Thesis VMP PHD PDF

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of
In the
FACULTY OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY
TO
GANPAT UNIVERSITY, KHERVA
February 2011
Research Guide: Submitted by:
Dr. H. S. PATEL Vikram M. PATEL

M. E., Ph.D. M. E.
Reg. No. EN/04/001/07
FACULTY OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY

GANPAT UNIVERSITY, KHERVA-382711,
MEHSANA (N.G.), INDIA
This is to certify that, thesis entitled “COMPUTER AIDED ANALYSIS
& DESIGN OF STRUCTURES IN TSUNAMI PRONE AREA” submitted
by Mr. Vikram M. Patel is his bonafide work carried out at Faculty of
Engineering & Technology, Ganpat University, Kherva under my
supervision and guidance in partial fulfillment for award of Ph. D.
degree in the subject of Civil Engineering is up to my satisfaction.
This work is original and no part of this thesis has been submitted for
any other degree or diploma or distinction of this or any other
university.
Research Guide:
Dr. H. S. Patel
Research Guide
Ganpat University
Kherva-382711, Mehsana (N.G.), India.
Forwarded through:
Prof. S. M. Patel
Dean
Faculty of Engineering & Technology
I hereby declare that the topic entitled “COMPUTER AIDED
ANALYSIS & DESIGN OF STRUCTURES IN TSUNAMI PRONE AREA”
which is submitted herewith to Ganpat University, Kherva, for the
award of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Engineering &
Technology is the result of work done by me in Ganpat University,
Kherva under the guidance of Dr. H. S. Patel, Asst. Professor, L. D.
College of Engineering, Research Guide of Ganpat University, Kherva.
I further declare that the results of this work have not been
previously submitted for any degree or fellowship.
Place: Ganpat Vidyanagar, Kherva. Mr. Vikram M. Patel

Date: 21st February, 2011 M. E.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I hereby seize the opportunity to express my sincere indebtedness and deep sense of
gratitude to thank Dr. H. S. Patel, Associate Professor, Applied Mechanics Department,
L. D. College of Engineering, Ahmedabad, who took care of each and every facet of this
work in congregation with personal attention and proper orientation. I am grateful to him
for excellently tutoring and grooming me with respect to professional ethics and real life
normal values in order to face squarely this swift changing competitive world with
compound nerve and verve. His approach and insight to the problem has helped me in
presenting this thesis in its present form.
I am grateful to Dr. B. K. Rastogi (D.G., ISR, G‘Nagar) for giving permission to use ISR
library, simulation model & other resource materials. I also thank scientists and librarian
of ISR, G’Nagar for their kind support for our research. My special thanks are in
particular to Dr. A. P. Singh who was always available to answer my questions and to
provide me with the necessary information concerning the research work and also for his
critical reflections on the numerical modeling.
I feel privileged in expressing my profound sense of gratitude to Prof. K. R. Patel,

Principal, B S Patel Polytechnic, Ganpat Vidyanagar. I would also like to thank to all the
faculty members of B S Patel Polytechnic, U V Patel College of Engineering, Ganpat
Vidynagar and L D College of Engineering who directly or indirectly have helped me.
My sincere thanks go to The Director, Mehsana District Education Foundation and The
Vice Chancellor, Ganpat University, Mehsana for his kind permission to carry out this
study.
I would like to thank Dr. H. S. Patil and Dr. B. B. Mistry for their valuable suggestions to
enhance the present work.
Sincere thanks for the friendship, support and professionalism of members of the BSPP
& UVPCE namely – Vijendra, Maitry, Bhavsar, R J Patel, D N Sheth, H T Patel, Vitthal,
Qureshi, V P Patel, Chhatani, Sitaram, Jigar & Bhaskar. Thank you also to the always-
cheerful staff of the Department of Civil & Computer.
I would like to thank V N Modi, V K Patel & Ramanuj who eagerly shared their wealth
of knowledge and wisdom for Neural Network application. Lastly I can not forget to
thank my esteemed mentors and many people who provided assistance for my research
visits across India, in particular Dr. S.K.Jain, Dr. Pradeep Kumar & Dr. Dholakia.
Ph.D. Thesis – V M Patel / Acknowledgement ii| Page

Thanks are also to my closest friends and family members of the Ganpat Vidyanagar, for
their all round encouragement and help rendered to me during my study.
The love and support of my Wife, Parents and Family made this journey both possible
and worthwhile.
I thank you all.
Vikram M. Patel
Ganpat University
Date: 21st February, 2011.
Ph.D. Thesis – V M Patel / Acknowledgement iii| Page

ABSTRACT
The Indian Ocean tsunami on December 26, 2004 resulted into massive destruction to
coastal communities with more than 3,00,000 fatalities, and severe damage to buildings,
bridges and other infrastructure causing serious socio-economic problems. Such deadliest
mega event made the coastal community realize the need for the preparedness against
initial ground shaking and subsequent effects followed by tsunami. The casualty can be
minimized with a proper Early Warning System and a network of solid refuge buildings
and roads. As most of the tsunamis are earthquake induced tsunamis, it is necessary that
coastal structures should be designed against both earthquake and tsunami loads.
The experience of the recent Indian Ocean Tsunami was new to the people of India. As
the western coast of Gujarat is also sensitive to tsunami attack, it is essential to take the
tsunami risk into consideration. This study will focus on the suitability of the tsunami
resistant structures for the Dwarka and western coast of Gujarat. Although this study is
aims at western coast of Gujarat, it can also be applied in a broader perspective.
Aim of this research is to help minimize vulnerability of Dwarka and western coast of
Gujarat against the devastating effect of earthquake induced tsunami and enable
sustainable and long-term economical development in these regions. For Dwarka and
western coast of Gujarat the feasibility of tsunami protection alternatives are reviewed in
this study.
The study consists of two parts: 1) the derivation of a design of tsunami wave height &
probable arrival time; and 2) the study of behavior of buildings under tsunami loads along
with other loadings and special design considerations for tsunami resistant structures.
Eastern and Western parts of the Makran Subduction Zone (MSZ) of southern Pakistan
are potential zones for great earthquakes that can generate tsunamis affecting west coast
of Gujarat. The eastern part of the MSZ has produced the 1945 Mw 8.1 earthquake that
generated the last major tsunami in the Arabian Sea. Some sectors of the MSZ are un-
ruptured for a long time and can produce large earthquakes in near future. In this study
investigation has been carried out for the far-field amplitude of tsunamis in the Arabian
Sea of mega-thrust earthquakes, ranging from probable to possible.
In this study available design codal provisions were reviewed to choose a comprehensive
set of loading equations that may be used to estimate the loads imposed by tsunami flow
on structural components. Historical tsunami events were reviewed with the intention of
evaluating experimental structural response.
In this research seven typical R.C. buildings were chosen for the analysis considering
different types of structural configurations and a comparative study is made on the
Ph.D. Thesis – VMP / Abstract iii| P a g e

response of these structures under wind load, earthquake load and tsunami loads for
2.264, 3, 5 and 10 meter high tsunami flow.
At the end of study important concluding remarks and recommendations are derived for
tsunami modeling and tsunami resistant structures.
Ph.D. Thesis – VMP / Abstract iv| P a g e

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ........................................................................................ ii
ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................... iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................ v
LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................ xii
LIST OF FIGURES .............................................................................................. xiv
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................... 1

1.1 PROBLEM’S DESCRIPTION ........................................................................ 2
1.2 AIM AND OBJECTIVES OF RESEARCH .................................................... 3
1.3 AREA OF STUDY ......................................................................................... 4
1.4 OVERVIEW OF THESIS ............................................................................... 5
CHAPTER 2 INTRODUCTION TO TSUNAMIS & SPECIFIC MEASURES

FOR TSUNAMI................................................................................................................ 7
1.1 PROBLEM’S DESCRIPTION ........................................................................ 8
2.2 NATURE AND ORIGIN OF TSUNAMIS...................................................... 8
2.3 MECHANICS OF GENERATION ................................................................. 8
2.3.1 Earthquake Generated Tsunamis .............................................................. 8
2.3.1.1 Fault Mechanisms ............................................................................ 9
2.4 LANDSLIDES.............................................................................................. 11
2.4.1 Volcanic Eruptions................................................................................. 12
2.4.2 Meteor Impacts ...................................................................................... 12
2.4.3 Cause Dependent Overview of Past Tsunamis ........................................ 12
2.5 TSUNAMI WAVES ..................................................................................... 13

2.5.1 Terminology .......................................................................................... 13
2.5.2 Propagation ............................................................................................ 14
2.5.3 Different Wave Forms ........................................................................... 17
2.5.4 Breaking ................................................................................................ 18
THESIS – VMP / Table of Contents v| P age

2.5.5 Tsunami Scales ...................................................................................... 18
2.6 HISTORICAL TSUNAMIS AFFECTED INDIA.......................................... 19

2.6.1 Tsunamis on Western Coast of India ...................................................... 31
2.6.2 Indian Ocean Tsunami of December 26, 2004 ........................................ 22
2.8 TSUNAMIGENIC SOURCES ...................................................................... 29

2.8.1 Andaman-Sumatra Tsunami Source ....................................................... 31
2.8.2 Makran Tsunami Source ........................................................................ 31
2.8.2.1 The Makran Coastal Region ........................................................... 31
2.8.2.2 The Makran Subduction Zone (MSZ).............................................. 32
2.9 TSUNAMI RISK .......................................................................................... 35

2.9.1 For the Tsunami Hazard Assessment ...................................................... 35
2.9.2 For The Exposure................................................................................... 36
2.9.3 Tsunami Vulnerability Assessment ........................................................ 36
2.9.4 Tsunami Risk Assessment ...................................................................... 36
2.10 SPECIFIC MEASURES FOR SAFETY FROM TSUNAMIS ....................... 36

2.10.1 Land Use and Site Planning For Tsunami Mitigation ............................. 36
2.10.2 Emergency Road Network Planning For Tsunami Mitigation ................. 37
2.10.3 Coastal Structures .................................................................................. 38
2.10.3.1 Detached breakwater ....................................................................... 38
2.10.3.2 Sea Wall and Off Shore Breakers .................................................... 38
2.10.3.3 Vegetation along the Coast ............................................................. 38
2.10.3.4 Tidal gate ........................................................................................ 39
2.11 VERTICAL EVACUATION STRUCTURE ................................................. 39

2.11.1 Vertical Evacuation Concepts ................................................................ 39
2.11.2 Siting Considerations For Vertical Evacuation Structure ........................ 40
2.11.2.1 Warning, Travel Time, and Spacing ................................................ 40
2.11.2.2 Ingress and Vertical Circulation ..................................................... 40
2.11.2.3 Consideration of Site Hazards ........................................................ 40
THESIS – VMP / Table of Contents vi| P age

2.11.3 Sizing Considerations ............................................................................ 42
2.11.4 Elevation Considerations........................................................................ 42
CHAPTER 3 DATA METHODOLOGY FOR NUMERICAL MODELING . 43

3.1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................ 44
3.2 BATHYMETRY CONSTRUCTION ............................................................ 44
3.3 LITERATURE REVIEW ON METHODOLOGY ........................................ 46
3.4 PROCESSING BATHYMETRIC DATA ..................................................... 47
3.5 TSUNAMI GENERATION .......................................................................... 48
3.6 FAULT DISLOCATION PARAMETERS/INITIAL JUMP .......................... 48
3.7 NUMERICAL MODELING OF TSUNAMI WAVES .................................. 50
3.8 SHALLOW WATER THEORY ................................................................... 52
3.9 DEEP WATER THEORY............................................................................. 55
3.10 INITIAL CONDITIONS ............................................................................... 55
3.11 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS ....................................................................... 55
3.11.1 Open Boundary Conditions for Free Transmission ................................. 55
3.11.2 Boundary Conditions at Run-up Front .................................................... 56
3.11.3 Necessity of Continuation of Regions in Numerical Computation .......... 56
3.12 RUN-UP MODELING AND VERIFICATION ............................................ 56

3.13 FAULTWAVE MODEL ............................................................................... 59
3.13.1 Input Files and Parameters ..................................................................... 59
3.13.2 Output files ............................................................................................ 60
3.14 TUNAMI- N2 MODEL ................................................................................ 61

3.15 IMAGE OUTPUTS AND ANIMATIONS .................................................... 62
3.16 RESULT TABLES ....................................................................................... 68
3.17 RESULT ANALYSIS ................................................................................... 71
3.18 INUNDATION MAPPING........................................................................... 76
3.20 NEURAL NETWORK APPLICATION ....................................................... 77
3.21 PRE PROCESSING ...................................................................................... 77
3.21 NEURAL NETWORK DESIGN AND TRAINING ...................................... 78
THESIS – VMP / Table of Contents vii| P age

3.21.1 MATLAB Implemented Training Algorithms ........................................ 78
3.22 MODEL SIMULATION ............................................................................... 79

3.23 POST PROCESSING ................................................................................... 79
3.23.1 LM14TT_76 ANN Model Weights ........................................................ 80
3.24 LINEAR REGRESSION OF LM14TT_76 MODEL ..................................... 80
CHAPTER 4 TSUNAMI DESIGN FORCES ........................................................ 81

4.1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................ 82
4.1.1 City and County of Honolulu Building Code (CCH 2000) ...................... 82
4.1.2 Federal Emergency Management Agency Coastal Construction Manual

(FEMA 55 - CCM, 2000) ..................................................................................... 83
4.1.3 SEI/ASCE 7-02 (ASCE 7, 2002) ............................................................ 83
4.1.4 FEMA P646, 2008 ................................................................................. 83
4.2 TSUNAMI FORCES ON STRUCTURES .................................................... 83

4.3 BUOYANT FORCE ..................................................................................... 84
4.3.1 City and Country of Honolulu, 2000 ...................................................... 84
4.3.2 FEMA 2000 : Coastal Construction Manual ........................................... 84
4.3.3 FEMA P646 – JUNE 2008 ..................................................................... 84
4.4 HYDRODYNAMIC FORCE ........................................................................ 84

4.4.3 FEMA P646 – JUNE 2008 ..................................................................... 86
4.5 SURGE FORCE ........................................................................................... 88

4.5.2 Tsuneo Okada et al., (2005) ................................................................... 88
4.5.2 FEMA P646 – JUNE 2008 ..................................................................... 88
4.6 IMPACT FORCE ......................................................................................... 89

4.6.2 ASCE – 7, 2002 ..................................................................................... 90
THESIS – VMP / Table of Contents viii| P age

4.5.3 FEMA P646 – JUNE 2008 ..................................................................... 90
4.6 HYDROSTATIC FORCE ............................................................................. 93

4.6.2 FEMA 2000: Coastal Construction Manual ............................................ 93
4.6.3 FEMA P646: JUNE - 2008 .................................................................... 93
4.8 LOCALIZED SCOUR .................................................................................. 94

4.9 BREAKING WAVE LOADS ....................................................................... 96

4.10 DAMMING OF WATERBORNE DEBRIS .................................................. 96
4.10.1 FEMA P646 – JUNE-2008..................................................................... 96
4.11 DESIGN FLOOD VELOCITY ..................................................................... 96

4.11.3 FEMA P646, 2008 ................................................................................. 97
4.11.4 M. Saatcioglu, 2009 ............................................................................... 97
4.12 HYDRODYNAMIC UPLIFT FORCES ON ELEVATED FLOORS ............ 98

4.12.1 FEMA P646, 2008 ................................................................................. 98
4.13 ADDITIONAL GRAVITY LOADS ON ELEVATED FLOORS .................. 99

4.13.1 FEMA P646, 2008 ................................................................................. 99
4.14 LOADING COMBINATIONS ..................................................................... 99

4.14.2 FEMA P646, 2008 ............................................................................... 100
4.15 STRUCTURAL PERFORMANCE DURING PAST TSUNAMI EVENTS 102

4.15.1 Structure I – Nicaragua 1992 ................................................................ 102
4.15.2 Structure II – Okushiri 1993 ................................................................. 104
4.15.3 Structure III – Phang Nga 2004 ............................................................ 107
THESIS – VMP / Table of Contents ix| P age

CAHPTER 5 TYPICAL RCC STRUCTURES .................................................. 109
5.1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................... 110
5.2 CALCULATING FORCES ON STRUCTURAL MEMBERS .................... 111
5.3 GENERAL DATA FOR ALL BUILDINGS ............................................... 112
5.4 EARTHQUAKE LOAD ............................................................................. 112
5.4.1 Load Combinations for Earthquake Loading ........................................ 113
5.5 WIND LOAD ............................................................................................. 113

5.6 TSUNAMI LOAD ...................................................................................... 114
5.6.1 Load Combinations for Tsunami Loading ............................................ 117
5.7 STRUCTURAL CONFIGURATION OF SEVEN TYPICAL BUILDINGS 117
CAHPTER 6 ANALYSIS OF RESULTS & INFERENCES ............................ 123

6.1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................... 124
6.2 NOTATIONS USED FOR BUILDINGS .................................................... 124
6.3 BUILDING WISE ANALYSIS OF RESULTS AND INFERENCES ......... 125
6.3.1 G+11 Building Analysis ....................................................................... 125
6.3.2 L – Shape Building Analysis ................................................................ 130
6.3.3 T – Shape Building Analysis ................................................................ 136
6.3.4 Six Storey Building Analysis ............................................................... 141
6.3.5 Rectangle Shape Building (Proposed VES) Analysis ............................ 146
6.3.6 Uneven G+11 Building Analysis .......................................................... 152
6.3.7 Uneven Rectangle Shape Building Analysis ......................................... 157
6.4 OVER ALL COMPARISION OF BUILDING ANALYSIS AND

INFERENCES....................................................................................................... 161
6.3.1 Inferences On Over All Comparision of Building ................................. 170
6.4 RESULT ANALYSIS OF INFILL MASONRY WALL MODELS ............. 171

6.5 TYPICAL DESIGN OF MEMBERS OF RECTANGULAR BUILDING
(PROPOSED VES) ............................................................................................... 172
6.6 COST COMPARISION .............................................................................. 174
THESIS – VMP / Table of Contents x| P age

CAHPTER 7 SUMMARY, CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATIONS ..... 180
7.1 SUMMARY ............................................................................................... 181
7.2 CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................ 182
7.3 RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................ 183
APPENDIX - A ................................................................................................... 185

APPENDIX - B.................................................................................................... 194
APPENDIX - C.................................................................................................... 196
APPENDIX - D ................................................................................................... 198
APPENDIX - E .................................................................................................... 201
REFERENCES .................................................................................................... 202
THESIS – VMP / Table of Contents xi| P age

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.1: Thesis Components ................................................................................... 6

Table 2.1: Causes of tsunami for all listed events up to 2005 ................................... 13
Table 2.2: List of Tsunamis that Affected Indian Region and Vicinity ..................... 19
Table 2.3: Tsunami Run-Up Height during Sumatra Earthquake at Different Locations
..................................................................................................................... 25
Table 2.4: Photo Gallery of Tsunami Run-Up Heights and Damages during Sumatra
Earthquake .............................................................................................................. 26
Table 2.5: Source parameters of Makran earthquakes from previous studies ............ 33
Table 2.6: Tsunami Hazard Zones Definition (Preliminary) ..................................... 35
Table 2.7: Tsunami Sources and Approximate Warning Times ................................ 40
Table 3.1: Values of Coefficient of Bottom Friction (Linsley and Franzini, 1979).... 54
Table 3.2: Result Table of Epi Centre – 1 ................................................................ 68
Table 3.3: Result Table of Epi Centre - 2 ................................................................. 68
Table 3.7: Result Table of Epi Centre – 6 ................................................................ 70
Table 3.9: Result Table of Epi Centre – 8 & 9.......................................................... 70
Table 3.10: Weights in Connections of LM14TT_76 model ..................................... 79
Table 4.1 Estimated Minimum scour Estimated minimum scour (Pachco, 2006)...... 95
Table 4.2: Data Taken for Sample Calculation ....................................................... 101
Table 4.3: Tsunami Load Calculation .................................................................... 101
Table 5.1: Typical Wind Load Calculation............................................................. 113
Table 5.2: Typical Tsunami Load Calculation ........................................................ 114
Table 5.3: Basic Load Cases for Tsunami Loading ................................................ 116
Table 6.1: G + 11 Building – Member Forces ........................................................ 125
Table 6.2: L – Shape Building – Member Forces ................................................... 131
Table 6.3: T - Shape Building – Member Forces .................................................... 136
THESIS – VMP / List of Tables xii| P age

Table 6.4: Six Storey Building – Member Forces................................................... 141
Table 6.5: Rectangle Shape Building (Proposed VES) – Member Forces ............... 146
Table 6.6: Uneven G + 11 Building – Member Forces ........................................... 152
Table 6.7: Uneven Rectangle Shape Building – Member Forces ............................ 157
Table 6.8: Infill Masonry Wall Model Results ....................................................... 173
Table 6.9: Column Design Details of Rectangular Building – T-2.264 ................... 174
Table 6.10: Beam Design Details of Rectangular Building – T-2.264..................... 174
Table 6.11: Construction Cost Comparision Results .............................................. 176
THESIS – VMP / List of Tables xiii| P age

LIST OF FIGURES
Fig 1.1: Makran Subduction Zone.............................................................................. 2

Fig 1.2: Bathymetry of Study Area ............................................................................ 4
Fig 2.1: Fault parameters of earthquake ..................................................................... 9
Fig 2.2: Dip-slip and strike-slip faults ...................................................................... 10
Fig 2.3: Impression of a thrust fault and associated water levels ............................... 11
Fig 2.4: Comparison of sub-aerial and submarine landslides as tsunami wave sources .
..................................................................................................................... 11
Fig 2.5: Terminology for tsunami waves .................................................................. 13
Fig 2.6: Tsunami waves radiating outward at Epi center .......................................... 14
Fig 2.7: Shoaling process of a tsunami wave, clearly showing the steepening of the
wave ..................................................................................................................... 15
Fig 2.8: Tsunami arriving at the coast ...................................................................... 16
Fig 2.9: Tsunami wave arriving at the coast as a bore .............................................. 16
Fig 2.10: Different wave forms of tsunami waves. ................................................... 17
Fig 2.11: Initial Surface Elevation of Sumatra Earthquake ....................................... 23
Fig 2.12: Tsunami Wave propagation in Arabian Sea............................................... 24
Fig 2.13: Major Tsunamigenic Earthquake Sources in Indian Ocean ........................ 30
Fig 2.14: NASA Satellite photo of Makran .............................................................. 32
Fig 2.15: Mangroves and vegetative cover on the coast............................................ 39
Fig 2.16: Location of VES at Coast of Dwarka ........................................................ 41
Fig 3.1: Bathymetry of Arabian Sea .......................................................................... 45
Fig 3.2: Closer contours of Gujarat Region .............................................................. 46
Fig 3.3: Fault Dislocation Parameters ...................................................................... 49
Fig 3.4: Initial Jump of EPI-1 - 200-100-15--10-90-250-8........................................ 50
Fig 3.5: Central Difference ...................................................................................... 52
Fig 3.6: Nested Grids for TUNAMI-N2 ................................................................... 57
Fig 3.7: Initial Jump of water ................................................................................... 58
Fig 3.8: Location of Epi Centers for Modeling ......................................................... 60
Fig 3.9.1: Propagation at 0 min. ............................................................................... 62
Fig 3.9.2: Propagation after 30 min. ......................................................................... 63
THESIS – VMP / Table of Contents xiv| P age

Fig 3.9.5: Propagation after 120 min. ....................................................................... 64
Fig 3.10: Directivity Map of Arabian Sea. ............................................................... 66
Fig 3.11: Run Up Height at Gujarat Coast................................................................ 66
Fig 3.12: Comparision of Run-Up Height with diff. Epicenters for Mandvi ............. 71
Fig 3.13: Comparision of Run-Up Height with diff. Epicenters for Okha ................. 71
Fig 3.14: Comparision of Run-Up Height with diff. Epicenters for Dwarka ............. 72
Fig 3.15: Comparision of Run-Up Height with diff. Epicenters for Porbandar.......... 72
Fig 3.16: Comparision of Run-Up Height for diff. location for EPI-1 ....................... 73
Fig 3.17: Comparision of Width Variation at Dwarka .............................................. 73
Fig 3.18: Comparision of Length Variation at Dwarka ............................................. 74
Fig 3.19: Comparision of Dip Variation at Dwarka .................................................. 74
Fig 3.20: Comparision of Depth to Top Variation at Dwarka ................................... 75
Fig 3.21: Comparision of Slip Variation at Dwarka.................................................. 75
Fig 3.22: Inundation Map of Gujarat ........................................................................ 76
Fig 3.23: ANN Model designation ........................................................................... 78
Fig 3.24: LM14TT_76 Model Simulation Results of Test data ................................. 79
Fig 3.25: LM14TT_76 Model Linear Regression in Training and Testing ................ 80
Fig 4.1: Lifted concrete dock slabs in Khao Lak, Thailand. ...................................... 85
Fig 4.2: Hydrodynamic Force Distribution and Location of Resultant ...................... 86
Fig 4.3: Damage of Building Due to Hydrodynamic Force ...................................... 87
Fig 4.4: Hydrodynamic Impulsive and Drag Forces on Components of A Building
Subjected to Inundation by A Tsunami Bore. ........................................................... 89
Fig 4.5: Maximum Flow Velocity of Depth, d, at the Ground Elevation, Z, and
Maximum Run-up Elevation, R. .............................................................................. 91
Fig 4.6: Damage of Building Due to Impact Force ................................................... 92
Fig 4.7: Hydrostatic Force Distribution and Location of Resultant. .......................... 94
Fig 4.8: Damage of Building Due to Scour .............................................................. 95
Fig 4.9: A Definition Sketch for Upward Buoyant Force Exerted on an Elevated
Floor. ..................................................................................................................... 98
Fig 4.10: Structure I Nicaragua – Front View......................................................... 103
THESIS – VMP / Table of Contents xv| P age

Fig 4.11: Structure I Nicaragua – Approximate Structural Framing ........................ 103
Fig 4.12: General Devastation on Okushiri Island .................................................. 104
Fig 4.13: Structure II Okushiri – Front View.......................................................... 105
Fig 4.14: Structure II Okushiri – Rear View........................................................... 105
Fig 4.15: Structure II Okushiri – Approximate Structural Layout ........................... 106
Fig 4.16: Front View of Phang Nga Building ......................................................... 108
Fig 4.17: Phang Nga Building Plan and Elevation .................................................. 108
Fig 5.1: Typical Floor Plan of G+11 Building & Uneven G+11 Building ............... 118
Fig 5.2: Elevation View of G+11 Building & Uneven G+11 Building.................... 118
Fig 5.3: Typical Floor Plan of L-Shape Building.................................................... 119
Fig 5.4: Elevation View of L-Shape Building ........................................................ 119
Fig 5.5: Typical Floor Plan of Rectangle Building & Uneven Rectangle Building.. 120
Fig 5.6: Elevation View of Rectangle Building & Uneven Rectangle Building ...... 120
Fig 5.7: Typical Floor Plan of Six Storey Building ................................................ 121
Fig 5.8: Elevation View of Six Storey Building ..................................................... 121
Fig 5.9: Typical Floor Plan of T-Shape Building.................................................... 122
Fig 5.10: Elevation View of T-Shape Building ...................................................... 122
Fig 6.1: Axial Force Comparision of Column - G + 11 Building - GF .................... 128
Fig 6.2: Shear Force Comparision of Column - G + 11 Building – GF ................... 128
Fig 6.3: Moment Comparision of Column - G + 11 Building - GF ......................... 129
Fig 6.4: Shear Force Comparision of Beam - G + 11 Building - GF ....................... 129
Fig 6.5: Bending Moment Comparision of Column - G + 11 Building - GF ........... 130
Fig 6.6: Axial Force Comparision of Column - L - Shape Building - GF................ 132
Fig 6.7: Shear Force Comparision of Column – L – Shape Building - GF .............. 133
Fig 6.8: Moment Comparision of Column – L – Shape Building - GF.................... 133
Fig 6.9: Shear Force Comparision of Beam – L – Shape Building - GF.................. 134
Fig 6.10: Bending Moment Comparision of Beam – L – Shape Building - GF ....... 134
Fig 6.11: Axial Force Comparision of Column – T – Shape Building – GF ............ 137
Fig 6.12: Shear Force Comparision of Column – T - Shape Building - GF ............. 138
Fig 6.13: Moment Comparision of Column – T - Shape Building - GF .................. 138
Fig 6.14: Shear Force Comparision of Beam – T - Shape Building - GF ................ 139
Fig 6.15: Bending Moment Comparision of Beam – T – Shape Building - GF ....... 139
Fig 6.16: Axial Force Comparision of Column – Six Storey Building - GF ............ 143
Fig 6.17: Shear Force Comparision of Column – Six Storey Building - GF ............ 143
THESIS – VMP / Table of Contents xvi| P age

Fig 6.18: Moment Comparision of Column – Six Storey Building - GF ................. 144
Fig 6.19: Shear Force Comparision of Beam – Six Storey Building - GF ............... 144
Fig 6.20: Bending Moment Comparision of Beam – Six Storey Building - GF....... 145
Fig 6.21: Axial Force Comparision of Column – Rectangle Shape Building - GF .. 148
Fig 6.22: Shear Force Comparision of Column - Rectangle Shape Building - GF ... 149
Fig 6.23: Moment Comparision of Column - Rectangle Shape Building - GF ........ 149
Fig 6.24: Shear Force Comparision of Beam - Rectangle Shape Building - GF ...... 150
Fig 6.25: Bending Moment Comparision of Beam - Rectangle Shape Building - GF....
................................................................................................................... 150
Fig 6.26: Axial Force Comparision of Column – Uneven G + 11 Building - GF .... 153
Fig 6.27: Shear Force Comparision of Column – Uneven G + 11 Building - GF .... 154
Fig 6.28: Moment Comparision of Column – Uneven G + 11 Building - GF .......... 154
Fig 6.29: Shear Force Comparision of Beam – Uneven G + 11 Building - GF ........ 155
Fig 6.30: Bending Moment Comparision of Beam - Uneven G + 11 Building - GF 155
Fig 6.31: Axial Force Comparision of Column – Uneven Rectangle Building - GF 158
Fig 6.32: Shear Force Comparision of Column - Uneven Rectangle Building - GF 158
Fig 6.33: Moment Comparision of Column - Uneven Rectangle Building - GF...... 159
Fig 6.34: Shear Force Comparision of Beam - Uneven Rectangle Building - GF .... 159
Fig 6.35: Bending Moment Comparision of Beam - Uneven Rectangle Building - GF .
................................................................................................................... 160
Fig 6.36: Comparision of Axial Force in Ref. Column - PL ................................... 161
Fig 6.37: Comparision of Axial Force in Ref. Column - GF ................................... 161
Fig 6.38: Comparision of Axial Force in Ref. Column - FF.................................... 162
Fig 6.39: Comparision of Axial Force in Ref. Column - Terrace ............................ 162
Fig 6.40: Comparision of Shear Force in Ref. Column – PL................................... 163
Fig 6.41: Comparision of Shear Force in Ref. Column - GF ................................... 163
Fig 6.42: Comparision of Shear Force in Ref. Column - FF ................................... 164
Fig 6.43: Comparision of Shear Force in Ref. Column – Terrace ........................... 164
Fig 6.44: Comparision of Moment in Ref. Column – PL ........................................ 165
Fig 6.45: Comparision of Moment in Ref. Column – GF........................................ 165
Fig 6.46: Comparision of Moment in Ref. Column – FF ........................................ 166
Fig 6.47: Comparision of Shear Force in Ref. Beam – Terrace............................... 166
Fig 6.48: Comparision of Shear Force in Ref. Beam - PL....................................... 167
Fig 6.49: Comparision of Shear Force in Ref. Beam - GF ...................................... 167
THESIS – VMP / Table of Contents xvii| P age

Fig 6.50: Comparision of Shear Force in Ref. Beam - FF ....................................... 168
Fig 6.51: Comparision of Shear Force in Ref. Beam - Terrace ............................... 168
Fig 6.52: Comparision of Bending Moment in Ref. Beam – PL ............................. 169
Fig 6.53: Comparision of Bending Moment in Ref. Beam - GF.............................. 169
Fig 6.54: Comparision of Bending Moment in Ref. Beam - FF .............................. 170
Fig 6.55: Comparision of Bending Moment in Ref. Beam – Terrace ...................... 170
Fig 6.56: Principal Major Stress Contour of Infill Masonry Wall Model ................ 172
Fig 6.57: Shear Stess Contour of Infill Masonry Wall Model ................................. 173
Fig 6.58: Construction Cost Comparision - G+11 Building .................................... 177
Fig 6.59: Construction Cost Comparision – Six Storey Building ............................ 178
Fig 6.60: Construction Cost Comparision – L – Shape Building ............................. 178
THESIS – VMP / Table of Contents xviii| P age

CHAPTER – 1
INTRODUCTION
Ph.D. Thesis – VMP / Chapter- 1 / Introduction 1| P age

1.1 PROBLEM’S DESCRIPTION
The western coast of India and Vicinity has experienced six tsunami events since
326 B.C. Distant tsunamis have originated from Makran Subduction Zone
(MSZ) and Iranian Coast. Although, the historical records are incomplete, it is
believed that such Tsunamis were destructive on the western coasts of India. The
most destructive tsunami ever recorded in the Arabian Sea was by the 28th
November 1945 earthquake in Makran region. More than 4000 people lost their
life along the Makran coast of Pakistan by both the earthquake and the tsunami.
The tsunami was responsible for great loss of life and destruction along the
coasts of India, Pakistan and Iran. The earthquake’s Richter Magnitude (Ms) was
7.8 (Pendse, 1948) & the Moment Magnitude (Mw) was revaluated to be 8.1
(Byrne et al, 1992). The run-up height during the tsunami was of 13m at Makran
coast 1.5 m at Karachi and 2 m near Bombay (Jaiswal et al., 2008).
Seismic gap area along the subduction zone of Makran is possible site of future
great earthquake, which could generate tsunamigenic condition along western
Indian coast (George, 2006 & Jaiswal et. al., 2008). Apart from known Eastern
Makran Zone the recent discovery shows that Western Makran Zone is also
capable of producing major far field tsunami (Fig 1.1). A review of various
tsunami catalogs (Rastogi and Jaiswal, 2006; Jordan, 2008; Murty, 1977) reveals
that the western coast of Gujarat is at risk from a locally generated tsunami too.
Fig 1.1: Makran Subduction Zone
Ph.D. Thesis – VMP / Chapter- 1 / Introduction 2| Page

Dwarka, a famous place for Dwarkadhish Temple which is built on north bank
of the Gomti River, is situated on western coast of Gujarat has one of the highest
tsunami risks in the Gujarat coastal areas. Currently, the strategy to prepare for a
tsunami in Gujarat and even in India focuses on developing early warning
systems, planning evacuation routes, conducting evacuation drills, and educating
the public about its risk. These are all necessary, yet insufficient efforts. Dwarka
is located so close to the coast as a large portion of its population cannot be able
to reach to the safe ground in the time between the tsunami warning and the
tsunami arrival at the shore.
It is estimated that over 52,000 inhabitants of Dwarka will be unable to evacuate

during that time, even if they head for safe ground immediately following the
tsunami warning. Under these circumstances, other means to prepare for the
expected tsunami must be developed. With this motivation, an effort has been
made to analyse and design tsunami resistant structures. Also in this research an
effort has been made to plan and design Dwarka’s VES—structure is to be
designed to rise above the maximum tsunami water level and to withstand the
expected earthquake and tsunami forces.
The literature survey of study area concluded that: 1) the tsunami-generating

earthquake is still a threat at Dwarka and western Gujarat coast; 2) Dwarka and
western Gujarat coast’s tsunami evacuation capacity is currently inadequate and
tsunami resistant structure need to be implemented as part of the safety plan; 3)
suitable safety solutions are highly dependent on the natural and built
environment. This study is now proposing to: 1) design and construct pedestrian
overpasses with good number of sign marks to serve as evacuation paths; 2)
build a tsunami evacuation raised Earth Park; 3) construction of tsunami resistant
structures at Dwarka and in coastal area of western Gujarat to serve as safety
evacuation solution; and 4) retrofitting of existing building to protect probable
tsunami forces.
1.2 AIM AND OBJECTIVES OF RESEARCH
The aims of this research work are to:
Evaluate design loads for tsunami resistant structures based on run up height of
waves, arrival time and inundation depth.
Provide insight into the feasibility of tsunami resistant structures for Dwarka and
western coast of Gujarat and to set up a design procedure for tsunami resistant
structures.

To achieve above aim, specific objectives of research are to:
a) Study literature related to intended research work

b) Create bathymetry with the help of GEBCO, GMB & SRTM data sets of
Arabian Sea
c) Model propagation of tsunami waves using TUNAMI-N2 for Western
coast of Gujarat for MSZ
d) Evaluate run-up height and arrival time of tsunami using MATLAB
Programme at important locations of Western coast of Gujarat
e) Develop inundation map of western coast of Gujarat
f) Evaluate tsunami evacuation alternatives
g) Compute tsunami loads on structures for different run-up height of
tsunami
h) Model different type of structures using STAAD-Pro v8i
i) Compare structural performance under different possible loadings
j) Derive important conclusions from result analysis
k) Recommend important features of sustainable buildings in tsunami prone
area
l) Design tsunami resistant structures for western coast of Gujarat
1.3 AREA OF STUDY
This study focuses on the Western Coast of Gujarat (Fig 1.2). On western side of
this region there is Arabian Sea, where large tsunami capable of reaching up to
Gujarat was generated in the past.
Fig 1.2: Bathymetry of Study Area

It is quite possible that historical tsunamis in this region have not been properly
reported or documented. The sesimotectonics of the MSZ, historical earthquakes
in the region, and the recent earthquake of October 8, 2005 are indicative of the
active tectonic collision process that is still taking place along the entire southern
and southeastern boundary of the Eurasian plate as it collides with the Indian
plate and adjacent micro plates. Stress loaded tectonic regions could trigger
tsunamigenic earthquakes in the Northern Arabian Sea in the future.
From these activities, in combination with results from hazard mapping and a
risk assessment, it was concluded that for the Western coast of Gujarat, where
there is one of the highest possibilities of loss of human life and economic value
in future, a further study into the feasibility of a tsunami resistant structure is
required. Based on these initial findings, the focus has been set to Dwarka and
western coast of Gujarat. However, many questions remain unanswered.
Tsunami resistant structure is unknown in this area, probably because no tsunami
has been reported since 1945. This yields questions concerning the frequency
and heights of future tsunamis. Finally a question is raised whether tsunami
protection is required.
With reference to the above question, does the matter concern with the actual
load on a structure? Is it anyhow possible to protect against extreme tsunami
events and preceding earthquakes? To what extend is tsunami impact influenced
by structure type, structure location, bathymetry, etc.
These questions have to be answered to assess the feasibility of tsunami resistant

structures for Dwarka and western coast of Gujarat.
1.4 OVERVIEW OF THESIS
This section provides an overview of the content of each chapter. The thesis is
structured into four core components over seven chapters comprising (refer to
Table 1.1): Introduction; Background; Modeling, Results and Analysis; and
Synthesis.
Chapter 1 is an introduction to the research investigation providing a synopsis of

the body of literature and prior work that led to the study and to arrive at a
problem description, thesis aim, objectives and study area. The chapter outlines
the research method and thesis overview, summarizing the contribution of each
chapter in an overall map of the thesis.
Preliminary design of a tsunami resistant structure requires a good understanding

of tsunami physics and statistics in common. To define the actual risk of
tsunamis, it is important to know what tsunamis can be expected in western coast
of Gujarat. For tsunami preparedness programme it is necessary to choose either

protective measures or evacuation solutions. For tsunami protection measures,
various alternatives are possible (Chapter 2).
Table 1.1: Thesis Components
Introduction Chapter 1 Introduction

Chapter 2 Introduction to Tsunamis & Specific
Background Measures for Tsunami
Chapter 3 Data & Methodology for Numerical
Modeling
Core Work Chapter 4 Tsunami Design Forces
Chapter 5 Prototype RCC Structures
Chapter 6 Result & Analysis
Synthesis Chapter 7 Conclusion and Recommendations
Various numerical models have been used in this study. To study the general
behavior of tsunamis for varying bathymetry, shape and height, simple
numerical models are used. These models are also used to get a general idea
about the effectiveness of several earthquake parameters (and combinations) in
tsunami waves. A description of a Numerical model is also presented.
Application of Neural Network is discussed in the field of tsunami warning
system (Chapter 3).
Past tsunami effects on various small scales coastal structures are investigated
for comparison between their structural performance and the different structural
parameters used. The available literature on tsunami load equations for tsunami
resistant structures from various building codes and published literature are
reviewed to develop one set of equations to calculate the tsunami forces (Chapter
4).
Description of seven typical reinforced concrete buildings selected for study

under earthquake, wind and tsunami loads (Chapter 5).
Structural behavior of selected buildings under earthquake load case, wind load
case and tsunami load case are studied and compared in this section. In the case
of tsunami, the buildings are analyzed subjected to tsunami flow at the depths of
2.464, 3, 5 and 10 meters. The resulting forces in structural elements are
compared with the seismic design forces. Also, the effects of different shapes of
building are studied under the tsunami loads (Chapter 6).
Important concluding remarks are presented regarding the effects of different

fault parameters on tsunami run-up height and arrival time. Various effective
measures are recommended regarding the effects of different tsunami loadings
and building types suitable for tsunami prone area (Chapter 7).

CHAPTER – 2
INTRODUCTION TO TUNAMIS &

SPECIFIC MEASURES FOR TSUNAMI
Ph.D. Thesis – V M Patel / Chapter- 2 / Introduction to Tsunamis 7| P a g e

2.1 INTRODUCTION
The term tsunami is derived from two Japanese words: ‘tsu’ , means harbor,
and ‘nami’, means wave. That is because these waves may create large surges
or oscillations in bays or harbors, which are not responsive to the action of normal
sea waves. In deep water, a tsunami is hardly noticeable, but near the coast
various mechanisms cause the wave to grow with sometimes devastating effects.
The term tsunami was created by fishermen who returned to their ports to
find the surrounding area devastated, although they had not been aware of any
wave in the open water.
2.2 NATURE AND ORIGIN OF TSUNAMIS
Tsunamis are caused by rapid perturbations of the seabed or of the water column
above it, which either lift the sea surface up above its normal level (the usual
case) or depress it. This perturbation produces a series of waves, or wave train,
which propagates outwards from the source area until it either, dissipates or collides
with a coastline. The physics of this propagation process is considered later.
L: wave length (m) h: water elevation (m)

Ho : wave height at deep water (m) H: wave height (m)
d: water depth (m) Hr : wave run-up (m)
η: wave elevation (m)
Tsunamis can be triggered by:
1. Earthquakes 3. Volcanic eruptions

2. Landslides 4. Meteor impact
Combinations of these generation mechanisms do often occur. As earthquakes are the
most common cause of tsunamis, they will be elaborated in more detail.
2.3 MECHANICS OF GENERATION
2.3.1 Earthquake Generated Tsunamis
The earth’s crust can generally be divided into fifteen major rigid plates. These plates
move relative to each other causing them to collide at certain locations and drift apart
elsewhere. These boundaries are called fault lines. The contact between these massive
plates does not run smooth, resulting in a buildup of stresses along the fault. When the
stress exceeds the resistance of the rocks, an earthquake occurs that (partially)
releases the built-up stresses in a certain time span. This process can result in
displacements of the earth’s surface up to several meters and subsequent displacement
of the overlying water mass. This will sometimes result in a series of waves, called
tsunamis. When this happens, this earthquake is called tsunamigenic.

The energy involved with these tsunamis can be expressed in a magnitude scale and
an intensity scale and depends on either the earthquake magnitude Mw or the
resulting run-up of the tsunami-waves. The probability of tsunami-generation also
depends on the depth of the epicenter (focal depth). With a focal depth of 30km, one
needs at least an 8.0 magnitude earthquake for trigger a significant tsunami with run-
up heights of 4-6m.
2.3.1.1 FAULT MECHANISMS
An earthquake can be considered to be produced by rupturing of part of the earth’s

crust with a relative displacement of its two sides and the release of the accumulated
elastic strain that had been produced by tectonic processes. The place where
earthquakes originate is called the focal region or focus. The parameters that define
the focus are those that describe the motion of a fracture of fault. These parameters
are explained by the Fig 2.1 below: The azimuth, φ, is the angle between the trace of
the fault (the intersection of the fault with the horizontal) and North (0˚≤φ≤360˚); the
angle is measured so that the fault plane dips to the right-hand side. The dip, δ, is the
angle between the faults.
Fig 2.1: Fault parameters of earthquake
Three main fault types can be distinguished: a normal fault, thrust (reverse) fault and
a strike slip fault. Normal fault and thrust fault are also called dip-slip fault. A dip-slip
earthquake can be on a vertical or a dipping plane. Views of different fault types are
shown in Fig 2.2.
In each case rupturing can occur at any point along the fault line. This point is known
as the focal depth of the epicenter. The hypocenter (focus) is the center of the

earthquake and the epicenter is its perpendicular projection on the Earth's surface. The
distance in between defines the depth of the earthquake.
The orientation of the rupture plane depends on two angles. The direction of the
fault plane relative to the Earth's local surface is defined by the dip angle δ.
The strike angle φ is the clockwise angle between the geographical north and the
strike. The classification of an earthquake is determined by the slip angle, which
indicates the direction in which the upper block moves with respect to the lower
block. The main types are the dip-slip (λ= ±90˚) and strike-slip (λ=0˚, 180˚). The
magnitude of an earthquake is associated with the amount of the movement along the
plane, the so-called slip.
While the vertical dip-slip (with δ ≈ 90˚) mechanism seems to be a logical one for
tsunami generation because it abruptly displaces large sections of the seafloor
vertically, the area of uplift cancels out the area of subsidence, resulting in small or
non-existent tsunami. An impression of a dip-slip fault is presented in Fig 2.2. But
this mechanism is still better at producing tsunami than the strike-slip pattern. The
thrust dip-slip fault is the most preferred fault mechanism for tsunami generation.
Shallow subduction zones earthquakes are one of the most common sources of
destructive tsunamis in the world.
Normal
fault
Thrust (Reverse) fault
Strike-slip fault
Fig 2.2: Dip-slip and strike-slip faults
Subduction zones typically have average dip values of δ ≈ 25˚ ± 9˚, with the largest
tsunami associated with higher dip values. As the dip-angle (δ) decreases, the
tsunami is more likely to have a leading trough.

Fig 2.3: Impression of a thrust fault and associated water levels.
As can be seen in Fig 2.3, the fault-type determines the characteristics of the wave. If
a coast-line is located on the sub-ducted plate a negative wave is expected, means an
initial drop-down of the water level. The coastline located on the sub-ducting plate (at
the left) will receive a positive tsunami. Negative tsunamis are generally more
powerful then positive tsunamis. Tsunami wave heights are highly variable. Many
parameters determine the final wave height at the coast. Besides that, earthquakes can
go together with landslides.
2.4 LANDSLIDES
Fig 2.4: Comparison of sub-aerial and submarine landslides as tsunami wave

sources

The characteristics of tsunamis generated by landslides are different from those
generated by earthquakes. One of the more important differences is the fact that the
direction of propagation of tsunamis generated by landslides is more focused. The
slide moves in a down-slope direction and the wave propagates both upslope and
parallel to the slide.
Two mechanisms can be distinguished, submarine and sub-aerial landslides. See Fig
2.4. As explained in the figure, sub-aerial landslides are more effective in generating
waves, since it yields a net addition of volume to the sea floor. Wave generation by
landslides depends primarily upon the volume of the material moved and submerged,
the speed of the landslide and the mechanism of movement.
Generally, the wavelengths and periods of landslide-generated tsunami range between

1 and 10km and 1 and 5 minutes respectively. These values are much shorter than
those produced by earthquakes (Bryant, 2001).
2.4.1 Volcanic Eruptions
Volcanic eruptions can generate tsunami in many different ways. The majority of
eruptions are accompanied by seismic tremors, which can trigger tsunami if they are
big enough and lie in or near the ocean. Volcanic activity can also induce submarine
landslides and submarine eruptions/explosions. The latter can cause violent tsunami,
when ocean water comes in contact with the magma chamber. This water is converted
instantly into steam, causing an explosion, which can generate large ocean waves. It is
believed that the August 1883 Krakatau eruption produced a 40m tsunami by this
mechanism.
2.4.2 Meteor Impacts
Unlike earthquakes, which cause most tsunami but have a well-defined upper limit,
the potential tsunami height caused by meteor-impact is almost unlimited. However,
most objects smaller than 100 - 200 m in diameter explode in the atmosphere and will
not produce significant waves.
2.4.3 Cause Dependent Overview of Past Tsunamis
Although a distinction has been made among different causes for tsunami, it is most
likely that a lot of tsunamis are caused by a combination of these mechanisms.
In Table 2.1 the percentage distribution of events and deaths are presented for
tsunami-events over the past 2000 year. Also joint occurrences are listed. From this
table it becomes clear that earthquake-induced tsunami form the biggest threat as they
are responsible for over 80% of all tsunami events and deaths.

Table 2.1: Causes of tsunami for all listed events up to 2005
Note: The listed events are only most-probable and definite tsunami events (Source:
Tsunami Event Database of the National Geophysical Data Centre)
2.5 TSUNAMI WAVES
2.5.1 Terminology
Fig 2.5: Terminology for tsunami waves
The terminology used to describe tsunami waves is shown schematically in Fig 2.5.
Much of this terminology is similar to the terminology used for wind waves.
However, there are some differences. The run-up height is referred to a reference
level, mostly mean sea level and not to the water level at the actual moment the
tsunami occurred. This is because of the run-up height is mostly measured some days
after the tsunami occurred. So one should be aware that the actual run-up height of the
tsunami is the reported run-up height Hr corrected with the tidal component. The
period of the wave is the time it takes for two successive peaks to pass a fixed point.

But due to the complex wave forms it is not always convenient and two zero
successive down crossings can be taken or even a more artificial definition has to be
used.
2.5.2 Propagation
The earthquake rupture triggers a series of fast-moving, long waves of initial low
amplitude that radiate outward in a manner resembling the waves radiating when a
pebble is dropped in a pond (Fig 2.6). Part of the tsunami travels into the deep ocean
(distant tsunami) and a part travels to the nearby coast (local and regional tsunami).
Fig 2.6: Tsunami waves radiating outward at Epi center
Most tsunamis generated by large earthquakes travel as wave trains. These wave
trains contain several long waves with wave lengths that often exceed 200 km in the
deep ocean. Usually one of the waves is more pronounced than the other. In deep
water even the highest wave seldom exceeds 0.5m. Their steepness is so small that a
ship out at sea does not feel a tsunami pass.
The maximum ocean depth lies between 8 to 10 km and tsunamis in the deep ocean
have typical wave lengths of hundreds of kilometers. Thus the wave length exceeds
many times the water depth (L>>d), therefore tsunami waves travel as shallow water
waves. The propagation speed of shallow water waves is solely a function of the
water depth:
= ( . ℎ) Eqn (2.1)
v : wave speed ( m/s); g : gravitational constant (m/ s ); h : water depth + water

elevation (m)

Due to the propagation speed being solely a function of the water depth, tsunamis
travel at speeds of 150 - 250 m/s in the deeper ocean (d > 2 km), 30-90 m/s across the
continental shelf (d < 1000 m) and 10 – 20 m/s in front of the coast (d = 50 - 10m).
Eqn (2.1) implies that tsunami waves are amplitude dispersive, meaning that higher
waves travel faster than lower waves. This phenomenon especially becomes
significant at smaller water depths (as h = water depth + wave elevation).
The wave length of a tsunami can be expressed as a simple function of the wave speed
(c) and the period of the wave (T), for a constant depth:
= . Eqn (2.2)
L = wave length (m); v = wave speed (m/s); T = time period of the wave (s)
Tsunamis typically have periods o f 100 - 2,000 seconds (1.6-33 min), referred to as
the tsunami window.
Fig 2.7: Shoaling process of a tsunami wave, clearly showing the steepening of
the wave
When water depths become shallower, the tsunami waves slows down Eqn (2.1) and
becomes compressed Eqn (2.2) causing them to grow in height (Fig 2.7). This is
called shoaling of the wave and it is a reversible process as long as the wave does not
break. This makes that the changes in the depth and in the seafloor cause the tsunami
waves to continuously evolve and change in shape as they propagate.

