Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
I
j
1400
600
o
-+ Vor 1i caJ st r ess Sz
o Mi nor hor i zont al st r ess Sh
Ma/Or hor i zont al st r ess SH
Legend l or l i nes :
A : Sh ver sus dept h
B : Theor et i cal over bur den st r ess = 0.027z
C : Sz ver sus dept h
D : SH ver sus dept h
Figure 10: Stress versus depth relationships
for overcoring tests
950
4.2 Rock support
The main cavern excavations are supported by
means of untensioned grouted dowels and
shotcrete. The first layer of shotcrete was primarily
intended to prevent rock loosening and to provide a
smooth surface so that the mesh could be placed in
reasonably close contact with the excavation
surface. The mesh reinforcement for the shotcrete
lining was fabricated from srnme bars and had a
200mm aperture. This was then fastened to Brnrntp
profiling bars which were fixed to the walls on a
1.5msquare grid. The mesh and profiling bars were
secured at each crossover by the pattern bolts and
the centre of each mesh panel was fixed against the
shotcrete by means of an S-hook. Shotcrete was
then applied in two further layers, each with a
minimum thickness of SOmm. In view of the
presence of the Drainage Gallery and its associated
drainage measures, a regular array of drainholes
through the shotcrete was not considered necessary
and drainholes were provided only in specific areas
of seepage.
The typical pattern of rock reinforcement is
shown on Figure 11 and mainly involved 2S<p
cement-grouted rebars with lengths ranging from 3
to 7m. The reinforcement for the Machine Hall was
as follows:
Crown:
Haunches:
3.7m2S$bars on a 1.srn grid
S.3mto 7m2S$bars on a 1.Smgrid
Beamfor
suspended
ceiling
MACHINEHALL
Sidewalls: Alternating 7mand 4.3m 2S$bars on
a 1.Smgrid; spot bolting only beneath
elevations of mass concrete (208m)
The above bolting patterns were based on an
assessment of the geological mapping of the roof
and sidewalls and took into account the
kinematically possible failure mechanisms. For the
discontinuity sets shown in Figure 8, the wedges
formed by combinations of these are generally quite
small and steep sided with little bolting being
needed to stabilise these. Additionally, the bolts
were intended to support the blast-damaged zone
around the excavation. Experience on other power
houses in China indicated that the blast damaged
zone was about 1.2mdeep but observations on this
scheme indicated that blast damage was generally
less than this depth.
The amount of support installed is quite low by
comparison with precedent practice and reflects the
excellent rock mass conditions and good excavation
practice employed by the Contractor.
As well as the pattern bolting noted above,
localised support measures were used where
geological inspections identified kinematically
feasible failure mechanisms. One of the largest
such mechanisms was associated with a major fault
which daylighted near the toe of the western end of
the Machine Hall. The gable end of the Machine
Hall strikes at NW100 compared with the fault strike
of NW25, with the fault dipping at about SO-5Soto
the southeast. The fault had a true thickness of
TRANSFORMER
HALL
Note:
All boltsarecement-groutedrebarsfrom3.7to7minlength
Boltsaregenerallyon1.5mgrid
Boltsincraneandceilingbeamare32mmdiameter
All otherboltsare25mmdiameter
Figure 11: Rock support installed in main caverns
951
about 2mwith a well defined kaolinite seamat the
upper interface with the rock mass. This area was
particularly critical since the Loading Bay was
directly above the fault and deadweights for the
crane testing needed to be placed there at an early
stage. The total volume of the potential wedge of
material above the fault was about 10,000 tonnes.
A significant amount of cracking was noted in the
Construction Access Tunnel within the gable end of
the Machine Hall. Followinga detailed evaluationof
the problem, it was concluded that the cracking was
mainly related to stress relief at the end of the
Machine Hall and that the wedge could be
adequately stabilised with rock reinforcement since
there were no obvious vertical release surfaces for
the wedge and the in situ stresses provided a
considerable stabilising action for any potential
failure.
Additional boltingwas also installedas part of the
crane beaminstallation(see later section).
