Tunnelling-induced ground movements
Instn
in clay
R. J. Grant, BEng, PhD and R. N. Taylor, MA, PhD, CEng, MICE
& A series of plane strain centrifuge model
tests of single tunnels in moderately sti€
clay has been conducted at City Univer-
sity, London. Ground movements were
measured using conventional displacement
transducers at the ground surface and by
digital image-processing techniques below
ground level. The relatively simple tests
are shown to result in ground movements
which are consistent with ®eld measure-
ments, but the tests produced considerably
more high-quality data, which have been
analysed to improve predictions of both
surface and subsurface movements in
the plane transverse to a tunnel in clay.
The measured data are assessed against
commonly used empirical predictive
techniques, indicating some deviations
from current practice. A procedure for
predicting horizontal movements as a
function of the vertical settlement pro®le
is suggested.
Keywords: models (physical); subsidence;
tunnels & tunnelling
Notation
D tunnel diameter
g gravity
H distance below the horizon of interest to
the level at which the projection of a
vector of movement intersects the ver-
tical centre line of the tunnel
H distance below the horizon of interest to
the intersection of the tangent to the
distribution of i with depth and the
vertical centre line of the tunnel
hm height in model
hp height in prototype
i distance from the tunnel centre line to
the point of in¯exion for a Gaussian
distribution
K settlement trough width parameter
N gravity scaling factor
r radius from centre of rotation
Sh horizontal ground movement
Sv settlement
Sv max maximum settlement at the tunnel
centre line
VL tunnel volume loss (as a percentage of
the excavated volume per metre length
of tunnel)
Vs volume of the settlement trough (per
metre length of tunnel)
Proc.
Civ. Engrs
Geotech. Engng,
2000, 143, Jan.,
43±55
Paper 11971
Written discussion
x horizontal distance from the tunnel closes 31 June 2000
centre line in the transverse direction
z vertical distance below the ground Manuscript received
surface 16 March 1999;
z0 depth of tunnel axis below the ground revised manuscript
surface accepted 15 October
1999
z vertical distance above the tunnel axis;
z ˆ z0 ÿ z
eh horizontal ground strain
ev vertical ground strain
o angular velocity (rad/s)
Introduction
The worldwide use of tunnelling techniques to
minimize the environmental impact of infra-
structure development has generated increased
activity in the investigation of tunnelling-
induced ground movements. Ground response
due to tunnelling is an area of ongoing
research interest at City University, London,
and as part of this work a series of seven plane
strain centrifuge model tests has been con-
ducted to investigate the development of move-
ments transverse to a tunnel in moderately sti€
clay.
2. Sti€ clay is a common tunnelling medium
throughout the world as construction is rela-
tively straightforward. For example, where R. J. Grant,
possible the recent Jubilee Line extension was Richard Davies
constructed within the sti€ London Clay. Gen- Associates,
erally, excavation can proceed with limited Consulting
groundwater seepage problems and the risk of Geotechnical
collapse in the short term is small. However, Engineers, Bradford
some ground movement at the tunnel boundary on Avon, formerly
is inevitable during the construction process. City University,
London
These movements propagate through the soil
mass and so can a€ect buildings and buried
services.
3. While underground construction can help
lessen the environmental impact of infrastruc-
ture development it is also necessary to mini-
mize the e€ects of construction on existing
structures. This includes settlement damage to
both surface and subsurface structures which
exist adjacent to the tunnel and it is the
assessment of such damage that has driven the R. N. Taylor,
need for more accurate prediction of tunnelling- Professor of
induced ground movements. Notwithstanding Geotechnical
Engineering,
the fact that the presence of existing structures
Geotechnical
will modify the development of ground move- Engineering Research
ments depending on the proximity of the Centre, Department
structures to the tunnel, it is important to of Civil Engineering,
understand the development of tunnelling- City University,
induced ground movements on a green®eld site London
43
 GRANT AND TAYLOR
before considering the added complexity of an
existing structure.
Current practice for predicting
tunnelling-induced ground movements in
clay
Vertical movements
4. It is commonly assumed that the trans-
verse settlement pro®les formed at the ground
surface during tunnel construction can be
approximated to the form of a Gaussian dis-
tribution as
 2
ÿx
Sv ˆ Sv max exp …1†
2i 2
where Sv is the settlement, x is the distance
from the tunnel centre line in the transverse
direction, Sv max is the settlement at x ˆ 0 and i
is the distance from the centre line to the point
of in¯exion of the curve. Many authors have
con®rmed the validity of this assumption,
including Peck 1 and O'Reilly and New. 2 De®ni-
tions for the Gaussian distribution as applied to
predicting surface and subsurface settlement
troughs are given in Fig. 1. The volume Vs of
the settlement trough (per metre length of
tunnel) is obtained by integrating equation (1)
with respect to x to give
p
Vs ˆ Sv max …2p†i …2†
In the short term, construction of a tunnel
produces largely undrained behaviour in clay
soils and the distribution of movements is
limited by the condition of constant volume. In
such a case, the volume of the surface settle-
ment trough is the same as the volume gener-
ated by the movements at the tunnel boundary,
and is generally expressed as a tunnel volume
loss and referred to as a percentage of the
excavated volume per metre length of tunnel
(VL %).
5. The complete surface settlement trough is
de®ned by equation (1) if values of i and VL %
can be determined. Estimating the magnitude of
VL % is not straightforward, as it depends not
only on the amount of overcut at the tunnel but
also on the degree of stress relaxation. Both of
these are functions of the method of tunnelling,
the type of ground and the skill of the
tunnellers. Solutions exist if the degree of
support is well known, for example when using
compressed-air or slurry support, but experi-
ence and back analysis of similar projects is
still probably the most reliable way of predict-
ing volume losses. If VL % is the measure of the
magnitude of ground movement then i is the
measure of the distribution. A variety of
expressions exist for determining values of i
but the most commonly applied is attributed to
O'Reilly and New 2 and is expressed as
i ˆ Kz0 …3†
44
Practical limit of settlement trough
2·5i
i
–x x
Svmax
2·5i
z
i
z0
Svmax
D
where K is a dimensionless trough width Fig. 1. De®nitions for
parameter and z0 is the depth of the tunnel axis settlement pro®les of
below ground level. On the basis of ®eld Gaussian form
measurement data O'Reilly and New 2 suggested
that a value of K ˆ 0
5 was appropriate for the
moderately sti€ London Clay, which was in
reasonable agreement with the earlier ®ndings
of Peck. 1
6. Equation (3), with K ˆ 0
5 for London
Clay, is only applicable to surface settlement
troughs as it was based solely on surface
measurement data. However, the lack of alter-
native methods led to gross extrapolation of the
equation to predict subsurface settlement
troughs in the form
i ˆ K…z0 ÿ z† …4†
where z is the distance of the subsurface
horizon from ground level.
7. Mair et al. 3 presented data from well-
instrumented ®eld sites and from centrifuge
model tests which indicated that although the
surface settlement troughs above tunnels in
clay were well predicted by assuming a con-
stant value of K ˆ 0
5 in equation (4), the
magnitude of i at depth was considerably
underestimated. They suggested the following
distribution of i with depth:
i=z0 ˆ 0
175 ‡ 0
325…1 ÿ z=z0 † …5†
which implies that K varies with depth as
0
175 ‡ 0
325…1 ÿ z=z0 †
Kˆ …6†
1 ÿ z=z0
Only at the ground surface, where z=z0 is zero,
does equation (5) yield the same value for i as
equations (3) and (4), assuming a constant value
of K ˆ 0
5.
8. As equation (5) predicts signi®cantly
larger values of i at depth than equation (4)
(assuming K ˆ 0
5), the implication is that the
subsurface zone of ground movements is wider

