Home | About Journal  | Editorial Board  | Instruction | Subscription | Advertisement | Message Board  | Contact Us | 中文
MODERN TUNNELLING TECHNOLOGY 2019, Vol. 56 Issue (1) :14-21    DOI:
Article Current Issue | Next Issue | Archive | Adv Search << [an error occurred while processing this directive] | [an error occurred while processing this directive] >>
Discussion on Classification Method and Criterion for the Deep-buried and Shallow-buried Rock Tunnels
(1 Logistical Engineering University of PLA, Chongqing 401311;2 China Construction Tunnel Corp. Ltd., Chongqing 401147; 3 Air Force Engineering University, Xi′an 710038; 4 Fujian Minwu Great Wall Geotechnical Engineering Co., Ltd., Fuzhou 350012)
Download: PDF (2286KB)   HTML (1KB)   Export: BibTeX or EndNote (RIS)      Supporting Info
Abstract The traditional classification for the deep-buried and shallow-buried tunnels is based on the Protodya? konov′s pressure arch theory and not reasonable enough due to its limitation of this theory. In view of this the finite element limit analysis method was applied to the classification for the deep-buried and shallow-buried tunnels, and three principles were put forward. For the rock tunnel with surrounding rock of Ⅳ and Ⅴ, the classification for the deep-buried and shallow-buried tunnels is based on the failure modes of tunnel, it is defined as the shallow-buried tunnel if the fracture plane cuts through ground surface while it is defined as the deep-buried one if the fracture plane doesn′t cut through ground surface, the height of pressure arch of the shallow-buried tunnel obtained by using FEM strength reduction method can be taken as the dividing line for the shallow-buried and deep-buried tunnels.For the rock tunnel with surrounding rock of higher grade, the deep-buried and shallow-buried tunnels are defined according to the stability safety factor of the unlined tunnel, it is defined as the deep-buried tunnel when the stability safety factor is more than or equals 1.5 while the failure mode should also be considered to define them when the stability safety factor is less than 1.5. In addition, the division of deep-buried and shallow-buried tunnels should still consider the effects of environment, construction, geological structure, unstable block, which will cause the surrounding rock collapse and form loose pressure. At last, it is suggested that for the deep-buried and shallow-buried tunnels it can be calculated by elastic-plastic numerical analysis method, but for the shallow-buried tunnel it should also be analyzed according to the load-structure model to ensure safety.
Service
Email this article
Add to my bookshelf
Add to citation manager
Email Alert
RSS
Articles by authors
KeywordsDeep-buried tunnel   Shallow-buried tunnel   Classification criterion   Protodyakonov&prime   s pressure arch   FEM strength reduction   Height of shallow-buried pressure arch   Stability safety factor     
Abstract: The traditional classification for the deep-buried and shallow-buried tunnels is based on the Protodya? konov′s pressure arch theory and not reasonable enough due to its limitation of this theory. In view of this the finite element limit analysis method was applied to the classification for the deep-buried and shallow-buried tunnels, and three principles were put forward. For the rock tunnel with surrounding rock of Ⅳ and Ⅴ, the classification for the deep-buried and shallow-buried tunnels is based on the failure modes of tunnel, it is defined as the shallow-buried tunnel if the fracture plane cuts through ground surface while it is defined as the deep-buried one if the fracture plane doesn′t cut through ground surface, the height of pressure arch of the shallow-buried tunnel obtained by using FEM strength reduction method can be taken as the dividing line for the shallow-buried and deep-buried tunnels.For the rock tunnel with surrounding rock of higher grade, the deep-buried and shallow-buried tunnels are defined according to the stability safety factor of the unlined tunnel, it is defined as the deep-buried tunnel when the stability safety factor is more than or equals 1.5 while the failure mode should also be considered to define them when the stability safety factor is less than 1.5. In addition, the division of deep-buried and shallow-buried tunnels should still consider the effects of environment, construction, geological structure, unstable block, which will cause the surrounding rock collapse and form loose pressure. At last, it is suggested that for the deep-buried and shallow-buried tunnels it can be calculated by elastic-plastic numerical analysis method, but for the shallow-buried tunnel it should also be analyzed according to the load-structure model to ensure safety.
KeywordsDeep-buried tunnel,   Shallow-buried tunnel,   Classification criterion,   Protodyakonov&prime,   s pressure arch,   FEM strength reduction,   Height of shallow-buried pressure arch,   Stability safety factor     
Cite this article:   
.Discussion on Classification Method and Criterion for the Deep-buried and Shallow-buried Rock Tunnels[J]  MODERN TUNNELLING TECHNOLOGY, 2019,V56(1): 14-21
URL:  
http://www.xdsdjs.com/EN/      或     http://www.xdsdjs.com/EN/Y2019/V56/I1/14
 
No references of article
[1] LIU Feixiang1,2.SCDZ133 Intelligent Multi-function Trolley and Its Application in Tunnelling[J]. MODERN TUNNELLING TECHNOLOGY, 2019,56(4): 1-7
[2] ZHOU Wenbo WU Huiming ZHAO Jun.On Driving Strategy of the Shield Machine with Atmospheric Cutterhead in Mudstone Strata[J]. MODERN TUNNELLING TECHNOLOGY, 2019,56(4): 8-15
[3] CHEN Zhuoli1,2 ZHU Xunguo1,2 ZHAO Deshen1,2 WANG Yunping1,2.Research on Anchorage Mechanism of Yielding Support in the Deep-buried Tunnel[J]. MODERN TUNNELLING TECHNOLOGY, 2019,56(4): 16-22
[4] WANG Quansheng.Case Study Based Analysis of Segment Division Principles of Rectangular Shield Tunnels[J]. MODERN TUNNELLING TECHNOLOGY, 2019,56(4): 23-29
[5] ZHANG Heng1 ZHU Yimo1 LIN Fang1 CHEN Shougen1 YANG Jiasong2.Study on Optimum Excavation Height of Middle Bench in an Underground Cavern Based on Q System Design[J]. MODERN TUNNELLING TECHNOLOGY, 2019,56(4): 30-37
[6] LI Hao.Geological Survey on Breakthrough Section of the Large-section Karst Tunnel by Radio Wave Penetration Method[J]. MODERN TUNNELLING TECHNOLOGY, 2019,56(4): 38-42
[7] CEN Peishan1 TIAN Kunyun2 WANG Ximin3.Study on Gas Hazard Assessment of Yangshan Tunnel on Inner MongoliaJiangxi Railway[J]. MODERN TUNNELLING TECHNOLOGY, 2019,56(4): 43-49
[8] ZHU Jianfeng1 GONG Quanmei2.Centrifugal Model Test on Long-term Settlement of Shield Tunnels in Soft Soils[J]. MODERN TUNNELLING TECHNOLOGY, 2019,56(4): 49-55
[9] CHEN Youzhou1 REN Tao2 DENG Peng2 WANG Bin3.Prediction of Tunnel Settlements by Optimized Wavelet Neural Network Based on ABC[J]. MODERN TUNNELLING TECHNOLOGY, 2019,56(4): 56-61
[10] WANG Dengmao TENG Zhennan TIAN Zhiyu CHEN Zhixue.Reflection on Disease Treatment and Design Issues of Unconventional Rockburst of Bamiao Tunnel on Taoyuan-Bazhong Highway[J]. MODERN TUNNELLING TECHNOLOGY, 2019,56(4): 62-68
[11] WU Shuyuan1 CHENG Yong1 XIE Quanmin2 LIU Jiguo1 CHEN Biguang1.Analysis on the Causes of the Large Deformation of Surrounding Rocks of Milashan Tunnel in Tibet[J]. MODERN TUNNELLING TECHNOLOGY, 2019,56(4): 69-73
[12] WANG Sui1,2,3 ZHONG Zuliang3 LIU Xinrong3 WU Bo1,2,4 ZHAO Yongbo1,2 LI Zhantao1,2.D-P Yield Criterion Based Elastoplastic Solution of the Circular Pressure Tunnel[J]. MODERN TUNNELLING TECHNOLOGY, 2019,56(4): 74-80
[13] LI Ming YAN Songhong PAN Chunyang ZHANG Xubin.Analysis of Fluid-Solid Coupling Effect during Excavation of the Water-rich Large-section Loess Tunnel[J]. MODERN TUNNELLING TECHNOLOGY, 2019,56(4): 81-88
[14] ZHANG Kai1 CHEN Shougen2 HUO Xiaolong3 TAN Xinrong4.Extension Assessment Model for the Risk of Water Inflow in Karst Tunnels and Its Application[J]. MODERN TUNNELLING TECHNOLOGY, 2019,56(4): 89-96
[15] LI Jie1 ZHANG Bin1 FU Ke1 MA Chao1 GUO Jingbo1 NIU Decao2.Site Data Based Prediction of Shield Driving Performance in Compound Strata[J]. MODERN TUNNELLING TECHNOLOGY, 2019,56(4): 97-104
Copyright 2010 by MODERN TUNNELLING TECHNOLOGY