International Symposium on Underground Excavation and Tunnelling

2-4 February 2006, Bangkok, Thailand

Characteristics of Ground Movements from Shield Tunnelling of

the First Bangkok Subway Line
Noppadol Phienwej1, Attasit Sirivachiraporn1, Sahapol Timpong1, Sippavut Tavaranum1,
Suchatvee Suwansawat2
1
2

School of Engineering and Technology, Asian Institute of Technology, Pathumthani, Thailand.

Dept. of Civil Engineering, King Mongkut Institute of Technology-Lad Krabang, Bangkok, Thailand

ABSTRACT
The contracts for construction of the first Bangkok MRT Subway line called for the design to avoid
damages to existing buildings, thus instrumentation for monitoring of ground movements induced by
the excavation was an important component of the construction works. The ground and building
movement data associated with the EPBS bored tunneling are interpreted and the findings are presented
in the paper. Comparisons were made between the observed ground movements and predictions given
by well known empirical and analytical methods. The magnitude of building settlement was interpreted
with respect to building height (depth of piled foundation) and distance from tunnel.

1. BANGKOK MRT PROJECT

The Bangkok MRT Initial System Project (ISP), officially named Chaloem Ratchamongkhol Line, is
the first underground MRT of Bangkok. This project was constructed along traffic congested roads in
the inner city areas. The line which is 22 km long has been constructed as twin bored single-track
tunnels with 18 stations by the cut and cover method. Construction of the underground structures in the
project was implemented in two contracts, the South Contract and the North Contract, each with about
equal scope of work.
Each of the tunnel tube is 6.3 m in outer diameter and lined with concrete segmental lining of 5.7
m in inner diameter. The tunnels were bored by 8 EPB shields (6 Kawasaki machines and two
Herrenknecht machines). They were placed at depths between 8 and 25 m below the ground surface.
Bangkok subsoil condition is relatively uniform through out the city area, of which the first 25-30 m
thick soils comprise of a layer of soft marine clay (12-15 m thick) underlain by the first stiff clay layer
and the medium dense sand layer. Although most of the tunnel alignment is placed in the stiff clay
layer, some shallow sections have roof in the overlying soft clay and some of the deep alignment was
excavated in the underlying sand layer. Groundwater level in the sand layer was at 22-24 m depth
below the surface. General layout of the twin tunnels is in side by side configuration (clear distance
between tunnel walls mostly of 1.0-1.5 times the excavated tunnel diameter (5.0-9.0 m) and the
minimum as close as 2.6 m). The vertical stacked configuration was adopted for the first 4.5 km of the
alignment due to obstruction from foundation of viaducts over the roadway and water tunnels.
In many sections of the alignment, the tunnels were bored very close to the piled foundations of
buildings, bridges and utilities lines. Thus control of ground movement and limiting damages to
existing nearby structures is the key for the success for the development of the project. In the design
and construction planning, prediction of the ground movement characteristics, building condition
survey, and potential damages of buildings located within ground movement influence zone were
carried out prior to the start of the excavation work. A comprehensive instrumentation program for
monitoring of ground movements and responses of concerned structures was carried out as an important

319

part of the contract works. Over 5,000 instrumentations points were installed along the tunnel route.
(1,276 surface settlement points, 39 settlement arrays, 36 subsurface instrument sets and 339 buildings
with settlement monitoring points)
The recorded instrumentation data served as a means to understand the ground movement behavior
induced by the EPB tunneling in the stratified Bangkok soils and as indices for construction control and
implementation of remedial measured when needed. Although there have been previous studies on the
characteristics of ground movements associated with shield tunneling in Bangkok soil (e.g. Phienwej,
1998), the data from the MRT ISP were comprehensive and of the largest sized bored tunneling with
EPB shields ever made in Bangkok. The findings on the characteristics of the ground movements and
building responses in the projects are reported herein.
2. GROUND MOVEMENTS
2.1 Surface settlement
Monitoring of ground surface settlements over the tunnel alignment at 50 m intervals showed that the
maximum settlements were in the range of 5 mm to 120 mm, mostly between 20 mm and 60 mm (Fig.
1). The largest magnitudes were recorded in the early leg of tunneling of the North Contract and in as
area of the vertically-stacked tunneling in South Contract, in both of which the tubes were bored in
layers of sand with ground water.
10.000

12.000

14.000

16.000

Station, Km
18.000 20.000

22.000

24.000

26.000

28.000

30.000

0.0
-20.0

Settlement, mm

-40.0
-60.0
-80.0
-100.0
-120.0
-140.0
-160.0
-180.0

Stacked Tunnels

Side-by-Side Tunnels

Figure 1 Maximum surface settlement along the subway alignment

Figure 1a Relationship between maximum surface settlement and shield face pressure

320

Studies were made to examine influencing factors controlling the magnitude of the ground
movement in EPB shield tunneling in the Bangkok MRT project (Suwansawat, 2002, Timpong, 2002,
Tavaranun, 2003, etc). It was found that the most important factor seems to be the applied face pressure
in the front chamber of the shield machine. The face pressure played an important role in maintaining
stability of the excavation and minimizing ground movement. Figure 1a shows the plot between the
observed maximum surface settlement and the face pressure in the Project. The plot clearly shows the
influence of the applied face pressure on the magnitude of ground settlement, in which larger settlement
occurred when lower face pressure was used in the shield excavation. In case of a very high face
pressure, heave occurred at the ground surface. On the other hand, when the shields were operated at
very low face pressures (<100 kPa), large ground movement occurred. This effect of the face pressure
was observed for the tunnel excavation in all settings of soil layers at the excavated face except for the
case of the full face in sand layer. No trend was found between the face pressure and surface
settlements when the tunnels were excavated entirely in sand layers.

Soft clay

First tunnel
excavation (SB)
ground loss 0.43%
Second tunnel
excavation (NB)
ground loss 0.61%

Stiff clay

SB

NB

-20 m.
Very Stiff clay

Figure 2. Surface settlement trough in side by side twin tunnels

Soft clay

First tunnel
excavation (SB)
ground loss 0.69%
Second tunnel
excavation (NB)
ground loss 0.80%

-15 m.

NB

Stiff clay
Very Stiff clay

SB

-26 m.

Dense sand

Figure 3. Surface settlement troughs in vertically stacked twin tunnels

321

Out of the 39 arrays of settlement trough monitoring, 19 arrays showed that the observed troughs
could be reasonably fitted with the Gaussian curve (Peck, 1969) as shown in Figures 2 and 3. The
calculated tunnel ground loss from the observed settlement troughs was mostly in the range of 0.52.5%. In difficult sections, the ground loss was up to 3.5%.
Settlement troughs of which shapes did not follow the Gaussian function were influenced by
foundation of adjacent foundations and flyovers. The existing piled foundations within the green-field
trough zone obstructed the ground movement and caused an unsymmetrical trough shape. The typical
shape in such a case is shown in Figure 4. Piled foundation acted as a barrier to confine the ground
movement, resulting in larger ground settlements in that side of the tunnel.
Ground settlement array no. 26-AR-001

NB

SB

Sand

-20 m.

Stiff clay

Soft clay

Zone 26
Ratchada - Lat Phrao

10.5 m.

Figure 4. Effect of piled foundation on settlement trough

12.00
Single tunnel
Twin Tunnel

10.00
Rock, Hard Clays,
Sand above
groundwater level

Z/2R

8.00

Soft to Stiff clay

6.00

4.00

2.00

0.00
0.00

Sand below
groundwater level

1.00

2.00

3.00
i/R

4.00

5.00

6.00

Figure 5. Relation between Z/2R with i/R plotted in Peck

(1969)s curves

322

Maximum surface settlement occurred above the centerline of first tunnel after the shield passage
through the section and normally the Gaussian shaped trough shape was observed. For the side-by-side
twin tunnel case, once the excavation of the second tunnel was made at the section, the trough expanded
and shifted toward the second tunnel. However the center of the trough was normally skewed toward
the first excavated tunnel.
The observed behavior agrees with that reported by New and Bowers (1993). In such a case, the
settlement trough of the twin tunnel is described by the shifted Gaussian function

( x a)2
= max exp

2i 2

where

=
max =
x
=
i
=
a
=

surface settlement at transverse distance x from the centerline of twin tunnels

maximum settlement (at x = 0)
horizontal distance from the centerline of twin tunnels
the distance from the centerline of twin tunnels to the point of inflection
shifted distance from twin tunnels centerline

For the Bangkok MRT, the offset parameter (a) observed on 24 arrays ranged from 0.03-0.58 of
the distance between the two tunnel centerlines (d). The mean a/d is 0.16, The width of the settlement
trough observed after the excavation of the twin tunnels in the project was about 6 to 12 m for the
vertically-stacked tunnels and 10 to 17 m for the side-by-side twin tunnels.
The settlement trough width data were analyzed according to Peck (1969)s method of prediction.
The plot of i/R versus Z/2R for the single tunnel case is shown in Figure 5. The trough width parameter
(i) was obtained by fitting the observed surface settlement data with the Gaussian function. As can be
seen, most of the data points fall within the zone of sand below ground water level rather than soft to
stiff clay zone. This implies that for tunneling in Bangkok subsoil with EPB shields, the settlement
trough width tends to be wider than the suggested value by Peck (1969)s empirical method.

40
Single tunnel

35

Twin tunnel

i = 0.3Z

i = 0.4Z

i = 0.5Z

i = 0.6Z

Depth, Z (m)

30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0

10

15

20

Trough width parameter, i (m)

Figure 6. Observed settlement trough width parameters after single tunnel compared with
the parameter recommended by O'Reilly and New (1982)

323

A plot is made between relationship between the settlement trough width parameter (i) and tunnel
depth (z), Figure 6. Most of the data points fall within the range of i = 0.5Z to 0.6Z for tunnels located
in both the stiff clay and soft clay layers and i < 0.4Z for tunnels in sand layer. This is in agreement
with the observation of OReilly and New (1982).
2.2 Subsurface ground movement
Monitoring of subsurface ground movements was made by means of borehole extensometers and
inclinometers installed at a number of sections along the tunnel alignment. The layouts of the
instruments in the two contracts are shown in Figure 7.

Extensometer installation in
South contract
Extensometer

Extensometer installation in
North contract

Inclinometer
casing

Extensometer

Inclinometer
casing

Soft Clay
Soft Clay

Stiff Clay

3 - 6 m.

Stiff Clay

Tunnel

Tunnel

Figure 7. Subsurface Instrumentation for bored tunneling

S u b s u rfa c e s e ttle m e n t
In s tru m e n t R E -5 T -7 (B o n K a i - S irik it)
-4 0

-2 0

20

0
-5

S o ft c la y

-1 5

S tiff c la y
S o ft c la y

-2 0

-1 5 m .

V e ry s tiff c la y

S tiff c la y
-2 0 m .

-2 5

V e ry s tiff
c la y
-2 5 m .

D ense sand

-3 0
-3 5

-4 0

-2 0

S u b s u rfa c e s e ttle m e n t (m m )

Figure 8. Subsurface settlement above tunnel centerline

324

20

Depth (m)

-1 0

1) Subsurface settlement
For area above the tunnel centerline, the magnitude of subsurface settlement after the tunnel was
excavated generally increased with depth toward the tunnel roof, as shown in Figure 8. For the
subsurface ground settlement to the side of the tunnel wall, it was generally observed that the largest
magnitude of the settlement usually occurred in the soft clay layer at location near the interface with the
underlying stiff clay (Figure 9). The settlement in the stiff clay along that vertical plane decreased with
depth as the point falls further from the movement cone. At some sections, a small heave was measured
below the tunnel level.
Subsurface settlement
Instrument 23-IEX-001 (Thiam Ruam Mit - Pracharat)
0

20

-40

-20

-60
0
-5
Soft clay

Measurement
Loganathan &
Poulos (1998)

-15
Soft clay

Stiff clay

-20

3.42 m.
-15 m.
-17 m.
Stiff clay
-23 m.

Depth (m)

-10

-25
Dense sand

-30

Dense sand

-35
20

-40

-20

-60

Subsurface settlement (mm)

Figure 9. Subsurface settlement to the side of tunnel wall

E xte nso me te r M o nito ring R e sult

N o . 2 5 -IE -0 0 3 S utthisa n - R a tc ha da
E la psed tim e (da ys)
0

20

40

60

80

100

120

-50

Settlement (mm)

-40
-30
-20
-10
Soft clay

25-M E-3/08

-2.02 m.

25-M E-3/07

-5.15 m.

25-M E-3/06

-8.32 m.

25-ME-3/05 - 11.45 m.

10

-15 m.
Stiff clay

20

-18.5 m.

25-ME-3/04 - 14.58 m.
6 .24 m.

25-ME-3/03 - 17.71 m.

Shield passing
30

Figure 10. Changing of subsurface settlement with time

325

140

Long term ground settlement behavior for the EPB shield tunnel excavation was examined. The
subsurface settlement data showed that after the shield passage, significant increase in the settlement in
long term could only be observed in the soft clay layer. This was probably attributed to the effect of
consolidation of the soft clay brought about by the effect of the shield tunneling. In some case the
amount of the increase in 3-4 months was almost 100 percent of the short term settlement (Figure 10).
However, the long term increase in the settlement in the stiff clay layer near the tunnel roof was
generally not significant.
2) Lateral displacement
The lateral displacements of ground beside the tunnel were observed at 12 locations along the
alignment. The instruments were placed at distance of 0.20-2.6 m from the tunnel wall. Most of the
measurements showed a similar pattern of the lateral ground movement which can be divided into two
different depth zones, i.e. above and below the level of the tunnel arch point (Figure 11).
Above the tunnel roof, the ground deformed laterally towards the tunnel with the maximum
displacement occurring in the lower area of the soft clay layer. The inward movement within this depth
zone continued to increase after the passage of the shield tail.
Inclinometer No. IN-T7-04
(Phetchaburi - Sukhumvit stations
0

