In-Situ and Laboratory Tests: Owner-S

r-s
ne
Site Investigation, Design & Construction
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
of Hydro & Transport Tunnels
e
sp e
re itz
Kathmandu, Nepal 19 - 20 December 2013
ir w
he - S
In-situ and Laboratory Tests
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
M.Sc. Felix Amberg
tio ou
ra F
st T
Amberg Engineering Ltd., Switzerland

llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
Understanding the Ground Conditions
r-s
Components Laboratory tests
ne
Desk study Tests for composition
tiv nd
ow
Field reconnaissance Tests for structure
ec rla
e
sp e
Field investigations Test for strength
re itz
Construction records Test for hydraulic properties
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
Methods Field Tests and Measurements
© a
Mapping (geological, structural..)
n nd Stress
tio ou
Remote sensing Deformability

ra F
Drillings Hydraulic properties

st T
llu E
Sampling
lI C
Al ITA
Source: „A Geology for Engineers“, 7. Edition F.G.H. Blyth Ph.D., D.i.e., F.G.S., Emeritus
Reader in Engineering Geology, Imperial College of Science and Technology, London, M.
©
H. de Freitas M.i.Geoi., Ph.D., p.i.c, F.G.S., Senior Lecturer in Engineering Geology,,

Imperial College of Science and Technology, London, Elsevier verlag Amsterdam, 2005
2
Site investigation, Design & Construction of Hydro & Transport Tunnels | Kathmandu, Nepal – 19-20 December 2013
Relevant Geological and Geotechnical Parameters for
Tunnel Design in Soils
r-s
ne
Cohesion (cu,c‘)
tiv nd
ow
Mechanical
Friction Angle (u,‘)
ec rla
properties
e
Deformation modulus (Et,Es)
sp e
re itz
Mineralog. content (i.e. Quartz and clays) (MC)
ir w
Sedimentological Grain distribution (GSD)
he - S
properties Porosity (n)
ft n
O tio
Interlamination (IB)
© a
n nd Natural water content (Wn)
Hydrogeological
Saturation degree (S)
tio ou
properties
Permeability coefficient (K)
ra F
st T
llu E
Atterberg limits (Wl, WP)

lI C
Plasticity Index (IP)

Al ITA
Index properties Consistancy Index (IC)

©
Mechanized Tunnelling in Urban

Activity Index (IA) Areas, Guglielmetti, V. et al,
Density (wsd)
Taylor&Francis, London, 2008
3
Field Strength Tests
The following are the major field tests for determining the soil
r-s
strength:
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
 Vane shear test (VST)
e
sp e
re itz
 Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
ir w
 Cone Penetration Test (CPT)
he - S
 The Borehole Shear Test (BST)
ft n
O tio
 The Flat Dilatometer Test (DMT)
© a
 The Pressure-meter Test (PMT)
n nd
tio ou
 The Plate Load Test (PLT)

ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
Site investigation, Design & Construction of Hydro & Transport Tunnels | Kathmandu, Nepal – 19-20 December 2013 4
Field Strength Tests
r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
Field Tests in Soil
Penetration Tests
r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
Number of blows / 300mm penetration (or similar)

©
Pictures: TU Texas, MYV, SED
Corrections are normally applied to the SPT blow count to
r-s
account for differences in:
ne
tiv nd
 energy imparted during the test (60% hammer efficiency)
ow
ec rla
 the stress level at the test depth
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
The following equation is used to compensate for the testing
he - S
factors (Skempton, 1986):
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
Cone Penetration Test (CPT)
r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
Field Tests in Soil
Vane Shear Test
r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
Pictures: Pangani, CanAm, GeoCPT
The Plate Load Test (PLT)
r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
Several dial gauges attached to an independent suspension system
r-s
to record plate settlements with each increment of the jack load
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
r-s
Scale Effect in Foundation Design
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
Field Tests in Soil
 Density Test
r-s
ne
 In-situ Density Test
tiv nd
ow
 Permeability Test
ec rla
e
sp e
 Well test
re itz
ir w
 Permeability for grouts etc
he - S
ft n
O tio
 Tests in Drill Holes
© a
n nd
 logs
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
Field Tests in Soil
In –Situ Density Test
r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
Pictures: Robertson
©
Field Tests in Soil
Well Tests
r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
Well head
©
Piezometer
Field Tests in Soil
Well Tests
r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
Lage Grundwasserspiegel bei Hochwasser (23.7.1991)
ft n
Lage Grundwasserspiegel vor Pumpbeginn
O tio
(26.10.1992)
Lage Grundwasserspiegel vor Pumpende (11.11.1992)
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
Field Tests in Soil
Geophysical Logs in Drillholes
r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
various logs for

llu E
 density
lI C
Al ITA
 permeability
 caliber etc
©
many of them need tubeless drill holes

limited application in soils
Large Scale Field Test in Soil – Case Study
Airport Tunnel Zurich Switzerland, Project overview
r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
27
r-s
Test Pit for Grout Injection Tests etc
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
28
Grout injections with Different Grout
r-s
Site plan
ne
Site plan
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd Longitudinal section
tio ou
ra F
experimental series 2
st T
(horizontal grout
llu E
injections)
lI C
Al ITA
experimental series 1
(vertical grout injections)
©
Drainage in-situ tests
r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
30
Excavated Grout Injections
r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
filled annular space filled annular space little strength of excavated

st T
– like encased excavated horizontal

llu E
lI C
grout column grout injection

Al ITA
©
Excavated Grouted Soil
r-s
ne
broken soil after grout injection
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
grout runs away

©
Lab - Analysis of Grout Specimen
r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
drill cores in grout column thin – ground section magnification x 50
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
after uniaxial compression after triaxial compression test

test
Laboratory Tests for Soils
Index Test
r-s
 Moisture content
ne
 Density
tiv nd
ow
 Atterberg limits
ec rla
e
 Particle size distribution
sp e
re itz
ir w
Shear Strength / Tri-axial Test
he - S
 Shear Box
ft n
 Laboratory vane shear
O tio
 Unconsolidated undrained tri-axial test (total stress)
© a
n nd
 Consolidated undrained tri-axial test (effective stress)
tio ou
 Consolidated drained tri-axial test (effective stress)

ra F
st T
llu E
Consolidation Testing
lI C
Al ITA
Permeability Testing
©
34
Granulometry
r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
Source: Engineering Geology, Principles and Practice, D.G.

©
Price, edited by M.H. de Freitas, Springer Verlag, 2009
35
Plasticity of Clay
r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
36
Granulometry
r-s
Ton Silt Sand Kies Steine
ne
100
tiv nd
ow
90 -ML
SM
ec rla
85
e
80
sp e
ML
re itz
70
CL
CL SC-
ir w
60
he - S
50
ML -CL
CL- GC
ft n
-GC
GM
O tio
40
-ML
GM
© a
30
n nd
20
GM
tio ou
15
GC
10
ra F
st T
0
llu E
0.001 0.002 0.006 0.01 0.02 0.06 0.1 0.2 0.6 1 2 6 10 20 60 100 200
lI C
Al ITA
USCS GC-CL SM-ML GC GM-ML GM GM-GC ML CL SC-CL CL-ML
k (m/s)
©
Application of EPB Machine
r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
Application of Slurry TBM
r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
Relevant Geological and Geotechnical Parameters for
Tunnel Design in Rock
r-s
Rock
Uniaxial Compressive Strength UCS MPa
ne
Brazilian test (sz) MPa
tiv nd
Point Load Strength Index Is50 MPa
ow
Strength
Elastic modulus E, V MPa
ec rla
Poisson ratio v
e
sp e
3
re itz
Bulk density ρR g/cm
Density Grain density ρs g/cm3
ir w
Porosity P %
he - S
Hard-rock geology and equivalent content of quartz Equ %
ft n
CERCHAR-Index CAI -
O tio
Abrasivity Rock Abrasivity Index (LCPC-Test) RAI -
Cutter Life Index CLI -
© a
Drilling Rate Index
n nd DRI
tio ou
Alterability
Alterability Water sensitivity
ra F
Swelling
st T
Adhesion Adhesion potential

llu E
Permeability K m/s
lI C
Stress Distribution σ MPa

Al ITA
Surrounding Rock
Porosity p %
3
Density ρs g/cm
©
© Austrian Society for Geomechanics
Field and Laboratory Tests in Rock
Required parameters for design determined by field or lab testing:
r-s
Field Testing  In-Situ rock mass conditions:
ne
tiv nd
 stresses (primary stresses)
ow
ec rla
 hydrogeological conditions (groundwater table)
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
 Rock mass properties:
he - S
Field Testing
 elastic properties (E, G, ν)
ft n
O tio
 strength properties of discontinuities
© a
n nd
 hydraulic properties (permeability)
tio ou
ra F
st T
Lab Testing  Rock properties:

llu E
lI C
 strength properties (UCS, c, ϕ, σt)

Al ITA
 elastic properties (E, G, ν)

©
 assestments about penetration and abrassivity
Lab Tests for Rock
r-s
 Rock Strength Parameters, Permeability

ne
Classification (moisture, density, porosity, slake, durability)

tiv nd
Point load strength
ow
 Uniaxial compressive strength and modulus
ec rla
 Triaxial strength; Brazilian test
e
sp e
 Permeability
re itz
 Chemical Testing (effect on construction materials)
ir w
he - S
 pH,
 sulphate, chloride, carbonate
ft n
O tio
 Contamination (analytical)
© a
 pH, organics, inorganics n nd
 Metals, asbestos
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
42
Field Tests in Rock: In-Situ Rock Mass Conditions
Hydraulic Fracturing (ISRM, 2003)
r-s
ne
Goal
tiv nd
ow
 Determine in-situ horizontal stresses σH, σh
ec rla
e
Procedure
sp e
re itz
 Installation of double-packer in borehole
ir w
he - S
 Injection of water under high pressure
ft n
 Record downhole pressure vs. time
O tio
Breakdown
 «Cracking» (Breakdown) of borehole wall
© a
n nd Pressure
and reduction of water pressure

tio ou
 Refrac: cycle repetition

ra F
st T
Shut-in
Output data
llu E
Pressure
lI C
 Shut-in pressure, equal to σh

Al ITA
 Breakdown pressure (PB) leads to σH:

©
Field Tests in Rock: In-Situ Rock Mass Conditions
Overcore Method (ISRM, 2003)
r-s
Goal
ne
tiv nd
 Determine in-situ horizontal stresses
ow
ec rla
Procedure
e
sp e
re itz
 Drilling main borehole (76 mm)
ir w
 Drilling pilot borehole (36 mm)
he - S
 Installation of probe with strain gauges
ft n
O tio
in pilot borehole
© a
 Overcore the probe
n nd
tio ou
 Record strain vs. time

ra F
st T
Output data
llu E
lI C
 From the strain differences after & before

Al ITA
overcoring follows:
©
 Magnitude and direction of σH, σh
Field Tests in Rock: Rock Mass Properties
Dilatometer Test
r-s
Goal
ne
tiv nd
 Determine deformation and elastic moduli of
ow
ec rla
rock under in-situ conditions
e
sp e
Procedure
re itz
ir w
 Installation dilatometer probe in borehole
he - S
 Expansion of the borehole through load-
ft n
O tio
unload cycles
© a
 Record radial deformation vs. applied
n nd
pressure
tio ou
ra F
Output data
st T
llu E
 Shear modulus G
lI C
Al ITA
 Young’s modulus follows from the

relationship: E 2G 1 ν
©
Plate Loading Test (ISRM, 1997)
r-s
Goal
ne
 Determine elastic modulus of
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
Procedure
re itz
ir w
 Installation of loading plates
he - S
and jack
ft n
 Record displacement vs.
O tio
applied force
© a
n nd
Output data
tio ou
 Young’s modulus
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
Radial Jack
r-s
Goal
ne
 Determine elastic modulus of
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
Procedure
re itz
ir w
 Installation of radial jack
he - S
 Record displacement vs.
ft n
applied force
O tio
© a
Output data n nd
 Young’s modulus
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
In-situ Direct Shear Test
r-s
Goal
ne
tiv nd
 Determine strength parameters of
ow
ec rla
discontinuities
e
sp e
Procedure
re itz
ir w
 Apply normal- and shear force
he - S
 Progressive increase of shear force
ft n
O tio
under constant normal force
© a
 Same process for different normal forces
n nd
tio ou
 Record normal- and shear force at failure

