Effect of soil body structure of mixed-type tunnel face on shape and size of subsidence trough on ground surface

The article describes the studies into the influence exerted by a soil body structure on the shape and size of a subsidence trough on ground surface under varying stresses and strains during construction of a double track subway tunnel by shield TBM tunneling with face pressure. The results were obtained from 3D finite-element modeling of a tunnel being constructed in soft ground featuring widely ranged strength and deformation characteristics. The modeling included the varied structure of the soil body of the mixed-type tunnel face. The change in the shape and size of the subsidence trough was estimated using three parameters: the area of subsidence, the value of subsidence above the tunnel axis, the distance between the vertical axis of the tunnel section and the point of curvature of the cross profile of the subsidence trough. The graphs of the subsidence trough shape and size parameters against the varying structure of the soil body of the mixed-type face are plotted. According to the modeling results, the greatest change in the size of the subsidence trough in case of a soil body having a uniform structure and the uniform physical and mechanical properties reaches 38% and occurs at the shortest spacing between the softened or strengthened soil layer and the tunnel axis. As the tunnel axis approaches the softened soil layer, the shape of the subsidence trough becomes flatter, which is confirmed by the different rates of change in subsidence above the tunnel axis and by the different distances between the vertical axis of the tunnel cross-section and the point of curvature of the cross profile of the subsidence trough.

Protosenya A. G., Kumov V. V. Effect of soil body structure of mixed-type tunnel face on shape and size of subsidence trough on ground surface. MIAB. Mining Inf. Anal. Bull. 2024;(4):5-21. [In Russ]. DOI: 10.25018/0236_1493_2024_4_0_5.

A.G. Protosenya¹, Dr. Sci. (Eng.), Professor, Head of Chair, e-mail: Protosenya_AG@pers.spmi.ru, ORCID ID: 0000-0001-7829-6743,
Kumov¹, Graduate Student, e-mail: vshuk1@mail.ru, ORCID ID: 0009-0006-2820-2941,
¹ Empress Catherine II Saint-Petersburg Mining University, 199106, Saint-Petersburg, Russia.

V.V. Kumov, e-mail: vshuk1@mail.ru.

1. Volokhov E. M., Mukminova D. Z. Deformations assessment during subway escalator tunnels construction by the method of artificial freezing of soil for the stage of ice wall formation. Journal of Mining Institute. 2021, vol. 252, pp. 826—839. [In Russ]. DOI: 10.31897/PMI.2021.6.5.

2. Clough W., Schmidt B. Design and performance of excavations and tunnels in soft clay. Developments in Geotechnical Engineering. 1981, vol. 20, pp. 567—634. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-444-417848.50011-3.

3. Komolov V., Belikov A. Assessment of the impact of the construction of semi-buried structures on the surrounding buildings and the road system. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering. 2020, vol. 918, no. 1, article 012027. DOI: 10.1088/1757-899X/918/1/012027.

4. Jiankang L., Yujing J. The influence of geological conditions of the rock mass before the tunnel face on the forecasting efficiency of the uniaxial compression strength prediction model. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. 2021, vol. 861, no. 4, article 042118. DOI: 10.1088/17551315/861/4/042116.

5. Zhang W., Li H., Wu C., Ly Y. Soft computing approach for prediction of surface settlement induced by earth pressure balance shield tunneling. Underground Space. 2021, vol. 6, pp. 353—363. DOI: 10.1016/j.undsp.2019.12.003.

6. Kang-Hyun L., Hyun-Jun S. Probabilistic estimation of predicting the state of the soil in front of TBM tunnels, combining each method of geophysical forecasting. Journal of the Korean Association of Tunneling and Underground Space. 2016, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 257—272. DOI: 10.9711/KTAJ.2016. 18.3.257.

7. Zhao S., Li S., Wan Z., Wang X. Effects of anti-clay agents on bubble size distribution and stability of aqueous foam under pressure for earth pressure balance shield tunneling. Colloid And Interface

8. Liu J., Tan Y., Song X., Fan D., Liu T. Effects of through-wall leaking during excavation in water-rich sand on lateral wall deflections and surrounding environment. Journal of Zhejiang University (Engineering Science). 2023, vol. 57, no. 3, pp. 530—541. DOI: 10.3785/j.issn.1008-973X.2023. 03.011.

9. Dashko R. E., Lokhmatikov G. A. The Upper Kotlin clays of the Saint Petersburg region as a foundation and medium for unique facilities: an engineering-geological and geotechnical analysis. Journal of Mining Institute. 2022, vol. 254, pp. 180—190. [In Russ]. DOI: 10.31897/PMI.2022.13.

10. Nabatov V. V., Voznesenskii A. S. Geomechanical analysis of the impact of the new tunnels construction in the vicinity of existing underground subway structures on the state of the soil massif. Journal of Mining Institute. 2023, vol. 264, pp. 926—936. [In Russ].

11. Dang T., Meschke G. Influence of muck properties and chamber design on pressure distribution in EPB pressure chambers — Insights from computational flow simulations. Tunnelling And Underground Space Technology. 2020, vol. 99. DOI: 10.1016/j.tust.2020.103333.

12. Fei P., Ma S. Analysis of experimental data on the effect of double-line parallel shield tunneling on the deformation of adjacent buildings. Alexandria Engineering Journal. 2021, vol. 60, pp. 3957— 3963. DOI: 10.1016/j.aej.2021.02.034.

13. Liu X., Xu S., Huang Y. Optimal control for earth pressure balance of shield machine based on action-dependent heuristic dynamic programming. ISA Transactions. 2019, vol. 94, pp. 28—35. DOI: 10.1016/j.isatra.2019.04.007.

14. Liu X., Xu S., Shao C. Optimal control of earth pressure balance of shield tunneling machine based on dual-heuristic dynamic programming. Optimal Control Applications and Methods. 2020, vol. 41, pp. 1510—1523. DOI: 10.1002/oca.2612.

15. Zhou X., Zhai S. Estimation of the cutterhead torque for earth pressure balance TBM under mixed-face conditions. Tunnelling And Underground Space Technology. 2018, vol. 74, pp. 217—229. DOI: 10.1016/j.tust.2018.01.025.

16. Ochmanski M., Spacagna R., Modoni G. 3D numerical simulation of consolidation induced in soft ground by EPB technology and lining defects. Computers And Geotechnics. 2021, vol. 128. DOI: 10.1016/j.compgeo.2020.103830.

17. Wang Y., Zhang F. Effects of pit-bottom-soil reinforcement on the deformation of subway deep foundation pits based on an improved model. Hindawi. Advances in Materials Science and Engineering. 2022, vol. 2022, article 2661311. DOI: 10.1155/2022/2661311.

18. Belikov A. A., Belyakov N. A. Method of predicting the stress-strain state of interchamber pillars lined with a compliant rope fastener. MIAB. Mining Inf. Anal. Bull. 2023, no. 4, pp. 20—34. [In Russ]. DOI: 10.25018/0236_1493_2023_4_0_20.

19. Karasev М. А., Pospehov G. B., Astapenka T. S., Shishkina V. S. Stress–strain behavior prediction models for weak manmade soil. MIAB. Mining Inf. Anal. Bull. 2023, no. 11, pp. 49—70. [In Russ]. DOI: 10.25018/0236_1493_2023_11_0_49.

20. Dzhemilev E. R., Shammazov I. A., Sidorkin D. I., Mastobaev B. N., Gumerov A. K. Developing technology and device for the main pipelines repair with cutting out their defective sections. Pipeline Transportation of Oil. 2022, vol. 10, pp. 78—82. DOI: 10.24887/0028-2448-2022-10-78-82.

21. Zhang P., Chen R., Wu H. Real-time analysis and regulation of EPB shield steering using Random Forest. Automation In Construction. 2019, vol. 106. DOI: 10.1016/j.autcon.2019.102860.

22. Shahmoradi J., Salari H., Roghanchi P. Face stability analysis for the earth pressure balance method in nonhomogeneous inclined soil layers: Case study. International Journal of Geomechanics. 2020, vol. 20, no. 10. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0001833.

23. Li Z., Yang X. Analysis and design charts for 3D active earth pressure in cohesive soils with cracks. Acta Geotechnica. 2021, vol. 16, pp. 3269—3283. DOI: 10.1007/s11440-021-01192-y.

24. Li Z., Yang X., Li Y. Active earth pressure coefficients based on a 3D rotational mechanism. Computers And Geotechnics. 2019, vol. 112, pp. 342—349. DOI: 10.1016/j.compgeo.2019.05.005.

25. Demenkov P. A., Romanova Е. L., Kotikov D. A. Stress–strain analysis of vertical shaft lining and adjacent rock mass under conditions of irregular contour. MIAB. Mining Inf. Anal. Bull. 2023, no. 11, pp. 33—48. [In Russ]. DOI: 10.25018/0236_1493_2023_11_0_33.

26. Kovalski E. R., Kongar-Syuryun Ch. B., Petrov D. N. Challenges and prospects for severalstage stoping in potash mining. Sustainable Development of Mountain Territories. 2023, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 349—364. [In Russ]. DOI: 10.21177/1998-4502-2023-15-2-349-364.

27. Zhao C., Zhao D. Application of construction waste in the reinforcement of soft soil foundation in coastal cities. Environmental Technology and Innovation. 2020, vol. 21, article 101195. DOI: 10.1016/j.eti.2020.101195.

28. Hu X., Fu W., Ju J., He C. Face stability conditions in granular soils during the advancing and stopping of earth-pressure-balanced-shield machine. Tunnelling And Underground Space Technology. 2021, vol. 109, no. 12, article 103755. DOI: 10.1016/j.tust.2020.103755.

29. Yin X., Chen R., Meng F. Influence of seepage and tunnel face opening on face support pressure of EPB shield. Computers And Geotechnics. 2021, vol. 135. DOI: 10.1016/j.compgeo.2021.104198.

30. Ma S., Li M., Guo Y., Safaei B. Field test and research on shield cutting pile penetrating cement soil single pile composite foundation. Geomechanics and Engineering. 2020, vol. 23, pp. 513—521. DOI: 10.12989/gae.2020.23.6.513.

31. Belyakov N. A., Morozov K. V., Emelyanov I. A. Data processing in full-scale in-situ stress testing by overcoring. Gornyi Zhurnal. 2023, no. 5, pp. 89—96. [In Russ]. DOI: 10.17580/gzh.2023.05.13.

32. Rohola H., Jamal R., Sohrabian B. Prediction of face pressure and required thrust force within tbm tunnelling through alluvial ground. 2nd International Conference on Tunneling Machines in Difficult Soils (TBM DiGs Istanbul). Istanbul, 2016.

33. Lee H., Hoi H., Choi S., Chang S. Numerical Simulation of EPB Shield Tunnelling with TBM Operational Condition Control Using Coupled DEM-FDM. Applied Sciences-Basel. 2021, vol. 11. DOI: 10.3390/app11062551.

34. Dashko R. E., Karpenko A. G. Current state of above-ground and underground structures of the Alexander Column: an integral basis for its stability. Journal of Mining Institute. 2023, vol. 263, pp. 757—773. [In Russ].

35. Melnikov R. V. Oedometer test data for finding hardening soil model parameters. Akademicheskiy vestnik UralNIIproekt RAASN. 2014, no. 4, pp. 90—94. [In Russ].

36. Hu X., He C., Walton G., Fang Y., Dai G. Laboratory model test of EPB shield tunneling in a cobble-rich soil. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering. 2020, vol. 146. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.000235.