IES Bored Tunnel For MRT System PDF

3/6/2015
DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF

BORED TUNNELS FOR MRT SYSTEM
Wen Dazhi, BSc, MSc, PhD
PE, PE(Geo), AC(Geo), MIES, CEng, MICE, CPEng, MIEAust
Geotech & Tunnel Consult
Design and Construction of Bored Tunnels

for MRT System
Introduction
General Arrangement
Structural Design
Durability
Constrction
Conclusion
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 2
3/6/2015

for MRT System
Introduction
General Arrangement
Structural Design
Durability
Construction
Conclusion
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 3
INTRODUCTION
Phase I/II MRT - NSL and EWL opened progressively from
1987; NSL Extension opened in 2014
Changi Extension opened in 2002
North East Line opened in 2003
Circle Line / CCL Extension CCL3 opened in 2009, CCL 1/2
in 2010, CCL4/5 in 2011 and CCLe in 2012.
Downtown Line 1,2 and 3 and Downtown Line Extension:
DTL1 opened in 2013, DTL2 to be opened in 2016, DTL3 in
2017 and DTLe in 2024
Thomson East Coast Line to be opened in stages from 2019
to 2023
Others Woodland Extension, Boon Lay Extension, Jurong
East Modification Project, LRT, Dover Station and Canberra
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 4
3/6/2015
INTRODUCTION
Existing Network
NSL
PGLRT
BPLRT
NEL
SKLRT
EWL
Legend
CCL
Interchange Stations
EWL East West Line
NSL North South Line
NEL North East Line
CCL Circle Line
SKLRT Sengkang Light Rapid Transit (LRT)
PGLRT Punggol LRT
BPLRT Bukit Panjang LRT
Rail Length
May 2013
178 km
Slide 5
IES 27 May 2015
INTRODUCTION
Network by around 2020
Thomson Line
2019/20/21
Tuas West
Ext - 2016
Downtown Line
3 - 2017
Eastern Region Line around 2023
Downtown Line
2 - 2016
North-South Line
Extension - 2014
Downtown Line 1 - 2013
Legend
Rail Length
May 2013
178 km
by 2020
280km
IES 27 May 2015
Interchange Stations
Existing Rail Lines
Slide 6
3/6/2015
INTRODUCTION
Network by 2030
Cross
Island Line North East Line
Extension
Jurong
Region
Line
In
Progress
Downtown Line
Extension
Rail Length
2013
178 km
By 2020
280 km
By 2030
360 km
IES 27 May 2015
Circle Line Stage 6
Legend
Existing Rail Lines
New Rail Lines by 2020
New Rail Lines by 2030
Slide 7

for MRT System
Introduction
General Arrangement
Structural Design
Durability
Construction
Conclusion
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 8
3/6/2015
GENERAL ARRANGEMENT
Elements in a completed ring: Ordinary
Segments + Key + Top Segments next to
Key
Radial
joints
IES 27 May 2015
Circumferential
joint
Slide 9
Width of
segments
GENERAL ARRANGEMENT
Phase I/II Projects
Internal diameter
min 5.2m with 100mm for
construction tolerance
Adopted by D&B
Contractors: 5.23 to 5.4m
to provide more tolerance
IES 27 May 2015
Thickness: 225 - 250mm

Width: 1.0m
5 or 6 Segments + Key
No walkway
Slide 10
3/6/2015
GENERAL ARRANGEMENT
NEL/CAL Projects
Typical Example
IES 27 May 2015
Internal diameter: 5.8m (5.4m

for CAL) with 100mm for
construction tolerance
Thickness: 250mm, except
C708 (275mm)
Width: 1.2 m, except C704 /
C706 (1.5m) and CAL (1.4m)
Radial joints: block except C705
/ CAL (convex to convex)
5 Segments + Key, except C705
(6 Segments + key)
Taper rings
Tunnel walkway in NEL
Slide 11
GENERAL ARRANGEMENT
CCL 1 to 3
Internal diameter: 5.8m with walkway

Thickness: 275mm, Width: 1.4m
5 segments (67.5o) + key (22.5o)
40mm taper for curve negotiation
Radial Joints: convex to convex (2m radius)
with 2 bolts per segment
Circle Joints: block joint with 3 bolts per
segment & 1 bolt for the key segment
Curved bolts of 24mm diameter in bolt holes of
34 mm diameter
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 12
3/6/2015
GENERAL ARRANGEMENT
CCL 1 to 3
Slide 13
IES 27 May 2015
GENERAL ARRANGEMENT
CCL 1 to 3
Tapered Ring
Sequence of Left Hand Taper and Right Hand Taper
Sequence of Universal Rings

IES 27 May 2015
Slide 14
3/6/2015
GENERAL ARRANGEMENT
CCL 1 to 3
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 15
GENERAL ARRANGEMENT
CCL 1 to 3
Gasket
Groove
IES 27 May 2015
Gasket
Groove
Slide 16
3/6/2015
GENERAL ARRANGEMENT
CCL 1 to 3
Slide 17
IES 27 May 2015
GENERAL ARRANGEMENT
Summary
Ring
arrangement
Segment
angles
703
5+1
704
5+1
705
5+1+1
706
5+1
708
5+1
710
5+1
CAL
5+1
5 @ 67.5o
1 @ 22.5o
3 @ 72o
2 @ 62.6o
1 @ 18.8o
5 @ 60o
1 @ 45o
1 @ 15o
3 @ 72o
2 @ 65.1
1 @ 13.8o
3 @ 68.6o
2 @ 68.1o
1 @ 18 o
3 @ 72o
2 @ 64.5o
1 @ 15 o
5 @ 65.454o 5 @ 67.5o
1.5m
1.2m
1.5m
1.2m
1.2m
1.4m
1.4m
945mm 450mm
495mm
1:6
250
30
Straight
759mm 519mm
240mm
1:10
250
30
Curved
690mm 390mm
300mm
1:10
250
36
Straight
1113mm 708mm
405mm
1:6
275
30
Curved
909mm 609mm
300mm
1:8
250
25
Curved
1542mm 1202mm
340mm
1:8
250
30
Curved
1260mm 860mm
400mm
1:7
275
40
Curved
2 in circle
2 in radial
none in key
circle joint
4 in circle
2 in circle
2 in radial
2 in radial
1 in key circle none in key
joint
circle joint
4 in circle
2 in radial
1 in key
circle joint
2 in circle
Dowels for
2 in radial
circle
none in key 2 in radial
circle joint
3 in circle
2 in radial
1 in key
circle joint
M24 x
370mm
M24 x
476mm
M24 x
476mm
M24 x
430mm
M24 x
530mm
Width of
1.2m
ring
Width of key 1139mm 939mm
Total Taper 200mm
Taper of key 1: 12
Thickness 250
Taper
38
Type of
Curved
bolts
Number of 3 in circle
bolts per
2 in radial
segment
1 in key
radial
circle joint
Size of bolts M22 x
433mm
IES 27 May 2015
M22 x
340mm
Slide 18
CCL1,2,3
5+1
1 @ 32.73 o 1 @ 22.5 o
M24 x
465mm
3/6/2015
GENERAL ARRANGEMENT
Recent Projects
Recent projects similar general arrangement

Bolts: curved or straight bolts
Joints: block joints or convex to convex
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 19
GENERAL ARRANGEMENT
Key
Interface in radial
direction
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 20
10
3/6/2015
GENERAL ARRANGEMENT
Key
Interface parallel to
each other in vertical
direction
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 21
GENERAL ARRANGEMENT
Key
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 22
11
3/6/2015
GENERAL ARRANGEMENT
Key
Example of a Parallel Key

IES 27 May 2015
Slide 23
GENERAL ARRANGEMENT
Key
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 24
12
3/6/2015

for MRT System
Introduction
General Arrangement
Structural Design
Durability
Construction
Conclusion
Slide 25
IES 27 May 2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Loading on Segmental Lining
Analysis Method
Effect of Joints
Load Combination
RC Detailing Links and Fire Resistance
Fire Testing
Design of Radial Joints
Temporary Loading
Other Design Checks
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 26
13
3/6/2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Full overburden to be considered, except for

fresh or slightly weathered rock
Surcharge
Water pressure highest water table not necessarily the
governing water pressure
Loads imposed by adjacent structures

Effects of adjacent tunnels
Effects due to future adjacent construction
Internal loading e.g. live load from trains
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 27
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Other data suggest 40 to 70%, Mair (2006) 46th Rankine Lecture

IES 27 May 2015
Slide 28
14
3/6/2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Hashimoto, T. et al (2008) Proceedings of Geotechnical Aspect of Underground

Construction in Soft Ground
Slide 29
IES 27 May 2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Hashimoto, et al 2008 showed that
In soft clay ground, the long term earth pressure at tunnel

crown = static pressure, v +/- cohesion, c
Lining pressure is distributed more uniformly than

prediction over the ring
In stiff ground the magnitude and distribution of earth

pressure largely depends on the backfilling grouting
Clough & Schmidt (1981) showed that in clay the

eventual total load without plastic zones around the
tunnel, pi
pi = v vsin
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 30
15
3/6/2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Analysis Method
Continuum Model by Muir Wood with

modification by Curtis
Bedded beam model by Duddeck and Erdmann
Finite element or finite difference models
Slide 31
IES 27 May 2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Analysis Method
Overburden
pressure
Soil
pressure
Deformed tunnel to
ellipse shape
Circular tunnel
Stability of ring relies

on pressures around
the circumference.
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 32
16
3/6/2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Muir Wood Modified by Curtis
M = -ro re (2Sn + St) cos2/6

(hogging moment +)
N = -ro (Sn+2St)cos2/3 + pwre + No
(compression hoop trust +)
U = -rero3(2Sn+St)con2/18EI + Uw + Uu
(increase in radius +)
At crown, = 0 ; at axis = 90
Muir Wood, A. M. (1975) The circular tunnel in elastic ground, Geotechnique 25, No. 1, 115 127
Curtis, D. J. (1976) Discussion on the reference above. Geotechnique 26, No. 1, 231 - 237
Slide 33
IES 27 May 2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Sn =(1-Q2)po/2[1+Q2(3-2/3-4)]
(if St<)
Sn = {3(3-4)po/2 -[2Q2+(4-6)]}/[4Q2+5-6]
(if St>)
St = (1+2Q2)po/2[1+Q2(3-2/3-4)]
Q2 = Ecro3/12EI(1+)
= c + tan
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 34
17
3/6/2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
No = v'(1+k)re/[2+2Ecro/EA(1+)]
Uw = -pwrero/EA
Uu = -Noro/EA
po = v - h'
Slide 35
IES 27 May 2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Effect of Joints
Joint
Joint
Joint
Joint
Joints have no effect on lining stiffness if they are

close to or at points of contraflexure.
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 36
18
3/6/2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Effect of Joints
Joint
Joint
Joint
Joint
Significant reduction in stiffness if joints are not at or close to points of
contraflexure - The examples show there are effectively 8 joints in the lining.
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 37
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Effect of Joints
If more than 4 joints, then the lining will always be

less stiff than an un-jointed lining. Use formula
from Muir Wood (1975):
Il = Ij + (4/n) 2 I
Where: Il is moment of inertia of jointed lining
Ij is the moment of inertia of the joint (approx. 0)
n is the number of joints (if >4)
I is the moment of inertia of the un-jointed lining
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 38
19
3/6/2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Effect of Joints
More joints mean more flexibility, which

means larger deflection, but less moment
Linings are often designed to allow for
joints to calculate maximum deflection
(worst case), but no joints to calculate
maximum moment (also worst case). This
is especially so when joints between rings
are staggered.
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 39
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Effect of Joints
Staggered Joints: No reduction of lining stiffness for moments due to ground loading
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 40
20
3/6/2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Load Combination
Full overburden pressure in combination

with:
Ground water table at the ground surface with no
surcharge.
Ground water table at the ground surface with
surcharge.
Ground water table at worst credible level below
the ground surface with no surcharge.
Ground water table at worse credible level below
the ground surface with surcharge.
Other requirement by the client
Slide 41
IES 27 May 2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Load Combination
Load Cases
Rigid Ring with Short Term E for Concrete

Ultimate Limit State
Load Factor = 1.4 and 1.6
Serviceability Limit State
Load Factor = 1.0
75kN/m2 Uniform Surcharge
Water Table at Ground Surface
Full Section Moment of Inertia
IES 27 May 2015
Reduced Section Moment of Inertia
Short Term Concrete Young's Modulus
Water Table Worse Credible Level Below

Ground Surface
Slide 42
21
3/6/2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
RC Detailing
Main segment body: Design and detailing

to SS CP65 as short columns
Lining deemed to satisfy 4-hour fire rating
if detailed to SS CP65 or BS 8110
Designs to be based on Eurocodes from
ECL
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 43
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
RC Detailing - Links
CP65 / BS8110 require links to be used for

containment of compression reinforcement

Size: the larger of of largest bar diameter

and 6 mm
Spacing: max 12 x size of smallest
compression bar
Corner bar and each alternate bar to be
contained; no bar is to be further than 150mm
from a restrained bar
Necessary to have closely-spaced links in

tunnel segments?
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 44
22
3/6/2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Failure mechanism of short columns:

