PRE-GROUTING AND WATER CONTROL SOME OF

THE REASONS FOR DOING IT,

IT AND THE THEORY
BEHIND ITS SUCCESS IN TUNNELLING
NB # 4

PRE-GROUTING FOR STABILITY AND OVER-BREAK CONTROL

PRE-GROUTING FOR WATER CONTROL
COMPARING PARTICLE SIZE WITH JOINT APERTURE
LUGEON TESTING FOR APERTURE ESTIMATION (e and E)
ROCK MASS QUALITY IMPROVEMENT BY GROUTING
TYPICAL HIGH-PRESSURE GROUTING QUANTITIES

SOME PRE-GROUTING
PRE GROUTING HOLES BEING DRILLED TO prevent
water inflow in THE NEXT THREE or FOUR ROUNDS OF
TUNNEL ADVANCE

PRE-INJECTION FANS FOR PROTECTING THE NEXT 4

TO 6 ROUNDS

THIS ELKEM EXAMPLE HAS OUTER BLOCKER-GROUT TO

ALLOW HIGHER PRESSURE WHEN LOW COVER

PRE-INJECTION MAY ALSO PREVENT PROBLEMS LIKE THIS

WITH EXCESSIVE OVER
OVER-BREAK
BREAK AND GREATLY INCREASED
CONCRETE VOLUMES LATER WHEN LINING

PRE-GROUTING TO
REDUCE FUTURE
CONCRETE USE
....AND CURING
PROBLEMS

LOW COVER HIGH WATER TABLE DEEP WEATHERING

AN APPROACHING RIVER CROSSING.
GOOD PRE-GROUTING IS IMPERATIVE!

SKETCHES OF WHY
PRE-GROUTING IS
NEEDED MAINLY
IF TUNNELS
(AND STATIONS) ARE
NOT DEEP AND
THEREFORE
IN WEATHERED,
PERMEABLE,,
LESS STABLE
ROCK MASSES !

OBVIOUSLY LEAKING JOINTS ARE EASY TO

GROUT.. BUT THE TIGHT ONES THAT ALSO
LEAK.?

The dilemma is how to get blocks

(i.e. particles) that are too large in
joints that are too tight.

..smaller particles! .. wider joints!

10

Before leaving large blocks and

concentrating on cement
particles.note problems
with hang
hang-up
up of blocks
in mine ore passes!

Blockage if D< 4.d95

Boundary layer
Wall roughness
Slow particles
Ore passes in mines also have
problems with large blocks
and wall roughness

11

SOME APPEARANCES OF WATER

IN TUNNEL WALLS

How can we reach the channels

with grout ???

12

SOME FUNDAMENTAL PHYSICAL ATTRIBUTES OF ROCK JOINTS

13

HEAD LOSSES IN JOINTS AND BOUNDARY LAYER EFFECTS

14

EFFECTIVE STRESSES IN WATER AND GROUT INJECTION

The existing apertures can be changed by fluid pressure which is very

advantageous in grouting!

15

WATER INJECTION TESTS LUGEON METHOD

16

Pay special attention to % of zero flow sections

ASSUMED POISSON DISTRIBUTION FOR ESTIMATING
AVERAGE SPACING OF WATER CONDUCTING JOINTS

17% of zero flow stages means 1.8 conducting joints per test lengthon average
17

SOME MORE SIMPLIFICATIONS ARE NEEDED!

BECAUSE WE ARE ENGINEERS WE NEED A SOLUTION!

This is how we ( modified from Snow,, 1968))

visualize the conducting network of joints
18

WE WILL NOW WORK WITH TWO DIFFERENT JOINT APERTURES

19

BECAUSE (e) << (E), larger cement particles than

expected can often be used

20

THEORETICAL INTERPRETATION (IN 3D) OF LUGEON RESULTS

based on Snow (1968)
(1968), and the hydraulic theory of Louis 1967 :
p
permeability
y of one smooth p
parallel p
plate :

k = e2/12

permeability of 1 set of parallel plates :

