Effects of Pipe Roof Supports and the

Tunnels Excavation on the Ground

Settlement
Mohd Fandey Abdul Latif
School of Civil Engineering, USM, Engineering Campus,
14300 Nibong Tebal, Seberang Perai Selatan, P. Pinang, Malaysia

Mohd Ashraf Mohamad Ismail (Dr.)

School of Civil Engineering, USM, Engineering Campus,
14300 Nibong Tebal, Seberang Perai Selatan, P. Pinang, Malaysia
e-mail: ceashraf@eng.usm.my

Mohamad Razip Selamat (Prof.)

School of Civil Engineering, USM, Engineering Campus,
14300 Nibong Tebal, Seberang Perai Selatan, P. Pinang, Malaysia
e-mail: cemrs@eng.usm.my

Soon Min Ng
School of Civil Engineering, USM, Engineering Campus,
14300 Nibong Tebal, Seberang Perai Selatan, P. Pinang, Malaysia
e-mail: soonmin1612@hotmail.com

ABSTRACT
Tunneling is one of the challenging tasks in civil engineering because it involves a variety of
decision making and engineering judgment based on prediction and experience. One of the
challenges is to construct tunnel under a sensitive area with shallow overburden in which the
ground settlement is inevitable. This paper discussed the interaction between twin parallel
tunnels with shallow overburden and the tunnel supports parameters that provide information on
ground settlement prediction using 2-D elasto-plastic finite element analysis. The objective of
this study is to determine the magnitude of ground settlement induced by the interaction
between a twin parallel tunnel that supported by a method called pipe roof system. The system
acts as a support to protect the above ground structure during tunnel excavation with different
horizontal spacing at a constant depth of 10 m. Composite beam is designed to represent the
pipe roof system which consists of steel pipes, grout infill and rock properties that were
combined using weighted averages and an equivalent rock mass strength derivation. The result
shows a different value of ground settlement at different spacing between the tunnels with and
without the pipe roof system. The highest magnitude of settlement recorded for pipe roof and
non-pipe roof tunnel were 6.8 x 10-3 mm and 8.1 x 10-3 respectively. The result obtained
delivers a great portion of engineering justification that may help engineer to make important
decisions during the planning, design and construction stages of tunnels with shallow
overburden.
KEYWORDS: Ground settlement, twin tunnels, pipe roof system, numerical analysis,
shallow overburden.

- 1045 -
 Vol. 18 [2012], Bund. E 1046

INTRODUCTION
Tunneling in shallow depth areas is always a challenge for all stakeholders involved in the
construction such as the client and the engineers. The increasing demand for urban space together
with other existing obstacles such as high rise and historical buildings had forces future
infrastructure to be carried out underground [1]. In addition, the increasing pressure on land use
especially in the urban area has lead to escalation in the number of tunneling project such as for
flood mitigation and transportation service purposes. This is due to the increasing number of
population in an area that derives the demand on the efficiency of public transport and
transportation system. For example, metro tunnels were constructed to reduce the use of land on the
ground and to avoid demolition of pre-existing or historical buildings for the purpose of selecting
route location alignment.
In urban tunneling, the consciousness of preservation and care for the surrounding environment
has raised the level of difficulty and challenge especially in the selection of suitable tunnel support
system. The most essential part of determining the types of support are the stability of the earth
materials that is being excavated, the quality of the building and structures surrounding the area and
the regions within the tunnel where field stresses have been changed during project phases [2].
Thus, all the factors that influence the strength properties and surface settlement of the underground
must be investigated carefully in order to reduce the surface settlement by means of engineering
controlled [3].
Pipe roof is one of the tunnel support system used during a shallow tunnel construction. The
installation of the support utilizes the area around the crown and sides of the tunnel wall. It acts as a
temporary reinforcement to enhance the soil structure before any excavation being held. However,
excavation of shallow tunnel normally leads to unavoidable amount of surface settlement especially
in the excavation of soft soil formation and weathered weak rocks. The surface settlement is caused
by a combination of ground loss at the tunnel, which includes the ground loss at the tunnel face,
convergence of the tunnel opening and the closure of the physical gap between the concrete lining
[4]. The magnitude of intensity and extension of settlement significantly depends on several factors
such as physical, mechanical and hydraulic properties of the interested rock/soil formation,
geomorphologic condition, tunnel overburden, tunnel cross-sectional area, excavation methods and
construction phases [5]. These problems become more critical when excavation performed below
an urban or congested area where the interaction between the tunnel and buildings foundation is
crucial. The dynamic loads created by moving objects add an extra displacement above the
excavated tunnel due to the densification or swelling effect of the overburden. Thus, study on this
problem is crucial in order to predict the amount of ground settlement to enable preventive measure
can be taken when and where necessary during the tunnel excavation.

