Hindawi

Mathematical Problems in Engineering

Volume 2021, Article ID 8842153, 11 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/8842153

Research Article
The Plastic Zone of Tunnel Surrounding Rock under Unequal
Stress in Two Directions Based on the Unified Strength Theory

Zongshan Zou,1 Jun Yang,1 Zhongming Wang,2 and Hongyan Liu 3

1
State Key Laboratory of Explosion Science and Technology, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China
2
Architecture Engineering College, Huanghuai University, Zhumadian, Henan 463000, China
3
School of Engineering & Technology, China University of Geosciences (Beijing), Beijing 100083, China

Correspondence should be addressed to Hongyan Liu; lhyan1204@126.com

Received 31 August 2020; Revised 24 January 2021; Accepted 28 January 2021; Published 8 February 2021

Academic Editor: Georgios I. Giannopoulos

Copyright © 2021 Zongshan Zou et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution
License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is
properly cited.

For the deficiencies that the existing calculation theory for the Plastic Zone of Tunnel Surrounding Rock (PZTSR) does not
consider the effect of the intermediate principal stress σ 2 and interaction between the surrounding rock and support
structure on the PZTSR under unequal stress, the Unified Strength Theory (UST) for the rock is adopted to replace the often
used Mohr-Coulomb (M-C) strength criterion to consider the effect of σ 2 on the PZTSR. Meanwhile, the interaction
mechanism between the surrounding rock and support structure is also considered in the proposed model. Finally, the effect
of the initial elastic displacement of the surrounding rock, stiffness of the support structure, and the coefficient b of the
intermediate principal stress on the plastic zone is discussed. The results show that the PZTSR will increase nonlinearly with
increasing the initial elastic displacement of the surrounding rock, and when it increases to a certain value, its increase
extent will be much obvious. With increasing the stiffness of the support structure, the PZTSR will gradually decrease
nonlinearly, but the decrease extent is not very much. With increasing b, the PZTSR will decrease; namely, σ 2 can improve
the stress condition of the surrounding rock and reduce the PZTSR.

1. Introduction of the tunnel under unequal stress in two directions is of

more practical significance. Kirsch [8] firstly obtained
The tunnel construction will inevitably lead to some the elastic solution of the circular tunnel in hydrostatic
plastic zone in the surrounding rock, which is vital for stress, and thereafter, many researchers investigated the
the tunnel stability and design of the support. Up to now, PZTSR with different rock strength criteria on basis of
it has been an important issue attracting more and more Kirsch’s solution, such as M-C strength criterion [9–11],
attention [1–5]. For a long time, Kastner’s method [6] is UST [12], and Hoek-Brown criterion [13], to determine
often adopted to calculate the surrounding rock stress the PZTSR. In sum, it can be seen that the profound
and plastic zone, and many improvements have been research has been made on the PZTSR under unequal
made to it [7], which greatly promotes the development stress in two directions; however, the studies above are
of the tunnel engineering. However, the existing studies only suitable for the situation that the support is con-
mainly focus on the circular tunnel under hydrostatic structed immediately when the tunnel is excavated, and
stress. In practice, the natural geostress field of the tunnel meanwhile, the support stress is invariable for all the
is often nonhydrostatic, and the horizontal stress is often time. In fact, the construction of the support always has
larger than the vertical one with the increased buried some delay, some ground deformation has always oc-
depth of the tunnel and intensive geological tectonic curred, and accordingly, the support stress will vary with
action. Therefore, the study on the mechanical behavior it. Therefore, the previous researches do not agree with
2 Mathematical Problems in Engineering

the actual condition and cannot reflect the interaction timing and stiffness of the support on the PZTSR. For the
between the support and ground. former, some researchers [19–22] found that the support
On the basis of the practical tunnel construction process, delay would increase the scope of the PZTSR. For the latter,
Hou et al. [14] assumed that there were three deficiencies in other researchers [23–25] assumed that the tunnel me-
the existing researches. Firstly, they assumed that the chanical behavior is much related to the support stiffness.
existing researches did not fit with the practical condition However, although many studies have been conducted on
which assumes that the support stress was applied on the this issue and much progress has been achieved, nearly no
tunnel at the same time with the ground stress. In fact, the researches focus on the effect of the intermediate principal
tunnel is always firstly loaded with the ground stress, then stress and the initial ground elastic displacement before the
excavated, and finally supported. Second, the support stress support construction and support stiffness on the PZTSR at the
is seen as the initiative one and applied for one time, which same time. Therefore, on basis of the calculation method of the
does not agree with the practice. In fact, except that the stress PZTSR under unequal stress in two directions proposed by
supplied by the prestressed bolt can be almost seen as the Ruppney [11], this study proposes a new model that can
initiative one, all the other support stresses are passive which consider the abovementioned three factors at the same time,
vary with the ground deformation towards the tunnel which will agree with the practical condition much more.
[15, 16]. Thirdly, after the tunnel is excavated, the instan-
taneous initial ground displacement towards the tunnel
center will occur before the support is constructed. There-
2. Elasticity Solution of the Circular
fore, it can be found that these three aspects are all related to Tunnel under Unequal Stress in
the interaction mechanism between the ground and support. Two Directions
Now Convergence Confinement Analysis (CCA) or Char-
acteristic Curve Analysis (CCA) proposed by many re- Assume that the ground is homogeneous and isotropic, the
searchers [6, 17, 18] is an effective tool to analyze the mechanical model of the circular tunnel is shown in Figure 1.
interaction mechanism between the ground and support. By superposing the stress components obtained from the
Thereafter, many studies on CCA have been conducted to models in Figures 1(b) and 1(c), the elastic stress and dis-
study the tunnel mechanical behavior, which can be clas- placement of the model in Figure 1(a) are as follows [26]:
sified into two categories, that is, the effect of construction

