Academia.eduAcademia.edu

GEER Team Members

Profile image of Roberto CairoRoberto Cairo
visibility

…

description

323 pages

link

1 file

Abstract

The GEER Association is supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF) through the Geotechnical Engineering Program under Grant No. CMMI-1266418. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF. The GEER Association is made possible by the vision and support of the NSF Geotechnical Engineering Program Directors: Dr. Richard Fragaszy and the late Dr. Cliff Astill. GEER members also donate their time, talent, and resources to collect time-sensitive field observations of the effects of extreme events. Sponsorship of GEER activities was also provided by the B. John Garrick Institute for the Risk Sciences at UCLA and the NSF I/UCRC Center for Unmanned Aircraft Systems (C-UAS) at BYU under Project BYU13-03. We thank Prof. Mauro Dolce and Engs. Paola Pagliara and Paola Bertuccioli from the Department of Civil Protection for their support and assistance. Matteo Francesco Stancato, master's student at Università della Calabria, contributed to data collection for building structures. We thank Giuseppe Riccioni (Ussita Municipality), Roberto Cantoni, and Raffaele Sorriento (Corpo Nazionale dei Vigili del Fuoco) for allowing surveys at Monte Bove northern flank and Valle di Panico. Eng. Monica Di Mattia (Teramo Province) supported survey activities in Crognaleto. Organizations within Italy that supported the activities reported herein include the Italian Geotechnical Society; the Consortium ReLUIS (Network of Italian Laboratories of Earthquake Engineering), headquartered in the

Figures (421)

Figure 1.1. Map of central Italy showing moment tensors of major earthquakes since 1997 and the intermediate gap areas. Finite fault models from Chiaraluce et al. (2004; 1997 Umbria-Marche event) Piatanesi and Cirella (2009; 2009 L’Aquila event), Tinti et al. (2016, 24 August event), and GdL INGV su terremoto in centro Italia, 2016, 26 and 30 October events). Moment tensors for 26 and 30 Octobe 2016 earthquakes are also shown. As shown in Figure 1.1, this earthquake sequence occurred in a gap between two earlier damaging events, the 1997 M6.1 Umbria-Marche earthquake to the north-west and the 2009 M6.1 L’Aquil: earthquake to the south-east. This gap had been previously recognized as a zone of elevated risk (Gdl INGV sul terremoto di Amatrice, 2016). These events occurred along the spine of the Apennine Mountain range on normal faults and had rake angles ranging from -80 to -100 deg, which correspond: to normal faulting. Each of these events produced substantial damage to local towns and villages. The 24 August event caused massive damages to the following villages: Arquata del Tronto, Accumoli Amatrice, and Pescara del Tronto. In total, there were 299 fatalities (www..ilgiornale.it), generally from collapses of unreinforced masonry dwellings. The October events caused significant new damage in the villages of Visso, Ussita, and Norcia, although they did not produce fatalities, since the area had largely been evacuated.
Figure 1.1. Map of central Italy showing moment tensors of major earthquakes since 1997 and the intermediate gap areas. Finite fault models from Chiaraluce et al. (2004; 1997 Umbria-Marche event) Piatanesi and Cirella (2009; 2009 L’Aquila event), Tinti et al. (2016, 24 August event), and GdL INGV su terremoto in centro Italia, 2016, 26 and 30 October events). Moment tensors for 26 and 30 Octobe 2016 earthquakes are also shown. As shown in Figure 1.1, this earthquake sequence occurred in a gap between two earlier damaging events, the 1997 M6.1 Umbria-Marche earthquake to the north-west and the 2009 M6.1 L’Aquil: earthquake to the south-east. This gap had been previously recognized as a zone of elevated risk (Gdl INGV sul terremoto di Amatrice, 2016). These events occurred along the spine of the Apennine Mountain range on normal faults and had rake angles ranging from -80 to -100 deg, which correspond: to normal faulting. Each of these events produced substantial damage to local towns and villages. The 24 August event caused massive damages to the following villages: Arquata del Tronto, Accumoli Amatrice, and Pescara del Tronto. In total, there were 299 fatalities (www..ilgiornale.it), generally from collapses of unreinforced masonry dwellings. The October events caused significant new damage in the villages of Visso, Ussita, and Norcia, although they did not produce fatalities, since the area had largely been evacuated.
Figure 1.2. Regional map showing the active fault systems, finite fault models and epicenters of the 24 August, 26 and 30 October events, ground motion station locations and recorded peak ground accelerations (PGA) for the 30 October events, and locations of various earthquake effects discussed in this report.
Figure 1.2. Regional map showing the active fault systems, finite fault models and epicenters of the 24 August, 26 and 30 October events, ground motion station locations and recorded peak ground accelerations (PGA) for the 30 October events, and locations of various earthquake effects discussed in this report.
Table 2.1. Summary of the six main events occurred in Central Italy between 24 August and 30 October 2016 Figure 2.1 shows focal mechanisms for each mainshock event, along with other information to be discussed subsequently. Each event involved normal slip on faults striking NW-SE and dipping to the SW. Specifics for each event are given in Table 2.1. The hypocenter locations, slip directions, and surface rupture suggest that the 26 and 30 October events occurred on segments of the Mt. Vettore fault. As described in GEER (2016), this fault and the neighboring Laga mountain fault to the south experienced rupture during the 24 August event.
Table 2.1. Summary of the six main events occurred in Central Italy between 24 August and 30 October 2016 Figure 2.1 shows focal mechanisms for each mainshock event, along with other information to be discussed subsequently. Each event involved normal slip on faults striking NW-SE and dipping to the SW. Specifics for each event are given in Table 2.1. The hypocenter locations, slip directions, and surface rupture suggest that the 26 and 30 October events occurred on segments of the Mt. Vettore fault. As described in GEER (2016), this fault and the neighboring Laga mountain fault to the south experienced rupture during the 24 August event.
Figure 2.1. Map showing locations of hypocenters for three mainshock events in central Italy between 24 August and 30 October 2016. Also shown on selected finite fault models for each event and aftershock patterns for the 24-hour periods post-rupture.
Figure 2.1. Map showing locations of hypocenters for three mainshock events in central Italy between 24 August and 30 October 2016. Also shown on selected finite fault models for each event and aftershock patterns for the 24-hour periods post-rupture.
Figure 2.2. (a) horizontal, and (b) vertical GPS-based co-seismic displacement estimated after the 26 October event. Data used for producing the Figures were obtained from: ftp://gpsfree.gm.ingv.it/amatrice2016/static/Cosismico 26Oct2016 GPS GdL V1.dat, last accessed 4 April, 2017). Crustal deformations associated with the 24 August 2016 event are described in Section 2.3.3 of GEER (2016 events. GPS da be expected approximately 30 October event (Figure 2.3), for which the levels of displacement are large resolution of horizontal disp ta were obtained from INGV working group (2016). Crustal displa to involve downward vertical displacement and horizonta to the southwest on the hanging walls of the fault. This is indeed . As with that event, crustal deformation data is available from GPS sensors for the two October events. Figures 2.2-2.3 show GPS-based deformation resu ts for the twc cements woulc displacement the case for the relative to the these measurement techniques. In the case of the 26 Octo ber event, the acements are relatively randomly oriented, and may reflect the effects of noise in the measurements (Figure 2.2). The data in Figures 2.2 shows peak horizontal and vertica crustal displacements of about 0 — 3 and -2 — +0.7 cm, respectively for the 26 October event The corresponding values for the 30 October event, shown in Figures 2.3, are 0 — 38 and -45- 45 cm.
Figure 2.2. (a) horizontal, and (b) vertical GPS-based co-seismic displacement estimated after the 26 October event. Data used for producing the Figures were obtained from: ftp://gpsfree.gm.ingv.it/amatrice2016/static/Cosismico 26Oct2016 GPS GdL V1.dat, last accessed 4 April, 2017). Crustal deformations associated with the 24 August 2016 event are described in Section 2.3.3 of GEER (2016 events. GPS da be expected approximately 30 October event (Figure 2.3), for which the levels of displacement are large resolution of horizontal disp ta were obtained from INGV working group (2016). Crustal displa to involve downward vertical displacement and horizonta to the southwest on the hanging walls of the fault. This is indeed . As with that event, crustal deformation data is available from GPS sensors for the two October events. Figures 2.2-2.3 show GPS-based deformation resu ts for the twc cements woulc displacement the case for the relative to the these measurement techniques. In the case of the 26 Octo ber event, the acements are relatively randomly oriented, and may reflect the effects of noise in the measurements (Figure 2.2). The data in Figures 2.2 shows peak horizontal and vertica crustal displacements of about 0 — 3 and -2 — +0.7 cm, respectively for the 26 October event The corresponding values for the 30 October event, shown in Figures 2.3, are 0 — 38 and -45- 45 cm.
Figure 2.3. (a) horizontal, and (b) vertical GPS-based co-seismic displacement estimated after the 30 October event. Data used for producing the Figures were obtained from: ftp://gpsfree.gm.ingv.it/amatrice2016/static/Cosismico 300ct2016 GPS Gdl V1.dat, last accessed 4 April, 2017).
Figure 2.3. (a) horizontal, and (b) vertical GPS-based co-seismic displacement estimated after the 30 October event. Data used for producing the Figures were obtained from: ftp://gpsfree.gm.ingv.it/amatrice2016/static/Cosismico 300ct2016 GPS Gdl V1.dat, last accessed 4 April, 2017).
The following sections summarize available information from the two events. Figure 2.4 shows the areas where surface rupture was observed in the two event, and locations of detail maps. The third section below explains in more details the method and results of GEER reconnaissance in early December 2016.
The following sections summarize available information from the two events. Figure 2.4 shows the areas where surface rupture was observed in the two event, and locations of detail maps. The third section below explains in more details the method and results of GEER reconnaissance in early December 2016.
Figure 2.5. Comparative fault offset of 10cm. (a) Vertical offset from the August event, and (b 30cm Vertical offset from the October 2016 events on the south face of Mt. Vettore near roa 5P477. Horizontal offsets were Ocm and 2cm. Lat = 42.79795, Long = 13.26607.
Figure 2.5. Comparative fault offset of 10cm. (a) Vertical offset from the August event, and (b 30cm Vertical offset from the October 2016 events on the south face of Mt. Vettore near roa 5P477. Horizontal offsets were Ocm and 2cm. Lat = 42.79795, Long = 13.26607.
Figure 2.6. Distribution of incremental and cumulative fault offsets for the southern half of the Mt. Vettore fault. All data in this Figure from hand measurements.
Figure 2.6. Distribution of incremental and cumulative fault offsets for the southern half of the Mt. Vettore fault. All data in this Figure from hand measurements.
all events, which for this portion of the fault arise from the 24 August and 30 October events The 3D model in these areas is based on UAV point cloud data, and the displacements were measured from the model using the program Dronedeploy. The comparison is considered quite good, with no clear evidence of bias. Further comparisons in other areas will be undertaken ir future work.
all events, which for this portion of the fault arise from the 24 August and 30 October events The 3D model in these areas is based on UAV point cloud data, and the displacements were measured from the model using the program Dronedeploy. The comparison is considered quite good, with no clear evidence of bias. Further comparisons in other areas will be undertaken ir future work.
Figure 2.8. Satellite image of the southern half of the Mt. Vettore Massif. The yellow box corresponds to the area shown in Figure 2.10 for the 3D model of the west face of Mt. Vettore, while the white box corresponds to the area shown in Figure 2.9 for the 3D models of the south face. The box to the west (orange) shows the location of the Piano Grande fault 3D model (Figure 2.11).
Figure 2.8. Satellite image of the southern half of the Mt. Vettore Massif. The yellow box corresponds to the area shown in Figure 2.10 for the 3D model of the west face of Mt. Vettore, while the white box corresponds to the area shown in Figure 2.9 for the 3D models of the south face. The box to the west (orange) shows the location of the Piano Grande fault 3D model (Figure 2.11).
Figure 2.9. 3D digital terrain model from merged SfM and LiDAR data of the Mt Vettore fault on the southern flank of the Mt Vettore Massif. Approximate main fault trace indicated in yellow. Looking from the west to the east. The upper left of the image is the top of the slope. Area of soft sediments where the fault trace breaks into several (4 — 6) small scarps is indicated in white.
Figure 2.9. 3D digital terrain model from merged SfM and LiDAR data of the Mt Vettore fault on the southern flank of the Mt Vettore Massif. Approximate main fault trace indicated in yellow. Looking from the west to the east. The upper left of the image is the top of the slope. Area of soft sediments where the fault trace breaks into several (4 — 6) small scarps is indicated in white.
Figure 2.10. 3D digital terrain model from merged SfM and LiDAR data of the Mt Vettore fault on the western flank of the Mt Vettore Massif. Approximate main fault trace(s) indicated in yellow, a second visible trace of the “Western Trace” shown in white (See Figure 2.11 for more details). Looking from the west. The left of the image is to the north. The slope moves from top to bottom of the image.
Figure 2.10. 3D digital terrain model from merged SfM and LiDAR data of the Mt Vettore fault on the western flank of the Mt Vettore Massif. Approximate main fault trace(s) indicated in yellow, a second visible trace of the “Western Trace” shown in white (See Figure 2.11 for more details). Looking from the west. The left of the image is to the north. The slope moves from top to bottom of the image.
Figure 2.11. 3D digital terrain model from merged SfM and LiDAR data of the Piano Grande fault on the western toe of the Mt Vettore Massif. Approximate fault trace(s) indicated ir yellow. Looking from the west. The left of the image is to the north. Mt. Vettore on the top of the image The final 3D point cloud model is from LiDAR imaging of the Piano Grande fault at the western foot of the Mt. Vettore Massif (location shown by the orange rectangle on left side of Figure 2.8). The Piano Grande fault has been interpreted as a secondary rupture surface. This fault was not observed after the August 2016 event. Figure 2.11 presents an image of this 3D model.
Figure 2.11. 3D digital terrain model from merged SfM and LiDAR data of the Piano Grande fault on the western toe of the Mt Vettore Massif. Approximate fault trace(s) indicated ir yellow. Looking from the west. The left of the image is to the north. Mt. Vettore on the top of the image The final 3D point cloud model is from LiDAR imaging of the Piano Grande fault at the western foot of the Mt. Vettore Massif (location shown by the orange rectangle on left side of Figure 2.8). The Piano Grande fault has been interpreted as a secondary rupture surface. This fault was not observed after the August 2016 event. Figure 2.11 presents an image of this 3D model.
selection of fault measurement locations and recorded offsets for this comparison. A comparison of offset measurements from the August 2016 and 30 October 2016 earthquakes from conventional mapping was performed and is illustrated in the following Figures. In these comparisons, we use co-located measurements when possible, and otherwise show initial displacements (measured in September) from adjacent locations for comparison to the offsets measured following the 30 October 2016 event. Figures 2.12 through 2.21 show a selection of fault measurement locations and recorded offsets for this comparison. Figure 2.12. Fault offset measurements showing relative offset of August 2016 (0 cm) and October 2016 (70 cm) events on the lower or “western” fault trace in Figure 2.10 (shown in white). Lat = 42.812901, Long = 13.24626.
selection of fault measurement locations and recorded offsets for this comparison. A comparison of offset measurements from the August 2016 and 30 October 2016 earthquakes from conventional mapping was performed and is illustrated in the following Figures. In these comparisons, we use co-located measurements when possible, and otherwise show initial displacements (measured in September) from adjacent locations for comparison to the offsets measured following the 30 October 2016 event. Figures 2.12 through 2.21 show a selection of fault measurement locations and recorded offsets for this comparison. Figure 2.12. Fault offset measurements showing relative offset of August 2016 (0 cm) and October 2016 (70 cm) events on the lower or “western” fault trace in Figure 2.10 (shown in white). Lat = 42.812901, Long = 13.24626.
Figure 2.13. Fault slip measurements showing multi-epoch offsets from August 2016 (upper white band, 16 cm) and October 2016 (130 cm) events. Lat = 42.81724, Long = 13.25449.
Figure 2.13. Fault slip measurements showing multi-epoch offsets from August 2016 (upper white band, 16 cm) and October 2016 (130 cm) events. Lat = 42.81724, Long = 13.25449.
‘igure 2.14. Location of maximum fault offset of 210 cm following October 2016 events. The \ugust event offset at this location is estimated as 20 cm, based on nearby data points. Lat = 12.81687, Long = 13.25503.
‘igure 2.14. Location of maximum fault offset of 210 cm following October 2016 events. The \ugust event offset at this location is estimated as 20 cm, based on nearby data points. Lat = 12.81687, Long = 13.25503.
Figure 2.15. Fault offset measurement across the footpath on the west face of Mt. Vettore. Offset measured as 80 cm following October events (a). This offset was 30 cm following August events (b). Lat = 42.807379, Long = 13.262966.
Figure 2.15. Fault offset measurement across the footpath on the west face of Mt. Vettore. Offset measured as 80 cm following October events (a). This offset was 30 cm following August events (b). Lat = 42.807379, Long = 13.262966.
Figure 2.16. Fault trace on the south face of Mt. Vettore, where the fault has ruptured along the path of buried polyethylene pipe supplying the pictured spring. Rupture partially hidden by long grass. Offset measured at 45 to 65cm. August offset data nearby is 0 to 15cm. Trace(s) above the spring indicated in red. Lat = 42.80474, Long = 13.26441.
Figure 2.16. Fault trace on the south face of Mt. Vettore, where the fault has ruptured along the path of buried polyethylene pipe supplying the pictured spring. Rupture partially hidden by long grass. Offset measured at 45 to 65cm. August offset data nearby is 0 to 15cm. Trace(s) above the spring indicated in red. Lat = 42.80474, Long = 13.26441.
Figure 2.17. Fault offset measurement of one of several (4 to 6) small traces on the south face of Mt. Vettore in the area indicated in white in Figure 2.9. In this area surface soils are thick and ductile. Offset measured at 8 to 52cm on each trace. August offsets were 0 cm. Lat = 42.80483, Long = 13.26443.
Figure 2.17. Fault offset measurement of one of several (4 to 6) small traces on the south face of Mt. Vettore in the area indicated in white in Figure 2.9. In this area surface soils are thick and ductile. Offset measured at 8 to 52cm on each trace. August offsets were 0 cm. Lat = 42.80483, Long = 13.26443.
Figure 2.18. Fault offset measurement in gulley on south face of Mt. Vettore. Offset measured at 80cm. August offset data nearby is 15cm, indicating October 2016 offset of 65cm.
Figure 2.18. Fault offset measurement in gulley on south face of Mt. Vettore. Offset measured at 80cm. August offset data nearby is 15cm, indicating October 2016 offset of 65cm.
Figure 2.19. Fault offset measurement across SR477 on south face of Mt. Vettore. August offset data nearby is 2cm (a). Offset measured at 18cm to 20cm after October (b). Lat = 42.796829, Long = 13.265899.
Figure 2.19. Fault offset measurement across SR477 on south face of Mt. Vettore. August offset data nearby is 2cm (a). Offset measured at 18cm to 20cm after October (b). Lat = 42.796829, Long = 13.265899.
Figure 2.20. Secondary fault offset across a road on the Piano Grande at the base of the Mt. Vettore Massif. August 2016 event offset of Ocm. October 2016 event offset of 7 to 18 cm.
Figure 2.20. Secondary fault offset across a road on the Piano Grande at the base of the Mt. Vettore Massif. August 2016 event offset of Ocm. October 2016 event offset of 7 to 18 cm.
Figure 2.21. Fault offset measurements along the south and west faces of the Mt. Vettore Massif showing differences in fault rupture offset through soil versus along the rock fault plane (where visible on the slope).
Figure 2.21. Fault offset measurements along the south and west faces of the Mt. Vettore Massif showing differences in fault rupture offset through soil versus along the rock fault plane (where visible on the slope).
1Number of recordings available for ground motion characterization purposes Table 3.1. Attributes of the six earthquake events analyzed.
1Number of recordings available for ground motion characterization purposes Table 3.1. Attributes of the six earthquake events analyzed.
Table 3.2. Measured Vs30 and details of the newly characterized recording station sites.
Table 3.2. Measured Vs30 and details of the newly characterized recording station sites.
Figure 3.4: Data source types used for Vs30 estimations for all considered recording stations.
Figure 3.4: Data source types used for Vs30 estimations for all considered recording stations.
Figure 3.5. Pseudo acceleration response spectra (5% damping) for Amatrice (AMT) and Norcia (NRC, NOR) sites from the M6.1 24 August event. Figure 3.5 shows 5% damped pseudo-acceleration response spectra (PSA) for the M6.1 24 August 2016 event, from three stations in the near field (AMT, NRC and NOR). The corrected ground motions have been rotated into fault normal (FN) and fault parallel (FP) orientations. The AMT ground motion has higher amplitudes in the FN direction at short oscillator periods (< 1.0 sec), whereas the two components are practically equivalent beyond about 0.6 sec. The NRC and NOR motions have higher amplitudes in the FN direction at long periods (> 1.0 sec). Figure 3.5 also compares for AMT median-component (RotD50) spectra for the origina (available from the database before 11 November 2016, labelled as ‘previous version’) and the reviewed recordings (published on 23 December 2016). There is no discernable difference between previous and reviewed recordings for NRC and NOR. There is approximately a factor of 2.0 difference for the AMT station.
Figure 3.5. Pseudo acceleration response spectra (5% damping) for Amatrice (AMT) and Norcia (NRC, NOR) sites from the M6.1 24 August event. Figure 3.5 shows 5% damped pseudo-acceleration response spectra (PSA) for the M6.1 24 August 2016 event, from three stations in the near field (AMT, NRC and NOR). The corrected ground motions have been rotated into fault normal (FN) and fault parallel (FP) orientations. The AMT ground motion has higher amplitudes in the FN direction at short oscillator periods (< 1.0 sec), whereas the two components are practically equivalent beyond about 0.6 sec. The NRC and NOR motions have higher amplitudes in the FN direction at long periods (> 1.0 sec). Figure 3.5 also compares for AMT median-component (RotD50) spectra for the origina (available from the database before 11 November 2016, labelled as ‘previous version’) and the reviewed recordings (published on 23 December 2016). There is no discernable difference between previous and reviewed recordings for NRC and NOR. There is approximately a factor of 2.0 difference for the AMT station.
Figure 3.6. Pseudo acceleration response spectra (5% damping) for nine near source recording sites from the M6.5 30 October 2016 event.
Figure 3.6. Pseudo acceleration response spectra (5% damping) for nine near source recording sites from the M6.5 30 October 2016 event.
Figure 3.7. Original ground motion, extracted pulse, and residual ground motion for the M6.5 30 October 2016 event recorded at the (a) T1214, (b) CLO, and (c) CNE stations.
Figure 3.7. Original ground motion, extracted pulse, and residual ground motion for the M6.5 30 October 2016 event recorded at the (a) T1214, (b) CLO, and (c) CNE stations.
Figure 3.10. Variation of PHA and PHV with Rye for rock (NTCO8: A), stiff (NTCO8: B), soft soi (NTCO8: C, D, E). The event terms are shown in Figure 3.14 as a function oscillator period for the six considered earthquakes. Also shown are plus/minus one between-event standard deviations from the Boore et al. (2014) GMM. For short periods (PGA to 0.5s), the Central Italy event terms for the NGA2-I range from zero to -1, whereas they are nearly zero for greater periods. This trend is consistent with what was observed for the 2009 L’Aquila event ground motions using NGA-West1 GMMs with an Italy adjustment (Stewart et al., 2012).
Figure 3.10. Variation of PHA and PHV with Rye for rock (NTCO8: A), stiff (NTCO8: B), soft soi (NTCO8: C, D, E). The event terms are shown in Figure 3.14 as a function oscillator period for the six considered earthquakes. Also shown are plus/minus one between-event standard deviations from the Boore et al. (2014) GMM. For short periods (PGA to 0.5s), the Central Italy event terms for the NGA2-I range from zero to -1, whereas they are nearly zero for greater periods. This trend is consistent with what was observed for the 2009 L’Aquila event ground motions using NGA-West1 GMMs with an Italy adjustment (Stewart et al., 2012).
Figure 3.11. Variation of PHA and PHV with Rye for rock (NTCO8: A), stiff (NTCO8: B), soft soil (NTCO8: C, D, E).
Figure 3.11. Variation of PHA and PHV with Rye for rock (NTCO8: A), stiff (NTCO8: B), soft soil (NTCO8: C, D, E).
Figure 3.13. Within-event residuals of PHV from recorded ground motions relative to predictions of the NGA2, NGA2-| andB11. Binned means shown with +/- one standard deviation.
Figure 3.13. Within-event residuals of PHV from recorded ground motions relative to predictions of the NGA2, NGA2-| andB11. Binned means shown with +/- one standard deviation.
Figure 3.14. Event terms for PGA and PSA oscillator periods of 0.1-2.0 sec for the three sets of models and six events. For context, the +/- one between-event standard deviation is shown: t2 for M>5.5 from the Boore et al (2014) and og from Bindi et al (2011).
Figure 3.14. Event terms for PGA and PSA oscillator periods of 0.1-2.0 sec for the three sets of models and six events. For context, the +/- one between-event standard deviation is shown: t2 for M>5.5 from the Boore et al (2014) and og from Bindi et al (2011).
Figure 4.1. (a) Map of observed landslides (green diamonds), along with surface fault projections and moment tensors for the three mainshocks; (b) Observed landslides superimposed to the IFFI inventory.
Figure 4.1. (a) Map of observed landslides (green diamonds), along with surface fault projections and moment tensors for the three mainshocks; (b) Observed landslides superimposed to the IFFI inventory.
Figure 4.2. Location of reconnaissance sites, epicenter locations, and spatial distribution of PGA for the 30 October M6.5 earthquake.
Figure 4.2. Location of reconnaissance sites, epicenter locations, and spatial distribution of PGA for the 30 October M6.5 earthquake.
Table 4.2. Reconnaissance landslide site locations (Visual inspection sites).
Table 4.2. Reconnaissance landslide site locations (Visual inspection sites).
Figure 4.4. Location of the Nera landslide. \ large rockfall above the Nera River, a tributary of the Tiber River, occurred just downstream and 1 kilometer west of the town of Visso (Figure 4.4 and Table 4.1). No reports of slope instability at this location were made following the 24 Aug 2017 event nor the 26 October 2017 event. The andslide was witnessed by a passing car during the 30 October 2017 event (Visso resident), who vad just passed through the Strade Provinciale 209 tunnel west of the site and saw the slide Jebris pass over the roadway in his rear-view mirror.
Figure 4.4. Location of the Nera landslide. \ large rockfall above the Nera River, a tributary of the Tiber River, occurred just downstream and 1 kilometer west of the town of Visso (Figure 4.4 and Table 4.1). No reports of slope instability at this location were made following the 24 Aug 2017 event nor the 26 October 2017 event. The andslide was witnessed by a passing car during the 30 October 2017 event (Visso resident), who vad just passed through the Strade Provinciale 209 tunnel west of the site and saw the slide Jebris pass over the roadway in his rear-view mirror.
Figure 4.5. Nera rock avalanche photographed from the UCLA DJI Phantom 4 drone at an elevation of 400 meters above Route SS209. The primary rock-fall was a wedge that detached on the right side of the image and disintegrated into talus debris as it fell 330 meters to the river valley floor. The limestone bedding is visible in the scar of the wedge detachment Geoloov
Figure 4.5. Nera rock avalanche photographed from the UCLA DJI Phantom 4 drone at an elevation of 400 meters above Route SS209. The primary rock-fall was a wedge that detached on the right side of the image and disintegrated into talus debris as it fell 330 meters to the river valley floor. The limestone bedding is visible in the scar of the wedge detachment Geoloov
Table 4.3. Landslide abundance as a function of little logic unit (from Guzzetti et al, 2004) Se a eee Se set Mcesieinhche ai! deat —— IM 0) ib edad pe atl During the 30 October 2016 earthquake, the rock avalanche at Nera separated from the stee rock-face in a brittle detachment. The fall was fast-moving and disintegrative. Quantitativ measurements from the rockfall were made from photogrammetric reconstruction of imager captured from the UCA DJI Phanton drone quad copter. Reconstruction was performed using th Structure-from Motion method. The crest of the valley wall at the top of the detachment i approximately 330 meters above SS209. The slope at the detachment area is between 75° an 80°. The slope of the debris apron SS209 is about 27°. The entire talus field covers about 20,00 m?.
Table 4.3. Landslide abundance as a function of little logic unit (from Guzzetti et al, 2004) Se a eee Se set Mcesieinhche ai! deat —— IM 0) ib edad pe atl During the 30 October 2016 earthquake, the rock avalanche at Nera separated from the stee rock-face in a brittle detachment. The fall was fast-moving and disintegrative. Quantitativ measurements from the rockfall were made from photogrammetric reconstruction of imager captured from the UCA DJI Phanton drone quad copter. Reconstruction was performed using th Structure-from Motion method. The crest of the valley wall at the top of the detachment i approximately 330 meters above SS209. The slope at the detachment area is between 75° an 80°. The slope of the debris apron SS209 is about 27°. The entire talus field covers about 20,00 m?.
The upper detachment zone can be seen in the SFM imagery of Figure 4.6-4.7. In these images, the bedding is seen with an apparent dip towards the east of 20°-30°, and the wedge is apparently a double joint set orthogonal to the bedding. The failure occurred along the joint sets. Further analysis of the SFM data may resolve the strike and dip of the bedding and the joint sets that resulted in the detachment. Figure 4.6. Headscarp of Nera rockfall.
The upper detachment zone can be seen in the SFM imagery of Figure 4.6-4.7. In these images, the bedding is seen with an apparent dip towards the east of 20°-30°, and the wedge is apparently a double joint set orthogonal to the bedding. The failure occurred along the joint sets. Further analysis of the SFM data may resolve the strike and dip of the bedding and the joint sets that resulted in the detachment. Figure 4.6. Headscarp of Nera rockfall.
Figure 4.7. 3D Structure-from Motion (SFM) model of the Nera river valley at the rockfall. The Nera rock avalanche is seen here from the east (Visso) side of the rockfall. The light color on the midslope is from the setting sunlight on the SfM UAV imagery. Elevation difference from the crest of the headscarp to the river is 330m.
Figure 4.7. 3D Structure-from Motion (SFM) model of the Nera river valley at the rockfall. The Nera rock avalanche is seen here from the east (Visso) side of the rockfall. The light color on the midslope is from the setting sunlight on the SfM UAV imagery. Elevation difference from the crest of the headscarp to the river is 330m.
Figure 4.9. Phantom 4 UAV image of Monte Bove. Suspected rockfall sources are circled in yellow.
Figure 4.9. Phantom 4 UAV image of Monte Bove. Suspected rockfall sources are circled in yellow.
Figure 4.10. Photograph (300 mm) of the upper rockfall near the summit of Monte Bove.
Figure 4.10. Photograph (300 mm) of the upper rockfall near the summit of Monte Bove.
Figure 4.11. Screenshot of Monte Bove SfM meshed 3D model. Note the missing summit of the mountain in the model due to insufficient UAV imagery
Figure 4.11. Screenshot of Monte Bove SfM meshed 3D model. Note the missing summit of the mountain in the model due to insufficient UAV imagery
Figure 4.12. Pescara del Tronto locality map. Specific locations referred to in the text shown
Figure 4.12. Pescara del Tronto locality map. Specific locations referred to in the text shown
Figure 4.13. Pescara del Tronto aerial photograph taken from the Phantom 4 UAV.
Figure 4.13. Pescara del Tronto aerial photograph taken from the Phantom 4 UAV.
Figure 4.14. 3D SfM model of main damaged building area overlying talus deposits (Location 3a)
Figure 4.14. 3D SfM model of main damaged building area overlying talus deposits (Location 3a)
Figure 4.15. View of talus behind failed retaining wall by Strada Statale No. 4 (Location 3b).
Figure 4.15. View of talus behind failed retaining wall by Strada Statale No. 4 (Location 3b).
Figure 4.16. Pavement and road base damage induced by underlying stability failure of fill material (Location 3c).
Figure 4.16. Pavement and road base damage induced by underlying stability failure of fill material (Location 3c).
Figure 4.17. Road damage induced by slight rotation of the underlying retaining wall and/or settlement of the retaining wall backfill.
Figure 4.17. Road damage induced by slight rotation of the underlying retaining wall and/or settlement of the retaining wall backfill.
Figure 4.18. Aerial photograph of landslide impacting Strada Statale No. 4 below Pescara del Tronto (Location 3d).
Figure 4.18. Aerial photograph of landslide impacting Strada Statale No. 4 below Pescara del Tronto (Location 3d).
Figure 4.19. View of damaged rockfall netting caused by loose debris material from the landslide above Strada Statale No. 4 (Location 3d).
Figure 4.19. View of damaged rockfall netting caused by loose debris material from the landslide above Strada Statale No. 4 (Location 3d).
Figure 4.20. Failure of steepened talus gully wall material and crest area above (Location 3e). i aos adil Se eee ee ee oe Pee ee cade il In Chapter 4 of the GEER (2016) report, several points of interest were observed and noted ir Pescara del Tronto (Figure 4.21). This section will now compare those same points of interest from the September reconnaissance mission with the December reconnaissance mission tc evaluate the presence of incremental ground deformations. We lack details regarding the origir of these changes between the 26 October and 30 October events. Ongoing change detectior analyses using SfM point clouds is already underway to detect where slopes may have movec and to estimate how much movement occurred between the two GEER reconnaissance missions
Figure 4.20. Failure of steepened talus gully wall material and crest area above (Location 3e). i aos adil Se eee ee ee oe Pee ee cade il In Chapter 4 of the GEER (2016) report, several points of interest were observed and noted ir Pescara del Tronto (Figure 4.21). This section will now compare those same points of interest from the September reconnaissance mission with the December reconnaissance mission tc evaluate the presence of incremental ground deformations. We lack details regarding the origir of these changes between the 26 October and 30 October events. Ongoing change detectior analyses using SfM point clouds is already underway to detect where slopes may have movec and to estimate how much movement occurred between the two GEER reconnaissance missions
one car) tumbled 12-25 m into the gulley as a result. Interestingly, the remaining side slope is nearly linear as it follows the gulley up the creek (Figure 4.25), with a uniform dip angle of about 53 degrees. This observed linearity of the remaining slope suggests that the failures involved anthropogenic soil fills and retaining walls failures, whereas the remaining soil/rock remained intact. Figure 4.24. 3D model comparison of the failed retaining wall below Pescara del Tronto between September 2016 (a) and December 2016 (b).
one car) tumbled 12-25 m into the gulley as a result. Interestingly, the remaining side slope is nearly linear as it follows the gulley up the creek (Figure 4.25), with a uniform dip angle of about 53 degrees. This observed linearity of the remaining slope suggests that the failures involved anthropogenic soil fills and retaining walls failures, whereas the remaining soil/rock remained intact. Figure 4.24. 3D model comparison of the failed retaining wall below Pescara del Tronto between September 2016 (a) and December 2016 (b).
Figure 4.25. 3D SfM model view of scarp linearity behind failed lower retaining wall in Pescara del Tronto. Area 6: Landslide on the Northern Slope of the Village: A shallow landslide was observed on the northern slope of the city following the 24 August event (Figure 4.27a). This landslide wa: observed to have exposed some tree roots and undermined a few residential structures Investigation of the same slope in December following the October events revealed that the depth of the landslide remained relatively unchanged, but the width of the landslide appears tc have expanded from 17 m in September to more than 36 m in December (Figure 4.27b). However it is difficult to discern from the UAV images and 3D model whether the flattened trees along the slope are due to an expansion of the shallow landslide or due to structural debris from above the slope. Area 7: Haul Road and Exposed Pipeline near the Gravel Pit: A small landslide was observed on the slope bounding the gravel pit on the southern portion of the village of Pescara del Tronto, adjacent to SP129, following the 24 August event (Figure 4.28a). This landslide was caused by the unraveling of weathered limestone and calcareous soils that were underlying a dirt haul road for the gravel pit. The landslide exposed approximately 15 m of a 50 cm-diameter pipeline. The A?
Figure 4.25. 3D SfM model view of scarp linearity behind failed lower retaining wall in Pescara del Tronto. Area 6: Landslide on the Northern Slope of the Village: A shallow landslide was observed on the northern slope of the city following the 24 August event (Figure 4.27a). This landslide wa: observed to have exposed some tree roots and undermined a few residential structures Investigation of the same slope in December following the October events revealed that the depth of the landslide remained relatively unchanged, but the width of the landslide appears tc have expanded from 17 m in September to more than 36 m in December (Figure 4.27b). However it is difficult to discern from the UAV images and 3D model whether the flattened trees along the slope are due to an expansion of the shallow landslide or due to structural debris from above the slope. Area 7: Haul Road and Exposed Pipeline near the Gravel Pit: A small landslide was observed on the slope bounding the gravel pit on the southern portion of the village of Pescara del Tronto, adjacent to SP129, following the 24 August event (Figure 4.28a). This landslide was caused by the unraveling of weathered limestone and calcareous soils that were underlying a dirt haul road for the gravel pit. The landslide exposed approximately 15 m of a 50 cm-diameter pipeline. The A?
condition of the landslide remained largely unchanged following the October earthquake events (Figure 4.28b). The slope beneath the haul road degraded slightly more, causing nearly half of the haul road above the landslide to disappear. Additionally, approximately 8 more meters of the pipeline became exposed from the additional slope movements, causing the pipeline to apparently sag and bow slightly. Another smaller pipe of a few centimeters’ diameter was also exposed and sagging substantially along the scarp. Figure 4.26. 3D model comparison of the landslide near the head of the gulley in Pescara del Tronto between September 2016 (a) and December 2016 (b).
condition of the landslide remained largely unchanged following the October earthquake events (Figure 4.28b). The slope beneath the haul road degraded slightly more, causing nearly half of the haul road above the landslide to disappear. Additionally, approximately 8 more meters of the pipeline became exposed from the additional slope movements, causing the pipeline to apparently sag and bow slightly. Another smaller pipe of a few centimeters’ diameter was also exposed and sagging substantially along the scarp. Figure 4.26. 3D model comparison of the landslide near the head of the gulley in Pescara del Tronto between September 2016 (a) and December 2016 (b).
Figure 4.28. 3D model comparison of the landslide near the gravel pit in Pescara del Tronto between September 2016 (a) and December 2016 (b).
Figure 4.28. 3D model comparison of the landslide near the gravel pit in Pescara del Tronto between September 2016 (a) and December 2016 (b).
of Accumoli and highlights three areas of observed damage that will be discussed below. Section 6.1.2 discussed the distribution of structural damage in Accumoli. Pe ee: Ea _— ne ae a bal ee ee ee ee oe eee oe ae ee oS aa ae oe Point 4a (a2. 69442 N 13.25029 E) identifies the location of a rotated retaining wall described in GEER (2016). Following the 24 August event, the 4.8 m-tall retaining wall was observed to be rotated outwards 3.5 degrees with horizontal movements of 57 cm and downward vertical movements of nearly 18 cm. A soil graben nearly 2.7 m wide was observed behind the rotated wall, with soil settlements of 45-50 cm.
of Accumoli and highlights three areas of observed damage that will be discussed below. Section 6.1.2 discussed the distribution of structural damage in Accumoli. Pe ee: Ea _— ne ae a bal ee ee ee ee oe eee oe ae ee oS aa ae oe Point 4a (a2. 69442 N 13.25029 E) identifies the location of a rotated retaining wall described in GEER (2016). Following the 24 August event, the 4.8 m-tall retaining wall was observed to be rotated outwards 3.5 degrees with horizontal movements of 57 cm and downward vertical movements of nearly 18 cm. A soil graben nearly 2.7 m wide was observed behind the rotated wall, with soil settlements of 45-50 cm.
Figure 4.30. Failure of retaining wall due to shallow landslide (Point 4a, looking towards north).
Figure 4.30. Failure of retaining wall due to shallow landslide (Point 4a, looking towards north).
Figure 4.31. Failure of retaining wall due to shallow landslide (Point 4a, looking towards south).
Figure 4.31. Failure of retaining wall due to shallow landslide (Point 4a, looking towards south).
Figure 4.32. 3D model screenshot identifying objects of interest with the failed retaining wall and shallow slope failure at Point 4a.
Figure 4.32. 3D model screenshot identifying objects of interest with the failed retaining wall and shallow slope failure at Point 4a.
Figure 4.33. 3D model screenshot of the destroyed roadway Frazione Fonte del Campo (i.e., SP- 18). the wall or cracking in the soil were observed. The structure adjacent to the wall was damaged, but still standing. In December, the wall was observed to have rotated outward 3.6 degrees, with a 1.8 m-wide graben forming behind the wall. The soil in the graben was measured to have settled approximately 29 cm. The structure adjacent to the wall was completely collapsed. The similarities in the observed damages with this wall with the observed damages of the now- collapsed wall in September are remarkable, and suggest that another shallow landslide may have formed beneath this damaged wall.
Figure 4.33. 3D model screenshot of the destroyed roadway Frazione Fonte del Campo (i.e., SP- 18). the wall or cracking in the soil were observed. The structure adjacent to the wall was damaged, but still standing. In December, the wall was observed to have rotated outward 3.6 degrees, with a 1.8 m-wide graben forming behind the wall. The soil in the graben was measured to have settled approximately 29 cm. The structure adjacent to the wall was completely collapsed. The similarities in the observed damages with this wall with the observed damages of the now- collapsed wall in September are remarkable, and suggest that another shallow landslide may have formed beneath this damaged wall.
Figure 4.34. 3D model screenshots showing a retaining wall beneath the northeastern slope of Accumoli (a) undamaged in September 2016, and (b) damaged in December 2016.
Figure 4.34. 3D model screenshots showing a retaining wall beneath the northeastern slope of Accumoli (a) undamaged in September 2016, and (b) damaged in December 2016.
Figure 4.35. 3D model screenshots showing cracking from a shallow landslide (a) during the September GEER reconnaissance, and (b) during the December GEER reconnaissance.
Figure 4.35. 3D model screenshots showing cracking from a shallow landslide (a) during the September GEER reconnaissance, and (b) during the December GEER reconnaissance.
he first site encountered (Point 5a) was a landslide in the soil slope through and beneath t oad. An aerial photograph of the landslide is shown in Figure 4.37 (note the fire fighter in t ipper left corner for scale). The landslide was measured to be 55-60 m in width. While the he f the landslide was easily seen in the road pavement, no toe or side scarp of the landslide cot ye traced on the heavily vegetated slope below the road. On the road, the vertical off: neasured in the pavement ranged from 10-70 cm, and the horizontal deformation ranged frc -40 cm. The GEER team observed that the eastern portion of the landslide headscarp showex listinct crack and displacement (Figure 4.38), while the western portion of the landsli \eadscarp appeared more gradual and showed more pavement cracking (Figure 4.39). TI andslide was believed to have occurred in the shallow soils along the side of the mountain slo ind appeared limited in its extents. Figure 4.36. Site vicinity map for the Valle di Panico, located to the east of Ussita and to the north of Monte Bove.
he first site encountered (Point 5a) was a landslide in the soil slope through and beneath t oad. An aerial photograph of the landslide is shown in Figure 4.37 (note the fire fighter in t ipper left corner for scale). The landslide was measured to be 55-60 m in width. While the he f the landslide was easily seen in the road pavement, no toe or side scarp of the landslide cot ye traced on the heavily vegetated slope below the road. On the road, the vertical off: neasured in the pavement ranged from 10-70 cm, and the horizontal deformation ranged frc -40 cm. The GEER team observed that the eastern portion of the landslide headscarp showex listinct crack and displacement (Figure 4.38), while the western portion of the landsli \eadscarp appeared more gradual and showed more pavement cracking (Figure 4.39). TI andslide was believed to have occurred in the shallow soils along the side of the mountain slo ind appeared limited in its extents. Figure 4.36. Site vicinity map for the Valle di Panico, located to the east of Ussita and to the north of Monte Bove.
Figure 4.37. Landslide encountered along mountain road in the Valle di Panico (Point 5a).
Figure 4.37. Landslide encountered along mountain road in the Valle di Panico (Point 5a).
Figure 4.38. 3D model of the eastern half of the Valle di Panico landslide headscarp.
Figure 4.38. 3D model of the eastern half of the Valle di Panico landslide headscarp.
Figure 4.39. 3D model of the western half of the Valle di Panico landslide headscarp.
Figure 4.39. 3D model of the western half of the Valle di Panico landslide headscarp.
Figure 4.40. 3D model of the Valle di Panico rockfall.
Figure 4.40. 3D model of the Valle di Panico rockfall.
Figure 4.41. Photograph of the largest observed boulder fragment in the Valle di Panico rockfall. The boulder measured approximately 3.0 meters in diameter.
Figure 4.41. Photograph of the largest observed boulder fragment in the Valle di Panico rockfall. The boulder measured approximately 3.0 meters in diameter.
Figure 4.42. 3D model of the source of the Valle di Panico rockfall, located 90 meters above the mountain road.
Figure 4.42. 3D model of the source of the Valle di Panico rockfall, located 90 meters above the mountain road.
Figure 4.43. 3D model of the boulders and small power or pump house at the toe of the Valle di Panico rockfall.
Figure 4.43. 3D model of the boulders and small power or pump house at the toe of the Valle di Panico rockfall.
Figure 4.44. Location of rockfall site near Cervaro village (Crognaleto).
Figure 4.44. Location of rockfall site near Cervaro village (Crognaleto).
Figure 4.45. 3D SfM model of rockfall site near Cervaro village (Crognaleto). Primary rockfall source circled in yellow.
Figure 4.45. 3D SfM model of rockfall site near Cervaro village (Crognaleto). Primary rockfall source circled in yellow.
Figure 4.46. Source and runout chute of rockfall site near Cervaro village (Crognaleto) as seen from road at base of slope. Primary rock source circled in white.
Figure 4.46. Source and runout chute of rockfall site near Cervaro village (Crognaleto) as seen from road at base of slope. Primary rock source circled in white.
Figure 4.47. UAV aerial image of rockfall path from source at top of slope to the road at bottom of slope. Red circles show boulder fragments larger than 1.5m. Last boulder fragment from rockfall near road at base of slope is circled in orange. in Figure 4.48, with a 1.7 m tall GEER team member next to the boulder for size perspective. Below the primary rock source, the large rock mass(es) followed the path of a drainage feature to the bottom of the slope just above the Via Trieste where the final large boulder came to rest. Figure 4.47 shows an overhead photo from the UAV with large boulder fragments identified. It may have been that the source rock was already fractured prior to the earthquake into 1 to 4m blocks that dislodged. It may also be that the rock dislodged in one or two large masses that broke apart on the runout down the slope towards the road. The final boulder is 4 m and is shown in Figure 4.48, with a 1.7 m tall GEER team member next to the boulder for size perspective.
Figure 4.47. UAV aerial image of rockfall path from source at top of slope to the road at bottom of slope. Red circles show boulder fragments larger than 1.5m. Last boulder fragment from rockfall near road at base of slope is circled in orange. in Figure 4.48, with a 1.7 m tall GEER team member next to the boulder for size perspective. Below the primary rock source, the large rock mass(es) followed the path of a drainage feature to the bottom of the slope just above the Via Trieste where the final large boulder came to rest. Figure 4.47 shows an overhead photo from the UAV with large boulder fragments identified. It may have been that the source rock was already fractured prior to the earthquake into 1 to 4m blocks that dislodged. It may also be that the rock dislodged in one or two large masses that broke apart on the runout down the slope towards the road. The final boulder is 4 m and is shown in Figure 4.48, with a 1.7 m tall GEER team member next to the boulder for size perspective.
Figure 4.48. Last boulder fragment (4 meter) from rockfall near road at base of slope. Also pictured are freshly toppled trees from the boulder’s roll to its final position.
Figure 4.48. Last boulder fragment (4 meter) from rockfall near road at base of slope. Also pictured are freshly toppled trees from the boulder’s roll to its final position.
were developed from both datasets. Figure 4.50 presents the SFM model from UAV data. The GEER team visited Teramo Province at the request of provincial engineers who recorded a large rockfall near the village of Crognaleto along road SP45a north of Crognaleto. Large block: detached from a 3.5 m thick sandstone seam located at an elevation of 1200 m a.s.l., i.e. about 100 m and 150 m above the upper and lower stretch of the SP45A motorway respectively, anc 250 m above the valley bottom. The rockfall location is shown in Figure 4.49, about 0.5 km frorr the village. The road SP45a winds along the mountainside at about mid-slope. The rockfal occurred at the top of the slope and boulders ran-out across SP45a down the slope. At Site 7, the GEER team performed both LiDAR and UAV data collection of the rockfall. 3D point cloud models were developed from both datasets. Figure 4.50 presents the SfM model from UAV data. Figure 4.49. Location of rockfall site near Crognaleto village.
were developed from both datasets. Figure 4.50 presents the SFM model from UAV data. The GEER team visited Teramo Province at the request of provincial engineers who recorded a large rockfall near the village of Crognaleto along road SP45a north of Crognaleto. Large block: detached from a 3.5 m thick sandstone seam located at an elevation of 1200 m a.s.l., i.e. about 100 m and 150 m above the upper and lower stretch of the SP45A motorway respectively, anc 250 m above the valley bottom. The rockfall location is shown in Figure 4.49, about 0.5 km frorr the village. The road SP45a winds along the mountainside at about mid-slope. The rockfal occurred at the top of the slope and boulders ran-out across SP45a down the slope. At Site 7, the GEER team performed both LiDAR and UAV data collection of the rockfall. 3D point cloud models were developed from both datasets. Figure 4.50 presents the SfM model from UAV data. Figure 4.49. Location of rockfall site near Crognaleto village.
Figure 4.50. 3D SfM model from UAV imagery of the rockfall site near Crognaleto village.
Figure 4.50. 3D SfM model from UAV imagery of the rockfall site near Crognaleto village.
Figure 4.51. UAV image of rockfall site near Crognaleto village from the source area at the top of slope looking down to road along runout chute. Note several large 1 to 3 meter boulder fragments in the drainage below the road (yellow circles).
Figure 4.51. UAV image of rockfall site near Crognaleto village from the source area at the top of slope looking down to road along runout chute. Note several large 1 to 3 meter boulder fragments in the drainage below the road (yellow circles).
shows that the area has regular rockfall, and that strong ground shaking from the October 30, 2016 earthquake has merely accelerated the rate of rockfall at the site. Figure 4.52. Damaged segmented concrete block retaining wall at roadway. Blocks that fell on road have been removed by local officials prior to visit from GEER team.
shows that the area has regular rockfall, and that strong ground shaking from the October 30, 2016 earthquake has merely accelerated the rate of rockfall at the site. Figure 4.52. Damaged segmented concrete block retaining wall at roadway. Blocks that fell on road have been removed by local officials prior to visit from GEER team.
Figure 4.53. View upslope of damaged retaining wall, boulder fragments and runout chute from road at rockfall site near Crognaleto village.
Figure 4.53. View upslope of damaged retaining wall, boulder fragments and runout chute from road at rockfall site near Crognaleto village.
Figure 4.54. Location of Pescia rockfall sites. The August 2016 rockfall was relatively minor compared to that in October 2016. In August 2016, few boulders that detached from the rock face reached the Via del Passero roadway. In the 30 October 2016 earthquake, many boulders reached the roadway, with some large boulders ‘eaching the valley floor and the stream below the road. The mountain slopes in the area have ong been creeping under gravity loads (as seen in Figure 4.55), but when the GEER team visited he site, the team also observed displacements of the roadway embankment fills for Via del -assero. These slope displacements were not observed after the August 2016 earthquake.
Figure 4.54. Location of Pescia rockfall sites. The August 2016 rockfall was relatively minor compared to that in October 2016. In August 2016, few boulders that detached from the rock face reached the Via del Passero roadway. In the 30 October 2016 earthquake, many boulders reached the roadway, with some large boulders ‘eaching the valley floor and the stream below the road. The mountain slopes in the area have ong been creeping under gravity loads (as seen in Figure 4.55), but when the GEER team visited he site, the team also observed displacements of the roadway embankment fills for Via del -assero. These slope displacements were not observed after the August 2016 earthquake.
Figure 4.56. Pescia rockfall site 9a 3D SfM model from UAV data. Rock source and 2.5 meter boulders circled in yellow.
Figure 4.56. Pescia rockfall site 9a 3D SfM model from UAV data. Rock source and 2.5 meter boulders circled in yellow.
Figure 4.57. 3D SfM orthophoto of the rockfall source at site 9a.
Figure 4.57. 3D SfM orthophoto of the rockfall source at site 9a.
Figure 4.59. Pescia rockfall site 9b. 3D SfM model from UAV data. Boulders that have rolled into field below the road are circled in yellow. Source is indicated by white circle.
Figure 4.59. Pescia rockfall site 9b. 3D SfM model from UAV data. Boulders that have rolled into field below the road are circled in yellow. Source is indicated by white circle.
Figure 4.60. Pescia rockfall site 9b. Source area at top with runout damage. Not pictured: runout boulders across road and into field, corresponding to approximate 30 degree Fahrboeschung angles.
Figure 4.60. Pescia rockfall site 9b. Source area at top with runout damage. Not pictured: runout boulders across road and into field, corresponding to approximate 30 degree Fahrboeschung angles.
Figure 4.61. Frontal view of the rock monolith at km 3 of SP134 motorway. On the opposite valley flank a rock slide occurred at a height of about 100 m above the valley 90ttom and evolved into a small rock avalanche that fell into the Nera River (some blocks reached he opposite riverside). UAV drone surveys were instrumental in understanding landslide Zeometry, rock mass quality and failure mechanism. The oblique view in Figure 4.63a shows that he failed mass suffered intense fragmentation and eroded the slope with significant entraining of debris overlying the bedrock. Figure 4.63b indicates that sliding involved an intensely fractured nvedge of Maiolica limestone delimited by two persistent joints.
Figure 4.61. Frontal view of the rock monolith at km 3 of SP134 motorway. On the opposite valley flank a rock slide occurred at a height of about 100 m above the valley 90ttom and evolved into a small rock avalanche that fell into the Nera River (some blocks reached he opposite riverside). UAV drone surveys were instrumental in understanding landslide Zeometry, rock mass quality and failure mechanism. The oblique view in Figure 4.63a shows that he failed mass suffered intense fragmentation and eroded the slope with significant entraining of debris overlying the bedrock. Figure 4.63b indicates that sliding involved an intensely fractured nvedge of Maiolica limestone delimited by two persistent joints.
Figure 4.62. Lateral view from the drone of the rock column at km 3 of S$P134 (right valley flank) (a). The left part of the column cap collapsed producing two small avalanches towards the column front and along the column free side. Scars left from two wedges on the adjacent cliff (b). Leftward tilting of the column cap is also visible in figure 4.61.
Figure 4.62. Lateral view from the drone of the rock column at km 3 of S$P134 (right valley flank) (a). The left part of the column cap collapsed producing two small avalanches towards the column front and along the column free side. Scars left from two wedges on the adjacent cliff (b). Leftward tilting of the column cap is also visible in figure 4.61.
Figure 4.63. General oblique view of the rock slide and subsequent rock avalanche on the left flank of the Nera valley (km 3 of SP134 motorway) (a); detail of the detachment area (b). Images taken from the 3D model generated by BYU on the basis of drone surveys.
Figure 4.63. General oblique view of the rock slide and subsequent rock avalanche on the left flank of the Nera valley (km 3 of SP134 motorway) (a); detail of the detachment area (b). Images taken from the 3D model generated by BYU on the basis of drone surveys.
Figure 4.64. General oblique view from the drone of the rock slide on the right flank of the Nera valley (km 4 of SP134 motorway); the rock avalanche invaded the motorway and the valley bottom below for a stretch of about 70 m spreading large blocks (b-c).
Figure 4.64. General oblique view from the drone of the rock slide on the right flank of the Nera valley (km 4 of SP134 motorway); the rock avalanche invaded the motorway and the valley bottom below for a stretch of about 70 m spreading large blocks (b-c).
Figure 4.65. Close-range drone image of the detachment area (a) and detail of a bedding joint forming the sliding surface taken from the slide foot (b).
Figure 4.65. Close-range drone image of the detachment area (a) and detail of a bedding joint forming the sliding surface taken from the slide foot (b).
igure 4.67. Satellite image of Mt. Vettore Massive showing fault alignment and _ slope lisplacement sites 11 and 19.
igure 4.67. Satellite image of Mt. Vettore Massive showing fault alignment and _ slope lisplacement sites 11 and 19.
Figure 4.68. Excerpt from 3D SfM model from UAV data of the side of Mt. Vettore. The blue dashed line indicates the footpath. Red dashed line indicates scarps interpreted as the fault rupture trace(s). The yellow lines indicate scarps interpreted as minor slope instabilities. Looking from the west to the west face of Mt. Vettore. On the right of the image the slope descends on the south face towards road SR477.
Figure 4.68. Excerpt from 3D SfM model from UAV data of the side of Mt. Vettore. The blue dashed line indicates the footpath. Red dashed line indicates scarps interpreted as the fault rupture trace(s). The yellow lines indicate scarps interpreted as minor slope instabilities. Looking from the west to the west face of Mt. Vettore. On the right of the image the slope descends on the south face towards road SR477.
Figure 4.69. View of the east slope of Mt. Vettore showing talus slopes and fault rupture trace. Fault rupture displacements and strong ground shaking have caused densification and sliding of talus.
Figure 4.69. View of the east slope of Mt. Vettore showing talus slopes and fault rupture trace. Fault rupture displacements and strong ground shaking have caused densification and sliding of talus.
Figure 4.70. Image of fault scarp and associated nearby slope instabilities (yellow). 4.2.11 Rockfall SP 477 Arquata-Castelluccio (reappraisal)
Figure 4.70. Image of fault scarp and associated nearby slope instabilities (yellow). 4.2.11 Rockfall SP 477 Arquata-Castelluccio (reappraisal)
Figure 4.71. Location of the rockfall on road SP 477 between Arquata and Castelluccio. FR EC) Eee em ee a eS ee) Be Tot ae ee ee ee eee ee eee, ( lee iad ciaacamians Rockfall in a layered limestone unit occurred along the SP477 route between Castelluccio and Norcia (Figure 4.71), showering the road with large blocks. The rockfall was observed following the 24 August event and again after the October events. All of the rockfalls were apparently the result of isolated blocks of limestone that detached from the outcropping bedrock above the highway. As with the August event, most of these blocks came to rest on the road, but individual boulders crossed the highway and descended a steep ravine. A UAV phantom4 was used to fly the outcrop bridge (Figures 4.72-4.73). Maximum block run out distances were on the order of 375 m, descending a net elevation change of 190-210 m.
Figure 4.71. Location of the rockfall on road SP 477 between Arquata and Castelluccio. FR EC) Eee em ee a eS ee) Be Tot ae ee ee ee eee ee eee, ( lee iad ciaacamians Rockfall in a layered limestone unit occurred along the SP477 route between Castelluccio and Norcia (Figure 4.71), showering the road with large blocks. The rockfall was observed following the 24 August event and again after the October events. All of the rockfalls were apparently the result of isolated blocks of limestone that detached from the outcropping bedrock above the highway. As with the August event, most of these blocks came to rest on the road, but individual boulders crossed the highway and descended a steep ravine. A UAV phantom4 was used to fly the outcrop bridge (Figures 4.72-4.73). Maximum block run out distances were on the order of 375 m, descending a net elevation change of 190-210 m.
Figure 4.72. Overlay of the UAV orthomosaic on top of the Google Earth image of SP477, the Castellucio-Norcia highway. Isolated boulders descended from the outcrop NE trending ridge on the left down to a ravine on the right side of the ortho mosaic, a maximum distance of approximately 375 m as indicated by the blue line. No other area along this highway had intense rockfall.
Figure 4.72. Overlay of the UAV orthomosaic on top of the Google Earth image of SP477, the Castellucio-Norcia highway. Isolated boulders descended from the outcrop NE trending ridge on the left down to a ravine on the right side of the ortho mosaic, a maximum distance of approximately 375 m as indicated by the blue line. No other area along this highway had intense rockfall.
Figure 4.73. The most active area along Route SP 477 is below a large south facing ridge o limestone. The white areas near the top of the ridge are zones where fresh rock is exposec following collapse of blocks. This ortho mosaic is part of a three-dimensional model producec using a UAV phantom 4.
Figure 4.73. The most active area along Route SP 477 is below a large south facing ridge o limestone. The white areas near the top of the ridge are zones where fresh rock is exposec following collapse of blocks. This ortho mosaic is part of a three-dimensional model producec using a UAV phantom 4.
We performed a field reconnaissance along the SP 477 (indicated in Figure 4.71). During ou it (December 10, 2016), public vehicular movement along the road was not possible becaus pavement fissures, embankment failures and rock obstructions. Indeed, several rock fall site d mass movements along SP477 were observed between 42.776881N 13.143958E an .770243N 13.151854E. Roadway damage mainly consisted of cracks along the road, uneve ick trails, edge barriers destroyed by rock falls, and damaged rock protection nets. Severe ulders were unstably supported by vegetation on the steep mountain slopes. Due to stee ypes, most of the falls should have run down, however countable debris was still present o ad pavement during our visit. Generally, boulder sized rocks were present in debris and th me sized were found in the unstably supported condition. A systematic overview of the variou mage features is presented in Figures 4.74-4.79. Minor damage in culvert was observed acros e road section. A telecommunication facility near the road pavement was found to be nc maged due to rockfall (see Figure 4.80). Figure 4.74. Rockfalls with boulders on the road.
We performed a field reconnaissance along the SP 477 (indicated in Figure 4.71). During ou it (December 10, 2016), public vehicular movement along the road was not possible becaus pavement fissures, embankment failures and rock obstructions. Indeed, several rock fall site d mass movements along SP477 were observed between 42.776881N 13.143958E an .770243N 13.151854E. Roadway damage mainly consisted of cracks along the road, uneve ick trails, edge barriers destroyed by rock falls, and damaged rock protection nets. Severe ulders were unstably supported by vegetation on the steep mountain slopes. Due to stee ypes, most of the falls should have run down, however countable debris was still present o ad pavement during our visit. Generally, boulder sized rocks were present in debris and th me sized were found in the unstably supported condition. A systematic overview of the variou mage features is presented in Figures 4.74-4.79. Minor damage in culvert was observed acros e road section. A telecommunication facility near the road pavement was found to be nc maged due to rockfall (see Figure 4.80). Figure 4.74. Rockfalls with boulders on the road.
Figure 4.75. Rockfalls with boulders on the road.
Figure 4.75. Rockfalls with boulders on the road.
Figure 4.76. Debris avalanche along the scarp of a previous landslide.
Figure 4.76. Debris avalanche along the scarp of a previous landslide.
Figure 4.77. Debris and boulders captured by the rockfall protection nets.
Figure 4.77. Debris and boulders captured by the rockfall protection nets.
Figure 4.78. Boulders supported by the vegetation.
Figure 4.78. Boulders supported by the vegetation.
Figure 4.79. Fracture along the road, large vertical offset due to fracture and ultimate movement, damaged edge barriers and debris and boulders on the road surface.
Figure 4.79. Fracture along the road, large vertical offset due to fracture and ultimate movement, damaged edge barriers and debris and boulders on the road surface.
Figure 4.80. Telecommunication facility (a) over and (b) under the road.
Figure 4.80. Telecommunication facility (a) over and (b) under the road.
Figure 4.82. Rockfalls along the SP209 between Triponzi and Visso. Figure 4.81. Location of the rockfalls in Pontechiusita along SP209.
Figure 4.82. Rockfalls along the SP209 between Triponzi and Visso. Figure 4.81. Location of the rockfalls in Pontechiusita along SP209.
Figure 4.83. Slope protection damaged by boulders and rock-blocks.
Figure 4.83. Slope protection damaged by boulders and rock-blocks.
Figure 4.84. Debris occurred on the right bank of the Nera river along SP209 (lat 42.9157N, lon 13.0456E).
Figure 4.84. Debris occurred on the right bank of the Nera river along SP209 (lat 42.9157N, lon 13.0456E).
We observed several rock failures along the highway SS685 (also known as Tre Valli Umbre) between the villages of Piedipaterno and Borgo Cerreto (Figure 4.85). These features, shown in Figure 4.86, are mainly isolated rock falls having a volume ranging from a dozen of cubic centimeters to a few of cubic meters. The geology of the site is characterized by the presence of calcareous rock formations known as red flakes (scaglia rossa), and screes constituted by broken rock fragments variously sized. The IFFI landslide inventory (Figure 4.1b) classifies this area as subjected to widespread rock falls and slumps. We did not observe damages on the slope protections (i.e. rockfall nets, dynamic rockfall barriers or catch fences) present along the road. Figure 4.85. Location of the rockfalls between Piedipaterno and Cerreto along highway SS685.
We observed several rock failures along the highway SS685 (also known as Tre Valli Umbre) between the villages of Piedipaterno and Borgo Cerreto (Figure 4.85). These features, shown in Figure 4.86, are mainly isolated rock falls having a volume ranging from a dozen of cubic centimeters to a few of cubic meters. The geology of the site is characterized by the presence of calcareous rock formations known as red flakes (scaglia rossa), and screes constituted by broken rock fragments variously sized. The IFFI landslide inventory (Figure 4.1b) classifies this area as subjected to widespread rock falls and slumps. We did not observe damages on the slope protections (i.e. rockfall nets, dynamic rockfall barriers or catch fences) present along the road. Figure 4.85. Location of the rockfalls between Piedipaterno and Cerreto along highway SS685.
Figure 4.86. Rockfalls between Piedipaterno and Cerreto along highway SS685 4.3.3 Landslide along SP746 road between Cittareale and Norcia
Figure 4.86. Rockfalls between Piedipaterno and Cerreto along highway SS685 4.3.3 Landslide along SP746 road between Cittareale and Norcia
Figure 4.87. Location of the landslide between Cittareale and Norcia along the SP746.
Figure 4.87. Location of the landslide between Cittareale and Norcia along the SP746.
Figure 4.88. Landslide between Cittareale and Norcia along the SP746: (a) General view of the area; (b) Zoom on the crown and main body of the scarp.
Figure 4.88. Landslide between Cittareale and Norcia along the SP746: (a) General view of the area; (b) Zoom on the crown and main body of the scarp.
Figure 4.89. Failure in calcareous breccia between Cittareale and Norcia along the SP746: from (a) to (e) view of the all facade; (f) rockfall on the road.
Figure 4.89. Failure in calcareous breccia between Cittareale and Norcia along the SP746: from (a) to (e) view of the all facade; (f) rockfall on the road.
Figure 4.90. Location of the landslide along the road Ortolano-Campotosto.
Figure 4.90. Location of the landslide along the road Ortolano-Campotosto.
Figure 4.91. (a) Overview of the whole longitudinal extent of the landslide area; (b) close up view of the landslide-related features from the road Ortolano-Campotosto.
Figure 4.91. (a) Overview of the whole longitudinal extent of the landslide area; (b) close up view of the landslide-related features from the road Ortolano-Campotosto.
Figure 4.92. Cracks along the road.
Figure 4.92. Cracks along the road.
Figure 4.93. A slide observed on the fill slope.
Figure 4.93. A slide observed on the fill slope.
Figure 4.94. Fractures on the cut slope.
Figure 4.94. Fractures on the cut slope.
Figure 4.95. Damages along the road.
Figure 4.95. Damages along the road.
Figure 4.96. Minor scarps observed on the cut slope side of the road.
Figure 4.96. Minor scarps observed on the cut slope side of the road.
Figure 4.98. Location of the rockfalls along SP476 (between Piedivalle and Preci). damage to slope protections (i.e. rockfall nets, dynamic rockfall barriers or catch fences) present along the road.
Figure 4.98. Location of the rockfalls along SP476 (between Piedivalle and Preci). damage to slope protections (i.e. rockfall nets, dynamic rockfall barriers or catch fences) present along the road.
Figure 4.99. Observed rockfalls along SP476 (between Piedivalle and Preci).
Figure 4.99. Observed rockfalls along SP476 (between Piedivalle and Preci).
Figures 4.101 and 4.102 show the landslide. Several of the boulders from the landslide measured 2 m and appeared to be heavily weathered. Rock was limestone or dolomite (limited time at the site to assess rock type did not allow for more precise identification). Soil cover over the rock was thin (less than 30cm). The slide debris consisted of large amounts of vegetation, as would be expected given the heavy forestation of the slope. No seepage was observed at the bottom of the slide or within the slide mass. To the south and the north of the landslide the slopes are flatter (15° to 20°), while at the location of the slide, the inclination is approximately 34° as measured via a clinometer. Landslide width was estimated at 11 m. Figure 4.100. Location of the Landslide below the village of Tino on small road parallel to highway SS4.
Figures 4.101 and 4.102 show the landslide. Several of the boulders from the landslide measured 2 m and appeared to be heavily weathered. Rock was limestone or dolomite (limited time at the site to assess rock type did not allow for more precise identification). Soil cover over the rock was thin (less than 30cm). The slide debris consisted of large amounts of vegetation, as would be expected given the heavy forestation of the slope. No seepage was observed at the bottom of the slide or within the slide mass. To the south and the north of the landslide the slopes are flatter (15° to 20°), while at the location of the slide, the inclination is approximately 34° as measured via a clinometer. Landslide width was estimated at 11 m. Figure 4.100. Location of the Landslide below the village of Tino on small road parallel to highway SS4.
Figure 4.101. Landslide debris covering the roadway. Boulders range in size up to 2 meters. Also pictured is rockfall netting used by local officials for minor rockfall control on the slope.
Figure 4.101. Landslide debris covering the roadway. Boulders range in size up to 2 meters. Also pictured is rockfall netting used by local officials for minor rockfall control on the slope.
Figure 4.102. Landslide debris and head scarp. Also pictured is rockfall netting.
Figure 4.102. Landslide debris and head scarp. Also pictured is rockfall netting.
Figure 4.103. Location embankment fill damage area next to fault trace zone along SP477 road Mt Vettore.
Figure 4.103. Location embankment fill damage area next to fault trace zone along SP477 road Mt Vettore.
Figure 4.104. 3D SfM model of embankment fill damage area next to fault trace zone along SP477 road, Mt Vettore. Fill that has experienced 15 to 20cm lateral displacement circled in yellow. Observed fault rupture trace shown in red.
Figure 4.104. 3D SfM model of embankment fill damage area next to fault trace zone along SP477 road, Mt Vettore. Fill that has experienced 15 to 20cm lateral displacement circled in yellow. Observed fault rupture trace shown in red.
Figure 4.105. Road embankment damage along SP477 road, Mt Vettore (Location 19, viewing North). Note fault trace across road and black (new) bitumen repairs following previous (24 August 2016) earthquake.
Figure 4.105. Road embankment damage along SP477 road, Mt Vettore (Location 19, viewing North). Note fault trace across road and black (new) bitumen repairs following previous (24 August 2016) earthquake.
Figure 4.106. Road embankment damage along SP477 road, Mt Vettore (Location 19, viewing west).
Figure 4.106. Road embankment damage along SP477 road, Mt Vettore (Location 19, viewing west).
Figure 5.1. Location of the observed mud volcanoes. We inspected two mud volcanoes that erupted within one day from the M6.5 30 October earthquake event (Figure 5.3): (1) Santa Maria in Paganico (Figures 5.4a-b) and (2) Valle Corvone (Figures 5.4c-d-e-f). In both cases, we observed fresh deposits of ejected material. Both eruptions, are located within 45 km from the epicenter. . During our reconnaissance activities, both mud volcanoes showed a reduced activity, with a small emission of water. We inspected the sites about one month after the INGV reconnaissance mission. We did not detect any new activity or variations in the soil surface conditions in the inspected area as shown ir Figure 5.5. As shown in Figure 5.4c-d-e-f, the material erupted by the mud volcano located in Valle Corvone covered a wide area involving both the river and the pavement of the road. This mud volcano is characterized by radial fractures 140 cm long, 38 cm wide and 80 cm deep. This eruption partially blocked the Ete river’s course (Figure 5.4f).
Figure 5.1. Location of the observed mud volcanoes. We inspected two mud volcanoes that erupted within one day from the M6.5 30 October earthquake event (Figure 5.3): (1) Santa Maria in Paganico (Figures 5.4a-b) and (2) Valle Corvone (Figures 5.4c-d-e-f). In both cases, we observed fresh deposits of ejected material. Both eruptions, are located within 45 km from the epicenter. . During our reconnaissance activities, both mud volcanoes showed a reduced activity, with a small emission of water. We inspected the sites about one month after the INGV reconnaissance mission. We did not detect any new activity or variations in the soil surface conditions in the inspected area as shown ir Figure 5.5. As shown in Figure 5.4c-d-e-f, the material erupted by the mud volcano located in Valle Corvone covered a wide area involving both the river and the pavement of the road. This mud volcano is characterized by radial fractures 140 cm long, 38 cm wide and 80 cm deep. This eruption partially blocked the Ete river’s course (Figure 5.4f).
Figure 5.2. Tour sign indicating mud volcanoes sited in Monteleone di Fermo
Figure 5.2. Tour sign indicating mud volcanoes sited in Monteleone di Fermo
Figure 5.3. Location of the observed mud volcanoes in Monteleone di Fermo.
Figure 5.3. Location of the observed mud volcanoes in Monteleone di Fermo.
Figure 5.6 shows the particle size distribution for samples SP1 (Santa Maria in Paganico) and SP2 (Valle Corvone). The soil in sample SP1 is constituted of 57.4% brown silt, 31.6% clay and 11.0% sand. The fine-grained soil exhibits a liquid limit LL = 47.5%, a plastic limit PL = 17.8%, and a plasticity index Pl = 29.7%. The plasticity chart (Figure 5.7a), shows that the soil of sample S can be classified as inorganic clay (CL) or organic silts and clays of low plasticity (OL). For SP1, the activity of clay is 0.94 and is therefore defined as normal (Figure 5.7b). The values of t Atterberg limits are representative of clayey soils for SP1. For SP2, the silt fraction is 66.2%, t sand fraction is 23.7%, and the clay fraction is 10.1%. The Atterberg limits for SP2 are LL = PI Ne ale 30.7%, PL = 18.7%, the plasticity index is equal to 11.9% and the fine-grained soil can classified as inorganic clay (CL) or organic silts and clays of low plasticity (OL). The activity clay for SP2 is normal (Fig. 5.7b). The Atterberg limits for SP2 are typical of silty soils be of
Figure 5.6 shows the particle size distribution for samples SP1 (Santa Maria in Paganico) and SP2 (Valle Corvone). The soil in sample SP1 is constituted of 57.4% brown silt, 31.6% clay and 11.0% sand. The fine-grained soil exhibits a liquid limit LL = 47.5%, a plastic limit PL = 17.8%, and a plasticity index Pl = 29.7%. The plasticity chart (Figure 5.7a), shows that the soil of sample S can be classified as inorganic clay (CL) or organic silts and clays of low plasticity (OL). For SP1, the activity of clay is 0.94 and is therefore defined as normal (Figure 5.7b). The values of t Atterberg limits are representative of clayey soils for SP1. For SP2, the silt fraction is 66.2%, t sand fraction is 23.7%, and the clay fraction is 10.1%. The Atterberg limits for SP2 are LL = PI Ne ale 30.7%, PL = 18.7%, the plasticity index is equal to 11.9% and the fine-grained soil can classified as inorganic clay (CL) or organic silts and clays of low plasticity (OL). The activity clay for SP2 is normal (Fig. 5.7b). The Atterberg limits for SP2 are typical of silty soils be of
Figure 5.4. (a) overview of the mud volcano in Santa Maria in Paganico; (b) sampling activities in in Santa Maria in Paganico; (c) crack originated by the mud volcano in Valle Corvone, (d) mud volcano in Valle Corvone, (e) details of a crack in Valle Corvone, (f) close-up view of the material ejected in the Ete Vivo river (Valle Corvone).
Figure 5.4. (a) overview of the mud volcano in Santa Maria in Paganico; (b) sampling activities in in Santa Maria in Paganico; (c) crack originated by the mud volcano in Valle Corvone, (d) mud volcano in Valle Corvone, (e) details of a crack in Valle Corvone, (f) close-up view of the material ejected in the Ete Vivo river (Valle Corvone).
Figure 5.5. (a) and (b) photos of the mud volcano in Valle Corvone taken by INGV in November 2016 (INGV, 2016); (c) and (d) photos of the mud volcano in Valle Corvone taken from a common perspective by GEER in December 2016.
Figure 5.5. (a) and (b) photos of the mud volcano in Valle Corvone taken by INGV in November 2016 (INGV, 2016); (c) and (d) photos of the mud volcano in Valle Corvone taken from a common perspective by GEER in December 2016.
Figure 5.6. Particle size distributions of the mud volcano soils in Monteleone di Fermo and Santa Vittoria in Matenano. We inspected the newly formed volcano that erupted within one day from the M6.5 30 October earthquake event. Figure 5.8 shows the location of this eruption. Figure 5.9 shows photos taken during our reconnaissance. During our reconnaissance activities, the eruption showed a reduced activity, with a small emission of water. We inspected the site about one month after the INGV reconnaissance mission. We observed a substantial increase in the erupted material compared to the INGV reconnaissance (Figure 5.9).
Figure 5.6. Particle size distributions of the mud volcano soils in Monteleone di Fermo and Santa Vittoria in Matenano. We inspected the newly formed volcano that erupted within one day from the M6.5 30 October earthquake event. Figure 5.8 shows the location of this eruption. Figure 5.9 shows photos taken during our reconnaissance. During our reconnaissance activities, the eruption showed a reduced activity, with a small emission of water. We inspected the site about one month after the INGV reconnaissance mission. We observed a substantial increase in the erupted material compared to the INGV reconnaissance (Figure 5.9).
Figure 5.7. (a) Plasticity chart and (b) activity chart of the mud volcano soils in Monteleone di Fermo and Santa Vittoria in Matenano.
Figure 5.7. (a) Plasticity chart and (b) activity chart of the mud volcano soils in Monteleone di Fermo and Santa Vittoria in Matenano.
Figure 5.8. Location of the inspected mud new volcano in Santa Vittoria in Matenano.
Figure 5.8. Location of the inspected mud new volcano in Santa Vittoria in Matenano.
Figure 5.9. Overview of the mud new volcano in Santa Vittoria in Matenano.
Figure 5.9. Overview of the mud new volcano in Santa Vittoria in Matenano.
Figure 5.10. Earthquake magnitude versus epicentral distance for earthquake-triggered mud volcanoes, along with limiting curves from Delle Donne et al (2010, blue dashed curve), and Manga et al. (2009, black dashed curve). Red dots represent data collected in this study, blue dots are data points from Delle Donne et al. (2010), black dots are data points from Manga et al. (2009).
Figure 5.10. Earthquake magnitude versus epicentral distance for earthquake-triggered mud volcanoes, along with limiting curves from Delle Donne et al (2010, blue dashed curve), and Manga et al. (2009, black dashed curve). Red dots represent data collected in this study, blue dots are data points from Delle Donne et al. (2010), black dots are data points from Manga et al. (2009).
Even though the majority of the building stock is masonry, there is no disproportiona damage observed between the first and the sequence of seismic events (Figure 6.1). This i: because, unlike Amatrice (Section 6.1.3), the initial damage state of most buildings after the August earthquake was DO, hence the structures had adequate strength to resist the subsequent earthquakes. By focusing more carefully on Figure 6.2, it is also evident that the few structures that suffered damage during the first event, indeed presented a disproportiona level of damage increase shifting from DS3 to DS5. Based on the above comparative assessment it can be concluded that masonry structures are particularly prone to failure under cascading seismic events provided that one event in the sequence initiates non-catastrophic damage, < fact that highlights the importance of quick visual inspection and reliable retrofit. Figure 6.1. Evolution of damage after (a) the 24 August earthquake, and (b) the October events.
Even though the majority of the building stock is masonry, there is no disproportiona damage observed between the first and the sequence of seismic events (Figure 6.1). This i: because, unlike Amatrice (Section 6.1.3), the initial damage state of most buildings after the August earthquake was DO, hence the structures had adequate strength to resist the subsequent earthquakes. By focusing more carefully on Figure 6.2, it is also evident that the few structures that suffered damage during the first event, indeed presented a disproportiona level of damage increase shifting from DS3 to DS5. Based on the above comparative assessment it can be concluded that masonry structures are particularly prone to failure under cascading seismic events provided that one event in the sequence initiates non-catastrophic damage, < fact that highlights the importance of quick visual inspection and reliable retrofit. Figure 6.1. Evolution of damage after (a) the 24 August earthquake, and (b) the October events.
Figure 6.2. Percentage of damaged structures (a) in the aftermath of first event and (b) after the whole sequence. Apart from the wider assessment, a side-by-side comparison of significate structures with nulti-epoch surveys is made. Figure 6.3 depicts the locations of the buildings presented. Figure ).4 illustrates one of the churches that were slightly damaged by the first seismic event, but ompletely collapsed subsequently. Many historical churches in Norcia experienced the same ind of damage evolution. Figure 6.5 shows one exceptional case of a typical reside nasonry building where the evolution of damage was rather moderate (damage state shi ntia ting rom DS2 to DS3). Conversely, Figure 6.6 shows a residential building with irregular masonry onstruction. This group of buildings experienced an abrupt damage evolution, with an ou lane mechanism and increased in-plane damage. Finally, Figure 6.7 depicts the out-of-p ailure of an historical monastery leading to partial loss of support of the roof. Notably, the ailure was concentrated at a level higher to that of the seismic retrofit, thus highlighting ocal interventions should not be only localized on the ground level but also take t-of- ane Wall that intc onsideration the reduced axial load and weak diaphragm action of the masonry walls at higher ovels. consideration the reduced axial load and weak diaphragm action of the masonry walls at higher
Figure 6.2. Percentage of damaged structures (a) in the aftermath of first event and (b) after the whole sequence. Apart from the wider assessment, a side-by-side comparison of significate structures with nulti-epoch surveys is made. Figure 6.3 depicts the locations of the buildings presented. Figure ).4 illustrates one of the churches that were slightly damaged by the first seismic event, but ompletely collapsed subsequently. Many historical churches in Norcia experienced the same ind of damage evolution. Figure 6.5 shows one exceptional case of a typical reside nasonry building where the evolution of damage was rather moderate (damage state shi ntia ting rom DS2 to DS3). Conversely, Figure 6.6 shows a residential building with irregular masonry onstruction. This group of buildings experienced an abrupt damage evolution, with an ou lane mechanism and increased in-plane damage. Finally, Figure 6.7 depicts the out-of-p ailure of an historical monastery leading to partial loss of support of the roof. Notably, the ailure was concentrated at a level higher to that of the seismic retrofit, thus highlighting ocal interventions should not be only localized on the ground level but also take t-of- ane Wall that intc onsideration the reduced axial load and weak diaphragm action of the masonry walls at higher ovels. consideration the reduced axial load and weak diaphragm action of the masonry walls at higher
Figure 6.4. Building M1. Figure 6.3. Structures shown in detail in the following. (M stands for Masonry)
Figure 6.4. Building M1. Figure 6.3. Structures shown in detail in the following. (M stands for Masonry)
Figure 6.8. Visual angles investigated during UAV flights. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vOVZOEuBMg, last accessed April 18, 2017).
Figure 6.8. Visual angles investigated during UAV flights. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vOVZOEuBMg, last accessed April 18, 2017).
Figure 6.9. UAV image V1. Figure 6.10. UAV image V2.
Figure 6.9. UAV image V1. Figure 6.10. UAV image V2.
Figure 6.11. UAV image V3.
Figure 6.11. UAV image V3.
Figure 6.12. UAV image V4. Figure 6.13. UAV image V5.
Figure 6.12. UAV image V4. Figure 6.13. UAV image V5.
Figure 6.15. Damage proxy map of Norcia, along with all structures with assigned damage level D5, and selected structures with assigned damage level D4.
Figure 6.15. Damage proxy map of Norcia, along with all structures with assigned damage level D5, and selected structures with assigned damage level D4.
Figure 6.16. Zoom-in of the damage proxy map of Norcia, along with the identification numbers of all structures with assigned damage level D5 from field inspections and available high-quality on-site information and photos.
Figure 6.16. Zoom-in of the damage proxy map of Norcia, along with the identification numbers of all structures with assigned damage level D5 from field inspections and available high-quality on-site information and photos.
N. 1 Via Cristoforo Colombo
N. 1 Via Cristoforo Colombo
As shown in Table 6.1, Accumoli experienced slightly weaker estimated ground motions during the 30 October event (PGA = 0.45 g) than in the 24 August event (PGA = 0.56 g). Accumoli was one of the most damaged villages after the 24 August main shock (GEER 2016). During the September reconnaissance, significant additional damage was observed, with widespread partial collapses throughout the village. The eastern part of the village, around the main square (Piazza San Francesco), was the most heavily damaged area, with partial collapses
As shown in Table 6.1, Accumoli experienced slightly weaker estimated ground motions during the 30 October event (PGA = 0.45 g) than in the 24 August event (PGA = 0.56 g). Accumoli was one of the most damaged villages after the 24 August main shock (GEER 2016). During the September reconnaissance, significant additional damage was observed, with widespread partial collapses throughout the village. The eastern part of the village, around the main square (Piazza San Francesco), was the most heavily damaged area, with partial collapses
‘igure 6.18. Evolution of damage after (a) the first seismic event and (b) the sequence of vents. The seismic sequence in October caused total devastation of the village. As shown in Figure 6.18, the vast majority of the buildings that were damaged during the August earthquake, eventually collapsed. The evolution of damage after multiple seismic events is also evident as also depicted in Figure 6.19, where a drastic shift from low (DSO/DS1) to high (DS4/DS5) damage states is clearly observed.
‘igure 6.18. Evolution of damage after (a) the first seismic event and (b) the sequence of vents. The seismic sequence in October caused total devastation of the village. As shown in Figure 6.18, the vast majority of the buildings that were damaged during the August earthquake, eventually collapsed. The evolution of damage after multiple seismic events is also evident as also depicted in Figure 6.19, where a drastic shift from low (DSO/DS1) to high (DS4/DS5) damage states is clearly observed.
Figure 6.19. Percentage of damaged structures (a) after the first event and (b) after the whole sequence.
Figure 6.19. Percentage of damaged structures (a) after the first event and (b) after the whole sequence.
Figure 6.20. (a) Access route to the lowest (easternmost) portion village (V1). (b) Piazza San Francesco (V2).
Figure 6.20. (a) Access route to the lowest (easternmost) portion village (V1). (b) Piazza San Francesco (V2).
Figure 6.21. Aerial view, east-west direction (V3).
Figure 6.21. Aerial view, east-west direction (V3).
Figure 6.22. Aerial view, west-east direction (V4).
Figure 6.22. Aerial view, west-east direction (V4).
Figure 6.23. Aerial view, south-north direction (V5).
Figure 6.23. Aerial view, south-north direction (V5).
from the same position, hence, colored circles are used to indicate the corresponding spots. The accumulation of damage across seismic events is also evident by comparing the panoramic view of the village after the September and December field missions (Figure 6.26 and Figure 6.27). More precisely, it is seen that the retaining wall completely overturned, causing disruption of the adjacent road. It is noted that it was not possible to take the pictures from the same position, hence, colored circles are used to indicate the corresponding spots. Figure 6.26. Representative pictures of landslide in eastern part of village (September 2016).
from the same position, hence, colored circles are used to indicate the corresponding spots. The accumulation of damage across seismic events is also evident by comparing the panoramic view of the village after the September and December field missions (Figure 6.26 and Figure 6.27). More precisely, it is seen that the retaining wall completely overturned, causing disruption of the adjacent road. It is noted that it was not possible to take the pictures from the same position, hence, colored circles are used to indicate the corresponding spots. Figure 6.26. Representative pictures of landslide in eastern part of village (September 2016).
Figure 6.27. Representative pictures of landslide in the eastern part of village (December 2016).
Figure 6.27. Representative pictures of landslide in the eastern part of village (December 2016).
Figure 6.28. Evolution of damage after (a) the first seismic event and (b) the sequence of events. (https://www.youtube.com/watch ?v=djF5fkUrYkk., last accessed April 17, 2017). Figure 6.32 to
Figure 6.28. Evolution of damage after (a) the first seismic event and (b) the sequence of events. (https://www.youtube.com/watch ?v=djF5fkUrYkk., last accessed April 17, 2017). Figure 6.32 to
Figure 6.29. Percentage of damaged structures (a) in the aftermath of first event and (b) after the whole sequence.
Figure 6.29. Percentage of damaged structures (a) in the aftermath of first event and (b) after the whole sequence.
Figure 6.30. Overview of the location and structural system of the buildings that are documented in the following. (RC: Reinforced Concrete, M: Masonry, and S: Steel buildings).
Figure 6.30. Overview of the location and structural system of the buildings that are documented in the following. (RC: Reinforced Concrete, M: Masonry, and S: Steel buildings).
Figure 6.31. Visual angles investigated during the UAV flight.
Figure 6.31. Visual angles investigated during the UAV flight.
Figure 6.32. UAV image V1.
Figure 6.32. UAV image V1.
Figure 6.33. UAV image V2.
Figure 6.33. UAV image V2.
Figure 6.34. UAV image V3.
Figure 6.34. UAV image V3.
Figure 6.35. UAV image V4. Figure 6.37 illustrates building RC1 in the aftermath of the first event (a,c) and after the October sequence (b,d). It evident that the infill panel has failed out-of-plane after the seismic sequence (but not after the first main shock), whereas the shear failure at the top of the right column has been clearly pronounced. Figure 6.38 depicts building RC2, a dual shear wall — moment resisting frame built with the older Italian seismic code (The Italian National Annex DM 1996, Norme Tecniche per le Costruzioni, 1996; NTC96). Similar out of plane failure of the,
Figure 6.35. UAV image V4. Figure 6.37 illustrates building RC1 in the aftermath of the first event (a,c) and after the October sequence (b,d). It evident that the infill panel has failed out-of-plane after the seismic sequence (but not after the first main shock), whereas the shear failure at the top of the right column has been clearly pronounced. Figure 6.38 depicts building RC2, a dual shear wall — moment resisting frame built with the older Italian seismic code (The Italian National Annex DM 1996, Norme Tecniche per le Costruzioni, 1996; NTC96). Similar out of plane failure of the,
Figure 6.37. Building RC1. initially diagonally cracked, infill panel is again observed as a result of shaking from multiple events. A detail of beam-column joint damage is illustrated in Figure 6.39 for building RC3. We observe cyclic degradation of column top, spalling of concrete, and minor longitudinal reba buckling in the absence of adequate transverse reinforcement. Finally, building RC4 in Figure 6.40 experienced only minor damage after the August event but suffered out-of-plane failure o the majority of its infill panels subsequently, thus exposing the structure to a potential sof story mechanism. Performance of this type was characteristic of the area.
Figure 6.37. Building RC1. initially diagonally cracked, infill panel is again observed as a result of shaking from multiple events. A detail of beam-column joint damage is illustrated in Figure 6.39 for building RC3. We observe cyclic degradation of column top, spalling of concrete, and minor longitudinal reba buckling in the absence of adequate transverse reinforcement. Finally, building RC4 in Figure 6.40 experienced only minor damage after the August event but suffered out-of-plane failure o the majority of its infill panels subsequently, thus exposing the structure to a potential sof story mechanism. Performance of this type was characteristic of the area.
Figure 6.39. Building RC3.
Figure 6.39. Building RC3.
Figure 6.43. Building M2. Figure 6.42. Building M1.
Figure 6.43. Building M2. Figure 6.42. Building M1.
Figure 6.45. Building M4.
Figure 6.45. Building M4.
EE Ea es SS Se ee ee Se ae ee es Le Lane ee See ees ee 2 ee eee eS Se ae es, & ee Overall, notwithstanding the clear evolution of all local damage modes of Reinforced Concrete structures as a result of multiple earthquake excitations, a general comment that can be made s that they did not experience the disproportional event-to-event damage increase observed ir masonry buildings. In most cases, R/C buildings showed adequate ductility and their globa Jamage at a system level remained approximately within the same Damage State that wa: reported after the initial visual inspections. On the contrary, masonry buildings suffered, or average, significant and disproportional damage during the sequence of seismic events, due tc their low residual capacity and the brittle nature of the failure modes involved, thus quickly shifting from low-to-moderate Damage States (DS1-DS3) to complete collapse (DS5).
EE Ea es SS Se ee ee Se ae ee es Le Lane ee See ees ee 2 ee eee eS Se ae es, & ee Overall, notwithstanding the clear evolution of all local damage modes of Reinforced Concrete structures as a result of multiple earthquake excitations, a general comment that can be made s that they did not experience the disproportional event-to-event damage increase observed ir masonry buildings. In most cases, R/C buildings showed adequate ductility and their globa Jamage at a system level remained approximately within the same Damage State that wa: reported after the initial visual inspections. On the contrary, masonry buildings suffered, or average, significant and disproportional damage during the sequence of seismic events, due tc their low residual capacity and the brittle nature of the failure modes involved, thus quickly shifting from low-to-moderate Damage States (DS1-DS3) to complete collapse (DS5).
Figure 6.47. Location of representative pictures taken in Arquata del Tronto/Borgo after the 24 August 2016 earthquake (yellow dots), and after the October events (red dots). (D5) is documented in Figure 6.52. Table 6.3 shows the locations and damage levels for all selected representative structures.
Figure 6.47. Location of representative pictures taken in Arquata del Tronto/Borgo after the 24 August 2016 earthquake (yellow dots), and after the October events (red dots). (D5) is documented in Figure 6.52. Table 6.3 shows the locations and damage levels for all selected representative structures.
Figure 6.48. Overview of Arquata del Tronto (a) after the 24 August earthquake, and (b) after the October events.
Figure 6.48. Overview of Arquata del Tronto (a) after the 24 August earthquake, and (b) after the October events.
Figure 6.49. A reinforced masonry building in Borgo (a) after the 24 August earthquake, and (b) after the October events.
Figure 6.49. A reinforced masonry building in Borgo (a) after the 24 August earthquake, and (b) after the October events.
Figure 6.50. A building in Borgo (a) after the 24 August earthquake, and (b) after the October events.
Figure 6.50. A building in Borgo (a) after the 24 August earthquake, and (b) after the October events.
Figure 6.51. Access road to Arquata del Tronto after the October events.
Figure 6.51. Access road to Arquata del Tronto after the October events.
Figure 6.52. Overview of the damage level in Arquata del Tronto after October events. Table 6.3. Locations of representative pictures with description of reported damage.
Figure 6.52. Overview of the damage level in Arquata del Tronto after October events. Table 6.3. Locations of representative pictures with description of reported damage.
Figure 6.53. Mapped damage levels in Pescara del Tronto: (a) after the 24 August, and (b) the October events. Figure 6.55 shows locations of selected buildings for which we show photos taken after the ugust and October events. The cumulative damage is also evident from Figure 6.56. Figure .57 shows a photographic overview of the hamlet taken from a common perspective after the ugust and October events. Figure 6.58 shows screenshots captured from 3D models createc rom images taken by UAVs. Table 6.4 summarizes locations and damage levels for all selectec 2oresentative structures.
Figure 6.53. Mapped damage levels in Pescara del Tronto: (a) after the 24 August, and (b) the October events. Figure 6.55 shows locations of selected buildings for which we show photos taken after the ugust and October events. The cumulative damage is also evident from Figure 6.56. Figure .57 shows a photographic overview of the hamlet taken from a common perspective after the ugust and October events. Figure 6.58 shows screenshots captured from 3D models createc rom images taken by UAVs. Table 6.4 summarizes locations and damage levels for all selectec 2oresentative structures.
Figure 6.54. Histogram of damage levels in Pescara del Tronto: (a) after the 24 August, and (b) the October events.
Figure 6.54. Histogram of damage levels in Pescara del Tronto: (a) after the 24 August, and (b) the October events.
Figure 6.55. Location of representative pictures taken in the village after the 24 August (yellow dots) and locations for which we have multi-epoch photos of the same structures (red dots).
Figure 6.55. Location of representative pictures taken in the village after the 24 August (yellow dots) and locations for which we have multi-epoch photos of the same structures (red dots).
Table 6.4. Locations of representative pictures with description of reported damage.
Table 6.4. Locations of representative pictures with description of reported damage.
Figure 6.59. Mapped damage levels in Tufo: (a) after the 24 August, and (b) the October events. markedly from the October events. Figure 6.59 and Figure 6.60 show the evolution of damages
Figure 6.59. Mapped damage levels in Tufo: (a) after the 24 August, and (b) the October events. markedly from the October events. Figure 6.59 and Figure 6.60 show the evolution of damages
Figure 6.61. Map of the selected representative structures in Tufo. An important monument in Tufo is the Santissima Maria Annunziata Church. It is a church built in the XVII century that appears to have been recently retrofitted. The church had no apparent damage (DO) from the August events (P4, P5, and P6 in Figure 6.62) and damage level D3 (partial collapse of fagade around the rose window; P4 in Figure 6.62) following the October events. Figure 6.62 also shows multiple layers of untied bricks and significant new cracks at corners (P5 and P6), possibly from lack of lateral reinforcement at the corner.
Figure 6.61. Map of the selected representative structures in Tufo. An important monument in Tufo is the Santissima Maria Annunziata Church. It is a church built in the XVII century that appears to have been recently retrofitted. The church had no apparent damage (DO) from the August events (P4, P5, and P6 in Figure 6.62) and damage level D3 (partial collapse of fagade around the rose window; P4 in Figure 6.62) following the October events. Figure 6.62 also shows multiple layers of untied bricks and significant new cracks at corners (P5 and P6), possibly from lack of lateral reinforcement at the corner.
Figure 6.62. Comparative pictures of selected structures in Tufo after the 24 August event, and after the October events.
Figure 6.62. Comparative pictures of selected structures in Tufo after the 24 August event, and after the October events.
Table 6.5. Summary of selected representative structures in Tufo (all pictures show the comparison between September (left) and December (right) inspection). The village of Montegallo is comprised of 23 dispersed hamlets (Section 5.4.5 of GEER 2016). Here we focus on the hamlets of Astorara, Balzo, Castro, Collefratte, Colleluce, Colle, Piano and Pistrino, which were visited following both the August and October event sequences. As shown in Table 6.1, Montegallo experienced estimated ground motions during the 30 October event of PGA = 0.25 g; corresponding values for the 24 August event were PGA = 0.24 g. These ground motion estimates do not include possible influences of local site effects.
Table 6.5. Summary of selected representative structures in Tufo (all pictures show the comparison between September (left) and December (right) inspection). The village of Montegallo is comprised of 23 dispersed hamlets (Section 5.4.5 of GEER 2016). Here we focus on the hamlets of Astorara, Balzo, Castro, Collefratte, Colleluce, Colle, Piano and Pistrino, which were visited following both the August and October event sequences. As shown in Table 6.1, Montegallo experienced estimated ground motions during the 30 October event of PGA = 0.25 g; corresponding values for the 24 August event were PGA = 0.24 g. These ground motion estimates do not include possible influences of local site effects.
Table 6.6. Summary of reconnaissance results for Montegallo hamlets Table 6.7. Summary of pictures and structures inspected in Montegallo hamlets.
Table 6.6. Summary of reconnaissance results for Montegallo hamlets Table 6.7. Summary of pictures and structures inspected in Montegallo hamlets.
* Pictures that show the comparison between September (left) and December (right) inspection Table 6.7 cont. Summary of pictures and structures inspected in Montegallo hamlets.
* Pictures that show the comparison between September (left) and December (right) inspection Table 6.7 cont. Summary of pictures and structures inspected in Montegallo hamlets.
P11 (Collefratte)
P11 (Collefratte)
Figure 6.63. Representative pictures taken in Montegallo during the GEER survey (see Table 6.6 and Table 6.7).
Figure 6.63. Representative pictures taken in Montegallo during the GEER survey (see Table 6.6 and Table 6.7).
Figure 6.64. Geological map (a) and cross-sections (b) of the Visso village area (Regione Marche 2012) Figure 6.65. Locations of representative structures inspected in the Visso village (see Table 6.8 for details).
Figure 6.64. Geological map (a) and cross-sections (b) of the Visso village area (Regione Marche 2012) Figure 6.65. Locations of representative structures inspected in the Visso village (see Table 6.8 for details).
Figure 6.66. Representative pictures taken in Visso during the survey (see Table 6.8).
Figure 6.66. Representative pictures taken in Visso during the survey (see Table 6.8).
Figure 6.67. Damage zonation within the villages of Visso village. The village was significantly damaged by the October events. However, the degree of damage to buildings is spatially variable. A tentative damage zonation map is reported in Figure 6.67. Damage levels as high as D3-D4 are concentrated in the historical center, especially the portion founded on the quaternary continental deposits (alluvial deposits, eluvio-colluvial deposits, and widespread slope deposits). Minor damage (D1-D2) was encountered in the portion founded on the SCC rock (Scaglia Cinerea Formation). In the NW portion (outside the historical center), we encountered D2-D3 on average. This part of the village is located on quaternary deposits. However, the relatively minor vulnerability of buildings was probably responsible for the minor damage observed in this part of the historical center.
Figure 6.67. Damage zonation within the villages of Visso village. The village was significantly damaged by the October events. However, the degree of damage to buildings is spatially variable. A tentative damage zonation map is reported in Figure 6.67. Damage levels as high as D3-D4 are concentrated in the historical center, especially the portion founded on the quaternary continental deposits (alluvial deposits, eluvio-colluvial deposits, and widespread slope deposits). Minor damage (D1-D2) was encountered in the portion founded on the SCC rock (Scaglia Cinerea Formation). In the NW portion (outside the historical center), we encountered D2-D3 on average. This part of the village is located on quaternary deposits. However, the relatively minor vulnerability of buildings was probably responsible for the minor damage observed in this part of the historical center.
Figure 6.68. Noise measurement TO1 results in terms of H/V spectral ratio (up) and H/V pola plots (bottom).
Figure 6.68. Noise measurement TO1 results in terms of H/V spectral ratio (up) and H/V pola plots (bottom).
Figure 6.69. Locations of representative structures inspected in Ussita, and damage zonation within the village.
Figure 6.69. Locations of representative structures inspected in Ussita, and damage zonation within the village.
Figure 6.70. Representative pictures taken in Ussita (P13)
Figure 6.70. Representative pictures taken in Ussita (P13)
Figure 6.71. San Nicola da Tolentino church, facade (left) and interior part (right) (before earthquake events).
Figure 6.71. San Nicola da Tolentino church, facade (left) and interior part (right) (before earthquake events).
Figure 6.72. Geological map of the Tolentino area.
Figure 6.72. Geological map of the Tolentino area.
Figure 6.73. Tolentino reconnaissance map: in green the most damaged zones.
Figure 6.73. Tolentino reconnaissance map: in green the most damaged zones.
PO2a-b-c Basilica di San Nicola (Saint Nicholas Church)
PO2a-b-c Basilica di San Nicola (Saint Nicholas Church)
PO2d-e-f Basilica di San Nicola (Saint Nicholas Church)
PO2d-e-f Basilica di San Nicola (Saint Nicholas Church)
PO3a-b Cloister of the Basilica di San Nicola (Saint Nicholas Church)
PO3a-b Cloister of the Basilica di San Nicola (Saint Nicholas Church)
PO3c-d-e Monastery of the Basilica di San Nicola (Saint Nicholas Church)
PO3c-d-e Monastery of the Basilica di San Nicola (Saint Nicholas Church)
PO6-PO7 (Viale Vittorio Veneto)
PO6-PO7 (Viale Vittorio Veneto)
PO8-PO9 (Via Martin Luther King)
PO8-PO9 (Via Martin Luther King)
Table 6.9. Summary of pictures and structures inspected in Tolentino.
Table 6.9. Summary of pictures and structures inspected in Tolentino.
Table 6.9 cont. Summary of pictures and structures inspected in Tolentino.
Table 6.9 cont. Summary of pictures and structures inspected in Tolentino.
Major attention during the reconnaissance was paid to Via Mazzini and Via Rossini neighborhoods, since evident site effects were detected. The first is located on a rise and is parallel to another very damaged road (Via Monti Sibillini). The latter is very close to the Potenza River and the structures were likely built up on the ancient riverbed. Close to Via Rossini there is Villa Collio, a restaurant-villa that was severely damaged. Furthermore, a quick inspection of two towers located on the village hill was carried out (Torre Smeducci and the old Cathedral Tower), as there are plans for the installations of a permanent monitoring system by Politecnico di Torino and Nagoya City University. Figure 6.75. Relative position and distance between San Severino Marche and Tolentino.
Major attention during the reconnaissance was paid to Via Mazzini and Via Rossini neighborhoods, since evident site effects were detected. The first is located on a rise and is parallel to another very damaged road (Via Monti Sibillini). The latter is very close to the Potenza River and the structures were likely built up on the ancient riverbed. Close to Via Rossini there is Villa Collio, a restaurant-villa that was severely damaged. Furthermore, a quick inspection of two towers located on the village hill was carried out (Torre Smeducci and the old Cathedral Tower), as there are plans for the installations of a permanent monitoring system by Politecnico di Torino and Nagoya City University. Figure 6.75. Relative position and distance between San Severino Marche and Tolentino.
Figure 6.76. Piazza del Popolo, San Severino Marche (before seismic events).
Figure 6.76. Piazza del Popolo, San Severino Marche (before seismic events).
Figure 6.77. Geological map of the San Severino area
Figure 6.77. Geological map of the San Severino area
Figure 6.78. Summary reconnaissance map for San Severino Marche.
Figure 6.78. Summary reconnaissance map for San Severino Marche.
Figure 6.79. Summary reconnaissance map for San Severino Marche (zoom on the Uvaiolo neighborhood).
Figure 6.79. Summary reconnaissance map for San Severino Marche (zoom on the Uvaiolo neighborhood).
‘igure 6.80. Representative pictures taken in San Severino Marche during the GEER survey (se Fable 6.10).
‘igure 6.80. Representative pictures taken in San Severino Marche during the GEER survey (se Fable 6.10).
Table 6.10. Summary of pictures and structures inspected in San Severino Marche.
Table 6.10. Summary of pictures and structures inspected in San Severino Marche.
Figure 6.81. Geological map of Camerino (a) and cross section BB’ (b) (Regione Marche, 2012). The village was reported to have been damaged during the seismic sequence of 1279 and 1328 and the Reatin earthquake of 1703, which destroyed Norcia. The strongest earthquake in Camerino was in 1799. An excerpt of the historical seismicity as reported in the CPTI database by INGV is reported in Figure 6.82.
Figure 6.81. Geological map of Camerino (a) and cross section BB’ (b) (Regione Marche, 2012). The village was reported to have been damaged during the seismic sequence of 1279 and 1328 and the Reatin earthquake of 1703, which destroyed Norcia. The strongest earthquake in Camerino was in 1799. An excerpt of the historical seismicity as reported in the CPTI database by INGV is reported in Figure 6.82.
Figure 6.83 and Table 6.11 show locations of representative buildings inspected in the historic center of Camerino, including the red zone. Figure 6.84 shows photographs of these representative structures, which include both masonry and reinforced concrete dwellings two to four stories in height. The average damage level in the inspected zone was D2.
Figure 6.83 and Table 6.11 show locations of representative buildings inspected in the historic center of Camerino, including the red zone. Figure 6.84 shows photographs of these representative structures, which include both masonry and reinforced concrete dwellings two to four stories in height. The average damage level in the inspected zone was D2.
Figure 6.83. Locations of the representative structures inspected in Camerino (including red zone) (see Table 6.11 for details).
Figure 6.83. Locations of the representative structures inspected in Camerino (including red zone) (see Table 6.11 for details).
Table 6.11. Locations of representative structures with damage descriptions.
Table 6.11. Locations of representative structures with damage descriptions.
Table 6.11 cont. Location of representative structures with damage descriptions.
Table 6.11 cont. Location of representative structures with damage descriptions.
Figure 6.85. (a) Geological map of Pievebovigliana village and (b) geological section showing the main stratigraphical relationships (Regione Marche, 2014).
Figure 6.85. (a) Geological map of Pievebovigliana village and (b) geological section showing the main stratigraphical relationships (Regione Marche, 2014).
Figure 6.86. Locations of representative structures inspected in Pievebovigliana (see Table 6.12 for details).
Figure 6.86. Locations of representative structures inspected in Pievebovigliana (see Table 6.12 for details).
Figure 6.87. Representative pictures in Pievebovigliana during the survey (see Table 6.12).
Figure 6.87. Representative pictures in Pievebovigliana during the survey (see Table 6.12).
Table 6.12. Locations of representative structures with damage descriptions
Table 6.12. Locations of representative structures with damage descriptions
Figure 6.88. Damage zonation within the villages of Pievebovigliana village.
Figure 6.88. Damage zonation within the villages of Pievebovigliana village.
Three microtremor noise measurements (T01-T02-TO3 in Figure 6.88) were carried out during the survey in the most damaged zone of the historical center. The same instrument and data acquisition procedures described for Visso were employed here. Average horizontal-to- vertical (H/V) spectral ratios and polar H/V are reported in Figure 6.89. The data indicate relevant H/V peaks in the 3-5 Hz range. The highest peak in TO1 can be related to the resonance of alluvial soils on bedrock while peaks in TO2 and TO3, slightly lower in amplitude and strongly polarized, are probably influenced by the topographic feature present in southern portion of village.
Three microtremor noise measurements (T01-T02-TO3 in Figure 6.88) were carried out during the survey in the most damaged zone of the historical center. The same instrument and data acquisition procedures described for Visso were employed here. Average horizontal-to- vertical (H/V) spectral ratios and polar H/V are reported in Figure 6.89. The data indicate relevant H/V peaks in the 3-5 Hz range. The highest peak in TO1 can be related to the resonance of alluvial soils on bedrock while peaks in TO2 and TO3, slightly lower in amplitude and strongly polarized, are probably influenced by the topographic feature present in southern portion of village.
Pieve Torina is a village of about 1500 inhabitants located in the Macerata province. In addition to the main village it has the following hamlets: Antico, Appennino, Capecchiara, Capodacqua, Capriglia, Casavecchia Alta, Fiume, Giulo, Le Rote, Lucciano, Pié Casavecchia, Piecollina, Seggiole, Tazza, Torricchio, Vari. GEER reconnaissance occurred in the main village and a few additional hamlets described in other sections below. This section concerns the main village only. As shown in Table 6.1, Pieve Torina experienced estimated ground motions during the 26 October event of PGA = 0.47 g, PGA = 0.34 g during the 30 October event, and PGA = 0.17 g during the 24 August event.
Pieve Torina is a village of about 1500 inhabitants located in the Macerata province. In addition to the main village it has the following hamlets: Antico, Appennino, Capecchiara, Capodacqua, Capriglia, Casavecchia Alta, Fiume, Giulo, Le Rote, Lucciano, Pié Casavecchia, Piecollina, Seggiole, Tazza, Torricchio, Vari. GEER reconnaissance occurred in the main village and a few additional hamlets described in other sections below. This section concerns the main village only. As shown in Table 6.1, Pieve Torina experienced estimated ground motions during the 26 October event of PGA = 0.47 g, PGA = 0.34 g during the 30 October event, and PGA = 0.17 g during the 24 August event.
Figure 6.90. Locations of representative structures inspected in Pieve Torina, and damage zonation within the village. Figure 6.91. Representative pictures taken in Pieve Torina.
Figure 6.90. Locations of representative structures inspected in Pieve Torina, and damage zonation within the village. Figure 6.91. Representative pictures taken in Pieve Torina.
OVERALL DAMAGE LEVELS:
OVERALL DAMAGE LEVELS:
Figure 6.92. Noise measurements results in terms of H/V spectral ratio (on the left column) and H/V polar plots (on the right). 5.2.8 Fiume
Figure 6.92. Noise measurements results in terms of H/V spectral ratio (on the left column) and H/V polar plots (on the right). 5.2.8 Fiume
Figure 6.93. (a) Geological map of Fiume (Pieve Torina) village and (b) EW Geological cross- section (Regione Marche, 2012). Two microtremor noise measurements (TO1-TO2 in Figure 6.94) were carried out during the survey in the damage zone. The same instrument and data acquisition procedures described for Visso were employed. Average horizontal-to-vertical (H/V) spectral ratios and polar H/V are reported in Figure 6.96. Both measurements show a large H/V peak around 4 Hz that is likely related to stiffness contrast between soil cover and underlying bedrock.
Figure 6.93. (a) Geological map of Fiume (Pieve Torina) village and (b) EW Geological cross- section (Regione Marche, 2012). Two microtremor noise measurements (TO1-TO2 in Figure 6.94) were carried out during the survey in the damage zone. The same instrument and data acquisition procedures described for Visso were employed. Average horizontal-to-vertical (H/V) spectral ratios and polar H/V are reported in Figure 6.96. Both measurements show a large H/V peak around 4 Hz that is likely related to stiffness contrast between soil cover and underlying bedrock.
Table 6.13. Locations of representative structures with damage descriptions.
Table 6.13. Locations of representative structures with damage descriptions.
Figure 6.94. Locations of representative structures inspected in Fiume (Pieve Torina) and damage zonation (see Table 6.13 for details).
Figure 6.94. Locations of representative structures inspected in Fiume (Pieve Torina) and damage zonation (see Table 6.13 for details).
Figure 6.95. Representative pictures taken in Fiume (Pieve Torina) during the survey (see Table 6.13).
Figure 6.95. Representative pictures taken in Fiume (Pieve Torina) during the survey (see Table 6.13).
Figure 6.96. Noise measurements results in terms of H/V spectral ratio (on the left column) and H/V polar plots (on the right).
Figure 6.96. Noise measurements results in terms of H/V spectral ratio (on the left column) and H/V polar plots (on the right).
A noise measurements (T01 in Figure 6.98) was carried out during the survey in the upper part. The same instrument and data acquisition procedures described for Visso survey were employed. Average horizontal-to-vertical (H/V) spectral ratios and polar H/V plot are reported in Figure 6.100. A broad band H/V peak appears at 2-6 Hz polarized in the direction of about 60°, i.e. perpendicular to the axis of the ridge, thus indicating possible topographic site effects (Pagliaroli et al., 2015).
A noise measurements (T01 in Figure 6.98) was carried out during the survey in the upper part. The same instrument and data acquisition procedures described for Visso survey were employed. Average horizontal-to-vertical (H/V) spectral ratios and polar H/V plot are reported in Figure 6.100. A broad band H/V peak appears at 2-6 Hz polarized in the direction of about 60°, i.e. perpendicular to the axis of the ridge, thus indicating possible topographic site effects (Pagliaroli et al., 2015).
Figure 6.97. (a) Geological map of Casavecchia Alta village, and (b) Geological cross-section (Regione Marche, 2012b).
Figure 6.97. (a) Geological map of Casavecchia Alta village, and (b) Geological cross-section (Regione Marche, 2012b).
Figure 6.98. Locations of representative structures inspected in Casavecchia (see Table 6.14 for details).
Figure 6.98. Locations of representative structures inspected in Casavecchia (see Table 6.14 for details).
Table 6.14. Locations of representative structures with damage descriptions.
Table 6.14. Locations of representative structures with damage descriptions.
Figure 6.99. Representative pictures taken in Casavecchia during the survey (see Table 6.14)
Figure 6.99. Representative pictures taken in Casavecchia during the survey (see Table 6.14)
‘igure 6.100. Noise measurement TO1 results in terms of H/V spectral ratio (up) and H/V polar slots (bottom).
‘igure 6.100. Noise measurement TO1 results in terms of H/V spectral ratio (up) and H/V polar slots (bottom).
Figure 6.101. Locations of representative structures inspected in Sellano and surrounding hamlets (see Table 6.15 for details). A noise measurement was carried out during the survey in the upper part of Sellano (close to PO6 in the Municipio square), about 30 m from a slope. The same instrument and data acquisition procedures described for Visso survey were employed. Average horizontal-to- vertical (H/V) spectral ratios and polar H/V plots are reported in Figure 6.103. A broad band peak can be identified at about 3-5 Hz that is clearly polarized in the direction of about 90°, which is roughly orthogonal to the strike of the adjacent slope.
Figure 6.101. Locations of representative structures inspected in Sellano and surrounding hamlets (see Table 6.15 for details). A noise measurement was carried out during the survey in the upper part of Sellano (close to PO6 in the Municipio square), about 30 m from a slope. The same instrument and data acquisition procedures described for Visso survey were employed. Average horizontal-to- vertical (H/V) spectral ratios and polar H/V plots are reported in Figure 6.103. A broad band peak can be identified at about 3-5 Hz that is clearly polarized in the direction of about 90°, which is roughly orthogonal to the strike of the adjacent slope.
Figure 6.103. Noise measurement results in terms of H/V spectral ratio (top) and H/V polar plots (bottom) (Sellano, Municipio square, 42.888828°- 12.926805°).
Figure 6.103. Noise measurement results in terms of H/V spectral ratio (top) and H/V polar plots (bottom) (Sellano, Municipio square, 42.888828°- 12.926805°).
Table 6.16. Location of representative structures with damage descriptions.
Table 6.16. Location of representative structures with damage descriptions.
Figure 6.104. Locations of the representative structures inspected in Ancarano pié del colle (see Table 6.16 for details).
Figure 6.104. Locations of the representative structures inspected in Ancarano pié del colle (see Table 6.16 for details).
Figure 6.105. Representative pictures taken at Ancarano pié del Colle (see Table 6.16 for for details).
Figure 6.105. Representative pictures taken at Ancarano pié del Colle (see Table 6.16 for for details).
Figure 6.106. Geological map of Cessapalombo main centre (Regione Marche, 2012). Table 6.17 summarizes locations and details of the representative inspected buildings, while Figure 6.108 shows locations of these buildings. Figure 6.109 shows pictures of representative structures in the village. The average damage level in the main village is approximately D1 to D2.
Figure 6.106. Geological map of Cessapalombo main centre (Regione Marche, 2012). Table 6.17 summarizes locations and details of the representative inspected buildings, while Figure 6.108 shows locations of these buildings. Figure 6.109 shows pictures of representative structures in the village. The average damage level in the main village is approximately D1 to D2.
Figure 6.107. Historical earthquakes felt in Cessapalombo (CPTI- INGV).
Figure 6.107. Historical earthquakes felt in Cessapalombo (CPTI- INGV).
Figure 6.108. Locations of the representative structures inspected in Cessapalombo (see Table 6.17 for details).
Figure 6.108. Locations of the representative structures inspected in Cessapalombo (see Table 6.17 for details).
Table 6.17. Location of representative structures with damage descriptions.
Table 6.17. Location of representative structures with damage descriptions.
Figure 6.109. Representative pictures taken at Cessapalombo (see Table 6.17 for details).
Figure 6.109. Representative pictures taken at Cessapalombo (see Table 6.17 for details).
Figure 6.110. Locations of the representative structures inspected in Preci
Figure 6.110. Locations of the representative structures inspected in Preci
Figure 6.111. Representative pictures of church in Preci (Lat = 42.881418, Lon = 13.036290).
Figure 6.111. Representative pictures of church in Preci (Lat = 42.881418, Lon = 13.036290).
Figure 6.112. Locations of the representative structures inspected in Piedivalle.
Figure 6.112. Locations of the representative structures inspected in Piedivalle.
Figure 6.113. Representative pictures taken at Piedivalle.
Figure 6.113. Representative pictures taken at Piedivalle.
Figure 6.114. Locations of the representative structures inspected in Caldarola (see Table 6.1! for details).
Figure 6.114. Locations of the representative structures inspected in Caldarola (see Table 6.1! for details).
Figure 6.115. Representative pictures taken at Caldarola (see Table 6.18 for details).
Figure 6.115. Representative pictures taken at Caldarola (see Table 6.18 for details).
Figure 6.116. Locations of the representative structures inspected in Castello di Campi (see Table 6.19 for details). he village of Castello di Campi (42.853729, 13.100582) belongs to the municipality of Norcic nd is about 11 km from the center of Norcia. It has 172 inhabitants according to the ISTAT ensus of 2001. Table 6.1 shows the ground motions levels. Figure 6.116 shows the locations o1 ispected buildings, Figure 6.117 shows the building photos. Table 6.19 shows details fol spected buildings. Observed buildings are unreinforced masonry. Damage levels vary from D2 9 D3.
Figure 6.116. Locations of the representative structures inspected in Castello di Campi (see Table 6.19 for details). he village of Castello di Campi (42.853729, 13.100582) belongs to the municipality of Norcic nd is about 11 km from the center of Norcia. It has 172 inhabitants according to the ISTAT ensus of 2001. Table 6.1 shows the ground motions levels. Figure 6.116 shows the locations o1 ispected buildings, Figure 6.117 shows the building photos. Table 6.19 shows details fol spected buildings. Observed buildings are unreinforced masonry. Damage levels vary from D2 9 D3.
Figure 6.117. Representative pictures taken at Castello di Campi (see Table 6.19 for details).
Figure 6.117. Representative pictures taken at Castello di Campi (see Table 6.19 for details).
Table 6.20. Locations of representative structures with damage descriptions As one can see from Figure 6.119 (modified from Regione Marche, 2012), San Lorenzo in Colpolina is built on a ridge elongated NNW-SSE and constitued by pelitic-arenacous and arenacous litofacies of Camerino Formation, that consists of foredeep turbidites, locally present in different silicoclatic lithofacies, having different lateral and overlapping relationships. In particular, in the study area there are outcrops of the pelitic-sandstone, and sandstone lithofacies; Tortonian-Messinain. In the geologic-geotechnical map Camerino Formation is
Table 6.20. Locations of representative structures with damage descriptions As one can see from Figure 6.119 (modified from Regione Marche, 2012), San Lorenzo in Colpolina is built on a ridge elongated NNW-SSE and constitued by pelitic-arenacous and arenacous litofacies of Camerino Formation, that consists of foredeep turbidites, locally present in different silicoclatic lithofacies, having different lateral and overlapping relationships. In particular, in the study area there are outcrops of the pelitic-sandstone, and sandstone lithofacies; Tortonian-Messinain. In the geologic-geotechnical map Camerino Formation is
A noise measurements (TO1 in Figure 6.120) was carried out during the survey on the ridge on to which San Lorenzo is founded. The same instrument and data acquisition procedure described for Visso survey were employed. Average horizontal-to-vertical (H/V) spectral ratios and polar H/V plot are reported in Figure 6.122. A peak can be identified at about 3 Hz polarized in the direction of about 100°, i.e. perpendicular to the axis of the ridge, thus indicating possible topographic site effects (Pagliaroli et al., 2015). Figure 6.120. Locations of representative structures inspected in San Lorenzo in Colpolina (see Table 6.21 for details).
A noise measurements (TO1 in Figure 6.120) was carried out during the survey on the ridge on to which San Lorenzo is founded. The same instrument and data acquisition procedure described for Visso survey were employed. Average horizontal-to-vertical (H/V) spectral ratios and polar H/V plot are reported in Figure 6.122. A peak can be identified at about 3 Hz polarized in the direction of about 100°, i.e. perpendicular to the axis of the ridge, thus indicating possible topographic site effects (Pagliaroli et al., 2015). Figure 6.120. Locations of representative structures inspected in San Lorenzo in Colpolina (see Table 6.21 for details).
Table 6.21. Locations of representative structures with damage descriptions.
Table 6.21. Locations of representative structures with damage descriptions.
Figure 6.121. Representative pictures taken in San Lorenzo in Colpolina during the survey (see Table 6.21).
Figure 6.121. Representative pictures taken in San Lorenzo in Colpolina during the survey (see Table 6.21).
Figure 6.122. Noise measurements results in terms of H/V spectral ratio (top) and H/V polar plots (bottom).
Figure 6.122. Noise measurements results in terms of H/V spectral ratio (top) and H/V polar plots (bottom).
Table 6.22 Locations of representative structures with damage descriptions
Table 6.22 Locations of representative structures with damage descriptions
Figure 6.123. Representative pictures taken in Serravalle during the GEER reconnaissance (see Table 6.22).
Figure 6.123. Representative pictures taken in Serravalle during the GEER reconnaissance (see Table 6.22).
Figure 6.124. Damage proxy map of Popoli (http://aria-share.jpl.nasa.gov/events/20161030- Italy_EQ/DPM/, last accessed 21 April, 2017).
Figure 6.124. Damage proxy map of Popoli (http://aria-share.jpl.nasa.gov/events/20161030- Italy_EQ/DPM/, last accessed 21 April, 2017).
Table 6.23. Locations of representative structures with damage descriptions
Table 6.23. Locations of representative structures with damage descriptions
Figure 6.125. Representative pictures taken in Popoli during the GEER reconnaissance (see Table 6.23).
Figure 6.125. Representative pictures taken in Popoli during the GEER reconnaissance (see Table 6.23).
During our reconnaissance following the 30 October event, we observed extensive damages in almost all the masonry structures (classified as D3-D5) located mainly in the historical center of the town, which was in part not accessible. Some pictures of the damaged buildings in the historical center are shown in Figure 6.127 (source Repubblica.it, last accessed 21 April, 2017). In the new part of the town damages were concentrated on non-structural components of some of the reinforced concrete buildings recently constructed (classified as D2). Figure 6.128 shows multi-epoch pictures (before August and after 30 October, 2017) of selected locations. Table 6.24 summarizes the overall damage level observed in these locations.
During our reconnaissance following the 30 October event, we observed extensive damages in almost all the masonry structures (classified as D3-D5) located mainly in the historical center of the town, which was in part not accessible. Some pictures of the damaged buildings in the historical center are shown in Figure 6.127 (source Repubblica.it, last accessed 21 April, 2017). In the new part of the town damages were concentrated on non-structural components of some of the reinforced concrete buildings recently constructed (classified as D2). Figure 6.128 shows multi-epoch pictures (before August and after 30 October, 2017) of selected locations. Table 6.24 summarizes the overall damage level observed in these locations.
Figure 6.127. Damaged constructions in the oldest part of San Pellegrino (http://video.repubblica.it/dossier/terremoto-30-ottobre/terremoto-centro-italia-la- distruzione-a-san-pellegrino-di-norcia-dal-drone/257495/257761).
Figure 6.127. Damaged constructions in the oldest part of San Pellegrino (http://video.repubblica.it/dossier/terremoto-30-ottobre/terremoto-centro-italia-la- distruzione-a-san-pellegrino-di-norcia-dal-drone/257495/257761).
Table 6.24. Locations of representative structures with damage descriptions.
Table 6.24. Locations of representative structures with damage descriptions.
earthquake. The outcomes of the survey are presented in Chapter 6 of GEER (2016). Most of the reinforced concrete (RC) and composite bridges that were inspected did not experience significant seismically-induced damage. Conversely, the masonry bridges suffered extensive damage during the August events that affected roadway operations. The latter damaged bridges were re-visited following the October seismic sequences. An additional small masonry bridge along SP477 was also checked. The earthquake reconnaissance showed that the investigated masonry bridges suffered substantial additional damage during the October seismic sequence. The locations of surveyed masonry bridges is shown in Figure 7.1; further details are given in Table 7.1. Figure 7.1. Map of epicentral region showing locations of bridge sites visited by the GEER team following the October 2016 seismic sequence.
earthquake. The outcomes of the survey are presented in Chapter 6 of GEER (2016). Most of the reinforced concrete (RC) and composite bridges that were inspected did not experience significant seismically-induced damage. Conversely, the masonry bridges suffered extensive damage during the August events that affected roadway operations. The latter damaged bridges were re-visited following the October seismic sequences. An additional small masonry bridge along SP477 was also checked. The earthquake reconnaissance showed that the investigated masonry bridges suffered substantial additional damage during the October seismic sequence. The locations of surveyed masonry bridges is shown in Figure 7.1; further details are given in Table 7.1. Figure 7.1. Map of epicentral region showing locations of bridge sites visited by the GEER team following the October 2016 seismic sequence.
Table 7.1. Details of bridges inspected following October 2016 seismic sequence.
Table 7.1. Details of bridges inspected following October 2016 seismic sequence.
The Ponte a Cinque Occhi (Five eyes) along the internal road connecting SS4 (from the Casale Nibbi exit) to SR260 along Scandarello lake suffered additional damage during the October strong motions. The damage was concentrated in the arches and the piers as shown in Figures 7.6a and 7.6b. The bridge was retrofitted, as a rapid intervention, in early December 2016 with fiber-reinforced mortar and steel mesh (see Figures 7.6c and 7.6d). The latter intervention was aimed at restoring the structural capacity to the piers and the abutments. Construction was also carried out on the carriage way (bridge deck) and drainage ducts were installed.
The Ponte a Cinque Occhi (Five eyes) along the internal road connecting SS4 (from the Casale Nibbi exit) to SR260 along Scandarello lake suffered additional damage during the October strong motions. The damage was concentrated in the arches and the piers as shown in Figures 7.6a and 7.6b. The bridge was retrofitted, as a rapid intervention, in early December 2016 with fiber-reinforced mortar and steel mesh (see Figures 7.6c and 7.6d). The latter intervention was aimed at restoring the structural capacity to the piers and the abutments. Construction was also carried out on the carriage way (bridge deck) and drainage ducts were installed.
Figure 7.2. Bridge along SP477 (42.782073 deg, 13.142383 deg): road surface cracks (a); longitudinal cracks along the road side (b); cracks between the bridge arch and the main structure (c-d); view of the bridge on December 2011 (e).
Figure 7.2. Bridge along SP477 (42.782073 deg, 13.142383 deg): road surface cracks (a); longitudinal cracks along the road side (b); cracks between the bridge arch and the main structure (c-d); view of the bridge on December 2011 (e).
Figure 7.4. Roman-era bridge along the Trisungo route (3 spans bridge - Tufo area — Arquata del Tronto - N42.73538, E13.25365): (c) after the 24 August event (photo on September 7 2016) and (d) after the 30 October event (photo on December 13 2016).
Figure 7.4. Roman-era bridge along the Trisungo route (3 spans bridge - Tufo area — Arquata del Tronto - N42.73538, E13.25365): (c) after the 24 August event (photo on September 7 2016) and (d) after the 30 October event (photo on December 13 2016).
Figure 7.5. Ponte a Tre Occhi (42.620668 deg, 13.290176deg): (a) after the 24 August event (photo on September 7 2016) and (b,c,d) after the 30 October event (photo on December 13 2016), repairing works (c) and bridge masonry collapse (d).
Figure 7.5. Ponte a Tre Occhi (42.620668 deg, 13.290176deg): (a) after the 24 August event (photo on September 7 2016) and (b,c,d) after the 30 October event (photo on December 13 2016), repairing works (c) and bridge masonry collapse (d).
Figure 7.6. Ponte a Cinque Occhi (42.623178 deg, 13.250428deg): increased sub-vertical cracks to the piers after the 30 October event at the top (a) and bottom (b) of the piers (photo on November 20 2016) and structural retrofitting of the bridge (c and d) (photo on December 15 2016).
Figure 7.6. Ponte a Cinque Occhi (42.623178 deg, 13.250428deg): increased sub-vertical cracks to the piers after the 30 October event at the top (a) and bottom (b) of the piers (photo on November 20 2016) and structural retrofitting of the bridge (c and d) (photo on December 15 2016).

Related papers

UCLA UCLA Previously Published Works Title Engineering Reconnaissance following the October 2016 Central Italy Earthquakes-Version 2 Permalink Publication Date Data Availability GEER Team Members
Roberto Cairo

2017

The GEER Association is supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF) through the Geotechnical Engineering Program under Grant No. CMMI-1266418. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF. The GEER Association is made possible by the vision and support of the NSF Geotechnical Engineering Program Directors: Dr. Richard Fragaszy and the late Dr. Cliff Astill. GEER members also donate their time, talent, and resources to collect time-sensitive field observations of the effects of extreme events. Sponsorship of GEER activities was also provided by the B. John Garrick Institute for the Risk Sciences at UCLA and the NSF I/UCRC Center for Unmanned Aircraft Systems (C-UAS) at BYU under Project BYU13-03. We thank Prof. Mauro Dolce and Engs. Paola Pagliara and Paola Bertuccioli from the Department of Civil Protection for their support and assistance. Matteo Francesco Stancato, master's student at Università della Calabria, contributed to data collection for building structures. We thank Giuseppe Riccioni (Ussita Municipality), Roberto Cantoni, and Raffaele Sorriento (Corpo Nazionale dei Vigili del Fuoco) for allowing surveys at Monte Bove northern flank and Valle di Panico. Eng. Monica Di Mattia (Teramo Province) supported survey activities in Crognaleto. Organizations within Italy that supported the activities reported herein include the Italian Geotechnical Society; the Consortium ReLUIS (Network of Italian Laboratories of Earthquake Engineering), headquartered in the

View PDFchevron_right
Engineering Reconnaissance Following the October 2016 Central Italy Earthquakes - Version 2
Paolo Tommasi

2017

View PDFchevron_right
UCLA UCLA Previously Published Works Title Engineering Reconnaissance following the 2016 M6.0 Central Italy Earthquake: Ver 1 Permalink Publication Date Data Availability
Augusto Penna

2016

View PDFchevron_right
Reconnaissance of geotechnical aspects of the 2016 Central Italy earthquakes
giovanna vessia

Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 2018

Between August and November 2016, three major earthquake events occurred in Central Italy. The first event, with M6.1, took place on 24 August 2016, the second (M5.9) on 26 October, and the third (M6.5) on 30 October 2016. Each event was followed by numerous aftershocks. The 24 August event caused massive damages especially to the villages of Arquata del Tronto, Accumoli, Amatrice, and Pescara del Tronto. In total, there were 299 fatalities, generally from collapses of unreinforced masonry dwellings. The October events caused significant new damage in the villages of Visso, Ussita, and Norcia, although not producing fatalities, since the area had largely been evacuated. The Italy-US Geotechnical Extreme Events Reconnaissance team investigated earthquake effects on slopes, villages, and major infrastructures. The approach adopted to carry out post-earthquake reconnaissance surveys was to combine traditional reconnaissance activities of onground evidences and mapping of field conditions with advanced imaging and damage detection routines enabled by state-of-the-art geomatics technology. Presented herein are & G. Vessia

View PDFchevron_right
Engineering Reconnaissance of the 24 August 2016 Central Italy Earthquake. Version 2 Editors: Geotechnical Extreme Events Reconnaissance Association
Fabrizio Galadini, Paolo Zimmaro

Chapter 2 describes active faults in the region that produced the 24 August 2016 earthquake. Each sub-section describes geological data (mainly based on criteria from Falcucci et al., 2016) and reviews historical seismicity, which collectively provide the basis for inferences of current activity. Data on the past earthquakes and the damage distribution have been derived from Rovida et al. (2016). Two faults among those presented below (namely the Montagna dei Fiori-Monti Gemelli and Leonessa faults) are considered inactive in the sense than they are likely unable to generate earthquakes of sufficient size to produce primary surface rupture (i.e., M>6.0±0.2; Falcucci et al., 2016). The discussion about inactivity is relevant for three reasons: i) They are normal faults with a trend consistent with the current tectonic regime; ii) They are characterized by geomorphologic features that could be incorrectly associated with current activity; and iii) Activity has been hypothesised for one of them (Leonessa) in the available literature. Finally, we discuss an unsolved seismogenic issue, related to the earthquake that struck in 1950 along the Gran Sasso chain (M 5.7).

View PDFchevron_right
Engineering Reconnaissance following the October 2016 Central Italy Earthquakes
Armando Lucio Simonelli

2017

View PDFchevron_right
Engineering Reconnaissance following the 2016 M 6.0 Central Italy Earthquake: Ver 1
Augusto Penna

2016

The earthquake was located in a gap between two earlier damaging events, the 1997 M6.1 Umbria-Marche earthquake to the northwest and the 2009 M6.1 L'Aquila earthquake to the southeast. This gap had been recognized prior to the event as a zone of elevated risk (GdL Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia, hereafter INGV, 2016). The present event and those that preceded it occurred along the spine of the Apennine Mountain range on normal faults and had rake angles ranging from-80 to-100. Each of these events produced substantial damage to local towns and villages; the present event most strongly affected Arquata del Tronto, Accumoli, Amatrice, and Pescara del Tronto, with a loss of life as of this writing of 294, generally from collapses of unreinforced masonry dwellings. The NSF-funded Geotechnical Extreme Events Reconnaissance (GEER) association, with cofunding from the B. John Garrick Institute for the Risk Sciences at UCLA and the NSF I/UCRC Center for Unmanned Aircraft Systems (C-UAS) at BYU, mobilized a US-based team to the area from 5-9 September 2016. The US team worked in close collaboration with Italian researchers organized under the auspices of the Italian Geotechnical Society, the Italian Center for Seismic Microzonation and its Applications, the Consortium ReLUIS, Centre of Competence of Department of Civil Protection and the DIsaster RECovery Team of Politecnico di Torino. The objective of the Italy-US GEER team was to collect and document perishable data that is essential to advance knowledge of earthquake effects, which ultimately leads to improved procedures for characterization and mitigation of seismic risk.

View PDFchevron_right
Engineering Reconnaissance of the 24 August 2016 Central Italy Earthquake. Version 2
Robert Kayen
View PDFchevron_right
Engineering reconnaissance following the August 24, 2016 M6.0 Central Italy earthquake
Giuseppe Tropeano

2017

An earthquake with a moment magnitude reported as 6 .0 from INGV (Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vul canologia); occurred at 03:36 AM (local time) on 24 August 2016 in the central part of Italy. The epicenter was lo cated at the borders of the Lazio, Abruzzi, Marche and Umbria regions, abou t 2.5 km north-east of the village of Accumoli and about 100 km from Rome. The hypocentral depth was about 8 km (INGV). We summarize preliminary findings of the Italy-US G EER (Geotechnical Extreme Events Reconnaissance) team, on damage distribution, causative faults, earthquak e-induced landslides and rockfalls, building and bridge performance, and ground motion characterization. Our reconnaissance team used multidisciplinary approaches, combining expertise in geo logy, seismology, geomatics, geotechnical engineeri g, and structural engineering. Our approach was to combine traditiona l reconnaissance activities of on-ground recording a d mapping of field conditions, with advanced imaging and ...

View PDFchevron_right