10.observational Methods and NATM

Chapter 10
Observational Methods and NATM
10.Observational Methods and NATM

(General)
• The Observational Method in ground engineering;

Because prediction of geotechnical behavior is often difficult, it is sometimes appropriate to adopt the approach
known as the ’observational method’, in which the design is reviewed during construction.
It is a continuous, managed, integrated, process of design, construction control, monitoring enabling modifications
during or after construction as appropriate.
The objective is to achieve greater overall economy without compromising safety (Nicholson et.al.,1999)
• ’observational method’ was first introduced by Peck (1969) in his Rankine lecture.
Terzaghi, in the 1940s tentatively proposed a method, called ’experimental method’ and ’learn−as−you−go method’.
• Method was mainly introduced due to the fact that;

in geotechnical engineering, a vast amount of effort goes towards securing roughly approximate values for required
parameter inputs.
Many additional variables are not considered or remain unknown.
Results of computations are no more than working hypotheses, subject to confirmation or modification during
construction.
• These uncertainties require;
either the adoption of an excessive factor of safety, which is wasteful
or assumptions based on general experience ; dangerous as most failures occur due to unanticipated ground
conditions.
Ce 439 Railway and Metro Tunnels Dr.Timucin Hergul 2
1
(Observational Methods)
The Observational Method has a specific meaning. Peck set forward the following procedural steps:
• The complete application of the observational method embodies the following aspects (Peck, 1969) :
a) sufficient exploration to establish general properties of the ground, but not necessariily in detail
b) assess the most probable conditions and the most unfavorable deviations from these conditions.
geology often plays a major role.
c) establish the design based on a ’working hypothesis’ of behavior anticipated under the most probable
conditions;
d) select quantities to be observed as construction proceeds and calculate their anticipated values on
the basis of the working hypothesis;
e) calculate values of the same quantities under the most unfavorable conditions compatible with the
available data concerning the subsurface conditions;
f) select in advance of a course of action or modification of design for every foreseeable significant
deviation of the observational findings from those predicted on the basis of the working hypothesis;
g) measure quantities to be observed and evaluate actual conditions;
h) Modify design to suit actual conditions.

• The Base Design developed in (c) will typically be based on analysis. However, analysis cannot replace judgement.
• The design in (c) may present difficulties associated with the term ’most probably’, and in practice (c) has been
interpreted as ’unlikely to be exceeded’.
• Some margin of conservatism is always necessary; it may therefore be more appropriate base the design on a
’moderately conservative’ approach. A moderately conservative design would be less conservative than a
conventional design, but more conservative than one based on Pecks ’most probable’, so that modifications to the
original design become exceptional, not the rule.
• Feedback and assessment from observations must be timely in order to confirm predictions or to provide adequate
warning of any undue trends in ground movements or loadings.
• There must be sufficient time to enable planned contingency measures to be implemented effectively. This
emphasises a further aspect of the Observational Method ;
• Measurements of quantities must occur at the required times during a construction sequence. It may be necessary
to interrupt construction progress and may even influence the way construction is sequenced.
• Other Observational Approaches ; As set out by Peck, the procedures (a)− (h) for the Observational Method may be
unnecessarily cumbersome and often impossible to achieve. Further, the ’most probable` condition in (c) is very
difficult to find in a statistically reliable manner. Simpler versions of an observational approach have been
suggested, as e.g. by Muir Wood.
2
• The principal objective is;

• To prevent uncertainty to unacceptable levels of
risk by applying sufficient resources. (after
Nicholson et al. 1999)
• GEOLOGICAL UNCERTAINTY: For complex geological

and hydrological conditions, unexpected variations in
the ground conditions.
• PARAMETER UNCERTAINITY: Uncertainties exist in
the knowledge of the ground characteristics and the
modeling of its behavior.
• SUPPORT UNCERTAINTY: The time dependent behavior
of sprayed concrete is difficult to estimate
accurately.
• GROUND TREATMENT UNCERTAINTY: There are a
number of ground treatments available to improve
specific properties of the ground.

(NATM)
New Austrian Tunneling Method (Natm):
In traditional tunnel design (Schubert, 2015);
Design of tunnel support is generally based on hypothesis of

dead loads.
The ground behaviour i.e. Squeezing, swelling and etc.are
generally neglected.
These assumptions result in thick and inadequate support
systems in many cases.
disintegration of the ground, and loading the support due to;
 Poor contact of the supports to the rock,
 their low stiffness,
 and the frequent repropping during the different stages of
excavation
A distinction between loads by loosened rock mass and by ground
deformation (often referred to as squeezing) was difficult. Thus
in squeezing conditions linings were designed very heavy, often
leading to their destruction.
The assumed relaxed zone of Bierbäumer (1913).
3
(NATM)
• One of the most well known methods using some elements of an observational approach is the New Austrian
Tunneling Method, or NATM. The method, which is in fact a broader concept of geotechnical engineering than a
single ’method’, has often been mentioned as a ’value engineered’ version of tunneling due to its use of light,
informal support.
• It has long been understood that the ground, if allowed to deform slightly, is capable of contributing to its
own support. NATM, with its use of modern means of monitoring and surface stabilisation, such as shotcrete and
rock bolts, utilizes this effect systematically.
• Historical Background;
• Traditional tunneling used first timber supports and later on steel arch supports in order to stabilise a tunnel
temporarily until the final support was installed. The final support was masonry or a concrete arch.
• Rock loads developed due to disintegration and detrimental loosening of the surrounding rock and loosened rock
exerted loads onto the support due to the weight of a loosened rock bulb (Kommerel, Terzaghi and others).
• Detrimental loosening was caused by the available excavation techniques, the support means and the long period
required to complete a tunnel section with many sequential intermediate construction stages.
• The result was very irregular heavy loading resulting in thick lining arches occupying a considerable
percentage of the tunnel cross−section (in the early trans−Alpine tunnels the permanent structure may occupy
as much as 40% of the excavated profile).

