Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 28 (2012) 287–296

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology

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

Analysis of ground movement due to metro station driven with enlarging

shield tunnels under building and its parameter sensitivity analysis
Jiangfeng Liu a,⇑, Taiyue Qi b, Zhanrui Wu b
a
Laboratoire de Mécanique de Lille (LML), Ecole Centrale de Lille, BP 48, F-59651 Villeneuve d’Ascq Cedex, France
b
School of Civil Engineering, Southwest Jiao Tong University, Chengdu 610031, PR China

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

Article history: Using expanding excavation based on shield tunnel can be regarded as a new approach to construct a
Received 21 November 2010 metro station, especially when traditional methods cannot be implemented. This paper focuses on the
Received in revised form 6 December 2011 ground movement property caused by shield tunneling and expanding construction. Ground movement
Accepted 22 December 2011
property and construction influence scope, which happens during the construction process, are obtained
Available online 14 January 2012
by large numbers of numerical calculations and monitoring measurements. Results show that expanding
excavation is the main factor which affects ground movement, and its influence will increase as the sta-
Keywords:
bility of surrounding rock deteriorates. Besides, horizontal displacement and vertical displacement
Shield tunneling
Expanding excavation
(uneven settlement) are the two important factors which lead to building deformation and cracks; there-
Ground movement fore, more attention should be given to these areas where the maximum displacement may occur during
Building deformation the construction process. Analysis of the two parameters, length to diameter ratio and depth to diameter
ratio, indicates their relationship with safety of tunnel and building. Influence degree and scope of ground
settlement are obtained due to change of the two parameters. The practical importance of this analysis is
that we can judge whether building and tunnel are in a dangerous zone and thereby adopt relevant pre-
reinforcements to ensure their safety. Later with the comparison of numerical simulation and in-situ data,
we verify the accuracy of simulation.
Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
At present, when building a metro station, conventional pro-
cesses and technologies cannot be implemented smoothly because
of restrictions caused by surrounding environment (e.g., launching
and receiving shafts cannot be constructed on the line because of
the existence of buildings and underground utilities). However,
these problems can be effectively solved when the shield tunneling
method or the expanding shield tunnels method are utilized to con-
struct a metro station directly. Meanwhile, construction period can
be shortened significantly and construction quality will also be im-
proved, which will definitely bring practical and economic signifi-
cance (Lu, 2007; Li, 2007; Liu, 2010). Both shield tunneling and
expanding construction will induce disturbance to the surrounding
rock and cause ground movement; however, what exactly the two
processes ‘‘contribute’’ to the ground movement is still unknown;
besides, considering the existence of a building, when H/D and L/D
change (H is the depth of tunnel, L is the horizontal distance be-
tween tunnel and building, D is diameter of shield tunnel), the influ-
ence of two construction processes on stratum movement is also
unknown. Currently, some published papers, which are related to
this subject, are mostly about construction schemes. For example,
Nakamura et al. (2003) introduced a method to excavate a rectangu-
lar cross-section for the Kyoto Municipal Subway. Shirai et al. (2005)
reported a new technology, namely using the large-diameter curved
pipe roof construction method to construct large underground
spaces. Kunihiko and Kenichi et al. (2006) presented that a large
diameter shield tunnel was used for the construction of subway,
and he also described a non-cut-and-cover method which was used
for cutting the ground between two large-diameter shield tunnels.
Hiroshi et al. (2006) showed that shield tunneling is utilized to build
the Central Circular Shinjuku Route of Tokyo Metropolitan Express-
way, and the space enlargement method was adopted to construct
branch connections and ramps. Hiroshi (2007) described an Open-
Cut Method which was used for the construction of enlarging road
shield tunnel. However, there is little research about the effect of
this construction method on the ground movement property are
few. This paper presents a detailed research on such problems, with
the background of a left line platform tunnel of Dongshankou metro
station Guangzhou metro line 6 in China.
2. Engineering situation

⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +33 0668259478. The use of expanding excavation based on shield tunnels is
E-mail address: jeafliu@gmail.com (J. Liu). adopted in an under-construction left line platform tunnel of