K1 = e2/12 x e/S

permeability of the conducting rock mass (3 sets) : Kmass 2e3/12 S

1 Lugeon 10-7m/s, 10-7m/s 10-14 m2, laminar flow
3D interpretation of Lugeon tests

e (6LS x 10-8)1/3

(e) and (S) in millimeters

millimeters, L is average Lugeon value
valueeach
each apply to
local domain, rock
type, or borehole
depth
21

The equation e (6LS x 10-8)1/3 looks like this for typical S-values of 0.5 to 3.0m

Obviously it is difficult to inject cement particles into e.g. < 0.1 Lugeon rock masses
unless E ( the physical joint aperture ) >> e ( the hydraulic aperture )
22

SOME OPTIONS FOR INJECTING TIGHT JOINTS

It usually helps to start injection with a high water/cement ratio (i.e. > 1.0)
It may help to use ultrafine or micro cements (with micro silica and
plasticisers) if the joints are very tight
y helps
p to use much higher
g
grouting
g
g pressure
p
(P
( G) than water p
pressure
It usually
(PW)

i e PG >> PW = 1 MPa
i.e.
In Norway we use final grouting pressures in the range 5 to 10 MPa
(50 to 100 bars), when pre-injecting ahead of tunnels, successively
reducing the w/c ratio. The grouts are stable (little shrinkage or water
separation).
BUT FIRST WE MUST INVESTIGATE IF WE NEED HIGH PRESSURE
GROUTING what p
physical
y
apertures
p
do we have??
23

Here we have Lugeon

g
results from 4 depth
p zones at a permeable
p
dam site
(e) and (S) have been interpreted as previously explained
(e) is converted to (E) using JRC (the joint roughness coefficient)
Note that the Grout-Take estimate (from this 1978 example) assumes the
24
same grout pressure as the Lugeon test.. i.e. PW = 1 MPa

HOW TO ESTIMATE . JRC THE JOINT ROUGHNESS COEFFICIENT

Can be done on core from ahead of the face, or in the tunnel close to the face

25

JRC estimation from profile matching

26

JRC value ranges derived from tilt tests and direct shear tests
CONVERSION BETWEEN (e) and (E) USING JRC0 (100mm scale)

27

THE (approx
(approx.)) LIMITS FOR INJECTION of ULTRAFINE,
ULTRAFINE MICRO and industrial cement

50, 100 and 400m limits are simpler to remember

28

IF THE AVERAGE APERTURES ((E)) ARE NOT LARGE ENOUGH ? then

(very exaggerated) the pressure must be increased!

Local aperture increase (0.1 to 0.3mm ?) with higher pressure

29

GROUTING BETWEEN THE JOINT SETS IS

ACHIEVED WITH HIGHER PRESSURES

30

Even this is possible (all 3 cements can be injected) due to E>e, and
maybe due to use of high injection pressure causing deformation

If the joints were smooth this would be impossible without higher

pressures

31

WHEN GROUTING PRESSURE IS TOO LOW

LOWONLY
ONLY 1 SET IS INJECTED?

32

ONE, or perhaps
ONE
h
TWO SETS ARE INJECTED..
INJECTED
BUT THE ROCK MASS IS STILL WET!

33

THE MECHANISM OF JOINT OPENING WITH REDUCED EFFECTIVE

STRESS
STRESS.
i.e.
i e WITH INCREASED GROUTING PRESSURE..
PRESSURE
SEE BB-MODELLING EXAMPLES
a))

H d
Hydraulic
li aperture
t
changes
h

34

b) Physical aperture changes

35

EXAMPLE OF INPUT DATA, AND INITIAL CALCULATIONS WITH BB-EXCEL

The initial unstressed physical aperture is estimated from an empirical equation :

E0 = JRC0/5(0.2c/JCS0 0.1) mm
36

THE ADVANTAGE OF AN INCREASE IN PRESSURE ON e

BUT. a false idea of permeability will be given with too high water pressure testing
37

THE ADVANTAGE OF AN INCREASE OF PRESSURE ON E

Note that E can be almost doubled from 30 to 60m now OK for ULTRAFINE?
38

The difference between E and e in a UDEC-BB model (Makurat, 1988: Oslo Tunnel)

39

SOME RECENT ESTIMATES OF (e) from LUGEON TESTS

and (E) from Jr to JRC conversion.
Large (E) due to high Lugeon values...and roughness.
(ORANGE and RED and PINK are

easiest to grout)
YELLOW (OK)GREENBLUE
needs higher pressure or finer micro/ultrafine

40

BUT ROCK MASSES ARE VERY VARIABLE.WHAT ABOUT SHEARING ???

