Küçük Çaplı Tünellerde Süreksizlik Kontrollü Deformasyon Tahmini

Yıl 2022, Cilt: 9 Sayı: 2, 829 - 842, 31.05.2022

Nazile Ural , Guncelleyiniz Guncelleyiniz , Evren Poşluk

https://doi.org/10.31202/ecjse.1013656

Cited By: 1

Öz

Tünel yapımında, güzergâh boyunca yapılan arama sondajlarından elde edilen zemin ve kaya profilleri, yeraltı suyu durumu ve yapı elemanları değerlendirilerek tünel projeleri gerçekleştirilmektedir. Uygulamada bazen sondajlar göre öngörülen jeolojik kesitler ile tünel yapımı sırasında karşılaşılan yapısal elemanlar arasında farklılıklar olabilmektedir. Bu çalışmada Phases 2D programı ile T35-GT1 tüneli için modellenmiştir. Ankara-İstanbul Hızlı Tren Projesi için konvansiyonel yöntemle açılan T35-GT1 tüneli imalatında sayısal analizlerle tahmin edilen ve karşılaşılan deformasyon miktarları karşılaştırılmıştır. Çalışmanın sonunda süreksizlik özellikleri hesaba dahil edildiğinde gerçekleşen deformasyonlar ile sayısal analizde elde edilen deformasyonların birbirine çok yakın değerler verdiği sonucuna varılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Tünel, Deformasyon, Sayısal analiz, süreksizlik

Discontinuity Controlled Deformation Estimation in small Diameter Tunnels

Öz

In tunnel construction, tunnel projects are carried out by evaluating the soil and rock profiles obtained from the exploration drillings along the route, groundwater status, and structural elements. In practice, there may sometimes be differences between the geological sections foreseen according to the exploration drillings and the structural elements encountered during tunnel construction. In this study were modeled for the T35-GT1 tunnel by Phases 2D program. For the Ankara-Istanbul High-Speed Train Project, the deformation amounts predicted by numerical analysis and encountered during the T35-GT1 tunnel manufacturing, opened by the conventional method were compared. At the end of the study, it was concluded that when the discontinuity properties are included in the calculation, the deformations realized and the deformations obtained in numerical analysis give values very close to each other.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Tunnel, Deformation, Numerical Analysis, Discontinuity

Kaynakça

• [1]. Aydan, Ö., Akagi, T., Kawamoto, T. 1993. The Squeezing Potential of Rocks Around Tunnels; Theory and Prediction, Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering, 26(2), 137-163.
• [2]. Goel, R. K., Jethwa, J.L., Paithakan, A.G. 1995. Tunneling through the young Himalayas-a case history of the Maneri-Uttarkashi power tunnel, Engineering Geology, 39, 31-44.
• [3]. Bhasin, R., Grimstad, E. 1996. The use of stressstrength relationship in the assessment of tunnel stability”, Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 11 (1), 93-98.
• [4]. Barla G., Pelizza S. 2000. Engineering Geology”, In:Proceedings of the International Conference on Geotechnical & Geological Engineering, Melbourne, Australia. Technomic, TBM tunnelling in difficult ground conditions, pp. 329–354.
• [5]. Önalp, A. 1982. Geotechnical knowledge for civil engineers, vol 2, Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon, Turkey (in Turkish).
• [6]. Barla, G. 1995. Squeezing rocks in tunnels, ISRM News Journal, 2, 44–49.
• [7]. Dalgic, S. 2002. Tunneling in squeezing rock, the Bolu tunnel, Anatolian Motorway, Turkey, Engineering Geology, 67.
• [8]. Schubert, W. 1996. Dealing with squeezing conditions in Alpine tunnels, Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering, 29, 145–153.
• [9]. Kovari K, Amstad C. 1993. Decision making in tunnelling based on field measurements, In: Hudson J, editor. Comprehensive rock engineering, vol. 4. Oxford:Pergamon, p. 571–605.
• [10].Hoek, E. 1999. Support for very weak rock associated with faults and shear zones. In: Villaescusa, E., Windsor, C., Thompson (Eds.), Rock Support and Reinforcement Practice in Mining: Proceedings of Fourth International Symposium on Ground Support. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp. 19–32.
• [11].Moritz B., Grossauer K. and Schubert, W. 2004. Short Term Prediction of System Behaviour of Shallow Tunnels in Heterogeneous Ground, FELSBAU 22 NR. 5.
• [12].Hoek, E and Guevara, R. 2009. Overcoming squeezing in the Yacambú-Quibor tunnel, Venezuela, Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering, Vol. 42, No. 2, 389 – 418.
• [13].Barla, G. 2010. Innovative tunneling construction method to cope with squeezing at the Saint Martin La Porte access adit (Lyon–Turin base tunnel), In: Vrkljan, I. (Ed.), Rock Engineering in Difficult Rock Conditions — Soft Rocks and Karst. Taylor & Francis Group, London, pp. 15–24.
• [14].Jimenez, R., Recio, D. 2011. A linear classifier for probabilistic prediction of squeezing conditions in Himalayan tunnels, Engineering geology, 121(3-4), 101-109.
• [15].Aksoy, C. O., Uyar, G. G., Posluk, E., Ogul, K., Topal, I., & Kucuk, K. 2016. Non-deformable support system application at tunnel-34 of Ankara-Istanbul high speed railway project, Structural Engineering and Mechanics, 58(5), 869-886.
• [16].Marinos V., Goricki A., Malandrakis E. 2019. Determining the principles of tunnel support based on the engineering geological behaviour types: example of a tunnel in tectonically disturbed heterogeneous rock in Serbia, Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, 78, 2887–2902.
• [17].Mahdevari S., Torabi S. R., Monjezi M. 2012. Application of artificial intelligence algorithms in predicting tunnel convergence to avoid TBM jamming phenomenon, International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences, 55, 33–44, doi: 10.1016/j.ijrmms.2012.06.005.
• [18].Feng XT, Zhao J, Zhang XW, Kong R. 2018. A novel true triaxial apparatus for studying the time-dependent behaviour of hard rocks under high stress. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering, 51(9):2653e67.
• [19].Feng, X. T., Hudson, J. A. 2010. Specifying the information required for rock mechanics modelling and rock engineering design, International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 47(2), 179-194.
• [20].UIC Code 779-9. 2003. Safety in railway tunnels, Standard, France.
• [21].Apaydın Poşluk, E., Koral H. 2014. Neogene Stratigraphy and Structural Features of Bozüyük (Bılecık) -Oklubalı (Eskışehır), Istanbul Journal of Earth Sciences, 26(2), 83-103, (in Turkish).
• [22].The New Austrian Tunnelling Method. In: Tunnelling and Tunnel Mechanics. 2008. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-28500-8_7 .
• [23].Turkey Highways Specification, General Directorate of Highways publication. 2013. Ankara, Turkey, (in Turkish).
• [24].RocScience. 2020. Phase2 8.0 Excavation & Support Design, Available Online:https://www.rocscience.com/documents/pdfs/uploads/8706.pdf.(accessed on 21.10.2020).
• [25]Vardar, M., Koçak, C., Tokgözoğlu, F. 1998. Examples of the origin and development of time-dependent deformations in the Bolu Tunnel, 4, National Rock Mechanics Symposium Proceedings, pp. 173-185 (in Turkish).
• [26].Sellner P.J. and Schubert, W. 2000. Prediction Of Displacements In Tunnelling, ISRM International Symposium, 19-24 November, Melbourne, Australia.
• [27].Schubert, W., Grossauer, K., Kim C.Y. 2003. Interpretation of Displacement Monitoring Results for Tunnels in Heterogeneous Rock Mass, Proceedings of the 6th International Geotechnical Conference, Bratislava, pp. 99-106.
• [28].Zhang, J-F, Chen, J-J, Wang, J-H,Zhu, Y-F. 2013. Prediction of tunnel displacement induced by adjacent excavation in soft soil, Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, Vol 36, pp 24-33.
• [29].Peck R.B. 1972. Observation and instrumentation: some elementary considerations. Highway Focus, U.S. Dept. of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, pp.1-7.
• [30].O’Rourke T.D. 1984. Guidelines for tunnel lining design, ASCE.
• [31].ISRM 2014, 2014. Ulusay, Reşat, ed. The ISRM suggested methods for rock characterization, testing and monitoring: 2007-2014, Springer.