Computers and Geotechnics 101 (2018) 48–64

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Computers and Geotechnics

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

Research Paper

Lateral behaviour of a pile group due to side-by-side twin tunnelling in dry T

sand: 3D centrifuge tests and numerical modelling
⁎,1
M.A. Soomroa, , C.W.W. Ngb, N.A. Memona, R. Bhanbhroa
a
Department of Civil Engineering, Quaid-e-Awam University of Engineering, Science & Technology, Sindh, Pakistan
b
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Clear Water Bay, Kowloon, Hong Kong Special Administrative
Region

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

Keywords: This paper presents lateral responses of an existing 2 × 2 pile group to advancement of side-by-side twin tunnels
Centrifuge modelling (with 1% volume loss) at various depths in dry sand using 3D centrifuge and numerical modelling. The tunnels
Numerical modelling were located near mid-depth of the pile shaft (test SS), next to (test TT) and below the toe (test BB) of the pile
Twin tunnelling group. The largest and the smallest lateral movement of the pile cap was induced after first tunnelling in test TT
Piles, deflection
and test SS, respectively. The shearing force was induced in piles as a reaction of pile deflection in tests TT and
BB.

1. Introduction typical sectional view of the project). A maximum dragload of up to 42%

Underground construction such as tunnels and excavations supports the
quality of life in cities by improving the availability and quality of the space
above ground [26,30,55]. Construction of tunnels is likely to encounter
existing underground structures such as pile foundations [31,39,40,47]. It is
well recognised that the capacity of a pile group depends on mobilised
stresses in the ground while tunnelling is essentially a stress release process
[7,55]. Stress release caused by tunnels may lead to excessive ground
movements. The interaction of these ground movements with nearby ex-
isting pile foundations develop additional loading in vertical as well as
horizontal direction on them [32,36,39]. Therefore, it is vital to investigate
the adverse effects of tunnelling on existing pile foundations. To understand
influence of tunnelling on existing piles, extensive numbers of studies have
been carried out based on field monitoring and centrifuge modelling
[4,5,8,9,10,13,28,35,25,53,30,39,46–49,51] numerical analysis and analy-
tical analysis [6,42–44,7,20,57,38,31–33,26,3,41,55,56,21,22,27,58]. They
all concluded that tunnelling adjacent to existing pile foundations caused
pile settlement, additional axial load on piles and induced bending mo-
ments along piles, which is unfavourable for piled foundations. The mag-
nitudes of likely depended on the relative locations of tunnels and piles.
However, most previous studies have focused on the effects of a single
tunnel on single piles and pile groups. In fact, twin tunnelling is particularly
favoured across the world when developing underground transportation
systems [22,53]. Pang et al. [53] carried out field monitoring on a metro
project in Singapore (i.e. North-East Line Contract 704) (Fig. 1 shows a
and 66% of the pile structural capacity was observed after single tunnel and
twin tunnel advancement, respectively. In this case history, field measure-
ments include only axial load and bending moments along a limited portion
of the pile shafts. Other important pile responses, such as settlement and
deflection of the pile foundation, were also not reported. To further explore
twin tunnelling effects on an existing single pile and a pile group in dry
sand, some centrifuge model tests and back-analysis of the tests were also
carried out at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology [47,48].
Side-by-side twin tunnels were simulated in-flight, either adjacent to or
below the pile toe. The existing single pile and pile group stood between the
twin tunnels, which were excavated one after the other. It was concluded
that owing to twin tunnelling, no significant bending moment was induced
in either case (i.e. no more than 17% of the pile bending moment capacity).
In addition, the twin tunnelling resulted in a maximum increase in axial
force in the single pile by 27%, due to load transfer within the pile. Fur-
thermore, the second tunnelling reversed almost completely the tilting of
the existing pile group caused by the first tunnelling.
In spite of the numerous previous investigations on this subject,
little attention was paid to behaviour of an existing pile group in lateral
direction due to tunnelling. It is well recognised that soil exhibits highly
non-linear behaviour and stiffness of the soil depends upon stress or
strain level, stress path and on the recent stress or strain history of the
soil [1,2]. Owing to non-linear soil behaviour, a tunnel excavation can
cause reduction in the stiffness of the ground. Therefore, it is vital to
investigate the lateral pile responses not only to first tunnel but also

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: eng.soomro@gmail.com (M.A. Soomro), cecwwng@ust.hk (C.W.W. Ng), nahmedmemon@gmail.com (N.A. Memon), riaz@quest.edu.pk (R. Bhanbhro).
1
Formerly The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Clear Water Bay, Kowloon, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2018.04.010
Received 4 January 2018; Received in revised form 16 February 2018; Accepted 7 April 2018
0266-352X/ © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M.A. Soomro et al.
Fig. 1. A sectional view showing MRT North East Line viaduct bridge,
Singapore [53].
subsequent tunnel in a twin-tunnelling transportation system.
In view of the aforementioned issues, this study aims at system-
atically investigating the induced lateral behaviour (i.e. lateral move-
ment of pile cap, deflection of piles, bending moment and lateral forces
in the piles) of an existing pile group due to side-by-side twin tunnels in
dry sand. To achieve these objectives, three 3D centrifuge experiments
were carried out to simulate in-flight advancement of side-by-side twin
tunnels (one after the other) on both sides of an axially loaded 2 × 2
pile group in dry sand. The only variable that differed between the
three tests was depth of the twin tunnels relative to the pile shaft. The
tunnels were located near mid-depth of the pile shaft (test SS), next to
(test TT) and below the toe (test BB) of the pile group. The centrifuge
tests were back-analysed by three-dimensional finite element analyses,
in which a hypoplastic constitutive soil model was employed. Measured
and computed results are compared and interpreted, with particular
attention paid to understand the mechanism of lateral effects on the pile
group due to twin tunnelling.
2. Three-dimensional centrifuge model test
2.1. Experimental programme and setup of centrifuge modelling
The centrifuge tests reported in this paper were carried out at the
Geotechnical Centrifuge Facility at the Hong Kong University of Science
and Technology. The 8.5 m diameter centrifuge has a payload of 400 g-
ton and is equipped with a biaxial hydraulic shaker and a computer
controlled four-axial robotic manipulator [50]. All of centrifuge tests
reported herein were carried out at a centrifugal acceleration of 40 g.
Scaling factors relevant to the centrifuge tests are summarised in
Table 1.
An in-flight pile load test (test L) was firstly carried out in “green-
field” conditions (i.e. with absence of tunnels) to obtain the ultimate
capacity of the pile group, and hence working load to be applied on the
pile group in the three tests simulating twin tunnelling.
Fig. 2(a) shows elevation view of test SS. In this test, both the
tunnels were simulated near the mid-depth of pile shaft. Each tunnel
had a diameter (D) of 152 mm (6.08 m in prototype). Cover-to-diameter
ratios (C/D) of both the tunnels were 1.5. The closest distance between
the centreline of the tunnel and the pile group was 114 mm, being
equivalent to 0.75D. The diameter and the length of each pile were
20 mm (0.8 m in prototype) and 600 mm (24.0 m in prototype), re-
spectively. The pile cap was elevated by 110 mm (above the ground
surface) and hence the embedded depth of each pile was 490 mm
(19.6 m in prototype).
Fig. 2(b) and (c) shows the elevation view of tests TT and BB,
49
Computers and Geotechnics 101 (2018) 48–64
Table 1
Scaling factors relevant to centrifuge tests in this study.
Physical quantity Scaling factor (model/prototype)
Gravitational acceleration n
Length 1/n
Area 1/n2
Volume 1/n3
Settlement n
Stress 1
Strain 1
Force 1/n2
Density 1
Mass 1/n3
Axial rigidity 1/n2
Bending rigidity 1/n4
respectively. The twin tunnelling was carried out near and below the
toe of the pile group in test TT (i.e. C/D = 2.7) and BB (i.e. C/D = 3.7),
respectively.
In each test (i.e. tests SS, TT and BB), in-flight three-dimensional
advancement of twin tunnels were simulated. Fig. 3(a) illustrates the
plan view of a typical test (i.e. test SS). As illustrated, the length of each
model tunnel (along its longitudinal direction) is 380 mm, which was
equivalent to 2.5D. Each tunnel excavation consisted of five construc-
tion stages, with the tunnel face advancing by a distance of 0.5D in each
stage and a volume loss of 1%. More details are given by Ng et al. [49].
The centrifuge test programme of this study is summarised in Table 2.
2.2. In-flight simulation of tunnel excavation
Each model tunnel was simulated by five independent cylindrical
rubber bags. Water was filled inside each rubber bag (without any air
bubble left in the bags). The rubber bags are placed in a frame with five
partitions separated by six rigid aluminium plates in order to stop any
soil movement towards tunnel face (see Fig. 4). Thus, the soil move-
ment towards tunnel face not allowed in each excavation stage. The
induced movement of soil due to tunnelling is in radial direction. Three-
dimensional tunnel advancement was modelled by draining away a
controlled amount of water, which was equivalent to a volume loss of
1.0%, one after another from the rubber bags.
2.3. Model pile group and instrumentation
As shown in Fig. 4, the 2 × 2 pile group was used in the centrifuge
tests. The pile group was installed between twin tunnels with each row
of piles parallel to tunnels. The four piles were firmly fixed to a rela-
tively rigid pile cap. The flexural rigidity of the cap was 15 GNm2 (in
prototype), being equivalent to a 1 m thick (in prototype) reinforced
concrete cap.
Each model pile was fabricated from a 600 mm (24 m in prototype)
long aluminum tube with an outer and inner diameter of 20 mm and
15 mm, respectively. Based on the scaling factors summarised in
Table 1, each model pile corresponds to a 0.8 m diameter (in prototype)
cylindrical reinforced concrete (grade 40, reinforcement ratio = 1%)
pile with flexural stiffness and bending moment capacity of 721 MN m2
and 800 kN m, respectively. To measure change of axial load in the
model piles, ten levels of Full Wheatstone bridge semiconductor strain
gauges (SGs) were bonded on the external surface of each pile. The
vertical spacing between each level of SGs was 60 mm (2.4 m in pro-
totype scale). Gauge factor (GF) of each semiconductor strain gauge
was 150, being much higher than conventional foil gauges (GF = 2).
The resolution of each SG was as low as 1 micro-strain. Prior to each
test, the axial load measurement of each pile was calibrated, by in-
crementally applying axial force to each pile with a hydraulic actuator.
Each pile was calibrated for axial and bending measurement prior to
each test. For axial calibration, each pile had a known force applied
M.A. Soomro et al.
Fig. 2. Elevation view of centrifuge tests: (a) SS; (b) TT and (c) TT. All di-
mensions are in mm in model scale.
incrementally on the top of pile using an actuator. Each strain gauge
output was then related to the applied axial force. For bending cali-
bration, each pile was simply supported at two ends, and a point load
was incrementally applied at the centre of the pile. Strain gauge outputs
were then related to calculated bending moments. Similar procedures
were repeated by applying point loads incrementally on the pile at
distances of one-third and two-third from the left support.
To protect the SGs, a 1.5 mm thick epoxy coating was uniformly
50
Computers and Geotechnics 101 (2018) 48–64
applied to the shaft of each pile. The interface property between
Toyoura sand and the epoxy-coated pile shaft were measured by car-
rying out two direct shear tests [54]. The measured average friction
angle of the Toyoura sand-epoxy interface was 29°. Surface roughness
of the epoxy-coating was measured using an optical profiler. An abso-
lute interface roughness Rmax of about 15 µm was measured. By nor-
malising the measured Rmax with the mean particle size
(D50 = 0.17 mm) of Toyoura sand, the normalised roughness Rn (de-
fined by Kishida and Uesugi [28]) is 0.09. According to Fioravante [11],
interfaces with Rn smaller than 0.02 and larger than 0.10 can be re-
garded as smooth and rough interfaces, respectively. The epoxy-coated
pile shaft in this study may, therefore, be described as relatively rough.
To measure lateral pile cap movement due to twin tunnelling, a
potentiometer were installed on right top of the pile cap (see Fig. 5).
2.4. Pile loading system
In the pile load test (test L), an incrementally increased vertical load
(loading increment = 400 N in model scale, or 640 kN in prototype)
was applied to the pile cap using a hydraulic jack. The load-controlled
pile load test was achieved by a closed loop system, which consists of a
servo-valve, a load cell (attached to the hydraulic jack) and a control
unit. During the load test, settlement of the pile group was measured by
a LVDT installed at the centre of the pile cap.
Based on the pile load test, the working load of the pile group can be
determined according to a displacement controlled criterion (discussed
in detail by Ng et al. [49]). The obtained working load (i.e. 5.5 MN) was
then applied to the three tests involving twin tunnelling simulation
(Tests SS, TT, BB), by mounting a dead weight of 8.6 kg (i.e. equivalent
to the working load at 40 g) on top of the pile cap before centrifuge
testing (at 1 g).
2.5. Testing material and model preparation
Dry Toyoura sand, which consists of sub-angular particles with a
mean diameter (D50) of 0.17 mm, was adopted for the centrifuge tests.
It was found by Fuglsang and Ovesen [16] that in small-scaled model
tests, particle size of soil became insignificant when it was less than 1/
30th of an important model dimension such as pile diameter. In this
study, the ratio of grain size of Toyoura sand to pile diameter (20 mm)
was 1/129, which was much smaller than the allowable limit proposed
by Fuglsang and Ovesen [15]. This implies that the particle size effect is
likely to be negligible in the centrifuge tests reported in this study.
To prepare sandy ground in each centrifuge test, pluvial deposition
method (i.e. raining dry Toyoura sand into the model box) was adopted,
with a constant falling height of sand (i.e. 500 mm). By doing so,
medium-dense sand (with relative density of about 65%) was obtained.
Once the sandy ground level reached the elevation where the invert of
the tunnel should be positioned, the model tunnel was placed in, prior
to continuing the sand raining process. Similarly, when the sand bed
reached the elevation of the pile toe, the pile group was temporarily
fixed at its designed location by mounting the pile cap firmly to a
temporary support beam (see Fig. 4). Then the sand raining process was
preceded until final elevation is achieved (i.e. 750 mm). After the pre-
paration of each layer, the average density of the layer was deduced by
measuring the weight and volume of sand used. Fig. 6 shows the
measured distributions of the sand density with depth in all four cen-
trifuge tests at 1 g. It can be seen from the figure that the density of sand
in the regions with the presence of model tunnel and piles are generally
less than that in the regions without the model structures. However, the
maximum difference in each test was less than 0.6%. For example, the
minimum density at the location of SS was 1526 kg/m3, which is 0.4%
smaller than the maximum density of 1533 kg/m3 obtained at about
640 mm below the same bed. Since the vertical and horizontal stresses
should be approximately proportional to the soil density, the initial
vertical and horizontal stresses are likely to be affected by less than
M.A. Soomro et al. Computers and Geotechnics 101 (2018) 48–64

Fig. 3. (a) Plan view of a typical centrifuge test, i.e., test SS (all dimensions are in mm in model scale); (b) arrangement of potentiometer on the pile cap.

Table 2 around the pile also increased under the Ko condition, which was si-
Centrifuge test programme. milar to that surrounding a non-displacement pile.
Test ID C/D Remark
Table 3 summarises the deduced average relative density (i.e. Dr) in
each test. The difference of Dr between each test was less than 2%,
L N/A Pile group load test suggesting that the sand beds prepared in the four tests were likely to be
SS 1.5, 1.5 Side-by-side twin tunnelling near pile shaft comparable.
TT 2.7, 2.7 Side-by-side twin tunnelling near pile toe
BB 3.7, 3.7 Side-by-side twin tunnelling below pile toe
2.6. Test procedure
N/A denotes not applicable.
After assembling the centrifuge model package, a dead weight (i.e.
0.6% in the regions where the model tunnel and piles are located. The 8.6 kg) was fixed on top of the pile cap to serve as working load. Then
pluvial deposition at 1 g resulted in relative small stress level around the whole package was mounted onto the swinging platform and spun
the pile. During the spinning up process of the soil model, the stress up to 40 g. Owing to incompressibility of water no any reduction in of

Fig. 4. Model tunnels and pile group in a typical test (i.e., test SS for this case).

51
M.A. Soomro et al. Computers and Geotechnics 101 (2018) 48–64

During the entire testing process, lateral movement of pile cap and
bending moment in piles were recorded.

3. Three-dimensional finite element analysis

To obtain better understanding of the centrifuge tests, three-di-

mensional finite element back-analyses of the tests were undertaken
using the finite element program ABAQUS [20]. As the model ground in
centrifuge tests is dry sand therefore, the drained analyses were
adopted in back-analyses.
A user-defined hypoplastic model, which accounts for strain-de-
pendent and path-dependent of soil stiffness, was incorporated in the
finite element program ABAQUS.

3.1. Finite element mesh and boundary conditions

Fig. 5. Model pile group and arrangement of potentiometer on the pile cap.
Fig. 7(a) and (b) shows plan and elevation view of a typical finite
element mesh (for back-analysing test TT). In the mesh, all dimensions
are in model scale and are identical to those in the centrifuge tests.
Displacements perpendicular to the outer boundaries of the mesh is
restrained. The soil and the deadweight are modelled by using eight-
noded brick elements while the pile is modelled by four-noded shell
elements, respectively. Regarding the mesh size, a numerical test shows
that further halving current mesh size can only lead to a change of

Fig. 6. Distributions of initial density of sand bed with depth in all four tests.

Table 3
Parameters of the soil deposit (at 1 g) in all four centrifuge tests.
Test identity Initial void ratio Initial density (ρ): Initial relative density
(e) kg/m3 (Dr): %

Test L 0.730 1531 65

Test SS 0.732 1529 64
Test TT 0.726 1532 66
Test BB 0.732 1529 64

volume of rubber bag was observed with increase of gravity (1–40 g).
Upon reaching 40 g, in-flight twin tunnel excavations were simulated
one after the other. Each tunnel was simulated in five stages, by
draining away water from five rubber bags (with 1% volume loss for Fig. 7. Finite element mesh for test TT. (a) Plan view and (b) Elevation view (all
each), respectively. dimensions are in mm).

