Changeset 7551
- Timestamp:
- Oct 16, 2009, 2:08:01 PM (15 years ago)
- Location:
- anuga_work/publications/boxing_day_validation_2008
- Files:
-
- 2 edited
Legend:
- Unmodified
- Added
- Removed
-
anuga_work/publications/boxing_day_validation_2008/results.tex
r7535 r7551 116 116 117 117 After propagating the tsunami in the open ocean using \textsc{ursga}, 118 the approximated ocean andsurface elevation and horizontal flow118 the approximated ocean surface elevation and horizontal flow 119 119 speeds were extracted and used to construct a boundary condition 120 120 for the \textsc{anuga} model. The interface between the \textsc{ursga} … … 164 164 As the \textsc{Ursga} model in this study was used to compute the 165 165 incident wave along the 100~m contour line only, there is no such 166 information available at ateach side of the \textsc{Anuga}166 information available at each side of the \textsc{Anuga} 167 167 domain towards the south and the north. Instead, 168 168 a transmissive boundary condition was chosen for these segments, … … 170 170 height present just inside the computational domain. 171 171 The velocity field on these boundaries was kept at 172 tozero during the simulation.172 zero during the simulation. 173 173 Other choices include applying the mean tide value as a 174 174 Dirichlet boundary condition. Experiments as well as the … … 184 184 at Patong Bay. Although the tsunami propagated for approximately three 185 185 hours before it reached Patong Bay, the period of time during which 186 the wave propagated through the \textsc{anuga} domain is much smaller 186 the wave propagated through the \textsc{anuga} domain is much smaller by 187 187 of the order of two~hours. Consequently the assumption of constant tide 188 188 height is reasonable. The initial water level for the river was set to … … 260 260 indicates a good model prediction of the survey. 261 261 262 Discrepancies between the survey data and the modelled inundation 263 includearise from errors and uncertainties in both the field surveys and the models.262 Discrepancies between the survey data and the modelled inundation 263 arise from errors and uncertainties in both the field surveys and the models. 264 264 The former include measurement errors in the GPS survey recordings and 265 265 missing data in the field survey data itself. -
anuga_work/publications/boxing_day_validation_2008/sensitivity.tex
r7531 r7551 77 77 Table~\ref{table:inundationAreas} it is apparent that densely built-up 78 78 areas act as dissipators greatly reducing the inundated area. 79 Figure~\ref{fig:sensitivity_buildings_speed} show the associated flow speeds in the presence and absence of buildings (bare earth).79 Figure~\ref{fig:sensitivity_buildings_speed} shows the associated flow speeds in the presence and absence of buildings (bare earth). 80 80 It is evident that flow speeds 81 81 tend to increase in passages between buildings but slow down in areas behind them as compared to the bare earth scenario. … … 99 99 Friction = 0.0003 & 0.83 & 0.26 \\ 100 100 Friction = 0.03 & 0.67 & 0.09\\ 101 Boundary wave h ight minus 10 cm & 0.77 & 0.17 \\102 Boundary wave h ight plus 10 cm & 0.82 & 0.22 \\101 Boundary wave height minus 10 cm & 0.77 & 0.17 \\ 102 Boundary wave height plus 10 cm & 0.82 & 0.22 \\ 103 103 No Buildings & 0.94 & 0.44 \\ 104 104 \hline
Note: See TracChangeset
for help on using the changeset viewer.