Pnas 0308251101
Pnas 0308251101
Pnas 0308251101
Edited by Henry J. Melosh, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, and approved April 7, 2004 (received for review December 11, 2003)
Vt ⫽ 冑 4Dsg
3Csg
. [2]
This paper was submitted directly (Track II) to the PNAS office.
Abbreviation: NASA, National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
Here g and g are the gas density and viscosity, d, s, and Cs are †To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: shinbrot@soemail.rutgers.edu.
characteristic particle diameter, density, and drag coefficient, g ¶Malin, M. C., Edgett, K. S., Carr, M. H., Danielson, G. E., Davies, M. E., Hartmann, W. K.,
is gravitational acceleration, and D gives the scale of the debris Ingersoll, A. P., James, P. B., Masursky, H., McEwen, A. S., et al. (2000) Autumn Afternoon
flow (16). These relations are only correct to the lowest order; in Hale Crater, NASA’s Planetary Photojournal MOC2–257, November 17, 2000. Available
however, they illustrate that, all other things being equal, particle at www.msss.com兾mars㛭images兾moc兾nov㛭00㛭hale.
settling speeds go as g, whereas debris flow speeds go as 公g. We © 2004 by The National Academy of Sciences of the USA
Morphological Comparisons
To compare laboratory and Martian morphologies, we note that
Martian geological features that have been identified as indi-
cating liquid surface water on Mars have been classified into
three categories (5): upstream features (e.g., alcoves), midstream
features (channels), and downstream features (aprons). In the
next three sections, we briefly compare features of our terrestrial
experiments in each of these flow regions in turn with Martian
analogues. After these qualitative comparisons, we analyze the
applicability of terrestrial, laboratory-scale, experiments for the
simulation of Martian, geological-scale, systems.
PHYSICS
comparison, in Fig. 1c, we display wave-like (20) sand dunes in Fig. 3d).
the Hale crater on Mars. Like our experiments, these dunes
emanate downhill from steep peaks: based on estimates using Midstream Features
shadow length and time of day,储 the peak visible at the top of this As with upstream features, midstream channels can develop a
figure is ⬎150 m above the crater floor, which is visible at the rich variety of patterns, depending on elapsed time (compare
bottom of the figure. Similar fluid-like features are seen in Fig. 1 a and b), particle properties (Fig. 2 e vs. f ), and bed
Newton Basin in Sirenum Terra,** again traveling downhill from preparation. The most common midstream feature seen is a
steep peaks. broad channel emanating from a spur-and-gully, as shown in Fig.
Evidently, dry grains can flow in a liquid-like manner when 3a alongside a comparable Martian channel in Fig. 3b. Such
their settling speed is sufficiently reduced—in our experiments channels are often straight, but can be sinuous as in this example.
by a simple reduction in grain density. We caution that reducing In this experiment as in those shown in Fig. 1, a bed of hollow
储Thelargest of the central peaks has been estimated (www.msss.com兾mars㛭images兾moc兾 ††Malin, M. C, Edgett, K. S, Davis, S. D, Caplinger, M. A, Jensen, E., Supulver, K. D, Sandoval,
nov㛭00㛭hale) to be 630 feet from the crater floor; the peak shown in Fig. 1c casts a shadow J., Posiolova, L. & Zimdar, R. (2000) MOC image M03– 04950, Malin Space Science Systems
one quarter as long. This estimate neglects the height and inclination of the surface on Mars Orbiter Camera Image Gallery, October 16, 2000. Available at www.msss.com兾
which the shadow falls, but sets a reasonable approximation for the height in the figure. moc㛭gallery兾ab1㛭m04兾images兾M0304950.html.
**Malin, M. C., Edgett, K. S., Carr, M. H, Danielson, G. E., Davies, M. E., Hartmann, W. K., ‡‡Malin,M. C., Edgett, K. S., Carr, M. H., Danielson, G. E., Davies, M. E., Hartmann, W. K.,
Ingersoll, A. P., James, P. B., Masursky, H., McEwen, A. S., et al. (2002) Gullies in crater at Ingersoll, A. P., James, P. B., Masursky, H., McEwen, A. S., et al. (2000) Polar Pit Wall,
42.4°S, 158.2°W, NASA’s Planetary Photojournal MOC2–320, October 7, 2002. Available NASA’s Planetary Photojournal MOC2–237, June 22, 2000. Available at www.msss.com兾
at www.msss.com兾mars㛭images兾moc兾e7㛭e12㛭captioned㛭rel. mars㛭images兾moc兾june2000兾sp㛭pit.
beads was aerated (by recently avalanching the grains) and then
tipped rapidly to produce comparatively wide flows of beads
(1–2 cm or 500–1,000 bead diameters across).
To better understand how our laboratory granular flows carve
channels and to explore a sampling of the spectrum of structures Fig. 4. Deposits, aprons, and swales. (a) Detail of conical depositional pile
that can be produced by granular flows at reduced Rst, we downstream of channel shown in Fig. 3c. (b) Detail of comparable deposi-
performed variants of our flow experiments. Notably, by com- tional cone from Martian gully channel shown in Fig. 3d. (c) Depositional
parison with earlier results, in Fig. 3c we prepared the bed apron of hollow beads, showing a fine swale that formed by erosion from a
(details follow) so as to generate a well settled mass that was then fluidized stream. (d) Later evolution of downstream deposit, showing exten-
tipped more slowly, producing the long narrow channels shown sive variegated erosion. (e) Comparative variegated aprons downstream of
channel described elsewhere (5).
(about 20 diameters across) with steep upstream boundaries
(magnified in Fig. 2f ) and conical downstream debris deposits
(Fig. 4a). In detail, for Fig. 3c we first allowed the beads to settle that dry granular flows may account for simple depositional
overnight; this preparation is necessary because the small size structures. More complicated features are also seen downstream
and density of the beads implies that they will only very slowly of Martian gully streams, however; so in Fig. 4c we show a
settle and expel air from interstices. If we instead tilt a bed of
portion of an apron containing hollow beads at the downstream
beads that has been recently agitated, we obtain broad channels
edge of a flowing region (the base surface of the tipped
as in Fig. 1b. In Fig. 3c, after overnight settling, we slowly stirred
container is visible at the bottom of the snapshot). As indicated
the bed with a rod to break up aggregates, and then tipped the
by the arrow, subsequent flows of beads cut a thin swale into the
box onto a corner and gently tapped it to move the beads into
apron; similar swales develop into striated channels as shown in
the corner and to smooth the bed surface. Finally, we slowly
a later evolution of the hollow beads in Fig. 4d. Such multiply
tilted the box until flow began. We repeat the experiment by
striated regions are not common in our experiments, but they can
tapping and then tilting the box again. In Fig. 3d, we show
comparable Martian gully channels discussed in investigations of be found at the tail end of flowing regions as shown in the figure,
the case for liquid water on Mars (1, 5). especially when the flow encounters an obstacle: here, the
vertical end wall of the container, which is located at the very
Downstream Features bottom of this snapshot. By comparison, swales cut into aprons
The final category of flow features that have been attributed to on Mars as identified by the arrow in Fig. 4e have been attributed
surface water flow on Mars is downstream depositional patterns, to water flow (5).
two of which are shown in Fig. 4. As we have mentioned, Fig. 4a
Analysis
displays a detail of the downstream conical pile of material from
the channel of Fig. 3c. Alongside this pile, we show the conical Evidently, reducing Rst by changing particle properties has the
(1, 5) deposit from the Martian channel of Fig. 3d, suggesting effect of producing remnant structures that are similar to some
geomorphic features believed to imply water flows in Martian
gullies. A unifying feature of all of the liquid-like flow patterns
§§Malin, M. C, Edgett, K. S, Davis, S. D, Caplinger, M. A, Jensen, E., Supulver, K. D., Sandoval, that we have seen in laboratory dry grains is that, for the
J., Posiolova, L. & Zimdar, R. (2000) MOC image M11– 02514 Malin Space Science Systems considerations of the interplay between settling and flow speeds
Mars Orbiter Camera Image Gallery, October 16, 2000. Available at www.msss.com兾
moc㛭gallery兾m07㛭m12兾images兾M11兾M1102514.html.
that we have summarized to come into play, particles need to
become fluidized to start with. The conditions imposed by using
¶¶Malin, M. C., Edgett, K. S, Davis, S. D, Caplinger, M. A, Jensen, E., Supulver, K. D, Sandoval,
hollow and small beads permit the grains to remain fluidized, but
J., Posiolova, L. & Zimdar, R. (2000) MOC image M03– 02290 Malin Space Science Systems
Mars Orbiter Camera Image Gallery, October 16, 2000. Available at www.msss.com兾 without a source of fluidized grains, the patterns that we have
moc㛭gallery兾ab1㛭m04兾images兾M0302290.html. shown would not form or endure.
All units are cgs, and these data apply at above 5–10 Torr: below that value, air viscosity scales (15) with
pressure2兾3, and settling speeds become ballistic (see Analysis). Moreover, these are upper bounds. For example,
particle settling speeds on Earth never exceed debris flow speeds, and as emphasized in the text, these data are
only presented as scaling relations. Particle densities, s, for hollow beads are reported by the manufacturer, and
for debris flows are measured in refs. 30 and 31. Gas densities, g, and viscosities, g, are a matter of record, see
for example, ref. 4. Hollow bead sizes, d, are measured in our laboratory from digitized microscope photographs,
and geological particle sizes are chosen to be representative of coarse sand. Debris sizes, D, are approximations
from Figs. 1 and 2 in our experiments and are from recorded data (e.g., ref. 31 and A. Mashiyama and K. Kurita,
unpublished work) for geological flows. The drag coefficient, Cd, is obtained from a recent computational study
(32) and represents an overestimate of drag across a geological surface.
In our experiments, we have found that fluidization of slowly geological substrates seem certain to be more robust than our
settling particles can appear spontaneously in one of two ways. simple compacted bed, and so the processes, whether water- or
First, a region of steep slope may abruptly collapse, releasing airborne, that could erode them are bound to be enormously
enough energy to fluidize grains downstream. Such a case is seen slower and more incremental than in our model laboratory
in Fig. 2a, where downstream flows emanate from steep-walled system. It is therefore surprising that Figs. 1–4 indicate that some
upstream alcoves after the initial collapse of the bed. Fluid-like geomorphological features associated with liquid flows may be
flows are readily observed to be generated after a region of the duplicated on the laboratory scale with dry grains by suitably
upstream bed collapses, producing an avalanche of rapidly reducing Rst. Similar scaling arguments have been applied to
flowing grains. Similarly, we find liquid-like flows typically extrapolate laboratory fluid experiments to geophysical scales
originate in steep mountainous regions (1). An example of this (26) and to relate laboratory granular experiments to extrater-
is shown in Fig. 3a, where we show results of an experiment with restrial craters (27). Even more germane, scaling using a ratio
hollow beads in which jagged surfaces, such as those shown between settling and debris flow speeds has been reported in
previously in Fig. 1b, are permitted to mature through prolonged terrestrial particle-laden oceanic and volcanic flows (28, 29). In
flow into sinuous and multiply branched channels. Alongside this those systems, direct comparisons between laboratory and geo-
snapshot from our laboratory, in Fig. 3b we display an actual logical scales have been made, including identification of a
mountainous region that supplies a Martian gully channel (5, 6). transition between liquid-like, suspended, and solidified, sedi-
The scenario of dry granular mass flow initiated by an upstream mented, phases that is seen when settling and flow speeds
collapse at a steep wall is consistent with available Mars data; in become comparable.
Martian gullies, it has been remarked that a universal feature To assess the extent of applicability of our terrestrial exper-
associated with gully morphologies that indicate water flow is iments using reduced–density grains to Martian geological
steep upstream walls (1); moreover, collapses that generate flows, in Table 1 we display values that appear in Eqs. 1 and 2
significant mass flows have been seen in recent Mars Express alongside the ratio Rst ⫽ Vs兾Vt for our laboratory experiments
photographs (www.esa.int兾export兾externals兾images兾016-
using (i) hollow beads, (ii) some terrestrial debris flows, and (iii)
090204㛭2-0037㛭02-6p.jpg). In our experiments [both the single
some Martian debris flows. We reiterate that Eqs. 1 and 2 are
collapse events (Fig. 2a) and prolonged flow (Figs. 2c and 3a)],
intended only as scaling relations, and the values provided in the
the fluidized granular cascades that we observe leave upstream
table are only representative approximations. Nevertheless, the
edges that are invariably steep and multifaceted.
A second mechanism that spontaneously generates fluidiza- data illustrate that both our laboratory beads and Martian
tion in our experiments appears when fluidized flow initiates at geological grains can settle more slowly than they flow (i.e.,
an already steep surface such as the container wall, where Rst ⬍ 1), whereas terrestrial geological grains typically do not
unobstructed air velocities are presumably highest relative to the (Rst ⬎1).
PHYSICS
substrate material. Such a situation is seen in the rivulets in Fig. In conclusion, several features in Martian gullies that are
1a. Air flow near the container wall visibly erodes material, as suggestive of liquid water flow have been revealed in past and
evidenced by the fact that a substantial groove is produced ongoing Mars missions. We have not attempted to comprehen-
between the wall and the granular bed: this groove is highlighted sively duplicate all of these features in the laboratory; however,
(arrows) in Fig. 2f, which presents an enlarged view of the from our limited studies, it appears that some features that have
upstream edge of the channel of Fig. 3c. The groove is smoothly been attributed to liquid flow may in fact also occur in dry grains
polished and is observed to enlarge steadily over time through under conditions that prolong fluidization, as can be anticipated
erosion. under reduced gravity. In particular, when we reduce the settling
Evidently, either in flow initiated by a collapse or in steady ratio, Rst, by using low-density beads, we have found (i) that
flow originating near a smooth boundary, the resulting upstream grains can flow, slosh, and reflect from boundaries in a liquid-
structures exhibit steep walls similar to those that have been like manner, (ii) that flowing grains can erode elongated chan-
remarked (1) to be a signature of Martian gully flows. From our nels, and (iii) that remnant structures left by these flows can
investigations of low Rst materials, it appears that steep upstream include hillocks, steeply banked alcoves, sinuous streams, mul-
walls may be far from coincidental to Martian gullies, but rather tiply branched inlets, depositional cones, and variegated aprons
may serve as a source of energized particles without which that resemble those reported in Martian gullies. The duplication
fluidization could not begin. of these features under dry conditions does not imply that liquid
water does or does not exist in Martian gullies, nor does it speak
Scaling to growing evidence of subsurface water, either liquid or solid (4,
Conditions and scales are enormously different between labo- 33–36). In addition, in light of the magnificent images and data
ratory and Martian geological dimensions. Moreover, Martian recently returned by National Aeronautics and Space Admin-
1. Treiman, A. H. (2003) J. Geophys. Res. 108, 2002JE001900. 22. Tee, S. Y., Mucha, P. J., Cipelletti, L., Manley, S., Brenner, M. P., Segre, P. N.&
2. Malin, M. C. & Carr, M. H. (1999) Nature 397, 589–591. Weitz, D. A. (2002) Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 054501.
3. Segura, T., Toon, O. B., Colaprete, A. & Zahnle, K. (2002) Science 298, 23. Kunii, D. & Levenspiel, O. (1991) Fluidization Engineering (Butterworth–
1977–1980. Heineman, Oxford, U.K.).
4. Baker, V. R., Carr, M. H., Gulick, V. C., Williams, C. R. & Marley, M. S. (1992) 24. Genovese, F. C., Watson, P. K., Castellanos, A. & Ramos, A. (1997) in Powders
in Mars, eds. Kieffer, H. H., Jakosky, B. M., Snyder, C. W. & Matthews, M. S. and Grains 97, eds. Behringer, R. P. & Jenkins, J. (Balkema, Rotterdam), pp.
(Univ. Arizona Press, Tucson, AZ), pp. 493–554. 151–154.
5. Malin, M. C. & Edgett, K. S. (2000) Science 288, 2330–2335. 25. Tardos, G. I. & Gupta, R. (1996) Powder Technol. 87, 175–180.
