Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Underground Space 3 (2018) 72–85
www.elsevier.com/locate/undsp

Robustness evaluation of cutting tool maintenance planning for

soft ground tunneling projects
Alena Conrads a,⇑, Markus Scheffer b, Markus König b, Markus Thewes a
a
Institute of Tunneling and Construction Management, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Germany
b
Chair of Computing in Engineering, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Germany

Received 21 August 2017; received in revised form 11 December 2017; accepted 8 January 2018
Available online 8 February 2018

Abstract

Tunnel boring machines require extensive maintenance and inspection effort to provide a high availability. The cutting tools of the
cutting wheel must be changed timely upon reaching a critical condition. While one possible maintenance strategy is to change tools only
when it is absolutely necessary, tools can also be changed preventively to avoid further damages. Such different maintenance strategies
influence the maintenance duration and the overall project performance. However, determine downtime related to a particular mainte-
nance strategy is still a challenging task. This paper shows an analysis of the robustness to achieve the planned project performance of a
maintenance strategy considering uncertainties of wear behavior of the cutting tools. A simulation based analysis is presented, imple-
menting an empirical wear prediction model. Different strategies of maintenance planning are compared by performing a parameter vari-
ation study including Monte-Carlo simulations. The maintenance costs are calculated and evaluated with respect to their robustness.
Finally, an improved and robust maintenance strategy has been determined.
Ó 2018 Tongji University and Tongji University Press. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Owner. This is an open access article
under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Keywords: Mechanized tunneling; Maintenance; Wear of cutting tools; Process simulation; Robustness; Uncertainty modeling

1. Introduction of laboratory test results and subjective evaluations. Since

Tunnel boring machines (TBM) excavate the ground by
pressing the rotating cutting wheel against the tunnel face.
With respect to prevailing soil conditions, the cutting wheel
is equipped with different kinds of cutting tools (e.g. discs,
scrapers and buckets). The cutting tools are the only
machine parts directly in contact with the tunnel face and
subject to constant wear processes. Therefore, inspection
and maintenance processes of the cutting tools are of
crucial importance for the project efficiency.
In mechanized tunneling projects, maintenance process
of cutting tools is currently planned based on a collection
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: alena.conrads@rub.de (A. Conrads).
URL: http://www.tlb.rub.de (A. Conrads).
no adequate opportunity to monitor the tool condition
during the advancement process exists, wear prediction
models must be used to determine necessary inspection
intervals and maintenance processes. However, due to a
lack of adequate wear prediction models as well as uncer-
tainties in the geotechnical boundary conditions, especially
the abrasiveness of the soil, frequently the planned mainte-
nance strategies must be modified during the project
progress.
Currently prediction models of wear behavior are
mostly based on input data gained during laboratory index
tests under idealized boundary conditions (Köhler et al.,
2011). However, the results of these tests do not always
fit with the in situ measured tool conditions (Küpferle
et al., 2015). In order to fill the gap between laboratory
and in situ wear behavior, an empirical approach based

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.undsp.2018.01.005
2467-9674/Ó 2018 Tongji University and Tongji University Press. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Owner.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
 A. Conrads et al. / Underground Space 3 (2018) 72–85
on project data of already finished tunneling projects has
been developed by Köppl et al. (2015). This model requires
several input parameters of which some are heavily prone
to uncertainty. Further, there is always the possibility that
the prevailing geological conditions deviate from the
expected values gained by borehole investigations. In order
to achieve efficient and robust maintenance strategies for
mechanized tunneling projects, the influences of these
uncertainties on the planned maintenance strategies must
be considered during the planning stage of a project.
This paper presents an approach for a robustness anal-
ysis of the maintenance of cutting tools in mechanized tun-
neling. A robust maintenance strategy has to minimize the
influence of uncertainties of the wear behavior of the cut-
ting tools on the duration, effort and costs of the mainte-
nance work. Considering these uncertainties already
during the planning phase, unplanned maintenance stops
can be reduced or avoided.
Therefore, the maintenance and wear processes in mech-
anized tunneling have been presented and discussed. After-
wards, an approach for robust optimization using Monte
Carlo Simulation is presented and adapted to determine
the distribution of costs that result from different mainte-
nance strategies.
A simulation-based approach evaluating the influences
of varying and uncertain boundary conditions on mainte-
nance efficiency is presented. In order to evaluate the effi-
ciency, a multi-method process simulation model based
on former investigations by Conrads, Scheffer, et al.
(2017) is enhanced. The TBM production processes are
represented using the discrete event simulation method
and TBM steering parameters gathered from completed
projects.
A system dynamic approach representing a surrogate
model of the cutting tool wear behavior with respect to
geotechnical boundary conditions is coupled with the pro-
cess simulation part. Thus, a multi-method simulation
model, capable of using uncertain input data and perform-
ing Monte Carlo and sensitivity analysis, provides a frame-
work evaluating the maintenance strategies for soft ground
tunneling projects. Further, a robustness evaluation is pre-
sented analyzing the influence of varying input parameters
on maintenance efficiency. This leads to comparable results
and allows the decision makers for finding a maintenance
strategy that meets with the project requirements.
The case study highlights that the presented approach is
a useful tool to analyze maintenance strategies regarding
their robustness in order to support the engineers and deci-
sion makers during the planning phase.
2. Background
In this section, the main production processes of the
mechanized tunneling are explained. The efficiency of a
project depends highly on the performance of the produc-
tion processes and is dependent on an accurate mainte-
nance planning. Following, the maintenance procedure
73
and the influence of maintenance planning on the produc-
tion processes are explained. Finally, an empirical wear
prediction model is introduced and reviewed regarding
uncertain input parameters.
2.1. Mechanized tunneling method
Tunnel boring machines (TBM) work as stepwise mov-
ing subsurface tunnel fabrication plants, performing every
production step from the excavation of ground to the
installation of tunnel lining segments (Fig. 1). These con-
crete lining segments prevent the newly created tunnel sec-
tion from collapsing due to the prevailing ground pressure.
The basic concept of a TBM is characterized by an alter-
nating procedure of a soil excavating advancement and
the tunnel lining construction. This procedure should only
be interrupted by planned maintenance stops.
In order to excavate the ground, the rotating cutting
wheel on the TBM head is pushed forward against the tun-
nel face. During the advance process, cutting tools
mounted on the cutter head are in contact with the ground
and are thus subject to continuous wear processes. This
wear behavior of the cutting tools is highly related to the
prevailing ground conditions, e.g. earth pressure or abra-
siveness, and machine steering parameters such as the face
support pressure, advance speed and cutting wheel rotation
speed.
Whenever a tool reaches a critical wear level and must
be replaced, the production processes of the TBM must
stop in order to get access to the excavation chamber and
to the cutting wheel. Unstable ground conditions require
a pressurized excavation chamber to prevent a collapse of
the tunnel face. Releasing the support pressure and con-
ducting maintenance work in atmospheric pressure condi-
tions significantly increases the risk of a tunnel face
collapse and is mostly unfeasible. However, when working
under pressurized conditions, additional time is needed for
workers to adapt to pressurized conditions. Consequently,
maintenance work is an elaborate and time consuming pro-
cess significantly decreasing the performance, but necessary
in order to ensure workability of the TBM.
2.2. Maintenance processes in mechanized tunneling
In mechanized tunneling the maintenance of all machine
parts is necessary to provide the workability. Most of the
maintenance work can be performed parallel to the main
production processes. However, the maintenance of the
cutting tools requires an interruption of the production
processes and causes a high amount of unproductive time
frames. In addition, monitoring the condition of the cut-
ting tools is hardly possible or provides unusable results.
Thus, surrogate models predicting the wear behavior are
required for an adequate maintenance scheduling. Due to
the high impact of cutting tool maintenance on the overall
project efficiency, the maintenance of cutting tools is
focused on the following approach.
74 A. Conrads et al. / Underground Space 3 (2018) 72–85

X
n X
nbolt X
ne;d X
ne;s X
ne;b
treplace ¼ tinspect;i þ tbolt;i þ te;d;i þ te;s;i þ te;b;i
i¼1 i¼1 i¼1 i¼1 i¼1

Fig. 1. Visualization of the main components of a Mixshield TBM and the
tunnel lining (Herrenknecht, 2017).
The maintenance of the cutting tools is not only time-
consuming but also a risky procedure. In order to access
the excavation chamber and maintain the cutting tools,
the support medium must be replaced by pressurized air.
During this procedure, there is a highly increased risk of
the tunnel face collapsing due to insufficient support pres-
sure. In addition, there is also a possibility of blow-outs.
Both not only cause settlements at the surface, but also
endanger the workers inside the excavation chamber per-
forming the maintenance work. Further obstacles are the
limited working time under pressurized conditions and
the time needed for the decompression of the workers.
A maintenance procedure for TBM cutting tools can be
divided into the mobilization processes, inspection and tool
replacing work and the demobilization processes.
The overall mobilization process (tmob ) includes lowering
the level of support medium (tlow ), compressing the workers
(tcompress ), installing working platforms (tinstallation ) and clean-
ing of the cutting wheel (tcleaning ). The lowering of the sup-
port medium needs an adaption of the air pressure in the
excavation chamber. The workers should not be exposed
to these pressure fluctuations. Therefore, the compression
of the workers is not conducted simultaneously to ensure
the safety of the workers and the stability of the tunnel
face. After the workers are adapted to the pressure condi-
tions, they enter the excavation chamber and have to
mount the working platforms first. Following, the cutting
wheel and tools can be reached and cleaned. This proce-
dure leads to the following equation to estimate tmob :
tmob ¼ tlow þ tcompress þ tinstallation þ tcleaning
Replacement work (treplace ) consists of a visual tool
inspection (tinspect ) of all tools, re-tightening of loose bolts
(tbolts ) and exchanging of all worn out tools (te ) (Eq. (2)).
The duration of the tool exchange depends on the different
tool types and the current tool condition. Severe damage,
e.g. worn tool holders or a damaged cutting wheel struc-
ture, requires welding work and causes the maintenance
processes to become more time-consuming.
ð2Þ
where
treplace : duration of replacement work [min]
tinspect : duration of tool inspection work [min/tool]
n: number of cutting tools [pcs]
tbolt : duration for re-tightening one bold [min/bolt]
nbolt : number re-tighted bolts [pcs]
te;i : duration for exchanging one tool [min/tool]
ne;d=s=b : number of exchanged tools [pcs]
(d: discs/s: scraper/b: buckets)
The demobilization (tdemob ) includes unmounting of the
working platforms (tunmount ), decompression time of the
workers (tdecompress ) and refilling the excavation chamber
with support medium (trefill ). As shown in Eq. (3), these
processes cannot be performed simultaneously. First, the
platforms are unmounted, then the workers are decom-
pressed. Afterwards, the excavation chamber is filled again
with the support medium. Again, these last two steps are
conducted separately to ensure the safety of the workers.
tdemob ¼ tunmount þ tdecompress þ trefill ð3Þ
The total duration of a maintenance stop is then calcu-
lated as follows:
tmaint ¼ tmob þ treplace þ tdemob ð4Þ
Typically, maintenance work in mechanized tunneling is
performed periodically, with additional preventive stops
before passing a critical tunneling section (e.g. high water
pressure or sensitive surface structures). For a periodical
strategy, the advance is stopped on a predefined position
and maintenance work is performed. The length of this
maintenance interval is determined beforehand according
to the expected geotechnical conditions and the forecasted
cutting tool wear behavior. If the interval between mainte-
nance stops is excessively long, there is a high chance to
damaged parts of the tool holders. Repairing these dam-
ages leads to a significant longer standstill compared to reg-
ular tool replacements. Conversely, a short interval results
in unnecessary stops and produces avoidable production
losses.
During the maintenance process, all worn-out tools are
replaced by new ones. Further, tools within an acceptable
ð1Þ conditions range can be exchanged preventively, to prevent
substantial damages before the next stopping position is
reached. This limit for preventive tool replacements is a
key factor dominating the performance and efficiency of
a project.
Fig. 2 shows the dependencies and influences of consec-
utive maintenance stops on the tool condition. Part (a)
shows the initial tool condition at the beginning of a
tunneling project. Each bar represents the maximum exca-
vation length (LcðmÞz;i ) for the tool on the corresponding
 A. Conrads et al. / Underground Space 3 (2018) 72–85
Fig. 2. Schematic of the dependencies between the maintenance interval and tool replacements.
cutting track resulting from the abrasive wear and penetra-
tion. The color indicates the condition of the tool along the
tunnel lining. The first stop is scheduled when a cutting tool
i (here: i = 1 and i = 18) is predicted to reach the wear
limit. During the first maintenance stop (b), the inspection
process identifies tools to be replaced. For a periodic main-
tenance strategy, the condition of remaining tools must be
adequate to resist wear processes until the next mainte-
nance stop is scheduled. Otherwise, a preventive tool
change is necessary (c). In this example, the tools i = 2, 3,
16 and 17 will be worn out before the next scheduled stop
and therefore are replaced, too. Further tools are deter-
mined by defining a safety factor ccl that reduces the max-
imum cutting path of the tool, thus the expected distance
until the tool is worn-out. This way, tools that are still in
an acceptable condition (here: i = 4 and i = 15) are
replaced preemptively to ensure workability even under
varying soil conditions. Part (d) shows the result of the first
maintenance stop.
Deteriorating tool conditions lead to decreasing TBM
performance and increase the chance of an unplanned
maintenance stop. These maintenance stops are called reac-
tive or corrective maintenance. Corrective maintenance is
unpredictable in place and time and in general more time
consuming and risky compared to planned stoppages.
Thus, a well-planned maintenance strategy reduced the
chances of unplanned stoppages to a minimum.
2.3. Wear prediction of cutting tools in soft ground
conditions
The life span of cutting tools depends on the wear
behavior. Since the condition of the cutting tools in soft
75
ground tunneling is difficult to monitor, sufficient wear pre-
diction models are required. For these estimations, several
index tests, like the LCPC-test (Thuro et al., 2006), SGAT
(Jakobsen et al., 2013) or Cherchar-test (Thuro and
Käsling, 2009) exist, providing trends of the abrasiveness
of the ground. However, these tests do not consider TBM
steering parameters (e.g. rotational speed of the cutting
wheel or penetration of the cutting tools) and in situ geo-
logical conditions. Thus, the expected wear behavior does
not always fit with the measured tool condition of tunnel-
ing projects (Küpferle et al., 2016).
In order to consider these boundary conditions, a quanti-
tative approach by Köppl et al. (2015) was developed based
on ground conditions and TBM steering data gained from
finished tunneling projects. The proposed soil abrasiveness
index value (SAI) describes the soil abrasiveness using the
equivalent quartz content eQu [%], the stresses using the
shear strength of the soil sc [kN/mm2] and the grain size dis-
tribution of the ground using the grain size D60 [mm].
Based on the SAI value as an input parameter, the max-
imum cutting path of a cutting tool sc;eðzÞ [km] is given by
Eq. (5) and shown in Fig. 3. The maximum cutting path
is developed for different types of cutting tools (Köppl
et al., 2015).

