Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Development of artificial neural networks and multiple regression models for the NATM tunnelling-induced settlement in Niayesh subway tunnel, Tehran

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Here we investigate maximum settlement prediction of the Niayesh subway tunnel, excavated by employing the New Austrian Tunnelling Method in the Tehran metropolitan area, by several approaches, such as the semi-empirical method, linear and non-linear multiple regression method (MR), and finally by a programming Multi-Layered Perception (MLP) with a Back Propagation training algorithm. The geology at the site is mostly composed of conglomerates with pebbles and boulders. The maximum settlement is estimated based on the semi-empirical relations represented by several researchers. The input data set for MR and MLP models are soil characteristic [cohesion (C), internal friction angle (φ), elasticity modulus (E) and unit weight (Gs)], excavation depth (Z 0), soil type (S t) and PLAXIS 2D settlement prediction by the Hardening Soil model. Among all MLP and MR models, MLP models and especially model 6, the model based on E, Z, φ, Gs, C and S t variables, seem to be reliable and agreeable to numerical results. The performance of MR, MLP, and optimized MLP models are evaluated by comparing statistic parameters, including coefficient correlations (R), root mean square error (RMSE), mean error (ME) and Akaike information criterion (AIC), whose values for model 6 are 0.93, 1.66, 0.89 and 13.16, respectively. Therefore, compared to other MLP and MR models, the optimized MLP model shows a relatively high level of accuracy. Additionally, model 4, the model based on E, Z, φ and Gs variables, shows in MLP analysis that unit weight does not have significant effect on maximum settlement.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Akaike H (1974) A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Trans Autom Control 19:716–723

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arioglu E (1992) Surface movements due to tunnelling activities in urban areas and minimization of building damages. Short Course, Istanbul Technical University, Mining Eng. Dept

  • Atkinson JH, Potts DM (1979) Subsidence above shallow tunnels in soft ground. J Geotech Eng Div, ASCE 4:307–325

    Google Scholar 

  • Attewell PB, Yeates J, Selby AR (1986) Soil movement induced by tunnelling and their effects on pipelines and structures. Chapman and Hall, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Atzl GV, Mayr JK (1994) FEM-analysis of Heathrow NATM trial tunnel. Numerical methods in geotechnical engineering. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 195–201

    Google Scholar 

  • Caudill M (1987) Neural networks primer, Part I. AI Expert. Miller Freeman, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  • Cha D, Zhang H, Blumenstein M (2011) Prediction of maximum wave-induced liquefaction in porous seabed using multi artificial neural network model. Ocean Eng 38:878–887

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapman DN, Metje N, Stärk A (2010) Introduction to tunnel construction, 1st edn. Taylor & Francis, New York, pp 127–243

    Google Scholar 

  • Chi SY, Cher JC, Lin CC (2001) Optimized back-analysis for tunneling-induced ground movement using equivalent ground loss model. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 16:159–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clough GW, O’Rourke TD (1990) Construction induced movement of in situ walls. In: Proceedings of Des Perform Earth Retain Structure ASCE, Special Conference, Ithaca, pp 439–470

  • Darabi A, Ahangari K, Noorzad A, Arab A (2012) Subsidence estimation utilizing various approaches—a case study: Tehran No. 3 subway line. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 31:117–127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dasari GR (1996) Numerical modelling of a NATM tunnel construction in London Clay. In: International Symposium on Geotechnical Aspects of Underground Construction in Soft Ground. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 491–496

  • Ercelebi SG, Copur H, Bilgin N, Feridunoglu C (2005) Surface settlement prediction for Istanbul metro tunnels via 3D FE and empirical methods. Underground Space Use: Analysis of the Past and Lessons for the Future. Taylor & Francis Group, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Farias MM, Junior AM, Assis AP (2004) Displacement control in tunnels excavated by the NATM: 3-D numerical simulations. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 19:283–293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghorbani Dashtaki S, Homaee M, Mahdian MH, Kouchakzadeh M (2009) Site-dependence performance of infiltration models. Water Resour Manag 23:2777–2790

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glossop NH (1978) Soil deformation caused by soft ground tunnelling. Dissertation, University of Durham

  • Hagan MT, Menhaj MB (1994) Training feedforward networks with Marquardt algorithm. IEEE Trans Neural Netw 5:989–993

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haykin S (1994) Neural networks—a comprehensive foundation. Prentice-Hall, Englewood

    Google Scholar 

  • Hertz J (1991) Introduction to the Computation of Neural Computation. Addison-Wesley, Reading

    Google Scholar 

  • Herzog M (1985) Surface subsidence above shallow tunnels. Bautechnik 62(11):375–377 (in German)

    Google Scholar 

  • Hornik K, Stinchcombe M, White H (1989) Multilayer feedforward networks are universal approximators. Neural Netw 2:359–366

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hwang SI (2004) Effect of texture on the performance of soil particle-size distribution models. Geoderma 123:363–371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kanungo DP, Arora MK, Sarkar S, Gupta RP (2006) A comparative study of conventional, ANN black box, fuzzy and combined neural and fuzzy weighting procedures for landslide susceptibility zonation in Darjeeling Himalayas. Eng Geol 85:347–366

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karakus M (2000) Numerical modelling for NATM in soft ground. Dissertation, the University of Leeds

  • Karakus M, Kumra M, Kilic O (2005) Predicting elastic properties of intact rocks from index tests using multiple regression modelling. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 42:323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim CY, Bae GJ, Hong SW, Park CH, Moon HK, Shin HS (2001) Neural network based prediction of ground surface settlements due to tunnelling. Comput Geotech 28:517–547

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim SH, Baek SH, Moon HK (2005) A study on the reinforcement effect of Umbrella Arch Method and prediction of tunnel crown and surface settlement Underground Space Use: Analysis of the Past and Lessons for the Future. Taylor & Francis Group, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence J (1991) Introduction to neural networks, 3rd edn. California Scientific Software, Grass Valley

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee KM, Ng CWW, Tang DKW (2004) Three-dimensional numerical investigations of New Austrian tunnelling method (NATM) twin tunnel interactions. Can Geotech J 41:523–539

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Legates DR, Gregory J, Jr McCabe (1999) Evaluating the use of “goodness-of-fit” measures in hydrologic and hydroclimatic model validation. Water Resour Res 35:233–241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leu SS, Lo HC (2004) Neural-network-based regression model of ground surface settlement induced by deep excavation. Autom Constr 13:279–289

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu M, AbouRizk SM, Hermann UH (2001) Sensitivity analysis of neural networks in spool fabrication productivity studies. J Comput Civil Eng 15:299–308

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matlab 7.1 (2005) Software for technical computing and model-based design. The Math Works Inc, Natick

    Google Scholar 

  • Moh ZC, Daniel HJ, Hwang RN (1996) Ground movements around tunnels in soft ground. In: Organizing Committee (Eds.) Proceedings of International Symposium on Geotechnical Aspects Underground Construction Soft Ground, London, pp 36–42

  • Neaupane KM, Adhikari NR (2006) Prediction of tunnelling-induced ground movement with the multi-layer perceptron. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 21:151–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norgrove WB, Cooper I, Attewell PB (1979) Site investigation procedures adopted for the Northumbrian Water Authority’s Tyneside Sewerage Scheme with special reference to settlement prediction when tunnelling through urban areas. In: Tunnelling, pp 79–104

  • Nourani V (2009) Reply to comment on ‘‘An ANN-based model for spatiotemporal groundwater level forecasting. Hydrol Process 24(3):370–371

    Google Scholar 

  • Nourani V, Sayyah Fard M (2012) Sensitivity analysis of the artificial neural network outputs in simulation of the evaporation process at different climatologic regimes. Adv Eng Softw 47:127–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Reilly MP, New BM (1982) Settlement above tunnels in the United Kingdom their magnitude and prediction. Tunn 82:173–181

    Google Scholar 

  • Ocak I (2008) Control of surface settlements with umbrella arch method in second stage excavations of Istanbul Metro. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 23(6):674–681

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ocak I (2013) Interaction of longitudinal surface settlements for twin tunnels in shallow and soft soils: the case of Istanbul Metro. Environ Earth Sci 69:1673–1683

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ocak I, Seker SE (2013) Calculation of surface settlements caused by EPBM tunneling using artificial neural network, SVM, and Gaussian processes. Environ Earth Sci 70:1263–1276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ou CY, Liao JT, Lin HD (1998) Performance of diaphragm wall constructed using top-down method. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng Div 124(9):799–808

    Google Scholar 

  • Ovidio J, Santos Jr, Celestino TB (2008) Artificial neural networks analysis of São Paulo subway tunnel settlement data. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 23:481–491

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patil NG, Pal DK, Mandal C, Mandal DK (2012) Soil water retention characteristics of vertisols and pedotransfer functions based on nearest neighbor and neural networks approach to estimate AWC. J Irrig Drain Eng 138(2):177–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peck RB (1969) Advantages and limitations of the observational method in applied soil mechanics. Geotechnique 19(2):171–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • PLAXIS 2D (2014) Material models manual. Delft University of Technology, Delft

    Google Scholar 

  • Pourtaghi A, Lotfollahi-Yaghin MA (2012) Wavenet ability assessment in comparison to ANN for predicting the maximum surface settlement caused by tunnelling. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 28:257–271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ranken WJ (1987) Ground movements resulting from urban tunnelling: predictions and effects. In: Bell FG, Culshaw MG, Cripps JC, Lovell MA (Eds), Engineering Geology for Underground Movements Geological Society of Engineering Geology. Special Publication, No. 5, pp 79–92

  • Rumelhart D, McClelland J (1986) Parallel Distribution Processing: Explorations in the Miscrostructure of Cognition. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 1–2

    Google Scholar 

  • Shahin MA, Maier HR, Jaksa MB (2003) Settlement prediction of shallow foundations on granular soils using B-spline neurofuzzy models. Comput Geotech 30:637–647

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shi JJ (2000) Reducing prediction error by transforming input data for neural networks. J Compu Civil Eng 14:109–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sozio LE (1998) General report on urban constraints on underground works. In: Proceedings of World Tunnel Cong on Tunn Metrop, Brazil, pp 879–897

  • Suwansawat S, Einstein HH (2006) Artificial neural networks for predicting the maximum surface settlement caused by EPB shield tunnelling. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 21:133–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valizadeh Kivi A, Sadaghiani MH, Ahmadi MM (2012) Numerical modelling of ground settlement control of large span underground metro station in Tehran Metro using Central Beam Column (CBC) structure. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 28:1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zurada JM (1992) Introduction to Artificial Neural Systems. West Publishing, St. Paul

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Geology, Faculty of Sciences, Bu-Ali Sina University, Mahdieh Ave, 65175-38695, Hamedan, Iran

    S. D. Mohammadi, F. Naseri & S. Alipoor

Authors
  1. S. D. Mohammadi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. F. Naseri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. S. Alipoor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. D. Mohammadi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mohammadi, S.D., Naseri, F. & Alipoor, S. Development of artificial neural networks and multiple regression models for the NATM tunnelling-induced settlement in Niayesh subway tunnel, Tehran. Bull Eng Geol Environ 74, 827–843 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-014-0660-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-014-0660-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation