Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258224136
CITATIONS READS
11 3,198
2 authors:
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
A new damage model for rock burst in hard rocks during deep mining View project
Management of coal bursts and pillar burst in deep coal mines View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Murat Karakus on 20 May 2014.
ABSTRACT: The objective of this paper is to investigate a particular tunnelling method, known as the New
Austrian Tunnelling Method (NATM), which first appeared in English publications in 1964. NATM was
described as a modern tunnelling method by Rabcewicz. Throughout the literature survey, there have been
encountered numerous ambiguities and conflicts relating to the NATM. Furthermore, researchers who
devoted themselves to tunnelling technology are split into three groups. These are the supporters of the early
precursors of the NATM as a new modern tunnelling method (Müller 1978; Golser 1979), the opponents as
nothing new and Austrian, and the neutral group. The ultimate criticism against NATM, denying its existence,
has been made by Kovári (1994). The applications of this method, however, have accelerated all over the
world due to its overwhelming beneficial features compared with other conventional tunnelling methods.
Sometimes, NATM is referred to using different titles such as Sprayed Concrete Lining (SCL) (ICE, 1996),
Sequential Excavation Method (SEM) as distinct from NATM (Brandt et al. quoted by ICE 1996), CD-
NATM, Centre Dividing wall NATM (Kobayashi et al. 1994), CDM, Centre Diaphragm Method (Seki et al.
1989) or CRD-NATM, Cross Diaphragm Method (Narasaki 1989) and UHVS, Upper half vertical
subdivision method (Seki et al. 1989). Detailed definitions for NATM are available in the literature and the
historical background with characteristic features will be discussed in paper.
2 sin φ
100
r 1−sin φ
pi = p 0 (1 − sin φ ) = np 0 (2) σr
σr /100
R 80
0
60 C’ C
The values of n are given as a function of p 0 and φ I
40 Pi
2
(see Rabcewicz 1964). Assuming no protective zone A
in which r=R, then the opening reaches equilibrium 20
1
B r/R
a loosening
without any deformation. The formulae given above
a’
0.9 0.8 0.7 Pi 0.6 Pi Pi min 0.5 0.4
0
are derived according to the stress distribution after 2 3 4 5 6 8 10 15 20 30 50 100
∆r
20
a cavity has been made, as is sketched in Figure 2.
40
60
80 Pia + PiI
time
s≥
100 Pia
T