Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Procedia Engineering 191 (2017) 1040 – 1047

Symposium of the International Society for Rock Mechanics

Stability Analysis of Underground Storage Cavern Excavation

in Singapore
Kar Winna*, Melvin Ngb, Louis Ngai Yuen Wongc
a
Geomotion (Singapore) P/L, #07-26, No.33 Vertex Bldg, Ubi Ave 3, Singapore 408868, Singapore
b
JTC Corporation, The JTC Summit, 8 Jurong Townhall Rd, Singapore 609434, Singapore
c
Department of Earth Sciences, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong, China

Abstract

The first underground rock caverns for hydrocarbon storage in South-East Asia has recently been completed in
Singapore. The storage capacity of 5 twin-caverns is 1.47 million cubic meters with total volume of rock excavation
is about 3 million cubic meters. Geologically, it was excavated in low-angled bedded meta-sedimentary rocks,
namely Jurong Formation, of late Triassic to early Jurassic age. The dimensions of cavern are 20 m in width, 27 m
in height and 340 m in length. Extensive rock tri-axial tests were carried out to determine intact strength properties.
Consequently equivalent rock mass properties were calculated based on GSI (Geology Strength Index) and D
(Excavation Damage Factor) those were recorded from rock face mapping. In situ horizontal stresses of rock mass
were measured before and during rock cavern excavation. The stability analysis was carried out based on those
parameters by using 2D FEM program such as Phase2 and UDEC. The calculated vertical displacements of cavern
roof and wall by FEM analysis were compared with those values monitored during excavation. The calculated axial
forces were far below design capacity of rock bolts. The strong rock mass strength and high horizontal to vertical
stress ratio enhanced safe working condition throughout the excavation period. Thus wide span caverns could be
successfully excavated in meta-sedimentary rocks.
© 2017The
© 2017 TheAuthors.
Authors. Published
Published by Elsevier
by Elsevier Ltd. is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
Ltd. This
Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of EUROCK 2017.
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of EUROCK 2017
Keywords: underground storage cavern; intact rock property; Geology Strength Index; Hoek-Brown criterion

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +65-97434704.

E-mail address: kar.winn@geomotion.com.sg

1877-7058 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of EUROCK 2017
doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2017.05.277
 Kar Winn et al. / Procedia Engineering 191 (2017) 1040 – 1047 1041

1. Introduction

South East Asia's first underground hydrocarbon storage rock caverns, namely Jurong Rock Cavern Project
(JRC), had recently completed excavation works in Jurong Island within the south western region of main Singapore
Islands as shown in Fig. 1 [1]. Two Access Shafts (AS 1 & AS 3) had been constructed through the reclaimed land
and terminated at the fresh bedrock layer where the start of the main storage rock caverns had been excavated using
dill and blast methods under the seabed as shown in Fig. 2.

1.1. Project background

A total of five caverns of storage capacity 1.47 mil cubic meters volume had been excavated under Phase 1.
There are two levels of excavation namely Level 0 at 132 m below ground level and Level 1 at 100 m below ground
level. Storage rock caverns are excavated at level 0 whereas operation tunnels for working access / operations and
other water curtain galleries for water injection into surrounding rock mass are excavated at level 1 (Fig. 2 & 3).
As the caverns are unlined, the stored hydrocarbon will be directly in contact with rock mass. The tightness of
the product is based on the hydraulic containment principle. The hydraulic potential of the water in the rock mass
shall be higher than that of caverns which is essential to prevent migration of product into the rock mass. To achieve
higher hydraulic potential in rock mass, water curtains, which ae composed of gallery and an array of boreholes are
crated between each cavern (Fig. 3).

Fig. 1. Location of JRC project. Fig. 2. Birds eye view showing 2 levels of excavation.

