Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment (2019) 78:6207–6219

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-019-01491-5

ORIGINAL PAPER

Experimental and numerical study of the water inrush mechanisms

of underground tunnels due to the proximity of a water-filled karst
cavern
Dongdong Pan 1 & Shucai Li 1 & Zhenhao Xu 1 & Peng Lin 1 & Xin Huang 1

Received: 2 October 2018 / Accepted: 25 February 2019 / Published online: 8 March 2019
# Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Abstract
The mechanism of lagging water inrush in underground tunnel constructions due to the proximity of a karst cavern with confined
water is investigated via large-scale physical three-dimensional (3D) model testing and 3D numerical simulations. A new method
is proposed for the preparation of modeled karst caverns filled with confined water. The physical 3D model testing is divided into
two stages: tunnel excavation and hydraulic pressure loading. Multivariate information is obtained at the two stages using
multiple measurement techniques. The results indicate that the displacement, hydraulic pressure, and the developmental trend
of the damage zone in the tunnel excavation process are related. It is evident from the physical 3D model testing results that the
process of water inrush can be divided into three stages, which include the initiation of group cracks, the formation of a water
inrush channel, and the complete collapse of the water-resistant slab. The 3D model testing in conjunction with the 3D numerical
simulations reveal that the disturbance due to excavation has an obvious impact on water inrush channel formation. However, an
increasing hydraulic pressure in the karst cavern has a greater impact on the collapse of the water-resistant slab. These test results
can provide support and guidance for tunnel construction under conditions that are susceptible to water inrush events.

Keywords Water inrush . Karst cavern . Three-dimensional model testing . Numerical simulation . Water-resistant slab

Introduction shifted toward the mountainous areas in western China with

its characteristically complex geological conditions. As such,
In recent years, numerous automobile expressways, high- numerous complex engineering problems are being encoun-
speed railways, and hydropower engineering structures in- tered by Chinese engineers during tunnel construction (Fu
volving extensive tunnel excavation have been constructed et al. 2015; Pan and Dias 2015). Unexpected events, such as
in China (Wang et al. 2004; Huang et al. 2012; Li et al. tunnel collapse, water inrush, and mud bursts, are very com-
2013a). However, the focus of these projects has gradually mon (Wu et al. 2017). The extreme difficulties associated with
hidden karst caverns filled with confined water are one of the
grave geological conditions encountered in many tunnel ex-
* Zhenhao Xu cavation activities. Therefore, it is no exaggeration that water
zhenhao_xu@sdu.edu.cn inrush events have become a serious threat to tunnel excava-
tion projects (Zhao et al. 2013; Pasha et al. 2015; Hou et al.
Dongdong Pan
pddyantu@163.com
2016; Liu 2018). This is particularly the case in areas of ex-
tensive karst development because of its distinct engineering
Shucai Li behavior (Yalcin et al. 2015). Accordingly, several types of
lishucai@sdu.edu.cn
water inrush have been proposed, including water inrush from
Peng Lin karst pipes or fault zones, water inrush caused by hydraulic
sddxytlp@163.com
fracturing, and water inrush due to fractures caused by bulging
Xin Huang (Wang et al. 2001). Generally, numerical calculations and
hx19891018@yeah.net physical model testing are regarded as the two primary
1 methods for researching construction process mechanics dur-
Shandong University, 17923 Jingshi Rd., Lixia,
Jinan 250061, Shandong, China ing tunneling (Zhang et al. 2016).
6208
In terms of theoretical research, Li et al. (2010a, b) provid-
ed semianalytical expressions for the minimum safety thick-
ness of rock resisting water inrush, and revealed the
mechanical mechanism of fissure water inrush in karst
tunnels. Guo (2011) adopted plate theories and an elastic
beam to investigate the rock stratum between the tunnel and
the karst cave. Song (2006) analyzed the mechanism of tunnel
instability induced by large-scale karst caves, and obtained
calculation formulas for the minimum safety thicknesses of
the tunnel roof and floor. Carried out the mechanical analysis
for the filling materials in the karst caves located on the top,
bottom, and lateral to the tunnel using the principle of the slice
method for reference. The mechanical mechanism of the rock
resisting water inrush was analyzed by adopting the theory of
elastic mechanics.
Numerical analyses have been extensively employed for
analyzing the mechanisms of water inrush. Zhao et al.
(2018) proposed a flow-stress coupling water inrush model
based on elastoplastic theory, in which the water inrush
channel was determined only by the permeability evolution
caused by rock deformation. Yang et al. (2007) developed a
coupled flow-stress-damage model, which was fitted to the
results of laboratory experiments, and follows the evolution
of viable outburst paths. Hou et al. (2016) estimated the
magnitudes of water inflow into tunnels during tunnel exca-
vation to provide guidance for tunnel construction under
conditions that are susceptible to water inrush events. Wu
et al. (2011) researched the mechanisms of lagging water
inrush in detail, and proposed a flow-solid coupling simula-
tion method for evaluating water inrush mechanisms near
faults.
With respect to physical model testing, Li et al. (2013b)
conducted physical model testing and numerical analysis to
investigate deformation mechanisms during tunnel excavation
in dipping layered formations, and compared their results with
the results obtained by field measurements conducted in prac-
tical tunnel engineering projects. Huang et al. (2013) employed
physical model testing to analyze the failure criterion and the
instability of the surrounding rock mass systematically in
tunnel projects. With respect to water inrush in particular,
Wang et al. (2016) designed a model-testing device for study-
ing the occurrence of water inrush in a local deep pit, and eight
model tests of water inrush were accordingly performed. Liang
et al. (2016) analyzed the stress, displacement, and water
pressure of the surrounding rock during tunnel excavation
based on physical water inrush simulation experiments. Liu
et al. (2009) adopted a similar physical model experimental
system to investigate water inrush mechanisms in deep mining
operations. Jiang et al. (2017) developed a three-dimensional
(3D) physical model to determine the minimum safe thickness
of water-resistant slabs for water inrush prevention. Li et al.
(2010a, b; 2012) investigated water inrush mechanisms in a
series of physical model testing studies. For instance, the water
D. Pan et al.
inrush mechanisms of faults were investigated via physical
model testing and numerical analysis. In addition, a fluid-
solid coupling model test system was adopted to study the
responses of surrounding rock in a coal mining operation under
a loosely confined aquifer. The work provided a useful analysis
of water inrush mechanisms in both faults and fault crushed
zones (Zhang et al. 2014a, b; Hu et al. 2014; Xu et al. 2011;
Ivars 2006).
The above discussion of past numerical calculations and
physical model testing for researching the mechanics of water
inrush has provided useful analyses of water inrush mecha-
nisms under general conditions. However, few studies have
focused on the specific mechanisms of water inrush owing to
the grave geological conditions encountered in many tunnel
excavation activities associated with concealed karst caverns
filled with confined water. Therefore, this paper employs a
custom-developed large-scale physical 3D model testing sys-
tem in conjunction with numerical simulation using
FLAC3D™ software (Itasca Consulting Group, Inc.) to pro-
vide multiple information sources to investigate the stability
of surrounding rock during tunnel excavation, and to reveal
the mechanisms of lagging water inrush for the excavated
tunnel owing to the proximity of a karst cavern filled with
confined water. The results of the physical model testing are
compared with those obtained from the numerical simula-
tions. To physically simulate a karst cavern during periods
of heavy rainfall, the hydraulic pressure in the physical 3D
model is increased gradually during testing until water inrush
occurs. The process of water inrush is thereby faithfully
reproduced at the hydraulic loading stage. The results present-
ed can serve as a reference for construction design and water-
inrush warning systems in tunnel construction.
Engineering background
The Qiyueshan Tunnel is a key engineering project of the
Lichuan-Wanzhou Highway passing through Qiyue
Mountain, which is located between Nanping Town and
Moudao Town. It is a separated tunnel, with a greatest buried
depth of 543 m. The exact geometry of the tunnel is a three-
centered circular arch. The height and width of the tunnel were
designed as 5.0 m and 10.5 m, respectively. The left tunnel is
3380 m long, and begins at mileage marker ZK19 + 005 and
ends at ZK22 + 380. The right tunnel is 3282 m long, and
begins at mileage marker YK19 + 016 and ends at YK22 +
402. Qiyue Mountain includes some large-scale karst depres-
sions, trough valleys, and sinkholes distributed over its fluc-
tuating surface. The Qiyueshan Tunnel passes through two
large regional faults (the Zhongcao reverse fault and
Deshengchang fault), and karst caverns are widely distributed
in the limestone of the area. As a result, karst is developed
intensely around the tunnel. Figure 1 presents a geological
section map of the Qiyueshan Tunnel (Wangle et al. 2017).
Experimental and numerical study of the water inrush mechanisms of underground tunnels due to the proximity...
Fig. 1 Geological section map of
the Qiyueshan Tunnel
Lichuan
As shown in the figure, the tunnel penetrates through an asym-
metric anticline, where the southeast occurrence is 115°∠70°
and the northwest occurrence is 320°∠60°. The anticline is
composed of thick limestone, shale, and coal strata.
The surface water system is not intensely developed in the
tunnel zone. Groundwater is mainly recharged by the infiltra-
tion of precipitation and the seepage of surface water. The
intensely developed surface and underground karst in the tun-
nel zone has a close hydraulic affiliation. Consequently, the
linkage between surface water and karst interacts mutually
into a karst spatial system. Fractures in the water-resistant slab
developed intensely during tunnel excavation. Moreover,
abundant rainfall during the rainy season resulted in an in-
creasing hydraulic pressure in neighboring karst caverns,
which caused a very high level of water inrush owing to the
collapse of the water-resistant slab. The simplified model
shown in Fig. 2 of a karst cavern filled with water neighboring
a tunnel excavation was established to evaluate the displace-
ment, stress, and hydraulic pressure of the surrounding rock as
a function of the extent of tunnel excavation.
γH
Hydraulic pressure
Karst cave water-resistant slab
Tunnel
Fig. 2 Schematic diagram of the simplified karst cavern filled with water
neighboring a tunnel excavation
6209
Wanzhou
Physical model testing
Solid-fluid coupling model testing system
The custom-designed 3D solid-fluid coupling model testing
system shown in Fig. 3 is composed of five primary compo-
nents: a steel structural frame, a multivariate information mon-
itoring system, automatic data collection equipment, a water
loading system, and a ground stress loading system. The di-
mensions of the model were 2.8 m × 1.2 m × 2.4 m. The steel
structural frame was composed of a base, reaction frames, a
tempered glass lining, and reaction beams. The tempered glass
improved the visibility of the test system while maintaining a
good water seal. Holes were fabricated in the tempered glass
lining to facilitate the tunnel entrance and the passage of data
lines. The multivariate information monitoring system was
composed of monitoring sensors, a multi-displacement mon-
itoring instrument, and a data acquisition device. Therefore,
multivariate information, such as displacement, stress, and
hydraulic pressure, were recorded at key points of the model
in the testing process. The ground stress loading system was
composed of a hydraulic station, a control cabinet, an oil
pump, three hydraulic jacks, and three reaction beams, as
shown in Fig. 4. The system fully provided a level of ground
stress satisfying the requirements of the proposed experi-
ments. The hydraulic pressure loading system was composed
of an air pump, storage water tank, and numerical pressure
indicator. The system provided both the karst cavern water
pressure and the groundwater pressure loading.
Similarity requirements
Physical models must satisfy a series of requirements
reflecting the essential similarity between the physical model
and the phenomenon the model is designed to replicate.
Similarity is considered in terms of various factors such as
geometry, equilibrium and physical equations, boundary con-
ditions, and Newton’s second law. In this paper, the reduced
dimension scale C L and the reduced density scale C γ
employed in the model were 35 and 1, respectively.
According to the similarity theory introduced by Garnier
et al. (2007) and Li et al. (2012), the essential similarity be-
tween the modeling materials and the undisturbed
6210 D. Pan et al.

Top beams
Jack
The water injection
pipe 1
The water injection
Reaction frame pipe 2
The karst cave

2400mm
The tunnel
Reserved holes
Simulated rock

2800mm

The base
(a) Structural steel frame employed for the physical 3D model
(a) Front view
Top beams

Bolts
The loading box
The karst cave
Water pump

Tunnel entrance
Monitoring
system Simulated rock
The tunnel
The base

(b) Side view

(b) Physical model testing devices
Fig. 3 Solid-fluid coupling model testing system. (a) Structural steel
frame employed for the physical 3D model. (b) Physical model testing
devices
surrounding rock can be summarized as given in Table 1.
These similarity criteria can satisfy the requirements for
modeling materials, such as the specified mechanical proper-
ties, the test model proportions and size, the boundary condi-
tions, and the value of the initial stress (Liu et al. 2003).
Fig. 4 The ground stress loading system. (a) Front view. (b) Side view
uniaxial tensile tests, and permeation experiments. In addition,
the simulated materials satisfied the requirements of large unit
weight, low intensity, and stable performance. Finally, the dis-
integration of the similar material employed after immersion in
water was matched to that of the natural rock. The physical and
Table 1 Reduced scales of the parameters adopted in the physical 3D
model testing

Parameters Relations Reduced scale

Materials similarity
Friction coefficient Cφ = Cμ 1
Elastic modulus CE = CγCL 35
The simulated rock was composed of iron powder, calcium
Poisson’s ratio Cμ = Cε 1
carbonate, white cement, quartz sand, silicone oil, and chlori-
Cohesion Cc = Cσ 35
nated paraffin. Among these, we adopted quartz sand as aggre- pffiffiffiffiffiffi
Permeability coefficient C K ¼ C L /Cγ 5.92
gate, iron powder and calcium carbonate as fine aggregate, and
Stress Cσ = CγCL 35
silicone oil and chlorinated paraffin as the bonding agent. The
Strain Cε = Cμ 1
proportions of the six materials were adopted according to the
discussed similarity theory to best match the behavior of the Note: the reduced scale of dimension CL was selected as 35, the reduced
modeled rock based on the results of uniaxial compression tests, scale of density Cγ was selected as 1
Experimental and numerical study of the water inrush mechanisms of underground tunnels due to the proximity... 6211

Table 2 Mechanical parameters of the surrounding rock and modeling materials

Material types Density (Kg/m3) Elastic modulus (GPa) Compressive Cohesion Friction Hydraulic conductivity (cm/s)
strength (MPa) (MPa) angle (°)

Surrounding rock 2.6 3–6 27–38 0.8–1.2 30 5.32 × 10−6~7.26 × 10−5

Modeling materials 2.53 0.13 0.87 0.023 31.1 3.16 × 10−6

mechanical parameters of the natural rock and modeling mate-
rials are listed in Table 2 (Li et al. 2012).
Physical model testing
As shown in Fig. 5, the physical 3D model employed two
monitoring sections denoted as sections I and II, and the sim-
ulated tunnel included more than 15 monitoring points lying in
the planes of the sections with four distinct orientations (la-
beled 1–4). Meanwhile, the displacement of the surrounding
rock was monitored by the newly developed grating multi-
point extensometer. Monitoring sections I and II were respec-
tively 210 mm and 390 mm away from the tunnel entrance.
Monitoring section I was designed to measure the
displacement, stress, and hydraulic pressure of the ordinary
surrounding rock in the tunnel arch foot, hance, and crown
according to measurement lines 2, 3, and 4, respectively. The
monitoring points were separated by either 160 mm or
320 mm, where the span of the tunnel was 320 mm.
Section II was regarded as the key monitoring section, and
was designed to measure the displacement, stress, and hydrau-
lic pressure of the water-resistant slab between the tunnel and
the water-filled karst cavern.
Simulation of the karst cavern
The preparation of realistic karst caverns filled with con-
fined water within a physical 3D model is generally

Fig. 5 Distribution of monitoring

points in the physical 3D testing
model (unit: mm). (a) Overall
layout. (b) Detailed layout in sec-
tion I Units: mm II I

2-1
3-1 2-2
1-3 3-2 2-3

2400
1-2 2-4 4-1
1-1 3-3 3-4 4-3
4-4 4-2

(a) Overall layout

2-1 2-1
2-2 2-2
3-1
3-2 2-3 2-3 3-1 2-3
2-4 3-2
3-3 3-3 3-3
3-4 4-4
4-3 4-2 4-1 4-3 4-2 4-3 4-1
Displacement measuring Hydraulic pressure Stress measuring points
points measuring points