312:0 þ expð0:0048ðSAI  1398:2ÞÞ discs
sc;eðzÞ ðSAIÞ ¼
280:9 þ expð0:0050ðSAI  1300:7ÞÞ scrapers=buckets
ð5Þ
During the advance process, each cutting tool follows a
helix-shaped path as described in Fig. 3, representing the
maximum cutting path sc;eðzÞ;i [km]. Taking the cutting
wheel geometry and tool position into account, the
maximum cutting path can be translated into the maximum
76 A. Conrads et al. / Underground Space 3 (2018) 72–85

Fig. 3. Actual cutting path sd;eðzÞ;i (blue), the maximum cutting path sc;eðzÞ;i (green), the maximum excavation length LcðmÞz;i (dark yellow), the radius of the
mounting position rs;i and the penetration peðzÞ;i of the cutting tool i as well as the actual excavation length LdðmÞz (yellow).

longitudinal length of the excavated tunnel section
LcðmÞz;i [m]. Vice versa the actual tool cutting path
sd;eðzÞ;i [km] can be calculated according to the actual
excavation length LdðmÞz [m] using Eq. (6). For this purpose,
the distance between the tool and the cutting wheel center
rs;i [mm] and the cutting wheel penetration peðzÞ;i [mm/rot.]
are needed as input parameters.
2p  rs;i  LdðmÞz
sd;eðzÞ;i ðrs;i ; peðzÞ;i Þ ¼
1000  peðzÞ;i
The wear level ecd;eðmÞz is estimated by comparing the cur-
rent driven cutting path of a tool sd;eðzÞ to the maximum cut-
ting path sc;eðzÞ . The safety factor ccl reduces the maximum
cutting path to ensure a workability of the cutting tools
under worse boundary condition (0 < ccl <¼ 1:0). This
wear level, calculated in Eq. (7), is used to determine the
tools that have to be replaced during a maintenance stop.
sd;eðzÞ ec;eðzÞ
ecd;eðmÞz ¼ ¼ ð7Þ
sc;eðzÞ  ccl ccl
If a cutting tool reaches the wear limit before a mainte-
nance stop is performed as shown in Fig. 3, the wear level
will be ec;eðzÞ > 1:0. At this point, the wear resistance of the
tool decreases due to the worn-out hard metal parts. These
hard metal parts are highly resistant against abrasive
strains. For a more precise estimation, Küpferle et al.
(2017) experimentally compared the wear behavior of typ-
ical tool materials. The results show that the wear rate of
the tool body material (substrate) is approximately 6.7
times higher than the wear rate of the hard metal. There-
fore, the wear rate of the cutting tool increases by the fac-
tor 6.7 (Fig. 4a).
If the tool wear level exceeds the predefined wear limit
by the factor two (ec;eðzÞ > 2:0), the chance of the tool
ð6Þ holder being completely destroyed increases significantly
(Fig. 4b).
2.4. Problem statement
Parameters significantly influencing the wear behavior,
e.g. geotechnical conditions (SAI) and TBM steering
parameters (peðzÞ ), are heavily prone to uncertainty. How-
ever, established wear prediction models used for estimat-
ing and planning inspection intervals and maintenance
works do not consider existing uncertainties of these
parameters. An accurate and robust maintenance strategy
should be able to ensure a high level of TBM utilization
even in circumstances differing from the expected
conditions. Currently, state of the art laboratory tests
and empirical approaches are not capable of handling
uncertain input parameters. Frequently, assumptions made
during the planning phase prove to be wrong during the

Fig. 4. (a) Schematic wear behavior of a cutting tool; (b) wear limit of a scraper defined by the depth of the hard metal parts, wear limit of the tool holder
to be damaged given by the geometrical boundaries (here: 2:0  hd;max;SM ).
 A. Conrads et al. / Underground Space 3 (2018) 72–85
project progress. Thus, TBMs are not capable of running
on full efficiency due to insufficient maintenance strategies.
Dealing with uncertain input parameters requires statis-
tical evaluation methods in order to interpret the outcom-
ing results. A relevant question is the likelihood that the
chosen maintenance strategy leads to a successful tunnel
project, even under unexpected project boundary condi-
tions. Proving an accurate and comparable approach to
dealing with this problem would significantly increase the
quality of maintenance planning in mechanized tunneling
projects.
3. Robustness evaluation of maintenance strategies
As discussed in Section 2.3, the wear behavior of cutting
tools is affected by uncertainty in soil and TBM steering
parameters. To evaluate the influence of these uncertainties
on the maintenance scheduling and to find an efficient and
robust strategy, a robustness analysis has to be performed.
Therefore, existing approaches for robustness analyses and
optimizations are reviewed and evaluated. Ongoing, by
using cost functions for maintenance work, a comparable
definition describing the efficiency of a maintenance strat-
egy is presented.
3.1. Robust system design
One of the first attempts dealing with robust system
design is given by Taguchi et al. (1991). According to that
approach, a robust design or process is given if the results
are close to the target and not highly scattered (Dellino
et al., 2012). This means, that the distribution of an output
value set is not greatly affected by deviations of the input
value set. Beyer and Sendhoff (2007) give a review of the
methods of robust optimization existing in the literature.
Several statistical methods are used for robust parame-
ter design or process robustness studies, especially in the
course of design of experiments (DoE) (e.g. Montgomery,
2013). In schedule optimization, robustness is an index
for the sensitivity of a schedule with respect to uncertainties
of the process durations or to disturbances of single pro-
cesses (e.g. Jankovič, 2015). Sometimes, the robustness
analysis includes an evaluation of the influence obtained
by uncertain input data using sensitivity analyses
(Chalupnik et al., 2007). Cherkaoui et al. (2016) investi-
gated the robustness of condition-based maintenance con-
sidering the maintenance costs of a system. They pointed
out that increasing the robustness may decrease the perfor-
mance of the system.
Rhein et al. (2013) and Zang et al. (2005) give an over-
view of different approaches for robust optimization. For a
single value approach, parameters given by statistical
methods like mean value, median, standard deviation or
interquartile range can be analyzed. However, a rather
small scattering of the results does not consequently
describe the optimal solution regarding a target value.
Therefore, a weighted objective function, considering either
77
the deviation and the mean value, or the median and the
inter-percentile range, is proposed in the literature (Athan
and Papalambros, 1996; Marler and Arora, 2010). By
introducing a weighting factor a, any preferences of the
decision makers are taken into account. Using Eq. (8), with
a ¼ 0:0 only the deviation is taken into account. Vice versa,
using a ¼ 1:0 only the mean value is regarded.
RðaÞ ¼ a  lm;i þ ð1  aÞ  ri ð8Þ
where
R: target value
lm;i : mean value/median
ri : standard deviation/inter-percentile range
By minimizing R, the optimal solution considering the
mean and the deviation of a system is obtained. Whether
the mean and standard deviation or the median and the
inter-percentile range should be regarded depends on the
examined system. A system with a critical behavior to
extreme values must be analyzed with special focus on
these values. In addition, considering relative values deter-
mines a comparable target value for similar systems. (see
Eq. (9)).
lm;i ri
RðaÞ ¼ a  þ ð1  aÞ  ð9Þ
lm;max rmax
where
lm;min : maximum of all mean values/medians
rmax : maximum of all standard deviations/inter-
percentile ranges
The values for these investigations are mostly computed
by Monte Carlo simulations (MCS).
3.2. Robustness of maintenance strategies in mechanized
tunneling
Robustness is a value representing the sensitivity of the
results to the input parameters. In mechanized tunneling,
the input parameters influencing the wear behavior are
divided into controllable parameters and noise or uncertain
parameters. Controllable parameters with respect to main-
tenance are the maintenance interval and the safety factor.
Noise parameters are the ground conditions given by the
SAI value and the TBM penetration.
Three specific values characterizing the robustness of
maintenance strategies exist. The first value is the total
duration of maintenance work. Secondly, the number of
replaced tools and worn tool holders is an identifier for
the efficiency of the maintenance strategy. Both heavily
influence the duration of the maintenance and increase the
costs significantly. As third, the location of maintenance
stops and the prevailing boundary conditions are of crucial
importance due to specific risk profiles of a tunnel align-
ment. If the chosen locations are not sufficient to handle
78 A. Conrads et al. / Underground Space 3 (2018) 72–85
such factors as sensitive surface structures or high ground
water levels, additional stops are needed right before the
critical section to ensure the workability of the TBM and
to avoid a maintenance stop there.
However, the occurrence of unplanned maintenance
stops is the most crucial factor. Unplanned stops cause
not only higher costs, but also increase the risk of work
accidents and damage to sensitive surface structures. The
worst case scenario is a corrective maintenance stop where
accessing the excavation chamber is hardly possible from a
technical point of view. The occurrence of unplanned stops
should be avoided by choosing a robust strategy, even if it
raises higher costs.
3.3. Maintenance cost evaluation
To gain a comparable value representing the robustness
of a maintenance strategy, a monetization of the conducted
maintenance procedure is necessary. Therefore, cost factors
are required in order to calculate the overall costs of a
maintenance strategy. These factors are divided into time-
dependent costs and material costs. A running construction
site and the working staff are paid with respect to the pro-
ject duration. Further, material costs for cutting tools or
tool holders depend on the actual cutting wheel condition.
To summarize, the following cost factors are required to
perform a comparable robustness analysis of maintenance
strategies in mechanized tunneling.
 time-dependent costs:
– general expenses of the jobsite [Euro/h]
– planned/unplanned maintenance stops [Euro/h]
 material costs:
– cutting discs [Euro/disc]
– scraper [Euro/scraper]
– bucket [Euro/bucket]
 fix costs
– compressing/decompressing operation costs [Euro/
operation]
– planned/unplanned maintenance stops [Euro/stop]
3.4. Simulation-based robustness analysis approach
A robustness evaluation of maintenance strategies in
mechanized tunneling projects must be based on uncertain
