Chapter 1

DESIGN OF A NATM TUNNEL FOR MISSION VALLEY LIGHT RAILEAST EXTENSION

David Powell
Mott MacDonald

David Field
Hatch Mott MacDonald

Richard Hulsen
Mott MacDonald

ABSTRACT The Mission Valley Light Rail will loop through San Diego State University (SDSU) and to minimize the impact of construction most of the works will be underground. The project will require construction of a 330-m long (1080-ft), 11.24-m wide (36.9-ft), single twin track tunnel through Stadium Conglomerate, a poorly cemented dense sandy gravel with cobbles. Key technical issues are discussed including the ground conditions and predicted ground response, the use of sequential excavation methods to control deformations and specic construction concerns such as instrumentation and monitoring. Management of the construction process to minimize risk is particularly important in this environment and the strategy selected to control the works is also considered. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The original method of construction planned for the Mission Valley Light Rail Tunnel section was a Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM) and a precast concrete segmental lining installed behind the cutter head. Changes to the alignment to signicantly reduce the impact on University buildings also substantially reduced the length of the tunnel section, Figure 1, and led to a re-evaluation of the proposed construction method. The revised alignment transitions from cut and cover construction into mined tunnel at Scripps Terrace and passes underneath the steep escarpment adjacent to the Womens gym with a maximum of 16.0 m (52.5 ft) cover, Figure 2. Due to a constant grade of 4.2% towards the Station, the amount of cover along the tunnel gradually reduces from this maximum and under campus athletic facilities and important utilities at Campanile Drive is as low as 6.0 m (19.7 ft). The ground conditions and the reduced mined tunnel length, much of which lies above the water table, supported the use of sequential excavation methods and support techniques commonly used in the New Austrian Tunneling Method (NATM).

2001 RETC PROCEEDINGS

Figure 1. Alignment
This approach allowed a switch from single track twin bores to a single bore twin track conguration, Figure 3. Cost savings were realized with this change and, despite the increase in span to 11.24 m (36.87 ft), the NATM approach when applied with appropriate risk management was expected to be effective in controlling the construction risks and impact on the University facilities. GROUND CONDITIONS AND EXPECTED GROUND BEHAVIOUR The entire length of the NATM tunnel will be mined in a lightly cemented dense sandy cobble conglomerate that forms part of the Stadium Conglomerate Formation. Although extensive information is available on the geological setting around the San Diego State University Campus, there is only limited experience of tunneling in the Stadium Conglomerate formation. It was important therefore to carefully assess the worst credible ground conditions likely to be encountered during excavation. Subsurface Hazards While the Stadium Conglomerate is generally uniform in composition, due to the high energy environment during deposition there are sufcient variations laterally and with depth to give rise to some local concerns during tunneling. These include the presence of large boulders (or clasts), layering with discrete contact surfaces and grading variations and the presence of groundwater conditions above the crown for part of the tunnel length. A discussion of these hazards follows.

DESIGN OF A NATM TUNNEL

Figure 2.

Prole and geology

2001 RETC PROCEEDINGS

Figure 3. Typical cross section Table 1. Clast distribution in Stadium Conglomerate

Clast Size Range (mm) 76 to 150 150 to 300 > 300 Baseline Average Cumulative Clast Volume (% of excavated material) 12% 8% 1% Number of Clast/m3 of Clast Material 2,000 230 95

Clasts. The Stadium Conglomerate Formation contains a signicant number of clasts that will be encountered during construction. These are usually known as Poway Clasts and are generally composed either of metavolcanic or quartzitic materials with an average unconned compressive strength of 200 MPa (29,000 psi). Table 1 indicates the likely quantity and grading of the clasts. Cohesionless Material. During tunnel excavation layers or lenses of poorly graded sand dominated matrix lenses up to 600 mm (23.6 inches) in thickness are predicted to occur within the Stadium Conglomerate. Although most of these are likely to occur above the tunnel crown, some will be present in the crown or sidewalls of the tunnel. If encountered below the groundwater table, these layers could lead to fast raveling and/or free owing conditions that locally represent a serious tunneling hazard. Groundwater Table. The initial section of the bored tunnel will lie just below the water table, Figure 2. Observations from large diameter boreholes designed to allow inspection of the layering at depth indicated seepage at the contact of layers, and particularly at the base of poorly graded sand layers. Between these layers seepage was not observed and the overall interpretation from pumping tests suggested that the zones of saturation represented semi-conned aquifers. The principal concern is the possibility that these saturated layers have the potential to create fast raveling and/or

