(II)

A Study on Adjacent Shield Tunnel Behavior

Induced by Deep Excavation(II)

R
NSC902211E230001
90 8 1 91 7 31

91 10 12

1


A Study on Adjacent Shield Tunnel Behavior Induced by Deep
Excavation
NSC902211E230001
90 8 1 91 7 31

evaluated by the formula (2). On the other hand,

the vertical displacement of shield tunnel
increases first and up to the maximum value
when the ground settlement reaches the
maximum value, after that, the vertical
displacement of shield tunnel becomes less.

And it can be estimated by the formula (7). The

numerical analysis model of the effect of
grouting pressure on soil preload has established
in this study. The analysis results show that it
is not obvious to decrease the displacement by
increasing the soil improvement ratio Ir, when
d the ratio is greater than 30%.
(2) Keywords: Deep Excavation, Shield Tunnel,
d Ground Improvement, Preload

d (7)

(preload)
I r 30%

Abstract
Base on the numerical analysis program
established on last year, this study explores the
effects of excavation on adjacent shield tunnel
for different cases history. Also, the wall
deflection after soil improved by grouting was [1,2]
collected to back analysis for numerical program.

And the effect of grouting pressure for wall
deflection was studied. 90 10

The results show that the influence of
excavation on the shield tunnel in the primary

influence zone was obvious. The horizontal
displacement of shield tunnel due to excavation
increases when the distance d of retaining wall is
close to the shield tunnel. This fact can be

2


[3]
[11][12] Ou [13]

Ir
25mm ((1))
1:750 FLAC
25mm
15mm
1:500 [4]
Peq = Pg I r 0.88 m + Pc (1 I r 0.88 m ) (1)

CP264

87 7
Nelson Baron(1971)

J 2
[5]

J 2

[6-10]

3.2

3.2.1

16 5 RC
61 105 41

19.7
90 35

46
35
37.5
2
(Back Analysis) 1

2

3.1 3.2.2

37 5
Itasca Consulting Group Inc.
21.0
FLAC
90

40
FLACish
30

3
 30 60 vavg
60 62 d = 10m
2.5 d > 10m
3 vavg d

9
4


3.3
havg / h max (d D)( H H f )
(exponential function)
(2) A B
H H f
(3)(4)
5 (5)(6)
vavg / v max
(d D)( H H f )

(d D)( H H f ) (

(preload) ) vavg / v max

(d D)( H H f )
(7)
vavg / v max (d D)( H H f )
3.3.1 C D
(7) x

(2)
h max H h max / H
H H f H H f havg
= Aexp( Bx) (2)
h max
h max / H
0.4% 0.6% 6
v max (H H f )
A= (Taipei) (3)
v max / H 0.2% 0.3% 0.054 + 1.012( H H f )

B = 0.252( H H f ) 0.978 (Taipei) (4)

8%

(H H f )
A= (Kaohsiung) (5)
10% 0.112 + 1.695( H H f )

h max / H 0.2%
B = 0.166( H H f ) 0.581 (Kaohsiung) (6)
0.5% 7 v max / H 0.1%
0.3%
x = (d / D)( H H f )
3.3.2

vavg Cx + ( D 1) x2
= (7)
havg v max 1 + (C 2) x + Dx2
d
8
4

h max v max
(2)(7)

havg vavg

8 9 1.
10 11

3.3.3


35 5
2.
22.3

100
8%
36

21
10%
21 57

3.1

12
21 27 3.
I r = 7% d
(2)
(1)

d d

d
(preload)
(7)

4.
(preload)


40%
13
5%

5. 1.0 2.0

40% h = 1.0 2.0 h initial
5% h = 1.5 h initial h = 2.0 h initial
14
I r 30%
1.0 2.0
h = 1.0 2.0 h initial
15 I r
I r 30%

16

h = 1.0 h initial h = 2.0 h initial
h = 1.5 h initial h = 2.0 h initial
17

5
 ()
40 51-61 (1992)

13.Ou, C. Y., Wu, T. S. and Hsieh, H. S.,

Analysis of Deep Excavation with Column
Type of Ground Improvement in Soft Clay,
Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE,
Vol. 122, No. 9, pp. 709-716 (1996).
1.

17 26-30 (1997)
2. CP262
17 72-78
(1997)
3.
(CEDM)
(1995)
4.Civil and Structural
Design Manual (CSDM), (1994)
5.
CP264
24 213-244
(2001)
6. Peck, R. B., Deep Excavation and Tunnelling
in Soft Clay, Proceedings of the 7th
International Conference on Soil Mechanics
and Foundation Engineering, State-of-the-Art
Volume, Mexico City, pp. 225-290(1969).
7. Rowe, R. K. and Kack, G. J., A Theoretical
Examination of the Settlements Induced by
Tunnelling : Four Case Histories, Canadian
Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 20, pp.
299-314(1983).
8.

1999
37-76 (1999)
9.
3 95-103
(1993)
1 0 .



S E G / R -G T -9 8 -0 5 ( 1 9 9 7 )
11.

(1997)
12.

6
 1F Stru t (L evel 1)
HH Prelo ad = 1260kN , GL . -2.20m
H300*300*10*15 Stag e 1
H GL. -3.40m
GL. -2.8m B1F Stru t (L evel 2)
HH
Prelo ad = 1570kN , GL . -5.40m Stag e 2
GL. -6.60m
GL. -4.9m
Stru t (L evel 3)
B2F HH
Prelo ad = 1860kN , GL . -8.60m Stag e 3
GL. -9.80m
GL. -8.6m Stru t (L evel 4)
B3F
HH
Preload = 2610kN , GL. -11.80m Stag e 4
GL. -13.00m
Stru t (L evel 5)
GL. -11.8m HH Preload = 2610kN , GL. -14.60m Stag e 5
GL. -15.40m
B4F Stru t (L evel 6)
HH Preload = 2750kN , GL. -16.60m Stag e 6
Stru t (L evel 7) GL. -17.40m
GL. -15.2m HH
Preload = 2750kN , GL. -18.45m Stag e 7
H H400*400*13*21 B5F GL. -19.25m
Stag e 8
GL. -17.3m GL. -21.00m

GL. -19.7m
Wall Depth = 35 m
Wall Thickness = 0.9 m

1
3

Displacement (cm) Wall Deflection (cm)

14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
0 0
Paulchen

-10
10
Depth (m)

Depth (m)

-20
20
-30

30
-40
Measured Obersved
Calculated Computed
40 -50

2 4

7
 10.0
Taipei case Excavation

movement of shield tunnel

2.8m
8.0 4.9m
10.0m Calculated 8.6m

havg(cm)
Avg. horizontal
11.8m
Hf d 6.0 15.2m
17.3m
4.0 19.7m
6.1m

Shield Tunnel 2.0

0.0
0 20 40 60 80
D L=Hf +D d (m)
Distance between retaining wall and shield tunnel

8
5

1.5 4.0
Taipei Distance from wall to tunnel Taipei case Excavation
2.8m
No Tunnel Existed
Avg. vertical movement

4.9m
1m 3.0 8.6m
6m
hmax/H (%)

vavg(cm)

Calculated 11.8m
of shield tunnel

1.0 10 m 15.2m
20 m 17.3m
30 m 2.0 19.7m
50 m
70 m

0.5 1.0

0.0
0.0 0 20 40 60 80
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 d (m)
H/Hf Distance between retaining wall and shield tunnel

6
9

1.5 6.0
Kaohsiung case Kaohsiung case Excavation
movement of shield tunnel

Distance from wall to tunnel

No Tunnel Existed 3.3m
1m 6.6m
6m 9.8m
hmax/H (%)

havg(cm)

10 m 4.0
Avg. horizontal

1.0 13.0m
20 m 15.4m
30 m Calculated
17.4m
50 m
70 m 19.25m
2.0 21.0m
0.5

0.0
0.0
0 20 40 60 80
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 d (m)
H/Hf Distance between retaining wall and shield tunnel

7 10

8
 4.0 8
SI-2

Max. Deflection of Wall (cm)

Kaohsiung case Excavation MRRB
Avg. vertical movement 3.4m SI-4 Ir=7%
6.6m No Preload Effect
3.0 9.8m 6
Preload Effect
vavg(cm)

13.0m
of shield tunnel

Calculated 15.4m
17.4m
2.0 19.25m 4
21.0m

1.0 2

0.0
0
0 20 40 60 80 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
d (m) Excavation Depth (m)
Distance between retaining wall and shield tunnel

13
11

Displacement (cm)
Stru t (L evel 1)
HH Prelo ad = 1470kN , GL . -2.20m Stag e 1
GL. -3.05m
-2 0 2 4 6 8 10
0
Stru t (L evel 2)
HH
Prelo ad = 1960kN , GL . -6.45m Stag e 2
MRRB
GL. -7.30m Stage 8
HH
Stru t (L evel 3)
Preload = 2350k N , GL. -10.25m Stag e 3
Ir=7%
Stru t (L evel 4) GL. -11.10m 10
HH
Preload = 2350k N , GL. -12.35m Stag e 4
GL. -13.20m
Stru t (L evel 5)
HH
Preload = 2350k N , GL. -14.35m Stag e 5
Depth (m)

GL. -15.20m
Stru t (L evel 6)
HH Preload = 2350k N , GL. -17.05m Stag e 6
GL. -17.90m 20
Stru t (L evel 7)
HH
Preload = 2350k N , GL. -19.65m Stag e 7
GL. -20.50m
Stag e 8
GL. -22.30m

30
SI-2
SI-4
No Preload Effect
Preload Effect
40

14

Fig. 3 Profile of Bracing System (MRRB Project)
12

9
 1.0h-initial

Grouting Zone

2.0h-initial

15

8
Max. Deflection of Wall (cm)

MRRB
Stage 8
6

2
No Preload Effect
Preload Effect
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Percentage of Improvement of Soil

16

8
Max. Deflection of Wall (cm)

MRRB SI-2
Ir=7% SI-4
6

4
Linear
1.00ho
1.25ho
2 1.50ho
1.75ho
2.00ho
0
10 15 20 25
Excavation Depth (m)

17

10