Coastal Engineering Journal

ISSN: 2166-4250 (Print) 1793-6292 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tcej20

Tsunami force estimation for beachfront

traditional buildings with elevated floor slab in
Malaysia

Wei Chek Moon, Chung Leong Law, Kok Kei Liew, Foo Siong Koon & Tze Liang
Lau

To cite this article: Wei Chek Moon, Chung Leong Law, Kok Kei Liew, Foo Siong Koon & Tze
Liang Lau (2019): Tsunami force estimation for beachfront traditional buildings with elevated floor
slab in Malaysia, Coastal Engineering Journal, DOI: 10.1080/21664250.2019.1672125

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/21664250.2019.1672125

Published online: 07 Oct 2019.

Submit your article to this journal

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tcej20
COASTAL ENGINEERING JOURNAL
https://doi.org/10.1080/21664250.2019.1672125

ORIGINAL RESEARCH PAPER

Tsunami force estimation for beachfront traditional buildings with elevated

floor slab in Malaysia
Wei Chek Moon , Chung Leong Law, Kok Kei Liew, Foo Siong Koon and Tze Liang Lau
School of Civil Engineering, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Nibong Tebal, Malaysia

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

Tsunamis have received increased worldwide awareness since their unprecedented occur- Received 18 July 2018
rences in the Indian Ocean and Tohoku in 2004 and 2011, respectively. In this study, the impact Accepted 12 September 2019
of tsunami on a building with an elevated floor slab was investigated at a reduced scale of KEYWORDS
1:100 and compared with that of a slab-on-grade building. Three nominal wave conditions Tsunami; elevated floor slab;
were tested to study the effects of tsunamis on each building model type. The tsunami-like horizontal force; vertical
wave forces and pressures on the building model were measured in the experiment. Results resultant force; wave
showed that the existence of an elevated floor slab significantly reduced the horizontal force pressure
on building upon the impingement of the initial wave. When the nominal wave height was
higher than the building model height, the wave-induced horizontal force was overestimated
by the Japanese design method. The maximum vertical resultant force on the elevated building
model manifested a linear trend with increasing wave-exposed height up to a maximum force
of approximately 3.8 N when the building model was fully submerged. This study also
presented a proposed methodology for tsunami force estimation of the front and back faces
of a building with an elevated floor slab.

1. Introduction co-researchers conducted a hydraulic experiment and

Tsunamis are destructive waves caused by large-scale
ocean disturbances such as earthquakes, landslides or
volcanic eruptions (Satake and Atwater 2007), which
comprise a series of long waves with wavelength of up
to several hundred kilometers and flow velocities of
several hundred to a thousand kilometers per hour.
Since 2004, major tsunamis have struck the coastline
around the Pacific Rim. Such tsunami occurrences have
left devastating impacts in terms of losses of millions of
people’s lives and damage to coastal structures.
Understanding tsunami forces is important in design-
ing a tsunami-resistant structure. Current guidelines
for designing tsunami-resistant structures categorize
the components of forces independently for simplicity
(Dames and Moore 1980; CCH 2000; ICC 2009; FEMA
P646 2008). As also mentioned by Yeh (2007) and
Lukkunaprasit, Thanasisathit, and Yeh (2009), common
tsunami loads considered in the existing guidelines
include hydrostatic, buoyant, hydrodynamic, surge,
debris impact and wave-breaking forces. The wave
height and flow velocity of a tsunami that strikes
structures may vary with time due to the complexity
associated with real situations. Thus, experimental stu-
dies have been conducted to fill this lacking part in
tsunami load evaluation.
Over the past decades, researchers have been con-
ducting numerous experimental studies of tsunami
forces on vertical walls and buildings. Asakura and his
proposed a practical formula for evaluating the tsu-
nami force on land structures. Asakura’s formulation as
in Equation (1) grossly simplifies the flow conditions by
calculating the forces based only on the inundation
depth.
Pmax z
¼α (1)
ρgh h
where Pmax refers to the maximum wave pressure at
a known elevation z. ρ, g and h respectively denote the
density of water, the gravitational acceleration and the
design inundation depth. Here, α is the multiplication
factor for the pressure intensity and also the effective
water depth, which is based on the Froude number (Fr)
of the tsunami bore. Figure 1 shows the pressure dis-
tribution of tsunami loading on slab-on-grade and
elevated buildings. As a conservative factor of safety,
this prediction formula with α = 3, has been adopted as
the general recommendation (as shown in Figure 1(a))
for the tsunami refuge building design in Japan unless
tsunami energy dissipation is expected (National
Institute for Land and Infrastructure Management
2012). On the other hand, the effect of open space
on a building with an elevated floor slab (as shown in
Figure 1(b)) is considered. Once the wave is adequately
high to hit the building, it forms a triangular distribu-
tion with α value of 3 but is based on the square root of
the multiplication of wave-exposed building height (h’)
and design inundation depth (h).

