Computerised tunnel engineering system (TES) for tunnel design and construction

H. Y. Bian Nanyang Technological University J. Zhao Nanyang Technological University ABSTRACT: Tunnelling is becoming a popular option for surface-congested area or land -scarce countries like Singapore. There are a large number of factors involved in tunnel engineering, including ground conditions, tunnelling machine, operation, tunnel support, environmental constraints and technologies. These factors are inter-dependent on and interact with each other. In order to understand the interaction mechanisms and identify optimum approaches in tunnel planning, design and construction, a Tunnel Engineering System (TES) is proposed. The TES provides a systems approach that allows one to study the interactions among the various factors. In this paper, the TES framework is established with interaction mechanis ms. The factors and parameters that affect tunnel engineering in terms of planning, design and construction and the interaction mechanisms amongst the factors are identified. Computerised model for the system is established. 1 INTRODUCTION 2 PARAMETERS RELEVANT TO TUNNELLING From proposi n g , p l a n n i n g , d e s i g n i n g t o construction, a lot of factors, including ground material, groundwater, end use of tunnel, tunnel dimension, tunnelling method, tunnel support, legislation, government policy, environment considerations, funding, cost and operation are involved and proper decisions have to be made at each stage. 2.1 Ground Condition (GC)

Tunnels serve an important function in infrastructure development, including transportation and sewerage system. Due to the lack of surface area, tunnelling has been one of the major construction activities in Singapore nowadays. Currently, a number of tunnels for rail transport and sewerage systems are under construction, and more road tunnels are going to be constructed in the next few years (Hulme and Burchell, 1999). Tunnelling method, type of support and effects on surrounding environment of tunnelling are the most concerning issues in these projects and need to be foreseen and designed accordingly to ensure the safe and economic construction. This is a complicated problem since a large number of parameters and uncertainties are involved in tunnel engineering. Those parameters include ground conditions, tunnelling machines, people and operation, tunnel support, environmental constraints, end use of the tunnel, and cost of tunnel. These factors are interdependent and interact with each other. In order to understand the interaction mechanisms between the parameters and identify optimum approaches in tunnel planning, design and construction, a Tunnel Engineering System (TES) is proposed in this paper. The TES framework is established with interaction mechanisms. The factors that affect tunnel engineering in planning, design and construction stages are identified, and the interaction mechanisms amongst the factors are established.

There is general recognition of the importance of knowledge on the geological aspects of tunnelling project. Ground condition is divided into approximately two categories: soft ground and rock, according to the formation and strength. Soft ground is considered to cover strata ranging from loose sands and gravels through various grades of clay to conglomerates and some of the softer grades of rock, including shales, mudstone, claystone and weathered elements of siltstone, sandstone and limestone. 2.2 Tunnelling Method (TM)

The engineer often has to choose among construction at surface, cut-and-cover construction or fully underground tunnelling by blasting or boring machine. The tunnelling system is designed for optimum performance in a given range of ground condition. The components of the

tunnelling machine are then built to cope with any ground condition generally regarded as an economic proposal. 2.3 Machine Performance (MP)

INTERACTION MECHANISMS

Machine performance is measured by penetration rate, advance rate or cutter wear. It directly controls the progress rate of the tunnelling project and thus overall cost. Typically, costs escalate substantially if delays occur, such as when excavation must stop to allow grouting from the face in the case of extremely soft ground. When difficult or mixed ground conditions are encountered, advance rate is then slowed down. As a result, the time needed for mucking and tunnel support erection is prolonged. The progress rate is therefore decreased. 2.4 Tunnel Support (TS)

First of all, the natural ground condition needs to be considered when selecting excavation method since ground conditions present major limitations on some particular methods. The strength and abrasiveness of ground have major effects on the thrust torque and cutting tools. Higher strength requires higher thrust torque and correspondingly may slow down the progress. To some extent, ground condition determines part of the cost. The excavation for the tunnel represents about 40-50 percent of the total cost in poor mixed-ground conditions, but this is reduced to perhaps 20 percent in good conditions or even less when an excavating machine is used. This is because ground condition influences the tunnelling machine performance significantly. When mixed or difficult ground conditions or suddenly changed soil profile is encountered; the tunnelling process is slowed down. Tunnel support type is selected based on ground conditions, too. Ground stand-up time determines when the support is needed and also which type of support is necessary. For flowing soil, tunnel support may be needed immediately after excavation is done, a tunnel support that can gain its strength in no time is needed, so in this case, cast-in-situ concrete lining is not a wise choice for tunnel support, or even sometimes, ground treatment may be necessary for successful tunnelling. While for rock masses with discontinuities under groundwater table, its standup time may be very long, while the ingress and accumulation of water to the invert of tunnel may prevent further excavation and installation of tunnel support. In this case, lowering of water table is required and water proofing of tunnel support is of significance. Tunnelling creates cavities in ground , a n d unavoidably disturbs the surrounding soil. Depending on the excavation method, tunnel dimension and tunnel support, the degree of disturbance varies. Tunnelling tends to release part of in -situ stress, and ground tends to squeeze into tunnel. If cut-and-cover method is used, the soil is excavated and filled back, the structure and stresses of soil is totally changed. If a boring machine is in use, there is a kneading action between cutting tools and soil at face, disturbance to the soil is obvious. If dense sand strata presents above the tunnel, it may be loosened due to the rearrangement of shear stresses within the

There are different types of tunnel support including steel ribs and lagging, Sprayed Concrete Lining (SCL), cast-in-situ concrete lining, pre-cast concrete segments and rock bolts. Tunnel support is selected empirically and checked by analytic solutions and a range of assumed ground conditions to ensure that stresses are acceptable. It has been proven that the type of tunnel support is mainly determined by ground condition and tunnelling method. 2.5 Environment Constraints (EN)

Tunnelling brings some vertical displacements, either settlement or heave. The tolerable settlement limits for buildings above and surrounding the tunnel are preset according to status of buildings. Noise, vibration levels and disturbance to surface activities are also of public concern. All these are closely related to the excavation method and need extremely careful consideration before and during construction. Except for the factors listed above, the other parameters involved in tunnel engineering include ground water (GW)(referring to free water), tunnel end use (TE) and dimension (TD), government policy (GP) and legislation, labour and operation (LO), cost (CO) and funding mechanism (FU).

deforming ground wedge and its volume increases. On the other hand, the change in stress may also compact loose non-cohesive strata and thus decrease their volume. At the same time, overconsolidated clay tends to dilate and increases in volume. Due to the cavity created, the overburden soil tends to settle down since it is no longer fully supported, plastic zones form around tunnel. Depending on depth of tunnel to cover, the plastic zone changes in shape and volume. In severe situation, the plastic zone extends to the ground surface, which simply indicates a failure of tunnelling. Tunnelling method also influences the settlement introduced by tunnelling. Large settlement may occur after tunnelling machine passes through. If compressed air tunnelling method is in use, pressurization of air in a TBM working chamber may cause settlement or heave at the face depending on the magnitude of pressure compared to the overburden stress, or even there is a potential of blowing out if pressure is too high. Tunnelling speed has impact on the settlement since the ground behaves like a viscous fluid. S p e e d y t u n n e l l i n g m a y d e c r e a s e p r e-face deformations by about 80% (Greschik et al, 1999). For tunnelling project, a maximum surface settlement is pre-defined to prevent surrounding surface structures form cracking or damaging. Depending on the stress changes and soil properties, the settlement varies. Groundwater plays an important role in settlement especially when tunnel is excavated below water table. Groundwater tends to seep into excavated tunnel, and thus leads to lowering of water table and stress increase in overburden ground, therefore, settlement occurs. The amount of water ingress depends on the surrounding soil property, such as permeability, and ground water pressure. Another problem brought by groundwater is that fine particles are washed into tunnel invert along with water. This may affect the overall stability of tunnel and sometimes excavation may need to be stopped for mucking purpose. And again, rate of progress is slowed down. When necessary, ground may need pre-treatment, such as grouting or freezing of weak soil. In the excavation process, skilled labours and proper operation of excavation machine are of extreme importance for efficient tunnelling. The tunnelling machine performance largely depends on continuous and cooperative work of each gang

of operators. They keep a close eye on the tunnelling process and ground condition change during excavation, report immediately when problem or sudden changes are encountered. If the total cost is limited by budget or difficult funding approach, the whole system again will be affected. Provided the tunnel can still be excavated safely, tunnelling method may need to be reselected since different tunnelling method option have various costs. Tunnel dimension may be changed slightly to reduce the total cost, since it is proven that bigger diameter tunnels cost more. For tunnel support, a compromise has to be found out to satisfy both the end use requirement and cost restraint. In one word, all these factors influence each other in one way or another; some may even have iterative effect on other factors again and again. An interaction matrix for three parameters: ground condition, excavation method and tunnel support, can be easily established. If this matrix is expanded to include all the parameters involved in tunnel engineering, a bigger matrix can be obtained to show the interaction between each parameter, as shown in Figure 1. Other than the interaction between the main parameters, each parameter can be regarded as a combination of a few sub-level parameters. For example, ground condition may include material strength, ground classification, discontinuities or fault, geological profile, chemical components of ground, stand-up time of ground, stability of surrounding ground and stresses in ground. These sub-level parameters also need to be taken into consideration when calculating the overall effect of ground condition to other main parameters. At the same time, the relative importance of influence of one factor on another needs to be quantified in order to find the most interactive and dominant factor in the whole system. In next section, semi-quantified interaction matrix will be generated to represent quantified interaction between all the factors. 4 INTERACTION MATRIX FOR TES

One of the interaction matrix coding methods is called the expert semi-quantitative (ESQ) method (Hudson, 1991, 1992). There are five categories into which the interaction mechanism can placed,

ranging from zero to four, corresponding to no, weak, medium, strong and critical interactions respectively. The sum of the row values is termed as cause and the sum of the column values is as effect, designated as co ordinates (C, E). Thus, C represents the way in which one leading diagonal term Pi affects the system; and E represents the effect that system has on Pi. Basically, from the C, E values, parameters in an interaction matrix can be divided into four categories: dominant if value of C-E is large; subordinate if C-E is small or even negative; interactive if C+E is large and non-interactive if C+E is comparatively smaller. Using Expert Semi-Quantitative Method (ESQ), interaction between factors involved in tunnel engineering can be presented in an asymmetric matrix as illustrated in Figure 2. These values are assigned from experience, by right, from experts experience, but at this stage, for the purpose of building tunnel engineering system framework, they are assigned from the authors experience and literature review. The corresponding cause and effect values for each parameter are tabulated in Table 1. C E and C + E are also calculated. Ground Condition has the maximum C E value (16), which means that it is the most dominant factor among all the parameters. It controls the selection of tunnelling methods, tunnelling machine performance and tunnel support design, and thus the cost largely depends on the ground condition. The minimum C E value (-10) is found from Funding, it shows that Funding is the most subordinate factor. It depends on the other factors to determine the total cost, then funding approach may be decided. Tunnelling Method is shown to be the most interactive factor in the tunnel engineering system. It has the maximum C + E value (70). It almost interacts with all the factors and all the other factors have influences on Tunnelling Method. On the other hand, Government Policy has the minimum C + E value (34) which indicates it is the least interactive factor. Among all the factors, it has effect only at the planning stage, once the tunnel is decided to be built, government policy no longer plays an important role in the tunnelling activity. Tunnel Support and Cost also have high C+E values, which show that both of them are highly interactive in the system. As mentioned in last section, support has great effects on

environment and cost, at the same time, it is controlled by ground condition, tunnelling method and cost. Machine Performance is very subordinate, since it is under control of other parameters such as ground condition, tunnelling method, tunnel support installation and others. 5 COMPUTERISATION OF TES

Data on ground conditions, tunnelling method, tunnel support, machine performance and total cost are collected from literature review. To simplify the computation process, those non-interactive factors are taken out from the matrix. And due to the lack of knowledge on government policies, legislation and funding approach, the interaction matrix is now a 5x5 asymmetrical matrix with ground condition, tunnelling method, tunnel support, machine performance and cost as diagonal items and the interaction between them as nondiagonal items, shown in Figure 3. From the simplified interaction matrix, the governing causeeffect interactions between these five parameters are determined as: Tunnelling method Tunnel support Tunnel dimension Ground condition Tunnel support Cost Ground condition Tunnelling method Tunnel support performance Tunnel dimension Cost Ground condition Tunnelling method Tunnel dimension Cost Cost Ground condition Tunnelling method Machine performance Tunnel support Tunnel dimension Ground Condition

Tunnelling method

Machine

Tunnel support Tunnel dimension

Cost

Matlab Neural Network is adopted to computerise the s implified TES. Feedforward backpropagation is used to train and simulate the interaction between diagonal parameters. Data from literature review are input for training of the six networks. Each of the six networks has three layers with two hidden layers and one output layer. Transfer function for the three layers are tansig, logsig, and purelin respectively. With appropriate number of neurons for each layer and sufficient number of runs, the simulation results agree well with the input training data. From the trained networks and relationships between all the parameters, we can roughly predict output from a specific set of input provided other parameters not included in the simplified matrix unchanged. 6 CONCLUSIONS -

Hudson, J.A. (1992). Rock Engineering Systems: Theory and Practice. Ellis Horwood, Chicester. Hulme, T.W. and Burchell, A. J. (1999). Tunnelling Project in Singapore: an Overview. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, Vol. 14, No.4, pp. 409418, 1999.

There are a large number of parameters involved in tunnel engineering. Each parameter interacts with others. Tunnel Engineering System framework is developed using interaction matrix to represent interaction mechanisms between parameters. From the preliminary analysis of the interaction matrix, it is shown that, among all the parameters, ground condition is the most dominant factor; funding is the most subordinate factor; tunnelling method acts as the most interactive parameter and government policy is the least interactive factor. Currently, the authors are computerising the Tunnel Engineering System. To complete the computerisation, opinions from experts in the industrial lines are needed. 7 REFERENCES Greschik, G.K. and Greschik, G. (1999). Prediction of Surface Subsidence due to Tunnelling in Soft Ground. Challenges for t h e 2 1st Century, Alten et al. (eds), Balkema, Rotterdam. Hudson, J.A. (1991). Atlas of Rock Engineering Mechanism: Underground Excavations. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Science & Geomechanics Abstracts, Vol. 28, pp. 523526.

Ground condition TBM brings less disturbance to ground Faster tunnelling speed, less disturbance

Uniform ground suitable for TBM Tunnelling method Method may be changed due to poor performance

Mixed ground difficult for tunnelling TBM is more efficient in uniform ground Machine

Running ground needs immediate support TBM requires circular tunnel support

Harder ground allows bigger tunnels TBM size availability

Less water ingress Good ground for ground with leaves more lower permeability options for end use TBM may require Boring tunnel best lowering of ground for sewage or table transportation

---

Difficult ground Uniform ground is needs multi funding easier to control approach

Softer ground results in more settlement

Mixed ground results in more delay and cost TBM is more expensive

TBM availability

TBM requires TBM introduces TBM is the mai n skilled labour and less settlement and part of capital cost operation disturbance

Machin e Good performance Good performance, performance Faster tunnelling, more alternatives determines tunnel leaves option for less water loss bigger tunnel for end use performance support installation peed The speed of Rigid support, less Available tunnel Tunnel Available support Support with good Support with poor support installation water proofing disturbance to supports limit size limits water proofing influences results in less water ground tunnelling m ethod dimension limits end use support performance loss Bigger tunnel, more Bigger tunnel Tunnel Bigger tunnel Bigger tunnel Bigger tunnel can disturbance Bigger tunnel, requires bigger size require bigger size brings more water transport more slower speed support, more tunnelling machine loss people or goods dimension space for erection Ground water loss TBM designed changes stresses according to water in ground condition Water ingress Water proofing Groundwater makes tunnelling required to prevent makes bigger more difficult water ingress tunnel more difficult Ground

---

Poor Good performance Poor performance, Poor performance, performance,more requires skilled more disturbance more delay, more delay, more flexible labour and to environment cost funding approach operation Tunnel support and Good quality of finishes cost much support requires Rigid support, less Support of higher and needs flexible skilled labour and settlement quality costs more funding approach operation Bigger and longer Bigger tunnel, more Bigger tunnel Bigger tunnel, more tunnel needs more settlement and needs more labour expensive fund disturbance

Tunnel support availability Big tunnel underneat h business area

Water makes Ground water Ground water may tunnelling more More money Water ingress limits Water loss results be considered in difficult, more fund requires closely needed to tackle tunnel end use monitored and in large settlement the policy water problem may need to tackle water experience water problem If tunnel end use Tunnel end use If tunnel used for TBM features Tunnel Tunnel itself brings Costs varies with Tunnel end use Some special use Different end use Some end use sets less may change Tunnel dimension transportation, designed according may require good needs water table needs different requirement needs disturbance to different tunnel end constraints, government policy vibration is to tunnel to suit end surrounding water proofing decided by end use below tunnel fund better workmanship use tunnelling will be for future tunnel end use unavoidable use environment faster design Government Government Government policy Tunnelling may be Route of tunnel Government has Government has Due to policy restraints stopped when Policy requirement Policy limits end restraints some influenced by rules on funding policy on foreign ----disturbance of restraints, cost may for tunnel support use of tunnel hitting existing methods government policy approach labour increase tunnelling to policy utilities environment Limited funding Limited funding may not allow to Enough funding Limited funding Limited funding Protection of Limited funding may not allow Available funding Multi funding ensure enough may not allow Limited funding may not allow environment purchase TBM may not allow large approaches approach allows for --perfect water restraints end use material on site in some expensive employ highly restrained by size tunnel pr oofing, thus more influences policy Funding higher cost time finishes skilled labour limited funding water loss Skilled labour, more efficient tunnel support erection --Good workmanship, less water loss ----More skilled labour requires more funding Labour & operation Skilled operation, More skilled labour, less disturbance to higher cost environment

Poor workmanship Available Skilled labour, results in more professionals limits higher productivity disturbance tunnel method If environment well protected, less disturbance to ground Environment restraints limit some methods

---

From environment Environment Environment Faster tunnelling is restraints requires consideration, big restraints may preferred from tunnel may not requires less water good quality of environment view allowed in some support table drop area Limited investment Lack of investment Limited materials Limited investment Limited investment may not allow and equipment restraints types of may not allow big may not allow to perfect water lower down support and buy TBM tunnels proofing or water tunnelling speed finishes treatment

Enviro nment restraints limit tunnel end use Tunnel end use may be changed due to cost limitation

Public attitude to More funding is Environment More environment environment needed to protect restraints require restraints, higher protection environment good workmanship cost influences Environment government policy Due to large Higher cost Limited cost Less cost results in amount of cost, requires more restraints the less money on government may flexible funding number of skilled environment need to change Cost approaches labours protection policy on funding

Figure 1. Illustration of key parameter interaction in matrix form

GC 4 3 1 4 3 3 1 0 0 1

2 2 1 2 TD

3 3 2 3 2

2 1 1 4 3

0 2 0 1 2 1 2

4 4 3 3 2 3 2

3 3 3 3 3 3 1

4 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 1 3

4 4 4 4 4 4 2 1 4 3

34 33 22 33 30 34 25 21 23 19

TM 4 3 2 MP 2 2 3 TS 4 4 4 3 4 2 4 4 1 1 1 4 3 4 4 2 3 3

GC 3 0 4 3 0

4 TM 0 0 4 4

4 4 MP 3 4 3

4 3 0 TS 3 4

0 0 0 0 TD 3

4 4 4 4 4 CO

1 GW 3 4 1 TE 2 4 0 0 1 2 4 2 0

GP 4 1 1 FU 2 0 1 LO

2 4 1 4 2 3 3 2 3 2 EN 3 29 0 4 3 4 3 1 2 2 4 3 2 CO 28 18 37 30 36 23 22 25 13 33 27 34 37

Notes: 0 1 2 3 4

------

No Interaction Weak Interaction Medium Interaction Strong Interaction Critical Interaction

Figure 2. The interaction matrix for Tunnelling Engineering System Figure 3. Simplified interaction matrix Table 1. Summation of cause and effect values for interaction matrix parameters Ground Condition Tunnelling Method Machine Tunnel Support Tunnel Dimension Ground Water Tunnel End Use Government policy Funding Labor and Environment Cost C 34 33 22 33 30 34 25 21 23 19 29 29 E 18 37 30 36 23 22 25 13 33 27 34 37 C-E 16 -4 -8 -3 7 12 0 8 -10 -8 -5 -8 C+E 52 70 52 69 53 56 50 34 56 46 63 66

Avg. 27.92 Max. 16 Max. 70 Min. -10 Min. 34