SEISMIC ANALYSIS OF TBM TUNNEL, CAIRO METRO LINE III

Ashraf ABU-KRISHA

National Authority for Tunnels (NAT), Ramses building,

Ramses Square, P.O. BOX 466, Cairo 11794, Egypt

KEYWORDS
Seismic, Numerical modeling, TBM Tunneling,

INTRODUCTION
The proposed Metro line III is suggested from Imbaba (Northwest) to Cairo Airport (Northeast)
with a total length of about 34 Km. The project will be excavated in four phases. Construction of
the first phase of the project has been already started and extended from Attaba station to Abbasia
station with a total length of about 4.3 Km using Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM) technique. The use
of a suitable type of a tunnel boring machine will guarantee that minimum deformations of the
terrain and high excavation advance rates will be achieved in the variable geological conditions.
The internal diameter of the tunnel is 8.35 m and the excavation diameter is 9.55 m. The circular
tunnel lining consists of seven segments and one key and the length of the ring is 1.5m. The
thickness of concrete lining is assumed to be 0.40 m. and the effective joint thickness is 0.24 m.
These joints are allowing rotations and thus are impeding important forces to develop into the
lining.
The shallow tunnels in soft soil are more susceptible than others for the seismic performance of
underground structures. During the last few years, some underground structures have learned
substantial earthquakes damage. Specially, the collapse of the Daikai subway metro station in
1995 Kobe, Japan, the several highway tunnels in 1999 Chi Chi, Taiwan and the twin Bolu bored
tunnel in 1999 Kocaeli, Turkey. On October 12th 1992 an earthquake of magnitude 5.9 hit the
middle part of Egypt and its epicenter was located 20 km south west of end station of Cairo Metro
line I. That earthquake was a practical full-scale check test for line I seismic resistively. Several
hazard maps for peak ground accelerations have been prepared for Egypt by (Sobaih, et al., 1992).
Regarding the earthquake effects on underground structures can be classified into two categories:
1- Ground shaking such as seismic.
2- Ground failure such as liquefaction, fault displacement and slope instability.
The shape, dimensions, depths and the properties of the structure influence the shaking damage.
However, the properties of the surrounding soil and the severity of the seismic control the safety
factor. (Kawashima, 1999) presents a review on seismic behavior and design of underground
structures in soft soil with an emphasis on development of the seismic deformation method. The
underground structures are subject to three types of seismic motions deformations, (Hashash et al.,
2001). Axial deformations in tunnels are generated by the components of seismic waves that
produce motions parallel to the axis of the tunnel and cause alternating compression and tension.
Bending deformations are caused by the components of seismic waves producing particle motions
perpendicular to the longitudinal axis. Ovaling of circular section deformations or racking of
rectangular section deformations in tunnel structure develop when shear waves propagate normally
to the tunnel axis. The ovaling deformations that will be our subject in this paper, and that cause a
distortion of the cross-sectional shape of the TBM tunnel lining.

TBM TUNNEL RESPONSE TO OVALING DEFORMATION

The studies have recommended that ovaling may be caused by shear waves propagating obliquely.
The vertical propagating shear waves are the predominant from of earthquake loading that causes

1
these types of deformations. The ground shear distortions can be defined in the perforated ground
greater than in the non- perforated ground. The numerical analysis can be used to estimate the free-
field shear distortions, particularly if the site stratigraphy is variable. The ovaling of TBM tunnel
which will be studied in this paper is shown in Figure 1 for cross section.
The response of the tunnel lining is a function of the compressibility and flexibility ratios of the
structure, and the in-situ overburden pressure and the at-rest coefficient of earth pressure of the soil
mass. The shear stress can be further expressed as a function of shear strain. The rigidity of a tunnel
relative to the surrounding soil is quantified by the compressibility and flexibility ratios (C & F),
which are measures of the resistance against flexural and tension, (Hashash, et al., 2001).
According to various studies of tunnels, the maximum lining internal forces and soil deformations
are controlled by full-slip and no-slip of soft soil interface conditions, (Wang, 1993). The full-slip
condition gives more conservative results in terms of bending moment and lining deformation while
the no-slip gives conservative results in terms of normal forces. On the other hand, a closed-form
elastic solutions for normal force, shearing force and bending moment on the tunnel lining due to
racking deformations, (Giannakou, et al, 2005), and (Penzien, et al, 1998). In general, the site
observations confirmed that the observed damage pattern is consistent with loading induced by
vertically propagating earthquake shear waves.