than assumed previously, resulting in `less
severe' subsurface settlement troughs with
regard to building damage assessments.
Horizontal movements
9. From inspection of ground displacements
in centrifuge model tests by Mair, 4 O'Reilly and
New 2 suggested that the vectors of movement
near the ground surface were directed towards
the tunnel axis. This resulted in a simple
relationship between vertical ground move-
ments, Sv , and horizontal ground movements,
Sh , at the ground surface as follows:
x
Sh ˆ Sv …7†
z0
and, extrapolating to the subsurface region,
x
Sh ˆ Sv …8†
z0 ÿ z
O'Reilly and New 2 correctly stated that this is
consistent with the condition of constant
volume for undrained behaviour in clay (pro-
vided K is constant with depth).
10. Following the work of Mair et al., 3
Taylor 5 stated that the condition of constant
volume and the variation of the parameter K
with depth de®ned by equation (5) imply that
the displacement vectors focus on a point on the
vertical centre line of the tunnel 0
175z0 =0
325
below the tunnel axis. This yields an alterna-
tive distribution of horizontal movements as
follows:
Sv x
Sh ˆ …9†
…1 ‡ 0
175=0
325†z0
Equation (9) predicts a signi®cantly smaller
proportion of horizontal to vertical displace-
ment than equation (8) and therefore less
potentially damaging horizontal ground strain.
The condition of constant volume is a necessary
requirement as without it vertical and horizon-
tal displacements cannot be related. In fact, the
constant-volume condition and distribution of
K as a function of depth are not sucient
without the assumption that the displacement
vectors focus on a single point. This is investi-
gated in detail later.
Centrifuge model tests
11. Centrifuge model testing is a powerful
tool for investigating geotechnical problems. It
provides a means of conducting well-controlled
e€ective-stress-path scale-model tests using
real soil. The increase in inertial acceleration at
N times gravity results in stress similitude with
a prototype of linear dimensions N times that of
the model. The principle is illustrated in Fig. 2.
It is relatively simple to vary the geometry of
the scale model to explore a variety of proto-
type situations and this leads to substantial
bene®ts over ®eld measurements in terms of
cost, time, variability and experimental control.
TUNNELLING-INDUCED GROUND
MOVEMENTS IN CLAY
In addition, recent advances in digital image Fig. 2. Principle of
processing at City University have increased centrifuge model
the quantity and quality of measurement data testing
that can be obtained from centrifuge model
tests. Considerable insight into ground move-
ments throughout the soil depth can now be
achieved in plane strain models.
Plane strain centrifuge model tests on tunnels
12. Figure 3 illustrates the sources of move-
ment around a tunnel heading (after Mair and
Taylor 6 ). While it is true that tunnelling-
induced ground movements are three-dimen-
sional in nature, many previous investigations
have shown that useful insight can be gained
from two-dimensional idealizations of tunnels
(e.g. Mair 4 ). With the exception of movement
towards the tunnel face, the face loss, all the
sources of movement identi®ed in Fig. 3 are in
the plane perpendicular to the tunnel and so it
is reasonable that movements transverse to
long tunnels may be represented under con-
ditions of plane strain. (Note that consolidation
movements are not considered in the work
presented.)
13. To investigate the ground movements
around single long tunnels in moderately sti€
clay a series of plane strain centrifuge model
tests has been conducted. A schematic diagram
of a typical model is presented in Fig. 4.
It consisted of a block of overconsolidated
kaolinite clay contained within a model con-
tainer (a strongbox). A circular tunnel cavity Fig. 3. Sources of
lined with a latex membrane and supported by movement at a tunnel
compressed air pressure was located in the heading (after Mair
clay, extending the full width of the model from and Taylor 6 )
1 Face loss
2 Passage of the shield
3 Closure of the tail void
2
1 4 Lining deflection
2
5
5
3
5 Consolidation 3
4 4
45
 GRANT AND TAYLOR

front to back. Equilibrium pore water pressures Displacement transducers (LVDTs)

were obtained from miniature pore pressure
transducers (Druck PDCR81). Movements were
generated by reducing the pressure within the
cavity and displacements were measured by
two methods. Conventional displacement trans-
ducers (linearly variable di€erential trans-
formers, LVDTs) monitored settlements of the
ground surface to an accuracy of approximately
Kaolinite clay
5 mm. In addition, a digital image-processing
system was used to track marker beads on the

Up to 304 mm
front face of the model in order to determine
subsurface patterns of movement; this is Marker beads
described brie¯y in the following section. A
total of seven tests were conducted and the
geometric details of each are given in Fig. 4 and

m
m
Table 1. The test geometries were chosen to

0
20
minimize the e€ects of the side wall boundaries.
550 mm
All the tests were conducted at an acceleration
of 100 times gravity (the gravity scaling factor
N was 100), at which the tunnel cavity of Pore pressure Tunnel cavity (50 mm dia.)
diameter D ˆ 50 mm represented a 5 m dia. transducers supported by compressed air pressure
prototype tunnel with the depth to the tunnel
axis varying from 10 m to 22´5 m. Fig. 4. Schematic diagram of a typical plane strain centrifuge model (not
to scale)
The centrifuge facility at City University,
London
14. The centrifuge facility has an Acutronic Table 1. Centrifuge model tests conducted*
661 geotechnical centrifuge with a radius to the
platform of 1´8 m and the capacity to test Test reference Total depth to tunnel axis
models weighing up to 200 kg at 200g. The
z0 (model scale): mm z 0 /D
normal payload volume is approximately
500 mm by 700 mm by 500 mm high. Fig. 5 is a RJG1 225 4´5
schematic diagram of the centrifuge and control RJG9 225 4´5
room. The model swing is shown at rest but as RJG14 100 2
the acceleration increases it rotates upwards in RJG15 175 3´5
line with the radial acceleration ®eld. Clearly, RJG17 150 3
the model apparatus must be designed to TH1 175 3´5
operate remotely and under high accelerations. CK1 125 2´5
15. An important feature for this research is * RJG1 was a preliminary test in which equilibrium conditions were not achieved
the digital image-processing capability. A small at 100g before reducing the tunnel pressure. In the other tests the water table was
solid-state charge-coupled device (CCD) camera 25 mm below ground level, except for TH1, in which it was 5 mm below ground
mounted on the centrifuge swing views the level. Measurement from image-processing techniques was successful from test
front face of the models in ¯ight through the RJG15 onwards.

