Predicting the Intensity of the Vulnerability of the Building due to Tunneling-Induced Settlement by Studying the Geomechanical Behavior of the Surrounding Medium

Document Type : Research Article

Author

Dept. of Mining Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Lorestan University, Khorramabad, Iran

Abstract

Summary
This paper investigates the effect of geotechnical parameters on the prediction of building damage severity due to tunneling-induced settlement. The influence of soil elastic modulus, cohesion, and internal friction angle on ground displacement and building deformation was studied using the numerical finite element method in the Tehran Metro Line 7 tunnel project. The severity of the building damage was analyzed based on an assessment of building deformation parameters. The results indicate that building damage severity is significantly sensitive to changes in soil elastic modulus. Minor changes in elastic modulus can lead to a shift in damage severity from structural and severe (damage grades 4 and 5) to non-structural and minor (damage grades 0 and 1). In contrast, changes in internal friction angle do not have a significant impact on damage severity. However, an increase in cohesion can be somewhat effective in reducing damage severity.
Introduction
One of the major challenges in urban tunneling is the occurrence of settlement and its detrimental effects on buildings [1]. Proper understanding of ground behavior in geotechnical projects, particularly tunneling, requires a sound comprehension of the relationship between soil strength characteristics and the surrounding environment, which enables accurate prediction of tunneling-induced building damage severity. Researchers have proposed various approaches for the evaluation and control of tunneling-induced settlement, including experimental methods [2], numerical modeling [3], physical and laboratory modeling [4], in-situ monitoring and measurements [5], and analytical methods [6]. However, adjacent buildings still suffer from minor and structural damage due to settlements [7]. Some researchers have also analyzed the tunnel-building interaction using analytical [8] and semi-analytical [9] methods.
Methodology and Approaches
In this study, the tunnel construction process was modeled using the three-dimensional finite element method. Numerical models were validated based on the results of the instruments' data deployed in the Tehran Metro Line 7 tunnel project. After reviewing the building damage criteria, five out of nine building deformation parameters induced by tunneling-induced settlement, namely maximum settlement (Sv,max), maximum differential settlement (δSv,max), maximum building slope (θmax), maximum tensile strain (εmax), and maximum angular distortion (βmax), were selected as evaluation criteria for damage severity. Then, to investigate the effect of elastic modulus changes on damage severity, numerical models were constructed by assigning a range of elastic modulus values to the soil layers. The 5 deformation parameters were analyzed based on different elastic moduli, and the damage severity level was determined. The same procedure was followed for internal friction angle and cohesion, and the results were analyzed.
Results and Conclusions
The results show that changes in the geomechanical behavior of soil layers caused by variations in geotechnical parameters affect building damage severity. Building damage severity is significantly sensitive to changes in elastic modulus, and minor changes in soil elastic modulus can lead to a shift in damage severity from structural and severe (damage classes 4 and 5) to minor and negligible (damage classes 0 and 1). This sensitivity is minimized for internal friction angle, and changes in internal friction angle do not have a significant impact on ground displacement and consequently on damage severity to buildings. The effect of increased cohesion on reducing damage severity is more pronounced than that of internal friction angle and less than that of elastic modulus, leading to a shift in damage severity from structural (damage class 4) to moderate (damage class 3). Figure 1 illustrates the impact of each geotechnical parameter on tunneling-induced building damage severity. The area of each parameter's surface represents its influence on building damage severity changes. As can be observed, building damage severity is highly sensitive to elastic modulus changes, and with increasing and decreasing elastic modulus, damage severity shifts from classes 4 and 5 to classes 0 and 1. This can be attributed to the significant impact of elastic modulus on soil cohesion and integrity. Increased soil elastic modulus reduces ground displacement and movement caused by tunneling, resulting in less severe building damage.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

[1]                  Li, P. F., Wang, F., Zhang, C. P., & Li, Z. (2019). Face stability analysis of a shallow tunnel in the saturated and multilayered soils in short-term condition. Computers and Geotechnics, 107, 25–35.
[2]                 Cao, L. Q., Zhang, D. L., & Fang, Q. (2020a). Semi-analytical prediction for tunnelling-induced ground movements in multi-layered clayey soils. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 102, 103446.
[3]                 Chu, Z. F., Wu, Z. J., Liu, Q. S., Weng, L., Xu, X. Y., Wu, K., & Sun, Z. Y. (2024). Viscos-elastic-plastic solution for deep buried tunnels considering tunnel face effect and sequential installation of double linings. Computers and Geotechnics, 165, 105930.
[4]                 Wan, M. S. P., Standing, J. R., Potts, D. M., & Burland, J. B. (2017). Measured short-term subsurface ground displacements from EPBM tunnelling in London Clay. Ge´otechnique, 67(9), 748–779.
[5]                 Li, W., & Zhang, C. P. (2020). Face stability analysis for a shield tunnel in anisotropic sands. International Journal of Geomechanics, 20(5), 04020043.
[6]                 Mollon, G., Dias, D., Soubra, A.H., 2009. Probabilistic analysis of circular tunnels in homogeneous soil using response surface methodology. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 135 (9), 1314–1325.
[7]                 Zhang, Z. G., Huang, M. S., & Zhang, M. X. (2011). Theoretical prediction of ground movements induced by tunnelling in multilayered soils. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 26(2), 345–355.
[8]                 Zymnis, D. M., Chatzigiannelis, I., & Whittle, A. J. (2013). Effect of anisotropy in ground movements caused by tunnelling.  e´otechnique, 63(13), 1083–1102.
[9]                 Eric Leca (2007). Settlements induced by tunneling in Soft Groun"; Tunneling and Underground Space Technology 22.
[10]             Peck, R. B. (1969). Deep excavations and tunneling in soft ground. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Mexico City, pp. 225–290.
[11]             Celestino, T. B., Gomes, R. A., & Bortolucci, A. A. (2000). Errors in ground distortions due to settlement trough adjustment. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 15(1), 97–100.
[12]             Lu, D. C., Lin, Q. T., Tian, Y., Du, X. L., & Gong, Q. M. (2020b). Formula for predicting ground settlement induced by tunnelling based on Gaussian function. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 103, 103443.
[13]             Boldini, D., Losacco, N., Bertolin, S., & Amorosi, A. (2018). Finite element modelling of tunnelling-induced displacements on framed structures. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 80, 222–231.
[14]             Lu, D. C., Li, X. Q., Du, X. L., Lin, Q. T., & Gong, Q. M. (2020a). Numerical simulation and analysis on the mechanical responses of the urban existing subway tunnel during the rising groundwater. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 98, 103297.
[15]             Ahmed, M., & Iskander, M. (2011). Analysis of tunneling-induced ground movements using transparent soil models. Journal
[16]             Franza, A., & Marshall, A. M. (2019). Empirical and semi-analytical methods for evaluating tunnelling-induced ground movements in sands. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 88, 47–62.
[17]             Soomro, M. A., Mangi, N., Xiong, H., Kumar, M., & Mangnejo, D. A. (2020). Centrifuge and numerical modelling of stress transfer mechanisms and settlement of pile group due to twin stacked tunnelling with different construction sequences. Computers and Geotechnics, 121, 103449.
[18]             Standing, J. R., & Selemetas, D. (2013). Greenfield ground response to EPBM tunnelling in London Clay. Ge´otechnique, 63(12), 989–1007.
[19]             Cao, L. Q., Zhang, D. L., Fang, Q., & Yu, L. (2020b). Movements of ground and existing structures induced by slurry pressure-balance tunnel boring machine (SPB TBM) tunnelling in clay. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 97, 103278.
[20]             Sagaseta, C. (1987). Analysis of undrained soil deformation due to ground loss. Ge´otechnique, 37(3), 301–320.
[21]             Verruijt, A. (1997). A complex variable solution for a deforming circular tunnel in an elastic half-plane. International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 21(2), 77–89.
[22]             Bobet, A. (2001). Analytical solutions for shallow tunnels in saturated ground. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 127(12), 1258–1266.
[23]             Yang, J. S., Liu, B. C., & Wang, M. C. (2004). Modeling of tunnelinginduced ground surface movements using stochastic medium theory. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 19(2), 113–123.
[24]             Pinto, F., & Whittle, A. J. (2014). Ground movements due to shallow tunnels in soft ground. I: Analytical solutions. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 140(4), 04013040.
[25]             Kong, F. C., Lu, D. C., Du, X. L., & Shen, C. P. (2019). Elastic analytical solution of shallow tunnel owing to twin tunnelling based on a unified displacement function. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 68, 422–442.
[26]             Zhang, Z. G., Huang, M. S., Zhang, C. P., Jiang, K. M., & Bai, Q. M. (2020). Analytical prediction of tunneling-induced ground movements and liner deformation in saturated soils considering influences of shield air pressure. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 78, 749–772.
[27]             Franza, A., & DeJong, M. J. (2019). Elastoplastic solutions to predict tunneling-induced load redistribution and deformation of surface structures. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 145(4), 04019007.
[28]             Milillo, P., Giardina, G., DeJong, M. J., Perissin, D., & Milillo, G. (2018). Multi-temporal InSAR structural damage assessment: The London crossrail case study. Remote Sensing, 10(2), 287.
[29]             Klar, A., & Marshall, A. M. (2015). Linear elastic tunnel pipeline interaction: the existence and consequence of volume loss equality. Géotechnique, 65(9), 788-792.
[30]             Elioab, E. K., Vua, H. U. N. G., Yvesa, B. O. H. A. L., Rasoola, M. E. H. D. I. Z. A. D. E. H., Michelb, K. H. O. U. R. I., Oliviera, D. E. C. K., & Pierreb, R. A. H. M. E. (2019). Influence of equivalent stiffness on the behavior of buildings subjected to soil settlements. Interface, 31(1000), 0-3.
[31]             Yiu, W. N., Burd, H. J., & Martin, C. M. (2017). Finite-element modelling for the assessment of tunnel-induced damage to a masonry building. Géotechnique, 67(9), 780-794.
[32]             Moosazadeh, S., Namazi, E., Aghababaei, H., Marto, A., Mohamad, H., & Hajihassani, M. (2019). Prediction of building damage induced by tunnelling through an optimized artificial neural network. Engineering with Computers, 35, 579-591.
[33]             Franza, A., Ritter, S., & Dejong, M. J. (2020). Continuum solutions for tunnel–building interaction and a modified framework for deformation prediction. Géotechnique, 70(2), 108-122.
[34]             Son, M., & Cording, E. J. (2020). Estimation of building damage in a 3D distorting structure to tunnel and underground excavation-induced ground movements. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 97, 103222.
[35]             Mei, Y., & Song, Q. (2021). Analytical solution for settlement of homogeneous structure where the tunnel passes underneath and its application. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 25(9), 3556-3567.
[36]             Kitiyodom, P., Matsumoto, T., & Kawaguchi, K. (2005). A simplified analysis method for piled raft foundations subjected to ground movements induced by tunnelling. International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 29(15), 1485-1507.
[37]             Huang, M., & Mu, L. (2012). Vertical response of pile raft foundations subjected to tunneling‐induced ground movements in layered soil. International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 36(8), 977-1001.
[38]             Giardina, G., Van de Graaf, A. V., Hendriks, M. A., Rots, J. G., & Marini, A. (2013). Numerical analysis of a masonry façade subject to tunnelling-induced settlements. Engineering structures, 54, 234-247.
[39]             Haji, T. K., Marshall, A. M., & Franza, A. (2018). Mixed empirical-numerical method for investigating tunnelling effects on structures. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 73, 92-104.
[40]             Dias, T. G., & Bezuijen, A. (2018). Pile tunnel interaction: Pile settlement vs Ground settlements. In WTC 2018. mci.
[41]             Qi, J., Zhang, G., Jiao, Y., Shen, L., Zheng, F., Zou, J., & Zhang, P. (2023). Semi-Analytical Prediction of Ground Surface Heave Induced by Shield Tunneling Considering Three-Dimensional Space Effect. Applied Sciences, 13(20), 11588.
[42]             Ninić, J., Gamra, A., & Ghiassi, B. (2024). Real-time assessment of tunnelling-induced damage to structures within the building information modelling framework. Underground Space, 14, 99-117.
