Dynamics of Strombolian explosions: Inferences from field and laboratory studies of erupted bombs from Stromboli volcano. Issue 1 (29th January 2014)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Gurioli, L.; Colo', L.; Bollasina, A. J.; Harris, A. J. L.; Whittington, A.; Ripepe, M.
• Is Part Of: Journal of geophysical research. Volume 119:Issue 1(2014:Jan.)
• Page Start: 319
• Page End: 345
• Publication Date: 2014-01-29
• Subjects: Geomagnetism -- Periodicals; Geochemistry -- Periodicals; Geophysics -- Periodicals; Earth sciences -- Periodicals; 551.1
• DOI: 10.1002/2013JB010355
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2169-9313

Abstract

<abstract abstract-type="main"> <title>Abstract</title> <p>Strombolian activity is characterized by repeated, low energy, explosions and is named after the volcano where such activity has persisted for around 2000 years, i.e., Stromboli (Aeolian Islands, Italy). Stromboli represents an excellent laboratory where measurements of such explosions can be made from safe, but close, distances. During a field campaign in 2008, two 15 cm diameter bombs were quenched and collected shortly after a normal explosion. The bombs were characterized in terms of their textural, chemical, rheological, and geophysical signatures. The vesicle and crystal size distribution of the samples, coupled with the glass chemistry, enabled us to quantify variations in the degassing history and rheology of the magma resident in the shallow (i.e., in last 250 m of conduit length). The different textural facies observed in these bombs showed that fresh magma was mingled with batches of partially to completely degassed, oxidized, high‐crystallinity, high‐viscosity, evolved magma. This magma sat at the top of the conduit and played only a passive role in the explosive process. The fresh, microlite‐poor, vesiculated batch, however, experienced a response to the explosive event, by undergoing rapid decompression. Integration of geophysical measurements with sample analyses indicates that popular bubble‐bursting models may not fit this case. We suggest that the degassed, magma forms a plug, or rheological layer, at the top of the conduit, through which the fresh magma bursts. In this model we need to consider the paradox of a slug ascending too fast through a magma of varying viscosity and yield strength.</p> </abstract>