12

th
ICSGE
10-12 Dec. 2007
Cairo - Egypt


Ain Shams University
Faculty of Engineering
Department of Structural Engineering
Twelfth International Colloquium on Structural and Geotechnical Engineering



INVERSE DESIGN OF NATM TUNNELS BY NEURAL
NETWORKS


F. M. EL-NAHHAS
Professor, Head of Department of Structural Engineering,
Ain Shams University
H. E. A. ALI
Associate Professor, Department of Structural Engineering,
Ain Shams University
S. M. EL-ARABY
Assistant Professor, Department of Structural Engineering,
Ain Shams University
H. E. ABDELBARY
PH.D. Research Student, Department of Structural Engineering,
Ain Shams University

ABSTRACT
Tunnels are often designed using uncertain geotechnical data. Insufficient boreholes,
natural variation, difficulties in extracting undisturbed samples and lack of realistic
testing procedures are common impediments rendering precise prediction of the
associated deformations and lining stresses practically unachievable. Faced with these
uncertainties, geotechnical engineers usually opt to re-appraise the assumed parameters
by inverse analysis using the monitoring measurements. The parameters obtained from
such analyses can then be realistically implemented in subsequent geotechnical
assessments.
In this paper, artificial neural networks (ANNs) are used in an attempt to simulate the
back analysis of the tunnels to obtain realistic parameters that can be used in the finite
element analysis to achieve more accurate design of tunnels. A large database of actual
models for a real case study of Tunnel in Algeria is used to develop and to verify the
ANN model. The designed tunnel deformations determined by utilizing ANNs through
the finite element analyses are compared with the measured deformations. The results
indicated that ANNs are useful technique for inverse design of tunnels.
KEYWORDS
Tunnels, NATM, Neural Networks, Rock Excavation, and Inverse (back) Analysis.
1 INTRODUCTION
In order to improve tunnel ground support behaviour and reduce costs associated with
over-design or rehabilitation due to under-design, there is always a need for better
modelling capability of support and lining behaviour prior to construction. Hence, the
need exists to model the rock mass behaviour well past the yielding point, not just the
typical elastic stress modelling that currently occurs in tunnelling [1].

Incompatibility often prevails between the predicted and the real behaviour of the model
and only during construction, it is possible to re-evaluate the input data and to
continuously refine the numerical model using the field measurements and inverse
analysis techniques. In this study, the inverse analysis conducted by the artificial
intelligence techniques (in particular Artificial Neural Networks, ANN) is investigated.

Over the last few years, the use of Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs) has dramatically
increased in many engineering fields [2], [3]. In particular, ANNs have been applied to
various geotechnical engineering problems, including the design of tunnel and
underground openings [4], and have demonstrated considerable degree of success in that
field.
2 CASE STUDY
The case study involves The Bouira Tunnel, which forms part of the construction lot
Lakhdaria-Liaison RN5 of Autoroute Est-Ouest and is located near the village of
Djebahia in the north of Algeria. It is a twin tube motorway tunnel with three lanes and
walkways on both sides in each tube, as shown in Fig 1. The tubes are running parallel,
with a distance between tunnel axes of 34.5m. Excavation cross section varies between
153 and 156m
2
.

Fig. 1: Cross-Section of the Bouira Tunnel at East Portal

The tunnels are running below a pass located at the end of Oued Djelada bordered by
Djebel Harchaoua (Elevation +770 m) in the southwest and by Djebel Guenadir
(Elevation +720 m) in the Northeast, as shown in Fig 2 [5]. The village of Ain Cheriki
is situated on this pass which shows an elevation of approximately 560m. The majority
of the tunnel alignment runs in a straight line from Northwest to Southeast before
turning to the east at the eastern tunnel portal. Overburden varies between 8 to 68m.
Table (1) shows the chainages of the portals for each tunnel.
Table 1: The Tunnel Portals are Located at the following Chainages:
Tunnel Western
Portal
Chainage (m)
Eastern Portal
Chainage
(m)
Total
Length
(m)
T1 182+985 184+230 1245
T2 183+025 184+208 1183
Cut and cover sections have originally been planned for the western portal for T1
between chainage PK 182+985 to PK 183+040 and for T2 between chainage PK
183+025 to PK 183+075. The rest of the tunnels have been planned to be excavated
using the New Austrian Tunnelling Method (NATM).

Fig. 2: The Geological Map for Bouira Tunnel
2.1 The Tunnel and Geology
The area in which the tunnel alignment is situated forms part of folded mountain chain
(Rifo-Tellin Chain), which extends over the entire length of the Maghreb and is part
of the Alpine chain. In the area of northern Algeria it is named Tell Atlas. According
to Pique [6] the region of interest should be part of the external zones of the Rifo-
Tellian mountain chain. The external zones are further divided into the ultra-Tellian
nappe, the Tellian units sensu strictu and the peni-Tellian and southern units. Due to the
lack of the regional geologic maps, an exact allocation of the region of interest to one of
these geological units is not possible up to now. This area has been exposed to
polyphase, complex tectonic deformation resulting in folding and faulting. Due to the
continuing convergence of Africa and Eurasia the area is at present still submitted to
active compressive faulting [6]. Three lithological formations of Senonian age are
described as follows:
- Foliated marl, strongly fractured and folded, at the base and the middle of the
excavation.
- Compact marl and hard limestone, intercalations of compact marls and of hard
limestone with a thickness of several meters.
- Clay / alterated Marl, light colored, dense marls, very superficially weathered.

The longitudinal geological section, as shown in Fig 3, shows the three lithogies: sound
marl, foliated marl and clay/alterated marl. All three lithological unites may be
considered as a succession of clay and deformed marl of Senonian age.








Fig. 3: The Longitudinal Section of the Tunnel with Geology

2.1 Monitoring
Two types of monitoring sections are considered. Monitoring section type A contains 5
points for convergence measurements and monitoring section B with 5 points for
convergence measurements and multiple rod extensometers. Distance between
monitoring sections type A is generally 100m. Three monitoring sections type B are
considered for each tunnel, Geoconsult 2004 [7]. Fig.4 shows the plan and cross-section
for the monitoring system.



Fig. 4: Schematic showing Instrumentation through Bouira Tunnel

3 FINITE ELEMENT PROCEDURES
The finite elements analysis is becoming a versatile tool in tunnelling analysis and
estimation of ground deformations [8]. The finite element software PLAXIS 8.2 [9] was
used to compute the horizontal and vertical deformations around the tunnel. The tunnel
was simulated assuming plane-strain conditions. Fig. 5 shows the utilized cross-section
configuration and rock stratification used in the FEM analysis and Fig. 6 shows the
simulated FEM model for Bouira Tunnel while Fig. 7 shows the details of the mesh
around the tunnel.

Fig. 5: Utilized Geological Cross-Section used in the FEM Analysis
0 1
2
3
5
6
8
9
10
11
13
14
16 17 18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26 27
29
30
34
35
37
38
40
41
43
44
46
47
49
50
52 53
55
56
59
60 62
64
65
67
68
69
71
72
74
75 77
78
80 81 83
84 86
89
90
92
94
96
97
98
99
102 103 104105106
107 108
109
110 111
113
114
116
117
119 121 123
126
127
130
131
133
134
136
137
139
140 142
143
145
146
148
149
151
152
154
155
157
158
160
161
163
165
166
167
168
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183 184
185
186 187
188
189
190
191
192
194
195
196
197
198
199
200

Fig. 6: Simulated FEM Model for Bouira Tunnel

Fig. 7: Details of the Mesh around the Bouira Tunnel
3.1 Calculation Steps
Table 2 shows calculation phases and the construction stages used in the finite element
simulations. The twin tunnels were explicitly modelled in the finite element simulations
while the study was carried out on tunnel (T1), as the construction of tunnel (T2) was
not started at the time when the field data measurements were recorded.
Table 2: PLAXIS Calculations Phases and the Corresponding Construction Stages
Calculation Phase Construction Stage
0 Initial Condition
1 T1 Heading Excavation
2 T1 Heading Support
3 T1 Bench Excavation
4 T1 Bench Support
3.2 Rock Parameters and Excavation Sequence
The elastic-plastic Mohr Coulomb model was used to characterise the rock constitutive
behaviour in PLAXIS simulation of the tunnel construction. Mohr Coulomb model
involves five input parameters, i.e. E and for soil elasticity; and c for soil plasticity
and as an angel of dilatancy.
A parametric study was carried out as shown in Figures 8 to 19 to obtain the most
influential parameters on the tunnel design. Based on the parametric analysis, Table 3
shows the range of the effective parameters that was used through the analysis to obtain
the horizontal deformations in order to learn the neural network model.

