Underground Storages in Unlined Mined Caverns - Comparison with

Civil Underground Excavations

Vaskou, P.1, Amantini, E.1 & You, T.1
1

Gostock, Mined Cavern Department, Rueil-Malmaison, France

ABSTRACT
Unlined mined storage facilities are often considered as standard underground works
comparable to railway/highway tunnels or hydroelectric power houses, this due to similar
shapes, concepts and excavation methods. However, mined cavern storage facilities for oil
and gas products are a very specific domain for design. Aspects such as investigation,
layout, section, depth, etc. are presented for mined caverns and compared with tunnels and
power houses. Similar to power houses, mined caverns require good rock mass conditions to
ensure long term stability of the openings with cost-effective rock support, structural
reinforcement and grouting works but also specific hydrogeological and petrophysical rock
mass characteristics to allow for hydraulic containment of the stored product without lining
(Van Hasselt et al., 2003).

1 INTRODUCTION
Underground storage facilities are excavated in hard rock environments for storing various
types of oil and gas derivates.
Ever since World War II, such caverns have been designed and implemented in various
countries and continents. The most common recognised advantages of storing oil and gas
products underground are low environmental impact, improved safety during operation,
security against terrorism, strategic advantages, reduced investments and operational costs.
In addition a specific advantage of unlined mined caverns is the significant flexibility
regarding variable geological conditions.
Mined caverns for underground storage are often compared to standard underground
works such as railway/highway tunnels or considered equivalent to hydroelectric power
houses, this due to the similar shapes and excavation methods. However, a significant
difference lies in the difficulty for direct internal inspection of the cavern once in operation.
Furthermore there is the requirement to develop an adaptive design and monitoring strategy,
this at early stage of the project and together with the specifications for the construction
works.
This constraint implies, for the three concerned engineering specialities - geology,
geotechnics and hydrogeology - specific approaches, design sequences, methodologies and
adapted skills. Similarities as well as specificities are analysed and compared, first
considering the geometry of the underground tunnels and caverns, and then following the
typical sequence of a project: investigation, design and construction.
Underground storage is neither a mine nor a civil work nor a laboratory (You & Vaskou,
2002). This has been explained several times and project organisation, corporate policy, and
local authorities have a real input although this is often neglected in the earliest stage of
design (You et al., 2003). The tendency is however that National Authorities consider
underground storage as related to mining regulations. This gives the context in which long

term and temporary support design, environmental water quality criteria and monitoring are
to be considered. Even future decommissioning and abandonment concepts should be given
some careful thinking keeping in mind specificities of underground storage. This is developed
below and in the concept of GIZ (geotechnical influenced zone or area of geotechnical
influence; Eurocode 7, 2005). New design methodology recommendations by ISRM,
Classification Missions Gotechniques in France (NF 94500, 2006), risk assessment for
tunnel in Austria, code of practice for mines in Australia (MOSHAB, 1999), geotechnical risk
management guidelines in UK, ASCEs GBR in US, all bring useful clarifications on the
matter of design and methodology underground storage is nowhere explicitly listed in the
scope or domain of the above but the recommended concepts are useful to all involved in the
design of similar facilities.

2. CAVERN GEOMETRY
Table 1 Typical geometrical values for underground works
Items
Length

Railway/Highway
Tunnels
Can reach several
kilometres

Hydroelectric
Power Houses
Less than 100m to
a few hundred
metres
20 to 30 m

Width of
tunnel/cavern

Limited

Total width if
several parallel
caverns
Shape of cavern(s)

20 to 25 meters in
case of double tube
Circular, horseshoe,
egg shape, etc.

Semi-circular roof
and vertical walls

Sections (m)
Depth

25 to 250 m2
0 to several hundred
metres
Linear works ;
variable depth from
entrance/exit to
centre part

400 to 900 m2
100 to 400m

Specificities

Underground works
having a high ratio
Height/Width

Crude Oil
Caverns
Up to 1 km

LPG Storage
Caverns
100 to 250 m

15 to 20 m

6 to 18 m

can reach 600

meters

100 m to 250 m

Rounded roof and

generally vertical
walls
400 to 600 m2
50 to 150 m

Various: egg shape,

basket handle roof,
TV screen shape, etc.
85 to 650 m
70 to 200 m

Set of multigallery caverns

stretching over
significant lateral
extensions

Small and compact

facilities with limited
extension; high
flexibility

Figure 1 Typical concept for multiproduct underwater mined cavern storage (Gostock
documentation, 2005)

Before comparing mined caverns with other civil engineering projects (see table 1 above)
it is to be mentioned that two types of underground storage caverns are to be considered,
distinction is based on size and specific depth for stored product containment:
- mined caverns for LPG: these facilities are relatively small in term of capacity,
typically 150,000m3, although larger LPG caverns exist; in term of lateral extensions, a
LPG cavern is typically in the range of 200m x 250m; cavern depth depends on the
product to be stored, typically 80 to 100m for butane and 120 to 175m for propane,
- mined cavern for storing liquids (essentially crude oil but also refined products such
as diesel oil, naphtha, etc): basically the required capacities are significantly higher than
for LPG; for strategic storage of crude oil the capacity may reach several millions of
cubic-metres; in term of lateral extensions the area involved may be in the range of up to
a kilometre by 500 to 600m; cavern depth may remain quite shallow because of the low
vapour pressure of the products to be stored (50 to 100m deep roof).
3. SITE INVESTIGATION
The way to investigate the rock mass (geology, geotechnical and hydrogeological
characteristics) depends highly on the type of underground work to be constructed. The two
extreme cases are railway/highway tunnels - for which the work is linear, going from Point A
to Point B - and the compact LPG caverns for which flexibility is the first advantage and
where the objective is to find a nucleus of rock having as homogeneous characteristics as
possible.
Apart from this aspect, related to the size of the underground works, the depth of the
investigation is also highly variable:
- railway/highway tunnels can be very shallow, both within highly weathered rocks or
either quite deep with potentially high stress problems
- power houses are compact works located in hard rock while the proximity of a valley
may lead to weathering as well as topographically induced stress problems
- LPG caverns require deep depth locations (Van Hasselt et al., 2003; de Lagurie,
2008), therefore deep enough to reach fresh rock
- underground storage facilities for liquids are shallow works and the actual depth of
caverns is generally more related to the rock quality (in term of weathering, jointing and
faulting) than to the stored product characteristics.
Again, the size of the underground works determines the investigation procedures and
techniques. A linear work will be investigated preferably using geophysical survey and
geological mapping of outcrops than by quantities cored boreholes, this at least for
prefeasibility or feasibility stages. On the other hand the opposite is the case for LPG
caverns where investigation is performed by fully cored drillings right from the early stages.
Whatever the type of underground excavation, a geological study is required. Basically,
the geological study includes desk studies, ground surface mapping (outcrops) as well as an
investigation survey (core boreholes, geophysics, wireline logging, etc.). From the very
beginning of the site selection, the geologist in charge of the study has to set up a model
(Goldschneider et al., 2009; Vaskou & Morruzzi, 2010), conduct a survey and collect as
much as possible data to validate the model. Flexibility is generally possible except in the
case of power houses due to large sections and relatively shallow situation and crude oil
caverns where the huge volume looked for necessitates long caverns and large sections.
In the latter, there is no compromise since crude oil caverns require good rock at shallow
depth in order to excavate large sections with a reinforcement limited to rock bolts and
shotcrete. In this regard, the geological studies are wider and deeper in the pre-feasibility
stages, compared to other types.

Table 2: Typical investigations methods for underground works

Items
Geophysical
investigation

Railway/Highway
Tunnels
Adapted to linear works;
method (refraction,
reflection seismic)
depends on depth

Geological
mapping of
outcrops

Generally required but

access can be difficult
(topography, etc.)

Core drillings

Generally too few (the

total length is never
covered); vertical
drillings are predominant

Adit

Rarely (or seldom),

except if local difficult
conditions are anticipated

Structural
analysis

Depends on the work;

required in case of deep
and/or complex geological
environment

Borehole
imagery

Rarely (or seldom)

(except in difficult
structural conditions)
Only in the case of deep
tunnels (often by
hydrofracturing in
dedicated holes)

Rarely

Relatively significant tests

to characterize the
various rock types as well
as the scattering
Relatively rare

Frequent; for
characterization
of matrix

Frequent even necessary;

typically Lugeon and
Lefranc tests

Frequent;
typically Lugeon
tests

Upon request

Upon request

In situ stress
measurements

Laboratory
testing

In-situ
geomechanical
testing
In-situ
hydrogeological
testing

Groundwater
Quality

Hydroelectric
Power Houses
Refraction
seismic is
favoured to
characterize rock
mass
Difficult if not in
the immediate
vicinity of valley
flanks
Classical
investigation
technique,
generally in large
diameter
(>100 mm)
Frequent, allows
for direct visual
observations;
also used for in
situ
geomechanical
testing
Required; input
datum of
geotechnical
models

Required for
modelling;
performed using
adits, typically
flat jack, overcoring, etc

Frequent

Crude Oil Caverns

LPG Storage Caverns

Only refraction
seismic to assess
top of fresh rock
and identify
weakness zones
Mandatory (except
if site is beneath
the sea or
reclaimed areas)
Vertical and
inclined drillings;
core diameter is
around 50mm,
typically NX

Only refraction seismic

to characterize fresh
rock velocity

Never as such but

access tunnel
provides additional
investigation

Required especially
to minimise
crossing
detrimental
structures (faults,
fractured zones,
dykes, etc.)
Frequent (acoustic
BHTV or visual
BIPS, OBI, etc.)
Systematically; to
identify stress
distribution along
crown and vertical
walls. Typically
hydrofracturing in
investigation holes
Frequent, for
characterization of
rock types and
joints
Almost never

Mandatory (except if
site is beneath the sea
or reclaimed areas)
Vertical and inclined
boreholes; high ratio
number of drillings vs.
subsurface works size;
core diameter is
typically H
Never as such but
access tunnel or shaft
provide additional
investigation

Required for 3D
knowledge of joints
and hydrogeological
behaviour
(microstructural
analysis)
Frequent acoustic
imagery to sustain
structural analysis
Performed if high H/V
stress ratio is expected
regionally or if
observed on cores.
Typically
hydrofracturing in
investigation holes
Relatively few since
there is only one main
rock type which is
fresh
Almost never

Compulsory; typically hydraulic conductivity

profiles (e.g. Lugeon tests), long duration
transient tests and interference tests on each
hydrogeological system identified.
Isopiezometric mapping and piezometric
survey.
Compulsory; zero balance of aquifer system
before construction and operation,
geochemical analysis and possibly modelling.

4. HYDROGEOLOGICAL DESIGN
The hydrogeological design of unlined storage cavern of oil and gas products requires a
proper quantitative evaluation and control of the three main conditions:
- the containment of the stored product in the storage cavern which is essentially based
on predominant groundwater hydrodynamic pressures; product containment is ensured
by maintaining at all times water to flow from the host rock mass into the cavern; for most
geological conditions encountered in hard fissured rock mass, these containmentpurpose requirements impose the installation of water curtain boreholes systems,
- the consequent water entries quantities into the storage cavern during construction
and operation; a comprehensive hydrogeological investigation is performed for improving
the accuracy in evaluating the water seepage quantities as well as designing adequate
grouting works,
- the hydrogeological interactions between the storage cavern and its hydrogeological
environment; enlarging the radius of the hydrogeological investigation and installing, if
necessary, specific hydraulic barriers such as peripheral water curtain systems could be
required in order to protect the storage from external hydraulic solicitations.
Such design objectives necessitate adapted investigation and modelling works of the
groundwater flow patterns for highly variable scales; ranging from detail works such as
cavern wall shape, intersections with connection galleries or water curtain boreholes
diameter and spacing, up to the hydrogeological equilibrium conditions of the overall
underground works with its natural hydrogeological environment.
During construction local adjustments of the initial design to actual geological or
hydrogeological conditions are likely to be defined and implemented. Allowing some flexibility
in adapting the initial design is crucial for securing the final performance of the storage
cavern facility. It is also necessary at design stage to evaluate the risks and elaborate
adapted technical specifications, monitoring procedures and flexible layout is often a
mitigation measure.
Compared to other underground works where drainage is sought, maintaining the rock
mass surrounding storage caverns water saturated all along excavation works is essential to
ensure the hydrodynamic containment conditions during operation period. This construction
requirement represents one of the main differences between tunnels / power houses and
storage caverns.
The scale effect is commonly observed in underground works in fissured rock mass
engineering, and especially designing the hydraulic containment conditions for storage
cavern, which necessitates focusing on critical elements of the storage galleries such as
crown and pillars of the storage galleries.
Joints and faults are the preferential pathway for water (Goldschneider et al., 2009;
Vaskou & Morruzzi, 2010) and the distribution of hydraulic conductivities is generally
complex but need to be characterized as precisely as possible to:
- locate the storage where it is the most appropriate,
- optimize the design of the storage to ensure its tightness during operation,
- interpret the monitoring data collected during the construction phase and adjust the
design to effective hydrogeological conditions encountered,
- carry out an informed analysis of the monitoring data collected during the whole life of the
storage and interpret tendencies observed,
- be able to propose efficient remedial actions if a degradation of the initial hydraulic
containment conditions of the storage appears in the course of operation.
Adaptations of the hydrodynamic containment principle to discontinuous and
heterogeneous fissured rock mass system (Van Hasselt et al., 2003), lead the hydrogeologist
engineer to:

evaluate the fissures system likely to induce the most critical hydraulic gradient
distribution at cavern scale, in order to optimise the orientation and shape of both cavern
galleries (Thoraval et al., 2005) and water curtain boreholes system
evaluate the capacity of the natural hydrogeological context in contributing satisfactorily
in the water balance of the site, maintaining the hydraulic gradients around cavern walls
at sufficient level, all along the operation life span of the storage cavern facility
design the artificial water supply system, which is required for compensating both the
possible local deficiencies of the hydraulic conditions of the fissured rockmass and the
eventual weakness of the hydrogeological environment to face to storage cavern water
withdrawn during operation.

5. GEOTECHNICAL / MINING DESIGN

The purpose of the Geotechnical Engineer is to design a facility that will be as much as
possible naturally stable by taking into account, not only the potentially good and fair rock
conditions area defined by the geologist during site investigation, but also the
hydrogeological constraint of keeping the rock saturated and the future operational constraint
of limiting inward flows.
By "naturally stable" one also means adapted to virgin or in-situ stress condition, with as
much as possible, a designed section consistent by its slenderness with the so-called K
value (ratio of horizontal versus vertical in-situ stress) and as much as possible with passive
support only designed by structural types of instabilities.
Most often, except in very high horizontal stress condition and at usual depth chosen for
oil or hydrocarbon caverns, the stress induced by excavation are not excessive compared to
rock mass strength. Low confinement and induced tensile stress condition within cavern
walls (see figure 2 below) are therefore avoided (You et al., 2003; You et al., 2006).

Figure 2: Section Design Predictive Measure

For long term behaviour during storage operations it must be kept in mind that the stored
product itself brings some stability to the excavation. Only a few bars (0.1MPa) of product
pressure bring more support than even some relatively high density of rock bolts and
shotcrete.
Once the sections are chosen compatible with the environment and initial rock mass
conditions the complete layout (accesses, connections, water curtains, shaft, sumps, etc ..)
are designed with the objective to limit the schedule, facilitate the excavation while keeping
the excavations shapes simple and without complex features that would create specific new
design concerns such as heavy reinforcements.(huge intersections or sharp angles creating
stress concentration to just give simple and almost obvious examples).
Design adaptations and work methods may then be proposed by the excavation
contractors and detail design team in order to seek optimisation once excavation material

(ventilation, jumbos, muck trucks and other plants) are proposed, but the general concepts
already set in the basic design are to be preserved. This means that the basic design team is
generally involved during project construction (detail design and monitoring), but the exact
involvement is highly dependent on owners organisation (NF 94500, 2006).
Indeed the design is presented above as if the geological engineer was choosing the
land, depth and contour of suitable host rock mass, the hydrogeological engineer was
choosing the depth below hydrostatic level and designing water supply systems to secure the
hydrodynamic containment of the stored product, the geotechnical engineer was selecting
the sections the support and the mining engineer was finalizing the layout, the time schedule
and cost estimates. However, the whole process is fully interactive and when one looks on
the details and sequences of a design, even at investigation and feasibility stage there is a
much larger number of interfaces between all specialised underground design engineers and
the owner than what may appear.

6. CONSTRUCTION AND MONITORING

There is no reason to consider that a design is completed once calculation are performed,
one should remember that the geological model and calculations have been performed on
interpretation and results from lab from odd few m3 of cores , these must be compared to the
several hundred of thousands m3 of excavation. The models and calculation have to be
validated even if the initial design is considered as robust and possibly over-conservative and
if a full observational method procedure is not formally chosen (DAllagnat, 2005).
The risk managements as performed nowadays always call for residual risks to be
managed and controlled during construction. Whatever contractual frameworks exist, the
owner and the designer cannot ignore the links required by the regulations and natural
design sequencing.
During execution of the works (excavation) the French Standard for Geotechnical Mission
(NF 94500, 2006) foresees two different missions or contracts, one detailed design
performed by or on behalf of the Contractor which is dependent on the chosen construction
methods and means, called G3 and one performed on behalf of the owner preferably
performed by the basic designer who will first supervise detail design but also underground
works construction, mission G4. The main objective being obviously identification of residual
hazards and provisions designed to limit their consequences and site adaptation in view of
monitoring measurements.
Whatever the type of work, the most complete knowledge of the rock mass is obtained
during and at the end of the construction. At this stage, the rock mass can be observed from
the inside. In power houses and storages caverns, accurate geological mapping is performed
by surveying precisely all joints that have been crossed during excavation and characterizing
in terms of location, filling and water ingress, this for stability issues (power houses and
storage caverns) and hydrogeological containment (storage caverns).
In storage caverns, joints are measured and therefore compiled in a 3D database and
map. Once all joints have been mapped, their structural relationships (chronology, tectonic
events) are established as well as the subsequent impact on stability and water ingress
(Thoraval et al., 2005). Only the joints having significant impact will be retained for input into
the model (Vibert & Vaskou, 2011).
A hydrogeological monitoring plan and testing program are also implemented, especially
in surface piezometers and in dedicated boreholes (underground piezometers) drilled from
access tunnel and water curtain galleries.
This testing and monitoring help in understanding the distribution in the rock mass of both
hydraulic conductivities and pore pressures.
A specific micro-seismic monitoring is also installed during construction and run all along
operation of the facility; the objective is to detect and localise any rock fall affecting the
cavern.

Data collected during construction that will be used for elaborating the visualisation model
(Vaskou & Morruzzi, 2010) are summarized in table 3.
Table 3 - Summary of Data collected during Site Investigation and Construction used as
Input Data in the Geological and Hydrogeological Model.
Geology

Hydrogeology

Site investigation
surface topography of site and outcrops
thickness of weathered zone
topography of fresh rock roof
lithology
oriented joints and/or faults
RQD
profile of hydraulic conductivity versus
depth

Storage construction
oriented joints in galleries
structural relationship between joints belonging to
different joint sets

hydraulic conductivity in water curtain and monitoring

boreholes

7. CONCLUSIONS
In the above chapters, similarities and differences have been presented between tunnels,
power houses, LPG storage caverns and crude oil storage caverns. It appears that even if
the underground works appear to be very similar (small LPG cavern vs. large tunnels, power
houses vs. crude oil caverns) significant differences are frequent all along the design and
construction process. In storage caverns, differences are basically due to the long term
stability which is ensured without lining and requesting at all times the water to flow from the
host rock mass into the cavern, during construction and then operation. These differences
require teams of geologists, rock mechanical engineers and hydrogeologists having
experience in this specific field to ensure quality of design and finally the containment of the
stored product.
REFERENCES
dAllagnat, 2005. La mthode observationnelle pour le dimensionnement interactif des ouvrages.
Presses de lENPC.
de Lagurie, P., 2008. Underground Storage of LPG in Rock Cavern at Visakhapatnam in Andhra
Pradesh (India). 21st World LP Gas Forum, Seoul (South Korea)
Eurocode 7,2005. NF EN 1997-1 calcul gotechnique part 1: Rgles Gnrales.
Goldschneider, A., Morruzzi, J., Bodin, J-L., Amantini E., Vaskou, P., 2009. Coupled Geological and
Hydrogeological Models in Fractured Systems: Understanding Interactions between Underground
Storages and their Rockmass. 37th IAH Congr. Hyderabad (India)
MOSHAB, 1999. Surface Rock Support for Underground Mines, Code of Practice, Western Australia.
NF 94500, rev. 2006. Classification et enchanement des missions gotechniques.
Thoraval, A., Gatelier, N., You, T., 2005. De certains effets hydromcaniques lors du creusement et
de l'exploitation de galeries de stockage en milieu fractur. Rev. Franaise Gotechnique, n 113.
Van Hasselt, B., Amantini, E., Cabon, F., Bodin, J-L., 2003. Hydrogeological Monitoring during
Construction and Operation of Underground LPG Storage Facilities in Mined Caverns. IAG Congr.
Prague, 14-19 September 2003.
Vaskou, P., Morruzzi, J., 2010. 3D Modelling of Geological Structures for Underground Caverns: a
new and simple Methodology. 6th ARMS Congr. New Delhi (India)
Vibert, C., Vaskou, P., 2011. Use of Rock Mass Classifications for Design: Recommendations and
Suggestions. 12th ISRM Congr. Beijing (China)
You T., Vaskou P., 2002. Les stockages souterrains en milieu difficile. JNGG 2002, 8-9 octobre 2002,
Nancy (France).
You, T., Kandel, J-C., Gatelier, N., 2003. Underground Storage in Sydney, some uncommon Rock
Mechanics Features of an uncommon Project in Australia. ISRM Congr. Johannesburg (South
Africa).
You, T., Gatelier, N., Laurent, S., 2006. Design Methodology for Hydrocarbon Caverns, Influence of insitu Stresses on large Sections; 4th ARMS Congr. Singapore