Technical Papers
May 17, 2022

Quantification of Stratigraphic Transition Location Uncertainty for Tunneling Projects

Publication: Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering
Volume 148, Issue 8

Abstract

Stratigraphic transitions within the tunnel envelope cause a rapid change in tunnel boring machine (TBM) operating parameters and impose a significant challenge to TBM tunnel projects. This paper presents a geostatistical modeling–based probabilistic approach to quantify the stratigraphic transition location uncertainty in the longitudinal direction of tunneling and at the tunnel face. Geotechnical data from a soil tunneling project were used to elucidate the capability of the approach. A deterministic soil profile and TBM operation data from the project were examined to evaluate the results of the approach. The results revealed that the stratigraphic transition location uncertainty (for 90% confidence interval) in the longitudinal direction, for the two stratigraphic transitions within the tunnel envelope, extended over a longitudinal distance of 28 rings and 130 rings. The occurrence of the stratigraphic transitions in the longitudinal direction at Ring 275 and Ring 550, for a 95% occurrence probability (P95), matched the locations of the change in rate of dissipation of chamber pressure from recorded TBM data. The stratigraphic transitions (P95) occurred 15 rings before and 30 rings after the locations suggested in the ground profiles suggested in the geotechnical baseline report (GBR). At the tunnel face, the probability of encountering stratigraphic transitions was the highest between Ring 200 and Ring 300, and varies between 60% and 90%.

Get full access to this article

View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.

Data Availability Statement

Lane Construction Corporation provided the borehole data used in this study. Direct requests for these data may be made to the provider. All code generated for this study is available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge the University Transportation Center for Underground Transportation Infrastructure (UTC-UTI) at the Colorado School of Mines for funding this research under Grant No. 69A3551747118 from the USDOT, and Lane Construction Corporation for providing the site investigation data used in this study. The opinions expressed in this paper are those of the authors and not of the USDOT.

