Soil mechanics aspects of
soft ground tunnelling
by J. H. ATKINSON*, BSc, MA, MSc, DIC, PhD, MICE, FGS
Synopsis
THE BASIC PRINCIPLES of soil mechanics
applicable to the behaviour of slopes,
foundations and retaining walls apply eq-
ually to the stability of tunnels in soft
ground and to the settlements caused by
tunnelling. Tunnel engineers, however,
have a separate terminology to describe
certain aspects of tunnelling and they em-
ploy terms such as squeeze, stand up time
and ground loss. In addition, tunnel en-
gineers often attribute to creep those
time-dependent phenomena which founda-
tion engineers rightly associate with pri-
mary consolidation.
Recently a number of calculations have
been developed, mostly as a result of
research carried out at Cambridge Univer-
sity, which deal with the stability of tun-
nels and tunnel headings and with settle-
ments caused by tunnelling, These calcu-
lations always consider quite separately
drained cases and undrained cases in ac-
cordance with the basic principles of soil
mechanics but it is not always obvious
which calculation is applicable for a parti-
cular practical tunnelling problem.
This Paper considers the stresses and
pore pressures in soft ground due to tun-
nelling and it discusses the calculations
appropriate for estimating the stability of
the tunnel and its heading and the settle-
ments caused by tunnelling.
Introduction
Geotechnical engineers accept that the
principle of effective stress provides the
fundamental basis for understanding the
behaviour of saturated soils and that, as
a consequence, it is necessary to distin-
guish clearly between stability and set-
tlement calculations for drained loading,
for undrained loading and for consolida-
tion. Thus, calculations for the stability
of a quickly excavated trench aro different
to those for the stability of an an-
cient hillside; similarly calculations for
the stability and settlement of a foun-
dation on a fine grained clayey soil are
different to those for the same foundation
on a coarse grained sandy soil. In both
cases further calculation may be required
to estimate the rate at which a trench
will become unstable and the rate at which
a foundation settles due to consolidation.
It is always necessary to distinguish
between drained, undrained and consoli-
dation calculations for soils for which the
principle of effective stress applies. Thus,
for calculations for the stability of tun-
nels and for settlements due to tunnelling
operations it is important to determine at
the outset whether the construction should
*Reader and Head of the Geotechnical Engineer-
ing Division, The City University, London.
IIAssIstant Principal Engineer, Scott Wilson Kirk-
patrick fk Partners
This Paper will be the subject of a British Geo-
technical Society Informal Discussion to be held
on Wednesday, September 30, 19B1, at the in-
stitution of Civil Engineers
20 Ground Engineering
at R. J. MAIR~,
be taken as drained or as undrained so
that the appropriate calculations may be
done. This Paper considers the factors
which determine whether a particular tun-
nelling operation may be taken as drained
or as undrained and discusses some cal-
culations for the stability of the heading
and the settlements caused by construc-
tion of the tunnel.
The principle of effective stress and
fundamental soil behaviour
The principle of effective stress was
stated by Terzaghi (1936) and it requ'res
that all measurable effects of a change
of stress, such as straining and changes
of strength, occur as a consequence of a
change of effective stress. Thus, if soil is
loaded or unloaded by changing total stres-
ses and pore pressure together in such a
way that the effective stresses remain
constant there will be no measurable ef-
fect on the soil, there will be no strains
and its strength will be unaltered. Con-
versely, if soil is loaded or unloaded with-
out strains occurring the effective stresses
and the strength will remain unaltered.
If the total normal and shear stresses are
<r and and the pore pressure is u, the
-,
effective stresses tr'nd -,'re
If a soil structure, such as a slope or a
foundation or a tunnel, remains undistur-
bed for a length of time the pore pres-
sure will reach steady state values in equi-
librium with the boundary conditions and
the steady state pore pressure is denoted
u,. If now, due to some loading, the pore
pressures are altered so that they are no
longer in equilibrium with the boundary
conditions the out of balance pore
pressure is known as the excess pore
pressure and is denoted as u which may
be positive or negative. Thus, the pore
pressure u is given by
u = u + ue (2)
Normally u„will be simply found from
hydrostatic conditions or from a steady
state seepage flownet but u will not us-
ually be easily determined.
For the present we will examine soil
behaviour in terms of stress parameters t
and s and strain parameters e~ and e„
given by
= —,'<,—irs) S = T (<, + ~a) (3)
ey —iti e« i!i. —ei + es (4)
and in terms of the specific volume v is
given by
v =1+ wG,
where w is the water content and
G, is the specific gravity of the soil
grains,
MA, PhD, MICE
The derivation and use of these para-
meters was discussed by Atkinson
Bransby (1978),
From eqn. 1 we have
t'rand s' s-u (6)
The parameter t is a deviator or shear
stress and the parameter s is an average
or normal stress neglecting the influence
of the intermediate principal stress trs .
Similarly e> is a deviator or shear strain
and ee is a volumetric strain and is given
also by
5v
he'V
v
The essential features of soil behav;'our
are illustrated in Fig. 1. The line AB is
the normal consolidation line and the line
BD is a swelling line, and these represent
the states of soil in the ground before any
construction has taken place; the sample
at B is normally consolidated, that at
C is lightly overconsolidated and that at
D is heavily overconsolidated.
In practice few, if any, natural soils
are truly normally consolidated; the states
of soft clays and loose sands are at points
such as C and these soils are taken to be
lightly overconsolidated; the states of stiff
clays and dense sands are at points such
as D and these soils are taken to be hea-
vily overconsolidated. The double line is
the critical state line which represents
the states of all samples at ultimate fail-
ure, and the projection of the critical state
line on the t':s'lane is given by
t =s . Sintii..'8)
where yea's the critical state friction an-
gle. Alternatively, the ultimate failure of
soil is given by
-,„' tr„'an tjiea (9)
where -,„' rn and o.„' <rn —u are the
shear and normal stresses on a particular
slip plane through the soil on which fail-
ure is taking place,
Eqns, 8 and 9 are the same as the Mohr-
Coulomb criterion of failure with zero co-
hesion appropriate for ultimate, or critical
state failure of remoulded soil, For over-
consolidated remoulded soils the peak
strength is greater than the critical state
strength but the peak strength is only
mobilised for very small strains. For nat-
ural soils, the peak strength may be grea-
ter than the peak strength of the same
soil remoulded to the same state but,
again, the peak strength will be mobilised
only for very small strains and, after mod-
est strains, the strength of natural soil
will approach the ultimate, or critical state
strength of the same soil remoulded to
the same state.
In practice it is quite possible that soil
strains which occur during construction

(a)
lb)
will be large enough to take the soil close
to the ultimate, or critical state strength
and, as argued by Atkinson & Bransby
(1978), it is logical to base designs on the
ultimate strength given by eqns. 8 and 9.
This approach is logical and conservative
and it would be reasonable to use lower
factors of safety in the design than would
commonly be used if the peak strength
was chosen.
As normally consolidated soils are
loaded towards ultimate failure the states
map out a surface which is known as the
state boundary surface, discussed in some
detail by Atkinson & Bransby (1978).
The essential features of a state boundary
surface for soil are that it limits all pos-
sible states for a particular soil; if the state
lies on the state boundary surface the
soil is normally consolidated and its be-
haviour is inelastic and if the state lies
inside the state boundary surface the soil
is overconsolidated and its behaviour is
elastic.
An underlying assumption within the
framework of critical state soil mechanics
is that all samples with the same specific
volume and loaded undrained with no
change of specific volume will ultimately
reach the critical state line at the same
point and they will all have the same un-
drained shear strength, irrespective of the
total stress loading path. For undrained
loading we may write
=c II
where c„, the undrained shear strength,
decreases exponentially with increasing
specific volume.
0
(Critical
State
Line)
U,
S =S —U
(a)
I
~ Undrained
(b)
drained
Fig. 1 (left). Con- During drained loading there are no ex-
solidati on, swelling cess pore pressures and the steady state
and failure lines for pore pressures can always be determined
soil from hydrostatic conditions or from a
steady state seepage flow-net. During un-
drained loading, however, there will us-
Fig. 2 (above). ually be excess pore pressures and as
Stresses, pore pres- these change with time they are not easily
sures and volume- calculated. Thus, for drained loading
tric strains during
strains are related to effective stresses
drained and un-
while for undrained loading strains may be
drained loading and
determined from total stress changes even
consolidati on
though they depend on changes of effec-
CSL (a) Undrained load- tive stress.
ing and consoli- Excess pore pressures dissipate with
dation
time and, even if total stresses remain
S =S —U (b) Drained loading constant, the changes of pore pressure
cause changes of effective stress which
The important feature for design pur- in turn lead to strains. These deformations
poses is that the loading is such that
if are due to consolidation and they occur
there is no volume change the soil strength without any change of external loading;
is given by eqn. 10 and we need not con- thus a foundation may continue to settle
sider effective stresses; for all cases when long after the loading is complete and set-
there are volume changes the strength tlements above tunnels may occur long
is given by eqns. 8 or 9 and it is neces- after construction, For undrained loading
sary to determine the pore pressures and of isotropic elastic soil ))s' 0 (e.g. At-
hence the effective stresses. kinson & Bransby, 1978) and, from eqn. 6
For overconsolidated soil for which the we have
states are inside the state boundary sur-
face the behaviour is taken to be elastic )(u = ))s
and increments of stress are related to
increments of strain by an appropriate Thus, knowing the steady state pore
form of Hooke's law. For drained loading pressures before and after construction
of isotropic elastic soil strains are related (these may or may not be the same) and
to effective stresses by the effective stress the changes of total stress due to con-
Young's modulus E'nd the effective struction we may calculate the changes
stress Poisson's ratio I 'ut for undrained of pore pressure, and hence effective
loading it is possible to relate strains to stress, during consolidation and so, for
total stresses by the undrained Young's elastic soil, calculate the consolidation
modulus E„ together with —-',. For an-
v„— settlements. For inelastic or anisotropic
isotropic elastic soil relationships be- soil similar calculations for consolidation
tween stresses and strains are more settlements are possible but they are more
complex but it is still necessary to dis- difficult to perform.
tinguish between drained and undrained Thus there are a number of different
loading. cases to be considered. Firstly, for drained
For normally consolidated soil for which loading for which excess pore pressures
the states are on the state boundary sur- are zero and effective stresses can be
face the behaviour is inelastic and stresses determined the behaviour of soil should
and strains must be related through some be analysed in terms of effective stresses.
elasto-plastic stress-strain law. The criti- The strength is given by eqns. 8 or 9 and,
cal state model provides one possible for elastic soil, strains are given by
elasto-plastic stress-strain law for soil Hooke's law in terms of effective stresses.
and stress-strain equations are given by Secondly, for undrained loading of satu-
( 10) Schofield & Wroth (1968) and by Atkin- rated soil for which there are no volume
son & Bransby (1978). Even with these changes, analyses may be carried out in
inelastic laws however, it is still essen- terms of total stresses and there is no
tial to distinguish between drained and need to determine the pore pressures. The
undrained loading. undrained shear strength given by eqn, 10,
July, 1981 21

(b)
3. Stages in the construction of a soft ground
Fig.
