Numerical analyses in the design of umbrella arch systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Due to advances in numerical modelling, it is possible to capture complex support-ground interaction in two dimensions and three dimensions for mechanical analysis of complex tunnel support systems, although such analysis may still be too complex for routine design calculations. One such system is the forepole element, installed within the umbrella arch temporary support system for tunnels, which warrants such support measures. A review of engineering literature illustrates that a lack of design standards exists regarding the use of forepole elements. Therefore, when designing such support, designers must employ complex numerical models combined with engineering judgement. With reference to past developments by others and new investigations conducted by the authors on the Driskos tunnel in Greece and the Istanbul metro, this paper illustrates how advanced numerical modelling tools can facilitate understanding of the influences of design parameters associated with the use of forepole elements. In addition, this paper highlights the complexity of the ground-support interaction when simulated with two-dimensional (2D) finite element software using a homogenous reinforced region, and three-dimensional (3D) finite difference software using structural elements. This paper further illustrates sequential optimisation of two design parameters (spacing and overlap) using numerical modelling. With regard to capturing system behaviour in the region between forepoles for the purpose of dimensioning spacing, this paper employs three distinctive advanced numerical models: particle codes, continuous finite element models with joint set and Voronoi blocks. Finally, to capture the behaviour/failure ahead of the tunnel face (overlap parameter), 2D axisymmetric models are employed. Finally, conclusions of 2D and 3D numerical assessment on the Driskos tunnel are drawn. The data enriched case study is examined to determine an optimum design, based on the proposed optimisation of design parameters, of forepole elements related to the site-specific considerations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".