Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-rxg44 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-18T11:00:13.535Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Calculating balance velocities with a membrane stress correction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2017

C. Rosie Williams
Affiliation:
British Antarctic Survey, Natural Environment Research Council (NERC), Cambridge, UK E-mail: chll1@bas.ac.uk
Richard C.A. Hindmarsh
Affiliation:
British Antarctic Survey, Natural Environment Research Council (NERC), Cambridge, UK E-mail: chll1@bas.ac.uk
Robert J. Arthern
Affiliation:
British Antarctic Survey, Natural Environment Research Council (NERC), Cambridge, UK E-mail: chll1@bas.ac.uk
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Inverse methods, where surface data are ‘inverted’ in order to quantify basal properties of ice sheets, play a major role in initializations. The balance-velocity method is a unique linear initialization, in which accumulation, surface elevation and thickness data are used to calculate the velocities and basal conditions required to maintain the observed ice-sheet altimetric signal, resulting in an estimate of the basal sliding viscosity that is guaranteed to be non-negative. We examine the observation that balance velocities based on the shallow-ice approximation (SIA) are extremely dependent on grid size, showing that Antarctic balance velocities on a 1 km grid are excessively over-channelized. Incorporating the membrane-stress approximation into balance-velocity calculations and comparing them with a simplified analytical solution shows that numerical error monotonically decreases with grid resolution and over-channelization is eliminated for Newtonian and non-Newtonian rheology. In contrast, for the SIA reducing grid size below the membrane-stress coupling length fails to improve accuracy. However, since this approach is nonlinear, a unique viscosity solution is not guaranteed, and in practice ‘sliding viscosity’ estimates are noisy. This raises problems of the sensitivity of these estimates to data and model errors, which may mean using inverse or smoothing techniques in association with balance-velocity methods in many, if not all, practical applications.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © International Glaciological Society 2014
Figure 0

Fig. 1. (a) Antarctic ice velocity derived from satellite radar interferometry measurements of Rignot and others, (2011). (b) Balance velocities calculated using a SIA with 1 km resolution and a 40 km smoothing of surface slopes. The insert in both cases shows velocities for Pine Island Glacier, West Antarctica, the location of which is indicated by the black box in the main figure.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. The membrane coupling length, MCL* (from Hindmarsh, 2006a), calculated on the 1 km grid of Antarctica from Bedmap2 (Fretwell and others, 2013).

Figure 2

Fig. 3. A trial dimensionless ice surface used for comparing analytical and numerical solutions, with parameter values shown in Table 1 and a grid size of 5 km.

Figure 3

Fig. 4. (a–c) x –velocities, (d–f) y –velocities and (g–i) diffusivities calculated using the analytical solution (a, d, g), the MSA (b, e, h) and the SIA (c, f, i) for the ice surface in Figure 3 and a grid resolution of 2.5 km. All variables are dimensionless and parameter values are shown in Table 1.

Figure 4

Fig. 5. The root-mean-square of the percentage error for speed for the MSA (crosses) and the SIA (open circles). The MCL for linear rheology and sliding (Eqn (28)) is shown as a black dashed line.

Figure 5

Fig. 6. Percentage speed error for SIA (circles) and MSA (crosses) at y ¼ 0: 5 for a grid resolution of 5 km.

Figure 6

Fig. 7. (a) The prescribed synthetic ice surface generated by the forward model, (b) the prescribed diffusivity and (c) the steady-state ice speeds from the forward model. The grid resolution is 2 km.

Figure 7

Fig. 8. (a, b) Balance speeds for the surface shown in Figure 7a calculated using (a) the MSA inversion method and (b) the SIA inversion method. (c, d) The percentage error of the speeds for the MSA (c) and the SIA (d) methods, when compared with the steady-state speeds for the forward model (Fig. 7c).

Figure 8

Fig. 9. (a, b) Diffusivities for the surface shown in Figure 7a calculated using (a) the MSA inversion method and (b) the SIA inversion method. (c, d) Percentage diffusivity errors for the MSA (c) and the SIA (d) methods. The prescribed diffusivity is shown in Figure 7b.

Figure 9

Fig. 10. (a) The trial ice surface generated by summing solutions of different wavelength, kxm (Eqn (29)), (b) the retrieved speeds and (c) diffusivities obtained using this surface and corresponding accumulation with the MSA inversion method. (d) The retrieved diffusivity across the flow at y ¼ 0: 5. The grid resolution is 5 km and the ice-stream width and length are 200 and 100 km, respectively.

Figure 10

Table 1. Parameter descriptions and typical values for parameters used in the analytical solution (in non-dimensional units). The dimensional ice-stream width and length are shown in parentheses