SpringerLink
Log in

Design and analysis of tunnel cross-passage openings: 3D finite element analysis versus 3D shell-spring approach

  • Technical paper
  • Published:
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Finite element analysis and shell-spring approach are two widely adopted methods to quantify the induced loads in a tunnel lining: for a typical sequential ring, without any openings. This study assesses the effectiveness of utilizing these methods to evaluate cross-passage opening-induced stress redistribution occurring in the segmental lining. For this purpose, member forces were derived using each method based on a case in Bangkok, Thailand, where two cross-passages were being constructed between a bored tunnel and a shaft. The analysis was followed by a comparative study to discuss the effectiveness of using each method in the design of cross-passages. According to the results, it was found that the predicted member forces from both models are in accordance with each other. Hence it was concluded that, for a similar case, one can use more simplistic 3D shell-spring models to examine the lining response rather than carrying out complex 3D finite element models. Furthermore, it was found that the presence of circumferential joints in tunnel lining significantly affects the load transfer mechanism between the opened ring and the adjacent fully enclosed ring. As opposed to the 3D finite element model, the ability to explicitly consider this effect in the calculation was one of the key advantages of conducting the 3D shell-spring model. Moreover, this study concludes that the design of a temporary support system can also be conducted relatively easily and precisely by the 3D shell-spring approach.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Germany)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20
Fig. 21
Fig. 22

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ribeiro E, Sousa L (2006) Learning with accidents and damage associated to underground works. In: Geotech risk rock tunnels—sel pap from a course geotech risk rock tunnels, pp 7–39. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780203963586.ch2

  2. Mashimo H (2002) State of the road tunnel safety technology in Japan. Tunn Undergr Sp Technol 17:145–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0886-7798(02)00017-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Lee T-H, Choi T-C (2017) Numerical analysis of cross passage opening for TBM tunnels. In: Proceedings of the 19th international conference on soil mechanics and geotechnical engineering, Seoul, pp 1713–1719

  4. The Professional Standards Compilation Group of People’s Republic of China (PSCG PRC) (2004) JTG D70-2004 Code for design of road tunnel. Bei**g

  5. ITA COSUF (2019) Current practice on cross-passage design to support safety in rail and metro tunnels

  6. Kuyt J (2015) Observed loading behavior during cross passage construction: Brisbane Airport Link Project. Colorado School of Mines

  7. Catsman WCGW (2018) Interaction between soil and tunnel lining during cross passage construction using artificial ground freezing. Delft University of Technology

  8. Murray MJ, Eskesen SD (1996) Design and construction of cross passages at the Storebaelt Eastern Railway tunnel. In: Tunnelling’97, pp 463–479

  9. Klappers C, Grubl F, Ostermeier B (2006) Structural analyses of segmental lining—coupled beam and spring analyses versus 3D-FEM calculations with shell elements. Tunn Undergr Sp Technol 21:254–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2005.12.116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Zhang Z-Q, Xu J, Wan X-Y (2007) Study on tunnel construction mechanics at intersection of horizontal adit and major tunnel in highway. Yantu Lixue(Rock Soil Mech) 28:247–252

  11. Li Z, Soga K, Wright P (2016) Three-dimensional finite element analysis of the behaviour of cross passage between cast-iron tunnels. Can Geotech J 53:930–945. https://doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2015-0273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. The British Tunnelling Society and The Institution of Civil Engineers (2004) Tunnel lining design guide

  13. International Tunnelling Association (2000) Guidelines for the design of shield tunnel lining (ITA WG 2 report). Tunn Undergr Sp Technol 15:303–331. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0886-7798(00)00058-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Murakami H, Koizumi A (1980) On the behaviour of the transverse joints of a segment. In: Proceedings of the Japan society of civil engineers. japan society of civil engineers, pp 73–86

  15. Duddeck H, Erdmann J (1985) Structural design models for tunnels in soft soil. Undergr Space, USA, p 9

  16. Gall VE, Marwan A, Smarslik M et al (2018) A holistic approach for the investigation of lining response to mechanized tunneling induced construction loadings. Undergr Sp 3:45–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.undsp.2018.01.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Li Z, Soga K, Wright P (2015) Long-term performance of cast-iron tunnel cross passage in London clay. Tunn Undergr Sp Technol 50:152–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2015.07.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Gruebl F (2012) Segmental ring design—new challenges with high tunnel diameters. TAI J (Half Yrly Tech J Indian Chap TAI) 1:4–9

