Changeset 7467


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Sep 2, 2009, 5:03:04 PM (11 years ago)
Author:
ole
Message:

Added new speed images from Kristy and added reference to NOAA data

Location:
anuga_work/publications/boxing_day_validation_2008
Files:
4 edited

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
  • anuga_work/publications/boxing_day_validation_2008/appendix.tex

    r7465 r7467  
    3737\end{figure}
    3838
    39 %\begin{figure}[ht]
    40 %\begin{center}
    41 %\includegraphics[width=6cm,keepaspectratio=true]{figures/sensitivity_f0_0003_speed}
    42 %\includegraphics[width=6cm,keepaspectratio=true]{figures/sensitivity_f0_03_speed}
    43 %\caption{The maximal flow speeds for the same model parameterisations
    44 %  found in Figure \protect \ref{fig:sensitivity_friction}. The
    45 %  reference flow speeds are shown in Figure \protect
    46 %  \ref{fig:reference_model} (right).}
    47 %\label{fig:sensitivity_friction_speed}
    48 %\end{center}
    49 %\end{figure}
    50 % John: I do not think we need to show sensitivity to flow speeds
     39\begin{figure}[ht]
     40\begin{center}
     41\includegraphics[width=\textwidth,keepaspectratio=true]{figures/sensitivity_friction_speed}
     42\caption{The maximal flow speeds for the same model parameterisations
     43  found in Figure \protect \ref{fig:sensitivity_friction}.}
     44\label{fig:sensitivity_friction_speed}
     45\end{center}
     46\end{figure}
    5147
    5248
    5349\begin{figure}[ht]
    5450\begin{center}
    55 %\includegraphics[width=6cm,keepaspectratio=true]{sensitivity_minus10cm_depth}
    56 %\includegraphics[width=6cm,keepaspectratio=true]{sensitivity_plus10cm_depth}
    5751\includegraphics[width=\textwidth,keepaspectratio=true]{figures/sensitivity_boundary_wave}
    5852\caption{Model results with wave height at \textsc{anuga} boundary artificially
    5953  modified to assess sensitivities.
    6054  The reference inundation extent is shown in Figure
    61   \protect \ref{fig:reference_model} (left).  The left and right images
     55  \protect \ref{fig:reference_model} (left). The left and right images
    6256  show the inundation results if the wave at the \textsc{anuga} boundary
    6357  is reduced or increased by 10 cm respectively. The inundation
     
    6862\end{center}
    6963\end{figure}
    70 FIXME (Jane): How and why was the +/- 10 cm chosen?
    7164
    7265
    73 %\begin{figure}[ht]
    74 %\begin{center}
    75 %\includegraphics[width=6cm,keepaspectratio=true]{figures/sensitivity_minus10cm_speed}
    76 %\includegraphics[width=6cm,keepaspectratio=true]{figures/sensitivity_plus10cm_speed}
    77 %\caption{The maximal flow speeds for the same model parameterisations
    78 %  found in Figure \protect \ref{fig:sensitivity_boundary}. The
    79 %  reference flow speeds are shown in Figure \protect
    80 %  \ref{fig:reference_model} (right).}
    81 %\label{fig:sensitivity_boundary_speed}
    82 %\end{center}
    83 %\end{figure}
     66\begin{figure}[ht]
     67\begin{center}
     68\includegraphics[width=\textwidth,keepaspectratio=true]{figures/sensitivity_boundary_wave_speed}
     69\caption{The maximal flow speeds for the same model parameterisations
     70  found in Figure \protect \ref{fig:sensitivity_boundary}.}
     71\label{fig:sensitivity_boundary_speed}
     72\end{center}
     73\end{figure}
     74
    8475
    8576\begin{figure}[ht]
     
    9586  buildings will increase the inundation extent beyond what was
    9687  surveyed.}
    97  
    98   % FIXME (Ole): Include speed picture elsewhere
    99   %The right hand image shows the corresponding flow speeds in the absence of buildings. 
    100   %The reference results are as shown in Figure
    101   %\protect \ref{fig:reference_model}.}
    102 \label{fig:sensitivity_nobuildings}
     88\label{fig:sensitivity_buildings}
    10389\end{center}
    10490\end{figure}
    10591
     92
     93\begin{figure}[ht]
     94\begin{center}
     95\includegraphics[width=\textwidth,keepaspectratio=true]{figures/sensitivity_buildings_speed}
     96\caption{The maximal flow speeds for the same model parameterisations
     97  found in Figure~\protect~\ref{fig:sensitivity_buildings}.
     98  As expected the presence of buildings reduce the flow speeds behind them,
     99  but tends to increase speeds in passages between buildings.}
     100\label{fig:sensitivity_buildings_speed}
     101\end{center}
     102\end{figure}
  • anuga_work/publications/boxing_day_validation_2008/data.tex

    r7463 r7467  
    8282  DBDB2, obtained from US Naval Research Labs
    8383  (\url{http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/DBDB2_WWW});
    84 \item a 3 second arc grid covering the whole of the Andaman Sea based
    85   on Thai Navy charts no. 45 and no. 362; and 
    86   (FIXME (OLE): wait for DB's reply)
     84\item a 3 second arc grid obtained directly from NOAA covering the
     85  whole of the Andaman Sea based on the
     86  Smith & Sandwell 2-minute
     87  dataset (\url{http://topex.ucsd.edu/WWW_html/srtm30_plus.html})as well as
     88  Thai Navy charts no. 45 and no. 362; and 
    8789\item a one second grid created from the digitised Thai Navy
    8890  bathymetry chart, no. 358, which covers Patong Bay and the
     
    203205\begin{figure}[ht]
    204206\begin{center}
    205 %\includegraphics[width=8.0cm,keepaspectratio=true]{patongescapemap.jpg}
    206207\includegraphics[width=\textwidth,keepaspectratio=true]{figures/post_tsunami_survey.jpg}
    207208\caption{Tsunami survey mapping the maximum observed inundation at
     
    221222the first wave between 9:55 am and 10:05 am local time or about 2 hours
    222223after the source rupture.
    223 FIXME (Ole): We should add observed arrival time and later relate that to
    224 the modelled dynamics. Wait for Drew's updated animation.
    225224
    226225
  • anuga_work/publications/boxing_day_validation_2008/results.tex

    r7465 r7467  
    186186reasonable.
    187187
    188 \subsection{Inundation}
     188\subsection{Inundation}\label{sec:inundation results}
    189189The \textsc{anuga} simulation described in the previous section and used to
    190190 model shallow water propgation also predicts
     
    230230\includegraphics[width=\textwidth,keepaspectratio=true]{figures/threshold.jpg}
    231231\caption{Simulated inundation versus observed inundation using an
    232 inundation threshold of 1cm (left) and 10cm (right).}
     232inundation threshold of 1 cm (left) and 10 cm (right).}
    233233\label{fig:inundationcomparison1cm}
    234234\end{center}
     
    265265
    266266\subsection{Eye-witness accounts}
     267
     268\subsubsection{Arrival time}
     269The arrival time of the first wave took place between 9:55 and 10:55 as described in
     270Section~\ref{sec:eyewitness data}. The modelled arrival time at the beach is 10:01
     271as can be verified from the animation provided in \label{sec:inundation results}.
     272Subsequent waves of variable magnitude appear over the next two hours
     273approximately 20-30 minutes apart.
     274% 10:01, 10:19, 10:46, 11:13, 11:43
     275The first arrival and overall dynamic behaviour is therefor reasonably consistent with the
     276eye-witness accounts.
     277
     278\subsubsection{Observed wave dynamics}
    267279Figure \ref{fig:gauge_locations} shows four locations where time
    268280series have been extracted from the model. The two offshore time series
     
    320332\label{tab:depth and flow comparisons}
    321333\end{table}
    322 FIXME (Jane): We should perhaps look at average data in area surrounding these points
    323334
    324335%can be estimated with landmarks found in
  • anuga_work/publications/boxing_day_validation_2008/sensitivity.tex

    r7451 r7467  
    4444%========================Wave-Height==========================%
    4545\subsection{Input Wave Height}\label{sec:waveheightSA}
    46 The effect of the wave height used as input to the inundation model
    47 \textsc{anuga} was also investigated.
     46Wave heights in the open ocean are
     47generally well predicted by the generation and propagation models such as
     48\textsc{ursga} as demonstrated in Section \ref{sec:resultsPropagation}
     49and also in \cite{thomas2009}. Nevertheless, the effect of errors in
     50the wave height used as input to the inundation model \textsc{anuga}
     51was investigated by perturbing the
     52amplitude of the input wave by $\pm$10 cm. This value was chosen to be larger
     53than the expected error in the amplitude predicted by the propagation model.
     54
    4855Figure~\ref{fig:sensitivity_boundary} and  Table~\ref{table:inundationAreas}
    49 indicate that the inundation
    50 severity is directly proportional to the boundary waveheight but small
     56indicate that the inundation severity is directly proportional to the
     57boundary waveheight but small
    5158perturbations in the input wave height of 10 cm appear to have little
    5259effect on the final inundated area. Obviously larger perturbations
    53 will have greater impact. However, wave heights in the open ocean are
    54 generally well
    55 predicted by the generation and propagation models such as
    56 \textsc{ursga} as demonstrated in Section \ref{sec:resultsPropagation}
    57 and also in \cite{thomas2009}.
     60would have greater impact.
     61
    5862
    5963
     
    6367The presence or absence of physical buildings in the elevation model was also
    6468investigated.
    65 Figure~\ref{fig:sensitivity_nobuildings} shows the inundated area
    66 %and the associated maximum flow speeds
    67 in the presence and absence of buildings. From
     69Figure~\ref{fig:sensitivity_buildings} shows the inundated area
     70in the presence and absence of buildings.
     71From
    6872Table~\ref{table:inundationAreas} it is apparent that densely built-up
    6973areas act as dissipators greatly reducing the inundated area.
    70 This result suggest that, when possible the presence of human-made structures
    71 should be included into the model topography. Furthermore this result also
    72 indicates that simply matching point sites with much lower resolution meshes
     74Figure~\ref{fig:sensitivity_buildings_speed} show the associated flow speeds in the presence and absence of buildings. It is evident that flow speeds
     75tend to increase in passages between buildings but slow down in areas behind them as compared to the bare earth scenario.
     76These results suggest that, when possible, the presence of
     77human-made structures should be included into the model topography.
     78Furthermore, these results also
     79indicate that simply matching point sites with much lower resolution meshes
    7380than used here is an over simplification. Such simulations cannot capture the
    74 fine detail that so clearly affects inundation.
    75 %However, flow speeds tend to increase in passages between buildings.
    76  
     81fine detail that so clearly affects inundation depth and flow speeds.
     82
     83
    7784
    7885\begin{table}
Note: See TracChangeset for help on using the changeset viewer.