1 / 21

James PM Syvitski & Eric WH Hutton, CSDMS, CU-Boulder

Earth-surface Dynamics Modeling & Model Coupling A short course. James PM Syvitski & Eric WH Hutton, CSDMS, CU-Boulder With special thanks to Pat Wiberg, Carl Friedrichs, Courtney Harris, Chris Reed, Rocky Geyer, Alan Niedoroda, Rich Signell, Chris Sherwood.

degraw
Télécharger la présentation

James PM Syvitski & Eric WH Hutton, CSDMS, CU-Boulder

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Earth-surface Dynamics Modeling & Model Coupling A short course James PM Syvitski & Eric WH Hutton, CSDMS, CU-Boulder With special thanks to Pat Wiberg, Carl Friedrichs, Courtney Harris, Chris Reed, Rocky Geyer, Alan Niedoroda, Rich Signell, Chris Sherwood

  2. Module 5: Shelf Sediment Transport ref: Syvitski, J.P.M. et al., 2007. Prediction of margin stratigraphy. In: C.A. Nittrouer, et al. (Eds.) Continental-Margin Sedimentation: From Sediment Transport to Sequence Stratigraphy. IAS Spec. Publ. No. 37: 459-530. Shelf diffusivity (3) Gravity-driven slope equilibrium (4) Event-based models (7) Coastal Ocean Models (4) Summary (1) Earth-surface Dynamic Modeling & Model Coupling, 2009

  3. Shelf diffusivity Local transport occurs if the probability of wave resuspension is exceeded at a particle’s water depth. 20000 NDBC Buoy 46022, 1982-1998 1 across shelf along shelf u >50 cm/s bs u >35 cm/s bs 15000 0.8 u >25 cm/s bs u >15 cm/s bs 0.6 10000 Sediment diffusivity (m2/hr) Exceedance Probability 0.4 5000 Eel 0.2 0 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 Depth (m) 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 120 150 Water Depth (m) Earth-surface Dynamic Modeling & Model Coupling, 2009

  4. Shelf diffusivity Resuspension and Advection by Bottom Boundary Energy • k(t,z) varies over time t (pdf of storms), and water depth z. Following Airy wave theory, k falls off exponentially with water depth. • ki is an index between 0 and 1 that reflects the ability of grain size i to be resuspended and advected. • k(t,z) ≥ ki for sediment transport Earth-surface Dynamic Modeling & Model Coupling, 2009

  5. Plumes Only Plumes & Wave Diffusion Earth-surface Dynamic Modeling & Model Coupling, 2009

  6. Gravity-driven slope equilibrium density stratification Shear instabilities occur for Ri < Ricr “ “ suppressed for Ri > Ricr Gradient Richardson Number (Ri) = velocity shear (b) (a) Height above bed Height above bed Ri > Ricr Ri = Ricr Ri = Ricr Ri < Ricr Sediment concentration Sediment concentration • If excess sediment enters BBL & Ri increases beyond Ricr, then turbulence is dampened, sediment is deposited, stratification is reduced and Ri returns to Ricr • If excess sediment settles out of boundary layer, or bottom stress increases & Ri decreases beyond Ricr then turbulence intensifies. Sediment re-enters base of boundary layer. Stratification is increased in boundary layer and Ri returns to Ricr. Earth-surface Dynamic Modeling & Model Coupling, 2009

  7. Gravity-driven slope equilibrium Buoyancy Shear z z = h c' z = 0 y q x a B = cd < |u| u > Down-slope pressure gradient = Bottom friction = (Uw2 + vc2+ugrav2)1/2 total velocity Richardson Number = = Critical value (Wright et al., Mar.Geol. 2001) (i) Momentum balance: = cd Umax ugrav x-shelf bed slope x-shelf gravity flow velocity wave-averaged, x-shelf component of quadratic velocity depth-integrated buoyancy anomaly bottom drag coefficient (ii) Maximum turbulent sediment load: (c.f. Trowbridge & Kineke, JGR 1994) Earth-surface Dynamic Modeling & Model Coupling, 2009

  8. COMPARISON OF MODEL PREDICTIONS TO OBSERVED DEPOSITION Application to 1996-97 Eel River Flood at 60-meter Site Deposition Rate Porosity (rsed/rwater -1) Bed slope Richardson # Drag coeff. P = 0.9 s = 1.6 a = 0.004 Ricr = 0.25 cd = 0.003 (Observations from Traykovski et al., CSR 2000) Wave orbital velocity Suspended sediment Predicted bed elevation Observed bed elevation Earth-surface Dynamic Modeling & Model Coupling, 2009

  9. Top: Plumes & Wave Diffusion; Bottom: Plumes, Waves & Fluid Muds Earth-surface Dynamic Modeling & Model Coupling, 2009

  10. qs Surface active layer Mixed layer  Exchange layer (after Parker) Event-based transport model Calculate suspended sediment flux (by grain size) using a 1-D shelf sediment transport model at a cross-shelf grid of nodes of specified depth and sediment characteristics. For each event (set of wave & current conditions), the net flux is calculated at each node. The divergence of the flux gives the change in bed elevation. Earth-surface Dynamic Modeling & Model Coupling, 2009

  11. 5 Bed elevation (cm) 0 -5 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 1 m <45 m m 45-63 m m 63-125 m Silt fraction 0.5 m 125-500 m 0 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 1 0.5 Sand fraction 0 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 Cross-shelf distance (km) Example of 5 repetitions of a transport event on Eel Margin. Earth-surface Dynamic Modeling & Model Coupling, 2009

  12. SLICE Description SLICE Description wind tides waves grid Neidoroda & Reed Earth-surface Dynamic Modeling & Model Coupling, 2009

  13. Neidoroda & Reed SLICE Description Earth-surface Dynamic Modeling & Model Coupling, 2009

  14. Neidoroda & Reed SLICE Density Flows Mudflow Profile Mudflow Deposit Earth-surface Dynamic Modeling & Model Coupling, 2009

  15. Neidoroda & Reed Earth-surface Dynamic Modeling & Model Coupling, 2009

  16. Neidoroda & Reed Earth-surface Dynamic Modeling & Model Coupling, 2009

  17. Nested Modeling Average Sediment and Currents. Sept, 2002 – May, 2003 C.Harris, VIMS C.Harris, VIMS Regional Hydrological Model (HydroTrend) (atm-landsurface model) to Regional Ocean Model (ROMS) for Sediment Supply, Buoyancy, Sediment Plumes Global Ocean Model (NOGAPS) (coupled ocean-atm model) to Regional Ocean Model (ROMS) (coupled ocean-atm model) for Regional Circulation and Current Shear Global Met. Model (NOGAPS) (coupled ocean-atm model) to Regional Met. Model (COAMPS) (coupled ocean-atm model) to Wave Model (SWAN) for Sediment Resuspension (ROMS) Earth-surface Dynamic Modeling & Model Coupling, 2009

  18. Circulation and Sediment-Transport Modeling • ROMS: Regional Ocean Modeling System — RANS for heat & momentum fluxes • 3-8 km grid, 21 vertical “S” levels • Initialized with ship data • Zero-gradient b.c. near Otronto, seven tidal components • LAMI forcing every 3 hours, SWAN waves, Po River discharge • k-w turbulence model, Styles & Glenn wave-current boundary layer • Resuspension & transport of single grain size, ws = 0.1 mm/s, tc =0.08Pa Salinity; Depth-meancurrents Winds; Wave height Bottom currents; Sus. Seds. Earth-surface Dynamic Modeling & Model Coupling, 2009

  19. C. Sherwood, USGS Earth-surface Dynamic Modeling & Model Coupling, 2009

  20. 2 km Sediment Model Inputs: sediment sources, sizes, critical shear stress, settling velocity. Calculates: flux, concentration, erosion / deposition. Currents, Bed Shear Sea Floor Grid VIMS-NCOM 3D Transport Model NCOM Vertical Grid Earth-surface Dynamic Modeling & Model Coupling, 2009

  21. Conclusions: Shelf diffusivity Advantages: uses daily pdf of regional ocean energy, simple and robust; compatible with landscape evolution models Disadvantages: depends wave energy pdf -- how variable is diffusion in response to decadal and longer term variability? Gravity-driven slope equilibrium Advantages: uses daily pdf of local total velocity, simple and robust; can be tested against field data Disadvantages: Needs pdf for wave energy and sediment discharge from rivers, to calculate Richardson number Event-based Approach Advantages: uses wave, current, and sediment information available for a site, preserving all correlations, can be tested against field data Disadvantages: time scales short, data needs intensive for long-term simulations, inshore boundary condition difficult to specify Coastal Ocean Model Advantages: Can get it right if all terms are included & appropriate resolution is used. Disadvantage: Computationally intensive: data needs intensive Earth-surface Dynamic Modeling & Model Coupling, 2009

More Related