(b) Detailed layout in section I

6212
Fig. 6 Simulated karst cavern
preparation method. (a) Fix
inflated rubber ball at the
appropriate location. (b) Sealing
of the entry pipe. (c) High-
temperature heating of the melt-
ing device. (d) Rubber ball resi-
due removal
(a) Fix inflated rubber ball at the appropriate location
(c) High-temperature heating of the melting device
difficult. Li et al. (2010a, b) simulated karst voids by em-
bedding halite in the modeling materials according to the
soluble characteristic of halite in water. However, this
method was found to be flawed if the karst cavern was
too large. Thus, the present work employed the innovative
method illustrated in Fig. 6 for preparing the karst cavern
filled with confined water. The preparation method as-
sumed a spherical shape for the simulated karst cavern in
the 3D model. The karst cavern preparation method is pri-
marily composed of the following five steps.
(1) A high-quality inflatable rubber ball was inflated to a
diameter of 320 mm (equal to the span of the tunnel),
and the ball was fixed at a specified location in the 3D
model, as shown Fig. 6a.
(2) The rubber ball was buried in layers of material, and the
surrounding material of each layer was compacted by
hammering until the ball was just covered.
(3) A 40-mm diameter steel tube was placed on top of the
rubber ball and sealed to the top layer of material, as
shown Fig. 6b.
(4) The tip of another steel tube with a 30 mm diameter
was heated to incandescence, and then inserted into
the rubber ball through the fixed steel tube to melt
the rubber ball, as shown Fig. 6c. This procedure was
repeated several times until the rubber ball was
completely melted.
D. Pan et al.
(b) Sealing of the entry pipe
(d) Rubber ball residue removal
(5) The rubber ball residue was removed prior to cooling
using an extraction device, as shown Fig. 6d, leaving a
prepared void in the model.
Model construction and tunnel excavation process
The primary steps employed in the model construction and
tunnel excavation process are summarized as follows.
(1) Model material preparation and installation: The six sim-
ulated rock materials were weighed according to the
established mixing proportions. The materials were
stirred well using a concrete mixer, and the model space
was filled layer-by-layer with appropriate compaction by
hammering, as shown in Fig. 7a. During the filling pro-
cess, the sensors and the karst void were embedded ac-
cording to the established monitoring scheme.
(2) Simulation of the in situ stress: The overburden depth in
the vertical direction of the modeled tunnel was assumed
to be 400 m, and the height of the top of the model was
adopted as 41.4 m according to the similarity ratio.
Therefore, a load of 260 kPa was applied to the top sur-
face of the physical 3D model, as shown in Fig. 7b, to
simulate the actual elevation.
(3) Simulation of the initial hydraulic pressure loading: The
designated hydraulic pressure was loaded 48 h after the
Experimental and numerical study of the water inrush mechanisms of underground tunnels due to the proximity...
completion of the in situ stress loading, as shown in
Fig. 7c. The initial groundwater pressure was 5 kPa
on the surface of the model, and the karst cavern hy-
draulic pressure was 20 kPa. To obtain the best loading
effect, the karst cavern hydraulic pressure loading pro-
cess was divided into four periods averagely.
(4) Tunnel excavation: The method of artificial drilling was
adopted in the construction of the tunnel. A lengthwise
tunnel section from 0 mm to 720 mm was excavated. The
tunnel section was separated into two benches with upper
bench and the lower bench heights of 141 mm and
107 mm, respectively. In addition, the tunnel was exca-
vated in sequence from the upper bench to the lower
bench. Meanwhile, the lengthwise excavation was
Fig. 7 Images of the physical 3D
model. (a) Material filling
process. (b) Simulation of in situ
stress. (c) Initial hydraulic
pressure loading. (d) Model test
system debugging. (e) Dribbling
water. (f) Water inrush
(a) Material filling process
(c) Initial hydraulic pressure loading
(e) Dribbling water
6213
divided into 24 60-mm-long steps. The tunnel’s
supporting structure was constructed immediately after
excavation.
(5) Simulation of karst cavern hydraulic pressure loading:
After completion of the tunnel excavation, the karst cav-
ern hydraulic pressure was loaded according to the load-
ing steps listed in Table 3. The monitoring data and the
water inflow in the tunnel were examined closely during
the loading process. The hydraulic pressure loading was
terminated once water inrush occurred owing to the col-
lapse or breakdown of the water-resistant slab. Examples
of dribbling water and water inrush obtained during hy-
draulic pressure loading of the karst cavern are shown in
Fig. 7e and f, respectively.
(b) Simulation of in situ stress
(d) Model test system debugging
(f) Water inrush
6214 D. Pan et al.

Table 3 Karst cavern hydraulic

pressure loading steps Loading steps Loading time /min Pressure /kPa Experimental phenomenon

1 20 20 Beaded seepage and the water flow increase gradually

2 20 30
3 30 40 The muddy water flows out
4 30 45 The muddy mixture gradually turns to clear water
5 40 50 The rock mass become unstable and abrupt
failure finally

Numerical analysis Among them, M is the Biot modulus (N/m2); α is the Biot
coefficient.
Numerical analysis is a key method for evaluating variations In particular, the elastic relations that relate effective stress-
in the displacement, stress, hydraulic pressure, and the extent es to strains are (small strain)
of the damage zone during practical tunnel excavation  
  2
operations. σij −σij þ α p−p δij ¼ 2Gεij þ K− G εkk
0 0
ð5Þ
3

Basic principle of fluid-solid coupling calculation where σ0ij is the initial stress; p0 is the initial pore pressure; K
and G represent the volume modulus of the material and the
The fluid transport is based on Darcy’s law, and the fluid-solid shear modulus of the material, respectively; εij represents the
coupling process follows Biot consolidation theory, so as to strain tensor.
simulate the fluid flow in porous media (Itasca Consulting The compatible equation describing the relationship be-
Group, Inc, 2005). And the finite difference method is used tween strain rate and velocity gradient can be expressed as:
to solve the following equations.
1 
For isotropic and homogeneous geotechnical materials, the ξij ¼ ν i; j þ ν j;i ð6Þ
fluid transport is described by Darcy’s law: 2
 
qi ¼ −k p−ρ f x f g j ð1Þ
Numerical model and boundary conditions
where k is the tensor of absolute mobility coefficients of rock
medium; ρf is fluid density; gj(j = 1, 2, 3) are the three compo- We employed FLAC3D with a fluid-solid coupling model to
nents of the gravity vector. analyze the mechanical states of the tunnel excavation. The
For small deformation, the fluid particle equilibrium equa-
tion is:
∂ζ
−qi;i þ qv ¼ ð2Þ
∂t
where qi, i is the seepage velocity (m/s); qv is the source
strength of the fluid (1/s); ζ is the variation of fluid volume
per unit volume of porous material.
The balance of momentum has the form
dν i
σij; j þ ρg i ¼ ρ ð3Þ
dt
where ρ = (1 − n)ρs + nsρw is the bulk density, ρs and ρw are
the densities of the dry matrix and the fluid, respectively.
Changes in the variation of fluid content are related to
changes in pore pressure, P, and mechanical volumetric
strains, ε.

1 ∂P n ∂s 1 ∂ζ ∂ε
þ ¼ −α ð4Þ Fig. 8 Numerical grid of the 3D simulation model
M ∂t s ∂t s ∂t ∂t
Experimental and numerical study of the water inrush mechanisms of underground tunnels due to the proximity... 6215

60
numerical model shown in Fig. 8 assumes a width of 60 m in 1-2 in model test
the strike direction (X direction), a height of 80 m in the 50 -1-2 in simulation
-3-3 in model test
vertical direction (Y direction), and a length of 70 m (Z direc-

Displacement (mm)
40 -3-3 in simulation
tion). The exact geometry of the tunnel is a three-centered -4-3 in model test
circular arch. To simulate conditions in the tunnel area, the 30 -4-3 in simulation

numerical model requires practical boundary conditions. The

20
horizontal displacements of the four sides were constrained
via normal constraints, and the allowable vertical displace- 10
ment at the bottom of the model was constrained to zero.
0
Meanwhile, the rock mass surrounding the tunnel was 0 5 10 15 20 25
governed by an elastic-plastic constitutive model with the Excavation steps
Mohr–Coulomb failure criterion. However, the fluid-solid Fig. 9 Comparison of calculated and measured displacements during
coupled behavior was assumed to be governed by an isotropic tunnel excavation with respect to excavation steps
seepage model based on the stable seepage analysis criterion.
In other words, two basic conditions were required to be met: direction. The top bench was excavated directly after first
the seepage material is nearly uniform and the seepage perme- excavating the lower bench.
ability k is constant. Based on the analysis above, the calcula-
tion scheme is summarized as follows: After one round of
excavation, the seepage was calculated to stability with the
fluid calculation module on and mechanical calculation mod-
Results and discussion
ule off. Next, the mechanical was calculated to equilibrium
with the fluid calculation module off and mechanical calcula-
Analysis of physical and simulated tunnel excavation
tion module on. Finally, the calculation results were saved and
results
the experiment proceeded to the next step.
Good consistency was generally observed between the results
of the physical model and those of the numerical simulation
Numerical simulation scheme
for the distribution of the displacements, the surrounding rock
stress, and the hydraulic pressure with respect to excavation
A vertical load (p = γH = 9.35 MPa) was applied to the surface
steps, as shown in Figs. 9, 10, and 11, respectively, which
of the model to simulate the initial ground stress. The stress in
were obtained for measurement points corresponding to point
the horizontal direction was assigned as the effective vertical
3–3 in section I (i.e., I-3-3) and point 1–2 in section II (i.e., II-
stress reduced by a factor of 0.75 according to a geological
1-2). Here, the location of section I corresponds to 8 excava-
investigation report. The hydraulic pressure on the top surface
tion steps and that of section II corresponds to 13 excavation
of the numerical model was defined as 0.1 MPa to simulate the
steps. These results are discussed in detail as follows.
water table. The seepage pressures of the tunnel walls and
The radial displacements of the monitoring sections shown
tunnel face were fixed to zero, and an impermeable boundary
in Fig. 9 changed stepwise. Specifically, the displacements
was also adopted during the process of excavation. The diam-
increased only slightly before the tunnel face was excavated
eter of the karst cavern was set equal to the span of the tunnel.
to the area affected by the karst cavern. However, the displace-
The thickness of the water-resistant slab between the tunnel
ments exhibit an obviously increasing trend as the tunnel face
and the karst cavern was defined as 5.6 m (i.e., half the span of
the tunnel). The angle between the karst cavern position and
the horizontal direction was 60°. The hydraulic pressure in the 800
karst cavern was assigned as 0.7 MPa. -1-1 in model test
700
Hydraulic pressure(Kpa)

-4-3 in model test

-1-1 in simulation
Simulated tunnel excavation 600
-4-3 in simulation
500
The excavation sequence employed in the numerical simula-
tion was similar to that employed for the physical 3D model. 400

The tunnel section was separated into two benches with an 300
upper bench height of 5 m and a lower bench height of 3.7 m.
200
The lengthwise excavation was divided into 52 2.1-m-long
0 5 10 15 20 25
steps. The excavation steps corresponding with those Excavation steps
employed for the physical model were mainly analyzed, Fig. 10 Comparison of calculated and measured hydraulic pressures
which involved excavation from 16 m to 41.2 m in the length during tunnel excavation with respect to excavation steps
6216
10
-1-2 in model test
Vertical stress /MPa 9
-3-3 in model test
8
7 and in section II during excavation steps 11 through 15.
6 greater than those in section II. Here, the magnitude of the
5 The magnitudes of the stress in the surrounding rock reached
0 5 10 15 20 25
Excavation steps
Fig. 11 Measured vertical stresses during tunnel excavation with respect
to excavation steps
approached the monitoring section, and the displacements
gradually stabilized after the tunnel face was driven 3–4 exca-
vation steps past the monitoring section. After completion of
the tunnel excavation, the displacement values in section I and
section II differed significantly, where the displacements in
section II were approximately double those in section I for both
the physical 3D model and the simulation results. In addition,
the radial displacement of the side wall closest to the karst
cavern was significantly greater than that of the other side.
We also note that the displacements obtained for the physical
model were greater than those obtained by the simulation.
From Fig. 10, we observe an obvious decrease in the hy-
draulic pressure in section I when the number of excavation
steps increased from 5 to 10 for both the physical 3D model
and the simulation results. The hydraulic pressure in the stable
state reduced by 54.9% compared with the initial value in
section II, while a 40.3% reduction was observed in section
I. In addition, a comparison of Figs. 9 and 10 indicates that the
displacement and the hydraulic pressure are related in the
tunnel excavation process.
In terms of the magnitudes of the vertical stress in the sur-
rounding rock, Fig. 11 presents a slightly increasing trend in
Excavation induced Damage zone further
damage zone development
Step 12 Step 15
Fig. 12 Damage zone distribution during tunnel excavation
D. Pan et al.
the stress at the beginning of tunnel excavation. Specifically,
the stress in the surrounding rock attained a maximum value
when the tunnel face was excavated to the monitoring section.
However, the surrounding rock stress presents a sharply de-
creasing trend in section I during excavation steps 7 through 10
However, the stress release rates in section I are significantly
stress release was 34.7% in section I and 15.9% in section II.
stable values after the 16th excavation step. The results exhibit
a generally high consistency between the stress distributions in
section I and section II.
When including a feature analysis of the damage zone and
the hydraulic pressure obtained by simulation during tunnel
excavation, as shown in Figs. 12 and 13, respectively, we find
that, on the whole, the results exhibit a generally high consis-
tency with the obtained variations in the displacements and the
hydraulic pressure of the surrounding rock. Fractures devel-
oped intensely in the water-resistant slab due to the disturbance
of tunnel excavation. From Fig. 12, we note that the extent of
the damage zone in the surrounding rock increases from the
tunnel walls to the karst cavern during the process of excava-
tion, and the damage zone is observed to penetrate the water-
resistant slab at excavation step 15. The hydraulic pressures of
the tunnel sidewall and work face were fixed to 0 during the
process of excavation, and we note that low hydraulic pres-
sures developed from the tunnel walls to the karst cavern with
the development of the damage zone caused by tunnel exca-
vation. The decreasing trend in the hydraulic pressures is gen-
erally quite consistent with the distribution of the damage zone
in the water-resistant slab. In practice, variations in the sur-
rounding rock prior to water inrush are obvious. Greater atten-
tion should be given to changes in the water inflow from the
sidewalls during the tunnel excavation process because the
rock mass in the water-resistant slab has a larger porosity and
a stronger permeability after the tunnel excavation.
Water inrush channel
connected
Step 20
Experimental and numerical study of the water inrush mechanisms of underground tunnels due to the proximity...
Step 8
Fig. 13 Hydraulic pressure analysis during tunnel excavation
Analysis of hydraulic loading stage
The process of water inrush was faithfully reproduced during
physical 3D model testing at the hydraulic loading stages after
the completion of tunnel excavation. The precursor informa-
tion of water inrush includes the displacement and the hydrau-
lic pressure obtained from the physical 3D model results with
respect to time. Among them, the displacement is the most
intuitive precursor information.
The bead-shaped water began seeping into the tunnel when
the karst cavern water pressure was maintained at 20 kPa.
Meanwhile, as discussed, fractures developed intensely in
the water-resistant slab under the influence of tunnel excava-
tion and the hydraulic pressure. From Fig. 14, we note that the
displacement at the two monitoring points of section I and at
the single monitoring point of section II steadily increased in
