Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword or section
Like this
14Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Tunelling Management by Design 7-11

Tunelling Management by Design 7-11

Ratings: (0)|Views: 689 |Likes:
Published by Hakan_KURU

More info:

Published by: Hakan_KURU on Mar 31, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

10/19/2013

pdf

text

original

 
Chapter 5
 
Design of the tunnel project
Design—the continuous thread.
5.1
 
Options in tunnel design
5.1.1
 
The nature of the ground 
Chapter 1 describes some of the developments in tunnelling which havecontributed to the options available at the present day. For any specificproject, the selection must be made against the known and suspectedfeatures of the ground, also of other relevant aspects such as access and localavailability of tunnelling traditions and skills. The method needs to beconsidered in relation to tolerance or adaptability in respect of the variabilityof the ground (seeChapter 6). Traditionally, in the days of simpler tunnelling techniques described inChapter 1, the ground was subdivided, for the sake of defining the approach tobe made, into ‘rock’ and ‘soft ground’. Now that it is possible to learn, whereappropriate, considerable information about the ground, not only in descriptiveterms but also in behavioural terms, e.g. features associating stress and strain ina time dependent manner, possibly the basis of the ruling constitutive equations,the subdivision from the viewpoint of tunnel stability is more fundamental: 1. Ground to be treated as a continuum, i.e. all forms of soil andincompetent rock. Incompetent rock is defined as rock which willnaturally and rapidly deform to close an unsupported cavity (say,
R
c
<2where
R
c
is defined below). The question of time is important since allrocks deform with time (although rates of deformation of familiar rocksat normal pressures and temperatures are imperceptibly slow), saltbodies being amongst the most readily deformable.2. Ground to be treated as a discontinuum, i.e. rock whose behaviour isdominated, in relation to tunnel stability, by movement along jointsbetween discrete blocks.
© 2000 Alan Muir Wood
 
Figure 5.1
Factors contributing to conceptual design.
Figure 5.2 
The synthetic and analytical approaches to rock mass modelling (after Hudson 1993).
© 2000 Alan Muir Wood
 
Occasionally, competent massive rock is so little jointed as to presentno stability problem. More taxing of ingenuity is the jointed,relatively weak, rock whose treatment needs to consider the rocksimultaneously as a continuum and as a discontinuum. Categorisationis affected by the relationship between tunnel size and joint spacing(Hoek and Brown 1980). Where choice exists, the position,orientation, shape and direction of tunnel construction should takeaccount of the rock structure and
in situ
stress tensor. Interbeddedrocks, e.g. alternating mudrocks and siltstones, may appear to form acontinuum but the effect of changed stress patterns as a result of tunnelling may induce cleavage along bedding planes with localfracturing and instability. The special needs for support, or foradaptation of tunnel profile, should be considered for suchcircumstances. Whatever may be the features of the tunnel to bedesigned, the approach should include these elements: 1.
Experience,
incorporating features of empiricism based on anunderstanding of ground characteristics and on successful practices infamiliar or similar ground.2.
Reason,
using analytical solutions, simple or more complex as thesituation may demand, based on an acceptable ‘ground model’ (seeAppendix 5F).3.
Observation
of the behaviour of the tunnel during construction,developing into monitoring with systematic predesigned modificationwhere a feature of Observational Design (Section 2.7) is to be adopted. This approach is illustrated byFigure 5.1, recognising that points 1, 2 and 3are complementary, contributing to the optimal approach to the particularcircumstances rather than competitive techniques of tunnel design. However,the mix will depend greatly upon the circumstances. For a traditional form of tunnelling in familiar ground, reliance on experience will predominate (zoneA in Figure 5.1); the design of a tunnel in a particularly sensitive area willdepend upon a reasoned design combined with the adoption of thetechniques of Observational Design (Section 2.7)and will thus lie nearerzone B of Figure 5.1. Hudson (1993) illustrates (Figure 5.2) an approachtowards a ‘ground model’, with the objective of striking the greatest degreeof proximity between the ‘top down’ and the ‘bottom up’ models, discussedin Appendix 5F.Where a specific problem of stability lends itself to analysis, resort may bemade to the Limit Theorems of the theory of plasticity (confusion may becaused by those who use the expressions ‘upper bound’ and ‘lower bound’more loosely to define high and low estimates of the measures needed toensure stability or safety): 
© 2000 Alan Muir Wood

Activity (14)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
YS_Ingenieros liked this
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads
Yahdi Azzuhry liked this
srosales33 liked this
최상익 liked this
st27383 liked this
9141029447 liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->