SETTLEMENTS ABOVE TUNNELS IN THE

UNITED KINGDOM - THEIR MAGNITUDE AND

PREDICTION
O'Reilly, Myles; New, Barry

ProQuest document link

ABSTRACT
SETTLEMENTS CAN be a problem with soft ground tunnelling in urban areas where buildings, both modem and
ancient, can be put at risk, services, too, can be endangered and at times it has been deemed necessary to divert
services before tunnelling is begun. These environmental considerations have led to a considerable research effort
being devoted to the study of settlements caused by tunnelling through soft ground; much of the research work has
been undertaken either directly by or under contract for the Transport and Road Research Laboratory.
Measurements of settlement and ground movement made on tunnelling projects located, in the main, in built-up
areas are reviewed. The ground conditions studied included stiff-fissured clays, glacial deposits and recently
deposited silty clays, as well as cohesionless soils of low density, weak rocks and made ground. Many of the tunnels
were driven in free air by use of shields, but compressed air was used in the weaker soils to maintain stability; the
bentonite shield and chemical treatment of the ground were also used in loose sands. The data from these case
studies are used to provide simple analytical tools that enable better prediction of the magnitude of settlements and
ground movements caused by tunnelling through soft ground to be made.
The analysis given above for cohesive soils is unlikely to be applicable to granular soils as the assumption that
particle displacements away from the tunnel are directed toward the tunnel axis is not supported by laboratory
studies. Further, the assumption of deformation at constant volume is untenable as some dilation or compaction of
granular soils is almost inevitable during deformation. Again, data from the field are limited and inconclusive.
Independent model studies reported by Potts |22! and Cording et al[231 indicate a rapid narrowing with large inward
displacements of the settlement trough near the ground surface with the sand soils funneling down into the void
created by the excavation (see Figure 3). This settlement mode was discussed by Atkinson and coworkers 1241 in
terms of a dilating wedge over the tunnel crown, which develops until collapse occurs on surfaces that propagate
vertically upwards from the tunnel haunches.
The transverse distance from the tunnel centre line to the point of inflexion (y = i) is used to describe the width of the
settlement trough and has been considered to be related both to the depth from ground surface to axis, Z, and to a
lesser extent the diameter of the tunnel. Multiple linear regression analyses performed on the field data presented
here, however, revealed no significant correlation between the trough width parameter, i, and tunnel diameter,
although the expected strong correlation of i with tunnel depth, Z, was found. This was true for both cohesive and
granular data groupings This finding is to some extent explained by [Glossop], who carried out an analysis based on
stochastic/ numerical modelling techniques l2lL The analysis showed that at distances of more than about one
tunnel diameter from the periphery of the tunnel the shape of the settlement trough is not significantly dependent on
the tunnel diameter and the loss of ground may be considered to occur at a point 'sink' located at the tunnel axis
Strictly, therefore, they are only applicable within these limits, but the indications are that the values would not be
appreciably different for reasonable extrapolation beyond the limits of'B', 'C and TT above, but the limitation on cover
must not be contravened. Further, the analysis given is two-dimensional and, although this may be satisfactory in
the prediction of conditions subsequent to the tunnel construction, other significant ground deformations of a three-
dimensional character may occur during the passing of the tunnel face He] [20] [3s]_ Considerable monitoring of
ground and building settlement is now routinely carried out on most tunnelling projects in urban areas. Where the
extent and/or magnitude of the predicted settlement are important, consideration should be given to arranging the

PDF GENERATED BY PROQUEST.COM Page 1 of 11

construction programme so that the settlement profile is determined in a 'safe' location, e.g. under parkland, as early
as possible in the project.

FULL TEXT

Headnote
This paper was first published in 1982 by Myles O'Reilly and Barry New with conference proceedings printed by the
Institution of Mining and Metallurgy. Following Myles's retirement from the Advisory Board of Tunnels and Tunnelling
this month, It Is reprinted here In appreciation of his many years of support
(ProQuest: ... denotes formulae omitted.)
SETTLEMENTS CAN be a problem with soft ground tunnelling in urban areas where buildings, both modem and
ancient, can be put at risk, services, too, can be endangered and at times it has been deemed necessary to divert
services before tunnelling is begun. These environmental considerations have led to a considerable research effort
being devoted to the study of settlements caused by tunnelling through soft ground; much of the research work has
been undertaken either directly by or under contract for the Transport and Road Research Laboratory.
Measurements of settlement and ground movement made on tunnelling projects located, in the main, in built-up
areas are reviewed. The ground conditions studied included stiff-fissured clays, glacial deposits and recently
deposited silty clays, as well as cohesionless soils of low density, weak rocks and made ground. Many of the tunnels
were driven in free air by use of shields, but compressed air was used in the weaker soils to maintain stability; the
bentonite shield and chemical treatment of the ground were also used in loose sands. The data from these case
studies are used to provide simple analytical tools that enable better prediction of the magnitude of settlements and
ground movements caused by tunnelling through soft ground to be made.
One ofthe three basic requirements for the design of a satisfactory tunnel|!l [21 is that its construction should cause
as little damage as possible to overlying or adjacent existing structures and services With soft-ground tunnelling
settlement is often a problem in built-up areas, where buildings, old and new, important or otherwise, can be put at
risk. Services, too, such as gas and water mains and sewers can be endangered and it has occasionally been
deemed prudent to carry out considerable service diversion and relocation works as a prelude to tunnelling.
To minimise overall project costs and the risk of damage or accident as a result of tunnel construction the engineer
who designs the tunnel needs to be able to make reliable predictions of the extent and amount of settlement that are
likely to arise from tunnelling in various conditions. Given reliable forecasts of ground deformations he would be in a
position to choose between a number of options, that, depending on the particular location, might include:
1. Relocation of the tunnel well clear of sensitive structures
2. A longer tunnel in better ground
3. Chemical stabilisation or freezing of weak ground on the more direct route
4. Underpinning of existing buildings and relocation of water and gas mains
Such considerations and a growing emphasis on environmental problems led to a considerable research effort being
devoted during the 1970s, both in the United Kingdom ad abroad, to the study of the settlements and ground
deformations caused by driving tunnels in soft ground. Much of this research in the United Kingdom was undertaken
either directly by, or under contract for, the Transport and Road Research Laboratory, and the results obtained on
some individual schemes and groups of schemes have already been reported [3'131. At the same time a
programme of centrifuge and static model tests was being carried out at Cambridge University to obtain a better
understanding of the response of the ground to tunnelling [l4'17*. In this paper summarised data from all the tunnel
sites studied have been assembled and analysed so that the designers and constructor of tunnels are better
equipped to make predictions of the settlements and ground deformations that result from tunnelling.
PATTERN OF GROUND MOVEMENT
Ground movements above tunnels may conveniently be considered under two headings. The first, surface
settlement, may adequately be described by assigning a particular geometrical form to the settlement profile and

