Abstract
Foundation dewatering has become a major cause of land subsidence in Shanghai. The burial depth of foundations in relation to geotechnical construction works is less than 75 m, and the corresponding groundwater includes phreatic, low-pressure artesian, and the first confined aquifers. Based on the geological and hydrogeological conditions beneath Shanghai, methods of dewatering may be divided into three modes and further five patterns according to the insertion depth of the dewatering-retaining system. The most common dewatering mode aims to reduce the water pressure in the confined aquifer by setting the dewatering wells inside the pit, whilst the retaining walls are buried in the confined aquifer and partially cut off the confined aquifer layer. To predict the settlement due to foundation dewatering, numerical models are generally adopted, which are similar to those used to predict land subsidence induced by regional groundwater withdrawal; however, since foundation dewatering is conducted along with the setting of retaining walls and foundation pit excavation, which differs from regional groundwater withdrawal, interactions between the retaining wall-dewatering well, the dewatering-excavation, and dewatering-recharge are important factors affecting the analytical model. Since the grading of the shallow soil layers is different, stratified settlement characteristics of the shallow soil strata and seepage erosion, which results in additional deformation, need to be given particular consideration.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Shanghai is located on a deltaic deposit near the estuary of the Yangtze River. Land subsidence in Shanghai has been officially recorded since 1921 (Chai et al. 2004; Xu et al. 2008, 2016), the primary reason of which is large-scale groundwater pumping (Xu et al. 2008, 2013a). Since 1966, land subsidence has been controlled by using different measures. During the 1990s, although the net volume of groundwater withdrawal did not increase, land subsidence accelerated. Soil layers down to 75 m depth gradually became a major source of land subsidence which contributes to 65% of regional subsidence (Gong et al. 2009). At the same time, a large number of municipal facilities, e.g., metro tunnels (Ni and Cheng 2012a, b; Cui et al. 2015a, b, c), embankments (Zhang et al. 2015a), and underground space for commercial use (Cheng et al. 2016, 2017), have been constructed in the urban centre of Shanghai. Land subsidence and urbanization bring to environmental implication. Land subsidence exaggerates the potential flooding hazard faced by such an urbanized area (Lyu et al. 2016, 2017). The leaking of underground structures (Shen et al. 2014, 2016; Wu et al. 2014b, 2015b, c; Cui et al. 2016) and foundation dewatering (Wang 2013; Wu et al. 2016) may have resulted in a lowering of the groundwater level. Sometimes the shallow aquifers were also polluted due to engineering activity (Du et al. 2014, 2015, 2016).
A soft deposit with a thickness of over 300 m was formed during the Quaternary era. The Quaternary Era in Shanghai was formed during the period of six cold-warm climate cycles (Yu et al. 2004). The climate interchange between warm and cold eras corresponds to the paleoclimate interchange between glacial and interglacial conditions. The fine particles were deposited in cold conditions to form an aquitard and coarse particles deposited in the warm era formed an aquifer (Xu et al. 2009). The cohesive soil in the aquifer has a water content that exceeds its liquid limit which thus induces highly time-dependent behaviour (Yin et al. 2011b). The soft Quaternary deposit is composed of five aquifers separated by five aquitards (Xu et al. 2009; Shen et al. 2013a; Wu et al. 2014b) to form a multi-aquifer-aquitard system (MAAS).
The size and depth of excavations have increased with the development of underground spaces in Shanghai (Tan and Wei 2012; Chai et al., 2014; Tan and Lu 2016; Tan et al. 2015, 2016). Quicksand or piping may occur during foundation excavation since excavation faces are commonly below groundwater level (Shaqour and Hasan 2008; Peng et al. 2011; Jurado et al. 2012; Wang et al. 2013a; Huang et al. 2015a). Generally dewatering in aquifers is conducted by pumping wells to prevent possible geo-hazards resulting from the lowering of the groundwater level at the excavation surface (Ni and Cheng 2011; Ni et al. 2011; Wang et al. 2013a, b; Wu et al. 2015d). Foundation dewatering may last for months or longer and may induce groundwater drawdown around the excavation areas resulting in land subsidence in the vicinity (Wang et al. 2012a; Wu et al. 2015f). Foundation dewatering has been one of the main factors which has resulted in the acceleration of land subsidence during urbanization (Gong et al. 2005; Zhang and Wei 2005; Xu et al. 2012, 2016; Wang et al. 2016). The mechanisms of land subsidence due to dewatering effects in the region are yet to be fully investigated. Most of the settlements were due to compaction of the aquitards as a result of pumping in the aquifers (Lewis and Schrefler 1978).
Foundation dewatering is an operation affected by many factors. Some underground structures including grouting or jet grouting columns (Ni and Cheng 2011, 2014; Shen et al. 2013b, c, d; Wang et al. 2013c, 2014), deep mixing piles (Shen et al. 2008; Chen et al. 2013), and diaphragm walls (Tan and Wang 2015a, b) have been constructed to mitigate ground movement or improve the stability of foundation pits before excavation (Wu et al. 2015d, e). The burial depth of such underground structures exerts a major influence on groundwater seepage during excavation dewatering projects (Vilarrasa et al. 2011; Wu et al. 2016). Furthermore, foundation dewatering and excavation are carried out simultaneously and so they will directly influence each other. The effect of retaining walls and foundation excavation should therefore be considered when evaluating land subsidence due to foundation dewatering.
The objective of this paper was to review the state of foundation dewatering engineering and research studies considering land subsidence due to foundation dewatering in Shanghai. Engineering geology and hydrogeology related to foundation dewatering was investigated, and the current state of foundation dewatering works resulting in land subsidence in Shanghai was discussed.
Engineering, geology, and hydrogeology related to dewatering
Shanghai is located at the front of Yangtze River delta. Its surface elevation is 2.2–4.5 m (Wei et al. 2010) with a topography inclining from east to west. With the exception of several small volcanic massifs, most of the deposits are loose sediments formed in the Quaternary Era. The thickness of these soft deposits is generally 200–320 m with the maximum being greater than 400 m. The Quaternary deposit consists of one phreatic aquifer (Aq0) which includes a phreatic aquifer (Aq01) and a low-pressure artesian aquifer (Aq02), and five confined aquifers (AqI to AqV). The aquifers are separated by six aquitards (AdI to AdVI). As shown in Fig. 1 (SHURD 2012), according to the cause of formation, sedimentary environment, and material composition, the landforms can be divided into five types as follows.
(1) The limnetic plain, located in the west of Shanghai which is subdivided into two areas (I-1 and I-2) according to the distribution of dark-green hard soil, hereinafter, the first hard soil; (2) the strand plain (II), located to the east of the limnetic plain where the urban centre is primarily located; (3) the estuary, spit, and sand island (III), located in the land area along the coast and islands to the north of Shanghai; (4) the tidal flat (IV), located in the south-eastern area along the river and the coast which extends gradually to the water’s edge; and (5) the denudation monadnock (V) consisting of several small volcanic massifs located in the west with an elevation of 23.2–99.8 m. The distribution and characteristics of the soil layers differ in these areas with their different landforms.
The burial depth of foundation soil layers related to construction engineering works is generally less than 75 m (SGEAEB 2002) amongst which soft clay is widely distributed in Shanghai. According to the sedimentary age and physical properties, there are nine engineering geological layers (Wei et al. 2010): a fill layer (1), surface soil (2), a shallow sand soil (23), the first compression soil (3 and 4), the second compression soil (5) locally mixing with the middle sand soil (52), the first hard soil (6), the lower sand soil (7), the second hard soil (8), and the sand soil (9). Table 1 summarizes the geology and hydrogeology within 100 m of the strand plain in Shanghai which is the location of the urban centre. Figure 2 shows the physical and mechanical properties of soil layers in the strand plain. Soil layers 52, 53, and 54 are generally distributed along paleochannels; however, soil layers 61 and 62 are mostly deficient in the area cut by these ancient river channels.
The groundwater related to the engineering construction works includes Aq01, Aq02, and AqI (SHURD 2012; Cheng et al. 2014):
-
1.
Aq01: the burial depth of the groundwater level of Aq01 is 0.3–1.5 m which lies within the shallow sand layer (Layer 23) and is affected by rainfall, spring tides, and surface water. Aq01 is distributed locally within landform II and widely in areas III and IV, but is deficient in areas I-1 and I-2. The water inflow rate to a single well (diameter, 500 mm; water level drawdown, 2 m) is 1–20 m3/d.
-
2.
Aq02: the burial depth of the groundwater level of Aq02 is 3–11 m which lies within the middle sand layer (Layer 52). Aq02 is found locally in areas I-2, II, and IV, and widely in the islands of area III, but is deficient in area I-1. The water inflow rate to a single well (diameter, 254 mm; water level drawdown, 5 m) is 1–20 m3/d.
-
3.
AqI: AqI lies in the lower sand layer (Layer 7) where the depth to the groundwater level is 3–12 m. The groundwater level of AqI undergoes seasonal change. Aq02 and AqI are locally connected, and AqI and AqII are connected to the south of Shanghai. AqI is distributed widely in most areas except for the islands in area III. The water inflow rate to a single well (diameter, 254 mm; water level drawdown, 5 m) is less than 500 m3/d.
The state of foundation dewatering in Shanghai
Groundwater should be depressed to 0.5–1.0 m under the excavation face for safe excavation in Shanghai (SHURD 2010b). Generally, the dewatering-retaining system is adopted for foundation dewatering projects. Multi-pumping wells are set in the field site to dewatering for excavations over confined aquifers. As shown in Fig. 3, the dewatering–retaining system is classified into three types according to the arrangement of the retaining wall and dewatering wells. It is then further categorized into five patterns as follows (Table 2) (Wu 2003; Wang et al. 2009; Xu et al. 2014; Wu et al. 2015a, f; Zhang et al. 2015b):
-
1.
Mode I (dewatering in pit with full-cut-off retaining wall): the wells are set inside the foundation pit. The retaining wall is buried in the aquitard under the dewatering aquifer layer and cuts off the aquifer completely. If the retaining wall is perfectly constructed, and no discontinuities exist, the hydraulic connection inside and outside the foundation pit is not obvious. Dewatering in the excavation pit lowers the groundwater level inside the pit, but the drawdown outside the pit is less than that inside the pit. Two patterns are classified according to the dewatering aquifer layer: (1) Pattern 1 (Fig. 3a): the wells are set to drain the phreatic water and the retaining walls are buried in the aquitard under phreatic aquifer; the excavation face is located in the phreatic aquifer. (2) Pattern 2 (Fig. 3b): the wells are set to withdraw confined water and the retaining walls are buried in the aquitard under the confined aquifer. The excavation face is located in the confined aquifer.
-
2.
Mode II (dewatering outside the pit): the wells are set outside the foundation pit to lower the groundwater head from the confined aquifer. The retaining wall extends into the aquitard above the confined aquifer, which rarely affects groundwater seepage. This dewatering-retaining system (Pattern 3, Fig. 3c) affects the surrounding environment to a significant extent as the excavation face is located in the aquitard above the confined aquifer.
-
3.
Mode III (dewatering in pit with partial-cut-off retaining wall): the wells are set inside the foundation pit to withdraw the confined water. The retaining wall is buried in the confined aquifer layer. Since the retaining wall partially cuts off the confined aquifer layer, there exists a hydraulic connection inside and outside the foundation pit. Groundwater flow is non-continuous and presents round flow near the retaining walls. Two patterns are classified according to the location of the excavation face: (1) Pattern 4 (Fig. 3d): the excavation face is located in the aquitard overlying the confined aquifer. (2) Pattern 5 (Fig. 3e): the excavation face is located in the confined aquifer.
Pattern 3 is rarely used due to its more severe effects on the surrounding environment. Pattern 1 is applied for excavations at a depth of less than 10 m in the area with the phreatic aquifer. Patterns 2, 4, and 5 can be used for the deep excavations larger than 20 m. Since it is difficult and uneconomic to construct retaining walls deep into AdII in practice, Pattern 2 has seldom been applied to reduce the water level in AqI. Patterns 4 and 5 are the most commonly used ways of reducing the water level in AqI for deep excavations and are used in Shanghai in the development of deep underground spaces.
Since the retaining walls do not fully cut off the hydraulic connection inside and outside the pit using Patterns 4 or 5, pumping groundwater inside the pit combined with a partial-cut-off wall inevitably causes drawdown of the groundwater level outside the pit and then results in settlement of the surrounding ground (Roy and Robinson 2009; Pujades et al. 2014; Wu et al. 2015e).
Calculation models of subsidence due to foundation dewatering
The mechanism of subsidence due to foundation dewatering is similar to regional land subsidence induced by large-scale groundwater withdrawal which can be explained by effective stress theory (Kim 2005; Galloway and Burbey 2011). The models used to describe subsidence due to foundation dewatering are built from groundwater flow and soil consolidation models, and mainly include the following four model types:
-
1.
The two-stage model
This model analyses groundwater seepage and land subsidence in (Gambolati and Frezle 1973; Gambolati et al. 1999): firstly, the groundwater seepage model is used to calculate the change in groundwater head. Secondly, effective stress and soil deformation are calculated according to the calculated groundwater head in the first stage. The total land subsidence is the sum of the deformations of each soil layer. This model is ever used to simulate ground settlement due to foundation dewatering in Shanghai (Zhou et al. 2010, 2011; Wang et al. 2013a; Wu et al. 2016). The parameters related to groundwater seepage and soil deformation remain constant during the calculation.
-
2.
The partly coupled model
The partly coupled model incorporates vertical consolidation compression based on Terzaghi’s 1-d theory into a 3-d groundwater flow model in single one-time step (Shen et al. 2006; Wu et al. 2015f). Terzaghi’s 1-d consolidation equation is as follows:
with C v = coefficient of consolidation; u = pore water pressure; t = time; γ w = unit weight of water; m v = coefficient of volume compressibility; α v = compression coefficient; K = saturated hydraulic conductivity; e = void ratio.
This model describes a coupled relationship between groundwater seepage, effective stress, and soil deformation in an aquifer system (Galloway and Burbey 2011). The coefficient of specific storage is related to the coefficient of volume compressibility, or the hydraulic conductivity is related to the void ratio in the model (Shen and Xu 2011). The equation governing groundwater seepage is as follows (Bear 1979):
where h = hydraulic head; K ij = hydraulic conductivity; S s = coefficient of specific storage; q = source/sink flux.
-
3.
