EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND STRUCTURAL DYNAMICS, VOL.

20,275-291 (1991)

DYNAMIC RESPONSE OF BUILDINGS DUE TO TRAINS IN

UNDERGROUND TUNNELS

T. BALENDRA,* C. G. KOH' A N D Y. C. HO*

Department of Civil Engineering. National University of Singapore, Kent Ridge Cresceni, Singapore 0511

SUMMARY
The interaction of a tunnel-soil-building system due to trains is investigated by a substructure technnique. The soil
medium is assumed to be a viscoelastic halfspace. The method of wave function expansion is used to construct the
displacement fields in terms of potentials. The total soil-structure interaction problem is decomposed into a foundation
radiation problem and a tunnel radiation problem. The impedance matrices for the corresponding substructureproblems
are obtained using a collocation technique. The steady state response of buildings for a given tunnel-foundation
geometry is determined using the impedance matrix. Hence, the response of the building to train loading at different
speeds is evaluated and compared with allowable vibration limits.

INTRODUCTION
Running trains induce vertical, transverse and longitudinal forces which act on the top of the rails at points of
contact with the wheels. When the train is running on a straight track at constant speed, the vertical force is
predominant. Frequent rail traffic creates corrugations on the rail head and wheel surfaces which act as
sources for high frequency excitation. The vertical forces, which are a function of train speed, corrugation
depth and wavelength,' are transmitted to the rail pads, concrete sleepers, sleeper bed and eventually to the
tunnel invert. As the lining of the tunnel walls is relatively stiff compared to the soil, strong localized point
vibration sources would not result; instead the applied train loading is uniformly distributed and plane strain
conditions would develop for reasonably uniform ground conditions. Although the groundborne vibration
from trains is usually not severe enough to cause structural defects, excessive vibration levels have been
known to cause architectural damage.2 Existing empirical methods for predicting the response of buildings
due to groundborne vibrations have generally used correction factors to account for the characteristics of the
vibration source3 and the transmission loss along the wave propagation ~ a t h . ~ - ~
In a recent paper by Balendra et d7the direct finite element method was used to evaluate the harmonic
response of subways located within the basement of the podium block of a building. Herein the inplane
vibration of the tunnel-soil-building system in a viscoelastic halfspace is investigated using a substructure
technique; the total problem is decomposed into a foundation radiation boundary value problem and a
tunnel radiation boundary value problem to obtain the impedance matrix for the tunnel-soil-building
system. The two boundary value problems are solved using a collocation boundary method known as
Trefftz's method.* The displacement fields are formulated by the method of wave function expansion and the
boundary conditions are satisfied only at a finite number of points along the traction free surface, the
tunnel-soil interface and the soil-foundation interface. Thus the unknown wave function coefficients are
solved in a least squares sense. Once the impedance matrix is obtained for a given tunnel-soil-foundation
geometry in a viscoelastic halfspace, the dynamic interaction problem due to trains is solved for different
single-degree-of-freedom systems representing the building.

*Associate Professor.
'Senior Lecturer.
'Research Assistant.

oO98-8847/9 1/030275-17$08.50 Received 14 May 1990

0 1991 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Revised 23 October 1990
276 T. BALENDRA, C. G. KOH AND Y.C. HO

Figure I . Rigid tunnel and foundation embedded in a viscoelastic halfspace

FORMULATION OF THE PROBLEM

As shown in Figure 1, a rigid rectangular foundation of width 2b, embedded to a depth do in a homogeneous,
isotropic viscoelastic soil medium with density p is considered. Located nearby is an infinitely long tunnel of
radius a, at a depth d , below the ground surface. Let S be the horizontal distance between the centres of
tunnel and foundation. It is assumed that the foundation and the tunnel are both perfectly bonded with the
soil. The system is excited by harmonic forces of angular frequency o acting in the tunnel. The inplane body
waves emanating from the tunnel are reflected at the ground surface and scattered by the foundation. The
scattered waves from the foundation are also reflected at the ground surface. The cylindrical body waves
emanating from the foundation and the tunnel are expressed in polar coordinate systems ( I n ,0,) and ( r l . 0, ).
respectively.
The displacement vector d in the soil medium must satisfy the Navier equation in the absence of body
forces
(A* + ,u*)VV * d + p*V2d + poi2 d = 0 (1)
where A* and p* are the complex Lame constants for a viscoelastic halfspace with a damping ratio 5. The
vector d can be written as a function of displacement potentials (Q, Y )in the form
d=VQ,+Vx'€'; V'Y=O (2)
Equation (2) is a solution of equation (1) if the displacement potentials are solutions of the following reduced
wave equation for steady state two dimensional wave propagation:
 RESPONSE OF BUILDINGS TO UNDERGROUND TRAINS 277

where k: = w/jTis the complex dilatational wave number; kf = w/bf is the complex shear wave number;
BT = ,fmis the complex dilatational wave velocity; and f i f = is the complex shear wave
velocity. The components of the displacement vector d in the radial direction u and azimuthal direction v are
given by u = ue, and v = ue,. The unit vectors e, and e, are in the polar radial and azimuthal directions.
+
Hence d = u v = ue, + ve, where the scalar values of d are given by

o=---
1 am ay
__
r d0 ar (4b)

The components of the stress vector s associated with the displacement potentials in the radial direction s,,
and, in the azimuthal direction S,, and SOB are given by s,, = a,,e,, So, = Ggeeg and S, = Treer in which the
scalar values are given by

Using the method of wave function expansions the displacement potentials for waves with their origin at
polar coordinates ( r o , 0,) and ( r , , 0,) can be assumed in the following forms:

in which Hi1)is the Hankel function of the first kind of order n. The expression H;')exp (- iwt) represents
outgoing cylindrical waves satisfying the radiation condition at infinity. The harmonic term exp (- iot) is
henceforth omitted and is understood to be applied throughout the analysis.
Substituting equation (6) into equation (4) and carrying out the differentiation gives an expression for the
total displacement d(') for any point in the soil medium in terms of ( r , , 0,) and ( I l rel):
d") = do + d, (7)
In component form equation (7) can be rewritten as u(') = u, + u1 and v(') = v, + v1 in which the scalar
values of uo, vo, u, and v1 are

Similarly the total stress field s(') at any point in the soil medium in terms of ( r o , 8,) and (rl ,el)is obtained by
substituting equation (6) into equation (5):
s'" = s, + s1 (9)
278 T. BALENDRA, C. G. KOH AND Y.C. HO

where so = (srroSee0 s,,,)~ and s1 = (s,,, sBBlSrel)T. The scalar values of so and s,, respectively, are

The expressions for &jll, bj12,&j21, 8jZ2,8j4,,8j42, 8j,1,&j72,8j8,and 8 j B 2forj = 0, 1 in equations (8) and
(10) are products of Fourier and Hankel functions given in Appendix I. The total displacement field d(') and
stress field s(') must satisfy the following boundary conditions:
1. At the soil-foundation interface r,,
d(') = Do
2. At the soil-tunnel interface rl
d(') = Dl ((2)
3. A t the traction free ground surface r,, yo = 0 and JxoI> bo
s(') = 0 il3)
where the rigid body displacements Do at roand D, at rl are related to displacements at the centroids of
foundation and tunnel, respectively.
When the centroidal displacements of the tunnel are represented by the horizontal displacement A,, , the
vertical displacement A,, and rotation Qzl at (x,,, y,,), the components of D, = U,e,, +
V,e,, on rl are
expressed as

where [ a , ] is the tunnel rigid body influence matrix (given in Appendix 11) and ex,, eyl are unit vectors in the
(x,, y,) Cartesian coordinate system.
The centroidal displacements of the foundation are represented by the horizontal displacement Axo, the
vertical displacement Ayo and the rotation Qzo at (x,,, yGo). The components of Do = UOexO Voeyoon r, +
are expressed as

where [ a o ] is the foundation rigid body influence matrix (given in Appendix 11) and exO,eyoare unit vectors
in the (xo, yo) Cartesian coordinates system.
To satsify equation (1 I), the polar components of d, and the Cartesian components of Do are resolved
parallel to the polar components of do to yield
-cos6,, sinB,,] {q}= [sine,
+ [-sine,, cose,, cos6, -sineo
(16)

where Q,,= (6, - 6,). Equation (16) above is expressed in normalized form by dividing by a , . Similarly
equation (12) yields

sin 8, cos 8, , cos6, -sin8, (17)