PDF GENERATED BY PROQUEST.COM Page 2 of 11

using case history data to predict its magnitude. Secondly, the horizontal component of surface ground movement
and generalised subsurface ground displacements are less easily dealt with, as further assumptions are required to
define the nature of the deformations The lack of reliable case history data - as exist for surface settlements - and
the different behaviour of cohesive and cohesionless soils make prediction of these movements somewhat
speculative. As surface horizontal and subsurface ground movement will, however, often be of considerable interest,
an attempt is made to determine the form of these displacements, particularly in the vicinity of the ground surface.
Surface settlement
Considering only vertical ground displacement at the surface, it is now well established an accepted that the shape
of the settlement trough above a tunnel may be reasonably represented by an error function curve of the form:
[1]...
Where S is the surface settlement at a transverse distance y from the tunnel centre line Smax is the maximum
settlement (at y = 0) and i is the standard deviation of the curve. The value of i provides a means of defining the
width of the trough and corresponds to the value of y at the point of inflexion of the curve; for practical purposes the
width of the trough can be taken as 6i.
This formulation was put forward by Martos 1181 and was based on statistical evaluation of field observations of
settlements above tabular mine openings. Other authors, notably SchmidtEl9ä and Peck !l1, have shown that this
approach adequately models the shape of the settlement trough caused by tunnelling in soft ground. On site it is
usually more convenient to measure settlement, although it is the angular distortions that result from differential
settlement that are of greatest interest with regard to potential damage to overlying structures and installations
Equations for the ground slope and curvature may be readily derived by differentiation of equation one, and the
settlement volume, Vs, per unit advance is obtained by integration:
[2]...
and substituting Smax in equation one gives
[3]...
then the slope
[4]...
and the curvature
[5]...
Given values for Vs and i, these equations may be easily evaluated on a pocket calculator to give the settlement,
slope and curvature at any point on the settlement profile. Figure 1 illustrates the form and principal features of this
settlement trough.
Horizontal and subsurface displacements
The above description of the shape of the surface settlement trough gives no indication of horizontal ground
movement or of the changing width of the subsurface settlement profile as the soil particles migrate toward the area
of ground loss in the vicinity of the tunnel. As differing mechanisms are likely to apply, the problem is best
considered separately for cohesive or clay soils and for cohesionless sands and gravels.
COHESIVESOILS
In addition to the assumption that the settlement trough takes the form of an error function curve, the following
analysis assumes that all particulate movements in the soil occur along radial paths toward the tunnel axis and that
conditions of plane strain constant volume deformation apply.
Support from field measurements for the radial flow postulate is limited by lack of below ground deformation
measurements, but the data that do exist do not conflict with such an assumption. The most convincing evidence in
support is provided by the results of the centrifuge tests on model tunnels in soft clay reported by Mair[2Q| (see
Figure 2). The information available tends to suggest that the flow is directed towards a 'sink', which is located at a
point somewhat below axis level of the tunnel perhaps close to invert level. Such variation in location of the sink is
not, however, of significance in consideration of deformations towards the surface well away from the tunnel.
The adoption of radial flow assumption means that the width of the zone of deformed ground decreases linearly with

PDF GENERATED BY PROQUEST.COM Page 3 of 11

depth below the ground surface. This results in the magnitude of the ground movements increasing linearly with
depth below the surface to conform with the plane strain constant volume postulate:
[6]...
where i is the standard deviation (trough width parameter) at height z above tunnel axis and K is an empirical
constant of proportionality. It also follows that
[7]...
where H(y,z) and S(y,z) are, respectively, the horizontal and vertical components of soil displacement at a
transverse distance y and a vertical distance z from the tunnel axis. Glossop's 1211 stochastic analysis of
subsurface movements around tunnels gives a result identical to equation seven, as does Martos [IB| for horizontal
surface displacements above tubular openings.
From equations one, three, six and seven, the generalised displacements are given by
[8]...
and
[9]...
and the vertical and horizontal ground strains (£v and £) are:
[10]...
and
[11]...
(note that (fv = -£H, which satisfies the conditions of plane strain constant volume deformation). These equations are
not applicable in the region close to the tunnel - say, within about a diameter of the periphery - because of the
simplifying assumptions in their derivation.
GRANULAR SOILS
The analysis given above for cohesive soils is unlikely to be applicable to granular soils as the assumption that
particle displacements away from the tunnel are directed toward the tunnel axis is not supported by laboratory
studies. Further, the assumption of deformation at constant volume is untenable as some dilation or compaction of
granular soils is almost inevitable during deformation. Again, data from the field are limited and inconclusive.
Independent model studies reported by Potts |22! and Cording et al[231 indicate a rapid narrowing with large inward
displacements of the settlement trough near the ground surface with the sand soils funneling down into the void
created by the excavation (see Figure 3). This settlement mode was discussed by Atkinson and coworkers 1241 in
terms of a dilating wedge over the tunnel crown, which develops until collapse occurs on surfaces that propagate
vertically upwards from the tunnel haunches.
This type of ground movement has been noted in the field and, when associated with vertical ground strains in
excess of 0.5 per cent, leads to a deep and narrow settlement trough with high horizontal surface strains that may
not always be accurately approximated by an error function curve [2S|.
FIELD MEASUREMENTS
Both the strength of the ground and the method of tunnel construction can affect the distribution and amount of
settlement that result from the driving of a tunnel. And, although the grosser effects of soil resistance to deformation
at the tunnel collapse condition can be dealt with quantitatively, the construction method adopted and in particular,
the rate of advance of the tunnel opening and the application of support can clearly influence the amount of
settlement.
The approach adopted in the field investigations was to identify and monitor a number of tunnel construction projects
that were located in a range of soft ground formations representative of conditions in the more populous built-up
areas of the United Kingdom. Such a collection of case history data would provide, in the first instance, the
quantitative information from which estimates might be made on the basis of experience of the likely extent and
amount of settlement that result from new tunnelling in similar ground conditions. It would subsequently provide the
basic field data on which more rational - less empirical - approaches could be tried and tested.
Stiff fissured clays

PDF GENERATED BY PROQUEST.COM Page 4 of 11

The construction of the Victoria Line of the London Underground provided a great deal of data on vertical settlement
over tunnels in London Clay during the late 1960s [2e|. Further, more detailed studies were carried out at Green
Park [3Î and Regents Park Ss] during the construction of the Jubilee Line, on an access tunnel near Kings Cross
Station 1,31 and on a sewer at Sutton. A comprehensive study of the settlements caused to Grand Buildings during
the construction of Strand Station has also been undertaken 1271 and, quite recently, measurements have been
made over a tunnel driven through Oxford Clay.
Cohesive glacial deposits
Settlement studies have been made at Tyneside on sewer tunnels driven in free air at Uebbum and Uowden i2S|
and at Eldon Square Newcastle on a tunnel that is being driven for the metro.
Recent silty clay deposits
Of considerably more concern are the settlements caused when tunnelling, usually in compressed air, through
recent silty clay deposits, which occur widely in coastal areas; their undrained shear strengths are typically in the 10-
50kN/ m2 range. Studies in such deposits were first made at Grangemouth, where considerable further settlement
was recorded subsequent to the release of compressed airl291. Eurther studies have been carried out at Willington
Quay |g|, at Belfast[ml, on the M5 near Bristol 1121 and at Grimsby on tunnels driven in compressed air; a small-
diameter tunnel driven in free air at Stockton-on-Tees [81 has also been studied.
Cohesionless soils
Traditionally, either compressed air or chemical treatment had been used where required in these conditions to
stabilise the tunnel face and control ground movements [30J.
The bentonite tunnelling process [3I] has recently been developed as an alternative to these and was shown to be
effective in controlling ground movements at trials at New Cross [41. The construction of three lengths of sewer
tunnel at Warrington in loose granular soils enabled ground settlements to be monitored where the above three
methods have been used as well as on sections of tunnel driven in free air ["s; a hand-excavated tunnel shield
driven below the water-table in sand has been monitored at Irvine |321.
Weak rock formations
Settlements have been measured over sections of tunnel driven in chalk at Chinnor [sl, in Keuper Marl at Cardiff and
in sandstone at Warrington [Ml.
Loose filled or made ground
Measurements have been made in Newcastle on a sewer tunnel driven across a valley infilled with municipal
rubbish; a section of tunnel overlain by fill has also been monitored at Sutton.
ANALYSIS OF RESULTS
Data from the sites where the settlement profile normal to the direction of tunnelling was established are
summarised in Tables One and Two, the former dealing with predominantly cohesive soils and the latter with
granular soils; information on the excavation method and ground conditions is also included. It was found that the
majority of settlement profiles could, as expected, be represented by an error function curve and values of the trough
width parameter, i, and ground loss, Vs, are given for each settlement profile. The simple analysis that follows is
designed to provide empirical predictions of i and Vs that together uniquely define the settlement profile.
As had been found previously 1,91 [331, no well-defined relations were apparent between ground losses and
stability ratio [34L This also proved to be the case when attempts were made to relate ground losses to load
factor[,?1, which, conceptually, has the ability to make allowance for differing ground support conditions at and
behind the tunnel face [l6|[2o; [35]
Difficulties of determining the appropriate value of the undrained shear strength of the ground mass, particularly in
stiff fissured clays [36*, and uncertainties in the operative P/D ratio (P is the distance from tunnel face to lining and D
is excavated diameter of tunnel) values in the field were two reasons for this.
In addition, ground losses are related to the rate of tunnel advance, so in many cases equilibrium will not have been
reached by the time that lining is completed.
SETTLEMENTTROUGH WIDTH

PDF GENERATED BY PROQUEST.COM Page 5 of 11

The transverse distance from the tunnel centre line to the point of inflexion (y = i) is used to describe the width of the
settlement trough and has been considered to be related both to the depth from ground surface to axis, Z, and to a
lesser extent the diameter of the tunnel. Multiple linear regression analyses performed on the field data presented
here, however, revealed no significant correlation between the trough width parameter, i, and tunnel diameter,
although the expected strong correlation of i with tunnel depth, Z, was found. This was true for both cohesive and
granular data groupings This finding is to some extent explained by Glossop, who carried out an analysis based on
stochastic/ numerical modelling techniques l2lL The analysis showed that at distances of more than about one
tunnel diameter from the periphery of the tunnel the shape of the settlement trough is not significantly dependent on
the tunnel diameter and the loss of ground may be considered to occur at a point 'sink' located at the tunnel axis
The two-variable regression analyses carried out on the data in Table One and Two gave the relationships:
[12]...
and
[13]...
where i and Z are in metres
Figure 4 shows the trough width parameter plotted against tunnel axis depth for both ground types The linear
relationship for cohesive soils is well defined.
The fewer data for granular soils are more scattered and reflect the often unpredictable consequences of tunnelling
in such ground. The data do not suggest that any relationship between i and Z, other than linear, would be more
appropriate for either ground conditions.
The linear regression lines pass close to the origin and may for most practical purposes be simplified to the form
[14]...
where K = 0.5 for cohesive or 0.25 for granular soils Further review of field data suggests that for clays K varies
between 0.4 (stiff clays) and 0.7 (soft, silty clay). For granular materials above the water-table K ranges between 0.2
and 0.3.
VOLUME OF LOST GROUND
As has already been discussed, both ground conditions and construction method determine the ground losses that
result from tunnelling. To normalise the volume of lost ground with respect to tunnel size the volume of the
settlement trough at the surface, Vs, is expressed as a percentage of the tunnel volume excavated, Vexc.
Examination of Tables One and Two shows that the volume of lost ground is well related to ground conditions In the
stiff fissured London Clay ground losses for the 4m-diameter underground railway tunnels fall in the 1-2 per cent
range. Ground losses can be somewhat larger on the smaller tunnels, where the overcut annulus around the shield
represents a larger proportion of the excavated cross-section; on the other hand, losses may well double over a
station complex with large multiple openings |271. Ground losses were 0.4 per cent over a 2.8m-diameter sewer
tunnel in Oxford Clay.
Although there are only two examples, the volume of lost ground for tunnels driven in free air in cohesive glacial
deposits appears to be marginally higher, up to 2.5 per cent, than is found in London Clay. The application of
compressed air has reduced total ground losses to 1.25 per cent, of which I per cent had occurred by the time the
compressed air was released.
Settlement occurs at tunnels driven through soft recent silty clay deposits in two distinct parts: (1) an initial portion
that, as for tunnels driven in free air, commences as the tunnel approaches the measurement point and, finally,
stabilises sometime after the tunnel has gone past and (2) a second phase that commences with the release of air
pressure and continues often for considerable periods thereafter. The amount and extent of the settlement during
the second phase may well exceed that in the initial phase and has on occasion caused considerable damage to
overlying buildings, e.g. at Willington Quay the volume of ground lost was 2.6 per cent and 10.5 per cent of the
tunnel volume in the initial and second phase, respectively. Ground losses of 32-42 per cent were recorded during
the driving of the small-diameter tunnel at Stockton-on-Tees in such soils.
In the cohesionless soils at Warrington ground loss was about 7 per cent in the tunnel driven below the water table

PDF GENERATED BY PROQUEST.COM Page 6 of 11

in loose sand with Standard Penetration Test (SPT) values of 2-8, and in a tunnel driven nearby in loose gravels,
following groundwater lowering, losses were 4.5 per cent. Where the bentonite tunnelling process was used ground
losses were usually less than 2 per cent. On the sections of tunnel where chemical treatment was used, ground
losses did not, in general, exceed 0.5 per cent, although quite damaging ground movements were caused when the
chemicals were being injected from the ground surface.
Ground losses above a tunnel driven through municipal rubbish were 16 per cent, and at Sutton the volume of the
settlement trough was more than doubled where the in-situ London Clay was overlain by backfilled ground. In weak
sandstone |nî and in chalk [6! the volume of lost ground was similar to that found on chemically treated sands, and
no movements were detected at the ground surface over a tunnel driven at depth in Keuper Marl in Cardiff.
PREDICTION OFGROUND DISPLACEMENTS
Predictions of ground displacements may be made by substituting the appropriate values of i and Vs by use of the
information discussed earlier into the appropriate equations given in the section 'Pattem of ground movement'. The
value of i may be taken from equation 14 or, where possible, related more specifically to ground conditions on site.
The estimate of settlement trough volume may be based on values given in the section 'Volume of lost ground' and
should, where possible, include an engineering appraisal that takes account of the proposed tunnelling methods and
site conditions and peculiarities.
The data obtained on cohesive soils can be summarised as shown in Table 3; constant, K, for the recent silty clay
soils allows for a considerable amount of long-term settlement, but some further movement may still take place. The
results for granular soils are fewer and more variable and, as yet, there are no marked trends.
Given the uncertainty involved, calculations for design purposes should check the sensitivity of the situation to the
likely range of conditions to be encountered. Estimates of the 'best' and 'worst' cases should be made to bracket the
extent and depth of ground deformation - this provides a useful starting point in any assessment. It is important to
realise that this predictive model can only give a general indication of the form and magnitude of the prospective
settlement. In practice, unexpected ground conditions on site or difficulties of construction or poor tunnelling
technique or a combination of all three could lead to significantly different ground displacements. The values
suggested for i and Vs are derived from data limited as follows:
A. Tunnels with a cover of at least one diameter
B. Tunnel diameters 1-5m approximately
C. "Maximum depth to axis, Z of 10m for granular materials
D. Maximum depth to axis, Z of 30m for cohesive materials
Strictly, therefore, they are only applicable within these limits, but the indications are that the values would not be
appreciably different for reasonable extrapolation beyond the limits of'B', 'C and TT above, but the limitation on cover
must not be contravened. Further, the analysis given is two-dimensional and, although this may be satisfactory in
the prediction of conditions subsequent to the tunnel construction, other significant ground deformations of a three-
dimensional character may occur during the passing of the tunnel face He] [20] [3s]_ Considerable monitoring of
ground and building settlement is now routinely carried out on most tunnelling projects in urban areas. Where the
extent and/or magnitude of the predicted settlement are important, consideration should be given to arranging the
construction programme so that the settlement profile is determined in a 'safe' location, e.g. under parkland, as early
as possible in the project.
Such data interpreted within the framework given here enable the predictions made during the design stages to be
revised so that decisions on costly underpinning or ground treatment can be made on the best available information.

CONCLUSION
The researches of the past decade have greatly improved the understanding of the settlement of the ground that
results from tunnelling, and the designers and constructors of tunnels are today in a much better position to estimate
and to some extent control such ground movements Considerable gaps in knowledge remain, however, and the
amount of usable field data is still quite limited; this is particularly so for subsurface deformations, especially close to

