Development, testing, and applications of site‐specific tsunami inundation models for real‐time forecasting

[1] The study describes the development, testing and applications of site-specific tsunami inundation models (forecast models) for use in NOAA’s tsunami forecast and warning system. The model development process includes sensitivity studies of tsunami wave characteristics in the nearshore and inundation, for a range of model grid setups, resolutions and parameters. To demonstrate the process, four forecast models in Hawaii, at Hilo, Kahului, Honolulu, and Nawiliwili are described. The models were validated with fourteen historical tsunamis and compared with numerical results from reference inundation models of higher resolution. The accuracy of the modeled maximum wave height is greater than 80% when the observation is greater than 0.5 m; when the observation is below 0.5 m the error is less than 0.3 m. The error of the modeled arrival time of the first peak is within 3% of the travel time. The developed forecast models were further applied to hazard assessment from simulated magnitude 7.5, 8.2, 8.7 and 9.3 tsunamis based on subduction zone earthquakes in the Pacific. The tsunami hazard assessment study indicates that use of a seismic magnitude alone for a tsunami source assessment is inadequate to achieve such accuracy for tsunami amplitude forecasts. The forecast models apply local bathymetric and topographic information, and utilize dynamic boundary conditions from the tsunami source function database, to provide site- and event-specific coastal predictions. Only by combining a Deep-ocean Assessment and Reporting of Tsunami-constrained tsunami magnitude with site-specific high-resolution models can the forecasts completely cover the evolution of earthquake-generated tsunami waves: generation, deep ocean propagation, and coastal inundation. Wavelet analysis of the tsunami waves suggests the coastal tsunami frequency responses at different sites are dominated by the local bathymetry, yet they can be partially related to the locations of the tsunami sources. The study also demonstrates the nonlinearity between offshore and nearshore maximum wave amplitudes.

[1]  Harold O. Mofjeld,et al.  Offshore Forecasting of Alaskan Tsunamis in Hawaii , 2001 .

[2]  K. Satake,et al.  Asperity Distribution of the 1952 Great Kamchatka Earthquake and its Relation to Future Earthquake Potential in Kamchatka , 1999 .

[3]  H. Kanamori,et al.  The 1957 great Aleutian earthquake , 1994 .

[4]  V. Titov,et al.  Developing tsunami forecast inundation models for Hawaii : procedures and testing , 2008 .

[5]  Paul M. Whitmore,et al.  TSUNAMI AMPLITUDE PREDICTION DURING EVENTS: A TEST BASED ON PREVIOUS TSUNAMIS , 2003 .

[6]  E. Okal,et al.  The Megatsunami of December 26 2004 , 2005 .

[7]  J. Coffman,et al.  National Geophysical Data Center , 1985 .

[8]  Michael C. Spillane,et al.  Real‐time experimental forecast of the Peruvian tsunami of August 2007 for U.S. coastlines , 2008 .

[9]  Vasily Titov,et al.  Offshore forecasting of Alaska-Aleutian subduction zone tsunamis in Hawaii , 1999 .

[10]  Harold O. Mofjeld,et al.  The NTHMP Tsunameter Network , 2005 .

[11]  K. Cheung,et al.  Resonance in Hawaii waters from the 2006 Kuril Islands Tsunami , 2008 .

[12]  H. Kanamori,et al.  The 1957 great Aleutian earthquake : Pure Applied Geophysics, 142 (1), 1994, pp 3–28 , 1994 .

[13]  Harold O. Mofjeld,et al.  The NTHMP Tsunameter Network , 2005 .

[14]  Kenji Satake,et al.  The 1964 Prince William Sound earthquake: Joint inversion of tsunami and geodetic data , 1996 .

[15]  Walter H. F. Smith,et al.  Global Sea Floor Topography from Satellite Altimetry and Ship Depth Soundings , 1997 .

[16]  Vasily Titov,et al.  Implementation and testing of the Method of Splitting Tsunami (MOST) model , 1997 .

[17]  Costas E Synolakis,et al.  Tsunami: wave of change. , 2006, Scientific American.

[18]  V. Titov,et al.  Tsunami forecast analysis for the May 2006 Tonga tsunami , 2008 .

[19]  Costas E Synolakis,et al.  Tsunami science before and beyond Boxing Day 2004 , 2006, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[20]  C. K. Green.  Seismic sea wave of April 1, 1946, as recorded on tide gages , 1946 .

[21]  E. Okal,et al.  The tsunami of 2007 September 12, Bengkulu province, Sumatra, Indonesia: post‐tsunami field survey and numerical modelling , 2009 .

[22]  Vasily Titov,et al.  Improving Tsunami Forecast Skill Using Deep Ocean Observations , 2006 .

[23]  Vasily Titov,et al.  Numerical Modeling of Tidal Wave Runup , 1998 .

[24]  M. Rothacher,et al.  Towards real‐time tsunami amplitude prediction , 2006 .

[25]  Hiroo Kanamori,et al.  Focal process of the great Chilean earthquake May 22, 1960☆ , 1974 .

[26]  Gerald T. Hebenstreit,et al.  Tsunami research at the end of a critical decade , 2001 .

[27]  V. Titov,et al.  Tsunami: scientific frontiers, mitigation, forecasting and policy implications , 2006, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[28]  Shailesh Nayak,et al.  INDIAN TSUNAMI WARNING SYSTEM , 2008 .

[29]  C. E. Synolakis,et al.  Validation and Verification of Tsunami Numerical Models , 2008 .

[30]  E. Okal,et al.  A seismological reassessment of the source of the 1946 Aleutian 'tsunami' earthquake , 2006 .

[31]  M. G. Spaeth,et al.  The tsunami of March 28, 1964, as recorded at tide stations , 1967 .

[32]  Ian Parsons,et al.  Surface deformation due to shear and tensile faults in a half-space , 1986 .

[33]  Extracting tsunami source parameters via inversion of DART buoy data , 2009 .

[34]  Vasily V. Titov,et al.  Real-Time Tsunami Forecasting: Challenges and Solutions , 2003 .

[35]  Michael C. Spillane,et al.  Development of the Forecast Propagation Database for NOAA's Short-term Inundation Forecast for Tsunamis (SIFT) , 2008 .