Influence of Young’s Modulus and Poisson’s Ratio on the Displacement Around a Circular Tunnel

  • A. K. Verma
  • T. N. Singh
Part of the Society of Earth Scientists Series book series (SESS)


Elastic parameters such as Young’s modulus and Poisson’s ratio are significant to demarcate the damage zone around circular opening of tunnels. In the present study, a three dimensional finite difference numerical code, FLAC3D has been employed to study the effect of elastic parameters (E and v) on the radial displacement along the longitudinal direction around circular tunnel in hydrostatic field conditions. The tunnel is assumed to be driven in a homogeneous, isotropic, linear elastic rock mass. The results are compared with work done by previous researchers. Also, volumetric strain around tunnel and its behavior near the tunnel face have also been investigated to examine the failure behavior near the tunnel face. The material properties incorporated in the numerical model were taken in the range of common Indian rocks strength properties where most of the tunneling activities are going on. The empirical equation based on influence of Young’s modulus and Poisson’s ratio on radial deformation along the longitudinal axis of tunnel has been provided. Also, the relations between elastic parameters (E and v) and radial displacement has been proposed for future use in similar rock conditions.


Rock Mass Volumetric Strain Radial Displacement Critical Distance Tunnel Face 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Abel JF, Lee FT (1973) Stress changes ahead of an advancing tunnel. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 10:673–679CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bieniawski ZT (1978) Determining rock mass deformability: experience from case histories. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 15:237–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brady BHG, Brown ET (1985) Rock mechanics for underground mining. Allen & Unwin, LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. Carranza-Torres C, Fairhurst C (2000) Application of the convergence confinement method of tunnel design to rock masses that satisfy the Hoek–Brown failure criterion. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 15(2):187–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Corbetta F, Bernaud D, Nguyen-Minh D (1991) Contribution a la ` method convergerce–confinement par le principe de la similitude. Rev Fr Geotech 54:5–11Google Scholar
  6. Guilloux A, Bretelle S, Bienvenue F (1996) Prise en compte des pre-soutenements dans le dimensionnement des tunnels. Rev Fr Geotech 76:3–16Google Scholar
  7. Hoek E, Brown ET (1980) Underground excavations in rock. Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, London, pp 84–96Google Scholar
  8. Itasca (1997) FLAC3D fast Lagrangian analysis of continua in 3 dimensions V.2.0. Itasca Consulting Group, Inc., MinnepolisGoogle Scholar
  9. Jaeger JC, Cook NGW (1976) Fundamentals of rock mechanics, 2nd edn. Chapman & Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  10. Niwa Y, Kobayashi S, Fukui T (1979) Stresses and displacements around an advancing face of a tunnel. In: Proceedings of the 4th international congress on rock mechanics, vol 1, ISRM. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 703–710Google Scholar
  11. Obert L, Duvall WI (1967) Rock mechanics and the design of structures in rock. Wiley, New York, 650 pGoogle Scholar
  12. Panet M (1993) Understanding deformations in tunnels. In: Hudson JA, Brown ET, Fairhurst C, Hoek E (eds) Comprehensive rock engineering, vol 1. Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp 663–690Google Scholar
  13. Panet M (1995) Calcul desT unnels par la Methode de Convergence–Confinement. Presses de l’Ecole Nationale des Ponts et Chaussees, Paris, p 178Google Scholar
  14. Panet M, Guenot A (1982) Analysis of convergence behind the face of a tunnel. In: Proceedings of the international symposium on tunnelling, London, pp 197–204Google Scholar
  15. Pellet F, Verma AK (2006) The effect of excavation rate on tunnel stability. Technical session 3H, A168. In: Second international congress on computational mechanics and simulation (ICCMS 06). IIT, GuwahatiGoogle Scholar
  16. Pelli F, Kaiser PK, Morgenstern NR (1991) The influence of near face behaviour on monitoring of deep tunnels. Can Geotech J 28:226–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Sakurai S (1978) Approximate time-dependent analysis of tunnel support structure considering progress of tunnel face. Int J Numer Anal Methods Geomech 2:159–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Serafim JL, Pereira JP (1983) Consideration of the geomechanics classification of Bieniawski. In: Proceedings of international symposium on engineering geology and underground constructions, Lisbon, pp 1133–1144Google Scholar
  19. Singh TN, Verma AK (2007) Evaluating the slope instability of the Amiya slide. In: Eberhardt E, Stead D, Morrison T (eds) Rock mechanics. Meeting society challenges and demand. Taylor & Francis, London, pp 993–998CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Singh TN, Verma AK (2009) Stress response around fracture surface under uniaxial loading. e-Journal Earth Sci India 2(3):148–159Google Scholar
  21. Sitharam TG, Maji VB, Verma AK (2005) Equivalent continuum analyses of jointed rockmass. In: 40th U.S. symposium on rock mechanics (USRMS): rock mechanics for energy, mineral and infrastructure development in the northern regions, Alaska, pp 25–29Google Scholar
  22. Sulem J, Panet M, Guenot A (1987) An analytical solution for time dependent displacements in a circular tunnel. Int J Rock Mech Min Geomech Abstr 24(3):155–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Unlu T, Gercek H (2003) Effect of Poisson’s ratio on the normalized radial displacement occurring around the face of a circular tunnel. Tunn Undergr Sp Technol 18:547–553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Verma AK, Singh TN (2010) Assessment of tunnel instability – a numerical approach. Int J Arab Geosci, Springer publication 3(2):181–192Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Earth ScienceIndian Institute of TechnologyBombayIndia

Personalised recommendations