# Performance Assessment of NAMI DANCE in Tsunami Evolution and Currents Using a Benchmark Problem

^{1}

^{2}

^{3}

^{4}

^{*}

## Abstract

**:**

## 1. Introduction

## 2. Materials and Methods

#### 2.1. The Numerical Model: NAMI DANCE

#### 2.2. The Benchmark Problem

## 3. Results

#### 3.1. Free Surface Elevation Time Series

#### 3.2. Velocity Time Series

#### 3.3. Performance Assessment of the Model

_{i}) represents the observed data and y

_{i}represents the predicted data.

## 4. Discussion

## 5. Conclusions

## Author Contributions

## Conflicts of Interest

## References

- Lynett, P.J.; Borrero, J.C.; Weiss, R.; Son, S.; Greer, D.; Renteria, W. Observations and modeling of tsunami-induced currents in ports and harbors. EPSL
**2012**, 327, 68–74. [Google Scholar] - Madsen, P.A.; Fuhrman, D.R.; Schaffer, H.A. On the solitary wave paradigm for tsunamis. J. Geophys. Res.
**2008**, 113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - NTHMP Mapping & Modeling Benchmarking Workshop: Tsunami Currents. Benchmark #5. Available online: http://coastal.usc.edu/currents_workshop/problems/prob5.html (accessed on 2 August 2016).
- Onat, Y.; Yalciner, A.C. Initial stage of database development for tsunami warning system along Turkish coasts. Ocean Eng.
**2013**, 74, 141–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Kian, R.; Yalciner, A.C.; Aytore, B.; Zaytsev, A. Wave Amplification and Resonance in Enclosed Basins; A Case Study in Haydarpasa Port of Istanbul. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE/OES Eleventh Current, Waves and Turbulence Measurement, St. Petersburg, VA, USA, 2–6 March 2015; Volume 11, pp. 1–7.
- Patel, V.M.; Dholakia, M.B.; Singh, A.P. Emergency preparedness in the case of Makran tsunami: A case study on tsunami risk visualization for the western parts of Gujarat, India. Geomat. Nat. Hazards Risk
**2016**, 7, 826–842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Yalciner, A.C.; Pelinovsky, E.; Zaytsev, A.; Kurkin, A.; Ozer, C.; Karakus, H.; Ozyurt, G. Modeling and visualization of tsunamis: Mediterranean examples. In Tsunami and Nonlinear Waves, 1st ed.; Kundu, A., Ed.; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2007; pp. 273–283. [Google Scholar]
- Synolakis, C.E.; Bernard, E.N.; Titov, V.; Kanoglu, U.; Gonzalez, F. Validation and verification of tsunami numerical models. PAGEOPH
**2008**, 165, 2197–2228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Yalciner, A.C.; Zaytsev, A.; Kanoglu, U.; Velioglu, D.; Dogan, G.G.; Kian, R.; Sharghivand, N.; Aytore, B. NTHMP Mapping and Modeling Benchmarking Workshop: Tsunami Currents. Available online: http://coastal.usc.edu/currents_workshop/presentations/Yalciner.pdf (accessed on 2 August 2016).
- Ozer, C.; Yalciner, A.C. Sensitivity study of hydrodynamic parameters during numerical simulations of tsunami inundation. PAGEOPH
**2011**, 168, 2083–2095. [Google Scholar] - Sozdinler, C.O.; Yalciner, A.C.; Zaytsev, A. Investigation of tsunami hydrodynamic parameters in inundation zones with different structural layouts. PAGEOPH
**2014**, 172, 931–952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Sozdinler, C.O.; Yalciner, A.C.; Zaytsev, A.; Suppasri, A.; Imamura, F. Investigation of hydrodynamic parameters and the effects of breakwaters during the 2011 Great East Japan Tsunami in Kamaishi Bay. PAGEOPH
**2015**, 172, 3473–3491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Velioglu, D.; Kian, R.; Yalciner, A.C.; Zaytsev, A. Validation and Performance Comparison of Numerical Codes for Tsunami Inundation. In Proceedings of the 2015 American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting, San Francisco, CA, USA, 14–18 December 2015.
- Velioglu, D.; Kian, R.; Yalciner, A.C.; Zaytsev, A. Validation and Comparison of 2D and 3D Codes for Nearshore Motion of Long Waves Using Benchmark Problems. In Proceedings of the 2016 European Geosciences Union, Vienna, Austria, 17–22 April 2016.
- Dilmen, D.I.; Kemec, S.; Yalciner, A.C.; Düzgün, S.; Zaytsev, A. Development of a tsunami inundation map in detecting tsunami risk in Gulf of Fethiye, Turkey. PAGEOPH
**2015**, 172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Heidarzadeh, M.; Krastel, S.; Yalciner, A.C. The state-of-the-art numerical tools for modeling landslide tsunamis: A short review. In Submarine Mass Movements and Their Consequences, 6th ed.; Sebastian, K., Jan-Hinrich, B., David, V., Michael, S., Christian, B., Roger, U., Jason, C., Katrin, H., Michael, S., Carl, B.H., Eds.; Springer: Bern, Switzerland, 2013; Volume 37, pp. 483–495. [Google Scholar]
- Yalciner, A.C.; Gülkan, P.; Dilmen, D. I.; Aytore, B.; Ayca, A.; Insel, I.; Zaytsev, A. Evaluation of tsunami scenarios for western Peloponnese, Greece. Boll. Geofis. Teor. Appl.
**2014**, 55, 485–500. [Google Scholar] - Zahibo, N.; Pelinovsky, E.; Kurkin, A.; Kozelkov, A. Estimation of far-field tsunami potential for the Caribbean Coast based on numerical simulation. Sci. Tsunami Hazards
**2003**, 21, 202–222. [Google Scholar] - Swigler, D.T. Laboratory Study Investigating the Three-dimensıonal Turbulence and Kinematic Properties Associated with a Breaking Solitary Wave. Master’s Thesis, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA, August 2009. [Google Scholar]
- National Tsunami Hazard Mitigation Program. Proceedings and Results of the 2011 NTHMP Model Benchmarking Workshop. Available online: http://nws.weather.gov/nthmp/documents/nthmpWorkshopProcMerged.pdf (accessed on 21 July 2016).

**Figure 3.**Comparison of free surface elevation (FSE) results: (

**a**) X = 7.5 m and Y = 0.0 m at Gage 1; (

**b**) X = 13.0 m and Y = 0.0 m at Gage 2; (

**c**) X = 21.0 m and Y = 0.0 m at Gage 3; (

**d**) X = 7.5 m and Y = 5.0 m at Gage 4; (

**e**) X = 13.0 m and Y = 5.0 m at Gage 5; (

**f**) X = 21.0 m and Y = 5.0 m at Gage 6; (

**g**) X = 25.0 m and Y = 0.0 m at Gage 7; (

**h**) X = 25.0 m and Y = 5.0 m at Gage 8. Black line represents benchmark data, red line represents numerical results.

**Figure 4.**Comparison of results: (

**a**) horizontal velocity in x-direction, U, recorded at X = 13.0 m, Y = 0.0 m and Z = 0.75 m at Gage 2; (

**b**) horizontal velocity in y-direction, V, recorded at X = 13.0 m, Y = 0.0 m and Z = 0.75 m at Gage 2; (

**c)**horizontal velocity in x-direction, U, recorded at X = 21.0 m, Y = −5.0 m and Z = 0.77 m at Gage 9; (

**d**) horizontal velocity in y-direction, V, recorded at X = 21.0 m, Y = −5.0 m and Z = 0.77 m at Gage 9. Black line represents benchmark data, red line represents numerical results.

**Table 1.**Error statistics of numerical results for free surface elevation time series recorded at each gage.

Free Surface Elevation (FSE) | % NRMSE | % MAX |
---|---|---|

Gage 1 | 0.60 | 0.02 |

Gage 2 | 7.30 | 19.30 |

Gage 3 | 15.00 | 17.60 |

Gage 4 | 2.60 | 2.60 |

Gage 5 | 7.20 | 18.80 |

Gage 6 | 8.70 | 8.20 |

Gage 7 | 4.50 | 7.30 |

Gage 8 | 5.00 | 6.80 |

**Table 2.**Error statistics of numerical results for horizontal velocity time series recorded at each gage.

Horizontal Velocity | % NRMSE | % MAX |
---|---|---|

Gage 2, U | 8.25 | 18.90 |

Gage 2, V | 16.00 | 27.90 |

Gage 9, U | 10.75 | 15.00 |

Gage 9, V | 16.00 | 28.60 |

© 2016 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

## Share and Cite

**MDPI and ACS Style**

Velioglu, D.; Kian, R.; Yalciner, A.C.; Zaytsev, A.
Performance Assessment of NAMI DANCE in Tsunami Evolution and Currents Using a Benchmark Problem. *J. Mar. Sci. Eng.* **2016**, *4*, 49.
https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse4030049

**AMA Style**

Velioglu D, Kian R, Yalciner AC, Zaytsev A.
Performance Assessment of NAMI DANCE in Tsunami Evolution and Currents Using a Benchmark Problem. *Journal of Marine Science and Engineering*. 2016; 4(3):49.
https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse4030049

**Chicago/Turabian Style**

Velioglu, Deniz, Rozita Kian, Ahmet Cevdet Yalciner, and Andrey Zaytsev.
2016. "Performance Assessment of NAMI DANCE in Tsunami Evolution and Currents Using a Benchmark Problem" *Journal of Marine Science and Engineering* 4, no. 3: 49.
https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse4030049