Transcript of Interpreting Seismic Observables Geoff Abers, Greg Hirth Velocities: compositional effects vs P,T...
- Slide 1
- Interpreting Seismic Observables Geoff Abers, Greg Hirth
Velocities: compositional effects vs P,T Attenuation at high P, T
Anisotropy (Hirth) Upload from bSpace -> Seismic_Properties:
Hacker&AbersMacro08Dec2010.xls & various papers
- Slide 2
- A random tomographic image (Ferris et al., 2006 GJI) Crustal
tomography: Woodlark Rift, Papua New Guinea - Transition from
continental to oceanic crust
- Slide 3
- Arc crust velocities Arc Vp along-strike Aleutians Vs. SiO2 in
arc lavas [Shillington et al., 2004] Arc lower crust predictions
[Behn & Kelemen, 2006]
- Slide 4
- Velocity variations within subducting slab W E Green:
relocated, same velocities. yellow: catalog hypocenters CAFE
Transect, Washington Cascades (Abers et al., Geology, 2009) km from
coast dlnVs = 10-15% dlnVs = 2-4%
- Slide 5
- Unusual low Vp/Vs in wedge Vp/Vs = 1.65-1.70 Alaska (Rossi et
al. 2006) Andes 31S (Wagner et al. 2004) Normal N Honshu Zhang et
al. (Geology 2004) Vp/Vs = 1.8-1.9 Strange: no volcanics * PREM: Vp
= 8.04 km/s, Vp/Vs = 1.80
- Slide 6
- Velocities & H2O in metabasalts Crust Hydrated at: low P,
or low T eclogite blueschist amphibolite gr-sch (Hacker et al.,
2003a JGR; Hacker & Abers, 2004 Gcubed) 100 92 87 95 81 84
%Vp/Vp HARZ %Vp ~ 99-103 % (eclogite/peridotite) %Vp ~ 85-95 %
(hydrated/peridotite)
- Slide 7
- What else affects velocities? (b) temperature (c) fluids = bulk
modulus = shear modulus = bulk modulus = shear modulus Takei (2002)
poroelastic theory Temperature Pore fluids melts H2OH2O Faul &
Jackson (2005) anelasticity + anharmonicity aspect ratio
0.1-0.5
- Slide 8
- Two Approaches (1) Direct measurement of rock velocities
- Slide 9
- V vs. composition Arc lower crust Behn & Kelemen 2006
Crustal rock variations Brocher, 2005
- Slide 10
- Second Approach (2) Measure/calculate mineral properties, and
aggregate Disaggregate rock into mineral modal abundances For each
mineral, look up K, G, V, at STP & derivatives Extrapolate
K(P,T), G(P,T), Aggregate to crystal mixture Calculate Vp, Vs
Eclogite: Abalos et al., GSABull 2011 Peridotites: Lee, 2003
- Slide 11
- Whole-rock vs. calculated velocities (Oceanic gabbros, from
Carlson et al., Gcubed 2009)
- Slide 12
- Measured vs predicted Vp Oceanic gabbros (data) Thick line:
predictions What is going on? Behn & Kelemen, 2003 Gcubed
- Slide 13
- Calculating seismic velocities from mineralogy, P,T (Hacker et
al., 2003, JGR; Hacker & Abers 2004, Gcubed) Thermodynamic
parameters for 55 end-member minerals - 3rd order finite strain EOS
- aggregated by solid mixing thy. Track V, , H 2 O, major elem.,
T,P minerals elastic parameters
- Slide 14
- Compiled Parameters o = (P=0 GPa,T=25 C) = density K T0 =
isothermal bulk modulus (STP) G 0 = shear modulus (STP) 0 ; d /dT
or similar = coef. Thermal expansion K = dK T /dP = pressure
derivative = dlnG/dln = T derivative (G(T)) G = dG/dP = pressure
derivative th = 1 st (thermal) Grneisen parameter T = 2 nd
(adiabatic) Grneisen parameter (K(T))
- Slide 15
- Elastic Moduli vs. P, T Computational Strategy: First increase
T thermal expansion Second increase P 3 rd order finite strain EoS
Integrate in T Integrate in P STP From Hacker et al. 2003a
- Slide 16
- Aggregating & Velocities Mixture theories, simple:
Voight-Reuss-Hill average K, 1/K, both Complex Hashin-Shtrikman
Mixtures sorted/weighted averages Finally, turn elastic parameters
to seismic velocities using the usual
- Slide 17
- Usage notes Raw data table: elastic parameters &
derivatives Intermediate calculation table Work table: Enter
compositions, P,T here Mineralinformation & stored compositions
database includes references & notes on source of values
- Slide 18
- Usage notes: rocks mins modes Compositions from Hacker et al.
2003 Metagabbros Metaperidotites Petrology for people who dont know
the secret codes
- Slide 19
- Usage Notes: you manipulate rocks sheet Enter compositions here
(adds to 100%) and P,T here (optional: d, f for anelastic
correction) then click to run (primary output) More info below
- Slide 20
- The mineral database how good? Dry, major mantle minerals: OK
Hydrous, and/or highly anisotropic..??? Shear Modulus (&
derivatives)???
- Slide 21
- Inside the macro Yellow: extrapolated, calculated from related
parameters, or otherwise indirect V KTKT KGG th Big problems w/
shear modulus
- Slide 22
- A couple of Apps Hydrated metabasalts (after Hacker, 2008;
Hacker and Abers, 2004) use Perple_X to calculate phases, HAMacro
to calculate velocities
- Slide 23
- Predict T(P) from model (Abers et al., 2006, EPSL) & Facies
from petrology (Hacker et al., 2003)
- Slide 24
- H2O Vs 2D model predictions Predictions from thermal/petrologic
model
- Slide 25
- Serpentinization effect on Vp [Hyndman and Peacock, 2003] Are
downgoing plates serpentinized? (Nicaragua forearc)
- Slide 26
- Result: low Vp/Vs in deeper wedge Where slab is deep: Vp/Vs =
1.64-1.69 (consistent w/ tomography)
- Slide 27
- The Andes [Wagner et al., 2004, JGR] 31.1S Flat Slab 32.6S
Vp/Vs < 1.68-1.72
- Slide 28
- Vp/Vs and composition: need quartz Andes AK wedge AK wedge
- Slide 29
- Slide 30
- What is seismic attenuation? Q = E/E - loss of energy per cycle
EE Amplitude ~ exp(- ftT/Q) T 1/f
- Slide 31
- What Causes Attenuation? Upper Crust: cracks, pores Normal
Mantle: thermally activated dissipation Cold Slabs: ?? (scattering
may dominate if 1/Q intrinsic is low)
- Slide 32
- Seismic Attenuation (1/Q) at high T Faul & Jackson (2005),
adjusted to 2.5 GPa d=1 mm 10 mm At High T, Q Has: strong T
sensitivity some to H 2 O, grain size, melt weak compositional
sensitivity shear, not bulk 1/Q
- Slide 33
- High-Temperature Background (HTB) Simple model (Jackson et al.
2002) grain size period activation energy temperature = 0.2-0.3
(frequency dep.) m = (grain size dep.)
- Slide 34
- Attenuating Signals 2 s DH1 = 0.92 RCK = 0.91 wedge RCKDH1
updip P waves depth 126 km (Stachnik et al., 2004, JGR)
- Slide 35
- Q Measurements Fit P, S spectra: T/Q, M 0, f c 0.5 (10-20) Hz
Forearc PathWedge Path S waves, slab event, ~ 100 km u(f) = U 0 A
source (f) e - fT/Q Q and amplitude u(f):
- Slide 36
- Path-averaged Qs assumes Q(f) from laboratory predictions
Invert these tomographically
- Slide 37
- Test of Q theory: Ratio of Bulk / Shear attenuation high 1/Qs
high 1/Qk Alaska cross-section (Stachnik et al., 2004)
- Slide 38
- Test of HTB: Frequency Dependence Q = Q 0 f Lab: Faul &
Jackson 2005 Observations from Alaska
- Slide 39
- Forearcs: cold; subarc mantle: hot Heat flow in northern
Cascadia: step 20-30 km from arc (Wada and Wang, 2009; after Wang
et al. 2005; Currie et al., 2004)
- Slide 40
- Results from Alaska (BEAAR): 1/Q S In wedge core: Q S ~ 100-140
@ 1 Hz 1200-1400C (dry) lo Q hi Q (Stachnik et al., 2004 JGR)
- Slide 41
- Attenuation in Central America (TUCAN) (Rychert et al., 2008
G-Cubed)
- Slide 42
- Anisotropy
- Slide 43
- EXTRAS
- Slide 44
- Attenuation vs Velocity: Physical Dispersion No attenuation
Attenuation + Causality = Delay in high-frequency energy
Attenuation without causality
- Slide 45
- Attenuation vs Velocity: Physical Dispersion No attenuation
Attenuation + Causality This means: Band-limited measurements of
travel time are late Band-limited measures give slower apparent
velocities As T increases, both V and Q decrease
- Slide 46
- Physical Dispersion: Faul/Jackson approx. K G anharmonic
anharmonic + anelastic
- Slide 47
- Physical Dispersion: Karato approx. Karato, 1993 GRL
- Slide 48
- Net effect: interpreting T from Vs Faul & Jackson, 2005
EPSL
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Deep under the hood: adiabatic vs. isothermal Important
distinction between adiabatic (const. S) and isothermal (const. T)
processes Useful: Bina & Helffrich, 1992 Ann. Rev.; Hacker and
Abers, 2004 GCubed Labs & petrologists usually measure this
Seismic waves see this (not the same!)
- Slide 51
- Deep under the hood: 1 st Grneisen parameter relates elastic to
thermal properties E is the internal energy, related to temperature
S is entropy e.g. defines the adiabat A more useful relationship
can be obtained with some definitions/algebra = coef. Thermal
expansion K T, K S = (isothermal, isentropic) bulk modulus C V, C P
= specific heat at const. (volume, P) Useful: Bina & Helffrich,
1992 Ann. Rev.; Anderson et al., 1992 Rev. Geophys.
- Slide 52
- The other parameters & scalings - Relates thermal expansion
(of volume) to thermal changes of bulk modulus K = K/P is usually
around 4.0 see Anderson et al., 1992 T ~ + K In absence of any data
- Same for shear modulus
- Slide 53
- Related/useful: Adiabatic Gradient Some monkeying around gives
Useful: Bina & Helffrich, 1992 Ann. Rev.; Hacker and Abers,
2004 GCubed So that the adiabatic gradient is This is a useful
formulism: ~ 0.8 1.3 for most solid-earth materials (1.1 is good
average) g ~ 10 m s 2 throughout upper mantle HOMEWORK: what is the
geothermal gradient?