Physical theory for near-bed turbulent particle-suspension capacity

Eggenhuisen, Joris T.; Cartigny, Matthieu; Leeuw, Jan de

doi:10.5194/esurf-2016-33

Cited by 13 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[] and Eggenhuisen et al . [] (although we comment on these in section 7 below), as well as in the original analysis of Parker et al . [].…”

Section: Steady‐state Solutionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[], who use the turbulence collapse criterion of Eggenhuisen et al . [] to identify a threshold in a submarine fan (the Skoorsteenberg Formation) beyond which both debris flow or bedload deposits and turbidites are both present. Unfortunately, since the theory of Eggenhuisen et al .…”

Section: Role Of Knapp‐bagnold Collapsementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Unfortunately, since the theory of Eggenhuisen et al . [] determines a threshold that is not strictly a function of Ro and Ri, no direct comparison of their threshold with the K‐B threshold is possible. While the results of Kane et al .…”

Section: Role Of Knapp‐bagnold Collapsementioning

confidence: 99%

“…[b] and Eggenhuisen et al . []. These criteria both depend upon the “shear Reynolds number,”

{Re}_{τ} = \frac{u_{*} h}{ν_{f}} .

…”

Section: Implications Of Depth‐averaged Theory For Sedimentology and mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A similar criterion for failure of the turbulence to successfully suspend the sediment has been proposed, based on much more sophisticated fluid mechanical reasoning, by Balachandar and collaborators [ Shringarpure et al ., ; Cantero et al ., b]. We also mention an alternative point of view [ Eggenhuisen et al ., ], which yields a rather different turbulence failure mechanism based on force balances within the boundary layer at the base of the flow.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Sedimentological regimes for turbidity currents: Depth‐averaged theory

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Turbidity currents are one of the most significant means by which sediment is moved from the continents into the deep ocean; their properties are interesting both as elements of the global sediment cycle and due to their role in contributing to the formation of deep water oil and gas reservoirs. One of the simplest models of the dynamics of turbidity current flow was introduced three decades ago, and is based on depth‐averaging of the fluid mechanical equations governing the turbulent gravity‐driven flow of relatively dilute turbidity currents. We examine the sedimentological regimes of a simplified version of this model, focusing on the role of the Richardson number Ri [dimensionless inertia] and Rouse number Ro [dimensionless sedimentation velocity] in determining whether a current is net depositional or net erosional. We find that for large Rouse numbers, the currents are strongly net depositional due to the disappearance of local equilibria between erosion and deposition. At lower Rouse numbers, the Richardson number also plays a role in determining the degree of erosion versus deposition. The currents become more erosive at lower values of the product Ro × Ri, due to the effect of clear water entrainment. At higher values of this product, the turbulence becomes insufficient to maintain the sediment in suspension, as first pointed out by Knapp and Bagnold. We speculate on the potential for two‐layer solutions in this insufficiently turbulent regime, which would comprise substantial bedload flow with an overlying turbidity current.

show abstract

“…[] and Eggenhuisen et al . [] (although we comment on these in section 7 below), as well as in the original analysis of Parker et al . [].…”

Section: Steady‐state Solutionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Role Of Knapp‐bagnold Collapsementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Role Of Knapp‐bagnold Collapsementioning

confidence: 99%

“…[b] and Eggenhuisen et al . []. These criteria both depend upon the “shear Reynolds number,”

{Re}_{τ} = \frac{u_{*} h}{ν_{f}} .

…”

Section: Implications Of Depth‐averaged Theory For Sedimentology and mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Sedimentological regimes for turbidity currents: Depth‐averaged theory

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Which Triggers Produce the Most Erosive, Frequent, and Longest Runout Turbidity Currents on Deltas?

Hizzett

Clarke

Sumner

et al. 2018

Geophysical Research Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Subaerial rivers and turbidity currents are the two most voluminous sediment transport processes on our planet, and it is important to understand how they are linked offshore from river mouths. Previously, it was thought that slope failures or direct plunging of river floodwater (hyperpycnal flow) dominated the triggering of turbidity currents on delta fronts. Here we reanalyze the most detailed time‐lapse monitoring yet of a submerged delta; comprising 93 surveys of the Squamish Delta in British Columbia, Canada. We show that most turbidity currents are triggered by settling of sediment from dilute surface river plumes, rather than landslides or hyperpycnal flows. Turbidity currents triggered by settling plumes occur frequently, run out as far as landslide‐triggered events, and cause the greatest changes to delta and lobe morphology. For the first time, we show that settling from surface plumes can dominate the triggering of hazardous submarine flows and offshore sediment fluxes.

show abstract

Particle Size Distribution Controls the Threshold Between Net Sediment Erosion and Deposition in Suspended Load Dominated Flows

Dorrell

Amy

Peakall

et al. 2018

Geophysical Research Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The central problem of describing most environmental and industrial flows is predicting when material is entrained into, or deposited from, suspension. The threshold between erosional and depositional flow has previously been modeled in terms of the volumetric amount of material transported in suspension. Here a new model of the threshold is proposed, which incorporates (i) volumetric and particle size limits on a flow's ability to transport material in suspension, (ii) particle size distribution effects, and (iii) a new particle entrainment function, where erosion is defined in terms of the power used to lift mass from the bed. While current suspended load transport models commonly use a single characteristic particle size, the model developed herein demonstrates that particle size distribution is a critical control on the threshold between erosional and depositional flow. The new model offers an order of magnitude, or better, improvement in predicting the erosional‐depositional threshold and significantly outperforms existing particle‐laden flow models.

show abstract

Physical theory for near-bed turbulent particle-suspension capacity

Cited by 13 publications

References 31 publications

Sedimentological regimes for turbidity currents: Depth‐averaged theory

Sedimentological regimes for turbidity currents: Depth‐averaged theory

Which Triggers Produce the Most Erosive, Frequent, and Longest Runout Turbidity Currents on Deltas?

Particle Size Distribution Controls the Threshold Between Net Sediment Erosion and Deposition in Suspended Load Dominated Flows

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About