International Journal of Modern Developments in Engineering and Science 32

Volume 1, Issue 7, July 2022

https://www.ijmdes.com | ISSN (Online): 2583-3138

2D FEM Analysis of Tunnel Segment

Mirza Aamir Baig1, Abinash Modak2*
1
Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Al-Falah University, Haryana, India
2
M.Tech. Student, Department of Civil Engineering, Al- Falah University, Haryana, India

Abstract: Tunnel is a horizontal passage constructed below the tunnel construction depends on factors such as the ground
ground level. Tunnels are excavated through different methods, conditions, the underground water conditions/level, length and
like by manually, by using explosives or by using modern machine
diameter of the tunnel, the depth of tunnel, final use and shape
tools or use of combination of these methods. Tunnels are designed
in such a way that it opposes forces like tension, compression, of tunnel and approximate risk management. There are several
shear and torsion, tunnels are made of strong materials, like tunnel construction methods are available like Cut and cover
masonry, concrete, iron and steel. Tunnels are broadly categorised method, Conventional method/NATM method and TBM
in different groups, tunnels for mining purpose, public utilities, method. Which have been developed in the tunnel construction
and transportation. Tunnels could of many shapes, but general industry to improve the constructability of tunnels and decrease
shapes are rectangular, circular, curvilinear or horse-shoe types.
the impact on surrounding structures and reduce ground
There are many challenges are encountered while construction of
a tunnel and almost every tunnel has unique solution to its settlement conditions with proper supporting system.
challenges and problems. Challenges can be water bodies, Depending on the sub-ground strata method of tunnelling is
mountains, other natural or manmade obstacles. The method of selected. In general, Cut and cover method is used in soft soil,
tunnel construction depends mainly upon the type of soil strata conventional method/NATM and TBM method are suitable for
through which it is going to pass. A thorough geological study of soft soil and hard rock.
the ground are conducted to know the type of material through
Deformation of ground surface due to construction of tunnel
which the tunnel needs to construct, to access relative risks of
different location (like soil and rock types, faults and shear zones, beneath ground which effects the structures, monitoring of
ground water etc.). This paper is to present 2D FEM analysis for deformation is very important aspect in the urban area tunnel
segment design for Bored tunnels. construction process. Final lining is the concrete structure
which comes in contact with the surrounding soil/rock and
Keywords: Curvilinear, Horse-shoe, Geological, Conventional, holds the different loads from surrounding. Final lining of
Mechanized, Segment, 2D FEM analysis.
tunnels is designed for various forces, dead load, earth pressure,
water pressure, surcharge loads, earthquake load, train and
1. Introduction
other services load, air pressure, TBM shove ram loads, gasket
A tunnel is an underground passageway, which is Dugged compression load, handling and stacking loads, grouting loads,
through the surrounding of soil/earth/rock and enclosed except and bolts & inserts loads.
for exit and entrance. In today’s world due to rapid urbanization The design of final lining pertains to precast concrete
in major cities, people from different places and background are segments, diameter of tunnel for a single track is 5800mm
getting attracted towards them, for job opportunities and better (5.8m) including all tolerances and thickness of final lining is
living standards and basic facilities which are not available in 275mm. Analysis of the bored tunnel linings is done
remote villages, this migration of people from small considering the interaction between the lining and the ground,
towns/villages to major cities making the cities over-crowded the deflection of the lining and the redistribution of the loading
and due to which the vehicular movement also increasing, dependent upon the relative flexibility of the lining, the
widening of roads has a limitation since the land is limited, variability and compressibility of the ground. 2D FEM analysis
hence traffic jams are occurring every days. So, utilization of are used to understand the soil structure interaction of TBM
underground space has become an important aspect and as a segment and adjoining rock-mass. The lining behavior as
solution and it is becoming popular. Tunnel construction is one estimated in STAAD analysis is re-evaluated by modeling the
of the important and large infrastructure projects (like actual ground condition in RS2 (RocScience) software.
Underground Metro systems, cross passages, subways etc.),
which are important for the development in the transportation 2. 2D FEM Analysis
networks, in major cities like Mumbai, Delhi, Chennai and
Bangalore etc. Tunnel projects requires large budget, A. By Staad Pro
construction of tunnel take long duration, it involves high risk, A two-dimensional Plane Frame Analyses is performed
and they are complex. Tunnels are dug in different types of using the computer program from STAAD Pro. V8i. A near
materials varying from soft soil to hard rock, the method of realistic 2D model using beams bedded by radial and tangential

*Corresponding author: [email protected]

Baig et al. International Journal of Modern Developments in Engineering and Science, VOL. 1, NO. 7, JULY 2022 33

springs are created and loads applied using STAAD command.

