• Armienti, P., G. Macedonia, and M. T. Parsechi, 1988: A numerical model for the distribution of tephra transport and deposition: Applications to May 18, 1980 Mt. St. Helens eruption. J. Geophys. Res.,93, 6463–6476.

  • Casadavell, T. J., 1994: The 1989–1990 eruption of Redoubt Volcano, Alaska: Impacts on aircraft operations. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res.,62, 301–316.

  • Chen, C., and W. R. Cotton, 1983: A one-dimensional simulation of the stratocumulus-capped mixed layer. Bound.-Layer Meteor.,25, 289–321.

  • Chen, C., and W. R. Cotton, 1987: The physics of the marine stratocumulus-capped mixed layer. J. Atmos. Sci.,44, 2591–2977.

  • Cronin, S. J., M. J. Hedley, V. E. Neall, and R. G. Smith, 1998: Agronomic impact of tephra fallout from the 1995 and 1996 Ruapehu Volcano eruptions, New Zealand. Environ. Geol.,34, 21–30.

  • Deardorff, J. W., 1980: Stratocumulus-capped mixed layers derived from a three-dimensional model. Bound.-Layer Meteor.,18, 495–527.

  • Glaze, L. S., and S. Self, 1991: Ashfall dispersal for the 16 September 1986 eruption of Lascar, Chile, calculated by a turbulent diffusion model. Geophys. Res. Lett.,18, 1237–1240.

  • Glaze, L. S., S. M. Baloga, and L. Wilson, 1997: Transport of atmospheric water vapor by volcanic eruption columns. J. Geophys. Res.,102, 6099–6108.

  • Hurst, A. W., and R. W. Turner, 1999: Performance of a program for volcanic ashfall forecasting. N.Z. J. Geol. Geophys.,42, 615–622.

  • Lechner, P., 1997: Living with volcanic ash episodes in civil aviation. Civil Aviation Authority of New Zealand Tech. Note, 10 pp. [Available from Civil Aviation Authority of New Zealand, P.O. Box 31-441, Lower Hutt, New Zealand.].

  • Macedonio, G., M. T. Parsechi, and R. Santacroce, 1988: A numerical simulation of the Plinian fall phase of the 79 AD eruption of Vesuvius. J. Geophys. Res.,93, 14 817–14 827.

  • Macedonio, G., M. T. Parsechi, and R. Santacroce, 1990: Renewal of explosive activity at Vesuvius: Models for the expected tephra fallout. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res.,40, 327–342.

  • New Zealand Official Yearbook, 1997: New Zealand Official Yearbook of 1997. GP Publications, 645 pp.

  • Pielke, R. A., W. R. Cotton, C. J. Tremback, M. E. Nicholls, M. D. Moran, D. A. Wesley, T. J. Lee, and J. H. Copeland, 1992: A comprehensive meteorological modelling system—RAMS. Meteor. Atmos. Phys.,49, 69–91.

  • Pudykiewicz, J., 1988: Numerical simulation of the transport of radioactive cloud from the Chernobyl nuclear accident. Tellus,40B, 241–259.

  • Ritchie, H., and C. Beaudoin, 1994: Approximations and sensitivity experiments with a baroclinic semi-Lagrangian spectral model. Mon. Wea. Rev.,122, 2391–2399.

  • Searcy, C., K. Dean, and W. Stringer, 1998: PUFF: A high-resolution volcanic ash tracking model. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res.,80, 1–16.

  • Self, S., and G. P. L. Walker, 1991: Ash clouds: Characteristics of eruption columns. U.S. Geol. Surv. Bull.,2047, 81–86.

  • Sparks, R. S. J., M. I. Bursik, S. N. Carey, A. W. Woods, and J. S. Gilbert, 1991: The controls of eruption-column dynamics on the injection and mass loading of ash into the atmosphere. U.S. Geol. Surv. Bull.,2047, 81–86.

  • Suzuki, T., 1983: A theoretical model for dispersion of tephra. Arc Volcanism: Physics and Tectonics, D. Shimozuru and I. Yokoyama, Eds., Terra Publishing Co., 95–113.

  • Tremback, C. J., J. Powell, W. R. Cotton, and R. A. Pielke, 1987: The forward-in-time upstream advection scheme. Mon. Wea. Rev.,115, 540–555.

  • Tripoli, G. J., and W. R. Cotton, 1980: A numerical investigation of several factors contributing to the observed variable intensity of deep convection over south Florida. J. Appl. Meteor.,19, 1037–1063.

  • Tripoli, G. J., and W. R. Cotton, 1982: The Colorado State University three-dimensional cloud/mesoscale model—1982. Part I: General theoretical framework and sensitivity experiments. J. Rech. Atmos.,16, 185–220.

  • Vandemeulebrouck, J., A. W. Hurst, and N. Poussielgue, 1994: Implications for the thermal regime of acoustic noise measurements in Crater Lake Mount Ruapehu, New Zealand. Bull. Volcanol.,56, 493–501.

  • Walko, R. L., and C. J. Tremback, 1995: HYPACT: The Hybrid Particle and Concentration Transport Model. User’s guide, 13 pp. [Available from ASTER Division, Mission Reasearch Corporation, P.O. Box 466, Fort Collins, CO 80522.].

  • Wilson, C. J. N., 1991: Ash-fall deposits from large-scale phreatomagmatic volcanism: Limitations of available eruption-column models. U.S. Geol. Surv. Bull.,2047, 93–99.

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 9 9 9
PDF Downloads 6 6 6

Factors Influencing Volcanic Ash Dispersal from the 1995 and 1996 Eruptions of Mount Ruapehu, New Zealand

View More View Less
  • a National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research, Ltd., Wellington, New Zealand
  • | b Institute for Geological and Nuclear Sciences, Ltd., Lower Hutt, New Zealand
Restricted access

Abstract

The prediction of the dispersal of volcanic ash from events such as the Ruapehu eruptions of 1995 and 1996 is important, not only for civil-defense authorities who need to warn people in downwind areas, but for airline companies that have to reroute aircraft to avoid the encounters with volcanic ash clouds that can badly damage expensive jet engines and jeopardize passenger safety. The results of numerical simulations of volcanic ash dispersal using the Regional Atmospheric Modeling System (RAMS) and Hybrid Particle and Concentration Transport Model (HYPACT) for three periods (11–12 October 1995, 14 October 1995, and 17 June 1996) during the recent Ruapehu eruptive sequence are presented here. RAMS is a 3D atmospheric model that can be used to give detailed predictions of winds for regions such as the volcanic plateau. HYPACT is a particle dispersion model that uses the RAMS-generated wind fields to predict the movement and concentration of the volcanic ash cloud. Validation is achieved through comparison of predictions of airborne distributions and ashfall patterns with contour maps of ashfall depth and with satellite images of the ash cloud. Comparison of the performance of RAMS/HYPACT with that of the current Gaussian-plume “ASHFALL” Model currently used for ashfall advisory guidance in New Zealand indicates that the RAMS/HYPACT suite provides more accurate spatial and temporal forecasts than ASHFALL does, but that, like ASHFALL, its accuracy is limited by the accuracy of the initial and lateral boundary conditions provided and by the accuracy of the volcanological parameters that control the eruption-plume characteristics.

Corresponding author address: Richard W. Turner, National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research, Ltd., P.O. Box 14901, Kilbirnie, Wellington, New Zealand.

r.turner@niwa.cri.nz

Abstract

The prediction of the dispersal of volcanic ash from events such as the Ruapehu eruptions of 1995 and 1996 is important, not only for civil-defense authorities who need to warn people in downwind areas, but for airline companies that have to reroute aircraft to avoid the encounters with volcanic ash clouds that can badly damage expensive jet engines and jeopardize passenger safety. The results of numerical simulations of volcanic ash dispersal using the Regional Atmospheric Modeling System (RAMS) and Hybrid Particle and Concentration Transport Model (HYPACT) for three periods (11–12 October 1995, 14 October 1995, and 17 June 1996) during the recent Ruapehu eruptive sequence are presented here. RAMS is a 3D atmospheric model that can be used to give detailed predictions of winds for regions such as the volcanic plateau. HYPACT is a particle dispersion model that uses the RAMS-generated wind fields to predict the movement and concentration of the volcanic ash cloud. Validation is achieved through comparison of predictions of airborne distributions and ashfall patterns with contour maps of ashfall depth and with satellite images of the ash cloud. Comparison of the performance of RAMS/HYPACT with that of the current Gaussian-plume “ASHFALL” Model currently used for ashfall advisory guidance in New Zealand indicates that the RAMS/HYPACT suite provides more accurate spatial and temporal forecasts than ASHFALL does, but that, like ASHFALL, its accuracy is limited by the accuracy of the initial and lateral boundary conditions provided and by the accuracy of the volcanological parameters that control the eruption-plume characteristics.

Corresponding author address: Richard W. Turner, National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research, Ltd., P.O. Box 14901, Kilbirnie, Wellington, New Zealand.

r.turner@niwa.cri.nz

Save