Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocemod.2021.101943
Title: Validation and inter-comparison of models for landslide tsunami generation
Authors: Kirby, James T
Grilli, Stephan T
Horrillo, Juan
Liu, Philip L-F 
Nicolsky, Dmitry
Abadie, Stephane
Ataie-Ashtiani, Behzad
Castro, Manuel J
Clous, Lucie
Escalante, Cipriano
Fine, Isaac
Gonzalez-Vida, Jose Manuel
Lovholt, Finn
Lynett, Patrick
Ma, Gangfeng 
Macias, Jorge
Ortega, Sergio
Shi, Fengyan
Yavari-Ramshe, Saeedeh
Zhang, Cheng
Keywords: Science & Technology
Physical Sciences
Meteorology & Atmospheric Sciences
Oceanography
Tsunamis
Landslide tsunamis
Tsunami benchmarks
Landslide tsunami models
SUBMARINE MASS FAILURE
CUMBRE VIEJA VOLCANO
NEW-GUINEA TSUNAMI
NUMERICAL-SIMULATION
SURFACE-WAVES
IMPULSIVE WAVES
BOUSSINESQ MODEL
MEGA-TSUNAMI
KARRAT FJORD
WATER-WAVES
Issue Date: Feb-2022
Publisher: ELSEVIER SCI LTD
Citation: Kirby, James T, Grilli, Stephan T, Horrillo, Juan, Liu, Philip L-F, Nicolsky, Dmitry, Abadie, Stephane, Ataie-Ashtiani, Behzad, Castro, Manuel J, Clous, Lucie, Escalante, Cipriano, Fine, Isaac, Gonzalez-Vida, Jose Manuel, Lovholt, Finn, Lynett, Patrick, Ma, Gangfeng, Macias, Jorge, Ortega, Sergio, Shi, Fengyan, Yavari-Ramshe, Saeedeh, Zhang, Cheng (2022-02). Validation and inter-comparison of models for landslide tsunami generation. OCEAN MODELLING 170. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocemod.2021.101943
Abstract: The Mapping and Modeling Subcommittee of the US National Tsunami Hazard Mitigation Program convened a workshop in January 2017 to evaluate the present state of numerical models for the simulation of tsunamis generated by submarine or subaerial landslides. A range of benchmark tests were provided to participants, with three tests emphasized: (i) a laboratory submarine solid slide in a 2D horizontal tank, (ii) a laboratory submarine granular slide in a 1D flume, and (iii) a field case based on submarine slides which occurred in Port Valdez, AK during the 1964 Alaska earthquake. Nine landslide tsunami models configured with 21 different combinations of physical options were benchmarked, including: (1) hydrostatic models with no frequency dispersion, which include the nonlinear shallow equation models traditionally used for modeling coseismic tsunamis; (2) Boussinesq or one-layer weakly dispersive models; (3) Multi-layer or non-hydrostatic (i.e., dispersive) models; and (4) Full Navier–Stokes models. Model/data comparison indicates that the inclusion of frequency dispersion in model formulations is critical to obtaining physically reasonable results for the test cases considered. Because the importance of dispersive effects is unknown a priori for any given simulated event, the central recommendation from this work is that a model with at minimum a leading-order representation of frequency dispersion effects be used whenever possible for landslide tsunami simulations.
Source Title: OCEAN MODELLING
URI: https://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/241703
ISSN: 1463-5003
1463-5011
DOI: 10.1016/j.ocemod.2021.101943
Appears in Collections:Staff Publications
Elements

Show full item record
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormatAccess SettingsVersion 
2022_Kirby_WM.pdf9.67 MBAdobe PDF

CLOSED

Published

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.