Made ground
Avg. face pressure = 100 kPa
Avg. grouting pressure = 2.5 bar
C.L. = 18.8 m
2.35 m from the inclinometer

-5
Soft clay

-10

Depth (m)

Zone 1

Zone 2

Zone 3

-15
Stiff clay

-20

Clayey sand
A. 2D before the shield face
B. 1D before the shield face
C. at the shield face
D. 0.5D behide the shield face
E. at the shield tail
F. 2D behide the shield face
G. 3D behide the shield face
H. 4D behide the shield face

-25
Very stiff clay

-4

-2

Lateral Deformation (mm)

Figure 11. Lateral displacements (After Suwansawat, 2002)

In the zone below the tunnel roof level, two types of lateral ground displacement were observed.
Generally, inward movement toward the tunnel was observed as can be seen in Figure 12. The
magnitude was smaller than those occurring above the tunnel roof. However, at few sections where
high face pressure was used in the shield operation, the ground in this depth zone experienced outward
movements during the passage of the shield as shown in Fig 11. The movement ceased after the passage
of the shield tail. This clearly indicates the effect of the applied face pressure in the EPB shield

326

tunneling in Bangkok soils as reported by Suwansawat (2002) who presented a correlation between the
outward lateral ground movement and the EPB face pressure observed for the project.

Figure 12. Comparison between lateral displacements with predictions

Studies were made to investigate applicable methods for prediction of ground movements induced
from shield tunneling in Bangkok soils. Both the empirical approach (e.g. Verruijt and Booker, 1996;
Loganathan and Poulos, 1998; etc.) and the numerical approach (e.g. FEM PLAXIS, FDA FLAC, etc.)
were investigated (Tavaranum, 2003). On the empirical approach, it was found that the method of
Loganathan and Poulos (1998) method generally can give reasonable fits to subsurface settlement
pattern with field data for both single and twin tunnels cases (8 out of 12 sections). The gap parameter,
g, from back calculation was in the range of 20-60 mm (Timpong, 2002). Reasonable prediction was
also offered by the Verruijt and Booker (1996)s method.
However, both of the empirical methods could not offer reasonable prediction of lateral ground
movement from the EPB shield tunneling in case of excavation with a high face pressure where
outward movement of ground from shield face occurred (6 out of 12 sections).
3. BUILDING RESPONSE
Along the alignment, there were 339 buildings and structures located in the zone of influence. These
structures were subjected to a detailed building condition survey. Instruments were installed to monitor
any movements and cracks induced during and after the passages of the shields.
With the existence of the soft clay layer in the entire Bangkok area, buildings and other structures
constructed in Bangkok need to be founded on piles. Different length and size of piles have been used
depending on the size of the building and the period of their construction. Generally, the depths of pile
tips of the buildings can be conceived as shown in Figure 13. Five categories of buildings based on the
depth of foundation piles were made in the project for consideration of potential damage from shield
tunneling in the project.

327

Type 1: Old buildings with expected pile length not exceeding 6 m.

Type 2: Buildings and shophouses, 2 to 3 storeys with expected pile lengths of
between 6 m and 14 m.
Type 3: Buildings , 4 to 10 storeys with expected pile lengths of between 15 m and
22 m
Type 4: Modern buildings exceeding 10 storeys or other structures with pile lengths
in excess of 22 m.

> 10 storey
building
4 to 10 storey
building
2 to 3 storey
building &
shophouse
Old building
and house
0.00 m.
Made ground
<6m

Soft clay

6 to 14 m
14 to 30 m.

-1.5 m.

-15 m.
1st Stiff clay
-22 m.

15 to 22 m
1st Sand deposit
Pile length > 22 m

-40 m.