[43]             Fu, J., Yu, Z., Wang, S., & Yang, J. (2018). Numerical analysis of framed building response to tunnelling induced ground movements. Engineering Structures, 158, 43-66.
[44]             Xu, J., Franza, A., Marshall, A. M., Losacco, N., & Boldini, D. (2021). Tunnel–framed building interaction: Comparison between raft and separate footing foundations. Géotechnique, 71(7), 631-644.
[45]             Pascariello, M.N., et al., Numerical modelling of the response of two heritage masonry buildings to nearby tunnelling. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2023. 131: p. 104845.
[46]             Chen, J., Tian, C., Luo, Y., Li, Y., Liu, W., Chen, H., & Zhu, H. (2024). Deformation behavior and damage characteristics of surface buildings induced by undercrossing of shallow large-section loess tunnels. Engineering Failure Analysis, 162, 108422.
[47]             Rieben, H. (1955) The Geology of the Tehran Plain. American Journal of Science, 253, 617-639. https://doi.org/10.2475/ajs.253.11.617
[48]             SAHEL consulting corporation (2009), Geotechnical supplementary studies report, line 7 of Tehran subway (In Persian)
[49]             Idris, J., Verdel, T., & Al-Heib, M. (2008). Numerical modelling and mechanical behaviour analysis of ancient tunnel masonry structures. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 23(3), 251-263.
[50]             Shahin, H. M., Nakai, T., Ishii, K., Iwata, T., & Kuroi, S. (2016). Investigation of influence of tunneling on existing building and tunnel: model tests and numerical simulations. Acta Geotechnica, 11, 679-692.
[51]             Boldini, D., Losacco, N., Franza, A., DeJong, M. J., Xu, J., & Marshall, A. M. (2021). Tunneling-induced deformation of bare frame structures on sand: Numerical study of building deformations. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 147(11), 04021116.
[52]             Wroth, C., & Burland, J. (1974). Settlement of buildings and associated damage. In SOA Review, Conf. Settlement of Structures. Cambridge, UK: Pentech Press.
[53]             Hudson J.A., )1992(.Comprehensive rock engineering, p.543-562, Japan, Railway Construction Public, (1996). Evaluation of Mechanical Stabilty of Underground Exavation.
[54]             Mair, R., Taylor, R., & Burland, J. (1996). Prediction of ground movements and assessment of risk of building damage due to bored tunnelling. Paper presented at the Geotechnical aspects of underground construction in soft ground.
[55]             Association Française des Tunnels et de l'Espace Souterrain (AFTES), settlement induced by tunnelling
[56]             Attewell, P. B., Yeates, J., & Selby, A. R. (1986). Soil movements induced by tunnelling and their effects on pipelines and structures.
[57]             Skempton, A. W., & MacDonald, D. H. (1956). The allowable settlements of buildings. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, 5(6), 727-768.
[58]             Grant, R., Christian, J. T., & Vanmarcke, E. H. (1974). Differential settlement of buildings. Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, 100(9), 973-991.
[59]             Kastner, R., Standing, J., & Kjekstad, O. (2003). Avoiding damage caused by soil-structure interaction: Lessons learnt from case histories: Thomas Telford.
[60]             Terzaghi, C., Settlement of structures in Europe and methods of observation. Transactions of the American Society of Civil Engineers, 1938. 103(1): p. 1432-1448.
[61]             Rankin, W. J. (1988). Ground movements resulting from urban tunnelling: predictions and effects. Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publications, 5(1), 79-92.
[62]             Polshin, D. E., & Tokar, R. A. (1957, August). Maximum allowable non-uniform settlement of structures. In Proc., 4th Int. Conf. on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering (Vol. 1, pp. 402-405). London: Butterworth’s.
[63]             Burland, J. B., Broms, B. B., & De Mello, V. F. (1978). Behaviour of foundations and structures.
[64]             Boscardin, M.D. and E.J. Cording, Building response to excavation-induced settlement. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 1989. 115(1): p. 1-21.
[65]             Bjerrum, L., & Lo, K. Y. (1963). Effect of again of the shear-strength properties of a normally consolidated clay. Geotechnique, 13(2), 147-157.

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 18 May 2024
  • Revise Date: 01 July 2024
  • Accept Date: 05 October 2024

Share

How to cite

Statistics