 RESPONSE OF BUILDINGS TO UNDERGROUND TRAINS 279

At any point on roor rl the stress components of so and s, must be transformed parallel and
perpendicular to the inward surface normal of any plane prior to any summation. Hence the total normal
stress vector G:) and shear stress vector r t ) at any plane are obtained by

where [Snj] is given in Appendix 11. The direction of the inward surface normal njis defined by Bmjforj = 0 , l .
Introducing the components of so and s, into equation (18) and expressing it in scalar form yields

(19)

To satisfy equation (13)the inward surface normal no is set vertically upwards (One = 0) on the traction free
halfspace I-,. Thus 0:) = cr!j0 and T:) = z!i0. Substituting equation (10) into equation (19) yields

Equation (20) above is normalized by p*a,

EQUATIONS OF MOTION FOR TUNNEL

The applied unit harmonic loads ( FTxFTyMT,)Tdue to trains in the tunnel are resisted by the forces that the

equations of motion of the rigid tunnel in the x1 and y, directions, denoted by

length of the tunnel in the z, direction are given by
-
soil exerts on the tunnel (F,, FylM,, )'. With tunnel inertia forces (F,,,,, F,,, Mmzl)' the normalized
over the variables, for unit

- - -
Fxl
I

Fyi
- Fmxl - FTx =

-
w

Fmy1 -
-
FTY =0
(21)
(22)
where
- mlA.x1/(~*a1) - ~ ( k ? a , ) ~ m , & l / ~ s , (234
-
Fmxl= =

Fmy, = m1Ay1/(~*a1)= - n ( k ~ a , ) ~ m , L y , / ~ s , (23b)

I

A,, = Axl/al
and Ayl = Ayl/a, (234
The normalized equation of motion for rotation about the z1 axis is
-
M,, fimzl- MT,
- 0
=
- - (24)
where M,,,,, = Z , l ~ , l / ( j i * a ~=) -n(k~a,)2mlR,l/M,, in which I , , = mla: is the mass polar moment of
inertia of the tunnel with the mass assumed to be concentrated in the tunnel lining. The normalized unit
applied harmonic loads are defined as iTx
I I

= FT, = MT, = 1/(1 -

2i4).
The forces exerted by the soil on an element at the tunnel-soil interface r, in the direction of the (xl, y,)
Cartesian coordinates system is

where [ T ; ' ] is (defined in Appendix 11) required to resolve the normal and shear stress on the element to be
parallel to (dF,, dFy,)T.The direction of these stresses on the element is defined by the inclination of the
inward surface normal vector n, given by On, = + 8,. The elemental forces along rl are transferred to the
280 T. BALENDRA, C. G. KOH A N D Y. C. HO

tunnel centroid by multiplying with [ r l l T and summed up to yield

EQUATIONS O F MOTION OF FOUNDATION

The motion of the tunnel induces the soil to exert forces (F,, Fyo Fzo)Ton the foundation to cause it to
move ( Axo A,,, R,o)T. The forces acting on the foundation to resist this motion consist of the inertia forces
of the foundation ( Fmxo F,,, Fm,o)Tand the inertia forces of the building ( F R , FRY FRZ)T.The normalized
equations of motion of the foundation in the xo and yo directions, denoted by
length of the rigid foundation in the zo direction are
-
over the variables, for unit

- - -
o F m x o - F B=
F ~- ~0 (27)
- -
F,,, - F,,,,
-
- FB,, = 0 (28)
where
L o = m o A x o / ( ~ * a l )= - ~ ( k ~ a , ) 2 m o & o / ~ ~ l (2 9 4
-
Fmvo= moA,,o/(p*ul)= -n(k,*a,)Zmo~,,o/M,l (29b)
zxo= Axo/al and Lvn = AYo/a, (29~)
The normalized equation of motion for rotation about the zo axis is
- -
Mz, - MmzO - M B =~ 0
- (30)
where GmzO = Zzofizo/(p*uf) = - ~ ( k ~ a l ) 2 1 , , R , o / ( M , l aand
~ ) I , , is the mass polar moment of inertia of
the rectangular foundation about its centroid (x,,, yGo).
Similarly the forces exerted by the soil on an element at the soil-foundation interface roin the direction of
the (xg . y o ) Cartesian coordinates system are

