9/2

Tunnel face stability in slurry shield tunnelling

La stabilité du front d’un tunnel percé par bouclier et bentonite

H.BALTHAUS, Philipp Holzmann AG, HN Düsseldorf, FRG

S Y N O P S I S : Fo r s l u r r y s h i e l d t u n n e l l i n g m a c h i n e s the s t a b i l i t y of the t u n n e l face d e p e n d s on the

g e o m e t r i c a l and so i l c o n d i t i o n s a n d th e p r e v a i l i n g s u p p o r t p r e s s u r e . T hi s s u p p o r t p r e s s u r e at the
t u n n e l face has to be a d j u s t e d to a v a l u e t h at g i v e s as w e l l s u f f i c i e n t s a f e t y a g B i n s t a c o l l a p s e
of the t u n n e l face as a g a i n s t u p l i f t i n g . In t h i s p a p e r a n e w m e t h o d for t he d e t e r m i n a t i o n of the
s u p p o r t p r e s s u r e an d the r e l a t e d s a f e t y l e v el is d i s c u s s e d . It is c o m p a r e d to o t h e r s and an e x a m p l e
is u s e d to i l l u s t r a t e its a p p l i c a t i o n in p r a c t i c e .

1 INTRODUCTION

Shield tun nel l in g with sl u rr y -s u p p o r t e d tunnel A c e r t a i n s i m i l a r i t y e x i s t s b e t w e e n the s t a ­

face ha s h a d an i n c r e a s i n g i m p o r t a n c e d u r i n g b i l i t y p r o b l e m of o p e n s i u r r y - f i 1 1 ed d i a p h r a g m
the last d e c a d e , p a r t i c u l a r l y in n e a r s u r f a c e wall trenches and slurry supported tunnel
t u n n e l l i n g b e l o w the w a t e r t a b l e in s o ft and faces. For diaphragm walls usually the
g r a n u l a r s o i l s . S u p p o r t i n g the t u n n e l face w i t h following factors of safety have to be
c l a y - w a t e r or b e n t o n i t e s l u r r i e s in m e c h a n i c a l examined:
s h i e l d a d v a n c e s h a s a n u m b e r of a d v a n t a g e s c o m ­
p a r e d to t r a d i t i o n a l c o m p r e s s e d air s u p p o r t : - s a f e t y a g a i n s t i n t r u s i o n of g r o u n d w a t e r
- s a f e t y a g a i n s t m o v e m e n t of s i n g l e g r a i n s
- no t i m e for o p e n i n g and c l o s i n g air l o c ks (local s t ab i l i t y )
- h i g h e r s a f e t y l ev e l - s a f e t y a g a i n s t too low s u p p o r t p r e s s u r e
- b e t t e r s t a b i l i t y of the t u n n e l face due to (global stability)
a f f i n i t y b e t w e e n s u p p o r t i n g p r e s s u r e and - s a f e t y a g a i n s t f o r m a t i o n of s l i p s u r f a c e s
a c t i n g e a r t h an d w a t e r p r e s s u r e ( c o l l a p s e of the t u n n e l face)
- a d d i t i o n a l s u p p o r t e f f e c t d ue to f o r m a t i o n
of a f i l t e r c a k e In W e s t Gerniany, G e r m a n s t a n d a r d D I N 4 1 2 6 r e g u ­
- r e d u c e d h a z a r d of b l o w - o u t due to l o w e r p r e s ­ lates th e required calculations an d safety
s ur e at th e t u n n e l r o o f a n d l o w e r p e r m e a b i l i ­ levels.
ty of th e s oi l for the s u p p o r t i n g s l u r r y F or s l u r r y s u p p o r t of t u n n e l f a ces a d d i t i o n a l l y
- s l u r r y ca n be u s e d for m u c k r e m o v a l h a v e to be e x a m i n e d :

T u n n e l face s t a b i l i t y for s l u r r y s h i e l d d r i v e s - s a f e t y a g a i n s t h e a v i n g o f the o v e r b u r d e n

depends on the geometrical an d geological (uplift)
b o u n d a r y c o n d i t i o n e s , the m e c h a n i c a l p r o p e r t i e s - safety against blow-out failure
of the p r e v a i l i n g s o i l s , the p r o p e r t i e s of the
s u p p o r t i n g s l u r r y a n d the s u p p o r t p r e s s u r e . The f irst t h r e e f a c t o r s of s a f e t y can be d e t e r ­
The s l u r r y p r o p e r t i e s h a v e to be a d j u s t e d to m i n e d a c c o r d i n g to D I N 4 1 26 . The s u p p o r t p r e s ­
the g r a i n s i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n and th e c h e m i c a l s u r e s h o u l d be at l e a s t 1 ,0 5 t i m e s the w a t e r
p r o p e r t i e s of the so i l to be cut. pressure. L ocal grain stabi lit y is g o v e r n e d
For the p r o p e r adjustment of the s u p p o r t m a i n l y by the a d j u s t a b l e y i e l d p o i n t of the
pressure, stability computations have to be s u p p o r t i n g s l u r r y.
carried out for all relevant c ro s s- s ec t io n s The d e t e r m i n a t i o n of s a f e t y a g a i n s t the f o r ­
a l o n g the t u n n e l l ine. A n e w m e t h o d for the mation o f s li p surfaces and against uplift
d e t e r m i n a t i o n of th e s u p p o r t p r e s s u r e w i l l be require special methods that satisfy the
o u t l i n e d in the f o l l o w i n g . p a r t i c u l a r b o u n d a r y c o n d i t i o n s of t u n n e l l i n g .
The f o r m a t i o n of b l o w - o u t c h a n n e l s d e p e n d s
not o n l y on the l ev e l of s u p p o r t p r e s s u r e but
2 TUNNEL FACE STABILITY AND SUPPORT PRESSURE a l s o on p o s s i b l e p r e f e r r e d s e e p a g e or air flow
channels in the overburden. A generalised
2.1 P o s s i b l e stability problems s a f e t y c o n c e p t c a n t h e r e f o r e not be a p p l i e d .

O n l y l i t t l e h as b e e n p u b l i s h e d a b o ut the p r a c ­
t i c a l p r o b l e m of d e t e r m i n i n g the t u n n e l face 2.2 S a f e t y a g a i n s t f o r m a t i o n of s l i p s u r f a c e s
stability along a tunnel line. Following a
s y s t e m a t i c c o m p a r i s o n of m e t h o d s p u b l i s h e d to The f a c t o r of s a f e t y a g a i n s t formation of sl i p
da te a n e w m e t h o d s h al l be i n t r o d u c e d that is s u r f a c e s c a n be d e f i n e d by
t a i l o r e d to the n e e d s of t u n n e l l i n g p r a c t i c e .

775
9/2

s - w 2.4 P r a c t i c a l m e t h o d s for the d e t e r m i n a t i o n of

(l)
s u p p o r t p r e s s u r e and factor of s a f e t y

W h e r e S i9t the s u p p o r t i n g force, W the w a t e r

pressure and E the e a r t h pressure. DIN 4126 2.4.1 G e n e r a l
requires a factor of s a f e t y of ^ = 1,3 n e a r
s t r u c t u r e s . This f a c t o r of s a f e t y is suggested A c a l c u l a t i o n model (suitable for a p p l i c a t i o n
here for s l u r r y s h i e l d d r i v e s a9 well. in t u n n e l l i n g practice) should allow for the
following features:

2.3 Calculation models for the support pressure - f r i c t i o n a n g l e f% and c o h e s i o n c' as input
parameters
Only few methods for the c a l c u l a t i o n o f the - soil s t r a t i f i c a t i o n
required support pressure for slurry shield - s u r c h a r g e s as a rea and l ine l oads
d r i v e s are d o c u m e n t e d in the l i t e r a t u r e ( B r o m s - g r o u n d w a t e r level
et al. 1967, A t k i n s o n et al. 1977, D a v i s et al. - d e p t h of o v e r b u r d e n
1980, K r a u s e et al. 1 9 87). In a s u m m a r i s e d and - spatial earth pressure effects
tabulated form the main characteristics of - d e p e n d e n c e of s u p p o r t p r e s s u r e
t hese methods are outlined and compared in on t u n n e l d epth
F i g . 2. F i g . l e x p l a i n s the s y m b o l s used. It w i l l - l evel of s a f e t y d e p e n d i n g on s u p p o r t pressure
be s h o w n to w h i c h d e g r e e the d i f f e r e n t m e t h o d s
are able to take into account the Advantageous is the p o s s i b i l i t y of a c c o u n t i n g
s t r a t i f i c a t i o n of soil, p o s i t i o n of g r o u n d w a t e r for arching effects above the tunnel roof
table, additional loads at or below the ( T e r z a g h i / J e l i n e k , 1954).
surface, d e p t h of o v e r b u r d e n a b o v e the t u n n e l An a d d i t i o n a l s a f e t y c h e c k for risk of u p l i f t
roof, s p a t i a l e a r t h p r e s s u r e e f f e c t s , and the ( o v e r b u r d e n h e a v i n g ) s h o u l d be p o s s i b l e . T h e r e ­
9o i 1 strength parameters. by a t h r e s h o l d value can be e s t a b l i s h e d that
forms an u p p e r l i m i t for the s u p p o r t p r e s s u r e .
Fig. 3 s h o w s how i m p o r t a n t it is to i n t r o d u c e
the soil stratification i nto the c a l c u l a t i o n
model. It is 9 h o w n how an u n s t a b l e l a y e r can
initiate a successive failure of the tunnel
face. A method that allows for l a y e r e d s oil
r.v.t.tu p r o f i l e s and r e n d e r s a s a f e t y p r o f i l e o v e r the
tunnel height could have revealed the hazard.
MW/M m m p£=support pressure
necessary to
Shield balance the 2 .4.2 Safety against collapse of the
earth pressure tunnel face

A m e t h o d t hat s a t i s f i e s the r e q u i r e m e n t s o u t ­
Figure 1. Explanation of s y m b o l s in Fig. 2 l i n e d b e f o r e can be d e r i v e d from t he n u m e r i c a l

Calculation method characteristics

strati- internal cohesion spatial soil ground
description source formula ficatior friction C(CU) earth over­ water
sur­ pres­ burden level
9
charge sure
Log.
Spiral 161 p^=f(fC,f,p,H,D) - + + — +

upper 121 pE »f(H.D/2)<.p-Ncu N«6 — — + + + —

and
lower
bounds 131 ^ - 1 r 0 ‘ PE‘ 1/hi ncosV ,lr ° l ^ — +■ — + — —
w
IU PE=y(H»D/2)*p-Ncu N=f{H/0) — — + + + —
/2 / Broms et a l . 1967
half
circle ,2 0 P£=(f0/6-jrc/2)/t'onyi — + + — — — /3/ Atkinson et al. 1977
___
/ 4 / D a v i s et a l . 1980
quarter
circle ,20
III P£=(j'D/3-rcc/2)/(0.5*tanif) - + + — — - / 5/ Krause 1907
/ 6 / Murayama
h olf
sphere ft)
p^= (¡f0/9->tc/2)/tany> - + + + — —

soil wedge
with
side friction $
- PE= fl(f,c,if,p1H,D,rj) + + + + + -i-

Figure 2. C o m p a r i s o n of different methods for determination of s l u r r y support pressures

at the t u n n e l face

776
 9/2

T required slurry level

Ä \ W nr v -
k 33SWP

progressing chimney? oGW * '

• . /
/
J . ' •
I ^ p ro g re ssiv e
■
Mf
slu rry. •'* . - v * / * '
" tunnel face sliding- • \ ■
Shield
before we’dge 0 1 / •
with min, / » • .
/W eak layer ?- depth factor o f/ . #
afte r profile safety /
wall W \ r ’ '' *
^ ■.* °- failure of the j
k min.
tunnel face requ.
safety
7rU
Shield i rh •
slurry earth water pressure
Figure 3. P r o c e s s of t u n n e l face collapse due face
to a too w e a k l ayer
Pressure balance
a l g o r i t h m d e s c r i b e d by W a l z and P u l s f o r t ( 1 903)
for the evaluation of open, s i u r r y - f i 1 led assumed
d i a p h r a g m wall t r e n c h e s . soil wedge
Fig. 4 i l l u s t r a t e s the m a i n f e a t u r e s of the
m e t h o d a p p l i e d to a s l u r r y s h i e l d t u n n e l . The
tunnel cross-section is approximated by a
conservative substitute rectangle. The tunnel
face is regarded as an open slurry-filled
t r e n c h and its s t a b i l i t y is c o m p u t e d a c c o r d i n g
actual
to the a b o v e m e n t i o n e d m e t h o d . For t h a t p u r p o s e sliding
a v e r t i c a l p r e s s u r e at the t u n n e l r o o f l e v e l is wedge
c a l c u l a t e d that m a y take into a c c o u n t p o s s i b l e
a r c h i n g e f f e c t s . S l u r r y p r e s s u r e is d e f i n e d by
an a s s u m e d ( f i c t i t i o u s ) s l u r r y level that lies T t t t j assumed tunnel face
11 i .l "~ sii
side pressure
above the t u n n e l roof. Section B-B
SectionA-A
The m e t h o d now c o m p u t e s the s t a b i l i t y (as a
factor of s a f e t y ) for d i f f e r e n t depths under Figure 4. C a l c u l a t i o n m o d e l for the s a f e t y
v a r i a t i o n of the a n g l e of i n c l i n a t i o n for the a g a i n s t c o l l a p s e of the t u n n e l face
slip surface of a sliding wedge. The c o m ­ (soil w e d g e m e t h o d )
p u t a t i o n r e n d e r s a s a f e t y p r o f i l e from t u n n e l
roof to base and a l o w e s t v a l u e for the f a c t o r
of sa f e t y . The s l u r r y l e v e l t h a t c o r r e l a t e s to
the m i n i m u m r e q u i r e d s a f e t y (e.g. ^ = 1,3) is
found by an i t e r a t i v e c o m p u t e r p r o c e d u r e . T h i s
s l u r r y l e v e l is r e l a t e d to the m i n i m u m s u p p o r t
pressure at the tunnel cross-section under
cons i d e r a t i o n .

2.4.3 Simplified methods

In practice less sophisticated methods are

o ften used. Tho methods shall be mentioned
here . e g^ = average active horizontal earth pressure
The f i r s t m e t h o d c a l c u l a t e s the s u p p o r t p r e s ­ between ground s u r f a c e and t u n n e l b a s e
sure at the tunnel r o o f as s u m of the w a t e r
pressure and the average horizontal active Figure 5. M e a n p r e s s u r e m e t h o d for support
e arth pressure between ground surface and pressure determination
t unnel b a s e (Fig. 5).
The s e c o n d m e t h o d is b a s e d on an e v a l u a t i o n 2.4.4 Safety against uplift of overburden
of r e s u l t s won by the m o r e s o p h i s t i c a t e d soil
wedge m e t h o d d e s c r i b e d a b o v e and e x p r e s s i n g the I n c r e a s i n g the s u p p o r t p r e s s u r e l e a d s to h i g h e r
r e s u l t s in the form fa c t o r s of safety against collapse of the
F tunnel face. However, too high support
( O'* P) (2)
p r e s s u r e s i n c r e a s e the r isk of b l o w o u t - f a i l u r e s
and o v e r b u r d e n u p l i f t a h e a d of the t u n n e l face.
k is an e m p i r i c a l earth pressure coefficient While the formation of blowouts mainly
d e p e n d i n g on soil l a y e r i n g and p r o p e r t i e s that d e p e n d s an p o s s i b l e p r e f e r r e d s e e p a g e c h a n n e l s ,
is d e r i v e d f r o m the soil w e d g e m e t h o d , k may the factor of safety against uplift can be
only be a p p l i e d for a l i m i t e d t u n n e l l e n g t h , e v a l u a t e d w i t h a c o m p a r a t i v e l y s i m p l e m o del.
w here soil conditions do not change For that p u r p o s e the f orce b a l a n c e a c c o r d i n g
c o n s i d e r a b l y . The v e r t i c a l p r e s s u r e * + p at to Fig. 6 at a soil obelisk is evaluated.
tunnel roof l evel s h o u l d be c a l c u l a t e d u s i n g an C o m p a r i n g the w e i g h t of the u p l i f t soil b o d y to
a r c h i n g r e d u c t i o n a c c o r d i n g to T e r z a g h i ( 1 9 5 4 ) . the u p l i f t i n g s l u r r y f orce y i e l d s a s a f e t y

777
9/2

d e f i n i t i o n (Fig. 6).rf and G in the e q u a t i o n s of

Fig. 6 are c o n s t a n t s i n d e p e n d e n t of B.
I n s t e a d of l o o k i n g at the f a c t o r of s a f e t y y
w h i c h s t i l l c o n t a i n s the u n k n o w n l e n g t h of a c ­
tion of the support pressure, at the t u n n e l
roof, it is s u f f i c i e n t to take o n l y the f i r s t soil uplift body
t erm of the d e f i n i t i o n f o r m u l a of ^ as a c o n ­
servative safety definition 71 » F i g « 6 ) .
For very deep t u n n e l s f jl may be u s e d as f a c t o r
of safety .
The m i n i m u m f a c t o r of s a f e t y a g a i n s t u p l i f t
can be b a s e d on t y p i c a l n a t i o n a l r e q u i r e m e n t s
for s a f e t y a g a i n s t b u o y a n c y .

2. 5 E x a m p l e

To d e t e r m i n e the s l u r r y s u p p o r t pressure and

the span w i t h i n w h i c h it m a y c h a n g e w i t h o u t a
risk for stability, for each charateristic
p o i n t a l o n g a t u n n e l line the f a c t o r s of s a f e t y
a g a i n s t c o l l a p s e of the t u n n e l face a n d u p l i f t
have to be d e t e r m i n e d . The d e p t h of the t u n n e l ,
the soil layering and p r o p e r t i e s , the g r ou n d
w a t e r level, and the s u r c h a r g e s i n f l u e n c e the support
results. pressure
If the s l u r r y l e v e l s that b e l o n g to c e r t a i n distribution
prescribed factors of s a f e t y a g a i n s t c o l l a p s e
of the t u n n e l face and u p l i f t of o v e r b u r d e n are A=width*of equivalent G= — -[ A B + A'-B**( A+ÄH B+Ö)] = * */3B
p l o t t e d a l o n g the t u nnel line, a s a f e t y p r o f i l e rectangle
re s u l t s that may be U 9 e d to d e f i n e an o p t i m u m B=effçctive length of P= A-B-pJ
support pressure that lies b e t w e e n the u p p e r action of support
pressure at funnel roof
and lower s a f e t y line.
Fig. 7 d e m o n s t r a t e s the e f f e c t of o v e r b u r d e n ,
s u r f a c e s u r c h a r g e , and g r o u n d w a t e r l e v e l on the Figure 6 . C a l c u l a t i o n model fur the safety
o p t i m u m s l u r r y level. V e r t i c a l s t r e s s has the against uplift of o v e r b u r d e n
most d o m i n a n t i n f l u e n c e .

slurry 7 - 1.1
. . optimum line
level ? =1,3 (coll
m
n
I
p»frH fs=10,5kN/m
1* 2 IriV-1I

Figure 7. Support
pressure and safety
margins as slurry
levels along a
tunnel line
(Mayer, 1987)

target
shaft

REFERENCES

DIN 4126, 1986. 0 r t b e t o n - Sch 1 i t z w ä n d e

B roms, B.B., H . B e n n e r m a r k 1967. S t a b i l i t y of c l a y at v e r t i c a l o p e n i n g s . J o u r n a l of the S oil M e c h a ­
nics and F o u n d a t i o n s D i v i s i o n . ASCE. No. SM 1: 7 1 - 9 4
A t k i n s o n , J.H., D.M. P o t t s 1977. S t a b i l i t y of a s h a l l o w c i r c u l a r t u n n e l in c o h e s i o n l e s s soil.
G e o t e c h i q u e 27. No. 22: 2 0 3 - 2 1 5
Davis, E.H., M.J. Gunn, R.J. M a i r , H.N. S e n e r i v a t n e 1980. The S t a b i l i t y of s h a l l o w t u n n e l s and
u n d e r g r o u n d o p e n i n g s in c o h e s i v e m a t e r i a l . G e o t e c h n i q u e 30. No. 4: 3 9 7 - 4 1 6
Kr a u s e , T. 1987. S c h i l d v o r t r i e b mit f1 ü s s i g k e i t s - u nd e r d g e s t ü t z e r O r t s b r u s t . D i s s e r t a t i o n , TU
Braunschweig
T e r z a g h i , K., R. J e l i n i k 1954. T h e o r e t i s c h e B o d e n m e c h a n i k . S p r i n g e r - V e r 1 ag , B e r l i n
W alz, B., M. P u l s f o r t 1983. R e c h n e r i s c h e S t a n d s i c h e r h e i t s u s p e n s i o n s g e s t ü t z t e r E r d w ä n d e .
Teil 1 und 2, T i e f b a u , I n g e n i e u r b a u , S t r a ß e n b a u , H.l: 4-7 and H . 2: 8 2 - 8 6
M a y e r , L. 1987. T h i x s c h i 1 d v o r t r i e b mit S t a h l a u s b a u im B e r g s e n k u n g s g e b i e t . S T U V A - T a g u n g , E s s e n

778