Bernat, S., Cambou, B. & Dubois, P. (1999). GeÂotechnique 49, No.
4, 427±452
Assessing a soft soil tunnelling numerical model using ®eld data
S . B E R NAT,  B. C A M B O U  a n d P. D U B O I S {
The aim of this paper is to assess a numerical
soft soil tunnelling model, using ®eld data. The
lining of the tunnel to be studied was a fairly
thick, very rigid structure. Given the low level
of applied stresses, lining deformation was
slight, and the deformation around the tunnel
essentially concerned the annular space created
between the soil and the lining during tunnel-
ling. This void was partially ®lled with injected
grout. The primary purpose of this paper is to
examine models that demonstrate soil±tunnelling
interactions. An empirical `decon®nement factor
ë' is then used to represent stress reduction
around tunnels during construction. In the ®rst
model it is simply assumed that soil stresses
around the tunnel reduce linearly by a factor ë.
The second analysis re®nes this notion and con-
siders a temporary `recon®nement' stage in or-
der to represent both the grouting behind the
lining once it is installed, and the hydrostatic
pressure that acts on the impervious tunnel
(pushing the lining up into the grout). Compari-
sons between these models and ®eld data meas-
urements obtained in three fully instrumented
areas of the Lyons-Vaise metro site will be
discussed.
KEYWORDS: ®eld instrumentation; numerical mod-
elling and analysis; settlement tunnels.
INTRODUCTION
The development of urban centres has led to an
increased need for tunnelling in soft soils in den-
sely built-up areas. For such shallow tunnels, often
built with slurry or earth pressure shields, the use
of empirical methods (Attewell, 1977; Cording &
Hansmire, 1977) proves unsuitable if displacements
around the tunnel are to be accurately calculated,
Manuscript received 31 July 1997; revised manuscript
accepted 28 September 1998.
Discussion on this paper closes 5 November 1999; for
further details see p. ii.
 EÂcole Centrale de Lyon.
{ Centre d'EÂtudes des Tunnels.
427
Cet article a pour but d'eÂvaluer un modeÁle
numeÂrique pour la construction d'un tunnel
dans un sol meuble, en utilisant des donneÂes de
terrain. Le reveÃtement du tunnel aÁ eÂtudier eÂtait
une structure assez eÂpaisse et treÁs rigide. E Â tant
donne que les contraintes appliqueÂes eÂtaient fa-
ibles, la deÂformation du reveÃtement eÂtait leÂgeÁre
et la deÂformation autour du tunnel eÂtait lieÂe
essentiellement a l'espace annulaire creÂe entre le
sol et la paroi pendant la construction. Ce vide
eÂtait partiellement rempli de coulis injecteÂ. Cet
article a pour objet, principalement, d'examiner
les modeÁles qui montrent les interactions entre le
sol et l'action de creusement du tunnel. Nous
utilisons ensuite un `facteur de deÂcon®nement ë9,
obtenu de manieÁre empirique, pour repreÂsenter
la baisse de contrainte autour des tunnels pen-
dant la construction. Dans le premier modeÁle,
nous preÂsumons simplement que les contraintes
dans le sol autour du tunnel baissent de facËon
lineÂaire d'un facteur ë. La seconde analyse raf-
®ne cette notion et consideÁre une eÂtape de `re-
con®nement' temporaire a®n de repreÂsenter aÁ la
fois l'injection de coulis derrieÁre la paroi une
fois que celle-ci est installeÂe et la pression hydro-
statique qui agit sur le tunnel eÂtanche (deÂplace-
ment vertical du revetement aÁ l'inteÂreur du
coulis). Nous commentons la comparaison entre
ces modeÁles et les mesures obtenues sur le ter-
rain dans trois zones entieÁrement instrumenteÂes
sur le site du meÂtro de Lyon-Vaise.
and precise stratigraphy and digging technologies
taken into account. This is where numerical models
come in. The modelling discussed in this paper is
based on:
(a) an `elastic±plastic model' for soil modelling
using the `CJS law', named after Cambou,
Jafari and Sidoroff, its creators;
(b) the CESAR-LCPC Finite Element Method
program;
(c) a laboratory procedure and in situ tests to
de®ne the model constants.
As part of the Lyons metro works, a research
scheme was set up to develop and assess a com-
plete procedure for forecasting movements induced
by tunnelling (Bernat et al., 1995a,b, 1996; Bernat,
1996).
428 BERNAT, CAMBOU AND DUBOIS
THE WORK SITE
Site description (Amet et al., 1996)
Existing urban conditions in the Lyons-Vaise
sector meant that underground excavation for the
metro was necessary (conventional cut-and-cover
methods would have required signi®cant building
demolition). Two tunnels, each 6´27 m in diameter
and 950 m long, were dug between June 1993 and
March 1995 under an overburden nowhere greater
than 15 m. The ground to be excavated lay under
the water table and consisted mainly of silty allu-
vial deposits with poor mechanical properties
(Table 1 and Fig. 1).
Four major types of soil were encountered:
(a) Fill 3±5 m average thickness.
(b) Silty alluvial deposits in thin, more or less
sandy or clayey soils. Some of these layers
were very sensitive to disturbance because the
deposits contained so much natural water that
they were almost liquid. The mechanical
characteristics indicated by pressuremeter,
penetrometer and laboratory tests were poor
and indicated that there could be signi®cant
deformation.
(c) Sandy±gravelly alluvial deposits, with some
elements over 50 mm in diameter, and a few
over 500 mm that required the use of a crusher.
(d) A gneissic substratum was encountered at
depths going from more than 80 m at Vaise
station to less than 20 m at Gorge de Loup.
These dif®cult conditions required the use of a
TBM (tunnel-boring machine, Fig. 2) despite the
short tunnel length. Face support was ensured by
bentonite slurry under pressure (around 100±
200 kPa) to counteract prevailing water pore pres-
sure and horizontal effective stress. Excavation was
carried out using a semi-enclosed wheel (Fig. 3)
®tted with cutter bits and, where necessary, roller
bits for hard soil conditions. Excavated soil was
hydraulically mucked out, the slurry being pumped
out and recycled. The tunnel was lined with precast
1 m long concrete segments of 6 m external dia-
meter and 0´35 m thickness installed under the
protection of the TBM tail. In order to limit
ground destressing, the annular space of 13´5m
between the outside of the tunnel lining segments
and the ground was injection-®lled with an inert
grout as excavation advanced (Fig. 4).
Instrumentation (Kastner et al., 1995; Kastner &
Ollier, 1996)
The complex, dif®cult conditions of this work
provided an opportunity to set up a research project
based on accurate on-site measuring in order to
develop and assess a complete procedure for fore-
casting ground movements induced by tunnelling.
This research project was funded by the French
Ministry of Research, and SYTRAL. The group
consisted of SEMALY (a metro-building company),
the Lyons National Institute of Applied Sciences
(INSA), the EÂcole Centrale de Lyon (an engineering
college) and the Centre d'EÂtudes des Tunnels
(CETU). Instrumentation units were set up in two
monitoring areas: zone 1 and zone 2 (Fig. 5).
(a) Zone 1 consisted of two sections, S1 (Fig.
6(a)) and S2 (Fig. 6(b)), located, respectively,
30 m and 65 m from the starting shaft in Vaise.
The retaining wall of a 6 m high embankment
explains the asymmetrical appearance of S1.
(b) Zone 2 (Fig. 6(c)) is at the other end, about
800 m from zone 1. It is symmetrical, but it
should be noted in this case that the bedrock is
3 m below the tunnels.
Measurements were taken during the excavation of
the two tunnels T1 and T2 in S1, but only during
the excavation of T1 in S2 and of T1 in P2 (zone
2 is called P2).
(a) Underground vertical movements were meas-
ured by multipoint extensometers having ®ve
measuring points (A±D, then S going up
towards the surface) connected to an automatic
data-logger. An extensometer was installed in
the axis of the tunnel being examined (EX11
for T1 in S1, EX41 for T2 in S1, EX21 for T1
in S2, and EX31 for T1 in P2), and others
were located on either side of the tunnel.
(b) Horizontal movements were measured on
either side of the tunnel by inclinometers
(I14 and I17 in S1, I24 in S2, I36 and I37 in
P2). Results were recorded manually, at the
rate of one measurement every 50 cm.
(c) Pore pressure cells were installed in low
permeable layers.
Analysing experimental curves
Figures 33±39 show the development of vertical
movements, with time, of the extensometers located
on the tunnel axis, at the surface (point S) and near
the tunnel crown (point A). Each of these four curves
highlights four main phases of separate vertical
displacements at the crown point levels (Fig. 7):
Phase 0: very slight settlement (1±2 mm) before
the shield face passage.
Phase 1: sudden settlement (2±9 mm) as the TBM
passes, related to alignment and shield
operating speed.
Phase 2: crown point rises 4 or 5 mm after the
passage of the shield.
Phase 3: delayed settlement (5±11 mm) over a
longer stabilization period, as a function
of the overburden encountered above the
tube, and geotechnical earth features.
Table 1. General geotechnical characteristics of the soil
Speci®c weight and water Atterberg limits Triaxial test Penetrometer Pressuremeter

