Professional Documents
Culture Documents
net/publication/308079519
CITATION READS
1 170
2 authors:
All content following this page was uploaded by Chia-Han Lee on 14 September 2016.
Abstract
This manuscript introduces a gas-induced accident in the west tunnel of Tsengwen Reservoir
Trans-basin Diversion project (TRTD). Tunnelling sections with problematic gas emission have been
investigated and paid attention during design stage, with gas detection instruments and associate
hazard mitigation measures prepared. However, excavation of tunnel run into gas outburst, with
methane concentration reaching 844,535 ppm revealed by Gas Chromatography-Flame Ionization
Detector (GC-FID), resulting in a severe explosion at the cost of 2 workmen. Due to two other
sections to be excavated have similar engineering geology conditions, the TRTD project was then
reviewed and associate with a strict and comprehensive gas-related hazard mitigations design
modification. Lessons learned from the gas emission and associate hazard are discussed and
commented.
1. Introduction
Emission of hazardous gas during tunnelling can cause catastrophic hazard and have been
classified into one of unfavorable geological conditions for many tunnelling projects worldwide.
Various theoretical and empirical approaches, based on geological investigation results, have been
proposed for identifying or predicting the ground with potential hazardous gas problems before tunnel
construction. However, the increase of hazardous gas related accidents, especially wide-spreading
from coal mine to traffic or hydraulic tunnels, shows that the gas emission and related explosive
potentials should be paid more attention for tunnelling tasks.
Gas outbursts are mainly affected by the stress, gas, physical properties of the rock mass,
production process and so on (Beamish and Crosdale, 1998; Cao et al., 2001; Huang et al., 2010).
Kidybinski (1980) proposed the presence of three precursor zones in the coal seam ahead of the
roadway face: (1) broken zone, (2) high gas pressure/active zone and (3) abutment stress zone, and
concluded that gas outburst would occur when the three fundamental conditions meet with each other.
Williams and Weissmann (1995) describe the coal and gas outburst by emphasizing on the gas
pressure and stress gradients existing ahead of the excavated face.
even worse, create CO, which is harmful to humans. Methane explosions produce high temperatures
(approximately 2000°C), extremely powerful pressure (7 kg/cm2), and strong winds. The center of the
explosion is a vacuum, which causes a strong backflow of wind into the tunnel (CPAMI, 2000).
Tunnel name Length Overburden Coal seam Gas region Gas content Gas emission Gas pressure Gas concentration Gas burning
No. (m) (m) thickness (m) (MPa) (%) / explosion
(m3/t) (m3/min)
1 Bailongshan 4845 600 0.8 High gas area 10.84 - 1.17 - -
2 Baishatuo No. 3 761 - - High gas area - - 0.37 4.85 -
3 Baishatuo No. 4 2118 300 - High gas area - - 0.78 10 -
4 Darroliangzi 4360 800 1.2 High gas area - - - 10 Gas escaping & burning
5 Faer 1241 100 2.13 High gas area 10.03 - - 11 -
6 Fenshui 4747 300 0.9 High gas area - 5 0.96 19 -
7 Fungshuepai 719 300 1.5 High gas area 4.14 - 0.87 - -
8 Hejiazhai 2335 280 2 High gas area 13.5 - 2.3 - -
9 Hongshiyan 7857 560 - Non gas area - - - 1.09 Gas burning
10 Hongfu 1527.5 - 0.15 High gas area 18.46 1.216 - - -
11 Huayingshan 4714 800 2.55 High gas area 9.16 - 1.87 - -
12 Hwangcho 7186 800 - Low gas area - - 0.258 0.3 -
13 Huanglianpo 5036 - 0.03 High gas area - 0.43 0.74 1 -
14 Huiyu 3455 - - High gas area - - - 0.3 -
15 Jiazhuqing 4990 500 4.38 High gas area 14.17 - 1.34 - -
16 Jiaoling 1655 250 - High gas area - 4.93 - - -
17 Jindong 9108 1000 1.05 Low gas area 8.741 0.498 2.192 - -
18 Liangfengya 4085 550 - High gas area - - - 0.7 Many times of gas burning
19 Longxi 3691 839 - High gas area - - - 5 -
20 Longyanjing 933.5 280 - High gas area - - - - Gas explosion
21 Mawangcao No.1 1266 550 0.72 Low gas area - - - 3 -
22 Meihuashan 3968 600 - High gas area - - 2 - -
High gas area One time of gas burning; two
23 Paotaishan 3078 400 - 3.03 - 0.2 -
times of gas explosion
24 Paozilin 6460 500 - High gas area - - - 0.7 -
25 Qiyueshan 10528 670 - Low gas area - - 0.14 1.2 -
26 Qingshan 4268 1000 - High gas area 9.35 - 2.24 - -
27 Shangqinghe 4238.29 300 - High gas area - 4 0.92 15 -
28 Sunjiazhai 533 90 5 High gas area - - - 1.5 -
29 Tianshengqiao 2450 - - High gas area 9.62 - 1.2 5.2 -
30 Tiefengshan 6030 630 - Low gas area 2.16 - 0.15 - -
31 Dingtonggou 2196 - - Non gas area - - - 1.3 Gas burning
32 Tongyu 4289 1000 2 Low gas area - 2.98 - - -
33 Wulong 9418 500 - High gas area - 0.8 - 60 Gas burning
34 Xishanping 1520 - - High gas area - - - 0.8 -
35 Xiaojiapo 2730 460 - Low gas area - 4.69 - 80 -
36 New Dabashan 10638 790 2 Low gas area - - - 0.5 -
37 New Shiyakou 1152 400 2 High gas area - - 1.4 - -
38 New Suzhai 698 200 0.8 High gas area - - - 0.64 -
39 New Yanjiaozhai 2641.5 - 7.1 High gas area 15.2 - 2.5 - -
40 New Zhai 4409 450 160 High gas area 15.779 - 1.82 - -
41 Yanjiaozhai 2714 - 8.92 High gas area - - 0.4 - Five times of gas explosion
42 Yesanguan 13791 1350 - High gas area - - 0.58 - -
43 Youyi 950 209 - High gas area - 0.857 - - Gas explosion
44 Yuanliangshan 11068 780 0.5 Low gas area - - 0.9 - -
45 Yuntaishan 8178 350 1.84 Low gas area - 4.03 0.18 - -
46 Zenjiaping 2477 500 - Low gas area 0.044 - - 8.2 Gas burning
47 Chuga 5194 370 2.1 High gas area - - 1.7 12.5 -
48 Zhongliangshan 3165 275 - High gas area 181.09 50 4 - -
49 Zipingpu 4090 550 0.3 High gas area - 3.19 0.67 - -
50 Zoumaling 2469 400 0.13 Low gas area - - 0.529 - -
8th Asian Rock Mechanics Symposium ARMS8
14-16 October 2014, Sapporo, Japan
18
16
14 y = 7.5954x0.6239
Gas content (m /t)
R2 = 0.7981
3
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Gas pressure (MPa)
(a)
20
18
y = 7.4397x1.257
Gas concentration (%)
16
14 R2 = 0.4918
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
Gas pressure (MPa)
(b)
Fig. 1. Relationship between (a) gas content and gas pressure and (b) gas concentration and gas
pressure from the studied database with gas emission or explosion during tunnelling.
Unfortunately, the west excavating face of the west diversion tunnel of TRTD project run into a
flammable methane gas explosion at the 13k+300 mark (between the second and third Pingxi fault
fracture zone, shown in Fig. 2) that caused the death of two engineering personnel and delayed the
construction in November 2007 (Xiao et al., 2009).
Fig. 2. The cross-section of gas explosion location in west diversion tunnel of TRTD project.
3.3 Investigation
Gas sampling and analysis was then conducted at Charshan and Shanminhuo in May 2007. Gas
Chromatography-Flame Ionization Detector (GC-FID) and Gas Chromatography-Thermal
Conductivity Detector (GC-TCD) analysis results showed that the gas collected at these two locations
contained mostly methane (84.6355 and 80.7038 % and 761996.00 and 715869.00 ppm, respectively).
Additionally, oil sampling and analysis was conducted at the TRTD project 13k+547 mark in August
2007. Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (GC-MS) instrument analysis showed that this oil
contained 23.0 vol % gasoline, 74.0 vol % kerosene and diesel, and 2.5 vol % reduced crude.
Sampling and analysis were conducted on oil and gas that seeped out at the TRTD project
13k+300-400 marks in January 2008. Table 2 shows the instrument analysis results of the sampled
gas. The gas contained 844,535 ppm of methane, which accounted for 94.8616% of the gas. This is
similar to the samples collected at the Charshan and Shanminhuo, which also contained mostly
methane. Oil samples from the 13k+300-400 mark were analyzed with GC-MS instrument. The total
ion chromatogram showed that the oil is composed of dark brown suspended emulsion and oil slick.
The oil components consist of light and medium oil. This conformed to the soil sample collected at
Charshan and Shanminhuo prior to the accident, which also consisted of light and medium oil (Weng
et al., 2009).
