Indexed in

Scopus Compendex and Geobase Elsevier, Chemical

Abstract Services-USA, Geo-Ref Information Services-USA,
List B of Scientific Journals, Poland,
Directory of Research Journals
www.cafetinnova.org October 2014, P.P. 1135-1145
ISSN 0974-5904, Volume 07, No. 05

Coastal Vulnerability Assessment for Northern Tamil Nadu Coast

using open source numerical software - DELFT 3D
PRADEEP. C, VIGNESHWARAN. S and THIRUMALAIVASAN. D
Institute of Remote Sensing, Anna University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
Email: pradeepfr07@gmail.com

Abstract: Coastal region of the Tamil Nadu State in the southern part of the Indian peninsula are potentially
vulnerable to multiple hazards. The present study therefore is an attempt to develop a coastal vulnerability index
(CVI) for the Northern coast or the Coramandal coast of Tamil Nadu using nine relative risk variables. Most of these
parameters are dynamic in nature and require a large amount of data from various sources viz., data from satellite
imageries; in situ measurements and from numerical models. Zones of vulnerability to coastal natural hazards of
different magnitude (high, medium, and low) are identified and shown on a map. In the present study in addition to
coastal regional elevation, bathymetry, shoreline change rate, geomorphology, tidal range, sea level rise, mean wave
height; tsunami run-up and extreme storm surges have been considered as additional risk parameters to calculate the
CVI. Delft 3D numerical model is used to generate the storm surge for the 50-year return period cyclones. The map
prepared for the Northern Tamil Nadu coast under this study can be used by the state and district administration
involved in the disaster mitigation and management plan.
Keywords: Coastal vulnerability index, Storm surge, Delft 3D, numerical model, Tamil Nadu

1. Introduction: is not possible, preparedness plans and mitigation

measures can certainly reduce the impact. Classification
The coastal zones all over the world generally remain
of coastal lands for the hazard vulnerability is required
dynamic due to the various geomorphic processes.
since the rapidly growing coastal population demands
Human activities also induce certain changes or
information regarding the vulnerability of the region.
accelerate the transformation. The regions are under
The risk reduction plans for the coastal region should be
constant and increasing stress due to development of
compatible for multiple hazards, rather than being
industries, trade, and tourism and population growth.
specific to tsunami or cyclones. The Vulnerability
These caused coastal regions to face many related
assessment takes into account several factors that drive
environmental problems. Further, the coastal zones
changes in the coastal zone. The factors combined and
remain vulnerably exposed to various natural disasters
quantified determine the vulnerability of the region.
viz: tsunamis, storm surges, cyclones, floods in addition
Before, during, and after such hazard events officials
to accelerated Sea Level Rise (SLR) and erosion.
need accurate maps and information to make informed
During the 20th century, tide gauge data show that the
decisions. Geographic information systems (GIS) and
global sea level rose by an average of 1.7 mm/year
maps have facilitated in identifying and analysis of the
(IPCC, 2007). Nearly 7 million people could be
danger or hazard zones. Assessment of coastal
displaced by a 1-m rise in sea-level in India (IPCC,
vulnerability is done mostly on the basis of constructing
2001). The increase in sea surface temperature,
and combining the vulnerability indices. They aid in
accelerated sea level rise could increase the intensity
identifying the vulnerable regions, set the framework for
and frequency of cyclones (Unnikrishnan et al., 2006),
evaluating specific measures, and thus form an early
which in turn will add to increased flooding, coastal
part of the decision process, as well as helping to
erosion and shoreline retreat (Pye and Blott, 2006).
monitor over a longer term.
Annually, about 120 million people are exposed to
One of the pioneers to develop a coastal vulnerability
tropical cyclone hazards. These killed 250,000 people
index particularly for sea-level rise was developed by
between 1980 and 2000 (Nicholls et.al 2007). After the
Gornitz (1991) for the east coast of United States.
December 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, studies on
Gornitz et al. (1994) have used Coastal Vulnerability
natural hazards and coastal processes along the Indian
Index (CVI) numerical method by combined six
coast have gained momentum. Natural disasters have
physical contributors including historical erosion rates,
always been a serious threat to the life and property all
static inundation, sea level rise and sediment dynamics
over the world. Though prevention of natural disasters