Figure 13. Expected pile length of buildings in Bangkok

The monitoring data of all the instrumented buildings (mostly reinforced concrete frame types)
were evaluated and the broad picture of the building response to the tunnel excavation could be
depicted by the summary plots of building settlements versus number of storey of the building and
distance from the tunnel excavation (Figure 14 and 15).
It clearly shows that buildings on deep piles were less influenced by the tunnel excavation (Types
4 Buildings: settlements < 10 mm). For smaller buildings (Types 2&3), the settlement could be larger
(up to 30 mm). For buildings on short piles (Type 1), settlement could be excessive. Fig 14 shows that
significant building settlement (> 20 mm) only recorded for buildings located within distance of 30 m
from the tunnel centerline.
The measured differential settlements of the buildings were calculated and expressed in term of
settlement ratio or tilt (differential settlement/distance between the two reference points)., The observed
tilts of these buildings were mostly smaller than 1:1000 (0.001) which was the alert level set forth for
the control of work in the Bangkok MRT project. According to Burland (1995) a (masonry) building
experiencing a maximum tilt of 1:500 (0.002) and a settlement of less than 10 mm has negligible risk of
any damage. In fact, very few cases of damages of the existing buildings due to shield tunneling
occurred in the project. These were limited to old 1-3 storey buildings founded on short piles (probably
with tips within soft clay layers). All of the tall buildings were not damaged by the tunnel excavation
even though the tunnel was excavated right next to the piles. A study is currently made to evaluate the
influence of the shield tunneling on the load carrying capacity and integrity of the piles.

328

Building settlements vs distance from tunnel

90

Buildings on foundation
Type 1
Type 2
Type 3
Type 4

building settlement (mm)

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

distance from tunnel (m.)

Figure 14. Relation between building settlement and distance of building from tunnel

Building settlement vs No. of storey

90

building settlement (mm)

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

No. of storey

Figure 15. Relation between building settlement and number of storey of building

4. CONCLUSIONS
-

Maximum ground surface settlement above the tunnels ranged from 5 mm to 120 mm, mostly 2060 mm. The corresponding volume loss in the tunnel excavation was 0.4-2.50%. Tunneling in
water bearing sand layer tended to give the largest ground movement.
Most of the surface settlement trough could be fitted by Gaussian function. The trough width
parameter (i) is approximately between 0.4Z and 0.6Z for tunnels in clays and less than 0.4Z for
tunnels in sands.
The long-term settlements in soft clay layer above the tunnel could be significant in some sections
but not for the stiff clay layer.

329

Outward lateral ground movement from the tunnel excavation occurred for depths below the tunnel
roof in sections where high face pressure was used in EPB excavation. Above the tunnel roof,
inward lateral displacement occurred in all cases.
In general, the observed subsurface settlements and lateral displacements could be reasonably fitted
with the prediction by the analytical methods of Verruijt and Booker (1996) and Loganathan and
Poulos (1998). However, the prediction was poor for lateral ground movements in case where
lateral outward ground movement occurred.
Settlement of buildings showed correlation with the height of building (depth of foundation piles).

REFERENCES
Burland, J.B., 1995. Assessment of risk of damage to buildings due to tunnelling and excavation, Proc
Int. Conf. Earthquake Geot. Eng., IS-Tokyo 95.
Loganathan N. and Poulos H.G., 1998. Analytical prediction for tunneling-induced ground movement
in clays, J. Geotech. Engrg ASCE, 124, no. 9, pp.846-856.
Mair R.J., Gunn M.J. and OReilly M.P., 1981, Ground movement around Shallow Tunnels in Soft
Clay, Proceedings of The 10th Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering,
Stockholm, Vol.1, pp. 323-328
New, B.M. and Bowers, K.H., 1993. Ground Movement model validation at the Heathrow Express
Trial Tunnel. Tunnelling 94, IMM, London, pp. 301-329.
OReilly, M.P. and New B.M., 1982. Settlements above Tunnels in United Kingdom-Their Magnitude
and Prediction, Tunnelling82, pp 173-181.
Peck, R.B., 1969. Deep Excavation in Soft Ground, Proc. 7th International Conference on Soil
Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, State of the Art Volume, pp 225-290.
Phienwej, N. 1998. Ground movements associated with soft ground tunnelling in Bangkok. Proc.
World Tunnel Congress 98: Tunnels and Metropolises, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Suwansawat, S., 2002. Earth Pressure Balance Shield Tunneling in Bangkok: Ground Response and
Prediction of Surface Settlements using Artificial Neural Networks. Doctoral Dissertation, MIT,
USA.
Timpong, S., 2002. Analysis of Ground Movement in Bangkok MRT Blue Line Project. M.S. Thesis,
AIT, Bangkok.
Tavaranum, S., 2003. Analysis of Subsurface Ground Movement Induced by EPB Shield Tunnelling in
Bangkok MRT Blue Line Project. M.S. Thesis, AIT, Bangkok.
Verruijt, A. and Booker, J.R., 1996, Surface settlements due to deformation tunnel in an Elastic Half
Plane, Geotechnique, Vol. 46, No. 4, pp. 753-756.

330