DESIGN OF A NATM TUNNEL

running ground conditions during excavation. The overall horizontal saturated hydraulic conductivity is considered to range from 2x106 to 2x105 cm/s. Ground Behavior. In order to provide some indication of the likely ground behavior, use has been made of observations from local cuts for foundations, test pits with horizontal enlargements to monitor and assess raveling and Terzaghis classication (Terzaghi 1950) for soils for tunneling. In general, the Stadium Conglomerate falls into the category of rm to slow raveling when above the groundwater table. Below the groundwater table it will behave in a similar manner in the short term but is expected to degrade to fast raveling within a period of a few hours. In terms of ground response during construction the material is extremely stiff and the design of the primary linings is based on the ground having sufcient stand-up time for advances of up to 1.0 m to be excavated safely. The test pit excavations and the enlargements indicated that this was likely to be several hours and adequate to allow an initial layer of shotcrete to be applied to maintain excavation stability. CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE AND SUPPORT TYPES The use of the NATM in soft ground such as Stadium Conglomerate is relatively recent in North America although it has been used successfully in rock tunnels since the 1970s, e.g., Washington Metro and L.A. Metro. It is also proposed for several current high prole projects such as Seattles Link Light Rail and Devils Slide Road Tunnel in California. While several notable and widely reported collapses have occurred on projects where the NATM has been used, a careful examination of the problems suggests that either the application was inappropriate for the ground conditions or the management and control procedures employed during construction were less than adequate (Health & Safety Executive 2000). Ensuring that the design intent is not compromised is especially critical for shallow tunnels in soft ground in high risk urban areas where tight excavation and support sequences are required to control settlements. Based on the predicted ground conditions, and precedent practice elsewhere in similar tunnels, e.g., Taiwan High Speed Rail system, three excavation and support types were selected. The expected distribution of the types along the tunnel length was related to key constraints and issues such as: Variations in the amount of cover above the crown The likely stand-up time and other relevant characteristics such as the frequency of boulders, poorly graded sand layers and the groundwater table The location of surface structures and utilities Estimated volume losses and predicted settlements The type of equipment used for this type of construction Interfaces with the cut and cover and SDSU station. Support Type 1 (Figure 4) From Station 4+591 to 4+745 the tunnel crown will be above the water table and rm to slow raveling conditions are predicted. The sequence will use a split top heading although a full top heading can be completed before the invert of the primary lining is constructed. Full closure of the lining is achieved within 4.0 m (13.1 ft) of the face.

2001 RETC PROCEEDINGS

Figure 4. Support type 1

Support Type 2 (Figure 5) The phreatic surface is present above the tunnel crown from Scripps Terrace portal to Station 4+591. Where poorly graded sand-dominated matrix lenses and layers are present this could lead to either fast raveling or owing ground conditions. To reduce the level of risk associated with this behavior, a side gallery and enlargement sequence has been specied to reduce the span in each of the top headings. With the possibility of owing conditions it is safer to fully support one sidewall of the tunnel before enlarging to the full section. In addition, routine probe holes with slotted liners have been specied to drain the ground ahead of the face and reduce hydrostatic pressures. Full closure of the lining is achieved within 4.08.0 m (13.126.2 ft) of the face.

Figure 5. Construction sequence 2

Support Type 3 (Figure 6) At Campanile Drive from Station 4+745 to 4+799 the cover to the tunnel will be less than 6.0 m (19.5 ft) and it will underpass a number of utilities. The clearance between the utilities and the crown of the tunnel is less than 4.0 m (13.1 ft) in some cases. In order to maintain a suitable cover to span ratio of at least 1.0 for each stage of the excavation, a twin side gallery and central pillar arrangement has been selected

DESIGN OF A NATM TUNNEL

Figure 6. Construction sequence 3

to tightly control surface settlements and any potential impact on the utilities. Full closure of the lining is related to the pillar removal sequence. ADDITIONAL SUPPORT MEASURES In addition to the sequences and support requirements for each of the support types, additional support measures have been specied. It is recognized from the site investigation information that local factors such as clasts and poorly graded sand layers or lenses could inuence the stability of the unsupported excavation at the face. The range of measures available to the contractor, if required, include: Temporary Face Support. A temporary shotcrete layer to support the face of the advancing excavation. This is a prudent safety measure that protects the workforce by controlling any potential for ground loss due to boulders or running ground as well as preventing the face from drying out. At various stages of the work, stoppages may occur that result in the face standing for longer periods than normally experienced during construction. To minimize the risk of instability, the bench/invert will be completed up to the face and the tunnel face domed and supported by a temporary headwall. This same procedure will be implemented for a change in the construction sequence. Spiling and Canopy Tubes. Around 15% of the lenses/layers of poorly graded material are predicted to be greater than 600 mm (23.6 inches) in thickness. Whilst these are not expected within the tunnel excavation, they could be as much as 2.4 m (7.9 ft) in thickness and would represent a stability concern in relation to the face and the adjacent shotcrete lining. If local instability develops, the layers will require temporary support to the heading in advance of the excavation and either spiling or canopy tubes have been specied for this purpose. Probe Drilling. Probe holes drilled ahead of the face have been specied for the entire length of tunnel to relieve any potential hydrostatic pressure ahead of the face. Installation of these holes will be implemented after logging of the face features and detection of the potential for hydrostatic pressures. Pressure relief holes may also be required in the temporary shotcrete face support to prevent local instability. Inll Shotcrete. Although clasts of up to 600 mm (23.6 inches) have been predicted for the entire length of the tunnel, the overall percentage encountered during excavation is expected to be small, as highlighted in Table 1. These clasts may be partially exposed in the excavated surface of the tunnel and remain stable even after excavation with mechanical methods. The integrity of the primary lining is unlikely to be affected by clasts

10

2001 RETC PROCEEDINGS

intruding up to 100 mm (4 inches) providing that they do not impede the placement of lattice girders. Where clasts exceed this dimension or are not sufciently stable they will be removed and the excavation made good with inll shotcrete. DESIGN APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY The design of the primary and secondary linings is based on the Stadium Conglomerate having sufcient stand-up time for advances of up to 1.0 m (3.3 ft) to be excavated and supported safely. The excavation sequences specied, Figures 4, 5 and 6, are designed to control strains in the ground so that as much as possible of the ground load bearing capacity is used and the strains are maintained at levels that prevent yielding. Numerical methods of analysis (FLAC Version 3.4) were used to model the different excavation stages and predict the performance of the linings in terms of the stresses and corresponding deformations. Three sections along the tunnel route were chosen to represent fully the range of ground conditions that could be encountered during construction, particularly the maximum potential hydrostatic pressures and the maximum and minimum ground cover to the exterior of the tunnel primary lining. The input parameters for the analyses to model ground and lining behavior are summarized in Table 2. Throughout the mesh a dry unit weight d of 17.65 kN/m3, a porosity of 0.286 and a tensile strength of 0 MPa were adopted. In addition, the initial tangent modulus assumed small strain stiffness with a non-linear reduction as the stress levels changed and strains increased. The Duncan and Chang (1970) method was used to represent the non-linear behavior. To verify the results of the plate loading tests carried out during the site investigations, the tests were modeled with FLAC to derive the stiffness values indicated in Table 2. Each analysis used drained parameters and the estimated non-linear stress-strain ground response was derived from the plate loading tests and from review of the down-hole geophysical testing. In addition, a range of Ko values (0.51.0) was applied to check the sensitivity of the headings and primary lining to variations of the in situ stresses. The following steps typically were used in the analyses to model the construction process: Excavation of the ground Establish steady state ow conditions Relaxation of the ground to represent deformations in advance of support Installation of the primary lining

Table 2. Soil parameters adopted for the analyses

Effective Internal Angle of Friction ' () 40 42 44 44 Effective Cohesion Intercept c' (kPa) 5 15 15 10 Initial Elastic Tangent Modulus Eut (MPa) 400 800 1600 2400

Level (mOD) G1131.4 131.4126.4 126.4121.4 121.4base

Angle of Dilation () 6 8 10 10

Poison Ratio 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35

DESIGN OF A NATM TUNNEL

11

Analysis of the model and solving to equilibrium Installation of the secondary lining Analysis of the model and solving to equilibrium. The results of the analyses were checked in accordance with ACI318 to ensure that the design complied with Ultimate Limit State and Serviceability Limit State requirements. In addition to static loadings derived from the construction process, the performance of the secondary lining was checked for compliance with the dynamic loading predicted for the ODE and MDE. MANAGEMENT OF THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS Tunneling is not a deterministic process and therefore carries higher risks than most other forms of civil construction. A recent and important development in the tunneling industry has been the introduction of management systems that ensure the safety of personnel and the public as well as exercising control over costs and schedule. Recent high prole collapses where the NATM has been used, for example Heathrow Express, highlighted the importance of implementing management procedures throughout the project process. This failure was strongly related to poor risk management, especially quality control in forming construction joints, and the main conclusion from the lengthy proceedings instituted by the UKs Health and Safety Executive was that effective site supervision is essential. This served to emphasize one of the main concerns of soft ground NATM tunneling, best practice has to include provision for the designer to actively follow through into the construction phase. This not only provides an owner with reassurance that any necessary adjustments can be made before problems arise, it also promotes the development of management and organizational systems that ensure key decisions on issues such as changes to the excavation sequence or support are monitored progressively and kept under constant review. Management Approach The owner, the Metropolitan Transportation Development Board (MTDB) of San Diego, has been proactive in requesting an Engineers Design Representative (EDR) to maintain continuity of the design through the construction phase. This is an important role and management systems and procedures have been implemented in the contract documents to allow the designer to form part of the supervision team. What is important in this process is avoidance of the more traditional confrontational relationship between the construction supervisor and contractor and promotion of a single team approach with the very clear objective of safe construction. Such an approach is important where the Designer is not the Construction Manager, as is typical in North American contract practice. There will always be numerous assumptions built into any tunnel designs that are not always easy to convey or obvious to the Construction Manager without the facility of regular communications and discussions of key issues. This type of approach, often viewed as Partnering, worked well on the LA Metro and will always be successful where there is a willingness for all parties to work together even though the risks and contractual arrangements are not always fully compatible with this objective. A single team approach, where key engineering decisions are made through assessment and evaluation of information on performance on a routine basis during construction has demonstrated clear benets in terms of reducing risks related to safety and quality control. The single team approach does not, however, mean that lines of responsibility are blurred as each organization is required to appoint

12

2001 RETC PROCEEDINGS

experienced staff to understand the engineering as well as contractual risks. In this context, the EDR will represent the Designers interests and has as a principal role in the interpretation of the Contract Documents for the Construction Management and Contractors Teams. Experience of similar type of construction and the response expected during the progress of the works also provides the client with the reassurance that the project can be completed on time and budget. Design Risk Management The input parameters and assumptions used in the design have been derived from the Geotechnical Interpretative and Baseline Reports (GIR & GBR). The site investigation data indicates reasonably uniform ground conditions along the alignment although there is layering, poorly graded bands, boulders etc., that could inuence the ground response locally. Even with designs based on conservative assumptions, there are always factors in this type of ground that are difcult to assess accurately prior to construction, such as: How certain is it that the Site Investigation has identied the worst credible conditions? Are there unforeseen local planes of weakness or pockets of wet poorly consolidated ground that could affect installation of support? Are the predicted deformations ahead of the face realistic for the support types? Are the predicted volume losses realistic? Although the ground conditions suggest that the face will be stable are there local factors that could affect safety? The excavation and support sequences have been selected to meet such risks and the additional support measures are designed to provide sufcient exibility during construction for the contractor to respond to the actual conditions encountered. However, verication of the design performance during the early stages of construction is essential and instrumentation and monitoring requirements are directed to achieve this. The assumptions made at the design stage will be updated progressively during construction through the EDR role. Support types will be veried and sequences adjusted as necessary to suit the actual ground conditions encountered. Notwithstanding the possibility of unforeseen conditions, having developed the design on the basis of lower bound conditions, the verication process should be viewed positively with the aim of beneting the client in terms of cost and program while also ensuring that the contractor is properly compensated. Construction Management Procedures Control of the construction process is related to the predicted and actual performance of the excavations. Three principal activities are required to ensure that the control is effective: The use of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) The implementation of daily site meetings to review the KPIs The facility of emergency Review Meetings should KPIs exceed trigger and limit values. Most designers dislike dening KPIs because structurally tunnel design is not a deterministic process. However, on projects in the UK such as Heathrow Express and the Jubilee Line Extension for London Underground Limited these worked well and they are compatible with the aims of the GBR. For the Mission Valley project lining and ground deformations will be monitored and trigger and limit values will be specied for:

DESIGN OF A NATM TUNNEL

13

Table 3. Frequency of Key Performance Indicator (KPI) monitoring

Key Performance Indicator In-Tunnel Deformation Frequency of Reading Distance from Face 0 m to +30 m +30 m to +60 m > +60 m Inclinometers & Extensometer 30 m to 15 m 15 m to 0 m 0 m to +30 m +30 m to +60 m > +60 m Settlement Monitoring Points 30 m to 0 m 0 m to +30 m +30 m to +60 m > +60 m Piezometers General 15 m to 0 m 0 m to +30 m Frequency Daily Twice Weekly Weekly Twice Weekly Daily Daily Weekly Weekly Daily Daily Twice Weekly Weekly Weekly Daily Daily

In-tunnel deformation arrays Borehole extensometers and inclinometers Surface settlement monitoring points Piezometers In terms of procedures, the trigger and limit values are compatible with the Serviceability and Ultimate Limit State for the primary and secondary linings. The daily site meetings will review the instrumentation and monitoring results and look at related issues such as the excavation sequences, additional support measures and quality control. The KPIs will also be viewed in terms of the trends and the response by the site team if trigger values are exceeded will take a balanced view of both the actual values and the trends. If there are real concerns in terms of the trends, the contract empowers the CM to convene emergency review meetings that will consist of the EDR, CM and Contractors representatives. The instrumentation array for in-tunnel deformations, and the trigger and limit values and the deformation trends dened for such as array are presented in Table 3. Quality Control Procedures The need for quality control throughout the construction process and, most importantly, during the installation of the initial support is fundamental. To achieve the specied shotcrete performance, Table 4, will require clear guidance on the mix design requirements, site trials to prove the mix design and application processes, and qualications of key staff. Specic mix design issues will include pumpability, workability and cohesiveness. Additives and admixtures, for example silica fume, have proven benets in achieving these requirements without affecting either the early and long-term strength or

14

2001 RETC PROCEEDINGS

Table 4. Specied shotcrete strength development

Age of Specimen 8 hours 24 hours 72 hours 28 Days Design Strength 4 MPa (580 psi) 7 MPa (1015 psi) 14 MPa (2030 psi) 25 MPa (3750 psi)

durability characteristics. At 10% by weight of cementitious material, silica fume, has been specied to promote: Increased mix cohesiveness and increased bond to substrate Reduced rebound Increased shotcrete strengths Reduced permeability and hence increased durability Comprehensive site trials of both the mix and applicators using the equipment specied for the tunnel works will be required to provide assurance that the specied mix design is workable and its short and long term strength characteristics are achievable. A series of test panels, both vertical and overhead, and laboratory and site testing will be used to satisfy performance requirements. Shotcrete performance will be thoroughly monitored throughout the tunnel construction. Recent failures, as mentioned previously, have clearly demonstrated the need for strict inspection and quality control procedures. The intention is that the EDR will assist the Construction Manager to strengthen the management team to ensure that the contract requirements are met. The use of shotcrete in an underground environment calls for experienced shotcrete applicators capable of placing well compacted, void free shotcrete. The need for experienced and qualied shotcrete applicators has been recognized in North America with the introduction of the ACI 506.3RGuide to Certication of Shotcrete Nozzlemen. This will be replaced shortly by ACI C660Certication of Shotcrete Nozzlemen. Moreover, the introduction of the American Shotcrete Association Nozzlemen Certication Program in 1999 will benet projects such as Mission Valley by setting training standards and creating a pool of trained applicators for the industry. REFERENCES Terzaghi, K., (1950). Geologic Aspects of Soft Ground Tunneling, Chapter 2. Applied Sedimentation. P.D.Trask (ed.), John Wiley and Sons, New York. Health & Safety Executive, (2000). The collapse of NATM tunnels at Heathrow Airport. HSE Books. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors wish to thank Dave Ragland of MTDB for his constructive comments and encouragement in preparation of the paper. Siegfried Fassman of BRW, the Project Manager for detailed design of the SDSU Loop, and John Hawley, Hatch Mott MacDonalds engineer-in-charge for the NATM section, have provided valuable advice and assistance in developing the bored tunnel design and their guidance and inputs during the design process are gratefully acknowledged.