0886-7798/$ - see front matter Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.tust.2011.12.005
288 J. Liu et al. / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 28 (2012) 287–296
Dongshankou metro station Guangzhou metro line 6, China. The
distance from the tunnel vault to the ground surface is 18.800–
19.845 m, and the distance between invert and ground is
27.045–27.534 m. The left line of station crosses a six storied
building of the Second Light Industry Group. The terrane through
which the left line platform tunnel passes consists mainly of mod-
erately weathered zones and silky weathered zones. The top of
tunnel crosses mainly through strong weathered zones, and it goes
partly through fully weathered zones. The formation parameter
and the geological section map are shown in Table 1 and Fig. 1,
respectively.
3. Model building
According to the construction scheme and geological data,
FLAC3D is used to build a three-dimensional model. Model dimen-
sion is 98 m  50 m  35 m, number of grid cells are 89,000, see
Fig. 2. When modeling, shell element and cable element are used
to simulate primary lining and rock bolts; besides we adopt beam
element to simulate columns and beams. The live load of every
floor is according to the code for design of building foundation
(The National Standards Compilation Group of People’s Republic
of China, 2002). Live load of top floor is 0.5 kN/m2, and the aver-
aged live load of other floors is 2.25 kN/m2. Considering the gravity
of wall which transmits to the framework of the beam, the applied
load to each floor is 4.9 kN/m2.
The following assumptions are used when simulating: (1)
Ground surface and each soil layer represent in homogeneous
and horizontal layered distribution; (2) Groundwater seepage is
overlooked, and deformation of soil itself has no relation with
time; (3) Soil is isotropic and elastic-perfectly plastic material,
which complies with Yield Criterion of Mohr–Coulomb; (4) We
adopt deformation compatibility to calculate deformation of build-
ings and foundation, as well as foundation and soil.
4. Ground movement property induced by shield tunneling and
expanding excavation
In urban areas, it is essential to protect pre-existing structures
and underground utilities from damage due to ground movement
caused by the construction of a metro station. Therefore, it is par-
ticularly important to know the influence degree and scope as a re-
sult of a metro station construction. This section will focus on this
problem.
4.1. Key points displacement
In order to analyse influence degree of shield tunneling and
expanding construction on the ground settlement, some points
of key parts are extracted from the model, such as ground sur-
face, distance from ground surface 1D, 2D and 3D (namely tunnel
vault). We define these points as Key Points, and then we extract
the vertical displacement of these points during the construction
process, see Table 2. During the process of shield tunneling, it
drives 1.4 m for each step, and the total steps are 25; during
the process of expanding construction, it excavates 0.7 m per
step, and total steps are 50. The intersection location of the
building and tunnel axis is at the position of y = 26 m (longitudi-
nal); therefore these key points are chosen from the section of
y = 26 m.
As presented in Table 2, shield tunneling only has a smaller ef-
fect on surface subsidence when comparing with expanding exca-
vation. During the process of shield tunneling, surface subsidence
of the sixth step, the fourteenth step, the eighteenth step and the
twenty-fifth step are 1.45 mm, 3.35 mm, 3.81 mm and 4.13 mm,
respectively, and all these values are less than 10 mm. However,
in contrast to shield tunneling, ground settlement caused by
expanding construction is larger. As shown in Table 2, in the
places of surface, depth of 1D, depth of 2D and vault, the settle-
ment caused by expanding construction accounts for 54.96%,
54.80%, 53.70%, and 50.86% of the total settlement. With the in-
crease of depth (above the vault), ground settlement rises sharply.
After expanding construction, the settlement amount of surface,
depth of 1D, depth of 2D and vault are 9.17 mm, 10.11 mm,
14.47 mm, and 20.84 mm respectively. It can be seen clearly that
the settlement value of vault is two times bigger than surface
subsidence.
4.2. Stratum settlement trough and three-dimensional ground
subsidence surface
Based on the same reason as in chapter 4.1, section of y = 26 m
is chosen to analyse. Stratum settlement trough and three-dimen-
sional ground subsidence are shown in Figs. 3–6.
According to settlement curves at different depths of stratum
(see Figs. 4 and 5), the shape of surface settlement curves is gentler,
and its distribution range is quite bigger. With the depth increasing
(above the vault), the form of settlement curves become precipi-
tous, and their distributions are narrower. In addition, ground set-
tlement of the same cross-section is not completely symmetrical
along the axis, which can be seen clearly from Figs. 4–6. The rea-
sons for this phenomenon are likely to be skew intersection of
building and tunnel axis, and on the other hand it has some rela-
tionships with formation lithology, construction methods, ground-
water and other factors.
Horizontal and vertical displacements of stratum are the two
most important factors which induce building deformation. By
analyzing the calculation results, the maximum horizontal dis-
placement and disturbance range to stratum, caused by shield tun-
neling and expending construction, are generalized in Table 3. This
data can be used to predict ground movement before construction.
When the maximum horizontal displacement occurs close to
underground utilities and architectural pile foundation, monitor-
ing must be strengthened and relevant Pre-reinforcement should
be adopted to ensure their normal usage and safety.
4.3. Horizontal displacement of stratum
As indicated in chapter 4.1, Z-direction displacement (differen-
tial settlement) and X-direction displacement of stratum (Stretch
and squeeze) may lead to building deformation and cracks, while
Y-direction displacement only has smaller influence on building
deformation because of its little value.
In X-direction the shape of curve represents in stretch and
squeeze, and it expresses changes in wave shape (see Figs. 7–10).
Because of skew intersection of building and tunnel axis, horizon-
tal displacements of stratum are not completely symmetrical about
the centerline during the construction process. Horizontal dis-
placements relative to the tunnel axis are in the opposite direction,
and the horizontal displacement caused by expanding excavation
is larger than the displacement caused by shield driving. With
the increase of buried depth, the curve becomes more precipitous,
and during the range of 6 m from the tunnel axial, horizontal dis-
placement of stratum increases gradually; while the distance is
more than 6 m, the variation tendency is the opposite. The influ-
ence range of horizontal movement decreases as the depth of stra-
tum increases (see Fig. 10), and the position of the maximum
horizontal displacement are different in different buried depths
(see Table 3). In the working-yard, ground surface cracks occur
mostly at the position around 9.5 m from the tunnel axis, which
coincides with the position of the maximum horizontal displace-
ment (see Table 3).
 J. Liu et al. / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 28 (2012) 287–296 289

Table 1
Soil properties (according to exploration data).

Geotechnical name Height Natural Shear test Compression Modulus of Modulus of

(m) density q coefficient a1 2 compression deformation E0
Directly quick shear test Consolidated quick shear
(g/cm3) (MPa 1) Es1 2 (MPa) (MPa)
test
Cohesive Internal Cohesive Internal
strength c friction strength c friction
(kPa) angle u (°) (kPa) angle u (°)
Layer of artificial filled soil 2.11 2.01 24.30 13.20 18.90 21.60 0.40 4.18 6.0
Layer of alluvial-diluvialsoil 7.2 2.00 28.5 14.4 26.10 20.3 0.36 5.04 7.5
Clasolite-completely 1.59 2.00 25.2 13.2 42.0 25.6 0.54 3.57 15.0
weathered zone of rock
Clasolite-strongly 5.13 2.17 80 25 100.0
weathered zone of rock
Clasolite-moderately 3.51 2.46 200 35 4.09  103
weathered zone of rock
Clasolite-silky weathered 12.21 2.58 300 40 13.2  103
zone of rock

Note: 4.09  103 MPa and 13.2  103 MPa are modulus of elasticity.

Fig. 1. Stratigraphic column.

Fig. 2. FD model and skeleton map of excavation. Note: P1 – outline of upper bench excavation; P2 – outline of lower bench excavation; P3 – area of shield driving; P4 –
segment; P5 – influence area due to of pre-grouting with sleeve valve pipes; P6 – influence area of large-pipe-shed.
290 J. Liu et al. / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 28 (2012) 287–296

Table 2
Some key points displacement.

Construction process Construction step Ground surface Buried depth of 1D Buried depth of 2D Buried depth of 3D (Vault)
Shield tunneling The sixth step 1.45 1.68 2.83 4.57
The tenth step 2.55 2.95 5.11 8.76
The fourteenth step 3.35 3.81 6.14 9.79
The eighteenth step 3.81 4.28 6.51 10.09
The twenty-fifth step 4.13 4.57 6.70 10.24
Expanding excavation The sixth step 4.67 5.17 7.52 11.06
The twentieth step 5.24 5.83 8.71 13.32
The twenty-eighth step 7.29 8.16 12.30 18.38
The thirty-sixth step 8.14 9.07 13.41 19.74
The forty-sixth step 9.04 9.99 14.37 20.75
The fiftieth step 9.17 10.11 14.47 20.84
Proportion Expanding excavation 54.96% 54.83% 53.41% 50.86%

Fig. 5. Stratum settlement at different buried depths (expanding excavation). Note:

Buried depth of 2D, 3D mean that the stratum at a distance of two or three times of
shield tunnel’s diameter to ground surface.
Fig. 3. Ground surface settlement happened in different construction process.

Fig. 6. Three-dimensional subsidence surface.

Fig. 4. Stratum settlement at different buried depths (shield driving).
4.4. Analysis of ground movement happened in different geological
conditions
Considering the complexity of formation condition in different
places of China, we choose three different formation conditions to
simulate. This section focuses on ground settlement property due
to construction of a metro station occurred in different geological
conditions. As in chapter 4.1, key points are chosen to analyse the
effect of formation condition on ground movement, see Table 4. It
is clear that the influence of expanding excavation construction
on ground movement increases gradually as condition of surround-
ing rock becomes deteriorated. For instance, from IV class sur-
rounding rock to VI class surrounding rock, ground settlement
caused by expanding construction accounts for 60%, 70%, and 75%
of the total settlement. Especially for VI class surrounding rock, hor-
izontal displacement, caused by expanding excavation, accounts for
more than 80% of the total displacement. Therefore, it is essential to
 J. Liu et al. / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 28 (2012) 287–296 291

Table 3
Sphere of influence due to construction.

Position Construction Ground Buried Buried

stage surface depth depth
(m) 2D (m) 3D (m)
Position of the Shield tunneling ±10 ±7 ±5
maximum & Expanding
horizontal excavation
displacement occurs
Influence range of Shield tunneling ±20 ±10 ±7
horizontal heave of
stratum
Expanding ±25 ±15 ±10
excavation
Influence range of Shield tunneling ±12 ±10 ±7
cross-sectional
ground subsidence
Expanding ±18 ±12 ±9
excavation

Fig. 9. Horizontal displacement of stratum (buried depth 3D).

Fig. 7. Horizontal displacement of stratum (ground surface).

Fig. 10. Horizontal displacement of stratum of different buried depth (expanding
excavation).

5. Parameter sensitivity analyses of ground movement under

existence of building

As indicated before, length to diameter ratio (L/D) and depth to

Fig. 8. Horizontal displacement of stratum (buried depth 2D).
diameter ratio (H/D) are the two important factors which have a
close relationship with ground movement. In this section parame-
ter sensitivity analysis of these two factors is analysed in detail
and relevant conclusions are obtained. The so-called ‘‘parameter
sensitivity’’ that is, when one parameter is fixed, the research objec-
tive will change with variation of other parameters. Some research-
ers have carried out similar research on this aspect. Neaupanea and
Adhikarib (2005) used diameter to depth ratio (D/Z) to predict the
horizontal ground movement. Zhang et al., (2006) adopted R (radius
of tunnel), H (buried depth) and u (soil friction angle) to research
the relationship between surface settlement and these three fac-
tors. Liao et al. (2006) obtained the relationship between H (the
depth of underground tunnel), L (the horizontal distance between
the tunnel and the building) and settlement of the upper building.

adopt some pre-reinforcement measures before expanding excava- 5.1. Effect of building location on the ground movement
tion when formation condition is worse than IV class. Besides, mon-
itoring measurement is an effective way to assure construction In order to better understand the effect of the horizontal dis-
safety. placement L on the ground movement, here we chose the lengths
292 J. Liu et al. / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 28 (2012) 287–296

Table 4
Some key points’ displacements of different surrounding rock classification.

Surrounding rock classification Construction process Settlement (mm) Horizontal displacement (mm)
Ground surface Buried depth of 1D Buried depth of 2D Stretching Compression
IV-grade After shield driving 2.0 3.0 3.37 1.0 2.0
After expanding excavation (mm) 5.0 7.5 8.29 1.5 4.9
Proportion (expanding excavation) 60% 60% 59% 32% 59%
V-grade After shield driving 3.0 4.0 4.9 1.0 2.3
After expanding excavation (mm) 10.0 12.0 14.9 5.0 15.19
Proportion (expanding excavation) 70% 67% 67% 80% 85%
VI-grade After shield driving 5.0 7.5 10.2 7.0 3.9
After expanding excavation (mm) 20.0 30.0 41.7 40.0 90.0
Proportion (expanding excavation) 75% 75% 76% 83% 96%

