Back Analysis of Settlement Data during Tunnel Excavation on Urban Areas (Case Study: Tehran Subway- Line 6)

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Associate Professor, Department of Mining Engineering, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Tehran, Iran

2 Ph.D., Student, Department of Mining Engineering, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Tehran, Iran.

3 Instructor, Faculty Member, Transportation Research Institute, Road. Housing and Urban Development Research Center, Tehran, Iran

4 M.Sc., Grad., AIC Consulting Engineers, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

Prediction and control of settlement have great importance both in terms of safety and economic point of view on urban area. Tehran subway- line 6 starts from Kouhsar square in the end of north Kouhsar Boulevard placed in north-west of Tehran and ends in Dolat-abad terminal at south of Tehran. North part of line 6 excavated using NATM method. Monitoring and instrumentation system are well equipped and their data have been processed during excavation. Although geotechnical parameter obtained from laboratory and in-situ tests and on the other hand there are distances from sample location to tunnel route, it is possible that different factors such as local heterogeneities in layers or variation of soil between two positions affect the geotechnical parameters. One of the best methods to evaluate these parameters in large scale is back analysis based on instrumentation results. In this paper numerical modeling are done with Plaxis2D software and using back analysis, geotechnical parameters estimated. Different parameters such as cohesion, angle of friction, elastic modules investigated. Also, stresses relaxation were examined before support installation. Based on sensitivity analysis, elastic modules and friction angle have the most influence on ground surface settlement. For example, changes of the friction angle from 24 to 40 will change settlement from 51.3 to 14.7. Also, changes of elastic modules from 75 to 215 will change settlement from 23.2 to 8. Based on these finding, changes of these two parameters in 9 different sections on tunnel route were verified settlement in numerical method with instrumentation settlement. Result shows that increase elastic modulus in numerical models about two times provide good result. Friction angle changes between 37 to 40.
 
 

Keywords

References

Aghamalian, M. (2006), “Inverse Analysis of Monitoring Data during Multi-Stage Construction of Resalat Twin Tunnels in Tehran”, M.S.Thesis, School of Civil Engineering-University of Tehran.  
-Asadollahpour, E., Rahmannejad, R., Asghari, A., Abdollahipour, A. (2014), “Back analysis of closure parameters of Panet equation and Burger׳s model of Babolak water tunnel conveyance”, International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, Volume 68, June 2014, pp. 159-166.
-Bassiri Tehrani, A. A. (2001), “Inverse Analysis of Tunnel Lining with Minimum of Sum of square Value Method with one Urban Tunnel Case Study”, M.S. Thesis, School of Civil Engineering of University of Tehran.
 
-Chenyang Zhao, Arash Alimardani Lavasan, Thomas Barciaga, Veselin Zarev, Maria Datcheva, Tom Schanz, (2015), “Model validation and calibration via back analysis for mechanized tunnel simulations – The Western Scheldt tunnelcase”, Computers and Geotechnics, Volume 69, September 2015, pp. 601-614.
 
-Farzaneh, O., Vahdani, S. and Zand, A. G. (2001), “Instrumentation Design and Analysis of Monitoring Data in a Urban Tunneling Project”, 5th Tunnel Confrence. 
-Geoida, G. (1985), “Some remarks on back analysis and characterization problems in geomechanics”, In Proc. 5th Int. Conf. Nume. Methods in Geomech. Nagoya
(­Edited by T.Kawamoto), PP. 47-61.
 
-ITA working Group on General Approaches to the design of tunnels (1998), “Guideline for the design of Tunnels”, Tunneling and Underground space technology, Vol. 3. PP. 149-237.
 
-Janin, J.P., Dias, D., Emeriault, F., Kastner, R., Le Bissonnais, H., Guilloux, A. (2015), “Numerical back-analysis of the southern Toulon tunnel measurements: A comparison of 3D and 2D approaches”, Engineering Geology, Volume 195, 10 September, pp. 42-52.
 
    -Miranda, T., Dias, D., Eclaircy-Caudron, S., Gomes Correia, A., Costa, L. (2011), “Back analysis of geomechanical parameters by optimisation of a 3D model of an underground structure”, Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, Volume 26, Issue 6, November 2011,
pp. 659–673.
 
-Miro, S., König, M., Hartmann, D., Schanz., T. (2015), “A probabilistic analysis of subsoil parameters uncertainty impacts on tunnel-induced ground movements with a 
back-analysisstudy”, Computers and Geotechnics, Volume 68, July, pp. 38-53.
 
-Moreira, N., Miranda, T., Pinheiro, M., Fernandes, P., Dias, D., Costa, L., Sena-Cruz, J. (2013), “Back analysis of geomechanical parameters in underground works using an Evolution Strategy algorithm”, Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, Volume 33, January 2013, pp. 143–158.
 
-Sakurai, S. (1993), “Back Analysis in Rock Engineering Comprehensive Rock Engineering”, Vol. 4, PP. 543- 568.
 
-Salehi, D. and Fakhimi, A.A. (2002), “Using Inverse Analysis for Estimating Soil Parameters in Resalat Tunnel Project”, 6th Tunnel Confrence.
 
-Sharifzadeh, M., Daraei, R., Sharifi Broojerdi, M. (2012), “Design of sequential excavation tunneling in weak rocks through findings obtained from displacements based backanalysis”, Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, Volume 28, March 2012, 
pp. 10-17.
 
-Youssef M.A. Hashash, Séverine Levasseur, Abdolreza Osouli, Richard Finno, Yann Malecot, (2010), “Comparison of two inverse analysis techniques for learning deep excavation response”, Computers and Geotechnics, Volume 37, Issue 3, April,
pp. 323–333.
 
 -Zand, A. (1999), “Instrumentation Design and Analysis of Monitoring Data in a Urban Tunneling Project”, M.S. Thesis, School of Civil Engineering -University of Tehran.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics