DECEMBER 9, 2020

CIVE420 ADVANCED GEOMECHANICS

SMART MONITORING (PART 2)

NAME:
STUDENT ID:
Contents
LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................................... 2
LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................................ 2
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 3
Aims and Objectives ..................................................................................................................................... 3
Selection of Monitoring Systems .................................................................................................................. 3
Brillouin Optical Time Domain Reflectometry (BOTDR) ....................................................................... 3
Temperature Compensation Cable (OS2 8 core unitube cable) ................................................................ 4
Design of Monitoring.................................................................................................................................... 4
Fiber Support Frame ................................................................................................................................. 4
Installation of strain and temperature cables............................................................................................. 4
Pre-straining .............................................................................................................................................. 5
Installing the cable .................................................................................................................................... 5
Gluing ....................................................................................................................................................... 6
Cable access following casting ................................................................................................................. 6
Location of Instrumented tunnel segments ............................................................................................... 7
Expected Results ........................................................................................................................................... 8
Ring ‘L’..................................................................................................................................................... 8
Longitudinal Strain Prediction .................................................................................................................. 8
Results ....................................................................................................................................................... 9
Ring ‘H’ .................................................................................................................................................. 11
Conclusions ................................................................................................................................................. 14
References ................................................................................................................................................... 15
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 16
Selection of Monitoring System ................................................................................................................. 18
Design of Monitoring.................................................................................................................................. 19
Conclusion .................................................................................................................................................. 23
References ................................................................................................................................................... 24

1|Page
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Fiber Optic Support Frame ............................................................................................................. 4
Figure 2 Instrumented Segment Mould ........................................................................................................ 5
Figure 3 Layout of Fiber Optic - 4m Trapezoidal Segment .......................................................................... 7
Figure 4 Raw absolute strain data for ring 'L' shove 1 and 2 ........................................................................ 8
Figure 5 Circumferential joint Geometry...................................................................................................... 9
Figure 6 Longitudinal strain cable reference diagram ................................................................................ 10
Figure 7 Differential strain data for segment BC - Shove 1-8 .................................................................... 10
Figure 8 Average differential longitudinal strain for shove 1-8.................................................................. 10
Figure 9 Average differential longitudinal strain for shove 1-8.................................................................. 11
Figure 10 Hoop cable reference diagram .................................................................................................... 11
Figure 11 Differential strain data segment 1 for ring 'H' ............................................................................ 12
Figure 12 Differential strain data segment 2 for ring 'H' ............................................................................ 12
Figure 13 Selected points in hoop data for ring ‘H’.................................................................................... 13
Figure 14 Differential strain at mid-span point all segments ...................................................................... 13
Figure 15 Exaggerated tunnel shape after 90 days...................................................................................... 14
Figure 16 Construction history of Pisa Tower ............................................................................................ 16
Figure 17 Cross-section in the plane of maximum tilt (1993) .................................................................... 17
Figure 18 Soil Profile beneath the Pisa Tower ........................................................................................... 18

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Strain Cable Distribution ................................................................................................................. 6
Table 2 'H' segment summary ..................................................................................................................... 14

2|Page
 Task 1: Monitoring of TBM tunnel
Introduction
The bearing structure that resists tunnel boring machine (TBM) loading regime is represented by Segmental
tunnel linings, permitting advance and holding back the overburdening earth pressure. These loads are
transferred through multiple hydraulic thrust rams presenting the concentration of pressure on the tunnel
lining. Compounded by Differential ram pressures, manufacturing and building irregularities; concrete
tunnel segments can be damaged during construction. Repairing such damages can hamper work progress
which in turn causes a negative effect on the overall outcome of the project.
A TBM, while tunneling in the earth pressure balance mode(EPB) mode, relies greatly on maintaining
reactive support to the earth through which it mines so that volume loss is modulated along with minimum
ground turbulence. So load is continuously imparted to the tunnel lining constructed in the TBM’s wake;
with minimum number of rams being withdrawn following each advance to allow the placement of a single
segment in turn that will form part of the next section of tunnel lining. The loading experienced by the
tunnel lining is alternatively between upper mining and lower static condition. It can be easily assumed that
a minimum of the lower bound loading would be locked into the tunnel lining after the tunneling operation,
which means there would be the same residual longitudinal strain in the tunnel lining.
However the time-related earth pressure will vary within different soil types. The instrumented tunnel rings
are fitted in locations inside London Clay, Lambeth Group and Thanet Sands. The result of a 90 days
monitoring period for the development of loading in Lambeth Group will be discussed in this report.

Aims and Objectives

In February 2011, the National Grid plc decided to start a seven years long project to rewire
London via deep underground tunnels so that it can meet the increasing demand of electricity. The
London Power tunnels will create ten new 400kV circuits at the heart of capital’s transmission
system.

Selection of Monitoring Systems

Brillouin Optical Time Domain Reflectometry (BOTDR)
If any standard, single mode fiber optic cable such as those used in telecommunications, is stretched, the
change in strain can be determined by a BOTDR analyzer. The cable can extend more than 10 km in length.
This is similar to having a continuous string of conventional foil, vibrating wire or bragg grating strain
gauges mounted each after one another. As a large number of conventional gauges seem unfeasible so their
implementation will be done by choosing discrete points based on the engineering judgment. A system
based on BOTDR can have cable transmitted continually around a structural element. Especially in the case
of geotechnical structures, the state of the structure cannot be predicted if we are unaware of the full strain
profile. Hence by using BOTDR, the performance of the structure can be calculated.
The principal of Brillouin scattering is used by the analyzer, which demonstrates that if a pulse of laser light
is passed through an optical fiber, a small amount of signal is reflected back. Backscatter within the
Brillouin spectrum experiences a shift with respect to the change in mechanical strain of the fiber optic
cable. A spectrum analyzer coupled to the source signal within the BOTDR analyzer can determine the

3|Page
peak Brillouin frequency which generates a shift that is directly proportional to the strain. The analyzer
records the time of flight of source light to the reception of backscatter, hence determining the exact position
of the measurement point. In this way the fiber optic cable is transformed in to a distributed strain sensor.

Temperature Compensation Cable (OS2 8 core unitube cable)

As the BOTDR system is sensitive to the change in temperature, a temperature compensation cable is
installed within the system to measure and compensate for the temperature changes. It is basically a loose
buffered type OS2 unitube, which means the glass fiber strands are suspended in a gel within a stiff outer
sheathing. Hence we are able to know that the mechanical strain from structure movement is not transferred
into the loose buffered cable, so the changes in the Brillouin frequency are because of changes in just
temperature.
Two cables are installed in the instrumented tunnel segment. A strain cable is used to measure the measure
the mechanical straining of the segment, while the Fujikura Reinforced Ribbon fiber, A temperature OS2 8
unitube cable, runs alongside the strain cable and tells the data interpreter of the detected changes in
temperature of the strain cable. Hence allowing the compensation and accurate strain result.

Design of Monitoring
The tunnel segments are manufactured at a distance from construction site. They are made from concrete
and casted with machined steel molds.

Fiber Support Frame

As the tunnel segments are unreinforced, a fiber support system is necessary so that the fiber strain and the
temperature cables can be attached within the segment mould during casting. The frame as shown in the
figure is spot wielded together. The frame is made as light as possible to so that there is no stiffening effect
on the instrumented segments because of the influence of steelwork.

Figure 1 Fiber Optic Support Frame

Installation of strain and temperature cables

The strain cable is installed along the top and bottom of the frame bars so that the orientation of the cable
is close to the external surface of the segment following casting as permitted by cover requirements. The

4|Page
reason behind this is to attain maximum differential of strain across the section so that accurate calculation
of segment curvature/bending can be done.

Pre-straining
Pre-straining is usual used when the fiber optic system is installed to the outsides of an existing structure
so that compressive strain can be measured. If cable is not pre strained, no further compressive strain can
be acquired because the cable goes slack and sags in between the anchorages. When the cable is fully
captured and embedded being part of the fabrication process, compressive strain is then transferred to the
cable.
The two other main reasons for using pre-straining within tunnel segments are the following
1) The TBM is expected to impart large compressive longitudinal strain on the segments. The
compressive effects will produce less extreme straining within the fiber optic calve if longitudinal
pre-straining is applied. This results in the optimization of the analyzer to capture a smaller strain
window, hence the reduction in time needed to obtain a single reading.
2) The pre-straining of the longitudinal section will display the analyzer the exact locations of the
longitudinal sections of the cable. Hence providing a reference point that is generally invaluable in
data as it removes ambiguity and allows automated processing.
Pre-straining is done to the main sections of the cable in the tunnel segments. Cable is clamped over 1m,
slack is removed and then the cable is stretched 1mm, inducing 100µε. The first longitudinal section of the
cable is routing is pre-strained along 500m, so it’s stretched 0.5mm.

