DESIGN OF SEGMENTAL TUNNEL LINING IN AN

EARTHQUAKE ZONE
Weng Lee Chow, Sek Kwan Tang, Swei Yeh Tong

AMBERG & TTI Engineering Pte Ltd, 2 International Business Park

#11-01 The Strategy, Singapore 609930

Keywords: design, tunnel lining, earthquake

INTRODUCTION
This paper presents the findings from the design of a 5.8m internal diameter reinforced concrete
segmental lining using 2D FEM analysis where pseudo-static loadings (the use of g value) are
used in an attempt to simulate earthquake loadings on the system. The segmental tunnel lining
design was carried out for Contract BC-24 of Phase II Delhi Metro Line.

Background and project description

Contract BC-24 includes the construction of 3 underground stations using cut-and-cover method
and 4.1km of twin bored tunnel using earth pressure balance (EPB) type tunnel boring machines
(TBMs) from Central Secretariat to Badarpur Corridor of Phase II Delhi Metro Line. It also
includes the construction of cross passages and an intervention shaft (IVS).

GEOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS
Ground conditions
The site is in an area of quaternary sediments classified as Older Alluvium. The geological map
does not indicate rock outcrop within the BC-24 alignment. Figure 1 presents the alignment of BC-
24 plotted on the geological map of Delhi.
The Older Alluvium is believed to be oxidised fluvial sediments comprising of silt, clay and
micaceous sand with disseminated nodules and bands of kankar laid down during the middle or
upper Pleistocene periods. Silt-clay and sand are the two major facies recognised in this sediment.
The alignment of bored tunnel comprises of the followings:
Fill - Made ground of up to 5 meters in thickness is found at certain section of the alignment.
The Silt Layer - Underlying the fill, the ground condition in the site comprises mainly of yellowish
brownish silt layer from Older Alluvium. This layer is the dominant layer for the whole of the
tunnel alignment. A borehole carried out at the interface of bored tunnel and J.Nehru Station
showed isolated layers of silty sand around the tunnel crown and tunnel invert levels.
No bedrock is encountered, within the depth of investigation, in the boreholes carried out for the
purpose of tunnelling. However, boreholes carried out in the cut and cover tunnel location towards
the interface with an adjacent contract showed quartzite bedrock at shallow depth.
Measured readings from water standpipes showed that the groundwater table ranges from 4m to
17m below existing ground level.

1
 Figure 1 Geology along the alignment of BC-24

Geotechnical design parameters

The geotechnical design parameters for analyses were derived from field and laboratory test results,
and based on experience on local and similar ground conditions. The parameters used in the static
design and analyses are presented in Table 1.

Table 1 - Design Parameters

Ko = 0.5; Concrete grade = 45MPa; Typical depth to tunnel axis = 17.5m

Earthquake loading = 0.18g (horizontal loading), 0.135g (vertical loading)

2
In order to carry out dynamic analysis in the tunnel lining design, appropriate dynamic parameters
of the soils have to be estimated. These include the shear wave velocity of the soil and rock
medium, low strain dynamic shear modulus, shear modulus variation with strain and soil damping
variation with strain. In addition, seismic data from previous seismic activities provides useful
information with regards to wave acceleration and propagation or damping characteristics
appropriate for the ground condition envisaged to be encountered.
The following data was obtained for the dynamic analysis:
(a) The peak ground acceleration recorded is about 3.5m/s2 from
(b) Seismic data from Roorkee Station, about 150km away from Delhi. Figure 2 shows the
locations of the various Strong Motion Accelerograph (SMA) Network. Roorkee Station
is about 160km from Chamoli, of which was adopted as the reference earthquake source.
(c) Peak acceleration recorded at Roorkee Station for the Chamoli Earthquake is 0.55 m/s2.
(d) As sensitivity study, seismic data from another SMA station Gopeshwar, about 20km
from Chamoli was used. The peak acceleration recorded at this station is about 3.5m/s2.
(e) Shear modulus, as derived from seismic test from BC-16, ranges from 100 MPa to
1000MPa, over a depth from ground surface to about 30m below ground surface.

Figure 2 - Locations of strong motion accelerographs (SMA) networks

ANALYSIS AND DESIGN

Design approach
The segmental tunnel lining design was carried out using 2D finite element (FE) program Plaxis to
obtain the stresses on the tunnel lining. Mohr Coulomb model was adopted and the soil material
type is taken to be drained. The tunnel linings are modelled with hinges to simulate the joints
between the 5 segments and a keystone.
The design consists of various parametric studies to determine the most critical load case with
respect to water table, presence of surcharge, K0 value, lining thickness, seismic forces and the
depth of tunnel. The maximum bending moment and its corresponding axial force are then used to

3
determine the reinforcement required for the particular load case. Pseudo static loadings (the use of
g value) are then used in an attempt to simulate earthquake loadings on the system where
applicable.
In addition, as a design validation case for Plaxis without considering the effects of earthquake
loading, the results from Plaxis was also compared against the results from the empirical closed
form solution of Muir-Wood (modified by Curtis).

Earthquake loading using pseudo static load method

In this method, the seismic loads are treated as equivalent pseudo-static loads. The dynamic earth
pressure loads induced by seismic activity are dynamically applied in increments and the effects are
combined with either the active or at-rest static soil pressures acting on the underground structure.
New Delhi is located in Zone IV of Seismic Zoning Map of India. It was stated that Zone IV has
fairly high seismicity with general occurrence of earthquakes of magnitude 5 6, a few of
magnitudes 6 7 and occasional incidence of 7.5 8.0 magnitude of shocks. The tunnel lining are
also required to be designed to forces equivalent to Modified Mercalli VII event in service
condition.
As indicated in IS 1893 Part 1 (2002), the Zone Factor, Z is 0.24. By applying a depth factor (IS
1893 Part 1 - 2002, pg 16, Clause 6.4.4), the effective peak ground acceleration can be reduced to
0.75*0.24 = 0.18g for a typical depth of 17.5m below ground level in the horizontal direction.
For the vertical direction, 0.135g was adopted based on Youssef et al (2001).
However, in order to simulate a full dynamic response of the tunnel lining using the equivalent pseudo-static
method, correlation between the dynamic and equivalent pseudo-static method has to be carried out.

Correlation with dynamic analysis

SHAKE 91 Program and Plaxis Version 8 are used in the correlation exercise. SHAKE 91 Program
is a DOS Program used to conduct equivalent linear seismic response analyses of horizontally
layered soil deposits. The soil profile is idealised as a system of homogeneous, visco-elastic sub-
layers of infinite horizontal extent. The response of this system is calculated considering vertically
propagating shear waves. In the program, an equivalent linear procedure is used to account for the
nonlinearity of the soil using an iterative procedure to obtain values for the modulus and damping
that are compatible with the equivalent uniform strain induced in each subsoil layers.
Plaxis Version 8 Program is a finite element program which has the capability of simulating the
dynamic load using real earthquake data. The dynamic loading is usually applied at the bottom of
the model resulting in shear waves that propagates upwards. The program is able to analyse the
propagation of shear waves through the soil and its influence on underground structures. Absorbent
boundaries are also specified at both sides of the model to absorb the increments of stresses on the
boundaries caused by the dynamic loading, that would otherwise be reflected inside the soil body.
Figure 3 below shows the Plaxis mesh use in the correlation exercise.

4
 Figure 3 - Plaxis mesh used for study and correlation for propagation of shear waves

Figure 4 - Correlation of acceleration-time curve between SHAKE and Plaxis

Figure 4 above shows a comparison of the acceleration-time curve between the SHAKE model and
the Plaxis model. The results indicated a good match between the two programs.

Input Data
For the dynamic analysis conducted in the SHAKE model, the actual time history of an earthquake
data was input at 70m below ground level (assuming rock layer). The dynamic shear modulus
Gmax of 500MPa was assumed for the entire soil layer. This 500MPa is the weighted average
obtained from the downhole seismic tests conducted at an adjacent site from ground level to 30m
below ground level. A sensitivity study was also conducted for 1000MPa (maximum value derived
from the seismic tests).
The SHAKE program was first used to derive the acceleration at the ground surface adopting the
earthquake load. The tunnel was not input in SHAKE because of the limitation of the program.
Through the soil medium, the acceleration of the earthquake load was amplified when the waves
reached the ground surface. This response for Delhi Silt is shown in Figure 5 below.
Different typical soil types of varying relationship of G/Gmax and Damping Ratio versus Percent
Strain were considered in the analysis (please see Figures 6 and 7). In a dynamic analysis, it is
known that the shear modulus G and damping ratio of the soil will change with respect to change in
the strain resulted from the earthquake load. From the SHAKE model, it was found that upper

5
bound of G/Gmax curve and lower bound of Damping Ratio of the various soil types gives the
largest acceleration at the ground surface.
The SHAKE model was then calibrated adopting a fixed equivalent damping ratio of 5% and Gmax
of 500MPa and this was found to obtain a similar acceleration at the ground surface as that of the
soil with upper bound of G/Gmax and the soil with lower bound of Damping Ratio.
Hence, the 5% damping and shear modulus of 500MPa was input in finite element program Plaxis
for the dynamic analysis which includes the tunnel lining which is modelled as beam elements. The
shear modulus of soil was initially adopted as 10MPa at the stage of excavation and installation of
the tunnel lining. During the dynamic analysis, the shear modulus was changed to 500MPa to
reflect the dynamic nature of the soil behaviour.

Figure 5 - Acceleration-time curve at depth and at ground surface calibrated from dynamic analysis

Figure 6 - Plot of G/Gmax versus Percent Strain used in model calibration

6
 Figure 7 - Plot of Damping Ratio versus Percent Strain used in model calibration

RESULTS AND FINDINGS

Results from pseudo-static approach
Figure 8 presents the results from the Plaxis program using pseudo-static approach. Figure 9
presents the results of the dynamic analysis.

Figure 8 - Forces in tunnel lining with no earthquake loading

7
 Figure 9 - Forces in tunnel lining with pseudo-static earthquake loading

Previous Figure 5 shows the acceleration-time curve at both bottom and top of the model. The
maximum acceleration amplifies from 0.55m/s2 at the bottom (or rock surface) to 1.7m/s2 at the
ground surface. With this amplification, the structural forces acting on the tunnel lining due to the
dynamic loading increases slightly. However, the structural forces are still less than that predicted
from the pseudo-static model.

Sensitivity study
Two additional sensitivity studies of the dynamic effects were also considered, one case (Case 1)
adopting higher shear modulus of 1000MPa and another case (Case 2) adopting a stronger
earthquake response recorded at Gopeshwar Station, about 20km from the earthquake at Chamoli.
The peak acceleration recorded at this station is about 3.5m/s2. It was known that higher shear
modulus will increase the acceleration. The results are shown in Figures 8 and 9. In this case, the
maximum acceleration amplifies from 0.55m/s2 at the bottom (or rock surface) to 2.0m/s2 at the
ground surface. There is no significant difference in the structural forces on the lining, as compared
to the case of shear modulus of 500MPa.

8
 Figure 8 - Acceleration-time curve for sensitivity study (Case 1 2 times higher shear modulus)

Figure 9 - Acceleration-time curve for sensitivity study (Case 2 Very strong earthquake)

However, as compared to the case without earthquake loading, results from Case 2 which produces
a maximum peak ground acceleration of 5.8m/s2, showed significant increases of structural forces
in the lining. The highest response was especially observed for the shear force, i.e. about 35% more.
In comparison with pseudo-static analysis, the bending moment only increases by about 4% and the
axial force are about 10%. Structural check for the bending capacity is found to be adequate for the
forces induced. A separate check on the shear was also conducted and the shear reinforcement is
found to be adequate, i.e. no collapse of the tunnel lining will occur. It is to be noted that this is an
extreme case of the earthquake loading acting on the tunnel lining, of which the occurrence is more
likely to be in Delhi Zone V rather than Zone IV which BC-24 project is located.
In summary, the structural forces in the tunnel lining is summarised in Table 2.

