
Dynamics and mass balance of Taylor Glacier, Antarctica: 2. Force balance and longitudinal coupling
Author(s) -
Kavanaugh J. L.,
Cuffey K. M.
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
journal of geophysical research: earth surface
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.67
H-Index - 298
eISSN - 2156-2202
pISSN - 0148-0227
DOI - 10.1029/2009jf001329
Subject(s) - glacier , geology , forcing (mathematics) , amplitude , geomorphology , glacier ice accumulation , ice stream , glacier mass balance , mechanics , geodesy , climatology , physics , cryosphere , sea ice , quantum mechanics
Taylor Glacier, Antarctica, exemplifies an ice sheet outlet that flows through a region of rugged topography and dry climate. In contrast to other well‐studied outlets, Taylor Glacier moves very slowly, despite a thickness of order 1 km and driving stresses averaging 1.5 bars. Here we analyze new measurements of glacier geometry and surface velocity to elucidate flow dynamics of Taylor Glacier. Force balance and basal temperatures are calculated at six locations along the glacier's length using an algorithm developed for this study. The effects of stress‐gradient coupling on longitudinal flow variations are also examined; we ask whether Kamb and Echelmeyer's (1986) linearized theory adequately describes the observed response of flow to large‐amplitude variations in driving stress. The force balance calculations indicate that no basal motion is needed to explain the observed flow of Taylor Glacier. Inferred basal temperatures are within a few degrees of the melting point in regions of kilometer‐thick ice and well below the melting point elsewhere; deformation of subfreezing ice largely controls the flow of Taylor Glacier. Basal drags are mostly in the range 0.9 to 1.2 bars, and lateral drags are in the range 0.2 to 0.5 bar. Stress‐gradient coupling strongly reduces the variability of velocities along the glacier. The velocity variations can be described as the convolution of a forcing function with a spatial filter, as Kamb and Echelmeyer suggested, but the form of the forcing function differs from the theoretical relation derived for small‐amplitude perturbations (the power on driving stress is one, not three).