Tunnelling and

Underground Space
Technology
incorporating Trenchless
Technology Research
Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 22 (2007) 1–9
www.elsevier.com/locate/tust

Ground–liner interaction in rock tunneling

a,* b
Moorak Son , Edward J. Cording
a
Korean Intellectual Property Office, Construction Technology Exam., Government Complex, Daejeon Building 4, Dunsan-dong, Seo-gu,
Daejeon, South Korea
b
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 205 N. Mathews Avenue MC-250,
Urbana, IL 61801, United States

Received 20 March 2005; received in revised form 15 August 2005; accepted 20 March 2006
Available online 2 May 2006

Abstract

Tunnel constructions are gradually increasing because of the development and upgrade of infrastructures such as highway, subway,
railway, and many other facilities. Most of tunnels are excavated either by using drilling and blasting or by using tunnel excavation
machines such as TBM (tunneling boring machine) or Shield. NATM (new Austrian tunneling method) is one of most frequently used
tunneling methods and it uses drilling and blasting to excavate a tunnel in rock. While tunnel excavation using TBM or Shield machines
produces quite a regular and smooth tunnel excavation surface, the tunnel excavation using drilling and blasting results in a very irreg-
ular and rough excavation surface. The stress behavior in a shotcrete tunnel liner installed along the excavation surface is very dependent
on the surface status and tunnel engineer should consider the surface condition for the design of a shotcrete tunnel liner.
Numerical analyses are conducted to investigate the effect of the irregularity of tunnel excavation surface on the response of the shot-
crete tunnel liner. For the investigations, the controlled parameters include the irregularity of the excavation surface, the stiffness of the
surrounding ground, and the coefficient of earth pressure at rest. The investigations show that the response of a shotcrete tunnel liner is
highly dependent on the parameters and for the same earth pressure condition the effect is more evident when the irregularity is more
severe and the surrounding ground is less stiff.
Ó 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Rock tunnel; Excavation surface irregularity; Shotcrete liner; Ground–liner interaction; Flexibility

1. Introduction able impact on 3rd parties, and finally performing

Tunnel is a main underground structure and is widely
used for transportation transfer, water passage, and other
purposes such as electricity or communication cable
installation. With the development and upgrade of infra-
structures, tunnel construction is increasing all over the
world and tunnel engineer is more aware of the impor-
tance of the safety and economics of tunnel construction.
In relation to tunnel construction, Peck (1969) stated
three issues, which are first, maintaining stability and
safety during construction, second, minimizing unfavor-
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +82 11 9831 6940; fax: +82 42 472 3519.
E-mail addresses: moorakson@empal.com (M. Son), ecording@uiuc.
edu (E.J. Cording).
intended function over the life of a project. Among the
issues, the first issue is directly related to the appropriate
design of tunnel support system.
In rock tunneling, the tunnel excavation conducted
either by using drilling and blasting or by using tunnel
excavation machines such as TBM or Shield. NATM
(new Austrian tunneling method), which is widely used
for a tunnel construction, uses the drilling and blasting
method to excavate a tunnel in rock and a shotcrete liner
and rock bolts are used as a main support system. The tun-
nel excavation using drilling and blasting results in a rela-
tively irregular tunnel excavation surface, compared with
tunnel excavation machines using TBM or Shield. The level
of the irregularity depends on blasting method, rock stiff-
ness, rock joint characteristic, scaling, and workmanship.

0886-7798/$ - see front matter Ó 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.tust.2006.03.002
2 M. Son, E.J. Cording / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 22 (2007) 1–9