SOFT SOIL TUNNELLING NUMERICAL MODEL

content

ãh: kN=m3 w: % w1 : % PI: % CI c9: kPa j9: 8 qC : MPa E: MPa P1 : MPa

First part of the layout (VAISE-VALMY)

Fill 19±21 4 0´5
Beige silt 18±21 35 58 26 0´9 0±30 29±35 ,2 ,4 ,0´8
Ochre silt 18±21 27 29 8 0´25 0±30 29±35 ,2 ,4 ,0´8
Grey clay 16±18 67 78 21 0´5 30±40 20±30 1 ,4 ,0´8
Violet clay 18´5 30±40 47 20 0´1 15 20 3 5 0´7±1´4
Sand and gravel 21 0 37 10±30 5±15 2
Second part of the layout (VALMY-BERTHET)
Fill 19±21
Brown silt 20±21 23 30 8 0´9 6 35
Ochre silt 20 24 30 8´6 0´5 0±30 37 0´5±4´5 1±20 0´5±1´4
Grey silt 20 26 27 5´6 0´6 77 30 0´5±4´5 1±20 0´5±1´4
Sand and gravel 21 .5 10±50 1±3

429
430 BERNAT, CAMBOU AND DUBOIS

rue de la Corderie
rue de la Claire

Pla rue des Bains

rue Cottin
rue St Pierre
rue Marietton
rue Roquette

de Vaise
rue Chinard
rue Laparte

s
ma
Impasse

de e Du
Recovery
Starting

re
shaft

Loi
c
shaft Station
BERTHET
VAISE VALMY

Reference level: 140.00

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 570 600 650 700 750 800 850 900

Backfill Sand and gravels Gneiss bed

Silt Conglomerate

Fig. 1. General geological pro®le along the T1 tunnel in the Lyon-Vaise work site

Air locks Erector Conveyor Segment lift Pilot cabin

R4
6m30

R1

R2 R3

Mucking pump Hydraulic unit Transformer Telescopic ducts

48m00
Cutter head no. 2
with discs Cutter head no. 1
and teeth
Thrust cylinders Backup R1 R2 R3 R4

R1 R2 R3 R3 R4

Fig. 2. Tunnel-boring machine (TBM) used in the Lyons-Vaise work site

Table 2 sums up the experimental data of the four triggered an upward movement of the impervious
phases relative to the crownpoint settlements of the segment inside the grout and, to a lesser degree, an
four sections being studied. Measurements showed upward movement of the overburden soil. In the
that the upward movement of the crown points in case of zone 2, where the settlements due to phase
phase 2 varies from 4 to 5 mm for each of the four 0 and phase 1 were slight, the upward movement
experimental sections. The beginning of this up- in phase 2 was predominant and the ®nal settle-
ward movement coincides with the beginning of ments were in inverse order compared with the
the grouting process, but its maximum is reached other three sections: in zone 2, ®nal surface settle-
between 4 and 8 m (or 24±48 h) later. Measure- ment was greater than ®nal crown settlement, and
ments recorded in zone 2 (Fig. 8) allowed three so intermediary phase 2 can no longer be ignored
types of results to be compared during the period in the corresponding modelling.
immediately following the grouting phase:
(a) vertical displacement of the crown point (black
MODELLING STRATEGY
curve), which rises 5 mm;
The proposed modelling strategy is based on the
(b) vertical displacement of the concrete segment
following:
(black dots) which rises 50 mm;
(c) a pressure measurement taken in the grouting,
(a) A constitutive model of the soil adapted to the
between the concrete segment and the soil
stress paths encountered during tunnelling
(grey curve).
(elastic±plastic CJS law developed in the Solid
Each curve peaked 20 h after grouting. This up- Mechanics Department of the EÂcole Centrale
ward movement effect thus seems to be due to de Lyon).
Archimedes' principle (hydrostatic pressure), which (b) A methodology to de®ne the CJS model
 SOFT SOIL TUNNELLING NUMERICAL MODEL
Fig. 3. The two wheels used for the TBM in the Lyon-
Vaise work site
constants based on laboratory tests (triaxial
and oedometer tests) and in situ tests (with
pressuremeters).
(c) A computation code (the CESAR ®nite ele-
ments software developed at the French Central
Bridges and Highways Laboratory, LCPC).
(d) An excavation model having a two-dimen-
sional approach in a plane orthogonal to the
tunnel and using a stress release at the
periphery of the excavation called the `decon-
®nement' process.
CJS constitutive model (Fig. 9)
Excavating a tunnel produces complex loading
which generates main stress rotation associated
with speci®c phenomena:
(a) At the tunnel crown and bottom, vertical stress
decreases, producing mainly an elastic unload-
ing (for normally consolidated soil).
Fig. 4. Grouting process at the end of the TBM tail
431
(b) At the tunnel haunches, horizontal stress
decreases, producing plastic deformations from
an elastic±plastic approach standpoint.
(c) At the intermediate points, the principal
stresses rotate.
The CJS elastic±plastic constitutive model (Cambou
& Jafari, 1988; Cambou & Lanier, 1988) is well
adapted to these kinds of stress paths. Its deforma-
tion mechanism can be expressed by three terms:
(a) Non-linear elastic deformation.
(b) Isotropic plastic deformation. This is due to
the variation in mean stress, associated with a
scalar parameter of isotropic strain-hardening
and a yielding surface corresponding to a plane
perpendicular to the hydrostatic axis in the
principal stress areas.
(c) Plastic deformation. This is due to the
deviatoric stress variation reduced to the mean
stress value that is associated with an isotropic
strain-hardening scalar parameter and a kine-
matic strain-hardening tensor parameter. The
corresponding yielding surface is a cone with a
varying aperture angle.
Both yielding surfaces clearly establish a restricted
range for elastic behaviour. The law, based on two
isotropic and one kinematic strain-hardening me-
chanisms, has twelve constants that can be identi-
®ed using conventional geotechnical tests (three
triaxial tests at different con®ning pressures and
one isotropic test or oedometer test) (Allouani,
1993). The `pressuremeter' test, commonly used
for soil investigation in France, can also be consid-
ered to specify the values of some CJS parameters,
using a ®tting technique.
The main feature of the CJS model is its kine-
matic strain-hardening, which enables the aniso-
tropy induced by loading to be taken into account.
The validation stage of the model was a major part
of the studies carried out by the French Coordi-
nated Research Group (GRECO) for geomaterials
(1986±1993). It was shown that the CJS model
gives reliable forecasts for homogeneous stress
paths, especially with reorientation of the main
directions (Cambou & Jafari, 1988; Cambou &
Lanier, 1988; Cambou et al., 1990), as in the case
of the rotation of the principal stress direction
432 BERNAT, CAMBOU AND DUBOIS

VALMY Station Zone 2 BERTHET shaft

Towards
Gorge de Loup
Engineer: SYTRAL
VAISE Owner: SEMALY
Starting shaft Contractors: SOGEA, Campenon Bernard, GTM
Number of tunnels: 2
Tunnel diameter: 6.28 m each
Maximal tunnel gradient: 6%
Zone 1 Minimal curvature radius: 200 m
Maximal overburden over tunnels: 16 m
Excavation started on 10 June 1993
Excavation ended on 28 February 1995

Station Valmy Berthet

Vaise

First instrumented area

Second instrumented area
Zone 1
Zone 2

555 m underground Station 335 m underground

110 m length

Fig. 5. Tunnel alignment of the LYONS Metro D line extension, instrumented areas

22.05 m 24.60 m 14.00 m

. 23.90 m 12.00 m
24 65 m 11 90 m
.
22.07 m
8.00 m 5.80 m 24.00 m
S S
Backfill
EX 16 EX 33
D D
13.80 m 10 m EX 31
C 10.20 m
C
B
7.87 m B EX 21
EX 11
EX 41 EX 15 EX 22 A
A EX 32
EX 34
EX 13 T2 T1 T1
T2 T1
EX 23
I 36 I 37 3m
3.30 m I 17 I 24 Bedrock
I 14
4.80 m

(a) (b) (c)

Fig. 6. Instrumentation of the Lyon-Vaise tunnel alignment: (a) section S1 of zone 1; (b) section S2 of zone 1; (c)
Zone 2

occurring in tunnelling processes. The CJS model
was also shown to be suitable for realistic simula-
tions of the behaviour of sand formation under
stress generated by footings, load pressure, or
tunnel excavation (GRECO, 1995). After this vali-
dation stage with centrifuged scale models (Rezgui,
1993), the research programme carried out on the
Lyons-Vaise site enabled the implementation of a
model evaluation stage in real tunnelling condi-
tions. This can only be considered an evaluation
stage in the present case, not a validation stage. In
the two-dimensional approach, forecasting quality
depends not only on the model capacity and com-
putation code used, but also on a number of
uncontrollable parameters in real-life conditions.
These include approximate assessment of site
 SOFT SOIL TUNNELLING NUMERICAL MODEL 433
Time

Vertical
displacement
of the crown
point

Ph0 Ph1 Ph2 Ph3

Beginning Passing Passing

of the the face the tail
monitoring

Passing the
TBM
Grouting process

Maximum of the crown point End of the

upward movement monitoring

Fig. 7. The four different phases of vertical displacement of the crown

points

Table 2. Absolute vertical displacements (v i ) and relative vertical displacements (dv i ˆv i 2v i21 ) for each phase no.
i, in mm
Phase 0 Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3
v0 dv1 v1 dv2 v2 dv3 v3
S1±T1: EXT11A ÿ1´7 ÿ7´8 ÿ9´5 ‡5´3 ÿ4´2 ÿ11´0 ÿ15´2
S1±T2: EXT41A ÿ2´0 ÿ8´8 ÿ10´8 ‡5´5 ÿ5´3 ÿ6´6 ÿ11´9
S2±T1: EXT21A ÿ1´3 ÿ2´7 ÿ4´0 ‡4´8 ‡0´8 ÿ9´0 ÿ8´2
P2±T1: EXT31A ÿ1´0 ÿ1´4 ÿ2´4 ‡5´4 ‡3´0 ÿ4´7 ÿ1´7

5 500
EX31A Pressure
4
Concrete upward movement: cm

segment 450
Settlement of EX31A: mm

3
400
Pressure: kPa

2
350
1
300
0
250
21

22 200

23 150
21 20.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Days since grouting

Fig. 8. Zone 2: measurement of soil and tunnel vertical displacement,

and of pore pressure in the grout
434 BERNAT, CAMBOU AND DUBOIS

q S2 of zone 1 was 35 m. The two sections'

Elastic domain ,φ 2 stratigraphies were very similar but their geome-
φ
trical conditions differed due to a retaining wall
1
K e0,G e0,n ,B ,
:A
r fac
e
Deviatoric mechanism designed to hold back a 6 m high back®ll. Zone 2
su geometry was symmetrical, but the nearness of the
ure Isotropic and kinematic
ail
F hardening: bedrock (3 m under the tubes) should be noted. The
A,a,G0,Rc,β selected stratigraphies are presented in Figs 10
(section S1), 10(b) (section S2) and 10(c) (zone 2).
They show alternating silts, ®ne sands and clays (in
Yielding su
rface
p the excavation zone) interlaid with the surface ®ll
Isotropic mechanism and a sand and gravel underlayer. Tables 3±5
Isotropic hardening:
summarize the geometrical data of the three
K p0,n
(a) computation sections.

Identifying soil layers for CJS parameters. Dur-

S1
Yielding surface
Deviatoric mechanism
Isotropic and kinematic
S2
hardening
S3
Failure surface
(b)
Fig. 9. Hardening mechanisms, yielding and failure
surfaces and constants, of the CJS constitutive model:
(a) ( p, q) plane; (b) deviatoric plane
geometry and stratigraphy, unavoidable soil re-
moulding during material core sampling (making
identi®cation of a given layer very dif®cult), scanty
knowledge of initial, pre-excavation formation con-
ditions, and badly controlled excavation modelling.
Model comparisons thus enable not only the model
capacity and computation code to be tested, but
also the whole two-dimensional procedure, includ-
ing the four items mentioned above.
Identifying model parameters of the layers of the
computation sections concerned (Bernat et al.,
1995a,b)
ing investigation sessions in the two test zones, core
boring (for laboratory tests) and ®eld pressuremeter
tests were carried out. The de®nition of the CJS
model constants initially consisted of performing
oedometer and triaxial CD laboratory tests. Avail-
able test results (summarized on the left of Fig.
10(a) for zone 1, and Fig. 10(c) for zone 2) were
entered into the various computer programs used
for CJS law identi®cation. The ®rst parameter sets
were thus de®ned for silty clay layers in the tube
vicinity of the sections considered. These sets
became input for the numerical modelling of
pressuremeter tests. These models were compared
with the results of in situ tests, and the selected
parameters were then re®ned and speci®c local site
conditions included. Figs 11(a) and 11(b), for
example, show simulated and experimental labora-
tory tests carried out in the violet clay of zone 1.
Fig. 11(c) shows pressuremeter tests at depths of 13
and 14 m in S1 (the pressuremeter tests were
carried out using an unloading±reloading inter-
mediate cycle, allowing the elastic constants to be
more accurately de®ned). These results show that
one of the model constant sets corresponds closely
to all the test results, despite the fact that all the
stress path tests are very different. Where no
laboratory tests were available, the ®rst set of
constants was de®ned using average values that had
been estimated for different types of soils, including
clay, silt, dense sand and loose sand (Maleki, 1998).
This ®rst set was then optimized, comparing the
numerical modelling of pressuremeter tests with
experimental results. This procedure, based on
pressuremeter tests, is useful because traditional
soil investigations in France use a large range of
pressuremeter tests and not many laboratory tests.

Identifying soil layers. Before computation sec-
tion models can be set up, their stratigraphy must
be de®ned. The various core samples collected in
the area were used and pressuremeter tests were
carried out to determine layer thickness. The
distance between the two design sections S1 and
Computation code CESAR-LCPC using the ®nite
element method
The mesh designed for the ®nite element meth-
od calculation is ®ner close to the tubes (where
gradients are steep) and enlarged laterally to avoid
boundary effects (which are signi®cant with a
 SOFT SOIL TUNNELLING NUMERICAL MODEL 435

Tests T 5 triaxial
O 5 oedometer
T O P P 5 pressure meter
1 Fill

1 2 2 Water table
Beige silt

2 2 Ochre silt

2 2 2 Grey clay

1 Tunnel Tunnel Grey sand

T2 T1
1 1 2 Violet clay

1 Sand and gravel

(a)

Fill

Water table Beige silt

Ochre silt

Grey clay

Grey sand
Tunnel Tunnel
Violet clay
T2 T1
Grey silt

Violet clay

Sand and gravel

(b)

Fig. 10. Continued overleaf

back®ll, as in zone 1). Imposed boundary condi-
tions consist of blocking horizontal displacements
on the sides, and vertical displacements in the
lower part of the mesh. In addition to the various
geological layers to be identi®ed, the mesh is
designed to monitor the tunnelling and supporting
techniques from the formation changes observed in
the areas to be excavated (the mesh used for S1 is
presented in Figs 12 and 13).
All the computations were carried out in drained
conditions (effective stresses under the water table).
Pore pressure measurements taken in the low per-
meable layer (silt located at the top of the tunnel)
in fact demonstrated that excess pressures gener-
ated by tunnelling operations generally dissipate in
a few hours. (Fig. 14, Kastner et al., 1995). The
experimental settlements drawn with respect to
time integrate two elements: the changing distance
to the working face (this plays an important role in
the boundary condition at the periphery of the
tunnel), and the possible increase of strain resulting
from soil consolidation. This second element is in
fact reckoned to occur rapidly, and the proposed
modelling was designed to consider only the soil
state after consolidation (drained conditions and
effective stresses) for each stage of calculation.
436 BERNAT, CAMBOU AND DUBOIS

Tests
T O P
1 Fill
Water table
3 3
Silt 1

1 1 1 Silt 2
1 2 Silt 3
1 Sand
1 1 1 Silt 4
Tunnel
1 1 1 T1 Clay
1 Sand

1 Sand and gravel

Bedrock

(c)
Fig. 10. Stratigraphical sections of the Lyon-Vaise work site: (a)
zone 1, section S2; (b) zone 8, section S2; (c) zone 2

Table 3. General characteristics of zone 1, section S1

Layers Level NGF top Depth top Depth top Thickness
left right

1) Fill 167´97±173´9 0 0 1´72±7.65

2) Beige silt (dry) 166´25 1´72 7´65 1´25
2b) Beige silt 165 2´97 8´9 1´85
3) Ochre silt 163´15 4´82 10´75 2´45
Layers 4) Grey clay 160´7 7´27 13´2 2´25
5) Grey sand 158´45 9´52 15´45 2´60
6) Violet clay 155´85 12´12 18´05 2´85
7) Sand and gravel 153 14´97 20´9
Top tunnel 1 160´10 13´79
Centre tunnel 1 156´97 16´93
Tunnel Bottom tunnel 1 153´83 20´06
Top tunnel 2 160´10 7´86
Centre tunnel 2 156´97 11
Bottom tunnel 2 153´83 14´13

The initial stress condition of the back®ll behind
the retaining wall in zone 1 was not geostatic; it
was de®ned using a preliminary settlement compu-
tation, under natural weight. This computation may
be carried out in one or two phases, since the
back®ll was probably formed after the sedimentary
constitution of the soil.
tion in the plane perpendicular to the shield ad-
vance (Panet & Guenot, 1982). This two-
dimensional approach appeared to be justi®ed in
the Lyons-Vaise case, since settlements recorded
ahead of the working face in phase 0 were always
minor.
Two methods are suitable for tunnel modelling
in two-dimensions.

