<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0"><?xmltex \makeatother\@nolinetrue\makeatletter?>
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">ADGEO</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Advances in Geosciences</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">ADGEO</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Adv. Geosci.</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1680-7359</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/adgeo-52-145-2021</article-id><title-group><article-title>Topography and structural heterogeneities in surface ground deformation: a
simulation test for Somma-Vesuvius volcano</article-title><alt-title>Somma-Vesuvius volcano, topography and structural heterogeneities</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Somma-Vesuvius volcano, topography and structural heterogeneities}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{U.~Tammaro et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Tammaro</surname><given-names>Umberto</given-names></name>
          <email>umberto.tammaro@ingv.it</email>
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2685-6064</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2 aff6">
          <name><surname>Riccardi</surname><given-names>Umberto</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0720-5415</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Romano</surname><given-names>Vittorio</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff4">
          <name><surname>Meo</surname><given-names>Michele</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff5">
          <name><surname>Capuano</surname><given-names>Paolo</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6074-6977</ext-link></contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia, Osservatorio Vesuviano, via Diocleziano 328, Napoli, Italy</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Dipartimento di Scienze della Terra, dell'ambiente e delle Risorse
(DiSTAR), <?xmltex \hack{\newline}?> University “Federico II” of Naples, Napoli, Italy</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Salerno, Fisciano,
Italy</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff4"><label>4</label><institution>Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Bath, BA2 7AY Bath, UK</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff5"><label>5</label><institution>Department of Physics “E.R. Caianiello”, University of Salerno,
Fisciano, Salerno, Italy</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff6"><label>6</label><institution>Research Group “Geodesia”, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, 28040
Madrid, Spain</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Umberto Tammaro (umberto.tammaro@ingv.it)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>19</day><month>March</month><year>2021</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>52</volume>
      <fpage>145</fpage><lpage>152</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>31</day><month>May</month><year>2020</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>20</day><month>November</month><year>2020</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>6</day><month>December</month><year>2020</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2021 Umberto Tammaro et al.</copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2021</copyright-year>
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://adgeo.copernicus.org/articles/52/145/2021/adgeo-52-145-2021.html">This article is available from https://adgeo.copernicus.org/articles/52/145/2021/adgeo-52-145-2021.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://adgeo.copernicus.org/articles/52/145/2021/adgeo-52-145-2021.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://adgeo.copernicus.org/articles/52/145/2021/adgeo-52-145-2021.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract><title>Abstract</title>
    <p id="d1e149">We simulate the deformation of Somma-Vesuvius volcano due
to some overpressure sources by means of a finite element 3D code. The main
goal of these simulations is to investigate the influence of topography and
structural heterogeneity on ground deformation. In our model the sources of
deformation are embedded in an elastic linear isotropic medium and located
at various depths. Geometry (shape and lateral extension) of the sources is
mainly constrained by the results coming from recent seismic tomography
studies. The structural heterogeneity has been modelled in terms of dynamic
elastic parameters (Young's modulus) retrieved from previous seismic
tomography and gravity studies. A high-resolution digital terrain model is
used for the topography of the volcano subaerial edifice. Evidences from our
results suggest that real topography and structural heterogeneities are key
factors governing the ground deformation, which often turns being one of the
most relevant problems in volcano monitoring. A large deviation from the
axially symmetrical model of the displacement field is the main result of
our modelling. Such an asymmetry is routinely unaccounted for when Mogi's
simplistic modelling in a homogeneous medium with simplified topography is
used. Our study clearly demonstrate that a better knowledge of deformation
patterns can significantly help in the location of monitoring sensors as
well as in the design of an efficient geodetic network.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e161">The volcanic complex of Somma-Vesuvius is a stratovolcano located in the
Campania Plain. It consists of an older edifice, partly dismantled by a
caldera process, Mount Somma and a younger one, Mount Vesuvius, that is
located within the caldera of Mount Somma, formed about 18 000 year BP
(Landi et al., 1999). It has a rim (maximum altitude 1131 m a.s.l.) well
preserved in the northern sector. Instead, Mount Vesuvius is almost
symmetrical cone, with maximum altitude of 1281 m a.s.l. It was formed by
means the accumulation of ash, scoria and lava flows, given off mainly from
the central vent.</p>
      <p id="d1e164">Somma-Vesuvius is known worldwide for the devastating Plinian eruption (79 AD) that destroyed Herculaneum and Pompeii. In 472 AD, a subplinian
eruption occurred, followed by a persistent activity of about 700 years
(Mastrolorenzo et al., 2002; Rolandi et al., 2004). From the 12th century to
1631 there was a period of low activity, which ended with a subplinian
eruption. It was followed, until 1944, by a period characterized by medium
and small-size eruptions. Since the last eruption in 1944, the
Somma-Vesuvius volcano is in a quiescent phase. It has an activity
consisting of hundreds of low energy earthquakes per year (Bianco et al.,
1998; De Natale et al., 1998, 2004), generally characterized by earthquake
swarms (Bianco et al., 1999), fumarolic activity at the summit crater
(Chiodini et al., 2001) and subsidence (Tammaro et al., 2013; Pingue et al.,
2013). The largest earthquake (MD <inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 3.6) was recorded on October 1999<?pagebreak page146?> (Del
Pezzo et al., 2004; De Natale et al., 2004; Galluzzo et al., 2004; Cubellis et
al., 2007).</p>
      <p id="d1e174">Among the various geophysical parameters monitored, the ground deformations
play an important role, because they contribute to the unrest assessment of
eruptive activity in medium-term (Dvorak and Dzurisin, 1997; Dzurisin, 2000;
2003). The hypothesis of a shallow magma chamber, coaxial with the crater
axis, and the hypothesis that Mogi's model (Mogi, 1958) adequately described
the ground deformation field, influenced the design of the geodetic
networks. In fact, in 1972 a leveling network was built to control the
medium-high altitude (from 600 to 1200 m) of the Gran Cono. In 1975,
the EDM (Electronic Distance Measurement) network was built with four
vertices on the crater. With the progress of scientific knowledge in the
physics of volcanism, this approach has been gradually abandoned. For a long
time now, the continuous monitoring networks, such as GNSS network, have
covered the entire volcanic apparatus, aimed to have information on a
deformation field that includes areas also outside the volcano.</p>
      <p id="d1e177">Moreover, the continuous geodetic monitoring networks also guarantee timely
detection of the change in the state of the volcano and, in the advanced
stages of the pre-eruptive process, allow the identification of the areas
more highly prone to the opening of eruptive vents. However, during rest
periods, such as the current one of Somma-Vesuvius, the deformation of the
volcano can be very elusive (Dzurisin, 2000).</p>
      <p id="d1e181">Therefore, the location of the sensors is of paramount importance. In fact,
as shown by Dzurisin (2003), sensors located too close to the area of the
deformation, would not allow to distinguish between an inflation dyke and a
deflation sphere (Dzurisin, 2003), because both sources of deformation would
produce subsidence in a confined area. A sparse and wide network of sensors
might fail to record localized deformation caused by a shallow source.</p>
      <p id="d1e184">Simulations of the ground displacements due to overpressure sources have
proven to be very useful for the design of networks. In this way, the
expected deformation field is simulated and therefore inferences can be made
on the most suitable location of the sensors. Due to the harsh topography
and structural heterogeneities, the simulation of ground displacements due
to overpressure sources embedded in a domain closely representing the
Somma-Vesuvius volcano is very challenging. In this study, which represents
a development of Meo et al. (2008), through a 3D finite element modelling,
we target to simulate, the deformation of Somma-Vesuvius volcano caused by
some overpressure sources. Under the assumption of linear elastic material
behaviour, the volcano deformation sources are located at various depths and
their geometry (shape and lateral extension) is mainly constrained by the
results of seismic tomography studies (Zollo et al., 1996; Capuano et al.,
2003).</p>
      <p id="d1e187">The paper is organized as follows. The Sect. 2 illustrates briefly the
Finite Element Method (FEM). In Sect. 3, we describe the Structural
heterogeneities and FEM model for Somma-Vesuvius volcano. Section 4 reports
on the 3D simulations. In Sect. 5 results are discussed and conclusions
are drawn.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>Finite Element Method for Somma-Vesuvio volcano model</title>
      <p id="d1e198">The finite element method (FEM) is a numerical technique for solving
problems which are described by partial differential equations or can be
formulated as functional minimization. The FEM has been used to investigate
a wide range of complex physical phenomena, particularly those with
geometrical and material nonlinearities (such as those often encountered in
the real-world geosciences). The principle of minimization of energy forms
the primary backbone of the finite element method. When a body is subject to
a particular boundary condition, this can lead to several configurations,
but yet only one particular configuration is realistically possible or
achieved governed by the principle of minimization of potential energy. It
states that when forces and boundary conditions are applied, among the
numerous possible configurations that the body can assume, the configuration
of minimum total energy is chosen.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e203"><bold>(a)</bold> Geological map relating to the part of the domain enclosed
in the red box (from Pennetta, 2018). It includes Gulf of Napoli and the
Somma-Vesuvius volcano, southern Italy. Inset shows a geographical sketch of
southern Italy, the circle indicates study area. <bold>(b)</bold> Finite element model
used in this study. The directions of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-axis and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-axis coincide with
the geographic North and East-West verse, respectively. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:mi>z</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-axis is
perpendicular to the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> plane.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://adgeo.copernicus.org/articles/52/145/2021/adgeo-52-145-2021-f01.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e250">In the finite element analysis, a domain of interest is divided into small
pieces known as “elements” and the corner point of each element is known
as a “node”. Approximating functions in finite elements are determined in
terms of nodal values of a physical field, in our study the displacement
field. A continuous physical problem is transformed into a discretized
finite element problem with unknown nodal values. Basically the unknown
displacement field is calculated at the nodal points. Interpolation
functions are defined for each element to interpolate, for values inside the
element, using nodal values. These interpolation functions are also often
referred to as shape functions. For examples, the relation (1) show the case
1D
          <disp-formula id="Ch1.E1" content-type="numbered"><label>1</label><mml:math id="M6" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">N</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">d</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
        where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">d</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the nodal displacement, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">N</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the shape function and function of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>
and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the global displacement function. For a linear problem, a system
of linear algebraic equations should be solved. Values inside finite
elements can be recovered using nodal values. The piece-wise approximation
of physical fields on finite elements can provide good precision even with
simple approximating functions. However, mesh sensitivity studies should be
carried out where increasing the number of elements a better accuracy can be
achieved. Moreover, the locality of approximation leads to sparse equation
systems for a discretized problem helping to solve problems with very large
number of nodal unknowns as in our case.</p>
      <p id="d1e315">The FEM allowed us to transform the domain of interest, the Somma-Vesuvius
volcano in this case, into elements with<?pagebreak page147?> discrete nodes in space. The
properties of the domain are obtained combining those of the elements. The
FEM is also suited to dealing with strong variations of stiffness
properties, such as those expected for a volcano. In this study, we have
used heterogeneous material properties for the different part of the
investigated domain and to evaluate the effect of these structural
heterogeneities in surface ground deformation. The element stiffness matrix,
for 3D elements, has the generic form presented in Eq. (2)
          <disp-formula id="Ch1.E2" content-type="numbered"><label>2</label><mml:math id="M11" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mfenced open="[" close="]"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold">k</mml:mi></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∫</mml:mo><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="-0.125em"/><mml:mspace width="-0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="-0.125em"/><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∫</mml:mo><mml:mspace width="-0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="-0.125em"/><mml:mspace width="-0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∫</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mfenced close="]" open="["><mml:mi mathvariant="bold">B</mml:mi></mml:mfenced><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:mfenced open="[" close="]"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold">D</mml:mi></mml:mfenced><mml:mfenced close="]" open="["><mml:mi mathvariant="bold">B</mml:mi></mml:mfenced><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>V</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
        where [<inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold">B</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>] is the strain displacement matrix and [<inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold">D</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>] the material properties'
matrix. The displacement over the domain of interest can be calculated from
Eq. (3)
          <disp-formula id="Ch1.E3" content-type="numbered"><label>3</label><mml:math id="M14" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mfenced close="]" open="["><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">F</mml:mi></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mfenced open="[" close="]"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold">K</mml:mi></mml:mfenced><mml:mfenced open="[" close="]"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold">d</mml:mi></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
        where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mfenced close="]" open="["><mml:mi mathvariant="bold">K</mml:mi></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the global stiffness matrix containing
the stiffness of each area and element connectivity information and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">F</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> the
applied loads.</p>
      <p id="d1e406">In this study, the Finite Element Model has been implemented in the
commercial code ANSYS, taking into account real topography of the
Somma-Vesuvio volcano as inferred from a detailed digital elevation model.
The mesh (Fig. 1) was built, as in Meo et al. (2008), by using elements with
smaller edge length in regions of high stress gradient while a coarser mesh
was used away from the main crater. In particular, in the main area of about
10 km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> with a side of 10 km enclosing the volcano, brick elements have
an edge length of 80 m. A coarser mesh was used for the remaining domain with
elements having edge length of 240 and 480 m. The main characteristics are
summarized in the Table 1.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d1e421">Main characteristics of the mesh.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="2">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Domain size</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">37</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">000</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">26</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Domain Depth</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">25 000 m</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Type Element</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Hexahedral defined</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">by eight nodes</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Degrees of freedom</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Three degrees of freedom</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">of the element</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">at each node, the translations in the</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">three nodal directions.</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Number of Nodes</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">643 525</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Number of Elements</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">612 880</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e536">Regarding the boundary conditions, the different constraints imposed on the
faces of the domain are described in Table 2.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T2"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Table 2</label><caption><p id="d1e542">Boundary conditions.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="2">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Node position</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Constrain</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">External faces with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> constant</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:mi>Y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> direction</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">External faces with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> constant</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> direction</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Bottom</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:mi>Z</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> direction</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Top</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">No</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>Structural heterogeneities</title>
      <p id="d1e651">Structural heterogeneities have been modelled in terms of the three
dynamical elastic parameters: Young's modulus (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mi>E</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>), Poisson's ratio (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and density (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ρ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>). At each element, we<?pagebreak page148?> have inferred these parameters
from seismic waves velocities retrieved from seismic tomography conducted at
Somma-Vesuvius volcano during TomoVes project (Gasparini et al., 1998;
Capuano et al., 2003). In particular, we have derived the density of
volcano by means the relationship (4) obtained by Currenti et al. (2007) and
therein references. The derived density lead to density differences
consistent with those obtained by 3D gravity inversion by Capuano et al. (2013). Instead, Young's modulus and Poisson's ratio can be calculated with
the relations (5) and (6). Moreover, as already done in Meo et al. (2008),
the model is built taking into account the real topography of the volcano,
which is inferred from a detailed digital elevation model.

              <disp-formula specific-use="gather" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M27" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E4"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>4</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ρ</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.2861</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.5498</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.0930</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.007</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E5"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>5</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ρ</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E6"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>6</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula></p>
      <p id="d1e825">In these relationships <inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> are P-wave and S-wave
propagation velocities respectively. Starting from these assumptions, we
have built a heterogeneity volcanic structure with distributions of elastic
and density parameters.</p>
      <p id="d1e842">The elastic Young's modulus varies in the range from 10 GPa at shallower
depth to about 80 GPA at higher depth (Fig. 2), Poisson's ratio varies
between 0.246 and 0.250. Indeed, the density varies in the range from 1800 to 2800 kg/m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d1e857">Internal structure derived from the seismic tomography (Gasparini et al., 1998; Capuano et al., 2003). The Young's modulus is shown for the depth indicated on the top of each plot. The last box at bottom right shows the topography.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=426.791339pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://adgeo.copernicus.org/articles/52/145/2021/adgeo-52-145-2021-f02.png"/>

      </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <label>4</label><title>Simulations</title>
      <p id="d1e874">We simulate, for Somma-Vesuvius volcano, the displacements caused by three
overpressure sources at various depths, 2, 3 and 5 km, in homogenous and
heterogeneous media.</p>
      <p id="d1e877">As in Meo et al. (2008), we have represented the reservoirs by means of a
prolate overpressure parallelepiped shaped with a horizontal side of 480 m
and thickness of 1.8 and 2.0 km both for shallower source at 2 km and for
the deeper ones at 3 and 5 km respectively; all sources are located along
the crater axis. We have chosen reservoirs with a lateral extension smaller
than 500 m, because the resolution of seismic tomography data do not show
body with extension greater than 0.5 km. The depth of the source is the
position of the center of the parallelepiped. For example, the source at 2 km, which has a height of 1.8 km, has the top at 1.1 km and the bottom at
2.9 km. The shallow part of domain that reaches the top of source (1.1 km)
is characterized by a Young's modulus that varies between 10 and about 30 GPa (Fig. 2). Therefore, we have chosen to use the minimum value of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:mi>E</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> for
the homogeneous case.</p>
      <p id="d1e887">For each source, the displacements field is computed by using three
homogeneous half-space model, with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> GPa and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and
an heterogeneous one obtained by evaluating, at each node of the mesh, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mi>E</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> with Eqs. (5) and (6).</p>
      <p id="d1e928">For each model the three components of the ground displacements are computed
at the nodes of FEM mesh, corresponding to the real topographic surface. We
present results for a uniform overpressure of 10 MPa applied to the source
walls. Different overpressure values will affect the ground deformation
magnitude but the deformation pattern will keep unchanged, due to the linear
elastic material model used in the simulation.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>5</label><title>Results and conclusions</title>
      <p id="d1e940">Results relative to the source located at 2 km are reported below. In
particular, the surface deformation produced by a source located at 2 km
depth in homogenous (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> GPa) and heterogeneous medium is shown in
Figs. 3 and 4. The deformations produced by a Mogi-type source (Mogi, 1930)
are depicted too, only as a term of comparison. In both cases, it is evident
a deviation from an axial symmetrical pattern of the displacement field, due
to the presence of the real topography. The ground deformation, in both
cases, is concentrated in a radius of about 3 km from the crater axis.
