Upload
diego-alejandro-leyton-trigo
View
215
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
tunnel
Citation preview
Tunnels in Swelling and Squeezing Grounds
Definition of Swelling and Squeezing Mechanisms
Empirical Values of Support for Case Tunnel (Highway)
Analytical Values of Support for Case Tunnel (Highway)
Design Values for the Support through the 2 methods
Excavation and Supports
Conclusion
Definition of Swelling and Squeezing Mechanisms
Swelling Mechanism:
- A combination of physico-chemical reaction involving
water and stress relief leading to volume increase with time
- Argillaceous soil or rock (Clay, Shale/Mudstone, Fault
gouge, and Weathering/Alteration zone)
Squeezing Mechanism:
- Time dependent shear displacement of the ground
leading to inward movement of the tunnel periphery
- Any soil or rocks as long as the ground around tunnel
creep
Ground and Tunnel Parameters
Ground = shale (cretaceous), fault zone
qu = 10 Mpa
v = 0.8 Mpa (Z=40m, r=20 KN/m3)
E = 500 Mpa, = 0.4
Material constant for shale (Hoek-Brown)
m=0.2 & s=0.0001, mr=0.01 & s=0
Max.swelling pressure = 0.2 Mpa (Oedometer test)
Initial radius of tunnel = 7 m
De = 14/1.0 = 14
Plan & Cross-sectional Views of the Case Tunnel
Empirical Method (Q-system)
1. RQD = very poor (10)
2. Jn = 3 joint set + random (12)
3. Jr = smooth planar (1.0)
4. Ja = swelling clay (montmorillonite) filling (10)
5. Jw = medium inflow or pressure (0.66)
6. SRF = mild swelling/squeezing (8)
Q = (RQD/Jn)(Jr/Ja)(Jw/SRF)
= (10/12)(1.0/10)(0.66/8) = 0.007
Category 38 (Barton’s Design Category)
= CCA (sr) 100-300 cm + B (tg) 0.5-1.0 m
Design category by Q-system
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
0 20 40 60 80 100
ui (mm)
pi
(Mp
a)
Steel rib Con'c lining Rockbolt Ground
Plot of Design Values by RQD
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
0 20 40 60 80 100
ui (mm)
pi
(Mp
a)
Steel rib Con'c lining Rockbolt Ground
Plot of Design Values by Q-system
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
0 20 40 60 80 100
ui (mm)
pi
(Mp
a)
Con'c lining Rockbolt Ground
Comparison of Empirical & Analytical Method
Empirical values
By RQD
- rock bolt : 0.6-0.9m spacing
- shotcrete : > 0.15m
- steel rib (very heavy)
: 0.6m spacing
By Q-system
- Cast concrete arch : 1-3m
- rock bolt (tensioned grouted)
: 0.5-1.0 m spacing
More conservative
Safer Design
Analytical values
- rock bolt (mechanically
or chemically anchored)
: 0.5m spacing
: 3m length
- concrete lining : 0.3m
- steel rib : 0.3m
: 12W65
More accurate
More Limitation
Excavation and Support
Excavation Methods
Sequential excavation
- Side drift method
- Heading and bench
Full face excavation
Side drift method
Heading and Bench
Full face excavation
Spring line side drift method
Excavation and Support
Effect of different support measures
Side drift method Heading and Bench
Additional Considerations on Supports in Tunnels in Squeezing Condition
Non-uniform distribution of the ground pressure
Main causes for the deviation of deformations from rotary symmetrical state
Additional Consideration on Supports in Tunnels in Squeezing Condition
Response of Supports to Non-uniform Distribution of Ground Pressure
Conclusion
We made a comparative study on the supports of the case tunnel in time-dependant ground(Shale) with the rock-support interaction analysis and empirical methods (RQD and Q-system).
The design values by rock-support interaction and Q-system showed the satisfactory results with respect to the ground stability than RQD for the given tunnel.
It is not easy to predict how much the swelling and squeezing occur with time at the stage of design.
Most important is the integration of design and construction including monitoring during construction and the possibility to adapt the design, if necessary.