Figure 2 Instrumented Segment Mould

Installing the cable

Cable is installed by routing it around the support frame according to the table 1 and pre-straining is done
at those locations.

5|Page
 Table 1 Strain Cable Distribution

Gluing
The cable is fully bonded to the support frame using Araldite 2021. Additional adhesive is applied at the
pre-strained section. The adhesive hardens up in almost 20 minutes after which the pre-straining clamps are
removed.

Cable access following casting

The segments are cast with 100mm x 150mm x 75mm IP 68 plastic enclosure boxes on their intrados, in
which the fiber cable is entered and terminated. A rebated channel is casted in the intrados of the segments
to connect the cable with the partnering segment along the radial joint in order to take readings from all the
segments simultaneously.

6|Page
 Figure 3 Layout of Fiber Optic - 4m Trapezoidal Segment

Location of Instrumented tunnel segments

Fiber optics are instrumented with 36 tunnel segments. These instrumented segments are built into 6 rings
of tunnel lining along 6 locations from the 4m St Johns Wood to Hackney tunnel alignment. This report
focuses on the 90 day axial loading of the two rings i.e. the 90 day axial loading of ring ‘H’ and short term
loading of ring ‘L’. The installation procedure discussed here are same for both the rings. Ring ‘L’ was
designed completely within Thanet Sands in between a few hundred meters of the Hackney reception shat
at the end of 4m tunnel drive.
Sequence for monitoring of construction
- 6 instrumented tunnel segments arrive at the TBM
- These segments are built in the sequence as; first invert (type AB), left knee (AB), right knee
(BC), left shoulder (BC), right shoulder (CD), crown (CD)
- Suspension of tunneling operation
- Instrumented segment fiber optics are joined in series forming a tunnel ring fiber optic network.
- Yokogawa AQ8603 BOTDR analyzer is connected to one end of the network.
- 3 readings are taken as baseline.
- Operations of tunnel are resumed.
- Analyzer takes reading during the advance shove loading resulting in the designated ‘Shove 1’.
- Construction of a new non instrumented ring of tunnel lining.
- Readings are taken once more during ‘Shove 2’.
- These readings are taken further on for 6 shoves.

7|Page
Expected Results
Ring ‘L’
The figure below demonstrates the raw profile of strain for 6 segments for the temperature and strain cables.
It can be seen that the temperature reduces after each reading because of the cooling effect due to contact
with ground. This is used later in the differential strain data. The jump seen here in straining between the
temperature and strain cables is due to difference cable type and also because of the compressive straining
that has been imparted in the segments because of the contractive concrete curing during the manufacturing
process. The peaks in the strain cable reading are the representation of the pre-strained section, keeping in
mind that these peaks represent ~1000 µε, then the raw data of strain cable is shifted by ~-1750 µε, hence
discounting the concrete shrinkage component.

Figure 4 Raw absolute strain data for ring 'L' shove 1 and 2

Longitudinal Strain Prediction

The applied loading by the rams can be really large. The upper limit is considered to be 8000kN for design
capacity checking. The expected longitudinal strain for 2 construction stages is calculated using simple
calculations before the analysis. Considering that the rams are directly acting on the segment in question,
there are 12 rams in the Herronknect TBM used in this project, each ram acting on the tunnel segments by
way of a nylon backed steel ram pad of the size of 175mm x 500mm. The straining is calculated to be
0.254% when the force of 8000kN is applied and the elastic modulus is assumed to be E = 30Gpa. Now for
the second shove, the area of contact is increased to the full circumferential joint bearing area, as the load
is distributed through the first ring of tunnel segment. If the upper and lower loading is assumed to be
7000kN and 9000kN, the longitudinal straining is 0.0108% and 0.0138% respectively. The geometry used
in this calculation is shown in the figure below.

8|Page
 Figure 5 Circumferential joint Geometry

Results
Figure 7 represent the differential strain data for shove 1 through 8 for a single segment (segment 4) against
the base-line reading. The selection of longitudinal data is done and highlighted in figure 7. The
compressive strain decreases gradually as the location of ring ‘L’ is moving away from the tunnel face
while the results of shove 1 are showing an anomaly. The averaged data of the middle point readings from
longitudinal section for shove 1 to 8 are shown in figure 8. The second shove has the strain value similar to
the predicted strain value of 0.01%. The compressive strain decreases dramatically for shove 3 and 4,
returning close to the near base-line level while the longitudinal loading is stabilized for shove 5 to 8.