Cracking along the height of the column

Concrete cover spalls and longitudinal bars
exposed.
Concrete failure and local buckling of
longitudinal bars at the unsupported length
between the lateral ties
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 45
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Links are required

to prevent spalling of the concrete cover or
local buckling of longitudinal bars
to provide confinement that increases strength
and improves ductility
Segments are concave elements
ground at the extrados provides continuous
bracing to the concrete and the longitudinal
bars
Closely spaced links not necessary for
strength and ductility reasons
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 46
23
3/6/2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Links are still necessary to meet the fire rating

Tunnel segments are cast using high strength
low permeability concrete
When exposed to fire, these segments are
more likely to exhibit explosive spalling due to
build-up of steam pressure inside the
segments
Slide 47
IES 27 May 2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
RC Detailing Fire Resistance
Tensile stress
High
compressive
stress
Failure mechanism
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 48
24
3/6/2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
RC Detailing Fire Resistance
Spalling of the concrete segments in the Channel Tunnel fire

IES 27 May 2015
Slide 49
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Fire Testing
Fire tests were carried out to investigate the

enhancement in the fire resistance of concrete
specimens with steel mesh
Based on BS476 Standard Fire Curve upto 2
hours
Where mesh is used,
the link spacing is
300mm, double the
spacing for the control
specimen (150mm)
Time (mins)
20
40
60
80
100
120
1000
C)
1200
Temperature (
800
600
400
200
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 50
25
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 52
INTRADOS
150
SECTION B - B
325
8T10 U LINKS
R=30
R=30
4T10 LINKS
T13 LIFTING HOOKS
325
8T10 U LINKS
SETTING OUT POINT

FOR LIFTING HOOKS
(CENTER MARK)
325
8T10 U LINKS
T13 LIFTING HOOKS

150
4T10 LINKS @
APPROX. 300 c/c
Slide 51
50 x 50
x3mm Steel
Mesh
325
8T10 U LINKS
6T16 (T&B)
IES 27 May 2015
PLAN VIEW OF SLAB 2
4T13 (T&B)
325
7T10 U LINKS
INTRADOS
4T13 (T&B)
150
SECTION A - A
4T10 LINKS
T13 LIFTING HOOKS

R=30
150
4T10 LINKS @
APPROX. 150 c/c
PLAN VIEW OF SLAB 1
6T16 (T&B)
325
7T10 U LINKS
R=30
T13 LIFTING HOOKS
325
7T10 U LINKS
SETTING OUT POINT

FOR LIFTING HOOKS
(CENTER MARK)
325
7T10 U LINKS
3/6/2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Fire Testing
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Fire Testing
26
3/6/2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Fire Testing
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 53
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Fire Testing
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 54
27
3/6/2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Fire Testing
Condition of slab at about 30 minutes after test started

IES 27 May 2015
Slide 55
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Fire Testing
Condition of Segment at about 1 hour after test started

IES 27 May 2015
Slide 56
28
3/6/2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Fire Testing
Exposure of links after test
Slab1 : Control (150mm c/c link spacing)

IES 27 May 2015
Slide 57
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Fire Testing
Exposure of mesh after test
Slab 2: 300mm c/c link spacing & 50x50x3mm steel mesh

IES 27 May 2015
Slide 58
29
3/6/2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Fire Testing
Segment 1 : Control (150mm c/c link spacing)

IES 27 May 2015
Slide 59
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Fire Testing
Exposure of mesh after test
Segment 2: 300mm c/c link spacing & 50 x 50 x 3mm steel mesh

IES 27 May 2015
Slide 60
30
3/6/2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Fire Testing
Observations during testing:

10mins after tests started, traces of water
appeared & cracks developed on all sides of the
specimens
Spalling accompanied by noise of explosion
initiated at about 15mins after commencement of
tests and lasted for about 15mins, beyond which
no spalling occurs (no noise of explosion)
During spalling, water flowed at a more distinct rate
& cracks widened & propagated
After spalling, water continued to flow & steam was
observed until end of tests
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 61
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Fire Testing
The presence of wire mesh retained the

concrete on the underside of specimens
Min spalling of concrete beyond the wire
mesh
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 62
31
3/6/2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Fire Resistance
Provision of links at inner face according to

code requirements deemed to comply
Use of anti-spalling mesh
Fire board
Use of polypropylene fibres
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 63
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Checking of bearing stress

Checking of bursting stress
Eccentricity due to rotation
Eccentricity due to building tolerance
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 64
32
3/6/2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Ref. A. Williams. Technical Report 552, Cement and Concrete

