DR Oskar 191020-SocMyanmarCivilEng - 01

Society of Myanmar Civil Engineers
(Singapore)
Challenges of Underground Construction

in the Built-up environment
Dr. Oskar SIGL – Geoconsult

Singapore, 20.10.2019
1
Synopsis
 Underground Construction is more and more taking place in

urban environments
 Increased levels of complexity, difficulty and providing ever

greater challenges to us engineers
 Linkways and Underpasses are often “forgotten”
 Discuss some “Special Solutions” to such linkway challenges

= Rectangular Pipe Jacking
= Box jacking in very shallow cover
= Pipe pile box with steel frames
= Mined tunnel in very shallow cover
 Some thoughts to evaluation of monitoring results

2
1. Rectangular Pipe Jacking TBM
 Open cut excavation with sheet piles not possible
 Services & Utilities & Traffic disruption
 Overall duration required for completion
 RC concrete box jacking was chosen
 Faster and higher productivity
3
Pedestrian Underpass
 Connecting Entrances with Station
MRT Station
4
Pedestrian Underpass
 Services and Utilities
5
Pedestrian
Project Underpass
 Subsequent TBM tunneling below
 Clearance crown-to-soffit about 10m
Cast
In-situ
141 m of Precast Segments (94 Nos) 15 m
6
Pedestrian Underpass - Future
 3x Future Knock-Out Panels (FKOP) for future connections
 1x Future underpassing of major underground expressway

infrastructure (FUI)
FUI
FKOP
7
Functional Cross Section
 Segment width is 1.5m
Cutting Line for FKOP

4625 Clear Internal Dimension
3005 Clearance to ceiling

Thickness of Segment = 500 mm
6600 Clear internal dimension
Cast in Situ Slab (min 275 mm)

Cutting Line for FKOP
External Radius of Corner = 1000 mm

100 mm Recess for Fire H.
Type 3 Segments
8
Geotechnical Long Section
 About 60m of ground treatment (44 rings)
 Overburden varies between 5 m and 7 m
 Total Number of rings = 94
 Intermediate Jacking Station = 1

Base of Kallang Formation
FILL
E
M
F1
GVI
GV
Rock Head
9
Ground Treatment
Ground Treatment (Zone 4)
Ground Treatment (Zones 2a & 2b)
Underpass Tunnel
NB
SB MRT
MRT
10
Rectangular Pipe Jacking Machine
11
 EPB Type of Excavation Machine

Intermediate Thrust Ring Back Support
Jacking System
Thrust System
12
 Intermediate
Jacking Station
13
 Bentonite injection system (Lubrication)
14
Lining Segment
 Pre-cast on site
15
Lining Segment
 Segment Turning and Lowering into the Shaft
16
Knock-out Panels
 One for this project & 3 for future connections

Side wall cut out of
Entrance D KOP 21 Segments (22%
Future KOP of 94 nos.)
Stronger Type 2
segments are used
Future KOP at KOP locations
Type 1b KOP not

possible to shift in
the future
Type 2 KOP could

FUI
be shifted to Type
1b location in the
future
17
Knockout Panels
 External Support provided to Roof and Base Slab
18
Future Connections
 Segments mainly supported from the outside
Macalloy tensioning
bars provided in the
top corners.
Temporary prop
across the drain
between corbel and
cast in situ slab.
Sufficient rebar is provided in

slab so that it is able to span
across the opening
19
Future Connections
 RC slab on top of linkway
20
Future Connections
 Slabs and Beams
FUTURE SLAB
FUTURE BEAMS
21
Tunnelling KPIs
 Target volume loss: <1% expected, 2% used for impact assessment
 Face pressure:
= Ground Treatment: Max. / Target / Min. = 105 / 85 / 75kPa
= Residual Soil: Max. / Target / Min. = 135 / 115 / 105kPa
 Lubricant pressure:
= Ground Treatment: Max. / Min. = 150 / 90kPa
= Residual Soil: Max. / Min. = 150 / 120kPa
 Backfill grout pressure Max. / Min. = 150 / 125kPa
 Thrust force 7,500 ~ 30,000 (Max. 50,000kN)
 Initial CHI air pressure: Treated Ground 75kPa

Residual Soil 95kPa
22
Construction
 Obstructions related to utility works in the past
 Left-in-place temporary retaining walls
23
Construction
 Obstructions
Steel recovered from screw conveyor
24
Obstructions
 Steel plate wrapped around cutter head
25
Tool Damage
 Damaged cutter bits, recovered from screw conveyor
26
Obstructions
 Granite boulders removed from cutterhead
27
Cutterhead Interventions
 CHI access only from the “middle”
28
Cutterhead
Intervention
29
Cutterhead Intervention
30
Excavation progress
Obstructions to Cutterhead
Very Soft Soils Residual Soils of Granite
31
Synopsis

urban environments

 Discuss some “Special Solutions” to such challenges


32
2. Box Jacking in very Shallow Cover
 Full scale underground expressway
 Stacked arrangement (2x3 lanes)
 Follows a major road
 Large number of utilities and services
 Crossing with existing MRT twin bored tunnels (above &

below)
 Practically no overburden for upper tunnel
 Lower tunnel crossing not presented here
33
Underground Expressway
 Top of final structure at ground level or higher
 Services & Utilities & Traffic
 Very wide structure (3 lanes expressway)
 Heave due to load reduction caused by excavation
 Maintain weight to eliminate uplift
 Safer, faster and higher productivity
34
Crossing Existing MRT Line
MRT
Crossing
35
Underground Expressway
 Crossing of
Existing MRT Fill
Southbound
Tunnel Sand (Fluvial)
Residual Soils NSL

Clay (Marine/Fluvial)
Northbound
Tunnel
Rock Head
Granite
36
Underground Expressway 2x 3-Lanes
 Major Road Junction
 Existing operational MRT Line
37
Underground Expressway 2x 3-Lanes
 Major Road Junction
 Existing operational MRT Line

Road on the surface Existing MRT bored tunnel Road on the surface
SB – Expressway 3 lanes
Future Development – Underpass Future Development - Underpass
NB – Expressway 3 lanes
38
Sequence
 Work shafts
39
Sequence
 Uplift of existing tunnels during excavation of Upper crossing
40
Reference Design
 Load path travels around many corners
41
Alternative – SFT Method
 Simple Faceless Tunneling Method (patented)
 Entire soil package is jacked out by jacking element
 Element is “pre-cast” in the shaft and then jacked into the

ground
 Maintain weight to eliminate uplift of existing MRT
 No open face
 All excavation is carried out in the shaft
 Once jacking is finished, the permanent structure is already

completed
42
SFT Box Jacking Method for the Upper
Tunnel
 Involves Patents Road level
SB Tunnel
1.5m
NSL Tunnel
43
Square Pile Box Installation
 Roof laid out on the ground Road level
NSL Tunnel
44
 Installed from adjacent shaft
1.5m
NSL Tunnel
45
46
– Retractable cutterhead
– Removal of obstructions when encountered
– Bentonite can be injected for lubrication
47
 Side from bottom up
Square pile box
1.5m
NSL Tunnel
48
 xx
49
Closure of the Square Pile Box
50
Friction Cut Plates
 On soil sides of square box pipes
 Connected by welding at the front edge and will be

pulled into ground by box pile during jacking process
 Left in the ground
Jacking
Jacking
Direction
Direction
For 1st Box Pipe For Subsequent Box Pipes
51
SFT Method
Friction cut plates

Square pile box and soil
Square piles
1000×1000×3000
Source: Uemura Giken Co. Ltd
52
SFT Method
Segment cast in shaft
Friction cut plates are left in the ground

Source: Uemura Giken Co. Ltd
53
Jacking of Box Segment
 Jacking force need to be taken care of
54
Jacking Arrangements
 Work shaft designs need to consider very large jacking forces
 Large jacking forces at the reaction wall
= Ground Treatment behind reaction wall
= T-shape diaphragm wall panels behind reaction wall
= Combination of both
 OR
= Early installation of permanent structure behind the reaction

