Journal Pre-proof

Evaluation of new Austrian tunnelling method applied to Bolu tunnel’s weak rocks

Ebu Bekir Aygar

PII: S1674-7755(20)30046-9
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrmge.2019.12.011
Reference: JRMGE 654

To appear in: Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering

Received Date: 17 May 2019

Revised Date: 10 December 2019
Accepted Date: 30 December 2019

Please cite this article as: Aygar EB, Evaluation of new Austrian tunnelling method applied to Bolu
tunnel’s weak rocks, Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jrmge.2019.12.011.

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition
of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of
record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published
in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that,
during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal
disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

© 2020 Institute of Rock and Soil Mechanics, Chinese Academy of Sciences. Production and hosting by
Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Full Length Article

Evaluation of new Austrian tunnelling method applied to Bolu tunnel’s weak rocks

Ebu Bekir Aygar

Fugro Sial Geosciences Consulting and Engineering Ltd., Cankaya, 06690, Ankara, Turkey
Received 17 May 2019; received in revised form 10 December 2019; accepted 30 December 2019

Abstract: Since the development of the new Austrian tunnelling method (NATM) in the 1960s, this technique has been applied successfully in
many tunnels. However, opinions of NATM principles emerged till 2000, i.e. NATM is not a tunnelling method, but an approach covering all
general principles of tunnelling. To investigate the general principles of the NATM, this study focused on tunnelling practices in the Bolu tunnel,
and evaluated the conditions under which the NATM practices could be effective. The Bolu tunnel project was designed following the NATM
principles presented by Golser, J. It is evident that practices adopted in this tunnel are important with respect to the NATM. In addition, it shows
that the solutions to the problems encountered in this tunnel are consistent with the NATM principles. Finally, the study determines the ground
types of the NATM principles and proposes associated updates.
Keywords: Bolu tunnel; new Austrian tunnelling method (NATM); support types