Another evidence, in the heterogeneous case, is the presence of subsidence
areas along both profiles. They are located in the upper part of the
volcano, in the younger part of the volcano (Gran Cono) and between the
younger and the older area (Somma). Moreover, maximum vertical displacements
are greater in homogenous case with respect to heterogeneous medium, both
along the south-north (Fig. 5) and east-west profiles (Fig. 6). In a
previous paper by Meo et al. (2008), on the other hand, it has been showed
that the heterogeneous layered case (10 GPa up to 2 km and 40 GPa under 2 km) turns out the maximum vertical displacement along the south-north
profile.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d1e957">Map of vertical displacements produced by a source located at 2 km depth embedded in homogenous medium (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> GPa and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). The names and locations of continuous GNSS stations are shown.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://adgeo.copernicus.org/articles/52/145/2021/adgeo-52-145-2021-f03.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e990">From our simulations turns out that the maximum vertical displacement is
provided by the homogeneous medium. This evident discrepancy with respect to
the results by Meo et al. (2008) is not a surprise, because it is recognized
that stratified models are strongly influenced by the position of the
source.</p>
      <p id="d1e994">In Meo et al. (2008), the source was located above and below the two layers
and the relative difference in Young's<?pagebreak page149?> modulus creates additional vertical
forces in the area above the overpressure source. Our heterogeneous model,
“closer to reality”, mitigates these effects by modelling more
realistically the various zones with different Young's modulus calculated
from tomography measurements.</p>
      <p id="d1e997">The geodetic monitoring of volcanoes is one of the major tools for
identifying possible warning signals of volcanic<?pagebreak page150?> activity. Therefore, the
modeling of the expected deformations from possible overpressure sources,
taking into account the real topography, can provide useful information for
optimizing the position of the sensors. In particular, our results indicate
the need for a better definition of the geometry in the summit area of
Somma-Vesuvius, in which we highlight the greater variations of the expected
deformations compared to simpler models that do not take into account the
heterogeneity of the structure and the actual topography. In fact, we
believe it is useful a spatial optimization of the geodetic network at
higher altitude in order to be able to identify in detail the uplift and
subsidence areas, the prompt detection of which, according to our model,
would be necessary to evaluate any phenomenology in progress. Obviously,
taking into account the operational difficulties, a compromise between dense
and sparse network of sensors should be achieved. In fact, as already
mentioned in the introduction, the sensors located too close to the area of
the deformation, would not allow to distinguish between an inflation dyke
and a deflation sphere. A sparse and wide network of sensors might fail to
record localized deformation caused by a shallow source.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d1e1002">Map of vertical displacements produced by a source located at 2 km depth embedded in heterogeneous medium obtained by evaluating, at each node of the mesh, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:mi>E</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> with Eqs. (5) and (6). The names and locations of continuous GNSS stations are shown.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://adgeo.copernicus.org/articles/52/145/2021/adgeo-52-145-2021-f04.png"/>

      </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d1e1027">Normalized vertical displacements for homogeneous, heterogeneous
cases and Mogi model, which does not take into account the topography, along
South-North profile.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://adgeo.copernicus.org/articles/52/145/2021/adgeo-52-145-2021-f05.png"/>

      </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6"><?xmltex \currentcnt{6}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 6</label><caption><p id="d1e1039">Normalized vertical displacements for homogeneous, heterogeneous
cases and Mogi model, which does not take into account the topography, along
East-West profile.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://adgeo.copernicus.org/articles/52/145/2021/adgeo-52-145-2021-f06.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e1048">In conclusion, a better definition of the geometry and characteristic of the
GNSS monitoring network, particularly in the summit area, as this study,
with the limit of validity of our source model, could represent a further
contribution for those ongoing projects that involve the thickening and
optimization of the network.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="codeavailability"><title>Code availability</title>

      <p id="d1e1055">The Finite Element Model has been implemented in the commercial code ANSYS version 14.5. (<uri>https://www.ansys.com</uri>, last access: 20 May 2020)</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="dataavailability"><title>Data availability</title>

      <p id="d1e1064">All data are available from the authors upon request.</p>
  </notes><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d1e1071">UT, PC and MM designed and developed this study and defined the methodology.
UT, MM and VR designed and implemented the data analysis and simulations.
MM, VR, UR validated the results.
UT prepared the manuscript with contributions from MM, UR.
PC supervised the project.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d1e1077">The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="disclaimer"><title>Disclaimer</title>

      <p id="d1e1083">This paper, however,
does not reflect the position and the official policies of the Dipartimento
della Protezione Civile Italiana (DPC – Italian Civil Protection
Department).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="sistatement"><title>Special issue statement</title>

      <p id="d1e1089">This article is part of the special issue “Understanding volcanic processes through geophysical and volcanological data investigations: some case studies from Italian sites (EGU2019 GMPV5.11 session, COV10 S01.11session)”. It is not associated with a conference.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e1095">Authors are strongly indebted to two reviewers, who contributed to improve the manuscript.</p></ack><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d1e1100">This paper was edited by Antonietta Maria Esposito and reviewed by Guido Russo and Claudio Martino.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bianco, F., Castellano, M., Milano, G., Ventura, G., and Vilardo, G.: The
Somma-Vesuvius stress field induced by regional tectonics: Evidences from
seismological and mesostructural data, in: Special
Issue Vesuvius, edited by: Spera, F. J., De Vivo, B., Ayuso, R. A., and Belkin, H. E.,  J. Volcanol. Geoth. Res.,
82, 199–218, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-0273(97)00065-6" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/S0377-0273(97)00065-6</ext-link>, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Bianco, F., Castellano, M., Milano, G., Vilardo, G., Ferrucci, F., and Gresta,
S.: The seismic crises at Mt. Vesuvius during 1995 and 1996, Phys. Chem.
Earth (A), 24, 977–983, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Capuano, P., Gasparini, P., Virieux, J., Zollo, A., Casale, R., and Yeroyanni,
M.: The Internal Structure of Mt. Vesuvius: A Seismic Tomography
Investigation, Liguori Editore, Napoli, 595 pp., ISBN 88-207-3503-2, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Capuano, P., Russo, G., and Scarpa, R.: P-wave velocity and density structure
beneath Mt. Vesuvius: a magma body in the upper edifice?, Ann.
Geophys.-Italy, 54, S0437–S0447, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.4401/ag-6443" ext-link-type="DOI">10.4401/ag-6443</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Chiodini, G., Marini, L., and Russo, M.: Geochemical evidences of high
temperature hydrothermal brines at Vesuvio volcano (Italy), Geochim.
Cosmochim. Ac., 65, 2129–2147, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Cubellis, E., Luongo, G., and Marturano, A.: Seismic hazard assessment at Mt.
Vesuvius: the maximum magnitude expected, J. Volcanol. Geoth. Res., 162,
139–149, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2007.03.003" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2007.03.003</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Currenti, G., Del Negro, C., and Ganci, G.: Modelling of ground deformation and gravity fields using finite element method: an application to Etna volcano, Geophys. J. Int., 169, 775–786, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2007.03380.x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/j.1365-246X.2007.03380.x</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Del Pezzo, E., Bianco, F., and Saccorotti, G.: Seismic Source Dynamics at
Vesuvius Volcano, Italy, J. Volcanol. Geoth. Res., 133, 23–39, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
De Natale, G., Capuano, P., Troise, C., and Zollo, A.: Seismicity at
Somma-Vesuvius and its implications for the 3D tomography of the volcano, in:  Special Issue Vesuvius, edited by: Spera, F. J., De
Vivo, B., Ayuso, R. A., and Belkin, H. E., J.
Volcanol. Geoth. Res., 82, 175–197, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
De Natale, G., Troise, C., Trigila, R., Dolfi, D., and Chiarabba, C.: Seismicity
and 3D substructure at Somma-Vesuvius volcano: evidence for magma quenching,
Earth Plan. Sci. Lett., 221, 181–196, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Dvorak, J. and Dzurisin, D.: Volcano Geodesy: the search for magma reservoirs and the formation of eruptive vents, Rev. Geophys., 35, 343–384, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/97RG00070" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/97RG00070</ext-link>, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Dzurisin, D.: Volcano geodesy: Challenges and opportunities for the 21st century, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A, 358, 1547–1566, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2000.0603" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1098/rsta.2000.0603</ext-link>, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Dzurisin, D.: A comprehensive approach to monitoring volcano deformation as
a window on the eruption cycle, Rev. Geophys., 41, 1001, 1–29,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2001RG000107" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2001RG000107</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Galluzzo, D., Del Pezzo, E., La Rocca, M., and Petrosino, S.: Peak Ground
Acceleration produced by local earthquakes in volcanic areas of Campi
Flegrei and Mt. Vesuvius, Ann. Geophys.-Italy, 47, 1377–1390, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Gasparini, P. and The TomoVes Project Field Team, TomoVes: A project of
seismic investigation of Mt.Vesuvius, EOS, 79, 229–232, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Landi, P., Bertagnini, A., and Rosi, M.: Chemical zoning and crystallization mechanisms in the magma chamber of the Pomici di Base plinian eruption of Somma-Vesuvius (Italy), Contrib. Mineral. Petrol., 135, 179–197, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s004100050505" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s004100050505</ext-link>, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Mastrolorenzo, G., Palladino, D., Vecchio, G., and Taddeucci, J.: The 472 A.D.
Pollena eruption of Somma-Vesuvius (Italy) and its environmental impact at
the end of the Roman Empire, J. Volcanol. Geoth. Res., 113, 19–36, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Meo, M., Tammaro, U., and Capuano, P.: Influence of topography on ground
deformation at Mt. Vesuvius (Italy) by finite element modelling,
Int. J. Nonlin. Mech., 43, 178–186,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnonlinmec.2007.12.005" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.ijnonlinmec.2007.12.005</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Mogi, K.: Relations between the Eruptions of Various Volcanoes and the
Deformations of the Ground Surfaces around them, B. Earthq. Res. I. Tokyo, 36, 99–134, 1958.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Pennetta, M.: Beach Erosion in the Gulf of Castellammare di Stabia in
Response to the Trapping of Longshore Drifting Sediments of the Gulf of
Napoli (Southern Italy), Geosciences, 8, 235,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences8070235" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3390/geosciences8070235</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Pingue, F., Bottiglieri, M., Godano, C., Obrizzo, F., Tammaro, U., Esposito,
T., and Serio, C.: Spatial and temporal distribution of vertical ground
movements at Mt. Vesuvius in the period 1973–2009, Ann. Geophys.-Italy, 56,
4, S0451, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.4401/ag-6457" ext-link-type="DOI">10.4401/ag-6457</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page152?><ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Rolandi, G., Bellucci, F., and Cortini, M.: A new model for formation of the
Somma Caldera, Miner. Petrol., 80, 27–44,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00710-003-0018-0" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s00710-003-0018-0</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Tammaro, U., De Martino, P., Obrizzo, F., Brandi, G., D'Alessandro, A.,
Dolce, M., Malaspina, S., Serio, C., and Pingue, F.: Somma Vesuvius volcano:
ground deformations from CGPS observations (2001–2012), Ann. Geophys.-Italy, 56, S0456; <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.4401/ag-6462" ext-link-type="DOI">10.4401/ag-6462</ext-link>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Zollo, A., Gasparini, P., Virieux, J., Le Meur, H., De Natale, G., Biella,
G., Boschi, E., Capuano, P., De Franco, R., Dell'Aversana, P., De Matteis,
R., Guerra, I., Iannaccone, G., Mirabile, L., and Vilardo, G.: Seismic evidence
for a low velocity zone in the upper crust beneath Mount Vesuvius, Science,
274, 592–594, 1996.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Topography and structural heterogeneities in surface ground deformation: a simulation test for Somma-Vesuvius volcano</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p>We simulate the deformation of Somma-Vesuvius volcano due
to some overpressure sources by means of a finite element 3D code. The main
goal of these simulations is to investigate the influence of topography and
structural heterogeneity on ground deformation. In our model the sources of
deformation are embedded in an elastic linear isotropic medium and located
at various depths. Geometry (shape and lateral extension) of the sources is
mainly constrained by the results coming from recent seismic tomography
studies. The structural heterogeneity has been modelled in terms of dynamic
elastic parameters (Young's modulus) retrieved from previous seismic
tomography and gravity studies. A high-resolution digital terrain model is
used for the topography of the volcano subaerial edifice. Evidences from our
results suggest that real topography and structural heterogeneities are key
factors governing the ground deformation, which often turns being one of the
most relevant problems in volcano monitoring. A large deviation from the
axially symmetrical model of the displacement field is the main result of
our modelling. Such an asymmetry is routinely unaccounted for when Mogi's
simplistic modelling in a homogeneous medium with simplified topography is
used. Our study clearly demonstrate that a better knowledge of deformation
patterns can significantly help in the location of monitoring sensors as
well as in the design of an efficient geodetic network.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Bianco, F., Castellano, M., Milano, G., Ventura, G., and Vilardo, G.: The
Somma-Vesuvius stress field induced by regional tectonics: Evidences from
seismological and mesostructural data, in: Special
Issue Vesuvius, edited by: Spera, F. J., De Vivo, B., Ayuso, R. A., and Belkin, H. E.,  J. Volcanol. Geoth. Res.,
82, 199–218, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-0273(97)00065-6" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-0273(97)00065-6</a>, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Bianco, F., Castellano, M., Milano, G., Vilardo, G., Ferrucci, F., and Gresta,
S.: The seismic crises at Mt. Vesuvius during 1995 and 1996, Phys. Chem.
Earth (A), 24, 977–983, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
Capuano, P., Gasparini, P., Virieux, J., Zollo, A., Casale, R., and Yeroyanni,
M.: The Internal Structure of Mt. Vesuvius: A Seismic Tomography
Investigation, Liguori Editore, Napoli, 595 pp., ISBN 88-207-3503-2, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
Capuano, P., Russo, G., and Scarpa, R.: P-wave velocity and density structure
beneath Mt. Vesuvius: a magma body in the upper edifice?, Ann.
Geophys.-Italy, 54, S0437–S0447, <a href="https://doi.org/10.4401/ag-6443" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.4401/ag-6443</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Chiodini, G., Marini, L., and Russo, M.: Geochemical evidences of high
temperature hydrothermal brines at Vesuvio volcano (Italy), Geochim.
Cosmochim. Ac., 65, 2129–2147, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
Cubellis, E., Luongo, G., and Marturano, A.: Seismic hazard assessment at Mt.
