See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/289343211

Invert heaving in operational tunnels - Problems and countermeasures

Conference Paper · May 2013

DOI: 10.1201/b14769-106

CITATION READS

1 2,839

4 authors, including:

Chia-Han Lee Tai-Tien Wang

United Geotech, Inc. National Taipei University of Technology
27 PUBLICATIONS   79 CITATIONS    65 PUBLICATIONS   887 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Chia-Han Lee on 14 September 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.





World Tunnel Congress 2013 Geneva
Underground – the way to the future!
G. Anagnostou & H. Ehrbar (eds)
© 2013 Taylor & Francis Group, London
ISBN 978-1-138-00094-0






Invert heaving in operational tunnels – problems and
countermeasures
C.H. Lee(1)(2), T.T. Wang(2), L.J. Sun(1), T.H. Huang(3)
(1)
United Geotech, Inc., Taipei, Taiwan
(2)
Institute of Mineral Resources Engineering, National Taipei University of Technology, Taipei, Taiwan
(3)
Department of Civil Engineering, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan

ABSTRACT: Many cases of invert heaving, which adversely affects tunnel stability and endangers users, have
been reported. When heaving displacement is small, repair work is typically overlaying slabs for railway tunnels or
pavement for road tunnels. However, in sections where displacement is significant, reconstruction of the tunnel
invert is inevitable. This study collects data for invert anomalies in operational tunnels and examines the
associated causes of these anomalies. Possible causes include swelling, squeezing, earthquake-induced,
weakening of surrounding geomaterials, high groundwater pressure, fault movement, landslide or creep, and
traffic-induced vibration. Invert heaving countermeasures are examined.

1 Introduction
Tunnels, especially those through rocks, are considered durable. Compared with primary supporting
elements applied immediately after tunnel excavation, the permanent lining structure of modern
tunnels withstands less external force from surrounding rock/soil. Instrumentation is usually employed
to monitor surrounding deformation during tunnel excavation. However, invert deformation, i.e.,
heaving when the deformation direction is upward, is difficult to measure due to subsequent step
excavations and running vehicles during construction. Furthermore, structural inspection and
maintenance of operational tunnels seldom pay attention to invert deformation. Consequently, invert
deformation data for operational tunnels are lacking.
When invert heaving occurs, the road surface in a highway tunnel or rails in a railway tunnel deform
upward with or without accompanied lining cracks, leakage, or water ingress with debris or mud,
adversely affecting tunnel stability and endangering users. Repairing invert heaving damage takes
time and severely impacts traffic flow. Consequently, invert heaving in operational tunnels warrants
further study to understand the deformation mechanism and implement repairs to keep tunnels
operational.
Field investigations and measurements are common approaches used to assess invert heaving in
tunnels and to identify possible causes (Kovári et al., 1988; Kitzler and Walter, 2004; Berdugo et al.,
2009) Numerical analyses are also utilized to simulate the influence of possible causes (Anagnostou,
1992; Wittke-Gattermann and Wittke, 2004; Wittke and Wittke, 2005; Mashimo, 2007; Alonso and
Olivella, 2008; Butscher et al., 2011, Steiner et al., 2011). Laboratory experiments have been
conducted to investigate the behavior of swelling-induced invert heaving (Kim et al., 2007; Seki, 2008;
Shimamoto et al., 2012). However, possible causes for the varied invert heaving damage lack
systematic study, as do the associated countermeasures.

2 Invert heaving in operational tunnels

This study first collects 50 tunnels suffering invert heaving phenomenon. Table 1 was only listed the
cases mentioned in this paper. As mentioned, the appearance of invert heaving damage varies,

770


manifesting, say, as cracks distributed in distinct locations and propagating in different directions with
various widths, upward deformation, slab displacement with partial settlement, or water inrush with or
without debris/mud.
Once invert anomalies are reported, railway tunnels usually maintain rail elevation by adjusting timber
sleepers and ballasts, and highway tunnels have their asphalt or concrete repaired to keep the road
surface smooth. As such, measured deformations in a tunnel invert are usually part of the actual
deformation magnitude.

3 Possible causes of invert heaving in tunnels

The identification of causes of invert heaving in a rock tunnel usually requires a series of
investigations. Geological and tunnel design data and construction details must be integrated with
structural inspections and maintenance records after tunnel completion to diagnosis possible causes.
Long-term monitoring is also necessary in some cases to validate the inferred causes. The possible
causes of invert heaving in collected cases are discussed as follows (Table 1 and Fig. 1).

3.1 Swelling
Swelling is the most common cause of invert heaving in tunnels (Fig. 1(a)), as has been observed in
Japan, China, Germany, Switzerland, Austria, Spain, and other countries (Wittke-Gattermann and
Wittke, 2004; Berdugo et al., 2009; Anagnostou et al., 2010). For tunnels with surrounding rock/soil
composed of minerals with swelling potential, such as anhydrite, pyrite, marcasite, mudstones, shale,
tuff, serpentine, and chlorite schist, invert heaving may occur after the minerals swell. The water-
induced increase in anhydrite volume can reach 60% (Rauh and Thuro, 2007), resulting in massive
swelling pressure. Once the volume increase destroys the invert structure and leads to water inflow,
invert heaving can reach several decimeters.

3.2 Squeezing
Squeezing, as defined by the International Society of Rock Mechanics (ISRM), is a time-dependent
large deformation phenomenon that occurs during tunneling (Barla, 1995). Conventionally, when
squeezing deformation of a tunnel is caused by excavation of surrounding rock/soil, is restrained
before in tunnels constructed by modern tunneling concept. However, squeezing deformation can
exist after tunnel completion, such as in the Rokujuurigoe, Tsukayama, Kamui, Tawarazaka, and
Sakazukiyama tunnels in Japan (Fig. 1(b)); the Yunling tunnel in China; and Taoyuan Irrigation No. 4
tunnel in Taiwan. Tunnels in weak rock masses with large overburdens have high squeezing potential.
Excavation-induced plastic behavior of the rock/soil surrounding a tunnel and the associated time-
dependent weakening affect the squeezing magnitude. The deterioration of a primary support element
may also cause deformation after tunnel completion.

3.3 Earthquake-induced
Earthquakes can damage tunnels in different ways. An earthquake may destroy tunnels that cross its
fault. Large earthquakes may also damage tunnel via their seismic impact, or via adjacent ground
failures such as slope instability or liquefaction (Wang et al., 2001; Chen et al., 2012). The 1995 Kobe
earthquake in Japan caused invert heaving in the Rokko (Fig. 1(c)) and Bantaki tunnels, resulted in
maximum heaving deformation was 120 mm in the Bantaki tunnel (Iwai, 2000); the 1999 Düzce
earthquake in Turkey caused invert heaving magnitude was 1000 mm in the Bolu tunnel (Amberg and
Russo, 2001); and the 2004 Niigata earthquake in Japan caused invert damage in the Myoken and
Uonuma tunnels, heaving deformation in the Uonuma tunnel exceeded 250 mm (Asakura, 2005).
Additionally, the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake in China seriously damaged tunnels along Wenchuan
highway; invert heaving was observed in two tunnels—the Zipingpu and Longxi tunnels. The heaving
deformation in the latter exceeded 1200 mm (Li, 2012).

771


Table 1. Invert heaving cases in operational tunnels (portion)

Tunnel name Invert heaving condition Possible causes Countermeasures

Install self-drilling rock bolts on
Tagokura 12 mm (max.) Swelling
invert
38 mm (max.), 6
Rokujuurigoe Squeezing Install invert structure
mm/year in average
Install (1) reinforced concrete
90 mm (max.), 15
Rebunhama Swelling lining; (2) pre-force rock bolts on
mm/year in average
invert
Kamui 120 mm (max.) Swelling Install rock bolts on invert
Rebungetouge 300 mm (max.) Swelling Install anchors on invert
Install reinforced concrete lining on
Ureshino 160 mm (max.) Swelling
invert
110 mm (max.), 99 (1) flooding; (2) train
Sengenyama Install lining structure on invert
mm/year in average vibration; (3) swelling
108 mm (max.), 45
Tawarazaka Squeezing Install lining structure on invert
mm/year in average
Myoken 40 mm (max.) 2004 Niigata earthquake Install rock bolts on invert
Uonuma 250 mm (max.) 2004 Niigata earthquake Install rock bolts on invert
Settlement 32 mm Cast-in-place small-diameter piles
(1) groundwater; (2) train
Shirasaka (max.), upwelling mud, beneath roadbed and strut slab
vibration
water gushing concrete
(1) cutting the original invert lining;
(2) narrow the curvature radius of
Sakazukiyama 950 mm (max.) Swelling the new invert lining; (3) install
shotcrete, steel ribs & reinforced
concrete lining
Install (1) scuppers; (2) crack
High groundwater
Wu 9 line 70 mm (max.) injection; (3) grouting (cement-
pressure
based) under invert
(1) cutting the original invert lining;
(2) narrow the curvature radius of
Yunling 25 mm (max.) Swelling the new invert lining; (3) install rock
bolts & reinforced concrete lining
on invert
Settlement 300 mm
Chungliao Fault movement Invert consolidation grouting
(max.)
(1) drilling and installing drain
New 300 mm (max.), High groundwater pipes; (2) setup water pumps and
Yungchuen transverse cracks pressure water collection wells at refuge and
recess space
(1) drilled drain holes on the
Settlement 300 mm sidewall; (2) install rock bolts on
Garbo Slope creeping
(max.) crown and sidewall; (3) spray
shotcrete on lining surface
Freudenstein (1) install yielding support under
30 mm (max.) Swelling
test gallery invert; (2) install anchors on invert
Install "Modular Yielding Support"
Chienberg 100 mm (max.) Swelling
on invert
Pfaender 1~5 mm Swelling Install anchors on invert
1000 mm (max.), 10 (1) change portion line; (2) setup
Bolu 1999 Düzce earthquake
mm/year in average the seismic joints in lining
(1) install piles with prestressed
anchors on slope; (2) install
S3 Uplift, open cracking Landslide
anchors and consolidation grouting
in tunnel
High groundwater (1) install grouting bars; (2)
Burnley 200 mm (max.)
pressure consolidation grouting

772


Shear crack Compressive failure

Gr
ou

Spalling
n
dw

Low Compressive Heaving

Heaving Heaving Spalling
ate

confining failure
r

Heaving
flo

pressure
w

Expansion Rock
pressure P-wave Water pressure
Expansion of
Shear failure
clay minerals
(a)Swelling (b)Squeezing (c)Earthquake (d)High groungwater pressure

Fault
zone

Sliding
surface Heaving
Heaving

(e)Landslide (creep) (f)Fault movement

Figure 1. The diagram of possible causes of invert heaving in tunnels ((a), (b) after Shimamoto et al.,
2012; (c) after Asakura et al., 2005)

3.4 High groundwater pressure

Groundwater pressure in mountain tunnels can be very high and damage the lining structure and
invert. For instance, an operational tunnel on the Wu 9 railway line in China suffered invert rupture due
to very high groundwater pressure caused by 428 mm of precipitation, its tracks heave 70 mm (Li,
2007). The Burnley tunnel in Australia (60 m below the Yarra river), had a maximum of 200 mm of
invert heaving, which was caused by a 40-l/sec water ingress during concrete lining casting
(Mothersille and Littlejohn, 2012).
Water inrush plagued Taiwan’s New Yungchuen tunnel during tunneling. The water with debris were
pumped out and then buried the 540-m-long support section. The measured maximum discharge and
water pressure were 1.33 m3/sec and 4.5 MPa, respectively. The tunnel was then realigned. Hot
bitumen grouting was used to solve the water inrush problem, with a series of drains and additional
chemical and cement grouting. The thickness of the tunnel lining was also increased to 1-m and 42-
MPa strong with reinforced steel bars (Wang et al., 2011). However, gushing groundwater with mud in
the invert outside the water inrush section during tunneling was reported four years after operations,
resulted in a 300-mm heaving deformation (Fig. 1(d)) and slightly twisted tracks. A series of in situ
measurements and laboratory tests were then conducted to investigate the possible causes for invert
heaving. Rock and concrete samples were cored from the invert and the ground beneath. The X-Ray
diffraction (XRD) results showed that the main components of the mud interbedded in rock and silt
between invert concrete and rocks were quartz and clay minerals (illite and chlorite). Illite and chlorite
were excluded swelling from the invert problem. Ballast was then removed for visual inspection of the
invert surface. A hole with outgushing groundwater and three transverse cracks in the invert slab were
observed. Six-month monitoring results indicated that the groundwater pressure was influenced by
precipitation and it can significant released from the sample coring holes. The possible cause for the
invert problem was very high groundwater pressure caused by heavy rainfall, which resulted in
breakages in the invert concrete, providing passage for groundwater to outgush and leading to invert
heaving and track deformation. After heaving and subsequent installation of additional drainage,
groundwater pressure decreased and the invert problem was solved (UGI, 2009).

773


3.5 Slope instability or creeping

Slope instability or creeping may also cause a tunnel lining to crack or deform (Wang, 2010). Sidewall
cracking and invert heaving of the S3 tunnel in Greece occurred during construction (Fig. 1(e)). After
an investigation, obvious open cracks were identified on the slope above the tunnel. Monitoring results
also confirmed that the slope had crept (Koronakis et al., 2004). In 2004, the Niigata earthquake in
Japan caused a slope to slide, and the Kizawa tunnel sidewalls and invert cracked; the widest crack
opening was 150 mm (Konagai et al., 2005). Two years after Taiwan’s Garbo tunnel was in operation,
cracks developed on its sidewalls, crown, and invert. Although steel mesh and shotcrete were used for
reinforcement, the shotcrete still continued to crack and deform. Sidewall deformation, water seepage,
and efflorescence continued, as did road surface subsidence. Over ten years of aerial photo
interpretation, site investigations, inclinometer measurements, road elevation and tunnel cross-
sectional surveys confirmed that tunnel abnormalities were caused by slope instability and creeping,
which were strongly related to excessive rainfall and earthquakes (Lee et al., 2013).

3.6 Fault movement or surrounding rock weakening

Fault affect tunneling, the tunnel lining, and the long-term stability of tunnels. After the 1999 Chi-Chi
earthquake in Taiwan, the north portal sidewalk and sidewall lining of the Chungliao tunnel had
localized cracking, and the south lane pavement had subsided slightly. Repairs were completed and
the tunnel was put back into operation in 2000. However, after four years, cracking and deterioration
were identified in the north portal section of the sidewalls. Despite repeated repairs, the pavement
continued to subside (Hou et al., 2007). Comprehensive geological comparisons, tunnel inspections,
post-operation records, and monitoring data showed that the possible causes of tunnel invert cracking
and pavement subsidence were as follows. (1) As the abnormal tunnel section is located on the
Chishan fault zone, the abnormality may be due to the fault movement effect. (2) After pavement
excavation revealed that the drainage pipes on both sides of the invert had broken, the continued
subsidence of the invert may have been caused by water from the broken pipes continuing to weaken
the rock surrounding the tunnel invert, decreasing bearing capacity and increasing deformation.

4 Countermeasures of invert heaving in tunnels

Countermeasures before were mostly the “active” type. However, many case studies showed that
when earth stress or the external force is large, engineering countermeasures are largely ineffective.
In recent years, the trend has been for “passive” countermeasures. The following classifies the above
invert heaving cases according to the “active” and “passive” countermeasures employed (Fig. 2).

Slots
Foam

(a) Invert arch (b) Anchoring system (C) Yielding support (d) Yielding support
foam slots

Ground
hang all cables surface
on the sidewall Reinforced concrete
heighten drain ditch piles
R.L and cable tray
F.L

PVC drain Consolidation

capillary drain tape
grouting Permanent pre-stressed
anchors

(e) Drain (f) Slope stabilization

Figure 2. The diagram of countermeasures of invert heaving in tunnels ((c), (d) after Kovári et al., 1988,
2009; (f) after Koronakis et al., 2004)

774


4.1 Active countermeasures

4.1.1 Invert lining casting

Early engineering principles governing mountain tunnel lining design only covered an invert with a
concrete lining for portal sections, shallow cover sections, and sections with weak geology. When
invert heaving damage is caused by swelling or squeezing, most engineers use an invert lining for
additional support (Fig. 2(a)). Case studies show that even when an invert lining is cast, swelling or
squeezing force can sometimes be too great, and further heaving damages the new lining; the
Rokujuurigoe, Rebunhama, Tsukayama, Ureshino, Sengenyama, and Tawarazaka tunnels in Japan
are such examples. The Tsukayama tunnel was only in operation for four months before invert
heaving damage was caused by squeezing, even after invert lining countermeasures had been
deployed in the affected section. After 20 years, the reinforced section of the crown and sidewalls
were spalled, cracked radially, and showed buckling abnormalities (JSCE, 2003). The reason for the
abnormalities in the crown and sidewalls was that the new invert lining had a higher stiffness than
other part lining, causing the overall stress distribution in the tunnel to be uneven.

