Tunneling and Underground Construction GSP 242 ASCE 2014 143

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by GADJAH MADA UNIVERSITY on 03/04/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Tunneling-Induced Settlement Evaluation for Underneath Existing Tunnel

Yi Zhao1S.M. ASCE and Taiyue Qi2

1
4190 Bell Engineering Center, Department of Civil Engineering, University of
Arkansas at Fayetteville, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA; yxz062@uark.edu
2
School of Civil Engineering, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu 610031, PR
China;qitaiyue58@126.com

ABSTRACT: The relationship between subsurface settlement and ground volume

loss caused by the excavation of a new tunnel underneath the existing tunnel was
analyzed and identified based on Mairs theory. Subsurface settlements were
determined by equations and a 3-D finite element numerical modeling. The
settlement and ground volume loss control measurements for the tunneling-induced
settlements in the existing tunnel were proposed and demonstrated by using 3-D finite
element analysis. The large pipe-shed (LPS)ground stabilization was utilized to
perform ground stabilization prior to the new tunnel excavation. The effects of using
LPS ground stabilization on ground volume loss control were evaluated by
comparing with non-LPS tunneling situations. The results indicate that the LPS
ground stabilization can significantly reduce the settlement of an existing tunnel
caused by the excavation of a new tunnel, and the ground volume loss method has
proven to be an effective approach to estimate the effects of LPS ground stabilization.

INTRODUCTION

At present, ground settlement caused by the excavation of new tunnels has been a
great issue in complex construction situations. Due to limited underground space or
unchangeable design layout, new tunnels will inevitably go under existing
underground structures, such as pipelines, tunnels, underground metro stations and
other similar structures. The excavation of a new tunnel will induce displacement in
these underground structures. Numerous damages in underground structures were
reported in the past decades (Kastner et al. 2003; Kunita et al. 1994).It is
indispensable to investigate the tunneling effects imposed on the above existing
structures although it is difficult to estimate the influence of new excavation activities
on them. Little research has focused on the evaluation of tunneling-induced
subsurface settlements. Mairet al. (1993) and Loganathan (1998) proposed theoretical
methods to estimate subsurface settlements caused by new tunnel excavation, but
little effort was put into ground volume loss control as well as the assessment of

Tunneling and Underground Construction

 Tunneling and Underground Construction GSP 242 ASCE 2014 144

enhancement measurement in the ground. Based on Mairs theory of immediate

settlement of soil this paper develops a method to bridge the subsurface settlement to
the ground volume loss. The ground volume loss will be determined from measuring
the subsurface settlement of existing underground structures. Furthermore, the ground
volume loss as well as the subsurface settlement can be significantly reduced by
applying large pipe-shed (LPS) enhancements prior to the excavation of the new
tunnel. The effects of LPS ground stabilization with the control of subsurface
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by GADJAH MADA UNIVERSITY on 03/04/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

settlement are estimated by evaluating the ground volume loss. The methods
proposed in this paper provide avalid approach to estimate and reduce tunnel-induced
displacement on existing underground structures.

REVIEW OF GROUND MOVEMENT

The amplitude and distribution of the tunneling-induced ground settlement in both

soft clay and stiff rock depend not only on ground losses in the tunnel but also on the
long-term interaction between the ambient soil and support systems. Due to
tunneling-induced displacement, huge damages to existing buildings, bridges and
surrounding infrastructure were reported (Kastner et al. 2003;Kunita et al. 1994).
Thus it is necessary to analyze the ground settlement profiles as well as to develop
technique to reduce or eliminate the effects of the tunneling on the structure of the
facility above. Field measurements of surface settlement profiles above the tunnels
were extensively utilized and considerable results were obtained (Peck 1969;
OReilly and New 1982; Rankin 1988).The Gaussian distribution, shown in Fig. 1, is
one of the most representative methods when analyzing the surface settlements
caused by the construction of the tunnel. The distribution of the vertical surface
trough is established by Peck (1969), in which is defined as Eq. 1.Extensive
research involving field measurement and model tests in the laboratory has been
explored to estimate the value of parameter for different ground conditions (Peck
1969;O'Reilly and New 1982; Mair 1993;Atkinson & Potts 1977).
x2
S S max exp( ) (1)
2t 2
where: is the maximum settlement, which occurs above the tunnel center line;the
parameter is the horizontal distance from the tunnel centerline to the
inflection point of the settlement trough; is the horizontal distance from the tunnel
centerline, which is transverse to the tunnel axis.

