journal article·2026-07-10Open access

A Simulation Optimization Decision Framework for Composite Tunnel Support Design Using FEM, Particle Swarm Optimization, and Multi-Criteria Decision-Making

José Miguel León-Ruiz, Carlos Chávez-Negrete, José Eleazar Arreygue-Rocha, Francisco Javier Domínguez-Mota, Monserrat Vázquez-Hernández, Luis Alberto Morales-Rosales

Applied Sciences· Volume 16· Issue 14

Abstract

Tunnel support design in rock masses requires controlling deformation while maintaining structural safety, constructability, and material efficiency under variable geotechnical conditions. This study presents a Simulation–Optimization–Decision Framework (SODF) for preliminary and comparative tunnel support design. The framework integrates FEM-based numerical modeling in PLAXIS 2D, Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO), and a Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) model to evaluate composite support systems composed of shotcrete and steel sets. Deformation at the tunnel crown was used as the primary optimization response, while structural feasibility was verified through axial force–bending moment and axial force–shear force interaction envelopes with a minimum safety factor of FS≥1.5. Two case studies were analyzed using GSI values of 40, 45, 50, and 55. Case 1 considered Erm=500,000 kN/m2, with an additional condition of 250,000 kN/m2 at GSI=40, whereas Case 2 considered Erm=545,000 kN/m2, with an additional condition of 300,000 kN/m2 at GSI=45. Three PSO configurations were evaluated to compare the search intensity, the diversity of feasible solutions, and the computational effort. The results showed that feasible configurations were mainly concentrated between 10 and 14 cm of shotcrete thickness in Case 1 and between 10 and 12 cm in Case 2, with frequent selection of 254 mm and 305 mm steel sets. The MCDM analysis indicated that the lowest-deformation alternative does not necessarily coincide with the most suitable engineering alternative when material cost, shotcrete applicability, steel-set maneuverability, and local availability are considered.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Tunneling and Rock Mechanics · Rock Mechanics and Modeling · Geotechnical Engineering and Analysis

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Doctorado en Ingeniería Civil, Facultad de Ingeniería Civil, Universidad Michoacana de San Nicolás de Hidalgo, Ciudad Universitaria, Avenida Francisco José Múgica S/N, Morelia 58060, Mexico

Department of Computer Science, National Institute for Astrophysics, Optics and Electronics, Luis Enrique Erro #1, Sta María Tonanzintla, Puebla 72840, Mexico

Secretaría de Ciencia, Humanidades, Tecnología e Innovación (SECIHTI), Insurgentes Sur 1582, Colonia Crédito Constructor Demarcación Territorial Benito Juárez, Ciudad de México 03940, Mexico

Funding

Secretaría de Ciencia, Humanidades, Tecnología e Innovación

References (43)

