Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-r5zm4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-27T22:34:01.319Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dynamics of complete turbulence suppression in turbidity currents driven by monodisperse suspensions of sediment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 September 2012

Mrugesh Shringarpure ,
Mariano I. Cantero  and
S. Balachandar
Mrugesh Shringarpure
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA
Mariano I. Cantero
Affiliation:
National Council for Scientific and Technological Research, Bariloche Atomic Center, Bustillo 9500 (CP: 8400), Río Negro, San Carlos de Bariloche, Argentina Institute Balseiro, National Commission of Atomic Energy, National University of Cuyo, San Carlos de Bariloche, Av. Bustillo 9500, Bariloche - Río Negro (8400), Río Negro, Argentina
S. Balachandar*
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA
*
†Email address for correspondence: bala1s@ufl.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Turbidity currents derive their motion from the excess density imposed by suspended sediments. The settling tendency of sediments is countered by flow turbulence, which expends energy to keep them in suspension. This interaction leads to downward increasing concentration of suspended sediments (stable stratification) in the flow. Thus in a turbidity current sediments play the dual role of sustaining turbulence by driving the flow and damping turbulence due to stable stratification. By means of direct numerical simulations, it has been shown previously that stratification above a threshold can substantially reduce turbulence and possibly extinguish it. This study expands the simplified model by Cantero et al. (J. Geophys. Res., vol. 114, 2009a, C03008), and puts forth a proposition that explains the mechanism of complete turbulence suppression due to suspended sediments. In our simulations it is observed that suspensions of larger sediments lead to stronger stratification and, above a threshold size, induce an abrupt transition in the flow to complete turbulence suppression. It has been widely accepted that hairpin and quasi-streamwise vortices are key to sustaining turbulence in wall-bounded flows, and that only vortices of sufficiently strong intensity can spawn the next generation of vortices. This auto-generation mechanism keeps the flow populated with hairpin and quasi-streamwise vortical structures and thus sustains turbulence. From statistical analysis of Reynolds stress events and visualization of flow structures, it is observed that settling sediments damp the Reynolds stress events (Q2 events), which means a reduction in both the strength and spatial distribution of vortical structures. Beyond the threshold sediment size, the existing vortical structures in the flow are damped to an extent where they lose their ability to regenerate the subsequent generation of turbulent vortical structures, which ultimately leads to complete turbulence suppression.

JFM classification

Geophysical and Geological Flows: Geophysical and Geological Flows
Type
Papers
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 712 , 10 December 2012 , pp. 384 - 417
Copyright
©2012 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adrian, R. J. 1994 Stochastic estimation of conditional structure: a review. Appl. Sci. Res. 53, 291–303.Google Scholar
Adrian, R. J. 2007 Hairpin vortex organization in wall turbulence. Phys. Fluids 19 (4), 041301.Google Scholar
Allen, J. R. L. 2001 Principles of Physical Sedimentology. Blackburn.Google Scholar
Bernard, P. S., Thomas, J. M. & Handler, R. A. 1993 Vortex dynamics and production of Reynolds stress. J. Fluid Mech. 253, 385–419.Google Scholar
Brooke, J. W. & Hanratty, T. J. 1993 Origin of turbulence-producing eddies in a channel flow. Phys. Fluids 5, 1011–1022.Google Scholar
Cantero, M. I., Balachandar, S., Cantelli, A., Pirmez, C. & Parker, G. 2009a Turbidity current with a roof: direct numerical simulation of self-stratified turbulent channel flow driven by suspended sediment. J. Geophys. Res. 114, C03008.Google Scholar
Cantero, M. I., Balachandar, S. & García, M. H. 2008a An Eulerian–Eulerian model for gravity currents driven by inertial particles. Intl J. Multiphase Flow 34, 484–501.Google Scholar
Cantero, M. I., Balachandar, S., García, M. H. & Bock, D. 2008b Turbulent structures in planar gravity currents and their influence of the flow dynamics. J. Geophys. Res. 113, C08018.Google Scholar
Cantero, M. I., Balachandar, S. & Parker, G. 2009b Direct numerical simulation of stratification effects in a sediment-laden turbulent channel flow. J. Turbul. 10, 1–28.Google Scholar
Cantero, M. I., Cantelli, A., Pirmez, C., Balachandar, S., Mohrig, D., Hickson, T. A., Yeh, T., Naruse, H. & Parker, G. 2012a Emplacement of massive turbidities linked to extinction of turbulence in turbidity currents. Nature Geosci. 5 (1), 42–45.Google Scholar
Cantero, M. I., García, M. H. & Balachandar, S. 2008c Effect of particle inertia on the dynamics of depositional particulate density currents. Comput. Geosci. 34, 1307–1318.Google Scholar
Cantero, M. I., Shringarpure, M. & Balachandar, S. 2012b Towards a universal criteria for turbulence suppression in dilute turbidity currents with non-cohesive sediments. Geophys. Res. Lett. 39 (14).Google Scholar
Canuto, C., Hussaini, M., Quarteroni, A. & Zang, T. 1988 Spectral Methods in Fluid Dynamics. Springer.Google Scholar
Chakraborty, P., Balachandar, S. & Adrian, R. J. 2005 On the relationships between local vortex identification schemes. J. Fluid Mech. 535, 189–214.Google Scholar
Cortese, T. A. & Balachandar, S. 1995 High performance spectral simulation of turbulent flows in massively parallel machines with distributed memory. Intl J. High Performance Comput. Appl. 9, 187–204.Google Scholar
Ferry, J. & Balachandar, S. 2001 A fast Eulerian method for disperse two-phase flow. Intl J. Multiphase Flow 27, 1199–1226.Google Scholar
Garcia, M. H. & Parker, G. 1993 Experiments on the entrainment of sediment into suspension by a dense bottom current. J. Geophys. Res. 98, 4793–4807.Google Scholar
Geyer, W. 1993 The importance of suppression of turbulence by stratification on the estuarine turbidity maximum. Estuar. Coast. 16, 113–125.Google Scholar
Hopfinger, E. J. 1983 Snow avalanche motion and related phenomena. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 15, 47–76.Google Scholar
Kim, J., Moin, P. & Moser, R. 1987 Turbulence statistics in fully developed channel flow at low Reynolds number. J. Fluid Mech. 177, 133–166.Google Scholar
Kneller, B. C. & Buckee, C. 2000 The structure and fluid mechanics of turbidity currents: a review of some recent studies and their geological implications. Sedimentology 47, 62–94.Google Scholar
Krause, D. C., White, W. C., Piper, D. J. W. & Heezen, B. C. 1970 Turbidity currents and cable breaks in the western New Britain trench. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 81, 2153–2160.Google Scholar
Mucha, P. J. & Brenner, M. P. 2003 Diffusivities and front propagation in sedimentation. Phys. Fluids 15 (5), 1305–1313.Google Scholar
Necker, F., Hartel, C., Kleiser, L. & Meiburg, E. 2005 Mixing and dissipation in particle-driven gravity currents. J. Fluid Mech. 545, 339–372.Google Scholar
Parker, G. 1982 Conditions for the ignition of catastrophically erosive turbidity currents. Mar. Geol. 46, 307–327.Google Scholar
Parker, G. 2008 Transport of gravel and sediment mixtures. In Sedimentation Engineering: Processes, Measurements, Modeling and Practice (ed. Garcia, M. H.), pp. 165–252. ASCE.Google Scholar
Parker, G., Fukushima, Y. & Pantin, H. M. 1986 Self-accelerating turbidity currents. J. Fluid Mech. 171, 145–181.Google Scholar
Pinet, P. R. 2006 Invitation to Oceanography, 4th edn. Jones and Bartlett.Google Scholar
Pirmez, C. & Imran, J. 2003 Reconstruction of turbidity currents in Amazon channel. Mar. Petrol. Geol. 20, 823–849.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segre, P. N., Liu, F., Umbanhowar, P. & Weitz, D. A. 2001 An effective gravitational temperature for sedimentation. Nature 409, 594–597.Google Scholar
Sequeiros, O. E., Naruse, H., Endo, N., García, M. H. & Parker, G. 2009 Experimental study on self-accelerating turbidity currents. J. Geophys. Res. 114, C05025.Google Scholar
Talling, P. J., Wynn, R. B., Masson, D. G., Frenz, M., Cronin, B. T., Schiebel, R., Akhmetzhanov, A. M., Dallmeier-Tiessen, S., Benetti, S., Weaver, P. P. E., Georgiopoulou, A., Zuhlsdorff, C. & Amy, L. A. 2007 Onset of submarine debris flow deposition far from original giant landslide. Nature 450, 541–544.Google Scholar
Zhou, J, Adrian, R. J. & Balachandar, S. 1996 Autogeneration of near-wall vortical structures in channel flow. Phys. Fluids 8, 288–290.Google Scholar
Zhou, J., Adrian, R. J., Balachandar, S. & Kendall, T. M. 1999 Mechanisms for generating coherent packets of hairpin vortices in channel flow. J. Fluid Mech. 387, 353–396.Google Scholar

Shringarpure et al. supplementary movie

Time evolution of iso-surface of swirling strength (\lamda_{ci}) for case 0. The value of iso-surface is \lamda_{ci} = 22.0.

Download Shringarpure et al. supplementary movie(Video)
Video 7.2 MB

Shringarpure et al. supplementary movie

Time evolution of iso-surface of swirling strength (\lamda_{ci}) for case 5. The value of iso-surface is \lamda_{ci} = 22.0.

Download Shringarpure et al. supplementary movie(Video)
Video 7.8 MB

Shringarpure et al. supplementary movie

Time evolution of iso-surface of swirling strength (\lamda_{ci}) for case 6. The value of iso-surface is \lamda_{ci} = 22.0.

Download Shringarpure et al. supplementary movie(Video)
Video 1.7 MB