CONTACT Tze Liang Lau celau@usm.my

© 2019 Japan Society of Civil Engineers
2 W. C. MOON ET AL.
Figure 1. Tsunami wave pressure distribution on a (a) slab-on-grade building and (b) building with an elevated floor slab.
Figure 2. Typical traditional houses in Cenang Beach, Langkawi Island, Malaysia.
The notion of elevated structures to let waves pass
underneath is not new. Figure 2 shows the typical
traditional beachfront houses along the Northwest
coast of Peninsular Malaysia. This vicinity is frequently
subjected to flooding. Thus, these houses are built with
an elevated ground floor to allow flood water to pass
underneath and inundate the area. As reported by
Robertson et al. (2007), FEMA P646 (2008) and
Tomiczek, Kennedy, and Rogers (2013), most of the
elevated structures suffered less damage than the slab-
on-grade structures located in the same vicinity during
the past tsunami and hurricane events. Although their
generation sources are different, tsunami and storm
surge waves exhibit similar physical characteristics in
terms of wave propagation, nonlinear transformation
and runup (Yim 2005). Tsunamis propagate through
deep oceans which can have wave periods of minutes
to hours, whereas the wave period of storm surges
varies from a few hours to a few days.
The design concept of an elevated floor slab for
tsunami-resistant buildings has been proposed, and
existing tsunami evacuation shelters are designed in
such a way that the buildings have sufficient height to
elevate evacuees above the level of tsunami inundation.
In the previous study done by Thusyanthan and
Madabhushi (2008), a house designed with an elevated
foundation and a large opening for the passage of wave
has been proven to reduce wave-induced pressure
compared with that on a typical coastal house. Recent
studies have been devoted to the force estimation on
structures with an elevated floor slab. In 2014, Honda
et al. (2014) and Wiebe, Park, and Cox (2014), respec-
tively verified the current guideline for piloti-type build-
ing and modified the Goda wave pressure distribution,
which was initially applied to calculate wave forces on
caissons to predict the horizontal wave loads on ele-
vated structures at nearshore regions.
Wang, Meng, and Zhao (2015) performed a three-
dimensional numerical simulation to investigate the
influence of a 5 m high tsunami wave on a five-story
building with and without walls at the upstream face at
the ground floor. The tsunami-induced horizontal
forces were used for the nonlinear finite element static
analysis on the structure. Do (2016) conducted a study
to determine the shear and uplift forces that act on
one- and two-story residential buildings subjected to
hurricane waves, simultaneously developing fragility
curves for an elevated coastal building for a specified
significant wave height and inundation level. Park et al.
(2017) investigated and presented the relationship
between a building’s air gap (the elevation of the
building’s base with respect to still water depth) and
tsunami-induced horizontal and vertical forces.
Although the concept of an elevated floor slab has
been recommended in the design of onshore build-
ings, the influence of the tsunami wave that strikes

elevated buildings remains insufficiently understood.
Wilson et al. (2009) highlighted that uplift force might
become the predominant component of loading when
water traveled beneath structures. Continuing in this
vein, the present study aims to experimentally exam-
ine the effects of different elevated floor heights on
tsunami wave flow and its induced loading. The mea-
sured horizontal force is compared with that in the
Japanese design method by National Institute for
Land and Infrastructure Management (2012). In the
last part of this study, a step forward on the tsunami
force estimation is proposed for a building with an
elevated floor slab.
2. Methodology
2.1. Wave flume and bathymetry
A hydraulic experiment was conducted at the
Hydraulic Laboratory in the Engineering Campus of
Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM). Figure 3 depicts the
laboratory setup. A 40 m long, 1 m wide and 1 m deep
wave flume was used for the tsunami modeling to
quantify the wave loadings on a building subjected
to a tsunami wave. The flume consisted of concrete
walls at both sides and a rigid bed constructed from
painted steel plates supported by structural steel
frames. The shore bed was assumed to be rigid and
without friction. The sediment transport was not con-
sidered in this study. In Figure 3, continuous plane
slopes of 1:200 and 1:125 were constructed to repre-
sent the typical coast profile in Malaysia. The 1:4 slop-
ing platform in the flume was positioned at the
upstream of the wave flume to incur the wave break-
ing process of the solitary wave. The 1:100 model scal-
ing was adopted in this study based on Froude number
similitude law, given that the inertial and gravitational
forces were dominant in tsunami flow.
In the experiment, tsunami wave was generated by
using a dam-break mechanism, controlled by a gate
Figure 3. Schematic diagrams of the laboratory setup (dimensions are in mm).
COASTAL ENGINEERING JOURNAL 3
that could be fully opened within a second. The
impoundment depth in the storage tank (located at
the upstream of the flume) was adjusted to generate
different solitary waves (with period of 21.89–29.73 s)
as shown in Figure 4. In all cases, a still water depth of
470 mm was maintained in the flume, which repre-
sented the offshore region. Upon release of the gate,
the traveling wave was first regulated by a wave baffle
assembled from interlocking plastic structural mod-
ules. When the generated solitary wave shoaled at
the 1:4 sloping platform, the flow velocity decreased.
The wave front became almost vertical and eventually
broke as a plunging-type breaker, thereby transform-
ing into bores. The broken wave subsequently
streamed across all remaining wave flume sections
and flowed into a sump located at the downstream
end of the flume. Only tsunami runup was simulated
and the tsunami drawdown was not considered in this
study. A detailed description of the laboratory setup
can be found in Moon, Tan, and Lau (2014) and Moon
et al. (2019).
2.2. Instrumentation
Three nominal wave conditions, that represented the
maximum height of the wave front (h) at H2 (without
building model) were simulated: 40, 60 and 80 mm
(actual wave scenarios of 4, 6 and 8 m nominal heights,
respectively). These conditions denoted the documen-
ted maximum inundation depth of the 2004 Indian
Ocean tsunami that struck Peninsular Malaysia and
the possible tsunami wave from the future events
with the maximum inundation depths similar to 1.5
and 2.0 times that of the 2004 tsunami. During the free
flow condition (without building model), the wave
profiles at H1 and H2 and the corresponding velocity
at V2 were obtained by using the capacitance-type
wave gauges (KENEK CHT6-30E) at a sampling rate of
50 Hz and an electromagnetic type current meter
(KENEK VP1200) at 40 Hz sampling rate, respectively.
4 W. C. MOON ET AL.
Figure 4. Generated solitary waves for different impoundment depths.
The waves that struck the building model consisted
of bores and surges. The downscaled building model
was located at the horizontal dry bed section (at
a horizontal distance of 3.225 m and a vertical height
of 25 mm from the shoreline) as shown in Figure 3.
During the wave impingement on the building model,
the wave gauge (WG2) and current meter at the loca-
tion of the building model were not installed to avoid
the instruments’ interference to the wave flow in the
vicinity of the building model. Subsequently, the nom-
inal wave height and maximum flow velocity at the
building model’s location were determined on the
basis of the previously established correlations with
the wave height at H1.
In this study, a typical single-story residential build-
ing of 10 m x 10 m in plane area with a story height of
3.6 m was considered. The building was simplified and
simulated as a rigid rectangular block model made
from acrylic plate to ensure its rigidity. As shown in
Figure 5, three types of building models, namely NE,
E15 and E30 models, represent the slab-on-grade
building, the building with 1.5 m elevated floor slab
and the building with 3.0 m elevated floor slab, respec-
tively (corresponding to those buildings as shown in
Figure 2). Nine experimental sets as listed in Table 1
were undertaken. These sets comprised three different
Figure 5. Constructed building models.
combinations of nominal wave conditions and build-
ing model types. As for the elevated building model,
10 × 10 mm square piers positioned at each of the
corners below the building model were attached at the
flume. For a scaled laboratory, the blockage ratio,
which is the ratio of the constriction’s width to flume,
should be less than 0.15 to avoid lateral wall effects
(Han, Ha, and Cho 2015). In the present experiment, all
the downscaled building models were set to be
100 mm and the blockage ratio was approximately
0.1. As also suggested by Nouri et al. (2010),
a blockage ratio under 0.4 insignificantly affected the
flow characteristics relative to the unobstructed flow.
In the experiment, the building model was
mounted onto an I-section attached to a three-axis
load cell (Interface 3A120) to record the time histories
of forces that acted on it in x and z directions subjected
to a tsunami wave. Diaphragm-type pressure gauges
(SSK P310-02) with a diameter of 10 mm were placed
from bottom to top at a distance of 13 mm along the
centerline of the building model’s front and back faces
to measure the pressure time histories. Figure 6 shows
the positions of pressure gauges on the building
model. The wave gauge, load cell and pressure gauges
were connected to the data logger (Kyowa EDX-10A)
where the measured data were collected and stored.
 COASTAL ENGINEERING JOURNAL 5

