This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

Welcome to Scribd! Start your free trial and access books, documents and more.Find out more

(1997) 30 (3), 121-127

Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering 9 Springer-Verlag 1997 Printed in Austria

**Effect of Tunnel Depth on Modulus of Deformation of Rock Mass
**

By

**M. Verman 1, B. Singh 2, M. N. Viladkar 2, and J. L. Jethwa 3
**

l Advanced Technology and Engineering Services, AIMIL Ltd., New Delhi, India 2 Department of Civil Engineering, University of Roorkee, Roorkee, India 3 Central Mining Research Institute Regional Centre, Nagpur, India

Summary

Deformability of rock mass significantly influences its behaviour and is, tberelore, an important consideration for the design of underground openings. The modulus of deformation of rock mass is, however, normally obtained from expensive and time-consuming uniaxial jacking tests, whose results often have a large scatter. An empirical correlation has, therefore, been proposed for a quick and inexpensive preliminary estimation of the modulus of deformation of rock mass on the basis of field instrumentation carried out in tunnels in India.

**1. Empirical Correlation for Modulus of Deformation
**

1.1 Back Analysis of Instrumentation Results

Field instrumentation was carried out in several Indian tunnels (Table 1) to obtain the data of support pressures and tunnel closures at various tunnel sections exhibiting elastic ground behaviour. The data were then back-analysed to obtain the modulus of deformation of rock mass using the following expression applicable for a circular opening driven through a homogeneous, isotropic and linearly elastic rock mass under hydrostatic stress field:

Ua/a = (1 + v)(po - p i ) / E d

where,

(1)

ua = radial tunnel closure, a = radius of tunnel opening, v = Poissoffs ratio of rock mass, Ed = modulus of deformation of rock mass, Po -= in-situ stress magnitude ( = rH, for hydrostatic stress field), r = unit weight of rock mass,

25. so does the RMR. Thus. proposed by Bieniawski (1973) in Fig. are also changed according to the rock mass quality. one may use Eq.122 M. Table 1.2 Effect of Depth on Modulus of Deformation of Rock Mass The back-analysed values of the modulus of deformation indicated its dependence on the height of overburden. Assuming a hydrostatic stress field (the hydrostatic solution is being used as an average even though all of the data may not have been obtained from a hydrostatic stress field). all the tunnel sections considered for the present study were excavated using the drill-and-blast method of excavation. from which the following correlation may be obtained for modulus of deformation of dry rock masses. Ed: Ea = 10(RMR-Z0)/38GPa (2) (correlation coefficient = 91%). Moreover. Po was considered equal to 7H and its values for different tunnel sections were accordingly obtained. The back-analysed values of the modulus of deformation are plotted against RMR (Rock Mass Rating). The damage tendency of blasting may be different for different rock mass qualities which could be reflected by the field data.1) with RMR.. Therefore. such as blast pattern. and Pi = support pressure (short-term). 1. Thus. 1. Mehrotra (1992) also obtained nearly the same correlation from uniaxial jacking tests on dry rock masses. To account for the effect of the height of overburden (or . Verman et al. An overview of tunnels Tunnel Depth of Purpose instrumented sections (m) 225-295 197 225-467 100-200 50 Instruments used Tunnel closure Support pressure Method of excavation Tehri Tunnels Lower Periyar Tunnel Maneri-Uttarkashi Tunnel Maneri Stage-II Tunnel Bagur-Navile Tunnel Hydropower Tape extensometer Loadcell Hydropower Tape extensometer Load cell Hydropower Tape extensometer Loadcell Hydropower Tape extensometer Loadcell Irrigation Tape extensometer Load cell Drill and blast Drill and blast Drill and blast Drill and blast Drill and blast H = height of overburden. Section 1. (2) with confidence in poor rock conditions also. The value of v was taken as 0. to correlate Ed (obtained from the field data. type of explosive etc. charge. only the post-blasting RMR was used. As shown in Table 1. the damage tendency of blasting is not likely to differ significantly in various rock mass qualities as the critical blasting parameters. if the field data (used to obtain Ed) reflects the damage tendency of blasting.

10(RMR-20)/38GPa. From Eq.3. Since the attempt here is to derive a depth-dependent correlation for the modulus of deformation. therefore be written as: E d = 0. in Fig. (2) in the following manner: E d = f . f = ~0(RMR_:0)/38 . from which the following correlation has been obtained: f = 0. This is because if the modulus of deformation is proportional to the depth. it would have been more appropriate to use a stress-dependent solution in place of the linear elastic solution given by Eq. (6) (5) 1. (1).3 H a. a correction factor.16 to 0.Effect of Tunnel Depth on Modulus of Deformation 123 2o a b c d e - Tehri Tunnels L o w e r Periyar T u n n e l Maneri-Uttarkashi Tunnel Maneri Stage-II Tunnel Bagur-Navile Tunnel e u 8 N E d ~1 a 11 3~ (RMR-20)/38 Ed = 10 . = 9 1 % ) 4~ RMR Fig. f. (5) and (6) but not the main argument. however. then it is proportional to the stress also. 10 (RMR 2~ where H is in meters. f. (3) Ed (4) The correction factor. (3).3 Effect of Stress-dependent Modulus of Deformation Equation (6) has been arrived at on the basis of the linear elastic solution given by Eq. Equation (3) may. was introduced in Eq. H. where o~ = 0. C o e f f . A stress-dependent solution would normally require . 1. affect the absolute value in Eqs. A stress-dependent solution will. is plotted against the height of overburden. Correlation between RMR and modulus of deformation of rock mass depth of tunnel). 2. and H > 50m.3 H a. 1. (Corr.

600 2.200 2. (RMR-20)/38 f = Ed/lO r- 0.0255 MPa/m. o i" . for various tunnel depths in Table 2. le. (1) has been used to arrive at the linear elastic displacement (as a ratio of tunnel radius). .2 po) ~ MPa (7) For the above values of the in situ stress.500 61218241.800 2. (6).100 1. ill I .600 3.900 3915211. Po Po Po Po Po = = = = = 1. H. the following corresponding values of RMR and o~ have been considered: RMR = 31 and ~ = 0.500 3. which have been performed by Referee (1995).100 2.500 2.3H r Height of Overburden..75 MPa at H -----500m. In this case.700 2. 2. are summarised below: Using an average value of unit weight of rock mass. ~ = 0.3 Upper b o u n d . .250 51117231.800 2814201.200 1.000 1.700 3. (rings) indicates that the solution is calculated iteratively over several rings of radii.300 2.02 MPa at H = 40 m 2. . I t II P~ 0. The calculations.2MPa at H = 4 0 0 m 12.900 2.750 . f = 0.3 Substituting these values in Eq.000 41016221. E d = 584 (39.1 MPa at H = 200 m 10.400 3.400 2.16 L o w e r b o u n d . The term E d . f = 0.000 2.rm) 400 500 Fig. sd.124 z M. it has been calculated over 38 rings of radii as follows: 1713191. Eq. Correctionfactor for effect of depth on modulusof deformationof rock mass a numerical method.3H J Pz 3 r.04 Mpa at H = 80 m 5.300 1. Referring to the subsequent Section 2. This is compared with the stressdependent displacement (as a ratio of tunnel radius). Verman et al.

Ed = 0.95 3528 5. Results of linear elastic and stress-dependent solutions H (m) Po (MPa) E~ .75 times the displacement obtained using a stress-dependent solution for various values of the in-situ stress. in Eq. .23 0.15 0.000 2 7 .4. therefore. A = displacement obtained from a linear elastic solution.74 3.75 1708-3771 0.5. It may be seen from Table 2 that the displacement obtained using a linear elastic solution is nearly 0.v)(po --Pi)/f' "Ed where (8) Ed = Modulus of deformation of rock mass at a given depth far away from the opening.4..4 H a . and B = displacement obtained from a stress-dependent solution. (Elast) (MPa) le le/sd 40 1 874-1770 80 2 1027-2170 200 5 1309-2850 400 10 1601-3528 125 500 12. crr.6.~ GPa GPa.15. E d = 0. f ' 9 E d represents the stress-dependent modulus of deformation.000 38 .8. (rings) (MPa) sd Ej .500 3 3 . These depend on the radial stress. . at the centre of the inner and outer rings).73 2 5 .79 3771 0. f ' . . Thus.94 1770 1.25.000 The range of values of Ed . H a .30.4.75.12.10.2crr)~ MPa.000 2 8 . .05 and 27. Equation (6) may.3 H a .73 4.75. f" or. will take care of the stressdependency of the modulus of deformation: Ua/a = (1 4.000 3 6 . f~ = 0. f ' = 0.000 37 . be rewritten as.5 (i.20 0.000 31 . .750 3 4 .7.250 3 2 .000 2 9 . This means that the introduction of a correction factor. .99 2850 4. (9) .56 2170 2.000 3 0 .4. Therefore. 10 (RMR-20)/38 GPa E d = ( 0 .000 2 6 . . f l = A/B.10 (RMR-.75 1.10 (aMR-2~ Substituting.71 0.Effect of Tunnel Depth on Modulus of Deformation Table 2. and are given by E d = 584 (39.74 2.62 0.000 35 . .e.20. . (rings) given is for the value 1. (1) in the following manner. 3 / f ' ) .

very poor to poor rock mass). Verman eta|. 1975.e. to suggest that a) the elasticity modulus increases with the confining pressure and has a relationship similar to Eq.. 2.126 M. E r.. Brown et al. Conclusions Based on the results of the field instrumentation carried out in several Indian tunnels. brittle rock materials. brittle rock masses. and b) this pressure dependency. Such situations. however. the value of c~ is lower than 0.e. The increase with confining pressure of the modulus of elasticity is. 1989. . (9) is such that Ee ~ 0 as H---* 0. reflected in the value of c~. making the correlation inapplicable to situations where the height of overburden is less than say 50 m. (6). Santarelli and Brown. The value of a varies between 0 and 1.16. due to the effect of the confining pressure. of the modulus of elasticity is more pronounced in the weaker rock materials and is almost absent in strong.. Kulhawy (1975). therefore. It is interesting. 2) This depth dependency of the deformation modulus is likely to be more pronounced in weaker rock masses and almost absent in strong. This argument originates from a growing evidence. Discussion on Effect of Depth on Modulus of Deformation The case-histories. a well documented phenomenon. proposed the following expression for modulus of elasticity of rock material. (9). It is quite likely that for rock masses having a higher RMR value than 68 (i.08 0"0'195 GPa (11) where ~3 is in MPa.3. A similar expression was obtained by Santarelli and Brown (1987) on the basis of triaxial compression tests on hollow cylinders of Carboniferous sandstone. Duncan Fama and Brown. are irrelevant in the context of the underground openings. to observe the occurrence of this phenomenon in the field as indicated by Eq. 1989). good to very good rock mass). an empirical correlation has been proposed for prediction of the deformation modulus of dry rock masses. (10) where 0.3 is the minor principal stress and E 0 is the Young's modulus measured in a uniaxial compression test (g3 = 0). 3. largely based on the laboratory tests. therefore. which is based on the actual support pressure and tunnel closure measurements in tunnels. The correlation indicates that: 1) The deformation modulus of the rock mass increases with increase in RMR and the tunnel depth. after examining a wide range of data: Er ----E 0 ~ . 1987. This is given by: Er = 15. for instance. pertain to poor to good rock mass quality (RMR -----31 to 68). (5). mainly based on the laboratory experiments (Kulhawy. The form of Eq. Other investigators have also obtained similar or slightly different expressions. considered to arrive at Eq. and for rock masses with a lesser RMR value than 31 (i. the value of c~ is greater than 0.

Afr. Inst. New Delhi. E. Kulhawy. France. 327-350. (1973): Engineering classification of jointed rock masses. Montreal. Brown. T. Int. In: Proc. University of Roorkee. T. Santarelli. 6th Congress Int. T. (1987): Performance of deep wellbores in rock with a confining pressure-dependent elastic modulus.D. Geol. Symposium on Rock at Great Depth. . M. Ph. Authors' address: Dr. J. Naimex House. India. J. F.. Rock Engng. Referee (1995): Personal communication. (1992): Estimation of engineering parameters of rock mass. V. Engng. Thesis Department of Civil Engineering. S. F. (1989): Influence of stress-dependent elastic moduli on stress and strains around axisymmetric boreholes.. Rock Mech. Bray. 2. Santarelli. Z. 9. Brown.. 819-826. 110 044 India.. AIMIL Ltd. E. A-8. T. E.. University of Roorkee.Effect of Tunnel Depth on Modulus of Deformation I27 References Bieniawski. 189-203. Civ. 1217-1222. K. 15(12). F. Manoj Verman. Trans. 2. 22. Eng. W. In: Proc. Vol. (1989): Influence of stress dependent elastic moduli on plane strain solution for boreholes. Vol. Society for Rock Mechanics. H. Duncan Fama. Pau. J. E. India. 335-344. Mohan Cooperative Industrial Estate. Mathura Road. Mehrotra. Brown. (1975): Stress deformation properties of rock and rock discontinuities... Advanced Technology and Engineering Services.

- Candian Foundation Manual 3rd Edt.
- The Shanghai Yantze River Tunnel Theory, Design and Consttuıctrion
- Class Notes on Underground Excavations in Rock (2006)1
- Site Investigations
- Urban Transportation Networks
- The Observational Method in Ground Engineering
- 03-The Observational Method in Ground Engineering
- 02-The Observational Method in Ground Engineering
- 01-The Observational Method in Ground Engineering
- Behaviour of Precast Reinforced Concrete Pile Caps
- Behaviour of Precast Concrete Floor Slabs Exposed to Standar
- Basic Concepts in Nonlinear Dynamics and Chaos
- Part3
- Part2
- Part1
- Twin Nat m Tunnels Pub
- Tünel ve kuyu açma (17 Mayıs)
- NATM_Info
- 13
- Geotechnical Baseline Report
- FMT_2007_GVNR
- FMT_2007_GVN
- FB6 05 Steiner
- Excavation Methods

- Young's Modulus, Shear Modulus, And Poisson's Ratio in Silicon and Germanium
- Elasticities and Strengths
- Introduction to Designing Elastomeric Vibration Isolators.pptx
- mid term 1-with solutions
- Design Stone material for construction of Mustafa Pasha Mosque Model
- (Sifat Mekanik)
- Somgjhgjhjknknjbvgcddsawertyuiop;l.,mnbvcxdsertyuilkmnbvcfdserrtyyuikjnhbvcxdsew45678uiolk,m,nbvcxdsewr5678uiol;,mnbvcdxsawq345678iolk,mnbvgfcdre678iolk,mnbvcfdsew45678
- Lab Report 1b.docx
- General Design Principles for Structural Design Formulae.pdf
- Simple Stress 2013a
- Material Science
- exer-A (1)
- 10.1177_0022034512468749
- 2 Axial Loading
- E G & K.pptx
- Caesar static Load Case Editor
- Document (1) (1)
- Lab Report 3.Docx
- Rock Mass Characteristics Modification Using Back Analysis Method for Isfahan Subway
- Ks
- Expt 01 Tensile Test - Al
- Habelitz Et Al. [2001] Mechanical Properties of Human Dental Enamel on the Nanometre Scale
- Projectile Impact on Carbon Fiber Reinforced Plate 2006
- H2000d
- Uplji Profili Pravougaonog Kvadra1tnog i Kru Nog Oblika 1381131503534
- Response-Based Damage Assessment of Structures (p 79-104)
- kurian
- modelling_of_thermoplastic_fibre-composites_and_finite_element_simulation_of_mechanical_properties[1]
- EverseriesUserGuide
- Delrin_AF

Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

We've moved you to where you read on your other device.

Get the full title to continue

Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.

scribd