9|Page
 Figure 6 Longitudinal strain cable reference diagram

Figure 7 Differential strain data for segment BC - Shove 1-8

Figure 8 Average differential longitudinal strain for shove 1-8

10 | P a g e
 Figure 9 Average differential longitudinal strain for shove 1-8

Ring ‘H’
The Baseline readings for ring ‘H’ were taken using the same procedure as that of ring ‘L’. Data is shown
for the baseline reading, shove 1 and a reading taken after 90 days. The position of fiber optic strain cable
within the tunnel segments is shown in the figure 10 below.

Figure 10 Hoop cable reference diagram

Figure 11 and 12 represents the differential strain profile for segment 1 and 2 by highlighting denoting
respective positons of fibers within segments. It can be seen in the figure 11 that the straining is developed
within the extrados of the segments and the neutral axis is not in the center of the cross section, in contrary
with the figure 12, which illustrates the neutral axis to be close to the selection center.

11 | P a g e
 Figure 11 Differential strain data segment 1 for ring 'H'

Figure 12 Differential strain data segment 2 for ring 'H'

12 | P a g e
 Figure 13 Selected points in hoop data for ring ‘H’

By selecting a single data point in the middle of the circumferential strain cable, points A, B, C, D, E, F, G
and H as shown in figure 13, the bending moment and the axial forces can be measured. The results of
segment 1 shows that the compressive strain of extrados is greater than the intrados. Between the points A
and B the strain difference is ~0.0087% while that between the points C and D is ~0.021%. On the contrary
to the results of segment 1, there is a tensile strain and small compressive strain in the extrados and it is
larger in the intrados of segment 2. Point E and F has a relative strain difference of ~0.016% and it is
~0.0093% between the points C and D.

(2) Strain Variations – Points ‘A’ and ‘B’ (3) Strain Variations – Point ‘C’ and ‘D’

(4) Strain Variations – Points ‘E’ and ‘F’ (5) Strain Variations – Point ‘G’ and ‘H’

Figure 14 Differential strain at mid-span point all segments

13 | P a g e
 Table 2 'H' segment summary

Figure 15 Exaggerated tunnel shape after 90 days

A deformation mode is postulated (figure 15) because of the mid span calculation of bending moment from
differential straining in intrados and extrados fibers for segment 1 and 2 located on the tunnel shoulder and
crown respectively. The deformation mode of the tunnel ring would exist if the horizontal earth pressure
was greater than the vertical earth pressure i.e. K>1.

Conclusions
Ram Load effects defined in data analysis of ring ‘L’ clearly showed continuous strain measurements
decreasing from the highest value at the 2nd shove to the near baseline levels till the 4th shove and the ram
load effect is stabilized from the 5th shove.
It is shown that the propagation of longitudinal thrust loading only extend as far as advance 4; 5.2 m from
tunneling face. Straining developed through compressive action of TBM shove 2 is according to the strain
prediction and TB< telemetry.

14 | P a g e
The shove 1 loading highlighted the expected interactions from segment to segment at the radial joints
mobilizing shearing friction within the joint, hence the counteracting tensile force is induced within the
longitudinal strain cables.
Results were taken after 90 days of installation of ring ‘H’. The optical fiber sensing data was obtained to
verify the segment behavior in the hoop direction. According to the results of segment 1, the compressive
strain was dominant for extrados while it was smaller at the intrados. This trend was reversed at the segment
two. An elliptical elongation (egging) of tunnel ling is postulated with a k value > 1.

References
C.Y. Gue, M. W. M. A. M. E. K. S. R. M., 2014. Monitoring the Effects of Tunneling under an existing
tunnel - Fiber Optics, s.l.: University of Cambridge.

Mohammed, H., 2008. Distributed optical fiber strain sensing of geotechnical structures., s.l.: University
of Cambridge.

Tunnels, L. P., 2020. London Power Tunnels. [Online]

Available at: http://www.londonpowertunnels.co.uk

15 | P a g e
 Task 2: Monitoring of Pisa tower
Introduction
The construction of Pisa tower began in 1173 that continued for the next two centuries with two long
interruptions in between. It is built as a hollow masonry cylinder surrounded by six colonnades and consists
of columns and vaults that rise from the base cylinder. The inner and outer walls are faced with San Giuliano
marble while the miscellaneous rock fragments fill the annular cavity. The tower started to lean southward
during the second stage of construction (figure 16). Tower reached the maximum tilt in 1993(figure 17)
before the stabilization works began. The average pressure at the foundation is 500kPa. A detailed computer
analysis showed that the pressure at the south edge was 1000kPa with the soil in local yield while it was
close to zero at the north edge.

Figure 16 Construction history of Pisa Tower

16 | P a g e
 Figure 17 Cross-section in the plane of maximum tilt (1993)

The ground below the Pisa Tower consists of three different layers of soil. Horizon A is about 10m thick
and consists of soft estuarine deposits of sandy and clayey silts under tidal conditions. Horizon B, about
40m deep, is composed of soft, sensitive and normally consolidated marine clay. Because of its sensitivity,
this material loses a lot of its strength upon any disturbance. Horizon C consists is at a depth of 60m and
consists of marine sand. Horizon A is encountered with upper perched water table in between 1m and 2m
below the level of Piazza dei Miracoli increasing the elevation +3.0m above m.s.1. The contact between
Horizon A and the upper clay in Horizon B is dished underneath the tower and indicates that the average
settlement of 3.0m and 3.5 m is experience. Hence the tilt is caused in the Pisa Tower due to the soil
subsidence.

17 | P a g e
 Figure 18 Soil Profile beneath the Pisa Tower

Selection of Monitoring System

A permanent sensor network design is installed in the tower for the seismic monitoring. This system
includes uniaxial accelerometers EpiSensor FBA ES-U and triaxial accelerometers EpiSensor FBA ES-T.
Their characteristics are listed in figure 19.

Table 3 Main characteristics of seismic sensor network

18 | P a g e
Design of Monitoring
Four points of measurement are taken on the Tower as shown figure 20. The point S1, S2 and S3 are
equipped with triaxial accelerometers. Their axes are oriented as East-West, North-South and vertical. At
measurement point S4, a uniaxial accelerometer is installed, with orientation in the vertical direction.
Apart from the sensors installed on the tower, the dynamic monitoring system includes a triaxial
accelerometer installed on the surface of ground. As its location is close to the foundation, it is intended for
field-free recordings however the recordings can be affected by the structural response.

Figure 19 Positions of accelerometers on the tower and ground

After the installation of this sensor network, the vertical array is triggered by a number of earthquakes. The
frequencies of fundamental mode in the two directions for all the selected seismic events, along with the
corresponding ground level is shown in Table 3. The results show that the fundamental mode’s natural
frequency is not much affected for the minor levels of PGAs and change in elevation of the ground water
table i.e. up to 0.25m. The results also tells that for all the recorded events, the natural frequency along the
E-W direction is slightly greater than the N-S direction. For each event the table tells the moment magnitude
M and the distance of epicenter from the site R along with the maximum acceleration of the tower and far
field. It is to be noted that the maximum structural acceleration is low i.e. 8 gal.

19 | P a g e
Table 4 Seismic events (N= N-S, E = E-W); Peak Tower Acceleration (PTA) recorded by S3 and PGA by far-field instrument;
natural frequency of the Tower along N and E directions and groundwater levels.

The 2012 earthquake had a magnitude greater than 5 and its seismic recordings are available. The sensor
S3 established a fixed base motion by applying following procedure:
V= (S4(v)+ S1(v))/ 2 (1)

 = (S4(v) – S1(v))/L (2)

Sa(str) = Sa(h) - S1(h) - H (3)

Where V = V(t) is the vertical acceleration at the tower base, H is the elevation difference in between the
stations S1 and S3 (36.4m),  is the corresponding rotational acceleration and L is the distance between S1
and S4 (7.3m)
The flexible base motion and the overall flexible-base motion obtained by equation 3 were analyzed using
Continuous Wavelet Transform (CWT) for the 2012 Emilia event as shown in figure 21. The analysis
confirmed that the mode at 1 Hz is the fundamental bending-type mode for the SSI. Such a mode also
includes a vertical component and the points located away from the tower also move vertically when the
tower bends, which can be viewed in the vertical component in figure 5. While the mode at 3 Hz in graph
V corresponds to the vertical mode. While there is no evidence of a mode at 3 Hz in the horizontal
components.
Lastly, the final graph in figure 5 [N-S structural fixed base plot (STR)], obtained by decoupled motion in
equation 3, represents a structural fixed-base period with the 0.35 s intervals. Table 5 shows the “fixed
base” identified frequencies of the Tower. The analysis of the dynamic response recorded in the 2012 Emilia
earthquake showed that the natural frequency of the natural bending mode in N-S direction is 0.96 Hz. The
natural frequency of the bending mode in E-W direction is slightly greater i.e. 1.02 Hz.