Fluid and electrical Centrifuge VCR and

slip ring stack control monitor

Counter-weight Camera boxes, signal

conditioning and PC
Junction Image Data Fig. 5. Schematic
boxes processing logging diagram of the
Model Acutronic 661
geotechnical
Pedestal and out-of-
Motor
Hydraulic centrifuge model-
control balance gauges CCD
unit camera control testing facility at City
Swing
(at rest)
University, LondonÐ
Motor
capacity 40g tonnes,
radius 1´8 m to swing
Centrifuge room Control room base in ¯ight
46
 TUNNELLING-INDUCED GROUND
MOVEMENTS IN CLAY

thick Perspex window forming one side of the

strongbox. The analogue images are relayed
through the slip ring stack to the control room,
where they can be viewed and recorded in
digital form at a rate of approximately one
frame per second through a frameboard in a PC.
A typical digital image and the calculated
positions of the targets in real space are shown
in Fig. 6. Black cylindrical markers have been
pushed into the soil to a depth of about 4 mm
and their positions can be calculated to a
precision of approximately 60 mm using tech-
niques of close-range photogrammetry. The
procedure requires an accurate method of
determining the camera location and orienta- (a)
tion, a mathematical model to account for
refraction through the Perspex and calibrations
for the camera and lens. A degree of post-test
processing is required but the system is largely
automated, producing detailed high-quality dis-
placement measurements throughout the centri-
fuge model tests. Further details are given by
Taylor et al. 7

Test procedure
16. Preparation of the models began by
mixing kaolinite clay with water to form a
slurry with a moisture content of approximately
120%. The clay slurry was then placed inside a
model container and one-dimensionally precon-
solidated in a press to produce a vertical
e€ective stress of 500 kPa throughout the soil.
Once this had been achieved the sample was (b)

swelled back to a vertical e€ective stress of

250 kPa. At each stage equilibrium conditions
were observed by monitoring the change in
volume of the sample. The total duration of this
preconsolidation phase was between two and
three weeks.
17. On the day of the test, free water was
removed from the boundaries of the sample to
minimize swelling when unloaded. The soil and
model container were removed from the press
and the sample trimmed to the required height.
To allow access to the front face of the soil
sample the wall of the strongbox was removed,
and the tunnel cavity was cut using a thin-
walled cutter and lined with a latex membrane.
At each stage, all free soil surfaces were coated
in a viscous paran liquid to prevent moisture
migration at the boundaries of the sample. To
enable the front of the soil model to be viewed
by the CCD camera in ¯ight, the front wall of
the strongbox was replaced by a thick Perspex
window, which was highly greased to minimize
friction between the clay and the Perspex. The
displacement transducers (LVDTs) were then
®xed in position to monitor the displacement of
the ground surface and the model package was
positioned on the swing of the centrifuge.
18. During the increase in acceleration to
100g the pressure within the tunnel cavity was
increased to balance the vertical total stress at
tunnel axis level by supplying compressed air Fig. 6. Digitized
pressure to the tunnel membrane. On reaching image from the CCD
the required speed, water was fed into the soil camera in ¯ight
model through a standpipe so that a constant (RJG17) and
head of water was applied which was consistent calculated positions of
with the required position of the water table. In the targets in real
all of the tests reported (except RJG1) this was space, after
between 5 mm and 25 mm below ground level. reconsolidation, but
The model was then left overnight to ensure before tunnel pressure
equilibrium with the new stress conditions, reduction
with the exception of test RJG1, which was a
preliminary test and where equilibrium con-
ditions at 100g were not achieved.
19. The following morning the tunnelling
event was simulated by reducing the pressure
within the tunnel at a rate of around 100 kPa/
min to produce a largely undrained response
from the clay. The deformations during this
phase were recorded both by LVDTs at the
ground surface and by digital image measure-
ment of the marker beads in the front face of
the soil model at a rate of approximately one
set of readings per second.
Typical measurement data
20. The data presented in this section are
from two of the tests: RJG15, in which the
tunnel axis was 175 mm (i.e. 3.5D) below ground
47
 GRANT AND TAYLOR

level, and RJG17, in which the tunnel axis was

150 mm (i.e. 3D) below ground level; both are
typical of the tests conducted.
21. Figure 7 shows the displacement of the
ground surface immediately above the tunnel
crown during test RJG15 as measured by an
LVDT. The abscissa shows the actual tunnel
support pressure and so the test proceeded from
right to left on the graph. Throughout this
presentation of results the values of volume
loss are quoted as a percentage of the initial
volume of the tunnel and were calculated from
the best-®t Gaussian distribution at the ground
surface determined from LVDT measurements.
A volume loss bar has been included at the top
of Fig. 7 and, as expected, the volume loss and
settlement increased with the reduction of the
tunnel support pressure. In Fig. 8 the ground
surface settlement pro®les measured by the
LVDTs are plotted for a range of volume losses Fig. 7. Displacement above the tunnel crown at the ground surface during
from 2% to 20%. The settlement trough is well test RJG15
de®ned over a wide range of volume losses and
the development of the trough as the test
progressed is clearly shown. The same data
have been plotted in Fig. 9. The Gaussian Horizontal distance from tunnel centre line, x : mm
distribution, as given by equation (1), can be –250 –200 –150 –100 –50 0 50 100 150 200 250
linearized as shown so that if the troughs are
well represented by a Gaussian curve the data
from each discrete time in the tests should plot –0·2