1. Introduction Romano (2009) suggested different nomenclatures that are used

The new Austrian tunnelling method (NATM) was developed
between 1957 and 1965. In 1944, Rabcewicz categorised rock masses into
seven types (from clay to hard rock) and loosesing, squeezing and
swelling. Moreover, the rock mass was classified into loosening,
squeezing and swelling status (Goricki, 2003). Different support systems
have been developed subsequently based on this classification (Goricki,
2003). In 1957, rock mass behaviour, rock mass parameters, duration of
failure, and tunnel supports were correlated with each other. The
fundamental principles of the NATM were proposed by Rabcewicz
(1964a,b; 1965). In 1974, Pacher, Rabcewicz, and Golser (Goricki, 2003)
correlated rock mass behaviour with different elements and classified
rocks into four main groups:
(1) Stable, to potential for large overbreak;
(2) Friable, to heavily friable;
(3) Squeezing, to heavy squeezing; and
(4) Special classes.
From then on, NATM has been widely applied in many countries.
Significant developments in the NATM were explained by Romano
(2009). In the study conducted by Golser and Mussger (1979), the
application and success of the NATM with the scenarios during tunnel
excavation are evaluated. Jakoubek (1986) demonstrated the advantages
and applications of NATM in a tunnel. Wagner (1986) compared the
applications of the NATM in shallow and deep underground structures
with other methods. Studies were also conducted on deep tunnels under
difficult rock conditions, applications of NATM in different tunnels, and
NATM principles (Braun, 1980; Brown, 1981). In addition, Müller (1978)
emphasised that NATM has often been misunderstood “It is not so much,
a way of excavating and supporting, but rather a concept. Success
depends on following a set of principles, one of which is to utilise the
surrounding rock mass to become the main load bearing component, with
the lining establishing a load bearing ring”. The importance of ring
closure distance and time and that of the invert section in weak soils are
also emphasised in his study.
worldwide with respect to the NATM, such as Spritz Betonbauweisse in
Germany, Méthode convergence-confinément in France, SCL (Sprayed
Concrete Lined Tunnels in UK), NMT (Norwegian method of tunnelling)
(Norway), several other names in Japan (CDM, UHVS), and SEM
(Sequential Excavation Method) that is frequently used.
Debates and different opinions have been proposed for the NATM
since its proposal. Some researchers hold different option against the
integration of general tunnelling method and classical drilling and
blasting (DB) method with a single name. In addition, Kovari (1994)
criticised the NATM with the concept of “Erroneous concepts behind the
new Austrian tunnelling method”. In 1994, the collapse of Heathrow
tunnel caused a revision of NATM, owing mainly to the English
publications regarding collapses using NATM (Romano, 2009).
In 1978, rock mass classification for tunnelling became part of the
Austrian standards (Goricki, 2003). In 1983–1994, the standards were
revised without changing the main concept by Rabcewicz and Golser
(1973) on the basis of their principles, Rock mass was then divided into
three main groups: A (stable), B (friable), and C (squeezing).
In 2001, the rock mass classification was revised again. A significant
modification of ONORM B2203 was that the issues of rock mass
characterisation and classification were excluded. Standards were re-
visited in 2001 and 2004 (Goricki, 2003; Pötsch et al., 2004; Schubert,
2004). In addition, a flowchart illustrating the soil behaviour and support
system behaviour as geotechnical design was proposed. Pöschl and
Kleberger (2004a,b) developed an approach in terms of rock mass
classification of geotechnical risks. In a work by Palmstrom and Stille
(2007), engineering tools for tunnels were proposed. The study of
Marinos (2010) on tunnel behaviour mechanism was similar to that of
Schubert (2004). In the present study, the works of Goricki (2003) and
Pötsch et al. (2004) were considered as the basis and compared with other
methods. The behaviours of approximately 62 tunnels were examined,
and eventually, a tunnel behaviour chart was created.
In China, many highways and railway tunnels are under
construction. However, some problems were encountered in these tunnels
because of the high rate of deformations during tunnel excavations (e.g.
Sun et al., 2019). The most popular tunnels among those in China are the
Muzhailing railway tunnel and Muzhailing road tunnel. The length of the
Muzhailing tunnel on the Lanzhou–Chongqing railway line is 19.1 km. Its
cross-sectional area is 70 m2. The excavation process was completed in
eight years. Deformations continued for three years after completion of
the excavations. The tunnel has a highly complex geological structure,
passing through 11 faults with a total length of 4500 m (Chen et al.,
2017). Geological units along the tunnel route generally exhibit low
strength, due to high content of carbonaceous slate, and high overburden
stress. During tunnel excavation, failures in the steel shafts, cracks in the
shotcrete, and swelling at the basement were observed. In certain parts of
the tunnel, deformations reached up to 1.6 m. The supports were applied
according to the principle of “strong support, weak release, support while
release, rapid construction”. Rapid construction implies rapid excavation,
rapid support, and rapid closure (Xi, 2017). Moreover, the support system
was selected with respect to pipe ahead, stringent grouting, short
excavation, strong support, rapid closure, regular measurement, and tight
lining principles (Xi, 2017).
Furthermore, the Zhegushan, Laodongshan, Minyazi, Xiangshan,
Yingfeng, and Yezhping tunnels in China represent similar problematic
cases (Wang et al., 2019). Many problems were encountered similarly in
these tunnels. During excavations, many fault zones, weak soils, and
shear zones were identified. While excavating these critical sections, large
deformations were encountered, failures occurred in the support systems,
and the deformation rates in the Xiangshan tunnel archetypally reached up
to 5.4 cm per day. High-risk scenarios in these sections were successfully
overcome by modifying the tunnel support systems appropriately (Wang
et al., 2019).
In this study, applications of NATM principles in Bolu tunnel will be
discussed. The conditions under which NATM principles fail will be
discussed and possible solution suggestion will be provided. The NATM
principles which failed in weak soils and fault zones will be determined
and the revisions to be made will be demonstrated.
2. Principles of NATM
The NATM is based on the principle of maximising the capacity of
the ground to sustain its own weight by precisely and rationally balancing
the pressures that affect the surrounding rock and support. This is
achieved by forming a cavity in the rock or ground through which the
tunnel will pass and reinforcing this cavity with support elements
(Rabcewicz and Golser, 1973).
There are two types of support systems. The first system involves a
flexible outer arch or protective support designed to balance the structure.
The system is reinforced by additional steel ribs, bolts, and shotcrete. The
ring is then closed using invert concrete. During the rearrangement of
forces, the behaviours of the protective support system and the ground
surrounding the tunnel are controlled by a highly developed measurement
system (Vardar 1979, 1985).
The second support system involves an inner concrete lining.
However, this lining is not fabricated until the outer lining reaches the
balance. The purpose of this concrete arch is to maintain or increase the
safety factor as necessary (Rabcewicz and Golser, 1973). The
fundamental principles of NATM, which were proposed by Müller
(1978), are listed below:
(1) The main element of the tunnel support is the surrounding rock.
The main function of the artificial supports is to aid the rock
around the tunnel in supporting itself.
(2) The initial robustness of the rock should be preserved. The main
principle is preserving the original strength of the rock mass to the
feasible extent.
(3) The loosening of the surrounding rock should be prevented to the
feasible extent. This is because loosening of the rock reduces its
bearing resistance and increases dead loads.
(4) The protective zone should be formed without reducing the bearing
resistance of the rock. The deformations that occur after excavation
will be sufficient for forming the protective zone. However, the
deformations should be controlled so that they will not lead to
loosening of the rock, which will reduce the bearing resistance. If
this is achieved, the safety factor and cost-efficiency of the works
will increase.
(5) Reinforcement should be carried out in a timely manner (neither
too early nor too late) and with the necessary flexibility to ensure
that the structure providing the lining resistance is neither too rigid
nor too weak.
(6) The reinforcement forces must be using the binding type. If
substantial deformations and loosening are likely to occur after
excavation, the reinforcement resistance should be in the form of
distributed loads, whereas the reinforcement measure should cover
the cavity surface. This is most effectively achieved by using
shotcrete, which binds within a short period of time.
(7) Both temporary and permanent reinforcement linings should be in
the form of ‘thin shells’, i.e. thin, shell-shaped, and bendable. The
bending moments in the shell, as well as the pull and shear
fractures resulting from these, can be prevented in this way.
(8) Reinforcement should be carried out with wire meshes, bolts,
shotcrete, and steel ribs. Wire meshes and ribs can provide the
necessary flexibility instead of thickening the shell. In order to
enable the rock to carry its own weight, the effective stresses
should be conveyed into the rock mass through anchorages.
The reinforcement shell should have a closed ring-shape. From a
static perspective, the rings must be closed so that an opening could be
completely load-bearing. A ring with joints, springs, or notches is
unstable compared with a circle. With this consideration, excavation and
reinforcement lining of the top heading and the right/left sides should
adhere to the cavity wall in an annular manner. Evidently, this can be
achieved well by reinforcing shells that follow the complete cross-section
of the excavation. The ring should be established at the earliest. The
behaviour of the rock during the formation of secondary stresses depends
on the deformations of the lining. A tunnel section that is not completely
closed will not assume the role of a carrier/bearing ring, and hence will
lead to the loosening of the rock.
Rounded spacer profiles should be used. The cross-section of the
underground cavity should be circular or elliptical, with no protrusions or
corners. The first lining should be thin to prevent undesirable bending
moments. The inner lining should also be thin and be tightly bonded to
the first lining frictionlessly. However, to prevent inner lining from
interfering with the loads that may be transmitted from the first lining, it
must be placed firmly by using its entire surface, with no friction applied
to the inner lining.
The stability of the structure must be ensured with pre-reinforcement
procedures. Deformations in the underground rock structure consisting of
the lining and surrounding rock should be halted before the inner lining is
put in place. The secondary stresses should achieve their balance. The
task of the inner lining is to enhance safety and improve architectural
appearance.
 The water pressure transmitted to the lining via the rock mass should
be discharged through drainage. To achieve this, drainage pipes should be
installed around the space.

