4.7 Article

Macroscopic Flow Disequilibrium Over Aeolian Dune Fields

Journal

GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS
Volume 47, Issue 18, Pages -

Publisher

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2020GL088773

Keywords

aeolian; geomorphology; atmospheric boundary layer; dune fields; land-atmosphere interaction; sediment transport

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation (NSF) NRI INT Award [1734355]
  2. White Sands National Monument through NPS-GC-CESU [P12AC51051]
  3. NSF through the National Center for Airborne Laser Mapping's EAR Award [1043051]
  4. International Society of Aeolian Research through the Elsevier Aeolian Research Scholarship
  5. UPenn Earth and Environmental Science department
  6. Directorate For Engineering
  7. Div Of Electrical, Commun & Cyber Sys [1734355] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  8. Division Of Earth Sciences
  9. Directorate For Geosciences [1043051] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aeolian dune fields are self-organized patterns formed by wind-blown sand. Dunes are topographic roughness elements that impose drag on the atmospheric boundary layer (ABL), creating a natural coupling between form and flow. While the steady-state influence of drag on the ABL is well studied, nonequilibrium effects due to roughness transitions are less understood. Here we examine the large-scale coupling between the ABL and an entire dune field. Field observations at White Sands, New Mexico, reveal a concomitant decline in wind speed and sand flux downwind of the transition from smooth playa to rough dunes at the upwind dune-field margin, that affects the entire similar to 10-km -long dune field. Using a theory for the system that accounts for the observations, we generalize to other roughness scenarios. We find that, via transitional ABL dynamics, aeolian sediment aggradation can be influenced by roughness both inside and outside dune fields.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available