#SPL02070550 Copyright ©2014 CAFET-INNOVA TECHNICAL SOCIETY. All rights reserved

 Coastal Vulnerability Assessment for Northern Tamil Nadu Coast using open source
numerical software - DELFT 3D
to assess the coastal vulnerability due to the effect of sea
level rise. Coastal slope, geomorphology, relative sea-
level rise rate, shoreline change rate, mean tidal range
and mean wave height were the main parameters used
by Thieler and Hammer-Klose (1999) for assessment of
coastal vulnerability of the US Atlantic coast. The result
showed that 26% is of very high vulnerability, 22% is of
high vulnerability, 24% of the coast is of moderate
vulnerability, and 28% of the U.S. Atlantic coast is of
low vulnerability. The CVI developed by the United
States Geological Survey (Gornitz and Kanciruk 1989,
Gornitz 1991, Thieler and Hammer-Klose 2000) is
based on the geomorphology, coastal slope, relative sea-
level rise, shoreline erosion/accretion, mean tidal range
and mean wave height. Bryan et al. (2001) used GIS to
determine vulnerability due to inundation and erosion
along the portion of the South Australian coast. Belperio
et al. (2001) considered exposure, elevation, aspect, and
slope for assessing the coastal vulnerability to sea-level
rise. To classify building vulnerability a new tsunami
vulnerability assessment method was applied Dominey-
Howes and Papathoma (2003) by taking the worse case
of the tsunami scenario, for two coastal villages in the
Gulf of Corinth, Greece. Pendleton, et al. (2005)
assessed the coastal vulnerability of Golden Gate
National Recreation area to sea level rise by calculating
a CVI.
In the Indian context Dinesh Kumar (2006) using sea
level rise, erosion, inundation study, potential
vulnerability implications of climate-induced sea level
rise for the coastal zone of Cochin, southwest coast of
India. Data from shoreline displacement, tide, waves
and elevation were used to investigate the hazard line
along Indian coast Rajawat et al. (2006). For the Udupi
coastal zone of Karnataka, Dwarakish et al. (2009)
calculated CVI using the physical parameters like shore-
line change rate, sea-level change rate, coastal slope,
mean tidal range, coastal geomorphology. Srinivasa
Kumar et al. (2010) assessed the CVI for the Orissa,
India coast using the physical parameters and also
included tsunami run-up. The multi-hazard vulnerability
along the coast of Cuddalore Villupuram was assessed
by Mahendra et al. (2011) by incorporating probability
of maximum storm surge height during the return
period, with the other the physical parameters . Kumar
et al. (2012) did a vulnerability assessment using geo-
spatial technologies for the Chennai coast.
In majority of the studies the CVI is expressed as the
square root of the product of the ranking factors divided
by the number of parameters considered (Thieler and
Hammar-Klose, 2000). However, Hegde and Reju
(2007) have used the sum of the value of each variable
such as geomorphology, regional coastal slope,
shoreline change rates, and population divided by
number of variables to develop CVI for Mangalore,
International Journal of Earth Sciences and Engineering
ISSN 0974-5904, Vol.07, No.05, October, 2014, pp.1135-1145
West coast of India. Nageswara Rao et al. (2008)
calculated CVI arising from sea-level rise by taking the
summation of the variables considered with the ranks of
each multiplied by their corresponding weights for
Andhra Pradesh coast. The major limitation in case of
most vulnerability assessments is that the weightage are
on the physical characteristics of vulnerability with little
inclusion of socio-economic aspects. Disasters do not
become catastrophes until lives are affected and hence
the addition of socioeconomic data is essential for
overall understanding of the vulnerability of a region.
Hughes and Brundrit (1992) used location,
infrastructure (economic value) and hazard as variables
for assessing vulnerability of the South African coast.
Yamada et al (1995) developed a sustainable capacity
index (SCI) for South Pacific coast by analyzing
vulnerability and resilience of natural, cultural,
institutional, infrastructural, economic and human
factors. The overall Coastal Social Vulnerability score
(CSoVI) by Boruff et al. (2005) considered socio-
economic variables for the coast of USA. Willroth et al.
(2012) studied the socio-economic vulnerability of
coastal communities in southern Thailand and also
discussed that social networks played a crucial role in
coping with the disaster. One of the major hurdles in
inclusion of the socio-economic data of the region is the
lack of proper database. The result of this analysis
includes identification of vulnerable units based on
geological-physical parameters; demarcation of the
priority regions to include the socioeconomic
parameters can be later in order to aid in regional
assessment and to provide suitable information for
planning preventive measures. The present research
study was taken up to evaluate the CVI of the Northern
Tamil Nadu coastal regions in the context of storm
surge hazard using vulnerability parameters such as
shoreline change rate, sea level change rate, significant
wave height, coastal slope, Tidal range, coastal regional
elevation, coastal geomorphology, tsunami run up,
maximum storm surge height during the return period
and the CVI is calculated by the method followed by
Thieler and Hammar-Klose (2000).
2. Study area:
Tamil Nadu state located in the Southern coast of India
is a maritime state with immense potential in natural
covers an area of 136,058 sq. km and has a total
population of 62.11 million as per the 2001 census. The
present study area is the Northern coast of Tamil Nadu
covering six coastal districts, viz., Thiruvallur, Chennai,
Kancheepuram, Villupuram, Cuddalore and
Nagapattinam spanning a coastline of 376.8 km (Figure
1). Ecologically important coastal area identified in the
 1137 PRADEEP. C, VIGNESHWARAN. S and THIRUMALAIVASAN. D

study area is the brackish water lagoon, the Puilcat total number of variables. The method of computing the
Lake; extensive mangrove forest and wetland, the CVI in the present study is similar to that used by
Pichavarm, Vedaranyam and Muthupettai (Figure 1). Thieler and Hammer-Klose (1999), in addition to the six
The coast is also vulnerable to multiple disasters such as parameters the present study uses an additional process
tropical cyclones, storm surges, and tsunamis. The risk variable i.e., coastal regional elevation, tsunami run-up
to the coastal population to such hazards has increased and maximum storm surge height during the 50-year
many folds with the growing population. A total of 87 return period. This method uses a rating system that
storms crossed the Tamil Nadu state coast during 1891- classifies the coastal area based on degree of
2012. Out of which 88.89% crossed the Northern Tamil vulnerability as low, medium, and high according to the
Nadu coast (Pradeep et al., 2014). Erosion has now CVI value of that area. The nine relative risk variables
become a more recurrent phenomenon. Identification of used are shoreline change rate, sea-level change rate,
vulnerable areas and effective risk mapping and coastal slope, mean significant wave height, mean tidal
assessment is the certainly required to minimize the range, coastal regional elevation, coastal
damage. geomorphology, tsunami run up and storm surge
height. Most of these parameters are dynamic in nature
that has to be acquired from different sources (Table 1).
They are derived from remote sensing, GIS, and
numerical model data. The importance of each of the
considered parameters and the procedure to generate the
same for use in assessment of CVI are given in the
following section.
Table 1: Data used for the study on coastal hazard
Period/
Parameter Data Used Resolution
Details
LANDSAT
30m 1988
Shore-line TM
change rate LANDSAT
15m 2014
8
Third Assessment Report of
Sea level
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
change rate
Change (Church et al., 2001)
Significant
Sanil Kumar et al., (2006)
wave height
Nautical charts published by the
Tidal Range National Hydrographic Office
(NHO), Dehradun, India
GEBCO 900m
Coastal slope NA
data (approx)
Coastal
regional SRTM data 90m NA
elevation
Figure 1: Study area Coastal
LANDSAT
geomorpholo 15m 2014
3. Methodology: 8
gy
The CVI allows the variables to be related in a Tsunami run
Field survey (Ilangovan et al. (2005)
quantifiable manner that expresses the relative up
vulnerability of the coast to physical changes occurring Delft 3D 50 yr
along the coast. This method yields numerical data that Storm surge Numerical 900 m return
cannot be equated directly with particular physical model period
effects. It does, however, highlight areas with respect to
the particular hazard may be the greatest. Each section 3.1. Shoreline Change Rate:
of the coastline is assigned a risk rate for each specific
data variable. The CVI is calculated as the square root Near-shore circulation, sediment characteristics, beach
of the product of the ranked variables divided by the form are dependent on the wave characteristics along