Association Publication
Radial
joints
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 65
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 66
33
3/6/2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
To check bearing
stress: p < 105
N/mm2 or 2 fcu
To check splitting
force, similar to
prestressing end
block design
Ref: BE5/75: Highway and
Traffic Technical
Memorandum (Bridges)
Slide 67
IES 27 May 2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Joint rotation due to

deflection of ring
Joint eccentricity due to
build tolerance
Loading due to
compression of gaskets
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 68
34
3/6/2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Temporary Loading
Demoulding / Handling
Stacking
Grouting Pressure
Shield Jacking Force
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 69
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Temporary Loading
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 70
35
3/6/2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Temporary Loading
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 71
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Temporary Loading
Active
grouting ports
Grouting
pressures around
tunnel lining
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 72
36
3/6/2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Temporary Loading
Slide 73
IES 27 May 2015
Geotech73
& Tunnel Consult
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Temporary Loading
Similarly for radial joints, bearing stress and bursting

force due to TBM jacks need to be checked
Jacking force typically in the range of 20 to 30MN

Tunnelling in full face rock does not necessarily
mean higher jacking force
Total jacking capacity can be as high as 45 MN,

depending on the machine design; and should be
checked in the design
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 74
37
3/6/2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Strengthened Edge Beam at Circle Joint
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 75
Geotech75
& Tunnel Consult
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 76
38
3/6/2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
C104: Newton Novena- Toa Payoh

C108: Tanjong Pagar Raffles Place
5 Segments + Key, Thickness: 250mm
C106: City Hall Dhoby Ghaut

Somerset
6 Segments + Key, Thickness: 235mm
Slide 77
IES 27 May 2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Other Design Checks - Loading due to Adjacent Piles
Divide the pile into
h1
N1 =
fs**D
v1
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 78
segments of 1m or other
suitable length till tunnel
level
Based on the ultimate
friction force on the pile /
soil, estimate the stress at
the crown level of the
tunnel due to this force
Superimpose all the
stresses due to the forces
from all segments as
additional design pressure
for the tunnel
39
3/6/2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Tunnels in Close Proximity
rb
ra
ub
Ground movement, uo for

a volume loss of Vs
ua
ro
uo = ro{1-
(1-Vs)}}
ua = uoro /ra ub = uoro /rb
= (ua-ub)/2
M = (3EI)/ r2
Wen, D, Poh, J & Y.H. Ng (2004) Design consideration for bored tunnels in close proximity. Proceedings of the 30th ITA-AITES World
Tunnel Congress, Singapore 22-27 May 2004.
Slide 79
IES 27 May 2015
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Other Design Checks - Stability Check
Ref: LTA Design Criteria

IES 27 May 2015
Slide 80
40
3/6/2015

for MRT System
Introduction
General Arrangement
Structural Design
Durability
Constrction
Conclusion
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 81
DURABILITY
Durability Objective
Mechanism of Corrosion and Examples
Design Measures
Waterproofing
Steel Fibre Reinforced Concrete Segment
Maintenance Grouting to Seal Seepage
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 82
41
3/6/2015
DURABILITY OBJECTIVE
The durability objective of major
infrastructures is typically to achieve a
service life, with appropriate maintenance,
of 100 or 120 years for all permanent
structures.
Measures need to be taken in design,
construction and operation maintenance
to achieve the objective.
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 83
DURABILITY
Mechanism of Corrosion in Tunnel Segments

IES 27 May 2015
Slide 84
42
3/6/2015
DURABILITY
Concrete Spalling due to Re-Bar Corrosion

IES 27 May 2015
Slide 85
DURABILITY
Salts Deposited on Lining Surface
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 86
43
3/6/2015
DURABILITY
Concrete Spalling and Repair

IES 27 May 2015
Slide 87
DURABILITY
Concrete Repair by Grouting

IES 27 May 2015
Slide 88
44
3/6/2015
DURABILITY
Seepage through joints

Problem areas
Segment joints;
interface with C&C
tunnels and with
crosspassages
Slide 89
IES 27 May 2015
DURABILITY
Design Measures
Design measures:

Concrete with low permeability and low chloride

diffusion: Cement with slag or pfa; use of silica
fume in the mix; good curing
Protective coating to extrados of segment
Detailing adequate cover to re-bars, including
drilling positions / bolt pockets
Electrically continuous steel cages as provision
for future cathodic protection, if required.
Provision of reinforcement mesh in track bed to
collect stray current
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 90
45
3/6/2015
DURABILITY
Design Measures
Concrete grade: 60 N/mm2 with silica

fume.
Concrete chloride diffusion rate to be no

more than 1000 coulomb.
Concrete additives can be used to achieve
the specified performance.

Cover 40 mm
Epoxy coating of external surface of
segments
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 91
WATERPROOFING
Phase I/II
Simple rectangular-section butyl
rubber
Composite neoprene and buytl rubber
strips
Neoprene gaskets
Hydrophilic strips
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 92
46
3/6/2015
WATERPROOFING
Phase I/II
Butyl rubber plastic and
once compressed, unable to
recover original shape
Composite neoprene and
butyl effectiveness reduced
if packing is required; and can
be damaged due to
misalignment around key
segments
Neoprene gaskets corners
proved to be problematic
Hydrophilic gaskets
performed the best among all
the materials
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 93
WATERPROOFING
NEL Projects
Contract specification required the use of both

EPDM gaskets and hydrophilic sealing strips
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 94
47
3/6/2015
WATERPROOFING
NEL Projects
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 95
WATERPROOFING
NEL Projects
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 96
48
3/6/2015
WATERPROOFING
CCL Projects
Indicative gasket details

on design drawing
Proposed and accepted

gasket
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 97
WATERPROOFING
CCL Projects
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 98
49
3/6/2015
WATERPROOFING
CCL Projects
Slide 99
IES 27 May 2015
WATERPROOFING
3.5mm
CCL Projects
Hydrophilic
strip
pressure
seal
EPDM pressure seal
16.5mm
Hydrophilic
strip
compressive
force
EPDM compressive force
10 mm
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 100
50
3/6/2015
WATERPROOFING
Gasket Testing
Testing should be specified by designer

Typically, test pressure to be resisted is
twice maximum current water pressure
to allow for aging of gaskets
Test step (offset of gaskets) usually
higher than maximum specified step in
construction tolerances
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 101
WATERPROOFING
Gasket Testing
Gasket Durability
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 102
51
3/6/2015
WATERPROOFING
Gasket Testing
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 103
WATERPROOFING
Gasket Testing
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 104
52
3/6/2015
WATERPROOFING
Gasket Testing
Testing pressure to be 2 times the maximum pressure

IES 27 May 2015
Slide 105
STEEL FIBRE REINFORCED CONCRETE

(SFRC) SEGMENTS
Elimination of risk of steel bar corrosion

Elimination of concrete spalling risk
More durable segment with min
maintenance effort.
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 106
53
3/6/2015
STEEL FIBRE REINFORCED CONCRETE

(SFRC) SEGMENTS
Steel fibres - Double end hooked
IES 27 May 2015
Steel fibres Crimped or Straight
Slide 107
SFRC SEGMENTS
Clients Perspective
Provide best durability available

Minimize handling damage
Achieve fire resistance with polypropylene
fibres
Save cost (10% - 20%)
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 108
54
3/6/2015
SFRC SEGMENTS
Designers Perspective
Design guides available, but no design code
Design supported by prototype testing
Quality testing beam tests, washing-out tests
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 109
SFRC SEGMENTS
Contractors Perspective
Ease of casting
Less damage
Ease of repair
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 110
55
3/6/2015
SFRC SEGMENTS
UKs Experience
30 / m3 savings
compared with re-bar
segments
90% segments using
SFRC; 10% using steel
bars for shaft
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 111
SFRC SEGMENTS
UKs Experience
Enhanced durability
Enhanced fire resistance
with polypropylene fibres
Design based on
established guidelines with
testing
Easy casting no steel bar
handling and minimum
automation required
Smaller segments without
steel bars easy installation
and lower risk of damage
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 112
56
3/6/2015
SFRC SEGMENTS
Testing Programme with NUS/NTU
Slide 113
IES 27 May 2015
SFRC SEGMENTS
Implementation in DTL3
SFRC segments for DTL3: 2350m

of bored tunnel for C933
Cross Over
at Jln Besar
Both tracks
in Kallang
~350m
Tunnel Escape
Shaft
Both tracks in Old
Alluvium ~1350m
Upper track in Kallang;

Lower track in OA, short
length in Kallang ~650m
Tunnel Escape Shaft
Sungei Road
Station
IES 27 May 2015
Jalan Besar
Station
Slide 114
Kalang Bahru
Station
57
3/6/2015
SFRC SEGMENTS
5.8m I.D., 275mm thk.
1.4m wide, +/-25mm
taper
5 ordinary segments,
2 counter-keys and 1
key segment
Increase no. of
segments to minimize
potential damage
during handling
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 115
SFRC SEGMENTS
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 116
58
3/6/2015
SFRC SEGMENTS
Design based on un-reinforced secion of

segment
Full scale tests of segments and joints carried
out to verify the structural performance
RILEM TC 162-TDF used as a reference
Quality control during construction
Slide 117
IES 27 May 2015
MAINTENANCE
Grout injection often used for tunnel repair
Material selection critical
Injection Materials
Properties
Water-reactive
Polyurethane Foam
Flexible
Polyurethane
Epoxy
Cementitious
Grout
Strength
Elasticity/
Flexibility
Moisture
Compatibility
X = Not relevant
IES 27 May 2015
= Good
Slide 118
= Excellent
59
3/6/2015
MAINTENANCE
Injection
Aim
Closing /
Sealing
Rigid
Connection
Flexible
Connection
Crack Condition
Dry
Wet / Water Bearing

without Pressure
Water Bearing with

Pressure
Epoxy
PU
CG
Epoxy
CG
PU
CG
Water-reactive PU
CG
Flexible PU
Flexible PU
Water-reactive PU
followed by flexible PU
PU = Polyurethane CG = Cementitious Grout

IES 27 May 2015
Slide 119
MAINTENANCE
Water Reactive Polyurethane Foam Open Cell Structure

IES 27 May 2015
Slide 120
60
3/6/2015
MAINTENANCE
Flexible PU Grout or Acrylic Gel

IES 27 May 2015
Slide 121
MAINTENANCE
For dry crack repair at casting yard, epoxy
resin should be used. Cracks should be dry
and dust free.
For wet / damp crack repair after installation,
flexible, low viscosity polyurethane grout
should be used.
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 122
61
3/6/2015
MAINTENANCE
Where water is seeping through cracks
under pressure, a two-staged grouting
procedure should be adopted. The first
stage should use water-reactive
polyurethane foam to stop the seepage,
followed by the second stage with flexible,
two component, low viscosity polyurethane
grout.
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 123

for MRT System
Introduction
General Arrangement
Structural Design
Durability
Construction
Conclusion
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 124
62
3/6/2015
CONSTRUCTION
Variable ground condition

TBM Types used in MRT Tunnel Constructions
Challenges in Tunnelling Works
Slide 125
IES 27 May 2015
CONSTRUCTION
Variable Ground Condition
Mandai
Punggol
Serangoon
Boon Lay
Scale :
-2
0 1 2
Dhoby
4 (Km)
Outram Park
Kallang Formation
Geological Map
IES 27 May 2015
Ghaut
Newton
Old Alluvium
Jurong Formation
Slide 126
Bukit Timah
Granite
Gombak Norite
Reclamation
63
3/6/2015
CONSTRUCTION
Variable Ground Condition
M
OA
FCBB
GV
F/E
S4
GIV
GI/GII/GIII
Jurong Formation
Bukit Timah Granite
(Sedimentary Rock)
(Igneous Rock)
In-filled Valleys Deep weathering of granite

Slide 127
IES 27 May 2015
CONSTRUCTION
TBM Types
Phase 1/2 MRT Construction in 1980s: Greathead
Shield with hydraulic backhoe excavator or roadheaders
/ 1 EPBM / 1 TBM
Compressed air used extensively
Grouting done through the segments
Greathead Shield
IES 27 May 2015
EPBM (C301)
Slide 128
64
3/6/2015
CONSTRUCTION
TBM Types
NEL: 14 EPBMs (2 Dual Modes), 2 Open Face TBMs
Automatic tail void grouting
Face pressure and stability by controlling the extrusion of
the spoil through the screw conveyor and the advancement
of the machine
EPBM
(C706)
EPBM
(C705)
Slide 129
IES 27 May 2015
EPBM
(C710)
CONSTRUCTION
TBM Types
Marine clay
Extrados of
segment
Tail void
grout
Automatic Tail Void Grouting

IES 27 May 2015
Slide 130
65
3/6/2015
CONSTRUCTION
TBM Types
Plastic Nature of Spoils to Maintain Face Pressure in EPBM
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 131
CONSTRUCTION
TBM Types
No Plug, Material Saturated and Flowing: EPBM in mixed tunnel face

IES 27 May 2015
Slide 132
66
3/6/2015
CONSTRUCTION
TBM Types
Over-excavation in
Mixed Tunnel Face by
EPBM
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 133
CONSTRUCTION
TBM Types
Circle Line: 19 EPBM, 8 Slurry TBMs
Scanners / belt weighing experimented and
adopted subsequently
Slurry TBM used for sections with granite
Slurry TBM
(C854)
IES 27 May 2015
Slurry Treatment
Plant
Slide 134
EPBM
(C823)
67
3/6/2015
CONSTRUCTION
TBM Types
Slurry TBM: Face pressure is

maintained by controlling the volume
difference of the bentonite suspension
supplied to the chamber and the
suspension combined with excavated
material removed from it
Slide 135
IES 27 May 2015
CONSTRUCTION
TBM Types
DTL1: 3 EPBMs
DTL2: 10 EPBMs + 9 Slurry TBMs
DTL3: 19 EPBMs
EPBM
(C902)
IES 27 May 2015
Slurry TBM
(C915)
Slide 136
EPBM
(C917)
68
3/6/2015
CONSTRUCTION
TBM Types
For the Thomson Line, there will be 38 TBMs, of
which 26 are expected to be slurry machines and
12 EPBMs. 20 new shields will also used for
some tunnel drives
For ECL, most likely EPBM would be selected
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 137
CONSTRUCTION
Challenges for Tunnelling Works
More efficient and accurate methods are

required to determine
rock levels (interface of soil and rock)
depth of existing piles for buildings close to or above
tunnel alignment
to minimize construction risk in urban areas
Reliable technology for investigation and

construction under or around the Natural
Reserve where strict controls will be in place
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 138
69
3/6/2015
CONSTRUCTION
Tunnel
Alignment
Slide 139
IES 27 May 2015
CONSTRUCTION
To have more boreholes practical

problems
To carry out geophysical survey
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 140
70
3/6/2015
CONSTRUCTION
Commonly used methods

Electrical resistivity
Seismic refraction
Seismic reflection
Surface wave method
Geo-tomography
141
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 141
CONSTRUCTION
Interpreted Profile of Surface Wave Velocity
Interpreted Rock Profile

IES 27 May 2015
Slide 142
71
3/6/2015
CONSTRUCTION
ABH2
6 FILL
ABH2
1 FILL
F1
F1
GV &
GVI
GV &
GVI
GII & GI
ABH1
8 FILL
F2
E
F1
F2
F1
GVI &
GV
GIII, GII &
G1
GIII &
GII
Soil / Rock Interface Accuracy ?
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 143
CONSTRUCTION
Detection of Pile
Depth Accuracy?
Estimated Pile Penetration:

21~22m (or) 26~27 m
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 144
72
3/6/2015
CONSTRUCTION
Detection of
Pile Depth
Accuracy?
Ground
Penetration
Radar Survey
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 145
CONCLUSION
Major land transport facilities to be
built in Singapore
Design and construction technology
have been advanced over the years
New methods and technologies
required to address challenges
IES 27 May 2015
Slide 146
73
3/6/2015
Thank You
74

IES Bored Tunnel For MRT System PDF

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

IES Bored Tunnel For MRT System PDF

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

3/6/2015

DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF

Geotech & Tunnel Consult

Design and Construction of Bored Tunnels

Geotech & Tunnel Consult

Design and Construction of Bored Tunnels

Geotech & Tunnel Consult

Geotech & Tunnel Consult

IES 27 May 2015

Geotech & Tunnel Consult

Eastern Region Line around 2023

IES 27 May 2015

Geotech & Tunnel Consult

IES 27 May 2015

Circle Line Stage 6

Geotech & Tunnel Consult

Design and Construction of Bored Tunnels

Geotech & Tunnel Consult

IES 27 May 2015

Geotech & Tunnel Consult

IES 27 May 2015

Thickness: 225 - 250mm

Geotech & Tunnel Consult

IES 27 May 2015

Internal diameter: 5.8m (5.4m

Geotech & Tunnel Consult

Internal diameter: 5.8m with walkway

IES 27 May 2015

Geotech & Tunnel Consult

IES 27 May 2015

Geotech & Tunnel Consult

Sequence of Left Hand Taper and Right Hand Taper

Sequence of Universal Rings

Geotech & Tunnel Consult

IES 27 May 2015

Geotech & Tunnel Consult

IES 27 May 2015

Geotech & Tunnel Consult

IES 27 May 2015

Geotech & Tunnel Consult

IES 27 May 2015

Geotech & Tunnel Consult

Recent projects similar general arrangement

IES 27 May 2015

Geotech & Tunnel Consult

IES 27 May 2015

Geotech & Tunnel Consult

IES 27 May 2015

Geotech & Tunnel Consult

IES 27 May 2015

Geotech & Tunnel Consult

Example of a Parallel Key

Geotech & Tunnel Consult

IES 27 May 2015

Geotech & Tunnel Consult

Design and Construction of Bored Tunnels

IES 27 May 2015

Geotech & Tunnel Consult

Geotech & Tunnel Consult

Full overburden to be considered, except for

Loads imposed by adjacent structures

Geotech & Tunnel Consult

Other data suggest 40 to 70%, Mair (2006) 46th Rankine Lecture