SEM TUNNEL SEISMIC DESIGN USING ITERATIVE SSI ANALYSIS FOR HIGH SEISMICITY REGIONS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a state-of-the-art review of the non-linear seismic design philosophy adopted for two tunnels to be excavated parallel to each other with Sequential Excavation Method (SEM) in Vancouver, Canada, known as an active seismic region. The two parallel tunnels were elliptical shaped with a maximum excavation height of approximately 5.6 m and width of 6.1 m, located at the transition between soft ground and bedrock. The seismic performance requirements included minimal damage and repairable damage for 100-year and 2,475-year return period earthquakes, respectively. An iterative procedure is presented using numerical soil-structure interaction (SSI) analysis where the tunnel is designed to withstand the ovaling/racking, and differential deformations imposed by the ground. In addition, the methodology described in this paper allows the iteration between the unfactored non-linear geotechnical FE analysis and the factored non-linear structural FE analysis. Although LRFD (Load and Resistance Factor Design) structural design contrasts the unfactored geotechnical SSI analysis, iterative process and tailored algorithm allows to maintain the design philosophy of both worlds without the need to compromise underlying physics. This methodology can be used in seismic design of underground structures where different load factor should be applied to different loads such as vertical ground pressures, horizontal ground pressures, groundwater pressure, seismic and etc.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".