Acta Geotechnica (2009) 4:716

DOI 10.1007/s11440-008-0062-3

RESEARCH PAPER

Finite-element modeling of a complex deep excavation in Shanghai

Y. M. Hou J. H. Wang L. L. Zhang

Received: 25 June 2007 / Accepted: 14 February 2008 / Published online: 15 August 2008
Springer-Verlag 2008

Abstract The excavation of the north square underground shopping center of Shanghai South Railway
Station is a complex deep excavation using the top-down
construction method. The excavation has a considerable
size and is close to the operating Metro Lines. In order to
predict the performance of the excavation more accurately, 3D finite-element analyses are conducted to
simulate the construction of this complex excavation. The
effects of the anisotropic soil stiffness, the adjacent
excavation, and zone excavation on the wall deformation
are investigated. It is shown that the numerical simulation
with anisotropic soil stiffness yields a more reasonable
prediction of the wall deflection than the case with isotropic soil stiffness. The deformation of the shared
diaphragm wall between two excavations is influenced by
the construction sequence of the two excavations. The
zoned excavation can greatly reduce the diaphragm wall
deformation. However, only the zoned excavation at the
first excavation stage affects the deformation of the walls
significantly. When the depth of the excavation increases,
the zoned excavation has minor effect on the deformation
of diaphragm walls.

Y. M. Hou (&)
J. H. Wang
L. L. Zhang

Civil Engineering Department,
Shanghai Jiaotong University,
1954 Hua Shan Road, Shanghai, China
e-mail: ymhou@sjtu.edu.cn
J. H. Wang
e-mail: wjh417@sjtu.edu.cn
L. L. Zhang
e-mail: lulu_zhang@sjtu.edu.cn

Keywords Anisotropic stiffness
Deep excavation

3D finite-element method
Zoned excavation

1 Introduction
With the rapid increase of construction in urban areas of
Shanghai, more and more excavations are constructed
adjacent to the existing Metro Lines or sensitive superstructures. The impact of the excavations on surrounding
structures is a major concern. The excavation for the north
square underground shopping center of Shanghai South
Railway Station was a large size, complex deep excavation.
The depth of the excavation was 14.7 m and the total area
of the excavation was 40,000 m2. It was only about 3 m
away from the operating Shanghai Metro Lines No. 1 and
No. 3. In addition, the excavation of the interchange station
of Metro Lines No. 1 and No. 3 was located besides this
excavation in the northeast and was carried out during the
construction of this excavation. A reliable prediction of the
performance of this excavation is therefore essential in
design stage.
After its first application to the analysis of excavation by
Clough et al. [2], the finite-element (FE) method has been
used to predict soil deformations and wall deflections in
many research studies [35, 8, 9, 11, 13]. FE analysis could
estimate the wall deflections of complex excavations by
simulating various construction sequences. The accuracy of
the numerical analysis is mainly affected by the constitutive models of the soil. Ng et al. [10] illustrated the
significance of inherent stiffness anisotropy on ground
deformation around deep excavations. Generally, the soils
in Shanghai are sedimentary soils, which are deposited
through sedimentation followed by consolidation under
accumulative overburden. Zhao et al. [16] performed a

123

Acta Geotechnica (2009) 4:716

Coefficent of compressibility: a

8
9.0x10

-4

8.0x10

-4

7.0x10

-4

6.0x10

-4

p=0~50 kPa
p=50~100 kPa
p=100~200 kPa
p=200~400 kPa

Surface of the
deposition

Cut plane

5.0x10

-4

4.0x10

-4

Angle of soil sampling

0

15

30

45

60

75

90

()
Fig. 1 The relationship between the coefficient of compressibility and the angle of soil sampling of a silty clay in Shanghai (modified from Zhao
et al. [16])

series of oedometer tests to investigate the inherent

anisotropy of a silty clay in Shanghai. Soil samples were
sliced at certain angles, i.e., 0, 15, 30, 45, 60, 75, and
90, to the plane of deposition and extracted from the soil
layer for the oedometer tests. They found out that the
coefficients of compressibility of the silty clay, are different for soil samples with different sampling angles (Fig. 1).
The compressibility of the silty clay in Shanghai generally
increases with the sampling angle. Therefore, it may be
necessary to consider soil anisotropy in numerical analysis
of deep excavation in Shanghai in order to obtain a realistic
prediction of ground movement of the excavation.
In this paper, 3D finite-element modeling is used to study
the performance of this large size complex excavation of the
north square underground shopping center of Shanghai
South Railway Station. The detailed construction process
including installation of foundation piles and diaphragm

walls, zoned excavation and installation of horizontal support system is simulated. The calculated wall deflection is
compared with the observed performance. The effects of the
anisotropic soil stiffness, the adjacent excavation, and zone
excavation on the wall deformation are investigated.

2 Ground conditions and construction sequences

The excavation site of the north square underground
shopping center of Shanghai South Railway Station is
located on the south of Shanghai. Figure 2 shows the layout of the excavation. The excavation was only about 3 m
away from the existing tunnels of Shanghai metro line No.
1 and No. 3, which were on the northwest and northeast
side of the excavation, respectively. The new route of
Shanghai metro line No. 1 was in the east of the site. The

Metro line No.1

Inclinometers in wall

IT11

Inclinometers in soil
IT10
IT9
IT8

IT7

I33
I38 I37 I36
I35
I39

I32

I31

I28 I27I26 I25

I30 I29

I22

I34

I21
I20

I40

1
I2

IT1
IT2
0 10 20 (m)

I3

I8
I5

I4
IT3

IT4

I6
IT5

I9

I10

I11

I12

I13

I14

I7
IT6

Scale

Fig. 2 The location and instrumentation of the excavation site

Metro line No.3

I24 I23

I41
I1

123

Diaphragm wall

New metro line No. 1 (planned)

Shanghai south railway staition

I19

I18
I15 I16 I17

Excavation
site of
interchange
station of
metro line
No. 1 and
No. 3

Acta Geotechnica (2009) 4:716

Soil layers
Fill
Silty clay
Very soft
silty clay

Depth (m)

10

3
t (kN/m ) w,w l,w p (%)

16 18 20

Cc

20 40 600.5 1.0 1.5

S u (kPa)

c (kPa)

0.5 1.0 0 40 80 0 20 40 0

( )

20

40

20

30

Silty sand

Silty clay

1- 1

40

Silty sand

w
wl
wp

50

Fig. 3 Soil profiles and variation of soil properties with depth

minimum distance between the excavation and the tunnel

was only 2 m. In addition, the excavation of the interchange station of Metro Lines No. 1 and No. 3 was located
besides this excavation in northeast and was constructed
before this excavation. The retaining walls of the two
excavations were shared by both excavations. To monitor
the performance of the excavation, as shown in Fig. 2, 41
inclinometers I1I41 were installed in the diaphragm walls
to measure the rotation and deflections of the walls. The
inclinometers IT1IT11 was installed to monitor the
ground movement near the metro tunnel.
According to the site investigation report, the site is
underlain by thick, relatively soft, quaternary alluvial,

and marine deposits. As shown in Fig. 3, the subsurface

consist of a 1.2 m thick fill layer, which is mainly
medium dense sand. Beneath the fill layer, there is a 2 m
thick silty clay layer. Two layers of very soft silty clay
with total thickness of 16.8 m are underneath the silty
clay layer. The subsequent soil layers are a silty sand
layer, a silty clay layer and a silty sand layer. In Fig. 3,
the variation of soil properties, i.e., the soil unit weight,
the water content, the void ratio of the soils, the compression index of the soils, etc., with the depth are
illustrated. It can be seen that the soils in this excavation
site are generally soft soils with low shear strength and
low modulus of deformation.

Fig. 4 Cross section AA of the excavation

123

10

Acta Geotechnica (2009) 4:716

To reduce the wall deflection during the construction, the

excavation is carried out in layers and zones and the
concrete floor slabs were also cast by zones. The sequence
of the zoned excavation is shown in Fig. 2.