wall for a defined distance (65m)
= Take force with diaphragm walls (side walls) and the slabs
55
Jacking Arrangements
 Design for very large jacking forces
 3D analysis of entire structure
 65m of permanent structure – walls and slabs take the load
56
Sequence
 Work shafts
57
Sequence
 Work shafts
Receiving Shaft Launching Shaft
58
Sequence
 Square pile box and reaction structure
Receiving Shaft Launching Shaft Reaction Structure
59
Sequence
 SFT Method – Jacking
Receiving Shaft Launching Shaft Reaction Structure
60
Sequence
 Upper Tunnel (SFT) completed
61
Sequence for Lower Tunnel
 For information only
 Excavate work shafts deeper
62
Sequence for Lower Tunnel
 Lower tunnel installed by JF Method (Front Jacking)
 Pulling from both sides using other side as reaction
Upper Tunnel
Future Development Future Development
Lower Tunnel 3 1 2
63
Synopsis

urban environments



64
3. Pipe Pile Box with Steel Frames
 Mixed ground conditions with granite rock and residual soils
 Underpasses a major intersection
 Large number of utilities and services and major 13m wide

drainage culvert
 Connecting to existing MRT station
 Alternative proposal with large diameter pipes and omitting

intermediate shaft
65
Original Proposal
 Keep jacking length to a maximum of around 40
 Intermediate work shaft
 42 nos. dia. 813/16mm interlocking steel pipes
 Support frame spacing 1.5m
 Horizontal ground treatment
66
Original Proposal
Entrance Shaft
Pipe jacking tunnel 1
Shaft 1
Pipe Jacking tunnel 2
Shaft 4
Shaft 3
67
Alternative Proposal
 No intermediate large work shaft (only concreting chute)
 Jacking length increased to almost 100m
 42 nos. of pipe jackings reduced to 13 nos.
 13 nos. dia. 2,030/16mm interlocking steel pipes
 Support frame spacing 5m
 Temporary concrete slab at the base between the frames
 Ground treatment form within the large pipes and vertical
68
 Revised Layout
Entrance C
Launching shaft
Link Bridge
Concreting access
Arrival shaft
Entrance A
69
Soil Profile
 Mixed ground conditions
Entrance A
Entrance C
Arrival
13m wide Canal Launching
FILL
GVI
F2
GIV GV
GIII
Proposed Pipe Jacking
FILL F1 F2 GVI GV GIV GIII
70
71
Alternative
Launching seal
72
Pipe Jacking Machine
 Collapsible cutter head due to no space for retrieval at arrival

shaft
Jacking diameter Collapsed diameter

2,082mm 1,810mm
73
Pipe Connections
 All pipes are interconnected with T-clutch detail
74
Alternative Ground Treatment
 Jet grouting from within the pipes
75
Alternative Ground Treatment
JGP
Columns
Rockhead
76
77
Completed Pedestrian Linkway
78
Synopsis

urban environments



79
4. Mined Tunnel in Shallow Cover
 Connecting Entrance to MRT station
 Mixed ground conditions with cemented sand and soft clays
 Large number of utilities and traffic without possibility of

diversion
 Original proposal pipe pile box with steel frames
 Due to programming constraints only excavation from the

station side possible
 A mined option was only one which was able to meet the
program
80
Original Proposal
 Pipe piles box with steel frames
 24 nos. dia. 800/12mm interlocking steel pipes
 Support frame spacing 1.5m
 Horizontal ground treatment
81
Passenger Linkway
Jacking Shaft
Receiving Shaft 8mx17m
4mx15m
STATION
Mined Tunnel Layout

82
Reference Design
Pipe Roof Cross Section
Ground Level 109.43 (approx.)
103.03m Existing 1.2m Water Pipe
101.48 Supporting Steel Frame
SUBWAY STRUCTURE
PIPE
800mmx11mm thk
Soil Improvement
~ 94.00m
83
Reference Design
Water Main 1.2m
Jacking Shaft
Reaction Wall
84
 Reverse excavation direction for programming reasons
 Remove all activities from the entrance side
Jacking Shaft Wall
85
Mined Tunnel – SCL
 Mixed Ground
FILL – N=10
Sand – N=20
Sand
Clayey Alluvium – N=15
Cemented Alluvium – N=50
Cemented Alluvium – N>80
86
Longitudinal Section - Sequencing
Double Pipe
roof
Double Single Pipe

Pipe roof roof
Top
Heading
Invert
87
Cross Section – Pipe Roof and Face
Grouting
Typical Pipe Roof
Arrangement
88
Typical Face Grouting Arrangement
Cross Section - Sequencing
89
90
91
Half of permanent
structure
Temp. props
92
93
94
95
Pipe Roof Drilling
96
Excavation
97
Excavation – Top Heading
98
Drilling of Face Grouting – 1st Drift
99
Excavation – 2nd Drift
100
2nd Drift Completed
101
Synopsis

urban environments

102
5. Monitoring Considerations
 Control over construction risks
 Sometimes only settlement tables – not even time histories
 Time history graphs do not tell the entire story
 Assessment of TREND lines or INFLUENCE lines
103
Monitoring
 Trend Line
 Longitudinal Settlement profiles
 Connect settlement points above the face with a line at different dates
 Provides a means of tend analysis
 Trend line often shows changes well before changes are “visible” in
time history graphs
104
Trend Line
 Connect settlement points above the face

with a line at different dates
105
Trend Line
 Same increments  horizontal line
106
Trend Line
 Larger increments, the curve is dipping down
107
Trend Line
 Surface
settlement
 Crown
settlement
108
Mined Tunnel – From rock into soft ground
 xxxx
 xxxxxxx
109
Mined Tunnel – From rock into soft ground
 xxxx
 xxxxxxx
110
Mined tunnel - Monitoring
 Time history plots
111
Mined tunnel – Monitoring
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
 Trend Line
 Tool for analysis of monitoring results

 Helps with judgement
121
Mined tunnel - Monitoring
122
Thank
You
123

DR Oskar 191020-SocMyanmarCivilEng - 01

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

DR Oskar 191020-SocMyanmarCivilEng - 01

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Society of Myanmar Civil Engineers

Challenges of Underground Construction

Dr. Oskar SIGL – Geoconsult

 Underground Construction is more and more taking place in

 Increased levels of complexity, difficulty and providing ever

 Linkways and Underpasses are often “forgotten”

 Discuss some “Special Solutions” to such linkway challenges

 Some thoughts to evaluation of monitoring results

 Open cut excavation with sheet piles not possible

 Services & Utilities & Traffic disruption

 Overall duration required for completion

 RC concrete box jacking was chosen

 Faster and higher productivity

 Connecting Entrances with Station

 Services and Utilities

 Subsequent TBM tunneling below

 Clearance crown-to-soffit about 10m

 3x Future Knock-Out Panels (FKOP) for future connections

 1x Future underpassing of major underground expressway

 Segment width is 1.5m

Cutting Line for FKOP

3005 Clearance to ceiling

Cast in Situ Slab (min 275 mm)

External Radius of Corner = 1000 mm

 About 60m of ground treatment (44 rings)

 Overburden varies between 5 m and 7 m

 Total Number of rings = 94

 Intermediate Jacking Station = 1

Ground Treatment (Zone 4)

Ground Treatment (Zone 3)

Ground Treatment (Zones 2a & 2b)

Ground Treatment (Zone 1)

 EPB Type of Excavation Machine

 Bentonite injection system (Lubrication)

 Segment Turning and Lowering into the Shaft

 One for this project & 3 for future connections

Type 1b KOP not

Type 2 KOP could

 External Support provided to Roof and Base Slab

 Segments mainly supported from the outside

Sufficient rebar is provided in

 RC slab on top of linkway

 Slabs and Beams

 Target volume loss: <1% expected, 2% used for impact assessment

 Backfill grout pressure Max. / Min. = 150 / 125kPa

 Thrust force 7,500 ~ 30,000 (Max. 50,000kN)

 Initial CHI air pressure: Treated Ground 75kPa

 Obstructions related to utility works in the past

 Left-in-place temporary retaining walls

Steel recovered from screw conveyor

 Steel plate wrapped around cutter head

 Damaged cutter bits, recovered from screw conveyor

 Granite boulders removed from cutterhead

 CHI access only from the “middle”

Very Soft Soils Residual Soils of Granite

 Underground Construction is more and more taking place in

 Increased levels of complexity, difficulty and providing ever

 Linkways and Underpasses are often “forgotten”

 Discuss some “Special Solutions” to such challenges

 Some thoughts to evaluation of monitoring results

 Full scale underground expressway

 Stacked arrangement (2x3 lanes)

 Follows a major road