E xp l or e
150 5 Support
Fig. 5.28.
Axial thrust within the lining at uniform
radial pressure (left) andbending with nonuniform pressure (right)
related increase of loads. This supporting action is called sealing and
can beobtained with thin layers of shotcrete. A recent development
is to seal with3-6 mm thick sprayon polymer liners. They have good adhesive
bond, whenapplied to clean rock, and develop a good performance
in tension and shear. Itshould be mentioned, though, that creep is still an open
question. In contrastto shotcrete, the compliant nature of synthetic
liners allows them to continueto function over a wide displacemen t range.
20
5.10 Recomme ndations for support
Originally, the support measures were determined in an empirical
way, following a sort of trial and error procedure, which is often (but
falsely) attributedas observation al method. Later on, empirical rules have
been based uponrock classication schemes. In contrast, rational analysis
seeks to design thesupport on the basis of the interplay between
ground and the several supportelem ents.The rational approach, based on
computation s, is increasingly applied. How-ever, there are still
important gaps in knowledge. To give an example, themechanic al behaviour
of green shotcrete is poorly known (see Section 22.3)and also the
loads exerted by the ground upon the lining cannot be exactlydeter
mined. Therefore, computation s are often biased and recommenda tionsbased
on rock mass rating are welcome to somehow ll the gap.Clearly, the required
support depends not only on the quality of the groundbut also on the
size and depth of the cavity and on the allowed deformation s.When
combining two or more types of support (e.g. shotcrete and rockbolts),at
tention should be paid to the fact that they may have di erent compliances,
i.e. their resistance is mobilised at di erent deformation s.
20
D. D. Tannant, Development of thin sprayon liners for underground rock sup-port an
alternative to shotcrete? In: Spritzbeton Technologie 2002, published byW. Kusterle,
University of Innsbruck, Institut fur Betonbau, Bausto e und Bau-physik, 141-153.
5.10 Recommenda tions for support 151
Support recommenda tions based on RMR:
Bieniawski
recommends the support measures
shown in table 5.2. They arebased on RMR
21
(see Section 3.6.1) and
refer to a tunnel of 10 m diameter.
RMR Heading Anchoring
20 mm, fullybondedS hotcrete R i b s 81-100 full face, advance3 m 61-80 full face,
advance1-1.5 m, completesupp ort 20 m fromfacelocall y bolts incrown, 3 m long,spaced
2.5 m,with occasionalwir e mesh5 cm in crownwhere required4160 top heading
andbench: 1.5-3 madvance in topheading, commencesup port after eachblast, completesupp
ort 10 m fromfacesyste matic bolts4 m long, spaced1.5-2 m in crownand walls
withwire mesh incrown5-10 cm incrown, 3 cm insides 21-40 top heading andbench: 1-
1.5 madvance in topheading, installsupport concurrentlyw ith excavation
10 m from facesystematic
bolts4-5 m long,spaced 1-1.5 min crown andwalls with wiremesh1015 cm incrown and
10 cmin sideslight ribs spaced1.5 m whererequired
20 multiple drifts:0.5-1.5 m advance
intop heading, installsupport concurrentlyw ith excavationsyst ematic bolts56m long,spaced
1-1.5 min crown andwalls with wiremesh. Boltinvert.1520 cm incrown, 15 cm insides
and 5 cmin facemedium toheavy ribsspaced 0.75 mwith steellagging andforepoling
if required. Closeinvert
Table 5.2.
Support measures based on RMR (according to
Bieniawski
)
21
Bieniawski, Z.T., Rock Mechanics Design in Mining and Tunnelling. Balkema,1984
152 5 Support
Support recommenda tions based on Q-values: Depending on the rock
quality and on the size of the cavity (expressed byits span s
or height) the recommende d support is indicated in a Q
s diagram(Fig. 5.29).
Exceptionally poor Extremely poor Very poor P o o r Fair
G o o d Very good Ext. good Exc. good 100 50 20 10 5 2 1 100 5 0 20 10 5 2 1 . 0 0 1 . 0 1 . 1 1 4 1 0 4 0 1 0 0 4 0 0 1 0 0 0
CA S T C O N C R E T E L INING CA S T C O N C R E T E LINING OR BOLT SAND FIBERCRET E
BO LTSA N D FI B E RC R ET E
BO L TSA N D S HO TC R E T E
S Y S T E MA T IC BO L T I NG
S POT BO LTI NG BO LT S P ACI NG ( m) N O ROCK S U P PO RT R EQ UI R E D 0. 5 1m 1m 11. 5 m 1. 5 - 3 m
Rock mass quality Q = RQD Jn ( ) Jr Ja ( ) Jw SRF ( ) x x
Equivalentdimension= SPAN.DIAMETER orHEIGHT(m) ESR
Fig. 5.29.
Recommende d types of support
23
. ESR is the so-called excavation sup-port ratio. Its values range between 0.5 and 5 and are
given in a table of the citedpaper for various types of excavations.
5.11 Temporar y and permanent linings
In su ciently strong rock (as often encountered e.g. in Scandinavia
) permanent lining is not provided for.
