SURFACE SETTLEMENT DUE TO DEEP EXCAVATION AND

GROUTING
_________________________________________
A Report Submitted for B. Tech. Project Part II
(CE852)

By
Jyotirmoy Pal (510417078)
&
Sufi Nourin Zamal(510417089)

Under the supervision of

Prof. Ambarish Ghosh

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

INDIAN INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY,
SHIBPUR
June, 2021

1
 EPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING
INDIAN INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING SCIENCE AND
TECHNOLOGY,SHIBPUR
HOWRAH- 711103
________________________________________________________

CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL
The foregoing Project Report is hereby approved as a creditable study of an
Engineering subject carried out and presented in a manner satisfactory to
warrant its acceptance as a prerequisite for the degree of Bachelor of
Technology in Civil Engineering which it has been submitted. It is understood
that by this approval the undersigned does not necessarily endorse or approve
any statement made, opinion expressed or conclusion drawn therein but
approve the report only for the purpose which it is submitted.

Board of Examiners:

2
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We take the opportunity to express our sincere gratitude and indebtedness to

my project guide, Prof. Ambarish Ghosh, Department of Civil Engineering,
Indian Institute of Engineering Science and Technology, Shibpur, for his
constant encouragement and enlightening discussions during the course of this
report without which it would not have been possible for us to reach this
point.

Dated: 02-06-2021
Indian Institute of Engineering
Science and Technology, Shibpur
Howrah -711103

Jyotirmoy Pal
(510417078)
&
Sufi Nourin Zamal
(510417089)

3
Content:
1. Introduction
1.1. Deep Excavation
1.1.1. Types of Deep Excavation
1.2. Grouting
1.2.1. Types of Grouting
2. Problems Faced
3. Literature Review
4. Approach For Determining Settlement Due to Piling and
Tunnelling
4.1. Assumptions
4.2. Calculation Method of Stochastic Medium Theory
5. Ground Surface Settlement Induced by Single Tunnel
Excavation
6. Ground Surface Settlement Induced by Pile
7. Ground Displacement Caused by Grouting of Shield
Tunnelling
7.1. Problem
7.2. Solution
8. Conclusion
9. References

4
1. Introduction:

1.1 Deep Excavation: Excavation is a procedure that involves soil or/and rock removal
in order to form a cavity and create construction space using different
techniques. Excavations that exceed a depth of 4.5m (15ft) are considered Deep
Excavations.
1.1.1 Types of Deep Excavation:
1.1.1.1 Full Open Cut Method: It divided into two major types including
sloped full open cut as shown in Figure 2 and cantilever full open
cut as illustrated in Figure 3. The former is assumed to be
economical since the side of excavation would be sloped and does
not need any support to held foundation wall. However, if the
slope is considerably gentle or the excavation is largely deep, it
will costly.
1.1.1.2 Full Open Cut Excavation with Side Slope: The latter needs
retaining wall to support foundation wall soil and prevent collapse
of foundation wall but it neither require backing nor slopes.
Therefore, it cannot categorically be claimed that which method is
more cost effect. The economical method may be distinguished
based on analysis, design, and evaluation results.
1.1.1.3 Cantilevered Full Open Cut Excavation Method: Bracing
excavation as shown in Figure 4 is the placement of horizontal
struts in front of retaining wall to held excavation wall material
pressure. Bracing system consist of wale, strut, center posts, end
braces, and corner braces. Earth pressure transfer to horizontal
struts through wale, and the purpose of corner and end braces is to
reduce wale span without increasing strut number. Center posts
prevent the failure of
1.1.1.4 Anchored Excavation Method: In this technique, anchors as shown
in Figure 5 are installed to counter act against earth pressure.
Configuration and components of anchored excavation technique
are illustrated in Figure 6. Bonded portion of the anchor provides
anchoring force that works against earth pressure whereas
unbonded part of the anchored transfer pressure to the anchor
head. Anchor head transfer loads to the retaining wall. The
anchoring force is greatly based on the soil strength. The higher
the soil strength the greater the anchoring forces. This technique is
not suitable for clay and granular soil with high ground water
table. Lastly, it require short time to complete excavation with
great efficiency and suitable for large areas and shallow depth.
1.1.1.5 Island Excavation Method: In this method, the center of excavation
area is dug and excavated material placed close to the retaining
wall to create a slope. After that, the major part of the structure
would be constructed at the center of the excavation. Then, the
sloped soil will be excavated and struts will be placed between

5
 retaining wall and the main structure. Finally, the struts will be
removed and remaining parts of the structure will be constructed.
Sometimes, it might be required to use anchored or braced
technique to removed slopes soil material, specifically when the
excavation is too deep.

1.2 Grouting: Grouting is the process of injection material to cavities or cracks in concrete,
masonry structure, soil, rock-mas to increase the structure’s load-bearing capacity refers
to grouting.

1.2.1 Types of Grouting:

1.2.1.1G1 Grouting: This type of grout is generally for steel
structures, towers, ships, small pumps, and all non-
vibrating machinery, but the precise application of the
grout type to any location will be according to the
relevant drawing.

The grout shall be a non-shrinking, free-flow cementless

grout with a minimum compressive strength at least
equal to the foundation concrete, but not less than 30 N /
mm2 in 7 days and 40 N / mm2 in 28 days.

1.2.1.2 G2 Grouting: This type of grout will be used, in

general, in prefabricated concrete structures,
compressors, and other heavy equipment subject to
vibration and for column bearing plates of heavy
structures.

2 Some Problem:
With the development of high-rise buildings and other civil engineering constructions, foundation
excavations get deeper and deeper. Some of them are over 15m in comparison to the normal depth
of 5-7m. In order to ensure the stability of the excavation and reduce the effect on the
neighbouring buildings and underground utilities caused by excavation, continuous wall
structures are often used. In these cases, the use of a multi-strutted structural system is often
desirable in order to reduce ground movements and to achieve relatively high economic benefits.
There are two common techniques for predicting horizontal wall displacements and ground
settlements using either interpolation from a published database of different areas of the world or
numerical analysis using either finite element methods or finite difference methods. As soil is a
complicated material that always shows non-linear or sometimes brittle behaviour, predictions of
ground movements are difficult. Even though many different aspects of soil are incorporated into
many numerical models, many of these models are usually complex and the parameters do not
have a clear physical meaning. In addition, these models require huge number of computational
resources. The parameters require special kind of testing technique and laboratory skills.
Therefore, practising engineers try to avoid using them and tend to use design charts which relate
wall deflections to soil properties only through the factor of safety against basal heave.

6
3 Literature Review:
Ground movements behind a supported wall occur as a result of unbalanced pressure due to
removal of soil mass inside the excavation site. The magnitude and distribution of the settlement
are related to many factors such as construction quality, soil and groundwater condition,
excavation geometry, excavation sequences, duration of excavation, surcharge condition,
existence of adjacent buildings, method of retaining wall construction, penetration depth, wall
stiffness, type and installation of lateral support, spacing and stiffness of struts. A method derived
purely from theoretical basis would be very complex.
Therefore, most of the existing predictive methods were obtained based on field measurements and
local experiences. Several commonly used empirical methods in engineering practice are presented as
follows:

3.1Peck’s Method
Peck (1969) summarized the field observations of ground surface settlement around
excavations in a graphical form as shown in. This method may be suitable for the
spandrel-type settlement profile. As shown in the figure, the settlement curve is classified
into three zones, I, II and III, depending on the type of soil and workmanship.Nb
represents the stability number, and Ncb represents the critical stability number for basal
heave. The case histories used in the development of the figure are prior to 1969 and the
excavations are supported by sheet pile or soldier piles with lagging. It is proposed that
the maximum ground settlement for very soft to soft clay is about 1% of the maximum
excavation depth. The lateral influence zone would extend up to two times the maximum
excavation depth. With the use of newer technology, say the use of diaphragm wall, the
maximum settlements are generally smaller then those defined in the figure. However, the
method of Peck is the first practical approach to estimate ground surface settlement.

3.2Bowles’ Method
Bowles (1988) proposed a method for estimating the spandrel-type settlement profile
induced by excavation. The steps are given as follows.
1. Lateral wall displacement is estimated.
2. Volume of lateral movement of soil mass is calculated.
3. The influence zone (D) using the method suggested by Caspe (1966) is adopted.
D = (He+Hd) tan(45 - φ’/2)
where He is the final excavation depth, φ’ is the internal frictional angle of soil. For cohesive soil,
Hd=B, where B=width of excavation; for cohesionless soil Hd = 0.5B tan(45+ φ’/2)
4. By assuming that maximum ground settlement occurs at the wall, maximum ground
settlement can be estimated by the following.

7
 δvm=4Vs/D
5. The settlement curve is assumed to be parabolic. The settlement (dv) at a distance from the
supported wall (d) can be calculated as,
δv=δvm(x/D)2
where D-x is the distance from the wall.

3.3Ou et al.’s Method

Based on 10 cases in Taipei, Taiwan, Ou et al. (1993) observed that the vertical
movements of the soil behind the wall may extend to a considerable distance. The
settlement at a limited distance behind the wall is not uniform and increases with
excavation depth. Buildings within this distance may be damaged. The zone is thus
defined as the apparent influence range (AIR). The settlement outside this AIR would be
negligible. According to Ou et al. (1993), the AIR is approximately equal to the distance
defined by the active zone. The upper limit is a distance equal to the wall depth, that is,
AIR = (He+Hp) tan(45-φ/2) < (He+Hp)
Where He is the final excavation depth and Hp is the wall penetration depth.
Ou et al. (1993) also proposed a method for prediction of both spandrel and concave types of
ground settlement profile. For the spandrel type, a bilinear line was suggested by averaging
settlement profiles of 10 case histories in Taipei. For the concave type, it was proposed that
the profile was represented by a tri-linear line, in which the maximum ground surface
settlement occurred at a distance equal to half the depth where the maximum later wall
deflection occurred.

3.4Hsieh and Ou’s Method:

Following the findings from Ou et al. (1993), Hsieh and Ou (1998) setup a procedure for
predicting ground deformation. The predicting procedures are listed as follows:
a. Predict the maximum lateral wall deflection (δ hm) by performing lateral deformation
analysis, e.g. finite element methods or beam on elastic foundation methods
b. Determine the type of settlement profile by calculating the cantilever area and deep inward
area of predicted wall deflection. If As ≥ 1.6Ac, concave type of settlement profile is adopted, where
As and Ac refer to areas of deep inward movement and area of cantilever movement in the graph of
wall horizontal displacement against depth, respectively.
c. Estimate the maximum ground settlement using empirical data. (e.g. relationship between
maximum horizontal displacement and maximum ground settlement)
d. Calculate the surface settlement at various distances behind the wall using the profile
suggested by Ou et al. (1993).

8
4. Approach for determining settlement due to piling and
tunnelling:
The influence of group piles near the metro tunnels on the ground surface settlement cannot be
neglected during the tunnel excavation. The ground surface settlement is predicted by linear
superposition of settlements caused by metro tunnels excavation and the group piles. The
approach followed was as follows:

(1) Based on stochastic medium theory, the ground settlement caused by metro tunnel excavation is
calculated.
(2) The ground settlement induced by the friction force between the group piles and soil mass is
obtained by using the shear displacement method.
(3) A linear superposition of steps (1) and (2)is adopted, and the ground surface settlement which is
caused by the metro tunnel excavation considering the effect of group piles is obtained.

4.1. Assumptions: To predict the ground surface settlement induced by tunnel excavation
considering the influence of group piles, the following assumptions are adopted:
(1) The soil mass is incompressible, and it is ideally adapted to the stochastic medium theory.
(2) The piles bodies remain motionless when the tunnels are excavated (i.e., piles will not sink with
tunnel excavation).
(3) There is no relative displacement between pile and adjacent soil mass.

4.2. Calculation Method of the Stochastic Medium Theory: A three-dimensional

Cartesian coordinate system is established in the space with 𝑧-axis for the vertical direction.
According to the stochastic medium theory

9
∂W ( z , x , y , ) ∂ 2W ( x , y , z ) ∂ 2W ( z , x , y ) ∂ 2 W (z , x , y)
=B 11 ( z , x , y ) + B 12 ( z , x , y ) + B 22 ( z , x , y ) + A 1( z , x
∂z ∂x 2 ∂x∂y ∂ y2

where 𝐵11, 𝐵12, 𝐵22, 𝐴1, 𝐴2, and 𝑁 are parameters that depend on the structural characteristics of
soil mass medium. Based on the stochastic medium theory, the process of tunnel excavation is divided
into numerous infinitesimal excavation elements, and the total surface displacements are obtained by
the superposing displacements induced by elemental excavations. Dual systems are adopted in this
study, and one is for the global coordinate (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑧) and the other is for the local coordinate (𝜉, 𝜁, 𝜂).
The calculation model of the ground settlement induced by the elemental excavation with the buried
depth of 𝐻 is shown.

According to the boundary conditions of elemental excavation, the elemental displacement function
(𝑊𝑒) can be solved by the following equations:
∂We
=lWe
∂ ze
𝑊𝑒 |𝑧𝑒 =0 =𝛿 (𝑥𝑒,𝑦𝑒),
where 𝑙 is a differential operator and 𝑙 = 𝐵11(𝜕2/𝜕𝑥2) + 𝐵12 (𝜕2/𝜕𝑥𝑒𝜕𝑦𝑒) + ⋅⋅⋅. 𝛿(𝑥𝑒,𝑦𝑒) is a pulse
function.

10
According to the assumption that the soil mass is incompressible (i.e., the volume of mass remains
constant) during metro tunnels excavation, the horizontal displacements (𝑈𝑒𝑥 and 𝑈𝑒𝑦) and the
vertical displacement (𝑊𝑒) are satisfied with

∂We ∂ Uex ∂Uey

+ + =0
∂z ∂x ∂y
Combining (1), (2), (3) soil displacement caused be metro tunnels excavation can be obtained by

2
−πxe2 π (ye− ρ(ze ))
1 r1
2
− 2
r 2 (ze )
We= e
r 1 ( ze ) r 2 ( ze )

xe dr 1(ze)
Uex= ¿ We
r 1 ( ze ) ¿ dze

ye−ρ ( ze ) dr 2 ( ze ) dρ ( ze )
Uey= [ r 2 ze dze
−
dze
We ]
where 𝑟1(𝑧𝑒) and 𝑟2(𝑧𝑒) are the influence radii of the ground surface settlement caused by elemental
excavation that are related to 𝐵11 and 𝐵12. 𝜌(𝑧𝑒) is the offset distance of the ground surface
settlement.
Here, vertical settlement caused by metro tunnel excavation incorporating the influence of group piles
is studied. According to (4), the calculation formula of the ground surface settlement at a point (𝑥,
𝑦,0) induced by elemental excavation can be simplified as follows:

2 2
−π(x + y )
1 [ r2(z )
]
We= 2 e
r ( z)
where 𝑟(𝑧) is the influence radius of the ground surface settlement caused by elemental excavation.

5. Ground Surface Settlement Induced by Single Tunnel

Excavation:
A circular metro tunnel with radius 𝑅 is excavated, where the distance from the center of
excavation section to surface is 𝐻. The three-dimensional calculation model of surface settlement
caused by single tunnel excavation is shown in.

11
The center axial line of the tunnel is parallel to 𝑦-axis, and any cross section that is perpendicular to
the center line can be regarded as the 𝑥𝑧 plane. The calculation of the ground surface settlement
induced by tunneling can be regarded as a plane problem. Thus, the settlement calculation of
elemental excavation (𝑑𝜉𝑑𝜁𝑑𝜂) is simplified as a two-dimensional problem, and the simplified model
is shown as Figure 3.

12
 The settlement of the ground surface induced by elemental excavation (𝑑𝜉𝑑𝜂)atthe point(𝑋,0)of 𝑥-𝑧
coordinates is dependent on
−π 2
1 [ r 2 (η ) X ]
dWp ( X )= e dξdη
r (η)
x
x
O

d𝜁
d𝜉
d𝜂

According to Liu [16], the main influence zone angle (𝛽) of the settlement is introduced to determine
the influence radius (𝑟(𝜂)):
𝑟(𝜂) = 𝜂 /tan 𝛽 , (7)
where 𝜂 is the depth of excavation.
The relationship between the main influence zone angle and the internal friction angle
(𝜑)ofsoilmasscan be expressed as

tan β=
√ 2 π tan (45 °−0.5 φ)
2.5
The ground surface movement is dependent on the radial convergence of tunnel’s cross section.
According to the stochastic medium theory, the surface settlement equals the settlement difference
caused by the original excavation section Ω and section Λ after shrinking as follows:

13
𝑊𝑝 (𝑋) =𝑊𝑝Ω (𝑋) −𝑊𝑝Λ (𝑋)

2
❑ −tan β
( X −η)2]
tanβ [ η
2

¿∬ e dξdη
Ω− A η

As shown in fig 4, the initial radius of circular tunnel section Ω is R; after uniformly shrinking, radius
becomes R-ΔR. The surface settlement in 2D induced by tunneling can be

Wp(X)
2 2
b d −tan β f h −tan β
( X −η)2] ( X −η)2]
tanβ [ η
2
tanβ [ η
2

¿ ∫∫ e dξdη−∫∫ e dξdη
a c η e g η

a=H−R
b=H +r
2 2
c=−√ R −( H−η ) ,
d=−c
e=H −( R− ΔR )
f =H + ( R−ΔR )
2 2
g=−√ ( R−ΔR ) −( H−η )
h=−g

14
6. Ground Surface Settlement Effected by the Pile:

The interaction between the pile and the soilmass is incorporated, andthe displacement by
thefrictionresistanceofpilemustbe considered. In the paper, the shear displacement method is used
to calculate the ground displacement by the friction resistance of pile. The pile with radius 𝑟0 and
the influence radius 𝑟𝑚 of the friction resistance are shown.

𝑠 is the vertical displacement of the soil mass element while 𝑟 is the distance between the soil mass
element and the pile center. Horizontal surface displacement of soil mass element is neglected. Thus,
the shear strain of the soil mass element is defined as
ds
γ=
dr
Therefore, shear stress is expressed as
ds
τ =G
dr
Where G is shear modulus.
An annular soil mass element height being 𝑘, the inner diameter being 𝑟,and theouter diameter being
𝑟+𝑑𝑟, is defined. Then, the equilibrium equation of the submerged soil mass element and the pile is
expressed as

2𝜋𝑟𝜏𝑘 = 2𝜋𝑟0𝜏0𝑘,
where 𝑟0 is radius of the pile. 𝜏0 is the friction resistance.

15
By substituting the differential equation is derived:

ds r ˳ τ ˳ k
G =
dr r
The displacement of soil mass around the pile is presented by integrating as follows

r ˳ τ ˳ rm
s=
{ G
0
ln
r
(r ˳ ≤ r ≤rm)
(r >rm)

Effect of Group Piles. According to the load transfer mechanism, the lateral load resistance of pile
foundations is critically important due to pile-soil-pile interaction when lateral soils move down
(Rollins et al. [22, 23]). The interaction effect between the group piles and soil masses should be
taken into account in the calculation ofsurface displacement. As an example of group piles as shown
in Figure 8, the interactions between pile C and other piles are present.
According to the group piles tests and the back analysis, formulations have been developed to
compute the interaction coefficients of group piles (𝑓𝑚)byRollins et al.[22,23] and the expressions for
each case are shown as follows:
First (lead) row piles:

fm=0.26 ln ( ds˳ )+ 0.5≤ 1.0

Second row piles:

fm=0.51 ln ( ds˳ ) ≤1.0

fm=0.6 ln ( ds˳ )−0.25 ≤1.0

where 𝑆 is center-to-center spacing between piles in the direction of loading and 𝑑0 is width or
outside diameter of the pile. The values of 𝑓𝑚 are limited to 1.0. The interaction between the pile
group is neglectedwhen the spacing between pilesislargerthan 6.5𝑑0.

16
7. Ground Displacement Caused by Grouting of Shield
Tunnelling in Soft Soil:

SXA=ℜ { 1+Ev [ (3−4 v ) f ( Z )−Zfˊ´( Z ) −ω´( Z ) ]},

1+ v
SYA=ℑ { [(3−4 v) f ( Z )−Zfˊ´( Z ) −ω ´( Z ) ]}
E

where Re and Im mean taking the real and imaginary parts, respectively; SxA = the displacement of
point A in x direction; SyA = the displacement of point A in y direction; υ = Poisson’s ratio; E =
Young’s modulus; x and y are coordinate values of point A in x direction and y direction,
respectively, as shown in Figure 2; Z = x + iy; f(Z) and ω(Z) are the analytic functions and can be
determined from the following equation:

Z ( 1+ Λ2 ) +i H t ( 1− Λ2 ) Z ( 1+ Λ2 )−i H t ( 1− Λ 2 )
[ 2
f ( Z )=η −2 i ( 1+ Λ ) +2i 2 2
Z ( 1+ Λ )−i H t ( 1− Λ ) ] +2 i Λ
2
2 2
Z ( 1+ Λ ) +i H t ( 1− Λ )
2
Z ( 1+ Λ 2) + i H t ( 1− Λ 2 ) Z ( 1+ Λ2 ) +i H t ( 1− Λ2 ) Z ( 1+ Λ 2) +i H t ( 1− Λ 2 )
{ 2
ω ( Z )=η [ −3 i ( 1+ Λ ) + 2i Λ 2

Z ( 1+ Λ2 ) −i H t ( 1− Λ2 ) }[
+i
Z ( 1+ Λ 2 )−i H t ( 1− Λ2 ) ] [ +2 i
Z ( 1+ Λ2 ) −i H t ( 1− Λ2 ) ] +

17
 4 H t ( 1− Λ 2 )( 1+ Λ 2 )
fˊ ( Z )=η {
[ Z ( 1+ Λ 2) −i H t ( 1− Λ2 ) ]
4 Λ 2 H t ( 1− Λ2 ) ( 1+ Λ2 )
2
− 2
}
[ Z ( 1+ Λ 2) +i H t ( 1− Λ 2 ) ]

Λ2 pum H t
η=
( 1− Λ2 ) ( 1− Λ 4 )
H t −√ H t2−r 2sg
Λ=
r sg
where Ht = the distance from the tunnel centre to the boundary of half plane; pum = the uniform
pressure at the soil-grout interface, which is related to the grout pressure (pg); η = a parameter defined
by pum, Ht and rsg; Λ = a parameter defined by Ht and rsg; rsg = the radius of the soill grout
interface, which can be estimated under equivalent volume conditions:

2
D out V L
r sg =
√ 4
+
π
where Dout = the outer diameters of the ring and VL = the grout volume per unit length.

7.1.Problem:
The unit weight of the superficial deposits averages 18 kN/m3. Avgerinos et al. [40]
indicated that the modulus of elasticity for the superficial deposits is measured at 10.0 MPa.
The successive London Clay at the depths varying from 6.0 to 59.9m below the ground
surface consisted of three units, that are, B2, A3, and A2, and the unit weight of London
Clay averages 20 kN/m3. Gasparre et al. [41, 42] indicated that Young’s modulus for
London Clay is measured to be 132 MPa. The axis of cross rail tunnels is some 34.5m below
the surface. The extrados of the tunnel rings measured at 6.8 m, and the width of each tunnel
ring is 1600 mm. Additionally, this case history recorded both the grouting pressure (pg) and
the volume of injected grout (VL), as shown in Figures 4 and 5. The grouting pressure varied
from 74 to 279 kPa, with an average value of 173.1 kPa. The volume of injected grout was
within the range of 2.74– 3.47m3/m, and the associated average value was measured at
3.12m3/m.

18
 7.2.Solution:

The numerical is calculated in the attached excel file.

19
8. Conclusion:
Grouting is a complex procedure to simultaneously fill the annular gap formed between the
erected tunnel lining and the excavated tunnel bore during shield tunnelling process. It is of great
importance to evaluate the ground movements caused by grouting during shield tunnelling in clay.
This paper described a simple procedure for calculating the grouting-induced ground movements
during shield tunnelling in soft soil using the expansion theory of a cylindrical cavity where the
grouting parameters (grouting pressure and volume of injected grout) and the soil properties are
taken into consideration. The grouting process is simplified as the expansion of a cylindrical
cavity with a uniform radial stress at soil-grout interface in a half plane. The proposed method
was verified with a case history of London Clay. The results obtained suggest that this procedure
would be very helpful in managing the grouting parameters adopted for upcoming soft ground
tunnelling project and mitigating the environmental impacts on adjoining properties

9. References:
[1] R. J. Mair, “Tunnelling and geotechnics: new horizons,” G´eotechnique, vol. 58, no. 9, pp.
695–736, 2008.

[2] J. R. Standing and D. Selemetas, “Greenfield ground response to EPBM tunnelling in London
Clay,” G´eotechnique, vol. 63, no. 12, pp. 989–1007, 2013.

[3] W. C. Cheng, J. C. Ni, and S. L. Shen, “Experimental and analytical modeling of shield
segment under cyclic loading,” International Journal of Geomechanics, vol. 17, no. 6, article
04016146, 2016.

[4] Z. Jin-Feng and S. Yu, “Theoretical solutions of a circular tunnel with the influence of the out-
of-plane stress based on the generalized Hoek–Brown failure criterion,” International Journal
ofGeomechanics,2015.

[5] J. F. Zou and Z. He, “Numerical approach for strain-softening rock with axial stress,”
Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers—Geotechnical Engineering,Inpress.

20
[6] J.F.Zou,S.S.Li, Y. Xu,H.C.Dan,and L. H. Zhao,“Theoretical solutions for a circular
opening in an elastic–brittle–plastic rock mass incorporating the out-of-plane stress and seepage
force,” KSCE Journal ofCivil Engineering,vol.20, no.2,pp. 687–701, 2016.

21