Geotechnical Special Publication No.

221 © ASCE 2011 145

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DE PARANA on 08/20/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Displacement Controlled Analysis on Tunnel-Soil-Pipe Interaction Based on

Layered Half Space Soil Model

ZhiGuo Zhang1, MaoSong Huang2, WeiDong Wang3, and MengXi Zhang4

1
Postdoctor, Ph.D., Department of Civil Engineering, Shanghai University, Yanchang Road 149#,
Shanghai P.R. China 200072; Department of Geotechnical Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai
P.R. China 200092; Shanghai Institute of Applied Mathematics and Mechanics, Shanghai P.R. China
200072 (corresponding author); Geoyunyi2006@yahoo.com.cn
2
Professor, Department of Geotechnical Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai P.R. China 200092;
mshuang@tongji.edu.cn
3
Professorial Senior Engineer, East China Architecture Design Institute, Shanghai P.R. China 200002;
weidong_wang@ecadi.com
4
Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Shanghai University, Shanghai P.R. China 200072;
mxzhang@shu.edu.cn

ABSTRACT: The effect of tunneling on existing buried pipes is a problem which

engineers designing and practicing in urban geotechnical environments encounter more
frequently than in the past. However, previous methods are usually based on the
assumption that the ground is homogeneous. This paper presents displacement
controlled method to analyze the tunnel-soil-pipe interaction based on the layered half
space soil model, which can solve the problem subjected to multi-layered
non-homogeneous soils. The accuracy of the proposed method is verified by the results
from displacement controlled finite element method. The results discussed in this paper
indicate that the proposed method is a valid approach with higher precision to analyze
response of existing pipe induced by tunneling in the layered soils and the effects of soil
stratification should be considered.

INTRODUCTION

Tunneling in soft ground is increasingly being used during the subway construction
due to considering the benefit of interference with congested traffic in dense urban
environments. However, subway authorities have also been forced to make use of
limited public areas for tunnels because of the high density of development and the
difficulty of land expropriation in crowded cities. Thus the new tunnels are frequently
constructed beneath streets. They are driven closed to or even under existing
infrastructures or buried pipes. Tunneling is likely to cause both vertical and lateral soil
movements and the major concern is to prevent or minimize damage to adjacent
underground utilities, such as the buried municipal pipes. In current design practice, the

Tunnel Management, Emerging Technologies, and Innovation

 Geotechnical Special Publication No. 221 © ASCE 2011 146

layered characteristics of the soil encountered during tunneling are neglected and there
has been little attention given to the development of movements in ground made up of
more than one soil layer. It is desirable to develop a theoretical method of predicting the
response of existing pipes induced by tunneling in multi-layered formations instead of
homogenous material, so that the analyzed results would reflect actual situations during
tunneling.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DE PARANA on 08/20/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Recently some attempts have been made to develop simplified theoretical methods
about deformation analysis of existing pipes due to adjacent tunneling, all of which are
based on the Winkler model or the homogeneous half space soil model. The
conventional approach for obtaining a solution for this problem utilizes the Winkler
model such as that proposed by Attewell et al. (1986). The Winkler model has the
advantage of simplicity for the complex tunnel-soil-pipe interaction through a single
degree of freedom load-displacement relation. However, the Winkler model can not
take account of the soil continuum. Klar et al. (2005) obtained a closed form solution for
the Winkler model, and a more rigorous solution was suggested based on the
homogeneous half space soil model. In this study, the green-field soil settlements are
described by a Gaussian curve. Vorster et al. (2005) utilized the boundary integral
method to formulate a design method for estimating the effect of tunneling on buried
pipes. They took advantage of the explicitly defined green-field settlement and
introduced a modified Gaussian curve which allows the practitioner more freedom in
fitting green-field settlement data relatively to the commonly used Gaussian curve. It is
worth noting that all of the above solutions are based on the assumption that the ground
is homogeneous and the effects of soil stratification should be taken into account.
In this study, the layered half space soil model is applied in order to consider the soil
stratification. The theoretical bases on this topic can be found in Burminster (1945) and
Muki (1960). Moreover, in order to simulate the real non-uniform soil deformation
behavior at the tunnel opening, the displacement controlled pattern proposed by Park
(2004) is applied to describe green-field soil settlements. Thus, the displacement
controlled method is presented to analyze the tunnel-soil-pipe interaction in the layered
soils.

