Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
SYNOPSIS: The stability of tunnels in weak rock is controlled by the ratio of the uniaxial compressive strength of the
rock mass to the maximum in situ stress. This ratio provides a guide to the first estimate of support requirements to control
strain to a specified level. Numerical analysis of the response of the tunnel to sequential excavation and support installa-
tion is the most reliable means of optimizing the support design. This approach to support design is illustrated by means of
a number of practical examples.
INTRODUCTION
The value of GSI can be estimated in the field from the A Monte Carlo analysis has been used to carry out
rock mass descriptions illustrated in Figure 3. Note that, this analysis for 2000 iterations for uniform distributions
for the purposes of this discussion on ‘weak rock masses’, of the rock mass properties, tunnel radius and in situ
GSI values from 5 to 35 are of primary interest. stress level. The rock mass properties were varied from
For this range of values, an approximate relationship fair (GSI = 35) to extremely poor (GSI = 5), correspond-
between GSI and the ratio of in situ to laboratory uniaxial ing to the properties of weak sandstones and mudstones
compressive strengths can be derived and this is illustrated down to material that can almost be classed as soil. The
in Figure 4. This relationship provides a simple means for in situ stresses (p0) were varied from 2 to 20 MPa, cor-
estimating the in situ rock mass strength σ cm that is used responding to depths below surface from 75 to 750 m,
in the following analysis of tunnel deformation. and the tunnel diameters were varied from 4 to 16 me-
tres.
TUNNEL DEFORMATION ANALYSIS The results of this analysis are plotted in Figures 5
and 6 that give the diameter of the zone of plastic failure
In order to explore the concepts of rock support interac- (dp) and the closure of the tunnel (δi) for different ratios
tion in a form which can readily be understood, a very of rock mass strength to in situ stress and different sup-
simple analytical model can be used. This model involves port pressures (pi).
a circular tunnel subjected to a hydrostatic stress field in These figures show that there is a remarkable change
which the horizontal and vertical stresses are equal. When in the diameter of the plastic zone and the closure of the
the in situ stresses exceed a critical level, a zone of plastic tunnel when the ratio of rock mass strength to in situ
failure develops in the rock mass surrounding the tunnel. stress falls below a critical level. The role of tunnel sup-
The analysis used follows that described by Duncan- port is to reduce this critical level.
Fama (1993) and by Hoek, Kaiser and Bawden (1995).
SURFACE CONDITIONS
the Hoek-Brown criterion should only be applied to rock
masses where the size of the individual blocks or pieces is
small compared with the size of the excavation under con-
sideration. When individual block sizes are more than ap-
VERY GOOD
VERY POOR
proximately one quarter of the excavation dimension, failure
will generally be structurally controlled and the Hoek-Brown
fragments
surfaces
surfaces
criterion should not be used.
GOOD
POOR
FAIR
STRUCTURE DECREASING SURFACE QUALITY
80
DECREASING INTERLOCKING OF ROCK PIECES
40
BLOCKY/DISTURBED - folded and/or faulted
with angular blocks formed by many intersect-
ing discontinuity sets
30
0.10
σ
0.09
0.15
0.08
Support pressure
0
0.07
In situ stress
0.05
0.10
0.10 0.15
0.06 0.20
0.30
0.40
0.05 0.50
0.04 0.05
0.03
0.02
0.00
5 10 15 20 25 30 35
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
Geological Strength Index - GSI
Rock mass strength / in situ stress
pi
2.4 −2
δi p σ cm po
= 0.002 − 0.0025 i
Plastic zone diameter / tunnel diameter
(2)
do po po
Support pressure
0
In situ stress
4 0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20 dp = Plastic zone radius
0.30
0.40 δi = Tunnel sidewall deformation
0.50 do = Original tunnel radius in metres
3 pi = Internal support pressure
po = In situ stress = depth × unit weight of rock mass
σcm= Rock mass strength = 2c cos φ /(1 − sin φ)
2 CRITICAL STRAIN
0.05
0.15
0.0
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.3
tunnels in Taiwan1. It can be seen that those tunnels cate- 10.0
0.5
between those tunnels that do not require special consid-
eration and those that need careful consideration in terms
of support design. In fact, all of the tunnels included in
Figure 7 were constructed successfully, including those 1.0
that suffered strains of approximately 10%. In some of
these cases the tunnels had to be re-mined since the pro-
files were no longer adequate to accommodate the service
structures for which they were designed.
The idea of using strain as a basis for tunnel design
Percent strain
can be taken a step further by considering the amount of
support required to limit the strain to a specified level.
These support pressures can be estimated from equation 2 0.1
for the case of a circular tunnel and are plotted in Figure 8, 0.01 0.10 1.00
which is a presentation of Figure 6 in a more useful form Rock mass strength σcm / in situ stress p o
for design purposes.
Figure 8: Approximate support pressure required for
different strain values for a circular tunnel subjected to
100
hydrostatic in situ stresses.
-0.318
critical strain ε = 1.073 σcm
pc
Note that this plot applies to a circular tunnel in a rock
10 mass subjected to hydrostatic in situ stresses. However,
it can be used to obtain an approximate first estimate of
Strain - ε pc percent
0.1 Hoek and Brown (1980) and Brady and Brown (1985)
have published equations that can be used to calculate
Tunnels requiring special support consideration the capacity of mechanically anchored rockbolts, shot-
Tunnels with no significant support problems
crete or concrete linings or steel sets for a circular tun-
0.01 nel.
0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Typical support pressures for a variety of different
Uniaxial compressive strength of rock mass σcm - MPa systems for a range of tunnel sizes are plotted in Figure
Figure 7: Percentage strain for different rock mass 9. Once again it must be emphasised that these support
strengths. The points plotted are for the Second Freeway, pressures are derived from idealised calculations for a
the Pinglin and the New Tienlun Headrace tunnels in Tai- circular tunnel and that great care has to be used in ap-
wan. plying these values to actual problems. As illustrated in
the practical examples presented later, these support es-
timates provide a useful starting point in a tunnel support
1
Information in this plot was supplied by Dr J.C. Chern of design evaluation, but it is necessary to check the details
Sinotech Engineering Consultants Inc., Taipei. of this design by numerical analysis.
Thickness - mm
Curve number
Maximum support pres- Maximum support pres-
Weight – kg/m
Curve number
UCS - MPa
Age - days
sure pimax (MPa) for a sure pimax (MPa) for a
Support type tunnel of diameter D (me- Support type tunnel of diameter D
tres) and a set spacing of s (metres)
(metres)
Anchored rockbolts
section steel ribs
pi max = 8.8D −1.27 s
Lattice girders
124 108 21 7
TH section rib
220 190 19
10.00
8 pi max = 8.6D −1.03 s 20
140 130 18
1
2 9
6
21
5
220 280 29
2.00 8
9 pi max = 18.3D −1.02 s 3 7
22
140 200 26 23
1.00
2
Available from the ITASCA Consulting Group Inc.,
Thresher Square East, 708 South Third Street, Suite 310,
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415, USA, Fax + 1 612 371 Figure 11: Plastic zone size and tunnel closure for a
4717. Internet: http://www.itascacg.com. depth of 250 m below surface. Horizontal span of plas-
3
Available from Rocscience Inc., 31 Balsam Avenue, tic zone = 27.2 m, vertical span of plastic zone = 33.5 m,
Toronto, Ontario, Canada M4E 3B5, Fax + 1 416 698 horizontal strain = 5%, vertical strain = 5.3%.
0908. Internet: http://www.rocscience.com.
0.6
0.4
0.3 50 m - equation 2
50 m - finite element
250 m - equation 2
250 m - finite element
0.2 500 m - equation 2
500 m - finite element
0.1
0.0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Percentage strain = 100*(tunnel closure/tunnel span)
Figure 15: Plastic zone formation in a tunnel at a depth of Figure 16: Assembly of a sliding joint in a Toussaint-
250 m, supported by rockbolts and shotcrete. Heintzmann or Top Hat section steel rib.
REFERENCES