As Hoek and Brown (1980) indicated, the irregularity of

tunnel excavation surface may induce high stress concen-
tration in an excavation support such as a shotcrete liner
installed along the irregular excavation surface and it
may result in the cracking and collapsing of the liner.
Even though, some emphasis was put on the irregular-
ity of a shotcrete liner thickness, most liners are designed
under the assumption that the tunnel is excavated with a
smooth surface, so that the liner has a uniform thickness
along the tunnel excavation perimeter. Besides that most
physical model tests performed to investigate the behavior
of a shotcrete tunnel liner, which includes the work by
Fernandez et al. (1975), had also a uniform liner
thickness.
To better understand the effect of the irregularity of the Fig. 1. Ground and liner under a state of pure shear (after Peck et al.,
tunnel excavation surface on the response of a shotcrete 1972).
tunnel liner and to provide a general background for the
design of the tunnel liner, this paper investigates the
where D is the diameter of the imaginary circle, E is the
response of a shotcrete tunnel liner under the various con-
Young’s modulus of the ground, and m is the Poission’s ra-
ditions of tunnel excavation surface, rock stiffness, and
tio of the ground.
earth pressure status, considering the ground–liner
Under a state of pure shear with a uniform external
interaction.
pressure, P, the diametral strain of the circular tunnel liner
(Fig. 1b) is given by
2. Design of tunnel liner
DD PR3
Peck (1969) stated that a liner is said to be flexible if it ¼ ð3Þ
D 6El I l
interacts with the surrounding ground in such a way that
and the flexural stiffness of the liner to consider the plane
the pressure distribution on the liner and the corresponding
strain effect is defined as follows:
deflected shape results in negligible bending moments at all
points in the lining, and a liner is said to be rigid if it P 6El I l
¼ ð4Þ
deflects insignificantly under the loads imposed by the DD=D R3 ð1  t2l Þ
ground with very little ground–structure interaction.
where El is the elastic modulus of the liner, Il is the moment
Whether a liner is flexible or rigid depends on the relative
of inertia of the liner of the cross section per unit length
stiffness between ground and liner and a tunnel diameter.
along the tunnel axis of the liner, and R is the radius of
For example, a liner may be said flexible with a stiff sur-
the liner. The flexibility ratio (F) is obtained by dividing
rounding ground and a large diameter, but the same liner
the flexural stiffness of ground by that of the liner and is de-
may be said rigid with a soft surrounding ground and a
fined as follows:
small diameter.
E
Peck et al. (1972) introduced the definition of stiffness ð1þtÞ
ratios, which are the flexibility ratio and the compressibility F ¼ 6El I l
ð5Þ
R3 ð1t2l Þ
ratio, for tunnel liners with analytic works by Burns and
Richard (1964) and Hoeg (1968). The compressibility is the extensional stiffness ratio
The flexibility ratio is the flexural stiffness ratio between between the ground and the liner, and the extensional stiff-
the ground and the liner, and the flexural stiffness is defined ness of the ground and the liner can be obtained by mea-
as the resistance of a change in shape under a state of pure suring the diametral change (DD/D) for a uniform
shear as shown in Fig. 1. The flexural stiffness of the external pressure, P, as shown in Fig. 2. The diametral
ground can be obtained by measuring the diametral change strain of the imaginary circular tunnel in ground
(DD/D) under a state of pure shear with a uniform external (Fig. 2a) is given by
pressure, P, as shown in Fig. 1a. The diametral strain of the
DD P
imaginary circle in ground (Fig. 1a) is given by ¼ ð1 þ tÞð1  2tÞ ð6Þ
D E
DD P and the extensional stiffness is defined as follows:
¼ ð1 þ tÞ ð1Þ
D E
P E
and the flexural stiffness of the ground is defined as follows: ¼ ð7Þ
DD=D ð1 þ tÞð1  2tÞ
P E where D is the tunnel diameter, E is the Young’s modulus
¼ ð2Þ
DD=D ð1 þ tÞ of the ground, and m is the Poission’s ratio of the ground.
 M. Son, E.J. Cording / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 22 (2007) 1–9 3

½ð1  2tÞð1  CÞF  0:5ð1  2tÞ2 C þ 2

Jn ¼
½ð3  2tÞ þ ð1  2tÞCF þ 0:5ð5  6tÞð1  2tÞC þ ð6  8tÞ
ð14Þ
½1 þ ð1  2tÞCF  0:5ð1  2tÞC  2
Nn ¼
½ð3  2tÞ þ ð1  2tÞCF þ 0:5ð5  6tÞð1  2tÞC þ ð6  8tÞ
ð15Þ
The moment and thrust that are theoretically deter-
mined are based on the assumption that the liner has a uni-
form thickness along the tunnel perimeter and there is no
slippage at the contact between the ground and the liner.
The theoretical values of the moment and thrust at the tun-
nel crown and springline are plotted and compared with
the results of numerical analyses under various conditions
Fig. 2. Ground and liner under a state of uniform compression (after Peck
et al., 1972).
in the following section.

