Three‐Dimensional Finite Difference Analysis on the Ground‐Sequential Tunneling‐Superstructure Interaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, a three‐dimensional finite difference analysis is presented to investigate the interactive effects of sequential tunneling and the superstructure on the settlement profile of the ground. To simulate the practical sequential tunneling procedure, tunnel excavation is conducted in a step‐by‐step framework; tunnel excavation starts from the beginning of the model and is updated in a continuous manner, and the installation of the tunnel support system is done with a delay step compared to tunnel excavation. The numerical modeling accuracy is validated using the available analytical and numerical solutions for both two‐dimensional and three‐dimensional simplified cases. The well‐validated modeling procedure is adopted to investigate effects of tunnel diameter, depth of tunneling, and number of superstructure stories on the profile of occurring settlements. Two cases of free‐field and three‐dimensional superstructural modeling are compared with regard to the effect of tunneling. In addition, the effect of tunneling advancement on the generation of excess structural forces and moments are studied as another important factor in the soil‐tunneling‐superstructure interaction problem. It is observed that, in the free‐field case, with advancing the tunnel face, the longitudinal settlement profiles approach the steady‐state condition and the maximum ground settlement tends to converge to a specific value, whereas as the tunnel passes under a structure, the settlement increases steadily as the tunnel progresses. There is a direct relationship between the depth and diameter of the tunnel and the settlement. In addition, the effect of the number of superstructure stories on the maximum settlement is more considerable compared to the free‐field condition. According to the results, when the tunnel passes under 8‐story and 12‐story structures, the maximum settlement increases by 40% and 70%, respectively, compared to the free‐field condition. It is also shown that tunneling‐induced settlements result in the regeneration of structural forces.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".