Geology Reports⌕ Search

Geology topics

L.G. Mastin

Publications and source records attributed to L.G. Mastin.

8 recordsLinked to original sources
USGS2008

Digital data for volcano hazards in the Crater Lake Region, Oregon

Crater Lake lies in a basin, or caldera, formed by collapse of the Cascade volcano known as Mount Mazama during a violent, climactic eruption about 7,700 years ago. This event dramatically changed the character of the volcano so that many potential types of future events have no precedent there. This potentially active volcanic center is contained within Crater Lake National Park, visited by 500,000 people per year, and is adjacent to the main transportation corridor east of the Cascade Range. Because a lake is now present within the most likely site of future volcanic activity, many of the hazards at Crater Lake are different from those at most other Cascade volcanoes. Also significant are many faults near Crater Lake that clearly have been active in the recent past. These faults, and historic seismicity, indicate that damaging earthquakes can occur there in the future. The USGS Open-File Report 97-487 (Bacon and others, 1997) describes the various types of volcano and earthquake hazards in the Crater Lake area, estimates of the likelihood of future events, recommendations for mitigation, and a map of hazard zones. The geographic information system (GIS) volcano hazard data layers used to produce the Crater Lake earthquake and volcano hazard map in USGS Open-File Report 97-487 are included in this data set. USGS scientists created one GIS data layer, c_faults, that delineates these faults and one layer, cballs, that depicts the downthrown side of the faults. Additional GIS layers chazline, chaz, and chazpoly were created to show 1) the extent of pumiceous pyroclastic-flow deposits of the caldera forming Mount Mazama eruption, 2) silicic and mafic vents in the Crater Lake region, and 3)the proximal hazard zone around the caldera rim, respectively.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2008

Digital data for volcano hazards at Newberry Volcano, Oregon

Newberry volcano is a broad shield volcano located in central Oregon, the product of thousands of eruptions, beginning about 600,000 years ago. At least 25 vents on the flanks and summit have been active during the past 10,000 years. The most recent eruption 1,300 years ago produced the Big Obsidian Flow. Thus, the volcano's long history and recent activity indicate that Newberry will erupt in the future. Newberry Crater, a volcanic depression or caldera has been the focus of Newberry's volcanic activity for at least the past 10,000 years. Newberry National Volcanic Monument, which is managed by the U.S. Forest Service, includes the caldera and extends to the Deschutes River. Newberry volcano is quiet. Local earthquake activity (seismicity) has been trifling throughout historic time. Subterranean heat is still present, as indicated by hot springs in the caldera and high temperatures encountered during exploratory drilling for geothermal energy. The report USGS Open-File Report 97-513 (Sherrod and others, 1997) describes the kinds of hazardous geologic events that might occur in the future at Newberry volcano. A hazard-zonation map is included to show the areas that will most likely be affected by renewed eruptions. When Newberry volcano becomes restless, the eruptive scenarios described herein can inform planners, emergency response personnel, and citizens about the kinds and sizes of events to expect. The geographic information system (GIS) volcano hazard data layers used to produce the Newberry volcano hazard map in USGS Open-File Report 97-513 are included in this data set. Scientists at the USGS Cascades Volcano Observatory created a GIS data layer to depict zones subject to the effects of an explosive pyroclastic eruption (tephra fallout, pyroclastic flows, and ballistics), lava flows, volcanic gasses, and lahars/floods in Paulina Creek. A separate GIS data layer depicts drill holes on the flanks of Newberry Volcano that were used to estimate the probability of coverage by future lava flows.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2005

The controlling effect of viscous dissipation on magma flow in silicic conduits

Nearly all volcanic conduit models assume that flow is Newtonian and isothermal. Such models predict that, during high-flux silicic eruptions, gradients in pressure with depth increase upward as magma accelerates and becomes more viscous, leading to extremely low pressure and fragmentation at a depth of kilometers below the surface. In this paper I show that shear heating, also known as viscous dissipation, dramatically reduces the pressure gradient required for flow and concentrates shear in narrow zones along the conduit margin. The reduction in friction may eliminate the zone of low pressure predicted by isothermal models and move the fragmentation level up to the surface.

Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research↗
USGS2001

Adiabatic temperature changes of magma-gas mixtures during ascent and eruption

Most quantitative studies of flow dynamics in eruptive conduits during volcanic eruptions use a simplified energy equation that ignores either temperature changes, or the thermal effects of gas exsolution. In this paper we assess the effects of those simplifications by analyzing the influence of equilibrium gas exsolution and expansion on final temperatures, velocities, and liquid viscosities of magma–gas mixtures during adiabatic decompression. For a given initial pressure ( p 1 ), temperature ( T 1 ) and melt composition, the final temperature ( T f ) and velocity ( u max ) will vary depending on the degree to which friction and other irreversible processes reduce mechanical energy within the conduit. The final conditions range between two thermodynamic end members: (1) constant enthalpy ( dh =0), in which T f is maximal and no energy goes into lifting or acceleration; and (2) constant entropy ( ds =0), in which T f is minimal and maximum energy goes into lifting and acceleration. For ds =0, T 1 =900 °C and p 1 =200 MPa, a water-saturated albitic melt cools by ~200 °C during decompression, but only about 250 °C of this temperature decrease can be attributed to the energy of gas exsolution per se: the remainder results from expansion of gas that has already exsolved. For the same T 1 and p 1 , and dh =0, T f is 10–15 °C hotter than T 1 but is about 10–25 °C cooler than T f in similar calculations that ignore the energy of gas exsolution. For ds =0, p 1 =200 MPa and T 1 =9,000 °C, assuming that all the enthalpy change of decompression goes into kinetic energy, a water-saturated albitic mixture can theoretically accelerate to ~800 m/s. Similar calculations that ignore gas exsolution (but take into account gas expansion) give velocities about 10–15% higher. For the same T 1 , p I =200 MPa, and ds =0, the cooling associated with gas expansion and exsolution increases final melt viscosity more than 2.5 orders of magnitude. For dh =0, isenthalpic heating decreases final melt viscosity by about 0.7 orders of magnitude. Thermal effects of gas exsolution are responsible for less than 10% of these viscosity changes. Isenthalpic heating could significantly reduce flow resistance in eruptive conduits if heat generation were concentrated along conduit walls, where shearing is greatest. Isentropic cooling could enhance clast fragmentation in near-surface vents in cases where extremely rapid pressure drops reduce gas temperatures and chill the margins of expanding pyroclasts.

Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology↗
USGS1995

Thermodynamics of gas and steam-blast eruptions

Eruptions of gas or steam and non-juvenile debris are common in volcanic and hydrothermal areas. From reports of non-juvenile eruptions or eruptive sequences world-wide, at least three types (or end-members) can be identified: (1) those involving rock and liquid water initially at boiling-point temperatures (‘boiling-point eruptions’); (2) those powered by gas (primarily water vapor) at initial temperatures approaching magmatic (‘gas eruptions’); and (3) those caused by rapid mixing of hot rock and ground- or surface water (‘mixing eruptions’). For these eruption types, the mechanical energy released, final temperatures, liquid water contents and maximum theoretical velocities are compared by assuming that the erupting mixtures of rock and fluid thermally equilibrate, then decompress isentropically from initial, near-surface pressure (≤10 MPa) to atmospheric pressure. Maximum mechanical energy release is by far greatest for gas eruptions (≤∼1.3 MJ/kg of fluid-rock mixture)-about one-half that of an equivalent mass of gunpowder and one-fourth that of TNT. It is somewhat less for mixing eruptions (≤∼0.4 MJ/kg), and least for boiling-point eruptions (≤∼0.25 MJ/kg). The final water contents of crupted boiling-point mixtures are usually high, producing wet, sloppy deposits. Final erupted mixtures from gas eruptions are nearly always dry, whereas those from mixing eruptions vary from wet to dry. If all the enthalpy released in the eruptions were converted to kinetic energy, the final velocity ( v max ) of these mixtures could range up to 670 m/s for boiling-point eruptions and 1820 m/s for gas eruptions (highest for high initial pressure and mass fractions of rock ( m r ) near zero). For mixing eruptions, v max ranges up to 1150 m/s. All observed eruption velocities are less than 400 m/s, largely because (1) most solid material is expelled when m r is high, hence v max is low; (2) observations are made of large blocks the velocities of which may be less than the average for the mixture; (3) heat from solid particles is not efficiently transferred to the fluid during the eruptions; and (4) maximum velocities are reduced by choked flow or friction in the conduit.

Bulletin of Volcanology↗
USGS1994

Explosive tephra emissions of Mount St. Helens, 1989-1991: the violent escape of magmatic gas following storms?

From 24 August 1989 until 18 June 1991, Mount St. Helens produced at least 28 shallow, explosion-like seismic events with signatures similar to those produced by gas explosions on the dome during the mid 1980s. At least six were accompanied by violent emission of non-juvenile tephra, ejection of blocks of rock nearly 1 km from the vent, and avalanching of debris off the north side of the dome. All six confirmed emissions and most (although not all) other seismic events took place hours to days after storms. The short delay between storms and emissions suggests that the events that follow storms originate at very shallow depth, probably within the dome itself. Although the exact causal mechanism is not known, it is speculated that slope instability or accelerated growth of cooling fractures following storms may have released gas trapped within or at the base of the dome. -from Author

Geological Society of America Bulletin↗