Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 106 (2020) 103610

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology

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

Effect of interparticle behavior on the development of soil arching in soil- T

structure interaction
M.I. Peeruna, D.E.L. Ongb, , C.S. Chooc, W.C. Chengd
⁎

a
Griffith University, School of Engineering and Built Environment, 170 Kessels Road, Nathan, Queensland 4111, Australia
b
Griffith University, School of Engineering and Built Environment, 170 Kessels Road, Nathan, Queensland 4111, Australia
c
Research Centre for Sustainable Technologies, Faculty of Engineering, Science & Computing, Swinburne University of Technology Sarawak Campus, 93350 Kuching,
Sarawak, Malaysia
d
Shaanxi Key Laboratory of Geotechnical and Underground Space Engineering, School of Civil Engineering, Xi'an University of Architecture and Technology, China

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: Direct shear tests have been commonly used to study the frictional stresses during pipe-jacking. Particle angu­
Apparent cohesion larity and mineralogy will influence the shear strength with apparent cohesion contributing to the arching effect
Direct shear during soil-structure interaction via pipe-jacking. Past researchers found it challenging to physically study
GeoPIV particle behavior along the shear band during shearing due to the opaque nature of the equipment. This study
Interlocking
used an original transparent shear box to conduct direct shear tests on tunneling rock spoils of sandstone and
Soil arching
shale. Sequential images were captured during shearing and analyzed using GeoPIV software to demonstrate
Pipe-jacking
localized activities which were found to influence the apparent cohesion. Furthermore, the findings were suc­
cessfully used to assess the arching phenomenon observed during pipe-jacking and other established pipe-
jacking case studies. Rounded particles with strong mineralogy were found to be more likely to produce an
arching effect as compared to angular particles with weaker minerals.

1. Introduction
Pipe-jacking consists of building an underground pipeline using
segmental pipes. These segmental pipes are lowered through a
launching shaft, behind a micro-tunnel boring machine (MTBM) which
is used to bore through the ground. Hydraulic jacks are used to thrust
the segmental pipes and the microtunnel boring machine through the
ground (Shen et al. 2016). During pipe-jacking works, jacking forces
have been found to be dependent on the traversed geological strata
(Cheng et al., 2018b). Better understanding of jacking forces, including
advancement in soil testing (Mehdizadeh et al. 2016, 2017) and mod­
eling techniques (Ong et al. 2006) in soil-structure interaction problems
for specific geological strata (Ong et al. 2003, Ong and Choo 2011,
2018) would lead to a more economical and sustainable project.
Arching phenomenon is of great interest during tunneling where the
lithology over the tunnel could arch, thus potentially allowing the
tunnel to self-stand without fully collapsing onto the jacking pipes.
Such tunnels with favorable arching can self-stand due to redistribution
of stresses around the tunnel and pipe surfaces. Arching is first de­
scribed as a redistribution of geostatic stresses by Terzaghi (1943)
which reduces the vertical stresses at the pipe crown. The reduction of
vertical load on the jacking pipe due to arching, would strongly influ­
ence the jacking forces. Hence, it is essential to define the vertical soil
stresses acting on the jacking pipes for the estimation of jacking forces
during the design process of the project (Misra et al., 2008; Rahjoo
et al., 2012; Olson, 2013; Olson et al., 2016; Khondoker et al., 2016).
Several jacking force models are currently available and used to esti­
mate jacking forces. Among the various jacking force models, some
have been acquired statistically by Chapman and Ichioka (1999), em­
pirically by Osumi (2000) and experimentally by Staheli (2006) as
described by Choo and Ong (2015). However, those models are parti­
cularly dependent on the traversed soil types, with minimal con­
siderations for pipe-jacking through highly weathered rock masses. The
jacking force models are limited in terms of ability to characterize the
pipe-jacking conditions (W.-C. Cheng et al., 2018; W. Cheng et al.,
2018). Choo and Ong (2015) pointed out an established jacking force
model developed by Pellet-Beaucour and Kastner (2002) which con­
siders arching. To cater for this effect, cohesion, C’ and internal friction
angle, ϕ’ of the surrounding soils are required.
Several researchers have studied jacking forces by conducting direct

Corresponding author at: Griffith University, School of Engineering and Built Environment, 170 Kessels Road, Nathan, Queensland 4111, Australia.
⁎

E-mail addresses: irfaan.peerun@griffithuni.edu.au (M.I. Peerun), d.ong@griffith.edu.au (D.E.L. Ong), cschoo@swinburne.edu.my (C.S. Choo),
w-c.cheng@xauat.edu.cn (W.C. Cheng).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2020.103610
Received 8 March 2020; Received in revised form 11 August 2020; Accepted 28 August 2020
0886-7798/ © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M.I. Peerun, et al.
shear tests for the evaluation of soil-structure frictional stresses. Staheli
(2006) performed interface direct shear test using sand and various
pipe materials with different surface roughnesses. Based on the find­
ings, a frictional jacking force model was developed but it was limited
to unlubricated drives only. However, direct shear test was able to
produce the strength parameters, which were used for the assessment of
jacking forces. Shou et al. (2010) studied the frictional properties of
several lubricants by simulating pipe-soil interaction during pipe-
jacking by conducting a simple large-scale frictional test. By adopting
the frictional coefficient obtained from the experiment, the assessment
of jacking forces showed an overestimation when compared to site re­
cords, which was due to overestimating the pipe-soil contact area.
Nonetheless, the experiment showed substantial results for the assess­
ment of jacking forces using lubrication. Ong and Choo (2016), Choo
and Ong (2020) and Ong and Choo (2018) conducted direct shear test
and finite element modeling for the assessment of jacking forces
through drives in highly fractured and weathered rock. The strength
properties of the reconstituted rock spoils were incorporated into the
jacking force model (Pellet-Beaucour and Kastner, 2002) to produce
reliable jacking force analyzes. Hence, by reconstituting the tunneling
rock spoils, direct shear test results can be used to assess the jacking
forces for different geologic lithologies. However, to have a better in­
sight on the arching effect, better understanding is required at the
particulate level during shearing. It is important to demonstrate the
non-continuous and non-uniform material during the arching me­
chanism of soil, at the particle size scale (Zhu and Gong, 2014).
DeJong and Westgate (2009) conducted an interface direct shear
test to study the localized mechanism during load transfer from a
structure to the surrounding soil. Particle image velocimetry (PIV) was
used to quantify the displacement and strains of the soil particles during
the soil-structure interface shearing. The main factors influencing the
local interface behavior were the relative density of the soil, the soils
particle angularity and hardness, and the surface roughness of the
structure. Fukuoka et al. (2006) conducted a ring shear test using a
transparent shear box to study the shear zone formation in granular
materials with the aid of particle image velocimetry (PIV) technology.
Shear zone thickness was studied for drained and undrained coarse-
grained silica sands. The test specimens were sheared at a speed of
10 cm/s and 100 cm/s. However, a complete analysis of the whole
shear zone was not achieved due to partial obstruction at the shear gap,
which was made of a non-transparent material. Velocity distribution
profiles during shearing was produced from the ring shear tests and the
data for the invisible section along the shear band was interpolated. No
difference was found in shear zone thickness between the drained and
undrained tests.
There have been ongoing efforts in providing better insight on
particle behavior during shearing. Due to the opaque nature of the
shear equipment, it is challenging to physically observe the inter­
particle activities during shearing. To overcome this, numerical mod­
elling has been vastly adopted for the study of discrete particles (Jing
et al., 2017; Wang et al., 2019; Zhou et al., 2019; Zhu et al., 2019).
Particle angularity and particle mineralogy were found to be the major
influencing factors of arching. Hence, although numerical models have
made significant contribution, there is still a need to physically study
particles activities such as interlocking and breakages which would
influence apparent cohesion and subsequently arching. By further un­
derstanding the influence of arching on pipe-jacking forces for various
geologic lithologies, contribution to a more economical and efficient
pipe-jacking design can be achieved. An efficient assessment of jacking
force would allow longer jacking distance and avoid damages to sur­
rounding structures due to excessive jacking force (Cheng et al., 2019).
This paper discusses the effects of particle angularity and miner­
alogy on the strength of tunneling spoils of sandstone and shale during
shearing. This was achieved by using a unique purpose-built trans­
parent shear box to capture sequential images of the particles, which
were then analyzed using PIV technology. The objectives of this study
2
Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 106 (2020) 103610
are: 1) to assess the influence of particle angularity and mineralogy
contributing to apparent cohesion, 2) to evaluate the vertical load
acting on the jacking pipe based on the shear strength and particle
behavior which is indicative of arching effect, and 3) to estimate
jacking forces using the shear strength parameters and compare against
jacking force records from the construction site.
2. Assessment of jacking forces
Several jacking force models are currently available for the pre­
diction of jacking forces in pipe-jacking works. The jacking force
equations were derived statistically (Chapman and Ichioka, 1999),
empirically (Osumi, 2000), and experimentally (Staheli, 2006) which
were used for drives passing through sand or clay. Hence, there were
limited considerations for drives traversing rocks. The jacking force
model developed by Pellet-Beaucour and Kastner (2002) took into
consideration the soil arching phenomenon. Soil arching was first stu­
died through a trap door experiment by Terzaghi (1936) and was de­
scribed as the relaxation of soil stresses due to disturbance in geostatic
stresses.
Sterling (2020) described that several jacking force models in­
corporated the findings from Terzaghi’s trap door experiment
(Terzaghi, 1943) for the assessment of soil pressure acting on the pipe.
The geometry and soil conditions would influence the shear band for­
mation during pipe-jacking cases which may not fully match with the
trap door experiment. Arching depends on critical factors namely the
silo width, height of shearing bands, friction angle and cohesion (Zhang
et al. 2016). However, not all jacking force models take into con­
sideration the vertical load acting onto the pipe. Soil arching was stu­
died by Choo and Ong (2015) and Ong and Choo (2016) for pipe-
jacking drives through highly weathered ‘soft rock’ masses by adopting
the Pellet-Beaucour and Kastner (2002) jacking force model. The au­
thors contextualised ‘soft rock’ as highly weathered rock masses which
exhibited soil-like behaviour, i.e. arching. The approach took into ac­
count the vertical rock stresses (σEV) acting vertically on the pipe crown,
which was used to assess the degree of arching. A negative value of σEV
would indicate the occurrence of arching favorable for lower pipe-
jacking forces, while a positive value of σEV would indicate unfavorable
arching, resulting in larger frictional jacking forces. By incorporating
the Mohr-Coulomb parameters, i.e. apparent cohesion and friction
angle, obtained from the direct shear test results into the jacking force
model, an indication of arching was made and subsequently validated
against site measurements of jacking forces, lubrication, jacking speed,
and other significant pipe-jacking activities. For example, case studies
from Choo and Ong (2020) recorded a vertical stress of 12.5 kN/m2
acting on the pipe when tunneling through a shale drive. A meta­
graywacke-siltstone drive and graywacke-phyllite drive produced
σEV = -19.9 kN/m2 and σEV = -38.5 kN/m2, respectively. This de­
monstrates that there was no vertical load acting on the pipe for the two
drives resulting in significant arching as opposed to the least favorable
arching condition for the shale drive. Case studies from Ong and Choo
(2016) also demonstrated the unfavorable arching condition for shale
drive with a vertical stress, σEV = 11.7 kN/m2. Other drives in sand­
stone and phyllite were more favorable to arching with σEV = −20.8
kN/m2 and σEV = –22.3 kN/m2 for the respective drives.
Table 1 shows the suitability of jacking force models with con­
sideration for the vertical soil stress acting on the pipe as an indication
of arching. The jacking force equations along with its parameters have
been listed for the models developed by Chapman and Ichioka (1999),
Osumi (2000), Staheli (2006) and Pellet-Beaucour and Kastner (2002).
From the various jacking force equations, only Pellet-Beaucour and
Kastner (2002) jacking force model took into consideration of the
vertical stress acting on the pipe. The said model is also applicable to a
wider range of ground condition including highly weathered ‘soft
rocks’. Hence, the jacking force model developed by Pellet-Beaucour
and Kastner (2002) was used in this study to assess jacking forces for
M.I. Peerun, et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 106 (2020) 103610

Table 1
Suitability of jacking force models for the assessment of soil arching.
Jacking force model Chapman and Osumi (2000) Staheli (2006) Pellet-Beaucour and Kastner (2002)
Ichioka (1999)

Equation P = a + 0.38D fo = ( Bc q + w ) µ + Bc C
JFfrict = µint ·
·r·cos 45 + r
2
· ·d·l
F = µLDe
2 ( EV +
De
2 )+K (
2 EV +
De
2 )
tan r
Parameters P = frictional Fo = frictional component of μint = pipe-soil residual interface F = total frictional jacking force;
resistance along the jacking force; friction coefficient; L = pipe span;
pipe run; β = jacking force reduction γ = total unit weight of the soil; De = outer pipe diameter;
a = parameter factor; ϕr = residual friction angle of the γ = soil unit weight;
dependent on soil Bc = outer diameter of pipe; soil; h = soil cover from the ground level to the pipe
type; and q = normal force; d = pipe diameter; crown;
D = external μ’ = interface friction coefficient, r = pipe radius; and K = lateral earth pressure coefficient; and
diameter of pipe. ϕ = interface friction angle; l = pipe length. K2 = thrust coefficient of soil acting on the pipe,
w = pipe weight; and σEV is the vertical stress acting on the pipe crown
C’ = pipe-soil adhesion
Applicability to ground Clay, sand and Clay, sand and gravels Clean sands, non-lubricated drives Clay, sand, gravel and rock; lubricated drives
condition gravels
Consideration of Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Applicable
vertical soil stress
acting onto pipe
crown (soil
arching)

drives passing through geologic lithologies namely sandstone and shale. Ong (2015), Ong and Choo (2018) and Choo and Ong (2020) have
The jacking force model is defined as successfully used the Pellet-Beaucour and Kastner (2002) model to as­
sess the vertical stress acting onto the pipe. The results were compared
De De
F = µLDe EV + + K2 EV + to site data and fair agreement was achieved.
2 2 2 (1) Frictional resistance is obtained by multiplying the total normal force
where acting on the pipes by an effective friction coefficient, µ. The coefficient of
friction will differ as a function of soil nature, outer pipe surface roughness
F = total frictional jacking force; and lubrication (Pellet-Beaucour and Kastner, 2002). Lubrication slurry
µ = coefficient of friction; consist mainly of bentonitic clay and their compositions are usually adjusted
L = pipe span; on site. The use of lubrication can significantly reduce frictional stresses
De = outer pipe diameter; during pipe-jacking up to 77% of the initial frictional stress. The efficiency
σEV = vertical soil stresses acting on the pipe crown; of lubrication is subjected to the volume of lubricant injected, the process of
γ = soil unit weight; injection, and the soil and lubricant nature. For jacking drives using lu­
K2 = thrust coefficient of soil acting onto the pipe (recommended brication, Stein (2005) suggested to adopt a coefficient of soil-pipe friction
value of 0.3 by Pellet-Beaucour and Kastner, 2002). ranging from 0.1 to 0.3.