Vesuvius: the maximum magnitude expected, J. Volcanol. Geoth. Res., 162,
139–149, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2007.03.003" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2007.03.003</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
Currenti, G., Del Negro, C., and Ganci, G.: Modelling of ground deformation and gravity fields using finite element method: an application to Etna volcano, Geophys. J. Int., 169, 775–786, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2007.03380.x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2007.03380.x</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Del Pezzo, E., Bianco, F., and Saccorotti, G.: Seismic Source Dynamics at
Vesuvius Volcano, Italy, J. Volcanol. Geoth. Res., 133, 23–39, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
De Natale, G., Capuano, P., Troise, C., and Zollo, A.: Seismicity at
Somma-Vesuvius and its implications for the 3D tomography of the volcano, in:  Special Issue Vesuvius, edited by: Spera, F. J., De
Vivo, B., Ayuso, R. A., and Belkin, H. E., J.
Volcanol. Geoth. Res., 82, 175–197, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
De Natale, G., Troise, C., Trigila, R., Dolfi, D., and Chiarabba, C.: Seismicity
and 3D substructure at Somma-Vesuvius volcano: evidence for magma quenching,
Earth Plan. Sci. Lett., 221, 181–196, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Dvorak, J. and Dzurisin, D.: Volcano Geodesy: the search for magma reservoirs and the formation of eruptive vents, Rev. Geophys., 35, 343–384, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/97RG00070" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/97RG00070</a>, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
Dzurisin, D.: Volcano geodesy: Challenges and opportunities for the 21st century, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A, 358, 1547–1566, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2000.0603" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2000.0603</a>, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
Dzurisin, D.: A comprehensive approach to monitoring volcano deformation as
a window on the eruption cycle, Rev. Geophys., 41, 1001, 1–29,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2001RG000107" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2001RG000107</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
Galluzzo, D., Del Pezzo, E., La Rocca, M., and Petrosino, S.: Peak Ground
Acceleration produced by local earthquakes in volcanic areas of Campi
Flegrei and Mt. Vesuvius, Ann. Geophys.-Italy, 47, 1377–1390, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
Gasparini, P. and The TomoVes Project Field Team, TomoVes: A project of
seismic investigation of Mt.Vesuvius, EOS, 79, 229–232, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
Landi, P., Bertagnini, A., and Rosi, M.: Chemical zoning and crystallization mechanisms in the magma chamber of the Pomici di Base plinian eruption of Somma-Vesuvius (Italy), Contrib. Mineral. Petrol., 135, 179–197, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s004100050505" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s004100050505</a>, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
Mastrolorenzo, G., Palladino, D., Vecchio, G., and Taddeucci, J.: The 472&thinsp;A.D.
Pollena eruption of Somma-Vesuvius (Italy) and its environmental impact at
the end of the Roman Empire, J. Volcanol. Geoth. Res., 113, 19–36, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Meo, M., Tammaro, U., and Capuano, P.: Influence of topography on ground
deformation at Mt. Vesuvius (Italy) by finite element modelling,
Int. J. Nonlin. Mech., 43, 178–186,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnonlinmec.2007.12.005" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnonlinmec.2007.12.005</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
Mogi, K.: Relations between the Eruptions of Various Volcanoes and the
Deformations of the Ground Surfaces around them, B. Earthq. Res. I. Tokyo, 36, 99–134, 1958.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
Pennetta, M.: Beach Erosion in the Gulf of Castellammare di Stabia in
Response to the Trapping of Longshore Drifting Sediments of the Gulf of
Napoli (Southern Italy), Geosciences, 8, 235,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences8070235" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences8070235</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
Pingue, F., Bottiglieri, M., Godano, C., Obrizzo, F., Tammaro, U., Esposito,
T., and Serio, C.: Spatial and temporal distribution of vertical ground
movements at Mt. Vesuvius in the period 1973–2009, Ann. Geophys.-Italy, 56,
4, S0451, <a href="https://doi.org/10.4401/ag-6457" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.4401/ag-6457</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
Rolandi, G., Bellucci, F., and Cortini, M.: A new model for formation of the
Somma Caldera, Miner. Petrol., 80, 27–44,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00710-003-0018-0" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00710-003-0018-0</a>, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
Tammaro, U., De Martino, P., Obrizzo, F., Brandi, G., D'Alessandro, A.,
Dolce, M., Malaspina, S., Serio, C., and Pingue, F.: Somma Vesuvius volcano:
ground deformations from CGPS observations (2001–2012), Ann. Geophys.-Italy, 56, S0456; <a href="https://doi.org/10.4401/ag-6462" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.4401/ag-6462</a>, 2013.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
Zollo, A., Gasparini, P., Virieux, J., Le Meur, H., De Natale, G., Biella,
G., Boschi, E., Capuano, P., De Franco, R., Dell'Aversana, P., De Matteis,
R., Guerra, I., Iannaccone, G., Mirabile, L., and Vilardo, G.: Seismic evidence
for a low velocity zone in the upper crust beneath Mount Vesuvius, Science,
274, 592–594, 1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