PDF GENERATED BY PROQUEST.COM Page 7 of 11

the tunnel periphery, where any non-uniformity or asymmetry in the situation can be magnified and exaggerated.
Clients, consulting engineers and contractors could do much to add to the store of knowledge; in many cases this
would only involve marginal extensions to settlement monitoring programmes that are already undertaken. In the
past data collected on ground settlements has often been less than comprehensive.
In many instances settlements above the tunnel centre line only were obtained, so the lateral extent of the
disturbance and the distortions in the ground cannot be determined.
The minimum requirements for settlement data to be suitable for analysis are:
1. Complete definition of the settlement trough - this requires measurements of settlement to be made to a distance
of 1.5 to 2.5 times the depth of the tunnel from centre line
2. Information on ground conditions, including water table levels and some indication of soil consistency, such as
undrained shear strength or SPT
3. Details of tunnel size, depth, method of construction and lining
The ground deformations due to tunnelling having been estimated, their effect on nearby structures and services has
to be assessed. The interactions between ground and structures can be extremely complex and only broad-brush
treatments are currently available to tackle the problem [37|í38!. The problem is inherently less difficult for services
and the situation is further improved by research into the effects of nearby excavations on them [2Bl [391 [4Q| D
References
References
1) Peck, R. B. Deep excavations and tunnelling in soft ground. (Proceedings of 7th International Conference on Soil
Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Mexico 1969) 225-90
2) Ward, W. H. and Pender M. J., Tunnelling in soft ground. (Proceedings of 10th International Conference on Soil
Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Stockholm 1981) 19-52
3) Attewell, P. B. and Farmer I. W., Ground Deformations from shield tunnelling in London Clay. (Can. Geotech. J.
11, 74) 380-95
4) Boden, J. B. and McCaul, C., Measurement of ground movements during a bentonite tunnelling experiment.
(Transport Road Research Laboratory Report 653,1974) 8
5) Barratt, D. A. and Tyler, R. G., Measurements of ground movements and lining behaviour on the London
Underground at Regents Park (TRRL Report 684, 1975) 53
6) McCaul, C., Morgan, J. M., and Boden, J. B., Measurement of ground movement due to excavation of a shallow
tunnel in Lower Chalk. (Transport Road Research Laboratory supp. Report 199, 76)
7) Tomlin, N. and Sklucki, T., Ground deformation around a tunnel excavation in Bunter Sandstone. (British
Geotechnical Society, Proc. of 'Conf. on Rock Engineering' Newcastle, UK 1977) 623-40
8) McCaul, C., Settlements caused by tunnelling in weak grounds at Stockton-on-Tees. (Transport Road Research
Laboratory, supp Report 383, 1978)
9) Attewell, P. B., Farmer I. W., and Glossop, N. H., Ground deformation caused by tunnelling in silty alluvial clay.
(Ground Engineering, 11, no.8, Nov 1978) 32-41
10) Glossop N. H. et al. Geotechnical aspects of shallow tunnel construction in Belfast estuarine deposits. (IMM,
Tunn. 79) 45-50
11) O'Reilly, M. P. et al. Comparison of settlements resulting from three methods of tunnelling in loose, cohesionless
soil. (Ground movement and structures: proceedings of the second international conference, Cardiff, UK, 1980. Pub:
1981) 359-76
12) Toombs, A. F., Settlement caused by tunnelling beneath a motorway embankment. (Transport Road Research
Laboratory, supp report 547, 1980)
13) West, G., Heath, W. G., and McCaul, C., Measurement of the effects of tunnelling at York VZay, London.
(Ground Engineering, 14, no.5, July 1981) 45-53
14) Atkinson, J. H., Orr, T. L. L, and Potts, D. M., Research studies into the behaviour of tunnels and tunnel linings in
soft ground. (TRRL, supp report 176, 1975)

