Numerical Analysis of Rock Cover Thickness of Subsea Tunnel

Xiang-bo Qiu1,2, Shu-cai Li 1,3, Wei-zhong Chen1 Key Laboratory of Rock and Soil Mechanics, Institute of Rock and Soil Mechanics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Wuhan 430071, P.R.China 2 School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Southampton, U.K. 3 School of Civil Engineering, Shandong University, P.R.China
1

ABSTRACT Since the first subsea tunnel-Kanmon tunnel was built in 1936 in Japan, nearly one hundred subsea tunnels had been constructed all over the world. Under special environmental and geological conditions, subsea tunnels are the safest and most economical scheme. But many problems still needed to be resolved. Here we try to research the relationship between minimum thickness of rock cover and tunnel stability by numerical method. The research combines with the engineering practice of Xiamen subsea tunnel gives a recommendation of minimum safety rock cover thickness.

1. INTRODUCTION OF CONSTRUCTED SUBSEA TUNNELS IN THE WORLD Countries that have constructed subsea tunnels include Japan, Norway, U.K, France, Denmark et. al. And the subsea rail-way tunnels and highway tunnels which were designed and constructed in drill-blast method are mainly in Japan and Norway. According to the literature, the Kanmon tunnel in Japan that began to be constructed at Sep. 1936 and finished at 1944 is the first subsea tunnel in the world. The famous Japanese Sei-kan highway tunnel is the longest subsea tunnel which is constructed by drill-blast method, and is 53.85 Km long. Some subsea tunnels are listed in Table 1. In the earlier period, such as when the 2 Japanese tunnels were constructed, there was no rigorous theory of the minimum rock cover thickness used in the designing and construction process. After then, some special research was done and some common understanding had been realised: a. The min. thickness of rock cover is one of the most important design parameters which can influence the engineering safety and cost. b. The min. thickness of rock cover is main factor that determine the length of the tunnel, after the angle of inclination is determined. c. The thinner the rock cover, the shorter the tunnel length, and the less the hydraulic pressure on the lining. d. To avoid accidentally rock fall and sea water ingress, the rock cover must be thick enough.

E16

e. To determine the rock cover thickness, two methods were always used, engineering analogical analysis and stability analysis( numerical method) Table 1. Main subsea tunnels in the world
Tunnel name National Year Use Length km Subsea length m Kanmon Kanmon Shin Kanmon Vollsfjord Frierfjord Vard Japan Japan Japan Norway Norway Norway 1944 1958 1974 1977 1977 1981 R H R W L H 3.6 3.5 18.7 9.4 3.6 2.6 0.6 3.1 1.14 95 90 16 16 53 -40 -49 -50 -80 -252 -88 Area m
2

Deepth m

Water deepth m 14

Rockcover thichness m 11 21 20 26 34 28

Rock type

Construct method

Drill-Blast Drill-Blast Drill-Blast Gneiss Gneiss Sandstone Shale Drill-Blast Drill-Blast Drill-Blast

Sei-kan( Ellingsy Valdery Kvalsund Gody Flekkery

Japan Norway Norway Norway Norway Norway Norway Norway Danmark Norway Norway Norway Norway Norway Norway Norway Norway U.K, France

1985 1987 1987 1988 1989 1989 1989 1989 1990 1990 1990 1990 1992 1992 1992 1994 1994 1994

R H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H R

53.9 3.5 4.2 1.5 3.8 2.3 1.8 3.8 7.9 1.8 2.3 2.7 5.8 4.4 5.2 3.4 5.3 50.5

23.0 1.1 2.2

90 68 68 43 48 46 55 45 28.5 55 43 43 70 70 70 257 70

-250 -140 -137 -56 -153 -101 -63 -120 -68 -60 -93 -100 -223 -133 -130 -101 -267 -105

140 65 70

100 42 34 22

Lava Gneiss Gneiss Gneiss Gneiss Gneiss Gneiss Gneiss Marlite Gneiss Gneiss Gneiss Phyllite Gneiss Gneiss Gneiss

Drill-Blast Drill-Blast Drill-Blast Drill-Blast Drill-Blast Drill-Blast Drill-Blast Drill-Blast TBM Drill-Blast Drill-Blast Drill-Blast Drill-Blast Drill-Blast Drill-Blast Drill-Blast Drill-Blast TBM

70

33 32 27 29 13 27 27 27

Nappstrqumen Hvaler Storeblt Nappstraumen Maursundet Fannefjord Byfjord Mastrefjord Freifjord Tromsysund Hitra England-France

180 60

45 40

Gneiss Gneiss

37.0

Troll Bjery Slverfjord Nordkapp Frya Oslofjord Bmlafjord

Norway Norway Norway Norway Norway Norway Norway

1995 1996 1997 1999 2000 2000 2000

W H H H H H H

3.8 2.0 3.3 6.9 5.3 7.3 7.9

66

-260 -88 -120 -150 -164 -120 -262.5

Drill-Blast Drill-Blast Drill-Blast Drill-Blast Drill-Blast Drill-Blast Drill-Blast

E16

2.