1.2 Geology setting of the area

The working access shafts were constructed through the reclaimed land of the Jurong Islands, south west part of
main Singapore Islands. About 15 m to 20 m thick hydraulically filled coarse sand were used to reclaim the sea
around the southern part of Jurong Islands as shown in Fig. 4 [2]. Underneath the sand are about 30 m thick residual
soils of Jurong Formation consisting of hard silty CLAY / clayey SILT and dense to very dense silty SAND which
were derived from chemical and physical weathering of the bedrock. Below the residual soils is about 10 m thick of
weak rocks which were followed by strong bedrocks of sedimentary Jurong Formation. It is comprised mainly of
interbedded sandstone, siltstone and mudstone. Limestone was found localized in AS 3 shaft area.
Structurally the sedimentary rocks show a broad anticlinal folded nature with gentle dipping about 0 to maximum
25 degrees towards 030 degree (NNE). Two major sub-vertical joint sets with trending NS and EW were observed
in the area. Majority of joint planes were coated with quartz and calcite fillings of secondary origin. Minor faults
were also observed frequently but they were sealed with quartz and calcite filling along the planes.
An approximately 20 meter thick light colored granitic intrusion, which cut across the sedimentary rocks, was
observed in both levels. Generally the Jurong Formation Rocks in the area have undergone low grade regional
metamorphism which gives rise to higher strength as compared with the typical sedimentary rocks.
1042 Kar Winn et al. / Procedia Engineering 191 (2017) 1040 – 1047

Fig. 3. Water curtain gallery system. Fig. 4. Generalized subsoil profile of project area.

2. Intact rock properties of Jurong Formation rocks

84 rock core samples from JRC were tested at Institute of Rock and Soil Mechanics of Chinese Academy of
Science (Wuhan), during October, 2010 and end Jan 2011. Those specimens were divided into four main groups
namely dry mudstone, wet mudstone, dry pyroclastic rocks and wet pyroclastic rocks. Those rock names were given
after careful examination of the core sample photographs and sedimentary features. The specimens in each group
were tested under four different confining pressures (σ3). Minimum 5 samples from each group were tested under
same confining pressure in which the first three with loading direction normal to the bedding planes and
the remaining with loading parallel to the bedding planes. Peak and residual strength, axial and lateral failure strain
of each specimen were also recorded. Among them, those results tested with normal loading direction were used to
reanalyze in this study as it reflected site geology condition. The beddings of sedimentary rocks and its associated
pyroclastic rocks are in sub-horizontal position in the project area. Thus natural overburden load is perpendicular to
the bedding planes.

Table 1. Summary of cohesion and friction angles of different rock types.

Water condition & rock Peak strength Residual strength
type Cohesion (c, MPa) Friction angle (φ, deg.) Cohesion (c, MPa) Friction angle (φ, deg.)
Dry mudstone 29.7 53.1 5.3 43.9
Wet mudstone 45.6 25.4 7.2 38.9
Dry pyroclastic rock 23.1 61.1 6.1 48.0
Wet pyroclastic rock 33.5 56.1 4.3 47.0

Table 2. Intact uniaxial compressive strength and Hoek-Brown parameters of different rock types.
Water condition & rock type Intact uniaxial compressive strength Hoek-Brown constant
(σci, MPa) (mi)
Dry mudstone 173.2 22.4
Wet mudstone 144.3 3.2
Dry pyroclastic rock 165.0 45.44
Wet pyroclastic rock 273.1 12.04

RocData 3.0 program by Rocscience Inc. was used to determine the intact uniaxial compressive strength, σci and
Hoek-Brown constant mi of each rock group. The cohesion (c, MPa) and friction angles (φ, degree) of both peak and
residual conditions of four rock groups were summarized in Table 1. The intact uniaxial compressive strength (σci,
MPa) and Hoek-Brown constant (mi) were shown in Table 2.
 Kar Winn et al. / Procedia Engineering 191 (2017) 1040 – 1047 1043

3. Determination of rock mass properties from intact rock properties of Jurong Formation rocks

The strength of a jointed rock mass depends on the properties of the intact rock pieces and also on the freedom of
these pieces to slide and rotate under different stress conditions. This freedom is controlled by the geometrical shape
of the intact rock pieces as well as the condition of the surfaces separating the pieces. Angular rock pieces with
clean rough discontinuity surfaces will result in a much stronger rock mass than one which contains rounded
particles surrounded by weathered and altered material.

3.1. Geology strength index (GSI)

It was introduced by [3] and [4] and provides a number, which combined with the intact rock properties, can be
used for estimating the reduction in rock mass strength for different geological conditions. The system is earlier for
blocky rock masses and for heterogeneous rock masses such as flysch. It has also been extended to deal with
molassic rocks [5] and ophiolites [6].

