4.5 Article

Full-depth englacial vertical ice sheet velocities measured using phase-sensitive radar

期刊

JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH-EARTH SURFACE
卷 119, 期 12, 页码 2604-2618

出版社

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1002/2014JF003275

关键词

ice sheets; glaciology; radar; ice core dating; ice rheology; ice flow

资金

  1. British Antarctic Survey's Polar Science for Planet Earth program
  2. UK's National Environmental Research Council [NE/F00446X/1, NE/J008087/1]
  3. U.S. National Science Foundation [ANT-0944307]
  4. NERC [bas0100027, NE/J008087/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  5. Natural Environment Research Council [bas0100027, NE/J008087/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  6. Directorate For Geosciences
  7. Office of Polar Programs (OPP) [0944307] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We describe a geophysical technique to measure englacial vertical velocities through to the beds of ice sheets without the need for borehole drilling. Using a ground-based phase-sensitive radio echo sounder (pRES) during seven Antarctic field seasons, we measure the temporal changes in the position of englacial reflectors within ice divides up to 900m thick on Berkner Island, Roosevelt Island, Fletcher Promontory, and Adelaide Island. Recorded changes in reflector positions yield full-depth profiles of vertical ice velocity that we use to examine spatial variations in ice flow near the divides. We interpret these variations by comparing them to the results of a full-Stokes simulation of ice divide flow, qualitatively validating the model and demonstrating that we are directly detecting an ice-dynamical phenomenon called the Raymond Effect. Using pRES, englacial vertical ice velocities can be measured in higher spatial resolution than is possible using instruments installed within the ice. We discuss how these measurements could be used with inverse methods to measure ice rheology and to improve ice core dating by incorporating pRES-measured vertical velocities into age modeling.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据