as a straight line. The inverse of the gradient of

the line is the distance to the point of in¯exion –0·4

of the curve, i. In fact, all the data shown in

Fig. 9 plot very close to a unique straight line, –0·6

which indicates that the form of the trough did Approximate

not change over the range of volume losses –0·8 values of VL %
shown, from 2% to 20%. A constant trough 2%
width regardless of volume loss is common to –1·0 5%
all of the tests, as is the slight deviation from 10%
the Gaussian distribution that can be seen in –1·2 15%

the outlying data points, furthest from the 20%

tunnel centre line. The same data are shown in –1·4

Displacement: mm
Fig. 10, but here they are plotted as normalized
settlement troughs. As the settlements have Fig. 8. Settlement troughs measured by LVDTs at the ground surface
been normalized by the maximum settlement, during test RJG15
on the tunnel centre line, and the troughs at
each volume loss have similar values of i, all of
the measured settlement troughs are coincident
with each other. The best-®t Gaussian distri-
bution determined from Fig. 9 has been plotted
on top of the data to illustrate the very close ®t
of the Gaussian distribution to the measured
settlements. The deviation at the two outlying
points is again apparent. It suggests that it is
reasonable to assume that the surface settle-
ments will take the form of a Gaussian dis-
tribution and that the width of the trough does
not change with volume loss, at least until the
tunnel begins to collapse. However, at the
extreme edges of the trough, approximately
when x is greater than the tunnel depth (z0 ), the
Gaussian distribution may underestimate the
magnitude of the settlements. As these move-
ments tend to deviate from the Gaussian form Fig. 9. Linearized movements at the ground surface during test RJG15
48
 TUNNELLING-INDUCED GROUND
MOVEMENTS IN CLAY

and predictions are rarely concerned with the

very small movements at the edges of the
trough, data within a horizontal distance of
x ˆ 2i have been used to determine best-®t
i values.
22. In Table 1 the centrifuge model tests are
listed in chronological order. Measurements
from digital image processing were obtained
from test RJG15 onwards but the quality of the
measurements improved signi®cantly after test
RJG15. Data from test RJG15 obtained by
digital image processing have been included in
the results presented later but test RJG17 is
used here to illustrate typical results obtained
by this technique. Fig. 11 shows a plot of
movement vectors at a discrete time during the
test. The vectors are typical of the quality of Fig. 10. Normalized settlement troughs at the ground surface during test
the data obtained from test RJG17 onwards RJG15
and clearly demonstrate that comprehensive
displacement data can be obtained by image
processing. Coordinates for every point at
approximately one-second intervals throughout
each test are available for analysis. In Fig. 12
the coordinate data have been extracted and
used to plot a normalized subsurface settlement
pro®le 70 mm below the ground surface. As
with the surface data measured by LVDTs, the
subsurface troughs measured by image analysis
show, in general, that the subsurface settlement
troughs are well represented by the form of a
Gaussian distribution. The normalized data
also show that the width of the trough at any
horizon does not vary over a wide range of
volume losses.
23. The typical results described above
show that both surface and subsurface settle-
ment troughs are well represented by Gaussian
distributions, although this assumption may
underestimate settlements towards the limits of
the troughs. It should be noted that the
measurements, particularly those from image
analysis, are not suciently accurate to de®ne Fig. 11. Vectors of ground movement (610) for test RJG17 when the
settlement troughs at the low volume losses movement immediately above the tunnel crown was *1´7 mm
typically associated with tunnel construction in
sti€ overconsolidated clays (1±2%). Neverthe-
less, it has been shown that the shape of the
settlement troughs prior to tunnel collapse is
independent of volume loss. Consequently, dis-
placement data at volume losses well beyond
those normally associated with tunnel con-
struction in sti€ clays may be used to explore
the distribution of movements. The best-®t i
values were determined as described above for
each time increment throughout a test. The
average i values in each test for each horizon
were then determined between volume losses of
2% and 20% for the surface data (LVDTs) and
between 5% and 20% for the subsurface data
(image analysis). The constant widths of the
settlement troughs up to such high volume
losses indicate that, for the kaolin clay used in
these tests, the tunnels were not showing signs Fig. 12. Normalized subsurface settlement troughs 70 mm below ground
of major collapse at volume losses up to 20%. level in test RJG17
49
 GRANT AND TAYLOR

However, in other soils such as natural clays 180 Ground surface for RJG15 and TH1
collapse may occur very suddenly and at
signi®cantly lower volume losses. In such 160
Ground surface for RJG17
cases, the range of precollapse volume losses
over which the trough widths were constant

Height above tunnel axis, z 0 – z : mm

140
would not be so great. Ground surface for CK1
120
Results
24. To examine the distributions of trough 100
width with depth, Fig. 13 shows the i values
measured in each test against height above the 80
tunnel axis. As the depth of the tunnel was not
0·5D above
the same for each test, the data from some tests 60
tunnel crown RJG15
extend further from the tunnel than others.
RJG17
Except at the extremes, that is, in the vicinity 40
TH1
of the tunnel and near the ground surface, the
data plot as a series of approximately parallel 20 CK1
lines, with the o€set from the vertical centre
line of the tunnel increasing with depth of soil 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
cover in the test. This implies that the distri- i : mm
bution of i with depth in clay can be described
by a straight line of constant gradient with an
than for the horizons at greater depth, particu- Fig. 13. Distributions
o€set from the vertical centre line of the tunnel
larly as the distance from the vertical centre of i with depth from
that increases with the depth of the tunnel
line of the tunnel increases. centrifuge model tests
below ground level, z0 . This is consistent with
26. The proportion of horizontal to vertical
Mair et al., 3 equation (5), and is illustrated in
movements seems to increase towards the
Fig. 14. This ®gure shows a series of three solid
free ground surface, where the value of i
lines which describe equation (5) for three
increases rapidly in comparison with the
di€erent tunnel depths, 2D, 3D and 4D, and a
linear distribution described by equation (5),
single dashed line which describes equation (4)
which tends to suggest a relationship between
for the same tunnel depths. The o€set from the
the two. Fig. 17 illustrates how such a relation- Fig. 14. Illustration of
vertical centre line of the tunnel increases with
ship might work. As noted previously, Taylor 5 some commonly
tunnel depth for equation (5) but stays constant
suggested that for constant-volume conditions applied distributions
for equation (4). Mair et al. 3 normalized their
the linear distribution of i described by equa- of i with depth
data by the depth of the tunnel axis below
ground level, z0 , and this has been done for the
present test data in Fig. 15. The data strongly
con®rm the use of equation (5) for predicting
settlement trough widths for tunnels in clay.
25. It is clear from both Fig. 13 and Fig. 15
that there is some deviation from the linear
distribution in the vicinity of both the tunnel
and the ground surface. Within about 0
5D of
the tunnel crown the value of i tends to be
smaller than predicted by equation (5) and the
trend of i with depth is towards the tunnel. This
is not surprising, as settlement troughs would
not be expected below the invert of the tunnel.
As illustrated in Fig. 16, although the assump-
tion of Gaussian distributions close to the
tunnel may be adequate for design purposes,
the settlement troughs tend to be steep and not
so well represented by Gaussian curves. Near
the ground surface the values of i tend to be
greater than predicted by the linear distribution
of equation (5). It is quite likely that this is due
to the proximity of the unrestrained free ground
surface, and the e€ect on the patterns of move-
ments is also apparent in the vector plot given
in Fig. 11. The top row of vectors shown were
10 mm below the ground surface in the model
and it is clear that the proportion of horizontal
to vertical movements is considerably greater
50
TUNNELLING-INDUCED GROUND
MOVEMENTS IN CLAY

Fig. 15. Plot of i=z0

against z=z0
(determined from
LVDT and image-
processing
measurements)

Fig. 16. Normalized

subsurface settlement
troughs 5 mm above
the tunnel crown in
test RJG17

Fig. 17. Implications

of a distribution of i
with depth assuming
constant-volume
conditions:
(a) intersections
of tangents to a
distribution of i with
depth with the tunnel
centre line; (b) vector
focus coincident with
the intersections of
the tangents to the
distribution of i with
depth given in (a) with
the tunnel centre line
51
 GRANT AND TAYLOR
tion (5) implies that the ground movement
vectors focus on the point where the distribu-
tion of i with depth intersects the vertical
centre line of the tunnel. Horizontal ground
movements can then be described as a function
of the vertical movements as in equation (9).
Assuming constant-volume conditions, for a
non-linear distribution of i with depth it can be
shown that if a vector focus exists for each
horizon it will also be at the point where the
tangent to the distribution of i with depth
intersects the vertical centre line of the tunnel;
a detailed derivation is given in Appendix 1.
The idea is illustrated in Fig. 17 and shows how
the vector focus may vary with depth.
27. Calculating the position of the projection
of ground movement vectors from the tests onto
the vertical centre line of the tunnel produced
considerable scatter at any horizon. No trend in
the position was apparent except in the region
close to the free ground surface, where the
position of the vectors projected onto the verti-
cal centre line of the tunnel tended to move up
with increasing horizontal distance from the
tunnel axis, that is, the proportion of horizontal
to vertical movements increased with x.
However, the average position of the vector
focus can be used to give average distributions
52
of horizontal movement, and these are compared Fig. 18. Vertical and
in Fig. 18 with normalized horizontal move- horizontal movement
ments at various horizons and for a range of at di€erent subsurface
volume losses in test RJG17. The vertical move- levels for test RJG17
ments are also shown, with the best-®t Gaussian with best-®t curves:
curves. In the near-surface region the horizontal (a) 10 mm below
movements are not well described by assuming ground level (140 mm
an average vector focus but at all other subsur- above tunnel axis);
face horizons shown the agreement is very good. (b) 30 mm below
28. Thus there is evidence that assuming a ground level (120 mm
vector focus at individual horizons may be an above tunnel axis);
appropriate way of predicting horizontal move- (c) 70 mm below
ments. In Fig. 19 the data from test RJG17 are ground level (80 mm
compared with predictions based on equations above tunnel axis);
(5) and (9), which are shown by the solid lines. (d) 100 mm below
The vertical movements are well predicted at ground level (50 mm
all horizons. The horizontal movements tend to above tunnel axis)
be overestimated but, with the exception of the
near-surface horizon, the predictions are
reasonable and probably more than adequate
for most design situations.
29. It should be noted that in the tests
described there was no constraint on the upper
soil surface and it has therefore been referred to
as a free ground surface. It is likely that the
deviation from the linear distribution of i with
depth given by equation (5) in the vicinity of
the soil surface is associated with this free

ground surface. In urban areas such a situation
is rare and it is possible that even the presence
of a thin pavement layer may provide sucient
restraint to negate the free-surface e€ect.
Conclusions
30. The centrifuge model tests described
have provided a considerable body of data to
examine the patterns of precollapse ground
movements caused by tunnelling in clay. The
empirical relations currently used for predic-
tions have been examined against the compre-
hensive measurements and their limitations
highlighted. The main ®ndings are
(a) both surface and subsurface settlement
troughs are well represented by Gaussian
distributions except within about 0
5D of
the tunnel crown
(b) the distribution of i with depth suggested
by Mair et al., 3 equation (5), adequately
predicts the distribution of vertical move-
ments except within 0
5D of the tunnel
crown, where steeper troughs may be
anticipated (see also (a) above), or within
the vicinity of a free ground surface, where
wider troughs may be anticipated
(c) if a focal point for ground movements
exists at any horizon and constant-volume
TUNNELLING-INDUCED GROUND
MOVEMENTS IN CLAY
conditions apply, the movements must Fig. 19. Vertical and
focus on the intersection of the tangent to horizontal movement
the distribution of i with depth and the at di€erent subsurface
vertical centre line of the tunnel levels for test RJG17
(d ) assuming an average vector focus at any with predicted curves:
given horizon results in a good prediction (a) 10 mm below
of horizontal movements despite there ground level (140 mm
being considerable scatter in the back- above tunnel axis);
analysed location of the focal point (b) 30 mm below
(e) except in the vicinity of a free ground ground level (120 mm
surface, adequate predictions of horizontal above tunnel axis);
movements can be made by using the linear (c) 70 mm below
distribution of i with depth described by ground level (80 mm
Mair et al., 3 equation (5), and assuming that above tunnel axis);
the ground movement vectors focus at the (d) 100 mm below
point where the tangent to the distribution ground level (50 mm
of i with depth intersects the vertical centre above tunnel axis)
line of the tunnel, equation (9).
Appendix 1. Focus of vectors of ground
movement due to tunnelling
31. The following analysis assumes that
constant-volume conditions apply, which is
consistent with the development of short-term
movements in clay. The geometric terms used
are de®ned in Fig. 20. It is convenient to
rede®ne the distance from the tunnel axis to the
horizon of interest as z ; relating this to the
53
 GRANT AND TAYLOR

Centre line The horizontal strain in the ground is given by

x dSh
eh ˆ …18†
i
dx
z
and, noting that by de®nition H ˆ f …z †, but
Svmax z0 H ˆ f …x† also, we obtain from equation (13)
z   
* dSh Vs 1 1 ÿx2
ˆp exp
H dx …2p† Kz H 2K 2 z2
 2

x ÿx ÿ2x
‡ exp
H 2K 2 z2 2K 2 z2
 
x dH ÿx2
ÿ 2 exp …19†
H dx 2K 2 z2
Fig. 20. De®nitions for focus of vectors of
ground movement so
 
Vs ÿx2 1
eh ˆ p exp
notation used in the main body of the paper, …2p† 2K 2 z2 Kz2
z ˆ z0 ÿ z.  
z z x2 z x dH
32. At any horizon above the tunnel, it is  ÿ ÿ …20†
H H K 2 z2 H 2 dx
assumed that the vertical ground settlement
pro®le takes the form of a Gaussian distribu- For zero volumetric strain, from equations (14),
tion as follows: (17) and (20),
 2
Vs ÿx x2 x2 dK z dK z z x2
Sv ˆ p exp …10† ‡ 3 ÿ1ÿ ‡ ÿ
…2p†i 2i 2 K z K z dz
2 2 K dz H H K 2 z2
If i ˆ Kz , then z x dH
ÿ 2 ˆ0 …21†
  H dx
Vs 1 ÿx2
Sv ˆ p exp and so
…2p† Kz 2K 2 z2
   
x2 z z dK z z dK
Assuming that any vector of ground movement 1 ÿ ‡ ÿ 1 ÿ ‡
above the tunnel is directed towards a point on K 2 z2 H K dz H K dz
the vertical centre line of the tunnel which is at z x dH
ÿ 2 ˆ0 …22†
a distance H below the horizon of interest, the H dx
horizontal movement is then described by 33. If it is assumed that at any particular
x horizon the vectors of movement focus on a
Sh ˆ Sv …12†
H single point which lies on the vertical centre
so that line of the tunnel, that is, dH =dx ˆ 0 at any z ,
  equation (22) is satis®ed if
Vs 1 x ÿx2
Sh ˆ p exp …13† z z dK
…2p† Kz H 2K 2 z2 1ÿ ‡ ˆ0 …23†
H K dz
For constant-volume conditions there must be
zero volumetric strain in any element of soil, so which gives

ev ‡ e h ˆ 0 …14† z z dK
ˆ1‡ …24†
H K dz
The vertical strain in the ground is given by
34. As shown in Fig. 21, i varies with depth
dSv and the distribution may be considered to be
ev ˆ …15†
dz linear except in the vicinity of the tunnel or a
Noting that K ˆ f …z †, we obtain from equation free surface. The tangent to the distribution of i
(11) with depth intersects the vertical centre line of
    the tunnel at a distance H below the horizon of
dSv Vs ÿx2 1 1 dK interest. Since i ˆ Kz and K ˆ f …z †,
ˆp exp ÿ ÿ
dz …2p† 2K 2 z2 Kz2 K 2 z dz
 2
 2  di dK
1 ÿx 2x 2x2 dK ˆ K ‡ z …25†
‡ exp ‡ dz dz
Kz 2K 2 z2 2K 2 z3 2z2 K 3 dz
and
…16†
so 1 di z dK
  ˆ1‡ …26†
Vs ÿx2 1 K dz K dz
ev ˆ p exp
…2p† 2K 2 z2 Kz2 Therefore, substituting equation (24),
 2 
x x2 dK z dK z 1 di
 ‡ ÿ 1 ÿ …17† ˆ …27†
K 2 z2 K 3 z dz K dz H K dz
54
 TUNNELLING-INDUCED GROUND
MOVEMENTS IN CLAY

Free surface Centre line was developed for the centrifuge largely by
members of the Engineering Surveying
Research Centre at City University. This was
also funded by the EPSRC, under grant award
i GR/J74022. Particular thanks are due to Dr
Linear Stuart Robson, Dr Jin Chen and Professor Mike
region Cooper.
38. Some of the tests reported were con-
z
* ducted by visitors and students at the Geo-
technical Engineering Research Centre at
City University. The e€orts of Dr Toshiyuki
H
* Hagiwara and Caesar Kerali are gratefully
A distribution of i
with depth acknowledged.

x
Fig. 21. De®nitions for the intersection of
tangents to a distribution of i with depth and the
vertical centre line of the tunnel
or
di Kz i clays. GeÂotechnique, 1993, 43, No. 2, 315±320.
ˆ ˆ …
dz H H
so at any particular z , H ˆ H .
35. Thus, assuming that the vertical ground
settlement pro®les are of Gaussian form, that
constant-volume conditions apply and that the
vectors of ground movement at a given horizon
above the tunnel focus on a single point on the
vertical centre line of the tunnel, the point of
focus lies at the intersection of the tangent to
the distribution of i with the vertical centre line
of the tunnel.
Acknowledgements
36. Most of the work described was funded
by the Engineering and Physical Sciences
Research Council (EPSRC) under grant award
GR/J53010.
37. The digital image-processing system
References
1. P E C K R. B. Deep excavations and tunnelling in
soft ground. Proceedings of the 7th International
Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineering, Mexico, 1969, state of the art
volume, 225±290.
2. O'R E I L L Y M. P. and N E W B. M. Settlements above
tunnels in the United KingdomÐtheir magnitude
and prediction. Proceedings of Tunnelling '82
Symposium, London, 1982, 173±181.
3. M A I R R. J., T A Y L O R R. N. and B R A C E G I R D L E A.
Subsurface settlement pro®les above tunnels in
28†
4. M A I R R. J. Centrifugal Modelling of Tunnel Con-
struction in Soft Clay. PhD thesis, University of
Cambridge, 1979.
5. T A Y L O R R. N. Tunnelling in soft ground in the
UK. Proceedings of the International Symposium
on Underground Construction in Soft Ground
(Fujita K. and Kusakabe O. (eds)). Balkema,
Rotterdam, 1995, 123±126.
6. M A I R R. J. and T A Y L O R R. N. Bored tunnelling in
the urban environment. Proceedings of the 14th
International Conference on Soil Mechanics and
Foundation Engineering, Hamburg, 1997, 4,
Theme Lecture.
7. T A Y L O R R. N., R O B S O N S., G R A N T R. J. and
K U W A N O J. An image analysis system for deter-
mining plane and 3-D displacements in centrifuge
models. Proceedings of the International Confer-
ence Centrifuge 98 (Kimura T., Kusakabe O. and
Takemura J. (eds)). Balkema, Rotterdam, 1998,
73±78.

Please email, fax or post your discussion contributions to the Secretary:

email: Wilson_l@ice.org.uk; fax: 020 7 799 1325; or post to Lesley Wilson,
Journals Department, Institution of Civil Engineers, 1±7 Great George Street,
London SW1P 3AA.

55