ra F
Output data
st T
llu E
 Inner friction angle ϕ

lI C
Al ITA
 Cohesion c
©
Lugeon Test (Packer Test)
r-s
Procedure
ne
 Installation of double-packer
tiv nd
ow
in borehole
ec rla
e
sp e
 Injection of water
re itz
 Record water
ir w
he - S
pressure & flowrate vs. time
ft n
Output data
O tio
 Rock mass permeability ks
© a
n nd
 Groundwater pressure
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
Field Tests in Rock
Geophysical Logs in Drillholes
r-s
 various parameters
ne
 televiewer
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
Pictures: USTM
Large Field Tests in Rock – Case Study
Semmering Basetunnel – Geological Situation
r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
Geological Longitudinal Section South
r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
Testfeld
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
Test Site ‘Lower Murz Valley’
r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
Geological Detail Analyse
r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
Borehole Scanning and
r-s
Lugeon Tests
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
LT (15,74 m – 20,80 m)
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
FB 01/07 – Test 1 – Luegeon Test (15,74 m– 20,80 m)
r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
Tested Injections Grout
r-s
Mischungsnummer PZB 1/6 PZB 1/1 PZBSP 1/6 PZAW 3/5 PZBSP 1/3
ne
tiv nd
ow
PZ01, PZ03
ec rla
Bohrloch PZ06 ZK01 ZK02 ZK03 ZK03
e
sp e
re itz
Tiefenstufe -10 bis -30 m -10 bis -30 m -09 bis -30 m -26 bis -30 m -09 bis -30 m
ir w
WZ Wert 1.0 0.7 0.5 0.7 0.5
he - S
ft n
Zusatzmittel Bentonit 2% Bentonit 2% GS 581 0.5% GS 581 1% GS 581 2.5%
O tio
Bentonit Bentonit Bentonit
© a 0.5% 1.6% 2.5%

n nd
tio ou
UWC 2%
ra F
st T
Ausfliesszeit 36sec 48sec 71sec 95sec 44sec

llu E
lI C
Sedimentationsrate
Al ITA
(2h) 4% 1.2% 0.8% 0.8% 0.8%
GS = Glenium Sky
©
Tested Injection Grout Mixdesigns
r-s
5%
ne
Absetzmass
PZB 1/6
tiv nd
ow
4%
ec rla
e
3%
sp e
re itz
PZST 3/1
2% PZB 1/5
ir w
he - S
PZBSP 1/1 PZB 1/1
1%
PZBSP 1/3 PZBSP 1/5 PZBSP 1/4
PZB 1/3
ft n
0% Marsh Zeit (sec)
O tio
0 60 120
© a
140
n nd
tio ou
Ausgepresstes Wasser [ml]
120
100
ra F
80
st T
llu E
60 PZAW 3/8 PZAW 3/7

lI C
40 PZAW 3/6 PZAW 3/5

Al ITA
20 PZAW 3/4
Zeitachse [min]
0
©
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Lab Tests for Rock: Rock Properties
Uniaxial Compressive Test (ISRM, 1979)
r-s
Goal
ne
tiv nd
 Determine uniaxial compressive strength of
ow
ec rla
a rock sample
e
sp e
Procedure
re itz
ir w
 Cylindrical rock specimen (Ø 54 mm)
he - S
 Progressive axial loading at constant stress
ft n
O tio
rate until specimen failure
σUCS
© a
 Record applied force vs. axial and radial
n nd
strains or specimen deformation
tio ou
ra F
Output data
st T
llu E
 Uniaxial compressive strength σUCS

lI C
Al ITA
 Young’s modulus E
 Poisson ratio ν
©
Point Load Test (ISRM, 1985)
r-s
Goal
ne
tiv nd
 Strength classification of rock material
ow
ec rla
 Prediction of uniaxial compressive strength
e
sp e
of rock samples not suitable for UCS-Test
re itz
ir w
Procedure
he - S
 Cylindrical or rectangular rock specimen
ft n
O tio
 Progressive axial loading at constant stress
rate until specimen failure
© a
n nd
tio ou
 Record of load at failure

ra F
Output data
st T
llu E
 Strength Index IS
lI C
Al ITA
 UCS value follows from the relationship:

©
Triaxial Compressive Test (ISRM, 1983)
r-s
Goal
ne
tiv nd
 Determine relation between strength
ow
ec rla
and confining pressure
e
sp e
 Determine rock strength parameters
re itz
ir w
Procedure
he - S
 Cylindrical rock specimen (Ø 54 mm)
ft n
O tio
 Progressive axial loading under
constant confining pressure
© a
n nd
tio ou
 Same process for different

ra F
confining pressure levels

st T
llu E
Output data
lI C
Al ITA
 Inner friction angle ϕ

 Cohesion c
©
Brazilian Test (ISRM, 1978)
r-s
ne
Goal
tiv nd
ow
 Determine uniaxial tensile
ec rla
e
strength of a rock sample
sp e
re itz
Procedure
ir w
he - S
 Cylindrical rock specimen
ft n
 Compression loading transversal
O tio
to the specimen axis until failure
© a
n nd
 Record Load at failure
tio ou
ra F
Output data
st T
 Failure Load F
llu E
lI C
 Tensile strength σt follows from the

Al ITA
relationship:
©
Modified Direct Tensile Test (TU Graz)
r-s
Goal
ne
tiv nd
 Determine uniaxial tensile
ow
ec rla
strength of a rock sample
e
sp e
Procedure
re itz
ir w
 Cylindrical rock specimen
he - S
 Testing follows with same
ft n
equipment as for UCS-Test
O tio
 Record stress vs. deformation
© a
n nd
tio ou
Output data
ra F
 Tensile strength σt
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
CAI – Cerchar Abrassivity Index (CHERCHAR, 1986)
r-s
Goal
ne
tiv nd
 Determine rock abrassivity
ow
ec rla
Procedure
e
sp e
re itz
 Steel pin scratched against the
ir w
surface of a rock specimen
he - S
Output data
ft n
O tio
 Diameter d of pin after testing
© a
 The CAI-value follows with the
n nd
tio ou
relationship:
ra F
st T
llu E
10
lI C
Al ITA
©
Brittleness Test
r-s
(von Matern & Hjelmér, 1943)
ne
tiv nd
Goal
ow
ec rla
 Measure rock ability to resist crushing
e
sp e
 Input to determine DRI
re itz
ir w
Procedure
he - S
 Sample is rock aggregate with
ft n
diameter > 11.2 mm
O tio
© a
 Crushing of aggregate sample in n nd
a mortar (20 impacts)
tio ou
 Sieve sample after crushing

ra F
st T
and record percentage of

llu E
material < 11.2 mm

lI C
Al ITA
Output data
©
 Brittleness Value S20 [%]

 mean value of 3-5 tests
Siever’s Miniature Drill Test
r-s
(Sievers, 1950)
ne
tiv nd
Goal
ow
ec rla
 Measure of rock surface hardness
e
sp e
 Input to determine DRI and CLI
re itz
ir w
Procedure
he - S
 Rectangular rock sample
ft n
O tio
 Drill bit is rotated against sample surface
 Record hole depth after 200
© a
n nd
revolutions of the drill bit
tio ou
ra F
Output data
st T
 Sievers J-value [1/10 mm]

llu E
lI C
 Mean value of 4-8 tests

Al ITA
©
DRI – Drilling Rate Index (SINTEF, NTNU)
r-s
ne
Goal
tiv nd
ow
 Determine rock drillability
ec rla
e
 Input to determine penetration
sp e
re itz
(Disc cutters for TBM advance or drilling
ir w
equipment in D&B advance)
he - S
Procedure
ft n
O tio
 DRI follows from the Sievers J-value
and Brittleness Value © a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
AV - Abrassion Value
r-s
ne
Goal
tiv nd
ow
 Measure of time-dependent
ec rla
abrasion of tungsten carbide
e
sp e
re itz
 Input to determine BWI
ir w
Procedure
he - S
 Rotate crushed rock powder
ft n
O tio
against a tungsten carbide bit
 Record weight loss of the © a
n nd
bit after 100 revolutions
tio ou
ra F
Output
st T
llu E
 Abrassion value AV [mg]

lI C
Al ITA
©
BWI – Bit Wear Index (NTNU, 1998)
r-s
ne
Goal
tiv nd
ow
 Estimation lifetime of drill bits
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
Procedure
ir w
he - S
 BWI follows from the DRI-Value
and the abrassion value AV
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
AVS - Abrassion Value Steel
r-s
ne
Goal
tiv nd
ow
 Measure of time-dependent abrasion
ec rla
of steel
e
sp e
re itz
 Input to determine CLI
ir w
Procedure
he - S
 Same procedure as AV
ft n
O tio
 Bit material is steel instead
of tungsten carbid © a
n nd
tio ou
Output
ra F
 Abrassion value AV [mg]

st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
CLI – Cutter Life Index
r-s
ne
Goal
tiv nd
ow
 Expresses lifetime of TBM
ec rla
disc cutters (steel)
e
sp e
re itz
Procedure
ir w
 CLI follows with the
he - S
Sievers SJ-value and
ft n
the AVS-value from
O tio
© a
the relationship: n nd
tio ou
.
13.84
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
Swelling Test (Huder & Amberg 1970)
r-s
ne
Goal
tiv nd
ow
 Determine ground reaction curve
ec rla
of argillaceous swelling rocks
e
sp e
re itz
Procedure
ir w
 Same testing equipment as for
he - S
oedometer test ε0
ft n
O tio
 Apply initial force (zero
displacement) and stepwise
© a
n nd
reduction of the applied force
tio ou
 Record applied force vs.

