|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
B l o w i n g |
S n o w |
|||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
![]()
SIMULATIONOF CREEP, SALTATIONAND SUSPENSION
![]()
A scalar advection equation ( eq. 4) is used as the basis for
modelling of snow transport. Suspension by mean flow is
consideredby solving this advectionequation for the snow
phase based on the Eulerian wind velocity field. Thus the
airborne snow phase is treated as a dilute suspension, and
relative drift between snow and air phase is additionally
given by eq. 5. The drift velocity is a result of the balance
between pressure forces and interfacial drag forces. Drift-
flux
modelling
of
snow
drift
without
accumulation
or
saltation can be found in Bang et al. (1994).
Modelling of saltation is boiled down to a vertical lift
problem
regarding the snow phase.
A vertical snow den-
sity
profile
based
on
empirical
knowledge
(Mellor
and
Fellers,
1986)
is
maintained above the
snow
surface,
by
introducing vertical transport in the advection equation.
Horizontal fluxes are then calculated as for suspension of
snow by the mean flow. The lift
effect
is
included until
the calculated friction
velocity in
eq.
3
decreases below
the threshold value for
saltation.
The snow is
therefrom
left to settle for possible accumulations. Deposition on the
snow surface is accomplished by accumulating a specific
part of the incoming snow fraction. It is also assumed that
the
amount
of
snow
transport
by
creep is
small and
in-
cluded in the saltation drifting process.
![]()
Left inlet boundary condition
![]()
Measurements during blowingsnow conditions shows that
the mean wind profile is proportional to the logarithm of
height above the snow surface (Male, 1980), which also is
true from
observations at non-blowing snow conditions.
The
mean wind
profile
in
snow
drift
seems
to
be
more
reducednear the surfacethan for situations without blow-
ing snow. This reduction in wind speed may be explained
by
a
transfer
of
momentum
through the
saltating
parti-
cles, from the wind to the surface, or by the vigorous stir-
ring by saltating particles which results in a reduction of
the shear of the wind velocity (Maeno et al., 1979).
Mean inlet velocity is in agreement with field observa-
tions given by
the logarithmic profile:
=0
(1)
![]()
(2)
phase:
where a andb representviscous accelerations and flow
losses across porous baffles,
respectively.
|
|
u*
= u (z) K/1n ( ----z
z
)
sno w
(3)
where u is the horizontal velocity at height z, k the von
Kármáns constant and zsno w the surface roughness height
for
calculations of
the
friction
velocity.
A procedure for
calculating the friction velocity
is proposed by Sundsbø
and Hansen (1996).
|
|
V--
ðf
ð
ðt
+
( fUA
--
>
) =-wF
--
ðz(fA z )
(4)
wF
is the terminal snowfall velocity and Az
is the frac-
tional area open to flow in vertical direction.
Relative velocity between the two phases:
--
U>
r =------------(rair
-rsno w)
K
( 1-f
(5)
Simulation
procedures
![]()
The air velocity model is based on a Eulerian description
that mainly involves solving Navier-Stokes equations to
obtain the mean velocity field.
The following procedures
are repeated for
each time step:
![]()
130
u ( z) = u
(--z
K
--
*
ln
z
) whem
z>>z
0
0
(6)
The inlet snow profile is given as a vertical mass concen-