Fig. 8: Effect of the Unloading Ratio for Fig. 9: Effect of the Unloading Ratio for
Heading Excavation on the Vertical and Bench Excavation on the Vertical and
Horizontal Total Deformations Horizontal Total Deformations







Fig. 10: Effect of the Ko of Foliated Marl Fig. 11: Effect of Ko of Marl Shale on
on the Vertical and Horizontal Total the Vertical and Horizontal Total
Deformations Deformations


Fig. 12: Effect of the Ko of Shear Zone Fig. 13: Effect of E of Foliated Marl of
on the Vertical and Horizontal Total on the Vertical and Horizontal Total
Deformations Deformations


Fig. 14: Effect of the E of Marl Shale Fig. 15: Effect of E of Shear Zone
on the Vertical and Horizontal Total on the Vertical and Horizontal Total
Deformations Deformations

Fig. 16: Effect of the C of Foliated Marl Fig. 17: Effect of Phi of Foliated Marl
on the Vertical and Horizontal Total on the Vertical and Horizontal Total
Deformations Deformations



Fig. 18: Effect of the C of Marl Shale Fig. 19: Effect of Phi of Marl Shale
on the Vertical and Horizontal Total on the Vertical and Horizontal Total
Deformations Deformations

Based on the previous parametric study, it was found that the following parameters have
the most influential on the horizontal and vertical deformations of the tunnel; Unloading
Ratio for Heading Excavation, Unloading Ratio for Bench Excavation (The Unloading
Ratio is the ratio between the part of the stresses released due to the excavation and the
remained stresses that will be imposed on the lining), Youngs Modulus E for
Foliated Marl Layer, Youngs Modulus E for Compact Marl Layer, Cohesion C for
Compact Marl Layer and Friction for Compact Marl Layer.
Table 3, based on this parametric study, shows the range of the influential parameters
that was used through the analysis to obtain the horizontal deformations in order to train
the neural network model.



Table 3: Range of the most Influential Parameters
Parameters Range Units
Unloading Ratio for
Heading Excavation
0.2 0.75 -
Unloading Ratio for
Bench Excavation
0.2 0.75 -
Youngs Modulus E for
Foliated Marl Layer
400 900 MPa
Youngs Modulus E for
Marl Shale Layer
100 600 MPa
Cohesion C for Marl
Shale Layer
50 100 kPa
Friction for Marl Shale
Layer
11 - 22 Deg.

The following figures from 20 to 25 showing the obtained deformations corresponding
to the variations of the most influential parameters after the heading excavation (step
no.1)


Fig. 20: Effect of the Unloading Ratio for Fig. 21: Effect of the Unloading Ratio
Heading Excavation on the Vertical and for Bench Excavation on the Vertical
and Horizontal Deformations Horizontal Deformations












Fig. 22 Effect of the E of Foliated Marl Fig. 23 Effect of the E of Marl Shale
on the Vertical and Horizontal on the Vertical and Horizontal
Deformations Deformations


Fig. 24: Effect of the C of Marl Shale Fig. 25: Effect of Phi of Marl Shale
on the Vertical and Horizontal on the Vertical and Horizontal
Deformations Deformations
4 DEVELOPMENT OF NEURAL NETWORK MODEL
The Pioneering work in developing ANN models shows that neural network concepts
can be extended to constitutive relations [10], [11]. A neural network is trained using
the input and output values deduced from the finite element analysis to learn the
material behaviour. If the training data contains enough relevant information, the trained
neural network can generalize material behaviour to new loading cases.
Among various types of neural networks, multi-layer feed-forward network is known to
be most suitable to describe non-linear functions [12], and so far, has been the only type
of neural network used to describe material constitutive behaviour.
The simulation of the neural network model through this work was carried out by
personal computer-based software NeuroSolutions Version 4.3 (2003) developed by
NeuroDimension, Inc [13].

The data used to calibrate and validate the neural network model were obtained from the
parametric study of the most influential parameters affecting on the tunnel design as
well as the corresponding deformations associated with the tunnel excavation. As
explained earlier, the data cover a wide range of variation in soil parameters and
sequence of excavation (unloading ratio). The database comprised a total of 77
individual cases.
4.1 Inputs and Outputs of the ANN-based Model
Ten input parameters were used in the ANNs model, as follows:
- Horizontal and vertical deformations for point no.1 (P1)
- Horizontal and vertical deformations for point no.2 (P2)
- Horizontal and vertical deformations for point no.3 (P3)
- Horizontal and vertical deformations for point no.4 (P4)
- Horizontal and vertical deformations for point no.5 (P5)
While the output layer consists of the following:
- Unloading Ratio for Heading Excavation
- Unloading Ratio for Bench Excavation
- Youngs Modulus E for Foliated Marl Layer
- Youngs Modulus E for Compact Marl Layer
- Cohesion C for Compact Marl Layer
- Friction for Compact Marl Layer
4.2 Data Division and Processing
It is common practice to divide the available data into two sub-sets; a training set, to
construct the neural network model, and an independent validation set to estimate model
performance in the deployed environment [14]. However, dividing the data into only
two subsets may lead to model overfitting. As a result, and as discussed later, cross
validation [15] is used as the stopping criterion in this study and, consequently, the
database is randomly divided into three sets: training, testing and validation. In total,
70% of the data are used for training and 15 % are used for validation set and 15% for
the testing set.
4.3 Model Architecture
Determining the network architecture is one of the most important and difficult tasks in
the development of ANN models. It requires the selection of the number of the hidden
layers and the number of the nodes in each of these. It has been shown that a network
with one hidden layer can approximate any continuous function, provided the sufficient
connection weights are used [16]. Consequently, one hidden layer is used in this study.
The utilized network paradigm is a Multi-Layer Perceptron type (MLP) consisting of
multiple layers of PEs connected in a feedforward pattern. Back-propagation of errors
technique is used to train the MLP. The calculated backpropagation components of error
pass backwards from the end of the network to the beginning. The gradient search
components adjust the weights contained in the synapses and axons. The network is
constructed using the medium complexity setting which have one hidden layer. The
criterion axon reads the desired file from the attached file component and determines
the error in the network. The output axon generates the actual network outputs. The
input axon does nothing but accept the input from the file component.
The number of the nodes in the input and output layers are restricted by the number of
the model inputs and outputs. The input layer of the ANN model developed in this work
has ten nodes; one for each of the model inputs [i.e., horizontal and vertical
deformations for point no.1 to point no. 5 (P1 to P5). The output layer has six nodes
[i.e., unloading ratio for heading excavation, unloading ratio for bench excavation,
youngs modulus E for foliated marl layer, youngs modulus E for compact marl
layer, cohesion C for compact marl layer, friction for compact marl layer]. In
order to obtain the optimum number of hidden layer nodes, it is important to strike a
balance between having sufficient free parameters (weights) to enable representation of
the function to be approximated, and not having too many so as to avoid overtraining
and to ensure that the relationship determined by the ANN can be interpreted in a
physical sense. Overtraining is not an issue in this study, as crossvalidation is used as
the stopping criterion. However, as just discussed, physical interpretation of the
connection weights is important, and hence the smallest network that is able to map the
desired relationship should be used. In order to determine the optimum network
geometry, ANNs with one, two, three and four hidden layer nodes are investigated.

Fig. 26: The Skeleton of the Neural Network Model
4.4 ANN Model Training
The process of optimizing the connection weights is known as training or learning.
The method most commonly used for finding the optimum weight combination for
feedforward neural networks is the back-propagation algorithm [17], which is based on
first-order gradient descent. Feedforwards networks trained with the backpropagation
algorithm have already been applied successfully for many geotechnical engineering
problems [18] and [19], and are thus used in this work.
In this study, the general strategy adopted for finding the optimal parameters that
control the training process is as follows; for each trial number of hidden layer nodes,
random initial weights and biases are generated. The neural network is then trained with
different combinations of momentum terms and step sizes in an attempt to identify the
ANN model that performs best on the testing data. The momentum terms used in this
study are 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8 and 1.0 whereas the step sizes used are 0.01. 0.05. 0.1. 0.3.
0.6 and 1.0
4.5 Stopping Criteria
Stopping criteria are those used to decide when to stop the training process. They
determine whether the model has been optimally or suboptimally trained. As discussed
earlier, the crossvalidation technique [15] is used in this work as the stopping criterion,
as it is considered to be the most valuable tool to ensure that overfitting does not occur
[20] and as sufficient data are available to create training, testing and validation sets.
The testing set measures the ability of the model to generalize, and the performance of
the model using this set is checked at many stages of the training process, and training is
stopped then the error of the testing set starts to increase. The testing set is also used to
determine the optimum number of hidden layer nodes and the optimum internal
parameters (step size, momentum and initial weights).
4.6 ANN Model Validation
Once the training phase of the model has been successfully accomplished, the
performance of the trained model is validated using the validation data, which have not
been used as part of the model building process. The purpose of the model validation
phase is to ensure that the model has the ability to generalize within the limits set by the
training data, rather than simply having memorized the input-output relationships that
are contained in the training data.
5 INVERSE MODELING: UPDATING TUNNEL DESIGN USING
REALISTIC ROCK PARAMETERS
After testing the trained network, it was shown that the correlation coefficient (R
2
)
between the networks output and the desired value is reached up to 0.88, 0.61 and 0.67
for data sets of training, cross validation and testing, respectively, which indicates a
successful performance as shown in (Table 4).
Table 4: Performance of Network for Different Output Parameters
R
2
Data Set Unloading
Ratio for
Heading
Excavation
Unloading
Ratio for
Bench
Excavation
E for
Foliated
Marl
Layer
E for
Marl
Shale
Layer
C for
Marl
Shale
Layer
for
Marl
Shale
Layer
Training 0.66 0.69 0.48 0.43 0.46 0.88
Cross
Validation
0.30 0.61 0.03 0.06 0.35 0.55
Testing 0.51 0.003 0.46 0.53 0.67 0.29

In Figures 27 to 44, the actual values for the most influential are plotted against the
networks output for different data sets of training, testing and cross validation.


Fig. 27 Fig. 28

Fig. 29 Fig. 30

Fig. 31 Fig. 32


Fig. 33 Fig. 34

Fig. 35 Fig. 36


Fig. 37 Fig. 38


Fig. 39 Fig. 40

Fig. 41 Fig. 42


Fig. 43 Fig. 44
5.1 Comments on the results
As shown in the aforementioned figures, it is clear that the influential parameters in
tunnel design can be predicted by using a Neural Networks model. The training of the
Neural Networks model is the key of obtaining more accurate results. This effect is
appeared in Figures 29, 30, 35 and 42. In order to improve the accuracy of the results, a
larger database should be used to train the model.
5.2 Validation of the model
The neural network model is validated by comparing the results of the model with the
deformation and stress measurements that are deliberately excluded from the learning
database, as indicated in Table 4 and Figures 27 through 44.

As this work is a part of an ongoing research for using the artificial neural networks in
the back analysis of tunnels, the authors believe, at this stage, that the accuracy of the
prediction can be enhanced by adopting the results of well-trained neural networks into
the learning database. This hypothesis shall be investigated/validated at the concluding
stage of this research.


6 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
At present, tunnels tend to be designed with considerable uncertainties. In this paper, a
neural network approach was presented to determine realistic soil/rock parameters that
to be used in the tunnel design.
A two hidden layer MLP was trained using data sets supplied by FE models. The
number of neurons, step sizes and momentum of the layers were optimized using
genetic algorithms during the training process. The testing of the trained network
showed that the neural network model can predict successfully the soil/rock parameters
that will be used in the FE model in the tunnel design.
7 ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The Authors would to thank Mr. Issam Ghalayini and Dr. Sherif Wissa, Directors of the
Geotechnical and Heavy Civil Engineering Department - Dar Al-Handasah (shair and
partners) for their kind help and permit to use data from their files on the Bouira tunnel.
8 NOTATIONS

K
o
At Rest Coefficient of Earth Pressure

E Elasticity of Modulus [MPa]

C Cohesion [kN/m
2
]

Angle of Friction [deg.]

