applied
sciences
Article
2-D Seismic Response Analysis of a Slope in the Tyrrhenian
Area (Italy)
Antonio Cavallaro 1, * , Antonio Ferraro 2 , Salvatore Grasso 2






Citation: Cavallaro, A.; Ferraro, A.;
Grasso, S.; Puccia, A. 2-D Seismic
Response Analysis of a Slope in the
Tyrrhenian Area (Italy). Appl. Sci.
2021, 11, 3180. https://doi.org/
10.3390/app11073180
Academic Editors: Jong Wan Hu and
Antonio Cavallaro
Received: 20 December 2020
Accepted: 26 March 2021
Published: 2 April 2021
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 3180. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11073180
and Antonio Puccia 2
1 CNR—ISPC National Research Council—Institute of Heritage Science, 95124 Catania, Italy
2 Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture, University of Catania, 95125 Catania, Italy;
aferraro@dica.unict.it (A.F.); sgrasso@dica.unict.it (S.G.); pucciaantonio@yahoo.it (A.P.)
* Correspondence: antoniomariafrancesco.cavallaro@cnr.it
Abstract: The Caronia area is located in the Tyrrhenian north-eastern sector of Sicily (Italy). Starting in
2010, attention focused on the study of landslides phenomena that occurred in this area, which caused
significant economic damage to buildings and infrastructures and loss of productive activities. The
site is characterized by geotechnical, geological and morphological heterogeneity, and for this reason
the site is particularly prone to seismic topographic amplification effects. In this paper, the authors
carried out numerical studies focused on the topographic seismic effect evaluation concerning the
slope affected by the landslide phenomena. For this site, geotechnical characterization was available
concerning both in-situ and laboratory tests; boreholes, piezometers, down-hole tests, multichannel
analysis of surface waves tests, seismic tomographies and inclinometer measurements were carried
out. Furthermore, 1-D and 2-D local seismic response analyses were carried out by using different
synthetic seismograms related to the earthquake of Messina and Reggio Calabria on 28 December
1908. The results of the numerical analyses are presented in terms of response seismograms and
response spectra at the surface.
Keywords: topographic effects; seismic response analysis; landslides; geotechnical characterization;
Tyrrhenian area
1. Introduction
The effects of the topography and geological conditions on seismic waves have been
studied by many authors from the second half of the last century. The observation of the
most important earthquakes shows that the presence of topographic irregularities can
significantly modify the consequences of the seismic input motion; so much so that even
the European Code [1] takes into account the modification of the seismic action due to
topography through a topographical amplification factor.
Among the most important experiences that must be remembered include the study
on the Pacoima Dam in San Fernando Valley, California [2,3], and also the study on the
Pacoima Canyon, which confirmed the very important role of topographic amplification
on landslide triggering [4]. In the recent past, the 1999 Athens Earthquake caused heavy
damage on the eastern bank of the Kifissos River canyon and inspired the study on the
topographic aggravation factor [5].
This paper is focused on the study of the local seismic amplification for a slope located
in the Tyrrhenian north-eastern part of Sicily (Italy), carried out through 2-D numerical
analyses, to determine the topographical contribution on the ground acceleration [6–9].
As is known, the local seismic response is significantly influenced by stratigraphic het-
erogeneity and by morphological irregularities. The surface morphology is relevant on
the seismic amplification of the site as evidenced by the structural damages detected in
correspondence of morphological elements, such as the slopes, the escarpments and the
canyons. From the geotechnical point of view, the topographical amplification involves the
evaluation of the seismic risk for the historical sites built on reliefs, but also for earthworks
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 24
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 3180 2 of 23

amplification involves the evaluation of the seismic risk for the historical sites built on
reliefs, but alsoworks
and important for earthworks and important
as bridges, dams, natural and works as bridges,
artificial dams,
slopes. The natural
Italian and
Building
artificial
Code (NTC slopes.
2018)The[10]Italian
allowsBuilding Code (NTC
for the evaluation of 2018) [10] allows
topographic for the evaluation
amplification using a sim-of
plified method
topographic based on the
amplification usea of
using the topographic
simplified amplification
method based on the usecoefficient ST , which
of the topographic
varies from a minimum
amplification coefficientvalue of 1.0varies
ST, which to a maximum value of 1.4.
from a minimum valueHowever,
of 1.0 toit ais maximum
important
to consider
value of 1.4.that the values
However, suggested to
it is important byconsider
NTC 2018 that[10]
theare referring
values to general
suggested by NTC and2018
not
particular
[10] configurations
are referring and provide
to general and notnumerical
particularvalues that in some
configurations andcases may not
provide be com-
numerical
pletely realistic.
values This work
that in some casesconcerns
may not thebedetermination
completely of topographic
realistic. This amplification
work concerns factors
the
that could influence the slope response in the case of seismic events.
determination of topographic amplification factors that could influence the slope response The topographical
amplification
in the case offactors
seismic were therefore
events. Thecalculated with 2-D
topographical numerical models
amplification factors andwerethe relative
therefore
values obtained
calculated from
with 2-D the analyses
numerical wereand
models compared withvalues
the relative the values provided
obtained fromby thethe Italian
analyses
Building
were Code. with the values provided by the Italian Building Code.
compared
The study
The study area
area isis aaportion
portionof ofthe
theCaronia
CaroniaMunicipality
Municipality(Figure(Figure1),1),where
whereinin2010
2010a
a non-coseismal landslide affected the southern part of the town
non-coseismal landslide affected the southern part of the town and caused damages to and caused damages
to urbanized
urbanized areas
areas andand infrastructures;
infrastructures; in inaddition,
addition,about
about120 120inhabitants
inhabitantsinin an an area
area of
of
approximately 50 hectares were
approximately 50 hectares were evacuated. evacuated.

Figure
Figure 1.
1. View
View of
of the
the study
study area
area with
with map
map of
of the involved locations
the involved locations during
during the
the 1908
1908 earthquake.
earthquake.

2.
2. Site
Site Characterization
Characterization
2.1.
2.1. Seismicity
Seismicity ofof the
the Study
Study Area
Area
The
The northern
northern partpart of
of Sicily,
Sicily, in
in front
front of
of the
the Tyrrhenian Sea where Caronia Caronia is located,
located,
is
is a place of frequent, intense and deep seismicity seismicity [11]. This peculiarity attracted many
seismologists,
seismologists, explaining
explaining thethe large
large number
number of of papers
papers dealing
dealing with
with it [12,13]. The area is
prone to high seismic risk, and in the coastal coastal part,
part, to
to high
high tsunami
tsunami risk.
risk. The strongest
historical
historical earthquake
earthquake recorded
recorded in in the area is also the strongest Italian earthquake, which
took
took place
place in the Messina Strait on 28 December 1908, causing an estimated 60,000 to
120,000 fatalities and the destruction of Messina, Reggio Calabria and many other cities in
Calabria and
Calabria and Sicily. The 1908 earthquake,
earthquake, which
which was felt strongly in Sicily and Calabria
(both regions of southern Italy), was caused by normal faulting in the Messina Strait
(both
starting at 05:20 a.m. on
starting on 28
28 December
December and lasting about 30 s. The earthquake was also felt
in the middle Italy
in the middle Italy regions of Campania and Molise, as well as on the Malta Island (south
of
of Sicily).
The shorelines
The shorelines of of Messina
Messina andand Reggio
Reggio Calabria
Calabria were
were stricken
stricken by
by up
up to
to 12
12 m
m waves,
waves,
completing the
completing the devastation
devastation andand displacing
displacing aa large
large quantity
quantity of of rubble
rubble from
from collapsed
collapsed
buildings. As
buildings. Asa aconsequence
consequence of the
of disaster, in the in
the disaster, areas
theallareas
communications were disrupted
all communications were
and rescue operations began right from the sea thanks to the presence
disrupted and rescue operations began right from the sea thanks to the presence of Englishof English ships
first and
ships firstthen
andalso
thenRussian ships toships
also Russian give to
immediate aide to the
give immediate aidepopulations. The medical
to the populations. The
officers of the Royal Navy and the Baltic Guard-Marine gave the first
medical officers of the Royal Navy and the Baltic Guard-Marine gave the first medical medical aid to aid
the
victims [14].
to the victims [14].
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 24
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 3180 3 of 23

Due to poor quality of construction and construction materials, the damage in

Dueand
Messina to poor quality
Reggio of construction
Calabria was very and construction
strong materials,
and contributed the damagethe
to delivering in Messina
coup de
and Reggio
grace Calabria
in the same was
areas very
that hadstrong
already and contributed
suffered seismicto delivering
events in thetheprevious
coup de15 grace in
years,
the same areas that had already suffered seismic events in the previous
such as the 1894, 1905 and 1907 southern Calabria earthquakes, all characterized by Me > 15 years, such as
6the 1894,
[15]. 1905 and
Historic 1907also
records southern
report Calabria earthquakes,
that the Ionian Islands all
offcharacterized
the west coastbyof M e > 6 [15].
Greece and
Historic records also report that the Ionian Islands
other countries such as Albania and Montenegro felt the earthquake. off the west coast of Greece and other
countries
The areasuchofasthe
Albania
Messina and Montenegro
Strait is locatedfelt the earthquake.
midway of the Calabrian Arc, one of the most
The areaactive
seismically of the areas
Messina inStrait is located
Italian midway of the Calabrian
and Mediterranean that hadArc, onestricken
been of the mostby
seismically active areas in Italian and Mediterranean that had been stricken
earthquakes several times in the past, but not as strong as the earthquake of December by earthquakes
several
1908. times2 in
Figure the past,
shows but not as
the intensity strongfor
pattern as the
the 1908
earthquake of December
earthquake 1908. the
[16]. Between Figure
main2
shows the intensity pattern for the 1908 earthquake [16]. Between
historical seismic events with Me > 5.5, the 31 August 853 and the 6 February 1783 the main historical
seismic eventsneed
earthquakes withto
Mebe> mentioned,
5.5, the 31 August 853 andwith
respectively, the 6 IFebruary 1783 earthquakes need
0 IX-X and I0 VIII-IX [17]. The
to be mentioned, respectively, with
historical records also report two events, I0 IX-X and I0
presumably VIII-IX
significant, inhistorical
[17]. The 91 B.C. (Irecords also
0 IX-X) and
report
361 A.D.two (I0events,
X). presumably significant, in 91 B.C. (I0 IX-X) and 361 A.D. (I0 X).

