A comparison of current analytical methods for predicting soil-structure interaction due to tunnelling

Giorgia Giardina, Matthew J. DeJong, Benjamin Chalmers, Bryan Ormond, Robert J. Mair

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Current procedures for the assessment of buildings response to tunnelling take into account the effect of soil-structure interaction through the definition of the building stiffness relative to the soil stiffness. Limitations of these procedures are uncertainties in the evaluation of structural parameters and inconsistent results between different methods. In this paper, three existing formulations of the Relative Stiffness Method (RSM) have been critically evaluated by analysing the governing factors in the building stiffness calculation and their effect on the structural damage assessment. The results of a sensitivity study on building height, eccentricity, opening ratio, tunnel depth, soil and masonry stiffness, and trough width parameter quantified the effect of these factors on the considered RSMs. The application of different RSMs to a real masonry building adjacent to the Jubilee Line tunnel excavation underlined the significant effect of window openings, façade stiffness and neutral axis position on the building stiffness calculation and deformation prediction. These results highlight the need for a consistent and robust damage assessment procedure.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)319-335
Number of pages17
JournalTunnelling and Underground Space Technology
Volume79
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2018
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Building damage
  • Building stiffness
  • Masonry structures
  • Relative stiffness
  • Soil settlements
  • Soil-structure interaction

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'A comparison of current analytical methods for predicting soil-structure interaction due to tunnelling'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this