Changeset 5355


Ignore:
Timestamp:
May 22, 2008, 10:52:49 AM (17 years ago)
Author:
ole
Message:

More work on paper

Location:
anuga_work/publications/anuga_2007
Files:
2 edited

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
  • anuga_work/publications/anuga_2007/anuga-bibliography.bib

    r5354 r5355  
    1 @INPROCEEDINGS{modsim2005,
     1@INPROCEEDINGS{Nielsen2005,
    22  AUTHOR =       {O. Nielsen and S. Roberts and D. Gray and A. McPherson and A. Hitchman},
    33  TITLE =        {Hydrodynamic modelling of coastal inundation},
  • anuga_work/publications/anuga_2007/anuga_validation.tex

    r5353 r5355  
    1616
    1717% Local LaTeX commands
    18 \newcommand{\ANUGA}{ANUGA} %{\textsc{ANUGA}}
    1918%\newcommand{\Python}{\textsc{Python}}
    2019%\newcommand{\VPython}{\textsc{VPython}}
     
    7675communities.  Geoscience Australia and the Australian National
    7776University have developed a hydrodynamic inundation modelling tool
    78 called \ANUGA{} to help simulate the impact of these hazards.
    79 The core of \ANUGA{} is a Python implementation of a finite-volume method
     77called ANUGA to help simulate the impact of these hazards.
     78The core of ANUGA is a Python implementation of a finite-volume method
    8079for solving the conservative form of the Shallow Water Wave equation.
    8180
    82 In this paper, a number of tests are performed to validate \ANUGA{}. These tests
     81In this paper, a number of tests are performed to validate ANUGA. These tests
    8382range from benchmark problems to wave and flume tank examples.
    84 \ANUGA{} is available as Open Source to enable
     83ANUGA is available as Open Source to enable
    8584free access to the software and allow the scientific community to
    8685use, validate and contribute to the software in the future.
     
    128127Australia in collaboration with the Mathematical Sciences Institute,
    129128Australian National University, is developing a software application
    130 called \ANUGA{} to model the hydrodynamics of floods, storm surges and
     129called ANUGA to model the hydrodynamics of floods, storm surges and
    131130tsunami. These hazards are modelled using the conservative shallow
    132131water equations which are described in section~\ref{sec:model}. In
    133 \ANUGA{} these equations are solved using a finite volume method as
     132ANUGA these equations are solved using a finite volume method as
    134133described in section~\ref{sec:model}.  A more complete discussion of the
    135 method can be found in \citet{modsim2005} where the model and solution
     134method can be found in \citet{Nielsen2005} where the model and solution
    136135technique is validated on a standard tsunami benchmark data set
    137 or in \citet{Roberts2007} where parallelisation of ANUGA is discussed.
     136or in \citet{Roberts2007} where the numerical method and parallelisation
     137of ANUGA is discussed.
    138138This modelling capability is part of
    139139Geoscience Australia's ongoing research effort to model and
    140140understand the potential impact from natural hazards in order to
    141141reduce their impact on Australian communities \citep{Nielsen2006}.
    142 \ANUGA{} is currently being trialled for flood
     142ANUGA is currently being trialled for flood
    143143modelling \citep{Rigby2008}.
    144144
    145145The validity of other hydrodynamic models have been reported
    146 elsewhere, with Hubbard and Dodd \citep{Hubbard02} providing an
     146elsewhere, with \citet{Hubbard02} providing an
    147147excellent review of 1D and 2D models and associated validation
    148148tests. They described the evolution of these models from fixed, nested
     
    150150moving shoreline. They highlighted the difficulty in verify the
    151151nonlinear shallow water equations themselves as the only standard
    152 analytical solution is that of Carrier and Greenspan
    153 \citep{Carrier58} that is strictly for non-breaking waves. Further,
    154 whilst there is a 2D analytic solution from Thacker (1981), it appears
     152analytical solution is that of \citet{Carrier58} that is strictly for
     153non-breaking waves. Further,
     154whilst there is a 2D analytic solution from \citet{Thacker81}, it appears
    155155that the circular island wave tank example of Briggs et al will become
    156156the standard data set to verify the equations.
    157157
    158158This paper will describe the validation outputs in a similar way to
    159 Hubbard and Dodd \citep{Hubbard02} to
     159\citet{Hubbard02} to
    160160present an exhaustive validation of the numerical model.
    161161Further to these tests, we will
     
    164164\begin{itemize}
    165165  \item Verification against the 1D analytical solution of Carrier and
    166   Greenspan (Section \ref{sec:carrier})
    167   \item Testing against 1D (flume) data sets to verify wave height and velocity
    168   (Section \ref{sec:stage and velocity})
     166  Greenspan (p~\pageref{sec:carrier})
     167  \item Testing against 1D (flume) data sets to verify wave height and
     168  velocity (p~\pageref{sec:stage and velocity})
    169169  \item Determining friction values from 1D flume data sets
    170   (Section \ref{sec:friction})
    171   \item Validation against a genuinely 2D analytical solution of the
    172   model equations
    173   (Section \ref{sec:XXX})
     170  (p~\pageref{sec:friction})
     171  \item Validation against a genuinely 2D analytical
     172  solution of the model equations (p~\ref{sec:XXX})
    174173  \item Testing against the 2D Okushiri benchmark problem
    175   (Section \ref{sec:okushiri})   
     174  (p~\pageref{sec:okushiri})   
    176175  \item Testing against the 2D data sets modelling wave run-up around a circular island by Briggs et al.
    177   (Section \ref{sec:circular island})
     176  (p~\pageref{sec:circular island})
    178177\end{itemize}   
    179178
     
