Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 82 (2018) 248–264

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tust

Physical experiment and numerical modelling of tunnel excavation in T

slanted upper-soft and lower-hard strata
⁎
Sheng-Qi Yang , Miao Chen, Gang Fang, Ying-Chao Wang, Bo Meng, Yuan-Hai Li, Hong-Wen Jing
State Key Laboratory for Geomechanics and Deep Underground Engineering, School of Mechanics and Civil Engineering, China University of Mining and Technology,
Xuzhou-221116, PR China

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: During the excavation of tunnels, the heading face often encounters alternating soft and hard strata. Many
Tunnel accidents have been reported to be closely related to the change in strata. To investigate the effect of alternating
Complex rock strata soft and hard strata on the stability of rock surrounding tunnels, physical experiments and numerical simulations
Physical experiment were performed to simulate tunnel excavation in slanted upper-soft and lower-hard strata. The evolution laws
Numerical modelling
and distribution features of stress, displacement and failure were analysed. During the process of stress redis-
Deformation
Crack evolution
tribution, the radial stress of the surrounding rock has a step-type decrease trend with step excavation, but the
evolution laws of tangential stress are closely related to lithology and the distance from the free face. The failure
process of the surrounding rock under un-supported conditions began with a shearing crack in the roof that then
extended further and coalesced at the interface between the hard and soft rock. Both the physical and numerical
results revealed that the final failure model shows obvious asymmetrical deformation; the soft rock area ex-
periences block dropping and roof falling, while the hard rock only shows shrinkage deformation. Therefore,
excavation and support design need to pay attention to the asymmetrical deformation failure in complex rock
strata, especially the large deformation of soft strata. Based on the numerical analysis results, the influence of
composition of strata lithology on the failure mode were further discussed. These results can provide helpful
references for the safe excavation and scientific support design of tunnels across alternating soft and hard strata.

1. Introduction
Sedimentary strata are the common strata encountered during
tunnel excavation. Unlike common layered strata composed of homo-
geneous rock, some sedimentary strata encountered in tunnel excava-
tion are composed of two or more different composition of sedimentary
materials (Stille and Palmström, 2008; Panda et al., 2014; Barla, 2016).
Strata encountered in tunnel excavation with significantly different
physical mechanics properties and geological status are usually referred
to as complex rock strata, mixed formations, weakly interbedded strata,
or heterogeneous strata. The deformation and failure mode of this kind
of strata will be considerably different from isotropic strata, which
shows clear transverse isotropy (Tien and Tsao, 2000; Tien et al., 2006).
Tunnels constructed in complex rock strata may face many challenges:
the alternating soft and hard rock will severely impact cutting efficiency
and lead to low penetration rates, long downtimes, and cost overruns
(Zhao et al., 2007); in addition, the fracture and dilatancy of weak
surrounding rock will cause strong extrusion and large deformation
under the action of high geo-stress, which causes tunnel-boring
machines (TBM) jamming and damage to the shield (Shang et al., 2004;
Ramoni and Anagnostou, 2011; Yu et al., 2016; Yang et al., 2017a).
Although a tunnel should be constructed away from a composite
stratum, sometimes encountering an alternating soft-hard stratum is
inevitable because of geological condition restrictions. Therefore, un-
derstanding the deformation and failure mechanism of a tunnel con-
structed in complex rock stratum is significant.
Physical model tests in a laboratory using a small-scale model is a
common method to investigate the stability of large-scale geotechnical
engineering. This method allows one to investigate the most relevant
factors influencing tunnel behavior, and the test results can provide
data for numerical modelling (Meguid et al., 2008). Therefore, many
model tests have been carried out to investigate the failure mechanism
of the tunnels excavated in complex rock strata in recent years. Lee
et al. (2006) studied the evolution of arching effects on the soil mass
surrounding tunnels. Nunes and Meguid (2009) studied the effects of
overlying stiff layers above a tunnel excavated in soft ground, and
found that the bending moment of lining was highly dependent on the
relative stiffness between the stiff overlying layer and the soft soil

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: yangsqi@hotmail.com (S.-Q. Yang).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2018.08.049
Received 31 December 2017; Received in revised form 24 April 2018; Accepted 18 August 2018
Available online 24 August 2018
0886-7798/ © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
S.-Q. Yang et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 82 (2018) 248–264

2.5 Hard rock

Axial stress σ1/ MPa

1.5

Similar lining
1

0.5 Soft rock

0
0 2 4 6 8
Axial strain/‰

Fig. 2. Uniaxial compression experiment and result of similar materials.

Table 2
Fig. 1. Sketch of soft and hard rock alternate strata that encountered in tunnel Physical and mechanical properties of similar material in this research.
excavation.
Similar material ρ (kg/m3) σc (MPa) σt (MPa) Ec (GPa) C (MPa) Φ (°)

deposit hosting the tunnel. Li et al. (2014) indicated that shear wedge
damage in the direction of minimum principal stress can easily lead to
collapse in tunnels. Zhang et al.’s (2015) research proved that a linear
increase of the relative thickness of the sandy layer could non-linearly
reduce the magnitude of both the moment and the convergence in
multi-layered formation. Huang et al. (2013) and Jeon et al. (2004)
carried out model tests to study the effect of weak interlayer parameters
on the failure behaviour of rock masses. Their test results indicated that
the location, dip and thickness of the interlayer were important factors
influencing tunnel stability.
An effective observation method to monitor and record the evolu-
tion of deformation and stress during physical experiments is the key
factor for physical model tests. With the development of monitoring
techniques, many technologies were used to investigate the progressive
failure mechanism of tunnels. These techniques include infrared ther-
mography method (He, 2011; Gong et al., 2015), acoustic emission
sensors (Lin et al., 2015), the photoelastic method (Zhu et al., 2015),
fibre strain bricks (Li et al., 2014), displacement sensing bars (Zhang
et al., 2015) and digital image correlation (Li et al., 2014). Digital
photogrammetry technology, a full-field noncontact measuring tech-
nique, has been employed for observations of surface deformation on
various scales (Li et al., 2006, 2016). This technology has many ad-
vantages over the traditional contact measurement techniques (such as
extensometer, strain gauge and photoelastic coating method, etc.); it is
convenient and avoids the local stress disturbance caused by contact
measurement. In our experiments, we used digital photogrammetry
technology and strain bricks to monitor the progressive deformation
mechanism and stress evolution of surrounding rocks, respectively.
Numerical simulation is also an effective method for investigating
the mechanical behaviour of tunnels excavated in anisotropic strata.
Current numerical approaches can be classified into two main types:
continuum-based methods and discontinuum-based methods (Jing and
Hudson, 2002; Elmo, 2006; Fortsakis et al., 2012; Kun and Onargan,
Soft rock 1579 0.332 0.080 0.120 0.088 31.29
Hard rock 1766 2.190 0.125 0.582 0.245 27.55
Similar lining 1440 1.730 – 0.345 – –
2013; Shi et al., 2013). Huang and Huabo (2010) simulated the con-
struction of a double arch tunnel through a faulted rock mass with a
finite difference method, and showed that asymmetric pressures leads
to asymmetric deformation of the tunnel. Feng et al. (2012) analysed
the principal stress evolution of the Mounigou tunnel that crosses a soft-
hard contact zone by FLAC3D simulation. The results show that local
stress concentration effects control the large deformation of soft rock in
the tunnel. The discrete element method (DEM) became popular re-
cently because DEM can represent broken states and the strong non-
linear mechanical phenomena of surrounding rocks in rock engineering.
Using UDEC, Hao and Azzam (2005) carried out a numerical in-
vestigation into the effects of interlayer dips, interlayer shear strength
and interlayer locations on the stability of underground structure. Other
studies (Gao et al., 2014; Karampinos et al., 2015; Yang et al., 2017b)
also indicate the reliability and practicability of DEM in simulating rock
engineering, as the DEM simulation results matched well with field
observations and experimental results.
Although previous studies have done extensive research into the
failure mechanism of rock surrounding tunnels, most of the previous
studies focused on modelling tunnels in isotropic and horizontal strata,
and few geomechanical model tests have been carried out to study the
deformation and failure behaviour of tunnels crossing the alternating
soft and hard strata. In this study, the main aim is to investigate the
stability problems of tunnelling in slanted alternating soft and hard
strata. First, large-scale geomechanical physical models and a discrete
element model with slanted upper-soft and lower-hard strata were set
up based on the engineering geological background of deep-water
tunnel in Qinghai Province, China. Then, physical model tests and
numerical simulations of tunnels excavated under un-supported and

Table 1
Physical–mechanical properties of prototype and ideal similar material.
Material type lithology ρ (kg/m3) σc (MPa) σt (MPa) Ec (GPa) C (MPa) φ (°)

Prototype Mudstone 2449 16.5 2.4 6 4.1 28

Quartz diorite 2775 100 7 29 12.25 47
Tunnel lining 2550 150 – 34.5 – –

Ideal similar material Soft rock 1531 0.33 0.048 0.12 0.082 28
Hard rock 1744 2 0.14 0.58 0.245 47
Similar lining 1594 3 – 0.69 – –

249
S.-Q. Yang et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 82 (2018) 248–264

Hydraulic light
control system Transparent
self developed toughened glass
micro TBM

Camera

Experimental
frame

Excavation system Physical model experimental system Digital photogrammetry system

Fig. 3. Structural schematic of the experimental device.

Fig. 4. Physical model test system.

lining supported conditions were conducted. The deformation law,
stress change and failure mechanism of rock surrounding tunnels
during these two excavation schemes were analysed and compared.
Finally, a further discussion of lithology's effects on the failure me-
chanism of tunnel excavation in alternating soft and hard strata was
presented.
environment is characterized by horizontal tectonic stress. The sur-
rounding rocks were mainly quartz diorite and mudstone. During the
tunnelling, a soft upper layer and a hard lower layer will be en-
countered, as shown in Fig. 1.
2.2. Physical experimental design

2. Physical experiment and numerical simulation design
2.1. Engineering geological condition
The water transmission system from Datong River to Huangshui
River is constructed in Qinghai Province in the northwest of China. One
of the water tunnel in Daban Mountain is built in depths from 690 m to
830 m and has an excavation diameter of 4.4 m and can be character-
ized as a deep buried tunnel. The tunnel has a minimum horizontal
stress of 12–14.2 MPa while the maximum horizontal stresses is
21.1–22.1 MPa with the vertical stress of 18.2–21.9 MPa. The stress
2.2.1. Similarity ratio and similar material
Geomechanical model tests must satisfy some basic similarity re-
quirements in terms of geometry, physical–mechanical properties,
boundary conditions and initial stress conditions. This similarity prin-
ciple requires that some similarity ratios, defined as the ratios of pro-
totype parameters to model parameters, must be constants (Zhu et al.,
2011). Considering the engineering geological condition and experi-
mental equipment, the geometric similarity ratio and volume-weight
similarity ratio in this model experiment are determined as Cl = 31 and
Cγ = 1.6, respectively, According to the similarity principle, the simi-
larity parameters of other parameters can be deduced as follows.

250
S.-Q. Yang et al.
Fig. 5. Schematic diagram of the digital image correlation analysis (Li et al.,
2012).
Cσ = CE = Cc = Cl·Cγ = 50 (1)
Cφ = Cμ = Cε (2)
where Cσ, CE, Cc, Cφ, Cμ and Cε are the similarity ratios of stress, elastic
modulus, cohesion, internal friction angle, Poisson’s ratio and strain,
respectively.
Based on the similarity principles and physical-mechanical para-
meters of in situ rock and tunnel lining, the physical and mechanical
properties of prototype and ideal similar materials are listed in Table 1.
It should be noted that it is difficult to ensure that all the mechanical
parameters of similar materials satisfied the requirements of the simi-
larity ratio; therefore, the characteristics of similar material should be
in accordance with the key parameters of the prototype, such as
strength and elastic modulus; the secondary parameters are negligible.
In this experiment, two main series of similar materials are required to
simulate hard rock and soft rock. Various laboratory tests were carried
out, including a weight test to check the volume-weight, uniaxial
compression tests to determine the uniaxial compressive strength and
elastic modulus, Brazilian splitting tests to obtain the tensile strength,
and direct shear tests to obtain cohesion and internal friction. Using
numerous tests, the physical and mechanical properties of different
proportions were compared and selected to ensure that the similar
Fig. 6. The preparation of physical model.
251
Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 82 (2018) 248–264
Fig. 7. Simulated lining structure.
materials and in situ rock mass could meet the requirements of the si-
milarity principle. A similar material composed of rosin, paraffin and
river-sand at mass ratios of 0.5:3:100 and 3.0:8:100 were determined to
simulate soft rock and hard rock, respectively. The primary con-
sideration for a similar material for the lining structure is compressive
strength and elastic modulus. Based on former research result (Kong,
2016), the similar material of concrete pipe is identified as the mixture
of gypsum and water with the ratio of 104:100. Fig. 2 shows the uni-
axial compression experiment and result of similar materials, and the
physical and mechanical properties of similar material are shown in
Table 2.
2.2.2. Physical model test system
The geomechanical experiments were conducted on the deep dis-
aster simulation system at the State Key Laboratory for Geomechanics
and Deep Underground Engineering, China University of Mining and
Technology, China. The system consists of two parts: a hydraulic
loading and control system and a monitoring system.
The experimental framework could conduct experiments on a model
with a size of 1000 mm × 250 mm × 1000 mm, and the framework is
made up of four separable blocks of 35# cast steel frames connected by
45# cast steel. The structure schematic of experimental device is shown
in Fig. 3a. In the front side, a rectangular steel plate with a size of
S.-Q. Yang et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 82 (2018) 248–264

Table 3
Micro-parameters for the simulated model.
Lithology Block properties Contact properties

Density (kg/ Bulk modulus Shear modulus Normal stiffness Shear stiffness Friction angle Bond strength Tensile strength
m3) (GPa) (GPa) (GPa/m) (GPa/m) (°) (MPa) (MPa)

Soft rock 1531 0.087 0.052 888.7 355.5 31 0.131 0.03

Hard rock 1744 0.467 0.280 4785.5 1914.2 37 0.769 0.16
Interface – – – 1 1 30 0.1 0

Table 4
Micro-parameters for the simulated lining structure.
Lining Density (kg/m3) Elastic modulus (GPa) Poisson's ratio Compressive strength (MPa) Tensile strength (MPa) Residual yield strength (MPa)

1440 0.345 0.2 1.73 0.173 0.006

0.35 2.5
0.3
2
Axial stress/MPa

Axial stress/MPa
0.25
0.2 1.5

0.15
1
0.1 Labortory test Labortory test
0.5
0.05 Udec modeliing Udec modeliing
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 0 2 4 6 8
Axial strain/‰ Axial strain/‰
(a) (b)
Fig. 8. Simulated uniaxial compressive tests and stress-strain curves for the (a) soft rock and (b) hard rock.

Fig. 9. Numerical model for physical model test.
200 × 300 mm can be removed to excavate the tunnel; in the central
part of the back side, a transparent toughened glass is equipped to
observe the deformation and failure process of surrounding rock with
digital photogrammetry system, as shown in Fig. 4.
The experimental device is controlled by a hydraulic control system
that has the capability of applying loads on the upper, lower, left and
right surfaces of the model through the loading plate. The 40 mm thick
loading plate measures 900 mm × 250 mm and the plate was driven by
three hydraulic jacks, which can generate a load pressure of up to
4.4 MPa. The hydraulic jack is controlled by the hydraulic control
system and the loading and unloading can be realized in two orthogonal
directions, which can simulate the biaxial load boundary conditions of
the in situ stress. The tunnel was excavated with a self-developed micro
TBM (Li et al., 2005). The excavation was completed in five steps with
each footage being 50 mm, as shown in Figs. 3a and 4b. The experi-
mental tests are divided into two cases: (1) Analysis case#1 is where the
tunnel has been excavated without lining; (2) Analysis case#2 is where
the tunnel with lining. Geological conditions in both experiments were
set to 30° complex strata with a soft upper layer and a hard lower layer.
The strain bricks were symmetrically distributed in the left rib, right
rib, roof and floor. The arrangement of strain brick is shown in Fig. 4a.
The monitoring system was composed of a digital photogrammetry
system and a static strain data collecting system. The digital photo-
grammetry system (Li et al., 2012) consists of five parts: image col-
lecting, image input, image analysis, data output and data processing,
This system could quickly, directly and accurately obtained the dis-
placement field and strain field of the physical model by tracing the
motion of a pixel on the surface.
The digital photogrammetry method is widely used in the study of
deformation and destruction of rock. By comparing the correlation of
all pixels’ red, green and blue (RGB) colour greyscale in the same pixel
block with the same size at two points, this method could identify
whether these two points in the two images before and after deforma-
tion are located at the same point, as shown in Fig. 5. The correlation
coefficient formula (formula 3) is used to calculate the evaluation
index. First, the correlation coefficients of all points within the search
scope in the images before (Pi) and after (Pd) deformation are de-
termined. Second, the point of the maximal correlation coefficient as

252
S.-Q. Yang et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 82 (2018) 248–264

Fig. 10. Sketch of virtual supporting force and step unloading path.

the target point is determined. Finally, the displacement of the mea-

suring point can be obtained by calculating the coordinates’ difference
before and after deformation by means of the finite element method for
rock’ s ability to withstand.
2k + 1 2k + 1
∑x = 1 ∑y = 1 v (x , y ) × u (x , y )
R12 = 2k + 1 2k + 1 2k + 1 k+1
∑x = 1 ∑y = 1 v (x , y )2 × ∑x = 1 ∑y = 1 u (x , y )2 (3)
where vi(x, y) and ui(x, y) are the pixel RGB colour values of the target
point and the reference point, respectively; 2k + 1 is the length or
width of a pixel block with the unit of pixel; and i values of 1, 2, 3
represent the colour component of RGB.
The stress variation in the surrounding rocks after excavation could
be monitored with a static strain data collecting instrument using the
Fig. 11. The displacement curves of measuring points in the surrounding rock strain bricks, 45° strain rosettes are pasted on the surface of the strain
without lining. bricks. With the strain values collected for each strain bricks, the pro-
cess of stress change in surrounding rock could be calculated through
the elastic mechanics equations as follows:
E (ε0 + με90)
σ1 =
1−μ2 (4)

E (ε90 + με0)
σ2 =
1−μ2 (5)
where ε0, ε90, E, μ, σ1 and σ2 represent the strain values in a horizontal
direction, the strain values in a vertical direction, elastic module,
Poisson's ratio, horizontal stress and vertical stress, respectively.
With the above equations, the radial stress and tangential stress of
monitoring points can be calculated using the 0° strain rosette and 90°
strain rosette data collected during the experiment.

2.3. Experimental procedure

Fig. 12. The station displacement curves of the surrounding rock with lining.

Fig. 13. The comparison of displacements before and after lining.
Step 1: Paste the anti-frication paper on the frame and loading plates
to improve the accuracy of experimental data by reducing the fric-
tion of the model during the experiment. Mark the monitoring
points of strain bricks and the boundary with an angle of 30°be-
tween hard rock and soft rock for easy pouring of the model, as
shown in Fig. 6a.
Step 2: Fill two similar materials into the frame according the ex-
perimental scheme, as shown in Fig. 6b. First, the similar material
that simulated the lower hard rock was filled and rammed and the
strain bricks were embedded during the pouring process. Second, a
2 mm thick mica powder was paved between the two kinds of rocks
to simulate the interface. Finally, the upper soft rock was filled and
rammed until the model was completed. The pouring process of the
lining model is similar to that of the un-supported model; however,
a concrete pipe (Fig. 7) is embedded when making the interface of
the lining model.
Step 3: The loads required to be applied in the model were calcu-
lated through similarity calculation based on the in situ stress test

253
S.-Q. Yang et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 82 (2018) 248–264

523 523

447 447

371 371

295 295

219 219

143 143
245 372 548 625 245 372 548 625

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.49 0.97

(a) Excavation (b) 0.5h after excavation
523 523

447 447

371 371

295 295

219 219

143 143
245 372 548 625 245 372 548 625

0.00 4.27 0.00 0.00 11.50 23.01

(c) 1h after excavation (d) 2h after excavation
Unit:mm
Fig. 14. The displacement evolution process of the surrounding rock without lining.

results. The geostatic stress is gradually applied on the physical
model while the increments in each loading steps are 0.05 MPa
every half hour until the horizontal and vertical stress reaches
0.35 MPa and 0.27 MPa, respectively.
Step 4: Turn on the static strain data collecting system to record the
data of strain bricks. It takes approximately 1.7 h for the load to
reach the designed in situ stress and remain stable. Remove the
rectangular baffle from the back side to reveal the excavation face.
Use the self-developed micro-TBM to excavated the tunnel, as shown
in Fig. 3a. Power on the digital photogrammetry system and take 1
photo every 10 s. When the stress and displacement data are stable,
the experiment ends and then the model is dismantled.
2.4. Numerical model construction
To verify the results of the physical experiments, numerical simu-
lations were also carried out by using the Universal Discrete Element
Code (UDEC). In a UDEC simulation, the computational domain of in-
terest is discretized into an assemblage of rigid or deformable blocks by
using a finite number of intersecting discontinuities and that are treated
as boundary conditions between blocks (Itasca, 2008). The fracture
process can be represented by the sliding or opening of the contact
between blocks.
In this simulation, the elastic constitutive model is used for blocks
and the Coulomb-slip model is used for contacts. The calibration
method of micro-parameters used for the simulation listed in Tables 3
and 4 are obtained by the calculations and simulated uniaxial com-
pressive tests (Yang et al., 2017b). The simulated stress-strain curves for
the soft and hard rock are shown in Fig. 8.
A two-dimensional discrete element model containing 8695 blocks
(Fig. 9) with the same dimensions as the physical model of 1 m
(width) × 1 m (height) was created. For computational efficiency, the
small trigon blocks with average length 0.01 m are generated in the
surrounding area of tunnel, and the rest of numerical model were as-
signed 0.015 m edge length Voronoi blocks to avoid a sudden large
increase in block size that could influences the modelling accuracy. The
boundary conditions for the numerical model are as same as the phy-
sical model.
The model was initially run to equilibrium to produce the in situ
stress field. The excavation was simulated by deleting the blocks. To
obtain a more real failure process, the Fish function “ZONK·FIS” in
UDEC (Itasca, 2008) was used to apply the gradually decreasing stress
on the tunnel surface (Chen et al., 2016). The release process was di-
vided into six stages (stages O, I, II, III, IV, V) to simulate the five-stage

254
S.-Q. Yang et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 82 (2018) 248–264

523 523

447 447

371 371

295 295

219 219

143 143
245 372 548 625 245 372 548 625

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.71 7.42

(a) excavating and lining (b) 0.5h after lining
523 523

447 447

371 371

295 295

219 219

143 143
245 372 548 625 245 372 548 625

0.00 4.24 8.47 0.00 4.37 8.75

(c) 3h after lining (d) 4h after lining
Unit:mm
Fig. 15. The displacement evolution nephrogram of the surrounding rock with lining.

excavation in physical modelling, as shown in Fig. 10.
3. The failure process analyses of surrounding rock
3.1. Deformation analysis
The displacement of monitoring points and the displacement dis-
tribution can be analysed and post-scripted through PhotoInfor system
using a series of photos captured during the model tests. Figs. 11 and 12
show the radial displacement curves of the points at the roadway sur-
face before and after lining support, respectively. The trend of de-
formation at the first 4 excavation stages was almost the same under
different support conditions. The surrounding rock moves towards the
free face as the time of excavation increases, and the displacement
curve shows a step-type increasing trend causing by the step excava-
tion. After the final excavation, the deformation trends in the left rib
and roof show a clear difference. In case 1, the sharp increase of dis-
placement in the left rib and roof indicated the precursor of instability.
In case 2, the displacement in the left rib and roof clearly decreased and
easily achieved a stable state compared with the un-supported condi-
tion. In addition, the decrease rate in soft rock was larger than that for
hard rock. The displacement in the right rib and floor only increased
slightly, indicating a good bearing capacity of the right rib and floor.
Fig. 13 shows the comparison of the displacements under different
support schemes. The settlement of the roof and the horizontal dis-
placement of the left rib were reduced by as much as 77.17% and 83.3%
compared with no support, respectively. The reduction of displacement
of the right rib and floor were 22.8% and 28.7%, respectively. This
indicates that the lining structure has a good control effect on the de-
formation of soft rock.
Fig. 14 demonstrates the displacement nephrogram evolution of the
surrounding rock without support. As shown in Fig. 15a, the self-sta-
bility of the surrounding rock is good in the initial phase of excavation.
Then, the surrounding rock of the left rib and roof start to show signs of
moving towards the free face during the stress redistribution caused by
the step excavation (Fig. 14b). Approximately 1 h after the excavation,
the soft rock shows a non-uniform deformation character, and a shear
slip plane appears near the bottom left between the interface of the soft
rock and the hard rock (Fig. 14c), which indicated that the overlying
soft rock slid along the bedding plane due to the mica powder that was
paved between them. Eventually, the rock in the left rib seriously de-
formed, especially in the upper right roof, while the hard rock in the
right rib and floor remained stable (Fig. 14d). The displacement ne-
phogram evolution under the lining support condition is shown in

255
S.-Q. Yang et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 82 (2018) 248–264

0.4 0.6

0.5

Tangential stress/ MPa

Tangential stress/ MPa
0.3
0.4

0.2 0.3

0.2
0.1
0.1

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Time/h Time/h
(a) Tangential stress of the left side (b) Tangential stress of the roof
0.4 0.7

0.6

Tangential stress/ MPa

Tangential stress/ MPa

0.35
0.5

0.3 0.4

0.3
0.25
0.2

0.2 0.1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Time/h Time/h
(c) Tangential stress of the right side (d) Tangential stress of the floor
Fig. 16. Tangential stress evolution curves of measuring points in the surrounding rock.

Fig. 15. At the initial phase of excavation, sporadic deformation ap-
peared in the upper soft rock near the interface between the soft rock
and the hard rock (Fig. 15b). Then, as the increasing deviator stress
exceeded the soft rock strength, the deformation in the soft rock became
serious, as shown in Fig. 15c. Eventually, the final deformation was
mainly concentrated at the roof and the right upper rib. Compared to
that in the un-supported tunnel, the deformation tended to be more
uniform with no significant sliding or collapses, which indicate that the
lining structure could effectively control the deformation of the exposed
surface of rock surrounding the tunnel, especially in the soft rock.
3.2. Stress analysis
3.2.1. Analysis of the stress evolution
The stress evolution process of monitoring points could be obtained
by analysing the data collected from the strain bricks, and the tan-
gential stress evolution of un-supported and lining cases are shown in
Figs. 16 and 17, respectively. It is found that the stress field of the
surrounding rock is in a stable state until the excavation causes stress
redistribution. Overall, the tangential stress of un-supported sur-
rounding rock increased gradually in the initial period, and the closer to
the tunnel surface the more tangential stress increased. However, the
tangential stresses near the tunnel surface at different locations show
clear differences in the later period. For example, both the tangential
stresses of the left rib and the roof increased first and then decreased
from stage IV. The tangential stresses of the right rib and the floor show
step-type increases at the initial excavation stage and the increase for
the floor is greater than the right rib. The tangential stress of the
shallow surrounding rock began to decrease from stage V. Compared
with the un-supported model, the excavation disturbance decreased
greatly with lining support, and only the shallow soft surrounding rock
within 6 cm shows an obvious stress redistribution. In addition, because
of the distribution of the 30° upper soft layer and the lower hard layer,
the energy for generating plastic deformation in soft rock is much lower
than for hard rock. Therefore, the increased range of tangential stress in
the floor is 71.4%, which is much higher than in the roof (20%).
Figs. 18 and 19 show the radial stress evolution of the un-supported
and lining cases, respectively. In contrast to the tangential stress, the
radial stress shows a step-type decreasing trend with the step excava-
tion. The surrounding rock experienced stress attenuations 5 times, and
the adjustment time becomes less and less for the final excavations. The
radial stresses of measuring points at different locations also show a
clear difference. In the un-supported case, all the radial stress of mon-
itoring points near the tunnel surface in the un-supported case de-
creased to near 0 MPa. This outcome is due to the movement of the
surrounding rock towards the free face caused by the excavation un-
loading. After the lining support was applied, the reduction of the radial
stress is improved by restricting the looseness of shallow surrounding
rock. Only the radial stress of monitoring points near the tunnel surface
experienced a sharp reduction, while the radial stress of other positions
did not decreased much significantly compared with the initial stress.
Excavation of the tunnel induces stress release. The surrounding
rock around the tunnel loses its support force and displacement con-
straint, the radial stress is reduced to zero, and the tangential stress is
highly concentrated. If the deviator stress exceeds the surrounding
rock's yield strength, rock failure will occur and the surrounding rock
will lose its bearing capacity. The surrounding rock will move towards
the free face and the stress concentration proceeds from the shallow

256
S.-Q. Yang et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 82 (2018) 248–264

0.4 0.5

Tangential stress/ MPa

Tangential stress/ MPa

0.3 0.4

0.2 0.3

0.1 0.2

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Time/h Time/h
(a) Tangential stress of the left side (b) Tangential stress of the roof
0.4 0.7

0.6
Tangential stress/ MPa

Tangential stress/ MPa

0.35
0.5

0.3 0.4

0.3
0.25
0.2

0.2 0.1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Time/h Time/h
(c) Tangential stress of the right side (d) Tangential stress of the floor
Fig. 17. Tangential stress evolution curves of measuring points in the surrounding rock with lining.

part to the deep part until a stable state is achieved. The asymmetric
stress distribution can be explained from the perspective of the strata
distribution of the model. The increasing deviator stress more easily
causes damage to soft rock than to hard rock. As the stress concentra-
tion appeared in the right rib and the floor for hard rock, the increased
deviator stress leads to increasing tangential stress and the radial stress
of each point will decrease due to the movement of the surrounding
rock towards the free face.
3.2.2. Comparison of the stress distribution
The surrounding rock deformations have been discussed above, and
it is known that the lining structure has a significant control effect on
soft rock deformation. Herein, according to the stress distribution
characteristics of the stress field in the surrounding rock before and
after the lining in the final stage, the influence mechanism of the lining
structure on the stress field of the surrounding rock will be identified.
Fig. 20 shows the comparisons of the stress distribution characteristics
of the measured points in the surrounding rock at the final stages before
and after the lining: where L is the distance from to the measurement
point to the tunnel surface; r is the tunnel's radius which is set to 7 cm;
σr and σrl are the radial stress of the tunnel with and without lining,
respectively; σθ and σθl indicate the tangential stress with and without
lining, respectively.
It can be seen from the Fig. 20 that the radial stress of the measuring
points around the tunnel gradually increases to the in situ stress with
the increase of the distance from the tunnel surface. This indicates that
the closer to the tunnel surface, the more serious the loose deformation
is. The relationship between the tangential stress and the distance to the
tunnel surface is related to the support conditions and position of the
measuring point. The tangential stress of the surrounding rock in soft
rock under un-supported conditions increases first from near 0 MPa to
the peak stress and then decreases, which indicated that the tangential
stress decreases sharply in the fractured shallow surrounding rock and
increase in the deep surrounding rock. After applying the lining struc-
ture, the tangential stress condition clearly improved due to the effect
of the constraint of the supporting structure. All the tangential stress for
both the floor and the right rib decreases gradually with the increase of
distance, whether the lining structure is applied or not. In addition, the
value difference is negligible, which indicates that the lining structure
has little influence on the tangential stress distribution characteristics in
hard rock. The difference is mainly caused by the different rock strata
where the measuring points are arranged, because the failure modes in
soft rock are mainly reflected in extrusion and collapse, while the hard
rock only shows a small amount of shrinkage deformations. Therefore,
the excavation and support design of tunnels in complex rock strata
need to pay attention to the asymmetrical deformation.
3.3. Analysis of the gradual failure process
As shown in Fig. 21, the gradual failure process of the un-supported
model was captured by digital camera. In the initial stage of excavation,
the surrounding rock shows a relatively stable state, as shown in
Fig. 21a. With the excavation disturbance caused by excavation un-
loading, the surrounding rock of the left rib and the roof move towards
the free face, while the right rib and the floor show no signs of loos-
ening, as shown in Fig. 21b. Approximately 0.5 h after excavation, the
increasing stress exceeds the strength of the soft rock near the vault,
which results in the loss of its bearing capacity, the falling of the wedge

257
S.-Q. Yang et al.
0.4
Radial stress/ MPa
0.3
0.2
0.1
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Time/h
(a) Radial stress of the left side
0.4
0.3
Radial stress/ MPa
0.2
0.1
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Time/h
(c) Radial stress of the right side
Fig. 18. Radial stress evolution curves of measuring points in the surrounding rock.
roof and the appearance of a shearing crack in the right of the roof of
approximately 4 cm, as shown in Fig. 21c. When the time reaches 1 h
after the excavation, the shearing crack in the roof extends further and
coalesces with the slip plane between the hard and soft rock, and the
roof falling phenomenon appears in the left of the roof, as shown in
Fig. 21d. Approximately 1.5 h after excavation, a secondary collapse
appears in the roof and the surrounding rock in the left rib contracts
further to the free face, although there is not a visible deformation in
the hard rock, as shown in Fig. 21e. In the final stages, an 8 cm high
falling arch appears in the vault, the shearing wedge blocks produced in
the interface between the soft and hard rock also fall, and there is a
5 cm wide crack in the left rib of the surrounding rock, as shown in
Fig. 21f.
Fig. 22 shows the simulated crack propagation process of the sur-
rounding rock in the un-supported case. The shear cracks and tensile
cracks are marked by blue and red lines, respectively. In the early
stages, only a few shear cracks appeared in the left of the roof while
other surrounding rock remained stable (Fig. 22a.b). When the stress
decreased to 0.2F, the cracks in the roof propagated and intersected in
the deep roof, which formed a triangular fracture zone (Fig. 22c). When
the stress was entirely released, the cracks in left side began to propa-
gate and intersected with the cracks in the roof; at this stage, few
tension cracks extended into the hard rock (Fig. 22d). As the cracks
continued to propagate and interact, loosing and peeling started to
appear in the right side of the roof under the action of gravity, and a
large tensile crack zone appeared in the soft rock, as shown in Fig. 22f.
It is to be noted that the failure process of the tunnel in the physical
experiment commenced after the five step-by-step excavation, while it
began within the excavation steps in numerical simulation. One
Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 82 (2018) 248–264
0.3
Radial stress/ MPa
0.2
0.1
8 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Time/h
(b) Radial stress of the roof
0.3
Radial stress/ MPa
0.2
0.1
8 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Time/h
(d) Radial stress of the floor
possible reason for these phenomena might be that some hot sand
embedded into the organic glass during the preparation of the model.
Therefore, the initial failure process cannot be observed in the glass side
under such a large friction force.
The comparison of failure modes of experimental and numerical
results is shown in Fig. 23, illustrating that the upper right soft rock is
seriously damaged, and the collapse model for the roof is in good
agreement with the physical experiment’s results. This indicates the
calibrated micro-parameters could successfully represent the experi-
mental result on a macro level. The most important factor of such un-
symmetrical deformation is related to the distribution of soft and hard
rock in the model test. The movement of the surrounding rock caused
by excavation unloading leads to the stress adjustment, and the in-
creasing deviatoric stress exceeds the strength of the soft rock, small
pieces of rock drop. With the further increase of the stress, two new
shear cracks propagate and coalesce next to the vault. Finally, the
secondary collapse of the roof from gravity appears.
Fig. 24 displays the progressive deformation process of the lining
structure. No obvious deformation occurred in the lining when the
excavation is completed, as shown in Fig. 24a. Due to the weak inter-
facial slip caused by the stress concentration, the simulated concrete
pipe near the right rib starts to spall and the top left surrounding rock is
damaged, as shown in Fig. 24b. With the increase of stress concentra-
tion, the spalling at the right rib become much more severe and the
concrete pipe in the soft rock shrinks to the free face, as shown in
Fig. 24c. As the stress redistribution caused by excavation ends, the
lining in contact with the soft rock presents a large surface spall, and
deformation without spalling appears in the contact area between the
hard rock and the lining structure. The deformation in the right rib is
258
S.-Q. Yang et al.
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5
Time/h
(a) Radial stress of the left side
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5
Time/h
(c) Radial stress of the right side
Fig. 19. Radial stress evolution curves of measuring points in the surrounding rock with lining.
the most serious, followed by the left rib, as shown in Fig. 24d.
To further illustrate the impact of asymmetric deformations on
lining structure, Fig. 25 shows the axial force and bending moment of
monitoring points on the lining, these data are obtained by the strain
gauges pasted on the lining. By comparing the results, the maximums of
axial force and bending moment were highest in the roof, secondly
highest in the left rib, followed by the right rib, and those in the floor
minimum. The uneven force subjecting condition indicated that the
lining structure contacted with the soft rock bearing larger stress. As
mentioned before, this is because the soft rock deformed more seriously
than the hard rock after the excavation, so the axial force and bending
moment of the lining structure in soft rock clearly increases while the
lining structure in the right rib and the floor is less affected by the
deformation force, and uneven force at the lining structure are critical
to the stability of surrounding rock mass and the supporting structure.
To ensure the stability of the tunnel, the lining strength in the regions
adjacent to the soft rock should be noted.
4. Failure mechanism of tunnels excavated in slanted alternating
soft and hard strata
As mentioned in the previous sections, due to the stress disturbance
caused by the step excavations, the radial stress decreases gradually
duo to the stress relief in the radial direction during the processes of
excavation (Figs. 18 and 19). This outcome leads to the trend of the
surrounding rock moving towards the free surface of the tunnel
(Figs. 11 and 12). Meanwhile, tangential stress increases gradually due
to the squeezing action of the surrounding rock in the tangential
Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 82 (2018) 248–264
0.3
0.2
0.1
6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Time/h
(b) Radial stress of the roof
0.3
0.2
0.1
6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Time/h
(d) Radial stress of the floor
direction (Figs. 16 and 17). When the increased deviator stress exceeds
the rock strength, rock failure occurs and then reduces bearing capa-
city. The stress concentration zone progresses towards the deeper sur-
rounding rock (Fig. 20) and the shallow failure rock moves towards the
excavation surface. If the deformation has not been controlled effec-
tively, the shallow failure rock may separate from the surrounding rock
and spall towards the free face under the action of gravity and com-
pression. As a result, the radial and tangential stress rapidly drop to
small values, or even close to zero, as the monitoring points A1 and B1
show in Figs. 17 and 19. Compared to the serious deformation in soft
rock, the hard rock remains stable due to its high strength.
According to the analysis above, the surrounding rock stability of a
tunnel excavated in slanted alternating soft and hard strata was greatly
influenced by the soft rock. Therefore, the failure behaviours of the
surrounding rock shows significant differences with tunnels excavated
in conventional isotropic and horizontal strata (Li et al., 2014; Zhang
et al., 2017; Zhou et al., 2017). Using numerical simulation, the effects
of lithology were further discussed in terms of soft strata and hard strata
location. Two additional simulation cases were investigated, including
the upper hard strata and lower soft strata case and isotropic soft strata
case. The micro-parameters and simulation conditions remain constant,
with only the lithology of the strata being varied. Fig. 26 shows the
comparison of simulated crack distribution modes with different
lithologies at stage V. Compared with the isotropic strata, the slanted
composite strata represent an obvious non-symmetrical fracturing
mode, and the fracture zone was concentrated in soft rock while the
hard rock remained intact. Note that the fracture degree of the isotropic
soft strata case is more serious than that of the alternating soft and hard
259
S.-Q. Yang et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 82 (2018) 248–264

0.4 0.6
0.35
0.5
0.3
Stress/ MPa

Stress/ MPa
0.4
0.25
0.2 0.3
0.15 0.2
0.1
0.1
0.05
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4
L/r L/r
(a) left rib (b) roof
0.35 0.7