PDF GENERATED BY PROQUEST.COM Page 8 of 11

15) Davis, E. H., et al, The stability of shallow tunnels and underground openings in cohesive material.
(Geotechnique, 30, 1980) 397-416
16) Kimura, T., and Mair, R. J., Centrifugal testing of model tunnels in soft clay. (Proceedings of the 10th
International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Stockholm, June 1981 - Published by
Balkema 1981) vol.l, 319-22
17) Mair, R. J., Gunn M. J., and O'Reilly, M. P., Ground movements around shallow tunnels in soft clay, [see Ref 16]
323-8
18) Martos, F., Concerning an approximate equation of the subsidence trough and its time factors. (International
Strata Control Congress, Leipzig 1958) 191-205
19) Schmidt, B., Settlements and ground movements associated with tunnelling in soil. (University of Illinois Ph.D
thesis, 1969)
20) Mair, R. J., Centrifugal modelling of tunnel construction in softclay. (Cambridge University Ph.D thesis, 1979)
21) Glossop, N. H., Soil deformation caused by soft ground tunnelling. (University of Durham Ph.D thesis, 1977)
22) Potts, D. M., Behaviour of lined and unlined tunnels in sand. (University of Cambridge Ph.D thesis, 1976)
23) Cording E. J. et al., Displacements around tunnels in soil. (Report to US DoT prepared at University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign. DOT-TST-76T-22, 1976)
24) Atkinson, J. H., Brown, E. T., and Potts, D. M., Collapse of shallow unlined tunnels in dense sand. (Tunnels and
Tunnelling, May/June 1975) 81 ; 84; 87
25) Attewell, P. B., Ground movements caused by tunnelling in soil. (Large ground movements and structures:
proceedings of the conference, Cardiff, July 1977 - Published by Pentech Press, 1978) 812-948
26) Morgan, H. D., and Bartlett, J. V., TheVictoria Line:3, tunnel design. (Proc. Institution of Civil Engineers,
supplementary volume, 1969) 377-95
27) Lyons, A. C., The Jubilee Line: 2, construction from Baker Street to Bond Street exclusive and from Admiralty
Arch toAldwych. (Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers supplementary volume, 1969) 377-95
28) O'Rourke, T. D. and Trautmann, C.H., Buried pipeline response to tunnelling. (Europlpe '82 Conference, Basel,
1982)
29) Henry, K., Grangemouth tunnel sewer. (Tunnels and Tunnelling, January 1974) 25-9
30) West, G. and O'Reilly, M. P., Methods of treating theground. (Tunnels and Tunnelling, September 1978) 25-9
31) Bartlett, J.V., Biggart, A. R., and Triggs, R. L., The bentonite tunnelling machine. (Proceedings of the Institution
of Civil Engineers, 54, pt 1, 1973) 605-24
32) Eadie, H. S., Settlements observed above a tunnel in sand. (Tunnels and Tunnelling, September/October 1977)
93-4
33) Clough G. W., and Schmidt, B., Design and performance of excavation and tunnels in soft clay: state of the art
report. (International Symposium on Soft Clay, Bangkok, 1977)
34) Broms, B. B., and Bennermark, H., Stability of clay at vertical openings. (J. Soil Mech. Found. Dlv. ASCE, 93,
SM1, 1967) 71-4
35) Atkinson, J. H., and Mair, R. J., Soil Mechanics and aspects of soft ground tunnelling. (Ground Engineering, 14,
no.5, July 1981) 20-38
36) Marsland, A., Large in situ tests to measure the properties of stiff fissured days. (Proceedings of the First
Australia-New Zealand Conference on Geomechanics, 1971) 180-9
37) Skempton, A. W., and MacDonald D. H., Allowable Settlement in Buildings. (Proc. Instn Civ. Eng., 5, III, 1956)
727-68
38) Burland, J. B. and Wroth, C. P., Settlement of buildings and associated damage. (Settlement of Structures
Conference, Cambridge 1974 - Published by Pentech Press, 1975) 611-51
39) New, B. M., Wild, P. T., and Bishop, C. J., Bentonite tunnelling beneath major services in loose ground. (Tunnels
and Tunnelling, June 1980) 14-6
40) Symons, I. F., Chard, B., and Carder, D. R., Ground movements caused by deep trench construction.

PDF GENERATED BY PROQUEST.COM Page 9 of 11

(Proceedings of Sewerage '81, London ICE 1982)
AuthorAffiliation
Myles O'Reilly
Myles, retired, is formerly ofthe Transport ft Road Research Laboratory
Barry New
Barry is an associate ofthe Geotechnical Consulting Group

DETAILS

Subject: Tunnels; Urban areas; Design; Projects; Studies; Standard deviation; Environmental
impact; Clay; Water mains; Laboratories

Business indexing term: Subject: Laboratories

Location: United Kingdom--UK

Classification: 9175: Western Europe; 8350: Transportation &travel industry; 9130:

Experiment/theoretical treatment

Publication title: Tunnels &Tunnelling International; Oxford

Pages: 56-66,5

Number of pages: 12

Publication year: 2015

Publication date: May 2015

Section: TECHNICAL/SETTLEMENT

Publisher: Compelo

Place of publication: Oxford

Country of publication: United Kingdom, Oxford

Publication subject: Engineering--Civil Engineering, Transportation

ISSN: 13693999

Source type: Trade Journal

Language of publication: English

Document type: Feature

Document feature: Equations; Graphs; Illustrations; Tables; References

ProQuest document ID: 1682903684

PDF GENERATED BY PROQUEST.COM Page 10 of 11

 Document URL: https://www.proquest.com/trade-journals/settlements-above-tunnels-united-kingdom-
their/docview/1682903684/se-2?accountid=8359

Copyright: Copyright World Market Intelligence (Progressive Media) May 2015

Last updated: 2023-11-14

Database: ProQuest Central

LINKS
Check for full text via 360 Link

Database copyright  2024 ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved.

Terms and Conditions Contact ProQuest

PDF GENERATED BY PROQUEST.COM Page 11 of 11