Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 373 (2019) 36–50

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jvolgeores

Numerical simulation of block-and-ash flows for different eruptive

scenarios of the Tacaná Volcanic Complex, México-Guatemala
Vázquez R. a,⁎, Macías J.L. a, Arce J.L. b, Cisneros G. a, Saucedo R. c
a
Instituto de Geofísica-UNAM, Antigua Carretera a Pátzcuaro 8701, 58190 Morelia, Michoacán, Mexico
b
Instituto de Geología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Coyoacán, 04510 Ciudad de México, Mexico
c
Instituto de Geología, Universidad Autónoma de San Luis Potosí, Dr. M. Nava no. 5, Zona Universitaria, 78240 San Luis Potosí, SLP, Mexico

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

Article history: The Tacaná Volcanic Complex (TVC), shared by México and Guatemala, is considered an active volcano that re-
Received 29 September 2018 sumed phreatic explosions in 1949 and 1986. The TVC has recorded at least eight eruptions emplacing block-
Received in revised form 20 January 2019 and-ash flows (BAFs) around the volcanic edifice during the past 42,000 years. The largest event generated the
Accepted 31 January 2019
Mixcun deposit some 1950 yr B.P. from San Antonio Volcano, the youngest structure of the complex. Based on
Available online 06 February 2019
the eight mapped BAF deposits of the complex, we perform numerical simulations with the TITAN2d code to rec-
Keywords:
reate the distribution and extent of these deposits. The results were used to prepare the zonation of the TVC based
Tacaná Volcanic complex on the surface bed friction angles, which are related to the different morphologies of the volcano. From this zo-
Block-and-ash flows nation and the features of the past BAF deposits, we define three new eruptive impact scenarios (low, medium
TITAN2d and high), to perform a hazard assessment of this phenomenon but considering the present morphology of the
Numerical modelling complex of the four eruptive centers. Next, we ranged the input parameters for each case scenario to analyze
Hazard zonation the dispersal, thickness and maximum runout of simulated flows. From the numerical simulations, we found
Eruptive scenarios that the most influential parameter in the model outputs is the basal friction angle, which varied from 23° to
12°. Then, we merged the eruptive scenarios simulated to construct new hazard maps for the different mass vol-
umes simulated for each scenario. These maps clearly evidenced that the Mexican territory would be seriously
affected in case of a renewed explosive activity of the TVC. In fact, even the partial collapse of any of the TVC
domes would produce BAFs capable to flow over ~70 communities affecting ca. 20,000 inhabitants, as well as pro-
mote the generation of syn-and-post eruptive lahars if they flow into the main rivers that drain the volcano.
Therefore, these maps are a great advance to evaluate the destructive potential of the TVC and must serve as
the basis for the construction of a new risk map by the local authorities to update the operative and evacuation
plans of the region. These actions would help to the N350,000 inhabitants living in a 35 km radius from the
volcano's summit to be aware of the perils posed by the volcano, and how to act and evacuate in case of a volcanic
crisis.
© 2019 Published by Elsevier B.V.

1. Introduction
Pyroclastic density currents (PDCs) are hot, gravity-driven currents
of solid volcanic particles and gas that travel at velocities from 10 to
300 m/s that produce widespread deposits encompassing areas up to
20,000 km2 (Carey, 1991; Freundt and Bursik, 1998; Branney and
Kokelaar, 2002; Dufek, 2016). According to Wilson and Houghton
(2000), two end-members of PDCs exist: dilute currents, that contain
b0.1 to 1% by volume of solids (i.e. pyroclastic surges), and concentrated
currents, which have a concentration of solids of N10% (i.e. pumice and
block-and-ash flows, “BAFs”). The interaction of PDCs with the pre-
existing topography strongly influences their behavior and spreading
⁎ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: rvazqez@igeofisica.unam.mx (R. Vázquez).
(Fisher, 1990, 1995; Baxter et al., 2005; Sulpizio and Dellino, 2008;
Sulpizio et al., 2010). This interaction becomes particularly important
on stratovolcanoes built at steep angles and surrounded by deep ravines
separated by high topographic ridges. This is the case of the Tacaná Vol-
canic Complex (TVC), the westernmost active volcano of the Central
American Volcanic Arc, a WNW-oriented volcanic chain that extends
for about 1300 km, from the México-Guatemala border up to western
Panama (Fig. 1A). The complex is composed by four volcanic structures
NE-SW oriented, named from oldest to youngest (Fig. 1B): Chichuj,
Tacaná, Ardillas dome and San Antonio (Macías et al., 2000). The com-
plex is shared by México and Guatemala (Fig. 1B), with the border
crossing the volcano summit (Tacaná volcano). The TVC has produced
at least eight BAFs (Fig. 1B) over the last 42,000 yrs. (Macías et al.,
2000; García-Palomo et al., 2006; Macías et al., 2010). The last one oc-
curred ~1950 yrs. B.P. during the eruption of San Antonio volcano that

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2019.01.026
0377-0273/© 2019 Published by Elsevier B.V.
 R. Vázquez et al. / Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 373 (2019) 36–50
Fig. 1. Location maps of the Tacaná Volcanic Complex (TVC). A) Regional setting of the TVC within the Central America Volcanic Arc. B) Shaded relief image of the TVC displaying its main
structures and the block-and-ash flow (BAFs) deposits mapped around the edifice with their respective ages.
emplaced the largest BAF deposit mapped so far at the complex, named
Mixcun with a minimum estimated volume of 0.12 km3 (Macías et al.,
2000). Nowadays, dozens of small villages with ~5000 inhabitants live
within a radius of 5 km from the volcano summit, most of these villages
are settled on top of or surrounded by BAF deposits. The recent erup-
tions of Volcán de Colima in 2015 (Capra et al., 2016; Reyes-Dávila
et al., 2016), and Fuego volcano in Guatemala on June 2018 produced
concentrated PDCs with the longest run-outs described in modern
times. The Fuego volcano eruption, caused about 165 casualties
(INACIF, 2018), and the partial destruction of three villages on the
flank of the volcano (GVP, 2018). These fatalities prompt us to analyze
and construct hazard maps for this type of phenomenon at the TVC. Pre-
vious works have roughly delineated the PDC hazard zones of the com-
plex, based on field data and photointerpretation (Mercado and Rose,
1992; Macías et al., 2000; Albarrán-Guerrero, 2013). In this work, we
used the TITAN2d numerical code (Patra et al., 2005) to recreate the ac-
tual extension and distribution of the BAF deposits at the volcano, and
then to simulate future concentrated PDCs considering three eruptive
scenarios: low, medium and high. The input parameters for the simula-
tions were defined from the data reported by De la Cruz and Hernández
(1985), Espíndola et al. (1989, 1993), Macías et al. (2000), and Macías
(2005), for the eight mapped BAF deposits.
In this study, we present the first systematic hazard analysis of the
dense undercurrent part of the BAFs of the TVC. This hazard assessment
is based on previous volcanological studies (Macías et al., 2015), new
fieldwork, and extensive numerical modelling of the phenomenon.
This modelling includes a thorough analysis of the maximum runout,
thickness, and distribution of future BAFs resulting by an eventual reac-
tivation of summit domes at the TVC. In order to provide such maps, we
considered different eruptive scenarios from the four volcanic struc-
tures forming the complex. The results of this study would serve to con-
struct an upgraded hazard map for the complex that would be an
important tool for the local governments and Civil Protection authori-
ties of both countries (México and Guatemala), for the construction of
the risk map of the TVC and the update of the emergency operative
plans for the volcano in case of a volcanic crisis.
2. Previous studies
Geological and volcanological reconnaissance of the TVC dates back
to the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th (Bergeat,
1894; Sapper, 1896, 1899; Böse, 1902, 1903). These studies described
the overall rock composition and morphological aspects of the summit.
Although a small explosion had taken place in 1878, these authors con-
sidered the TVC as a dormant volcano but not extinct (Waibel, 1933).
37
The complex remained in a quiescent state until 1949 when a phreatic
explosion occurred a couple of hundred meters below the summit
(Müllerried, 1951) to the NW slope. After this eruption, the TVC was
considered an active volcano (Mooser et al., 1958). Thirty-seven years
later, an earthquake swarm ended with another phreatic explosion in
1986 to the NE slope of the summit (De la Cruz-Reyna et al., 1989)
followed by fumarolic activity that lasted several years. This event
marked the TVC as one of the active volcanoes of México and prompted
a series of studies that included: geological mapping, volcanic stratigra-
phy, geochemistry, hydrothermal monitoring, and analysis of the volca-
nic hazards and geological evolution of the volcano and surrounding
areas (Martíni et al., 1987; De Cserna et al., 1988; Espíndola et al.,
1989; Mercado and Rose, 1992; Espíndola et al., 1993; Macías et al.,
2000; Mora et al., 2004; Rowet et al., 2004, 2009; García-Palomo et al.,
2006; Macías et al., 2010; Mora et al., 2013; Murcia and Macías, 2014;
Macías et al., 2015). These studies have served to determine that the
TVC has had at least two Pélean and two Plinian-type eruptions during
the last 42,000 years (Espíndola et al., 1989, 1993; Macías et al., 2000;
Mora et al., 2004; Arce et al., 2012), which have generated PDCs, ash-
fall deposits, and the partial failure of the volcanic edifice with debris av-
alanche deposits exposed to the N-NW; E-NE, and SE sides of the TVC
(Macías et al., 2000; García-Palomo et al., 2006; Macías et al., 2010). Re-
cent studies have presented a more detailed geological map of the vol-
cano and summarized the distribution of the eight deposits of the
concentrated PDCs produced by the complex (Macías et al., 2015,
2018), which are shown in Fig. 1B, and are named from oldest to youn-
gest: La Trinidad (LT), Monte Perla (MP), Muxbal (MXB), Agua Caliente
(AC), San Rafael (SR), Mixcun (MXC), La Vega (LV) and Chiquihuites
(CHI). De la Cruz and Hernández reported initially in 1985, three main
pyroclastic flow units of Quaternary age, which named arbitrarily Qt1,
Qt2, and Qt3. From these, Espíndola et al. (1989) dated in ~42,000 yr
BP the Qt3 unit near La Trinidad village, from which it was named (i.e.
LT). Then, in 1993 Espíndola et al. dated another unit in ~30,000 yr BP,
in the vicinity of Monte Perla village (i.e, MP). This unit correlates ac-
cording to Mora et al. (2004) with another BAF deposit exposed in the
Muxbal gully (i.e. MXB), with an age of ~28,500 yr BP. In 2010, Macías
et al. described a sector collapse occurred between 21,000 and
10,000 yr BP, in the N-NW flank of the TVC, which originated a
volcaniclastic sequence composed by debris-avalanche, debris flows
and BAF deposits, known as Agua Caliente Sequence (i.e. AC), from
these, the BAF unit correlates with the Qt1 unit of De la Cruz and
Hernández (1985) and Espíndola et al. (1989). Mora et al. (2004), also
reported a BAF unit near San Rafael village (i.e. SR) in the Department
of San Marcos, Guatemala, with an age of ~16,300 yr BP. Finally,
Macías et al. (2000) described in detail the largest BAF deposited in
38 R. Vázquez et al. / Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 373 (2019) 36–50
the area (i.e. the Qt2 unit in De la Cruz and Hernández, 1985; Espíndola
et al., 1989), named the Mixcun flow deposit (i.e. MXC, Fig. 1B), which
originated from the 1950 yr BP eruption of San Antonio volcano. This
flow extended for about 14 km from the source towards the S-SW, cov-
ering an area of 25 km2. Macías et al. (2000) also reported that the chan-
nel facies of the deposit reached a minimum thickness of 10 m near the
villages of Once de Abril and Mixcun; however, they estimated a mini-
mum volume of 0.12 km3 considering a mean thickness for the whole
deposit of 5 m. Macías (2005) mentioned a BAF named La Vega (i.e.
LV, Fig. 1B) that is exposed up to 2.5 km from the Chichuj summit, and
the Chiquihuites BAF (i.e. CHI, Fig. 1B), that has an approximated age
of 6500 years B.P. and extends ~6.8 km to the south of Tacaná volcano
beyond the village of the same name.
Nowadays, the only hazard map that consider the perils posed by
BAFs at the TVC are the ones proposed by Mercado and Rose (1992)
and Macías et al. (2000), which relates the development of these
flows to Tacaná and San Antonio volcanoes alone.
3. Numerical modelling
Traditionally, the hazard assessment of volcanic processes has been
based on the geological record and instrumental monitoring; however,
the geological record tends to be biased towards the largest events, as
deposits from smaller eruptions are often removed by erosion
(Bonadonna, 2006). Moreover, the most active volcanoes in the world
are the ones that normally are monitored, but those that have not pre-
sented significant activity in the last century remains poorly known
and unmonitored. Is in those cases that numerical modelling and prob-
ability analysis can be used to complement the information provided by
the geological record and to explore a much wider range of possible sce-
narios (Bonadonna, 2006). Nowadays, the numerical models are consid-
ered an essential tool for hazard mapping of volcanic processes
(Sheridan et al., 2010), and as a result, it is no longer necessary to rely
solely on deposit-based interpretations to develop a volcanic hazard zo-
nation (Williams, 2015).
In general, the numerical models of PDCs try to solve the conserva-
tion of mass momentum and energy equations, and based on the way
to do so, the models are classified in (adapted from Breard, 2016):
i) kinetic models, which simplify the flow as a rigid block driven by
gravity, that follows the topography by a resistive law (e.g. Wadge
et al., 1998); ii) discrete element models, in which the motion of indi-
vidual particles is solved by using the Newton's equation of motion
(e.g. Mitani et al., 2004); iii) dilute models, that use an approximation
of a well-mixed and fully dilute current while assuming conservation
of mass and volume in order to describe the thickness and kinematics
of the dilute flow head (e.g. Dade and Huppert, 1995; Bursik and
Woods, 1996); iv) depth-averaged models, in these, the discretization
takes the form of a column where the flow properties are averaged
across the flow height (e.g. Savage and Hutter, 1989; Patra et al.,
2005; Charbonnier and Gertisser, 2009, 2012); v) multiphase models,
in which particle and gas properties are averaged and attributed to
nodes of a vertical and horizontal mesh, in which all phases interact
with each other (e.g. Wholetz et al., 1984). In this study, we use the
depth-averaged model to simulate the dense granular part of BAFs pro-
duced by the partial collapse or total destruction of summit domes at
the TVC. These models use information such as surface slope and curva-
ture, derived from a digital elevation model (DEM), to simulate the
propagation of BAFs and the calculate inundation areas (Kelfoun and
Druitt, 2005; Patra et al., 2005), which can then be used for hazard map-
ping (Capra et al., 2008; Dalbey et al., 2008; Macías et al., 2008;
Stefanescu et al., 2010a, 2010b; Williams, 2015). For this work, we use
TITAN2d, which is a computer program designed for simulating geolog-
ical mass flows over natural terrain using an adaptive finite volume
scheme (Patra et al., 2005). The flow model assumes that a granular
flow can be modeled as an incompressible continuum satisfying a
Mohr-Coulomb law (Patra et al., 2005). The direct outputs of the
model include flow depth and momentum, which may then be used
to compute field observable variables like run-up height, inundation
areas, discharge rates, and time of flow (Patra et al., 2005). One of the
main advantages of this code is that it has been successfully used to pre-
dict inundation zones of BAFs at several volcanoes: Volcán de Colima, El
Chichón and Nevado de Toluca in México (Bursik et al., 2005; Saucedo
et al., 2005; Rupp et al., 2006; Capra et al., 2008; Macías et al., 2008;
Sulpizio et al., 2010); Soufrière Hills volcano, Montserrat (Hidayat
et al., 2007; Ogburn, 2008; Ogburn et al., 2014; Ogburn and Calder,
2017); Tungurahua, Ecuador (Kelfoun et al., 2009); Galeras and Cerro
Machín, Colombia (Stefanescu et al., 2009; Murcia et al., 2010); Tacaná,
México (Murcia, 2008); and Merapi Volcano, Indonesia (Charbonnier
and Gertisser, 2009, 2012).
In this work, we initially perform numerical simulations to recreate
the actual BAF deposits of the TVC. To do so, we first guessed the loca-
tion of the initial source points (eight) from which flows could be gen-
erated atop the complex (Fig. 1B), to match the distribution of the BAF
deposits around the complex. From the visual analysis, we spotted ten
point-sources whose coordinates are described in Table 1 and which
are related to the four eruptive centers of the TVC. Then, we roughly cal-
culated the approximated volume of the LV, CHI, MP, LT, MXB and SR
deposits, according to their areal extents and mean thicknesses ob-
served in distal outcrops (Table 1). For the AC and MXC deposits, mini-
mum volumes of 80 × 106 and 120 × 106 m3, have been previously
reported by Macías et al. (2010) and Macías et al. (2000), respectively.
All these volumes were then subtracted from an original DEM of the
TVC, obtained from an ALOS PALSAR RTC image of 12.5 m in vertical
and horizontal resolution (ASF DAAC, 2015). This DEM was processed
by using different tools of ArcGIS 10.2, in order to obtain the morphol-
ogy of the volcano surface before the deposition of the BAFs. However,
the steep and sinuous morphology of the complex made difficult to dis-
criminate this variation in the morphology of the processed surface. The
TITAN2d model also requires as an input parameter, a value of the basal
friction angle, reason for which we used the ΔH/L ratio or Heim friction
coefficient (Heim, 1932), which is an estimation of the resistance to
flow of a sliding mass by interaction with its underlying surface,
where ΔH corresponds to the fall height and L to the horizontal travel
distance. Therefore, this ratio was calculated for each of the BAF deposits
shown in Fig. 1B, according to the previous ten point-sources selected;
the values obtained are summarized in Table 2. Moreover, the first re-
sults of the simulations using these values did not fit well the extension
and thickness of the BAF deposits, so we vary the basal friction angle
until we get the best approximation. From this analysis, we obtained a
zonation of the TVC based on the surface bed friction angles that in
turn are related to the different morphologies of the complex. Therefore,
the complex was divided into four zones (Fig. 2): a) West (W-ZONE),
that corresponds to the western side of the San Rafael caldera rim and
the uplifted granitic basement; b) North (N-ZONE), that is limited by
the northern scarp of the San Rafael caldera rim; c) South-East (SE-
ZONE), that comprises the Chichuj edifice and another portion of the
granitic tertiary basement; and d) South-West (SW-ZONE), which en-
compasses the San Antonio volcano up to the flat terrain including the
village of Cacahoatán. It is worth to note that the West zone has an
abrupt topography with steep slopes and V-shaped valleys that has
served as a natural barrier for volcanic flows of the complex.
After the first approximation of modelling the past BAFs of the TVC,
we then perform a hazard assessment of the dense granular component
of future BAF events. We simulated three possible scenarios: low (LI),
medium (MI) and high-impact (HI).
The LI scenario was defined based on the LV deposit (see Fig. 1B)
which is the smallest BAF of the complex described so far. LV has a
maximum runout from the complex summit of 3.7 km and covers
an area of 0.53 km2. We calculated a minimum volume for this deposit
of 2.6 × 106 m3 (see Table 1). Hence, for this scenario, we considered a
volume range between 0.5 × 106 and 3.0 × 106 m3 during the simula-
tions, in order to account for volume uncertainties (see Table 3).
 R. Vázquez et al. / Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 373 (2019) 36–50 39

Table 1
Physical features of the BAF deposits mapped at the TVC and location of the source-points detected for simulate these BAFs.

Block-and-ash flow Age Area Mean Minimum Elevation at maximum Thickness of the deposit at Source-points (UTM coordinates)
(kyr) (km2) thickness estimated volume runout (m a.s.l.) the reference point (m)
(m) (m3)

Agua Calientea (AC) 21–10 4 20 80 × 106 1670 30 Center Ardillas (CA) → 594873 N, 1672669 W
San Rafaelb (SR) 16 2.6 5 13 × 106 1860 5 San Rafael (SR) → 595991 N, 1674077 W
La Vegae (LV) ? 0.53 5e 2.6 × 106 2690 3 Center Tacaná (CT) → 595815 N, 1672950 W
c
Muxbal (MXB) 28.5 1.3 10e 13 × 106 1270 – North-West Tacaná (NWT) → 594776 N, 1673578 W
c
Monte Perla (MP) 30 8.7 10e 87 × 106 720 – North Tacaná (NT) → 595226 N, 1674319 W
La Trinidadc (LT) 40 12.16 10e 97 × 106 510 – South Tacaná (NT) → 5958706 N, 1672314 W
Chiquihuitese (CHI) ? 2.6 10e 2.6 × 106 1130 10 Center Chichuj (CCH) → 596,956 N, 1673231 W
Mixcund (MXC) 1.9 25 5 120 × 106 500 10 East Chichuj (ECH) → 597552 N, 1673237 W
South Chichuj (SCH) → 596544 N, 1672480 W
San Antonio (SA) → 594625 N, 1671974 W
South San Antonio (SSA) → 594473 N, 1671094 W

Note: The reference points of the thickness of the deposits, mentioned on the table are shown on Fig. 3.
a
Macías et al. (2010).
b
Mora et al. (2004).
c
Espíndola et al. (1989).
d
Macías et al. (2000).
e
Field observations.

The MI scenario was defined considering the SR and CHI deposits, a minimum thickness for this BAF deposit of 20 m at San Rafael Valley,
which present maximum runouts of 4 and 5.5 km from the Tacaná sum- and up to 25 m in the vicinity of the Agua Caliente village, estimating
mit, respectively, both covering areas of ~2.6 km2. We estimated the vol- a minimum volume of 80 × 106 m3. The other deposit is the Mixcun
ume of both deposits according to their thicknesses in outcrops yielding BAF (i.e. MXC), which reached a maximum runout from San Antonio
volumes of ~13 × 106 (SR), and 26 × 106 m3 (CHI). Hence, we ranged the summit of ~14.8 km, covering an area of 25 km2, with a minimum vol-
input pile volumes for this scenario from 10 × 106 to 30 × 106 m3 to ac- ume of 120 × 106 m3 (Macías et al., 2000). Therefore, considering the
count for volumes uncertainties (Table 3). physical features of these two BAF deposits, we vary the input volumes
Finally, the HI scenario was defined considering the two best de- from 50 × 106 to 150 × 106 m3 to account for volume uncertainties of
scribed BAF deposits at the TVC: the BAF unit of the Agua Caliente Se- these deposits (Table 3).
quence (i.e. AC) described by Macías et al. (2010), located in the NW For the three scenarios described, we not only vary the input vol-
flank of the volcano, which reached a maximum runout of 5.3 km ume, but also the basal friction angle, scale, and source points. The latter
from Tacaná summit covering an area of ~4 km2; these authors reported values were established considering the actual morphology of the com-
plex and the four volcanic structures of the edifice and not just Tacaná
and San Antonio, as in previous works did (Mercado and Rose, 1992;
Table 2 Macías et al., 2000). The basal friction angles were varied according to
Summary of the Heim friction coefficients calculated for the numerical model of the the zonation obtained with the analysis of ancient BAF deposits, and
mapped BAFs at the TVC from the source-points detected (Table 1).
the position of the source-points within these zones (Fig. 2), as de-
Transect ΔH L (m) ΔH/L α (°) Mean Other bed friction values scribed in Table 3. Finally, the input parameters that remained fixed
considered (m) value (°) simulated (°) through all scenarios were: the internal friction angle, set to 30°, that is
CA-AC 2110 5600 0.38 20.65 21.35 23, 20 a value commonly used for dry granular materials (Sheridan et al.,
NWT-AC 2270 5700 0.40 21.71 2005; Capra et al., 2008; Macías et al., 2008; Charbonnier and Gertisser,
CT-AC 2390 6000 0.40 21.72
2009; Sulpizio et al., 2010); the initial velocity, direction and orientation
NT-AC 2070 5300 0.39 21.33
NT-SR 1880 4400 0.43 23.14 23.28 23, 21, 20 angles of the failing pile or mass of simulated dome material were set to
SR-SR 1730 4000 0.43 23.39 zero, values that are adequate for gravitational dome collapse as those
CT-SR 2200 5100 0.43 23.33 produced by the TVC (Macías, 2005; Macías et al., 2010).
CCH-LV 1110 2700 0.41 22.35 20.22 21, 18
ECH-LV 740 2100 0.35 19.41
CT-LV 1370 4000 0.34 18.91
4. Results
CCH-MXB 2530 8300 0.30 16.95 16.23 20, 18, 14
SCH-MXB 2210 7800 0.28 15.82 We performed two sets of numerical simulations: one modelling to
CT-MXB 2790 9000 0.31 17.22 recreate the past BAF deposits of the volcano, from which we obtained
ECH-MXB 2160 8100 0.27 14.93
parameters used to calibrate the model for the second set of simulations
CCH-MP 3080 12,800 0.24 13.53 13.18 20, 18, 14
ECH-MP 2710 12,700 0.21 12.05 for eruptions with different magnitudes.
SCH-MP 2760 12,100 0.23 12.85
CT-MP 3340 13,100 0.25 14.30 4.1. Numerical simulation of past BAFs
CCH-LT 3290 14,000 0.24 13.22 13.05 20, 18, 14
ECH-LT 2920 14,100 0.21 11.70
For this analysis, we performed ~140 simulations with the parame-
SCH-LT 2970 13,000 0.23 12.87
CT-LT 3550 13,800 0.26 14.43 ters described in Tables 1 and 2. As observed in Fig. 3, the most likely or-
CT-CHI 2930 7100 0.41 22.42 20.48 21, 18 igin sources for the mapped BAFs were the NT (Agua Caliente), SR (San
SCH-CHI 2350 6500 0.36 19.88 Rafael), ECH (La Vega), ST (Chiquihuites), and SSA (Mixcun) source
CCH-CHI 2670 7300 0.37 20.09
points. This figure shows the extent of simulated flows that best fit the
ECH-CHI 2300 7500 0.31 17.05
ST-CHI 2370 5600 0.42 22.93 distribution, and thickness of five of the eight BAF deposits analyzed.
CT-MXC 3560 16,800 0.21 11.96 11.06 12, 10, 8, 7 The missing BAF deposits of Muxbal, Monte Perla, and La Trinidad are
SA-MXC 3200 15,000 0.21 12.04 most likely related to the Chichuj edifice (Fig. 3F). However, all simula-
SSA-MXC 2300 14,200 0.16 9.20 tions run with the initial conditions for this analysis fail to recreate these
Note: The abbreviations used are referred to the ones of Table 1. deposits as observed in Fig. 3F. Here, the violet polygon comprises the
40 R. Vázquez et al. / Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 373 (2019) 36–50
Fig. 2. Map showing the zonation obtained for the TVC from the simulations of BAF deposits, according to the morphological features of the flanks of the complex and the bed friction angles
gathered from the simulations.
maximum area covered by all simulated flows considering the source
points related to Chichuj volcano (i.e. CCH, ECH, and SCH, from Table 1).
In addition, Fig. 3 shows that none of the results fit exactly the areal
extent of the deposits. In fact, as summarized in Table 4, for the AC, MXC
and SR BAFs, the difference between the areas covered by the deposits
and the surfaces enclosed by the outputs is approximately +75%,
which means that the maximum extent of the outputs is three times
bigger than the original deposits. For the case of the CHI and LV deposits,
this difference is about +86%. However, the flow depth obtained with
the numerical simulations coincides with the thicknesses of the deposits
reported at the reference points described in Table 1 (see correspon-
dence with values of Table 4).
As previously discussed the basal friction angle used in the simula-
tions varied depending on the flank of the edifice where the deposits
were located (i.e., N, SE, or SW zone, see Fig. 2). For the deposits AC
and SR (Fig. 3A and B) located on the northern flank of the complex,
the initial values used for the basal friction angle ranged from ~21 to
~23, according to the Heim coefficients calculated (Table 2); however,
these values gave results that did not fit the simulated deposits. There-
fore, we performed diverse simulations varying these values (±3°) until
finding that 20° value best fitted the model outputs with the deposits.
Therefore, we assumed that for the N-Zone (Fig. 2) the friction coeffi-
cient should range from 23° to 20°. We used the same process for the
deposits located on the south-eastern flank of the edifice (LV, CHI,
MXB, MP and LT BAFs), whose Heim coefficients initially ranged from
~20° to ~13°. The simulations indicate that a value of 18° was sufficient
to recreate the LV and CHI deposits (Fig. 3C and D). As it was previously
mentioned the MXB, MP and LT deposits could not be recreated with the
overall input parameters considered for the analysis. However, for the
SE-Zone (Fig. 2), we found that a range of 20° to 18° of friction coeffi-
cient should be assumed. Lastly, for the south-western flank of the com-
plex, we found that in order to recreate the MXC deposit (biggest BAF
deposit of the complex) and its extraordinary runout and volume, an
angle of 7° needed to be used (Fig. 3E). Albeit, for further simulations
run for the SW-Zone we propose a friction value of 12°, in accordance
with the actual ΔH/L Heim coefficient (see Table 2).
4.2. Numerical simulation of the eruptive scenarios
For this analysis, we performed about 160 simulations as a result of
the combination of 8 source points and 3 different volume values con-
sidered for each scenario. For these combinations, the input basal
 R. Vázquez et al. / Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 373 (2019) 36–50 41

Table 3
Summary of the input parameters defined for the numerical modelling of the Low, Medium and High-impact scenarios of BAFs at the TVC.

Scenario Variable input parameters

Zone Source-points (UTM Coordinates) Basal friction angle Volume of the simulated pile Length scale of simulation
(°) (m3) (m)

Low impact (LI) N-ZONE AD → 595,053 N, 1672795 W 23, 20 y 18 V1 = 0.5 × 106 3500
NWTAC → 595,671 N, 1673548 W NETAC → 596,045 N, 23 y 20 V2 = 1.5 × 106
1673647 W V3 = 3.0 × 106
SE-ZONE CHJ → 596,898 N, 1673412 W 20 y 18
SCHJ → 596,933 N, 1672700 W
SWTAC → 595,424 N, 1672712 W
TAC → 595,784 N, 1673172 W 23, 20, 18 y 12
SW-ZONE SAN → 594,736 N, 1672262 W 12
Medium impact N-ZONE AD 23, 20 y 18 V1 = 10 × 106 8000
(MI) NWTAC 23 y 20 V2 = 15 × 106
NETAC V3 = 30 × 106
SE-ZONE CHJ 20 y 18
SCHJ
SWTAC
TAC 23, 20, 18 y 12
SW-ZONE SAN 12
High impact (HI) N-ZONE AD 23, 20 y 18 V1 = 50 × 106 15,000
NWTAC 23 y 20 V2 = 100 × 106
NETAC V3 = 150 × 106
SE-ZONE CHJ 20 y 18
SCHJ
SWTAC
TAC 23, 20, 18 y 12
SW-ZONE SAN 12

Fixed input parameters for all Initial velocity Internal friction angle Orientation angle of the pile Initial direction of the pile DEM → 12.5 m resolution
scenarios (m/s) (°) (°) (°) (vertical and horizontal)
Model of the material →
Coulomb

0 0 0 0

Note: The DEM used for these simulations is the original model, with the morphology of the actual BAF deposits, not the one processed.

friction angles used were defined for each source-point according to the
zonation proposed in the previous section (Table 3). In Figs. 4 to 7, we
summarize some of the outputs obtained with this analysis to illustrate
the effects of the variation of the input parameters for each scenario and
among the scenarios modeled. The main features of all the outputs are
also listed in Table 5 to facilitate the comprehension of our results.
In Fig. 4, we present a map of the LI scenario with superimposed out-
puts for the simulation of a volume pile of 1.5 × 106 m3, at each of the 8
source-points considered. The map shows the division of the zones in
which the flanks of the volcano are classified, along with the source
points for the simulated flows in each zone. The basal friction angles
considered were: 20°, 18°, and 12°, for the N, SE and SW Zones, respec-
tively. The values of the pile height (or flow depth) of the simulations,
are shown with a range of colors, which is the same for all source points;
and as displayed in the figure, the mean depth ranges from 5 m within
the main channels that drain the edifice to 0.1 m in overbank deposits.
The longest runout for these outputs is 8.7 km from the Tacaná volcano
summit, but for the shortest flows, the mean runout distance is ~5 km.
The average maximum velocities reached for these flows is ~43 m/s
(Table 5).
On Fig. 5, we present the outputs of the MI scenario (Table 3). In this
case, we used a volume pile of 30 × 106 m3 for each of the source-points
considered but are presented separately to observe the preferential di-
rection and dispersion of flows according to their original source. For in-
stance, flows sourced at Ardillas dome (i.e AD) (Fig. 5A), one of the
points of the N-Zone, split towards the NW and SW flanks of the com-
plex (Mexican territory); instead of being totally directed over the
northern flank of the complex towards Guatemala, as the other two
points (i.e. NWTAC and NETAC, Fig. 5B–C, respectively). The maps D
and E that corresponds to the SE-Zone show that flows would be dis-
persed over the Chichuj edifice (i.e. on Guatemalan territory), and will
be blocked by the ridge that divides the San Rafael and Sibinal calderas
east of the complex. Contrarily, on map F the source point located on the
Tacaná edifice, in the Mexican side, would disperse flows over the
southern flank of the volcano, where the Toquián-Las Nubes villages
are located, and just a small part of the flow will move in the same direc-
tion as those of map A. Instead, the source-point located atop the Tacaná
edifice (map G) would disperse flows around the volcano, over
Guatemalan and Mexican territories, but without reaching the SW-
Zone. Finally, map H presents the output of the source-point located
to the SW-Zone related to the San Antonio volcano. The dispersion of
these flows entirely moved over Mexican territory, surrounding the
ridge of the W-Zone, and filling the ravines located at the southern
side of the complex up to the Once de Abril village (Fig. 5H).
In summary, the maximum flow depth reached by almost all flows is
30 m (Fig. 5; Table 5) on the main ravines of the complex and at the base
of the San Rafael caldera rim on the northern flank. The maximum
runout from the main summit of the complex is 9.3 km originated
from the SAN source-point. Finally, the average maximum velocity de-
veloped by these flows is ~48.8 m/s.
Following this analysis, we present nine maps of the SAN source-
point (Fig. 6) of each of the simulations proposed (Table 3), in order
to compare the results of the different input volumes. In this figure,
maps A–C, correspond to the LI scenario; maps D-F to the MI scenario,
and maps G-I to the HI scenario. These maps show the extent of the dis-
persed flows and its maximum flow depths that increase gradually with
the increasing volume and disperse in all cases towards the Mexican
territory. Nonetheless, for the SAN source-point, there are three marked
flow paths followed by the flows: i) along the north-western flank of the
complex towards the Agua Caliente ridge (see Fig. 2); ii) the southern
slope that strikes directly over the Toquián-Las Nubes villages; and iii)
the southern branch that follows part of the southern flank of the
Tacaná edifice to then surrounds the ridge of the granitic basement
that eventually joins branch (ii) towards the Once de Abril village. It is
42 R. Vázquez et al. / Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 373 (2019) 36–50

Fig. 3. Summary of the best-suited outputs for the BAF deposits of the TVC obtained from the numerical simulations. Maps comparing BAF deposits with best output simulations for A) AC
deposit and simulation from the source-point NT, using a basal friction angle of 20°. B) SR deposit and simulation of the SR point, using a basal friction angle of 20°. C) LV deposit and the
simulation output of the source-point ECH, using a basal friction angle of 18°. D) CHI deposit and the output from the simulation of the ST point, using a basal friction angle of 18°. E) MXC
deposit and the best result obtained from the simulation of the source-point SSA, using a basal friction angle of 7°. F) MXB, MP, and LT deposits with maximum extents for simulations
sourced at points CCH, ECH, and SCH.

worth to note that this branch split over the granitic basement south of
the Chiquihuites village towards Talquián and Unión Juárez. The maxi-
mum runout distances for these outputs range from 8.4 km at the LI sce-
nario up to ~11 km at the HI scenario; and the maximum flow depths
vary from 5 to 30 m, respectively. The mean velocities reached by
flows in these simulations are ~69 m/s.
Finally, on Fig. 7 appear four maps of the source-point TAC for simu-
lations run with the biggest volume (150 × 106 m3) of the HI scenario.
Here, we varied the input value of the basal friction angle (Table 3) to
observe the changes caused by this parameter in the output models.
The location of the TAC source-point, between the N and SE Zones,
shares the bed friction angles of both zones. But to go further in the anal-
ysis of this source-point, which is also the highest in elevation of all the
source-points considered; we decided to include in these simulations
the bed friction value of the SW-Zone (i.e. 12°). Hence, in these
simulations, the bed friction varied from 23° to 12°. Fig. 7 shows the
maps of these simulations with bed friction angles of 23° (A), 20° (B),
18° (C), and 12° (D). From these results, and considering that the vol-
ume of the simulated pile is the same in the four maps, it is clear that
shifting values of this parameter, deeply affect the maximum runout
of the model, that varies from 5.8 km in A up to 9.2 km in D. From
Table 5, we can also observe that the variation on the basal friction
angle, also affects the maximum velocity reached by the flows going
from ~44 to ~74 m/s. However, the maximum flow depth in all cases
reaches up to 30 m giving with a radial distribution.
After analyzing the outputs of all simulations and the effects caused
by each of the input parameters, we summarize our results on Fig. 8 that
shows the overall outputs from the smallest and biggest volumes simu-
lated for each case scenario. The maps show all possible outputs
(superimposed) for each volume delimiting the maximum areal extent

Table 4
Summary of the results that represents best the past BAF deposits of the TVC.

Simulation Maximum Area covered by the simulated Difference between the area of the BAF deposit and Flow depth reached at the Maximum
runout (m) flow (km2) the simulation (%) reference point (m) velocity (m/s)

NT-AC_20 5400 15.66 +74.4 30.5 47

SR-SR_20 4500 10.34 +74.8 5.8 39
ECH-LV_18 2500 4.58 +88.4 3.4 31
ST-CHI_18 6400 17.1 +84.8 11.4 50.5
SSA-MXC_7 14,500 108 +76.8 10.8 85

Note: The nomenclature used for the simulations name is referred to the ones used on Tables 1 and 3.
 R. Vázquez et al. / Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 373 (2019) 36–50
Fig. 4. Map showing a summary of the outputs achieved for the simulation of a pile of 1.5 × 106 m3 (LI scenario), considering all the source points of Table 3. The results are superimposed
on this single map, which also shows the zonation proposed for the TVC.
of the flows on a single polygon. Accordingly, map A displays the hazard
zones that could be affected by BAFs developed by collapsing domes
with the volume of 0.5 × 106 m3 (in red), and 3.0 × 106 m3 (in pale
rose), that are the two extreme cases of the LI scenario (i.e. V1 and V3
of Table 3). We applied the same process for the MI and HI scenarios,
which are presented on maps 8-B and 8-C, respectively. The red zones
of this figure correspond to the low volume outcomes of each scenario
that increase considerably their extent from LI to HI. These flows are ini-
tially restricted to the main channels of the edifice (LI scenario, Fig. 8A)
to then embrace the whole edifice on the north and eastern sides where
flows are blocked by the San Rafael caldera rim, and the granitic base-
ment, respectively (Fig. 8B and C). The abrupt topography of the area
to the west splits the flows into the NW and SW directions. From the
analysis of the three maps of Fig. 8, it is clear that the difference between
the red and the pale-rose zones (highest volume value for each sce-
nario) is not large because the volumes considered does not vary a lot.
Based on these results, we propose a new hazard map on Fig. 9, which
encloses the hazard zones related to the three eruptive scenarios
modeled. The zones show the inundation areas for BAFs with volumes
of 1.5 × 106, 15 × 106, and 150 × 106 m3, which correspond to the values
modeled for the LI, MI, and HI scenarios, respectively (Table 3). The low
43
impact zone (red colour) encompasses an area of ~47 km2, the medium
impact zone (pale rose area) ~85 km2, and the high impact zone (yellow
area) ~140 km2. In all cases, both Mexican and Guatemalan territories
would be affected with a larger impact on the Mexican side that is
also the most populated with ~70 localities settled inside these hazard
zones. From these maps, it is also evident that some areas will not be af-
fected by BAFs of the TVC because they are located in high topographic
ridges.
5. Discussion
The results of this study are the first attempt to produce a compre-
hensive evaluation of the hazards posed by BAFs at the TVC by using
the numerical modelling with the TITAN2d code. In order to carry out
these simulations, we used all previous volcanological information of
the complex and new field observations of the deposits. During the sim-
ulations we used a two-step criterion: first to recreate the distribution
and thicknesses of BAF deposits (Fig. 1B), and second to assess the out-
comes of future BAFs at the complex.
From the first analysis, we were not able to fully recreate the exten-
sion of the mapped deposits of the complex, however, it represents a
44 R. Vázquez et al. / Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 373 (2019) 36–50

Fig. 5. Summary of the outputs obtained for the simulation of a pile of 30 × 106 m3 (MI scenario), considering each one of the source-points of Table 3 but shown separately. The A, B and C
maps display the outputs obtained for the source-points AD, NWTAC, and NETAC, respectively; which corresponds to the N-Zone and were run using a basal friction angle of 20°. The D, E, F
and G maps show the outputs obtained for the source-points CHJ, SCHJ, SWTAC, and TAC, respectively; which corresponds to the SE-Zone and were run using a basal friction angle of 18°.
The H map shows the outcome of the SAN source-point, that is enclosed on the SW-Zone and was run with a basal friction angle of 12°.

good approach to detect uncertainties of the input parameters and flaws
of the chosen model. Our input parameters are based on the geologic in-
formation of the deposits reported in the literature, although, the exten-
sion, areas, and volumes reported may not represent the original extent
of the deposits (Table 1). In some cases, post-depositional erosion, veg-
etation, and quarrying may have changed the extension of the deposits.
Another important factor is that the TVC has not produced BAF deposits
during historic times. Because of these uncertainties we made some as-
sumptions regarding the physical features of the deposits to constrain
the input parameters during the numerical modelling. We obtained
rough estimations of the minimum volumes of most BAF deposits be-
cause only two of them had estimated values (AC and MXC in
Table 1). However, these values could still be largely underestimated
(Table 2). We also calculated the basal friction angles for the simula-
tions, based on the Heim friction coefficient (Heim, 1932, revised by
Hayashi and Self, 1992); a methodology that has been broadly used on
numerical modelling of volcanic flows (Saucedo et al., 2005; Sheridan
et al., 2005; Macías et al., 2006; Procter et al., 2010; Charbonnier and
Gertisser, 2012; Ogburn and Calder, 2017). However, even when this
approach is commonly used as a guideline for choosing the appropriate
basal friction angles for models like TITAN2d, in our analysis we found
that none of the outputs obtained by using these friction values yielded
reasonable outcomes that fitted the extent and thickness of the BAF de-
posits, so we were constrained to vary this parameter to better fit the
deposits (Fig. 3). The results obtained are very incompatible, consider-
ing that the areal differences are three to almost four times bigger
than the real deposits. These inconsistencies could be due to the fact
that the model used by TITAN2d is highly sensitive to the bed friction
value; therefore, using a single bed friction value for models over a com-
plex topography, like the one at the TVC, can lead to important discrep-
ancies with actual events, as described by Stinton et al. (2004). This was
also evidenced by the very low friction angle (7°) needed for the SSA-
MXC simulation to reach the same runout as the MXC deposit. Macías
et al. (2018) used a bed friction angle of 8° to model the same deposit
with a DEM resolution of 30 m. It is worth to note that the shape of
the area covered by our simulation, compared to the one presented by
Macías et al. (2018) provide a better match to the actual shape of the
MXC deposit. So, the fact that we used an even lower bed friction angle
for this simulation is in accordance with the findings of Stefanescu et al.
(2009), Sulpizio et al. (2010) and Capra et al. (2011), who described
that the use of lower basal friction angles is needed when high-
resolution DEMs are available. Another reason why the runout of the
MXC BAF was so long, could be due to the fact that the 1950 yr eruption
of San Antonio volcano result in a laterally driven Peléan style eruption
(Macías et al., 2000), not from a dome collapse event, as the ones that
were simulated on this work, which initial velocities were set to zero.
Regarding the effect produced by the use of single-bed friction an-
gles over complex topographies, Stinton et al. (2004) incorporated a
tool within the TITAN2d code, which uses a raster map with variable
bed friction angles. We did not use this tool for our analysis because
we varied the bed friction angles according to the location of the past
BAFs over the flanks of the volcano. This process was useful to divide
the TVC into four zones: W, N, SE, and SW (Fig. 2). These zones were
delimited, according to the different morphologies of the volcano and
the bed friction angles used on the simulations that better suited the
BAF deposits over those zones. Although we are aware that the calibra-
tion of the resistance terms like the friction coefficient should be well-
constrained from field observations, we decided to use our results to de-
fine some of the input parameters for the simulation of eruptive scenar-
ios at the TVC.
Charbonnier and Gertisser (2012) warned that the performance of
this model to simulate actual events is critically dependent on: i) the
calibration of the model by means of extensive field data; ii) the incor-
poration of a high-resolution DEM, and iii) the choice of the input pa-
rameters. For the case of the TVC, we do not completely fulfill these
issues for the reasons described above. Also, Charbonnier et al. (2015)
suggested that the TITAN2d code should be used as a predictive tool
for the hazard assessment of dense granular material, like those pro-
duced by gravity-driven dome collapse events, rather than trying to rec-
reate past events, without the appropriate initial values, which most of
the time are unknown, especially in those cases where the deposits that
are trying to replicate are not well described.
 R. Vázquez et al. / Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 373 (2019) 36–50 45

Fig. 6. Summary of the outputs obtained for all the corresponding simulations related to the SAN source-point, described in Table 3, using in all cases a basal friction angle of 12°. The A, B,
and C maps correspond respectively to the V1, V2 and V3 volumes simulated from the LI scenario. The D, E, and F maps correspond instead to the V1, V2 and V3 volumes of the MI scenario.
The G, H, and I maps correspond finally to the V1, V2 and V3 volumes of the HI scenario.

For the second analysis, we carried out numerical simulations simi-
lar to those performed by Procter et al. (2010) at Mount Taranaki,
New Zealand to forecast future BAFs hazards comparable to past events
(Table 1; Fig. 1B) but using the present morphology of the complex. For
this analysis, we defined the LI, MI and HI eruptive scenarios, whose
input parameters are described in Table 3, and are based on range
values of the volume, maximum runout and bed friction derived from
the first analysis of past BAF deposits. Some of the outputs of this anal-
ysis were described in Figs. 4 to 7, to illustrate the effects on the varia-
tion of the input parameters and among the different scenarios
considered. About 160 numerical simulations were performed for this
analysis, following Ogburn and Calder (2017). These authors suggest
that for hazard assessment purposes, geophysical models like TITAN2d
must be run many times with varying input parameters in order to
achieve better and realistic results for scenario-based simulations.
Hence, for this reason, we integrate the results from our simulations
on several hazard maps, which are presented on Figs. 8 and 9. On
Fig. 8 are summarized the outputs from the LI, MI and HI scenarios
that were merged into a single polygon that shows the maximum ex-
tent of the simulated flows at each one of the eight source-points con-
sidered on Table 3. Each map of Fig. 8A–C display two hazard zones
related to the smallest and biggest volume values simulated for each
46 R. Vázquez et al. / Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 373 (2019) 36–50

Fig. 7. Summary of the map outputs obtained for the TAC source-point from the simulation of a pile of 100 × 106 m3 (HI scenario), but varying the value of the basal friction angle. Case
scenarios of A) Basal friction angle of 23°. B) Basal friction angle of 20°. C) Basal friction angle of 18°. D) Basal friction angle of 12°.

case scenario (Table 3). Surprisingly, the areal difference between the
two zones in all maps does not vary much, the reason for which we de-
signed a new hazard map of Fig. 9 that includes the overall results for
the three scenarios. This figure shows a classical hazard map with the
limits of the three scenarios. The limits are represented by different
colors going from red to yellow, according to the impact scenario
simulated. The area covered by each colored polygon represents
the summary of the maximum area covered by the flows simulated
at each source-point for the 1.5 × 106, 15 × 106 and 150 × 106 m3 vol-
umes simulated at the LI, MI, and HI scenarios, respectively. For the
smallest volume (red zone) almost all flow paths remain restricted
to the upper flanks of the complex, in comparison to the highest vol-
ume (yellow zone), that covers most of the complex flanks up to the
flood plain towards the south. It is worth noticing that any small-
volume scenario (red zone) will produce flows with runouts up to
8 km from the TVC summit. Such long runouts could be due to the
steep topography of the complex and areas without morphological
barriers that promote the propagation of flows further downslope
(Fig. 4).
From this map, it is also clear that all hazard zones are limited on the
northern flank of the map by the San Rafael caldera rim, which is a 500-
m high wall. Towards the E and SE sides of the complex, the hazard
zones are constrained by the Sibinal caldera and the abrupt topography
of the granitic basement (Fig. 2). To the north-western-side of the com-
plex, the hazard zones are restricted to the base of the Chanjale caldera
and will be diverted into the valley of the Coatán river; and to the south-
west, the channelized flows will follow the ravines that drain the edifice
to the Mixcun and Cahoacán rivers. This map also shows some areas SW
and NE of the TVC that remained as islands around swept areas by sim-
ulated flows because they stand as topographic highs made by base-
ment rocks too. Within the hazard zones of Fig. 9 occur at least 70
localities with circa 20,000 inhabitants (INEGI, 2010) of which ≥30% of
them are settled on the red zone.
The results also indicate that future eruptions from Chichuj edifice or
the NE side of Tacaná would produce flows to go towards Guatemalan
territory, and that will be confined by the steep walls of the Sibinal
and San Rafael calderas. These flows will dam the San Rafael river pro-
moting the generation of syn-and-post eruptive lahars as it has occurred
 R. Vázquez et al. / Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 373 (2019) 36–50 47

