Lyell Collection

Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publications

Lyell Centre  |   Lyell Collection  |   Subscriptions   |   Geological Society  |   Email alerts  |   Online bookshop  |   Help


Keywords:
Author:
Advanced search>>
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Selby, A.R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation
Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publications; 1988; v. 5; p. 71-77;
DOI: 10.1144/GSL.ENG.1988.005.01.05
© 1988 Geological Society of London

Session 2: Ground Movements Due to Tunnelling

Surface movements caused by tunnelling in two-layer soil

A.R. Selby

School of Engineering and Applied Science, University of Durham, South Road, Durham DH1 3LE, UK

Empirical equations suitably defining surface movements caused by tunnelling in uniform soils are now well-established. Settlements transverse to the tunnel line are usually and conveniently described by a normal probability equation in terms of ground loss, V(m3/m) and of distance to the point of inflection, i (m). Vis dominantly a function of tunnelling method, and i has been expressed explicitly as a function of depth, but dependent upon whether the soil type is granular or cohesive.

Little attention, however, has been given to the estimation of ground movements caused by tunnelling through a granular soil overlain by a cohesive stratum, and vice versa. The problem is addressed both by a simple extension to the expressions leading to the normal distribution settlement profile and the consequent transverse inward movements, and also by a linear elastic finite element model.

Two well-documented case histories are assessed by the two methods of analysis and both give acceptable estimates of ground movement.