Top > JDR > Risk Evaluation of Drifting Ship by Tsunami

single-dr.php

JDR Vol.8 No.4 pp. 573-583
(2013)
doi: 10.20965/jdr.2013.p0573

Paper:

Views over last 60 days: 682

Risk Evaluation of Drifting Ship by Tsunami

Yusuke Suga*, Shunichi Koshimura**, and Ei-ichi Kobayashi***

*Miyagi Prefectural Government, Honcho 3-8-1, Aoba-ku, Sendai 980-8570, Japan

**International Research Institute of Disaster Science, Tohoku University, Aoba 6-6-03, Aramaki, Aoba-ku, Sendai 980-8579, Japan

***Graduate School of Maritime Sciences, Kobe University, 5-1-1 Fukae-minamimachi, Higashinada-ku, Kobe 658-0022, Japan

Received:
May 7, 2013
Accepted:
July 22, 2013
Published:
August 1, 2013
Creative Commons License
Keywords:
the 2011 Tohoku earthquake tsunami, ship drift, numerical modeling, tsunami risk evaluation
Abstract
Drifting ship due to tsunami inundation flow may cause additional damage in harbor area. Many drifting ships were found in the 2011 Great East Japan earthquake tsunami and these caused various problems (damage of ships themselves, striking other structures and obstacle for restoration). In this sense, it is very important for disaster prevention to predict the drifting motion of a large ship by tsunami current. This study aims to simulate the drifting motion of ships by the 2011 Tohoku earthquake tsunami in Kesennuma harbor, Miyagi Prefecture. First, we simulated the hydrodynamic features of the 2011 tsunami by numerical simulation. Secondly, we analyzed the drifting motion of large ships using the result of tsunami numerical simulation. In the analysis, several test cases were conducted by changing parameter and initial position of the ship. Then we verified the results of the ship drifting simulation by comparing with actual grounding position of ships. Throughout the comparisons and verifications, we found the grounding position by the simulation was generally consistent with actual position of ships. Although it is necessary to verify the drifting route of ships, the results suggest that this model is beneficial for future disaster prevention.
Cite this article as:
Y. Suga, S. Koshimura, and E. Kobayashi, “Risk Evaluation of Drifting Ship by Tsunami,” J. Disaster Res., Vol.8 No.4, pp. 573-583, 2013.
Data files:
References
  1. [1] B. H. Choi, S. J. Hong, D. Hwang, R. Hidayat, V. Kaistrenko, Yu. Korolev, A. Kukin, E. Pelinovsky, N. Polukhin, G. Prasetya, N. Razzhigaeva, D. Subandono, A. Yalciner, S. B. Yoon, and A. Zaitsev, “Data of Two Field Surveys and Numerical Simulation, Sumatra Tsunami on 26 December 2004, Asian and Pacific Coasts, Catastrophic Tsunami in the Indian Ocean (December 26, 2004),” pp. 159-187, 2005.
  2. [2] F. Imamura, T. Arikawa, T. Tomita, T.Yasuda, and Y. Kawata, “Field Investigation on the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami in the Southwestern Coast of Sri Lanka, Sumatra Tsunami on 26 December 2004, Asian and Pacific Coasts,” pp. 93-105, 2005.
  3. [3] E. Kobayashi, S. Koshimura, and M. Kubo, “A Basic Study on Ship Drifting by Tsunami,” Journal of the Kansai Society of Naval Architects, Vol.243, pp. 49-56, 2005 (in Japanese).
  4. [4] T. Hashimoto, S. Koshimura, E. Kobayashi, N. Fujii, and M. Takao, “Development of hazard map in waterfront area by ship drifting and grounding model in tsunami,” Journal of Japan Society of Civil Engineers, Ser. B2(Coastal Engineering), 66.1, pp. 236-240, 2010 (in Japanese).
  5. [5] C. Goto, Y. Ogawa, N. Shuto, and F. Imamura, “IUGG/IOC TIME Project, Numerical Method of Tsunami Simulation with the Leapfrog Scheme,” UNESCO, 126p., 1997.
  6. [6] F. Imamura, S. Koshimura, R. Oie, Y. Mabuchi, and Y.Murashima, “Tohoku University model (version 1.0)” (in Japanese),
    http://www.tsunami.civil.tohoku.ac.jp/hokusai3/J/events/tohoku2011/model/[accessed January 12, 2011]
  7. [7] Y. Okada, “Surface deformation due to shear and tensile faults in a half-space,” Bulletin of the seismological society of America, Vol.75, No.4, pp. 1135-1154, 1985.
  8. [8] N. Mori, T. Takahashi, and the 2011 Tohoku Earthquake Tsunami Joint Survey Group, “Nationwide post event survey and analysis of the 2011 Tohoku Earthquake Tsunami,” Coastal Engineering Journal, Vol.54, No.1, pp. 1250001-1, 2012, doi:10.1142/S0578563412500015
  9. [9] I. Aida, “Reliability of a tsunami source model derived from fault parameters,” Journal of Physics of the Earth, Vol.26, No.1, pp. 57-73, 1978.
  10. [10] A. C. Landsburg, “Design and Verification for Adequate Ship Maneuverability,” SNAME TRANS, Vol.91, pp. 351-401, 1983.
  11. [11] A. Ogawa, K. Hasegawa, and Y. Yoshimura, “Experimental verification and improvement of amathematical model of ship maneuvering,” Bulletin of the Society of Naval Architects of Japan, Vol.616, pp. 565-576, 1980 (in Japanese).
  12. [12] The Society of Naval Architects of Japan, Proceedings of the 2nd Symposium on Ship Maneuverability, 69p. 1970 (in Japanese).
  13. [13] The Japan Association of Marine Safety, “Guideline of Ultra-large ship Maneuvering,” 129p., 1975 (in Japanese).
  14. [14] E. Kobayashi, “The development of principal simulation system to evaluate ship maneuverability in shallow water,” Proceedings of the sixth international symposium on practical design of ship and mobile units (PRADS 95), pp. 712-723, 1995.
  15. [15] H. Matsutomi, “Method for estimating collision force of driftwood accompanying tsunami inundation flow,” Journal of Disaster Research, Vol.4, No.6, pp. 435-440, 2009.
  16. [16] G. S. Yeom, T. Nakamura, and N. Mizutani, “Collision analysis of container drifted by runup tsunami using drift collision coupled model,” Journal of Disaster Research, Vol.4, No.6, pp. 441-449, 2009.
  17. [17] R. B. Haehnel and S. F. Daly, “Maximum impact force of woody debris on floodplain structures,” Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, Vol.130, No.2, pp. 112-120, 2004.
  18. [18] American Association of State Highways and Transportation Officials, “LRFD Bridge Design Specifications,” Second edition, pp. 26-27, 1998.

Creative Commons License  This article is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internationa License.

*This site is desgined based on HTML5 and CSS3 for modern browsers, e.g. Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge, Opera.

Last updated on Apr. 19, 2024