Table 1. Experimental conditions. three repetitions. The time t = 0 s denotes the instant
Elevation from Nominal wave the wave first reaches H2.
ground condition
Type of building (mm) Notation (mm)
Figure 7(a) depicts that the generated tsunami wave
Slab-on-grade 0 NE 40, 60, 80 front consists of a wave with shallow height. For all the
With an elevated floor 15 E15 40, 60, 80 incident waves generated, the wave height increases
slab 30 E30 40, 60, 80
with time and achieves the nominal height later.
A sudden jump occurs at approximately 2.5 s for 40
and 60 mm nominal wave conditions. This occurrence
Similar to wave height measurement, the sampling
is due to the incoming wave in the bore form, that is the
rate was kept at 50 Hz to determine the pulsating
nominal wave with a height higher than that of the
pressure and force in this study.
surge. However, this sudden jump is less obvious for
The instrumented building model was located at
the 80 mm nominal wave condition. For the 40 mm
the horizontal dry bed section before being subjected
nominal wave condition, the wave reaches the nominal
to tsunami waves. Consequently, thermal shock might
height at approximately 3 s. The incident waves with
be generated in the pressure gauge, thereby causing
high nominal wave conditions attain their respective
erroneous pressure measurement, as indicated in the
nominal heights at a relatively later time (Figure 7(a)).
study of Kihara et al. (2015). In the present study, a trial
After reaching the nominal wave height, the wave
run was initially conducted to minimize the effects of
height remains significant and quasi-steady at the later
thermal shock, so that the instrumented building
stage.
model with pressure gauge would be flushed with
Figure 7(b) presents the typical flow velocity time
water. By doing this, the temperature in the pressure
histories at V2 associated with each nominal wave
gauge would reach the water temperature. Right after
condition. As shown in Figure 7(b), flow velocity attains
the trial run, the subsequent tests were conducted
its peak at the surge front with shallow height. High
continuously, with a 5 min interval between each run.
nominal wave indicates the high peak velocity
All cases were repeated at least three times to confirm
achieved by the wave. The maximum flow velocities
the repeatability and the reliability of the results.
of 1.2, 1.7 and 2.2 m/s were achieved by the flow of the
A five-point moving average method was used to filter
incident waves with nominal wave heights of 40, 60
the noise of the recorded data. The filtered data were
and 80 mm, respectively. For all nominal wave condi-
checked, so that the filtered and unfiltered peak pres-
tions, the maximum wave height does not occur at the
sure recordings were differed by less than 5%. Two
same time with the peak velocity flow. As the wave
Sony Handycam camcorders (operating at 50 fps)
height increases with time, the flow velocity of the
were synchronized with the instrumentation to record
corresponding wave gradually decreases and becomes
the wave that attacked the front and back faces of the
fairly uniform once the wave achieves its nominal wave
building model.
height for all the incident waves generated in this
study.
3. Results and discussion Figure 7(c) shows the momentum flux (hu2). Initially,
the momentum flux increases as the flow velocity at
3.1. Wave height-flow velocity relationship
the surge front is the highest. Following the decrement
At least three repetitions were made for each nominal of flow velocity, the momentum flux decreases gradu-
wave generated to ensure the repeatability of the ally. This result indicates that the momentum flux at
measurement. Figure 7(a) shows the wave height the initial stage is influenced by the flow velocity. The
time histories at H2 during the free flow condition for momentum flux increases as the wave height rises

Figure 6. Position of pressure gauges on different building models (dimensions are in mm).
6 W. C. MOON ET AL.
Figure 7. Time histories of (a) wave height at H2 (for three repetitions), (b) flow velocity at V2, (c) momentum flux (without
building model) and (d) computed surge front profile.
afterward with the incoming nominal wave. It is
observed in Figure 7(c) that the maximum momentum
flux occurs when the nominal wave height is achieved
by the flow, except for the 80 mm nominal wave
condition.
In order to obtain the surge front profile, the initial
rapid-increase part of the wave height in the time-
domain (Figure 7(a)) is transformed to the wave height
in the distance-domain which is shown in Figure 7(d).
This transformation is conducted by using the peak
flow velocity for each nominal wave condition (Figure
7(b)). In this study, the surge front slopes of 3.96°, 4.18°
and 5.47° are computed for 40, 60 and 80 mm nominal
wave conditions, respectively (Figure 7(d)). In the pre-
vious study conducted by Asakura et al. (2002), Fr of
the tsunami bore is based on the maximum inundation
depth (equivalent to nominal wave height in this
study) and its corresponding flow velocity. In the pre-
sent study, the calculated Fr values for the three simu-
lated waves in this experiment range from 1 to 1.23.
More details on the flow characteristics of the experi-
ment simulated tsunami can be further obtained in Lau
et al. (2015).
3.2. Wave attack on building model
Figure 8 depicts the sequences of wave attack on the
NE, E15 and E30 models (marked as dotted lines) dur-
ing the 60 mm nominal wave condition. Upon the
initial impact of the leading edge of the wave,
a sharp water jet that travels upwards is formed at
the front face of the NE model (Figure 8(a)). However,
water jet is immediately overcome by the incoming
wave. The remaining wave subsequently splits and
spreads to the sideway. For the 60 mm nominal wave
condition, the flowing wave overtops the NE model
before the wave achieves its nominal height. The inun-
dation depth at the NE model’s back face rapidly
increases due to the wave-overtopping effect on the
NE model.
By referring to Figure 8(b,c), the wave flow in the
case of the elevated building models exhibit a different
scenario due to the existence of an elevated floor slab
compared with the NE model. Upon the initial impin-
gement of the wave on the elevated building models,
most of the waves manage to pass beneath the ele-
vated floor slab, while some of the waves have
impacted the piers and splashed up on the front face
of the piers. As the wave height increases afterward,
the entire upstream wall of the elevated building
model begins to contact with the wave. Figure 8(b)
shows that the wave is high enough to hit the front
face of the E15 model at approximately 0.4 s. While the
obstructed wave rises upward along the front face of
the E15 model, the remaining wave divides sideway
and flows around the E15 model. Subsequently, the
E15 model is gushed by the nominal wave and com-
pletely submerged underwater.
A similar wave attack is observed for the E30 model.
The wave at approximately 1 s is high enough to strike
the E30 model’s front face. Less amount of water
splashes down on the top surface of the E30 model
after the piled-up wave collapses downward, consider-
ing that the height of the E30 model is adequately
greater than the nominal wave height (Figure 8(c)).
Subsequently, the building model is partially

Figure 8. Sequences of wave attack on building models (h = 60 mm). (a) NE model, (b) E15 model and (c) E30 model.
submerged as the incoming nominal wave gushes
over the E30 model.
3.3. Wave force on building model
3.3.1. Horizontal force
The front face horizontal force (Fx) that acts on the build-
ing model is discussed in this section. Since the load cell
records the resultant force that acts on the building
model, Fx in this work is computed on the basis of the
pressure integration method (Thusyanthan and
Madabhushi 2008; Shafiei, Melville, and Shamseldin
2016), in which the building model’s front surface is
divided horizontally into three strips assuming that the
pressure is the same along the strip’s height and width.
Figure 9 shows a comparison of the time histories
COASTAL ENGINEERING JOURNAL 7
between the measured horizontal resultant force and
the integrated force. The results show that the difference
between the maximum integrated force and the max-
imum resultant force is less than 5%.
Figure 10 shows the representative Fx time histories
of the NE, E15 and E30 models for all three nominal
wave conditions. An increase in Fx occurs following the
impingement of the leading edge on the NE model.
This increase is followed by a slight decrease in force
immediately after the initial impact as the wave reflects
from the NE model and interferes with the incoming
wave at the front vicinity of the NE model. When the
wave increases in height in the later stage, a gradual
increase in Fx is observed. For all nominal wave condi-
tions, the moment at the occurrence of the maximum
Fx almost coincides the time when the momentum flux
8 W. C. MOON ET AL.
Figure 9. Comparison of time histories between measured horizontal resultant force (dotted line) and computed integrated force
(solid line) on E15 models.
is the greatest (Figure 7(c)). Yeh (2007) also proposed
that the maximum hydrodynamic force must be calcu-
lated on the basis of the maximum momentum flux
that occurred at the site (without building). Force gra-
dually decreases with flow velocity. However, the wave
height remains significant and the hydrostatic force is
dominant because of the main body of the tsunami
wave that acts on the building model (Arimitsu and
Kawasaki 2016).
A comparison is performed for Fx on different build-
ing model types with the same nominal wave condition
as shown in Figure 10. In comparison with the slab-on-
grade building model, the elevated building models
experience a great reduction in Fx time histories.
Figure 10 indicates that the E30 model has the lowest
Fx followed by the E15 and NE models. As the incoming
flow keeps gushing the building models, the building
model with a higher elevation experiences a lower Fx
because the surface contact between the wave and
building model’s front face is less. The effect of having
an elevated floor slab on Fx is the most significant
during the wave condition with the lowest nominal
wave height (h = 40 mm).
In Figure 10, the maximum Fx between the slab-on-
grade and the elevated building models may not have
a significant difference, especially for higher nominal
wave conditions. However, force reduction for the
building model with an elevated floor slab is significant
at the initial stage. The reason is that the leading edge
of the wave thrusts toward the bed with shallow
height and flows beneath the elevated floor slab,
thereby inducing minimal force on the building
model at the starting stage. The 80 mm nominal
wave condition is followed by a rapid increase in the
incoming wave due to the steep surge front. This
phenomenon causes Fx at the initial stage to increase
faster than that in the 40 and 60 mm nominal wave
conditions. A comparison is also conducted between
the E15 and E30 models. Figure 10 shows that the E30
model, which has a high elevated height, always has
a lower horizontal force than that of the E15 model.
Figure 11 illustrates the measured maximum Fx
plotted against the design tsunami inundation depth,
as proposed in the Japanese design method (as shown
in Figure 1). In this section, the wave pressure distribu-
tion proposed by the Japanese design method is vali-
dated using the experimental measurements. The
wave-induced horizontal force on the building’s front
face can be estimated by considering the integration
of wave pressure with respect to the surface area
exposed to inundation depth. Dashed lines that repre-
sent the estimated force for slab-on-grade and ele-
vated buildings are described in Figure 11(a,b),
respectively.
For the case of slab-on-grade building, all the
experimental data lie within the safe side, where Fx
estimation for the NE model is overestimated approxi-
mately by 1.3 times (Figure 11(a)). For the case of
building with an elevated floor slab, a disagreement
aroused between the experimental data and the
dashed line (Figure 11(b)). Similar findings by Honda
et al. (2014) is observed, in which the maximum hor-
izontal force that acts on the E30 model (for the case of
40 mm nominal wave) appears to be underestimated
by the Japanese design method. However, when the
nominal wave is higher than the building model, the
estimated horizontal force on the building model with
an elevated floor slab tends to be larger than the
experimental data.
3.3.2. Vertical resultant force
As mentioned earlier, an elevated building model exhi-
bits different flow characteristics compared with
a slab-on-grade building model due to an unimpeded
flow beneath the elevated floor slab. Thus, hydrody-
namic uplift force may be generated by the water that
travels beneath the elevated building (Wilson et al.
2009). Honda et al. (2014) also showed that the uplift
 COASTAL ENGINEERING JOURNAL 9

Figure 10. Horizontal force time histories of NE, E15 and E30 models. (a) h = 40 mm, (b) h = 60 mm and (c) h = 80 mm.

pressure might be more than several hundred kPa in
the full scale.
Figure 12 shows the typical time histories of the
vertical resultant force (Fz) that acts on the elevated
building models. Fz discussed in this section denotes
the vertical resultant force experienced by the entire
building model, which consists of upward and down-
ward forces. As shown in Figure 12, Fz gradually
increases with time until it achieves its peak at the
later stage. For the 80 mm nominal wave condition,
10 W. C. MOON ET AL.
Figure 11. Maximum horizontal force acting on (a) NE model and (b) E15 and E30 models.
Figure 12. Vertical resultant force time histories of (a) E15 and (b) E30 models.
a rapid increase in the incoming wave occurs at the
initial stage. Immediately after the initial wave impact
on the E15 and E30 models, Fz abruptly decreases
because the surged-up wave collapses and falls on
top of the building model, thereby resulting in the
vertical impact on the building model. A similar phe-
nomenon is observed for the 60 mm nominal wave
condition.
Afterward, Fz substantially increases with the wave
height until it reaches the nominal height (Figure 12). As
mentioned earlier, after the building model is gushed
and overtopped by the incoming nominal wave, the
building model is submerged either partially or comple-
tely underwater. This phenomenon increases the addi-
tional gravitational force that acts on the building
model. Fz subsequently falls off gradually after the
wave achieves its nominal height for the 60 and
80 mm nominal wave conditions (Figure 12). For the
40 mm nominal wave condition, the effect of the addi-
tional gravitational force is less significant because the
nominal wave height is lower than the building model.
Figure 12 depicts a second increase in Fz time histories
at approximately 15 s. This increase implies that the
wave-overtopping effect is reduced during this period
as the wave height begins to decrease until the wave
reaches a quasi-steady state. The inundation depth at the
back face of the building model begins to build up,
thereby increasing the total volume of the building
model submerged underwater and subsequently
increasing the buoyant force (Fbu). As mentioned pre-
viously, Fz experienced by the entire building model
comprises not only the hydrodynamic uplift force, but
also the buoyant force. Besides, it is noted that Fz time
histories for the lower nominal wave condition begin to
increase earlier than that for the high nominal wave
condition. This result might be related to the propagation
velocity of the wave. For the low nominal wave condition
with a low propagation velocity, the water builds up at
the back of the building model early.
For all the three nominal wave conditions, the max-
imum Fz occurs at the later stage when the wave is in
the quasi-steady state. The maximum Fz on the elevated
building model is plotted against the dimensionless
factor ((h-e)/zs) as illustrated in Figure 13, where
h-e represents the height of the elevated building
model exposed to the wave and zs is the story height
of the building model. Figure 13 shows that the relation-
ship of the maximum Fz on the building model and the
wave-exposed height exhibits a linear trend. Once the
wave touches the soffit slab of the elevated building
model, the value of peak Fz increases with the value of
(h-e)/zs until it saturates at approximately 3.8 N. It is
worth to notice that the data in the plot can be sepa-
rated into two conditions. The building is partially or not
submerged in water when the value of (h-e)/zs is less
than 1. During this condition, a high wave height causes
Fz that acts on the building model to have a high
magnitude. On the contrary, once the building is fully
submerged underwater ((h-e)/zs > 1), the resultant ver-
tical force is almost the same, which is around 3.8 N.
To quantify hydrodynamic uplift force induced by
the tsunami wave in this study, the line that represents
 COASTAL ENGINEERING JOURNAL 11

Figure 13. Relationship between maximum Fz and (h-e)/zs for elevated building model.

Fbu (computed from Equation (2)) is also plotted in the
same graph as displayed in Figure 13.
Fbu ¼ Vρg
where V is the volume of the building model sub-
merged underwater. Figure 13 indicates that the
hydrodynamic uplift force is generated by the tsunami
wave in this study. Although the building model is
submerged, which contributes a certain amount of
additional gravitational force that acts downward on
the building model and eventually reducing the uplift
force, the experimental measurements show that the
uplift force is still deemed dominant for the building
model with an elevated floor slab.
(2)
3.3.3. Ratio of horizontal to vertical force
Figure 14 shows the ratio of the maximum Fx to the
maximum Fz (Fxmax/Fzmax) plotted against the dimen-
sionless factor ((h-e)/zs). Notably, for the case of (h-e)/zs
< 0, the nominal wave height is lower than the ele-
vated floor height, thus the induced Fx and Fz on an
elevated building would equal zero. In this study, the
computed (h-e)/zs values for all nominal wave condi-
tions range from 0.3 to 1.9. As shown in Figure 14,

Figure 14. Relationship between Fxmax/Fzmaz and (h-e)/zs for elevated building model.
12 W. C. MOON ET AL.
Fxmax/Fzmax ratio is low for a low value of (h-e)/zs,
indicating that for partial or no submerged condition,
the induced maximum Fz is larger with respect to the
maximum Fx. Such experimental data are corroborated
by the previous work by Park et al. (2017), which
indicates that the vertical force may become
a significant design parameter for small wave heights.
Nevertheless, Fxmax/Fzmax ratio might be increased as
the building model is further elevated above the
ground level (Park et al. 2017).
As Fxmax/Fzmax ratio increases with (h-e)/zs, the max-
imum Fx becomes almost equal to the maximum Fz
when the nominal wave is almost as high as the build-
ing model’s height (0.83 < (h-e)/zs < 1.25). With the
further increase in (h-e)/zs, Fx becomes larger, in which
the maximum Fx is approximately 1.4 times the max-
imum Fz for the submerged condition, especially when
the value of (h-e)/zs is more than 1.5. These results
imply that Fx and Fz may cause the structural failure
of an elevated building and depend on the relation-
ship between the heights of the building and the
nominal wave. Therefore, in addition to the horizontal
force, vertical force must also be considered for design-
ing a building with an elevated floor slab.
3.4. Wave pressure on building model
3.4.1. Pressure time histories
Figure 15 shows the typical time histories of the wave
pressures at different gauge locations of the building
models. As shown in Figure 15, the recorded pressure
Figure 15. Pressure time histories on E15 model’s (a) front, (b) back faces and E30 model’s (c) front, (d) back faces (h = 60 mm).
P is normalized by the hydrostatic pressure (ρgh)
induced by the 60 mm nominal wave condition.
For the elevated building models tested in this
study, all the pressure gauges at the building models’
front face do not initially experience the wave pressure
caused by the leading tongue of tsunami surge. This
phenomenon occurs because the wave manages to
pass beneath the elevated building model at the initial
stage. Once the wave height increases afterward as
a consequence of the sloping front of the surge, the
pressure gauge mounted at the bottommost part of
the building models’ front face (P1) is exposed to wave
pressure, which reaches approximately 1.4 and 0.9
times the hydrostatic pressure for the E15 and E30
models, respectively. The remaining pressure gauges
located at higher positions (P2 and P3) are subse-
quently exposed when the water level increases at
the front of the building models and covers the two
gauges.
It is apparent from Figure 15(a,c) that the front face
pressure time histories for the E15 and E30 models
exhibit a similar trend. As expected, the pressure
gauges located at the bottommost part of the building
models always record the highest pressure. The occur-
rence of peak pressures recorded by the front pressure
gauges almost coincides with that of the nominal wave
height. Such behavior is contributed by the rapid
increase in flow depth as the wave achieves its nominal
height at this moment. For the 60 mm nominal wave
condition, the maximum pressures are recorded to be
approximately 1.9 and 1.7 times the hydrostatic