4.1.2 Install rock bolts or ground anchors

When the invert section subject to heaving already has a concrete lining, rock bolts or ground anchors
(Fig. 2(b)) are often used to protect the invert by friction resistance against swelling or squeezing and
keep the tunnel operational; the Tagokura, Rebunhama, Kamui, Rebungetouge, Myoken, Uonuma,
and Shirasaka tunnels in Japan, the Yunling tunnel in China, and the Pfaender tunnel in Austria are
examples of when rock bolts or ground anchors were used. In the Shirasaka tunnel, two rows of cast
piles were installed directly on the invert track board (D=180 mm, L=1.8 m) to reinforce the tunnel’s
invert ground-bearing capacity (Saito et al., 2009).

4.1.3 Stabilize slope first

If tunnel invert heaving is caused by sliding or creeping of an adjacent slope, the correct
countermeasure should be to stabilize the slope before reinforcing the tunnel (Fig. 2(f)). The Kizawa
tunnel in Japan, the Xuewu and Garbo tunnels in Taiwan, and the S3 tunnel in Greece are examples
specify. In the S3 tunnel, rows of piles (D=1 m, L=30 m) were first utilized to stabilize the upper slope.
Pre-stressed ground anchors (600 kN, L=30 m) with grouting were then installed in the tunnel
(Koronakis et al., 2004).

4.2 Passive countermeasures

4.2.1 Install yielding supports

Many tunnels in Europe are located in places with swelling potential due to existence of claystone, and
marl and sulfate rocks. Experts began researching the design of tunnels using inverts of yielding
materials to absorb swelling and deformation forces as early as the 1980s (Figs. 2(c) and (d)). The
Freudenstein tunnel in Germany and the Chienberg tunnel in Switzerland are good examples.
Engineers explored the effectiveness of an invert lining, rock bolts, and yielding supports in the
Freudenstein tunnel. A test gallery was excavated in which all these countermeasures were tested.
Monitoring instruments were for comparative analysis (Berdugo et al., 2009). The final design of the
Chienberg tunnel used replaceable yielding supports in the invert space. When deformation of the
yielding material reaches its final design limit, the material can be replaced to maintain normal
operations (Kovári, 2009).

4.2.2 Relieve high groundwater pressure by drainage

When tunnel invert heaving damage is caused by high groundwater pressure, the most effective
method is to drill holes in the invert and install drain pipes to release the pressure (Fig. 2(e)). In
China’s New Yungchuen tunnel, (1) all cables hang on the tunnel’s sidewalls; (2) the height of the
drain ditch and cable tray have been increased; (3) drain pipes with check valves have been installed
in the ditch bottom; (4) and capillary drain tapes have been installed on the bottom of the railway
board. The drain and cable tray space are used to relieve water pressure and drain it away. If the
amount of water exceeds the capacity of the drainage ditch and cable tray, then water is pumped out
and water collection wells must be used in the refuge and recess spaces (UGI, 2010).

775


5 Conclusion
Data for 50 tunnels with invert heaving damage worldwide were collected. The possible causes of
invert heaving damage were as follows: (1) swelling; (2) squeezing; (3) earthquake-induced; (4) high
groundwater pressure; (5) slope instability or creeping; and (6) fault movement or surrounding rock
weakening. The countermeasures taken were as follows: (1) invert lining casting; (2) installation of
rock bolts or ground anchors; (3) stabilization of the slope as the first step; (4) installation of yielding
supports; (5) and decreasing high groundwater pressure by drainage.
However, before designing countermeasures, the causes of invert heaving must be identified. Also,
the countermeasures used must consider tunnel function and operation. Additionally, determination of
swelling potential, its forces, the characteristics of deformation, and water pressure all require that
monitoring and measuring equipment be installed on site, and samples must also be taken back to
laboratory for testing and analysis. If the causes of tunnel invert heaving are not due to the
surrounding rock, but to slope instability, then the slope should be stabilizes before the tunnel is
reinforced. In cases of an earthquake or fault movement, because of the extreme stress generated,
normal countermeasures become difficult to apply. Currently, no effective solutions are existed.
In addition to underscoring the importance of identifying causes, this study investigated in depth each
damage mechanism. Research results can be used to select tunnel invert heaving countermeasures
and even contribute to route selection for new tunnels. They will also help in determining the
investigation type and tests that should be conducted in the planning stages and what special design
considerations should be included in the design stage. Such considerations address the entire
lifecycle of a tunnel, including its planning, design, and maintenance.

