4.7 Article

Ground movement induced by parallel EPB tunnels in silty soils

期刊

TUNNELLING AND UNDERGROUND SPACE TECHNOLOGY
卷 26, 期 1, 页码 163-171

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.tust.2010.09.004

关键词

EPBS; Parallel tunnels; Field measurement; Pore pressure; Soil movement

资金

  1. National Basic Research Program of China [2007CB714001]
  2. Program for New Century Excellent Talents in University (NCET)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

When constructing tunnels with poor geotechnical conditions in densely populated urban areas, there are many challenges including intolerable ground movement, face failure, and potential damage to adjacent structures (i.e., tunnels, piles, and pipelines). Earth pressure balanced (EPB) shields have been widely used to solve these problems. However, tunnel excavation causes release of in situ soil stress, which results in the soil movement. This paper focuses on field measurements of parallel tunnels using EPB shields in silty soils. Specifications on the ground profile, construction procedure, and field monitoring of pore pressure in the soils, ground subsidence, subsurface settlement, and horizontal displacement are reported. During shield advancement, the pore pressures in the soils showed the zigzag-shape distribution along the distance. The settlements indicated upheaval-subsiding behavior in the longitudinal direction. The soil settlement decreased from the crown of the excavation face to the ground surface and to the invert of the excavation face in the transverse direction. Outward horizontal displacements of soils adjacent to the tunnels and inward horizontal displacements of the soils near the ground surface were also observed before the tail injection. The second tunnel excavated rendered a slight squeezing effect on the first tunnel. These satisfactory measurements indicate the effectiveness of the EPB technique in reducing potential damage to adjacent structures. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据