Tunel

THE APPLICATION OF HYDRAULIC FRACTURING
TO THE ASSESSMENT OF LINING

REQUIREMENTS FOR A PRESSURE TUNNEL
By
J ENEVERI, B WOOLTORTON2 AND M JOHNSON3
ABSTRACT
A programme of hydraulic fracture stress
measurements conducted in surface drill holes
along the alignment of the King River Power
Tunnel has provided information of importance
to the assessment of the extent of steel
lining requirements for the tunnel. A
significant horizontal stress field has been
detected at a location remote from the power
station site, with a corresponding absolute
minimum stress magnitude approximating the
overburden pressure based on depth of cover.
Measurements made closer to the power station
site (located toward the bottom of a valley)
have revealed an apparently relatively
destressed region with minimum stress magnitude
less than overburden pressure. The implications
of these results are discussed.
ZEEHAN
SCAlE km
2 , 6 ,
INTRODUCTION
The work described in this paper draws on
an investigation undertaken by the Commonwealth
Scientific and Industrial Research Organization
(CSIRO) Division of Geomechanics in conjunction
with the Hydro Electric Commission (H.E.C.) of
Tasmania, as part of a study of geotechnica1
conditions for the King River Tunnel. The King
River Tunnel forms part of the King River Power
Development Scheme (Figure 1) situated on the
central west coast of Tasmania, Australia. The
7 km long tunnel is planned to link the water
storage being formed by the construction of dual
rockfi11 dams (Crotty and Darwin) with a power
station located on the King River above its
junction with the Queen River. Figure 2 shows a
section along the tunnel alignment, with the
approximate limits of the major geological
units superimposed.
Construction work on the tunnel commenced
early in 1986, and is due for completion in
1990. The tunnel is being excavated with an
unlined horse-shoe cross-section 7.2 metres in
I Principle Research Scientist, Division of
Geomechanics, CSIRO, Mt. Waver1ey, Australia.
2 Experimental Scientist, Division of
Geomechanics, CSIRO, Mt. Waver1ey, Australia.
Design Engineer, Penstock Section, H.E.C.
Tasmania.
Figure 1. Location map of King River Power
Development Scheme.
diameter, with a flat invert 5.3 metres wide.
The majority of the tunnel is planned for service
without permanent lining, with the exception of
a concrete invert. The headrace tunnel extends
from the intake to the proximity of the surge
shaft, a length of 6,000 metres. This section
is being driven from the intake on a rising
grade of 0.2%, using drill and blast methods and
rail mounted equipment. The power tunnel
section extends downstream from the headrace
tunnel, initially on a 30% decline for
approximately 400 metres and then on a 1% down
grade to the downstream access adit before a
short section on a 30% decline to the power
station. The estimated cost of the tunnel
works is $35 million.
The section of tunnel immediately upstream
of the power station will have a permanent steel
lining designed to resist the hydro-dynamic
water pressure in service. The estimated in-
stalled cost of the lining ($1.3 million per 100
metres) makes it of obvious importance to assess
the capability of the rock mass to withstand
the head and thus to place a limit on the extent
to which the lining is required. In a general
sense, the design criterion in this regard is to
limit the extent of steel liner to that
section of tunnel where the minimum in situ
rock stress is less than the anticipated hydro-
VI Australian Tunnelling Conference, Melbourne, March 1987
109
11 0
...
..,
POWER STATION SITE
.... ESTERN SEQUENCE
QUARTZ - FElDSPAR PORPHYRY
BEDDED TUFF
TUFFACEDUS SANDSTONE &SILTSTONE
(STRONG TO VERY STRONG)
J ENEVER, B WOOLTORTON AND M
C>
C>
~
CENTRAL SEQUENCE
FELDSPAR PORPHYRY
WElDED ruFF
EASTERN SEQUENCE
QUARTZ - FELDSPAR PORPHYRY
CONGLOMERATE
SANDSTONE &SILTSTDNE
PYRITE MINERALISATION
Figure 2. Section along tunnel alignment showing approximate limits of major
geological units.
