ABSTRACT. We present results from numerical ice-flow models that include calving criteria based on penetration of surface and basal crevasses, which in turn is a function of longitudinal strain rates near the glacier front. The position of the calving front is defined as the point where either (1) surface crevasses reach the waterline (model CDw), or (2) surface and basal crevasses penetrate the full thickness of the glacier (model CD). For comparison with previous studies, results are also presented for a height-above-buoyancy calving model. Qualitatively, both models CDw and CD produce similar behaviour. Unlike previous models for calving, the new calving criteria are applicable to both grounded termini and floating ice shelves and tongues. The numerical ice-flow model is applied to an idealized geometry characteristic of marine outlet glaciers. Results indicate that grounding-line dynamics are less sensitive to basal topography than previously suggested. Stable grounding-line positions can be obtained even on a reverse bed slope with or without floating termini. The proposed calving criteria also allow calving losses to be linked to surface melt and therefore climate. In contrast to previous studies in which calving rate or position of the terminus is linked to local water depth, the new calving criterion is able to produce seasonal cycles of retreat and advance as observed for Greenland marine outlet glaciers. The contrasting dynamical behaviour and stability found for different calving models suggests that a realistic parameterization for the process of calving is crucial for any predictions of marine outlet glacier change.
Predictions of marine ice-sheet behaviour require models that are able to robustly simulate grounding line migration. We present results of an intercomparison exercise for marine ice-sheet models. Verification is effected by comparison with approximate analytical solutions for flux across the grounding line using simplified geometrical configurations (no lateral variations, no effects of lateral buttressing). Unique steady state grounding line positions exist for ice sheets on a downward sloping bed, while hysteresis occurs across an overdeepened bed, and stable steady state grounding line positions only occur on the downward-sloping sections. Models based on the shallow ice approximation, which does not resolve extensional stresses, do not reproduce the approximate analytical results unless appropriate parameterizations for ice flux are imposed at the grounding line. For extensional-stress resolving "shelfy stream" models, differences between model results were mainly due to the choice of spatial discretization. Moving grid methods were found to be the most accurate at capturing grounding line evolution, since they track the grounding line explicitly. Adaptive mesh refinement can further improve accuracy, including fixed grid models that generally perform poorly at coarse resolution. Fixed grid models, with nested grid representations of the grounding line, are able to generate accurate steady state positions, but can be inaccurate over transients. Only one full-Stokes model was included in the intercomparison, and consequently the accuracy of shelfy stream models as approximations of full-Stokes models remains to be determined in detail, especially during transients
Over the past decade, ice loss from the Greenland Ice Sheet increased as a result of both increased surface melting and ice discharge to the ocean 1,2 . The latter is controlled by acceleration of ice flow and subsequent thinning of fast-flowing marine-terminating outlet glaciers 3 . Quantifying the future dynamic contribution of such glaciers to sea-level rise (SLR) remains a major challenge since outlet-glacier dynamics are poorly understood 4 . Here we present a model that includes a fully dynamic treatment of marine termini. We use this model to
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.