Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 42 (2014) 175–183

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tust

Probabilistic estimation of ground condition and construction cost

for mountain tunnels
Zhenchang Guan a,b,⇑, Tao Deng a, Yujing Jiang b,c, Cheng Zhao d, Hongwei Huang d
a
College of Civil Engineering, Fuzhou University, Fuzhou 350108, China
b
State Key Laboratory of Mine Disaster Prevention and Control, Shandong University of Science and Technology, Qingdao 266510, China
c
Faculty of Engineering, Nagasaki University, Nagasaki 852-8521, Japan
d
College of Civil Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: An innovative methodology for the probabilistic estimation of ground condition and construction cost is
Received 28 November 2013 proposed in this article, which is an integration of the geology prediction approach based on Markov pro-
Received in revised form 13 January 2014 cess and the cost variance analysis based on work breakdown structure. The former one provides the
Accepted 27 February 2014
probabilistic description of ground classification along tunnel alignment according to the geology infor-
Available online 25 March 2014
mation revealed from boring holes. The latter one provides the probabilistic description of expected cost
for each interested operation according to the survey feedbacks among practitioners. Then an engineering
Keywords:
application to Chuanshi Tunnel is well presented to demonstrate how the ground condition and the con-
Mountain tunnel
Geology prediction approach
struction cost are estimated in a quantitative and probabilistic way. It facilitates both the owners and the
Markov process contractors to be aware of the risk they should carry before construction, and it is meaningful for both
Cost variance analysis tendering and bidding.
Work breakdown structure Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction On the other hand, variance in direct-cost is the secondary

