Consolidação PDF

Compensation Grouting - Evolution, Field of Application,
and Current State of the Art in UK Practice

Clif Kettle
Clif Kettle
Technical Manager, Bachy Soletanche Ltd, Alton, UK; clif.kettle@bacsol.co.uk
ABSTRACT: Compensation grouting, in the modern currently accepted sense, is a

relatively new application in the field of grouting which is being applied increasingly
in the field of urban construction to mitigate the effects on surface and sub-surface
structures and utilities which arise as a consequence of settlements induced by
tunnelling and sub-surface excavations.
This paper will review elements of current thinking on best practice, and examine
key practical, technical, and contractual requirements for the successful application
of this technique in the field.

134A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
INTRODUCTION
Compensation grouting, in the modern currently accepted sense, is a relatively new

application in the field of grouting, which is receiving more and more attention,
increasingly widespread application, and is frequently being specified as a key
element of the construction process in urban areas. It would be fair to say that it has
revitalized the approach to grouting by acting as a catalyst for new technology, by
bringing an understanding of injection processes and capabilities to a wider
engineering audience, largely by increasing interaction with civil engineering and
tunnelling planners, designers, and contractors.
The technique is being used increasingly in the field of urban construction,
principally to mitigate the effect of settlement arising from face loss during
tunnelling, but also settlements arising from any deep excavations, including even
pile and diaphragm wall construction. The process is designed to avoid excessive
differential settlement and the associated damage to surface and subsurface structures
and utilities.
The objective is to replace as early as possible any volume loss, and reverse
relaxation of strata at depth, in order to limit the migration of this relaxation towards
the surface. The technique relies upon a surgical approach to grouting, targeting
injections in place and time, under complete control of the injection parameters and
in concert with both the tunnelling excavation programme, and with a comprehensive
monitoring system. It requires considerable pre-investigation and analysis of ground
conditions, and of structures and utilities predicted to be adversely affected by
tunnelling operations, early installation and priming of the grouting system, and very
close co-ordination with excavation activity. It follows that compensation grouting is
and always will be an expensive process, which should only be applied where other
less expensive methods cannot be applied. As engineers and professionals we owe it
both to our clients and to ourselves to deliver safety first of all, sound engineering,
and a cost effective solution. We should consider all passive or active alternatives
including - underpinning by piles, jet grouting, and permeation grouting; foundation
INTRODUCTION

and utilities.
134
77B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
134
Page 1 of 66

Clif Kettle
Clif Kettle

and utilities.
134

1
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
INTRODUCTION
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.


1
Page 1 of 66
INTRODUCTION

and utilities.
134
Grouting and Deep Mixing 2012
Page 1 of 66
Page 1 of 66
135
strengthening; block permeation; stress isolation by pile or jet wall; structural

strengthening and/or repair; placement of jacks in foundation elements; tunnelling
methodology including arch and face support measures to reduce face loss; and even,
in some cases, de-commissioning or demolition of structures where protection is not
cost effective.
There has been some tendency to consider this technology as a get out of jail free
card and we must guard against the temptation to over specify this method just
because it appears too difficult to liaise with property owners or tunnelling
contractors to apply alternative means.
Nevertheless, despite the considerable cost, there are now many examples where
alternative means of controlling settlement have proven either to be impossible,
impractical, or where their effect on the project cost and programme have rendered
them more expensive than compensation grouting.
This paper aims to identify and share important lessons learned during in the
evolution of this technology, with reference to a number of successful projects
world-wide, where developments have taken place which have given clients,
contractors, and third party stakeholders increased confidence in applying this
technology on highly complex and demanding projects - not as a fringe specialist
activity, but as a vital and core engineering process.
In particular, the paper will explain something of the evolution of the process and
highlight selected issues associated with this relatively new technique, including
those of project risk and liability.
2
HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT

Grouting injection in soils, whether fracture grouting or permeation grouting
always causes localised displacement, even though this may never be observed.
Frequently, in the past the means to measure such displacement were unavailable or
were sufficiently insensitive to pick up the scale of movements generated. Most of
the time such displacements were insignificant, or transient due to pore pressure
dissipation, and very often were carried out in advance of construction below open
field sites, or at sufficient depth so that no significant surface displacement was
observed. Nevertheless, those displacements were undoubtedly present at depth, and
compensation grouting utilises this capacity to displace soil.
Many papers have been written about the use of grouting in soils as a remedial
measure to restore support to and/or re-level a structure or floor slab which had
settled as a result of inadequate foundations, loss of support, or heterogeneous soil
conditions. Bernatzik in 1951 reported on the use of grouting to correct for ground
loss by fracture grouting. In1967 Henri Cambefort, writing in Injections des Sols
was detailing several examples where structures had been re-levelled by the
application of grouting injection methods. Generally these were carried out at
shallow depths, and immediately below the foundations or base slab. Such injections
were generally carried out with a relatively viscous, non-shrink grout, as part of a
continuous injection program of relatively short duration.
During the 80s and 90s in the USA, papers such as Jim Warners 1984 paper
Compaction Grouting-The First 30 Years, Alan Stilleys paper Compaction
GROUTING AND DEEP MIXING 2012

cost effective.
2

Page 2 of 66
135

cost effective.
2

135

cost effective.
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 2 of 66
78A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
135
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40

Page 2 of 66
Page 2 of 66
136
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Page 3 of 66
Page 3 of 66
136
Grouting for Foundation Stabilisation, and Lifting and Levelling Heavy Concrete
Structures by John King and Eduardo Bindhoff, demonstrate that the practice of
using viscous mortars and grouts was well-established for improving the density,
stiffness, and bearing capacity of weak soils, whether for the purposes of improving
soil bearing capacities for new build structures, or as a remedial process for existing
structures. The increasing knowledge and understanding of soil behaviour was
enabling progressive contractors to find an increasing range of applications for this
technology.
Also in 1984, Francisco Gallavresi reported on the degree of precision that was
achievable by careful placement of medium to high viscosity cementitious slurries in
the very weak soils of the Venice lagoon. This paper indicated some of the advanced
thinking that was being applied to this process, including the careful use of
instrumentation such as water cells to monitor and control differential uplifts,
observations on the soil pre--conditioning effect of the early injections, and the
selective targeting with increased injection volumes and pressures below the ground
bearing elements of the foundation. In the late 80s and early 90s there were a
number of similar examples in northern Germany, again for re-levelling of individual
structures affected by shallow depth urban tunnelling.
As early as 1977 Henri Cambefort had published his seminal work the Principles
and Applications of Grouting. Although the use of rigid mortars occupies only a
small part of this paper, detailing the controlled re-levelling of a factory unit in
Rotterdam, it summarises concisely the levels of design and understanding which
were currently being applied to the design of grout properties, and the precise nature
in which particular grouts interact with soils and rocks during placement. His paper
sets out a firm technical understanding on which the development of future grouting
technology can be based, and highlights just how far grouting technology has
progressed since the turn off the 20thcentury.
Subsequent ground breaking work by specialists such as Dr.Tornaghi in Italy, and
the collaboration between Don Deere and Prof Lombardi have completely
revolutionised how we think about grouts and their application in the field, as well as
enormously enhancing the credibility of grouting technology, distancing it forever
from the black art label which it has often carried.
In parallel with all these developments in grouting technology, both in the
hardware and software, there has been an amazingly rapid advance in the level of
research and understanding of soil mechanics, particularly in relation to soil-structure
interaction, the engineering behaviour of soils, and our particular areas of interest for
the topic of this presentation, the response of soils and structures to tunnelling and
subsurface excavation. The paper by Y. Leblais for AFTES, published in 1995
summarises the then current understanding of the mechanisms for settlements
induced by tunnelling, based upon the work of many earlier advances in soil
mechanics theory by authors such as Glossop, Cording, Boscordin, Burland, Peck,
and Mair amongst many others. There is today a very wide understanding and
agreement on the mechanisms of soil deformation under a wide range of conditions,
and this combined with our advances in grouting technology has enabled the
development of the process which we now call compensation grouting.
136
technology.
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
technology.
technology.
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
136
Page 3 of 66
Page 3 of 66
137
Of course, there are two important missing elements which serendipitously have
arrived at exactly the right time over the period of the last 20 years to enable
compensation grouting to develop as a true engineering process, capable of being
executed arguably with as much precision and control as any other branch of civil
engineering. These are firstly the rapid development in the science of geotechnical
and structural monitoring, using many new instruments which are available on the
market such as electro levels, in-place inclinometers, automatic total station
theodolites, piezometers, extensometers, and strain gauges, and a wide variety of
other instruments which can be read remotely and in real and semi-real-time.
Secondly, we cannot overlook the enormous contribution made by the advancement
in computing technology and power, in both the hardware and software, which
enables rapid assimilation, analysis, evaluation at site level of a huge volume of data
arising from the injection processes, structure and soil deformation measurements,
the strain and displacement in tunnel linings.
In respect of the grouting process, computers in particular have completely
revolutionised our understanding, recording, and control of the injection process,
enabling us to place grout with surgical precision in response to observed or
predicted movements of subsurface or surface structures, and soils. By enabling us to
control precisely the injection parameters of any injection throughout the entire
period of grout placement, by allowing us to examine the continuous record of these
parameters during each individual injection, and by providing the means of rapidly
assimilating the information from this huge stream of data into a visual graphical
format for rapid evaluation, our understanding of the interaction between grout
placement and the surrounding soil has given the modern grouting engineer a level of
understanding of the fundamentals and mechanics of grouting which would have
astonished their predecessors of 30 or 40 years ago.
The coming together of all these technologies is vital and timely. There has never
been more tunnelling activity around the world, particularly in urban areas, and there
is always an overarching drive for efficiency and cost effectiveness in tunnel
construction. The increasing congestion below established urban centres means that
the interaction of the tunnelling operations with existing surface and subsurface
infrastructure becomes critically important. Tunnel design and construction is
becoming increasingly adventurous, even audacious, both in terms of increased
tunnel diameters, and in the increasingly marginal and difficult ground conditions
through which tunnels are being driven, thereby increasing the risks to the tunnelling
operation and to third parties very significantly.
There have been many recorded incidents of tunnel failure over recent years,
generally during construction, and there has never been a more important time for the
development of compensation grouting processes in order to assist in the safe and
controlled subsurface excavation for tunnels and deep structures.
In the early 1990s compensation grouting was raised to the level of a significant
element of tunnelling design, planning, and construction by the construction of the
Jubilee Line Extension (JLE) project in central London. The route of the proposed
tunnels affected hundreds of structures, existing London Underground tunnels, major
utilities, and including many historic buildings of national importance. It was
recognised by the client that without compensation grouting the new Metro line
Page 4 of 66
137
137
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 4 of 66
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
137
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 4 of 66
Page 4 of 66
138
could not be constructed on its proposed alignment, or at least not without huge
additional cost.
The fact that the client was prepared to put so much confidence into this relatively
new technique was due to the experience of the preliminary work is carried out in
1992-3 at the historic Victory Arch entrance to Waterloo Station. For this project,
active compensation grouting was carried out in very close co-operation with the
Building Research Establishment (BRE) monitoring specialists, who were trying to
develop the level of understanding and control necessary for future projects. The
success of the Victory project led directly to the process being applied extensively
across the subsequent Jubilee Line Extension project, with approximately 70
million worth of specialist instrumentation and compensation grouting works being
carried out during the period 1994 to 1996.
Largely Observational Approach
Waterloo Victory Arch
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Victory Arch
Electrolevel
chains
Waterloo &
City Line
New-build escalator sand

passenger walkways
Targeted compensation grouting
within River Terrace Gravels and
London Clay
Sub horizontal arrays of in-place
inclinometers
FIG. 1 Victory Arch Concept and key elements
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Victory Arch
Electrolevel
chains
Waterloo &
City Line

passenger walkways
London Clay
inclinometers
Page 5 of 66
138
additional cost.
Page 5 of 66

Victory Arch
Electrolevel
chains
Waterloo &
City Line

passenger walkways
London Clay
inclinometers
138
additional cost.
additional cost.
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
138

Victory Arch
Electrolevel
chains
Waterloo &
City Line

passenger walkways
London Clay
inclinometers
Page 5 of 66
Page 5 of 66
139
FIG. 2 Exhumed Manchettes in the River Terrace Gravels
The Victory Arch project provided an excellent opportunity to experiment with the
injection methodology in both the River Terrace gravels and the London Clay. The
geometry of the site meant that compensation grouting had to take place in both
strata, and with an appropriate grout formulation injections in both were found to be
very effective. Experiments were made with differing grout types to which a dye was
added to facilitate later investigation. The project was extremely valuable in that it
offered the rare opportunity to exhume early in the project some of the injection
pipes, and valuable observations were made which influenced subsequent design and
practice on the project.
Fig. 2 above show the distribution of grout within the terrace gravels around a
manchette (grout sleeve) location. The grout was deliberately chosen to be unstable,
so that during injection the solids content would remain close to the point of
injection, whilst the water was extruded from the mix by pressure filtration. A very
weak formulation was selected, initially a bentonite cement slurry, but later a preblended material was used, comprising OPC and PFA in a ratio1:20, and with a
water/solids ratio of 0.5. This mix was selected so that the build-up of grout around
the manchette would not unduly inhibit the ability to break out through this material
for subsequent injections. Although injection in the gravels were successful, even
with a weak mix it became progressively more difficult to break out from the
manchette, due to the fact that injections were executed over a period of six months,
requiring up to 35 injections via some the individual sleeves. A notable feature
within the gravels, which has been observed on subsequent contracts, is the effect of
barrel expansion of the sleeve grout around the manchette. Whilst this expansion
must have assisted the re-compaction around the manchette, it clearly contributed
significantly to the increasing difficulty of breaking out through the sleeve grout.
One observed advantage of injecting within the gravels was that it generated a
progressive displacement of the soil akin to a ratcheting mechanism. In the London
Clay however, more frequent injections were required over a longer period to effect a
similar result because each individual injection elevated pore pressures locally, and
these would dissipate over the following weeks so that a repeated cycle of
displacement with partial relaxation evolved throughout the injection period.
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 6 of 66
Page 6 of 66
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
139
139
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
139
Page 6 of 66
Page 6 of 66
140
FIG. 3 Penettration by hydro-fracture in the London Cllay

This was an exciting perriod during which all the major consultants annd specialist
contractors were involvedd in trying to establish ground rules and technnology by
which this process could be
b firmly established as an accepted working method. In
this regard, we are all indeebted to Prof Robert Mair of the Geotechnicaal Consultancy
Group GCG for his keen interest
i
in the Victory Arch project, and the trremendous
level of constructive suppport on the part of the Engineer, BRE, and the Client,
London Underground Ltdd (LUL).
Also in the mid-late 19990s a number of contractors, software develoopers,
instrument manufacturers, and university soil mechanics departments collaborated
c
on
a European funded COSM
MUS project during the construction of the Riio Piedras in
Puerto Rico and Madrid Metro
M
projects. This research project focused on the
prediction and modelling of tunnelling induced settlements, and upon modelling
m
the
effects of active compensaation grouting - that is to say compensation grouting
g
carried
out in parallel with tunnellling operations in order to mitigate the effectts on surface
structures of those operatiions. The objective was to try to codify a systtematic design
approach to managing thee negative impact of tunnelling operations on surface
structures.
Over the past 18 years thhe process has been applied on many projectss
internationally including significant
s
projects in the USA, Canada, Puerrto Rico,
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
i
c
on
M
m
the
g
carried
structures.
s
Page 7 of 66
Page 7 of 66
140
Nevertheless the net displlacement was positive and controllable and thhe nature of the
London Clay permitted innjections to be made more easily and at lowerr pressures than
within the gravels. These were all important observations which later informed
decisions on grout selectioon and compensation design for future projeccts.
Fig. 3 below indicates thhe typical pattern of grout penetration by hyddro-fracture
within the London Clay. Note
N that even very close to the gravel/clay innterface the
grout laminae remain sub-- horizontal, and of no more than 2 to 5 mm in
i thickness.
Given that the London claay is a compressible material, and that lower initial
i
injection
pressures are required to propagate
p
grout through the clay, means that the
t effect of
such injections is slower, more incremental, and generates much lowerr stresses over
a larger area than injectionns within the terrace gravels.

i
c
on
M
m
the
g
carried
structures.
s
140
i thickness.
i
injection
p
t effect of
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
i thickness.
i
injection
p
t effect of
i thickness.
i
injection
p
t effect of
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
140
i
c
on
M
m
the
g
carried
structures.
s
Page 7 of 66
Page 7 of 66
141
France, Spain, Italy, Germany, Belgium and Russia. This is a process whose time has
come. Despite the prevalence of UK examples in the literature, it is today neither a
purely British technology, nor suited solely to excavations within London clay. The
process has been applied in many varying soil types and has consistently delivered
excellent results. Currently, there is the exciting prospect of compensation grouting
being applied to antique structures in Rome.
Currently, London is embarking upon the new Crossrail project, a five-year, 15
billion infrastructure project aimed at connecting full-sized rail tunnels across the
centre of London, and involving six new station complexes, and the upgrading of a
further seven existing railway stations. By the completion of this project over 150
million worth of compensation grouting and monitoring will have been executed.
Again, for many of the affected structures there would have been no viable
alternative protective measures had compensation grouting not been available, and
the project may never have received the Royal assent to proceed.
The remaining part of this paper will examine the principles and technology on
which much compensation grouting design and construction is based today, as well
as detailing some of the difficulties and potential limits of the technology.
3
CORE PRINCIPLES AND DEFINITION