24
Usually, however,
conventional ly driventunnel s obtain a permanent lining (inner lining) of
cast concrete in additionto the temporary lining of shotcrete (outer
lining). The prevailing idea is thatthe loads exerted on the shotcrete lining are
initially reduced due to archingbut then slowly increase. It is also
believed that the shotcrete lining decayswith time so that an inner
lining of cast concrete becomes necessary. Theseideas have never
been conrmed. Of course, there is no doubt that the in-ner lining
increases safety. There are also some other benets from the inner
23
Barton, N., Grimstad, E.: The Q-System following 20 years of application,
Fels-bau
12, No. 6 (1994), 428436
24
E.g. the Gjvik Olympic Cavern Hall in Norway
with 91 m span, 24 m heightand a capacity of 5,800 persons
5.12 Permanent lining 153
lining: A sealing membrane (if necessary)
can be mounted between the outerand inner linings. In addition, a
smooth surface of the tunnel wall (as is thecase with a cast concrete
lining) is advantageou s from the points of view of aerodyna mics
(ventilation) and illumination. In the case of segmental linings (as
used in shield driven tunnels) there isusually no inner lining
of cast concrete. Such linings are watertight up towater
pressures of 6 bar.
5.12 Permanent lining
The usual thickness of
a permanent lining is at least 25 cm. For reinforced andwatertigh t linings a
minimum thickness of 35 cm is recommende d
25
. Blocksof 8 to 12 m in
length are separated with extension joints. Usually concreteC20
/25 is used. Concretes of higher strengths develop higher temperature
sduring setting (ssures!) and are more brittle.
Fig. 5.30.
Rolling formwork
(Engelberg base tunnel)
26
The concrete is poured into rolling formworks (Fig. 5.30,
5.31) and compactedw ith vibrators in the invert and with external vibrators in
the crown (one
25
Concrete Linings for Mined Tunnels, Recommendat
ions by DAUB, Dec. 2000,
Tunnel
, 3/2001, 2743
26
Tunnel
, 3/2001, p. 30
27
Tunnel
, 3/2001, p. 31
154 5 Support
Fig. 5.31.
Rolling formwork (Nebenwegtun nel,
Vaihingen/En z)
27
vibrator for 3 to 4 m
2
). It is di cult to achieve
complete lling of the crownspace with concrete: The pumping
pressure should be limited, otherwise therolling formwork can be
destroyed. Possibly unlled parts should be regroutedwit h pressures of
2 bar 56 days after concreting. Usage of self-
compactingc oncrete
28
can possibly help to avoid incomplete lling of the formwork.W
ithin 8 hours the concrete should attain a su cient strength, so that
theformwork can be removed. However, there are cases reported
where the settingwas insu cient and the lining collapsed after early
removal of the formwork. 5.12.1 Reinforceme nt of the
permanent lining Since the loads acting upon the inner lining are not
exactly known, the re-quirement for its reinforceme nt is an open question.
29
In France and Austria,for instance, inner linings are usually not
reinforced. The German Rail, onthe other hand, decided to reinforce the inner
linings, based on its experi-ences from the new HannoverWurzburg
line. One should also consider thehindranc e to tra c due to repair works of
defective linings. Apart from the
28
This is a concrete of high
owability (spread
>
70cm)
29
One of the greatest gures in
contemporary tunnelling,
Leopold MullerSalzburg
writes: Experience teaches that our inability to design
tunnels realisti-cally leads to considerable overdesign and fearreinforcement , without any
addi-tional safety despite substantial additional costs.
Recommended
37 p . T unn elli ng bo t s _ h ead s ho t 270 R e a ds
443 p . T unn elli n g and T unn elM e c ha ni cs fi ck e s 1 307 2629 R e a ds
359 p . H ar dr oc k T unn elB ori ng M a c hi n es W il ey 5165 R e a ds $125 0 .0
60 p . T unn elT e c hno l ogy ak m e ez 6041 R e a ds
More From This User
1p. A b oH ajj a j 138 R e a ds
2p. 5 go l de nr u l est o fi n d you rlif e p a rt ner A b oH ajj a j 304 R e a ds
4p. i t n er ac ti n g w it hw m o e n can i m pai rm e n s cogn iti veu f n c ti on i ng A b oH ajj a j 8166 R e a ds
338 p . A b oH ajj a j 4457 R e a ds
Featured
54 p . K or ea M a g az i ne R e pub li c o fK or ea
13 p . N o nPr o fitB estP r ac ti ce s K e nY e ung
19 p . C m o pa ni e s W eT hi nk We L ove B e ac on P r e ss
115 p . Fut ur eDi g it a lB o ok P ub l sh i i ng W M e F di a ,I nc. $5 . 99 C o mm e nt s
About
A b ou tS cri bd Bl og J o i n ou rt ea m ! C o nt ac tU s
Premium
Pe r m m u R e i a der S cri bd S t or e
Advertise with us
G ets t a rt ed A d C h oi ce s
Support
H el p F AQ Pr e ss
Partners
D e v el op e r s / A PI
Legal
T er ms P ri v acy C o py ri gh t
C opy ri gh t2013 S cri bd I n c. L a ngu a ge: E ng li s h
