Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-r8qmj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-16T10:23:23.446Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Phase and compositional evolution of the flooded layer during snow-ice formation on Antarctic sea ice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 September 2017

Ted Maksym
Affiliation:
Geophysical Institute, University of Alaska Fairbanks, 903 Koyukuk Drive, P.O. Box 757320, Fairbanks, AK 99775−7320, U.S.A.
Martin O. Jeffries
Affiliation:
Geophysical Institute, University of Alaska Fairbanks, 903 Koyukuk Drive, P.O. Box 757320, Fairbanks, AK 99775−7320, U.S.A.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A two-dimensional convective transport model has been been developed to investigate the phase and compositional evolution of a flooded slush layer overlying sea ice. The processes governing the solutal and compositional evolution of the flooded layer are investigated in an attempt to explain field observations of salinity and oxygen isotope ratios. Simulations indicate fairly vigorous convective transport in the slush layer, which may lead to the formation of porous channels, depending on permeability. It is found that the salinity and δ18O composition of the freezing slush layer is determined primarily by the sea-ice permeability. Simulated salinity and δ18O profiles produce varied results, though consistent with observations. The influence of the slush on the salinity and δ18O composition of the underlying ice was found to be minimal.

Information

Type
Brine Percolation, Flooding and Snow-Sea-Ice Interactions and Processes
Copyright
Copyright © the Author(s) [year] 2001
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Scatter plot of ice salinity vs δ18O for cores obtained during r.v. Nathaniel B. Palmer cruise 95−5 in the ross sea during austral winter 1995 the different symbols indicate ice type: ⋄, snow ice; +, congelation ice; □, frazil. snow ice is defined here as granular ice with a negative δ18O value. the arrows show typical trajectories of simulated composition (see text). for clarity, not all data points are shown.

Figure 1

Table 1. Notation

Figure 2

Table 2. Snow and ice permeability relations

Figure 3

Fig. 2. (a) Convective pattern with streamlines showing salt finger formation for refreezing slush at 1.5 days after flooding solid contours indicate temperature (°c), and dotted contours represent streamlines, (b) brine volume (as a fraction of total volume) contour plot after 5 days. focusing of convection produces highly porous columns (grey areas have brine volumes of>80%) resembling brine-drainage tubes analogous to chimneys formed during the casting of alloys.

Figure 4

Fig. 3. Time series of temperature (°c) and salimty (‰o) for a refreezing slush. zero depth indicates the slush/ice interface, (a) thermal evolution with convection of a 0.1m thick slush layer for a surface temperature of −20°c (b) salinity profile, (c) thermal evolution excluding convection. note that contours are not evenly spaced.

Figure 5

Fig. 4. Salinity decrease (a) and isotopic shift (b) for the slush layer after freezing. solid lines are for an ice salinity of8‰ and initial snow density of 3.50 kg m–3 (high ice and slush permeability). dashed lines are for an ice salinity of5‰ (low ice permeability), and dotted lines indicate an initial snow density of 500 kg m–3 (low slush permeability). the legend indicates the surface temperature (ts) forcing. Comparing the thermal evolution with convection to that without convection (Fig. 3c) shows that although the advance of the isotherms is slowed during convective events, there is only a moderate difference in the temperature profiles for the convecting and non-convecting cases. Generally, the convection provides a heat flux of only 2–4 W m–2 to the slush layer from below, while the conductive heat flux through the snow was approximately 25 Wm−2. The effect of convective heat flux to the slush is compensated by the increase in thermal conductivity due to brine drainage so that after 10 days the temperature profiles of the convecting and non-convecting case match closely.

Figure 6

Fig. 5. Salinity (a) and isotopic (b) profiles for various simulation runs. a, standard simulation; b, initial ice salinity of5‰; c, initial ice salinity of.5‰ and snow density of 500 kg m–3; d, same as simulation b, but with brine drainage tubes present. the dotted lines indicate the initial composition at the beginning of each simulation. the tick interval is 5‰for salinity and 1‰for δ18O.