You are on page 1of 8

Soils and Foundations 2014;54(2):225–232

The Japanese Geotechnical Society

Soils and Foundations

www.sciencedirect.com
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/sandf

A modified solution of radial subgrade modulus for a circular


tunnel in elastic ground
Dongming Zhanga, Hongwei Huanga,n, Kok Kwang Phoonb, Qunfang Huc
a
Key Laboratory of Geotechnical and Underground Engineering of Minister of Education, Department of Geotechnical Engineering, Tongji University,
Shanghai, China
b
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, National University of Singapore, Blk E1A, # 07-03, 1 Engineering Drive 2, Singapore 117576, Singapore
c
Shanghai Institute of Disaster Prevention and Relief, Shanghai, China
Received 16 May 2013; received in revised form 19 August 2013; accepted 2 October 2013
Available online 13 April 2014

Abstract

In models based on Winkler springs for tunnel lining design, designers always face the difficulty of selecting appropriate values for the radial
subgrade modulus (kr). The widely used solution kr for a circular tunnel in elastic ground proposed by Wood (1975) was found to be applicable
only when the tunnel radial deformation is oval-shaped. On the basis of the Wood's solution, this note presents a general solution for kr when the
radial deformation of the tunnel is described by a Fourier series. This modified Wood's solution of kr using compatible stress functions is
validated by a numerical example. The modified solution for the example shows good consistency with the original Wood's solution when the
tunnel becomes an oval shape with deformations. The example indicates that the magnitude of kr is significantly affected by the distribution shape
of the tunnel radial deformation. The value of kr is no longer a constant value around the tunnel when the tunnel deforms into a general shape
described by a Fourier series. It is quite different from the value of kr for a distribution shape described by a single Fourier term, i.e. one involving
a single frequency. The application of a general solution for kr is illustrated by a design case using a bedded beam model.
& 2014 The Japanese Geotechnical Society. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Tunnel lining; Winkler model; Radial subgrade modulus; Fourier series; Elastic analysis

1. Introduction

Recommended by guidelines for the structural design of


n
Corresponding author. Tel.: þ86 2165989273; fax: þ 86 2165985017. tunnel linings, the bedded beam model based on Winkler
E-mail addresses: 09zhang@tongji.edu.cn (D. Zhang), springs is widely used by tunnel design engineers (RTRI,
huanghw@tongji.edu.cn (H. Huang), kkphoon@nus.edu.sg (K.K. Phoon), 1997; ITA, 2004; JSCE, 2007). In this model, however, it is
huqunf@tongji.edu.cn (Q. Hu). not easy for engineers to determine the radial subgrade
Peer review under responsibility of The Japanese Geotechnical Society.
modulus (kr) appropriately (Duddeck and Erdmann, 1982;
Mair, 2008; Gruebl, 2012). Table 1 shows values for kr
recommended by Standards in China and Japan for shield-
driven tunnels. Table 1indicates that even when the soil is
of a specific type, engineers still have to select a value from

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2014.02.012
0038-0806 & 2014 The Japanese Geotechnical Society. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
226 D. Zhang et al. / Soils and Foundations 54 (2014) 225–232

Nomenclature ur, uθ soil radial and tangential displacement


um weight of a general mode m in Fourier series
Am, Bm, Cm, Dm coefficients in stress function r, r0, r1 radial coordinate, tunnel radius, radius of the large
am weight of the krm circle in FEM mesh
EC, v soil Young's modulus, Poisson's ratio sr soil radial stress changes
kr, krm radial subgrade modulus, the value for a general θ angle measured counterclockwise from the
mode m tunnel crown
m shape mode of the tunnel radial deformation

the wide range of kr based on their own experience. Unfortu- 2. Problem statement
nately, the structural behavior of the segmental lining and the
joints have been found to be quite sensitive to the selected Fig. 1 shows the problem geometry. A circular tunnel with
magnitude of kr (Lee et al., 2001). Hence, some analytical radius r0 is embedded in a homogeneous isotropic infinite
solutions of kr have been put forward as a rational method to elastic ground. The tunnel is assumed to deform radially into
determine the magnitude of this parameter (Arnau and Molins, the shape described by a Fourier series due to tunneling. With
2011). the prescribed radial displacement and the calculated stress
To derive these analytical solutions for kr, the distribution change, the radial subgrade modulus (kr) can be obtained as
shape of the radial deformation of the tunnel (hereafter referred follows:
to as the distribution shape) must be prescribed. Usually this sr 
distribution shape is assumed to be either circular (Sagaseta, kr ¼  ð2Þ
ur r ¼ r 0
1987) or oval (Wood, 1975). However, a single distribution
shape might not be sufficient to describe the actual behavior of The assumptions made in this note are the same as those
the tunnel lining due to the complex soil-lining interactions. made by Wood (1975): (a) the plane strain condition is in a
Hence, a solution of kr based on the single circular or oval direction perpendicular to the cross section of the tunnel; (b)
shape would be ideal for tunnel designs. In this note, an
analytical solution for kr for a more general distribution shape σr
described by a Fourier series (Eq. (1)) is presented. σθ

ur ¼ ∑ um cos mθ ð1Þ τrθ


m Fourier series deformation shape

ur=∑umcosmθ
Besides the solution for an oval shape, Wood (1975) also r=r1
presented a solution of kr for the distribution shape described
by a general term of the above Fourier series. However, the θ
Airy stress function used in the Wood (1975)'s solution of kr
r=r0
for the general term does not satisfy the strain compatibility
equation identically. Wood (1975)'s solution is thus revised
using compatible Airy stress functions to derive a complete uθ ur
solution of kr for a general distribution shape described in the Undeformed tunnel shape
form of a Fourier series. A numerical example presented by
Bobet (2001) is adopted to validate the proposed analytical
solution of kr. Finally, a design case is introduced to illustrate
Homogeneous linear elastic soil: EC, v
the applicability of the proposed solution of kr to the bedded
beam model. Fig. 1. Geometry of the problem.

Table 1
Parameter kr recommended by standards in China and Japan.

Type of soil Clayer or silty soils Sandy soils

Very soft Soft Medium Stiff Very loose Loose Medium Dense
a
kr (MPa/m) 3–15 15–30 30–150 4150 3–15 15–30 30–100 4 100
(kr  2r0)b (MPa) 0–4 4–15 15–46 446 0–28 28–55
a
China Standard (Liu and Hou, 1997).
b
Japan Standard (RTRI, 1997): radial subgrade modulus (kr)  tunnel diameter (2r0).
D. Zhang et al. / Soils and Foundations 54 (2014) 225–232 227

the interface between the tunnel lining and ground is assumed in Wood (1975)'s solution is not compatible for general values
to have a small coefficient of friction, so that the shear stress at of m.
the interface can be neglected; and (c) the stress change and the This incompatibility of the Airy stress function adopted in
displacement of the ground at infinity from the tunnel axis the Muir Wood's solution is further demonstrated when an
must be zero. FEM analysis is used with the commercial finite element code
ABAQUS™. This has been widely used for the numerical
3. Wood (1975)'s solution analysis for tunnels (Cui and Kimura, 2010). The finite
element mesh, shown in Fig. 2, is a half ring cut from the
On the basis of the work done by Morgan (1961), Wood infinite problem domain. The linear elastic soil is simulated by
(1975) refined a solution of kr for a distribution shape 3600 6-node quadratic triangle elements. The soil Young's
described by a general Fourier term (Eq. (3)), namely: modulus is assumed to be 20 MPa and different soil Poisson's
ratios are studied. The inner arc is the tunnel boundary at
ur ¼ um cos mθ; mZ1 ð3Þ r¼ r0 ¼ 3 m (BC-C) and the outer arc is the soil element at
To solve this two-dimensional problem, the Airy stress r¼ r1 ¼ 10 m (BC-A). The infinite problem domain away from
function method is adopted. The Airy stress function should the outer arc is simulated by 90 5-node infinite elements
satisfy both the differential equations of equilibrium and the provided by the ABAQUS/Standard program. The length d in
compatibility equation. Thus, the solution of this two-dimensional the infinite direction for each infinite element is set 2 times r1
problem is reduced to finding a compatible Airy stress function (shown in Fig. 2). The boundary BC-B is an axis of symmetry.
that only needs to satisfy the boundary conditions of the problem. The displacement boundary conditions calculated by Eqs. (5b)
The Airy stress function for Wood (1975)'s solution is and (5c) are applied on the tunnel boundary BC-C. With the
calculated stress changes and the prescribed displacements, kr
ϕ ¼ ðcr  2 þ dÞ cos mθ ð4Þ can be computed numerically from Eq. (2).
The respective solutions for the radial stress change, Fig. 3 compares the numerical values of kr derived from the
radial displacement and tangential displacement, satisfying the FEM with the analytical solutions (Eq. (6)) for different
equilibrium equations, the constitutive laws and the boundary Poisson's ratios. The numerical values do not match the
conditions, are: analytical solutions, except for the case where m ¼ 2. This
inconsistency is likely to be caused by an incompatible Airy
sr ¼  cr  4 ðm2 þ 2  3m2 r 2 r 0 2 Þ cos mθ ð5aÞ stress function, as noted previously. Hence, the Wood (1975)'s
solution of kr is correct only when the tunnel deforms into an
ð1þ vÞcr  3 
ur ¼ 2 þ m2 þ vð4  m2 Þ oval distribution shape. Fortunately, this oval shape might be a
3EC
 fairly satisfactory assumption in cases characterized by an
þ 9r 2 r 0 2 ðv 1Þm2 cos mθ ð5bÞ absence of information about tunnel deformation. That
explains why the solution proposed by Wood in the 1970s is
ð1þ vÞcr  3  2 still widely used today, especially in the preliminary design
uθ ¼  m  16þ vð16  4m2 Þ
3E C m stage. However, the in-situ soil-lining interactions induced by

þ 9r 2 r 0 2 ð2v 1Þm2 sin mθ ð5cÞ tunneling can be highly complex due to various factors
(Koyama, 2003; Sung et al., 2006; Shahin et al., 2011;
By substituting Eqs. (5a) and (5b) into Eq. (2), the
corresponding kr is
3ðm2  1ÞE C
kr ¼ ð6Þ
ð1 þ vÞ½ð4m2  1Þ  ð4m2 þ 2Þvr 0
From Eq. (6), Wood (1975) found that the parameter m has
little effect on the magnitude of kr. As a result, he concluded
that it is reasonable to assume kr is independent of the
distribution shape and the error introduced by this assumption
is acceptable when compared with the uncertainty associated
with other soil parameters.
However, by substituting the Airy stress function (Eq. (4))
into the strain compatibility equation,
 2  2 
∂ 1∂ 1 ∂2 ∂ φ 1 ∂φ 1 ∂2 φ
þ þ þ þ
∂r 2 r ∂r r 2 ∂θ2 ∂r 2 r ∂r r 2 ∂θ2
¼ cr  6 cos mθð2  mÞð2 þ mÞð16 m2 þ 3m2 r 2 r 0 2 Þ ¼ 0
ð7Þ
Eq. (7) cannot be identically satisfied except in special cases
where m ¼ 2. In other words, the Airy stress function adopted Fig. 2. Finite element mesh.
228 D. Zhang et al. / Soils and Foundations 54 (2014) 225–232

Huang et al., 2013). Even for the preliminary design in the  ð1þ vÞC m  
ur ¼ þ
mðm  1Þr 20  ðm þ 1Þ½m þ 2ð1  2vÞr 2
greenfield, some of the analytical solutions (Bobet, 2001) have ðm þ 1ÞE C r 1 m

also indicated that there should be another shape mode, m, for


 cos mθ ð9bÞ
the tunnel deformation. A single distribution shape (m ¼ 2)
may well be insufficient to describe the actual behavior of the  ð1þ vÞC m  
tunnel lining. Hence, a solution of kr for a distribution shape uθ ¼ þ
mðm  1Þr 20  ðm þ 1Þ½m  4ð1 vÞr 2
ðm þ 1ÞEC r 1 m
described by a general term of a Fourier series should be
 sin mθ ð9cÞ
helpful in the design of the tunnel lining. In this case, a
modified solution of kr found by adopting a compatible Airy By substituting Eqs. (9a) and (9b) into Eq. (2), the kr is
stress function for the general Fourier term is presented and given by
validated by the FEM results below. sr  ðm2  1ÞEC
kr ¼  ¼ ð10Þ
ur r ¼ r0 ð1 þ vÞ½2mð1  vÞþ 1  2vr 0

4. Modified solution Eq. (10) is also validated using an FEM analysis. The finite
element mesh and the soil properties are the same as those
A compatible Airy stress function corresponding to Eq. (3) used in the FEM analysis for the validation of the Wood
is chosen from the general stress function proposed by (1975)'s solution in Fig. 2. Following the previous procedure,
Timoshenko and Goodier (1970) as follows: the displacements calculated by Eqs. (9b) and (9c) are first
applied on the tunnel boundary BC-C. Then the stress changes
(
ðAm r  m þ Bm rm þ C m r 2  m þ Dm r 2 þ m Þ cos mθ; m Z 2; are calculated and the numerical results of kr can be obtained
φ¼  1Þ
ðA1 r  1 þ C 1 r ln r þ D1 r 3 Þ cos θ þ 2ðv
1  2v C 1 rθ sin θ; m ¼ 1; from Eq. (2).
Fig. 4 shows the results of kr both from the numerical
ð8Þ analysis and from Eq. (10). The numerical results are clearly in
The general case for m Z 2 is first considered. Correspond- good agreement with the analytical solutions from Eq. (10),
ing to the Airy stress function for m Z2 in Eq. (8), the indicating that the modified solution of kr for the distribution
modified solutions of the stress change and the displacement of shape described by a general term of Fourier series is correct.
the ground are In Fig. 4, both the analytical and numerical results show a
significant effect of the mode parameter m on the magnitude
 
sr ¼ ðm  1ÞCm r  m ðr 2 r 0 2  1Þm  2 cos mθ ð9aÞ of kr.
Corresponding to the Airy stress function for the case
6 where m ¼ 1 in Eq. (8), solutions of the stress change and
v=0 (Wood(1975)) v=0 (FEM) the displacement of the ground are
5 v=0.35 (Wood(1975)) v=0.35(FEM)  2 
v=0.49 (Wood(1975)) v=0.49(FEM) r 0 ð1 2vÞþ r 2 ð3  2vÞ C 1
sr ¼ cos θ ð11aÞ
Dimensionless k r

4
r 3 ð2v  1Þ
k rr0 /E

3
C 1 ð1 þ vÞ  2  2 
ur ¼ r 0 r ð1  2vÞþ ln rð8v  6Þ cos θ ð11bÞ
2 2ð1 2vÞE C
1 C 1 ð1 þ vÞ  2  2 
uθ ¼ r 0 r ð1  2vÞþ 2½ ln rð3 4vÞþ 1 sin θ
0 2ð1 2vÞE
2 3 4 5 6 7
Mode parameter m ð11cÞ
Fig. 3. Validation of Wood (1975)'s solution of kr. It is interesting to note that the solutions of soil displacement
(Eqs. (11b) and (11c)) have a term expressed by the logarithm
7
of the radial coordinate. In this case, the amount of displace-
v=0 (Modified) v=0 (FEM) ment increases as the distance from the tunnel axis increases,
6 v=0.35 (Modified) v=0.35 (FEM) which is in conflict with the assumption (c). Mathematically,
v=0.49 (Modified) v=0.49 (FEM)
5 this is a consequence of the unbalanced boundary condition
Dimensionless k r

4 when the tunnel deforms into the mode shape when m ¼ 1, but
k rr0 /E

it has no physical meaning in reality. To avoid this confliction,


3
Bobet (2001) introduced a characteristic dimension to make
2 the displacement of the ground arbitrarily equal to zero for
1 rZ characteristic dimension. The adoption of the character-
0
istic dimension is reasonable because in actual cases there is
2 3 4 5 6 7 always a stiff layer below the tunnel where displacement
Mode parameter m
should be zero. The effect of the depth of the stiff layer on the
Fig. 4. Validation of modified solution of kr. soil stress is not significant as long as the depth of the layer is
D. Zhang et al. / Soils and Foundations 54 (2014) 225–232 229

approximately 5 times the tunnel radius (Bobet, 2001). 5. Numerical example


In addition, the arching effect of the soils for a deep tunnel
also makes the ground behavior insignificant above the tunnel The following distribution shape presented by Bobet (2001)
for a distance of characteristic dimension (Chevalier and Otani, is adopted to validate the analytical solution presented in
2011). Based on Bobet's suggestion, the characteristic dimen- Eq. 16:
sion in this note is considered to be 10 times the tunnel radius. ur0 ¼  u0  u1 cos θ  u2 cos 2θ þ u3 cos 3θ ð17Þ
Eqs. (11a) and (11b) is modified as follows (r r characteristic
dimension): A specific Bobet's shape is chosen and plotted in Fig. 5(a).
Fig. 5(b)–(e) are the shapes corresponding to a single mode
C    parameter m (m ¼ 0, 1, 2 and 3) in Bobet's shape. The Young's
sr ¼ ð1  2vÞr 20 r  3  ð10r 0 Þ  3
2v  1 modulus of the soil is assumed to be 20 MPa and its Poisson's

þ ð3  2vÞ½r  1  ð10r 0 Þ  1  cos θ ð12aÞ ratio is assumed to be 0.3. The tunnel radius is 3.0 m.
For comparison purposes, both Wood (1975)'s solution
Cð1 þ vÞ    (Eq. (6)) and the modified solutions developed in the present
ur ¼ ð1  2vÞr 20 r  2  ð10r 0 Þ  2
2ð1  2vÞE study (Eqs. (10) and (13)) are used to formulate the krm in
 Eq. (16). The analytical solutions of kr for the Bobet's shape
þ ð8v  6Þln ½rð10rÞ  1  cos θ ð12bÞ
are obtained by using Eq. (16) and plotted against the angle θ
Cð1 þ vÞ    in Fig. 6. The validations of these analytical solutions are
uθ ¼ ð1  2vÞr 20 r  2  ð10r 0 Þ  2 carried out by using a similar approach adopted for the
2ð1  2vÞE
 validation of Eqs. (6) and (10). The displacements for each
þ 2ð3  4vÞln ½rð10r 0 Þ  1  cos θ ð12cÞ
u0 u1
By substituting Eqs. (12a) and (12b) into Eq. (2), the Bobet (2001)'s general shape
solution of kr for m ¼ 1 then becomes u0:u1 :u2 :u3 =190:77:83:1

9ð411 422vÞE C u0
kr ¼ ð13Þ
5ð1 þ vÞ½99 þ 600 ln 10 ð198 þ 800 ln 10Þvr 0
u0 u1
The case in which the mode parameter m is equal to zero,
which represents a circular distribution shape, also needs to be m=0 m=1
considered to cover all the terms in a Fourier series. The
solution of kr for this circular shape has already been solved
u2 u3
(Sagaseta, 1987) and is given by
r0
sr  EC
kr ¼  ¼ ð14Þ u2 u3
ur r ¼ r0 ð1þ vÞr 0

So far, the distribution shape of tunnel radial deformation u2


has only been described by a single term of the Fourier series. u3
u3
However, because of the complexity of real tunnel deforma- Underformed shape
m=2 m=3
tions, the Fourier series (Eq. (1)) is preferred to describe the Bobet (2001)'s shape

distribution shape. By invoking superposition, the soil stress


change corresponding to Eq. (1) is
Fig. 5. The Bobet (2001)'s distribution shape.
sr ¼ kr0 u0 þ k r1 u1 cos θ þ ⋯þ krm um cos mθ þ ⋯
1
¼ ∑ krm um cos mθ ð15Þ 2.0
Modified solution
m¼0 Wood(1975)'s solution
FEM (Modified solution)
By substituting Eqs. (1) and (15) into Eq. (2), it follows that 1.5 FEM (Wood (1975)'s solution)
the solution of kr for any arbitrary distribution shape described
Dimensionless k r

max krr0/E (Single m=3) Wood (1975)'s Solution


by a Fourier series is
k rr0/Ec

1.0
1
∑ krm um cos mθ
sr  1
¼ m ¼10
Modified Solution
kr ¼  ¼ ∑ am krm ð16Þ 0.5
ur r ¼ r 0 m¼0 min krr0/E (Single m=1)
∑ um cos mθ
m¼0
0.0
where krm is the kr for the distribution shape described by a 0.0 22.5 45.0 67.5 90.0 112.5 135.0 157.5 180.0
The angle θ
general Fourier term (Eqs. (10), (13) and (14)), and am is the
weight of krm, expressed by (um/ur)cos mθ. Fig. 6. kr for Bobet (2001)'s distribution shape.
230 D. Zhang et al. / Soils and Foundations 54 (2014) 225–232

single term in Eq. (16) are superposed and applied to the p1


tunnel boundary. The numerical values of kr are calculated and
plotted in Fig. 6. q1 q1
In Fig. 6, the modified solutions are consistent with the
corresponding numerical results. Wood (1975)'s solutions do pg
not agree with the corresponding numerical results. It is also
interesting to find that the kr at the tunnel springline (θ ¼ 90º) r0
calculated by Wood (1975)'s solution are exactly the same as
those calculated by modified solutions. The reason is that cos θ Tunnel Lining
and cos 3θ vanish when θ is equal to 90º. The deformation
shape (Eq. (17)) is made up of two terms (i.e. u0 and u2 cos 2θ)
at tunnel springline. As mentioned in relation to Fig. 3, Wood, q2 Spring q2
(1975)'s solution is correct for the case where m ¼ 2. Hence,
the same value of kr is calculated by these two solutions only
p2
at the tunnel springline (i.e. θ ¼ 90º) in Fig. 6. However, the
modified solution presented in this note should be used to Fig. 7. The bedded beam model (BBM) for the application case.
determine the kr for an arbitrary distribution shape described
by a Fourier series. The results from Fig. 6 also show that kr
for the distribution shape described by a Fourier series will not in the form of Eq. (17), for which the mode weights (u0, u1, u2
be constant around the tunnel, which is different from the kr for and u3) need to be determined.
the shape described by a single Fourier term (see the dash lines Fig. 8 shows the iterative process of determining the mode
in Fig. 6). The variation of kr can be attributed to the fact that weights um and the kr in the form of the results against the
the weight (am) varies with the angle θ around the tunnel angle θ around the tunnel perimeter. In total, ten iterative steps
according to the definition of am in Eq. (16). are conducted for this case. For each step, the radial displace-
ments ur and the corresponding kr are plotted in the left and
6. Application to a design case right panels of Fig. 8, respectively. From the left panel of
Fig. 8, it is evident that the trial Fourier series (Eq. (17))
It is well recognized from the numerical example that the kr describes the “true” distribution shape calculated by BBM with
can be significantly affected by the mode parameter m and the remarkable accuracy. The coefficient of determination (R2) for
corresponding weight um in the Fourier series. However, the the trial Fourier series is 1.00 for each step. The ur and kr
values for the parameters m and um are usually unknown at the obtained at step 10 are regarded as the object values for this
design stage. In that case, the values for m and um can be design case. From a visual inspection, it is found in Fig. 8 that
determined by an iterative process of applying the bedded the difference between the results of step 2 and the object
beam model (BBM) repeatedly. Following the traditional results (step 10) are not significant. It implies that error can be
calculation procedure of the BBM, the lining displacements accepted even at step 2 in engineering practice. From the
are first calculated and then are best fitted by a trial Fourier results of ur shown in step 10, the ellipse mode shape (m ¼ 2) is
series. Then from Eq. (16), this best fitted Fourier series can be the dominant mode with 68% in the Fourier series. However, it
used to determine the kr for next step of calculation. The only is also obvious that this single shape (m ¼ 2) does not describe
difference between calculation steps is the kr used in the BBM. the true distribution shape accurately. It is possible that the
The iterative process can be stopped until the error between error may be in the range of 50% when compared with the true
two successive steps is below the tolerance level. Note that the ur at the crown and invert, as shown in Fig. 8. Correspond-
soil loads acting on the lining should remain unchanged during ingly, the kr at step 10 shown in Fig. 8 is quite different from
the iterative process, which is also the basic assumption when the kr for the single mode shape (m ¼ 2). It is also interesting to
using the BBM. find that singular points for kr were observed near the location
A simple design case has been chosen to demonstrate this where ur is close to zero. In that case, calculated negative kr
iterative process. In this application case, the tunnel lining has around a singular point should be set to zero due to the non-
a density of 2.5 kg/m3, an outer radius r0 of 6 m and a negativity for kr. The effect of the subgrade reaction at these
thickness of 0.50 m. The cover depth from the ground surface points on the results is negligible due to the small magnitude
to the tunnel crown is 20 m. The water table is at the ground of ur.
surface. The saturated soil gravity is 18 kN/m3. The soil has a The convergence of the error between two successive steps
Young's modulus of 40 MPa and a Poisson's ratio of 0.33. The is analyzed for these ten steps. The relative error for ur and kr
lateral earth pressure coefficient is 0.7. The corresponding at the tunnel crown are both plotted against the step number N
bedded beam model for this case is illustrated in Fig. 7. The in Fig. 9. Numerically, it is evident that convergence occurs
loads acting on the lining, e.g., vertical total pressure (p1, p2), rapidly. In this case, the error of the results at the 3rd step is
lateral total pressure (q1, q2) and dead load (pg), are determined smaller than 10% and at the 6th step it is smaller than 0.1%.
by following the ITA guideline (ITA, 2004). The kr around the This proves that the iteration method is very efficient to
tunnel at the initial step is set to zero. The trial Fourier series is determine the values for mode parameters um and the kr.
D. Zhang et al. / Soils and Foundations 54 (2014) 225–232 231

100 2.00
BBM kr
75 Fourier (R2=1.00
Object (Step 10)
Object (Step 10) 1.50
50

ur (mm)

krr0/Ec
25
The angle θ
0 1.00
0.0 22.5 45.0 67.5 90.0 112.5 135.0 157.5 180.0
-25

-50 0.50

-75
u0:u1:u2:u3=2 : -4 : 84 : -10 The angle θ
-100 0.00
0.0 22.5 45.0 67.5 90.0 112.5 135.0 157.5 180.0
30 2.00
BBM kr
20 Fourier
Object (Step 10) Object (Step 10)
1.50
10
ur (mm)

krr0/Ec
The angle θ
0 1.00
0.0 22.5 45.0 67.5 90.0 112.5 135.0 157.5 180.0
-10
0.50
-20
u0:u1:u2:u3=5 : -9 : 66 : -20 The angle θ
-30 0.00
0.0 22.5 45.0 67.5 90.0 112.5 135.0 157.5 180.0

30 2.00
BBM
20 Object (Step 10) Object (Step 10)
m=2 1.50
10
ur (mm)

krr0/Ec

The angle θ
0 1.00
0.0 22.5 45.0 67.5 90.0 112.5 135.0 157.5 180.0 m=2
-10
0.50
-20
u0:u1:u2:u3=5 : -9 : 68 : -18 The angle θ
-30 0.00
0.0 22.5 45.0 67.5 90.0 112.5 135.0 157.5 180.0

Fig. 8. The ur and kr during the iterative process for the application case.

1.0E+01 presented and validated using a numerical example. The


1.0E+00 Ur_Error example demonstrates that apart from parameters of the elastic
kr_Error properties (Ec, ν) and tunnel radius (r0), kr can also be
1.0E-01
significantly affected by the mode parameter m, the weight
1.0E-02 um of the corresponding mode m in Fourier series and the angle
Error

1.0E-03 θ measured from the tunnel crown. The value of kr is no longer


constant around the tunnel when the distribution shape is
1.0E-04
described by a Fourier series. This is different from the value
1.0E-05 Errorn=(Rn-Rn-1)/Rn of kr for a distribution shape described by a single Fourier
1.0E-06 term, which is independent of θ. Finally, a simple design case
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
was presented using the bedded beam model to show the
Iterative Step N applicability of the proposed solution of kr.
Fig. 9. The convergence of the relative error for ur and kr. It should be noted that this modified solution, like other
elastic solutions, is restricted to certain geotechnical situations
where the soil deformation is relatively small. Fortunately, the
7. Conclusion lining deformation for tunnels driven by modern shield techni-
ques tends to be quite small. This allows for the application of
To determine the analytical solution of kr, it is necessary to elastic solutions of kr over a wider range of ground conditions.
prescribe the distribution shape of tunnel radial deformation. In
this note, a general distribution shape, described by a Fourier Acknowledgments
series, is considered for the solution of kr. The Wood (1975)'s
solution of kr is found to be applicable in cases where the This study was substantially supported by the National Basic
deformation shape is oval only (one special Fourier term). Research Program of China (2011CB013800), Natural Science
A modified solution using a compatible Airy stress function is Foundation Committee Program (51278381) and Shanghai
232 D. Zhang et al. / Soils and Foundations 54 (2014) 225–232

Outstanding Academic Leaders Program (12XD1405100). Japan Society of Civil Engineers (JSCE), 2007. Standard Specifications for
The authors would like to acknowledge this support and express Tunneling-2006, Shield Tunnels, Tokyo, Japan.
Koyama, Y., 2003. Present status and technology of shield tunneling method in
their appreciation.
Japan. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 18 (2–3), 145–159.
Lee, K.M., Hou, X.Y., Ge, X.W., Tang, Y., 2001. An analytical solution for a
References jointed shield driven tunnel lining. Int. J. Numer. Anal. Methods Geomech.
25, 365–390.
Arnau, O., Molins, C., 2011. Experimental and analytical study of the Liu, J.H., Hou, X.Y., 1997. Excavation Engineering Handbook. China
structural response of segmental tunnel linings based on an in situ loading Construction Industry Press, Beijing, China (in Chinese).
test. Part 2: numerical simulation. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 26 (6), Mair, R.J., 2008. Tunneling and geotechnics: new horizons. Géotechnique 58
778–788. (9), 695–736.
Bobet, A., 2001. Analytical solutions for shallow tunnels in saturated ground. Morgan, H.D., 1961. A contribution to the analysis of stress in a circular
J. Eng. Mech. – ASCE 127 (12), 1258–1266. tunnel. Géotechnique 11 (1), 37–46.
Chevalier, B., Otani, J., 2011. Arching observation in three-dimensional Railway Technical Research Institute (RTRI), 1997. Design Standard for
trapdoor problem with X-ray CT and discrete element method. Soils Railway Structures (Shield-Driven Tunnel), Maruzen, pp. 47–61 (in
Found. 51 (3), 459–469. Japanese).
Cui, Y., Kimura, M., 2010. Model test and numerical analysis methods in Sagaseta, C., 1987. Analysis of undrained soil deformation due to ground loss.
tunnel excavation problem. Soils Found. 50 (6), 915–923. Géotechnique 37 (3), 301–320.
Duddeck, H., Erdmann, J., 1982. Structural design models for tunnels. In: Shahin, H.M., Nakai, T., Zhang, F., Kikumoto, M., Nakahara, E., 2011.
Proceedings of the Tunnelling '82, Brighton, pp. 83–91. Behavior of ground and response of existing foundation due to tunneling.
Gruebl, F., 2012. Segmental ring design new challenges with high tunnel Soils Found. 51 (3), 395–409.
diameters (ITA-AITES Muir Wood Lecture 2012), ITA World Tunnel Sung, E., Shahin, H.M., Nakai, T., Hinokio, M., Yamamoto, M., 2006. Ground
Congress 2012, Bankok. behavior due to tunnel excavation with existing foundation. Soils Found.
Huang, X., Schweiger, H.F., Huang, H.W., 2013. Influence of deep excava- 46 (2), 189–207.
tions on nearby existing tunnels. Int. J. Geomech. – ASCE 13 (2), Timoshenko, S.P., Goodier, J.N., 1970. Theory of Elasticity. Mc-Graw-Hill,
170–180. New York.
International Tunneling and Underground Space Association (ITA), 2004. Wood, M., 1975. The circular tunnel in elastic ground. Geotechnique 25 (1),
Guidelines for the design of shield tunnel lining. Tunn. Undergr. Space 115–127.
Technol. 15 (3), 303–331.