The indicative vertical soil stresses, σEV, was obtained from Eq. (2). 3. Materials and methods

b ( 2C
) 3.1. Tested materials
EV =
2K tanØ
b
(1 e 2K h tan
b
) (2)
The test specimens consisted of spoils of sandstone and shale ob­
where tained from pipe-jacking sites in Kuching, Malaysia. Based on visual
inspection using a laboratory microscope, sandstone particles were
C = soil cohesion; categorized as rounded to sub-angular smooth particles, while shale
ϕ = soil internal friction angle; particles were defined as angular with rougher surface. Pfeffer (2014)
γ = soil unit weight; described shale as relatively weaker due to being fissile, known as ea­
K = lateral earth pressure coefficient (recommended value of 1.0 by sily split apart due to weathering. Petrographic analysis showed that
Pellet-Beaucour and Kastner, 2002); the shale spoils were mainly clay minerals, silt-sized quartz grains, tiny
h = soil cover from the ground level to the pipe crown flakes of mica and carbonaceous materials. Brownish iron oxide veins
and quartz veins occurred as infilling along the cleavage. The relatively
and b is the influencing soil width above the pipe, defined as strong particles of sandstone consisted high amount of pure quartz and
is categorized as orthoquartzite (Pfeffer, 2014).
b = De 1 + 2tan
4 2 (3)
3.2. Direct shear testing
The normal stress acting onto the jacked pipe is a combined product
from the surrounding soil and the pipe weight (Pellet-Beaucour and In order to obtain the strength parameters of sandstone and shale spoils,
Kastner, 2002). The tunnel boring machine would influence the initial direct shear tests were conducted according to ASTM D3080-11 (ASTM
state of stresses around the tunnel resulting in soil relaxation due to the 2011). The strength caracteristics, namely friction angle and apparent co­
creation of an overcut. Terzaghi’s silo model assumes that the ground is hesion, were essential for the assessment of jacking forces using the Pellet-
moving along two vertical planes from the top of the pipe and that the Beaucour & Kastner jacking force model (Pellet-Beaucour and Kastner,
movement is significant enough to create sliding planes. Based on this 2002). To have a better understanding on the behaviors of the particles
assumption, Pellet-Beaucour and Kastner (2002) produced Eq. (2) for along the shear band, the shearing process was explained through the use of
the assessment of vertical soil stress acting on the pipe crown. Choo and a four-stage shearing model which was developed by Li and Aydin (2010).

3
M.I. Peerun, et al.
3.2.1. Shearing stages
Li and Aydin (2010) described Stage 1 as ‘end zone deformation’
when shearing starts and the particles rearrange themselves within
existing voids causing the sample to contract. Stage 1 ends at the lowest
point of contraction where particles interlock, resulting in the increase
of inter-particle contact points, thus preventing any further contraction
of the test specimen (Shimizu, 1997). Stage 2 known as ‘particle in­
terlocking’ starts from the lowest contraction point where particles in-
contact with each other have to surpass interlocking along the shear
band resulting in localized dilation. This stage ends at the peak shear
stress where maximum interlocking has been achieved within the shear
band. Stage 3 is the ’shear zone formation’ which starts from the peak
shear stress where particles rearrange themselves into the voids by ei­
ther rolling or rotating, producing a reduction in shear resistance. In
direct shear testing, this is usually observed as a reduction from peak
shear stresses towards residual shear stresses. The behaviors of the
particles will produce a looser shear band layer (Oda and Konishi, 1974;
Fukuoka et al., 2006). This stage ends when a constant residual stress is
achieved. ‘Steady shear’ is the last stage (Stage 4) of shearing which is
achieved by constant shear stress where minimal vertical deformation is
recorded. The particles slide along the shear band in an equilibrium of
dilation and contraction while the bottom half of the shear box dis­
places with constant amplitude and attain residual state (Li and Aydin,
2010).
3.3. Experimental setup
A fully automated shearing equipment was used to conduct direct
shear tests on the two specimens up to a maximum horizontal dis­
placement of 15 mm. This was to ensure that the specimens had
reached a residual state, i.e. Stage 4 of shearing. The tests were con­
ducted at normal stresses of 100 kPa, 300 kPa and 500 kPa to develop
the respective failure criterion for each material.
3.3.1. Purpose-built transparent shear box
A purpose-built shear box made of transparent Perspex was used to
study the behaviors of the particles during shearing. The transparent
shear box allowed for clear visibility of the particles along the shear
band (see Fig. 1), which overcomes the challenges from past studies
(Wang and Sassa, 2002; Wafid et al., 2004; Fukuoka et al., 2006). The
size and specifications of the transparent shear box were made to
conform with ASTM D3080-11 (ASTM, 2011). A bottom plate was fixed
to the shear box to ensure that the latter was raised above the water
reservoir to obtain an unobstructed view during image acquisition.
Fig. 1. Sample image with region of interest highlighted obtained from transparent shear box.
4
Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 106 (2020) 103610
3.3.2. GeoPIV
White and Take (2002) developed GeoPIV, which is a MATLAB
module that uses particle image velocimetry (PIV) technique for geo­
technical testing applications. From a batch of sequential images, the
software uses the concept of PIV to produce displacement vectors to
indicate the movement and speed of particles when subjected to a
variety of tests. Many researchers have used GeoPIV to study particles
movement in various fields (White and Take, 2002; DeJong and
Westgate, 2009; Jackson, 2010; Grognet, 2011; Kelly, 2014). This
software is an accurate tool which can be used to better understand the
behaviors of the particles during shearing. Localized activities within
the test specimen, such as localized dilation and compression, can be
captured to understand the mechanisms that contribute to friction angle
and apparent cohesion of the tested material.
3.4. Testing procedure
3.4.1. Sample preparation
Tunneling spoils of sandstone and shale were oven-dried and
scalped to obtain a particle size distribution (PSD) passing 2.36 mm
sieve and retained by 75 µm sieve. Scalping was required by ASTM
D3080-11 (ASTM, 2011), which stated that the PSD of the tested spe­
cimen was restricted to a minimum specimen width not less than ten
times the maximum particle size diameter, dmax and the minimum
specimen height not less than 6dmax. Choo and Ong (2015) have pre­
viously used the scalping method for shearing reconstituted tunneling
rock spoils.
Sandstone spoils was categorized as well-graded while the spoils of
shale was categorized as poorly-graded spoils according to Unified Soil
Classification System (ASTM, 2000). Dry pluviation technique was
adopted to achieve dense test specimens using a funnel of 35 mm
opening and 100 mm fall height (DeGregorio, 1990). To ensure re­
peatability, similar dry density was maintained for each specimen when
tested at various normal loads. Sandstone and shale spoils produced a
dry density of 1,995.4 kg/m3 and 1,819.4 kg/m3 respectively. Table 2
shows the physical characteristics of the test specimens.
3.4.2. Image acquisition
Sequential images were captured using a Canon EOS 450D camera
while the specimen was sheared for a total horizontal displacement of
15 mm. The camera was remotely controlled to avoid any disturbance
during the image acquisition. Dim diffused lights were used to improve
visibility of the particles while preventing the casting of shadows onto
the shear box. The equipment setup is shown in Fig. 2.
M.I. Peerun, et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 106 (2020) 103610

Table 2
Physical characteristics of test specimens.
Specimen D60 (mm) D30 (mm) D10 (mm) Coefficient of uniformity Coefficient of curvature Dry density (Kg/ Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM
Cu Cc m3) 2000)

Sandstone spoils 0.70 0.27 0.10 7.00 1.04 1995.4 Well-graded sand-sized spoils
Shale spoils 0.90 0.40 0.20 4.50 0.89 1819.4 Poorly graded sand-sized spoils

Fig. 2. Equipment setup for image acquisition.

