Engineering with Computers

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-018-0615-5

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Prediction of building damage induced by tunnelling

through an optimized artificial neural network
S. Moosazadeh1 · E. Namazi2 · H. Aghababaei1 · A. Marto3 · H. Mohamad4 · M. Hajihassani5 

Received: 22 December 2017 / Accepted: 8 May 2018

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2018

Abstract
Ground surface movement due to tunnelling in urban areas imposes strains to the adjacent buildings through distortion and
rotation, and may consequently cause structural damage. The methods of building damage estimation are generally based on
a two-stage procedure in which ground movement in the greenfield condition is estimated empirically, and then, a separate
method based on structural mechanic principles is used to assess the damage. This paper predicts the building damage based
on a model obtained from artificial neural network and a particle swarm optimization algorithm. To develop the model, the
input and output parameters were collected from Line No. 2 of the Karaj Urban Railway Project in Iran. Accordingly, two
case studies of damaged buildings were used to assess the ability of this model to predict the damage. Comparison with the
measured data indicated that the model achieved the satisfactory results.

Keywords  Building damage · Ground movement · Tunnelling · Artificial neural network · Particle swarm optimization

1 Introduction empirical, semi-analytical, and numerical methods. The

The rapid growth of urban developments has resulted in the
need to construct new tunnels for transportation and public
facilities beneath the ground surface. Construction of tun-
nel induces ground surface movement which distorts and, in
severe cases, damages existing surface buildings. Therefore,
prediction of the ground displacement and assessment of
the risk of damage to buildings is an essential part of the
planning, design, and construction of tunnels in urban areas.
A number of methods found in the literature correlate the
building damage with associated ground movements using
* M. Hajihassani
1 used to model the construction of the tunnel in greenfield
Faculty of Mining Engineering, Sahand University
of Technology, Tabriz, Iran
2 building/soil stiffness. The ground displacement results are
COWI, London, UK
3
Department of Geotechnics and Transportation, Universiti
Teknologi Malaysia, Johor, Malaysia
4
Civil and Environmental Engineering Department, Universiti
Teknologi Petronas, Perak, Malaysia
5
Department of Mining Engineering, Urmia University,
Urmia, Iran
empirical methods are mainly limited to damage caused by
settlements arising from the weight of the structure and do
not consider the deformation which may occur as a result
of nearby excavation [1, 2]. In the semi-analytical methods,
which are widely used in engineering practice, the onset
of cracks in the building is assumed to be associated with
average tensile strain [3–10]. The maximum tensile strain
in the building is calculated by representing the building as
a beam or plate undergoing sagging and hogging modes of
deformation.
The semi-analytical approaches are usually conservative,
since they do not consider the effects of building stiffness on
the ground movements. To include such an effect, a refined
method considering the interaction between building stiff-
ness and soil was suggested [11–16]. In this method, the
numerical analysis and physical modelling methods are
conditions and beneath buildings for the different ratios of
compared, and a set of design curves are published to predict
the building deformation.
Over the last few years, various artificial intelligence (AI)
methods have been widely used for advanced analysis in a
diversity of engineering applications [17–23]. Artificial neu-
ral network (ANN) as a powerful modelling tool has widely

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
 Engineering with Computers

used for advanced analysis in a diversity of civil engineer-

ing applications, and the use of this technique is increasing
[24–26]. Several types of research have been successfully
carried out using ANNs to predict ground movements due to
excavation of tunnel as reported by Kim et al. [27] and Bou-
bou et al. [28], and tunnel convergence by Adoko and Wu
[29] and Rafiai and Moosavi [30], with reasonable accuracy.
The current study is aimed to develop a new model based
on a hybrid Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) algorithm
and ANN to predict the building damage induced by ground
movements due to tunnelling. To predict the building dam-
age using the Artificial Neural Network and a Particle
Swarm Optimization algorithm (PSO-based ANN) model,
information on damaged buildings due to tunnelling was col-
lected from the Karaj Urban Railway (KUR) project, in Iran.
Subsequently, the characteristics of the buildings, building/
soil stiffness ratios, cracks, and ground displacement param-
eters were considered to assess the building damage due to
tunnelling.

2 Case study

Line 2 of Karaj Urban Railway (KUR), Spanning 27 km,

constructed between Kamal-Shahr, in north-western Karaj Fig. 1  Line No. 2 of KUR project and location of the case study
and Malard, in the south of the city (Fig. 1). To contribute to buildings with regard to station E
ground self-stability until completion of the lining installa-
tion, the tunnel excavation was divided into two sections: top
heading and bench. The top heading was being excavated in
one step and the bench in two steps. The tunnel dimensions
and sequence of the excavation are shown in Fig. 2. Refer- Ground Surface

ring to this figure, the tunnel excavation was divided into

three steps in which step I (top heading) was excavated first.
After excavating the top heading for a distance of 1.2 m, the
exposed area was supported using primary support system.
Upon reaching the 120 m distance for the excavation of the
top heading, the excavation for step II was started and later
step III. After the installation of the waterproof membrane,
completed excavation areas were supported using concrete
4.1 m

Top Heading
STEP I
reinforced liner as a final lining of the tunnel.
7.8 m

Station E of Phase 1 was excavated adjacent to resid-

ual and commercial buildings. This station was excavated STEP III STEP II STEP III Bench
3.7 m

by spray concrete lining (SCL) tunnelling method. In this

method, two side drifts were excavated and enlarged with the 6.4 m

subsequent boring of cast-in-place piles (to form the internal 8.4 m

walls below the two side walls) (Fig. 3). The excavation

continued with the installation of arch ribs above the walls,
followed by excavation of the whole tunnel space below the Fig. 2  Tunnel dimensions and construction sequence
arch.
During construction of the tunnel and station, ground
movements and buildings were monitored. This paper analy- founded on the shallow foundations. The cracks in the build-
ses the monitoring data obtained from the buildings adjacent ings were recorded before construction and monitored dur-
to the station. Most of the buildings were low-rise buildings ing construction of the station and tunnel. The development

13
Engineering with Computers
Fig. 3  Plan view of station E and location of some cracks in the buildings
of crack openings was measured by means of a digital ruler
calliper and photographed (to provide useful records of crack
pattern and density). The ground and buildings movements
were frequently monitored during construction of the sta-
tion using ground and building settlement markers. In this
study, the data obtained from 44 buildings adjacent to the
station have been collected and analysed. The buildings were
old framed residual and commercial structures with 1, 2, or
3-storey founded on reinforced concrete rafts. In general,
several shop premises were damaged severity and hair cracks
were observed in most of the buildings. Figure 3 shows the
location of some cracks recorded with the crack opening of
greater than 2 mm. Only a few cracks with widths of more
than 15 mm were observed in the buildings Group D and E.
These cracks were extended the whole height of the interior
wall from the floor to the roof of the building. In addition,
cracks with 8 mm wide were reported in the floor of Build-
ing G.
3 Hybrid PSO‑based ANN
As the BP is a local search learning algorithm [31], the
ANNs might cause the convergence of a solution to failing.
There are many attempts have been made to improve the per-
formance and generalization capabilities of ANNs in recent
years. In another side, PSO has been used as a robust global
search algorithm to adjust the weights and biases of ANN
to increase the performance and accuracy of this method.
In the following sections, the procedure of ANN and PSO
and their implementations to minimize the problem will be
discussed in more detail.
3.1 Artificial neural networks
The ANNs are a form of artificial intelligence that attempts
to estimate existing function from the actual data based on
simulating the biological nervous systems. In contrast to the
most empirical and analytical solutions which need the pre-
vious knowledge, the ANNs learn by examples and obtain a
close approximation relationship among the data.
The threshold logic unit (TLU) was the earliest neuron,
proposed by McCulloch and Pitts [32]. The TLU generally
recognized as the designer of the first neural network and its
invention is still the fundamental way in which ANNs oper-
ate. Nevertheless, the first ANN was developed by Rosen-
blatt [33], called the perceptron and based on the work of
McCulloch and Pitts [32]. The perception can be seen as
the simplest kind of feedforward neural network. Using a
linear combination of inputs, this network produces an out-
put scaled as 1 and − 1. Although the concept of artificial
neurons was first introduced in 1943, researches into appli-
cations of ANNs have been grown sharply since the intro-
duction of the BP training algorithm for feedforward ANNs.
BP is a supervised learning technique that back-propagates
the error at the output layer to the hidden layer, so weight
changes can be calculated. Subsequently, ANNs were devel-
oped by many researchers in their structures and operations,
as reported by Hopfield and Tank [34] and Basheer and Haj-
meer [35].
13

As shown in Fig. 4, a set of parallel interconnected pro-
cessing units, titled nodes or neurons, form the basis of an
ANN. The activation signals are transferred between nodes
using their weights. Along each neuron is an activation func-
tion that controls the amplitude of the output.
A multilayer perceptron (MLP) is a feedforward ANN
model that maps sets of input data into a set of proper data.
An MLP network consists of several layers or nodes referred
to commonly as the input layer, hidden layer(s), and output
layer, in which data flows in one direction from the input to
the output layer. Except for the input nodes, each node is a pro-
cessing element (or neuron) with a nonlinear activation func-
tion. The actual processing is done by neurons in the hidden
layer(s), whereas the input and output neurons purely collect
and distribute the signals. A network with one hidden layer
can approximate any continuous function, despite the fact that
many hidden layers are used [36].
3.2 Particle swarm optimization (PSO)
Particle swarm optimization is a computational method origi-
nally proposed by Kennedy and Eberhart [37] which was
developed further by Shi and Eberhart [38], motivated by the
social behavior of organisms such as bird flocking and fish
schooling. On the foundation of a few mathematical formu-
las, the particles move around the search space area to find
the optimum solution. Particle movements steer by their own
best-known position, called their personal best (pbest), as well
as the best-known positions of all of the particles, called the
global best (gbest).
According to Kennedy and Eberhart [37], a stochastic vari-
able called craziness or randomness is added to update the
scheme of the particles to avoid the settlement of particles
on a united, unchanging direction. Therefore, at each itera-
tion, some changes are added randomly to choose the velocity
parameters. Based on relations (1) and (2), the position and
velocity of each particle are computed and the procedure is
continued until the termination criterion is met [37]:
(1)
( ) ( )
⃗ = v⃗ + r1 C1 × p������
v������ ⃗ − p⃗ + r2 C2 × g������
⃗ − p⃗
new best best
new⃗ = p⃗ + v������
p������ new⃗ (2)
Fig. 4  Artificial neural network model
13
Engineering with Computers
where v������ ⃗ , v⃗ , p������
new new⃗ , and p⃗ are the new and current veloci-
ties and positions of the particles: C1 and C2 are pre-defined
coefficients; p������ ⃗ is the personal best position of the parti-
best
cle; g������
⃗
best is the global best position among all the particles;
and r1 and r2 are random values in the range (0,1) sampled
from a uniform distribution. In the above equation, an inertia
weight (w) could be added to the velocity equation [39]. The
inertia weight determines the contribution rate of a particle’s
previous velocity to its velocity at the current time step [40].
The above equation can be updated to the below equation
considering the w:
⃗ − p⃗ . (3)
( ) ( )
⃗ = w ⋅ v⃗ + r1 C1 × p������
v������ ⃗ − p⃗ + r2 C2 × g������
new best best
The PSO algorithm can be applied for scientific and engi-
neering purposes. Compared with other developing optimi-
zation algorithms, it has a greater optimization ability using
simple relations and can be completed easily. Figure 5 illus-
trates the workflow of the PSO algorithm.
3.3 Implementation of hybrid PSO‑based ANN
The PSO and ANNs employ different approaches to mini-
mize a problem. Typically, there is a greater probability of
convergence at a local minimum by ANNs and minimum
error between the actual and predicted answer, whereas
PSO is capable of finding a global minimum and continues
searching around it. As a consequence, the hybrid PSO-
based ANN model is an optimized technique which has the
search properties of both PSO and ANN. The PSO looks for
all the minima in the search space and ANN uses them to
find the best results. In this model, each particle represents
a candidate solution to the optimization problem, and since
the weights of a trained ANN are a solution, a single par-
ticle represents one complete network. For this case, each
component of a particle characterizes a weight or bias in
the model. The particle’s velocity and position are updated
using the PSO equations, and subsequently, the weights and
biases of the model are adjusted in each iteration. Using this
representation, any of the PSO algorithms can be used to
find the best weights for an ANN and to minimize the error
function [41].
4 Development of PSO‑based ANN model
for building damage prediction
4.1 Input and output data
Building damage due to the excavation of tunnel depends
on the ground, tunnel and building parameters. The tun-
nel causes reduction of the geostatic pressure around the
excavation, and the ground moves toward to the tunnel.
The ground movement develops to the ground surface
Engineering with Computers
Fig. 5  Flowchart depicting the general PSO algorithm
and affects the building. Depending on the building stiff-
ness and interaction between the ground and structure,
the ground distortion may be developed fully or partially
inside the building and causes cracking. To simulate the
building damage by hybrid PSO-based ANN model, the
relevant parameters of the tunnel, building, and ground
should be considered. In general, the following groups of
parameters are considered in the models:
1. ground parameters depicting the surface settlement
trough induced by tunnelling;
2. structure properties;
3. building–soil interaction parameters which relating the
building stiffness to the ground mass;
4. output parameters which are the damage criteria and
classification of the building damage.
The first three components are treated as parameters
required for the ANN input cells, whereas the last can be
associated with the output data. The following sections dis-
cussed the basis of the input and output parameters.
4.1.1 Ground parameters
The prediction and mitigation of damage caused by con-
struction-induced ground movements represent a major
factor in the design of tunnels. In the context of evaluating
damage to adjacent structures, many design approaches are
largely based on the greenfield displacement input. The use
of empirical models that relate the observed settlement at
sites is very common in engineering practice, since the set-
tlement curve can be characterized by a few input parame-
ters. The most extensive data relates to the transverse ground
surface settlement trough for ‘greenfield conditions’, usually
described by the classical Gaussian distribution function as
[42, 43]
( 2)
y
Sv = Smax exp − 2 (4)
2i
in which Sv is the surface settlement, Smax is the maximum
surface settlement at the tunnel centreline, y is the horizontal
distance from the tunnel centreline, and i is the horizontal
distance from the tunnel centreline to the points of inflection
of the settlement trough (Fig. 6). The inflection point parti-
tions the settlement trough between the hogging and sagging
region. The parameter i is related to the depth of the tunnel
axis Z0 by the linear expression:
i = KZ0 . (5)
The trough width parameter K depends on the soil type. It
varies from 0.2 to 0.3 for granular material through 0.4–0.5
for stiff clay to as high as 0.7 for silty clays deposits [44].
The greenfield shape function is essentially governed by
the Smax and i. The former relates to the intensity of the
settlement trough, whereas the latter describes the width
and steepness of the envelope. The eccentricity e which is
the distance between the tunnel and building center may
be added as an input parameter together with the building
length L to account for the positioning of the structure rela-
tive to the tunnel. Thus, the eccentricity, inflection point,
and length of the building make a distinction as to whether
structural damage caused by differential settlements is due to
the hogging or sagging types of deformation. For instance,
a building may experience sagging when i > (e + B), or hog-
ging when i < (e–B), or both sagging and hogging other than
in the aforementioned conditions (where B is half the length
of the building, see Fig. 6).
Lateral ground movements at the foundation level are
important as the building damage can also result from the
horizontal extension of the building [4]. The horizontal
13
 Engineering with Computers

Fig. 6  Excavation of a tunnel
beneath a building and the asso-
ciated ground parameters

movements are shown in Fig. 6 can be found by assuming

a direct relationship with the vertical movements, as shown
in Eq. (6):
Sv y
Sh = (6)
Z0

where Sh is the horizontal movement. The above equation

is based on the assumption that the vectors of movement
at the ground surface are directed toward the tunnel center
[44]. Figure 6 shows the horizontal strain component εh
calculated from the relative horizontal movements of two
reference points.
The measured settlement data at adjacent reference sites
with similar ground and tunnelling conditions are used to
consider the impact associated greenfield ground param-
eters on the affected buildings. Figure 7 shows an exam-
ple of greenfield settlement data of a reference site in the
KUR project that is well matched with the Gaussian shape
distribution.
4.1.2 Building parameters
Many damage criteria for excavation-induced damage to
buildings idealize building facade as rectangular beams
[3, 4, 7–9]. The deep beam relates critical tensile strains
(at which cracking becomes evident) in the building to the
imposing deformation (bending, shear, and direct extension).
The building, which is presented by elastic plate and beam,
is characterized by different ratios of the Young’s and shear
Fig. 7  Measured greenfield settlement trough of KUR project
modulus, E/G, depending on the type of structure. Burland
and Wroth [3] postulated that (on the basis of a very good
agreement with the case records of damaged and undam-
aged buildings undergoing settlement) for buildings with
significant tensile restraint, or that are very flexible in shear
(i.e., frame buildings), an E/G ratio greater than the theoreti-
cal value of 2.6 would be appropriate, and recommended
that the value be taken as 12.5. However, for buildings that
have little or no tensile restraint (i.e., traditional masonry
buildings), they recommended that the E/G ratio should be
reduced to 0.5.
It can be asserted that the implicit assumption of the
building type characterized by E/G does not account for the
different moduli of each structural element, the transference
of shear between elements, or the limit strains beyond which
the linear stress–strain relationship defining the modulus E

13
Engineering with Computers
would no longer apply. Nevertheless, the method is well-
established and has proven to give reasonably accurate pre-
dictions of damage categories compared with published data
[10].
4.1.3 Influence of building stiffness
It is known that the inherent stiffness of structures can influ-
ence their settlement response to tunnelling- and excavation-
induced movements [45–47]. The alteration of greenfield
ground movements caused by the presence of building
may be evaluated using the factor of relative structure/soil
stiffness. Following the previous studies [11, 15, 16], two
parameters were defined to explain the modification to the
settlement and axial response of buildings; these were rela-
tive axial stiffness, α and relative bending stiffness, β. The α
and β ratios are presented as below:
EA
𝛼=
ES B (7)
EI
𝛽=
ES B4 (8)
where Es is the secant stiffness of the soil at 0.01% axial
stiffness at half the depth of the tunnel axis from the ground
surface, and EI and EA are the bending stiffness and the
axial stiffness of the building, respectively.
Equations (7) and (8) enable building details such as
floors, walls, the foundation slab and openings to be explic-
itly accounted for when evaluating the interaction between
the structure and the soil. In this study, the stiffness of the
soil (at half the depth of the tunnel) is assumed Es = 72 MPa
at 0.01% axial strain. The stiffness of the building, E, for
the masonry and steel frame are assumed as 5500 and
16,500 MPa, respectively [3, 10].
4.1.4 Damage criteria
Building damage classification has traditionally been
divided into three general groups, including architectural,
functional, and structural damage. Table 1 shows this clas-
sification system with six categories, first put forward by
Burland et al. [48] on the basis of visible damage (observed
crack width) to walls with particular reference to the ease of
repair of the plaster and brickwork or masonry. Categories
0–2 are related to visual appearance or “aesthetic”, 3 and 4
affect “serviceability” or function, and 5 represents damage
affecting “stability”. Note that these classifications are very
general without clearly defined limits, and there may be con-
siderable overlap of the categories depending upon the type
and use of the particular structure considered.
In this study, the maximum crack width and frequency
are used as the output parameters for the model. The crite-
rion describing cumulative crack widths [6] is inferred in
Table 1 to determine the severity of damage owing to mul-
tiple cracks. In the case of multiple cracks, it is assumed
in the model that the maximum crack width value corre-
sponds to the averaged crack width from the number of
cracks recorded.
4.1.5 Input–output parameters of KUR project
In general, a total of 44 data sets were obtained from the
KUR Project, each refers to a set of 10 inputs and 2 outputs.
Table 2 indicates the input and output parameters used for
the analysis of prediction of building damage due to tun-
nelling. The negative horizontal strain shown in the table
is the tensile strain developed in the hogging zone of the
settlement trough, and the positive horizontal strain is the
compression strain developed in the sagging zone of the set-
tlement trough.
4.2 Network design
A series of network architecture analyses were performed
using MATLAB code to obtain the optimum PSO and
ANN parameters. The PSO parameters include the number
of particles, the coefficient of velocity equation, and inertia
weight. The ANN parameters include network architecture
which consists of hidden layers and the number of nodes in
the hidden layer. In the initial model, a PSO-based ANN
model, consisting of a single hidden layer with ten nodes,
was utilized. Each analysis was conducted three times and
the best value was selected as the representative value of the
model. The values were used to propose an optimum net-
work architecture. This network architecture was proposed
later for prediction of the building damage due to tunnelling
for this project.
4.2.1 Swarm size
The first sensitivity analysis was conducted on the swarm
size (number of particles). A larger swarm size was cho-
sen, while a small swarm may fail to converge to a global
solution. Selection of a large swarm could cause the delay
in the convergence and increase training time. A series of
sensitivity analyses of PSO swarm size were applied to
determine the appropriate number of particles in the swarm.
The coefficient of determination (R2) and consumed training
time (elapsed time using the Intel Core i7 Processor 2600
3.40 GHz) were used as the model selection criteria.
The models with 250, 450, and 500 particles yield high
values (more than 0.80) of correlation of determination.
However, the elapsed time by the model with 250 particles
13

13
Table 1  Category of building damage
Category Degree of severity Maximum crack width, χ (mm)
of dam-
age
0 Negligible
1 Very slight
2 Slight
3 Moderate
4 Severe
5 Very severe
Cumulative crack Ease of repair Overall description of the typical damage
width, Σχ (mm)
< 0.1 < 0.15 – Hairline cracks
<1 0.15< Σχ < 1.5 Fine cracks which are easily treated during Damage generally restricted to internal wall fin-
normal decoration ishes. Closed inspection may reveal some cracks
in external brickwork or masonry
<5 1.5 < Σχ < 7.5 Cracks easily filled. Re-decoration probably Doors and windows may stick slightly
required. Recurrent cracks can be masked by
suitable linings. Cracks may be visible exter-
nally and some repointing may be required to
ensure weather tightness
5 < χ < 15 7.5 < Σχ < 22.5 The cracks require some opening up and can be Doors and windows sticking. Service pipes may
Or patched by a mason. Repointing of external fracture. Weather tightness often impaired
Several greater than 3 mm brickwork and possibly a small amount of
brickwork to be replaced
15 < χ < 25 22.5 < Σχ < 37.5 Extensive repair work involving breaking-out Windows and door frames distorted, floor sloping
Also depends on the number of cracks and replacing sections of walls, especially over noticeably. Walls leaning or bulging noticeably,
doors and windows some loss of bearing in beams. Service pipes
disrupted
> 25 > 37.5 This requires a major repair job involving partial Beams lose bearing; walls lean badly and require
or complete rebuilding shoring. Windows were broken with distortion.
The danger of instability
Engineering with Computers
Engineering with Computers

Table 2  Range of input and Parameter Description Minimum value Maximum value Average Standard
output parameters used for deviation
prediction of building damage
Building height (m) Input 3 18 6.09 3.88
Building width (m) Input 2.8 24 7.30 4.04
Building length (m) Input 4.5 38 15.73 8.14
Building stiffness ratio Input 2.6 12.5 7.34 4.95
Eccentricity (m) Input 12.2 29 18.94 4.05
Inflection point (m) Input 8.5 20.5 12.63 2.81
Maximum settlement (mm) Input 10.2 90.2 35.47 19.15
Horizontal strain (%) Input − 0.034 0.476 0.11 0.12
Axial stiffness ratio ­(m−1) Input 30.56 416.67 116.14 75.32
Bending stiffness ratio ­(m−1) Input 0.04 11.13 1.25 2.11
Number of cracks Output 1 5 2.35 1.27
Crack width (mm) Output 0.1 20 3.51 4.70

(1608s) is almost half that of the other two models (2808s
for 450 particles and 3133s for 500 particles). Therefore, this
model was selected as the appropriate model and the swarm
size of 250 was selected as the optimum number of particles.
4.2.2 Coefficients of velocity equation
The sensitivity analyses also were performed on the same
model to find the optimum values of the coefficients of the
velocity equation (C1 and C2). Based on the original coef-
ficients of Kennedy and Eberhart [37] and modified coef-
ficients (proposed by Clerc and Kennedy [49]), a series of
candidate combinations were utilized, as shown in Table 3.
The tests were performed with the constant initial swarm
size of 250 and the maximum iterations of 400. The analyses
were conducted with 10 nodes with one hidden layer on the
previous network. Table 3 shows the reasonable precision of
84% for training and 81% for testing at C1 = 0.75C2 (model
Number 3). Consequently, this model was selected as the
optimum network.
4.2.3 Inertia weight
The other sensitivity analysis conducted was to determine
the optimum value of inertia weight (w) to be used in the
equation of velocity. Four different inertial weight were
checked for the tests. The optimum size of 250 with the
C1 = 1.714 and C2 = 2.286 was applied for all the tests.
The results of sensitivity analyses on the inertia weight
are shown in Fig. 8. From the figure, it can be seen that the
best R2 for training and testing data sets were obtained when
the inertia weights were 0.25 and 0.5. The same results were
obtained for RMSE. The value of 0.25 for the inertia weight,
which yields the best results, was selected as the optimal
inertia weight.

Table 3  Results of sensitivity Model Relationship C1 C2 C1 + C2 Training Testing

analyses for coefficients of
2
velocity equation R RMSE R2 RMSE

1 C1 = 0.25 C2 0.8 3.2 4 0.718 0.246 0.587 0.380

2 C1 = 0.5 C2 1.333 2.667 4 0.827 0.222 0.744 0.251
3 C1 = 0.75 C2 1.714 2.286 4 0.842 0.206 0.809 0.207
4 C2 = 0.25 C1 3.2 0.8 4 0.644 0.500 0.537 0.424
5 C2 = 0.5 C1 2.667 1.333 4 0.683 0.252 0.732 0.355
6 C2 = 0.75 C1 2.286 1.714 4 0.685 0.352 0.701 0.154
7 C1 = 2 C2 2.5 2.5 5 0.824 0.185 0.471 0.352
8 C1 = C2 2 2 4 0.829 0.226 0.669 0.259
9 C1 = C2 1.75 1.75 3.5 0.627 0.292 0.470 0.506
10 C1 = C2 1.5 1.5 3 0.670 0.172 0.463 0.449
11 C1 = C2 1.25 1.25 2.5 0.513 0.311 0.509 0.460
12 C1 = C2 1 1 2 0.507 0.366 0.505 0.486

13
 Engineering with Computers

utilized. By this technique, the data are divided into k

Fig. 8  a R2 and b RMSE for training and testing data sets at different
inertia weights
4.2.4 Network architecture
The network architecture was determined based on the
trial and error method. To evaluate the performance of
each model, a k-fold cross-validation technique [50] was
parts, in which (k-1) parts are used to train and one part
is used to test the model. In total, the process is repeated
k times and all of the inputs are used in the training and
testing stages.
For this work, 14 models were used in the analyses. To
evaluate the performance of the models, a fourfold cross
validation was utilized. Each model was trained by three-
fold (33 data sets) and tested with the rest of the data (11
data sets). The models were trained and tested four times
with the different combination of training and testing data
sets. R2ave and R­ MSEave for testing of the data sets were
used as a model performance criterion. The models were
trained with the optimized PSO parameters of 250 parti-
cles, C1 = 1.714, C2 = 2.286 and 400 iterations which are
explained in the previous sections.
The results of the analyses with different data are pre-
sented in Table 4. As mentioned earlier, the values of R2ave
and ­RMSEave for testing data sets are the criteria for choos-
ing the proper model. Comparing the above parameters
showing that Model 3 has the highest value of R2ave for
training (96%) and the lowest value of R ­ MSEave (0.092).
However, it gives weaker results than Model 4 in terms of
testing. Therefore, Model 4 is selected because of the best
performance in terms of testing (93%).
Figure 9 shows the actual and predicted values obtained
by the selected analysis for testing of the data sets. This
figure illustrates that the predicted values are approxi-
mately close to the actual values. The structure of the
selected model includes one hidden layer and its 13 nodes
is illustrated in Fig. 10.

Table 4  Performance of trained Model Network architecture Results

PSO-based ANN models
Hidden Nodes in the hidden Training Testing
layers layer (s)
Rave2 RMSEave Rave2 RMSEave

1 1 4 0.870 0.185 0.817 0.199

2 1 7 0.876 0.160 0.830 0.191
3 1 10 0.959 0.092 0.902 0.172
4 1 13 0.941 0.112 0.926 0.149
5 1 16 0.940 0.104 0.887 0.208
6 1 19 0.862 0.192 0.851 0.198
7 1 21 0.903 0.167 0.847 0.170
8 2 4 0.859 0.191 0.791 0.299
9 2 7 0.864 0.238 0.801 0.225
10 2 10 0.863 0.148 0.843 0.159
11 2 13 0.904 0.150 0.897 0.193
12 2 16 0.854 0.241 0.864 0.260
13 2 19 0.868 0.197 0.816 0.252
14 2 21 0.838 0.192 0.811 0.258

13
Engineering with Computers
Fig. 9  Concordance between actual and predicted values for testing
data sets
Fig. 10  Structure of the selected PSO-based ANN model to predict
tunnelling-induced building damage
5 Building damage prediction by PSO‑based
ANN model
To check the applicability and validity of the proposed
model for predicting building damage due to tunnelling,
two well-documented damaged buildings from the KUR
Project were selected. The severity of the damage which
includes crack widths and frequency of the crack was
predicted by the model and was compared with the meas-
ured values.
These two buildings called Sarvenaz Residential (SR) and
Financial and Credit Institution (FCI). The SR building is
a five-storey concrete frame structure which is located in
the vicinity of the KUR tunnel between Stations E and F,
while the FCI building is a relatively old two-storey build-
ing with a load-bearing wall situated in the vicinity of Sta-
tion E. Table 5 shows the characteristics of the buildings,
their eccentricities from the tunnel, maximum surface set-
tlements, settlement through inflection points, the measured
crack widths, and number of cracks formed in the selected
damaged buildings. Using the available data on the number
of cracks and crack width (2.95 mm for SR and 4.27 mm for
FCI, respectively), the SR and FCI buildings belong to the
slight damage category based on a classification proposed by
Institution of Structural Engineers, London (1994).
To predict the category of damage in the SR and FCI
buildings using the proposed PSO-based ANN model, the
geometry of the building, building stiffness, maximum sur-
face settlement, the inflection point, eccentricity, horizon-
tal strain, and axial and bending stiffness ratio was used as
input parameters. The results show that the crack widths
were obtained as 3.15 mm for the SR building and 4.78 mm
for the FCI building. Consequently, these buildings belong
to the slight damage category. Table 6 compares the building
damage category obtained by the presented PSO-based ANN
model and the measured values. As seen in the table, the
damage categories obtained by the PSO-based ANN model
are in agreement with the actual damage category.
6 Conclusion
A new approach was introduced to predict the potential risk
of building damage induced by ground movements due to
tunnelling based on the hybrid PSO-based ANN model.
In this model, the ANN learning process was improved
by means of replacing the BP with the PSO algorithm to
increase the accuracy and applicability of ANNs for pre-
diction of building damage. Sensitivity analyses were per-
formed to determine the optimum parameters of the PSO
algorithm. The optimum network architecture was deter-
mined by the trial and error method and a k-fold cross-
validation technique to validate the network performance.
Finally, a model with one hidden layer and 13 nodes were
selected. A data set of 44 buildings was collected from Phase
1 of Line No. 2 of the KUR project to create the model.
The data set includes ten inputs associated with the building
properties and greenfield settlement trough, and two outputs
consisting of the measured crack width and the frequency of
cracking. The results indicate that the calculations obtained
are in good agreement with field measurements. However,
13
 Engineering with Computers

Table 5  Properties of the Parameter Unit Sarvenaz residential Financial and credit

selected damaged buildings building institution building
with predicted greenfield
surface settlement Building type – Frame structure Load-bearing wall
Reported Damage – Slight Slight
Number of floors – 5 2
Building stiffness ratio – 12.5 2.6
Height m 15 6
Length m 16.5 30.8
Width m 12.5 6.3
Eccentricity m 12.2 25.8
Maximum surface settlement mm 30.29 40.58
The inflection point of settlement through m 8.7 9.2
Horizontal Strain % − 0.011 − 0.024
Axial stiffness ratio m− 1 416.67 89.22
Bending stiffness ratio m− 1 11.13 0.08
Number of crack occurrences – 2 1
Measured crack width mm 2.95 4.27

Table 6  Category of building damage obtained by the PSO-based 6. Boone SJ, Westland J, Nusink R (1999) Comparative evaluation
ANN model and measured values of building responses to an adjacent braced excavation. Can
Geotech J 36:210–223
Damage criteria Sarvenaz Residential Financial Institution 7. Finno RJ, Voss FT, Rossow E, Tanner Blackburn J (2005) Eval-
Building Building uating damage potential in buildings affected by excavations. J
Geotech Geoenviron Eng 131:1199–1210
PSO-based Actual PSO-based Actual
8. Netzel H (2009) Building response due to ground movements.
ANN predic- ANN predic-
IOS Press, Amsterdam
tion tion
9. Namazi E, Mohamad H (2013) Potential damage assessment
Crack width (mm) 3.15 2.95 4.78 4.27 in buildings undergoing tilt. Proc Inst Civil Eng Geotech Eng
166(4):365–375
Number of cracks 2 2 1 1
10. Namazi E, Mohamad H (2013) Assessment of building dam-
Damage category Slight Slight Slight Slight age induced by three-dimensional ground movements. J Geo-
tech Geoenviron Eng 139(4):608–618. https​://doi.org/10.1061/
(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.00008​22
11. Potts DM, Addenbrooke TI (1997) A structure’s influence on
the applicability of this approach is constrained by the tunnelling-induced ground movements. Proc ICE-Geotech Eng
125(2):109–125
data used in the training step. Despite the aforementioned 12. Son M, Cording EJ (2005) Estimation of building damage due to
limitation, according to the adequate consistency observed excavation-induced ground movements. J Geotech Geoenviron
between the predicted results extracted from the model and Eng 131:162–177
the measured values, it is concluded that the proposed PSO- 13. Son M, Cording EJ (2007) Evaluation of building stiffness for
building response analysis to excavation-induced ground move-
based ANN method can be used to predict building damage ments. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 133:995–1002
due to tunnelling with relatively high accuracy. 14. Franzius JN, Potts DM, Burland JB (2006) The response of the
surface structure to tunnel construction. Proc ICE Geotech Eng
159(1): 3–17
15. Dimmock PS, Mair RJ (2008) Effect of building stiffness on
References tunnelling-induced ground movement. Tunn Undergr Space
Technol 23(4):438–450
1. Skempton AW, MacDonald DH (1956) The allowable settlement 16. Farrell RP, Mair RJ, Sciotti A, Pigorini A, Ricci M (2012) The
of buildings. Proc Inst Civ Eng 5(3):727–768 response of buildings to tunnelling: a case study. Geotechnical
2. Charles JA, Skinner HD (2004) Settlement and tilt of low-rise aspects of underground construction in soft ground. In: Proceed-
buildings. Geotechn Eng 157:65–75 ings of the 7th international symposium on geotechnical aspects
3. Burland JB, Wroth CP (1974) Settlement of buildings and associ- of underground construction in soft ground, pp 877–885
ated damage. In: Proc conference settlement of structures. Pentech 17. Sharma LK, Vishal V, Singh TN (2017) Predicting C ­ O2 perme-
Press, London, pp 611–654 ability of bituminous coal using statistical and adaptive neuro-
4. Boscardin MD, Cording JC (1989) Response to excavation- fuzzy analysis. J Nat Gas Sci Eng 42:216–225
induced settlement. J Geotech Eng 115(1):1–21 18. Sharma LK, Vishal V, Singh TN (2017) Developing novel mod-
5. Boone SJ (1996) Ground-movement-related building damage. J els using neural networks and fuzzy systems for the prediction
Geotech Eng 122(11):886–896