International Journal of Earth Sciences and Engineering

ISSN 0974-5904, Vol.07, No.05, October, 2014, pp.1135-1145
 Coastal Vulnerability Assessment for Northern Tamil Nadu Coast using open source
numerical software - DELFT 3D
the shoreline. These are the major coastal processes
which make the coastal shorelines to change over a
period of time. From the coastal vulnerability point of
view, coastal erosion will be considered as more
vulnerable because of the resultant loss of beaches,
dunes, and marshes; whereas areas of accretion will be
considered as less vulnerable areas as the coast move
towards the ocean. Erosion reduces the distance
between coastal population and ocean, thereby
increasing the risk to coastal hazards. Landsat TM and
Landsat 8 images covering the Northern Tamil Nadu
coastline for the years 1988 and 2014 were downloaded
from USGS Earth Explorer website
(http://earthexplorer.usgs.gov/). The data have been
projected to the Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM)
projection system with WGS-84 datum. Using the on-
screen point mode in ArcMap 10 software the shoreline
was used to digitized. The near infrared band that is
most suitable for the demarcation of the land water
boundary has been used to extract the shoreline. Digital
Shoreline Analysis System (DSAS) downloaded from
USGS site (Thieler, E.R et al., 2009) was used to
calculate the rate of shoreline change. The vector format
of the shoreline for the years 1988 and 2014 were used
as the input. The rate of shoreline change is calculated
for the entire study area, and risk ratings are assigned.
3.2. Sea-Level Change Rate:
The height of the sea averaged over a period of time,
long enough that fluctuations caused by waves and tides
are largely removed is called as the Mean sea level
(MSL) at the coast. The MSL is with respect to a local
land benchmark. A relative sea-level change is the
changes in MSL as measured by tide gauges (Church et
al., 2001). The serious impact upon the natural
environment and socio-economic conditions in the
coastal zone due to the raise of Sea-level is the
permanent inundation of coastal areas. It can accelerate
the coastal erosion since more land is submerged under
the sea. It also aids in storm and tsunami waves to
penetrate deep into the land. Coasts subjected to a high
rate of sea-level rise are considered as a high vulnerable
area and vice versa. For the present study, mean relative
sea-level data reported in the Third Assessment Report
of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
(Church et al., 2001) is utilized and risk rating is
assigned to study area.
3.3. Significant Wave Height:
The wind parameters are responsible for generating the
heights of the waves (Ashok Kumar, Raju and Sanil
Kumar, 2005). Wave height is the average height
(trough to crest) of the one-third highest waves valid for
the indicated 12-hour period. Wave heights are used to
demarcate the vulnerability line all along the coast.
Mean significant wave height is used here as a
International Journal of Earth Sciences and Engineering
ISSN 0974-5904, Vol.07, No.05, October, 2014, pp.1135-1145
substitute for wave energy, which drives coastal
sediment transport. Wave energy increases as the square
of the wave height; thus the ability to mobilize and
transport beach/coastal materials is a function of wave
height (USGS, 2001).Those coastal areas of high wave
height are considered as more vulnerable coasts and
vice versa. For the present study, wave height data
reported by Sanil Kumar et al., (2006) is utilized and
risk rating is assigned to study area.
3.4. Tidal Range:
Tidal range is defined as the vertical difference (in
meters) between the highest high tide and the lowest
low tide. Tides are the rise and fall of sea levels forced
by the combined effects of the gravitational forces
exerted by the Moon and the Sun and the rotation of the
Earth. Tides are periodic and highly predictable. In the
current study, tide data from nautical charts published
by the National Hydrographic Office (NHO), Dehradun,
India is taken as the base data and risk rates are
assigned.
3.5. Coastal Slope:
The ratio of the altitude change to the horizontal
distance between any two points on the coast is called as
coastal slope. A coastal region with a higher slope value
indicates a steeper slope and vice versa. Coastal
flooding i.e. inundation of the region is depended on the
slope. Coastal slope feature is a significant factor in
deciding the degree to which coastal land is at risk of
flooding from tsunami and storm surges. Gentle land
slope allows the seawater to penetrate to a greater extent
while coastal locations having steep slope do not allow
inundation (Klein, Reese, and Sterr, 2000). Thus coastal
areas having steep slope were considered as low
vulnerable areas and areas of gentle slope as areas of
high vulnerability. General Bathymetric Chart of the
Oceans (GEBCO) data of approximately 900m grid
resolution coastal topography and bathymetry has been
used to get the slope of the coastal area. The slope
values in degrees are calculated and risk ratings are
assigned.
3.6. Coastal Regional Elevation:
Regional elevation is referred to as the average
elevation of a particular area above mean sea level. To
estimate the extent of land area threatened by coastal
flooding coastal regional elevation detail is vital.
Coastal regions having high elevation will more
resistance for inundation against the rising sea level,
tsunami run-up, and storm surge. Thus from the
vulnerability point of view, coastal regions having low
elevation will be considered as high vulnerable areas. In
the present study, Shuttle Radar Topography Mission
(SRTM) 90-m resolution data are used to derive the
 1139 PRADEEP. C, VIGNESHWARAN. S and THIRUMALAIVASAN. D
coastal regional elevation. The risk rates are assigned to
the entire coastline based on the elevation values.
3.7. Coastal Geomorphology:
The geomorphology variable expresses the relative
erodibility of different landform types. Basic
understanding of the coastal environment can be
understood upon studying the coastal geomorphology.
Rising sea level will bring about the redistribution of
coastal landforms comprising sub tidal bed forms,
intertidal flats, salt marshes, shingle banks, sand dunes,
cliffs, and coastal lowlands (Pethick and Crooks, 2000).
The coastal geomorphic classes were extracted based on
the visual interpretation keys using the on-screen
digitization technique. Landsat 8 satellite image dated
18-04-2014 have been used to extract the coastal
geomorphology. The satellite data were geo-corrected
using the reference image and projected to the UTM
projection system. The coastline geomorphology has
been classified based on the dominant geomorphic class.
Further, these geomorphic classes were assigned the risk
rating as high vulnerable (barrier beaches, sandy
beaches, deltas, mangroves, mud flats, estuary, lagoon,
back water), medium vulnerable (low cliffs, beach
ridges, beach vegetation), and low vulnerable (cliffs,
uplands, rocky coasts and inundated coasts).
3.8. Tsunami Arrival Height:
Tsunamis result in generation of waves of different
periods and height triggered by underwater earthquake
or landslide. These wave parameters depend on
earthquake parameters, bathymetry, beach profile,
coastal land topography. The December 26th 2004,
Indian Ocean tsunami was one of the deadliest natural
disasters in modern times. Many countries bordering the
Indian Ocean were severely affected. In India, Tamil
Nadu coast had the highest number of fatalities. In
Tamil Nadu 7,965 people lost their lives (Sheth et al.
2006). In the current study, the 2004 Indian Ocean
tsunami with a magnitude of 9.1 9.3 earthquake in the
Sunda Arc (Stein and Okal 2005; Lay et al. 2005) zone
has been considered to cause the worst-case tsunami
scenario for the Northern Tamil Nadu coast. Based on
the run-up reported in Ilangovan et al. (2005) along the
entire study area, the risk ratings are assigned. Field
survey was carried out from January 15 to February 7,
2005, by the National Institute of Oceanography (NIO)
along the Northern Tamil Nadu coast (Vedaranyam to
Pulicat). The survey was based on the UNESCO IOC
(1998) guidelines; run-up heights normalized to the
Indian Chart datum of the tsunami were measured.
3.9. Extreme storm surges and return periods:
Tropical cyclones accompanied by storm surges cause
threat to coastal communities. They turn into severe
hazards or disasters when they strike densely populated
International Journal of Earth Sciences and Engineering
ISSN 0974-5904, Vol.07, No.05, October, 2014, pp.1135-1145
coastal areas. Storm surge is accountable for 90% of the
threat (NDMG, 2008). The storm surge height depends
on the near shore coastal bathymetry, the pressure
pressure, wind speed (Murty et al., 1986 and Siddiqui
Z.A., 2009). Storm surges have claimed high number of
lives along the East coast of India (Pradeep et al., 2014).
If these storm surges could be forecasted well in
advance, loss of several lives could be reduced. Das P.K
(1972) first developed a Numerical storm surge
modeling for the Bay of Bengal region. Later several
studies were attempted to forecast storm surges which
have been broadly reviewed by (Murty et al., 1986). In
the present study DELFT 3D FLOW an open source
hydrodynamic model, a widely used to model storm
surges (Vatvani D.K., et al., 2002, Vatvani D.K., et al
2012, Nguyen Tho Sao, 2008, Riyaz Khan N.H et al.,
2014) is adopted for the simulation. GEBCO
bathymetric data, synthesized cyclone tracks and
statistical projections for 50 year return period cyclone
for Tamil Nadu coast are obtained from are Indu Jain et.
al., (2010) were used as input in the model. The storm
surge depends upon the intensity, pressure drop, angle
to the coast of the cyclone. The risks along the coast can
be accessed from obtained from extreme storm surges.
Based on the run-up estimated along the entire study
area, the risk ratings are assigned.
4.0. RESULTS:
4.1. Calculation of CVI:
The CVI is a mathematical formula that relates the
different types of data to each other to calculate an
index value. This method yields numerical data that
cannot be directly equated with particular physical
effects. Each of the nine input relative risk variables are
assigned appropriate risk classes 1, 2, and 3 based on its
ability to cause low, medium and high damage,
respectively, for the coastline. The risk rating assigned
for each variable is given in Table 2. Once each section
of coastline is assigned a risk value based on each
specific data variable, the coastal vulnerability index is
calculated as the square root of the geometric mean, or
the square root of the product of the ranked variables
divided by the total number of variables as
CVI (a * b * c * d * e * f * g * h * i ) / 9 (1)
Where,
a = risk rating assigned to shoreline-change rate
b = risk rating assigned to sea-level change rate
c = risk rating assigned to significant wave height
d = risk rating assigned to tidal range
e = risk rating assigned to coastal slope
f = risk rating assigned to coastal regional elevation
g = risk rating assigned to coastal geomorphology
h = risk rating assigned to tsunami run-up
i = risk rating assigned to extreme storm surges.
 Coastal Vulnerability Assessment for Northern Tamil Nadu Coast using open source
numerical software - DELFT 3D

of IPCC (Church et al., 2001) the sea-level rise estimate

The CVI values thus generated for different segments of
in the north Indian Ocean lie closer to 2.0 mm/yr. This
the coastline are categorized into three CVI classes, viz.,
estimate for the north Indian Ocean is consistent with
low, medium and high vulnerable corresponding to <
other findings. Douglas (2001) found a global mean of
25th percentile, 25th 50th percentile, and > 50th
about 1.8 mm/yr for the past 70 years. Holgate and
percentile, respectively.
Woodworth (2004) give a rate of 1.7 ± 0.4 mm/yr for
4.1.1. Shoreline Change Rate: the sea-level rise for 1948 2002 (Figure 2B).
The present study revealed that about 101 km of
coastline has a high risk rating, recording erosion rates
more than 1 m/y. Coastal stretches north of Chennai and
Ennore port, Cuddalore, north of Parangipettai,
Poompuhar and south of Nagapattinam are subject to
high erosion. About 217 km of coastline has a medium
risk rating with erosion and acceration rates less than 1
m/y. About 58 km of coastline that recorded accretion
along the coastal stretches between Velankanni and
Vedaranyam, Parangipettai and in Marina Beach has a
low risk rating (Figure 2A)
Table 2: Risk rating assigned for different parameters.
MEDIUM HIGH
VARIABLE LOW (1) (2) (3)
-
Shore-line >1 1(erosion)
> -1
change rate (accretio -
(erosion)
(m/y) n) 1(accretion
)
Sea level
change rate
2
(mm/y)
Significant
wave height 0.2 - 2.1
(m) Figure 2 (A-C): Risk classes for shoreline change rate,
Tidal Range sea level change rate and mean wave height.
<2
(m)
Coastal slope 4.1.3. Significant Wave Height:
>1 0.2 - 1
(degrees) Wave height range reported by Sanil Kumar et al.,
Coastal (2006) during the month of December for Nagore is 0.2
regional >6 3-6 0-3 - 2.0, and for Pillaipermalnalur and Port Nova (June) is
elevation (m) 0.2- 2.1. These mean significant wave height is
Sandy considered for the whole coast. The entire coastline is in
Inundate beaches, the medium vulnerability class (Figure 2C).
Coastal Vegetated
d coasts, deltas,
geomorpholog coasts, low 4.1.4. Tidal Range:
cliffs, mangrove
y cliffs
dunes s, mud Tidal range is ranked such that macro tidal (tide range
flats >4 m) coasts are at low risk and micro tidal (tide range
Tsunami run <2.0 m) coasts are at high risk and. The primary reason
<1 1-2 >2
up (m) is that storm surge impact is relative to the tide range.
Storm surge For a macro tidal region a storm having a 3 m surge
<1 1-2 >2 height is still up to 1 m below the elevation of high tide
(m)
for half a tidal cycle. A micro tidal coastline, on the
4.1.2. Sea-Level Change Rate: tide and
therefore always at the greatest risk of inundation from
The present study revealed that the coastline has a high storms. Since on a tidal coastline, there is only 50%
risk rating. As per the Third Assessment Report (TAR) chance of a storm occurring at high tide. Tidal range is