⎪
⎧
⎪
⎪ 1 r2 1 r2 r4 r2
⎪
⎪ σ r � (1 + λ)p0 􏼠1 − 02 􏼡 − (1 − λ)p0 􏼠1 − 4 02 + 3 04 􏼡cos 2θ + ps 02 ,
⎪
⎪ 2 r 2 r r r
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎨ 1 r20 1 r40 r20
σ
⎪ θ 2 � (1 + λ)p 0 􏼠 1 + 􏼡 + (1 − λ)p 0 􏼠 1 + 3 􏼡cos 2θ − ps 2,
⎪
⎪
⎪ r2 2 r4 r
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ 1 r20 r40
⎪
⎪ (1)
⎪ τ
⎩ rθ 2� (1 − λ)p 0 􏼠 1 + 2 − 3 􏼡sin 2θ,
r2 r4

⎪
⎧
⎪ r 1 r20 1 r20 r40
⎪
⎪ u � 􏼢 p + (1 + λ)p − (1 − λ)p 􏼠 4 (1 − ]) − 4 􏼡cos 2θ􏼣,
⎪
⎪ 2G s
2 0
r 2
2 0
r 2
r
⎪
⎪
⎨
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ 4 2
⎪ v � − rps θ + r · 1 (1 − λ)p 􏼢r0 + 2(1 − 2]) r0 􏼣sin 2θ,
⎪
⎩ 0
G 2G 2 r4 r2

where σ r and σ θ are the radial and circumferential normal 3. The PZTSR under Unequal Stress in Two
stress components, respectively; τ rθ is the shear stress Directions Based on the UST
component; θ is the polar angle; r is the polar radius; u and v
are the radial and tangential displacement components, 3.1. The Theoretical Model. The field test of the ground stress
respectively; E, G, and ] are the rock elastic modulus, shear indicates that the horizontal stress is not equal to the vertical
modulus, and Poisson’s ratio, respectively. one in most cases [27, 28], and so the surrounding rock plastic
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 3

p0 λp0 (1 – λ)p0

θ θ
λp0 O r0 λp0 O
ps r0 O
θ
r0
ps
tunnel tunnel tunnel

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 1: The mechanical model of the circular tunnel under unequal stress in two directions. r0 is the tunnel radius, ps is the support stress
evenly acting on the tunnel inner wall, p0 (� ch, where c is the rock gravitational density and h is the depth from the ground surface to the
tunnel center) is the vertical ground self-gravity stress, λ is the lateral pressure coefficient, and θ is the polar angle. According to the
superposition principle of the linear elasticity theory, the elasticity solution of the model, shown in (a), can be seen as the sum of that of the
model in uniform stress condition, shown in (b), and that of the model in one-single direction stress condition, shown in (c).

zone in the circular tunnel is not circular anymore. As stated plastic zone radius rp of the circular tunnel based on the M-C
above, many researches have been conducted on this issue; for criterion, which is
instance, Ruppneyt [11] proposed the calculation method of the

((1− sin φ)/(2 sin φ))

􏼂(1 + λ)p0 + 2c cot φ􏼃(1 − sin φ) (1 − λ)p0 (1 − sin φ)cos 2θ
rp � r0 􏼨 􏼩 × 􏼨1 + 􏼩, (2)
2ps + 2c cot φ 􏼂(1 + λ)p0 + 2c cot φ􏼃sin φ

where c and φ are the cohesion and internal friction angle of the rock failure, it cannot reflect the difference in the rock
the rock, respectively, and the other parameters are stated as strength of different meridians [28]. And then Yu et al.
above. [28, 29] proposed the USTfor the rock and introduced it into
If λ � 1, namely, the stress field is uniform, equation (2) is the tunnel mechanical analysis to take into account the effect
identical to that obtained by Kastner [6]. of the intermediate principal stress on the tunnel mechanical
Although it is widely used in the soil and rock me- behavior [30].
chanics, the M-C criterion cannot reflect the effect of the Assume that these three principal stresses are σ 1, σ 2, and
intermediate principal stress on the rock failure, and then it σ 3, respectively, there is σ 1 > σ 2 > σ 3. According to the UST
cannot explain the failure phenomenon of the rock under proposed by Yu et al. [28, 29], when the element is in the
high confining pressure and hydrostress. However, although critical failure state, these three principal stresses should
the Drucker-Prager strength criterion proposed in the 1950s satisfy
can consider the effect of the intermediate principal stress on

⎪
⎧ 1 − sin φ 1 2c cos φ σ + σ3 σ1 − σ3
⎪
⎪
⎪ σ1 − bσ 2 + σ 3 􏼁 � , σ2 ≤ 1 + sin φ,
⎪
⎪ 1 + sin φ 1 − b 1 + sin φ 2 2
⎨
⎪ (3)
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ 1 − sin φ 2c cos φ σ + σ3 σ1 − σ3
⎪
⎩ σ + bσ 2 􏼁 − σ 3 � , σ2 ≥ 1 + sin φ,
(1 + b)(1 + sin φ) 1 1 + sin φ 2 2
where b is the intermediate principal stress coefficient, which Substituting equation (4) into (3) yields
reflects the effect of the intermediate principal stress on the
rock failure. σ 1 − σ 3 σ 1 + σ 3 2(1 + b)sin φ 2(1 + b)c cos φ
For a plane strain issue, when the material goes into the − � . (5)
2 2 2 + b(1 + sin φ) 2 + b(1 + sin φ)
plastic state, the longitudinal axial stress is the intermediate
principal stress σ 2. It is approximately the mean of σ 1 and σ 3;
namely, Let sin φt � ((2(1 + b)sin φ)/(2 + b(1 + sin φ))) and
ct � ((2(1 + b)c cos φ)/(2 + b(1 + sin φ))) · (1/cos φt ), and
σ + σ3
σ2 � 1 . (4) then equation (5) can be written as
2
4 Mathematical Problems in Engineering

σ1 − σ3 σ1 + σ3 Table 1: The calculation parameters of the tunnel.

− sin φt � ct cos φt . (6)
2 2 r0 (m) E (GPa) v p0 (MPa) ps (MPa) φ (°) c (MPa) λ
Equation (6) is completely similar to the M-C criterion 3 10 0.25 8 0.4 40 1.0 0.6
in the form; therefore, it is assumed that the calculation
method of the plastic zone radius rp of the circular tunnel be obtained if ct and φt are adopted to replace c and φ in
under unequal stress in two directions based on the UST can equation (2). Then, we obtain

(((2+b)(1− sin φ))/(4(1+b)sin φ))

􏼂(1 + λ)p0 + 2c cot[arcsin((2(1 + b)sin φ)/(2 + b(1 + sin φ)))]􏼃 · ((2 + b)(1 − sin φ)/(2 + b(1 + sin φ)))
rp � r0 􏼨 􏼩
2ps + 2c cot[arcsin((2(1 + b)sin φ)/(2 + b(1 + sin φ)))]

(1 − λ)p0 (((2 + b)(1 − sin φ))/(2 + b(1 + sin φ)))cos 2θ

× 􏼨1 + 􏼩.
􏼂(1 + λ)p0 + 2c cot[arcsin((2(1 + b)sin φ)/(2 + b(1 + sin φ)))]􏼃 · ((2(1 + b)sin φ)/(2 + b(1 + sin φ)))
(7)

3.2. The Analysis of the Calculation Example. Here, the surrounding rock relative plastic zones are all oval. It in-
calculation model in Figure 1 is adopted. According to the dicates that increasing p0 does not change the shape of the
field test in the buried depth of 205.65∼583.15 m, the ground PZTSR but only affects its size. The larger the initial ground
stress components SH, Sh, and SV of Sangzhuling tunnel, stress p0 is, the larger the size of the PZTSR is. When p0
which is the key engineering of Sichuan-Tibet railway of increases from 8 MPa to 12 and 16 MPa, respectively, the
China, are 9.41∼17.72, 5.61∼13.10, and 5.34∼15.13 MPa, corresponding surrounding rock relative plastic zone in the
respectively. Therefore, the parameters in Table 1 are horizontal direction will increase from 1.227 to 1.339 and
adopted, and the tunnel surrounding rock relative plastic 1.426, respectively, whose increase extent is 9.13% and
zone (here, it is denoted by rp/r0) with different intermediate 6.50%, respectively. It indicates that the increase extent
principal stress coefficient b is obtained with equation (7), gradually becomes gentle.
which is shown in Figure 2.
It can be seen that the surrounding rock relative plastic
zone of the circular tunnel under unequal stress in two di- 3.2.2. Effect of ps on the PZTSR. Here, ps is assumed to be 0,
rections is not a circle anymore, but an oval. It indicates that the 0.2, and 0.4 MPa, respectively, and the variation of the
coefficient λ has much effect on the PZTSR. In this calculation PZTSR with ps is shown in Figure 4. It can also be found that
model, λ � 0.6; namely, the vertical stress is larger than the the surrounding rock relative plastic zones are all oval. It
horizontal one, and accordingly, the size of the plastic zone in indicates that increasing ps does not change the shape of the
the vertical direction is less than that in the horizontal direction, PZTSR but only affects its size. With increasing ps, the size of
which agrees with the research result obtained by Simanjuntak the PZTSR induced by the tunnel excavation becomes less
[13]. Meanwhile, the tunnel surrounding rock relative plastic and less. This is because the increase in the support stress will
zone decreases with increasing b, which is a group of ovals with lead to an increase in the confining pressure of the rock, and
the same center. Because b reflects the effect of the intermediate therefore, the PZTSR decreases. Although the support stress
principal stress on the rock failure, it is assumed that the in- can effectively reduce the PZTSR, the decrease extent is
termediate principal stress has much effect on the PZTSR. The different. When ps increases from 0 MPa to 0.2 and 0.4 MPa,
UST with b � 0 is identical to the M-C criterion, and then it is respectively, the corresponding surrounding rock relative
assumed that the PZTSR is the largest when the intermediate plastic zone in the horizontal direction gradually decreases
principal stress is not considered, while for other cases, the from 1.321 to 1.270 and 1.227, respectively, whose decrease
effect of b is all considered, and the surrounding rock plastic extent is 3.86% and 3.39%, respectively. Namely, the de-
zone decreases with increasing b; namely, when b increases crease extent becomes gentle. It indicates that the effect of
from 0 to 1, the surrounding rock relative plastic zone gradually the support stress on the PZTSR becomes not much when it
decreases from 1.295 to 1.254, 1.227, 1.209, and 1.195. The increases to some degree.
largest decrease extent is 8.37%, which indicates that the in-
termediate principal stress has some effect on the PZTSR. 3.2.3. Effect of λ on the PZTSR. Here, λ is assumed to be 0.6,
Here, the parametric sensitivity analysis is adopted to 1, and 1.4, respectively, and the variation of the PZTSR with
discuss the effect of the calculation parameters on the λ is shown in Figure 5. It can also be found that the sur-
PZTSR, in which b � 0.5 and only one parameter in Table 1 is rounding rock relative plastic zones are all oval except for
changed for one time. λ � 1, and its long axis direction changes with increasing λ.
When λ < 1, its long axis is in the horizontal direction, which
3.2.1. Effect of p0 on the PZTSR. Here, p0 is assumed to be 8, indicates that the PZTSR is larger in this direction. When
12, and 16 MPa, respectively, and the variation of the PZTSR λ � 1, it is circular, and when λ > 1, its long axis is in the
with p0 is shown in Figure 3. It can be found that the vertical direction, which indicates that the PZTSR is larger in
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 5

rp/r0

rp/r0
1.2 1.5

0.9

0.6 1

0.3
rp/r0 0.5
0
–1.4 –1 –0.6 –0.2 0.2 0.6 1 1.4
–0.3 rp/r0
0
–0.6 –1.5 –1 –0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5

–0.9
–0.5
–1.2
b=0 b = 0.75
b = 0.25 b=1 –1
b = 0.5
Figure 2: The effect of the intermediate principal stress coefficient b
on the tunnel surrounding rock relative plastic zone. –1.5

ps = 0 MPa
ps = 0.2 MPa
ps = 0.4 MPa
rp/r0

1.5 Figure 4: The variation of the tunnel surrounding rock relative

plastic zone with ps.

rp/r0
1.5

0.5
1
rp/r0
0
–1.5 –1 –0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
0.5

–0.5
rp/r0
0
–1.5 –1 –0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
–1

–0.5
–1.5
p0 = 8MPa
p0 = 12MPa –1
p0 = 16MPa

Figure 3: The variation of the tunnel surrounding rock relative

plastic zone with p0. –1.5
λ = 0.6
this direction. Therefore, it is assumed that the lateral λ=1
λ = 1.4
pressure coefficient λ has much effect on the shape of the
PZTSR. In practice, the field ground stress test should be Figure 5: The variation of the tunnel surrounding rock relative
conducted in order to obtain the reliable lateral pressure plastic zone with λ.
6 Mathematical Problems in Engineering

rp/r0

rp/r0
1.5 1.5

1 1

0.5
0.5

rp/r0
0 rp/r0
–1.8 –1.5 –1.2 –0.9 –0.6 –0.3 0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5 1.8 0
–1.6 –1.2 –0.8 –0.4 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6

–0.5
–0.5

–1

–1

–1.5
c = 0MPa
–1.5
c = 0.5MPa
c = 1MPa φ = 30°
φ = 35°
φ = 40°
(a) (b)

Figure 6: The variation of the tunnel surrounding rock relative plastic zone with c and φ.

coefficient, which provides the basis for the tunnel sur- be solved from viewpoint of the interaction between the
rounding rock support design. ground and the support structure.
Now, the often used support types in tunnel engineering
are shotcrete, reinforced concrete liner, bolt, and their
3.2.4. Effect of c and φ on the PZTSR. Here, the rock co-
combination. Here, the reinforced concrete liner is taken as
hesion c is assumed to be 0, 0.5, and 1 MPa, respectively, and
an example, and comparing with the rock mechanical
the variation of the PZTSR with c is shown in Figure 6(a). It
property, it can be seen to be linear elastic. Therefore, it is
can be seen that the surrounding rock relative plastic zones
assumed that the radial support stress ps produced by the
are all oval. It indicates that increasing c does not change the
support is proportional to the radial displacement (us )r�r0 at
shape of the PZTSR and only affects its size. With increasing
the tunnel inner wall [31].
the rock strength, the PZTSR will become less and less.
Therefore, some engineering reinforcement measures such ps � ks us 􏼁r�r0 , (8)
as grouting can be adopted to reduce the PZTSR. Mean-
while, the decrease extent of the PZTSR becomes less and where ks is the support stiffness. Because only the radial
less with increasing c. The effect of rock internal friction support stress is considered here, ks only refers to the tensile
angle φ on the PZTSR is shown in Figure 6(b), which is or compressive stiffness.
similar to that of the rock cohesion c, and we do not state it Because the support is mostly constructed after the
again. tunnel excavation, the initial ground radial displacement u0
inevitably occurs. Therefore, the relationship between the
4. The PZTSR by considering the support stress ps and u0 can be expressed as
Interaction between the Ground and
the Support ps � ks us − u0 􏼁r�r0 . (9)

Most of the existing tunnel mechanical models are based on Because the plastic deformation cannot be recovered, the
Kastner’s theory [6], which assumes that the radial support support should be constructed before the maximum ground
stress ps induced by the support on the tunnel inner wall is elastic radial displacement (ue )max happens, which can be
invariable and applied immediately. However, as stated calculated as follows [32]:
above, Hou et al. [14] made a detailed analysis on the de- rp
ficiencies of Kastner’s theory and assumed that ps is not ue 􏼁max � 0 0 . (10)
G
constant anymore, and it will vary with the interaction
between the ground and the support structure. Next, ps will Therefore, 0 ≦ u0 ≦ (ue)max.
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 7

Then, the calculation of the radial displacement (us )r�r0 Substituting equations (9) into (11) and assuming that no
at the tunnel inner wall is discussed. According to the relative circumferential displacement occurs between the
elastoplastic theory [33], the calculation method of the support and ground during the whole tunnel deformation,
ground displacement in the plastic condition is the same as the radial displacement us of the support structure equals
that in the elastic condition when satisfying the plain strain (us )r�r0 at the tunnel inner wall. After simplifying, we obtain
and volume incompressibility conditions. Therefore, (us )r�r0 (1 + λ)p0 − (1 − λ)p0 (3 − 4])cos 2θ − 2ks u0
can be derived. us 􏼁r�r0 � .
4G/ r0 − 2ks 􏼁
r
us 􏼁r�r0 � 0 􏼂2ps +(1 + λ)p0 − (1 − λ)p0 (3 − 4])cos 2 θ􏼃. (12)
4G
(11) Substituting equations (9) and (12) into (7) yields

(((2+b)(1− sin φ))/(4(1+b)sin φ))

􏼂(1 + λ)p0 + 2c cot[arcsin((2(1 + b)sin φ)/(2 + b(1 + sin φ)))]􏼃 · (((2 + b)(1 − sin φ))/(2 + b(1 + sin φ)))
rp � r0 􏼨 􏼩
2ks 􏼂(1 + λ)p0 − (1 − λ)p0 (3 − 4])cos 2θ − 2ks u0 􏼃􏼁/ 4G/ r0 − 2ks 􏼁􏼁􏼁 − 2ks u0 + 2c cot[arcsin((2(1 + b)sin φ)/(2 + b(1 + sin φ)))]

(1 − λ)p0 (((2 + b)(1 − sin φ))/(2 + b(1 + sin φ)))cos 2θ

× 􏼨1 + 􏼩.
􏼂(1 + λ)p0 + 2c cot[arcsin((2(1 + b)sin φ)/(2 + b(1 + sin φ)))]􏼃 · ((2(1 + b)sin φ)/(2 + b(1 + sin φ)))
(13)

Therefore, the tunnel surrounding rock plastic zone does not change the shape of the PZTSR but only affects its
radius rp can be obtained with equation (13) by considering size. However, the effect extent of p0 on the PZTSR is dif-
the intermediate principal stress, support stiffness, and ferent. When p0 increases from 8 MPa to 12 and 16 MPa, the
construction timing at the same time. size of the relative plastic zone in the horizontal direction
only increases from 1.315 to 1.417 and 1.491, respectively,
5. Analysis of the Calculation Examples whose increase extent degrees are 7.76% and 5.22%, re-
spectively. It shows that its increase extent becomes less and
The calculation model of the deeply buried circular tunnel less, which can be explained with the support stress shown in
and its calculation parameter are shown in Figure 1 and Figure 8(b). Because the support stiffness is fixed in this case,
Table 1 with b � 0.5. Meanwhile, the support stiffness when p0 is little, the support stress is also little, and some
ks � 50 MPa/m is adopted here. From equation (10), the plastic zone will occur in the surrounding rock. While with
maximum ground elastic radial displacement (ue)max at the increasing p0, the increase extent of the support stress is
tunnel inner wall can be calculated to be 0.015 m; accord- larger, which indicates that the increase in p0 fully motivates
ingly, here, u0 � 0.001 m is adopted. Then, the calculation the capacity of the support structure and reduces the in-
results of the surrounding rock relative plastic zone and crease extent of the plastic zone of the surrounding rock. So,
support stress obtained with equation (13) are shown in it indicates the interaction between the surrounding rock
Figure 7. The following findings can be obtained. First of all, and support structure.
the PZTSR is still oval with a long axis in the horizontal
direction because λ � 0.6. Second, the support stress is the
least in the horizontal direction and is about 0.02 MPa,
5.2. Effect of u0 on the PZTSR. Here, u0 is assumed to be 0,
which is about 0.265 MPa in the vertical direction and about
0.005, and 0.01 m, b � 0.5, ks � 50 MPa/m, and the other
13.25 times that in the horizontal direction. It indicates that
parameters are shown in Table 1. The following findings
the different support stress will produce in different direc-
can be obtained from Figure 9. First of all, the size of the
tions because of unequal stress in two directions even if for
PZTSR increases with increasing u0, but its shape is ba-
the same support structure. Therefore, it is suggested to
sically the same, which are oval with a long axis in the
design the workload of the support structure according to
horizontal direction. It indicates that the initial ground
the proposed method, which will not only ensure the safety
radial displacement does not change the shape of the
of the tunnel but also reduce its cost.
PZTSR but only affects its size. The main factor affecting its
In order to perfectly investigate the effect of p0, u0, ks, and
shape is still the lateral pressure coefficient λ. What is more,
b on the PZTSR, the parametric sensitivity analysis is made.
the effect extent of u0 on the PZTSR is different. When u0
increases from 0 m to 0.005 and 0.01 m, the size of the
5.1. Effect of p0 on the PZTSR. Here, p0 is assumed to be 8, 12, relative plastic zone in the horizontal direction only in-
and 16 MPa, b � 0.5, ks � 50 MPa/m, u0 � 0.001 m, and the creases from 1.288 to 1.466 and 2.019, respectively, whose
other parameters are shown in Table 1. The following increase extent degrees are 13.82% and 37.72%, respec-
findings can be obtained from Figure 8(a). First of all, the tively. It shows that its increase extent becomes larger and
size of the PZTSR increases with increasing p0, but its shape larger, which indicates that the size of the PZTSR will
is basically the same, which are oval with a long axis in the dramatically increase when u0 increases to a certain value.
horizontal direction. It indicates that the initial ground stress Therefore, the support should be constructed as soon as
8 Mathematical Problems in Engineering

ps (MPa)
rp/r0
1.5
0.3

1
0.2

0.5
0.1
rp/r0
0 ps (MPa)
–1.5 –1 –0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 0
–0.15 –0.05 0.05 0.15

–0.5
–0.1

–1
–0.2

–1.5
–0.3
(a) (b)

Figure 7: The calculation results of the PZTSR and support stress by considering the interaction between the surrounding rock and support
structure.
rp/r0

ps (MPa)
1.5
0.8

1 0.6

0.4
0.5

0.2
rp/r0
0 ps (MPa)
–2 –1 0 1 2 0
–0.3 –0.1 0.1 0.3

–0.5 –0.2

–0.4
–1

–0.6

–1.5
–0.8
p0 = 8MPa
p0 = 12MPa p0 = 8 MPa
p0 = 16MPa p0 = 12 MPa
p0 = 16 MPa

(a) (b)

Figure 8: Effect of p0 on the surrounding rock plastic zone and the support stress.

possible in the practical engineering in order to avoid the parameters are shown in Table 1. The following findings
excessive surrounding rock failure. can be obtained from Figure 10. First of all, when k s
varies, the PZTSR is the concentric oval, which indicates
that k s affects only the size of the PZTSR, but not its
5.3. Effect of ks on the PZTSR. Here, ks is assumed to be 100, shape. Second, when k s increases from 100 MPa/m to 200
200, and 300 MPa/m, u0 � 0.001 m, b � 0.5, and the other and 300 MPa/m, respectively, the maximum size of the
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 9

rp/r0
1.5

0.5

rp/r0
0
–2.5 –2 –1.5 –1 –0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

–0.5

–1

–1.5
u0 = 0m
u0 = 0.005m
u0 = 0.01 m

Figure 9: Effect of u0 on the PZTSR.

rp/r0

1.2

0.8

0.4

rp/r0
0
–1.5 –1 –0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5

–0.4

–0.8

–1.2
ks = 100MPa/m
ks = 200MPa/m
ks = 300MPa/m

Figure 10: Effect of ks on the PZTSR.

relative plastic zone decreases from 1.310 to 1.298 and scope of the plastic zone of the tunnel surrounding rock.
1.285, respectively, which indicates that the relative Accordingly, it will increase the cost of the support
plastic zone gradually decreases with increasing ks . It engineering, so in the practical engineering, we should
shows that increasing the support stiffness can reduce the comprehensively consider the relationship between the
plastic zone of the tunnel surrounding rock. Therefore, economy and safety to gain the maximum comprehen-
the support structure with large stiffness can reduce the sive benefits.
10 Mathematical Problems in Engineering

Data Availability

rp/r0
1.2

The data used to support the findings of this study are in-
0.8 cluded within the manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest
0.4
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
rp/r0
0
–1.5 –1 –0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 Authors’ Contributions
All the authors contributed equally to this work.
–0.4

Acknowledgments
–0.8
This work was supported by the National Key Research and
Development Plan of China (Grant no. 2019YFC1509701).
–1.2
b=0 References
b = 0.5
[1] E. Komurlu, A. Kesimal, and R. Hasanpour, “In situ hori-
b=1
zontal stress effect on plastic zone around circular under-
Figure 11: Effect of b on the PZTSR. ground openings excavated in elastic zones,” Geomechanics
and Engineering, vol. 8, no. 6, pp. 783–799, 2015.
[2] S. Wang, Z. Wu, M. Guo, and X. Ge, “Theoretical solutions of
5.4. Effect of the Intermediate Principal Stress b on the PZTSR. a circular tunnel with the influence of axial in situ stress in
Here, b is assumed to be 0, 0.5, and 1, u0 � 0.001 m, elastic-brittle-plastic rock,” Tunnelling and Underground
ks � 50 MPa/s, and the other parameters are shown in Table 1. Space Technology, vol. 30, pp. 155–168, 2012.
The following findings can be obtained from Figure 11. First of [3] S. A. Massinas and M. G. Sakellariou, “Closed-form solution
all, when b varies, the PZTSR is the concentric oval. It indicates for plastic zone formation around a circular tunnel in half-
that b affects only the size of the PZTSR, but not its shape. Its space obeying Mohr-Coulomb criterion,” Géotechnique,
size gradually decreases with increasing b, which indicates that vol. 59, no. 8, pp. 691–701, 2009.
the intermediate principal stress can strengthen the stability of [4] Q. Jiang, X. P. Liu, F. Yan, Y. Yang, D. P. Xu, and G. L. Feng,
“Failure performance of 3DP physical twin-tunnel model and
the surrounding rock and reduce the PZTSR. Finally, as far as
corresponding safety factor evaluation,” Rock Mechanics and
the decrease extent of b on the PZTSR is concerned, the de- Rock Engineering, 2020.
crease extent for b from 0 to 0.5 is much larger than that for b [5] X. Liu, Q. Fang, D. Zhang, and Y. Liu, “Energy-based pre-
from 0.5 to 1, which indicates that the effect of the intermediate diction of volume loss ratio and plastic zone dimension of
principal stress on the PZTSR is nonlinear. shallow tunnelling,” Computers and Geotechnics, vol. 118,
Article ID 103343, 2020.
[6] H. Kastner, Static des Tunnel-und Stollenbaues, Springer,
6. Conclusions Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany, 1962.
[7] Y. M. Cheng, “Modified kastner formula for cylindrical cavity
(1) In order to consider the effect of σ 2 on the PZTSR, contraction in mohr-coulomb medium for circular tunnel in
UST for the rock is adopted to replace the M-C isotropic medium,” Journal of Mechanics, vol. 28, no. 1,
strength criterion. pp. 163–169, 2012.
[8] G. Kirsch, “Die Theorie der elastizitat und die bedurfnisse der
(2) To take into account the effect of the interaction festigkeitslehre,” Zeitschrift des Vereines Deutscher Ingenieure,
mechanism between the surrounding rock and vol. 42, pp. 797–807, 1898.
support structure on the PZTSR, p0 is assumed to be [9] E. Detournay and C. Fairhurst, “Two-dimensional elasto-
linear with the radial displacement at the tunnel plastic analysis of a long, cylindrical cavity under non-hy-
inner wall, which is not constant anymore. So, u0 and drostatic loading,” International Journal of Rock Mechanics
ks can be both considered in the proposed model. and Mining Sciences & Geomechanics Abstracts, vol. 24, no. 4,
pp. 197–211, 1987.
(3) The calculation examples show that b, u0, ks, and rock [10] A. A. Bello-Maldonado, “General elasto-plastic theory applied
strength all have an effect on the PZTSR, which to circular tunnels (K0 not equal 1),” in Rock Mechanics in the
agrees with the existing research conclusions. National Interest, D. Elsworth, J. P. Tunucci, and
K. A. Heasley, Eds., American Rock Mechanics Association,
Meanwhile, this study mainly discusses the effect of the Washington, DC, USA, 2011.
rock strength criterion on the PZTSR and does not involve [11] K. B. Ruppneyt, Several Problems in Mining Rock Mechanics,
the rock mechanical behavior after yield such as strain China Coal Industry Publishing House, Beijing, China, 1960,
softening or strengthening behavior. Therefore, this pro- in Chinese.
posed method is more suitable for the rock with the ideal [12] L. W. Chen, J. B. Peng, W. Fan, and P. Sun, “Analysis of
elastic-plastic mechanical behavior. surrounding rock mass plastic zone of round tunnel under
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 11