THE EFFECT OF TUNNELING ON GROUND

SETTLEMENT
The primary reason for ground movements above the tunnel, also known as surface settlements
or settlement trough is convergence of the ground after excavation, which changes the in situ stress
state of the ground and results in stress relief [2]. Short-term settlements usually occur during or
after excavation within a certain period of time by assuming that the soil is in the state of dominant
undrained condition. In long-term settlements, the conditions are mostly due to creep, stress
redistribution, consolidation of soil after underground water drained, and elimination of pore water
 Vol. 18 [2012], Bund. E 1047

pressure inside the soil; thus, it may take a few months to a few years to reach stabilized level. The
underground are so unique in many ways that engineer will faces new challenges and obstacles in
monitoring the quality of the underground condition in their routine works. Generally most tunnel
design and construction are based on the observational design and construction method which was
widely applied in most of the underground construction throughout the world besides having
individuals with different experience on site [6].

ANALYSIS OF TWIN TUNNELS INTERACTION

Numerical modeling is commonly used to present a process of physical and mathematical order
of an idealized conceptual model. This method is a very effective tool in anticipating any possible
effects in the tunnel. In addition, uncertainties that might occur in the tunnel environment can be
replicated using numerical modeling. Even though numerical modeling do not produce an accurate
magnitude of data at full scale, the results are still effective in providing assistance in understanding
the underlying mechanisms exists to provide more options for ground reinforcement and
improvement. Interaction between twin tunnels has long been studied using various approaches
such as physical model, site observation, numerical modeling and empirical analysis [7, 8, 9, 10].
These studies emphasized more on the effect of vertical and horizontal displacement induced by the
excavation of the twin tunnel. The simplest way to predict the settlement above second tunnel is by
observing the pattern or profile of settlement above first tunnel [9]. By taking into account the side
by side tunnels of the same size, the displacements above second tunnel are found based on the
same assumption made for the first tunnel. Other researcher has performed a numerical simulations
by using finite element method (FEM) using PLAXIS 3D [11]. The study comes to the effect of
second tunnel excavation on first tunnel which consider the changes of circumferential
displacement, axial force and bending moment. It shows that the total displacement of first tunnel
peripheral induced by the first and the second tunnel excavation. After the second tunnel
excavation, a small progress of displacement continues, but the trend of the displacement is toward
the second tunnel [11].

NUMERICAL ANALYSIS AND PARAMETERS

SELECTION
Analysis used in this study demonstrated the application of finite element method in 2-D form.
The conceptual model consists of two parallel horseshoe shaped tunnels with 8.5m height and 9m
width. The tunnels are located at depth of zo=10m below the ground surface in weak rock
formation. The main purpose of this study is to understand the interaction between two adjacent
pipe roof tunnels based on the changes in spacing between them which induced the ground
settlement. The sequence of excavation is carried out in two parts which separate the top heading
with diameter of 4.5m to the bottom bench of 4.5m height. The overburden consists of weak rock
mass which need to be supported to avoid cave in or settlement of the ground surface. The pipe roof
method is selected to support the arch of the top heading around the tunnel crown. The pipe roof
and its mechanism are adopted in the numerical modeling using the composite material which acts
as the pipe roof [12]. The composite material consists of steel pipes, grout and rock properties were
combined using weighted averages and an equivalent rock mass strength derivation [13]. The
proper weak rock mass properties are selected based on the Generalized Hoek-Brown criterion as
shown in Table 1.
 Vol. 18 [2012], Bund. E 1048

Table 1: Rock Mass Properties

Geological index, GSI 25
Hoek-Brown constant, mi 10
Intact rock strength, ci 3 MPa
Disturbance factor 0.3
Material Constant, mb 0.342
Material constant, s 9.522 x 10-5
Material constant, a 0.531
Deformation modulus, E 308 MPa

The numerical modeling of the twin tunnel had focused on the effect of ground settlement due
to the interaction between the tunnels. The tunnel spacing interval was chose based on the
correlation with tunnel width, d (0.0d, 0.5d, 1.0d, 2.0d, and 4.0d). The boundary condition that
employed in this numerical analysis is shown in Figure 1. The detail of the composite beam is
displayed in Figure 2 and the specifications of the composite beams are shown in Table 2 as well as
the calculations of the equivalent composite beam that consists of rock, steel pipes and grout.

(-50, 0) X (50, 0)

Z0 = 10m

CL CL

1 3

2 4
Spacing(m)

(-50, -30)
(50, -30)

Figure 2: Boundary condition employed in the numerical modeling

The simulation begins with the setup of boundary condition which having free resistant at the
surface and horizontal restraint at both right and side boundary. The bottom of the boundary
condition was set up to create restraint on both vertical and horizontal direction. The excavation
stages were divided into 4 stages begins with the left side tunnel and ends at the right side tunnel.
The steel frames were installed by defining the liner properties after the excavation of both tunnels
with the stiffness of 30 x 103MPa and 0.1 m thickness. The analysis was performed to observe the
changes of settlement that occur at the ground surface. The change in ground settlement had been
observed when the interval between the two tunnels had been increased. The interval is based on
the distance between the centers of the two tunnels. Thus, to reduce the ground settlement, the
 Vol. 18 [2012], Bund. E 1049

effectiveness of the pipe roof will be further investigated. To install the pipe roof, 1 m width and
0.6 m depth of composite beam is used. The composite beam consists of steel pipes with outer
diameter of 130 mm and 6 mm thickness at 0.5 m spacing. The strength of the steel pipes is 200
MPa. The hollow section of the steel pipes had been filled with grout material with the strength of
30 MPa. During the numerical analysis, the results were compared to the non-pipe roof twin tunnels
which having the same input parameters and model frame.

Table 2: Specifications of the composite beam

Component Area (m2) Strength (MPa) Product
Rock 0.6 x 1.0 0.2 0.120
Steel pipes 2 x 2.700 x 10-3 200 1.080
Grout 2 x 10.539 x 10-3 30 0.632
TOTAL 0.627 1.832

From Table 2, the rock mass strength of the composite beam is to be determined as
1.832/0.627=2.92 MPa.

Table 3: Rock mass parameters for the composite beam using Generalized Hoek-Brown
Failure Criterion
Geological index, GSI 30
Hoek-Brown constant, mi 10
Intact rock strength, ci 35
Disturbance factor 1
Material Constant, mb 0.0674
Material constant, s 8.58 x 10-6
Material constant, a 0.5223
Deformation modulus, E 1250 MPa

Steel pipes Composite beam

0.6 m

Grout 0.6 m
Top heading

0.5 m

Bottom heading
1.0 m

Rock

Figure 3: Details of composite beam [12]

 Vol. 18 [2012], Bund. E 1050

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

The effect of adjacent spacing between twin tunnels on the ground settlement was investigated
by using five different spacing; 0.0d, 0.5d, 1.0d, 2.0d and 4.0d (where d = diameter of tunnel) as
displayed in Figure 5(a) to Figure 5(e). Figure 4(a) and Figure 4(b) present the ground settlement
profile of the non-pipe roof and pipe roof tunnel respectively from the nearest to the farthest
spacing given. As expected, the increase in distance between the twin tunnels decreases the vertical
displacement especially in the centre between the tunnels. The distance between the tunnels were
increased to 50% each time from the current distance and the results show a maximum settlement
from 20 to 30 percents. This is a general trend of ground settlement for any parallel twin tunnel;
however, the percentage was differing from one to another researcher [8, 3, 9, 10, 11]. The ground
settlements are more obvious at the centre between the tunnels. As the spacing reached 2.0d, the
pattern of displacement profile is also changes from V shape to W shape as depicted in Figure 4(a)
and Figure 4(b). This signifies that the maximum ground settlement occurred above the tunnels.
Similarly, at first Bangkok Subway line using shield tunneling method, the maximum surface
settlement occurred above the centerline of first tunnel after the excavation through the section and
normally the Gaussian function trough shape (V shape) was observed [14]. On the other hand, once
the excavation of the second tunnel was made at the section, the trough expanded and shifted
toward the second tunnel.
By comparing the results in Figure 4(a) and Figure 4(b), a significant reduction of 10-20% of
ground settlement was observed after installing the pipe roof system to the tunnels by using the
numerical analysis. Compare to previous research, the result had shown about 45 percent of
maximum settlement reduction from non-pipe roof to pipe roof tunnel [4]. This proved that the
installation of pipe roof able to withstand an amount of settlement of the ground. Nonetheless, the
vertical displacements at second tunnel can be 2-3 times greater than the first tunnel which indicates
that the excavation of the first tunnel render the increment of convergences [3]. Moreover,
analytical method can be done to determine the magnitude of ground settlement of the same tunnel
parameters in this research, however, circular shape tunnel is required where ground loss,
ovalization and vertical movement are to be considered [15, 16].
At the site, optical point was used to provide reading of settlement on the ground while
extensometers were installed around the tunnel wall to monitor convergence. The composite beam
used in this paper is a direct input to the numerical modeling prior to tunnel excavation without
considering the method of installing pipe roof system. In addition, the ground movement during the
installation of composite beam is neglected. The techniques of pipe roof installation are varies
upon the condition of the ground. In most critical ground condition, seepage may appear causing
massive settlement during the installation of pipe roof. Hence, the tunnel must be supported by steel
frame and shotcrete right after each excavation advanced. The steel frame is to be installed to
support the tunnel crown from collapse after excavation being executed. The shotcrete is
pneumatically projected at high velocity onto the tunnel wall and undergoes placement and
compaction at the same time due to the force with which it is projected from the nozzle.
Vol. 18 [2012], Bund. E 1051

Distance from the center of tunnels (m)

0
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60
-0.001

-0.002
0.0d
-0.003 0.5d
Settlement (m)

-0.004 1.0d
2.0d
-0.005
4.0d
-0.006

-0.007

-0.008

-0.009

Figure 4(a): Ground Settlement Profile of Non-Pipe Roof Tunnels Interaction

Distance from the center of tunnels (m)

0
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60
-0.001

-0.002
0.0d
Settlement (m)

-0.003 0.5d
1.0d
-0.004
2.0d
-0.005 4.0d

-0.006

-0.007

-0.008

Figure 4(b): Ground Settlement Profile of Pipe Roof Tunnels Interaction

Vol. 18 [2012
2], Bund. E 1052

Figure
F 5(a): Non-Pipe Roof
R (left) an
nd Pipe Rooff Tunnel (rigght) at 0.0d sspacing

Figure
F 5(b): Non-Pipe Roof
R (left) an
nd Pipe Rooff Tunnel (rigght) at 0.5d sspacing
Vol. 18 [2012
2], Bund. E 1053

Figure
F 5(c): Non-Pipe Roof
R (left) an
nd Pipe Rooff Tunnel (rigght) at 1.0d sspacing

Figure
F 5(d): Non-Pipe Roof
R (left) an
nd Pipe Rooff Tunnel (rigght) at 2.0d sspacing
 Vol. 18 [2
2012], Bun
nd. E 1054

ure 5(e): Non-Pipe

Figu N Rooof (left) andd Pipe Rooff Tunnel (right) at 4.0dd spacing

CONCLU
C USIONS
S
The interacttion betweenn twin tunneels was analyzed by using 2D finitee element method m to
inveestigate the performance
p of pipe roof system. Inn this study, the pipe rooof is represennted as a
commposite beam m consists oof steel pipes, grout and rock properrties combination using weighted
w
averrages and ann equivalentt rock mass strength derrivation. Thhe geotechniccal propertiees of the
grouund were sellected basedd on Hoek-B Brown criteriion. The resu ults from thhe numerical analysis
show w that the veertical displaccement decreeased as the spacing betw ween the twiins tunnels inncreased.
The maximum vertical
v displaacement wass observed att the centre between
b the tunnels
t and gradually
g
movves towards above
a the tunnnels. The reeduction of maximum
m setttlement of 20-30%
2 was recorded
as thhe distance between thee tunnels inccrease graduually. After the t spacing between thee tunnels
reacched 4.0d, thee interactionn between thee tunnels hass become lesss significant.. The trend ofo ground
settllement betweeen the tunneels is expected to be the same in anyy twin tunnels constructioon except
withh a differentt magnitude.. The compaarison betweeen non-pipee roof and pipe p roof tunnnel had
show wn a significcant reduction of 10-20% % in ground settlement.
s T proved thhat the installlation of
This
pipee roof is ablee to reduce thet amount of o ground seettlement. Thhus, it can be b concludedd that the
distaance betweeen the tunneels plays ann important factor in deetermining thhe characterristics of
grouund settlemen nt besides thhe effectiveness of the pippe roof as a support systtem. The effeect of the
pipee roof was simmulated in tw wo-dimensioonal form durring the excaavation although the effecctiveness
of thhe pipe roof system still can be furth her investigatted in the fo
orm of three dimensionall form by
conssidering the advancing effect
e and sequence of exxcavation sin nce the grou und settlemennt is also
effeccted by otherr factors suchh as ground loss, methodd of excavatio on and overb burden depthh.

ACK
KNOWLED
DGEMEN
NT

The authors greatly apprreciate the fin

nancial assistance from USM
U Short Term
T Grant thhat made
this research posssible.
 Vol. 18 [2012], Bund. E 1055

REFERENCES

[1] Eder S., Poscher G. And Kohl B. (2004) Tunnelling in Urbanised Areas Geotechnical
Case Studies at Different Project Stages, Engineering Geology for Infrastructure Planning in
Europe, Vol. 4, pp. 435-443.
[2] Ocak I. (2008) Control of Surface Settlements with Umbrella Arch Method in Second
Stage Excavations of Istanbul Metro, Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, Vol. 23,
pp. 674-681.
[3] Karakus M., Ozsan A. And Baarr H. (2006) Finite Element Analysis for the Twin
Metro Tunnel Constructed in Ankara Clay, Turkey, Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the
Environment, Vol. 66, No. 1, pp. 71-79.
[4] Tan W. L. And Ranjith P. G. (2008) Numerical Analysis of Pipe Roof Reinforcement in
Soft Ground Tunnelling, The 16th ASCE Engineering Mechanics Conference, University of
Washington, Seattle, 16-18 July 2008.
[5] Barbieri G. And Collotta T. (2010) Subsidence Induced by Shallow Tunnels
Construction: A Simplified Approach to the Risk-of-Damage Band Evaluation, The European
Rock Mechanics Symposium (EUROCK), Lausanne, Switzerland, pp. 475-478.
[6] Lee Y. Z., Schubert W. And Kim C. Y. (2005) The Influence of the Round Length on
the Stability of Tunnel Face and Unsupported Span, Underground Space Use: Analysis of The
Past and Lessons for the Future, Vol. 1, pp. 211-216.
[7] Mirhabibi A. And Soroush A. (2012) Effects of Surface Buildings on Twin Tunnelling-
Induced Ground Settlements, Tunnelling and underground Space Technology, Vol. 29, Issues 1-
2, pp. 40-51.
[8] Chakeri H., Hasanpour R., Ali-Hindistan M. And nver B. (2010) Analysis of
Interaction between Tunnels in Soft Ground by 3D Numerical Modelling, Bulletin of
Engineering Geology and the Environment, Vol. 70, No. 3, pp. 439-448.
[9] Chapman D.N, Rogers C. D. F. And Hunt D. V. L. (2004) Predicting the Settlements
above Twin Tunnels Constructed in Soft Ground, Tunnelling and underground Space
Technology, Vol. 19, Issues 4-5, pp. 378.
[10] Chenade F. H. And Shahrour I. (2008) Numerical Analysis of the Interaction between
Twin-Tunnels: Influence of the Realative Position and Construction Procedure, Tunnelling and
Underground Space Technology, Vol. 23, pp. 210-214.
[11] Afifipour M., Sharifzadeh M., Shahriar K. And Jamshidi H. (2011) Interaction of Twin
Tunnels and Shallow Foundation at Zand Underpass, Shiraz Metro, Iran, Tunnelling and
Underground Space Technology, Vol. 26, pp. 356-363.
[12] Hefny A.M., Tan W.L., Ranjith P., Sharma J. And Zhao J. (2012) Numerical Analysis
for Umbrella Arch Method in Shallow Large Scale Excavation in Weak Rock, Tunnelling and
underground Space Technology, Vol. 19, Issues 4-5, pp. 500.
[13] Hoek E. And Brown E. T. (1997) Practical Estimates of Rock Mass Strenght,
International Journal for rock Mechanic and mining Science and Geomechanics Abstract, Vol.
34, pp. 1165-1186.
[14] Phienwej N., Sirivachiraporn A., Timpong S., Tavaranum S. And Suwansawat S. (2006)
Characteristics of Ground Movements from Shield Tunnelling of First Bangkok Subway Line,
International Symposium on Underground Excavation and Tunnelling, pp. 319-330.
 Vol. 18 [2012], Bund. E 1056

[15] Gonzlez C. And Sagaseta C. (2001) Patterns of Soil Deformations around Tunnels.
Application to the Extension of Madrid Metro, Computer and Geotechnics, Vol. 28, pp. 445-468.
[16] Verruijt A. And Booker R. (1996) Surface Settlements due to Deformation of a tunnel in
an Elastic Half Plane, Gotechnique, Vol. 46, No. 4, pp. 753-756.

2013, EJGE