Abstract: Sandy cobble soil exhibits pronounced heterogeneity. The assessment of the uncertainty surrounding its properties is crucial for the analysis of settlement characteristics resulting from volume loss during shield tunnelling. In this study, a series of probabilistic analyses of surface and subsurface settlements was conducted considering the spatial variability of the friction angle and reference stiffness modulus, under different volumetric block proportions (P_v) and tunnel volume loss rates (η_t). The non-intrusive random finite difference method was used to investigate the probabilistic characteristics of maximum surface settlement, width of subsurface settlement trough, maximum subsurface settlement, and subsurface soil volume loss rate through Monte Carlo simulations. Additionally, a comparison between stochastic and deterministic analysis results is presented to underscore the significance of probabilistic analysis. Parametric analyses were subsequently conducted to investigate the impacts of the key input parameters in random fields on the settlement characteristics. The results indicate that scenarios with higher P_v or greater η_t result in a higher dispersion of stochastic analysis results. Neglecting the spatial variability of soil properties and relying solely on the mean values of material parameters for deterministic analysis may result in an underestimation of surface and subsurface settlements. From a probabilistic perspective, deterministic analysis alone may prove inadequate in accurately capturing the volumetric deformation mode of the soil above the tunnel crown, potentially affecting the prediction of subsurface settlement.

考虑空间变异性的砂卵石地层盾构隧道沉降特征概率分析

[1]AliA, LyaminAV, HuangJS, et al., 2017. Undrained stability of a single circular tunnel in spatially variable soil subjected to surcharge loading. Computers and Geotechnics, 84:16-27.

[2]CaoSZ, CuiJ, FangY, et al., 2019. Performance of slurry TBM tunnelling in sandy cobble ground—a case study in Lanzhou. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 23(7):3207-3217.

[3]ChenDF, XuDP, RenGF, et al., 2019. Simulation of cross-correlated non-Gaussian random fields for layered rock mass mechanical parameters. Computers and Geotechnics, 112:104-119.

[4]ChengHZ, ChenJ, ChenRP, et al., 2019a. Comparison of modeling soil parameters using random variables and random fields in reliability analysis of tunnel face. International Journal of Geomechanics, 19(1):04018184.

[5]ChengHZ, ChenJ, LiJB, 2019b. Probabilistic analysis of ground movements caused by tunneling in a spatially variable soil. International Journal of Geomechanics, 19(12):04019125.

[6]ChengHZ, ChenJ, ChenRP, et al., 2019c. Reliability study on shield tunnel face using a random limit analysis method in multilayered soils. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 84:353-363.

[7]ChengHZ, ChenJ, ChenRP, et al., 2019d. Three-dimensional analysis of tunnel face stability in spatially variable soils. Computers and Geotechnics, 111:76-88.

[8]ChingJ, PhoonKK, 2013. Effect of element sizes in random field finite element simulations of soil shear strength. Computers & Structures, 126:120-134.

[9]DengZP, PanM, NiuJT, et al., 2022. Full probability design of soil slopes considering both stratigraphic uncertainty and spatial variability of soil properties. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, 81(5):195.

[10]DiQG, LiPF, ZhangMJ, et al., 2022. Investigation of progressive settlement of sandy cobble strata for shield tunnels with different burial depths. Engineering Failure Analysis, 141:106708.

[11]HaoXJ, SunZW, ZhaoYX, et al., 2021. Characteristics of ground surface settlement of double-line adjacent metro construction in sandy cobble stratum: a case study of Beijing airport line. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 25(11):4443-4456.

[12]HeC, FengK, FangY, et al., 2012. Surface settlement caused by twin-parallel shield tunnelling in sandy cobble strata. Journal of Zhejiang University-SCIENCE A (Applied Physics & Engineering), 13(11):858-869.

[13]HuangHW, XiaoL, ZhangDM, et al., 2017. Influence of spatial variability of soil Young’s modulus on tunnel convergence in soft soils. Engineering Geology, 228:357-370.

[14]HuangSP, QuekST, PhoonKK, 2001. Convergence study of the truncated Karhunen–Loeve expansion for simulation of stochastic processes. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 52(9):1029-1043.

[15]Itasca Consulting Group, Inc., 2017. FLAC3D6.0 FLAC3DModeling. Itasca Consulting Group, Inc., Minneapolis, USA.

[16]JiangSH, LiDQ, ZhangLM, et al., 2014. Slope reliability analysis considering spatially variable shear strength parameters using a non-intrusive stochastic finite element method. Engineering Geology, 168:120-128.

[17]JiangSH, HuangJS, GriffithsDV, et al., 2022. Advances in reliability and risk analyses of slopes in spatially variable soils: a state-of-the-art review. Computers and Geotechnics, 141:104498.

[18]LiDQ, JiangSH, CaoZJ, et al., 2015. A multiple response-surface method for slope reliability analysis considering spatial variability of soil properties. Engineering Geology, 187:60-72.

[19]LiJB, ChenJ, ChengHZ, et al., 2019. Sensitivity analysis of mechanical parameters to surrounding-soil response induced by shield tunneling considering spatial variability. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 38(8):1667-1676 (in Chinese).

[20]LiTZ, GongWP, TangHM, 2021. Three-dimensional stochastic geological modeling for probabilistic stability analysis of a circular tunnel face. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 118:104190.

[21]LiTZ, PanQJ, ShenZC, et al., 2022. Probabilistic stability analysis of a tunnel face in spatially random Hoek‒Brown rock masses with a multi-tangent method. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering, 55(6):3545-3561.

[22]LiX, GengAP, 2024. Investigation and measurement of old building response to the overlapped shield tunnel of multiple schemes in the sandy cobble stratum. Underground Space, 15:260-274.

[23]LüQ, XiaoZP, ZhengJ, et al., 2018. Probabilistic assessment of tunnel convergence considering spatial variability in rock mass properties using interpolated autocorrelation and response surface method. Geoscience Frontiers, 9(6):1619-1629.

[24]MollonG, DiasD, SoubraAH, 2009a. Probabilistic analysis of circular tunnels in homogeneous soil using response surface methodology. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 135(9):1314-1325.

[25]MollonG, DiasD, SoubraAH, 2009b. Probabilistic analysis and design of circular tunnels against face stability. International Journal of Geomechanics, 9(6):237-249.

[26]MollonG, DiasD, SoubraAH, 2011. Probabilistic analysis of pressurized tunnels against face stability using collocation-based stochastic response surface method. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 137(4):385-397.

[27]MollonG, DiasD, SoubraAH, 2013. Probabilistic analyses of tunneling-induced ground movements. Acta Geotechnica, 8(2):181-199.

[28]PanQJ, DiasD, 2017. Probabilistic evaluation of tunnel face stability in spatially random soils using sparse polynomial chaos expansion with global sensitivity analysis. Acta Geotechnica, 12(6):1415-1429.

[29]PanYT, YaoK, PhoonKK, et al., 2019. Analysis of tunnelling through spatially-variable improved surrounding‍–‍a simplified approach. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 93:103102.

[30]PanditB, Sivakumar BabuGL, 2021. Probabilistic stability assessment of tunnel-support system considering spatial variability in weak rock mass. Computers and Geotechnics, 137:104242.

[31]SchanzT, VermeerPA, BonnierPG, 1999. The hardening soil model: formulation and verification. In: Brinkgreve RBJ (Ed.), Beyond 2000 in Computational Geotechnics. Routledge, London, UK, p.281-296.

[32]VanmarckeEH, 1977. Probabilistic modeling of soil profiles. Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, 103(11):1227-1246.

[33]WangF, DuXL, LiPF, et al., 2023a. A meso-scale numerical modelling method for the stability analysis of tunnels in sandy cobble stratum. Transportation Geotechnics, 38:100921.

[34]WangF, DuXL, LiPF, 2023b. Predictions of ground surface settlement for shield tunnels in sandy cobble stratum based on stochastic medium theory and empirical formulas. Underground Space, 11:189-203.

[35]WangF, DuXL, LiPF, 2024. Prediction of subsurface settlement induced by shield tunnelling in sandy cobble stratum. Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, 16(1):192-212.

[36]WuGQ, ZhaoH, ZhaoMH, et al., 2021. Stochastic analysis of dual tunnels in spatially random soil. Computers and Geotechnics, 129:103861.

[37]WuH, GanXL, LiuNW, et al., 2024. Analysis of tunneling-induced ground movements in spatially variable soil under the influence of existing building. Computers and Geotechnics, 166:106003.

[38]WuYX, BaoH, WangJC, et al., 2021. Probabilistic analysis of tunnel convergence on spatially variable soil: the importance of distribution type of soil properties. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 109:103747.

[39]ZhangHL, LuoF, GengWJ, et al., 2023. An efficient method for reliability analysis of high-speed railway tunnel convergence in spatially variable soil based on a deep convolutional neural network. International Journal of Geomechanics, 23(11):1-15.

[40]ZhangJZ, HuangHW, ZhangDM, et al., 2021. Effect of ground surface surcharge on deformational performance of tunnel in spatially variable soil. Computers and Geotechnics, 136:104229.

[41]ZhangSC, WangYQ, GaoQD, et al., 2024. Probabilistic analysis of ground settlement induced by tunnel excavation in multilayered soil considering spatial variability. Computers and Geotechnics, 165:105951.

[42]ZhangWG, HanL, GuX, et al., 2022. Tunneling and deep excavations in spatially variable soil and rock masses: a short review. Underground Space, 7(3):380-407.

[43]ZhangZX, LiuC, HuangX, et al., 2016. Three-dimensional finite-element analysis on ground responses during twin-tunnel construction using the URUP method. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 58:133-146.