Abstract: An increasing number of engineering accidents have shown that the failure of a tunnel can propagate to a neighbouring tunnel. However, due to the complex interaction between the failed tunnel structure and the soil medium, the mechanism by which the failure is propagated between two closely spaced tunnels remains unclear. In this study, the coupled Eulerian-Lagrangian (CEL) modelling technique was adopted to investigate the influence of a failed tunnel (FT) on an adjacent tunnel, which was termed an “influenced tunnel” (IT). The safety of the IT was analysed in detail under different circumstances, such as different failure positions of the FT, different failure degrees of the FT, and different spatial relationships between the two tunnels. The simulation results indicated that the most adverse case may occur when the two tunnels are arranged as offsets and the IT is the upper tunnel. Under this circumstance, significant shear deformation may occur in IT because IT is located at the shear band of the FT.

近距离双线盾构隧道连锁破坏机理数值研究

[1]Arrazola PJ, Özel T, 2010. Investigations on the effects of friction modeling in finite element simulation of machining. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences, 52(1):31-42.

[2]Atkinson JH, Potts DM, 1977. Stability of a shallow circular tunnel in cohesionless soil. Géotechnique, 27(2):203-215.

[3]Bi XL, Liu X, Wang XZ, et al., 2014. Experimental investigation on the ultimate bearing capacity of continuous-jointed segmental tunnel linings. China Civil Engineering Journal, 47(10):117-127 (in Chinese).

[4]Chambon P, Corté JF, 1994. Shallow tunnels in cohesionless soil: stability of tunnel face. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 120(7):1148-1165.

[5]Cui T, 2017. Study on the Mechanism and Prevention of Progressive Failure of Shield Tunnel Induced by Local Failure. PhD Thesis, Tianjin University, Tianjin, China (in Chinese).

[6]Dai XR, Wang JH, Fan YF, 2018. Issues of numerical simulation of the spudcan penetration based on CEL method. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 39(6):2278-2286 (in Chinese).

[7]Department of Emergency Management of Guangdong Province, 2019. Investigation Report on the Collapse of Metro Line 2 in Foshan, Guangdong Province (in Chinese). http://yjgl.gd.gov.cn/gk/zdlyxxgk/sgdcbg/content/post_2511537.html

[8]Fang JH, Zhang ZH, Zhang JY, 2009. Application of artificial freezing to recovering a collapsed tunnel in Shanghai Metro No. 4 Line. China Civil Engineering Journal, 42(8):124-128 (in Chinese).

[9]Geng P, Tang R, Chen PL, et al., 2020. Research of mechanical model of shield tunnel’s segment joint under the shearing effect. Engineering Mechanics, 37(3):157-166 (in Chinese).

[10]He J, Ma JS, Wu DL, et al., 2019. Applications of CEL algorithmin soil large deformation simulation. Computer Simulation, 36(1):291-294 (in Chinese).

[11]Herle I, Gudehus G, 1999. Determination of parameters of a hypoplastic constitutive model from properties of grain assemblies. Mechanics of Cohesive-Frictional Materials, 4(5):461-486.

[12]HSE (Health and Safety Executive), 1996. Safety of New Austrian Tunneling Method (NATM) Tunnels. HSE, London, UK.

[13]Huang ZK, Pitilakis K, Tsinidis G, et al., 2020. Seismic vulnerability of circular tunnels in soft soil deposits: the case of Shanghai metropolitan system. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 98:103341.

[14]Huang ZK, Pitilakis K, Argyroudis S, et al., 2021. Selection of optimal intensity measures for fragility assessment of circular tunnels in soft soil deposits. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 145:106724.

[15]Huo ZL, Yan Y, Li J, et al., 2016. Study of pipeline penetration in clay based on CEL. China Offshore Platform, 31(4):87-92.

[16]Jin YF, Yin ZY, Wu ZX, et al., 2018a. Identifying parameters of easily crushable sand and application to offshore pile driving. Ocean Engineering, 154:416-429.

[17]Jin YF, Yin ZY, Wu ZX, et al., 2018b. Numerical modeling of pile penetration in silica sands considering the effect of grain breakage. Finite Elements in Analysis and Design, 144:15-29.

[18]Jin YF, Zhu BQ, Yin ZY, et al., 2019. Three-dimensional numerical analysis of the interaction of two crossing tunnels in soft clay. Underground Space, 4(4):310-327.

[19]Jin Z, Yin ZY, Kotronis P, et al., 2019. Advanced numerical modelling of caisson foundations in sand to investigate the failure envelope in the H-M-V space. Ocean Engineering, 190:106394.

[20]Li XJ, Yan ZG, Wang Z, et al., 2015. Experimental and analytical study on longitudinal joint opening of concrete segmental lining. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 46:52-63.

[21]Liu X, Huang XD, 2015. Experimental study of collapse capacity of straight joint segmental tunnel lining structure. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 34(S2):3703-3714 (in Chinese).

[22]Liu X, Zhang CG, Zhang C, 2016. Investigation on the ultimate bearing capacity of longitudinal joints in segmental tunnel lining. China Civil Engineering Journal, 49(10):110-122 (in Chinese).

[23]Lu M, Qin H, Zhu ZX, 2007. Introduction of shield running tunnel emergency repair of Shanghai rail rapid transit Line 9. China Building Waterproofing, (1):27-30 (in Chinese).

[24]Ng CWW, Sun HS, Lei GH, et al., 2015. Ability of three different soil constitutive models to predict a tunnel’s response to basement excavation. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 52(11):1685-1698.

[25]Niemunis A, Herle I, 1997. Hypoplastic model for cohesionless soils with elastic strain range. Mechanics of Cohesive-Frictional Materials, 2(4):279-299.

[26]Qi L, Liu ZW, Xu H, et al., 2018. Comparative analysis of SPH and CEL methods used in submarine landslides. Journal of Natural Disasters, 27(6):180-185 (in Chinese).

[27]Qiu G, Grabe J, 2012. Numerical investigation of bearing capacity due to spudcan penetration in sand overlying clay. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 49(12):1393-1407.

[28]Qiu G, Henke S, Grabe J, 2011. Application of a coupled Eulerian–Lagrangian approach on geomechanical problems involving large deformations. Computers and Geotechnics, 38(1):30-39.

[29]Seidenfuß T, 2006. Collapses in Tunneling. MS Thesis, Stuttgart University of Applied Sciences, Stuttgart, Germany (in German).

[30]Wu ZX, Jin YF, Ji H, et al., 2017. Numerical simulation analysis of flat bottom pile drived into foundation of easily crushable sand. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 38(S2):330-336 (in Chinese).

[31]Yamamoto K, Lyamin AV, Wilson DW, et al., 2011. Stability of a single tunnel in cohesive–frictional soil subjected to surcharge loading. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 48(12):1841-1854.

[32]Yang L, 2011. The repair construction technology for a tunnel accident in a city. Proceedings of the 5th China’s International Symposium on Tunneling, p.57-61 (in Chinese).

[33]Yin ZY, Jin Z, Kotronis P, et al., 2018. Novel SPH SIMSAND-based approach for modeling of granular collapse. International Journal of Geomechanics, 18(11):04018156.

[34]Yin ZY, Wang P, Zhang FS, 2020. Effect of particle shape on the progressive failure of shield tunnel face in granular soils by coupled FDM-DEM method. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 100:103394.

[35]Zeng DY, He C, 2004. Numerical simulation of segment joint bending stiffness of metro shield tunnel. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 39(6):744-748 (in Chinese).

[36]Zhang L, Su R, He C, et al., 2020. Full-scale experimental study on bending performance of segmental joints of large cross-section shield tunnel under pure compressive bending condition. Tunnel Construction, 40(7):997-1003 (in Chinese).

[37]Zhang TQ, 2016. Investigation on the Induced Surface Settlements, Tunnel Interaction Mechanisms and Control Countermeasures During the Construction of Two Parallel Shield Tunnels. PhD Thesis, Tianjin University, Tianjin, China (in Chinese).

[38]Zheng G, Sun JB, Zhang TQ, et al., 2018. Eulerian finite element model for stability analysis of circular tunnels in undrained clay. Engineering Failure Analysis, 91:216-224.

[39]Zheng G, Sun JB, Zhang TQ, et al., 2020. Mechanism and countermeasures of domino-like failure in underground pre-fabricated structures. Engineering Failure Analysis, 115(2):104603.