Figure 2. 2.
Figure Intensity
Intensitypattern
pattern of the1908
of the 1908earthquake
earthquake (after
(after Mercalli,
Mercalli, [16]). [16]). The dashed
The dashed area suffered
area suffered the ground
the strongest strongest ground
shaking.
shaking.
2.2. Geological Aspects
2.2. Geological Aspects
The eastern sector of the Nebrodi Mountains (NE Sicily), a part of the Apennines-
The eastern
Maghrebian sectorchain,
orogenic of the isNebrodi Mountains
characterized by a(NE highSicily), a part
landslide of the[18,19].
hazard Apennines-The
Maghrebian
study area is characterized by three different geological units (Tardorogene The
orogenic chain, is characterized by a high landslide hazard [18,19]. study
covering,
area is characterized
Sicilide by three different
complex and Panormide complex), geological
accordingunitsto the(Tardorogene
Geological Mapcovering, Sicilide
of the Messina
complex and Panormide
Province, as shown in Figure 3. complex), according to the Geological Map of the Messina
Province, as shown
The features of in
theFigure 3.
geological units are reported in the following:
The features of the geological units are reported in the following:
(a) Tardorogene coverings unit—Reitano flysch: alternation of micaceous sandstones, of
(a) Tardorogene coverings unit—Reitano
yellowish or gray-brown flysch: alternation
color, with intercalations of micaceous
of grayish or greenishsandstones,
marly clays of
yellowish or gray-brown color,
(Ma and Mas in the geological map). with intercalations of grayish or greenish marly clays
(b) (Ma andcomplex—Upper
Sicilide Mas in the geological scalymap).
clays unit: marly clays and gray-blackish clayey marl
(b) Sicilide
with decimetric levels of grayclays
complex—Upper scaly marlyunit: marly clays
limestone and and gray-blackish
grayish calcareniteclayey
(Cc inmarl
the
with decimetric
geological map);levels
Salici of gray marly limestone
Mount—Castelli Mount unit: and numidic
grayish calcarenite (Cc in
flysch, blackish the
shafts
geological
(OM in themap); Salici map)
geological Mount—Castelli Mountto
passing upwards unit: numidic flysch,
an alternation blackish
of brown shafts
clays and
(OM in thequartz
yellowish geological map)
arenites passing
with upwards
local marly to an alternation
limestone and marl. of brown clays and
yellowish quartz arenites with local marly limestone
(c) Panormide complex—numidic flysch, alternation of siliceous and marl. argillites and quartz
(c) Panormide complex—numidic flysch, alternation
arenites or quartz osyltites (Omi in the geological map). of siliceous argillites and quartz
arenites or quartz osyltites (Omi in the geological map).
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 3180 4 of 23
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 24

In general,
In general, ititisisobserved
observedthat
thatsome
someportions of of
portions thethe
Reitano Flysch
Reitano appear
Flysch disarticulated
appear disarticu-
in the outcrop, with fragmented and fractured lithoid layers.
lated in the outcrop, with fragmented and fractured lithoid layers.

Figure 3. Geological map of the study area [20].

2.3.
2.3. Investigation
Investigation Program
Program andand Geotechnical
Geotechnical Soil
Soil Properties
Properties
The
The Regional Department of the Civil Defense put
Regional Department of the Civil Defense put inin many
many efforts
efforts in
in terms
terms of
of studies
studies
and analyses that obtained precious information for a detailed geotechnical
and analyses that obtained precious information for a detailed geotechnical characterizationcharacteriza-
tion
of theofCaronia
the Caronia
area area
[21]. [21].
The static and
and dynamic
dynamicgeotechnical
geotechnicalcharacterization
characterizationofofsoils
soils
inin the
the Contrada
Contrada Lineri
Lineri of
of Caronia
Caronia waswas performed
performed within
within an investigation
an investigation testtest
site site
withwith a surface
a surface of about
of about 13 hec-
13 hectares;
tares;
FigureFigure 4 shows
4 shows the layout
the layout of testofsites
test with
sites with the location
the location of geotechnical
of geotechnical boreholes
boreholes and
and piezometers.
piezometers. The study area reached a maximum depth of 30 m. Laboratory tests (moisture
content; soil unit weight; specific gravity; grain size analysis; Atterberg limits; direct shear
test) were performed on undisturbed samples [22].
To evaluate the geotechnical characteristics of soils, the following in situ and laboratory
tests were performed in the area: n. 11 Boreholes, n. 10 Piezometers, n. 5 Inclinometric Mea-
surements, n. 3 Down-Hole tests (DHT), n. 7 Seismic Tomography Tests, n. 2 Multichannel
Analysis of Surface Waves (MASW), n. 12 Direct Shear Tests (DST).
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 3180 5 of 23
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 24

Figure
Figure 4.
4. Layout
Layout of
of test
test sites
sites with
with the
the location
location of
of geotechnical
geotechnical boreholes
boreholes and piezometers.