International Journal of Earth Sciences and Engineering

ISSN 0974-5904, Vol.07, No.05, October, 2014, pp.1135-1145
 1141 PRADEEP. C, VIGNESHWARAN. S and THIRUMALAIVASAN. D
obtained from the nautical charts for Pulicat,
Nagapattinam and Cuddalore is 0.6m, Port Nova and
Pondicherry is 0.8m and for Chennai is 1m. Therefore a
high vulnerability has been assigned for the present
study area (Figure 3D).
Figure 3 (D-F): Risk classes for tidal rate, coastal
slope and coastal regional elevation
4.1.5. Coastal Slope:
The present study revealed that 185 km of the coastline
has a high risk rating, with coastal slopes of less than
0.2 deg. 191 km of coastal stretch are in the medium
risk category, with a coastal slope between 0. 2 deg and
1.0 deg (Figure 3E).
4.1.6. Coastal Regional Elevation:
The present study revealed that about 231 km of
coastline has a high risk rating, where the coastal
regional elevation is between 0 and 3 m. along the
coastal stretches of Nagapattinam, Cuddalore and
Chennai districts. About 103 km of coastline has a
medium risk rating with coastal regional elevation
between 3.0 and 6.0 m along the coastal stretches of
Kancheepuram district. Only 42 km of coastline that has
coastal regional elevation of more than 6.0 m has a low
risk rating (Figure 3F).
4.1.7. Coastal Geomorphology:
The Northern Tamil Nadu coast is straight and narrow
without much indentation except at Vedaranyam.
International Journal of Earth Sciences and Engineering
ISSN 0974-5904, Vol.07, No.05, October, 2014, pp.1135-1145
Pichavaram, Vedaranyam and Point Calimere have well
developed mangrove systems The 149 km of the
coastline comprised sandy beaches, deltas, spits,
mangroves, and mudflats that have a high risk rating.
About 202 km length of coastline comprising of
vegetated coasts and low cliffs have a medium risk
rating. About 25 km of coastline comprising of sand
dunes has a low risk rating (Figure 4G).
Figure 4 (G-I): Risk classes for geomorphology,
tsunami run up and extreme storm surges
4.1.8. Tsunami Arrival Height:
The post-tsunami field survey carried out by Ilangovan
et al. (2005) from January 15 to February 7, 2005.
Maximum run-up heights due to the tsunami waves
were reported by them for about 24 locations in the
study area. The maximum run-up of 6.53 m at
Periyakalapet and a maximum inundation limit of 862 m
at Nagore were reported. Based on the report about 361
km of coastline has a high risk rating, recording tsunami
run-up of more than 2.0 m. Only 15 km of coastline has
a medium risk rating with tsunami run-up between 1.0
to 2.0 m along the southern tip of the coastline (Figure
4H).
4.1.9. Extreme storm surges and return periods:
The cyclone tracks and the storm surge associated with
them are shown in Figure 5. Mean sea level is not
included in the model. Thus the obtained result is pure
surge only without any atmospheric forcing. The present
 Coastal Vulnerability Assessment for Northern Tamil Nadu Coast using open source
numerical software - DELFT 3D

study revealed that about 152 km of coastline has a high

risk rating, recording storm surge height of more than
2.0 m. About 100 km of coastline has a medium risk
rating with storm surge height between 1.0 to 2.0 m.
About 125 km of coastline that has recorded storm
surge height between 0 and 1.0 m was accorded a low
risk rating (Figure 4I)

Figure 6: CVI for Kancheepuram, Chennai and

Tiruvallur districts.

Figure 5: Extreme storm surges based on 50 yr return

period intensity.

4.2. Coastal Vulnerability Index (CVI):

The Northern Tamil Nadu coast is classified as low,
medium, and high risk based on their vulnerability to
the nine relative risk variables under study. The
resultant CVI by eqn. (1) is calculated and the
vulnerability zones along the coastal shoreline are
delineated on the map (Figure 6). The CVI value along
the study area varied from 6 to 38.18. The 25th and 50th
percentiles of CVI value are 12 and 16.97, respectively.
Those parts of the coastline having CVI values ranging
from 6 to 12 are considered to be least vulnerable; those Figure 7: CVI for Cuddalore, Villupuram and
ranging from 12 to 16.97 are considered to be medium Nagapattinam districts.
vulnerable, and the remaining parts having CVI values
5. Conclusion:
of more than 16.97 are highly vulnerable. Accordingly,
about 99 km, 92 km and 185 km of the coast is low, The CVI method is very effective way to identify the
medium and highly vulnerable respectively. coastal stretch vulnerable to a particular hazard or a

International Journal of Earth Sciences and Engineering

ISSN 0974-5904, Vol.07, No.05, October, 2014, pp.1135-1145
 1143 PRADEEP. C, VIGNESHWARAN. S and THIRUMALAIVASAN. D

multiple of hazard. The open source DELFT 3D [5] J.A. Church,

numerical model is used to estimate the extreme storm
surge heights in this research. Evolving technologies in 11. Location: International Panel on Climate
remote sensing and GIS are making accurate data Change, 2001
available at better spatial and temporal scales. These [6] A prediction model for storm surges in
data sets have improved the vulnerability study and Nature, 239., 211 213., 1972.
taken them to village level. Use of Socio-economic [7] P.K. Dinesh Ku
parameters if included will provide an additional implications of sea level rise for the coastal zones
strength to the current study. The availability of data
and the continuous transformation of the socio- Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 123.,
economic parameters make them complicated to 333 344., 2006.
incorporate in the study. The map presented here can be [8]
used further to look at including other social parameters In Sea Level Rise - History
for the high risk zone alone. This map can be used as a and Consequences, Ed Douglas, B.C. Kearney,
planning tool for managing and protecting the coastal M.S. Leatherman, S.P. Academic Press. 37-64,
resources. 2001.
[9] D.Dominey-
6. Acknowledgements:
vulnerability assessment and its implication for
The authors also gratefully acknowledge the support of coastal hazard analysis and disaster management
Dr. Bhoop Singh, National Resources Data Natural
Management System (NRDMS), Department of Science Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 3., 733 747.,
and Technology (DST), Govt. of India, New Delhi, Dr. 2003
Rajinder Kumar Bhasin, Regional Manager Asia, [10] G.S. Dwarakish, S.A. Vinay, U. Natesan, T. Asano,
Norwegian Geotechnical Institute (NGI), Norway and T. Kakinuma, K. Venkataramana, B.J.Pai,
Dr. Ramakrishnan, Director, Institute of Remote
Sensing, Anna University, Chennai for their support in the future sea level rise in Udupi coastal zone of
writing the present paper. The technical staffs of NGI Ocean Coast.
are thanked for providing technical assistance during the Manage., 52., 467 478., 2009.
course of study. The INDO-Norwegian project was [11] Global coastal hazards from future sea
funded by the DST and the Norwegian Ministry of level rise Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol.
Foreign Affairs (NMFA) under Project Agreement No. Palaeoecol., 89., 379 398.,1991.
IND 3025-09/066. DST and NMFA are thanked for [12] V.M. Gornitz, R.C. Daniels, T.W. White, K.R.
supporting this work. To this end, the work has
assessment database, Vulnerability to sea-level rise
J Coastal Res Spe Iss 12.,
Sensing at Anna University which is highly appreciated 327-338., 1994
by the authors. [13] global
coastal hazards from sea- Proceedings of
7. References:
the 6th Symposium on Coastal and Ocean
[1] K. Ashok Kumar, N.S.N. Raju, and V. Sanil management, ASCE, July 11-14, 1989, Charleston,
SC.
Annual Report, Goa, [14]
India: National Institute of Oceanography, Ocean
Engineering Division, 2005. Journal of Coastal Research, 23., 1106 1111.,
[2] T. Belperio, B. Bourman, B. Bryan, N. Harvey, 2007
[15]
assessment of coastal vulnerability to sea-level
Environmental Modeling and Assessment, 6, Geophys. Res. Lett., 31., 2004.
1., 57 65., 2001. [16]
[3] -level
hazard vulnerability of US c J. South Afr Journal of Science, 88., 308 311.,1992.
Coast. Res., 21., 932 942., 2005. [17] I. Jain, A.D. Rao, V.Jitendra, and S.K. Dube,
[4] B. Bryan, N. Harvey, T. Belperio, B. Bourman,
, Journal of Coastal
assessment of coastal vulnerability to sea-level Research, 26, 4., 681-687., 2010.
Environ. Model. Assess., 6., 57 65., 2001.

International Journal of Earth Sciences and Engineering

ISSN 0974-5904, Vol.07, No.05, October, 2014, pp.1135-1145
 Coastal Vulnerability Assessment for Northern Tamil Nadu Coast using open source
numerical software - DELFT 3D
[18] Climate
Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis.
Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth
Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M.
Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt,
M.Tignor and H.L. Miller]. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
and New York, NY, USA, 2007
[19] IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
-I, Climate
Change Cambridge,
UK: Cambridge University Press, 2001
http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/tar/wg1/408.htm
(accessed August 10, 2014).
[20]
change and coastal zones: an overview of the state-
of-the-art on regional and local
Giupponi, C. and Shechther, M. (eds.), Climate
Change in the Mediterranean: Socio-economic
Perspective of Impacts, Vulnerability and
Adaptation. Camberley, UK: Edward Elgar
Publishing, 245 278., 2000.
[21] lnerability
assessment for Chennai, east coast of India using
Nat. Hazards, 64., 853
872., 2012.
[22] T.Lay, H. Kanamori, C. Ammon, M. Nettles, S.N.
Ward, R.C. Aster, S.L. Beck, S.L Bilek, M.R.
Brudzinski, R. Butle, H.R. DeShon, G. Ekstro¨m,
K. Satake, S. Sipkin, "The great Sumatra Andaman
Science,
308.,1127 1133.,2005.
[23] R.S. Mahendra, P.C. Mohanty, H. Bisoyi, T.
management of coastal multi-hazard vulnerability
along the Cuddalore Villupuram, east coast of
Ocean &
Coastal Management 54, 4., 302-311., 2001
[24] The storm
Progress in
Oceanography, 16., 195 233., 1986.
[25] K. Nageswara Rao, P. Subraelu, T. Venkateswara
Rao, B. Hema Malini, R. Ratheesh, S.
-level rise and
coastal vulnerability: an assessment of Andhra
Pradesh coast, India through remote sensing and
J. Coast Conserv., 12., 195 207., 2008.
[26] R.J. Nicholls, P.P. Wong, V.R. Burkett, J.O.
Codignotto, J.E. Hay, R.F. McLean, S. Ragoonaden
Coastal systems and low-lying
areas. In: Climate change 2007: impacts, adaptation
and vulnerability. Contributions of Working Group
II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the
edited by Parry ML, Canziani OF, Palutikof JP, van
International Journal of Earth Sciences and Engineering
ISSN 0974-5904, Vol.07, No.05, October, 2014, pp.1135-1145
den Linden PJ and Hanson CJ (Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge) 315-356., 2007
[27] NDMG. Management of Cyclones. 2008. National
Disaster Management Guidelines, National Disaster
Management Authority, Government of India,
2008. Available on the Web at:
http://ndma.gov.in/ndma/guidelines/Management%
20of%20Cyclones.pdf.
[28] Nguyen Tho Sao. Storm surge predictions for
Vietnam coast by Delft3D model using results from
RAMS model. Journal of Water Resources and
Environmental Engineering, 23., 2008.
[29] al processes and
morphological change in the Dunwich Sizewell
J. Coast. Res., 22., 453 473.,
2006.
[30] C. Pradeep, A.K.Bharadwaj, and
In:
Disaster Management: Issues and Challenges,
(Eds: S.Eswari, Yasodharan Suresh, Rajib
Bhaduri), Semmoodhai Pathippagam, Chennai,
2014.
[31] Development of a coastal
vulnerability index: a geomorphological
Environmental Conservation, 27.,
359-367., 2000.
[32] E.A. Pendleton, E.R. Thieler, S.W. Jeffress,
National Recreation Area to Sea-
USGS Open-File Report 2005-1058., 2005
[33] A.S.Rajawat, S. Bhattacharya, S. Jain, M. Gupta, P.
Jayaprasad, V. Tamilarasan, Ajai, S. Nayak,
Coast. Second International Symposium on
Geoinformation for Disaster Management (Dona
Paula, Goa, India, International Society for
Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing)., 2006.
[34] N.H. Riyaz Khan, C. Pradeep, K. Srinivasaraju,
surges for the Chennai coast using DELFT-3D 4th
National conference LACE-2014, RMK
Engineering college, Chennai, 4th April., 2014.
[35] V. Sanil Kumar, K.C. Pathak, P. Pednekar, N.S.N.
Current science., 91, 4., 530
536., 2006.
[36] T. Srinivasa Kuma, R.S. Mahendra, S. Nayak, K.
Vulnerability Assessment for Orissa state, East
Journal of Coastal Research 26, 3.,
523- 534., 2010.
[37]
Nature, 434., 581 582., 2005.
[38]
of the December 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami on the
 1145 PRADEEP. C, VIGNESHWARAN. S and THIRUMALAIVASAN. D

Earthq Spectra 22, S3., 435

473., 2006.
[39] Storm Surge Forecasting for the
Marine Geodesy, 32., 199-217.,
2009.
[40] E.R. Thieler, E.A. Himmelstoss, J.L. Zichichi,
Ergul,
(DSAS) version 4.0 An ArcGIS extension for
U.S. Geological
Survey Open-File Report 2008-1278., 2009.
[41] E.R. Thieler, E.S. Hammar-
Assessment of Coastal Vulnerability to Sea-Level
U.S. Atlantic Coast: U.S.Geological Survey
Open-File Report, 99-593, 1 sheet., 1999.
[42]
Vulnerability to Future Sea- USGS
Fact Sheet, fs-076-100., 2000
[43] A.S. Unnikrishnan, K.R. Kumar, S.E. Fernandes,

along the
Indian coast: observations and
Curr. Sci. India, 90., 362 368., 2006.
[44] UNESCO-IOC (1998) Tsunami glossary. IOC/INF-
1221
[45] USGS (U.S. Geological Survey), 2001. National
Assessment of Coastal Vulnerability to Sea-Level
Rise: Preliminary Results for the U.S. Gulf of
Mexico Coast. http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2000/of00-
179/pages/risk.html (accessed August 10, 2014).
[46] D.K. Vatvani, H. Gerritsen, G.S. Stelling, K. Rao,
Cyclone-induced storm surge and flood
, Proceedings of the
2002 Coastal Disasters Conference, San Diego,
CA, USA., 2002.
[47] D.K. Vatvani, N.C. Zweers, M. van Ormondt, A.J.
Smale, Storm surge and
wave simulations in the Gulf of Mexico using a
consistent drag relation for atmospheric and storm
Natural Hazards and Earth System
Sciences, 12., 2399-2410., 2012.
[48] P. Willroth, F. Massmann, R. Wehrhahn, J. Revilla
-economic vulnerability of coastal
communities in southern Thailand: the development
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst.
Sci., 12., 2647 2658., 2012.
[49] K. Yamada, P.D. Nunn, N. Mimura, S. Machida,

vulnerability of South Pacific island countries to

sea- Journal of
Global Environmental Engineering,1., 101-125.,
1995

International Journal of Earth Sciences and Engineering

ISSN 0974-5904, Vol.07, No.05, October, 2014, pp.1135-1145

View publication stats