See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264187991

Ground Behavior around Tunnel Using Tunnel-

shaped Trapdoor Model Test

Article April 2014

DOI: 10.7843/kgs.2014.30.4.65

CITATIONS READS

0 179

3 authors, including:

Sang-Hwan Kim
Hoseo University
26 PUBLICATIONS 65 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Sang-Hwan Kim on 04 August 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are added to the original document
and are linked to publications on ResearchGate, letting you access and read them immediately.
 30 4 2014 4 pp. 65 80 ISSN 1229-2427 (Print)
JOURNAL OF THE KOREAN GEOTECHNICAL SOCIETY ISSN 2288-646X (Online)
Vol.30, No.4, April 2014 pp. 65 80 http://dx.doi.org/10.7843/kgs.2014.30.4.65

Trapdoor
Ground Behavior around Tunnel Using Tunnel-shaped Trapdoor Model Test

1
Han, Young-Chul
2
Kim, Sang-Hwan
3
Jeong, Sang-Seom

Abstract
This study conducted Trapdoor tests with actual tunnel shape, investigated the mechanical behavior of ground and
loosening load on tunnels, and evaluated the mechanism of progressive failure by numerical simulation. The loosening
load sharply decreased initially, but it generally increased and reached the stabilized level exhibiting the arching effect,
and loose sand showed relatively higher values than those of dense sand. The shear band started from the tunnel shoulder
with 63 (loose sand) to 69 (dense sand), and gently curved inward to the ground surface. The widths of shear band
formation above the tunnel showed a range from 1.8b to 1.9b (b=Tunnel width), which are similar to those values
calculated from existing formular. The vertical height of this shear band for deep tunnel was turned out to be a bit
lower than that from existing studies (3.0*Tunnel Height).

Trapdoor ,
. Trapdoor
,
. 63() 69()
. 1.83
b1.92b(b ) ,
1.52.0 ( 3.0) .

Keywords : Trapdoor, Progressive failure, Loosening loads, Ground Arch, Plastic zone, Shear band

1. Trapdoor
(Terzaghi, 1943)
Terzaghi(1936) ,

1 , (Member, Ph.D. Research Associate, Dept. of Civil Engrg., Yonsei Univ.)

2 , (Member, Professor, Dept. of Civil Engrg., Univ. of Hoseo)
3 , (Member, Prof., Dept. of Civil Engrg., Yonsei Univ., Tel: +82-2-2123-2807, Fax: +82-2-364-5300, soj9081@yonsei.ac.kr,
Corresponding author, )
* 2014 10 31 . .

Copyright 2014 by the Korean Geotechnical Society

This is an Open-Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0)
which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Trapdoor 65
 3 (Zone-III)
(Evans, 1983). .
Trapdoor
(Adachi et al., 1985)
2 Terzaghi(1936, 1943) (Ground Arch)
Ladanyi and Hoyaux(1969),
Murayama and Matsuoka(1971), Evans(1983), Tanaka Fig. 1 2
and Sakai(1993), Adachi et al.(2002), Shahin et al.(2004), (Zone-II) Trapdoor
Chevalier(2011) Trapdoor
. .
, Terzaghi Trapdoor
(Photogrammetric Trapdoor
Method) , Plaxis 2D(Ver. 8.2)
(Ladanyi and Hoyaux, 1969; Murayama et al., 1971;
Adachi et al., 1985; Lee et al., 2006; Shahin et al., 2008).
Terzaghi Trapdoor ,
(Plate Trapdoor)
Trapdoor (Kim et al., 2011).

(Terzaghi, 1943). Trapdoor Washington DC
(Hansmire and Cording, 1985)
(shear band) (Load transfer) (pressurized pipe, air bag/tube)
(arching effect) (Atkinson et al., 1975; Kolymbas, 1982; Akutagawa
, Murayama and Matsuoka(1971), Tanaka(1993) et al., 1998, 2000)
Fig. 1 Trapdoor ,
3 Trapdoor
1 (Zone-I),
2 (Zone-II),
(Progressive Failure Mechanism)
.

10% (Sugiyama,
1993)
.

2.

