The morphology and texture of Plinian pyroclasts reflect their lateral sourcing in the conduit

Trafton, Kathleen R.; Giachetti, Thomas

doi:10.1016/j.epsl.2021.116844

Cited by 16 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 74 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The subtle difference in microtextures (total porosity, vesicle connectivity, throat diameters, and throat-vesicle ratios) between high vesicularity raft pumice and high vesicularity seafloor pumice [Fig. 6b] may reflect observed natural variations in pumice textures produced from laterally heterogeneous regions of the conduit with less shearing [Houghton et al 2010;Ohashi et al 2021;Trafton and Giachetti 2021]. The clear connectivity separation at high vesicularity by "sink or float" may just be a case of endmember sampling bias (only raft pumice with most extreme "flotation-permitting" microtextures will still have been afloat 1 year after eruption).…”

Section: Impact Of Pore Structure On Gas Trappingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sink or float: microtextural controls on the fate of pumice deposition during the 2012 submarine Havre eruption

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Silicic submarine volcanic eruptions can produce large volumes of pumices that may rise buoyantly to the ocean surface and/or sink to the seafloor. For eruptions that release significant volumes of pumice into rafts, the proximal to medial submarine geologic record is thus depleted in large volumes of pumice that would have sedimented closer to source in any subaerial eruption. The 2012 eruption of Havre volcano, a submarine volcano in the Kermadec Arc, presents a unique opportunity to study the partitioning of well-constrained rafted and seafloor pumice. Macro- and microtextural analysis was performed on clasts from the Havre pumice raft and from coeval pumiceous seafloor units around the Havre caldera. The raft and seafloor clasts have indistinguishable macrotextures, componentry, and vesicularity ranges. Microtextural differences are apparent as raft pumices have higher vesicle number densities (109 cm−3 vs. 108 cm−3) and significantly lower pore space connectivity (0.3–0.95 vs. 0.9–1.0) than seafloor pumices. Porosity analysis shows that high vesicularity raft pumices required trapping of gas in the connected porosity to remain afloat, whereas lower vesicularity raft pumices could float just from gas within isolated porosity. Measurements of minimum vesicle throat openings further show that raft pumices have a larger proportion of small vesicle throats than seafloor pumices. Narrow throats increase gas trapping as a result of higher capillary pressures acting over gas–water interfaces between vesicles and lower capillary number inhibiting gas bubble escape. Differences in isolated porosity and pore throat distribution ultimately control whether pumices sink or float and thus whether pumice deposits are preserved or not on the seafloor.

show abstract

Section: Impact Of Pore Structure On Gas Trappingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sink or float: microtextural controls on the fate of pumice deposition during the 2012 submarine Havre eruption

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Their volume, V, was determined either by the classical immersion method (Houghton and Wilson, 1989) or using a Microtrac PartAn 3D particle size analyzer (Trafton and Giachetti, 2021). The mass of each clast, M, was measured using a high-precision balance and the bulk (total) porosity calculated using = /( ) × 100, where is the density of the solid phase.…”

Section: Lapilli Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Estimated mass discharge rate is 2±1×10 8 kg/s (Young, 1990). It was Giachetti, T., et al, 2021, The products of primary magma fragmentation finally revealed by pumice agglomerates: Geology, v. 49,…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Supplemental Material: The products of primary magma fragmentation finally revealed by pumice agglomerates

Giachetti¹

2021

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In terms of code development, higher-dimensional models are challenging because of the multiphase and multi-scale (temporal and spatial) nature of magma ascent processes. Obtaining and utilizing observations to provide constraints on higher-dimensional models will be challenging and will require careful assessment to what extent going to higher dimensions is justifiable based on observations (Trafton and Giachetti, 2021). Such endeavors would undoubtedly benefit from the collaborative synergies envisaged for a modeling collaboratory.…”

Section: Eruptive Magma Ascentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modeling Volcano-Magmatic Systems: Workshop Report for the Modeling Collaboratory for Subduction Research Coordination Network

Gonnermann¹,

Anderson²

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This document summarizes the outcomes of the Modeling Collaboratory for Subduction Zone Science (MCS) Volcanic Systems Workshop and presents a vision for advancing collaborative modeling of volcano-magmatic systems. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has identified 161 potentially active volcanoes in the United States and its territories, of which 57 are considered to be high or very high threats (Ewert et al., 2018). All western states, including Alaska and Hawaii, have potentially active volcanoes. Eruptions range from the quiet effusion of sluggish lava flows over hours to decades to immense explosive ejections of tephra which produce massive calderas.Understanding these volcanoes and assessing their threat to society requires the development of quantitative models, rooted in physics and chemistry, which can be used to interpret diverse observations including real-time monitoring data. Existing models have tremendously advanced our understanding of volcanic systems and have improved our ability to assess hazards and forecast future activity, contributing directly to reductions in the number of lives lost to volcanic eruptions and helping mitigate their costs to society. Magmatic system models also provide a quantitative framework for understanding processes that occur at depth beneath volcanoes, linking volcanic systems with a broad range of deeper processes associated with the production, transport, and storage of magma and associated fluids above subducting slabs.Despite this exciting progress much remains to be accomplished and workshop participants identified several important opportunities. First and foremost is the recognition that enhanced support for the development and dissemination of volcano-magmatic system models and associated methodologies will enable advances in ways not currently possible. A key outcome of the workshops is a recognition of the transformative potential of diverse groups of scientists working together on common problems. Support for collaborative working groups will enable communication across disciplines and between modelers and non-modelers, leveraging expertise from scientists studying different aspects of volcano-magmatic systems, and between geoscientists and outside experts from fields such as mathematics, statistics, and material sciences. Better support will also enable modelers to more fully verify, validate, benchmark, and document their codes, and also provide new training opportunities. Enhanced model sharing and interoperability will reduce the need for different groups to independently duplicate (re-invent) code and increase confidence in published results. This report lays out a proposal for a collaborative modeling environment that is centered in large part around community working groups manifested as workshops, summer schools, and sustained long-term research collaborations involving diverse groups of scientists working on common problems. Programmatic support is envisioned in the form of enhanced student and postdoc funding for model development, incentives and support for cross-disciplinary collaborative research projects, and related support for these activities. This support will fundamentally improve our ability to integrate and interpret observations using volcanic and magmatic system models.

show abstract

The morphology and texture of Plinian pyroclasts reflect their lateral sourcing in the conduit

Cited by 16 publications

References 74 publications

Sink or float: microtextural controls on the fate of pumice deposition during the 2012 submarine Havre eruption

Sink or float: microtextural controls on the fate of pumice deposition during the 2012 submarine Havre eruption

Supplemental Material: The products of primary magma fragmentation finally revealed by pumice agglomerates

Modeling Volcano-Magmatic Systems: Workshop Report for the Modeling Collaboratory for Subduction Research Coordination Network

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About