6. Costard, F., Forget, F., Mangold, N. & Peulvast, J. P. (2001) Science 295, 26. Sommeria, J., Meyers, S. D. & Swinney, H. L. (1988) Nature 331, 374–376.
110–113. 27. Walsh, A. M., Holloway, K. E., Habdas, P. & de Bruyn, J. R. (2003) Phys. Rev.
7. Malin, M. C. & Edgett, K. S. (2002) J. Geophys. Res. 106, 23429–23570. Lett. 91, 104301.
8. Christensen, P. R. (2003) Nature 422, 45–48. 28. Gerald G. J., Ernst, R., Sparks, S. J., Carey, S. N. & Bursik, M. I. (1996) J.
9. Hoffman, N. (2000) Science 290, 711–712. Geophys. Res. 101, 95JB01900
10. Saunders, R. S. & Zurek, R. W. (2000) Science 290, 712 (lett.).
29. Fierstein, J., Houghton, B. F., Wilson, C. J. N. & Hildreth, W. (1997) J.
11. Doran, P. T. & Forman, S. L. (2000) Science 290, 711–712 (lett.).
Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 76, 215–227.
12. Knauth, L. P, Klonowski, S. & Burt, D. (2000) Science 290, 711 (lett.).
30. Iverson, R. M. (1997) Rev. Geophys. 35, 245–296.
13. Kieffer, H. H., Jakosky, B. M. & Snyder, C. W. (1992) in Mars, eds. Kieffer,
31. Denlinger, R. P. & Iverson, R. M. (2001) J. Geophys. Res. 106, 553–566.
H. H., Jakosky, B. M., Snyder, C. W. & Matthews, M. S. (Univ. Arizona Press,
32. Chehata, D., Zenit, R. & Wassgren, C. R. (2003) Phys. Fluids 15, 1622–1631.
Tucson, AZ), pp. 1–33.
33. Titus, T. N., Kieffer, H. H. & Christensen, P. R. (2003) Science 299, 1048–1051.
14. Christensen, P. R., Bandfield, J. L., Bell, J. F., III, Gorelick, N., Hamilton, V. E.,
Ivanov, A., Jakosky, B. M., Kieffer, H. H., Lane, M. D., Malin, M. C., et al. 34. Kranoppolsky, V. A. & Feldman, P. D. (2001) Science 294, 1914–1917.
(2003) Science 300, 2056–2060. 35. Mitrofanov, I., Anfimov, D., Kozyrev, A., Litvak, M., Sanin, A., Tretyakov, V.,
15. Bird, R. B., Stewart, W. E. & Lightfoot, E. N. (2001) Transport Phenomena Krylov, A., Shvetsov, V., Boynton, W., Shinohara, C., et al. (2002) Science 297,
(Wiley, New York), 2nd Ed., pp. 61, 179. 78–81.
16. Tritton, D. J. (1988) Physical Fluid Dynamics (Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford), pp. 36. Mustard, J. F., Cooper, C. D. & Rifkin, M. K. (2001) Nature 412, 411–414.
33–34. 37. Pak, H. K., van Doorn, E. & Behringer, R. P. (1995) Phys. Rev. Lett. 74,
17. Leovy, C. B. (2003) Nature 424, 1008–1009. 4643–4646.
18. Tillman, J. E. (1988) J. Geophys. Res. 93, 9433–9451. 38. Evesque, P. (1990) J. Phys. France 51, 697.
19. Jaeger, H. M., Nagel, S. R. & Behringer, R. P. (1996) Rev. Mod. Phys. 68, 39. Tillman, J. E. (1988) J. Geophys. Res. 93, 9433–9451.
1259–1273. 40. Zurek, R. W., Barnes, J. R., Haberle, R. M., Pollack, J. B., Tillman, J. E. &
20. Adomeit, P. & Renz, U. (2000) Int. J. Multiphase Flow 26, 1183–1208. Leovy, C. B. (1992) in Mars, eds. Kieffer, H. H., Jakosky, B. M., Snyder, C. W.
21. Pasquero, C., Provenzale, A. & Spiegel, E. A. (2003) Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 054502. & Matthews, M. S. (Univ. Arizona Press, Tucson, AZ), pp. 493–555.