Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Prediction of shield tunneling-induced ground settlement using machine learning techniques

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Predicting the tunneling-induced maximum ground surface settlement is a complex problem since the settlement depends on plenty of intrinsic and extrinsic factors. This study investigates the efficiency and feasibility of six machine learning (ML) algorithms, namely, back-propagation neural network, wavelet neural network, general regression neural network (GRNN), extreme learning machine, support vector machine and random forest (RF), to predict tunneling-induced settlement. Field data sets including geological conditions, shield operational parameters, and tunnel geometry collected from four sections of tunnel with a total of 3.93 km are used to build models. Three indicators, mean absolute error, root mean absolute error, and coefficient of determination the (R2) are used to demonstrate the performance of each computational model. The results indicated that ML algorithms have great potential to predict tunneling-induced settlement, compared with the traditional multivariate linear regression method. GRNN and RF algorithms show the best performance among six ML algorithms, which accurately recognize the evolution of tunneling-induced settlement. The correlation between the input variables and settlement is also investigated by Pearson correlation coefficient.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Chen R P, Lin X T, Kang X, Zhong Z Q, Liu Y, Zhang P, Wu H N. Deformation and stress characteristics of existing twin tunnels induced by close-distance EPBS under-crossing. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2018, 82: 468–481

    Google Scholar 

  2. Zhang P, Chen R P, Wu H N. Real-time analysis and regulation of EPB shield steering using random forest. Automation in Construction, 2019, 106: 102860

    Google Scholar 

  3. Wu H N, Shen S L, Yang J. Identification of tunnel settlement caused by land subsidence in soft deposit of Shanghai. Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, 2017, 31(6): 04017092

    Google Scholar 

  4. Wu H N, Shen S L, Liao S M, Yin Z Y. Longitudinal structural modelling of shield tunnels considering shearing dislocation between segmental rings. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2015, 50: 317–323

    Google Scholar 

  5. Wu H N, Shen S L, Yang J, Zhou A N. Soil-tunnel interaction modelling for shield tunnels considering shearing dislocation in longitudinal joints. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2018, 78: 168–177

    Google Scholar 

  6. Zhang Z, Huang M. Geotechnical influence on existing subway tunnels induced by multiline tunneling in Shanghai soft soil. Computers and Geotechnics, 2014, 56: 121–132

    Google Scholar 

  7. Shi H, Yang H, Gong G, Wang L. Determination of the cutterhead torque for EPB shield tunneling machine. Automation in Construction, 2011, 20(8): 1087–1095

    Google Scholar 

  8. Zheng G, Cui T, Cheng X, Diao Y, Zhang T, Sun J, Ge L. Study of the collapse mechanism of shield tunnels due to the failure of segments in sandy ground. Engineering Failure Analysis, 2017, 79: 464–490

    Google Scholar 

  9. Chen R P, Li Z C, Chen Y M, Ou C Y, Hu Q, Rao M. Failure investigation at a collapsed deep excavation in very sensitive organic soft clay. Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, 2015, 29(3): 04014078

    Google Scholar 

  10. Huang Q, Huang H, Ye B, Zhang D, Zhang F. Evaluation of train-induced settlement for metro tunnel in saturated clay based on an elastoplastic constitutive model. Underground Space, 2018, 3(2): 109–124

    Google Scholar 

  11. Shen S L, Wu H N, Cui Y J, Yin Z Y. Long-term settlementbehaviour of metro tunnels in the soft deposits of Shanghai. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2014, 40: 309–323

    Google Scholar 

  12. Wang Z F, Cheng W C, Wang Y Q. Investigation into geohazards during urbanization process of Xi’an, China. Natural Hazards, 2018, 92(3): 1937–1953

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Vorster T E, Klar A, Soga K, Mair R J. Estimating the effects of tunneling on existing pipelines. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2005, 131(11): 1399–1410

    Google Scholar 

  14. Attewell P B, Hurrell M R. Settlement development caused by tunnelling in soil. Ground Engineering, 1985, 18(8): 17–20

    Google Scholar 

  15. Peck R B. Deep excavations and tunneling in soft ground. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Soil Mechanic and Foundation Engineering. Mexico City, 1969, 225–290

    Google Scholar 

  16. Sagaseta C. Analysis of undrained soil deformation due to ground loss. Geotechnique, 1987, 37(3): 301–320

    Google Scholar 

  17. Verruijt A, Booker J R. Surface settlements due to deformation of a tunnel in an elastic half plane. Geotechnique, 1998, 48(5): 709–713

    Google Scholar 

  18. Chen R P, Meng F Y, Li Z C, Ye Y H, Ye J N. Investigation of response of metro tunnels due to adjacent large excavation and protective measures in soft soils. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2016, 58: 224–235

    Google Scholar 

  19. Huang H, Gong W, Khoshnevisan S, Juang C H, Zhang D, Wang L. Simplified procedure for finite element analysis of the longitudinal performance of shield tunnels considering spatial soil variability in longitudinal direction. Computers and Geotechnics, 2015, 64: 132–145

    Google Scholar 

  20. Paternesi A, Schweiger H F, Scarpelli G. Numerical analyses of stability and deformation behavior of reinforced and unreinforced tunnel faces. Computers and Geotechnics, 2017, 88: 256–266

    Google Scholar 

  21. Zhang L, Wu X, Ji W, AbouRizk S M. Intelligent approach to estimation of tunnel-induced ground settlement using wavelet packet and support vector machines. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, 2017, 31(2): 04016053

    Google Scholar 

  22. Pourtaghi A, Lotfollahi-Yaghin M A. Wavenet ability assessment in comparison to ANN for predicting the maximum surface settlement caused by tunneling. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2012, 28: 257–271

    Google Scholar 

  23. Zhang L, Wu X, Zhu H, AbouRizk S M. Performing global uncertainty and sensitivity analysis from given data in tunnel construction. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, 2017, 31(6): 04017065

    Google Scholar 

  24. Chou J S, Lin C. Predicting disputes in public-private partnership projects: Classification and ensemble models. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, 2013, 27(1): 51–60

    Google Scholar 

  25. Zoveidavianpoor M. A comparative study of artificial neural network and adaptive neurofuzzy inference system for prediction of compressional wave velocity. Neural Computing & Applications, 2014, 25(5): 1169–1176

    Google Scholar 

  26. Hamdia K M, Lahmer T, Nguyen-Thoi T, Rabczuk T. Predicting the fracture toughness of PNCs: A stochastic approach based on ANN and ANFIS. Computational Materials Science, 2015, 102: 304–313

    Google Scholar 

  27. Dai H, Cao Z. A wavelet support vector machine-based neural network metamodel for structural reliability assessment. Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, 2017, 32(4): 344–357

    Google Scholar 

  28. Bouayad D, Emeriault F. Modeling the relationship between ground surface settlements induced by shield tunneling and the operational and geological parameters based on the hybrid PCA/ANFIS method. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2017, 68: 142–152

    Google Scholar 

  29. Kim C Y, Bae G J, Hong S W, Park C H, Moon H K, Shin H S. Neural network based prediction of ground surface settlements due to tunnelling. Computers and Geotechnics, 2001, 28(6–7): 517–547

    Google Scholar 

  30. Santos O J Jr, Celestino T B. Artificial neural networks analysis of São Paulo subway tunnel settlement data. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2008, 23(5): 481–491

    Google Scholar 

  31. Shi J, Ortigao J A R, Bai J. Modular neural networks for predicting settlements during tunneling. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 1998, 124(5): 389–395

    Google Scholar 

  32. Suwansawat S, Einstein H H. Artificial neural networks for predicting the maximum surface settlement caused by EPB shield tunneling. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2006, 21(2): 133–150

    Google Scholar 

  33. Hasanipanah M, Noorian-Bidgoli M, Jahed Armaghani D, Khamesi H. Feasibility of PSO-ANN model for predicting surface settlement caused by tunneling. Engineering with Computers, 2016, 32(4): 705–715

    Google Scholar 

  34. Meschke G. From advance exploration to real time steering of TBMs: A review on pertinent research in the Collaborative Research Center “Interaction Modeling in Mechanized Tunneling”. Underground Space, 2018, 3(1): 1–20

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  35. Ding L, Wang F, Luo H, Yu M, Wu X. Feedforward analysis for shield-ground system. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, 2013, 27(3): 231–242

    Google Scholar 

  36. Samui P, Sitharam T G. Least-square support vector machine applied to settlement of shallow foundations on cohesionless soils. International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 2008, 32(17): 2033–2043

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  37. Qi C, Tang X. Slope stability prediction using integrated metaheuristic and machine learning approaches: A comparative study. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 2018, 118: 112–122

    Google Scholar 

  38. Liu W, Wu X, Zhang L, Wang Y, Teng J. Sensitivity analysis of structural health risk in operational tunnels. Automation in Construction, 2018, 94: 135–153

    Google Scholar 

  39. Behzad M, Asghari K, Coppola E A Jr. Comparative study of SVMs and ANNs in aquifer water level prediction. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, 2010, 24(5): 408–413

    Google Scholar 

  40. Kohestani V R, Bazargan-LariM R, Asgari-marnani J. Prediction of maximum surface settlement caused by earth pressure balance shield tunneling using random forest. Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Data Mining, 2017, 5(1): 127–135

