You are on page 1of 6


Full Paper
Received in revised form
Siti Norafida Jusoha*, Hisham Mohamadb, Aminaton Martoa, Nor 8 March 2016
Eliza Aliasc,d, Muhammad Azril Hezmia, Rini Asnida Abdullaha, Nor
18 March 2016
Zurairahetty Mohd. Yunusa

*Corresponding author
of Geotechnics and Transportation, Universiti
Teknologi Malaysia, 81310 UTM Johor Bahru, Johor, Malaysia
bDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Universiti

Teknologi PETRONAS, 32610 Bandar Seri Iskandar, Perak
cDepartment of Hydraulic and Hydrology, Universiti Teknologi

Malaysia, 81310 UTM Johor Bahru, Johor, Malaysia
dClimate Change Research Group, Resource Sustainability

Research Alliance, 81310 UTM Johor Bahru, Johor, Malaysia

Graphical abstract Abstract
Tunnel lining design is an interactive problem, which is not merely about the strength, but
how much the lining could deform to accommodate the ground movement. When tunnel
Tie interactions interacts with soil, stress from the ground is distributed onto the structure. In precast
segmental tunnel lining, it is critical to investigate the lining reaction when applied with
load, as this affects the overall flexural behaviour of tunnel lining. The objective of this
paper is to understand the basis of tunnel lining mechanical behaviour response. A series
of conducted flexural bending laboratory testing and developed numerical models
presented here in order to discuss on the mechanics of segmental tunnel lining. By having
two different support mechanisms, variation trend in load-deflection and moment
bending curve depicted. Mirror trend of pin-pin support can easily be spotted in the results
Roller indicated segment lining affected by the load and support design.
Equivalent support
strip load
Keywords: Segmental lining; segment’s joint; flexural test; numerical model

Rekabentuk pelapik terowong adalah masalah interaktif, di mana ianya bukan semata-
mata berkisar mengenai kekuatan, tetapi setakat mana pelapik dibenarkan untuk
melentur bagi menampung pergerakan tanah. Apabila terowong berinteraksi dengan
tanah, tekanan dari tanah akan disebarkan kepada struktur. Di dalam segmen pelapik
terowong konkrit pratuang, adalah kritikal untuk menyiasat tingkahlaku lenturan apabila
dikenakan beban memandangkan ia akan memberi kesan kepada keseluruhan
tingkahlaku lenturan pada terowong. Tujuan kertas kerja ini ditulis ialah untuk memahami
asas tingkahlaku mekanik pelapik terowong. Siri ujian makmal lenturan yang telah
dijalankan dan pembangunan model berangka dibentangkan untuk membincangkan
mekanik segmen pelapik terowong. Dengan dua jenis mekanisma sokongan yang
berbeza, perubahan bentuk beban-pesongan dan lengkung momen lentur diperolehi.
Bentuk cerminan sokongan pin-pin mudah dilihat dalam keputusan menunjukkan pelapik
segmen terkesan dengan beban dan reka bentuk sokongan.
Kata kunci: Pelapik segmen; penghubung segmen; ujian lenturan; model berangka

© 2016 Penerbit UTM Press. All rights reserved

78: 8–6 (2016) 61–66 | | eISSN 2180–3722 |

segment's connection in partially fix or hinge for a single and multiple tunnels has been undertaken were still not fully understood.e. [3. Large distortion can often be tangential stresses along the lining did not changed accommodated in the tunnel lining by rotation or much because of the hardening of grout. A series of flexural bending tunnel lining condition in real [12]. but shear at the joints between segments inducing high distribution in a ring lining did change [3]. Researchers concluded that stresses behaviour of joint was depicted at the longitudinal joint is crucial to investigate but the extrados side of segment joint and concentration of analysis is complex to fulfil [3. Intensive review on previous flexural test both in One can see that abundant useful information was numerical simulation and laboratory testing on tunnel obtained from previous researcher. Lining assemble in are not uniformly distributed in radial.3 also than once within two to three rings is almost 30% investigated via contact element [8]. The direction mechanics of segmental lining was not explored and of future research regarding on the performance in discussed in great detail. Results showed diameter of the ring. Three out via numerical analysis. / Jurnal Teknologi (Sciences & Engineering) 78: 8–6 (2016) 61–66 1. both in longitudinal performance of rings placement [13]. axial normal forces thrust based on the overburden and groundwater found tend to have eccentricity and sectional forces pressure at spring line.9. unfortunately the have been presented in Jusoh [11. Considerable research on movement and stresses Whereas. While bending strength concluded that the packing stiffness. Thus. this paper. The lining. In laboratory testing are also mentioned earlier [11]. The the jointed lining produced smaller magnitude of concern on how much bending moment carrying maximum bending moment than the non-jointed one capacity in lining brings a notion that understanding [9]. influence of packing material onto the structure. “fixed-fixed” conditions were considered here in. slender tunnel of new Line 9 (L9) of the metro of flexural bending moment in tunnel lining) and the Barcelona have been developed to investigate the behaviour of the joints condition. nonlinear tensile specific [1. the lining stresses measured in the field construction Lining tunnel is one of its kinds.8. laboratory and full-scale hydraulic flat jacks embedded at the extrados of the test that included the joint tunnel response but not in loaded ring. Understanding the number of segment was introduced. Numerical models also developed to simulate . Researchers from total occurrences [2]. accepted practical angular joint stiffness design of lining. When taking in accumulative for configurations.12]. Segment’s joint and circumferential joints. axial and segmental part connected with bolt. interacts with soil. the importance of understanding on tunnel Concentrated rotation occurs in segment’s joints.8]. 3 and 8-10]. In reality.. only maintain the good services during its design life. stresses in the linings themselves especially when the range of how much stress distribution changed in interacts with ground surroundings [1]. From the simulation. stress from the ground is distributed Similarly. behaviour. shield segment and thickness of concrete segments to the critical damage that occur around segment joint more contact deficiencies in tunnel using DIANA 9. their thickness and stiffness and width both segment’s and ring’s joint. lead to cost effective production and is in the range of 1000-3000 kNm/rad [9]. lack of investigation exists for Numerical modelling simulated an in situ testing of extreme details conditions of structural response (i. the width and and stiffness of structural linings are reported small the thickness of segment do influence the critical compared with those of the surrounding ground [3]. 5-7]. When tunnel lining is not mention in exact amount/ percentage. [14].13]. Research has been carried were simulated as shell interface elements [13]. these indicate compression stresses occurred in intrados side [13]. In the numerical work. an investigation of tunnel lining joint connections and the importance of the mechanics of segmental tunnel lining is crucial. contact deficiency [8]. Based on the segmental behaviour is important to optimize the model test. it was found that moment carrying by the main segment [4].62 Siti Norafida Jusoh et al. However. However. However. Japanese Society of Civil Engineering empirically Simplified FEM analyses using shell element for recommends in its popular simplified design lining segment and spring to model the joint method to suggest a lining should be designed to connections have been compared with a true scale carry only 60–80% of the maximum bending model test [9]. current research works performed by the Laboratory testing of point load test have been authors on mechanics behaviour of precast segment developed to imitate flexural behaviour of segmental tunnel lining are presented. how much tunnel lining allowed to bend These resembled behaviour of joint in full-scale test and to understand their load-displacement curve. A parameter called moment reduction factor behaviour of segmental joint tunnel and carefully expressed by a function of angular joint stiffness and designs it is important.0 INTRODUCTION behaviour of segment connections of southern high- speed line of "Green Heart" shield driven tunnel have The evolution of construction techniques and trend been investigated via ANSYS finite element software towards integrated use of structure design nowadays [3] via contact element. Simulation mentioned that are to promote reliable and economic construction. laboratory testing conducted presented here in order Previous numerical modelling was accomplished that to discuss on the mechanics of segmental tunnel involved segment’s modelling [3. resist an axial tangential directions [3]. Therefore. plus bending stresses resulting and moment are measured twice higher compared from an arbitrary percentage distortion of the with conventional models [3].

