PSI - Issue 78

Vincenzo Calvanese et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 78 (2026) 1134–1142

1141

3.2. The monitoring of the Insula Meridionalis As far as the structural design is oriented to intervene with local and minimum work in order to be less invasive in the original structure, it is fundamental to monitor the insula Meridionalis part that is more vulnerable. For this reason, a section of the Insula's facade will be monitored using sensors and a Leica MS60 MultiStation robotic total station (see in Fig. 7 the equipment and the monitored area). This instrument allows for multiple surveying modes with a single device. The MS60 model can function as a total station, but it also performs scans at a maximum speed of 30,000 points per second. Its scanner function, utilizing digital imaging, enables measurement operations without the need for mini-prisms. This monitoring, without any visible prisms or sensors, will allow us to evaluate any deformation and movement in the future.

Fig. 7 Monitoring: The Total Station and the monitored structures.

4. Conclusions Executing work in the archaeological field demands a meticulous understanding of materials and construction details. This is crucial to limit interventions and avoid compromising the originality of the historical-archaeological entity. Therefore, an iterative, step-by-step approach is essential. This method allows for the calibration of interventions based on knowledge acquired during the process of diagnostic and archaeological investigations. Ultimately, this ensures adherence to restoration principles and guarantees the safety of both the asset and individuals, considering not only static loads but also other inherent risks. The extensive experience gained from employing a multidisciplinary approach to conservation design is crucial for developing effective guidelines to protect archaeological sites from seismic and other dynamic events. Given the current absence of specific seismic regulations within the field of archaeology, these comprehensive insights could be of great help for the practitioners in the sectors. Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank Giuseppe Mastrangelo and Valentino Limata for their kind support for the images. References P. Mighetto, Insula Meridionalis di Pompei, in “Bollettino degli Scavi di Pompei”, 01. 2024. https://pompeiisites.org/bollettino-degli-scavi-di pompei/insula-meridionalis-di-pompeibollettino-2024-n-01/(in Italian). F. Lorenzoni, M.R. Valluzzi, C. Modena, 2019. Seismic assessment and numerical modelling of the Sarno Baths, Pompeii, Journal of Cultural heritage, DOI:10.1016/j.culher.2019.04.017 L. Gambilongo, N. Chieffo, P. B. Lourenço, 2024 A comprehensive approach to assess the seismic vulnerability of archaeological sites: the Wupatki Pueblo in Arizona, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 22:4413 – 4445 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-024-01942-9.