Science China Technological Sciences

, Volume 58, Issue 12, pp 2139–2152 | Cite as

Post-failure behavior of tunnel heading collapse by MPM simulation

  • XueSong Cheng
  • Gang Zheng
  • K. Soga
  • S. S. Bandara
  • K. Kumar
  • Yu Diao
  • Jie Xu
Article

Abstract

Tunnel collapse presents a serious threat to the safety of urban construction. The traditional approach adopted to assess this risk is to evaluate the factor of safety against failure. However, this analysis only determines on whether the tunnel will collapse or not, and does not provide information on the magnitude of the post-failure behavior (for example, catastrophic or progressive) if the tunnel collapse occurs. In this study, a meshless method based on the material point method (MPM) was used to investigate the post-failure behavior of tunnel heading collapse in two-dimensional plane-strain conditions. The capability and accuracy of MPM were verified by comparing the elicited results to centrifuge test data and to analytical solutions obtained from limit state methods. MPM simulations were conducted at different soil conditions (clay or sand) and profiles (homogenous or linear increasing strength) as well as at different tunnel geometries (i.e. tunnel depth and unlined length). The differences in the post-failure behavior and mechanisms are examined and reported.

Keywords

tunnel stability collapse mechanism material point method large deformation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Seidenfuß T. Collapses in tunneling. Dissertation of Master Degree. Stuttgart: Stuttgart University of Applied Sciences, 2006Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    HSE. Safety of New Austrian Tunnelling Method (NATM) Tunnels. London: HSE Books, 1996Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    CEDD. Catalogue of notable tunnel failure case histories. Hong Kong: Civil Engineering and Development Department of Hong Kong, 2008Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mair R J. Centrifugal modelling of tunnel construction in soft clay. Dissertation of Doctor Degree. Cambridge: University of Cambridge, 1979Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Potts D M. Behaviour of lined and unlined tunnels in sand. Dissertation of Doctor Degree. Cambridge: University of Cambridge, 1976Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Atkinson J, Potts D. Stability of a shallow circular tunnel in cohesionless soil. Geotechnique, 1977, 27: 203–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chambon P, Corté J F. Shallow tunnels in cohesionless soil: Stability of tunnel face. J Geotech Eng-ASCE, 1994, 120: 1148–1165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sloan S, Assadi A. Undrained stability of a plane strain heading. Can Geotech J, 1994, 31: 443–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Vermeer P A, Ruse N, Marcher T. Tunnel heading stability in drained ground. Felsbau, 2002, 20: 8–18Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Callari C. The application of a strong-discontinuity fem to the analysis of strain localization induced by underground openings. In: Proceedings of the Eighth International Symposium on Numerical Models in Geomechanics, Rotterdam: Balkema, 2002. 163–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chatawut C. Fundamental study on design and stability of tunnel structures. Dissertation of Doctor Degree. Kyoto: Kyoto University, 2005Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wilson D, Abbo A, Sloan S, et al. Undrained stability of dual square tunnels. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference of International Association for Computer Methods and Advances in Geomechanics, Goa: IACMAG, 2008. 4284–4291Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wilson D W, Abbo A J, Sloan S W, et al. Undrained stability of a circular tunnel where the shear strength increases linearly with depth. Can Geotech, 2011, 48: 1328–1342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kim S H, Tonon F. Face stability and required support pressure for tbm driven tunnels with ideal face membrane–drained case. Tunn Undergr Sp Tech, 2010, 25: 526–542CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yamamoto K, Lyamin A V, Wilson D W, et al. Stability of a circular tunnel in cohesive-frictional soil subjected to surcharge loading. Comput Geotech, 2011, 38: 504–514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sloan S, Assadi A. Undrained stability of a square tunnel in a soil whose strength increases linearly with depth. Comput Geotech, 1991, 12: 321–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Assadi A, Sloan S W. Undrained stability of shallow square tunnel. J Geotech Eng-ASCE, 1991, 117: 1152–1173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Augarde C, Lyamin A, Sloan S. Stability of an undrained plane strain heading revisited. Comput Geotech, 2003, 30: 419–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yamamoto K, Lyamin A V, Wilson D W, et al. Stability of a single tunnel in cohesive–frictional soil subjected to surcharge loading. Can Geotech J, 2011, 48: 1841–1854CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Yamamoto K, Lyamin A V, Wilson DW, et al. Stability of dual circular tunnels in cohesive-frictional soil subjected to surcharge loading. Comput Geotech, 2013, 50: 41–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wilson D W, Abbo A J, Sloan S W, et al. Undrained stability of a square tunnel where the shear strength increases linearly with depth. Comput Geotech, 2013, 49: 314–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kamata H, Mashimo H. Centrifuge model test of tunnel face reinforcement by bolting. Tunn Undergr Sp Tech, 2003, 18: 205–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zhang Z, Hu X, Scott K D. A discrete numerical approach for modeling face stability in slurry shield tunnelling in soft soils. Comput Geotech, 2011, 38: 94–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Chen R, Tang L, Ling D, et al. Face stability analysis of shallow shield tunnels in dry sandy ground using the discrete element method. Comput Geotech, 2011, 38: 187–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zhang Q, Huang T, Huang G Y, et al. Theoretical model for loads prediction on shield tunneling machine with consideration of soil-rock interbedded ground. Sci China Tech Sci, 2013, 56: 2259–2267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wieckowski Z. The material point method in large strain engineering problems. Comput Method Appl M, 2004, 193: 4417–4438CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sulsky D, Chen Z, Schreyer H L. A particle method for history-dependent materials. Computer Comput Method Appl M, 1994, 118: 179–196CrossRefMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bardenhagen S, Kober E. The generalized interpolation material point method. Cmes-Comp Model Eng, 2004, 5: 477–496Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sulsky D, Zhou S J, Schreyer H L. Application of a particle-in-cell method to solid mechanics. Comput Phys Commun, 1995, 87: 236–252CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Coetzee C, Vermeer P, Basson A. The modelling of anchors using the material point method. Int J Numer Anal Met, 2005, 29: 879–895CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Andersen S, Andersen L. Modelling of landslides with the material-point method. Computat Geosci, 2010, 14: 137–147CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Vermeer P, Beuth L, Benz T. A quasi-static method for large deformation problems in geomechanics. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference of International Association for Computer Methods and Advances in Geomechanics, Goa: IACMAG, 2008. 55–63Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    York A R, Sulsky D, Schreyer H L. The material point method for simulation of thin membranes. Int J Numer Anal Met, 1999, 44: 1429–1456CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    York A R, Sulsky D, Schreyer H L. Fluid–membrane interaction based on the material point method. Int J Numer Anal Met, 2000, 48: 901–924CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Bandara S S. Material point method to simulate large deformation problems in fluid-saturated granular medium. Dissertation of Doctor Degree. Cambridge: University of Cambridge, 2013Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Davis E, Gunn M, Mair R, et al. The stability of shallow tunnels and underground openings in cohesive material. Geotechnique, 1980, 30: 397–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Krause T. Schildvortrieb mit fl¨ussigkeits-und erdgest¨utzter ortsbrust (in German). Dissertation of Doctor Degree. Braunschweig: Technischen Universit at Carolo-Wilhelmina, 1987Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Broere W. Tunnel face stability & new cpt applications. Dissertation of Doctor Degree. Delft: Delft University, 2001Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Mair R J, Taylor R N. Theme lecture: Bored tunneling in the urban environment. In: Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Hamburg: Balkema, 1999. 2353–2385Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Ladd C C. Stability evaluation during staged construction. J Geotech Eng-ASCE, 1991, 117: 540–615CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Science China Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • XueSong Cheng
    • 1
    • 2
  • Gang Zheng
    • 1
    • 2
  • K. Soga
    • 3
  • S. S. Bandara
    • 3
  • K. Kumar
    • 3
  • Yu Diao
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jie Xu
    • 2
  1. 1.MOE Key Laboratory of Coast Civil Structure SafetyTianjin UniversityTianjinChina
  2. 2.Department of Civil EngineeringTianjin UniversityTianjinChina
  3. 3.Department of EngineeringUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUK

Personalised recommendations