    181180Throughout the paper, qualitative comparisons will be drawn against
    182181other models.  Moreover, all source code necessary to reproduce the
    183 results reported in this paper is available as part of the \ANUGA{}
     182results reported in this paper is available as part of the ANUGA
    184183distribution in the form of a test suite. It is thus possible for
    185184anyone to readily verify that the implementation meets the
     
    187186 
    188187
    189 %Hubbard and Dodd's model, OTT-2D, has some similarities to \ANUGA{}, and
     188%Hubbard and Dodd's model, OTT-2D, has some similarities to ANUGA, and
    190189%whilst the mesh can be refined, it is based on rectangular mesh.
    191190
    192 The \ANUGA{} model and numerical scheme is briefly described in
    193 section~\ref{sec:model}.  A detailed description of the numerical
    194 scheme and software implementation can be found in the MODSIM, CTAC
    195 etc papers. The six case studies to validation and verify \ANUGA{}
     191%The ANUGA model and numerical scheme is briefly described in
     192%section~\ref{sec:model}.  A more detailed description of the numerical
     193%scheme and software implementation can be found in \citet{Nielsen2005} and
     194%\citet{Roberts2007}.
     195The six case studies to validation and verify ANUGA
    196196will be presented in section~\ref{sec:validation}, with the
    197197conclusions outlined in section~\ref{sec:conclusions}.
     
    208208\citet{Stoker57} and \citet{Peregrine67} for the background or
    209209\citet{Roberts1999} for more details on the mathematical model
    210 used by \ANUGA{}.
     210used by ANUGA.
    211211
    212212The conservation form of the shallow water wave
    213 equations used in \ANUGA{} are:
     213equations used in ANUGA are:
    214214\[
    215215\frac{\partial \UU}{\partial t}+\frac{\partial \EE}{\partial
     
    258258%%know it is excellent?
    259259
    260 \ANUGA{} uses a finite-volume method as
     260ANUGA uses a finite-volume method as
    261261described in \citet{Roberts2007} where the study area is represented by an
    262262unstructured triangular mesh in which the vector of conserved quantities
     
    268268
    269269
    270 The approach used in \ANUGA{} are distinguished from many
     270The approach used in ANUGA are distinguished from many
    271271other implementations (e.g. \citet{Hubbard02} or \citet{Zhang07}) by the
    272272following features:
     
    278278    critical flow transitions using one general approach. We have
    279279    found this scheme to be pleasingly simple, robust and efficient.
    280     \item \ANUGA{} does not employ a shoreline detection algorithm as the
     280    \item ANUGA does not employ a shoreline detection algorithm as the
    281281    central-upwind scheme is capable of resolving fluxes arising between
    282     wet and dry cells. \ANUGA{} does optionally bypass unnecessary
     282    wet and dry cells. ANUGA does optionally bypass unnecessary
    283283    computations for dry-dry cell boundaries for purely performance reasons.
    284     \item \ANUGA{} employs a second order spatial reconstruction of triangles
     284    \item ANUGA employs a second order spatial reconstruction of triangles
    285285    to produce a piece-wise linear function construction of the conserved
    286286    quantities. This function is allowed to be discontinuous across the
     
    316316
    317317
    318 \ANUGA{} utilises a general velocity limiter described in the
     318ANUGA utilises a general velocity limiter described in the
    319319manual which guarantees a gradual compression of computed velocities
    320320in the presence of very shallow depths:
     
    326326
    327327
    328 \ANUGA{} is mostly written in the object-oriented programming
     328ANUGA is mostly written in the object-oriented programming
    329329language Python with computationally intensive parts implemented
    330330as highly optimised shared objects written in C.
     
    335335language syntax. In addition, Python's automatic memory management,
    336336dynamic typing, object model and vast number of libraries means that
    337 \ANUGA scripts can be produced quickly and can be adapted fairly easily to
     337ANUGA scripts can be produced quickly and can be adapted fairly easily to
    338338changing requirements.
    339339
     
    342342\section{Validation}
    343343\label{sec:validation} Validation is an ongoing process and the purpose of this paper
    344 is to describe a range of tests that validate \ANUGA{} as a hydrodynamic model.
     344is to describe a range of tests that validate ANUGA as a hydrodynamic model.
    345345This section will describe the six tests outlined in section~\ref{sec:intro}.
    346346Run times where specified measure the model time only and exclude model setup,
     
    358358This section will describe tilting flume tank experiments that were
    359359conducted at the Gordon McKay Hydraulics Laboratory at the University of
    360 Queensland that confirm \ANUGA{}'s ability to estimate wave height
     360Queensland that confirm ANUGA's ability to estimate wave height
    361361and velocity. The same flume tank simulations were also used
    362362to explore Manning's friction and this will be described in the next section.
     
