Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-bkrcr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-18T06:55:28.348Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Evidence of log-periodic oscillations and increasing icequake activity during the breaking-off of large ice masses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 September 2017

Jérome Faillettaz
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Hydraulics, Hydrology and Glaciology (VAW), ETH Zurich, CH-8092 Zürich, Switzerland E-mail: faillettaz@vaw.baug.ethz.ch
Antoine Pralong
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Hydraulics, Hydrology and Glaciology (VAW), ETH Zurich, CH-8092 Zürich, Switzerland E-mail: faillettaz@vaw.baug.ethz.ch
Martin Funk
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Hydraulics, Hydrology and Glaciology (VAW), ETH Zurich, CH-8092 Zürich, Switzerland E-mail: faillettaz@vaw.baug.ethz.ch
Nicholas Deichmann
Affiliation:
Institute of Geophysics, ETH Hönggerberg, CH-8093 Zürich, Switzerland
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In 1973, surface velocities were measured for the first time on an unstable hanging glacier to predict its collapse. The observed velocities have been shown to increase as a power-law function of time up to infinity at the theoretical time of failure (known as ‘finite time singularity’). This is the characteristic signature of critical phenomena and has been observed in the case of various other naturally occurring ruptures such as earthquakes, landslides and snow avalanches. Recent velocity measurements performed on Weisshorn and Mönch hanging glaciers, Switzerland, confirmed this behaviour, while log-periodic oscillations superimposed on this general acceleration were also detected. Despite different rupture mechanisms in both cases, the log frequency of the oscillations is shown to be the same. The seismic activity was recorded near the unstable Weisshorn hanging glacier, simultaneously with the velocity measurements. Results show dramatically increasing icequake activity 3 days before the final collapse. Combined motion–seismic monitoring seems to be a promising way to accurately predict the breaking-off of hanging glaciers. Such a combined analysis is also useful for capturing the physical mechanisms of rupture in natural heterogeneous materials.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © International Glaciological Society 2008
Figure 0

Fig. 1. The east face of the Weisshorn with the hanging glacier. The village of Randa and transit routes are visible in the valley. The asterisk indicates the location of the hanging glacier. The inset shows the location of Weisshorn and Mönch glaciers in Switzerland.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. General schematic view of Weisshorn hanging glacier (dashed zone) and the monitoring setting (theodolite and automatic camera). Thick black lines indicate the mountain ridges, and the thin line represents the bottom of the valley.

Figure 2

Fig. 3. Left: general situation of the south face of Mönch. The picture shows the relics of an ice avalanche which occurred on 5 July 1984 (photograph courtesy of J. Alean). Right: side view of the unstable part of the glacier. The unstable mass is approximately 50 m high, 300 m long and 40 m wide.

Figure 3

Fig. 4. Sketch of Mönch (left; wedge fracture) and Weisshorn (right; slab fracture) break-off. The unstable ice masses are depicted in grey. The mass-balance regime is indicated with arrows (after Pralong and Funk, 2006).

Figure 4

Fig. 5. Velocity of Weisshorn glacier before the 1973 break-off. The vertical thick dashed line represents the observed time of failure (at day 306). The thin dashed curve is a fit of the data with Equation (1). The inset shows extensometer measurements a few days before break-off.

Figure 5

Fig. 6. Comparison of the evolution of glacier geometry for the 1973 break-off (left column, VAW, unpublished) with the glacier geometry evolution for the 2005 break-off (right column; source VAW). The grey zones represent lost sections of the glacier from one picture to the next.

Figure 6

Fig. 7. Aerial view of Weisshorn hanging glacier in (a) September 1980, (b) September 1996, (c) September 2000 and (d) March 2005 (Swisstopo). Ellipses indicate the unstable part of the glacier.

Figure 7

Fig. 8. Orthophotograph of Weisshorn glacier on 16 March 2005 (left; before the break-off) and on 3 April 2005 (right; after the break-off) (Swisstopo). The monitored points (black dots) and the geophone (black square) on the east face of the Weisshorn are highlighted. The black line indicates the location of the cross-sectional view (Fig. 9).

Figure 8

Fig. 9. Cross-sectional view of Weisshorn glacier along the flowline drawn in Figure 8 in March 2005 (thick line) and in April 2005 (thin dashed line).

Figure 9

Fig. 10. Position of point 103 before correction, projected on the horizontal plane. The arrow indicates the direction of motion. The inset shows the raw displacement before correction as a function of time. This inset can be compared with the displacement after correction (Fig. 11).

Figure 10

Fig. 11. Displacement of point 103 after corrections. The dotted line shows the first break-off (26.5 days) and the dashed line indicates the final rupture (33.5 days).

Figure 11

Fig. 12. Smoothed velocities of the monitored stakes.

Figure 12

Fig. 13. (a) Corrected displacement of Weisshorn glacier at point 103. The grey curve represents the power-law fit (time integral of Equation (1)). (b) Residual of the power-law fit. The two vertical dashed lines show the two successive break-offs (after 26.5 and 33.5 days of monitoring).

Figure 13

Fig. 14. Oscillating part of the four points showing a dramatic acceleration. The solid grey lines indicate the fit of the log-periodic oscillations with parameters of Table 1. The two vertical dashed lines represent the two successive break-off events which occurred on the Weisshorn glacier (after 26.5 and 33.5 days of monitoring). See Figure 8 for point location.

Figure 14

Table 1. Values of the estimated coefficients of Equation (2) with λ = 1.93 and us = 0.1 m d−1 and the root-mean-square error (RMSE) of the fit

Figure 15

Table 2. Estimated coefficients of Equation (2) for the four analyzed datasets, assuming us = 0.1 m d−1, and RMSE of the fit

Figure 16

Fig. 15. Lomb periodogram for the different points and the corresponding log frequencies (λ) of the peaks (see Fig. 8 for point location).

Figure 17

Fig. 16. Mean Lomb periodogram for points 103–105.

Figure 18

Fig. 17. Threshold analysis: number of events per day with an amplitude greater than a given threshold as a function of time. The vertical dotted line indicates the first observed rupture.

Figure 19

Fig. 18. Lomb periodogram for one measured point on Mönch hanging glacier.

Figure 20

Fig. 19. Oscillating part of one measured point on Mönch hanging glacier. Solid line indicates the fit of the log-periodic oscillations. The dashed vertical line shows the break-off occurrence after 107 days of measurements.

Figure 21

Table 3. Values of the estimated coefficients of Equation (2) with λ = 1.93 and the RMSE of the fit

Figure 22

Fig. 20. The triadic Cantor set is created by repeatedly deleting the open middle thirds of a set of line segments. One starts by deleting the middle third from the interval [0,1], leaving two line segments. Next, the middle third of each of the remaining segments is deleted. This process is continued ad infinitum. The Cantor set contains all points that are not deleted at any step in this infinite process.

Figure 23

Fig. 21. Motion of the serac of Weisshorn glacier, obtained from a photogrammetric analysis of terrestrial pictures taken prior to the 1973 rupture (see also Fig. 6). The deformations are concentrated in the vicinity of the glacier bed, where the formation of the cracks is concentrated (VAW, unpublished).

Figure 24

Table 4. Estimated values of coefficient λ (Equation (2)) for various phenomena (Sornette and Sammis, 1995; Sornette, 1998; Sornette and Johansen, 2001; Zhou and Sornette, 2002a)

Figure 25

Fig. 22. Predicted failure time as a function of the number of days of observation for the Weisshorn 2005 break-off. The dashed curve shows the prediction obtained by fitting Equation (1) and the solid curve the prediction obtained by fitting Equation (2). The inset shows the corresponding RMSE.

Figure 26

Fig. 23. Displacement of point 106 (up) and the oscillating part as a combination of two different log-periodic oscillations.