Modeling maximum surface settlement due to EPBM tunneling by various soft computing techniques

  • Sayed Rahim Moeinossadat
  • Kaveh Ahangari
  • Kourosh Shahriar
State-of-the-Art Paper


There are various methods to predict the settlement caused by shallow tunneling, with each method having particular strengths and weaknesses. However, the most important weakness of common methods is the failure to consider all parameters contributing into the settlement. Nowadays, earth pressure balance machines (EPBMs) are commonly applied for tunneling into soft grounds. In this tunneling method, many parameters affect resultant surface settlement, it difficult to estimate the settlement by traditional methods. Soft computing, however, can be devised to cope with such engineering limitations. The aim of this study is to evaluate the ability of the soft computing methods of neuro-genetic system (NGS), adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS), and gene expression programming (GEP) to predict maximum surface settlement (S max) caused by tunneling in Shanghai Subway LRT Line 2 project. For this purpose, S max is considered as a function of geometric, strength and operational factors, with the factors combined using different methods to reconstruct different models. The results showed that the models with operational factors outperformed other models. Among tested methods, ANFIS and NGS presented the best and the worst forecasts, respectively. With respect to the results of this research, it can be said that, despite the fact that GEP had lower accuracy in comparison to ANFIS, it represented the most suitable method to estimate S max , because of providing useful mathematical equations.


Shallow tunnel Surface settlement Earth pressure balance machine (EPBM) Neuro-genetic system (NGS) Adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS) Gene expression programming (GEP) 


  1. 1.
    Ahangari K, Moeinossadat SR, Behnia D (2015) Estimation of tunnelling-induced settlement by modern intelligent methods. Soils Found 55(4):737–748. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    An H, Sun J, Hu X (2004) Study on intelligent method of prediction by small samples for ground settlement in shield tunnelling. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 30th ITA-AITES World Tunnel Congress C, 2004Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Attewell PB, Yeates J, Selby AR (1986) Soil movements induced by tunnelling and their effects on pipelines and structures. Blackies and Sons Ltd, LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Behnia D, Ahangari K, Noorzad A, Moeinossadat SR (2013) Predicting crest settlement in concrete face rockfill dams using adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system and gene expression programming intelligent methods. J Zhejiang Univ Sci A (Appl Phys Eng) 14(8):589–602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Behnia D, Moeinossadat SR, Behnia B, Behnia M, Safari Gorji A, Zakerian P (2014) prediction of settlement in sloping core rockfill dams using soft-computing. Res Civil Environ Eng (RCEE) 2(02):55–65. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Boubou R, Emeriault F, Kastner R (2010) Artificial neural network application for the prediction of ground surface movements induced by shield tunnelling. Can Geotech J 47(11):1214–1233. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cha D, Blumenstein M, Zhang H, Jeng DS (2008) A neural-genetic technique for coastal engineering: determining wave-induced seabed liquefaction depth. Eng Evolut Intell Syst 82:337–351. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Darabi A, Ahangari K, Noorzad A, Arab A (2012) subsidence estimation utilizing various approaches–a case study: Tehran no. 3 subway line. Tunn undergr sp tech 31:117–127. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ferreira C (2001) Gene expression programming: a new adaptive algorithm for solving problems. Complex Syst 13(2):87–129Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Garg A, Tai K, Vijayaraghavan V, Singru Pravin M (2014) Mathematical modelling of burr height of the drilling process using a statistical-based multi-gene genetic programming approach. Int J Adv Manuf Tech 73:113–126. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hecht-Nielsen R (1987) Kolmogorov’s mapping neural network existence theorem. In: Proceedings of first IEEE international conference on neural networks, San Dieg, pp 11–14Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hou J, Zhang M, Tu M (2009) Prediction of surface settlements induced by shield tunneling: An ANFIS model. Taylor & Francis Group, London, pp 551–554. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hush DR (1989) Classification with neural networks: a performance analysis. In: Proceedings of IEEE international conference systems Eng, Dayton. Ohio, pp 277–280Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jalalifar H, Mojedifar S, Sahebi AA, Nezamabadi-pour H (2011) Application of the adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system for prediction of a rock engineering classification system. Comput Geotech 38:783–790. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jang JSR (1993) ANFIS: adaptive-Network-Based fuzzy inference systems. IEEE Transact Syst, Man Cybern 23(3):665–685. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jang JSR, Sun CT (1997) Neuro-Fuzzy modeling and control. In: Proceedings IEEE 83(3):378–406. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jang JSR, Sun CT, Mizutani E (1997) Neuro-Fuzzy and Soft Computing A Computational Approach to Learning and Machine Intelligence. Prentice Hall, 640PGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kanellopoulos I, Wilkinson GG (1997) Strategies and best practice for neural network image classification. Int J Remote Sens 18:711–725. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kartalopoulos SV (1996) Understanding neural networks and fuzzy logic. Basic concepts and applications. IEEE, Press, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kayadelen C (2011) Soil liquefaction modeling by gene expression programming and Neuro-Fuzzy. Expert Syst Appl 38:4080–4087. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kim CY, Bae G, Hong S, Park C, Moon H, Shin H (2001) Neural network based prediction of ground surface settlements due to tunnelling. Comput Geotech 28(6):517–547. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kosko B (1991) Neural networks and fuzzy systems: a dynamical approach to machine intelligence. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, p 449PGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Majdi A, Beiki M (2010) Evolving neural network using a genetic algorithm for predicting the deformation modulus of rock masses. I J Rock Mech Min Sci 47:246–253. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Masters T (1994) Practical neural network recipes in C ++. Academic Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Neaupane KM, Adhikari N (2006) Prediction of tunneling-induced ground movement with the multi-layer perceptron. Tunn Undergr Sp Technol 21(2):151–159. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ocak I, Seker SE (2013) Calculation of surface settlements caused by EPBM tunneling using artificial neural network, SVM, and Gaussian processes. Environ Earth Sci 70(3):1263–1276. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Osman MS, Abo-sina MA, Mousa AAA (2004) Combined genetic algorithm-fuzzy logic controller (GA-FLC) in nonlinear programming. J Appl Math Comput 170(2):821–840CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Rajabi M, Bohloli B, Gholampour Ahangar E (2010) Intelligent approaches for prediction of compressional, shear and Stoneley wave velocities from conventional well log data: a case study from the Sarvak carbonate reservoir in the Abadan Plain (Southwestern Iran). Comput Geosci 36:647–664. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ripley BD (1993) Statistical aspects of neural networks. In: Barndoff-Neilsen OE, Jensen JL, Kendall WS (eds) Networks and chaos-statistical and probabilistic aspects. Chapman & Hall, London, pp 40–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Shi J, Ortigao J, Bai J (1998) Modular neural networks for predicting settlements during tunneling. J geotech geoenvironmental eng 124(5):389–395. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Singh R, Kainthola A, Singh TN (2012) Estimation of elastic constant of rocks using an ANFIS approach. Appl Soft Comput 12:40–45. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Suwansawat S, Einstein HH (2006) Artificial neural networks for predicting the maximum surface settlement caused by EPB shield tunneling. Tunn Underg Sp Tech 21(2):133–150. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Suwansawat S (2006) Using artificial neural networks for predicting surface settlements over twin tunnels. In: international symposium on underground excavation and tunnelling, Bangkok, Thailand, pp 309–318Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Tarawneh B (2013) Pipe pile setup: database and prediction model using artificial neural network. Soils Found 53(4):607–615. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Qiao J, Liu J, Guo W, Zhang Y (2010) Artificial neural network to predict the surface maximum settlement by shield tunneling. In: ICIRA’10 proceedings of the third international conference on intelligent robotics and applications, pp 257–265. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wang CA (1994) Theory of generalization in learning machines with neural application. Ph. D thesis, University of Pennsylvania, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Whittaker B, Reddish D (1989) Subsidence: occurrence, prediction and control (Developments in Geotechnical Engineering, 56). Elsevier, Amsterdam, p 528PGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mining Engineering, Science and Research BranchIslamic Azad UniversityTehranIran
  2. 2.Department of Mining and Metallurgical EngineeringAmirkabir University of TechnologyTehranIran

Personalised recommendations