ra F
st T
displacement increment
llu E
lI C
Output data
Al ITA
 Swelling pressure σ* [MPa]

©
 Swelling ratio ε0 [%] σ*
Lab Test for Rock: TBM Penetration Rate
Geological and geotechnical influencing factors for penetration
r-s
prediction models
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
Lab Test for Rock: TBM Penetration Rate
Influences on penetration rate
r-s
 Uniaxial compressive strength
ne
tiv nd
 Perpendicularly oriented to tunnel axis > maximum penetration
ow
ec rla
 Parallel oriented > minimum penetration
e
sp e
re itz
 Stress conditions at the tunnel face
ir w
 Failure mode
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
Lab Tests for Rock: TBM Penetration Rate
Penetration prediction according to the different authors
r-s
ne
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
e
sp e
re itz
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
© a
n nd
tio ou
ra F
st T
llu E
lI C
Al ITA
©
Uniaxial strentgh [N/mm2]
r-s
ne
Site Investigation, Design & Construction
tiv nd
ow
ec rla
of Hydro & Transport Tunnels
e
sp e
re itz
Kathmandu, Nepal 19 - 20 December 2013
ir w
he - S
ft n
O tio
Disclaimer
© a
n nd
tio ou
A. The speakers are presenting their own personal views and are not
ra F
expressing the view of the Foundation.

st T
llu E
lI C
B. Papers and documents displayed or handed out during the Event are
Al ITA
copyrighted. The participants must observe and comply with all applicable
law regulations concerning the copyright.
©

In-Situ and Laboratory Tests: Owner-S

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

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

In-Situ and Laboratory Tests: Owner-S

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

r-s

Amberg Engineering Ltd., Switzerland

Remote sensing Deformability

Drillings Hydraulic properties

H. de Freitas M.i.Geoi., Ph.D., p.i.c, F.G.S., Senior Lecturer in Engineering Geology,,

Atterberg limits (Wl, WP)

Plasticity Index (IP)

Index properties Consistancy Index (IC)

Mechanized Tunnelling in Urban

 The Plate Load Test (PLT)

Number of blows / 300mm penetration (or similar)

Pictures: TU Texas, MYV, SED

Corrections are normally applied to the SPT blow count to

Pictures: Pangani, CanAm, GeoCPT

Several dial gauges attached to an independent suspension system

various logs for

many of them need tubeless drill holes

filled annular space filled annular space little strength of excavated

– like encased excavated horizontal

grout column grout injection

grout runs away

after uniaxial compression after triaxial compression test

 Consolidated drained tri-axial test (effective stress)

Source: Engineering Geology, Principles and Practice, D.G.

Price, edited by M.H. de Freitas, Springer Verlag, 2009

USCS GC-CL SM-ML GC GM-ML GM GM-GC ML CL SC-CL CL-ML

Adhesion Adhesion potential

Stress Distribution σ MPa

© Austrian Society for Geomechanics

Lab Testing  Rock properties:

 strength properties (UCS, c, ϕ, σt)

 elastic properties (E, G, ν)

 assestments about penetration and abrassivity

and reduction of water pressure

 Refrac: cycle repetition

 Shut-in pressure, equal to σh

 Breakdown pressure (PB) leads to σH:

 Record strain vs. time

 From the strain differences after & before

 Magnitude and direction of σH, σh

 Young’s modulus follows from the

 Record normal- and shear force at failure

 Inner friction angle ϕ

© a 0.5% 1.6% 2.5%

Ausfliesszeit 36sec 48sec 71sec 95sec 44sec

(2h) 4% 1.2% 0.8% 0.8% 0.8%

60 PZAW 3/8 PZAW 3/7

40 PZAW 3/6 PZAW 3/5

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180

 Uniaxial compressive strength σUCS

 Record of load at failure

 UCS value follows from the relationship:

 Same process for different

confining pressure levels

 Inner friction angle ϕ

 Tensile strength σt follows from the

 Sieve sample after crushing

and record percentage of

material < 11.2 mm

 Brittleness Value S20 [%]

 Sievers J-value [1/10 mm]

 Mean value of 4-8 tests

 Abrassion value AV [mg]