input parameters. Uncertain values are represented by dis-
tribution functions.
A maintenance strategy is defined by two parameters:
the maintenance intervals Li , specifying the distance
between periodical stops, and the safety factor ccl , influenc-
ing the minimum acceptable condition of a tool during an
inspection procedure. To identify the optimal strategy,
these two parameters are varied using the crossed array
method by Taguchi et al. (1991). This way, all possible
parameter variations are analyzed. As mentioned before,
the worst case in mechanized tunneling is an unplanned
maintenance stop. Since the planning of the maintenance
should avoid unplanned stoppages for the expected uncer-
tainties, strategies that result in unplanned stoppages are
considered as unfeasible.
For a first comparison, a scatter plot of the mean and
standard deviation of the estimated maintenance costs is
used to compare all investigated strategies. Here, the mean
value is taken, because the influence of the outliers, which
is crucial for the estimation, should not be neglected. The
strategies leading to the minimum mean values and stan-
dard deviations are identified. In addition, the examined
strategies are rated by using the weighted target function
with relative values. Since the weighting factor a is chosen
subjectively, a sensitivity analysis has to be conducted that
examines the influence of a on the decision making process.
If not one single optimal strategy can be found by the
target function, histograms can be used to analyze and
compare the shape and position of the resulting distribu-
tion. As a result, a maintenance strategy consisting of a
maintenance interval and a safety factor is found, which
is optimal according to the amount and deviation of costs.
4. Simulation model
Simulation models can facilitate the decision making
process in highly complex systems and are well accepted
in the construction industry (Martinez, 2010; Ruwanpura
and Ariaratnam, 2007). In general, evaluating different
project setups or maintenance strategies before project exe-
cution is often not possible or far too expensive. A digital
representation of the real system provides these options
and enables a comparison of different setups and evalua-
tion criteria.
Process simulation is a useful tool to analyze complex
systems dealing with uncertainties within the input param-
eter set. Liu et al. (2015) performed a schedule risk analysis
for projects using a mechanized tunneling method that
takes geological uncertainties into account. The model
focuses on a detailed representation of the TBM produc-
tion processes and the effects of differing ground conditions
on the planned project schedule. However, wear behavior
and maintenance processes are not regarded in this
approach.
Using the CYCLONE simulation method for construc-
tion projects published by Halpin (1977), Hajjar and
AbouRizk (1999) developed a widely established special
purpose simulation framework (SIMPHONY) in order to
enable the quick and simple modeling of construction pro-
cesses (Hajjar and AbouRizk, 2002). These approaches are
commonly adapted on tunneling jobsites (Al-Battaineh
et al., 2006; Fernando et al., 2003). Ebrahimy et al.
(2011) showed that simulation based sensitivity analyses
lead to a deeper and more transparent understanding of
a construction project by evaluating a tunneling jobsites
supply chain. Zang et al. (2005) presented a simulation-
 A. Conrads et al. / Underground Space 3 (2018) 72–85
based approach predicting the TBM performance consider-
ing failure rates of technical equipment.
Former research by Conrads, Scheffer, et al. (2017) pre-
sented a simple simulation-based implementation of the
wear prediction model introduced in Section 2.3. The main
focus was to analyze different maintenance strategies
according to the maintenance duration. This implementa-
tion did not include any optimization or robustness analy-
sis approach. A first optimization approach was presented
by Scheffer et al. (2016), but still does not analyze the
robustness of the maintenance strategies. Furthermore,
both approaches only focus on the maintenance duration
and neglect any cost evaluation.
The ongoing research approach overcomes the fact that
maintenance strategies are still not assessable according to
economic efficiency, nor are they robust against varying
boundary conditions. Fig. 5 shows the flowchart of the
simulation-based robustness analysis approach.
The presented workflow is divided into three modules.
The parameter variation module analyzes the effects of dif-
ferent parameters on the model behavior. The parameters
of one parameter set define a maintenance strategy by using
the inspection interval Li and the safety factor ccl . One set
of this parameter combination represents a certain mainte-
nance strategy and is used as a starting point for the Monte
Carlo analyses performed by the second module. To handle
the uncertainties in maintenance strategy planning, the
geotechnical and operational input parameters are repre-
sented by distribution functions. These distribution func-
tions are either fitted by using measured data of former
projects or assumptions are made based on engineering
knowledge and experience. Since Monte Carlo simulations
sample single values based on the given distribution func-
tions, getting meaningful results requires sufficient simula-
tion iterations. Therefore, for every combination of the
Fig. 5. Procedure model for the evaluation of maintenance strategies with regard to their robustness by using process simulation.
79
parameter variation, multiple simulation runs are per-
formed. The simulation is a coupled multi-method model
analyzing the efficiency of a given maintenance strategy.
As a result, for a specific maintenance strategy, a cost dis-
tribution function is estimated. This cost distribution func-
tion represents the cost efficiency by calculating the mean
value and the sensitivity in terms of varying boundary con-
ditions by estimating the standard deviation. These two
values, for all parameter sets, are summarized in a scatter
plot for the analysis module.
The third part of the workflow deals with the interpreta-
tion and analysis of the gathered simulation results. As
introduced in Section 3, the definitions of an efficient and
robust maintenance strategy depend on the subjective eval-
uation of the decision maker. Thus, the optimal solution is
defined by a weighted target function. For all parameter
sets, the target function RðaÞ is determined. The minimal
R-value for each value of a is computed. The correspond-
ing maintenance strategy of this value represents the best
solution for the given a. By plotting the target functions
of the identified strategies over a, the sensitivity of the
strategies against the chosen weighting becomes visible.
Finally, an improved maintenance strategy considering
the amount and scattering of the costs is obtained.
4.1. Formal description of the simulation model
Simulation models are always a simplification of the real
world and developed on a special purpose. Thus, the sys-
tem under consideration must be reduced and defined with
respect to the simulation requirements. The formal struc-
ture of the system describing all relevant elements and
information for estimating the wear behavior and analyz-
ing maintenance processes of cutting tools is shown in
Fig. 6. In order to create a consistent formal system
80 A. Conrads et al. / Underground Space 3 (2018) 72–85

Fig. 6. Block definition diagram describing the system analyzing maintenance strategies in mechanized tunneling.

description, a general-purpose modeling language is

required. The System Modeling Language (SysML) para-
digm is widely established in the field of system engineering
and provides flexible and expressive diagrams describing
highly complex systems and system behavior (Friedenthal
et al., 2011; Object Management Group, 2012).
Forecasting the wear behavior requires certain soil
parameters, as described in Section 2.3, provided by the
Soil-block element. Each project is composed of one
TBM-block element and one Tunnel-block element and
several Soil-block elements. The current length of the exca-
vated tunnel specifies the corresponding soil section. Rep-
resenting the production and maintenance processes, the
TBM-block element includes a state machine diagram as
shown in Fig. 7. Within this specification, the process flow
and dependencies necessary for an evaluation of mainte-
nance processes are described. Further, the TBM-block ele-
ment provides the operational parameter influencing the
cutting tool wear behavior and defines the cutting wheel
design.
Fig. 7. State machine diagram describing the system behavior and process
As shown in Fig. 7, the alternating processes advance
flow.
and ringbuild represent a TBM production cycle. The cycle
can be interrupted due to a maintenance procedure. When-
ever a scheduled or corrective maintenance is required, the nance costs are determined and used for the evaluation of
maintenance sequence starts with the mobilization, replace- the maintenance efficiency.
ment and demobilization process according to the mainte-
nance definition in Section 2.2. The TBM cycle restarts 4.2. Implementation
when the demobilization process finishes. The duration of
processes during a maintenance stop are calculated with The developed simulation model is closely related to the
respect to the actual condition of the cutting tools and formal description in Section 4.1 and represents a simpli-
the required maintenance effort. Based on the maintenance fied process model of a TBM system. The introduced
duration and the amount of replaced cutting tools, mainte- approach is implemented using the commercial simulation
 A. Conrads et al. / Underground Space 3 (2018) 72–85 81

software AnyLogic (The AnyLogic Company, 2017). This mental lining has a width of 2.00 m. The design of the cut-
java-based multi-method simulation framework enables ting wheel and cutting tools are given in Fig. 8.
the usage of State Charts to model processes for Discrete The simulation input parameters are given in Table 1.
Event Simulation (DES). Each bdd-Block shown in The cost factors are divided into time-dependent and fixed
Fig. 6 is represented by a single AnyLogic-Object. costs. All given values are assumptions that are based on
The wear of cutting tools is implemented using the Sys- the experiences of a jobsite manager and have to be
tem Dynamic (SD) method. All input parameters are taken adapted for each new project.
into account to enable the continuous evaluation of each The uncertain input parameters represented by the dis-
single cutting tool’s condition. The DES is connected to tribution functions given in Table 2 are used for the calcu-
the SD wear model to control whenever the machine is lation of the wear behavior of the cutting tools. These
advancing and tool degeneration starts. Conversely, during values define the SAI value and actual penetration for
the ringbuild process the tool condition stays constant. Soil the distance of one ring and are updated after each
parameters as well as the machine steering parameters are
recalculated for every advance cycle and thus directly affect
the current wear rate. Table 1
To evaluate different maintenance strategies, the simula- Certain input parameters of the simulation model.
tion framework provides the use of parameter variation Input parameters Unit Expected value
and Monte Carlo simulation. As presented in Fig. 5, both Boundary conditions
simulation methods are combined in order to evaluate dif- Ltunnel – tunnel length [m] 3000
ferent simulation setups with respect to uncertain input d – outer diameter [mm] 8.5
U – rotational speed [rot./min] 2.0
parameters.
Overburden:
h – above groundwater [m] 3.0
h0 – below groundwater [m] 15.0
5. Case study
Cost factors
Planned maintenance stop:
To show the usability of the presented methods and the cp;f – fix costs [Euro/stop] 1500
simulation model, a case study of a generic tunneling pro- cp;t – time-dependent costs [Euro/h] 100
ject is performed. Unplanned maintenance stop:
cu;f – fix costs [Euro/stop] 3000
cu;t – time-dependent costs [Euro/h] 100
5.1. Project description ct;p – time-dependent costs (project) [Euro/h] 1200
Cutting tools:
The investigated tunneling project is defined by a tunnel cd – cutting disc [Euro/disc] 2000
length of 3000 m and an outer diameter of 8.50 m with an cs – scraper [Euro/scraper] 300
cb – bucket [Euro/bucket] 1200
over-cut of approximately 30.0 cm. Each ring of the seg-

Fig. 8. Cutting wheel design scheme (Conrads, Duhme, et al., 2017).

82 A. Conrads et al. / Underground Space 3 (2018) 72–85

Table 2
Uncertain input parameters.
Input parameter Unit Distribution function Mean
Weight of soil:
c – above groundwater [kN/m] Normal (21.0, 2.0) 21.0
c0 – below groundwater [kN/m] Normal (12.0, 1.0) 12.0
/ – friction angle [°] Normal (41.0, 1.5) 41.0
eQu – equiv. quartz content [%] Normal (92.0, 2.8) 92.0
D60 – grain size [mm] Normal (1.5, 0.1) 1.5
pe – penetration [mm/rot] Weibull (10.0, 5.0, 20.0) 24.76

advancement cycle as described in Section 4.2. According
to the given mean values of Table 2, the mean SAI value
is 268.19.
5.2. Results
For the given project, the maintenance interval is cal-
culated by the deterministic approach according to
Köppl et al. (2015). This interval is used as an input
parameter for a first deterministic simulation. A mainte-
nance interval of 240 rings results in 6 maintenance stops
with 331 replaced tools and total maintenance cost of
949,065 Euro.
Ongoing, a Monte Carlo simulation was conducted,
investigating the influence of uncertainties in the input
parameter set for the given strategy. Fig. 9 presents the
resulting histogram of 1000 iterations. The given mainte-
nance strategy under uncertain conditions results in a small
cost deviation. For all iterations of the analysis, no correc-
tive maintenance has been conducted, explaining the small
scattering of the cost values.
A parameter variation study was performed, varying the
length of the maintenance interval between 10 and 300
rings and a step size of 5 rings. The safety factor is varied
from 0.1 to 1.0 with a step size of 0.1. For each parameter
set, a Monte Carlo simulation with 1000 iterations was
conducted.
The results show that for a maintenance interval 6275
rings no corrective maintenance will occur. Larger mainte-
nance intervals lead to unplanned stops, even using an
improved safety factor. To conclude, the scattering of the
maintenance cost for an interval length 6275 rings is only
caused by the varying number of replaced tools.
According to the procedure described in Section 4, the
results of the parameter variation are summarized in the
scatter plot shown in Fig. 10.
The results presented in the scatter plot show that there
is a difference in the mean values of the different parameter
sets of about approximately 8,000,000 Euro. The most
expensive maintenance strategies are using a small safety
factor, which means replacing the tools more preemptively.
However, these strategies tend to result in a small devia-
tion. Nonetheless, other parameter sets with a higher safety
factor result in similar deviations but with smaller mean
values. The scatter plot still does not provide a transparent
evaluation to identify the best maintenance strategies.

Fig. 9. Histogram (1000 simulation runs) of the deterministically determined maintenance strategy; standard deviation = 2324 Euro; most frequent value
= 949,065 Euro.
 A. Conrads et al. / Underground Space 3 (2018) 72–85 83

Fig. 10. Scatter plot of the parameter variation.

Using the weighted target function, all strategies are
compared according to their robustness index RðaÞ (see
Eq. (9)). Therefore, the relative standard deviation and
the relative mean values are calculated with respect to the
absolute maximum values of all analyzed parameter sets.
This way, the R-value is calculated to be 1.0 for the worst
case and 0.0 for the best strategy.
For each a, a strategy with the minimal R-value was iden-
tified. In total, there are 32 different maintenance strategies,
leading to a minimum R-value. The weighted target func-
tions of selected strategies are presented in Fig. 11. For most
of the a-values, the first two strategies represent the best
parameter sets. Both strategies produce the exact same R-
values, since the parameter sets are nearly similar. For
a ¼ 0:0 there are several parameter sets with a minimal R-
value. Strategy (3) and (4) are exemplary target functions
having the smallest and highest gradient. Strategy (5) has
the smallest R-value when a is set to 1.0, thus, it has the small-
est mean value of maintenance costs. Target function (6) rep-
resents the maintenance strategy that has been determined
by using the deterministic wear prediction method of
Köppl et al. (2015). It is important to note that for each
alpha, a better maintenance strategy has been found.
6. Conclusion and outlook
Cutting tool wear in mechanized tunneling involves sev-
eral uncertainties that have to be considered during main-
tenance scheduling. Possible maintenance strategies can

Fig. 11. Target functions R(a) for given parameter sets.

84 A. Conrads et al. / Underground Space 3 (2018) 72–85
be described by the length of the maintenance interval and
a safety factor for the replacement limit.
6.1. Discussion
The results show that a deterministic approach for the
scheduling of maintenance work is not sufficient to find
the most economic and robust maintenance strategy. The
uncertainties of the input parameters have a significant
influence on the system that has to be taken into account
during maintenance scheduling. Nonetheless, using the
deterministic method to identify the maintenance interval
is sufficient to avoid corrective maintenance for the given
scattering of the soil and steering parameters, if there is
only continuous abrasive wear. One reason for this robust-
ness against corrective maintenance is the estimation of the
remaining cutting path of a tool and the preventive replace-
ment. Due to the preventive replacement policy, the wear
limit of damaged holders will only be reached if there are
high deviations of the input parameters or the maximum
cutting path is greatly exceeded.
Besides the number of corrective maintenance stops, the
duration of maintenance and the number of replaced tools
were taken into account by using cost factors. These values
are used for a robust optimization approach performing a
parameter variation study including Monte Carlo simula-
tions. Therefore, the mean value and the standard devia-
tion are considered to identify an optimized maintenance
strategy for the given boundary condition. Using a
weighted target function, the mean value and the standard
deviation are taken into account. It became apparent, that
a small standard deviation, which indicates a robust main-
tenance strategy, leads to a higher mean value, thus higher
total costs, if a small maintenance interval is chosen.
Finally, an improved maintenance strategy, robust against
uncertainties of the input parameters, has been found. The
parameter set of the resulting strategy is similar to the dis-
crete calculated parameter set, but results in a better
robustness index.
Nevertheless, it has to be kept in mind that an empir-
ical wear prediction method was used as a surrogate
model forecasting the wear behavior. This method bears
uncertainties, which could not be considered in this anal-
ysis. Therefore, a validation of the presented model is
necessary. The quality of results gained by a
simulation-based approach is only as good as the defined
input parameters.
It can be said, that the method for a simulation-based
robustness analysis that is presented in this paper provides
an opportunity to find an improved maintenance strategy
regarding the amount and deviation of maintenance costs.
This way, the maintenance duration and the number of
maintenance stops as well as replaced cutting tools are
summarized in one value. The simulation model used is a
useful tool to estimate the wear of cutting tools with respect
to the uncertainties of the input parameters. By performing
Monte Carlo simulation and parameter variation studies,
maintenance strategies can be compared and the best and
most robust strategy can be found.
6.2. Outlook
The concept and method presented is the basis for fur-
ther research analyzing non-periodical maintenance strate-
gies. Furthermore, the model has to be extended to
consider more boundary and changing soil conditions. In
addition, by validating the model, the uncertainties given
from the wear prediction model can be estimated as well.
The given model helps the decision making process dur-
ing the planning phase of a tunneling project. It supports
the scheduling of maintenance work of the cutting tools.
Extending the model can be used for real time updates
including automatically or manually measured data during
execution phase.
Conflict of interest
There is no conflict of interest.
Acknowledgement
The authors would like to acknowledge the financial
support for this research received from the German
Research Foundation (DFG) within the framework of sub-
project C3 of the Collaborative Research Center SFB 837.
References
Al-Battaineh, H. T., AbouRizk, S. M., Tan, J., & Fernando, S. (2006).
Productivity simulation during the planning phase of the Blencoe
Tunnel in Calgary, Canada: A case study. In D. Nicol, R. Fujimoto, B.
Lawson, J. Liu, F. Perrone, & F. Wieland (Eds.), Proceedings of the
2006 winter simulation conference (pp. 2087–2092).
Athan, T. W., & Papalambros, P. Y. (1996). A note on weighted criteria
methods for compromise solutions in multi-objective optimization.
Engineering Optimization, 27, 155–176.
Beyer, H.-G., & Sendhoff, B. (2007). Robust optimization – A compre-
hensive survey. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engi-
neering, 196, 3190–3218.
Chalupnik, M. J., Wynn, D. C., Eckert, C. M., & Clarkson, P. J. (2007).
Understanding design process robustness: A modelling approach. In
J.-C. Bocquet (Ed.), Proceedings of ICED 2007, the 16th international
conference on engineering design.
Cherkaoui, H., Huynh, K. T., & Grall, A. (2016). On the assessment of
performance and robustness of condition-based maintenance strate-
gies. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 49, 809–814.
Conrads, A., Duhme, R., Thewes, M., Scheffer, M., Mattern, H., &
König, M. (2017). Simulation based decision support for maintenance
in mechanized tunneling. In G. Hofstetter, K. Bergmeister, J: Eber-
hardsteiner, G. Meschke, & H. F. Schweiger (Eds.), Proceedings of the
fourth international conference on computational methods in tunneling
and subsurface engineering. Universität Innsbruck.
Conrads, A., Scheffer, M., Mattern, H., König, M., & Thewes, M. (2017).
Assessing maintenance strategies for cutting tool replacements in
mechanized tunneling using process simulation. Journal of Simulation,
11, 51–61.
Dellino, G., Kleijnen, J. P. C., & Meloni, C. (2012). Robust optimization
in simulation: Taguchi and Krige combined. INFORMS Journal on
Computing, 24, 471–484.
 A. Conrads et al. / Underground Space 3 (2018) 72–85
Ebrahimy, Y., AbouRizk, S. M., Fernando, S., & Mohamed, Y. (2011).
Simulation modeling and sensitivity analysis of a tunneling construc-
tion project’s supply chain. Engineering, Construction and Architectural
Management, 18, 462–480.
Fernando, S., Er, K. C., Mohamed, Y., AbouRizk, S. M., & Ruwanpura,
J. Y. (2003). A review of simulation applications for varying demands
in tunneling. In K. R. Molenaar, & P. S. Chinowsky (Eds.),
Proceedings of the 2003 ASCE construction research congress (pp.
80–90).
Friedenthal, S., Moore, A., & Steiner, R. (2011). A practical guide to
SysML: The systems modeling language. New York: Morgan Kauf-
mann OMG Press/Elsevier.
Hajjar, D., & AbouRizk, S. (1999). Simphony: An environment for
building special purpose construction simulation tools. In Simulation
conference proceedings, 1999 winter (Vol. 2, pp. 998–1006).
Hajjar, D., & AbouRizk, S. M. (2002). Unified modeling methodology for
construction simulation. Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management, 128, 174–185.
Halpin, D. W. (1977). CYCLONE-method for modeling job site
processes. Journal of the Construction Division, 103.
Herrenknecht A. G. (2017). <https://www.herrenknecht.com/de/pro-
dukte/kernprodukte/tunnelling/mixschild.html> Accessed: 24.11.2017
(modified).
Jakobsen, P. D., Langmaack, L., Dahl, F., & Breivik, T. (2013).
Development of the Soft Ground Abrasion Tester (SGAT) to predict
TBM tool wear, torque and thrust. Tunnelling and Underground Space
Technology, 38, 398–408.
Jankovič, P. (2015). Agent-based simulation for creating robust plans and
schedules. Procedia Computer Science, 51, 895–904.
Köhler, M., Maidl, U., & Martak, L. (2011). Abrasiveness and tool wear
in shield tunnelling in soil/Abrasivität und Werkzeugverschleiß beim
Schildvortrieb im Lockergestein. Geomechanics and Tunnelling, 4,
36–54.
Köppl, F., Thuro, K., & Thewes, M. (2015). Suggestion of an empirical
prognosis model for cutting tool wear of Hydroshield TBM. Tunnelling
and Underground Space Technology, 49, 287–294.
Küpferle, J., Röttger, A., Alber, M., & Theisen, W. (2015). Assessment of
the LCPC abrasiveness test from the view of material science/
Bewertung des LCPC-Abrasivitätstests aus werkstofftechnischer Sicht.
Geomechanics and Tunnelling, 8, 211–220.
Küpferle, J., Röttger, A., Theisen, W., & Alber, M. (2016). The RUB
Tunneling Device – A newly developed test method to analyze and
determine the wear of excavation tools in soils. Tunnelling and
85
Underground Space Technology, 59, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.tust.2016.06.006.
Küpferle, J., Röttger, A., & Theisen, W. (2017). Excavation tool concepts
for TBMs – Understanding the material-dependent response to
abrasive wear. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 68,
22–31.
Liu, D., Xuan, P., Li, S., & Huang, P. (2015). Schedule risk analysis for
TBM tunneling based on adaptive CYCLONE simulation in a geologic
uncertainty–aware context. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering,
29, 04014103.
Marler, R. T., & Arora, J. S. (2010). The weighted sum method for multi-
objective optimization: New insights. Structural and Multidisciplinary
Optimization, 41, 853–862.
Martinez, J. C. (2010). Methodology for conducting discrete-event
simulation studies in construction engineering and management.
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136, 3–16.
Montgomery, D. C. (2013). Design and analysis of experiments (8th ed.).
Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
Object Management Group (2012). OMG Systems Modeling Language
(OMG SysMLTM) – Version 1.3. Object Management Group.
Rhein, B., Clees, T., & Ruschitzka, M. (2013). Robustness measures and
numerical approximation of the cumulative density function of
response surfaces. Communications in Statistics – Simulation and
Computation, 43, 1–17.
Ruwanpura, J. Y., & Ariaratnam, S. T. (2007). Simulation modeling
techniques for underground infrastructure construction processes.
Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 22, 553–567.
Scheffer, M., Mattern, H., Konig, M., Conrads, A., & Thewes, M. (2016).
Simulation of maintenance strategies in mechanized tunneling. In T.
M. Roeder, P. I. Frazier, R. Szechtman, & E. Zhou (Eds.), Simulating
complex service systems (pp. 3345–3356). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
Taguchi, G., Clausing, D., & Watanabe Tung, L. (1991). System of
experimental design: Engineering methods to optimize quality and
minimize cost. White Plains, NY: Quality Resources.
The AnyLogic Company (2017). AnyLogic 8.0.5 University.
Thuro, K., & Käsling, H. (2009). Classification of the abrasiveness of soil
and rock. Geomechanik und Tunnelbau, 2, 179–188.
Thuro, K., Singer, J., Keasling, H., & Bauer, M. (2006). Soil abrasivity
assessment using the LCPC testing device. Felsbau, 24, 37–45.
Zang, C., Friswell, M. I., & Mottershead, J. E. (2005). A review of robust
optimal design and its application in dynamics. Computers & Struc-
tures, 83, 315–326.