Similar articles

Abstract: The control criteria for structural deformation and the evaluation of operational safety performance for large-diameter shield tunnel segments are not yet clearly defined. To address this issue, a refined 3D finite element model was established to analyze the transverse deformation response of a large-diameter segmental ring. By analyzing the stress, deformation, and crack distribution of large-diameter segments under overload conditions, the transverse deformation of the segmental ring could be divided into four stages. The main reasons for the decrease in segmental ring stiffness were found to be the extensive development of cracks and the complete formation of four plastic hinges. The deformation control value for the large-diameter shield tunnel segment is chosen as 8‰ of the segment’s outer diameter, representing the transverse deformation during the formation of the first semi-plastic hinge (i.‍e., the first yield point) in the structure. This control value can serve as a reinforcement standard for preventing the failure of large-diameter shield tunnel segments. The flexural bearing capacity characteristic curve of segments was used to evaluate the structural strength of a large-diameter segmental ring. It was discovered that the maximum internal force combination of the segment did not exceed the segment ultimate bearing capacity curve (SUBC). However, the combination of internal force at 9°, 85°, and 161° of the joints, and their symmetrical locations about the 0°‍–‍180°axis exceeded the joint ultimate bearing capacity curve (JUBC). The results indicate that the failure of the large-diameter segment lining was mainly due to insufficient joint strength, leading to an instability failure. The findings from this study can be used to develop more effective maintenance strategies for large-diameter shield tunnel segments to ensure their long-term performance.

大直径盾构隧道管片环力学失效性能研究

[1]ArnauO, MolinsC, 2012. Three dimensional structural response of segmental tunnel linings. Engineering Structures, 44:210-221.

[2]ArnauO, MolinsC, 2015. Theoretical and numerical analysis of the three-dimensional response of segmental tunnel linings subjected to localized loads. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 49:384-399.

[3]BirtelV, MarkP, 2006. Parameterised finite element modelling of RC beam shear failure. Proceedings of the 19th Annual International ABAQUS User’s Conference, p.95-108.

[4]BlomCBM, van der HorstEJ, JovanovicPS, 1999. Three-dimensional structural analyses of the shield-driven “green heart” tunnel of the high-speed line south. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 14(2):217-224.

[5]CavalaroSHP, BlomCBM, WalravenJC, et al., 2011. Structural analysis of contact deficiencies in segmented lining. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 26(6):734-749.

[6]ChangCT, SunCW, DuannSW, et al., 2001. Response of a Taipei rapid transit system (TRTS) tunnel to adjacent excavation. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 16(3):151-158.

[7]ChenJS, MoHH, 2008. Mechanical behavior of segment rebar of shield tunnel in construction stage. Journal of Zhejiang University-SCIENCE A, 9(7):888-899.

[8]ChenJS, MoHH, 2009. Numerical study on crack problems in segments of shield tunnel using finite element method. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 24(1):91-102.

[9]ChenRP, MengFY, LiZC, et al., 2016. Investigation of response of metro tunnels due to adjacent large excavation and protective measures in soft soils. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 58:224-235.

[10]ChenRP, LinXT, WuHN, 2019. An analytical model to predict the limit support pressure on a deep shield tunnel face. Computers and Geotechnics, 115:103174.

[11]ChenRP, ChenS, WuHN, et al., 2020. Investigation on deformation behavior and failure mechanism of a segmental ring in shield tunnels based on elaborate numerical simulation. Engineering Failure Analysis, 117:104960.

[12]Dassault SystèmesD, 2016. Abaqus Analysis User’s Guide. Technical Report Abaqus 6.14 Documentation, Simulia Corp., USA.

[13]DingWQ, YueZQ, ThamLG, et al., 2004. Analysis of shield tunnel. International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 28(1):57-91.

[14]DingWQ, JinYL, ZhaoW, et al., 2014. A computational method for ground penetrating shield tunnel. Proceedings of Geo-Shanghai 2014.

[15]DuXL, JinL, MaGW, 2014. Numerical simulation of dynamic tensile-failure of concrete at meso-scale. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 66:5-17.

[16]FengK, HeC, QiuY, et al., 2018. Full-scale tests on bending behavior of segmental joints for large underwater shield tunnels. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 75:100-116.

[17]GongCJ, DingWQ, 2018. A computational framework to predict the water-leakage pressure of segmental joints in underwater shield tunnels using an advanced finite element method. International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 42(16):1957-1975.

[18]GuoWQ, FengK, ZhouYL, et al., 2023. Full-scale test and numerical modeling on deformation and damage behavior of segmental joints under ultimate compression-bending load. Engineering Structures, 279:115648.

[19]HanL, YeGL, ChenJJ, et al., 2017. Pressures on the lining of a large shield tunnel with a small overburden: a case study. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 64:1-9.

[20]HeC, FengK, 2021. Integrated analysis method for shield tunnel structure with large cross-section. Tunnel Construction, 41(11):1827-1848 (in Chinese).

[21]HuangX, HuangHW, ZhangJ, 2012. Flattening of jointed shield-driven tunnel induced by longitudinal differential settlements. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 31:20-32.

[22]HuangZ, ZhangCL, MaSK, et al., 2021. Study of the mechanical behaviour and damage characteristics of three new types of joints for fabricated rectangular tunnels using a numerical approach. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 118:104184.

[23]JinYL, DingWQ, YanZG, et al., 2017. Experimental investigation of the nonlinear behavior of segmental joints in a water-conveyance tunnel. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 68:153-166.

[24]KoyamaY, NishimuraT, 1998. Design of lining segment of shield tunnel using a beam-spring model. Quarterly Report of RTRI (Railway Technical Research Institute), 39(1):23-27 (in Japanese).

[25]LeeKM, GeXW, 2001. The equivalence of a jointed shield-driven tunnel lining to a continuous ring structure. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 38(3):461-483.

[26]LiP, DuSJ, MaXF, et al., 2014. Centrifuge investigation into the effect of new shield tunnelling on an existing underlying large-diameter tunnel. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 42:59-66.

[27]LiXJ, YanZG, WangZ, et al., 2015. A progressive model to simulate the full mechanical behavior of concrete segmental lining longitudinal joints. Engineering Structures, 93:97-113.

[28]LiZL, SogaK, WrightP, 2016. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of the behaviour of cross passage between cast-iron tunnels. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 53(6):930-945.

[29]LiaoSM, PengFL, ShenSL, 2008. Analysis of shearing effect on tunnel induced by load transfer along longitudinal direction. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 23(4):421-430.

[30]LiuJW, ShiCH, GongCJ, et al., 2022. Investigation of ultimate bearing capacity of shield tunnel based on concrete damage model. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 125:104510.

[31]LiuX, BaiY, YuanY, et al., 2016. Experimental investigation of the ultimate bearing capacity of continuously jointed segmental tunnel linings. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 12(10):1364-1379.

[32]LiuX, DongZB, BaiY, et al., 2017. Investigation of the structural effect induced by stagger joints in segmental tunnel linings: first results from full-scale ring tests. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 66:1-18.

[33]LiuX, JiangZJ, YuanY, et al., 2018a. Experimental investigation of the ultimate bearing capacity of deformed segmental tunnel linings strengthened by epoxy-bonded steel plates. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 14(6):685-700.

[34]LiuX, LiuZ, YeYH, et al., 2018b. Mechanical behavior of quasi-rectangular segmental tunnel linings: further insights from full-scale ring tests. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 79:304-318.

[35]LiuX, ZhangYM, BaoYH, 2020. Full-scale experimental investigation on stagger effect of segmental tunnel linings. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 102:103423.

[36]LuL, LuXL, FanPF, 2011. Full-ring experimental study of the lining structure of Shanghai Changjiang Tunnel. Journal of Civil Engineering and Architecture, 5(8):732-739.

[37]MengFY, ChenRP, LiuSL, et al., 2021. Centrifuge modeling of ground and tunnel responses to nearby excavation in soft clay. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 147(3):04020178.

[38]MengFY, ChenRP, XuY, et al., 2022. Contributions to responses of existing tunnel subjected to nearby excavation: a review. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 119:104195.

[39]MOHURD (Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of the People’s Republic of China), GAQSIQ (General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine of the People’s Republic of China), 2015. Chinese Code for Design of Concrete Structured, GB 50010‒2010, National Standards of the People’s Republic of China(in Chinese).

[40]MoradlooAJ, AdibA, PiroozniaA, 2019. Damage analysis of arch concrete dams subjected to underwater explosion. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 75:709-734.

[41]MurakamiH, KoizumiA, 1978. Study on load bearing capacity and mechanics of shield segment ring. Proceedings of the Japan Society of Civil Engineers, 1978(272):‍103-115 (in Japanese).

[42]NakamuraH, KubotaT, FurukawaM, et al., 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.

[43]QiuY, HuXY, WaltonG, et al., 2021. Full scale tests and a progressive failure model to simulate full mechanical behavior of concrete tunnel segmental lining joints. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 110:103834.

[44]SAMR (State Administration for Market Regulation), SA (Standardization Administration of the People’s Republic of China), 2022. Test Methods of Steel for Reinforcement of Concrete, GB/T 28900‒2022, National Standards of the People’s Republic of China(in Chinese).

[45]ShenSL, YanT, ZhouAN, 2023a. Estimating locations of soil–rock interfaces based on vibration data during shield tunnelling. Automation in Construction, 150:104813.

[46]ShenSL, ZhangN, ZhouAN, 2023b. Investigation of disc cutter wear during shield tunnelling in weathered granite: a case study. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 140:105323.

[47]WangF, ShiJK, HuangHW, et al., 2020. Modified analytical solution of shield tunnel lining considering nonlinear bending stiffness of longitudinal joint. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 106:103625.

[48]WangMN, DongYC, YuL, et al., 2019. Experimental and numerical researches of precast segment under radial dislocation conditions. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 92:103055.

[49]WeiG, FengFF, HuCB, et al., 2023. Mechanical performances of shield tunnel segments under asymmetric unloading induced by pit excavation. Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, 15(6):1547-1564.

[50]WuHN, ShenSL, ChenRP, et al., 2020. Three-dimensional numerical modelling on localised leakage in segmental lining of shield tunnels. Computers and Geotechnics, 122:103549.

[51]WuHN, ChenS, ChenRP, et al., 2022. Deformation behaviors and failure mechanism of segmental RC lining under unloading condition. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 130:104687.

[52]YanQX, XuYJ, ZhangWL, et al., 2018. Numerical analysis of the cracking and failure behaviors of segmental lining structure of an underwater shield tunnel subjected to a derailed high-speed train impact. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 72:41-54.

[53]YanT, ShenSL, ZhouAN, 2023a. GFII: a new index to identify geological features during shield tunnelling. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 142:105440.

[54]YanT, ShenSL, ZhouAN, 2023b. Identification of geological characteristics from construction parameters during shield tunnelling. Acta Geotechnica, 18(1):535-551.

[55]YangF, CaoSR, QinG, 2020. Simplified spring models for concrete segmental lining longitudinal joints with gaskets. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 96:103227.

[56]YuanY, JiangXM, LiuX, 2013. Predictive maintenance of shield tunnels. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 38:69-86.

[57]ZhangDM, ChenS, WangRC, et al., 2021. Behaviour of a large-diameter shield tunnel through multi-layered strata. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 116:104062.

[58]ZhangL, FengK, GouC, et al., 2019a. Failure tests and bearing performance of prototype segmental linings of shield tunnel under high water pressure. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 92:103053.

[59]ZhangL, FengK, LiMR, et al., 2019b. Analytical method regarding compression-bending capacity of segmental joints: theoretical model and verification. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 93:103083.

[60]ZhangL, FengK, XuPK, et al., 2020. Refined three-dimensional numerical model for segmental joint and its application. Structural Concrete, 21(4):1612-1624.

[61]ZhangL, FengK, HeC, et al., 2023. Numerical investigation of the compression–bending stiffness of segmental joints with different types of joint surfaces. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 132:104898.

[62]ZhangN, ShenSL, ZhouAN, 2023. A new index for cutter life evaluation and ensemble model for prediction of cutter wear. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 131:104830.

[63]ZhangWJ, QiJB, ZhangGL, et al., 2022. Full-scale experimental study on failure characteristics of the key segment in shield tunnel with super-large cross-section. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 129:104671.

[64]ZhaoHL, LiuX, BaoYH, et al., 2017. Nonlinear simulation of tunnel linings with a simplified numerical modelling. Structural Engineering and Mechanics, 61(5):593-603.