dynamic pressure in service. This is based on
the notion that elsewhere the rock stress
acting across any incipient planes of weakness
or tight joints in the rock mass will ensure
that such features do not open up in service
leading to uncontrolled water loss from an
unlined tunnel. Considerable experience with
unlined pressure tunnels world wide (particularly
in Norway) has led to the development of
empirical "rules of thumb" to deal with this
question, based essentially on the minimum rock
cover (Bergh-Christensen, 1986). These rules
depend on the assumption that a "gravity" stress
condition will prevail. While appropriate in
many cases these rules are not universally
applicable. A more recent trend is toward the
reliance on direct in situ stress measurements
(Vik and Tundbridge, 1986).
A number of holes were drilled along the
tunnel alignment during the site investigation,
particularly in the region adjacent to the
power station. The opportunity was taken to
apply the hydraulic fracture stress measurement
technique in three of these holes (highlighted
in Figure 2) with a view to assessing the
in situ stress field, specifically to
provide an early indication of the
extent of steel liner. All of these holes were
located, geologically, in the "Western Sequence".
The core from all holes was reasonably intact,
with few apparently open cracks but with a
large number of cemented incipient weaknesses
(joints, veins etc).
THE HYDRAULIC FRACTURE TECHNIQUE
Hydraulic fracture stress measurement
involves the isolation of a selected test
horizon in a hole (usually with an inflatable
straddle packer) and subsequent pressurisation
of the isolated horizon until the wall rock
fractures. Information extracted from the
pressure record can be used to estimate the in
situ stress field.
The basic concepts underlying the
application of hydraulic fracturing to the
measurement of in situ rock stress were
described in a paper presented at the fifth
Australian tunnelling conference (Enever et al.
1986). In this reference the theoretical
considerations relevant to the application of
hydraulic fracturing in uniform, isotropic
materials were presented. In this situation,
axial fractures (i.e. in the plane of the axis
of the test hole) forming in the direction of
the major secondary principal stress in the
plane normal to the hole axis (01) can generally
be expected to result from pressurisation of the
borehole. When this occurs, the equilibrium
(shut-in) pressure developed in the crack when
pressurisation is stopped can be considered to
estimate the magnitude of the minor secondary
principal stress in the plane normal to the hole
axis (02). If the test hole is vertical, the
development of vertical hydraulic fractures can
potentially yield sufficient information to
define the horizontal stress field as follows:
Minor horizontal stress component magnitude
(02) = shut-in pressure
Major horizontal stress component magnitude
(01) = 302+S-Pi-Po
Orientation of 01 = orientation of induced
fracture.
In the above equation:
S is the fracture strength of the rock
determined from laboratory tests
Pi is the crack initiation pressure
P is the ambient pore pressure
o
Crack initiation pressure and shut-in pressure
can be determined directly from the pressure
record obtained during testing (Enever et al.,
1986).
The rock types evident in the core from the
test holes were distinctly anisotropic,
exhibiting varying degrees of sub-vertical
foliation or cleavage that would be likely to
lead to a variation in fracture strength in the
horizontal plane and therefore potentially
influence the direction of fracture initiation
during testing. In this situation the under-
standing of hydraulic fracturing as outlined
above is not generally applicable. Even if
vertical fractures are developed, all that can be
strictly deduced from the pressure record is the
magnitude of the stress component acting normal
J ENEVER , B WOOLTORTON AND M JOHNSON 111
to the fracture plane, as estimated from the
shut-in pressure. Further analysis to determine
the magnitude of the stress component acting in
the direction of the fracture plane can only be
undertaken if the fracture occurs in the direction
of one of the horizontal principal stress
components (01 or 02). This implies that if this
analysis is to be conducted it must be assumed
that the effect of any anisotropy of strength
is limited to influencing fractures to occur in
either the direction of 01 or 02. Consistent
with this assumption, it is possible to define
three limiting cases producing limiting
estimates of the magnitudes of 01 and 02.
These are summarised in Figure 3.
In addition to the anisotropic fabric
evident in the core from the test holes, much
of the core exhibited obvious incipient
weaknesses (joints, veins etc) as described
above. These flaws had a wide variety of
orientations both in terms of azimuth and dip,
and potentially represented an overiding
influence on the orientation of fracture
initiation in many of the test horizons
selected, as well as on the orientation of
fracture development subsequent to initiation
for all tests. In this event, the shut-in
pressure recorded during testing could
be expected to estimate the magnitude of
the net stress acting normal to the disposition
of the flaw affecting fracture initiation/
development. In most instances the short term
shut-in pressure (i.e. on the initial cycle of
pressurisation) could reasonably be assumed to
approximately represent the stress magnitude
normal to the controlling feature as it
appears at the hole wall. The longer term shut-
in pressure (after several cycles of
pressurisation) could, in at least
some cases, reasonably be assumed to approach
the minimum stress magnitude in the region
under test as the test fluid permeates further
into the interconnected system of flaws seeking
out those flaws oriented normal to the minimum
stress component. When fracture initiation
is influenced by a flaw such that the fracture
develops other than in an axial plane in the
direction of either 01 or 02, analysis of the
stress field, apart from using the shut-in
pressure to estimate the magnitude of the stress
component acting normal to the flaw, is not
justified.
EQUIPMENT, TEST PROCEDURE AND SITE
EQUIPMENT
The downhole equipment used for the field
test programme was essentially as described in
Enever et al. (1986). The fracture tool
consists of two high pressure inflatable packers
(approximately 70 mm in diameter and 1 metre
long) separated by a test interval. The packers
and test interval can be pressurised
simultaneously but separately during testing.
Both pressures are measured by a down-hole
pressure transducing system during testing.
A high pressure impression packer, fitted
with a remote reading digital compass to permit
orientation, allows the disposition of fractures
induced during testing to be determined.
The downhole tools were located in position
on the end of a string of specially modified
drill rods. A drill rig was used to handle the
rods. The drill rods were modified by the
inclusion of "0" ring seals in the couplings to
allow the rod string to be used as a high
Rock fabric
CASE 1
CASE 2
CASE 3
Figure 3. Summary of limiting cases for analysis of pressure records.
CASE 1 - Fracture in direction of minimum strength (S i )
mn
02 = Shut-in press. 01(min) = 302 + Smin - Pi - Po
CASE 2 - Fracture normal to direction of minimum strength (S )
02 = Shut-in press. 01(max) = 302 + S - Pi _ P max
max 0
CASE 3 - 01 Shut-in press. 02 = 301 + Smin - Pi Po
11 2 J ENEVER, B WOOLTORTON AND M JOHNSON
Figure 4. CSIRO "portable" hydraulic fracture
equipment.
pressure conduit for pressurisation of the test
interval. All equipment necessary for pumping,
test control, recording information during
testing and handling the ancillary packer
inflation hose/data cable was contained in
three reinforced boxes. These boxes were of a
convenient size to facilitate helicopter
transport to and from the test sites necessitated
by the rugged terrain. Figure 4 shows the
system in operation.
TEST PROCEDURE
The field test procedure employed was
as described in Enever et al. (1986). A test
interval length of approximately 0.6 metres
(the shortest length practicably attainable) was
used for most tests, in recognition of the
relatively short lengths of core free of major
flaws available for testing. Water was used as
the fracture fluid. Relatively small capacity
pumps (approximately 1 litre/min maximum flow)
were used for the majority of the test
programme, to ensure that fracture propagation
extended only to a minimum extent during the
first cycle of pressurisation. This ensured
that initial shut-in pressure would be a
reasonable reflection of the fracture
orientation as revealed at the hole wall.
A laboratory testing programme was
undertaken on core recovered from the test
holes to establish the minimum and maximum
values of fracture strength (S i and S )
m n max
necessary for analysis. The test arrangement is
summarised in Figure 5. The fracture strength
in the direction of failure was determined from
the net circumferential tensile stress
resulting from the combination of external and
internal pressures at fracture initiation.
Samples were oriented in the test apparatus with
any obvious fabric aligned either parallel or
normal to the axis of symmetry of external
pressure. By varying this orientation and the
level of external pressure it was possible to
get the samples to fail in the three different
modes summarised in Figure 3.
SITES
Tests were attempted in the three vertical,
75 mm diametre holes shown in Figure 2. Hole
6126 collapsed soon after commencement of the
field programme preventing completion of
testing. In the other two holes it was possible
to select, by inspection of the core, a number
of relatively intact horizons. A total of 11
such horizons were selected in hole 6067,
covering a depth range from 26 to 101 metres,
and 14 in hole 6121, covering a depth range from
36 to 90 metres. In addition, 10 extra tests
were conducted in hole 6121 covering 1 metre
increments from 78 to 90 metres, the zone
corresponding to the proposed tunnel depth.
RESULTS
LABORATORY
A summary of the laboratory test results is
given in Table 1. Three separate groups of
results have been identified in Table 1,
corresponding respectively to the three failure
modes identified in Figure 3. The results from
tests yielding Case 1 failures were used to
determine S . The results from tests yielding
1I11.n
Case 2 failures were used to determine S
max
The results from tests yielding Case 3
failures were used to determine lower limiting
values for S The extent of the anisotropy
max
of strength is immediately obvious from Table 1,
with an average ratio of S /S i of approxi-
max m n
mately 2. The minimum estimates of Smax and
S. for each hole in which successful field
m1.n
tests were conducted (6067 and 6121) were
employed for the analysis of the field data
from the respective holes, based on the premise
that fractures would initiate at the location
of minimum strength and in recognition of the
relatively small range of corresponding strengths
in each hole.
FIELD
The test pressure records obtained from
holes 6067 and 6121 exhibited characteristics
that allowed them to be broadly grouped into
categories. Corresponding evidence from the
impression packer images obtained from those
tests for which impressions were taken
suggested two categories:
J ENEVER, B WOOLTORTON AND M JOHNSON
11 3
FIXED EXTERNAL PRESSURE, Pe
INTERNAL PRESSURE AT FAILURE, Pi
,.------- FLEXIBLE MEMBRANE CONTAINING OIL
,--------PLASTER TO TRANSFER EXTERNAL PRESSURE TO SAMPLE
----SEALING TAPE
---STEEL SLEEVE TO PREVENT PRESSURE BEING TRANSMITTED TO SAMPLE
HOLE FOR INTERNAL PRESSURIZATION
'------ SAMPLE
---GAP TO ALLOW FOR BENDING OF SLEEVE
>-----STEEL BODY
CRACK
Figure 5. Arrangement for laboratory tests.
Cl & Cz are stress concentration factors
Cl P = circumferential tension due to external pressure
Cz pe = circumferential compression to external pressure
Pi e circumferential tension around perifery of hole due to internal
pressure at failure
S = CIP
e
+ Pi
TABLE 1
Summary of Laboratory Tests
Hole and Case 1
I
Case 2 Failure Mode Case 3 Failure Mode S
Test Fa i 1ure Mode
max
Horizon
(P =0)
Smin
e
Pi = SMin
Pe
Cl
D
Smax
Pe
Cl
Pi
Lower 1imit
. i of S
(MPa) (MPa) (MPaj
(MPa) (MPa) (MPa)
max
(MPa)
6067/1 12.7-16.9
/2 14.5
/4 13.1-22.4 1.5-2.0
/7
10.9-14.5 6.9 0.6 17.2 21.4
/9 12.6-14.6 6.9 0.6 21.4 25.5 1.7-2.0
Minimum approx. 11 MPa approx.
1.9
21MPa
6121/3 8.8-14.0 6.9 0.6 17.5 21. 7 1.6-2.5
/5 10.0-12.4 8.0 0.5 16.8 20.8 1. 7-2.1
/6 7.9- 9.1 8.0 0.5 14.7 18.6 3.4- 1.0- 10.2-12.6 13.6-16.5 1.5-2.4
5.5 0.7
/9 9.2-11.9 8.0 0.5 19.0 22.9 8.3 0.5 16.1 20.3 1.7-2.5
/14 8.8 8.3 0.5 17.0 21.2 2.4
/5,., 11.3-18.4 3.4- 1.0- 11.3-17.2 14.7-21.3 0.8-1.9
6.9 0.6
/12A 9.8-10.5 6.9- 0.6- 17.1-13.1 21.2-17.3 1.6-2.2
8.3 0.5
Minimum approx. 8MPa approx. approx. 14MPa 2.4
19MPa I
114
Category A - vertical or sub-vertical crack
initiation substantially unaffected by specific
incipient flaws, with initial shut-in pressure
reflecting the magnitude of the horizontal
stress field.
Category B - crack initiation obviously
influenced by one or more specific incipient
flaws, with initial shut-in pressure reflecting
the magnitude of the stress component normal to
the orientation of the feature as revealed by
the impression packer image.
with much lower shut-in pressures. In some
instances the pressore records for Category A
and Category B tests showed substantial changes
in shot-in pressure from pressurisation cycle
to cycle, generally with shut-in pressure
decreasing with successive cycles of
pressurisation, presumably in response to the
influence of incipient weaknesses on crack
development. The lower shut-in pressures for
all categories can be expected to approximate
the minimum stress in the region.
The salient data extracted from the
A third category (Category C) can be used pressure records is summarised in Table 2.
to cover tests for which impressions were not Those tests not listed in Table 2 represented
obtained. In some instances Category C tests test horizons that were found to "leak" during
had pressure records exhibiting characteristics preparations for pressurisation. Included in
that suggested they might fall within Category Table 2 is a summary of the interpretation of
A or B. In other instances the Category C the stress field based on Category A and B tests.
test pressure records were distinctly different For both categories of tests the initial shut-in
to either Categoy A or Category B, generally pressure was used for analysis, allowing for
TABLE 2. SUIt1ARY OF FIELD RESULTS
Hole and Depth from Test Peak Shut-in Est. of Min. Est.of Max.Elt.of Orientation Est. of stress
Test Horizon hole collar Category Pressure Pressure a. (MPa) 01 (MPa) 01 (MPa) of 01 normal to
(m)
Pi (MPa) Ranoe orientation of
(MPa) feature (MPa)
~ 0 6 7 / 1 26.0 A 8.16 4.2-3.2 4.2 15.5 25.3 60W of Mg N -
/2 28.7 C 4.93 3.2-4.2 - - - - -
/3 36.0 B 8.02 3.2-6.1 - - - -
3.4 normal to joint
striking 16W of Mg Nand
dipping 50 toward E
/4 38.1 C 6.87 3.1-6.1 - - - - -
/5 43.0 C 2.92 1.5 - - - - -
/6 48.0 C 5.03 1.5-1.7 - - - - -
17 81.3 A 7.89 4.4-3.9 4.4 16.5 25.6 89W of Mg N -
/8 84.2 C 6.12 3.7-3.3 - - -
- -
/9 92.5 B 8.43 3.8-3.4 - - - -
3.8 normal to joint
dipping near vertical
/10 99.1 B 5.17 3.4-2.8 - - - -
3.4 normal to joint
/11 100.8 B 4.96 1.8-1.6 - - - - 1.8 normal to joint
striking 19E of Mg Nand
dipping 50 toward E
6121/1 89. g C 5.10 2.6-2.2 - - - -
/2 86.4 C 9.52 2.2-1.7 - - - - -
/3 82.4 B 10.30 3.4-6.1 - - - -
3.9 normal to joint
/5 71. 5 A 7.62 1.8-1.5 1.8 5.8 16.8 50
0
Wof Mg N -
/6 68.5 A 9.66 2.4-1. 3 2.4 5.5 16.5 26W of Mg N -
/7 65.6 C 6.19 1.1-0.5 - - - - -
/g 58.1 A 7.82 1. 5-0. 7 1.5 4.7 15.7 32W of Mg N -
/10 51.0 B 3.43 0.8-0.4 - - - -
0.8 normal to joint
/11 48.2 C 4.83 0.5-0.3
- - - - -
/14 36.1 B 9.28 4.3-2.4
- - - - 4.3 normal to joint
~ 1 2 1 / 1 A 89-90 C 4.79 1.7-1.4 - - - - -
2A 88-89 C 4.25 0.6-0.4 - - - -
-
3A 87-88 C 2.79 1.8 - - - - -
4A 86-87 C 9.52 2.2-1.7 - - - - -
SA 85-86 B 8.02 4.8-2.8 - - - -
4.8 normal to joint
striking lOW of Mg Nand
6P 84-85 B 8.19 5.1-3.2 - - - -
5.1 normal to 'joint
7A 83-84 C 4.69 1.3-0.8
- -
-
- -
RA
82-83 B 10.3 3.4-6.1 -
- - -
3.9 normal to joint
9A 81-82 C 5.13 0.9-0.3
- - - - -
lOA 80-81 C 1.87 0.2
- - - - -
12A 78-79 B 5.98 2.9-0.2
- - - - 2.9 normal to joint
J ENEVER, B WOOLTORTON AND M JOHNSON 115
the possibility of the orientation of fractures
changing during progressive propagation. In
the case of Category A tests, analysis of the
three limiting cases summarised in Figure 3 was
undertaken, based on the appropriate values of
Sma and S i from Table 1. In all instances
x m n
the solution for Case 3 was found to be
unacceptable leaving the solutions for Cases 1
and 2 to provide minimum and maximum estimates
of 01 respectively.
DISCUSSION
Figure 6 summarises the estimates of the
orientation of 0i derived from the Category A
tests in Table 2, shown in relation to the
locations of the respective test holes. The
agreement between corresponding estimates can
be considered reasonable. The orientation of
the stress field indicated in Figure 6 is in
general agreement with the regional structural
trend for the west coast of Tasmania, and with
the orientation of the horizontal stress field
measured by overcoring nearby at the Renison
Mine (Lang, 1982).
Figure 6 shows a tendency for the estimates
of orientation to reflect the local trends of
the rock fabric (as indicated by the cleavage).
This implies the possibility of the Case 1
DIP [ ORIENTATION Of mAVAGE
\ ...
\I-
= - - - ~ j
Figure 6. Summary of orientation of vertical
fractures reflecting orientation of
major horizontal stress component.
situation in Figure 3 being the appropriate
limiting case on which to base analysis,
consequently waking the lower bound estimates
of the magnitude of 01 in Table 2 the best
estimates.
Figures 7 (a) and (b) summarise the data
contained in Table 2 for holes 6067 and 6121
respectively, including the best estimates of
01 and Oz from Category A tests. The shut-in
pressure ranges recorded for all tests are
shown plotted against the corresponding
locations of the tests, presented on a common
scale of reduced level. The shut-in pressure
ranges for those Category B tests in which
the feature influencing fracture initiation had
a similar orientation to the fractures initiated
in the Category A tests are highlighted. The
initial shut-in pressures in these instances
can be considered as additional estimates of Oz.
In the case of hole 6067 (furthermost from
the influence of topography in proximity to the
power station site), Figure 7(a) suggests an
approximately consistent horizontal stress
field (with depth). This, together with the
relatively high ratio (4:1) of the two
horizontal stress component magnitudes and the
noted consistency of orientation with respect to
the regional structural trend, suggests the
existence of a regional tectonic stress field.
Three tests in hole 6067 had shut-in pressure
ranges considerably less than the other tests,
presumably reflecting the minimum stress
component magnitude at the respective locations.
