Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-h8lrw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-19T15:56:05.165Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A two-dimensional shallow ice-flow model of Glacier de Saint-Sorlin, France

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 September 2017

Emmanuel Le Meur
Affiliation:
Cemagref, 2 rue de la papeterie, BP 76, 38402 Saint-Martin-d’Heres Cedex, France E-mail: manu@lgge.obs.ujf-grenoble.fr
Christian Vincent
Affiliation:
Laboratoire de Glaciologie et Géophysique de l’Environnement du CNRS (associé à l’Université Joseph Fourier), 54 rue Molíere, BP 96, 38402 Saint-Martin-d’Héres Cedex, France
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A two-dimensional ice-flow model based on the shallow-ice approximation (SIA) is used to investigate the dynamics of Glacier de Saint-Sorlin, France. This glacier is well suited for this kind of study. First, the particular geometry of the glacier itself as well as that of the bedrock surface allows for correct applicability of the SIA (zeroth-order equations), provided that thickness changes and termini positions rather than short-scale dynamics are considered. Secondly, the wealth of available data for the glacier including mass-balance series and records of glacier changes provides a reliable forcing and a powerful constraining set for the model. Steady-state simulations show realistic results and the capabilities of the model in reproducing the glacier extent at the beginning of the 20th century. An extensive parameter study of ice rheology and sliding intensity is also carried out and the results are checked against the thickness changes as well as the glacier termini positions since 1905. It is possible to find a parameter combination that best matches these two types of data with an ice-flow rate factor of 2 × 10−24 Pa−3 s−1 and a Weertman-type sliding factor of 5 × 10−14 m8 N−3 a−1 which both appear to be in agreement with similar inferences from recent modelling attempts.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © International Glaciological Society 2003
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Outline of Glacier de Saint-Sorlin based on “mechanical” grounds from interpretation of a 1998 summer picture. Using visible and estimated bergschrund positions, some peripheral permanent snowfields or areas of slow ice motion have been disregarded. See Vincent and others (2000, fig. 1) for a more general location of the glacier.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. 1957–99 averaged net mass-balance data obtained by interpolation and extrapolation of stake measurements (in m w.e. a−1). Outlined are the present-day extent (solid line) and theglacier terminus of 1905 (dashed line).

Figure 2

Fig. 3. Time variation of the yearly net mass balance with reference to the spatial distribution of Figure 2.The righthandside values from1957 (black dots) come from stake measurements, whereas those before 1957 (gray dots) result from a mass-balance reconstruction (see text).

Figure 3

Fig. 4. Bedrock topography from the DEM (see text). Also outlined is the 1998 extent of the glacier.

Figure 4

Fig. 5. Present-day (1998) ice distribution.The maximum ice thickness of slightly less than 140 m lies above a southwest–northeast-oriented trough between points “600 m” and “1400 m’. Points labelled 600, 1400, 1800 and 2200 m refer to the distance from Col des Quirlies and are the same reference points as inVincent and others (2000). Also shown is the cross-section location (near point 2200 m) used for computing the snout average position (see section 5.2.1).

Figure 5

Table 1. Main parameters used in the model and their possible range of variation

Figure 6

Fig. 6. Steady-state ice distribution corresponding to the 1957–99 average mass-balance distribution and obtained after 250 years of simulation.The longitudinal profile used in Figure 8 for assessing the necessary mass-balance increase in section is also depicted.

Figure 7

Fig. 7. Stationarity index for the model in terms of averaged yearly thickness changes (in m w.e. a−1). Also shown is the corresponding cumulative curve, which reveals that the average loss for the glacier is 25 m w.e. Experimental design is that of the steady-state run of section 5.1.1. After 40 years, the glacier has lost an equivalent layer of 9.6 m, whereas 71 years of simulation are necessary for the initial imbalance to reduce by 63% after15.7 m have been lost (see conclusion).

Figure 8

Fig. 8. Glacier steady-state longitudinal profiles as a function of the mass-balance increase (cm w.e. a−1) applied to the 1957–99 average distribution. A good match with the 1998 profile requires an increase of 25–30 cm w.e. a−1. Profile location is depicted on Figure 6.

Figure 9

Fig. 9. Steady-state ice distribution following a 0.58 m w.e. a−1 increase applied to the 1957–99 average mass-balance distribution.

Figure 10

Fig. 10. Measured (with error bars) and modelled (solid line) snout positions (a) and thickness changes (b1–4), 1907–97.The distance indicated in parentheses in each of the bottom frames refers to the distance from Col des Quirlies and corresponds to the points labelled in Figures 5, 6 and 9. The rate factors for ice deformation and basal sliding are the “Reference value”ones shown inTable 1.

Figure 11

Fig. 11. Matching index, in metres, between measured and modelled dataset as shown in Figure 10. (a) Standard deviations for snout positions at 14 equally spaced dates between 1907 and 1997 (selected among those represented in Figure 10a). (b) The same, but for thicknesses at all of the 24 measurement points at the reference locations depicted in Figure 10b1–4. The grey and black crosses represent the exact locations of the pairs of parameters used in Figures 10 (initial set) and 12 (optimal set) respectively.

Figure 12

Fig. 12. Same as Figure 10, but with the inferred “optimal”parameter set (A = 2 × 10−24 Pa−3 s−1 and ).