GEOLOGY AND GEOTECHNICS

The geology formations along the tunnel route are typical Cairo Nile Alluvial Deposits.
Geotechnical parameters are based on the Geotechnical investigation report (NAT, 2007). The
Geotechnical formation along the tunnel route is mainly composed of three main strata as well as a
sacrificial made ground layer. These strata are sand, gravel and clay strata. Several layers were
identified in the findings of the boreholes report (NAT, 2007). A summary of the model geo-
mechanical parameters used in the current analyses is given in Table 1. The water table was ranging
between 2 to 6 m below the ground surface.

Figure (1): Deformation of TBM tunnel due to ovaling seismic waves.

Table 1: Geotechnical soil parameters

E (MPa) γ (KN/m3) C (KPa) Rayleigh

Depth ν φ (o)
damping
Fill 0 to 2.0 4 17 0.35 0 28 0.01
Upper Sand 2.0 to 6.0 40 19 0.30 0 37 0.01
Clay with silt 6.0 to 8.0 20 18.5 0.45 50 20 0.01
lower Sand 2.0 to 30 70 19 0.30 0 39 0.01

2
SEISMIC RESISTANCE THEORETICAL SOLUtION
The analytically analysis is performed using French recommendations (AFTES & AFPS 90, 2001).
This analysis was performed with a seismic acceleration of 0.15g which represents the seismic zone
of the area of the project considering with the Egyptian specification. Also, the complementary
check using a seismic acceleration of 0.20g was carried out. The maximum values of soil speed and
displacement according to this seismic acceleration are given in Table 2, (NAT, 2008). The results
of the longitudinal section for the maximum flexural internal forces are given in Table 3 while, the
results of the transversal section for the maximum flexural internal forces and deformations are
given in Table 4, (NAT, 2008).

Table 2: Soil deformations

Nominal value of Macro seismic Wave length Max. wave propagation Max. soil
acceleration (m/s2) intensity (i) (L=c/f) (m) speed (m/s) displacement
(mm)
0.15g 7 104.7 0.1 40
0.20g 8 157.1 0.2 120

Table 3: Longitudinal section results

Nominal value of Normal force (t) Bending moment (t.m) Shear force (t) Joint movement
acceleration (m/s2) (mm)
0.15g 9.9 11.4 68.2 0.3
0.20g 19.8 15.2 60.6 0.6

Table 4: Transversal section results

Nominal value of acceleration Bending moment (t.m) Shear force (t) Max. diameter deformation
(m/s2) (mm)
0.15g 0.51 0.76 0.82
0.20g 1.52 2.29 2.47

PRESENTATION OF THE NUMERICAL MODEL

The dynamic proposed of the TBM tunnel method has been analyzed numerically by finite element
software PLAXIS. A plane strain analysis has been performed. The structural model for soil media
was described by means of 15 node linearly varying strain triangular finite elements. The lining was
modeled by using of curved boundary plate elements. Standard earthquake boundaries have a
convenient default setting to generate standard boundary conditions for earthquake loading. These
boundaries consist of a combination of absorbent boundaries and prescribed displacements,
velocities or accelerations. The vertical boundaries were taken relatively far away from the tunnel.
The dynamic analysis has been carried out for shallow tunnel with depth of 11.10 m from the tunnel
crown. The finite element model is plotted in figure 2. It is constituted by a rectangular domain 100
m wide and 35 m high, in order to place far enough the lateral boundaries.