Notwithstanding the route by which this technology has developed, modern day
compensation grouting is very different from the remedial grouting technology upon
which it is based. Most clients and specialist grouting contractors would today
separate remedial grouting completely from compensation grouting, even though
they may be closely related. Certainly third parties affected by urban tunnelling,
whether proprietors, businesses, metro or utility companies and the like would
rapidly be seeking injunctions to halt any on-going construction work if its progress
were based on damaging buildings and then carrying out remedial works. Clients,
and third parties affected by works carried out on behalf of the client, are looking for
minimum of damage and continuity of functionality without risk to their business or
public safety. In order to address these concerns compensation grouting has
developed into be something far more powerful than simply a remedial or corrective
technique.
Put simply, compensation grouting today is intended to minimise the effects of
tunnelling activity on surface and subsurface structures and utilities, to limit and
manage total and differential settlements and deflections within acceptable and
agreed limits. These acceptable limits will of course vary from structure to structure
depending upon the nature of the business, the safety risks, the age and condition of
the structure, and the value of the structure, whether historical or financial.
Compensation grouting is an expensive process and is therefore not ideal for every
situation. It really only comes into its own as a process where important structures,
services, or utilities require protection and which by virtue of difficult access to the
ground below the structure cannot be protected by any other means.
As practised today, the key objective is to try to maintain structures and soil as
close to at rest conditions as possible. Many structures which require the protection
by compensation grouting are old, are of masonry or brick construction, and have a
3

technique.
Page 8 of 66
141
3

technique.
141
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 8 of 66
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
141
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40

technique.
Page 8 of 66
Page 8 of 66
142
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Page 9 of 66
Page 9 of 66
142
complex structural history. These structures do not normally tolerate hogging, and
their response to hogging, differential settlement, and/or repeated cycles of excessive
settlement and heave, can seldom be accurately predicted.
For these reasons we should not therefore advocate the approach of some designers
and contractors, of either pre-heaving of the ground, allowing the anticipated
settlement to return the structure close to its original position, or over reliance of
post-settlement jacking up of structures. In fact, these approaches tend to be
advocated in situations where there is either inadequate real-time monitoring of
structures, and/or an absence of real time control of their injection processes, and
both these scenarios involve a high degree of unnecessary risk. With compensation
grouting at its current level of development we have an internationally proven
technology, an industrial and highly effective process which can in appropriate
conditions, and with adequate control and management, mitigate many of the effects
of construction on surface and underground structures - e.g. total and differential
settlement, angular distortion, excessive strain.
It must be remembered that the specialist geotechnical contractor, however good or
efficient, cannot compensate for errors and omissions in design, construction, or
planning by the designer, client, principal contractor, or tunnelling contractor.
Compensation grouting is not a bolt-on technology which can be added at will - for
success and to maximise its efficiency, it must be integral to the design and planning
of the project from the outset, because it demands a significant amount of preparation
prior to the commencement of any excavation or tunnelling. It follows that the
specialist contractor cannot safely or effectively carry out compensation grouting
without a total, day by day, integration of the roles and operations of the various
parties to the project.
With these guiding principles in mind, the current preferred definition of
compensation grouting, applied almost universally in UK, would be
The injection, simultaneously with construction activity, of self-hardening grouts or
mortars to replace ground loss as it occurs and/or locally re-compact soils to their
original stiffness and density as they relax, in such a manner as to limit differential
and total settlement of a given structure, and thereby mitigate the adverse effects of
construction activity.
The desired effects may be summarised as:
limiting total and differential surface and subsurface settlements
reduction in induced stresses and cyclical movements, to minimise the
potential for damage
accelerate the re-consolidation of soils for long-term stability
The general characteristics of the process may be summarised as:
a rapidly developing technology, developed to an industrial process level the
Jubilee line extension, made possible via advances in computerised injection
techniques and in structural and geotechnical monitoring technology
active compensation grouting takes place in parallel with tunnelling and/or
deep excavation works
highly dependent upon efficient structural monitoring and analysis of
structural displacements
highly effective when applied correctly, but not appropriate everywhere
142
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
142
Page 9 of 66
Page 9 of 66
143
very controlled and responsive in reacting to observed settlements and effects

allows considerable flexibility
initially based upon an observational method approach, but increasingly
benefiting from early intervention based upon predicted levels of face loss
The general requirements for successful application of the process:
establishment of clear objectives and performance criteria
thorough geotechnical investigation, design, and modelling
extensive structural surveys, defects monitoring, and damage prediction
extensive and careful planning, preparation, and installation of geotechnical
and structural monitoring
effective control processes for all construction activities, including
compensation grouting
experienced designers and contractors
integration of the design, monitoring, tunnelling, civil , and geotechnical
operations
flexibility of management structure
appropriate commercial and contractual framework
4
DESIGN - KEY CONSIDERATIONS
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
4.1 Fundamental Geotechnical Design

There must be an agreed basis for the geotechnical design, with adequate, good
quality, site investigation to establish the geotechnical base conditions. Whilst there
is general agreement on the principles to be applied, there can be differences of
interpretation. It is essential that the basis of calculation of the settlement trough
geometry is agreed by all parties Research projects such as COSMUS1 have helped
to confirm the basic design rules.
FIG. 4a & 4b Settlement model introduced by Peck (1969)
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40

Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Page 10 of 66
143

operations

operations

Page 10 of 66
143
143

operations

Page 10 of 66
Page 10 of 66
144
144
For the case of a single tunnel in green field conditions, Peck2 has shown that the
surface settlement trough above and ahead of the advancing heading develops as
shown on Figure 4a. The transverse settlement immediately following construction is
well-described by a Gaussian bell as shown on Fig. 4b, given by;
S = S max exp( y 2 / 2i 2 )
S = S max exp( y 2 / 2i 2 )
(1)
(1)
Where S is the settlement at distance y from the tunnel centre line, and Smax is the
maximum settlement, at long distance from tunnel face. Parameter i (distance of
inflexion points to centre line) characterises the width of the trough. Volume of the
settlement trough per meter of tunnel is given by
V s = 2 iS max
V s = 2 iS max
(2)
Vl =
2 iS max
A
Vl =
(3)
Where A is the section of the tunnel.
i = KZ
i = KZ
Where Z is depth of tunnel centreline and K is the proportionality factor.
ix =KxZ, iy= Ky Z
(4)
Further refinements can be introduced by differentiating K factor along X and Y

axis:

axis:
(5)
ix =KxZ, iy= Ky Z
Although it is very basic and takes no account of any soil characteristics, this
model has proved to be extremely efficient, and has been verified on a number of
projects. For instance, the following experimental values have been found on Jubilee
Line Extension, in London Clay: Ky = 0.55; Kx = 0.63 ; Vl = 2.5 %
(5)
Compensation Grouting Principles
4.2
Similarly, heave produced by grouting can be modelled by a Gaussian bell, with

similar parameters i (opening of the bell), proportional to depth, and the following
equation:
144
(3)
The first level of refinement is to correlate the opening of the trough to the depth of
the tunnel centreline,
(4)
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
2 iS max
A
4.2
(2)
The Volume Loss Factor Vl can be defined as the ratio of settlement trough volume
divided by excavated volume, or as:
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40

equation:
Page 11 of 66
Page 11 of 66
144
S = S max exp( y 2 / 2i 2 )
S = S max exp( y 2 / 2i 2 )
V s = 2 iS max
(2)
Vl =
2 iS max
A
(3)

i = KZ
(4)

axis:
ix =KxZ, iy= Ky Z
(5)
4.2

equation:
(1)
V s = 2 iS max
(2)
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
(1)
Vl =
2 iS max
A
(3)

i = KZ
(4)

axis:
ix =KxZ, iy= Ky Z
(5)
4.2

equation:
Page 11 of 66
Page 11 of 66
145
FIG. 5 Modelling the effect of grouting
GEC * V grout
(7)
2i 2
GEC =
S ( r ) = S max exp( r 2 / 2i 2 )
(6)
V heave
V grout
S max =
(8)
i = KZ
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
S ( r ) = S max exp( r 2 / 2i 2 )
S max =
GEC * V grout
(7)
2i 2
GEC =
V heave
V grout
(8)
(4)
Where
S(r) is heave at the surface at distance r from the grouting point,
Vgrout is the volume of grouting applied at depth Z
Vheave is the volume of associated heave
GEC is the grouting efficiency coefficient.
The following experimental values have been found on Jubilee Line Extension, in
London Clay: GEC in the range 0.3 - 0.6 ; K=0.4 ;
More complex models have been developed using finite elements methods. The
figures below illustrate two basic models employed by the Cambridge University
Engineering Department to represent the expansion of a grout body.
Cavity Expansion Model
Hydrofracture Model
FIG. 6 Cambridge university models of grout expansion
Page 12 of 66
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
145
145

(6)
GEC * V grout
(7)
2i 2
V heave
V grout
(8)
i = KZ
(4)
Where
S ( r ) = S max exp( r 2 / 2i 2 )
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
S ( r ) = S max exp( r 2 / 2i 2 )
GEC =
Hydrofracture Model
Page 12 of 66
(6)
i = KZ
(4)
Where
S max =
145
S max =
(6)
GEC * V grout
GEC =
(7)
2i 2
V heave
V grout
(8)
i = KZ
(4)
Where
Hydrofracture Model
Hydrofracture Model
Page 12 of 66
Page 12 of 66
146
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
FIG. 7 Cambridge university study on the effect of over-consolidation ratio on

grouting efficiency
The COSMUS project and subsequent research have tried to evaluate the rules of
application for both a hydro-fracture model injection, and a mortar or cavity
expansion model injection (Fig 6). In the COSMUS project also, an original model
was developed to calculate the evolution of the settlement trough and to evaluate the
response which might be generated by injection of varying volumes of grout at
several elevations above and ahead of advancing tunnel excavation. The majority of
these investigations were carried out during the compensation grouting works in
Puerto Rico, which has been fully reported elsewhere, but design development
continued thereafter, evaluating the theoretical and physical effects of various
patterns of injections at varying depths.
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52

grouting efficiency
Page 13 of 66
Page 13 of 66
146

grouting efficiency
146
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
146

grouting efficiency
Page 13 of 66
Page 13 of 66
147
FIG.8a, b, & c Aspects of settlement and compensation modelling or the

COSMUS programme (figures courtesy of TRACTEBEL)
Although the COSMUS project was completed over 10 years ago, the main
conclusions and recommendations of the research remain valid today:
maintain soil as close as possible to at-rest (Ko) conditions;

anticipate magnitude and distribution of settlements;
efficient and timely compensation must start before settlements appear at the
surface;
minimise pore pressure increases by using small individual volumes for each
grout injection.
Process Control Prerequisites:
maintain precise control of grout injection parameters;

surgical approach to injection - small volumes in the correct place at the
correct time;
precise real-time monitoring of instrumentation.
Operational prerequisites:
early design and installation of instrumentation;

early design and installation of grouting arrays;
importance of a pre-conditioning grouting phase;
predictive assessment phase for early intervention;
responsive compensation grouting in sensitive environments;
post construction re-compaction for long-term stability.

Core geotechnical objectives should be to:

surface;
grout injection.

correct time;
Page 14 of 66

Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40

Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52

correct time;
147


surface;
grout injection.
Page 14 of 66
147
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
147


surface;
grout injection.

correct time;

Page 14 of 66
Page 14 of 66
4.3
148
Systems of Compensation
Observational / Responsive
4.3.1
This method requires the injection of discrete volumes of grout, controlling

volumes and pressures, and limited only by the observed response of adjacent
structures and the ground. Grout is injected essentially to re-compact relaxed soil
with a view to arresting the settlement to confine total settlement within specified
limits, or of reversing the degree of settlement recorded. In practice, because
settlement is progressive due either to on-going construction works or to the delayed
reaction of the structure, the process in effect requires the repeated injections of grout
to restore or maintain levels. Used in isolation, the system can be problematic,
particularly for buildings sensitive to the effects of hogging, as it effectively requires
repeated cycles of settlement and heave.
The observational method is the only one of these three methods which has been
used in isolation. Providing the means are in place to respond in a timely manner,
this is the easiest method to apply, requiring less preliminary design and analytical
work, relying entirely upon adequate real-time instrumentation to which the grouting
programs respond. The observational approach will always be a significant and
integral part of any compensation grouting solution, but its prevalence to date has
been due to a number of factors
148
148

the lack of a real consensus on the extent and geometry of the relaxation
trough generated for a given tunnel geometry or excavation sequence
4.3
In the early 1990s, when compensation grouting was becoming more widely
accepted, the process was almost entirely observational, based upon repeated cycles
of injections executed in response to observed surface or subsurface displacements.
This was principally due to a lack of understanding of the relationship between the
amount and geometry of the soil displacement or heave induced by the placement of
a given volume of grout, in a given soil, at a given pressure.
Today we are not confined to a purely observational approach, thanks to the
extensive work carried out by many tunnelling and engineering designers, by
specialist grouting and tunnelling contractors, and because of the impact of programs
such as COSMUS and the huge amount of published research in the field of soil
mechanics and the effects of tunnelling induced settlements.
In an ideal world, with a perfectly responding compensation system there would be
no surface settlement at all. This is clearly an impossible goal. The ideal scenario
then becomes reducing the degree of settlement, and the rate of settlement, controlling it within predefined limits for a given structure, based on a detailed
analysis of the condition and characteristics of the individual structure being
protected.
Essentially there are three basic methods by which compensation grouting has
typically been executed - the observational method, the predictive method, and the
pressure method. Only the observational method has ever been used in isolation, but
it is now much more common to combine elements of these three methods, which
can be briefly summarised as follows
Page 15 of 66
4.3.1
Page 15 of 66
4.3

Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
protected.
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
protected.
4.3.1
4.3
protected.
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
148
4.3.1

Page 15 of 66
Page 15 of 66
Predictive Method
increased experience of managing the compensation grouting process in the

field,
149
4.3.2
Predictive Method

field,
149
a lack in the early days of this technology of understanding and experience of

the relationship between the volume and distribution of grout injected, and
the degree of response of the ground and structures
the lack of extensive techniques and software for recording and managing the
real-time monitoring of structures and soil displacements, either due to the
then limited extent of software and equipment development, or the reluctance
of to pay for real-time monitoring
limited availability of real-time monitoring equipment, techniques, and
software to assist the grouting engineer in preplanning the daily injection
programs
The risk with a purely observational system, particularly if the borehole array is at
considerable depth and supported only by surface monitoring, is that it allows the
majority of the relaxation to migrate above the borehole array before any surface
settlement becomes evident. This builds up a significant amount of settlement inertia
and necessitates an increased work content in the injection program because the
grouting is now required not only to re-compact soil but to lift the structure and the
entire body of soil above the borehole array in order to effect any correction in the
rate and amount of settlement. More critically, it builds unnecessary delay into the
response time, resulting in greater settlement, and/or a greater amplitude to the cycle
of settlement and recovery.
The observational method will be adequate for certain sites, but where there are
sensitive underground structures/utilities, or very demanding limits on differential
and total settlement, it would be preferable to combine the observational and
predictive methods.
4.3.2
With this method compensation grouting is controlled by design assumptions on

the percentage face loss, the rate of tunnelling, the induced settlement profile for
each 1metre element of advance, the grout placement sequence, and the grouting
induced displacement, including the grouting efficiency coefficient (GEC - ratio of
volume of grout injected to the net volume replacement)
From an assessment of the net effective face or ground loss deriving from
underground excavation, a programme of injection is implemented whereby a
smaller proportion of the replacement volume is injected ahead of the advancing
tunnel face with the majority of grout injected into zone immediately behind the
tunnel face exclusion zone. To be fully effective, this method requires very close coordination with the tunnel contractor, and an accurate estimate of the GEC. The
planning and implementation of the grouting is complex and the predictive method
requires considerably more pre-planning, design and analysis than a purely
observational system. It should ideally incorporate additional subsurface monitoring
such as extensometers and sub horizontal arrays of in-place inclinometers (IPI) to
take full advantage of the possibilities. The predictive method has become more
viable as a significant component of this method because of:

programs
predictive methods.

