Skip to main content
Log in

Effect of initial excess density and discharge on constant flux gravity currents propagating on a slope

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Environmental Fluid Mechanics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The effect of the upstream conditions on propagation of gravity current over a slope is investigated using three-dimensional numerical simulations. The current produced by constant buoyancy flux, is simulated using a large eddy simulation solver. The dense saline solution used at the inlet is the driving force of the flow. Higher replenishment of the current is possible either by a high inflow discharge or high initial fractional density excess. In the simulations, it is observed that these two parameters affect the flow in different ways. Results show that the front speed of the descending current is proportional to the cube root of buoyancy flux, \((g_o^{\prime } Q)^{1/3}\), which agrees with the previous experimental and numerical observations. The height of the tail of the current grows linearly in the streamwise direction. Formation of a strong shear layer at the boundary of mixed upper layer and dense lower layer is observed within the body and the tail of the current. Over the tail of the current far enough from the inlet, the vertical velocity and density profiles are compared to the ones from an experimental study. Distance from the bed to the point of maximum velocity increases with an increase in inflow discharge, while it remains practically unchanged with increasing initial fractional excess density in the simulations. Even though the velocity profiles are in good agreement, some discrepancies are observed in fractional excess density profiles among experimental and numerical results. Possible reasons for these discrepancies are discussed. Generally, gravity current type of flows could be expressed in layer-integrated formulation of governing equations. However, layer integration introduces several constants, commonly known as shape factors, to the equations of motion. The values of these shape factors are calculated based on simulation results and compared to the values from experiments and to the favorably used ‘top hat’ assumption.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Adduce C, Sciortino G, Proietti S (2012) Gravity currents produces by lock-exchangeq: experiments and simulations with a two-layer shallow-water model with entrainment. J Hydraul Eng 138(2):111–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Altinakar MS, Graf WH, Hopfinger EJ (1996) Flow structure in turbidity currents. J Hydraul Res 34:713–718

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. An S, Julien PY, Venayagamoorthy SK (2012) Numerical simulation of particle-driven gravity currents. Environ Fluid Mech 12:495–513

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Ansys Fluent (2009) User’s guide 12.0. ANSYS Inc., Canonsburg

    Google Scholar 

  5. Benjamin TB (1968) Gravity currents and related phenomena. J Fluid Mech 31:209–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Blanchette F, Strauss M, Meiburg E, Kneller B, Glinsky ME (2005) High-resolution numerical simulations of resuspending gravity currents: conditions for self-sustainment. J Geophys Res Ocean 110(C12). doi:10.1029/2005JC002927

  7. Bournet PE, Dartus D, Tassin B, Vincon-Leite B (1999) Numerical investigation of plunging density current. J Hydraul Eng 125(6):584–594

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Britter RE, Linden PF (1980) The motion of the front of a gravity current travelling down an incline. J Fluid Mech 99(3):531–543

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Cantero MI, Balachandar S, Garcia MH (2007) High-resolution simulations of cylindrical density currents. J Fluid Mech 590:437–469

    Google Scholar 

  10. Cantero MI, Lee JR, Balachandar S, Garcia MH (2007) On the front velocity of gravity currents. J Fluid Mech 586:1–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Cantero M, García MH, Balachandar S (2008) An Eulerian–Eulerian model for gravity currents driven by inertial particles. Int J Multiph Flow 34(5):484–501

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Cantero M, García M, Balachandar S (2008) Effect of particle inertia on depositional particulate gravity currents. Comput Geosci 34(10):1308–1318

    Google Scholar 

  13. Cantero MI, Balachandar S, García MH, Bock D (2008) Turbulent structures in planar gravity currents and their influence on the flow dynamics. J Geophys Res Ocean 113(C8). doi:10.1029/2007JC004645

  14. Chen G, Lee JHW (2001) Turbulent lock release gravity current. Sci China E 44(5):449–462

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Choi SU, García MH (2002) k-\(\varepsilon \) Turbulence modelling of density currents developing two dimensionally on a slope. J Hydraul Eng 128(1):55–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Dai A (2012) Gravity currents propagating on sloping boundaries. J Hydraul Eng. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0000716

  17. Dai A, Ozdemir C, Cantero M, Balachandar S (2012) Gravity currents from instantaneous sources down a slope. J Hydraul Eng 138(3):237–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ellison TH, Turner JS (1959) Turbulent entrainment in stratified flows. J Fluid Mech 6:423–448

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. García MH (1993) Hydraulic jumps in sediment-driven bottom currents. J Hydraul Eng 119(10):1094–1117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. García MH (1994) Depositional turbidity currents laden with poorly sorted sediment. J Hydraul Eng 120(11):1240–1263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. García MH (2008) Sedimentation engineering—processes, measurements, modeling, and practice. ASCE Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice No. 110

  22. García MH, Parker G (1993) Experiments on the entrainment of sediment into suspension by a dense bottom current. J Geophys Res Ocean 98(C3):4793–4807

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Georgoulas AN, Angelidis PB, Panagiotidis TG, Kotsovinos NE (2010) 3D numerical modeling of turbidity currents. Environ Fluid Mech 10:603–635

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Gerber G, Diedericks G, Basson GR (2011) Particle image velocimetry measurements and numerical modeling of saline density currents. J Hydraul Eng 137(3):333–342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Gonzalez-Juez E, Meiburg E, Constantinescu GS (2009) Gravity currents impinging on bottom mounted square cylinders: flow fields and associated forces. J Fluid Mech 631:65–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Gray TE, Alexander J, Leeder MR (2006) Quantifying velocity and turbulence structure in depositing sustained turbidity currents across breaks in slope. Sedimentology 52:467–488

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Hartel C, Carlsson F, Thunblom M (2000) Analysis and direct numerical simulation of the flow at a gravity-current head. Part 2. The lobe-and-cleft instability. J Fluid Mech 418:213–229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Hartel C, Meiburg E, Necker F (2000) Analysis and direct numerical simulation of the flow at a gravity-current head. Part 1. Flow topology and front speed for slip and no-slip boundaries. J Fluid Mech 418:189–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Hinze JO (1975) Turbulence. McGraw-Hill Publishing Co., New York

    Google Scholar 

  30. Huang H, Imran J, Pirmez C (2005) Numerical model of turbidity currents with a deforming bottom boundary. J Hydraul Eng 131(4):283–293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Huang H, Imran J, Pirmez C (2007) Numerical modeling of poorly sorted depositional turbidity currents. J Geophys Res 112:1–15

    Google Scholar 

  32. Huang H, Imran J, Pirmez C (2009) Nondimensional parameters of depth-average gravity flow models. J Hydraul Res 47(4):455–465

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Ilicak M, Özgökmen TM, Özsoy E, Fischer PF (2009) Non-hydrostatic modeling of exchange flows across complex geometries. Ocean Model 29:159–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Imran J, Kassem A, Khan SM (2004) Three-dimensional modeling of density current. I. Flow in straight confined and unconfined channels. J Hydraul Res 42(6):578–590

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Johnson G, Massoudi M, Rajagopal KR (1991) Flow of a fluid–solid mixture between flat plates. Chem Eng Sci 46(7):1713–1723

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Kneller B, Bennett SJ, McCaffrey WD (1999) Velocity structure, turbulence and fluid stresses in experimental gravity currents. J Geophys Res Ocean 104(C3):5381–5391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Martin JE, Sun T, García MH (2012) Chapter 18: Optical methods in the laboratory: an application to density currents over bedforms. IAHR Monograph. In: Rodi W, Uhlman M (eds) Environmental fluid mechanics: memorial volume in honour of Prof. Gerhard H. Jirka. CRC Press (Taylor & Francis Group), Boca Raton, pp 333–346

    Google Scholar 

  38. Middleton GV (1966) Experiments on density and turbidity currents: II. Uniform flow of density currents. Can J Earth Sci 3:627–637

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Ooi SK, Constantinescu SG, Weber L (2009) Numerical simulations of lock exchange compositional gravity currents. J Fluid Mech 635:361–388

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Özgökmen TM, Chassignet EP (2002) Dynamics of two-dimensional turbulent bottom gravity current. J Phys Oceanogr 32:1460–1478

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Özgökmen TM, Fischer PF, Duan J, Iliescu T (2004) Three-dimensional turbulent bottom density currents from a high-order nonhydrostatic spectral element model. J Phys Oceanogr 34:2006–2026

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Özgökmen TM, Fischer PF, Johns WE (2006) Product water mass formation by turbulent density current from a high-order nonhydrostatic spectral element model. Ocean Model 12:237–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Özgökmen TM, Iliescu T, Fischer PF, Srinivasan A, Duan J (2007) Large eddy simulation of stratified mixing in two-dimensional dam-break problem in a rectangular enclosed domain. Ocean Model 16:106–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Özgökmen TM, Fischer PF (2008) On the role of bottom roughness in overflows. Ocean Model 20:336–361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Özgökmen TM, Iliescu T, Fischer PF (2009) Large eddy simulation of stratified mixing in a three-dimensional lock-exchange system. Ocean Model 26:134–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Özgökmen TM, Iliescu T, Fischer PF (2009) Reynolds number dependence of mixing in a lock-exchange system from direct numerical and large eddy simulations. Ocean Model 30:190–206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Parker G, Fukushima Y, Pantin H (1986) Self-accelerating turbidity currents. J Fluid Mech 171:145–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Sequeiros OE, Spinewine B, Beaubouef RT, Sun T, García MH, Parker G (2010) Characteristics of velocity and excess density profiles of saline underflows and turbidity currents flowing over a mobile bed. J Hydraul Eng 136(7):412–433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Shin J, Dalziel S, Linden PF (2004) Gravity currents produced by lock exchange. J Fluid Mech 521:1–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Simpson JE, Britter RE (1979) The dynamics of the head of a gravity current advancing over a horizontal surface. J Fluid Mech 94(3):477–495

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Simpson JE (1997) Gravity currents in the environment and the laboratory, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  52. Smagorinsky J (1963) General circulation experiments with the primitive equations. I. The basic experiment. Mon Weather Rev 164:91–99

    Google Scholar 

  53. Tokyay T, Constantinescu G, Meiburg E (2011) Lock exchange gravity currents with a high volume of release propagating over periodic array of obstacles. J Fluid Mech 672:570–605

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Tokyay T, Constantinescu G, Gonzalez-Juez E, Meiburg E (2011) Gravity currents propagating over periodic arrays of blunt obstacles: effect of the obstacle size. J Fluids Struct. doi:10.1016/j.jfluidstructs.2011.01.006

  55. Tokyay T, Constantinescu G, Meiburg E (2012) Tail structure and bed friction velocity distribution of gravity currents propagating over an array of obstacles. J Fluid Mech. doi:10.1017/jfm.2011.542

  56. Turner JS (1973) Buoyancy effects in fluids. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  57. Turner J (1986) Turbulent entrainment: the development of the entrainment assumption, and its application to geophysical flows. J Fluid Mech 173:431–471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Ungarish M (2012) Gravity currents and intrusions of stratified fluids into a stratified ambient. Environ Fluid Mech 12:115–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Von Karman T (1940) The engineer grapples with nonlinear problems. Bull Am Math Soc 46:615–683

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Yam K, McCaffrey WD, Ingham DB, Burns AD (2011) CFD modeling of selected laboratory turbidity currents. J Hydraul Res 49(5):657–666

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Talia E. Tokyay.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tokyay, T.E., García, M.H. Effect of initial excess density and discharge on constant flux gravity currents propagating on a slope. Environ Fluid Mech 14, 409–429 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10652-013-9317-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10652-013-9317-0

Keywords

Navigation