Jökull


Jökull - 01.01.2015, Page 34

Jökull - 01.01.2015, Page 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
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
Page 105
Page 106
Page 107
Page 108
Page 109
Page 110
Page 111
Page 112
Page 113
Page 114
Page 115
Page 116
Page 117
Page 118
Page 119
Page 120

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.