Search Documents

By A. A. Mathews

During the past year (1967-68), there have been many instances of either partial or complete failure of a tunnel-support system. It looks like the art is in a pretty sad state, but as long as we permit the field of tunnel design to remain basically an art, that's about what we can expect. The application of scientific principles to tunnel design involves much more than assigning values to a series of factors in an equation. I am reminded of the case where the engineer calculated that steel ribs with struts were required to support a horseshoe-shaped tunnel in firm ground. The contractor had driven several hundred feet without installing the struts when the engineer visited the job. When he was informed that the struts had been left out, he fled the tunnel in alarm. As one authority has so aptly put it, "There is far too much calculating and too little observing." Initially, one might think of a tunnel support as a structural member, such as a strut or arch which is installed in order to support some definite load. Similarly, a tunnel lining might be considered as a treatment of the interior surface of the tunnel in order to produce desired aesthetic, hydraulic, or architectural results, or to serve a protective function. Actually, many linings, such as a concrete lining, serve a dual purpose and support a load as well as satisfy other requirements. Not too many years ago a tunnel, during the driving or excavating stage, was considered to be either supported or unsupported. In recent years, however, several techniques have been developed, which by helping the tunnel to support itself, permit the elimination of separate structural support. Since these techniques in many cases actually become a substitute for the conventional types of supports and linings, a state-of-the-art review would hardly be complete without including them for consideration. Thus, for the purpose of this discussion, we shall define tunnel supports as any system or technique which effectively maintains the integrity of the tunnel opening. In their chapters, both Jacobs (No. 6) and Lippold (No. 7) pointed out how support systems have advanced from timber supports to steel supports

Jan 1, 1970

By Arthur Green

A GROUP of 13 cities situated in Los Angeles and Orange counties in Southern California is engaged in constructing an aqueduct to carry water from the Colorado River at a point near Parker, Arizona, to a distribution point sear Riverside, California. The aqueduct will have a total length of approximately 241 miles, and is designed to deliver 1605 cu. ft. of water per second, or a little more than one billion gallons per day. The aqueduct crosses a barren, desert waste and the project includes approximately 91 miles of 16-ft. tunnel. The large amount of tunnel driving that has been done in this country in the past few years has resulted in some remarkable developments in equipment and methods. The building of the Colorado River Aqueduct, with its 91 miles of tunnels, has called on the best engineering knowledge in the country. New and better equipment has been designed for all phases of the work, and this equipment has been coordinated and adapted to the various conditions with a high degree of efficiency. The result has been that records for tunnel driving have been set under adverse natural conditions that exceed the estimates for progress under good conditions. All of the tunnels in the main aqueduct, except the Valverde and Bernasconi at the western end, have a finished diameter, inside the concrete lining, of 16 ft. Fig. 4 shows a section of the tunnel with the concrete lining in place. Fig. 5 illustrates the finished tunnel in three typical sections. The standard tunnel grade is 3.432 ft. per mile in the 16-ft. tunnels, but the Valverde and Bernasconi tunnels have a steeper grade and a finished diameter of 15 ft. 3 in. The rough bore of the large main aqueduct tunnels averages 12.95 solid cubic yards of material per foot of advance in timbered sections and 10.76 solid cubic yards per foot in unsupported sections.

Jan 1, 1936

W. L. Saunders, New York, N. Y. (communication to the Secretary*):—The Laramie tunnel, though a small one, compares very favorably in the speed of driving with the great Alpine tunnels which have the record so far. I think it safe to say that, taking all things into consideration, the record made at Laramie is the best American record, though it still falls short of the long-tunnel records abroad. In discussing tunnel-records it must always be borne in mind that there are conditions peculiar to each individual tunnel job, so that no comparisons are complete, fair and conclusive. At Laramie there is one point which stands out prominently, and which distinguishes this from any of the recently-built Alpine tunnels, and that is that here we have great progress in an American driven tunnel without the use of a carriage for mounting the drills. At the Arlberg and Loetschberg tunnels, the carriage was an essential condition for progress. All the heading-drills were mounted upon a bar which rested upon a small carriage. This carriage was withdrawn after the drilling and run into the heading after the blast without much disturbance of the drills, and with very little adjustment except that required in jacking the horizontal bar across the tunnel. The carriage was so small in its track-area that it required little mucking to run it in to the face; and as the rock-drills used were heavy machines 38 in. in diameter, progress in setting up and drilling was very much accelerated by the use of the carriage. At the Laramie tunnel hammer-drills were used instead of piston-drills, and here we have an important distinction which

Jan 1, 1913

By T. N. Williamson

The art of drilling tunnels is still in its infancy, although it is 70 years since the first tunnel driver was put into operation. (It was used to drive 6000 ft of tunnel under the English Channel.) But during the next 60 years neither government agencies nor private enterprise could find much of a future in tunnel drivers. It was difficult to justify the heavy investments, labor was opposed to the machines, and there had been some spectacular failures. In the last ten years, however, there have been changes. Tunnel drivers are being tried with increasing frequency-in spite of the fact that a large number of them have had to be abandoned on site.

Jan 7, 1965

By Don Rose

In the USA the cost of steel ribs for tunnels approximates $100 million each year. European practice has long since abandoned heavy steel ribs for tunnel support, and tunnel coats in Europe (normalized for wages) are about half the costs incurred in the USA. A feeling has existed for some time that the USA practices of supporting tunnels with heavy steel ribs have been overly conservative. The USA practice is based on rock load coefficients by Karl Terzaghi. In 1946, Karl Terzaghi published a tunnel rock classification system (Terzaghi, 1946), with the rock loads on tunnels predicted for each class of rock. No data on real rock loads were presented by Terzaghi and his rock load coefficients may have been largely intuitive. His classification system and associated predicted rock loads have been widely used in the USA. Each rock class, taken from Terzaghi's classification system, is assumed to generate loads of loosened rock resting as dead load. The dimensions of the loosened rock are described by rock load coefficients multiplied by the tunnel diameter. The resulting rock loads are used by design engineers, contractors and agencies to size supporting steel ribs. Terzaghi clearly stated that he had conservatively assumed high rock loads for his classes 4, 5 and 6 to take a presumed effect of groundwater into account. If the tunnel was not affected by ground- water, Terzaghi stated those rock loads should be reduced by 50 percent. Twenty two years later Tor Brekke (1968) wrote a paper clearly showing that based on observation of more than 250 tunnels groundwater does not affect tunnel rock loads. In 1969, Deere, et al., published measurements made on a number of tunnels, and a well-known curve was drawn by Deere to illustrate Terzaghios coefficients graphically. Deere's text stated that Terzaghi's predicted rock loads were too high and should be reduced. Cording and Deere (1972) more recently published data indicating that very large real rock caverns and chambers were being successfully built using rock bolts, which can take only a very limited rock load, thus indicating that real rock load is much smaller than Terzaghi or even Deere predicted.

Jan 1, 1982

By T. F. Adams, D. P. Morse

Tunneling is primarily an excavating cycle consisting of a sequence of operations: drilling, shooting, ventilating, mucking, and erecting supports, if necessary. However, the type and condition of the ground that is being worked, as well as the size and shape of the tunnel, determine the rate of advance. In addition developments in drilling, ventilation, mucking, and haulage equipment have contributed to faster tunneling. Geology: This discussion will be limited primarily to rock tunnels or those which require the use of explosives, and the cost and hazards depend primarily on the condition of the rock which may be broken, decomposed, and contain water with gas. Advance geological study is an important part of any tunnel work and helps to minimize serious miscalculations. The geology itself, at best, is a matter of experience and prediction and it is not so much a matter of the types of rock the tunnel may go through, but a knowledge of the class and intensity of the rock defects that may be encountered.