3 Finite-element modeling of the excavation

Fig. 5 Cross section BB of the excavation

Figures 4 and 5 present the retaining structures of the

excavation in cross sections AA and BB, respectively.
The excavation was 14.7 m deep with two basement levels
and was supported by 0.8 m thick diaphragm walls. The
depth of the diaphragm walls was about 24 m. As the topdown method was adopted, three levels of concrete floor
slabs were employed to support the diaphragm walls at
depths of-3.0, -8.45, and -14.7 m. The site of the
interchange station of Shanghai metro line No. 1 and No. 3
was adjacent to the excavation site. The 12.1 m deep
excavation of that site was conducted using the bottom-up
method. A 0.8 m thick and 27.85 m deep diaphragm wall
was adopted as the earth-retaining structure of that site.
There were three levels of steel struts to support the
excavation, which were at elevations of -2.83, -6.43, and
-9.83 m, respectively. The diaphragm walls between the
two excavations were shared by both excavations.
The construction sequences of this excavation together
with the excavation of the interchange station are as
follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

Stage 1: excavate to -3.75 m

Stage 2: install diaphragm walls and piles
Stage 3: excavate the adjacent site of the interchange
station to the bottom (-12.1 m) and install steel struts
Stage 4: construct the roof slab (B0F) at -3.00 m and
then excavate to -7.50 m
Stage 5: excavate to -10.00 m
Stage 6: construct the first floor slab (B1F) at -8.45 m
and then excavate to -12.00 m
Stage 7: excavate to the bottom of the excavation and
construct the second floor slab (B2F).

123

A 3D finite-element model (1,200 m 9 500 m 9 80 m)

was established using the general-purpose nonlinear finiteelement analysis program suite ABAQUS. The meshes of
the entire model and the retaining structures are shown in
Fig. 6. The 3D solid elements were used for soils. The
columns and girders of the structure are simulated by
beam elements. The diaphragm walls and the concrete
floor slabs are modeled using shell elements. The entire
3D model consists of 155,306 elements and 178,053
nodes. To reduce the computation load, all the elements
are linear-order elements. The four side boundary surfaces
are fixed along the direction perpendicular to each surface. The bottom boundary is constrained along all x, y,
and z directions.
The diaphragm walls, the steel columns, the RC piles of
the foundation, and the floor slabs are modeled as isotropic
linear-elastic materials. The Youngs modulus and the
Poissons ratio of the concrete are taken as 30 GPa and 0.2,
respectively, while those of the steel are taken as 211 GPa
and 0.3, respectively.
Considering the complexity of the 3D finite-element
mesh, the difficulties of numerical modeling and the
computation time, it is reasonable to model soil as elastic
material. As the soils in the site are generally quaternary
alluvial and marine soils, deposited through the process of
sedimentation followed by consolidation in horizontal
layers, the anisotropy of soil properties needs to be considered in the numerical analysis. In this study, two cases
with different soil stiffness, i.e., one with the isotropic
soil properties and the other with anisotropic soil properties, are conducted. In the case with anisotropic soil
properties, the soils are assumed to be cross-anisotropic
materials with inherent anisotropy. The stress-induced
anisotropy and the change of the degree of anisotropy due
to excavation are ignored. For an idealized cross-anisotropic elastic material, the stress-strain behavior is
governed by five independent elastic parameters: Eh, Ev,
Gvh, mvh and mhh, where Eh and Ev are the Youngs moduli
in the horizontal and vertical directions, respectively; Gvh
is the shear modulus in any vertical plane; mhh is the
Poissons ratio for the effect of horizontal strain on the
complementary horizontal plane; and mvh is the Poissons
ratio for the effect of vertical strain on horizontal strain.
As the stress path of the soils around an excavation
corresponds approximately to a triaxial extension

Acta Geotechnica (2009) 4:716

11

Fig. 6 Mesh of the 3D finite-element model

condition [12], the extension moduli of the soils should be

used in the numerical analysis. Becker [1] summarized
the undrained anisotropic elastic parameters for various
clays based on experiment results. The ratio of Eh/Ev
ranges from 0.5 to 2.4, and the ratio of Gvh/Ev varies from
0.23 to 0.44. Lee [7] suggested that the ratio of Gvh/Ev

should be 40-100% of the value of G/E under isotropic

condition. In this study, the Youngs modulus in the
vertical direction, Ev, is assumed to be four times of the
modulus of compressibility Ec, which was determined
by laboratory oedometer tests. The ratios of Eh/Ev and
Gvh/Ev of the soils are assumed to be 0.6 and 0.26,

123

12

Acta Geotechnica (2009) 4:716

Table 1 Soil parameters used in numerical analysis

Soil layer no.

Soil type

ct (kN/m3)

K0

Fill

19.1

0.50

5,530

13.27

22.12

Silty clay

19.5

0.50

3,870

9.28

15.48

Very soft silty clay

17.8

0.55

3,040

7.29

12.16

Ec (kPa)

Eh (MPa)

Very soft silty clay

17.0

0.64

2,090

Silty sand

18.5

0.52

13,750

33

Silty clay

24.3

0.43

20,250

1-1

Silty sand

19.3

0.43

respectively. Table 1 presents the list of soil parameters

adopted for the case with anisotropic soil properties. For
the case with isotropic soil properties, the Youngs
modulus E and the Poissons ratio m are equal to the values
of Ev and mhh in Table 1. The effects of the anisotropic
soil stiffness will be discussed in the next section.
Numerical analysis was performed following the construction sequence of the excavation. The detailed
construction process such as installation of piles and diaphragm walls, the construction of the interchange station
excavation and the zoned and layered excavation are also
simulated. The effects of the adjacent excavation and
zoned excavation procedure will be presented and discussed in the next section.

4 Results of numerical analysis and discussion

4.1 Effects of anisotropic soil stiffness
Figure 7 presents the contours of the wall deflections of the
diaphragm walls for the case with anisotropic soil properties. The 3D behavior [15] of the diaphragm walls is
illustrated clearly in this graph. The wall deflections near
the corners are much smaller than those of the walls near
the center. The wall deflection is also influenced by the
shape of the wall. For those panels forming a wall with arc
shape, the lateral displacements of the walls are relatively
small.

48.6
120

Ev (MPa)

8.36
55
81
200

mvh

mhh

6.2

0.33

0.35

4.0

0.29

0.30

3.16

0.33

0.35

Gvh (MPa)

0.37

0.42

14.3

2.17

0.29

0.30

21.06

0.29

0.30

0.29

0.30

520

Figure 8 shows the calculated wall deflections and the

field measurements at inclinometers I6 and I29 during the
whole process of the excavation. The inclinometer I6 is
close to the planned new tunnels of metro line No. 1 and
the inclinometer I29 is adjacent to the existing metro line
No. 1. At stage 4, the wall was propped by the roof slab at
the elevation of -3.00 m. Due to the excavation of previous stages, the diaphragm wall moved towards the
excavation. With the subsequent excavation, the wall
deflection continued to increase. At the final stage of the
excavation, a deep-seated deflected shape of the wall was
observed and the maximum wall deflection occurred
around the bottom of the excavation. The ratios of the
maximum measured wall deflection to the final excavation
depth at the inclinometers I6 and I29 were 0.34 and 0.32%,
respectively, which are within the range of the reported
values in [14].
According to Fig. 8, the calculated wall deflections of
the anisotropic case agree well with the measured ones,
while the calculated wall deflections of the isotropic case
are generally smaller than the field measurements. The
computed maximum wall deflections for the anisotropic
case were about 24.5 and 37.9% larger than the isotropic
case at I6 and I29, respectively. The maximum difference
between the measured and calculated deflection for the
anisotropic case is about 8%. However, the maximum
difference between the measured and the computed results
for the isotropic case is about 30%. Therefore, the soil
models with anisotropic stiffness can significantly improve

Fig. 7 The contours of the calculated wall deflections at stage 7 for the case with anisotropic soil stiffness (unit: mm)

123

Acta Geotechnica (2009) 4:716

(a)

13
0

0
I6

I6

I6

IT10

-5

-5

-15

-10
-20
-25

10 20 30 40

(b) 0

Stage 7

Stage 6

Stage 4

-30

10 20 30 40

10 20 30 40

Lateral displacement (mm)

Measured
Anisotropic
I29

I29

Depth (mm)

Depth (m)

-10

-15

-20

Isotropic )
I29

Measured
Anisotropic
Isotropic

-25

-5

Depth (m)

-10

-30
-15

10

20

30

Lateral displacement (mm)

-20

Fig. 9 Effect of the anisotropic soil stiffness on the calculated soil

lateral displacement at inclinometer IT10

-25

0 10 20 30 40

Stage 7

Stage 6

Stage 4

-30

10 20 30 40

10 20 30 40

Lateral displacement (mm)

(

Measured

Anisotropic

Isotropic )

Fig. 8 Effect of the anisotropic soil stiffness on the calculated wall

deflections at a inclinometer I6 and b inclinometer I29

diaphragm walls between the two excavations were shared.

Figure 10 illustrates the 3D deformation behavior of the
diaphragm walls around the excavation of the interchange
station. It can be seen that the deflections of the shared
diaphragm walls are smaller than those of other wall

the accuracy of the prediction of the wall deflection for the

site with horizontally deposited soils.
Figure 9 illustrates the soil displacement in horizontal
direction at inclinometer IT10. The maximum value of the
observed horizontal soil movement at IT10 was about
18 mm, which is much smaller than the maximum wall
deflection of the inclinometer I29. This shows that the
retaining structure of the excavation reduced the ground
movement and the deformation of the operating tunnels of
metro line No. 1 is well controlled. The computed maximum ground movement of the anisotropic case is 18.4 mm,
while the computed maximum ground movement of the
isotropic case is only 14.7 mm. Obviously, the numerical
analysis with anisotropic soil parameters yields better
estimation of the maximum lateral ground movement.
4.2 Effect of adjacent excavation
The excavation of the interchange station of Metro Lines
No. 1 and No. 3 was located besides this excavation in
northeast side and was excavated to the bottom level before
the construction of the roof slab of this excavation. The

Fig. 10 The contours of the calculated wall deflections around the

excavation of the interchange station at a stage 3 and b stage 7
(unit: mm)

123

14

Acta Geotechnica (2009) 4:716

sections. This is because the deformation of the shared

walls is affected by the excavation process on both sides of
the walls. After the excavation of the interchange station is
finished, the maximum displacement of the share wall is
about 30 mm. When the excavation of the north square
starts, the shared wall starts to move to the side of that
excavation, and hence the deflection of the shared wall is
reduced.
Figure 11 shows the measured and calculated deflections of the shared diaphragm wall at the inclinometers I16
and I18. In each diagram the wall deflection is greater than
zero, it means that the wall moves to the side of the
excavation of the north square. If the lateral displacement

(a)

of the wall is negative, it means that the diaphragm wall

moves towards the site of the interchange station. The
calculated wall defections are for the case with anisotropic
soil properties.
According to the field measurements, after the site of
the interchange station was excavated, the wall gradually
moved towards the side of that excavation. When the site
of the interchange station was excavated to the bottom
level, the maximum wall deflections at inclinometers I16
and I18 were 35.5 mm and 34.7 mm, respectively. After
the excavation of the north square started, the shared
diaphragm wall moved towards the side of that excavation
and the wall deflection was reduced. At stage 7, the

Stage 3

Stage 4

Stage 6

Stage 7

-5

Depth (m)

-10

-15

-20

-25

-30

-35
10

Interchange
station
excavation
side

I 16
0 -10 -20 -30 -40

10 0 -10 -20 -30 -40

Lateral displacement (mm) (

(b)

10 0 -10 -20 -30 -40

measured

10 0 -10 -20 -30 -40

calculated )

Stage 3

Stage 4

Stage 7

Stage 6

-5

-10

Depth (m)

-15

-20

-25

-30

-35
10

Interchange
station
excavation
side

I 18
0 -10 -20 -30 -40

10 0 -10 -20 -30 -40

Lateral displacement (mm) (

10 0 -10 -20 -30 -40

measured

10 0 -10 -20 -30 -40

calculated )

