Rockfall seismic features analysis based on in situ tests: frequency, amplitude, and duration

In the seismic event classification, determining the seismic features of rockfall is significantly important for the automatic classification of seismic events because of the huge amount of raw data recorded by seismic stations in continuous monitoring. At the same time, the rockfall seismic features are still not completely understood. This study concentrates on the rockfall frequency content, amplitude (ground velocity), seismic waveform and duration analysis, of an artificial rockfall test at Torgiovannetto (a former quarry in Central Italy). A total of 90 blocks were released in the test, and their seismic signals and moving trajectories were recorded by four tri-axial seismic stations and four cameras, respectively. In the analysis processing, all the artificial rockfall signal traces were cut separately and the seismic features were extracted individually and automatically. In this study, the relationships between a) frequency content and impacted materials, b) frequency content and the distance between block releasing position and seismic station (source-receiver distance) were discussed. As a result, we found that the frequency content of rockfall focuses on 10–60 Hz and 80–90 Hz within a source-receiver distance of 200 m, and it is well correlated with impacted material and source-receiver distance. To evaluate the difference between earthquake and rockfall, 23 clear earthquake signals recorded in a seven month-long continuous seismic monitoring, carried out with the four seismic stations, were picked out, according to the Italian national earthquakes database (INGV). On these traces we performed the same analysis as in the artificial rockfall traces, and two parameters were defined to separate rockfall events from earthquake noise. The first one, the amplitude ratio, is related to the amplitude variation of rockfall between two stations and is greater than that of earthquakes, because of the higher attenuation occurring for rockfall events, which consists in high frequencies whereas for earthquakes it consists in low frequencies. The other parameter, the shape of waveform of signal trace, showed a significant difference between rockfall and earthquake and that could be a complementary feature to discriminate between both. This analysis of artificial rockfall is a first step helpful to understand the seismic characteristics of rockfall, and useful for rockfall seismic events classification in seismic monitoring of slope.