Items Countermeasures
1. The fixed hazardous gas detectors are set at each 500 m and in front of the
Hazardous gas excavation face in addition.
detection 2. The fixed hazardous gas detectors are changed to automatically logger
equipment type.
3. The portable gas detectors are increased to 5 units per excavation face.
1. Gas detection position is increased to 4 points per excavation face.
Gas detection
2. Gas detection position is also located at each advancing exploration
position
borehole.
1. After each work shift.
2. Before each drilling and blasting.
Gas detection
3. After each drilling and blasting.
frequency
4. During each rockbolt drilling.
5. During each advancing exploration borehole.
1. The ventilation volume is increased to 1800 m3/min.
Ventilation
2. The diameter of ventilation tube is increased to 140 cm ø.
equipment
3. The wind speed in the tunnel is increased to 0.5 m/sec.
Lighting facilities The lighting facilities are changed to explosion-proof type.
Construction Jumbos, excavators, trucks, spraying machines and other devices are installed
equipment Flame bane.
5. Conclusions
The TRTD project run into the accident of gas-induced explosion during tunnelling in Taiwan.
Although the cause is different from every case, occurrence of such an explosion generally need a
combination of three conditions, a flammable gas in explosive concentrations, adequate oxygen, and
an ignition source. Rescue and post-processing after a tunnel gas explosion is extremely difficult. If
tunnels cannot avoid areas with potential gas deposits, gas survey, gas concentration monitoring
system, safety management measures, increase ventilation to reduce concentration, and ignition
control measures are the foremost principles in handling gas overflow.
Statistical analysis results from gas-induced tunnelling problem in this study showed that potential
gas emission may occur in areas outside of coal layers. Tunnels that pass through faults or anticline
sedimentary rock regions may also encounter gas overflow hazards. Thus, the survey and design stage
should conduct gas explosion hazard level evaluations to assess ventilation method during tunnel
excavation. When necessary, gas prevention grouting must be prepared in coordination with specific
hazardous gas detection, construction management, emergency response measures to reduce potential
gas explosion risk to a minimum, thereby ensuring worker safety.
Acknowledgements
Authors would like to thank the Ta-Chen and Nishimatsu joint venture group for offering the data
and agreement for publishing this article.
References
Beamish, B.B. and Crosdale, P.J., 1998, Instantaneous outbursts in underground coal mines: an
overview and association with coal type, International Journal of Coal Geology, 35, 27-55.
Cao, Y.X., He, D.D. and Glick, D.D., 2001, Coal and gas outbursts in footwalls of reverse faults,
International Journal of Coal Geology, 48, 47-63.
CPAMI, 2000, The processing technology of tunnel gas explosion, The Construction and Planning
Agency Ministry of the Interior, Taipei, Taiwan. (in Chinese)
Ding, C., 2010, Key technology on gas tunnel construction, China Communications Press, China. (in
Chinese)
Huang, W., Chen, Z.Q., Yue, J.H., Zhang, Y. and Yang, M., 2010, Failure modes of coal containing
gas and mechanism of gas outburst, Mining Science and Technology, 20, 504-509.
Kang, X.B., 2009, Study on Gas Disaster Risk Assessment System of Tunnel Engineering, PhD thesis,
Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu, China. (in Chinese)
8th Asian Rock Mechanics Symposium ARMS8
14-16 October 2014, Sapporo, Japan
Kidybinski, A., 1980, Significance of in situ strength measurements for prediction of outburst hazard
in coal mines of Lower Silesia, Symposia Series – Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy,
193-201.
Weng, Z.Y., He, S.P., Wu, S.H., Lai, R.Q., Xiong, B.C. and Weng, U.F., 2009, Identification of
explosion in section C of west tunnel in Tseng Wen reservoir diversion tunnel, Proceeding of the
8th cross-strait symposium on tunnels and underground works, Taipei, Taiwan, C8-1~C8-12. (in
Chinese)
Williams, R.J. and Weissmann, J.J., 1995, Gas Emission and Outburst Assessment in Mixed CO2 and
CH4 Environments, ACIRL Seminar – Prosperity with Safety in a Hostile Environment, University
of New South Wales, Brisbane, 1-13.
Xiao, F.Y., Liu, J.J. and Zheng, J.L., 2009, Geological hazard and Construction Treatment in the
D&B Section of the Tseng-Wen Reservoir Transbasin Water Diversion Tunnel, The 13th
conference on current researches in geotechnical engineering in Taiwan, I02-1~I02-10. (in
Chinese)