of (L) 5 m (L/D: 0.78), 15 (L/D: 2.34), 25 m (L/D: 3.90) and 35 m (L/

D: 5.47) to analyse, and H (H/D 1.56) is 10 m. Construction pro-
cesses are shield tunneling and expanding excavation. In order to
clarify changes in surface settlement of the building and the top
of tunnel, we chose two monitor points A and B to analyse (see
Fig. 11).
Fig. 12 represents the settlement curve of point A which hap-
pens during the process of shield tunneling. When the ratio (L/D)
is less than 2, the horizontal distance L between tunnel and build-
ing exerts a greater effect upon the surface subsidence (above the
tunnel); when L/D exceed 3.1, the shape of curve tends to be
smooth, which indicates that the ratio of L/D (when L/D > 3.1) only
has a slight effect upon ground settlement. For the process of
expanding construction, within range of 2.8, L/D has a bigger effect
on surface subsidence; when the ratio is more than 3.9, ground
movement is little affected by it (L/D).
Based on the settlement curve of point B (see Fig. 13), in the
course of shield tunneling, the smaller the ratio of L/D, the steeper
the curve, and the greater influence of the ratio on the settlement Fig. 12. Settlement curve of point A (H/D is constant).
of building. While the ratio exceeds 2.3, the shape of the curve be-
comes gentler, namely, the ratio has a slight effect on the subsi-
dence of building. When the ratio overtakes 4.1, subsidence of
point B is less than 1.5 mm; it means that the rate of L/D only
has a tiny effect on the building settlement. As for expanding con-
struction, when the ratio is less than 3.4, it will exert a strong influ-
ence on the building subsidence. When the ratio is more than 3.4,
the settlement curve tends to be smooth. While the L/D is above

Fig. 13. Settlement curve of point B (H/D is constant).

4.4, the settlement of point B is no more than 2.0 mm; it means

that building settlement is insignificantly affected by the ratio.

5.2. Impact of tunnel’s depth on ground movement

Improvement of knowledge about influence of a tunnel depth

on surface subsidence is also particularly important. In this section,
we chose the depths of (H) 5 m (H/D: 0.78), 15 m (H/D: 2.34), 25 m
Fig. 11. Schematic diagram of the relative position of building and tunnel. (H/D: 3.9) and 35 m (H/D: 5.47) to analyse, and L is 10 m (L/D:
 J. Liu et al. / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 28 (2012) 287–296 293

Table 5
Parameters table ground movement under building.

Variable Monitoring Construction Ratio Larger Smaller Slight

parameter point stage
L/D A Shield 0–1.4
driving
1.4–2.2
>2.2
Expanding 0–2
excavation
2–2.8
>2.8
B Shield 0–1.6
driving
1.6–2.9
>2.9
Expanding 0–2.4
excavation
2.4–3.1
Fig. 14. Settlement curve of point A (L/D is constant). >3.1
H/D A Shield 0–2.2
driving
2.2–2.8
>2.8
Expanding 0–2.6
excavation
2.6–3.1
>3.1
B Shield 0–1.5
driving
1.5–2.4
>2.4
Expanding 0–2
excavation
2–2.8
>2.8

5.3. Analysis table of parameter sensitivity

In order to reflect intuitively the relationship between H/D, L/D

Fig. 15. Settlement curve of point B (L/D is constant).
1.56). Similar to the previous situation, construction processes are
also shield tunneling and expanding construction.
According to settlement curve of point A (see Fig. 14), during
shield tunneling, the shallower the depth of the tunnel, the steeper
the curve becomes. While H/D exceeds 3.1, the curve becomes
smooth, which indicates that the ratio of H/D (H/D > 3.1) only has
a little effect on ground movement. When the ratio of H/D is above
3.9, the subsidence of point A is less than 2.0 mm; it means that
surface settlement is seldom affected by the buried depth of tun-
nel. For the expanding construction, within the scope of 3.7, the
rate will affect greatly on the surface subsidence of the tunnel’s up-
ward side; when the ratio is more than 3.7, the form of subsidence
curve turns to be gentle, which means that ground movement
above the tunnel is lightly affected by it (H/D). When the H/D is
more than 4.4 (less than 5.47), the subsidence of point A is stable
at the 7.8 mm; therefore, when the H/D exceeds 4.4, the ratio has
scarcely impact on surface subsidence.
Fig. 15 shows the settlement curve of point B which occurs
within the process of shield driving. It is quite interesting to note
that subsidence of point B is greatly affected by the tunnel’s depth
within the range of 2.2. When the ratio exceeds 3.4, the form of
curve becomes gradual. It means that influence of ratio H/D on
the settlement of point B also decreases gradually. During the pro-
cess of expanding construction, when the H/D is less than 2.8, it
will affect point B’s subsidence greatly. While the ratio is more
than 3.9, the settlement curve tends to be gentle, and ground sur-
face settlement near the building is hardly affected by it (H/D).
and the safety of the tunnel and building, research results are sum-
marized in Table 5. Comparing with the table, we can predict and
judge intuitively the safety case of building and tunnel due to
shield tunneling and expanding construction, and adopt relevant
reinforcement measures before construction. This conclusion has
been used successfully in Dongshankou metro station, which will
be analysed in detail in Section 6.
6. Comparison of numerical simulation and in situ monitoring
data
6.1. Layout of measuring points
The station is located in the intersection between Shuqian Road
and Zhongshan Road, while the platform tunnel is under the build-
ings of Shuqian Road. Measuring points are difficult to fix as the de-
sign drawing because of heavy traffic flow. Therefore, we make some
adjustments when arranging the monitoring points, see Fig. 16.
6.2. Monitoring Results
According to exploration data, the distance between the plat-
form tunnel of the left line and the surface is 18.80–19.85 m (H/
D 2.9–3.1). The building is on the top of station. Comparing with
Table 5, it is within the range of a relatively large influence region.
Therefore, it needs to take some pre-reinforced measures before
construction. When constructing, before expanding excavation, a
construction shaft is utilized to fix large pipe shed along longitudi-
nal direction of tunnel within a certain range of the tunnel’s vault
294 J. Liu et al. / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 28 (2012) 287–296

(during the range of 120°); and two rows of horizontal sleeve valve
pipes are set up within range of the tunnel’s vault (during the
range of 120°), with the purpose of grouting to the rock of tunnel’s
vault. Specific process is presented in Fig. 17. The whole aim is to
ensure the stability of host rock during the construction process.
Now the platform of left line has been completed and it does not
have any problems during the construction process; in addition,
the building deformation is also under control. This could indicate
that the pre-reinforcement measures have played a good role (Liu
et al., 2010).
The monitoring data is shown in Table 6. In order to verify the
accuracy of numerical simulation, we chose section I (horizontal)
and section II (longitudinal) to analyse, see Fig. 16. Section I is near
to the boundary of the metro station and the running tunnel, and
section II is close to the central line of the metro station. Compar-
ison of numerical simulation and monitoring data are presented in
Figs. 18–20, which provide a verification of the predictions ob-
tained from the finite difference analysis.

6.3. Interpretation of result Fig. 17. Specific construction process.

Based on the obtained results of measurements, the maximum
settlement of taken points is 14.06 mm and the minimum surface
settlement is 8.3 mm, which are among the permissible range of
+10–30 mm, see Table 6. It means that these pre-reinforcements
have played a good control effect on ground settlement. In addition,
monitoring values dovetail nicely with the result of simulation, see
Figs. 18–20; however, the calculated amount of settlement from
FLAC3D is a little smaller than the results of local surveys. The reason
is that the effect of underground water is not considered when per-
forming calculation, and the soil parameters are deemed to be un-
changed at grade. Meanwhile, there are some uncertainties of
solum condition and underground water state during the construc-
tion process. In transverse section, both monitoring data and simu-
lation value are in accordance with the law of settlement trough (Liu
et al., 2008), and their values are not completely symmetrical along
the axis, see Fig. 19. In the longitudinal section, ground settlement of
monitoring points decreases gradually with vertical distance, see
Fig. 20. This is largely due to consolidation settlement of stratum
(Lin et al., 2011; Zangerl et al., 2008a,b).
Tunnel-soil-building interaction is a complicated process, one as-
pect may affect another during construction process (Cheng et al.,
2007; Burd et al., 2000; Keshuan and Lieyun, 2008). On the one hand
the existence of building will affect adjacent ground movement, and
on the other hand movement of stratum and ground surface will also
exert some influence on building deformation, leading to stress
redistribution of building interior load. The displacement of four
building monitoring points J4, J5, J12 and J15 are larger than adjacent
surface monitoring points. For example, the displacement of moni-
toring point J12 is 14.6 mm (12.9 mm), while the displacement of
monitoring point D9 is 12.8 mm (11.1 mm), see Figs. 18 and
19(the value which is presented in parenthesis is simulation value).
It means that existence of the building really has an effect on the sur-
face settlement. In addition, differential settlement of building really
occurs during construction process, see Fig. 18. For instance, dis-
placements of four building monitoring points J4, J5, J12 and J15 (lo-
cated at the four corners of the building) are 10.3 mm (9.0 mm),
11.46 mm (10.0 mm), 14.6 mm (12.9 mm), and 12.21 (9.7) mm,
respectively. The maximum differential settlement of the length
direction and the width direction are d1 = 4.3 mm (3.9 mm),
d2 = 2.39 mm (3.2 mm). According to the Code for Building Ground
Sill and Foundation Design (GB50007 – 2002), the allowable differ-
ential settlement of frame structure are shown in Table 7.
As this building has been built for many years and the soil is al-
ready compressed to a certain extent, it is considered as medium

Fig. 16. Layout of ground monitoring points. Note: YDK14 (km) + 869.602 (m); ZDK14 (km) + 960.702 (m).
 J. Liu et al. / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 28 (2012) 287–296 295

Table 6
Monitoring Report of ground settlement (Donshankou station).

Instrument DSZ2 + FS1 Monitoring 2009.3.1

Number Date
Number of Settlement Accumulated Settlement Warning Controlling
monitoring of this settlement rate value value
points time (mm) (mm) (mm/d) (mm) (mm)
D8 0.3 11.3 0.15 24 30
D9 0.2 12.8 0.1 24 30
D10 0.4 11.2 0.2 24 30
D11 0.6 10.1 0.3 24 30
D12 0.4 10.3 0.2 24 30
D13 0.8 10.9 0.4 24 30
D14 0.7 10.2 0.35 24 30
D15 0.4 9.5 0.2 24 30
D16 0.3 9.1 0.15 24 30
D17 0.2 8.6 0.1 24 30
D18 0.3 8.3 0.15 24 30
J4 0.3 10.3 0.15 24 30 Fig. 20. Monitoring points settlement of section II (longitudinal). Note: Monitoring
J5 0.2 11.46 0.1 24 30 points presented in Fig. 19 are DJ15, D8, D9, DJ12 and D10. Monitoring points
J12 0.22 14.6 0.11 24 30 presented in Fig. 20 are D10, DJ12, J11, B4, DB4 and DJ4. These points are distributed
J15 0.18 12.21 0.09 24 30 around section I and section II.

Note: Settlement ‘‘ + ’’ means rise, ‘‘ ’’ means decline, D represents monitoring

points of ground settlement, J represents monitoring points of building Warning
value is 80% of control value (30 mm).
Table 7
Allowable differential settlement of frame structure.

Soil type Medium and low High compressive

compressive soils soils
Allowable differential 0.002L 0.003L
settlement

Note: L is the distance between two pile foundation.

in length; d1 = 4.3 mm (3.9 mm) < 80 mm; and the allowable differ-
ential settlement of the building is [0.002  14,000 mm] = [28 mm]
in width; d2 = 2.39 mm (3.2 mm) < 28 mm. This means that ad-
vanced large pipe shed and sleeve-valve-pipe grouting have played
a good role in controlling differential settlement of building. Mean-
while, the monitoring values and numerical results dovetail nicely.

7. Conclusions

Fig. 18. Settlement of monitoring points (monitoring data and simulation value).
In this article, at first we analyse the ground movement prop-
erty caused by shield tunneling and expanding excavation. Consid-
ering the different formation condition of China, we chose three
different formation conditions to analyse; and then we conducted
some research on parameter sensitivity analysis about L/D and H/D
under existence of building. Finally, accuracy of numerical simula-
tion is verified by comparing with in situ monitoring data. The re-
sults of the present study are summarized below:

– For the two factors of shield driving and expanding excavation,

Fig. 19. Monitoring points settlement of section I (transverse).
and low compressive soils. Therefore, the allowable differential set-
tlement of adjacent piles is 0.002L. For this building, its length and
width are 40 m and 14 m, respectively. Hence, the allowable differ-
ential settlement of the building is [0.002  40,000 mm] = [80 mm]
expanding excavation is the principal factor which influences
ground movement. This influence is particularly obvious when
the stability of surrounding rock becomes deteriorated. E.g.,
for different formation condition, ground settlement caused
by expanding construction account for 60% (IV-grade), 70% (V-
grade) and 75% (VI-grade) of the total settlement, see Table 4.
– Research indicates that building deformation and cracks are
mainly caused by uneven settlement, stretch and squeeze of
stratum. Therefore, monitoring measurement is extremely
important, especially for these positions where the maximum
displacement happened, see Table 3.
– By comparing with Table 5, it is easy for us to predict and judge
the safety of a tunnel and any adjacent building before con-
struction, which is particularly important in urban area. Further,
this study can help us to determine whether it is essential to
296 J. Liu et al. / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 28 (2012) 287–296
take some relevant pre-reinforcement measures to ensure con-
struction safety. At present, we have successfully applied this
conclusion to Dongshankou metro station.
– Analysis is performed on the basis of both in situ data and
numerical simulation, which can assist us to verify the accuracy
of numerical data and to understand the influence of construc-
tion on ground movement.
The use of shield tunneling and expanding excavation for metro
station construction is a new construction method in China. Be-
sides, Dongshankou station is the first station which adopts this
method to construct a metro station. There are not too many expe-
riences which can be used for reference; therefore, we hope we can
supply some useful information to the following projects.
References
Burd, H.J., Houlsby, G.T., Augarde, C.E., Liu, G., 2000. Modelling tunnelling-induced
settlement of masonry buildings. Geotechnical Engineering 143 (1), 17–29.
Cheng, C.Y., Dasari, G.R., Chow, Y.K., 2007. Finite element analysis of tunnel -soil-
pile interaction using displacement controlled model. Tunnelling and
Underground Space Technology 22 (4), 450–466.
Hiroshi, N., 2007. Construction of enlarging road shield tunnel for the non-open-cut
method. In: The Fourth China–Japan Exchange of Shield Driving Tunnel
Technique, China, pp. 265–273.
Hiroshi, N., Takuya, M., Akio, M., 2006. Space Enlargement Methods of Shield
Tunnels for Constructing Branch Connections-Examples of the Open Cut
Method and the Non-Open Cut Method. Technical Research Report of Hazama
Corporation (CD-ROM), vol. 38.
Keshuan, M., Lieyun, D., 2008. Finite element analysis of tunnel-soil-building
interaction using displacement controlled model. In: 7th WSEAS Int. Conf. on
Applied Computer & Applied Computational Science (ACACOS’08), Hangzhou,
China, pp. 306–311.
Kunihiko, T., Kenichi, Y., 2006. The state of affairs of large diameter shield tunnel
method for subway and the recent trend of shield technology in Japan. In:
International Symposium on Underground Excavation and Tunnelling, Bangkok,
Thailand, pp. 57–66.
Li, W., 2007. Study on Design and Constructions Schemes for Metro Station Based on
NATM by Using Sh1e1d Tunnel. Dissertation for Master’s Degree, Southwest
Jiaotong University (in Chinese).
Liao, H.J., Qing, W.C., Zhang, Z.G., Mochizuki, A., 2006. Research on the effect of
underground tunnelling on the settlement of the building and the ground
surfaces. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 21 (3–4), 290.
Lin, C.G., Zhang, Z.M., W, S.M., 2011. Case study of long-term ground settlements
induced by slurry shield tunnelling. Advanced Materials Research 243–249,
3078–3081.
Liu, J.F., 2010. Research on the Ground Movement Law Due to Metro Station Driven
with Enlarging Shield Tunnels [D]. Dissertation for Master’s Degree, Southwest
Jiaotong University (in Chinese).
Liu, H.Y., Small, J.C., Carter, J.P., 2008. Full 3D modeling for effects of tunnelling on
existing support systems in the Sydney region. Tunnelling and Underground
Space Technology 23 (4), 399–420.
Liu, J.F., Qi, T.Y., Kuang, W.T., 2010. Analysis on ground settlement caused by
enlarging shield tunnelling. Railway Standard Design 4, 80–82 (in Chinese).
Lu, M.L., 2007. Study on Schemes and Risk Analysis of the Expanded Metro Station
under Shield Running Tunnel. Dissertation for Doctor’s Degree, Beijing Jiaotong
University (in Chinese).
Nakamura, H., Kubota, T., Furukawa, M., Nakao, T., 2003. Unified construction of
running track tunnel and crossover tunnel for subway by rectangular shape
double track cross-section shield machine. Tunnelling and Underground Space
Technology 18 (2–3), 253–262.
Neaupanea, K.M., Adhikarib, N.R., 2005. Prediction of tunnelling-induced ground
movement with the multi-layer perceptron. Tunnelling and Underground Space
Technology 21 (2), 151–159.
Shirai, S., Kano, M., Watabe, S., Hujiya, T., Ito, Y., Nakamura, M., Akiyama, H.,
Yamamoto, Y., 2005. Construction of non-open-cut large underground space by
the large-diameter curved pipe roof. Construction Machinery and Equipment
489 (41), 40–43.
The National Standards Compilation Group of People’s Republic of China. Technical
Code for Building Ground Sill and Foundation Design (GB5007-2002).
Zangerl, C., Eberhardt, E., Evans, K., Loew, S., 2008a. Consolidation settlements above
deep tunnels in fractured crystalline rock: Part 2 – Numerical analysis of the
Gotthard highway tunnel case study. International Journal of Rock Mechanics
and Mining Sciences 45, 1211–1225.
Zangerl, C., Evans, K., Eberhardt, E., Loew, S., 2008b. Consolidation settlements
above deep tunnels in fractured crystalline rock: Part 1 – Investigations above
the Gotthard highway tunnel. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and
Mining Sciences 45, 1195–1210.
Zhang, Y.T., Tao, L.J., Bian, J., Guo, J., 2006. Numerical modeling of shield tunnelling
based on the stress release ratio method. In: The 10th IAEG International
Congress, Nottingham, United Kingdom.