Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 97 (2020) 103281

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology

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

Seismic capacity assessment of cracked lining tunnel based on the pseudo- T

static method
Wenge Qiu, Bingtian Li⁎, Lun Gong, Xingxin Qi, Zhiheng Deng, Guang Huang, Hui Hu
Key Laboratory of Transportation Tunnel Engineering, Ministry of Education, School of Civil Engineering, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu 610031, China

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Crack is one of the most common lining deteriorations, which is generally regarded as an indicator of tunnel
Seismic capacity safety. The present study investigated the lining cracks of 11 tunnels which are 200 km away from the
Tunnel Longmenshan fault zone. In order to evaluate the seismic capacity of these tunnels with longitudinal cracks in
Permanent lining the permanent lining, a modified deformation-based pseudo-static assessment method was developed. The
Crack
propagation of lining cracks was simulated by a reconstructed damaged plasticity constitutive model of re-
Pseudo-static method
Damage plastic
inforced concrete. The analyses adopted a two-dimensional finite element model and took tunnel depth, initial
crack position, and the interaction between soil and lining structures into account. The analysis results showed
that the modified evaluation method could simulate the damage process of lining structures under the action of
seismic shear wave well. The results also showed that the failure modes of tunnels with cracked permanent lining
were different with different burial depth in an earthquake. The cracks in the spandrel had the greatest impact
on the seismic capacity of tunnels and should be reinforced in time before the earthquake. In addition, the
interaction between the temporary support and permanent lining had little effect on the damage process of
linings but had an impact on the damage speed. This study can provide a reference for the safety assessment of
cracked lining tunnels in seismically active areas and help to determine the reinforcement measures and time
more reasonably.

1. Introduction
A large number of tunnels have been built in the mountainous areas
of western China. In the past 10 years, seismic activity in this area,
including four intensive earthquakes: the 2008 Wenchuan Earthquake
(Ms = 8.0), 2010 Yushu Earthquake (Ms = 7.1), 2013 Lushan
Earthquake (Ms = 7.0) and 2017 Jiuzhaigou Earthquake (Ms = 7.0).
Although underground structures are generally considered to be more
seismic-resistant than overground structures, some relevant literature
shows that tunnels can be damaged in strong earthquakes (Asakura,
1997; Shen et al., 2014; Wang et al., 2001; YASHIRO and KOJIMA,
2007). Therefore, as an important part of transportation infrastructure,
the seismic performance of tunnels in seismically active areas is still an
important issue.
Tunnels generally satisfy the seismic design requirements in a long
period after the construction. However, the time-dependent deteriora-
tion of rock masses and lining structures are sometimes inevitable,
which may lead to degradation in operational tunnels, such as cracks,
leakage and spalling. Lining cracks are the most common tunnel
anomalies, which are frequently regarded as one of the indicators of
tunnel safety (Asakura and Kojima, 2003; Richards, 1998; Yuan et al.,
2012). Cracks bring leakage, carbonization, and corrosion to the con-
crete structure, and even destroy the structural integrity, leading to
spalling and collapse. Researchers have been carrying out extensive
research on the root cause, evolution mechanism and safety assessment
of the lining cracks. Wang (2010) and Chiu et al. (2017) studied lining
crack evolution influenced by slope instability based on the long-term
records and analysis of detailed anomaly variation in a mountain
tunnel. Konagai et al. (2009) and Wang and Zhang (2013) analyzed the
earthquake-induced cracks of tunnels due to the 2008 Wenchuan
earthquake and the 2004 Mid-Niigata earthquake. Using a three-di-
mensional numerical simulation method, Xiao et al. (2014) studied the
cracking mechanism of permanent lining for a shallow and asymme-
trically-loaded tunnel in loose deposits. Song et al. (2019) studied the
deformation evolution laws, cracking mechanism and failure process of
the secondary lining for an existing highway tunnel in loess ground by
carrying out field investigations and laboratory model tests. In addition,
the tunnel maintenance guidelines of the United States, Japan, and
China also provide the evaluation criteria for lining cracks (Federal
Highway Administration, 2004; Japan Society of Civil Engineers, 2005;

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: libingtian@my.swjtu.edu.cn (B. Li).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2020.103281
Received 30 May 2019; Received in revised form 16 December 2019; Accepted 2 January 2020
0886-7798/ © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
W. Qiu, et al.
Ministry of Transport of the PRC, 2015). However, little attention has
been devoted to the influence of cracks on the seismic capacity of
tunnel linings up to now.
The vertically propagating shear wave is the prevailing form of
earthquake load (Wang, 1993). The seismically induced ovaling or
racking deformations rather than the inertial force has the most sig-
nificant influence on the tunnel lining (Penzien, 2015). Therefore,
tunnel seismic analysis was simplified as a pseudo-static form in many
cases (Hashash et al., 2005; Iai, 2005; Lu and Hwang, 2017; Zou et al.,
2017). Previous studies mostly analyzed concrete tunnel lining in linear
elasticity. Through monitoring the internal force such as axial force and
bending moment of structures, the possible location of cracks and the
failure state of linings can be determined. However, for the analysis of
cracked lining tunnels, such an approach cannot point out the evolution
of structural damage and the path of crack propagation. The plastic
damage analysis method was often more accurate and effective (Chen
and Wei, 2012; Cui et al., 2015; Wu et al., 2015; Xu et al., 2017; Yan
et al., 2018).
The main objective of this paper is to study the effect of the lining
cracks on the seismic response of tunnels. Based on the investigation of
lining cracks of 11 tunnels in earthquake-prone areas of China, the
typical analysis object was determined first. Then a modified de-
formation-based pseudo-static assessment method was developed, in
which a reconstructed damaged plasticity constitutive model of re-
inforced concrete was proposed and used to simulated the damage
evolution of cracked lining structures. The analyses adopted a two-di-
mensional finite element numerical model considering the impact of
tunnel depth, initial crack position, and interaction between soil and
lining structures.
2. Engineering background
Dazhou-Chengdu railway is located in Sichuan Province, China. It
was built in June 1992 and opened to traffic in November 1997.
Upgrading was completed in 2007 with a design speed of 200 km/h. In
2012, the lining quality of 11 tunnels near Nanchong was inspected by
ground-penetrating radar (GPR) and laser scanning. The topography
around these tunnels can be seen in Fig. 1. These tunnels are about
200 km away from the Longmenshan fault zone and the seismic peak
ground acceleration (PGA) of the designed earthquake in this area is
0.05 g. The overburden depths range from 8 m to 115 m. The design
data and geological investigation indicate that the ground formation
which the tunnels pass through is mudstone mixed with sandstone, and
the upper stratum to the surface is silt and silty clay with a thickness of
about 0–3 m. The physical and mechanical properties of these forma-
tions are summarized in Table 1.
These tunnels were built by the New Austrian tunneling method
(NATM). The cross-section of the tunnels is shown in Fig. 2. Shotcrete
Fig. 1. The geographical locations of the tunnels and the surrounding topography.
2
Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 97 (2020) 103281
C25 was used for the temporary support with a design thickness of
0.2 m. The permanent lining was constructed of reinforced concrete
C30 with a design thickness of 0.4 m. The compressive strength and
tensile strength of concrete are 20.1 MPa and 2.01 MPa respectively.
The diameter of the main steel bar is 22 mm and the reinforcement ratio
is 0.95%.
The inspect result indicated that lining cracks were the main
anomalies of these tunnels. The tunnel length, max overburden depths,
and lining crack statistics of these tunnels are summarized in Table 2.
These cracks are mainly longitudinal cracks and a small number of
circumferential cracks, oblique cracks, and reticular cracks. According
to the tunnel maintenance guidelines of China (Ministry of Transport of
the PRC, 2015), crack with length L c ≥ 5m and width Wc ≥ 1mm was
defined to be a severe crack that needs to be strengthened in time.
Penetrating crack was also considered to be of high risk. Other cracks
were considered to have no impact on structural safety and do not need
to be repaired. However, the influence of these minor cracks on the
seismic capacity of the tunnel was not considered at that time.
3. Methodology
3.1. A damaged plasticity constitutive model of reinforced concrete
There are several constitutive models for concrete crack analysis,
such as the discrete crack model (Ayari and Saouma, 1990), the
smeared crack model (Vargas-Loli and Fenves, 2010), and the plastic-
damage model (Lee and Fenves, 1998). The conventional approach to
account for the reinforced concrete by the plastic-damage model is to
adopt a plastic-damage model for concrete and model the reinforcing
bars with one-dimensional elements (Hamid et al., 2012; Qiu et al.,
2019). This method costs a lot of computational work, and sometimes it
is difficult to achieve the desired results because of the complex inter-
action between steel and concrete. Wu et al. (2015) proposed a sim-
plified method for three-dimensional simulation, in which reinforcing
bars were smeared into a membrane element and then embedded into a
solid concrete element.
Lee and Fenves (1998) developed a plastic-damage model for con-
crete subjected to cyclic loading using the concepts of fracture-energy-
based damage and stiffness degradation in continuum damage me-
chanics, as shown in Fig. 3. Reinforcing bars can improve the me-
chanical behavior of concrete structures, especially tensile behavior
because the tensile strength of steel is much greater than that of con-
crete. Nefedov (2005) studied the stability of tensioned reinforced
concrete in the process of cracking and pointed out that due to the
different reinforcing radio and mechanical properties of materials, re-
inforced concrete has two different instability processes. Based on the
hypothesis of strain compatibility and strength equivalence, the me-
chanical behavior of reinforcing bars can be incorporated into the
W. Qiu, et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 97 (2020) 103281

Table 1
The parameters of the mudstone mixed with sandstone, silt, and silty clay formations.
Ground formation Unit weight γ (KN/m3) Young’s modulus E (MPa) Cohesion c (kPa) Friction angle ϕ (°) Poisson’s ratioν Shear wave velocity Vs (m/s)

Mudstone mixed with sandstone 2.2 920 100 35 0.35 393.6

Silt 1.85 10 12 7 0.23 46.9
Silty clay 1.95 15 25 12 0.30 54.4

σA = σc (A − A' ) + σs A' (2)

where σc and σs are the average stress in concrete and reinforcing steel,
respectively.
In the elastic state:

σA = Ec εc (A − A' ) + Es εs A' = ERC εA (3)

ERC A = Ec (A − A' ) + Es A' (4)

Fig. 2. The cross-section of the 11 tunnels.
equivalent constitutive model of reinforced concrete instead of being an
independent material. This modified constitutive model can effectively
reflect the mechanical behavior of reinforced concrete, simplify the
calculation work, and is more suitable for engineering analysis.
Section of the reinforced concrete lining structure studied in this
paper is shown in Fig. 4(a). The cross-section area of reinforced con-
crete and reinforcing bars is A and A' . The reinforcing steel is assumed
to be elastic-perfect plastic and the stress-strain relation of concrete
damaged plasticity model is defined by GB-50010 (2010), as shown in
Fig. 5 and Fig. 6.
According to the hypothesis of strain coordination, it is assumed
that the strain of concrete and reinforcing steel is equal:
εc = εs
The nominal stress σ of the reinforced concrete equivalent material
can be obtained:
where ERC is the equivalent elastic modulus of the reinforced concrete
equivalent material element; ε is the nominal strain of the reinforced
concrete equivalent material.
The equivalent material can be explained as the superposition of
concrete and reinforcing bars, as Fig. 4(b) shows. According to Eq. (3)
and Eq. (4), the constitutive model of reinforced concrete equivalent
material can be obtained. Fig. 7(a) shows the tensile behavior of re-
inforced concrete equivalent material, which is consistent with one of
the two instability processes of reinforced concrete proposed by
Nefedov (2005). On the segment OM, the equivalent material is in the
elastic state, and the stress grows steadily. The concrete reaches yield
strength at point M. Subsequently, the structure load gradually turns to
be borne by reinforcing bars, corresponding to the segment MN. The
roles of concrete and reinforcement are exchanged after the inflection
point of the segment MN. Point N represents the stress in reinforcing
bars reaches the yield strength and the strain of equivalent material
increases rapidly. Fig. 7 (b) shows the compressive behavior of re-
inforced concrete equivalent material, similar to that of concrete, but
with higher yield strength.
The evolution of tensile and compressive damage variables of con-
crete can be obtained according to Wittke et al. (2006) as follows:
d=
( 1
α )
− 1 ε plE0
σ+ ( 1
α )
− 1 ε plE0 (5)
ε pl = αε in (6)
where ε pl
is the equivalent plastic strain; ε in
= ε − σ / E0 is the inelastic
(1) strain; α is the constant factor with 0 < α < α1.
Replace E0 in Eq. (5) with ERC and order α = 0.7 , the damage
variables of the reinforced concrete equivalent material studied in this
paper are obtained, as shown in Fig. 8. The tensile damage variables