field,
Page 16 of 66
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Predictive Method
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52

programs

Page 16 of 66
149
predictive methods.
4.3.2


programs
predictive methods.
4.3.2
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
149
Predictive Method


field,
Page 16 of 66
Page 16 of 66
150
FIG. 9 Schematic flow chart of the predictive approach for compensation

grouting
Pressure Method
Page 17 of 66
Page 17 of 66
150
rapid advances in the capability of monitoring instrumentation and analytical

software
increased empirical basis for assessing the GEC
The method uses the excavation rate and geometry of each element of the
tunnel advance, the predicted face loss for the given tunnelling method and
soil type, and the GEC to calculate in advance the optimum volume and
distribution of grout for each element (typically 1m) of the tunnel advance.
Combined with subsurface instrumentation this enables a very early response
to the onset of relaxation at depth, before this is manifested at the surface
It generally requires smaller grout quantities, and induces smaller
displacement of structures at the surface, reducing the cycles of settlement /
jacking and associated cyclical shear strains in structures.
Depending upon the soil type, it also permits a proportion of the grout required to
be injected ahead of the tunnel face and its associated exclusion zone, the balance of
the grout being injected after the exclusion zone has passed. The predictive method
should always be used in conjunction with the observational method because the %
face loss, the GEC, and the anticipated building response to differential settlement
are all predictions. For this reason the full volume of grout predicted is never injected
in a continuous phase,to avoid the possibility of over-injecting and thereby
unnecessarily stressing subsurface structures and utilities.

grouting
4.3.3
Pressure Method
In this method the effective stresses within the soil are assessed by carrying out an
extensive phase of grouting prior to the onset of tunnelling, when the soil is at an at-
Pressure Method
150

grouting
4.3.3
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52

software
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
4.3.3

software

grouting
4.3.3

software
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
150
Pressure Method
Page 17 of 66
Page 17 of 66
151
rest natural state, in order to assess the pressure of injection required to initiate soil
displacements at each injection port. This value, the signature pressure, becomes the
limiting injection pressure. Thereafter, all subsequent injections are limited by this
established limiting pressure, the objective being purely to re-compact soil to its
initial condition prior to tunnelling. The pressure method has been used with
considerable success, but on a very limited number of contracts because it requires
Surface movement
Surface Movements Over Time
Time
FIG. 10 Comparison of the cyclical surface displacements associated with a

purely observational process, with those of a pressure method approach
4.3.4
Summary
Thorough analysis of the anticipated settlement contours for each phase of

tunnelling, to permit the design of appropriate monitoring and grouting
programmes
The basic arrays of injection pipes must be fully installed prior to the
commencement of any activity which might induce movement or stresses in
adjacent structures, since after the onset of settlement there is insufficient
extensive pre-injection and analysis of the pre-injection results to define the

pressure characteristics of the ground around each individual injection port
an injection control and data management system, preferably real-time, which
allows the original pressure characteristics of the ground to be utilised as a
target value to automatically terminate the injection
The objective with the pressure method is simply to locally restore the ground
stresses to the conditions which existed prior to any excavation work or relaxation. It
has been used principally on the Jubilee line extension project 101 below the Ritz
Hotel in London, where the specified maximum differential settlement across the
structure was set at an extremely onerous value of 1: 3000. It was successful because
the rate of excavation was very slow, with the tunnel being advanced by backhoe
excavator or hand-dig methods. It is unlikely that this method could ever cope
effectively with rapid rates of excavation generated by a TBM.
Surface movement

Summary
For all three methods there are a number of absolutely fundamental requirements in
order to enable the system to respond in a timely and control manner to the effects of
tunnelling:

programmes
Page 18 of 66
Surface movement
Time

Summary

programmes

Surface movement
Time

4.3.4
tunnelling:
151

4.3.4
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
151
Page 18 of 66
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Time
4.3.4
tunnelling:

151
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Summary
tunnelling:

programmes
Page 18 of 66
Page 18 of 66
4.4
time to install injection plant and the grout injection pipes in required
locations.
Prior to the onset of any tunnelling, a period of injection is required in all
areas in order to pre- condition the ground. This is effected by injecting grout
until there is the slightest visible (1mm 2mm) response of adjacent
structures. This process primes the natural undisturbed ground prior to the
start of tunnelling, so that any grout subsequently injected during or after
tunnelling is purely addressing the problem of ground relaxation due to the
tunnelling or excavation. In this way significant delays can be avoided at
critical stages of construction by eliminating the time necessary to compact
the natural soil sufficiently so that it can efficiently transfer the effects of
grouting to adjacent structures or soil.
Accurate, timely monitoring of any structures or soil likely to be affected by
the construction works. Where either the buildings are sensitive, the
construction sequence complex or critical, or where adjacent structures are
expected to respond rapidly to the construction works, it is essential that the
compensation grouting team have access to accurate, real-time, data
concerning movement of structures and the ground around structures. Data
collection for background signature movements of structures likely to be
affected by the works must commence sufficiently in advance of the works to
enable normal movements induced by normal cyclical daily temperature
variations and usage, to be assessed and understood.
It is essential that the practical implementation of the compensation grouting
is done in an absolutely controlled manner. To achieve this, the site practical
procedures and equipment must permit total control of the injection process.
The requisite safety and management systems must be in place, including not
only the measures and procedures necessary to record the process and effects
of compensation grouting, but to analyse the data and to respond in a timely
and controlled manner.
Detailed condition surveys for affected structures to enable a prediction of the
response to any induced settlements
Active Compensation
4.4
locations.
Active Compensation
152
The design of an active compensation grouting program requires detailed attention

to many aspects of the operation, and must be combined with:
Active Compensation
a detailed knowledge of the tunnelling method and programme

a detailed understanding of the specified performance criteria, including the
management of trigger values ( eg. settlement, deflection, strain, damage )
full knowledge and awareness of the structural nature and condition of the
buildings to be protected
a thorough understanding of the geology and the key geotechnical parameters
accurate 3-D modelling of the borehole array and the injection ports in
relation to all existing structures, utilities, and infrastructure, as well as to the
new-build tunnel elements
Page 19 of 66
Page 19 of 66

152
locations.


Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
4.4

Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
152
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
152
4.4
locations.
Active Compensation


Page 19 of 66
Page 19 of 66
an understanding of any external operations which may affect the settlement

of structures falling within the scope of the compensation grouting
a detailed appreciation of the proposed monitoring equipment, including
access to and interface with the monitoring data
an understanding of the natural cyclical movement of the targeted structures,
based upon the background baseline monitoring established by the client
In order to minimise the effects of tunnelling induced settlements, it is important to

be able to respond to the onset of relaxation as early as possible to limit the migration
of this relaxation through the strata to the surface. In order to achieve this it is vital to
understand, and have an engineering basis for, calculating the volumes of grout, and
the distribution of grout injections required for each individual element of the tunnel
excavation. The ideal is to model the volume of excavation, the volume of face loss,
and a corresponding volume and distribution of grout required for each 1 m advance
of the tunnel.
With this information, it becomes a routine exercise to prepare daily injection
programs based upon the optimum distribution of grout around the element of
excavation, while still respecting the face exclusion zones. The geometry of these
grouting exclusion zones around the excavation face is frequently defined in great
detail within the contract documents. Clearly whilst the exclusion zone is present at a
given location, there can be no volume replacement immediately above the tunnel
face within the settlement trough. Any relaxation which occurs during the presence
of this contractually imposed exclusion zone cannot be made the responsibility of the
geotechnical contractor, since no compensation grouting can take place.
However, this does not mean the project or the geotechnical contractor is left
completely without the means to provide protection to the overlying structures. By
carefully targeting injections around the exclusion zone, it is frequently possible to
maintain the structure within its specified settlement limits, until such time as the
exclusion zone has passed and the contractor is able to regain access to the former
exclusion zone to carry out any remaining injections which would have taken place
had access been available at the time.
In order to facilitate the contractor in covering this critical period, which can be
extremely important where the excavations are at shallow depths and/or complex, or
where the exclusion zone remains in place for an extended period (eg: where a
complex element of the tunnel excavation such as a cruciform or turn out element is
constructed), the contractor should consider providing a degree of passive support to
assist in bridging the exclusion zone, thereby allowing the contractor time to effect a
measured re-compaction of the soil in due course. The easiest way of providing such
a passive support is to install manchette tubes in these critical areas which are heavy
duty structural elements in their own right, allowing them to provide a passive
reinforcement of the soil not dissimilar to pipe roofing. An array of this type,
combined with a sufficient and thorough pre-consolidation phase, can assist greatly
in allowing stresses to be distributed to the ground outside the limiting exclusion
zone. In critical locations it may be possible, even necessary, to install multiple
layers of boreholes which need not be necessarily parallel or follow the same
alignments. Fig. 11 below indicates the arrangement of three arrays of structural steel
manchettes provided for the passive and active protection of live railway track at
153


of the tunnel.
153


of the tunnel.
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 20 of 66
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52


of the tunnel.
Page 20 of 66
153
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
153
Page 20 of 66
Page 20 of 66
154
FIG. 11 Section view and 3D model view of King Cross passive/active

compensation grouting array.
Provided space is available it would be possible to combine pipe roofing at one
level, possibly close to the foundations of the structure, with a compensation
grouting array closer to the source of relaxation at depth. Given the space and access,
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52


Page 21 of 66
Page 21 of 66
154
King's Cross station in London during the excavation of very shallow tunnels as part
of the station redevelopment. The design was intended to mobilise not only the
stiffness of the structural steel array with the possibility of compensation grouting
once the exclusion zone had been removed, but also to provide support by the array
acting in a similar manner to tension piles, bridging the area of maximum settlement
to produce a protective vault below the live track.

154
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
154


Page 21 of 66
Page 21 of 66
155
the designer may have many options in trying to provide coverage which will allow
controlled compensation grouting.
By liaising carefully with the tunnelling contractor at daily review meetings, the
geotechnical contractor can understand the programme of excavation for the
following 24 hours, and schedule a programme of injection specifically targeted at
the relaxation generated within that period. It can be seen that this information could
equally be used to provide an element of predictive grouting ahead of the tunnel face,
for example by injecting 10 to 15% of the anticipated grout volume, leaving the
balance to be injected after the exclusion zone has passed thereby carrying out the
maximum amount of work at the earliest possible time. Fig.12 below indicates the
detailed geometry of the face exclusion zone specified for a Crossrail tunnel advance.
Managing injections around this advancing face is critical to ensuring the minimum
response time of the operation. It should be noted however that great care is required
when injecting outside an exclusion zone not to increase the slope of the settlement
trough and the resulting differential displacement of the structure above.
FIG. 12 Grouting exclusion infront of SCL

Exclusion zones are often imposed to avoid grouting in close proximity to the
tunnel face a) to avoid risk to the stability of the face, and b) prevent excessive
pressures on the new-build tunnel lining. This is an important issue, as the exclusion
zone necessitates complex adjustments to the injection programme design, and
generally prohibits injection at the precise location and time where it is most needed.
There are numerous cases where compensation grouting was rendered impossible for
several critical weeks due to the exclusion zone geometry. Often the design of the
geometry of the exclusion zone is highly empirical, and much more research is
required to assess the necessity for, and optimum geometry of, this zone.
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52

155
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 22 of 66
155
Page 22 of 66
155
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 22 of 66
Page 22 of 66
156
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
FIG. 13 COGNAC design software output for an injection programme around a

cruciform exclusion zone
4.5
Borehole Geometry
4.5
A key constraint and challenge for any compensation grouting exercise is to find
the optimum location in which to inject. The elevation at which arrays are installed
may often be dictated by subsurface congestion of utilities and existing
infrastructure, and the sensitivity of the tunnel linings under construction, the
presence of basements, and access to the target areas for drilling. Many infrastructure
and utility companies impose a permanent exclusion zone around their assets, in the
range of 3 to 12 m depending on the sensitivity of the asset, within which no
compensation grouting is allowed to take place.
The subsurface limitations are often compounded by the lack of surface access to
install enough shafts for manageable drilling, leading in some cases to a requirement
for exceptionally long boreholes of up to 80 m to be drilled sub horizontally from
small specially constructed shafts of diameter 4 to 5 m. It is often specified that the
maximum distance between the injection boreholes at the edge of the array is no
greater than 3 to 5 m. For very extensive arrays of boreholes, this leads to a very high
congestion of injection pipes and boreholes in the 30 meters surrounding the shaft,
and, particularly when steel injection pipes installed designers should give careful
consideration to any future works which may require excavations through this forest
of steel pipes.
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Page 23 of 66
Page 23 of 66
156

4.5
Borehole Geometry
of steel pipes.
Borehole Geometry
of steel pipes.
156

Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
156

4.5
Borehole Geometry
of steel pipes.
Page 23 of 66
Page 23 of 66
157
The maximum vertical settlements and gradients induced by tunnel excavations are
located above the excavation itself. The settlement trough increases in width towards
the surface, and correspondingly the vertical displacements and gradients reduce. In
general, therefore, where tunnels are deep, it is often considered more efficient to
carry out compensation grouting at depth where the settlement trough is narrowest.
Where tunnels are at relatively shallow depths, there is often very little choice of
the horizon into which the injection pipes must be installed, and in these situations
careful consideration should be given as to whether the strata at this horizon is
suitable for compensation grouting. Where space is limited it is limited necessary to
strike a balance between maintaining a safe distance from both the tunnel excavation
and from any adjacent or overlying structures, infrastructure, and utilities. This
dilemma is often managed by the imposition of exclusion zones around the tunnel
face as it advances. Fig. 14 indicates various elevations within the trough where
arrays might be installed.
Compensation Grouting - Premise
Where to grout for best

effect and efficiency ?
Depends upon
structure condition
ground conditions
predicted settlements
damage risk
tunnelling method
access constraints
time constraints
FIG. 14 Selection of the appropriate zone for compensation grouting is heavily

dependent upon 3D site geometry and access.
Adjacent to tunnel excavations it is necessary to maintain an adequate exclusion
zone around the tunnel excavation face, so that localised soil displacements due to
grouting do not induce unacceptable stresses on the tunnel temporary or permanent
lining. This approach is easy to implement where there is considerable distance
between the tunnel excavation and the foundations of overriding or adjacent
structures, much more complex when tunnels are at shallow depth.
For surface structures with a raft foundation, the problems of any differential
settlements or subsequent soil displacements induced by compensation grouting tend
to be evened out over the plan area of the building. However, where a structure is
constructed on heavily loaded strip or pad footings, there is a risk that if injection is
carried out in close proximity to the foundations, much of the effectiveness of
treatment will be negated by lateral displacement of soil into the zone between
foundation footings where vertical stresses are lower. In order to avoid this
Depends upon
structure condition
ground conditions
damage risk
tunnelling method
access constraints
time constraints


157
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40

Depends upon
structure condition
ground conditions
damage risk
tunnelling method
access constraints
time constraints
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52

Page 24 of 66
157

Page 24 of 66
157
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40

Depends upon
structure condition
ground conditions
damage risk
tunnelling method
access constraints
time constraints


Page 24 of 66
Page 24 of 66
158
FIG. 15a & 15b Compensation of structures with areas of variable loading
Because of the complexity of many urban underground developments, it is
becoming standard practice to design the installation of the borehole array using a
full 3-D modelling capability which is capable of handling the geometry of all newbuild tunnels, existing utilities infrastructure, exclusion zones, and borehole arrays.
Without such a model the compensation grouting could be rendered ineffective and
the source of very considerable risk to both the tunnelling operations and structures
which are to be protected.
The borehole geometry must also take into account all possible sources of
relaxation during the works, and there are a number of projects where the
compensation grouting contractor was charged by the client with protecting the
structures specified in his contract, even if those structures are subject to relaxation
coming from adjacent worksites or external activities with which the contractor has
no commercial and contractual contact. This may mean including boreholes to
address, for example, an adjacent deep excavation which might give rise to the lateral
relaxation due to the deflection of a diaphragm wall or pile wall. (Refer to Fig. 16
below)
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52

below)
Page 25 of 66
Page 25 of 66
158
possibility, care must be taken in targeting the location of grout injection and in
controlling the rate and volume of injected material. Consideration should also be
given to some pre-injection to limit grout migration during active compensation. In
Figure 15a below, the right-hand arch indicates an example of this problem which
has occurred in practice, and the left-hand arch indicates how this could be managed
by stiffening the soil below the arch to prevent the lateral displacement of soil.
Figure 15b indicates an example on the Jubilee line project where the compensation
grouting within the London clay was confined by the formation of a slab within the
overlying gravels by permeation grouting, thereby confining the compensation
grouting and distributing its effect to avoid grout punching towards the surface below
the arch as shown in Fig. 15 below:
below)
158
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
158

below)
Page 25 of 66
Page 25 of 66
159
FIG. 16 An example where borehole arrays designed to deal solely with

tunnelling induced relaxation will have little effect in protecting the structure
from the effects of lateral movement on the wall, without the installation of
additional boreholes.
It is not uncommon, due to the lack of access, for the installation of dedicated
shafts for compensation grouting, to install arrays of boreholes from deep
excavations which form part of the permanent works, or from existing structures
which are used for temporary access to the duration of the project. In these
circumstances it may be necessary on compilation of the compensation grouting
works to provide the means for decoupling the steel injection pipes from the
permanent structure in order to isolate it from the drag effect of any long-term
settlement within the area of the borehole array.
4.6
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40

System Of Injection
4.6
In the early days of compensation grouting there was much debate over whether a
viscous slurry or mortar, injected as a compaction grouting exercise was preferable to
the injection of a fluid slurry injected via manchette pipes. Each method has its
advantageous and disadvantages. Compensation grouting is essentially a type of
displacement grouting, of which there are many varieties. Figure 17 below indicates
a general classification of grout mechanisms based upon the type of grout selected,
and the method of placement.
Compensation grouting would normally be confined to the processes included
within the intrusion grouting area in Fig. 17 below.
System Of Injection
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
4.6
Page 26 of 66
159

159

4.6
System Of Injection
Page 26 of 66
159
System Of Injection
Page 26 of 66
Page 26 of 66
160
160
The soil grouting process
Grout is a self hardening fluid or slurry injected into ground

for consolidation or impermeabilisation
Slab
jacking
Displacement
grouting
Intrusion
grouting
Compaction
Permeation
grouting
Viscous paste or mortar
Fluid slurry
High Injection pressure

Fewer single injections
Intrusion
grouting
Claquage
Fracture
Compaction
Hydrofracture
Lower Injection pressure
Repeated small
injections
Repeated small
injections
FIG. 17 Grouting classified according to grout viscosity and method of injection
4.6.1
Mortar
Zone of
compaction
Zone of plastic
deformation
FIG. 18 Compaction grouting principle - volumetric expansion of a body of

mortar, physically displacing the soil mass
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Stiff Mortars
The problem with the compaction grouting approach is that in essence it is a single
phase operation. If the operations were a pre-heaving exercise, or a remedial grouting
exercise after the building had settled, there would be no particular time constraint
other than cost. However, for most compensation grouting projects this is not the
situation in which we find ourselves, because we are dealing with a dynamic
situation where buildings are in the process of settling as the ground relaxes. Timely
controlled placement of grout is therefore of the essence.
Typically,
combined drill
and grout pipe
progressively
withdrawn
The soil grouting process - compaction grouting
Mortar
Compaction
grouted body
can be columnar
lenticular
elliptical or
spherical
Depends upon
ground structure &
compressibility,
grout properties
injection sequence
& volume
160
Grout
jacking
Claquage
Fracture
Soilfrac
Hydrofracture
Fluid slurry
Repeated small
injections

Stiff Mortars
Mortar
Depends upon
ground structure &
compressibility,
grout properties
injection sequence
& volume
Typically,
combined drill
and grout pipe
progressively
withdrawn
Zone of
compaction
Zone of plastic
deformation

Permeation
grouting
Slab
jacking
Displacement
grouting
Intrusion
grouting
Compaction
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Intrusion
grouting

Slab
jacking
Displacement
grouting
Compaction
grouted body
can be columnar
lenticular
elliptical or
spherical
Zone of plastic
deformation
Page 27 of 66
4.6.1
Zone of
compaction
Page 27 of 66

Compaction
Typically,
combined drill
and grout pipe
progressively
withdrawn

Permeation
grouting
Hydrofracture
160
Soilfrac
Fluid slurry
Stiff Mortars
Depends upon
ground structure &
compressibility,
grout properties
injection sequence
& volume
Claquage
Compaction
grouted body
can be columnar
lenticular
elliptical or
spherical
Grout
jacking
Fracture
Soilfrac

4.6.1
Slab
jacking
Displacement
grouting
Grout
jacking
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Permeation
grouting

Grout
jacking
Claquage
Fracture
Soilfrac
Hydrofracture
Fluid slurry
Repeated small
injections
4.6.1
Stiff Mortars
Mortar
Compaction
grouted body
can be columnar
lenticular
elliptical or
spherical
Depends upon
ground structure &
compressibility,
grout properties
injection sequence
& volume
Typically,
combined drill
and grout pipe
progressively
withdrawn
Zone of
compaction
Zone of plastic
deformation

Page 27 of 66
Page 27 of 66
161
For compensation grouting we generally are dealing with multi-phased

excavations, often carried out over an extended period up - to 2 or three years is not
uncommon for a major civil engineering or tunnelling project - and we are trying to
respond as rapidly and as early as possible from time at which the face loss or
relaxation occurs. This places a severe restriction on the use of compaction grouting
with a stiff mortar, because it is slow to implement, and it requires the continued
presence of a drill on site in order to carry out subsequent phases of reinjection. Very
often space is congested and there is only time and space to carry out either drilling
or grouting at any one time. Further, access constraints often dictate that the drilling
of the grout holes has to take place from within shafts of small diameter (4-5m) and
this is generally incompatible with the injection of viscous mortars.
A compaction grouting approach, because of the practical constraints, means that
any volume replacement at a particular location takes place in one single operation,
implying very significant local displacements of the soil by up to 300 to 400 mm
from the point of injection. This inevitably creates huge stresses locally within the
soil
Another constraint with the use of viscous mortars again relates to access. Very
often compensation grouting boreholes are required to have a length of up to 60 m,
and it is generally impracticable to place viscous mortars in a borehole with any
control over this sort of distance.
A final major disadvantage can be the pressure required to place the mortar, which
may be in excess of 30bars. In purely simplistic terms, the concept of injecting a stiff
mortar to physically displace the soil in a very localised area sounds like an ideal
mechanism for compensation grouting. However many compensation grouting
operations take place in close proximity to subsurface utilities, the new build tunnels
which may have sprayed concrete linings, and existing subsurface infrastructure.
These three categories of structure are extremely sensitive to the application of
localised stresses and for this reason compaction grouting techniques are simply not
allowable due to limitations imposed by designers and owners on induced stresses.
Despite all these reservations, there may still be situations where localised
placement of a viscous mortar immediately below a key foundation element,
particularly where this is ground-bearing, might be appropriate as part of a more
comprehensive settlement mitigation program.
4.6.2
Fluid, Non-Shrink Slurries
4.6.2
Fluid, non-shrink slurries have many advantages for compensation grouting.

They can be placed via a manchette system which means that once the borehole
array has been drilled and injection pipes installed, the specialist drilling crew can be
demobilised from site, leaving the restrictive worksite free for the injection crew.
The principal advantage with the use of the manchette is however that it lends itself
to repeated injections over an extended period as the successive phases of injection
take place. It is not uncommon for a single structure to be affected by up to 10 or 15
phases of excavation during the construction of complex tunnelling works. There
may be multiple tunnels, multiple phases of excavation and enlargement for a single
tunnel, cruciform junctions, connections with existing structures etc. Once the
boreholes have been drilled and the manchette is installed, the boreholes are typically
4.6.2

161

soil
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
4.6.2
Page 28 of 66
161

soil

Page 28 of 66
161

soil
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40

Page 28 of 66
Page 28 of 66
162
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Page 29 of 66
Page 29 of 66
162
surveyed for alignment using an instrument such as the Maxibor. This allows a
precise location with X, Y, Z coordinates can be defined for each injection port along
the length of the borehole. This means the grout can be placed repeatedly at a precise
location within the soil. This is a critical advantage where structures have a ground
bearing foundation since it allows placement in a very surgical manner below a key
foundation element, depending upon the degree of settlement being observed in
recorded.
A secondary but important advantage of using a manchette system is that it dictates
the nature of the grout which may be employed. The grout of course is required to be
fluid, non-shrink, self-hardening, but of relatively low strength. In fact excessive
strength is a disadvantage. It is sufficient for the grout to be self-hardening within a
reasonable period of time, and the grout is required to be solid but sufficiently weak
to be fissile over the duration of the excavation works, so that the strength of the
grout does not become an impediment to repeated injections at a precise location.
A major advantage of the use of a fluid grout is that it can be placed at very
significantly lower pressures than a viscous mortar. Typically injection pressures,
after the initial breakout from the manchette, may be as low as 3-10 bars. Further,
because the injection tends to be in the form of a narrow lens or filament of grout, the
localised displacement generated by each injection may be only of the order of
several millimetres. Given that most soils are compressible to a lesser or greater
degree this means that volume replacement with a fluid grout is characterised by
repeated successive injections of small quantities of grout at relatively low pressure,
making it a very much more cautious and incremental approach to replacing volume
and re-establishing stresses in the ground, not least by allowing greater time for pore
pressures to dissipate in cohesive soils. This is a huge advantage when trying to
control the impact of grouting-induced stresses on structures and utilities in close
proximity.
Fig. 18 below indicates the nature and extent of fissures generated by hydro
fracture with a cement slurry in stiff over-consolidated London clay. Note that the
fissures are generally somewhat horizontal, and this is to be expected since they
ought naturally to propagate at right angles to the direction of principal stress.
162
recorded.
proximity.
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
recorded.
proximity.
recorded.
proximity.
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
162
Page 29 of 66
Page 29 of 66
163
FIG. 19 Exhumed injection pipe in stiff, overconsolidated clay, demonstrating

thin (approx. 5mm), sub-horizontal grout intrusions
Grout Mix

4.7
The basic objective of compensation grouting is the replacement of volume loss

associated with tunnelling or deep excavation, and/or the re-compaction of relaxed
soils to re-establish the stresses within the soil which existed prior to excavation.
Depending upon the soil type, the predicted extent and magnitude of settlement,
and the rate of construction, the grout type selected may either be a fluid, stable,
grout based upon a cementitious self - hardening suspension, a non-stable self hardening suspension, or a viscous mortar.
A non-stable grout is one which under pressure loses constituent water from the
grout mix due to pressure filtration, and therefore becomes more viscous. This type
of grout can be the best solution in granular materials. The description stable when
applied to grout implies the property of retaining fluidity and integrity when under
pressure, and stable grouts are commonly used in cohesive materials where there is
no exit route to allow the dissipation of any expelled water. Each grout type has its
advantages and disadvantages depending upon the particular application.
Mortar Grouts may be favoured by some designers and practitioners in more
compressible soils, or where the rate of settlement or ground loss are expected to be
high. Whereas fluid grouts tend to be injected at lower pressures and to have a wider
area of influence from a given injection, mortars naturally tend to be injected at much
greater pressures and have a much more localised effect. The disadvantage of
mortars when used in close proximity to delicate structures is that locally they can
generate high soil displacements and stresses. In clays, particularly stiff clays such
as London Clay, there can be an added disadvantage that localised stresses build up
due to the compressibility of the soil and the consequent tendency to jack up pore
pressures. These elevated pore pressures may take time to dissipate, such that the
final degree of stress and displacement is not seen at the time of cessation of
grouting, and this can lead to uncontrolled increase in stresses coming onto a tunnel
lining over some considerable period after cessation of injection. Clearly, this is
difficult to control. The process of mortar injection is generally therefore best
confined to situations where the geometry allows injection to take place at some
distance from any sensitive structures likely to be influenced by the grouting, such
that the localised high displacements and stresses are dissipated over a wide area
with the passage of time. In summary, the process of mortar injection is therefore
best confined to situations where
a) the geometry allows injections to take place at some considerable distance
from any sensitive structures likely to be influenced by the grouting, such that
the localised high displacements and stresses are dissipated over a wide area
with the passage of time, or
b) there is a robust and/or heavy structure with high ground bearing pressure,
where there may be benefit in a targeted mortar injection immediately below
the footing. In these circumstances mortar injection may provide a valuable
component of a more comprehensive settlement mitigation scheme

Page 30 of 66
Page 30 of 66
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
163

Grout Mix
4.7

163

Grout Mix

Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
4.7
Grout Mix

Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
4.7
163

Page 30 of 66
Page 30 of 66
164
164
Fluid Grouts since the primary objective is to replace a volume loss, there is no
requirement for a high-performance grout mix. In fact, the set grout need not be any
stronger than the strata into which it is being injected. Most grouts selected for
compensation grouting are therefore relatively weak, with a 28 day strength of the
order of 3 to 5 N, and with a very low bleed capacity. The latter is essential in
cohesive or unstable soils because in these conditions we do not want to introduce
free water into the soil, and we do not want to lose the efficiency and advantage of
the volume of grout already placed. Typically these grouts may consist of
cementitious slurries of low water solids ratio, in the range 0.4 -1.0, although stable
low bleed slurries with a water cement ratio of up to 2 have been reported.
Primary decisions which need to be made at the outset are therefore
injection mechanism - compaction grouting with a stiff mortar, or claquage

(hydrofracture) with a more fluid slurry
grout mix type - viscosity, mix constituents
geometry of the installation system - the borehole array. This is generally
dictated by the access available to the ground below the structure to be
protected.
When using fluid grouts there may be circumstances where it is necessary to

accelerate the setting times during periods of rapid settlement, to allow rapid
incremental re-compaction of volume replacement. The geometry of the borehole
array, and the distance of the injection port from the point of injection will dictate
whether an accelerator additive is required. It is rarely practicable to add an
accelerator anywhere else than at the point of injection via a separate grout line
feeding the accelerator into the mix at the point of injection.
4.8
4.8
Injection parameters will vary greatly from location to location, depending upon
the nature of the compensation grouting, the depth of injection, the proximity of
sensitive structures, and any limits imposed by the tunnelling contractor and
utilities/infrastructure operations.
Since the settlement mitigation process cannot be effective unless grout is placed in
a timely manner, tunnel designers must consider carefully the design of the primary
lining, and the tunnel construction procedures in order to allow the grouting
contractor to intervene as early as this is practicably possible.
For SCL (sprayed concrete lining) tunnelling operations, contractors tend to design
their linings for at the very least for full overburden pressure plus a factor of safety to
protect the excavation face from the effects of compensation grouting. Clearly, a
compromise has to be made between the extent of the exclusion zone, the efficiency
of the grouting operation, and the cost of the tunnel lining.
Whatever the injection parameters selected, it is of critical importance to ensure
that these are adhered to, and that there is no risk of human error or oversight in
allowing excessive pressures, flow rates, or volumes to be placed at any time during
individual injection. The safest and most efficient way to manage this risk is to
Page 31 of 66
164

protected.

4.8
Page 31 of 66
Injection Parameters
164

protected.

Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40

protected.

4.8
Page 31 of 66
Page 31 of 66
165
employ computer piloted grouting equipment with the facility to automatically stop
the pump when limiting injection pressures or volumes are reached.
It goes without saying that the ideal is to place the grout at the minimum
practicable volume in a controlled measured approach which allows observation of
the response. A predictive approach, with early and timely intervention, will
minimize the necessity of placing grout rapidly under duress in order to try and
rapidly arrest a high rate of settlement.
4.9
4.9
Many individual strands of research have come together to help designers establish
the principles and guidelines upon which the current specification criteria for
compensation grouting in particular, and settlement mitigation in general, are based.
Much detailed analysis has been carried out by Burland, Standing, and Jardine and
others on behalf of CIRIA (UK governmental agency - Construction Industry
Research &Information Association) and research by the building research
establishment (BRE) into the strain effects on structures of tunnelling induced
sagging and hogging.
There has been a gradual movement away from the establishment of settlement
limits for individual structures, towards criteria such as the differential settlement
and deflection ratio for individual structures. Depending upon the nature and
condition of the structure the performance criteria may be specified for the project as
a whole, or may vary to suit the requirements and sensitivity of individual structures.
Clearly the geotechnical contractor is dependent upon the adequacy of the
structural monitoring systems installed. Often the monitoring system is specified by
the client and installed under a separate contract, and this has the benefit of being an
independent check. It is therefore essential for the specialist contractor to understand
what information he requires in order to manage his responsibilities under the
contract, and to insist upon the level of monitoring, the frequency of monitoring, the
mode of data presentation and the arrangements for access to the interpreted
settlement data. Failure to insist on these points, which can be overlooked if they are
not a part of the geotechnical package, could place the project, the client and
specialist contractor at considerable risk.
Page 32 of 66
Page 32 of 66
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Specified Performance Criteria
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
165
165
4.9
4.9
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
165
Page 32 of 66
Page 32 of 66
166
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
FIG. 20 Extracts from Building Response to Tunnelling by Burland, Standing,

and Jardine
On the basis of this CIRIA and BRE research, in the UK the approach to
establishing a functional and realistic specification has been to:
start from a base prediction of the green field settlement, based on the
excavation geometry and a specified target value for the % face loss.
carry out a detailed damage assessment analysis for individual structures,
based upon the anticipated differential settlements and angular deflections
suggested by the green field settlement analysis. Various damage
classification levels been established by Burland et al., and these are typically
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
166

and Jardine
Page 33 of 66

and Jardine
Page 33 of 66
166
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
166

and Jardine
Page 33 of 66
Page 33 of 66
167
used by the client to identify individual structures which are a risk. These
structures are then specified as requiring mandatory protection. Other
structures at lower risk of damage are specified as requiring mandatory
monitoring during the excavation of the project
undertake a further level of sensitivity analysis upon the proposed method of
construction of the building, with further levels of consideration including the
historical importance of the structure, the impact on public safety of a failure,
etc
carry out, prior to commencement of the excavation works either as a
requirement on the part of the Client or on the part of the contractor, a
detailed structural condition survey for building is considered to be a risk, in
order to identify any particular structural elements or defects requiring special
consideration. Because of various practical and contractual constraints, these
structural damage assessments are rarely carried out prior to the award of
contract.
based upon all of the foregoing analysis, define acceptable performance limits
limits, including total and differential settlement, allowable deflection across
consecutive monitoring points, allowable strain, and damage.
define a series of trigger values for each of the control criteria, together with a
schedule appropriate responses and/or hold points in the event of any breach
of trigger value.
define the nature and extent of mandatory structural and ground monitoring to
ensure adequate control of the excavation and settlement mitigation works
define the minimum levels of management and supervision, including levels
of experience and competency for key individuals
Currently in UK for the Crossrail project, the Client has specified very
precisely just such performance criteria in respect of compensation grouting,
in terms of settlement limits, differential settlement and angular deflection,
with some discretion left to the contractor for specifying additional measures
establishing the ground conditions, and augmenting the monitoring regime.
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 34 of 66
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 34 of 66
167
etc
contract.
of trigger value.
etc
contract.
of trigger value.
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
167
167
etc
contract.
of trigger value.
Page 34 of 66
Page 34 of 66
168
168
TABLE No. 1 Extracts from the BRE classification of Building Damage

Classification upon which UK settlement mitigation strategy is based.

Building Damage Classification

2
Description of Typical Damage and

Likely Form of Repair for Typical
Masonry Buildings
Risk
Category
Max
Tensile
Strain %
Description
of Degree of
Damage

Masonry Buildings
Approx2 Crack
Width (mm)
0.05 or
less
Negligible
Hairline Cracks
More than
0.05 and
not
exceeding
0.075
Very Slight
Fine cracks easily treated during normal

redecorations. Perhaps isolated slight
fractures inside building. Cracks in
exterior brickwork visible upon close
inspection
More than
0.075 and
not
exceeding
0.15
Slight
Cracks easily filled. Redecoration

probably required. Several slight fractures
inside building. Exterior cracks visible;
some repointing may be required for
water-tightness. Doors and windows may
stick slightly.
1 to 5
More than
0.15 and
not
exceeding
0.3
Moderate
Cracks may require cutting out and

patching. Recurrent cracks can be masked
by suitable linings. Repointing and
possibly replacement of a small amount of
exterior brickwork may be required. Doors
and windows sticking. Utility services may
be interrupted. Weather tightness often
impaired.
5 to 15 or a
number of
cracks greater
than 3
More than
0.3
Severe
Extensive repair involving removal and

replacement of sections of walls,
especially over doors and windows
required. Windows and door frames
distorted. Floor slopes noticeably, some
loss of bearing in beams. Utility services
disrupted.
15 to 25 but
also depends on
number of
cracks
Very severe
Major repair required involving partial or

complete reconstruction. Beams lose
bearing, walls lean badly and require
shoring. Windows broken by distortion.
Danger of instability.
Usually greater
than 25 but
depends on
number of
cracks
Approx Crack
Width (mm)
Risk
Category
Max
Tensile
Strain %
Description
of Degree of
Damage
0.05 or
less
Negligible
Hairline Cracks
More than
0.05 and
not
exceeding
0.075
Very Slight

inspection
More than
0.075 and
not
exceeding
0.15
Slight

stick slightly.
1 to 5
More than
0.15 and
not
exceeding
0.3
Moderate

impaired.
5 to 15 or a
number of
cracks greater
than 3
More than
0.3
Severe

disrupted.
15 to 25 but
also depends on
number of
cracks
Very severe

Usually greater
than 25 but
depends on
number of
cracks
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
168
0.1 to 1
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 35 of 66
Page 35 of 66
168



Masonry Buildings
Approx Crack
Width (mm)
Risk
Category
Max
Tensile
Strain %
Description
of Degree of
Damage
0.05 or
less
Negligible
Hairline Cracks
More than
0.05 and
not
exceeding
0.075
Very Slight

inspection
More than
0.075 and
not
exceeding
0.15
Slight

stick slightly.
1 to 5
More than
0.15 and
not
exceeding
0.3
Moderate

impaired.
5 to 15 or a
number of
cracks greater
than 3
More than
0.3
Severe

disrupted.
15 to 25 but
also depends on
number of
cracks
Very severe

Usually greater
than 25 but
depends on
number of
cracks
0.1 to 1
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40

1
0.1 to 1
Risk
Category
Max
Tensile
Strain %
Description
of Degree of
Damage

Masonry Buildings
Approx2 Crack
Width (mm)
0.05 or
less
Negligible
Hairline Cracks
More than
0.05 and
not
exceeding
0.075
Very Slight

inspection
More than
0.075 and
not
exceeding
0.15
Slight

stick slightly.
1 to 5
More than
0.15 and
not
exceeding
0.3
Moderate

impaired.
5 to 15 or a
number of
cracks greater
than 3
More than
0.3
Severe

disrupted.
15 to 25 but
also depends on
number of
cracks
Very severe

Usually greater
than 25 but
depends on
number of
cracks
0.1 to 1
Page 35 of 66
Page 35 of 66
169
TABLE No. 2 Extracts from the BRE classification for Sensitivity Assessment of
Listed Buildings
Listed Buildings
Scoring for Sensitivity Assessment of Listed Buildings

Score
Sensitivity to movement of particular
features within the building
Sensitivity of the structure to ground

movements and interaction with adjacent
buildings
0
Criteria
Masonry buildings with lime mortar not

surrounded by other buildings. Uniform facades
with no particular large openings.
No particular sensitive features.
Buildings of delicate structural form or

buildings sandwiched between modern framed
buildings which are much stiffer, perhaps with
one or more significant openings.
Brittle finishes, e.g. faience or tight joined

stonework, which are susceptible to small
movements and difficult to repair
Buildings which, by their structural form, will

tend to concentrate all their movements in one
location.
Finishes which if damaged will have a

significant effect on the heritage of the
building, e.g. cracks through frescoes.
It is a sign of the increasing confidence in this technology, based on extensive field

experience, that specifications with very tight, precise, limits on displacement can be
contemplated and specified. It is worthwhile therefore reproducing a few selected
extracts from the Crossrail specification for the extensive works currently underway,
which clearly demonstrate current UK thinking and practice :a)
The compensation grouting works comprise the injection of cementitious

grouts through Tubes Manchettes grout tubes (TAMs) installed from
shafts, adits, box excavations or from the ground surface. The purpose of the
compensation grouting treatment is to control settlement and associated
angular distortions of the structures and utilities to prevent the development of
unacceptable damage. The requirement for compensation grouting is driven by
the need to protect buildings and services and, in particular, sensitive Listed
buildings as a result of the reduced level of settlement and damage deemed
acceptable for these structures.
b) All instrumentation on structures and in the ground, detailed in the

Specification and Drawings, shall be installed and commissioned prior to the
commencement of any works which will produce ground movements including
the sinking of temporary shafts for the installation of the compensation
grouting facilities. The specified instrumentation is a minimum requirement;
the Contractor will propose any additional instrumentation that he requires to
control the Works, for acceptance by the Project Manager. In particular, the
Contractor shall review the Defect Surveys procured by the Project Manager
and propose the installation of instrumentation on all significant defects.



location.


Page 36 of 66
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Score




location.




Criteria
buildings
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Criteria
buildings
169
Listed Buildings

Score


169
Listed Buildings


Page 36 of 66
Criteria
buildings
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Score
169





location.




Page 36 of 66
Page 36 of 66
170
170
KC21.1302
Principle of Implementation
KC21.1302
The principle for implementation of compensation grouting is that, whenever

practicable, injections will be made concurrent with tunnel excavation to limit
movements to a practicable minimum. Ground movements generated by shaft
and box excavations are also to be mitigated by undertaking compensation
grouting during the excavation phase either concurrent with excavation or as
grout jacking episodes after each excavation phase.

3.2.5.1
3.2.5.1
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
The Works Information expressly requires the Contractor to provide a zone of

compensation grouting in the vicinity of the two stations extending over part of
the platform tunnels and associated station structures. The Contractor shall
provide this compensation grouting to limit ground settlements as far as is
practicable and in any event shall ensure the induced settlement complies with
the following Compensation Grouting Performance Requirements. The
settlement shall not produce: (i) a slope between any adjacent monitoring
points in excess of 1/1000 and (ii) a deflection ratio (/L) determined from any
three points along a building boundary wall (including party walls), or on
surface points above a utility, in excess of 1/2000. These values are subject to
modification where the grouting extent is complex and for buildings adjacent
to either piled buildings or those where mitigation measures are shown as
under development on the drawings.
3.2.3.5

3.2.3.5
Green, amber and red trigger values shall be set at volume losses equal to 80%,
100% and 125% of the specified volume loss limit respectively. A trigger will
be deemed to be exceeded if more than 2 of the settlement points record
settlement of 2mm or more greater than the calculated settlement trend for that
specific trigger at any stage of construction. These trigger levels are for
Construction Control and Design Verification; trigger levels for Asset
Protection will be given in the Employers I&M Plans.
3.3.2.3
3.3.2.3
The Contractor shall continue to undertake settlement monitoring after the

completion of excavation until it can be reliably demonstrated that the rate of
settlement has reduced to less than 2mm/year by a minimum of four readings
over a period of 12 months.
FIG. 21 Extracts from Crossrails Works Information and Specification for the
Control of Ground Movements
It order to effectively manage the compensation grouting operations and
compliance with this specification, it is necessary for the contractor to generate
contour plots of the predicted settlement for each individual phase of tunnelling
excavation - for example the pilot tunnel, and for each successive stage of tunnel
enlargement. This is vital because for a given structure the differential settlement
generated, whether hogging or sagging, may be worse for the partial settlement
generated by a single phase of excavation than may be suggested by an analysis of


Page 37 of 66
Page 37 of 66
170
KC21.1302

3.2.5.1
3.2.3.5
3.3.2.3
KC21.1302

3.2.5.1
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
170

3.2.3.5
3.3.2.3

Page 37 of 66
Page 37 of 66
171
the settlements generated by the whole of the works. This can be particularly evident
where a structure lies within the settlement trough of two or more tunnels which are
excavated different times.
It will be evident that the management of settlement mitigation is a complex and
time-consuming activity which cannot be managed by one party in isolation. It
requires the full participation and co-operation of all parties to the contract. It is also
evident that it order to meet the performance criteria, for a dynamic process such as
compensation grouting, it is impossible to consider the design and execution of the
works without a total integration of the monitoring system.
In addition to the performance criteria established for the compensation grouting,
tunnelling specifications typically set a limit on the allowable percentage face loss
for different elements of the works. On the face of it, this is clearly a sensible
approach since it targets the primary activity giving rise to face loss or relaxation,
and hence impacts directly upon the choice of tunnelling method and work
procedures adopted by the contractor.
The difficulty is that it is almost impossible, when compensation grouting is taking
place above, to verify the actual face loss, and whether or not the tunnelling
contractor has complied with the specified limit. This is because the percentage face
loss, the degree of surface settlement generated by this face loss, and the efficiency
factor for the grouting, are all assumptions, and it is very difficult if not impossible to
separate out these three activities. It is this reason that the various parties involved in
the works need to be bound together so that they work together as a single team with
a common goal.
Whatever the performance criteria specified, it is essential that the implication of
these criteria, and the trigger values associated with them are clearly understood by
and communicated to everyone associated with the works. In this regard it is always
beneficial to try to summarise the performance criteria in a graphical, visual manner
so that there is no confusion. The same benefit derives from ensuring that the
monitoring data presentation is focused upon the performance criteria and not just on
absolute values.
A visual representation of the trigger values established on a recent UK project
(Figure 22). Note that in order to allow more time to place grout in a controlled
manner, the contractor imposed on his operations more onerous trigger values than
had been set by the specification. The plan requires that as each trigger value is
approached, a deeper level of scrutiny is required on the data, with more senior
engineers and management notified and participating in the review of progress and
procedures.
a common goal.
absolute values.
procedures.
Page 38 of 66
171
a common goal.
absolute values.
procedures.
171
a common goal.
absolute values.
procedures.
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 38 of 66
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
171
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 38 of 66
Page 38 of 66
172
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
FIG. 22 An example of progressive remedial work in response to breach of

specified trigger values for total settlement
4.10 Monitoring
It is normal for the Client or Engineer to specify a basic level of monitoring, and
establish the principles for the monitoring regime. However, it is frequently the
responsibility of the contractor to ensure that the scope, design, sensitivity, and
management system of the monitoring proposals are adequate to allow the works to
be properly controlled, and to specify and/or provide any additional monitoring
which he thinks may be required in order to allow to him comply with the
specification.
If the monitoring is being provided by others, it is essential for the specialist subcontractor to have direct access to the monitoring database on a real-time basis for
the automatic monitoring, and on a daily basis for precise levelling.
The availability of accurate real-time information is of vital importance to
compensation grouting in closed proximity to adjacent structures, and it is essential
that a daily review meeting be convened between Engineer, Principal Contractor,
monitoring sub-contractor, and specialist contractor to jointly evaluate the latest
monitoring data prior to the specialist sub-contractor preparing a detailed programme
of injection for the following shift. Part of this evaluation will require a detailed
analysis of the progress of tunnel excavation, and the compensation grouting
programme.
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52

specification.
programme.
Page 39 of 66
Page 39 of 66
172

4.10 Monitoring
specification.
programme.
172
4.10 Monitoring
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
172

4.10 Monitoring
specification.
programme.
Page 39 of 66
Page 39 of 66
173
In addition to the surface instrumentation, designers and contractors should

consider at a very early stage the installation of subsurface instrumentation in the
form of extensometers or sub horizontal arrays of boreholes, containing chains of
electrolevels or IPIs. The purpose of these additional arrays is to provide much
greater sensitivity in the control of the grouting operation by identifying the onset of
relaxation at depth, both to assist in tracking the development of the settlement
trough across the project, and to observe any unwanted or excessive local
displacements induced by the grouting.
In UK practice the application of trigger values is a core feature of all settlement
mitigation works. These trigger values, whether based for example upon differential
settlement, angular deflection, or strain are essential in focusing the attention of all
parties on the dynamic aspect of the settlement and settlement mitigation, and they
form the basis for the review of data. The trigger values require some consultation
and agreement between the various parties. It is pointless having trigger values which
are just an alert that a threshold has been breached. The trigger value must be set at a
level which gives sufficient advance warning for the compensation grouting
contractor to have sufficient time to respond by increasing the scale and frequency of
injections.
On previous projects, the focus has been very much on the settlement limits rather
than the angular deflection or differential settlement, because it is relatively simple to
collect and disseminate this information to all parties. Monitoring techniques are
constantly developing, becoming more powerful and sophisticated. For the Crossrail
project it is expected that settlement data will be presented graphically in real time,
and/or as a daily contour plot highlighting not just the basic settlement contours, but
also in the form of a graphical contour plot of the gradients to identify as early as
possible any developing hotspots.
It is essential that monitoring data be interpreted by specialists familiar with the
characteristics of the instruments installed, and that the results of monitoring be
presented in a format which enables the key features to be rapidly understood by all
parties. This is an essential prerequisite to achieving a common understanding and
consensus as to the current situation, and the on-going program of settlement
mitigation. Failure to manage the analysis and presentation of monitoring data in a
timely manner can lead to either an inadequate or excessive level of response, and a
total loss of control of settlement.

injections.
Page 40 of 66
173

injections.
173

injections.
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 40 of 66
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
173
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 40 of 66
Page 40 of 66
174
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
FIG. 23a, b and c Examples of interactive real-time screen display of

structural movement
5
EXECUTION
For most compensation grouting operations there are a number of discrete phases
of work which need to be respected. The following chart is a very simplified
indication of the cadence of activities on a typical site, for a single shaft. Of key
importance to the planning of the works are the essential activities which need to be
fully completed prior to commencement of any excavation which might generate
relaxation. It should be noted that clients are increasingly looking for baseline
monitoring data to be collected for periods of the order of 3 to 12 months prior to any
construction activity, so that seasonal variations in the natural climate-induced
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
EXECUTION
Page 41 of 66
174

structural movement
5

structural movement
Page 41 of 66
EXECUTION
174
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
174

structural movement
EXECUTION
Page 41 of 66
Page 41 of 66
175
movements of structures can be recorded and fully understood prior to

commencement of the project.

Timescale - Project Level - Early planning and preparation
Typical basic construction sequence and timing
Monitoring
Monitoring
3-4 weeks
TaM Installation
n weeks
1-3 weeks
Soil recompaction / stabilisation

Site presence
FIG. 24 Typical sequence of compensation grouting activity

Drilling
5.1
Although very much a secondary operation there are several issues to consider
when planning and executing the drilling operation.
Access to the target area for compensation grouting is often at distances of up to
60m to 80m. The Clients scheme for Crossrail envisages horizontal drilling with a
high degree of accuracy, 1/80 over distances of up to 80m. This onerous criteria is
intended to ensure an adequate density of injection ports at the distal end of the
borehole array. Directional drilling is expensive and difficult to execute from shafts
where the diameter is often a small as 4 to 4.5m. The drilling design and
methodology therefore has to be very carefully considered in order to allow the
accuracy of grout placement required beneath individual foundation elements. These
drilling distances frequently mean the use of high flow and pressure in the flushing
medium. There have been several occasions where these pressures have led to
unwanted heave in the very structures which the contractor was trying to protect. For
accuracy, and to enable drilling to be executed with the minimum flush pressure and
volume, every effort should be made to facilitate the task of drilling wherever
possible by installing and carefully locating sufficient shafts so that the drilling
distances can be kept to a moderate length - ideally not more than 40 to 50m
maximum.
Active compensation

Drilling
maximum.
Page 42 of 66
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
175

Monitoring
Monitoring
3-4 weeks
TaM Installation
TaM Installation
1-2 weeks
Pre consolidation
Pre consolidation
< 1 weeks
Predictive injection
n weeks
Tunnelling / Excavation
Active compensation
n weeks
1-3 weeks
Site presence

Drilling
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
1-3 weeks
Site presence
175

n weeks
Page 42 of 66
n weeks
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Active compensation
< 1 weeks
n weeks
1-2 weeks
Pre consolidation
< 1 weeks
5.1
3-4 weeks
TaM Installation
1-2 weeks
Pre consolidation
5.1
175
5.1
maximum.
Active compensation
3-4 weeks
1-2 weeks
< 1 weeks
n weeks
n weeks
1-3 weeks
Site presence

Drilling
maximum.
Page 42 of 66
Page 42 of 66
176
5.2
Grout Plant Selection And Installation
5.2
In the area of any given tunnel excavation face, provided the tunnelling operations
are executed to minimise face loss, the volume of grout required to be injected within
a 24-hour period is usually small, of the order of a few m3. However, with the
boreholes radiating out to length of up to 60 to 80 m from a single shaft, the area
covered can be enormous, involving very many structures and utilities. On a complex
project it is therefore possible that several excavation faces may generate a
requirement for compensation grouting simultaneously from within the same shaft.
Since compensation grouting is a dynamic exercise, carried out when excavations
are progressing and structures are subject to continuous displacement, it is therefore
vital to ensure that the grouting facilities at each shaft location are adequate to meet
the mixing and injection capacities required for all the tunnel faces, and sufficient to
provide backup capacity in the event of a breakdown. It should be remembered also
that settlement may continue in an area long after a given tunnel face has passed, so
that the number of areas requiring compensation may exceed the number of working
faces in the tunnel.
Cleaning manchette pipes at lengths of up to 60 to 80 m is a very onerous and
backbreaking task. Upto 60% of a 24-hour cycle can be required to be spent just in
cleaning the manchettes, and contractors are strongly advised to have on hand a highpressure jetting pump with a rotating head in order to thoroughly scour the manchette
after each phase of grouting. Failure to do this may lead to blockage or nonaccessibility of a critical group of manchettes when a given foundation starts to
settle.
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Page 43 of 66
Page 43 of 66
176
Where there is a risk of encountering granular material along the length of the
borehole, any method employing augers should be avoided at all costs as this may
lead to the over excavation during drilling, thereby removing ground support in the
short-term, and potentially leading to an excessive thickness of sleeve grout around
the manchette which could impede future operations.
In weak soils, or even in stiff cohesively soils where drilling in close proximity to
foundation bearing elements, it may be necessary to consider the use of a polymer as
the flushing medium to avoid softening or erosion of the soil with water. In close
proximity to utilities, air flush should be avoided.
There is always the risk that an intensive drilling operation may in itself generate
settlement in the short-term, and it is therefore necessary to have on hand the means
to carry out localized compensation to address this issue. The risk can be greatly
alleviated by phasing the works such that drilling is not concentrated within any
given area, but sequenced so that the sleeve grout around an individual borehole is
fully rigid before another borehole is installed within a radius of 4 to 5 m.
Finally, it is often not so critical if a borehole deviates from its planned alignment,
provided this is not excessive. However to execute targeted grouting below
individual foundation elements it is essential to understand exactly where the
injection ports are located, and for this reason boreholes over a length of 30 to 35 m
should in every case the surveyed, their as-built alignment plotted accurately on a
foundation plan of the structure, and the location of each injection port indicated in
relation to the building footings.
5.2
settle.
settle.
176
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
176
5.2
settle.
Page 43 of 66
Page 43 of 66
177
It should be remembered also that the manchette pipes themselves are subject to
distortion of alignment as a result of the tunnelling induced settlements, and even the
compensation grouting itself. Where the injection work is likely to be intensive, or of
long duration, designers should specify the use of steel manchette pipes as this will
give increased durability and facilitate the cleaning operations.
In areas where high ground bearing pressures are foreseen, where active
compensation grouting may be prevented for considerable periods due to the
presence of an exclusion zone, designers should consider the use of steel manchettes
which have the ability to serve both for injection, and at the same time act as a rigid
passive strengthening element, similar to pipe roofing.
Finally, where there are intermittent phases of compensation grouting over a long
duration it is important to ensure the functionality of the system at all times by
regularly re-visiting the manchettes and cracking the sleeve grout with water or
bentonite, so that there is no delay in the event of any requirement for rapid
intervention.
5.3
5.3
Pre-Conditioning Phase
5.4
Active Compensation Grouting
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
intervention.
The pre-conditioning phase is carried out prior to tunnelling, or any other

construction process which might give rise to settlement. The grouting is intended to
induce a slight uplift or response in adjacent structures likely to be affected by the
tunnel works. A low radius of action for the grout is not required, since the aim is
simply to check the system and the ground reaction, and prime the ground ready for
subsequent active compensation grouting. This operation reduces the response time
during active compensation by ensuring that time is not wasted at critical periods in
improving the competence and bearing capacity of the virgin soil to enable it to
transfer the uplift effects of grouting to the foundations.
The initial surface response required by current specifications is generally limited
to a range of from 1 - 3 mm. Although it may give comfort to see physical
displacement during preconditioning as evidence that the ground is fully primed,
there are occasions when this may be impracticable or inadvisable. Where there are
heavily loaded footings or facades weighing many thousands of tons, it may be
extremely time-consuming and costly to generate significant heave. It may also pose
considerable risk to shallow utilities and infrastructure. Under these circumstances it
may be necessary to use the grout injection records as a measure of when the ground
has been sufficiently primed.
This phase of injection is carried out in parallel with the tunnelling operation and is
aimed at protecting the structure in real-time from settlements induced by the tunnel
excavation. The extent and timing of injection during this phase relies upon
information received from the real-time and other monitoring data provided by the
Clients instrumentation sub-contractor.
Where the system is purely observational, active compensation grouting may be
characterised by a relatively continuous programme for a short duration, in the form
of regular daily injections. It is extremely rare that injections need to take place for
more than a few hours in each 24-hour cycle. In fact, it is often considered
Page 44 of 66
Page 44 of 66
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52

5.4
177
177
intervention.
intervention.
5.3
5.3

5.4
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
177

5.4
Page 44 of 66
Page 44 of 66
178
5.5
Post Excavation Re-Compaction
5.5
This phase is carried out after completion of the tunnel excavation and the
construction of the permanent lining. The general aim is to re-compact the ground in
areas of residual relaxation, to prevent further settlements in the long-term. This long
term relaxation is generally a function of both the slow dissipation of the elevated
pore pressures generated by the grouting activity, and by the geometry of the
borehole array, which may be at some distance from the source of relaxation. For the
current Crossrail works in London the Client has specified that the specialist
contractor must remain on site with full capability for a minimum of three months
after cessation of tunnelling work, unless the contractor is able to demonstrate to the
client that the long-term relaxation has levelled off to an acceptable level. Only at
this point may the contractor de-commission and backfill the manchette pipes and
demobilize.
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Page 45 of 66
Page 45 of 66
178
advantageous to carry out active compensation on a single shift basis, generally

dayshift, when there are more supervisory staff present on duty. This then allows the
background settlement trend to be monitored during the second shift, the data
collated and interpreted, ready for the all-party daily review meeting at
commencement of the dayshift.
Notwithstanding this regime, most specifications require the contractor to provide
for a full grouting crew to be present at all times whilst tunnel excavation is
progressing, even if on standby, and for a crew on emergency callout at any time
during the project in the event of settlement developing.
The daily review meeting is vital to ensuring adequate cooperation between all
parties on site, and is principally where the results of the previous days grouting are
reviewed against the response of the structure, and the advance of the tunnelling
excavation. Based upon the overnight monitoring information an informed decision
can be made of whether or not it is safe and/or necessary to grout during the current
shift without risk to the tunnelling operations, underground structures, or utilities.
Where there is a predictive element to the compensation grouting, grouting
programs may be executed more regularly, in anticipation to the actual rate of tunnel
advance and the volume of face loss, rather than in response to any observed
movement surface or on affected structures.
A key feature is the managing of any static or transient exclusion zones which may
have been specified in the contract. Such exclusion zones may be a defined physical
area around the advancing tunnel face, or there may be built into the contract an
override whereby the actual strength of the tunnel lining, in the case of sprayed
concrete, is measured daily and taken into consideration. Much will depend upon
how the primary and secondary linings of the tunnel are designed. In order to protect
sprayed concrete linings from any accidental oversight in grouting program or error
of measurement of the SCL strength, linings are designed to take full overburden
pressures, applied with a factor of safety, such that surface recovery or heave would
be generated before there is a risk of the collapse of the SCL lining.
5.5
demobilize.
demobilize.
178

Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40


Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
178
5.5
demobilize.
Page 45 of 66
Page 45 of 66
5.6
179
Process Control And Management
5.6
Every contractor will have their own procedures, equipment, and analytical
methods for managing their injection programs. Over the last 30 years, therefore, and
in particular over the last 15 years with the advent of powerful desktop computers,
contractors and equipment manufacturers have been developing operational control
measures for grouting operations from the point of view of practicing geotechnical
engineers. With their understanding of the principles of both geotechnical design
and practical grouting technology, contractors have sought to develop processes and
equipment which allow their grouting engineers and designers total control over the
injection processes. The key element of this development has been the development
of an unrivalled capacity for the handling and analysis of processing and
geotechnical data, and the presentation of such data in a manner which can be readily
understood and utilised by site operatives and engineers.
The core elements of such systems are :
A series of technical developments in the design and construction of grouting

pumps and equipment, enabling the automation of the pump performance
throughout the injection process, to both control and record the injection
process in real-time.
Software for the design and control of grout injections, for the recording and
interpretation of data, and for the presentation of interpretive reports and
production reports.
Closer integration of construction data and monitoring data to track the
specific effects of each element of the excavation and settlement mitigation
works.
Transparent control and management procedures with open exchange of data
between all parties. It is becoming increasingly common for consulting
engineers and clients to insist upon terminals in their own offices, often
remote from site, to allow them free access to observe the progress of the
works and the status of affected structures.
Since all company systems vary, in order to provide some understanding of how far
these developments have taken the industry, included below is a brief summary of
the various software packages employed within my own Group. Within my own
Group, the combination of the two areas of development outlined above have
resulted in a series of technical modules which are used in various combinations
depending upon the requirements of individual work sites. For compensation
grouting, a number of these modules provide essential tools for controlling the
process :-
5.6
The core elements of such systems are :-

production reports.
works.
process :-
179
The core elements of such systems are :179A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
179
Page 46 of 66
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
5.6

production reports.
works.
process :-
Page 46 of 66
179
The core elements of such systems are :179A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40

production reports.
works.
process :-
Page 46 of 66
Page 46 of 66
180
180
TABLE No. 3 An example of computer assisted design and control software

employed in managing compensation grouting works

Activity
Function
Module
Activity
Function
Enpasol
Drilling
Monitor drilling parameters in real-time and produce a

detailed soil geotechnical profile
Enpasol
Drilling

Castaur
Drilling &
Grouting
3-D modelling of the drilling arrays with respect to the

anticipated zone grouting
Castaur
Drilling &
Grouting

Sphinx
Drilling &
Grouting
Design and programming of grouting parameters,

preparation of electronic grouting instructions from the
computer piloting of the grout pumps, injection data records
and database analysis
Sphinx
Drilling &
Grouting

Spice
Grouting
Automated piloting of the grout pumps in accordance with

the injection parameters generated in Sphinx
Spice
Grouting

Cognac
Grouting
Detailed design of compensation grouting injection

programmes based upon the tunnelling parameters and rate
of advance, the predicted GEC, and the location of the
injection ports in relation to the settlement trough, source of
relaxation, and foundation geometry
Cognac
Grouting

Scan 3D
Grouting
Graphical display of grout injection data for rapid

interpretation
Scan 3D
Grouting

interpretation
Visu Spice
Grouting
Graphical interface indicating in real-time borehole array,

the current point of injection, and the real-time monitoring
data
Visu Spice
Grouting

data
Geoscope
Web
Monitoring
Web based monitoring station where all project monitoring

data can be accessed and reviewed at any time, management
of figure values for individual structures, and interface with
the injection software to automatically halt any injection in
response to predetermined criteria.
Geoscope
Web
Monitoring

Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Module
Whilst the process control procedures may vary from company to company, the
core elements are common to most companies working in this field as they are
essential elements to safely managing settlement mitigation works.
5.7
Reporting
5.7
Even for a simple project involving a single structure, but especially for a major
project involving different contractors working on different Lots, it is essential to
establish a common, and commonly understood system of reporting for all parties.
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
180
Page 47 of 66
Page 47 of 66
180
Activity
Function
Enpasol
Drilling

Castaur
Drilling &
Grouting

Sphinx
Drilling &
Grouting

Spice
Grouting

Cognac
Grouting

Scan 3D
Grouting

interpretation
Visu Spice
Grouting

data
Geoscope
Web
Monitoring

Reporting
Module
Activity
Function
Enpasol
Drilling

Castaur
Drilling &
Grouting

Sphinx
Drilling &
Grouting

Spice
Grouting

Cognac
Grouting

Scan 3D
Grouting

interpretation
Visu Spice
Grouting

data
Geoscope
Web
Monitoring

Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Module
5.7


5.7
Reporting
Reporting
Page 47 of 66
Page 47 of 66
181
Particularly for the client, it would be extremely difficult and extremely risky
undertaking to try to manage a project if different contractors had their own
proprietary monitoring and reporting system, because under these circumstances it
could lead to significant data being overlooked because a particular settlement trend
or feature was presented with different emphasis from one part of the project to
another.
Information should be freely available to all parties associated with the works if
full and open co-operation is to be guaranteed. In particular the output from the daily
all-party review meeting should be immediately available not only for individuals
attending the meeting, but for the engineers and operatives in the field carrying out
works. A system of daily briefings, with an adequate handover package to the
following shift must be established from the outset. If the reporting system is not in
place and fully formed at the start of the project it could lead to considerable
difficulties if any significant changes to the system have to be made on stream during
the works, and it is very easy to lose continuity in terms of a feel for the project and
the developing conditions for each structure.
FIG. 25 Example of a daily synopsis report prepared for the all-party daily
review meeting
Page 48 of 66
review meeting
181
another.
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 48 of 66
181
another.
review meeting
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
181
another.
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
review meeting
Page 48 of 66
Page 48 of 66
182
FIG. 26 Graphical plot of injection volumes and pressures for each injection
port, which were targeted below ground bearing footings
At daily progress meetings it is common for the all of the contracting teams tunnelling and civil engineering monitoring, and geotechnical / settlement mitigation,
to report their activities and obtain clearance to proceed. There is often a huge
amount of base data particularly for the monitoring, to be collected, synthesised,
analysed, and summarised prior to the review meeting.
The collection and presentation of this data is a key role on all compensation
grouting works, demanding a high level of skill and experience, and the level of time
and resource required for this task should not be underestimated, particularly when
tunnelling operations are running 24/7 or 24/5, and settlement mitigation works are
responding in real time to a dynamic and developing source of relaxation at depth.
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Page 49 of 66
Page 49 of 66
182
All reporting needs to be concise, clear, and unambiguous. With a dynamic process
engineers and operatives in the field do not have the time to waste in trying to
independently interpret lengthy or tabulated daily reports. The daily executive
summary report, produced after the review meeting need not be more than one two
pages for each activity , and should wherever possible contain visual/graphic
presentation of just the essential data.
182
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
182
Page 49 of 66
Page 49 of 66
183
FIG. 27 Daily reports visually displaying latest real time data as typically
recorded at start of shift. Both are screen plots of active screens which can be
interrogated to display time -settlement data for trend and anomaly analysis.
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 50 of 66
Page 50 of 66
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
183
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
183
183
Page 50 of 66
Page 50 of 66
184
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
FIG. 28 Synopsis plot of preconditioning phase injections , which identified at

the southern end of this site an extensive area of weaker material within the
London Clay. Each box represents an injection port. The size of the box is
proportional to the grout take and the colour indicates the final average
injection pressure.
6
SELECTED CASE HISTORIES
Compensation grouting works are currently under consideration or in progress in a

number of countries, but there is a lack of detail case histories as a guide to those
entering is field for the first time. The recent paper by Mair, Viggiani, and Menkiti
refers to a number of historical projects including the Channel Tunnel rail link CTRL
220, Jubilee Line Contract 102 at Big Ben, the Treasury Building, Cab Road and
Kings Cross in London, and Naples and Bologna. From this and other papers
referenced herein it is possible to appreciate the very wide range of applications for
this technology, whether for rapid TBM excavation or much slower hand dug and
backhoe excavations, and the very wide range of ground conditions in which they
can be employed, from stiff cohesive soils, through alluvial sands and gravels to
brecciated limestone.
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Page 51 of 66
Page 51 of 66
184

injection pressure.
6


184

injection pressure.
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
184

injection pressure.

Page 51 of 66
Page 51 of 66
6.1
185
Bologna Tunnels
6.1
60.1
60.1
1.5m
Treatmentt zone
4.4m
3.0m
yers of
Two lay
curved TAMs
T
42.0
10m
Scale
3.0m
42.0
10m
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Tunnel 1
FIG. 30 Grouting with relatively fluid cement bentonite slurry (w

w/c ratio 0.78 )
in granular deposits to maintain the structure with a differential settlement of
1:1000. The triggger value to initiate injection was set at 1:3000.

w/c ratio 0.78 )
Page 52 of 66
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
185
Bologna Tunnels
6.1
60.1
60.1
59.4
57.7
1.5m
yers of
Two lay
curved TAMs
T
1.5m
Treatmentt zone
4.4m
Existing Naples-Milan
onry
rail link on maso
viaduct
Temporary
pit
59.4
57.7
3.0m
yers of
Two lay
curved TAMs
T
42.0
10m
Scale
185
Bologna Tunnels
onry
rail link on maso
viaduct
Temporary
pit
Tunnel 2
FIG. 29 Bologna Tunneels ( after Mair, Viggiani, Menkiti ) - Directtional drilling

executed from an open cut trench at surface to target an otherwise inaccessible
compensation groutingg zone up to 60m distant. Note the close prooximity to the
tunnelling works.
Page 52 of 66
Treatmentt zone
4.4m
3.0m
42.0
10m
Scale
Tunnel 1
Tunnel 2
Tunnel 1

tunnelling works.

w/c ratio 0.78 )
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
4.4m
Tunnel 2

tunnelling works.
Treatmentt zone
Scale
Tunnel 1
6.1
59.4
57.7
1.5m
yers of
Two lay
curved TAMs
T
onry
rail link on maso
viaduct
Temporary
pit
59.4
57.7
185
Bologna Tunnels
onry
rail link on maso
viaduct
Temporary
pit
Tunnel 2

tunnelling works.

w/c ratio 0.78 )
Page 52 of 66
Page 52 of 66
186
Cab Road, Waterlooo Road, London
6.2
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
6.2
FIG. 31 Complex geometry of new-build tunnels below existing piiers and piles.
Structural settlemen
nts were corrected by a combination of und
derpinning,
ground consolidation
n by grouting, flat jacks incorporated into piers, and
compensatioon grouting in a highly complex constructioon
Toulon
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
186
6.2
Toulon
Page 53 of 66
Page 53 of 66
186
6.2
derpinning,
6.3
derpinning,
6.3
Toulon
6.3
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
186
derpinning,
6.3
Toulon
Page 53 of 66
Page 53 of 66
187
FIG. 32a & b Multiple borehole arrays drilled through highly variable strata
below a ground-bearing residential structure. The injections to control
differential settlement were controlled by electro-levels installed in the
basement, within the specified limits of 1/833 for heave and 1/2000 for
settlement.
6.4
Great Northern Hotel, London
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
settlement.
6.4
FIG. 33 Plot of recovery of extensive settlement, induced by open-cut

excavation, and recovery under compensation grouting operations (periods
highlighted in red), with partial lossof recovery due to pore pressure dissipation
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
6.4
Page 54 of 66
187
settlement.
187
settlement.
6.4


Page 54 of 66
187

Page 54 of 66
Page 54 of 66
188
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
FIG. 34 Example of compensation grouting array employed pre-tunnelling to

selectively rotate a structure which had been subject to displacement arising
from an adjacent open cut excavation on a different contract - indicating the
degree of precision which is achievable by a programme of targeted, well
controlled injection. Red figures are pre-injection, blue figures are post.
6.5
Madrid Metro
Madrid
Use of FE analysis to predict the effect of rigid jet grout

elements and to refine the design-control feed-back loop.
-3.000
-6.000
-9.000
-12.000
-15.000
-18.000
Deformed Mesh
Extreme total displacement 1,41 m
(displacements scaled up 2,00 times)
FIG. 35 Stress isolation/ capture by rigid element modelled in Plaxis
-3.000
-6.000
-9.000
-12.000
-15.000
-18.000
Deformed Mesh
188
Madrid Metro
Use of rigid elements designed to absorb stress and to isolate structures from
displacements. Plaxis was used to design a rigid element as an alternative or
supplement to active compensation grouting.
Madrid

Page 55 of 66

6.5
Madrid
0.000
Page 55 of 66

0.000
-3.000
-6.000
-9.000
-12.000
-15.000
-18.000
Deformed Mesh
188
Madrid Metro
0.000
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52

6.5
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
188

6.5
Madrid Metro
Madrid

0.000
-3.000
-6.000
-9.000
-12.000
-15.000
-18.000
Deformed Mesh
Page 55 of 66
Page 55 of 66
6.6
189
Antwerp ( After Dekker &Otterbein)
6.6
FIG. 36 Antwerp Station - Innovative hybrid solution with jacked tubes

providing reaction for compensation grouting arrays at shallow depth below
historic station, and a vault for the new tunnel excavation below. Heavy
loadings and complex geometry reduced the efficiency factor, expressed in this
case as volume of induced heave to volume of grout, to 11%
6.7
Crossrail Bond Street Station
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
6.6
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
189

6.7
Page 56 of 66
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
6.6
189

6.7
For the current works at Bond Street Station in London, extensive preliminary
design is being undertaken to examine the feasibility of installing borehole arrays
through a highly complex network of major utilities and existing infrastructure to
compensate below pad foundations, some of which merge with the utilities,
demonstrating the absolute necessity of 3-D modelling and detailed foundation
surveys. Borehole modelling is required to accommodate the allowable envelope of
borehole deviation. The complexity of the juxtaposition and interaction of
underground and surface structures to be protected, each with their own individual
specification for settlement limits and allowable damage, will entail a complex
design incorporating compensation grouting at various elevations, installed from
dedicated drilling shafts and galleries, passive support from heavy duty
compensation grouting boreholes, pipe roofing, and ground treatment. It is likely that
directional drilling will be required for many holes where sub-surface geometry
requires high precision drilling over distances of up to 70m.
Page 56 of 66

6.7
189
Page 56 of 66
Page 56 of 66
190
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
FIG. 37 Bond St Station - Avon House

6.8
Crossrail Project C510 Liverpool Street Station
6.8
This example demonstrates the increasingly demanding requirements currently

being made of compensation grouting, to mitigate settlements from tunnels to be
excavated through and between bearing piles, and below major structures, utilities,
and infrastructure.
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Page 57 of 66
190

6.8
Page 57 of 66

and infrastructure.
190

and infrastructure.
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
190
6.8


and infrastructure.
Page 57 of 66
Page 57 of 66
191
FIGS. 38a & b, Crossrail - Liverpool St Station

Figure 38b above is a case where settlement limitation measures will require highly
detailed design and analysis. The specified zone of sub-horizontal drilling for the
injection pipe installation (highlighted in red) is required to serve for protection of a
highly sensitive and relatively light Victorian era brick tunnel (part of the London
Underground network) which is surrounded by utilities, and the very heavy stone
facade of a prestigious office structure, the ground bearing facade of which is
retained by stainless steel dowels from the more recently stripped-out and piled
interior. The new station tunnels passing below the LUL and Post Office tunnels will
be constructed first, followed by a new passenger walkway tunnel way located only
9m below the foundations of the facade and LUL tunnel. The solution will require a
high attention to face loss control during tunnelling, with the Client seeking to limit
face loss to 1% . Further protection will probably require both passive stiffening by
pipe roofing, active compensation grouting, and structural support to the light well.
6.9
London Jubilee Line - protection to Big Ben clock tower
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
6.9
Page 58 of 66
191
191
6.9
A highly classic case history of the protection of an iconic national structure, - by a

combination of observational and predictive compensation grouting and real time
monitoring, requiring extreme care in the design, planning, and construction of the
diaphragm wall box and its internal support measures for a very large station box
excavation. The Big Ben tower already had a slight tilt, generating critical soil
stresses critical under the eastern edge of the timber foundations. The protection
measures included low level tunnelled struts constructed prior to full excavation of

Page 58 of 66
6.9

191

Page 58 of 66
Page 58 of 66
192
FIG. 39 a & 39b Westminster

W
Station, Jubilee Line Extension
n, London
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
192
the box, and equipped witth jacks to allow for lateral expansion, large diameter
d
jacked
pipe arch, and extensive active
a
compensation grouting.
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
d
jacked
a

W
n, London
Page 59 of 66
Page 59 of 66
192

W
n, London
d
jacked
a
d
jacked
a
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
192

W
n, London
Page 59 of 66
Page 59 of 66
193
FUTURE DEVELOPMENT
In the future we may confidently expect
FUTURE DEVELOPMENT
continued detailed research into the fundamental soil mechanics principles

governing the generation of settlement by construction activity
the development of advanced tunnelling techniques which minimise the
potential face loss
the development improved monitoring equipment and techniques, particularly
for subsurface monitoring, including the use of optic fibre strain measurement
and improved means of graphical presentation
the development of injection equipment, design and control systems, and
processes to improve the targeted placement of grout
the development of more sophisticated contractual arrangements and
performance specifications which reflect the shared responsibility and risk in
delivering complex works with the minimum risk to public safety
improvements in evaluating and managing project technical and commercial
risk
continuing increases in the market for tunnelling work in congested urban
environments, requiring adventurous and demanding construction techniques
FIG. 40 Modern grout injection station with computer controlled pumps and a
project monitoring database terminal for trigger alarm notification and
automatic pump arrest
We must however be wary of trying to push the technology too far, or too fast. We
must always consider alternative processes wherever possible which might deliver
either increases in safety, or deliver the same level of safety and protection more cost
effectively.
The industry must not be tempted to consider compensation grouting as the
primary means of protection of structures. The primary means of protecting
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
effectively.
Page 60 of 66
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
193
FUTURE DEVELOPMENT
193
FUTURE DEVELOPMENT

potential face loss
risk
effectively.
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40

potential face loss
risk
Page 60 of 66
193

potential face loss
risk
effectively.
Page 60 of 66
Page 60 of 66
194
194
structures must always be the selection of tunnelling method, and the quality of the
personnel, equipment, and work procedures employed. Compensation grouting
should be considered is a valuable and important secondary protective measure, to be
employed where physical constraints on the tunnelling and the civil engineering
works may require an additional level of safeguard to ensure the safety of the works
and the public
and the public
We must also not consider this technology as the easy option to be wish dreamed
in-place, solving all potential problems by transferring the construction and safety
risks to the specialist geotechnical contractor alone. On a given project the safest,
most appropriate, but not necessarily least expensive, solution may lie within realms
of the structural or tunnelling design and construction.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
Allard, A.J., sand Goldney R.,P(1998) Jubilee Line Extension: Waterloo Station
ticket hall construction, Proceedings of the ICE Structures and Buildings,
Volume 128, Issue3, pages 274-281
Attewell, P.B., Yeates, J. & Selby, A.R. (1986). Soil movements induced by
tunnelling and their effects on pipelines and structures. Blackie and Son Ltd,
UK.
Baker, W.H., McPherson, H.H., Cording, E.J. (1980). Compaction routing to limit
ground movements: instrumented case history evaluation of the Bolton Hill
Subway Tunnels, Baltimore, MD. Technical Report, U.S. Dept. of
Transportation.
Bernatzik, W. Anheben des Kraftwerkes Hessigheim am Neckar mit Hilfe van
Zementunterpressungen, Der Bauingenieur, Heft 4, 1951.
Boeck, T.H. and Scheller, P. 4. RohreElbtunnel Sicherung der Bebauung am
Nordhang der Elbe. Baugrundtagung in Hannover, 2000, Deutsche Gesellschaft
fur Geotechnike.V.
Boone, S.J., Artigiani, E., Shirlaw, J.N., Ginanneschi, R., Leinala, T. &
Kochmanova, N. (2005). Use of ground conditioning agents for earth pressure
balance machine tunnelling. Proc. AFTES International Congress, Cambery.
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Page 61 of 66
194
and the public
8
Through continuous development of design, construction techniques, monitoring

systems, and grouting technology industry has responded to the challenges of urban
development by evolving a new field of application in the field of grouting which is
already advanced to a high level of sophistication, and which is gaining increasing
acceptance world-wide.
In order for this methodology to reach its full potential it is essential that clients,
engineering organisations, and contractors are generous in sharing their experience in
delivering compensation grouting projects, competently, professionally and with the
highest regard to the safety of the public and their employees.
9
Page 61 of 66
REFERENCES
UK.
Transportation.
fur Geotechnike.V.
194
REFERENCES
UK.
Transportation.
fur Geotechnike.V.
and the public
8

Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40

Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40

REFERENCES
UK.
Transportation.
fur Geotechnike.V.
Page 61 of 66
Page 61 of 66
195
Borghi, F.X. (2006). Lubrication and Soil conditioning in pipe jacking and
tunnelling.PhD Thesis, Cambridge University.
Borghi, F.X. &Mair, R.J. (2006) Soil Conditioning for EPB tunnelling machines in
London ground conditions. Tunnels and Tunnelling International. September
2006, 18-20.
Burland, J., B., Simpson, B. and St John, H., D. (1979) Movements around
excavations in London Clay. Invited National Paper. Proc 7th European Conf.
on SMFE, Brighton, I, pp 13-29.
Burland, J.B. (1995). Assessment of risk damage to buildings due to tunnelling and
excavation. Proc. 1st Int. Conf. Earthquake Geot. Eng., IS-Tokyo 95
Burland, J.B. (2001). Results of the research. Ch. 21 of Building Response to
tunnelling 0 case studies from construction of the Jubilee Line Extension,
London. Volume 1: Projects and methods. Burland, J.B., Standing, J.R., and
F.M. Jardine eds. (CIRIA Special Publication 200, CIRIA and Thomas Telford),
pp 315-344.
Carayol, S. (1998).Linjection de compensation assistee par ordinateur.Travaux No.
748, pp. 49-53.
Carayol, S (1997) Settlement Monitoring and Compensation Grouting (1997),
Tunnels et Ouvrages Souterrains No. 140, March/Apr 1997.
Chambosse, G. and Otterbein, R. Central Station Antwerp Compensation Grouting
under high loaded foundations.
Chen, X.L., Liu, Y.H., Cao, W.H., HE, Z.F. (1998). Protection of the former
observatory during construction of the Yan An Dong Lu Tunnel. Tunnels and
Metropolises. Negro Jr. & Ferreira (eds), 1083-1088.
Dimmock, P. and Mair, R.J. (2006b) Estimating volume loss for open face tunnels in
London Clay. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, Geotechnical
Engineering, Vol 160(1) pp 13-22
1
European Research Project COSMUS (1996-2000), led by Soletanche Bachy,;
Tractebel, Gltzl, Cea-Leti, Cambridge University, EPFL
Gabener, Raabe and Wilms.Einstatz van Soilfracturing zur Setzungsminderungbeim
Tunnelvortrieb, Taschenbuch fur den Tunnelbau, 1989, Deutsche Gesellsschaft
fur Erd- und Grundbau, Verlag Gluckauk GmbH, Essen
Gay M., Rippentrop, G., Hansmire, W., Romero, V. (1999). Tunnelling on the Tren
Urano Project, San Juan, Puerto Rico ; 1999 Rapid Excavation and Tunnelling
Conference Proceedings.
Gens, A., Di Mariano, A., Gesto, J.M. & Schwartz, H (2006). Ground movement
control in the construction of a new metro line in Barcelona. In Geotechnical
aspects of underground construction in soft ground ) eds Bakker, K.J., Bezuijen,
A., Broere, W. and Kwast, E.A.) pp 389-395. Leiden: Taylor &
Francis/Balkema.
Hamelin, J.P., Lavene, L., La Fonta, J.G. (2000), Compensation Grouting Under
Real-Time Monitoring, Rio Piedras Project, San Juan, Puerto Rico, Proceedings
og the 25th Annual Members Conference and Eighth International Conference
and Exposition,2000, New York NY DFI 2000 International Conference.
Harris, D.I., Mair, R.J., Love, J.P., Taylor, R.N. and Henderson, T.O. (1994)
Observations of ground and structure movements for compensation grouting
2006, 18-20.
pp 315-344.
748, pp. 49-53.
1
Francis/Balkema.
Page 62 of 66
195
2006, 18-20.
pp 315-344.
748, pp. 49-53.
1
Francis/Balkema.
195
2006, 18-20.
pp 315-344.
748, pp. 49-53.
1
Francis/Balkema.
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 62 of 66
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
195
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 62 of 66
Page 62 of 66
196
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Page 63 of 66
Page 63 of 66
196
during tunnel construction at Waterloo Station. Geotechnique Vol 44 No.4, 691713

Harris, D.I., Menkiti, C.O., Pooley, A.J. & Stephenson, J.A. (1996).Construction of
low-level tunnels below Waterloo Station with compensation grouting for the
Jubilee Line Extension. Geotechnical Aspects of Underground Construction in
Soft Ground, Mair& Taylor (eds) 1996 Balkema, Rotterdam. ISBN 90 5410 856
8
Harris, D.I., Mair, R.J., Burland, J.B. and Standing, J. (1999) Compensation grouting
to control tilt of Big Ben Clock Tower. Geotechnical Aspects of Underground
Construction in Soft Ground, Kusakabe, Fujita & Miyazaki (eds), 2000
Balkema, Rotterdam, ISBN 90 5809 1 066
Harris, D. (2001). Protective measures, Chapter 11 in: Building response to
tunnelling case studies from construction of the Jubilee Line Extension,
London, Vol.1 Projects and Methods. Thomas Telford, London, 135-176
Harris, D. (2001). The Big Ben Clock Tower and the Palace of Westminster, Chapter
28 in: Building response to tunnelling. Case studies from construction of the
Jubilee Line Extension, London, Vol.2 Case Studies. Thomas Telford, London,
453-508.
Kettle, C., Totty, R., McLachlan, R. (2008) Kings Cross Station Re-Development:
Passive and Active Mitigation of Tunnelling Induced Settlement, Proceedings
of 33rd Annual and 11th International Conference on Deep Foundations, 2008,
New York, NY, USA.
Kimmance, J.P., Linney, L.F. & Stapleton, M.J. (1995). Potential of grouting method
to prevent and compensate for tunnelling induced settlement of London Clay.
Engineering Geology of Construction, Geological Society. Special publication
No. 10, pp 289-297.
Komiya, K., Soga, K., Akagi, H., Jafari, M.R. & Bolton, M.D. (2001). Soil
consolidation associated with grouting during shield tunnelling in soft clayey
ground. Geotechnique 51, No.10, 835-846.
Kovacevic, N Edmonds, H.E., Mair, R.J., Higgins, K.G. & Potts, D.M.
(1996).Numerical modeling of the NATM and compensation grouting trials at
Redcross Way. Proc. Int. Symp. On Geotechnical Aspects of Underground
Construction in Soft Ground. London (eds. R.J. Mair and R.N.Taylor), Balkema,
pp 553-559.
Kudella and Gudehus, Bodenverdrangungdurch Einpressen von Fluiden, Vortrage
der Baugrundtagung in Dresden, 1992, Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Erd- und
Grundbau
Kummerer, C., Thurner, R., Rigazio, A. and Zamagni, A. (2007). Compensation
grouting for limiting settlements of two railway bridges induced by a twintunnel excavation. Proceedings of European Conference on Soil Mechanics and
Geotechnical Engineering, Madrid, September 2007.
La Fonta, J.G &Carayol, S (1997) Settlement Monitoring and Compensation
Grouting (1997), Tunnels et Ouvrages Souterrains No. 140, March/Apr 1997.
La Fonta, J.G. & Person, T.H. (1999) Puerto Rica, real-time compensation grouting
with the Cyclops System, Geotechnical News Volume 17 No.2, June 1999.
196

8
453-508.
New York, NY, USA.
No. 10, pp 289-297.
pp 553-559.
Grundbau
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40

8
453-508.
New York, NY, USA.
No. 10, pp 289-297.
pp 553-559.
Grundbau

8
453-508.
New York, NY, USA.
No. 10, pp 289-297.
pp 553-559.
Grundbau
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
196
Page 63 of 66
Page 63 of 66
197
Lee, K.M. & Rowe, R.K. (1991). An analysis of three dimensional ground
movements: Thunder Bay tunnel. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol 28, pp2541
Leinala, T., Grabinsky, M., Delmar, R. & Collins, J.R. (2000). Effects of foam soil
conditioning on EPBM performance. Proc. North American Tunnelling 00,
Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 514-524.
Le Project Cosmus:Une Methode observationnelle pour les injections de
compensation, ABTUS Study day on 08.12.2000 in Antwerp on compensation
grouting and visit of the works.
Maidl, U. (1995). Erweiterung der Einsatzbereiche der Erddruckschildedurch
Bodenkonditionierungmit Schaum. PhD thesis, Ruhr University, Bochum.
Maiorano, R.M.S., Viggiani, G.M.B. (2003). Observed movements above a tunnel on
pyroclastic ground. Proc. Int. Conf. on Response of buildings to excavationinduced ground movements, London. Jardine F.M. ed., CIRIA Special
Publication 201, pp 375-386.
Mair, R.J., Taylor, R.N. & Bracegirdle, A. (1993). Sub-surface settlement profiles
above tunnels in clays. Geotechnique.43 No.2, 315-320.
Mair, R.J. &Hight, D.W., (1994). Compensation grouting. World Tunnelling.
November 1994, 361-367.
Mair, R.J. (1994). Report on Session 4: Displacement Grouting. Proc. Conf.
Grouting in the Ground, ICE, Nov. 1992, 375-383. London: Thomas Telford.
Mair, R.J., Viggiani, G., Menkiti, C.O. Reduction and control of surface settlement
induced by shallow and deep excavations.
Mair, R.J., Harris, D.I., Love, J.P., Blakey, D. & Kettle, C. (1994). Compensation
grouting to limit settlements during tunnelling at Waterloo Station. Proceedings
of Conference Tunnelling 94, London, Institution of Mining and Metallurgy,
279-300, Chapman and Hall.
2
Mair, R.J. & Taylor R.N. (1997). Bored tunnelling in the urban environment. Stateof-the-art Report and Theme Lecture. Proceedings of the 14th International
Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Hamburg,
Balkema, Vol. 4., 2353-2385.
Mair, R.J. (2008). Tunnelling and geotechnics: new horizons. 46th Rankine Lecture,
Geotechnique 58, No, 9, 695-736
Martak, L. and Liebsch, H. Soil-fracturing in silt and clay New applications in the
Vienna Underground, Internationale Konferenzbetreffend Injektionen in Fels
und Beton, Salzburg, 1993. Osterreichische Gesellschaft fur Geomahanik.
Merritt, A.S., Borghi, F.X. &Mair, R.J. (2003). Conditioning of Clay soils for earth
pressure balance tunnelling machines. Proc. Underground Construction, London
Dockland, UK:455-466.
Merritt, A.S. (2004). Soil conditioning for earth pressure balance amchines.PhD
Thesis, Cambridge University.
Merritt, A.S. &Mair, R.J. (2006). Mechanics of tunnelling machine screw conveyors:
model tests. Geotechnique 56 (9) 605-615
a theoretical model. Geotechnique 58, No.2, 79-94.
November 1994, 361-367.
2
Balkema, Vol. 4., 2353-2385.
Page 64 of 66
197
November 1994, 361-367.
2
Balkema, Vol. 4., 2353-2385.
197
November 1994, 361-367.
2
Balkema, Vol. 4., 2353-2385.
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 64 of 66
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
197
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 64 of 66
Page 64 of 66
198
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Page 65 of 66
Page 65 of 66
198
Milligan, G.W.E. (2000). Lubrication and soil conditioning in tunnelling, pipe

jacking and microtunnelling: A state-of-the-art review. Geotechnical Consulting
Group, London, UK. www-civil.eng.ox.ac.uk/research/pipejack/soilcond.html
Milligan, G.W.E. (2001). Soil conditioning and lubricating agents in tunnelling and
pipe jacking. Proc. Underground Construction Symposium 2001, London
Docklands, UK: 105-116.
OCarroll, J.B. (2005). A guide to planning, constructing and supervising earth
pressure balance TBM tunnelling. Monograph 18 published by Parsons
Brinkerhoff, New York.
Oteo, C.S., Arnaiz, M., Trabada, J., Melis, M. &Mendana, F. (1999). Experiences in
the subsidence problems in Madrid Subway Extension. In Geotechnical aspects
of underground construction in soft grounds (edsKusakabe, O., Fujita, K. and
Miyazaki, Y.) pp 275-280. London: Balkema
Peck, R.B. (1969a). Deep excavations and tunnelling in sift ground. Proc. 7th Int.
Conf. Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering. Mexicao City. State of the
Aty Volume, pp 225-290.
Peck, R.B. (1969b) Advantages and limitations of the Observational Method in
applied soil mechanics, Geotechnique, 19 (2) pp 171-187
Pigorini, A., Iannotta, F., Mair, R.J., Harris, D.I., Menkiti, C.O. & Leoni, F. (2009).
The application of compensation grouting to protect a railway viaduct from
tunnelling induced movements, ITA-AITES World Tunnel Congress, Budapest,
Hungary, May 23-28, 2009
Potts, D.M. &Addenbrooke, T.I. (1996). The influence of an existing surface
structure on the ground movements due to tunnelling. Proc. Int. Symp. On
Geotechnical Aspects of Underground Construction on Soft Ground. London,
Balkema., pp. 573-578.
Potts, D.M. (2003) Numerical analysis: a virtual dream or practical reality?,
Geotechnique Vol 53, No.6, pp 535-573
Raabe, E.W. and Esters, K. Soilfracturing techniques for terminating settlements and
restoring levels of building and structures, Ground Improvement, M.P. Moseley,
Hayward Baker Inc./USA, Chapman & Hall, Glasgow, 1993.
Rankin, W.J. (1988). Ground movements resulting from urban tunnelling:
predictions and effects. Engineering Geology of Underground Movement,
Geology Society, Engineering Geology Special Publication No.5, 79-92
Rowe, R.K. &Kack, G.J. (1983). A theoretical examination of the settlements
induced by tunnelling: 4 case histories. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol 20,
pp 229-324.
Soga. K., Bolton, M.D., Au, S.K.K., Komiya, K., Hamelin, J.P., Van Cotthem, A.,
Buchet, G., Michel, J.P. (1999). Development of Compensation Grouting
Moddelling and Control System.Proceedings of the International Symposium on
Geotechnical Aspects of Underground Construction on Soft Ground (IS-Tokyo).
Soga, K., Au, S.K., M.R. Jafari, R. and Bolton, M.D. (2004) Laboratory investigation
of multiple grout injections into clay. Geotechnique 54, No.2, 81-89.
Sola, P.R., Monroe, A.S., Martin, L., Blanco, M.A. & San Juan, R. (2003). Ground
treatment for tunnel construction on the Madrid Metro. Proc. ASCA 3rd Int.
198

pp 229-324.
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40

pp 229-324.

pp 229-324.
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
198
Page 65 of 66
Page 65 of 66
199
Conf. on Grouting and Ground Treatment 1, (eds Johnsen, L.F., Bruce, D.A. and
Byle, M.J.) New Orleans, 1518-1533.
Standing J.R. and Burland, J.B. (2006). Unexpected tunnelling volume losses in the
Westminster area, London, Geotechnique, Vol 56 pages 11-26
Viggiani, G.M.B. (2001). Grout intensities. Ch 20 of Building response to tunnelling
case studies from construction of the Jubilee Line Extension, London. Volume
1: Projects and methods. Burland, J.B., Standing, J.R. and F.M. Jardine eds.
(CIRIA Special Publication 200, CIRIA and Thomas Telford), pp 311-314.
Viggiani, G.M.B., de Sanctis, L., Mandolini, A. (2007). Monitoraggio di
scavi :lesperienzadella Linea 1 dellaMetropilitana di Napoli. Proc XXIII
ConvegnoNazionale di Geotecnica previsione e controlle del
comportamentodellaopere - AbanoTerme
Viggiani, G.M.B., Standing, J.R. (2001) The treasury. Ch 26 of Building response to
London.Volume 2, Case Studies.Burland, J.B., Standing, J.R. and F.M. Jardine
eds. (CIRIA Special Publication 200, CIRIA and Thomas Telford), pp 401-432
Woods, E., Battye, G., Bowers, K. and Mimnagh, F. (2007). Channel Tunnel Rail
Link Section 2: London Tunnels. Proc ICE. Civil Engineering, 160, November
2007, 24-28, paper 700008.
Wongsaroj. J. Borghi, F.X., Soga, K., Mair, R.J., Sugiyama, T., Hagiwara, T. &
Bowers, K.J. (2005). Effect of TBM driving parameters on ground surface
movements: Channel Tunnel Rail Link Contract 220. Geotechnical Aspects of
Underground Construction in Soft Ground. Bakker et al. (eds) 2006 Taylor &
Francis Group, London, ISBN 0 415 39124 5, pp 335-341
World Tunnelling (2008) Another fine mesh, World Tunnelling, Nov 2008,
www.world-tunnelling.com/features/another-fine-mesh
2007, 24-28, paper 700008.
Page 66 of 66
199
2007, 24-28, paper 700008.
199
2007, 24-28, paper 700008.
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 66 of 66
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
199
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 66 of 66
Page 66 of 66

Consolidação PDF

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Consolidação PDF

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Compensation Grouting - Evolution, Field of Application,

and Current State of the Art in UK Practice

Compensation Grouting - Evolution, Field of Application,

Technical Manager, Bachy Soletanche Ltd, Alton, UK; clif.kettle@bacsol.co.uk

Technical Manager, Bachy Soletanche Ltd, Alton, UK; clif.kettle@bacsol.co.uk

ABSTRACT: Compensation grouting, in the modern currently accepted sense, is a

ABSTRACT: Compensation grouting, in the modern currently accepted sense, is a

Compensation grouting, in the modern currently accepted sense, is a relatively new

Compensation grouting, in the modern currently accepted sense, is a relatively new

Compensation Grouting - Evolution, Field of Application,

Technical Manager, Bachy Soletanche Ltd, Alton, UK; clif.kettle@bacsol.co.uk

Technical Manager, Bachy Soletanche Ltd, Alton, UK; clif.kettle@bacsol.co.uk

Compensation grouting, in the modern currently accepted sense, is a relatively new

ABSTRACT: Compensation grouting, in the modern currently accepted sense, is a

Compensation Grouting - Evolution, Field of Application,

ABSTRACT: Compensation grouting, in the modern currently accepted sense, is a

Compensation grouting, in the modern currently accepted sense, is a relatively new

strengthening; block permeation; stress isolation by pile or jet wall; structural

HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT

GROUTING AND DEEP MIXING 2012

strengthening; block permeation; stress isolation by pile or jet wall; structural

HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT

strengthening; block permeation; stress isolation by pile or jet wall; structural

HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT

GROUTING AND DEEP MIXING 2012

strengthening; block permeation; stress isolation by pile or jet wall; structural

GROUTING AND DEEP MIXING 2012

GROUTING AND DEEP MIXING 2012

HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT

Grouting and Deep Mixing 2012

GROUTING AND DEEP MIXING 2012

GROUTING AND DEEP MIXING 2012

GROUTING AND DEEP MIXING 2012

GROUTING AND DEEP MIXING 2012

Grouting and Deep Mixing 2012

GROUTING AND DEEP MIXING 2012

GROUTING AND DEEP MIXING 2012

GROUTING AND DEEP MIXING 2012

GROUTING AND DEEP MIXING 2012

Grouting and Deep Mixing 2012

GROUTING AND DEEP MIXING 2012

Largely Observational Approach

Waterloo Victory Arch

Waterloo Victory Arch

New-build escalator sand

FIG. 1 Victory Arch Concept and key elements

New-build escalator sand

FIG. 1 Victory Arch Concept and key elements

GROUTING AND DEEP MIXING 2012

Waterloo Victory Arch

Largely Observational Approach

Largely Observational Approach

New-build escalator sand

FIG. 1 Victory Arch Concept and key elements

GROUTING AND DEEP MIXING 2012

GROUTING AND DEEP MIXING 2012

Waterloo Victory Arch

Largely Observational Approach

New-build escalator sand

FIG. 1 Victory Arch Concept and key elements

Grouting and Deep Mixing 2012

GROUTING AND DEEP MIXING 2012

GROUTING AND DEEP MIXING 2012