3
 Figure 2: Finite Element Mesh adopted for the TBM tunneling model.

The Mohr-Coulomb constitutive model was used for the soil. The wave velocities Vp and Vs has
been calculated related to the stiffness parameters E and ν. The material damping (Rayleigh) in the
soil is generally caused by its viscous properties, friction and the development of plasticity. The
Rayleigh damping term is assumed that is proportional to the mass and stiffness of the soil material.
The Rayleigh parameters α and β were assumed 0.01 and 0.01 respectively. The damping
coefficient C is assumed to be proportional to the soil mass M and stiffness K by means two
coefficients α and β. The damping coefficient C is obtained by next matrix equation.

C=αM+βK (1)

The time integration scheme (new mark) parameters are setting for the iterative procedures
determine the numeric time integration according to the implicit new-mark scheme. The dynamic
model analysis uses a different time parameter than other types of models. These times are time
stepping, time interval and realized end time.

CALCULATION PROCESS
In numerical computation, the earthquake loading was often imposed as an acceleration time-
history at the base of the model. Three cases of seismic action were considered for 2D analysis
using PLAXIS, which are:
• Harmonic load multiplies with frequency 7 Hz.
• Harmonic load multiplies with frequency 8 Hz.
• Load multiplier from data file (earthquake 28/2/1990).

The Harmonic load with amplitude of 1 KN/m2 and frequency of 7 Hz related to ground
acceleration of 0.15g and frequency of 8 Hz related to ground acceleration of 0.20g. Figure 3 shows
the graphical acceleration time-history that was applied in the analysis as an input data file from the
PLAXIS library. The time integration scheme (new mark) adapted in the analysis are constant and
assumed as α = 0.3025 and β =0.60. The wave absorption coefficients were used with constant
values, where C1 = 1 for dissipation in the direction normal to the boundary and C2= 0.25 in the
tangential direction. The soil Rayleigh damping parameters α and β were assumed with constant
value 0.01 and 0.01 respectively. The time interval for the duration of the earthquake loading was
10 sec. and the time inclement was chosen 1 sec.

4
 Figure 3: Accelerations time-history

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The results of the analysis of these three models show a significant increase of the internal forces
that act on the lining. Furthermore the deformations in the segmental lining increase with the effect
of the dynamic loads. Table 5 clearly indicates and comparatively results the effect of the seismic
excitation on the stability and safety of the TBM tunneling for the increase of the internal forces in
lining and its deformations. It can be noted that, the earthquake excitation has large effect on the
time history of shearing forces and bending moments. The results of the static load for the internal
forces and deformation may be observed in table 6.

Table 5: Internal forces results for seismic loads.

Nominal value of Normal force (t) Bending moment (t.m) Shear force (t) Lining
acceleration (m/s2) deformation
(mm)
0.15g 0.45 0.27 0.5 1.38
0.20g 0.84 0.42 0.33 1.21
Earthquake 28/2/1990 0.60 0.45 0.18 19.0

Table 6: Internal forces results for static load.

internal forces & Normal force (t) Bending moment (t.m) Shear force (t) Lining deformation
deformations (mm)
Static load 84.15 6.12 3.22 19.5

It can be noted that, the damping has effect on the results for the increase in the internal forces and
deformation in the segmental lining. The time history of the vertical displacements in the tunnel
lining at the crown due to earthquake excitation were plotted in figure 4 for 0.15g acceleration and
load multiplier from data file respectively. As it is observed, the maximum bending moment on the
segmental lining occurs when the differential displacement of the crown and invert of the tunnel is
maximized.

5
 |U| [m]
0.04

|U| [m]
1e-3

0.03
8e-4

6e-4
0.02

4e-4

0.01
2e-4

0
0 2 4 6 8 10
0
Dynamic time [s] 0 2 4 6 8 10
Dynamic time [s]

Figure 4: Time-history of vertical displacements at crown node.

In the figure 5 the maximum bending moments and shearing forces on the segmental lining derived
from the numerical analysis with respect to different ground acceleration are compared to those
calculated using analytically solutions, showing quite an agreement between the analytical and
numerical results.
The results of the numerical analyses show a little significant increase of the axial force that act on
the segmental lining.
1.6

1.4
Bending moment (t.m)

2.5
1.2

2
1

analysis analysis
0.8
analytical
shear force

1.5 analytical

0.6

1
0.4

0.2
0.5

0
0 0.15g 0.20g
0.15g 0.20g

Acceleration (m/s2) Acceleration (m/s2)

Figure 5: Comparison of numerical and analytical results for dynamically loads.

In terms of frequency, the dynamic responses of models are affected by the choice of these
parameters to a large extent. Figures 6a, 6b & 6c explain the results of the numerical analysis for the
three cases of seismic action for velocity and acceleration respectively. The numerical damping
coefficients chosen by the default in software have a great influence on the dynamic response of the
considering models. The dynamic numerical results are close to the expected theoretical values.

6
 Figure 6 (a): Harmonic load multiplies with frequency 7 Hz.

Figure 6 (b): Harmonic load multiplies with frequency 8 Hz.

Figure 6 (c): Load multiplier from data file (earthquake 28/2/1990).

From the results of the dynamic analysis, it is clear that there is no reflect waves back to the
numerical three models of seismic action due to the material damping coefficients consideration.

7
CONCLUSIONS
A numerical and analytical seismic hazard analyses method have been performed for TBM tunnel,
Cairo metro line III in this paper. From these analyses, it can be concluded that:

The analyses results for the internal forces and deformations are found to compare well with
analytical solutions.

The analytical analysis can be calibrated the numerical model before conducting a seismic
hazard for 2-D problem. Some parameters can be chose by comparing the dynamic response
of model under vertical shear wave's propagation to the analytical solutions.

The material damping coefficients should be taken into-consideration to represent the real
behavior of dynamic TBM tunnel models.

The design with TBM was checked under seismic hazard for phase I of Cairo Metro-Line III and
found to be of no risk and safe, even considering a soil acceleration of 0.20g.

The results confirm the merits of the numerical modelling to calculate the seismic effect on
the segmental lining of the TBM tunnel.

REFERENCES
Kawashima, K., (1999) "Seismic design of underground structures in soft ground", a review. Proceedings of
the International Symposium on Tunnelling in Difficult Ground Conditions. Tokyo, Japan.
NAT, (2007), "National Authority for Tunnels. Greater Cairo Metro Line III, phase I Geotechnical
investigation report", Cairo, Egypt.
Hashash, Y.M.A., Hook, J.J., Schmidt, B., Yao J.I-C., (2001) "Seismic design of underground structures".
Tunnelling and Underground space technology 16/4, 247-293.
Giannakou A., Nomikos P., Anastasopoulos I., Sofianos A., Gazetas G., Yiouta-Mitra. (2005), "Seismic
behaviour of tunnels in soft soil: parametric numerical study and investigation on the causes of failure of
Bolu tunnel (Düzce, Turky)". Proceedings of the 31st ITA-AITES world tunnel congress “Underground
Space Use: analysis of the past and lessons for future “, Istanbul, , Turkey.
Penzien, J., Wu, C. (1998), "Stresses in linings of bored tunnels". Int. J. Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn. 27, Pp
283 – 300.
Wang, J.-N. (1993) "Seismic design of tunnels: A state-of-the-art approach". Monograph 7. Parsons,
Brinckerhoff, Quade and Douglas Inc.
AFPS/AFTS, (2001), "Guide line on Earthquake design and protection of underground structures”, version 1,
NAT, (2008), National Authority for Tunnels. Greater Cairo Metro Line III, phase I Seismic resistance check
report, Cairo , Egypt.
Mohamed Sobaih, Rashad M. Kebeasy, Khaled A. Ahmed. (1992), Development of Seismic hazard maps for
Egypt. Inter. Journal of earthquake engineering, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 33-58.
Ahmed K.A., Sobaih M., Kebeasy R.M. (1992), Sensitivity analysis of uncertainty in estimating Seismic
hazard for Egypt. Inter. Journal of earthquake engineering, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 1-32,.