NATM How to reduce risks and improve safety

N. Ayaydin IGT - Consulting Engineers Geotechnik Und Tunnelbau

ABSTRACT: Safety in structural engineering is determined by well-defined loads and by proven parameters of the structure. For tunnelling design and construction we have to deal with a wide spread of ground conditions, not exactly determined parameters and mostly unknown loads. Adaptable tunnelling methods provide a great number of measures to improve safety and to achieve an economic construction. This flexibility can lead to some risks and reduction of safety during construction, if an adequate management system is not established. The aim must be to eliminate possible hazards and to identify remaining risks at the design stage and to plan control and management measures for construction work.

1 INTRODUCTION No tunneling project or method can be without some level of risk having to be managed. Even the most careful investigations usually cannot define the ground conditions to achieve a design confidence level comparable to structural design conditions. Flexible tunnelling methods - as "New Austrian Tunnelling Method" (NATM) - provide a number of possibilities for adapting tunnel excavation and support measures for a wide field of ground behaviour. This flexibility at one hand leads to economical benefits for the project, but at the other hand to some risks and reduction of safety during construction. The aim must be to eliminate possible hazards and to identify remaining risks at the design stage and to plan control and management measures for construction work. It is well known, that exact determination of safety for tunnelling works during construction is not possible. First of all we have to check the probability of risks and the consequences for a project, considering all circumstances of the project. 2. GENERAL CONDITIONS FOR NATM Already in this first stage of the design process it is necessary to have a special focus on the chosen method if it is NATM. For NATM is essential: High level of design experience in this method

An integrated approach should be taken for the design of permanent and temporary works. - Design should consider the whole process of tunnel construction. - Designer should be closely involved during construction works and monitoring. - Contractual agreements with contractor should take full account to the flexibility of the method and to special organization on site. - The safety depends on monitoring and interpretation of data on site. Design should d e t e r m i n e t h e m onitoring procedure and necessary actions. - Experience of contractor and his staff in this method and sufficient resources in terms of plant and material. - Geotechnical decisions on site should not made by staff, who are mainly involved with administration, contractual and economical matters. If one the above mentioned conditions cannot be ensured, the client can decide if he will take a higher level of risk or choose another tunnelling method.
-

3. DESIGN CONCEPT Based on the geotechnical expectation model, the design specifies the support and construction procedures for the different geotechnical sections of the tunnel. The design contains elements that can only be changed by the designer in the case of changed ground conditions and elements that can be adjusted by the site organization (Engineer and/or Contractor). The site organization is not allowed to reduce the designed measures below the minimum

requirements stipulated. This concept is called "framework design". For design concept we have to differ three g eneral categories of tunnels.

The classical methods measuring deformations (convergences) with tape extensometers has many disadvantages. Convergence readings only provide relative displacements between two points. Therefore its not possible to determine the real deformation of the tunnel shape. Measurement with tape extensometers are interfering (disturbing) the tunnelling works, so usually the measurements section are at large distance and the intervals are long. Past 10 years the development of surveying techniques have opened new possibilities to enhance the performance of tunnel monitoring. These techniques allow the determination coordinates of targets fixed on tunnel lining with high accuracy. The automatic and easy collection and processing of survey date allows a dense spacing of sections (usually 10 m) and the construction works are not influenced.

Fig.1 Degree of flexibility depending on depth an environment of the tunnel In deep tunnels, when the knowledge of the ground conditions is poor and where we mainly have to deal with stress release, controlled displacements must be allowed to build economically. Reaction Time for setting additional measures is given. Thus the majority of decisions will be taken at the site. In an urban environment (with low overburden ) however, the avoidance or minimization of settlements are essential for design work. In this case, the power of decision for the site organisation to influence support measures will be very limited. Poor confinement and strain-sensitive soils may cause sudden load changes to shallow tunnels. The framework design has to consider this by suitable reserves. Therefore, support of the tunnel circumference will be mainly defined by the designer, while some authority is given to the job site for the establishment of measures in front of the face, face support and construction sequence. This paper deals with those conditions at shallow tunnels. Two examples will show, one with a not adequate management system, when a collapse occurred and another one when a new management system was successful. The safety depends on quality of monitoring, of monitoring and interpretation of date on site. Some brief explanations will show state-of-the-art of interpretation of displacements. 4. INTERPRETATION OF MONITORED DISPLACEMENTS

Fig.2 Schematic example of lines of influence The visualisation of data can performed as "time history diagrams", "vector plots in sections" or (displacement versus chainage) "lines of influence". Time history diagrams and vector plot are well known methods. A line of influence (Line 1, Fig. 2) is a spline function connecting the displacements in a sequence of monitoring sections at a certain time. In case of homogeneous conditions the lines of influence would produce onion-shell-type figures (see excavation steps 1-4 , F i g . 2 ) . U s e f u l information is provided by a trend-line (Line 2, Fig. 2) connecting the displacements a chosen position relative to the tunnel excavation. For instance, the trend of displacements at constant distance (d) behind the face.