Geological condition is the primary source of uncertainty in the
construction of mountain tunnels. The construction cost and peri-
od fluctuate dramatically corresponding to the varying geological
conditions, and both the owner and the contractor are facing with
huge risks of cost overspending and period delaying. Therefore,
many hard methods and soft methods have been employed to mit-
igate the geology-related uncertainty during survey, design and
construction phases. Hard methods, such as subsurface boring,
pilot drilling and advanced geophysical prospecting, utilize
in situ equipments to detect the geology information in some spe-
cific locations along the tunnel alignment (Alimoradi et al., 2008;
Kuroda et al., 2009; Lee et al., 2010; Carrière et al., 2013). Soft
methods, such as time series approach, neural network approach
and random process approach, utilize mathematical models to pre-
dict the geology information in a continuous and dynamic way
along the tunnel alignment (Ioannou, 1987; Jeon et al., 2005; Ching
and Chen, 2007; Leu and Adi, 2011; Guan et al., 2012). These hard
and soft methods are developed complementarily, and many
successful engineering applications have been well reported.
⇑ Corresponding author at: College of Civil Engineering, Fuzhou University,
Fuzhou 350108, China. Tel.: +86 13960757102.
E-mail addresses: gaussto@hotmail.com, zcguan@fzu.edu.cn (Z. Guan).
source of uncertainty in the construction of mountain tunnels.
The construction cost is generally divided into direct-cost (i.e.
labor, material and machinery) and indirect-cost (e.g. overhead,
tax and so on). The indirect-cost has little variance in tunnel con-
struction, while the direct-cost is often influenced by the market
fluctuation, as well as the different proficiency of working skill.
The construction cost can be estimated roughly from historical
data (Rostami et al., 2013; Paraskevopoulou and Benardos, 2013),
or on the other hand, be analyzed directly based on work break-
down structure (Jung and Woo, 2004; Chua and Godinot, 2006;
Jung and Kang, 2007; Chen, 2008). And some norms and quotas
have been regulated to specify the average level of direct-cost in
tunnel construction.
Based on these achievements presented above, an innovative
methodology, which is an integration of the geology prediction ap-
proach based on Markov process and the cost variance analysis
based on work breakdown structure, is proposed in this article to
estimate the ground condition and construction cost in a quantita-
tive and probabilistic way. The geology prediction approach, which
is mainly referred to Ioannou (1987) and Guan et al. (2012), is
briefly presented in Section 2. The cost variance analysis, which
is mainly referred to MTPRC (2007), is briefly presented in
Section 3. Then an engineering application to Chuangshi Tunnel
in Songjian Expressway is well presented in Section 4.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2014.02.014
0886-7798/Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
176 Z. Guan et al. / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 42 (2014) 175–183
2. Geology prediction approach based on Markov process
2.1. Single geological parameter as a continuous-space discrete-state
Markov process
The spatial variability of a single geologic parameter can be de-
scribed by the transition in or out of its states, each of which has a
certain length of persistence. Therefore, a single geologic parame-
ter can be regarded as a random process X(t), whose state probabil-
ity is a function of location t. In practice, Markov process with its
distinguishing characteristic of one-step memory is often em-
ployed to describe this random process. The continuous-space dis-
crete-state Markov process for a single geological parameter is
completely determined by its transition intensity matrix A, as
shown in Eq. (1).
( With the updated transition intensity matrix A0 , one can infer
ci ; i¼j
A ¼ ½aij ; where aij ¼ i; j ¼ 1; 2; . . . n
ci pij ; i–j
In the above, transition probability pij is the probability that the
next state of X will be j given the present state is i; transition inten-
sity coefficient ci is the expected distance over which the parame-
ter X will remain in a particular state i.
The probabilistic behavior of a Markov process X(t) over interval
is defined by the interval transition probability matrix V, as shown
in Eq. (2). Due to the one-step memory characteristic, the interval
transition probability matrix V satisfies the Kolmogorov differen-
tial equation, and thus can be linked with its transition intensity
matrix A by Eq. (3).
V ¼ ½v ij ; where v ij ¼ P½Xðtz Þ ¼ jjXðtq Þ ¼ i
Vðt z  t q Þ ¼ eðtz tq ÞA ;
If the state probability at location tq is known and denoted as
row vector ~ s(tq), one can infer the state probability at new location
tz by Eq. (4).
~
sðt z Þ ¼ ~
sðt q ÞVðtz  t q Þ
As presented above, a Markov process is totally determined by
its transition intensity matrix A. In general, the estimation of pij
and ci can be accomplished by either subjective assessment or sta-
tistical procedure. If the geology profile along tunnel alignment
and the geology map for a large area are available, ci can be esti-
mated by computing the inverse of average length of each state i,
while pij can be estimated by computing the ratio between the
number of transitions from states i to j and the total number of
transitions out of state i.
2.2. Bayesian updating for transition intensity matrix
The likelihood matrix L for a particular exploration method at a
certain location is defined by Eq. (5), where ljk denotes the likeli-
hood of observation result k given that the true parameter state
is j. The likelihood matrix L reflects the engineers’ confidence about
the observation results. In generally, it is assessed subjectively and
varies from different exploration methods and different locations.
L ¼ ½ljk ; where ljk ¼ P½Yðt b Þ ¼ kjXðtb Þ ¼ j
When new geological information is available (e.g. a new face
logging or a new boring hole is revealed), the interval transition
probability matrix V should be updated sequentially according to
this new information. Suppose that a new location tn is revealed to-
wards the direction of a known location tq. Considering the interval
from location tn to location tq, the prior interval transition probabil-
ity matrix V(tn–tq) is calculated by Eq. (3), using the prior transition
intensity matrix A. Then according to Bayes’ theorem, the posterior
interval transition probability matrix V’(tn–tq) is updated by Eq. (6),
when a certain observation result k is revealed at location tn.
vl
V 0 ¼ ½v 0ij ; where v 0ij ¼ Pn ij jk for a certain observation
j¼1 v ij ljk
result k at a new location ð6Þ
0
Then the posterior transition intensity matrix A , which reflects
the ‘‘average’’ transition probability and the ‘‘average’’ transition
intensity coefficient within the interval from location tn to location
tq, can be computed inversely by Eq. (7).
log V 0 ðt n  t q Þ
A0 ¼ ð7Þ
tn  tq
the state probability at any interested location tz within the inter-
ð1Þ val from location tn to location tq, just by using Eqs. (3) and (4)
again.
2.3. Ground condition as a function of 4 geological parameters
As presented above, the state probability for a single geological
parameter can be described by Markov process and updated by
Bayes’ theorem. In practice, however, the ground condition is clas-
sified into grades according to the different combination of several
geological parameters. As one example, the BQ system specified by
Chinese Codes for Design of Road Tunnel (2004) is presented in
Appendix A.
In accordance with the BQ system, 4 geological parameters are
ð2Þ selected and described by the Markov processes independently in
this article. Rock hardness (H) corresponds to the parameter of Rc
ð3Þ (uniaxial compression strength) in BQ system. Index 1 or 2 denotes
that the revealed intact rock is relatively hard or relatively soft.
Joint intensity (I) partially corresponds to the parameter of Kv (coef-
ficient of integrity) in BQ system. Index 1, 2 or 3 denotes that the
joint number accounted within unit area is relatively less, medium
ð4Þ or relatively more. Joint quality (Q) partially corresponds to the
parameters of Kv and K2 (occurrence of major joint) in BQ system.
Index 1, 2 or 3 denotes that the joint quality revealed is relatively
good, medium or relatively poor. Water content (C) corresponds
to the parameter of K1 (inflow of underground water) in BQ system.
Index 1 or 2 denotes that the location revealed is relatively dry or
relatively humid. Notice that, the indices of geological parameters
merely describe the relative relationships and should be defined
case by case. The definitions of 4 geological parameters presented
above provide one good example, which is employed in the engi-
neering application of Chuanshi Tunnel (see details in Section 4).
After the definition of 4 geological parameters, a geology table
should be established to specify which kinds of geological param-
eter combination belong to which grade of ground condition. As
consequence, the ground condition can be regarded as a function
totally determined by these 4 geological parameters. Notice again
that, the definition of geology table is also case by case, one good
example is presented in the engineering application of Chuanshi
Tunnel (see details in Section 4). When the probabilistic character-
istic of each geological parameter is determined, the state proba-
bility of ground condition can be calculated in accordance with
ð5Þ the geology table.
3. Cost variance analysis based on work breakdown structure
3.1. The work breakdown structure due to budgetary norms
Since the indirect-cost has little variance, only the direct-cost is
focused in this article and abbreviated as cost henceforth. In
 Z. Guan et al. / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 42 (2014) 175–183 177

practice, the cost is often analyzed by the work breakdown struc- Table 1
ture, which is a hierarchical grouping of project component, and Cost analysis for excavating & mucking of 100 m3 rock/soil mass.