The fully coupled model
The partly coupled model only considers soil deformation in the vertical direction and cannot represent real soil behaviour. Biot (1941) derived 3-d consolidation equations describing the dissipation of excess pore pressure and soil deformation as follows:
where ε v = volumetric strain; ν = Poisson’s ratio; G = shear modulus; \(\nabla^{2}\) = the Laplace operator.
The seepage and deformation can be calculated in one process by using Biot’s 3-d theory. Full consolidation analysis is most accurate for settlement analysis in theory, which can consider the elastic, elasto-plastic, and creep behaviour of soft soil (Yin et al. 2011a, 2013a, b, 2014, 2015). This model can more rigorously couple groundwater seepage and soil deformation but is more complicated (Kim 2005; Galloway and Burbey 2011; Loáiciga 2013).
Xu et al. (2010) established a 3-d visco-elastic fully coupled model to analyse foundation dewatering in the Dong-Jia-Du Tunnel of Metro Line 4 in Shanghai. Although the fully coupled Biot model is theoretically appropriate, the use thereof is inconvenient, and may not be the optimum choice if the parameters in the 3-d consolidation equation cannot be determined (Xu et al. 2008; Niu et al. 2013).
-
4.
Models based on Cosserat mechanics
According to classical soil mechanics, since the compressibility of sandy soil in the aquifer layers is much lower than that of the clay soil in aquitard layers due to groundwater withdrawal, the consolidation of aquitards is ever considered as the main reason for land subsidence. The compression of aquifers is generally ignored (Shen et al. 2006; Xu et al. 2008; Gambolati and Frezle 1973); however, large compression of the geologic media in the aquifers has been found in Shanghai and Changzhou (Shi et al. 2007; Ma et al. 2014; Xu et al. 2015). Wang (2013) showed that the cumulative deformation of the first confined aquifer is similar to that of the second compression layer beneath Shanghai. This indicates that the aquifers have become one of the main compression layers, but the deformation of the aquifer predicted by the aforementioned three models was much lower than that deduced from field-measured results. Large hydraulic gradients exist due to groundwater withdrawal which may cause unbalanced shear stresses in confined or unconfined aquifers. The deformation caused by the imbalance of shear stress constitutes a part of the total deformation of the aquifers. Since the aforementioned three models were based on Cauchy continuum mechanics, in which only the isotropic consolidation of the unit cell using the volumetric compressibility of soil was considered, the phenomenon of increased deformation rate in aquifers was difficult to predict using existing models (Shen et al. 2013a). A possible tool capable of solving the above problem is the theory of Cosserat continuum mechanics (Cosserat and Cosserat 1909).
Based on Cosserat continuum mechanics, Budhu and Adiyaman (2010) established a Cosserat model to predict the deformation of a phreatic aquifer due to groundwater withdrawal in Arizona, USA. Shen et al. (2013a) predicted the deformation of confined aquifers in Shanghai based on Budhu’s model. Equation (4) shows the effective stress equation used by Budhu and Adiyaman (2010):
where σ ij ′= effective stress tensor, \(\bar{\sigma }^{\prime}\) = the average effective stress tensor, β = a factor related to the degree of saturation and the porosity, V = the characteristic volume of the element.
The groundwater level inside and outside the foundation pit is different due to the existence of the retaining wall in the foundation dewatering project which generates a shear stress on the soil. Since Cosserat theory considers the shear stress in aquifers resulted from differences in the groundwater levels, the evaluated value of deformation of aquifers by the Cosserat model is more accurate than that by the classic Cauchy model.
Discussion
The foundation dewatering project is a project involving many factors (An et al. 2014). Foundation excavation, the setting and waterproof effect of retaining walls, or the setting of recharge wells may affect land subsidence due to foundation dewatering. As the foundation excavation depth is within 75 m, more attention is paid to the deformation of shallow soils which differ from regional land subsidence due to large-scale groundwater withdrawal. The characteristics of foundation dewatering should be further considered in any modelling.
Retaining wall-dewatering well effects
Figure 4 shows the change in groundwater level due to foundation dewatering differs from regional land subsidence because of large-scale groundwater withdrawal and the existence of a retaining wall. Generally, regional groundwater seepage is restricted by the natural boundaries, whilst local groundwater seepage in a foundation dewatering project is restricted by the retaining wall. The impact of retaining walls on groundwater seepage includes reduction of the seepage area, extension of the seepage path, and change of the seepage direction in foundation dewatering projects (Jiao et al. 2008; Vilarrasa et al. 2011; Pujades et al. 2012; Xu et al. 2014). The retaining wall in an aquifer will also change the long-term settlement behaviour on the two sides of the retaining wall (Xu et al. 2013b). If the retaining wall completely cuts off the aquifer, assuming that the retaining wall is perfectly constructed and no discontinuities exist therein, the hydraulic connection inside and outside the foundation pit is not obvious. Dewatering in the excavation pit lowers the groundwater level inside the pit, and the drawdown outside the pit is far less than that inside the pit. Settlement outside the pit due to dewatering inside the pit can therefore be prevented; however, for most foundation pit dewatering projects, especially when using dewatering patterns 4 and 5, the retaining wall only partially occludes the confined aquifer with high thickness. Dewatering combined with a partial-cut-off wall may cause groundwater drawdown outside the pit.
The characteristics of groundwater levels inside and outside the pit are crucial to the prediction of land subsidence. Currently, some studies have discussed the characteristics of seepage by considering the disposition of retaining walls and dewatering wells (Wang et al. 2009; Xu et al. 2011, 2013b; Wu et al. 2016; Ni et al. 2013). Xu et al. (2011, 2013b) indicated that, if the depth to which the retaining wall penetrating an aquifer exceeds 70% of the thickness of the aquifer, the groundwater levels inside and outside the foundation pit differ to a significant extent. Wu et al. (2016) investigated the drawdown curve induced by dewatering in a foundation pit with a partial-cut-off retaining wall in this aquifer. The influencing factors include: the thickness of the aquifer, the depth of penetration of the pumping well, and the length of screen. Wang et al. (2010) investigated the mechanism of those interactions between the retaining wall and the dewatering well in a foundation dewatering project. Dewatering mode III was further divided into four types according to the relative position of the retaining wall and well screen in the vertical direction (Fig. 5). As the groundwater flow paths of the four types are different, the change in groundwater level outside the pit is also different. The distribution of groundwater level in the foundation dewatering project is affected by the spatial layout of the dewatering wells and retaining walls which mainly include the burial depth of the retaining walls relative to the dewatering aquifer, the distance between the dewatering wells and the retaining walls, and all pumping well parameters including pumping flow and well distance. The interaction of the dewatering wells and retaining walls should be comprehensively considered in any such model.
Combined action of dewatering-excavation
Generally, dewatering and excavation are conducted simultaneously, which are considered as the main reasons for ground settlement around the foundation pit (Hsi and Small 1992; Xu et al. 2012). The range of influence of ground settlement due to foundation excavation is 2–4 times that of the excavation depth, whilst that due to foundation dewatering reaches around 10–15 times that of the excavation depth (Gong et al.2008). The stress, seepage and deformation fields interact with each other. It is difficult to distinguish the quantity of ground settlement resulting from foundation dewatering or excavation. This is because the mechanical properties of soil under combined actions of dewatering and excavation differ from those considering only excavation or dewatering.
Unloading caused by foundation excavation and subsequent displacement of the retaining wall alters the soil stress field which directly changes the void ratio. The hydraulic conductivity changes caused by changes in void ratio are expressed by different equations according to soil types (Samarasinghe et al. 1982; Shen and Xu 2011; Shen et al. 2015a, b). Liu et al. (2010, 2013) established from a fluid–solid coupling model which is used to analyse soil deformation due to simultaneous dewatering and excavation in foundation pit engineering in Shanghai. However, in this study the changes in hydraulic parameters of the soil due to the influence of foundation excavation were not explicit. The influence of foundation excavation on the changes in the void ratio and hydraulic conductivity should be considered to evaluate land subsidence induced by foundation dewatering.
Dewatering-recharge effects
Artificial groundwater recharge is used in foundation engineering of Shanghai to control land subsidence due to foundation dewatering (Wang et al. 2012b; Huang et al. 2015b). A dewatering-recharge integrated system in which the recharged wells are set outside the pit is generally used in dewatering projects when the retaining walls are not completely cut off from the dewatering confined aquifer. The artificial recharge is considered to be a way to recover groundwater levels in deep confined aquifers (Wu et al. 2008; Zhang et al. 2015b; Shi et al. 2016). However, the recharge effect on shallow confined aquifers is different to that on deep confined aquifers due to the different lithology and hydrodynamic conditions in confined aquifers (Wu et al. 2009; Yang et al. 2010). The deep confined aquifer layers are mainly composed of coarse-grained sand which is conducive to artificial recharge—whilst the shallow confined aquifer layers consist mainly of fine silts and clays which are not conducive to artificial recharge. The recharge effect on the control of land subsidence should therefore be investigated. Wang et al. (2012b) conducted a field experiment of groundwater artificial recharge to investigate the response of a shallow confined aquifer. Huang et al. (2015b) established a numerical model to simulate land subsidence rebound through artificial recharge in shallow confined aquifers. The results indicated that artificial recharging is useful for the control of groundwater levels and land subsidence in dewatering of deep foundation pits.
There are still many factors that may influence the recharge effect on the control of land subsidence. The permeability of a soft clay may change with changes in its void ratio during pumping and recharge, thus affecting the deformation characteristics of the soil (Zhang et al. 2015c). Yang et al. (2010) concluded that recharge pressure and rate had the greatest effect on the recharge effect. However, recharge, with the associated pressure change, will result in physical clogging of the confined aquifer (Pavelic et al. 2011; Zheng et al. 2013) which will influence the recharge effect and the permeability of the clay (Zheng et al. 2013).
Stratified settlement characteristics of the soil layers
Ground settlement is the cumulative effect of the deformation of each of the soil layers. Land subsidence caused by reductions in the pore water pressure in a confined aquifer involves deformation of the confined aquifer, aquitard, and phreatic aquifer (Cui et al. 2016). Gong et al. (2009) concluded that the compaction of the upper Shanghai soft clay, with its thickness of 40 m, contributes to land subsidence in Shanghai. Figure 6 shows the cumulative deformation of the shallow soil layers at different time periods in Shanghai.
The contribution of these soil layers to land subsidence is different. The first compression layer is the principal shallow soil layer that contributes to land subsidence. Furthermore, the cumulative deformation of the first confined aquifer is similar to that of the second compression layer which cannot be excluded. Wu et al. (2014a) performed consolidation tests to investigate the compressibility of Shanghai shallow clays. Figure 7 shows the relationship between void ratio and vertical pressure. The compression index of layer 6 is the lowest, of which the deposition conditions are different to those of the other clay layers. Layers 3 and 4, corresponding to the first compression layers, are typical soft soils with higher compressibilities. The compression characteristics of the clay soil layers are different, and so to evaluate ground settlement it is vital to determine the characteristics of stratified settlement as a result of foundation dewatering.
Furthermore, the rebound of Shanghai clay was seen in the Yishan Road Station deep pit of Shanghai Subway Line 9 (Wang et al. 2013b; Zhu et al. 2015). It was found that the accumulated stratified settlement is not equal to the ground settlement. Zhu et al. (2015) analysed the observed groundwater level, ground settlement, and stratified settlement data from the Yishan Road Station site to find that some layers swelled upon dewatering.
The behaviour of stratified settlement and the rebound of Shanghai soft clay caused by dewatering have attracted much research attention. Wang et al. (2013b) analysed the mechanism of stratified settlement and rebound of Shanghai clay using a centrifugal model test. However, only a qualitative analysis was possible due to the limitations of model scale and soil complexity.
Additional deformation due to seepage erosion
The shallow aquifer layers, particularly Aq02 and the upper part of AqI, are mainly composed of silt layers interspersed with clay. Internal erosion of soils may occur in the process of foundation dewatering due to the hydraulic gradient therein. Ground loss caused by water–soil loss causes additional land subsidence and deformation.
In practical engineering works, the retaining walls may not be perfectly constructed and some leakage may occur in the form of groundwater seepage. Wu (2016b) analysed land subsidence due to foundation dewatering to evaluate the influence of leakage. Leakage through a retaining wall causes changes in flow direction and drawdown of the groundwater level outside the excavation area. If the fine soil particles pass through the joints, water–soil loss may occur and erosion of the soil can lead to large ground deformation (Zheng and Diao 2015). The leaks in the retaining walls may be potential seepage erosion channels.
Besides the bottom of the retaining walls, the well screens are another potential seepage erosion channel source (Fig. 8). As the cut-off effect of the retaining walls influences groundwater flow, the ground levels on the two sides of the retaining wall differ, thus causing soil erosion. Zhang et al. (2013) evaluated land subsidence caused by pit seepage erosion when using dewatering mode III in Shanghai. The research demonstrated that internal soil erosion can cause increased soil deformation which is related to the characteristics of the soils and the applied hydraulic gradient.
Furthermore, the screen of the pumping well is another channel through which fine particles are transported by groundwater seepage. Zhang et al. (2005) revealed that the movement of soil particles from the well may also lead to large soil deformation. Evaluation of additional deformation as a result of the movement of soil particles from the screen of the pumping well has not yet been reported.
Conclusions
The burial depth of foundation soil layers related to geotechnical construction is less than 75 m in Shanghai, and the corresponding groundwater types include phreatic, low-pressure artesian, and the first confined aquifers. Thus, dewatering is required during excavation construction. Foundation dewatering will cause ground settlement. An investigation of ground settlement due to dewatering is conducted. Based on the investigation, the following conclusions can be drawn:
-
1.
A dewatering-retaining system is generally adopted during dewatering works in Shanghai which can be classified as belonging to one of three modes, and a further five patterns, according to the burial depth of the retaining walls, the burial depth range of the well screens, and overall excavation depth. The mode of dewatering in a pit with a partial-cut-off retaining wall is the most common dewatering mode used to reduce groundwater pressure in the confined aquifer during deep excavations. Since the retaining walls partially cut off the dewatered aquifer layer, lowering of groundwater levels outside the pit should be predicted.
-
2.
A two-stage model, a partly coupled model based on Terzaghi’s 1-d theory, a fully coupled model based on Biot’s 3-d theory, and a model based on Cosserat mechanics are four possible approaches to the estimation of settlement due to dewatering. The fully coupled model is theoretically appropriate; however, it is inconvenient when used in practice since it is difficult to determine many of its input parameters. The evaluated value of the deformation of aquifers by the Cosserat model is more accurate than that by the classic Cauchy model because Cosserat theory considers the unbalanced shear stress in an aquifer as induced by a high hydraulic gradient.
-
3.
Foundation dewatering is conducted along with the setting of retaining walls and foundation pit excavation, which has different effects to regional groundwater withdrawal. Moreover, a dewatering-recharge integrated system is generally adopted to control land subsidence during foundation engineering works in Shanghai. The mechanism of interaction of the retaining wall-dewatering well, dewatering-excavation, and dewatering-recharge is significant to any investigation of land subsidence due to foundation dewatering. The stratified settlement characteristics of shallow soil strata should be evaluated because the compression characteristics of these shallow soil layers are different from those at greater depth. Furthermore, seepage erosion will result in additional deformation during foundation dewatering.
References
An XY, Zuo DJ, Li MM, Pei WB, Li JD (2014) Study on coupling model for three-dimensional seepage and land subsidence of deep foundation pit dewatering. In: Proceedings of the 2014 international conference on engineering technology and applications, pp 71–80
Bear J (1979) Hydraulics of groundwater. McGraw-Hill, New York
Biot MA (1941) General theory of three-dimensional consolidation. J Appl Phys 12(2):155–164
Budhu M, Adiyaman IB (2010) Mechanics of land subsidence due to groundwater pumping. Int J Numer Anal Methods Geomech 34(14):1459–1478. doi:10.1002/nag.863
Chai JC, Shen SL, Zhu HH, Zhang XL (2004) Land subsidence due to groundwater drawdown in Shanghai. Géotechnique 54(3):143–148. doi:10.1680/geot.2004.54.2.143
Chai JC, Shen SL, Ding WQ, Zhu HH, Cater JP (2014) Numerical investigation of the failure of a building in Shanghai, China. Comput Geotech 55(2014):482–493. doi:10.1016/j.compgeo.2013.10.001
Chen JJ, Zhang LY, Zhang JF, Zhu YF, Wang JH (2013) Field tests, modification and application of deep soil mixing method in soft clay. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 139(1):24–34. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000746
Cheng GH, Zhai GY, Zhuang YX (2014) Geological survey achievement and application in China. Science Press, Beijing (in Chinese)
Cheng WC, Ni JC, Shen SL (2016) Experimental and analytical modeling of shield segment under cyclic loading. Int J Geomech 04016146:1–17. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0000810
Cheng WC, Ni JC, Shen JS, Huang HW (2017) Investigation into factors affecting jacking force: a case study. Proc Inst Civil Eng Geotech Eng. doi:10.1680/jgeen.16.00117
Cosserat E, Cosserat F (1909) Theorie des corps deformables. Herman et fils, Paris
Cui QL, Shen SL, Xu YS, Wu HN, Yin ZY (2015a) Mitigation of geohazards during deep excavation in Karst region with caverns: a case study. Eng Geol 195(2015):16–27. doi:10.1016/j.enggeo.2015.05.024
Cui QL, Shen SL, Xu YS, Yin ZY, Horpibulsuk S (2015b) Field performance of jacking pipe during jacking in soft deposits. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 49(2015):336–344. doi:10.1016/j.tust.2015.05.005
Cui QL, Wu HN, Shen SL, Xu YS, Ye GL (2015c) Chinese Karst geology and measures to prevent geohazards during shield tunnelling in Karst regions with caves. Nat Hazards 77:129–152. doi:10.1007/s11069-014-1585-6
Cui ZD, Jia YJ, Yuan L (2016) Distribution law of soil deformation caused by decompression of confined water. Environ Earth Sci 75:1281. doi:10.1007/s12665-016-6075-6
Du YJ, Jiang NJ, Liu SY, Jin F, Singh DN, Pulppara A (2014) Engineering properties and microstructural characteristics of cement solidified zinc-contaminated kaolin clay. Can Geotech J 51:289–302
Du YJ, Fan RD, Reddy KR, Liu SY, Yang YL (2015) Impacts of presence of lead contamination in clayey soil–calcium bentonite cutoff wall backfills. Appl Clay Sci 108:111–122
Du YJ, Jiang NJ, Liu SY, Horpibulski S, Arulrajah A (2016) Field evaluation of soft highway subgrade soil stabilized with calcium carbide residue. Soils Found 56(2):301–314
Galloway DL, Burbey TJ (2011) Review: regional land subsidence accompanying groundwater extraction. Hydrogeol J 19(8):1459–1486. doi:10.1007/s10040-011-0775-5
Gambolati G, Frezle RA (1973) Mathematical simulation of the subsidence of Venice. Theory. Water Resour Res 9(3):721–733
Gambolati G, Teatini P, Tomasi L (1999) Stress–strain analysis in productive gas/oil reservoirs. Int J Numer Anal Methods Geomech 23(13):1495–1519. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1096-9853(199911)23
Gong SL, Wu JZ, Yan XX (2005) Analysis on land subsidence due to construction engineering in soft soil region of Shanghai. In: Zhang AG, Gong SL, Carbognin L, Johnson AI (eds) Proceedings of the seventh international symposium on land subsidence, vol. 1, p 82–87
Gong SL, Ye WM, Chen HS, Chen B, Yang TL, Wan M (2008) Theory and methodology on assessment of land subsidence caused by excavation engineering for deep foundation pit in Shanghai. Chin J Geol Hazard Control 19(4):55–60 (in Chinese)
Gong SL, Li C, Yang SL (2009) The microscopic characteristics of Shanghai soft clay and its effect on soil body deformation and land subsidence. Environ Geol 56(6):1051–1056. doi:10.1007/s00254-008-1205-4
Hsi JP, Small JC (1992) Ground settlements and drawdown of the water table around an excavation. Can Geotech J 29(5):740–756. doi:10.1139/t92-082
Huang Y, Bao YJ, Wang YH (2015a) Analysis of geoenvironmental hazards in urban underground space development in Shanghai. Nat Hazards 75:2067–2079. doi:10.1007/s11069-014-1414-y
Huang Y, Yang Y, Li JL (2015b) Numerical simulation of artificial groundwater recharge for controlling land subsidence. KSCE J Civil Eng 19(2):418–426. doi:10.1007/s12205-015-0505-y
Jiao JJ, Leung CM, Ding GP (2008) Changes to the groundwater system, from 1888 to present, in a highly-urbanized coastal area in Hong Kong, China. Hydrogeol J 16(8):1527–1539. doi:10.1007/s10040-008-0332-z
Jurado A, De Gaspari F, Vilarrasa V, Bolster D, Sánchez-Vila X, Fernàndez-Garcia D, Tartakovsky DM (2012) Probabilistic analysis of groundwater-related risks at subsurface excavation sites. Eng Geol 125(1):35–44. doi:10.1016/j.enggeo.2011.10.015
Kim JM (2005) Three-dimensional numerical simulation of fully coupled groundwater flow and land deformation in unsaturated true anisotropic aquifers due to groundwater pumping. Water Resour Res 41(1):W01003. doi:10.1029/2003WR002941
Lewis RW, Schrefler B (1978) A fully coupled consolidation model of the subsidence of Venice. Water Resour Res 14(2):223–230
Liu J, Chen JJ, Wang JH (2010) Fluid structure coupling analysis of dewatering and excavation in 500 kV Shanghai expo underground substation. J Shanghai Jiaotong Univ 44(6):721–725 (in Chinese)
Liu J, Chen JJ, Wang JH (2013) Fluid-solid coupling analysis of multi-grade dewatering in Hongqiao transport hub. Chin J Geotech Eng 35(s1):210–215 (in Chinese)
Loáiciga AH (2013) Consolidation settlement in aquifers caused by pumping. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 139(7):1191–1204. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000836
Lyu HM, Wang GF, Shen JS, Lu LH, Wang GQ (2016) Analysis and GIS mapping of flooding hazards on 10 May, 2016, Guangzhou, China. Water 8(447):1–17. doi:10.3390/w8100447
Lyu HM, Wang GF, Cheng WC, Shen SL (2017) Tornado hazards on June 23rd in Jiangsu Province, China: preliminary investigation and analysis. Nat Hazards 85(1):597–604. doi:10.1007/s11069-016-2588-2
Ma L, Xu YS, Shen SL, Sun WJ (2014) Evaluation of the hydraulic conductivity of aquifers with piles. Hydrogeol J 22(2):371–382. doi:10.1007/s10040-013-1068-y
Ni JC, Cheng WC (2011) Shield machine disassembly in grouted soils outside the ventilation shaft: a case history in Taipei rapid transit system (TRTS). Tunn Undergr Space Technol 26(2):435–443
Ni JC, Cheng WC (2012a) Steering characteristics of microtunnelling in various deposits. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 28:321–330
Ni JC, Cheng WC (2012b) Characterising the failure pattern of a station box of Taipei rapid transit system (TRTS) and its rehabilitation. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 32:260–272
Ni JC, Cheng WC (2014) Quality control of double fluid jet grouting below groundwater table: case history. Soils Found 54(6):1039–1053
Ni JC, Cheng WC, Ge L (2011) A case history of field pumping tests in a deep gravel formation in the Taipei Basin, Taiwan. Eng Geol 117(1–2):17–28. doi:10.1016/j.enggeo.2010.10.001
Ni JC, Cheng WC, Ge L (2013) A simple data reduction method for pumping tests with tidal, partial penetration, and storage effects. Soils Found 53(6):894–902. doi:10.1016/j.sandf.2013.10.008
Niu WJ, Wang ZY, Chen F, Li H (2013) Settlement analysis of a confined sand aquifer overlain by a clay layer due to single well pumping. Math Probl Eng 3–4:388–400. doi:10.1155/2013/789853
Pavelic P, Dillon PJ, Mucha M, Nakai T, Barry KE, Bestland E (2011) Laboratory assessment of factors affecting soil clogging of soil aquifer treatment systems. Water Res 45(10):3135–3163. doi:10.1016/j.watres.2011.03.027
Peng FL, Wang HL, Tan Y, Xu ZL, Li YL (2011) Field measurements and FEM simulation of a tunnel shaft constructed by pneumatic caisson method in Shanghai soft ground. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE 137(5):516–524. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000460
Pujades E, López A, Carrera J, Vázquez-Suñé E, Jurado A (2012) Barrier effect of underground structures on aquifers. Eng Geol 145–146(2012):41–49. doi:10.1016/j.enggeo.2012.07.004
Pujades E, Vázquez-Suñé E, Carrera J, Vilarrasa V, De Simone S, Jurado A, Ledesma A, Ramos G, Lloret A (2014) Deep enclosures versus pumping to reduce settlements during shaft excavations. Eng Geol 169(4):100–111. doi:10.1016/j.enggeo.2013.11.017
Roy D, Robinson KE (2009) Surface settlements at a soft soil site due to bedrock dewatering. Eng Geol 107(3–4):109–117. doi:10.1016/j.enggeo.2009.05.006
Samarasinghe AM, Huang YH, Dmevich VP (1982) Permeability and consolidation of normally consolidated soils. J Geotech Eng Div 108(6):835–850
Shanghai City Housing and Urban–Rural Construction Management Committee (SHURD) (2010a). Foundation design code (DGJ08-11-2010)
Shanghai City Housing and Urban–Rural Construction Management Committee (SHURD) (2010b). Technical code for excavation engineering (DG/TJ08-61-2010)
Shanghai City Housing and Urban–Rural Construction Management Committee (SHURD) (2012). Code for investigation of geotechnical engineering (DGJ08-37-2012)
Shanghai Geological Environmental Atlas Editorial Board (SGEAEB) (2002) Shanghai geological environmental atlas (SGEA). Geology Press, Beijing
Shaqour FM, Hasan SE (2008) Groundwater control for construction purposes: a case study from Kuwait. Environ Geol 53(8):1603–1612. doi:10.1007/s00254-007-0768-9
Shen SL, Xu YS (2011) Numerical evaluation of land subsidence induced by groundwater pumping in Shanghai. Can Geotech J 48(9):1378–1392. doi:10.1139/T11-049
Shen SL, Xu YS, Hong ZS (2006) Estimation of land subsidence based on groundwater flow model. Mar Georesour Geotechnol 24(2):149–167. doi:10.1080/10641190600704848
Shen SL, Han J, Du YJ (2008) Deep mixing induced property changes in surrounding sensitive marine clays. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 134(6):845–854. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2008)134:6(845)
Shen SL, Ma L, Xu YS, Yin ZY (2013a) Interpretation of increased deformation rate in aquifer IV due to groundwater pumping in Shanghai. Can Geotech J 50(11):1129–1142. doi:10.1139/cgj-2013-0042
Shen SL, Wang ZF, Horpibulsuk S, Kim YH (2013b) Jet grouting with a newly developed technology: the Twin-Jet method. Eng Geol 152(1):87–95. doi:10.1016/j.enggeo.2012.10.018
Shen SL, Wang ZF, Sun WJ, Wang LB, Horpibulsuk S (2013c) A field trial of horizontal jet grouting using the composite-pipe method in the soft deposits of Shanghai. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 35(2013):142–151. doi:10.1016/j.tust.2013.01.003
Shen SL, Wang ZF, Yang J, Ho CE (2013d) Generalized approach for prediction of jet grout column diameter. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 139(12):2060–2069. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000932c
Shen SL, Wu HN, Cui YJ, Yin ZY (2014) Long-term settlement behavior of the metro tunnel in Shanghai. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 40(2014):309–323. doi:10.1016/j.tust.2013.10.013
Shen SL, Wang JP, Wu HN, Xu YS, Ye GL, Yin ZY (2015a) Evaluation of hydraulic conductivity for both marine and deltaic deposit based on piezocone test. Ocean Eng 110(2015):174–182. doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2015.10.011
Shen SL, Wu YX, Xu YS, Hino T, Wu HN (2015b) Evaluation of hydraulic parameter based on groundwater pumping test of multi-aquifer system of Tianjin. Comput Geotech 68(2015):196–207. doi:10.1016/J.COMPGEO.2015.03.011
Shen SL, Cui QL, Ho EC, Xu YS (2016) Ground response to multiple parallel Microtunneling operations in cemented silty clay and sand. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 142(5):04016001. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0001441
Shi XQ, Xue YQ, Ye SJ, Wu JC, Zhang Y, Yu J (2007) Characterization of land subsidence induced by groundwater withdrawals in Su–Xi–Chang area, China. Environ Geol 52(1):27–40. doi:10.1007/s00254-006-0446-3
Shi XQ, Jiang SM, Xu HX, Jiang F, He ZF, Wu JC (2016) The effects of artificial recharge of groundwater on controlling land subsidence and its influence on groundwater quality and aquifer energy storage in Shanghai, China. Environ Earth Sci 75:195. doi:10.1007/s12665-015-5019-x
Tan Y, Lu Y (2016) Why excavation of a small air shaft caused excessively large displacements: forensic investigation. J Perform Constr Facil ASCE 04016083:1–20. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0000947
Tan Y, Wang D (2015a) Structural behaviors of large underground earth-retaining systems in Shanghai. I: unpropped circular diaphragm wall. J Perform Constr Facil ASCE 29(2):04014058. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0000521
Tan Y, Wang D (2015b) Structural behaviors of large underground earth-retaining systems in Shanghai. II: multipropped rectangular diaphragm wall. J Perform Constr Facil ASCE 29(2):04014059. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0000535
Tan Y, Wei B (2012) Performance of an over excavated metro station and facilities nearby. J Perform Constr Facil 26(3):241–254. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0000231
Tan Y, Wei B, Zhou X, Diao Y (2015) Lessons learned from construction of Shanghai metro stations: importance of quick excavation, prompt propping, timely casting, and segmented construction. J Perform Constr Facil 29(4):4014096. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0000599
Tan Y, Huang R, Kang Z, Bin W (2016) Covered semi-top-down excavation of subway station surrounded by closely spaced buildings in downtown Shanghai: building response. J Perform Constr Facil ASCE 30(6):04016040. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0000892
Vilarrasa V, Carrera J, Jurado A, Pujades E, Vázquez-Suné E (2011) A methodology for characterizing the hydraulic effectiveness of an annular low permeability barrier. Eng Geol 120(1):68–80. doi:10.1016/j.enggeo.2011.04.005
Wang HM (2013) The risk assessment system and risk management of land subsidence in Shanghai. Doctoral Dissertation, Shanghai University, Shanghai (in Chinese)
Wang JX, Hu LS, Wu LG, Tang YQ, Zhu YF, Yang P (2009) Hydraulic barrier function of the underground continuous concrete wall in the pit of subway station and its optimization. Environ Geol 57:447–453. doi:10.1007/s00254-008-1315-z
Wang JX, Guo TP, Wu LG, Zhu YF, Tang YQ, Yang P (2010) Mechanism and application of interaction between underground wall and well in dewatering for deep excavation. Chin J Undergr Space Eng 6(3):564–570 (in Chinese)
Wang JX, Feng B, Liu Y, Wu LG, Zhu YF, Zhang XS, Tang YQ, Yang P (2012a) Controlling subsidence caused by de-watering in a deep foundation pit. Bull Eng Geol Environ 71(3):545–555. doi:10.1007/s10064-012-0420-0
Wang JX, Wu YB, Zhang XS, Liu Y, Yang TL, Feng B (2012b) Field experiments and numerical simulations of confined aquifer response to multi-cycle recharge-recovery process through a well. J Hydrol 464–465(2012):328–343. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.07.018
Wang JX, Feng B, Yu HP, Guo TP, Yang GY, Tang YQ (2013a) Numerical study of dewatering in a large deep foundation pit. Environ Earth Sci 69(3):863–872. doi:10.1007/s12665-012-1972-9
Wang JX, Huang TR, Sui DC (2013b) A case study on stratified settlement and rebound characteristics due to dewatering in Shanghai subway station. Sci World J 2013:213070. doi:10.1155/2013/213070
Wang ZF, Shen SL, Ho EC, Kim YH (2013c) Investigation of field installation effects of horizontal Twin-Jet grouting in Shanghai soft soil deposits. Can Geotech J 50(3):288–297. doi:10.1139/cgj-2012-0199
Wang ZF, Shen SL, Ho CE, Xu YS (2014) Jet grouting for mitigation of installation disturbance. Geotech Eng ICE Proc 167(GE6):526–536. doi:10.1680/geng.13.00103
Wang JX, Wu YB, Liu XT, Yang TL, Wang HM, Zhu YF (2016) Areal subsidence under pumping well–curtain interaction in subway foundation pit dewatering: conceptual model and numerical simulations. Environ Earth Sci 75:198. doi:10.1007/s12665-015-4860-2
Wei ZX, Zhai GY, Yan XX (2010) Atlas of Shanghai urban geology. Geology Press, Beijing
Wu LG (2003) Design and construction of dewatering engineering and theory of pit seepage. China Communication Press, Beijing (in Chinese)
Wu LG (2016a) Comprehensive treatment of damages caused by confined water in deep excavation engineering. China Communications Press, Beijing (in Chinese)
Wu, YX (2016b) Method of barrier effect of waterproof curtain on groundwater seepage during dewatering in aquifers. Doctor Dissertation, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai (in Chinese)
Wu JC, Shi XQ, Xue YQ, Zhang Y, Wei ZX, Yu J (2008) The development and control of the land subsidence in the Yangtze Delta, China. Environ Geol 55:1725–1735. doi:10.1007/s00254-007-1123-x
Wu JZ, Wang HM, Yang TL (2009) Experimental research on artificial recharge to shallow aquifer to control land subsidence due to construction in Shanghai city. Geoscience 23(6):1194–1200 (in Chinese)
Wu CJ, Ye GL, Wang JH (2014a) Relationship between compression index and natural water content of Shanghai clay. Rock Soil Mech 35(11):3184–3190 (in Chinese)
Wu HN, Huang RQ, Sun WJ, Shen SL, Xu YS, Liu YB, Du SJ (2014b) Leaking behaviour of shield tunnels under the Huangpu river of Shanghai with induced hazards. Nat Hazards 70(2):1115–1132. doi:10.1007/s11069-013-0863-z
Wu CJ, Ye GL, Zhang LL, Bishop D, Wang JH (2015a) Depositional environment and geotechnical properties of Shanghai clay: a comparison with Ariake and Bangkok clays. Bull Eng Geol Environ 74:717–732. doi:10.1007/s10064-014-0670-0
Wu HN, Shen SL, Ma L, Yin ZY, Horpibulsuk S (2015b) Evaluation of the strength increase of marine clay under staged embankment loading: a case study. Mar Georesour Geotechnol 33(6):532–541
Wu HN, Shen SL, Liao SM, Yin ZY (2015c) Longitudinal structural modelling of shield tunnels considering shearing dislocation between segmental rings. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 50(2015):317–323
Wu YX, Shen SL, Xu YS, Yin ZY (2015d) Characteristics of groundwater seepage with cut-off wall in gravel aquifer. I: field observations. Can Geotech J 52(10):1526–1538. doi:10.1139/cgj-2014-0285
Wu YX, Shen SL, Yin ZY, Xu YS (2015e) Characteristics of groundwater seepage with cut-off wall in gravel aquifer. II: numerical analysis. Can Geotech J 52(10):1539–1549. doi:10.1139/cgj-2014-0289
Wu YX, Shen SL, Wu HN, Xu YS, Yin ZY, Sun WJ (2015f) Environmental protection using dewatering technology in a deep confined aquifer beneath a shallow aquifer. Eng Geol 196(2015):59–70. doi:10.1016/J.ENGGEO.2015.06.015
