Tsunami hazard and risk assessment for multiple buildings by considering the spatial correlation of wave height using copulas

Fukutani, Yo; Moriguchi, Shuji; Terada, Kenjiro; Kotani, Takuma; Otake, Yu; Kitano, Toshikazu

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-19-2619-2019

Articles | Volume 19, issue 11

https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-19-2619-2019

© Author(s) 2019. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-19-2619-2019

© Author(s) 2019. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Articles | Volume 19, issue 11

Research article

|

22 Nov 2019

Research article |

| 22 Nov 2019

Tsunami hazard and risk assessment for multiple buildings by considering the spatial correlation of wave height using copulas

Yo Fukutani, Shuji Moriguchi, Kenjiro Terada, Takuma Kotani, Yu Otake, and Toshikazu Kitano

Download

Final revised paper (published on 22 Nov 2019)
Preprint (discussion started on 27 May 2019)

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment

- Printer-friendly version

- Supplement

RC1: 'Review of the paper entitled "Tsunami risk assessment for multiple buildings by considering spatial correlation of wave height using copulas ", by Y. Fukutani et al.', Anonymous Referee #1, 26 Jun 2019
- AC1: 'Authors comments to the Anonymous Referee #1', Yo Fukutani, 16 Sep 2019
RC2: 'review of the paper by Fukutani et al.', Anonymous Referee #2, 09 Aug 2019
- AC2: 'Authors comments to the Anonymous Referee #2', Yo Fukutani, 16 Sep 2019

Peer-review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision

ED: Reconsider after major revisions (further review by editor and referees) (21 Sep 2019) by Ira Didenkulova

AR by Yo Fukutani on behalf of the Authors (21 Sep 2019) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (24 Sep 2019) by Ira Didenkulova

RR by Elena Suleimani (01 Oct 2019)

RR by Anonymous Referee #1 (11 Oct 2019)

Suggestions for revision or reasons for rejection

Review of revised paper by Fukutani et al. – Tsunami hazard and risk assessment for multiple buildings by spatial correlation of wave height using copulas

Dear Authors

I've read the revised version of the paper and the rebuttal letter, and I am happy to see that the paper is significantly improved on a number of points. Most of the review comments from the first version are adequately resolved. Just a remaining points should be fixed. Of these, there is only one major improvement point, and this major point is concerning the complex inundation field from inundation simulations, and its relation to the response surfaces used in this analysis. Given that these comments are adequately resolved, the paper could be suited for publication in NHESS. Remaining comments to be amended are listed below.

Major concern:

On the last part of page 3 and first part of page 4, the authors have included a new text concerning heterogeneous slip and other complicating factors that are not treated in their analysis. This addition is highly welcomed. However, the authors missed my most important point, which concerns the spatial inundation height and flow depth variability that would emerge from a real tsunami (e.g in from field observations), or estimated through numerical inundation simulations. As said in the previous review, these variations are suppressed in the present analysis, and this issue is still not fixed. In essence, it would not help to use heterogeneous slip if the inundation field is smoothed anyway by a response surface. So a remark on this simplification is still needed. It needs to be pointed out that there will be a spatial variability not incorporated by the response surface, and that this is a limitation of the analysis. The authors touches the subject, but this was not explicitly mentioned, and you feel that the implications of this concern was not fully understood. If the authors wish, they can consult for instance Glimsdal et al. (2019), which analysed the stochastic variability of onshore flow for various numerical simulations.

Minor comments

Page 2 – line 17: Thanks for providing this extra explanations. However, the sentence starting with "In this case…" is still not fully clear.

Page 3 – line 28: Add reference to Geist (2002)

Page 6 – The table provide only average slip values but not average areas. Please include these as well.

Page 7 – line 25: Please spell out what quantity your response surface represents.

Page 8 – line 5: Remove "the" before source 8

References:

Geist, E. L., Complex earthquake rupture and local tsunamis, J. Geophys. Res., 107( B5), doi:10.1029/2000JB000139, 2002.

Glimsdal, S., Løvholt, F., Harbitz, C. B., Romano, F., Lorito, S., Orefice, S., Brizuela, B., Selva, J., Hoechner, A., Volpe, M., Babeyko, A., Tonini, R., Wronna, M., and Omira R. (2019). A new approximate method for quantifying tsunami maximum inundation height probability. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 176(7), 3227-3246.

Hide

ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (review by editor) (14 Oct 2019) by Ira Didenkulova

AR by Yo Fukutani on behalf of the Authors (17 Oct 2019) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Publish subject to technical corrections (19 Oct 2019) by Ira Didenkulova

Dear Yo Fukutani, Shuji Moriguchi, Kenjiro Terada, Takuma Kotani, Yu Otake, and Toshikazu Kitano,

I am pleased to inform you that the revised version of your manuscript nhess-2019-139 can now be accepted for publication in our journal Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences (NHESS) pending technical corrections, which I outline further below. Please inform your co-authors of the editorial decision.

(1) The sentence on page 2, line 17 still remains unclear "In this case, ..." Please, re-phrase it.

(2) In-text citations. In general, you do a good job at citing appropriate in-text citations to support your facts, but please go through the paper from beginning to end (the text and the figure captions and table headers) to make sure that EVERY sentence it is clear where the facts/information are coming from. For example, Line 5, Page 2.

(3) For all figures, please ensure that they have some indication of scale either on the figure or in the figure caption. For example, in Figure 2a, 4, 5.

(4) Size of text in figures. Ensure that the minimum font size is legible in your figures. For example Figure 4b & 6 legend numbers--will these be legible once the figure is printed (would be an easy task now to enlarge the legend numbers). Figures 7, 12 the axis labels and numbers may be a bit small. The same for the Table 3 and the colorbar in Figure 5.

After submission of the technical corrections, you will be contacted by the journal publication office for the preparation of the final version of your manuscript. Please respond promptly to the requests of the publication office, as this will condition the time of your publication, and read carefully any copy-editing recommendations that they make. Let me remind you that final publication of your paper on the journal web site is subject to the payment of the appropriate service charges. Also, do not forget that as an open-access journal you can freely distribute your paper once it is published.

I take this opportunity to thank you and your co-authors for having selected Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences (NHESS) for the publication of your scientific work. I look forward to receiving further contributions to our journal from you and your co-authors.

Sincerely,
Ira Didenkulova
NHESS editor

Hide

AR by Yo Fukutani on behalf of the Authors (25 Oct 2019) Author's response Manuscript

Short summary

We demonstrate a method of tsunami risk assessment for two buildings using copulas of tsunami hazards that can consider the nonlinear spatial correlation of wave heights. As a result, the maximum value of the expected aggregate damage probability was approximately 3.0 % higher in the case considering the wave height correlation. We clearly showed the importance of considering wave height correlation and the usefulness of copula modeling in evaluating the tsunami risk of a building portfolio.