Thermobarokinetics of ice: constitutive formulation for the coupled effect of temperature, stress, and strain rate in ice
Abstract. Understanding and modeling the mechanical behavior of ice under varying thermal and loading conditions is essential for cryospheric science, permafrost engineering, and the design of polar infrastructure. A central challenge lies in capturing the strong coupling between stress, strain rate, and temperature, an interdependence referred to in this work as the thermobarokinetics of ice. This study presents a three-dimensional constitutive model that explicitly incorporates this coupling through a unified thermomechanical framework. Notably, the model employs shared functional dependencies for both viscosity and damage initiation, allowing key rate- and temperature-sensitive processes to be represented using a minimal set of physically interpretable parameters. Damage evolution is governed by an energy-based law that depends on strain rate and temperature. The model is calibrated and validated against triaxial compression and relaxation test data on polycrystalline ice, demonstrating its ability to capture salient features of ice mechanics such as ductile to brittle transitions, strain-rate-dependent strength, stress relaxation, and thermal softening. In addition, a novel healing mechanism inspired by viscous sintering is introduced, in which the rate of damage reversal is driven by viscous energy dissipation and modulated by pressure and temperature.
I thoroughly enjoyed reading "Thermobarokinetics of ice: constitutive formulation for the coupled effect of temperature, stress, and strain rate in ice." This paper carefully develops a new multi-part model of ice rheology by building on previously proposed models for the elastic, viscous, and damage/healing response of ice in the presence of varying pressure, temperature and strain rate, with the goal of illuminating coupling among these complex components. I appreciated the way the authors carefully and convincingly develop their model, and their comparison with real experimental data was a nice way to demonstrating both the strengths and limitations of the model. I think this paper is an excellent contribution to our understanding of the mechanics of ice deformation with many implications for glaciology and other icy systems. The presentation, writing, and figures are all very high quality, and the literature review is very thorough and nicely done.Â
While I don't feel qualified to comment on the accuracy of the presented equations, I had no problem following the logic of the paper and am confident that the equations presented are justified (I would encourage the authors to double check for typos in equations before the final revision). I have only a few minor questions/comments about this paper, outlined below. These are largely suggestions, and I leave it to the authors to decide whether they are worth addressing in the present study or in future work.Â
-I appreciated the approach of calibrating the model to one set of experiments, and then applying that calibrated model to another set. This is a nice way of testing the universality of the model and sensitivity to calibrated parameters. I imagine different instances of ice have inherent variability in parameters such as A, E and nu, and I am curious whether there is enough information in the literature to constrain a reasonable range of these parameters in natural systems. Do they range over orders of magnitude? Are there any physically based ways of estimating them? This is largely beyond the scope of this paper, but a little bit of information in the discussion might be nice.Â
-Along these lines of relating the paper to real systems, a 1km thick glacier might experience a pressure at the base on order of tens of MPa. This nicely falls within the regime of parameters used in this study, enhancing applicability to glaciology (something the authors might want to mention). This is especially important for studies of glacial erosion, in which the shear stress and velocity exerted on the bed at the bottom of the glacier determine erosion. Again, this is outside the scope of the study but it might be worth mentioning a few key papers to enhance the paper's broad applicability and importance (e.g., https://www.nature.com/articles/s43017-021-00165-9; https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-14583-8; https://www.science.org/doi/full/10.1126/science.aab2386).Â
-It would be nice to include some discussion about what would be the most useful future studies- especially experimental- that could be done to improve our understanding of ice mechanics in light of the findings in this paper. There could be a paragraph or two about this toward the end of the paper.Â
Â