Characterizing supraglacial meltwater channel hydraulics on the Greenland Ice Sheet from in situ observations

Colin J. Gleason; Laurence C. Smith; Vena W. Chu; Carl J. Legleiter; Lincoln H. Pitcher; Brandon T. Overstreet; Asa K. Rennermalm; Richard R. Forster; Kang Yang

doi:10.1002/esp.3977

USGS · 70170667

Characterizing supraglacial meltwater channel hydraulics on the Greenland Ice Sheet from in situ observations

Colin J. Gleason·Laurence C. Smith·Vena W. Chu·Carl J. Legleiter·Lincoln H. Pitcher·Brandon T. Overstreet·Asa K. Rennermalm·Richard R. Forster·Kang Yang

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Supraglacial rivers on the Greenland ice sheet (GrIS) transport large volumes of surface meltwater toward the ocean, yet have received relatively little direct research. This study presents field observations of channel width, depth, velocity, and water surface slope for nine supraglacial channels on the southwestern GrIS collected between 23 July and 20 August, 2012. Field sites are located up to 74 km inland and span 494-1485 m elevation, and contain measured discharges larger than any previous in situ study: from 0.006 to 23.12 m 3 /s in channels 0.20 to 20.62 m wide. All channels were deeply incised with near vertical banks, and hydraulic geometry results indicate that supraglacial channels primarily accommodate greater discharges by increasing velocity. Smaller streams had steeper water surface slopes (0.74-8.83%) than typical in terrestrial settings, yielding correspondingly high velocities (0.40-2.60 m/s) and Froude numbers (0.45-3.11) with supercritical flow observed in 54% of measurements. Derived Manning's n values were larger and more variable than anticipated from channels of uniform substrate, ranging from 0.009 to 0.154 with a mean value of 0.035 +/- 0.027 despite the absence of sediment, debris, or other roughness elements. Ubiquitous micro-depressions in shallow sections of the channel bed may explain some of these roughness values. However, we find that other, unobserved sources of flow resistance likely contributed to these elevated n values: future work should explicitly consider additional sources of flow resistance beyond bed roughness in supraglacial channels. We conclude that hydraulic modelling for these channels must allow for both sub- and supercritical flow, and most importantly must refrain from assuming that all ice-substrate channels exhibit similar hydraulic behavior, especially for Froude numbers and Manning's n. Finally, this study highlights that further theoretical and empirical work on supraglacial channel hydraulics is necessary before broad scale understanding of ice sheet hydrology can be achieved. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Explore related subjects

Earth Surface Processes and Landforms Article

Source-reported bounding extent: 60.03676° to 83.64513° latitude; -73.297° to -12.20855° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Colin J. Gleason, Laurence C. Smith, Vena W. Chu, Carl J. Legleiter, Lincoln H. Pitcher, Brandon T. Overstreet, Asa K. Rennermalm, Richard R. Forster, Kang Yang. 2016-07-10. Characterizing supraglacial meltwater channel hydraulics on the Greenland Ice Sheet from in situ observations. https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.3977

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

Remote detection of streambank erosion and channel incision using high-resolution, repeat lidar-derived metrics in Raleigh, North Carolina

This study evaluated the use of lidar data to detect streambank erosion and channel incision throughout Raleigh, North Carolina. The study included five components. (1) Generation of lidar-derived rasters, including a digital elevation model of difference that represented channel erosion and positive openness rasters that represented channel incision. (2) Completion of site-based field assessments throughout the study area. (3) Spatial analysis of raster datasets at three spatial scales: erosion patches, channel segments, and subbasins. (4) Comparison of field assessment results with lidar-derived metrics. (5) Pairing of landscape attributes with lidar-derived metrics to evaluate potential causative factors associated with variations in channel incision. Field assessment results indicated 74% of surveyed sites had Bank Erosion Hazard Index ratings ranging from ‘high’ to ‘extreme’ and 77% had ‘high’ or ‘severe’ degrees of channel incision. Select field measures showed agreement with lidar-derived metrics. Lidar-derived erosion patches, ranging in size from 20 to 948 m 2 , were detected in 24.3% of channel segments, and patch density increased with Strahler stream order. Channel segments, ranging from 50 to 150 m, had inconsistent spatial patterns of erosion and incision. Erosion in channel segments increased with Strahler stream order and 36% of channel segments became more incised during the study period. Lidar-derived metrics across subbasins revealed variability of erosion and incision throughout the study area. The assessment of landscape drivers could not explain variability at the channel-segment scale, but subbasins with fewer forests tended to have greater erosion and incision. However, unexplained variability remained, demonstrating the complexity of stream stability in urban watersheds. As lidar datasets become more widespread, pairing remote data with field assessments may be a viable approach to characterize and understand stream geomorphology in urban settings.

North Carolina↗

USGS2026

Deep learning models for mapping surficial geology in selected physiographic regions of New York

Surficial geologic mapping is required for decisions including infrastructure and water-resource development and management. Deep learning, a type of machine learning that uses training data to self-learn and perform tasks, is explored as a tool to help increase efficiency of the labour- and time-intensive mapping process. Deep learning models were trained, and their potential to aid in mapping surficial geology was explored for two physiographic regions in New York: the high-relief Allegheny Plateau and the low-relief Erie-Ontario Lowlands. Key to the development of deep learning models is the availability of highly detailed surficial geologic maps in each of these regions from which the models can learn. Through exploring different groupings of surficial deposits and their corresponding spatial data, deep learning models were iteratively developed to reproduce published mapping for greater than 79% of the training areas, and with similar accuracy in test areas within the same physiographic region. These models were trained using only two inputs: high-resolution lidar data and previously published surficial geologic maps. This straightforward approach is intended to make the methods and models created easily reproducible using widely accessible datasets. This research describes the strengths and limitations of lidar-derived surficial geologic models and how broadly grouping surficial types, characteristics of different physiographic regions, and testing models in physiographic regions outside of their training areas affect model creation and performance. In addition, the models created could be used as a tool for mapping surficial geology in similar physiographic regions, in addition to establishing a framework for creating similar models elsewhere.

New York↗

USGS2026

Regional models for postfire debris-flow likelihood and rainfall thresholds across the western United States

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) uses an empirical model developed with logistic regression (the ‘M1’ model) to rapidly assess debris-flow likelihood and to identify quantitative rainfall thresholds for debris flows after wildfire in the western United States. The M1 model was calibrated to a debris-flow inventory from southern California (United States) and has been applied throughout the western United States. Limited spatial coverage in the calibration dataset has motivated evaluation of M1 model accuracy outside the calibration region (e.g., the Sierra Nevada or the eastern Cascade Range, United States). Previous test cases showed that M1 overpredicts debris-flow likelihood and underpredicts rainfall thresholds for some locations (e.g., Arizona, northern California, Colorado, New Mexico, United States). We sought to improve the regional applicability of a debris-flow likelihood model by expanding the debris-flow inventory used for calibration, testing multiple potential models and generating an updated model framework. The updated inventory includes 3788 observations from 67 burned areas paired with short duration rainfall ratios. The updated model framework consists of a modified model structure and sets of coefficients calibrated separately to the entire updated inventory and to subsets of the inventory that intersect three Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Level 2 ecoregions (Mediterranean California, Upper Gila Mountains and Western Cordillera). Comparisons of predictions from the updated models with observed rainfall and debris-flow activity show that the updated models outperform the M1 model by ~15%–60% and improve the uniformity of predictive performance across the western United States. The updated models also reduce false positive rates relative to M1 and generate rainfall thresholds that are better aligned with relative differences in regional climatology and debris-flow activity.

Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nev↗