pressure, for E15 and E30 models, respectively (Figure
15(a,c)). After the peak, the pressure time histories at
the front face of both elevated building models gradu-
ally fall off and remain at the quasi-static state at
approximately 22 s.
On the other hand, the back face pressures on the
elevated building models slightly increase later than the
front face pressures because the wave takes a longer
time to reach the building models’ back face. Therefore,
the back face pressure is low at the initial impact and
only exists at the lowest region of the building models,
because the inundation depth at the back of the build-
ing model is insignificant. Figure 15(b) and 15(d) illus-
trate that some of the back face pressures show
negative values. This result may be due to the water
surface fluctuation when the wave impact occurs at the
level of the pressure gauge. However, the negative
values are small and insignificant. Figure 15 indicates
that an increase in back face pressure occurs when the
wave achieves its nominal height at approximately 3 s.
The plausible reason is that the overtopped wave falls at
the back of the building models, thereby causing
a massive impact on the building models’ back face at
that moment. Once the water at the back of the build-
ing models builds up at the later stage, the back face
pressure gradually increases and remains relatively
unchanged when the wave is in a quasi-steady state
after 15 s. Figure 15(b,d) show that the maximum back
face pressures for the E15 and E30 models occur in the
quasi-steady-state phase.
3.4.2. Maximum pressure distribution
Figure 16 presents the vertical distribution of the max-
imum normalized pressure recorded on the front and
back faces of the elevated building models (from all
repeated trials). The maximum normalized pressure is
plotted against the normalized height (z/h), where
z signifies the elevation of the building point where
pressure is recorded. As mentioned in the earlier sec-
tion, the determination of tsunami forces is associated
with wave height and flow velocity at the vicinity of the
buildings. Yeh (2007) proposed that the maximum
Figure 16. Maximum pressure distribution on (a) front and (b) back faces of elevated building models.
COASTAL ENGINEERING JOURNAL 13
hydrodynamic force must be calculated from the max-
imum momentum flux that occurred at the site with-
out the presence of a building. Therefore, Fr of the
tsunami wave should be considered in estimating the
tsunami wave pressure.
In the present study, Fr ranges from 1 to 1.23 for the
three simulated waves in the experiment. Considering
the influence of Fr, the maximum wave pressure esti-
mation for the slab-on-grade building, which is pre-
dicted using the equation proposed by Asakura et al.
(2002) and Sakakiyama (2014) is also included for the
comparison in Figure 16(a). It is clearly noticeable that
the measured data are plotted among the lines of the
proposed pressure distributions. The pressure distribu-
tion (Fr = 1) proposed by Asakura et al. (2002) shows
good agreement with the tsunami wave pressures at
the lower elevation, but it might overestimate the
wave pressure at the higher elevation. As for the pres-
sure distribution (Fr = 1.23) proposed by Asakura et al.
(2002), it tends to overestimate the experimental
results. On the other hand, the experimental results
are underestimated by Sakakiyama (2014), and the
difference increases at the lower elevation. The experi-
mental results in Figure 16(a) show that the pressure
distribution prediction formulas for the slab-on-grade
building may be inapplicable for estimating the tsu-
nami force that acts on elevated buildings.
In the present study, the pressure distribution on
elevated building models can be represented by
a linear variation with high pressure at the base of
the building models, regardless of the value of Fr. The
plausible reason is the small range of Fr value tested in
the present study. The mean pressure distribution on
the front face of the elevated building models is
defined by a linear function with approximately 2.55
times the hydrostatic pressure at the ground level and
decreases linearly to zero at 1.82 times the nominal
wave (Figure 16(a)). Conversely, the back face wave
pressure distribution is slightly higher than the hydro-
static pressure (Figure 16(b)). The mean of the max-
imum pressure distribution on the front and back faces
of the elevated building model is defined as follows,
14 W. C. MOON ET AL.
On building’s front face,
 z
Pmax ¼ ρgh 1:82  =0:71 (3)
h
On building’s back face,
 z
Pmax ¼ ρgh 1:06  =0:94 (4)
h
For nominal wave heights between 40 and 80 mm (1
< Fr < 1.23), the proposed prediction formulas for the
maximum tsunami wave pressure on the front
(Equation (5)) and back (Equation (6)) faces of the
buildings with an elevated floor slab may adopt the
equation obtained from linear least squares regression
(Mean+2SD) which corresponds to 95% data
percentiles.
On building’s front face,
 z
Pmax ¼ ρgh 1:98  =0:71 (5)
h
On building’s back face,
 z
Pmax ¼ ρgh 1:18  =0:94 (6)
h sure induced by the initial wave impingement might
4. Summary and conclusions
In this study, three nominal wave conditions that
represented the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami striking
Peninsular Malaysia were reproduced at a reduced
scale of 1:100. Two types of single-story building mod-
els (slab-on-grade and with an elevated floor slab)
were subjected to the tsunami wave of nominal
heights of 40, 60 and 80 mm with Fr values from 1 to
1.23. The following findings were obtained from the
experimental results:
(1) The existence of an elevated floor slab signifi-
cantly reduces Fx at the initial impingement of
the wave, because most of the waves manage to
pass beneath the elevated floor slab.
(2) The pressure distribution proposed in the
Japanese design method tends to overestimate
the force that acts on a building model with an
elevated floor slab, when the tsunami nominal
wave is higher than the building model.
(3) The maximum upward force that acts on
a building model with an elevated floor slab is
represented by a linear function until the ele-
vated building is fully submerged underwater.
(4) Fxmax/Fzmax ratio depends on the relationship
between the heights of a building model and
the nominal wave, where Fzmax is larger than
Fxmax for partial or no submerged condition,
whereas the horizontal force is more significant
when the elevated building model is fully sub-
merged underwater.
(5) The maximum wave pressure forms a rather
equivalent triangular distribution with the great-
est pressure at the base of the building model.
The prediction formulas in Equations (5) and (6)
are proposed to estimate the tsunami wave pres-
sure on the front and back faces of a building
with an elevated floor slab, respectively.
It is important to note that the hydraulic experiments
were conducted under several limited conditions. As an
experimental limitation, the generated solitary waves
were shorter than typical tsunamis. However, in the
present study, prior to the tsunami surge impingement
on the building models, the flow characteristics were
compared with the documented 2004 Indian Ocean
tsunami that struck Peninsular Malaysia in terms of
nominal wave height and flow velocity at the dry
shore. Another experimental limitation is the low sam-
pling rate used in the measurement of pressure and
force. The present study measured the pulsating pres-
sure when the nominal wave height at the quasi-static
state was achieved, considering that the impulsive pres-
not be sufficiently captured. In addition, the hydraulic
experiments were conducted at a small scale given the
limitations of the flume dimensions. As such, the effect
of flow viscosity is neglected during the downscaling
process based on Froude number similarity. With
a model scaling of 1:100, the tsunami flow velocity is
expected to be smaller than the large-scale experi-
ments. The scale effect on wave-induced pressure is
possibly caused by the air entrainment difference, espe-
cially for a turbulent broken wave. Thus, the proposed
methodology for tsunami force estimation in the pre-
sent work (as in Equations (5) and (6)) can be assumed
to be a conservative approach considering the possible
scale effect on the wave-induced loadings on a building
with an elevated floor slab. Howbeit, additional works
on different wave conditions in terms of Fr in combina-
tion with different types of structures are required in our
future research to improve the current findings and
guideline for buildings with elevated floor slab.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support
by the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation
(MOSTI), Malaysia through ScienceFund Research Grant (04-
01-05-SF0562) and JICA Project for AUN/SEED-Net through
Collaborative Research for Alumni (CRA) 2013. The authors
greatly appreciate the contributions by Mr. Kenny Chia in
carrying out the hydraulic experiment.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the
authors.

Funding
This work was supported by the Japan International
Cooperation Agency [USMCRA-1301];Kementerian Sains,
Teknologi dan Inovasi [04-01-05-SF0562];
ORCID
Wei Chek Moon http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1484-8523
References
Arimitsu, T., and K. Kawasaki. 2016. “Development of
Estimation Method of Tsunami Wave Pressure Exerting
on Land Structure Using Depth-Integrated Flow Model.”
Coastal Engineering Journal 58 (04): 1640021-1-1640021-
18. doi:10.1142/S0578563416400210.
Asakura, R., K. Iwase, T. Ikeya, M. Takao, T. Kaneto, N. Fujii, and
M. Ohmori. 2002. “The Tsunami Wave Force Acting on
Land Structures.” In Coastal Engineering 2002: Solving
Coastal Conundrums, 1191–1202. Cardiff, Wales.
CCH. 2000. The City and County of Honolulu Building Code.
Chapter 16, Article 11. Honolulu, HI: Department of
Planning and Permitting.
Dames and Moore. 1980. Design and Construction Standards
for Residential Construction in Tsunami-prone Areas in
Hawaii. Washington, DC: Federal Emergency Management
Agency.
Do, T. Q. 2016. “Fragility Approach for Performance-based
Design in Fluid-structure Interaction Problems, Part I: Wind
and Wind Turbines, Part II: Waves and Elevated Coastal
Structures.” PhD diss, Colorado State University.
FEMA P646. 2008. Guidelines for Design of Structures for
Vertical Evacuation from Tsunamis. Washington, DC:
Federal Emergency Management Agency.
Han, S., T. Ha, and Y. S. Cho. 2015. “Laboratory Experiments
on Run-up and Force of Solitary Waves.” Journal of Hydro-
environment Research 9 (4): 582–591. doi:10.1016/j.
jher.2015.05.002.
Honda, T., Y. Oda, K. Ito, M. Watanabe, and T. Takabatake. 2014.
“An Experimental Study on the Tsunami Pressure Acting on
Piloti-type Building.” Coastal Engineering Proceedings 1 (34):
1–11. doi:10.9753/icce.v34.structures.41.
ICC. 2009. International Building Code 2009: Flood Resistant
Construction. Appendix G. USA: International Code Council.
Kihara, N., Y. Niida, D. Takabatake, H. Kaida, A. Shibayama, and
Y. Miyagawa. 2015. “Large-scale Experiments on
Tsunami-induced Pressure on a Vertical Tide Wall.” Coastal
Engineering 99: 46–63. doi:10.1016/j.coastaleng.2015.02.009.
Lau, T. L., K. K. Choong, T. A. Majid, N. A. Zakaria, and S. Inoue.
2015. “Estimation of Tsunami Force for Onshore Buildings
in the Northwest Coast of Peninsular Malaysia.” Applied
Mechanics and Materials 802: 172–177. doi:10.4028/www.
scientific.net/AMM.802.172.
Lukkunaprasit, P., N. Thanasisathit, and H. Yeh. 2009.
“Experimental Verification of FEMA P646 Tsunami
Loading.” Journal of Disaster Research 4 (6): 410–418.
doi:10.20965/jdr.2009.p0410.
Moon, W. C., L. Q. Chiew, K. W. Cheong, Y. C. Tee, J. B. Chun,
and T. L. Lau. 2019. “An Experimental Study for Estimating
Tsunami Wave Forces Acting on Building with Seaward
COASTAL ENGINEERING JOURNAL 15
and Landward Macroroughness.” Ocean Engineering 186:
106116. doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2019.106116.
Moon, W. C., K. C. Tan, and T. L. Lau. 2014. “An Experimental
Study on Wave Forces of Tsunami on Simplified Onshore
Buildings at Penang Island, Malaysia.” Journal of Civil
Engineering Research 4 (3A): 164–172.
National Institute for Land and Infrastructure Management.
2012. Practical Guide on Requirement for Structural Design
of Tsunami Evacuation Buildings. Technical Note, No. 673.
Tsukuba, Japan. (in Japanese)
Nouri, Y., I. Nistor, D. Palermo, and A. Cornett. 2010.
“Experimental Investigation of Tsunami Impact on Free
Standing Structures.” Coastal Engineering Journal 52 (1):
43–70. doi:10.1142/S0578563410002117.
Park, H., T. Tomiczek, D. T. Cox, J. W. van de Lindt, and
P. Lomonaco. 2017. “Experimental Modeling of
Horizontal and Vertical Wave Forces on an Elevated
Coastal Structure.” Coastal Engineering 128: 58–74.
doi:10.1016/j.coastaleng.2017.08.001.
Robertson, I. N., H. R. Riggs, S. C. Yim, and Y. L. Young. 2007.
“Lessons from Hurricane Katrina Storm Surge on Bridges
and Buildings.” Journal of Waterway, Port, Coastal, and
Ocean Engineering 133 (6): 463–483. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)
0733-950X(2007)133:6(463).
Sakakiyama, T. 2014. “Tsunami Pressure on Structures Due to
Tsunami Inundation Flow.” In Proc. 34th Int. Conf. Coastal
Engineering 1 (34): 1–12.
Satake, K., and B. F. Atwater. 2007. “Long-term Perspectives
on Giant Earthquakes and Tsunamis at Subduction Zones.”
Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences 35: 349–374.
doi:10.1146/annurev.earth.35.031306.140302.
Shafiei, S., B. W. Melville, and A. Y. Shamseldin. 2016.
“Experimental Investigation of Tsunami Bore Impact Force
and Pressure on a Square Prism.” Coastal Engineering 110:
1–16. doi:10.1016/j.coastaleng.2015.12.006.
Thusyanthan, N. I., and S. G. Madabhushi. 2008 “Tsunami
Wave Loading on Coastal Houses: A Model Approach.”
Proc. of the ICE-Civil Engineering, 77–86. doi:10.1177/
1753193407087891
Tomiczek, T., A. Kennedy, and S. Rogers. 2013. “Survival
Analysis of Elevated Homes on the Bolivar Peninsula
after Hurricane Ike.” In Advances in Hurricane Engineering:
Learning from Our Past, 108–118. Miami, Florida.
Wang, T., T. Meng, and H. Zhao. 2015. “Analysis of Tsunami
Effect and Structural Response.” Technical Gazette 22 (6):
1365–1371.
Wiebe, D. M., H. Park, and D. T. Cox. 2014. “Application of the
Goda Pressure Formulae for Horizontal Wave Loads on
Elevated Structures.” KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering 18
(6): 1573–1579. doi:10.1007/s12205-014-0175-1.
Wilson, J. S., R. Gupta, J. W. van de Lindt, M. Clauson, and
R. Garcia. 2009. “Behavior of a One-sixth Scale Wood-framed
Residential Structure under Wave Loading.” Journal of
Performance of Constructed Facilities 23 (5): 336–345.
doi:10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0000039.
Yeh, H. 2007. “Design Tsunami Forces for Onshore
Structures.” Journal of Disaster Research 2 (6): 531–536.
doi:10.20965/jdr.2007.p0531.
Yim, S. C. 2005. “Modeling and Simulation of Tsunami and
Storm Surge Hydrodynamics Loads on Coastal Bridge
Structures.” Proceedings of the 21st US-Japan Bridge
Engineering Workshop, 1–14. Tsukuba, Japan.