Terzaghi(1936, 1943)
,

Fig. 1. Zoning of ground behavior above the Trapdoor (Murayama,
1971) . Terzaghi

66 30 4
(1943) Trapdoor Fig. 2 ( D>5B1) Fig. 3

(1) , D1
45-/2
(Evans, (2) .
1983).




(1)
(2)

, = 1/2, =, =, , =, = ,
=, =, = = ()

Terzaghi(1946)
(D1) 1.5
(Fig. 3), Fig. 4a
Fig. 4b

(equivalent overburden
height, Hp) . (D)
(Hp,mim)
,
(Hp max) ,
(time increase
of loosening load) (Hp,ult) 15%
(a) (b)
Table 1
Fig. 2. Shallow tunnel (a) flow of soil when yielding happened
(b) vertical stress profile (Terzaghi, 1943) (Hp) .
Terzaghi

(a) (b) (a) (b)

Fig. 3. Deep tunnel (a) yielding zone (b) vertical stress profile Fig. 4. Configuration of ground arch (a) and simplified model of
(Terzaghi, 1943) loads on tunnel support (b) (Terzaghi, 1946)

Trapdoor 67
 3.
Szchy(1969)
Table 2 3.1
(Schmitt, 2009).
2 Fig. 6 120cm60cm
Bierbumer Protodjakonov 85cm(),
Fig. 5
. Trapdoor( 15cm8cm) 3

Table 1. Equivalent overburden height in sands (Terzaghi, Proctor and White, 1946)

Above water level Below water level

Materials
Hp mim Hp max Hp mim Hp max

Initial 0.27(B+Ht) 0.60(B+Ht) 0.54(B+Ht) 1.20(B+Ht)

Dense sand
Ultimate 0.31(B+Ht) 0.69(B+Ht) 0.62(B+Ht) 1.38(B+Ht)
Initial 0.47(B+Ht) 0.60(B+Ht) 0.94(B+Ht) 1.20(B+Ht)
Loose sand
Ultimate 0.54(B+Ht) 0.69(B+Ht) 1.08(B+Ht) 1.38(B+Ht)

Table 2. Experimental theories of loosening loads applied to tunnel (Schmitt, 2009)

Considering overburden Neglecting overburden

Bierbumer, A. (1913) (after Szchy,1969) Engesser, F. (1882)
Suquet, A. (1920) Forchheimer, P. (1882)
Maillart, R. (1923) Ritter, W. (1879)
Jaky, J. (1925) Kommerell, O. (1940)
Eszt, P. (1939) Harosy, T. (1958)
Terzaghi, K.V. (1946) Szchy, K. (1963)
Balla, A. (1963) Protodjakonov M.M. (1961) (after Szchy,1969)

p=
, ,


where, ; uniaxial strength


bell loads ,

(a) Bierbumer (after Szchy,1973) (b) Protodjakonov (after Szchy,1969)

Fig. 5. Models of experimental theories for loosening load (Schmitt, 2009)

68 30 4
 Fig. 6. Apparatus and setup of model test

. Trapdoor Table 3. Physical properties of Jumunjin standard sand

Trapdoor Specific gravity (Gs) 2.65 (mm) 0.42

. 15cm12.5cm(, Uniformity coeff. (Cu) 1.48 (mm) 0.62

) 12.0m10.0m Curvature coeff. (Cg) 0.96 UCSC SP

1/80 ,
(guide support)
, Table 3 .
.
3.3 (CD-)
3.2

( 30%)

(a) Dense Sand (Dr.=80%) (a) Loose Sand (Dr.=30%)

Fig. 7. Stress paths on p-q space for Jumujin sand

Trapdoor 69
(80%) ,
(CD-) .
. (
) 5kPa (stress .
level) (c) 5kPa, 13kPa 18kPa
3.5
(Sress path) Fig. 7
Table 4 .

3.4 (p, kN/mm)
Fig. 8 .
Fig. 8
(h) 2h 4h Trapdoor
3( 80mm 3ea.) ,
3 .
.
(severe squeezing) .
5% (Hoek, 2001)
5.33% 4.0mm
.
0.01mm/sec 0
(lever) ,
.
(0) Trapdoor .

