Engineering Geology 71 (2004) 199 211 www.elsevier.

com/locate/enggeo

A case history of Tunnel Boring Machine jamming in an inter-layer shear zone at the Yellow River Diversion Project in China
Yanjun Shang a,*, Jihong Xue b, Sijing Wang a, Zhifa Yang a, Jie Yang c
a

Key Laboratory of Engineering Geomechanics, Institute of Geology and Geophysics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100029, China b Deputy Site Agent of CMC for Connecting WorksLot 5 of Shanxi Wanjiazhai Yellow River Diversion Project, Chaicun Town, P.O. Box 18, Taiyuan 030023, China c Department of Civil Engineering, Xian University of Science and Technology, Xian 710054, China Received 10 July 2002; accepted 6 March 2003

Abstract This is a case study of a Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM) jamming in a section of the Connection Works No. 7 tunnel of the Yellow River Diversion Project (YRDP) in China. Analysis of tunnel lithology, rock convergence by shearing, rock strength and ground stress, indicates that a high rate of convergence within an inter-layer shear zone in the lower part of an anticline was a dominant factor in the jamming. In addition, the shield encountered unfavorable tunnelling conditions in the form of wet clay, groundwater inflow, and cavities, coincident with tensile stresses in the lower part of an adjacent syncline. Based on these diagnoses, economical and quick measures were adopted, including additional excavation outside of the shield leaving free space to release the TBM. After 9 days of being jammed, the TBM was totally released and resumed normal excavation. This example highlights lessons learned from folding and inter-layer shear zone in TBM tunnelling. D 2003 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: TBM; Inter-layer shear zone; Fold; Marl

1. Introduction Jointed and fractured rock masses, fault zones, cavities and groundwater inflow are frequently encountered and discussed with respect to engineering geological conditions unfavorable to tunnelling. Most of them have been included in case studies of TBM tunnelling. Barton (2000) has modified his wellknown empirical rock mass classification for TBM case histories, known as QTBM. Einstein (2000) re-

* Corresponding author. Fax: +86-10-62040574. E-mail address: jun94@mail.igcas.ac.cn (Y. Shang).

viewed case histories in the Opalinus Clayshale. Alber (2000) evaluated advance rates of hard rock TBMs and their effects on project economics. Barla (1999) considered the protection of springs during excavation of large diameter TBM tunnels. Hamza et al. (1999) monitored and studied ground movement due to the construction of cut-and-cover structures and a slurry shield TBM in the Cairo Metro. Swoboda and Abu-Krisha (1999) used 3D numerical modeling for analysis of TBM tunnelling in consolidated clay. However, as a feature of geological settings, folds have not received much attention. In large-scale hydro projects for transferring water from southern to north-

0013-7952/$ - see front matter D 2003 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/S0013-7952(03)00134-0

200

Y. Shang et al. / Engineering Geology 71 (2004) 199211

ern China, problems associated with geological structures including faulting and folding will be a common occurrence (Fu, 1998). It has been found difficult to construct consistent structural geological models for TBM tunnelling sites, given the linear nature of tunnel site investigations. Therefore, detailed site investigation and probe drilling are necessary in complex geological conditions in order for TBMs to perform to specification (Pelizza et al., 2001; Barton, 2000). For example, the approaches to fault zones should integrate field investigation, bore drilling, probe-drilling, geological radar, and daily logging (Zhang, 1999; Su et al., 2000, 2001; Xu et al., 2000; Liu and Cheng, 2000). Here, it should be noted again that typical case histories of empirical or actual investigation results require complete re-evaluation and retrospective study (Bappler, 2001) for the construction of different structural geological models. Obviously, these models are significant in integrating exceptional conditions encountered in tunnelling. Moreover, they will promote the advanced development of TBM techniques (Voerckel and Peters, 2001). In folding section with high ground stress, the inter-layer shear zones are categorized as either being under-developed or well developed according to the shearing displacement being dominant and apparent or not. Only the latter category affects the stability of rock engineering works (Qu and Xu, 1979; Xiao et al., 2000). Laboratory studies indicate that the two types of inter-layer shear zone are differentiated from the shearing function which the inter-layer zone experienced (Morgensten and Tchaleko, 1967). We know little about how the fold geometry adjustment affects location of the inter-layer shear zone, except about the evaluations of the effects of lithological properties on fold geometry according to mechanical analysis and modeling (Ramsay and Huber, 1987). With an increase in the imposed stress, a large displacement due to shearing will occur, which must involve the movement of the heavy rock layers overburden, in addition to localized stress concentration, as indicated by field evidences (Qu, 1985; Xiao et al., 2000). This kind of phenomenon is widely known in Daqing Petroleum Field, Northeast China, where the convergence often results in borehole failure during drilling to a large depth because of secondary inter-layer shearing (Prof. Jiamo Xu, per-