Two-dimensional excavation modelling Procedure 1: tunnelling is simulated by a stress

Presentation. Stress evolution generated by tun-
nel excavation is essentially three-dimensional,
since it depends on the distance to the working
face. A signi®cant (but conventional) simpli®cation
was applied by considering a plane strain calcula-
boundary condition at the periphery of the tunnel
The principle (see ®rst part of Fig. 15) is to
remove the soil inside the excavation and to re-
place it by ®ctitious stress supporting vectors
which equilibrate the initial state. Tunnel modelling
 SOFT SOIL TUNNELLING NUMERICAL MODEL 437
Table 4. General characteristics of zone 1, section S2
Layers Level NGF Depth top Thickness
top left

1) Fill 168´12 0 2´12

2) Beige silt (dry) 166´00 2´12 1´00
2b) Beige silt 165´00 3´12 1´50
3) Ochre silt 163´50 4´62 2´70
Layers 4) Grey clay 160´80 7´32 3´20
5) Grey sand 1 157´60 10´52 2´00
6) Violet clay 1 155´60 12´52 1´50
5b) Grey sand 2 154´10 14´02 0´90
6b) Violet clay 2 153´20 14´92 1´90
7) Sand and gravel 151´30 16´82
Top tunnel 1 158´10 10´015
Centre tunnel 1 154´97 13´15
Tunnel Bottom tunnel 1 151´83 16´285
Top tunnel 2 158´23 9´885
Centre tunnel 2 155´10 13´02
Bottom tunnel 2 151´96 16´155

Table 5. General characteristics of zone 2

Layers Level NGF Depth top Thickness
top left

1) Fill 168´35 0 3´00

2) Silt 1 165´35 3´00 4´00
3) Silt 2 161´35 7´00 2´00
4) Silt 3 159´35 9´00 2´00
Layers 5) Sand 157´35 11´00 1´00
6) Silt 4 156´35 12´00 1´00
7) Grey clay 155´35 13´00 1´50
8) Sand 153´85 14´50 1´50
9) Sand and gravels 152´35 16´00 3´50
10) Bedrock 148´85 19´50
Top tunnel 1 158´14 10´20
Tunnel Centre tunnel 1 155´01 13´34
Bottom tunnel 1 151´87 16´47

consists of progressively releasing all the compo-
nents of the stress vector acting on the excavation
periphery. The reducing factor is called the `decon-
®nement factor' (or stress release factor), written ë.
In such modelling with no support in the tunnel,
the stress boundary condition can continue until
the total cancelling of the vectors for ë equals
100%. But in the case of tunnel lining, the decon-
®nement factor never reaches 100% because stabi-
lization occurs at a lower value that corresponds to
the interaction between soil and structure. The
problem is to calculate this ®nal factor ë f , as-
sumed to be representative of the whole tunnelling
process. ë f is dif®cult to estimate a priori but can
be determined a posteriori by comparison between
modelling and measurements.
Procedure 2: modelling the soil±lining interaction
(Bernat et al., 1997)
This more complex modelling (see second part
of Fig. 15) consists of direct taking into account of
the interaction between soil and structure. A ®rst
decon®nement is considered, and then the tunnel
(including lining and grout) is taken into account
and the decon®nement factor is increased to 100%.
The ®nal stress state will result from the inter-
action between the lining, the grout and the soil ±
it will no longer be determined by the value of ë f
as in procedure 1.
The ®rst procedure uses only one parameter ë f
whose de®nition will be analysed later.
The second procedure seems more realistic but
is also more complex to use because it is necessary
438 BERNAT, CAMBOU AND DUBOIS
20
Experiment 700

ε1: %

dV : cm3
16
600
12

8 500
Simulation
4
σ: kPa 400
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
6 300
σ1 2 σ3
σ3

5
Exp-14m
4 Simulation 200
Simu-14m
3 Simu-13m
100 Exp-13m
2 Experiment
1 DP: kPa
ε1: % 0
0 0 200 400 600 800 1000
0 5 10 15 20 25

Fig. 11. Oedometer (a) and triaxial (b) tests carried out in the violet clay of zone 1. (c) Pressuremeter
tests carried out in the violet clay of zone 1 and 13 m and 14 m depth

Fig. 12. Mesh of section S1, zone 1

to model the complete interaction between the soil

and the structure. This particularly implies taking
into account the mechanical characteristics of the
grout, which goes from a ¯uid state to a solid state
after being injected between the concrete segment
and the soil. For these reasons, only the ®rst
procedure will be presented in this paper. The
second procedure was analysed and compared with
the ®rst in Bernat's thesis in 1996, and will be
presented in a future paper.

General analysis of stress paths around unlined

tunnels. An initial general analysis was carried out
Fig. 13. Mesh of tunnel T1, S1 to better understand the different stress paths
 SOFT SOIL TUNNELLING NUMERICAL MODEL 439
80

70

Hydrostatic pressure: kPa

60

50

40
Upward
30 phase

20
Passing
the face
10 Grouting

0
25 24 23 22 21 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Days before or after passing the face

Fig. 14. Pore pressure measurement at the crown of S1±T1

Excavation

λ 5 0% 0 , λ , 100% λ 5 100%

T0
Without lining

(1 2 λ) T0
0
λ T0
T0
T0 T0 T0
Soil Soil Soil
Cavity Cavity Cavity
With lining at λ1

T0
(1 2 λ1) T0 Ts

λ1 T0 T0
T0
T0 T0
Soil Soil Soil
Tr
Cavity Cavity Lining

Fig. 15. Two ways of modelling tunnelling

occurring around the tunnel (Lee & Rowe, 1989), obtain realistic results, constants of the two models
and to compare the local behaviour indicated by the (MC and CJS) were de®ned using triaxial test data
CJS model with the MC model (the Mohr± obtained on silty sand. To account for the
Coulomb elastic±perfectly plastic model) in a dependence of the Young modulus on depth,
simple homogeneous theoretical case study. The ®ctitious 3 m thick layers were used for this
tunnel was represented by a circular 3 m radius imaginary case study. The Young's modulus used
cross-section and an overburden the thickness of in MC was the secant modulus at 50% of the failure
two diameters. The soil was considered to be stress from the triaxial test simulated using the CJS
homogeneous. For the sake of simplicity, the initial model, with con®ning pressure near the horizontal
stress state was considered to be located on the K0 stress in the middle of each layer (Figs 16 and 17).
line. In the calculation procedure, this stress state It should be noted that this type of `MC-equivalent
corresponded to certain values of hardening para- Young's modulus' takes into account plastic defor-
meters which had been initially calculated. To mations. The stress paths of various points (located
440 BERNAT, CAMBOU AND DUBOIS
300 200 .
.
Triaxial simulated test at K0 line
180 5
195 kPa of confining pressure MC criterion . 4
250
Line defining the MC Isotropic line
160
.

Minor principal stress σ1: kPa

.
equivalent Young modulus 3
200 140 .
Stress: kPa

.
1 2
120 .
150
Around 50% of the 1 2
100 .
maximum stress
100 3
80 .
52.2% 4
. 5
50 60 45%
MC equivalent point 1
Young modulus 40 Each point 5 an increment point 2
0 of 10% of deconfinement . point 3
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 20 point 4
point 5
Strain: % 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Fig. 16. Modelling of a triaxial test with CJS para-
Minor principal stress σ2: kPa
meters and de®nition of an equivalent Young modulus
(for MC)
200
K0 line
MC criterion 5
15 180
12 . . . 4
Vertical distance from T1 centre line: m

.
9 . .
Isotropic line
160
6
Minor principal stress σ1: kPa

.
.
3 140 3
0
23 E-MC .
51 2
26 E-CJS 120
4
29 . 1 2
212 100
215 . 3
3
218 80
221 57.5% 5
4
224 60 1 2 45%
227 point 1
230 40 point 2
233 . point 3
236 20 point 4
239 point 5
0 20 40 60 80
100 120 140 160 180 0
10 30 50 70 90 110 130 150 170 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Young modulus value: MPa
Minor principal stress σ2: kPa
Fig. 17. Confrontation of CJS and MC Young modulus
with depth Fig. 18. Effective stress paths around an unlined
tunnel: MC (a) and CJS (b) simulations until
ë ˆ 100%
at the excavation periphery) obtained by ®nite
element analysis were drawn in the principal stress
plan (Figs 18(a) for MC and 18(b) for CJS). 30%). The paths then follow the plastic
criterion, which is not exactly the same for
(a) All effective stress paths start from the K0 the two models because of the plane strain
line. paths considered.
(b) At the crown and the bottom, excavation (d) The points located 458 above and below the
produces a decrease in vertical stress, follow- haunches follow the same kind of paths, but
ing an elastic unloading path as far as the more progressively. Rotation of the principal
isotropic state where the principal directions directions occurred here so that the initial one
are inverted (for ë near 50%). Vertical stress (which was vertical and horizontal) rotated
then continues to decrease and the path reaches such that the minor principal stress took the
the failure point. radial direction. It should be noted that for
(c) At the haunches, excavation induces horizontal values of ë under 30%, MC modelling leads to
unloading, which leads, more quickly in MC stress states that satisfy elastic conditions.
than in CJS, to the plastic state (for ë close to Even for high values of ë, the calculation
 SOFT SOIL TUNNELLING NUMERICAL MODEL
shows (Fig. 19) that the plastic strains remain
near the tunnel haunches, in a very small area.
In the case of the Lyons-Vaise site where the
measurements correspond to small values of ë (as
we will see later), the MC model works essentially
as an elastic model, giving only reversible defor-
mation. In such cases, the CJS model, which shows
irrecoverable strains even for small values of ë, is
much more realistic, particularly if an unloading±
reloading cycle (to be explained below) has to be
taken into account.
EXCAVATION MODELLING AS A STRESS
BOUNDARY CONDITION
In the `convergence±con®nement' method
(Panet & Guenot, 1982), some empirical formula-
tions were put forward to determine the ë f value
to be used for deep tunnelling models in hard rock.
In the case of shallow tunnels in soft soil, this ë f
information does not seem realistic. In the Lyons-
Vaise case, this ®nal factor was estimated for
section S1 before the beginning of the work ± a
value of about 35% leads to surface settlements
between 20 and 30 mm (Bernat, 1995). A more
accurate ë f value can be obtained by ®tting the
modelling results and ®eld data together. This
measurement can be carried out at the beginning
of the work and would be of great interest if a
realistic forecast is required throughout the length.
This procedure would only be of interest if it could
be demonstrated that ë f is approximately constant
441
throughout the tunnel length. This point will be
analysed and commented on later when considering
®eld data. On the Lyons-Vaise site it was decided
to use the value of the vertical displacements of
the measurement point closest to the excavation
(EX11A for S1±T1, EX21A for S2±T1, EX31A
for P2±T1 and EX41A for S1±T2) for ®tting
purposes.
Determination of ëf using the ®nal measurements
The curves of settlement with time of the
`crown' points are detailed later. It should be noted
that the settlement curves for the three points at
the crown of zone 1 have almost the same slope
before and after the upward phase 2, and that this
upward movement observed at the crown point is
practically negligible at the surface. In this zone it
seems that this intermediate upward phase has no
effect on the ®nal state. The ë f value was there-
fore adjusted (Fig. 20) so as to give good agree-
ment between calculated and recorded ®nal
settlement value at the crown point level for zone
1 (the case of zone 2 is discussed later). It should
be added that these ®nal values corresponded to
the last measurements carried out before instru-
mentation removal and they had not yet been fully
stabilized.
Excavation of the ®rst (T1) tube in zone 1. It can
be observed that despite substantially different
geometrical and stratigraphical conditions, the two
sections S1 and S2 of zone 1 show ®nal settlements

λ 5 30% λ 5 40% λ 5 50% λ 5 60% λ 5 70% λ 5 80% λ 5 90% λ 5 100%

Fig. 19. Development of plastic areas around the tunnel during MC tunnelling modelling

5 5
Experimental settlements: mm

Calculated settlements: mm

EX31A
0 0
P2: EX31A: 21.7 mm λ 5 2.8%

25 25
S2: EX21A: 28.2 mm
210 EX21A
210
λ 5 11.3%
S1-T2: EX41A: 211.9 mm
EX41A
215 215
S1-T1: EX11A: 215.2 mm λ 5 18.2%
EX11A
λ 5 11.5%
220 220
210 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Time since the passing of the face: days Deconfinement factor: %

Fig. 20. Settlement of the crown point of each four sections: (a) experiment; (b) CJS modelling
442 BERNAT, CAMBOU AND DUBOIS

Vertical distance from T1 centre line: m

corresponding to the same ë f ± close to 12% after 18
excavation of the ®rst tunnel. This seems to con®rm 16
EX13-T1-cjs
EX13-T1-mc
that such a factor can be explained primarily by the 14 EX13-T1-exp
tunnelling technique used. 12
Surface
10
T1 excavation in S1 8
CJS and MC models give reasonable modelling 6
of surface settlements and, in particular, anticipate 4
the movement of the settlement trough centre 2
towards the retaining wall (Fig. 21). The fairly 0
close harmony between MC simulations and ®eld 22
data can be explained as follows: 218 216 214 212 210 28 26 24 22 0
(a) In the case being analysed, loading increased Vertical displacement: mm
continuously and the deformations around the (a)
tunnel were relatively small (essentially in the

Vertical distance from T1 centre line: m

elastic domain). 18
(b) The elastic characteristics were de®ned from 16 Surface
the pressuremeter test; in other words these 14
characteristics included some non-linear phe- 12
nomena. 10
8
Figure 22 shows good concordance between
6
modelling and experimental measurements from
4
two extensometers in S1 (showing how settlement EX11-T1-cjs
2
varied with depth), placed respectively on the left EX11-T1-mc
EX11-T1-exp
and at the crown of T1. It is interesting to plot the 0
displacements calculated at the tunnel periphery. In 22
218 216 214 212 210 28 26 24 22 0
terms of vertical displacement around the tunnel
Vertical displacement: mm
(Fig. 23), the crown settlement (from 16 mm in
CJS to 18 mm in MC) and the bottom upward (b)
movement (from 2 mm in CJS to 5´5 mm in MC)
Fig. 22. Extensometer EX13 (a) and EX11 (b) of S1±
should be noted. The back®ll-related asymmetry T1 (CJS and MC modelling with ë ˆ 11:5%, and ®eld
that can be observed substantially increased settle- data `exp')
ment on the right side of the tunnel. For CJS
calculation, a left-haunch 2 mm settlement and a 5
right-haunch 7 mm settlement were recorded. In

Up
Vertical displacements: mm

terms of horizontal displacements around the tun- 0

nel, Fig. 24 shows inward-converging horizontal
displacements (in particular calculated with the 25
CJS model) for the tunnel periphery at haunch T1v-cjs
T1v-mc
height. However, this phenomenon was limited to a 210
very short stretch of the tunnel because inclin-
ometer measurements (Fig. 25) show that at a 215 Left Right
Crown haunch Bottom haunch Crown
0 220
Vertical displacements: mm

0 45 90 135 180 225 270 315 360

22
Angle (8)
24
Fig. 23. Vertical displacements at the periphery of T1
26 in S1 (CJS and MC modelling with ë ˆ 11:5%)
28
210 certain distance from the tunnel a ground outward
cuv-T1-cjs movement is observed at haunch height. This phe-
212 cuv-T1-mc
cuv-T1-exp nomenon is described very well by the CJS model
214 but is not present in the MC model.
230 220 210 0 10 20 30
Horizontal distance from T1 centre line: m Excavation of T1 in S2
Fig. 21. Surface settlement: modelling (in CJS and in For S2, instrumented only for the excavation of
MC with ë ˆ 11:5%) and ®eld date (`exp') for S1±T1 T1, the curves in Fig. 26 show good concordance
 SOFT SOIL TUNNELLING NUMERICAL MODEL 443
of the computed results with the surface settlement 0
trough (Fig. 26), the width of which is slightly

Vertical displacements: mm
21
overestimated by the calculation, and the extens- cuv-T1-cjs
22
ometer at the crown EX21 (Fig. 27). As regards cuv-T1-exp
horizontal displacements (Fig. 28), CJS computa- 23
tion anticipated a lateral outward movement ®ve
24
times lower than that observed. This measurement,
double that in S1, is not related to an increase in 25
grouting pressure for S2 and has not been ex-
26
plained.
27
Comparison of the vertical movements induced in 250 230 210 10 20 30
S1 and S2 Horizontal distance from T1 centre line: m
It should be noted that experience produces Fig. 26. Surface settlement: modelling (in CJS with
settlement values whose signi®cance decreases with ë ˆ 11:5%) and ®eld data (`exp') for S2±T1
tunnel depth between S1 and S2. Computation
predicted such differences in settlements between

Vertical distance from T1 centre line: m

the two sections, since they decreased from 14
15´2 mm at the crown for S1 to 8´2 mm at the
crown for S2, for the same ë f close to 12%. This 12
can be explained because for the same ë f value,
10
incremental unloading will be less for the smaller
value of overburden where the initial stresses are 8
smaller.
6

4 EX21-T1-cjs
4 EX21-T1-exp
To the right
Horizontal displacements: mm

T1u-cjs
2
T1u-mc
2 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 0
Vertical displacements: mm
0
Fig. 27. Extensometer EX21 of S2±T1 (CJS modelling
with ë ˆ 11:5%, and ®eld data `exp')
22

Excavation of the second tube (T2) in zone 1.

24 Left Right
Crown haunch Bottom haunch Crown
Excavation of T2 in S1
26
0 45 90 135 180 225 270 315 360
For the second tube excavation in S1, the com-
Angle (8)
putation±experience adjustment yielded a ®nal de-
con®nement factor close to 18%, bearing in mind
Fig. 24. Horizontal displacements at the periphery of that the grout around the ®rst tube T1 had been
T1±S1 (CJS and MC modelling with ë ˆ 11:5%) consolidated. This ë f increase could be related to
Vertical distance from T1 centre line: m

16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
22
24 I14-T1-cjs I17-T1-cjs
I14-T1-mc I17-T1-mc
26 I14-T1-exp I17-T1-exp
28
210
25 24 23 22 21 0 1 2 25 24 23 22 21 0 1 2
Horizontal displacements: mm Horizontal displacements: mm

Fig. 25. Inclinometer I14 and I17 of S1±T1 (CJS and MC modelling with ë ˆ 11:5%, and ®eld data `exp')
444 BERNAT, CAMBOU AND DUBOIS

10

Vertical distance from T1 centre line: m

8 I24-T1-cjs
I24-T1-exp
6
4
2
0
22
24
26
28
210
26 25 24 23 22 21 0 1 2
Horizontal displacements: mm

Fig. 28. Inclinometer I24 of S2±T1 (CJS modelling with ë ˆ 11:5%,

and ®eld data `exp')

a technological change ± the TBM ran into a hard Vertical distance from T1 centre line: m
17
conglomerate zone, and so the cutting head was EX41-T2-cjs
EX41-T2-exp
15
changed for the boring of tunnel T2. This second EX11-T2-cjs
head was more suited to dealing with hard ground, 13 EX11-T2-exp
but less adapted to soft ground. The settlement 11 EX41 EX41
trough at the surface (Fig. 29) was shallower than simu
exp
that of the ®rst excavation, owing to the lower 9
EX11
overburden above the tube. Modelling always gives 7 EX11 simu
the back®ll in¯uence (on the right-hand side) actu- exp
5
ally observed at the experimental trough level.
Extensometers (Fig. 30) show experimental meas- 3
urements in concordance with computed results. 212 210 28 26 24 22 0
CJS modelling slightly underestimates settlements Vertical displacements: mm
at the EX11 level, but the trough alignment shows
that such a phenomenon is limited locally and then Fig. 30. Extensometers EX41 and EX11 in S1±T2
(CJS modelling with ëT1 ˆ 11:5% and ëT2 ˆ 18%,
has a reverse trend close to the trough sides. ®eld data `exp')

Comparing ®nal modelling settlements of both sec-

tions of zone 1
Section S2 was not instrumented during the
0 second excavation operation. Modelling results are
presented with an 18% factor for the excavation of
Vertical displacements: mm

22 the second tunnel. In S1, dominating settlements

were generated by the ®rst excavation due to the
24 signi®cant overburden over the T1 tube (Fig. 31).
In S2, dominating settlements were generated by
26 the second excavation related to a higher decon-
®nement factor for the same overburden between
28 cuv-T2-cjs T1 and T2 (Fig. 32).
cuv-T2-exp
210 Conclusions for zone 1
230 220 210 0 10 20 30 (a) These various comparisons between experi-
Horizontal distance from T1 centre line: m mental and modelling curves demonstrated that
Fig. 29. Surface settlement in S1±T2 (CJS modelling the whole proposed procedure (and in parti-
with ë ˆ 11:5% for T1 and ë ˆ 18% for T2, ®eld data cular the conventional decon®nement mode)
`exp') enabled modelling in good agreement with the
 SOFT SOIL TUNNELLING NUMERICAL MODEL 445
0 (e) This calculation in one stage of decon®nement
cannot be applied in zone 2, where ®nal crown
Vertical displacements: mm

22
24 vertical displacements were smaller than ®nal
T2
26 surface settlements.
28
210 T1
212
Modelling a `recon®nement' cycle
In order to take into account the intermediate
214 cuv-S1-T1-cjs
T112 cuv-S1-T2-cjs
phase 2 (which is not without importance in zone
216
cuv-S1-T112-cjs 2), new modelling was carried out by imposing a
218 decon®nement factor value adjusted to the settle-
240 230 220 210 0 10 20 30 40 ment changes with time at the crown points.
Horizontal distance from T1 centre line: m Because of the minor settlements recorded in phase
Fig. 31. Surface settlement in S1±T1, S1±T2 and S1± 0, this phase was integrated into the following
T1 ‡ 2 CJS modelling with ëT1 ˆ 11:5% and settlement phase 1. Three phases were modelled:
ëT2 ˆ 18% the ®rst settlement phase 0±1 was modelled by a
®rst decon®nement until ë1, an upward movement
0
phase 2 was modelled by an intermediate stress
increase (called `recon®nement') of äë2 to ë2, and
Vertical displacements: mm

22
24
26 T2
28
T112
210
212
214
216
218
240 230 220 210
Horizontal distance from T1 centre line: m
Fig. 32. Surface settlement in S2±T1, S2±T2 and S2±
T1 ‡ 2 CJS modelling with ëT1 ˆ 11:5% and
ëT2 ˆ 18%
phenomena observed under tunnelling condi-
tions.
(b) The adjustment of ë f in zone 1 gave a ®nal
factor that was close to 12% for T1 excavation.
The same value was then found in the two
cases (S1±T1 and S2±T1) where the same
excavation process and the same alignment
were present but where different geometrical
and stratigraphical conditions were recorded.
Maximum settlements decreased from
15´2 mm to 8´2 mm between the two sections,
this decrease having been accurately predicted
by the calculation for the same ë f of 12%.
(c) The adjustment of ë f in section S1 gave a
®nal factor close to 18% for the second (T2)
tunnel excavation. In the same geometrical and
stratigraphical conditions in S1, this increase
of ë f between the excavation of the two
tunnels T1 and T2 could be explained by a
technological change.
(d) These results proved that with the same layout
conditions in zone 1. The ®nal decon®nement
factor seems to depend essentially on the
technical conditions.
a second settlement phase 3 modelled by a second
T1
decon®nement of äë3 to ë3. Figs 18±21 and Table
6 give the results of this analysis which brings out
the following elements.
As far as the excavation of tubes T1 and T2 in
cuv-S2-T1-cjs section S1 is concerned, the modelling of the
cuv-S2-T2-cjs
cuv-S2-T112-cjs
intermediate stress increase phase of phase 2 has
no effect on ®nal settlements. It should nevertheless
0 10 20 30 40 be noticed that intermediate stress increase was
simulated in S1±T1 for a factor twice as low as the
®nal factor (Fig. 33(b)), while it was observed in S1±
T2 for a factor close to the ®nal factor (Fig. 34(b)).
The intermediate stress increase phase had to be
continued in both cases up to a factor close to 0%, as
if grouting and hydrostatic pressure restored initial
®eld pressure. Modelling clearly shows the phenom-
enon of crown point rising, and, to a lesser degree,
that of the surface points. Decon®nement then occurs
in the reverse order of the intermediate stress increase
stage, on the right-hand side of the reloading curve
up, then returning to the initial curve. This shows
elastic-type behaviour during the cycle.
Conversely, the intermediate stress increase
phase of phase 2 has a signi®cant effect on ®nal
settlements in S2 and zone 2. It should be observed
that in both cases (Figs 35b and 36b) intermediate
stress increase modelling does not stop at 0%, but
goes beyond this value to reach negative factors
applying a pressure higher than that existing under
initial conditions before the start of excavation.
When reaching the negative factors, the intermedi-
ate stress increase curves of phase 2 are no longer
linear. This non-linearity announces signi®cant
irreversible deformations. The phase 3 decon®ne-
ment phase following phase 2 is illustrated by a
curve which no longer links up with that obtained
by ignoring the intermediate stage (extension of
phase 1). Finally, at the end of the excavating
446 BERNAT, CAMBOU AND DUBOIS

Table 6. Absolute decon®nement factor (ë i ) and relative decon®nement factor (äëi ˆ ë i 2 ë i21 ) for each phase no.
i, in %
Ph1 ‡ 2 ‡ 3 Ph1 Ph2 Ph3
Tunnel Section: ®tting point ëf ë1 äë2 ë2 äë3 ë3
T1 S1: EXT11A 11´5 7´7 ÿ10´4 ÿ2´7 14´6 11´9
T1 S2±T1: EXT21A 11´3 6´0 ÿ11´9 ÿ5´9 19´1 13´2
T1 P2±T1: EXT31A 2´8 3´9 ÿ13´1 ÿ9´5 14´0 4´5
T2 S1±T2: EXT41A 18´2 17´0 ÿ17´2 ÿ0´2 18´5 18´3

0 0
EX11A EX41A
Vertical displacements: mm

Vertical displacements: mm
22 EX11S EX41S
22
24
26 24

28 26
210 Passing 28
212 the face
214 210

216 212
220 0 20 40 60 210 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Time: days
Time: days
(a)
(a)

0 0
EX11S-cjs EX41S-cjs
Vertical displacements: mm
Vertical displacements: mm

22 EX11A-cjs EX41A-cjs
22
24
24
26
28 26
210
28
212
210
214
216 212
232221 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 21 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19
Deconfinement factor: % Deconfinement factor: %
(b) (b)

