Geotech Geol Eng (2020) 38:2039–2060

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-019-01147-x (0123456789().,-volV)
( 01234567
89().,-volV)

ORIGINAL PAPER

A Numerical Study on Parameters Affecting Seismic

Behavior of Cut and Cover Tunnel
Aliakbar Golshani . Mohammadamir Rezaeibadashiani

Received: 4 December 2018 / Accepted: 9 December 2019 / Published online: 16 December 2019
Ó Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Abstract Underground structures and facilities con-
stitute the underlying and infrastructural part of
modern urbanization and are used for a wide range
of applications, including urban underground railroad
and urban road tunnels, silos etc. Underground
structure’s construction method depends on such
factors as the ground conditions, the ground water
conditions, the tunnel span and the buried depth. The
cut and cover method is an engineering technique for
underground construction with low buried depth in
urban areas. Furthermore, some urban underground
facilities have been constructed in areas with risk of
seismic activity which be resistant to both static and
seismic loads. Therefore, seismic response of such
shallow tunnels which are usually constructed by cut
and cover method is of great importance and is
investigated in this paper. Numerical analyses were
performed on a shallow tunnel subjected to S-wave by
using FLAC software, and the effects of different
parameters are investigated. The maximum forces and
bending moments in the tunnel lining during the
earthquake motion for two earthquakes i.e., Tabas and
Gilroy were compared and it was found that at all
levels of maximum acceleration of input motion,
seismic forces on tunnel structures during the Tabas
earthquake were more critical which is related to the
A. Golshani (&)  M. Rezaeibadashiani
Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Tarbiat
Modares University, Tehran, Iran
e-mail: golshani@modares.ac.ir
Arias intensity of the input motion. Increasing the
buried depth of shallow tunnel and the enlargement of
the tunnel span lead to more seismic forces on tunnel
structures. Furthermore, with the increasing rigidity of
the tunnel to the surrounding soil, additional dynamic
forces in the tunnel lining will be more, however the
stresses in the tunnel lining are reduced.
Keywords Numerical analysis  Cut and cover
tunnels  Tunnel lining  Seismic behavior  Arias
intensity  Dynamic force
1 Introduction
Underground structures and facilities constitute the
underlying and infrastructural part of modern urban-
ization and are used for a wide range of applications,
including urban underground railroad (Metro) and
interurban railways, highways, fuel reserves, silos,
nuclear waste tank, and water and wastewater transfer
facilities. Some urban underground facilities have
been constructed in areas which are at greater risk of
seismic activity. These structures must be resistant to
both static and seismic loads. Empirically, under-
ground structures are less vulnerable than surface
structures. However, a number of underground struc-
tures have experienced significant hazards in recent
major earthquakes such as the 1995 Kobe, Japan

123
2040 Geotech Geol Eng (2020) 38:2039–2060

earthquake, the 1999 Chi-Chi, Taiwan earthquake, and lining due to vertically propagating transverse shear
the 1999 Kocaeli, Turkey earthquake (Dowding and waves are major causes of damage to the tunnels
Rozan 1978; Hashash 2001). (Hashash et al. 2001; Wang and Munfakh 2001;
Destruction of small arterial lines was first observed Pakbaz and Yareevand 2005). Ovaling and racking of
in the Niigata earthquake (1964), and then in the tunnel lining are reported to be the most critical
Alaska earthquake (Azadi and Hosseini 2010; Hall and sources of damage to the tunnel structure (Penzien
O’Rourke 1991). Since then, the debate about earth- 2000). Damage is reported to be increasing as the
quake effect on underground structures has gained duration of the earthquake increases, because repeated
importance and numerous studies have been done on load cycles cause fatigue in the tunnel lining (Hashash
the design of these structures against earthquakes et al. 2001).
(Azadi and Hosseini 2010). There are few examples of Results obtained from the observations of earth-
heavy damages of large space underground structures. quake effects on the underground structure are as
The most interesting case is that of the Daikai station, follows:
that collapsed during the major Hyogoken-Nambu
1. Underground structures suffer a lower rate of
earthquake (1995) (Iida et al. 1996; Kawashima 2000;
damage than surface structures.
Hashash et al. 2001). In the 1995 Kobe earthquake, the
2. The mentioned damage reduces as the overhead
worst damage was related to the urban metro system,
depth increases for deep tunnels (which are
namely Daikai station which was severely damaged
excavated without removing the ground above)
(Azadi and Hosseini 2010; Tajiri 1997). Among
and they seem to be safer and more secure and
damage to underground structures we can refer to
experience the least damage during earthquake
the damage occurred in the 1999 Taiwan earthquake
shocks compared to surface ones.
due to which the mountain tunnels in the city center
3. Underground facilities and buildings con-
were severely damaged (Azadi and Hosseini 2010;
structed in soils sustain greater damage than
Wang et al. 2001). Destruction of underground
appropriate rock excavation with good
structures such as highway tunnels in the Duzce
characteristics.
(1999) earthquake in Turkey is also considered as one
4. Injected lined tunnels are more reliable than
of them (Azadi and Hosseini 2010; O’Rourke et al.
unlined tunnels in rock. Damage caused by
2002). Seismic performance of tunnels has been
earthquakes can be reduced by the stabilization
reported by several researchers (Dowding and Rozan
of the earth surrounding the tunnel. Addition-
1978; Wang et al. 2001, 2009; Owen and Scholl 1981;
ally, damage can be reduced by changing the
Sharma and Judd 1991; Power et al. 1998).
contact area between the lining and the earth
Seismic design of the superstructures is often
surrounding the tunnel and the injection
carried out regarding forces applied on structure by
process.
calculating the effect of acceleration caused by the
5. Tunnels under symmetric load are more stable,
earthquake on the mass of the structure, however,
and as a result, the soil-tunnel- structure inter-
underground structures are generally designed with
action is improved. Improving the quality of the
regard to the imposed deformation in structures by
tunnel lining by replacing with a harder and
surrounding environment in order to adapt to these
thicker section without taking appropriate mea-
deformations which are often led to the soil-tunnel-
sures to stabilize the loose and problematic earth
structure interaction (Wang 1993; St John and Zahrah
surrounding the tunnel may lead to additional
1987). The main components affecting the lining of
seismic forces in the tunnel lining. Modifying
tunnel under seismic loading are elliptical and lateral
and stabilizing the soil and the rock may
deformations (Penzien 2000). Studies have shown that
improve the reliability of surface tunnels.
vertical or near-vertical propagation of shear waves
6. Damage rate may depend on the maximum
can create such a kind of deformation (Wang 1993).
acceleration and peak ground velocity (PGV),
The few case studies that exist show that slope
which also depends on the magnitude as well as
failure near the tunnel, shearing off the lining due to
the epicentral distance (the center of earth-
fault crossing the tunnel axis, liquefaction induced
quake) of the occurred earthquake. It has mostly
floatation or sinking or ovaling and racking of tunnel

123
Geotech Geol Eng (2020) 38:2039–2060
been observed that collapses have occurred in
torque magnitude higher than 7 or with a peak
ground acceleration (PGA) of more than 0.5 g
7. The duration of strong ground motion during
earthquake is of paramount importance because
it may lead to fatigue rupture and consequently
the greatest deformation.
8. The high frequencies of the motion may lead to
flake formation or cause the rock or concrete to
fall along the weak surface. These frequencies,
which are rapidly decayed, may be created at a
short distance from the fault causing the
earthquake.
9. Depending on the angle and how the earthquake
wave strikes the tunnel, these waves can be
amplified. If the wave length is between 1 and 4
times the tunnel diameter, the ground motion at
the intersection of the tunnel may intensify.
10. If the earthquake causes instability of rocky and
earthy slopes, the earthquake damage inside and
near the entrance of tunnels (portals) may be
noticeable (Hashash et al. 2001; Wang 1993).
Most studies have been conducted on the seismic
behavior of tunnels with circular cross-section (Pak-
baz and Yareevand 2005; Hashash et al. 1998, 2005;
Kasper and Meschke 2006; Amorosi and Boldini
2009; Hatzigeorgiou and Beskos 2010; Corigliano
et al. 2011; Chen et al. 2012; Garner and Coffman
2013; Gomes 2013; Amorosi et al. 2014; Bilotta et al.
2014; Conti et al. 2014; Do et al. 2014, 2015; Kontoe
et al. 2014; Kouretzis et al. 2014; Pitilakis et al. 2014;
Sahoo and Kumar 2014; Alielahi et al. 2015; Gomes
et al. 2015; Moghadam and Baziar 2016; Argyroudis
et al. 2017; Wang et al. 2018; Tsinidis et al. 2016;
Lemnitzer et al. 2017; Tsinidis 2017), while shallow
tunnels are often rectangular and made using cut-cover
method. Different methods have been used to analyze
the behavior of underground structures under dynamic
loads. The three main methods used by various
researchers are: experimental (Tsinidis et al. 2016;
Lemnitzer et al. 2017; Tsinidis 2017; Hassanzadeh
et al. 2018; Patil et al. 2018), numerical (Do et al.
2015; Moghadam and Baziar 2016; Argyroudis et al.
2017; Bao et al. 2017; Ma et al. 2018) and analytical
(Huo et al. 2006; Bobet et al. 2008; Bobet 2010).
From the perspective of the seismic design, these
cubic structures have characteristics which not only
differ in geometric aspects, but also in the
2041
characteristics of the circular tunnels, making this
form of structures to be more vulnerable (Wang 1993).
The external force that the cut-cover tunnel structure is
exposed to, is in the form of shear stresses and normal
pressures around the outer surfaces of the tunnel.
Assessing the magnitude and distribution of these
dynamic forces and stresses is complicated and
difficult and accompanied by uncertainty. On the
other hand, these external forces are summed up with
static force available in structural members. It should
be noted that rectangular tunnels dimensions are
generally larger than circular tunnels, and the rectan-
gular frame maintaining tunnel does not pass static
loads as good as lining of the circular tunnel. As a
result, the rectangular frame’s walls and slabs are
thicker. Therefore, the rectangular tunnel structure is
more rigid than the circular lining in the transversal
direction and has a higher deformation tolerance. This
feature together with the large-scale seismic deforma-
tions of the earth, which are specific to shallow soil
deposits, causes the soil-structure interaction to gain
importance, especially in seismic design of rectangu-
lar cut-cover tunnels (O’Rourke et al. 2002; Wang
1993). Box-type tunnels are designed to withstand
ground failure and ground shaking (Bobet et al. 2008).
Ground failure includes shear displacements due to
active faults intersecting the tunnel, soil liquefaction,
slope instability, tectonic uplift and subsidence.
Ground shaking is due to propagating waves distorting
the support, i.e., compression/extension along the
longitudinal axis, longitudinal bending and racking.
Judging from the literature, racking distortion is
considered the most critical and is induced mainly
by vertically propagating shear waves (Merritt et al.
1985).
The current research was conducted with the aim to
model a shallow urban tunnel with rectangular cross
section through cut and cover method using FLAC 2D
software. The seismic behavior of shallow tunnel was
investigated and the effect of parameters affecting
seismic behavior of tunnel such as tunnel dimensions,
tunnel shape, and thickness of tunnel lining, tunnel
buried depth, and the maximum acceleration of input
wave was evaluated in the form of additional axial
force and flexural bending moment in tunnel lining,
and critical elements of tunnel under seismic load were
identified.
123
2042 Geotech Geol Eng (2020) 38:2039–2060

2 Cut and Cover Method

In cut and cover method, the excavation is first carried

out from the ground level to the level at which the
tunnel is going to be built. After the structure was
completed, it is covered over by soil and reinstated.
This method is used when the tunnel profile is surface
and the excavation from the surface is possible and
economical. This method is more economical and
widely used at depths of 10–12 m, however, it is not
uneconomical even at a depth of 18 m and rarely
exceeds 30 m. In order to stabilize the trench two
methods are used, the first method is to use sustainable
slope in which the trench sloped walls are excavated to
the intended level without using a trench shield or
support system. In the second method, the trench walls
are excavated vertically and the support system is also Fig. 2 Stage construction of top-down method
used (Hung et al. 2009).
The cut and cover method is used to construct the structure supporting excavation is often used as the
subways, subway stations, tunnels in flat terrain, or final tunnel walls. After finishing walls construction,
wherever constructing tunnel at shallow depths is the tunnel roof is constructed and tied into the walls.
economical. The cut and cover method includes two After its completion and before the construction is
main types of bottom-up method and top-down continued, the surface ground is reinstated. The
method as shown in Figs. 1 and 2. remainder of the excavation and construction opera-
The top-down method was used in this research. tion is completed under the protection of the roof slab.
This method was originally developed for construction After the excavation construction was completed, the
of shallow tunnels in urban areas where bottom-top tunnel invert is constructed and tied into the walls. In
method would interfere the traffic. As shown in Fig. 2, order to decrease the span of the tunnel roof,
in this method, first, the tunnel walls are constructed temporary or permanent piles or walls are usually
using slurry walls or secant pile walls. In this method installed in the center of the tunnel for wider tunnels.

3 Numerical Modeling

Dimensions of the numerical model were selected as

such so that the boundaries effects on the tunnel
response reach the lowest amount. Sensitivity analysis
on this case showed that the numerical model dimen-
sions of 130 m 9 40 m are considered appropriate.
The important point in creating the appropriate
geometry is selecting the appropriate area of the
surrounding environment. The initial idea in this field
is the precise mathematical solution in elastic envi-
ronments (Kirsch’s equations) (Ward 1965), in which
the maximum impact zone of an underground cavity is
estimated to be three times its diameter. The Elasto-
Plasticity behavior of soil is considered using the
Mohr–Coulomb failure criterion. A rectangular mesh
Fig. 1 Stage construction of bottom-up method

123
Geotech Geol Eng (2020) 38:2039–2060 2043

Fig. 3 Numerical model layout in FLAC

Table 1 Soil and concrete mechanical properties (Golshani et al. 2014)

Soil density cd Cohesion CU Friction angle Poisson Elasticity modulus Elasticity modulus of Concrete
(kN/m3) (kg/cm2) UU (degree) ratio m E (kg/cm2) concrete (GPa) density (kN/m3)

19.0 0.35 35 0.31 650 24 20

with dimensions of 0.25 m was used in the vicinity of

tunnels and the 0.5 m meshes were used in other areas
of the model. In order to have the lowest rate of error in
the results, small mesh size was used (Fig. 3).
In order to model tunnel, beam elements are used.
These are 2-node elements with three degrees of
freedom per node. In addition to tolerating axial and
shear forces, they also have the ability to withstand
bending moment; therefore, they can be used for
modeling of tunnel. The behavior of this element used
to model tunnel has been supposed to be linear elastic.
The rigidity of the joint interface of the roof and the
invert, and the rigidity of the joint interface of the
tunnel side walls are equal. These rigidity values
obtained based on bulk modulus (k) and shear modulus Fig. 4 Time history of Tabas earthquake versus Gilroy
earthquake not scaled
(G), and then, the smallest width of the adjacent zone
ðDZmin Þ (ITASCA 2011). Soil and concrete mechan-
considerable amount of energy dissipation can occur
ical properties are shown in Table 1.
during plastic flow (viscous damping). Thus, for many
 
k þ 43 G dynamic analyses that involve large-strain, only a
Ks ¼ Kn ¼ 10  max ð1Þ minimal percentage of damping (e.g., 5%) may be
DZmin
required (ITASCA 2011). Therefore, damping ratio
The material damping was selected to be of Riley’s for soil was considered to be 5% of critical damping
damping type. In analyses that use one of the plasticity which is applied in the dominant frequency of the
constitutive models (e.g., Mohr–Coulomb), a model. After dedicating damping to material, in order

123
2044 Geotech Geol Eng (2020) 38:2039–2060

to model infinite conditions in the environment,
dynamic boundary conditions should be applied to
model. In order to minimize the reflection of the
waves, free field boundary conditions model was
assigned to the lateral boundaries (The model should
be in static equilibrium before the free-field boundary
is applied). In this way, earthquake waves propagating
upward suffer no distortion at the boundary because
the free field boundary supplies conditions that are
identical to those in an infinite model (ITASCA 2011).
Given that applying dynamic load is done through
acceleration mapping, for bottom boundary only the
embedded boundary in two directions suffices.
In order to conduct dynamic analysis, the horizontal
component of Tabas and Gilroy earthquakes acceler-
ation mapping was used, whose time history can be
observed in Fig. 4. These accelerometers were applied
to the model bottom after the base line correction.

Fig. 5 General specification of the laboratory model

Fig. 6 Mesh and dimensions of the numerical model

123
Geotech Geol Eng (2020) 38:2039–2060 2045

4 Verification of Numerical Modeling models constructed in this paper (sandy sand, rectan-
gular tunnel, using actual earthquake acceleration).
In order to evaluate the validity of the results of Figure 5 shows the general description of this
numerical models and to adapt them to the actual experiment.
models in nature, the results from centrifuge experi- Due to the acceleration of the centrifugal device
ments on a rectangular tunnel and in sandy soil that during the test, the conversion coefficients is 40, the
was performed by Tsinidis et al. were used (Tsinidis dimensions of the numerical model are based on this
et al. 2016). In this test, a tunnel of 54 9 50 mm in a coefficient, as shown in Fig. 6. The dimensions of
box of sandy soil of 800 9 360 mm is made. The model are 32 m 9 14.5 m. The numerical model was
actual acceleration of the earthquake and the harmonic similarly modeled based on the experimental model
load are used in the test. This test was performed under and applied to the conversion coefficients. A square
a centrifugal acceleration of 40 g. Hence, the test mesh with dimensions of 0.25 m and 0.5 m was used
conditions are highly consistent with the numerical to construct the model. The Elasto-Plasticity behavior
of soil is considered using the Mohr–Coulomb failure
Table 2 Mechanical properties of tunnel lining criterion. Riley damping was applied at the central
frequency of the soil. The mechanical properties of the
Density (kN/m3) Elastic modulus (GPa) Poisson ratio
soil and the tunnel lining are given in Tables 2 and 3.
2.7 71 0.33 The first numerical model was used to accelerate
the Northridge 1994 earthquake. This acceleration was
applied to the invert of the numerical model. In order
Table 3 Mechanical properties of soil to verify the accuracy of the numerical model, the time
histories of a15 and a4 acceleration that were obtained
Properties Model 1 Model 2
from centrifuge model were compared with the results
q(t/m3) 1.612 1.612 of the numerical model. In Figs. 7 and 8, numerical
Poisson ratio, v 0.28 0.28 results and the centrifuge results are compared. The
Rayleigh damping, D (%) 22 24 numerical model has good agreement with experi-
Friction angle 33 33 mental results.
Dilatancy angle 0 0 In the second numerical model, the harmonic load
Cohesion, c (kPa) 1 1 was applied to the invert of the model and the
eÞ2 0 0:5 e = 0.643 e = 0.643 horizontal displacement history of the tunnel lining
Gmax ¼ 100 ð3
1þe ðr Þ
was recorded under this stimulation. As shown in
Figs. 9 and 10, the horizontal displacement values of

Fig. 7 Time windows of representative acceleration time histories; experimental versus numerical predictions for A15 accelerometer

123
2046 Geotech Geol Eng (2020) 38:2039–2060

Fig. 8 Time windows of representative acceleration time histories; experimental versus numerical predictions for A4 accelerometer

Fig. 9 Comparisons between computed experimental versus numerical horizontal deformation time histories of the left side-wall of
the model tunnels F5

Fig. 10 Comparisons between computed experimental versus numerical horizontal deformation time histories of the left side-wall of
the model tunnels F2

123
Geotech Geol Eng (2020) 38:2039–2060 2047

Fig. 11 Dynamic bending moment time history in a wall,

b invert slab and c roof slab Fig. 12 Dynamic axial force time history in a wall, b invert
slab and c roof slab

123
2048
Fig. 13 Comparisons between maximum static and dynamic
axial force
Fig. 14 Comparisons between maximum static and dynamic
bending moment
the tunnel lining are close to each other in both
experimental and numerical models.
5 Investigating Seismic Behavior
In order to investigate the seismic behavior of the
tunnel, the model with the tunnel span dimensions of
8 m 9 8 m, the overburden thickness of 2 m, and
under the seismic load with the maximum acceleration
of 0.35 g was considered to be the reference model.
The dynamic bending moment history for the elements
in the tunnel wall, the invert slab and the roof slab is
123
Geotech Geol Eng (2020) 38:2039–2060
shown in Fig. 11. For bending moment three states can
be defined, including transient state, steady state, and
residual state after the earthquake action was com-
pleted. During the first few cycles of the earthquake,
the bending moment is made and in the steady-state
phase it fluctuates around an average value, and
finally, after the quake, a residual moment occurs in
the tunnel elements. The residual bending moment
values remain in the tunnel elements. This can be
assigned to the redistribution of stresses in the soil
caused by plastic deformations. The value of resultant
bending moment in the roof slab is approximately
equal to zero (Fig. 11c) and the maximum value of
resultant moment will occur in the invert slab.
Like bending moment, there are three states for
axial force. The maximum values of resultant axial
forces occur in the tunnel walls and then in the invert
and roof slabs, respectively (Fig. 12).
According to Fig. 13, in the static state, the
maximum values of axial force occur and the axial
force occurred in the roof slab of the tunnel is greater
than that of invert slab. In the dynamic state, the
maximum amount of additional axial force occurs in
the invert slab of the tunnel, and then, in the walls and
roof slab, respectively. The values of forces occurred
in walls are very similar and hereinafter only the
values of one of these walls are used in the results
analysis representatively. Considering the vertical
propagation of shear waves, the whole surface of the
invert slab is exposed to waves and it is logical that the
maximum values of seismic force occur in this part of
tunnel.
Considering bending moment, in the static state, the
maximum values of the moment occur on the wall and
roof slab and a small moment also occurs in the invert
slab. The maximum value of dynamic moment occurs
in the invert slab, and the dynamic moments of the
wall and roof slab are approximately equal (Fig. 14).
6 Critical Elements
In order to investigate the critical elements of tunnel
under seismic load, which sustain the maximum value
of axial force and bending moment, the input wave
with maximum acceleration was used and the structure
was modeled and analyzed. Results indicate that the
maximum values of dynamic forces caused by the
Geotech Geol Eng (2020) 38:2039–2060 2049

Fig. 15 Schematic critical

elements of tunnel lining
and effective parameters on
seismic behavior of tunnel

Table 4 Critical elements of the structure with dimensions of 8 m 9 8 m

PGA Of input wave (g) Floor slab Roof slab Right wall Left wall

Critical element under axial force 0.51 3 2 8 6

0.35 4 1 8 6
Critical element under bending moment 0.51 3 1 8 5
0.35 3 1 8 5

Table 5 Critical elements of the structure with dimensions of 14 m 9 14 m

PGA Of input wave (g) Floor slab Roof slab Right wall Left wall

Critical element under axial force 0.51 3 1 8 6

0.35 3 1 8 6
Critical element under bending moment 0.51 3 1 8 6
0.35 3 1 8 6

earthquake occur at the junction of roof and invert
slabs to the tunnel walls (Fig. 15).
According to Tables 4 and 5, as the maximum
acceleration of the input wave increases and the
structure gets larger, the location of critical elements
still remains stable at the junction of the slab and walls.
7 Effect of Tunnel Dimensions and the Maximum
Acceleration of the Input Wave
In order to assess the effects of the structure shape and
the maximum acceleration of the input wave, two
structures with dimensions of 8 m 9 8 m and
14 m 9 14 m were modeled and subjected to three
earthquakes with the maximum acceleration of the

123
2050
Fig. 16 PGA effect and tunnel dimension effect on Maximum
tunnel drift
Fig. 17 PGA effect on maximum dynamic bending moment of
tunnel slabs and tunnel wall
input wave of 0.1 g, 0.35 g, and 0.51 g. The history of
the all elements of the tunnel was recorded in order to
determine the maximum values of dynamic forces.
According to Fig. 16, the tunnel maximum seismic
drift which is equal to the relative horizontal displace-
ments of the roof slab and invert slab, increases as
PGA increases and the structure gets larger.
As shown in Fig. 17, in PGA = 0.1 g, the values of
bending moment occurred in walls and tunnel slabs are
approximately equal for both structures. The structure
getting larger has also led to the increase of bending
moment. As the maximum acceleration of the input
wave increases, the values of the moment occurred in
123
Geotech Geol Eng (2020) 38:2039–2060
Fig. 18 PGA effect on maximum dynamic axial force of tunnel
slabs and tunnel wall
Fig. 19 Lining thickness effect on maximum dynamic axial
force of tunnel slabs and tunnel wall
the elements increase in both structures. The maxi-
mum value of bending moment occurs in the invert
slab and the increase-rate of moment is also higher. In
the larger structure, as the maximum acceleration of
the input wave increases, the moment occurred on the
tunnel wall becomes greater than the roof slab and in
the smaller structure it remains the same.
As shown in Fig. 18, in PGA = 0.1 g, the maxi-
mum value of the axial force occurs on the tunnel wall.
The structure getting larger causes an increase in the
difference between the axial force of the walls and
slabs. As the maximum acceleration of the input wave
Geotech Geol Eng (2020) 38:2039–2060
Fig. 20 Lining thickness effect on maximum dynamic bending
moment of tunnel slabs and tunnel wall
Fig. 21 Lining thickness effect on compression stress of tunnel
slabs and tunnel wall
increases, we see that the axial force occurred in the
structure elements increases. The maximum increase-
rate occurs in the tunnel invert slab. As the amount of
PGA increases, plastic areas surrounding tunnel
increase, resulting in larger displacements in the
environment and larger forced deformations for the
structure, and the values of forces and seismic drift
between the crown and invert of the tunnel increase.
8 Effect of Thickness of Tunnel Lining
According to Fig. 19, as the thickness of the tunnel
lining increases, the axial force occurred on the wall
2051
Fig. 22 Lining thickness effect on tension stress of tunnel slabs
and tunnel wall
Fig. 23 L/H ratio effect on maximum dynamic axial force of
tunnel slabs and tunnel wall
and roof slab of the tunnel increases and the axial force
of the invert slab decreases. Of course, the change rate
of the roof slab is negligible. According to Fig. 20, as
the thickness of the tunnel lining increases the values
of the moments in the tunnel structures elements
increase. The increase-rate of bending moment for the
wall and the roof slab is negligible, but significant for
the invert slab.
As the thickness of the tunnel lining increases, the
tunnel rigidity increases and shows greater resistance
123
2052
Fig. 24 L/H ratio effect on dynamic Maximum bending
moment of tunnel slabs and tunnel wall
Fig. 25 Stability length effect on maximum dynamic axial
force of tunnel slabs and tunnel wall
to the deformation applied by the surrounding envi-
ronment and therefore experiences greater dynamic
forces.
Figures 21 and 22 show that as the thickness of the
tunnel lining increases, the compressive and tensile
stresses of all elements of tunnel reduce and the
seismic risk decreases and safety increases. The
maximum values of the compressive and tensile stress
occur in the invert slab, wall and roof slab,
respectively.
123
Geotech Geol Eng (2020) 38:2039–2060
Fig. 26 Stability length effect on maximum dynamic bending
moment of tunnel slabs and tunnel wall
Fig. 27 Overburden depth effect on maximum dynamic axial
force of tunnel slabs and tunnel wall
9 Effect of L/H Ratio of the Structure
In order to investigate the effect of the structure shape,
several models were constructed at a fixed height of
8 m. The tunnel height and span are defined as H and L
according to Figs. 23 and 24, by increasing the L/H
ratio of the structure (in fact by increasing the tunnel
span) the values of axial forces and bending moment
of tunnel slabs increase.
Geotech Geol Eng (2020) 38:2039–2060
Fig. 28 Overburden depth effect on maximum dynamic
bending moment of tunnel slabs and tunnel wall
10 Effect of Embedded Length of the Tunnel
In the cut and cover structures, tunnel wall continued
some meters lower than the tunnel invert level. This is
done to maintain tunnel stability. According to
Fig. 25, as the embedded depth increases up to 5 m,
the values of axial forces applied on the tunnel
elements increase. But by increasing this depth, the
values of the applied axial forces reduce. As shown in
Fig. 26, by increasing the embedded length of the
tunnel to 5 m the bending moments applied on the wall
Fig. 29 Arias intensity time history at different PGA of input motions
2053
and slabs increase, and then decrease. When tunnel
lacks stability depth, the values of the moments
applied on the slabs and the wall of the tunnel are very
close to each other.
11 Effect of Overburden Thickness
According to Figs. 27 and 28, by increasing overbur-
den thickness from 2 m to 6 m for a shallow cut and
cover tunnel in all values of the maximum acceleration
of the input wave, the axial forces and bending
moment applied on the wall and slabs increase. The
seismic forces applied to the tunnel at a depth of 6 m
and under the maximum acceleration of 0.35 are
greater than the forces applied to the tunnel at a depth
of 4 m and under the maximum acceleration of 0.51,
indicating that not only does the depth increase not
reduce the seismic risk, but also makes the situation
more critical.
12 Effect of Input Wave
In order to investigate the effects of input wave,
accelerometers of Tabas and Gilroy earthquakes were
used. Accelerometers were scaled at three acceleration
levels of PGA = 0.1 g, PGA = 0.35 g, and PGA =
0.51 g and applied to the model. By investigating
forces applied to the tunnel structure, it was found that
123
2054 Geotech Geol Eng (2020) 38:2039–2060

Fig. 31 Comparison of bending moment of tunnel during two

Fig. 30 Comparison of axial forces of tunnel during two Tabas
Tabas and Gilroy earthquakes at different maximum accelera-
and Gilroy earthquakes at different maximum accelerations in
tions in a roof slab, b invert slab, c wall
a roof slab, b invert slab, c wall

Arias intensity (Ia) is a parameter indicating the rate

Tabas earthquake had more destructive effects on
of energy applied to the structure and is considered as
tunnel. In order to identify the reason, a variety of
an appropriate criterion to estimate the potential of
factors were investigated and Arias intensity param-
damage caused by earthquake. By measuring the
eter was identified as the effective factor (Fig. 29).
transient ground wave acceleration, this parameter
estimates the amount of energy of the earthquake. This

123
Geotech Geol Eng (2020) 38:2039–2060 2055

Table 6 Arias intensity (Ia)

PGA (g) Gilroy earthquake Tabas earthquake
0.51 0.35 0.1 0.51 0.35 0.1

Ia (m/s) 1.639 0.772 0.063 4.102 1.932 0.158

criterion was first developed by Arthur Arias in 1970

(Arias 1970).This parameter is defined as the time
integral of the squared ground acceleration and is
defined as follows:
ZTd
p
Ia ¼ ðaðtÞÞ2 dt ð2Þ
2g
0

As the PGA of the input wave increases, the Arias

intensity increases, and therefore, greater energy is
applied to the structure and more seismic forces are
generated in the structure.
According to Figs. 30 and 31, the seismic forces
generated in the tunnel elements in Tabas earthquake
are greater than Gilroy earthquake values in all values
of the maximum acceleration of the input wave. The
difference between values created during two earth-
quakes increases as the maximum acceleration of the
input wave increases, and the maximum value of the
difference between forces is in the tunnel invert slab.
The values of the Arias intensity of Tabas earth-
quake in all PGAs are greater than Gilroy earthquake
and this causes the seismic forces during Tabas
earthquake to be greater than Gilroy earthquake
(Table 6 and Fig. 29).
The Arias intensity of Tabas earthquake in PGA =
0.35 g is greater than Gilroy earthquake with PGA =
0.51. Accordingly, the seismic forces applied on the
structure in PGA = 0.35 g in Tabas earthquake are
greater than PGA = 0.51 g in Gilroy earthquake. Of
course, an exception is observed regarding the axial
force of the tunnel roof slab.
Based on Fig. 29 of the Arias intensity versus time,
in the first 10 s of the earthquake, the Arias intensity of Fig. 32 Time history of axial force in tunnel components in
Tabas earthquake is less than that of Gilroy. By Tabas and Gilroy earthquakes at PGA = 0.1 g; a invert slab,
investigating the time history diagram of axial force b wall, c roof slab
and bending moment generated in the structure
elements, it was found that the values of these forces values for Tabas earthquake becomes very higher than
for Gilroy earthquake to the first 10 s are greater than Gilroy’s (Figs. 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37). In order to
those of Tabas earthquake, and after these 10 s, the calculate duration of strong motions of various
earthquakes, one can use the definition of the

123
2056
Fig. 33 Time history of bending moment in tunnel components
in Tabas and Gilroy earthquakes at PGA = 0.1 g; a invert slab
b wall, c roof slab
significant duration time. The significant duration time
can be defined as a time interval that includes a certain
percentage of Arias intensity. This percentage has
been defined differently by different researchers. The
123
Geotech Geol Eng (2020) 38:2039–2060
Fig. 34 Time history of axial force in tunnel components in
Tabas and Gilroy earthquakes at PGA = 0.35 g; a roof slab,
b invert slab, c wall
most common definition has been presented by
Trifunac and Brady (1975) based on the interval
between 5 and 95% of the Arias acceleration (Trifunac
and Brady 1975).
Geotech Geol Eng (2020) 38:2039–2060
Fig. 35 Time history of bending moment in tunnel components
in Tabas and Gilroy earthquakes at PGA = 0.35 g; a roof slab,
b invert slab, c wall
The significant duration time for Gilroy earthquake
is 6.53 s, which begins approximately from 2.75 s and
continues to 9.25 s. This time is 16.51 s for Tabas
earthquake which begins from 5.25 s and ends at
21.75 s. The significant duration time does not depend
on the maximum acceleration and remains constant.
2057
Fig. 36 Time history of axial force in tunnel components in
Tabas and Gilroy earthquakes at PGA = 0.51 g; a roof slab,
b invert slab, c wall
According to Figs. 15 and 16, it turns out that the
maximum values of seismic forces occur at significant
time. The value of generated forces in the structure
during Gilroy earthquake at times between 3 and 5 s is
greater than that of forces in Tabas earthquake. This
123
2058 Geotech Geol Eng (2020) 38:2039–2060

13 Conclusions

1. Dynamic forces generated in the tunnel due to

Fig. 37 Time history of bending moment in tunnel components
in Tabas and Gilroy earthquakes at PGA = 0.51 g; a roof slab,
b invert slab, c wall
time interval is located in the significant time of Gilroy
earthquake but not in the Tabas.
the earthquake are formed in three phases,
including the transient state, the steady state,
and the remaining state after the earthquake.
2. With the onset of the earthquake, dynamic force
is generated in slabs and tunnel walls. The walls
exhibit the same behavior during an earthquake.
The greatest impact of the earthquake is on the
invert slab.
3. The maximum value of dynamic axial force
occurs on walls and the maximum value of
dynamic bending moment occurs in the invert
slab.
4. As the structure dimensions get larger, the
plastic areas surrounding tunnel increase and a
larger displacement occurs in the environment
and consequently larger deformations are
applied on the structure and seismic drifts of
the structure increase. Therefore, as the struc-
ture gets larger, the forces applied on the
elements increase.
5. In the low PGA values, the maximum acceler-
ation of the input waves of tunnel elements
forces does not show significant increase. In this
state, the soil around the tunnel remains in an
elastic phase and does not undergo significant
deformation. As the PGA increases, the plastic
areas around tunnel and hence the forces applied
to the element increase.
6. As the L/H ratio of the structure increases, the
flexibility of the structure to the environment
increases and the environment applies more
deformation to the structure and more drift is
applied to the structure. Additionally, the values
of the seismic forces increase. In fact, the larger
the tunnel span, the greater forces are applied to
the structure.
7. By increasing the overburden thickness from
2 m to 6 m for this shallow tunnel, the seismic
risk increases and greater damage and forces are
applied to the structure.
8. The increased tunnel stability length up to a
depth of 5 m leads to an increase in the forces,
but as this length reaches to 7 m, the forces in
the elements decrease.

123
Geotech Geol Eng (2020) 38:2039–2060
9. During the earthquake, the critical elements of
the tunnel are located at the top and the bottom
of the walls-to-slabs connection site, and the
maximum values of the axial force and bending
moment occur in them.
10. The Arias intensity of the input wave plays an
important role in the seismic behavior of the
shallow cut and cover tunnels. It seems that the
Arias intensity of the input wave is more
determinative than the maximum acceleration
of the input wave, such that for two applied
earthquake waves with equal maximum accel-
eration, the wave with greater Arias intensity is
more destructive. Furthermore, most of
dynamic forces are formed in the tunnel lining
during the significant time of the earthquake
which is obtained based on the Arias intensity of
the input wave.
References
Alielahi H, Kamalian M, Adampira M (2015) Seismic ground
amplification by unlined tunnels subjected to vertically
propagating SV and P waves using BEM. Soil Dyn Earthq
Eng 71:63–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2015.01.
007
Amorosi A, Boldini D (2009) Numerical modelling of the
transverse dynamic behaviour of circular tunnels in clayey
soils. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 29(6):1059–1072
Amorosi A, Boldini D, Falcone G (2014) Numerical prediction
of tunnel performance during centrifuge dynamic tests.
Acta Geotech 9(4):581–596
Argyroudis S, Tsinidis G, Gatti F, Pitilakis K (2017) Effects of
SSI and lining corrosion on the seismic vulnerability of
shallow circular tunnels. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 98:244–256
Arias A (1970) Measure of earthquake intensity. Massachusetts
Inst. of Tech., Cambridge, Univ. of Chile, Santiago de
Chile
Azadi M, Hosseini SMM (2010) Analyses of the effect of
seismic behavior of shallow tunnels in liquefiable grounds.
Tunn Undergr Space Technol 25(5):543–552
Bao X, Xia Z, Ye G, Fu Y, Su D (2017) Numerical analysis on
the seismic behavior of a large metro subway tunnel in
liquefiable ground. Tunn Undergr Space Technol
66:91–106
Bilotta E, Lanzano G, Madabhushi SG, Silvestri F (2014) A
numerical Round Robin on tunnels under seismic actions.
Acta Geotech 9(4):563–579
Bobet A (2010) Drained and undrained response of deep tunnels
subjected to far-field shear loading. Tunn Undergr Space
Technol 25(1):21–31
Bobet A, Fernandez G, Huo H, Ramirez J (2008) A practical
iterative procedure to estimate seismic-induced
2059
deformations of shallow rectangular structures. Can Geo-
tech J 45(7):923–938
Chen CH, Wang TT, Jeng FS, Huang TH (2012) Mechanisms
causing seismic damage of tunnels at different depths.
Tunn Undergr Space Technol 28:31–40
Conti R, Viggiani GM, Perugini F (2014) Numerical modelling
of centrifuge dynamic tests of circular tunnels in dry sand.
Acta Geotech 9(4):597–612
Corigliano M, Scandella L, Lai CG, Paolucci R (2011) Seismic
analysis of deep tunnels in near fault conditions: a case
study in Southern Italy. Bull Earthq Eng 9(4):975–995
Do NA, Dias D, Oreste P, Djeran-Maigre I (2014) 2D tunnel
numerical investigation: the influence of the simplified
excavation method on tunnel behaviour. Geotech Geol Eng
32(1):43–58
Do NA, Dias D, Oreste P, Djeran-Maigre I (2015) 2D numerical
investigation of segmental tunnel lining under seismic
loading. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 72:66–76
Dowding CH, Rozan A (1978) Damage to rock tunnels from
earthquake shaking. ASCE J Geotech Eng Div
104(2):175–191
Garner CD, Coffman RA (2013) Subway tunnel design using a
ground surface settlement profile to characterize an
acceptable configuration. Tunn Undergr Space Technol
35:219–226
Golshani A, Hosseini M, Majidian S (2014) Construction of
underpassing a crowded junction with shallow soil depth
(case study, Tehran). In: Yoo C, Park S-W, Kim B, Ban H
(eds) Geotechnical aspects of underground construction in
soft ground. Korean Geotechnical Society, Seoul, Korea,
pp 479–483
Gomes RC (2013) Effect of stress disturbance induced by
construction on the seismic response of shallow bored
tunnels. Comput Geotech 49:338–351
Gomes RC, Gouveia F, Torcato D, Santos J (2015) Seismic
response of shallow circular tunnels in two-layered ground.
Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 75:37–43
Hall WJ, O’Rourke TD (1991) Seismic behavior and vulnera-
bility of pipelines. In: Lifeline earthquake engineering.
ASCE, pp 761–773
Hashash Y (2001) Seismic behavior of underground structures
and site response. In: Spencer BF, Hu YX (eds) Earthquake
engineering frontiers in the new millennium, Swets &
Zeitlinger, Beijing, China, pp 243–249
Hashash Y, Tseng WS, Krimotat A (1998) Seismic soil–struc-
ture interaction analysis for immersed tube tunnels retrofit.
In: Geotechnical earthquake engineering and soil dynamics
III. ASCE, pp 1380–1391
Hashash YM, Hook JJ, Schmidt B, John I, Yao C (2001) Seismic
design and analysis of underground structures. Tunn
Undergr Space Technol 16(4):247–293
Hashash YM, Park D, John I, Yao C (2005) Ovaling deforma-
tions of circular tunnels under seismic loading, an update
on seismic design and analysis of underground structures.
Tunn Undergr Space Technol 20(5):435–441
Hassanzadeh M, Bonab MH, Javadi AA (2018) Experimental
and numerical study of the behaviour of shallow rectan-
gular tunnels. J Vibroeng 20(4):1783–1796
Hatzigeorgiou GD, Beskos DE (2010) Soil–structure interaction
effects on seismic inelastic analysis of 3-D tunnels. Soil
Dyn Earthq Eng 30(9):851–861
123
2060
Hung JC, Monsees J, Munfah N, Wisniewski J (2009) Technical
manual for design and construction of road tunnels-civil
elements. Prepared for the US Department of Transporta-
tion. Publication No. FHWA-NHI-10-034
Huo H, Bobet A, Fernández G, Ramı́rez J (2006) Analytical
solution for deep rectangular structures subjected to far-
field shear stresses. Tunn Undergr Space Technol
21(6):613–625
Iida H, Hiroto T, Yoshida N, Iwafuji M (1996) Damage to
Daikai subway station. Soils Found 36(Special):283–300
ITASCA F (2011) 7.0: user manual. Licence Number 213-039-
0127-18973. Sapienza—Univ. of Rome, Earth Science
Department
Kasper T, Meschke G (2006) A numerical study of the effect of
soil and grout material properties and cover depth in shield
tunnelling. Comput Geotech 33(4–5):234–247
Kawashima K (2000) Seismic design of underground structures
in soft ground: a review. Geotechnical aspects of under-
ground construction in soft ground. Rotterdam Google
Scholar, Balkema
Kontoe S, Avgerinos V, Potts DM (2014) Numerical validation
of analytical solutions and their use for equivalent-linear
seismic analysis of circular tunnels. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng
66:206–219
Kouretzis GP, Andrianopoulos KI, Sloan SW, Carter JP (2014)
Analysis of circular tunnels due to seismic P-wave propa-
gation, with emphasis on unreinforced concrete liners.
Comput Geotech 55:187–194
Lemnitzer A, Keykhosropour L, Kawamata Y, Towhata I (2017)
Dynamic response of underground structures in sand:
experimental data. Earthq Spectra 33(1):347–372
Ma C, Lu D, Du X, Qi C (2018) Effect of buried depth on
seismic response of rectangular underground structures
considering the influence of ground loss. Soil Dyn Earthq
Eng 106:278–297
Merritt JL, Monsees JE, Hendron AJ Jr (1985) Seismic design of
underground structures. In: Proceedings of the 1985 rapid
excavation tunneling conference, vol 1, pp 104–131
Moghadam MR, Baziar MH (2016) Seismic ground motion
amplification pattern induced by a subway tunnel: shaking
table testing and numerical simulation. Soil Dyn Earthq
Eng 83:81–97
O’Rourke TD, Goh SH, Menkiti CO, Mair RJ (2002) Highway
tunnel performance during the 1999 Duzce earthquake. In:
Proceedings of the international conference on soil
mechanics and geotechnical engineering, vol 2. AA Balk-
ema Publishers, pp 1365–1368
Owen GN, Scholl RE (1981) Earthquake engineering of large
underground structures. NASA STI/Recon technical report
no. 82
Pakbaz MC, Yareevand A (2005) 2-D analysis of circular tunnel
against earthquake loading. Tunn Undergr Space Technol
20(5):411–417
Patil M, Choudhury D, Ranjith PG, Zhao J (2018) Behavior of
shallow tunnel in soft soil under seismic conditions. Tunn
Undergr Space Technol 82:30–38
123
Geotech Geol Eng (2020) 38:2039–2060
Penzien J (2000) Seismically induced racking of tunnel linings.
Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 29(5):683–691
Pitilakis K, Tsinidis G, Leanza A, Maugeri M (2014) Seismic
behaviour of circular tunnels accounting for above ground
structures interaction effects. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 67:1–15
Power M, Rosidi D, Kaneshiro J, Gilstrap S, Chiou SJ (1998)
Summary and evaluation of procedures for the seismic
design of tunnels. Final report for task 112-d-5.3 (c).
National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research,
Buffalo, New York
Sahoo JP, Kumar J (2014) Stability of a circular tunnel in
presence of pseudostatic seismic body forces. Tunn
Undergr Space Technol 42:264–276
Sharma S, Judd WR (1991) Underground opening damage from
earthquakes. Eng Geol 30(3–4):263–276
St John CM, Zahrah TF (1987) Aseismic design of underground
structures. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 2(2):165–197
Tajiri M (1997) Damage done by the great earthquake disaster of
the Hanshin. Awaji district to the Kobe municipal subway
system and restoration works of the damage. Jpn Railw Eng
36(2):19–23
Trifunac MD, Brady AG (1975) A study on the duration of
strong earthquake ground motion. Bull Seismol Soc Am
65(3):581–626
Tsinidis G (2017) Response characteristics of rectangular tun-
nels in soft soil subjected to transversal ground shaking.
Tunn Undergr Space Technol 62:1–22
Tsinidis G, Rovithis E, Pitilakis K, Chazelas JL (2016) Seismic
response of box-type tunnels in soft soil: experimental and
numerical investigation. Tunn Undergr Space Technol
59:199–214
Wang JN (1993) Seismic design of tunnels: a simple state-of-
the-art design approach. Parsons Brinckerhoff, New York
Wang JN, Munfakh GA (2001) Seismic design of tunnels. WIT
Trans Built Environ 57:589–598
Wang WL, Wang TT, Su JJ, Lin CH, Seng CR, Huang TH
(2001) Assessment of damage in mountain tunnels due to
the Taiwan Chi-Chi earthquake. Tunn Undergr Space
Technol 16(3):133–150
Wang Z, Gao B, Jiang Y, Yuan S (2009) Investigation and
assessment on mountain tunnels and geotechnical damage
after the Wenchuan earthquake. Sci China Ser E: Technol
Sci 52(2):546–558
Wang G, Yuan M, Miao Y, Wu J, Wang Y (2018) Experimental
study on seismic response of underground tunnel-soil-
surface structure interaction system. Tunn Undergr Space
Technol 76:145–159
Ward WH (1965) The development of earth loading and
deformation in tunnel linings in London Clay. In: Pro-
ceedings of the sixth international conference on soil
mechanics and foundation engineering, 1965, vol 2,
pp 432–436
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with
regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and
institutional affiliations.