Tunneling and Underground Construction

 Tunneling and Underground Construction GSP 242 ASCE 2014 145
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by GADJAH MADA UNIVERSITY on 03/04/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 1. Surface and subsurface settlement profiles (modified from Peck 1969).

The tunneling-induced settlements are characterized as the volume loss which

includes the movement of ground into the face of the tunnel and radial movement to
the tunnel axis resulting from the reductions in supporting pressure. The value of is
highly dependent on the type of soil, the tunneling method, the depth of the tunnel,
and the length of time in providing active support system during construction (Mair et
al. 1993).The volume of the settlement trough (per meter length of tunnel) is
presented as Eq. 2 (Mair et al. 1993).It can be seen from Eq. 4that the maximum
surface settlement above a tunnel, for a given volume loss and tunnel diameter,
as well as for a specific value of , is inversely proportional to the depth of tunnel.

Vs 2 iS max (2)
4Vs
VL (3)
D2
0.313VL D 2
Smax (4)
KZ 0
The tunneling-induced subsurface settlement is of significance when analyzing the
effects of boring a new tunnel on the above existing underground infrastructures. For
instance, the pipelines, pile foundation, tunnel, and other facilities were found to be
affected by the tunneling underneath them (Vorster et al. 2005; Harris et al. 1994). It
is assumed that the shape of the subsurface settlement profiles can be characterized
by a Gaussian distribution (see the lower curve in Fig. 1). Thus the Eq. 4 is also
applicable by substituting the distance above the tunnel axis for , which can
be presented as the Eq. 5-8 proposed by Mairet al. (1993).

Tunneling and Underground Construction

 Tunneling and Underground Construction GSP 242 ASCE 2014 146
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by GADJAH MADA UNIVERSITY on 03/04/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 2. The variation of subsurface settlement trough width parameter with

depth for tunnels (modified from Mair et al. 1993).

The relationship of and (or ) is shown in Fig. 2, and can be determined by

Eq. 5 and Eq. 6.CombiningEq. 5 and Eq. 6, the parameter can be expressed as Eq.
7.Therefore the maximum subsurface settlement can be obtained as Eq. 8.For
any given depth of , the subsurface settlement can be calculated by substituting
in the Eq. 1.
i z
0.175 0.325(1 ) (5)
Z0 z0
i K ( z z0 ) (6)
z
0.175 0.325(1 )
z0
K (7)
z
1
z0
Smax 1.25VL R

R z
0.175 0.325(1 ) z0 (8)
z0
where: is the radius of the tunnel.

Tunneling and Underground Construction

 Tunneling and Underground Construction GSP 242 ASCE 2014 147

REVIEW OF ENGINEERING SITUATION

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by GADJAH MADA UNIVERSITY on 03/04/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

(a) In-situ survey (b) Three dimension

model
Fig.3.The relationship between the New Jiuyanshan Tunnel and the
Hongshigou II Tunnel.

Note: Layer 1: Medium sandy loess, Layer 2: Stiff sandy loess, Layer 3:
Clayey loess, Layer 4: Weathered shale, Layer 5: Shale. (unit: m).
Fig. 4. The engineering geology conditions at the tunnel construction area.

The New Jiuyanshan Tunnel, located in Yanan in Shanxi Province in China, is

designed to be a railway tunnel (9353m in length) which would go underneath the
existing Hongshigou II Tunnel. The Hongshigou II Tunnel is located at the depth of
52.2m below the ground surface while the NewJiuyanshan Tunnel is located at the
depth of 60m below the ground surface, and thus the nearest distance between the two
tunnels is about 7.8m (see Fig. 3). The geology conditions for the construction site are
presented in Fig. 4.
Unstable geological conditions (loose loess, crushed shale, landslide and other
geological phenomenon) are encountered in this area (loess plateau), and thus strict
tunneling-induced settlement control methods are required during tunnel construction.
In order to control the settlement of the existing Hongshigou II Tunnel, the large
pipe-shed (LPS) advanced enhancement method was selected as the ground
stabilization method considering the factors of engineering safety, technical reliability

Tunneling and Underground Construction

 Tunneling and Underground Construction GSP 242 ASCE 2014 148

and economic feasibility. The LPS enhancement method was utilized above the new
tunnel vault zone, which is shown in Fig. 5.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by GADJAH MADA UNIVERSITY on 03/04/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 5. The three dimension model for the tunnel excavation.

SETTLEMENT AND GROUND VOLUME LOSS CONTROL ANALYSES

Subsurface settlements and ground volume loss

According to Mairs theory of immediate settlement of soil due to tunneling, the
relationship between the settlement at the depth of the existing tunnel and volume
loss is analyzed based on the New Jiuyanshan Tunnel project in China (Mair et al.

Fig.6.The relationship of subsurface settlement and ground volume loss.

1993). The subsurface settlement will increase with the increment of volume loss,
which is shown in Fig.6.The subsurface settlements are calculated by Eq. 8. The
depth value chosen for calculation is 60 m, and the diameter D of the tunnel
chosen is 13.8 m. The subsurface settlements have a linear relationship with the
ground volume loss, and Eq. 9 can be derived from Fig.6.
13
S max 23.353VL 110 (9)
It is difficult to directly determine the ground volume loss, while it is possible to
examine the relationship between the subsurface settlement and ground volume loss.

Tunneling and Underground Construction

 Tunneling and Underground Construction GSP 242 ASCE 2014 149

Eq. 9 provides an example to determine the ground volume loss from the subsurface
settlement. In practice it is convenient to measure the surface or subsurface
settlement. For instance, the subsurface settlement can be obtained through
measuring the displacement of existing underground structures. In this paper, the
existing tunnel provides an example to measure the subsurface settlements.
Furthermore, the ground volume loss due to tunneling can be identified.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by GADJAH MADA UNIVERSITY on 03/04/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

3-D finite element modeling analyses

To analyze the effect of the tunneling-induced settlement of the existing
Hongshigou II Tunnel, as well as recommend the optimum parameters of the
supporting system, the FLAC finite element analysis, based on the construction
scheme and geological data, is used to simulate the excavation of the New Jiuyanshan
Tunnel. The simulation model has the dimension of 100m40m99m (length
width height), including 54,566 grid cell elements (see Fig.5). The cross section of
the New Jiuyanshan Tunnel is approximately in the shape of a horseshoe which has a
wide span of 13.8m and 11.6m in height. In the model, the strata were assumed as
strain-softening materials, while the Mohr-Coulomb material was utilized in
simulating the reinforced cable. The large pipe-shed (LPS) was accomplished by
enhancing the parameters of the corresponding elements. The parameters of the strata
and supporting systems used in this model are presented in Table 1 and Table 2,
respectively.

Table 1. The Material Properties of Strata for New Jiuyanshan Tunnel.

Bulk Shear Bulk Internal

Thickness Cohesion
Strata modulus modulus density friction angle
(m) (MPa) (MPa) (Kg/m3) () (MPa)
Medium
34.9 560 22 1650 13 0.01
sandy loess
Stiff sandy
16.0 690 35 1850 15 0.02
loess
Clayey loess 34.0 1200 48 1950 18 0.05
Weathered
51.0 2300 69 2100 27 0.07
shale
Shale 24.1 36000 111 2400 42 0.10

Table 2.The Parameters of the Supporting System (Large Pipe-Shed).

Shear Internal friction
Bulk modulus Bulk density Cohesion
modulus angle
(MPa) (MPa) (Kg/m3) () (MPa)
600 210 2350 40 0.250

Tunneling and Underground Construction

 Tunneling and Underground Construction GSP 242 ASCE 2014 150

The tunneling-induced settlement in existing tunnel

It is estimated that the closer the existing tunnel is to the new tunnel face, the
greater the settlement that would be expected. Typically, symmetrical mechanical
properties on the existing tunnel were expected to be observed when the new tunnel
was located directly below the existing tunnel (Mohamad et al. 2010). Therefore, the
section of existing tunnel that is corresponding to the intersecting part of the new
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by GADJAH MADA UNIVERSITY on 03/04/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