3.4.3. Region of interest
Prior to the GeoPIV analysis, grids were drawn onto the images
known as patches to produce a mesh file. Higher image resolution
would produce larger number of patches and hence more information
can be acquired (Grognet, 2011). The region of interest (ROI) and
image dimensions of 4272 × 2848 pixels obtained from the 72-dpi
resolution camera are shown in Fig. 1. The ROI was set constant along
the shear gap for all the tests to obtain a constant image of the upper
and lower halves of the shear box.
4. Results
4.1. Direct shear test results
Direct shear tests were conducted on tunneling spoils of sandstone
and shale at normal stresses of 100 kPa, 300 kPa and 500 kPa. Table 3
shows the results of peak and residual shear strength along with the
dilatancy angle for sandstone and shale. Eq. (4) was used to obtain the
dilatancy angle, , as defined by Bolton (1986).
d y
tan =
d yz (4)
where y is the vertical strain and yz is the shear strain. Both vertical
strain and shear strain were recorded at the occurrence of peak shear
stress during direct shear tests. A positive dilatancy angle would mean
that the specimen is dilating while a negative dilatancy angle would
represent contraction of the specimen. From Table 3, higher dilatancy
angle of 6.4° was recorded for sandstone while a relatively lower di­
latancy angle of 2.0° was produced for shale spoils at a normal stress of
300 kPa. At 500 kPa, sandstone produced a dilatancy angle of 4.1°
while shale produced a negative dilatancy angle of −0.1°, which was
due to compression of the test specimen. From Table 3, it can be ob­
served that with increasing normal stresses, a reduction in dilatancy
angle is noticeable.

Table 3
Comparison of results of peak and residual shear strength for sandstone and shale spoils.
Material Tangent at normal stress (kPa) Dilatancy angle, (ψ) (degree)a Shear stress (τ) (kPa) Apparent cohesion (c′) (kPa) Internal friction angle (ϕ′) (degree)

Peak Residual Peak Residual Peak Residual

Sandstone 100 8.2 97.9 64.8 14.7 4.1 39.4 30.9

300 6.4 241.6 177.7 37.3 11.5 34.8 29.2
500 4.1 383.6 292.1 57.5 18.6 32.8 28.4
Shaleb 100 2.4 90.5 73.8 0.0 0.0 37.3 35.0
300 2.0 236.8 201.2
500 −0.1 395.7 359.5

Note:
a
Measured at occurrence of peak shear stresses.
b
Line of best fit was sufficient to develop M−C failure criterion.

5
M.I. Peerun, et al.
Sandstone demonstrated nonlinear stress–strain behavior while
shale spoils exhibited a linear stress–strain behavior as shown in Fig. 3
(a) and (b) respectively. If a best-fit MC strength criterion is adopted
conveniently, Choo and Ong (2015) found that an over-estimation of
shear stresses may happen at lower and higher normal stresses while an
under-estimation of shear stresses at intermediate normal stresses when
testing non-linear strength materials. Therefore, to overcome such in­
accuracies, De Mello’s (1977) Power Law function to characterize the
non-linear strength behavior of such materials is proposed to be used.
Eq. (5) defines the simplified Power Law function.
= A. ( ') B (5)
where, A is defined as a dimensionless constant which controls the
magnitude of the power function while B is a dimensionless constant
which controls the curvature of the power function (De Mello, 1977).
The power law parameters, A and B for the sandstone specimens are
1.95 and 0.85 respectively, as shown in Fig. 3 (a). Similar approach
using power law parameters, A and B have been documented by Charles
and Watts (1980); De Mello (1977); Choo and Ong (2015) and Ong
et al. (2018).
To assess the arching effect, the MC strength parameters were still
required. Hence, Yang and Yin (2004) proposed a generalized tangen­
tial technique that can be used to obtain the tangential friction angle
and tangential cohesion from the nonlinear behavior of the tested
specimens in this current study. The generalized tangential method
consists of drawing a tangent to the power law strength envelope at the
appropriate normal stress, which in this study corresponded with the in-
situ overburden pressures at the respective pipe-jacking tunnel inverts.
The strength envelopes for sandstone specimens showed non-linearity
and hence the power law function was applied with tangents drawn at
100 kPa, 300 kPa and 500 kPa normal stresses for peak and residual
stresses. This technique was used to interpret friction angle and cohe­
sion of reconstituted tunneling rock spoils by Choo and Ong (2015),
Ong and Choo (2016) and Peerun et al. (2019). A best-fit MC line was
used for shale specimen as it showed linear strength behavior. Well-
graded sandstone produced relatively higher apparent cohesion due to
its coarse particles as compared to shale, which was comprised of flaky
micaceous particles. Sandstone particles consisting of strong quartz
constituents could have greater interlocking and hence resulted in
higher apparent cohesion. However, limited apparent cohesion was
observed for shale spoils. It could be due to minimal interlocking among
its particles, which consist of fine-grained clay minerals as compared to
Fig. 3. (a) Non-linear strength envelope of sandstone spoils and (b) M−C linear strength envelope of shale spoils.
6
Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 106 (2020) 103610
the well-graded sandstone particles.
4.2. GeoPIV results
Vector plots were produced with respect to the corresponding stages
in the four-state shear model (Li and Aydin, 2010). Particle movements
were captured at various stages of shearing for each of the applied
normal stresses. The directions of particle movements were represented
with vectors, while the magnitude of particle displacements were re­
presented by the lengths of the vectors. The upper and lower halves of
the shear box were easily distinguishible, where the top half consisted
of relatively less movements as compared to the lower half of the shear
box. This was because only the lower half was displaced during the
shearing of the test specimens; the top half of the shear box and the
camera were stationery during the tests. During the shearing process,
vector plots showed particles moving downwards at the right end of the
shear box while an upward movement was recorded on the left end of
the shear box, as shown by the dotted arrow in Fig. 4. Several re­
searchers found similar observations during discrete element modelling
for granular materials (O'Sullivan et al., 2006; Kang et al., 2012;
Indraratna et al., 2014; Salazar et al., 2015; Peerun et al., 2019). Other
activities such as localized dilation and compression were also found in
the vector plots.
Using both the direct shear test and GeoPIV results together, the
behaviors of the particles along the shear band can be interpreted to­
gether with the specimen strength parameters at different shearing
stages. Localized activities can be observed and linked to its respective
shear stress and volumetric plots. Localized compression could be due
to possible particle breakages while localized dilation could be due to
interlocking. It is to be mentioned that particle breakage do not form
part of this study.
From Table 3, sandstone spoils produced larger apparent cohesion
with an increase of normal stress for both peak and residual states. At
100 kPa, sandstone produced an apparent cohesion of 14.7 kPa at peak
which was increased up to 18.6 kPa for a normal stress of 500 kPa. At
500 kPa normal stress, an apparent cohesion of 3.9 times at peak state
was recorded as opposed to a normal stress of 100 kPa. Figs. 4, 5 and 6
show the vector plots for sandstone spoils during Stage 2 shearing at
normal stresses of 100 kPa, 300 kPa and 500 kPa respectively. As per
this stage, the particles interlock against one another which resulted in
dilation of the specimen as shown by the vertically inclined vectors in
Fig. 4. The maximum state of dilation would hence produce a peak
M.I. Peerun, et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 106 (2020) 103610

Fig. 4. Dilation due to interlocking activities for sandstone spoils during Stage 2 shearing at normal stresses of 100 kPa.

Fig. 5. Dilation due to interlocking activities for sandstone spoils during Stage 2 shearing at normal stresses of 300 kPa.

Fig. 6. Dilation due to interlocking activities for sandstone spoils during Stage 2 shearing at normal stresses of 500 kPa.

shear stress. With increasing normal stresses of 300 kPa and 500 kPa
(Figs. 5 and 6), a reduction in dilation activities is observed respec­
tively. This is due to the relatively higher normal stresses acting onto
the sandstone particles, producing more contact areas among the par­
ticles and making it more difficult for the particles to roll onto one
another during the interlocking stage. The volumetric plots in Fig. 7
confirm that the most dilation occurs at 100 kPa (vertical deforma­
tion = 0.3 mm) and while the least dilation occurs at 500 kPa normal
stress (vertical deformation = 0.18 mm). Furthermore, Table 3 also
validates this important observation where with the highest dilatancy
angle was recorded at 8.2° for 100 kPa and while the lowest dilatancy
angle of 4.1° was observed at 500 kPa. Therefore, at higher normal
stresses, larger contact areas among the particles would produce more
interlocking but due to the larger normal load, it would be more dif­
ficult for the particles to roll over the surrounding particles. The latter
would result in greater resistance, which is demonstrated in terms of
apparent cohesion. Table 3 also shows with an increase of normal
stresses, relatively larger apparent cohesion was obtained with a cor­
responding reduction in friction angle. At peak state from 100 kPa to
500 kPa, an apparent cohesion of 14.7 kPa was increased to 57.5 kPa
with increasing normal stress while the internal friction angle of 39.4°
was reduced to 32.8°.

7
M.I. Peerun, et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 106 (2020) 103610

While particle interlocking generate dilation, particle breakages

would result in compression of the specimen. Shale comprises of rough
angular particles which were more prone to particle breakages as it had
relatively weaker mineralogical content consisting of fine-grained clay
minerals. An attempt in studying particle breakages was conducted by
plotting the particle size distributions (PSD) before and after shearing.
For such relatively small specimen volume of 3.34 × 10-4 m3, the small
amount of particle breakages could not be represented on a PSD curve.
Kim and Ha (2014) showed similar results where a large shear box was
used to study the effect of particle size on shear behavior of sand and
gravel using geogrids as reinforcement. The PSD curve before and after
the test showed insignificant change and particle crushing could not be
conclusive. Hence, with the aid of novel vector plots from the GeoPIV
analysis, localized activities could be identified such as dilation and
compression representing particle interlocking and possible breakages,
respectively (Peerun et al. 2019). Figs. 8 and 9 show the vector plots at
Fig. 7. Vertical deformation plot for sandstone spoils at 100 kPa, 300 kPa and
Stage 3 under normal stress of 300 kPa for sandstone and shale
500 kPa normal stresses with solid lines representing shearing Stage 2.

Fig. 8. Vector plots showing localized interlocking for sandstone at Stage 3 and confining pressure of 300 kPa.

8
M.I. Peerun, et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 106 (2020) 103610

Fig. 9. Vector plots showing localized interlocking for shale at Stage 3 and confining pressure of 300 kPa.

respectively. In contrast to dilation observed in Fig. 8, the shale spe­
cimen consisted of localized compression which could be due to pos­
sible particle breakages. The non-existent particle interlocking in shale
can be concluded from the localized compression and minimal dilation
in Fig. 9. With minimal interlocking activities, the relatively weaker
shale spoils produced no cohesion as per Table 3 and showed linear
strength behavior based on Fig. 3 (b).
The schematic diagram of Fig. 10 shows the influence of particle
shapes and mineralogy on the shear stress. The well-graded and rela­
tively strong sandstone particles consisting low void ratio produced

9
M.I. Peerun, et al.
Fig. 10. Influence of (a) particle shapes and mineralogy on (b) shear stress and (c) shear strength.
Fig. 11. Representation of change in shear stresses during direct shear test in assessment of arching using Pellet-Beaucour and Kastner (2002) model.
greater inter-particle contact area against one another to produce a
distinct peak shear stress. On the other hand, the weaker angular par­
ticles of shale, which consisted relatively higher void ratio, was com­
pressed and resulted in a steady shear stress distribution at larger dis­
placement. Therefore, it is thought that the interlocking particles
produce an apparent cohesion for the non-linear strength behavior of
sandstone while the flaky micaceous shale spoils breaks and then slide
over one another without further interaction, thus resulting in a linear
MC strength behavior, which subsequently produce a friction angle and
zero cohesion.
5. Case studies
This section discusses the assessment of jacking forces for four
10
Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 106 (2020) 103610
tunnel drives traversing sandstone and shale geology. This was
achieved by using the soil properties obtained from direct shear tests
and Eqs. (1), (2) and (3) to assess the vertical stresses acting on the pipe
crown of each drives. The arching effect is defined as the transfer of
pressure from a yielding mass of soil onto adjoining stationary parts
(Terzaghi, 1943). Arching is maintained purely by shearing stresses,
which is strongly related to the direct shear test. The change in stresses
during DST where the soil in the upper half of the shear box is displaced
along the stationary soil in the lower half of the shear box is a good
representation of the change in stresses along the vertical boundary
plane of a developing wedge failure as shown schematically in Fig. 11.
Therefore, the shear strength properties obtained from DST can be used
to quantify the influence of apparent cohesion and friction angle on soil
arching. From Pellet-Beaucour and Kastner (2002) model, φ’ and c’ are
M.I. Peerun, et al.
Fig. 12. Soil profiles for Drive A and B.
influencing factors in defining the vertical soil stress acting on the pipe
crown (Eq. (2)) and φ’ in defining the silo width, b (Eq. (3)). The soil
profiles and properties of the four tunnel drives are shown in Figs. 12
and 13.
5.1. Drive A
Drive A consisted of jacking a concrete pipeline of 65 m and 1.43
diameter at a depth of 9.50 m. Based on soil investigations, the pipeline
traversed moderately weathered sandstone. During the first half of the
11
Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 106 (2020) 103610
pipeline, no lubrication was used while an average of 250 L/m were
used for the second half. The jacking speed was recorded ranging be­
tween 10 and 40 mm/min with some occasional spikes. However, this
produced a steady drive with a measured jacking force of 10.1 kN/m.
Fig. 14 (a) shows the jacking forces, jacking speed and lubrication used
for Drive A. Direct shear tests were conducted on sandstone spoils to
obtain the non-linear strength parameters and used to interpret Drive A
passing through the excavated sandstone. The apparent cohesion, cpeak’
was 11.9 kPa and friction angle, ϕpeak’ was 40.5°. By inputting these
strength parameters in Eq. (2), the relatively strong, rounded particles
M.I. Peerun, et al.
Fig. 13. Soil profiles for Drive C and D.
of sandstone produced a vertical stress, σEV of 15.3 kPa acting on the
pipeline. Vertical soil stress at the pipe crown, σEV lower than zero
(negative values) is an indication of the absence of soil pressure acting
on the jacked sewer pipeline (presence of strong arching) while a po­
sitive value of the vertical soil stress at the pipe crown, σEV would in­
dicate soil contact on the pipe (presence of less arching) (Choo and Ong,
2015, 2017; Ong et al., 2018). σEV computed for the tunneling drives
can be found in Table 4 together with the relevant parameters. The soil
12
Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 106 (2020) 103610
friction angle and cohesion were obtained based on the effective
overburden pressure for each drive.
For Drive A in sandstone, a relatively smaller amount of σEV of
15.3 kPa was found acting on the pipe crown. This may not demon­
strate strong presence of arching but it shows lower soil pressure acting
on the pipe crown as compared to its overburden pressure of 78 kPa.
The significant amount of dilation as shown in Fig. 8 was due to particle
interlocking amongst the strong and rounded quartz particles,
M.I. Peerun, et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 106 (2020) 103610

Fig. 14. Variations in measured jacking forces, jacking speed, lubricant and back-analysed jacking forces for (a) Drive A, (b) Drive B.

13
M.I. Peerun, et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 106 (2020) 103610

Table 4
Computation of vertical soil stresses, σEV.
Parameters Symbol Units Drive A Drive B Drive C Drive D

Geology – – Sandstone Shale

Outer pipe diameter De m 1.43 1.43 1.43 1.78

Effective overburden pressure σ'V kPa 78.0 121.7 110 156
Average soil unit weight γ kN/m3 18.21 19.19 18.64 18.44
Soil cover from ground to pipe crown h M 9.50 13.5 12.5 18.0
Soil friction angle (based on Power Law) ϕ(a) degree 40.5 28.6 37.3 37.3
Soil cohesion (based on Power Law) C(b) kPa 11.9 17.3 0.0 0.0
Lateral earth pressure coefficient K – 1.0 1 1 1
Influencing soil width above pipe b m 2.70 2.8 2.8 3.5
Thrust coefficient K2 – 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3
Jacking force measured (F/L) JF kN/m 10.1 18.9 29.0 28.5
Calculated vertical stress acting on pipe crown from Eq. (2) σEV kN/m2 15.3 12.1 34.8 42.9
Calculated frictional coefficient from Eq. (1) μavg – 0.122 0.251 0.207 0.132

producing relatively higher shear stress and apparent cohesion as listed
in Table 3. From Table 4, the higher frictional angle of 40.5° and co­
hesion of 11.9 kPa produced a σEV of 15.3 kPa which made it possible to
jack through sandstone steadily at an average jacking force of 10.1 kN/
m, an average jacking speed of 29.2 mm/min and requiring sig­
nificantly lower lubrication (250 L/m).
5.2. Drive B
The second drive consisted of a 160 m long and 1.43 m diameter
concrete pipeline which traversed a moderately strong light grey
slightly weathered sandstone at a depth of 13.5 m. The soil profile along
with its properties are found in Fig. 12. From the 13.5 m of soil cover to
the pipe crown, the tangential power law MC parameters of 28.6°
frictional angle and 17.3 kPa cohesion were obtained for a soil pressure
of 121.7 kPa. By incorporating these parameters into Eq. (2), a σEV of
12.1 kPa was found acting on the pipe crown. Similar to Drive A, a
lower soil pressure of 12.1 kPa was found acting on the pipe crown as
compared to its overburden pressure of 121.7 kPa. The significantly low
soil pressure acting on the pipe crown again is a result of relatively
significantly high frictional angle and cohesion values which are the
product of interparticle activities as discussed for Drive A. As such, a
jacking force of 18.9 kN/m was required to complete the 160 m drive.
This was achieved at an average jacking speed of up to 22.4 mm/min
and required minimal constant lubricants of 250 L/m as shown in
Fig. 14 (b).
5.3. Drive C
Drive C traverses a very weak grey highly weathered shale for a
span of 140 m at a depth of 12.5 m. The poorly graded shale spoils were
subjected to direct shear tests and produced a frictional angle of 37.3°
with no cohesion. When compared to sandstone, shale specimens pro­
duced localized compression which is due to suspected particle
breakages as shown in Fig. 9, resulting in lower shear stresses and no
cohesion. From the MC parameters, σEV acting on the pipe crown was
computed to be 34.8 kPa which is 2.3 times of Drive A and 2.9 times of
Drive B. Hence, a relatively greater soil pressure was acting on the pipe
which then required a 29.0 kN/m jacking force to tunnel through shale.
Again, a relatively larger jacking force of 2.9 times of Drive A and 1.5
times of Drive B, was required but with a relatively much slower
average jacking speed of 10.4 mm/min. An attempt to reduce the
jacking force and to speed up the process was made by increasing the
amount of lubrication as shown in Fig. 15 (a). In total, up to 2500 L/m
were eventually used for this drive. However, the effectiveness of the
lubricant is doubtful due to the continous high jacking force and re­
duced jacking speed. This could be due to loss of lubrication to the
surrounding fissures/cracks of shale as discussed in detail by Choo and
Ong (2015).
5.4. Drive D
This drive consisted of a relatively short tunnel span of 30 m only
traversing very weak grey highly weathered shale at a depth of 18 m.
The weak carboneous angular shale spoils produced a frictional angle of
37.3° with no cohesion due to localized compression as discussed in
Drive C, producing σEV of 42.9 kPa acting on the pipe crown. Again, this
significantly larger soil pressure (2.8 times of Drive A and 3.5 times of
Drive B) required a larger jacking force of 28.5 kN/m to jack through
the challenging shale geology. This is 2.8 and 1.5 times greater than for
Drives A and B in sandstone, respectively. An average jacking speed of
18.9 mm/min and lubrication of up to 500 L/m were recorded for the
short drive in shale (Fig. 15 (b)). The overall comparison between the
sandstone and shale drives showed distinct differences in magnitudes in
terms of jacking force, jacking speed and lubricant used. Drives A and B
required lower jacking forces to tunnel through sandstone at a higher
jacking speed and significantly lower amount of lubricants used as
compared to Drives C and D in shale. Such assessment was achieved by
analyzing σEV acting on the pipe crown, which was found to be de­
pendent on the soil frictional angle and cohesion in this paper.

14
M.I. Peerun, et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 106 (2020) 103610

Fig. 15. Variations in measured jacking forces, jacking speed, lubricant and back-analysed jacking forces for (a) Drive C and (b) Drive D.