13
Engineering with Computers
of strength of rocks from key geomechanical properties. Meas-
urement 102:158–169
19. Singh R, Umrao RK, Ahmad M, Ansari MK, Sharma LK, Singh
TN (2017) Prediction of geomechanical parameters using soft
computing and multiple regression approach. Measurement
99:108–119
20. Hasanipanah M, Armaghani DJ, Amnieh HB, Majid MZA, Tahir
MM (2017) Application of PSO to develop a powerful equation
for prediction of flyrock due to blasting. Neural Comput Appl
28(1):1043–1050
21. Hasanipanah M, Amnieh HB, Arab H, Zamzam MS (2016) Fea-
sibility of PSO-ANFIS model to estimate rock fragmentation pro-
duced by mine blasting. Neural Comput Appl 1–10
22. Taheri K, Hasanipanah M, Golzar SB, Majid MZA (2017) A
hybrid artificial bee colony algorithm-artificial neural network
for forecasting the blast-produced ground vibration. Eng Comput
33(3):689–700
23. Mokfi T, Shahnazar A, Bakhshayeshi I, Derakhsh AM, Tabrizi O
(2018) Proposing of a new soft computing-based model to predict
peak particle velocity induced by blasting. Eng Comput. https​://
doi.org/10.1007/s0036​6-018-0578-6
24. Singh TN, Singh V (2005) An intelligent approach to predic-
tion and control ground vibration in mines. Geotech Geol Eng
23(3):249–262
25. Sharma LK, Singh R, Umrao RK, Sharma KM, Singh TN (2017)
Evaluating the modulus of elasticity of soil using soft computing
system. Eng Comput 33(3):497–507
26. Singh TN, Verma AK (2012) Comparative analysis of intelligent
algorithms to correlate strength and petrographic properties of
some schistose rocks. Eng Comput 28(1):1–12
27. Kim CY, Bae GJ, Hong SW, Park CH, Moon HK, Shin HS (2001)
Neural network based prediction of ground surface settlements
due to tunnelling. Comput Geotech 28(6):517–547
28. Boubou R, Emeriault F, Kastner R (2010) Artificial neural net-
work application for the prediction of ground surface movements
induced by shield tunnelling. Can Geotech J 47:1214–1233
29. Adoko AC, Wu L (2012) Estimation of convergence of a high-
speed railway tunnel in weak rocks using an adaptive neuro-fuzzy
inference system (ANFIS) approach. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng
4(1):11–18
30. Rafiai H, Moosavi M (2012) An approximate ANN-based solution
for convergence of lined circular tunnels in elasto-plastic rock
masses with anisotropic stresses. Tunn Undergr Space Technol
27:52–59
31. Liou SW, Wang CM, Huang YF (2009) Integrative discovery
of multifaceted sequence patterns by frame-relayed search and
hybrid PSO-ANN. J Univers Comput Sci 15(4):742–764
32. McCulloch WS, Pitts W (1943) A logical calculus of the ideas
immanent in nervous activity. Bull Math Biophys 5:115–133
33. Rosenblatt F (1959) The perceptron: a probabilistic model for
information storage and organization in the brain. Psychol Rev
65:386–408
34. Hopfield JJ, Tank DW (1986) Computing with neural circuits: a
model. Science 233:625–633
35. Basheer IA, Hajmeer M (2000) Artificial neural networks: funda-
mentals, computing, design, and application. J Microbiol Methods
43:3–31
36. Hornik K, Stinchcombe M, White H (1989) Multilayer feed-
forward networks are universal approximators. Neural Netw
2:359–366
37. Kennedy J, Eberhart R (1995) Particle swarm optimization. In:
IEEE international conference on neural networks perth, Australia
1942–1948
38. Shi Y, Eberhart RC (1998) A modified particle swarm optimizer.
In: Proceedings of IEEE international congress on evolutionary
computation, pp 69–73
39. Poli R, Kennedy J, Blackwell T (2007) Particle swarm optimiza-
tion: an overview. Swarm Intell 1:33–57
40. Bansal JC, Singh PK, Saraswat M, Verma A, Jadon SS, Abraham
A (2011) Inertia weight strategies in particle swarm optimiza-
tion. In: Third world congress on nature and biologically inspired
computing. IEEE, pp 640–647
41. Hajihassani M, Armaghani DJ, Sohaei H, Mohamad ET, Marto
A (2014) Prediction of airblast-overpressure induced by blasting
using a hybrid artificial neural network and particle swarm opti-
mization. Appl Acoust 80:57–67
42. Schmidt B (1969) Settlements and ground movements associated
with tunnelling in soil PhD Thesis, University of Illinois
43. Peck RB (1969) Deep excavations and tunnelling in soft ground.
In: Proceedings of the 7th international conference on soil
mechanics and foundation engineering state of the art, pp 225–290
44. O’Reilly MP, New BM (1982) Settlements above tunnels in the
United Kingdom-their magnitude and prediction. Tunnelling 82.
The Institution of Mining and Metallurgy, London, pp 55–64
45. Breth H, Chambosse G (1974) Settlement behavior of buildings
above subway tunnels in Frankfurt clay. In: Proceedings of the
conference on settlement of structures, London, pp 329–336
46. Frischmann WW, Hellings JE, Gittoes S, Snowden C (1994) Pro-
tection of the mansion house against damage caused by ground
movements due to the docklands light railway extension. In: Pro-
ceedings of the ICE-geotechnical engineering, vol 107, No 2, pp
65–76
47. Mair RJ, Taylor RN (2001) Settlement predictions for Neptune,
Murdoch, and Clegg Houses and adjacent masonry walls build-
ing response to tunnelling—case studies from construction of
the Jubilee line extension, London. Vol 1 projects and methods.
In: Burland JB, Standing JR, Jardine FM (eds) CIRIA SP200,
pp 217–228
48. Burland JB, Broms BB, de Mello VFB (1977) Behavior of founda-
tions and structures. In: State-of-the-art report proc 9th int conf
on soil mech and found engr, vol II, Tokyo, pp 495–546
49. Clerc M, Kennedy J (2002) The particle swarm-explosion, stabil-
ity, and convergence in a multi-dimensional complex space. IEEE
Trans Evol Comput 6(1):58–73
50. Diamantidis NA, Karlis D, Giakoumakis EA (2000) Unsuper-
vised stratification of cross-validation for accuracy estimation.
Artif Intell 116(1):1–16
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
13