(NATM)
• In the first part of the 20th century tunnellers and scientists at that time understood the necessity to reduce
deformations in order to utilise the carrying capacity of the rock mass, and the reciprocal relationship between
support resistance and deformations.
• The New Austrian Tunneling Method (NATM) grew out of experience with the old methods. In his book "Gebirgsdruck
und Tunnelbau" 1944 Prof. L.v. Rabcewicz published a systematic of rock pressure phenomena and their
interpretation.
• Rabcewicz in 1948 patented a tunneling method, which was based on a double concrete shell approach. He
summarizes the philosophy of NATM in his patent of 1948 (Rabcewicz, 1964) as follows:
A new tunneling method, particularly adapted for unstable ground, has been developed which uses surface
stabilisation by a thin auxiliary shotcrete lining, suitably reinforced by rockbolting and closed as soon as
possible by an invert. Systematic measurement of deformation and stresses enables the required lining thickness
to be evaluated and controlled.
With a flexible primary support a new equilibrium shall be reached. This shall be controlled by in−situ
deformation measurements. After this new equilibrium is reached an inner arch shall be built. In specific cases
the inner arch can· be omitted.
4
(NATM)
As a summary;
• Natm attempts to develop the most stable and economic application by;
Continuous monitoring of the ground,
stabilizing the surface with shotcrete and bolts,
allowing the ground to deform slightly,
revising the excavation and support procedures,
mobilizing the self−supporting capability of the ground to an optimum.
• For this purpose;

Primary lining should be installed quickly to avoid disintegration and thus development of dead loads on lining
Waterproofing between primary and secondary lining.
Determination of installation of inner lining based on measuring results.
Inner lining should be installed after deformations ceased.

(NATM)
The Main principles of natm can be summarized as (Adapted from Müller and Fecker, 1978);
Mobilization of rock mass strength: (Prevent disintegration of the

rock mass, thus keeping its strength)
The ground offers the main support to the excavated tunnel.

The sprayed concrete has only a secondary supporting function.
The original strength of the ground should be preserved by
careful excavation and application of support and strengthening
means in combination with controlled deformations.
Loosening of the ground deteriorates its strength.
The support must not be installed too early or too late. It
should not be too stiff or too weak.
Force−transfer coupling between the lining and the ground, and
the installation of the support at the right time is essential.
Thus support must have suitable load−deformation characteristics
and be placed at the correct time.
A good engineering practice is to allow for deformation,
but to control further displacement beyond Necessary
(Zhao, 2008)
5
(NATM)
The NATM is based on the philosophy of

ˆBuild as you go˜
approach with the following caution.
ˆNot too stiff ,

Nor too flexible
Not too early,
Nor too late.˜
Support (external lining) not too early, not too late, not too stiff, not too flexible.
Main tools in the process of rock design.
(Singh & Goel, 2006)

(NATM)
Shotcrete protection to preserve the load−carrying capacity

of the ring of rock mass (Primary support system):
Installation of systematic rock bolting with shotcrete

lining allows limited deformations but prevents loosening of
the rock mass.
In the initial stage it requires small forces to prevent rock
mass from moving in, but once movement has started, large
forces are required.
Therefore, NATM advocates installation of supports within
stand−up time to prevent movements.
It is essential support is placed and remains in physical
contact with the ground and deforms with it.
Supports must be effective not at spots but overall.
(Singh and Goel, 2006)
6
(NATM)
Monitoring the deformation of the excavated rock mass:
The choice of support and construction sequence is made

on the basis of displacement monitoring.
Therefore, the behaviour shall be monitored to observe
the stabilization process and allow for adjustments of
construction measures to ground conditions.
Examples of NATM tunnel monitoring equipment

(1:Convergence tape, 2:Extensometer, 3:Anchor force,
4: Pressure cell

(NATM)
Providing flexible but active supports:
The method uses a thin sprayed concrete lining. This will

minimise bending moments and facilitate the stress
rearrangement process without exposing the lining to
unfavourable sectional forces.
Increasing the support is not achieved by a thicker lining,
but by the use of girders, steel reinforcement and
anchors.
The lining shall be in full contact with the exposed rock.
Shotcrete fulfils this requirement.
7
(NATM)
Closing of invert to form a load−bearing support ring to control

deformation of then rock mass:
In static consideration, a tunnel should be treated as a thick wall

tube, consisting of a load−bearing ring of rock arch and supporting
lining.
Since, a tube can act as a tube only if it is closed, the closing of
the ring becomes of paramount importance, specially where the
foundation rock is not capable of withstanding high support
pressure in squeezing ground condition.

(NATM)
The excavation sequence is important for the overall

stability and full face excavation should be used
whenever possible:
Due to stress−redistribution, when an opening is

being excavated, a full−face heading is considered
most favorable.
Drivage in different stages complicates the stress
redistribution phenomenon and destroys the rock
mass. The length of the tunnel left unsupported at
any time during construction should be as short as
possible.
8
(NATM)
Rounded shape:
Stress concentrations in corners where

progressive failure mechanisms start shall be
avoided by maintaining a rounded shape for the
tunnel profile.

(NATM)
the following main surveys, measurements and controls can be performed:

• Geomechanical surveys of the excavation face or walls
• Convergences AND Deformation of the ground
• Strain and loads on linings
• Water−pressure measurements
The monitoring system should collect as much information as possible in order to evaluate
the effectiveness of ground improvements and confinement systems, and the suitability of the
construction methods adopted.
9
(NATM)
Measurement instruments for the monitoring phase

(Lunardi, 2008)

(NATM)
The application of the Observational Method to the NATM (Nicholson et.al.,1999)
10
(NATM)
Application of natm in hard rock conditions:
The basis for the design of tunnels in rock depends on

both the ground conditions and the usage of the tunnel
(water, road, railway tunnel, etc.).
Tunnels excavated in sound rock are generally horseshoe
shaped, whereas tunnels excavated in poor rock generally
require an invert arch to ensure stability.
The tunnel is typically advanced by drill and blast
following a sequential excavation method (top heading,
bench, invert).
However if favorable rock conditions are anticipated,
full−face excavation can be used.
Example of cross−section in hard rock conditions
(Austrian society for geomechanics, 2010)

(NATM)
Possible excavation sequences for SCL (and NATM) (ICE 1996)
11
(NATM)
Application of natm in hard rock conditions:
The bench is excavated simultaneously to the top

heading, up to a few hundred meters behind the
excavation face, providing a ramp for access to
the heading.
Some distance behind the bench, the invert is
excavated. If ground conditions are unfavorable,
an invert arch is provided to close the lining,
forming a complete ring.
In a separate operation following the
excavation, concrete abutments and plastic
drainage pipes are installed.
The tunnel profile is checked by scanning the
surface and is corrected if necessary.
The primary lining and the dowel heads are
covered with a smoothening layer in preparation
for the installation of the waterproofing
system. Construction sequence including invert arch
(Austrian society for geomechanics, 2010)

(NATM)
Application of natm in Soft ground conditions:
• Application examples Road tunnel, overburden 50m (Austrian society for geomechanics, 2010) (1);
A tunnel is excavated with a drained lining system in sandy, silty gravel with interbedded layers of silt.
The cross section is similar to that of a hard rock tunnel, however, an invert arch, consisting of shotcrete and
reinforced or unreinforced concrete, is provided throughout.
In contrast to a hard rock tunnel, the main support element is shotcrete applied to a substantial thickness (0.3 m ˘
0.4 m). The thickness of the secondary lining is to be determined by structural analysis.
12
(NATM)
• Application examples Road tunnel, overburden 50m (Austrian society for geomechanics, 2010) (1);
The excavation sequence is top heading ˘ bench ˘ invert.

Face support (supporting core), elephant feet, a temporary invert in the top heading and the arrangement of a pipe
canopy can be employed.
The length of the excavation rounds for this example is limited to a maximum of 1.0 m in the top heading, 2.0 m in
the bench and 4.0 m in the invert.

(NATM)
• Application examples Railway Tunnel, Shallow Overburden (Austrian society for geomechanics, 2010) (2);
Tunnels with large cross−sections in shallow overburden requires that the size of the excavation face be reduced to
limit surface settlement.
Can be achieved by using an excavation sequence consisting of two sidewall drifts and a centre core.
the side wall drifts are staggered and served as both a pilot tunnel and a foundation for the crown support.
13
(NATM)
NATM: Advantages/Limitations
Advantages:
• The primary advantage of NATM is the economy resulting from matching the amount of support installed to the
ground conditions, as opposed to installing support for the expected worst case scenario throughout the entire
tunnel.
• The safety of the work is more easily assured because the sizes and configurations of the headings making up the
total tunnel cross section can be adapted to the degree of instability of the working face.
Disadvantages:
• One of the chief problems is the need for cooperation between the Owner´s and Contractor´s engineers in deciding
the amount of support to be installed from day to day. It is not easy to achieve this in the adversarial conditions
often encountered.
• Also, the one man, one job philosophy of union contracting tends to spoil the economic advantages since most of the
tasks are necessarily performed sequentially, some of them by other trades. Daily production rates are often
lower, and in soft ground, more support is generally required to support the working face, than with shield driven
tunnels (McCusker, 1991).

(NATM)
14
(Ground response)
• the results of the three−dimensional finite element analysis of the deformation of the rock mass surrounding a
circular tunnel advancing through a weak rock mass subjected to equal stresses in all directions shows that
(Hoek, 1998);
 Deformation of the rock mass starts about two and one half tunnel diameters ahead of the advancing face and
reaches its maximum value about four and one half diameters behind the face.
 At the face position about one third of the total radial closure of the tunnel has already occurred and the
tunnel face deforms inwards.
 Therefore, ground response to excavation as well as ground ˘support interaction is a 3D problem.