Table 2
The tunnel length, max overburden depths, and lining crack statistics of 11 tunnels.
Tunnel Length (m) Max overburden depths Longitudinal crack Circumferential crack and Oblique Reticular crack Total
(m) crack
L c ≥ 5 m and L c ≤ 5 m or
Wc ≥ 1 mm Wc ≤ 1 mm

Liangfuwan 620 103 15 16 5 1 37

Goujiagou 590 106 23 10 7 1 41
Ranjiawan 670 108 26 7 5 0 38
Zhaizishan 105 37 1 4 0 0 5
Chenjiawan 463 89 25 26 9 1 61
Ranfangwan 787 115 43 38 17 0 98
Zhangjiawan 188 42 17 8 6 0 31
Wangjiawan 223 50 11 4 6 0 21
Jiajiagou 106 36 9 2 1 0 12
Nianzigou 238 55 8 7 0 0 15
Xuejigou 252 58 0 6 3 0 9

3
W. Qiu, et al.
Fig. 3. The response of concrete to uniaxial loading in tension and compression.
Fig. 4. The cross-section of the reinforced concrete lining structure. (a) real, (b)
equivalent.
Fig. 5. Stress-strain curves of reinforcing steel.
corresponding to the inflection point and point N on segment MN in
Fig. 7(a) is 0.7 and 0.82, respectively. The compressive damage variable
is 0.26 when the equivalent material reaches the compressive yield
strength.
3.2. Pseudo-static method
Pseudo-static analysis can either be deformation-based or force-
based (Sun and Dias, 2019). An early application of the deformation-
based method was the cross-section racking deformation (CSRD)
method developed by the San Francisco Bay Area Transit (SFBAT) in
the 1960 s. This method simulated the seismic action on the
4
Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 97 (2020) 103281
underground structure by imposing seismic racking deformation on
structures. But the interaction between underground structure and the
surrounding ground was not considered. The International Standard,
ISO23469, presented a simplified equivalent static analysis method as a
guideline for the seismic design of geotechnical works (Iai, 2005). The
ground displacement, inertia force, and interface shear stress were
taken into account, while the soil-structure interaction was simulated
by a series of normal and shear springs. Lu and Hwang (Lu and Hwang,
2017) proposed a modified cross-section racking deformation (MCSRD)
method which can automatically consider the nonlinear soil-tunnel
interaction based on the FLAC2D program.
Compared with the dynamic analysis, the pseudo-static analysis
cannot accurately catch the real variation of the relative stiffness, nor
consider the cumulative damage of structures during the earthquake.
However, the pseudo-static analysis can reflect the ultimate seismic
capacity of tunnel lining to a certain extent. The calculation time can be
considerably reduced, and the analysis process can be greatly simpli-
fied. Therefore, the pseudo-static method was adopted in many studies,
especially in engineering design and evaluation, and a good agreement
was observed in most cases (Bilotta et al., 2014; Corigliano et al., 2011;
Hwang and Lu, 2007; Kontoe et al., 2014; Lu and Hwang, 2018).
This paper put forward a modified deformation-based pseudo-static
method. Based on the damage plasticity constitutive model of re-
inforced concrete proposed in Section 3.1, the seismic capacity of the
cracked lining tunnels described in Section 2 was evaluated by ana-
lyzing the damage evolution of the lining structure under different
seismic shear strains. The analysis and assessment steps are summarized
in Fig. 9 and described below:
1. Set up a numerical model with a suitable mesh domain; establish
geostatic equilibrium; excavate rock mass and construct tunnels in
the domain.
2. Apply seismic shear strain step by step with a fixed rate on the
boundaries of the numerical simulation domain.
3. Monitor the stress-strain curves and the damage evolution of lining
structural elements during shear strain application; compare them
with the curves shown in Fig. 7 and Fig. 8.
4. Check damage state of lining under different input shear strains;
correspond the damage state of lining with the failure process; and
determine the seismic shear strain γ leading to tunnel failure which
can be evaluated by the following equation (John and Zahrah,
1987).
γ = v / Vs (7)
where v is the peak ground velocity (PGV) during earthquake shaking at
the location; and Vs is the average shear wave velocity of the ground.
The Chinese Seismic Intensity Scale (Standardization Administration of
W. Qiu, et al.
Fig. 6. Stress-strain curves of concrete (GB-50010, 2010).
PRC, 2008) gives the relationship between PGV, PGA, and the seismic
intensity, as shown in Table 3.
4. Numerical model description and validation
4.1. Pseudo-static model
Fig. 10 shows the configuration of the pseudo-static numerical
model in the XY plane. The burial depth of the tunnel, H', is the vertical
distance from the free surface to the vault of the tunnel. Three burial
depths of 20 m, 60 m, and 100 m are considered in this paper. B denotes
the maximum horizontal diameter of the tunnel. The size of the com-
putational domain is very important to the pseudo-static method, which
not only affects the computational costs but also affects the accuracy of
the analysis results. Lu and Hwang (2017) studied the influence of the
boundary distance by analyzing the variation of vertical stress after
excavation and the distribution of shear strain after imposing seismic
shear-strain along the sidewall direction. Sun and Dias (2019) studied
the boundary effects by considering the influence zone caused by tun-
neling and the effect of the model width on the lining forces. Based on
the above study, the boundary distance to the centerline of the tunnel,
L = 65 m , corresponding to the L/ B = 65 m/12.67 m = 5.13 was
adopted in the present study. The height of the computational domain,
H , was equal to the width of the computational domain. The rock mass
and the temporary support were considered to be a Mohr-Coulomb
material. Because the thickness of the silt and silty clay near the surface
is less than 3 m, only the stratum of mudstone mixed with sandstone
was considered in the numerical model. The shear strength parameters
Fig. 7. The constitutive model of reinforced concrete equivalent material. (a) Tensile behavior, (b) Compressive behavior.
5
Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 97 (2020) 103281
of shotcrete C25 refer to the experiment in Cong et al. (2015). The
damage plasticity constitutive model of reinforced concrete studied in
Section 3.1 was used to simulate the mechanical behavior of the per-
manent lining, which can be defined by material behavior of Concrete
Damaged Plasticity in ABAQUS. The parameters of tunnel lining are
presented in Table 4.
The lining cracks can be interpreted as that the permanent lining
had taken part of confining stress as time went by. In order to reflect the
stress state of tunnel lining structure at that time, the stress release of
30% was considered after the excavation of rock mass and the perma-
nent lining was constructed simultaneously with the temporary support
in this model. No slipping is allowed between the temporary support
and the rock mass. The interaction between the temporary support and
the permanent lining is difficult to obtain accurately. Two extreme
cases: the full-slip and no-slip conditions were considered in the model,
as the idealizations of real contact.
The initial crack of permanent lining was simulated by seam cracks
in ABAQUS. A seam defines an edge or a face in your model that is
originally closed but can open during an analysis. ABAQUS places
overlapping duplicate nodes along a seam when the mesh is generated.
According to the in-situ data, the longitudinal initial crack was taken as
the research target of this paper. Initial cracks in the vault, spandrel,
and sidewall were considered in the model. The depth of the initial
crack was defined as 20 cm, which is half the thickness of the perma-
nent lining.
A triangular displacement distribution was applied along the lateral
boundaries and a uniform displacement was also applied along the top
boundary and bottom boundary, as shown in Fig. 9. Both were applied
W. Qiu, et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 97 (2020) 103281

Fig. 8. The damage variables of the reinforced concrete equivalent material.

Fig. 9. Flow chart of analysis and assessment procedure.

Table 3 shear strain is considered in both directions in these cases.

The corresponding relationship between PGV, PGA and seismic intensity. Compared with the two-dimensional model, the three-dimensional
Intensity Seismic ground motion parameters in horizontal model is more accurate in simulation but required more computational
load and longer calculation period. Therefore, the tunnel structure was
PGA(m/s2) PGV(m/s) simplified to a plane strain model for analysis in some cases. In this
paper, two-dimensional and three-dimensional finite element models
VI 0.63 (0.45–0.89) 0.06 (0.05–0.09)
were established in ABAQUS, and the situation of a 20 m depth tunnel
VII 1.25 (0.90–1.77) 0.13 (0.10–0.18)
VIII 2.50 (1.78–3.53) 0.25 (0.19–0.35) with the initial crack at the spandrel of lining was analyzed and com-
IX 5.00 (3.54–7.07) 0.50 (0.36–0.71) pared, as shown in Fig. 11 and Fig. 12. The three-dimensional model is
X 10.00 (7.08–14.14) 1.00 (0.72–1.41) 24 m along the longitudinal direction. The initial longitudinal crack is
5 m long and is in the middle of the lining model.
Fig. 13 shows the failure process of the lining structure in three-
at a uniform rate in the time step. The maximum shear strain γmax ap- dimensional simulation. In the first stage, the initial crack propagated
plied in the model is 0.00358. According to Eq. (7) and the shear wave along the longitudinal direction of the lining. The damage at the crack
velocity of the stratum, the PGV is 1.41 m/s, corresponding to the tip was greater than that in other crack propagation areas. However,
seismic intensity Ⅹ in Table 3. The initial cracks in the spandrel and the initial crack and new cracks did not extend along the radial direc-
sidewall make the model geometrically asymmetric, so the seismic tion of the lining at this stage. In the second stage, the initial crack

6
W. Qiu, et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 97 (2020) 103281

of failure started in the initial crack zone, which is the most dangerous
area. The failure process of the lining structure in the two-dimensional
model is similar to that in the three-dimensional model, as shown in
Fig. 14. In general, the results of the two-dimensional analysis, as ex-
pected, are different from those of three-dimensional analysis. How-
ever, these differences can be allowed when the more effective and
more realistic from an engineering point of view. Therefore, the two-
dimensional model was chosen for the later analysis in this paper.

4.2. The response of the displacement field

Fig. 15 shows the global and local displacement field for the case of
the 20 m deep tunnel when γ = 0.00358 is applied on the boundary of
the pseudo-static model. The global displacement fields show that the
pseudo-static model can simulate the shear deformation of the ground
well. The local displacement fields show that the ground displacement
near the tunnel is restrained by the tunnel and the interaction between
the temporary support and permanent lining affects the seismic dis-
Fig. 10. Pseudo-static numerical model in the XY plane. placement response of the tunnel. The deflection of the displacement
field near the permanent lining is more obvious under the condition of
full-slip.
Table 4
Properties of tunnel lining.
4.3. Comparison with dynamic analysis for no-crack tunnel
Parameters Temporary support Permanent lining

Unit weight γ (KN/m3) 2.2 2.35 Representative dynamic analyses were performed with the two-di-
Thickness t (cm) 20 40 mensional model by the finite element code ABAQUS in order to
Young’s modulus E (GPa) 23 32.9 compare and validate the results of the pseudo-static method for the no-
Poisson’s ratioν 0.2 0.2
crack tunnel. The width of the model was 20 times the diameter of the
Cohesion c (MPa) 3 –
Friction angle ϕ (°) 55 – tunnel and the left and right boundaries were set to infinite element
Compressive behavior boundaries. The upper boundary of the model was a free surface. A
Ultimate stress σ cu (MPa) – 22.4 harmonic wave was used in the analysis with a frequency of 2.5 Hz. The
Tensile behavior amplitude of the incident wave had to be chosen to produce the same
Initial yield strength σ1(MPa) – 2.13
maximum shear strain of the free-field ground as in the pseudo-static
Secondary yield strength σ2 (MPa) – 3.98
case. Referring to the analysis model proposed by Chen et al. (2012),
the ratio of the element size to the wavelength of the incident wave was
propagated along the radial direction of the lining. The propagation set to less than 1/10 to ensure the accuracy of the simulated displace-
started in the middle of the initial crack until the initial crack zone ments and stresses. And the analysis was terminated when the wave
penetrated the lining along the radial direction. In the final stage, the was reflected from the free surface and reached the bottom boundary to
penetrating crack extended along the longitudinal direction. All stages prevent disturbance of the stress state of the tunnel by further reflection
from the bottom boundary. The dynamic responses of the vault and

Fig. 11. Two-dimensional pseudo-static model.

7
W. Qiu, et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 97 (2020) 103281

Fig. 12. Three-dimensional pseudo-static model.

Fig. 13. Failure process of lining structure in three-dimensional simulation.

spandrel of the permanent lining were monitored. practical and efficient method to evaluate the seismic capacity of tun-
Fig. 16 shows the comparison of the internal forces at monitored nels. But at the same time, it should also be noted that the pseudo-static
points between dynamic analysis and pseudo-static method for tunnels method cannot simulate the real nonlinear and hysteretic character-
with different depths. The general trends of the internal forces versus istics of the tunnel under earthquake.
seismic shear strain were similar for both methods. The differences of
the peak responses varied with the tunnel depth and the locations of the
lining, but it was reasonably close in the engineering view. This sug-
gests that the pseudo-static method can be regarded as a more simple,

8
W. Qiu, et al.
Fig. 14. Failure process of lining structure in two-dimensional simulation.
5. Numerical result and discussion
5.1. Failure process of no-crack lining
Fig. 17 shows the principal stress distribution of tunnels with dif-
ferent buried depths after construction. The principal stress of lining
structures distributes along the circumferential direction, all of which is
compressive stress. Due to the Consideration of the temporary support
9
Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 97 (2020) 103281
Fig. 15. The global and local displacement
fields under the application of γ = 0.00358.
(a) no-slip, (b) full-slip.
and the permanent lining took the confining stress simultaneously, the
deeper the buried depth, the greater the compressive stress on the lining
structure.
The failure process of no-crack linings under seismic shear de-
formation and corresponding shear strain are listed in Table 5. The
tunnel located at 20 m depth was only damaged by tension under
seismic shear deformation. The concrete cracked first near the spandrel
of lining, then steel bars yielded in tension, leading to partial instability
W. Qiu, et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 97 (2020) 103281

Fig. 16. The comparison of the internal forces at monitored points. (a) 20 m, (b) 60 m, (c) 100 m.

of the structure. For the 60 m deep tunnel, both tensile damage and structure. The 100 m deep tunnel mainly suffered from compression
compressive damage occurred near the spandrel of the lining. The crush damage under seismic shear deformation. In all three cases, the da-
of reinforced concrete in the compression zone occurred earlier than the maged zones did not penetrate the lining under γmax . In an earthquake,
yield of steel bars in the tensile zone, leading to partial spalling of the shear deformation of the stratum leads to the ovaling of lining, as

10
W. Qiu, et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 97 (2020) 103281

Fig. 16. (continued)

Fig. 17. Principal stress distribution of linings with different buried depths after construction.

Table 5
Failure process of no-crack linings under seismic shear deformation.
Buried depth No-slip Full-slip

Seismic shear strain γ Description of damage Seismic shear strain γ Description of damage

20 m 0.173% Concrete near spandrel cracks obviously 0.182% Concrete near spandrel cracks obviously
0.304% Steel bars in the tensile zone yield 0.311% Steel bars in the tensile zone yield

60 m 0.221% Concrete near spandrel cracks obviously 0.225% Concrete near spandrel cracks obviously
0.251% Reinforced concrete in the compression zone of 0.278% Reinforced concrete in the compression zone of spandrel
spandrel crushed crushed
0.326% Steel bars in the tensile zone yield 0.309% Steel bars in the tensile zone yield

100 m 0.243% Reinforced concrete in the compression zone of 0.261% Reinforced concrete in the compression zone of spandrel
spandrel crushed crushed
0.304% Concrete near spandrel cracks obviously 0.314% Concrete near spandrel cracks obviously

11
W. Qiu, et al.
Fig. 18. Deformation modes of tunnels under seismic waves (Hashash and
Romero-Arduz, 2015).
shown in Fig. 18. This results in tension or compression concentration
near the spandrel of the lining. The initial stress states of linings with
different buried depth are different, so the failure modes are also dif-
ferent in seismic.
Several typical failure processes of lining structures under the action
of seismic shear deformation are classified in Table 6. The corre-
sponding representative damage values based on Section 3.1 are also
given. Considering that it has no impact on the normal use of tunnels,
cracking of lining concrete is defined as minor damage. Yielding of steel
bars in the tension zone or crushing of reinforced concrete in the
compression zone is defined as moderate damage, which may lead to
partial spalling of lining and endanger traffic safety. The lining may
lose stability or even collapse when the cracking zone or crushing zone
penetrates the structure. This damage state is defined as severe damage.
5.2. Effect of the lining cracks on the seismic capacity of tunnels
Table 7 shows the failure process and corresponding shear strain of
the 20 m deep tunnel with lining cracks under seismic shear deforma-
tion. The lining with the initial crack in the sidewall has the same
failure process as the no-crack lining. The initial crack in the vault
developed slightly with the increase of seismic shear strain. However,
there was no further damage to the structure. The initial crack in the
spandrel of lining has a great impact on the seismic response and ca-
pacity of the tunnel. The cracking zone near the tip of the initial crack
developed rapidly and eventually penetrated the lining. The final da-
mage state of lining is shown in Fig. 19(a).
Table 8 shows the failure process and corresponding shear strain of
Table 6
Classification of failure characteristics of lining structures.
Damage level Description of damage
III Concrete in the tensile zone cracking obviously
(DAMAGETa 0.7)
Ⅱ Steel bars in the tensile zone yield
(DAMAGETa 0.82)
Reinforced concrete in the compression zone crushed
(DAMAGECb 0.26)
Ⅰ Cracking or crushing zone penetrates lining
(DAMAGET 0.82& DAMAGEC 0.26)
a
Tensile damage variable.
b
Compressive damage variable.
12
Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 97 (2020) 103281
the 60 m deep tunnel with lining cracks under seismic shear deforma-
tion. The initial crack in the vault and sidewall did not improve the
damage level of the tunnel. But for the no-slip case of the cracked lining
tunnel, the steel bars in the tensile zone yielded earlier. Compared with
the no-cracked lining, both tensile damage and compression damage
occurred earlier near the spandrel crack. With the increase of seismic
shear strain, the crushing zone of reinforced concrete near the crack tip
gradually enlarged and eventually penetrated the lining, leading to
structural collapse, as shown in Fig. 19(b).
Table 9 shows the failure process and corresponding shear strain of
the 100 m deep tunnel with lining cracks under seismic shear de-
formation. The initial cracks in the vault and the sidewall had little
effect on the seismic response of the tunnel. The initial crack in the
spandrel was sensitive to seismic action. The crushing zone developed
from the crack tip along the circumferential and radial direction and
quickly penetrated the lining structure. The final damage state of lining
is shown in Fig. 19(c). The seismic capacity of the tunnel was greatly
reduced, especially under full-slip conditions.
The numerical result indicates that cracks in vault and sidewall have
a slight impact on the seismic response of linings under seismic shear
wave conditions. There was little further development of damage near
the initial cracks in these conditions. However, cracks in spandrel were
in totally different situations and the seismic capacity of the tunnel was
reduced. With the increase of seismic shear strain, structural damage
developed rapidly near the initial cracks. In the case of the shallow
tunnel, the cracking zone developed along the radial direction of lining
from the crack tip and penetrated the structure. In the case of the deep-
buried tunnel, crushing zones firstly appeared near the initial crack in
spandrel and then connected with it. Finally, the lining structure col-
lapse along the oblique section.
5.3. Effect of the interaction between temporary support and permanent
lining
The damage process of linings in the cases of no-slip and full-slip
was similar, while the thresholds of different failure states were dif-
ferent. The development of damage states in the no-slip case was faster
than that in the full-slip case for the no-crack lining. It demonstrates
that the allowance of relative slip between the temporary support and
permanent lining slows the damage state development under the same
loading conditions, which is consistent with previous research (Lu and
Hwang, 2018; Sedarat et al., 2009; Sun and Dias, 2019). The lining with
cracks in vault and sidewall also conforms to the above-mentioned
rules. However, the lining structure with cracks in the spandrel was
more likely to lose stability and collapse under the condition of full-slip.
This shows that the deformation of the permanent lining is limited by
the no-slip condition under the seismic shear deformation. Therefore,
the lining structure is less likely to have penetration damage under this
condition.
Effect on the capacity of structures
Do not affect the normal use
Part of the structure reaches the ultimate state of bearing capacity
(partial spalling of structure)
Structure loses stability or collapse
W. Qiu, et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 97 (2020) 103281

Table 7
Failure process of cracked linings under seismic shear deformation (20 m buried depth).
Initial crack location Interaction Seismic shear strain γ Description of damage Damage level

Vault No-slip 0.172% Concrete near spandrel cracks obviously (new cracks) III
0.271% Initial crack propagating III
0.318% Steel bars in the tensile zone yield Ⅱ
Full-slip 0.185% Concrete near spandrel cracks obviously (new cracks) III
0.277% Initial crack propagating III
0.336% Steel bars in the tensile zone yield Ⅱ

Spandrel No-slip 0.158% Concrete near spandrel cracks obviously (new cracks) III
0.226% Initial crack propagating III
0.263% Steel bars in the tensile zone yield Ⅱ
0.326% Cracking zone penetrates lining from the initial crack Ⅰ
Full-slip 0.147% Initial crack propagating III
0.183% Concrete near spandrel cracks obviously (new cracks) III
0.282% Cracking zone penetrates lining from the initial crack Ⅰ

Sidewall No-slip 0.167% Concrete near spandrel cracks obviously (new cracks) III
0.335% Steel bars in the tensile zone yield Ⅱ
Full-slip 0.220% Concrete near spandrel cracks obviously (new cracks) III

Fig. 19. Finial damage state of lining with the initial crack.

Table 8
Failure process of cracked linings under seismic shear deformation (60 m buried depth).
Initial location of crack Interaction Seismic shear strain γ Description of damage Damage level

Vault No-slip 0.213% Concrete near spandrel cracks obviously (new cracks) III
0.247% Reinforced concrete in the compression zone of spandrel crushed Ⅱ
0.305% Steel bars in the tensile zone yield Ⅱ
Full-slip 0.215% Concrete near spandrel cracks obviously (new cracks) III
0.261% Reinforced concrete in the compression zone of spandrel crushed Ⅱ
0.296% Steel bars in the tensile zone yield Ⅱ

Spandrel No-slip 0.188% Reinforced concrete near the initial crack crushed Ⅱ
0.212% Concrete near spandrel cracks obviously (new cracks) III
0.257% Initial crack propagating III
0.275% Steel bars in the tensile zone yield Ⅱ
0.356% Crushing zone penetrating lining from the initial crack Ⅰ
Full-slip 0.219% Concrete near spandrel cracks obviously (new cracks) III
0.221% Reinforced concrete near the initial crack crushed Ⅱ
0.233% Initial crack propagating III
0.275% Steel bars in the tensile zone yield Ⅱ
0.332% Cracking and crushing zone penetrating lining from the initial crack Ⅰ

Sidewall No-slip 0.215% Concrete near spandrel cracks obviously (new cracks) III
0.258% Reinforced concrete in the compression zone of spandrel crushed Ⅱ
0.296% Steel bars in the tensile zone yield Ⅱ
Full-slip 0.232% Concrete near spandrel cracks obviously (new cracks) III
0.275% Reinforced concrete in the compression zone of spandrel crushed Ⅱ
0.319% Steel bars in the tensile zone yield Ⅱ

6. Conclusions modified deformation-based pseudo-static analysis. This analysis em-

ployed a reconstructed damaged plasticity constitutive model of re-
This paper highlighted the important effect of the longitudinal inforced concrete to simulate the propagation of lining cracks. Based on
cracks in the permanent lining on the seismic capacity of tunnels by a the case study of 11 tunnels in earthquake-prone areas of western

