2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.undsp.2019.03.005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Control of settlement and volume loss induced by tunneling under recently reclaimed land

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
3
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
1
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Shirlaw (2016a) showed how the penetration index, the specific energy and the cutter wear during EPB tunnelling in mixed-face conditions increased dramatically as the proportion of rock increased, particularly once the proportion of strong rock increased to over 50% of the total face area. As recorded by Shirlaw et al (2017) and Kwong et al (2019), the use of slurry TBMs in similar mixed-ground conditions in weathered granite in Hong Kong did not experience similar problems with ground control. With the slurry TBMs, reasonable rates of progress were achieved despite the need to spend significant amounts of time changing cutters due to the abrasive nature of the rock and the saprolite; nor was there need to use grouting to aid the tunnelling, except at break-in and break-out.…”
supporting
confidence: 67%
“…Shirlaw (2016a) showed how the penetration index, the specific energy and the cutter wear during EPB tunnelling in mixed-face conditions increased dramatically as the proportion of rock increased, particularly once the proportion of strong rock increased to over 50% of the total face area. As recorded by Shirlaw et al (2017) and Kwong et al (2019), the use of slurry TBMs in similar mixed-ground conditions in weathered granite in Hong Kong did not experience similar problems with ground control. With the slurry TBMs, reasonable rates of progress were achieved despite the need to spend significant amounts of time changing cutters due to the abrasive nature of the rock and the saprolite; nor was there need to use grouting to aid the tunnelling, except at break-in and break-out.…”
supporting
confidence: 67%
“…For tunnelling in the northern approach tunnel from the north LS to the NVS through newly reclaimed ground, and soft alluvium/weaker CDG, TBM (S880) advanced at an average of 3.3 m/day with a best record of 10 m in one day, whereas TBM (S882) in the northern approach tunnel advanced at an average of 4.7 m/day with a best record of 12.8 m in one day. Only minor settlement was recorded on the ground surface across this zone with a volume face loss of less than 1.3%, which is below the specification of 2% (Kwong et al, 2019).…”
Section: Tunnelling Performance Overviewmentioning
confidence: 65%
“…The TBMs were tailor-made and equipped with innovative equipment to minimise Tunnelling in newly reclaimed land poses a risk of lining ovalisation and instability resulting from continuous settlement/consolidation of the land. In order to accelerate the consolidation of the newly reclaimed land, different ground treatment methods were used between the LS of the TBMs and the NVS (Figure 22) (Kwong et al, 2018).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the soft clay layer, the volume loss caused by shield tunneling is mostly between 0.5% and 2.0%. Compared with the settlement-sensitive area in Shanghai, the volume loss caused by tunnel construction in the newly reclaimed land area of Hong Kong is likely to be larger, but the operation of shield machine drivers has a great impact on the settlement, which is not easy to predict [5][6][7]. Therefore, it is very important to determine a reasonable range of shield tunneling parameters.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%