131)

where[T;fo] is defined in Appendix 11. The direction of the stresses in equation (31) is defined by the
inclination of the inward surface normal vector no given by On, = 71 + 8,. Thus the forces evaluated at the
foundation centroid are

The lateral force exerted by the building on the foundation arises when the mass of the building mbl is
subjected to an absolute acceleration (Axo + hbfizo + Abl), where Abl is the horizontal displacement of the
building relative to the foundation. This force when normalized by p*al is
= -x(k~ul)2mbl(;Tx0 + nbl + hb&O/'l)/Msl (33)
where h, is the vertical distance from the centroid of the foundation to the centroid of the building. The
vertical inertia of the building is
-
FBy = mblAyO/(p*al) = -n(kZal)2mblAyO/Ms1 (34)
 RESPONSE OF BUILDINGS TO UNDERGROUND TRAINS 28 1

and the moment exerted by the inertia forces of the building on the foundation is given by
fiBz
= lzb&O/(p*‘?) = - X(G a, )’ mbl Q Z 0 ~ ~ / (a?)
m,, (35)
a
where fzb= mb,hE is the mass moment of inertia of the building about the foundation centroid.

EQUATION OF MOTION OF BUILDING

The normalized equation of motion of the building in the xo direction subjected to a harmonic base
excitation Axo and base rotation Azo is given by
abl + Fxb, =0 (36)
where
-
Hxbl = -nn(k?ul)2(1 + 2itb10bl/w - (Wbl/W)2)mbl/MsI
and
-
Fxbl = -n(k~al)2mbl(Bx0 + hbQzO/ul)/Msl

SUBSTRUCTURING
The number of boundary conditions defined in equations (16), (17), (20), (21), (22),(24), (27), (28), (30) and (36)
exceeds the number of unknown coefficients. The solution can be obtained by discretizing the boundary into
a finite number of elements and satisfying the boundary conditions in a least-squares sense at the element
nodes.* The interfaces ro,rl and rgare thus discretized with Lo, L, and L, nodes or collocation points,
reyectively. A system of equations is thus formed and solved for the unknown coefficients
(A:) ) 2 & ) $2) )T where m = -n to n.
:
With m terms of the series in equation (6) the above boundary conditions, excluding equation (36), can be
written in matrix form as

0
0
0
0

[i:: t::] 0
0
0
(37)

0
0
0

where the submatrices of [L] are products of Fourier, Bessel and Hankel functions. The row size of matrix
[L] is 2(L0 + L, + L, + 3) and the column size is 4(2n + 1). Expanding the first 2(L0 + L , + L p )rows of
matrix [L] in equation (37) and rearranging gives

where (A} = (Axo Ayo Qzo Ax, Q,,)T.

282 T. BALENDRA, C. G. KOH A N D Y. C. HO

The system of equations are solved in a least squares sense when equation (38) is multiplied with [L:,], the
,
conjugate transpose of [L, 1, to form a 4(2n + 1) square matrix

The total problem represented in equation (39) is decomposed into six boundary value problems by rewriting
the displacement vector at the centroid of the foundation and tunnel as
i21 = { d i l I i x o + . . + { 6 i 5 ) & l + ( 6 i 6 I ~ z 1 1 (40)
where { 6,) is a 6 x 1 vector in which the elements 6, = 1 for i = j and zero otherwise. Equation (40) is then
substituted into equation (39) and solved for each mode of vibration, thereby resulting in six boundary value
problems:

(a) Foundation radiation problem: The foundation is moving at unit amplitude whilst the tunnel is held
fixed, that is,
(I) Horizontal translation,
- = 0 and Q,, = 0
ax0=J, Ay0
(11) Vertical translation, ax0= 0, Ayo = 1 and R,, = 0
I w

(111) Rocking translation, A,, = 0, A,, =0 and R,, = 1

(b) Tunnel radiation problem: The tunnel is moving at unit amplitude whilst the foundation is held fixed,
that is,
(IV) Horizontal translatio?, a,., 4

=,', Ayl = 0 and R,, = 0

-
(V) Vertical translation, A,., = 0, Ayl = 1 and R,, = 0
(VI) Rocking translation, Kxl= 0, A,, = 0 and RZ1= 1

This kinematic decomposition process allows the unknown coefficients ( 2:) 2:) i:')' for m = - n to n
to be written as

where the subscripts (I) to (VI) refer to the above mentioned foundation and tunnel radiation subproblems.
Substituting equation (41) into the remaining rows of equation (37) yields

2:) 2): &) $:))T with the matrix [LZ1],of size 6 x 4(2n + l),
The process of multiplying the coefficients (
in equation (42) corresponds to the integral over the interfaces r, and To in equation (26) and equation (32),
respectively. The numerical integration uses a greater number of collocation points as compared to the total
m terms used in the process to solve for the unknown coefficients (2:) 2:) 6:) &'I)' in order to form an
 RESPONSE OF BUILDINGS TO UNDERGROUND TRAINS 283

overdetermined system of equations and to ensure sufficient accuracy in the summation of forces on the
discretized To and rl.

where the elements of the normalized impedance matrix are defined for i, j = 0, 1 as
w..

-
I

- -
-
-..
a,. -
- -
I I..

K2x = Fxi/Axj;Kji = Fyi/Axj;Kk$ = Mzi/Axj

I._ - -
- -
KYy = FXi/Ayj;Kf;:= Fyi/Ayj;KZ',, = M z i / A y j
I
MBz

GTz
FBx
[BY
-
FTx
FT,

-._
KY,
- I..

= Fxi/Qzj;KYz =
- -._ -
Fyi/Qzj;K:J, M,JQzj
=

Combining equations (36) and (43) in matrix form yields

(45)

The load vectors on the left of equation (45) are functions of (Axo A,, R,, A,, A,, R,, )' and must be brought
into the matrix prior to solving. While equation (43) is written for a single-degree-of-freedombuilding, it can
be generalized easily for multi-degree-of-freedom systems mounted on top of the foundation.

NUMERICAL RESULTS
Verification of the collocation method
To verify the accuracy of the method presented above, the vibration of an embedded foundation bonded to
an elastic halfspace and separated at a clear distance 46, from a strip foundation as shown in Figure 2 is
considered. In this problem the embedded foundation is vibrating at unit amplitude whilst the strip
foundation is held fixed. The response is evaluated for a range of frequencies kb, with a Poisson's ratio of 0.3.
The term kb, is the dimensionless frequency normalized with respect to the width bo (kb, corresponds to the
real part of k*b,, where k is the shear wavenumber).
The terms associated with the tunnel have been used to model the strip foundation. To avoid the
singularity at the origin (Il,6,) an artificial boundary can be introduced such that within the bounded region
Bessel first order functions are used whereas in the exterior region Hankel functions are applicable for
radiating waves.' This introduces extra unknowns as stress ( qr and displacement ( u v ) compatibility
~
are required to be enforced at this artificial boundary. An alternative method to avoid the singularity is to
shift the polar origin above the halfspace such that Hankel functions are applicable throughout the soil
medium, thus obviating the need to introduce an artificial boundary. With this method least error will be for
a foundation shape of circular geometry where all collocation points are equidistant from the polar origin. As
such, in this study the polar origin (Il, 8 , ) has been shifted by a vertical distance b,, whereas the polar origin
( r , , 0,) for the scattered waves from the rectangular rigid foundation has been shifted a distance of 0-5bo.
284 T. BALENDRA, C. G. KOH A N D Y. C. HO

Yl

Figure 2. An embedded rigid foundation in the presence of another foundation supported on the surface of an elastic halfspace

Acceptable results are obtained if a portion of the traction free surface is discretized on both sides of the
foundation and plate for a length equal to 2b0 with L, = 5 for this length. The numbers of collocation points
on the foundation To and on the rigid plate rl are Lo = 3 1 and L , = 11, respectively. The diagonal terms of
the foundation impedance matrix are shown in Figure 3 and there is a good comparison with the results
obtained by Rajapakse and Shah9 who have used a flexibility approach to obtain the impedance matrix. This
increases confidence in the present method, which is sufficiently accurate for the practical analysis of
soil -structure interaction problems.

Vibrations due to trains

For the foundation-tunnel system shown in Figure 4 the width b,, depth do and the tunnel radius C I are,
taken as 16.5, 10.5 and 3.0 m, respectively. These dimensions are typical of a basement structure and of an
underground rail tunnel. The horizontal distance S between the centres of the tunnel and the foundation is
23.0 m and the depth d , of the tunnel centre is 16.5 m. The soil is assumed to have 5 per cent damping. The
tunnel and foundation are discretized with L, = 15 and Lo = 37 points, respectively. The traction free
surface is discretized into L, = 25 points over a length of 5b0; a length of 3b0 was taken above the tunnel.
The matrix [K] in equation (43) is evaluated for the dimensionless wavenumber ka, up to 3.6 with the
order of series expansion in equation (6) varying from n = 3 to 7. For brevity only the diagonal terms of the
impedance matrix are presented in Figure 5. The magnitude of the imaginary part of the diagonal terms in
Figure 5 is very much larger than the real part, which signifies that radiation damping in a halfspace is
predominant. This radiation damping increases with frequency. The foundation rocking impedance is very
much larger than the tunnel rocking impedance.
In the numerical results presented the soil shear velocity is assumed to be 350 m/s, which represents a
sandy clay soil with boulders in it. The lateral stiffness of the building" is taken to be 3.9 MN/m and the
structural damping is assumed to be 5 per cent. The response of the system can be described by the mass
ratios m , / M , , , rn,/M,, and rn,,/M,, which are the relative mass of tunnel, foundation and the building,
 RESPONSE OF BUILDINGS TO UNDERGROUND TRAINS 285

-2.5

o a
0 -
0 %
O h
3.0 t
t=
W
CT
I= 2.0
w
E

1.0

"."
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 0.0 0.5 1a 1.5 2.0

Wave number kbo Wave number kbo

Figure 3. Diagonal elements of impedance matrix for the embedded foundation

respectively, to the mass of soil replaced by the tunnel. When the density of concrete, pc, and the density of
soil, p, are taken to be 2350 and 1850 kg/m3, respectively, the ratios m , / M , , and mQ/M,, are found to be 0-3
and 5.0, respectively. Having obtained the elements of [El, the displacements (axo
A,, nzo zx1ayl
nZ1>T are
solved for a unit vertical normalized harmonic train load applied downwards in the negative y , direction.
The displacement and acceleration amplitudes of the foundation and tunnel for horizontal, vertical and
rocking motion are shown in Figure 6 for a building with a natural frequency of 2 Hz. The foundation and
tunnel rocking component is considerably less in magnitude than the translational components. The transfer
functions for vertical displacement and acceleration of the tunnel I&lI and lxyll
are predominant at all - +-
frequencies. The relative displacement I and the absolute horizontal acceleration IX,I = [A,, $1
+ dy,h/a, I for the building are also shown in Figure 6 for different natural frequencies of the building, viz. 1,
5 and 10Hz.
An approximate mathematical model has been developed by Kraemer' for the rms vertical train loading
spectrum at the tunnel invert for a direct fixation track system. Low frequency excitation in the model is
primarily due to quasistatic wheel load effects. Track resonance and irregularities in the rail and wheel
surfaces contribute towards high frequency excitation. The rms train loading spectra for train speeds of 40,60
and 80 km/h are shown in Figure 7. These spectra are derived using the train and track vehicle parameters
 I
L
1

Figure 4. Dimensions of tunnel-soil-foundation interaction problem

8.0 =: -60.0
- x
x I=-=

-
‘2 6.0 I
E -50.0
CT

1.0
p -4l.0
CI
6 5) x -30.0
:g 2.0 p-”
I=
I
E -no
B 0.0
-10.0
-2.0 0.0

-Loll

-300

-200 1s
-10 0 -
E

5oo
Wave number kal Wave number ka,
Figure 5. Diagonal elements of impedance matrix for 18 = 0.33 and ( = 5 per cent
 RESPONSE OF BUILDINGS TO UNDERGROUND TRAINS 287

Frequency [ H z ) Frequency { Hz 1
Figure 6. Displacement and acceleration amplitudes of foundation, tunnel and building due to unit harmonic motion

F
1 10 100
Frequency (Hrl
Figure 7. RMS Force spectra of train load for different train velocities
288 T. BALENDRA, C. G. KOH A N D Y. C. HO

described by Chua" for the Singapore Mass Rapid Transit railway system. The low frequency peak at 1-6Hz
is due to quasistatic load effects of the wheel bogies. The direct fixation track has a second resonant frequency
at about 55 Hz owing to rail roughness.
Once the loading spectrum is obtained the response of the system to trains is easily evaluated using
equation (45). The tunnel rms acceleration response is shown in Figure 8 for different train speeds. The
reponse peaks of the tunnel tend to occur at the same frequencies of the peaks in the loading spectrum and
the magnitude of the response at high frequencies tends to be of the same order as that at low frequencies. The
acceleration response spectra of the foundation at different train speeds are also shown in Figure 8. The
peaks of the foundation response exhibit a behaviour similar to that of the tunnel, except that the response at
high frequencies is at least an order of magnitude smaller.
The horizontal absolute acceleration response spectra of a building system for five different natural
frequencies are shown in Figure 9(a) for a train running at 80 km/h. These results are compared with the
acceleration vibration limits specified by BS6611 l 2 and BS647213 for human tolerance. The tolerable
acceptable level of vibration depends on the environment. This level is obtained by correcting the base curve
with appropriate factors pertaining to the duration and frequency of these transient vibrations. Thus the

Frequency ( Ht) Frequency I H t I

Figure 8. Acceleration amplitudes for tunnel and foundation
 RESPONSE OF BUILDINGS TO UNDERGROUND TRAINS 289

Frequency (Hzl

Figure 9. Absolute acceleration, velocity and relative displacement amplitudes for building with different natural frequencies

appropriate multiplying factor in BS647213 due to trains varies from 2 (residential) to 4 (office). For a
frequency band between 1 and 10 Hz, all the peaks tend to be above the threshold perception level of sensitive
humans in critical working areas such as hospitals. With a factor of 4 all the acceleration peaks in Figure 9(a)
are almost below this factored base curve in an urban office environment.
The risk to damage is commonly assessed using the peak particle velocities, and in United States peak
velocities of 50 mm/s (35 mmjs rms) and 5 mm/s (3.5 mm/s rms) have been widely accepted as the threshold
criteria for structural and architectural damage respectively. The absolute rms velocity response spectra are
shown in Figure 9(b). All curves are almost below the factored base curve of 4 for the rms velocity vibration
limits which are obtained by dividing the peak velocity values given inBS647213 by fi.
In Figure 9(c) the spectral relative displacement of the building is presented to check the effect of a small
differential displacement on the architectural finishes of a building. All peaks are below the base curve which
is obtained by assuming simple harmonic motion for the 2 mm/s rms velocity limit in DIN 4150.14
If this level proves unacceptable other preventive measures could be implemented on the source
characteristics such as replacement with a softer rail pad, using a floating slab track or limiting the train
speeds to ensure human comfort. Alternatively the stiffness of the columns and beams may be varied to
ensure acceptable limits on the vibration level. In the latter case, reassessment of the severity of vibration can
be accomplished easily by the proposed substructure method.

CONCLUSION
The interaction between the tunnel and the embedded foundation due to trains is analysed effectively by the
proposed substructure approach in which the total problem has been decomposed into a foundation
290 T. BALENDRA, C. G. KOH A N D Y. C. HO

radiation problem and a tunnel radiation problem. In this approach, the impedance matrix for a given
tunnel-foundation geometry is obtained first and then it is used to solve for different buildings, trains and
track problems. The method provides a simple semi-analytical approach to predict the level of groundborne
vibration, unlike the use of empirical methods. With this approach it is possible to model the interaction of
any foundation with an arbitrary shaped tunnel.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The financial support provided by the National University of Singapore under Grant R P 86031 is gratefully
acknowledged.