each descending level represents an increasing detailed definition Detail accounts Unit Grade III Grade IV Grade V
about the project components. The work breakdown structure Labor work Manday 50.9 63.1 64.5
varies significantly from different project (e.g. bridge, tunnel, sub-
Wood m3 0.024 0.022 0.021
grade, and pavement) and different purpose (e.g. cost, schedule Sawn timber m3 0.022 0.020 0.019
and quality). According to the budgetary norms of highway project Steel drill kg 10.8 6.4 4.0
in China (MTPRC, 2007), a typical work breakdown structure con- Alloy bit (<U50 mm) Piece 5.0 3.0 2.0
sisting of 3 hierarchies is illustrated in Fig. 1. One mountain tunnel Iron nail kg 0.2 0.2 0.2
Iron wire kg 2.1 1.9 1.8
project is divided into 4 divisions, which are further subdivided Ammonium nitrate explosive kg 98.5 76.7 30.5
into 22, 3, 7 and 13 operations respectively. The cost for each oper- Non-electronic detonator Piece 113 84 53
ation is then carefully analyzed, as one example about the exca & Detonating cord m3 60 53 53
muck operation is expatiated in Table 1. Water m3 25 25 25
To excavating & mucking 100 m3 rock/soil mass of Grade V, it Other material Yuan 26.7 18.5 8.7
needs 64.5 manday labor work, 4.0 kg steel drill, 30.5 kg ammo- Air-leg driller Shift 6.79 3.56 4.65
Air compressor (<20 m3/min) Shift 1.48 1.13 1.30
nium nitrate explosive, 0.35 shift wheel loader and so on. The base
Wheel loader (<2 m3) Shift 0.45 0.35 0.35
prices for every kind of labor, material and machinery are also reg- Dump truck (<12 t) Shift 1.21 0.93 0.93
ulated by the norms, so that the base price of the exca & muck Small apparatus Yuan 108.8 57.7 74.4
operation (Grade V) is summed up to 5649 Yuan. By the similar Base price Yuan 5858 5703 5649
means, the base prices of all operations can be regulated, as some
of them are presented in Section 4.

3.2. The cost variance
The base price regulated by the budgetary norms only reflects
the ‘‘average’’ level during a certain period and within a certain re-
gion. In practice, the cost variance always occurs due to the price
fluctuation of labor, material and machinery among markets, as
well as the different working proficiency among contractors.
Therefore, some questionnaire surveys, which contain the work
breakdown structure and the base prices of some interested oper-
ations, are carried out to ask the practitioners for their expected
prices. From these feedbacks, one can simply estimate the cost var-
iance of each operation by triangular distribution. According to the
triangular distribution, the probabilistic distribution function
(PDF) of expected price can be expressed by Eq. (8), where b is
the base price from budgetary norms, a and c are the minimum
and maximum expected prices among respondents. The triangular
distribution is employed here for simplicity, one can establish
more proper distribution if enough information and statistical data
are available.
8 The Chuangshi Tunnel in Songjian expressway, which is located
< 2ðxaÞ
ðbaÞðcaÞ
x 2 ½a; b
f ðxÞ ¼
: 2ðxcÞ
x 2 ½b; c
ðbcÞðccÞ
Taking the exca & muck operation (Grade V) for example, the
minimum and maximum expected prices among respondents are
5500 Yuan and 6000 Yuan respectively, so that the PDF of expected
price is depicted in Fig. 2. Notice that, both the abscissa and the
ordinate are scaled in this figure. They are divided and multiplied
by the base price of 5649 respectively, so that the peak of PDF al-
ways occurs at the abscissa of one and the integral of PDF always
comes out to one. The scaling technique is important, which signif-
icantly facilitates the superposition among different PDFs. By the
similar means, the PDFs of expected prices for all interested oper-
ations can be estimated, as some of them are presented in
Section 4.
4. Engineering application
Base on the geology prediction approach presented in Section 2
and the cost variance analysis presented in Section 3, it is now pos-
sible to combine these two achievements together and estimate
the ground condition and construction cost in a quantitative and
probabilistic way.
4.1. Outline of Chuangshi Tunnel
in northern Fujian Province of China, is a separate road tunnel with
ð8Þ
4 lanes in up-line & down-line totally. The geology profile along
Chuangshi Tunnel alignment, as illustrated in Fig. 3, is obtained
from surface geophysical prospecting and subsurface boring explo-
ration. The ground covered by eluvial soil of 2–20 m deep consists
of tuff and phyllite in general, and there exists a fault about 40 m
wide beneath the valley.

Project
mountain tunnel
Level

Division
Level tunnel body tunnel portal auxiliary gallery installation

Operation excavating small pipe steel rock shotcrete cast-in-place

Level mucking forepoling bracing bolt lining concrete

Fig. 1. The work breakdown structure for cost analysis in mountain tunnels.
178 Z. Guan et al. / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 42 (2014) 175–183
25 base price
20
for exca & muck operation (Grade V)
base price=5649
Probability
15
minimun maximun
expected price expected price
10
5
0 The likelihood matrixes of 4 geological parameters, as listed in
0.95 1.00 1.05
Expected price
Fig. 2. Triangular probabilistic distribution function of expected price.
Analogy method is employed during design phase, and different
lining patterns and forepoling patterns are selected corresponding
to different ground conditions, as described in Table 2. As exam-
ples, the lining pattern Z4-0 and the forepoling pattern F3 are de-
picted in Fig. 4 (TPDIFP, 2009).
The 764 m long tunnel is constructed by the New Austrian Tun-
neling Method. The top-heading excavation is employed consis-
tently throughout the whole tunnel, and the excavation length of
each cycle ranges from 1 m to 3 m according to different ground
conditions. The construction of Chuangshi Tunnel began in January
2010 and finished in July 2011, and the construction monitoring
(including tunnel convergence monitoring, face logging and ad-
vanced geophysical prospecting) was carried out by the authors’
workgroup.
4.2. Probabilistic description of ground classification
4.2.1. Definitions of geological parameters and geology table
According to the geology information revealed from 7 boring
holes as well as the geology profile along tunnel alignment, the
indices of rock hardness (H), joint intensity (I), joint quality (Q)
and water content (C) are defined subjectively, which have been
presented in Section 2. Table 3 shows the indices of 4 geological
parameters at the locations of 7 boring holes
Fig. 3. The geology profile along Chuangshi Tunnel alignment.
Corresponding to the definitions of 4 geological parameters,
there exists a total of 36 possible combinations (i.e. geology vec-
tor), which are further classified into three ground conditions as
shown in Table 4. Notice that, the definition of geology table is also
case by case, which is partially referred to Chinese codes for Design
of Road Tunnel (2004) and partially subjected to engineers’ experi-
ence about Chuangshi Tunnel.
4.2.2. Prior transition intensity matrixes and likelihood matrixes
The prior transition intensity matrixes of 4 geological parame-
ters, as listed in Table 5, are calculated mainly referring to the geol-
ogy map in a larger area and partially referring to the design &
construction documents of other similar projects.
1.10 Table 6, parameter are subjectively estimated from the engineers’
experience (not constrained in the engineering instance of Chuang-
shi Tunnel). The likelihood matrixes reflecting the engineers’ con-
fidence about the observation results are different from location
to location in general, for simplification however, they are assumed
constant throughout the whole tunnel alignment.
4.2.3. Probabilities of ground classification at the locations of boring
holes
Taking the location of 2# boring hole as example, the observa-
tion results of 4 geological parameters come out as (1 3 3 2).
According to the likelihood matrixes, the state probabilities of 4
geological parameters are computed firstly, which are then used
to compute the probabilities of 36 geology vectors. Finally sum-
ming up those geology vectors belonging to the same ground con-
dition, the probability of ground classification at the location of
BH2 turns out as: 0.026 in Grade III, 0.215 in Grade IV and 0.759
in Grade V. Similarly, the probabilities of ground classification at
other locations of boring holes can be calculated in the same
way, as listed in Table 7.
4.2.4. Probabilities of ground classification within the interval of two
boring holes
Regarding BH2 as ‘‘known’’ location and BH1 as ‘‘new’’ location,
the probabilities of ground classification within the interval from
BH1 to BH2 can be estimated by the following procedures. (1)
For the geological parameter of rock hardness, according to the
observation results at location BH2 and location BH1, the posterior
transition intensity matrix is calculated by using Eqs. (3), (6), and
(7) sequently. Then with the updated transition intensity matrix,
the state probability of rock hardness at any location within the
 Z. Guan et al. / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 42 (2014) 175–183 179

Table 2
The lining patterns and the forepoling patterns.

Pattern Description Usage

Lining Z5-1 First lining (shotcrete with 24 cm thick and U6 wire mesh, I18 section steel with 0.5 m spacing); radial bolt In Grade V condition with shallow
(U25 grouted hollow pipe with 3.5 m long, 1.0 m spacing and ± 120° azimuth); second lining with invert cover
(reinforcement concrete with 45 cm thick);
Z5-0 First lining (the same with Z5-1 but with sparser spacing of 0.7 m); radial bolt (the same with Z5-1); second In Grade V condition with deep
lining with invert (the same with Z5-1 but with less reinforcement ratio); cover
Z4-1 First lining (shotcrete with 20 cm thick and U6 wire mesh, grid steel with 0.7 m spacing); radial bolt (U22 In Grade IV condition with shallow
grouted rebar with 3.0 m long, 1.2 m spacing and ± 75° azimuth); second lining with invert (reinforcement cover
concrete with 40 cm thick);
Z4-0 First lining (shotcrete with 18 cm thick and U6 wire mesh, grid steel with 1.0 m spacing); radial bolt (the In Grade IV condition with deep
same with Z4-1); second lining without invert (plain concrete with 35 cm thick); cover
Z3-0 First lining (shotcrete with 10 cm thick and U6 wire mesh); radial bolt (U22 grouted rebar with 2.5 m long, in Grade III condition with deep
1.2 m spacing and ± 60° azimuth); second lining without invert (plain concrete with 30 cm thick); cover
Forepoling F1 Arch cover (plain concrete with 30 cm thick and expansion footing); grouted pipe roof (U108 steel tube with In tunnel entrance with Grade V
40 m long, 35 pieces in one section with 0.54 m spacing); condition
F2 Grouted small pipe (U50 steel pipe with 5.0 m long, 35 pieces in one section with 0.54 m spacing, inclined In Grade V condition
angle of 15°, one section every 2.8 m along tunnel axial direction);
F3 Grouted rockbolt (U22 rebar with 5.0 m long, 35 pieces in one section with 0.54 m spacing, inclined angle of In Grade IV condition that is closely
15°, one section every 3.0 m along tunnel axial direction) adjacent to Grade V

Fig. 4. Schematic representation of (a) lining pattern Z4-0 and (b) forepoling pattern F3.

Table 3
The indices of 4 geological parameters at the locations of 7 boring holes. 4.2.5. Probabilities of ground classification along tunnel alignment
The probabilities of ground classification within other intervals
No. Position (H) (I) (Q) (W)
are obtained by the same means, so that the probabilities of ground
BH1 ZK57 + 064 2 3 3 2 classification along the whole tunnel alignment are depicted in
BH2 ZK57 + 140 1 3 3 2
Fig. 5. The areas below blue-line and above red-line denote the
BH3 ZK57 + 264 1 1 1 1
BH4 ZK57 + 448 2 2 1 1 probabilities of grade V and grade III respectively, while the area
BH5 ZK57 + 536 2 2 3 2 between these two lines denotes the probability of grade IV. Dur-
BH6 ZK57 + 704 1 2 3 2 ing design phase, the ground condition is classified in a determin-
BH7 ZK57 + 828 2 3 3 2 istic way, whose result is also depicted in the top of Fig. 5 for
comparison. They agree with each other basically, but the ground
classification estimated by the probabilistic means provides a
interval can be calculated by using Eqs. (3) and (4) sequently. (2) smooth transition from one ground condition to another.
The state probabilities of other 3 parameters at any location within
the interval can also be calculated in the same way. (3) In 4.3. Quantities and expected prices of interested operations
accordance with the geology table, the probabilities of ground clas-
sification at any location within the interval can be calculated now, 4.3.1. Quantities of interested operations
just as they have been done at the locations of boring hole. The work breakdown structure specified by budgetary norms
Regarding BH1 as ‘‘known’’ location and BH2 as ‘‘new’’ location, divides the mountain tunnel project into 4 divisions and 45 oper-
the procedures presented above are repeated again. Taking the ations in maximum. However, some operations are not used in
average of them, the probabilities of ground classification within Chuangshi Tunnel and some operations have no relations to the
the interval of two boring holes are finally determined. ground condition. Therefore, only 8 operations that are closely
180 Z. Guan et al. / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 42 (2014) 175–183

Table 4 shown in Table 1, while the others are not listed in this article.
The geology table of Chuangshi tunnel. However, the base price only reflects the ‘‘average’’ level during a
Ground condition Geology vector Geological parameter certain period and within a certain region. In practice the price al-
(GC) (GV) (H) (I) (Q) (W) ways varies dynamically due to the market fluctuation of labor,
material and machinery, as well as the different working profi-
Grade III GV01 1 1 1 1
GV02 1 1 1 2
ciency. Therefore, 10 questionnaires are distributed to the manag-
GV03 1 2 1 1 ers of engineering department or finical department, 6 on behalves
GV04 1 2 1 2 of contractors’ standpoint and 4 on behalves of owners’ standpoint,
GV05 1 3 1 1 to ask for their minimum and maximum expected prices of these 8
GV06 1 1 2 1
operations. The work breakdown structure and the detail accounts
GV07 1 1 2 2
GV08 1 2 2 1 for each operation are also presented to the respondents, and only
GV09 1 1 3 1 the direct-cost is focused in the questionnaire survey. From their
GV10 2 1 1 1 feedbacks, the minimum and maximum expected prices of these
Grade IV GV11 1 3 1 2 8 operations (18 subitems) are also listed in Table 9.
GV12 1 2 2 2
GV13 1 3 2 1
GV14 1 3 2 2
4.4. Probabilistic estimation of construction cost
GV15 1 1 3 2
GV16 1 2 3 1 4.4.1. Cost variance of single operation (subitem)
GV17 2 1 1 2 Corresponding to the minimum and maximum expected prices
GV18 2 2 1 1
listed in Table 9, the PDFs of expected cost for all operations (subi-
GV19 2 2 1 2
GV20 2 3 1 1 tems) can be established by using Eq. (8) respectively. As examples,
GV21 2 1 2 1 the PDFs of expected cost for operations (subitems) of exca & muck
GV22 2 1 2 2 in Grade IV, rebar rockbolt, steel grid and shotcrete are depicted in
GV23 2 2 2 1 Fig. 6 respectively.
GV24 2 2 2 2
GV25 2 1 3 1
Grade V GV26 1 2 3 2
4.4.2. Cost variance of single pattern
GV27 1 3 3 1 Taking lining pattern Z4-0 for example, it needs 6 operations (7
GV28 1 3 3 2 subitems): 0.819 unit of exca & muck in Grade IV, 0.112 unit of re-
GV29 2 3 1 2 bar rockbolt, 0.462 unit of steel grid, 0.421 unit of shotcrete and so
GV30 2 3 2 1
on. Referring to the base cost of each operation (or subitem), the
GV31 2 3 2 2
GV32 2 1 3 2 base cost of lining pattern Z4-0 per linear meter is summed up
GV33 2 2 3 1 by: 0.819  5703 + 0.112  8345 + 0.462  6521 + 0.421  5564 +
GV34 2 2 3 2 . . .. . . = 19,680, and the weight of each operation (subitem) taken
GV35 2 3 3 1 in this pattern can also be calculated. Then superposing these PDFs
GV36 2 3 3 2
by their weights, the PDF of expected cost for lining pattern Z4-0
per linear meter can be calculated and depicted in Fig. 7. By the

related to the ground condition are focused in this article, and the Table 7
quantities of these 8 operations per linear meter in 5 lining pattern The probabilities of ground classification at the locations of 7 boring holes.
and 3 forepoling pattern are listed in Table 8. Notice that, each
No. Position Probability of ground classification
operation includes 2 or 3 subitems in different units, and different
BH1 ZK57 + 064 0.002/0.057/0.941
lining or forepoling patterns need different quantities.
BH2 ZK57 + 140 0.026/0.215/0.759
BH3 ZK57 + 264 0.952/0.043/0.005
BH4 ZK57 + 448 0.148/0.778/0.074
4.3.2. Expected prices of interested operations
BH5 ZK57 + 536 0.005/0.212/0.783
The base prices of these 8 operations (including 18 subitems) BH6 ZK57 + 704 0.016/0.719/0.265
are listed in Table 9, which are extracted from the budgetary BH7 ZK57 + 828 0.002/0.057/0.941
norms. The detail accounts for exca & muck operation have been

Table 5
The prior transition intensity matrixes of 4 geological parameters.

For rock hardness: AH For joint intensity: AI For joint quality: AQ For water content: AC
0.0027 0.0018 0.0009 0.0053 0.0036 0.0018
0.0090 0.0090 0.0024 0.0048 0.0024 0.0025 0.0050 0.0025 0.0080 0.0080
0.0041 0.0041 0.0026 0.0054 0.0080 0.0026 0.0054 0.0080 0.0089 0.0089

Table 6
The likelihood matrixes of 4 geological parameters.

For rock hardness: LH For joint intensity: LI For joint quality: LQ For water content: LC
0.8 0.15 0.05 0.8 0.15 0.05
0.95 0.05 0.15 0.7 0.15 0.15 0.7 0.15 0.9 0.1
0.05 0.95 0.05 0.15 0.8 0.05 0.15 0.8 0.1 0.9
 Z. Guan et al. / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 42 (2014) 175–183 181

V IV III IV V IV V

60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 660 720 780 840
1.0
Probability of ground classification

0.8

III IV
0.6

0.4

V IV V V
0.2

0.0
60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 660 720 780 840

BH1 BH2 BH3 Location (m) BH4 BH5 BH6 BH7

(2 3 3 2) (1 3 3 2) (1 1 1 1) (2 2 1 1) (2 2 3 2) (2 2 2 2) (2 3 3 2)

Fig. 5. The probabilities of ground classification along tunnel alignment.

Table 8
The quantities of operations (subitems) per linear meter in different patterns.

No. Operation (subitem) Unit Z5-1 Z5-0 Z4-1 Z4-0 Z3-0 F1 F2 F3

1 Exca & muck Grade III 100 m3 0.784
Grade IV 100 m3 0.944 0.819
Grade V 100 m3 0.999 0.999
2 Rockbolt Rebar bolt 1t 0.112 0.112 0.068 0.176
Hollow bolt 100 m 0.805 0.805
3 Steel bracing Section steel 1t 1.747 1.248
Steel grid 1t 0.672 0.462
4 Shotcrete lining Shotcrete 10 m3 0.856 0.856 0.477 0.421 0.185
Wire mesh 1t 0.049 0.049 0.042 0.041 0.027
5 Umbrella pipe roof Steel pipe 10 m 3.500
Concrete arch 10 m3 3.657
6 Small pipe forepoling Steel pipe 100 m 0.589
Cement mortar 10 m3 0.400
7 Cast-in-place concrete lining Wall & crown 10 m3 1.123 1.123 0.997 0.820 0.704
Invert 10 m3 0.417 0.417 0.370
Rebar 1t 1.142 0.829 0.826
8 Water proofing Plate & cloth 100 m2 0.470 0.470 0.465 0.464 0.461
Water-proof strip 10 m 2.349 2.349 2.335 2.272 2.272

Table 9
The base prices, minimum expected prices and maximum expected prices of operations (subitems).

No. Operation (subitem) Unit Base price Min price Max price
1 Exca & muck Grade III 100 m3 5858 5700 6400
Grade IV 100 m3 5703 5600 6200
Grade V 100 m3 5649 5500 6000
2 Rockbolt Rebar bolt 1t 8345 7200 9600
Hollow bolt 100 m 4564 4000 5200
3 Steel bracing Section steel 1t 5449 5000 6500
Steel grid 1t 6521 6000 7900
4 Shotcrete lining Shotcrete 10 m3 5564 5400 5800
Wire mesh 1t 4735 4500 5000
5 Umbrella pipe roof Steel pipe 10 m 2163 2000 2800
Concrete arch 10 m3 3871 3800 4000
6 Small pipe forepoling Steel pipe 100 m 3134 3000 3900
Cement mortar 10 m3 3700 3600 3900
7 Cast-in-place concrete lining Wall & crown 10 m3 7418 7200 8400
Invert 10 m3 4428 4100 4800
Rebar 1t 4395 4100 4800
8 Water proofing Plate & cloth 100 m2 3183 3100 3300
Water-proof strip 10 m 425 400 500
182 Z. Guan et al. / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 42 (2014) 175–183

similar means, the PDFs of expected cost for all 5 lining patterns 16
and 3 forepoling patterns can be established, as some of them for pattern Z3-0
are also depicted in Fig. 7. base cost=13973
12

4.4.3. Cost variance of single location

Probability
Different lining patterns and forepoling patterns are selected for pattern Z4-0
8 base cost=19680
according to different ground conditions, as presented in Table 2.
Taking location ZK57 + 540 for example, the ground condition
for pattern Z5-1
has the probabilities of 0.682/0.314/0.004 in Grade V/Grade IV/ base cost=41522 for pattern F2
Grade III, and the cover depth is relatively deep. As consequence, 4 base cost=3326
it has the probabilities of 0.682/0.314/0.004 to select lining pattern
of Z5-0/Z4-0/Z3-0, and has the probability of 0.682/0.314 to select
forepoling pattern of F2/F3. Then referring to the base cost of each 0
pattern, the base cost of location ZK57 + 540 is summed up by: 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15 1.20 1.25
0.682  41,522 + 0.314  28,690 + 0.004  13,973 + . . .. . . = 34,490, Expected cost
and the weight of each pattern taken in this location can also be
calculated. Then superposing these PDFs by their weights, the Fig. 7. Probabilistic distribution functions of expected cost for different patterns.
PDF of expected cost for location ZK57 + 540 can be calculated
and depicted in Fig. 8.
Corresponding to the probabilities of ground classification (say 20
Fig. 5) and the principle for pattern selection (say Table 2), the
for location ZK57+068
probabilities of pattern selection along the whole tunnel alignment base cost=62402
16
can be determined (although not presented here). Then the PDFs of
expected cost for all locations can be established by the similar
means, as some of them are also depicted in Fig. 8. 12
Probability

4.4.4. Cost variance of whole tunnel for location ZK57+540

8 for location ZK57+256
base cost=34490
The base cost of whole tunnel is summed up by the base cost of base cost=14882
each location and turns out to be 22346684, and the weight of each
location taken in whole tunnel can also be calculated. Then super- 4

posing the PDFs by their weights, the PDF of expected cost for
whole tunnel can be calculated and depicted in Fig. 9. The mini- 0
mum and maximum expected costs are 0.863 time and 1.291 time 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15 1.20 1.25
of base cost respectively, but there is a probability of more than 0.9 Expected cost
that the construction cost would fall in the interval from 0.95 time
to 1.10 time of base cost. Fig. 8. Probabilistic distribution functions of expected cost for different locations.
The cost variance is essentially due to two aspects: (1) price
fluctuation among markets and working proficiency among con-
tractors, which is subjectively estimated by questionnaire and re- 18 base cost
flected by the PDFs of expected cost for each operation. (2)
Quantity alteration in pattern selection, which is caused by geology 15
uncertainty and reflected by the probabilities of ground classifica-
tion. Notice again that only the operations that are closely related
12
to ground condition are taken into account, one can accommodate for Chuangshi Tunnel
Probability

base cost=22346684
9
30
6 minimun expected cost maximun expected cost
25 =0.863 base cost =1.291 base cost
for shotcrete
base cost=5564 3
20
Probability

0
15 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15 1.20 1.25 1.30
for exca & muck in Grade IV Expected cost
base cost=5703
10 Fig. 9. Probabilistic distribution functions of expected cost for whole tunnel.
for steel grid
base cost=6521
5 for rebar rockbolt more factors within the framework of proposed methodology, if
base cost=8345
enough data are available.
0
0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15 1.20 1.25
5. Conclusions and comments
Expected cost

Fig. 6. Probabilistic distribution functions of expected cost for different operations The innovative methodology, which is an integration of the
(subitems). geology prediction approach based on Markov process and the cost
 Z. Guan et al. / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 42 (2014) 175–183
variance analysis based on work breakdown structure, is proposed
in this article. The engineering application to Chuanshi Tunnel in
Songjian Expressway is well presented to demonstrate how the
ground condition and the construction cost are estimated in a
quantitative and probabilistic way. Although in practice, only one
kind of lining/forepoling pattern is used at a certain location. The
probabilistic estimation of ground condition and construction cost
does help the owners and the contractors to be aware of the risk
they should carry before construction, which is meaningful for
both tendering and bidding.
The innovative methodology presented above could be further
improved. (1) The geology prediction approach could accommo-
date new geology information dynamically. When new boring hole
is explored or new face is excavated, the newly revealed informa-
tion can be fed back to update the probability of ground condition
dynamically. (2) The work breakdown structure for cost variance
analysis is employed in this article, and only the operations that
are closely related to ground condition are taken into account. In
fact, it could be further expanded to accommodate more complex
factors, say accidents and human mistakes, if enough statistical
data and information are available.
Acknowledgement
The research is sponsored by National Natural Science Founda-
tion of China (Grant No. 51008082).
Appendix A. BQ system for rock mass classification
Firstly, the basic quality index of rock mass is related to the uni-
axial compression strength Rc and coefficient of integrity Kv by the
following equation.
BQ ¼ 90 þ 3Rc þ 250K v ðA1Þ
Rc (in unit of MPa) can be obtained by standard uniaxial compres-
sion test in laboratory, or related to in situ point load strength
Is(50) by Eq. (A2). Kv (dimensionless) can be related to the p-wave
velocity in rock mass Vpm and the p-wave velocity in intact rock
Vpr as shown in Eq. (A3).
Rc ¼ 22:82 I0:75
sð50Þ ðA2Þ
K v ¼ ðV pm =V pr Þ2 ðA3Þ
If the experimental data are not available, Rc and Kv can also be
estimated by qualitative means. In accord with two specified
empirical tables (not listed here), the engineers could estimate
the Rc value empirically according to the rock type and hammer re-
bound, and estimate the Kv value empirically according to joint
number in unit area, joint openness, and joint infilling.
183
Secondly, the modified quality index of rock mass is calculated
by the following equation.
½BQ ¼ BQ  100ðK 1 þ K 2 þ K 3 Þ ðA4Þ
The dimensionless correction factors K1, K2 and K3 are related to
the inflow of underground water, the occurrence of major joint, the
level of in situ stresses. In accord with three specified empirical ta-
bles (not listed here), these factors are estimated empirically
according to the engineers’ assessment.
Finally, the rock mass classifications of Grade I, Grade II, Grade
III, Grade IV and Grade V, correspond to the modified quality indi-
ces of >550, 550–451, 450–351, 350–251 and <250.
References
Alimoradi, A., Moradzadeh, A., et al., 2008. Prediction of geological hazardous zones
in front of a tunnel face using TSP-203 and artificial neural networks. Tunn.
Undergr. Sp. Tech. 23, 711–717.
Carrière, S., Chalikakis, K., et al., 2013. Combining electrical resistivity tomography
and ground penetrating radar to study geological structuring of karst
unsaturated zone. J. Appl. Geophys. 94, 31–41.
Chen, P., 2008. Integration of cost and schedule using extensive matrix method and
spreadsheets. Autom. Constr. 18, 32–41.
Ministry of Transportation of PR China, 2004. Chinese Codes for Design of Road
Tunnel JTGD70-2004. (in Chinese).
Ching, J., Chen, Y., 2007. Transitional Markov chain Monte Carlo method for
Bayesian model updating model class selection and model averaging. J. Engng.
Mech. ASCE 133, 816–832.
Chua, D., Godinot, M., 2006. Use of a WBS matrix to improve interface management
in projects. J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 132, 67–79.
Guan, Z., Deng, T., et al., 2012. Markovian geology prediction approach and its
application in mountain tunnels. Tunn. Undergr. Sp. Tech. 31, 61–67.
Ioannou, P., 1987. Geologic prediction model for tunneling. J. Constr. Engng.
Manage. ASCE 113, 569–590.
Jeon, J., Martin, C., et al., 2005. Predicting ground conditions ahead of the tunnel face
by vector orientation analysis. Tunn. Undergr. Sp. Tech. 20, 344–355.
Jung, Y., Kang, S., 2007. Knowledge-based standard progress measurement for
integrated cost and schedule performance control. J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 133,
10–21.
Jung, Y., Woo, S., 2004. Flexible work breakdown structure for integrated cost and
schedule control. J. Constr. Eng. Manage. ASCE 130, 616–625.
Kuroda, S., Jang, H., et al., 2009. Time-lapse borehole radar monitoring of an
infiltration experiment in the vadose zone. J. Appl. Geophys. 67, 361–366.
Lee, J., Sagong, M., et al., 2010. Experimental estimation of the fallout size and
reinforcement design of a tunnel under excavation. Tunn. Undergr. Sp. Tech. 25,
518–525.
Leu, S., Adi, T., 2011. Probabilistic prediction of tunnel geology using a hybrid
neural-HMM. Engng. Appl. Artif. Intel. 38, 658–665.
Ministry of Transportation of PR China, 2007. Budgetary Norms of Highway Project
in CHINA JTGTB0602-2007. (in Chinese).
Paraskevopoulou, C., Benardos, A., 2013. Assessing the construction cost of Greek
transportation tunnel projects. Tunn. Undergr. Sp. Tech. 38, 497–505.
Rostami, J., Sepehrmanesh, M., et al., 2013. Planning level tunnel cost estimation
based on statistical analysis of historical data. Tunn. Undergr. Sp. Tech. 33, 22–
33.
Transportation Planning and Design Institute of Fujian Province, 2009. Design
Documents for Songjian Expressway in Fujian Province (in Chinese).