R
2
Coefficient of Correlation
9 REFERENCES

[1] Crowder, J .J ., and Bawden, W. F. Review of post-peak parameters and
behaviour of rock masses: Current trends and research [Online]. (2004)
Rocnews, Fall 2004, available from: http://www.rocscience.com/library/rocnews
[2] Ali, H. A.; 2001, "Neuronet Based Liquefaction Potential Assessment and
Stress-Strain Behavior Simulation of Sandy Soils", Ph. D. Thesis, Kansas State
University, Manhattan, Kansas, USA.
[3] Fayed, Ayman, 2002, "Interaction between Deep Braced Excavation and Ground
for Metro Subway Stations", Ph. D. Thesis, Ain Shams Univ., Cairo, Egypt.
[4] Nour El-Din, S.M. (2003). Neuronet Prediction of Surface Settlement
Associated with Soft Ground Tunnelling. M.Sc. Department of Structural
Engineering, Ain shams University.
[5] DAR Al-Handasah, United Kingdom, 1999. Autoroute Est-Ouest, Troncon
Lakhdaria-Liaison RN5, Lot Tunnel du PK182+985 au PK184+230
Tunnels de Bouira, Algeria, Rapport de Presentation.
[6] Pique, A. Geology of the Northwest Africa Beitragze zur Regionalen Geologie
der Erde, Band 29. Engl. Test by Carpenter, M.S.N., Gebruder Borntraeger
(Berlin, Stuttgart). (2001)
[7] Geocounsult, Austria, 2004, Autoroute Est-Ouest, Troncon Lakhdaria-Liaison
RN5, Lot Tunnel du PK182+985 au PK184+230 Tunnels de Bouira,
A;geria, Review of Optical Displacement Monitoring Temporary Support
Performance, Tunnel T1 Report.
[8] El-Sayed, S. M., 2001, Elasto-Plastic Three Dimensional Analysis of Shielded
Tunnels, with Special Application on Greater Cairo Metro, Ph. D. Thesis, Ain
Shams Univ., Cairo, Egypt.
[9] Plaxis, (2002), Finite Element Code for Soil and Rock Analysis, Version 8.2,
Plaxis B. V., P.O.Box 851, 3160 AB RHOON, Netherlands.
[10] Ghaboussi J , Garret J . H, Wu X. (1991). Knowledge-based modeling of
material behavior with neural networks. J ournal of Engineering Mechanics
Division (ASCE), 117(1):132-153
[11] Ghaboussi J , Sidarta D. E. (1997). New method of material modeling using
neural networks. Proceedings of the 6
th
international Symposium on Numerical
Models in Geomechanics. 393-400
[12] Reed RD, Marks RJ . (1999). Neural Smithing Supervised Learning in
Feedforward Artificial Neural Networks. The MIT Press: Cambridge. MA.
[13] NeuroSolution Version 4.3, NeuroDimension, Inc. 1800 N. Main Street, Suite
D4, Gainesville, FL 32609.
[14] Twomey, J . M., and Smith, A. E. (1997). Validation and verification.
Artificial neural networks for civil eningineers: Fundamentals and applications,
N. Kartam, I. Flood, and J . H. Garrett, eds. ASCE, New York, 44-64.
[15] Stone, M. (1974). Cross-validatory choice and assessment of statistical
predictions. J . R. Stat. Soc., B 36, 111 147
[16] Hornik, K., Stinchcombe, M., and White, H. (1989). Multilayer feedforward
networks are universal approximates. Neural Networks, 2, 359-366.
[17] Rumelhart, D. E., Hinton, G. E., and Williams, R. J . (1986). Learning internal
representation by error propagation. Parallel distributed processing, Vol. 1,
Chap. 8, D. E. Rumelhart and J . L. McClelland.
[18] Goh, A. T. C. (1994). Seismic liquefaction potential assessed by neural
networks. J . Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 120(9), 1467-1480.
[19] Najjar, Y. M., and Basheer, I. A. (1996).A neural network approach for sirte
characterization and uncertinity prediction. Geotechnical Special Publication,
58(1), 134-148
[20] Smith, M. (1993). Neural networks for statistical modeling., Van Nostrand-
Reinhold, New York.