Two‐phase magma flow with phase exchange: Part I. Physical modeling of a volcanic conduit

In a review paper in this same volume, we present the state of the art on modeling of compressible viscous flows ranging from single‐phase to two‐phase systems. It focuses on mathematical properties related to weak stability because they are important for numerical resolution and on the homogenization process that leads from a microscopic description of two separate phases to an averaged two‐phase model. This review serves as the foundation for Parts I and II, which present averaged two‐phase models with phase exchange applicable to magma flow during volcanic eruptions. Here, in Part I, after introducing the physical processes occurring in a volcanic conduit, we detail the steps needed at both microscopic and macroscopic scales to obtain a two‐phase transient conduit flow model ensuring: (1) mass and volatile species conservation, (2) disequilibrium degassing considering both viscous relaxation and volatile diffusion, and (3) dissipation of total energy. The resulting compressible/incompressible system has eight transport equations on eight unknowns (gas volume fraction and density, dissolved water content, liquid pressure, and the velocity and temperature of both phases) as well as algebraic closures for gas pressure and bubble radius. We establish valid sets of boundary conditions such as imposing pressures and stress‐free conditions at the conduit outlet and either velocity or pressure at the inlet. This model is then used to obtain a drift‐flux system that isolates the effects of relative velocities, pressures, and temperatures. The dimensional analysis of this drift‐flux system suggests that relative velocities can be captured with a Darcy equation and that gas–liquid pressure differences partly control magma acceleration. Unlike the vanishing small gas–liquid temperature differences, bulk magma temperature is expected to vary because of gas expansion. Mass exchange being a major control of flow dynamics, we propose a limit case of mass exchange by establishing a relaxed system at chemical equilibrium. This single‐velocity, single‐temperature system is a generalization of an existing volcanic conduit flow model. Finally, we compare our full compressible/incompressible system to another existing volcanic conduit flow model where both phases are compressible. This comparison illustrates that different two‐phase systems may be obtained depending on the governing unknowns chosen. Part II presents a 1.5D version of the model established herein that is solved numerically. The numerical outputs are compared to those of another steady‐state, equilibrium degassing, isothermal model under conditions typical of an effusive eruption at an andesitic volcano.