A multi-parameter field monitoring system to investigate the dynamics of large earth slides–earth flows in the Northern Apennines, Italy

Processes and factors controlling the groundwater flow in a complex landslide: A case study in the northern Italy

“…Consequentially, during the recharge period, the flow inside macropores and soil pipes becomes predominant and acquires a nonnegligible sub-horizontal downgradient component when the inflow rate in the aquifer exceeds the drainage capacity of the media. Anyway, differently to many other case studies (e.g., Bogaard et al, 2007;Bordoni et al, 2015;Debieche et al, 2012;Marino et al, 2021;Onda et al, 2004) and considering the geophysical results obtained in Chelli et al (2020), no local perched water body is formed after intense precipitation events.…”

“…Electrical Conductivity logs were performed in all the piezometers on a biweekly basis, from June 2018 to July 2019, with a borehole probe (Solinst TLC) in order to characterize the different groundwater salinity between the saturated landslide body and the slip surfaces, as well as their possible variations over time. Based on the results of Chelli et al (2020), the measurements were recorded: (1) immediately below the water table (−7 and −7.5 m bgs in P2 and P5, respectively) in order to investigate the shallow horizon of the landslide; (2) in the landslide body (−22 and −33 m bgs in P4 and P3, respectively); (3) along the slip surface intercepted with the boreholes (−14, −23 and −34 m bgs in P5, P2 and P1, respectively). The effectiveness of EC values was always verified through laboratory analyses.…”

“…Case Pennetta is a large active phenomenon evolving from 700 to 250 m asl with a total length of more than 1500 m and a maximum width of 150 m. The landslide involves a volume of material of two to four million cubic meters, calculated according to the methods proposed by Ju et al, 2023. It can be described as a complex landslide composed by (Carlini et al, 2016;Chelli et al, 2020;Quagliarini et al, 2017) main scarp of RTS, the maximum slip surface depth provided by the inclinometer I1 (Figure 1b,c and Table 1) is about 33-34 m bgs, but the major local movement was detected at 22-23 m bgs with a maximum local displacement of 13,1 mm over a period of 26 months (April 2016-June 2018). Differently, in the main body of RTS, four main slip surfaces were detected (at 1.5, 6.5, 14.5-15.0, and 20.0 m bgs, respectively) by the inclinometer I2 (Figure 1b,c and Table 1), with the maximum local displacement of 2.3 mm in 26 months in the shallowest one (Chelli et al, 2020). The cumulative displacements recorded in 26 months were 37.9 mm for I1 and 18.3 mm for I2.…”

“…The analyses were carried out at the Institute of Geosciences and Earth Resources of the National Research Council of Italy.3.4 | Electrical conductivity logsElectrical Conductivity logs were performed in all the piezometers on a biweekly basis, from June 2018 to July 2019, with a borehole probe (Solinst TLC) in order to characterize the different groundwater salinity between the saturated landslide body and the slip surfaces, as well as their possible variations over time. Based on the results ofChelli et al (2020), the measurements were recorded: (1) immediately below the water table (À7 and À7.5 m bgs in P2 and P5, respectively) in order to investigate the shallow horizon of the landslide; (2) in the landslide body (À22 and À33 m bgs in P4 and P3, respectively);…”

Advancing hydrological process understanding from long‐term resistivity monitoring systems

“…Neyamadpour (2019) extended the interpretation of such data sets to consider possible links between changes in resistivity and geotechnical properties more directly related to soil strength. Other LTRM examples for landslide assessment include Chelli et al (2020) (data sampled daily over an 11‐month period) and Holmes et al (2020) (data sampled twice daily over a 2‐year period).…”