the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
| 19 Apr 2024
Brief communication: Stalagmite damage by cave-ice flow quantitatively assessed by fluid-structure-interaction simulations
Abstract. Mechanical damage to stalagmites is commonly observed in mid-latitude caves. Former studies identified thermoelastic ice expansion as a plausible mechanism for such damage. This study builds on these findings and investigates the role of ice flow along the cave bed as a possible second mechanism for stalagmite damage. Utilizing fluid-structure interaction models based on the finite element method, forces created by ice flow are simulated for different stalagmite geometries. The resulting effects of such forces on the structural integrity of stalagmites are analyzed and presented. Our results suggest that structural failure of stalagmites caused by ice flow is possible, albeit unlikely.
- Preprint
(7889 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 01 Jul 2024)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-751', Anonymous Referee #1, 21 May 2024
reply
Review of Jarosch et al. egusphere-2024-751 (Brief communication: Stalagmite damage by cave-ice flow quantitatively assessed by fluid-structure-interaction simulations).
This short report is an extension of the modelling described in Spotl et al. 2023, wherein fracture of cave stalagmites by cave ice processes was shown to be more likely caused by thermal expansion of the ice rather than by direct movement of the ice. The research reported here adds more conditions to the basic modelling, and shows that thermal expansion is confirmed as the most likely cause of stalagmite fracture and only in rare situations could fracture be attributed to ice flow dynamics.
The techniques used in the modelling appear to be sound and the conclusions justified. The paper is well written and clear. However, there is one glaring ambiguity in the examples shown to illustrate the process and asserted to be “examples of stalagmites damaged by ice during the last glacial period”.
If a clear example is to be presented, then it must have ice action as the obvious and, ideally, only process that might have caused shattering. Figure 1 B and C are from Shatter Cave, Mendip, UK. Yes, this cave shows nice examples of cryogenic cave calcite deposits, so, yes, ice was present. However, attribution of the cause of the stalagmite shattering is very much compromised by the fact that the cave was only discovered, in 1969, as a result of quarrying, which started in the 1920s. It was named to commemorate the damage assumed to have been done by blasting. If this cave is to be used to support the idea of cryogenic fracturing, then I suggest it be made clear how the cryogenic fracturing differs from quarrying fracturing.
Secondly, the assertion of the timing (that the shattering had occurred during the last glacial period) requires more proof. These examples show no obvious post-shattering cementation with calcite and no dates are offered.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-751-RC1
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 164 | 50 | 16 | 230 | 13 | 12 |
- HTML: 164
- PDF: 50
- XML: 16
- Total: 230
- BibTeX: 13
- EndNote: 12
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1