3. Bolu tunnel

Bolu tunnel located on the İstanbul–Ankara highway consists of two

tunnels, each having three lanes. Excavation initiated at the Asarsuyu
(Istanbul) side on 16 June 1993 and at the Elmalık (Ankara) side on 24
June 1994. The excavation of the tunnel was completed in 2006, and it
was open to traffic in 2007 (Fig. 1).
Between the two tunnels, there is a buttress with 50–60 m width. The
tunnels are constructed mostly 100–150 m below the ground surface, with
the deepest point at 250 m. With the changes of the ground conditions,
lining thickness, and deformations, the cross-sectional area of the tunnel
Fig. 2. Cross-section of Bolu tunnel (unit: m) (Geoconsult, 1997b).
face varies between 133 m2 and 260 m2. The equivalent excavation
diameters are 13–18.2 m. In the typical excavation cross-sections, the
The tunnel route is located near the active North Anatolian transform
inner surface of the concrete lining has a horizontal opening of 14 m and
fault between the Eurasia plate in the north and Anatolian plates in the
height of 8.6 m (Fig. 2).
south. It is shifting westward from the Anatolian plate.
The general geological structure adopts the form of the North
Anatolian metamorphic crystalline base. The Silurian, Devonian, and
Carboniferous layers are composed of conglomerates, arkose, sandstone,
mudstone, marl, shale, limestone, and dolomitic limestone (Astaldi,
1993), as shown in Fig. 3. The crystalline bedrock consists mostly of
granite, grandiorite, quartzdiorite, and diorite, whereas metamorphic
rocks in the amphibolite faults contain gneiss and amphibolites as
migmatite. The ridges of the crystalline basins within Paleozoic
formations have been eroded.
In the young Paleozoic layer, the northern continental basin was
separated from the marine basin to the south. This formation resulted
from low-grade metamorphism transforming old sediments into marble,
phyllite, and schist. Owing to many faults on the route of the Elmalık
tunnel, a large number of rock mass blocks (crystalline bedrock,
metasediment rock series, and the relevant sections of the flysch
formation) are buried within a large-scale matrix of clayey faults,
stretching to several hundred meters.
The geology of the Elmalık side in the fault zone contains flysch
series with largely tectonic and rigidly weighted fault clay infilling with
smooth discontinuity surfaces and exhibiting plastic properties. These
flysch series comprise of claystone, siltstone, and limestone units. The
Asarsuyu side is generally traversed by a metasediment series and
cataclastic zones formed by these series. This formation continued until
the transition to the Bakacak fault and intersects with Bolu tunnel within a
200 m wide fault zone. The fault is oriented in EW direction and crosses
the tunnel route perpendicularly between chainages 62 + 800 km and 63 +
000 km (in the left tunnel). These faults have north-oriented plunge
angles on cross-sections and cut the tunnel by means of fault clay
materials at 75 m in the left tunnel and 91.5 m in the right tunnel,
respectively. This fault clay material is comprised of the mixture of
metasediments (metasilt stone, quartz limestone, crystallised limestone,
Fig. 1. Bolu tunnel location map.
low to medium plastic, dense and well-cemented sandy silty fault clay
matrix, smooth and polished surface, and water flow) and quartz rocks +
amphibolite + metacrystalline basement. This fault zone is located at the
junction of the Asarsuyu and Elmalık geological formations.
 Fig. 3. Geological profile of left tunnel of Bolu tunnel (Simsek, 2004).
The units in the Bolu tunnel can be classified into four main groups:
metacrystalline base (Yedigöller formation), metasedimentary base
(İkizoluk formation), flysch sequence (Fındıcak formation), and clayey
fault zones (Dalgıç, 2002). The oldest unit in the tunnel route is
Yedigöller formation, located at the Asarsuyu entrance and comprised of
metamorphic rocks. Yedigöller formation is overlapped by İkizoluk
formation comprised of Devonian metamorphic units with a tectonic
contact. These two formations are primarily overlapped by intrusive
granite and also sedimentary rock diversified from Upper Cretaceous to
Upper Eocene. A lithological section comprised of amphibole and
weathered granodiorite units are observed at the beginning of the
Asarsuyu entrance. The other sections are presented to be sandstone,
quartzite, and weathered granodiorite and amphibole units combined with
marble. Contact between the crystalline basement and sedimentary
overburden was formed by the activities of low-angle and conjugate
faults. The entire sequence has a fractured structure as a result of clayey
fault zones diagonally covering the units. The limestone basement at the
Elmalık entrance appears to be scattered sections in between sandstone
and clayey strata containing limestone blocks. The entire sequence
contains clayey fault zones and fault infillings.
The fault zone material at the tunnel elevation is in a series of two
units. The first unit is a dark brown, highly plastic, and smoothly polished
surface. Meanwhile, the second unit consists of a reddish brown, medium
plastic, highly smooth-hard polished surface, and these materials
constitute the Bakacak fault and geology.
4. Support systems applied to the Bolu tunnel—C modified support
system
Owing to the complex geological and geotechnical conditions in
Bolu tunnel, there are large differences between the expected and
practical rock classes. In the flysch series and the clayey fault zones,
significant displacements have occurred in the support systems due to the
swelling and compression characteristics of the ground. Large
deformations (approximately 1.5 m) have occurred in the tunnel while
crossing the clayey fault zone in the Elmalık right tunnel. This section
was filled with a backfill material to prevent the total collapse of the
tunnel (Geoconsult, 1998e). In addition, deformations larger than 1 m
occurred in the flysch series and minor fault zones were observed in the
left tube of the Elmalık tunnel, where regular repairs had to be conducted.
Apart from these problems at the Elmalık entrances, a water flow/entry of
up to 400 L/s was observed at the metasediment series of the Asarsuyu
entrances. This was caused by a large number of instability problems in
the tunnel (Aygar, 2000). To resolve all these problems, the C modified
(CM) support system was developed and applied for the first time in Bolu
tunnel (Geoconsult, 1997a).
4.1. Primary design phase of the tunnel
In Bolu tunnel, the project was performed according to the NATM
principles. Austrian standards (ONORM B2203) were also implemented.
Accordingly, rock behaviours were divided into three categories as stable,
brittle, and squeezing (Table 1), and the support systems were divided support classes.
into eight main groups (Table 2). Figs. 4 and 5 illustrate the determined

Table 1.
Rock behaviour according to Austrian standard ONORM B2203 (Dalgıç, 2002).
Rock behaviour Failure mode Support requirements
Stable Local fall-out owing to gravity Only local support required for safety of personnel and
equipment and to maintain smooth profile
Friable Progressive rock fall due to gravity and kinematics of discontinuities Immediate, systematic support required; if not installed in
time, progressive fallout
Squeezing Secondary stresses exceed rock strength resulting in material failure (spilling or Immediate, systematic support required
shear failure)
Table 2.
Rock class designation according to Austrian standard ONORM B2203 (Dalgıç, 2002).
Class Rock mass type Effect of supporting on heading sequence General support requirements
A1 Stable rock None None
A2 Local instabilities Disruptions insignificant Roof support
B1 Tendencies to loosen Partly disrupted Roof support
B2 Locally overstressed Strongly disrupted Roof and wall support
C1 Pressure exerting rock Interrupted Roof and wall support and invert support, if required
C2 Heavy pressure exerting rock Interrupted Roof and wall support and invert face support, if required
L1 Cohesionless ground Interrupted Special support requirements, additional measures
L2 Cohesionless ground Interrupted Special support requirements, additional measures

thickness had to be increased to 140 cm for the upper half and 300 cm for
the bench section.
According to ONORM B2203, excavation would be conducted
theoretically as a full face in class A1 rocks. In practice, it is excavated in
two parts: top and bottom. Rocks of class A2 are similar to those of class
A1. Excavation in class B1 rocks is divided into two parts: top heading
and bench. In class B2, two separate excavations were performed for top
heading-bench and basement, respectively. In general, excavations were
conducted by DB method. Excavation of rock masses sensitive to
vibration was performed by excavators. The top and bottom excavations
were performed separately in class C1 rocks. Excavation was performed
by DB method or excavators. Separate excavations were performed at the
top heading and bench section of class C2 rocks. In many cases,
reinforcements were required at the face of the top heading. Excavation
was performed by DB method or tunnel excavators.
Excavation was conducted for the top heading, middle, and basement
sections in class L1 soils. In many cases, reinforcements are necessary for
the face of the top heading. Excavation was conducted by vibration-free
blasting or tunnel excavators. Blocks and hard rock sections need to be
detonated. Staged drilling and implementation of side galleries were
required to overcome instability problems at the face in class L2 ground
units. Excavation was conducted with tunnel excavators.
In the design phase of the Bolu tunnel, 1% A2 rock, 9% B1 rock,
40% B2 rock, 19% C1 rock, 11% C2 rock, 10% L1 rock, and 10% L2
rock were expected. The rock classes estimated during the design stage
before excavation are presented in the Table 4. The excavation in Bolu
tunnel was planned to be carried out as follows: 50% on A or B class
rock, 30% on C1 or C2 class rock, and 20% on L1 and L2 class rock. The
rock classes encountered after completion of tunnel excavation are
Fig. 4. Details of rocks of classes A2, B1, and B2 (unit: m) (Aygar, 2000).
presented in Table 5 and illustrated in Fig. 6, showing that the rocks upon
tunnel excavation is composed of 75% compacted (C) rock class. In
Figs. 4 and 5 and Table 3 detail the proposed support system for
addition, 68% of C2M, CM, OP3, and OP4 rock classes were identified
each rock class. Evidently, all the support systems were applied at the
during excavation, which were not anticipated during design phase. These
initial design phase depending on the NATM principles and flexible outer
segments were entirely designed regardless of the NATM principles.
lining principle. The thickness of the shotcrete pavement increased from 5
cm to 25 cm. However, due to unpreventable deformations originated
from a previous design of shotcrete thickness of 25 cm, the coating
 Fig. 5. Details of support systems for rocks of classes C1, C2, L1, and L2 (unit: m) (Aygar, 2000).
Table 3.
Details of support class at design stage of Bolu tunnel.
Support class Round length (m) Shotcrete thickness (cm) Bolt length (m) Steel rib
A2 3.5–4 5 Local, 3–4 None
B1 2–3 10 4 None
B2 1.5–2 15 4–6 HEB100
C1 1–1.5 20 6–9 HEB100
C2 0.8–1.2 25 6–9 HEB100
L1 1–1.5 25 6–9 HEB100
L2 0.8–1.2 25 4–6 HEB100

Table 4.
Anticipated support class distribution of Bolu tunnel.
Rock class Length (m) Percentage (%)
A2 36 0.63
B1 806 14.25
B2 461 8.16
C1 177 3.14
C2 346 6.11
C2M 311 5.49
CM 2417 42.72
OP3 740 13.07
OP4 323 5.88

Table 5.
Predicted support class distribution of Bolu tunnel.
Length (m)
Section Total Length (m)
A1 A2 B1 B2 C1 C2 L1 L2
Asarusyu Portal–51 + 600 235 - 47 118 70 - - - -
51 + 600–51 + 850 250 - - - 25 225 - - -
51 + 850–52 + 200 350 - - 158 158 17 17 - -
52 + 200–52 + 650 450 - - - 112 169 169 - -
52 + 650–52 + 900 250 - - - 220 15 15 - -
52 + 900–53 + 450 550 - - - 270 140 140 - -
53 + 450–54 + 000 550 - - - 440 55 55 - -
54 + 000–Elmalık Portal 626 - - - - - - 313 313
Total 3261 - 47 276 1295 621 396 313 313
Percentage % 0 1 9 40 19 11 10 10

Fig. 6. Predicted support class percentage.
4.2. CM support system
The CM support system is essentially a method developed
specifically for Bolu tunnel (Aygar, 2000). The CM support system was
based on the solutions proposed for the section of Bolu tunnel where
support systems were applied successfully between 1993 and 1999. That
is, all these support systems, which differ significantly from each other in
terms of their application ranges, are classified as CM support systems.
The Bernold lining was applied in the flysch series and minor fault zone
sections, whereas the bench pilot tunnel method was implemented for the
large fault zones. The support systems were applied in the metasediment
series and metacrystalline grounds. All these application methods belong
to the CM support system. Different support systems were categorised
under a single class according to the requirement of significant changes in
the support systems proposed in the project design phase. The CM
support system was applied on four main levels (Geoconsult, 1998a,b):
(1) Metasediments (observed in Asarsuyu);
(2) Metacrystalline (observed in both Asarsuyu and Elmalık entrances);
(3) Flysch series (observed only at the entrance of Elmalık); and
(4) Clayey fault zones (observed in the transitional sections of the
ground types mentioned above).
These support systems were grouped under four main headings
(Tokgozoglu and Isik, 2002):
(1) Option 1: CM class temporary shotcrete basement with or without
invert (CM 35);
(2) Option 2: CM class (flysch series, low swelling potential) with
reduced ring closure distance and temporary shotcrete with invert
(CM 45);
(3) Option 3: Intermediate (Bernold) lining, temporary shotcrete with
invert; and
(4) Option 4: Bench section—pilot tunnel excavation.
Option 1 is implemented through metacrystalline layers, whereas
Option 2 is generally excavated through fracture-crushed metasediment
rocks and flysch series with low swelling potential. In addition, Option 3
is implemented for small fault zones with blocky flysch series exhibiting
high swelling potential, whereas Option 4 is designed for the worst-case
fault conditions such as thick fault clay layers. In accordance with the
above explanations, the details of the support and excavation class of
these sections are summarised below (Tokgozoglu and Isik, 2002):
(a) Option 1: CM class (Metacrystalline layer): Standard CM class is a
tunnel support system having shotcrete lining of a maximum of 35
cm, monolithic basement concrete, and 360 m rock bolt installed in
each advance. This class has a maximum ring closure distance of
30 m. The excavation speed remains constant in this ring closure
distance (Figs. 7 and 8).
(b) Option 2: CM class (Flysch series) reduced ring closure distance,
implementation for more unfavourable rock conditions.
Intermediate (temporary) basement concrete is required for the top
heading section. Shortening the ring closure distance does not
affect the excavation speed. The shortest ring closure distance is
22–23 m. The shotcrete lining is 45 cm (Figs. 9 and 10).
(c) Option 3: Intermediate (Bernold) lining: Option 3 is applied for
weak flysch series and clayey fault zones (length less than 20 m).
The purpose of this system is to ensure the stability of the
excavation with rigid supports without applying a large amount of
shotcrete in the areas where deformation increases. The
intermediate linings are applied while the tunnel displacements
continue at high speed, aiming to maintain the stability of
excavation with an intermediate lining. The Bernold lining is
implemented after installing monoblock basement concrete. The
ring closure distance ranges from 20 m to 24 m, and a temporary
basement is applied to the top heading section. The Option 3
project is prepared for blocky flyer floors. This project can also be
used for thin clay layers of fault zones. The basement concrete is
installed as a monoblock with iron reinforcements. If necessary,
large deformation can be suppressed by applying a temporary
basement at the top heading section extending to the bench section.
The primary lining in the support systems includes highly tight
rock bolts for each interval (generally 1.1 m) with a shotcrete shell
supported by TH-29 steel ribs (Geoconsult, 1998c). Fig. 11
illustrates the cross-section of the Option 3 support system (Aygar,
2007).
(d) Option 4 (Lower half pilot tunnel method): Under highly
unfavourable ground conditions, pilot tunnel excavation of bench
section is the only choice. Pilot tunnel excavation of bench section
was performed in almost all the conditions in Bolu tunnel,
particularly in clayey fault zones spreading over more than 20 m.
In this case, the primary support consisted of 40 cm-thick steel
fibre shotcrete applied to the tunnel face. The intermediate lining
was located 8–16 m behind the face and consisted of an 80 cm-
thick steel fibre lining. A bench and a deep (depth of 5.35 m)
monoblock basement concrete arch were formed 22–35 m after the
tunnel face so as to complete the tunnel circle (ring closure). The
final lining (inner lining concrete) was comprised of 60 cm-thick
concrete with class B40 iron reinforcements (Geoconsult, 1999d).
Fig. 12 illustrates the support system for Option 4 (Aygar, 2007).
Fig. 7. Standard CM class, Option 1 (Geoconsult, 1998b).
 Fig. 10. CM 45 support class details, stretch 2-Bolu tunnel by-pass class CM45
initial support (Geoconsult, 2002).

Fig. 8. CM 35 support class details, stretch 2-Bolu tunnel by-pass class CM for
metasediment refinement initial support (Geoconsult, 2001).

Fig. 11. Option 3 intermediate (Bernold) lining longitudinal section, stretch 2 Bolu
tunnel Option 3 Bernold initial support (Geoconsult, 1999a).

Fig. 9. CM 45 support class, longitudinal section (Option 2) (Geocosult, 1998b).

Fig. 12. Bench pilot tunnel support details, stretch 2 Bolu tunnel Option 4 initial
support section with deformation elements (Geoconsult, 1999b).
4.3. Practical and predicted geological conditions in Bolu tunnel and
stability problems

Fig. 13 illustrates the predicted geological sections and practical

sections in the entrance to the Elmalık tunnel. The predicted and practical
geological sections for the entrance of Asarsuyu are presented in Fig. 14.
The CM support system was implemented following the
fundamental principles of the NATM, from 1995 to 1997. No significant
differences were imparted to the support systems during this period. In
accordance with the progress rate of displacement, there was no change in
the support system except for altering the shotcrete thickness, steel ribs,
and arrangement of the rock bolts. Meanwhile, in the left tube of the
Elmalık tunnel, the tunnel excavation was interrupted due to the
unavoidable displacements. These were overcome by applying 60 cm-
thick shotcrete lining to the flysch units. Subsequently, it was understood
that Bolu tunnel potentially violated the fundamental principle of the
NATM, and a ‘flexible outer lining’ failed to combat the displacements
around the tunnel to form a protective zone. Therefore, it was decided that
a more rigid lining method was applied in the flysch series and fault zones
of Bolu tunnel. This resulted in implementation of the Bernold lining
method (Option 3) (Geoconsult, 1998c) and bench pilot tunnel method
(Option 4) (Geoconsult, 1999d). Whereas the thickness of the first lining
(shotcrete) in the metasediment and metacrystalline ground was 45 cm,
this thickness exceeded 1 m in the clayey fault zones and flysch series.

Fig. 14. Predicted and encountered geological cross-sections at the Asarsuyu

entrance (Chainage in km and elevation in m) (Geoconsult, 1998d).

4.4. Asarsuyu entrance

The tunnel behaviours and recorded displacements were consistent

Fig. 13. Predicted and practical geological cross-sections at the Elmalık entrance
(Chainage in km and elevation in m) (Geoconsult, 1998d).
with the predicted values in chainages 61 + 900 km (left tunnel) and 51 +
800 km (right tunnel) from the entrance of Asarsuyu. The tunnel support
systems were selected based on the rock classes, ranging from A2 to C2.
Moreover, the number of rock bolts was altered when the deformation
exceeded 1 m at points approximately 150 m from their entrances, and a
significant number of remediation processes had to be carried out. As a
result, the C2 support class was adapted to C3, and the number of rock
bolts installed per meter of progression of the tunnel increased from 123
to 350. Furthermore, additional support elements were used (such as
double steel ribs and longer bolts). In spite of these improvements,
stability could not be maintained in this area, and the first lining was
severely damaged. Given these undesirable scenarios, the faces were
temporarily stopped at chainages 62 + 104 km (left tunnel) and 51 + 974
km (right tunnel). The CM class support was implemented for these
locations after geological and geotechnical investigations, beginning in
September 1996 (Aygar, 2000).
4.5. Elmalık entrance left tunnel

In the Elmalık tunnels, the class C2 support was applied at chainages

64 + 140 km in the left tunnel and 54 + 074 km in the right tunnel.
Subsequently, from this location, the C2 rock class was revised according
to the increase in displacement and the deterioration of the ground, and
the implementation of the CM support system was initiated. In the left
tunnel, an attempt was made to advance from chainages 64 + 140 km to
63 + 880 km without excessive alterations to the support. In this section,
the only modifications were to increase the number of rock bolts, alter the
steel ribs, and vary the thickness of the shotcrete.
This section of the tunnel is located in the fault zone between
chainages 64 + 140 km and 64 + 210 km. This fault zone is a low angle
fault zone with high plastic properties (Aygar, 2000). The tunnel was
excavated along the fault infilling which was dark brown-reddish brown
in colour (Isik and Ozben, 2007). According to the test results, 80% of the
material consists of clay fractions. Vertical deformations emerged due to
the overlapping low angle fault zone, as shown in Fig. 15. The
deformation value reached up to 63 cm. In addition, lateral deformations
in this section of the tunnel reached up to 50 cm (see Fig. 15). These
measurements were taken in the period before 1996. Deformation rise
was noticed in progress between 1996 and January 1998. Condition of the
deformations is illustrated in Fig. 16 with an uppermost value of 100 cm.
When the deformation value reached 100 cm, additional shotcrete was
applied as an emergency measure, as shown in Fig. 17. In other words,
the tunnel was at the threshold of failure and those support systems were
implemented to prevent tunnel collapse. Unfortunately, when the
deformation value reached 100 cm, Düzce earthquake occurred, and this
part of the tunnel completely collapsed under the force of earthquake.

Fig. 16. Displacement measurements at chainage 64 + 182 km in the left tunnel of

Elmalık (Astaldi, 1998).

Fig. 17. Reinforcement work prior to the earthquake in the section that collapsed
during Düzce earthquake (Aygar, 2007).
Fig. 15. Vertical deformation in chainages 64 + 117 km to 64 + 246 km.
The deformation in the left tunnel led to the observed fractures and
cracks in the concrete. Over elapsed time, these movements continued
over a distance of 200 m from the tunnel face. Comprehensive repair and
strengthening work started in the tunnel (Aygar, 2000). In addition,
extensometers with lengths of 6 m, 9 m, and 12 m were placed at the
tunnel ceiling and lateral walls. The placement of the extensometers is
illustrated in Figs. 18 and 19. The extensometer measurements were
performed at chainage 64 + 034 km of Elmalık's left tunnel to gain an
understanding of the plastic area around the tunnel.
 Fig. 20. Extensometer measurements performed on ceiling section of Elmalık left
Fig. 18. Extensometer installation on shotcrete surface. tunnel at chainage 64 + 034 km (Astaldi, 1997).

Fig. 21. Extensometer measurements performed at the left lower half section of
Elmalık left tunnel at chainage 64 + 034 km (Astaldi, 1997).

Fig. 19. Extensometer installation locations.

As presented in Fig. 20, an examination of the measurements for the
6 m, 9 m and 12 m long single-point extensometers placed in the tunnel
ceiling revealed that the displacements continued at a 12 m section in the
tunnel ceiling. The 6 m, 9 m, and 12 m long extensometer underwent a
total displacement of 7 cm, 5.8 cm, and 2.5 cm, respectively. The
extensometer measurements at 6 m, 9 m, and 12 m in the left bench of the
tunnel are illustrated in Figs. 21 and 22. In the lower left half (Fig. 21),
the 12 m, 9 m, and 6 m long extensometers recorded displacements of 13
cm, 8 cm, and 4.8 cm, respectively. The displacements occurring at the
right bench of the tunnel (Fig. 22) were observed to be 4.8 cm, 3.8 cm,
and 0.8 cm by the 6 m, 9 m and 12 m long extensometers, respectively.
The main reason for the differences between the measurements of the left
and right benches is that the left tunnel was affected by the right tunnel Fig. 22. Extensometer measurements at the right lower half section at the Elmalık
excavation. Considering that the largest displacement occurred in the 12m left tunnel at chainage 64 + 034 km (Astaldi, 1997).
long extensometer, it is apparent that the right tunnel severely affected the
left tunnel in this section. According to the extensometer measurements, 4.6. Evaluation of the right tunnel support systems
the plastic zone around the tunnel appeared to exceed 12 m. Considering
that the length of the longest rock bolt placed in the tunnel system was 12 To cross the clayey fault zone in the right tunnel of Elmalık between
m, it was apparent that all rock bolts were placed in the plastic zone and chainages 54 + 080 km and 54 + 140 km (Fig. 23), a pilot tunnel was
cannot reach the elastic zone. This demonstrates that the outer lining of opened in the upper half section (Geoconsult, 1996). It was feasible to
the tunnel did not provide a complete arch around the tunnel. carry out sufficient geological and geotechnical investigations of the fault
zone through this pilot tunnel. A fresh support system was developed.
Then, the excavation restarted (Fig. 24). The excavation in the application
phase is illustrated in Fig. 25. Despite of the application of the support
system following the principle of a ‘flexible outer lining’ within the
NATM, a large displacement of 160 cm occurred in this area (Aygar,
2000). Severe buckling was observed in the intermediate invert in the top
heading (Schubert et al., 1996). The tunnel stability was not assumed.
 Fig. 23. Geology of Elmalık entrance, where a collapse occurred during the Düzce earthquake (Geoconsult, 1999c)

)
displacements exceeded 100 cm over a period of five months. Moreover,
a deformation of 65 cm was observed in the horizontal direction (Fig. 27).
That is, the tunnel was severely narrowed both vertically and horizontally.
The measurements made at chainage 54 + 147 km in this section are
illustrated in Fig. 28. In the top heading, a vertical displacement of 1.64 m
occurred in section 1 (tunnel roof), whereas a vertical displacement of
1.23 m occurred in the left and right sides of the top heading (sections 4
and 5). In this sense, stability could not be achieved in the tunnel, and
displacements continued during this period with increasing intensity.
Owing to unexpected large displacements, this section was completely
abandoned and filled with backfill material to prevent tunnel collapse (see
Figs. 29 and 30) (Aygar, 2000).
Figs. 31 and 32 illustrate the damage at the tunnel caused by the
displacements in this section. These images were captured during the
reprofiling works performed after filling the tunnel with backfill material.

Fig. 24. Support system applied in the right tunnel of Elmalık between chainages 54
+ 140 km and 54 + 080 km (Geoconsult, 1996).

Fig. 26. Measurements of vertical displacement between chainages 54 + 141.50 km

Fig. 25. Excavation works performed at Elmalık right tunnel between chainages 54 and 54 + 240 km of the left tunnel of Elmalık (Astaldi, 1997).
+ 140 km and 54 + 080 km.
The displacement measurements between chainages 54 + 141 km
and 54 + 240 km in the right tunnel of Elmalık are illustrated in Fig. 26.
This section is located in the main fault zone and was involved with the
section of the tunnel that collapsed during the earthquake. The
measurements were obtained along a 100 m tunnel line, and the vertical

Fig. 27. Measurements of horizontal displacements between chainages 54 + 141.50
km and 54 + 240 km of left tunnel of Elmalık (Astaldi, 1997).
Fig. 28. Displacement measurements in the right tunnel of Elmalık at chainage 54 +
147 km (Astaldi, 1997).
Fig. 29. Concrete filling implemented at right tunnel of Elmalık between chainages
54 + 140 km and 54 + 080 km following the collapse (Aygar, 2000).
Fig. 30. General view of concrete filling implemented in Elmalık’s right tunnel
between chainages 54 + 140 km and 54 + 080 km following the collapse (Aygar,
2000).
Fig. 31. The approximately 3.5 m buckling that occurred in the tunnel top heading
due to excessive displacements, and the mechanism of failure in the top heading
invert (Aygar, 2000).
Fig. 32. Damage to the tunnel section due to excessive displacements (Aygar, 2000).
Various solutions were considered for the section that was filled
following the collapse. First, it was concluded that the support system
should be a method not based on NATM principles. The principle of
maintaining an arch through a flexible outer lining lost its validity in the
fault zones. Therefore, it was decided to utilise a more rigid lining.
Eventually, the most appropriate project design for crossing this fault
zone would be applying the bench pilot tunnel method (Figs. 33 and 34).
As is evident in Fig. 33 two 5 m-diameter pilot tunnel excavations were
made in the bench of these sections, and they were filled with iron
reinforcement and concrete. The top heading section comprised 70 cm
shotcrete. The fault zone was passed smoothly using the bench pilot
tunnel method. Apparently, this method is completely out of the scope of
the NATM principles, involving a very rigid lining thickness (Aygar,
2000).
 Fig. 33. Cross-section of bench pilot tunnels (unit: m) (Geoconsult, 1999b).

It was not feasible to decide what support class should be

implemented in the flysch series of the right tunnel (from chainages 54 +
140 km to 54 + 080 km). Based on the experience gained during
applications in the left tunnel, it was clear that a rigid shotcrete layer of 60
cm would be insufficient and a middle lining would be required for these
sections. The middle lining (Bernold lining) is a lining located between
the shotcrete and the inner lining, for which a lining method was applied
after completion of top heading, bench, and invert concrete linings (Fig.
35). The application of the Bernold lining in tunnels is illustrated in Fig.
36.
Fig. 34. A view during excavation of the bench pilot tunnel method in Elmalık
tunnel.
 Fig. 35. Bernold lining (unit: m) (Geoconsult, 1998c).
Fig. 36. Application of Bernold lining in the tunnel.
5. Conclusions
NATM is an approach that covers the principles of general
underground support rather than a tunnelling method. The results
obtained from Bolu tunnel reveal that it is not always feasible to
implement the principle of “ensuring an arch with a flexible outer lining”.
Thus, the implementation of this method could not always be an
appropriate or economic approach. Implementation of this method
resulted in significant increase in the cost of Bolu tunnel. The collapse of
a 50 m section in the right tunnel can also be induced by implementation
of this method. Furthermore, in the left tunnel, excavation works were
halted for approximately 10 months, and continuous repair and
reinforcement works were required.
A wide range of opinions is that each tunnel brings with a site-
specific method. The results obtained in a tunnel tend to serve as a guide
for other tunnels. By the time, the excavation was completed for Bolu
tunnel, which was originally designed according to NATM principles, but
completed without it. Implementation of NATM principles and proposing
solutions for the encountered problems would be appropriate only if they
are revised according to the solutions developed for a case wherein the
NATM provides unsatisfactory outcomes. The NATM principles consist
of 22 items set out by Müller (1978). The revised ones are as follows:
(1) The reinforcement lining should be in the form of ‘thin shells’.
However, when the ground conditions are highly inadequate (such
as presence of widespread fault zones and flysch series containing
low angle faults having the potential of swelling and squeezing),
the outer lining should be significantly more rigid than the thin
shell. If necessary, the bench pilot tunnel method should be applied
in large fault zones. In sections where the ground is in good
condition, both the temporary and permanent reinforcement linings
should be thin, shell-shaped, and sufficiently flexible to permit
bending. This aids in preventing the formation of bending moments
in the shell. It also prevents the formation of associated pull and
shear fractures.
(2) Reinforcements should be made of steel meshes, bolts and steel
ribs, rather than by thickening the shell, to provide the necessary
flexibility to the shell. With the deterioration of ground conditions,
a more rigid system such as the Bernold lining will be required as a
supplement to the reinforcement elements in the fault zones and
flysch series.
(3) The inner lining should be thin and frictionless, yet tightly bonded
 to the outer lining. The outer lining should be thin to prevent
undesired bending moments. To prevent them from interfering with
the loads originating from the outer lining, the inner and outer
linings should be placed firmly by using their entire surface
without friction. Bolu tunnel has demonstrated that thin outer lining
is not suitable for all ground conditions. This is why a rigid system
should be preferred for the outer lining under weak ground
conditions.
(4) The stability of the structure must be ensured during the pre-
stabilisation phase. Deformation in the underground rock units
including the crust and surrounding rock should be halted before
the inner lining is installed. That is, the secondary stress condition
should be finalised in a balanced manner. The purpose of the inner
lining is to enhance safety and provide an appropriate architectural
appearance. However, when groundwater is present, the inner shell
should be sized to receive all loads. In these cases, the layer
between the outer and inner shells should be waterproof using
bitumen, nylon, membranes, etc. As a highly important element of
temporary stabilisation, bolts must be protected against corrosion,
so that they can be relied upon for permanent strengthening. When
the stability of the structure is not secured by the outer lining, the
deformation could not be completely halted, and they continue to a
certain extent. Thus, the inner lining should be installed as close to
the tunnel face as possible. Moreover, the tunnel should be
reinforced with steel bars before deformation rates decrease below
2 mm per month based on the Austrian Standards.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The author wishes to confirm that there are no known conflicts of
interest associated with this publication and there has been no significant
financial support for this work that could have influenced its outcome.
Acknowledgments
The author thanks to General Directorate of Highways (KGM) for
their supports.
References
Astaldi S.p.A. Anatolian Motorway, Gumusoa Gerede Section 2, Elmalik
Tunnel Final Projects, Geological Report. Report No. 45.110/R/2034; 1993.
Astaldi S.p.A. Geotehnical Measurements Results. Austria: Geodata; 1997.
Astaldi S.p.A. Geotechnical Measurements Results. Austria: Geodata; 1998
Aygar E. A critical approach to the new Austrian tunneling method in Bolu
tunnels. MSc Thesis. Ankara, Turkey: Hacettepe University; 2000.
Aygar E. Investigation of the Bolu Tunnel stability by means of static and
dyanamic analyses. PhD Thesis. Ankara, Turkey: Hacettepe University;
2007.
Braun WM. Application of the NATM in deep tunnels and difficult rock
formations. Tunnels & Tunnelling International 1980;12(2):17–20.
Brown ET. Putting the NATM into perspective. Tunnels & Tunnelling
International 1981;13(10):13–7.
Chen Z, Lv Y, Bian Y. 2017. Prediction of tunnel squeezing considering rock
creep. Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering 2017;22:1609–20.
Dalgıç S. Tunneling in squeezing rock, the Bolu tunnel, Anatolian Motorway,
Turkey. Engineering Geology 2002;67(1–2):73–96.
Geoconsult ZT GmbH. Bolu Tunnels, Technıcal Report on Elmalık Rıght
Tube Pılot Tunnel Through Fault Zone ch. 54+139 to 54+080 approx.
Technical Report No. 45.110/R/2123; 1996.
Geoconsult ZT GMBH. Anatolian Motorway, Gumusova-Gerede Section 2,
Bolu Tunnels, Report on Redesign of Lining Concept, 1997a,
Geoconsult ZT GmbH. Anatolian Motorway, Gumusova-Gerede Section 2,
Bolu Tunnels, Redesign-Bolu Tunnel Class CM theoretical regular cross
section with invert concrete block, Drawing No. 45.1120/8470-1; 1997b.
Geoconsult ZT GmbH. Anatolian Motorway Stretch-2 Bolu Tunnels design
methodology, primary and inner lining. Technical Report No. 45.110/R/
2132; 1998a.
Geoconsult ZT GmbH. Anatolian Motorway Stretch-2 Bolu Tunnels design
methods for unexcavated sections. Technical Report No. 45.110/R/2149;
1998b.
Geoconsult ZT GmbH. Anatolian Motorway Stretch-2 Bolu Tunnels
computations related with supporting system of 50 cm thick Bernold lining.
Technical Report No. 45.110/R2226; 1998c.
Geoconsult ZT GmbH. Anatolian Motorway Stretch-2 Bolu Tunnels
geotechnical parameters, new test results. Technical Report No.
45.110/R/2155; 1998d.
Geoconsult ZT GmbH. Anatolian Motorway, Gumusova-Gerede Section 2,
Bolu Tunnels, Elmalik drives between chainage 54+076 and 53+880
calculation report. Technical Report No. 45.110/R/2140; 1998e.
Geoconsult ZT GmbH. Anatolian Motorway Stretch 2-Bolu Tunnels Option 3-
Bernold lining initial support, Technical Drawing No. 45.110/R/9464,
1999a.
Geoconsult ZT GMBH. Anatolian Motorway Stretch 2 Bolu Tunnels Option
4Initial Support Section with Deformation Elements, Drawing No.
45.110/R/9432A, 1999b
Geoconsult ZT GmbH. Anatolian Motorway Stretch 2 Bolu Tunnel Elmalık
Portal Left and Right Tube Geological Outline, Technical Drawing No.
45.110/S-42/1; 1999c.
Geoconsult ZT GmbH. Anatolian Motorway Stretch-2 Bolu Tunnels Option 4
calculation report. Technical Report No. 45.110/R/2161; 1999d.
Geoconsult ZT GmbH. Anatolian Motorway Stretch 2-Bolu Tunnels By-Pass
Class CM for metasediment refinement initial support. Technical Drawing
No. 45.110/R/9426, 2001.
Geoconsult ZT GmbH. Anatolian Motorway Stretch 2-Bolu Tunnels By-Pass
Class CM45 initial support. Technical Drawing No.
45.110/TN/TUG/D/EX/303; 2002.
Golser J, Mussger K. New Austrian Tunnelling Method (NATM), contractual
aspects. In: Tunnelling under Difficult Conditions, Proceedings of the
International Tunnel Symposium, Tokyo. Pergamon Press; 1979. p. 387–92.
Goricki A. Classification of rock mass behaviour based on a hierarchical rock
mass characterization for the design of underground structures. PhD Thesis.
Austria: University of Technology; 2003. p. 203.
Isık S, Ozben M. Assessment of deformation effects of 12 November 1999
Düzce earthquake on Bolu tunnels and seismic design. In: Proceedings of
the Sixth National Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Istanbul, Turkey;
2007.
Jakoubek J. New Austrian Tunnelling Method. In: Proceedings of the Austrian
Technical-Scientific Symposium in Turkey; 1986.
Kovari K. Erroneous concepts behind the New Austrian Tunnelling Method.
Tunnels and Tunnelling 1994;26(11):38–42.
Marinos PV. Geological Behaviour of rock masses in underground
excavations. Bulletin of the Geological Society of Greece 2010;43(3):1238–
47.
Müller L. Removing misconceptions on the new Austrian tunnelling method.
Tunnels & Tunnelling International 1978;10(8):29–32.
Palmstrom A, Stille H. Ground behaviour and rock engineering tools for
underground excavations. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology
2007;22(4):363–76.
Pöschl I, Kleberger J. Geotechnical risks in rock mass characterisation—Part
1. Tunnels and Tunnelling International 2004a;36(9):37–9.
Pöschl I, Kleberger J. Geotechnical risks in rock mass characterisation—Part
2. Tunnels and Tunnelling International 2004b;36(10):36–8.
Pötsch M, Schubert W, Goricki A, Steidl A. Determination of rock mass
behaviour types - A case study. In: EUROCK 2004 & 53rd Geomechanics
Colloquium; 2004.
Rabcewicz L. The New Austrian Tunnelling Method, Part One, Water Power
1964a; 453–7.
Rabcewicz L. The New Austrian Tunnelling Method, Part Two, Water Power
1964b; 511–5.
Rabcewicz L. The New Austrian Tunnelling Method, Part Three, Water Power
1965; 19–24.
Rabcewicz L, Golser J. Principles of dimensioning the supporting system for
the “New Austrian Tunnelling Method”. Water Power, Marc 1973; 88-93.
Romano P. Could the New Austrian Tunnelling Method be used safely in
cities? In: Proceedings of the ITA-Aites World Congress; 2009.
Schubert P, Moggiolli M, Brandl H, Golser J. Extraordinary difficulties
driving the motorway tunnels through Bolu Mountains, Turkey. Felsbau
1996;15(5).
Schubert W. Basics and Application of the Austrian Guideline for the
Geomechanical Design of Underground Structures. In: EUROCK 2004 &
53rd Geomechanics Colloquium; 2004.
Dr. Ebu Bekir Aygar has been the Tunnel Design Division Manager in Fugro
Turkey since 2009. He obtained his PhD degree in 2007 with his studies on
NATM tunnelling applications and tunnel stability in static and dynamic
conditions. His research is focused on numerical analyses carried out in
NATM tunnelling, underground support design and rock mechanics. He
participated in Bolu Tunnel Project as a shift engineer and worked as a
research assistant in Mining Engineering Department of Hacettepe University
in Turkey. He currently manages the tunnel projects including support design
(shotcrete, rock bolts, etc.), inner lining design, drainage projects, numerical
analysis of tunnels, and portal design of highway and railway projects. He has
24 years’ experience for variety of tunnel projects. He most recently served as
a Lead Engineer in several tunnel design projects in Turkey, Algeria and Saudi
Arabia.
Simsek O. Bolu Tunnel Geological Longitudinal Prfile Along Left Tube As
Built Conditins, Asarsuyu Portal to Elmalık Portal, (Km:61+187.180-
64+141.00). Technical Drawing No. S-050; 2004.
Sun X, Zhang B, Gan L, Tao Z, Zhao C. Application of constant resistance and
large deformation anchor cable in soft rock highway tunnel. Advances in
Civil Engineering 2019;2019(8). https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/4347302.
Tokgozoglu F, Isik S. Bolu Dağı Tünelleri Proje ve Yapım Aşamaları. In:
Proceedings of the International Conference/Workshop & Exhibition on
Tunnelling & Underground Space Use; 2002 (In Turkish).
Vardar M. Yeraltı Yapıları Mekaniğinde Yeni Avusturya Tünel Açma
Yönteminin Ana İlkeleri, Ankrajlar ve Boyutlandırması, D.S.I., Ankara.
1979 (In Turkish).
Vardar M. Sürtünmeli Çelik Bağların Yeni Avusturya Tünel Açma
Yönteminde NATM kullanılabilme Olanakları, Rock Mechanics Bulletin
1985;3: 35–44 (In Turkish).
Wagner H. Planning and construction of shallow and deep underground
structures according to the New Austrian Tunneling Method. In:
Proceedings of the Austrian Technical-Scientific Symposium in Turkey;
1986.
Wang X, Lai J, Garnes RS, Lou J. Support system for tunnelling in squeezing
ground of Qingling-Daba mountainous area: A case study from soft rock
tunnels. Advances in Civil Engineering 2019.
https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/8682535.
Xi C. Discussion on the large deformation law of Muzhailing tunnel in Lanhai
Expressway. World Construction 2017;6(2):22–5.
 Declaration of interests

☒ The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships
that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

☐The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered
as potential competing interests:

EBU BEKİR AYGAR

09.12.2019