Investigations on maar-diatreme volcanoes by inversion of magnetic and gravity data from the Eifel area, Germany

A study of maar-diatreme volcanoes has been perfomed by inversion of gravity and magnetic data. The geophysical inverse problem has been solved by means of the damped nonlinear least-squares method. To ensure stability and convergence of the solution of the inverse problem, a mathematical tool, consisting in data weighting and model scaling, has been worked out. Theoretical gravity and magnetic modeling of maar-diatreme volcanoes has been conducted in order to get information, which is used for a simple rough qualitative and/or quantitative interpretation. The information also serves as a priori information to design models for the inversion and/or to assist the interpretation of inversion results. The results of theoretical modeling have been used to roughly estimate the heights and the dip angles of the walls of eight Eifel maar-diatremes — each taken as a whole. Inversemodeling has been conducted for the Schönfeld Maar (magnetics) and the Hausten-Morswiesen Maar (gravity and magnetics). The geometrical parameters of these maars, as well as the density and magnetic properties of the rocks filling them, have been estimated. For a reliable interpretation of the inversion results, beside the knowledge from theoretical modeling, it was resorted to other tools such like field transformations and spectral analysis for complementary information. Geologic models, based on thesynthesis of the respective interpretation results, are presented for the two maars mentioned above. The results gave more insight into the genesis, physics and posteruptive development of the maar-diatreme volcanoes. A classification of the maar-diatreme volcanoes into three main types has been elaborated. Relatively high magnetic anomalies are indicative of scoria cones embeded within maar-diatremes if they are not caused by a strong remanent component of the magnetization. Smaller (weaker) secondary gravity and magnetic anomalies on the background of the main anomaly of a maar-diatreme — especially in the boundary areas — are indicative for subsidence processes, which probably occurred in the late sedimentation phase of the posteruptive development. Contrary to postulates referring to kimberlite pipes, there exists no generalized systematics between diameter and height nor between geophysical anomaly and the dimensions of the maar-diatreme volcanoes. Although both maar-diatreme volcanoes and kimberlite pipes are products of phreatomagmatism, they probably formed in different thermodynamic and hydrogeological environments. In the case of kimberlite pipes, large amounts of magma and groundwater, certainly supplied by deep and large reservoirs, interacted under high pressure and temperature conditions. This led to a long period phreatomagmatic process and hence to the formation of large structures. Concerning the maar-diatreme and tuff-ring-diatreme volcanoes, the phreatomagmatic process takes place due to an interaction between magma from small and shallow magma chambers (probably segregated magmas) and small amounts of near-surface groundwater under low pressure and temperature conditions. This leads to shorter time eruptions and consequently to structures of smaller size in comparison with kimberlite pipes. Nevertheless, the results show that the diameter to height ratio for 50% of the studied maar-diatremes is around 1, whereby the dip angle of the diatreme walls is similar to that of the kimberlite pipes and lies between 70 and 85°. Note that these numerical characteristics, especially the dip angle, hold for the maars the diatremes of which — estimated by modeling — have the shape of a truncated cone. This indicates that the diatreme can not be completely resolved by inversion.