20 | P a g e
Figure 20 CWT of the seismic response acceleration during the 2012 Emilia event recorded at Station S3 and horizontal with
fixed base: STR, through equation 3, using the stations S1, S3 and S4.

The vertical acceleration time histories are recorded in stations S1 and S4 within the frequency band of
interest, so that the foundation rocking can be assessed. It is seen in the top plot (figure 21) that the bending-
induced vertical response in two opposite points at the base of the tower is essentially out of phase. While
the vertical responses at the same point in the central plot are almost same because of the vertical mode.
Hence a strong rocking component is included in the bending mode while the vertical one does not have
any base rotation. The average vertical motion w0 is removed from the original recordings of each sensor
so that the vertical motion at S1 and S4 is obtained. It can be concluded that the responses in S1 and S4 are
out of phase with each other.

21 | P a g e
 Table 5 Identified frequencies (in Hz) of the Tower from structural response recorded in the 2012 Emilia event and its
comparison with previous studies

Figure 21 Vertical responses recorded at S1 and S4 during the 2012 Emilia event

22 | P a g e
Conclusion
Three vibration modes were identified by the analysis of seismic records. They consisted a vertical mode
with a frequency of almost 3 Hz and two bending modes with the frequencies of 1 Hz in N-S and E-W
direction.
There was a motion is the direction of inclined axis of the tower (not vertical) due to the vertical mode
response that led to a moderate increase in the base bending. The increase in base bending caused by
horizontal excitation would have surpassed 50%, had the specific mode was vertical instead of axial. The
proper identification of mode shapes, especially the torsional ones, was not possible due to the lack of the
number of sensors mounted on the structure. Furthermore the location existing far-field stations is far too
close to the tower not to be affected by its response. The selection of new measurement points far enough
from the tower is mandatory for the better monitoring of the free field motion. Seismic monitoring system
upgrade should be done for the better management and data storage.
The stability of the Pisa Tower is still one of the main issues. However there are many methods that can
take place for increasing its stability, one of which is the loading ground. It consists of loading the ground
that is on the higher side of the structure. The northern side of the tower, at a distance of 6.3 m from the
tower axis, is loaded with 600 tons of load weights. The overturning moment can be reduced by about 10%.

23 | P a g e
References
Acunzo, G. P. A. a. S. G., 2014. Un software di supporto alla selezione di accelerogrammi naturali spettro-
compatibili per analisi geotecniche e strutturali. s.l., Gruppo Nazionale di Geofisica della Terra Solida.

Akkar, S. a. B. J. J., 2010. Empirical equations for the prediction of PGA, PGV, and spectral accelerations
in Europe, the Mediterranean region, and the Middle East.. Seismological Research Letters, pp. 81-95.

Angina, A. S. A. S. S. a. L. P. D., 2018. Free-field seismic response analysis: The Piazza dei Miracoli in Pisa
case study. International Journal of Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering.

Atzeni, C. B. A. D. D. F. M. a. P. M., 2010. Remote survey of the Leaning Tower of Pisa by interferometric
sensing. IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters, pp. 185-189.

Bommer, J. J. a. A. A. B., 2004. The use of real earthquake accelerograms as input to dynamic analysis.
Journal of Earthquake Engineering.

Bommer, J. J. a. A. N. A., 2006. Why do modern probabilistic seismic-hazard analyses often lead to
increased hazard estimates?. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, Issue 96.

Burland, J. B. J. M. B. a. V. C., 2009. Leaning Tower of Pisa: Behavior after stabilization operations.
International Journal of Geoengineering Case Histories, pp. 156-169.

Capon, J., 1969. High-resolution frequency-wavenumber spectrum analysis. s.l., IEEE.

Castellaro, S. a. M. F., 2010. How far from a building does the ground-motion free-field start? The cases
of three famous towers and a modern building.. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, Issue
100.

Viggiani, J. B. M. J. a. C., 2009. Leaning Tower of Pisa: Behavior after Stabilization Operations.
International Journal of Geoengineering Case Histories, 1(3), pp. 156-196.

24 | P a g e