Solution

ID: past-exam-of-the-mathematics-course-of-the-university-of-cambridge/2010/iii/paper-65/4/d/solution

For stable shear-driven turbulence, let be the rate of production of turbulent kinetic energy by mean shear and the rate consumed by buoyancy work. The Flux Richardson number is
With an upward coordinate and vertical turbulent buoyancy flux , , while shear production is . In a locally steady balance without net turbulent-energy transport or storage, , so and the dissipation-normalized mixing coefficient is . A global ratio need not equal this local production-normalized Flux Richardson number when energy transport, storage, or bulk acceleration is important.
The interfacial Richardson number in this tank is
In model S,
Thus the relative importance of interface stratification changes continually. If mixing efficiency depends on interfacial Richardson number, constant is not generally self-consistent over substantial deepening; it can at best describe a regime where that dependence is weak. In model K,
A local efficiency depending only on this ratio can therefore remain constant, provided the fixed interface thickness and the other empirical coefficients remain appropriate.
The energetic reason to expect intermediate behavior is that entrainment must both lift and homogenize dense fluid and mobilize it. The whole upper-layer kinetic energy budget has the form , apart from additional boundary losses. Keeping the characteristic speed constant makes and requires a continuing power supply to accelerate new fluid, together with dissipation in an ever larger layer. Keeping constant instead forces the speed to decline as . A finite lid forcing plausibly produces an initial regime near the former and a deeper regime near the latter, rather than indefinite constant-speed entrainment.
One can make this expected bracket quantitative after matching the models' initial interface speed . Suppose the actual speed lies between and , and the same local coefficients are used. Set . Then
Integrating these inequalities gives
Equivalently, if with , the local power closure yields a late-time depth exponent between and . This is the intended energetic interpolation between K and S, not a universal bound following from the printed assumptions alone. Different efficiencies or unmatched initial coefficients can invalidate pointwise ordering; quantitative prediction requires the lid-to-interface power transfer and the actual energy budget.

New to topics? Read the docs here!