pic

RESEARCH> Turbulence Modeling

Turbulence Modeling

Quantifying and understanding turbulent fluxes of salinity, temperature and momentum is a fundamental problem in physical oceanography. Regional ocean models such as POM (Princeton Ocean Model) and ROMS (Regional Ocean Modeling Systems) cannot resolve small-scale turbulent processes and rely on turbulence closure models to parameterize the unresolved processes. However, these parameterization schemes sometimes fail to properly represent important turbulent mixing processes. For example, Mellor-Yamada model is known to produce too little mixing in stratified fluids. We are using Large Eddy Simulation (LES) model to investigate stratified shear flows in shallow-water estuaries. Our goal is to develop improved mixing parameterization schemes. 

Figure 1. Comparison of turbulence fields between ebb (top panel) and flood tide (bottom panel) in a LES simulation of a partially mixed estuary. Distributions of (a, c) vertical velocity and (b, d) salinity in a vertical section aligned in the along-stream direction. Turbulence in the bottom boundary layer appears to be driven by the bottom friction during the flood tide whereas localized shear-induced turbulence dominates in the outer part of the boundary layer during the ebb tide.  

MATLAB Handle Graphics

Observations have shown that stratification and turbulent mixing exhibit a flood-ebb tidal asymmetry in estuaries and continental shelf regions affected by horizontal density gradients. We use a Large Eddy Simulation (LES) model to investigate the penetration of a tidally driven bottom boundary layer into stratified water in the presence of a horizontal density gradient. Turbulence in the bottom boundary layer is driven by bottom stress during flood tides, with low gradient (Ri) and flux (Rf) Richardson numbers, but by localized shear during ebb tides, with Ri= ¼ and Rf=0.2 in the upper half of the boundary layer. If the water column is unstratified initially, the LES model reproduces periodic stratification associated with tidal straining. The model results show that the energetics criterion based on the competition between tidal straining and tidal stirring provides a good prediction for the onset of periodic stratification, but the tidally averaged horizontal Richardson number Rix has a threshold value of about 0.2, which is lower than 3 suggested in a recent study. Although the tidal straining leads to negative buoyancy flux on flood tides, we find that for typical values of horizontal density gradient and tidal currents in estuaries and shelf regions, buoyancy production is much smaller than shear production in generating turbulent kinetic energy.

MATLAB Handle Graphics

Figure 2.  Along-channel distributions of (a, d) along-channel barotropic tidal current velocity, (b, e) salinity and (c, f) logarithm of vertical diffusivity (m2s-1) at time when the tide is in the flood phase in the lower and middle Bay (day 109.2) or when the tide is in the ebb phase in the lower Bay (day 109.4).

 
MATLAB Handle Graphics

  Figure 3. Along-channel distributions of detided residual   current (ms-1) at (a) day 109.2 (a), (b) day 109.4 and (c)   tidally averaged current.


Previous investigations have convincingly demonstrated that tidal straining causes flood-ebb asymmetry in mixing and stratification in estuaries and shelf seas affected by river runoff. However, it has not been shown how the asymmetric tidal mixing affects the residual circulation. It remains unclear and hotly debated if the estuarine circulation is driven by the baroclinic pressure gradient as hypothesized in the classic theory of Pritchard (1956) or is driven by tidal straining and asymmetric tidal mixing as proposed in recent papers (e.g. Jay and Smith, 1990; Stacey et al., 2001). We use ROMS to investigate intra-tidal and spring-neap variations of turbulent mixing, stratification and residual circulation in the Chesapeake Bay estuary. As expected, vertical profiles of salinity, velocity and eddy diffusivity show a marked asymmetry between the flood and ebb tides. This flood-ebb asymmetry results in a north-south asymmetry in turbulent mixing because tidal currents vary out of phase between the lower and upper regions of Chesapeake Bay. The asymmetric tidal mixing causes significant variation of salinity distribution over the flood-ebb tidal cycle but insignificant changes in the residual circulation. Due to the modulation of tidal currents over the spring-neap cycle, turbulent mixing and vertical stratification show large fortnightly and monthly fluctuations. The stratification is not a linear function of the tidal-current amplitude. Strong stratification is only established during those neap tides when low turbulence intensity persists for several days. Residual circulation also shows large variations over the spring-neap cycle. The tidally averaged residual currents are about 50% stronger during the neap tides than during the spring tides.


Related publications:

Li, M., J. Trowbridge and W.R. Geyer. 2007. Asymmetric tidal mixing due to the horizontal density gradient. Journal of Physical Oceanography, in press.

Piomelli, U., S. Radhakrishnan, L. Zhong and M. Li. 2007. Wall-layer models for large-eddy simulations of high Reynolds number non-equilibrium flows. Proc. 11th European Turbulence Conference, Springer, Berlin, in press.

Li, M., L. Zhong, W. C. Boicourt, S. Zhang and D. Zhang. 2007. Hurricane-induced destratification and destratification in a partially-mixed estuary. Journal of Marine Research, 65, 169-192.

Li, M. and L. Zhong. 2007. Flood-ebb and spring-neap variations of stratification, mixing and circulation in Chesapeake Bay. Continental Shelf Research (Special PECS issue), doi:10.1016/j.csr.2007.06.012.

Li, M., L. Zhong, W. C. Boicourt, S. Zhang and D. Zhang. 2006. Hurricane-induced storm surges, currents and destratification in a semi-enclosed bay. Geophysical Research Letters, 33, L02604, doi:10.1029/2005GL024992.
Zhong, L. and M. Li. 2006. Tidal energy fluxes and dissipation in the Chesapeake Bay. Continental Shelf Research, 26, 752-770.

Li, M., L. Zhong, and W. C. Boicourt. 2005. Simulations of Chesapeake Bay estuary: Sensitivity to turbulence mixing parameterizations and comparison with observations, Journal of Geophysical Research, 110, C12004, doi:10.1029/2004JC002585.