1 | The calculated run-up height and resulting inundation ashore is determined by |
---|
2 | the input topographic and bathymetric data, the forcing terms, the |
---|
3 | initial and boundary conditions, as well as the cell resolution. It |
---|
4 | would be ideal if the data adequately captures all complex features |
---|
5 | of the underlying bathymetry and topography and that the cell |
---|
6 | resolution be commensurate with the underlying data. Any limitations |
---|
7 | in terms of resolution and accuracy in the data will introduce |
---|
8 | errors to the inundation maps as well as the range of model approximations, |
---|
9 | including the cell resolution. |
---|
10 | |
---|
11 | A number of sources have supplied data for this study. With |
---|
12 | respect to the onshore data, the Defence Imagery and Geospatial |
---|
13 | Organisation (DIGO) supplied the DTED (Digital Terrain Elevation |
---|
14 | Data) Level 2 data which has been authorised for Australian Tsunami |
---|
15 | Warning System use only. This data has a resolution of 1 second |
---|
16 | (about 30 metres), produced from 1:50 000 contours, elevations and |
---|
17 | drainage. The Department of Land Information (DLI) has provided a |
---|
18 | 20m DEM and orthophotography covering the NW Shelf. As the 30m |
---|
19 | DTED Level 2 data is bare earth we have chosen to use this as |
---|
20 | the onshore data set. |
---|
21 | |
---|
22 | With respect to the offshore data, the Department of Planning and |
---|
23 | Infrastructure have provided state digital fairsheet data around |
---|
24 | Onslow. This data covers only a very small geographic area. (Note, |
---|
25 | similar data has also been provided for Pt Hedland and Broome.) |
---|
26 | The Australian Hydrographic Office fairsheet data has also been utilised. |
---|
27 | |
---|
28 | In summary, |
---|
29 | |
---|
30 | \begin{center} |
---|
31 | \begin{tabular}{|l|l|}\hline |
---|
32 | Data & Detail \\ \hline |
---|
33 | DIGO DTED Level 2 & Onshore, 1 second $\approx$ 30m) \\ \hline |
---|
34 | DLI & Onshore, 20m DEM and orthophotography \\ \hline |
---|
35 | DPI & Offshore, fairsheet data around Onslow \\ \hline |
---|
36 | \end{tabular} |
---|
37 | \end{center} |
---|
38 | |
---|
39 | The coastline has been generated from the DIGO DTED Level 2 and modified |
---|
40 | using the aerial photography and the two detailed surveys provided |
---|
41 | by WA Department of Planning and Infrastructure. |
---|
42 | |
---|
43 | The extent of the |
---|
44 | data used for the tsunami impact modelling can be seen in the |
---|
45 | following figure. |
---|
46 | |
---|
47 | \begin{figure}[hbt] |
---|
48 | |
---|
49 | \centerline{ \includegraphics[width=100mm, height=75mm]{onslow_data_extent.png}} |
---|
50 | |
---|
51 | \caption{Data extent for Onslow scenario. Offshore data shown in blue and onshore data |
---|
52 | in green. The bounding polygon used for the simulation is shown in red.} |
---|
53 | \label{fig:onslow_data_area} |
---|
54 | \end{figure} |
---|
55 | |
---|
56 | |
---|
57 | Section \ref{sec:metadata} outlines the metadata for data used for |
---|
58 | this study. |
---|
59 | |
---|
60 | |
---|
61 | |
---|
62 | |
---|