    Google Scholar 

  19. Brand EW, AS B (1977) Soil compressibility and land subsidence in Bangkok

  20. Balasubramaniam AS, Oh EYN, Phienwej N (2009) Bored and driven pile testing in Bangkok sub-soils. Lowl Technol Int 11:29–36

    Google Scholar 

  21. Phien-wej N, Giao PH, Nutalaya P (2006) Land subsidence in bangkok, Thailand. Eng Geol 82:187–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Surarak C, Likitlersuang S, Wanatowski D et al (2012) Stiffness and strength parameters for hardening soil model of soft and stiff Bangkok clays. Soils Found. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2012.07.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Thasnanipan N, Aye ZZ, Teparaksa W (2002) Barrette of over 50,000 kN ultimate capacity constructed in the multi-layered soil of Bangkok. In: Deep foundations 2002: an international perspective on theory, design, construction, and performance, pp 1073–1087

  24. Narong T, Zaw AZ, Chanchai S, Wanchai T (2002) Performance of wet-process bored piles constructed with polymer-based slurry in Bangkok subsoil. Deep Found 2002:143–157

    Google Scholar 

  25. AGATE Consortium (2017) The MRT Orange Line (East Section) project contract E2: underground civil works Ram Khamhaeng 12—Hua Mak section geotechnical interpretative report

  26. Jayasiri NS (2020) Design and Analysis of Tunnel Cross Passage for Rail and Road Tunnel with Emphasis on Tunnels with Segmental Lining. Asian Institute of Technology, Thailand

    Google Scholar 

  27. Wood AMM (1975) The circular tunnel in elastic ground. Géotechnique 25:115–127. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.1975.25.1.115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Brinkgreve RBJ, Engin E, Swolfs WM (2013) PLAXIS 3D 2013 user manual. Plaxis BV, Delft

    Google Scholar 

  29. Vermeer PA, Brinkgreve R (1993) Plaxis version 5 manual. AA Balkema, Rotterdam

    Google Scholar 

  30. Peck RB (1969) Deep excavations and tunneling in soft ground. In: Proc 7th ICSMFE, pp 225–290

  31. O’Reilly MP, New BM (1982) Settlements above tunnels in the United Kingdom-their magnitude and prediction. In: Tunneling’82 (1992), pp 173–181

  32. Phien-Wej N, Humza M, Aye ZZ (2012) Numerical modeling of diaphragm wall behavior in Bangkok soil using hardening soil model. In: Geotechnical aspects of underground construction in soft ground. CRC Press, pp 733–740

  33. CSISV (2010) 8 (2002) Integrated finite element analysis and design of structures basic analysis reference manual. Comput Struct Inc, Berkeley, California, USA

    Google Scholar 

  34. Wright S (1921) Correlation and causation. J Agric Res 20:557–585

    Google Scholar 

  35. Koyizumi J (2006) Segment design from allowable stress method to limit state method. Tokyo Jpn Soc Civ Eng

  36. Yang F, Cao S, Qin G (2018) Performance of the prestressed composite lining of a tunnel: case study of the yellow river crossing tunnel. Int J Civ Eng 16:229–241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Yan Q, Li SC, **e C, Li Y (2018) Analytical solution for bolted tunnels in expansive loess using the convergence-confinement method. Int J Geomech 18:4017124

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the Mass Rapid Transit Authority of Thailand (MRTA) and CH. Karnchang-Sino-Thai (CKST) Joint Venture for providing required data for the analysis.

Funding

No funding was received for conducting this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Asian Institute of Technology, Klong Luang, Pathum Thani, 12120, Thailand

    Nilan S. Jayasiri, Kuo Chieh Chao & Noppadol Phien-Wej

  2. Geotechnical and Foundation Engineering Co., Ltd, Bangkok, 10230, Thailand

    Ochok Duangsano & Auttakit Asanprakit

Authors
  1. Nilan S. Jayasiri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kuo Chieh Chao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Noppadol Phien-Wej
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ochok Duangsano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Auttakit Asanprakit
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nilan S. Jayasiri.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

There is no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jayasiri, N.S., Chao, K.C., Phien-Wej, N. et al. Design and analysis of tunnel cross-passage openings: 3D finite element analysis versus 3D shell-spring approach. Innov. Infrastruct. Solut. 7, 204 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-022-00805-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-022-00805-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation