Changeset 2735


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Apr 20, 2006, 4:42:33 PM (18 years ago)
Author:
sexton
Message:

updates

File:
1 edited

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
  • inundation/report_generation/report_fesa_project_v1.tex

    r2703 r2735  
    1717\usepackage{lscape} %landcape pages support
    1818%\input{definitions}
    19 
    20 \title{Tsunami impact modelling for NW shelf}
     19%\paperwidth
     20\title{Tsunami impact modelling for the NW shelf}
    2121\date{}
    2222
     
    4242understand impact and risk to tsunami hazard.
    4343
    44 The current results represent ongoing work and may change in the future.
    4544
    4645The software tool, ANUGA, has been used to develop the inundation extent
     
    4948wave equation using the finite volume technique (described in [1]).
    5049An advantage of this technique is that the cell resolution can be changed
    51 according to areas of interest.
    52 
    53 The following set of information is necessary input to undertake the tsunami
    54 impact modelling.
     50according to areas of interest. ANUGA is under constant development and
     51validation investigations. As such, the current results represent ongoing work
     52and may change in the future.
     53
     54The following set of information is required input to undertake the tsunami
     55impact modelling and will be discussed in following sections.
    5556
    5657\begin{itemize}
     
    6061\end{itemize}
    6162
     63The inundation results for the two scenarios are described in section \ref{sec:results}.
     64
    6265\section{Data sources}
     66\label{sec:data}
    6367
    6468The runup height and resulting inundation ashore is determined by the input
    65 topographic and bathymetric data, the forcing terms as well as the initial
    66 and boundary conditions. It would be ideal if the data adequately captures
    67 all complex features of the underlying bathymetry and topography.
    68 
    69 What can we say about the data used here? How happy?
    70 
     69topographic and bathymetric data, the forcing terms, the initial
     70and boundary conditions, as well as the cell resolution.
     71It would be ideal if the data adequately captures
     72all complex features of the underlying bathymetry and topography and that
     73the cell resolution be commensurate with the underlying data. Errors in any of
     74these areas will affect the accuracy of the final model result.
     75
     76A number of sources have supplied data for these two studies. With respect to the
     77onshore data, the Defence Imagery and Geospatial Organisation (DIGO) supplied the
     78DTED (Digital Terrain Elevation Data) Level 2 data which
     79has been authorised for Australian Tsunami Warning System use only. This data has a resolution of
     801 second (about 30 metres), produced from 1:50 000 contours, elevations and drainage. 
     81The Department of Land Information (DLI) has provided a 20m DEM and orthophotography
     82covering the NW Shelf. This data set is not bare earth and as a result, we have
     83chosen to use the 30m DTED Level 2 data due to its bare earth thingo.
     84 
     85With respect to the offshore data, the Department of Planning and Infrastructure have provided
     86state digital fairsheet data around Onslow.
     87This data covers only a very small geographic area.
     88(Note, similar data has also been provided for Broome.)
     89The Port Hedland Port Authority has provided digital data from a multibeam survey of the
     90Port Hedland channel.  The Australian Hydrographic Office fairsheet data has also been utilised.
     91
     92The coastline has been generated from the DIGO DTED2 and modified using the aerial photography and the two detailed
     93surveys provided by WA Department of Planning and Infrastructure. The extent of the data used
     94for the tsunami impact modelling can be seen in the following two figures.
     95
     96\begin{figure}[hbt]
     97
     98  %\centerline{ \includegraphics[width=75mm, height=75mm]{figures/.eps}}
     99
     100  \caption{Data extent for Onslow scenario}
     101  \label{fig:onslow_area}
     102\end{figure}
     103
     104\begin{figure}[hbt]
     105
     106  %\centerline{ \includegraphics[width=75mm, height=75mm]{figures/.eps}}
     107
     108  \caption{Data extent for Pt Hedland scenario}
     109  \label{fig:pt_hedland_area}
     110\end{figure}
     111
     112
     113In summary,
     114
     115
     116\begin{tabular}{|l|l}} \hline
     117Data & Detail \hline
     118DIGO DTED Level 2 DIGO & Onshore, 1 second (\approx 30m) \hline
     119DLI & Onshore, 20m DEM and orthophotography \hline
     120DPI & Offshore, fairsheet data around Onslow \hline
     121Pt Hedland Port Authority & offshore, digital multibeam survey \hline
     122
     123\end{tabular}
     124
     125
     126What can we say about the data used here? How happy? Need to put in some words
     127here from Hamish on the data - any issues etc.
     128Do we have to combine any data? If so, comment.
     129
     130%\input{data_issues}
    71131
    72132\section{Tsunami scenarios}
    73 
    74 \begin{figure}[hbt]
    75 
    76   %\centerline{ \includegraphics[width=75mm, height=75mm]{examples/.eps}}
     133\label{sec:tsunami_scenarios}
     134
     135need to say something about the event, i.e. Mw 8.5 event initiated along the
     136Java Trench (get from David)
     137
     138\begin{figure}[hbt]
     139
     140  %\centerline{ \includegraphics[width=75mm, height=75mm]{figures/.eps}}
    77141
    78142  \caption{Source zones of influence}
     
    81145
    82146
    83 
    84147\section{Inundation modelling results}
    85 
    86 Do we have to combine any data? If so, comment.
    87 %\include{interpretation.tex}
    88 \begin{figure}[hbt]
    89 
    90   %\centerline{ \includegraphics[width=75mm, height=75mm]{examples/.eps}}
     148\label{sec:results}
     149
     150To initiate the modelling, the computational mesh is constructed to cover the available data.
     151The resolution is chosen to balance computational time and desired resolution in areas of interest,
     152particularly in the interface between the on and offshore.
     153The following series of figures illustrate the study extent for the two
     154scenarios and the resulting computational mesh, highlighting areas of
     155refinement around areas of particular interest.
     156
     157\begin{figure}[hbt]
     158
     159  %\centerline{ \includegraphics[width=75mm, height=75mm]{figures/.eps}}
    91160
    92161  \caption{Study area for scenario 1: Onslow}
     
    94163\end{figure}
    95164
    96 \begin{figure}[hbt]
    97 
    98   %\centerline{ \includegraphics[width=75mm, height=75mm]{examples/.eps}}
     165
     166\begin{figure}[hbt]
     167
     168  %\centerline{ \includegraphics[width=75mm, height=75mm]{figures/.eps}}
    99169
    100170  \caption{Computational mesh for Onslow study area}
     
    104174\begin{figure}[hbt]
    105175
    106   %\centerline{ \includegraphics[width=75mm, height=75mm]{examples/.eps}}
     176  %\centerline{ \includegraphics[width=75mm, height=75mm]{figures/.eps}}
    107177
    108178  \caption{Study area for scenario 2: Pt Hedland}
     
    110180\end{figure}
    111181
    112 \begin{figure}[hbt]
    113 
    114   %\centerline{ \includegraphics[width=75mm, height=75mm]{examples/.eps}}
     182
     183\begin{figure}[hbt]
     184
     185  %\centerline{ \includegraphics[width=75mm, height=75mm]{figures/.eps}}
    115186
    116187  \caption{Computational mesh for Pt Hedland study area}
     
    118189\end{figure}
    119190
    120 Time series at relevant gauge locations - INSERT RESULTS HERE ( insert generated
    121 latex file)
    122 
     191%\input{interpretation}
     192
     193
     194\input{tex_output_test}
    123195
    124196\section{Summary}
Note: See TracChangeset for help on using the changeset viewer.