Fig. 11 Comparison of the observed and calculated wall deflection of the shared diaphragm wall between the excavations at a inclinometer I16
and b inclinometer I18

123

Acta Geotechnica (2009) 4:716

0
I6

I6

Stage 4

Stage 6

I6

-5
-10

Depth (m)

maximum deflection at inclinometer I16 and I18 were

16.45 mm and 12.32 mm, respectively. The point of the
maximum wall deflection moved upwards from around 14 m at stage 3 to -11 m at stage 7. However, as indicated in Fig. 11, even after the excavation was completed,
the shared wall still deflected towards the site of the
interchange station, especially the lower part of the walls,
which is below the bottom of the excavation of the
interchange station.
As shown in Fig. 11, the calculated results of the 3D
finite-element analysis agree well with the field measurements except for the final two stages. For inclinometer I18,
the shape of the calculated wall deflection and the measured one at stage 7 are different. The reason is probably
that after the site of the interchange station was excavated
to the bottom level, the steel struts were demolished in
zones and the concrete slabs were cast subsequently.
However, it would take several days before the construction of all concrete slabs were finished and the whole floor
slab was formed to support the walls. Therefore, the lateral
movement of the shared diaphragm walls was mostly
influenced by the excavation of the north square. While in
the 3D finite-element analysis of this study, the steel struts
in the interchange station site are kept during the construction of the excavation of north square. The
demolishment of the steel struts and the construction of the
concrete slab of the adjacent interchange station are not
modeled as the detailed construction sequence of the site of
the interchange station is not available.

15

-15
-20
-25
-30
0

20

40

60

20

40

60

Stage 7
0

20

40

60

Lateral displacement (mm)

(

Measured

Zoned

Unzoned )

Fig. 12 The effect of zoned excavation on the wall deflection at

inclinometer I6

unzoned excavation, the soils above -7.0 m are removed

all at once at stage 4 and the walls deflect without support
of the roof concrete slab. After the roof slab is cast, the
displacement at the top of the wall remains unchanged and
the deflection of the lower part of the wall is restricted by
the floor slabs during the subsequent stage of excavation.
When the excavation is completed, the maximum wall
deflection at inclinometers I6 of the unzoned excavation is
51.5% larger than that of the zoned case. Therefore, the
zoned excavation can greatly reduce the diaphragm wall
deformation.
Ou et al. [15] studied the effect of zoned excavation
using finite-element analysis. However, the comparison of

4.3 Effect of zoned excavation

0

Zoned
Unzoned

-5

-10

Depth (m)

In order to investigate the effect of zoned excavation on the

wall deformation, two types of 3D finite-element analysis,
zoned excavation, and unzoned excavation, are performed.
The construction sequence employed in the studies of the
previous sections is termed as zoned excavation, in which
the soils are excavated by zones as shown in Fig. 2. In the
case of unzoned excavation, the soils are removed in the
entire excavation area at once in each stage of the excavation. In both cases, the soil properties are anisotropic.
Figure 12 presents the comparison of the calculated wall
deflections at inclinometer I6 for the cases of zoned and
unzoned excavation. As indicated in this figure, zoned
excavation has significant effect on the wall deflection. At
stage 4, the shape of the wall deflection of the case of
unzoned excavation is cantilever-type, which is significantly different from the observed shape of the wall
deflection. It is because in the case of zoned excavation, the
roof concrete slab is constructed soon after the excavation
in each zone and therefore the concrete slab in the excavated zone and the soils in the unexcavated zone restrict
the deformation of the walls. However, in the case of

-15

-20

-25

-30
-4

-2

Incremental wall displacement (mm)

Fig. 13 Incremental wall deflection at inclinometer I6 from stage 6 to

stage 7

123

16

Acta Geotechnica (2009) 4:716

zoned excavation and unzoned excavation is performed

only for the final stage. Therefore, the difference between
zone and unzoned excavations appears to be insignificant.
Figure 13 presents the incremental deflection of the diaphragm wall at inclinometer I6 from stage 6 to stage 7. It
can be seen that at the final stage, the incremental wall
deflection is only slightly affected by the zoned excavation.
This observation agrees with the findings by Ou et al. [15].
According to Fig. 12 and Fig. 13, zoned excavation at the
first excavation stage significantly affects the deformation
of the walls. When the depth of the excavation increases,
zoned excavation has less effect on the deflection of diaphragm walls.

5 Conclusions
This paper presents a 3D finite element modeling for the
excavation of the north square of Shanghai South Railway
Station. The following conclusions can be made:
1.

2.

3.

The assumption of soil stiffness has significant effect

on the wall deformation. The numerical simulation
with anisotropic soil stiffness yields better prediction
of the wall deflection compared with the case with
isotropic soil stiffness.
The deformation of the shared diaphragm wall
between two excavations is influenced by construction
sequence of both excavations.
For a large excavation, zoned excavation can greatly
reduce the diaphragm wall deformation. However,
only the zoned excavation at the first excavation stage
affects the deformation of the walls significantly.
When the depth of the excavation increases, the zoned
excavation has minor effect on the deformation of
diaphragm walls.

Acknowledgments This study was substantially supported by the

grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant
No. 50679041) and the Shanghai Municipal Sciences and Technology
Committee (Grant No. 04DZ12001).

123

References
1. Becker DE (1981) Settlement analysis of intermittently-loaded
structures founded on clay sub-soils. PhD thesis, University of
Western Ontario
2. Clough GW, Weber PR and Lamont J (1972) Design and
observation of excavation support systems by iterative design. In:
Proc ASCE Spec Conf on Perf of Earth and Earth-supported
Struct ASCE, New York, 1:13671390
3. Finno RJ, Harahap IS (1991) Finite-element analysis of HDR-4
excavation. J Geotech Eng ASCE 117(10):15901609
4. Finno RJ, Blackburn JT, Roboski JF (2007) Three-dimensional
effects for supported excavations in clay. J Geotech Eng ASCE,
113(1): 3036. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2007)133:1(30)
5. Gourvenec SM, Powrie W (2000) Three-dimensional finite-element analysis of embedded retaining walls supported by
discontinuous earth berms. Can Geotech J 37:10621077
6. Hu ZF, Yue ZQ, Zhou J, Tham LG (2003) Design and construction of a deep excavation in soft soils adjacent to the
Shanghai Metro tunnels. Can Geotech J 40:933948. doi:
10.1139/T03-041
7. Lee KM, Rowe RK (1989) Deformations caused by surface
loading and tunneling: the role of elastic anisotropy. Geotechnique 39(1):125140
8. Mana AI, Clough GW (1981) Prediction of movement for braced
cut in clay. J Geotech Eng ASCE 107(8):759777
9. Ng CWW, Lings ML (1995) Effects of modeling soil non-linearity and wall installation on back-analysis of deep excavation in
stiff clay. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE. 121(10):687695
10. Ng CWW, Leung EHY, Lau CK (2004) Inherent anisotropic
stiffness of weathered geomaterial and its influence on ground
deformations around deep excavations. Can Geotech J 41:1224
11. Ng CWW, Simpson B, Lings ML, Nash DFT (1998) Numerical
analysis of a multipropped excavation in stiff clay. Can Geotech J
35:115130
12. Ng RMC (1984) Ground reaction and behavior of tunnels in soft
clays. PhD thesis, University of Western Ontario
13. Ou CY, Chiou DC, Wu TS (1996) Three-dimensional finite element analysis of deep excavations. J Geotech Eng ASCE
122(5):337345
14. Ou CY, Hsieh PG, Chiou DC (1993) Characteristics of ground
surface settlement during excavation. Can Geotech J 30(5):758
767
15. Ou CY, Shiau BY, Wang IW (2000) Three-dimensional deformation behavior of the Taipei National Enterprise Center (TNEC)
excavation case history. Can Geotech J 37:438448
16. Zhao HH, Yuan JY, Ye ZC (2002) Experimental study on the
anisotropy of brownyellow silty clay in Shanghai (in Chinese).
Site Investigation Sci Technol 4:2124