9
Table 2 - Summarised results from empirical Muir-Wood (modified Curtis) method and pseudo-static method
from finite element Plaxis program

Max Peak
Max Bending Max Shear Max Axial
Earthquake Gmax Ground
Method Soil Type Moment Force Force
Data (MPa) Acceleration
(kNm/m) (kN/m) (kN/m)
(m/s2)
Empirical
(Muir-
Mohr-
Wood - - - 112 148 1263
Coulomb
and
Curtis)
Pseudo-static
Mohr-
Plaxis Earthquake 10 - 138 113 1350
Coulomb
Load
Mohr-
Plaxis No Earthquake 10 - 116 92 1190
Coulomb
Mohr- Chamoli 500
Plaxis 1.7 116 94 1190
Coulomb Roorkee dynamic
Sensitivity Studies
Mohr- Chamoli 1000
Plaxis 2.0 116 95 1200
Coulomb Roorkee dynamic
Mohr- Chamoli 500
Plaxis 5.8 143 153 1490
Coulomb Gopeshwar dynamic

CONCLUSIONS
In order to be able carry out a reliable pseudo-static analysis in Plaxis for the design of segmental
tunnel lining for BC-24, correlation with a full dynamic analysis using SHAKE was carried out.
The results obtained from the pseudo-static analysis were compared with those obtained from static
analysis using Muir-Wood (modified by Curtis). It was shown that pseudo-static analysis predicts a
higher structural force on the tunnel lining as expected. This paper illustrated that with appropriate
dynamic field data of the soil and measured dynamic responses from a seismic event, an appropriate
correlation with dynamic response can be carried out reliably. A pseudo-static analysis can then be
carried out effectively to obtain the induced forces onto the tunnel lining due to a seismic or
earthquake event.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to thank and acknowledge the co-operation and permission from the main
contractor, Italian-Thai Development (ITD) JV and the client, DMRC for the publication of this
paper.

10
REFERENCES
Downhole seismic test results from Geotechnical Investigation Report for DMRC BC-16 Contract, Report No.
IGS/CEC-SOMA/DMRC BC-16/01.
Earthquake Data from COSMOS Virtual Data Centre.
I.M. Idriss & J.I. Sun (1992), Users Manual for SHAKE 91.
P.B. Schnabel, J. Lysmer, H.B. Seed (1972), SHAKE, A computer program for earthquake response analysis of
horizontally layered Sites, Report No. EERC 72-12, College of Engineering, University of California, Berkeley,
California.
S. Mukhopadhyay, Y. Pandey, R. Dharmaraju, P.K.S. Chauhan, P. Singh & A. Dev (2002), Seismic Microzonation of
Delhi for Ground-Shaking Site Effects, Current Science, Vol. 82, No.7, 10 April 2002, pp. 877-881.
V. Gupta, H.G. Poulos & S.G. Reid, Seismic Micro-Zonation of Delhi.
Y. Pandey, R. Dharmaraju, P.K.S. Chauhan & B. Chidanand (2003), Preliminary Seismic Microzonation Map of
Delhi.
Y. Pandey, R. Dharmaraju & P.K.S. Chauhan (2001), Estimation of Source Parameters of Chamoli Earthquake,
India, Proc. Indian Acad. Sci. (Earth Planet. Sci.), 110, No. 2, June 2001, pp.171-177.
Youssef M A Hashash, Jeffrey J. Hook, Birger Schmidt and John I-Chian Yao. Seismic design and analysis of
underground structures, Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 16 (2001).

11