Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 97 (2020) 103277

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology

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

Research of jacking force of densely arranged pipe jacks process in pipe-roof T

pre-construction method
Songsong Yanga, Mei Wanga, , Jianan Dub, Yong Guoc, Yan Genga, Teng Lic
⁎

a
Department of Underground Engineering, Taiyuan University of Technology, Taiyuan 030009, China
b
Taiyuan Urban Construction Management Center, Taiyuan, Shanxi 030024, China
c
China Railway 14th Bureau Group Second Engineering Co., Ltd. Shandong Taian 271000, China

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: The tunnel crossing project of the Taiyuan Railway Station is constructed by using a pipe roof preconstruction
Model experiment method (PPM). The project uses 20 steel pipe jacks with a diameter of 2 m. The distance between the jacking
Jacking force pipes is 165–265 mm. In this study, the jacking force of densely arranged pipe jacks was studied by a large-scale
Pipe–soil arching effect similar model test and engineering measured data. Pipe jacking forces at different positions during the model test
were analysed. The upper pipe jacks of the PPM interacted with the surrounding soil. The soil between the pipe
jacks became tightly compressed, and an arched soil–pipe jack pseudostructure was formed (pipe–soil arching
effect). A squeezing phenomenon was observed during the jacking process. The jacking force of the pipe below
the waterline was reduced by water buoyancy. The formula for calculating the jacking force of the jacking pipe
below the pipe arching effect was proposed. The passive soil pressure coefficient should be reasonable in the
formula for calculating the jacking force. The formula for calculating the jacking force below the water level line
was derived.

1. Introduction
The Taiyuan Railway Station′s North–South Tunnel Project is the
first project of its kind in China to use the pipe roof preconstruction
method (PPM) in constructing beneath preexisting railways while
avoiding disruptions to the regular operations of the railway station.
The PPM is an improved version of the traditional tubular method (Park
et al., 2006). The traditional tubular method entails the pushing of a
preprepared box culvert structure after the completion of the end pipe.
By contrast, the PPM uses large-diameter steel pipe jacks and only ne-
cessitates the cutting, arrangement and welding of these pipe jacks. The
PPM requires the cutting of pipe jacks and the welding of each pipe jack
to those adjacent to it. Once the pipe jacks are welded together, the
structure can be called a connected steel pipe corridor. This connected
steel pipe corridor is used in place of the box culvert structure from the
traditional tubular method. Such method needs to push in the pre-
prepared box culvert structure after the end pipe is finished. By con-
trast, the PPM uses a large-diameter steel pipe; after the jacking pipe is
completed, the adjacent pipe jacks are cut and welded, the pipe jacking
is welded into a connected steel pipe corridor (Liu et al., 2018; Xiao
et al., 2016), and the steel pipe corridor is directly used as the box
culvert structure, thus eliminating the need for another box culvert
structure. The large number and large diameters of the pipe jacks result
in a small spacing between them. Therefore, the process of arranging
and jacking each large-diameter pipe jack is extremely difficult. The
aforementioned process is crucial to the construction of the connected
steel pipe corridor. The calculation of the jacking force before initiating
construction operations is vital to ensure safety during construction
(Sun et al., 2015). The main factors affecting jacking force are buried
pipe depth, friction resistance of jacking pipe and soil, pipe diameter
and grouting pressure (Cheng et al., 2017). In the nonexcavation con-
struction of pipe jacking, soil pressure is one of the important condi-
tions affecting the jacking force (Shen et al., 2016). Mashimo et al.
(2003) conducted on-site measurements of soil pressure loads in gravel
foundation tunnels. The results show that the soil pressure acting on
shallow tunnels can utilise the pressure of the large sand subsoil. The
pressure on deep tunnels is mainly water pressure. Tadros et al. (1989)
used numerical simulation to study the soil pressure on a box culvert.
When the buried depth-to-pipe diameter ratio is < 5, the soil pressure is
positively correlated with soil cover height. At present, many studies on
single pipe jacking force have been performed. The main theoretical
formulas of soil pressure on a jacking pipe are those by M. M. Promo-
jiyfakonov and Terzaghi. Some scholars (Kang et al., 2016) have
pointed out that the Terzaghi theoretical formula is applicable to

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: wangmei@tyut.edu.com (M. Wang).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2019.103277
Received 19 June 2019; Received in revised form 24 December 2019; Accepted 24 December 2019
Available online 08 January 2020
0886-7798/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
S. Yang, et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 97 (2020) 103277

shallow buried pipes. The formula of M. M. Promojiyfakonov is ap-

plicable to deep buried pipes. Both theoretical formulas inevitably
calculate the vertical pressure of overlying soil in the pipe section. Ren
et al. (2018) studied the effects of surface deformation and grouting
pressure on the jacking force during the pipe jacking process, and
proposed the Sagaseta′s method to consider the ground loss caused by
over-excavation. An et al. (2002) proposed an empirical calculation
formula for pipe jacking construction after the calculation and analysis
of the two types of soil pressure theory, and they provided a detailed
introduction to the jacking force of reinforced concrete and metal
jacking pipes. Shi et al. (2018) studied the jacking force formula of
curved pipe jacking according to the Gongbei tunnel project. During the
jacking force calculation, the overburden pressure on the jacking pipe
should be determined. The research on jacking force is mainly focused
on static analysis, but pipe jacking is a dynamic process. During the Fig. 1. Taiyuan railway Station′s North tunnel pipe jacking layout.
process of jacking pipe, the jacking pipe will squeeze the surrounding
soil. Therefore, this paper studies the construction process of pipe
respectively. Fig. 1 shows the layout of the jacking pipe of the Taiyuan
jacking, and considers that the active soil pressure coefficient is used
Railway Station′s north tunnel.
instead of the passive soil pressure coefficient in the calculation of the
The PPM constructs two shafts at the beginning of the pipe jacking
lateral pressure of the jacking pipe.
construction and the end of the pipe jacking. The pouring of reinforced
Hisatake et al. (2008) studied the influence of a pipe shed support
concrete and the road building are used for the shaft well and the
on the surface part of a tunnel excavation process through centrifugal
bottom of the shaft well (Yang and Li, 2018; Choo et al., 2015). Fig. 2
model tests. The maximum settlement of a ground excavated by the
shows the shaft at the starting position of the pipe jack. Firstly, the shaft
full-face excavation method with pipe roof supports is approximately
well at the starting position of the pipe jack provides the required
one-fourth of that without pipe roof supports. Shou et al. (2010) studied
support for the pipe jacking system. Secondly, the shaft can provide
the variation of the frictional resistance of pipe jacking under different
adequate space to adjust the position of the jack; the condition is
soil conditions by constructing a model box. The research on jacking
conducive to the subsequent pipe jacking construction. The shaft well at
force is mainly focused on single or double parallel jacking pipes. With
the end of the pipe jacking can be used as a site for the subsequent
regard to the close–packed annular pipe roof, the author believes that
construction of the pipe jacking. The three main steps in the con-
the jacking pipes of a tunnel dome interact with the surrounding soil to
struction method are as follows: pipe jacking construction, permanent
create a pipe–soil arching effect. When the jacking pipe of the tunnel
underground structure construction and earthwork excavation in a steel
vault is completed and pipe jacking is continued under construction, the
pipe corridor.
upper jacking pipe and the surrounding soil body begin to function (Sun
et al.,2015; Zhen et al., 2014). The soil arching effect of the tunnel arch
bears additional overburden loads and protects the lower pipe. The soil
2.1. First step: Jacking pipe construction
pressure transmitted to the lower jacking pipe of the pipe roof becomes
less than the theoretical calculation at burial depth. This paper in-
The actual construction of the railway station site involves the use of
vestigates Taiyuan Railway Station′s North–South Tunnel Project as the
a steel pipe with a diameter of 2000 mm as the PPM. The wall thickness
background to study the variation law of the jacking force during the
of the pipe is 20 mm, and the spacing between adjacent pipe jacks is
construction of close-packed pipe jacking through large-scale model
165–265 mm. The length is 9 m, and each pipe jacking is connected by
tests, and to study the effect of pipe-soil arching formed during the
welding and jacking up section by section.
construction of the close-packed pipe group on the jacking force impact.
The soil arch structure is the key mechanism that affects the alternate
transmission. The effect of the pipe–soil arching effect on the alternate
transmission is studied through model tests; Water buoyancy is often
ignored during jacking force calculation. Therefore, after a stress ana-
lysis of pipe jacking below the water level line, we derive the formula
for calculating the jacking force of jacking pipes below the water level
line.

2. Description of physical model test

The planned site of the Taiyuan railway Station′s North–South

tunnel project under Yingze Street in Taiyuan City is located in the
valley plain in the northern end of the Taiyuan Basin. The site terrain is
flat. In this model test, the north tunnel is taken as an example. The
buried depth of the north channel is 3.51–12.01 m, and the average
groundwater depth is 8.89 m. The north–south passage of the Taiyuan
Railway Station is the first project in China to use the PPM beneath a
special railway station under operation. The underground pipeline of
the Taiyuan Railway Station is complex, and the railway transportation
is busy. Wear under construction is difficult and dangerous. The ground
settlement is strict, and the safety of the station based on an ordinary
underground excavation method is difficult to ensure. Therefore, the
north–south channel is constructed by the PPM. The lengths of the
south and north channel pipe sections are 105 and 102.5 m, Fig. 2. Pipe jacking.

2
S. Yang, et al.
Fig.3. Pipe jacking cutting.
2.2. Second step: Pipe joint communication and pouring construction
After the jacking pipe construction is completed, the adjacent pipe
jacks are cut according to the design requirements. The adjacent pipe
jacks are welded with steel plates, and the cutting portions are arranged
at intervals of 1.2 m (Fig. 3). The pipe jacks are formed into a connected
pipe roof corridor, and then the steel bars are tied in the pipe corridor of
Unicom. Concrete is poured in time to form a closed steel pipe roof.
2.3. Third step: Soil excavation in the steel pipe roof
When concrete pouring in the pipe corridor is completed, the steel
pipe corridor and reinforced concrete become the permanent support
structure of the underground passage. Subsequently, the internal soil of
the permanent support structure is excavated in layers (Fig. 4). After
the soil inside the concrete-filled curtain is excavated, the underground
passage pavement and lighting facilities can be applied.
3. Model test
3.1. Experimental preparation
It is necessary that the physical model satisfies a series of similarity
criteria in terms of the geometry, stress and mechanical parameters,
because of the differences in scale between the engineering field and
physical test (Liu et al. 2013). According to similarity theory, the fol-
lowing criteria must be satisfied by the physical model tests:
CE = C CL
Fig. 4. Earthwork excavation in the steel pipe corridor.
3
Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 97 (2020) 103277
Table 1
Similarity ratio of each physical quantity.
Physical quantity Similarity ratios
Pipe jacking diameter 11.76:1
Jacking density 1:1
Soil density 1:1
Soil cohesion 1:1
Soil friction angle 1:1
Elastic modulus of jacking pipe 1:1
Poisson′s ratio 1:1
Cµ = C = 1
C = C = C = CE
where CE, Cγ, CL, Cμ, Cε, Cσ, Cτ and Cδ represent the similarity constants
for Young′s modulus, unit weight, geometry size, Poisson′s ratio, strain,
soil cohesion, shear strength and displacement, respectively. Con-
sidering that the test uses a jacking pipe measuring 170 mm in dia-
meter, we determine the geometric similarity criteria on the basis of the
prototype pipe diameter and model shield of CL = 11.76. A large-scale
model test is used to study the determination of the jacking force of the
densely arranged large-diameter pipe jacks on the basis of the actual
railway station project. In the model test, the cross-sectional dimension
of the model pipe corridor and the cross-sectional dimension of the pipe
roof at the construction site must meet the similarity criteria. Table 1
shows the similarity ratio of each physical quantity in this test.
This model test mainly studies the influence of jacking force on the
buried depth of pipe jacking and the pipe–soil arching effect appearing
during the construction of the jacking pipe. In case the boundary con-
ditions are met, the dimensions of each structure in the model are set
according to the geometric similarity criterion of 11.76:1. The model
box size is 2700 (width) mm × 2000 (length) mm × 1800 (height)
mm. Fig. 5 shows the jacking force arrangement order and jacking pipe
spacing in the model test. The model test is filled with the actual soil on
site to ensure that the jacking force is similar to that of the prototype
pipe.
3.2. Experiment device
Fig. 6 presents the model box. The model box is welded by a Q235A
steel plate with a thickness of 20 mm. The lateral and vertical square
ribs are provided on the outside to ensure sufficient rigidity. The upper
layer of the thin silicone grease is applied to the boundary of the model
box to make the model test similar to the engineering boundary con-
ditions on the site. The soil in the model box is filled according to the
engineering construction site′s soil conditions.
Table 2 shows the jacking pipe parameters. The test pipe jacking
force is obtained using an external probe dynamometer, and the
Fig. 5. Pipe jacking position map in model test.
S. Yang, et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 97 (2020) 103277

Table 3
Soil layer parameters.
Site Density Volume- Cohesion Internal Thickness (m)
construction (g/cm3) weight (kPa) friction
soil layer (kN/m3) angle (°)

1–1 Filling soil 2.02 18.1 10 7.9 9.6

1–2 loess 2.13 20.8 30.69 17.3 5.4
Model box soil
1–1 Filling soil 2.0 19.6 10 9 0.86
1–2 loess 1.86 18.23 29.39 18 0.94

Table 4
Jacking force per meter and measured results.
Jacking pipe number A4 A14 A17 A18

