Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Collapsing calderas Field evidence, experiments, modeling Caldera faulting and flexure From Roche et al 2000 Glencoe and Valles These two examples highlight the important point of simple surface structure contrasting with complex subsurface structure Etive Rhyolites, Glencoe caldera •Lava-like ignimbrites near-vent ponded by faults hot low fountains no associated breccia – why ? •Basal phreatomagmatic layers suggestive of lacustrine environments •Pre-eruptive fault bounded lakes faults active to form lakes? possible cause-effect relationship between tectonics and eruptions? Caldera faulting vs tectonic faulting How does basin development occur at Glencoe ? Do the basins develop as a result of tectonic faulting? Or do they develop as true caldera basins? Or a combination of the two processes? Caldera faulting •Thick ignimbrite •Megabreccias and mesobreccias intimately interbedded within and associated with the ignimbrite sequence This association is probably diagnostic of active syn-caldera faulting, i.e., the development of a caldera The location of breccia within an ignimbrite sequence can help constrain the timing and nature of caldera collapse Opening of vents and/or crevasses in peripheral extensional zone of caldera? Early breccias Moore and Kokelaar 1998 Late breccias Moore and Kokelaar 1998 I think a very interesting question is how a caldera subsides, i.e., the timing and nature of the subsidence: •When does subsidence occur: early, middle, or late? •Does it occur incrementally? •And what is the relationship between subsidence mechanics and magma chamber dynamics? A key question in this regard: •Does a caldera subside passively (response to magma evacuation from chamber) ? •Does a caldera subside actively, i.e., does subsidence of the roof “push” magma out of the reservoir ? (64 hours) Katmai 1912, Pinatubo 1991 Silicic magma Stix and Kobayashi 2008, JGR (8-9 hours) Basaltic magma Stix and Kobayashi 2008 Basaltic magma Stix and Kobayashi 2008 Subsidence experiments of Kennedy et al. 2008 These experiments examined the settling of the caldera roof into the magma reservoir, modelled by aqueous corn syrup solutions At high Reynolds numbers: •Flow mainly vertical •Eddy formation •Vorticity at the end…intense stirring Higher flow velocities and Reynolds numbers: •In wider ring dikes •In magmas with reduced viscosities Two-block experiments (piecemeal collapse) Kennedy et al 2008 Ponding of ignimbrite in tectonically-controlled basins Perhaps no active faulting during eruptions Perhaps downsagging (flexure) is important Lack of megabreccias and mesobreccias ? Would there be breccias (e.g., fanglomerates) related to tectonic faults, what would they look like, and how might they relate to the volcanic sequence? Caldera faulting and megabreccias At Glencoe, it appears that faults are re-used during different eruptive and caldera-forming events This raises the possibility of ignimbrite of older calderas becoming the megabreccia and mesobreccia of younger calderas which are nested Yellowstone may be a good example Yellowstone geology, courtesy USGS Glencoe ring fault It is not clear – at least to me – what the role of the ring fault at Glencoe was Perhaps it pertains to a later stage of caldera development The caldera “space” problem Roof aspect ratio Aspect ratio = roof thickness / roof width width Low aspect ratio High aspect ratio reservoir reservoir thickness Scaling Cohesion of roof Cohesion needs to be scaled as * = *g*l*, where * is the cohesion ratio, * the density ratio, g* the gravity ratio, and l* the length ratio (most important) A difficult thing to estimate is the cohesion of natural materials, and its variability in space and time….people typically use values of 106 – 107 Pa Magma viscosity Viscosity scales as * = *T*, where T* is the time ratio The use of water and silicone as magma analogues can result in very different viscosity scaling aspect ratio = 0.5 Caldera faulting •Downsagging is observed at early stages •A set of main reverse faults which controls subsidence Faults propagate upward from margins of reservoir Fault dips shallow upward (listric) •A zone of peripheral extension which develops as a result of subsidence this peripheral zone is a region of breccia production extensional crevasses and vents may develop in this region (see Moore and Kokelaar) Roche et al 2000 Influence of chamber shape From Roche et al 2000, Kennedy et al 2004, GSA Bull Aspect ratio As the aspect ratio of the roof block increases: •Area of undeformed piston decreases AR=0.2 •Area of peripheral extension increases •Intersection of initial reverse faults at depth This might promote stoping of roof blocks into the chamber AR=1 Caldera asymmetry – plan view Note how the circular nature of the caldera decreases as roof aspect ratio increases (magma chamber dimensions are constant) AR=0.2 •So if the aspect ratio is low, it is possible to infer the shape of the reservoir, but this becomes increasingly difficult to do at higher aspect ratio Another influence may simply be the scale of the experiment compared to the scale or grainsize of the sand AR=1 Experiments at larger scale – greater asymmetry 1 meter Ossipee ring complex, New Hampshire From Kennedy et al 2004, Kennedy and Stix 2007 Caldera asymmetry – cross-section Roche et al 2000 •Subsidence almost always asymmetric in crosssection •Nucleation and development of first fault – principal fault with greatest throw •A trapdoor-style caldera results •Vents concentrated here •Seen in Roche et al, and also in strike-slip regimes in Holohan et al experiments •Lateral propagation of faults (which is stopped by high-angle regional faults – see Holohan et al) Kennedy et al 2004 Holohan et al experiments •Tangential regional structures important during collapse Faults within chamber margin: used as caldera reverse faults Faults outside chamber margin: develop into peripheral normal faults •Non-tangential structures important during tumescence and resurgence ? •Strike-slip faults as preferential pathways for magmas and fluids Repeated uplift and collapse experiments From Troll et al 2002, Geology, 30, 135-138. The end