Inadequacy of fluvial energetics for describing gravity current autosuspension
Authors:
Sojiro Fukuda,
Marijke G. W. de Vet,
Edward W. G. Skevington,
Elena Bastianon,
Roberto Fernandez,
Xuxu Wu,
William D. McCaffrey,
Hajime Naruse,
Daniel R. Parsons,
Robert M. Dorrell
Abstract:
"Consider the [turbidity] current as ... a river" R. A. Bagnold (1962); the foundation of contemporary deep marine sedimentology.
Gravity currents, such as sediment-laden turbidity currents, are ubiquitous natural flows that are driven by a density difference. Turbidity currents have provided vital motivation to advance understanding of this class of flows because their enigmatic long run-out an…
▽ More
"Consider the [turbidity] current as ... a river" R. A. Bagnold (1962); the foundation of contemporary deep marine sedimentology.
Gravity currents, such as sediment-laden turbidity currents, are ubiquitous natural flows that are driven by a density difference. Turbidity currents have provided vital motivation to advance understanding of this class of flows because their enigmatic long run-out and driving mechanisms are not properly understood. Extant models assume that material transport by gravity currents is dynamically similar to fluvial flows. Here, empirical research from different types of particle-driven gravity currents is integrated with our experimental data, to show that material transport is fundamentally different from fluvial systems. Contrary to current theory, buoyancy production is shown to have a non-linear dependence on available flow power, indicating an underestimation of the total kinetic energy lost from the mean flow. A revised energy budget directly implies that the mixing efficiency of gravity currents is enhanced.
△ Less
Submitted 23 February, 2023;
originally announced February 2023.
