Skip to main content
Log in

Residence and exposure times : when diffusion does not matter

  • Published:
Ocean Dynamics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Under constant hydrodynamic conditions and assuming horizontal homogeneity, negatively buoyant particles released at the surface of the water column have a mean residence time in the surface mixed layer of h/w, where h is the thickness of the latter and w ( > 0) is the sinking velocity Deleersnijder (Environ Fluid Mech 6(6):541–547, 2006a). The residence time does not depend on the diffusivity and equals the settling timescale. We show that this behavior is a result of the particular boundary conditions of the problem and that it is related to a similar property of the exposure time in a one-dimensional infinite domain. In 1-D advection–diffusion problem with a constant and uniform velocity, the exposure time—which is a generalization of the residence time measuring the total time spent by a particle in a control domain allowing the particle to leave and reenter the control domain—is also equal to the advection timescale at the upstream boundary of the control domain. To explain this result, the concept of point exposure is introduced; the point exposure is the time integral of the concentration at a given location. It measures the integrated influence of a point release at a given location and is related to the concept of number of visits of the theory of random walks. We show that the point exposure takes a constant value downstream the point of release, even when the diffusivity varies in space. The analysis of this result reveals also that the integrated downstream transport of a passive tracer is only effected by advection. While the diffusion flux differs from zero at all times, its integrated value is strictly zero.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. http://www.climate.be/CART

References

  • Beckers JM, Delhez E, Deleersnijder E (2001) Some properties of generalized age-distribution equations in fluid dynamics. SIAM J Appl Math 61(5):1526–1544

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolin B, Rhode H (1973) A note on the concepts of age distribution and residence time in natural reservoirs. Tellus 25:58–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Brauwere A, de Brye B, Blaise S, Deleersnijder E (2011) Residence time, exposure time and connectivity in the Scheldt estuary. J Mar Syst 84(3–4):85–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deleersnijder E, Beckers JM, Delhez EJM (2006a) On the behaviour of the residence time at the bottom of the mixed layer. Environ Fluid Mech 6(6):541–547

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deleersnijder E, Beckers JM, Delhez EJM (2006b) The residence time of settling particles in the surface mixed layer. Environ Fluid Mech 6(1):25–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deleersnijder E, Delhez EJM (2004) Symmetry and asymmetry of water ages in a one-dimensional flow. J Mar Syst 48(1–4):61–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deleersnijder E, Delhez EJM, Crucifix M, Beckers JM (2001) On the symmetry of the age field of a passive tracer released into a one-dimensional fluid flow by a point source. Bull Soc R Sci Liège 70:5–21

    Google Scholar 

  • Delhez EJM (1998) Macroscale ecohydrodynamic modeling on the northwest European continental shelf. J Mar Syst 16(1–2):171–190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delhez EJM, Deleersnijder E (2006) The boundary layer of the residence time field. Ocean Dyn 56(2):139–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delhez EJM, Deleersnijder E (2010) Residence time and exposure time of sinking phytoplankton in the euphotic layer. J Theor Biol 262(3):505–516

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delhez EJM, Heemink AW, Deleersnijder E (2004) Residence time in a semi-enclosed domain from the solution of an adjoint problem. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 61(4):691–702

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ennet P, Kuosa H, Tamsalu R (2000) The influence of upwelling and entrainment on the algal bloom in the Baltic Sea. J Mare Syst 25(3–4):359–367

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franks PJS (2001) Turbulence avoidance: an alternate explanation of turbulence-enhanced ingestion rates in the field. Limnol Oceanogr 46(4):959–963

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fung JCH (1993) Gravitational settling of particles and bubbles in homogeneous turbulence. J Geophys Res Ocean 98(C11):20287–20297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall TM, Haine TWN (2004) Tracer age symmetry in advective-diffusive flows. J Mar Syst 48(–4):51–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holzer M, Hall TM (2000) Transit-time and tracer-age distributions in geophysical flows. J Atmos Sci 57(21):3539–3558

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lande R, Wood AM (1987) Suspension times of particles in the upper ocean. Deep-Sea Res 34:61–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lessin G, Raudsepp U (2007) Modelling the spatial distribution of phytoplankton and inorganic nitrogen in Narva Bay, Southeastern Gulf Of Finland, in the biologically active period. Ecol Model 201(3–4):348–358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lillebo AI, Neto JM, Martins I, Verdelhos T, Leston S, Cardoso PG Ferreira SM, Marques JC, Pardal MA (2005) Management of a shallow temperate estuary to control eutrophication: the effect of hydrodynamics on the system’s nutrient loading. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 65(4):697–707

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maxey MR (1987) The motion of small spherical-particles in a cellular-flow field. Phys Fluids 30(7):1915–1928

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Monsen NE, Cloern JE, Lucas LV, Monismith SG (2002) A comment on the use of flushing time, residence time, and age as transport time scales. Limnol Oceanogr 47(5):1545–1553

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morse PM, Feshbach H (1999) Methods of theoretical physics. In: International series in pure and applied physics. McGraw-Hill, Boston, Mass

    Google Scholar 

  • Nihoul JCJ, Djenidi S (1991) Hierarchy and scales in marine ecohydrodynamics. Earth-Sci Rev 31(3–4):255–277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Painting SJ, Devlin MJ, Malcolm SJ, Parker ER, Mills DK, Mills C, Tett P, Wither A, Burt J, Jones R, Winpenny K (2007) Assessing the impact of nutrient enrichment in estuaries: susceptibility to eutrophication. Mar Pollut Bull 55(1–6):74–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross ON (2006) Particles in motion: how turbulence affects plankton sedimentation from an oceanic mixed layer. Geophys Res Lett 33(10):L10609-L10609

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz J (1996) The role of turbulence in the sedimentation loss of pelagic aggregates from the mixed layer. J Mar Res 54(2):385–406

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shah SHAM, Heemink AW, Deleersnijder E (2011) Assessing Lagrangian schemes for simulating diffusion on non-flat isopycnal surfaces. Ocean Model 39(3–4):351–361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spitzer F (2001) Principles of random walk. In: Graduate texts in mathematics, vol 34, 2nd edn. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Takeoka H (1984) Fundamental concepts of exchange and transport time scales in a coastal sea. Cont Shelf Res 3:311–326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang CF, Hsu MH, Kuo AY (2004) Residence time of the Danshuei River Estuary, Taiwan. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 60(3):381–393

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang LP, Maxey MR (1993) Settling velocity and concentration distribution of heavy-particles in homogeneous isotropic turbulence. J Fluid Mech 256:27–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolanski E (2007) Estuarine ecohydrology. Elsevier, Amsterdam; Oxford, p 157

  • Zimmerman JC (1976) Mixing and flushing of tidal embayments in the Western Dutch Wadden Sea. Part I: Distribution of salinity and calculation of mixing time scales. Neth J Sea Res 10(2):149–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

EJMD and ED are honorary research associates with the National Fund for Scientific Research (Belgium). This work was supported by the Interuniversity Attraction Poles Programme TIMOTHY-P6/13 (Belgian Science Policy). This paper is MARE publication n°232.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Éric J. M. Delhez.

Additional information

Responsible Editor: Jin-Song von Storch

Appendix—Point exposure in a 1-D infinite or semi-infinite domain

Appendix—Point exposure in a 1-D infinite or semi-infinite domain

Consider first an infinite channel whose cross-sectional area S(x) depends on the longitudinal coordinate x ∈ ] − ∞ , ∞ [. The velocity u(x) > 0 is assumed to be constant in time but varies spatially in such a way that the volumetric flow rate

$$ Q = S(x) u(x) $$
(26)

is a constant. When a spatially variable diffusivity κ(x) is taken into account, the concentration C(t, x) (or rather its average value over the cross section) obeys the equation

$$ \frac{\partial}{\partial t} \left[S(x)C \right] + \frac{\partial}{\partial_x} \left[Q C - \kappa(x) S(x)\frac{\partial C}{\partial x} \right] = 0 $$
(27)

where t denotes the time.

In order to evaluate the point exposure, a point discharge is introduced at the initial time at some location x 0, i.e.

$$ C(0,x) = \dfrac 1 {S(x_0)} \delta(x-x_0). $$
(28)

In the context of one-dimensional channel with a variable cross section, the residence time and exposure time in a control domain ω can be computed from the solution of the initial value problem Eqs. 2728 as

$$ \theta(x_0), \Theta(x_0) = {\int_0^\infty \int_\omega S(x) C(t,x) \textrm{d}x \textrm{d}t},$$
(29)

It is therefore appropriate to define the point exposure as

$$C^\Theta_{x_0}(x) = \int_0^\infty S(x)C(t,x) \textrm{d}t$$
(30)

which can be expressed as

$$C^\Theta_{x_0}(x) = S(x)\xi(x)$$
(31)

using the auxiliary variable

$$\xi(x) = \int_0^\infty C(t,x) \textrm{d}t.$$
(32)

A differential equation for this auxiliary variable can be obtained by integrating Eq. 27 for t ∈ ]0, + ∞ [. One gets

$$ \begin{array}{rll} && S(x)\left[\lim\limits_{t\to+\infty}C(t,x)- C(0,x)\right] \\ &&\quad + \dfrac{\textrm{d}\phantom x}{\textrm{d}x}\left(Q \xi - \kappa(x)S(x)\dfrac {\textrm{d}\xi} {\textrm{d}x} \right)=0. \end{array} $$
(33)

Using Eq. 28, assuming that the tracer is completely flushed out as t tends to infinity, one has:

$$\delta(x-x_0) = \dfrac{\textrm{d}\phantom x}{\textrm{d}x}\left(Q \xi - \kappa(x)S(x)\dfrac {\textrm{d}\xi} {\textrm{d}x} \right).$$
(34)

On the upstream side, assuming that the signal does not diffuse to − ∞, one gets

$$Q \xi - \kappa(x)S(x)\dfrac {\textrm{d}\xi} {\textrm{d}x} =0 $$
(35)

and

$$\xi (x) = \xi(x_0^-) \exp \left[-\int_x^{x_0} \dfrac Q {\kappa(x')S(x')} \textrm{d}x'\right], \qquad x<x_0.$$
(36)

Downstream, the solution takes the form

$$\xi(x) = \alpha + \beta \exp \left[\int_{x_0}^x \dfrac Q {\kappa(x')S(x')} \textrm{d}x'\right], \qquad x>x_0$$
(37)

where α and β are appropriate integration constants. To avoid the exponential growth as x tends to infinity, one must have β = 0 (unless κ vanishes at a sublinear rate), so that ξ(x) is a constant in this part of the domain.

The matching of the solutions in the upstream and downstream parts requires that

$$\lim\limits_{x\to x_0^+} \xi(x) = \lim\limits_{x\to x_0^-} \xi(x)$$
(38)

and

$$ \begin{array}{rll} &&\lim\limits_{x\to x_0^+} \left(Q \xi - \kappa(x)S(x)\dfrac {\textrm{d}\xi} {\textrm{d}x} \right)\\ &&\quad -\lim\limits_{x\to x_0^-} \left(Q \xi - \kappa(x)S(x)\dfrac {\textrm{d}\xi} {\textrm{d}x} \right)= 1 \end{array} $$
(39)

hence

$$\xi(x_0^-) = \alpha = \dfrac 1 Q.$$
(40)

Finally, one gets

$$C^\Theta_{x_0}(x) = \begin{cases}\dfrac {S(x)} Q \exp \left[-\displaystyle\int_x^{x_0} \dfrac Q {\kappa(x')S(x')} \textrm{d}x'\right] \qquad &x< x_0\\[12pt] \dfrac {S(x)} Q \qquad &x\geq x_0.\end{cases}$$
(41)

Obviously, the above-mentioned results also apply to a semi-infinite domain x ∈ ]a, + ∞ [ provided that the condition Eq. 35 is valid upstream the point of release. In particular, Eq. 41 applies also to any semi-infinite channel if the total tracer flux (advection + diffusion) vanishes at the upstream boundary.

Also, when the cross section of the channel is a constant, the velocity u is also constant, and Eq. 41 takes the simpler form Eq. 19.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Delhez, É.J.M., Deleersnijder, É. Residence and exposure times : when diffusion does not matter. Ocean Dynamics 62, 1399–1407 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10236-012-0568-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10236-012-0568-y

Keywords

Navigation