Jökull


Jökull - 01.01.2015, Side 34

Jökull - 01.01.2015, Side 34
Þorsteinsdóttir et al. EXPLOSIVE VOLCANISM: WET VERSUS DRY ERUPTIONS Explosive eruptions are of two different kinds, mag- matic explosive eruptions were the explosive ac- tivity is first and foremost caused by gas ex- pansion in the magma and secondly hydromag- matic/phreatomagmatic eruptions which are caused by interaction between external water and magma (White and Houghton, 2000; Morrisey et al., 2000; Vergniolle and Mangan, 2000; Cashman et al., 2000; Francis, 2001; Francis and Oppenheimer, 2004). Magmatic eruptions Magmatic eruptions (sometimes called dry eruptions), are divided into several types, for example Hawai- ian, Strombolian and Plinian eruptions. They are as mentioned earlier, eruptions where only volatiles take place in the explosive activity. The two basic pro- cesses of tephra formation are fragmentation of the magma and the cooling of the fragments or clasts (Cashman et al., 2000; Vergniolle and Mangan, 2000; Francis and Oppenheimer, 2004). In the following only silicic magma is considered. Fragmentation of magma may occur when the ten- sile strength of the melt is exceeded. If strain rates are very high the magma cannot deform fast enough and the melt can break as a solid matter would, in a brittle fashion (e.g. Cashman et al., 2000; Zhang, 1999). Fragmentation in magmatic eruptions where the magma is high-viscosity silicic magma may result either from rapid acceleration or rapid decompression of magma according to Cashman et al. (2000). Hydromagmatic eruptions Hydromagmatic eruptions are divided into three cat- egories: Phreatic eruptions where magma is not directly involved, phreatomagmatic eruptions and phreatoplinian eruptions where the fragmentation is partly or solely the result of interaction with water and can produce extremely fine-grained tephra. Frag- mentation in hydromagmatic eruptions is much more complex process than in magmatic eruptions. The presence of external water can affect both fragmenta- tion and cooling at various stages in an eruption (e.g. Morrisey et al., 2000; White and Houghton, 2000; Zi- manowski et al., 1997; Wohletz, 1983). Fragmentation in most of the phreatoplinian erup- tions described by Houghton et al., (2000) was brought about by vesiculation and bubble expansion as well as by quenching by external water. The pumice clasts were vesicular enough to imply that the magma had already formed foam and perhaps begun to fragment or disintergrate when it first en- countered external water. The fragmentation resulting from the magma-water interaction could be the result of thermal contraction upon quencing, brittle failure caused by high shear rate resulting from expansion of steam or both these mechanisms. Lithics appear to be less common in phreatoplinian eruptions than in the basaltic ones. This could suggest that the fragmenta- tion caused by water takes place at the interface be- tween the magma and overlying ice/water, rather than deeper in the conduit (Dellino et al., 2012). METHODS Tephra samples were collected along the thickness axes of the SILK-LN and H-1947 tephra layers from undisturbed tephra. Samples in two cross sections of SILK-LN tephra were also collected. At each lo- cation the tephra layers were cleaned, photographed, measured and macroscopic features described such as bedding, grading, colour, texture, grain size and grain types (for details see Þorsteinsdóttir 2015). Following logging, bulk samples and/or samples from particu- lar units within the layer were collected. Samples of the Katla SILK-LN tephra (Figure 2) were collected from 10 previously logged soil sections (Larsen un- publ. data). The H-1947 samples were collected in 3 places (Figure 4) in addition to the field and laboratory measurement of Thorarinsson (1954). Grain size analysis Sieving (by hand to avoid breaking/abrading) was used for size fractions larger than 4Φ (0.063 mm) and settling velocity for smaller than 4Φ. A Sedigraph (Micromeritics, 2010) was used for grains smaller than 4Φ. The results from both methods were com- bined and plotted on a graph, showing the complete grain size distribution of each tephra sample. Grain size distribution can provide important in- formation about an eruption because different erup- tion conditions influence both size and shape of the 34 JÖKULL No. 65, 2015
Side 1
Side 2
Side 3
Side 4
Side 5
Side 6
Side 7
Side 8
Side 9
Side 10
Side 11
Side 12
Side 13
Side 14
Side 15
Side 16
Side 17
Side 18
Side 19
Side 20
Side 21
Side 22
Side 23
Side 24
Side 25
Side 26
Side 27
Side 28
Side 29
Side 30
Side 31
Side 32
Side 33
Side 34
Side 35
Side 36
Side 37
Side 38
Side 39
Side 40
Side 41
Side 42
Side 43
Side 44
Side 45
Side 46
Side 47
Side 48
Side 49
Side 50
Side 51
Side 52
Side 53
Side 54
Side 55
Side 56
Side 57
Side 58
Side 59
Side 60
Side 61
Side 62
Side 63
Side 64
Side 65
Side 66
Side 67
Side 68
Side 69
Side 70
Side 71
Side 72
Side 73
Side 74
Side 75
Side 76
Side 77
Side 78
Side 79
Side 80
Side 81
Side 82
Side 83
Side 84
Side 85
Side 86
Side 87
Side 88
Side 89
Side 90
Side 91
Side 92
Side 93
Side 94
Side 95
Side 96
Side 97
Side 98
Side 99
Side 100
Side 101
Side 102
Side 103
Side 104
Side 105
Side 106
Side 107
Side 108
Side 109
Side 110
Side 111
Side 112
Side 113
Side 114
Side 115
Side 116
Side 117
Side 118
Side 119
Side 120

x

Jökull

Direkte link

Hvis du vil linke til denne avis/magasin, skal du bruge disse links:

Link til denne avis/magasin: Jökull
https://timarit.is/publication/1155

Link til dette eksemplar:

Link til denne side:

Link til denne artikel:

Venligst ikke link direkte til billeder eller PDfs på Timarit.is, da sådanne webadresser kan ændres uden advarsel. Brug venligst de angivne webadresser for at linke til sitet.