Show source-provided references
1. Bobet, A., and Einstein, H.H. (2023). Tunnel Design Methods, CRC Press.10.1201/9781003328940 ↗
2. National Highway Institute (US), and Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas (2010). Technical Manual for Design and Construction of Road Tunnels–Civil Elements, AASHTO.
3. The effect of opening shapes on the stability of underground tunnels: A finite element analysis
4. A strain applied method for FEM-2D modelling of TBM tunnels in coarse-grained soils with comparative analysis of case histories10.1016/j.tust.2024.106001 ↗
5. Tang, B., Cheng, H., Tang, Y., Zheng, T., Yao, Z., Wang, C., and Rong, C. (2020). Supporting design optimization of tunnel boring machines-excavated coal mine roadways: A case study in Zhangji, China. Processes, 8.10.3390/pr8010046 ↗
6. Optimal strategy to mitigate tunnel-induced settlement in soft soils: Simulation approach10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0001322 ↗
7. Optimization and design of pre-reinforcement for a subsea tunnel crossing a fault fracture zone10.1080/1064119X.2021.2009602 ↗
8. From digital models to numerical analysis for mechanised tunnelling: A fully automated design-through-analysis workflow10.1016/j.tust.2020.103622 ↗
9. Analysis and optimization design of submarine tunnels crossing fault fracture zones based on numerical simulation10.1080/1064119X.2019.1655120 ↗
10. BIM-to-IGA: A fully automatic design-through-analysis workflow for segmented tunnel linings10.1016/j.aei.2020.101137 ↗
11. Koliji, A., Metral, M., and Bonnefon, J. (2025). Digital optimization in tunnel design. Tunnelling into a Sustainable Future–Methods and Technologies, CRC Press.10.1201/9781003559047-27 ↗
12. Eberhart, R., and Kennedy, J. (1995). A new optimizer using particle swarm theory. MHS’95. Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on Micro Machine and Human Science, IEEE.10.1109/MHS.1995.494215 ↗
13. A survey of algorithms, applications and trends for particle swarm optimization
14. Inverse parameter identification technique using PSO algorithm applied to geotechnical modeling
15. Particle Swarm Optimization Variants for Solving Geotechnical Problems: Review and Comparative Analysis: AR Kashani et al10.1007/s11831-020-09442-0 ↗
16. Machine learning–finite element mesh optimization-based modeling and prediction of excavation-induced shield tunnel ground settlement10.1142/S021987622450066X ↗
17. Applications of particle swarm optimization in geotechnical engineering: A comprehensive review10.1007/s10706-017-0356-z ↗
18. The analytic hierarchy process—What it is and how it is used10.1016/0270-0255(87)90473-8 ↗
19. Analytical solution for deep circular tunnels in rock with consideration of disturbed zone, 3D strength and large strain10.1007/s00603-020-02339-1 ↗
20. Mechanical analysis of circular liners with particular reference to composite supports. For example, liners consisting of shotcrete and steel sets10.1016/j.tust.2009.02.001 ↗
21. Witasse, R. (2026, June 05). Application of the Convergence–Confinement Method in PLAXIS 2D. Available online: https://bentleysystems.service-now.com/community?id=kb_article_view&sysparm_article=KB0045526.
22. Curran, J.H., Hammah, R.E., and Yacoub, T. (October, January 29). A two-dimensional approach for designing tunnel support in weak rock. Proceedings of the 56th Canadian Geotechnical Conference, Winnepeg, MB, Canada.
23. A Hybrid Methodology of Rock Support Design for Poor Ground Conditions in Hard Rock Tunnelling10.1007/s00603-023-03273-8 ↗
24. Design of rock support in hard and layered rock masses using a hybrid method: A study based on the construction of the new Skarvberg tunnel, Norway10.1007/s00603-024-04082-3 ↗
25. Design of Rock Support in Low Overburden and Hard Rock Conditions with the Use of Rock Mass Classification Systems and Numerical Analyses: A Study Based on the Construction of the Hestnes Railway Tunnel, Norway10.1007/s00603-024-04126-8 ↗
26. Analysis of Plastic Deformations for Tunnel Support Design in Weak Flysch Rock Mass of a Hydropower Tunnel in Central Albania10.1007/s00603-025-04545-1 ↗
27. Eiesland, O. (2022). Implementation of Random Finite Element Method in PLAXIS Using API/Python Scripting. [Master’s Thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology].
28. Parra Silva, M.A. (2022). Diseño Sísmico Paramétrico de Túneles Mediante Métodos Numéricos e Inteligencia Artificial. [Bachelor’s Thesis, University of Chile].
29. Shape and Reinforcement Optimization of Underground Tunnels10.1299/jcst.4.51 ↗
30. Zhang, T., Zhao, J., Kuang, R., and Li, C. (2025). Stability Analysis and Support Optimization of Tunnel Surrounding Rock with Weak Interlayer Based on Catastrophe Theory. Buildings, 15.10.3390/buildings15030507 ↗
31. Mechanical behavior prediction of tunnel with single-layer steel fiber shotcrete lining10.1038/s41598-025-17837-x ↗
32. Niu, S., Wu, J., Zhao, J., and Pei, J. (2025). Optimal Lower Step Height of Tunnel Excavation Designs by Using the Non-Dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm-II. Appl. Sci., 15.10.3390/app15115854 ↗
33. Song, Z., Yang, Z., Huo, R., and Zhang, Y. (2023). Inversion Analysis Method for Tunnel and Underground Space Engineering: A Short Review. Appl. Sci., 13.10.3390/app13095454 ↗
34. Mohammadi, E., Nikoo, M.R., Javankhoshdel, S., Ghahramani, A., Jahanandish, M., and Sousa, R. (2024). Multi-objective robust decision-making for optimizing Subway Station Support Systems under spatial variability of soil parameters. Res. Sq.10.21203/rs.3.rs-4378703/v1 ↗
35. Optimising tunnel support design with machine learning models10.1007/s12665-025-12573-x ↗
36. Wang, L., He, P., Ma, Z., Liu, N., Yang, C., and Gao, Y. (2025). Analytical Method for Tunnel Support Parameter Design Based on Surrounding Rock Failure Mode Identification. Geosciences, 15.10.3390/geosciences15090369 ↗
37. The Hoek–Brown failure criterion and GSI—2018 edition10.1016/j.jrmge.2018.08.001 ↗
38. Bentley Systems (2026, June 05). How to Define Composite Section Plate Properties and Evaluate Tunnel Liner Capacity with PLAXIS. Available online: https://communities.bentley.com/products/geotech/.
39. Hoek–Brown failure criterion–2002 edition
40. Improved longitudinal displacement profiles for convergence confinement analysis of deep tunnels10.1007/s00603-009-0176-4 ↗
41. Hoek, E., Carranza-Torres, C., Diederichs, M., and Corkum, B. (2008, January 29). Integration of geotechnical and structural design in tunneling: The 2008 Kersten lecture. Proceedings of the 56th Annual Geotechnical Engineering Conference, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
42. Numerical Optimisation of Excavation Pit Design Using Finite Element Analyses10.1007/s10706-023-02639-7 ↗
43. A Hybrid RNN–GPOD Surrogate Model for Real-Time Settlement Predictions in Mechanised Tunnelling10.1186/s40323-016-0057-9 ↗