    Google Scholar 

  41. Sun W, Shi M, Zhang C, Zhao J, Song X. Dynamic load prediction of tunnel boring machine (TBM) based on heterogeneous in-situ data. Automation in Construction, 2018, 92: 23–34

    Google Scholar 

  42. Bendu H, Deepak B B V L, Murugan S. Application of GRNN for the prediction of performance and exhaust emissions in HCCI engine using ethanol. Energy Conversion and Management, 2016, 122: 165–173

    Google Scholar 

  43. Anoop Krishnan N M, Mangalathu S, Smedskjaer M M, Tandia A, Burton H, Bauchy M. Predicting the dissolution kinetics of silicate glasses using machine learning. Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids, 2018, 487: 37–45

    Google Scholar 

  44. Mangalathu S, Jeon J S. Classification of failure mode and prediction of shear strength for reinforced concrete beam-column joints using machine learning techniques. Engineering Structures, 2018, 160: 85–94

    Google Scholar 

  45. Zhou J, Li X, Mitri H S. Classification of rockburst in underground projects: Comparison of ten supervised learning methods. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, 2016, 30(5): 04016003

    Google Scholar 

  46. Dwivedi A K. Performance evaluation of different machine learning techniques for prediction of heart disease. Neural Computing & Applications, 2018, 29(10): 685–693

    Google Scholar 

  47. Naghibi S A, Ahmadi K, Daneshi A. Application of support vector machine, random forest, and genetic algorithm optimized random forest models in groundwater potential mapping. Water Resources Management, 2017, 31(9): 2761–2775

    Google Scholar 

  48. Zhao Y, Pan H, Wang H, Yu H. Dynamics research on grouping characteristics of a shield tunneling machine’s thrust system. Automation in Construction, 2017, 76: 97–107

    Google Scholar 

  49. Huang G B, Zhu Q Y, Siew C K. Extreme learning machine: Theory and applications. Neurocomputing, 2006, 70(1–3): 489–501

    Google Scholar 

  50. Breiman L. Bagging Predictors. Machine Learning, 1996, 24(2): 123–140

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  51. Ho T K. The random subspace method for constructing decision forests. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 1998, 20(8): 832–844

    Google Scholar 

  52. Liaw A, Wiener M, Liaw A. Classification and regression by random forest. R News, 2002, 23(23): 18–21

    Google Scholar 

  53. Tseranidis S, Brown N C, Mueller C T. Data-driven approximation algorithms for rapid performance evaluation and optimization of civil structures. Automation in Construction, 2016, 72: 279–293

    Google Scholar 

  54. Braga-Neto U, Hashimoto R, Dougherty E R, Nguyen D V, Carroll R J. Is cross-validation better than resubstitution for ranking genes? Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2004, 20(2): 253–258

    Google Scholar 

  55. Badawy M F, Msekh M A, Hamdia K M, Steiner M K, Lahmer T, Rabczuk T. Hybrid nonlinear surrogate models for fracture behavior of polymeric nanocomposites. Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics, 2017, 50: 64–75

    Google Scholar 

  56. Stone M. Cross-validatory choice and assessment of statistical predictions. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (General), 1974, 36(2): 111–147

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  57. Theodosiou M. Disaggregation & aggregation of time series components: A hybrid forecasting approach using generalized regression neural networks and the theta method. Neurocomputing, 2011, 74(6): 896–905

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The present work was carried out with the support of Research Program of Changsha Science and Technology Bureau (cskq1703051), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 41472244 and 51878267), the Industrial Technology and Development Program of Zhongjian Tunnel Construction Co., Ltd. (17430102000417), Natural Science Foundation of Hunan Province, China (2019JJ30006).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Key Laboratory of Building Safety and Energy Efficiency, Hunan University, Changsha, 410082, China

    Renpeng Chen & Huaina Wu

  2. National Joint Research Center for Building Safety and Environment, Hunan University, Changsha, 410082, China

    Renpeng Chen & Huaina Wu

  3. College of Civil Engineering, Hunan University, Changsha, 410082, China

    Renpeng Chen, Pin Zhang, Huaina Wu & Zhiteng Wang

  4. China Construction Fifth Engineering Division Co., Ltd, Changsha, 410082, China

    Zhiquan Zhong

Authors
  1. Renpeng Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pin Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Huaina Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Zhiteng Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Zhiquan Zhong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Pin Zhang or Huaina Wu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chen, R., Zhang, P., Wu, H. et al. Prediction of shield tunneling-induced ground settlement using machine learning techniques. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng. 13, 1363–1378 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-019-0561-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-019-0561-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation