Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-2dmjx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-10T08:59:05.191Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

An analytical approach to deformation of anisotropic ice-crystal aggregates

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 September 2017

Throstur Thorsteinsson*
Affiliation:
Department of Earth and Space Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195–1310, U.S.A.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Deformation rates of single hexagonal crystals, deforming by glide on the basal plane, are described as a function of stress state and crystal orientation. These results are used to infer the deformation rate of crystal aggregates assuming that the stress distribution within the crystal aggregate is homogeneous. Analytical equations for the deformation rate of anisotropic ice aggregates are derived for vertically symmetric girdle fabric. This type of fabric is approximated by a uniform distribution of c-axis orientations between a cone angle and a smaller girdle angle relative to the symmetry axis. For simple shear stress acting on a single-maximum fabric there is a slight de-enhancement for cone angles of 60–90°. In uniaxial compression a maximum enhancement of ∼1.7 occurs at a cone angle of 57°. A pure shear stress state has similar features, with the additional complication that it causes a non-zero transverse strain rate, except for perfect vertical alignment of crystals and isotropic fabric. In combined states of stress the contribution of each stress component to the strain rate depends on fabric. A single enhancement factor is not adequate to describe the effects of anisotropy for complex stress states.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © International Glaciological Society 2001
Figure 0

Fig. 1. An equal-area plot (Schmidt plot) of a girdle fabric. The c axes are distributed uniformly between α0= 15° (girdle angle) and α = 60° (cone angle). Also shown are the zenith angle, θ, and the azimuth, ø.

Figure 1

Fig 2. The velocity gradient tensor, of a single crystal in uniaxial compression. The crystal is deforming only by glide in the basal plane. Each plot shows a different component normalized by Aσ3, with the component in the top left corner and in the bottom right corner. Lighter colors are positive, and darker negative. See Figure 1 for explanation of θ and ø.

Figure 2

Fig. 3. Normalized axial strain rate in uniaxial compression σ33 as a function of cone angle.

Figure 3

Fig. 4. The velocity gradient tensor, , of a single crystal in pure shear stress σ33 = − σ11. The crystal is deforming only by glide in the basal plane. Each plot shows a different component normalized by , with the component in the top left corner and in the bottom right corner. Lighter colors are positive, and darker negative. See Figure 1 for explanation of θ and ø.

Figure 4

Fig. 5. Normalized strain rate in pure shear stress state σ11 = −σ33 as a function of cone angle. The normalized strain rate is equal to the enhancement relative to isotropic ice. Note the non-zero strain rate, , which is transverse to the plane of applied stress, and that for all cone angles.

Figure 5

Fig. 6. The velocity gradient tensor, , of a single crystal in simple shear stress σ13 = σ31. The crystal is deforming only by glide in the basal plane. Each plot shows a different component normalized by , with the component in the top left corner and in the bottom right corner. Lighter colors are positive, and darker negative. See Figure 1 for explanation of θ and ø.

Figure 6

Fig. 7 Normalized strain rate in simple shear as a function of cone angle. Note that the enhancement is smaller than 1 for cone angles of 60–90°, with a minimum of 0.857 at a cone angle α = 73°.

Figure 7

Fig 8. Normalized strain rate, (solid line) as a function of cone angle in combined compression and shear. The resulting strain rate is made up of two terms, one that depends on σ3 only (dashed line) and one that depends on the shear stress and compression τ2σ only (dotted line). Here τ/σ = 0.5.

Figure 8

Fig 9. Normalized strain rate (solid line) as afunction of cone angle in combined compression and shear. The resulting strain rate is made up of two terms, one due to the shear stress τ3 (dashed line), and one caused by the uniaxial compression stress and shear σ2τ (dotted line). Here τ/σ = 0.5.

Figure 9

Fig. 10. The normalized vertical strain rate, (α = 90°, τ/σ), as a function of the ratio of shear to compressive stress, τ/σ, and cone angle, a. Note that the compression has a maximum rate at cone angle about 60° when τ/σ is small and near 35° at larger ratios.

Figure 10

Fig. 11. The normalized shear strain rate, (α = 90°, τ / σ), as a function of the ratio of shear to compressive stress, τ / σ, and cone angle, α.

Figure 11

Fig. 12. Comparing (a) obtained using the Sachs and Johnson formulation for combined pure shear (σ11 = − σ33 = −1) and simple shear τ = σ13 = (0, 0.3, 0.6, 0.9, 1.2, 1.5).

Figure 12

Fig. 13. Comparing (a) obtained using the Sachs and Johnson formulation for combined pure shear (σ11 = − σ33 = −1) and simple shear τ = σ13 = (0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1.0, 1.25).

Figure 13

Fig. 14. Horizontal velocity U (Z ) as a function of height above bed (Z = z/H, where H is the ice thickness) for isotropic ice (α(Z) = 90°; dashed line) and anisotropic ice (α(Z) = 20° + 70° Z; solid line). The anisotropy enhances the deformation (a), and concentrates it closer to the bed (b).