(b) tunnel heading; (c) lined tunnel
depends only on the water content and
is independent of the loading and, for elas- will be dug in a few hours and earthquake
tic soil, strains are given by Hooke's
law in terms of total stresses with t „—— rate of erosion of a natural slope will be
2
Thirdly, excess pore pressures produced
as a result of undrained loading dissipate
with time and, for elastic soil, the addi-
tional strains may be calculated from seeps from places where the excess pore
elastic theory. These calculations are pressures are large toward the boundar-
familiar to geotechnical engineers con-
cerned with the stability and settlement
of foundations and the same principles
apply equally to calculations for the sta-
bility of tunnels and for settlements due soil is related to the hydraulic gradient i
to tunnelling.
Rates of loading and consolidation
Any changes of total stress or boundary
conditions give rise to excess pore pres-
sures which in turn give rise to migration
of the pore water, volume changes and
consolidation. The rate of change of total
stress due to loading or excavation may
be very fast compared to the rate at which
excess pore pressures diminish, so that
it may be assumed that there is no con-
solidation during loading or construction.
In this case, the loading is known as
undrained and, for saturated soil, there
will be no volumetric strains but usually
there will be undrained shear strains. Al-
ternatively, the rate of change of total
stress may be very slow compared to
the rate at which excess pore pressures
diminish, so that it may be assumed that
all consolidation takes place during load-
ing. In this case, the loading is known as
drained, there are no excess pore pres-
sures but there will probably be volumetric
and shear strains.
Fig, 2 (a) shows a case of undrained
loading where the total stress <r is applied
relatively quickly so that at a time t,. when
the loading is complete there are no vol-
umetric strains e, but the excess pore
pressure is u,.; thereafter volumetric strains
increase as excess pore pressures dimin-
ish. Fig, 2(b) shows a case of drained
loading where the total stress o. is ap-
plied relatively slowly so that excess pore
pressures are always zero and volumetric
strains follow the loading. The essential
distinction between drained and undrained
loading rests with the rate of loading com-
pared to the rate of consolidation; it is
not the absolute rate of loading which is
important.
The rate of loading is determined sim-
ply by the construction. Thus, a river
will erode a natural slope over several
decades, a foundation will be constructed
and loaded over a year or so, a cutting
made in several months, several metres
22 Ground Engineering
h
WRY LY/ .zvz
t f
lc)
tunnel: (a) before construction;
of tunnel driven in a few days, a trench
loads may last less than a minute. The
of the order of 10" times slower than the
rate at which loads are imposed by an
earthquake.
takes place as water
Consolidation
ies where the excess pore pressures are
zero and the rate of consolidation depends,
among other things, on the rate of seepage.
The velocity V of water seeping through
by Darcy's law,
V =ki
where k is known as the coefficient of
permeability and is taken to be a constant
for a given soil.
Values for k for coarse grained sandy
soils are of the order of 10" times greater
than values of k for fine grained clayey
soils and hence, all other things being
equal, consolidation of sandy soils will
take place of the order of 10e times fas-
ter than consolidation of clayey soils.
Thus earthquakes may cause undrained
loading of sandy soils while natural slopes
in clayey soils should be considered as
drained.
The first task of a geotechnical engin-
eer is to determine whether a particular
case may be taken to be drained or un-
drained and, in the latter case, there will
be subsequent settlements due to consoli-
dation, These general principles apply
equally to all soil structures, to founda-
tions, to slopes, to retaining walls as well
as to tunnels.
Total stress changes in the ground
due to tunnelling
Without complex analysis it is impos-
sible to determine accurately the stresses
in the ground due to tunnelling but sim-
ple estimates can be made which illus-
trate important features.
Fig. 3. shows a section of a long cir-
cular tunnel during construction. At the
soil surface there is a uniform surcharge
<rs which may arise due to buildings, traf-
fic or the presence of a layer of very weak
soil, Inside the tunnel there is assumed
to be a uniform total stress or applied
to the tunnel wall and the face of the
heading. The tunnel pressure o-r may arise
from air or bentonite slurry pressure, from
the support of a shield and face plate or
from the support of a permanent lining.
In practice the total stresses applied by a
permanent lining may be greater or smaller
than those applied by the temporary sup-
port system but for the present, and for
simplicity, we will assume that the value
of <rr at the heading is the same as the
value of <rr due to the permanent lining
We will assume, also, that shields and
C
linings are smooth and relatively flexible
and hence <r, is uniform, radial and
constant.
< At (a) in Fig. 3, ahead of the advancing
tunnel, the vertical and horizontal total
I
D
stresses at any depth z are o, and
respectively and the groundwater condi-
tions are steady state and hydrostatic. If,
for simplicity, we take Ke = 1 appropriate
for a soil which is moderately overcon-
solidated, vertical and horizontal stresses
are equalt and
= <rh —<r,. + ./z (13)
where ./ is the unit weight of the soil,
At (b) in Fig. 3, at the heading, the
horizontal total stress in an element in the
face and the vertical total stress in an
element above the crown are <rz as
shown. For a drained case the ground
water conditions are steady state seepage
towards, or away from, the heading and
for an undrained case there will be ex-
cess pore pressures induced by the chan-
ges of total stress. If compressed air or
bentonite slurry is used to maintain sta-
bility or to prevent excessive seepage
of ground water into the heading the value
of <r, is simply the air or slurry pressure
which may be controlled by the engineer.
Small values of o-r are desirable for eco-
( 12) nomic and health reasons and a value only
slightly greater than the original steady
state pore pressure is usually chosen.
The value of o-r due to a shield depends
on a number of factors including the size
of any overcutting bead, the use of face
plates, the stiffness of the soil and the
stresses applied as the shield is jacked
ahead. It is unusual for o-r greatly to ex-
ceed the original overburden pressure
given by eqn. 13, and clearly in an un-
lined tunnel with no air or bentonite pres-
sure <rr = 0. In many cases it would be
a reasonable estimate that o-r during con-
struction falls in the range 0 < (o-r (~ zzy
(C + —,'D), the lower values applying for
heavily overconsolidated stiff soils and the
higher values applying for shallow tun-
nels in lightly overconsolidated soft soils.
Thus, since o-r is likely to be appreciably
less than the original total stress in the
ground, tunnelling will in general cause a
decrease in the mean total stress s and an
increase in the total shear stress t, For
the special case of tunnelling in isotropic
elastic soil it turns out that the changes
of radial and tangential total stesses close
to the tunnel and close to the heading
are equal and opposite with the result
that hs = 0 but for anisotropic and in-
elastic soil the value of s decreases (Mair,
1979; Seneviratne, 1979) .
At (c) in Fig. 3, where the tunnel is
complete with its permanent lining and
groundwater conditions are steady state,
the value of <Tr depends on a number of
factors including the construction proced-
ure, the stiffness of the soil, the stiffness
of the lining and any stresses jacked into
an expanded lining. For the present, how-
ever, we will assume that the total stress
Strictly K —~ '/~
e
'elates horizontal and
vertical effect<'ve
stresses in the ground but if
~
'
<r„'hen ~ —~
h h
also.
 n which
I if the lining is sealed the pore pressures
S state two-dimensional flow and pore pres-
Fig. 4. Total stress path for a typical soil
element near a tunnel during construction
applied by a permanent lining is the
same as that applied by a temporary sup-
port system, and hence total stresses at
(b) in Fig. 3 are taken to be the same as
those at (c). When soil deformations oc-
cur around the tunnel, o-T applied by a
support system will be less than the origi-
nal total stress in the ground, due to the
contribution from the mobilised strength
of the ground itself. The stresses imposed
upon the permanent lining would therefore
almost certainly be less than the original
total stress in the ground since soil defor-
mations inevitably occur during construc-
tion.
We may now sketch the total stress
path for a typical element near the tun-
nel as ABC in Fig. 4, where the points A,
B and C correspond to the sectiors (a)
(b) and (c) in Fig. 3. Since the total stres-
ses at (b) and (c) are assumed to be the
same the points B and C coincide. In
practice the loads on a permanent lining
will probably be a little greater than the
total stresses applied by a temporary sup-
port system and hence the total stresses
at (b) and at (c) in Fig. 3 will differ, and
the points B and C in Fig. 4 will not coin-
cide but they will probably not be signi-
ficantly different. The precise shape of the
stress path ABC in Fig, 4 depends on
the nature of the soil and for the pres-
ent illustration we have simply sketched
an arbitrary curve, For the special case of
isotropic elastic soil fjs = 0 and the line
ABC is straight and vertical, and so the
curve shown in Fig, 4 is appropriate for
inelastic or anisotropic soil.
Pore pressures in the ground due to
tunnelling
At any instant the pore pressure u in
the ground is given by
U = 7 . h (14)
where 7„, is the unit weight of water and
h is the rise of water in a stand-
pipe as shown in Fig. 3.
At (a) in Fig. 3, ahead of the advanc-
tunnel the initial steady state pore
ing
pressures are u„and water rises in stand-
pipes to heights h, corresponding to the
natural water table. Thus it is usually a
simple matter to determine the initial pore
pressure u, everywhere in the soil.
At (c) in Fig. 3, the final steady state
pore pressures are u„and water rises in
standpipes to heights h„as shown. These
final pore pressures correspond to con-
ditions of steady state seepage towards,
or away from, the tunnel and they are
in equilibrium with the pore pressures
just behind the tunnel lining.
The precise values of u„just behind
the lining will depend on whether or not
the lining is impermeable and whether the
tunnel contains fluid pressures. If the
lining leaks then u„just behind the lin-
ing is simply the pressure in the tunnel
will usually be atmospheric, but
depend on the conditions in the region
of disturbed ground immediately behind
the lining.
For the present it is assumed that the
final pore pressures u are a little less
than the initial pore pressures u, but in
any case, at (c) in Fig. 3, there is steady
sures everywhere may be found from a
simple two-dimensional flow-net (e.g. Tay-
lor, 1979)
At (b) in Fig. 3, the pore pressures
are u,. and water rises in standpipes to
heights h,. as shown, but the values of
u,. depend on whether the construction is
drained or undrained. If the tunnelling op-
erations can be taken as drained the pore
pressures u,. correspond to conditions of
steady state seepage towards, or away
from, the heading and they are in equili-
brium with the tunnel pressure o-r in the
heading due to air or bentonite slurry
pressure. For the drained case pore pres-
sures u,. everywhere may be found from a
three-dimensional flow-net and these pore
pressures u,. will usually be different from
the final steady state pore pressures u„
corresponding to two-dimensional seep-
age. If the tunnelling operations can be
taken as undrained so there are no vol-
ume changes during construction, the pore
pressures u,. will be determined by the
initial pore pressures u, and the changes
of total stress due to the tunnelling, These
pore pressures are not in equilibrium with
the boundary conditions at the tunnel and
the excess pore pressures dissipate as
consolidation occurs.
