Collignon, Marine

Faubert, Maite

Hadi, Soffian

Husein, Alwi

Karyono, Karyono

Lupi, Matteo

Mauri, Guillaume

Mazzini, Adriano

Miller, Stephen A.

OceanRep

Geophysical Research AbstractsVol. 18, EGU2016-13163-1, 2016EGU General Assembly 2016© Author(s) 2016. CC Attribution 3.0 License.Continuous multi-component geophysical experiment on LUSI mudedifice: What can we learn from it?Guillaume Mauri (1), Alwi Husein (2,3,4), Karyono Karyono (2,5,6), Soffian Hadi (4), Adriano Mazzini (2),Marine Collignon (2), Maïté Faubert (1), Stephen A. Miller (1), and Matteo Lupi (7)(1) University of Neuchâtel, Center for Hydrogeology and Geothermics, CHYN, Neuchâtel, Switzerland(guillaume.mauri@unine.ch), (2) CEED, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway, (3) Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember,Surabaya, Indonesia, (4) Badan Penanggulangan Lumpur Sidoarjo, Sidoarjo,Indonesia, (5) Padjadjaran University (UNPAD),Bandung, Indonesia, (6) Agency for Meteorology, Climatology and Geophysics (BMKG), Jakarta, Indonesia, (7) Departmentof Earth Sciences, Université de Genève, Genève, Suisse.The Lusi eruption is located in East Java, Indonesia, and is ongoing since May 29th, 2006. In the framework ofjoined international projects, several joint geophysical studies focussing on seismic monitoring, spatial investiga-tion over the mud edifice and its surroundings are being conducted. Here we present freshly acquired data from atest site to investigate: (1) potential change in the natural electrical self-potential generation over time (2) potentialchange in gravity field associated to change in mass or volume, (3) if the geysering activity generates disruptionon either the electrical or gravity field.We selected a location ∼200m to the NE of the active Lusi crater. The experiment site covers an area of 60m x80m, crossing the boundaries between the soft and the solid walkable mud. The western edge of the study area wasless than 100m away from the rim of the crater site.A self-potential array made of 6 Pb-PbCl2 electrodes was deployed over the site. The electrodes were positionedinside active seeps, on dry unaltered zones and close to the mud stream that flushes the water erupted from thecrater site. All the electrodes were connected to a single Pb-PbCl2 electrode reference.A second array of 7 thermometers was installed positioning 5 of them next to SP electrodes, one to measureatmospheric temperature and another P/T probe to monitor the stream water.In addition a seismometer coupled with a HD video camera, a thermal camera and a gravimeter recorded on sitefor several days monitoring visual and seismic activity of the crater.The collected data allows us to 1) monitor and define the different geysering activities ongoing at the crater,2) define the delay existing between the recorded seismicity and the visual observations, 3) verify if the crateractivity triggers perturbations that are transmitted to e.g. the thousands of satellite seeps distributed in the 7 squarekilometers zone inside the embankment; 4) how significant is the delay between the crater activity and the waterstreamed out.

Continuous multi-component geophysical experiment on LUSI mud edifice: What can we learn from it?

http://oceanrep.geomar.de/43186/1/EGU2016-13163-1.pdf

Continuous multi-component geophysical experiment on LUSI mud edifice: What can we learn from it?

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

OceanRep