Changeset 3045


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Jun 1, 2006, 6:46:53 PM (18 years ago)
Author:
sexton
Message:

minor updates

File:
1 edited

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
  • documentation/experimentation/MOST_ANUGA.tex

    r3044 r3045  
    2222\marginparwidth 0.5pt
    2323\textwidth \paperwidth
    24 %\advance\textwidth -2.5in
     24\advance\textwidth -2.5in
    2525%\setstretch{1.5}
    2626%\parindent 0pt
    2727%\parskip 2pt
    2828
    29 \title{Inundation Modelling of an Earthquake Source: Where is the boundary?}
     29\title{Inundation Modelling from an Earthquake Source}
    3030\date{}
    3131
     
    3838The ATWS aims to detect and warn the community
    3939of tsunami-genic events as well as develop community education programs for
    40 preparation of the event. Risk mitigation involves understanding the relative risk
    41 of tsunamis to communities so that appropropriate evacuation plans can be put in place.
     40preparation of the event. Risk mitigation involves understanding the relative
     41risk
     42of tsunamis to communities so that appropropriate evacuation plans can be
     43put in place.
    4244To develop an understanding of the risk, the Risk Research Group is developing
    43 decision support tools to assist emergency managers. These tools consist of inundation
    44 maps, damage modelling overlaid on aerial photography of the region which details critical
     45decision support tools to assist emergency managers. These tools consist
     46of inundation
     47maps and damage modelling overlaid on aerial photography of the region
     48detailing critical
    4549infrastructure. This report deals with the tsunami inundation modelling
    46 and the interaction with the event propagation model, Method of Splitting Tsunami (MOST).
     50and the interaction with the event propagation model, Method of
     51Splitting Tsunami (MOST).
    4752
    4853  \end{abstract}
     
    5358\label{intro}
    5459
    55 Following the risk methodology of determining the hazard, consequence,
    56 exposure to find the overall risk, the first step in determining
    57 tsunami risk is understanding the hazard. Tsunamis can be generated by
     60To determine tsunami risk, we follow the risk methodology of
     61determining the hazard, consequence and
     62exposure. The tsunami hazard can be generated by
    5863submarine earthquakes and mass failures, as well as volcanoes and asteroid
    5964impacts. Here, we concentrate on submarine earthquakes only. The
    6065Method of Splitting Tsunami (MOST) models the earthquake event and
    6166propagates the tsunami wave in deep water, \cite{titov:most}.
    62 Due to the wavelength and water depth, a linear model is appropriate. GA
    63 has developed a preliminary hazard map for Australia which is based
     67GA has used this model to develop
     68a preliminary hazard map for Australia which is based
    6469on generating a series of earthquakes along the relevant subduction
    6570zones surrounding Australia. The map details the average wave height
    6671at the 50m contour line and has been used in nominating areas of
    6772detailed inundation modelling by the Fire and Emergency Services Authority
    68 in Western Australia.
    69 
    70 The next step in developing the tsunami risk is to determine the
    71 consequence of the tsunami wave once is reaches the coastline.
    72 Here, we use the software tool ANUGA which solves the shallow water wave equation to
    73 calculate as the maximum inundation depth ashore. ANUGA uses the
    74 finite volume technique, \cite{ON:modsim} whose
    75 advantage is that the cell resolution can be changed
     73in Western Australia. MOST uses a finite difference technique and is
     74based on a fixed grid structure. Inputs include bathymetric data, typically
     75on the order of 100m grid spacing, and details regarding the source, such
     76as location, size, slip angle, for example.
     77
     78In determining the
     79consequence of the tsunami wave once is reaches the coastline,
     80we use the software tool ANUGA which solves the shallow water
     81wave equation to
     82calculate the maximum inundation depth ashore. ANUGA uses the
     83finite volume technique, \cite{ON:modsim} with the
     84advantage being that the cell resolution can be changed
    7685according to areas of interest and that wetting and drying
    7786is treated robustly as part of the numerical scheme.
    78 ANUGA is continually being developed and validated. ANUGA requires a number
     87ANUGA requires a number
    7988of inputs including on and offshore data,
    8089an initial condition (such as the tidal height), forcing
     
    8291the tsunami wave). This report discusses the details of the latter point,
    8392i.e the interaction between ANUGA and MOST
    84 focussing on the location at which information is "best" passed from one model
    85 to the next. Drivers for this study surround computational processing time
     93focussing on the location at which information is ``best''
     94passed from one model
     95to the next.
     96
     97Drivers for this study surround computational processing time
    8698to develop both {\it tactical} and {\it strategic} decision support tools.
    87 Tactical tools support “real time” consequence prediction for emergency manager use
     99Tactical tools support ``real time'' consequence prediction for
     100emergency manager use
    88101to obtain assessments of tsunami impact and expected
    89102consequences to guide initial resource deployment. Strategic tools are based
    90 on using estimated recurrence rates of tsunamigenic events, the modelled inundation
    91 and associated damage\footnote{This activity is also part of the Risk Research Group
    92 which uses the National Building Exposure Database, see
    93 http://www.ga.gov.au/urban/projects/ramp/NBED.jsp}  (the exposure)
    94 to present a national tsunami risk map. On another strategic level,
     103on using estimated recurrence rates of tsunamigenic events (the hazard),
     104the modelled
     105inundation and associated damage (exposure)
     106to present a national tsunami risk map.
     107On another strategic level,
    95108the precomputed simulations
    96109and risk maps will comprise a library of scenarios for the Australian Tsunami
    97 Warning System to assist in mitigation, warning, response and community recovery
    98 in the event of a tsunami disaster.
     110Warning System to assist in mitigation, warning, response and community
     111recovery in the event of a tsunami disaster.
    99112
    100113\section{The modelling environment}
     
    108121calls for interpolation from the MOST output to the defined boundary. As
    109122MOST is modelling the tsunami wave from its source and is often made
    110 up of a series of waves, We need to account for its time varying nature.
     123up of a series of waves,
     124ANUGA needs to account for its time varying nature.
    111125ANUGA deals with a time varying boundary in the following way.
    112126
     
    115129\label{compare}
    116130
    117 This section details a range of comparisons at "gauge" points located
    118 within the study area, including the boundary. The purpose is to ascertain
    119 any relationships between the bathymetric topography and the "matching"
     131This section details a range of comparisons at ``gauge'' points located
     132within the study area, including the boundary. Note, these gauges are
     133constructed for computational purposes only and are not physical tide
     134gauges. The purpose is to ascertain
     135any relationships between the bathymetric topography and the ``matching''
    120136of the ANUGA and MOST outputs. The difficult question is to
    121 how to define this "matching". Here, we define the measure of blah de blah.
     137how to define this matching. Here, we define the measure of blah de blah.
    122138
    123139Firstly, at what water depth should we place the ANUGA boundary? And where
     
    127143when the depth of the water,
    128144$d$, becomes less than one half of the wavelength of the wave,
    129 $\lambda$\footnote{http://electron4.phys.utk.edu/141/dec8/December%208.htm}.
    130 Wavelengths can often be of the order of 100km which would place the transition
    131 at 50km! This then aligns with the following NOAA statement,
     145$\lambda$
     146\footnote{http://electron4.phys.utk.edu/141/dec8/December\%208.htm}.
     147Wavelengths can often be of the order of 100km which would place the
     148transition at 50km! This then aligns with the following NOAA statement,
    132149"[t]sunami waves are shallow-water waves with long periods and wave lengths."
    133 \footnote{http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/tsunami-hazard/tsunami_faqs.htm}
     150\footnote{http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/tsunami-hazard/tsunami\_faqs.htm}
    134151
    135152Unfortunately, this doesn't help the modelling effort as the study area
    136 is constrained by UTM zones and the computational load. However, the former issue
    137 is planned for investigation and the latter is underway through the parallelisation
    138 of ANUGA.
     153is constrained by UTM zones and the computational load. However, the
     154former issue
     155is planned for investigation and the latter is underway through the
     156parallelisation of ANUGA.
    139157
    140158need some words here about why 100m has been chosen
     
    145163\subsection{Onslow case study}
    146164
    147 Picture of grid layout, ANUGA boundary and choice of gauge locatations.
    148 
    149 Table of gauge locations
    150 
    151 \begin{table}{|l|l|l|l|}
    152 \label{gaugetable}
     165\begin{figure}
     166\caption{Diagram of MOST grid layout, ANUGA boundary and gauge
     167locatations.}
     168\label{fig:setup}
     169\end{figure}
     170
     171\begin{table}
     172\label{table:gauge}
    153173\caption{Gauge locations used for comparative study}
     174\centering
     175\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l|}\hline
    154176Gauge number & Latitude & Longitude & Elevation (m) \\ \hline
    155177& & & -372 \\ \hline
     178\end{tabular}
    156179\end{table}
    157180
    158 comparison table
    159 
    160 \begin{table}{|l|l|l|l|}
    161 \label{comparisontable}
    162 \caption{Comparison in output when ANUGA boundary at 50m contour and 100m contour.}
     181
     182\begin{table}
     183\label{table:comparison}
     184\caption{Comparison in output when ANUGA boundary at 50m contour and
     185100m contour.}
     186\centering
     187\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|}\hline
    163188Gauge number & Boundary at 50m contour & Boundary at 100m contour \\ \hline
    164 & & &  some sort of measure of fit \\ \hline
     189& &  some sort of measure of fit \\ \hline
     190\end{tabular}
    165191\end{table}
    166192
     
    172198\begin{thebibliography}{99}
    173199
    174 \bibitem{ON:modsim} Nielsen, O., S. Robers, D. Gray, A. McPherson, and A. Hitchman (2005)
     200\bibitem{ON:modsim} Nielsen, O., S. Robers, D. Gray, A. McPherson, and
     201A. Hitchman (2005)
    175202Hydrodynamic modelling of coastal inundation, MODSIM 2005 International
    176203Congress on Modelling and Simulation. Modelling and Simulation Society
     
    178205http://www.mssanz.org.au/modsim05/papers/nielsen.pdf
    179206
    180 \bibitem{titov:most} Titov, V.V., and F.I. Gonzalez (1997), Implementation and testing of
     207\bibitem{titov:most} Titov, V.V., and F.I. Gonzalez (1997), Implementation
     208and testing of
    181209the Method of Splitting Tsunami (MOST) model, NOAA Technical Memorandum
    182210ERL PMEL-112.
Note: See TracChangeset for help on using the changeset viewer.