Simplified Method for Predicting the Shield Tunnel Longitudinal Responses to Over-Crossing Tunneling Considering Circumferential Joint Effect
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A simplified theoretical approach for predicting the longitudinal behaviors of the existing shield tunnel related to over-crossing tunneling is developed by considering the circumferential joint effect. A simplified beam–spring model (SBSM) is established to describe the shield tunnel longitudinal behaviors, in which the segmental linings are simplified into Euler–Bernoulli short beams, and the circumferential joints are represented using the linear rotation and shearing springs. The SBSM can reflect the opening and dislocation of shield tunnels simultaneously. The existing shield tunnel is then regarded as the SBSM lying on the Pasternak foundation, and the displacement and joint deformations of the existing tunnel are obtained by the finite-difference method (FDM). By virtue of the FDM, the complex tunnel–soil interaction and ring-to-ring interaction can be easily transformed into the numerical solutions. The feasibility of the present approach is examined by two published cases and comparison with previous solutions. Parametric analyses are also conducted to explore the impacts of several dominant variables. The findings showed that the predicted tunnel displacements from the present solution are almost the same as those from the Timoshenko beam model and the measurements, but the present method predicts a slightly higher joint opening and lower dislocation between rings than the Timoshenko beam model. In addition, the present method takes the stiffness reduction at circumferential joints into consideration, which leads to the obtained tunnel displacement curves being neither smooth nor continuous. The rigid motion primarily appears at the lining rings, whereas the rotation and dislocation appear at the circumferential joints. The existing solutions always give continuous tunnel heave curves, which fails to truly reflect the discontinuous deformations at circumferential joints.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".