Proposed Tsunami Network Systems
as of
11/04/05
Our class has discussed the possible tsunami network
systems that will make warning and evacuation, in the case of a tsunami
most efficient.
One of the possible tsunami network systems that were discussed, Network System A is summarized in
the flow diagram below.
<Insert diagram>
Another possible network, Network
System B is explained in the following flow diagram.
<Insert diagram>
The advantages and disadvantages of the differences in these proposed
network systems still need to be analyzed.
1.
In the event of a tsunami, in other words, when the
DART II system triggers event mode, a
critical difference exists between the operation of the first
network system A and the second network system B.
Network system A, consists
of the buoy sending data to the warning centers to have scientists
analyze and verify that this data is reliable and that a tsunami will
definitely occur near a certain area. The advantage to this system is
that it will in the least significantly minimize, if not eliminate the
possibility of
a false alarm, which if occurs could diminish the effectiveness of the
entire warning system.
On the other hand, network system B, consists of the buoy
not only sending data to the warning centers immediately after a
tsunami is detected, but to simultaneously trigger a warning of the possibility of a tsunami. Once it
is triggered a warning of the possibility of a tsuami will be issued to
the community through the tsunami warning system, which includes but is
not limited to: sirens and radios. In order to prevent the attitude
towards a false alarm, the ring of the siren, the message on the radio
and other communication systems will only warn people that there is a possibility of a tsunami hitting
their area. Thus it will be a lower level of warning than if it is verified that a tsunami will
hit. Since the buoy's data still goes to the warning center, the
existence of a tsunami can be verified, and thus the level of the
warning is increased. The advantage to this system is that all
operations will have more time, (a minimum of 5 more minutes) to
prepare in the case that it is a real tsunami. The disadvantage to this
system is that if the lower level of warning is frequent, or too
frequent, the regard for the warning could be taken lightly by the
people and thus decrease the efficiency and purpose of the warning
system. We must still answer if it is possible to have this extra time
without creating this apathy towards the warning system.
Another problem with these network systems consists involves the
communication of a tsunami warning to the governments of Peru,
Micronesia and other nearby countries. If there was a law in place that
guaranteed the tsunami warning center to issue a warning directly to
the people in the case a tsunami was detected, with not much but
notifying government simultaneously, then the network system will be
much more time efficient. Of course, this idea still needs to be
modified in a way that would be acceptable to the governments of Peru
and Micronesia.
3.
All these network systems assume that if an earthquake caused a
tsunami, the magnitude and location of the earthquake would be sent
immediately to tsunami warning centers.
Link
to your Annotated Bibliography
Sources
quoted directly
Photo
Credits
Graphic
for banner on this page from http://www.noaa.gov/tsunamis.html
Page
last updated by your-username at 10/31/2005 2:43:16 PM
Timestamp
