Skip to main content

Effects of the March 2011 Japanese Tsunami in Bays and Estuaries of SE Australia

Abstract

On 11 March 2011 a subsea earthquake off the north-eastern coast of Honshu Island, Japan generated a huge tsunami which was felt throughout the Pacific. At the opposite end of the Pacific Ocean, on the south-east coast of Australia, multiple reflections, scatterings and alternate pathways lead to a prolonged and complicated response. This response was largely unaltered in crossing the continental shelf but was then transformed by bay resonances and admittances. These effects are described using data from tide recorders sparsely spread over 1,000 km of the coast. Some new adaptations and applications of time-series analysis are applied to separate tsunami waves that have followed different pathways but contain the same spectral components. The possible types of harbour response are classified and illustrated. Despite its small height in this region, the tsunami put several swimmers at serious risk and generated strong harbour oscillations, which should be considered when generating future warnings.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18

References

  1. Abe, K. (1990), Spectral characteristics of the 1983 Japan Sea tsunami observed in Japan, Tohoku Phys. J. 32(2), 97–106.

  2. Abe, K. (2007), Phase representing source lengths of tsunami in tide gauge records, Pure Appl. Geophys. 164, 453–463.

  3. Abe, K. (2009), Excitation and resonant modes along the Japanese coast by the 1993 and 1983 tsunamis in the Japan Sea, Pure Appl. Geophys. 166, 117–130.

  4. Abe, K. and Ishii, H. (1983), Study of shelf effect for tsunamis using spectral analysis, In Tsunamis: Their Science and Engineering (eds. Iida, K. and Iwasaki, T.), (IUGG, Washington, 1983), pp 161–172.

  5. Australian Bureau of Statistics (2006), Census 2006 STE boundaries-© Australian Bureau of Statistics.

  6. Baptista, M. A., Miranda, P. and Victor, L.M. (1992), Maximum entropy analysis of Portuguese tsunami data. The tsunamis of 28/02/1969 and 26/05/1975, Sci. Tsunami Hazards 10(1), 9–20.

  7. BoM. (2011), Tsunami event summary, Friday 11 March 2011, Bureau of Meteorology, Australia, http://www.bom.gov.au/tsunami/history/20110311.shtml, accessed 28 March 2011.

  8. Borrero, J.C., Bell, R., Csata, C., DeLange, W., Goring, D,, Greer, S.D., Picket, V. and Power, W. (2012) Observations, effects and real time assessment of the March 11, 2011 Tohoku-oki Tsunami in New Zealand, Pure Appl Geophys, doi:10.1007/s00024-012-0492-6.

  9. Emery, W.J. and Thomson, R.E. (2001) Data Analysis Methods in Physical Oceanography, 2nd. Ed (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2001) pp. 451–3.

  10. Gabor, D (1946), Theory of Communication, Part 1: The analysis of information, J. Inst. Elec. Eng., Part III: Radio Communic. Eng. 93, 429–441.

  11. Geoscience Australia (2009), Australian Bathymetry and Topography Grid-© Commonwealth of Australia.

  12. Hinwood, J.B. and McLean, E.J. (1999), The Snowy River: a mature barrier estuary, Proc. Roy. Soc. Victoria 111(2), 215–228.

  13. Hinwood, J.B. and McLean, E.J. (2000), Generation of long wave energy in coastal bays, In Coastal Engineering 2000—Proc. ICCE2000, Sydney, Australia, (ed. Edge, B.L.) (ASCE, 2001), 2, 1422–1433.

  14. Hinwood, J.B. and McLean, E.J. (2001), Monitoring and modelling tidal regime changes following inlet scour, J. Coastal Res., Special Publ. 34, pp 449–458.

  15. Luick, J.L. and Hinwood, J.B. (2008), Waterlevels in a dual-basin harbour in response to infragravity and edge waves, Progr. Oceanogr. 77, 367–375.

  16. Miles, J. and Munk, W. (1961), Harbor paradox, ASCE J. Waterways Harbors Division, 87(WW3), 111–129.

  17. Miller, G.R., Munk, W.H. and Snodgrass, F.E. (1962), Long-period waves over California’s continental borderland, Part II Tsunamis, J Marine Res. 20(1), 31–41.

  18. Miller, G.R., Relative Spectra of Tsunamis, Hawaii Institute of Geophysics, Report HIG-72-8, (1972), 7 pp.

  19. NOAA (2011), Japan (East coast of Honshu) tsunami, 11 March, 2011, NOAA Center for Tsunami Research, http://nctr.pmel.noaa.gov/honshu20110311/, accessed 28 March 2011.

  20. Oh, I.M. and Rabinovich, A.B. (1994), Manifestations of Hokkaido Southwest (Okushiri) Tsunami, 12 July 1993, at the coast of Korea: 1. Statistical characteristics, spectral analysis, and energy decay, Sci. Tsunami Hazards, 12, 93–116.

  21. Pattiaratchi, C.B. and Wijeratne, E.M.S. (2009), Tide gauge observations of 20042007 Indian Ocean tsunamis from Sri Lanka and Western Australia, Pure Appl. Geophys. 166, 233–258.

  22. Power, W., Downes, G., McSaveney, M., Beavan, J. and Hancox, G. (2005), The Fiordland earthquake and tsunami, New Zealand, 21 August 2003, In Tsunamis: Case Studies and Recent Developments (ed. Satake, K.) (Springer Verlag, Berlin, 2005), pp 31–42.

  23. Rabinovich, A.B. (1997), Spectral analysis of tsunami waves: separation of source and topography effects, J. Geophys. Res. 102(C6), 12663–76.

