Reconstruction of a meteotsunami in Lake Erie on 27 May 2012: Roles of atmospheric conditions on hydrodynamic response in enclosed basins

Abstract

On 27 May 2012, atmospheric conditions gave rise to two convective systems that generated a series of waves in the meteotsunami band on Lake Erie. The resulting waves swept three swimmers a 0.5 mi offshore, inundated a marina, and may have led to a capsized boat along the southern shoreline. Analysis of radial velocities from a nearby radar tower in combination with coastal meteorological observation indicates that the convective systems produced a series of outflow bands that were the likely atmospheric cause of the meteotsunami. In order to explain the processes that led to meteotsunami generation, we model the hydrodynamic response to three meteorological forcing scenarios: (i) the reconstructed atmospheric disturbance from radar analysis, (ii) simulated conditions from a high‐resolution weather model, and (iii) interpolated meteorological conditions from the NOAA Great Lakes Coastal Forecasting System. The results reveal that the convective systems generated a series of waves incident to the southern shore of the lake that reflected toward the northern shoreline and reflected again to the southern shore, resulting in spatial wave focusing and edge wave formation that combined to impact recreational users near Cleveland, OH. This study illustrates the effects of meteotsunami development in an enclosed basin, including wave reflection, focusing, and edge wave formation as well as temporal lags between the causative atmospheric conditions and arrival of dangerous wave conditions. As a result, the ability to detect these extreme storms and predict the hydrodynamic response is crucial to reducing risk and building resilient coastal communities.

Modern Approaches in Meteotsunami Research and Early Warning

“…However, these water level data are not available in real time and may be used only for research purposes. Multihazard standard observatories, satellites mapping the spatial and temporal characteristics of tsunamigenic disturbances (Belušić and Strelec Mahović, 2009) and meteorological (Anderson et al, 2015) or high-frequency ocean radars (Lipa et al, 2014) for early detection of meteotsunami waves, may be other ways of collecting the data for real-time meteotsunami warning. Unfortunately, these observation systems are expensive, cannot cover all meteotsunami hot spots and their applicability for meteotsunami detection still needs to be quantified.…”

“…Such a system needs to become a part of the general tsunami warning system, or of a broader MHEWS system, once it has advanced to the operative level of providing reliable disaster warnings. The system could be supplemented with additional procedures, including radar or satellite detection of tsunamigenic atmospheric disturbances (Belušić and Strelec Mahović, 2009;Anderson et al, 2015) and hazardous long ocean waves (Lipa et al, 2014). The warning system should also be site-or regionspecific, as the phenomenon seems to have regionally dependant characteristics and on particular occasions can affect thousands of kilometres within a few days (Šepić et al, 2015a).…”

Meteotsunamis in the Laurentian Great Lakes

“…Meteotsunami waves, which typically have periods from 2 mins to 2 hours2, have caused disastrous effects to property and life along coasts worldwide due to their significant runup and strong associated currents345678. Even meteotsunamis with seemingly modest heights (~0.3 m) can produce dangerous currents910 that have created hazardous conditions for recreational users11. Episodic analysis of large events has revealed that meteotsunamis are mainly caused by atmospheric pressure and wind perturbations associated with frontal passages12, cyclones1314, atmospheric gravity waves15, and mesoscale convective systems1617, including derechos18.…”

“…Atmospheric energy is constantly fed into the wave if the propagation speed of the atmospheric disturbance is approximately equal to the local free wave speed, which is dependent upon water depth for open-ocean long waves19 and shelf slope for coastally trapped edge waves20. Heights of meteotsunami can further increase at the coast through local mechanisms such as shoaling, shelf resonance, reflection, and harbor resonance1121222324. Owing to the ubiquity of atmospheric disturbances in pressure and wind, meteotsunamis can add to risk posed by seismic tsunamis25 or present a threat to regions which are not traditionally recognized as under risk of seismic tsunamis26.…”

“…1 4111829303132 ( see supplemental Table S1 for a list of historic events ). The disastrous effects of meteotsunamis in the Great Lakes were most vividly demonstrated in 1954, when a three meter meteotsunami killed seven people in Chicago, IL, USA4.…”