tunnel and the existing tunnel is selected as the point of interest. The excavating
length for every step is 1.25m, and there are 32 steps in this model, and thus the total
excavating length is 40m.
The settlements at the vault and bottom (y=15m) of the existing tunnel caused by
the excavation of the new tunnel are analyzed and the results are presented in Fig.7(a)
and Fig.7(b). The settlement curves caused by the excavation of the new tunnel
correspond to the excavation step. It indicates that the excavation around the existing
tunnel may cause significant displacement of both the vault and bottom of the
existing tunnel. For instance, the excavation step 15 and step 20 (z15, z20 in
Fig.7(a)) of the new tunnel will result in about 14mm settlement at the vault of the
existing settlement; the excavation step15 and step 20 (z15, z20 in Fig.7(b)) of the
new tunnel will result in about 8.3-9.5mm settlement at the vault of the existing
settlement. In addition, the vault of the existing tunnel is much more affected than
the bottom of the existing tunnel by the excavation of the new tunnel.

(a) At the vault (b) At the bottom

Note:z1stands for step 1, z2 stands for step2, and z32 is the same like.
Fig.7. Tunneling-induced settlement of the Hongshigou Tunnel II (with LPS).

Tunneling-induced settlement control

In order to reduce the influence of excavating the new tunnel (New Jiuyanshan
Tunnel) on the existing tunnel (Hongshigou II Tunnel), Large Pipe-Shed (LPS) was
recommended during the construction of the new tunnel. Two excavating cases (case
1: excavating without LPS; case 2: excavating with LPS) are simulated in two
models, and the results are presented in Fig.8 and Fig.9, respectively. Five positions
along the excavation centerline of the new tunnel are chosen as the monitor point, and
they are: y=10m, y=15m, y=20m, y=25m, y=30m. The existing tunnel is located
between y=15m and y=20m.

Tunneling and Underground Construction

 Tunneling and Underground Construction GSP 242 ASCE 2014 151

During the construction of tunneling without LPS (case 1), significant ground
settlement of the existing tunnel is presented in both Fig.8(a) and Fig.9(a). The
ground near the existing tunnel generates large settlement ranging from 160mm ~ 834
mm at the depth of the vault. Typically, the vault of the existing tunnel reaches the
peak value of 834mm. However, at the depth of the bottom of the existing tunnel, the
ground around the existing tunnel has large movement range from 232mm
(settlement) to 187mm (upheaval). Typically the bottom of the existing tunnel
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by GADJAH MADA UNIVERSITY on 03/04/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

reaches the peak value of 187mm of upheaval, which is probably caused by the
discharge of stress in the ground. All these displacements cannot meet the settlement
requirement (30 mm, given by Brandl 2004), and may result in serious damage to the
existing structures.

(a) Excavating without LPS (b) Excavating with LPS

Fig.8.Comparison of the tunneling-induced settlement at the bottom of the
Hongshigou Tunnel II.

(a) Excavating without LPS (b) Excavating with LPS

Fig.9.Comparison of the tunneling-induced settlement at the vault of the
Hongshigou Tunnel II.

The settlement of the ground can be greatly reduced by applying the LPS during
tunneling, which can be shown in Fig.8(b) and Fig.9(b). The ground settlement at the
depth of the vault of the existing tunnel is reduced within 14mm-18mm. The ground

Tunneling and Underground Construction

 Tunneling and Underground Construction GSP 242 ASCE 2014 152

settlement at the depth of the bottom of the existing tunnel is reduced to within 4mm-
26mm. All these displacements can meet the settlement control requirement (30mm,
given by Brandl 2004).
The significant effects of applying LPS into the excavating process are shown in
Fig. 10(a) and (b). The settlement of the vault and bottom of the existing tunnel, both
increases with the new tunnel excavating without LPS, can dramatically be reduced
by applying the support LPS. For instance, it indicates that the settlement at the
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by GADJAH MADA UNIVERSITY on 03/04/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

bottom of the existing tunnel will be 138mm for the case of tunneling without LPS,
while the settlement will be reduced to 14.7mm when tunneling with LPS. Thus, the
LPS will significantly reduce the displacement caused by the excavation of the new
tunnel.

(a) At the vault (b) At the bottom

Fig.10.The influence of LPS on the settlement of the Hongshigou Tunnel II.

Tunneling-induced settlement and volume loss

Ground volume loss due to tunneling can be controlled by applying LPS
enhancement prior to excavation of the new tunnel. Based on Mairs theory of
immediate settlement of soil due to tunneling and numerical modeling, the subsurface
settlement and corresponding volume loss are examined. The results are presented in
Table 3. It indicates that the application of LPS enhancement significantly reduces
the ground volume loss. Without using LPS the volume loss at the bottom and vault
of the existing tunnel is 5.9% and 35.48%, respectively. The ground volume loss is
significantly reduced within 0.62%-0.63% when applying LPS enhancement.

Table 3. The volume loss control with the application of LPS enhancement.
Position Enhancement Settlement, (mm) VL, (%)
No LPS -138 5.91
Bottom
LPS -14.7 0.63
No LPS -828.5 35.48
Vault
LPS -14.5 0.62

Tunneling and Underground Construction

 Tunneling and Underground Construction GSP 242 ASCE 2014 153

CONCLUSIONS

In this article, the subsurface settlements as well as ground volume loss caused by
the excavating of the new tunnel are analyzed. The relationship between subsurface
settlement and ground volume loss is derived based on Mairs theory of immediate
settlement of soil. LPS ground stabilization technique is applied prior to the
construction of the new tunnel. The results of this study are summarized below:
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by GADJAH MADA UNIVERSITY on 03/04/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

1) Subsurface settlement can be determined based on Mairs theory.

2) The relationship between subsurface settlement and ground volume loss can be
identified for a given project. The ground volume loss can be determined by
measuring the subsurface settlement.
3) The tunneling-induced subsurface settlement and ground volume loss can be
controlled through LPS enhancement prior to the excavation of new tunnel.
4) Ground volume loss provides a practical method to evaluate the damage of
underground structures caused by the excavation of the new tunnel.

REFERENCES

Atkinson, J.H., Potts, D.M., (1977).Subsidence above shallow tunnels in soft

ground. Journal of GeoenvironmentEngineering Division, ASCE, Vol. GT4,
pp:307-325.
Brandl, H. (2004). Geotechnical aspects for high-speed railways. In: Correira AG
and Loizos A (eds) Geotechnics in Pavement and Raiwlay Design and
Construction. Millpress, pp:117-132.
Harris, D.I., Mair, R.J., Love, J.P., Taylor, R.N. & Henderson, T.O.
(1994).Observations of ground and structure movements for compensation
grouting during tunnel construction at Waterloo station.Gotechnique, 44(4),691-
713.
Kastner, R., Standing, J., Kjekstad, O. (2003). Avoiding Damage Caused by Soil-
structure Interaction: Lessons learnt from Case Histories.London: Thomas
Telford, pp: 46-56.
Kunita, M., Takemata, R., &Iai, Y. (1994).Restoration of a tunnel damaged by
earthquake.Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 9(4), 439-448.
Loganathan, N. and Poulos, H. (1998).Analytical Prediction for Tunneling-Induced
Ground Movements in Clays.Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenviromental
Engineering, 124(9), 846856.
Mair, R. J., Taylor, R. N., and Bracegirdle, A. (1993). Subsurface settlement profiles
above tunnels in clays.Geotechnique, 43(2), 315-320.
Mohamad, H and Bennett, PJ and Soga, K and Mair, RJ and Bowers,
K.(2010).Behaviour of an old masonry tunnel due to tunnelling-induced ground
settlement.Geotechnique, 60(12), 927-938.
OReilly, M. P., and New, B.M.(1982).Settlement above tunnels in the United
Kingdom-Their magnitude and prediction.Tunneling82, London Institute of
Mining and Metallury, 173-181.

Tunneling and Underground Construction

 Tunneling and Underground Construction GSP 242 ASCE 2014 154

Peck, R. B. (1969). Deep excavations and tunnelling in soft ground.Proceedings,

7th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering,
Mexico City, pp: 225-290.
Rankin, W.J. (1988). Ground movements resulting from urban tunnelling: prediction
and effects.Engineering Geology of Underground Movements: 7992.
Vorster, T., Klar, A., Soga, K., and Mair, R.(2005).Estimating the Effects of
Tunneling on Existing Pipelines.Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenviromental
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by GADJAH MADA UNIVERSITY on 03/04/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Engineering, 131(11), 13991410.

Tunneling and Underground Construction