Effects of twin-tunnel excavation on an existing horseshoe-shaped tunnel considering the influence of a settlement joint
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In urban centres, the construction of a new tunnel would cause ground disturbance and affect any adjacent existing tunnel. Tunnel–tunnel interaction problems have not yet been comprehensively studied. In particular, the response of an existing horseshoe-shaped tunnel to the construction of two perpendicularly undercrossing tunnels remains unclear. In this study, three-dimensional centrifuge tests and three-dimensional numerical analysis were designed and conducted in dry sand to investigate the effects of twin-tunnel undercrossing on an existing horseshoe-shaped tunnel considering the influence of a settlement joint. It is found that the adverse effects caused by the tunnel excavated later were smaller than those by the earlier one. For the existing tunnel without a settlement joint, the settlement at the invert and crown along the longitudinal direction showed sagging and hogging curves, respectively, owing to significant vertical elongation of the middle section. The presence of a settlement joint resulted in an increase in the settlement of the ground surface and the existing tunnel by over 100%. In both cases, larger bending strains were induced in the transverse direction than in the longitudinal direction, particularly around the corners.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".