Changeset 3232

Jun 26, 2006, 2:48:51 PM (17 years ago)

report updates

8 edited


  • production/onslow_2006/

    r3221 r3232  
    265265s = """
    266    \section{Summary}
     266   \section{Discussion}
     267     \input{discussion}
     269     \section{Summary}
    267270     \input{summary}
  • production/onslow_2006/report/anuga.tex

    r3217 r3232  
    99according to areas of interest and that wetting and drying
    1010is treated robustly as part of the numerical scheme.
    11 ANUGA is continually being developed and validated.
     11ANUGA is continually being developed and validated to ensure
     12the modelling approximations reflect new theory or
     13available experimental data sets.
    1214As such, the current results represent ongoing work
    1315and may change in the future.
    2224\item boundary condition (the tsunami source as described in
    2325Section \ref{sec:tsunamiscenario})
    24 \item forcing terms (such as wind)
    2526\item computational requirements relating to the mesh construction
    28 As part of the CRA, it was decided to provide results for the
    29 extremes of the tidal regimes to understand the potential range of impacts
    30 from the event. Onslow is termed a Standard Port
    31 by the Australian Hydrographic Service, with tidal
    32 predictions based on continuous observation of the tide
    33 over a period of at least one year, however it is advised that these
    34 observations extend to three years to note changes in the mean
    35 sea level. The Australian National Tide Tables 2006 \cite{antt:06}
    36 describes how
    37 these predictions are rounded to two decimal places, then
    38 further rounded to a single decimal place.
    39 Figure \ref{fig:ic} shows the contour lines for
    40 the values for
    41 Highest Astronomical Tide (HAT; 1.5m AHD), Mean Sea Level (MSL; 0m AHD)
    42 and Lowest Astronomical Tide (LAT; -1.5m AHD) for Onslow, \cite{antt:06}.
    43 It is evident from this figure that significant areas of Onslow are
    44 inundated before the simulation is even begun indicating
    45 shortcomings with the underlying data set. Therefore, we use only
    46 one initial condition for this scenario; 0m AHD. Further
    47 discussion surrounding the data and its sources is described in
    48 Sections \ref{sec:data} and \ref{sec:metadata}.
    49 %It is important to note that there is no Bureau of Metereoolgy
    50 %tide gauge in Onslow,
    51 As an aside, a current GA contract is
    52 extracting information from LANDSAT imagery to reconstruct the
    53 tidal variations for various WA locations. Future modelling of
    54 these areas will incorporate this information.
    55 Further, the dynamics of
     29The initial condition used for this scenario is 0m Australian Height Datum
     30which is approximately equal to Mean Sea Level.
     31The dynamics of
    5632tidal effects (that is, the changes in water height over time for
    5733the entire study area) is not currently modelled.
    58 %In the simulations provided in this report, we assume that
    59 %increase of water height for the initial condition is spatially consistent
    60 %for the study region.
    6134Bottom friction will generally provide resistance to the water flow
    6235and thus reduce the impact somewhat. However, it is an open area
    6336of research on how to determine the friction coefficients, and
    6437thus it has not been incorporated
    65 in the scenarios presented in this report. Therefore, the
     38in the scenario presented in this report. Therefore, the
    6639results presented are over estimated to some degree.
    68 \begin{figure}[hbt]
    70   \centerline{ \includegraphics[width=150mm, height=100mm]
    71 {../report_figures/contours.jpg}}
    73   \caption{Onslow regions showing the 1.5m AHD, 0m AHD and -1.5m AHD contour lines.}
    74   \label{fig:ic}
    75 \end{figure}
  • production/onslow_2006/report/computational_setup.tex

    r3201 r3232  
    8686the boundary (the 100m contour line as shown in Figure \ref{fig:onslow_area})
    8787and continues to propagate the wave in shallow water and onshore.
    88 To illustrate the form of the tsunami wave, we show the form
    89 of the tsunami wave moving through the point locations
    90 shown in \ref{fig:pointline3d}. This time history is
    91 shown as a surface in Figure \ref{fig:MOSTsolution}.
    93 \begin{figure}[hbt]
    95   \centerline{ \includegraphics[width=100mm, height=75mm]
    96               {../report_figures/point_line_3d.png}}
    98   \caption{Point locations used to show form of tsunami wave.}
    99   \label{fig:pointline3d}
    100 \end{figure}
    102 \begin{figure}[hbt]
    104   \centerline{ \includegraphics[width=100mm, height=75mm]
    105               {../report_figures/solution_surfaceMOST.png}}
    107   \caption{Time history of tsunami wave.}
    108   \label{fig:MOSTsolution}
    109 \end{figure}
     88To illustrate the form of the tsunami wave, we show the
     89tsunami wave moving through the point locations
     90(Figure \ref{fig:MOSTsolution}(a)). This time history is
     91shown as a surface in Figure \ref{fig:MOSTsolution}(b).
     95 \centering
     96 \begin{tabular}{cc}
     97\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth, height=50mm]{../report_figures/point_line_3d.png}&
     98\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth, height=50mm]{../report_figures/solution_surfaceMOST.png}\\
     100 \caption{(1) Point locations used to illustrate form of tsunami wave.
     101(2) Time hisorty of tsunami wave)}
     102 \label{fig:MOSTsolution}
     103 \end{figure}
  • production/onslow_2006/report/damage.tex

    r3221 r3232  
    2 This section deals with impact modelling which covers damage
    3 modelling and economic impact analysis.
    5 Damage modelling refers to damage
    6 to infrastructure as a result
    7 of the inundation described in the previous sections. The infrastructure
     2%This section deals with impact modelling which covers damage
     3%modelling and economic impact analysis.
     4In this report, impact modelling refers to damage as a result
     5of the inundation described in Section \ref{sec:results}. This damage
     6is reported as to damage to infrastructure as well as
     7number of human injuries. The infrastructure
    88refers to residential structures only and is sourced from the
    99the National Building Exposure Database (NBED). The NBED has been
    3434residential collapse probability models and casualty models and their
    3535application to inundation modelling.
    37 There is a paucity of data on the tsunami vulnerability of buildings.
    38 With reference to the limited data found in the international literature,
     36With limited data found in the international literature,
    3937along with reported observations made of building performance during the
    4038recent Indian Ocean tsunami, vulnerability models have been proposed for
  • production/onslow_2006/report/damage_inputs.tex

    r3221 r3232  
    88Building Location &
    9         <1.0 &  1.0<h<2.0&      2.0<h<3.0       &3.0<h<5.0      &>5.0 \\ \hline
     9$h$<1.0 &1.0<$h$<2.0&   2.0<$h$<3.0     &3.0<$h$<5.0    &$h$>5.0 \\ \hline
    1010First 2 Rows
    1111(1st block)     &0.05   &0.6    &0.8    &0.95   &0.99 \\ \hline
  • production/onslow_2006/report/introduction.tex

    r3169 r3232  
    1313threat and develop detailed response plans for a range of plausible events.
    15 This report is the first in a series of studies assessing the relative
    16 risk to the tsunami threat. Subsequent reports will not only
     15This report is the first in a series of studies which
     16becomes a component of the suite of tsunami assessments for the North West
     18Subsequent reports will not only
    1719describe studies for other localities, they will also revisit these
    18 scenarios as more refined hazard models become available. In this report,
     20scenarios as more refined hazard models with associated return rates
     21become available. In this report,
    1922the methods, assumptions and impacts of a
    2023single tsunami source scenario is described for the Onslow area in the
  • production/onslow_2006/report/modelling_methodology.tex

    r3222 r3232  
    1 Tsunami hazard models have been available some time. They generally
     1Tsunami hazard models have been available for some time. They generally
    22work by converting the energy released by a subduction earthquake into
    33a vertical displacement of the ocean surface. The resulting wave is
    1818\cite{matsuyama:1999}. To model the
    1919details of tsunami inundation of a community one must therefore capture what is
    20 known as non-linear effects and use a much higher resolution for the elevation data.
    21 The model ANUGA (\cite{ON:modsim}) is suitable for this type of modelling.
     20known as non-linear effects and use a much higher resolution for the
     21elevation data.
     22Linear models typically use data resolutions of the order
     23of hundreds of metres, which is sufficient to model long wavelength tsunami waves.
     24Non-linear models by contrast require much finer resolution in order to capture
     25the complexity associated the water flow from off to onshore. The data
     26resolution is typically of the order of tens of metres.
     27The model ANUGA (\cite{ON:modsim}) is suitable for this type of non-linear
    2230However, using a non-linear model capable of resolving local bathymetric effects
    2331and runup using detailed elevation data will require much more computational
    4654             {../report_figures/refined_mesh.jpg}}
    48   \caption{Computational mesh with variable resolution.}
     56  \caption{Unstructured mesh with variable resolution.}
    4957  \label{fig:refinedmesh}
  • production/onslow_2006/report/tsunami_scenario.tex

    r3169 r3232  
    1111could potentially be as high as 9.
    13 Current studies underway in GA are building probabilistic
     13FESA are interested in the ``most frequent worst case scenario''. Whilst
     14we currently cannot determine exactly what that event may be, the Mw 9 event
     15provides a plausible worst case scenario. To understand the
     16frequency of these tsunami-genic events,
     17current studies underway in GA are building probabilistic
    1418models to develop a more complete tsunami hazard assessment
    1519for the Sunda Arc subduction zone,
    1923they are likely to pose a comparatively low and more localised hazard to WA.
    21 FESA are interested in the ``most frequent worst case scenario''. Whilst
    22 we cannot determine exactly what that event may be, the Mw 9 event provides
    23 a plausible worst case scenario.
    2525Figure \ref{fig:mw9} shows the maximum wave height at the 50m contour
    2626for a Mw 9 event off
    2727the coast of Java. It is this event which provides the source and
    2828boundary condition to the
    29 inundation model presented in this report. Description of the boundary
    30 condition particular to the Onslow study area
    31 follows in Section \ref{sec:anuga}.
     29inundation model presented in Section \ref{sec:anuga}.
Note: See TracChangeset for help on using the changeset viewer.