'Superimposed on Figure 7(a) is a gradient of
the expected overburden pressure based on
depth of cover. It can be speculated that the
low shut-in pressures approximately reflect the
overburden pressure gradient and that the
overburden pressure gradient therefore
represents the profile of minimum stress
magnitude in proximity to hole 6067.
In the case of hole 6121, Figure 7(b)
suggests a more complex situation. The results
of analysis of the Category A tests, and the
estimates of Oz from the Category B tests in
which the features influencing fracture
initiation had a similar orientation to the
fractures initiated in the Category A tests,
suggest a minimum horizontal stress magnitude
increasing with depth from an origin
approximately 40 metres below the surface.
This may well reflect a local destressing in
the nearer surface rock resulting from the fact
that the tunnel alignment in this region is
located within a ridge. The increase in
magnitude of Oz with depth presumably reflects
the decreasing influence of this factor, perhaps
compounded by a stress concentration associated
with the bottoms of the valleys occurring
approximately at invert level.
116
30
Figure 7b. Summary of results for hole 6121.
! oz) from Category A tests
01)
Category B tests with orientation consistent
with Category A tests
6 Oz from Category B tests
A number of tests conducted in hole 6121
exhibited shut-in pressure ranges somewhat
greater than the general trend. In all cases
these tests were associated with fractures
influenced by vertical or sub-vertical features
having substantially different orientations to
the Category A fractures, the shut-in
pressures reflecting a stress component magnitude
between 01 and oz, with the higher values
approximating the magnitude of al. The general
trend evident for 01 in Figure 7(b) suggests
that the maximum horizontal stress component
persists above the level at which the minimum
horizontal stress component has its apparent
origin. This is consistent with the major
component of the regional stress field persisting,
at a reduced magnitude, in the direction of the
maximum topographic slope.
A number of tests conducted in hole 6121
exhibited shut-in pressure ranges significantly
below the trend for oz, and below the over-
burden pressure gradient based on depth of
cover, implying a minimum stress in proximity
to hole 6121 substantially less than the
overburden pressure. This factor, taken
together with the significantly different and
generally lower horizontal stress field
revealed in hole 6121 compared to hole 6067,
points to the likelihood of the complex
topography in proximity to hole 6121 having
significantly influenced the stress field in
this region. The relatively low minimum stress
magnitude is generally consistent with
expectations based on an understanding of the
distribution of stresses existing in slopes in
the presence of a regional horizontal stress
field (Worotnicki, 1969, Zienkiewicz et al. 1966).
The apparent existence of a relatively
destressed region in proximity to hole 6121,
particularly the possibility of a minimum stress
less than the assumed overburden pressure, is of
significance in the selection of a limit for the
extent of steel lining. The significance is
illustrated diagramatica11y in Figure 8, in
which the balance between the minimum rock
cover required to resist the hydraulic
pressure in service and the actual cover can
be visualised for the region of the power
tunnel. On the basis of depth of cover, Figure
8 implies the need for a steel liner to
extend some distance upstream from the location
of hole 6121. However, on the basis of the
minimum stress magnitude relative to overburden
pressure indicated by Figure 7(b) for hole
6121, it can be expected that the steel liner
will have to extend even further upstream than
indicated by the direct depth of cover criterion.
In recognition of the potential significance
of the results obtained from the initial
RELEVANCE TO LINING REQUIREMENT DESIGN
INVERT LEVEL
SHUT-IN PRESSURE, MPa
50 100
..... .
INVERT LEVEL
\APPRDXIMATE TREND OF MINIMUM HORIZONTAl.
STRESS COMPONENT MAGNITUDE
OVERBURDEN PRESSURE GRADIENT
150
.-------.------,----------, SURFACE
OVERBURDEN PRESSURE GRADIENT
Summary of results for hole 6067,
SHUT-IN PRESSURE, MPa
5-0 10-0 15-0
.------.------.,--------,SURFACE
o
140
150
110
120
130
-J
ILl
90
>
ILl
-J
Cl
BO ILl
U
=>
Cl
ILl
70 a:
60
-
50
40
0
240
230
220
210
E_
200
-J
ILl
>
ILl
190
-J
Cl
ILl
u
180 =>
Cl
ILl
a:
170
160
Figure 7a.
, '7
w
z
TUNNEL INVERT lEVEL
rH 6121
OH 6067
1
_

__ --.;JRl O.
EXTENT OF LINER ON IlASlS OF MINIMUM ROCK STRESS DYERBUIlOEN
PRESSURE RATIO INDICATED IN 0 M6121 AT INVERT LEVEL
HORIZONTAl. DISTANCE 1,.<I,.s'
g
e
I
8

gi
8 g g 8
g;!
::

q

'"

:0

Figure 8. Summary of information relevant to choice of a limit for pressure lining.
investigation described here, a more detailed
programme of in situ stress measurement is
planned, to be conducted from the tunnel when
excavated. A mathematical modelling programme
is currently underway to examine the stress
distribution attributable to the topography in
proximity to the tunnel, based on the measured
stress field.
CONCLUSIONS
1. The hydraulic fracture stress measurement
programme conducted in relation to the King
River Tunnel has provided an initial under-
standing of the stress regime in proximity to
the tunnel alignment. The horizontal stress
field revealed by the measurement programme
shows reasonable agreement with the structural
trend for the west coast of Tasmania and with
independent measurements of the stress field in
the region.
2. Remote from the influence of local
topography in the vicinity of the power station
site, the horizontal stress field appears to be
of significant magnitude and highly directional,
with a consistent ratio of the two stress
component magnitudes of approximately 4:1. The
indications are that the minimum stress
magnitude is defined by the overburden pressure
gradient based on depth of cover.
3. Closer to the power station site, and
presumably subject to the influence of the
local topography, the horizontal stress field
appears to be of generally lower magnitude.
The indications are that the minimum stress
magnitude is less than the overburden pressure
based on depth of cover.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to thank the H.E.C.
for their support of the work and for their
permission to publish this paper. The authors
acknowledge the valuable assistance rendered by
H.E.C. personnel on site. The contribution made
by CSIRO personel on site (A. Dean) and in the
laboratory (H. Kiechle) is gratefully
acknowledged.
REFERENCES
Bergh-Christensen, J. 1986. Rock stress
measurements for the design of a 965 metre
head unlined pressure shaft. Proc. of the
International Symposium on Rock Stress and
Rock Stress Measurements, p.583-590, Centek
Publishers, Lulea.
Enever, J.R., Hattersley, P. and Wooltorton, B.
1986. In situ rock stress measurements
using the hydraulic fracture technique for
the proposed Sydney Ocean Outfalls Project.
Trans. of the Institution of Engs. Australia,
Civil Eng. Vol. CE28 No. 1, Jan, p.1-8.
Lang, A.M. 1982. The application of rock
uechanics touining at Renison Limited. Proc.
Underground Operators Conference. Australasian
Inst. Min. Metall., West Coast Tas. Branch
p. 33-39.
11 8
Vik, G. and Tundbridge, L. 1986. Hydraulic
fracturing - A simple tool for controlling
the safety of unlined high pressure shafts
and headrace tunnels. Proc. of the
International Symposium on Rock Stress and
Rock Stress Measurements, p59l-S97, Centek
Publishers, Lulea.
Worotnicki, G. 1969. Effect of topography on
ground stress. Proc. Rock Mechanics Symp.
Sydney Division, Inst. of Eng. Aust., and
Sydney Branch, Australasian I n s t ~ Min. Metall.
p. 71-86.
Zienkiewicz, D.C. Cheung, Y.K. and Stagg, K.G.
1966. Stresses in anisotropic media with
particular reference to problems in rock
mechanics, Jnl. of Strain Analysis, Vol. 1,
No. 2. p. 172-182.

Tunel

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Tunel

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE APPLICATION OF HYDRAULIC FRACTURING

TO THE ASSESSMENT OF LINING

You might also like