Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T04:32:02.415Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Stokes, Euler and Lagrange Aspects of Residual Tidal Transports in the English Channel and the Southern Bight of the North Sea

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2009

R. D. Pingree  and
Linda Maddock
R. D. Pingree
Affiliation:
N.E.R.C. Institute of Oceanographic Sciences, Brook Road, Wormley, Godalming, Surrey GU8 5UB
Linda Maddock
Affiliation:
The Laboratory, Marine Biological Association, Citadel Hill, Plymouth PL1 2PB
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

INTRODUCTION

The dust cart on the Isles of Scilly did not end its service at the local tip, over the cliffs at Deep Point on the eastern side of St Mary's on 14 October 1983. Instead it floated off and continued in service as a Lagrangian drifter, indicating the residual transport of water around the islands. As a hazard to shipping its position was given out as a navigation warning and it was allegedly sighted on the western side of Scilly. The interesting oceanographic question is whether the dust cart was (or would have had it not sunk) circumnavigating the islands in a clockwise or anticlockwise sense. Accordingly this experiment has been repeated using satellite tracked Argos drifting buoys, drogued with parachutes (~ 10 m diameter), and set at depths of about 15 m. The releases showed that the residual transport was clockwise around the islands. In one instance a drogue circumnavigated the islands in about 12 h (i.e. ~ one tidal period) at an average speed of about 100 cm s−1 (Fig. 1).

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 65 , Issue 4 , November 1985 , pp. 969 - 982
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Cooper, L. H. N., Lawford, A. L. & Veley, V. F. C., 1960. On variations in the current at the Seven Stones Light Vessel. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 39, 659–665.Google Scholar
Hydrographic Department, 1960. Admiralty Tidal Stream Atlas. The Channel Islands and the Adjacent Coasts of France (N.P. 264). Taunton: Hydrographic Department.Google Scholar
Hydrographic Department, 1973. Admiralty Tidal Stream Altas. The English and Bristol Channels (N.P. 250). Taunton: Hydrographic Department.Google Scholar
Jones, S. R., 1974. Some results from Woodhead seabed drifter releases in the western English Channel and Celtic Sea. Technical Report of the Fisheries Laboratory, Lowestoft, no. 10, 22 pp.Google Scholar
Longuet-Higgins, M. S., 1969. On the transport of mass by time-varying current. Deep-Sea Research, 16, 431—447.Google Scholar
Maddock, L. & Pingree, R. D., 1982. Mean heat and salt budgets for the eastern English Channel and Southern Bight of the North Sea. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 62, 559–575.Google Scholar
Pingree, R. D. & Griffiths, D. K., 1982. Tidal friction and the diurnal tides on the north-west European shelf. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 62, 577–593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pingree, R. D. & Maddock, L., 1979. The tidal physics of headland flows and offshore tidal bank formation. Marine Geology, 32, 269–289.Google Scholar
Pingree, R. D. & Maddock, L., 1985. Rotary currents and residual circulation around banks and islands. Deep-Sea Research. (In the Press.)Google Scholar
Pingree, R. D., Mardell, G. T. & Maddock, L., 1985. Tidal mixing in the Channel Isles region derived from the results of remote sensing and measurements at sea. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 20, 1–18.Google Scholar
Taylor, G. I. T., 1921. Tidal oscillations in gulfs and rectangular basins. Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society, 20 (2), 148–181.Google Scholar