Advertisement

Boundary-Layer Meteorology

, Volume 170, Issue 3, pp 443–469 | Cite as

Trapping of Sand-Sized Particles Exterior and Interior to Large Porous Roughness Forms in the Atmospheric Surface Layer

  • John A. GilliesEmail author
  • Vic Etyemezian
  • George Nikolich
Research Article
  • 111 Downloads

Abstract

Six same-sized, double-walled, porous cubes constructed of plastic mesh material of different porosity ε were deployed at a field site where they interacted with wind-driven saltation to evaluate their relative potential for sand sequestration (internal and external). The internal mass collected and externally deposited mass and lengths demonstrate that, for large three-dimensional porous forms with both well-defined geometric shape and dimensional properties of the permeable walls, sequestration of saltating sand is largely controlled by the characteristic three-dimensional permeability K′ and the hydraulic diameter Hd of the wall material and not simply the value of ε of the walls of the forms. These two properties collapse the relationships for the particle-sequestration effectiveness [i.e., the (internal) trapping efficiency, normalized (external) deposit length, and normalized (external) deposit mass] for the five forms with geometrically-similar square/rhomboid-shaped pores. The form with rounded-rectangular holes and very thin walls does not correspond to the same relationship, suggesting that pore geometry plays a key role in the magnitude of the amount of sand sequestered, as the data from the form with the differently-shaped pores are consistent outliers compared with the other five forms with similarly-shaped pores. This is due to the physical properties of the form, the pore shape, and the shape of the solid material around the pore, as the change in flow speed between the exterior and interior scales continually as a function of permeability K′, with no apparent effect related to the pore geometry.

Keywords

Porous roughness Saltation Sand-trapping effectiveness 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful for the financial, logistical, technical, and intellectual support received from the Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District, Bishop California, and the City of Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, Keeler, California, during the execution of this project. We also thank Mr. L. Sheetz, Sheetz Enterprises, for constructing the roughness forms and helping with the site installation.

References

  1. Al-Awadhi JM (2014) The effect of a single shrub on wind speed and nabkhas dune development: a case study in Kuwait. Int J Geosci 5:20–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Al-Awadhi JM, Al-Dousari AM (2013) Morphological characteristics and development of coastal Nabkhas, north-east Kuwait. Int J Earth Sci 102(3):949–958CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bagnold RA (1941) The physics of blown sand and desert dunes. Chapman and Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. Bauer B, Yi J, Namikas SL, Sherman DL (1998) Event detection and conditional averaging in unsteady aeolian systems. J Arid Environ 39:345–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bean A, Alperi RW, Federer CA (1975) A method for categorizing shelterbelt porosity. Agric Meteorol 14:417–429CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blott SJ, Pye K (2001) GRADISTAT: a grain size distribution and statistics package for the analysis of unconsolidated sediments. Earth Surf Proc Landf 26:1237–1248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bommisetty RVN, Joshi DS, Kollati VR (2013) Flow loss in screens: a fresh look at old correlation. J Mech Eng Auto 3:29–34Google Scholar
  8. Bradley EF, Mulhearn PJ (1983) Development of velocity and shear stress distributions in the wake of a porous shelter fence. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 15:145–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Durán O, Moore LJ (2013) Vegetation controls on the maximum size of coastal dunes. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 110(43):17217–17222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fang FM, Wang DY (1997) On the flow around a vertical porous fence. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 67–68:415–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Folk RL (1974) Petrology of sedimentary rocks. Hemphill Publishing, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Fryrear DW (1986) A field dust sampler. J Soil Water Conserv 41:117–120Google Scholar
  13. Gares PA, Davidson-Arnott RGD, Bauer BO, Sherman DJ, Carter RWG, Jackson DWT, Nordstrom KF (1996) Alongshore variations in aeolian sediment transport, Carrick Finn Strand, Ireland. J Coast Res 12:673–682Google Scholar
  14. Gillies JA, Lancaster N (2013) Large roughness element effects on sand transport, Oceano Dunes, California. Earth Surf Process Landf 38(8):785–792CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gillies JA, Lancaster N, Nickling WG, Crawley DM (2000) Field determination of drag forces and shear stress partitioning effects for a desert shrub (Sarcobatus vermiculatus, greasewood). J Geophys Res 105(D20):24871–24880CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gillies JA, Nickling WG, King J (2002) Drag coefficient and plant form-response to wind speed in three plant species: Burning Bush (Euonymus alatus), Colorado Blue Spruce (Picea pungens glauca.), and Fountain Grass (Pennisetum setaceum). J Geophys Res 107(D24):4760CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gillies JA, Nickling WG, Tilson M, Furtak-Cole E (2012) Wind-formed gravel bed forms, Wright Valley, Antarctica. J Geophys Res Earth Surf 117:F04017Google Scholar
  18. Gillies JA, Nickling WG, Tilson M (2013) Frequency, magnitude, and characteristics of aeolian sediment transport: McMurdo Dry Valleys, Antarctica. J Geophys Res Earth Surf 118:1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gillies JA, Nield JM, Nickling WG (2014) Wind speed and sediment transport recovery in the lee of a vegetated and denuded Nebkha within a Nebkha dune field. Aeolian Res 12:135–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gillies JA, Green H, McCarley-Holder G, Grimm S, Howard C, Barbieri N, Ono D, Schade T (2015) Using solid element roughness to control sand movement: Keeler Dunes, Keeler, California. Aeolian Res 18:35–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gillies JA, Nickling WG, Nikolich G, Etyemezian V (2017a) Aerodynamic and sand trapping properties of porous mesh 3-dimensional roughness elements. Aeolian Res 25:23–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gillies JA, Etyemezian V, Nikolich G, Glick R, Rowland P, Pesce T, Skinner M (2017b) Effectiveness of an array of porous fences to reduce sand flux: Oceano Dunes, Oceano CA. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 168:247–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gillies JA, Etyemezian V, Nikolich G, Nickling WG, Kok JF (2018) Changes in the saltation flux following a step-change in macro-roughness. Earth Surf Proc Landf 43(9):1871–1884CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Grant PF, Nickling WG (1998) Direct field measurement of wind drag on vegetation for application to windbreak design and modelling. Land Deg Dev 9:57–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hellemaa P (1998) The development of coastal dunes and their vegetation in Finland. Fennia 176(1):111–221Google Scholar
  26. Hong S-W, Lee I-B, Seo I-H (2015) Modelling and predicting wind velocity patterns for windbreak fence design. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 142:53–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hotta S, Kraus NC, Horikawa K (1987) Function of sand fences in controlling wind-blown sand. Coast Sed 87:772–787Google Scholar
  28. Jackson NL, Sherman DJ, Hesp PA, Klein AHF, Ballasteros F, Nordstrom KF (2006) Small-scale spatial variations in aeolian sediment transport on a fine-sand beach. J Coast Res 39:379–383Google Scholar
  29. Kenney WA (1987) A method for estimating windbreak porosity using digitized photographic silhouettes. Agric For Meteorol 39:91–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kidron GJ, Zohar M (2016) Factors controlling the formation of coppice dunes (nebkhas) in the Negev Desert. Earth Surf Process Landf 41(7):918–927CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lee JA (1987) A field experiment on the role of small scale wind gustiness in Aeolian sand transport. Earth Surf Process Landf 12:331–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lee S-J, Kim H-B (1999) Laboratory measurements of velocity and turbulence field behind porous fences. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 80:311–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Li B, McKenna Neuman C (2012) Boundary-layer turbulence characteristics during aeolian saltation. Geophys Res Lett 39:L11402Google Scholar
  34. Li B, Sherman DJ (2015) Aerodynamics and morphodynamics of sand fences: a review. Aeolian Res 17:33–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Luo W, Dong Z, Qian G, Lu J (2012) Wind tunnel simulation of the three-dimensional airflow patterns behind cuboid obstacles at different angles of wind incidence, and their significance for the formation of sand shadows. Geomorphology 139–140:258–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Luo W, Lu J, Qian G, Dong Z (2016) Influence of the gap ratio on variations in the surface shear stress and on sand accumulation in the lee of two side-by-side obstacles. Environ Earth Sci 75:766CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Manohar M, Bruun P (1970) Mechanics of dune growth by sand fences. Dock Harbor Auth 51:243–252Google Scholar
  38. Martin RL, Kok JF (2017) Linear scaling of wind-driven sand flux with shear stress. Sci Adv 3(6):e-1602569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mayaud JR, Webb NP (2017) Vegetation in drylands: effects on wind flow and aeolian sediment transport. Land 6(3):64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mayaud JR, Wiggs GFS, Bailey RM (2016) Characterizing turbulent wind flow around dryland vegetation. Earth Surf Process Landf 41(10):1421–1436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Mayaud JR, Wiggs GFS, Bailey RM (2017) A field-based parameterization of wind flow recovery in the lee of dryland plants. Earth Surf Process Landf 42(2):378–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. McKenna Neuman C, Bédard O (2015) A wind tunnel study of flow structure adjustment on deformable sand beds containing a surface-mounted obstacle. J Geophys Res Earth Surf 120(9):1824–1840CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Middleton GV, Southard JB (1984) Mechanics of sediment movement, 2nd edn. S.E.P.M, TulsaCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Miguel AF (1998) Airflow through porous screens: from theory to practical considerations. Energy Build 29:63–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Nield DA (2002) Modelling fluid flow in saturated porous media and at interfaces. In: Pop I, Ingham DB (eds) Transport phenomena in porous media II. Pergamon, Oxford, pp 1–19Google Scholar
  46. Nield JM, Baas ACW (2008) Investigating parabolic and nebkha dune formation using a cellular automaton modelling approach. Earth Surf Process Landf 33(5):724–740CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Packwood AR (2000) Flow through porous fences in thick boundary layers: comparisons between laboratory and numerical experiments. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 88:75–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Ranga Raju KG, Garde RJ, Singh SK, Singh N (1988) Experimental study on characteristics of flow past porous fences. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 29:155–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Savage RP (1963) Experimental study of dune building with sand fences. In: Proceedings of the 8th conference on coastal engineering, Mexico City, Mexico, November 1962, pp 380–396Google Scholar
  50. Savage RP, Woodhouse WWJ (1968) Creation and stabilization of coastal and barrier dunes. In: Proceedings of the 11th international conference on coastal engineering, New York City, New York, pp 671–700Google Scholar
  51. Shao Y, Raupach MR (1992) The overshoot and equilibration of saltation. J Geophys Res Atmos 97(D18):20559–20564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Sherman DJ, Farrell EJ (2008) Aerodynamic roughness lengths over movable beds: comparison of wind tunnel and field data. J Geophys Res Earth Surf 113:F02S08CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Stout JE, Zobeck TM (1997) Intermittent saltation. Sedimentol 44(5):959–970CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sutton SLF, McKenna Neuman C (2008) Sediment entrainment to the lee of roughness elements: effects of vortical structures. J Geophys Res Earth Surf 113(F2):F02S09CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Thomas DSG, Tsoar H (1990) The geomorphological role of vegetation in desert dune systems. In: Thornes JB (ed) Vegetation and erosion. Wiley, Chichester, pp 471–489Google Scholar
  56. Tsoar H, Møller JT (1986) The role of vegetation in the formation of linear sand dunes. In: Nickling WG (ed) Aeolian geomorphology. Allen and Unwin, Boston, pp 75–95Google Scholar
  57. Wiggs GFS, Livingstone I, Thomas DSG, Bullard JA (1996) Airflow and roughness characteristics over partially vegetated linear dunes in the Southwest Kalahari Desert. Earth Surf Process Landf 21:19–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wolfe SA, Nickling WG (1994) The morphology and origin of Nabkhas, region of Mopti, Mali, West Africa. J Arid Environ 28:13–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Zhang N, Lee SJ, Chen T-G (2015) Trajectories of saltating sand particles behind a porous fence. Geomorphology 228:608–616CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Atmospheric SciencesDesert Research InstituteRenoUSA
  2. 2.Division of Atmospheric SciencesDesert Research InstituteLas VegasUSA

Personalised recommendations