Table 5 phenomenon that has been documented during the evolution of TVC
Summary of the main features of the outputs shown on Figs. 4, 5, 6 and 7, obtained for the (Macías et al., 201; Macías et al., 2018). In fact, the City of Tapachula
eruptive scenario analysis.
was founded on top of the remains of ancient lahar deposits (Murcia
Scenario Simulation Max. Max. Max. runout Graphical and Macías, 2014). Remobilization of pyroclastic material could also
flow velocity distance output on be effective by the occurrence of floods caused by extreme hydromete-
depth (m/s) from the main figure
orological events as Hurricane Stan in 2005 that eroded the riverbed of
(m) summit (km)
the Coatan river and exposed past and historic flood deposits in the out-
LI ADV220 5 32.6 5.1 4
skirts of the City of Tapachula (Murcia and Macías, 2009). This type of
NETACV220 10 42.9 3.8 4
NWTACV220 10 48 5.0 4 secondary perils could be disastrous for the people living at the low-
SCHJV218 10 48.6 6.1 4 lands, that is the most populated zone in the surroundings of the vol-
CHJV218 5 21.7 4.3 4 cano. An event of this nature occurred 1950 yr B.P. (30 BCE–80 CE)
TACV218 5 41.9 5.3 4 when a Peleean type eruption of San Antonio volcano produced BAFs
SWTACV218 10 44.8 5.1 4
SANV112 5 70.7 8.4 6
that dammed the Cahoacan and Mixcun rivers generating lahars that
SANV212 5 70.5 8.4 4, 6 flooded the Izapa prehispanic settlements causing its abandonment
SANV312 5 69.2 8.4 6 (Macías et al., 2010; Macías et al., 2018).
MI ADV320 30 42.5 7.3 5
NWTACV320 30 54.8 6.2 5
6. Conclusions
NETACV320 30 45.9 5.3 5
CHJV318 30 29.9 5.4 5
SCHJV318 30 47 6.7 5 The hazard zonation map obtained for BAFs of the TVC is based on
SWTACV318 30 47.6 8.4 5 the known stratigraphy of the complex, which includes eight dome de-
TACV318 10 54.5 6.4 5 struction events during the past 42,000 years. For this assessment, we
SANV312 30 68.8 9.3 5
performed two sets of numerical simulations using the TITAN2d code.
SANV112 10 68.2 8.5 6
SANV212 10 69.1 8.7 6 One was carried out to mimic past BAF deposits of the complex and
HI TACV223 30 44.4 5.8 7 the other to forecast the hazards of future BAFs, size-comparable to
TACV220 30 50.9 7.2 7 the ancient ones, but considering the actual morphology of the volcano.
TACV218 30 56 8.1 7
From this analysis, we obtain: a zonation based on the morphology of
TACV212 30 74.2 9.2 7
SANV112 30 68.9 9.9 6 the complex flanks that are linked to the surface friction angles applied
SANV212 30 69.6 10.5 6 for the simulations that best fitted the deposits, and hazard maps from
SANV312 30 69.6 10.7 6 the scenario-based simulations. The proposed hazard maps consider
Note: The nomenclature used for the name of the simulations express: the name of the the smallest and the biggest simulated volumes used for each scenario
source-point, then the volume value of the simulated piled, and finally the basal friction (low, medium, and high). So, based on these maps we finally propose a
angle used for the simulation (please see Table 3 for these values). BAF hazard zonation map that integrates the results from the three sce-
narios proposed, considering the 1.5 × 106, 15 × 106 and 150 × 106 m3
in the past (Macías et al., 2010). Nonetheless, the last eruptive activity of of volume values. This map shows the maximum area covered by BAFs
Chichuj volcano dates back to the Pleistocene (i.e. ~24,000 yrs), hence that could be originated from the four volcanic structures of the complex
its potential for future activity is uncertain. Reactivation of San Antonio, at each eruptive scenario. In the LI scenario, small volume dome collapse
Ardillas dome, or the southern crater rim of Tacaná would produce events could generate flows that may reach up to 8 km from the summit
flows towards Mexican territory affecting ~2100 inhabitants in the red (red zone) area inhabited by ~6000 people. Therefore, special attention
zone, ~4500 in the pale-rose zone and ~11,200 in the yellow zone must be given to any precursor activity of the complex in order to under-
(INEGI, 2010). Another possibility for the generation of BAFs atop the take the necessary tasks to reduce the volcanic risk and a volcanic disaster.
complex could be the extrusion of a new dome and lava flows. All haz- Finally, even though a more robust analysis of the stratigraphy of the
ard zones of the TVC enclose the main rivers and streams that drain the TVC needs to be fulfilled in the future to better constrain the hazard map
complex as the Coatán, Cahoacán, and Suchiate. Therefore, damming of of the complex, the model-based hazard analysis presented here repre-
these rivers will promote the generation of syn-eruptive lahars a sents a considerable advance in understanding the flow behavior of

Fig. 8. Hazard maps for the simulated BAFs at the TVC that summarize the maximum inundation areas of the smallest and biggest volume simulated for each eruptive scenario. Simulations
were run from all the points of Table 3. Hazard maps of A) Flows with volume ranging from 0.5 × 106 and 3.0 × 106 m3 (red and pale-rose colors, respectively) from the LI scenario. B) Flows
of the MI scenario with volumes ranging from 10 × 106 to 30 × 106 m3. C) Flows of the HI scenario with volumes ranging from 50 × 106 to 150 × 106 m3. (For interpretation of the references
to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
48 R. Vázquez et al. / Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 373 (2019) 36–50

Fig. 9. BAF hazard map for the TVC that encloses the outputs from the three eruptive scenarios considered for the modelling. The red zone shows the maximum areal extent of the flows of a
volume of 1.5 × 106 m3 (from the LI scenario). The pale-rose zone shows the maximum areal extent of flows with a volume of 15 × 106 m3 (from the MI scenario). The yellow zone shows
the maximum areal extent of flows with a volume of 150 × 106 m3 (from the HI scenario). (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the
web version of this article.)

BAFs produced by the destruction of central domes. The use of numeri-
cal codes such as TITAN2d has proved to be critical to assess these types
of hazards at the complex, getting to know the preferential trajectories
and runouts of future flows, from different scenarios based on a range of
volumes. In fact, the simulations presented in this work would be help-
ful to update the operative and emergency plans of the volcano, in case
of a future volcanic crisis.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by CONACyT PN522 project, managed by J.
L. Macías. Special thanks are due to Marcus Bursik for their help with the
review and the insightful comments that greatly improved this work.
Thanks, are also expressed to the staff of Unidad de Gestión Ambiental
y Riesgo and the Oficina Municipal de Agua y Saneamiento of Sibinal
of San Marcos Department of Guatemala, especially to Edilzar Romeo
y Marco Vinicio Velásquez. Civil Protection staff of Union Juárez, México
is also thanked for their support during fieldwork (Alejandro Lugo). We
also thank all the students and colleagues who help with the numerical
simulations and with the field campaigns. We appreciated the reviews
of Sylvain Charbonnier and an anonymous reviewer.
References
Albarrán-Guerrero, F.M., 2013. Restitución fotogramétrica del Volcán Tacaná para
desarrollar un mapa de peligros. (Thesis). UNAM, Facultad de Ingeniería (64 p).
Arce, J.L., Macías, J.L., Gardner, J.E., Rangel, E., 2012. Reconstruction of the Sibinal Pumice,
an andesitic Plinian eruption at Tacaná Volcanic Complex, Mexico-Guatemala.
J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 217–218, 39–55.
ASF DAAC, 2015. ALOS PALSAR Radiometric Terrain Corrected High Resolution Dataset. In-
cludes Material ©JAXA/METU 2007 (Accessed through ASF DAAC 11 November 2015).
Baxter, P.J., Boyle, R., Cole, P., Neri, A., Spence, R.S., Zuccaro, G., 2005. The impact of pyro-
clastic surges on buildings at the eruption of the Soufrière Hills volcano, Montserrat.
Bull. Volcanol. 67, 292–313.
Bergeat, A., 1894. Zur Kenntnis der jurgen Eruptivgesteine der Republik Guatemala.
Zeitschrift der Deutschen Zeitschrift der Deutschen Geologischen Gesellschaft 46,
131–157.
Bonadonna, C., 2006. Probabilistic modellinf of tephra dispersion. In: Mader, H.M., Coles,
S.G., Connor, C.B., Connor, L.J. (Eds.), Statistics in Volcanology, Special Publications
of IAVCEI. 1. Geological Society, London, pp. 243–259.
 R. Vázquez et al. / Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 373 (2019) 36–50
Böse, E., 1902. Breve noticia sobre el estado actual del Volcán Tacaná, Chiapas. Memorias y
Revista de la Sociedad Científica “Antonio Alzate”. 18, pp. 266–270.
Böse, E., 1903. Los temblores de Zanatepec, Oaxaca, a fines de Septiembre de 1902. Estado
actual del volcán Tacaná, Chiapas, México. Oficina tipográfica de la Secretaria de
Fomento: Parergones Ins. Geol. 1 (25p).
Branney, M.J., Kokelaar, P., 2002. Pyroclastic Density Currents and the Sedimentation of
Ignimbrites. Geol Soc Mem, London (152 pp).
Breard, E.C.P., 2016. Dynamics of Pyroclastic Density Currents. (PhD Thesis). Massey Uni-
versity, New Zealand (380p).
Bursik, M.I., Woods, A.W., 1996. The dynamics and thermodynamics of large ash flows.
Bull. Volcanol. 58 (2–3), 175–193.
Bursik, M., Patra, A., Pitman, E.B., Nichita, C., Macías, J.L., Saucedo, R., Girina, O., 2005. Ad-
vances in studies of dense volcanic granular flows. Rep. Prog. Phys. 68 (2), 271–301.
Capra, L., Norini, G., Gropelli, G., Macías, J.L., Arce, J.L., 2008. Volcanic hazard zonation of
Nevado de Toluca Volcano. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 176, 469–484.
Capra, L., Manea, V.C., Manea, M., Norini, G., 2011. The importance of digital elevation
model resolution on granular flow simulations: a test case for Colima volcano using
TITAN2D computational routine. Nat. Hazards 59, 665–680.
Capra, L., Macías, J.L., Cortés, A., Dávila, N., Saucedo, R., Osorio-Ocampo, S., Arce, J.L.,
Gavilanes-Ruiz, J.C., Corona-Chávez, P., García-Sánchez, L., Sosa-Ceballos, G.,
Vázquez, R., 2016. Preliminary report on the July 10–11, 2015 eruption at Volcán
de Colima: pyroclastic density currents with exceptional runouts and volume.
J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 310, 39–49.
Carey, S., 1991. Transport and deposition of tephra by pyroclastic flows and surges. In:
Fisher, R.V., Smith, R. (Eds.), Sedimentation in Volcanic Setting. SEMP Special Publica-
tion vol. 45, pp. 39–57.
Charbonnier, S.J., Gertisser, R., 2009. Numerical simulations of block-and-ash flows using
the Titan2D flow model: examples from the 2006 eruption of Merapi Volcano, Java,
Indonesia. Bull. Volcanol. 71, 953–959.
Charbonnier, S.J., Gertisser, R., 2012. Evaluation of geophysical mass flow models using
the 2006 block-and-ash flows using the TITAN2D flow model: examples from the
2006 eruption of Merapi volcano, Java, Indonesia. Bull. Volcanol. 71 (8), 953–959.
Charbonnier, S.J., Palma, J.L., Ogburn, S., 2015. Application of “Shallow-Water” Numerical
Models for Hazard Assessment of Volcanic Flows: the Case of Titan2d and Turrialba
Volcano (Costa Rica). School of Geosciencies Faculty and Staff Publications (paper
600).
Dade, B.W., Huppert, H.E., 1995. Runout and fine-sediment deposits of axisymmetric tur-
bidity currents. J. Geophys. Res. 100, 18597–18609.
Dalbey, K., Patra, A.K., Pitman, E.B., Bursik, M.I., Sheridan, M.F., 2008. Input uncertainty
propagation methods and hazard mapping of geophysical mass flows. J. Geophys.
Res. Solid Earth 113 (B5).
De Cserna, Z., Aranda-Gómez, J.J., Mitre-Salazar, L.M., 1988. Mapa fotogeológico
preliminar y secciones estructurales del volcán Tacaná. UNAM, Instituto de Geología,
Cartas Geológicas y Mineras 7, scale 1:50,000, 1 sheet.
De la Cruz, V., Hernández, R., 1985. Estudio geológico a semidetalle de la zona geotérmica
del Volcán Tacaná, Chiapas. CFE, México (41/85).
De la Cruz-Reyna, S., Armienta, M.A., Zamora, V., Juárez, F., 1989. Chemical changes in
spring waters at Tacaná Volcano, Chiapas, México. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 38,
345–353.
Dufek, J., 2016. The fluid mechanics of pyroclastic density currents. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech.
48, 459–485. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-fluid-122414-034252.
Espíndola, J.M., Medina, F.M., De los Ríos, M., 1989. A C-14 age determination in the
Tacaná volcano (Chiapas, México). Geofis. Int. 28, 123–128.
Espíndola, J.M., Macías, J.L., Sheridan, M.F., 1993. El Volcán Tacaná: Un ejemplo de los
problemas en la evaluación del Riesgo Volcánico. Proceedings, Simposio Internacional
sobre Riesgos Naturales e Inducidos en los Grandes Centros Urbanos de América La-
tina, México, D.F., CENAPRED, pp. 62–71.
Fisher, R.V., 1990. Transport and deposition of a pyroclastic surge across an area of high
relief: the 18 May 1980 eruption of Mount St. Helens, Washington. Geol. Soc. Am.
Bull. 102, 1038–1054.
Fisher, R.V., 1995. Decoupling of pyroclastic currents – hazard assessments. J. Volcanol.
Geotherm. Res. 66, 257–263.
Freundt, A., Bursik, M.I., 1998. Pyroclastic flow transport mechanism. In: Freundt, A., Rosi,
M. (Eds.), From Magma to Tephra: Modelling Physical Processes of Explosive Volcanic
Eruptions. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 173–246.
García-Palomo, A., Macías, J.L., Arce, J.L., Mora, J.C., Hughes, S., Saucedo, R., Espíndola, J.M.,
Escobar, R., Layer, P., 2006. Geological evolution of the Tacaná Volcanic complex,
México-Guatemala. In: Rose, W.I., Bluth, G.J.S., Carr, M.J., Ewert, J.W., Patino, L.C.,
Vallance, J.W. (Eds.), Natural Hazards in Central America. Geol. Soc. Am. Spec. Pap
vol. 412, pp. 39–57.
GVP, 2018. Global volcanism program: Activity report for the week of 30 May–5 June
2018. USGS Weekly Volcanic Activity Report. Smithsonian Institution, National Mu-
seum of Natural History https://volcano.si.edu/showreport.cfm?doi=GVP.
WVAR20180530-342090.
Hayashi, J.N., Self, S., 1992. A comparison of pyroclastic flow and debris avalanche mobil-
ity. J. Geophys. Res. 97, 9063–9071.
Heim, A., 1932. Bergsturz und Menschenleben. Fritz and Wasmuth Verlag, Zürich (218p).
Hidayat, D., Widiwijayanti, C., Voight, B., Patra, A., Pitman, E.B., 2007. TITAN2D analyses of
dome-collapse pyroclastic flows on Montserrat. Eos Transactions AGU 88 (52), Fall
Meeting 2007, Abstract #V31B-0499.
INACIF, 2018. Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Forenses de Guatemala, Reporte al 26 de Julio
de 2018. www.inacif.gob.gt.
INEGI, 2010. Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática, Censo de Población
y Vivienda 2010 (Informe nacional y estatales). http://www.censo2010.org.mx.
Kelfoun, K., Druitt, T.H., 2005. Numerical modelling of the emplacement of Socompa rock
avalanche, Chile. J. Geophys. Res. 110, 1–13.
49
Kelfoun, K., Samaniego, P., Palacios, P., Barba, D., 2009. Testing the suitability of frictional
behaviour for pyroclastic flow simulation by comparison with a well-constrained
eruption at Tungurahua volcano (Ecuador). Bull. Volcanol. 71 (9), 1057–1075.
Macías, J.L., 2005. Geología e historia eruptiva de algunos de los grandes volcanes activos
de México. Volumen Conmemorativo del Centenario, Temas Selectos de la Geología
Mexicana, Bol. Soc. Geol. Mex. Tomo LVII. 3 pp. 379–424.
Macías, J.L., Espíndola, J.M., García-Palomo, A., Scott, K.M., Hughes, S., Mora, J.C., 2000. Late
Holocene Peléan-style eruption at Tacaná volcano, Mexico and Guatemala: past, pres-
ent, and future hazards. GSA Bull. 112 (8), 1234–1249.
Macías, J.L., Saucedo, R., Gavilanes, J.C., Varley, N., García, S.V., Bursik, M.I., Vargas
Gutierrez, V., Cortés, A., 2006. Flujos piroclásticos asociados a la actividad explosiva
del Volcán de Colima y perspectivas futuras. GEOS 25 (3), 340–351.
Macías, J.L., Capr, L., Arce, J.L., Espíndola, J.M., García-Palomo, A., Sheridan, M.F., 2008. Haz-
ard map of El Chichón volcano, Chiapas, México: Constraints posed by eruptive his-
tory and computer simulations. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 175, 444–458.
Macías, J.L., Arce, J.L., García-Palomo, A., Mora, J.C., Layer, P.W., Espíndola, J.M., 2010. Late-
Pleistocene flank collapse triggered by dome growth at Tacaná volcano, México-
Guatemala, and its relationship to the regional stress regime. Bull. Volcanol. 72,
33–53.
Macías, J.L., Arce, J.L., Layer, P.W., Saucedo, R., Mora, J.C., 2015. Eruptive history of the
Tacaná Volcanic complex. In: Scolamacchia, T., Macías, J.L. (Eds.), Active Volcanoes
of Chiapas (Mexico): El Chichón and Tacaná. Active Volcanoes of the World. Springer,
Berlín, Heidelberg, pp. 115–138.
Macías, J.L., Arce, J.L., Capra, L., Saucedo, R., Sánchez-Núñez, J.M., 2018. Late formative
flooding of Izapa after an eruption of Tacaná Volcano. Anc. Mesoam. 29 (1) (in press).
Martíni, M., Capaccioni, B., Giannini, L., 1987. Ripresa dell'attivita sísmica e fumarólica al
Vulcano di Tacaná (Chiapas, Messico) dopo un quarantennio di quiescenza. Estrato
da Bolletino del Grupo Nazionale per la Vulcanologia. pp. 467–470.
Mercado, R., Rose, W.I., 1992. Reconocimiento geológico y evaluación preliminar de
peligrosidad del Volcán Tacaná, Guatemala/México. Geofis. Int. 31, 205–237.
Mitani, N.K., Matuttis, H.G., Kadono, T., 2004. Density and size segregation in deposits of
pyroclastic flows. Geophys. Res. Lett. 31 (15) (n/a-n/a).
Mooser, F., Meyer-Abich, H., McBirney, A.R., 1958. Catalogue of the active volcanoes of the
world including solftara fields. Part VI Central America. Nap. Int. Volcanol. Asoc. 1–36.
Mora, J.C., Macías, J.L., García-Palomo, A., Arce, J.L., Espíndola, J.M., Manetti, P., Vaselli, O.,
Sánchez, M., 2004. Petrology and geochemistry of the Tacaná Volcanic complex,
Mexico-Guatemala: evidence for the last 40 000 yr of activity. Geofis. Int. 43,
331–359.
Mora, J.C., Gardener, J.E., Macías, J.L., Meriggi, L., Santo, A.P., 2013. Magmatic controls on
eruption dynamics of the 1950 yr B.P. eruption of San Antonio Volcano, Tacaná Vol-
canic Complex, Mexico-Guatemala. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 262, 134–152.
Müllerried, F.K.G., 1951. La reciente actividad del Volcán Tacaná, Estado de Chiapas, a
fines de 1949 y principios de 1950. Informe del Instituto de Geología, UNAM
(28p).
Murcia, H., 2008. Depósitos de lahar del Complejo Volcánico Tacaná y depósitos fluviales
en el abanico de Tapachula, Chiapas – México. (M. Sc. Thesis). Universidad Nacional
Autónoma de México, Ciudad de México (152 p).
Murcia, H.F., Macías, J.L., 2009. Registro geológico de inundaciones recurrentes e
inundación del 4 de octubre de 2005 en la ciudad de Tapachula, Chiapas, México.
Rev. Mex. Cienc. Geol. 26 (1), 1–17.
Murcia, H., Macías, J.L., 2014. Volcaniclastic sequences at the foot of Tacaná Volcano,
southern México: implications for hazard assessment. Bull. Volcanol. 76 (27 p).
Murcia, H., Sheridan, M., Macías, J.L., Cortés, G., 2010. TITAN2D simulations of pyroclastic
flows at Cerro Machín Volcano, Colombia: Hazard implications. J. S. Am. Earth Sci. 29
(2), 161–170.
Ogburn, S.E., 2008. Potential Hazards at Soufrière Hills Volcano, Montserrat: Northwards-
Directed Dome-Collapses and Major Explosive Eruptions. (M. Sc. Thesis). State Uni-
versity of New York, Buffalo (178 pp).
Ogburn, S.E., Calder, E.S., 2017. The relative effectiveness of empirical and physical models
for simulating the dense undercurrent of pyroclastic flows under different emplace-
ment conditions. Front. Earth Sci. 5 (83).
Ogburn, S.E., Calder, E.S., Cole, P.D., Stinton, A.J., 2014. The effect of topography on ash-
cloud surge generation and propagation. In: Wadge, G., Robertson, R.E.A., Voight, B.
(Eds.), The Eruption of Soufrière Hills Volcano, Montserrat from 2000 to 2010. Geol.
Soc. Lon. Mem vol. 39, pp. 179–194.
Patra, A.K., Bauer, A.C., Nichita, C.C., Pitman, E.B., Sheridan, M.F., Bursik, M.I., Rupp, B.,
Webber, A., Stinton, A.J., Namikawa, L., Renschler, C., 2005. Parallel adaptive numeri-
cal simulation of dry avalanches over natural terrain. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 139,
1–21.
Procter, J.N., Cronin, S.J., Platz, T., Patra, A., Dalbey, K., Sheridan, M., Neal, V., 2010. Mapping
block-and-ash flow hazards based on Titan 2D simulations: a case study from Mt. Ta-
ranaki, NZ. Nat. Hazards 53, 483–501.
Reyes-Dávila, G., Arámbula-Mendoza, R., Espinasa-Pereña, R., Pankhurst, M.J., Navarro-
Ochoa, C., Savov, I., Varga-Bracamontes, D.M., Cortés-Cortés, A., Gutiérrez-Martinez,
C., Valdés-González, C., Domínguez-Reyes, T., González-Amezcua, M., Martínez-
Fierros, A., Ramírez-Vázquez, C.A., Cárdenas-González, L., Castañeda-Bastida, E.,
Vázquez Espinoza de los Monteros, D.M., Nieto-Torres, A., Campion, R., Courtois, L.,
Lee, P.D., 2016. Volcán de Colima dome collapse of July, 2015 and associated pyroclas-
tic density currents. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 320, 100–106.
Rowet, D., Taran, Y., Inguaggiato, S., Varley, N., 2004. Hydrothermal activity at Tacaná vol-
cano, Mexico-Guatemala. In: Wanty, R., Seal II, R. (Eds.), WRI-11. Taylor and Francis
Group, London, pp. 173–176.
Rowet, D., Inguaggiato, S., Taran, Y., Varley, N., Santiago, J.A., 2009. Chemical and isotopic
compositions of termal springs, fumaroles and bubbling gases at Tacaná Volcano
(Mexico-Guatemala): implications for volcanic surveillance. Bull. Volcanol. 71,
319–335.
50 R. Vázquez et al. / Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 373 (2019) 36–50
Rupp, B., Bursik, M., Namikawa, L., Webb, A., Patra, A.K., Saucedo, R., Macías, J.L., Renschler,
C., 2006. Computational modelling of the 1991 block and ash flows at Colima Vol-
cano, México. In: Siebe, C., Macías, J.L., Aguirre-Díaz, G.J. (Eds.), Neogene-
Quaternary Continental Margin Volcanism: A Perspective from México. Geol. Soc.
Am. Spec. Pap. 402, Penrose Conference Series, pp. 237–252.
Sapper, K., 1896. La geografía física y la geografía de la Península de Yucatán. Ins. Geol.
Mex. 3, 1–58.
Sapper, K., 1899. Ueper Gebirsbau und Boden des noerdlichen Mittelamerika. Petermanns
Geogr. Mitt. 127 (119 p).
Saucedo, R., Macías, J.L., Sheridan, M.F., Busik, M.I., Komorowski, J.C., 2005. Modelling of
pyroclastic flows of Colima Volcano, Mexico: Implications for hazard assessment.
J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 139, 103–115.
Savage, S.B., Hutter, K., 1989. The motion of finite mass of granular material down a rough
incline. J. Fluid Mech. 199, 177–215.
Sheridan, M.F., Stinton, A.J., Patra, A., Pitman, E.B., Bauer, A., Nichita, C.C., 2005. Evaluating
Titan2D mass-flow model using the 1963 Little Tahoma Peak avalanches, Mount
Rainier, Washington. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 139, 89–102.
Sheridan, M.F., Patra, A., Dalbey, K., Hubbard, B., 2010. Probabilistic digital hazard maps for
avalanches and massive pyroclastic flows using TITAN2D. Geol. Soc. Am. Spec. Pap.
464, 281–291.
Stefanescu, E.R., Bursik, M.I., Patra, A.K., 2009. Effect of digital elevation models on geo-
physical flow model output. Nat. Hazards 62 (2), 635–656.
Stefanescu, E.R., Bursik, M.I., Dalbey, K., Jones, M., Patra, A.K., Pitman, E.B., 2010a. DEM un-
certainty and hazard analysis using a geophysical flow model. In: Swayne, D.A., Yang,
W., Voinov, A.A., Rizzoli, A., Filatova, F. (Eds.), Modelling for Environment's Sake. Pro-
ceedings of the Fifth Biennal Conference of the International Environmental Model-
ling, Software Society, Ottawa, Canada.
Stefanescu, E.R., Bursik, M.I., Cordoba, G., Patra, A.K., Pieri, D.C., Sheridan, M.F., 2010b. Im-
pact of DEM uncertainty on TITAN2D flow model output, Galeras Volcano, Colombia.
In: Swayne, D.A., Yang, W., Voinov, A.A., Rizzoli, A., Filatova, F. (Eds.), Modelling for
Environment's Sake. Proceedings of the Fifth Biennal Conference of the International
Environmental Modelling, Software Society, Ottawa, Canada, p. 427.
Stinton, A.J., Scheridan, M.F., Patra, A., Dalbey, K., Namikawa, N., 2004. Incorporation of
variable bed friction into Titan2D mass-flow model: Application to Little Tahoma
Peak Avalanche (Washington). Acta Vulcanol. 16 (1–2), 00.
Sulpizio, R., Dellino, P., 2008. Sedimentology, depositional mechanisms and pulsating be-
havior of pyroclastic density currents. In: Martí, J., Gottsman, J. (Eds.), Caldera Volca-
nism: Analysis, Modelling and Response. Developments in Volcanology. 10. Elsevier,
pp. 57–96.
Sulpizio, R., Capra, L., Sarocchi, D., Saucedo, R., Gavilanes-Ruiz, J.C., Varley, N.R., 2010.
Predicting the block-and-ash flow inundation areas at Volcán de Colima (Colima,
Mexico) based on the present day (February 2010) status. J. Volcanol. Geotherm.
Res. 193, 49–66.
Wadge, G., Jackson, P., Bower, S.M., Woods, A.W., Calder, E., 1998. Computer simulations
of pyroclastic flows from drome collapse. Geophys. Res. Lett. 25 (19), 3677–3680.
Waibel, L., 1933. Die Sierra Madre de Chiapas: Mitteilungen der Geographischen Gesell-
schaft in Hamburg. 43 pp. 13–162.
Wholetz, K.H., McGetchin, T.R., Sandford, M.T., Jones, E.M., 1984. Hydrodynamic aspects of
caldera-forming eruptions: numerical models. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 89 (B10),
8269–8285.
Williams, H.E., 2015. Uncertainty in the Prediction of Overtopping Parameters in Numer-
ical and Physical Models Due to Offshore Spectral Boundary Conditions. (PhD Thesis).
University of Nottingham (178p).
Wilson, C.J.N., Houghton, B.F., 2000. Pyroclastic transport and deposition. In: Sigurdsson,
H., Houghton, B., McNutt, S.R., Hazel, R., Stix, J. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Volcanoes. Ac-
ademic Press, New York, pp. 545–555.