Jan 4, 1958

By Ole Singstad

THE legislatures of New York and New Jersey, determined in 1919 that a vehicular tunnel should be built under the Hudson River. On July 1, 1919, an engineering staff was organized with the late Clifford M. Holland as chief engineer, and this staff was given a number of problems to solve, such as location, size, type of tunnel, method of construction, method of ventilation and cost. After a period of preliminary investigations and studies it was decided to build the tunnel at Canal St., New York, connecting 12th St., Jersey City. This is the center of the heaviest traffic across the Hudson River. It was also decided to build two tunnels-one for west-bound traffic and one for east-bound traffic-the tunnels to be of cast iron, built up of segments and bolted together, each tunnel to have a roadway 20 ft. wide and a clear heat room of 13 ft., 6 in. This is to provide for two lines of vehicles in each direction. The tunnels have an exterior diameter of 29 ft., 6 in. The interior lining is of concrete, the sidewalls tiled with a vitreous white tile and the roadways paved with granite block. The entrances and exits at both ends are separated by two blocks so as to reduce traffic congestion. BASIS OF VENTILATION It was recognized very early that one of the most important problems confronting the engineers was a proper ventilation system. It was estimated that each tunnel as planned would have a traffic capacity of 1900 vehicles per hr. The tunnels are 8500 ft. long between portals, and it was considered that the ventilation should be based on all of these vehicles being operated by gasoline engines. That presented a problem in ventilation unlike any other either in magnitude or character.

Jan 8, 1926

By WILLIAM COUPER

THE completion of the excavation of the tunnels through Bergen Hill for the extension of the Pennsylvania Railroad into New York City, together with the fact that the excavation for the rest of the tunnel-line has been practically completed for some time past, arouses sufficient interest to justify a description of the engineering- and contracting-work, and the organization by which it has been accomplished. The finishing of the excavation is a long step towards the completion of the entire tunnel-project. It will be interesting to the members of the Institute, who last spring were taken through a great part of this work, to know that by the excavation now completed it is possible to walk by tunnel from a, point near Sunnyside yard, Long Island, east of the 34th Street ferry, to the central passenger station site in the City of New York, and thence by tunnel to the Hackensack meadows, and by an embankment constructed across these meadows to Newark, N. J. This New York tunnel extension is being constructed as a part of the Pennsylvania Railroad system by the Pennsylvania Tunnel & Terminal R. R. Co., a corporation of the States of New Jersey and New York. It extends from a point near Newark, N. J., to the Sunnyside yard, Long Island, as indicated on the accompanying plan.

Jan 7, 1908

By Ole Singstad

THE legislatures of New York and New Jersey, determined in 1919 that a vehicular tunnel should be built under the Hudson River. On July 1, 1919, an engineering staff was organized with the late Clifford M. Holland as chief engineer, and this staff was given a number of problems to solve, such as location, size, type of tunnel, method of construction, method of ventilation and cost. After a period of preliminary investigations and studies it was decided to build the tunnel at Canal St., New York, connecting 12th St., Jersey City. This is the center of the heaviest traffic across the Hudson River. It was also decided to build two tunnels-one for west-bound traffic and one for east-bound traffic-the tunnels to be of cast iron, built up of segments and bolted together, each tunnel to have a roadway 20 ft. wide and a clear heat room of 13 ft., 6 in. This is to provide for two lines of vehicles in each direction. The tunnels have an exterior diameter of 29 ft., 6 in. The interior lining is of concrete, the sidewalls tiled with a vitreous white tile and the roadways paved with granite block. The entrances and exits at both ends are separated by two blocks so as to reduce traffic congestion.

Jan 8, 1926

By Ole Singstad

The legislatures of New York and New Jersey, determined in 1919 that a vehicular tunnel should be built under the Hudson River. On July 1, 1919, an engineering staff was organized with the late Clifford M. Holland as chief engineer. After preliminary investigation it was decided to build the tunnel from Canal St., New York, to 12th St., Jersey City, which is the center of the heaviest traffic across the Hudson River. It was also decided to build two tunnels—one for west-bound traffic and one for east-bound—the tunnels to be of cast iron, built up of segments and bolted together, each tunnel to have a roadway 20 ft. wide and a clear head room of 13 ft. 6 in. The tunnels have an exterior diameter of 29 ft. 6 in. The interior lining is of concrete, the sidewalls, tiled with a vitreous white tile, and the roadways are paved with granite block. The entrances and exits at both ends are separated by two blocks so as to reduce traffic congestion. Basis of Ventilation It was recognized very early that one of the most important problems confronting the engineers was a proper ventilation system. It was estimated that each tunnel as planned would have a traffic capacity of 1900 vehicles per hr. The tunnels are 8500 ft. long between portals, and it was considered that the ventilation should be based on all of these vehicles being operated by gasoline engines. That presented a problem in ventilation unlike any other either in magnitude or character. There have been vehicular tunnels built in Europe, principally in London, but they are shorter and have a smaller traffic capacity. Up to the present time, at least, they have handled a very large percentage of horsedrawn vehicles so that the necessary ventilation has been provided for by the natural draft through the portals and open shafts. Within the last few years, however, a small mechanical ventilating plant has been installed in the Blackwall Tunnel, which has been in operation about 27 years. I might mention that at the time this work was started, it was considered by many that the problem of ventilation was insuperable and it

Jan 1, 1927

By A. L. O’Neil, J. A. Wineland, A. B. Arnold

Movement of water through the Tehachapi Mountains was one of the most challenging parts of the planning, design, and construction of the California Aqueduct. The California Aqueduct is the main artery of the California State Water Project, which will move water 444 miles from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta into the arid and semiarid, densely populated parts of Southern California. The $2,000,000,000 project, designed and constructed by the California State Dept. of Water Resources, was started in 1957 at the Oroville Dam site and is now well past the halfway mark in construction. Water is now being delivered from the California Aqueduct to portions of the San Joaquin Valley. The California Aqueduct is scheduled for completion in 1972. Tunnels on the Tehachapi Crossing are often overshadowed in engineering descriptions of the Crossing by the tremendous importance and engineering significance of the Tehachapi pumping plant which will pump water through the tunnel system. For purposes of this paper, it will suffice to say that the plant is designed to lift 4100 cu ft of water per sec up approximately 2000 ft, making this the highest pumplift in the United States and one of the largest in the world. Water will be moved from the pumping plant through twin tunnels called the Tehachapi Discharge Lines to the top of the lift. From here, water will flow through four additional tunnels which are all linked by short connecting structures (Fig. 1). The tunnels are referred to as Tunnels 1, 2, 3, and Carley V. Porter Tunnel. HISTORY Selection of the final route of the Tehachapi Crossing was the result of comprehensive investigations beginning in 195 1. Numerous tunnel

Jan 1, 1970

By Pierre Hines

THE. Owyhee Tunnels in eastern Oregon were started in the early part of 1930, and were completed early in 1932, with the excep-tion of the Magoffin contract. One tunnel is a large water tun-nel, and the other is a small water tunnel; each is approximately tour miles long. Modern equipment was used to full advantage, and remarkably fast time was made during the driving period. The ,J. F. Shea Co., con-tractors, of Portland, Oregon, have broken established records in the smaller tunnel. Their methods are described in detail. The time of a complete round has been reduced by intelligent handling of mechanical shoveling, and this article records some of the useful facts developed. Charles A. Shea (president of the J. F. Shea Co., and secretary of The Six Companies, Inc.) not only granted permission to publish this article, but placed the company's complete daily reports at the writer's disposal. These reports were made out to conform with previous records upon important tunnel work, and enable a comparison to be made of actual averages, rather than ideal cycles, or representative cycles. Gilbert Shea, present superintendent, has been helpful with time, criticisms, and corrections of the information presented. Morton S. Boss, superintendent during the first 15 months of the tunnel work, gave many hours of his time during two visits lasting over two weeks. The whole staff of the J. F. Shea Co. has given encouragement and assistance.

Jan 1, 1933

By L. A. Wright, J. F. Emerson

The Pine Creek mine, owned by Union Carbide Nuclear Co., Div. of Union Carbide and Carbon Corp., is one of the world's largest producers of tungsten. The mine is located on the eastern slope of the Sierra Nevada Mountains, about 25 miles north- west of Bishop, Calif. Prior to 1948, production from the property came either from surface pits or from underground workings above A level haulage tunnel. The tunnel is at an elevation of 10,900 ft, which left 500 to 600 ft of vertical backs to the surface outcrops. Heavy production demands during World War II hastened the planning for long range development of orebodies below A level. A 7000-ft haulage tunnel, 1500 ft below A level, was started in 1943 and completed in early 1947. This haulage tunnel is at an elevation of 9400 ft and is known as Zero tunnel.

Apr 1, 1956

By T. S. Lovering

The Moffat tunnel passes through the continental divide about 50 miles west of Denver, Colo., on the Denver & Salt Lake R. R.: It is 16 ft. wide, 24 ft. high, and 32,383 ft. long, a distance of a little more than 6 miles. The advantages accruing from its construction may be briefly summarized as follows: The tunnel eliminates 27 miles of grade averaging more than 3.5 per cent. and actually running well over 4 per cent. in many places, and changes the steepest grade from 4.5 to 2 per cent. It reduced the peak of the railroad from 11,660 to 9249 ft. which enables one engine to pull four times as much freight as it could before the tunnel was built. If the Denver & Salt Lake R. R. completes its line, this road will shorten the distance between Denver and Salt Lake City by 200 miles and will have no steeper grades than the lines now connecting the two cities. The proposal to drive the tunnel through the divide dates back about 25 years and D. H. Moffat, who was the leading spirit in the organization of the Denver & Salt Lake R. R. spent much of his time and energy in efforts to raise money for the tunnel that bears his name. He was unsuccessful and died before the work was started. In 1920 an effort was made to obtain state legislation favoring a bond issue to finance three important railroad tunnels in Colorado but the measure was defeated, largely through the efforts of the citizens of the region near Pueblo. A few years later devastating floods caused the Pueblo voters to seek relief from the state and at this time they withdrew their objection to the tunnel bond issue. As a result, a $6,720,000 bond was issued to finance the Moffat tunnel. Construction bids were so high that the work was finally allotted on a scheme analogous to a cost-plus basis. The contract was awarded to Hitchcock and Tinckler, who are paid a fee of $140,000 for driving the tunnel. All bills are paid by the Moffat Tunnel Commission. The contract was let Sept. 19, 1923, and Hitchcock and Tinckler agreed to complete the work by July 19, 1927. In the event of finishing before this date they were to be given a bonus of $1000 a day and

Jan 1, 1928

By Louis W. Huber

The Liberty tunnels extend through a very steep hill in Pittsburgh (locally called Mount Washington) for a distance of slightly over a mile. The two tunnels parallel each other and are 59 ft. apart, center to center (Fig. 1) They are for vehicular traffic, and in each there is ample space for two lines of vehicles. Northbound traffic, toward downtown Pitts- burgh, is confined to the east tunnel and southbound traffic to the west tunnel. The South Hills residential district is separated from downtown Pittsburgh by Mount Washington, a steeply rising escarpment south of and adjacent to the Monongahela River. The Mount Washington district immediately south of the Monongahela River has been reached, for many

Jan 1, 1927

By Chikaosa Tanimoto

INTRODUCTION The committee on Rock Mechanics, Japanese Society for Civil Engineers, has been discussing 'soft rock engineering in Japan' and presented several papers concerning dam, tunnel, bridge and slope constructions to International Symposium on Weak Rock, Tokyo 1981. This is the summarized paper based on References of Okamoto et a1 (1981), Iida et a1 (1981), Working Group on Tunneling-JSCE (1981), Working Group on Bridge Foundations-JSCE (1951) and Kikuchi et a1 (1981), which can convey general view on engineering experiences with weak rocks in Japan. From the point of view to the origin and/or distinctive physical properties, weak rocks in Japan may be classified into (1) sedimentary, (2) weathered, (3) low welded-pyroclastic and (4) fractured ones. Their typical characteristics are summarized in the following section. Concerning dam foundations on soft rock, several hundreds have already been constructed and, at present, nearly one hundred are under construction or at planning stage. These dams, almost without exception, have some problems such as site selection, material selection for fill-type and concrete dams, design of dam and its foundation, and construction procedures, requiring special ingeneous and cautious measures to cope with the local geotechnical difficult situations. In tunneling, for the decade of 1970s, the number of tunnels in soft rock either completed or under construction was at least 160, including Seikan Tunnel of 53.9 km long, Nakayama Tunnel of 14.8 km long and so on. Most of these tunnels are distributed in the northern half of Mainland, consisting of a basement of Paleozoic strata and Plutonic rocks, overlayed by Neogene Tertiary formations which include large

Jan 1, 1982

By William I. Gardner

Optimum design of a structure obviously requires a thorough knowledge of the materials to be utilized in its construction. When the structure is a tunnel, a most important element in its design and construction is the geology. As a tunnel may be many miles in length and at depths of hundreds or thousands of feet, we face a real problem to meet the needs of the designer and builder. How can we determine the properties of our construction materials in this situation? Engineering geology has had a formidable challenge to meet the requirements of conventional excavation methods; the advent of machine methods for rapid excavation compounds the requirements for more detailed and more precise geological knowledge of the tunnel site. This chapter will discuss the means now at our disposal to meet the challenge to produce the required data on the tunnel site in the preconstruction stage. Our considerations will be directed towards construction of a free-flow tunnel, primarily in fractured rock formations, without any requirements for the rock mechanics type of in-situ tests that might be made for a pressure tunnel or for a large opening for an underground power plant. In essence the investigation must determine: (1) The geologic conditions affecting the type of construction equipment and excavation method of the rock to be broken and removed. (2) The quantities of water and gas to be encountered. (3) The strength and stability of the material surrounding the bore and its need for support and lining. GEOLOGICAL FACTORS AFFECTING TUNNEL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION The engineer or contractor may classify the rock as either competent or incompetent or more pointedly as "good" or "bad" ground. The geologist may bestow a precise petrographic name upon the rock, such as granodiorite or indurated tuff breccia or name the formation, as Mancos shale, for

Jan 1, 1970

By T. Krauthammer

A combined numerical approach is proposed for the analysis of rock-liner interact ion in tunnels under the effects of severe dynamic loads. The method is based on employing finite element formulations which describe the linear behavior and incorporating it into a finite difference code which can describe the behavior of a jointed rock medium. This method can be applied for the analysis of tunnel systems in rock, and for studying the requirements for adequate support of the tunnel.

Jan 1, 1984

By C. M. St. John

INTRODUCTION The stress redistribution accompanying the excavation of a deep tunnel may induce failure of the rock. The role of the support system is to control the extent of the failed region and hence to limit closure of the tunnel within an allowable amount. In such circumstances, the design of the support system is generally based on the Ground Reaction Curve (GRC). The GRC is the relationship between the support pressure and the induced displacement at the tunnel wall for a circular tunnel under hydrostatic loading. In the calculation of the GRC (see Brown et al. (1983) for an exhaustive list of reference), the rock is generally treated as an elastoplastic material characterized by cohesive-frictional yield strength and by dilatancy during plastic deformation. A recent analytical development (Detournay, 1983) has allowed the generalization of the GRC concept for some cases of non-hydrostatic in-situ stress fields (Detournay and Fairhurst, 1982). As an application of that development, this paper describes design charts that provide powerful means of performing parametric analysis for tunnels subject to non-hydrostatic loading. BACKGROUND The in-situ stress in a plane perpendicular to the tunnel axis can be decomposed into mean and deviatoric components, Po and So (see Fig. 1). Since it is assumed that the rock is characterized by a Mohr-Coulomb yield strength, the deviatoric invariant So must be less than the limiting value Sl0 given by

Jan 1, 1984

By Walter H. Ortel, George B. Wallace

INTRODUCTION A greater understanding is required about the factors which control tunneling operations if we are to meet the expected demand for tunnels. Much of the needed information can best be achieved by the proper use of instrumentation and advanced engineering concepts. Tunnel measurements and their analysis may prove to be the key which will give the insight necessary to understand the relationship of rock, tunnel supports, and linings. There are three main areas which can be improved through the use of tunnel instrumentation. First, and of prime importance, is safety for men and the project. When unstable conditions occur, sets become distorted. Even without measurements, it is sometimes possible to tell when trouble is approaching. In effect, the set acts as a load cell. Distortions in the set indicate reinforcements may be required to maintain stability. Additional sets or rock bolts, if they are placed soon enough, may provide this stability. However, when large rock displacements occur in short periods of time, it could be too late. Figure 1 is an example of the difficulties encountered in stopping moving rock. To stop the movement and possible failure, large props were placed above the spring line and the massive concrete gravity buttress was constructed along the legs. Rock bolts from the buttress deep into the rock were also used in an attempt to stabilize the rock mass. However, this work is for a highway tunnel and eventually these props and buttresses must be removed.

Jan 1, 1971