13
W. Qiu, et al.
Table 9
Failure process of cracked linings under seismic shear deformation (100 m buried depth).
Initial location of crack Interaction Seismic shear strain γ
Vault No-slip 0.284%
0.303%
Full-slip 0.286%
0.311%
Spandrel No-slip 0.225%
0.264%
Full-slip 0.211%
0.254%
Sidewall No-slip 0.293%
0.294%
Full-slip 0.303%
0.318%
China, a two-dimensional finite element model was established con-
sidering the influence of tunnel depth, initial crack position, and in-
teraction between soil and lining structures.
The simulation results showed that the failure process of the re-
inforced concrete structure could be accurately simulated by the mod-
ified damaged constitutive model and identified by the damage vari-
ables. The analysis considered the contribution of permanent linings to
the confining stress of operating tunnels. The initial stress state of the
permanent lining was different with different depth, and the failure
mode under the action of the seismic shear deformation was also dif-
ferent. However, for all three cases with different depths, the damage
zone first appeared in the spandrel of linings.
Cracks in vault and sidewall had a slight impact on the seismic re-
sponse of linings, while cracks in spandrel were in totally different si-
tuations. With the increase of seismic shear strain, structural damage
developed rapidly near the initial spandrel cracks. For shallow tunnel,
the cracking zone developed along the radial direction of lining from
the crack tip and penetrated the structure. For deep-buried tunnel,
crushing zones were formed in a large area near the initial crack, re-
sulting in the lining structure collapse along the oblique section. The
seismic capacity of tunnels with lining cracks in the spandrel was
greatly reduced.
The interaction between the temporary support and permanent
lining had little effect on the damage process of linings but had an
impact on the thresholds of different failure states. The development of
damage states in the no-slip case was faster than that in the full-slip case
for no-crack lining, and so does for the lining with cracks in vault and
sidewall. However, the allowance of relative slip slows the damage state
development on the permanent lining under the same loading condi-
tions but also increases its deformation capacity. Therefore, the lining
structure with cracks in the spandrel was more likely to have pene-
tration damage and lose stability under the condition of full-slip.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Wenge Qiu: Conceptualization, Methodology, Supervision.
Bingtian Li: Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation, Writing -
original draft, Writing - review & editing. Lun Gong: Writing - review &
editing. Xingxin Qi: Investigation, Visualization. Zhiheng Deng:
Investigation, Visualization. Guang Huang: Investigation,
Visualization. Hui Hu: Investigation, Visualization.
Acknowledgments
The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support of the
National Key R&D Program of China (2017YFC0806000), the National
Natural Science Foundation of China (U1434206).
Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 97 (2020) 103281
Description of damage Damage level
Concrete near vault cracks obviously (new cracks) III
Reinforced concrete in the compression zone of spandrel crushed Ⅱ
Concrete near vault cracks obviously (new cracks) III
Reinforced concrete in the compression zone of spandrel crushed Ⅱ
Reinforced concrete near the initial crack crushed Ⅱ
Crushing zone penetrating lining near the initial crack Ⅰ
Concrete near spandrel cracks obviously (new cracks) III
Crushing zone penetrating lining from the initial crack Ⅰ
Reinforced concrete in the compression zone of spandrel crushed Ⅱ
Concrete near vault cracks obviously (new cracks) III
Reinforced concrete in the compression zone of spandrel crushed Ⅱ
Concrete near vault cracks obviously (new cracks) III
References
Asakura, T., 1997. Mountain tunnels performance in the 1995 hyogoken-nanbu earth-
quake. International Symposium on Recent Advances in Exploration Geophysics.
Asakura, T., Kojima, Y., 2003. Tunnel maintenance in Japan. Tunn. Undergr. Sp. Tech.
18, 161–169.
Ayari, M.L., Saouma, V.E., 1990. A fracture mechanics based seismic analysis of concrete
gravity dams using discrete cracks. Eng. Fract. Mech. 35, 587–598.
Bilotta, E., Lanzano, G., Madabhushi, S.P.G., Silvestri, F., 2014. A numerical Round Robin
on tunnels under seismic actions. Acta Geotechnica. 9, 563–579.
Chen, C.-H., Wang, T.-T., Jeng, F.-S., Huang, T.-H., 2012. Mechanisms causing seismic
damage of tunnels at different depths. Tunn. Undergr. Sp. Tech. 28, 31–40.
Chen, Z., Wei, J., 2012. Correlation between ground motion parameters and lining da-
mage indices for mountain tunnels. Nat. Hazards. 65, 1683–1702.
Chiu, Y.-C., Lee, C.-H., Wang, T.-T., 2017. Lining crack evolution of an operational tunnel
influenced by slope instability. Tunn. Undergr. Sp. Tech. 65, 167–178.
Yu, C.O., Liang, K.O., Yingren, Z.H., 2015. Experimental study on shear strength of
concrete. Concrete 5, 40–45.
Corigliano, M., Scandella, L., Lai, C.G., Paolucci, R., 2011. Seismic analysis of deep
tunnels in near fault conditions: a case study in Southern Italy. Bull. Earthquake Eng.
9, 975–995.
Cui, X., Li, S., Lou, J., Wang, Z., Zhang, J., Tang, W., Gao, Z., 2015. Dynamic responses
and damage analyses of tunnel lining and errant large vehicle during collision. Tunn.
Undergr. Sp. Tech. 50, 1–12.
Federal Highway Administration, 2004. Highway and Rail Transit Tunnel Maintenance
and Rehabilitation Manual.
GB-50010, 2010. Code for design of concrete structures. China Architecture and Building
Press, Beijing.
Hamid, S., Mahdi, S., Amir, H.A., Mohammad, A., Ali, S., 2012. Evaluation of reinforced
concrete beam behavior using finite element analysis by ABAQUS. Sci. Res. Essays. 7.