6. Conclusions calibrated GeoPIV technique. The interpretation of shear strength re­

This study focuses on the assessment of the arching phenomenon
with the aid of particle behavior such as localized compression or di­
lation in a specially fabricated and enhanced transparent shear box, as
evidenced by the series of images reliably analyzed using the well-
sults along with the GeoPIV results have provided a better insight on
the behaviors of the particles during shearing. Furthermore, the out­
comes were used to assess the arching phenomenon during pipe-jacking
works based on established case studies. The following observations
were made:

15
M.I. Peerun, et al.
1) materials with stronger particles mineralogy are prone to greater
dilation as compared to weaker matrices particles content;
2) Angular particles would produce a sample with higher void ratio
and hence are subjected to greater compression as compared to rounded
shape particles;
3) Particle interlocking will produce greater dilation and resulting
in higher apparent cohesion;
4) Specimen compression due to possible particles breakages will
reduce the peak shear stress;
5) At higher normal stresses, increase in interlocking activities will
produce higher apparent cohesion with a corresponding reduction in
friction angle;
6) Greater apparent cohesion will result in a reduction of over­
burden pressure or vertical soil stresses acting on the jacked pipe, hence
demonstrating effect of arching. Therefore, as illustrated by the fair
agreement between the laboratory results and the well-established field
case studies, by being able to express the significance of arching for
different geological settings in the field, engineers can estimate the
impact of σEV acting on the jacked pipe. This knowledge would enable
engineers to not only plan the jackable length of the pipe-jacking drive
more efficiently, but also being able to estimate quantitatively the
jacking force. Therefore, by incorporating the knowledge of the arching
phenomenon into soil-structure interaction, in this case, pipe-jacking
works in fractured rock mass, a more efficient and economical design
can be subsequently achieved.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
M.I. Peerun: Data curation, Formal analysis, Validation, Software,
Writing - original draft. D.E.L. Ong: Conceptualization, Methodology,
Writing - review & editing, Supervision, Project administration,
Funding acquisition. C.S. Choo: Data curation, Methodology,
Resources, Writing - review & editing. W.C. Cheng: Writing - review &
editing.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influ­
ence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgement
The authors would like to thank David White for providing the
GeoPIV software and their grateful appreciation to Hock Seng Lee Bhd
and Jurutera Jasa (Sarawak) Sdn Bhd in providing field data for this
study.
References
ASTM, 2000. Standard practice for classification of soils for engineering purposes (unified
soil classification system). D2487-00, West Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM, 2011. Standard Test Method for Direct Shear Test of Soils Under Consolidated
Drained Conditions, D3080M-11, West Conshohocken, PA.
Bolton, M.D., 1986. The strength and dilatancy of sands. Géotechnique 36 (1), 65–78.
Charles, J.A., Watts, K.S., 1980. The influence of confining pressure on the shear strength
of compacted rockfill. Géotechnique 30 (4), 353–367. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.
1980.30.4.353.
Chapman, D.N., Ichioka, Y., 1999. Prediction of jacking forces for microtunnelling op­
erations. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 14, 31–41.
Cheng, W., Ni, J.C., Arulrajah, A., Huang, H., 2018. A simple approach for characterising
tunnel bore conditions based upon pipe-jacking data. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol.
71 (2018), 494–504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2017.10.002.
Cheng, W.-C., Ni, J.C., Huang, H.-W., Shen, J.S., 2018b. The use of tunnelling parameters
and spoil characteristics to assess soil types: a case study from alluvial deposits at a
pipejacking project site. Bull. Eng. Geol. Environ. 78 (2019), 2933–2942. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s10064-018-1288-4.
Cheng, W.-C., Wang, L., Xue, Z.-F., Ni, J.C., Rahman, M.M., Arulrajah, A., 2019.
Lubrication performance of pipejacking in soft alluvial deposits. Tunn. Undergr.
Space Technol. 91, 102991. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2019.102991.
16
Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 106 (2020) 103610
Choo, C.S., Ong, D.E.L., 2015. Evaluation of Pipe-Jacking Forces Based on Direct Shear
Testing of Reconstituted Tunneling Rock Spoils. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 141
(10). https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0001348.
Choo, C.S., Ong, D.E.L., 2017. Impact of highly weathered geology on pipe-jacking forces.
Geotech. Res. 4 (2), 94–106. https://doi.org/10.1680/jgere.16.00022.
Choo, C.S., Ong, D.E.L., 2020. Assessment of non-linear rock strength parameters for the
estimation of pipe-jacking forces. Part 2. Numerical modeling. Eng. Geol. 265,
105405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2019.105405.
De Mello, V.F.B., 1977. Reflections on design decisions of practical significance to em­
bankment dams. Géotechnique 27 (3), 281–355. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.1977.
27.3.281.
DeGregorio, V.B., 1990. Loading Systems, Sample Preparation, and Liquefaction. J.
Geotech. Eng. 116 (5), 805–821. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1990)
116:5(805).
DeJong, J.T., Westgate, Z.J., 2009. Role of Initial State, Material Properties, and
Confinement Condition on Local and Global Soil-Structure Interface Behavior. J.
Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 135 (11), 1646–1660. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)
1090-0241(2009)135:11(1646).
Fukuoka, H., Sassa, K., Wang, G., Sasaki, R., 2006. Observation of shear zone develop­
ment in ring-shear apparatus with a transparent shear box. Landslides 3 (3), 239–251.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-006-0043-2.
Grognet, M., 2011. The boundary conditions in direct simple shear tests, development for
peat testing at low vertical stress. MSc thesis thesis. Delft University of Technology.
Indraratna, B., Ngo, N.T., Rujikiatkamjorn, C., Vinod, J.S., 2014. Behavior of Fresh and
Fouled Railway Ballast Subjected to Direct Shear Testing: Discrete Element
Simulation. Int. J. Geomech. 14 (1), 34–44. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.
1943-5622.0000264.
Jackson, P., 2010. An Investigation into the Deformation Behaviour of Geosynthetic
Reinforced Soil Walls under Seismic Loading. MEng Thesis. University of
Canterbury.
Jing, X.-Y., Zhou, W.-H., Zhu, H.-X., Yin, Z.-Y., Li, Y., 2017. Analysis of soil-structural
interface behavior using three-dimensional DEM simulations. Int. J. Numer. Anal.
Methods Geomech. 42 (2), 339–357. https://doi.org/10.1002/nag.2745.
Kang, D.H., Lee, J.H., Choo, J., Yun, T.S., 2012. Pore directivity of soils subjected to
shearing: numerical simulation and image processing. GeoCongress 2012,
2342–2351. https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784412121.240.
Kelly, P., 2014. Soil Structure Interaction and Group Mechanics of Vibrated Stone Column
Foundations. PhD Thesis. University of Sheffield.
Khondoker, M. T. H., Yi, Y., and Bayat, A., 2016. Comparison of different methods for
normal stres calculation during pipe jacking/microtunnelling. Int. J. of Geo. Mech.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19386362.2016.1147193.
Kim, D., and Ha, S., 2014. Effects of particle size on the shear behavior of coarse grained
soils reinforced with geogrid. Materials, 7963–979. https://doi.org/10.3390/
ma7020963.
Li, Y.R., Aydin, A., 2010. Behavior of rounded granular materials in direct shear:
Mechanisms and quantification of fluctuations. Eng. Geol. 115 (1-2), 96–104. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2010.06.008.
Mehdizadeh, A., Disfani, M.M., Evans, R., Arulrajah, A., Ong, D.E.L., 2016. Discussion of
“Development of an internal camera-based volume determination system for triaxial
testing”. Geotech. Test. J. 39 (1), 165–168. https://doi.org/10.1520/GTJ20150153.
Mehdizadeh, A., Disfani, M.M., Evans, R., Arulrajah, A., Ong, D.E.L., 2017. Mechanical
Consequences of Suffusion on Undrained Behaviour of a Gap-Graded Cohesionless
Soil - An Experimental Approach. Geotech. Test. J. 40 (6), 1026–1042. https://doi.
org/10.1520/GTJ20160145.
Misra, A., Roberts, L.A., Najafi, M., 2008. Probabilistic soil-structure interaction model for
pipe-jacking force analysis, Proceedings of Pipelines 2008: Pipeline Asset
Management: Maximizing Performance of our Pipeline Infrastructure. American
Society of Civil Engineers, New York, pp. 1–10.
O'Sullivan, C., Bray, J.D., Cui, L., 2006. Experimental validation of particle-based discrete
element methods. GeoCongress 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1061/40803(187)5.
Oda, M., Kunishi, J., 1974. Microscopic deformation mechanism of granular material in
simple shear. Japan Soc. Soil Mech. Found. 14 (4), 25–38.
Olson, M.P., 2013. Pilot tube microtunneling: instrumentation and monitoring for jacking
force and productivity analysis, MSc thesis, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ.
Olson, M.P., Ariaratnam, S.T., Lueke, J.S., 2015. Jacking force and productivity analysis
of pilot tube microtunneling installations, J. Pipeline Syst. Eng. Pract., 04015018-1.
Ong, D.E.L., Leung, C.F., Chow, Y.K., 2003. Piles subject to excavation-induced soil
movement in clay. Proc. 13th European Conference on Soil Mechanics and
Geotechnical Engineering, Prague, Czech Republic, Vol. 2, pp. 777–782.
Ong, D.E.L., Yang, D.Q., Phang, S.K., 2006. Comparison of finite element modelling of a
deep excavation using SAGE-CRISP and PLAXIS. Int. Conf. on Deep Excavations, 28-
30 June 2006, Singapore, pp. 51–64.
Ong, D.E.L., Choo, C.S., 2011. Sustainable Bored Pile Construction in Erratic Phyllite.
ASEAN-Australian Engineering Congress. Kuching, Malaysia (ISBN 978-967-10485),
July 2011, pp. 30–45.
Ong, D.E.L., Choo, C.S., 2016. Back-analysis and finite element modeling of jacking forces
in weathered rocks. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 51, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.tust.2015.10.014.
Ong, D.E.L., Choo, C.S., 2018. Assessment of non-linear rock strength parameters for the
estimation of pipe-jacking forces. Part 1. Direct shear testing and backanlaysis. Eng.
Geol. 244 (2018), 159–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2018.07.013.
Ong, D.E.L., Sim, Y.S., Leung, C.F., 2018. Performance of Field and Numerical Back-
Analysis of Floating Stone Columns in Soft Clay Considering the Influence of
Dilatancy. Int. J. Geomech. 18 (10). https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.
0001261.
Osumi, T., 2000. Calculating jacking forces for pipe jacking methods. No-Dig Int. Res.
M.I. Peerun, et al.
40–42.
Peerun, M.I, Ong, D.E.L., Choo, C.S., 2019. Interpretation of Geomaterial Behavior during
Shearing Aided by PIV Technology. J. Mater. Civil Eng., 31(9). https://doi.org/10.
1061/(ASCE) MT.1943-5533.0002834.
Pellet-Beaucour, A.-L., Kastner, R., 2002. Experimental and analytical study of friction
forces during microtunneling operations. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 17 (1),
83–97.
Pfeffer, W.T., 2014, Sedimentary rocks, CVN 3698 Engineering geology spring, INSTAAR
Dept. Civil. Env. Architectural Eng,University of Colorado.
Rahjoo, S., Najafi, M., Williammee, R., Khankarli, G., 2012. Comparison of jacking load
models for trenchless pipe jacking, Pipelines 2012: Innovations in design, construc­
tion, operations, and maintenance, doing more with less. American Society of Civil
Engineers, New York, pp. 1507–1520.
Salazar, A., Sáez, E., Pardo, G., 2015. Modeling the direct shear test of a coarse sand using
the 3D Discrete Element Method with a rolling friction model. Comput. Geotech. 67,
83–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2015.02.017.
Shen, S.-L., Cui, Q.-L., Ho, C.-E., Xu, Y.-S., 2016. Ground Response to Multiple Parallel
Microtunneling Operations in Cemented Silty Clay and Sand. J. Geotech. Geoenviron.
Eng. 142 (5). https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0001441.
Shimizu, M., 1997. Strain fields in direct shear box tests on a metal-rods model of
granular soils. In: Asaoka, Adachi, Oka. Deform. Progr. Failure Geomech., 151–156.
Shou, K., Yen, J., Liu, M., 2010. On the frictional property of lubricants and its impact on
jacking force and soil–pipe interaction of pipe-jacking. Tunn. Undergr. Space
Technol. 25 (4), 469–477. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2010.02.009.
Staheli, K., 2006. Jacking force prediction: an interface friction approach based on pipe
surface roughness. PhD thesis. Georgia Institute of Technology.
Stein, D., 2005. Trenchless technology for installation of cables and pipelines. Prof. Dr.-
Ing. Stein & Partner GmbH, Bochum, Germany.
Sterling, R.L., 2020. Developments and research directions in pipe jacking and micro­
tunneling. Undergr. Space 5 (1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.undsp.2018.09.
17
Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 106 (2020) 103610
001.
Terzaghi, K., 1936. Stress distribution in dry and in saturated sand above a yielding trap
door. Proc., 1st Int. Conf. on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Harvard
Univ., Cambridge, MA, 307–311.
Terzaghi, K., 1943. Conditions for Shear Failure in Ideal Soils. Theoretical Soil Mechanics,
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Wafid, M.A., Sassa, K., Fukuoka, H., Wang, G.H., 2004. Evolution of shear-zone structure
in undrained ring-shear tests. Landslide 1 (2), 101–112.
Wang, G.H., Sassa, K., 2002. Post mobility of saturated sands in undrained load-controlled
ring shear tests. Can. Geotech. J. 3\9, 4, 821–837.
Wang, H., Zhou, W., Yin, Z., Jie, X., 2019. Effect of grain size distribution of sandy soil on
shearing behaviors at soil-structure interface. J. Mater. Viv. Eng. (ASCE) 31 (10).
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0002880.
White, D.J., Take, W.A., 2002. GeoPIV: Particle Image Velocimetry (PIV) software for use
in geotechnical testing, Eng. Dept. Cambridge University.
Yang, X.L., Yin, J.H., 2004. Slope stability analysis with nonlinear failure criterion. J. Eng.
Mech., 130, 3, 267–273. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2004)
130:3(267).
Zhang, H., Zhang, P., Zhou, W., Dong, S., Ma, B., 2016. A new model to predict soil
pressure acting on deep burial jacked pipes. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 60,
183–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2016.09.005.
Zhou, W.-H., Jing, X.-Y., Yin, Z.-Y., Geng, X., 2019. Effects of particle sphericity and
initial fabric on the shearing behavior of soil–rough structural interface. Acta
Geotech. 14 (6), 1699–1716. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-019-00781-2.
Zhu, H.-X., Zhou, W.-H., Jing, X.-Y., Yin, Z.-Y., 2019. Observations on fabric evolution to
a common micromechanical state at the soil‐structure interface. Int. J. Numer. Anal.
Methods Geomech. 43 (15), 2449–2470. https://doi.org/10.1002/nag.2989.
Zhu, X., Gong, W., 2014. Study on soil arching in the cushion of composite foundation.
Soil Behaviour and Geomechanics, Geo-Shanghai 2014, ASCE, https://doi.org/10.
1061/9780784413388.058.