We must be very careful here to note
that for conditions of steady state see-
page there will be additional effective
stresses due solely to the drag of the
flowing water on the soil. These seepage
stresses u-,.'ct in the direction of the
flowlines and are given by
rr,. = 7«. I (15)
where i is the hydraulic gradient (Atkinson
Ik Bransby, 1978).
It is these seepage stresses which give
rise to piping at the toe of a sheet pile
wall and, for seepage towards a tunnel,
they reduce the stability of the tunnel and
may cause ravelling in granular soils well-
known to tunnelling engineers,
Effective stress paths for tunnelling
We have already seen that, in accor-
dance with the principle of effective stress,
it is the effective, not the total, stresses
which determine soil behaviour and so we
must consider the changes of pore pres-
sure as well as the changes of total stress.
In considering pore pressures we must be
very careful to consider the case for
Fig. 5. Total and ef-
fective stress paths
for a typical soil ele-
ment near a tunnel
during drained ex-
cavation
drained tunnelling separately from the
case for undrained tunnelling followed by
consolidation.
We will begin by considering the drain-
ed case for which the rate of excavation
is relatively slow compared with the rate
of consolidation so that excess pore pres-
sures are zero and all changes of effective
stress and all strains take place during
excavation.
Fig. 5 shows total and effective stress
paths sketched for typical elements of
soil near a tunnel for drained excavation.
The total stress path ABC is the same
as that shown in Fig. 4, and the pore
pressures
u„) u,.) have been sketched
u„where u„are pore pres-
sures before construction, u,. are steady
for
state pore pressures near the heading and
u„are steady state pore pressures around
the lined tunnel. In Fig. 5, the effective
stress state B'or excavation approaches
the critical state line and, if the effective
stress path A''eaches the critical state
line, the soil fails. The effective stress path
B''orresponding to the reduction in
pore pressure from ur to u at constant to
tal stress moves away from the critical
state line and hence the factor of safety at
(c) is greater than that at (b). The path
A''nvolves a modest reduction of
a relatively large increase in t'nd s'nd
will give rise to settlements due largely
to shear straining. The path B''nvolves
an increase of s'nd will give rise to set-
tlements due to volumetric compressive
strains. It must be emphasised that, for
drained loading, all strains and settlements
occur immediately the loads or pore pres-
sures are changed. Since the pore pres-
sures are known from the appropriate
flow-nets all calculations for stability and
settlement may be carried out in terms
of effective stresses.
For undrained tunnelling the rate of ex-
cavation is relatively quick compared to
the rate of consolidation so that there is
no drainage during construction and vol-
ume changes are zero. Thus, any set-
tlements that occur during undrained tun-
nelling are due to shear strains only. At
(a) in Fig. 3 the steady state pore pres-
sure u, before construction is hydrostatic.
At (b) in Fig. 3, the pore pressures are
u,. where
u,.=u, +flu ( 16)
and f)u are the changes of pore pressure
due to the changes of total stress during
excavation. In most cases pore pressures
decrease during undrained tunnelling so bu
has a negative value. At (c) in Fig. 3,
steady state pore pressures u„ in equili-
brium with the pressures just behind the
lining are exactly the same at those fol-
lowing drained loading discussed in the
previous section. Thus, immediately after
A
July, 1981 23
 SL
construction the excess pore pressure
IS
0;=0,— =u Lj +jILI —ij ... (17)
noting that Iiu is usually negative for tun-
nelling. Consolidation occurs as the excess
pore pressures change from u,. to u„=
0 mate and minimise deformations. But tun-
and strains and settlements are due to the
corresponding changes of effective stress.
Fig. 6 shows total and effective stress
paths sketched for typical elements of
soil near a tunnel for undrained tunnelling
followed by consolidation, The total stress
path is the same as that shown in Fig. 4
for u, ) u„.
and the pore pressures have been sketched
ing to undrained
The path A''orrespond-
tunnelling involves a re-
latively large increase of t'hich will give
rise to settlements due solely to shear
straining and, of course, there are no vol-
umetric strains. The path B''orres-
ponding to consolidation as the pore pres-
sures change from u,. to 0 involves an
increase of s'hich gives rise to consoli-
dation settlements due solely to volume-
etric straining.
In Fig. 6, the effective stress path
excavation approaches the critical
state line and if the effective stress state
A''or
B'eaches the critical state line the soil
fails. The effective stress path B''or-
responding to the increase of pore pres-
sure from u,. to u during consolidation
also moves towards the critical state line
and hence the factor of safety at (c) is
less than that at (b) and, if either point
B'r point C'n Fig. 6 reach the critical
state line the soil fails. The time for the
effective stress to move from B'oa point
on the critical state line when failure oc-
curs is often known as the stand-up time
and it depends on the rate of consolida-
tion.
The rate at which the consolidation set-
tlements occur depends largely on the
permeability of the soil and, for clayey soils
for which undrained loading applies, the
consolidation process may be lengthy. For
the undrained case there are excess pore
pressures which are not easily determined
but, provided there are no volume chan-
ges, calculations for stability and settle-
ment may be carried out in terms of total
stresses.
Calculations for stability of tunnels
Tunnels in soft ground are usually rela-
tively shallow and the total stresses ap-
plied by the soil and the pore-water are
too small to cause the failure of a shield
or a permanent lining. Thus, possible in-
stability is likely to occur at the heading
and at sections which are unsupported or
supported by insufficient air or bentonite
slurry pressure.