sonal communications, 2001). When inter-layer shear appears in the middle of a coal seam, it is traditionally known as a bedding shear zone, or soft-coal band (Li, 2001). To perform analyses of shear zones and joints, a simple contactfriction interface element for 2D models is applied (Lei et al., 1995). The contact zone (esp. inter-layer shearing zone) between two beds (incompetent and competent) with distinctive mechanical features generally deformed and failed due to secondary shearing (Ramsay, 1967). The shearing displacement resulted from simple shearing usually occurs in the soft rocks or layers adjacent to the contact zone (Qu, 1985). This movement not only induces the disintegration of intact rock masses, but also disturbs the original distribution of ground stresses and results in convergence (Hudson and Harrison, 1992). According to numerous case examples of underground engineering in soft rocks, when a project requires a depth of more than 200 m and especially more than 300 m, the convergence values are often large. Pelizza et al. (2001) have discussed the instability of the tunnel excavation faces and walls, fault zones, and squeezing/swelling ground as typical limiting ground conditions affecting the performance of Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM). They noted that jamming of rock TBMs for long periods of time due to convergence problems has not been heard of, at least recently. This case study of TBM jamming, which occurred on 18 June 2001, in the Connection Works No. 7 tunnel of Yellow River Diversion Project (YRDP) (Fig. 1) provides an example of this kind of problem. With a total length of 13.52 km, the No. 7 tunnel excavation of the YRDP (Fig. 1) started in December 2000. The final breakthrough to the TBM exit shaft was achieved by the end of September 2001. A 1994 Robbins Double Shield TBM model 155-274 with a 4.8-m external diameter was used, together with a complete backup system. It has a unit square cutting power of 52 kW/m2 with two-speed motors. The modified length of the backup line was 330 m; its production rate was 2.4 m/cycle. Although four Robbins Double Shield TBMs had been previously used in the YRDP with great success (Martinis, 1995; Liu et al., 2000; Cao et al., 2001), severe jamming initially occurred in No. 7 tunnel. The lessons learned from this are discussed below.

Y. Shang et al. / Engineering Geology 71 (2004) 199211

Fig. 1. Sketch map showing the alignment of No. 7 tunnel of the Yellow River Diversion Project (A B cross-section shown in Fig. 3).

201

202

Y. Shang et al. / Engineering Geology 71 (2004) 199211

Within one 1130-m section of No. 7 tunnel of the YRDP, TBM encountered cavities and groundwater inflow from 22 May to 3 June. After that, boring advanced at a slow rate under unfavorable geological conditions before jamming occurred. After jamming took place on 18 June, it took 9 days to free the machine. Then, the TBM was again advanced at a normal rate. Backfilling with pea-gravel and grouting for fractured rocks and cavities, enlargement excavation outside of the shield with a jackhammer, were carried out accordingly. In this paper, the lithology, structural geology, and ground stress behavior in the section with a distance of 1130 m are analyzed. The approaches adopted include site investigation, laboratory test and logging data analysis, and conveyor-taken muck observations.

2. Engineering geological setting The No. 7 tunnel, which is the subject of this case history, is located in the southern flank of an anticline (Fig. 2), in the western mountainous area of the Meso Cenozoic sedimentary basin of Taiyuan on the North China Craton (Shanxi Bureau of Geology, 1989). In the section where the TBM became jammed, the axis of a small-scale anticline trends about 50jNE, whereas the orientation of the tunnel is 71.7jNE (Fig. 2). The included angle, therefore, is about 20j. The dip angles of the southern and northern limbs of the anticline are 20j and 16j, respectively, in the researched section (Fig. 2). To a larger area, there are two dominant sets of folds. The first one was formed earlier with an orientation of SN at the eastern part of this area. The second set was formed later with an orientation of NE at the western part of this area. Rocks surrounding the tunnel mainly include thickly bedded dolomitic limestone (O2s2), marl with breccia and marl intercalated with argillaceous limestone, and gypsiferous limestone (O2s1), of Upper Majiagou Group, Middle Ordovician System.

3. Exceptional events in No. 7 tunnel As shown in Fig. 3, TBM excavation encountered very bad geological conditions from May 21 to June

18, 2001, along a total length of 1130 m (chainages 49 km + 321.21 m to 48 km + 190.48 m). First, cavities, wet clay and then groundwater inflow appeared in sequence. Then on 18 June, the TBM was totally jammed in squeezing ground. From 21 to 27 May, TBM tunnelling advanced slowly through strongly fractured rock masses in a zone between O2s1 and O2s2, soft rocks (marls) and hard rocks (dolomitic limestone) appeared alternately with high frequencies, together with the presence of large fissures and karst cavities of various sizes. The location with karst cavities is just 200 m deep from a valley bed surface (Fig. 3). Surrounding rock masses were very unstable and fallen stalactite in various size of karst cavities were at chainage 49 km + 167.06 m. From 29 to 31 May, a karst cavity was encountered at the upper-left side of the tunnel section. It was about 0.8 2.0 m wide and 2 4 m long along the perimeter of tunnel, and it extended about 10 15 m along the tunnel alignment (Fig. 3). This cavity was situated partially in marl and partially in limestone. Rock fragments of up to 1 2 m3 fell into the excavation chamber. About five wagons of muck comprising of marly clay with high moisture content were taken from the TBM excavation face and sent out on the last train of the night shift of 2 June (at chainage 48 km + 895.41). From then until 5 June (reaching to chainage 48 km + 829.64 m), groundwater seeping occurred locally. After 6 June, the TBM slowly advanced more than 600 m forward through both dry and wet plastic marl soils, but without encountering seeping water. However, at midnight of 17 18 June, the TBM became totally jammed in squeezing ground. The total free space between the shield of the TBM and surrounding rocks with a width of 5 8 cm (Fig. 4) was closed in about 2 h. Thus, the rate of convergence was about 20 40 mm/h. The particular geological problems encountered as wet clay, underground water, cavities and squeezing ground are all in the upper part of the O2s1 formation overlay by O2s2. Geographically, The former three accidents occurred in a depth of 200 m beneath a valley bed, the latter one happened at a depth of 300 m from the peak crest. In geology, the former three are in the lower part of a syncline core, while the latter one is near the limb and in the lower part of an anticline core (Fig. 3). Therefore, the folding played a

Y. Shang et al. / Engineering Geology 71 (2004) 199211 Fig. 2. Geological map of the tunnel site in the western mountainous area of Taiyuan (A B cross-section shown in Fig. 3) (according to Shanxi Bureau of Geology, 1979, 1989). (1) Holocene alluvia; (2) Upper Pleistocene pluvial-talus series; (3) Middle Pleistocene pluvia; (4) Pliocene sediment series; (5) Sandy shale, sandstone of Upper Permian system; (6) Sandstone, sandy shale, shale intercalated with coal seam of Lower Permian; (7) Sandstone, sandy shale, shale intercalated with coal seam, Shanxi Group of Upper Carboniferous system; (8) Sandstone, sandy shale, shale, limestone with coal seam, Taiyuan Group of Upper Carboniferous system; (9) Allite, shale, limestone and iron deposit, Benxi Group of Middle Carboniferous system; (10) Dolomitic marl with breccia, Limestone, gypsum, Fengfeng group of Middle Ordovician system; (11) Dolomitic limestone, marl with breccia, limestone, Upper Majiagou Group of Middle Ordovician system; (12) Marl with breccia, dolomitic limestone, argillaceous dolomite, Lower Majiagou Group of Middle Ordovician system; (13) Argillaceous dolomite, dolomite intercalated with shale, Lower Ordovician system; (14) Reversed fault; (15) Normal fault; (16) River; (17) Tunnel and researched section (A B). 203

204 Y. Shang et al. / Engineering Geology 71 (2004) 199211 Fig. 3. Engineering geological problems encountered when the TBM excavated through the fold (including geological section and occurrence sequence of the accidents) (note that the vertical scale is larger than the horizontal scale of the tunnel, which gives a false appearance of steeply dipping layers in the tunnel than the overlaying strata).

Y. Shang et al. / Engineering Geology 71 (2004) 199211

205

Fig. 4. Free space left between shield of TBM and surrounding rocks before TBM jamming with orientation of principal ground stresses.

major role in engineering geological conditions in this case history.

deviatoric stress was about 5 MPa, which was similar to the UCS value of the marl. 4.2. Fold and inter-layer shear zone

4. Analysis of engineering geological conditions 4.1. Ground stresses and rock strength The rock mass is generally in a dry state since the groundwater table in this site is 40 80 m deeper than the bottom of the tunnel. The limestone and dolomitic limestone (O2s2) were in the form of massive thick beds with high strength as hard rocks. For dolmitic limestone with a natural moisture content, the uniaxial compression strength (UCS) was about 60 MPa, and the deformation modulus, between 300 and 1000 MPa. In contrast, the marl (O2s1) was soft rock with lower strength: its UCS was about 5 MPa (much lower when saturated), and its deformation modulus, generally about 300 MPa in a dry condition (SHIDI, 1996). From Fig. 3, it can be seen that in this section the rock mass quality is Grade V (similar to those with a quality index of rock mass by Barton Q < 0.1) (Li, 1999, Table 9-2). From the results of hydraulic fracture tests aimed to determine ground stresses, it was known that the horizontal component comprising the major principal stress increased with depth (Fig. 5). At a depth of about 300 m, where the TBM jamming occurred, the maximum horizontal major principal stress was larger than the vertical major principal stress. The horizontal The exceptional events occurred at a position between two boreholes (Fig. 3). So, the initial geological conditions had been inferred from the drill logging and site investigation. On the lower part of the adjacent syncline, extensive joints and small-scale fissures had developed (Fig. 3), which were favorable for rock fracture and groundwater movement. Dolomitic limestone, the major part of O2s2, acts as a permeable aquifer, whereas marl, the dominant part of O2s1, constitutes impermeable strata. Thus, karst cavities in various sizes and residual wet clay mainly from dissolution of limestone formed along the contact zone between the two beds as illustrated in Fig. 3. As a result, perched groundwater actively accumulated there. After a long-term dissolution, stalactites formed on the roof of karst cavities and wet clay accumulated on the floor. Karst cavities, wet and plastic clay, and groundwater inflow developed not only because of lithology, but also because the tensile stress in the lower part of the syncline affected the formation of these unfavorable geological conditions (Engineering Geomechanics Lab., Institute of Geology, CAS, 1976). In a plane map, the TBM jammed section is on the axis of the anticline (Fig. 2), and the anticlinal axis plunges to the NE. In a cross-section, this part is in the

206

Y. Shang et al. / Engineering Geology 71 (2004) 199211

Fig. 5. Measured and computed ground stress components at different depth of two boreholes near No. 7 tunnel.

lower part of the anticline where compressional shearing stress is dominant (Engineering Geomechanics Lab., Institute of Geology, CAS, 1976). Stresses concentration occurred at interface between the dolomitic limestone and marls, known as an inter-layer shear zone. Then shear convergence, taking the marls as its dominant, took place (Figs. 3 and 6). The TBM excavation at a depth of 300 m in soft surrounding rocks with high ground stress concentrations caused the flow of marl at a rate of 20 40 mm/h in the inter-layer shear zone. The excavation of TBM further disturbed the ground stress distribution,

and caused the TBM jamming. Observations outside of the TBM opened windows (a square with side length 80 80 cm) on the two sides of the rear shield (for their locations, see Fig. 4) in the jammed section, provided the following information.


The inter-layer shear zone between greyish black limestone and greyish yellow marl, with a thickness of 12f13 cm, and at 30jB 20j, could be found on the northern side. The intercalated shear zone materials had geometries indicating levorotary shear (Fig. 6A).

Fig. 6. Plates taken outside of the shield windows showing geological conditions in TBM jammed location (for standpoint and view orientation, see Fig. 4). (A) Inter-layer shear zone between limestone and marl with sheared and crept rock mass, small-scale fold developed in it; (B) marl with breccia; (C) tensive longitudinal fissure in the tunnel roof; (D) local scratches implies secondary compressive shearing (E) old grouped scratches in marls.

Y. Shang et al. / Engineering Geology 71 (2004) 199211

207

208 

Y. Shang et al. / Engineering Geology 71 (2004) 199211 

On the northern side of the front shield, marl with breccia with a higher strength (UCS = 13 MPa in saturation) (SHIDI, 1996) was dominant (Fig. 6B). It belongs to O2s1 and comprises the soft rocks.  From the window on the roof of the front shield, a longitudinal fissure was seen (Fig. 6C), which implied differential shear stress on the walls and roof, respectively. Mostly, it is parallel with the axis of the anticline.  Outside of the window on the southern side of the rear shield, both newly formed scratches from the shearing and crushing action of marls could be seen (Fig. 6D). Back of it is also soft marls with early-formed scratches surrounding and tightly crushing on the shield (Fig. 6E). These soft marls presented more pushing force on the southern side of the shield, and acted as a major part jamming the TBM. It should be noted here that the gypsum content in O2s1 varies, although such gypsum could not be found in the field profile. Its existence, however, obviously affects groundwater discharge by reducing porosity and permeability (Fig. 3). Certainly as a waterproofing agent, gypsum prevents or hinders groundwater seepage. The dissolution of gypsum, on the other hand, produces cavities in the gypsiferous limestones. But after observation at the tunnel site, it could be seen that most of the gypsum has not been dissolved. Thus, its effect on unfavorable geological conditions at the TBM jamming site was not so important as that of the ground stresses concentration and the low strength of the marl at the inter-layer shear zone. In brief, from site investigation and laboratory tests, it is known that the combination of the following four factors resulted in TBM jamming:


ground stress: The principal horizontal stress components were high and locally concentrated at the interface in the lower part of the anticline. It induced the shearing stress playing roles in the interlayer shear zone and resulted in the movement of the soft marls, and finally caused the TBM jamming. While in the lower part of the synclinal core, the ground stress transformed to tension state and provided space for development of karst cavities.  TBM excavation: The TBM excavation unloaded the stress confining the layered rocks, and made the shearing stress activated in the jamming site. Thus, it could be said that the TBM excavation was a triggering force for the convergence at the interlayer shear zone. Therefore, the inter-layer shearing directly caused the lateral flow toward the free space around the TBM shield, which finally induced the TBM jamming. That is, the high rate of convergence is mostly due to the concentration of ground stresses locally controlled by the inter-layer shear zone in the lower part of the anticline.

5. Treatment measures and the results For the purpose of freeing the TBM from squeezing ground, manual excavation with a jackhammer was used to cut and remove the converged rock mass behind the shield from the windows of the telescopic shield. Meanwhile, two windows were opened on the rear shields (for their locations, see Fig. 4), in order to provide entrances for manual excavation. The space left by removing squeezing soft rock via a jackhammer was just outside the shield of the TBM with a width of about 1.0 m (Fig. 6). In the unfavorable geological conditions with different kinds of exceptional events, some other measures were also adopted. These can be summarized under four headings. (1) Measures which were feasible and effective in boring through small-size karst cavities:  slow down the TBM advance rate and drive the TBM very carefully;  observe carefully any abnormal phenomena seen during the excavation;

Fold: The fractured rocks and karst cavities exist in the lower part of the syncline, while the TBM jamming site was in the lower part of the anticline. The stress states are very different at these two locations of the fold.  Inter-layer shear zone: It has soft marl and overlaying hard dolomitic limestone as its two components. The marl, mainly presenting in surrounding rocks as soft rock layers, could not withstand the shearing force compared with the limestone and marl with breccia because of its lower strength.

Y. Shang et al. / Engineering Geology 71 (2004) 199211

209

use grouting to backfill the gap between segment extrados and the surrounding rock as quickly and as completely as possible;  keep the cutterhead against the front face in order to avoid any collapse or over-excavation. (2) In order to minimize the bending of the telescopic shield on the TBM, the extended length of the thrust cylinders was reduced from 0.6 to 0.1 m. Because the support from the surrounding rock masses was insufficient and the segment joints were not able to be closed, the installed segments in the area of the karst cavity were bolted together with steel plates. Meanwhile, the cavity was backfilled with pea-gravel as soon as possible. (3) In order not to interfere with or stop TBM excavation because of the presence of big fissures, fractures, karst cavities, and the unstable surrounding rock masses, grouting was carried out in two stages.  The first stage was completed during TBM excavation to backfill the lower part of tunnel with grouting;  The second stage grouting was performed after TBM completion of the whole length of No. 7 tunnel, with some special treatment to fissures and cavities before that time. (4) In sections where the clay was sticking and squeezing, the buckets, the hoppers and the conveyor belt were manually cleaned. At the same time, some cutters were removed in order to increase the incoming crushed rocks. Water was sprayed on the conveyor belt so as to reduce the sticking clay. Following the adoption of these measures, the TBM advanced at a rate of 42 m/day under these unfavorable geological conditions before the jamming. After jamming, it took 9 days to release the machine. After that, the TBM continued to advance at an average rate of 60 m/day.

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

high rate of convergence is mostly likely to be triggered. The potential for rapid squeezing ground of marl in areas of folding indicates that TBM excavation may not be economic in these portions of the tunnel. Difficult ground conditions can be handled using various alternative tunnelling techniques. It may be possible, for example, to mine these difficult zones by drill and blast or hand mining methods. With good quality geological information at the head of the tunnel face, the need for such non-TBM techniques can be anticipated in advance and preparations can be made accordingly. In TBM tunnelling, substantial attention should be given to prior engineering geological and hydrogeological investigations and analyses, especially as to the suitability of TBM excavation under unexpected geological conditions in order to assist the flexible design of TBM tunnelling. When facing exceptional events, the design schedule may require modification to fit the new conditions. The high rate of tunnel wall convergence should be further researched in detail, which influences the TBM excavation more directly than the total convergence value in soft rock masses to a large extent. A general structural geological model is required before tunnel boring begins, in order to systematically tackle complicated geological conditions at different depth of folds without the benefits of detailed site investigation and logging data.

7. Conclusions The existence of an inter-layer shear zone in the lower part of the anticlinal core, together with local concentration of ground stresses caused a high rate of convergence of marls in the tunnel wall, which directly brought about TBM jamming. The trough of the syncline under tension stresses controls the development of fractured and jointed rocks and cavities. Differential dissolution between marl and limestone at this location made the formation of karst cavities and wet clay and groundwater inflows possible.

6. Discussion (1) Rock loads as predicted by conventional empirical methods are not applicable to TBM tunnelling in squeezing ground, especially at large depths of folds with ground stresses concentration where

210

Y. Shang et al. / Engineering Geology 71 (2004) 199211 Hamza, M., Ata, A., Roussin, A., 1999. Ground movements due to the construction of cut-and-cover structures and slurry shield tunnel of the Cairo Metro. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 14 (3), 281 289. Hudson, J.A., Harrison, J.P., 1992. A new approach to studying complete rock engineering problems. Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology 25, 93 105. Lei, X.Y., Swoboda, G., Zenz, G., 1995. Application of contact friction interface element to tunnel excavation in faulted rock. Computers and Geotechnics 17, 349 370. Li, S.H., 1999. A new concept of tunnel support designapplication and theory of precedent type analysis. Science Press, Beijing, pp. 312 318 (in Chinese). Li, H.Y., 2001. Major and minor structural features of a bedding shear zone along a coal seam and related gas outburst, Pingdingshan coal field, Northern China. International Journal of Coal Geology 47, 101 113. Liu, L.P., Cheng, B.C., 2000. Harm of defects in TBM construction to hydraulic tunnel. Shanxi Hydrotechnics (3), 27 29 (in Chinese). Liu, L.P., Jin, Z.Y., Sun, W.N., 2000. Wide application of full-faced TBM, probable problems in tunnelling. Shanxi Hydrotechnics (2), 30 32 (in Chinese). Martinis, A., 1995. Yellow River Diversion. World Tunnelling Oct., 299 302. Morgensten, N.R., Tchaleko, J.S., 1967. Microscopic structure in kaolin subject to direct shear. Geotechnique 17 (4), 307 328. Pelizza, S., Grasso, P., Xu, S.L., 2001. Tunnelling by TBMan overview of international issues relevant to China. Workshop Tunnel Boring Machines and Related Engineering Practice, Beijing, Sept. Unpublished. Qu, Y.X., 1985. Engineering geological prediction of inter-layer shear zones. Institute of Geology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Research on Engineering Geomechanics. Geological Publishing House, Beijing, pp. 87 97 (in Chinese). Qu, Y.X., Xu, R.C., 1979. Study on the inter-layer shear zone at the Gezhouba Dam site in the Yangtze River. Institute of Geology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Problems in Research of Rock Engineering Geomechanics, 1 10 (in Chinese). Ramsay, J.G., 1967. Folding and fracturing of rocks. McGraw-Hill, London, pp. 266 288. Ramsay, J.G., Huber, M.I., 1987. The techniques of modern structural geology, Vol. 2: Folds and Faults. Academic Press, H.B. Jovanovich, London, pp. 106 174. Shanxi Bureau of Geology, 1979. Regional geological investigation report (1:200,000): Yuci Section (J-49-XXIII) (Geology Part). Shanxi Bureau of Geology, Taiyuan (in Chinese). Shanxi Bureau of Geology, 1989. Shanxi regional geology. Geological Publishing House, Beijing (in Chinese). SHIDI, 1996. Engineering investigation report on the South Main Exit to Taiyuan of the YRDP. Shanxi Hydroelectric Investigation and Design Institute of MWRC, Taiyuan, Shanxi Province (in Chinese). Su, S., Zan, Z.B., He, J.P., 2000. TBM construction in fault zone. Shanxi Hydrotechnics (4), 31 32 (in Chinese). Su, S., Du, C.Q., Cheng, X.M., 2001. Geological problems and construction measures of the tunnels constructed by TBM in

Enlargement excavation with a jackhammer outside of the shield is both feasible and economical to free the blocked TBM in time.

Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank Prof. Bingjun Fu, the former General Secretary of Chinese ISRM, and Prof. Jiamo Xu, for their constructive advice on revision of this paper. Field investigation was assisted by the staffs of the Shanxi Wanjiazhai Yellow River Diversion Project, CMC Company, Italy. Language (English) correction was provided by Prof. Gregory Davis, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Southern California. Thanks should also be extended to the two anonymous reviewers for their helpful suggestions and comments. The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Project No.: 40102024).

References
Alber, M., 2000. Advance rate of hard rock TBMs and their effects on project economics. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 15 (1), 55 64. Bappler, D.I.K., 2001. Learning from experience. Tunnels and Tunnelling International 33 (10), 25 27. Barla, G., 1999. Larger diameter TBM tunnel excavation in weak environmental conditions. News Journal, International Society for Rock Mechanics 5 (3), 48 54. Barton, N., 2000. TBM Tunnelling in jointed and faulted rock. Balkema, the Netherlands, pp. 3 104, 147 149. Cao, C.C., Meng, J.Z., Fan, A.S., Guo, Y.F., 2001. Development of TBM at home and abroad and application in YRDP. Water Resources and Hydropower Engineering 32 (4), 27 30 (in Chinese). Einstein, H.H., 2000. Tunnels in Opalinus Clayshalea review of case histories and new developments. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 15 (1), 13 29. Engineering Geomechanics Lab., Institute of Geology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 1976. Basement and approaches for researches on the engineering geomechanics of rock masses. In: Institute of Geology (Ed.), Problems of the Engineering Geomechanics of Rock Masses. Science Press, Beijing, pp. 1 45 (in Chinese). Fu, B.J., 1998. Mega Hydro Projects for transferring water from Southern to Northern China. News Journal, International Society for Rock Mechanics 5 (2), 25 30.

Y. Shang et al. / Engineering Geology 71 (2004) 199211 YRDP. Water Resources and Hydropower Engineering 32 (4), 15 17 (in Chinese). Swoboda, G., Abu-Krisha, A., 1999. Three-dimensional numerical modelling for TBM tunnelling in consolidated clay. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 14 (3), 327 333. Voerckel, M., Peters, M., 2001. Tunnelling with TBM-state of the art and future development. Workshop Tunnel Boring Machines and Related Engineering Practice, Beijing, Sept. Unpublished.

211

Xiao, Y.X., Lee, C.F., Wang, S.J., 2000. Spatial distribution of interlayer shear zones at Gaobazhou dam site, Qingjiang River, China. Engineering Geology 55, 227 239. Xu, J.Y., Liang, J.P., Jin, Y.J., Wang, W.B., 2000. Geological documentation during TBM tunnel construction. Hydrogeology and Engineering Geology (6), 35 38 (in Chinese). Zhang, J.J., 1999. The application and some problems of TBM and its prospects. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering 18 (3), 363 367 (in Chinese).