0.3 0.6

0.25 0.5

Stress/ MPa
Stress/ MPa

0.2 0.4
0.15 0.3
0.1 0.2
0.05 0.1
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
L/r L/r
(c) right rib (d) floor
Fig. 20. Before and after comparison of the surrounding rock stress distribution at final stable stage with lining.

cases. An explanation for this phenomenon might be that the loading
stress was applied from the top and sides in the numerical mode, and
the slanted hard strata bear a partial load, which reduces the stress
concentration in soft rock, thereby reducing the failure zone in soft
rock.
Meanwhile, to further illustrate this phenomenon, the radial dis-
placements of the surrounding rock on the monitoring lines were
plotted in Fig. 27. The comparison also confirms that the maximum
deformation appears in the isotropic soft strata case and the presence of
hard rock strata could reduce the deformation in soft rock. The lining
structure could provide support to resist the deformation of shallow
surrounding rock, especially in the soft rock. It is also notable that the
soft rock strata were more easily deformed, so timely support for the
soft rock strata might be an effective way to ensure successful im-
plementation of tunnel excavation in a slanted alternating soft and hard
strata.
5. Conclusions
Alternating soft and hard strata are often encountered during the
excavation of tunnels. In this paper, geomechanical physical model tests
and DEM simulations are conducted to study the progressive de-
formation characteristics and failure mechanisms of the surrounding
rock around a tunnel crossing deep slanted complex rock stratum.
Based on the analysis of results, the following conclusions can be
drawn:
(1) The failure process of the surrounding rock under un-supported
condition began with a shearing crack in the roof which then ex-
tended further and coalesced at the interface between the hard and
soft rock. The final failure patterns included collapses in the roof
and spalling in the left rib. The hard rock only showed shrinkage
deformation. The uneven force subjecting condition of the lining
structure also indicated that the soft surrounding rock was the least
stable area. Therefore, excavation and support design need to pay
attention to the asymmetrical deformation failure in complex rock
strata, especially the large deformation of soft strata.
(2) The excavation of the tunnel resulted in stress release of the sur-
rounding rock. During the process of stress redistribution, the radial
stress of the surrounding rock in both cases showed a step-type
decreasing trend with the step excavation, but the changes in tan-
gential stress were related to the lithology and the distance from the
tunnel surface. The lining structure effectively reduced the stress
disturbance to the surrounding rock.
(3) The rock mass lithology was an important factor influencing the
failure pattern of slanted complex rock strata. Using numerical si-
mulation, the effects of lithology were further discussed. Compared
with the isotropic strata, the slanted composite strata showed a
clear non-symmetrical fracturing mode, and the fracture zone was
concentrated in soft rock while the hard rock remained intact. In
addition, the fracture degree of the isotropic soft strata case was
more serious than that of alternating soft and hard cases.
In this study, the influence of slanted complex rock strata on tunnel
stability was investigated, especially for stress evolution and failure
processes. Further experimental and numerical investigations are
needed to study other aspects of this interesting stability problem in-
cluding the angle of strata, reinforcement measures and the lateral
pressure coefficient.

260
S.-Q. Yang et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 82 (2018) 248–264

(a) Excavation (b) 0.3h after excavation (c) 0.5h after excavation

(d) 1.0h after excavation (e) 1.5h after excavation (f) 2.0h after excavation
Fig. 21. Gradual failure process of the surrounding rock after stage V.

Stage II Stage III Stage IV

(a) (b) (c)

Stage V Step 539728 Step 1148873

(d) (e) (f)
Fig. 22. Simulated crack propagation process in the un-supported case.

261
S.-Q. Yang et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 82 (2018) 248–264

Soft rock Soft rock

Hard rock Hard rock

(a) Experimental failure mode (b) Simulated failure mode

Fig. 23. Failure mode from experimental and numerical results.

Soft Rock Soft Rock

Spalling

Hard Rock Hard Rock

(a) 0.5h after excavation (b) 1.5h after excavation

Spalling
Soft Rock
Soft Rock

Hard Rock
Hard Rock

(c) 3.0h after excavation (d) 4.0h after excavation(back side)

Fig. 24. Lining structure deformation and failure process.

262
S.-Q. Yang et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 82 (2018) 248–264

2.5 15

bending moment/kN.m
2
Axial force/ kN 10
1.5

1
5
0.5

0 0
Left rib Roof Right rib Floor Left rib Roof Right rib Floor
(a) Axial force (b) Bending moment
Fig. 25. The axial force and bending moment of the lining structure.

(a) Experiment case#1 (b) Experiment case#2 (c) Upper hard rock (d) Isotropic strata
and lower soft rock

Fig. 26. Comparison of crack distribution at stage V.

Fig. 27. Comparison of the radial displacement at stage V.

263
S.-Q. Yang et al.
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by Independent Innovation Project for
Double First-level Construction (China University of Mining and
Technology) (Grant No. 2018ZZCX04). The authors would like to ex-
press their sincere gratitude to the editor and two anonymous reviewers
for their valuable comments, which have greatly improved this paper.
References
Barla, G., 2016. Full-face excavation of large tunnels in difficult conditions. J. Rock Mech.
Geotech. Eng. 8 (3), 294–303.
Chen, M., Yang, S.Q., Zhang, Y.C., Zang, C.W., 2016. Analysis of the failure mechanism
and support technology for the Dongtan deep coal roadway. Geomech. Eng. 11 (3),
401–420.
Elmo, D., 2006. Evaluation of a hybrid FEM/DEM approach for determination of rock
mass strength using a combination of discontinuity mapping and fracture mechanics
modelling, with particular emphasis on modelling of jointed pillars. University of
Exeter, Falmouth, UK.
Feng, W., Huang, R., Li, T., 2012. Deformation analysis of a soft–hard rock contact zone
surrounding a tunnel. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 32, 190–197.
Fortsakis, P., Nikas, K., Marinos, V., Marinos, P., 2012. Anisotropic behaviour of stratified
rock masses in tunnelling. Eng. Geol. 141–142, 74–83.
Gao, F., Stead, D., Kang, H., 2014. Simulation of roof shear failure in coal mine roadways
using an innovative UDEC trigon approach. Comput. Geotech. 61 (3), 33–41.
Gong, W., Peng, Y., He, M., Xie, T., Zhao, S., 2015. An overview of the thermography-
based experimental studies on roadway excavation in stratified rock masses at
CUMTB. Int. J. Min. Sci. Technol. 25 (3), 333–345.
Hao, Y.H., Azzam, R., 2005. The plastic zones and displacements around underground
openings in rock masses containing a fault. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 20 (1),
49–61.
He, M.C., 2011. Physical modeling of an underground roadway excavation in geologically
45° inclined rock using infrared thermography. Eng. Geol. 121 (3–4), 165–176.
Huang, F., Zhu, H., Xu, Q., Cai, Y., Zhuang, X., 2013. The effect of weak interlayer on the
failure pattern of rock mass around tunnel – scaled model tests and numerical ana-
lysis. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 35 (35), 207–218.
Huang, R.Q., Huabo, X., 2010. Deformation mechanism of a shallow double-arch tunnel
in a sloping rock mass. Bull. Eng. Geol. Environ. 69 (1), 89–97.
Itasca Consulting Group, Inc., 2008. UDEC User Manual. Itasca Consulting Group, Inc.,
USA, Minneapolis, MN.
Jeon, S., Kim, J., Seo, Y., Hong, C., 2004. Effect of a fault and weak plane on the stability
of a tunnel in rock—a scaled model test and numerical analysis. Int. J. Rock Mech.
Min. Sci. 41 (3), 658–663.
Jing, L., Hudson, J.A., 2002. Numerical methods in rock mechanics. Int. J. Rock Mech.
Min. Sci. 39 (4), 409–427.
Karampinos, E., Hadjigeorgiou, J., Hazzard, J., Turcotte, P., 2015. Discrete element
modelling of the buckling phenomenon in deep hard rock mines. Int. J. Rock Mech.
Min. Sci. 80, 346–356.
Kong, J., 2016. Study on formation effect and supporting mechanism in the TBM tunnel of
deep strata. Master thesis. China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou,
China (in Chinese).
Kun, M., Onargan, T., 2013. Influence of the fault zone in shallow tunneling: a case study
of IZMIR metro tunnel. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 33 (1), 34–45.
Lee, C.J., Wu, B.R., Chen, H.T., Chiang, K.H., 2006. Tunnel stability and arching effects
during tunneling in soft clayey soil. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 21 (2), 119–132.
Li, Y.H., Lin, Z.B., Jing, H.W., Yang, S.Q., 2012. High-accuracy digital speckle correlation
method for rock with dynamic fractures. Chin. J. Geotech. Eng. 34 (6), 1061–1069 (in
Chinese).
Li, Y.H., Jing, H.W., Zeng, Q., 2006. Development and application of digital
264
Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 82 (2018) 248–264
photogrammetry software package for geotechnical engineering. Chin. J. Rock Mech.
Eng. 25 (2), 3859–3866 (in Chinese).
Li, Y.H., Zhang, Q., Lin, Z.B., Wang, X.D., 2016. Spatiotemporal evolution rule of rocks
fracture surrounding gob-side roadway with model experiments. Int. J. Min. Sci.
Technol. 26 (5), 895–902.
Li, Y., Zhang, D., Fang, Q., Yu, Q., Xia, L., 2014. A physical and numerical investigation of
the failure mechanism of weak rocks surrounding tunnels. Comput. Geotech. 61 (3),
292–307.
Li, Z., Liu, H., Dai, R., Su, X., 2005. Application of numerical analysis principles and key
technology for high fidelity simulation to 3-d physical model tests for underground
caverns. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 20 (4), 390–399.
Lin, P., Liu, H., Zhou, W., 2015. Experimental study on failure behaviour of deep tunnels
under high in-situ stresses. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 46 (2), 28–45.
Meguid, M.A., Saada, O., Nunes, M.A., Mattar, J., 2008. Physical modeling of tunnels in
soft ground: a review. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 23 (2), 185–198.
Nunes, M.A., Meguid, M.A., 2009. A study on the effects of overlying soil strata on the
stresses developing in a tunnel lining. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 24 (6),
716–722.
Panda, M.K., Mohanty, S., Pingua, B.M.P., Mishra, A.K., 2014. Engineering geological and
geotechnical investigations along the head race tunnel in Teesta Stage-III hydro-
electric project, India. Eng. Geol. 181, 297–308.
Ramoni, M., Anagnostou, G., 2011. The interaction between shield, ground and tunnel
support in TBM tunnelling through squeezing ground. Rock Mech. Rock Eng. 44 (1),
37–61.
Shang, Y., Xue, J., Wang, S., Yang, Z., Yang, J., 2004. A case history of tunnel boring
machine jamming in an inter-layer shear zone at the yellow river diversion project in
china. Eng. Geol. 71 (3), 199–211.
Shi, S., Li, S., Li, L., Sui, B., Zhou, Z., 2013. Influence of weak interlayer on stability of
tunnel surrounding rock. Chin. J. Undergr. Space Eng. 9 (4), 836–842.
Stille, H., Palmström, A., 2008. Ground behaviour and rock mass composition in under-
ground excavations. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 23 (1), 46–64.
Tien, Y.M., Tsao, P.F., 2000. Preparation and mechanical properties of artificial trans-
versely isotropic rock. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 37 (6), 1001–1012.
Tien, Y.M., Kuo, M.C., Juang, C.H., 2006. An experimental investigation of the failure
mechanism of simulated transversely isotropic rocks. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 43
(8), 1163–1181.
Yang, J., Chen, W., Zhao, W., Tan, X., Tian, H., Yang, D., Ma, C., 2017a. Geohazards of
tunnel excavation in interbedded layers under high in situ stress. Eng. Geol. 230,
11–22.
Yang, S.Q., Chen, M., Jing, H.W., Chen, K.F., Meng, B., 2017b. A case study on large
deformation failure mechanism of deep soft rock roadway in Xin'An coal mine, China.
Eng. Geol. 217, 89–101.
Yu, K., Inaba, T., Yamamoto, T., 2016. Theoretical analysis and seismic investigation for
TBM jamming in squeezing fissile slate. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 57, 284–286.
Zhang, D.M., Huang, H.W., Hu, Q.F., Jiang, F., 2015. Influence of multi-layered soil
formation on shield tunnel lining behavior. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 47,
123–135.
Zhang, Q., Zhang, X., Wang, Z., Xiang, W., Xue, J., 2017. Failure mechanism and nu-
merical simulation of zonal disintegration around a deep tunnel under high stress.
Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 93, 344–355.
Zhao, J., Gong, Q.M., Eisensten, Z., 2007. Tunnelling through a frequently changing and
mixed ground: a case history in Singapore. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 22 (4),
388–400.
Zhou, H., Qu, C.K., Hu, D.W., Zhang, C.Q., Azhar, M.U., Shen, Z., Chen, J., 2017. In situ
monitoring of tunnel deformation evolutions from auxiliary tunnel in deep mine. Eng.
Geol. 221, 10–15.
Zhu, W., Li, Y., Li, S., Wang, S., Zhang, Q., 2011. Quasi-three-dimensional physical model
tests on a cavern complex under high in-situ stresses. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 48
(2), 199–209.
Zhu, Z., Li, Y., Xie, J., Liu, B., 2015. The effect of principal stress orientation on tunnel
stability. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 49, 279–286.