At the left support is a steel box with 2 m segment [12] anchored steel bolted to the floor. A 200 support designation is developed in numerical model tonne of load cell are attached with computerized to get more realistic results.. roller support on the right) was designed in such way that it could slide horizontally while the other end (on the left) is bolted to the floor to function as a pin support. 1.1 Laboratory Testing Work extrados of segment surface were measured. Pin-Pin fixed with bolted floor anchor and H-beam. nearby factory has been carried out. . element and verified successfully with analytical Testing was carried out using a Dartec hydraulic method.. The segments configurations have been mention earlier in [12]. In the first experiment (Phase 1).e. Three different laboratory experiments. Strains at intrados and 2.e. Support mechanisms were designated at performed. NJPR) shown in Figure 1. the first tunnel segment were laid as Pin-Roller and applied This research involve two major parts of work. In the first stage. a full ring of tunnel would consist of 5 to 8 segments jointed together. Then.4 m long of three steel rollers (i.2 Numerical Modelling testing. At first. numerical methods. The triangle steel beam also supported laterally with H-beams to eliminate the triangular beam translation during the 2. Two one side (which previously allowed to move) was then support mechanisms are introduced namely. region. The joints allow tunnel either to flex inward or outward. LVDTs were mounted at boundary condition of segment’s joint (support locations with higher anticipated movement.. At the same time. system used to verify the applied load from hydraulic Figure 2 shows the arrangement model of phase 1 ram of system. The support system was fabricated using combination of simply supported steel beam to form triangular shape (Figure 1). The results from numerical shall a triangle steel support of one side was allowed to be used to compare data obtained from the move to imitate hinge joint interaction. loading) and 300 kN (Test 2) and the performance of segment was investigated. a non-jointed pin-pin test (NJPP) was certainty. A pair of triangular steel beam element was mounted onto extrados and intrados of segment test introduced at two ends to simulate the complicated specimen. As segment is not perfectly half of rounded shape. This paper is focus on surrounding the tunnel. simulations effort ram with a load-controlled system. a triangle steel support of first place to resemble the joint behaviour in lining. Similarly. testing was carried out to analyse the 1). and to understand the structure response with more In Phase 2. incremental loading discussions of the single intact segment testing results has been applied up to 130 kN (Test 1) ("elastic" only. A two-point was continued.e.e. thus allowing tunnel 2. Tie constraint node-to-node interaction was Translation readings at the support system were also introduced to model wall plug function that attached being monitored. system). The roller steel was applied with grease roller (to ensure none friction will occur) to function as a Figure 1 Test arrangement of pin-roller support for single roller support. one of the supports. The strain gauges were properly testing. the support system to the segment. To attach segment to the triangular steel beam. imitating the localised ground static systems in laboratory testing. therefore.10 has been carried out.0 METHODOLOGY to stay in a good service. load series. continued with double the amount of initial loading complex lining joint behaviour in longitudinal direction stage (Test 2) and finally loading to failure (Test 3). beginning within “elastic” loading (i. In reality.63 Siti Norafida Jusoh et al. Unit load Method. Both of the results are presented in the results and discussion Flexural bending test using segments taken from section. support systems were developed to make sure the edge of segment lies comfortably in the testing area. For NJPP test. In pin-roller testing. specially designed wall plug of 220 mm length Numerical modelling of segmental tunnel lining via and 50 mm thread with diameter of 25 mm were used ABAQUS 6. Test In particular. As the experimental segments’ vertical load (using a frame extension redistribute as response did affected by the designated support strip loading). a model of load was applied to the middle of the segment. one is with load system (i. This was support (Phase 1 and 3) and followed by Pin-Roller carried out to imitate almost rigid ground condition support (Phase 2 and 4). later known as non-jointed pin- laboratory testing and another is simulation using roller test. simple to help fixed the segment in position and to the hole segment model were performed by means beam of triangle steel beam support system. / Jurnal Teknologi (Sciences & Engineering) 78: 8–6 (2016) 61–66 laboratory experiment and understand more Tests were performed initially within the elastic certainty on the structural response and deformations. i.

40 An equivalent two strip load pressure applied to Pin-roller One Segment the partitioned surface in the range of 0. 3. 15 0. hinge jointed segment's connection) gave more room for tunnel to flex thus leading to lower mid span Figure 3 Mesh generation for segment and support deflection. In conclusion. Using the data inferred from the strain gauges.2.002 0.e. Es of 207.01 Bias meshes were assigned at critical stress area and very finer mesh approximation is generated at the interaction regions to make sure interactions node can be assigned appropriately (Figure 3). for Pin-Roller support system. Ec of 33 GPa and 100 Poisson’s ratio of 0.5 meter from 20 mid-span of segment at both side. the Equivalent strip flexural moment versus segment's span of selected load Roller load range were plotted in Figure 5.64 Siti Norafida Jusoh et al. In Pin-Roller.006 0.004 0. As expected.008 modelling. є parameter. steel supports were assigned with density of 7800 kg/m3. Symmetrical curve of outward bending moment were depicted for Pin-Pin support system which generally Figure 2 Phase 1 numerical model true for rigid tunnel condition. Pin and roller support assigned respectively Deflection (m) onto the outer surfaces of the support model. Pin-Roller support mechanisms (i. designation 140 Concrete damage plasticity model (CDP) has 120 been assigned to the segment with properties of 2400 kg/m3 for density.32. loading caused compression strain at the Pin Tie interactions extrados and tensile strain at the intrados of support segmented lining.1 1. / Jurnal Teknologi (Sciences & Engineering) 78: 8–6 (2016) 61–66 A total of 12870 number of shell elements (SR4) was Table 1 Plasticity material parameter used in CDP model assigned to mesh the model with the reference surface was at shell mid-surface (mid of segment’s Dilation Flow potential fb/fc0 Kc Viscosity thickness). the moment of structure shows higher in magnitude when came to middle position and decreased dramatically at edge of roller side as segment try to response to interactions occurs. Whilst. Incremental of load 0 imitating the experimental loading were used in the 0 0.666 0..5 GPa and Poisson’s ratio of 0. the deflection measured at the mid-section of segments showed that the pin-roller segment lead to more deflection compared to pin-pin support condition.  connection between segments and support systems. which purposely carried out to imitate jointed hinge longitudinal condition.16 0. lower moment occurred at pin side and higher moment measured at quarter roller support side followed with sudden drop of moment magnitude. Young Modulus. Load versus segment's deflection for both Pin-Roller and Pin-Pin support condition are plotted in Figure 4. Figure 4 Load vs deflection at mid-section of segment .0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION In general. More details properties are Load(kN) 80 presented in table 1. ψ eccentricity. higher moment embraced at the mid span segment followed with imbalance distribution of flexural moment occurred. An inward support moment is represented by negative flexural moment. While for support. Young 60 Pin-pin One Segment Modulus. Tie interactions was used to represent join Angle.

also found that the triangle support model of segments in laboratory did gave affect to the overall results. C. Causes of shield segment damages -4000 during construction.. [4] Koyama. and non-jointed pin-pin test (NJPP) of single segment Mirror trend of pin-pin support can easily spotted in the results indicated tunnel behave simultaneously according to the support design. A series of 8000 laboratory testing of segmented tunnel lining had been carried out to conduct a flexural test.2009.. Numerical study on crack problems 0 in segments of shield tunnel using finite element method. Numerical interactions and also to predict the ground load model showed continuous plotted moment diagram surrounding . E. Present status and technology of shield NJPP and FEM-NJPP) at load P=100 kN tunneling method in Japan. 1999.q (Radian) element analyses. The overall approach was to -4000 conduct computational simulations by means of finite Angle of segment.5 0 0.5 1 understand the structural response and deformations -2000 in more certainty. Therefore. Angle of segment.structure effect. Bangkok. The load (Nm) 6000 was applied on an arch configuration of tunnel lining 4000 to record the movements of the segment in elastic- plastic range and to understand the flexural moment 2000 deflection response in tunnel segments. . Results showed that by having two different support mechanisms. / Jurnal Teknologi (Sciences & Engineering) 78: 8–6 (2016) 61–66 Tangential bending moment.5 0 0.5 1 Tunn. thanks to the support provided by MTD ACPI Engineering Bhd. Undergr.q (Radian) Thailand. -1 -0. 24 (1): 91–102. Y. ‘‘Green Heart’’ Tunnel Of The High-Speed Line South". Tunn pin support condition (NJPP) and non-jointed pin-roller Undergr Space Technol. Undergr. International Symposium on -6000 Underground Excavation and Tunnelling. variation trend in load- Figure 5 Bending moment for non-jointed pin-roller test (NJPR) deflection and moment bending curve depicted.0 CONCLUSION 12000 NJPP P = 100 kN Investigation on the mechanics behaviour of precast 10000 segmental tunnel lining was presented. Vote #4L061. . P.. Vote #06H71 and the Ministry of Higher Education 12000 (MOHE). 18 (2/3). 14(2): 217–224. appropriate model of support and material properties modelled have been carefully Acknowledgement adopted in numerical to represent the real laboratory settings condition. 6000 4000 References 2000 [1] Chen.. 2006. Space Technol. Tunn. It is more certainty. Jovanovis. This could give more more accurate moment reaction when compared to understanding on the ground-tunnel interactions in laboratory results (i.. which are essential for for segment in whole segment's span which gave long-term safety measurements.65 Siti Norafida Jusoh et al.. -2000 [2] Sugimoto. Van der Horst. 145–159. In addition. J. H. Space Technol. Three- Dimensional Structural Analyses Of The Shield-Driven Figure 6 Tangential bending moment for non-jointed pin. M NJPR P = 100 kN 4. Figure 6 compares the results of bending moment Further research is needed to be carried out to diagram calculated using numerical model and the understand the appropriate characteristics of tunnel laboratory data of non-jointed single segment with response especially related to segment’s joint pin-pin support (NJPP) for load of 100 kN. M (Nm) 16000 NJPP P = 100 kN authors also would like to thanks the financial support FEM NJPP P=100 kN 14000 from UTM Research University Grant Scheme (RUGS). 2003. responsible of the design and supplying segment tunnel for NJPR P = 100 kN Construction and Completion of Singapore Beduk FEM NJPR P = 100 kN Reservoir and Tunnels for Downtown Line Stage 3. The Tangential bending moment. only few points measured). Mo. This research was made possible. (NJPR) with respectively numerical modelling result (FEM.e. M. [3] Blom. Malaysia through the Research 10000 Commissioner and Exploratory Research Grant 8000 Scheme (ERGS). 0 numerical modelling has been carried out to -1 -0.

Geoenviron. [15] Nishikawa K. Teknologi (Sciences & Engineering). 26: 778–788. Tunnelling Linings Based On An In Situ Loading Test.Z. effect on a tunnel induced by load transfer along [13] Arnau O. 2011b.. & Aguado. "Analytical Prediction [11] Jusoh. 28:159–173. Z. F. T. & Molins C. and Chub-uppakarn. Elastic Solution for Tunneling-Induced [12] Jusoh.. / Jurnal Teknologi (Sciences & Engineering) 78: 8–6 (2016) 61–66 [5] Loganathan. 18: 243–251. S. Malaysian Journal of Civil Engineering. S. Yunus.L. K. Experimental And Analytical longitudinal direction. Peng. Tunnelling and Underground Space Study Of The Structural Response Of Segmental Tunnel Technology 23: 421–430. "Development Of A Prestressed And Construction behaviour simulation of a hydraulic tunnel Precast Concrete Segmental Lining". Ling-ling Li. Eng. 4(4): 310. 2003... A. Wang. Ground Movements in Clays. Marto. 25(4): 490–494. [10] Wang.. 2011a. A.H. Experimental And Analytical [9] Teachavorasinskun.N.. Space Technology. J. A... . 2008. S. Analysis of shearing 81-92. 2011. . Tunn Undergr Space Technol. H. S. 2011. Tunn Undergr Space Technol simple and coupled stresses. [6] Park.N. Part 1: Test [8] Cavalaro. & Poulos. N. Segment’s Joint In Precast Tunnel Lining Design.C. 2010. International Journal of Point Load Testing Of Flexural Behavior Of Segmented Geomechanics.G. L. & Wang. Mohamad. 77(11): 91–98. L. & Molins C. 674–685. Tunnelling and Underground Underground Space Technology. S. simulation. H. For Tunneelling-Induced Ground Movements In Clays".L. Packer behaviour under Configuration And Execution.. Marto. Tunnelling and during standpipe lifting.N. 26: 764–777. J. 27(1): [7] Liao. Shen. Mohamad. 1998. Study Of The Structural Response Of Segmental Tunnel Influence of Segmental Joints on Tunnel Lining. & Yunus. 26.M. Linings Based On An In Situ Loading Test. [14] Arnau O. 2004.. H. 2015. Jurnal Geotech.. M. 846-856.N. Part 2: Numerical and Underground Space Technology. Tunnel Lining. 2015. Tunn Undergr Space Technol .L.66 Siti Norafida Jusoh et al. 124(9). S. M.