A basic engineering decision to be made
when designing a tunnel in soft ground
24 Ground Engineering
Fig. 6. Total and ef required to maintain stability is given by
fecti ve stress paths
for a typical soil ele- ( 19)
ment near a tunnel
during undrained for the case when the surface pres-
and
excavation followed sure is large and the weight of the soil
by consolidation may be neglected the required tunnel pres
sure is given by
(20)
where T» and T, are dimensionless stabil-
ity numbers.
In order to estimate the tunnel pressure
at collapse the soil strength is given by
q,.,'ut, to include a factor of safety the
soil strength is given by an allowable
u,. is whether or not the tunnel can be safely angle of shearing resistance y„'iven by
—
excavated without compressed air, pres-
surised slurry or other temporary support 1
being required before erection of the lining, tan y„' tan Ifr,'x
(21)
In addition, as in most geotechnical engin-
eering problems, it is necessary to esti-
The tunnel stability numbers T,, T» and
nel engineers must firstly assess the over- T,. are analogous to the bearing capacity
all stability of their tunnels so that they factors N, N» and N„and their values
have an appreciation of the factor of safe- depend on such things as the geometry
ty under working conditions. of the tunnel and soil strength. Values for
For fine-grained clayey soils, for which tunnel stability numbers have been ob-
tunnelling may be considered to take place tained using the limit theorems of plas-
under undrained conditions, stability ana- ticity theory in conjunction with model
lyses should be carried out in terms of
total stresses using the undrained
strength c„. Care must be taken, how-
shear
tests.
Values of Tr based on theoretical analy-
ses for headings and for plane sections
ever, to determine whether there are any of circular tunnels were given by Davis
layers of coarse-grained sandy soil pre- et al (1980) and results of centrifugal
sent which may accelerate the rate of con model tests reported by Kimura & Mair
solidation so that the conditions are no (1981) are in good agreement with these
longer fully undrained. For cases where theoretical analyses. It was found that
undrained loading applies the tunnel pres- tunnel stability in clay soils is strongly
sure Irr required to maintain stability for influenced by the length of unlined head-
<rr = rr,. —
c„2C—
a factor of safety F, is given by
— F,
Tr+ 2»D (1+
D
) (18)
ing P, the cover C and the tunnel diameter
D. Values of T, obtained from theoretical
analyses and centrifugal model tests for
different ratios P/D and C/D are given in
Fig. 7. The results shown are for tunnels
in clay with constant undrained shear
where T, is a dimensionless tunnel stability strength c„.
Where c„varies with depth,
number and the other terms are as de- appropriate calculations may be done
fined in Fig. 3. using the average strength between the
For coarse grained sandy soils for which surface and the tunnel axis.
tunnelling may often be taken as drained, Tunnel stability numbers T» and T,
stability analyses should be carried out in based on theoretical analyses and model
terms of effective stresses and, for a logi- test results were discussed by Atkinson
cal and conservative design, it is appro- & Potts (1977a). The values of 7> depend
priate to take the critical state soil strength only on the soil strength and are indepen-
with y„'nd c' 0. For dry soil and for dent of the depth of the tunnel unless the
the case when Ir, = 0 the tunnel pressure tunnel is extremely shallow, but values
D
C/D
1 2 3
Fig. 7. Influence of heading geometry and depth on the tunnel stability number To
 2.0—
1.0—
Fig.
I
10' 20'
8. Influence of soil strength on the
tunnel stability number T>
for T, given by Atkinson & Potts (1977a)
depend both on the soil strength and on
the depth. Values for T> and T, shown in
Figs. 8 and 9 are those obtained as theo-
retical safe bounds and centrifugal and
laboratory models collapsed when the sup-
port pressures fell below those given by
these values of T~ and T,. Model tests
on tunnel headings in sand by Argyle
(1976) and by Aspden (1976) indicated
that the three-dimensional influence on sta-
bility in cohesionless soils is much less
significant than observed for clay soils
(Casarin, 1977; Mair, 1979).
The solutions for drained loading were
obtained for dry soil for which total and
effective stresses are the same and for
soil which is not dry allowance must be
made for pore pressures and seepage
stresses. If the lining is impermeable and
there is no seepage the lining must sup-
port hydrostatic water pressures in ad-
dition to the effective stresses from the
soil while if there is seepage the effective
stresses must be modified to account for
the seepage stresses. If there is excessive
seepage towards an unlined tunnel fail-
ure may occur due to piping. Loads ap-
pl.'ed to impermeable linings due to water
pressures may exceed the loads applied
by the soil.
Calculations of settlemertts caused
by tunnelling
Settlements due to tunnelling may be
estimated by empirical methods (Atkin-
son & Potts, 1977b) or by analysis using
the finite element method (Atkinson, Orr
& Wroth, 1978), the associated fields met
hod (Atkinson & Potts, 1978) or similar
computer based calculations. For soil
which is overconsolidated and for tunnels
for which the factor of safety is relative-
ly large the state of the soil will remain
inside the state boundary surface and its
behaviour will be elastic.
Settlements of elastic soil may be cal-
culated using the finite element method
taking the effective stress elastic para-
meters E'nd >'or drained loading and
the total stress elastic parameters E„and
~„— ——,'or undrained loading. For elastic
so'.I the behaviour is path independent and
this means that the settlements depend
on the initial and final states and not on
the stress path. If the final condit.'ons for
drained loading are the same as those for
undrained loading followed by consolida-
tion (i.e, the points C're the same in
Figs. 5 and 6) settlements due to drained
loading are the same as those due to un-
drained loading followed by consolidation.
26 Ground Engineering
10
0.5
30' 40'0'0
I
Fig. 9. Influence of soil strength and depth on the tunnel stability
number T,
Thus consolidation settlements may be
found as the difference between drained
and undrained settlements. For these elas-
tic calculations it will be necessary, in
most cases, to make allowance for aniso-
tropy and inhomogeneity of the soil and,
for drained loading, the value of E'ill
not be constant.
If the soil is only very lightly over-
consolidated, or if the tunnel is close to a
state of collapse the state of the soil may
reach the state boundary surface and the
behaviour will no longer be purely elastic.
In this case the calculations must be modi-
fied to take account of the plastic compo-
nents of strain. This may be done by in-
cluding an elasto-plastic soil model, such
as that based on theories of critical
state soil mechanics, into the finite ele-
ment program or by making use of a
plastic method of deformation analysis
such as the associated fields method. In
any case however it is necessary, as al-
ways, to distinguish between drained and
undrained loading,
Due to inward displacement of the sur-
rounding soil, the volume of soil excavated
during tunnelling is always somewhat
greater than the volume corresponding
to the tunnel cross-section and the addi-
tional volume is known as ground loss.
Under undrained conditions, when the
soil must deform at constant volume, the
ground loss into the tunnel per unit len-
gth of tunnel advance is equal to the area
of the surface settlement trough, Ground
losses for shallow tunnels in soft clays
can be predicted by finite element met-
hods using critical state soil models (Mair,
Gunn & O'Reilly, 1981) and hence, by
combining these methods with the empiri-
cal patterns of surface settlement sug-
gested by Peck (1969) settlements above
tunnels can be predicted.
The rate at which consolidat:on set-
tlements occur depends on the depth of
the tunnel, on its geometry and on the
B''n
coefficient of consolidation of the soil
which depends, in turn, on its permea-
bility and compressibility. The problem is
similar to that of estimating the rate of
settlement of a foundation due to con-
sol:dation and was examined by Senevi-
ratne (1979). While it is of interest to
calculate the rate at which consolidation
settlements occur the most important as-
pect of calculations for the rate of con-
solidation is for estimating the stand-up
time of a tunnel for which the construc-
t':on was undrained and for which effec-
tive stresses are moving towards the cri-
tical state line as shown by the path
30'0
Fig, 6. We have already seen that the
principal factor controlling stand-up time
of a tunnel is the rate at which excess
pore pressures dissipate due to consoli-
dation and the rate of consolidation de-
pends on the permeability and compres-
sibility of the soil and on lengths of drain-
age paths.
Calculations for settlements caused by
tunnelling are more complex and, at pres-
ent, seem to be less accurate than the
calculations for stability discussed in the
previous section. Nevertheless, the same
basic soil mechanics principles apply to
each analysis; in particular it is essential
to distinguish between drained and un-
drained loading and all time-dependent
phenomena are taken as being due to
consolidation.
Discussion
Tunnelling in soft ground is basically a
problem of soil mechanics and so all the
principles of soil mechanics apply. A sim-
ple and unified view of the behaviour of
soils is given by the ideas of critical state
soil mechanics and these ideas have been
used to examine the behaviour of soil
during tunnelling construction. In this
Paper a number of broad simplifying as-
sumptions have been made concerning the
changes of stress and pore pressure in
order to expose the basic principles. In
practice changes of stress and pore pres-
sure may be different to those assumed
but the basic principles will remain the
same. Particular care has been taken to
distinguish between drained loading ap-
plicable for tunnelling in coarse grained
soils from undrained loading followed by
consolidation applicable for tunnelling in
fine grained soils. Different calculations are
required for stability and settlements for
each case.
In the ideas of critical state soil mec-
hanics and, indeed, in the classical theories
of soil mechanics, strains due to creep
are neglected and all time-dependent ef-
fects are regarded as being due to primary
consolidation. Thus, in the present analy-
sis, settlements occurring after construc-
tion and the stand-up time are shown to
be dependent on the rate of consolidation.
Tunnel construction in soft ground can
be achieved by a variety of techniques
and many factors affect the development
of ground movements: these include the
geometry characterising the unlined tun-
nel heading and its depth from the sur-
face, the properties of the soil strata and
their stress histories, the type of lining
(concluded on page 38j
 l- iltiltilll A
=I+ ik
Soil mechanics
and tunnelling
T (continued from page 26)
II B used, and the method and rate of exca-
5m vation. It is recognised that it is often
3m difficult to assess the influence of each of
C LAY 3 y these factors in isolation, but it has been
D
the aim of this Paper to show how it is
possible to separate some of the more
important parameters and interpret the
Sm r4 1 behaviour of a tunnel in soft ground in
L
terms of well-established principles of soil
mechanics. With this approach to soft
ground tunnelling, a more rational under-
standing of tunnel deformation behaviour
E can be developed and a framework provi-
GEOMETRY LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES ded for tunnel design and interpretation
of field data.
Fig. 17. Example 2
Acknowledge mertts
Moments about tie position (ii) Clay: c„=35kN/m', /', — 15kN/m'et
Much of the work referred to in this
Paper was carried out at Cambridge Uni-
Moment due to net available passive re- versity as part of a programme of inves-
lateral earth pressures: tigations into the behaviour of tunnels in
sistance
Zone Moment (kNm/m run) soft ground, supported by the Transport
ACTIVE SIDE and Road Research Laboratory
Earth pressure 5 0.5 x 223.9 x (TRRL).
The authors are grateful to Mr. M. P.
