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

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

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)
36 Downloads (Pure)

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
Early online date19 Jun 2018
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Sep 2018

    Fingerprint

Keywords

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

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Building and Construction
  • Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering Geology

Cite this