Based
The on of
study areathereached
data available
a maximumfrom depth
boreholesof 30(Table 1), soil profiles
m. Laboratory of the ground
tests (moisture con-
beneath the Caronia test sites could be designed. Summarizing the borehole
tent; soil unit weight; specific gravity; grain size analysis; Atterberg limits; direct shear results, it
is possible to define four soil classes,
test) were performed on undisturbed samples [22]. namely: plastic structureless clays, brown color
structureless
To evaluate clays,
thegray color structureless
geotechnical clays of
characteristics and argillites.
soils, The water
the following leveland
in situ waslabora-
in the
range
tory 8.30–11.20
tests m.
were performed in the area: n. 11 Boreholes, n. 10 Piezometers, n. 5 Inclinometric
Measurements, n. 3 Down-Hole tests (DHT), n. 7 Seismic Tomography Tests, n. 2 Multi-
Table 1. Soil profile for Caronia area.
channel Analysis of Surface Waves (MASW), n. 12 Direct Shear Tests (DST).
D Based on of the data available from boreholes (Table 1), soil profiles of Vthe S
ground
Borehole Soil Profile
[m] beneath the Caronia test sites could be designed. Summarizing the borehole[m/s] results, it is
BH105 possible
0.00–4.00 to define
Debris: four soil
conglomerate classes,
screed, namely:
boulders and plastic
chaotic structureless
material. clays, brown<260 color struc-
tureless clays, gray color structureless clays and argillites. The water level was in the range
Tobacco brown clays, to the touch plastic and from medium
8.30–11.20 m.
consistent to consistent in the lower part (10.50–15.50 m); at times
BH105 4.00–15.50 The stratigraphic columns were obtained directly by the study of topographical <350 pro-
there are clay levels; overall, when cut, they present themselves with
files. ferrous,
This was done by and
rust-colored trying to predict
alternatively as alterations.
gray accurately as possible what the soil profile
looked like beneath the surface from the information available from the stratigraphic col-
Dark gray clay with very consistent sections, alternating with
umns, linking corresponding strata with neighboring >450
BH105 15.50–31.00 fractured and flattened layers; moreover, there are rarestratigraphic
levels of clay columns where possi-
<600
ble. Once each stratum
with plastic wasdark
behavior and completed,
color. the corresponding lithological design was as-
BH3 signed
0.00–4.00 (Figure 5).
Plastic structureless clays (landslide debris). <260
Chaotic structureless
Table 1. Soil clay with
profile foroccasional compact clay levels of
Caronia area.
BH3 4.00–6.00 <350
brown color with plastic consistency and poor characteristics.
D Chaotic structureless clay with occasional compact clay levels of gray >350 VS
Borehole
BH3 6.00–15.50 Soil Profile
[m] color with plastic consistency and mediocre characteristics. <450 [m/s]
BH105 0.00–4.00 Debris: conglomerate
Argillites screed,
with lytic tracts boulders and
and sub-vertical chaotic
fractures, material.
dark gray or >450 <260
BH3 15.50–31.00
blackish brown
Tobacco in color clays,
with mediocre characteristics.
to the touch plastic and from medium consistent to<600
where: D = Depth, VSconsistent inVelocity
= Shear Wave the lower part (10.50–15.50
and BH105 m); where
or BH3 = Boreholes at times there are
the profiles wereclay levels;
taken.
BH105 4.00–15.50 <350
overall, when cut, they present themselves with ferrous, rust-colored and
alternatively gray alterations.
 Dark gray clay with very consistent sections, alternating with fractured
>450
BH105 15.50–31.00 and flattened layers; moreover, there are rare levels of clay with plastic be-
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 3180
<600
6 of 23
havior and dark color.
BH3 0.00–4.00 Plastic structureless clays (landslide debris). <260
Chaotic structureless clay with occasional compact clay levels of brown
BH3 4.00–6.00 <350
color with plastic consistency
The stratigraphic columns wereand poor characteristics.
obtained directly by the study of topographical
Chaotic
profiles. Thisstructureless
was done byclay with
trying to occasional compact clay
predict as accurately levels of what
as possible gray color
the soil >350
profile
BH3 6.00–15.50
with
looked plastic
like consistency
beneath and mediocre
the surface from the characteristics.
information available from the stratigraphic <450
columns, linking
Argillites withcorresponding
lytic tracts andstrata with neighboring
sub-vertical stratigraphic
fractures, dark columns >450
gray or blackish where
BH3 15.50–31.00
possible. Once each stratum was completed, the corresponding lithological design was
in color with mediocre characteristics. <600
Where: D = Depth, VS = Shear assigned (Figureand
Wave Velocity 5). BH105 or BH3 = Boreholes where the profiles were taken.

Figure 5.
Figure 5. Soil
Soil profiles
profiles of
of S105
S105 and
and S3
S3 boreholes.
boreholes.

Based on the
the laboratory
laboratory tests,
tests, the
the typical
typical range
range of
of physical
physical characteristics,
characteristics, index
index
properties and strength parameters of the deposits mainly encountered in these areas
properties and strength parameters of the deposits mainly encountered in these areas are are
reported in
reported in Tables
Tables 22 and
and3.3.

Table 2. Mechanical
Table 2. Mechanical characteristics
characteristics for
for Caronia
Caroniaarea.
area.

D D γ γ Wn Wn WL W L WP WP PI PI CICI AI
AI
Site
Site 3]
[m] [m] [kN/m [kN/m
3] [%] [%] [%] [%] [%] [%] [%] [%] [%][%] [%]
[%]
BH2CI1
BH2CI1 2.50–3.00
2.50–3.00 19.8119.81 12.5412.54 34.1734.17 11.9811.98 22.1922.19 0.97
0.97 1.07
1.07
BH3CI1
BH3CI1 2.50–3.00 19.7119.71
2.50–3.00 26.2126.21 31.7831.78 22.7122.71 9.079.07 1.58
1.58 0.34
0.34
BH3CI2 6.00–6.40 19.61 22.65 37.63 19.74 17.89 0.97 0.44
BH3CI2 6.00–6.40 19.61 22.65 37.63 19.74 17.89 0.97 0.44
BH4CI1 7.30–7.60 18.24 15.78 53.27 20.20 33.07 0.99 0.64
BH4CI1
BH4CI2 7.30–7.60
10.70–11.00 18.2419.22 15.7824.45 53.2722.58 20.2013.42 33.079.16 0.99
1.29 0.64
0.52
BH4CI2
BH5CI1 10.70–11.00
12.00–12.45 19.2219.12 24.4526.35 22.5848.56 13.4220.06 9.1628.50 1.29
0.96 0.52
0.48
BH102-CM1 4.20–450 19.71 14.12 38.00 17.00 21.00 1.14 0.87
BH2CI1 2.50–3.00 19.81 12.54 34.17 11.98 22.19 0.97 1.07
BH3CI1 2.50–3.00 19.71 26.21 31.78 22.71 9.07 1.58 0.34
BH3CI2 6.00–6.40 19.61 22.65 37.63 19.74 17.89 0.97 0.44
BH4CI1 7.30–7.60 18.24 15.78 53.27 20.20 33.07 0.99 0.64
BH4CI2 10.70–11.00 19.22 24.45 22.58 13.42 9.16 1.29 0.52
where: D = Depth, γ = Total Unit Weight, Wn = Water Content, WL = Liquid Limit, WP = Plastic Limit, PI = Plasticity Index,
CI = Consistence Index and AI = Activity Index.
 BH4CI2 10.70–11.00 19.22 24.45 22.58 13.42 9.16 1.29 0.52
where: D = Depth, γ = Total Unit Weight, Wn = Water Content, WL = Liquid Limit, WP = Plastic Limit, PI = Plasticity Index,
CI = Consistence Index and AI = Activity Index.

Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 3180 Table 3. Mechanical characteristics for Caronia area. 7 of 23

D Sr c’ φ‘
Site e n
[m] [%] [kPa] [°]
BH2CI1 2.50–3.00 0.51 0.34 66.58 4.88 31.6
BH3CI1 2.50–3.00 0.66 0.40 69.89
Table 3. Mechanical characteristics for Caronia area.
5.86 27.6
BH3CI2 6.00–6.40 0.66 0.40 81.96 6.93 23.4
BH4CI1
Site
7.30–7.60
D 0.57
e
0.36
n
95.58
Sr 19.95
c’ 28.1
ϕ‘
[m] [%] [kPa] [ ◦]
BH4CI2 10.70–11.00 0.43 0.30 67.06 21.73 15.8
BH2CI1
BH5CI1 2.50–3.00
12.00–12.45 0.51
0.74 0.34
0.43 66.58
78.96 4.88
2.41 31.6
16.0
BH3CI1
BH102-CM1 2.50–3.00
4.20–450 0.66
0.52 0.40
0.34 69.89
73.12 5.86
33.20 27.6
21
BH3CI2 6.00–6.40 0.66 0.40 81.96 6.93 23.4
BH2CI1
BH4CI1
2.50–3.00
7.30–7.60
0.44
0.57
0.30
0.36
67.02
95.58
20.30
19.95
22
28.1
BH3CI1
BH4CI2 2.50–3.00
10.70–11.00 0.49
0.43 0.33
0.30 78.88
67.06 36.50
21.73 30
15.8
BH3CI2
BH5CI1 6.00–6.40
12.00–12.45 0.44
0.74 0.31
0.43 85.07
78.96 51.80
2.41 22
16.0
BH102-CM1
BH4CI1 4.20–450
7.30–7.60 0.52
0.39 0.34
0.28 73.12
73.30 33.20
34.00 21
20
BH2CI1 2.50–3.00 0.44 0.30 67.02 20.30 22
BH4CI2 10.70–11.00 0.35 0.26 85.63 23.20 21
BH3CI1 2.50–3.00 0.49 0.33 78.88 36.50 30
where: D = Depth,6.00–6.40
BH3CI2 e = Void Ratio, n = Porosity,
0.44 Sr = Degree of Saturation, c’85.07
0.31 = Cohesion and φ‘51.80
= Effective friction angle
22
from Direct Shear 7.30–7.60
BH4CI1 Test (DST). 0.39 0.28 73.30 34.00 20
BH4CI2 10.70–11.00 0.35 0.26 85.63 23.20 21
The value (Figure 6) of the natural moisture content wn prevalently ranged between
where: D = Depth, e = Void Ratio, n = Porosity, Sr = Degree of Saturation, c’ = Cohesion and ϕ‘ = Effective friction angle from Direct
Shear Test (DST). 11–26%, while characteristic values for e (void ratio) ranged between 0.35 and 0.74 for the
Caronia test site.
Regarding
The strength
value (Figure 6)parameters of the
of the natural deposits
moisture mainly
content wn (Table 3) encountered
prevalently in this
ranged between
area, c’ from
11–26%, whileDST ranged between
characteristic 2.41kPa
values for and
e (void 51.8kPa
ratio) while
ranged φ‘ from
between 0.35 DST ranged
and 0.74 be-
for the
tween 15.8° and
Caronia test site.31.6°.

Figure 6. Index
Figure 6. Index properties
properties of
of Caronia
Caroniaarea,
area,where:
where:DD== Depth,
Depth,CF
CF== Clay
Clay Fraction,
Fraction, W
WPP = Plastic Limit,
= Plastic Limit, W
Wnn == Water
Water Content,
Content,
W
WLL = Liquid Limit, PI == Plasticity
Plasticity Index,
Index, γγ ==Total
Total Unit
Unit Weight
Weight and e == Void
Void Ratio.

Regarding strength parameters of the deposits mainly (Table 3) encountered in this

area, c’ from DST ranged between 2.41kPa and 51.8kPa while ϕ‘ from DST ranged between
15.8◦ and 31.6◦ .
It was also possible to evaluate the small strain shear modulus in the Caronia area by
means of the following seismic tests based on Down Hole (DH). In Figure 7, the shear and
compression wave velocities are shown against depth.
The shear Vs and compression Vp wave velocities gradually increased with depth. At
the depth of about 25–30 m, there was a rapid increase in velocities due to the presence of
fractured argillite.
In Figure 8, the dynamic Poisson ratio (ν) variation with depth, obtained from the
Down-Hole (DH) test, is plotted to show site characteristics. It is shown that the values
oscillate around 0.03–0.48 for DH.
 Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 24
It was also possible to evaluate the small strain shear modulus in the Caronia area by
means of the following seismic tests based on Down Hole (DH). In Figure 7, the shear and
It was alsowave
compression possible to evaluate
velocities theshown
are small strain shear modulus
against depth. in the Caronia area by
means of the following seismic tests based on Down Hole (DH). In Figure 7, the shear and
The shear Vs and compression Vp wave velocities gradually increased with depth. At
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 3180 compression wave velocities are shown against depth. 8 of of
23
the depth of about
The shear Vs and25–30 m, there
compression wasvelocities
Vp wave a rapidgradually
increaseincreased
in velocities dueAt
with depth. to the presence
fractured argillite.
the depth of about 25–30 m, there was a rapid increase in velocities due to the presence of
fractured argillite.

V [m/s] V [m/s] V [m/s]

V [m/s] V [m/s] V [m/s]
0 0 500 500 1000
1000 1500
1500 0 0 1000 1000
2000 2000
3000 3000
0 500 0 1000 5001500 1000 1500
0 0 0 0 0 0
VsVs- -DH1
DH1 Vs - DH2 Vs- DH2 Vs - DH3 Vs - DH3
Vp - DH2 Vp - DH3
Vp - DH2 5
5 Vp - DH1 5
5 Vp - DH1 5 5 Vp - DH3

10 10 10
10 10 10
15 15 15

D [m]
D [m]

D [m]
15 15 15

D [m]
D [m]

D [m]
20 20 20

20 25 2520 25 20

30 30 30
25 25 25
CARONIA CARONIA CARONIA
35 Borehole BH2 35 Borehole BH5 35 Borehole BH3
30 30 30
7. Vs and Vp from down-hole tests in CaroniaCARONIA
FigureCARONIA area, where: Vs = Shear wave velocity and VCARONIA
p = Compression wave

35 Borehole BH2
velocity. 35 Borehole BH5 35 Borehole BH3

7. VVs sand
andVV In Figure
fromdown-hole
down-hole 8, theCaronia
tests dynamic area,
Poisson ratio (ν) variation with depth, obtained from
Vp =theCompression
Figure
Figure 7. ppfrom tests in in
Caronia area, where:
where: Vs =VShear
s = Shear
wavewave velocity
velocity and Vand
p = Compression
Down-Hole (DH) test, is plotted to show site characteristics. It is shown that the values
wave
wave velocity.
velocity. oscillate around 0.03–0.48 for DH.

In Figure 8, the dynamic Poisson ν ratio (ν) variation with depth, obtained from the
Down-Hole
0.00 (DH) test,
0.10 is plotted
0.20 to show0.30
site characteristics.
0.40 It 0.50
is shown that the values
0
oscillate around 0.03–0.48 for DH.
5
ν
10
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50
15
0
D [m]

20 CARONIA
5
DH 1
25
DH 2
10 DH 3
30

15
35
D [m]

Figure
Figure 8. Poisson ratio from down-hole
tests. tests.
20 CARONIA
8. Poisson ratio from down-hole

In
In Figure
Figure 9,9,DH
thethe1 coefficient
coefficient of pressure
of earth earth pressure at rest Kwith
at rest Ko variation o variation with depth, obtained
depth, obtained
25
from
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW Down-HoleDH
fromaa Down-Hole 2(DH)
(DH) test,test,
is plotted to showto
is plotted siteshow
characteristics. It is shown that
site characteristics. 9Itapart
of is24 shown that apart
from the top 5 m,DH
from the top 5 m, the 3 values
values
the oscillate around 0.07–0.93 from DH.
oscillate around 0.07–0.93 from DH.
30
Ko
35
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00
0
Figure 8. Poisson ratio from down-hole tests. DH 1
5 DH 2
In Figure 9, the coefficient of earth pressure at rest K variation with depth, obtained o
DH 3
10
from a Down-Hole (DH) test, is plotted to show site characteristics. It is shown that apart
15 the top 5 m, the values oscillate around 0.07–0.93 from DH.
from
D [m]

20

25

30 CARONIA

35

Figure The
Figure 9.9.The coefficient
coefficient of pressure
of earth earth pressure
at rest K0 at rest
from Ko from
down-hole down-hole tests.
tests.

A
Acomparison
comparison between the shear
between themodulus values of Gvalues
shear modulus o obtained from in situ tests
of Go obtained from in situ tests
performed on the area under consideration is shown in Figure 10. The down-hole tests
performed on the area under consideration is shown in Figure 10. The down-hole
performed in the Caronia area show Go values increasing with depth. Very high values of
tests
Go were obtained for depths greater than 25 m in borehole 5. According to these data, it
was possible to assume Go values oscillating around 50–1000 MPa.

Go [MPa]
 25

30 CARONIA

35
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 3180 9 of 23
Figure 9. The coefficient of earth pressure at rest K0 from down-hole tests.

A comparison between the shear modulus values of Go obtained from in situ tests
performed on the area under consideration is shown in Figure 10. The down-hole tests
performed
performed in in
thethe Caronia
Caronia areaGshow
area show Go values with
o values increasing
increasing with
depth. Very depth.
high values Very
of high values of
G wereobtained
Goo were obtained for depths
for depths greater greater
than 25 mthan 25 m in
in borehole boreholeto5.these
5. According According
data, it to these data, it
was possible
was possible to assume
to assume Go values
Go values oscillating
oscillating around
around 50–1000 MPa.50–1000 MPa.

Go [MPa]

0 400 800 1200 1600 2000 2400 2800 3200 3600 4000 4400 4800
0
DH 1 - Borehole 2
5
DH 2 - Borehole 5
DH 3 - Borehole 3
10

15
D [m]

20

25

30

35

Figure 10.
Figure 10.Shear modulus
Shear valuesvalues
modulus of G0 from
of down-hole tests.
Go from down-hole tests.

Figure 11 shows a particular cross-section with the geological and geotechnical infor-
Figure 11 shows a particular cross-section with the geological and geotechnical infor-
mation from which we note the presence of predominantly clayey material with Vs values
mation
included from
in the which we note
range 200–700 m/s.the
Thepresence of predominantly
borehole BH105 was performedclayey material
along with the with Vs values
included
stable sharein the range
of landslide 200–700 m/s.
cross-section, The
while the borehole
borehole BH105
BH3 was was performed
performed along with along with the
stable shareshare
the unstable of landslide
of landslidecross-section, while
cross-section. These twothe borehole
boreholes BH3
allow us towas performed along with
definition
the geotechnical
the
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW unstable sharecharacteristics of the Caronia
of landslide landslide. These two boreholes allow us
cross-section. 10 to
of definition
24
the geotechnical characteristics of the Caronia landslide.

Figure 11.
Figure 11. Particulars
Particularsofof
thethe
cross-section.
cross-section.

3. Site Response Analysis

3.1. Seismic Input Motion and Soil Dynamic Properties
This work takes into specific consideration the site effects’ role on the predictable
ground motions in the Caronia area. More precisely, when it comes to site effects, we gen-
erally refer to the influence of the first 40–50 m of near-surface stratigraphy on the seismic
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 3180 10 of 23

3. Site Response Analysis

3.1. Seismic Input Motion and Soil Dynamic Properties
This work takes into specific consideration the site effects’ role on the predictable
ground motions in the Caronia area. More precisely, when it comes to site effects, we
generally refer to the influence of the first 40–50 m of near-surface stratigraphy on the
seismic response of the soil. Great importance is also given to the source and the path
effects [23].
Seven different inputs were used, consisting of six synthetic seismograms related to
the Messina and Reggio Calabria 1908 earthquake (Bottari et al. [24]; Tortorici et al. [25];
Amoruso et al. [26]; DISS Aspromonte Est; DISS Gioia Tauro; DISS Messina Strait) and one
related to the 1693 Catania scenario earthquake [27–30]. The seismograms were scaled to
the (Peak Ground Acceleration) PGA = 0.176 g provided by the Italian Code NTC 2018 for
the site.
Soil dynamic properties were also taken into account in the numerical analyses
through the stiffness attenuation G/Go -γ and damping ratio evolution with strain D-γ
curves [31] related to similar materials of the same area [32,33].
The dependency of the shear modulus and damping ratio on shear strain level
was obtained by interpolating the experimental resonant column tests (RCT) data by
Yokota et al.’s [34] equation to the experimental data points. For the Caronia area, the
following equations were used:

G(γ) 1
= (1)
Go 1 + αγ(%)β

to describe the shear modulus decay with shear strain level, in which G(γ) = strain depen-
dent shear modulus, γ = shear strain and α, β = soil constants, with
 
G(γ)
D(γ)(%) = η · exp −λ · (2)
Go

to describe the inverse variation of damping ratio with respect to the normalized shear
modulus, in which D(γ) = strain dependent damping ratio, γ = shear strain and η, λ = soil
constants.
The values of α, β and of η, λ are reported in Table 4.

Table 4. Soil constants for Caronia area.

Soil α β η λ
Debris 65 1.15 34.8 1.9
Brown Clay 20 0.87 19 2.3
Dark Gray Clay 7.5 0.897 90 4.5

3.2. Numerical Analyses

To evaluate morphological and stratigraphic effects, 1-D and 2-D equivalent-linear site
response analyses were performed. Several techniques were proposed for the assessment
of these effects; by comparing the results from experimental estimates of local site amplifi-
cation effects and numerical analyses, it was demonstrated that 1-D numerical modeling
can underestimate the amplification of ground motion and cannot account for resonant
frequencies every time [35]. In these cases, the use of 2-D numerical methods is almost
essential to obtain a more realistic estimate of the seismic response [36].
The 1-D analyses were carried out in three vertical profiles extracted from the 2-D
cross-section, located in this way: (1) the first behind the crest of the slope, (2) the second at
the crest of the slope, (3) the third at a point downstream sufficiently far from the foot of
the slope.
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 3180 11 of 23

The 1-D analyses were performed by the EERA (Equivalent-Linear Earthquake Site
Response Analysis) code [37] that permits performance of frequency domain analyses for
equivalent linear stratified sub-soils. The same elaborations were also carried out through
the QUAKE/W code to obtain a calibration of the two codes and be able to proceed
subsequently with the 2-D analyses. A comparison of results from these two different codes
is a good way of validating the formulation and implementation of the work. The EERA
model was simulated in QUAKE/W as a column of elements where the base of the column
is fixed. This has the effect of the earthquake motion being applied at the column base. The
sides of the column are fixed in the vertical direction, which ensures that all the motion is
in the horizontal direction only, an assumption inherent in the EERA 1-D formulation.
The 2-D analyses were performed by the QUAKE/W [38] code based on a finite ele-
ment formulation with a direct integration scheme in the time domain. “Direct integration”
means no transformation of the equations into the frequency domain is required. Then, the
motion equations are solved directly using a finite-difference time-stepping procedure.
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW Figure 12 shows the cross-section used for the finite element analyses; the three-surface
12 of 24
points monitored by 1-D and 2-D analyses were also indicated in the same figure.

Figure
Figure 12.
12. Cross-section
Cross-section and
and location
location of
of the
the three
three monitored points.
monitored points.

1-D Analysis
3.3. 1-D Analysis
For complex geometries,
geometries,ititisisvery
veryimportant
importanttotoperform
performdynamic
dynamic analyses
analyses byby different
differ-
codes,
ent andand
codes, in particular through
in particular through 2-D2-Dcodes
codesthat
thatcan
cancatch
catchsome
someaspects
aspectsthat
that 1-D
1-D codes
cannot catch.
The 1-D
The 1-D analyses
analyses performed
performed by by EERA
EERA and and QUAKE/W
QUAKE/W codes, codes, for
for the
the seven
seven inputs,
inputs,
show similar values of PGA for points 1 and 2 (behind the crest point and
show similar values of PGA for points 1 and 2 (behind the crest point and crest point) [39]. crest point) [39].
The following figures show in red and blue, respectively, the EERA
The following figures show in red and blue, respectively, the EERA and QUAKE/W re- and QUAKE/W results
in terms
sults of acceleration
in terms time history
of acceleration and spectral
time history acceleration.
and spectral In particular,
acceleration. Figures
In particular, 13–15
Figures
show the
13–15 show1-D analysis
the resultsresults
1-D analysis for thefor
Amoruso et al. [26]
the Amoruso et al.input, and the
[26] input, andresults have have
the results been
summarized in the Table 5. Results obtained for points 1 and 2 show
been summarized in the Table 5. Results obtained for points 1 and 2 show values of the values of the strati-
graphic soil amplification
stratigraphic factorfactor
soil amplification of about 1.30 using
of about the EERA
1.30 using code and
the EERA codeofand
about 1.20 using
of about 1.20
the QUAKE/W code. For point 3, there is no significant stratigraphic soil
using the QUAKE/W code. For point 3, there is no significant stratigraphic soil amplifica- amplification.
tion.
Table 6 shows, for the same points, the results of 1-D analysis carried out by the seis-
mograms for the Bottari et al. [24], Tortorici et al. [25], DISS Messina Strait, DISS Gioia
Tauro, DISS Aspromonte Est, and 1693 Catania Earthquake.
Results obtained for points 1 and 2, show maximum values of the stratigraphic soil
amplification factor of about 1.45 using EERA code and of about 1.50 using QUAKE/W
code. While for point 3 results show a slight stratigraphic soil amplification of about 1.10.
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 3180 12 of 23
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 24
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 24

Figure 13.
Figure 13. Comparison
Comparisonbetween
between1-D
1-Danalyses
analysesperformed
performed bybyEquivalent-Linear
Equivalent-Linear Earthquake SiteSite
Earthquake
Figure
Response13. Analysis
Comparison between
(EERA) and 1-D analyses performed by Equivalent-Linear Earthquake Site
Response Analysis (EERA) and QUAKE/W
QUAKE/Wfor forpoint
point1,1,ininterms
termsofof
acceleration time
acceleration history
time and
history and
Response
spectral Analysis (EERA)
acceleration, for theand QUAKE/W
Amoruso et al. for
[26]point 1, in terms of acceleration time history and
input.
spectral acceleration, for the Amoruso et al. [26] input.
spectral acceleration, for the Amoruso et al. [26] input.

Figure 14. Comparison between 1-D analyses performed by EERA and QUAKE/W for point 2, in
Figure 14.
terms of
Figure Comparison
Comparison
acceleration
14. between
between
time 1-D
andanalyses
history1-D spectralperformed
analyses performed by EERA
byfor
acceleration, the and
EERA andQUAKE/W
QUAKE/W
Amoruso for
forpoint
et al. [26] point2,2,inin
input.
terms of acceleration time history and spectral acceleration, for the Amoruso et al. [26] input.
terms of acceleration time history and spectral acceleration, for the Amoruso et al. [26] input.