Professional Documents
Culture Documents
DOI 10.1007/s00603-014-0571-3
ORIGINAL PAPER
Received: 10 July 2013 / Accepted: 15 March 2014 / Published online: 17 April 2014
Springer-Verlag Wien 2014
1 Introduction
With the further implement of the West Development Plan
of China and the exhaustion of shallow mineral resources
at present, more and more deep transportation and mining
tunnels, or water diversion tunnels are being constructed or
planned. The increase of buried depth means higher in situ
stress and more intensive excavation disturbances. Generally speaking, the excavation disturbed zones of tunnels
could be divided into three parts from excavation boundary
to the inside surrounding rocks: the failed zone, the damaged zone and the disturbed zone, respectively (Read
2004). Obviously, the Excavation Damage Zone (EDZ)
inside surrounding rocks should be considered more carefully than the visible failed zone on the surface. The estimate of the damage extent and intensity as well as the
123
716
123
P. Yan et al.
with a group of long headrace tunnels, which were comprised of four parallel tunnels with a length of 16.7 km per
tunnel. The average buried depth of the headrace tunnels is
about 1,5002,000 m and the maximum depth reaches
2,525 m. The measured maximum principle in situ stress
along the headrace tunnel lines both reach 70 MPa under a
depth of 2,500 m (Shan and Yan 2010). The headrace
tunnels were planned to excavate with the D&B method
mainly, and the TBM (Tunnel Boring machine) method is
only adopted in some parts. Because of complicated geologic conditions and high in situ stress, the excavation
disturbances of the headrace tunnels of JPII are extremely
intensive (Tang et al. 2010). The monitored extents of EDZ
in headrace tunnels are mostly larger than 1.52.0 m and
the maximum extent may exceed 3.0 m in some large
deformation positions. This project provides a special case
to study the developing mechanism of EDZ under high
in situ stress conditions. The contributions of explosive
load and in situ stress transient redistribution to developing
of EDZ based on the deep headrace tunnels of JPII are
thoroughly studied in this paper.
(b)
717
(c)
(d)
123
718
P. Yan et al.
Labels
S2
S3
S4
S5
HT
2.80
2.80
3.60
4.20
3.00
HI
1.60
1.40
1.40
1.50
1.30
HO
1.20
1.40
2.20
2.70
1.70
HI/HT 9 100 %
57 %
50 %
39 %
36 %
43 %
123
719
(2004) to some extent, but the interpretation of the formation mechanism of the inner damage zone is totally
different.
According to the result of Martino and Chandler (2004),
the inner damage zone is caused by blasting load and the
outer damage zone is attributed to the redistribution of
in situ stress. But after studying the extent resulting from
blasting load only (see Sect. 3 of this paper), it can be
found that the transient unloading effect of in situ stress
during blasting is also an important factor for developing
the inner damage zone beyond blasting load. The distribution of the inner damage zone along an excavation
contour is the direct evidence. If the inner damage zone is
caused by blasting load only, the extent of it at every
location should be homogeneous provided the smooth
blasting technique is adopted, because all the contour holes
are initiated at the same moment and are loaded with the
same amount of explosive and the same charge structure
during smooth blasting.
The subordinate damage zones have been shown in
Fig. 5 and Table 1. It can be seen that the extent of the
inner damage zone is almost above 1.0 m and accounts for
4050 % of the total damage extent. The in situ stresses in
the cross section plane of DT2# are r2 and r3, and the
values are 34.4 and 29.2 MPa, respectively. Although the
two principle stresses in the detection section are very close
to each other, it can also be found that the damage extent at
the position of the right-up arch of the detection section is
much larger than that of other parts, and this area is the
stress concentration area.
According to Martino and Chandler (2004), the extent of
the inner damage zone of the TSX tunnel is less than 0.3 m
and the outer damage zone varies between 0.4 and 1 m
depending on the location around the tunnel and the measurement method. The r1 direction of TSX tunnel is parallel to the tunnel axis and the value of r1 is 60 MPa. The
r2 and r3 are 45 and 11 Mpa, respectively, in the cross
section plane of the TSX tunnel. The rock lithology of the
TSX tunnel is Lac du Bonnet granite. For comparison,
Martino and Chandler (2004) also presented the extent of
damage zones of BDA tunnel with similar geometry and
similar orientation to in situ stress of the TSX tunnel, as
shown in Fig. 6. The major principle stress (r1) at the BDA
tunnel is 26 MPa, and the r2 is 16 Mpa and r3 is 12 Mpa.