Fig. 6. Model box. Jacking pipe buried depth (m) 0.21 1.00 0.92 0.82
Unoptimised pipe jacking force (kN) 3.8 11.66 7.6 6.8
Optimised pipe jacking force (kN) – 10.01 5.9 4.5
dynamometer is externally connected to the TST3827 dynamic and Experimentally measured jacking force (kN) 3.93 8.36 6.35 4.47
static strain test system, which can monitor the pipe jacking force
during the jacking process. The external probe dynamometer is placed
between the jacking pipe and the jack. During the jacking process of the Table 5
jacking pipe, the jacking pipe can be directly displayed through the Considering the influence of water buoyancy jacking force per meter.
computer connected to the TST3827 static strain gauge. The TST3827
Site pipe jacking number A15 A17
dynamic and static signal tester is suitable for measuring the changing
physical quantities. Data preprocessing, spectral analysis, frequency Calculate the jacking force (kN/m) 2.16 2.04
response analysis, statistical analysis, shock response spectrum, wind Pipe jacking depth (m) 10.94 10.49
tunnel calculation, pile foundation detection and strain acquisition can
be completed. After the reading is stable during the jacking process, the
4. Jacking force research
jacking pipe is pushed 5 cm to record the jacking force.

4.1. Jacking force overburden pressure theory

3.3. Experimental procedure
Firstly, we calculate the vertical jacking pipe soil pressure to de-
termine the jacking force. Secondly, we calculate the lateral soil pres-
The model box is filled according to the soil conditions of the con-
sure of the jacking pipe. The calculation of the lateral confining pres-
struction site. The soil density in the model box is as consistent as
sure involves the selection of soil pressure coefficient. The selection of
possible with the actual construction site. The model box is compacted
soil pressure coefficient is the key to the calculation of the jacking pipe.
once every 30 cm of soil filling. The filling is continued after compac-
When calculating the lateral confining pressure of the jacking pipe,
tion. Table 3 shows the distribution of the soil layer in the Taiyuan
passive soil pressure is usually used, and it is considered that the sur-
Railway Station′s north tunnel and the distribution of the soil layer of
rounding soil is squeezed during the jacking process. However, the
the model boxes. After the soil of the model box is filled, the soil is
process of pipe jacking is a dynamic process. During the process of
allowed to stand for 30 days so that it is further compacted by its own
jacking pipe, the jacking pipe will squeeze the surrounding soil.
weight. Tables 4 and 5.
Therefore, the active soil pressure should be used to calculate the lateral
The reasonable sequence of the jacking pipe roof construction is as
pressure of the jacking pipe.
follows to verify whether the pipe–soil arching effect will occur during
The soil pressure on the pipe jacking is an important factor affecting
the construction of the closed arched pipe roof: A4, A2, A6, A3, A5, A1,
the jacking force. Selecting an appropriate calculation formula for the
A7, A20, A8, A19, A9, A18, A10, A17, A11, A16, A12, A15, A13 and
soil pressure on the jacking pipe is a prerequisite for accurately calcu-
A14. This model test is carried out in this order for the pipe jacking test.
lating the jacking force. The two main theories for calculating soil
Before the start of the pipe jacking, the data connection of the collector
pressure in pipe jacking are those by Terzaghi and M. M.
should be correct. The jacking pipe level is determined by using the
Promojiyfakonov. Yang et al (2013) studied the application range of
water gauge. The soil cutting tool used in the test is a Luoyang shovel.
Terzaghi and M. M. Promojiyfakonov soil pressure formulas, and con-
The pipe jacking construction method after excavation is used. The
cluded that when the pipe diameter of the jacking pipe in the shallow
excavation depth is 2.5 cm every time. Thereafter, a jack is used to push
buried pipe is less than five times the buried depth, the theory of Ter-
the jacking pipe 2.5 cm. The maximum jacking range of the jack is
zaghi foundation is used to calculate the jacking force of the pipe.
11 cm, and the maximum jacking force is 3.2 tons. Simulating grouting
Meanwhile, Terzaghi (1943) theory includes soil arching and non-soil
in the test is difficult due to the small diameter of the jacking pipe of the
arching theory. When the soil on the construction site is soft and it is
model test. Thus, no grouting is present around the jacking pipe during
difficult to form a stable soil arch around the excavated tunnel, the
the test. Fig. 7 presents the schematic of the jacking model test. Fig. 8.
Terzaghi foundation non-soil arching formula should be used. The M.
M. Promojiyfakonov theory considers that excavation in deep soils will

Table 2
Pipe-jacking parameters.
Number of pipe jacking (number) Thickness (mm) Elastic Modulus (MPa) Jacking pipe outer diameter (mm) Jacking length (mm)

20 2.3–2.6 1.96 170 1800

4
S. Yang, et al.
Fig. 7. Schematic of pipe jacking model test.
form soil arches. Some soils below the surface actually have certain self-
stability due to the existence of the soil arching effect. Thus, they are
derived from M. M. Promojiyfakonov′s soil pressure. The jacking force
is not related to pipe jacking depth. The jacking force of the A19 pipe
jacking with a large buried depth is substantially greater than that of
the A20 pipe jacking with a small buried depth. The jacking force of the
jacking pipe increases with the increase of the buried depth of the
jacking pipe. This situation indicates that the unloading arch will not
easily occur during the actual jacking process. The close-packed pipe is
in the surrounding soil during the construction process. The body dis-
turbance is large. The soil at the construction site comprises loess with
large water content and soft soil. Therefore, the theory of Terzaghi with
regard to soil pressure is suitable during the jacking process. Shi et al.
(2018) showed that the greater the buried depth of the pipe jacking is,
the larger the diameter of the pipe jacking and greater the increase in
the jacking force will be.
4.2. Improvement of jacking force formula
The previous section indicates that the overburden soil pressure
theory should be used to calculate the overburden pressure on the pipe
jacking (An et al., 2002).
p = mGL (1)
where P is the calculated jacking force (kN), G is the unit length self-
weight (kN/m), L is the jacking distance w (m) and m is the soil coef-
ficient.
Formula (1) manifests that the empirical calculation formula does
a A20 pipe jacking (buried depth 5.67 m)
Fig. 8. Measured pipe jacking force of Taiyuan Railway Station′s north tunnel field.
5
Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 97 (2020) 103277
not consider the factor of the buried pipe depth. Accordingly, the cal-
culated jacking force and the actual jacking force will have no large
coincidence, which is inconsistent with the actual results. The optimi-
sation of the jacking force of the circular metal pipe is based on the
Water Supply and Drainage Pipeline Engineering Construction and
Acceptance Specification formulated by the Ministry of Metallurgical
Industry (2015). The formula for calculating the jacking force without
considering the soil arching effect is as follows:
D D
p= D (1 + K )(H + ) (2 + K ) f + wf
2 2 3 (2)
where f is the friction coefficient between the pipe wall and the soil
during pipe jacking. Domestic and international research reported that
the recommended values are given according to engineering examples.
The friction coefficient of the metal pipe is usually 0.1 to 1.0 without
grouting (Khazaei et al., 2006). Given that the model test does not take
grouting measures, the friction coefficient between the pipe jacks and
the surrounding soil is 1.0.
H is the buried depth of the pipe, K is the active soil pressure
coefficient, w is the weight per pipe length of the jacking pipe, D is the
pipe diameter and γ is the soil weight. The analysis of the on-site and
model experiment jacking process indicates that the active soil pressure
coefficient of K in formula (2) is unreasonable. The grouting pressure
causes the pipe wall to squeeze around the soil because of the grouting
around the pipe wall during the pipe jacking process. Pipe jacking also
squeezes the surrounding soil during the jacking process. Thus, the
passive soil pressure coefficient is realistic according to the actual si-
tuation. Fig. 9 shows that the pipe jacking force basically increases with
b A19 pipe jacking (buried depth 5.67 m)
S. Yang, et al.
Fig. 9. Jacking distance and pipe jacking force.
jacking distance. However, the pipe jacking force does not increase with
the increase of embedding depth. Fig. 5 illustrates that the A4 jacking
pipe has a low buried depth and that the A14 pipe has a large one.
However, the measured jacking force of the model test is not the
minimum jacking force of the A4 pipe. The pipe jacking force of the
A14 jacking pipe is large. This model test indicates that the jacking pipe
with a low jacking force during the pipe jacking process is A18. The
pipe jacking force is negatively correlated with the buried depth. This
finding indicates that the jacking force cannot be simply calculated
using the empirical formula in the calculation of the jacking force.
Fig. 10.
Fig. 9 demonstrates that the soil pressures on the three pipe jacks
are basically the same when jacking pipes A20, A19 and A18 are con-
structed under the premise of ignoring the self-weight of the pipe jack.
However, the test results indicate that the jacking forces of the three
jacking pipes are different. Further research reveals that when the pipe
jacking enters A20, the upper pipe and the surrounding soil interact to
form the pipe arching effect because the pipe jacking sequence is
stepped from the A4 pipe to the sides. When the pipe is introduced into
both sides of the pipe and the pipe jacks of the arch, the upper pipe
starts to work. The upper soil and pipe are disturbed to produce an
uneven displacement. The upper pipe is caused by the inconsistency of
the upper pipe and the soil displacement. The surrounding soil particles
Fig. 10. Schematic of pipe–soil arch structure.
6
Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 97 (2020) 103277
are compressed and “wedged” to each other, thus creating an “arching
effect” over a certain range of soil layers around the pipe jacks (Al-
Naddaf et al., 2019). The pipe-soli arching effect produced by the
jacking pipe on the pipe roof and the surrounding soil bears the over-
burden pressure on a part of the upper pipe jacks. This situation results
in a significant reduction in the soil pressure transmitted to the A19 and
A18 pipe jacks. Thus, when A19 is constructed and when A18 is jacked,