Fig. 33. Excavation of T1±S1: (a) measurements of Fig. 34. Excavation of T2±S1: (a) measurements of
EX11A and EX11S settlements; (b) modelling of EX41A and EX41S settlements; (b) modelling of
EX11A and EX11S settlements EX41A and EX41S settlements

procedure, modelling anticipated surface settle-
ments higher than those at the crown in S2 and
zone 2. The phenomena recorded for zone 2 (Fig.
36a) were obtained from the model. The phase-
by-phase patterns (Figs 37±39) correspond very
well with the actual results, and the modelling
results concerning the decon®nement±recon®ne-
ment phases, depending on the technology used.
In the same way, this phenomenon was recorded
experimentally in S2 during the 5-day period
following grouting (Fig. 35(a)).
Conclusion: the relative value of each decon®ne-
ment±recon®nement phase.
(a) Phase 0±1 (before the passage of the TBM)
seems to be related to the speci®c layout
(Table 7). ë1 is around 4% in horizontal and
straight-line alignment (P2), and about 6±8%
with a slope and curvature in the tunnel
alignment (S1 and S2). The TBM's 48 h halt
under section S1 may explain the highest value
of 8%.
 SOFT SOIL TUNNELLING NUMERICAL MODEL 447
1 3
EX21A EX31A

Vertical displacements: mm
Vertical displacements: mm

EX21S EX31S
21 1.5

23
0
25
21.5
27

29 23
210 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 25 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time: days Time: days
(a) (a)

1 3
EX21S-cjs EX31S-cjs
Vertical displacements: mm

Vertical displacements: mm
0
EX21A-cjs 2 EX31A-cjs
21
22 1
23
0
24
25 21
26 22
27
28 23
29 24
27 24 21 2 5 8 11 14 211 29 27 25 23 21 1 3 5
Deconfinement factor: % Deconfinement factor: %
(b) (b)

Fig. 35. Excavation of T1±S2: (a) measurements of Fig. 36. Excavation of T1±zone 2: (a) measurements of
EX21A and EX21S settlements; (b) modelling of EX31A and EX31S settlements; (b) modelling of
EX21A and EX21S settlements EX31A and EX31S settlements

(b) Phase 2 seems to be of the same order of
magnitude for all three instrumented sections
(äë2 is between 10% and 13%). The small
differences observed could be explained by
different grout pressure values, especially in
zone 2 and S1±T2, where grout pressure was
increased.
(c) Phase 3 certainly has an essential link with
grout consolidation, because very close values
have been found (äë3 is between 14% and
19%). It can be assumed that these values
depend on the density of the injected grout,
linked to grout pressure, and on the overburden
on which the ®nal stress state depends (Table
8).
(d) Because of the cutter-head change between the
excavation of the two tunnels, there is only one
set of ®eld data in these changed technological
conditions. It is therefore very dif®cult to
analyse the values obtained and in particular
whether the observed increase in ë1 and äë2 is
due to this change or to the in¯uence of the
®rst tunnel.
(e) MC simulations have not been presented in
this section because they led to unrealistic
results (surface soil heaving): the MC model is
known to give unrealistic forecasts for cyclic
loadings.
Grouting ¯uid properties (Bernat, 1996)
The grout injected behind the segments is inert
and consists of a ®ller material, bentonite and
water. Its ¯uid behaviour means that it cannot bear
any shear stress. Thus actual shear stress evolution
(shear decon®nement) at the excavation periphery
is certainly higher than radial stress evolution
(radial decon®nement). In order to better under-
stand these two mechanisms, radial-only, then
shear-only, decon®nements were simulated for S1±
T1. It should be noted that the decrease of shear
stresses on the inner face of the excavation was
only a boundary condition. This does not imply
that the shear stresses in the soil around the tunnel
could be signi®cantly reduced.
448 BERNAT, CAMBOU AND DUBOIS

0.5 14

Vertical distance from T1 centre line: m

12
0 Ph2
10
Vertical displacements: mm

20.5 8
6
21 Ph1 Ph1
4 Ph2
21.5 2
Ph3
Ph3 Ph1
Ph2 0
22
Ph3 22
22.5
24
23 26
230 224 218 212 26 0 6 12 18 24 30 21.5 21 20.5 0 0.5 1
Horizontal distance from T1 centre line: m Horizontal displacements: mm
(a) (a)

0.5 14

Vertical distance from T1 centre line: m

12
0
Ph2
Vertical displacements: mm

10
20.5 8
6
21
4
Ph1
21.5 2
Ph1
22 Ph2 0
Ph3 22 Ph1
22.5 Ph3 Ph2
24 Ph3
23 26
230 224 218 212 26 0 6 12 18 24 30 21.5 21 20.5 0 0.5 1
Horizontal distance from T1 centre line: m Horizontal displacements: mm
(b) (b)

Fig. 37. Excavation of tunnel T1±zone 2: comparison Fig. 38. Excavation of tunnel T1±zone 2: comparison
modelling-®eld data for the surface settlement (three modelling-®eld data for the Inclinometer I36 (three
different phases). (a) Experiment. (b) Simulation different phases). (a) Experiment. (b) Simulation

(a) The diagram shown in Fig. 40 illustrates the
settlement changes for the two extreme points
EX11A and EX11S of crown extensometer
EX11 in S1, as a function of the decon®ne-
ment type selected. The 15´2 mm value meas-
ured experimentally at EX11A was obtained
for a radial decon®nement factor of 12´5% and
for a shear decon®nement factor of 92%. This
demonstrates that the displacements measured
are compatible with large shear decon®nement
factors.
(b) Plotting the horizontal displacements calcu-
lated at the T1 excavation periphery (Fig.
41(b)) demonstrates that shear decon®nement
increased lateral outward movement as com-
pared to radial decon®nement. This is con-
®rmed by the plot of simulated inclinometric
measurements (Fig. 41(c) for I14 and I17).
(c) Plotting the vertical displacement on EX11
(Fig. 41(e)) shows that in a purely shear
decon®nement case, the maximum value is no
longer located at the crown point but at some
distance from it. Measurements do not show
such a phenomenon.
(d) It should be noted that the crown ®tting gives
surface settlements of the same order of
magnitude for both kinds of decon®nement
(Fig. 41(d)).
 SOFT SOIL TUNNELLING NUMERICAL MODEL 449
14 Conclusions
Vertical distance from T1 centre line: m

(a) Decon®nement can be used as a boundary

12
EX31
condition until a ®nal factor or possibly with
Ph3 EX31 Ph1 an intermediate `recon®nement' cycle, both
10 Ph1 Ph2 experimentally determined. This allows displa-
Ph3 cements measured in the ground, especially
8 surface settlements, to be found.
(b) The analysis proved that the whole tunnelling
EX31 process cannot be modelled by a shear-only
6
Ph2 decon®nement. On the other hand, by correctly
forecasting lateral outward movement related
4
to the shear-only decon®nement calculation, it
also showed that part of the tunnelling process
2 (probably in phase 1) could be modelled by
24 23 22 21 0 1 2 3 4 increasing the shear release factor relative to
Vertical displacements: mm the radial one.
(a)

CONCLUSION
14
The ®eld data obtained on the Lyons-Vaise
metro was used to evaluate an excavation model-
Vertical distance from T1 centre line: m

EX31
ling procedure using the ®nite element method.
12
Ph3
Ph1 The various model results-to-®eld-data comparisons
Ph2 demonstrated that the computation strategy selected
10 Ph3 led to reasonably accurate forecasting when based
EX31 on actual working conditions, with a basic know-
8 Ph1 ledge of soil layers and of the decon®nement
factor. When adjusting the observations of a few
6 measurements at the beginning of the tunnelling
EX31
Ph2
operation, an accurate assessment of the decon®ne-
4
ment factor enables good forecasting over the
whole site to be obtained despite constant changes
in geometrical and stratigraphical elements.
2
Two cases can be noted:
24 23 22 21 0 1 2 3 4
Vertical displacements: mm (a) In more dif®cult excavation conditions (slopes
(b) and bends), the initial settlement phase 0±1 is
important relative to the upward movement of
Fig. 39. Excavation of tunnel T1±zone 2: comparison phase 2. In that case, an analysis of ®nal
modelling-®eld data for the Extensometer EX31 (three conditions is suf®cient and modelling can be
different phases). (a) Experiment. (b) Simulation done in only one decon®nement stage. The

Table 7. Layout conditions and TBM halt beneath instrumented sections

Section S1±T1 S2±T1 P2±T1 S1±T2
Overburden 13´8 m 10 m 10´2 m 7´9 m
Horizontal Descent x x x
alignment Straight line x
Vertical Left bend x x x
alignment Straight line x
Halt Before section ÿ1 m ÿ1 m ÿ2 m
of (1/2 day) (1 day) (3´5 days)
TBM Under section 2´5 days 2´5 days
450 BERNAT, CAMBOU AND DUBOIS

