivals from layer 1 and layer 2 must be greater than 12 km. Thus a lower limit of 2.0 km is found for the thickness of layer 1. As described earlier the crustal velocity model in Table 1 was approximated by a model with layers of constant velocity gradients. The latter model was then used as an input for the loca- tion program. Using the location program to locate the ex- plosions it was found that the distances and depths were well within the error limits, but the azimuths were systematically wrong by 15— 18°. This systematic deviation can be corrected by assuming a time delay of 0.05 sec on the southeasternmost station in the array. A dip of the interface between layer 0 and layer 1 of 10° to the SE would cause the necessary time delay. Many different combinations of relative time delays can produce the observed error in azi- muth. But since the apparent velocity of the explosions NE of the array was not significantly in error the azimuth error is most likely caused by a time delay on the south-easternmost sta- tion. Furthermore it can be explained by a dipping interface with a strike parallel to the structural grain of the region. Fortunately most of the earthquakes occurred close to the lake where the explosions were made. Thus the azimuth corrections applied to most of the earthquakes were nearly identical to those applied to the explosions and are therefore independent of any assumptions about irregularities in the crustal structure. During the period of seismic recording at Hekla a swarm of earthquakes occurred near Sandvatn about 50 km to the NNW of Hekla (Fig. 1). Numerous earthquakes of that swarm were recorded by the Hekla array. Judging from the crustal structure, the distance and the probable depth of these earthquakes the first P-wave should arrive at the Hekla array with an apparent velocity of about 6.5 km/sec, which is the P-velocity in layer 3. It was found, how- 12 JÖKULL26. ÁR ever, that the apparent velocities were signi- ficantly lower, averaging about 5.5 km/sec. As before it is possible to explain this difference by assuming a time delay on tlie southeastern- most station. The necessary delay is of the same magnitude as the one necessary to explain the discrepancy in tlie azimuth of the explosions. If interpreted in terms of dipping layers this observation implies that all interfaces down to and including the layer 2 — layer 3 interface have the same dip of 10° to the SE. THE SEISMIC ACTIVITY Before the eruption An examination of the records from the WWNSS seismograph station at Akureyri and the Preliminary Seismograph Readings of the Meteorological Office do not reveal any un- usual seismic activity around Hekla during several weeks prior to the eruption. Two earth- quakes of magnitudes 2.8 and 3.3 were recorded on April 16 and 18 respectively with epicenters possibly near Hekla. These events would by no means awaken any suspicion of an impending eruption. It is possible, however, that significant activity occurred but was too weak to be re- corded by the permanent seismic stations. A considerable number of weak earthquakes oc- curred prior to the 1973 Heimaey eruption (Fig. 1) and was recorded by two short-period seismometers located at the distances of 60 and 90 km (Björnsson and Einarsson, paper in pre- paration). This activity was not observed by the permanent seismic network. The beginning of the eruption During the last half hour before the start of the eruption, earth tremors were recorded by all three permanent seismic stations in Iceland. These tremors were continuous and their ampli- tude increased steadily until 21:18 when there was a sudden burst of tremors (Fig. 3). After that time numerous bursts occurred superim- posed on the continuous tremors. These bursts are probably S-waves and surface waves of earthquakes. For some of them the correspond- ing P-waves could be found on the records with S-P time appropriate for earthquakes near Hekla. These events were of magnitudes be- tween 3.6 and 4.0. No particularly outstanding
Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Page 10
Page 11
Page 12
Page 13
Page 14
Page 15
Page 16
Page 17
Page 18
Page 19
Page 20
Page 21
Page 22
Page 23
Page 24
Page 25
Page 26
Page 27
Page 28
Page 29
Page 30
Page 31
Page 32
Page 33
Page 34
Page 35
Page 36
Page 37
Page 38
Page 39
Page 40
Page 41
Page 42
Page 43
Page 44
Page 45
Page 46
Page 47
Page 48
Page 49
Page 50
Page 51
Page 52
Page 53
Page 54
Page 55
Page 56
Page 57
Page 58
Page 59
Page 60
Page 61
Page 62
Page 63
Page 64
Page 65
Page 66
Page 67
Page 68
Page 69
Page 70
Page 71
Page 72
Page 73
Page 74
Page 75
Page 76
Page 77
Page 78
Page 79
Page 80
Page 81
Page 82
Page 83
Page 84
Page 85
Page 86
Page 87
Page 88
Page 89
Page 90
Page 91
Page 92
Page 93
Page 94
Page 95
Page 96
Page 97
Page 98
Page 99
Page 100
Page 101
Page 102
Page 103
Page 104

x

Jökull

Direct Links

If you want to link to this newspaper/magazine, please use these links:

Link to this newspaper/magazine: Jökull
https://timarit.is/publication/1155

Link to this issue:

Link to this page:

Link to this article:

Please do not link directly to images or PDFs on Timarit.is as such URLs may change without warning. Please use the URLs provided above for linking to the website.