LOCAL EFFECTS

Maria Pia Boni

Thanks to Dr F. Pergalani Dipartimento di Ingegneria Civile e Ambientale - Politecnico di Milano

Lecco 15-03-2018
 LOCAL EFFECTS

DETERMINISTIC PROBABILISTIC
V
U
L
SEISMIC SCENARIO N SEISMIC HAZARD
E
R
LOCAL A LOCAL
EFFECTS B EFFECTS
I
L
DETAILED SEISMIC I
LOCAL HAZARD
SCENARIO T
Y

DAMAGE SEISMIC
SCENARIO RISK
 LOCAL EFFECTS

• Evaluation of amplification and instability factors:

local modification of the shake due to geologic and
geomorphologic effects

• Individuation of the zones producing amplification

and instability

• Experience during the last earthquakes

• Individuation of the typical situations and evaluation

of the effects
 LOCAL EFFECTS

Site
amplifications

Dynamic
Falls compaction
Liquefaction Flow/slide

Cave

Focus
Fault
 AMPLIFICATION OR INSTABILITY

Site effects or amplification effects

• Lithological
• Morphological
Soil characterized by a seismic stable behavior

Instability effects
• Landslides
• Settlements and liquefactions
Soil characterized by a seismic instable behavior
Permanent soil modifications

• Amplification effects are extensive on the area with different results

• Instability effects are punctual in small areas
CLASSIFYING TABLE FOR QUALITATIVE
LOCAL EFFECT SITUATIONS

SITUATION EFFECTS
Active landslide
Dormant landslide INSTABILITIES
Potentially unstable area
Soft soil (low density fills, saturated soils LIQUEFACTION
with fine fraction) /SETTLEMENTS

Cliff with height ³ 10m MORPHOLOGICAL

Ridge area AMPLIFICATIONS

Valley filled by alluvial deposits LITHOLOGICAL

Slope toe, slope debris and alluvial fan AMPLIFICATIONS

Stratigraphic-tectonic contact between two

DIFFERENTIAL
lithologic units with different geotechnical
BEHAVIORS
characteristics
LOCAL EFFECTS: EXAMPLES

El Salvador Earthquake 13/01/2001 (M=7.7)

LOCAL EFFECTS: EXAMPLES

LANDSLIDES
 LOCAL EFFECTS: EXAMPLES

Falls
LOCAL EFFECTS: EXAMPLES

OBSERVATION OF SURFACE FAULT RUPTURES

LOCAL EFFECTS: EXAMPLES

OBSERVATIONS OF FAULT

Anatolian fault slip, Koakaeli, 1999

LOCAL EFFECTS: EXAMPLES

OBSERVATIONS OF LIQUEFACTION EFFECTS

LOCAL EFFECTS: EXAMPLES

LIQUEFACTION EFFECTS
LOCAL EFFECTS: EXAMPLES

OBSERVATIONS OF AMPLIFICATION EFFECTS

 SEISMIC WAVES PROPOAGATION

Earthquake energy release through elastic body waves

Different damping (influencing factors):

• radiation damping (geometry)
• scattering damping (reflection and refraction phenomena)
• material damping (characteristics of the materials)
 SURFACE EFFECTS (E): ROCK Vs SOIL

Damping of the energy in the seismic waves considering the distance

focus - epicenter (P)
SURFACE EFFECTS (E)

ROCK (ideal conditions) SOIL (real conditions)

Vs > 800 m/s Vs < 800 m/s
Horizontal morphology Lateral heterogeneities
Non-horizontal morphology

Essentially depending on: Depending also on:

SOURCE (A) GEOLOGIC AND
GEOMORPHOLOGIC
PROPAGATION (P)
CONDITION OF THE SITE (S)
E = f (A , P) E = f (A , P , S)
 PARAMETERS DEFINITION: dynamic behavior

Considering the engineering point of view, the most influent motions,

for the safety of the structures, are the horizontal ones, due to the shear
waves (S)

The mechanical properties of the

soil are evaluated on the basis of
the stress-strain behavior in the
plane τ – g

Derived parameters:
G0 - initial elastic shear modulus
(tangent in the origin)

G - secant shear modulus (t/g)

Energy dissipated in the cycle

D - damping ratio
Energy accumulated in the 1° load
CURVES G-g AND D-g

Non-linear behavior of a
material, described by the
trends of G and D with
increasing values of g
(derived by laboratory cyclic
tests)

gl = elastic threshold
(0.0001 – 0.01 %)

gv = volumetric threshold
(0.01 – 0.1 %)
a) Linear elastic model or viscous-
elastic
b) Equivalent linear elastic model
(G-D)
c) Non-linear elastic-plastic model
ICMS: guidelines for local effects in Italy

2008
 ICMS: 3-LEVELS APPROACH

Relating to the work scale and to the results:

• Qualitative approach – Level 1

• Semi-quantitative approach – Level 2

• Quantitative approach – Level 3

 LEVEL 1 - QUALITATIVE APPROACH

Represents a preparatory and mandatory study for the subsequent levels

Objective: mapping microzones with homogeneous seismic behaviour at a

scale of 1:5,000 – 1:10,000

Investigations
• Collection of prior data: geological, geomorphological, engineering-
geological surveys and boreholes
Elaborations
• analysis and synthesis of the available data and cartography
Deliverables
• investigation Map
• geolithological map with cross-sections
• map of seismic homogeneous zones (MOPS), scale 1:5.000-1:10.000
• final report
 LEVEL 1 - QUALITATIVE APPROACH: results

MAP OF SEISMIC HOMOGENEOUS ZONES

(MOPS)

• Deriving from the data, the MOPS points out the situations that
can produce instability and amplification effects
• Gives an areal definition of the different situations (stable zones,
stable zones prone to local amplification, zones prone to
instability)
• Presents a qualitative analysis of the effects
MOPS EXAMPLE
 LEVEL 2: SEMI-QUANTITATIVE APPROACH

Using specific tables or classifications it is possible to obtain the value

of a parameter as an indicator of the amplification
Some examples:
• “Manual for Zonation on Seismic Geotechnical Hazards”, written in 1993 from TC4 (Technical Committee n°
4 for Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering) of ISSMFE (International Society of Soil Mechanics and
Foundation Engineering)

• “Guidelines for seismic microzonation studies”, written in 1995 from Scientific and Technical Committee of
AFPS (Association Francaise du Genie Parasismique - French Association for Earthquake Engineering) in
the sector of “Delegation of Major Risks of the French Ministry of the Environment – Direction for Prevention,
Pollution and Risks”
• NEHRP Recommended provisions for seismic regulations for new buildings and other structures (FEMA 450)
- Part 1: Provisions (Cap. 3) - 2003
• Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance - Part 1: General rules, seismic actions and rules
for buildings 1998-2003
• Norme Tecniche per le Costruzioni – DM 14/1/2008
• Criteri ed indirizzi per la definizione della componente geologica, idrogeologica e sismica del PGT, in
attuazione dell’art. 57 della L.R. 11 marzo 2005, n. 12 - ALLEGATO 5 DGR VIII/7374 (28-05-2008)
• Indirizzi e criteri per la microzonazione sismica (ICMS)– Conferenza delle Regioni e delle Provincie
autonome – Dipartimento della Protezione Civile, Roma, 2008
 LEVEL 2: SEMI-QUANTITATIVE APPROACH

Objectives
• offsetting some of the uncertainties encountered at Level 1 by conducting
detailed investigations;
• using simplified methods to provide numerical quantifications (schedules and
empirical laws) of local changes to seismic motion at the surface (stable zones prone
to local amplification) and permanent deformations (instability-prone zones).

Investigations
• In-hole (DH or CH) geophysical investigations, seismic cone, refraction seismology,
analyses with active and passive surface wave scatter techniques to estimate VS,
microtremors and seismic events.
Elaborations
• Correlations and comparison with results of Level 1, revision of geological model,
schedules for amplification factors, schedules and empirical formulas for slope
instability and liquefaction.
Deliverables
• Investigation Map
• SM Map (SM= Seismic Microzonation)
• Report describing the SM Map
 Amplification factors for lithostratigraphic effects
(definitions to calculate Fa and Fv tables)
In term of pseudo-acceleration

1 1.5Tao 1 1.5Tai
FA = ∫ SAo( T )dT
Tao 0.5Tao
∫ SAi( T )dT
Tai 0.5Tai

• SA(T) is the elastic acceleration response spectrum, equal to SAi for the input, SAo for the output
• Ta is the value of natural period at which the maximum acceleration response is recorded, TA is
equal to TAi for the input and to TAo for the output

In term of pseudo-velocity
1 1.2Tvo 1 1.2Tvi
FV = ∫ SVo( T )dT
0.4Tvo 0.8Tvo
∫ SVi( T )dT
Tvi 0.8Tvi

• SV(T) is the pseudo-velocity spectrum , equal to SVi for the input, SVo for the output

• Tv is the value of period at which correspond the maximum value of the pseudo-velocity, Tv is
equal to Tvi for the input and to Tvo for the output
 LEVEL 2: SEMI-QUANTITATIVE APPROACH

TABLES TO OBTAIN FA OR FV: PARAMETERS FOR THE CHOICE

Hypothesis about the model of the soil: homogeneous, horizontal

plan and parallel layers

Tables identified by:

• 3 Vs profile: medium, maximum
and constant gradient
• Soil typology: clay, sand, gravel
• Expected peak ground
acceleration (Tr=475y): 0.06,
0.18, 0.26g
• Soil thickness
 LEVEL 2 DATA: Vs average value

TABLES TO OBTAIN FA OR FV: PARAMETERS FOR THE CHOICE

Vs average value: mean value of the Vs values related

to the layers, until the seismic bedrock (Vs≥800m/s)
LEVEL 2: FA TABLE (example)

Amplification factor Soil typology Vs profile

Clay Linear medium gradient
LEVEL 2: EXAMPLE

DATA: LITHOLOGY
LEVEL 2: EXAMPLE
STRATIGRAPHIC COLUMNS
LEVEL 1 MAP
LEVEL 2: EXAMPLE – tests to obtain Vs

SAMPLES AND DH

MASW
LEVEL 2: EXAMPLE – RESULTS (Fa, Fv MAPS)
LEVEL 3: QUANTITATIVE APPROACH

Two Methodologies
• Numerical analyses
• Experimental analyses
 LEVEL 3: QUANTITATIVE APPROACH
The level 3 of study is applied to:
• stable zones prone to local amplification (under complex geological and
geotechnical conditions) whose problems cannot be solved using the tables , or
when – given the extent of the study area - a global detailed analysis may be
useful, or for buildings or structures of particular importance;
• zones prone to particularly severe instabilities owing to the complexity of
phenomenon and/or local diffusion, whose problems cannot be solved using the
fast track methodologies.
Investigations
• Surveys for acquisition of seismometric data, boreholes, in-hole and surface tests
to determine the Vs profile, refraction seismology, in-situ and lab geotechnical
tests, microtremors.
Elaborations
• Numerical 1D and 2D analyses for amplification, complete dynamic analyses for
estimating permanent deformations.
Deliverables
• Investigation Map
• Detailed SM Map
• Report describing the Detailed SM Map
 LEVEL 3: NUMERICAL ANALYSES

DATA AND CODES REQUIRED

• Seismic input
• Soils stratigraphy
• Soils mechanical properties
• Numerical codes
 LEVEL 3: NUMERICAL ANALYSES
Spettro di risposta Spettro isoprobabile Tr 475 anni
Spettro di risposta evento generato
0.80

0.70

0.60

0.50
SEISMIC INPUT
PSA (g)

0.40

0.30

0.20

0.10

0.00
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Periodo (s)
Periodo di ritorno 475 anni
Magnitudo 5.5
Con Deviazione Standard
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
Accelerazione (g)

0.05
0.00
-0.05
-0.10
-0.15
-0.20
-0.25
-0.30
-0.35
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30
Tempo (s)
LEVEL 3: NUMERICAL ANALYSES

SOIL CHARACTERIZATION
identification of the typologies

• Construction of the cross-sections

• Individuation of the geotechnical and

geophysical parameters: shear wave velocity,
normal wave velocity, shear modulus, Poisson
coefficient, damping ratio, density, G/G0 and D
curves in function of γ
LEVEL 3: NUMERICAL ANALYSES

MODELING

• Choice of the numerical codes to be applied

(one-dimensional, two-dimensional, etc.)

• Choice of the amplification parameters (Pga,

accelerograms, response spectra, etc.)
ONE-DIMENSIONAL MODELS

Continuous layers Concentrated

model masses model
 LEVEL 3: NUMERICAL ANALYSES- MODELING

ONE-DIMENSIONAL NUMERICAL CODE

Limits
Too simple for some real situation

Advantages
Possibility of application on large areas (columns)
The knowledge of the deep geometry is not necessary
 TWO-DIMENSIONAL MODEL

350

340

330

320

310

300

290

280

270
FEM
260
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

BEM
(boundary element method)
 LEVEL 3: NUMERICAL ANALYSES- MODELING

TWO-DIMENSIONAL NUMERICAL CODE

Limits
Complexity of the model reconstruction
Knowledge of the deep geometrical
characteristics required ( > investigations)

Advantages
Good response
Possibility to model all the situations
 LEVEL 3: NUMERICAL ANALYSES- RESULTS

• Accelerograms
• Elastic response spectra and Fourier spectra
• Amplification factors (Fa)
ratio of spectral intensities (SI) calculated using the velocity or
acceleration response spectra, considering the 5% of damping, for
different period ranges (0.1-0.5s, 0.5-1.5s, etc.)

Fa = SIout / SIinp
 LEVEL 3 APPLICATION - PERUGIA

GOALS

• Seismic 3° level microzonation using both numerical

and experimental analyses;

• To give operative procedure for urban planning, for

emergency planning, for the Civil Protection and for
project design
 LEVEL 3 APPLICATION - PERUGIA

FUNDAMENTAL STEPS OF THE STUDY (1/2)

• Geologic field (scale 1:10.000)

• Drafting of geologic maps and local seismic hazard (level 1)
maps
• Collection of geologic, geomorphologic, geotechnical and
geophysical data both existent both from in-situ and
laboratory investigations performed during the project
• Historical study on the past damages due to past
earthquakes
• Construction of the geologic-geophysical model and
individuation of the representative cross-sections
 LEVEL 3 APPLICATION - PERUGIA

FUNDAMENTAL STEPS OF THE STUDY (2/2)

• Individuation of the seismic input

• Numerical analysis 1D e 2D and determination of the
amplification factors and acceleration elastic response
spectra
• Experimental analysis on significant points: determination
of amplification factors and elastic acceleration response
spectra
• Comparison between the results of the numerical analyses
and the experimental analyses
• First indications for the use of the results both in urban
planning both in project design
 LEVEL 3 APPLICATION - PERUGIA

DATA COLLECTION
• Geologic and geotechnical investigations (800 boreholes)

• Information on the historical damage due to past earthquakes (500 data)

• Historical geographic maps since 1572 (156 maps)

• New geotechnical field tests:

- 12 boreholes (deep 40 m) and relative down hole
- 11 SPT investigations
- 11 geophysical investigations (138 m each one) with information on SH e P velocities
- 3 MASW and Remi profiles
- Static and dynamic laboratory tests on 23 sample (physical properties, granulometric
analysis, edometric test, triaxial test and resonant column test)
LEVEL 3 APPLICATION – PERUGIA: stratigraphy
APPLICATION – PERUGIA: geophysical analysis
APPLICATION – PERUGIA: geothecnical tests
 APPLICATION - PERUGIA

sigla Vs (m/s) Vp (m/s) g (kN/m )

3
unità geofisica
riporti R 220 710 19.2
frane F 250 750 19.2
unità eluvio-colluviale EC 260 830 19.6
unità ghiaiosa alluvionale GA 300 1020 19.7
unità limosa alluvionale LA 270 780 19.4
unità argillosa Pian di Massiano APM 250 1800 19.7 GEOLOGIC AND
unità argillosa S. Sisto SS 350 1350 19.3
unità conglomeratica Tassello CT 510 1890 20.2
GEOPHYSICAL
unità sabbiosa Monterone
unità argillosa Monteluce
SM
AM
470
500
2060
1870
21
20
MODEL
unità conglomeratica Piscille CP 650 2200 20
unità torbiditica alterata TA 540 2120 20
unità Marnoso-Arenacea MA 760 2440 20.9
unità Schlier S 900 2300 21
unità Bisciaro B 900 2400 23.5
unità Scaglia Cinerea SC 1000 2520 24.2
unità Scaglia Rossa SR 1800 4560 25.5
S1C2 APM S5C2 SS-LA S1C2 APM S5C2 SS-LA
S6C2 SM S8C2 AM S6C2 SM S8C2 AM
S9C3 TA S12C1 EC-F-R S9C3 TA S12C1 EC-F-R
Rollins (1998) CP-CT-GA Sintema di Fighille (2001) AM Rollins (1998) CP-CT-GA Sintema di Fighille (2001) AM
1 20.00
0.9 18.00
0.8 16.00
0.7 14.00
0.6 12.00
G/G0

D%

0.5 10.00
0.4 8.00
0.3 6.00
0.2 4.00
0.1 2.00
0 0.00
0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1
Deformazione tangenziale (g%) Deformazione tangenziale (g%)
APPLICATION – PERUGIA: CROSS-SECTIONS
APPLICATION – PERUGIA: CROSS-SECTIONS

GEOLOGIC AND GEOPHYSICAL CROSS-SECTIONS

1 3 5 8 9 R 12
EC 2 4 6
7R 10 11EC
13
CT CT 14
AM AM
TA TA 15EC
Centro Storico 16
GA

6
5EC 7EC
3 9
CT 10
4 AM F8 CT R11
1 CT SM 12
2 TA CT EC CT
TA
APM TA
Centro Storico 13 GA
TA
TA
Pian di Massiano
 APPLICATION – PERUGIA: SEISMIC INPUT

Referring to the Italian National Technical Code

(Norme Tecniche per le Costruzioni - D.M. 14/01/08):

5 accelerograms recorded on subsoil of A category

- Compatible to the seismogenetic characteristic of the studied area
- Compatible to the value of expected amax (GdL, 2004)
- Compatible to the couple magnitude-distance from disaggregation analysis
- Source: ITACA database

Events
Lat Long Profondità
Evento Data Ora Mw ML Regime tettonico
(°) (°) (km)
VAL NERINA 1979-09-19 21:35:37 42.800 13.040 6.0 5.8 5.5 Faglia normale
GUBBIO 1984-04-29 05:03:00 43.208 12.568 6.0 5.6 5.2 Faglia normale
UMBRIA-MARCHE
1997-09-26 00:33:12 43.023 12.891 3.5 5.7 5.6 Faglia normale
1° SHOCK
UMBRIA-MARCHE
1997-09-26 09:40:25 43.015 12.854 9.9 6.0 5.8 Faglia normale
2° SHOCK
 APPLICATION – PERUGIA: SEISMIC INPUT

Records
Lat Long Distanza epicentrale Pga
Sigla Evento Stazione Comp. Litologia
(°) (°) (km) (g)
CSC 42.710 13.010 9.3 VAL NERINA Cascia W-E Roccia 0.203

PTL 43.420 12.440 26.1 GUBBIO Pietralunga N-S Roccia - 0.172

PTL 43.420 12.440 26.1 GUBBIO Pietralunga W-E Roccia - 0.177

UMBRIA-MARCHE
ASS 43.070 12.600 24.0 Assisi N-S Roccia 0.155
1° SHOCK
UMBRIA-MARCHE
ASS 43.070 12.600 21.4 Assisi W-E Roccia 0.188
2° SHOCK
0.80
VAL NERINA_CSC_W-E

0.70 GUBBIO_PTL_N-S
GUBBIO_PTL_W-E
0.60 U-M 1° shock_ASS_N-S
U-M 2° shock_ASS_W-E
0.50
MEDIA
PSA (g)

NTC_Categoria A_Perugia
0.40

0.30

0.20

0.10

0.00
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
Periodo (s)
 APPLICATION – PERUGIA: SEISMIC INPUT
0.20
VAL NERINA_CSC_WE
0.15

0.10

Accelerazione (g)
0.05

0.00
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-0.05

-0.10

-0.15

-0.20
Tempo (s)

0.20 0.20
GUBBIO_PTL_NS GUBBIO_PTL_WE
0.15

0.10
0.15

0.10
Accelerograms
Accelerazione (g)
Accelerazione (g)

0.05 0.05

0.00 0.00
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-0.05 -0.05

-0.10 -0.10

-0.15 -0.15

-0.20 -0.20
Tempo (s) Tempo (s)

0.20 0.20
U-M 1° SHOCK_ASS_NS U-M 2° SHOCK_ASS_WE
0.15 0.15

0.10 0.10
Accelerazione (g)

Accelerazione (g)

0.05 0.05

0.00 0.00
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-0.05 -0.05

-0.10 -0.10

-0.15 -0.15

-0.20 -0.20
Tempo (s) Tempo (s)
 APPLICATION – PERUGIA: NUMERICAL CODES

Relating to the geologic, geotechnical and geophysical

characteristics of the studied areas, that present an
horizontal behavior of the surface layers, the numerical code
used was a one-dimensional code (1D)

Along the section n. 2 two two-dimensional morphologies

were identified, these were analyzed by two-dimensional
code (2D):
• a valley (Pian di Massiano) - FEM
• a ridge (Historical centre of Perugia) - BEM
 APPLICATION – PERUGIA: RESULTS

• Amplification factors Fa (0.1-0.5s; 0.5-1.5s; 0.1-2.5s)

• Elastic acceleration response spectra at 5% of the

critical damping

Calculated in each point reported on the sections,

characterized by a high level of representatively of the
profiles characterized by different sequences of geophysical
units and different thickness
 APPLICATION – PERUGIA: RESULTS

Amplification Factors
The results in term of amplification factors show, generally,
modest values of amplification, excluding the area
characterized by the presence of man-made (R), eluvial-
colluvial deposits (EC) and the silt or gravel alluvial units (LA
e GA) with thickness more than 5 m
2.0 2.0 1.96
1.91
1.9 1.86 fa .1-0.5 fa .5-1.5 fa .1-2.5 1.9 fa .1-0.5 fa .5-1.5 fa .1-2.5

1.79 1.80
1.8 1.8 1.76
1.74

1.7 1.67 1.7 1.68

1.6 1.6
1.55
1.53
1.51
1.48
1.48
Fa

Fa

1.5 1.47 1.5 1.46 1.46

1.41 1.40 1.41
1.39 1.38
1.4 1.36 1.4 1.37
1.35 1.35 1.36 1.35 1.35 1.35
1.33 1.33 1.32 1.33
1.31 1.31 1.31 1.31 1.31
1.28 1.28 1.28 1.29
1.3 1.271.26 1.3 1.27
1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.26
1.22 1.23 1.23 1.24
1.22 1.22 1.23 1.24 1.22 1.22 1.22
1.22
1.19 1.201.19 1.20 1.20
1.18
1.18 1.18 1.191.19 1.18
1.2 1.2 1.16
1.13 1.13
1.09 1.10 1.10
1.1 1.07 1.08 1.08 1.1 1.06
1.04

1.0 1.0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Profili analizzati Profili analizzati
 APPLICATION – PERUGIA: RESULTS

Acceleration response spectra: examples

The elastic acceleration response spectra show modest levels of
amplification and the spectra of the Italian National Code (NTC), associated
to the relative subsoil category, are adequate, excluding the situations
discussed before.
Example of results: in the left the NTC spectrum is adequate, in the right the
NTC spectrum, for P11, is not adequate
1.00 1.00
P3 P4
P5 P6 P11 P13 NTC_Categoria E_Perugia
0.90 0.90
P9 P10
0.80 P12 NTC_Categoria B_Perugia
0.80

0.70 0.70

0.60 0.60
PSA (g)

PSA (g)

0.50 0.50

0.40 0.40

0.30 0.30

0.20 0.20

0.10 0.10

0.00 0.00
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
Periodo (s) Periodo (s)
 APPLICATION – PERUGIA: RESULTS

Influence of the topographic amplifications

The 2D analysis performed on the cliff of the historical center shows
that the topographic amplifications are not influent: it is shown the
comparison between the average response spectra on the higher
point of the ridge (point 6 section 2) of the 1D and 2D analyses
1.0

0.9 Media_1D Media_2D NTC_Categoria B_Perugia

0.8

0.7

0.6
PSA (g)

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
Periodo (s)
 APPLICATION – PERUGIA: RESULTS

Influence of the topographic amplifications

The 2D analysis performed on the Pian di Massiano shows amplification
values similar to those obtained from the 1D analysis, showing a scarce
influence of the deep geometries on the amplification: it is shown the
comparison between the average response spectra obtained on point 2
section 2 of the 1D and 2D analyses
1.0

0.9 Media_1D Media_2D NTC_Categoria C_Perugia

0.8

0.7

0.6
PSA (g)

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
Periodo (s)
 APPLICATION – PERUGIA
EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS

EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS
Spectral ratio method
28 sites, 2 are considered as reference sites on bedrock
Instruments at 3 components Lennartz Le-3Dlite
Time registration 9 months
2100 events, Ml = 1.0-5.8, D = 20-500 Km

METHODOLOGY
Calculus of the spectral ratio
Amplification function
Calculus of Fa and response spectra at sites using the seismic inputs
of the numerical analysis
 APPLICATION – PERUGIA
EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS

SPECTRAL RATIO METHOD - HHSR

• The method considers the acceleration, velocity or

displacement registrations carried out on different stations and
one is considered as a reference station (on bedrock)

• The ratio between the Fourier spectra of the stations and the
Fourier spectrum of the reference station allows to calculate
the transfer functions of the soil, that applied to the input
motion, give the amplification degree
APPLICATION – PERUGIA
EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS

ANALYZED SITES
APPLICATION – PERUGIA
EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS

RESULTS
 APPLICATION - PERUGIA

COMPARISON OF THE RESULTS Num. Vs Exp.

The results obtained from the numerical analyses are been compared with
those obtained from the experimental analyses: generally they are
concordant both in term of Fa values and response spectra, as shown in the
two example point 10 section n. 1 in presence of the man-made with
thickness more than 5 m, point 2 section n. 1 in presence of eluvial-
colluvial deposits with thickness less than 5 m
1.4 1.4
NUMERICA STRUMENTALE INPUT NUMERICA STRUMENTALE INPUT
1.2 1.2

1.0 1.0

0.8 0.8
PSA (g)
PSA (g)

0.6 0.6

0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2

0.0 0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
Periodo (s) Periodo (s)
 APPLICATION - PERUGIA

USE OF THE RESULTS

Considering the robustness of the obtained results it is

possible to define:

• For the Fa values an use during the planning phase to

define a list of the more dangerous areas, after the geologic
and geophysical extrapolation and the production of the
relative maps

• For the elastic response spectra the direct use during the
project design phase or the indirect use for the choice of
the NTC spectra that better represent the analyzed situation
APPLICATION - PERUGIA

USE OF THE RESULTS (Fa map)

 APPLICATION - PERUGIA

USE OF THE RESULTS elastic response spectra

1.00
P1 P2
P3 P4
0.90 P5-P6 P8
P9 P11
0.80 P12 P13
P14 P15
0.70 P16 NTC_Categoria B_Perugia

0.60
PSA (g)

0.50

0.40

0.30

0.20 1.00
0.10 P7 P10 NTC_Categoria C_Perugia
0.90
0.00 0.80
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
Periodo (s) 0.70

0.60
PSA (g)

0.50

0.40

0.30

0.20

0.10

0.00
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
Periodo (s)
USE OF THE RESULTS: RESUME (ICMS)