Pure and Applied Geophysics

, Volume 174, Issue 8, pp 3043–3063 | Cite as

Challenges in Defining Tsunami Wave Heights

  • Paula Dunbar
  • George Mungov
  • Aaron Sweeney
  • Kelly Stroker
  • Nicolas Arcos
Article

Abstract

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) and co-located World Data Service for Geophysics maintain the global tsunami archive consisting of the historical tsunami database, imagery, and raw and processed water level data. The historical tsunami database incorporates, where available, maximum wave heights for each coastal tide gauge and deep-ocean buoy that recorded a tsunami signal. These data are important because they are used for tsunami hazard assessment, model calibration, validation, and forecast and warning. There have been ongoing discussions in the tsunami community about the correct way to measure and report these wave heights. It is important to understand how these measurements might vary depending on how the data were processed and the definition of maximum wave height. On September 16, 2015, an 8.3 M w earthquake located 48 km west of Illapel, Chile generated a tsunami that was observed all over the Pacific region. We processed the time-series water level data for 57 coastal tide gauges that recorded this tsunami and compared the maximum wave heights determined from different definitions. We also compared the maximum wave heights from the NCEI-processed data with the heights reported by the NOAA Tsunami Warning Centers. We found that in the near field different methods of determining the maximum tsunami wave heights could result in large differences due to possible instrumental clipping. We also found that the maximum peak is usually larger than the maximum amplitude (½ peak-to-trough), but the differences for the majority of the stations were <20 cm. For this event, the maximum tsunami wave heights determined by either definition (maximum peak or amplitude) would have validated the forecasts issued by the NOAA Tsunami Warning Centers. Since there is currently only one field in the NCEI historical tsunami database to store the maximum tsunami wave height for each tide gauge and deep-ocean buoy, NCEI will consider adding an additional field for the maximum peak measurement.

Keywords

Tsunami tide gauge DART® amplitude peak trough wave height 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to acknowledge the partner agencies whose continued collaboration ensures the success of the United States end-to-end tsunami warning system. The NOAA National Tsunami Warning Center, the NOAA Pacific Tsunami Warning Center, the National Ocean Service Center for Operational Oceanographic Products and Services, the National Data Buoy Center, the UNESCO/IOC-NOAA International Tsunami Information Center (ITIC), the Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory, and the University of Hawaii Sea Level Center each provide critical expertise.

References

  1. Dunbar, P. K., Stroker, K. J., Brocko, V. R., Varner, J. D., McLean, S. J., Taylor, L. A., et al. (2008). Long-term tsunami data archive supports tsunami forecast, warning, research, and mitigation. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 165, 2275–2291. doi: 10.1007/s00024-008-0419-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Eblé, M. C., Mungov, G. T., & Rabinovich, A. B. (2015). On the leading negative phase of major 2010–2014 tsunamis. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 172(12), 3493–3508. doi: 10.1007/s00024-015-1127-5(2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Foreman, M. G. G. (2004). Manual for tidal heights analysis and prediction. Pacific Marine Science Report. 77-10. Institute of Ocean Sciences, Patricia Bay. http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/science/data-donnees/tidal-marees/index-eng.html. Accessed 2 Nov 2016.
  4. Foreman, G., Cherniavsky, J., & Ballantyne, V. A. (2009). Versatile harmonic tidal analysis: improvements and applications. Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, 26, 806–817. doi: 10.1175/2008JTECHO615.1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission. (2014). Users guide for the pacific tsunami warning center enhanced products for the pacific tsunami warning system, IOC technical series, 105 (Revised ed.). Paris: UNESCO/IOC.Google Scholar
  6. Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission. (2016). Tsunami glossary, IOC technical series, 85 (3rd ed.). Paris: UNESCO/IOC.Google Scholar
  7. Lander, J. F. (1996). Tsunamis affecting Alaska 1737–1996, KGRD no. 31, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Geophysical Data Center, Boulder, Colorado, USA, September, 195 p.Google Scholar
  8. Lander, J. F., Lockridge, P. A. (1989). United States Tsunamis (Including United States Possessions) 1690–1988, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Geophysical Data Center, Boulder, Colorado, USA, Publication 41-2, 265 p.Google Scholar
  9. Lander, J. F., Lockridge, P. A., Kozuch, M. J. (1993). Tsunamis affecting the West Coast of the United States, 1806–1992, KGRD no. 29, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Geophysical Data Center, Boulder, Colorado, USA, September, 242 p.Google Scholar
  10. Mungov, G., Eblé, M., & Bouchard, R. (2013). DART® tsunameter retrospective and real-time data: A reflection on 10 years of processing in support of tsunami research and operations. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 170, 1369–1384. doi: 10.1007/s00024-012-0477-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. National Centers for Environmental Information/World Data Service (NCEI/WDS). (2017). Global Historical Tsunami Database. National Centers for Environmental Information, NOAA. doi: 10.7289/V5PN93H7.
  12. NOAA National Tsunami Warning Center (NTWC). (2015). Tsunami of 16 September 2015 (off the coast of central Chile). http://wcatwc.arh.noaa.gov/previous.events/?p=09-16-2015-Chile(M8.3). Accessed 23 Oct 2015.
  13. NOAA National Tsunami Warning Center (NTWC). (2017). Personal communication.Google Scholar
  14. NOAA Pacific Tsunami Warning Center (PTWC). (2015). Tsunami of 16 September 2015 (off the coast of central Chile), personal communication 24 September 2015.Google Scholar
  15. NOAA Pacific Tsunami Warning Center (PTWC). (2017). Personal communication.Google Scholar
  16. Okal, E., & Synolakis, C. (2016). Sequencing of tsunami waves: Why the first wave is not always the largest. Geophysical Journal International, 204(2), 719–735. doi: 10.1093/gji/ggv457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Pugh, E. T. (2004). Changing sea levels, effects of tides, weather and climate (p. 265). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Rabinovich, A. B. (1997). Spectral analysis of tsunami waves: Separation of source and topography effects. Journal of Geophysical Research, 102(C6), 12663–12676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Tang, L., Titov, V., Moore, C., & Wei, Y. (2016). Real-time assessment of the 16 September 2015 Chile tsunami and implications for near-field forecast. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 173, 369–387. doi: 10.1007/s00024-015-1226-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Thomson, R., & Emery, W. (2014). Data analysis methods in physical oceanography (3rd ed.). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag (outside the USA) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paula Dunbar
    • 1
  • George Mungov
    • 1
    • 2
  • Aaron Sweeney
    • 1
    • 2
  • Kelly Stroker
    • 1
    • 2
  • Nicolas Arcos
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.NOAA, NESDIS, National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI)BoulderUSA
  2. 2.Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES)University of Colorado at Boulder 216 UCBBoulderUSA

Personalised recommendations