52
M.A. Soomro et al.
Fig. 8. Displacement controlled method [8] adopted in this study.
computed results of no more than 0.2%.
The tunnel excavation was simulated by deactivating soil elements
inside the tunnel and applying non-uniform inward displacements to
nodes around the boundary of the tunnel, with a pre-defined 1% vo-
lume loss (i.e. difference between original volumes to reduced volume).
The face of each tunnel section was fixed by applying zero displacement
boundary condition to restrain the inward tunnel face movement si-
milar to that in centrifuge tests. Although tunnel lining was not ex-
plicitly simulated in the numerical analysis, the effect of this was im-
plicitly included by controlling an equivalent volume loss.
Pattern of the applied non-uniform displacement boundaries was
determined according to Cheng et al. [8]’s displacement controlled
model (DCM), as shown in Fig. 8. The DCM was proposed based on
deformation mechanisms (in green-field) observed in the field and in
centrifuge tests. The validity of the DCM in modelling tunnel–soil–pile
interaction problems had been demonstrated through back analysis of a
centrifuge test and a case history. According to DCM, displacement
pattern around a tunnel can be determined by knowing ground surface
settlement and volume loss and by assuming:
(a) The volume loss is distributed non-uniformly around the tunnel, i.e.
with zero displacement occurring at the invert of the tunnel and the
maximum displacement at the crown;
(b) The final profile of the tunnel is similar to the excavated shape
(which can be taken as circular). This assumption is justified as
deformations are usually small compared to tunnel size under
working conditions [8].
(c) Displacements of nodes around the boundary of the tunnel all
converge to a single point A (see Fig. 8), which is located between
the centre and the invert of the tunnel. The point of convergence
depends on tunnel cover (distance between ground surface and
tunnel crown) to diameter ratio (C/D) and predefined volume loss.
As the tunnel becomes shallower (i.e. cover to tunnel diameter (C/
D) ratio decreases), with a given volume loss the convergence point
shift downwards within the bounds of the tunnel centre and the
invert. As the convergence point moves to invert of the tunnel, the
maximum settlement increases and settlement trough becomes
narrower. On the contrary, in deeper tunnel, with the same value of
volume loss the convergence point moves upward which will result
in wider settlement trough and smaller maximum settlement.
53
Computers and Geotechnics 101 (2018) 48–64
Based on this method, displacement boundaries around the tunnel
in tests SS, TT and BB are calculated and imposed in the numerical
analyses. By going through a trial-and-error process, with 1% of volume
loss the location of the convergence point (point A), which resulted in
the best-fit ground settlements, was obtained. In tests SS, TT and BB, the
calibrated convergence points were located at 0.15, 0.3 and 0.4D above
the tunnel invert, respectively.
3.2. Constitutive model and model parameters
The hypoplastic model was developed to describe non-linear re-
sponse of granular material [17,18,29]. It consists of eight model
parameters (ϕ′c, hs, n, ed0, ec0, ei0, α and β). The first six parameters (ϕ′c,
hs, n, ed0, ec0, ei0) of Toyoura sand were calibrated by Herle and Gu-
dehus [19]. The remaining two parameters (α and β) were obtained by
curving fitting Maeda and Miura [38]’s triaxial test results (at large
strains).
To account for strain-dependency and path-dependency of soil
stiffness (at small strains), Niemunis and Herle [52] further improved
the hypoplastic model by incorporating intergranular strain concept
into the model. Five additional parameters (mR, mT, R, βr and χ) are
required. These five parameters were obtained by curve fitting stiffness
degradation curves of Toyoura sand measured in this study. Fig. 9
compares the measured and the computed variation of stiffness of
Toyoura sand by the Hypoplastic model (sand) with the deviatoric
strain. The measured and computed stiffness results show a reasonable
agreement in both trend and magnitude with maximum difference
being 10%. The good match of computed results (with calibrated
parameters) with that of the measured implies the capability of the
Hypoplastic model (sand) to capture the small strain stiffness and de-
gradation of the soil stiffness with strain, which is an important aspect
of soil behaviour to predict the soil movement during tunnelling [1,3].
The coefficient of at-rest earth pressure (K0 = 0.5) was estimated based
on effective angle of shearing resistance at critical state (ϕ′ = 31°, as
reported by Ishihara [24]) and Jáky [25]’s equation. Table 4 sum-
marises model parameters of Toyoura sand adopted in the numerical
analyses.
The model pile group (made of aluminum) was modelled as a linear
elastic material with Young’s modulus, Poisson ratio and unit weight of
70 GPa, 0.2 and 27 kN/m3, respectively.
The soil-pile interface was simulated as zero thickness elements by
M.A. Soomro et al.
Fig. 9. Measured and computed degradation curves of Toyoura sand subjected
to varying recent stress histories.
using duplicated nodes in ABAQUS [20]. This interface was simulated
by the Coulomb friction law, in which interface friction coefficient (μ)
and limiting displacement (γlim) are required. They are μ = 0.5 and
γlim = 5 mm), as reported by Peng [54] based on direct shear tests on
Toyoura sand-epoxy interface.
3.3. Numerical modelling procedure
Procedures of numerical analysis are the same as those of the cen-
trifuge test. Details are summarised as follows:
1. Set up the initial boundary and initial stress conditions (i.e. static
stress conditions with Ko = 0.5) at 1 g.
2. Activate pile group (modelled as “wished-in-place”) and deadweight
on top of the pile cap.
3. Increase stress level of the entire mesh (including soil, pile group
and deadweight) by raising its gravitational acceleration from 1 g to
40 g.
4. Fix face of each tunnel section to be excavated.
5. Simulate tunnel excavation of the first segment, with a 1% volume
loss (by DCM as explained in Section 3.1).
6. Repeat step 5 to simulate advancement of the second tunnel.
For further illustration, the steps of numerical modelling procedure
are depicted in Fig. 10.
4. Interpretation of computed results
4.1. Measured and computed lateral movement of the pile cap
Fig. 11(a) and (b) shows the lateral movement of the pile cap (x)
Table 4
Model parameters of Toyoura sand adopted in the numerical analyses.
Description
Effective angle of shearing resistance at critical state: ϕ′
Coefficient of at-rest earth pressure, Ko
Hardness of granulates, hs
Exponent n
Minimum void ratio at zero pressure, edo
Maximum void ratio at zero pressure, eio
Critical void ratio at zero pressure, eco
Exponent α
Exponent β
Parameter controlling initial shear modulus upon 180° strain path reversal, mR
Parameter controlling initial shear modulus upon 90° strain path reversal, mT
Size of elastic range, R
Parameter controlling degradation rate of stiffness with strain, βr
Parameter controlling degradation rate of stiffness with strain, χ
Computers and Geotechnics 101 (2018) 48–64
due to advancement of the first tunnel and the second tunnel in all the
three tests (i.e. test SS, test TT and test BB). The advancement of both
tunnels is indicated by the distance (i.e. y) from the tunnel face to the
centreline of the pile group (defined as the monitoring section in the
inset of Fig. 3(a)). The x and y are normalised by pile diameter (dp) and
tunnel diameter (D), respectively. As a sign convention, lateral move-
ment of the pile cap towards the first tunnel is taken as positive.
It can be seen that the x of the pile cap increased almost linearly
with tunnelling stage (i.e. y/D) in test SS. However, non-linear lateral
movement characteristics of the pile group were observed during ad-
vancement of the first tunnel (T and B) in tests TT and BB. The rate of
lateral movement increases as the tunnel face approaches the mon-
itoring section (MS) and decreases as it moves away from the MS.
Among the three tests discussed, the largest and the smallest x resulted
from tunnelling below the pile toe (i.e. test TT) and near mid-depth of
the pile shaft (i.e. test SS), respectively. This may be because of stress
release-induced shear strain due to tunnelling next to pile toe (ex-
plained in the section ‘‘Computed ground deformation mechanism and
deviatoric strain’’). The induced final cap movement after excavation of
first tunnel in tests SS, TT and BB were 1.7, 9.5 and 2.8 mm (i.e. 0.21%,
1.2% and 0.34% of pile diameter), respectively.
During the second tunnelling (as shown in Fig. 11(b)), lateral
movement of the pile cap decreased non-linearly with excavation stages
in tests TT and BB. As a result, the pile group almost moves back to its
original position after twin tunnelling. However, negligible movement
of the pile cap was observed due to second tunnelling in test SS. This
may be attributed to two reasons. Firstly, the reduction of normal stress
difference on the pile in tests TT and BB is greater than that induced in
test SS (explained in the section ‘‘Computed normal stresses acting on
pile”). Second reason is limited non-linearity in the soil response.
It can be seen from Fig. 11(a) and (b) that during the entire process
of twin tunnelling in all the three tests, the most significant lateral
movement occurs at the end of the first tunnelling.
Compared to the measured pile cap lateral movement, computed
results show good correspondence. In terms of magnitude, the max-
imum percentage difference between the measurements and the com-
puted results is less than 15%.
4.2. Induced bending moments in piles
The measured and computed bending moment of two typical piles
P1 (closest to the first tunnel) and P2 (closest to the second tunnel) (see
Fig. 3(b)) were selected for discussion in each test. A positive bending
moment means that tensile stress was induced along the pile shaft fa-
cing the first tunnel.
Fig. 12(a) and (b) illustrates the measured and computed bending
moment along pile P1 and pile P2 in response of twin tunnelling in test
SS, respectively. Owing to the first tunnel (S) induced stress release and
Parameter Reference
31° Ishihara [24]
0.5 Estimated by Jáky [25]’s equation
2.6 GPa Herle and Gudehus [19]
0.27
0.61
1.10
0.98
0.14
3
8 Calibrated from stiffness degradation curve of Toyoura sand (see Fig. 9)
4
2 × 10−5
0.1
1.0
54
M.A. Soomro et al.
Fig. 10. Depicted numerical modelling procedure.
lateral soil movement (explained in the section ‘‘Computed ground
deformation mechanism and deviatoric strain’’), the maximum positive
bending moment was induced in pile P1 above the springline of the first
tunnel. This positive bending moment was counter-balanced by the
negative bending moment near pile head. The magnitude of maximum
positive bending moment at Z/Lp = 0.25 was 325 kN m. In contrast,
negligible bending moment was induced below the tunnel springline.
This was because the tunnelling induced soil movement below the
tunnel springline was insignificant [26]. Subsequently, the pile group
was subjected to stress release on the other side due to the second
tunnel (S), the bending moment near the pile head P1 decreased. Fi-
nally, a positive bending moment 65 kN m was induced. The measured
and computed bending moment profile of pile P2 was almost similar to
that of pile P1 (see Fig. 12(b)). Compared to measured induced bending
moment in each pile after the first and second tunnel, the computed
results show a broad agreement qualitatively.
Fig. 13(a) and (b) shows the measured and computed bending
moment along pile P1 and pile P2 in response of twin tunnelling in test
TT, respectively. It can be observed from Fig. 13(a) that the most sig-
nificant bending moment (i.e. 850 kN m) was induced in pile P1 near
the pile cap after the completion of the first tunnel (T) near the pile toe.
The measured maximum bending moment exceeded the ultimate ca-
pacity of a prototype reinforced concrete pile (i.e. 800 kN m, as dis-
cussed) with corresponding flexural rigidity. This implies that tunnel-
ling with a volume loss of 1% close to the toe of a pile group may cause
structural failure near the pile head. In contrast, a much smaller
bending moment was induced in a single pile subjected to tunnelling
near the pile toe [48], as no rigid constraint was applied near the single
pile head. The induced bending moment reduced to zero near the pile
head after the second tunnel (T) excavation. However, a net bending
moment of magnitude 174 kN m at Z/Lp = 0.25 induced in pile P1. The
measured and computed bending moment profile of pile P2 was almost
similar to that of pile P1 (see Fig. 13(b)). The computed induced
bending moments in both the piles were broadly consistent with the
55
Computers and Geotechnics 101 (2018) 48–64
measured data.
Fig. 14(a) and (b) shows that owing to stress-release and ground
movement after the first tunnel excavation in test BB, the maximum
bending moment was also induced near the head of both piles P1 and
P2. The magnitude of the induced maximum bending moment was
600 kN m near the pile head, which was 75% of the bending moment
capacity of the pile (i.e. 800 kN m). Subsequently, the bending moment
decreased as the second tunnel was excavated. The computed changes
in induced bending moment in each pile showed a broadly consistent
trend with that of measured induced bending moment.
Among the three tests reported, the first tunnelling in test TT in-
duced the largest bending moment which exceeds the pile BM capacity
(i.e. 850 kN m) near the pile head. However, the induced bending
moment along the pile decreased significantly due to the excavation of
the second tunnel in each case. This is because of the side-by-side twin
tunnelling configuration in which the second tunnel caused a stress
release on the opposite side of the pile.
4.3. Induced pile lateral displacement
To substantiate the discussion in the previous section, induced
computed displacement of pile P1 and pile P2 is interpreted in this
section.
Fig. 15(a), (b) and (c) illustrates the computed induced lateral pile
displacement (x) along the front pile P1 and the rear pile P2 after the
completion of first and second tunnels in tests SS, TT and BB, respec-
tively. Pile deflection towards the first tunnel is regarded as the positive
direction.
It can be seen from Fig. 15(a) that pile P1 and pile P2 deflected
towards first tunnel with pile displacement decreasing along the pile
length. The maximum lateral displacement of 0.1% of pile diameter was
induced at the pile head as there was no constraint at the pile cap. This
is because the piles were subjected to tunnelling-induced stress release
and lateral movement towards the first tunnel (explained in the section
M.A. Soomro et al. Computers and Geotechnics 101 (2018) 48–64

‘‘Computed ground deformation mechanism and deviatoric strain’’).

However, no lateral movement was computed at the pile toe.
After the subsequent tunnelling in test SS, both the piles P1 and P2
were deflected back to their original positions. This ‘‘elastic’’ response
implies that the plastic strains generated adjacent to the two tunnels did
not overlap with each other (evidence is given in ‘‘Computed ground
deformation mechanism and deviatoric strain’’).
In test TT (see Fig. 15(b)), the heads and toes of pile P1 and P2
displaced towards the first tunnel after completion of the first tunnel.
Due to rigid connection of the pile with pile cap and no constraint of the
pile, both the pile heads displaced with same magnitude of 0.75% of
pile diameter. However, the lateral movement of the toe of pile P1 is
larger than that of pile P2. This is because of pile P1 is subjected to
higher stress release and soil movement due to first tunnelling as
compared to pile P2.
On the completion of the second tunnel in test TT, the upper portion
of pile P1 (0 ≤ Z/Lp ≤ 0.56) was displaced back to its original position.
However, negligible lateral displacement of the toe of pile P1 was in-
duced after second tunnelling. On the contrary, pile P2 displaced back
to its original position entirely along its length. This is because of the
overlapping of plastic strain developed adjacent the toe of the pile
group due to twin tunnelling as discussed later.
It can be observed from Fig. 15(c) that twin tunnelling-induced
lateral displacement profiles of pile P1 and pile P2 in test BB are similar
to that of observed in test TT. However, quantitatively the induced
lateral displacements in test BB are less than that in test TT. The
maximum computed lateral displacements of 0.2%dp and 0.13%dp at
the head and at the toe were induced in pile P1, respectively.
Among all the three tests, the pile deflection profile after second
tunnelling is consistent with induced bending moment which returned
to zero after excavation of the second tunnel.

4.4. Induced tilting of the pile cap

Fig. 16 illustrates the measured and computed transverse tilting of

the pile cap after the first and twin tunnels due to tunnelling at different
Fig. 11. Lateral movement of pile cap during twin tunnelling: (a) the first cover to diameter (C/D) ratios (i.e. 1.5, 2.7 and 3.7). The tilting was
tunnel (i.e., tunnels S, T and B); (b) the second tunnel (i.e., tunnels S, T and B). defined as the ratio of differential settlement at two edges of the pile
cap (measured by L1 and L2, see Fig. 3(b)) to the distance between

Fig. 12. Measured and computed induced bending moment due to twin tunnelling in test SS: (a) pile P1; (b) pile P2.

56
M.A. Soomro et al.
Fig. 13. Measured and computed induced bending moment due to twin tunnelling in test TT: (a) pile P1; (b) pile P2.
them. As a sign convention, tilting of the pile cap towards the first
tunnel is taken as positive. Owing to soil displacement and shear strain
due to first tunnelling stress release, the positive tilting was induced in
the pile cap in each case. The maximum titling (i.e. 0.2%) was observed
when tunnel was excavated adjacent to the pile group toe (i.e. at C/
D = 2.7). This is because of the toe of pile P1 is subjected to major part
of stress which resulted in intensive shear strain zone around the pile
toe. Consequently, significant positive tilting of the pile cap occurred
due to first tunnel at C/D = 2.7. Hence lateral forces were developed on
the pile as a reaction of the movement of the pile group (explained in
Section 4.6). After second tunnelling in each case the pile cap almost
tilts back to its original position. This is because of the same reasons as
due to the first tunnel. The second tunnelling induced stress release
generated shear strain zone on the other side of the pile group (ex-
plained in Section 4.6).
The measured and computed tilting results show reasonable
Fig. 14. Measured and computed induced bending moment due to twin tunnelling in test BB: (a) pile P1; (b) pile P2.
57
Computers and Geotechnics 101 (2018) 48–64
agreement in both trend and magnitude, with the maximum difference
being 10%.
4.5. Computed soil displacement vectors and deviatoric strain
Fig. 17(a) and (b) shows computed incremental soil displacement
vectors resulting from stress reliefs after the first tunnelling and twin
tunnelling in test SS, respectively. In addition, computed incremental
deviatoric strain contours developed after the first and twin tunnelling
are superimposed in the figure. Loganathan et al. [37] assumed tun-
nelling-induced ground movement in sand is mainly bounded by a
wedge with an inclined angle of 45° + ϕ′/2 (calculated to be 61° for this
study) drawn from the tunnel springline to the ground surface. The
major influence zone proposed by Loganathan et al. [37] is included in
the figure for comparison. It can be seen that the tunnelling-induced
ground movement occurs predominantly within a 60° wedge (inclined
M.A. Soomro et al.
Fig. 15. Computed lateral displacement in pile P1 and pile P2 due to twin tunnelling (a) test SS (b) test TT (c) test BB.
to the horizontal) starting from the tunnel springline to the ground
surface. This is similar to that proposed by Loganathan et al. [37] in
their analytical solution. In addition to ground movement, significant
shear strain (up to 2.4%) is also developed in two ear-shaped zones
extending nearly vertically from the tunnel shoulders. This computed
distribution of shear strain is similar to that measured from centrifuge
tests simulating tunnelling in sand [39,40].
58
Computers and Geotechnics 101 (2018) 48–64
It can be seen from Fig. 17(a) that the toes of the pile group are
located outside the major influence zone of ground movement and
shear strain zone. Furthermore, the soil within the sliding wedge dis-
placed towards the first tunnel resulting in the deflection and bending
moment in the piles. Since the first tunnel is located at mid depth of the
pile (Z/Lp = 0.61) in test SS, only upper portion of the pile (0 ≤ Z/
Lp ≤ 0.61) is deflected (see Fig. 15(a)).
M.A. Soomro et al.
Fig. 16. Induced transverse tilting of the pile cap due to tunnels at different (C/
D) ratios.
It can be clearly seen from Fig. 17(b) that shear strain zone devel-
oped resulting after twin tunnelling is not overlapping each other.
Moreover, the soil displacement occurred vertically towards the twin
tunnels. This is the evidence of elastic response of the pile group to
second tunnelling in test SS resulting deflection of the pile to its original
position (see Fig. 15(a)).
Fig. 18(a) and (b) shows computed incremental soil displacement
vectors resulting from stress reliefs after the first tunnelling and twin
tunnelling in test TT, respectively. Similar to test SS tunnelling-induced
ground movement occurs predominantly within a 60° wedge (inclined
to the horizontal) starting from the tunnel springline to the ground
surface. Significant shear strain (up to 2.4%) is also developed in two
ear-shaped zones which extend upwards from the shoulders of the
tunnel. Similar to test SS, the toes of the pile group are located outside
the major influence zone of ground movement. However, the toe of pile
P1 is located within the localised region where significant shear strain is
developed. Since toe of pile P1 is located within the localised intensive
shear strain zone while P2 is located beyond, a relatively large tilting of
the pile group occurred (see Fig. 16). Due to significant tilting of the
pile group, large bending moment (see Fig. 13) and deflection (see
Fig. 15(b)) was induced in the piles near the pile head. In addition to
bending moment and deflection, lateral forces were induced along the
piles as reaction to a forced movement of the pile group (explained in
Section 4.6). After the completion of twin tunnelling in test TT (see
Fig. 18(b)), tunnelling-induced incremental soil displacement vectors
Fig. 17. Computed incremental soil displacement vectors and shear strain in test SS after: (a) the first tunnel; (b) the twin tunnelling.
59
Computers and Geotechnics 101 (2018) 48–64
are directed towards the second tunnel. Furthermore, shear strain zones
generated due to twin tunneling are overlapping each other resulting in
an intensive shear strain zone around the pile group toe. Different from
that in test SS, this ground deformation and shear strain mechanism
inducing a net bending moment in the pile group after the completion
of the both tunnels.
Fig. 19(a) shows computed incremental displacement vectors due to
the first tunnelling in test BB. Computed incremental shear strain re-
sulting from the first tunnelling is also included in the figure. Similar to
tests SS and TT tunnelling-induced ground movement occurred pre-
dominantly within a 60° wedge (inclined to the horizontal) starting
from the tunnel springline to the ground surface. Tunnelling-induced
significant shear strain (up to 2.4%) was also developed in two ear-
shaped zones which extend upwards from the shoulders of the tunnel.
Different from tests SS and TT, the entire pile group in test BB is located
within the major influence zone of ground movement. On the other
hand, toes of the pile group in test BB are located beyond the shear
strain zone. Consequently, smaller tilting of the pile cap (see Fig. 16)
was induced as compared with that in test TT. Hence the maximum
bending moment induced near pile heads in test BB is less than that of
induced in test TT. Similar to test TT, lateral forces (earth pressure)
were induced in the piles as reaction resulting from the tilting of the
pile cap (explained in Section 4.6). Moreover, the directions of soil
displacement vectors are towards the first tunnel. As a result of this,
lateral movement of the pile toes was observed (see Fig. 15(c)). After
the second tunnelling in test BB, tunnelling-induced incremental dis-
placement are directing vertically. This causing the pile group deflects
to its original position (see Fig. 15(c)). The overlapping of shear strain
zone (as observed from Fig. 19(b)) resulting in a net bending moment of
340 kN m at Z/Lp = 0.75 (see Fig. 14(b)).
4.6. Comparison of computed induced lateral force due to twin tunnelling
To further explore lateral response of the pile group to twin tun-
nelling, computed induced lateral forces (i.e. shearing force) along the
pile length is interpreted in this section. Since bending moment and pile
deflection profiles are similar in piles P1 and P2 in each test, this section
only reports induced lateral forces in pile P1 for illustration.
4.6.1. Lateral force distribution in test SS
Fig. 20(a) shows the computed induced lateral forces (Fx) in the pile
P1 after first and second tunnelling in test SS. A positive value of force
indicates the direction of the force towards the first tunnel. After twin
tunnelling, a highly non-linear distribution of lateral force is computed.
Along the middle portion of the pile (i.e. 0.25 ≤ Z/Lp ≤ 0.61) negative
lateral force was induced. This is because of tunnelling induced stress
released and inward soil inward movement towards the first tunnel.
M.A. Soomro et al.
Fig. 18. Computed incremental soil displacement vectors and shear strain in test TT after: (a) the first tunnel; (b) the twin tunnelling.
Fig. 19. Computed incremental soil displacement vectors and shear strain in test BB after: (a) the first tunnel; (b) the twin tunnelling.
The inward soil movement (discussed in section ‘‘Computed ground
deformation mechanism and deviatoric strain’’) tends to push the pile
towards the first tunnel. Consequently the lateral forces are developed
in opposite direction of that of the first tunnel. To counterbalance the
negative induced lateral force, positive lateral force were induced at the
upper portion (i.e. Z/Lp ≥ 0.25) and lower portion of the pile (i.e.
0.61 ≤ Z/Lp ≤ 0.80). The maximum value of 200 kN induced at Z/
Lp ≤ 0.50. Since the soil movement after twin tunnelling is vertical, the
net induced negative lateral forces remains at the middle portion of the
pile. However, at the upper portion (i.e. Z/Lp ≥ 0.25) of the pile the
induced lateral forces changes the sign (i.e. from positive to negative) as
result stress release induced shear strains (discussed in section ‘‘Com-
puted ground deformation mechanism and deviatoric strain’’). After
twin tunnelling in test SS, a net maximum lateral force of 150 kN was
induced at Z/Lp = 0.67.
4.6.2. Lateral force distribution in test TT
Fig. 20(b) illustrates the computed induced lateral forces (Fx) in the
pile P1 after first and second tunnelling in test TT. It can be observed
from the figure that negative lateral force was induced at the lower
portion (i.e. Z/Lp ≥ 0.8) and upper middle portion (0 ≤ Z/Lp ≤ 0.62) of
pile P1 after the first tunnelling adjacent to the pile toe. This is because
of the soil displacement towards the first tunnelling-induced stress re-
lease and shear strain (see Fig. 18). Owing to tunnelling-induced in-
tensive shear strain zone generated, the pile group tilted towards the
first tunnel (see Fig. 16). The lateral forces on the piles are hence a
reaction to a forced movement of the pile group. The maximum lateral
force of 180 kN was induced at Z/Lp ≤ 0.31. After subsequent
60
Computers and Geotechnics 101 (2018) 48–64
tunnelling the lateral force reduced 56% of that induced due to first
tunnelling. This is because of pile group tilted back as result of that the
second tunnelling induced-shear strain generated at the toe of pile P2
(see Fig. 18). The tilting of the pile group on the opposite side has re-
leased the reaction (i.e. lateral forces on the pile).
4.6.3. Lateral force distribution in test BB
Fig. 20(c) illustrates the computed induced lateral forces (Fx) in the
pile P1 after first and second tunnelling in test BB. Owing to tilting of
the pile cap (see Fig. 16), lateral forces on the pile induced as reaction
of forced movement of the pile group. The negative lateral forces in-
duced along the entire pile length except near pile head where positive
lateral forces were induced. It can be observed from the figure that
qualitatively, tunneling-induced lateral forces along the length of the
pile in test BB are similar to that of in test TT. The maximum lateral
force of 136 kN induced at Z/Lp ≤ 0.21. During subsequent tunnelling
in test BB, the lateral force reduced to 50 kN (64% of that of due to first
tunnelling) at Z/Lp ≤ 0.21. However, the lateral force increased by
200% of that during first tunnelling at the pile head.
4.7. Computed normal stresses acting on pile P1
Fig. 21(a), (b) and (c) shows the computed normal stress (horizontal
pressure) acting on pile P1 before and after excavation in tests SS, TT
and BB, respectively. Two directions were investigated: the front (F)
and back (B) of the pile, which correspond to their location relative to
the tunnels. Earth pressure at rest and Rankine active and passive earth
pressure (Ko, Ka and Kp lines, respectively) are included for comparison.
M.A. Soomro et al.
Fig. 20. Computed induced lateral forces along the length of pile P1 after first and second tunnelling (a) test SS (b) test TT (c) test BB.
Considering the normally consolidated condition, Ko is estimated by
K 0 = (1−sinφ′) [43]. Ka and Kp are calculated by K a = tan2 (45−φ′/2)
and Kp = tan2 (45 + φ′/2) , respectively. In these equations, φ′ is de-
termined as 31° [23]. Thus Ko, Ka and Kp are 0.51, 0.32, and 3.12, re-
spectively. Before twin tunnel excavation, normal stress along the pile
length in directions B and F was approximately equal to the Ko pressure.
It can be observed from Fig. 21(a) that after completion of first
61
Computers and Geotechnics 101 (2018) 48–64
tunnel (S), normal stress in both direction F and B decreased (with
maximum percentage reduction of 78% and 52%, respectively at tunnel
springline) dramatically at the middle portion of the pile (i.e. 0.30 ≤ Z/
Lp ≤ 0.8) which are lower than Rankine active earth pressure. Owing to
reduction in normal stresses in direction F and direction B, soil would
displace towards the first tunnel (see Fig. 17) and resulted in inducing
lateral force (see Fig. 20(a)), deflection (see Fig. 15(a)) and bending
M.A. Soomro et al.
Fig. 21. Computed normal stress acting on the pile in (a) test SS (b) test TT (c) test BB.
moment (see Fig. 12) in the pile. However, after subsequent tunnelling
on the other side of the pile group, the difference between normal
stresses in direction F and direction B decreased. Due to this reason, the
induced bending moment and deflection in the pile were reduced.
During twin tunnelling near the shaft (test SS), negligible changes in
normal stresses in both the directions were induced.
In test TT (see Fig. 21(b)), normal stresses in the pile decreased
(maximum reduction = 122 kPa) significantly in both directions at
lower portion of the pile (Z/Lp > 0.3) after first tunnelling. However,
the normal stress increased in the upper part of the pile, approaching
the Rankine passive earth pressure at shallow depths. This can be at-
tributed to the reaction force generated as result of forced movement of
pile and soil arching as discussed by Jacobsz et al. [26], Ng and Lee
[46]. Owing to the differences of normal stresses in the pile in at the
lower portion direction F and B, the pile toe displaced towards the first
tunnel and the lateral force was induced at the pile toe. In addition,
reduction of normal stresses in the pile at the lower portion, significant
bending moment (see Fig. 13) induced near pile head. Similarly, owing
to stress release due to second tunnelling adjacent to the pile toe (in test
62
Computers and Geotechnics 101 (2018) 48–64
TT) on the other side of the pile group, the normal stress at the lower
portion of the pile recovered slightly but with the difference in normal
stress in the pile in both directions. However, normal stresses at the
upper part of the pile further increased and reached to Rankine passive
earth pressure at Z/Lp > 0.03. As result of this, the pile toe displaced
towards almost its original position and induced lateral force near the
pile toe reduced insignificantly. On contrary, induced lateral forces
increased (with maximum increment of 16.5 kN) at upper part of the
pile.
Similar to tunnelling adjacent to the pile toe, the normal stress in
the pile lower portion (Z/Lp > 0.36) decreased in both directions (di-
rection F and direction B) with a difference of 10 kPa due to excavation
of the twin tunnelling below the pile toe in test BB as shown in
Fig. 21(c). However, the normal stress increased at the upper portion of
the pile (Z/Lp < 0.36) as result of forced movement (i.e. titling see
Fig. 16) of the pile group the earth pressure on the pile. The normal
stresses became less than the Rankine active earth pressure (Ka). Due to
the difference in normal stresses at the lower portion (Z/Lp > 0.45) of
the pile, lateral forces and deflection in the pile was induced.
M.A. Soomro et al.
Fig. 22. K/Ko variation a column between the first tunnel and pile P1.
Subsequent tunnelling caused further reduction in the normal stresses
at the lower portion (Z/Lp > 0.45) of the pile. However, normal
stresses increase at the upper portion of the pile approaching Rankine’s
passive earth pressure (Kp). This increment resulted additional induced
lateral forces at the upper part of the pile.
4.8. Variation of K/Ko along soil column near pile P1
Fig. 22 shows the K/Ko variation along a soil column between the
first tunnel and pile P1 before and after excavation in tests SS, TT and
BB, where K and K0 denote the lateral earth pressure coefficient and the
earth pressure coefficient at rest, respectively. K is calculated by di-
viding the horizontal stress by the vertical stress of soil along the soil
column. In addition, the Ka/Ko line (i.e. Ka/Ko = 0.64) is also shown for
comparison. Before tunnelling, the soil column experienced almost at-
rest earth pressure. However, the K/Ko increases near the pile head and
toe due to pile group loading.
Owing to the stress relief due to twin tunnelling in test SS, the earth
pressure coefficient decreased at along the mid-portion of the soil
column (i.e. 0 ≤ Z/Lp ≤ 0.62). The value of K approached Rankine
active earth pressure coefficient (Ka). In contrast, the value of K in-
creased at the upper and lower parts of the soil column. This can be
attributed to the force pile group movement towards tunnelling (i.e.
tilting) generating reaction force and soil arching as discussed by
Jacobsz et al. [26] and Ng and Lee [46]. During subsequent tunnel on
the other of the pile group in test SS, the value of K decrease slightly at
the upper part of the pile. In contrast to reduction of the value of K in
the soil column at the tunnel springline (at Z/Lp = 0.67) due to twin
tunnelling in test SS, the values of K increased substantially along entire
length of the soil column in tests TT and BB.
5. Summary and conclusions
In this paper, a series of three-dimensional centrifuge model tests
and numerical simulations using an advanced hypoplastic soil model
were carried out to investigate the lateral response of an existing 2 × 2
pile group to advancement of side-by-side twin tunnels at various
depths in dry sand. Side-by-side twin tunnels (excavated one after the
other on both sides of the pile group) were simulated in-flight by
63
Computers and Geotechnics 101 (2018) 48–64
controlling 1% volume loss at three critical locations relative to the pile
group, namely near the mid-depth of pile shaft (test SS), next to (test
TT), and below (test BB) the toe of the pile group. Based on the ground
conditions, geometries and tunnelling method simulated, the following
conclusions can be drawn
(a) The most significant lateral movement of the pile cap induced after
the completion of the first tunnel in each test. Among the three
tests, the largest and the smallest lateral movement of the pile cap
resulted from tunnelling below the pile toe (i.e. test TT) and near
mid-depth of the pile shaft (i.e. test SS), respectively. The induced
final cap movement after excavation of first tunnel in tests SS, TT
and BB were 1.7, 9.5 and 2.8 mm (i.e. 0.21%, 1.2% and 0.34% of
pile diameter), respectively.
(b) Among the three tests reported, induced bending moment (which
exceeds the pile BM capacity of 850 kN m) and pile deflection can
be critical when first tunnelling advanced adjacent to pile toe (i.e.
test TT). The maximum lateral displacement of 0.75% of pile dia-
meter was induced at the pile head after completion of the first
tunnelling. However, the induced bending moment along the pile
decreased significantly due to the excavation of the second tunnel
in each case. This is because of the side-by-side twin tunnelling
configuration in which the second tunnel caused a stress release on
the opposite side of the pile.
(c) This suggests that structural integrity of piles should be carefully
checked and protected in the design and construction of tunnelling
adjacent to existing pile foundations, especially for piles in group
and pile-raft foundations.
(d) In addition to vertical load transfer along each pile and load re-
distribution among piles in the group (discussed by Ng et al. [48]),
lateral forces (shearing forces to the pile group) also induced in
piles during twin tunnelling. This can be because of reaction to pile
group lateral movement. Among three test, maximum lateral force
of 200 kN (i.e. 15% of the working load shared by each pile) in-
duced in the pile at Z/Lp ≤ 0.50 in test SS.
Readers should be reminded that the above conclusions are drawn
from four centrifuge tests and back-analyses of the tests in dry sand
only. Any extrapolation from these results should be treated with cau-
tion.”
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support pro-
vided by Quaid-e-Awam University of Engineering, Science &
Technology, Sindh and Pakistan and the Research Grants Council of the
HKSAR (General Research Fund Project No. 16207414).
References
[1] Atkinson JH, Richardson D, Stallebrass SE. Effect of recent stress history on the
stiffness of over consolidated soil. Géotechnique 1990;40(4):531–40.
[2] Atkinson JH, Sällfors G. Experimental determination of stress-strain-time char-
acteristics in laboratory and in-situ tests. General report. In: Proceedings of 10th
European conference on soil mechanics and foundation engineering, Florence, Italy,
vol. 3; 1991. p. 915–56.
[3] Avgerinos V, Potts DM, Standing JR. Numerical investigation on existing tunnels.
Géotechnique 2017;67(9):808–22.
[4] Basile F. Effects of tunnelling on pile foundations. Soils Found 2014;54(3):280–95.
[5] Bezuijen A, Van der Schrier JS. The influence of a bored tunnel on pile foundations.
In: Proceedings of centrifuge’94, Belkema, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; 1994. p.
681–6.
[6] Boonyarak T, Phisitkul K, Ng CWW, Teparaksa W, Aye ZZ. Observed ground and
pile group responses due to tunneling in Bangkok stiff clay. Can Geotech J
2014;51(5):479–95.
[7] Chen LT, Poulos HG, Loganathan N. Pile responses caused by tunneling. J Geotech
Geoenviron Eng 1999;125(3):207–15.
[8] Cheng CY, Dasari GR, Chow YK, Leung CF. Finite element analysis of tunnel-soil-pile
interaction using displacement controlled model. Tunn Undergr Space Technol
2007;22:450–66.
M.A. Soomro et al.
[9] Coutts DR, Wang J. Monitoring of reinforced concrete piles under horizontal and
vertical loads. In: Proceeding of the international conference on tunnels and un-
derground structures, Singapore; 2000. p. 541–6.
[10] Dias TGS, Bezuijen A. Data analysis of pile tunnel interaction. J Geotech Geoenviron
Eng 2015:04015051. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0001350.
[11] Fioravante V. On the shaft friction modelling of non-displacement piles in sand.
Soils Found 2002;42(2):23–33.
[13] Franza A, Marshall AM. Centrifuge modelling of tunnelling beneath axially loaded
displacement and non-displacement piles in sand. In: Branson TL, Valentine RJ,
editors. Proc, geotechnical frontiers. GSP 277: transportation facilities, structures,
and site investigation. Reston (VA): ASCE; 2017b. p. 576–86.
[15] Franza A, Marshall AM. Centrifuge modeling study of the response of piled struc-
tures to tunneling. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 2018;144(2):04017109.
[16] Fuglsang LD, Ovesen NK. The theory of modelling to centrifuge studies, centrifuge
in soil mechanics. Craig, James, Schofield, editors. Balkema, Rotterdam; 1988.
[17] Gudehus G. A comprehensive constitutive equation for granular materials. Soils
Found 1996;36(1):1–12.
[18] Gudehus G, Mašín D. Graphical representation of constitutive equations.
Géotechnique 2009;59(2):147–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/geot.2007.00155.
[19] Herle I, Gudehus G. Determination of parameters of a hypoplastic constitutive
model from properties of grain assemblies. Mech Cohesive Frictional Mater
1999;4(5):461–86.
[20] Hibbitt, Karlsson, Sorensen. Abaqus user’s manual, version 6.8.2. Providence, RI,
USA: Hibbitt, Karlsson & Sorensen Inc; 2008.
[21] Huang M, Zhang C, Li Z. A simplified analysis method for the influence of tunnelling
on grouped piles. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 2009;24:410–22.
[22] Hu ZF, Yue ZQ, Tham LG. Design and construction of a deep excavation in soft soils
adjacent to the Shanghai Metro tunnels. Can Geotech J 2003;40:933–48.
[23] Hong Y, Soomro MA, Ng CWW. Settlement and load transfer mechanism of pile
group due to side-by-side twin tunnelling. Comput Geotech 2015;64(105):119.
[24] Ishihara K. Liquefaction and flow failure during earthquakes. Géotechnique
1993;43(3):351–415.
[25] Jáky J. The coefficient of earth pressure at rest. J Soc Hungarian Arch AndEng
1944;355–8 [in Hungarian].
[26] Jacobsz SW, Standing JR, Mair RJ, Hahiwara T, Suiyama T. Centrifuge modeling of
tunnelling near driven piles. Soil Found 2004;44(1):49–56.
[27] Jongpradist P, Kaewsri T, Sawatparnich A, Suwansawat S, Youwai S, Kongkitkul W,
et al. Development of tunneling influence zones for adjacent pile foundations by
numerical analyses. Tunnell Undergr Space Technol 2013;34(Feb):96–109.
[28] Kishida H, Uesugi M. Tests of the interface between sand and steel in the simple
shear apparatus. Géotechnique 1987;37(1):45–52.
[29] Kolymbas D. An outline of hypoplasticity. Arch Appl Mech 1991;61(3):143–51.
[30] Korff M, Mair RJ, Van Tol FAF. Pile-soil interaction and settlement effects induced
by deep excavations. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 2016;142(8):04016034.
[31] Lee CJ, Chiang KH. Responses of single piles to tunnelling-induced soil movements
in sandy ground. Can Geotech J 2007;44(10):1224–41.
[32] Lee CJ. Numerical analysis of the interface shear transfer mechanism of a single pile
to tunnelling in weathered residual soil. Comput Geotech 2002;42:193–203.
[33] Lee CJ. Three-dimensional numerical analyses of the response of a single pile and
pile groups to tunnelling in weak weathered rock. Tunn Undergr Space Technol
2012;32:132–42.
[35] Lee GTK, Ng CWW. The effects of advancing open face tunneling on an existing
loaded pile. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng, ASCE 2005;131(2):193–201.
[36] Loganathan N, Poulos HG, Stewart DP. Centrifuge model testing of tunnelling-in-
duced ground and pile deformations. Géotechnique 2000;50(3):283–94.
[37] Loganathan N, Poulos HG, Xu KJ. Ground and pile group responses due to tun-
neling. Soils Found 2001;41(1):57–67.
[38] Maeda K, Miura K. Relative density of dependency of mechanical properties of
sands. Soils Found 1999;39(1):69–79.
[39] Marshal AM. Tunnelling in sand and its effect on pipelines and piles. Engineering
Department, Cambridge University; 2009.
64
Computers and Geotechnics 101 (2018) 48–64
[40] Marshall AM, Mair RJ. Tunneling beneath driven or jacked end-bearing piles in
sand. Can Geotech J 2011;48(12):1757–71.
[41] Marshall AM. Tunnel-pile interaction analysis using cavity expansion methods. J
Geotech Geo Environ Eng 2012;138(10):1237–46.
[42] Marshall AM, Haji T. An analytical study of tunnel-pile-interaction. Tunnell
Undergr Space Technol 2015;45(Jan):43–51.
[43] Mayne P, Kulhawy F. K0-OCR relationships in soils. J Geotech Eng ASCE
1982;108(6):851–72.
[44] Mroueh H, Shahrour I. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of the interaction
between tunnelling and pile foundations. Int J Numer Anal Meth Geomech
2002;26:217–30.
[46] Ng CWW, Lee GTK. Three-dimensional ground settlements and stress transfer me-
chanisms due to open-face tunnelling. Can Geotech J 2005;42(4):1015–29.
[47] Ng CWW, Lu H. Effects of construction sequence of twin tunnelling at different
depth on a single pile. Can Geotech J 2013;51(2):173–83.
[48] Ng CWW, Lu H, Peng SY. Three-dimensional centrifuge modelling of effects of twin
tunnelling on as existing pile. Tunnell Undergr Space Technol 2013;35:189–99.
[49] Ng CWW, Soomro MA, Hong Y. Three-dimensional centrifuge modelling of pile
group responses to side-by-side twin tunnelling. Tunn Undergr Space Technol
2014;43:350–61.
[50] Ng CWW. The 6th ZENG Guo-xi Lecture: the State-of-the-Art centrifuge modelling
of geotechnical problems at HKUST. J Zhejiang Univ – Sci A (Appl Phys Eng)
2014;15:1–21.
[51] Ng CWW, Hong Y, Soomro MA. Effects of piggyback twin tunnelling on a pile group:
3D centrifuge tests and numerical modelling. Géotechnique 2015;65(1):38–51.
[52] Niemunis A, Herle I. Hypoplastic model for cohesionless soils with elastic strain
range. Mech Cohesive-Frict Mater 1997;2:279–99.
[53] Pang CH, Yong KY, Chow YK. Three dimensional numerical simulation of tunnel
advancement on adjacent pile foundation. In: Erdem Y, Solak, T, editor.
Underground space use: analysis of the past and lessons for the future. London:
Taylor and Francis; 2005. p. 1141–7.
[54] Peng SY. Influence of stress relief due to deep excavation on capacity of pile
foundations [Ph.D. thesis]. Hong Kong University of Science and Technology; 2012.
[55] Selemetas D. The response of full-scale piles and pile structures to tunneling [Ph.D.
thesis]. Cambridge University; 2005.
[56] Soomro MA, Hong Y, Ng CWW, Lu H, Peng SY. Load transfer mechanism in pile
group due to single tunnel advancement in stiff clay. Tunn Undergr Space Technol
2015;45:63–72.
[57] Von Wolffersdorff PA. A hypoplastic relationship for granular materials with a
predefined limit state surface. Mech. Cohesive-frictional Mater 1 1996;No. 3:251,
271.
[58] Zhang RJ, Zheng JJ, Zhang LM, Pu HF. An analysis method for the influence of
tunneling on adjacent loaded pile groups with rigid elevated caps. Int J Numer Anal
Methods Geomech 2011;35(18):1949–71.
Further reading
[12] Franza A, Marshall AM. A centrifuge modelling study of the response of piled
structures to tunneling. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 2017http://dx.doi.org/10.
17639/nott.74.
[14] Franza A, Marshall AM, Haji T, Abdelatif AO, Carbonari S, Morici M. A simplified
elastic analysis of tunnel-piled structure interaction. Tunnell Undergr Space
Technol 2017;61(Jan):104–21.
[34] Lee CJ. Numerical analysis of pile response to open face tunnelling in stiff clay.
Comput Geotech 2013;42:116–27.
[45] Ng CWW, Yau TLY, Li JHM, Tang WH. New failure load criterion for large diameter
bored piles in weathered geomaterials. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng, ASCE
2001;127(6):488–98.