Fig 2.8: Tsunami arriving at the coast
Fig 2.9: Tsunami wave arriving at the coast as a bore
On approaching land the wave height will have increased dramatically, whereas the
wave length will have significantly decreased. Despite of the steepening of the
tsunami waves, most waves hit the coast as a fast rising or falling tide (Fig 2.8).
Occasionally when the wave steepness does cause the tsunami waves to break, they
hit the coast as a bore (Fig 2.9). It happens very rarely that tsunami waves break on
the coast.
When the tsunami acts as a rapidly rising tide, the resulting incident is that the current
velocities are relatively low and most initial damage will result from buoyant and

hydrostatic forces and the effects of flooding. Once the tip of the wave arrives, the
velocities increase gradually and a lot of damage occurs by strong currents and
floating debris. When the tsunami hits the coast as a bore, initial damage does not
only occur by buoyant and hydrostatic forces but also by impact forces of the bore
front caused by high turbulence, the high water velocities and by dragged debris in the
bore front. Once the bore front has passed further damage can be attributed to strong
currents and floating debris.
2.5.3 Different Wave Forms
Fig 2.10: Different wave forms of tsunami waves.
Tsunamis in the open ocean are approximately sinusoidal in shape (Fig 2.10). At this
stage the waves can be described by the linear wave theory. As they approach the
coast, the waves become more peaked: the wave peak sharpens and the wave through
becomes more flattened. Mathematically the wave in this stage can be described by
the 2nd order Stokes wave theory. As the tsunami waves approach the coast the wave
through disappears and only the wave peak remains. The wave train evolves to a
succession of solitary waves.
Until this was the common vision among scientists; most experiments and
calculations assumed that tsunamis at the shore manifested themselves as solitary
waves. However, in the nineties scientists began to doubt this approach. First of all
because almost every big tsunami investigated, was reported by people having a
dipole form: a large through accompanied the tsunami arrival. This kind of wave

form cannot be described by a solitary wave, but they can be described as what
mathematicians call N- waves.
One of the reasons it took so long before scientists started to accept the N-wave form,
is that the solitary wave was somewhat easier in describing mathematically and also
easier in generating during experiments. One must realize that before mid-eighties
computational modeling and the computational control of experiments was not as
obvious as it is now.
Nevertheless several aspects of solitary waves and N-waves correspond quite well;
the solitary wave and the N-wave both preserve their wave form, and the propagation
is comparable. But N-waves can become steeper than solitary waves before they
break. This makes that the older work based on solitary waves can still contain a lot of
valuable information.
Some older work can give quantitative insight in the behavior of tsunami waves and
can be used for a preliminary approach to calculate refraction (based on the linear
wave theory), behavior of tsunamis at abrupt depth transitions, wave reflections,
resonance phenomena and many more tsunami wave related phenomena.
2.5.4 Breaking
As stated above tsunami waves do rarely break, because of their very long wave
lengths and modest wave height. A breaking criterion is given by Bryant (2001):
²
= Eqn (2.3)
( ² )
Br: Breaker Parameter (Br>1, wave breaks); H: Wave Height (m); : Slope of the
coast (rad); ω: Radiation frequency of the waves (1/s)
However it is not stated, which wave form is considered. Until the solitary wave was
regarded as the tsunami wave form in coastal waters, it is most likely that the breaker
criterion is derived for solitary waves. At this moment the form of tsunami waves are
often regarded as N-waves, which can become steeper than solitary waves before they
break. So, conveniently, the presented breaker criterion Eqn (2.3) can be regarded as a
lower limit for breaking of tsunami waves, as N-waves break later than solitary
waves.
2.5.5 Tsunami Scales
There are two distinct measures for describing tsunamis: intensity and magnitude.
The intensity gives an indication of the strength of the tsunami at a given location and
its magnitude is an indication for the total energy of a tsunami. The most common
tsunami scales, based on work of Hatori (1995) and Bryant (2001) listed below are
used to quantify tsunami events.

 Imamura-Ida scale, m
 Tsunami Intensity Scale, (i)
 Tsunami Magnitude, Mt
2.6 HISTORICAL TSUNAMIS AFFECTED INDIA
Tsunamis are not as common in the Indian Ocean as in the Pacific. As compared to
average eight tsunamis per year in the Pacific, Indian Ocean has one in three years or
so. Though rare, tsunamis have hit India earlier. The tsunamis in the Indian region and
vicinity are listed in Table 2.2. About eighty percent of the tsunamis of the Indian
Ocean originate in Sunda arc covering Java and Sumatra.
Table 2.2: List of Tsunamis that Affected Indian Region and Vicinity
Sr Date Location Lo Lat. Eq. Cause P Max Ref.
. ng. Ma r Run
N g. o Up
o. b (Run
Ups)
1 326 Indus delta 1 4 (Lisitzin,
B.C. 1974)
2 About Poompuhar, 79. 11.1 4 Wikipedia
500 AD Tamilnadu 52 2
(Probably due to
karkatau
cruption)
3 900AD Nagapattinam, 79. 10.4 4 (Kalaki
Tamilnadu (may 53 6 Krishnmurty)
be from Sunda –
Andaman arc)
4 1008 Iraninan Coast 60 25 1 4 (Murty et al.,
1999)
5 1524 Dabhol, 73. 17 (Bendik and
Maharashtra 2 Bilham, 1999)
6 May Samaji-Delta of 68 24 (Oldham,
1668 Indus 1883)
7 1762.04. Bay of Bengal 92 22 1 4 >2 (Mathur,
12 (Bangladesh) (1) 1998)
8 1819.06. Kutch 26. 71.9 Mw 1 3 (Macmurdo,
16 6 7.8 1821)
9 1842.11. N. Bay of 90 21.5 1 4 (3) (Oldham,
11 Bengal 1883)
10 1845.06. Kutch 23. 68.3 1 3 Nelson

19 6 7
11 1847.10. Little Nicobar 93. 7.33 Mw 1 3 (Berninghause
31 islands 66 3 7.5 n, 1966;
7 – Heck, 1947)
7.9
12 1868.08. Andaman Islands 92. 11.6 1 4 4 NGDC/NOA
19 73 7 A
13 1874 Sunderbans 89 22 1 2 Mihir Guha,
(Bangladesh) Free Journal
14 1881.12. W. of Car 92. 8.52 Mw 1 4 1.2 (Berninghause
31 Nicobar 43 7.9 n, 1966; Ortiz
and Bilham,
2003)
15 Jan. Sri Lanka (may 81. 8.34 1 3 (Berninghause
1882 be from 14 n, 1966)
Indonesia) E
16 1883.08. Karkatau 10 - 6 4 2 (Berninghause
27 (Volcanic 5.2 6.06 n, 1966)
Eruption) 5
17 1884 W. of bay of (Murty et al.,
Bengal 1999)
18 1935.05. Andaman Mw 1 4 (1) NGDC/NOA
31 Nicobar 7.5 A
19 1935.11. Andaman 94 5.5 Mw 1 2 NGDC/NOA
25 Nicobar 6.5 A
20 1941.06. Andaman Islands 92. 12.1 Mw 1 4 1.25 (Bilham et al.,
26 5 7.7 2005)
21 1945.11. Makran Coast 63. 25.1 Mw 1 4 17 (Murty et al.,
28 48 5 8.1 1999; Byrne
et al., 1992)
22 1983.11. Chagos ridge 72. - Mw 1 4 1.5(2 NGDC/NOA
30 11 6.85 7.7 ) A
23 2004.12. Off west coast of 95. 3.30 Mw 3 4 30 NGDC/NOA
26 Sumatra and 94 7 9.3 A
Andaman – 7
Nicobar
Source: Rastogi and Jaiswal, 2006
The cause and probability of the tsunamis are shown by “Cause” and “Prob.”
respectively. The cause and probability of the tsunamis are given by following codes.
Cause Code:

Cause code indicates the cause or source of the tsunamis. Valid values: 1 to 12
1 = earthquake; 3 = earthquake and landslide; 6 = volcano
Event Probability:
Probability of actual tsunami occurrence is indicated by a numerical rating of the

validity of the reports of that event: Valid values: 0 to 4
4 = definite tsunami; 3 = probable tsunami; 2 = questionable tsunami
1 = very doubtful tsunami; 0 = erroneous entry
2.6.1 Tsunamis on Western Coast of India
The western coast of India and Vicinity has experienced six tsunami events since 326
B.C. Distant tsunamis have originated from Makran Subduction Zone (MSZ) and
Iranian Coast (Jordan, 2008; Rastogi and Jaiswal, 2006; Rajendran et al., 2008). Local
tsunamis have originated form Kutch region and Maharashtra
The oldest record of tsunami is available from November 326 BC earthquake near the
Indus delta /Kutch region that set off massive sea waves in the Arabian Sea (Lisitzin,
1974). Tsunami has been observed in the North Indian Ocean on the Iranian coast
from a local earthquake between 1 st April and 9 th May 1008 (Murty, 1977).
An earthquake occurred during 1524 A.D. off the coast of Dabhol, Maharashtra and. a
resulting large tsunami caused considerable alarm to the Portuguese fleet that was
assembled in the area (Bendick and Bilham, 1999).
The town of Samawani (or Samaji) sunk in to the ground with 30,000 houses during
an earthquake of Samaji-Delta of Indus in May 1668.
On June 16 1819, a severe earthquake with Mw 7.8 was recorded in Kutch, India
resulting in large changes in the elevation of the land. The town of Sindri (26.6N
71.9E) and adjoining countries were inundated by a tremendous rush from the ocean,
and all submerged, the ground sinking apparently by about 5m (Macmurdo, 1821)
On June 19 1845, “The sea rolled up the Koree (Kori creek, 23.6N 68.37E) (the east)
mouth of the Indus overflowing the country as far westward as the Goongra river,
northward to the vicinity of Veyre, and eastward to the Sindree Lake in Kutch, India,”
(Nelson, 1846)
On 28 November 1945, a great earthquake, of Pakistan's Makran Coast (Balochistan)

generated a destructive tsunami in the Northern Arabian Sea and the Indian Ocean.
More than 4,000 people were killed along the Makran Coast of Pakistan by both the
earthquake and the tsunami. Also, the tsunami was responsible for loss of life and
great destruction along the coasts of Iran, Oman and western India (and possibly
elsewhere). The great earthquake occurred at 21:56 UTC (03:26 IST), on 28

November 1945. Its epicenter was at 25.15 N 63.48 E., in the northern Arabian Sea,
about 100 km south of Karachi and about 87 km SSW of Churi (Baluchistan),
Pakistan. The earthquake's Richter Magnitude (Ms) was 7.8. The Moment Magnitude
(Mw) was revaluated to be 8.1; the quake was recorded by observatories in New
Delhi, Kolkata (Calcutta) and Kodaikanal (Byrne et al., 1992; George, 2006). The
earthquake was also characterized by the eruption of a mud volcano, a few kilometers
off the Makran Coast, which are common features in Western Pakistan and Myanmar.
It led to the formation of a four small islands. A large volume of gas that erupted from
one of the islands, sent flames leaping "hundreds of meters" into the sky (Murty,
1977). The most significant aspect of this earthquake was the tsunami that it triggered.
The tsunami reached a height of 17m in some Makran ports and caused great damage
to the entire coastal region. A good number of people were washed away. The
tsunami was also recorded at Muscat and Gwadar (Pendse, 1945). It was recorded in
Bombay Harbour, Versova (Andheri), Haji Ali (Mahalaxmi), Juhu (Ville Parle) and
Danda (Khar). At Versova (Andheri, Mumbai), 5 persons who were fishing were
washed away. At Haji Ali (Mahalaxmi, Mumbai), 6 persons were swept into the sea.
At Danda and Juhu, several fishing boats were torn off their moorings. The height of
the tsunami in Mumbai was 2m. A total of 15 persons were washed away in Mumbai.
2.6.2 Indian Ocean Tsunami of December 26, 2004
On Sunday, December 26, 2004 at 06:28:53 a.m. (IST), the earthquake that created
the tsunami is the world’s fifth largest with a magnitude of 9.3 on the Richter scale of
the west coast of Northern Sumatra, Indonesia (Borrero, 2006; EERI, 2005-1) (Fig
2.11). The epicenter located at (3.09◦N, 94.26◦ E), and aftershocks occurred along a
fault line stretching from Indonesia to the Andaman Islands in the north where the
Indo-Australian plate subducting Sunda and Burma sub-plates at a velocity of roughly
60mm/year to north east. The faulting released elastic strains accumulated for
centuries in a few minutes. The estimate of the seismic moment of the earthquake is
3.95x1029 dyne.cm (3 95 × 1022Nm). A maximum slip of 13.9 meters is estimated
from the data. This is a very large slip compared to great earthquakes. Like, the
Imperial Valley earthquake of M 7.1 showed 1.4 m maximum slip and for the Kobe
earthquake (M 7.3), the maximum slip is 2.6 m.

Fig 2.11: Initial Surface Elevation of Sumatra Earthquake
The aftershock activity concentrated more towards the north of the main shock and
very little or nil towards the south. The large offset in vertical component is dominant
as compared to the horizontal components. This is one of the possible reasons for
generation of a large tsunami in the Indian Ocean. The ground motion in the epicenter
zone continued for a period of about 2000 seconds (nearly 33 minutes).
The damage caused by the earthquake and subsequent tsunami is enormous.

According to the most recent information, 300,000 people were killed (EERI, 2005-
1). Serious damages and death were even reported along the east coast of Africa, as
far as 8000 km away from the epicenter (http:// earthquake.usgs.gov/ eqinthenews/
2004/ usslav/).
 Wave Propagation Modeling of Sumatra Earthquake
For the Sumatra earthquake, currently available fault plane models differ in many
interesting details, but are consistent in implying that the fault rupture propagated to
the northwest from the epicenter and that substantial fault rupture occurred within
hundreds of kilometers northwest of the epicenter.
The fault plane model is an impulsive model, including three adjacent rectangular
fault planes covering the entire 150km × 1170km fault region (http://
www.pmel.noaa.gov /∼titov/Titov/).

Fault Parameters Fault 1 Fault 2 Fault 3
Fault length 200 km 670 km 300 km
Fault width 150 km 150 km 150 km
Fault depth 5 km 5 km 5 km
Strike, Dip, Slip 300˚, 13˚, 90˚ 345˚, 13˚, 90˚ 365˚, 13˚, 90˚
Dislocation 15 m 15 m 15 m
Source: (Wang and Liu, 2006).
AFTER 35 MINUTES AFTER 70 MINUTES
AFTER 135 MINUTES AFTER 270 MINUTES
Fig 2.12: Tsunami Wave propagation in Arabian Sea
Fig 2.12 shows the estimated tsunami travel time in the Indian Ocean. The tsunami
attacked the coasts of Indonesia in 75 minutes, Thailand and Sri Lanka in 2 hours, the
Maldives within 4 hours, and east Africa in 10 hours. The tsunamis were observed at
a great number of tidal stations in the Indian Ocean.
In areas where the beach is gently sloped, the tsunami waves were very powerful and
this is evident in places like Lhok Nga, Ulhue Lhe, Krueng Raya and Meulaboh. The
destruction by the tsunami in those areas was very severe (Table 2.3 & 2.4).

In places where there is a harbor with deep water, the tsunami wave strength was
reduced and the dominant force is buoyancy. This could be observed at Lhok Nga
cement factory jetty, Malahayati harbor and Ulhue Lhe harbor.
In areas close to the center of the city of Banda Aceh, damage by impact force could
be observed. The impact force is caused by floating of fishermen’s boats and also by
cascading debris in mud. In Lhok Nga and several villages on the west coast of
Sumatra Island near Banda Aceh, where tsunamis 15 to 30 meters high hit coastal
villages, no body survived.
The tsunami devastated the distant shores of Thailand and Malaysia to the east, Sri
Lanka and India to the west and Burma to the north. The tsunami arrived in the A&N
Islands at 7:15 a.m., and it caused extensive devastation of the built environment.
Tamil Nadu and Kerala were extensively damaged, while Andhra Pradesh sustained
moderate damage.
Survey reports states that the Nicobar Islands indicate the most severe losses: out of
the total population of 42,068, about 1,395 are reported dead, 5,764 missing, and
27,497 were in the relief camps (as of March 10, 2005) (EERI, 2005-2) (Table 2.4).
Table 2.3: Tsunami Run-Up Height during Sumatra Earthquake at Different

Locations
Location Run-Up Ht. Location Run-Up Ht.
(m) (m)
Idi 2.5 Lhokruet 10+
Panteraja 4.2 - 4.7 Kreung Raya 5.0+
Lhok Nga 31.0 Sri Lanka 10+
Banda Aceh 8.0+ Phuket, Thailand 10+
Breuh Island 20.1 Nicobar Island 8+
Deudap Island 10.7 Malacca and Hut Bay 10-12
(Little Andaman)
Port Blair (South 3.0 Diglipur Harbor (North 1.2
Andaman) Andaman)
Nagapattinam (Tamil 4-5 Kanyakumari (Tamil 4.5
Nadu) Nadu)
Kollam 3.4 Kovalam 4.3
and Ernakulam (Kerala)
Tarangambadi 4.4 Kalpakkam 4.1

Table 2.4: Photo Gallery of Tsunami Run-Up Heights and Damages during
Sumatra Earthquake
Tsunami Run-Up Height in Banda Aceh
Tsunami Run-up Height in Lhok Nga Tsunami Run-up Height in Meulaboh
Damage of Buildings in Banda Aceh (Coastal Zone)

Damage of Buildings in Banda Aceh (Inner Zone)
Damage of Buildings in Lhok Nga
Damage of Buildings in Ulhue Lhe

Damage of Buildings in Krueng Raya
Damage of Buildings in Meulaboh
Damage of Buildings in Andaman – Nicobar Islands

Damage of Buildings in India
Damage of Roads and Bridges
Damage of telecommunication
Source: Ghobarah et al., 2006; Lukkunaprasit et al., 2008; EERI, 2005-1
2.8 TSUNAMIGENIC SOURCES
Based on an assessment of the repeat periods of great earthquakes from past

seismicity, convergence rates and seismological results, possible future source zones
of tsunami generating earthquakes in the Indian Ocean are identified along subduction
zones and zones of compression.

Due to the movement of the Indian plate in north northeast direction, the subduction
zones are confined in the north along the Himalayan region due to the continent –
continent collision between Indian and Eurasian plates, in the east along the
Andaman-Sumatra Sunda trench where the Indian plate is subducting below the
Burmese plate, and a subduction zone in the west along Makran coast, near Karachi,
Pakistan. Thus, the Andaman-Sumatra and Makran Subduction zones are the two
main sources in the Indian Ocean (Fig 2.13) where earthquakes of magnitudes 7.9 and
above can occur giving rise to tsunamis, which can affect the east and the west coasts
of India. (Chadha, 2006).
Furthermore, Bangladesh-Myanmar coast has produced some well documented

tsunamis. Karachi-Kutch coast region has also produced some possible tsunamis. The
Carlsberg spreading ridge or old oceanic ridges like Chagos Ridge and Ninetyeast
Ridge with normal faulting can give rise to local tsunamis. (Rastogi and Jaiswal,
2006).
Iran
Pakistan
Oman
Makran
India
Srilanka
INDIAN OCEAN
Sumatra
Fig 2.13: Major Tsunamigenic Earthquake Sources in Indian Ocean
Thrust type earthquakes along subduction zones that cause vertical movement of the
ocean floor are usually tsunamigenic (Jaiswal et al., 2008-2). Minor tsunamis can be
generated due to dip-slip faulting along oceanic ridges.
Far-field tsunami hazard in an ocean basin is a direct function of the seismic potential
for the extremely large events required to generate tsunamis capable of exporting
death and destruction to distant shores. Research indicates that a seismic moment in
excess of 7 x 10 28 dyn.cm is required in this respect (Okal and Synolakis, 2008).

2.8.1 Andaman-Sumatra Tsunami Source
The M 9.3 earthquake of the coast of Sumatra triggered the tsunami. The earthquake
occurred due to the thrusting of the Burmese plate over the Indian plate. The fracture
propagated unidirectionally from Sumatra, toward north along the plate boundary
paralleling the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, at a velocity of about 2.4 m/s for the
first 600 km and then it slowed down to about 1.5 km/s (Jaiswal et al., 2008-2). The
total length of the fracture as seen from the aftershocks distribution is about 1250 km.
McCloskey et al. (2005) estimated a maximum displacement of the order of about

20m. with most of the slip being concentrated in the first 500 km from the epicenter.
On March 28, 2005, another great earthquake of M8.7 occurred 150 km further
southeast of the December 26, 2004 event. This event also occurred on a thrust fault
in Sunda trench at a depth of 30 km.
2.8.2 Makran Tsunami Source
The convergence of the Indian plate with the Arabian plate, with the Arabian and
Iranian microplates of the Eurasian tectonic blocks has created an active east-west
subduction zone along the Makran coast in southern Pakistan.
2.8.2.1 THE MAKRAN COASTAL REGION
The Makran coast is rugged and tectonic in origin with uplifted terraces, cliffs and
headlands. The entire coastline is characterized by extreme sediment accretion
(Jaiswal et al., 2008-2; Byrne, 1992; Singh et al., 2008; Mohammad et al., 2009). It is
one of largest sediment accretionary wedges on earth, with up to 7 km of sediments
deposited in the Gulf of Oman to the west and major rivers contributing vast amount
of sediment to the offshore region in the east. The accretionary complex is more than
900 km long and there is no evidence of very active volcanism. The complex has an
east-west orientation and is bounded on both sides by large transform faults associated
with tectonic plate boundaries.
The Balochistan section of the Makran coast of Pakistan has several small river deltas.
In the eastern Sindh region of Pakistan the Indus River has formed one of the largest
deltas in the world. Past meandering of Indus has formed extensive deltas east of
Karachi. Extensive sedimentation from the erosion in the Himalayas has widened the
continental shelf of the Sindh coast to about 150 km. Along the Balochistan region
where there is less sedimentation; the continental shelf measures only 15-40 km (Fig
2.14) (George, 2006).

Fig 2.14: NASA Satellite photo of Makran
Source: (George, 2006)
2.8.2.2 THE MAKRAN SUBDUCTION ZONE (MSZ)
The MSZ extends east from the strait of Hormoz in Iran to near Karachi in Pakistan
with the length of about 900 km. Stonely (1974) first proposed that a subduction zone
off the Makran coast forms the boundary between the Arabian and Eurasian Plates.
Quittmeyer and Jacob (1979) stated that the seismicity in the Makran region is
consistent with the interpretation of this area as an active subduction zone. According
to Page et al. (1979), the raised beaches along the Makran coast confirm the tectonic
model of subduction zone along this region. Recently, a comprehensive study on the
tectonic and climatic evolution of the Makran region was conducted by Clift et al.
(2002).
Offshore, the active tectonic convergence of the India plate with the Arabian and
Iranian microplates of the Eurasian tectonic block has created a tectonic plate margin
- an active subduction zone along the boundary of the Arabian plate on the Makran
coast. The tectonic plates there converge at an estimated rate of about 30 to 50 mm/y
(George, 2006).

The level of seismicity in Makran is quite low. Those earthquakes that do occur are
generally small, with few teleseismic events larger than magnitude 5, and large of
great earthquakes are uncommon. A number of focal mechanisms have been
determined for events with magnitudes around 6 (Quittmeyer and Jacob 1979). Most
of these events occur as bending-related earthquakes at intermediate depths within the
down going plate (Table 2.5).
Table 2.5: Source parameters of Makran earthquakes from previous studies

Date Origin Latitud Longitud Dept M Strike Rake Referenc
Time, eN eE h km w , deg , deg e
UTC
Nov. 21:56:55. 25.15 63.48 27 7.9 7 89 BS
27, 2
1945
Aug. 5, 14:24:13. 25.04 63.49 20 6.8 7 68 BS
1947 7
May 08:35:01. 27.00 59.40 52 5.2 18 -90 C
29, 0
1963
82 187 C
Aug. 18:29:39. 25.32 63.14 5 5.4 30 0 Q
12, 7
1963
Aug. 2, 13:30:23. 27.54 60.92 62 5.7 16 -60 JM
1968 3
65 5.7 22 -116 JQ
62 5.7 29 32 N
Nov. 7, 18:34:04. 27.80 60.02 35 6.1 30 -16 JM
1969 3
74 6.1 26 -161 JQ
35 6.1 37 180 N
Aug. 01:12:50. 25.04 61.22 33 5.5 22 114 C
6,1972 5
30 5.4 41 49 Q
33 5.5 20 90 JM
Aug. 8, 19:09:31. 25.14 61.22 30 5.5 5 90 C
1972 5
41 5.4 18 34 Q
41 5.5 20 90 JM
Nov. 09:09:01. 27.40 59.14 65 5.4 15 -90 C
17,197 7
2
32 20 C

65 5.4 80 20 JM
Sept. 2, 07:23:16. 24.88 63.21 30 5.3 30 90 Q
1973 6
Jan. 10, 01:26:16. 26.55 60.95 33 5.9 40 90 JM
1979 6
Jan. 10, 15:05:43. 26.48 61.02 33 5.9 34 90 JM
1979 5
April 07:04:40. 27.54 64.50 34 5.4 6 -90 JM
28, 6
1980
April 10:58:51. 27.79 62.05 65 6.5 32 -67 L
18, 2
1983
Dec. 05:46:22. 27.50 56.74 15 5.1 9 78 CMT
10, 5
1977
May 6, 11:16:06. 29.80 66.20 33 5.4 89 -11 CMT
1978 0
Dec. 01:30:16. 28.59 66.06 33 4.8 86 -12 CMT
10, 3
1978
Feb. 7, 15:06:26. 26.28 57.21 33 5.5 42 172 CMT
1983 6
Oct. 2, 03:19:40. 26.96 66.45 13 5.2 76 0 CMT
1984 7
Oct. 8, 03:50:40 34.49 73.63 26 7.6 116 90 USGS
2005
Oct. 23:09:58 30.66 67.36 15 6.4 212 90 USGS
28,
2008
Source: (Rastogi and Jaiswal, 2006)
References of the Table:
BS - Byrne & Sykes (1992) JQ - Quittmeyer and Jacob

(1979)
C - Chandra (1984) L - Laane and Chen (1989)
CMT - Centroid Moment N - Nowroosi (1972)
Tensor, e.g., Dziewonski et al. (1983)
JM - Jackson and McKenzie Q - Quittmeyer and Kafka
(1984) (1984)
USGS - United States Geological
Survey

2.9 TSUNAMI RISK
It is agreed that no human interference is possible to control tsunami event but

precautionary measures such as coastal area planning for locating coastal
communities in safer areas, protecting and propagating the natural protecting systems
such as mangroves, coral reefs, shelter belt plantations, along with installation of early
warning systems, timely evacuation and relief measures can minimize loss of life and
property to a large extent.
The recent Tsunami has made us to understand that the planning of coastal areas
involves more care than the normal land use planning since our coast is vulnerable to
natural disasters.
It will be assessed by a deterministic approach according to the following:
TSUNAMI RISK = TSUNAMI HAZARD + EXPOSURE + VULNERABILITY.
2.9.1 For the Tsunami Hazard Assessment
The Tsunami hazard map may be empirically defined using a deterministic approach,
based upon potential maximum wave heights for the scenario tsunamis. For the
terrestrial environment the hazard may be presented as inundation levels, in terms of
run-up heights at specified land contours. For the marine environment (“ON
WATER”) Harbour, Bay and Reefs – hazard may be given in terms of potential
maximum wave heights. The definition of the tsunami hazard zones, as preliminary
estimates, is given in Table 2.6.
The elevation data sets are the most important input for inundation mapping in
tsunami prone areas. Preparation of a vulnerability map could inform coastal
community and others about susceptibility to inundation corresponding to various
wave-heights.
Table 2.6: Tsunami Hazard Zones Definition (Preliminary)

CHARACTERISTIC TSUNAMI HAZARD
ZONE
HI MED LOW
On Land Inundation Level-Maximum (M Contour ) 5 3 1
Run-up Height –Average (M) >3 1-3 0-1
Tsunami Intensity (I) >2 1-2 0
Likelihood of Tsunami Yes Yes Possible
Damage Observed in Earlier Tsunami Severe Minor None
Coast Adjacent To Tsunamigenic Source Yes Yes No
On Water Wave Heights (M) >2 1-2 <1

CHARACTERISTIC TSUNAMI HAZARD
ZONE
HI MED LOW
Reef Damage Severe Minor None
2.9.2 For The Exposure
 List all habitations below 10 m contour level and locate on a map.

 List and locate all vital installations below 10 m contour level (Ports,
Harbours, Schools, Hospitals, Power Plants, Bridges, etc.)
2.9.3 Tsunami Vulnerability Assessment
The vulnerability assessment is expressed as details of elements of the built, natural

and human environments vulnerable to potential tsunami-related damage. These need
to be considered in terms of the Tsunami Hazard Zones for the terrestrial
environments around the shores and the marine environments.
2.9.4 Tsunami Risk Assessment
By integrating the hazard and vulnerability assessments, the tsunami risk assessment
is to be developed in terms of zonation and inundation maps and associated affects.
2.10 SPECIFIC MEASURES FOR SAFETY FROM TSUNAMIS
In tsunami disasters, the biggest damages and losses occur in the urban areas.
Once the tsunami strikes, there will be tremendous losses and damages in the city.
Therefore, it is very important to prepare the city and its community with a disaster
mitigation plan in order to reduce or minimize potential loss or damage.
2.10.1 Land Use and Site Planning For Tsunami Mitigation
To reduce tsunami hazard risk, recommendations on land use planning

strategies include the following:
 Designation or acquisition of tsunami hazard areas for open-space uses

 Land use designation in hazard area
 Zoning arrangement from the public to private zone
 Capital improvement planning and budgeting
According to the US National Tsunami Mitigation Hazard Program US NTHMP,

there are four basic site planning techniques to reduce tsunami risk that can be
developed or combined with other broader built environment design. These site-
planning techniques include the following:

 Avoid inundation areas
 Slow water currents
 Steer water forces
 Block water forces
2.10.2 Emergency Road Network Planning For Tsunami

Mitigation
To support the mobility of evacuation and aid efforts, the planning for emergency
road network is strongly required. Emergency road network is organized into escape
road and relief road. Escape roads accommodate people in the hazard zone to escape
from disaster in a short time. Relief roads mainly function for immediate treatment
(first-aid), evacuating citizens, and supplying relief materials. The road network
ensures connection with safer area in surrounding region of tsunami hazard zone.

2.10.3 Coastal Structures
The following structures are required to build in coastal area in order to reduce
destructive energy of tsunami waves. Materialization of these structures should
consider local condition of tsunami-prone area in terms of geography, topography,
and financial resources.
2.10.3.1 DETACHED BREAKWATER
Detached breakwaters are structures situated offshore and generally parallel to the
shore. Detached breakwaters protect the adjacent shoreline by reducing incoming
wave energy due to storm surge, mid-scale and small-scale tsunami. Sand transported
along the beach is then carried into the sheltered area behind the breakwater where it
is deposited in the lower wave energy portion.
2.10.3.2 SEA W ALL AND OFF SHORE BREAKERS
Today, nations around the Ocean are trying to decide whether to allow rebuilding on
the coast, which structures to rebuild and which ones to relocate, and how to rebuild
to minimize losses due to future tsunamis. There are a wide range of technical and
management options for coastal protection, which include the sea wall construction
and off shore breakers as artificial barriers.
2.10.3.3 VEGETATION ALONG THE COAST
A coastal landscape is generally comprised of combination of landforms, coastal

water surfaces, vegetation and other significant visual elements. Landscape values and
the presence of distinctive natural features are among the qualities which go to make
up the natural character of particular coastal areas. Distinctive natural features within
or immediately adjacent to the coastal marine area can include beaches, sand spits,
islands, and reefs.
If Mangrove ecosystem or Wet lands had found in these areas the impact would have
reduced as mangrove ecosystem would have acted as buffer zones People living along
the coastal zones must be encouraged to organize afforest ration programme of
mangrove for preventing future impact of tsunami in the coastal zones. While there is
no guarantee that replanting mangroves will prevent another tsunami tragedy, coastal
communities need many more life-saving belts to help filter the energy of strong
winds and tidal waves. Until recently, mangrove forests have been recognized mainly
for their direct-use values (Fig 2.15).

Fig 2.15: Mangroves and vegetative cover on the coast
2.10.3.4 TIDAL GATE
Tidal gate located in the river mouth to prevent tsunami run-up and inundation
through the river channel. It also prevents the collapse of bridges due to hydraulic
bore of tsunami waves that travel to upstream. Lower priority is given to the
construction of tidal gate because of high construction cost. The tidal gate would be
required when development of facilities and infrastructures along river channel
is carried out.
2.11 VERTICAL EVACUATION STRUCTURE
Vertical evacuation structure (VES) can be intended for general use by the
surrounding population, or by the occupants of a specific building or group of
buildings. Choice between various options available for vertical evacuation structures
will depend on emergency response planning and needs of the community, the type of
construction and use of the buildings in the immediate vicinity, and the project-
specific financial situation of the state, municipality, local community, or private
owner considering such a structure.
2.11.1 Vertical Evacuation Concepts
The 2004 Sumatra Earthquake and Indian Ocean Tsunami vibrantly demonstrated the
menace of major tsunamis. Interestingly, the majority of reinforced-concrete
buildings, except those very close to the shoreline, survived with minor structural
damage, even though they were not designed for tsunamis or earthquakes
(Lukkunaprasit et al., 2008). This indicates that it is possible to design buildings to
withstand moderate tsunamis to serve as evacuation shelters. However, development
of design guidelines for safe and economical buildings against tsunami is still in its
early life.

2.11.2 Siting Considerations For Vertical Evacuation Structure
Vertical Evacuation Structures (VES) should be located such that all persons
designated to take refuge can reach the structure within the time available between
tsunami warning and tsunami inundation.
2.11.2.1 WARNING, TRAVEL TIME, AND SPACING
Table 5-1 summarizes approximate warning times associated with the distance
between a tsunamigenic source and the site of interest.
Table 2.7: Tsunami Sources and Approximate Warning Times

Location of Source Approximate Warning Time (t)
Far-source-generated tsunami t > 2 hrs
Mid-source-generated tsunami 30 min < t < 2 hrs
Near-source-generated tsunami t < 30 min
To determine the maximum spacing of tsunami vertical evacuation structures, the

critical parameters are warning time and ambulatory capability of the surrounding
community. Once maximum spacing is determined, size must be considered, and
population becomes an important parameter.
The average, healthy person can walk at approximately 4-mph. Portions of the
population in a community, however, may have restricted ambulatory capability due
to age, health, or disability. The average pace of a mobility-impaired population can
be assumed to be about 2-mph (FEMA P646, 2008).
Assuming a 2-hour warning time associated with far-source-generated tsunamis,

vertical evacuation structures would need to be located a maximum of 4 miles from
any given starting point. This would result in a maximum spacing of approximately 8
miles between structures.
2.11.2.2 INGRESS AND VERTICAL CIRCULATION
Tsunami VES should be spaced such that people will have adequate time not only to
reach the structure, but to enter and move within the structure to areas of refuge that
are located above the anticipated tsunami inundation elevation. Stairs or elevators are
traditional methods of ingress and vertical circulation in buildings, especially when
designated users have impaired mobility. Ramps, such as the ones used in sporting
venues, however, can be more effective for moving large numbers of people into and
up to refuge areas in a structure.
2.11.2.3 CONSIDERATION OF SITE HAZARDS
Special hazards in the vicinity of each site should be considered in locating VES.
Potential site hazards include breaking waves, sources of large waterborne debris, and

sources of waterborne hazardous materials. When possible, VES should be located
away from potential hazards that could result in additional damage to the structure
and reduced safety for the occupants.
Wave breaking takes place where the water depth is sufficiently finite. In the design
of usual coastal structures (e.g., breakwaters, seawalls, jetties), critical wave forces
often result from breaking waves. In general, tsunamis break offshore. In the case of
very steep terrain, however, they can break right at the shoreline, which is known as a
collapsing breaker.
Forces from collapsing breakers can be extremely high and very uncertain. Location
of vertical evacuation structures within the tsunami wave-breaking zone poses
unknown additional risk to the structure. While the possibility of tsunami wave
breaking at an on-shore location is not zero, it is considered to be very rare. For these
reasons, recommended sites for vertical evacuation structures are located inland of the
wave-breaking zone, and wave breaking forces are not considered in this research
work. Fig 2.16 shows location of VES at the coast of Dwarka just opposite to
Dwarkadhish temple.
Fig 2.16: Location of VES at Coast of Dwarka

2.11.3 Sizing Considerations
Sizing of a vertical evacuation structure depends on the intended number of

occupants, the type of occupancy, and the duration of occupancy. The number of
occupants will depend on the surrounding population and the spacing and number of
vertical evacuation structures located in the area. Duration of occupancy will depend
on the nature of the hazard and the intended function of the facility.
For short-term refuge in a tsunami VES, the duration of occupancy should be

expected to last between 8 to 12 hours, as a minimum. Because tsunami events can
include several cycles of waves, there are recommendations that suggest evacuees
should remain in a tsunami refuge until the second high tide after the first tsunami
wave, which could occur up to 24 hours later.
Based on square footage recommendations employed in the design of shelters for

other hazards, the recommended minimum square footage per occupant for a tsunami
refuge is 10 square feet per person (FEMA P646, 2008).
2.11.4 Elevation Considerations
In order to serve effectively as a VES, it is essential that the area of refuge be located
well above the maximum tsunami inundation level anticipated at the site.
To account for this uncertainty, the magnitude of tsunami force effects is determined
assuming a maximum tsunami run-up elevation that is 30% higher than values
predicted by numerical simulation modeling or obtained from tsunami inundation
maps.
The recommended minimum freeboard is one story height, or 10 feet (3 meters) above
the tsunami run-up elevation used in tsunami force calculations. The recommended
minimum elevation for a tsunami refuge area is, therefore, the maximum tsunami run-
up elevation anticipated at the site, plus 30%, plus 10 feet (3 meters) (FEMA P646,
2008).

CHAPTER – 3
DATA & METHODOLOGY FOR NUMERICAL MODELING
Ph.D. Thesis – V M Patel / Chapter- 3 / Data & Methodology 43| P a g e

3.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter describes the processes involved to create the files and steps
necessary to complete the numerical modeling of a tsunami for the Arabian Sea.
Numerical modeling of tsunamis is commonly carried out to better understand
events that have occurred either during or before historical times. Numerical
modeling can also help to predict the effects of a future tsunami.
The present study uses the finite difference code of TUNAMI – N2 to predict
wave propagation (Imamura, 2005). Static displacement on the surface of an
elastic half space due to elastic dislocation was computed on the basis of
equations provided by Mansinha and smylie (1971).
Model runs of eighty six earthquake events were simulated for a far source
generated tsunami caused by an offshore earthquake. The models show a tsunami
wave approaching and starting to hit the west coast of Gujarat 140 to 185 minutes
after the earthquake event (Table 6.1 to Table 6.8). Out of 86, one model is in
keeping with what has already been seen in Makran Earthquake on November 28,
1945; a tsunami struck the coast approximately 150 minutes after the earthquake
event (Jaiswal et al.-1, 2008). As it has been suggested, there may also be other
possible generation mechanisms (Rastogi and Jaiswal, 2006; Mohammad et al.,
2009).
Several software applications were utilized for bathymetry manipulation and

tsunami propagation modeling.
The software used included:

1. AutoCAD 2007 4. Global Mapper 9.0
2. Golden Software SURFER 8.0 5. MatLab R2009a
3. TUNAMI-N2 6. Microsoft Excel 2007
3.2 BATHYMETRY CONSTRUCTION
High resolution bathymetric data from the whole Arabian Sea is not often
collected due to the time, money and area involved to get such data. An only
small portion of the Western coast of Gujarat is known in sufficient detail to
recognize and count all the effects.
Western coast of Gujarat has not been extensively surveyed before. The
bathymetric grid was built from GEBCO 30 second resolution database. But due
to the large spatial variation of these points they didn’t give high enough
resolution to allow for accurate hydrodynamic modeling. This was a problem as it
would have a major effect on the accuracy of the results. Latest hydrographic
charts of Gujarat Maritime Board (GMB) and latest topographical data available

from Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) were used to try and fill in
some of the more critical areas, such as in closer to the shore where
hydrodynamics start to become more complex due to the shallowing water. As
tsunami enters shallow water it undergoes shoaling transformations. These can
alter tsunami characteristics considerably.
The basic GEBCO grid is in the form of World Geographic System format, it has
been converted in the form of Cartesian System in meter form by latitude-
longitude conversion constants with the help of Global Mapper and Surfer.
Fig 3.1: Bathymetry of Arabian Sea

Fig 3.2: Closer contours of Gujarat Region
MS Excel was used to manipulate the digitized data and merged the entire
individual files into one, which was in turn loaded into SURFER 8.0 to
create the bathymetric files and maps that would be used in the TUNAMI-N2
numerical modeling suite. Fig 3.1 shows bathymetry of Arabian Sea and Fig 3.2
shows closer contours of Gujarat Region.
3.3 LITERATURE REVIEW ON METHODOLOGY
Compared to seismic hazard analysis a few research works have been devoted to
tsunami hazard assessment. Different researchers employed three main methods
for tsunami hazard assessment as follows: (a) Direct Statistical Tsunami Hazard
Assessment (DSTHA), (b) DTHA, and (c) Probabilistic Tsunami Hazard
Assessment (PHTA).
In this study, the method of DTHA has been employed for Makran for the
following reasons: a) the historical data of tsunami in the Makran region are rather
poor. Therefore, the direct statistical method (DSTHA) cannot yield useful results.
b) Establishment of specific tsunamigenic zones offshore Makran coast is difficult
because only one event is instrumentally recorded. This makes the application of
PTHA difficult. Furthermore, as this is one of the initial studies on the Makran
tsunami hazard assessment; there is a preference for the deterministic method over
the probabilistic one. The present deterministic methodology includes the
following steps: (a) selecting the characteristic earthquake, (b) modeling initial
condition, and (c) numerical modeling of tsunami.

3.4 PROCESSING BATHYMETRIC DATA
TUNAMI-N2 program uses the bathymetry of the area as input data. The
bathymetry of the area is usually stored as data files. This file consists of three
values; x coordinate, y coordinate and the depth values. However data files are
typically randomly spaced files and this data must be converted into an evenly
spaced grid before using as input file of the program. To convert into a grid file, a
program called Surfer is used.
Surfer is contouring as well as 3D surface mapping program which runs under

Microsoft Windows environment. It quickly and easily converts data into
outstanding contour, surface, wireframe, vector, image, shaded relief, and post
maps.
Below is the procedure for converting the bathymetry data file to grid file by
SURFER.
1. Start Surfer.
2. Click on the Grid | Data command to display the Open dialog.
3. Specify the name of the XYZ data file which is the bathymetry data of the
area, and then click OK.
4. In the Grid Data dialog, specify the parameters for the type of grid file
you want to produce.
The Grid Data Dialog
When creating a grid file you can usually accept all of the default gridding
parameters.
 Data Columns
Individually specify the columns for the X data, the Y data, and the Z data. Surfer
defaults to X: Column A, Y: Column B, and Z: Column C, which represents the x
coordinate, y coordinate and the depth respectively.
 Gridding Method
The gridding method should be set to Kriging which is the recommended gridding
method with the default linear variogram. This is actually the selected default
gridding method because it gives good results for most XYZ data sets.
 Output Grid File
TUNAMI-N2 requires a specific file format for the output grid file which is
ASCII grid file format.

3.5 TSUNAMI GENERATION
The tsunami generation location was chosen due to the history of the area and past
events. As seen in chapter 2, different researchers have plotted historical
earthquake events that have preceded tsunami waves that are known to have
caused damage to the Western Coast of Gujarat in Past.
The 1945 Makran earthquake (Mw 8.1) is considered to be the characteristic

earthquake for tsunami hazard assessment, because (1) it is the most destructive
event in the region, among those known; (2) it has been the largest earthquake
occurred in this region; and (3) there is sufficient information on the seismic
parameters.
Byrne et al. (1992) calculated the source parameters of the 1945 earthquake as
seismic moment of 1.8 x 1021 Nm, moment magnitude of Mw 8.1, rupture length
of 150-200 km, rupture width of about 100 km, slip angle of 89˚, and depth of 17-
30km. Quittmeyer and Jacob (1979) reported surface magnitude (Ms), and rupture
length of the 1945 event to be 8 and 100-200 km, respectively. Jaiswal et al.-1
(2009) has taken fault parameters of the earthquake as fault length 200km and
width 100km, angle of strike, dip and slip 270˚, 15˚ and 90˚, respectively, focal
depth 10km and slip 10m.
Thus different researchers have mentioned different fault parameters of 1945

Makran earthquake because it was very poorly recorded at that time in absence of
high-tech instruments like today. Wells and Coppersmith (1994) has plotted
different relations of fault parameters and given equations of relations. In this
study, it has been cleared that there may be a variation of fault parameters by ±
20% with reference to earthquake magnitude.
In present study, the earthquake’s epicenter was moved along the MSZ to define
different scenarios for tsunami modeling. Based on the seismic parameters of the
1945 event and some other future probabilistic events, Eighty Six earthquakes
spaced along the MSZ from Karachi to the Strait of Hormoz have been considered
because any similar earthquake is capable of rupturing about 200-250 km of the
plate boundary (Rastogi and Jaiswal, 2006).
3.6 FAULT DISLOCATION PARAMETERS/INITIAL JUMP
Total eighty six different fault dislocation scenarios were used. In this study there
were total nine earthquakes’s epicenter along the MSZ have been taken. For each
epicenter different fault parameters have been taken with the variation of ± 20% in
each fault parameter with reference to 1945 Makran Earthquake. All the faults are
of dip slip type.

The fault dislocation model was created using past research data (Mansinha and
Smylie, 1971). The paper looks at closed analytical expressions for the
displacement fields of inclined, finite strike-slip and dip-slip faults. Their
equations were used in the numerical computation of the displacement fields used
in this thesis.
The displacement field theory has been generalized to real Earth models by
Mansinha and Smylie (1971). They included initial hydrostatic stress, a liquid
core, self-gravitation, and radial variation of elastic constants, density and gravity
(Mansinha and Smylie, 1971).
Fig 3.3: Fault Dislocation Parameters
The basic parameters required for these models (Fig. 3.3):

Origin of the Fault Plane Fault area (length L and width W) (m)
Angle of dip (deg) Depth of fracture (m)
Angle of Rake (deg) Angle of strike φ (deg)
Slip Magnitude (m)
These variables come together to form the displacement field produced by

a dislocation across a surface.

SAMPLE FAULT – EPI-1 - 200-100-15--10-90-250-8 (Fig. 3.4)
276, 983 - ORIGIN OF THE FAULT PLANE (GRID "A"

COORDINATES)
200000, 100000 - FAULT LENGTH L AND WIDTH W (meters)
15 - DIP ANGLE (degrees)
-10000 - DEPTH (meters)
90 - RAKE ANGLE (degrees)
250.0 - STRIKE φ (degrees)
8 - SLIP MAGNITUDE (meters)
Fig 3.4: Initial Jump of EPI-1 - 200-100-15--10-90-250-8
3.7 NUMERICAL MODELING OF TSUNAMI WAVES
The generation and propagation of tsunami waves are modeled using TUNAMI-
N2 code with the kind permission of Institute of Seismological Research,
Gandhinagar. TUNAMI-N2 is authored by Fumihiko Imamura of Tahoku
University, Japan, and developed in Middle East Technical University (METU)
and in the University of Southern California. It is an outcome of UNESCO TIME

project. A leap-frog, semi-implicit time stepping integration scheme is used for
the tsunami simulations. This allows the use of larger time steps while
maintaining stability and accuracy (Morey et al. 2003; Rueda and Schladow,
2002). However, if too large a time step is used and the Courant, Friedrichs, and
Lewy (CFL) condition is violated, gravity waves may be slowed down. The CFL
condition states that the time step must be smaller than the time it takes for a wave
to propagate from one grid point to the next. The model generates the water level
displacement in model domain at given time intervals for all nested grids and
maximum water level displacement at each grid cell independently of the time
when it occurred. This array is the one used to examine the extent of inundation in
the grids where the model is used in its non-linear mode.
All numerical models are based on two equations, which are solved by time
stepping. These equations are the momentum and mass conservations equations.
The momentum equation is used to describe the accelerations and retardation of
the water body when forces are applied to it. The equation is based on Newton’s
2 nd law of motion, where the acceleration is directionally proportional to any force
acting upon it. The mass conservation equation determines the total mass entering
and leaving model cells and ensures that mass is conserved in these cells (Black
1995).
The tsunami modeling process can be divided into three parts: generation,
propagation, and run-up.
Tsunami generation and run up are more difficult to model with computer
simulations. Simulation of wave run-up is very important for assessing the
magnitude of flooding in coastal areas (Enet and Grilli, 2005). Wave run-up
depends on both the wave amplitude and the wave period (Singh et al., 2008). It is
the main objective of this research to determine run-up height of tsunami wave at
different locations and how it will affect the western coast of Gujarat.
One common characteristic of all run-up laws, is a square root dependence on the
slope, and an almost linear dependence of the run-up on the wave height = H.
The process involved in tsunami generation is extremely complex. It is generally

assumed that the sea-surface displacement is identical to that of the ocean bottom.
TUNAMI-N2 is one of the key tools for developing studies for propagation and
coastal amplification of tsunamis in relation to different initial conditions. It
solves nonlinear shallow water equations in Cartesian coordinates using the leap-
frog scheme of finite differences (Yalciner et al. 2002). TUNAMI-N2 and MOST
are the only two existing nonlinear shallow water codes, validated with laboratory
and field data (Yeh et al., 1996).

3.8 SHALLOW WATER THEORY
Tsunamis which are mainly generated by the movement of sea bottom due to
earthquakes belong to long waves. In the theory of such waves, the vertical
acceleration of water particles are negligible compared to the gravitational
acceleration except for an oceanic propagation of tsunami [Kajiura, 1963].
Consequently, the vertical motion of water particles has no effect on the pressure
distribution. It is a good approximation that the pressure is hydrostatic.
Based upon these approximations and neglecting the vertical acceleration, the
equations of mass conservation and momentum in the three dimensional problem
(see Fig 3.5) are expressed by the following theory:
+ + + =0
1 1
+ + + + + + + =0
1 1
+ + + + + + + =0
g+ =0 Eqn (3.1)
Fig 3.5: Central Difference
where x and y are horizontal axis, z the vertical axis, t time, h the still water depth,
the vertical displacement of water surface above the still water surface, u, v and w
are water particle velocities in the x, y and z directions, g the gravitational
acceleration, and Tij the normal or tangential shear stress in the i direction on the j
normal plane.

The equations of momentum in the z-direction with the dynamic condition at a
surface that p = 0 yields the hydrostatic pressure p = ρg ( − z) .
Any wave propagation problem can be solved using the governing equations -
Eqn (3.1) with boundary conditions. The dynamic and kinetic conditions at
surface and bottom are given as follows:
p=0 at z= Eqn (3.2)
w= +u +v at z= Eqn (3.3)
w = -u −v at z=-h Eqn (3.4)
Now, let us integrate Eqn (3.1) from the bottom to the surface using by Liebnitz
rule. For example, the first term of the momentum equation in the x-direction is
rewritten as follows:
( )
∫ = ∫ − ⃒ + ⃒ Eqn (3.5)
With dynamic and kinetic condition - Eqs. (3.2)-(3.4), the following two
dimensional equations are obtained, this is called the shallow water theory.
+ + =0 (2 − )
² ² ²
+ + +g + = +
² ²
² ² ²
+ + +g + = +
² ²
(2D Mass Momentum Equation) Eqn (3.6)
where D is the total water depth given by h+η, τx and τy the bottom frictions in the
x and y directions, A the horizontal eddy viscosity which is assumed to be
constant in space, the shear stress on a surface wave is neglected. M and N are the
discharge fluxes in the x- and y- directions which are given by,
= = (ℎ + ) =
= ∫ = (ℎ + ) = Eqn (3.7)
Thus, the bottom friction terms are expressed by

²
= /
+
²
= / √ + Eqn (3.8)
Table 3.1: Values of Coefficient of Bottom Friction (Linsley and Franzini, 1979)
Channel Material Value of Coefficient (n)
Neat cement, smooth metal 0.010
Rubble masonry 0.017
Smooth earth 0.018
Natural channels in good condition 0.025
Natural channels with stones and weeds 0.035
Very poor natural channels 0.060
Throughout the present modeling, the expression of bottom friction as shown in

Eqn-(3.8) is being used. Value of coefficient (n) may be selected depending on the
condition of the bottom surface according to the Table 3.1.
For the propagation of tsunami in the shallow water, the horizontal eddy
turbulence could be negligible compared to the bottom friction except for run-up
on the land. The following equations are therefore given as the fundamental
equations in the present model.
+ + =0
² gn²
+ + +g + /
+ =0
² ²
+ + +gD + /
N√M + N = 0 Eqn (3.9)
3.9 DEEP WATER THEORY
For the first step to describe the numerical scheme for the tsunami model, the
linearized long wave equation without bottom friction in one dimensional
propagation, Eqn (3.10), is introduced.