    389389\begin{figure}[htbp]
    390390\centerline{\includegraphics[width=4in]{uq-flume-depth}}
    391 \caption{Comparison of wave tank and \ANUGA{} water height at .4 m
     391\caption{Comparison of wave tank and ANUGA water height at .4 m
    392392  from the gate}\label{fig:uq-flume-depth}
    393393\end{figure}
     
    395395\begin{figure}[htbp]
    396396\centerline{\includegraphics[width=4in]{uq-flume-velocity}}
    397 \caption{Comparison of wave tank and \ANUGA{} water velocity at .45 m
     397\caption{Comparison of wave tank and ANUGA water velocity at .45 m
    398398  from the gate}\label{fig:uq-flume-velocity}
    399399\end{figure}
     
    450450\begin{figure}[htbp]
    451451\centerline{\includegraphics[width=4in]{uq-friction-depth}}
    452 \caption{Comparison of wave tank and \ANUGA{} water height at .4 m
     452\caption{Comparison of wave tank and ANUGA water height at .4 m
    453453  from the gate, simulated using a Mannings friction of 0.0 and
    454454  0.1.}\label{fig:uq-friction-depth}
     
    478478\centerline{\includegraphics[width=4in]{ch7.png}}
    479479\centerline{\includegraphics[width=4in]{ch9.png}}
    480 \caption{Comparison of wave tank and \ANUGA{} water stages at gauge
     480\caption{Comparison of wave tank and ANUGA water stages at gauge
    4814815,7 and 9.}\label{fig:val}
    482482\end{figure}
     
    486486\centerline{\includegraphics[width=4in]{okushiri-model.jpg}}
    487487\caption{Complex reflection patterns and run-up into Monai Valley
    488 simulated by \ANUGA{} and visualised using our netcdf OSG
     488simulated by ANUGA and visualised using our netcdf OSG
    489489viewer.}\label{fig:run}
    490490\end{figure}
    491491
    492492The wave tank simulation of the Hokkaido tsunami was used as the
    493 first scenario for validating \ANUGA{}. The dataset provided
     493first scenario for validating ANUGA. The dataset provided
    494494bathymetry and topography along with initial water depth and the
    495495wave specifications. The dataset also contained water depth time
    496496series from three wave gauges situated offshore from the simulated
    497 inundation area. The \ANUGA{} model comprised $41404$ triangles
     497inundation area. The ANUGA model comprised $41404$ triangles
    498498and took about $1330$ s to run on the test platform described in
    499499Section~\ref{sec:validation}.
     
    504504
    505505Figure~\ref{fig:val} compares the observed wave tank and modelled
    506 \ANUGA{} water depth (stage height) at one of the gauges. The plots
    507 show good agreement between the two time series, with \ANUGA{
     506ANUGA water depth (stage height) at one of the gauges. The plots
     507show good agreement between the two time series, with ANUGA
    508508closely modelling the initial draw down, the wave shoulder and the
    509509subsequent reflections. The discrepancy between modelled and
     
    511511condition in the physical tank not being uniformly zero. Similarly
    512512good comparisons are evident with data from the other two gauges.
    513 Additionally, \ANUGA{} replicates exceptionally well the 32~m Monai
     513Additionally, ANUGA replicates exceptionally well the 32~m Monai
    514514Valley run-up, and demonstrates its occurrence to be due to the
    515515interaction of the tsunami wave with two juxtaposed valleys above
     
    517517
    518518This successful replication of the tsunami wave tank simulation on a
    519 complex 3D beach is a positive first step in validating the \ANUGA{}
     519complex 3D beach is a positive first step in validating the ANUGA
    520520modelling capability.
    521521
     
    570570\section{Conclusions}
    571571\label{sec:conclusions}
    572 \ANUGA{} is a flexible and robust modelling system
     572ANUGA is a flexible and robust modelling system
    573573that simulates hydrodynamics by solving the shallow water wave
    574574equation in a triangular mesh. It can model the process of wetting
     
    576576capturing hydraulic shocks due to the ability of the finite-volume
    577577method to accommodate discontinuities in the solution.
    578 \ANUGA{} can take as input bathymetric and topographic datasets and
     578ANUGA can take as input bathymetric and topographic datasets and
    579579simulate the behaviour of riverine flooding, storm surge,
    580580tsunami or even dam breaks.
    581 Initial validation using wave tank data supports \ANUGA{}'s
     581Initial validation using wave tank data supports ANUGA's
    582582ability to model complex scenarios. Further validation will be
    583583pursued as additional datasets become available.
    584 The \ANUGA{} source code is available
     584The ANUGA source code and validation case studies reported here are available
    585585at \url{http://sourceforge.net/projects/anuga}.
    586586
Note: See TracChangeset for help on using the changeset viewer.