Wu YX, Shen SL, Yuan DJ (2016) Characteristics of dewatering induced drawdown curve under blocking effect of retaining wall in aquifer. J Hydrol 539:554–566. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2016.05.065
Xu YS, Shen SL, Cai ZY, Zhou GY (2008) The state of land subsidence and prediction activities due to groundwater withdrawal in China. Nat Hazards 45(1):123–135. doi:10.1007/s11069-007-9168-4
Xu YS, Shen SL, Du YJ (2009) Geological and hydrogeological environment in Shanghai with geohazards to construction and maintenance of infrastructures. Eng Geol 109(3–4):241–254. doi:10.1016/j.enggeo.2009.08.009
Xu S, Miao JF, Lou RX (2010) Viscoelastic analysis of surrounding deformation due to dewatering of confined aquifers. Chin J Undergr Space Eng 6(1):213–218 (in Chinese)
Xu YS, Shen SL, Sun WJ, Ma L (2011) Laboratory investigation on the cutoff behavior of retaining structure on groundwater seepage in aquifer. In: The 14th Asian regional conference on soil mechanics and geotechnical engineering, Hong Kong, p 1–6
Xu YS, Ma L, Du YJ, Shen SL (2012) Analysis of urbanization-induced land subsidence in Shanghai. Nat Hazards 63(2):1255–1267. doi:10.1007/s11069-012-0220-7
Xu YS, Huang RQ, Han J, Shen SL (2013a) Evaluation of allowable withdrawn volume of groundwater based on observed data. Nat Hazards 67(2):513–522. doi:10.1007/s11069-013-0576-3
Xu YS, Shen SL, Du YJ, Chai JC, Horpibulsuk S (2013b) Modelling the cutoff behavior of underground structure in multi-aquifer-aquitard groundwater system. Nat Hazards 66(2):731–748. doi:10.1007/s11069-012-0512-y
Xu YS, Shen SL, Ma L, Sun WJ, Yin ZY (2014) Evaluation of the blocking effect of retaining walls on groundwater seepage in aquifers with different insertion depths. Eng Geol 183(2014):254–264. doi:10.1016/j.enggeo.2014.08.023
Xu YS, Yuan Y, Shen SL, Yin ZY, Wu HN, Ma L (2015) Investigation into subsidence hazards due to groundwater pumping from aquifer II in Changzhou, China. Nat Hazards 78(1):281–296. doi:10.1007/s11069-015-1714-x
Xu YS, Shen SL, Ren DJ, Wu HN (2016) Factor analysis of land subsidence in Shanghai: a view based on strategic environmental assessment. Sustainability 8(1–12):573. doi:10.3390/su8060573
Yang TL, Yan XX, Wang HM, Wu JZ, Liu JB (2010) Experimental research of shallow aquifer pressure groundwater recharge based on dual control pattern of groundwater level and land subsidence. Shanghai Geol 31(4):12–17 (in Chinese)
Yin ZY, Hattab M, Hicher PY (2011a) Multiscale modeling of a sensitive marine clay. Int J Numer Anal Methods Geomech 35(15):1682–1702. doi:10.1002/nag.977
Yin ZY, Karstunen M, Chang CS, Koskinen M, Lojander M (2011b) Modeling time-dependent behavior of soft sensitive clay. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE 137(11):1103–1113. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000527
Yin ZY, Xu Q, Chang CS (2013a) Modeling cyclic behavior of clay by micromechanical approach. J Eng Mech ASCE 139(9):1305–1309. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)EM.1943-7889.0000516
Yin ZY, Xu Q, Hicher PY (2013b) A simple critical state based double-yield-surface model for clay behavior under complex loading. Acta Geotech 8(5):509–523. doi:10.1007/s11440-013-0206-y
Yin ZY, Zhu QY, Yin JH, Ni Q (2014) Stress relaxation coefficient and formulation for soft soils. Géotech Lett 4(1):45–51. doi:10.1680/geolett.13.00070c
Yin ZY, Xu Q, Yu C (2015) Elastic viscoplastic modeling for natural soft clays considering nonlinear creep. ASCE Int J Geomech 15(5):A6014001. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0000284
Yu ZJ, Zhang YP, Wang RH, Liang XH (2004) The division and age of the Neogene strata in the Yangtze Delta Area. J Stratigr 28(3):257–264 (in Chinese)
Zhang AG, Wei ZX (2005) Prevention and cure with Shanghai land subsidence and city sustaining development. In: Zhang AG, Gong SL, Carbognin L, Johnson AI (eds) Proceedings of the seventh international symposium on land subsidence, vol 1, p 10–17
Zhang JS, Wu YQ, Li Z (2005) A mathematical water-pumping model of single wells withdrawing water from confined aquifers and its analytical analysis considering soil-particle movements. Agric Res Arid Areas 23(1):45–49 (in Chinese)
Zhang XS, Wang JX, Wong H, Leo CJ, Liu YQ, Tang YQ, Yan XL, Sun WH, Huang ZQ, Hao XH (2013) Land subsidence caused by internal soil erosion owing to pumping confined aquifer groundwater during the deep foundation construction in Shanghai. Nat Hazards 69(1):473–489. doi:10.1007/s11069-013-0718-7
Zhang N, Shen SL, Wu HN, Chai JC, Yin ZY (2015a) Evaluation of effect of basal geotextile reinforcement under embankment loading on soft marine deposits. Geotext Geomembr 43(6):506–514
Zhang Y, Wu JC, Xue YQ, Wang ZC, Yao YG, Yan XX, Wang HM (2015b) Land subsidence and uplift due to long-term groundwater extraction and artificial recharge in Shanghai, China. Hydrol J 23:1851–1866. doi:10.1007/s10040-015-1302-x
Zhang YQ, Ran AL, Wu CJ, Chen JJ, Wang JH (2015c) Experimental study on permeability properties of soft clay in process of pumping and recharge. Chin J Geotech Eng 37(Supp. 1):21–25 (in Chinese)
Zheng G, Diao Y (2015) Environmental impact of ground deformation caused by underground construction in China. In: The 15th Asian regional conference on soil mechanics and geotechnical engineering, p 10–24
Zheng XL, Shan BB, Heng C, Zhang SH, Cheng GF (2013) Test and numerical simulation on physical clogging during aquifer artificial recharge. Earth Sci J China Univ Geosci 38(6):1321–1326 (in Chinese)
Zhou NQ, Vermeer PA, Lou RX, Tang YQ, Jiang SM (2010) Numerical simulation of deep foundation pit dewatering and optimization of controlling land subsidence. Eng Geol 114(2010):251–260. doi:10.1016/j.enggeo.2010.05.002
Zhou NQ, Tang YQ, Lou RX, Jiang SM (2011) Numerical simulation of deep foundation pit dewatering and land subsidence control of Xujiahui metro station. Chin J Geotech Eng 33(12):1950–1956 (in Chinese)
Zhu YF, Huang YZ, Tan YP, Chen JJ (2015) Stratified settlement characteristics of the soil strata in Shanghai due to dewatering. J Aerosp Eng 28(6):A4014005. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)AS.1943-5525.0000453
Acknowledgements
The research work described herein was supported by Key Laboratory of Land Subsidence Monitoring and Prevention, Ministry of Land and Resources in China (No. KLLSMP201502). This financial support is gratefully acknowledged.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Xu, YS., Wu, HN., Wang, B.ZF. et al. Dewatering induced subsidence during excavation in a Shanghai soft deposit. Environ Earth Sci 76, 351 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-017-6685-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-017-6685-7