+ =0
+gD =0 Eqn (3.10)
The above finite methods provide stable result as long as the C.F.L condition is
satisfied:
C (celerity) < ∆ /∆
Imamura (1996) investigated the truncation errors in three kinds of typical scheme
for long wave’s simulations and showed that in term of numerical accuracy the
staggered leap-frog scheme is the best among them.
3.10 INITIAL CONDITIONS
The present program is only for tsunamis. No wind waves and tides are included.
The still water level is given by tides and is assumed constant during
tsunamis are computed. Accordingly, no motion is assumed up to the time n-1.
It means, therefore, in sea,
, , , =0 Eqn (3.11)
, ,
For run-up computation on land, the initial water level is equal to the ground
height h.
, = −ℎ , Eqn (3.12)
It should be kept in mind that values of h take negative sign on land.
3.11 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS
3.11.1 Open Boundary Conditions for Free Transmission
A method is given to make waves in the computation region go outward by freely

passing the open boundary. The characteristics relationship is used. At the
boundary x = x , the relationships are
And = Eqn (3.13)
This yield

= Eqn (3.14)
3.11.2 Boundary Conditions at Run-up Front
Run-up is taken into consideration only in nonlinear computations but not in

linear computations. Whether a cell is dry or submerged is judged as follows.
D =h + > 0, then the cell is submerged and
0, then the cell is dry.
The wave front is located between the dry and submerged cells. Discharge across
the boundary between the two cells is carried out if the ground height in the dry
cell is lower than the water level in the submerged cell. In other cases, discharge
is considered zero.
3.11.3 Necessity of Continuation of Regions in Numerical Computation
The equations belong to the wave equation, for which the CFL condition should
be satisfied for stability of numerical computation.
Eqn (3.15)
Where t and x are the temporal and spatial grid lengths and hmax is the
maximum still water depth in a computation region.
3.12 RUN-UP MODELING AND VERIFICATION
In this study four nested domains, namely A, B, C, D are used (Fig-3.6). The
increased resolution is essential in order to simulate as best as possible the travel
time and tsunami amplitude of the waves. The intermediated grid (B) allows for a
better resolution all around the Arabian Sea. For grids A and B the model runs in
the linear mode which, although is not good enough for run-up estimates, is good
enough for travel time estimates. Another reason for increasing resolution as we
go into shallower water (grid C & D) is the fact that (Imamura, 1996; Murty,
1977) each tsunami wavelength should be covered by at least 20 grid points in
order to diminish numerical dispersion. Ramming and Kowalik (1980) found that
10 grid points per wave length is sufficient if we are willing to accept 2% error in
the phase velocity. Still another reason is that numerical stability considerations
require that the finite differences time step be such that Δt ≤ [Δx / √(2gh)], where
Δx is the space discretization size, g the gravitational acceleration, and h is the
maximum depth in the given grid. As the wave propagates into shallower waters h
decreases and by decreasing Δx we can maintain a constant Δt.

Fig 3.6: Nested Grids for TUNAMI-N2
Typically, significant vertical deformation of the sea floor (i.e. a dip/slip

earthquake) is required for tsunami generation. This deformation can be due to
either isostatic rebound of an accretionary prism near a subduction zone or a
change in crustal elevation (Okal and Synolakis, 2008). The direction of
movement, depth of deformation, length and width of the deforming fault or plate
boundary, deformation dip and slip angles, and focal depth will determine the size
of the tsunami (Kanamori & Given, 1983; Zahibo, 2005). For example, a shallow
subduction zone earthquake or an earthquake with a more vertical angle of
deformation will usually displace a larger volume of water and consequently
generate a larger tsunami (Kanamori and Given, 1983; Kanamori, 1972). The
overlying geology also determines whether a tsunami will result from an
earthquake (Kanamori, 1972).

According to available evidence, the 1945 Makran Coast event was due to a
submarine earthquake fault located on the Makran Subduction Zone. It is called a
near-field tsunami for Pansi, because it was generated close to the affected area.
The initial condition consists of a sea surface deformation which itself, in this
case, is due to a vertical displacement of the sea bottom. In this study the vertical
displacement of the sea bottom is calculated with the Mansinha and Smylie
method (1971), and it is assumed to be equal to the tsunami initial profile with no
modification.
Fig 3.7: Initial Jump of water
The initial displacement is generated in the exterior domain (A), and it is

interpolated into the higher resolution grids B, C and D. The end result is an initial
sea surface profile that extends smoothly from the exterior, lower resolution,
domain into the higher resolution domains. This is the sea surface condition at
time t = 0s. The sea bottom displacement is immediately reflected in a sea surface
displacement. The first step in the gravity wave formalization is to determine the
static vertical displacement of the seafloor. It is in the first step that earthquake
source parameters relate directly to tsunami generation. When an earthquake or
fault motion occurred, the elastic dislocation theory shows that during such
deformation, seafloor just above the fault is uplifted while above the deeper end of
the fault is subsided. Therefore the initial wave at t = 0 (Fig. 3.7) for simulation
purpose has been computed by the fault parameters.

To verify the tsunami propagation modeling, the modeling results are compared
with the actual data of the 1945 Makran tsunami. Among nine epicenters
considered in this study (Fig 3.8), the epicenter of the EPI-3 case coincides with
that of the actual data of the 1945 event.
The data of Makran 1945 tsunami wave heights on the coastlines are rather poor,
and no tide gauge data is available. However, we were able to collect some data
about tsunami wave heights on various Makran coasts. Based on Page et al.
(1979), the 1945 tsunami reached a height of 7-10 m in Pansi. According to
Ambraseys and Melville (1982), tsunami wave height in Pansi was about 4-5 m
and was about 1.5 m high in Karachi. According to Pendse (1946), tsunami wave
height in Pansi was about 12-15 m and was about 1.37 m high in Karachi.
Numerical model adopted here is successfully reproducing the wave height of
between 1 to 2 m at Karachi as well as 7-12 m in Pansi.
3.13 FAULTWAVE MODEL
TUNAMI does not use the fault data as it is. There is programme called
FAULTWAVE.f which runs the fault data and produces the initial wave by the
fault. TUNAMI uses this initial wave data to start with the modeling.
3.13.1 Input Files and Parameters
LO : Fault Length (m)
WO : Fault Width (m)
TH : Strike Direction (degrees)
DL : Dip Angle (degrees)
RD : Rake Angle (degrees)
DO : Slip Magnitude (m)
HH : Depth (m)
Other than the input file, the dimensional parameters in the FORTRAN code are
needed to be modified according to the number of grids of the bathymetry file.

Fig 3.8: Location of Epi Centers for Modeling
3.13.2 Output files
The output file of the program is the initial wave in the sea which contains the
water surface elevations at each grid point of the bathymetry data. This output file
which is usually named as fault***.grd is also one of the input files of the
TUNAMI program.

3.14 TUNAMI- N2 MODEL
TUNAMI-N2 is a tsunami numerical simulation program with the linear theory in

deep sea and with the shallow water theory in shallow sea and on land with
constant grid length in the whole region. The run up can be computed with this
program as per following flow chart.
Start
Input: IF, JF Dimension Parameters
Input: dx, dt Spatial grid size and time

step
Input: gauges Gauge.dat (coordinates of
Input: fault (initial Output file of faultwave.f
Time internal for output

Input: outsec,
Total time of simulation
Input: bathymetry Bathymetry.grd file in ASCII
Conservation of mass NLMASS subroutine
Conservation of momentum No NLMMT subroutine
Check of area for computation
Time > Total
Ye
Output
End

3.15 IMAGE OUTPUTS AND ANIMATIONS
Tsunami-N2 model is used for the propagation of tsunami waves for the event of
November 28, 1945, that happened in the Makran region of the Arabian Sea. The
tsunami propagation states at every 1-min interval are simulated. In this study,
model outer domain has a horizontal resolution of 2700 m over the Arabian Sea
including the Indian sub-continent (7–26N and 62–80E). The simulation is carried
out for duration of 360 min and the Sea states at 0, 30, 60, 90, 120, 150 and 180
min in the Arabian Sea are presented in (Fig-3.9.1 to 3.9.7). Because of the
variability in the bathymetry of the Arabian Sea and the earthquake that triggered
the tsunami waves, the wave amplitude varies with the propagation of waves. At t
= 0 min, the wave amplitude that is shown in the side bar with different colors,
next to the simulation figure, shows red at the point of epicenter. This indicates
the wave height is in the range of 5–6 m on the land-ocean boundary. At t = 30
min, the wave starts propagating toward the Makran and the western coast of
India. The wave amplitude varies with the forward motion of the tsunami waves.
Boundary conditions play a significant role in the separation of the land and ocean
boundary. Further, the red color indicates in (Fig-3.9.1) that the water surface is
higher than normal, while the blue means lower. Because of the fault geometry,
the waves propagating to the Makran Coast begin with a receding wave, which
explain why the Sea started to recede minutes before flooding the coast.
Fig 3.9.1: Propagation at 0 min.

Fig 3.9.2: Propagation after 30 min.



Fig 3.10: Directivity Map of Arabian Sea.
Fig 3.11: Run Up Height at Gujarat Coast
Directivity of earthquake fault in Arabian Sea and run-up height at Gujarat coast
is also evaluated with the help of software (Fig. 3.10 &3.11).

The final step was to create the animation movie. Files were made by utilizing
MatLab environment. TUNAMI-N2 gives water surface image of each minute in
MatLab form. These all files were loaded in sequence and stored in the form of
movie with the help of MatLab based program. One another program of MatLab
prepared for Time of arrival and run up height, which will give us data of
particular location on Gujarat coast.
Photographs show the maximum amplitude simulated across the Indian Ocean
Basin. In order to validate quantitatively the simulation, it is compared to the only
available measurements of the 1945 Makran tsunami. The results obtained are
configured with the available reports of 1945 Makran Tsunami (Pendse, 1948;
Jaiswal et al.-1, 2008).
It is to conclude that our simulation provides an acceptable order of magnitude of

the maximum sea surface elevation, which remains poorly documented in the
instrumental record. There are several parameters in selected source model which
affect the results. Such variations are taken as representative of unavoidable
uncertainties, which accompany the investigation of scenarios of future
earthquakes.
Table -3.2 to 3.9 shows the time of arrival of maximum amplitude of water waves
and wave run up height at Okha, Mandvi, Dwarka and Porbandar for different
fault models of MSZ. These give clear idea about how tsunami wave is
propagating in Arabian sea and what are the effects of shoreline bathymetry and
topography on it. The model also gives data about how far waves enter in the
landside. For exact inundation condition, a rigorous analysis with actual buildings
and other obstructions in coastal area is required with the help of this model data
as input.

3.16 RESULT TABLES
Table 3.2: Result Table of Epi Centre – 1
Table 3.3: Result Table of Epi Centre - 2


Table 3.7: Result Table of Epi Centre – 6
Table 3.9: Result Table of Epi Centre – 8 & 9

3.17 RESULT ANALYSIS
Comparision of Run-Up Height (m) with diff. Epicentre for

Mandvi
0.8
0.68
0.7 0.63 0.65
0.6 0.54 0.56 0.56 0.55 0.55 0.54

0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
EPI - 1
EPI - 2
EPI - 3
EPI - 4
EPI - 5
EPI - 6
EPI - 7
EPI - 8
EPI - 9
Fig 3.12: Comparision of Run-Up Height with diff. Epicenters for Mandvi

Okha
0.6
0.51
0.5
0.39 0.4
0.38
0.4 0.34
0.36 0.35 0.35 0.34
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
EPI - 1
EPI - 2
EPI - 3
EPI - 4
EPI - 5
EPI - 6
EPI - 7
EPI - 8
EPI - 9
Fig 3.13: Comparision of Run-Up Height with diff. Epicenters for Okha

Dwarka
1.4
1.22 1.19
1.14 1.16 1.16 1.15 1.15
1.2 1.12
1.0
0.8
0.64
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
EPI - 1
EPI - 2
EPI - 3
EPI - 4
EPI - 5
EPI - 6
EPI - 7
EPI - 8
EPI - 9
Fig 3.14: Comparision of Run-Up Height with diff. Epicenters for Dwarka

Porbandar
2.0 1.81
1.8
1.6
1.39
1.4 1.28 1.32
1.2 1.12 1.12 1.09
1.0 0.86
0.8
0.58
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
EPI - 1
EPI - 2
EPI - 3
EPI - 4
EPI - 5
EPI - 6
EPI - 7
EPI - 8
EPI - 9
Fig 3.15: Comparision of Run-Up Height with diff. Epicenters for Porbandar

Comparision of Run-Up Height (m) for diff. location for
EPI-1
1.2 1.14 1.12
1.0
0.8
0.6 0.54
0.4 0.34
0.2
0.0
MANDVI OKHA DWARKA PORBANDAR
Fig 3.16: Comparision of Run-Up Height for diff. location for EPI-1
Fig 3.17: Comparision of Width Variation at Dwarka

Fig 3.18: Comparision of Length Variation at Dwarka
Fig 3.19: Comparision of Dip Variation at Dwarka

Fig 3.20: Comparision of Depth to Top Variation at Dwarka
Fig 3.21: Comparision of Slip Variation at Dwarka

3.18 INUNDATION MAPPING
The elevation data sets are the most important input for inundation mapping in
tsunami prone areas. Preparation of a vulnerability map could inform coastal
community and others about susceptibility to inundation corresponding to various
wave-heights. The Gujarat state has important installations like ports, jetties,
industries along the coast, and also other socio-economical perspective, which can
be affected by tsunami trigged due to such events, and hence the determination of
possible inundation areas is important (Singh et al., 2008).
Run Up Height in Meter.
Fig 3.22: Inundation Map of Gujarat
Inundation model is prepared for coastal parts of Gujarat belt on the basis of
existing topographic and bathymetric (water depth) data sets. For preparation of
the inundation map, high resolution of SRTM data set has been used. Surfer 8.0
software is used to plot elevation data. The different colors in Fig. 3.22 represent
various elevations from 0 to 10 m, over the parts of Gujarat state. From this Fig it
can be inferred that the Rann of Kutch region has very low elevations, and
therefore inundation would be more due to tsunamigenic conditions than other
costal parts of Gujarat.

3.20 NEURAL NETWORK APPLICATION
Determination of tsunami wave height and arrival time is complex and time
consuming procedure and dependent on number of parameters. For such type of
complex problem artificial neural network architecture can be useful tool to
predict wave height and arrival time for future tsunami using available data sets of
tsunami propagation modeling. This cost effective tool may be useful as tsunami
warning system.
This section describes preprocessing, model design & training, model simulation
and post processing for generation of ANN prediction models.
3.21 PRE PROCESSING
Before applying inputs and outputs for ANN training, data have to be converted in
to range of 0 to 1 or -1 to 1 i.e. data should be normalized for ANN training. Eqn
3.16 shows an equation used for data normalization which ranges the data to [0,
1]. Normalized result table is shown in Appendix - 4. All 86 tsunami data sets are
divided for training, validation and testing. Different Neural Network models
were trained by Levenberg-Marquardt (LM) algorithm which used 76 data sets for
training and 10 data sets for testing. Use of more data sets in training reduces
processing time in ANN learning and improves generalization capability of
models, therefore maximum number of data sets available were used to train the
models.
Eqn (3.16)
Where,
Xn = Normalized Value of Variable X
X = Value of variable X
Xmin = Minimum Value of Variable X
Xmax = Maximum Value of Variable X
It is desirable to discard abnormal data sets for ANN model generation which
creates very large errors in prediction results of models.

3.21 NEURAL NETWORK DESIGN AND TRAINING
The neural network design and training was done using MATLAB R2009a and its
associated GUI for Neural Network Toolbox.
3.21.1 MATLAB Implemented Training Algorithms
Training a neural network in the MATLAB environment is normally

accomplished using one of the built-in training functions that are included in the
Neural Network Toolbox. There are sixteen different training functions
implemented and included as part of the toolbox (Beale et al., 2010). While each
of the training algorithms could be used for specific problem, since they are more
suited for certain classes of problems and network architectures. One of the issues
was to determine, which algorithm was best suited for the problem at hand and the
network architectures under investigation.
For feed-forward back propagation networks, the default training algorithm is the
Levenberg-Marquardt (LM) algorithm. According to literature review this
algorithm is well suited to functionalize approximation or prediction problems
with networks of moderate size and number of parameters (Beale et al., 2010). It
is also well suited to problems that require the approximation to be very accurate.
As the problem under study fits that description, these recommendations were
considered and the conclusions on the actual data for this problem were validated.
Fig 3.23: ANN Model designation
Fig. 3.23 suggests how this model is designated. This designation covers various
properties of created ANN model. It covers type of training algorithm used,
number of neurons in hidden layer, transfer function used in between input and
hidden layer, and in between hidden and output layer.

3.22 MODEL SIMULATION
The simulated model was trained for 76 test data and tested for 10 data sets. Fig.
3.24 shows MATLAB window of predicted output result for supplied test data
after simulation of LM14TT_76 model.
Fig 3.24: LM14TT_76 Model Simulation Results of Test data
3.23 POST PROCESSING
Errors in prediction of results were studied for different architecture of ANN

model. These predicted results with minimum errors (in training and in
simulation) are the base for selection of proper architecture of ANN model.
Table 3.10: Weights in Connections of LM14TT_76 model

3.23.1 LM14TT_76 ANN Model Weights
ANN model is trained by changing and storing proper weights in inter connection
links between neurons lying in various layers. These weight values are the
responsible parameters which gives prediction capability to trained ANN models.
It in connection links among input and hidden neurons, and neurons in hidden and
output layer for LM14TT_76 are shown in Table 3.10.
3.24 LINEAR REGRESSION OF LM14TT_76 MODEL
The performance of a trained network can be measured to some extent by the

errors on the training, validation and test sets, but it is often useful to investigate
the network response in more detail. One option is to perform a regression
analysis between the network response and the corresponding targets. Graphs and
respective parameters (Fig. 3.25) show that LM14TT_76 model is linearly closely
fit with the supplied target values. This indicates LM14TT_76 model is well
suited for tsunami run-up and arrival time prediction with high accuracy.
Fig 3.25: LM14TT_76 Model Linear Regression in Training and Testing

CHAPTER – 4
TSUNAMI DESIGN FORCES
Ph.D. Thesis – V M Patel / Chapter- 4 / Tsunami Design Forces 81| P a g e

4.1 INTRODUCTION
Before the Indian Ocean Tsunami, it was assumed that there was no need for the design
of structures against tsunami-induced forces. This situation was due to the assumption
that tsunamis are “rare” events, with significantly large return periods. The devastation
that may be caused by a tsunami of a large magnitude can be catastrophic as
demonstrated by the 2004 Indian Ocean event which induced significant structural
damage on infrastructure, killing over 3,00,000 people and leaving an estimated 1.5
million homeless (Ghobarah et al., 2006; EEFIT, 2006). It is shown that engineered
reinforced concrete buildings generally survived the tsunami without much damage (M.
Saatcioglu, 2009). Non-engineered concrete frame and confined masonry buildings
suffered different degrees of structural and non-structural damage, depending on the
topography and their proximity to the shoreline.
The design of structures in flood-prone areas has previously been investigated, but only
few existing codes specifically address the design of onshore civil structures built in
tsunami-prone areas. However, tsunami-induced forces and the impact of debris are not
properly accounted for in the existing codes and significant improvement is needed. A
comprehensive review of tsunami forces presented by Kason Hoku Pacheco (2005), M.
Saatcioglu (2009), Palermo and Nistor (2008), Nouri et al. (2008) and Okada et al. (2006)
are referred here. Recommendation by existing building codes and some other references
are depicted in this chapter. These include: the City and County of Honolulu Building
Code (CCH, 2000); the minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures;
SEI/ASCE 7-02 (ASCE 7, 2002); the Federal Emergency Management Agency- “Coastal
Construction Manual” (FEMA CCM, 2000); and the Federal Emergency Management
Agency- “Guidelines for Design of Structures for Vertical Evacuation from Tsunamis”
(FEMA P646, 2008); Okada et al., (2005); M. Saatcioglu, 2009.
4.1.1 City and County of Honolulu Building Code (CCH 2000)
The City and County of Honolulu Building Code Chapter 16 Article 11 authored by the
Department of Planning and Permitting of Honolulu, Hawaii, contains definitions, flood
proofing requirements in certain areas, flood proofing methods, structural requirements
and coastal flood water design to resist tsunami effects. Floodwater equations are
provided for the design of elevated structures which are based from the Dames & Moore,
1980 report.
4.1.2 Federal Emergency Management Agency Coastal Construction

Manual (FEMA 55 - CCM, 2000)
The Federal Emergency Management Agency Coastal Construction Manual chapter 11 of

the code provides expressions for flood loads and wave loads on specific types of

structural members. The code also recommends certain loading combinations for specific
types of structural elements. The objective of this manual is to provide design and
construction guidance for structures built in coastal areas throughout the United States in
order to resist the effects of storm and hurricane surge and wave action. FEMA 55 - CCM
briefly introduces some aspects of tsunami loading.
4.1.3 SEI/ASCE 7-02 (ASCE 7, 2002)
The ASCE 7-02 "Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and other Structures" is authored
by the American Society of Civil Engineers, Committee 7. This model code provides the
various forces involved with flood and wave loads on specific types of structural
elements. The code also covers important definitions that relate to flooding and coastal
high hazard areas.
4.1.4 FEMA P646, 2008
The Federal Emergency Management Agency Guidelines for Design of Structures for
Vertical Evacuation from Tsunamis chapter 6 of the code provides expressions for flood
loads and wave loads on specific types of structural members. The code also recommends
certain loading combinations for specific types of structural elements. FEMA P646
briefly introduces latest aspects of tsunami loading.
4.2 TSUNAMI FORCES ON STRUCTURES
There are three parameters essential for defining the magnitude and application of
designing forces on structures: a) flow direction; b) inundation depth; and c) flow
velocity. These parameters mainly depend on: 1) run-up height of tsunami and arrival
time; 2) coastal topography; and 3) roughness of the coastal inland. The flow velocity and
direction is generally more difficult to estimate.
A set of generalized equations were selected from currently available building codes and
published literatures, which contain information and recommended equations on tsunami
forces on structures.

Notations Used for Tsunami Design Load Evaluation
ρ = density of salty water (kg / m3) g = gravitational acceleration ( m/sec2)
h = surge height (m) B = width of column = (m)
Af = tsunami exposed area = B * h (m2) Cd = drag co-efficient = 2
R = design run-up height (m) Z = height of ground at site (m)
dt = impact time of object (sec) m = mass of impacting object (kg)
γ = specific weight of salty water = ρg (N) V = area of floor * h = (m3)
u = tsunami velocity in m/s Cu = uplift force co-efficient = 3
4.3 BUOYANT FORCE
The buoyant force is the vertical force acting through the center of mass of a submerged
body. Buoyant forces are a concern for basements, empty above-ground and below-
ground tanks, and for swimming pools. Any buoyant force on an object must be resisted
by the weight of the object and any opposing force resisting flotation. If there is
insufficient building weight to resist buoyant forces, tension piles may be used to increase
the resistance to flotation, but reduction in pile side friction due to anticipated scour
around the tops of the piles must be considered.
4.3.1 City and Country of Honolulu, 2000
Buoyant force acting vertically Fg = ρgV Eqn (4.1)
4.3.2 FEMA 2000 : Coastal Construction Manual
Vertical hydrostatic force Fray = γ (Vol) Eqn (4.2)
4.3.3 FEMA P646 – JUNE 2008
Buoyant force Fb = ρgV Eqn (4.3)

Fig 4.1: Lifted concrete dock slabs in Khao Lak, Thailand.
4.4 HYDRODYNAMIC FORCE
When water flows around a building with moderate to high velocity hydrodynamic loads
caused by drag are applied to the building. They are usually called the drag forces, which
are combination of the lateral loads caused by the impact of the moving mass of water
and the friction forces as the water flows around the obstruction. These loads are a
function of flow velocity and structure geometry, and include frontal impact on the
upstream face, drag along the sides, and suction on the downstream side. The flow is
assumed to be uniform, and therefore, the resultant force will act at the centroid of the
projected area or in the form of uniformly distributed load along the inundation depth.
The hydrodynamic force is directly proportional to the square of the tsunami bore
velocity as indicated in Eqn (4.4). Therefore, the estimation of the bore velocity remains
to be one of the critical elements on which there is significant disagreement in literature.
Total drag force acting in the direction of flow
Fd = Cd u2 ρ A Eqn (4.4)

Where :
Cd = drag coefficient (non-dimensional) (1.0 for circular piles/columns, 2.0 for square
piles/columns, 1.5 for wall sections)
Horizontal drag force Fd = Cd u2 ρ A Eqn (4.5)
Where :
Cd = drag coefficient (recommended values are 2.0 for square or rectangular
piles/columns and 1.2 for round piles/columns).
4.4.3 FEMA P646 – JUNE 2008
Hydrodynamic forces Fd = ρCd B (hu2 )max Eqn (4.6)
It is recommended that the drag coefficient be taken as Cd  2.0 . The resultant

hydrodynamic force is applied approximately at the centered of the wetted surface of the
component, as shown in Fig 4.2.
Fig 4.2: Hydrodynamic Force Distribution and Location of Resultant
The combination h u 2 represents the momentum flux per unit mass. Note that  h u 2 
max
2
does not equal hmax umax . The maximum flow depth, hmax and maximum flow velocity,
hmax at a particular site may not occur at the same time. The hydrodynamic forces must be
based on the parameter  h u 2  , which is the maximum momentum flux per unit mass
max
occurring at the site at any time during the tsunami.
The maximum value of h u 2 can be obtained by running a detailed numerical simulation

model or acquiring existing simulation data. The numerical model in the run-up zone
must be run with a very fine grid size to ensure adequate accuracy in the prediction of
h u2 .
The value  h u 2  can be roughly estimated using Eqn (4.7).

max
2
 z z 
 hu 
2
max
2
 gR  0.125  0.235  0.11  
 R  R  
 Eqn (4.7)
Where g is the acceleration due to gravity, R is the design run-up elevation, and z is the
ground elevation at the base of the structure. The design run-up elevation, R, is taken as
1.3 time the maximum run-up elevation, R*, which is the maximum inundation elevation
at the structure from a detailed numerical simulation model, or the ground elevation at
maximum penetration of the tsunami from available tsunami inundation maps. To use this
formula, the sea level datum must be consistent with that used in the inundation maps.
Non-Engineering Lightly Reinforced Total Collapse of Single-Storey RC

Concrete Building in Thailand Buildings in Thailand
Fig 4.3: Damage of Building Due to Hydrodynamic Force

4.5 SURGE FORCE
The surge force is generated by the impingement of the advancing water front of a
tsunami bore on a structure. The surge force is computed as a force per unit width on a
vertical wall subjected to a surge from the leading edge of a tsunami. Due to lack of
detailed experimental research specifically applicable to tsunami bores running up the
shoreline, the calculation of the surge force exerted on a structure is subjected to
substantial uncertainty.
The surge-force computation by Dames and Moore (1980), CCH (2000) may result in
excessively overestimated values. The estimation made by CCH (2000) implies that the
surging force would be 9 times the hydrostatic force alone. Such an excessively large
surging force is contradictory to the laboratory results by Ramsden (1993) and Arnason
(2005) referenced by (Yeh et al., 2005). Lukkunaprasit et. al. (2010) confirms that the
predicted forces by FEMA P646, 2008 provide a reasonable upper bound for the
measured forces.
Fs = ρgh2+ ρu2h Eqn (4.8)
Referenced from Yeh et. al., 2005
Substituting u  2 gh yields equation stated below
Fs = 4.5 ρgh2 Eqn (4.9)
4.5.2 Tsuneo Okada et al., (2005)
The equivalent static pressure resulting from the tsunami impact is associated with a
triangular distribution where water depth equals three times the tsunami inundation depth
(Asakura et. al, 2000)
qx = ρ g (3h – z) Without soliton (solitary wave) breakup
qx = max (5.4h – 4z, 3h –z) ρ g with soliton (solitary wave) break up Eqn (4.10)
where qx is the tsunami wave pressure for structure design, z is the height of the relevant
portion from ground level (o ≤ z ≤ 3h).
4.5.2 FEMA P646 – JUNE 2008
FEMA P646 recommended that the impulsive forces or surge forces be taken as 1.5 times
the hydrodynamic force.
Fs = 1.5 Fd Eqn (4.11)

Impulsive forces will act on members at the leading edge of the tsunami bore, while
hydrodynamic forces will act on all members that have already been passed by the
leading edge, as shown in Fig 4.4.
Fig 4.4: Hydrodynamic Impulsive and Drag Forces on Components of A Building

Subjected to Inundation by A Tsunami Bore.
4.6 IMPACT FORCE
A high-speed tsunami bore traveling inland carries floating debris such as driftwood,
small boats, floating pieces of houses, cars, automobiles, etc., or any object transported by
floodwaters, striking against buildings and structures or parts thereof. The impact of
floating debris can induce significant forces on a building, but it is very difficult to predict
the magnitude of these loads. Yet some reasonable allowance must be made for them.
The object is assumed to be at or near the water surface level when it strikes the building.
Therefore, the object is assumed to strike the building at the water level. Uncertainty
about the duration of the impact time is the most likely cause of error in the calculation of
debris impact loads. The duration of impact is influenced primarily by the natural
frequency of the building, which is a function of the building’s stiffness. This stiffness is
determined by the properties of the material being struck by the object, the number of
supporting members (columns/piles), the height of the building above the ground, and the
height at which the building is struck.

Fi = m * (dub/dt) = m (Vb/dt) Eqn (4.11)

Where : Fi= impact force
dub/dt = acceleration (deceleration) of the body at (m/s2)
Vb= velocity of the body (m/s)
For structural material of wood construction, assume dt, the time interval over which
impact occurs, is one second; for structural material of reinforced concrete construction dt
is 0.1 second and dt is 0.5 seconds for steel construction.
4.6.2 ASCE – 7, 2002
Fi = m * a Eqn (4.12)
Where : Fi = impact force in pounds (kN)
V
a
t
wV
Fi 
gt Eqn (4.13)
Where :
1
V = velocity of water in m/sec or approximated by gd ,
2
t = duration of impact in seconds (1.0 seconds for wood construction, 0.5 seconds for
steel construction and 0.1 seconds for reinforced concrete).
4.5.3 FEMA P646 – JUNE 2008
The debris impact force can be estimated using Eqn (4.14):
Fi  Cmumax km Eqn (4.14)

Where Cm is the added mass coefficient taken as 2, u max is the maximum flow velocity
caring the debris at the site, and m and k are the mass and the effective stiffness of the
debris, respectively.
Where a suitable numerical simulation model is unavailable, the maximum flow velocity
carrying lumber or a wooden log (with essentially no draft) can be estimated using the

analytical solution of tsunami run-up on a uniformly sloping beach with no lateral
topographical variation, given by Eqn (4.15):
 z
umax  2 gR  1  
 R Eqn (4.15)
where g is the acceleration due to gravity, R is the design run-up height that is 1.3 times
the ground elevation R at the maximum tsunami penetration, and z is the ground elevation
at the structure (the datum must be at the sea level).
For a shipping container or other similar large debris with draft d, the ratio of the draft d
to the maximum run-up height R can be computed, and Fig 4.5 can be used to estimate
the maximum flow velocity, Draft d can be estimated using Eqn (4.15):
d = W / (ρ g Af) Eqn (4.15)
where W is the weight of the debris, ρ is the fluid density including sediment, g is the
acceleration due to gravity, and Af is the cross-sectional area parallel to the water surface
such that the product d x Af represents the volume of water displaced by the debris.
Fig 4.5: Maximum Flow Velocity of Depth, d, at the Ground Elevation, Z, and
Maximum Run-up Elevation, R.
Based on the appropriate curve for η (d/R), and ration between the elevations of the
structure relative to the design run-up elevation z/R, Fig 4.5 will provide an estimate of
the maximum flow velocity.

Impact of Car on a building in Laem Second - floor concrete column damaged
Pakarang by the impact of debris.
Impact of boats caused damage to a concrete structure.
Fig 4.6: Damage of Building Due to Impact Force

4.6 HYDROSTATIC FORCE
The hydrostatic force is generated by still or slow-moving water encounters a building or

building components. Hydrostatic loads can act laterally on an object. This load always
acts perpendicular to the surface to which it is applied. It is caused by an imbalance of
pressure due to a differential water depth on opposite sides of a structure or structural
member. Hydrostatic force may not be relevant to a building with a finite breadth, for
which the water can flow around and quickly fill up behind the building. Hydrostatic
force is usually important for a 2-D structure such as seawalls and dikes or for evaluation
of an individual wall panel where the water level outside differs substantially from the
level inside.
1  up 2 
FR  pg  h  
2  2g 
Eqn (4.16)
Where FR = hydrostatic force (kN/m) on a wall, per unit width of wall
p = density of water
u p = component of velocity of flood flow perpendicular to the wall (m/s)
The resultant force will act horizontally at a distance of hg above the base of the wall,
1 up 2 
hg   h  
3 2g 
Eqn (4.17)
4.6.2 FEMA 2000: Coastal Construction Manual
1 2
fm  rd s
2 Eqn (4.18)
Where : f m = hydrostatic force per unit width (kN/m) resulting from flooding against
vertical element
4.6.3 FEMA P646: JUNE - 2008
Fh = ρ Aw = ½ ρ g b h2 max Eqn (4.19)

Where Fh is the hydrostatic pressure, Aw is the wetted area of the panel, and hmax is the
maximum water height above the base of the wall at the structure location. hmax is the
vertical difference between the design tsunami run-up elevation R and the base elevation

of the wall at the structure, Z w as shown in Eqn (4.20):
hmax  1.3R *  Z w  R  zw Eqn (4.20)

Where R* is the maximum tsunami run-up elevation taken as the estimated maximum
inundation elevation at the structure from a detailed numerical simulation model, or the
ground elevation at maximum penetration of the tsunami from available tsunami
inundation maps. The design run-up elevation, R, is taken as 1.3 times the predicted
maximum run-up elevation, R*.
Fig 4.7: Hydrostatic Force Distribution and Location of Resultant.
4.8 LOCALIZED SCOUR
Tsunami flooding is capable of creating scour around structural foundation elements.

Scour effects are critical in designing coastal foundations to ensure that failure during and
after flooding does not occur as a result of the loss in either bearing capacity or anchoring
resistance around the structural foundation elements.
Past research suggest that scour depth depends on soil type and that scour depths in areas
up to 91 meter and above 91 meter from the shoreline can be determined as a percentage
of the Stillwater depth h, as shown in Table 4.1.

Table 4.1 Estimated Minimum scour Estimated minimum scour (Pachco, 2006)
Soil Type Up to 91 meter Up to Greater than
Expected depth (% of 91 meter Expected
h) depth (% of h)
Loose sand 80% h 60% h
Dense sand 50% h 35% h
Soft silt 50% h 25% h
Stiff silt 25% h 15% h
Soft clay 25% h 15% h
Stiff clay 10% h 5% h
Above stated values may be reduced by 40%, if a substantial dune or beam higher
than the regulatory flood elevation protects the building site. In case of the entire
region is essentially flat, values may be reduced by 50% .
This code is also recommending the same scour depth as recommended by CCH (2000).
Subgrade failure resulted from scouring Loss of support under shallow foundations
(Kamala, Phuket) (Thailand)
Fig 4.8: Damage of Building Due to Scour

4.9 BREAKING WAVE LOADS
Tsunami waves tend to break offshore and approach shoreline as a broken hydraulic bore
or a soliton, depending on wave characteristics and coastal bathymetry. Buildings and
shelters are usually constructed on land some distance from the shoreline. Hence, wave-
breaking force exerting directly onto the building would be a rare case and need not to
consider while designing a onshore building.
4.10 DAMMING OF WATERBORNE DEBRIS
4.10.1 FEMA P646 – JUNE-2008
The damming effect caused by accumulation of waterborne debris can be treated as a

hydrodynamic force enhanced by the breadth of the debris dam against the front face of
the structure. Eqn (4.21) is a modification of Eqn (4.6) to include the breadth of the debris
dam:
Fdm = ½ ρ Cd Bd (hu2)max Eqn (4.21)
Where Bd is the breadth of the debris dam. A minimum debris dam width of Bd = 12m,
representing a sideways shipping container or a mass of floating lumber, is recommended.
4.11 DESIGN FLOOD VELOCITY
The estimation of design flood velocities in coastal flood hazard areas is subject to
considerable uncertainty. There is little reliable historical information concerning the
velocity of floodwaters during coastal flooding. The direction and velocity of floodwaters
can vary significantly throughout a coastal flood event. Flood velocities should be
estimated conservatively by assuming floodwaters would approach from the most critical
direction and by assuming high flow velocities. Prevailing codes do not mention the site-
specific tsunami velocity.
V=h
Tsunami
V  2 gd , Eqn (4.22)
Upper Bound
V  gd ,

d5
V
Lower Bound t
Where: V = design flood velocity in m/sec

d5 = design Stillwater flood depth in m
t = 1 sec
4.11.3 FEMA P646, 2008
 z
umax  2 gR  1  
 R Eqn (4.23)
Where g is the acceleration due to gravity, R is the design run-up height that is 1.3 times
the ground elevation R at the maximum tsunami penetration, and z is the ground elevation
at the structure (the datum must be at the sea level).
4.11.4 M. Saatcioglu, 2009
V = 1.1√(gh) presented by (Lizuka, 2000)

V = √(2gh) presented by (Kirkoz, 1983)
V = 1.83 √(gh) presented by (Murty, 1997)
V = 1.67 h0.7 presented by (Bryant, 2001)

4.12 HYDRODYNAMIC UPLIFT FORCES ON ELEVATED FLOORS
4.12.1 FEMA P646, 2008
Fig 4.9: A Definition Sketch for Upward Buoyant Force Exerted on an Elevated
Floor.
The total uplift force on the floor system can be estimated using Eqn (4.24)
Fu = ½ Cu ρ Af uv2 Eqn (4.24)
Where Cu is a coefficient (taken as 3.0), Af is the area of the floor panel or floor framing
component, and uv is the estimated vertical velocity or water rise rate.
Unless a detailed hydrodynamic study is performed, the value of uv for the condition of
sloping terrain below the building can be estimated using Eqn (4.25):
uv  u tan  Eqn (4.25)

Where u is the horizontal flow velocity corresponding to a water depth, and  is the
average slope of grade at the site.

4.13 ADDITIONAL GRAVITY LOADS ON ELEVATED FLOORS
4.13.1 FEMA P646, 2008
The maximum potential downward load per unit area, fr can be estimated using Eqn
(4.26):
fr = ρ g hr Eqn (4.26)
where hr is the maximum potential depth of water retained on the elevated floor
determined using Eqn (4.27):
hr  hmax  h1  hbw Eqn (4.27)
Where hmax is the maximum inundation level predicted at the site, h1 is the floor
elevation above grade, and hbw is the maximum water depth that can be retained before
failure of the wall due internal hydrostatic pressure.
4.14 LOADING COMBINATIONS
Case 1 : Piles/columns or open foundation

Fs (on all piles/columns) + Fi (on one corner or critical pile/column)
Or
Fs (on front row of piles/columns only) + Fd (on all piles/columns but front row) + Fi (on
one corner or critical pile/column)
Case 2 : Solid (Wall) foundation
Fs (on walls facing shoreline, which includes hydrostatic component)+ Fd (assume one
corner is destroyed by debris, and design in redundancy)

4.14.2 FEMA P646, 2008
Tsunami forces area combined on individual structural components (e.g., columns, walls,
and beams), as follows:
Impulsive force, Fs due to the leading edge of the tsunami bore, for maximum
hu 2
Hydrodynamic drag force, Fd plus debris impact, Fb at the most critical location
2
on the member, for maximum h u .
Debris damming, Fdm due to a minimum 12.2 m wide debris dam causing the
2
worst possible loading on the member, for maximum h u .
Hydrostatic pressure, Fd on walls enclosing watertight areas of a structure, for
maximum h.
For uplift on floor framing components, the following combinations of tsunami forces
should be considered:
Buoyancy, Fb of submerged floor framing components including the effects of

entrapped air and upturned beams or walls, for maximum h.
Hydrodynamic uplift, Fu due to rapidly rising flood waters, for flow velocity at a
depth equal to the soffit of the floor system, hs
Maximum uplift case: The larger of the above uplift loads combined with 90%
dead load and zero live load on the floor system, for design against uplift failure
of floor slabs, beams, and connections.
For downward load on floor framing components due to retained water, the following
force combination should be considered:
Downward load due to water retained by exterior walls, f n combined with 100% dead
load.

Table 4.2: Data Taken for Sample Calculation
Data Taken for Sample Calculation
ρ = density of water (kg / m3) = 1200 kg/m3 g = gravitational acceleration = 9.81 m/sec2
h = surge height = 3 m B = width of column = 0.45 m
Af = exposed area of column Cd = drag co-efficient = 2
= B * h = 0.45 * 3 = 1.35 m2
R = design run-up height Z = height of ground at site = 2
= 1.3 X 3.85 = 5.0 Z /R = 0.4
dt = impact time of object = 0.1 sec m = 450 kg for wooden log and 30000 kg for
ship
γ = specific weight of salty water V = area of floor * h = 50 * 3 = 150 m3
= ρg = 11772 N
u = tsunami velocity in m/s Cu = uplift force co-efficient = 3
Table 4.3: Tsunami Load Calculation
TSUNAMI LOAD CALCULATION
CCH FEMA - 2000 -
FORCE NAME ASCE 7 FEMA - P646
2000 CCM
Buoyant Force (Static) - Fb -
1765 kN 1765 kN 1765 kN 1765 kN
SOLID WALL
Hydrodynamic Force - Fd 190.71 kN -- 190.71 kN 6.44 kN
Impulsive Force - Fs 476.77 kN -- -- 9.665 kN
Impact Force (wood) - Fiw 48.82 kN 48.82 kN 48.82 kN 91.36 kN
Impact Force (shipping
-- -- -- 746 kN
container) - Fis
Damming Effect of Water
-- -- -- 85.82 kN
borne Debris - Fdm
Hydrodynamic Uplift Forces -- -- -- 0.02 kN
Additional Gravity Loads on
-- -- -- 529.74 kN
Elevated floors – sill level wall
7.67 m/s - tsunami
Tsunami Flood Velocity - u 10.85 m/s 10.85 m/s 10.85 m/s bore velocity and 1.39
m/s – impact velocity

4.15 STRUCTURAL PERFORMANCE DURING PAST TSUNAMI EVENTS
The pacific basin has a long history of devastation by tsunami, because it is the most
active seismic region on earth. Tsunamis worldwide have killed hundreds of thousands of
people. On 26th December, 2004, an earthquake of moment magnitude 9.3 off the coast
of Sumatra in the Indian ocean, triggered a series of lethal tsunami that killed over
3,00,000 people, making this the deadliest tsunami in recorded history. It has been
concluded that any community near a coastline is vulnerable to a tsunami, which indicates
a need for a global tsunami warning system. Coastlines have always been a popular
location for people to settle, because of the natural resources the ocean provides and its
beauty.
Since tsunami is relatively infrequent, it is difficult to measure tsunami flow velocities,
and the resulting loads on structures. The maximum vertical height and horizontal
distance to which the water is observed with reference to sea level is referred to as run-up
and inundation, respectively.
Performance of buildings during the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami indicate that tsunami
generated hydraulic pressures and debris impact forces can have significant effects on
structural behavior (M. Saatcioglu, 2009). In past tsunamis, the majority of non-
engineered structures are completely destroyed. However, much can be learned from
structures that survived the tsunami, or were only partially damaged. Field surveys and
photos obtained from a number of past tsunamis were used for further evaluation of the
characteristics of tsunami and structural response.
Following three structures are studied here; a) In 1992, an earthquake with the magnitude
of 7.0 generated a tsunami in Nicaragua which devastated communities along the
shoreline and caused 116 deaths. b) In 1993, a powerful earthquake west of Hokkaido in
the Sea of Japan caused a tsunami that demolished areas on nearby Okushiri Island. c) On
Sunday 26 December, 2004, at 7:58 am local time, a megathrust earthquake of moment
magnitude 9.3 occurred off the west coast of the Indonesian island of Sumatra (EERI-1;
Ghobarah et al., 2006).
4.15.1 Structure I – Nicaragua 1992
This structure is located in Nicaragua near the shoreline approximately 100 feet from the
ocean. The structure consists of concrete slab foundation with a timber structure sitting 9
feet 6 inches high on timber columns (Fig 4.10 and 4.11). The 1992 tsunami inundated
approximately 6 feet 7 inches (2 meters) at this location. The estimated tsunami flood
velocity was approximately 4 meters per second. The structure survived since the tsunami
flood was able to flow freely under the structure without impacting the structural walls.
The “knee-bracing” at the top of the columns proved adequate to resist loads developed
on the columns during the tsunami. Scouring is evident around the edge of the foundation,

but the concrete slab was able to span the understanding and remain intact.
Fig 4.10: Structure I Nicaragua – Front View
Fig 4.11: Structure I Nicaragua – Approximate Structural Framing

4.15.2 Structure II – Okushiri 1993
This Structure is located in an area that experienced almost devastation (Figure 4.12). The
structure consists of reinforced concrete walls and columns (Fig 4.13 to Fig 4.15). Only
non-structural damage was noted to the top level balcony railings and the front glass
windows. The tsunami flood reached 2.7 meters at the structure, with debris deposited on
the second floor level. The estimated tsunami flood velocity was approximately 5 meters
per second. The reinforced concrete framing in this structure was able to resist the
tsunami loads even though much of the first floor walls did not breakaway.
Fig 4.12: General Devastation on Okushiri Island

Fig 4.13: Structure II Okushiri – Front View
Fig 4.14: Structure II Okushiri – Rear View

Fig 4.15: Structure II Okushiri – Approximate Structural Layout

4.15.3 Structure III – Phang Nga 2004
This Structure is a weather monitoring building of the Meteorological station at Takua Pa,
Phang Nga, Thailand. The building is about 200m from the shore line, relatively without
obstruction from the incoming waves except for a few lines of pine trees. The single story
reinforced concrete (RC) structure, whose plan and elevation are shown in Fig 4.17, is
supported by shallow foundations. The columns, 200mm × 200mm in cross section, are
reinforced with 4–12mm diameter longitudinal reinforcing bars. The building has
survived the 4.4 m wave height with minor structural damage (Fig 4.16 and 4.17). The
covers of the columns did not even spall off.
Fig 4.16: Front View of Phang Nga Building

Fig 4.17: Phang Nga Building Plan and Elevation

CHAPTER – 5
TYPICAL RCC STRUCTURES
Ph.D. Thesis – V M Patel / Chapter- 5 / Typical RCC Structures 109| P a g e

5.1 INTRODUCTION
The ability of a structure near the shoreline in a tsunami inundation zone to survive a
tsunami is important in order to save lives. If the structure is capable of resisting the
tsunami loads, it can be used for vertical evacuation. The recent Indian Ocean tsunami
event illustrated the effectiveness of vertical evacuation particularly for a locally
generated tsunami. With limited warning time, it is often more appropriate for people to
seek refuge in the upper floors of a multistory building than to attempt horizontal
evacuation to higher grounds. It is important, therefore, that such buildings resist not only
the initial ground shaking but also the subsequent tsunami loads.
Several model studies have focused on tsunami loading on structures (M. Saatcioglu,
2009; Palermo and Nistor, 2008; Nouri et al., 2008; Okada et al., 2006; Lukkunaprasit et.
al., 2009; Yeh et al.,2005). Yeh. et. al. (2005) developed design guidelines for buildings
subjected to tsunami loading by analyzing tsunami force in detail and compiling
equations currently addressing loads under flooding. A recent design guidelines
document – FEMA P646, 2008 published by the US Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) – proposes a practical method to estimate the tsunami design forces at a
given locality with a known maximum tsunami run-up height. Lukkunaprasit et al. (2009)
confirms that the predicted forces by FEMA P646, 2008 provide a reasonable upper
bound for the measured forces.
For generalization of structural behavior under tsunami forces seven typical structures
having different configuration are taken for investigation. It is presumed that structures
are located on western coast of Gujarat for seismic and wind analysis. Analysis for
tsunami has been carried out for 3m, 5m and 10m design run-up height. The building
suggested for VES (Rectangular Building) is analyzed for seismic zone III, IV & V, wind
and tsunami having design run-up height 2.264m, 3m, 5m & 10m.
Among seven typical buildings a G + 11 Building is taken from “Evaluation of Tsunami
Loads and Their Effect on Reinforced Concrete Buildings” by Kason Hoku Pacheco,
2006 for validation of structural behavior under the tsunami effects using STAAD-Pro
v8i (Appendix – B). In this reference design of five reinforced concrete buildings for
tsunami effects are presented.
Six Storey Building is one another typical building which was taken from IITK-GSDMA
CODES (EQ-26) for validation of earthquake effects simulated using STAAD-Pro v8i
(Appendix – A). In this reference authors have provided analysis and design of six storey
reinforced concrete building for seismic effects under IS Codal provisions.
All seven reinforced concrete buildings incorporate different structural configurations.
Buildings are analyzed and designed according to the Indian Standard (IS) Codal
Provisions. Particularly this study utilizes IS 456, IS 1893-I, IS 875-I, IS 875-II, IS 875-

III, IS-875-V and IS 1905 for reference. Guidelines of FEMA P646-I has been referred
for Tsunami loading evaluation.
Depending on the location, the lateral framing system is analyzed for the appropriate
wind and seismic loads. Beams and columns at some critical locations are designed and
detailed for the governing load combination.
If all wall, windows, doors, etc. at the lower levels of the typical buildings are assumed
not to break-away during the tsunami, then significantly larger tsunami loads would be
anticipated. These loads are computed considering solid wall. Comparision of solid wall
model with break-away wall model illustrate the importance of providing break-away
non-structural elements at the lower levels. The three kinds of tsunami forces used for
these fully enclosed buildings are hydrodynamic force, impulsive force and impact force.
Also the effect of damming effect of floating debris, buoyant force, hydrodynamic uplift
force and additional gravity force has been referred for their effects on building. The
impact force is calculated for both wooden log and floating ship. The calculated impact
force is added at the top of the tsunami flow. The result which yields the greatest force on
the structure in each tsunami run-up height is compared to the wind or seismic.
5.2 CALCULATING FORCES ON STRUCTURAL MEMBERS
Different tsunami loading combinations were applied to the respective floor columns.
Structural members all floor levels were investigated. Lower storey columns are having
danger of impact loads. Failure of any of these members could lead to progressive
collapse of a significant portion of the building.
The lateral tsunami loads were applied to the structural members using STAAD-Pro
Version v8i, a structural analysis computer program. The maximum bending moment,
shear force and axial force obtained in tsunami load case were compared with the seismic
and wind load case for critically located members.

5.3 GENERAL DATA FOR ALL BUILDINGS
Location : Coast of Dwarka

Wind load : As per IS: 875-III
Earthquake load : As per IS-1893 (Part 1) - 2002
Partition brick masonry walls only at
Walls : periphery of each floor.
Type of soil : Type II, Medium Soil as per IS:1893
Damping : 5%
Live load : 2.0 kN/m2 at typical floor
: 1.0 kN/m2 on terrace
Weight of Slab Including Floor
Finish : 4.8 kN/m2
Material : Reinforced Concrete
5.4 EARTHQUAKE LOAD
Seismic loading has been considered as per IS: 1893(Part-1) -2002.

The horizontal earthquake forced has been calculated for the seismic weight of building
as per clauses 3.29, 7.3 & 7.4 of IS: 1893-2002.
Horizontal design seismic coefficient Ah is determined by the following expression.
Ah = Z/2 x I/R x Sa/g
Z = Zone factor = 0.16 (Zone III) (Table-2, IS 1893:2002)
I = Importance factor = 1.0 (Table-6, IS 1893:2002)
R = Response reduction factor =5 (Table-7, IS 1893:2002)
Ta = Fundamental natural period = 0.075 h 0.75
Sa/g = Avg. response accel. Coeffi. = 1.36/Ta

5.4.1 Load Combinations for Earthquake Loading
The load combinations considered for analysis of structure members are as follows:
LOAD COMB 1.5 (DL + IL) LOAD COMB 1.5 (DL + EXTN)
LOAD COMB 1.2 (DL + IL + EXP) LOAD COMB 1.5 (DL + EZTP)
LOAD COMB 1.2 (DL + IL + EXTN) LOAD COMB 1.5 (DL + EZTN)
LOAD COMB 1.2 (DL + IL + EZTP) LOAD COMB [0.9 DL + 1.5 EXTP]
LOAD COMB 1.2 (DL + IL + EZTN) LOAD COMB [0.9 DL + 1.5 EXTN]
LOAD COMB 1.5 (DL + EXTP) LOAD COMB [0.9 DL + 1.5 EZTP]
LOAD COMB [0.9 DL + 1.5 EZTN]
5.5 WIND LOAD
Table 5.1: Typical Wind Load Calculation

Building Height Common Data K2 Vz = Vb x K1 x Pz = 0.6 x Vz2
K2 x K3
10 m height Vb = 50x1.15 = 1.05 60.375 m/s 2.187kN/m2
15 m height 57.5 m/s 1.09 62.675 m/s 2.357 kN/m2
20 m height (cl. 5.5 – IS 875-3) 1.12 64.4 m/s 2.488 kN/m2
30 m height K1 = 1 1.15 66.125 m/s 2.62kN/m2
50 m height K3 = 1 1.20 69 m/s 2.857kN/m2

5.6 TSUNAMI LOAD
Table 5.2: Typical Tsunami Load Calculation
TSUNAMI LOAD CALCULATION FOR VERTICAL EVACUATION BUILDING

STEP -
1 DATA
WIDTH OF BUILDING (B) (m) 20.13
FLOOR HEIGHT (m) 3.66
NO. OF FLOORS 4
HEIGHT OF PLINTH (FROM GL) (m) 0.5
HEIGHT OF BUILDING (FROM GL) (m) 12.5
HEIGHT OF GROUND AT SITE (m) = Z 2
MAXIMUM RUNUP HEIGHT (m) = R* 9.23
DESIGN RUNUP HEIGHT (m) = R = R* X 1.3 11.999
REFUGE AREA HEIGHT (m) = R + 3 14.999
PROVIDED REFUGE AREA HEIGHT (FROM
SEA LEVEL) (m) 18.3
WOODEN LOG - m (kg), k (N/m),draft (m),
length (m) 450 2.40E+06 0.25 12
2
shipping container (A box) - area (m ), length
(m), Width (m) 29.768 12.2 2.44
SHIPPING CONTAINER (m,k) 30000 2.40E+06 12.2
FLUID DENSITY (ρ)(kg/m3) 1200
HEIGHT OF WALL PANEL (hw) (m) 3.66
WIDTH OF WALL PANEL (b) (m) 6.71
Grevitational Constant 9.81
height of flood at site (m) 9.999
height of partial submerged floor level (m) 7.32
height water in partial submerged floor (m) 2.679
2
buoyant floor panel size (Af) m 53.2103 7.93 6.71
height difference for buoyant floor (hb) (m) 2.679
ζ = Z/R 0.166680557
Cm 2
height of floor below partially filled floor= hs
(w.r.t fig - 6.8) (m) 0.5
Cu 3
hr (m) 2.679
column size 0.71 0.71

LOAD CALCULATION UNIT DISTANCE
STEP-
3 Buoyant Force (Static) - SOLID WALL
Fb = ρ*g*Af*hb 1678103.23 1678.10 kN
Buoynt Force per Unit area 31537.19 0.59 kN/m2 ON FLOOR AREA IN UPWARD DIR.
STEP-
4 Hydrodynamic Force - Fd
(hu2)max
(hu2)max = [g*R2(0.125 - 0.235*(Z/R) + m3 /
0.11(Z/R)2)] 125.54 sec2
u2 12.56

Fd = 0.5*ρ*Cd*B*(hu2)max 3032621.10 3032.62 kN
Fd = 0.5*ρ*Cd*B*(hu2)max / (B*(R-Z))
Hydrodynamic Force per Unit Area 15066.69 15.07 kN/m2
Hydrodynamic Force (UDL on Column up to AT COLUMN UP TO HEIGHT OF
Height of Tsunami) - (BREAK AWAY WALL) - TSUNAMI (UDL) - BREAK AWAY
DEPTH OF COLUMN 13697.35 13.70 kN/m WALL.
Height of Tsunami) - (BREAK AWAY WALL) - TSUNAMI (UDL) - BREAK AWAY
WIDTH OF COLUMN 13697.35 13.70 kN/m WALL.

Height of Tsunami) - (SOLID WALL) 101097.48 101.10 kN/m TSUNAMI (UDL) - SOLID WALL.
STEP-
5 Impulsive Force - Fs
Fs = 1.5 * Fd 4548931.65 4548.93 kN
Impulsive Force per Unit Area 22600.03 22.60 kN/m2
Impulsive Force (UDL on Column up to Height AT COLUMN UP TO HEIGHT OF
of Tsunami)-(BREAK AWAY WALL) - DEPTH TSUNAMI (UDL) - BREAK AWAY
OF COLUMN 20546.02 20.55 kN/m WALL.
of Tsunami)-(BREAK AWAY WALL)- WIDTH TSUNAMI (UDL) - BREAK AWAY
OF COLUMN 20546.02 20.55 kN/m WALL.

of Tsunami)- (SOLID WALL) 151646.22 151.65 kN/m TSUNAMI (UDL) - SOLID WALL.
STEP-
6 Impact Force (wood) - Fi - 1
umax = √(2*g*R(1-(Z/R))) 14.01 m/sec
AT LEADING EDGE OF STR AND AT
Fiw = Cm * umax * √(k*m) 920597.22 920.60 kN WATER LEVEL
ζ = Z/R 0.17
flow depth ratio = d/R 0.02
umax / √(2*g*R) from fig - 6.7 - FEMA - P
646 0.14
umax 2.15 m/sec
Fiw (realistic) = Cm * umax * √(k*m) 141186.10 141.19 kN WATER LEVEL (POINT LOAD)
STEP-
7 Impact Force (shipping container) - Fi - 3
draft d = m*g / (ρ*g*A box) 0.84 m
d/R 0.07
ζ = Z/R 0.17
646 0.14
umax 2.15 m/sec
Fis (realistic) = Cm * umax * √(k*m) 1152779.67 1152.78 kN WATER LEVEL (POINT LOAD)
STEP-
8 Damming Effect of Water borne Debris - Fdm
Fdm = Fd * (width of ship / width of wall) 1807821.82 1807.82 kN
Damming Effect of Water borne Debris per AT LEADING EDGE OF STR AND AT
Unit length = Fdm 903910.91 903.91 kN WATER LEVEL (TWO POINT LOAD)
STEP-
9 Hydrodynamic Uplift Forces - F uplift
ζ = Z/R 0.17

Flow Depth Ratio = d/R = hs/R 0.04
646 0.14
umax 2.15 m/sec
uv = u * tan α 0.02
Hydrodynamic Uplift Forces = Fu =
0.5*Cu*ρ*Af*uv2 44.19 0.04 kN
Hydrodynamic Uplift Forces per Unit Floor ON FLOOR AREA IN UPWARD DIR.
Area 0.83 kN/m2 (PRESSURE)
STEP- Additional Gravity Loads on Elevated floors -
10 SOLID WALL
ON FLOOR AREA IN DOWNWARD

fr = ρ * g * hr 31537.19 31.54 kN/m2 DIR. (PRESSURE)
hbw = max water depth that can be retained
before failure of the wall due to internal
hydrostatic pressure.
hr = hmax - h1 <= hbw
Table 5.3: Basic Load Cases for Tsunami Loading

BASIC LOAD CASES FOR TSUNAMI LOADING
1 Fs 6 Fd + Fi3
2 Fd 7 Fd + Fi4
3 Fd + Fs 8 DL
4 Fd + Fi1 9 LL
5 Fd + Fi2

5.6.1 Load Combinations for Tsunami Loading
The load combinations considered for analysis of structure are as per as follows:
LOAD COMB 1.05 DL + 1.275 LL + 1.275 ( FI-1 + FD)
LOAD COMB 1.05 DL + 1.275 LL + 1.275 ( FI-1 + FD + FS)
LOAD COMB 0.9 DL + 1.3 ( FI-1 + FD)
LOAD COMB 0.9 DL + 1.3 ( FI-1 + FD + FS)
5.7 STRUCTURAL CONFIGURATION OF SEVEN TYPICAL

BUILDINGS
Figs 5.1 to 5.10 depict line diagram of plan and elevation of seven typical buildings. The
structural element at critical locations indicated in the plan. The flow of tsunami is also
shown in plan. All dimensions of the buildings are in meter.

Tsunami
Flow
Fig 5.1: Typical Floor Plan of G+11 Building & Uneven G+11 Building
Fig 5.2: Elevation View of G+11 Building & Uneven G+11 Building

Tsunami
Flow
Fig 5.3: Typical Floor Plan of L-Shape Building
Fig 5.4: Elevation View of L-Shape Building

Tsunami
Flow
Fig 5.5: Typical Floor Plan of Rectangle Building & Uneven Rectangle Building
Fig 5.6: Elevation View of Rectangle Building & Uneven Rectangle Building

Tsunami
Flow
Fig 5.7: Typical Floor Plan of Six Storey Building
Fig 5.8: Elevation View of Six Storey Building

Tsunami
Flow
Fig 5.9: Typical Floor Plan of T-Shape Building
Fig 5.10: Elevation View of T-Shape Building

CHAPTER – 7
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATIONS
Ph.D. Thesis – V M Patel / Chapter- 7 / Summary, Conclusion & Recommendations 180| P a ge

7.1 SUMMARY
Earthquakes generating tsunami have occurred in the past; it has occurred now and
will continue to occur. As the population of coastal areas increases, the need for, and
value of, scientific understanding of earthquake and tsunami hazards also increases.
To mitigate this hazard, efforts in four directions are needed. Firstly, work has to be
done in the direction of developing Tsunami Early Warning System. Secondly,
tsunami hazard maps have to be prepared showing the possible inundation areas in
case of a tsunami attack. Thirdly, educating people and disseminating information
about the people likely to be affected. Lastly, planning, designing and construction or
retrofitting of structures in coastal areas considering tsunami loads.
Eastern and Western parts of the MSZ of southern Pakistan are potential zones for
great earthquakes that can generate tsunamis affecting west coast of Gujarat. The
eastern part of the MSZ has produced the 1945 Mw 8.1 earthquake that generated the
last major tsunami in the Arabian Sea. Some sectors of the MSZ are un-ruptured for a
long time and can produce large earthquakes in near future.
In this study investigation has been carried out for the far-field amplitude of tsunamis
in the Arabian Sea for 86 numbers of scenarios of mega-thrust earthquakes, ranging
from probable to possible. The most important lesson from the scenarios investigated
in this study is that the patterns of far-field maximum amplitudes predicted by these
simulations are matching with the observed in 1945 Makran Earthquake.
Each model is having 900 X 1360 nodes. Each model is simulated for 6 hours time,
which will take almost 15 hours time on Core 2 duo processor. Each model will
occupy 3.6 to 3.9 GB hard disk space.
Particularly in western coast of Gujarat, Dwarka is also one of the most important
cities. Dwarka, a religious and historical place of Gujarat and India, may have more
severe hazard against tsunami from the Arabian Sea. So Dwarka can be protected
with proper methods of mitigation and disaster management. Vertical Evacuation
Structure has been proposed for the Dwarka city.
In this study available design codal provisions are reviewed to choose a

comprehensive set of loading equations that may be used to estimate the loads
imposed by tsunami flow on structural components. Historical tsunami events were
reviewed with the intention of evaluating experimental structural response.
Seven typical R.C. buildings are analyzed for wind, earthquake and forces subjected
to 2.264, 3, 5 and 10 meter high tsunami flow. Important conclusions have been
drawn from the analysis results.
Ph.D. Thesis – V M Patel / Chapter- 7 / Summary, Conclusion & Recommendations 181| P age
7.2 CONCLUSIONS
 The following conclusions are drawn from tsunami propagation modeling

study:
 The Numerical modeling is an appropriate tool and can be used for scientific
studies aimed at revealing the physical processes of tsunami generation,
propagation and inundation; and to establish seismic criteria for issuing
tsunami warnings in the event of an actual tsunami.
 When width, length and dip angle increase, time of arrival of tsunami
decreases and run up height increases.
 Arrival time is decreases while depth of water increases.
 At 250˚ orientation of failure plane, whole MSZ is having same effect at
Dwarka, below 250˚ orientation eastern Makran is more effective while above
250˚ orientation western Makran is more effective.
 When depth to top of focus increases, effect of tsunami increases.
 It is very important to confirm the tsunami generation by earthquake
parameters as early as possible, since tsunami arrival time at Dwarka is 140 to
185 minutes.
 Application of Artificial Neural Network is proved to be helpful to predict
arrival time and probable height of tsunami waves with admissible accuracy.
Using ANN very efficient Tsunami Warning System is possible.
 The following concluding remarks are drawn from analysis of structural

performance of typical buildings considering inferences derived in previous
chapter:
 In some locations, high ground may not exist, or tsunamis triggered by local
events may not allow sufficient warning time for communities to evacuate
low-lying areas or densely populated areas like Dwarka Temple. Where
horizontal evacuation out of the tsunami inundation zone is neither possible
nor practical, a potential solution is vertical evacuation structure, which is
designed and detailed to resist the tsunami forces.
 Historical records state that only structurally engineered buildings, and
structures raised above the tsunami flow, were able to survive the tsunami
forces without collapse. In some cases, the failure of breakaway walls at the
lower levels or large openings in walls at lower storey reduced the tsunami
loadings, hence the building survived.
 Higher design forces in columns and beams below tsunami flow level were
observed in the typical buildings with solid walls.
 Reduction in design forces were observed when longer side of the building is
in perpendicular direction to shoreline.
 With an additional cost of about 5%, a building with 50% opening can be
tsunami resistant for tsunami flow up to 3 meter.
 With an additional cost of about 28%, a building with 50% opening can be
tsunami resistant for tsunami flow up to 5 meter.
 Damming effect of water born debris and impact loads are two critical loads
for failure of buildings up to 5 meter height of tsunami flow, and these loads
can be eliminated with proper vegetation along the coast like mangrove trees.
 Irregularity in plan & elevation of building will increase shear force and
bending moment of beam and column.
 Overall axial force is lower in tsunami load case except 10 meter high tsunami
flow with solid wall case compared to earthquake load case.
 A solid masonry wall cannot resist the tsunami flow of height 3 meter or
more, but the failure of solid wall will minimize the tsunami load and framed
structure may survive.
 For Gujarat coastal area, there is a risk of 3.28 meter high tsunami flow.
Therefore, ground floor columns and foundations should be strengthened
according to tsunami requirements to make the whole building safe against
probable tsunamis.
 In wind case, all member forces are observed lower, but non-structural
elements in the building should be designed considering local wind pressure
co-efficient in coastal area.
 In case of more than 3 meter tsunami height, beams near corner which are
parallel to tsunami flow observed considerably higher shear force and bending
moment below tsunami height.
7.3 RECOMMENDATIONS
 Large scale wave tank studies are recommended to verify tsunami velocity
and corresponding effect on acting loads and impact loads due to water borne
debris.
 Effects of vegetation need to be checked experimentally.
 Based on experimental studies, the tsunami loading equations can be revised.
It is recommended that breaking wave forces should not be considered.
 Progressive collapse analysis may be recommended in case of higher impact
forces.
 It is recommended to avoid use of solid walls perpendicular to the anticipated
tsunami flow in the buildings.
 Reinforced concrete or steel frame structures are recommended in tsunami
prone areas.
 Further research is needed to improve design and detailing requirements for
structural and non-structural components.
APPENDIX - A
VALIDATION OF STAAD-PRO FOR EQ LOADING
A1.1 SIX STOREY BUILDING
Reference Model: Six Storey Building – (EQ-26)

Reference Source: National Information Centre of Earthquake Engineering –
IITK – GSDMA Codes
Object: Seismic Analysis and Design of a Six Storey Building
Table A1.1 Data of the Example

Live load : 4.0 kN/m2 at typical floor
: 1.5 kN/m2 on terrace
Floor finish : 1.0 kN/m2
Water proofing : 2.0 kN/m2
Terrace finish : 1.0 kN/m2
Location : Vadodara city
As per IS: 875-Not designed for wind load, since
Wind load : earthquake loads exceed the wind loads.
Earthquake load : As per IS-1893 (Part 1) - 2002
Depth of foundation below
ground : 2.5 m
Type of soil : Type II, Medium as per IS:1893
Allowable bearing pressure : 200 kN/m2
Average thickness of footing : 0.9 m, assume isolated footings Storey height
Storey Height : Typical floor: 5 m, GF: 3.4 m Floors
Floors : G.F. + 5 upper floors.
Ground beams : To be provided at 100 mm below G.L. Plinth level
Plinth Level : 0.6 m
Walls : 230 mm thick brick masonry walls only at periphery.
A1.1.2 Geometry of the Six Storey Building
The general layout of the building is shown in Figure 1. At ground level, the floor beams
FB are not provided, since the floor directly rests on ground (earth filling and 1:4:8 c.c. at
Ph.D. Thesis – V M Patel – Appendix – A 185| P a g e

plinth level) and no slab is provided. The ground beams are provided at 100 mm below
ground level. The numbering of the members is explained as below.
A1.1.3 Storey Number
Storey numbers are given to the portion of the building between two successive grids of
beams. For the example building, the storey numbers are defined as follows:
Table A1.2: Six Storey Building Description

Portion of the building Storey no.
Foundation top – Ground floor 1
Ground beams – First floor 2
First Floor – Second floor 3
Second floor – Third floor 4
Third floor – Fourth floor 5
Fourth floor – Fifth floor 6
Fifth floor - Terrace 7

Fig A1.1: Typical Floor Plan of Six Storey Building

Fig A1.2: Part Section of Six Storey Building
Max: -251.829 kN
88.103 kN
32.173 kN Max: -127.204 Max:

kN -286.580 kN
Max: 129.077 kN
-30.300 kN -189.676 kN
Max: -268.251 kN
71.680 kN
Fig A1.3: Shear Force Diagram for Loadcase: [1.5 (DL + EXTP)]
-71.680 kN
Max: 268.251 kN
189.676 kN 30.300 kN Max: -129.077 kN

Max: 286.580 kN
Max: 127.204 kN
-32.172 kN
-88.103 kN
Max: 251.829 kN
Fig A1.4: Shear Force Diagram for Loadcase: [1.5 (DL - EXTP)]

Max: 528.377 kNm
Max: 575.427 kNm
Max: 556.893 kNm
-85.595 kNm
-19.893 kNm
-15.211 kNm
Max: -216.773 kNm
-180.251 kNm
Fig A1.5: Bending Moment Diagram for Loadcase: [1.5 (DL + EXTP)]
Max: 556.893 kNm
-180.251 kNm
Max: 575.427 kNm
-15.211 kNm
Max: 528.377 kNm -19.893 kNm

Max: -216.773 kNm
-85.595 kNm
Fig A1.6: Bending Moment Diagram for Loadcase: [1.5 (DL - EXTP)]

Table A1.3: Beam End Moments – EQ-26
Factored End Moments (kNm) for Load Combinations - EQ-26

Sr. Load combination B2001 B2002 B2003
No. Left Right Left Right Left Right
1 [1.5(DL+IL)] 204.2 -281.7 371.7 -371.7 281.7 -204.2
2 [1.2(DL+IL+EXTP)] -124.3 -484.4 60.4 -534.2 -33.7 -451.1
3 [1.2(DL+IL-EXTP)] 451.1 33.7 534.2 -60.4 484.5 124.4
4 [1.5(DL+EXTP)] -182.7 -560.8 -12.7 -579.6 -86.9 -536.6
5 [1.5(DL-EXTP)] 536.6 86.9 579.6 12.7 560.8 182.7
6 [0.9DL+1.5EXTP] -253.5 -466.0 -126.0 -466.2 -181.7 -465.8
7 [0.9DL-1.5EXTP] 465.8 181.7 466.2 126.0 466.0 253.5
Table A1.4: Beam End Moments – STAAD-Pro Model

Factored End Moments (kNm) for Load Combinations - STAAD-
PRO MODEL
1 [1.5(DL+IL)] 201.0 280.8 368.2 368.2 280.8 201.0
2 [1.2(DL+IL+EXTP)] -122.6 481.6 58.3 530.8 -32.4 444.3
3 [1.2(DL+IL-EXTP)] 444.3 -32.4 530.8 58.3 481.6 -122.6
4 [1.5(DL+EXTP)] -180.3 556.9 -15.2 575.4 -85.6 528.4
5 [1.5(DL-EXTP)] 528.4 -85.6 575.4 -15.2 556.9 -180.3
6 [0.9DL+1.5EXTP] -249.9 462.6 -127.3 463.4 -179.9 458.8
7 [0.9DL-1.5EXTP] 458.8 -179.9 463.4 -127.3 462.6 -249.9
Table A1.5: Beam End Shear Force – EQ-26
Factored End Shears (kN) for Load Combinations - EQ-26

1 [1.5(DL+IL)] 189.35 210.02 266.36 266.36 210.02 189.35
2 [1.2(DL+IL+EXTP)] 78.58 240.92 149.92 276.26 95.11 224.39
3 [1.2(DL+IL-EXTP)] 224.38 95.12 276.26 149.92 240.93 78.57
4 [1.5(DL+EXTP)] 72.44 270.69 131.15 289.07 88.43 254.70
5 [1.5(DL-EXTP)] 254.69 88.44 289.07 131.15 270.70 72.43
6 [0.9DL+1.5EXTP] 7.01 198.86 47.11 205.03 16.60 189.27
7 [0.9DL-1.5EXTP] 189.26 16.61 205.03 47.11 198.87 7.00

Table A1.6: Beam End Shear Force – STAAD-Pro Model
Factored End Shears (kN) for Load Combinations - STAAD PRO

MODEL
1 [1.5(DL+IL)] 187.45 208.73 264.08 264.08 208.73 187.45
2 [1.2(DL+IL+EXTP)] 77.90 239.04 148.26 274.26 94.92 222.02
3 [1.2(DL+IL-EXTP)] 222.02 94.92 274.26 148.26 239.04 77.90
4 [1.5(DL+EXTP)] 71.68 268.25 129.08 286.58 88.10 251.83
5 [1.5(DL-EXTP)] 251.83 88.10 286.58 129.08 268.25 71.68
6 [0.9DL+1.5EXTP] 6.98 196.98 45.95 203.45 16.83 187.13
7 [0.9DL-1.5EXTP] 187.13 16.83 203.45 45.95 196.98 6.98
A1.2 G+11 BUILDING
Reference Model: G+11 Building

Reference Source: ETABS Nonlinear v9.2.0
Object: Seismic Analysis and Design of a G+11 Building
Fig A1.7: 3D Model View of G+11 Building in ETABS

Fig A1.8: Mode shapes of G+11 Building in ETABS
Fig A1.9: Response Spectrum Data Snap of G+11 Building in ETABS

FigA1.10: Storey Shear Plot of G+11 Building in ETABS
Table A1.7: Comparision of G+11 Building Results

Result Data ETABS Model STAAD-Pro
Results Model Results
Seismic Weight 162603.81 kN 163451.7 kN
Sa/g 1.054 1.054
Factor C 0.0253 0.0253
Base Shear 4114.85 kN 4135.71 kN

APPENDIX - B
VALIDATION OF TSUNAMI LOADING USING STAAD-PRO
Reference Model: Prototype Structure 1: SDC A
Reference Source: Kason Hoku Pacheco, 2005 – Thesis
Reference Loading: Impact Force & Hydrodynamic Force
Table A2.1: Load Case-1: Impact Load
g = 9.81 m/s2 Gravitational Constant

ds = 3m Tsunami Flow Depth (3m)
W = 4.45kN Code Assumed Weight of Debris
V = 2√(g*ds) = 10.85 m/s Tsunami Design Flood Velocity
Δt = 0.1 s Code Assumed Impact Duration
Fi = WV / (g* Δt) = 49.218 kN Impact Force
Table A2.2: Load Case-2: Hydrodynamic Force
Cd = 2.0 Drag Co-efficient for Square Column

ρ = 104.59 kg*s2/m4 Mass Density of Fluid
ds = 3m Tsunami Flow Depth (3m)
D = 0.711 m X 0.711 m Column Dimension
A = D * ds = 2.133 m2 Column Exposed Area
g = 9.81 m/s2 Gravitational Constant
V = 2√(g*ds) = 10.85 m/s Tsunami Design Flood Velocity
Fd = 0.5 * ρ * Cd * A * = 257.6 kN Hydrodynamic Force
V2
Ph.D. Thesis – V M Patel – Appendix – B 194| P a g e

Rect 0.71x0.71
Max: 185.276 kN 10.750 kN
-121.582 kN
Rect 0.71x0.71 Max: -83.115 kN
Max: -121.582 kN
Load 0 : Shear Y : Displacement

Force - kN
Fig A2.1: Shear Force Diagram
Max: 117.044 kNm
Rect 0.71x0.71
Max: 132.207 kNm Max: -37.159

-37.159 kNm kNm
Rect 0.71x0.71
Max: -67.279 kNm
Load 0 : Bending Z : Displacement

Moment - kNm
Fig A2.2: Bending Moment Diagram
Table A2.3: Comparision of Results
Result Data Reference Results Equivalent Results Model Results

S.F. at Bottom End 41.671 kips 185.362 kN 185.276 kN
S.F. at Top End 27.260 kips 121.258 kN 121.582kN
B.M. at Bottom End 97.82 kips-ft 132.626 kN.m 132.207 kN.m
B.M. at Top End 85.82 kips-ft 116.357 kN.m 117.044 kN.m
Ph.D. Thesis – V M Patel – Appendix – B 195| P a g e

APPENDIX - C
PROGRAMME TO FIND OUT RUN-UP HEIGHT AND TIME

OF TSUNAMI WAVE
clear all;
close all;
load grid_a.grd; % input bathymetry
ind=find(grid_a < 0); % looking for dry land updated on 24.05.2005
[M,N]=size(grid_a);
a1=[];
a2=[];
a3=[];
a4=[];
for k = 150 : 156
filename = ['z' num2str(1000+k-1)];
fid=fopen(filename,'r');
z=fscanf(fid,'%f',[N,M]); z=z';
fclose(fid);
z(ind)=nan*z(ind);
text(100,500,[num2str(k-1), 'min']);
a1=[a1 z(615,842)];
a2=[a2 z(590,867)];
a3=[a3 z(594,876)];
a4=[a4 z(607,890)];
end
[max_val1,index1]=max(a1);
disp('max value PORBANDAR is: ');
disp(max_val1);
disp('frame for PORBANDAR is: ');
disp(['z' num2str(1150+index1-1)]);
disp('max value DWARKA is: ');
disp(max_val2);
disp('frame for DWARKA is: ');
disp('max value OKHA is: ');
disp(max_val3);
disp('frame for OKHA is: ');
disp('max value MANDVI is: ');
disp(max_val4);
Ph.D. Thesis – V M Patel – Appendix – C 196| P a g e

disp('frame for MANDVI is: ');
data = {'PORBANDAR', (max_val1) (100+index1-1)
'DWARKA', (max_val2) (100+index2-1)
'OKHA', (max_val3) (100+index3-1)
'MANDVI', (max_val4) (100+index4-1)};
save vmp_data.mat a1 a2 a3 a4 data;
Ph.D. Thesis – V M Patel – Appendix – C 197| P a g e

APPENDIX - D
NORMALIZED RESULT TABLE OF TSUNAMI

PROPAGATION MODELING
INPUT DATA OUTPUT

Depth
DEPTH RUN-
LENGTH WIDTH of Inclined
DIP TO RAKE SLIP UP
(KM) (KM) Water Distance
TOP HT.
(m)
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.21 0.94 0.23
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.01 0.21 0.94 0.16
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.99 0.21 0.94 0.31
0.75 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.21 0.94 0.41
0.01 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.21 0.94 0.22
0.26 0.01 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.21 0.94 0.08
0.26 0.50 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.21 0.94 0.13
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.26 0.50 0.21 0.94 0.13
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.75 0.50 0.21 0.94 0.18
DATA FOR TRAINING AND VALIDATION

0.26 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.01 0.50 0.21 0.94 0.28
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.99 0.50 0.21 0.94 0.10
0.26 0.99 0.66 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.21 0.94 0.29
0.26 0.99 0.99 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.21 0.94 0.34
0.26 0.99 0.01 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.21 0.94 0.18
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.01 0.50 0.50 0.21 0.94 0.26
0.99 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.99 0.21 0.94 0.41
0.75 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.26 0.99 0.21 0.94 0.49
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.14 0.48 0.24
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.01 0.14 0.48 0.16
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.99 0.14 0.48 0.32
0.50 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.14 0.48 0.26
0.75 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.14 0.48 0.39
0.99 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.14 0.48 0.46
0.01 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.14 0.48 0.20
0.26 0.01 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.14 0.48 0.11
0.26 0.50 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.14 0.48 0.14
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.26 0.50 0.14 0.48 0.30
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.01 0.50 0.14 0.48 0.34
Ph.D. Thesis – V M Patel – Appendix – D 198| P a g e

0.26 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.99 0.50 0.14 0.48 0.07
0.26 0.99 0.99 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.14 0.48 0.33
0.26 0.99 0.01 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.14 0.48 0.19
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.99 0.50 0.50 0.14 0.48 0.18
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.01 0.50 0.50 0.14 0.48 0.28
0.99 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.99 0.14 0.48 0.46
0.75 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.26 0.99 0.14 0.48 0.56
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.03 0.05 0.24
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.99 0.03 0.05 0.32
0.50 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.03 0.05 0.31
0.75 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.03 0.05 0.48
0.01 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.03 0.05 0.20
0.26 0.01 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.03 0.05 0.09
0.26 0.50 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.03 0.05 0.14
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.26 0.50 0.03 0.05 0.14
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.75 0.50 0.03 0.05 0.16
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.01 0.50 0.03 0.05 0.31
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.99 0.50 0.03 0.05 0.01
0.26 0.99 0.66 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.03 0.05 0.29
0.26 0.99 0.99 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.03 0.05 0.33
DATA FOR TRAINING AND VALIDATION

0.26 0.99 0.01 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.03 0.05 0.19
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.99 0.50 0.50 0.03 0.05 0.18
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.01 0.50 0.50 0.03 0.05 0.28
0.99 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.99 0.03 0.05 0.52
0.99 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.26 0.99 0.03 0.05 0.64
0.99 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.01 0.99 0.03 0.05 0.99
0.75 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.26 0.50 0.48 0.71 0.40
0.26 0.50 0.66 0.50 0.26 0.50 0.48 0.71 0.26
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.99 0.48 0.71 0.32
0.75 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.48 0.71 0.35
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.01 0.50 0.50 0.48 0.71 0.30
0.75 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.26 0.50 0.04 0.27 0.48
0.26 0.50 0.66 0.50 0.26 0.50 0.04 0.27 0.33
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.99 0.04 0.27 0.34
0.75 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.04 0.27 0.38
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.01 0.50 0.50 0.04 0.27 0.30
0.75 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.26 0.50 0.95 0.04 0.45
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.99 0.95 0.04 0.33
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.95 0.04 0.25
0.75 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.95 0.04 0.33
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.01 0.50 0.50 0.95 0.04 0.29
0.75 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.26 0.50 0.66 0.94 0.37
0.26 0.50 0.66 0.50 0.26 0.50 0.66 0.94 0.27

0.26 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.66 0.94 0.24
0.75 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.66 0.94 0.31
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.01 0.50 0.50 0.66 0.94 0.26
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.99 0.99 0.23
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.01 0.01 0.06
0.50 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.21 0.94 0.29

0.26 0.99 0.34 0.99 0.50 0.50 0.21 0.94 0.18
DATA FOR TESTING

0.26 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.75 0.50 0.14 0.48 0.16
0.26 0.99 0.66 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.14 0.48 0.29
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.01 0.03 0.05 0.16
0.75 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.26 0.99 0.03 0.05 0.63
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.48 0.71 0.24
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.04 0.27 0.26
0.26 0.50 0.66 0.50 0.26 0.50 0.95 0.04 0.29
0.26 0.99 0.34 0.50 0.50 0.99 0.66 0.94 0.32

APPENDIX - E
SHEAR STRENGTH CAPACITY OF RC COLUMN
Following Data Taken For Shear Strength Capacity Check of T-2.264 Model –
Column C1:
Vc = Shear Resistance Offered by Concrete Vs = Shear Resistance Offered by Steel

Fsh = Characteristic Tensile Strength of fck = Characteristic Compressive Strength
Shear Reinforcement of Concrete = 25 N/mm2
D = Depth of Column = 500 mm bw = Width of Column = 500 mm
Dr = D – (2* Cover) – φsh – φ = 360 mm P = 738 kN
Ag = bw * D
Vc = {[√(fck/6)] x [1 + (P / 14 Ag)] x (bwD)}

[AASHTO, 2002 referred from Jae-Hoon Lee]
= {[√(25/6)] x [1 + (738 / 14 x 500 x 500)] x (500x500)}
= 208.37 kN
D = D/2 + Dr/∏
= 500/2 + 360/3.14
= 364.65 mm
Vs = [(Av x Fsh x D) / S]
[AASHTO, 2002 referred from Jae-Hoon Lee]
= [(6 x 78.54 x 415 x 364.65) / 140]
= 509.37 kN
Vn = Vc + Vs
= 208.37 + 509.37
= 717.75 kN > 612.00 kN (Shear Force acting on Column C1 at GF of T-2.264 of
Tsunami Model)
Ph.D. Thesis – V M Patel – Appendix – E 201| P a g e

REFERENCES
Ambraseys, N N, and Melville, C P, (1982), A History of Persian Earthquakes,

Cambridge University Press, New York, New York, pp.219.
Beale M H, Hagon M T, Demuth H B, (2010), Nueral Network Toolbox tm 7 User’s

Guide – www.mathworks.com/help/pdf_doc/nnet.pdf
Bendick, R, and Bilham R, 1999, Search for buckling of the southwest Indian coast
related to Himalayan collision, In Macfarlane, A., Sorkhabi, R., and Quade, J. (Eds.),
1999, Himalaya and Tibet: mountain roots to mountain tops, Geological Society of
America Special Paper 328, p. 313-323.
Borrero J C, Synolakis C E, Fritz H, 2006, Northern Sumatra Field Survey after the
December 2004 Great Sumatra Earthquake and Indian Ocean Tsunami, Earthquake
Spectra, Vol.22, Nos.S3, pp. S93–S104.
Bryant E, (2001), Tsunami - The Underrated Hazard, Cambridge University Press,

Cambridge, UK, 320 pp.
Byrne, D E, Sykes L R, Davis D M, (1992). Great Thrust Earthquakes And A Seismic

Slip Along The Plate Boundary Of The Makran Subduction Zone, J. Geophys. Res., 97,
449-478.
Chadha, R K, (2006). Collection of Papers by T. S. Murty, Tsunamigenic Sources in the

Indian Ocean: Factors and Impact on the Indian Landmass.
Clift P D, Kroon D, Gaedicke C, Craig J, (2002), The Techtonic and Climatic Evolution
of the Arabian Sea Region, Geological Society, London, Special Publication, 195, pp.1-6.
Earthquake Engineering Field Investigation Team, (2006), The Indian Ocean Tsunami of
26 December 2004: Mission Findings in Sri Lanka and Thailand, Institution of Structural
Engineers, London, UK.
EERI -1, The Great Sumatra Earthquake and Indian Ocean Tsunami of December 26,
2004, EERI Special Earthquake Report — March 2005.
EERI -2, The Great Sumatra Earthquake and Indian Ocean Tsunami of December 26,
2004, EERI Special Earthquake Report — April 2005..
Enet F and Grilli, S, (2005), Tsunami Landslide Generation: Modeling and Experiments,
Ocean Waves Measurement and analysis, 5th International Symposium WAVES 2005,
Madrid, Spain, pp. 88-97.
Ph.D. Thesis – V M Patel / References 202| Page

George Pararas-Carayannis, (2006), The Potential of Tsunami Generation Along the
Makran Subduction Zone in the Northern Arabian Sea. Case Study: The Earthquake and
Tsunami of November 28, 1945, Science of Tsunami Hazards, Vol-24, pp 358.
Ghobarah A, Saatcioglu M, Nistor I, (2006), The impact of the 26 December 2004

Earthquake and Tsunami on Structures and Infrastructure, Engineering Structures, vol.
28, pp. 312–326.
HarryYeh, (2006), Maximum Fluid Forces in the Tsunami Run-up Zone, Journal of
Water Way, Port,Coastal, and Ocean Engineering, pp. 496-500.
Hatori, T., (1995), Magnitude Scales for the Central American Tsunamis, (1990-1993),
Pure and Applied Geophysics, Vol.144, Nos.3/4, pp.471-479.
Imamura H, Roberton I, Preuss J, (2005), Development of Design Guide lines for

Structures that Serve as Tsunami Vertical Evacuation Sites, Washington Division of
Geology and Earth Resources Open File Report 2005-4.
Imamura, F., (1996). Review of Tsunami simulation with a finite – difference method in
Long –wave Run-up Models, World Scientific, Singapore, pp. 25-42.
Jaiswal R K, Rastogi B K, Murty T S, (2008), Tsunamigenic Sources in the Indian

Ocean, Science of Tsunami Hazards, Vol. 27, No. 2, pp. 32-53.
Jaiswal R K, Singh A P, Rastogi B K, (2008), Simulation of the Arabian Sea Tsunami

Propagation Generated Due to 1945 Makran Earthquake and Its Effect on Western Parts
of Gujarat (India), Natural Hazards, vol. 48, pp. 245-258.
Jaiswal R K, Singh A P, Rastogi B K (2008). Simulation Of The Arabian Sea Tsunami

Propagation Generated Due To 1945 Makran Earthquake And Its Effect On Western
Parts Of Gujarat (India), Natural Hazards, 2008.
Jordan B R, (2008), Tsunamis of the Arabian Peninsula a Guide of Historic Events,

Science of Tsunami Hazards, Vol. 27, No. 1, page 31-46.
Kajiura K, (1963), The Leading Edge of a Tsunami, Bulletin of the Earthquake Research
Institute, Uni. Tokyo, Vol. 41, pp. 535-571.
Kanamori H and Given W, (1983), Use of Long-Period Seismic Waves for Rapid
Evaluation of Tsunami Potential of Large Earthquakes, Tsunamis – Their Science and
Engineering, pp. 37-49.
Kanamori H, (1972), Mechanism of Tsunami Earthquakes, Phys. Earth Planet Interiors,

Vol. 6, pp.346-359.

Lisitzin E, (1974), Sea-level changes. Elsevier Oceanogr. Ser. 8. Elsevier Sci, Publ.
Co., Amsterdam, Oxford, New York. vi + 286.
Lukkunaprasit P, Ruangrassamee A, Thanasisathit N, (2009), Tsunami Loading on

Buildings With Openings, Science of Tsunami Hazards, Vol. 28, No. 5, pp. 303-310.
Macmurdo C, (1821), Account of the earthquake which occurred in India in June 1819,
Edinburgh Phil.J. 4, 106-109.
Mansinha L, Smylie D (1971), The Displacement fields Of Inclined Faults, Bull Seismol
Soc Am 61: 1433–1440.
McCloskey J, Nalbant S S, Steacy S, (2005), Earthquake risk from co-seismic stress.

Nature 434, 291.
Mohammad M, Pirooz M D, Zaker N, Yalciner A C, (2009), Preliminary estimation of

the tsunami hazards associated with the Makran Subduction zone at the northwestern
Indian Ocean, Nat Hazards Vol – 48, 229-243.
Morey S L, Martin P J, O’Brien J J, Wallcraft A A, Zavala-Hidalgo J, (2003). Export

pathways for river discharged fresh water in the northern Gulf of Mexico, J. Geophys.
Res. 108:3303–3318.doi: 10.1029/2002JC001674.
Murty T S, (1977), Seismic Sea Waves – Tsunamis, D. W. Frieses & Sons Ltd., Altona,
Canada, ISBN – 0-660-00565-4.
Nelson C, (1846). Notice of an earthquake and a probable subsidence of the land in the
district of Cutch, near the mouth of Koree, or the eastern branch of the Indus in June
1845, Geol. Soc. London, Quart. J., 2, 103.
Nouri Y, Nistor I, Palermo D, Cornett A, (2008), Experimental Investigation of the

Impact of a Tsunami-Induced Bore on Structures, ICCE, Hemburg.
Okada T, Sugano, Ishikawa, Takai & Tateno, (2006), Tsunami Loads and Structural
Design of Tsunami Refuge Building, www.bcj.or.jp / src / c05_research / results /
tsunami2006_1.pdf.
Okal E A and Synolkis C E, (2008), Far-Field Tsunami Hazard from Mega-thrust

Earthquakes in the Indian Ocean, Geophysical Journal Institute, Vol. 172, pp. 995-1015.
Pacheco K K, (2005), Evaluation of Tsunami Loads and Their Effect on Reinforced

Concrete Building, University of Hawaii, M.Sc. Thesis.

Page W D, Alt J N, Cluff L S, Plafker G, (1979), Evidence for the recurrence of large-
magnitude earthquakes along the Makran coast of Iran and Pakistan. Tectonophysics
52:533-547.
Palermo D, Nistor I, (2008), Understanding Tsunami Risk to Structures: A Canadian

Perspective, World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, China.
Pendse, C G, (1948), The Mekran Earthquake Of The 28th November 1945,

Scientific Notes, Vol. X. No. 125.
Quittmeyer R C and Jacob K H (1979), Historical And Modern Seismicity Of Pakistan,

Afghanistan, Northwestern India And Southwestern Iran, Bull. Seis. Soc. Am. 69,
No.-3.
Rajendran C P, Ramanmurthy M V, Reddy N T, Rajendran K, (2008), Hazard

Implications of the Late Arrival of the 1945 Makran Tsunami, Current Science, Vol. 95,
No 12.
Ramming H G and Kowalik Z, (1980), Numerical Modeling of Marine Hydrodynamics,

Elsevier, NewYork, pp. 368.
Rastogi B K and Jaiswal R K, (2006). A Catlog of Tsunamis in the Indian Ocean, Science
of Tsunami Hazards, Vol-25, pp 128-142.
Rueda F J and Schladow S G, (2002). Quantitative Comparison of Models for Isotropic

Response of Homogeneous Basins, J. Hydraul. Eng, vol.128, pp.201–203.
Singh A P, Bhonde U, Rastogi B K, Jaiswal R K, (2008), Possible Innundation Map of

Coastal Areas of Gujarat with a Tsunamigenic Earthquake, Indian Minerals, Vol. 61(3-4)
& 62 (1-2), 59-64.
Stoneley R L (1974), Evolution of The Continental Margins Bounding a Former Southern

Tethys, The Geology Of Continental Margins, Springer-Verlag, New York, 889-903.
Wang X and Liu P F, (2006), Ananalysis of 2004 Sumatra Earthquake Fault Plane
Mechanisms and Indian Ocean Tsunami, Journal of Hydraulic Research, Vol.00, No.0,
pp.1–8.
Wells D L and Coppersmith K J, (1994), New Empirical Relationships Among

Magnitude, Rupture Length, Rupture Width, Rupture Area and Surface Displacement,
Bulletin of the Seismological Soc. of America 1994 84: 974-1002.
Yeh H I, Robertson, Pruess J., (2005), Development of Design Guidelines for Structures
that Serve as Tsunami Vertical Evacuation Sites, Washington State Department of
Natural Resources, Olympia, WA.

Zahibo N, Pelinovsky E, Okal E, Yalçiner A, Kharif C, Talipova T, Kozelkov A, (2005),
The Earthquake and Tsunami of November 21, 2004 at Les Saintes, Guadeloupe, Lesser
Antilles, Science of Tsunami Hazards, Vol. 23, No. 1, page 25-39.
Codes:
FEMA 55, (2000), Federal Emergency Management Agency - Coastal Construction

Manual.
FEMA P646, (2008), Federal Emergency Management Agency - Guidelines for Design
of Structures for Vertical Evacuation from Tsunamis.
IS-1893, (Part-I)-2002 Indian Standard Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of

Structures - General Provisions and Buildings.
IS-1905, (1987), Indian Standard Code of Practice for Structural Use of Unreinforced
Masonry.
IS-456, (2000), Indian Standard - Plain and Reinforced Concrete - Code of Practice
IS-875, PART-I, (1997), Indian Standard Code of Practice for Design Loads (Other Than
Earthquake) for Buildings and Structures - Dead Loads.
IS-875, PART-II, (1997), Indian Standard Code of Practice for Design Loads (Other
Than Earthquake) for Buildings and Structures, Imposed Loads.
IS-875, PART-III, (1997), Indian Standard Code of Practice for Design Loads (Other
Than Earthquake) for Buildings and Structures, Wind Loads.
IS-875, PART-V, (1997), Indian Standard Code of Practice for Design Loads (Other
Than Earthquake) for Buildings and Structures, Special Loads and Combinations

Web Sites:
http:// earthquake.usgs.gov/ eqinthenews/ 2004/ usslav/
http:// www.pmel.noaa.gov /∼titov/Titov/
Jae-Hoon L, Hyun S K, Choi J H: http://mceer.buffalo.edu / research /

International_Research / ANCER / Activities / 2004 / lee_in_keerc.pdf
NGDC – National geophysical data center: www.ngdc.noaa.gov/hazard/tsupu.shtml
NTHMP – www.nthmp.tsunami.gov/publications.html
Design Example of a Six Storey Building developed by IITK-GSDMA Project on

Building Codes Document No.: IITK-GSDMA-EQ26-V3.0 – EQ-26:
http://www.iitk.ac.in/nicee/IITK-GSDMA/EQ26.pdf
Saatcioglu, M., (2009), Performance of Structures During The 2004 Indian Ocean
Tsunami and Tsunami Induced Forces For Structural Design, “Earthquakes and
Tsunamis”, A.T. Tankut (ed): http://books.google.co.in/books?id=u-
BrJdXr70MC&pg=PA170&lpg=PA170&dq=impact+force+cch-2000&source= bl&ots=
RxdFdQRcL4&sig=suSqdJCdekK0vZIX77GkAwhToiQ&hl=en&ei=mwMQTd6OMcjm
rAfv66XECw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CDcQ6AEwBQ#v=
onepage&q=impact%20force%20cch-2000&f=false

PUBLICATIONS OF RESEARCH WORK
 PUBLICATION IN JOURNAL PROCEEDINGS

 A paper titled “TSUNAMI PROPAGATION IN ARABIAN SEA AND ITS EFFECT
ON PORBANDAR, GUJARAT, INDIA” published in International Journal of
Engineering Studies and Research, Volume I, Issue II, Oct.-Dec,’ 2010, E-
ISSN 0976-7916.
 UNDER CONSIDERATION - “EARTHQUAKES IN INDIA” in Ganpat University
Journal.
 PUBLICATION IN INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS

 “Tsunami Wave Forces on Costal Structures” in International Conference
on Emerging Technologies and Applications in Engineering, Technology
and Sciences (ICETAETS 2008) held on 13-14 January, 2008 at Rajkot.
 “Tsunami Effect On Porbandar, Western Gujarat Coast” in International
Symposium on Advances in Earthquake Science (AES – 2011) held at
Institute of Seismological Research, Gandhinagar during 22-24 January,
2011.
 PUBLICATION IN NATIONAL CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS

 “Tsunami Hazard from Earthquakes in the Western Indian Ocean” in Civil
Engineering Conference – Innovation without Limits (CEC-09) held at N.I.T.
Hamirpur on 18-19 September, 2009.
 Earthquake Induced Tsunami Propagation in Arabian Sea & its Effect on West
Coast of India” in Civil Engineering Conference – Innovation without Limits (CEC-
09) held at N.I.T. Hamirpur on 18-19 September, 2009.
 “A Review on Modeling of Tsunami Waves” in Innovations and Applications of
Mathematical Modeling Techniques in Engineering System (IAMTES-2008) held
at A.D.I.T. , New V. V. Nagar on 10 December, 2008.
Ph.D. Thesis – VMP / Abstract 208| P a g e

 SPECIAL ACHIEVEMENTS OF RESEARCH WORK
 Expert Lecture on “Tsunami Hazard in India and Vicinity” in Convergence – 2010
at U.V.P.C.E., Ganpat University, Kherva.
 Special technical episode on “Tsunami Risk at Western Gujarat Coast” was
telecasted on AAJ Tak National Channel on 4th February, 2011.
 Live talk and Special technical report on “Tsunami Risk at Gujarat Coast” was
telecasted on NEWS 24 Channel on 5th February, 2011.
 A technical article on “Possibility of Tsunamis and Necessary Actions Required at
Gujarat Coast” was published on 25th January, 2011 in DNA NEWS paper.
 A technical article on “Tsunami Hazard and Protective Measures required at
Gujarat Coast” was published on 9th February, 2011 in SANDESH paper.
Ph.D. Thesis – VMP / Abstract 209| P a g e

Thesis VMP PHD PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Thesis VMP PHD PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree of

Research Guide: Submitted by:

Dr. H. S. PATEL Vikram M. PATEL

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY

Place: Ganpat Vidyanagar, Kherva. Mr. Vikram M. Patel

I feel privileged in expressing my profound sense of gratitude to Prof. K. R. Patel,

Ph.D. Thesis – V M Patel / Acknowledgement ii| Page

I thank you all.

Date: 21st February, 2011.

Ph.D. Thesis – V M Patel / Acknowledgement iii| Page

Ph.D. Thesis – VMP / Abstract iii| P a g e

Ph.D. Thesis – VMP / Abstract iv| P a g e

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................... 1

CHAPTER 2 INTRODUCTION TO TSUNAMIS & SPECIFIC MEASURES

2.3.1.1 Fault Mechanisms ............................................................................ 9

2.4.2 Meteor Impacts ...................................................................................... 12

2.4.3 Cause Dependent Overview of Past Tsunamis ........................................ 12

2.5 TSUNAMI WAVES ..................................................................................... 13

2.5.2 Propagation ............................................................................................ 14

2.5.3 Different Wave Forms ........................................................................... 17

2.5.4 Breaking ................................................................................................ 18

THESIS – VMP / Table of Contents v| P age

2.6 HISTORICAL TSUNAMIS AFFECTED INDIA.......................................... 19

2.6.2 Indian Ocean Tsunami of December 26, 2004 ........................................ 22

2.8 TSUNAMIGENIC SOURCES ...................................................................... 29

2.8.2 Makran Tsunami Source ........................................................................ 31

2.8.2.1 The Makran Coastal Region ........................................................... 31

2.8.2.2 The Makran Subduction Zone (MSZ).............................................. 32

2.9 TSUNAMI RISK .......................................................................................... 35

2.9.2 For The Exposure................................................................................... 36

2.9.3 Tsunami Vulnerability Assessment ........................................................ 36

2.9.4 Tsunami Risk Assessment ...................................................................... 36

2.10 SPECIFIC MEASURES FOR SAFETY FROM TSUNAMIS ....................... 36

2.10.2 Emergency Road Network Planning For Tsunami Mitigation ................. 37

2.10.3 Coastal Structures .................................................................................. 38

2.10.3.1 Detached breakwater ....................................................................... 38

2.10.3.2 Sea Wall and Off Shore Breakers .................................................... 38

2.10.3.3 Vegetation along the Coast ............................................................. 38

2.10.3.4 Tidal gate ........................................................................................ 39

2.11 VERTICAL EVACUATION STRUCTURE ................................................. 39

2.11.2 Siting Considerations For Vertical Evacuation Structure ........................ 40

2.11.2.1 Warning, Travel Time, and Spacing ................................................ 40

2.11.2.2 Ingress and Vertical Circulation ..................................................... 40

2.11.2.3 Consideration of Site Hazards ........................................................ 40

THESIS – VMP / Table of Contents vi| P age

2.11.4 Elevation Considerations........................................................................ 42

CHAPTER 3 DATA METHODOLOGY FOR NUMERICAL MODELING . 43

3.11.2 Boundary Conditions at Run-up Front .................................................... 56

3.11.3 Necessity of Continuation of Regions in Numerical Computation .......... 56

3.12 RUN-UP MODELING AND VERIFICATION ............................................ 56

3.13.2 Output files ............................................................................................ 60

3.14 TUNAMI- N2 MODEL ................................................................................ 61

THESIS – VMP / Table of Contents vii| P age

3.22 MODEL SIMULATION ............................................................................... 79

3.24 LINEAR REGRESSION OF LM14TT_76 MODEL ..................................... 80

CHAPTER 4 TSUNAMI DESIGN FORCES ........................................................ 81

4.1.2 Federal Emergency Management Agency Coastal Construction Manual

4.1.3 SEI/ASCE 7-02 (ASCE 7, 2002) ............................................................ 83

4.1.4 FEMA P646, 2008 ................................................................................. 83

4.2 TSUNAMI FORCES ON STRUCTURES .................................................... 83

4.3.2 FEMA 2000 : Coastal Construction Manual ........................................... 84

4.3.3 FEMA P646 – JUNE 2008 ..................................................................... 84