Comparison of indirect boundary element and finite element methods A case study: Shiraz-Esfahan railway tunnel in Iran

doi:10.1007/s11709-012-0173-7

Front Struc Civil Eng

0, Vol.

Issue () : 385-392 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-012-0173-7

CASE STUDY

Comparison of indirect boundary element and finite element methods A case study: Shiraz-Esfahan railway tunnel in Iran

Amin MANOUCHEHRIAN(

), Mohammad Fatehi MARJI, Mohsen MOHEBBI

Mining and Metallurgical Engineering Department, Yazd University, Yazd 89195, Iran

Download: PDF(654 KB) HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks

Abstract

Because of the high importance of transportation tunnels, most precise analyses of stress concentration and displacement around them are essential to provide safety of them as much as possible. Recently, various numerical methods such as finite element method (FEM), discrete element method (DEM), finite difference method (FDM) and boundary element method (BEM) have been used extremely in geosciences problems, but among these numerical methods, BEM has been used less than others because the computational algorithm is not so straightforward. This paper suggests the implementation of the indirect boundary element method (IBEM) as a formulation of BEM to analyze displacement around Shiraz-Esfahan railway tunnel in Zagros Mountains southwest of Iran. For this purpose, this tunnel has been modeled numerically using two-dimensional fictitious stress method (TWOFS) algorithm. To validate the results, they were compared with FEM results as a commonly used numerical method. Results of current theoretical study have shown that the presented approach using IBEM is reasonably accurate and can be used for analysis of displacement in geosciences problems. In rock mechanics, for problems with a low ratio of boundary surface to volume, FEM is not very well suited and may be cumbersome, but use of such a proposed IBEM approach can be particularly attractive.

Keywords indirect boundary element method finite element method displacement tunnel case study

Corresponding Author(s): MANOUCHEHRIAN Amin,Email:amin.manouchehrian@gmail.com

Issue Date: 05 December 2012

Cite this article:

Amin MANOUCHEHRIAN,Mohammad Fatehi MARJI,Mohsen MOHEBBI. Comparison of indirect boundary element and finite element methods A case study: Shiraz-Esfahan railway tunnel in Iran[J]. Front Struc Civil Eng, 0, (): 385-392.

URL:

https://academic.hep.com.cn/fsce/EN/10.1007/s11709-012-0173-7
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fsce/EN/Y0/V/I/385

Fig.1 Discretization in 2D with: a) BEM and b) FEM

Fig.2 Location of the tunnel

Fig.3 Tunnel cross section

Fig.4 The longitudinal section of the tunnel

Tab.1 Rock mass classification through the tunnel path

Tab.2 Geomechanical parameters of rocks

Fig.5 (a) Finite plate and (b) infinite plate

Fig.6 Tunnel schematic geometry modeled in TWOFS

Fig.7 Vertical and horizontal displacement in the invert from IBEM

Fig.8 Vertical and horizontal displacement on the side walls from IBEM

Fig.9 Vertical and horizontal displacement at the roof from IBEM

Fig.10 Mesh and geometry adopted in the FEM simulation

Fig.11 Vertical displacement around the tunnel from FEM

Fig.12 Horizontal displacement around the tunnel from FEM

Fig.13 Comparison of the results from IBEM and FEM

1	Panet M. Le Calcul des Tunnels par la Methode Convergence-Confinement. Presses de l’Ecole Nationale des Pontset Chaussees , 1995
2	Hoek, E. Practical Rock Engineering. Internet reference: www.rocscience.com, 2000
3	Lunardi P. Design and constructing tunnels—ADECO-RS approach. Tunnels and Tunnelling International Special Supplement . Internet reference: www.rocksoil.com, 2000
4	Lai J X, Fan H B, Liu B Z, Liu T L. Analysis of seismic response of shallow large section multi-arch tunnel. Procedia Engineering , 2011, 15: 5473-5477 doi: 10.1016/j.proeng.2011.08.1015
5	Chen R P, Tang L J, Ling D S, Chen Y M. Face stability analysis of shallow shield tunnels in dry sandy ground using the discrete element method. Computers and Geotechnics , 2011, 38(2): 187-195 doi: 10.1016/j.compgeo.2010.11.003
6	Duenser C, Beer G. Simulation of sequential excavation with the Boundary Element Method. Computers and Geotechnics , 2012, 44: 157-166 doi: 10.1016/j.compgeo.2012.04.003
7	Banerjee P K, Butterfield R. Boundary Element Methods in Engineering Science. New York: McGraw-Hill,1981
8	Chen G, Zhou J. Boundary Element Methods. London: Academic Press, 1992
9	Watson J O, Cowling R. Applications of Three-Dimensional Boundary Element Method to Modelling of Large Mining Excavations at Depth. In: Proceedings of 5th International Symposium of Numerical Methods in Geomechanics . Rotterdam: Balkema, 1985
10	Beer G, Smith I, Duenser C. The Boundary Element Method with Programming: For Engineers and Scientists. Berlin: Springer Verlag, 2008
11	Cisilino A P, Aliabadi M H. A boundary element method for three-dimensional elastoplastic problems. Engineering with Computers , 1998, 15: 1011-1030
12	Davies T G, Gao X W. Three dimensional elasto-plastic analysis via the boundary element method. Computers and Geotechnics , 2006, 33(3): 145-154 doi: 10.1016/j.compgeo.2006.03.003
13	Shou K. A three dimensional hybrid boundary element method for non-linear analysis of a weak plane near an underground excavation. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology , 2000, 15(2): 215-226 doi: 10.1016/S0886-7798(00)00047-X
14	Wang C B, Chatterjee J, Banerjee P K. An ef?cient implementation of BEM for two- and three-dimensional multi-region elastoplastic analysis. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering , 2007, 196(4-6): 829-842 doi: 10.1016/j.cma.2006.06.012
15	Bobet A. Numerical Methods in geomechanics. Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering , 2010, 35: 27-48
16	Prazeres P G C, Thoeni K, Beer G. Nonlinear analysis of NATM tunnel construction with the boundary element method. Computers and Geotechnics , 2012, 40: 160-173 doi: 10.1016/j.compgeo.2011.10.005
17	Vlahopoulos N, Raveendra S T. Formulation, implementation and validation of multiple connection and free edge constraints in an indirect boundary element formulation. Journal of Sound and Vibration , 1998, 210(1): 137-152 doi: 10.1006/jsvi.1997.1299
18	Greengard L, Kropinski M C, Mayo A. Integral equation methods for Stokes ?ow and isotropic elasticity in the plane. Journal of Computational Physics , 1996, 125(2): 403-414 doi: 10.1006/jcph.1996.0102
19	Crouch S L, Starfield A M. Boundary Element Methods in Solid Mechanics. London: Allen &Unwin, 1989
20	Jing L. A Review of Techniques, Advances and Outstanding Issues in Numerical Modelling for Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences , 2003, 40(3): 283-353 doi: 10.1016/S1365-1609(03)00013-3

[1]	Meng HUANG, Mingli HUANG, Ze YANG, Yuan SONG, Zhien ZHANG. Large-scale model test study on the water pressure resistance of construction joints of karst tunnel linings[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2023, 17(8): 1249-1263.
[2]	Boshun GAO, Xin XIAO, Jiayu WANG, Ligao JIANG, Qing YAO. Development of combined transitional pavement structure for urban tram track-road grade crossings[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2023, 17(8): 1199-1210.
[3]	Pengfei LI, Ziqi JIA, Mingju ZHANG, Xiaojing GAO, Haifeng WANG, Wu FENG. Bending failure performance of a shield tunnel segment based on full-scale test and numerical analysis[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2023, 17(7): 1033-1046.
[4]	Jie HE, Hehua ZHU, Xiangyang WEI, Rui JIN, Yaji JIAO, Mei YIN. Numerical and experimental analyses of methane leakage in shield tunnel[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2023, 17(7): 1011-1020.
[5]	Xiaojing GAO, Pengfei LI, Mingju ZHANG, Haifeng WANG, Zenghui LIU, Ziqi JIA. Analytical algorithms of compressive bending capacity of bolted circumferential joint in metro shield tunnels[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2023, 17(6): 901-914.
[6]	Huai-Na WU, Lei LIU, Yuan LIU, Ren-Peng CHEN, Hai-Lin WANG, Shi-Qiang RUAN, Meng FAN. Weakening behavior of waterproof performance in joints of shield tunnels under adjacent constructions[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2023, 17(6): 884-900.
[7]	Hui WANG, Yong YUAN, Junnan QIU, Yuan XUE, Guangzhou XIE, Qian CHENG, Yuanchao DING, Qing AI. Connection of the prefabricated updeck of road tunnels by a short lap-spliced joint using ultra-high-performance fiber-reinforced concrete[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2023, 17(6): 870-883.
[8]	Mehrdad KARAMI, Mohammad NAZARI-SHARABIAN, James BRISTOW, Moses KARAKOUZIAN. Evaluation of the stability of terraced slopes in clayey gravel soil using a novel numerical technique[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2023, 17(5): 796-811.
[9]	Zhong ZHOU, Yidi ZHENG, Junjie ZHANG, Hao YANG. Fast detection algorithm for cracks on tunnel linings based on deep semantic segmentation[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2023, 17(5): 732-744.
[10]	Shimin WANG, Xiaoyu PENG, Hang ZHOU, Xuhu HE, Anqi ZHOU, Bing CHEN. Deformation control criterion of shield tunnel under lateral relaxation of soft soil[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2023, 17(5): 780-795.
[11]	Xuefei HONG, Dingli ZHANG, Zhenyu SUN. Mechanical responses of multi-layered ground due to shallow tunneling with arbitrary ground surface load[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2023, 17(5): 745-762.
[12]	Fengwei YANG, Weilin SU, Yi YANG, Zhiguo CAO. Analysis of load and adaptability of disc cutters during shield tunneling in soft–hard varied strata[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2023, 17(4): 533-545.
[13]	Jiachong XIE, Xin HUANG, Zixin ZHANG, Guolong JIN. Cohesive zone model-based analyses of localized leakage of segmentally lined tunnels[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2023, 17(4): 503-521.
[14]	Yinzun YANG, Dajun YUAN, Dalong JIN. Effect of cutterhead configuration on tunnel face stability during shield machine maintenance outages[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2023, 17(4): 522-532.
[15]	Quoc-Hoa PHAM, Parviz MALEKZADEH, Van Ke TRAN, Trung NGUYEN-THOI. Free vibration analysis of functionally graded porous curved nanobeams on elastic foundation in hygro–thermo–magnetic environment[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2023, 17(4): 584-605.

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed