NATM Design Construction

NATM Design and Construction
Tunneling Short Course

September 12-15, 2016
Boulder, Colorado
Conrad W. Felice, Ph.D., P.E., P.Eng. September 13, 2016

Managing Principal
C. W. Felice, LLC
Annual Tunneling Short Course - 2016
Outline
 What is NATM and historical perspective

 Applications, advantages and disadvantages
 Design & construction
page 2
Outline

page 3
What is NATM and historical perspective
• New Austrian Tunneling Method (NATM)

• Sequential Excavation Method (SEM)
• Sprayed Concrete Lining Method (SCL)
• Shotcrete Support Method
• Sequential Support Method
• Shotcrete Method
• Observational Method
• Observational Tunneling Method
SEQUENTIONAL EXCAVATION
FOR TUNNELS & SHAFTS (SETS) page 4
Richardson and Mayo, 1941
page 5
Whittaker and Frith, 1990


1848 to 1920s: Development of the use of fast setting mortars as a tunnel support; invention of the cement
gun and the registration of patents; early uses of gunite in civil and mining engineering tunnel operations
1948: Development of concepts relating to controlled rock deformation and dual lining system involving
systematic anchoring for tunneling which were postulated by Rabcewicz
1954: The first application of shotcrete as a supporting element in squeezing ground in tunneling was carried
out at the Runserau HEP Project, Austria by Brunner
1958: Brunner filed a patent of this concept of tunnel construction in squeezing ground and called it the
Shotcrete Method
1960: Mueller recognized the roles played by load and deformation measurements as part of the design
process aimed at preventing excessive rock loading of tunnels and consequently developed a systematic
measuring system which formed part of the process.
1962: Rabcewicz first used the term the New Austrian Tunneling Method
whilst speaking at a meeting in Salzburg
1964: NATM achieved worldwide recognition and appears to have originated from the publication of
Rabcewicz [15.7] in connection with the application of the shotcrete method in the Schwaikheim Tunnel which
was designed under the guidance of Mueller and Rabcewicz.
page 6

Rabcewicz (1964):
“A new tunnelling method – particularly

adapted for unstable ground has been
developed which uses surface stabilization
by a thin shotcrete lining, suitable
reinforced by rock bolting and closed as
soon as possible by an invert. Systematic
measurement of deformations and stresses
enables the required lining thickness to be
evaluated and controlled.”
“On the basis of best available information

one can make a preliminary support
design. It would be unrealistic to expect
that this could be the optimum and final
answer.”
“It is therefore reasonable to expect

modifications, to plan for them, and to
base them on more complete information,
that is, information that can only be page 7
obtained while the tunnel is being driven.”
Outline

page 8
Annual Tunneling Short Course – 2016
Applications, advantages, and disadvantages
An approach or philosophy where the surrounding rock-or soil

formations of a tunnel or underground opening are integrated into an
overall ring-like support structure. The following principles are
observed:
• Ground support is adapted to ground conditions
• Adverse states of stresses and deformations must be avoided by

applying the appropriate means of support in due time
• The support means can/should be optimized according to the

admissible deformations
• Instrumentation and observations are used during construction to

check, optimize, and revise ground support as needed
page 9
GOOD POOR
Changing ground conditions
Minimal Ground Medium Ground High Ground Support

Support Support
Adaptation of ground support
page 10
• Large cross sections and non-circular cross sections
• Complex and variable ground conditions
• Tunnels (typically less than 1.5 km)
• Complex underground structures with multiple cross sections,

variable sizes and shapes
• Economical support applied as required in contrast to TBM

segments, which are designed for the worst load case
• Adaptable equipment and crews able to work on multiple headings

in order to optimize the schedule
page 11
 Complex structures
Sources: CERN & Phillip Holzmann

page 12
 Large non-circular sections
Excavation & Support Waterproofing - Drained Cast-in-Place Concrete Lining
Source: CERN, Geneva, Phillip Holzmann
page 13
Flexible - Support provide as

required by the ground conditions
Safe - Able to deal with locally

unexpected ground condition,
minimizing claims
Economical - Support provided as

required by the encountered ground
conditions, in contrast to TBM
segments, which are designed for
worst load case - if needed or not,
therefore overdesigned
Adaptable - Optimizing equipment

and crews, allowing multiple heading
operations concurrent
page 14
• High level of coordination,

cooperation and
communication
• Lower production rates
• Interruptions in excavation
and support works have to
be avoided as much as
possible
page 15
Outline

page 16
Design & construction

 Information needs
Hydrology Geology
Laboratory
Explorations and in-situ
testing
Pre & During Excavation Ground

Support
Post Excavation
Decision
Observations
during Instrumentation
construction
page 17

 Systems approach
Field and Lab Test
Design Parameters
Compare Actual Readings with Original Design Models

Design
Phase
Models for Various Rock /

Soil Categories
Ongoing Process Constant Interaction

Design
Construction and Support
Geotechnical Field
Construction
Monitoring
Phase
Geotechnical Reading,
Evaluation & Interpretation
Re-Evaluation Compare
with Original Design Model
Continue Construction and

Adjust Support if Required page 18

Assess encountered Rock Mass
Type and Behavior
Determine
Reevaluate Category and Reevaluate
and modify Local and modify
criteria Measures criteria
Category reduction Install additional local

and/or local measures Excavation measures as required
System
NO Behaving
NO - Unstable
Too Rigid? as
expected
YES
Excavation and
Ground support page 19
OK
GEOLOGY
DESIGN
METHODOLOGY
CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT
METHODS SYSTEMS
page 20
 Managing risk
Other
Design
4%
5% Site boundaries
Services
6% 22%
Investigation
9%
Obstructions
10%
Soil properties
20%
Contamination
11%
Water
13% page 21
Clayton, 2001
 Managing risk
Hoek, et al, 1995 page 22

 Site investigation
• Regional geology
• Spatial changes in ground
characteristics
• Parameter evaluation
• Employ a range of tools:
invasive and non-invasive
exploration
page 23
 Site investigation and characterization
Thimble to ~50 Oil Drums
Harvey Parker
page 24
 Site investigation and characterization
https://www.ita-aites.org
page 25
“What’s between your boreholes?
• Good decisions cannot be made with bad information

• Analysis is only as good as the data on which it is
based
• Even if the data is good and the site investigation
adequate, interpretation is open to interpretation
page 26
 Material properties & design parameters
• Guess
page 27
• Field tests
page 28
• Laboratory testing
page 29
 Material properties and design parameters
page 30
Hoek and Brown 1982
 Material properties and design parameters
• Field tests
• Laboratory tests
• Guess
• Engineering judgement
page 31
 Approaches to analysis
page 32
Hoek and Brown 1982
 Primary analysis categories  Fundamental solution requirements
• Closed form • Equilibrium
• Simple • Compatibility
• Numerical • Material Behavior
• Boundary conditions
page 33
Solution requirements
Analysis
Method Material Boundary
Equilibrium Compatibility
Behavior conditions
Linear
Closed form   elastic

Failure
Simple  condition
Numerical   Any 
page 34
Closed
Practical conditions Simple Numerical
form
Behavior under working loads   
Distinguish between different
methods of construction

Construction stages 
In-situ conditions 
Local stability   
Global stability 
page 35
Empirical methods
• Relate practical experience gained on past projects to the
conditions expected at a proposed site
• Simple
• Manages uncertainties
• Rapidly adapts to changes of geology
• Popular
• Based primarily on rock mass classification systems
• “A compromise between the use of a complete theory and
ignoring the rock properties entirely” (Hudson and Harrison,
page 36
1997)
Why numerical modeling
• Analytical solutions may not

exist
Tunnel
Services
• Complex interacting systems
• Inherent nature of
geomaterials
page 37
Definition:
A process whereby a physical system can be described
and the behavior of the system examined in response to
change. In essence, a means of discovery.
page 38
Factors Affecting Development of A Numerical Solution
Physical Numerical User Hardware
Precision,Accuracy and
Economy
page 39
• Unlike empirical methods, finite element simulations allow one to account explicitly
for construction details and constitutive responses
• As construction proceeds, procedures become known and main uncertainties are soil
parameters
• Use inverse techniques to update computed results based on field performance data
• Allows changes in construction procedure from that assumed in design stage
• Adjusts for inevitable variability in soil responses between field and laboratory
• Can be used to find “optimal” locations of instruments
page 40
Two dimensional Three dimensional
page 41
Plane strain Axi-symmetric
page 42
page 43
Traditional geotechnical analysis
Completed Construction
Numerical
project techniques &
Simulation
practices
Engineering judgment
page 44
 Engineering judgement
NY Times, March 26, 2006
Over all, the group found that the 17th

Street Canal floodwall “appears to
reflect an overall pattern of
engineering judgment inconsistent
with that required for critical
structures.”
page 45
 Engineering judgement
Good judgment comes from Experience
Experience come from Bad judgment
page 46
 Ground classification
• Terzaghi’s Rock Mass Classification

• Deere’s Rock Quality Designation (RQD)
• Tunnelman’s Ground Classification – Soils
• Rock Structure Rating (RSR)
• Rock Mass Rating (RMR) – Geomechanics Classification
• Barton’s “Q” Classification – NGI
• GSI
• Others…
page 49
page 50
Bieniawski, 1989
page 51
Bieniawski, 1989
Bieniawski, 1989 page 52

page 53
 Standup time
• Proposed by Lauffer in 1958
• Assumed that ground stability is primarily based on structural defects
• “Stand-up Time” is dependent on rock quality and the span of the tunnel
• Realized that other factors could influence stand-up time, e.g.

– Orientation of tunnel axis
– Tunnel shape
– Excavation method
– Support method
page 54
 Standup time
page 55
 Standup time
page 56
 Standup time
page 57
 Ground loads
𝑨𝑨𝑨𝑨𝑨𝑨𝑨𝑨𝑨𝑨𝑨𝑨 𝑪𝑪𝑪𝑪𝑪𝑪𝑪𝑪𝑪𝑪𝑪𝑪𝒃𝒃′ 𝒔𝒔 𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍𝒍
𝒔𝒔 = 𝒄𝒄 + 𝝈𝝈 𝐭𝐭𝐭𝐭𝐭𝐭 𝝓𝝓
and
𝝈𝝈𝒗𝒗 = K𝝈𝝈𝒗𝒗
where
𝒒𝒒; 𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔
𝝈𝝈𝒗𝒗 ; vertical stress
𝝈𝝈𝒉𝒉 ; 𝒉𝒉𝒉𝒉𝒉𝒉𝒉𝒉𝒉𝒉𝒉𝒉𝒉𝒉𝒉𝒉𝒉𝒉𝒉𝒉 𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔
K; coefficient of earth pressure
𝝓𝝓; 𝒇𝒇𝒇𝒇𝒇𝒇𝒇𝒇𝒇𝒇𝒇𝒇𝒇𝒇𝒇𝒇 𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂
c; cohesion
2B𝜸𝜸𝜸𝜸𝜸𝜸 = 𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐(𝝈𝝈𝒗𝒗 + 𝒅𝒅𝝈𝝈𝒗𝒗 ) - 𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝝈𝝈𝒗𝒗 + 𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐 + 𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝝈𝝈𝒗𝒗 𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕∅𝒅𝒅𝒅𝒅
𝑩𝑩𝑩𝑩𝑩𝑩𝑩𝑩𝑩𝑩𝑩𝑩𝑩𝑩𝑩𝑩 𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄: 𝝈𝝈𝒗𝒗 = q if z=0

𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭 𝑲𝑲 = 𝟏𝟏 𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂 𝝓𝝓 = 𝟑𝟑𝟑𝟑
𝒄𝒄
𝑩𝑩 𝜸𝜸 − −𝑲𝑲 𝐭𝐭𝐭𝐭𝐭𝐭 𝝓𝝓�𝒛𝒛�𝑩𝑩� −𝑲𝑲 𝐭𝐭𝐭𝐭𝐭𝐭 𝝓𝝓�𝒛𝒛�𝑩𝑩�
𝝈𝝈𝒗𝒗 = 𝑩𝑩 𝟏𝟏 − 𝒆𝒆 + 𝒒𝒒𝒆𝒆 𝝈𝝈𝒗𝒗 = 2B𝜸𝜸
𝑲𝑲 𝐭𝐭𝐭𝐭𝐭𝐭 𝝓𝝓
page 58
 Ground loads
page 59
 Ground loads
page 60
 Ground loads
page 61
Hoek and Brown 1982
 Ground reaction & support curves
Austrian Society for Geomechanics, (2010)
Hoek, et al, 1995

page 62
page 63
Rocscience, 2015
 Ground reaction & support curves 𝟐𝟐𝒑𝒑𝒐𝒐 − 𝝈𝝈𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄

𝐩𝐩𝐨𝐨 𝒑𝒑𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄 =
𝑼𝑼𝑼𝑼𝑼𝑼𝑼𝑼𝑼𝑼 𝒂𝒂 𝑴𝑴𝑴𝑴𝑴𝑴𝑴𝑴 − 𝑪𝑪𝑪𝑪𝑪𝑪𝑪𝑪𝑪𝑪𝑪𝑪𝑪𝑪 𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄 𝟏𝟏 + 𝒌𝒌
𝝈𝝈𝟏𝟏 = 𝝈𝝈𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄 + 𝒌𝒌𝝈𝝈𝟑𝟑
Support pressure
𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐 cos 𝝓𝝓 𝐩𝐩𝐜𝐜𝐜𝐜
𝝈𝝈𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄 =
𝟏𝟏 − sin 𝝓𝝓
𝟏𝟏 + sin 𝝓𝝓
𝒌𝒌 = 𝐩𝐩𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞
𝟏𝟏 − sin 𝝓𝝓
𝐩𝐩𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬
Where
𝝈𝝈𝟏𝟏 𝐢𝐢𝐢𝐢 𝐭𝐭𝐭𝐭𝐭𝐭 𝐚𝐚𝐚𝐚𝐚𝐚𝐚𝐚𝐚𝐚 𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬 𝐚𝐚𝐚𝐚 𝐟𝐟𝐟𝐟𝐟𝐟𝐟𝐟𝐟𝐟𝐟𝐟𝐟𝐟
𝝈𝝈𝟑𝟑 is the confining stress
𝝈𝝈𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄 𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊 𝒖𝒖𝒖𝒖𝒖𝒖𝒖𝒖𝒖𝒖𝒖𝒖𝒖𝒖𝒖𝒖 𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄 𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔 𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐 𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕 𝒓𝒓𝒓𝒓𝒓𝒓𝒓𝒓 𝒎𝒎𝒎𝒎𝒎𝒎𝒎𝒎
𝒄𝒄 𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊 𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄 𝐮𝐮𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬 𝐮𝐮𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬
𝝓𝝓 𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊 𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕 𝒇𝒇𝒇𝒇𝒇𝒇𝒇𝒇𝒇𝒇𝒇𝒇𝒇𝒇𝒇𝒇 𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂
Inward displacement
𝒑𝒑𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄 𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊 𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕 𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄 𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔 𝒑𝒑𝒑𝒑𝒑𝒑𝒑𝒑𝒑𝒑𝒑𝒑𝒑𝒑𝒑𝒑
𝒑𝒑𝒐𝒐 𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊 𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕 𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊 𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔 𝒑𝒑
Factor of safety = 𝒑𝒑𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔
𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆
page 64
Rocscience, 2015
page 65

Ground conditions Support
Blocky sandstone Spacing 34mm diameter

Tunnel diameter = 6 m mechanically anchored rock bolts
Insitu stress – 10 MPa Length – 1.3. of diameter
c = 2.6 MPa Spacing – ½ as bolt length
Friction angle = 30°
E (Young’s modulus) = 1000 MPa
Poisson's ratio = 0.25
Strength of rock mass = 9 MPa
k=3
Factor of Safety : 0.443314

Mobilized Support Pressure : 0.354 MPa
With support installed :

Radius of Plastic Zone rp : 3.66515 m
Wall Displacement up : 42.8045 mm
Tunnel Convergence : 1.42682 %
With no support installed :

Radius of Plastic Zone rp : 3.80643 m
Wall Displacement up : 46.9255 mm
Tunnel Convergence : 1.56418 %
Critical Pressure pcr : 2.7475 MPa
page 66
 Ground support
• Rock bolts
• Rock dowels
• Shotcrete
• Wire mesh/mine straps
• Lattice girders
• Spiles
• Pipe umbrellas
• Ribs and boards
• Liner plate
• Etc.
page 67
 Ground support Rib design

Thrust Calculation
T = Pv R S
Moment Calculation
Mt = h T
C
h = R − R 2 − ( )2
2
M max = 0.86 M t
Pv = Vertical Rock Load

R = Radius
S = Spacing of Ribs
h = Rise Between Blocking Points
C = Distance Between Blocking Points
page 68
Proctor and White, 1988

 Ground support
page 69
Stillborg, 1994
 Ground support
page 70
Stillborg, 1994
 Ground support
Wedge Analysis
• Using geological date (dip, strike of

joints etc.)
• Considering 3 dimensions
• Deriving most unfavorable block
• Defining the required rock dowels
• Considering tension and shear for rock

dowels
• Variable safety depending on the

number of rock dowels for a single
block page 71
 Ground support
Beam Spring Model load p
• Rock Mass considered by

radial and tangential
springs
• No tension in radial springs
• Failure Criterion for

tangential springs
• Lining as Beams
• Load is derived from

geotechnical considerations
page 72
 Advance support
Graphic courtesy of DSI

page 73
 Advance support
Analytical Model
• Spiles/Pipes are modeled as The picture can't be displayed.

spile / pipe
shotcrete
beams
unsupp.
length
• Load is derived using silo
theory
s = 1.5 unsupp. length B

A
page 74
 Advance support
page 75
 Advance support
page 76
 Advance support
• Face Stability
• Analytical Model
• Safety is derived
considering driving and
resisting forces
• 3-D effect is included in

the model (friction and
cohesion on side planes
page 77
 Advance support
Vallejo, L. G, and M. Ferrer, (2011)

page 78
 Advance support
page 79
Vallejo, L. G, and M. Ferrer, (2011)

 Surface settlement
3500mm Diameter storm

tunnel to replace existing DB
tunnel
2920mm
Diameter storm
tunnel to replace
existing DB
tunnel
page 80
Sources of settlement
• Face instability
• Characteristics of temporary
support
• Excavation staging
• Final liner installation
• Construction operations
• Groundwater
• Vibrations
page 81
Empirical methods
• Relate practical experience gained on past projects to the
conditions expected at a proposed site
• Simple and rapid appraisal for risk analysis
• Conservative damage assessment for structures
• Popular
• “A compromise between the use of a complete theory and
ignoring the rock properties entirely” (Hudson and Harrison,
1997)
page 82
Yeates, 1985
Peck, 1969
page 83
Annual Tunneling Short Course – 2016 Relationship among Volume Loss, Construction
Practice and Ground Conditions (FHWA 2009)
VL
𝑖𝑖 = 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
- The volume of the settlement trough Vs is closely

related to the magnitude of ground loss VL
- The magnitude of settlement Svmax is proportional
to Vs and therefore to VL
- The ground loss VL is strongly influenced by
construction method
𝑉𝑉𝐿𝐿
𝑉𝑉𝐿𝐿 = 2𝜋𝜋 𝑖𝑖 𝑆𝑆𝑣𝑣𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝑉𝑉𝐿𝐿 (%) = 100 page 84
𝑉𝑉𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸
page 85
 Instrumentation
• Verification of design,
parameters, and support
measure
• Safety – active
performance monitoring
• Tunnel, deformation and

pressure
• Surface and subsurface
Vallejo, L. G, and M. Ferrer, (2011) page 86

 Instrumentation
• Define the project conditions

• Predict mechanics that control behavior
• Define the purpose of the instrumentation and monitoring and the
information that is needed
• Select what is to be measured
• Predict magnitudes and rates of change
• Set action thresholds
• Identify response actions and prepare for implementation
• Assign responsible parties
• Select instruments and locations
• Identify what might affect a measurement
• Establish QA/QC procedures
• Establish a system design report
• Plan for regular calibration and maintenance
• Plan data collection and data management protocols
page 87
 Instrumentation
page 88
 Instrumentation
• 3D Geological documentation of
geometry and surface texture
• Verification of excavation profile
• Immediate analysis of under break

and geological over break areas
• Enhanced tunnel face and rock

mass characterization
• Visual analysis of rock surface
• Record installed rock support
page 89
 Instrumentation
page 90
 Instrumentation
page 91
 Instrumentation
page 92
 Threshold values
page 93
Sakurai, 1977
General recommendation (Tunnel lining design guide, 2004)
Limit strains to < 1%)
Hoek and Marinos, 2000)
page 94
Hoek and Marinos, 2000) page 95

 Excavation methods
• Heading and bench or multidrift excavation

• Excavation either by blasting or mechanical means
• Initial ground support usually combination of shotcrete, dowels,
mesh, and lattice girders
• Forepoling, or spiling, pipe umbrella as necessary
• Face stabilization using shotcrete and fiberglass dowels as
necessary
• Ground improvement as necessary
• Instrumentation and monitoring
page 96
 Typical cross section
EXCAVATION LINE
INITIAL SUPPORT
WATERPROOFING
FINAL CAST IN
PLACE CONCRETE
page 97
“Construction deserves more

attention in design (Peck, 1973)”
“Engineering judgment is a feel for
the appropriateness of a solution
from the narrowest technical
details to the broadest concepts of
planning… (Peck 1969)”
page 108
Annual Tunneling Short Course 2016

Bibliography and reference list:
Austrian Society for Geomechanics, (2010). Guideline for the Geotechnical Design of Underground Structures with
Conventional Excavation, Salzburg, Austria.
Bieniawski, Z. T. (1898). Engineering Rock Mass Classifications, John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Clayton, C.R.I., (2001). Managing Geotechnical Risk, Thomas Telford, London.
Einstein, H. H., C. W. Schwartz, W. Steiner, M. M. Baligh, and R. E. Levitt, (1980). Improved Design for Tunnel Supports:
Analysis Methods and Ground Structure Behavior: A Review, DOT/RSPA/DPB-50/79/10, U.S. Department of Transportation,
Washington DC., May.
Hoek, E. and P. Marinos, (2000). Predicting tunnel squeezing problems in weak heterogeneous rock masses, Tunnels $
Tunneling International, Part 1 November, pp 45-51, Part 2, December, pp33-36.
Hoek, E., P.K. Kaiser, and W. F Bawden, (1998). Support of Underground Excavations in Hard Rock, Taylor & Francis, New
York.
Hoek , E. and E.T. Brown, (1982). Underground Excavations in Rock, Institution of Mining and Metallurgy, London.
Proctor, R., and T. White, (1977). Earth Tunneling with Steel Supports, Commercial Shearing, Inc. Youngston, Ohio.
Proctor, R., and T. White, (1968). Rock Tunneling with Steel Supports, Commercial Shearing, Inc. Youngston, Ohio.
Richardson, Harold W. and R. S. Mayo, (1941). Practical Tunnel Driving, McGraw Hill Book Company, Inc., New York.
Rocscience, (2015). RockSupport, Introduction Manual, Toronto, Ontario. page 109


Sandstrom, Gosta E., (1963). The History of Tunnelling, Barrie and Rockliff, London.
Sakirai, S. (1997). Lessons learned from field measurement in tunneling, Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 12,
No. 4 Elsevier, Oxford, pp. 453-460.
Schwartz, Charles W. and H. Einstein, (1980). Improved Design of Tunnel Supports: Volume 1 Simplified Analysis for Ground-
Structure Interaction in Tunneling, Report No. UMTA-MA-06-0100-80-4, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington DC.,
June.
Schwartz, Charles W., A. S. Azzouz, and H. Einstein, (1980). Improved Design of Tunnel Supports: Volume 2 Aspects of
Yielding in Ground-Structure Interaction in Tunneling, Report No. UMTA-MA-06-0100-80-5, U.S. Department of Transportation,
Washington, DC, June.
Schwartz, Charles W., A. S. Azzouz, and H. Einstein, (1980). Improved Design of Tunnel Supports: Volume 2 Aspects of
Yielding in Ground-Structure Interaction in Tunneling, Report No. UMTA-MA-06-0100-80-5, U.S. Department of Transportation,
Washington, DC, June.
Stillborg, B, (1994). Professional Users Handbook for Rock Bolting: Series on Rock and Soil Mechanics 2nd Edition, Trans
Tech Publications.
Steiner, W. and H. Einstein, (1980). Improved Design of Tunnel Supports: Volume 5 Empirical Methods in Rock Tunneling –
Review and Recommendations, Report No. UMTA-MA-06-0100-80-8, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington DC,
June.
Tunnel lining design guide, (2003)The British Tunnelling Society and the Institution of Civil Engineers, Thomas Telford,
London. page 110

Vallejo, L. G, and M. Ferrer, (2011). Geological Engineering, CRC Press, New York.
Whittaker, Barry N. and R. C. Frith, (1990). Tunnelling Design, Stability, and Construction, The Institution of Mining and
Metallurgy, London.
Tunnel lining design guide, (2003)The British Tunnelling Society and the Institution of Civil Engineers, Thomas Telford,
London.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, (1997). Engineering and Design, Tunnels and Shafts in Rock, EM-1110-2-2907, Washington,
DC, May 30.
Vallejo, L. G, and M. Ferrer, (2011). Geological Engineering, CRC Press, New York.
Whittaker, Barry N. and R. C. Frith, (1990). Tunnelling Design, Stability, and Construction, The Institution of Mining and
Metallurgy, London.
page 111
Contact information:
Conrad W. Felice
Email: conrad.felice@cwfelicellc.com
Web site: www.cwfelicellc.com
Mobile: 1-425-753-3316
page 112

NATM Design Construction

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

NATM Design Construction

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

NATM Design and Construction

Tunneling Short Course

Conrad W. Felice, Ph.D., P.E., P.Eng. September 13, 2016

 What is NATM and historical perspective

 What is NATM and historical perspective

What is NATM and historical perspective

• New Austrian Tunneling Method (NATM)

What is NATM and historical perspective

Richardson and Mayo, 1941

Whittaker and Frith, 1990

What is NATM and historical perspective

What is NATM and historical perspective

“A new tunnelling method – particularly

“On the basis of best available information

“It is therefore reasonable to expect

 What is NATM and historical perspective

Applications, advantages, and disadvantages

An approach or philosophy where the surrounding rock-or soil

• Adverse states of stresses and deformations must be avoided by

• The support means can/should be optimized according to the

• Instrumentation and observations are used during construction to

Applications, advantages, and disadvantages

Minimal Ground Medium Ground High Ground Support

Adaptation of ground support

Applications, advantages, and disadvantages

• Large cross sections and non-circular cross sections

• Complex and variable ground conditions

• Tunnels (typically less than 1.5 km)

• Complex underground structures with multiple cross sections,

• Economical support applied as required in contrast to TBM

• Adaptable equipment and crews able to work on multiple headings

Applications, advantages, and disadvantages

Sources: CERN & Phillip Holzmann

Applications, advantages, and disadvantages

 Large non-circular sections

Excavation & Support Waterproofing - Drained Cast-in-Place Concrete Lining

Source: CERN, Geneva, Phillip Holzmann

Applications, advantages, and disadvantages

Flexible - Support provide as

Safe - Able to deal with locally

Economical - Support provided as

Adaptable - Optimizing equipment

Applications, advantages, and disadvantages

• High level of coordination,

 What is NATM and historical perspective

Design & construction

Pre & During Excavation Ground

Design & construction

Field and Lab Test

Compare Actual Readings with Original Design Models

Models for Various Rock /

Ongoing Process Constant Interaction

Construction and Support

Continue Construction and

Design & construction

Category reduction Install additional local

Design & construction

Design & construction

Design & construction

Hoek, et al, 1995 page 22

Design & construction

Design & construction

 Site investigation and characterization