2017
DOI: 10.1002/2016jb013812
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The effect of nonlinear decompression history on H2O/CO2 vesiculation in rhyolitic magmas

Abstract: Magma ascent rate is one of the key parameters that control volcanic eruption style, tephra dispersion, and volcanic atmospheric impact. Many methods have been employed to investigate the magma ascent rate in volcanic eruptions, and most rely on equilibrium thermodynamics. Combining the mixed H2O‐CO2 solubility model with the diffusivities of both H2O and CO2 for normal rhyolitic melt, we model the kinetics of H2O and CO2 in rhyolitic eruptions that involve nonlinear decompression rates. Our study focuses on t… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
(47 reference statements)
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…MEM has been increasingly used in recent years to extract average decompression rates of basaltic (0.05–0.45 MPa/s; Ferguson et al., 2016; Lloyd et al., 2014; Newcombe et al., 2020a) and rhyolitic magmas (0.001–1.6 MPa/s; Humphreys et al., 2008; Liu et al., 2007; Myers et al., 2016; 2018) using a variety of diffusing volatile species, such as H 2 O, CO 2 , and S. Potentially, other species with faster or slower diffusivities could be used to target an even broader range of decompression rates (e.g., Li). An important note is that decompression rate is nonlinear (e.g., Su & Huber, 2017), and MEM retrieves an average decompression rate experienced by the melt embayment.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…MEM has been increasingly used in recent years to extract average decompression rates of basaltic (0.05–0.45 MPa/s; Ferguson et al., 2016; Lloyd et al., 2014; Newcombe et al., 2020a) and rhyolitic magmas (0.001–1.6 MPa/s; Humphreys et al., 2008; Liu et al., 2007; Myers et al., 2016; 2018) using a variety of diffusing volatile species, such as H 2 O, CO 2 , and S. Potentially, other species with faster or slower diffusivities could be used to target an even broader range of decompression rates (e.g., Li). An important note is that decompression rate is nonlinear (e.g., Su & Huber, 2017), and MEM retrieves an average decompression rate experienced by the melt embayment.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We assumed a linear decompression rate and equilibrium closed‐system degassing as an external boundary condition. Additional complexities include: Magma decompression is expected to be highly non‐linear (Barth et al., 2019; Gonnermann & Manga, 2007; Hajimirza et al., 2021; Su & Huber, 2017). Exsolution of water and subsequent nucleation and growth of bubbles at shallow depth increases the buoyancy of the magma and drives acceleration (Gonnermann & Manga, 2007).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this study we focused on confirming the fidelity of embayments to record constant‐rate decompression scenarios using a 1D numerical modeling approach. Not accounting for the nonlinearity in magma decompression in numerical modeling of embayment diffusion profiles may result in underestimated ascent times (Su & Huber, 2017). Additionally, stalling of viscous magma (e.g., Zimmer et al., 2007) may allow time for volatile re‐equilibration in embayments and, if unaccounted for, can lead to misleading decompression rate and ascent time estimates.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The embayment speedometer has been leveraged in explosive eruptions spanning a broad compositional range, with studies on rhyolite to rhyo‐dacite (Geshi et al., 2021; Humphreys et al., 2008; Liu et al., 2007; Myers et al., 2018, 2021; Saalfeld et al., 2022) as well as basaltic‐andesite to basalt (Ferguson et al., 2016; Lloyd et al., 2014; Moussallam et al., 2019; Newcombe et al., 2020; Zuccarello et al., 2022) providing insights into how magma decompression rate may (or may not) correlate with eruption composition and explosivity (Figure 1). However, attempts to model volatile concentration gradients in embayments have seen variable success, likely a result of complex magma decompression histories being met with simplifying model assumptions (deGraffenried & Shea, 2021; Su & Huber, 2017). For example, several studies have found that embayments often preserve interior H 2 O ± CO 2 concentrations and corresponding saturation pressures lower than those of co‐erupted melt inclusions, with the use of melt inclusion‐derived storage pressures therefore in some cases unsuccessful in producing good model fits to the observed concentration gradients (Lloyd et al., 2014; Myers et al., 2018, 2021; Saalfeld et al., 2022).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%