A CASE STUDY FROM INDIA ON TUNNEL

BORING MACHINE DRIVING UNDER LOW

OVERBURDEN
Debasis Barman
CEng, MICE

New Delhi, India

Project area overview

THE RESPECTIVE AREA LIES BETWEEN HUSSAINGANJ STATION & SOUTH RAMP STRETCH OF LUCKNOW
METRO UNDERGROUND PART.

Haider Canal area is a very congested, and densely populated. There is limited access to any investigation and
construction sites. All buildings along the banks of canal are mostly brickworks with no proper foundation for
even two storied buildings. Most buildings constructed were lacking of proper engineering design & execution
technology. Materials are often of inappropriate quality. Both banks of the canal were developed by dumping locally
available fill material and daily used garbage’s had been dumped from time to time.

Haider canal where

TBM was driven
below canal bed

2
 Risks associated to project (Design stage) Risks associated to project (Execution stage)
Risks Types of Risk Consequences of the Remedial
Identified Risk Measures to ❖ Mostly due to dumped fill on banks of canal there
during design eliminate risk
Damage to Threat to Large extent of damage Evacuation, Partial were concern on stability of building’s lying on banks
vulnerable superstructures along with partial collapse Demolition,
buildings on lying on Haider of structures due to its own treatment of
both banks Canal Bank condition in service life. foundation of all due to Tunnel boring machine vibrations driving
during TBM vulnerable buildings
mining due to prior to TBM mining. below buildings.
uncontrolled
Volume
(%).
Loss
❖ Ground cover available from the tunnel crown was
Significant Threat to stability Possible failure of the bank Restoration of the
movement of of Haider Canal slopes as the ground is ground along banks estimated to be less than 1m. This presented a high
ground lying on Banks along with mostly dumped fill which and dedicated
banks due to people working on has occurred in long time. instrumentation risk of flotation along with sinking of the Tunnel
Volume Loss banks during TBM mining.
during TBM boring machine at the canal bed due to soft ground
driving
Drop of face Threat to TBM Loss of ground at face Bentonite slurry
pressure during being stuck at along collapse of face and were injected to
conditions.
mining due to canal bed and hindrance to TBM maintain the face
weak ground further getting movement pressure. ❖ During TBM movement, significant movement of
encountered. settled under its
own weight ground lying on banks and possible failure of the
Ingress of water Chances of Possible flooding of the Closure of bulkhead
from Cutter flooding inside TBM & Tunnel built gate along with
Chamber as TBM along with mobilization of bank slopes as the ground is mostly dumped fill
mining done safety issues to dewatering pumps
under Canal TBM crew. during operation

3
Ground characterization
The results of soil investigation indicated that the strata at the site was dominantly
Tender
stage
cohesive soil structure. The cohesive type soil comprised of either silty clay soil, of low to
Depth of medium plasticity and compressibility, or clayey silt soil, of low plasticity and
BH – 25m compressibility belonging to CL, CI, ML group (62 to 99 % material finer than 75 microns).
The only non-cohesive type soil is found to comprise of sandy silt, ML type, (having 67 %
fines). Standard Penetration blows ranged from 6 to 7 for 3m depth below ground.
Beyond 3 m depth, SPT -values increased from 8 to 31.

Thickness of Description SPT/blows Soil stiffness Cohesion Friction Unit Weight

soil layer (m) of ground (MPa) (kPa) Angle (kN/m3)
(degree)

3 Fill - 3 0 26 17
4 CL (Low 10 9 30 10 19
Design compressible
stage clay)
Depth of
BH- 15m 5 CI 24 22 100 13 20
(Intermediate
compressible
clay)

3 CL (Low 28 25 140 13 21
compressible
clay)

4
 Preliminary option
Solid concrete block of dimension 12x12x12m
Block would be prepared by 1.2m dia
interlocking piles which will be terminated at
least 3m below tunnel invert level
Grade of concrete for piles would be M10
(characteristic strength of 10MPa), so TBM can
cut pile easily
Limitations of the proposal
❖ Maintain stability of the concrete block as a whole during tunnel
boring machine cutting the block, as a chance the whole block
might move ahead.
❖ Number of total piles to be bored were 300 no’s and being of
big diameter i.e., 1.2m, it was difficult to execute as heavy
capacity pile driving rig was difficult to be placed on such soft
ground
❖ Efficiency of the whole scheme would depend on the tolerances
of each pile bored and such efficient agency was not available
locally in the area.
❖ Time constraint and cost incurred was significant. 5
 Final option

Concrete slab (1400 thk)

Pressure relief holes
Concrete piles (400 dia) (100mm dia)

Tunnel (5.8m dia)

❖ Dead weight of the slab counteracted the chances of flotation issues during TBM drive.
❖ Slab was supported on 400ø concrete piles at 1m x 1m grid
❖ Pressure relief holes drilled through slab released excess pore water pressure due to slab weight on canal bed 6
 Design studies
❖ Check against flotation
❖ Check individual bored pile capacity
❖ Check stability of composite system w.r.t. slab & pile movement during TBM drive
❖ Check movements below building foundations within the tunnel influence zone
3rd & 4th options were checked by performing FEM analysis using Rocscience RS 2 software

7
 Design studies
Outputs of analysis
Stage of Maximu Pile toe Remarks FEM analysis steps
execution m movem ❖ Setting up original conditions prior to construction with all
settleme ent
(mm)
boundary conditions
nt of
concrete ❖ Casting of bored piles and recording associated movements
slab
(mm) ❖ Casting of 1400mm thick slab in two stages and recording
900 mm slab 47 associated movements
Casting (1st Consolidation settlement of slab in ❖ Resetting the all above displacements to zero
stage) stages
Pile casting 52 5 ❖ Mining of 1st Tunnel boring machine volume loss (%) simulated
Full Slab 61 20 ❖ Cast-in situ lining simulation of 1st tunnel completed
1.4m casting
(2nd stage) ❖ Mining of 2nd Tunnel boring machine volume loss (%) simulated
Additional 66 22
Settlement
❖ Cast-in situ lining simulation of 2nd tunnel completed
due to ❖ Recording forces in all structural elements
tunneling

Building damage assessment Volume loss (%) were limited to 0.2% taking in considerations
(after Burland et al, 1977 and of the low cover above tunnel & dilapidated conditions of the
Boscardin and Cording, 1989) building lying on tunnel alignment.
Damage Category
No. of B-0 B-1 B-2 B-3 B-4 During Tunnel boring machine driving 5-6 mm movement were
Section
Buildings Negligible Very Slight Moderate Severe predicted at slab bottom which were very negligible considering
Slight slab weight. Forces imposed on concrete slab & pile were
Haider canal area 27 4 3 15 3 2
within allowable limits due to tunnel boring machine movement.

8
 Construction scenario’s and strategy implemented

Retrofitting of superstructure’s

❖ Major part of the buildings was temporarily supported using steel props.
❖ All the cavities as found in building floors were filled with cement slurry
immediately. All voids were filled with cement grout in pressure range of
2-3 bar so the voids get filled and create a compacted surface for all
buildings.
❖ All ground lying on foundation of all buildings were properly regarded
and compacted. Voids in the ground were filled with lean concrete.
❖ External edges of all buildings projected on the bank side were
supported by propping as per availability of space.
❖ Very critical category buildings as identified by building damage
assessment discussed previously were temporarily evacuated till
Tunnel boring machine mining & ring building were not completed.
❖ Monitoring activities were continued as per design proposal and
recordings interpreted for any type of movement in regular intervals.

9
 Construction scenario’s and strategy implemented

Regrading of slopes on both banks of canal prior to TBM

driving
Soil mass on both banks were regarded to stable slope and
supported with shotcrete & wire mesh. A retaining wall were
constructed along the banks till influence zone of Tunnel
boring machine on both sides and backfill with lean concrete
completed behind wall

Spraying shotcrete on slopes

Retaining wall construction

10
 Construction scenario’s and strategy implemented

Regrading of slopes on both banks of canal prior to TBM

driving
❖ After all building structures were supported both externally and

internally and ground of the both banks were regarded, bored piling

operations were initiated.

❖ To prepare a dry surface for working, canal was diverted on one side

using temporary bunds.

❖ Holes were punctured slightly higher than pile diameter and bored piles

constructed using percussion drilling technique. Reinforcement from

piles were projected to be connected with slab in future.

❖ All piling operations was completed, reinforcement placing & casting of

the half slab commenced. The total thickness of 1400mm for slab were

executed in two stages of 500+900mm.

❖ Completion of half slab, water was diverted on the slab and the other

half was made dry to repeat the above steps.

11
 Construction scenario’s and strategy implemented
Tunnel boring machine driving parameters fixation and
monitoring

Total crossing length of canal was divided in 5 zones and face pressures
distributed as per ground cover above TBM available,
The following machine records were obtained which were quite close to
recommended:
1. Zone 1 – 0.7 to 0.8 bar
1. Face Pressure – 0.3 bar (min) to 1.0 bar (maximum)
2. Zone 2 – 0.7 to 0.8 bar 2. Thrust Force – 18000 kN (maximum)
3. Zone 3 – 0.5 to 0.6 bar (canal crossing) 3. Cutter Torque – 1500 kN-m (maximum)
4. Zone 4 – 0.7 to 0.8 bar 4. Grout Volume – 130% of excavation volume
5. Grout Pressure – 2.0 to 3.0 bar
5. Zone 5 – 0.7 to 0.8 bar
12
Construction scenario’s and strategy implemented
Ground movement & building settlement monitoring
For building structures monitoring the
following instruments were recommended
as per results of building damage
assessment,
❖ Building settlement marker
❖ Tilt plate
❖ Crack meter
❖ Bi Reflex target

For Ground Monitoring of bank slopes

along tunnel alignment the following
instruments were proposed,
❖ Ground settlement marker
❖ Multiple point borehole extensometer
❖ Piezometer

Building settlement point showed a

maximum movement of 4mm which is less
than predicted value of 7.5mm. Also
ground settlement markers showed a
maximum value of 5mm which was within
tolerable range as per design.

13
Team communication

A dedicated Tunnelling Task Force Team was formed

between the Tunnel boring machine Crew and
respective senior personnel from contractor including
consultant representative. The function of the team was
to make a coordinated approach to the problem with
inputs from different levels and to generate a common
understanding. The team used to monitor all activities
related to Tunnel boring machine movement on shift
basis and provided their inputs based on Tunnel boring
machine parameters recorded along with ground &
structures monitoring records. During real execution,
designer representative was mobilised in site during both
Tunnel boring machine drive to provide his inputs biased
on ground monitoring & Tunnel boring machine record
obtained. As per designer observations, machine speed,
Face Pressure & Grout Pressure were modified to avoid
blowing of ground & minimize Tunnel boring machine tail
end volume loss.
14
THANK YO U

15