Effects of different tunnel face advance excavation on the settlement by FEM

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.authoridKarakus, Murat/0000-0001-6701-1888
dc.authorwosidKarakus, Murat/A-9517-2011
dc.contributor.authorKarakus, M
dc.contributor.authorFowell, RJ
dc.date.accessioned2024-08-04T20:13:27Z
dc.date.available2024-08-04T20:13:27Z
dc.date.issued2003
dc.departmentİnönü Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractThe excavation process for a tunnel changes in terms of its service requirements, ground conditions and the stability of surface buildings in urban areas. When a tunnel is excavated, there will be settlement, which may cause damage to surface structures. To control and limit the settlement caused by tunnelling operations, there have been many tunnelling techniques proposed. Thus, in this paper, a number of Finite Element Method analyses were conducted to investigate the effects of different patterns for advancing the tunnel face on the settlement. The Heathrow Express Trial tunnel was constructed in accordance with the principles of the New Austrian Tunnelling Method (NATM). The settlement measurements taken during its construction were used to validate the results from the analyses undertaken. Three different face advance techniques were used during the construction of the Heathrow Express Trial tunnel viz. Twin sidewall excavation (TS1), single sidewall excavation (TS2), and Crown, Bench and Invert excavation (TS3). As the trial work proved that TS2 produced the minimum settlement above tunnel centreline, only TS2 was subjected to the FEM analysis in this research. In order to simulate TS2 correctly three types of excavation models were devised and the results compared to field measurements of TS2. For the FEM analysis the Hypothetical Modulus of Elasticity (HME) soft lining approach was used and a practical method to estimate HME is proposed for when it is used for different face advance sequences. Results proved that when the excavation pattern was changed, the HME value was also changed and settlement over the tunnel centreline changed in terms of the face advance pattern adopted. (C) 2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/S0886-7798(03)00068-3
dc.identifier.endpage523en_US
dc.identifier.issn0886-7798
dc.identifier.issue5en_US
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-0141649144en_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ1en_US
dc.identifier.startpage513en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1016/S0886-7798(03)00068-3
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11616/93620
dc.identifier.volume18en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000185773800006en_US
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ3en_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Scienceen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopusen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherPergamon-Elsevier Science Ltden_US
dc.relation.ispartofTunnelling and Underground Space Technologyen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectfinite element analysis (FEM)en_US
dc.subjectsettlementen_US
dc.subjectNATMen_US
dc.subjectLondon cayen_US
dc.subjectHMEen_US
dc.titleEffects of different tunnel face advance excavation on the settlement by FEMen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu