MYRES on Heat, Helium, Hotspots, and Whole Mantle Convection Dynamics of Thermal Boundary Layers and Convective Upwellings Shijie Zhong Department of Physics.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
MANTLE PLUMES, plumes and ‘plumes’: do we need all of them? 1. History of plumes and definitions 2. Plumes are thought to be required by evidence: a. Temperature.
Advertisements

Plate tectonics is the surface expression of mantle convection
Geoneutrinos: Earth composition, heat production and deep structures
Grain size-dependent viscosity convection Slava Solomatov Washington University in St. Louis Acknowledgements: Rifa El-Khozondar Boulder CO, June 23.
Dynamic elevation of the Cordillera, western United States Anthony R. Lowry, Neil M. Ribe and Robert B. Smith Presentation by Doug Jones.
Have plumes been detected seismologically? Maeve O’Shea University of Durham October 2004.
Pacific Secular Variation A result of hot lower mantle David Gubbins School of Earth Sciences University of Leeds.
Earth’s Energy Equation, simplified Q surface ≈ H radioactive + H mantle secular cooling + Q core Q surface ≈ 44 TW (surface heat flow measurements) H.
THE HEAT LOSS OF THE EARTH Claude Jaupart Jean-Claude Mareschal Stéphane Labrosse Institut de Physique du Globe de Paris.
1 SUMMARY OF MANTLE TEMPERATURES DON L. ANDERSON 2006.
Impact plumes: Implications for Tharsis C.C. Reese & V.S. Solomatov Dept. of Earth & Planetary Sciences Washington University in St. Louis Saint Louis,
Predicting Global Perovskite to Post-Perovskite Phase Boundary Don Helmberger, Daoyuan Sun, Xiaodong Song, Steve Grand, Sidio Ni, and Mike Gurnis.
Simulating Solid-Earth Processes Associated With Viscous and Viscoelastic Deformation Shijie Zhong Dept. of Physics University of Colorado Boulder, Colorado.
Europa Scenarios: Physical Models Ice-cracks on surface consistent with either “warm-ice” or water beneath the surface Near infrared mapping consistent.
MECh300H Introduction to Finite Element Methods
Class 1. Earth Structure and Plate Tectonics William Wilcock OCEAN/ESS 410.
Thermal structure of continental lithosphere from heat flow and seismic constraints: Implications for upper mantle composition and geodynamic models Claire.
Heat Transfer in the Earth What are the 3 types of heat transfer ? 1. Conduction 2. Convection 3. Radioactive heating Where are each dominant in the Earth.
Mantle Convection and the Martian Hemispheric Dichotomy John Hernlund.
Earth System Science II – EES 717 The Earth Interior – Mantle Convection & Plate Tectonics.
Power Requirements for Earth’s Magnetic Field Bruce Buffett University of Chicago.
Geodynamics DayLecturerLectures 2BBTemperature in the mantle 3BBGoverning equations and approximate solutions 4CLBNumerical, analytical and laboratory.
Are the predictions of the plume hypothesis borne out by observation? 1.Temperature Natalie Starkey.
Mount Erebus(photo NASA) The role of mantle plumes in the Earth's heat budget Chapman Conference, August 2005 Guust Nolet With thanks to: Raffaella Montelli.
GEO 5/6690 Geodynamics 24 Oct 2014 © A.R. Lowry 2014 Read for Wed 5 Nov: T&S Last Time: Flexural Isostasy Generally, loading will occur both by.
GEO 5/6690 Geodynamics 24 Oct 2014 © A.R. Lowry 2014 Read for Fri 31 Oct: T&S Last Time: Flexural Isostasy Isostasy is a stress balance resulting.
Structure and dynamics of earth’s lower mantle Edward J. Garnero and Allen K. McNamara Presented by: David de Vlieg Folkert van Straaten.
Dynamics of Mantle Plumes Methods for modeling basic thermal plumes (with and without tracers) Plumes interacting with plates (and ridges) Plumes in thermo-chemical.
Past, Present and Future What have we learned? -Mantle and Plates are an intimately coupled system -Deep mantle structure is important for the surface.
An model for mantle structure evolution and its implications for mantle seismic and compositional structures and supercontinent process Nan Zhang,
Cooling of the Earth: A parameterized convection study of whole versus layered models by McNamara and Van Keken 2000 Presentation on 15 Feb 2005 by Group.
Large Low Shear Velocity Provinces in the lowermost mantle, and Plume Generation Zones at their margins Bernhard Steinberger Collaborators: Kevin Burke.
Earth on the Move Earth Structure & Plate Tectonics Notes.
Paradigms versus paradoxes: Developing a new paradigm for the mantle Attreyee Ghosh, Ricardo Arevalo Jr., Ved Lekic, and Victor Tsai with Adam Dziewonski,
GLOBAL TOPOGRAPHY. CONTINENTAL & OCEANIC LITHOSPHERE.
Influences of Compositional Stratification S.E.Zaranek E.M. Parmentier Brown University Department of Geological Sciences.
Earth Systems and Resources. Geologic Time Scale – Earth’s History is measured.
What is a plume? By Julian Winter Alexandra Witze (2003)
Geological data, geophysics and modelling of the mantle Yanick Ricard & Joerg Schmalzl " Geophysical observations; Introduction " Geochemical measurements.
What are the Low-Velocity anomalies in the deep mantle? Bernhard Steinberger Center for Geodynamics, NGU, Trondheim, Norway.
The Lithosphere There term lithosphere is in a variety of ways. The most general use is as: The lithosphere is the upper region of the crust and mantle.
Class 1: Plate Tectonics Review Today’s topics:  Earth’s compositional layers  Plate tectonics: theory & actions.
G. Marquart Gravity Effect of Plumes Geodynamik Workshop, Hamburg, Modeling Gravity Anomalies Caused by Mantle Plumes Gabriele Marquart Mantle.
Energy, heat and temperature Olivia Jensen – 13/10/11... for 666 Module 2.
Investigating Large-Scale Mantle Heterogeneity using the Thermochemical Extension of CitcomS Allen K. McNamara Department of Geological Sciences Arizona.
Plumes, hotspots and the CMB Lecture 6: Geodynamics Carolina Lithgow-Bertelloni.
Hot Spots. A major hot spot in the Pacific ocean created the Hawaiian Island and Emperor Seamount island chains.
Why do migrating TJs suddenly start erupting large volumes of MORB?
Are plumes predicted by realistic convection experiments and numerical situations? John Watson.
Lower mantle upper mantle potential hotspot Based on illustration by Lidunka Vočadlo, University College London We propose this scenario: Layered Mantle.
E. M. Parmentier Department of Geological Sciences Brown University in collaboration with: Linda Elkins-Tanton; Paul Hess; Yan Liang Early planetary differentiation.
M. D. Ballmer, J. van Hunen, G. Ito, P. J. Tackley and T. A. Bianco Intraplate volcano chains originating from small-scale sublithospheric convection.
Lijun Liu Seismo Lab, Caltech Dec. 18, 2006 Inferring Mantle Structure in the Past ---Adjoint method in mantle convection.
GEO 5/6690 Geodynamics 21 Nov 2014 © A.R. Lowry 2014 Read for Mon 1 Dec: T&S Last Time: The Lithosphere Revisited There are several different processes.
3D spherical geodynamic modeling through time Scott D. King Department of Geosciences Virginia Tech, Blacksburg USA Session 21f: Chemical Geodynamics Through.
MECH4450 Introduction to Finite Element Methods
Also: Shijie Objective: reconstruct the mantle from 450Ma to the present-day using a numerical model of mantle convection that includes plate motion history,
Geology 6600/7600 Signal Analysis 18 Nov 2015 Last time: Deconvolution in Flexural Isostasy Tharsis loading controversy: Surface loading by volcanic extrusives?
Mantle convective heat flux into continental lithosphere
Class 1. Earth Structure and Plate Tectonics William Wilcock
Plate Tectonics
Lijuan He Institute of Geology and Geophysics, CAS, Beijing,
Volcanoes.
Deep Earth dynamics – numerical and fluid tank modelling
9-4 Mechanisms of Plate Motion
Hot Spots What They Are Their Characteristics How They Behave
Mechanisms of Plate Motion
Measuring Plate Motion
5% of all known volcanoes in the world are not located close to a plate margin. These are known as intraplate volcanoes and occur as a result of mantle.
Asthenosphere flow and mantle lithosphere instabilities below continental rifts and rifted margins Jolante van Wijk (University of Houston) Jeroen van.
Presentation transcript:

MYRES on Heat, Helium, Hotspots, and Whole Mantle Convection Dynamics of Thermal Boundary Layers and Convective Upwellings Shijie Zhong Department of Physics University of Colorado at Boulder August 2004

Outline 1. Introduction. a) Thermal boundary layers (TBL) and their dynamics. b) Layered versus whole mantle convection and heat budget. c) Plume heat flux. 2.Plume population and heat transfer. 3.Conclusions and remaining issues.

What is a thermal boundary layer (TBL)? A layer across which there is a significant temperature difference and the heat transfer is primarily via heat conduction, for example, the oceanic lithosphere. Temperature: T=T s + (T m -T s )erf[y/(4  t) 1/2 ] Surface heat flux: Q ~ k(T m -T s )/  Tm Tm T m ~1350 o C Ts Ts or y

How many TBLs are there in the mantle?

Why does a TBL form? A TBL forms as a consequence of thermal convection. Why does thermal convection occur?    and  D: box height;  T=T b -T s At t=0, T=T s +(D-z)  T/D +  q o ~ k  T/D TbTb TsTs T ave z TbTb TsTs

Governing equations for isochemical convection Ra =  g  TD 3 /(    )  Rayleigh number.  =1 for isoviscous flow. H=0 for basal heating or no internal heating. When Ra>Ra cr ~ 10 3,  convection.

Thermal convection with Ra=1e4 > Ra cr Basal heating and isoviscous

Convection transfers heat more efficiently TbTb TsTs z  TiTi q s ~k(T i -T s )/  or  q s ~k(T b -T s )/(2  ). If no convection, q o ~ k(T b -T s )/D. As 2  q o. Nu=q s /q o >1. Nu: Nusselt # q b = q s for basal heating convection TiTi TsTs TbTb T ave

Control on the thickness of TBL,   is limited by TBL instabilities such that Ra  =  g  T i -T s )  3 /(  ) ~ Ra cr ~ As a consequence, plumes form. Ra=10 5   ~ Ra -1/3 and Nu ~  -1 ~ Ra 1/3

Control on the thickness of TBL,   ~ Ra -1/3 and Nu ~ Ra 1/3 Ra=10 4 Ra=10 5 Nu=4.88Nu=10.4 Davaille & Jaupart [1993]; Conrad & Molnar [1999]; Solomatov & Moresi [2000]; Korenaga & Jordan [2003]; Huang, Zhong & van Hunen [2003]; Zaranek & Parmentier [2004].

Linear and Plume structures in 3D thermal convection with  (T) and 40% internal heating cold Hot A simulation from CitcomS [Zhong et al., 2000]

Outline 1. Introduction. a) Thermal boundary layers (TBL) and their dynamics. b) Layered versus whole mantle convection and heat budget. c) Plume heat flux. 2.Plume population and heat transfer. 3.Conclusions and remaining issues.

Whole mantle convection Bunge & Richards [1996] Grand, van der Hilst, & Widiyantoro [1997] Seismic structure Long-wavelength geoid [Hager, 1984]. Coupling plate motion to the mantle [Hager & O’Connell, 1981].

Seismic evidence for compositional anomalies at the base of the mantle Ni et al. [2002] Masters et al. [2000]

Heat budget of the Earth Q total ~ 41 TW. Q mantle ~ 36 TW. Q sec ~ 9.3 TW (70 K/Ga). For a mantle with the MORB source material, Q rad ~ 3-7 TW (???). (A modified version for the whole mantle convection [Davies, 1999]) Two TBLs: the surface and CMB Q mantle Q rad Q sec Q core Q core ~ 3.5 TW (plume flux ???). Unaccounted for: Q mantle -Q rad -Q sec -Q core =18 TW

A layered mantle with an enriched bottom layer To increase Q rad in the bottom layer, Q rad_btm. Q mantle Q rad Q sec Q core Q comp Three TBLs: the surface, CMB, and the interface. Q comp = Q core + Q rad_btm.

A variety of layered mantle models (Tackley, 2002) Hofmann [1997] L. Kellogg et al. [1999] Becker et al. [1999]

Review of thermochemical convection studies, I Stability i) against overturn. ii) against entrainment. Structure  btm >  top Jellinek & Manga [2002] Gonnermann et al. [2002] Other studies: Sleep [1988]; Davaille [1999]; Zhong & Hager [2003]

Review of thermochemical convection studies, II Tackley, 2002 Isolated Piles Thick bottom layer Thin bottom layer Davaille et al., 2002 Domes Require the bottom layer more viscous. But how? Favor a thin bottom layer.

Q core ~ plume heat flux Q plume, for a layered mantle? Q core ~ 3.5 TW becomes really questionable, as it was estimated from Q plume, assuming a whole mantle convection and other things [Davies, 1988; Sleep, 1990]. At best, Q plume of 3.5 TW should now be ~ Q comp = Q core + Q rad_btm. Q mantle Q rad Q sec Q core Q comp

Outline 1. Introduction. a) Thermal boundary layers (TBL) and their dynamics. b) Layered versus whole mantle convection and heat budget. c) Plume heat flux. 2.Plume population and heat transfer. 3.Conclusions and remaining issues.

Swell topography and hotspots Volcanic chain and swell

Hawaiian Swell and Islands Swell width~1200 km; Swell height~ km. Best quantified by Wessel [1993] and Phipps Morgan et al. [1995].

Origins of the hotspots and swell topography Shallow origins (fractures [Turcotte and Oxburgh, 1972]). Deep origins (plumes [Morgan, 1971]). 10s [Crough, 1983] to 5000 plumes [Malamud & Turcotte, 1999].

Hotspot and thermal plumes Montelli et al. [2004] Romanowicz and Gung [2002]

A plume model for Hawaiian swell Ribe and Christensen [1994]

Estimate plume heat flux [Davies, 1988; Sleep, 1990] Plume heat flux: Q =  r 2 u  TC p = BC p /  r u  T Plume flux of mass anomalies: B =  r 2 u  =  r 2 u  T  M = B Q = MC p /  = hwV p (  m -  w )C p /  VpVp w h The rate at which new surface mass anomalies are created due to the uplift: M = hwV p  m -  w  r

Hawaiian swell as an example w ~1000 km; h~1 km; V p ~10 cm/yr;  m -  w =2300 kg/m3;  =3x10 -5 K -1 ; C p =1000 J kg -1 K -1 Q = hwV p (  m -  w )C p /  Q ~ 0.24 TW ~ 0.7% of Q mantle

Total plume heat flux [Davies, 1988; Sleep, 1990] Q plume ~ 3.5 TW from ~30 hotspots. Considered as Q core, in a whole mantle convection, as plumes result from instabilities of TBL at CMB (???). Further considered as evidence for largely internally heating mantle convection, as Q core /Q mantle ~90% [Davies, 1999] (???). Q mantle Q rad Q sec Q core

Q core = Q plume for a layered mantle! Q plume ~ Q comp = Q core + Q rad_btm because plumes result from TBL instabilities at the compositional boundary, if the proposal by Davies and Sleep is correct. If so, Q plume poses a limit on how much Q rad_btm into the bottom layer! Q mantle Q rad Q sec Q core Q comp

Outline 1. Introduction. a) Thermal boundary layers (TBL) and their dynamics. b) Layered versus whole mantle convection and heat budget. c) Plume heat flux. 2.Plume population and heat transfer. 3.Conclusions and remaining issues.

Questions 1.Should we expect thousands of small plumes that transfer significant amount of heat but produce no surface expression in terms of topography and volcanism (i.e., invisible)? as suggested by Malamud & Turcotte [1999]. 2.To what extent does Q plume represent Q btm of the convective system including surface plates? 3.Should we care at all about Q plume ?

Dependence of plume population on Ra Ra=3x10 6 Ra=10 7 Ra=3x10 7 Ra=10 8

There is a limit on number of plumes The limit is ~75 plumes, if scaled to the Earth’s mantle. Plumes merge

Heat transfer by thermal plumes Convective heat flux: q ~  cu z (T-T ave ), important outside of TBLs.  For hot upwellings, T-T ave > 0 and u z > 0, so q uw >0.  For cold downwellings, T-T ave 0 as well. Ra=10 4 Nu=4.72 Ra=3x10 5 Nu=16.10 For these basal heating cases, q uw ~ q dw ~ 1/2q s = 1/2q b, i.e., upwelling plumes only transfer ½ of heat flux from the bottom!

The cooling effect of downwellings on Q btm Labrosse, 2002

Quantifying Q uw [internal heating +  (T)+spherical geometry] Q i /Q s =0Q i /Q s =26%Q i /Q s =57% How does Q uw /Q s (or Q plume /Q s ) depend on internal heating rate Q i /Q s ? How does Q uw /Q btm depend on internal heating rate Q i /Q s ?

Now the answers … Remember 90% internal heating rate suggested based on Q u /Q s ~10%? If Q i /Q s ~40%, then Q u /Q btm ~20%. As Q u ~3.5 TW, Q btm ~17 TW.

Summary Plume heat flux remains a constraint on the heat from the bottom layer (core or the bottom layer of the mantle). Q i /Q s ~40% and Q plume /Q btm ~20%, or Q btm ~17TW (??). A thin layer (100’s km) at the base of the mantle, D”? Expect some (10’s) plumes that produce observable surface features.

“Dynamic (residual)” Topography Panasyuk and Hager, 2000

Remaining issues Heat budget: i) Plume heat flux: super-plumes (What are they?) and the role of weak asthenosphere. ii) Secular cooling. iii) Wish list (easy to say but hard to do, perhaps). Try to estimate uncertainties for both seismic and geochemical models.

We have a long way to go … experimentalist theorist