SUMMARY OF THE XIAMEN SUBSEA TUNNEL SCHEME

Xiamen is an island at south-east China, recently, its economics is developing quickly. By now, there are only two entrances to Xiamen island, Xiamen bridge and Haichang bridge, the traffic is very congested. So the third entrance-Xiamen Subsea Tunnel is very necessary and imperative. The tunnel scheme was approved by State Development Planning Commission at the early 2003. After it is constructed, it will be the first subsea tunnel in P.R.China. The highway tunnel will have double-lines, each line will be about 6000 m long and have three running line. The cross section of each tunnel is about 14.7m width and 9.85m high, the area is about 100m2, the maximum inclined angle is 3.5%, the design altitude is -70m. The distance between the central lines of the two tunnels is about 50 m. Drill-blast excavation method will be adopted. The rock type in the tunnel area is mainly diorite granite. According to weathering grade, it can be classified as 4 layers, fully weathered, strongly weathered, slightly weathered and fresh diorite granite. The construction in the tunnel site is simple, basal rock is almost intact. Effected by the fault around the site, there distribute joints in several orientations. The mechanical parameters are listed in table 2. The geological section diagram is listed in Fig. 1. Table 2. Parameters of rock mass Rock type Fully weathered granite Strongly weathered granite Slightly weathered granite Fresh granite D 1950 2650 2650 2650 0.45 0.35 0.25 0.25 E t (GPa) (Mpa) 0.05 1.0 15 20 0.1 0.5 1.0 1.5 Shear strength F(Degree) C(MPa) 23 0.033 30 0.2 39 1.0 42 1.2

D- density (Kn/m3);- Posssions ratio; E- Youngs modulus; t -Tension strength; f-friction; Ccohesion

Fully weathered granite Strongly weathered granite Slightly weathered granite Tunnel

K8+350

K8+750

K9+450

K10+000

K11+120

Fig.1 Geological sections diagram of Xiamen tunnel

3

E16

3.

RESEARCH ON MIN. ROCK COVER THICKNESS OF XIAMEN TUNNEL

In the investigating process, governments and engineers have paid the most attention to its safety and economy. For different design altitude, the rock cover thicknesses in several key cross sections are list in table 3. Comparing with Norway subsea tunnel experience, formula is plotted in Fig.2. Table 3. Rock cover thickness of different scheme
Position Water Depth (m 27.5 32.0 32.5 20.0 22.5 5.0 Min. rock cover thickness(m) Original Design 35.0 37.2 41.0 50.0 42.5 42.5 +2m 33.0 35.2 39.0 48.0 40.5 40.5 +4m 31.0 33.2 37.0 46.0 38.5 38.5 +6m 29.0 31.2 35.0 44.0 36.5 36.5 +8m 27.0 29.2 33.0 42.0 34.5 34.5 -2m 37.0 39.2 43.0 52.0 44.5 44.5 -4m 39.0 41.2 45.0 54.0 46.5 46.5 -6m 41.0 43.2 47.0 56.0 48.5 48.5

K8+350 K8+750 K9+450 K10+0.0 K10+500 K11+120

40 35 W at er dept h m 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 5 10 15 20 O r i gi nal 0r i gi nal +2. 0m O r i gi nal +4. 0 O r i gi anl +6. 0m O r i gi anl +8. 0m O r i gi anl - 2. 0m O r i gi anl - 4. 0m O r i gi anl - 6. 0m

For intact rock

For cracked rock

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

M i n. r ock cover t hi ckness m

Fig.2 Comparison of Norway experience formula with the rock cover thickness in key cross sections of different altitude scheme of Xiamen tunnel Through Fig.2, its very clear that, for most cross sections, if the design altitude is elevated 8.0m, the rock cover thickness still satisfy the Norway experience formula, but for position K8+750, special reinforcement is needed. To ensure the suitable rock cover thickness, according to engineering comparison analysis, different tunnel altitude models are adopted in numerical analysis. Different initial geo-stress conditions are considered and three-dimension fast Lagrange method is used. A solid-fluid model is adopted and construction progress is considered which include excavation and

E16

primary lining. For simulating flow of fluid in saturated porous materials with FLAC-3D, fluid analysis is independent of structural analysis. The variables involved in the description of fluid flow through porous media are the pore pressure and the three components of the specific discharge vector. These variables are related through the fluid mass-balance equation, Darcys law for fluid transport and a constitutive equation specifying the fluid response to changes in pore pressure, volumetric strains and temperature. For a homogeneous, isotropic solid and constant fluid density, this law is given in the form of

q i = k [ P f x j g j ]i
where k is the permeability (or mobility coefficient) in [m4/Ns], i is the fluid density in
[kg/m3], and gi , i = 1,3, are the three components of the gravity vector in [m/s2]. In the FLAC-3D formulation, changes in the variation of fluid content are related linearly to changes in pore pressure, p, mechanical volumetric strains, e, and temperature, T . The fluid constitutive law is expressed as:

1 p T e + = t t t M t
where M is the Biot modulus in [N/m2], is the Biot coefficient, and is the undrained thermal coefficient in [1 /C], which takes into account the fluid and grain thermal expansions. Due to the paper length limited, only the calculation result of the scheme of original +4.0m is given. The displacements in 4 key cross sections are listed in Table 4. Table 4. Displacement of original +4.0m scheme Section Calculation V / H = 0 .6 V / H = 0 .9 method Settlement of Uplift of Settlement of top bottom top K8+350 F-f -1.334 1.453 -1.244 E-P -1.113 1.396 -1.029 K8+750 F-F -1.662 1.497 -1.549 E-P -1.233 1.467 -1.134 K9+450 F-F -1.496 1.563 -1.401 E-P -1.122 1.486 -1.039 K11+12 F-F -0.954 1.472 -0.880 0 E-P -0.937 1.284 -0.828 * F-F, mains Fluid flow analysis; E-P, mains Elastic-Plastic analysis.

Uplift of bottom 1.412 1.315 1.452 1.396 1.516 1.438 1.432 1.170

For section K8+750, the pore pressure results after excavated 70 days are showed in Fig.3. The tension
5

E16

stress in K8+750 and K9+450 are little higher, the max. value is 0.366MPa, and locate at bottom of tunnel.
FLAC3D 2.00
Step 308691 Model Perspective 10:01:20 Tue Sep 24 2002 Center: X: 0.000e+000 Y: 6.000e+000 Z: 2.499e+001 Dist: 9.185e+002 Plane Origin: X: 0.000e+000 Y: 6.000e+000 Z: 0.000e+000 Rotation: X: 0.000 Y: 0.000 Z: 0.000 Mag.: 3.81 Ang.: 22.500 Plane Normal: X: 0.000e+000 Y: 1.000e+000 Z: 0.000e+000 Job Title: FLUID - MECHANICAL INTERACTION

Contour of Pore Pressure

Plane: on 0.0000e+000 to 1.0000e+005 to 2.0000e+005 to 3.0000e+005 to 4.0000e+005 to 5.0000e+005 to 6.0000e+005 to 7.0000e+005 to 8.0000e+005 to 9.0000e+005 to 1.0000e+006 to 1.0500e+006 to Interval = 5.0e+004

5.0000e+004 1.5000e+005 2.5000e+005 3.5000e+005 4.5000e+005 5.5000e+005 6.5000e+005 7.5000e+005 8.5000e+005 9.5000e+005 1.0500e+006 1.0553e+006

Itasca Consulting Group, Inc. Minneapolis, Minnesota USA

Fig.3 Pore pressure contour of K8+750 section ( V / H = 0.6 )

4.

CONCLUSIONS

Through the above analysis, some concepts about Xiamen subsea tunnel are obtained. 1) The fluid flow tends to be stable in 70 days after excavation. Compared to elastic-plastic analysis results, the max. tension stress increase and compression stress decrease. 2) The tunnel is on the whole stable if we adopt original +4.0m scheme, but in section K8+750, there are thicker strongly weathered layer, the influence of fluid flow is notable. In construction process, it will need special treatment such as grouting. 3) From the viewpoint of engineering analogical and numerical analysis, the min. rock cover thickness is of original +4.0m scheme.

REFERENCE Nilsen,B. Empirical analysis of minimum rock cover for subsea rock tunnels, Options for Tunnelling 1993 edited by H.Burger, 677~687, Amsterdam: Elsevier. Akira Kitamura. Technical Development for the Seikan Tunnel, Tunneling and Underground Space Technology, 1986, 1(3/4), 341~349. Einar Broch. etr. Support of Large Rock Caverns in Norway Tunneling and Underground Space Technology, 1996, 11(1): 11~19. Z. D. Eisensteir, Large Undersea Tunnels and the progress of Tunnelling Technology. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 1994, 9 (3 ), 283~292. Shogo Matsuo. An Overview of the Seikan Tunnel Project, Tunneling and Underground Space

E16

Technology, 1986, 1(3/4): 323~331. T. S. Dahlo and B. Nilsen Stability and Rock Cover of Hard Rock Subsea Tunnels Tunneling and Underground Space Technology 1994 9(2) 151~15. Philippe Vandebrouck. The Channel Tunnel: The Dream Becomes Reality Tunneling and Underground Space Technology, 1995, 10(1) :17~21. X.Qiu, D.Yang, B.Xu. et.al. 3-D FLAC Application in Stability Analysis of Ventilator Chamber of Highway Tunnel, Rock and Soil Mech., 2003, 24(5): (in press)

E16