Springs have been generated by using Staad command and
reference are made to STAAD manual for further details. The
bedding is modeled in such a way that the parts of the cross-
sections where inward deformation occurs, i.e., where the
springs would be subject to tensions, are neglected. The
material behavior of ground and lining is generally assumed as
being elastic. All forces are applied on the frame model in
STAAD Pro and load combination are used for Ultimate Limit
State (ULS) & Serviceability Limit State (SLS), and the Fig. 3. View of max. water pressure and surcharge load (symmetrical) on
Members are checked for the load combination for Ultimate segment
Limit State (ULS) & Serviceability Limit State (SLS). The
Normal force, bending moment and shear force for all members
are taken from the Staad Pro and designed.
Calculation of Spring Constants for Rock-mass:
The lining is modeled as a beam bedded by springs. Multiple
beam elements are created along centroidal axis of lining
subtending angle of 50 to 100 representing linear 2D structure
Beam model spring constants are derived from modulus of sub
grade reaction Ks, which is calculated from:
KS = E / (1+ν)×R, where: Fig. 4. View of surcharge load (asymmetrical) and derailment load on
E - Young’s Modulus of soil/rock segment
Ν - Poisson’s Ratio of soil/rock mass
R - Radius of Tunnel (with R ≤ 7 m)
The spring constant of a bedding spring representing a certain
area A of sub grade is derived as:
Cr = Ks x A
The tangential spring constants Kt is calculated from: 𝐾𝑡 =
0.5 ∗ 𝐾𝑆 / (1 + ν).
The bending stiffness of the structural element is equal to
Ec*Ig. The moment of inertia Ig is based on the modulus of
inertia of gross concrete section about centroidal axis,
neglecting reinforcement. Fig. 5. View of air pressure on segment

Fig. 1. Idealized model with spring supports and 3D rendered view

Output Diagrams of Staad file: Fig. 6. Bending moment on segment

Fig. 2. View of over burden load and extreme water pressure on segment

Fig. 7. Shear force on segment

Baig et al. International Journal of Modern Developments in Engineering and Science, VOL. 1, NO. 7, JULY 2022 34

Fig. 8. Axial force on segment

B. By RS2 (RocScience2) Fig. 9. (Case 1-GG) FEM model showing ground as per General case and
Surface loading
Assumptions considered while performing 2D analysis in
RS2:
1. Plain strain condition is assumed; the geotechnical
properties are considered assuming homogeneous,
isotropic behavior of each layer.
2. The ground layers are modelled with the given
properties, and the analyses are performed for drained
condition.
3. Water table is assumed at surface.
4. Mohr-Coulomb failure criteria is considered; peak and
residual value of shear strength parameters is defined.
5. External boundaries of model are assumed considering
the size of tunnel, its cover from the surface and Fig. 10. (Case 3-WG) FEM model showing ground as per Worst case and
distance between two tubes, and theoretical influence Surface loading
zone. Boundary conditions are modelled as free top
boundary (representing ground surface), fully fixed at Steps of modelling as per Construction sequence
bottom and vertical roller at the sides. Numerical analyses are performed mainly in two stages:
6. The segmental liner is simulated using structural 1. Initial stage which simulates the ground condition
monolithic elastic beam elements in 2-dimensional before construction, and
plane strain; main parameters defined are modulus of 2. Tunnel excavation and segmental liner installation
elasticity and moment of inertia. Effective moment of
inertia is considered to take effect of joints in the Output Diagrams of RS2 file:
precast segmental using Muir Wood’s equation. A. Maximum Overburden and General ground condition with
RS2 software used to simulate various ground layers and Surcharge = 50kN/m2
their lateral earth pressure coefficient, modeling the effect of
twin tunnels and space between them and also the seismic
condition or ordinary design and maximum design case.
Based on the understanding of ground conditions two cases
are analyzed:
1. General Case – Having low soil cover and Basalt/
Breccia of grade II at the tunnel level. Fig. 11. Axial Force in liner at stage 2 & 3
2. Worst case – Thick soil cover and grade III Tuff
around the at the tunnel level.
Surface loading (Surcharge)
General case = 50kN/m2
Worst case = 120kN/m2