Table 4. Summary of results by Triaxial compression test

Type Relative density (Dr) Dry unit weight ( ) Cohesion (c) Internal friction angle () Deformation modulus (Es)
3 2
Loose sand 30% 14.10 kN/m 0.0 kN/m 39.78 6.30E+03 kPa
3 2
Dense sand 80% 15.81 kN/m 0.0 kN/m 45.69 1.02E+04 kPa

(a) Dense sand (DS) (a) Loose Sand (LS)

Fig. 8. Results of loads versus Trapdoor displacement (h; Tunnel height)

70 30 4
 ,
( ) (dilatancy)
(Normalized Force Ratio, p/p0)
Fig. 9 . Fig. 9 .
(0.2mm) Terzaghi Trapdoor
Trapdoor
,
(LS 2h) Fig. 10 . Fig. 10
1.2 . 10mm (s/B>10%)
Trapdoor(B) 3 (a)
, (0.76.0mm) (p/p0=330%)
. , ,
2 3 (p/p0=1240%) , Trapdoor
. Fig. 9 (B) 2 (b)
(DS 4h) (p/p0=1048%) (0.76.0mm)

(a) Dense Sand (DS) (a) Loose Sand (LS)

Fig. 9. Normalized force versus displacement curves with overburden (h; Tunnel Height)

(a) Large displacements (D>3.0B) (b) Large displacements (D<2.0B)

Fig. 10. Distribution of Normalized force versus displacement curves on various experimental Trapdoor tests

Trapdoor 71
 25mm Plaxis
((p/p0=6090%) 2D(Ver. 8.2) , Fig.
. 12 15-nodes
Mesh Fig. 13 Trapdoor
(Fig. 9) Trapdoor (Prescribed displacement) (staged
( construction) .
0.2mm)
(p/p0=125%) 4.2
.
Terzaghi ( 1, 2), (Table 1) -
(Fig. 5) ( c=5kPa) MohrCoulomb
Fig.
11 .
Fig. 11
(a) Terzaghi Bierbumer

, (b)


.
Protodjakonov
Terzaghi (Table 1)
.

4.

4.1

Fig. 12. Model grid and mesh generation

(a) Dense Sand (b) Loose Sand

Fig. 11. Comparison of test results with those estimated by various methods for loosening loads (kN/m)

72 30 4
 -(Elastic-perfectly-plastic) model) Fig. 14 .
(MC model) Hyperbolic (strain-stress) 5kN/m2
Hardening(isotropic) Soil model(HS
MC model .
(Dr=80%) (Strain softening)
.

Table 5 .
(K0)
Jaky .
(interface
elements)
(strength reduction factor, Rint)
(i) i = 36.8,
41.0 . (dilatancy)
dilatancy angle() Bolton(1986) (-30)
.

4.3

Fig. 13. Boundary condition and prescribed displacement 4.3.1

step 0
(staged construction)
0.5mm 0.01mm, 0.05mm

5.33% 4.0mm(121 steps)
.
(kN/mm)
, ,

.

4.3.2

(Normalized Force Ratio, p/p0)
Fig. 14. Constitutive models (MC, HS) for Stress-strain Relationship Fig. 15 .

Table 5. Input variables for numerical analysis by Plaxis (Mohr-Coulomb model)

Type (kN/m3) (kN/m3) c (kN/m )

2
()
2
Es (kN/m ) K0 R
inter

Loose (Dr=30%) 14.10 18.59 0.3 0.001 39.78 2.70.E+03 0.413 0.90
Dense (Dr=80%) 15.81 19.65 0.3 0.001 45.69 8.60.E+03 0.327 0.85
Tunnel Section Acrylic (t=8 mm) 0.2 - - 3.30.E+06 - -

Trapdoor 73
 1.25

.
. Terzaghi(1946) (Murayama, 1971;
(shear band) Atkinson, 1975; Adachi, 1985; Wong, 1991; Kikumoto,
2003; Costa, 2009) (D)
, (b) 23
.
. 2h(D=1.67b)
Fig. 15 0.8
(p/p0)
, 4h(D=3.33b) .
2h(D=1.67b)
0.570.78 4.3.3
(, b=150mm). 2h(D=1.67b)

