1887

Abstract

Summary

This study investigates the effectiveness and complementarity of different seismic methods for shear wave velocity (Vs) profiling in complex urban settings. Focusing on historical areas of Rome, where subsurface conditions are deeply influenced by anthropogenic layers and archaeological constraints, we applied a combination of downhole testing, active and passive surface wave analysis, and HVSR techniques. Each method was critically evaluated in terms of resolution, uncertainty, and depth coverage, particularly in relation to urban constraints such as limited acquisition space and cultural noise.

Special emphasis was placed on characterizing deeper stratigraphic horizons that are typically inaccessible with standard borehole investigations, and which are essential for seismic response analyses. Integrated processing and joint inversion approaches were tested to enhance consistency across methods and improve reliability at different depth ranges. The study also highlights the role of low-frequency techniques in overcoming limitations imposed by urban infrastructure and thick fill layers.

Our findings underscore the necessity of a multi-method approach to capture the complexity of the subsurface in heritage cities, allowing for robust Vs modeling even where conventional investigations fall short.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202520217
2025-09-07
2026-02-14
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) [2019]. Standard Test Methods for Downhole Seismic Testing. D7400M-19.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Cercato, M. [2018]. Sensitivity of Rayleigh wave ellipticity and implications for surface wave inversion. Geophysical Journal International, 213(1), 489–510.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Ingber, L. [1989] Very fast simulated re-annealing. Math. and Computer Modelling, 12(8), 967–973.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Park, C.B., Miller, R.D., and Xia, J. [1999] Multichannel analysis of surface waves. Geophysics, 64(3), 800–808.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Sambridge, M., and Mosegaard, K. [2002] Monte Carlo methods in geophysical inverse problems. Reviews of Geophysics, 40(3), 1–29.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Tian, Y. and Chen, X. [2005] A rapid and accurate two-point ray tracing method in horizontally layered velocity model. Acta Sismologica Sinica, 18(2), 154–161.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Vassallo, M., Riccio, G., Mercuri, A., Cultrera, G., and Di Giulio, G. [2022]. HV Noise and Earthquake Automatic Analysis (HVNEA). Seismological Research Letters, 94(1), 350–368
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Wathelet, M., Chatelain, J.L., Cornou, C., Di Giulio, G., Guillier, B., Ohrnberger, M., and Savvaidis, A. [2020] Geopsy: A User‐Friendly Open‐Source Tool Set for Ambient Vibration Processing. Seismological Research Letters, 91(3), 1878–1889.
    [Google Scholar]
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202520217
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202520217
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error