6 References
Alonso, E.E., Olivella, S. 2008. Modelling Tunnel Performance in Expansive Gypsum Claystone. The 12th
International Conference of International Association for Computer Methods and Advances in Geomechanics,
India, 891-910.
Amberg, W., Russo, M. 2001. Seismic Design of Underground Structures the Bolu Tunnel. ITA-AITES World
Tunnel Congress and 27th General Assembly, Milan, 137-145.
Anagnostou, G. 1992. Importance of unsaturated flow in predicting the deformations around tunnels in swelling
rock. Porous and Fracturated Unsaturated Media, Transports and Behaviour, Scientific Colloquium, Monte
Verita, 343-359.
Anagnostou, G., Pimentel, E., Serafeimidis, K. 2010. Swelling of sulphatic claystones – some fundamental
questions and their practical relevance. 59th Geomechanics Colloquy 2010, Session on “Tunnel construction
in swelling ground”, 1-12.
Asakura, T., Tsukada, K., Matsunaga, T., Matsuoka, S., Yashiro, K., Shiba, Y., Oya, T. 2005. Damage to
Mountain Tunnels by Earthquake and its Mechanism. The EIT-JAPAN-AIT Joint Workshop 2005 “Geo-Risk
Engineering & Management”.
Barla, G. 1995. Squeezing rocks in tunnels. News Journal, ISRM, 2(3&4), 44-53.
Berdugo, I.R., Pérez, E.A., Morales, E.R., Solé, A.G. 2009. Tunnelling and Swelling in Triassic Sulphate–Bearing
Rocks. Part I - Case studies from Baden–Württemberg. Revista Épsilon N.º 12: 13-37 / enero - junio de 2009,
13-37.
Berdugo, I.R., Pérez, E.A., Morales, E.R., Solé, A.G. 2009. Tunnelling and Swelling in Triassic Sulphate–Bearing
Rocks. Part II - Case studies from Jura Mountains. Revista Épsilon N.º 12: 13-37 / enero - junio de 2009, 39-
53.
Butscher, C., Huggenberger, P., Zechner, E., Einstein, H.H. 2011. Relation between hydrogeological setting and
swelling potential of clay-sulfate rocks in tunneling. Engineering Geology, 122, 204-214.
Chen, C.H., Wang, T.T., Jeng, F.S., Huang, T.H. 2012. Mechanisms causing seismic damage of tunnels at
different depths. Tunnelling and underground Space Technology, 28, 31-40.
Hou, J.S., Tseng, D.J., Lee, Y.H. 2007. Monitoring and evaluation after repair and reinforcement of damaged 3-
lane Freeway Tunnel located within fault influenced zone. ITA-AITES World Tunnel Congress and 33th
General Assembly, Prague, 1885-1890.
Iwai, T. 2000. Earthquake disaster and restoration of mountain tunnels in Japan. Tunnel Engineering Geology
Treatment Technology, 173-205.
JSCE. 2003. Tunnel deformation mechanism. Japan Society of Civil Engineers. (in Japanese)

776


Kim, K.J., Koh, S.Y., Choo, S.Y., Hong, C.S., Hwang, D.J. 2007. A study of the invert tunnel’s behavior in a
weathered-rock using laboratory model test and numerical analysis. ITA-AITES World Tunnel Congress and
33th General Assembly, Prague, 501-506.
Kitzler, C., Walter, H. 2004. Geotechnical measurements in swelling rock – instrumentation of exploratory
headings, results, conclusions. 2nd Colloquium “Rock Mechanics – Theory and Practice”, 117-128.
Konagai, K., Numada, M., Zafeirakos, A., Johansson, J., Sadr, A. Katagiri, T. 2005. An example of landslide-
inflicted damage to tunnel in the 2004 Mid-Niigata Prefecture earthquake. Landslides, 2, 159-163.
Koronakis, N., Kontothanassis, P., Kazilis, N., Gikas, N. 2004. Stabilization measures for shallow tunnels with
ongoing translational movements due to slope instability. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 19,
495.
Kovári, K. 2009. Design Methods with Yielding Support in Squeezing and Swelling Rocks. ITA-AITES World
Tunnel Congress and 35th General Assembly, Budapest, 1-13.
Kovári, K., Amstad, C., Anagnostou, G. 1988. Tunnelling in swelling rocks. Proc. 29th U.S. Symp. Rock Mech.
Balkema, 17-32.
Lee, C.H., Chiu, Y.C., Wang, T.T., Huang, T.H. 2013. Application and validation of simple image-mosaic
technology for interpreting cracks on tunnel lining. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 34, 61-72.
Li, G.Y. 2007. The karst area tunnel invert cracking remediation, Railway Standard Design, 68-71. (in Chinese)
Li, T. 2012. Damage to mountain tunnels related to the Wenchuan earthquake and some suggestions for
aseismic tunnel construction. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, 71, 297-308.
Mashimo, H. 2007. Analytical investigation of damaged tunnel linings by the action of excessive earth pressure.
ITA-AITES World Tunnel Congress and 33th General Assembly, Prague, 1931-1936.
Mothersille, D., Littlejohn, S. 2012. Grouting of Anchors to Resist Hydrostatic Uplift at Burnley Tunnel, Melbourne,
Australia. 4th International Conference on Grouting and Deep Mixing, 1-10.
Rauh, F., Thuro, K. 2007. Investigations on the swelling behavior of pure anhydrites. Proceedings of the 1st
Canada-US Rock Mechanics Symposium, Vancouver, Canada, 27-31.
Saito, T., Moriyama, T., Taniguchi, Y., Shimizu, M. 2009. The Development about the Countermeasure Method
for Mud-pumping at the Shinkansen Tunnel. ITA-AITES World Tunnel Congress and 35th General Assembly,
Budapest, 1-6.
Seki, S., Kaise, S., Morisaki, Y., Azetaka, S., Jiang, Y. 2008. Model experiments for examining heaving
phenomenon in tunnels. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 23, 128-138.
Shimamoto, K., Yashiro, K., Kojima, Y., Nakanishi, Y., Tsukada, K., Asakura, T. 2012. Study on the Mechanisms
of Heaving and its Countermeasures in Mountain Tunnels. ITA-AITES World Tunnel Congress and 38th
General Assembly, Bangkok, 1-8.
Steiner, W., Kaiser, P.K., Spaun, G. 2011. Role of brittle fracture on swelling behaviour: evidence from tunnelling
case histories. Geomechanics and Tunnelling, 4, 2, 17-32.
United Geotech, Inc. 2009. Safety inspection, survey, data processing, identify, assessment and analysis report
for New Yongchun tunnel of north line K7+030~090 rail uplift improve engineering. Prepared for Taiwan
Railways Administration, MOTC, Taiwan. (in Chinese)
United Geotech, Inc. 2010. Improve program planning report for New Yongchun tunnel of north line K7+030~090
rail uplift improve engineering. Prepared for Taiwan Railways Administration, MOTC, Taiwan. (in Chinese)
Wang, T.T. 2010. Characterizing crack patterns on tunnel linings associated with shear deformation induced by
instability of neighboring slopes. Engineering Geology, 115, 80-95.
Wang, T.T., Jeng, F.S., Lo, W. 2011. Mitigating large water inrushes into the New Yungchuen Tunnel, Taiwan,
Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, 70(2), 173-186.
Wang, W.L., Wang, T.T., Su, J.J., Lin, C.H., Seng, C.R., Huang, T.H. 2001. Assessment of damages in mountain
tunnels due to the Taiwan Chi-Chi Earthquake. Tunnelling and underground Space Technology, 16(3), 133-
150.
Wittke, W., Wittke, M. 2005. Design, construction and supervision of tunnels in swelling rock. ITA-AITES World
Tunnel Congress and 31th General Assembly, Istanbul, 1173-1178.
Wittke-Gattermann, P., Wittke, M. 2004. Computation of Strains and Pressures for Tunnels in Swelling Rocks.
Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 19, 422-423.

777

View publication stats