(a) Dense Sand (b) Loose Sand

Fig. 15. Comparison of Loosening loads by Numerical Analysis with test results

(a) Dense Sand (b) Loose Sand

Fig. 16. Results of surface settlement plots by Numerical Analysis

74 30 4
 Fig. (-C) Kf-line
16 .
Fig. 16 (a) . (K0-condition)
, Trapdoor
(b) p,q Trapdoor
, ,
(K0)
(Mller, 2006) . (extension failure) . Fig.
17 2h
4.3.4 (Stress Path) Trapoor

0.5h .
Fig. 17 (D=4h) (tan )
Fig. 18 . 0.71, 0.64
Fig. 17 Fig. 18 -A (Fig. 7)
(K0-line, tan ; initial status), -B . Fig. 17 0.5h
(step 0) (-C) ,
. 0.20.30mm, 0.80.9mm

(a) Dense Sand (b) Loose Sand

Fig. 17. Stress paths with overburdens (at 0.5h above tunnel)

(a) Dense Sand (b) Loose Sand

Fig. 18. Stress paths at depths (Deep tunnel; D=4h)

Trapdoor 75
 (Fig. 9) (2h) (4h)
Trapdoor(Fig. 10) ( ) (
(0.20.9mm) . ) Fig. 19 Fig. 20 . Terzaghi
Fig. 18 (a) 2.0h,
(b) 1.5h (Fig. 9)
(Kf-line) .
. (Fig. 19)
(spring
4.3.5 line)
(Rabbit ears)
,

DS 2h s=0.5 mm DS 2h s=1.0 mm DS 2h s=2.0 mm DS 2h s=4.0 mm

LS 2h s=0.5 mm LS 2h s=1.0 mm LS 2h s=2.0 mm LS 2h s=4.0 mm

Fig. 19. Distribution of plastic zones and shear strains (overburden 2h); Strain interval 0.5 mm

DS 4h s=0.5 mm DS 4h s=1.0 mm DS 4h s=2.0 mm DS 4h s=4.0 mm

LS 4h s=0.5 mm LS 4h s=1.0 mm LS 4h s=2.0 mm LS 4h s=4.0 mm

Fig. 20. Distribution of plastic zones and shear strains (overburden 4h); Strain interval 0.5 mm

76 30 4
 (K0) 1.0 63(Loose sand) 69(Dense sand)
(Wong et al., 1991; Jiang et 0.5h
al., 2001). Fig. 19 ,
(shear band) Terzaghi (45+ /2)
, (2h) (63) ,
(4h) (66.2)
. (Bt)
. 1.83b(b =150mm)
Akutagawa et al.(1998, 2008) 1.92b Bt=b+h=1.83b(Proctor and White,
airbag 1946) Bt=b+2htan(45- /2)=1.73b1.85b(Terzaghi,
1943) .
(Table 2)
.
Fig. 21 , Zone-A k
k Murayama
kk (slip band) a (1971) Trapdoor (slip)
, Zone-A (arch) .
b Zone-B , (
b 45+ /2( : ) 0.4% ) , Fig. 1 Zone
I .
. 1,2 Trapdoor
Murayama(1971) Fig. 1 (shear band)
. (slip)
Fig. 19
. (arch) ,
()
(spring line) () ( )
.
,
Fig. 22
. Fig. 22a 0.5h

(LS 2h)
. LS 2h Fig. 19

0.5h
.
Fig. 22b Fig. 22c 4h
,
0.5h

Fig. 21. Failure mechanism on shallow tunnel (Akutagawa, 2008) .

Trapdoor 77
 (a) At 0.5h above tunnel (b) At depths (D=4h, Dense) (c) At depths (D=4h, Loose)

Fig. 22. Distribution of shear strains at depths

1.5h2.0h(Fig. 22b), 1.25

1.0h1.5h(Fig. 22c) .
, Fig. 17 2h(D=1.67b)
(Kf-line) 2.0h 1.5h 0.8
.
Terzaghi(1943) Trapdoor .
(Fig. 3) (1.5B1=3.03.2h) (3) Terzaghi Bierbumer
, Terzaghi(1936)
Trapdoor ,
Trapdoor .
. (4) (stress path)
(0.2
5. 0.9mm) (Kf-line)

Terzaghi Trapdoor , (tan
Trapdoor ) 0.71, 0.64
.
(5)
.
. (D=2h)
(1) Trapdoor (spring line) (
(0.2mm) ) (Rabbit ears)

Trapdoor
(0.71.6mm) , (D=4h)
(8.5mm)
. ,
(2) 63()
(p/p0) 69()
. , (D/b>2.5) 4h(D=3.33b) 0.5h
0.570.78 , Terzaghi
, 2h(D=1.67b) (63)

78 30 4
 , (66.2) 9. Chevalier, B., Combe, G., and Villard, P. (2011), Experimental
and discrete element modeling studies of the Trapdoor problem:
.
influence of the macro-mechanical frictional parameters, Acta
(6) (Bt) 1.83b Geotechnica, DOI 10.1007/s11440-011-0152-5.
(b =150mm) 1.92b 10. Chikahisa, H., Arai Y., Tsutsui, M., amd Ono, K. (1992), Model
experiment of the ground behavior in tunnel excavation in sandy
(1.73b1.85b) ground, J. of Geotechnical Engineering, JSCE, III-318, pp.
. 676-677. (in Japanese).
11. Costa, Y., Zornberg, J., Bueno, B., and Costa, C. (2009), Failure
(7)
Mechanisms in Sand over a Deep Active Trapdoor, J. Geotech.
0.5h Geoenviron. Eng., 135(11), pp.1741-1753.
. 12. Evans, C.H. (1983), An examination of arching in granular soils,
Msc, MIT.
(8)
13. Hansmire, W.H. and Cording, E.J. (1985), Soil tunnel test section:
2.0h, 1.5h Case histiry summary, J. Geotech. Engrg. 1985, Vol.111, pp.
Terzaghi (1.5B1=3.03.2h) 1301-1320.
14. Hoek, E. (1998), Reliability of Hoek-Brown estimates of rock
. Terzaghi mass properties and their impact on design, Int. J. Rock Mech.
(1936) Trapdoor Min. Sci. 35(1), pp.63-68.
15. Jiang, Y., Yoneda, H., and Tanabashi, Y. (2001), Theoretical
Trapdoor
estimation of loosening pressure on tunnels in soft rocks, Tunnelling
. and Underground Space Technology, 16(2001), pp.99-105.
(9) 16. Kikumoto M., Kimura, M., Kishida, K., and Adachi, T. (2003),
Three dimensional Trapdoor experiments and its numerical analyses

on the mechanical behavior during tunnel excavation, Proceedings
. of JSCE, Vol. No.750, pp.145-158. (in Japanese).
17. Kim, S.H., Kim, J. T., and Kang, J.G. (2011), A study on the
new supporting system using steel ribs in sandy soil, J. of Korean
(References) Tunnelling and Underground Space Association (KTA), Vol.13,
No.5, September 2011, pp.395-411.
1. Adachi, T., Tamura, T., Yashima, A., and Ueno, H. (1985), Behavior 18. Kolymbas, D. (1982), Vereinfachte statische Berechnung der Firste
and simulation of sandy ground tunnel, J. of JSCE, Vol.358/3-3, eines Tunnels in massigem Fels; Simplified static analysis the roof
pp.129. (in Japanese). of a tunnel in a moderate rock, Rock Mechanics 14, pp.201-207.
2. Adachi, T., Kimura, M., Kishida, K., and Kikumoto, M. (2002), 19. Ladanyi, B. and Hoyaux, B. (1969), A study of the Trap-door
3-D Trapdoor experiment and its analysis on the earth pressure problem in a granular mass, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 6(1),
characteristics during tunnel excavation, Proceedings of the Japan pp. 1-14.
National Conference on Geotechnical Engineering, Vol.JGS37, pp. 20. Lee, I.M., Jung, J.H., Kim, K.R., Kim, D.H., and Hyun, K.C.
1685-1686. (in Japanese) (2010), Effect of apparent cohesion in unsaturated soils on the
3. Akutagawa, S., Kitani, T., Abe, Y., and Sakurai, S. (1998), A ground behavior during underground excavation, Tunnelling Technology,
consideration on tunnel pressure derived from the Terzaghis formula Vol.12, No.2, March 2010, pp.117-127.
based on an equilibrium assumption in a limit state, Proceedings 21. Lee, Yong-Joo and Bassett, R. H. (2006), Application of a photo-
of Tunnel Engineering, JSCE, pp.95-100. (in Japanese). grammetric technique to a model tunnel, Tunnelling and Underground
4. Akutagawa, S., Matsumoto, K., and Nagai, H. (2000), Numerical Space Technology, Vol.21, Issue No.01, pp.79-95.
simulation of a nonlinear deformation behavior around a shallow 22. Murayama, S. and Matsuoka, H. (1971), Earth Pressure on tunnels
tunnel, Proceedings of Tunnel Engineering, JSCE, Vol.10, pp.113-118. in sandy ground, Proc. of JSCE, Vol.187, pp.95-108. (in Japanese).
(in Japanese). 23. Mller, S. (2006); Tunnel induced settlements and structural forces
5. Akutagawa, S., Lee, Jae-Ho, and Kitani, T. (2008), Numerical in linings, Ph.D. Thesis, Institut fr Geotechnik, Universitt Stuttgart.
modeling of nonlinear deformation behavior of shallow tunnel by 24. Schmitt, J.A. (2009), Stress-strain behavior of the rock during
strain-softening analysis, J. of the Society of Materials Science, excavation by tunnel boring machines with shield, Braunschweig,
Japan, Vol.57, No.2, pp.191-198. Techn. Univ., (Dissertation_Schmitt_low.pdf)(in German)
6. Atkinson, J.H., Brown, E.T., and Potts, D.M. (1975), Collapse of 25. Shahin, H. M., Nakai, T., Hinokio, M. and Kurimot, T., and Sada,
Shallow Unlined Tunnels in Dense Sand, Tunnels and Tunnelling, T. (2004), Influence of surface loads and construction sequence
May 1975, pp.82-87. on ground response due to tunnelling, Soil and Foundations, JGS,
7. Bolton, M.D. (1986), The strength and dilatancy of sands, Vol.44, No.2, pp.71-84.
Gotechnique, 36, No.1, pp.65-78. 26. Shahin, H.M., Nakai, T., Zhang, F., Kikumoto, M., Tabata, Y., and
8. Brinkgreve, R.B.J. (2005), PLAXIS 2D. V.8.2, A.A. Balkema Nakahara, E. (2008), Model tests and numerical simulations on
Publishers. shallow circular tunneling-Ground movement and earth pressure due

Trapdoor 79
 to circular tunneling, Proc. of the 6th International Symposium on 307-311.
Geotechnical Aspects of Underground Construction in Soft Ground, 30. Terzaghi K. (1943), Theoretical soil mechanics, J. Wiley & Sons,
Shanghai, China, pp.709-715. New York (USA).
27. Sugiyama, T., Matui, M., Watanabe, T., and Shimizu, E. (1993), 31. Terzaghi, K. (1946), Rock defects and loads in tunnel supports,
Applicabilty of the disyinct element method to investigation by Rock tunneling with steel supports. R.V. Proctor and T.L. White,
trap door test using sandy soil, Proceedings of tunnel engineering, eds., The Commercial Shearing and Stamping Co., Youngstown,
JSCE, Vol.3(4), pp.25-32(in Japanese). Ohio, pp.17-99.
28. Tanaka, T. and Sakai, T. (1993), Progressive Failure and Scale 32. Wong, R. C. K. and Kaiser, P. K. (1991), Performance assessment
Effect of Trap-door problems with granular materials, Japanese of tunnels in cohesionless soils, J. of Geotech. Engrg. ASCE,
Society of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Vol.33, 1991. Vol.117, pp.1880-1901.
No.1, pp.11-22. (in Japanese).
29. Terzaghi K. (1936), Stress distribution in dry and saturated sand Received : December 19th, 2013
above a yielding trap-door, Proceedings of International Conference Revised : December 31st, 2013
of Soil Mechanics, Harvard University, Cambridge (USA), 1, pp. Accepted : April 8th, 2014

80 30 4

View publication stats