Hashash, Y.M.A., Park, D., Yao, J.I.C., 2005. Ovaling deformations of circular tunnels
under seismic loading, an update on seismic design and analysis of underground
structures. Tunn. Undergr. Sp. Tech. 20, 435–441.
Hashash, Y.M.A., Romero-Arduz, M.I., 2015. Seismic Design of Tunnels.
Hwang, J.-H., Lu, C.-C., 2007. Seismic capacity assessment of old Sanyi railway tunnels.
Tunn. Undergr. Sp. Tech. 22, 433–449.
Iai, S., 2005. International standard (ISO) on seismic actions for designing geotechnical
works–An overview. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 25, 605–615.
Japan Society of Civil Engineers, 2005. Tunnel Maintenance and Management. Japan
Society of Civil Engineers, Tokyo, Japan.
John, C.M.S., Zahrah, T.F., 1987. Aseismic design of underground structures. Tunn.
Undergr. Sp. Tech. 2, 165–197.
Konagai, K., Takatsu, S., Kanai, T., Fujita, T., Ikeda, T., Johansson, J., 2009. Kizawa
tunnel cracked on 23 October 2004 Mid-Niigata earthquake: An example of earth-
quake-induced damage to tunnels in active-folding zones. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 29,
394–403.
Kontoe, S., Avgerinos, V., Potts, D.M., 2014. Numerical validation of analytical solutions
and their use for equivalent-linear seismic analysis of circular tunnels. Soil Dyn.
Earthq. Eng. 66, 206–219.
Lee, J., Fenves, G.L., 1998. Plastic-damage model for cyclic loading of concrete structures.
J. Eng. Mech. 124, 892–900.
Lu, C.-C., Hwang, J.-H., 2017. Implementation of the modified cross-section racking de-
formation method using explicit FDM program: A critical assessment. Tunn. Undergr.
Sp. Tech. 68, 58–73.
Lu, C.-C., Hwang, J.-H., 2018. Damage analysis of the new Sanyi railway tunnel in the
1999 Chi-Chi earthquake: Necessity of second lining reinforcement. Tunn. Undergr.
Sp. Tech. 73, 48–59.
Ministry of Transport of the PRC, 2015. Technical Specification of Maintenance for
Highway Tunnel. China Communications Press.
Nefedov, S.S., 2005. Instability of reinforced concrete containment under internal pres-
sure. International Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology.
Penzien, J., 2015. Seismically induced racking of tunnel linings. Earthquake. Eng. Struc.
29, 683–691.
Qiu, W., Lu, F., Wang, G., Huang, G., Zhang, H., Zhang, Z., Gong, C., 2019. Evaluation of
14
W. Qiu, et al.
mechanical performance and optimization design for lattice girders. Tunn. Undergr.
Sp. Tech. 87, 100–111.
Richards, J.A., 1998. Inspection, maintenance and repair of tunnels: International lessons
and practice. Tunn. Undergr. Sp. Tech. 13, 369–375.
Sedarat, H., Kozak, A., Hashash, Y.M.A., Shamsabadi, A., Krimotat, A., 2009. Contact
interface in seismic analysis of circular tunnels. Tunn. Undergr. Sp. Tech. 24,
482–490.
Shen, Y., Gao, B., Yang, X., Tao, S., 2014. Seismic damage mechanism and dynamic de-
formation characteristic analysis of mountain tunnel after Wenchuan earthquake.
Eng. Geol. 180, 85–98.
Song, W., Lai, H., Liu, Y., Yang, W., Zhu, Z., 2019. Field and laboratory study of cracking
and safety of secondary lining for an existing highway tunnel in loess ground. Tunn.
Undergr. Sp. Tech. 88, 35–46.
Standardization Administration of PRC, 2008. The Chinese seismic intensity scale.
Standardization Administration of People's Republic of China, China.
Sun, Q.Q., Dias, D., 2019. Assessment of stress relief during excavation on the seismic
tunnel response by the pseudo-static method. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 117, 384–397.
Vargas-Loli, L.M., Fenves, G.L., 2010. Effects of concrete cracking on the earthquake
response of gravity dams. Earthquake. Eng. Struc. 18, 575–592.
Wang, J.-N., 1993. Seismic design of tunnels: a simple state-of-the-art approach. Parsons
Brickerhoff Quade & Douglas Inc, New York.
Wang, T.-T., 2010. Characterizing crack patterns on tunnel linings associated with shear
deformation induced by instability of neighboring slopes. Eng. Geol. 115, 80–95.
Wang, W.L., Wang, T.T., Su, J.J., Lin, C.H., Seng, C.R., Huang, T.H., 2001. Assessment of
damage in mountain tunnels due to the Taiwan Chi-Chi Earthquake. Tunn. Undergr.
Sp. Tech. 16, 133–150.
15
Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 97 (2020) 103281
Wang, Z.Z., Zhang, Z., 2013. Seismic damage classification and risk assessment of
mountain tunnels with a validation for the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake. Soil Dyn.
Earthq. Eng. 45, 45–55.
Wittke, W., Pierau, B., Erichsen, C., 2006. New austrian tunneling method (NATM) sta-
bility analysis and design. WBN, Essen, pp. 2441.
Wu, D., Gao, B., Shen, Y., Zhou, J., Chen, G., 2015. Damage evolution of tunnel portal
during the longitudinal propagation of Rayleigh waves. Nat. Hazards. 75,
2519–2543.
Xiao, J.Z., Dai, F.C., Wei, Y.Q., Min, H., Xu, C., Tu, X.B., Wang, M.L., 2014. Cracking
mechanism of secondary lining for a shallow and asymmetrically-loaded tunnel in
loose deposits. Tunn. Undergr. Sp. Tech. 43, 232–240.
Xu, D.-P., Feng, X.-T., Chen, D.-F., Zhang, C.-Q., Fan, Q.-X., 2017. Constitutive re-
presentation and damage degree index for the layered rock mass excavation response
in underground openings. Tunn. Undergr. Sp. Tech. 64, 133–145.
Yan, Q., Xu, Y., Zhang, W., Geng, P., Yang, W., 2018. Numerical analysis of the cracking
and failure behaviors of segmental lining structure of an underwater shield tunnel
subjected to a derailed high-speed train impact. Tunn. Undergr. Sp. Tech. 72, 41–54.
Yashiro, K., Kojima, Y., 2007. Historical earthquake damage to tunnels in japan and case
studies of railway tunnels in the 2004 niigataken-chuetsu earthquake. Qr of Rtri. 48,
136–141.
Yuan, Y., Bai, Y., Liu, J., 2012. Assessment service state of tunnel structure. Tunn.
Undergr. Sp. Tech. 27, 72–85.
Zou, Y., Liu, H., Jing, L., Cui, J., 2017. A pseudo-static method for seismic responses of
underground frame structures subjected to increasing excitations. Tunn. Undergr. Sp.
Tech. 65, 106–120.