Table 1 Fig. 12. Axial Force in liner at stage 4 & 5

Four analyses (2x2) are performed using RS2 software
General Condition
General (G) Worst (W)
Surface General (G) Case 1 (GG) Case 3 (WG)
Loading Worst (W) Case 2 (GW) Case 4 (WW)

The FEM model used for case 1 and 3 are shown in figure 9
& 10 the modeling stages are, Fig. 13. Bending Moment in liner at stage 2 & 3
Baig et al. International Journal of Modern Developments in Engineering and Science, VOL. 1, NO. 7, JULY 2022 35

Fig. 14. Bending Moment in liner at stage 4 & 5 Fig. 21. Bending Moment in liner at stage 4 & 5

Fig. 15. Shear Force in liner at stage 2 & 3

Fig. 22. Bending Moment in liner at stage 6

Fig. 16. Shear Force in liner at stage 4 & 5

B. Maximum Overburden and General ground condition with

Surcharge = 120kN/m2

Fig. 23. Shear Force in liner at stage 2 & 3

Fig. 17. Axial Force in liner at stage 2 & 3

Fig. 24. Shear Force in liner at stage 4 & 5

Fig. 18. Axial Force in liner at stage 4 & 5

Fig. 24. Shear Force in liner at stage 6

C.
Maximum overburden and worst ground condition with
surcharge = 50kN/m2

Fig. 19. Axial Force in liner at stage 6

Fig. 25. Axial Force in liner at stage 2 & 3

Fig. 20. Bending Moment in liner at stage 2 & 3

Baig et al. International Journal of Modern Developments in Engineering and Science, VOL. 1, NO. 7, JULY 2022 36

Fig. 26. Axial Force in liner at stage 4 & 5 Fig. 34. Bending Moment in liner at stage 2 & 3

Fig. 27. Bending Moment in liner at stage 2 & 3 Fig. 35. Bending Moment Force in liner at stage 4 & 5

Fig. 28. Bending Moment in liner at stage 4 & 5

Fig. 36. Bending Moment in liner at stage 6

Fig. 29. Shear Force in liner at stage 2 & 3

Fig. 37. Shear Force in liner at stage 2 & 3

Fig. 30. Shear Force in liner at stage 4 & 5

D. Maximum overburden and worst ground condition with

surcharge = 120kN/m2

Fig. 38. Shear Force in liner at stage 4 & 5

Fig. 31. Axial Force in liner at stage 2 & 3

Fig. 32. Axial Force in liner at stage 4 & 5

Fig. 39. Shear Force in liner at stage 6

3. Conclusion
Two method of FEM analysis (STAAD Pro and
RocScience2) are used to study the behaviour of soil/rock mass
surrounding the tunnels. The FEM method made the study of
soil/rock masses behaviour much easier and simplified the
Fig. 33. Axial Force in liner at stage 6 design of segment for the bored tunnel. Different forces are
Baig et al. International Journal of Modern Developments in Engineering and Science, VOL. 1, NO. 7, JULY 2022 37

applied in the model and with the help of possible load [4] Areeb Ahmad, Masoom Reza, “Analysis for Construction Technology,
IJERT, vol. 9, no. 10, Oct. 2020
combinations the segment is designed for normal and worse [5] Moatassem Abdallah, Mohamed Marzouk, “Planning of Tunnelling
load cases. The study of surrounding soil/rock masses the Projects Using Computer Simulation and Fuzzy Decision making,” Aug.
settlement and deformation in the existing adjacent building or 2013.
[6] Nandolia Usamaa, Shaikh Taliba, Shaikh Abdull Alima, Shaikh
any other structure can be anticipated in well advance and
Mohammed Shezad, “Comparative Analysis of Underground &
which will help the designer to provide additional supports at Underwater Tunnel,” IJERT, vol. 9, no. 7, July 2020.
that particular location to avoid excess settlement. [7] Technical Manual for Design of Construction of Road Tunnels, American
Association of State highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
[8] Vasiliki N. Georgiannou, Andreas Serafis and Eleni-Maria Pavlopoulou,
References “Analysis of a Vertical Segmental Shaft Using 2D & 3D Finite Element
[1] Guidelines for the Design of Tunnels, ITA Working Group. Codes”, International Journal of GEOMATE, vol. 13, no. 36, pp. 138-146,
[2] General Report on Conventional Tunnelling Method from ITA Working Aug. 2017.
Group. [9] K. J. Bakker, “Structural design of linings for bored tunnels in soft
[3] General Report on Mechanized Tunnelling Method from ITA Working ground”, Jan. 2003.
Group.