FORMULATION

Fundamental solution for the layered half space soil model

The vertical point load P in the layered half space soil model is concentrated at a
point ( x0 , y0 , hm1 ) in the m th layer (assuming the load surface is considered as an
artificial interface). The key assumptions involved in the derivation are: (1) The layered
half space consists of n parallel, elastic isotropic layers lying on a homogeneous elastic
half space, where n is an integer and satisfies n ≥ 1 ; (2) The i th layer occupies a layer
region hi −1 ≤ z ≤ hi of thickness Δhi ( Δhi = hi − hi −1 ), Young's modulus Ei and Poisson's
ratio μ i , where i = 1,2,L, or n , and h0 is defined by the value of zero.
Using the basic elasticity equation and the double Laplace integral transforms, a set
of linear differential equations with constant coefficients as the basic unknowns is
obtained as follows:

Tunnel Management, Emerging Technologies, and Innovation

 Geotechnical Special Publication No. 221 © ASCE 2011 147

d
dz
[G (ξ ,η , z )] = A(ξ ,η )G (ξ ,η , z ) (1)
where
]
G (ξ ,η , z ) = [u (ξ ,η , z ) v (ξ ,η , z ) w (ξ ,η , z ) τ zx (ξ ,η , z ) τ zy (ξ ,η , z ) σ z (ξ ,η , z ) T ,
⎡ 1 ⎤
⎢ 0 0 −ξ 0 0 ⎥
G
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DE PARANA on 08/20/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

⎢ 1 ⎥ .
⎢ 0 0 −η 0 0 ⎥
⎢ G ⎥
⎢ μ μ 1 − 2μ ⎥
ξ η 0 0 0
A(ξ ,η ) = ⎢ μ −1 μ −1 2G (1 − μ )⎥
⎢ 2G G (1 + μ ) μ ⎥
⎢ ξ 2 − Gη 2 ξη 0 0 0 ξ ⎥
⎢μ −1 μ −1 μ −1 ⎥
⎢ G (1 + μ ) 2G μ ⎥
⎢ ξη η 2 − Gξ 2 0 0 0 η ⎥
⎢ μ −1 μ −1 μ −1 ⎥
⎣⎢ 0 0 0 −ξ −η 0 ⎦⎥
The solutions of initial functions for single-layered soil in Eq. (1) can be represented
in the following form:
G (ξ ,η , z ) = Φ (ξ ,η , z )G (ξ ,η ,0 ) (2)
where Φ (ξ ,η , z ) = exp[zA(ξ ,η )] , and it is called the transferring matrix.
Assume that any two connected dissimilar layers are fully bonded, and the
displacements and stresses will be continuous along the interfaces. Mathematically, the
continuity conditions can be expressed as:
u ( x, y, hi+ ) = u ( x, y, hi−−1 ) (3a)
+ −
v( x, y, hi ) = v( x, y, hi −1 ) (3b)
+ −
w( x, y, hi ) = w( x, y, hi −1 ) (3c)
+ −
τ zx ( x, y, hi ) = τ zx ( x, y, hi −1 ) (3d)
+ −
τ zy ( x, y, hi ) = τ zy ( x, y, hi −1 ) (3e)
σ z ( x, y, hi+ ) =σ z( x, y, hi−−1 ) − q( x, y, hm1 ) g ( z ) (3f)
where hi is the distance from the bottom of the i th layer to the surface of the first layer
( i = 2,3, L , or n ); the superscripts “+” and “－” denote the values of the functions just on
upper and lower interface boundary of the i th layer; q(x, y, hm1) denotes the surface
density distribution of the point load P( x0 , y0 , hm1 ) , i.e.,
q( x, y, hm1 ) = P( x0 , y0 , hm1 )δ ( x − x0 , y − y0 ) (4)
with δ (x − x0 , y − y0 ) is the Dirac singularity function; and g (z ) is a term to judge whether
the load P( x0 , y0 , hm1 ) existed at the artificial interface or not, i.e.,
⎧1 z = hm1
g ( z) = ⎨ (5)
⎩0 z ≠ hm1
Using the transferring matrix solutions for one layer soil in Eq. (2) and the fully
continuity conditions (3a)-(3f), the equations governing the relations between the six
variables at two boundary surfaces z = 0 and z = hn can be expressed as follows:
G (ξ , η , hn− ) = [F1 ]G (ξ , η ,0) − [F2 ]{Q} (6)
Where [F1 ] = Φ(ξ ,η , Δhn )Φ (ξ ,η , Δhn−1 )L Φ (ξ ,η , Δh1 ) , [F2 ] = Φ(ξ ,η, Δhn )Φ(ξ ,η, Δhn−1 )LΦ(ξ ,η, Δhm2 ) ,
{Q} = [0 0 0 0 0 q (ξ ,η , hm1 )]T , Δhi is the thickness of the i th elastic layer,
Δ h1 = h1 , Δhi = hi − hi −1 , i = 2,L, n , Δhm 2 = hm − hm1 .

Tunnel Management, Emerging Technologies, and Innovation

 Geotechnical Special Publication No. 221 © ASCE 2011 148

Considering a traction free condition at the upper surface of the layered elastic
system, it can be expressed as follows:
τ zx ( x, y,0) = τ zy ( x, y,0) = σ z ( x, y,0) = 0 (7a)
Accordingly, for a fixed boundary condition at the bottom of the layered medium, it
can be expressed as follows:
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DE PARANA on 08/20/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

u ( x, y, hn ) = v( x, y, hn ) = w( x, y, hn ) = 0 (7b)
By applying the two boundary conditions, the G (ξ ,η , hn− ) and G (ξ ,η ,0) in Eq. (6) can
be determined analytically.
For a given depth z in the i th layer above the horizontal plane on which the load acts
(including just on the plane, i.e., z ≤ hm1 ), the stresses and displacements in the Laplace
transform domain can be expressed as follows:
G (ξ ,η , z ) = [S ]G (ξ ,η ,0 ) (8)
where [S ] = Φ(ξ ,η , z − hi −1 )Φ(ξ ,η , Δhi −1 )L Φ(ξ ,η , Δh1 )
For a given depth z in the i th layer below the horizontal plane on which the load acts
(i.e., z > hm1 ), the stresses and displacements in the Laplace transform domain can be
expressed as follows:
G (ξ ,η , z ) = [S1 ]G (ξ ,η , hn− ) (9)
where [S1 ] = Φ(ξ ,η , z − hi )Φ(ξ ,η ,−Δhi +1 )L Φ(ξ ,η ,−Δhn )
Applying the inverse double Laplace transform into the solution G (ξ ,η , z ) in Eqs.(8)
and (9), the elastic solution for stresses and displacements in the layered soils subjected
to the vertical load can be obtained.

Green-field settlements induced by tunneling

In this study, the analytical solution proposed by Park (2004) is applied to calculate
the green-field settlements profile at pipe level. The subsurface settlements u zs for the
shallow tunnel it can be estimated as follows:
1.5 ⎛ a γa 2
uzs = − ⎜⎜ 0 sin θ +
E⎝r
{ln r(sin2 θ − cos2 θ ) − cos2 θ }⎞⎟⎟
2
(10)
⎠
where E is the Young’s modulus of soil, a is the radius of tunnel, a0 = μg (1 + sin θ )a , g
is the gap parameter suggested by Lee et al. (1992).
The subsurface settlements u zd for the deep tunnel it can be estimated as follows:
1.5 a0
uz = − sin θ (11)
E r

Displacement controlled analysis for tunnel-soil-pipe interaction

Fig. 1 shows a schematic diagram of the problem, in which an existing pipe is buried
in layered soils. The key assumptions of the computing model are: (1) The existing pipe
remains in contact with the surrounding soils; (2) The existing pipe is elastic,
homogeneous, and continuous.
The pipe behavior is represented by:
[ K b ]{ub } = {Fb } (12)

Tunnel Management, Emerging Technologies, and Innovation

 Geotechnical Special Publication No. 221 © ASCE 2011 149

where [ K b ] is the stiffness matrix of the pipe composed of standard beam elements,
{ub } is the displacement vector, {Fb } is the force vector representing soil loads acting
on the beam elements.

x
Layer one
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DE PARANA on 08/20/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

z Layer two

Existing pipe Layer m

Tunnel Layer k

Layer n
Half space

FIG. 1. Tunnel-soil-pipe interaction model in this study.

The soil continuous displacement at the arbitrary point i can be represented:

n
usi = ∑R δ j ij
(13)
j =1

where Rj is the pipe force acting on the point j of the soil medium; δ ij is the soil
continuous displacement at point i due to the unit load at point j , and it is calculated
by the fundamental solution for the layered half space system.
The summation in Eq. (13) can also be written as follows:
n
u s i = R i δ ii + ∑ R j δ ij (14)
j =1 , j ≠ i

where the first term of the right side is defined herein as the local displacements due to
its own loads. The second term is additional continuous displacements at that point due
to forces acting at different points. δ ii is the displacement of the singularity point. Such
displacement is taken as the average displacement around the circumference of the pipe.
In order to consider the adjacent tunneling, Eq. (14) can further be decomposed as
follows:
last pipeline node
u s i = Ri δ ii + ∑ R j δ ij
j = first pipeline node
+ u sif (15)
j ≠i

where the second term of the right side is additional displacements of the point i due to
forces resulting from soil-pipe interaction. The third term is additional displacements
due to the existence of tunnel. u sif is defined as the green-field settlements profile at
pipe level, and is calculated by the method proposed by Park (2004).
The static equilibrium condition and the displacement compatibility relation are also
considered. And the deformation behavior of the existing pipe due to tunneling can be
obtained:
([ K b ] + [ K s ] + [ K s ][ λs ][ K b ]){ub } = [ K s ]{u sf } (16)

Tunnel Management, Emerging Technologies, and Innovation

 Geotechnical Special Publication No. 221 © ASCE 2011 150

⎧1
i= j
[K s ]ij = ⎪⎨δ ii (17)
⎪⎩ 0 i≠ j
δ i≠ j
[λs ]ij = ⎧⎨ ij (18)
⎩0 i= j
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DE PARANA on 08/20/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

where [ K s ] is the local soil stiffness matrix, which only takes consideration of the effect
of the singularity point, and [λs ] is the soil flexibility matrix, which doesn’t take
consideration of the effect of the singularity point, δ ii and δ ij can be calculated by the
inverse transform of Eqs.(8) and (9).

VERIFICATION

The outer diameter and inner diameter of an existing pipe ( EI =3.09×107 kN·m2) are
6.2 m and 5.5 m, respectively. It is buried at a depth of 13.3 m. A newly-built tunnel
with the outer diameter 6.4 m and axis depth 25 m is running transversely beneath the
existing pipe. The equivalent average ground loss ratio is 2.02 %. The first layer is 2.8
m, the unit weight is 18 KN/m3, the Young’s modulus is 2.53 MPa, the Poisson’s ratio is
0.33; the second layer is 5.2 m, the unit weight is 19.6 KN/m3, the Young’s modulus is
7.44 MPa, the Poisson’s ratio is 0.32; the third layer is 12 m, the unit weight is 18.5
KN/m3, the Young’s modulus is 13.16 MPa, the Poisson’s ratio is 0.3; the forth layer is
12.1 m, the unit weight is 19.4 KN/m3, the Young’s modulus is 22.3 MPa, the Poisson’s
ratio is 0.3; the five layer is 20.3 m, the unit weight is 20.1 KN/m3, the Young’s modulus
is 50.7 MPa, the Poisson’s ratio is 0.2.
In order to compare with the continuous elastic solutions, the finite element
numerical analysis is conducted based on the large-scale commercial software. Fig. 2
shows the 2-D mesh used in the analysis. There are 5120 elements and 5190 nodes. A
displacement controlled finite element method (i.e., DCFEM) proposed by Cheng et al.
(2007) is adopted in this study.

FIG. 2. Finite element mesh.

Figs. 3 and 4 show the existing pipe settlement and bending moment results using the
proposed solutions under the condition of the homogeneous soil and layered soils, and
their comparisons with those presented by DCFEM. The elastic parameters of the
homogeneous soil are calculated by the means of weighted average method proposed by
Poulos and Davis (1980). As shown in two figures, the proposed results based on
realistic layered soils provide a reasonably good match with the computed results by
DCFEM. However, there is a poor agreement between the proposed results based on
homogeneous soil and DCFEM by the software.

Tunnel Management, Emerging Technologies, and Innovation

 Geotechnical Special Publication No. 221 © ASCE 2011 151

From the above-mentioned analysis, it is shown that the proposed method is a valid
approach with higher precision in assessing the existing pipe behavior in
non-homogeneous layered soils. Moreover, as to the layered soils where the difference
of elastic parameters among successive layers is large, the error obtained via the
weighted average method based on homogeneous soil is not negligible.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DE PARANA on 08/20/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

FIG. 3. Comparisons of existing pipe settlement.

FIG. 4. Comparisons of existing pipe bending moment.

CONCLUSIONS

A displacement controlled method to analyze the tunnel-soil-pipe interaction

problem is suggested based on the layered half space soil model. It has been
demonstrated that the proposed method provides reliable estimates for the existing pipe
behavior due to tunneling in multi-layered soils. The results discussed in this paper
indicate that as for the layered soils where the differences of elastic parameters among
successive layers are large, the error is not negligible, which is obtained employing
average elastic parameters based on homogeneous soil converted from layered soils.
It should be noted that the suggested method does not consider the nonlinearity
resulting from pipe-soil interaction. Advanced mechanisms such as relative uplift
failure and gapping between the existing pipes and soils, which would contribute
additionally to nonlinear soil behavior, should be introduced into the analyses.
Therefore the further research on this subject is still required in order to more
reasonably simulate the existing pipe deformation behavior due to the adjacent
tunneling.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors acknowledge the financial support provided by National Natural Science
Foundation of China (No. 51008188) and by China Postdoctoral Science Foundation

Tunnel Management, Emerging Technologies, and Innovation

 Geotechnical Special Publication No. 221 © ASCE 2011 152

(No. 20100470677) and by Shanghai Postdoctoral Sustentation Fund (No.

11R21413200), and wish to express their sincere gratitude to Dr. Klar A. and Dr.
Marshall at Univ. of Cambridge.

REFERENCES
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DE PARANA on 08/20/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Attewell, P.B., Yeates, J., Selby, A.R., (1986). "Soil movements induced by tunneling
and their effects on pipelines and structures." London: Blackie & Son Ltd..
Burmister, D.M. (1945). "The general theory of stresses and displacements in layered
soil systems ( Ⅰ , Ⅱ , Ⅲ )." J. Appl. Phys., Vol. 6(2), 89-96; 6(3), 126-127; 6(5),
296-302.
Cheng, C.Y., Dasari, G.R., Chow, Y.K., et al. (2007). "Finite element analysis of
tunnel-soil-pile interaction using displacement controlled model." Tunnelling and
Underground Space Technology, Vol. 22 (4), 450-466.
Chu, B.L., Hsu, S.C., Chang, Y.L., et al., (2007). "Mechanical behavior of a twin-tunnel
in multi-layered formations." Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, Vol.
22(3): 351-362.
Klar, A., Vorster, T.E.B., Soga, K., et al. (2005). "Soil-pipe interaction due to
tunnelling: comparison between Winkler and elastic continuum solutions."
Geotechnique, Vol. 55(6), 461- 466.
Lin, Y.S., (1996). "Study of a twin-tunnel in infinite multi-layer formations." Ph. D.
Thesis, Taichung: Chung-Hsing University.
Lee, K.M., Rowe, R.K., Lo, K.Y. (1992). "Subsidence owing to tunneling I: Estimating
the gap parameter." Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 29(6), 929-940.
Muki, R. (1960). "Asymmetric problems of the theory of elasticity for a semi-infinite
solid and a thick plate." Progress in solid mechanics, Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Peck, R.B. (1969). "Deep excavation and tunneling in soft ground." In: Proceedings of
7th International Symposium on Soil Mechanics Foundation Engineering, Mexico
City, 266-290.
Park, K.H. (2004). "Elastic solution for tunneling-induced Ground Movements in
Clays." International Journal of Geomechanics, Vol. 4(4), 310-318.
Poulos, H.G., Davis, E.H. (1980). "Pile foundation analysis and design." New York:
Wiley.
Vorster, T.E.B., Klar, A., Soga, K., et al. (2005). "Estimating the effects of tunneling on
existing pipelines." J. Geotechnical & Geoenv. Engrg., ASCE, Vol. 131(11),
1399-1410.

Tunnel Management, Emerging Technologies, and Innovation