Effect of Variable-Density and Constant-Density Representations of Flow on Simulating Terrestrial Groundwater Discharge into a Coastal Lagoon

The need for modeling 3-D seismic data in a 2-D setting has motivated investigators to create so‐called 2.5-D modeling methods. One such method proposed by Liner involves the use of an approximate 2.5-D wave operator for constant‐density media. The traveltimes and amplitudes predicted by high‐frequency asymptotic ray series (WKBJ) analysis of the Liner 2.5-D wave equation match those predicted by Bleistein’s 2.5-D ray‐theoretic development in constant wavespeed media. However, high‐frequency analysis indicates that the Liner 2.5-D variable wavespeed equation will have a maximum amplitude error of ±35% in a linear c(z) model where the wavespeed doubles or halves from the beginning to the end of a raypath. These amplitudes are comparable to those produced by converting 2-D data to 2.5-D using correction factors of the type proposed by Emersoy and Oristaglio and Deregowski and Brown, with the exception being that the Liner equation lacks the half derivative waveform correction present in these operators. An alternate method of constructing 2.5-D wave operators based on the WKBJ analysis is proposed. This method permits variable density (acoustic) 2.5-D wave operators to be derived.

Download Full-text

Comments on avalanche flow models based on the concept of random kinetic energy

Journal of Glaciology ◽

10.1017/jog.2017.62 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 64 (243) ◽

pp. 148-164 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

DIETER ISSLER ◽

JAMES T. JENKINS ◽

JIM N. McELWAINE

Keyword(s):

Kinetic Energy ◽

Mathematical Formulation ◽

Variable Density ◽

Constant Density ◽

Third Order ◽

Flow Models ◽

Suspension Layer ◽

Avalanche Flow ◽

Friction Parameters ◽

Single Constant

ABSTRACTIn a series of papers, Bartelt and co-workers developed novel snow-avalanche models in which random kinetic energy (RKE) RK (a.k.a. granular temperature) is a key concept. The earliest models were for a single, constant density layer, using a Voellmy model but with RK-dependent friction parameters. This was then extended to variable density, and finally a suspension layer (powder-snow cloud) was added. The physical basis and mathematical formulation of these models are critically reviewed here, with the following main findings: (i) Key assumptions in the original RKE model differ substantially from established results on dense granular flows; in particular, the effective friction coefficient decreases to zero with velocity in the RKE model. (ii) In the variable-density model, non-canonical interpretation of the energy balance leads to a third-order evolution equation for the flow depth or density, whereas the stated assumptions imply a first-order equation. (iii) The model for the suspension layer neglects gravity and disregards well-established theoretical and experimental results on particulate gravity currents. Some options for improving these aspects are discussed.

Download Full-text