References

Armstrong, M., A. Galli, H. Beucher, G. Loc’h, D. Renard, B. Doligez, R. Eschard, and F. Geffroy. 2011. “Plurigaussian simulations in geosciences.” In Plurigaussian simulations in geosciences. Berlin: Springer.
Bezuijen, A. 2002. “The influence of permeability on the properties of a foam mixture in a TBM.” In Proc., 4th Int. Symp. on Geotechnical Aspects of Underground Construction in Soft Ground, edited by R. Kastner, F. Emeriault, D. Dias, and A. Guilloux, 221–226. Lyon, France: Spécifique.
Bezuijen, A., and T. G. S. Dias. 2017. “EPB, chamber pressure dissipation during standstill.” In Proc., EURO:TUN 2017—4th Int. Conf. on Computational Methods in Tunneling and Subsurface Engineering. Innsbruck, Austria: Innsbruck Univ.
Blanchin, R., and J.-P. Chilès. 1993. “The Channel Tunnel: Geostatistical prediction of the geological conditions and its validation by the reality.” Math. Geol. 25 (7): 963–974. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00891054.
Boyd, D. L. 2019. Application of geostatistical methods for the quantification of multiple-scale uncertainty due to aleatory geologic variability. Golden, CO: Colorado School of Mines.
BTS (British Tunneling Society). 2005. Closed-face tunnelling machines and ground stability: A guideline for best practice. London: Institution of Civil Engineers. https://doi.org/doi:10.1680/cftmags.33863.
Cao, Z., Y. Wang, and D. Li. 2016. “Quantification of prior knowledge in geotechnical site characterization.” Eng. Geol. 203 (Mar): 107–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2015.08.018.
Carle, S. F., and G. E. Fogg. 1997. “Modeling spatial variability with one and multidimensional continuous-lag Markov chains.” Math. Geol. 29 (7): 891–918. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022303706942.
Chen, J., X. Li, H. Zhu, and Y. Rubin. 2017. “Geostatistical method for inferring RMR ahead of tunnel face excavation using dynamically exposed geological information.” Eng. Geol. 228 (Oct): 214–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2017.08.004.
Chiles, J.-P., and P. Delfiner. 2009. Vol. 497 of Geostatistics: Modeling spatial uncertainty. New York: Wiley.
Chilès, J.-P., C. Aug, A. Guillen, and T. Lees. 2004. “Modelling the geometry of geological units and its uncertainty in 3D from structural data: The potential-field method.” In Orebody modelling and strategic mine planning—Uncertainty and risk management models, spectrum series, 14. Carlton, VIC, Australia: Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy.
Ching, J., J.-S. Wang, C. H. Juang, and C.-S. Ku. 2015. “Cone penetration test (CPT)-based stratigraphic profiling using the wavelet transform modulus maxima method.” Can. Geotech. J. 52 (12): 1993–2007. https://doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2015-0027.
Clough, G. W., and E. Leca. 1993. “EPB shield tunneling in mixed face conditions.” J. Geotech. Eng. 119 (10): 1640–1656. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1993)119:10(1640).
Cressie, N. 1985. “Fitting variogram models by weighted least squares.” J. Int. Assoc. Math. Geol. 17 (5): 563–586. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01032109.
Emery, X. 2007. “Simulation of geological domains using the plurigaussian model: New developments and computer programs.” Comput. Geosci. 33 (9): 1189–1201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2007.01.006.
Gong, W., C. H. Juang, J. R. Martin II, H. Tang, Q. Wang, and H. Huang. 2018. “Probabilistic analysis of tunnel longitudinal performance based upon conditional random field simulation of soil properties.” Tunnelling Underground Space Technol. 73 (Mar): 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2017.11.026.
Gong, W., C. Zhao, C. H. Juang, H. Tang, H. Wang, and X. Hu. 2020. “Stratigraphic uncertainty modelling with random field approach.” Comput. Geotech. 125 (Sep): 103681. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2020.103681.
Grasmick, J. G. 2019. Modeling spatial geotechnical parameter uncertainty and quantitative tunneling risks. Golden, CO: Colorado School of Mines.
Hu, Y., and Y. Wang. 2020. “Probabilistic soil classification and stratification in a vertical cross-section from limited cone penetration tests using random field and Monte Carlo simulation.” Comput. Geotech. 124 (Aug): 103634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2020.103634.
Huang, H. W., L. Xiao, D. M. Zhang, and J. Zhang. 2017. “Influence of spatial variability of soil Young’s modulus on tunnel convergence in soft soils.” Eng. Geol. 228 (Oct): 357–370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2017.09.011.
Karacan, C. Ö., R. A. Olea, and G. Goodman. 2012. “Geostatistical modeling of the gas emission zone and its in-place gas content for Pittsburgh-seam mines using sequential Gaussian simulation.” Int. J. Coal Geol. 90–91 (Feb): 50–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coal.2011.10.010.
Lark, R. M. 2012. “Towards soil geostatistics.” Spatial Stat. 1 (May): 92–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spasta.2012.02.001.
Lark, R. M., B. R. Cullis, and S. J. Welham. 2006. “On spatial prediction of soil properties in the presence of a spatial trend: The empirical best linear unbiased predictor (E-BLUP) with REML.” Eur. J. Soil Sci. 57 (6): 787–799. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2389.2005.00768.x.
Lark, R. M., and R. Webster. 2006. “Geostatistical mapping of geomorphic variables in the presence of trend.” Earth Surf. Processes Landforms 31 (7): 862–874. https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.1296.
Li, Z., X. Wang, H. Wang, and R. Y. Liang. 2016. “Quantifying stratigraphic uncertainties by stochastic simulation techniques based on Markov random field.” Eng. Geol. 201 (Feb): 106–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2015.12.017.
Ma, Y. Z. 2019. Quantitative geosciences: Data analytics, geostatistics, reservoir characterization and modeling. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-17860-4.
Madani, N., and X. Emery. 2015. “Simulation of geo-domains accounting for chronology and contact relationships: Application to the Río Blanco copper deposit.” Stochastic Environ. Res. Risk Assess. 29 (8): 2173–2191. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-014-0997-x.
Madani, N., M. Maleki, and X. Emery. 2019. “Nonparametric geostatistical simulation of subsurface facies: Tools for validating the reproduction of, and uncertainty in, facies geometry.” Nat. Resour. Res. 28 (3): 1163–1182. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11053-018-9444-x.
Maleki, M., X. Emery, and N. Mery. 2017. “Indicator variograms as an aid for geological interpretation and modeling of ore deposits.” Minerals 7 (12): 241. https://doi.org/10.3390/min7120241.
Oliver, M. A., and R. Webster. 2014. “A tutorial guide to geostatistics: Computing and modelling variograms and kriging.” Catena 113 (Feb): 56–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2013.09.006.
Phoon, K.-K., S.-T. Quek, and P. An. 2003. “Identification of statistically homogeneous soil layers using modified Bartlett statistics.” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 129 (7): 649–659. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2003)129:7(649).
Pinheiro, M., J. Vallejos, T. Miranda, and X. Emery. 2016. “Geostatistical simulation to map the spatial heterogeneity of geomechanical parameters: A case study with rock mass rating.” Eng. Geol. 205 (Apr): 93–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2016.03.003.
Pyrcz, M. J., and C. V. Deutsch. 2014. Geostatistical reservoir modeling. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Shannon, C. E. 1948. “A mathematical theory of communication.” Bell Syst. Tech. J. 27 (3): 379–423. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1538-7305.1948.tb01338.x.
Shi, C., and Y. Wang. 2021a. “Development of subsurface geological cross-section from limited site-specific boreholes and prior geological knowledge using iterative convolution XGBoost.” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 147 (9): 04021082. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0002583.
Shi, C., and Y. Wang. 2021b. “Nonparametric and data-driven interpolation of subsurface soil stratigraphy from limited data using multiple point statistics.” Can. Geotech. J. 58 (2): 261–280. https://doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2019-0843.
Sousa, R. L. 2010. “Risk analysis for tunneling projects.” Ph.D. thesis, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Uzielli, M., S. Lacasse, F. Nadim, and K. Phoon. 2007. “Soil variability analysis for geotechnical practice.” In Characterisation and engineering properties of natural soils. London: Taylor & Francis.
Wang, C. H., B. Harken, C. A. Osorio-Murillo, H. H. Zhu, and Y. Rubin. 2016a. “Bayesian approach for probabilistic site characterization assimilating borehole experiments and Cone Penetration Tests.” Eng. Geol. 207 (Jun): 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2016.04.002.
Wang, X., Z. Li, H. Wang, Q. Rong, and R. Y. Liang. 2016b. “Probabilistic analysis of shield-driven tunnel in multiple strata considering stratigraphic uncertainty.” Struct. Saf. 62 (Sep): 88–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strusafe.2016.06.007.
Wang, X., H. Wang, and R. Y. Liang. 2018. “A method for slope stability analysis considering subsurface stratigraphic uncertainty.” Landslides 15 (5): 925–936. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-017-0925-5.
Wang, Y., K. Huang, and Z. Cao. 2014. “Bayesian identification of soil strata in London clay.” Géotechnique 64 (3): 239–246. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.13.T.018.
Webster, R., and M. A. Oliver. 1992. “Sample adequately to estimate variograms of soil properties.” Eur. J. Soil Sci. 43 (1): 177–192. https://doi.org/10.5771/0038-6073-2013-1-2-191.
Wellmann, J. F., F. G. Horowitz, E. Schill, and K. Regenauer-Lieb. 2010. “Towards incorporating uncertainty of structural data in 3D geological inversion.” Tectonophysics 490 (3–4): 141–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2010.04.022.
Xiao, T., L.-M. Zhang, X.-Y. Li, and D.-Q. Li. 2017. “Probabilistic stratification modeling in geotechnical site characterization.” ASCE-ASME J. Risk Uncertainty Eng. Syst. Part A: Civ. Eng. 3 (4): 04017019. https://doi.org/10.1061/AJRUA6.0000924.
Yu, H., M. Mooney, and A. Bezuijen. 2020. “A simplified excavation chamber pressure model for EPBM tunneling.” Tunnelling Underground Space Technol. 103 (May): 103457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2020.103457.

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Go to Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering
Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering
Volume 148Issue 8August 2022

History

Received: Oct 22, 2020
Accepted: Feb 23, 2022
Published online: May 17, 2022
Published in print: Aug 1, 2022
Discussion open until: Oct 17, 2022

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Authors

Affiliations

Ph.D. Student, Center for Underground Construction and Tunneling, Colorado School of Mines, 1500 Illinois St., Golden, CO 80401 (corresponding author). ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8873-4126. Email: [email protected]; [email protected]
Michael A. Mooney, M.ASCE
Grewcock Endowed Chair Professor, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Colorado School of Mines, 1500 Illinois St., Golden, CO 80401.
Whitney Trainor-Guitton, M.ASCE https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5726-3886
Affiliate Faculty, Dept. of Geophysics, Colorado School of Mines, 1500 Illinois St., Golden, CO 80401. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5726-3886.

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

Download citation

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.

View Options

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Copy the content Link

Share with email

Email a colleague

Share