  24. Rabinovich, A.B., Candella, R.N. and Thomson, R.E. (2011), Energy decay of the 2004 Sumatra tsunami in the world ocean, Pure Appl. Geophys. 168, 1919–1950.

  25. Rabinovich, A.B., Djumagaliev, V.A., Fine, I.V. and Kulikov, E.A. (1993), Analysis of weak tsunamis in the region of the Kuril Islands and resonant influences of topography, In Proc. Internat. Tsunami Seminar, Wakayama, Japan (IUGG, Toronto, Canada, 1993), pp 95–105.

  26. Rabinovich, A.B. and Levyant, A.S. (1992), Influence of seiche oscillations on the formation of the long-wave spectrum near the coast of the southern Kuriles, translated Amer. Geophys. Union, Oceanology (USSR), 32(1), 17–23.

  27. Rabinovich, A.B. and Stephenson, F.E. (2004), Long wave measurements for the coast of British Columbia and improvements to the tsunami warning capability, Natural Hazards, 32, 313–343.

  28. Rabinovich, A.B. and Thomson, R.E. (2007), The 26 December 2004 Sumatra tsunami: analysis of tide gauge data from the world ocean Part I Indian Ocean and South Africa, Pure Appl. Geophys. 164, 261–308.

  29. Schlurmann, T. (2001), The empirical mode decomposition and the Hilbert spectra to analyse embedded characteristic oscillations of extreme waves. Rogue Waves 2000 (Ifremer, Brest, France, 2001), pp. 157–165.

  30. Thomson, R.E., Rabinovich, A.B., and Krassovski, M.V. (2007), Double jeopardy: Concurrent arrival of the 2004 Sumatra tsunami and storm-generated waves on the Atlantic coast of the United States and Canada, Geophys. Res. Lett., 34, L15607, doi:10.1029/2007GL030685.

  31. USGS (2011a), Poster of the great Tohoku earthquake, US Geological Survey, http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eqarchives/poster/2011/20110311.php, accessed 28 March 2011.

  32. USGS (2011b), Magnitude 9.0, 2011 March 11 05:46:24 UTC, Near the East Coast of Honshu, Japan, Time of Earthquake in Other Zones. http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/eq_depot/2011/eq_110311_c0001xgp/neic_c0001xgp_tz.html, accessed 28 March 2011 and 13 September 2011.

  33. Van Dorn, W. G. (1984), Some tsunami characteristics deducible from tide records, J. Phys. Oceanogr. 14, 353–363.

  34. Wilson, R.I., Admire, A.R., Borrero, J.C., Dengler, L.A., Legg, M.R., Lynett, P., McCrink, T.P., Miller, K.M., Ritchie, A., Sterling, K., and Whitmore, P.M. (2012), Observations and Impacts from the 2010 Chilean and 2011 Japanese tsunamis in California (USA), Pure Appl. Geophys. doi:10.1007/s00024-012-0527-z.

Download references

Acknowledgments

Thanks to Dr. J. Chittleborough, National Tidal Centre, Bureau of Meteorology, Melbourne; Dr. J. L. Luick, PIRSA, Adelaide; the Port Kembla Port Corporation staff, in particular Mr. A. Dunne, Environment and Engineering Manager and Mr. R. Thompson, IT Manager; the Newcastle Port Corporation staff, in particular Mr. D. Connors, Senior Hydrographic Surveyor, and the staff of the Manly Hydraulics Laboratory and the NSW Office of Heritage and Environment.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jon B. Hinwood.

Appendix: Guide to Interpretation of Cross-Correlation Plots

Appendix: Guide to Interpretation of Cross-Correlation Plots

The cross-correlation coefficient plots show the relationship between two time-series, typically two waterlevel records. If the two waterlevel records are each made up of a continuous periodic wave train, there are two typical patterns. The first pattern is produced when the waves have the same period. In this case they will be perfectly correlated at some value of the lag, and again if the lag is increased by an integer number of wave periods. This pattern is shown in Fig. 19a. Here each waterlevel record consists of a wave train of period 61 min. The two waterlevel records are not in phase, with one lagging the other by 5 min. The effect of lag on the cross-correlation coefficient is shown by the vertical displacement of the maximum correlation band in Fig. 19. A rapid change in the lag at a given time will cause a step change in the vertical alignment of the bands at that time.

The second basic pattern is produced when each waterlevel record consists of a periodic train of waves but the periods in the two records differ. This pattern is shown in Fig. 19b. Here one waterlevel record consists of a wave train of period 61 min and the other a wave train of period 62 min. The two waterlevel records are initially in phase but cannot maintain phase with different periods. The steepness of the slope of the bands increases as the relative difference of the periods increases, hence a change in the periods at a given time will cause a change in the slope of the bands.

Fig. 19
figure19

Basic cross-correlation coefficient patterns. a Two waves of same period (61 min) with constant phase lag (5 min); b two waves of different period (61 and 62 min), no initial phase lag

An actual cross-correlation plot will have more than one period present in each waterlevel record and each periodic component is likely to undergo minor shifts of phase and period. These factors will cause some blurring of the pattern, particularly as the lag increases, and causing the maximum cross-correlation coefficient to be less than 1.0. Major changes in a record will cause changes of vertical alignment or slope as outlined above.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hinwood, J.B., Mclean, E.J. Effects of the March 2011 Japanese Tsunami in Bays and Estuaries of SE Australia. Pure Appl. Geophys. 170, 1207–1227 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-012-0561-x

Download citation

Keywords

  • Tsunami
  • Japan
  • harbour oscillations
  • tide gauge record
  • correlation
  • spectra
  • timeseries