(Ground response)
Interaction btw. The ground & the support:

• The convergence˙confinement method or the ground
response (or reaction, or characteristics) curve
concept is the basic concept for understanding the
complex interaction between the rock mass and the
installed support.
• It is applicable for stress−induced instability where
plastic or time−dependent deformations are involved.
The basic mechanism is shear failures in the rock
mass. The load effect depends on the deformations of
the opening. In principle, the load effect will
decrease with increasing deformations.
• The actual load effect will then depend on the
stiffness of the support. The interaction is normally
presented in a ground˙support interaction diagram
with the ground reaction curve and the reaction line
of the support. An example of a ground support interaction diagram or a Fenner˙
Pacher curve. The numbers 1 and 2 show two different support
systems installed at different times.
(Reproduced from Brown, 1981)
15
(Ground response)
• Consider an excavation in which a heading is being advanced by
conventional drill and blast methods.
• The pre−excavation state of stress is assumed to be hydrostatic
and of magnitude p0
Step 1
• Blocked steel sets are installed after each drill and blast
cycle.The development of radial displacement and radial support
pressure at a point on the excavation periphery at section X˘X
as the heading progressively advances to and beyond X˘X is
discussed.
• In step 1, the heading has not yet reached X˘X and the rock
mass on the periphery of the proposed profile is in equilibrium
with an internal support pressure, pi, acting equal and opposite
to p0. Po
Step 1
pi Po
Po
Hypothetical example of a tunnel being advanced by full−face

drill and blast methods with blocked steel sets being installed
Po after each mucking cycle (Daemen, 1977)

(Ground response)
• In step 2, the face has been advanced beyond X˘X and the support
pressure, pi, previously provided by the rock inside the excavation
periphery, has been reduced to zero.
• However, the apparently unsupported section of the heading
between the face and the last steel set installed, is constrained
to some extent by the proximity of the face.
• Figure shows the development with distance from the face of radial
displacement at the periphery of a circular tunnel in an elastic
material subject to a hydrostatic in situ stress field.
Po
Step 2
Roof Curve
pi Po Step 2
Po
Wall Curve the radial support pressure (pi) required
to limit the boundary displacement (i) to
Po a given value can be plotted
16
(Ground response)
• By step 3, the heading has been mucked out and steel sets have
been installed close to the face. At this stage, the sets carry no
load because no deformation of the rock has occurred since their
installation.
• This assumes that the rock mass does not exhibit time−dependent
stress˘strain behaviour. On the graph, the radial displacements of
points in the roof and in the side wall, are still those given by
points B and C.
Po
Step 2
Roof Curve
pi Po Step 3
Po
Wall Curve
Po

(Ground response)
• In step 4, the heading is advanced about one and a half tunnel

diameters beyond X˘X by a further cycle of drilling and blasting.
• The restraint offered by the proximity of the face is now
negligible, and there is further radial displacement of the rock
surface at X˘X as indicated by the curves CEG and BFH.
• This induces load in the steel sets which are assumed to show
linear radial stress˘displacement behaviour.
Step 2
17
(Ground response)
• Thus the supports typically load along a path such as DEF, known as the support reaction or available support
line. The curve representing the behaviour of the rock mass is known as the ground characteristic or required
support line.
• Equilibrium between the rock and the steel sets is reached at point E for the side wall and point F for the roof.
It is important to note that most of the redistributed stress arising from creation of the excavation is carried
by the rock and not by the steel sets.
• If steel sets had not been installed after the

last two stages of heading advance, the radial
displacements at X˘X would have increased along
Step 2
the dashed curves EG and FH.
• In the case of the side walls, equilibrium would
have been reached at point G.
• However, the support pressure required to limit
displacement of the roof may drop to a minimum and
then increase again as rock becomes loosened and
has to be held up. In this example, the roof would
collapse if no support were provided.

(Ground response)
(Summary):
As the excavation proceeds, the ground moves into the tunnel

and the radial pressure that is required to achieve
equilibrium reduces as the ground strength is mobilized.
(Points A−C)
Point B represents the completion of the lining whereby the
ground load causes the inward movement of the lining.
Point C is the point of equilibrium when the radial pressure
required for equilibrium is provided by the lining.
Point D represents the end of the convergence of the lining.
Without the support of the lining, the convergence increases
and the ground may ultimately collapse into the tunnel.
The lack of stability of the ground is key in determining the
amount of face subdivision and the length of the round. One
indicator of the round length is the speed with which the Ground˘Lining Relationship (Adapted from Safety of the
support can be installed. In more stable ground, the top New Austrian Tunneling Method (NATM) Tunnels, Health
and Safety Executive, 1996)
heading may be driven, with the bench following at a distance
determined by the ground stability.
18
(Ground response)
Construction of ground response curve
Basic assumptions of convergence ˘ confinement approach;
• Tunnel is circular
• Plane strain conditions exist
• Far−field stresses are uniform (hydrostatic)
• Material is isotropic and homogeneous (elastic or elasto−plastic)
• Support is axi−symmetric and exerts a uniform internal pressure (Support forms a closed ring)
• Effect of the tunnel front in the vicinity of the tunnel section regarded as a fictitious support pressure.
𝜎 =
• In case ground behaves as elastic material.......
• Lame´s Solution with; r0
• Hydrostatic stresses ri 𝜎 =
• Axial symmetry and
• Thick wall with linearly elastic material pi
𝜎 =2υ
P0
𝜎 =0

(Ground response)
The stress distribution and radial displacements will be;
R 𝜎 =𝜎 𝜎 𝑝

pi r
r
𝜎 =𝜎 𝜎 𝑝
𝜎
ur
𝑢 =‐ 𝜎 𝑝
19
(Ground response)
The elastic radial displacement at the tunnel wall according to Lame will be (where R=r);
R

pi r
r
𝜎
ur
𝑢 = 𝜎 𝑝 σ0 = initial hydrostatic stress
pcr = critical pressure
uel = maximum elastic displacement
𝐸 R = tunnel radius
𝐺 ν = Poisson’s ratio
2 1 𝜐 E = Young Modulus

(Ground response)
Yield criteria for different quality rock masses
Suggested post failure characteristics for different quality rock masses (Hoek,2000).
20
(Ground response)
• Curve 1 represents the perfect excavation case, in

which there is no disturbance of the remaining
rock.
• Curve 2 may occur in a machine−driven tunnel, in
which there is a slight disturbance to the
remaining rock with the result of increased final
displacement.
• Curve 3 could represent high−quality blasting,
where more disturbance is inevitable and the
resulting displacements are increased yet further.
• All three of these curves intersect the boundary
displacement axis which indicates that no support
is required, providing the displacements are
tolerable.
Ground response curves in (a) different types of rock and • Curve 4, representing the response following poor−
(b) in the same rock type but excavated by different methods.
quality blasting, indicates that support is
(Hudson & Harrision, 1997).
essential if stability of the excavation is to be
maintained.

(Ground response)
Elastic • Experience has shown that shortly after excavating a tunnel,

the surrounding rock shows signs of being strained or even
overstrained;
• Split tensile and buckling failure develops near the
Plastic
excavation line in straight side walls or inverts or
• Shear failure develops in high pressure exerting rock if
lateral confinement is insufficient.
R 
• These failures are generally of progressive nature and can be
Rpl pi r r kept under control with the information of careful in situ
observation.
ur • Other problem areas may be rock burst in brittle behaving rock
under high uniaxial stress or swelling rock like clays or
anhydrite.
• Rock sample testing should be carried out under laboratory
conditions as well as in situ examinations. The gained values
of the rock−mechanical properties, their variability in
particular long−term changes and also the effects of water
inflow must be taken into account.
21
(Ground response)
Talobre´s Interpretation (1957)

• Talobre assumes that the rock is in a hydrostatic state of stress with k = 1. For circular galleries the
circumferential stress at the periphery of the rock excavation is then 𝜎 =2𝜎 at whatever angle 𝜙. This is correct so
long as 𝜎 =2𝜎 is smaller than the elastic limit of the rock.
• Whenever the circumferential stress at a distance r from the centre of the gallery reaches this limit of elasticity,
the rock is plastically deformed or even crushed, which relieves the stresses with some inward displacement.
• Crushing of the rock will occur if 𝜎 ˙𝜎 > 𝜎 where 𝜎 is a critical value obtained from the Mohr circle. It is
likely that the rock crushing leads progressively to stabilization of the deformations of the rock and the tunnel.
• These sketches give only qualitative information, as they cannot take into account the lack of homogeneity of
natural rock.
Stresses about cavities in isotropic rock, uniform residual stresses (v = r = = p’) : (a) 2p’< e1 :
(b) 2p’> e1 (c) crushed rock, e1 = elastic limit (after Talobre, 1957, adapted from Jaeger, 2007).

(Ground response)
Rabcewicz´s Interpretation (1957, 1964, 1965)

• Rabcewicz assumes that the gallery is excavated in rock strained
by a vertical field of forces v = p* (with k = 0).
• Stress rearrangement generally occurs in three stages. At first,
wedge−shaped bodies on either side of the cavity shear off along
the Mohr surfaces and move towards the cavity, with movement
perpendicular to the main pressure direction. The increased span
thus produced causes the roof and floor to start converging and
lateral pressure develops in a horizontal direction.
• In the next stage movement is increased and the rock buckles
under continuous lateral pressure and may protrude onto the
cavity. Squeezing pressures − the last stage − though common in
mining, are seldom encountered in civil engineering.
• Dangerous compression stresses develop along the horizontal
tunnel diameter. The theories assume a reasonable degree of
homogeneity and isotropy of the rock masses. The image of the Stresses and strains about a cavity in rock. Initial residual
rock deformations as sketched by Talobre and Rabcewicz are stresses uniaxial (v = p*, h = 0). Progressive redistribution
fundamentally altered when the rock is fissured, fractured or of stresses and rock displacements towards the cavity
stratified. (after Rabcewicz, 1964,1965, adapted from Jaeger, 2007).
22
(Ground response)
Fenner´s Equation (1938)

• Talobre and Rabcewicz in estimating the stress distribution about a gallery excavated in overstrained rock use
Fenner’s equation:
r = radius of the cavity,

R = radius of the protective, overstrained zone,
pi = rr the required radial ’skin resistance` and p0 the
uniform residual rock stress (v = h = p0 = p*)
Schematic representation of Fenner’s equation (after

Kastner, 1962, adapted from Jaeger, 2007).
Ce 439 Railway and Metro Tunnels Dr.Timucin Hergul

45

(Ground response)
Fenner´s Equation (1938)
• Talobre assumes that usually pi = 0 and the equation gives R, when c and  are known. Talobre gives the following
example for a 6−m−diameter tunnel at 1500 m depth:
• p0 = 400 kg/cm2 = 4000 t/m2, pi = 0, sin  = 0.5 and c cot  = 50 kg/cm2 = 500 t/m2.
• Fenner’s equation becomes; −500 + [500 + 4000 x 1/2] (r/R)2 = 0 ; r/R = (1/5)(1/2) ; with r = 3 ; R=6.7m = (3m+3.7m)
• The width of the crushed protective zone would be 3.70 m. Rabcewicz assumes that pi can be positive, corresponding to
the ’skin resistance’ of the shotcrete layer or to the radial stress due to rock bolting.
• Fenner’s equation has been criticized, because, in some cases, it fails to yield acceptable values. On the estimate of
the required rock support for tunnels, solutions differing from Fenner’s equation has developed, based on Kastner’s
and Lombardi’s suggestions (Jaeger, 1975,1976). Fenner’s equation and the alternatives proposed by others are
important to many basic engineering problems.
• Tunnel engineers may feel the geomechanicist’s approach discussed in Chapter 3 and 4 to be not entirely convincing.
Some of them (Kastner, 1962; Lombardi, 1971, 1974; Egger, 1973; Jaeger, 1973, 1975) advocate a completely different
approach to rocksupport estimates based on rock mass deformations, either measured or predicted on the basis of
measured rock parameters.
23
(Ground response)
0
Elastic • A yield criterion shall be applied to consider the elasto− plastic behaviour of ground
If pi < pcr the problem is characterized by two regions:

Plastic 1‐ Elastic region r ≥ Rpl
2‐ Plastic region r ≤ Rpl
R If pi ≥ pcr

the problem is fully elastic and can be solved by Lamé’s solution
r r
The solution for the elastic region will be (r> Rpl)
Rpl pi
0 0
ur 𝜎 =𝜎 𝜎 𝑝
𝜎 =𝜎 𝜎 𝑝
Material can be modeled as
elasto−plastic with Mohr−Coulomb 𝑢 =‐ 𝜎 𝑝
0 or Hoek−Brown failure criterion

(Ground response)
• If Mohr−Coulomb yield criterion is applied;
1 sin 𝜙 1 sin 𝜓
𝜎 =𝜎 𝐾 𝜎 𝐾 𝐾
1 sin 𝜙 1 sin 𝜓
2𝜎 𝜎 2𝑐 cos 𝜙
𝑝 𝜎
1 𝐾 1 sin 𝜙
𝜎 is the axial stress at which failure occurs
𝜎 is the confining stress For pi ≥ pcr no failure occurs and the behaviour of the rock mass
c is the cohesion surrounding the tunnel is elastic. The inward radial elastic
𝜙 is the angle of friction of the rock mass displacement of the tunnel wall is given by:
𝜓 is the dilatancy angle of the rock mass
𝑢 = 𝜎 𝑝
24
(Ground response)
• For elastic ˘ perfectly plastic behaviour;
For pi < pcr , failure occurs and the radius Rpl of the plastic zone around the tunnel is given by:
2 𝜎 𝑐 cot 𝜙
𝑅 R
𝐾 1 𝑝 𝑐 cot 𝜙
and the total inward radial diplacement will be;
𝑢 = 𝐴 𝐴 𝐴
𝐴 = 1 2𝜈 𝜎 𝑐 cot 𝜙
1 𝜈 1 𝐾 𝐾 2 𝜎 𝑐 cot 𝜙 2 1 𝜈 𝐾 1 𝜎 𝑐 cot 𝜙
𝐴 𝜈 𝐴
𝐾 𝐾 𝐾 1 𝐾 𝐾

(Ground response)
• For elastic ˘ perfectly plastic behaviour;
The total inward radial diplacement can be simplified as;
𝑢 = 2 1 𝜐 𝜎 𝑝 1 2𝜐 𝜎 𝑝
25
(Ground response)
Construction of support reaction line
𝑢 𝑢
Or pressure on support after installation will be;
𝑢 Initial radial displacement till support installation

𝑝 𝑢 𝑢 𝑘 𝑢 Final radial displacement
𝑝 Pressure on support
𝑝 𝑝 𝑘 Support Stiffness
𝑝 Support Capacity

(Ground response)
• The stiffness and the time of installation of the support element have an important
influence on this displacement control. The ground characteristic line is given by
ABCDE. The earliest practicable time at which support can be installed is after radial
displacement of an amount OF has occurred.
• Support 1 is installed at F and reaches equilibrium with the rock mass at point B. This
support is too stiff for the purpose and attracts an excessive share of the
redistributed load. As a consequence, the support elements may fail causing
catastrophic failure of the rock surrounding the excavation.
• Support 2, having a lower stiffness, is installed at F and reaches equilibrium with the
rock mass at C. Provided the corresponding displacement of the periphery of the
excavation is acceptable operationally, this system provides a good solution.
• The rock mass carries a major portion of the redistributed load, and the support
elements are not stressed excessively.
• Note that if, as in the temporary/permanent support concept, this support were to be
removed after equilibrium had been reached, uncontrolled displacement and collapse of
the rock mass would almost certainly occur.
26
(Ground response)
• Support 3, having a much lower stiffness than support 2, is also installed at F but reaches
equilibrium with the rock mass at D where the rock mass has started to loosen.
• Although this may provide an acceptable temporary solution, the situation is a dangerous
one because any extra load imposed, for example by a redistribution of stress associated
with nearby mining, will have to be carried by the support elements.
• In general, support 3 is too flexible for this particular application.
• Support 4, of the same type and stiffness as support 2, is not installed until a radial
displacement of the rock mass of OG has occurred.
• In this case, the support is installed too late, excessive convergence of the excavation will
occur, and the support elements will probably become overstressed before equilibrium is
reached.

(Ground response)
• Combination of supports (Zhao, 2008);
𝑘 ∑ 𝑘
𝑝 , ∑ 𝑝 ,
Non−linear support reaction

curves observed for some support
Types (Brady & Brown, 2004)
27
(Ground response)
• Estimation of support capacity;

Hoek and Brown (1980) and Brady and Brown (1985) published equations calculating the capacity of steel sets, shotcrete
or concrete linings and rockbolts for a circular tunnel in a hydrostatic stress field.
• For steel set Support;
The maximum support pressure pssmax of the sets is;
𝐴 𝜎
𝑝
𝑠𝑟
The stiffness Kss of the sets is
𝐴 𝐸 where;
𝐾 𝜎 is the yield strength of the steel (MPa)
𝑠𝑟 Es is the Young’s modulus of the steel (MPa)
As is the cross‐sectional area of the section (m2)
sl is the set spacing along the tunnel axis (m)
ro is the radius of the tunnel (m)

(Ground response)

• For Concrete or shotcrete lining;
The maximum support pressure pscmax is;
𝜎 𝑟 𝑡
𝑝 1
2 𝑟
The stiffness Ksc is
𝐸 𝑟 𝑟 𝑡 where;
𝐾 𝜎 is the uniaxial comp. strength of the conc. of shotcrete (MPa)
2 1 𝜐 𝑟 𝑡 𝑟 Ec is the Young’s modulus of the concrete or shotcrete (MPa)
𝜐 is the Poisson’s ratio of the concrete of shotcrete
tc is the thickness of the lining (m)
ro is the radius of the tunnel (m)
28
(Ground response)
• For Rockbolts;
The maximum support pressure psbmax is;
𝑇
𝑝
𝑠𝑠
The stiffness Ksb is

where;
𝐸 𝜋𝑑 db is the rockbolt or cable diameter (m)
𝐾
4𝑙𝑠 𝑠 l is the free length of the bolt or cable (m)
Es is the Young’s modulus of the bolt or cable (MPa)
sc is the circumferential bolt spacing (m)
sl is the longitudinal bolt spacing (m)
Tbf is the ultimate bolt or cable load obtained from a pull‐out test (MN)

(Ground response)
Maximum support pressure versus tunnel radius for the range of support types (Hoek,2000).
29
(Ground response)
Typical examples of support types used in tunnelling (Hoek,2000).

(References)
References:
• Austrian Society for Geomechanics, (2010), NATM, The Austrian practice of conventional tunneling, ISBN 978−3−200−
01989−8
• Bierbaumer, A. (1913), Die Dimensionierung des Tunnelmauerwerkes, Leipzig, Engelmann.
• Brady B.H.G. and E.T. Brown, (1997), Rock Mechanics for Underground Mining, 2nd Edition, Kluwer Academic Publishers.
• Brown E.T. (ed) (1981) Rock characterization, testing and monitoring˙ISRM suggested methods. Pergamon, Oxford, pp
171˘183
• Daemen, J.J.K. (1977), Problems in Tunnel support mechanics, Underground space 1: 163−172.
• Fenner, R. (1938). Ûndersuchungen zur erkenntnis des gebirgsdruckes˜. Gluckauf, 74, 681−695 and 705−715.
• Hoek, E. 1998. Tunnel support in weak rock Keynote address, Symposium of Sedimentary Rock Engineering, Taipei,
Taiwan, November 20−22, 1998.
• Hoek, E., Brown, E.T. (1980). Underground Excavations in Rock. London : Institution of Mining and Metallurgy. 527 p.
• HSE (1996). Safety of New Austrian Tunnelling Method (NATM) Tunnels: A Review of Sprayed Concrete Lined Tunnels
with Particular Reference to London Clay, HSE Books, Sudbury, UK.
• ICE (1996). Sprayed Concrete Linings (NATM) for Tunnels
30
(References)
• Jaeger, J., Cook, N.G. and Zimmerman, R., (2007), Fundamentals of Rock Mechanics, Blackwell Publishing, 4th Ed.
• Kastner, H. 1962. Statik des tunnel−und Stollenbaues. Springer, Berlin / Göttingen.
• Kolymbas, D. (2008), Tunneling & tunnel mechanics, A rational approach to tunneling, Springer, pp.443.
• Lombardi, G., (1974), Tunnel support. Procedures of the 3rd Congress of International Society of Rock Mechanics,
Volume IIB, Denver.
• Lunardi, P., (2008). Design and construction of tunnels. Analysis of controlled deformations in rock and soils
/ADECO−RS), Springer Science, 576 pg.
• Müller, L. and Fecker, E. (1978). Grundgedanken und Grundsätze der Neuen Österreichischen Tunnelbauweise. Trans
Tech Publications: 247˘2.
• Nicholson, D, Tse, C and Penny, C. (1999). The Observational Method in ground engineering ˘ principles and
applications. Report 185, CIRIA, London.
• Panet M. 1995. Calcul des Tunnels par la Methode de Convergence˘Confinement. Presses de lÉcole Nationale des
Ponts et Chausseés. Paris. 178p
• Peck, R.B., (1969), Advantages and Limitations of the observational method in applied soil mechanics, Geotechnique,
19,2, 171−187.
• Rabcewicz, L. V. (1964). The New Austrian Tunnelling Method. Water Power, 453˘515. November 1964.

(References)
• Rabcewicz, L.V., (1948), Patentschrift, Austrian patent no:165 473

• Schubert, W. (1999). `Perspektiven der NÖT. Neue Entwicklungen in der Geo tech nik. 4. Stuttgarter Geotechnik
Symposium, Stuttgart, Germany, October, pp. 35˘45.
• Schubert, W. (2015), Development and Background of Natm, Tunnel design, guidelines, construction and contractual
practices with case studies, General Directorate of highways, Ankara, Turkey.
• Singh, B.; Goel, R.K. (2006), Tunnelling in Weak Rocks. Geo−Engineering 5. Elsevier Science. p. 512. ISBN 978−0−08−
044987−6.
• Zhao, J. (2008), Rock mechanics course lecture notes, Laboratoire de Mécanique des Roches ˘ Ecole polytechnique
federale de Lausanne.
31

10.observational Methods and NATM

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

10.observational Methods and NATM

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter 10

Observational Methods and NATM

10.Observational Methods and NATM

• The Observational Method in ground engineering;

• Method was mainly introduced due to the fact that;

Ce 439 Railway and Metro Tunnels Dr.Timucin Hergul 2

Ce 439 Railway and Metro Tunnels Dr.Timucin Hergul 3

10.Observational Methods and NATM

Ce 439 Railway and Metro Tunnels Dr.Timucin Hergul 4

• The principal objective is;

• GEOLOGICAL UNCERTAINTY: For complex geological

Ce 439 Railway and Metro Tunnels Dr.Timucin Hergul 5

10.Observational Methods and NATM

In traditional tunnel design (Schubert, 2015);

Design of tunnel support is generally based on hypothesis of

Ce 439 Railway and Metro Tunnels Dr.Timucin Hergul 6

Ce 439 Railway and Metro Tunnels Dr.Timucin Hergul 7

10.Observational Methods and NATM

Ce 439 Railway and Metro Tunnels Dr.Timucin Hergul 8

• For this purpose;

Ce 439 Railway and Metro Tunnels Dr.Timucin Hergul 9

10.Observational Methods and NATM

Mobilization of rock mass strength: (Prevent disintegration of the

The ground offers the main support to the excavated tunnel.

Ce 439 Railway and Metro Tunnels Dr.Timucin Hergul 10

The NATM is based on the philosophy of

ˆNot too stiff ,

Ce 439 Railway and Metro Tunnels Dr.Timucin Hergul 11

10.Observational Methods and NATM

Shotcrete protection to preserve the load−carrying capacity

Installation of systematic rock bolting with shotcrete

Ce 439 Railway and Metro Tunnels Dr.Timucin Hergul 12

Monitoring the deformation of the excavated rock mass:

The choice of support and construction sequence is made

Examples of NATM tunnel monitoring equipment

Ce 439 Railway and Metro Tunnels Dr.Timucin Hergul 13

10.Observational Methods and NATM

Providing flexible but active supports:

The method uses a thin sprayed concrete lining. This will

Ce 439 Railway and Metro Tunnels Dr.Timucin Hergul 14

Closing of invert to form a load−bearing support ring to control

In static consideration, a tunnel should be treated as a thick wall

Ce 439 Railway and Metro Tunnels Dr.Timucin Hergul 15

10.Observational Methods and NATM

The excavation sequence is important for the overall

Due to stress−redistribution, when an opening is

Ce 439 Railway and Metro Tunnels Dr.Timucin Hergul 16

Stress concentrations in corners where

Ce 439 Railway and Metro Tunnels Dr.Timucin Hergul 17

10.Observational Methods and NATM

the following main surveys, measurements and controls can be performed:

Ce 439 Railway and Metro Tunnels Dr.Timucin Hergul 18

Measurement instruments for the monitoring phase

Ce 439 Railway and Metro Tunnels Dr.Timucin Hergul 19

10.Observational Methods and NATM

The application of the Observational Method to the NATM (Nicholson et.al.,1999)

Ce 439 Railway and Metro Tunnels Dr.Timucin Hergul 20

Application of natm in hard rock conditions:

The basis for the design of tunnels in rock depends on

Ce 439 Railway and Metro Tunnels Dr.Timucin Hergul 21

10.Observational Methods and NATM

Possible excavation sequences for SCL (and NATM) (ICE 1996)

Ce 439 Railway and Metro Tunnels Dr.Timucin Hergul 22