Performance of an existing raft foundation rested on granular soils due to TBM tunneling process

  • Ahmed M. ElMouchi
  • Asmaa M. Hassan
  • Mohamed I. Amer
GeoMEast2017
  • 53 Downloads
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Geotechnical Engineering for Urban and Major Infrastructure Development

Abstract

In urban areas, there is a necessity to evaluate the performance of existing structures during and after the construction of nearby tunnels. Therefore, a 3D numerical modeling technique is needed to consider the geometrical interactions between the tunnel and the existing structures. To validate the results of 3D numerical simulation for the tunneling process, the surface settlement trough resulted from the numerical model has been compared with field measurements of a selected case study (Second Heinenoord Tunnel in Netherlands). The 3D finite element model has also been used to evaluate the raft settlements and bending moments. The study is performed during and after the tunnel advancement process. In addition, the effect of related parameters, such as soil relative density (Dr), tunnel diameter (D), tunnel cover (Z), horizontal clearance between the raft centerline and the tunnel centerline (CL), raft inclination angle (i), and raft thickness (d), have been studied.

Keywords

PLAXIS 3D Tunnel diameter Tunnel cover Horizontal clearance between raft centerline and tunnel centerline Raft inclination Raft thickness 

References

  1. Jacobsz SW, Standing JR, Mair RJ, Hagiwara T, Sugiyama (2004) Centrifuge modelling of tunnelling near driven piles. Soils Found 44(1):49-56.  https://doi.org/10.3208/sandf.44.49
  2. Kun M (2014) The effect of shallow depth tunnelling on aboveground constructions. Arab J Geosci 8:5247-5256.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-014-1507-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Maleki MH, Sereshteh M, Mousivand M, Bayat (2011) An equivalent beam model for the analysis of tunnel-building interaction. Tunnell Underground Space Technol 26(4):524-533.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2011.02.006
  4. Moeinossadat SR, Ahangari K, Shahriar K (2017) Modeling maximum surface settlement due to EPBM tunneling by various soft computing techniques. Innov Infrastructure Solut 3:10.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-017-0114-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Moller S (2006) Tunnel induced settlements and structural forces in lining. Dissertation, University of StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  6. Mroueh H, Shahrour I (2003) A full 3-D finite element analysis of tunneling–adjacent structures interaction. J Comput Geotech 30:245–253.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0266-352X(02)00047-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Muir Wood AM (1975) The circular tunnel in elastic ground. Geotechnique 25(1):115–127.  https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.1975.25.1.115 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. O’Reilly MP, New BM (1982) Settlements above tunnels in the United Kingdom: their magnitude and prediction. Proc. Tunneling’82, Brighton, p 173–181. http://worldcat.org/isbn/090048862X
  9. Peck RB (1969) Deep excavation and tunneling in soft ground. In: Proceedings of 7th International Conference on Soil mechanic Foundation Engineering, Mexico, State-of-the-Art Volume, p 225–290Google Scholar
  10. Sugiyama T, Hagiwara T, Nomoto T, Nomoto M, Ano Y, Mair RJ, Bolton MD, Soga K (1999) Observations of ground movements during tunnel construction by slurry shield method at the Docklands Light Railway Lewisham extension – East London. Soils Found 39(3):99–112.  https://doi.org/10.3208/sandf.39.3_99 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Saudi Society for Geosciences 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ahmed M. ElMouchi
    • 1
  • Asmaa M. Hassan
    • 2
  • Mohamed I. Amer
    • 2
  1. 1.Faculty of EngineeringCairo UniversityGizaEgypt
  2. 2.Public Works Department, Faculty of EngineeringCairo UniversityGizaEgypt

Personalised recommendations