Performance Comparison of NAMI DANCE and FLOW-3D® Models in Tsunami Propagation, Inundation and Currents using NTHMP Benchmark Problems
Field observations provide valuable data regarding nearshore tsunami impact, yet only in inundation areas where tsunami waves have already flooded. Therefore, tsunami modeling is essential to understand tsunami behavior and prepare for tsunami inundation. It is necessary that all numerical models used in tsunami emergency planning be subject to benchmark tests for validation and verification. This study focuses on two numerical codes, NAMI DANCE and FLOW-3D®, for validation and performance comparison. NAMI DANCE is an in-house tsunami numerical model developed by the Ocean Engineering Research Center of Middle East Technical University, Turkey and Laboratory of Special Research Bureau for Automation of Marine Research, Russia. FLOW-3D® is a general purpose computational fluid dynamics software, which was developed by scientists who pioneered in the design of the Volume-of-Fluid technique. The codes are validated and their performances are compared via analytical, experimental and field benchmark problems, which are documented in the ‘‘Proceedings and Results of the 2011 National Tsunami Hazard Mitigation Program (NTHMP) Model Benchmarking Workshop’’ and the ‘‘Proceedings and Results of the NTHMP 2015 Tsunami Current Modeling Workshop”. The variations between the numerical solutions of these two models are evaluated through statistical error analysis.
KeywordsTsunami depth-averaged shallow water Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes benchmarking NAMI DANCE FLOW-3D®
The authors wish to thank Dr. Andrey Zaytsev due to his undeniable contributions to the development of in-house numerical model, NAMI DANCE. The Turkish branch of Flow Science, Inc. is also acknowledged. Finally, the National Tsunami Hazard Mitigation Program (NTHMP), who provided most of the benchmark data, is appreciated. This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
- Basu, D., Green, S., Das, K., Janetzke, R. and Stamatakos, J. (2009). Numerical Simulation of Surface Waves Generated by a Subaerial Landslide at Lituya Bay, Alaska. Proceedings of 28th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering. Honolulu, Hawaii, USA.Google Scholar
- Cox, D., T. Tomita, P. Lynett, R.A., Holman. (2008). Tsunami Inundation with Macroroughness in the Constructed Environment. Proceedings of 31st International Conference on Coastal Engineering, ASCE, pp. 1421–1432.Google Scholar
- Flow Science. (2002). FLOW-3D User’s Manual.Google Scholar
- Liu, P. L.-F. (1994). Model equations for wave propagations from deep to shallow water. (P.-F. Liu, Ed.) Advances in Coastal and Ocean Engineering, 1, 125–158.Google Scholar
- Liu, P. L.-F., Yeh, H., & Synolakis, C. E. (2008). Advanced numerical models for simulating Tsunami waves and run-up. Advances in Coastal and Ocean Engineering, 10, 344.Google Scholar
- Matsuyama, M., & Tanaka, H. (2001). An experimental study of the highest run-up height in the 1993 Hokkaidō Nansei-Oki Earthquake Tsunami. Proceedings of ITS, 2001, 879–889.Google Scholar
- National Tsunami Hazard Mitigation Program. 2012. Proceedings and Results of the 2011 NTHMP Model Benchmarking Workshop. Boulder: U.S. Department of Commerce/NOAA/NTHMP; (NOAA Special Report). p. 436.Google Scholar
- National Tsunami Hazard Mitigation Program. (2017). Proceedings and Results of the National Tsunami Hazard Mitigation Program 2015 Tsunami Current Modeling Workshop, February 9-10, 2015, Portland, Oregon: compiled by Patrick Lynett and Rick Wilson, p 194.Google Scholar
- Nichols, B.D. and Hirt, C.W. (1975). Methods for Calculating Multi-Dimensional, Transient Free Surface Flows Past Bodies. Proceedings of 1st International Conference Num. Ship Hydrodynamics. Gaithersburg.Google Scholar
- NOAA Center for Tsunami Research: Tsunami Run-up onto a Complex Three-dimensional Beach; Monai Valley. (n.d). Retrieved from: https://nctr.pmel.noaa.gov/benchmark/Laboratory/Laboratory_MonaiValley/.
- Pelinovsky, E., Kim, D.-C., Kim, K.-O., & Choi, B.-H. (2013). Three-dimensional simulation of extreme run-up heights during the 2004 Indonesian and 2011 Japanese Tsunamis. Vienna: EGU General Assembly.Google Scholar
- Synolakis, C. E. (1986). The run-up of long waves. Ph.D. Thesis. California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California.Google Scholar
- Synolakis, C. E., Bernard, E. N., Titov, V. V., Kanoglu, U. & Gonzalez, F. (2007). Standards, criteria, and procedures for NOAA evaluation of Tsunami Numerical Models. 55 p. Seattle, Washington: NOAA OAR Special Report, Contribution No 3053, NOAA/OAR/PMEL.Google Scholar
- Velioglu, D. (2017). Advanced two- and three-dimensional Tsunami models: benchmarking and validation. Ph.D. Thesis. Middle East Technical University, Ankara.Google Scholar
- Velioglu, D., Kian, R., Yalciner, A.C. and Zaytsev, A. (2016). Performance assessment of NAMI DANCE in Tsunami evolution and currents using a benchmark problem. (R. Signell, Ed.) J. Mar. Sci. Eng., 4(3), 49.Google Scholar
- Yalciner, A. C., Dogan, P. and Sukru. E. (2005). December 26 2004, Indian Ocean Tsunami Field Survey, North of Sumatra Island. UNESCO.Google Scholar
- Yalciner, A. C., Gülkan, P., Dilmen, I., Aytore, B., Ayca, A., Insel, I., et al. (2014). Evaluation of Tsunami scenarios For Western Peloponnese, Greece. Bollettino di Geofisica Teorica ed Applicata, 55, 485–500.Google Scholar
- Yen, B. C. (1991). Hydraulic resistance in open channels. In B. C. Yen (Ed.), Channel flow resistance: centennial of manning’s formula (pp. 1–135). Highlands Ranch: Water Resource Publications.Google Scholar
- Zaitsev, A. I., Kovalev, D. P., Kurkin, A. A., Levin, B. V., Pelinovskii, E. N., Chernov, A. G., et al. (2009). The Tsunami on Sakhalin on August 2, 2007: mareograph evidence and numerical simulation. Tikhookeanskaya Geologiya, 28, 30–35.Google Scholar