4.3 Observed behaviour
Monitoring of the underground excavations involved
the use of sliding micrometers, multipoint borehole
extensometers and convergence meters. Apart
fromareas of local loosening associated with locally
adverse geological structures, the rock mass
generally showed only minor response to the
excavation process. The maximum deformation in
the crown of the Machine Hall was generally about
3mm as measured by the sliding micrometers.
Convergence across the 22m span cavern was
generally less than 10mm as measured by tape
extensometers.
Comparison of the observed deformations with
those predicted by stress-strain analyses indicated
that the in situ modulus of elasticity was about 60
GPa. Apart from locally anomalies caused by
instruments crossing major discontinuities, the rock
mass essentiallybehavedas an elastic material.
5. CRANE BEAM
InlinewithChinese practice on earlier power house
caverns, the crane beam for the Guangzhou
Machine Hall has been constructed as a reinforced
concrete bracket anchored to the sidewalls with
grouted dowels. The geometry of the beam is
shownon Figure 12. The crane toadonthe beamis
432tonnevertical and6 tonne horizontal, equivalent
to about 400 kN/mvertical and 40 kN/mhorizontal.
The beam is located on a sidewall haunch with a
nominal shape of 20 from the vertical. Support to
the beamwas provided by upward and downward
inclined32mmq>dowels at 600to 800mmcentres.
An extensive monitoring programme was carried
out during test loading of the crane beam. This
azmmbers
em l ong 81
600mr n cent r es
32mmbar s
6m l ong at
eOOmm cerures
Cr ane beam
1.6mwi de by
t.am deep
Figure 12: Crane beam in Machine Hall
included boltmeters, rebar strain gauges, crack
meters, vibrating wire gauges in the concrete and
strain gauges on the surface of the concrete beam.
Rebar strain gauges at 0.8m to 3m from the
beam/sidewall interface showed only minor
increases in stress on loading and no stress
changes were measured in gauges more than 3m
from the theoretical interface. No cracking was
observed during crane beamloading nor was there
any response from adjacent MPBX's. When the
crane beam was unloaded, the monitoring
instruments returnedto their zero position indicating
consistent elastic behaviour.
6. PRESSURETUNNELS
6. 1 Pressure tunnel layout
Thevarious options considered for the arrangement
of the High Pressure Shafts and Tunnels included
thefollowing:
Avertical shaft
An upper vertical shaft, an intermediate
horizontal tunnel anda lower vertical shaft
A singleshaft inclinedat 50
An upper inclined shaft at 50, an intermediate
horizontal shaft anda lower inclinedshaft
The designers' preference for the inclined shaft
option in Stage I rather than the vertical option was
basedonthefollowingfactors:
The total length of the waterway was reduced by
several hundredmetres.
The overall hydraulic efficiency of the scheme
was improved.
For Stage II, the preference for the inclined shaft
option was strengthened because of the fact that
the slipforming equipment had been purchased for
Stage I and represented a capital value of about $3
millionUS dollars.
Although the construction and safety
disadvantages of inclined shafts are well
recognised, the GPSJ VC made the decision to
952
adopt inclined shafts on the basis of their theoretical
operational benefits. In the event, the excavation
and lining of the shafts for both stages were
successfully executed without any undue
construction problems.
6.2 High pressure test gallery
A high pressure test gallery was excavated and
monitored as part of the design validation process
for the waterway system. The gallery was located
about 35m above the Stage I manifold and had the
same orientation as the latter. The excavation was
made in Class I-II rock of similar quality to the actual
manifold conditions. The test area was constructed
to half scale. The main tunnel section was 34m
long and 4m diameter. A branch tunnel 12m long,
1.75m diameter was oriented in the same direction
as the penstocks. Both tunnels were lined with
O.3mthick reinforced concrete.
Tests were carried out in the following pressure
ranges:
2 Mpa in increasing and decreasing steps of 0.5
Mpa
4 Mpa in increasing and decreasing stages of 1,
2, 2.5, 3, 3.5 and 4 Mpa
Testing was also proposed at 5 Mpa but only 5.5
Mpa could be reached because of limitations with
the pumping equipment.
The test gallery was comprehensively monitored
with 12 arrays of instruments in the main and
branch tunnels. For the 5.5 Mpa test, the main
tunnel showed -0.24mm convergence in a near-
vertical direction and + 0.44mm extension on the 45
axis pointing down and away from the branch
tunnel. Observed water pressures in the rock mass
Within 2m of the lining were generally slightly lower
than the water pressure in the tunnel. The rate of
seepage per unit area of the tunnel was 1.8
lttres/sec/jooorn" - however seepage through the
plug affected this result and the actual seepage into
the rock would have been considerably lower than
this figure. Despite the fact that the branch test
tunnel was only 20m from the Drainage Gallery and
27m from the Machine Hall, no seepage was noted
in adjacent galleries as a result of the high pressure
testing.
6.3 Excavation of the inclined shafts
Initial excavations in the inclined shaft consisted of a
raised pilot tunnel 2m x 2m in dimension located
along the invert of the full shaft diameter. These
Were undertaken for exploratory purposes and to
provide a mucking facility for the main excavation.
During these excavations, a number of faults,
fractured zones and seepage zones were
encountered.
The equipment used for shaft slashing consisted
of 8 no. hand-held drills, a platform for transporting
material and a working platform from which drilling,
charging and rock support were carried out. The
working face was normal to the 50 shaft. The blast
pattern used about 200 blastholes producing an
average advance rate per round of 3m and an
average monthly advance' rate of 50m.
Rock support in the inclined shafts comprised
spot bolting and shotcrete in the Class I-II rock and
pattern bolting in the remaining rock. pattern bolting
consisted of 2.5m long, 25mm rebars on a 1.2 to
1.5m grid. Shotcrete thickness ranged from 100mm
to 150mm thick and incorporated mesh
reinforcement for the poorer rock mass quality.
Heavier reinforcement was required in slashing
through some of the fault zones. For example,
slashing through a 16m section of one of the major
faults in the Upper Inclined Shaft took over six
weeks with the face advance being reduced to
1.5m, bolting increased to a 0.7m grid and shotcrete
thickness increased to 250mm with mesh in some
locations. Swellex bolts were used for some of the
temporary support in the shafts.
The main problems connected with the driving of
the inclined shafts were:
Difficult working' conditions for drilling, grouting
and rock support because of the irreqular invert
caused by high overbreak in many areas and the
fact that the platform had to be offset to allow for
installation of services.
Ventilation problems due to marked differences
in temperature between the upper and lower
reservoirs and because of material choking up
the pilot raise
Choking of muck in the pilot raise
Safety problems connected with the installation of
rails and dowels above the working platform for
subsequent slipforming operations and the
requirement to periodically clear out the mucking
raise when it became blocked.
6.4 Concrete lining
The permanent support of the shafts comprised a
reinforced concrete lining O.6m thick. Lining was
carried out by means of a hybrid slipforming
technique in steps of 12.5m. The lining
incorporated waterstops at cold joints. The rate at
which lining was carried out was between 4m and
7m per day once the operation overcame initial
setting up difficulties.
6.5 Grouting of hydraulic tunnels
Low pressure tunnels
Initially, it was envisaged that grouting of the Low
953
Pressure Tunnels would be made in arrays of 10 no.
5m long boreholes at 2.5m spacing along the
tunnels, regardless of the rock quality. An extensive
programme of test grouting in different rock quality
provided valuable data which allowed the following
design procedure to be adopted:
All rockclasses Cavity grouting plus
consolidation grouting only
when water pressure tests
indicate Lugeon values above 3.
For lowgrout takes, holes below
springline were omitted.
Maximum grouting pressure of
1 Mpa used.
Class I and II Borehole length of 2.5m with
grouting only above springline
Class III Borehole lengths 3m above
springline and 4mbelow
Class IV As per original design
High pressure tunnels
A high pressure grouting trial was carried out in the
High Pressure Test Gallery with three different types
of grouting being used to improve the rock:
Backfill grouting in the crown of the test tunnels
Contact grouting in 1.25m long holes
High pressure grouting in 4m long holes
Contact grouting used a pressure of 1 Mpa while
high pressure grouting was made in four stages up
to 6.1 Mpa. The rock mass in the test area was
Class I-II with few discontinuities and a low
conductivity. Water injection tests were carried out
in 42 boreholes and the maximum reported Lugeon
value was 1.55.
Most of the rock mass along the waterways
consists of high quality granite and high pressure
grouting would not be effective in improving this.
rock quality, but would help to prestress the lining
and improve the blast damaged zone close to the
tunnel periphery. Consequently, the boreholes in
good quality rock (Class I and II) were restricted to
about 2m in order to just penetrate the blast
damaged zone which was generally about 0.8m
thick. Grouting pressures in the inclined shafts had
to be restricted depending on the amount of
overburden pressure.
6.6 Initial filling of the waterway system
Initial filling of the Stage I hydraulic tunnels was
carried out in February 1993 with the tunnels being
temporarily dewatered for a brief period in late
J une/early J uly of the same year. The water inflow
to the Stage I Power House increased quite
significantly in the first six months of operation from
4.5 m%r to about 20 m%r in early 1994. The main
cause of the inflow was considered to be associated
with the No 3 Penstock. The upstream sidewall in
the Power House initially became damp and inflows
became apparent in the Power House itself. By
J anuary 1994, the seepage area had reached the
crane beam at elevation 229m, and by February it
had reached the beam for the false ceiling.
Drainage boreholes at various orientations
(vertical, inclined and subhorizontal) were drilled
from the drainage gallery close to Penstock No 3 in
early 1994. These remedial works appeared to fulfil
their purpose in that the total inflow stabilised at
about 20-25 m
3
/hr until J une 1994. However water
inflows had increased to about 45 m
3
/hr by late
1994.
The cause of the seepage was considered to be
due to poor sealing of the grouting holes through
the steel lined section of the penstocks. Inspections
made after the initial test filling indicated that about
5% of the grout hole sin Penstock No 3 were
defective and yielding water. Leakage from these
holes followed a path along the blast damaged
zones around the tunnels and Machine Hall,
eventually reaching above the springline of the main
cavern some 40m above the initial points of
leakage.
In March 1995, in connection with a stoppage at
Daya Bay Nuclear Power Station, the GPSJ VC
decided to dewater the hydraulic tunnels in order to
investigate the reasons for the leakage and to
undertake additional remedial actions. Dewatering
was done at a rate of about 5 m/hr and took a total
of one week. After emptying, the steel lining and
the groutholes were inspected. 42 groutholes were
found to be defective with four of these having open
holes, the largest of which was 7 by 10mm. The old
seals were removed and the backfill concrete was
found to be absent in some cases. Remedial works
were carried out and the re-filling of the tunnel
started just over one week after the tunnels had
been dewatered. When the tunnels were
refilled, the total inflow was found to be only about
3.6 m
3
/hr compared with the 43 m
3
/hr before the
remedial works.
Analysis of the data collected during the two
filling/emptying cycles indicated that the maximum
external pressure head acting on the concrete lining
was about 200m maximum when dewatering was
carried out at a rate of 5-6 m/hr.
7. CONCLUSIONS
The Guangzhou Pumped Storage Power Station
has been a notable construction project from the
perspective of both China and the international
scene. Apart from the fact that, when completed, it
will be the largest pumped storage scheme in the
world, the project has set a number of milestones
for speed of construction and cost per installed kW.
The combination of good rock quality and good
construction practice has enabled rock
reinforcement in the main caverns to be kept to very
low levels by comparison with precedent practice.
The Stage I scheme is also notable in that the
954
waterways have been dewatered twice shortly after
initial filling. This has provided an opportunity to
assess the external water pressures acting on the
linings while at the same time carrying out remedial
measures to reduce water inflows into the main
caverns.
8. REFERENCES
Cheng Xuemin
Hydropower development in China
Proc. Instn Civ. Engrs Civ. Engng, 102, No.1,
22-33,1994
955