5. CASE HISTORY 1: SAFETY MANAGEMENT FAILED During the bench-excavation of a railway tunnel a sudden collapse happened on June 30, 1992, with a break through to the surface. Nobody was harmed by this accident, but the damage was about 4 Million $ and a time loss of 3 months.

Fig.5 Geological long. section collapsed area

Fig.3 Crater caused by tunnel collapse

The collapse occurred during bench excavation chainage 655 where a niche was to be excavated also. The top heading (with a temporary invert arch) was about 150 m far from this point. Before we discuss the events directly related to the tunnel collapse, we should recapitulate the top heading excavation between chainage 640 m und 660 m.

Fig.4 Geological cross section- collapsed area

Fig.6 sudden increase of settlement of left top heading footing We consider the settlement of the left top heading footing (fig. 6). Until May 30th the development of settlement was regular and normal. The magnitude of settlement two diameters behind the face reached 30 to 40 mm because of the high weathering of the soil. On May 31st a sudden increase of settlement was registered with 26 mm on the first day. Compared to

the normal conditions this was an increase of about 15 mm. The top heading proceeded and soon this small incident was forgotten. At the time when the bench excavation approached chainage 590 m, people were aware of the relatively high magnitude of settlements resulting from top heading excavation in the order of about 1/250 of the tunnel diameter. The influence of the settlement on the loads acting on the tunnelling and the surrounding ground was however not understood. When the bench hit the highly weathered region increased settlements occurred corresponding to what had happened in the top heading (fig. 7)

Fig. 8: settlements of the left footing after excavation of the top heading and additional settlements from bench excavation until June 28th the critical situation and recapitulate the whole history of defo rmations in this region. Especially considering the niche excavation in this area, alarm bells should ring on tunnel site. Additional measures like grounting or piling under top heading footing, intense bolting of bench walls, pulling the invert closer and temporary canceling of niche excavation would have been adequate reactions. Why did the site staff (experienced engineers) not understood this risky situation? Supervisor of the client and site engineer of the contractor are involved with lot of administrative, contractual, organizational and economical matters. There was nobody, who could investigate enough time to interpret the monitoring data and the designer was not directly involved with the site. This experience lead the owner to discuss the site management and to perform a new organisation system. 6 GEOTECHNICAL SAFETY MANAGEMENT

Fig. 7: Settlements of the left footing after excavation of the top heading and additional settlements from bench excavation until June 24th Already at this stage the ground had evidently been close to failure due to increased loading. Latest on June 24th the settlement peak around ch. 630 m should have been understood as a warning and a reminder to the critical deformation development and ground behaviour during top heading excavation. Remember that in this zone the top heading excavation caused on unexplained settlement of the left footing. Four days later, when the approached ch. 650 (Fig. 8) was a further chance to understand

Fig. 9 Organization chart for geotechnical safety management

-

The Supervising Engineer The background to this paper is a contractual context where the Supervising Engineer is the Client's representative at the job site with the power of instruction to implement the design, control the quality and measure the quantity of the works. The Geotechnical Engineer A t t h e job site there is one experienced geotechnical engineer, present at every working day. This usually requires shift working of two engineers. The job of the Geotechnical Engineer is to analyse and interpret the monitoring results and assess the encountered ground conditions. The Geotechnical Engineer - usually a civil engineer with structural understanding determines any deviation from the expectation model together with the Geologist. Thus the Geotechnical Engineer constitutes the last element of the design process and naturally has a common interest with the designer.

For good communication between the Geotechnical Engineer and the Design company its recommended that Geotechnical Engineer comes from the Design Company. The Geotechnical Engineer must be independent of the economic and time forces of the construction and may focus completely on his job. His suggestions must primarily consider safety and stability, not cost. However, the Geotechnical Engineer has no power of instruction. This lies in the hands of the Supervising Engineer, which usually has to seek agreement with the Contractor. The Geotechnical Engineer interprets and communicates the result of his analysis to the Engineer in a way that allows the determination of suitable measures. In case the Geotechnical Engineer does not receive sufficient attention or respect for his suggestions, he has the power to approach the Client's Project Management through the Designer. The Project Management has the power of instruction to the Supervising -Engineer, if required. The External Expert One external expert shall be involved in the Geotechnical assessment and interpretation of monitoring data. The expert receives the data from the Geotechnical Engineer in regular

intervals, usually by e-mail, and makes his own interpretation and assessment of stability and communicates the result to the job site. The job also involves a comprehensive exchange of opinions and experience with the Geotechnical Engineer. Geotechnical Monitoring division Effective work of the Geotechnical Engineer requires a very high standard of the monitoring data and of the tools to evaluate the data. Today, 95 % of the monitoring information comes from precise surveying of the tunnel lining displacements and of the surface settlements. The accuracy in the range of 1 mm and the reliability of the survey data is mandatory for the useful interpretation by the Geotechnical Engineer. The survey data contain a large amount of information that can only be of use, if the data are processed into suitable diagrams that allow easy identification of ground behaviour changes in time and space. This requires in addition to the common time histories particularly diagrams of displacement versus chainage "influence lines" and the full development of surface settlement. These are minimum conditions to put the Geotechnical Engineer into the position to issue early warning of unfavourable changes of the ground and tunnel behaviour. The Geologist The existing geological situation of each round should be mapped in cross and longitudinal sections. The synopsis of the monitoring data with the geological conditions is essential. This can only be performed if the geological information is presented in a comprehensive view, and is aimed at highlighting the properties of the ground that are of influence to the construction. That means that the documentation of the status of the ground is more important than the lithological conditions.

Information Flow and Reporting: The relevant information from the construction, the geological documentation and the monitoring is collected by the Geotechnical Engineer and subjected to a comprehensive evaluation and interpretation. The scope of the Geotechnical Engineers includes the following areas: - Comparison of the encountered ground and groundwater conditions with the expectation model; - Analysis of the surface settlements regarding extent, inclinations and settlement through;

Analysis of tunnel displacements regarding extent, time and spatial trends; Analysis of tunnel displacements regarding compatibility with the expected strains in the shotcrete lining, possibly determination of shotcrete stresses Interpretation of deformation patterns in the ground and verification of the useful application of support elements, number and orientation of rock bolts, support at and ahead of the face.

Level l:

The Geotechnical Engineer delivers his interpretation to the Supervising Engineer, to the Contractor and the External Expert. It is useful to make a short daily report with selected diagrams, which support the assessment of the Geotechnical Engineer. A detailed geotechnical explanation and a proposal for corrective measures are required at those sections that show a deviation from the normal behaviour. At regular time intervals a "Geotechnical meeting" is held, where the findings from the construction, the geology and monitoring are presented to a bigger forum and discussed comprehensively. These meetings serve to digest the recent experience, to focus the attention of all involved people to risk, and to decide on adjustments for the tunnel sections ahead. A detailed report is delivered at the meeting. The framework design concept requires that the given minimum measures cannot be reduced by the job site organization. In case the encountered ground conditions are persistently better than predicted and assumed in the expectation model the Geotechnical Engineer is required to present the situation to the Designer with all details of the encountered ground conditions and the interpretation of the monitoring data. He may also bring his justified proposals for reductions and changes in the support. A change of the framework design can only be made by the Designer and requires the approval and clearance by the Project Management. This procedure is to make sure that the support installed is always in accordance with the structural and geotechnical considerations of the Designer. Management procedures must be set up at the beginning of the project to clarify the responsibilities and procedures with regard to the geotechnical safety management and to establish a warning system. The warning system shall be adjusted to the boundary conditions of the project, and may for example contain the following levels: Level 0: System behaviour within the expected bandwidth, "normal behaviour"

Deviation from normal behaviour, corrective phase Level 2: Danger ahead, the potential effect is confined to the job site, crisis handling Level 3: Danger ahead, the potential effect may go beyond the job site and concern the public or third party, crisis handling The Client and the Contractor may have considerably diverging priorities in case of a crisis. A p r o-active harmonization of procedures and clarification of responsibilities is therefore particularly important. The decision on immediate measures in the crisis is within the duty of the Supervising Engineer and the Contractor. Changed procedures or measures for the further continuation of the excavation, however, require the involvement of the Designer and a modified framework design. 7. CASE HISTORY 2: SUCCESSFUL MANAGEMENT AVOIDS GROUND FAILURE A railway tunnel with an excavation cross section of 1 2 5 m2 is constructed in densely layered, diagenetically compacted fine and medium grained sand. This sands have often a distinctly sheard structure with steep fissures. The overburden was 10 m to max. 50 m. Between station 430 and 450 at an overburden of 15 to 17 m, displacement values of the top heading continuously increased. Round lengths in this section had to be decreased from 1.2 to 1 and later to 0.85 m. Additionally, the thickness of the shotcrete lining was increased stepwise from 300 to 400 mm. After about 2 m3 loose sand had trickled into the left side of the top heading at station 447, and on the basis of findings from several probe drillings, it was clear that the rock surrounding the left side was badly fractured. Furthermore, there were indications that the drive was heading into this fractured zone. Within the fault zone up to 100 mm wide sand-filled fissures, as well as several serried fractures with dislocations of up to 2 m were found. The zone intersects the tunnel at an acute angle. As a result of these factors, it could not be excluded that larger deformations would induce sudden shearing to the surface. At an overburden of 17 m this would have resulted in considerable increase of load on the lining.

fracturing, to consolidate the shell and invert bedding, and to finally achieve a stabilisation. For the resumption of excavation, a new top heading invert design was developed and adapted to the given situation on the basis of mutually interactive co-operation of all parties concerned, both on-site and in the design office. The modified design of the temporary invert provided for massive underpinning and proper ring closure in the top heading.

Fig. 10 Settlement of left footing during top heading exavation As an immediate measure for the ongoing excavation, injection pipes were installed at the sidewall and ahead of the left footing area of the heading. Anchoring of the remaining "more rigid ground" wedge between the tunnel and the fault was also increased. Subsequently, wider elephant footings and a reinforced top heading invert were used. Despite these additional measures, the deformation increased considerably from station 450 to 470. Furthermore, due to the obvious overloading of the ground in the footing area, displacement of the lining hardly stabilised. A further settlement of the footing would have resulted in an additional settlement of the lining, thereby increasing the load. The hence necessary reassessment of the situation led to the conclusion that the supplementary measures taken in the already excavated tunnel would not suffice, and excavation was stopped at station 473 to implement additional measures. As an immediate safety measure against ground failure in the left footing area, the temporary invert was anchored down along the footing. Settlement was primarily counteracted by underpinning the shell with shotcrete invert ribs, working backwards from station 473 to station 440, and thus achieving a redistribution of forces. For a proper redistribution of the lining forces, supports for the ribs were cut into the already completed lining of the top heading. The reinforced shotcrete invert ribs were installed intermittently. The invert ribs were 1.4 m wide, the shotcrete averaged 400 mm in thickness. Extensive grouting in areas where the invert ribs were already firm served to decrease the load -induced ground

Fig. 11 Remedial measures in first fault zone: Invert anchoring and shotcrete ribs.

In the remaining excavation, this modified invert was again implemented at further two fault zones encountered in the section between chainage 604 and 753 over a distance of 149 m. Due to the well balanced construction of the top heading as well as the extensive supplementary measures implemented in the fault zone between station 450 and station 490, the following bench and invert excavation could be carried out without difficulties. 9. CONCLUSION With an appropriate geotechnical safety management, experienced staff and with a consistent process from the design to the construction phase risks could be minimized using the NATM. It is necessary that contractual agreements with contractor, designer and engineer take full account to the flexibility of the method and to the shown organisation on site. Therefore it is the Client's duty to set up the guidelines, specify the requirement and establish a geotechnical safety management on site. 10. REFERENCES Huber, G., Junker, A.& Lemmerer, J. Shallow Tunnelling in fault zones Felsbau 16; Nr. 2, 1998 Vavrovsky, G.M & Ayaydin, N. Bedeutung der vortriebsorientierten Auswertung geotechnischer Messungen im oberflchennahen Tunnelbau. Forschung & Praxis, Band 22, 1988, Dsseldorf-Germany Vavrovsky, G.M.; Schubert, P. Advanced analysis Monitored Displacements Proceeding 8th, Int. Congr. Rock Mechanics 1995, Tokyo Vavrovsky, G. M. Tunnelbau im Spannungsfeld zwischen Sicherheit und Wirtschaftlichkeit Bauingenieur 72, 1997 Vavrovsky, G. M., Ayaydin, N. & Schubert, P. Geotechnisches Sicherheitsmanagement im ober-flchennahen Tunnelbau Felsbau 19, Nr. 5, 2001

Fig. 12 Modified top heading design. The measures taken allowed a successful resumption and continuation of the top heading excavation in effectively primarily sheared ground (Figure 13). The modified invert was implemented in the first fault zone from chainage 473 to chainage 490 over a distance of 17 m.

Fig. 13 Results of settlement measurement after modified design