Table 8. Comparison of relative crown settlement, relative decon®nement factor

and overburden in phase 3
Crown point Overburden: m äv3: mm äë3: %
EXT11A 13´8 ÿ11´0 14´6
EXT41A 7´9 ÿ6´6 18´5
EXT21A 10´0 ÿ9´0 19´1
EXT31A 10´2 ÿ4´7 14´0

0
EX11S: radial deconf.
22 EX11A: radial deconf.
EX11A: shear deconf.
Vertical displacements: mm

24 EX11S: shear deconf.

26
EX11S
28 EX11S dec-shear
dec-rad
210
EX11A
dec-shear
212

214 EX11A
dec-rad
216
210 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Radial or shear ‘deconfinement’ factor: %

Fig. 40. Excavation of T1±S1: EX11A and EX11S modelling of radial

and shear `decon®nement'

analysis proved that for the same tunnelling
technique, this factor is approximately constant
on the length (about 12% in the case studied, with
a slurry-pressurized TBM and the ®rst wheel).
(b) In the best excavation conditions (horizontal and
linear), the upward intermediate phase 2 can no
longer be ignored. Modelling using the `decon-
®nement factor' with an intermediary `decon-
®nement±recon®nement' cycle seems to give
realistic results as far as ground displacements
are concerned. The ®rst decon®nement phase 0±
1 (4±8% with the ®rst wheel for T1 excavation,
18% with the second wheel for T2 excavation) to
be simulated seems to be essentially related to the
TBM digging process, to the layout conditions
and to the TBM speed. The `recon®nement'
phase 2 (ÿ10% to ÿ17%) is related to the
grouting and to the upward movement of the
tunnel inside the grout under hydrostatic pres-
sure. The second decon®nement phase 3 (14±
20%) is essentially related to the consolidation of
the grout injected in its ¯uid state.
This modelling based on a decon®nement pro-
cedure does not require the mechanical properties
of the grout to be determined, and seems to give
reasonable forecasts for surface settlements due to
shallow tunnelling. It thus appears to be a very
simple way of obtaining good assessment of possi-
ble damage related to shallow tunnelling in soft
soil. But it must be noted that ë is only a
mathematical strategem and has no physical rea-
lity. In the case of shallow tunnels in particular,
the weight equilibrium of the tunnel is not com-
pletely satis®ed by such modelling, and the loads
at the periphery of the excavation are certainly
not representative of the real values applied to the
concrete segments. Therefore if precise informa-
tion is needed on the upward movement of the
tunnel and on the stress inside the lining (useful
for segment design), it is better to try to take into
account real interactions between soil and struc-
ture. These two approaches will be compared in
another paper to appear soon in Computers and
Geotechnics.
 SOFT SOIL TUNNELLING NUMERICAL MODEL 451
4 10

Horizontal displacements: mm
Radial ‘deconf.’
Vertical displacements: mm

2 Shear ‘deconf.’
5
0
22
0
24
26 25
Radial ‘deconf.’
28 Shear ‘deconf.’
210 210
212 Left Right Crown Left Right Crown
Crown Crown
214 haunch Bottom haunch 215 haunch Bottom haunch
216
218 220
0 45 90 135 180 225 270 315 360 0 45 90 135 180 225 270 315 360
Angle (8) Angle (8)

(a) (b)
Vertical distance from T1 centre line: m

Radial ‘deconf.’
16 Shear ‘deconf.’ Field data
14 Inclinometer
12 Inclinometer I14 S1–T1
I17 S1–T1
10
8
6
4
2
0
22
24
26
28
210
210292827262524232221 0 1 2 3 4 5 210292827262524232221 0 1 2 3 4 5
Horizontal displacement: mm Horizontal displacement: mm
(c)
Vertical distance from T1 centre line: m

0 18
Radial ‘deconf.’ Radial ‘deconf.’
Vertical displacements: mm

22 Shear ‘deconf.’ 16 Shear ‘deconf.’

Field data
14
24
Field data 12
26
10
28
8
210 6
212 4
214 2
230 220 210 0 10 20 30 218 216 214 212 210 28
Vertical distance from T1 centre line: m Vertical displacements: mm
(d) (e)

Fig. 41. Simulation of different stress release cases: (a) vertical displacements of T1±S1; (b) horizontal
displacements of T1±S1; (c) lateral displacements of I14 and I17 after T1 excavation; (d) surface settlements
after T1 excavation; (e) vertical displacements of EX11 after T1 excavation

REFERENCES Attewell, P. B. (1977). Ground movements caused by

Allouani, M. (1993). Identi®cation des lois de comporte- tunnelling in soil. Proceedings of the large ground
ment de sols. De®nition de la strateÂgie et de la qualite movements and structures conference, Cardiff, pp.
de l'identi®cation. Thesis EÂcole Centrale de Lyon. 812±848.
Amet, J. C., Guibert, G. & Schwenzfeier, A. (1996). Bernat, S. (1996). ModeÂlisation des deÂformations induites
Shield-experience on Line D Extension Lyons Metro. par le creusement d'un tunnel-Application au meÂtro
Proceedings of the North American Tunneling 96, de Lyons-Vaise. Thesis, Ecole Centrale de Lyon.
Washington, 27±33. Bernat, S., Cambou, B. & Dubois, P. (1995a). Modelling
452 BERNAT, CAMBOU AND DUBOIS
of the excavation during tunnelling in soft soil. Pro-
ceedings of the 5th international symposium on nu-
merical models in geo-mechanics (NUMOG V),
Davos, 471±476.
Bernat, S., Ollier, C., Cambou B., Kastner, R., Dubois, P.
& Guilbert, G. (1995b). Des geÂomateÂriaux aux ouv-
rages, creusement de tunnels en terrains meubles. In
ExpeÂrimentation sur chantier, modeÂlisation et valida-
tion (eds C. Petit, G. Pijaudier-Cabot and J. H.
Reynouard), pp. 283±322. Paris: Hermes.
Bernat, S., Cambou, B. & Dubois, P. (1996). Numerical
modelling of tunneling in soft soil. Proceedings of the
international symposium of Technical Committee TC
28, Underground construction in soft ground, London,
pp. 465±470.
Bernat, S., Cambou, B. & Purwaningsih, S. (1997).
Modelling of soil-structure interaction during tunnel-
ling in soft soil. Proceedings of the 9th international
conference of the international association for compu-
ter methods and advances in geomechanics (IACMAG
97), Wuhan, 1377±1382.
Cambou, B. & Jafari, K. (1988). ModeÁle de comporte-
ment des sols non-coheÂrents. Rev. FrancËaise GeÂotech-
nique, No. 44, 43±45.
Cambou, B. & Lanier, J. (1988). Induced anisotropy in
cohesionless soil: experiments and modellings. Com-
puters Geotech., 6, 291±311.
Cambou, B., Dubujet, P. & Doanh, T. (1990). Undrained
cyclic loading with reorientation of principal axes:
experiments and modelling. Proceedings of the 3rd
international conference on constitutive laws for en-
gineering material: theory and applications, Tucson.
Cording, E. J. & Hansmire, W. H. (1977). Les deÂplace-
ments autour des tunnels en terrain tendre. TOS
(Tunnels et Ouvrages Souterrains) Nos 22, 23, 24.
GRECO (1995). La modeÂlisation numeÂrique du comporte-
ment des ouvrages souterrains et sa validation. In Les
geÂomateÂriaux, avanceÂes reÂcentes en calcul d'ouvrages
(eds F. Darve, P. Y. Hicher and J. H. Reynouard),
pp. 229±252. Paris: HermeÁs.
Kastner, R. & Ollier, C. (1996). In situ monitoring of
the Lyons Metro, Line D Extension. Proceedings of
the international symposium of Technical Committee
TC 28, Underground construction in soft ground,
London, pp. 701±706.
Kastner, R., Ollier, C., Bernat, S. & Cambou, B. (1995).
Monitoring of a tunnel excavated in soft ground with
a pressure tunnel boring machine. Validation of a
modelling procedure. Proceedings of the 4th interna-
tional symposium of `®eld measurements in geomecha-
nics', FMGM 95, Bergame, 145±153.
Lee, K. M. & Rowe, R. K. (1989). Deformations caused
by surface loading and tunnelling: the role of elastic
anisotropy. GeÂotechnique 39, No. 1, 125±140.
Maleki, M. (1998). ModeÁles de comportement de sols
hierarchiseÂs. Thesis EÂcole Centrale de Lyon.
Panet, M. & Guenot, A. (1982). Analysis of convergence
behind the face of a tunnel. Proceedings of Tunnelling
'82, London, 197±204.
Peck, R. B. (1969). Deep excavations and tunnelling in
soft ground. Proceedings of the 7th international
conference on soil mechanism foundation engineering,
225±290.
Rezgui, B. (1993). Validation de code de calcul et de
modeÁle de comportement sur ouvrage type. Thesis
EÂcole Centrale de Lyon.