geodynamics vi core dynamics and the magnetic field

39
Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field Bruce Buffett, UC Berkeley

Upload: grady-reyes

Post on 03-Jan-2016

26 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field. Bruce Buffett, UC Berkeley. er. General Objectives. How do fluid motions in liquid core generate a magnetic field?. Planetary Perspective. planetary dynamos are sensitive to the internal state. Did the Early Earth have a Magnetic Field ?. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Geodynamics VI

Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Bruce Buffett, UC Berkeley

Page 2: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

er

General Objectives

How do fluid motions in liquid core generate a magnetic field?

Page 3: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Planetary Perspective

planetary dynamos are sensitive to the internal state

Page 4: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Did the Early Earth have a Magnetic Field ?

Page 5: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Observations

NASA

1. Paleomagnetic evidence of a magnetic field at 3.45 Ga (Tarduno et al. 2009)

2. Measurement of 15N/14N ratio in lunar soil (Ozima et al. 2005)

- no field before 3.9 Ga ?

Implications for the early Earth?

(probably tells us about tectonics)

Page 6: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Outline

2. Thermal evolution and dynamo power

3. Convection in core

4. Generation of magnetic field

numericalmodels

1. Physical setting and processes

Page 7: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Physical Processes

Cooling of the core is controlled by mantle convection

contraction

Present day

Page 8: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Present-Day Temperature

temperature drop across D”: T = 900 - 1900 K

D”

Page 9: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Core Heat Flow

~ 5 to 10 TW

thermal boundary layer on the core side?

900 – 1900 K adiabat

Page 10: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Core Heat Flow

~ 5 to 10 TW

~ 3 to 5 TW

conduction along adiabat is comparable to mantle heat flow

Page 11: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Core Heat Flow

~ 5 to 10 TW

~ 3 to 5 TW

conduction along adiabat is comparable to total heat flow

10 to 15 TW

Page 12: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Convection in the Core

Fe alloy

Q > Qa

cold thermal boundary layer

Page 13: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Convection in the Core

Q < Qa

i) compositional buoyancy mixes warm fluid

ii) thermally stratified layer develops

Options

Page 14: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Early Earth

i) Q < Qa

- geodynamo fails *

- convection ceases

- a geodynamo is possible

ii) Q > Qa

* core-mantle (chemical) interactions might help

Page 15: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Chemical Interactions

Early Earth

Cooling reduces solubility ofmantle components

Energy Supply depends on

- abundance of element

- T-dependence of solubility

O and/or Si appear to be under saturated at present

Page 16: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Growth of Inner Core

Based on energy conservation

t

Often assumes that the coreevolves through a series of statesthat are hydrostatic, well-mixed and adiabatic

Page 17: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Growth of Inner Core

Based on energy conservation

Heat budget includes

- secular cooling

- radioactive heat sources

- latent heat

- gravitational energy*

t*due to chemical rearrangement

*

Page 18: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Example

Inner-core Radius CMB Temperature

based on Buffett (2002)

Page 19: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Power Available for Geodynamo

dissipation

Entropy Balance

Carnot efficiency

convection

Page 20: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Carnot Efficiencies

Dynamo Power

thermal latent heat composition

Page 21: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Carnot Efficiencies

Dynamo Power

thermal latent heat composition

Example using Qcmb = 6 TW

i) Present day = 1.3 TW

ii) Early Earth = 0.1 TW

Page 22: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Carnot Efficiencies

Dynamo Power

thermal latent heat composition

Example using Qcmb = 6 TW

i) Present day = 0.8 TW

ii) Early Earth = 0.1 TW

Page 23: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

AverageDigression on Thermal History

Convective Heat Flux

where

This means that qconv is independent of L

Page 24: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

A thermal dynamo on early Earth?

(a) Two regimes for

i) Pre-Plate tectonics (Tm > 1500o C)

ii) Plate tectonics (Tm < 1500o C)(b) CMB Heat Flux

evidence of a field by 3.45 Ga(Sleep, 2007)

(a)

(b)

Tm

Tc

Page 25: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

A Thermal History

Mantle Temperature CMB Heat Flux

(i)

(ii) Q = 76 TW

evidence of field

decreasing radiogenic heat

Implications: a) vigorous dynamo during first (few) 100 Ma (dipolar?)

b) narrow range of parameters allow the dynamo to turn off

Page 26: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Numerical Models

Glatzmaier & Roberts (1996)

magnetic fieldvertical vorticity

Numerical Models

Page 27: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Description of Problem

1. Conservation of momentum (1687)

2. Magnetic Induction (1864)

3. Conservation of Energy (1850)

Newton

Maxwell

Fourier

Page 28: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Convection in Rotating Fluid

1. Momentum equation (ma = f)

Coriolis buoyancy viscous

Character of Flow

Page 29: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Taylor-Proudman Constraint

1. Momentum equation (ma = f)

Introduce vorticity

V

Radial component requires a buoyant parcelwill not rise

Page 30: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Taylor-Proudman Constraint

1. Momentum equation (ma = f)

Introduce vorticity

V

Radial component requires

Page 31: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Taylor-Proudman Constraint

1. Momentum equation (ma = f)

Introduce vorticity

V

Radial component requires

Page 32: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Planetary DynamoVertical Vorticity

E = 5 x 10-5

Page 33: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Are dynamo models realistic(1) ?

A popular scaling is based on the assumption that viscosity is unimportant

dynamo simulations appear to be controlled by viscosity (King, in prep)

Page 34: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Are dynamo models realistic(2)?

Da Vinci, 1509

“Big whirls have little whirlsthat feed on their velocity,and little whirls have lesser whirlsand so on to viscosity”

Richardson, 1922

Viscosity (i.e. momentum diffusion) limits the length scale of flow

Magnetic diffusion () limits the length scale of field

Page 35: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Properties of the Liquid Metal

Viscosity ~ 10-6 m2/s

Thermal Diffusivity ~ 10-5 m2/s

Magnetic Diffusivity ~ 1 m2/s

Prandtl Numbers

Page 36: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Characteristic Scales

(Sakuraba and Roberts, 2009)

Velocity (radial) Magnetic Field (radial)

E = 3x10-6 Pm = 0.1

Page 37: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Exploit Scale Separation?

use realistic properties in a small (10 km)3 volume

Page 38: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Model Geometry temperature

256x128x64

Small-Scale Convection

Use structure of small-scale flow to construct “turbulent” dynamo model ?

Page 39: Geodynamics VI Core Dynamics and the Magnetic Field

Summary

The existence or absence of a field tells us about the dynamics of the mantle,the style of tectonics and the vigor of geological activity.

All viable thermal history models need to satisfied the observed constraintEarth had a field by 3.45 Ga

We have seen remarkable progress in dynamo models in the last decade. We probably have a long way to go, although that view is not accepted byeveryone in the geodynamo community.