APPENDIX I
The following expressions are given by Pao and Mao15

where the wave function enis the cylindrical Bessel Function Jn, or the Hankel function of the first kind Hi”
or second kind HL2),of order n. The arguments in the wave functions are x1 = k:r and r l = k:r.

APPENDIX II
The tunnel rigid body influence matrix is
 RESPONSE OF BUILDINGS TO UNDERGROUND TRAINS 29 1

and the foundation rigid body influence matrix is

[a01 = 0 [ 1 0 Yo - Y c o
1 XG0 - xo 1
The transformation matrix for stresses to be perpendicular and parallel to any plane of interest is
(57)

where @) = (Onj - Oi) for i , j = 0, 1 and 19,is the azimuth of the centre of the element on ro,r, or r,. The
plane of interest is defined by its inward normal vector.
The matrix to resolve elemental forces on rl in the direction of the (xl, y,) Cartesian coordinate system is
,
The matrix to resolve elemental forces on
[T:’] =
- sin 8,
cos 8,,
cos 8,
sin On, 1
roin the direction of the (xo, y o ) Cartesian coordinate system is
(59)

[T;O] =
- sin On, cos 8,,
cos OnO sin On, 1
REFERENCES
1. S. L. Grassie, R. W. Gregory, D. Harrison and K. L. Johnson, ‘Dynamic response of railway track to high frequency vertical
excitation’, J . mech. eng. sci. 24, 77-90 (1982).
2. A. W. Paolillo, ‘Control of noise and vibration in buildings adjacent to subways’, Proc. noise-con 73 Washington D.C. 152-157
(1973).
3. H. P. Verhas, ‘Prediction of the propagation of train induced ground vibration’, J. sound vib. 66, 371-376 (1979).
4. J. Melke, ‘Noise and vibration from underground railway lines: Proposals for a prediction procedure’, J . sound vib. 120, 3 9 1 4 6
(1 988).
5. L. Kurzweil and E. E. Ungar, ‘Prediction of noise and vibration in buildings near the New York City subway’, Proc. inter-noise 82
San Francisco 213-216 (1982).
6. J. T. Nelson and H. J. Saurenman, ‘State of the art review: Prediction and control of groundborne noise and vibration from rail
transit trains’, Report No. U M TA-MM6-OO49-83-4, Wilson, Ihlrig and Associates, 1983.
7. T. Balendra, K. H. Chua, K. W. Lo and S. L. Lee, ‘Steady-state vibration of subway-soil-building system’, J . eng. mech. ASCE 115,
145-162 (1989).
8. M. A. Bravo and F. J. Sanchez-Sesma, ‘Trefftz’s method for vibration of rigid plate,’ J . eng. mech. ASCE 113, 885-892 (1987).
9. R. K. N. D. Rajapakse and A. H. Shah, ‘Impedances of embedded rigid strip foundations’, Earthquake eng. stmct. dyn. 16,255-273
(1988).
10. K. H. Chua, ‘Groundborne noise and vibrations in a building due to mass rapid train passbys’, M . Eng. Thesis, National University
of Singapore, 1986.
1 1 . S. Kraemer, ‘Noise and vibration in buildings from underground railway lines’, Ph.D Thesis, University of London, 1984.
12. 8,96611, Evaluation of the Response of Occupants of Fixed Structures, Especially Buildings and Offshore Structures, to Low-Frequency
Horizontal Motion (0.063H z to I Hz), British Standards Institution, London, 1984.
13. BS6472, Evaluation of Human Exposure to Vibration in Buildings ( I H z to 80 Hz), British Standards Institution, London, 1984.
14. DIN 4150, Vibrations in Buildings, Deutsches Inst. for Normuny, West Germany, 1975.
15. Y. H. Pa0 and C. C. Mow, Diffraction of Elastic Waves and Dynamic Stress Concentrations, Crane, Russak, New York, 1973.