Tectonophysics 471 (2009) 87–95

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Tectonophysics
j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w. e l s ev i e r. c o m / l o c a t e / t e c t o

Modelling ground deformation caused by oscillating overpressure in a dyke conduit

at Soufrière Hills Volcano, Montserrat
Stefanie Hautmann a,⁎, Joachim Gottsmann a,1, R. Stephen J. Sparks a,1, Antonio Costa b,2,
Oleg Melnik c,3, Barry Voight d,4
a
Department of Earth Sciences, University of Bristol, Wills Memorial Building, Queen's Road, Bristol, BS8 1RJ, United Kingdom
b
Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia, Via Diocleziano 328, 80124 Napoli, Italy
c
Institute of Mechanics, Moscow State University, 1-112b Michurinsky prosp., Moscow, Russia
d
Department of Geosciences, Penn State University, 334A Deike Building, University Park, PA 16802, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: A dyke conduit has been shown to be a realistic model for the shallow magmatic feeder system for the dome
Received 14 November 2007 forming eruption at Soufrière Hills Volcano, Montserrat. Here we use a three-dimensional Finite Element
Received in revised form 16 October 2008 model to examine the ground deformation that can be expected due to the pressurization of a dyke conduit.
Accepted 16 October 2008
We find that the generated deformation has a bilateral symmetry with nearly no displacement in the
Available online 29 October 2008
direction of dyke strike, and a maximal ground deformation about 1 km away from the vent in the
Keywords:
perpendicular direction. Resultant surface deformation is mainly triggered by the upper part of the feeder
Soufrière Hills Volcano system, where the dyke opens into a cylindrical conduit. We apply our deformation model to investigate tilt
Dyke conduit data collected in 1997 in order to infer the orientation of the dyke. We obtain a best-fit for a NNW–SSE
Finite Element Model trending dyke, which matches observations of the ground displacement field obtained by differential GPS
Ground deformation and the alignment of main structural geologic features of southern Montserrat.
© 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Soufrière Hills Volcano (SHV), Montserrat, began erupting in 1995
and is presently one of the most active lava dome volcanoes on earth.
A common phenomenon of dome-forming volcanoes is the occur-
rence of cyclic pulses in lava discharge, with durations on the order of
hours to years (e.g., Sparks, 1997; Denlinger and Hoblitt, 1999; Sparks
and Young, 2002; Costa et al., 2007b). Typically, these pulsations are
identified from seismic and deformation records, gas emission data,
and eruption phenomena.
At SHV, periodic behaviour of activity has been observed on three
different time scales:
First, a short term (6–30 h) periodicity, has been recorded by tilt
meters in 1997 (Voight et al., 1998; Widiwijayanti et al., 2005). This
cyclicity was accompanied by an increasing number of hybrid earth-
quakes during the inflationary part of the cycle (Miller et al.,1998; Green
and Neuberg, 2006) and enhanced gas emissions just after the cycle
⁎ Corresponding author. Fax: +44 117 9253385.
E-mail addresses: stefanie.hautmann@googlemail.com (S. Hautmann),
j.gottsmann@bristol.ac.uk (J. Gottsmann), steve.sparks@bristol.ac.uk (R.S.J. Sparks),
costa@ov.ingv.it (A. Costa), melnik@imec.msu.ru (O. Melnik), voight@ems.psu.edu
(B. Voight).
1
Fax: +44 117 9253385.
2
Fax: +39 081 6108351.
3
Fax: +7 495 939 0165.
4
Fax: +1 814 863 7832.
peak (Watson et al., 2000). Throughout the deflationary part of the cycle
the number of hybrid earthquakes decreased, but rockfall and
pyroclastic flow activity increased (Voight et al., 1998, 1999). The peak
of the cycles was characterized by a Vulcanian explosion. Similar short-
term cycles with ~10 h periodicity were recorded in December 1999–
January 2000, involving pulsations of seismic tremor intensity and SO2
emissions (Young et al., 2003).
Second, a cyclic pattern of activity, with a period of 5–7 weeks
occurred between April 1997 and March 1998. The pattern was
recognized by sharp onset of tilt and seismic signals (Voight et al.,
1999; Sparks and Young, 2002; Costa et al., 2007a,b). Major dome
collapses or onset of Vulcanian explosive activity took place within a few
hours to a few days after the onset of a new cycle.
Third, periodic lava dome extrusion has been observed throughout
the eruption. Periods of dome growth last 2–3 years, and are separated
by periods of quiescence of 1.5–2 years (Sparks and Young, 2002; Wadge
et al., 2006). Deformation data from GPS stations fit the observed long-
term periodic extrusion activity well, showing deflation in the years of
dome extrusion and inflation in times of quiescence (Mattioli et al.,
1998; Wadge et al., 2006).
The short-term (order of hours) process has been explained by
pressurization in the upper conduit, which has been attributed to non-
linear dynamics of the magma flow as a consequence of degassing,
crystallization and rheological stiffening of magma during decompres-
sion (Sparks, 1997; Voight et al., 1998; Denlinger and Hoblitt, 1999;
Voight et al., 1999; Wylie et al., 1999; Clarke et al., 2007). In contrast, the

0040-1951/$ – see front matter © 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.tecto.2008.10.021
88 S. Hautmann et al. / Tectonophysics 471 (2009) 87–95

long-term (years) oscillations are thought to be controlled by deeper-
seated dynamic processes within the magma chamber (Mattioli et al.,
1998; Melnik and Sparks, 1999, 2005; Wadge et al., 2006).
Costa et al. (2007a,b) developed a new model for conduit flow during
lava dome extrusion fed by a dyke with a cylindrical conduit geometry
only developed at shallow levels. This model builds upon earlier
modelling investigations for magma flow in cylindrical volcanic
conduits (Melnik and Sparks, 1999, 2005). It accounts for degassing-
induced crystallization kinetics, gas exsolution and filtration through
the magma, rheological stiffening of magma due to crystallization, and
latent heat release. As a consequence of these non-linear dynamics,
magma pressure inside the conduit is continually changing, leading to a
maximum pressure when the eruption activity (discharge rate) is at a
minimum and vice versa. Costa et al. (2007a,b) adapted this earlier
model for the new dyke geometry and accounted for variations in
conduit cross-section due to elastic deformation of the wallrocks. This
new model of a dyke conduit feeder system is the only currently
available model explaining the observed periodicity of several weeks in
the activity pattern, as well as the sharp onset of geophysical signals.
The scope of our work is to investigate the ground displacement
caused by pressure variations in the dyke conduit as described by Costa
et al. (2007a,b), which appear to control the 5–7 weeks periodicity of
activity and to check if recorded tilt data matches predictions from the
model. We do not aim to parameterize the source or to discuss
mechanism that are producing tilt cycles, however we employ our
model to determine the orientation of the dyke conduit, which is a
matter of debate: Mattioli et al. (1998) proposed NW–SE trending dyke
on the basis of differential GPS, while Roman et al. (2006) calculated
fault-plane solutions from volcano–tectonic earthquakes to determine a
dyke orientation at right angle to the earlier.
2. Data and method
To analyze the generic case of surface deformation caused by dyke
conduit pressurization, as described by Costa et al. (2007a,b), we
generated a 3-D Finite Element Model (FEM) of the domain, with a
simplified, rotationally symmetric geometry for the volcanic edifice. The
geometry used was a cone with roughly the same dimensions as SHV

Fig. 1. Finite Element Model of a dyke conduit at Soufrière Hills Volcano, Montserrat. Top: map view of the southern part of the island (green), the coast (yellow), and bathymetry
(blue). Bottom: west facing lateral view onto the volcanic region. The island (green), coast (yellow) and the magmatic dyke conduit (red) are shown. The shown dyke conduit is
orientated parallel to strike with only the upper 3 km shown. Note that the upper part of the conduit is obscured by the topographic model. For a full scheme of the geometry of the
dyke conduit see Figs. 1 and 4. The mesh coarsens with distance from the dyke conduit and the edifice of the active SHV. See text for details. (For interpretation of the references to
colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
 S. Hautmann et al. / Tectonophysics 471 (2009) 87–95
Fig. 2. Left: Schematic view of the assumed dyke conduit system (from Costa et al., 2007b). Length of the dyke conduit system is L = 5 km. The smooth transition from an elliptic dyke
to a cylindrical conduit occurs below depth LT of approximately 1.2 km. The radius of the conduit R is set as 15 m. The variation with depth of semi-axis lengths, a0 and b0, are defined
using arctangent functions (for details see Costa et al., 2007b). Right: Overpressure along the dyke conduit for times of high (solid) and low (dashed line) magmatic overpressures.
(1 km height, 4 km basal radius). We were thus able to eliminate first-
order topographic effects of the resulting deformation pattern. For the
investigation of the dyke orientation at SHV, we generated a more
detailed FEM, in which we implemented a pre-eruption digital elevation
model (DEM) of the island of Montserrat (available at: http://www.
nerc-essc.ac.uk/~gw/www_data/Montydems.html [courtesy of G.
Wadge]) with a spatial resolution of 150 m. We further added offshore
bathymetric data (Trofimovs et al., 2006) to a distance of 15 km.
We applied a series of simplified 2-D Finite Element Models using
different sizes of the computational domain in order to find an
appropriate model size, which satisfies the balance between computa-
tional restrictions and avoiding boundary effects on the displacement
fields both onshore and up to 3 km offshore. We found that using a
mathematical domain 9 times the size of the island provides satisfactory
results and this domain size was maintained during all model runs. The
final 3-D models are represented each with a structured mesh having
601,424 elements and 105,208 nodes for the generic model and 963,494
elements and 172,104 nodes for the application to Montserrat (see also
Fig. 1). The meshes coarsen with distance from the pressure source and
the topography of the volcano region. The elastic equations are solved
numerically via a finite element method with nodal implementation
(Codina and Folch, 2004).
The geometry of the dyke conduit is given by Costa et al. (2007a,b). A
schematic view is shown in Fig. 2. The dyke has an elliptic cross-section
with length axes dependent on the vertical coordinates and a smooth
transition from a thin dyke at depth to a cylindrical conduit at shallow
level. The length of the dyke conduit is 5 km (from chamber to surface),
with a dyke width between 450–480 m and a dyke thickness between
1.9–2.0 m. The thickness-to-width ratio is linked to the overpressure and
increases as a function of depth. At a depth of about 1.2 km, the dyke
opens into a cylindrical conduit, which extends towards the surface,
where it has a radius of 15 m. The depth for the transition from dyke to
conduit was chosen based on abundant evidences for conduit excavation
to between 1–2 km depth during sub-plinian and vulcanian explosions
(from ballistics, bulk water content in ejected glass, quench pressure of
groundmass crystallinities, and volume of ejected magma; Robertson
et al., 1998; Druitt et al., 2002; Clarke et al., 2007). The cylindrical
geometry and the width of the conduit near the surface were estimated
from dimensions of spines and the early crater of SHV (Melnik and
Sparks, 1999), as well as from petrological (Devine et al., 1998) and
89
ground deformation data (Shepherd et al., 1998). The following values
for boundary conditions in the FEM are chosen in agreement with model
assumptions and results given in Costa et al. (2007a,b). For overpressure
variations from 34 MPa to 40 MPa (increasing upwards along the dyke),
the discharge rate is at a minimum. For overpressure values between
34 MPa and 25 MPa (decreasing upwards along the dyke), the discharge
rate is at its maximum (see also Fig. 2). From about 1.2 km depth, where
the dyke opens into a conduit, the overpressure within the magmatic
system is constantly decreasing towards zero at the ground surface. Costa
et al. (2007a,b) found that the oscillating discharge rate in the dyke leads
to less than 5 MPa of pressure variation inside the magma chamber. This
relatively low value for pressure variation compared to the absolute
(lithostatic and magmastatic) magma chamber pressure of 157 MPa
(Costa et al., 2007b) allows a constant pressure to be assumed for the
magma chamber. Therefore, we modeled the dyke as uncoupled from the
chamber. The dyke conduit is embedded into an elastic medium with the
Poisson's ratio set at v = 0.3. The rigidity G is increasing linearly with
depth from 1.5 GPa to 6.0 GPa, as suggested by measurements in
laboratory tests and best fits to ground deformation (Voight et al., 1999,
2006).
Continuous tiltmeter recordings are available from two bubble-type
biaxial platform tiltmeters, CP2 and CP3, which were both installed at
Chances Peak. CP2 was based at a distance of about 680 m away from the
vent with azimuth 065, while CP3 was located at a distance of 530 m
from the vent with azimuth 062. Both tiltmeters worked only for a
relatively short period of time, with CP2 recording data from 20 May–1
June 1997 and CP3 working from 23 May–5 August 1997. Nevertheless,
the recorded time series have already been a valuable tool for
understanding the ongoing eruption of SHV (e.g., Voight et al., 1998,
1999; Widiwijayanti et al., 2005). Two of the 5–7 weeks activity cycles,
which are of interest for this paper, occurred during tiltmeter operations
(17 May–21 June and 22 June–30 July 1997). CP3 recorded these cycles
nearly in their entirety, whereas CP2 ran only during the beginning of
the first cycle. However, the data from CP2 are useful to test the quality of
the signals recorded by CP3, i.e. to confirm that the time series data
available from CP3 reflect a real volcanic signal rather than a local
disturbance at the benchmark. The tilt data were transmitted by radio at
nominal 8 min interval and the values were averaged to 0.0016 Hz. All
data have been resolved into their radial (direction ENE, towards the
vent) and tangential (direction NNW, orthogonal to the radial)
90 S. Hautmann et al. / Tectonophysics 471 (2009) 87–95

components. A positive radial signal variation means uplift of the
volcanic center, a positive signal variation of the tangential component
means uplift in a clockwise direction. A linear inflationary trend in the
dataset has been removed in order to emphasize the cyclic signal, which
is of interest for this work (compare to Sparks and Young (2002) for
original data). The fluctuations over 6–30 h only have a very minor
influence on the amplitude of the signal with 5–7 weeks periodicity.
Hence, these short-term variations have no bearing on our analysis.
3. Results
3.1. Generic model of deformation due to dyke conduit pressurization
Results for the generic model in which we demonstrate the surface
deformation that can be expected from pressurizing the dyke conduit,
are shown in Fig. 3a–d. In this generic model we orientated the dyke in a
N–S direction. Our model has intrinsically a bilateral symmetric defor-
mation pattern. A maximum vertical uplift Uzmax = 9 cm is found for
periods of high dyke magma overpressure (34–40 MPa), whereas for
times of low magma overpressure (34–25 MPa), Uzmax = 7 cm. The
maximum vertical surface displacement occurs at distances of about
1.1 km from the vent, orthogonal to the strike of the dyke. At distances
greater than 1 km from the vent in strike direction, a slight ground
subsidence of 0.5 cm is found for both high and low magma pressure. The
horizontal displacement vectors show a pattern similar to the vertical
displacements vectors. The maximum horizontal displacement Urmax is
found 1.6 km from the vent towards the direction of dyke opening, with
Urmax = 10 cm for high magma pressures and Urmax = 7.5 cm for low
magma pressures. The convention used for horizontal displacements is
that positive values mean a movement away from the volcanic center.
The effective ground displacement at the volcano is the difference
between relative inflation and relative deflation. Any asymmetric
patterns are due to numerical effects and can therefore be neglected.
Fig. 4 shows cross-sections through the dyke in the direction of strike
and, orthogonally, in the direction of dyke opening. Results clearly show
that vertical surface displacements are mainly caused by that part of the

Fig. 3. Generic model for surface deformation response to magmatic overpressure within a dyke conduit in times of high and low discharge rates (minimum discharge rate
corresponds to maximum overpressure). Dyke orientation is in the N–S direction (parallel to y-axis). Any pattern differing from bilateral symmetry is a numerical effect and can be
neglected. (a) vertical displacement during high magma pressure, (b) vertical displacement during low magma pressure, (c) horizontal displacement during high magma pressure,
(d) horizontal displacement during low magma pressure. Convention for horizontal displacement is that absolute values are plotted with deformation away from the vent indicated
by positive values (shown in red). (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
 S. Hautmann et al. / Tectonophysics 471 (2009) 87–95
Fig. 4. Cross-sections of the generic model, showing the geometry, mesh, and calculated vertical displacements, parallel (left) and perpendicular (right) to strike of dyke. Colours indicate distribution and grade of vertical uplift due to magmatic
overpressure within the dyke (i.e. times where discharge rate is at its minimum). Note that the surface displacements are mainly triggered by this part of the magmatic system, where the dyke opens into a cylindrical conduit. Any asymmetric
patterns are due to numerical effects and can therefore be neglected. Cross-sections showing the calculated horizontal displacements are similar to the one presented here.

91
92 S. Hautmann et al. / Tectonophysics 471 (2009) 87–95
magmatic system, where the dyke opens into the cylindrical conduit, i.e.
the deformation triggering pressure source is located at a depth between
880–1230 m. It is found that the general pattern of deformation along
the dyke conduit is similar for vertical and horizontal displacement
vectors, with horizontal surface displacements being initiated from the
dyke to conduit transition zone.
To test the compatibility of the analytical model of Costa et al. (2007a,
b) with the numerical model presented herein, and hence to show the
significance of the models, we compare the respective results for the
deformation of the dyke wall due to pressurization. The diagram in Fig. 5
shows the differences in cross-sectional areas of the dyke with respect to
depth and to high and low magma pressure phases, respectively. Results
from both the analytical model of Costa et al. (2007a,b) and the numerical
model presented herein are compared. The deformation patterns from
both models are similar. Also, the scale of deformation along the dyke wall
is similar for both models, with a slightly larger deformation (within a
factor 1.5) predicted by the analytical model of Costa et al. (2007a,b).
3.2. Application to Soufrière Hills Volcano, Montserrat
The tilt meter data show variations with a similar amplitude on the
radial and on the tangential component. A model of a cylindrical conduit,
however, would not be able to explain tilt variations recorded in the
tangential direction, as a cylindrical pressure source produces rotation-
ally symmetric surface deformation around the volcano. Thus, the
observed tilt variations can only be explained with a bi-axial pressure
source (i.e. a dyke).
Analysis of the 5–7 weeks cycle of the tilt data shows that each of the
recorded periods begins with a negative signal on the radial component
and a positive signal on the tangential component (Fig. 6). This
corresponds to a relative down movement towards the direction of
the volcanic center and a relative upward movement of the area located
NNW of the tiltmeters. In the course of the activity cycle, the signal
curves are flattening and, after nearly half the period of the cycle, the
signal polarities reverse.
The beginning of each activity period was characterized by a peak in
the discharge rate (Sparks and Young, 2002), which is associated with
Fig. 5. Cross-sectional area changes of the pressurized dyke conduit as a function of
depth. Results show the relative changes (dyke wall displacements due to high magma
pressure minus dyke wall displacements due to low magma pressures) for both the
analytical model, given by Costa et al. (2007a,b), and the numerical model presented
herein.
minimum values for overpressure (Costa et al., 2007a,b). This means
that overpressure values are increasing during the first part of each 5–
7 week cycle and decreasing within the second half of the cycle.
According to our generic model, increasing the pressure in the dyke
conduit leads to a ground uplift about 1.1 km away from the vent (see
Fig. 3). The tiltmeters located 530 m and 680 m respectively, WSW from
the vent, show a relative subsidence of the vent during the first part of
the cycle. This allows us to infer the approximate strike of the dyke to a
NW–SE direction, for the vertical deformation to roughly agree with the
radial tilt records. Further refinement of the model to fit simultaneously
the vertical surface deformation with the tangential component of the
tilt data (subsidence of the area located SSE from the tiltmeters in
the first part of the cycle), results in an inferred NNW–SSE orientation of
the dyke in order to obtain the maximal vertical uplift northwest of the
tiltmeter benchmarks. We applied a series of forward models (rotating
the dyke between 1° to 5° in a search range between 300° and 360°) in
order to find the best fit of dyke orientation as well as a range of
directions of dyke strike, which also give a good agreement of model
data with recorded observations. Our model, which includes the
topography of Montserrat, gives a best fit of vertical surface displace-
ment to the recorded tilt data for a dyke conduit striking towards
343°± 3° (Fig. 7). This dyke orientation also satisfies the observation
that the cyclic tilt data are comparable in amplitude in both the radial
and tangential directions.
Estimating the tilt angle from the synthetic vertical displacements
given by our model for the area between the tiltmeter stations and the
vent, results in a tilt variation of approximately 40–50 μrad. This matches
within an order of magnitude with the data that have been recorded at
the tilt stations. Measured tilt variations are in between 60–80 μrad
(Fig. 6).
4. Discussion
4.1. Model agreement with recorded data of ground deformation
We presented results of a 3-D FEM to highlight ground deformation
induced by pressure variations in the dyke conduit of SHV as it is given
by Costa et al. (2007a,b). The overall displacement pattern agrees with
results from other studies (both theoretical considerations and from
data inversion) on surface stresses and deformation associated with
dyke pressurization (Pollard et al., 1983; Bonafede and Olivieri, 1995;
Cayol and Cornet, 1998; Currenti et al., 2008). As tilt variations at SHV
were recorded on the radial and tangential component the deformation
inducing pressure source needs to be of bi-axial symmetric shape. Our
results revealed that recorded tilt variations are explained best by a
vertical 343° trending dyke conduit. The model predicts tilt amplitude
variations on the same order of magnitude of measured 5–7 week tilt
cycles. Hence, a dyke conduit as feeder system at SHV is able to produce
the observed 5–7 weeks activity cycles and the corresponding surface
deformation. There is currently no other model available, which would
succeed in explaining both the phenomena.
Earlier investigations of the tilt records to obtain the source's location
and geometry concentrated only on periodic cycles that lasted between
6–30 h (Voight et al., 1998; Widiwijayanti et al., 2005). These authors
stated that such cycles can be related to a pressure source, located at
depths between 740–870 m. For our model of a dyke conduit as a
pressure source for tilt variations with a period of 5–7 weeks, we found
that the vertical ground deformation at the tiltmeter sites mainly
initiated from depths between 880–1230 m, with displacements closer
to the vent reflecting shallower pressurization. These depths are the
same as the inferred depth of the transition zone, in which the thin dyke
opens to a cylindrical conduit (compare to Fig. 5), i.e. the dyke-conduit
transition zone is essentially that part of the magmatic system that
triggers surface deformation. However, Voight et al. (1998) and
Widiwijayanti et al. (2005) estimated the depth of the pressure source
on the basis of a half-space model, which means that topographic effects
 S. Hautmann et al. / Tectonophysics 471 (2009) 87–95 93

Fig. 6. Tilt records from CP2 and CP3 for the period 20 May–1 June 1997 (CP2) and 23 May–5 August 1997 (CP3). The tiltmeters were located at Chances Peak, 680 m and 530 m WSW
from the vent, respectively. The records have been resolved into their radial (blue) and tangential (red) components. A positive signal variation on the radial component corresponds
to a subsidence of the volcanic center, a positive signal variation on the tangential component correlates with a subsidence in anticlockwise direction, each with respect to the
position of the tiltmeters. A linear signal trend has been removed, compare to Sparks and Young (2002) for original data. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure
legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

are not accounted. Taking this into consideration, the results of Voight
et al. (1998) and Widiwijayanti et al. (2005) for the inferred depth of the
pressure source indeed fit well with the results given by our model.
Widiwijayanti et al. (2005) further constrained the source geometry
as an idealized sphere or cylinder with a radius between 200–340 m.
However, as noted by these authors, the existence of a spherical magma
chamber at these shallow depths is unlikely and the calculated
dimensions for a cylindrical conduit greatly exceeds the estimations of
conduit size, based on magma flux and fluid dynamic considerations. As
consequence, Green et al. (2006) suggested shear stress at the conduit
wall as a deformation source (for a more realistic conduit radius of
15 m), which would produce pressure gradients large enough to
generate the observed tilt amplitudes. However, the authors did not
account for the fact that tilt variations of the 6–30 h cycles are also
documented on the tangential component, which a priori excludes a
rotationally symmetric source geometry (with respect to the vertical
axis). Even by taking into account topographic effects, a rotationally
symmetric pressure source, such as a sphere or a cylinder, is not able to
produce the tangential tilt variations at the recorded scale. Hence, the
models given by Widiwijayanti et al. (2005) and Green et al. (2006) do
not sufficiently explain the complete record of the data. In contrast, a
pressurized dyke conduit as we suggested it as source for the 5–7 weeks
tilt cycles can readily also generate the observed surface deformation of
the 6–30 h cycles. The projection of a 343° trending dyke in direction of
the tiltmeter positions gives a horizontal source width between 390–
110 m for the part of the dyke conduit, in which the near-field surface
displacements are initiated (880–1230 m depth). In this respect, our
model can also explain the unusually large dimensions of the pressure
source that were calculated by Widiwijayanti et al. (2005).
Combining the observations listed above leads to the overall
conclusion that the geometry of a dyke conduit striking roughly
NNW–SSE provides a model consistent with all near-field volcanic
ground deformation data recorded at SHV. We demonstrated a good
agreement of our model with surface deformation occurring during the
5–7 weeks activity cycle. We also found that this geometry is able to
explain the activity cycles on short time scales (6–30 h). In addition,
Mattioli et al. (1998) previously explained long-term ground deforma-
tions that were recorded by GPS (between 1995–1996) using a dyke in
the shallow volcanic edifice, orientated in a similar direction. The
amplitude and periodicity of these deformation cycles are determined
by differing values for oscillating overpressure within the dyke conduit,
i.e. the scale of the ground deformation cycles is controlled by non-linear
94 S. Hautmann et al. / Tectonophysics 471 (2009) 87–95
Fig. 7. Vertical ground deformation caused by oscillating overpressure of a dyke conduit at Soufrière Hills Volcano, Montserrat. Island topography is taken from a pre-eruption DEM,
coordinates are given in UTM. The locations of tiltmeters CP2 (in the west) and CP3 (in the east) are marked by dark-blue crosses. A dyke, with strike of 343°, represents the best fit of
vertical surface deformation to tilt records. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
dynamic processes that occur within the shallow magmatic system
(including magma chamber and dyke conduit) (for details see Costa
et al., 2007a,b; Lensky et al., 2008).
Matching results of dyke wall deformation using both the 2-D
analytical model of Costa et al. (2007a,b) and our numerical model
validated the compatibility, and thus the significance of both models.
The slightly larger deformation predicted by the analytical model can be
explained by the fact that it involves more simplifications; for example,
the problem is solved mathematically in 2-D and does also not account
for the vertical displacement field. Thus the calculated cross-sectional
areas of the dyke in the two-dimensional model are upper bounds. We
also found that the scale of mesh resolution in the numerical model
slightly influences the values of predicted deformation.
4.2. Model agreement with previous observations
Our dyke orientation supports earlier results presented by Mattioli
et al. (1998), who inferred a dyke orientation of 320° on the basis of
ground deformation recorded by differential GPS (between 1995–1996).
Similarly, hypocenter alignments established by double-difference
precise locations of high-frequency onset earthquakes during the early
eruptive stage at SHV have been interpreted as caused by a dyke with
NW–SE to NNW–SSE orientation (Miller et al., submitted for publica-
tion). A strike direction of NW–SE to NNW–SSE is also consistent with
the structural geology of Montserrat and tectonic structures on the
surrounding sea floor. Earlier lava domes of SHV (Roches Bluff, Perches
Mountain, Galways Mountain, Castle Peak, Chances Peak, Gages Peak)
are aligned along a NW–SE trending axis and define, together with the
older volcaniclastic horsts of St. Georges Hill and Garibaldi Hill, the main
volcanotectonic structure in the southern part of the island (e.g., Wadge
and Isaacs, 1988; Le Friant et al., 2004). Offshore, the NW–SE trending
Bouillante–Montserrat half-graben connects this structure in a south-
easterly direction towards Guadeloupe (Le Friant et al., 2004). The half-
graben is bounded by a large normal fault (oriented NW–SE), which can
be traced into southern Montserrat and which suggests that in this
region the arc crest is in extension.
In contrast, there is an alternative suggestion of a NE–SW trending
dyke proposed by Roman et al. (2006). Using double-couple fault plane
solutions of volcanotectonic earthquakes, the authors observed switch-
ing of the azimuth of the p-axes between a NW–SE and NE–SW
direction. They found that the main compressional stresses are directed
NW–SE in times of inferred volcanic inflation and NE–SW during
inferred volcanic deflation, suggesting a NE–SW trending dyke.
However, the authors provide no evidence to explain their linking of
time periods to volcanic inflation and deflation, respectively. Roman
et al. (2006) partly infer the NE–SW orientation of the maximum
tectonic stress based on the arc-scale study of Wadge (1986). However,
as discussed above, the tectonic structures suggest that in the
neighborhood of Montserrat the maximum tectonic stress is oriented
about NW–SE. In addition, the interpretation of the seismic data is not
unambiguous, as the dip of the p-axes has not been quantified. A re-
localization of the events might also provide a better understanding.
Moreover, Roman et al. (2006) stress that the orientation of the principal
compressional axes of the moment tensor (p-axes) does not necessarily
correlate with the direction of maximum compressive stresses.
5. Conclusions
We generated a three-dimensional Finite Element model in order to
examine ground deformation resulting from pressurization of a dyke-
conduit system according to the model presented by Costa et al. (2007a,
b). We analyzed for the first time the expected general surface
deformation pattern and demonstrated that for the case of Soufrière
Hills Volcano, Montserrat, approximating the shallow feeder system as a
dyke conduit provides best fit to ground tilt records in the near-field
region of the volcano. We further determined the orientation of the
shallow dyke at SHV to be trending roughly in a NNW–SSE direction.
This result is in good agreement with results from differential GPS
measurements (Mattioli et al., 1998) and fits the general tectonic
framework of Montserrat. Our semi-quantitative model succeeds in
reproducing both the observed 5–7 weeks cyclicity at SHV (Costa et al.,
2007a,b) and the accompanying ground deformation.
We showed the displacement field induced by pressurizing a dyke
conduit as opposed to a cylindrical conduit to be distinctly different. A
dyke conduit geometry should therefore be taken into consideration in
future models of shallow feeder system dynamics for dome forming
 S. Hautmann et al. / Tectonophysics 471 (2009) 87–95
eruptions on Montserrat and elsewhere. This scenario may help
improving fits to recorded ground deformation data and thus places
important constraints on future modelling of volcanic systems.
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank A. Folch and A. Geyer for invaluable help in
using the computer programs GID and FEMFES. We further thank C.
Gans for critical comments on the manuscript. SH acknowledges funding
by the Bavarian Research Foundation (BFS DPA-53/05). JG was
supported by a Royal Society University Research Fellowship, a RS
International Joint Project, and NERC grant NE/E007961/1. Support is
acknowledged for RSJS, OM and AC by a NERC research grant NE/
C509958/1, for OM by the President of Russian Federation program
(NCH-4710.2006.1). The paper benefited from comments by Agust
Gudmundsson, Jürgen Neuberg and one anonymous reviewer.
References
Bonafede, M., Olivieri, M., 1995. Displacement and gravity anomaly produced by a shallow
vertical dyke in a cohesionless medium. Geophysical Journal International 123,
639–652.
Cayol, V., Cornet, F.H., 1998. Three-dimensional modeling of the 1983–1984 eruption at
Piton de la Fournaise Volcano, Réunion Island. Journal of Geophysical Research 103
(B8), 18025–18037.
Clarke, A.B., Stephens, S., Teasdale, R., Sparks, R.S.J., Diller, K., 2007. Petrological
constraints on the decompression history of magma prior to Vulcanian explosions
at the Soufrière Hills Volcano, Montserrat. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal
Research 161 (4), 261–274.
Codina, R., Folch, A., 2004. A stabilized finite element predictor-corrector scheme for the
incompressible Navier–Stokes equations using a nodalbased implementation.
International Journal of Numerical Methods in Fluids 44, 483–503.
Costa, A., Melnik, O., Sparks, R.S.J., 2007a. Control of conduit geometry and wallrock
elasticity on lava dome eruptions. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 260, 137–151.
Costa, A., Melnik, O., Sparks, R.S.J., Voight, B., 2007b. Control of magma flow in dykes on
cyclic lava dome extrusion. Geophysical Research Letters 34, L02303. doi:10.1029/
2006GL027466.
Currenti, G., Del Negro, C., Ganci, G., Scandura, D., 2008. 3D numerical deformation
model of the intrusive event forerunning the 2001 Etna eruption. Physics of the
earth and planetary interiors 169 (1–2), 88–96.
Denlinger, R., Hoblitt, R.P., 1999. Cyclic eruptive behavior of silicic volcanoes. Geology 27
(5), 459–462.
Devine, J.D., Rutherford, M.J., Gardner, J.E., 1998. Petrologic determination of ascent
rates for the 1995–1997 Soufrière Hills Volcano andesitic magma. Geophysical
Research Letters 25 (19), 3673–3676.
Druitt, T.H., Young, S.R., Baptie, B.J., Bonadonna, C., Calder, E.S., Clarke, A.B., Cole, P.D.,
Harford, C.L., Herd, R.A., Lockett, R., Ryan, G., Voight, B., 2002. Episodes of cyclic
vulcanian explosive activity with fountain collapse at Soufrière Hills Volcano,
Montserrat. In: Druitt, T.H., Kokelaar, B.P. (Eds.), The Eruption of Soufrière Hills
Volcano, Montserrat, from 1995 to 1999. Geological Society Memoirs 21, London,
pp. 281–306.
Green, D.N., Neuberg, J., 2006. Waveform classification of volcanic low-frequency
earthquake swarms and its implication at Soufrière Hills Volcano, Montserrat. Journal
of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 153 (1–2), 51–63.
Green, D.N., Neuberg, J., Cayol, V., 2006. Shear stress along the conduit wall as plausible
source of tilt at Soufrière Hills volcano, Montserrat. Geophysical Research Letters 33,
L10306. doi:10.1029/2006GL025890.
Le Friant, A., Harford, C.L., Deplus, C., Boudon, G., Sparks, R.S.J., Herd, R.A., Komorowski, J.C.,
2004. Geomorphological evolution of Montserrat (West Indies): importance of flank
collapse and erosional processes. Journal of the Geological Society 161, 147–160.
Lensky, N.G., Sparks, R.S.J., Navon, O., Lyakhovsky, V., 2008. Cylic activity at Soufrière
Hills Volcano, Montserrat. In: Lane, S.J., Gilbert, J.S. (Eds.), Fluid Motions in Volcanic
Conduits: A Source of Seismic and Acoustic Signals. Geological Society Special
Publications 307, London, pp. 169–188. doi:10.1144/SP307.10.
Mattioli, G., Dixon, T.H., Farina, F.F., Howell, E.S., Jansma, P.E., Smith, A.L., 1998. GPS
measurment of surface deformation around Soufrière Hills Volcano, Montserrat, from
October 1995 to July 1996. Geophysical Research Letters 25 (18), 3417–3420.
95
Melnik, O., Sparks, R.S.J., 1999. Nonlinear dynamics of lava dome extrusion. Nature 402
(6757), 37–41.
Melnik, O., Sparks, R.S.J., 2005. Controls on conduit magma flow dynamics during lava dome
building. Journal of Geophysical Research 110, B02209. doi:10.1029/2004JB003183.
Miller, A.D., Stewart, R.C., White, R.A., Luckett, R., Baptie, B.J., Aspinall, W.P., Latchman, J.L.,
Lynch, L.L., Voight, B., 1998. Seismicity associated with dome growth and collapse at
the Soufrière Hills Volcano, Montserrat. Geophysical Research Letters 25 (18),
3401–3404.
Miller, V., Ammon, C.J., Voight, B., Thompson, G., submitted for publication. Precise
hypocenter location of high-frequency onset earthquakes during the initial eruptive
stages, Soufrière Hills Volcano, Montserrat. Earth and Planetary Science Letters.
Pollard, D.D., Delaney, P.T., Duffield, W.A., Endo, E.T., Okamura, A.T., 1983. Surface
deformation in volcanic rift zones. Tectonophysics 94 (1–4), 541–584.
Robertson, R., Cole, P., Sparks, R.S.J., Harford, C., Lejeune, A.M., McGuire, W.J., Miller, A.D.,
Murphy, M.D., Norton, G., Stevens, N.F., Young, S.R., 1998. The explosive eruption of
Soufriere Hills Volcano, Montserrat, West Indies, 17 September, 1996. Geophysical
Research Letters 25 (18), 3429–3432.
Roman, D.C., Neuberg, J., Luckett, R.R., 2006. Assessing the likelihood of volcanic
eruption through analysis of volcanotectonic earthquake fault-plane solutions.
Earth and Planetary Science Letters 248 (1–2), 244–252.
Shepherd, J.B., Herd, R.A., Jackson, P., Watts, R., 1998. Ground deformation measure-
ments at the Soufriere Hills Volcano Montserrat: II: Rapid static GPS measurements
June 1996–June 1997. Geophysical Research Letters 25 (18), 3413–3416.
Sparks, R.S.J., 1997. Causes and consequences of pressurisation in lava dome eruptions.
Earth and Planetary Science Letters 150 (3–4), 177–189.
Sparks, R.S.J., Young, S.R., 2002. The eruption of Soufrière Hills Volcano, Montserrat
(1995–1998): overview of scientific results. In: Druitt, T.H., Kokelaar, B.P. (Eds.), The
Eruption of Soufrière Hills Volcano, Montserrat, from 1995 to 1999. Geological
Society Memoirs 21, London, pp. 45–70.
Trofimovs, J., Amy, L., Boudon, G., Deplus, C., Doyle, E., Fournier, N., Hart, M.B.,
Komorowski, J.C., Le Friant, A., Lock, E.J., Pudsey, C., Ryan, G., Sparks, R.S.J., Talling, P.J.,
2006. Submarine pyroclastic deposits formed at the Soufrière Hills volcano,
Montserrat (1995–2003): What happens when pyroclastic flows enter the ocean?
Geology 34 (7), 549–552.
Voight, B., Hoblitt, R.P., Clarke, A.B., Lockhart, A.B., Miller, A.D., Lynch, L., McMahon, J.,
1998. Remarkable cyclic ground deformation monitored in real-time on Mon-
tserrat, and its use in eruption forecasting. Geophysical Research Letters 25 (18),
3405–3409.
Voight, B., Sparks, R.S.J., Miller, A.D., Stewart, R.C., Hoblitt, R.P., Clarke, A., Ewart, J.,
Aspinall, W.P., Baptie, B., Calder, E.S., Cole, P., Druit, T.H., Hartford, C., Herd, R.A.,
Jackson, P., Lejeune, A.M., Lockhart, A.B., Loughlin, S.C., Luckett, R., Lynch, L., Norton,
G.E., Robertson, R., Watson, I.M., Watts, R., Young, S.R., 1999. Magma flow instability
and cyclic activity at Soufrière Hills Volcano, Montserrat, British West Indies.
Science 283 (5405), 1138–1142.
Voight, B., Linde, A.T., Sacks, S., Mattioli, G.S., Sparks, R.S.J., Elsworth, D., Hidayat, D.,
Malin, P.E., Shalev, E., Widiwijayanti, C., Young, S.R., Bass, V., Clarke, A., Dunkley, P.,
Johnston, W., McWorther, N., Neuberg, J., Williams, P., 2006. Unprecedented
pressure increase in deep magma reservoir triggered by lava-dome collapse.
Geophysical Research Letters 33, L03312. doi:10.1029/2005GL024870.
Wadge, G., 1986. The dykes and structural setting of the volcanic front in the Lesser
Antilles island arc. Bulletin of Volcanology 48 (6), 349–372.
Wadge, G., Isaacs, M.C., 1988. Mapping the volcanic hazards from Soufrière Hills Volcano,
Montserrat, West Indies using an image processor. Journal of the Geological Society 145,
541–551.
Wadge, G., Mattioli, G.S., Herd, R.A., 2006. Ground deformation at Soufrière Hills
Volcano, Montserrat during 1998–2000 measured by radar interferometry and GPS.
Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 152 (1–2), 157–173.
Watson, I.M., Oppenheimer, C., Voight, B., Francis, P., Clarke, A., Stix, J., Miller, A., Pyle, D.M.,
Burton, M.R., Young, S.R., Norton, G., Loughlin, S., Darroux, B., Staff, MVO, 2000. The
relationship between degassing and ground deformation at Soufriere Hills Volcano,
Montserrat. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 98 (1–4), 117–126.
Widiwijayanti, C., Clarke, A., Elsworth, D., Voight, B., 2005. Geodetic constraints on the
shallow magma system at Soufrière Hills Volcano, Montserrat. Geophysical Research
Letters 32, L11309. doi:10.1029/2005GL022846.
Wylie, J.J., Voight, B., Whitehead, J.A., 1999. Instability of magma flow from volatile-
dependent viscosity. Science 285 (5453), 1883–1885.
Young, S.R., Voight, B., Duffell, H.J., 2003. Magma extrusion dynamics revealed by high-
frequency gas monitoring at Soufriere Hills volcano, Montserrat. Geological Society
London Special Publications 213, 219–230.