The complexity of flow and wide variety of depositional processes operating in subaqueous density flows, combined with post-depositional consolidation and soft-sediment deformation, often make it difficult to interpret the characteristics of the original flow from the sedimentary record. This has led to considerable confusion of nomenclature in the literature. This paper attempts to clarify this situation by presenting a simple classification of sedimentary density flows, based on physical flow properties and grain-support mechanisms, and briefly discusses the likely characteristics of the deposited sediments. Cohesive flows are commonly referred to as debris flows and mud flows and defined on the basis of sediment characteristics. The boundary between cohesive and non-cohesive density flows (frictional flows) is poorly constrained, but dimensionless numbers may be of use to define flow thresholds. Frictional flows include a continuous series from sediment slides to turbidity currents. Subdivision of these flows is made on the basis of the dominant particle-support mechanisms, which include matrix strength (in cohesive flows), buoyancy, pore pressure, grain-to-grain interaction (causing dispersive pressure), Reynolds stresses (turbulence) and bed support (particles moved on the stationary bed). The dominant particle-support mechanism depends upon flow conditions, particle concentration, grain-size distribution and particle type. In hyperconcentrated density flows, very high sediment concentrations (>25 volume%) make particle interactions of major importance. The difference between hyperconcentrated density flows and cohesive flows is that the former are friction dominated. With decreasing sediment concentration, vertical particle sorting can result from differential settling, and flows in which this can occur are termed concentrated density flows. The boundary between hyperconcentrated and concentrated density flows is defined by a change in particle behaviour, such that denser or larger grains are no longer fully supported by grain interaction, thus allowing coarse-grain tail (or dense-grain tail) normal grading. The concentration at which this change occurs depends on particle size, sorting, composition and relative density, so that a single threshold concentration cannot be defined. Concentrated density flows may be highly erosive and subsequently deposit complete or incomplete Lowe and Bouma sequences. Conversely, hydroplaning at the base of debris flows, and possibly also in some hyperconcentrated flows, may reduce the fluid drag, thus allowing high flow velocities while preventing large-scale erosion. Flows with concentrations <9% by volume are true turbidity flows (sensuBagnold, 1962), in which fluid turbulence is the main particle-support mechanism. Turbidity flows and concentrated density flows can be subdivided on the basis of flow duration into instantaneous surges, longer duration surge-like flows and quasi-steady currents. Flow duration is shown to control the nature of the resulting deposits. Surge-like turbidity currents tend to produce classical Bouma sequences, whose nature at any one site depends on factors such as flow size, sediment type and proximity to source. In contrast, quasi-steady turbidity currents, generated by hyperpycnal river effluent, can deposit coarsening-up units capped by fining-up units (because of waxing and waning conditions respectively) and may also include thick units of uniform character (resulting from prolonged periods of near-steady conditions). Any flow type may progressively change character along the transport path, with transformation primarily resulting from reductions in sediment concentration through progressive entrainment of surrounding fluid and/or sediment deposition. The rate of fluid entrainment, and consequently flow transformation, is dependent on factors including slope gradient, lateral confinement, bed roughness, flow thickness and water depth. Flows with high and low sediment concentrations may co-exist in one transport event because of downflow transformations, flow stratification or shear layer development of the mixing interface with the overlying water (mixing cloud formation). Deposits of an individual flow event at one site may therefore form from a succession of different flow types, and this introduces considerable complexity into classifying the flow event or component flow types from the deposits.

The physical character of subaqueous sedimentary density flows and their deposits

http://basin.earth.ncu.edu.tw/download/courses/seminar_MSc/2012/1018_1_1.pdf

Marine hyperpycnal flows: initiation, behavior and related deposits. A review

A marine hyperpycnal plume is a particular kind of turbidity current occurring at a river mouth when the concentration of suspended sediment is so large that the density of the river water is greater than the density of sea water. The plume can then plunge and possibly erode the seafloor to become self-maintained for a particular period of time (hours to weeks). Frequency of hyperpycnal plumes emanating from river discharge can be predicted with knowledge of rating curve characteristics, particularly during flood conditions. Examples of these curves are shown for middle-sized North American rivers. Semi-empirical relationships among average discharge, average sediment concentration, and the discharge during flood are proposed and applied to 150 world rivers. Results show the importance of small and medium sized rivers in their ability to trigger underflow at their mouth. There are at least nine "dirty" rivers that may trigger underflows during one or more periods of the year. Most other rivers are cleaner...

Turbidity Currents Generated at River Mouths during Exceptional Discharges to the World Oceans

[1] Methane gas hydrates, crystalline inclusion compounds formed from methane and water, are found in marine continental margin and permafrost sediments worldwide. This article reviews the current understanding of phenomena involved in gas hydrate formation and the physical properties of hydrate-bearing sediments. Formation phenomena include pore-scale habit, solubility, spatial variability, and host sediment aggregate properties. Physical properties include thermal properties, permeability, electrical conductivity and permittivity, small-strain elastic P and S wave velocities, shear strength, and volume changes resulting from hydrate dissociation. The magnitudes and interdependencies of these properties are critically important for predicting and quantifying macroscale responses of hydrate-bearing sediments to changes in mechanical, thermal, or chemical boundary conditions. These predictions are vital for mitigating borehole, local, and regional slope stability hazards; optimizing recovery techniques for extracting methane from hydrate-bearing sediments or sequestering carbon dioxide in gas hydrate; and evaluating the role of gas hydrate in the global carbon cycle.

/pdf/physical-properties-of-hydrate-bearing-sediments-3z1dw9zs82.pdf

Physical properties of hydrate-bearing sediments

Huge landslides, mobilizing hundreds to thousands of km3 of sediment and rock are ubiquitous in submarine settings ranging from the steepest volcanic island slopes to the gentlest muddy slopes of submarine deltas. Here, we summarize current knowledge of such landslides and the problems of assessing their hazard potential. The major hazards related to submarine landslides include destruction of seabed infrastructure, collapse of coastal areas into the sea and landslide-generated tsunamis. Most submarine slopes are inherently stable. Elevated pore pressures (leading to decreased frictional resistance to sliding) and specific weak layers within stratified sequences appear to be the key factors influencing landslide occurrence. Elevated pore pressures can result from normal depositional processes or from transient processes such as earthquake shaking; historical evidence suggests that the majority of large submarine landslides are triggered by earthquakes. Because of their tsunamigenic potential, ocean-island flank collapses and rockslides in fjords have been identified as the most dangerous of all landslide related hazards. Published models of ocean-island landslides mainly examine ‘worst-case scenarios’ that have a low probability of occurrence. Areas prone to submarine landsliding are relatively easy to identify, but we are still some way from being able to forecast individual events with precision. Monitoring of critical areas where landslides might be imminent and modelling landslide consequences so that appropriate mitigation strategies can be developed would appear to be areas where advances on current practice are possible.

Submarine landslides: processes, triggers and hazard prediction

More than 100 offshore mass-movement deposits have been studied in Holocene and Pleistocene sediments. The processes can be divided into three main types: slides/slumps, plastic flows, and turbidity currents, of which 13 main varieties have been recognized. The three types are differentiated mainly by motion, architecture, and shape of failure surface. For slides, the morphology of deposits can usually be linked to a process, but for plastic flows and turbidity currents, information about the motion is mainly provided by the sedimentary record. A static classification based on these features is given, and is related to a dynamic classification system to try to underline the morphological transformation of an offshore event from initiation to deposition.

Classification of offshore mass movements

Classification of Offshore Mass Movements

Effect of gas hydrates melting on seafloor slope instability

Triggering mechanisms of slope instability processes and sediment failures on continental margins: a geotechnical approach

http://www.gm.univ-montp2.fr/spip/IMG/pdf/Gay_al2006_MG.pdf

Isolated seafloor pockmarks linked to BSRs, fluid chimneys, polygonal faults and stacked Oligocene-Miocene turbiditic palaeochannels in the Lower Congo Basin

Pierre Cochonat

Papers

Classification of offshore mass movements

Classification of Offshore Mass Movements

Effect of gas hydrates melting on seafloor slope instability

Triggering mechanisms of slope instability processes and sediment failures on continental margins: a geotechnical approach

Isolated seafloor pockmarks linked to BSRs, fluid chimneys, polygonal faults and stacked Oligocene-Miocene turbiditic palaeochannels in the Lower Congo Basin