the jacking force is less than that of the A20 jacking pipe. The jacking
force of the jacking pipe in the upper part of the pipe arching bottom
pipe increases due to the pipe arching effect during the construction of
the A17 jacking pipe to the A14 jacking pipe. Therefore, the above-
mentioned formula should be improved when calculating the pipe
jacking force of the A9–A19 pipes. When calculating the jacking force,
the soil pressure on the pipe arching effect should be reduced because
the pipe-soil arching effect bears part of the upper load and is trans-
mitted to the lower row pipe. As the soil pressure is reduced, the soil
pressure actually applied to the lower jacking pipe is less than the
theoretical calculation value. Therefore, the pipe jacking force is
smaller than the existing theoretical calculation value on both sides of
the construction pipe roof and the arch bottom pipe. The existing for-
mula for calculating the pipe jacking force is only applicable to a single
jacking pipe. The mutual influence between jacking pipes is neglected
for the jacking of the dense jacking pipe. When calculating the jacking
force of densely arranged pipe jacks, the close jacking pipe, jacking
sequence and pipe–soil arching effect must be considered.
The calculation formula should be optimised on the basis of the
original formula for calculating the jacking force per meter when cal-
culating the jacking forces of A9–A19. Take the A14 pipe jacking as an
example. The formula for calculating the jacking force per meter is as
follows:
p
D D
= D (1 + K1 ) H1 + (2 + K1) + D
2 2 3
D D
(1 + K1 ) H1 + (2 + K1) + wf
2 2 3 (3)
where α is the soil pressure reduction factor whose recommended value
is 0.5, H1 is the distance from the A4 pipe to the surface, H2 is the
distance from the A14 pipe to the A4 pipe and K1is the passive soil
pressure coefficient. We calculate the pipe jacking force below the pi-
pe–soil arching effect according to Formula (3). Fig. 11 is a comparison
chart of the measured jacking force and the calculated jacking force of
S. Yang, et al.
Fig. 11. Pipe jacking force calculation and measured value.
the experimental jacking pipe. Fig. 11 shows that if the pipe–soil
arching effect is not considered in the calculation of soil pressure, then
the calculated jacking force is larger than the experimental test data. A
reasonable calculation of the jacking force of closely packed pipe
jacking should be carried out in detail for the jacking sequence of the
pipe. If the pipe–soil arching effect occurs during the pipe jacking
process, then the upper row should be dealt with when calculating the
pipe soil pressure below the pipe–soil arching effect. The overlying load
of the jacking pipe is reduced. Thus, the calculation result is in line with
the actual situation.
4.3. Pipe-arch effect verification
A set of control experiments opposite to the optimal pipe jack se-
quence is performed to verify whether the pipe–soil arching effect
exists during the construction of densely arranged large-diameter pipe
jacks. The pipe jacking sequence of the control test is opposite to the
optimal pipe jacking scheme. The sequence is as follows:
A14,A12,A16,A13,A15,A18,A10,A17,A11,A20,A8,A19,A9,A2,A5,A1,
A7,A3, A6 and A4. The comparison diagram of the jacking forces of
the two schemes in Fig. 12 shows that the pipe jacking force of the
other comparison schemes is greater than that of the optimal scheme.
However, the optimal scheme of the A4 pipe jacking is the same as
that of the comparative one. The comparative test shows that the pi-
pe–soil arching effect does exist during the jacking process. The upper
pipe and the surrounding soil act to form the pipe–soil arching effect
when constructing the pipe jacks on the sealed pipe roof. The pipe
under the pipe roof forms a “protection,” which causes the jacking
force of the pipe jacks below the pipe arch structure to become small.
7
Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 97 (2020) 103277
5. Study on the jacking force of each pipe before the waterline
Groundwater is difficult to simulate in the model test. The jacking
force analysis of the pipe jacking below the groundwater level line is
based on the measured jacking force data of the Taiyuan Railway
Station′s north tunnel project.
During the survey, the initial groundwater level in the borehole was
3.8–13.1 m, with an average value of 8.89 m. In the on-site construc-
tion, the A11–A17 jacking pipes are located below the waterline. The
jacking system installed in the working shaft during the construction of
the jacking pipe of the railway station automatically records the jacking
force. After the jacking force of many jacking pipes is analysed, we find
that the jacking force is relatively small when the jacking pipe is below
the construction water level line. When the jacking pipe is below the
water line, the pipe is subjected to water buoyancy (Xu et al., 2013).
The soil weight is calculated below the water level line to select the
floating weight. Thus, the soil pressure of the pipe jacking below the
water level line is reduced. The buoyancy of the pipe jacking causes the
pressure on the upper and lower pipes of the jacking pipe to be unequal.
Water buoyancy needs to be considered when calculating the pipe
jacking force below the waterline. Fig. 13 shows the soil pressure of the
pipe jacking below the waterline. Fig. 14.
The pipe weight is ignored because the weight of the jacking pipe is
much smaller than that of the pipe jacking:
Ffloat + NZ 2 = NZ1 (4)
The force on the right side of the jacking pipe is calculated because
the jacking pipe is symmetrical. The microsurface ds is taken on the
basis of the circumference of the angle θ, and the central angle of ds is
S. Yang, et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 97 (2020) 103277

Fig. 12. Comparison of pipe jacking forces of the two experimental schemes.

D
NZ1 = D H+ D2
8 2 6

D
NX1 = K1 D H + K1 D 2
8 2 12
Positive pressure generated by the lower vertical and horizontal soil
pressures:
D D2
NZ2 = D H+ D2 g
8 2 6 3

D D2
NX 2 = K1 D H + K1 D 2 g
8 2 12 6

Q = 2(NZ1 + NX 1 + NZ 2 + NX 2)
D
= D (1 + K1 ) H + D 2 (2 + K1) D2 g
2 2 3 (5)

D
p=f D (1 + K1 ) H + D2 (2 + K1) D 2 g + wf
2 2 3 (6)

Fig. 13. Calculation sketch of soil pressure. where is the floating weight and ρ is the water density. The jacking
force of the A15 and A17 pipe jacks below the waterline is calculated
according to Formula (6) of the pipe jacking force per meter (m) that
d . The vertical soil pressure dNZ1 on the scope ds is set.
considers buoyancy. The result is then compared with the measured
At 0~ 2 : NZ1 = (
H+ 2
D D
2
sin ) data of the Taiyuan Railway Station′s north tunnel project. A stable
At 2 ~ 2 : NZ 2 =
3
(
H+ 2
D
2
D
sin )
D sin( ) g mud jacket is formed around the jacking pipe due to the good grouting
The positive pressure generated by the upper vertical and horizontal at the construction site. The relevant data (Wen et al., 2018) indicate
soil pressures can be obtained by integration: that the friction coefficient of the pipe jacking is 0.003–0.023. The
average value is 0.01 when the grouting is good. In this calculation, the
friction coefficient of the jacking pipe of A15 and A17 is 0.007. The

8
S. Yang, et al.
(a) A15 (buried depth 10.94 m)
Fig. 14. Different theories and measured results of jacking pressure.
figure shows that the formula for calculating the jacking force that
considers buoyancy force is in good agreement with the measured data
in the calculation of the pipe jacking force below the waterline.
6. Conclusions
(1) During the pipe jacking construction process, the pipe–soil arching
effect formed by the interaction between the upper pipe and the
surrounding soil can effectively bear the overlying load of a part of
the upper pipe. In the calculation, the soil pressure assumed by the
pipe–soil arching effect should be considered to improve the jacking
force formula.
(2) A large-diameter closely packed pipe group is disturbed in the
surrounding soil during the construction process, and the original
structure of the soil around the pipe is damaged. A soil arching
effect around the pipe is difficult to form. Therefore, Terzaghi′s
theory should be prioritised over M. M. Promojiyfakonov′s theory
when calculating the jacking force of the upper portion of the pipe.
(3) The pipe under the waterline is affected by water buoyancy, which
causes the soil pressure in the lower part of the pipe to decrease.
The formula for calculating the jacking force under the influence of
buoyancy is derived according to this phenomenon. The research
results show that the formula for calculating the jacking force of
buoyancy is in good agreement with the engineering measured
data.
(4) The PPM is similar to the anti-sliding pile process. A jacking soil
phenomenon is observed in the pipe jacks. The jacking force study
is mainly focused on static analysis. However, pipe jacking is a
dynamic process. In the current jacking force calculation, the active
soil pressure coefficient is mostly used, which is inconsistent with
the actual pipe jacking phenomenon. The passive soil pressure
coefficient is suitable for actual situations.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influ-
ence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the National Key R&D Program of
China (grant numbers: 2018YFC0808704), China Railway 14th Bureau
Group Second Engineering Co., Ltd. and Taiyuan Urban Construction
Management Committee.
9
Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 97 (2020) 103277
(b) A17 (buried depth 10.49 m)
Appendix A. Supplementary material
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2019.103277.
References
An, G.F., Yin, K.L., Tang, H.M., 2002. Discussion on the calculation formula of jacking
force. Jus, 23(3), 358–361 (in Chinese).
Al-Naddaf, M., Han, J., Xu, C., Jawad, S., Abdulrasool, G., 2019. Experimental in-
vestigation of soil arching mobilization and degradation under localized surface
loading. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 145 (12), 04019114.
Cheng, W.C., Ni, J.C., Shen, 2017. Investigation into factors affecting jacking force: a case
study. Proc. Inst. Civil Eng. – Geotech. Eng. 1–13.
Choo, C.S., Ong, D.E.L., 2015. Evaluation of pipe-jacking forces based on direct shear
testing of reconstituted tunneling rock spoils. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 141 (10),
04015044.
Hisatake, M., Ohno, S., 2008. Effects of pipe roof supports and the excavation method on
the displacements above a tunnel face. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 23 (2),
120–127.
Liu, J.G., Ma, B.S., Chen, Y., 2018. Design of the gongbei tunnel using a very large cross-
section pipe-roof and soil freezing method. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 72, 28–40.
Liu, Y.R., Guan, F.H., Yang, Q., Yang, R.Q., Zhou, R.W., 2013. Geomechanical model test
for stability analysis of high arch dam based on small blocks masonry technique. Int.
J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 61, 231–243.
Mashimo, H., Ishimura, T., 2003. Evaluation of the load on shield tunnel lining in gravel.
Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 18 (2), 233–241.
Ministry of Metallurgical Industry., 2015. Water Supply and Drainage Pipeline
Engineering Construction and Acceptance Specification. Metallurgical Industry Press
(in Chinese).
Kang, Y.S., Liu, Q.S., Cheng, Y., Liu, X.Y., 2016. Combined freeze-sealing and new tubular
roof construction methods for seaside urban tunnel in soft ground. Tunn. Undergr.
Space Technol. 58, 1–10.
Khazaei, S., Shimada, H., Kawai, T., Yotsumoto, J., Matsui, K., 2006. Monitoring of over
cutting area and lubrication distribution in a large slurry pipe jacking operation.
Geotech. Geol. Eng. 24 (3), 735–755.
Park, I.J., Kwak, C.W., Kim, S.W., Kim, J.Y., Han, S.H., 2006. Verification and general
behavior of tubular roof & trenchmethod (TR&T) by numerical analysis in Korea.
Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 21 (3), 394–398.
Ren, D.J., Xu, Y.S., Shen, J., Zhou, A.N., Arulrajah, A., 2018. Prediction of ground de-
formation during pipe-jacking considering multiple factors. Appl. Sci. 8 (7), 1051.
Sun, Y., Su, J.B., Xia, X.H., Xu, Z.L., 2015. Numerical analysis of soil deformation behind
the reaction wall of an open caisson induced by horizontal parallel pipe-jacking
construction. Can. Geotech. J. 2015, 1–9.
Shen, S.L., Cui, Q.L., Ho, C.E., Xu, Y.S., 2016. Ground response to multiple parallel mi-
crotunneling operations in cemented silty clay and sand. J. Geotech. Geoenviron.
Eng. 142 (5), 04016001.
Shi, P.X., Liu, W., Pan, J.L., Yu, C.C., 2018. Experimental and analytical study of jacking
load during microtunneling gongbei tunnel pipe roof. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.
144 (1), 05017006.
Shou, K., Yen, J., Liu, M., 2010. On the frictional property of lubricants and its impact on
jacking force and soil–pipe interaction of pipe-jacking. Tunn. Undergr. Space
Technol. 25 (4), 469–477.
Tadros, M.K., Benak, J.V., 1989. Soil pressure on Box Culverts. ACI Struct. J., 86(4): 439-
450.
Terzaghi, K., 1943. Theoretical soil mechanics. Wiley, New York.
Wen, K., Shimada, H., Zeng, W., Sasaoka, T., Qian, D.Y., 2018. Frictional analysis of pipe-
S. Yang, et al.
slurry-soil interaction and jacking force prediction of rectangular pipe jacking. Europ.
J. Environmen. Civil Eng. 1, 1–19.
Xiao, J.Z., Dai, F.C., Wei, Y.Q., Xing, Y.C., Cai, Xu, C., Xu, C., 2016. Analysis of me-
chanical behavior in a pipe roof during excavation of a shallow bias tunnel in loose
deposits. Environ. Earth Sci. 75 (4), 1–18.
Xu, Y.S., Huang, R.Q., Han, J., Shen, S.L., 2013. Evaluation of allowable withdrawn vo-
lume of groundwater based on observed data. Nat. Hazards 67 (2), 513–522.
Yang, X., Li, Y.S., 2018. Research of surface settlement for a single arch long-span subway
10
Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 97 (2020) 103277
station using the Pipe-roof Pre-construction Method. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol.
72, 210–217.
Yang X., Zhang K., Li Y., 2013. Theoretical and experimental actual measurement analysis
of jacking force during deep-buried pipe jacking. Rock Soil Mech. 34(3),757-761 (in
Chinese).
Zhen, L., Chen, J.J., Qiao, P., Wang, J.H., 2014. Analysis and remedial treatment of a steel
pipe-jacking accident in complex underground environment. Eng. Struct. 59,
210–219.