41

HERE THERE IS POTENTIAL SHEARING ON THE INCLINED JOINT SET

IF THE STRESSES ARE ANISOTROPIC

42

LOCAL SHEARING CAUSES LOCAL DILATION AND EASIER GROUT

PENETRATION IN JOINTS THAT MAY HAVE BEEN TOO TIGHT

43

A TYPICAL SITUATION WHERE JOINT SHEAR AND DILATION MIGHT

OCCUR DURING HIGH PRESSURE PRE-GROUTING

Future tunnel wall on rightprincipal stress vertical.but no hydraulic fracturing

44

HIGH PRESSURE PRE-INJECTION COULD CAUSE LOCAL HYDRAULIC

SPLITTING IN ROCKS WITH LOW TENSILE STRENGTH
but the presence of joints in other directions (not parallel to principal stress) will
often prevent this

45

DIFFERENT JOINT DEFORMATION MECHANISMS CAN OBVIOUSLY

OPERATE (LOCALLY) DURING HIGH PRESSURE INJECTION..
due to the reduced local effective stresses

46

BUT HIGH PRESSURE GROUTING IS UNLIKELY TO CAUSE UNWANTED

DEFORMATION i.e. uncontrolled hydraulic opening.
d tto HYDRAULIC (N
due
(Newtonian
t i flfluid)
id) pressure d
decay mechanisms
h i

THE LOGARITHMIC PRESSURE DECAY IS A SAFETY MECHANISM for

high pressure grouting.while flow is still occurring.. and is extra
effective with cohesive + frictional fluids like grout

47

Logarithmic pressure decay with radial, laminar or turbulent flow (e.g. Cruz, 1979)
48

IT IS IMPORTANT TO BE AWARE OF UPLIFT (OR TUNNEL FACE)

DEFORMATION THAT MAY OCCUR IF FLOW HAS CEASED
AND PRESSURE IS MAINTAINED

49

WHAT HAPPENS WITH TOO LOW PRESSURE, TOO TIGHT JOINTS, TOO
LARGE CEMENT PARTICLES..AND UNSTABLE GROUTS
THAT BLEED WATER?

50

WATER-SICK
WATER SICK ROCK
ROCK......MORE
MORE WATER AFTER PRE
PRE-GROUTING
GROUTING, THAN BEFORE !

BUTTHE NEXT SCREENS SHOW WHAT OCCURS WHEN DOING

SUCCESSFUL INJECTION when the grout penetrates as expected
51

NOTE DRY ROCK BEHIND JUMBO ((ALREADY PREGROUTED)SEE SEVERAL EXAMPLES THAT FOLLOW

52

58

59

STABLE NON-BLEEDING GROUTS ARE ALSO ESSENTIAL FOR

PREVENTING WATER-SICK ROCK

60

WHAT ABOUT PROPERTY

IMPROVEMENT?
CAUSED BY SUCCESSFUL GROUTING

61

IPT multilti
probemulti-hole
measure
ment of
grouting
(Quadros
and
d
Correa
Filho,
Filho
1995)

62

 In summary the 3 principal permeability tensors have rotated and

reduced in magnitude due to grouting
Single hole interpretation shows from 1 to 4 orders of magnitude
improvement e.g. 10-7 to10-8 m/s up to 10-4 to 10-8 m/s
With 3D interpretation across 4 to 8 m of rock mass (this was the
h l spacing),
hole
i ) the
h iimprovement iis 1/1
1/17 ffor Kmax, and
d 1/11 ffor Kmin
This emphasises the need for closer spacing (e.g. split-spacing) of
holes
The results suggest that individual joint sets are successively
injected
Norwegian experiences suggest pressure plateau . as each joint
j
set is injected?
Can we take this further and think of rock mass property
improvement ???
63

Suppose the following small improvements occur to individual Q-parameters

64

These could give the following improvements in rock mass properties ?

65

SOME OF THE
EMPIRICAL
EQUATIONS
RELATING
Q-value and
rock mass
property estimates
((allll seen iin earlier
li
lectures)

66

HERE WE SEE THE POTENTIAL FOR REDUCED TUNNEL SUPPORT . IF

THE EFFECTIVE Q-VALUE CAN BE IMPROVED

67

REDUCED TUNNEL DEFORMATION. WOULD ALSO BE SEEN IN MODELS

68

IF Q-VALUES CAN BE IMPROVED SO TOO WILL SEISMIC VELOCITY

AND MODULUS OF DEFORMATION
DEFORMATION AND SUPPORT PRESSURE NEEDS
(see steep-diagonal behaviour due to consolidation effect)

69

RELATIVE TIME FOR TUNNEL EXCAVATION AND SUPPORT

potential benefits of pre-grouting, especially if Q 0.1

70

RELATIVE COST FOR TUNNEL EXCAVATION AND SUPPORT

potential benefits of pre-grouting, especially if Q 0.1

71

CONSEQUENCES OF
PRE INJECTION
PRE-INJECTION
ON COST.....
IF EFFECTIVE
Q-VALUE
CAN BE INCREASED
TRY TO ELIMINATE
MOST OF THE LOW
Q-VALUE ROCK
Q
i.e. Q< 1
THEN GET LOWER
COST BECAUSE OF
LESS PROBLEMS
WITH CONSTRUCTION

72

Take care if cover (depth to surface ) is limited !

73

kg cement / bored meter?

Sdra Lnken = 5 kg /m (Swedish: too low pressure: 20
20-25
25 bars instruction
from Engineer. (1 year delay with post injection, contractor won compensation)
Arlandabanen = 16.9 kg/m (rail)
Tsen
= 24 kg/m
Svartdal
= 80 kg/m (very bad rock and low cover, mainly for stability)
Lundby
= 5.9 kg/m (Swedish: too low pressure extra injection rounds
needed)
Storhaug
g
= 8.0 kg/m
g
Bragernes
= 68 kg/m (deformable volcanic rock)
Baneheia
= 9.0 kg/m
Jong-Asker JA1: = 13 kg/m, JA2: = 19 kg/m (4 to 8 MPa)
(Th
(These
are mostly
tl Norwegian
N
i tunnels,
t
l where
h
systematic
t
ti pre-injection
i j ti
was used
d
for many kilometers. Pressure range 2 to 9 MPa, cover 2 to 150 m)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Line 4, screen 4
11 kg/m (mean 134 kg/hole,12m long holes using 13 holes in arch only)
(pressure 10- 60 bars, mean 32 bars
AREA OF TUNNEL per 12 m grout fan 12.D x 12.10 x 180 m2
1,735 kg/180m2 = 9.6 kg/m2 (THIS IS LOW, BUT SEE FIGURE FOR GNEISS
(assumed 6 m cylinder of grout gives 1.6
1 6 l/
l/m3 ...typical for tight gneiss, granite)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 74

How many litres of grout per m3 of rock mass?

with 6m cylinder assumption usually 1 to 6 liters/m3.

75

Some pre-grouting volumetric results

g
g data derived from ndal et al.,, 2001.
Pre-grouting

kg/m2 tunnel surface

kg/m3

litres/m3

gneiss

11.0 to 16.5

1.8-2,8

1.7-2.6

granite

12.0 to 52

2.0-8.7

1.8-8.3

phyllite

26

4.3

4.1

rhomb porphyry

28 to (99)

4 7 (16 5)
4.7-(16.5)

4 5 (15 7)
4.5-(15.7)

syenite (dike)

30 to (186)

5.0-(31)

4.7-(28.7)

fracture zone

19 to 50

3.1-8.3

2.9-7.7

Rock type

ASSUME 6M THICK CYLINDER (ON AVERAGE) IS GROUTED

76

AN UPDATE FROM 2006 NUMEROUS RECENT

NORWEGIAN TUNNELLING PROJECTS

77

Estimating Liters-of-grout / m3 of rock mass (as previous)

78

SUGGESTION FOR ALTERNATING SHORT AND LONG HOLES

(to give better over-lap, and act as probe-holes without extra drilling)

79