The extent of the inner damage zone of BDA tunnel is also
within 0.3 m and the outer damage depth is within 0.5 m. It
can be seen that the extent of the inner damage zone of
TSX tunnel is larger than that of the BDA tunnel and the
maximum extent of the inner damage zone along excavation contour locates in the top-right corner in the cross
section, the stress concentration area, according to the
in situ stress field. It indicates that the distribution of the
inner damage zone along the excavation contour is
123
720
Fig. 6 Comparison of the extent of the inner and outer damage zones
around TSX and BDA tunnels [Martino and Chandler (2004)]
123
P. Yan et al.
Fig. 9 Curves of blasting load vs. time (Lu et al. 2011, revised)
721
Elastic
modulus
(GPa)
Density
(kg m-3)
Poissons
ratio
Uniaxial
compressive stress
(MPa)
Tangent
modulus
(GPa)
Parameter
C
Parameter
P
15.0
2650
0.22
70.0
8.0
40
2.2
Labels
Hb
S1
S2
S3
S4
S5
0.78
0.81
0.79
0.85
0.78
HI
1.60
1.40
1.40
1.20
1.30
Hb/HI 9
100 %
49 %
58 %
56 %
71 %
60 %
123
722
P. Yan et al.
123
723
Fig. 12 The stress wave induced by quickly punching a hole in a circle plate in tension (Miklowitz 1960)
123
724
P. Yan et al.
Labels
S3
S4
S5
HS
2.72
1.65
1.55
1.85
1.41
HBS
3.17
2.62
2.50
2.89
2.57
HBT
3.63
2.80
3.90
4.09
3.20
HB = HBS-HS
0.45
0.97
0.95
1.04
1.16
HTR = HBT-HBS
0.46
0.18
1.40
1.20
0.63
HI = HBT-HS
0.91
1.15
2.35
2.24
1.79
HB/HI 9 100 %
49 %
84 %
40 %
46 %
65 %
123
S1
5 Conclusion
The conclusions are as follows:
1.
725
2.
3.
References
Abuov MG, Aitaliev ShM, Ermekov TM et al (1989) Studies of the
effect of dynamic processes during explosive break-out upon the
roof of mining excavations [J]. J Min Sci 24(6):581590
Felice JJ, Beattie TA, Spathis AT (1993) Face velocity measurements
using a microwave radar. In: Preece DS, Evans R, Richards AB.
Coupled explosive gas flow and rock motion modeling with
comparison to bench blast field data[C]. Proceedings 4th
International Symposium Rock Fragmentation by Blasting.
Vienna, Austria, pp 239246
Hsiung SM, Chowdhury AH, Nstsrss MS (2005) Numerical simulation of thermalmechanical processes observed at the lkdriftscale heater test at Yucca Mountain Nevada USA [J]. Int J Rock
Mech Min Sci 42(5/6):652666
LSTC (2003) LS-DYNA keyword users manual [M]. Livermore
Software Technology Corporation, Livermore
Lu WB, Yang JH, Chen M et al (2011) An equivalent method for
blasting vibration simulation. Simul Model Pract Theory
19(9):20502062
Lu WB, Yang JH, Yan P et al (2012) Dynamic response of rock mass
induced by the transient release of in situ stress. Int J Rock Mech
Min Sci 53:129141
Martino JB, Chandler NA (2004) Excavation-induced damage studies
at the underground research laboratory [J]. Int J Rock Mech Min
Sci 41(8):1 4131 426
Miklowitz J (1960) Plane-stress unloading waves emanating from a
suddenly punched hole in a stretched elastic plate [J]. J Appl
Mech 27:165171
Read RS (2004) 20 Years of excavation response studies at Aecls
underground research laboratory [J]. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci
41(8):12511275
123
726
Shan ZG, Yan P (2010) Management of rock bursts during excavation
of the deep tunnels in Jinping II hydropower station. Bull Eng
Geol Environ 69:353363
Tang C, Wang J, Zhang J (2010) Preliminary engineering application
of microseismic monitoring technique to rockburst prediction in
tunneling of Jinping II project. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng
2(3):193208
Zhang CS (2007) Study on technical cruxes of headrace tunnels of
Jingping II hydropower prjoect on Yalong River. China Inv Des
8:4147 (in Chinese)
123
P. Yan et al.
Zhang ZY, Liu Y, Zhang WX (1993) Research to the vibration effect
induced by blasting excavation of the main power house in
Dongfeng hydropower station [A]. Proceedings of Engineering
blasting [C], pp 299305 (in Chinese)
Zhang CQ, Feng XT, Zhou H et al (2012) Case histories of four
extremely intense rock bursts in deep tunnels. Rock Mech Rock
Eng 45:275288