Ice Thickness Literature and Science

[DrTskoul]

PETROGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF YOUNG SEA ICE,POINT BARROW, ALASKA

A pilot study is made of interrelations between structural features readily observed inhorizontal thin sections of sea ice under low magnification. The core used was 31.4 cm inlength and was collected from Elson Lagoon, Point Barrow, Alaska on 26 October, 1960.The growth of the ice sheet from its formation on 1 October to the time of sampling can bedescribed by....

[DrTskoul]

Billelo et al. : FORMATION, GROWTH, AND DECAY OF SEA-ICE IN  THE CANADIAN ARCTIC ARCHIPELAGO

[DrTskoul]

Assur et al : Growth, structure, and strength of sea ice

[DrTskoul]

Weeks et al. : The mechanical properties of sea ice

[oren]

Thank you Dr for opening this discussion and posting the links. Given the focus on FDDs and their anomalies and the resulting effect on ice thickness, such a thread is very important.
My own two cents is that the formulas derived under past arctic conditions might not work so well in the current environment:
Was: relative uniformity of winter temperatures. Currently: highly variable, with spikes to near-zero and storms in mid-winter.
Was: initial freeze-up under relatively calm conditions. Currently: large swaths of open water are often far from calm.
Was: average thickness of snow on the newly formed ice. Currently: Probably above-average snow due to more open water.

[DrTskoul]

For average thickness over large grid cells etc. You are probably right. Locally though the physics are the same ( adding physics - waves, downwelling longrange IR, etc.will change result ; either you update formula or treat change aso a perturbation additive to the main formula)

[crandles]

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000410/full

Arctic ice management
also posted on geoengineering thread but re-posting here because

see fig 4 and section 2.1:

To constrain the ability of mechanical devices to thicken Arctic sea ice, it is first necessary to have a model of how seawater freezes.
...
We choose this value to match our derived x(t) to an empirical formula found by Maykut [1986]:
x(FDD) = .0133 FDD^.58   m

In Appendix A we solve the above formulas. The results are displayed in Figure 4. For the optimal value of c = 0.68, deriving the following formula (for x > x0):

x(FDD) = -.533 + 0.5 (FDD/221.2 + 1.364 )^.5    m