3.2. Disturbance factor (D)

The influence of blast damage on the near surface rock mass properties has been taken into account in the 2002
version of the Hoek-Brown criterion [7] as follows

ீௌூିଵ଴଴
݉௕ ൌ ݉௜ ݁‫ ݌ݔ‬ቀ ቁ (1)
ଶ଼ିଵସ஽

ீௌூିଵ଴଴
‫ ݏ‬ൌ ݁‫ ݌ݔ‬ቀ ቁ (2)
ଽିଷ஽

ಸೄ಺
ଵ ଵ
ܽ ൌ   ൅  ൬݁ ି భఱ െ  ݁ ିଶ଴Ȁଷ ൰ (3)
ଶ ଺

D is a factor which depends on the degree of disturbance due to blast damage and stress relaxation. It varies from
zero (0) for undisturbed in situ rock masses to 1 for very disturbed rock masses.

3.3 GSI and Disturbance factor (D) determination in JRC project

The recorded GSI=40 and D = 0 of excavated rock face during geological face mapping is shown in Fig. 5 and 6.

Fig. 5. Excavated face, GSI = 40. Fig. 6. Excavated face, D = 0.

1044 Kar Winn et al. / Procedia Engineering 191 (2017) 1040 – 1047

3.4 Equivalent roc mass properties (Hoek-Brown criterion, mb, s and a) of JRC project

Hoek-Brown criterion of rock mass (mb, s and a) can be calculated by applying equations (1, 2 & 3) based on
the intact rock parameters (mi) presented in Table 2 with input of GSI values in Fig. 5 and factor D in Fig. 6.
RocData 3.0 program by Rocscience Inc. was again used to determine those parameters from each rock group and
calculated results were summarized in Table 3 for wet mudstone.

Table 3. Equivalent rock mass parameters of wet mudstone, Jurong Rock Cavern Project.
Classification Parameters Wet Mudstone
Disturbance Factor D=0 D = 0.5
GSI 40 40
Intact uniaxial compressive strength σci 144.3 144.3
Hoek-Brown constant mi 3.2 3.2
Hoek-Brown criterion mb 0.3717 0.1820
s 0.0013 0.0003
a 0.511 0.511
Mohr-Coulomb Fit Cohesion (MPa) 1.04 0.64
Friction angle (angle) 40.52 35.3
Tensile strength (MPa) -0.49 -0.27
Uniaxial comp. strength (MPa) 4.77 2.41
Rock mass parameters Global strength (MPa) 11.57 7.9
Modulus of deformation (MPa) 5623.41 4217.56

4. Stability analysis of cavern excavation in Jurong Formation rocks by 2D FEM program

RS2 (Phase2, Rocscience Inc.) [8] is a powerful 2D finite element program for soil and rock application.
Complex, multi-stage models can be easily created and quickly analyzed such as tunnels in weak or jointed rock.
JRC project comprised of two levels of excavation. There are total 5 twin storage caverns at lower level.
The dimension of each storage cavern is 340 m in length, 20 m in width and 27 m in height as shown in Fig 7.
Excavation is done into 3 stages namely top heading (TH), bench 1 (B1) and bench 2 (B2) with 9 m height in each
stage.

4.1. Numerical analysis using equivalent rock mass properties (Generalized Hoek-Brown Criteria)

The rock mass properties used in the analysis are shown in the Table 4. Those were calculated based on intact
uniaxial compressive strength of wet mudstone in Table 2 as 145 MPa and H-B constant as 3.5 with input of GSI
as 40.

Table 4. Generalised Hoek-Brown Rock Mass Properties of Wet Mudstone.

Initial element loading Field stress & Body Force
Young's modulus 4629.9 MPa Poisson's ratio 0.3
Intact Compressive strength 145 MPa Material unit weight 0.027 MN/m3
mi (intact rock) 3.5 GSI 40
Material Type Plastic Dilation parameter 0
mb parameter 0.41 Residual mb 0.41
s parameter 0.0013 Residual s 0.0013
a parameter 0.511 Residual a 0.511
Failure Criteria Generalised Hoek-Brown
 Kar Winn et al. / Procedia Engineering 191 (2017) 1040 – 1047 1045

4.2. Field stress system

Gravity loading filed stress type with actual ground surface, which is 145 m above the base level of twin caverns,
was applied. Horizontal to vertical stress ratio of maximum (σH / σv) 2.2 and minimum (σh / σv) 1.8, [9] were put in
the analysis. Those maximum and minimum horizontal stresses and directions were measured by hydraulic
fracturing methods during construction works.

4.3. Tunnel support system

The properties of shotcrete and GFRP rock bolts used for tunnel support system are shown in Table 5 and 6.

Table 5. Shotcrete Properties.

Liner Type Formulation Thickness Young's Modulus Poisson's ratio
Standard Beam Timoshenko 0.08m 20000 MPa 0.15

Table 6. GFRP Rock Bolt Properties (Glass Fibre Reinforced Polymer Bolts).
Bolt Type Swellex / Split Sets
Tensile Capacity 0.35 MN In plane spacing 2.2 m
Tributary area 380 mm2 Out of plane spacing 2.2 m
Bolt modulus 50000 MPa Bond shear stiffness 100 (MN/m/m)
Bolt length 5m Residual tensile capacity 0
Bond strength 0.188 (MN/m) Allow joints to shear Bolt Yes

4.4. Excavation and construction sequences of twin storage caverns

Typical six stages of excavation with 80 mm thick shotcrete and 5 m length rock bolts as support systems were
modelled in this study as presented in the Fig 7.

Fig. 7. Six stages of cavern excavation.

1046 Kar Winn et al. / Procedia Engineering 191 (2017) 1040 – 1047

4.5. Calculated vertical displacement and axial force of rock bolts

The calculated vertical displacement of 13 mm at centers of both cavern crowns and 3 to 6 mm at both shoulders
are presented in Fig. 8. The calculated axial forces of individual rock bolts those of which are much lesser than
design capacity are shown in Fig. 9.

Fig. 8. Calculated vertyical displacement of roof at both caverns.

Fig. 9. Calculated rock bolt axial force showing much lower than design capacity.

5. Cavern crown displacement monitoring with glass prisms

Vertical displacement was monitored by installing glass prisms on the cavern crown and side walls at different
locations along the alignment. The measured results at cavern crown (points 2, 3 & 4) in a particular section over
time are shown in Fig. 10. The maximum vertical displacement was measured to be 8 mm at crown center whereas
5 mm at both shoulders (downward settlement in negative values) which were observed stable throughout
the excavation period. Due to construction safety reason, glass prisms could be installed for monitoring at around 5
to 10 m behind excavation face. Thus the results were lesser than those obtained by Phase 2 analysis (Fig. 8) as
immediate displacement could not be caught.
 Kar Winn et al. / Procedia Engineering 191 (2017) 1040 – 1047 1047

Fig. 10. Cavern crown displacement monitoring.

6. Conclusion

Phase2 (RS2) analysis provided maximum 13 mm cavern crown vertical displacement with rock bolts’ axial force
lower than design allowance. The high horizontal to vertical stress ratio in JRC project also favoured cavern crown
stability condition. Slight to moderate regional metamorphism made the rock mass in JRC strong in strength. Thus
such wide spanned cavern, ie 20 m width, could be excavated safely in bedded sedimentary rock.

References

[1] S.T. Wong, T.Y. Teo, P.C. Chong, M. Ng, Breaking New Ground – Jurong Rock Cavern Project in Jurong Island, CAFEO 27, Singapore,
December 2009.
[2] K. Winn, M. Ng., T.Y. Teo, P.C. Chong, Comparison of rock support design for underground hydrocarbon storage caverns, World Tunnel
Congress, 2012.
[3] E. Hoek, Strength of rock and rock masses, ISRM News J. 2(2) (1994) 4–16.
[4] E. Hoek, P.K. Kaiser, W.F. Bawden, Support of underground excavations in hard rock, Rotterdam: Balkema, 1995.
[5] E. Hoek, P. Marinos, V. Marinos, Characterization and engineering properties of tectonically undisturbed but lithologically varied
sedimentary rock masses, Intl. J. of Rock. Mech. Min Sci. 42(2) (2005) 77–285.
[6] P. Marinos, E. Hoek, V. Marinos, Variability of the engineering properties of rock masses quantified by the geological strength index:
the case of ophiolites with special emphasis on tunnelling, Bull. Eng. Geol. Env. 65(2) (2006) 129–142.
[7] E. Hoek, C.T. Carranza-Torres, B. Corkum, Hoek-Brown Failure Criterion – 2002 edition, in: Proceedings of the 5th North American Rock
Mechanics Symp., Toronto, Canada, 2002, pp. 267–273.
[8] Rocscience Inc., Phase2 version 8 (RS2) user’s guide.
[9] K. Winn, M. Ng, In situ stress measurement in Singapore, 18 SE Geotechnical Conference, Singapore, May 2013.