unequal stress in two directions based on the unified strength Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, vol. 39, no. 8,
theory,” Journal of China Coal Society, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 975–989, 2002.
pp. 20–23, 2007, in Chinese. [30] S.-Q. Xu and M.-H. Yu, “The effect of the intermediate
[13] T. D. Y. F. Simanjuntak, M. Marence, A. E. Mynett, and principal stress on the ground response of circular openings in
A. J. Schleiss, “Pressure tunnels in non-uniform in situ stress rock mass,” Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering, vol. 39,
conditions,” Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, no. 2, pp. 169–181, 2006.
vol. 42, pp. 227–236, 2014. [31] C. H. Tan, “Passive bolts reinforcement around a circular
[14] G. Y. Hou, “Review of interaction mechanism between sur- opening in strain-softening elastoplastic rock mass,” Inter-
rounding rock and support and analysis of conceptual model national Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences,
of rheological deformation mechanism,” Chinese Journal of vol. 88, pp. 221–234, 2016.
Rock Mechanics and Engineering, vol. 27, pp. 3618–3629, 2008, [32] J. C. Jaeger, N. G. W. Cook, and R. W. Zimmerman, Fun-
in Chinese. damentals of Rock Mechanics, Blackwell Publishing, Hoboken,
[15] J. Penzien and C. L. Wu, “Stresses in linings of bored tunnels,” NJ, USA, 4th edition, 2007.
Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, vol. 27, no. 3, [33] T. Z. Blazynski, Applied Elasto-Plasticity of Solids, MacMillian
pp. 283–300, 1998. Press Ltd., London, UK, 1983.
[16] A. Bobet and S. W. Nam, “Stresses around pressure tunnels
with semi-permeable liners,” Rock Mechanics and Rock En-
gineering, vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 287–315, 2007.
[17] E. Hoek and E. T. Brown, Underground Excavations in Rock,
The Institution of Mining and Metallurgy, London, UK, 2008.
[18] E. T. Brown, J. W. Bray, and B. J. Ladanyi, “Ground response
curves for rock tunnels,” International Journal of Rock Me-
chanics and Mining Sciences & Geomechanics Abstracts,
vol. 109, pp. 15–39, 1983.
[19] A. Z. Lv, L. Q. Zhang, and N. Zhang, “Analytic stress solutions
for a circular pressure tunnel at pressure and great depth
including support delay,” International Journal of Rock Me-
chanics and Mining Sciences, vol. 48, no. 3, pp. 514–519, 2011.
[20] H. H. Einstein and C. W. Schwartz, “Simplified analysis for
tunnel supports,” ASCE Journal of Geotechnics and Engi-
neering Division, vol. 105, no. 4, pp. 499–518, 1979.
[21] C. Carranza-Torres, B. Rysdahl, and M. Kasim, “On the elastic
analysis of a circular lined tunnel considering the delayed
installation of the support,” International Journal of Rock
Mechanics and Mining Sciences, vol. 61, pp. 57–85, 2013.
[22] T. M. Su, H. Y. Peng, and H. Y. Liu, “Mechanical analysis of
the circular tunnel considering the interaction between the
ground response curve and support response curve,” Math-
ematical Problems in Engineering, vol. 2018, Article ID
7892010, 8 pages, 2018.
[23] M.-B. Wang and S.-C. Li, “A complex variable solution for
stress and displacement field around a lined circular tunnel at
great depth,” International Journal for Numerical and Ana-
lytical Methods in Geomechanics, vol. 33, no. 7, pp. 939–951,
2009.
[24] T. Kitagawa, T. Kumeta, T. Ichizyo, S. Soga, M. Sato, and
M. Yasukawa, “Application of convergence confinement
analysis to the study of preceding displacement of a squeezing
rock tunnel,” Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering, vol. 24,
no. 1, pp. 31–51, 1991.
[25] R. D. Dwivedi, M. Singh, M. N. Viladkar, and R. K. Goel,
“Prediction of tunnel deformation in squeezing grounds,”
Engineering Geology, vol. 161, pp. 55–64, 2013.
[26] H. S. Martin, Elasticity: Theory, Applications, and Numeric,
Linacre House, Jordan Hill, Oxford, UK, 2005.
[27] W. Yang, H. Wang, B. Q. Lin et al., ““Outburst mechanism of
tunnelling through coal seams and the safety strategy by using
“strong-weak” coupling circle-layers,” Tunnelling and Un-
derground Space Technology, vol. 42, pp. 227–236, 2014.
[28] M. H. Yu, Unified Strength Criterion and its Application,
Springer, Berlin, Germany, 2004.
[29] M.-H. Yu, Y.-W. Zan, J. Zhao, and M. Yoshimine, “A unified
strength criterion for rock material,” International Journal of