1 / 29

MODELLING TURBULENT STIRRING OF A LARGE STRATIFIED LAKE

MODELLING TURBULENT STIRRING OF A LARGE STRATIFIED LAKE. Peter A Davies (University of Dundee, UK) William Rizk, Alan Cuthbertson (University of Dundee) Yarko Nino (University of Chile). Geophysical/Environmental context. Wind-induced hydrodynamics of stratified lakes, reservoirs

jileen-caffrey
Download Presentation

MODELLING TURBULENT STIRRING OF A LARGE STRATIFIED LAKE

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. MODELLING TURBULENT STIRRING OF A LARGE STRATIFIED LAKE Peter A Davies (University of Dundee, UK) William Rizk, Alan Cuthbertson (University of Dundee) Yarko Nino (University of Chile)

  2. Geophysical/Environmental context • Wind-induced hydrodynamics of stratified lakes, reservoirs • (Csanady, 1968, 1972; Spigel & Imberger, 1980; Imberger & Hamblin, 1982; Imberger & Patterson, 1990 etc etc) • Coastal hydrodynamics (e.g Baltic Sea) • (Walin, 1972)

  3. Field data: Case I Lake Villarrica, Chile • Strong, down-valley, warm, föhn-type summer winds (Puelche) • Summer stratification (Meruane, Nino & Garreaud, 2008)

  4. Field data – Lake Villarrica • Puelche events (3-4 days) –thermocline distortion

  5. Field data: Case II – Lake Kinneret • Periodic forcing • Daily, summer sea breeze (15 m.s-1 at 10 m) • Internal Kelvin, Poincaré waves Antenucci & Imberger, Limnol. Oceanogr. (2003) (Antenucci & Imberger, 2005)

  6. U x = L x = 0 ρ1 ∂ ρ2 Previous laboratory modelling studiesNon-rotating cases: configuration 1 • Surface forcing: entrainment from below • Downward migration of boundary between unmixed and mixed fluid g ↓ ue↓ Kranenburg, 1985; Nino et al, 2003

  7. ρ1 ∂ ρ2 U x = 0 x = L Previous laboratory modelling studiesNon-rotating cases: configuration 2 • Base forcing: entrainment from above • Upward migration of boundary between mixed and unmixed fluid g ↓ ue↑ Monismith (1986)

  8. U x = L x = 0 ρ1 ∂ ρ2 ρ1 ∂ ρ2 U x = 0 x = L Non-rotating cases: parameterisation • Define: Ri* = g'h1,2/u*2 • u* = (τ0/ρ1,2)1/2 g'= g(ρ2 - ρ1)/ρ1τ0 = [(μ∂‹u›/∂z) – (ρ1,2‹u´w´›)] • Entrainment Parameterisation: ue/u* =k Ri*-n

  9. L h1, ρ1 H h2, ρ2 U z Ω x y Present model:Effects of background rotation • Rotating container • Rigid lid, moving bottom boundary (“Configuration 2”) Width W

  10. L h1, ρ1 H h2, ρ2 U Ω Dimensionless Parameters (rotating flow) • Ri*=g’h2/u*2; Ke-1= Rod/W(U/u* ~ 17-20) • [Rod = c/2Ω); c2 = g´h1h2/(h1 + h2)] • Re = Uh2/ν(> 3.5 x 104): h1/h2 ( = 2): H/L: H/W • Derived parameters: Ro-1 = 2ΩW/U; WN = Ri*(h2/L); Ek = ν/2Ωh22 Lake Villarrica: c ~ 0.54 m.s-1; Rod ~ 7.5 km; Ke-1 ~ 0.3; Ro-1 ~ 10-1

  11. Experimental facility 2-layers, immiscible (saline, fresh water)

  12. 4 Density and velocity profiles 1 2 3 Centre

  13. 1 4 2 3 U Non-rotating casesDensity profiles – time series Time scale? Ω-1, L/c, L/U h2/h1 = 1/2 Ri* = 37.5, Re = 3.4 x 104 (WN = 2.5)

  14. 1 4 2 3 U Density profile time series (non-rotating cases)Δρ/(Δρ)0 versus ct/L 1 2 3 4 Ri* = 16.6 , Re = 3.9 x 104, (WN = 1.1)

  15. 1 4 2 3 U Non-rotating casesTrack bounding isopycnal (Δρ)/(Δρ)0 = 0.05 Ri* = 37.5, Re = 3.4 x 104 1,2,3,4

  16. Non-rotating cases: Entrainment velocity parameterisation Note that WN = (Ri*)(h2/L)

  17. 1 4 2 3 U Rotating cases: Δρ/(Δρ)0 versus ct/L 1 2 3 4 Ri* = 52.2, WN = 3.5, Ro-1 = 0.43, Ke-1 = 0.68

  18. 1 4 2 3 U Rotating casesΔρ/(Δρ)0 versus ct/L 1 2 3 4 Ri* = 68.7, (WN = 4.6), Ro-1 = 0.50, Ke-1 = 0.68

  19. 1 4 2 3 U Rotating casesΔρ/(Δρ)0 versus ct/L at z/H = 0.11 1,2,3,4 Ri* = 52.2 (WN = 3.5), Ro-1 = 0.43 (Ke-1 = 0.68)

  20. 1 4 2 3 U Rotating casesTrack Δρ/(Δρ)0 = 0.05 isopycnal 1,2,3,4 Ri* = 68.7, (WN = 4.6), Ro-1 = 0.50, Ke-1 = 0.68

  21. 1 2 1 2 Bounding isopycnal (Δρ/(Δρ)0= 0.05) • Longitudinal and transverse slopes • Both slopes = 0 for non-rotating cases • Non-zero slopes with rotation. x = L x = 0 y = 0 y = W z↑ OU

  22. 1 4 2 3 U Rotating casesSlope of Δρ/(Δρ)0 = 0.05 isopycnal Ri* = 52.2 (WN = 3.5), Ro-1 = 0.66 (Ke-1 = 0.45)

  23. Rotating Cases: Plan view (velocity/vorticity) z/H = 0.24; ct/L = 47.1; 0.84 < x/L < 0.16 ← U s-1 Ri* = 21.9 (WN = 1.47); Ro-1 = 0.50 (Ke-1 = 0.33)

  24. Rotating Cases: Velocity profiles u(z) y/W = 0 y/W = 0.38 y/W = -0.38 Ri* = 21.9 (WN = 1.47); Ro-1 = 0.50 (Ke-1 = 0.33); ct/L = 47.1

  25. Conditions of Geostrophy • 2Ωu = -(1/ρ0)(∂p/∂y)→ (∆z)/(∆y) ~ 2Ωu/g′ • Measurements? • umax~ 1-3 (u*) ~ (1-3)(U/20) ; Ω ~ 0.24 s-1; g'= 0.03 – 0.1 m.s-2 • 2Ωu/g′ ~ 0.2 - 0.5 • Note that Ro' = umax/2ΩW << 1

  26. 1 4 2 3 U Rotating cases: Entrainment velocity Probe 1

  27. 1 4 2 3 U Rotating cases: Entrainment velocity Probe 2

  28. Conclusions • Strong background rotation destroys 2d response of non-rotating counterpart flows • In rotating cases, significant transverse & longitudinal slopes of bounding isopycnal between unmixed and mixed fluid layers, with formation of boundary currents. • Boundary currents in geostrophic balance (at least in early stages of flow development). • Enhanced entrainment in boundary current region (lower gradient Ri?) • Entrainment still parameterised well by Ri* in strongly rotating system

  29. BJØRN GJEVIK – TEACHER AND ATHLETE ca 1979

More Related