6 x (4 + 6) = 6 717.0 Position Earth Pressure (kN/m') O'Reilly, Head of the Tunnels Division at
A 10 x 0.27 = 2.7 the TRRL, for his continual interest and
Moments activated by retained material constructive criticisms. The authors are
0.27 (10 + 20
x 2) 13.5 indebted to Professors A. N. Schofield and
Zone Moment (kNm/m run) C. P. Wroth for their overall direction of
Earth pressure 1 0.5 x 15.7 x 2.67
—D 10+ 2x 20+ the research work.
x (0.67 x 2.67 —2) 3 x 15 —2 x 35 = 25
—4.4 +D 10+ 2x20+ References
Earth pressure 2 15.7 x 5.33 x (0.67 3x15 95 Argyle, D. N. (1976): "An investigation into the
= 279 collapse of tunnel headings in dense sand".
+ 2.67) PASSIVE SIDE Cambridge University Engineering Tripos Part II
— Research Report
Earth pressure 3 0.5 x (33.8 15.7)
Aspden, R. (1976): "Co'lapse of unlined tunnels
x 5.33 x (0.67 + D 4x35 with headings in dense sand". Cambridge Uni-
0.67 x 5.33) = 205 versity Engineering Tripos Part II Research Report
Earth pressure 4 33.8x 6x Moments about tie position:
Atkinson, J.H. & Bransby, P. L. (1978): The Mec-
hanics of Soils. McGraw-Hill, London
(6 + 3) =1825 Atkinson, J. H„orr, T. L. L, & Wroth, C, P.
6 0.5 x 22.1 x 2.67 25 (1978): "Finite element calculations for the de-
Water pressure
x (0.67 + 0.67 x Length y = — = 1.67m formations around model tunnels". In Computer
Methods in Tunnel Design. ICE, pp, 121-144.
2.67) = 72 15 Atkinson, J.H. & Potts, D, M. (1979): "The sta-
bility of a shallow circular tunnel in cohesionless
Water pressure 7 18 x 2.67 x (0.67 soil". Geotechnique, Vol 27: 2, pp. 203-215.
+ 1.5x 2.67) = 224 Moment due to net available passive re- Atkinson, J. H & Potts, D. M. (1977); "Subsi-
Water pressure 8 0.5 (22.1 —18) sistance dence above shallow tunnels in soft ground".
Jnl, Geot. Eng. Div., ASCE., Vol. 103, GT4, pp.
x 2.67 x (0.67 307-325.
Zone Moment (kNm/m run)
+ 2.67 + 0.33 Atkinson, J, H. & Potts, D M. (1978): "Calcula-
x 2.67) = 23 Clay 5 140 x 5 x 5.5 =3850 tion of stresses and deformations around shallow
circular tunne's in soft ground by the method
Water pressure 9 05x18x6x of associated fields" In Computer
Tunnel Design. ICE, pp. 61-84.
methods in
(6 + 2) = 432 Moments activated by retained material
Casarin, C. (1977): "Soil deformations around
tunnel headings in c'ay". MSc. Thesis, University
Zone Moment (kNm/m run) of Cambridge
Tot a I 3 056.0
1 2x2.7x (-1) = -5,4 Davis, E. H., Gunn, M, J., Mair, R. J.
viratne, H, N. (1980): "The stability of shallow
& Sene-
Factor of safety F„: Fill 2 0.5 x (13.5—2.7) x tunnels and underground openings
material". Geotechnique 30, No 4, 397-416.
in cohesive
2x (-0.67) = -7.2
Kimura, T. & Mair, R. J (1981 ): "Centrifuqal

F„
moment of net available
passive resistance

moment activated by
= —
6 717
3 056
= 2.2
Clay

Clay
3

4
0.5 x 25 x 1.67 x (1.33
+ 0.67 x 1.67)
95 x 5 x 5.5
= 51.12
=2 612.5
testing of model tunnels in soft clay". Proc, 10th
International
Foundation
Mair, R. J.
Conference on Soil Mechanics and
Engineering, Stockholm.
(1979): "Centrifugal modelling of tun-
nel construction in soft clay" PhD Thesis, Uni-
retained material versity of Cambridge.
Total 2 651 Mair, R. J., Gunn, M,
"Ground movements
J. & O'Reilly, M. P. (1981):
For comparison the factors of safety cor- around shallow tunnels in
soft c'ay" Proc. 10th International Conference
responding to Methods 1, 2 and 4 respec- on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering,
tively are: F = 1.5 Factor of safety F„: Stockholm.
F „=4.7 Peck. R. B. (1969): "Deep excavations and tun-
F, = 1.4 nelling in soft ground". Proc. 7th Int. Conf, on

Example 2: Short-term analysis of a

propped wall retaining
F„=
moment of net available
passive resistance

moment activated by
= —
3 850
2 651
= 1.45
Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, State-
of-the-Art Vo'ume, pp. 226-290,
Schofield, A. N. & Wroth C P, (1968): Crit'cal
State Soil Mechanics. McGraw-Hill, London.
Seneviratne, H. N. (1979): "Deformations and pore
retained material pressures around model tunnels in soft clay".
clay overlain by a gran- PhD Thesis, Cambridge University
ular fill and a surcharge For comparison the factors of safety cor- Taylor, R. N. (1979): "Stand-up of a model tun-
(Fig. 17) responding to Methods 1, 2 and 4 res-
nel in silt". MPhil Thesis, University of Cam-
Soil properties: pectively are: —
F, = 1.63
bridge.
Terzaghi, K. (1936): "The shearing resistance of
(i) Fill: i)i' 35, )I'
. Kx = 0.27,
0,
= 20kN/ms
F „=
=
32.1 saturated soil and the angle between the planes
of shear", Proc. 1st Int. Conf, Soil Mech and
7»x F, 1.41 Foundn. Enging., Vol. 1, pp. 54-56,
38 Ground Engineering