Next Article in Journal
Projected 21st Century Sea-Level Changes, Observed Sea Level Extremes, and Sea Level Allowances for Norway
Previous Article in Journal
Integrating Long Tide Gauge Records with Projection Modelling Outputs. A Case Study: New York
Article

CaMEL and ADCIRC Storm Surge Models—A Comparative Study

1
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Tennessee State University, Nashville, TN 37209, USA
2
Institute of Marine Sciences, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Morehead City, NC 28557, USA
3
Seahorse Coastal Consulting, Morehead City, NC 28557, USA
4
Northrop Grumman Center for High Performance Computing, Jackson State University, Jackson, MS 39204, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2017, 5(3), 35; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse5030035
Received: 5 June 2017 / Revised: 28 July 2017 / Accepted: 28 July 2017 / Published: 9 August 2017
The Computation and Modeling Engineering Laboratory (CaMEL), an implicit solver-based storm surge model, has been extended for use on high performance computing platforms. An MPI (Message Passing Interface) based parallel version of CaMEL has been developed from the previously existing serial version. CaMEL uses hybrid finite element and finite volume techniques to solve shallow water conservation equations in either a Cartesian or a spherical coordinate system and includes hurricane-induced wind stress and pressure, bottom friction, the Coriolis effect, and tidal forcing. Both semi-implicit and fully-implicit time stepping formulations are available. Once the parallel implementation is properly validated, CaMEL is evaluated against ADCIRC, an established storm surge model, using a hindcast of storm surge due to Hurricane Katrina. Observed high water marks are used to verify that both models have comparable accuracy. The effects of time step on the stability and accuracy of the models are investigated and indicate that the semi- and fully-implicit solvers in CaMEL allow the use of larger timesteps than ADCIRC’s explicit and semi-implicit solvers. However, ADCIRC outperforms CaMEL in parallel scalability and execution wall clock times. Wall times of CaMEL improve significantly when the largest stable time step sizes are used in respective models, although ADCIRC still is faster. View Full-Text
Keywords: shallow water equation; storm surge; parallel model; hybrid finite volume and finite element method; implicit matrix-free solver; spherical coordinate system shallow water equation; storm surge; parallel model; hybrid finite volume and finite element method; implicit matrix-free solver; spherical coordinate system
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Akbar, M.K.; Luettich, R.A.; Fleming, J.G.; Aliabadi, S.K. CaMEL and ADCIRC Storm Surge Models—A Comparative Study. J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2017, 5, 35. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse5030035

AMA Style

Akbar MK, Luettich RA, Fleming JG, Aliabadi SK. CaMEL and ADCIRC Storm Surge Models—A Comparative Study. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering. 2017; 5(3):35. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse5030035

Chicago/Turabian Style

Akbar, Muhammad K., Richard A. Luettich, Jason G. Fleming, and Shahrouz K. Aliabadi 2017. "CaMEL and ADCIRC Storm Surge Models—A Comparative Study" Journal of Marine Science and Engineering 5, no. 3: 35. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse5030035

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop