BRAZILIAN TUNNELLING

COMMITTEE
COMITÊ BRASILEIRO
DE TÚNEIS

r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
TUNNELS FOR ENERGY

ec rla
e
sp e
Iguassu Falls, Brazil 09 - 10 May 2014

re itz
ir w
he - S
Site Investigations for Rock Tunnels

ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
Harvey W. Parker
tio ou
ra F
st T

Harvey Parker & Associates, Inc.

llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
 Importance of Geology
Geology can be both good and bad

r-s
• Paramount in every

ne
tiv nd
ow
tunnel decision

ec rla
e
• Geology dominates

sp e
re itz
ir w
• Feasibility

he - S
• Alignment

ft n
O tio
• Constructability
© a
n nd
• Cost
tio ou

• Usefulness, behavior, &

ra F
st T

maintenance of the
llu E
lI C

completed structure
Al ITA

• Respect geology from

©

concept through
operation
Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014
 PURPOSES OF SITE INVESTIGATIONS
 Determine the geology of the site

r-s
 Identify adverse geologic features

ne
 Provide information to select the most economical and appropriate

tiv nd
ow
ec rla
 Horizontal and vertical alignment

e
sp e
 Excavation & Support Methods

re itz
ir w
 Define physical characteristics of the soil, rock, and groundwater

he - S
 Input for design

ft n
O tio
 Minimize uncertainties & risk by providing data needed to evaluate
 Constructability & Productivity © a
n nd
tio ou
 Schedule & Cost
ra F

 Provide Observational Approach to Managing Geotechnical

st T
llu E

Conditions Encountered during Construction

lI C
Al ITA

 Confirmation of Design Assumptions

 To document as-built conditions of the completed project
©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 ©
Al ITA
lI C
llu E
st T
ra F
tio ou
n nd
© a
O tio
ft n
he - S
ir w
re itz
sp e
ec rla
tiv nd
Underground

e
ow
Challenges of the

ne
r-s
Strange, Unique Functions of the Ground
• The ground is the load

r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
• The ground is the medium that transfers this load to the

e
sp e
re itz
tunnel lining

ir w
he - S
ft n
• The ground is the structural material that actually carries

O tio
most of the load © a
n nd
tio ou

– Tunnel linings only have to carry part of total load

ra F
st T
llu E
lI C

• We call it “Arching”
Al ITA
©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 Rock versus Soil

r-s
ne
• Rock behavior dictated by discontinuities

tiv nd
ow
ec rla
• In Rock, Discontinuities (joints) govern behavior

e
sp e
re itz
–

ir w
Movements are along joints

he - S
– Water flows mostly through joints

ft n
O tio
– Properties of joints must be determined
© a
n nd
– Important relationship of joint spacing to opening size
tio ou

– Dictates choice of investigative methods

ra F
st T

• Behavior is governed by the relationship

llu E
lI C
Al ITA

between nature of joints & size of openings

©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 ©
Al ITA
lI C
llu E
st T
ra F
tio ou
n nd
© a
O tio
ft n
he - S
ir w
re itz
sp e
ec rla
Source: Hoek

tiv nd
e
ow
ne
r-s
Relationship Between Joint Spacing & Size of Opening
Intact vs. Mass Physical Properties

r-s
• Intact properties are the properties of the rock

ne
tiv nd
ow
or soil on a small (core sample size) scale

ec rla
e
sp e
• Mass physical properties

re itz
ir w
– 1) Strength, 2) Permeability, 3) Deformability

he - S
ft n
– Includes the fundamental intact properties

O tio
© a
– Modified by the effects of jointing
n nd
tio ou

• For instance, persistence; whether smooth, planar or

ra F
st T

interlocked; properties of joint infilling etc.

llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

Challenges of the Underground: Variability

r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
 Geology can be Subtle and Illusive

ir w
he - S
 Variability is Guaranteed & Often Abrupt

ft n
O tio
 Magnitude of Properties Varies Significantly
© a
n nd
tio ou

 Time, Seasons, Sample Size, Rate of Loading

ra F

 Properties of Geologic Materials have an

st T
llu E
lI C

enormous range of values

Al ITA
©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

Potential Variations in Geotechnical Data
• Different SCALE between Lab and the Field

r-s
ne
– Time or Rate of Loading

tiv nd
ow
ec rla
– Size of Sample vs Size of Excavation

e
sp e
re itz
• Variation Depends on:

ir w
he - S
– Disturbance to sample

ft n
O tio
– Size of Lab Sample
© a
n nd
– Rate of loading & Stress Regime in lab test
tio ou
ra F

– Anisotropy
st T
llu E
lI C

– Deterioration with time

Al ITA

– Seasonal fluctuations of Groundwater levels

©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 Range of permeability

r-s
ne
 Greater than any other engineering

tiv nd
ow
ec rla
parameter

e
sp e
re itz
 Roughly 10-9 to 10+1 m/sec

ir w
he - S
 Factor of 10,000,000,000

ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
 For Comparison: Strength
tio ou
ra F

 Much Smaller Range

st T
llu E

 Soft Clay to Concrete ~ 1,000

lI C
Al ITA

 Soft Clay to Steel/Rock ~ 100,000

©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

Selected Important Geotechnical
Issues

r-s
ne


tiv nd
Geology

ow
ec rla
e
 Groundwater

sp e
re itz


ir w
Groundwater

he - S
 Groundwater

ft n
O tio
 Adverse Geological Features © a
n nd
tio ou

 Contaminated Soil or Groundwater

ra F
st T

 Gas & Other Safety Issues

llu E
lI C
Al ITA

 Ground and Groundwater Properties

©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 Geotechnical Explorations
Comparative Sampling Frequency

r-s
ne
• Concrete Structure

tiv nd
ow
ec rla
– Every 20 to 50 m3

e
sp e
• ~ 0.1%

re itz
ir w
– See 100% off Truck

he - S
ft n
O tio
• Urban Geotechnical Exploration
© a
n nd
– Borings: 6 to 8 cm diameter
tio ou

core @ 90 m spacing =
ra F

– ~ 0.0005%
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA

• Long & Deep Tunnels

©

– Miniscule
Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014
 0.0005 % is like
Thimble to ~50 Oil Drums

r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 Selected Challenges of the
Underground

r-s
ne
 Your Predictions will be

tiv nd
ow
ec rla
EXPOSED

e
sp e
re itz
 Actual Vs Predicted

ir w
he - S
 Stratigraphy

ft n


O tio
Groundwater Flow
 Gas Encountered
© a
n nd

tio ou
Behavior
ra F

 Comparison is
st T
llu E

guaranteed!
lI C
Al ITA

 In detail!
©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 Selected Challenges of the
Underground

r-s
ne
tiv nd
 Vast Uncertainty

ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
 Never See What is Ahead

ir w
he - S
 Yet Fortunately –

ft n
O tio
 Owners, Designers & Contractors do © a
n nd
tio ou
ra F

a remarkable job
st T
llu E
lI C

 Because of adaptability, flexibility,

Al ITA

creativity, and our Observational Approach

©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 ©
Al ITA
lI C
llu E
st T
ra F
tio ou
n nd
© a
O tio
ft n
he - S
ir w
re itz
sp e
ec rla
tiv nd
e
METHODS & PRINCIPLES

ow
ne
r-s
Site Investigations
 Tunnel Behavior is Complex=
Extra demands for Site Investigation

r-s
• Behavior of the Ground During Tunnelling is

ne
tiv nd
ow
Determined by MANY factors including:

ec rla
e
sp e
• Geology

re itz
• Engineering Properties of Materials

ir w
he - S
• Means and Methods

ft n
O tio
– Excavation Method
© a
– Ground Support & Lining Method
n nd
– Ground Modification Method, if any
tio ou
ra F

• Generally:
st T
llu E

– Owner “Owns the Ground”

lI C
Al ITA

– Contractor “Owns the effects of Means & Methods”

©

• But these are always interdependent and never so clear

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 NO LONGER SUFFICIENT TO

r-s
DESCRIBE STRATIGRAPHY &

ne
tiv nd
ow
GROUNDWATER TABLE

ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
• MUST PREDICT BEHAVIOR

he - S
ft n
O tio
• MUST BE ABLE TO PREDICT COST © a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T

• MUST ESTABLISH A BASELINE

llu E
lI C
Al ITA

– So "changed condition" (if encountered) can be

administered fairly
©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 Guidelines for Site Investigation
(Local, National, International)

r-s
ne
Several guides exist to assist planning investigation .

tiv nd
ow
ec rla
Examples shown below:

e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 Common-Sense Phased Approach
• 1) Conduct geologic investigations in several

r-s
phases, planning each phase on results of previous

ne
tiv nd
ow
phase

ec rla
e
• 2) Collection & Evaluation of Existing Information

sp e
re itz
ir w
– Develop a comprehensive risk-based investigative

he - S
ft n
approach develop & Continuously Update the Geological

O tio
© a
Model and Rock Mass Data as new data is obtained
n nd
tio ou

– Identify important parameters, identify good tunnelling

ra F

ground, and the potential for adverse geology

st T
llu E
lI C

• Air Photos, Satellite Imagery, Lessons Learned from Case Histories

Al ITA

• Geologic, Seismic, & Environmental Maps & Data

©

• Topographic evaluation of potential faults & Insitu Stress

• Case Histories, Precedents, and Lessons Learned
Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014
Feasibility and Corridor Site Investigation

r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
• 3) Conduct sufficient field mapping, geophysics, &

ec rla
e
sp e
borings to confirm geologic predictions & provide

re itz
ir w
factual data about geology at depth. Conduct

he - S
Environmental Impact Studies (EIS)

ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
• 4) As soon as possible, divide alignment(s) into
tio ou

zones which have similar geologic features, rock

ra F
st T

types, and risks to update Geological Model

llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
 Preliminary Investigation for
Alignment Selection

r-s
ne
• 5) Enough data reliability to provide a sound basis

tiv nd
ow
ec rla
for cost estimates & identification of residual risks

e
sp e
re itz
• 6) Select alignment based on a critical risk-based

ir w
he - S
quantitative comparison of alternative alignments

ft n
O tio
based on favorable and unfavorable aspects of
© a
n nd
geology, hydrogeology, EIS, constructability, and
tio ou
ra F

estimated cost & schedule

st T
llu E

• Note: Alignment selection often dominates all

lI C
Al ITA

other decisions
©
 Detailed Site Investigations
• 7) Conduct Detailed Geotechnical

r-s
ne
Investigation for Preliminary Design, Final

tiv nd
ow
ec rla
Design and/or Tender Documents

e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
• 8) Conduct Rock Mass Classification

ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou

• 9) Use risk management to reduce risk to As

ra F
st T

Low as Reasonably Practical (ALARP)

llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 Cost Confirmation Investigation
(Following preliminary and final design geo-investigation)

r-s
• 10) Additional investigation to confirm data for

ne
tiv nd
ow
Geotechnical Reference Conditions (Baseline)

ec rla
e
sp e
Report & to give the bidder quantitative data to

re itz
ir w
estimate productivity, evaluate risk, as input the

he - S
ft n
best estimate of cost.

O tio
– Quantify cost drivers such as: © a
n nd
tio ou

• Adverse geology an unfavorable insitu stress

ra F
st T

• Variations in Permeability
llu E
lI C

• Deterioration, Abrasion, & Clogging

Al ITA

• Productivity
©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 Geo-Investigations during
Construction & Operation

r-s
• 11) Test design assumptions during construction.

ne
tiv nd
ow
Continue geotechncial investigations. Use

ec rla
e
sp e
Observational Approach to adjust to actual

re itz
ir w
conditions & to compile As-Built Report

he - S
–

ft n
Geophysics/Probing Ahead

O tio
– Monitoring grouting
© a
n nd
– Monitoring deformations
tio ou

– Simple confirmation of insitu stress

ra F

Source: Eivind Grov

st T

• 12) After construction, actively monitor

llu E
lI C
Al ITA

instrumentation to confirm tunnel is operating

©

satisfactorily & to prepare As-Built Report.

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014
 ©
Al ITA
lI C
llu E
st T
ra F
tio ou
n nd
© a
O tio
ft n
he - S
ir w
re itz
sp e
ec rla
tiv nd
e
ow
ne
r-s
Site Investigation Methods
 ©
Al ITA
lI C
llu E
st T
ra F
tio ou
n nd
© a
O tio
ft n
he - S
ir w
re itz
sp e
ec rla
tiv nd
e
ow
ne
r-s
Most Important Investigative Tool
Consult Air Photos, Geologic Maps, & Satellite Resources
Especially Check Surficial Geologic Maps
Develop Terrain Systems Mapping Approach

r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©

Source: Wikipedia Source: About.com

 Drilling Rigs & Mobilization

r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

Field Inspection, Logging, & Evaluation of Core

r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 Evaluation of Core Borings
• Use Larger core diameter & triple core barrel

r-s
– See more “Fabric” & “Texture” including on joints

ne
tiv nd
ow
– More Recovery & Less disturbance

ec rla
e
• Disturbance reduces Engineering Properties

sp e
re itz
• Need Oriented Core to get joint strike & dip

ir w
he - S
– Photograph ALL Core. Preserve core from deterioration

ft n
O tio
• Fear what you do not see
© a
n nd
– Could be poor quality coring
tio ou
ra F

– Most likely bad ground, or worse, a void

st T
llu E

• Inclined borings are essential in rock tunneling

lI C
Al ITA

• Seriously Consider Directionally Drilled Borings

©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 Rock Mass Permeability

r-s
ne
• Permeability of Joint System (not intact rock) is vital

tiv nd
ow
ec rla
• Measured by pumping water in to borehole (Packers)

e
sp e
re itz
• The “Lugeon” is a measure of permeability =

ir w
he - S
– 1 litre of flow per minute

ft n
O tio
– Into one meter length of borehole
© a
n nd
– At 10 bars pressure
tio ou
ra F

• 1 Lugeon is approximately equivalent to:

st T
llu E
lI C

– ~Permeability of 10-7 m/sec

Al ITA
©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 Laboratory testing to determine
Intact physical properties

r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 ©
Al ITA
lI C
llu E
st T
ra F
tio ou
n nd
© a
O tio
ft n
he - S
ir w
re itz
sp e
ec rla
investigations

tiv nd
e
ow
conducted during site

ne
r-s
Rock Classifications to be
 Rock Mass Classifications

r-s
•

ne
Assess importance of each parameter

tiv nd
ow
ec rla
• Level platform for comparing case histories

e
sp e
re itz
•

ir w
Predict behavior

he - S
• Semi-empirical estimate of required support

ft n
O tio
• © a
Can be measured & confirmed in field to
n nd
tio ou

confirm “as built” conditions

ra F
st T

• But they are only “Aids to Planning & Design,”

llu E
lI C
Al ITA

They are NOT Design Methods

©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

Terzaghi Rock Classification (1946)

r-s
• Intact

ne
tiv nd
•

ow
Stratified

ec rla
e
sp e
• Moderately jointed

re itz
ir w
•

he - S
Blocky and seamy

ft n
O tio
• Crushed but chemically intact
© a
n nd
• Squeezing
tio ou
ra F

•
st T

Swelling
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 Rock Mass Classification
• Many Classification Systems have been proposed; the

r-s
most popular are:

ne
tiv nd
ow
– Rock Quality Designation (RQD) by Deere

ec rla
e
• Now used as an index rather than a classification system

sp e
re itz
• Provides input to RMR and Q

ir w
he - S
– Rock Mass Rating (RMR) by Bieniawski

ft n
O tio
– Rock Tunnelling Quality Index (Q) by Barton
© a
n nd
• Geological Strength Index (GSI) by Hoek (& Marinos)
tio ou

– Very useful concept but not a rock classification system

ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

Rock Quality Designation Index (RQD)
Modified Core Recovery

r-s
ne
Count ONLY Sound Pieces that are 100 mm or greater

tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 Bieniawski’s Rock Mass Rating, RMR

r-s
Parameter Max Points

ne
tiv nd
Uniaxial compressive strength 15

ow
ec rla
of intact rock

e
sp e
re itz
Rock Quality Designation RQD &
20

ir w
he - S
(RQD) Spacing
Points now

ft n
O tio
Spacing of discontinuities Combined 20

© a
n nd
Condition of discontinuities 30
tio ou
ra F

Groundwater conditions 15
st T
llu E

Reduce RMR by 2 to 12 Points

lI C

Adjustment for unfavorable

Al ITA

orientation of joints Bieniawski Rock Mass Class

©

81-100=Very Good Rock 61-80=Good Rock

41-60=Fair Rock 21-40=Poor Rock
<20=Very Poor Rock
Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014
 Correlations with Bieniawski’s RMR
• Guidelines have been published for

r-s
ne
– ground support recommendations

tiv nd
ow
ec rla
• Rock Bolt Length/Spacing, Shotcrete thickness, etc.

e
sp e
– stand-up time

re itz
ir w
– correlations to other parameters such as rock mass

he - S
modulus, as a function of RMR

ft n
O tio
– See Lowson & Bieniawski (2013) for most recent update
© a
n nd
• System has been modified and adapted by
tio ou
ra F

others for the mining industry

st T
llu E
lI C

• Frequently used in conjunction with and correlated

Al ITA

with the Q-System (ie use both Q and RMR)

©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 ©
Al ITA
lI C
llu E
st T
ra F
tio ou
n nd
© a
O tio
ft n
he - S
ir w
re itz
sp e
ec rla
tiv nd
e
ow
ne
r-s
Updated RMR Correlations

Source: Lowson & Bieniawski, 2013

 Barton’s Q System

r-s
Q = (RQD/Jn) x (Jr/Ja) x (Jw/SRF)

ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
Rock Mass Condition Q System Parameter

sp e
re itz
RQD RQD

ir w
he - S
Number of joint sets Jn

ft n
O tio
Joint roughness Jr
© a
n nd
Joint alteration Ja
tio ou

Joint water Jw
ra F
st T
llu E

Stress Reduction SRF

lI C
Al ITA

Factor
©
 Barton’s Q System
of Rock Classification

r-s
ne
• Rock Tunnelling Quality Index = Q

tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
• Q = (RQD/Jn) x (Jr/Ja) x (Jw/SRF)

sp e
re itz
ir w
• Physical significance of components

he - S
ft n
– (RQD/Jn) is effect of block size

O tio
© a
– (Jr/Ja) is effect of inter-block strength
n nd
tio ou

– (Jw/SRF) is effect of external forces such as in-situ

ra F
st T
llu E

stress and groundwater effects

lI C
Al ITA
©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 Correlations with Barton’s Q System
Published by Barton (and others)

r-s
ne
•

tiv nd
Tables provide guidelines for ground support

ow
ec rla
•

e
Charts illustrate guidelines for ground support

sp e
re itz
•

ir w
Correlations with other classification systems

he - S
• Correlations with maximum unsupported span

ft n
O tio
and estimated permanent roof pressure© a
n nd
• Correlations are constantly being updated
tio ou
ra F

including application with TBM’s

st T
llu E
lI C

– Be sure to understand the development of the

Al ITA

system and to use latest version

©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

RMR & Q as an Aid to Design Relationships

r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©

For Illustration Only

Not for Design
Source: Bieniawski (2011) after Barton &
Bieniawski (2008)
 ©
Al ITA
lI C
llu E
st T
ra F
tio ou
n nd
© a
O tio
ft n
he - S
ir w
re itz
sp e
ec rla
tiv nd
e
ow
ne
r-s
Geological Strength Index (GSI)

Source: Rockscience-Hoek & Marinos (2000)

 ©
Al ITA
lI C
llu E
st T
ra F
tio ou
n nd
© a
O tio
ft n
he - S
ir w
re itz
sp e
ec rla
tiv nd
e
ow
ne
r-s
Required Joint & Fault Data
Rock Projects Require Detailed Data on all
Discontinuities; joints and faults

r-s
ne
•

tiv nd
Engineering Geologic Mapping of Outcrops

ow
ec rla
e
•

sp e
Oriented Core and/or Borehole Photography

re itz
ir w
•

he - S
Mapping of Adits

ft n
•
O tio
Effect of Joints on InSitu Tests & Evaluation
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 Required Site Investigation Data
on Discontinuities

r-s
• Discontinuities require special procedures

ne
tiv nd
ow
during field and lab investigation

ec rla
e
– Type

sp e
re itz
ir w
– Orientation

he - S
– Infilling

ft n
O tio
• May require engineering properties of infilling
© a
n nd
– Spacing
tio ou

– Persistence
ra F
st T

–
llu E

Weathering
lI C

–
Al ITA

Interaction between multiple joint sets

–
©

Detailed characterization of faults

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

Potential Adverse Ground & Groundwater Conditions
in Mountain Faults

r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©

Source: Deere (2007)

Stereographic Analysis of Discontinuities
(Now done by computers)

r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©

Source: Hoek, Kaiser, Bawden (1993)

Examples why investigations must determine strike &
dip of joint sets to identify potential adverse

r-s
conditions in underground excavations

ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T

Source: USACE (1997)

llu E
lI C

Note: Even small tunnels can experience

Al ITA

difficulty because of adverse orientation of

©

joints and/or high insitu stress effects on rock Source: Hoek (1991)

behavior
 ©
Al ITA
lI C
llu E
st T
ra F
tio ou
n nd
© a
O tio
ft n
he - S
ir w
re itz
sp e
ec rla
tiv nd
e
ow
ne
r-s
Selected Site Investigation Issues
 Special Investigations for Hydraulic Tunnels (1of 2)
(After ITA Working Group 17-Long & Deep Tunnels)
• Location and seasonal variations in natural water

r-s
ne
table

tiv nd
ow
ec rla
– support design for internal and external water pressure

e
sp e
re itz
• Insitu stress data for hydraulic jacking prevention

ir w
he - S
• Reliable data required for design

ft n
O tio
• Should be confirmed during construction
© a
n nd
• Length and Cost of Steel Lining
tio ou

• Identify clayey or otherwise soluble, slaking,

ra F
st T
llu E

swelling, or deterioration characteristics especially

lI C
Al ITA

along weathered seams and faults

©

– Volcanic regimes with high temperature groundwater

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014
 Special Investigations for Hydraulic Tunnels (2 of 2)
(After ITA Working Group 17-Long & Deep Tunnels)
• Rock Permeability (Conduct Many Tests)

r-s
ne
– Evaluate with respect to natural ground water table

tiv nd
ow
ec rla
• Both for construction & operation

e
sp e
re itz
– Low rock mass permeability desired

ir w
he - S
– Data needed for grout design if needed

ft n
O tio
– Document location & nature of natural springs and
© a
n nd
effect on stability of adjacent slopes
tio ou
ra F

• Deformation modulus of rock, Em

st T
llu E
lI C

– High Em rock mass shares internal load with lining

Al ITA

– Reliable Em values required for lining design

©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 ©
Al ITA
lI C
llu E
st T
ra F
tio ou
n nd
© a
O tio
ft n
he - S
ir w
re itz
sp e
ec rla
Insitu Stress

tiv nd
e
ow
ne
r-s
 World Stress Map (WSM)

r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014 Source: Rocscience/Evert Hoek
Topographic Stress Relief Fractures
(Use Geomorphology to predict zones of potential low and high

r-s
stress such as topographic valley stress relief and “noses”)

ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©

USGS Water Supply Paper 2177 ( 1981)

 ©
Al ITA
lI C
llu E
st T
ra F
tio ou
n nd
© a
O tio
ft n
he - S
ir w
re itz
sp e
ec rla
tiv nd
e
ow
ne
r-s
InSitu Stress Measurement Methods

Source: Evind Grov

 Interpretation of Insitu Stress Tests

r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
Source: ISRM
n nd
Idealized Interpretation Source: Eivind Grov
tio ou
ra F

Note: For pressure tunnels, these tests are done during site investigation to determine
st T

the minimum stress to provide desired factor of safety against hydrojacking and to
llu E
lI C

determine Ko. Tests can also be done from inside tunnel during construction but zone
Al ITA

of tests must be conducted 1 ½ to 2 diameters from tunnel

©
 Selected Geotechnical Issues for
Modern Tunnel Projects

r-s
ne


tiv nd
Closed Face TBM Issues

ow
ec rla
e


sp e
Abrasion, Erosion, Clogging Tests

re itz
ir w


he - S
Sonic Drilling

ft n

O tio
Methane, H2S, & Ground Contamination
© a
n nd
 Muck Disposal
tio ou
ra F

 Computer Analyses & Graphics

st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 Special Investigation Needs for
Closed-Face TBMs

r-s
• Continuous Sampling (If possible)

ne
tiv nd
ow
– Greater sample volume for tests

ec rla
e
sp e
– Document nature of mixed-face conditions

re itz
ir w
• Abundant Grain Size Tests

he - S
ft n
O tio
– Silt-Sand-Gravel
© a
n nd
– Hydrometer
tio ou

• Chemistry & Mineralogy for Conditioner

ra F
st T
llu E
lI C

Selection
Al ITA

• Special Strength & Stress-Strain Testing

©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 Special Investigation Needs for
Closed-Face TBMs

r-s
• Abrasion Tests to predict wear & interventions

ne
tiv nd
ow
• Stickiness testing & evaluation for Clogging

ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
• In Situ Soil & Groundwater Pressures needed for:

ir w
he - S
– Prediction of operating face pressures

ft n
O tio
– Determination of Maximum pressure to prevent blow
© a
n nd
• Potential Obstructions & Hazards
tio ou
ra F

– Boulder/Concretion Size, distribution, & Frequency

st T
llu E
lI C

– Gas & Contaminated Soils

Al ITA

– Manmade Obstructions such as Tiebacks

©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

Selected Site Investigation Parameters for TBM Projects
Drilling Rate Index (DRI)

r-s
90 90
Extremely high Bit Wear Index (BWI)
100 100
80 80

ne
Very high
90 90
70 70
Extremely high

tiv nd
80 80

ow
High
60 60
70 70

ec rla
50 Medium 50 Very high
60 60
DRI

e
BWI
40 40

sp e
Low
50 High
50

re itz
30 Very low 30 40 40
Medium

ir w
30 30
20 20
Low
Extremely low

he - S
20 20
10 10 Very low

10 10
0 0 Extremely low

0 0

ft n
Quartzite Basalt Limestone
Quartzite Basalt Limestone

O tio
Source: Eivind Grov

© a
100
n nd
Cutter Life Index (CLI)
100
tio ou
Extremely high
90 90

80 80
ra F

70 70
st T

60 60
llu E

Very high
CLI

50 50
lI C

40 40
Al ITA

30 30
High

20 20
©

Medium
10 10
Low
Very low
Extremely low
0 0
Quartzite Basalt Limestone

Source: Markus Thewes

Sonic Borehole Drilling & Sampling for Portals
 Larger Diameter Core

r-s
 Continuous Recovery

ne
tiv nd
ow
 Even in Boulders, Rock

ec rla
e
 Better Definition of Stratigraphy

sp e
re itz
 Easy definition of Contacts

ir w
he - S
 Can see the “Fabric and texture”

ft n
O tio
 Relative Stratigraphy Remains Intact
© a
n nd
 Some Disturbance of Soil/Rock
tio ou
ra F

 Much Heat Generated

st T

 Disturbance affects Engineering Properties

llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 Methane, Hydrogen Sulfide &
Ground Contamination

r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
 More Prevalent in Tunnels & Mines than

sp e
re itz
ir w
Previously Thought

he - S
ft n
 Must Investigate for these Hazards
O tio
© a
n nd
 Important Decision Regarding Safety
tio ou

Measures and Cost

ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

Muck Disposal- Major Issue for Site
Investigations (Often Neglected)

r-s
ne
• Muck is generated 24 hours/day

tiv nd
ow
ec rla
– Potential Public Disturbance

e
sp e
re itz
• Muck disposal sites are often far away

ir w
he - S
– Cost and Disturbance Issue

ft n
O tio
• Muck is sometimes needs special treatment
© a
n nd
tio ou

– Can go only to certain very expensive disposal

ra F
st T

sites
llu E
lI C

– EPB and Slurry Muck needs special treatment

Al ITA

• However, Muck is sometimes Re-Useable

©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 Computer Graphics Advantages & Pitfalls
Advantages

r-s
ne
Better Understanding of Task

tiv nd
ow
Better communication (Internal &

ec rla
e
External)

sp e
re itz
Professional Look

ir w
But - Computer Graphics Can Make

he - S
Anything Look Accurate and Credible

ft n
O tio
Scrutinize anything that Looks too
© a
good
n nd
tio ou

Geophysics
ra F

Computer Analyses
st T
llu E

FEM
lI C
Al ITA

GIS
©
 ©
Al ITA
lI C
llu E
st T
ra F
tio ou
n nd
© a
O tio
ft n
he - S
ir w
re itz
sp e
Lessons Learned

ec rla
tiv nd
Investigations

e
ow
ne
r-s
Selected Risk Issues for Site
RISK & CHOICES ARE PLENTIFUL
Use Risk Management to Plan Site

r-s
ne
Investigations to Avoid Problems

tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
 ©
Al ITA
lI C
llu E
st T
ra F
tio ou
n nd
© a
O tio
ft n
he - S
ir w
re itz
sp e
ec rla
tiv nd
e
ow
ne
r-s
Risk Management HEALS Weak Links

Risk Management
Systematic Formal
 Guidelines for Risk Management
• ITA Guidelines (2004) Published in TUST

r-s
• ITIG International Code of Practice (May 2012)

ne
tiv nd
ow
– Requires Risk Registers and RMP from project

ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
conception through construction

ir w
– Re-Insurance Industry is demanding compliance

he - S
ft n
with Code

O tio
• National & Local Guidelines © a
n nd
tio ou

 Make Geotechnical Baseline Report (also

ra F
st T

called Ground Reference Conditions) part of

llu E
lI C

contract documents
Al ITA

 Share Risk and Share Fairly

©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 Risk Management Workshops
Involve Many Subject Matter Experts (SME)

r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou

1) Identify Problem or Problem Category

ra F

2) Create a Risk Register

st T
llu E

1) Assign likelihood (1-5)

lI C

2) Assign Impact (1-5)

Al ITA

3) Calculate Risk
©

4) Identify Mitigation if needed

5) Tracked with Risk Registers
Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014
HOW MUCH TO DO?

r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
WHEN TO STOP?

e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou

Depends on many factors including

ra F
st T

Size & Complexity of Project

llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
 Past Practices

r-s
 No accepted standard

ne
tiv nd
ow
 # Borings

ec rla
e
sp e
 Spacing

re itz
ir w
 Depth

he - S
ft n
O tio
 Geotechnical Investigation Cost
© a
n nd
 1/2 to 3+ Percent of Construction Cost
tio ou
ra F

 Some up to 8++ % have been reported.

st T
llu E

 Special Class way above these guidelines:

lI C
Al ITA

 Nuclear Waste or Hazardous Waste

©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 Guidelines for Level of Geotechnical Effort
All Tunnel Projects

r-s
 Get more information than needed for “design”

ne
tiv nd
ow
 Explore Much deeper than proposed alignment (Will be needed)

ec rla
e
 Find the Good Geology/Favorable Tunneling Zone

sp e
re itz
ir w
 Find the adverse geologic zones

he - S
 Enough data to predict “Ground Behavior”,

ft n
O tio
Equipment Selection & Productivity © a
n nd
tio ou

 Alternative construction methods

ra F

 TBM or Traditional techniques

st T
llu E
lI C

 Special needs for Closed-Face TBMs

Al ITA

 Enough data to minimize uncertainty

©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

Guidelines for Level of Geotechnical Effort
All Tunnel Projects

r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
 Conduct a “Supplementary Cost Exploration

e
sp e
re itz
Phase”

ir w
he - S
 After alignment is fixed & after design

ft n
O tio
 Confirm the design
© a
n nd
 Get information contractor needs to estimate
tio ou

 Productivity (rate of advance)

ra F
st T
llu E

 Wear & Tear on Equipment

lI C
Al ITA

 Estimate the costs and to bid the job

©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 Guidelines for Level of Geotechnical Effort
Large or Major Projects

r-s
ne
 Develop multi-phased program to fill actual needs.

tiv nd
ow
Budget about 3% of Construction Cost

ec rla
e
sp e
 Use non-traditional techniques if they reduce

re itz
ir w
uncertainty

he - S
 Geophysics

ft n
O tio
 In Situ Tests, Packer Tests, Pressuremeters, Pump tests, etc., as
© a
appropriate n nd
 Exploratory shafts, adits, pilot tunnels
tio ou

 Exploration by Directional Drilling

ra F
st T

 Good Exploration reduces Bid & Construction Cost by

llu E
lI C
Al ITA

10 to 15 Times Exploration cost

©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 Norwegian Investigation Cost as % of Excavation Costs

r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C

A = Hydropower tunnels
Al ITA

B = Infrastructure tunnels Source: Grov after Palmstrom et al (2003)

©

C = Modern infrastructure tunnels

C (undersjøisk) = sub sea tunnels
Example Range of Investigation Scope
Item Small Project not Pressure Tunnel with Power Cavern

r-s
involving pressure tunnel or Large/Complex Project

ne
Strength Index Tests & Unconfined Sophisticated lab triax tests on rock and

tiv nd
ow
Tests joint filling. Possibly unloading tests

ec rla
Modulus Correlation with RMR Advanced tests; Pressuremeter or plate

e
sp e
jacking tests

re itz
Groundwater Static level in borings. Many Full-Scale Packer Tests. Confirm

ir w
he - S
Estimate inflow natural water table. Measure
permeability & calculate range of inflow

ft n
O tio
InSitu Stress Estimate from case histories Full InSitu Stress Test Program. Conduct
& existing data confirmation tests during Construction
© a
n nd
Joint Studies Mapping of joints from Comprehensive mapping & stereo
tio ou
outcrops. Evaluate joint projection for numerical analysis
ra F

Abrasion, Full coverage Full evaluation of erosion, slaking,

st T

Erosion, Slaking, abrasion, & stickiness. Confirmation of

llu E
lI C

Stickiness rock durability during construction

Al ITA

Safety Hazards Geo-environmental Increased geo-environmental evaluation,

evaluation, Sniff Borings for Sniff Borings for methane or H2S
©

methane or H2S
 Selected References
• AFTES, 1994, The Choice of geotechnical Parameters and Tests Useful to the Design,
Dimensioning and Construction of Underground Structures, Association Française des Tunnels

r-s
et de l'Espace Souterrain, Paris, France (Published in English in 1999)

ne
• AFTES, 2003, Guidelines for Characterization of Rock Masses Useful for the Design and the

tiv nd
ow
Construction of Underground Structures, Association Française des Tunnels et de l'Espace

ec rla
Souterrain, Paris, France

e
sp e
• Barton, N.R., R. Lien, and J. Lunde, 1974, Engineering Classification of Rock Masses for the

re itz
Design of Tunnel Support, Rock Mechanics 6, pp 183-236

ir w
• Bieniawski, Z.T., 1989, Engineering Rock Mass Classifications, John Wiley & Sons, New York

he - S
• Hoek, 2005, Practical Rock Engineering, Rockscience, Inc., Toronto, Canada Available on-line
at <www.rocscience.com> where many of Dr. Hoek’s papers are available

ft n
•

O tio
ITA Working Group No. 17 (2010), Long Tunnels at Great Depth, ITA Report 004, Available on-
line at <www.ita-aites.org>
•
© a
n nd
ITA Working Group No. 17 (2013), Adits for Long and Deep Tunnels, ITA Report 012, Available
on-line at <www.ita-aites.org>
tio ou

• Guglielmetti, Vittorio; Grasso, Piergiorgio;Mahtab, Ashraf; & Xu, Shuln; Editors, 2008,
ra F

Mechanized aTunnelling in Urban Areas, Taylor & Francis Group, London, 507 pp.
st T

• Lowson, A.R. & Bieniawski, Z.T. (2013) Critical Assessment of RMR-Based Tunnel Design
llu E

Practices: A Practical Engineer’s Approach, RETC

lI C

• Parker, Harvey W. 1996, Geotechnical Investigations, Chapter 4 of Tunnel Engineering

Al ITA

Handbook, 2nd Edition, edited by Kuesel & King, Chapman & Hall, New York
• USNC/TT (1984), Geotechnical Site Investigations for Underground Projects, U.S. National
©

Committee on Tunneling Technology, National Research Council, Washington, D.C.

• USACE, 1997. Engineering and Design - Tunnels and Shafts in Rock, Engineering Manual, EM
1110-2-2901, U.S. Army Corps of Engineer’s, Washington, D.C.
Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014
 Site Investigation: Conclusions

r-s
ne
 Geology Dominates Every Major Decision

tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
 Allow Geo-Issues their Proper Role in Planning & Design

ir w
he - S
 Challenges and Potential Benefits of the Underground are

ft n
Enormous

O tio
© a
 Exploration programs “see” only a very small % of volume
n nd
to be tunnelled especially long tunnels at great depth.
tio ou
ra F

(<0.0005%)
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA

• The Ground is the Load and it also Provides Support for Most
©

of the Load

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 Site Investigation: Conclusions
• Start Geotechnical Work in Conceptual Stage & Continue

r-s
ne
Monitoring during Operations

tiv nd
ow
• Conduct exploration in carefully planned Phases

ec rla
e
• Determine Rock Mass Properties taking into account the nature

sp e
re itz
and pay special attention to engineering properties/behavior of

ir w
he - S
discontinuities.

ft n
• Use Rock Classification Systems Carefully

O tio
© a
• They are not design methods but rather Aids to Design
n nd
tio ou

• Must not be blindly used in construction

ra F

• Use New Investigation Techniques

st T
llu E

• Inclined Borings on all rock projects

lI C
Al ITA

• Directionally Drilled Boring if cost effective

• TBMs impose more site investigation requirements
©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 Site Investigation:
Conclusions

r-s
• Pressure Tunnels require special attention

ne
tiv nd
–

ow
Must determine natural ground water level

ec rla
– Must be aware of potential open joints from valley stress relief

e
sp e
–

re itz
Must conduct many packer tests to determine permeability

ir w
– Must conduct hydraulic fracture tests to determine insitu stress

he - S
– Recognize that stress ratio must be determined

ft n
• Valley stress relief may adversely affect Ko

O tio
• Other areas may have high Ko
© a
n nd
– Must identify all adverse geology
tio ou
• Particularly erodible materials which may deteriorate with time
ra F

– Observational Approach during construction to confirm/modify design

st T

assumptions is essential
llu E
lI C

• May need special investigations to determine Em (Deformatility)

Al ITA

• TBMs impose additional requirements to site investigation

©

– Abrasion, clogging, chemical interactions with conditioners

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 Site Investigation: Conclusions

r-s
ne
• Use Risk Management to Plan/Manage Site

tiv nd
ow
ec rla
Investigations

e
sp e
re itz
• Budget about 3% of Construction Cost for Geotechnical

ir w
he - S
Investigation

ft n
O tio
• Conduct additional exploration to provide quantitative
© a
n nd
data that bidder/constructor needs to estimate his
tio ou

productivity and costs.

ra F
st T
llu E

 Good Exploration reduces Construction Cost by:

lI C
Al ITA

 10 to 15 Times the Cost of Exploration

©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 Overall Conclusion

r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
• Geology & Geotechnology are

sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
Essential to Planning, Design,

ft n
Construction, & Operations
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©

Tunnels for Energy | Iguassus Falls, Brazil – 09-10 May 2014

 ©
Al ITA
lI C
llu E
st T
ra F
tio ou
n nd
© a
O tio
ft n
he - S
ir w
re itz
Obrigado

sp e
ec rla
tiv nd
Harvey W. Parker
e
ow
ne
r-s
Thank You for your attention
 r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
TUNNELS FOR ENERGY

ec rla
e
sp e
Iguassu Falls, Brazil 09 - 10 May 2014

re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
Disclaimer
© a
n nd
A. The speakers are presenting their own personal views and are not expressing the
tio ou

view of the Foundation.

ra F
st T

B. Papers and documents displayed or handed out during the Event are copyrighted.
llu E

The participants must observe and comply with all applicable law regulations
lI C
Al ITA

concerning the copyright.

©