stages with respect to time during hydraulic loading. As a
result, the magnitude of water seepage into the tunnel contin-
ued to increase. The displacement in section I was generally
less than that in section II with increasing time, where the
crown settlement at point I-2-3 is generally greater than that
at the shoulder monitoring point I-3-3, reflecting the greater
hydraulic pressure. In the area influenced by the karst cavern,
the clastic rock mass was forced out from the sidewall when
the hydraulic pressure was loaded to 40 kPa. Meanwhile, the
Time (min)
0 20 40 60 80
-40
Displacement (mm)
-80
-1-2 in model test
-120
-3-3 in model test
-2-3 in model test
-160
-200
Fig. 14 Measured displacements after completion of tunnel excavation
with respect to time
6217
Step 14 Step 18
mud mixture flowed from the fractures in the water-resistant
slab, and the displacement in section II increased continuous-
ly. However, no significant changes in the displacements were
observed in section I. When the hydraulic pressure was in-
creased to 45 kPa, the fluid in the tunnel gradually changed
from a mud mixture to clear water. Furthermore, when the
hydraulic pressure increased to 50 kPa, water inrush occurred
with a rupture of the water-resistant slab and the ejection of a
mixture of clastic rock mass and water. Finally, hydraulic
pressure loading was continued for 3 min after inrush until
the liquid flowing in the tunnel was clear water.
Conclusions
A custom-developed physical 3D model was constructed and
tested to investigate the stability of surrounding rock during
tunnel excavation, and to reveal the mechanisms of lagging
water inrush for the excavated tunnel owing to the proximity
of a karst cavern filled with confined water. The stability of the
surrounding rock during tunnel excavation was also investi-
gated via 3D numerical simulations. The results of the phys-
ical model testing were compared with those obtained from
the numerical simulations. The primary findings of the study
can be given as follows.
100 120 (1) The physical 3D model considered fluid-solid coupling
using materials that provided the actual properties of sur-
rounding rock masses. In addition, a new method was
proposed for preparing the representation of a karst cavern
filled with confined water. The preparation method pro-
vided greater flexibility and efficiency than conventional
methods. The physical model test system included many
advantages such as different similar scale, embedded
depths of tunnels, and different groundwater pressures.
(2) The water-resistant slab between the tunnel and the karst
cavern is the primary area initiating water inrush. The
vertical stress measured during tunnel excavation in the
6218
ordinary surrounding rock at section I was initially great-
er than the stress in the water-resistant slab measured at
section II. However, the stress release rates in section I
were significantly greater than those in section II. The
displacement of the side wall closest to the karst cavern
was significantly greater than that of the other side.
Moreover, the displacement of the water-resistant slab
exhibited no obvious stable state during tunnel excava-
tion, and the displacement increased continuously until
the completion of excavation. The results also revealed
that the displacement, the hydraulic pressure, and the
development of the damage zone in the process of tunnel
excavation were related. The damage zone developed
from the disturbed zone of excavation to the karst cavern
during tunnel excavation, and the damage zone eventu-
ally penetrated through the water-resistant slab at exca-
vation step 16.
(3) The collapse of the water-resistant slab mainly resulted
from excavation disturbance in conjunction with the con-
fined water in the karst cavern. The results of physical
3D model testing clearly indicate that the water inrush
process can be divided into three stages, which include
the initiation of group cracks, water-inrush channel for-
mation, and the complete collapse of the water-resistant
slab. The combined results of physical model testing and
numerical simulation revealed that the disturbance due to
excavation has an obvious impact on water inrush chan-
nel formation. However, a continuous increase in the
hydraulic pressure of the karst cavern has a greater im-
pact on the collapse of the water-resistant slab. These test
results can provide support and guidance for practical
tunnel construction operations under conditions that are
susceptible to water inrush events.
Acknowledgments We would like to acknowledge the financial support
from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant no.:
51879153), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant
no.: 51509147), and the Fundamental Research Funds of Shandong
University (grant no: 2017JC001).
References
Fu J, Yang J, Klapperich H, Wang S (2015) Analytical prediction of
ground movements due to a nonuniform deforming tunnel. Int J
Geomech. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.
0000580,04015089
Garnier J, Gaudin C, Springman SM, Culligan PJ, Goodings D, Konig D
et al (2007) Catalogue of scaling laws and similitude questions in
geotechnical centrifuge modelling. Int J Phys Model Geo 7(3):1
Guo, J. Q. (2011). BStudy on against-inrush thickness and water burst
mechanism of karst tunnel.^ Ph.D. dissertation, Beijing Jiaotong
Univ., Beijing
Hou TX, Yang XG, Xing HG, Huang KX, Zhou JW (2016) Forecasting
and prevention of water inrush during the excavation process of a
D. Pan et al.
diversion tunnel at the Jinping II Hydropower Station, China.
SpringerPlus. 5(1):700
Hu XY, Wang LG, Lu YL, Yu M (2014) Analysis of insidious fault
activation and water inrush from the mining floor. Int J Min Sci
Technol 24(4):477–483
Huang M, Jiang YJ, Liu XR, G ZC, Y J (2012) Study on the water burst
characteristics and risk aversion in water-enriched karst tunnel with
high hydraulic pressure. Disaster Adv 5(4):1680–1685
Huang, F., Zhu, H., Xu, Q., Cai, Y., Zhuang, X. (2013). BThe effect of
weak interlayer on the failure pattern of rock mass around tunnel–
Scaled model tests and numerical analysis.^ Tunn. Undergr. Sp.
Tech. 35, 207-218
Itasca Consulting Group, Inc. FLAC3D user manuals (version3.0) [R].
Minneapolis, Minnesota: Itasca Consulting Group, Inc., 2005
Ivars DM (2006) Water inflow into excavations in fractured rock-a three-
dimensional hydro-mechanical numerical study. Int J Rock Mech
Min Sci 43(5):705–725
Jiang HM, Li L, Rong XL, Wang MY, Xia YP, Zhang ZC (2017) Model
test to investigate water-resistant slab minimum safety thickness for
water inrush geohazards. Tunn Undergr Sp Tech 62:35–42
Li SC, Li LP, Li SC, Feng XD, Li GY, Liu B, Wang J, Xu ZH (2010a)
Development and application of similar physical model test system
for water inrush of underground engineering. J Min Safe Eng 27(3):
299–304
Li LP, Li SC, Zhang QS (2010b) Study of mechanism of water inrush
induced by hydraulic fracturing in karst tunnels. Rock Soil Mech
31(2):523–528
Li SC, Zhou Y, Li LP, Zhang Q, Song SG, Li JL, Wang K, Wang QH
(2012) Development and application of a new similar material for
underground engineering fluid-solid coupling model test. Chinese J
Rock Mech Eng 31(6):1128–1137
Li SC, Hu C, Li LP, Song SG, Zhou Y, Shi SS (2013a) Bidirectional
construction process mechanics for tunnels in dipping layered for-
mation. Tunn. Undergr. Sp. Tech. 36:57–65
Li SC, Zhou ZQ, Li LP, Xu ZH, Zhang QQ, Shi SS (2013b) Risk assess-
ment of water inrush in karst tunnels based on attribute synthetic
evaluation system. Tunn. Undergr. Sp. Tech. 38:50–58
Liang DX, Jiang ZQ, Zhu SY (2016) Experimental research on water
inrush in tunnel construction. Nat Hazards 81(1):467–480
Liu J, Feng XT, Ding XL (2003) Stability assessment of the three-gorges
dam foundation, China, using physical and numerical modeling-part
I: physical model tests. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 40(5):609–631
Liu AH, Peng SQ, Li XB, Chen HH (2009) Development and application
of similar physical model experiment system for water inrush mech-
anism in deep mining. Chinese J. Rock Mech. Eng. 28(7):1335–
1341
Liu J, Chen W, Yuan J, Li C, Zhang Q, Li X (2018) Groundwater control
and curtain grouting for tunnel construction in completely weathered
granite. Bull Eng Geol Environ 77:515–531
Pan QJ, Dias D (2015) Face stability analysis for a shield-driven tunnel in
anisotropic and nonhomogeneous soils by the kinematical approach.
Int. J. Geomech. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.
0000569,04015076
Pasha, A., Khoshghalb, A., and Khalili, N. (2015). BPitfalls in
Interpretation of Gravimetric Water Content–Based Soil-Water
Characteristic Curve for Deformable Porous Media.^ Int. J.
Geomech., https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.
0000570, D4015004
Song, Z. P. (2006). BResearch on the influence of concealed karst caverns
upon the stability of tunnels and its support structure.^ Ph.D. disser-
tation, Xi’an Univ. of Technology, Xi’an, China
Wang JX, He J, Yang LZ (2001) Hydrogeological analysis for karst water
inrush in large-scale underground engineering. Hydrol Eng Geol 4:
49–52
Experimental and numerical study of the water inrush mechanisms of underground tunnels due to the proximity...
Wang TT, Wang WL, Lin ML (2004) Harnessing the catastrophic inrush
of water into new Yungchuen tunnel in Taiwan. Tunn. Undergr. Sp.
Tech. 19:4–5
Wang JX, Liu XT, Xiang JD (2016) Laboratory model tests on water
inrush in foundation pit bottom. Environ Earth Sci 75(14):1–13
Wang J, Li S-C, Li L-P, Lin P, Xu Z-H, Gao C-L (2017) Attribute recog-
nition model for risk assessment of water inrush. Bull Eng Geol
Environ 77:515–531
Wu Q, Zhu B, Liu SQ (2011) Flow-solid coupling simulation method
analysis and time identification of lagging waterinrush near mine
fault belt. Chin J Rock Mech Eng 30(1):93–104
Wu W, Zhao Z, Duan K (2017) Unloading-induced instability of a sim-
ulated granular fault and implications for excavation-induced seis-
micity. Tunn Undergr Sp Technol 63:154–161
Xu JL, Zhu WB, Wang XZ (2011) Study on water-inrush mechanism and
prevention during coal mining under unconsolidated confined aqui-
fer. J Min Safe Eng 3:002
Yalcin, E., Gurocak, Z., Ghabchi, R., and Zaman, M. (2015). BNumerical
Analysis for a Realistic Support Design: Case Study of the
Komurhan Tunnel in Eastern Turkey.^ Int. J. Geomech., https://
doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0000564, 05015001
6219
Yang TH, Liu J, Zhu WC, Elsworth D, Tham LG, Tang CA (2007) A
coupled flow-stress-damage model for groundwater outbursts from
an underlying aquifer into mining excavations. Int J Rock Mech Min
Sci 44:87–97
Zhang R, Jiang ZQ, Zhou HY (2014a) Groundwater outbursts from faults
above a confined aquifer in the coal mining. Nat Hazards 71(3):
1861–1872
Zhang YJ, Yang DF, Chen GP (2014b) Numerical simulation research on
activation water inrush mechanism of mining floor with concealed
minor faults. Coal Sci Technol 42(10):45–47
Zhang QB, He L, Zhu WS (2016) Displacement measurement techniques
and numerical verification in 3D geomechanical model tests of an
underground cavern group. Tunn. Undergr. Sp. Tech. 56:54–64
Zhao Y, Li PF, Tian SM (2013) Prevention and treatment technologies of
railway tunnel water inrush and mud gushing in China. J Rock Mech
Geotechn Eng 5(6):468–477
Zhao J, Yin L, Guo W (2018) Stress–seepage coupling of cataclastic rock
masses based on digital image technologies. Rock Mech Rock Eng
51:2355–2372