3. Numerical analysis
For the uniform external pressure, P, the diametral strain
of the circular tunnel liner (Fig. 2b) is given by Numerical analyses are run to investigate the response
DD PR of the liner in rock tunneling. As mentioned previously,
¼ ð8Þ rock tunneling with drilling and blasting induces a tunnel
D El t
excavation surface irregular and rough. The irregularity
and the extensional stiffness of the liner in plane strain is of the excavation surface may result in the thrust and
defined by as follows: moment increase in the liner installed along the tunnel
P El t excavation perimeter due to the stress concentration. How-
¼ ð9Þ
DD=D Rð1  t2l Þ ever, the theoretical relationship for the ground–liner inter-
action is based on the assumption that the tunnel
where El is the elastic modulus of the liner and R and t are,
excavation surface is smooth enough with no irregularity
respectively, the radius and the thickness of the liner. The
and the liner thickness is uniform along the tunnel
compressibility ratio (C) is obtained by dividing the exten-
perimeter.
sional stiffness of ground by that of the liner and is defined
In rock tunneling excavated with drilling and blasting, it
as follows:
is difficult to make the tunnel excavation surface com-
E
ð1þtÞð12tÞ pletely smooth, though it is possible to reduce the level of
C¼ El t ð10Þ irregularity. Accordingly, it is quite important to investi-
Rð1t2l Þ
gate the thrust and moment change in a shotcrete tunnel
A tunnel liner should be designed safe and stable for the liner due to the irregularity and to provide some reasonable
thrust and moment induced by the external load. Because concepts for designing and installing a shotcrete tunnel
of the interaction between the ground and the liner, the liner for a tunnel in rock, which is excavated with drilling
thrust and moment in the liner are affected by the flexibility and blasting.
and compressibility ratios as Burns and Richard (1964) have Numerical analyses are performed with the 2-D Univer-
shown. For a given condition, the measure of moment and sal Distinct Element Code (UDEC 3.1, 2000). The advan-
thrust in the liner can be theoretically obtained as follows: tages of the numerical analysis are that many different
   conditions can easily be considered under limited time,
PR2 ð1  2tÞC
MomentðMÞ ¼ ð1 þ K o Þ ½1  Ln  cost, and space, and reproducible analyses are possible.
2 6F
 These characteristics enable the effects of various parame-
þ 0:5ð1  K o Þ½1  J n  2N n  cos 2h ð11Þ ters on the responses of a shotcrete tunnel liner installed
along the irregular tunnel excavation surface to be
PR2 investigated.
ThrustðT Þ ¼ fð1 þ K o Þ½1  Ln  A tunnel is assumed to have a circular shape with the
2
þð1  K o Þ½1 þ J n  cos 2hg ð12Þ diameter of 10m and to be constructed at the depth of
30 m below the ground surface (Fig. 3). Considering the
where Ko is the earth pressure coefficient at rest, h is the an-
symmetric condition of the tunnel, a quarter portion of
gle measured in counterclockwise from horizontal plane, F
the tunnel is used for the numerical tests (Fig. 4a–4d).
is the flexibility ratio and C is the compressibility ratio.
The boundary condition for the ground and liner was roller
ð1  2tÞðC  1Þ supports at the left vertical and bottom horizontal bound-
Ln ¼ ð13Þ
1 þ ð1  2tÞC aries and the ground stress was applied at the right and top
4 M. Son, E.J. Cording / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 22 (2007) 1–9

Fig. 4b. Numerical geometries of a tunnel with the irregularity of

I = 5 cm.

Fig. 3. Geometries and conditions of a tunnel used for numerical

parametric studies.

boundaries (Fig. 4a). The ground and the liner were mod-
eled separately with finer meshes in the liner and analyses
were performed under plane strain conditions for both
ground and liner. The ground and liner was assumed as
isotropic, homogeneous, weightless, and elastic elements.
The ground/liner contact model was chosen so that
when the contact normal stress exceeds the maximum ten-
sile strength of the contact or the contact shear stress
exceeds the contact shear strength, which is a combination
of cohesive (C) and frictional strength (/), the contact loses
strength. Before losing the strength, the ground/liner con-
tact model has a linear stress–displacement relationship Fig. 4c. Numerical geometries of a tunnel with the irregularity of
with the slope of the contact normal stiffness for the normal I = 15 cm.

Fig. 4a. Numerical geometries and boundary conditions of a tunnel with no irregularity (I = 0 cm).
 M. Son, E.J. Cording / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 22 (2007) 1–9 5

values were observed and compared among others with

the flexibility ratio change. Peck et al. (1972) stated from
their study that the normalized moment and thrust ratios
increases as the depth of tunnel burial and approaches
the fully buried condition at a dimensionless depth (Z/D,
where D = tunnel diameter) of 1.5. The dimensionless
depth in this paper is three (Z = 30 m and D = 10 m),
which is deep enough to allow the fully buried condition.
Besides the numerical parametric studies, theoretical
normalized moment and thrust ratios, which are based
on the irregularity of I = 0 cm, were also calculated and
plotted for different ground stiffness and earth pressure
coefficient at rest to compare with the results of the numer-
ical parametric tests and to point out the effect of the exca-
vation surface irregularity. For the theoretical calculations,
it was assumed that there was no slippage at the contact
Fig. 4d. Numerical geometries of a tunnel with the irregularity of between a shotcrete tunnel liner and a surrounding ground
I = 30 cm. and the theoretical values were similar to the results of the
irregularity of I = 0 cm.
stress condition and with the slope of the contact shear The results of the parametric studies, together with the
stiffness for the shear stress condition. After losing the theoretical calculations, will provide fundamental and use-
strength, the contact has only a frictional shear resistance. ful information for investigating the responses of a shot-
The properties of ground and liner, which are elastic crete tunnel liner installed along a tunnel surface
modulus and Poisson’s ratio, and the properties of the excavated with drilling and blasting.
ground/liner contact, which are normal stiffness, shear stiff-
ness, friction angle, tensile strength, and cohesive strength 3.1. Effect on the moment in tunnel shotcrete liner
were selected based on the reasonable field values (Table 1).
With the given conditions, numerical parametric studies Fig. 5 shows the relationship between the flexibility
were performed on the effect of the irregularity of tunnel ratio and the normalized moment ratio at the tunnel crown
excavation surface on the thrust and moment change in a for Ko = 0.5, 1, and 2. With increasing of the coefficient of
shotcrete tunnel liner. The controlled parameters include earth pressure at rest, the normalized moment ratio
ground stiffness (E), irregularity (I, see Fig. 4d), and coeffi- increased significantly for the irregularity of I = 15 and
cient of earth pressure at rest (Ko) (Table 1). The paramet- 30 cm, when compared with no irregularity case, which is
ric studies were performed investigating the normalized I = 0 cm. However, there was relatively slight increase

M for the irregularity of I = 5 cm. The increase of the nor-
moment
 ratio cZR2 and the normalized thrust ratio
malized moment ratio was highly dependent on the irreg-
T
induced in a shotcrete tunnel liner due to the irregu-
cZR ularity height and the earth pressure coefficient, and the
larity of tunnel excavation surface, where c = unit weight larger the irregularity height and the earth pressure coeffi-
of the ground, Z = tunnel depth to the springline, and cient, the bigger the increase of the normalized moment
R = tunnel radius, and the variations of the normalized ratio. As the flexibility ratio increases, the normalized
moment ratio experienced a significant drop at F =
Table 1 192,400 (E = 21 GPa, fair to good rock with RMR  60–
Properties and parameters used for the numerical parametric studies 80), when compared with the ratio at F = 19,240 (E =
Shotcrete liner 2.1 GPa, poor to fair rock with RMR  40–60), and then
Young’s modulus (El) 21 GPa it was gradually decreasing and finally became close to
Poisson’s ratio (ml) 0.15 zero with high increase of the flexibility ratio. The investi-
Thickness (t) 10 cm
gation indicates that the increase of the normalized
Irregularity (I) 0, 5, 15, and 30 cm
moment ratio was more evident with the larger irregularity
Ground height and the lower flexibility ratio and implies that if a
Young’s modulus (E) 2.1, 21, 105, and 210 GPa
Poisson’s ratio (m) 0.25
shotcrete tunnel liner becomes relatively flexible compared
Earth pressure coefficient (Ko) 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 with the surrounding ground, the induced moment in the
shotcrete liner is less affected by the tunnel excavation sur-
Contact between ground and liner
Contact normal stiffness (Kn) 5.0e6 kPa/m face and earth pressure conditions. In other words, for a
Contact shear stiffness (Ks) 5.0e6 kPa/m given shotcrete liner condition, the effect of the irregularity
Friction angle (/) 45° on the response of the shotcrete liner could be more signif-
Tensile strength (rt) 1.0e3 kPa icant of the poor rock condition than the good condition
Cohesive strength (c) 1.0e3 kPa
in rock quality.
6 M. Son, E.J. Cording / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 22 (2007) 1–9
Fig. 5. Relationship between flexibility ratios and normalized moment ratios at tunnel crown.
Fig. 6 shows the relationship between the flexibility
ratio and the normalized moment ratio at the tunnel
springline for Ko = 0.5, 1, and 2. With decreasing of
the coefficient of earth pressure at rest, the normalized
moment ratio increased significantly for the irregularity
of I = 15 and 30 cm, as it did at the crown. The increase
of the normalized moment ratio was also highly depen-
dent on the irregularity height and the earth pressure
coefficient. Similar trends as at the tunnel crown were
found for the relationship between the flexibility ratios
and the normalized moment ratios. However, the change
of induced moment due to the irregularity height and the
earth pressure coefficient was relatively smaller than that
at the tunnel crown.
3.2. Effect on the thrust in tunnel shotcrete liner
Fig. 7 shows the relationship between the flexibility ratio
and the normalized thrust ratio at the tunnel crown for
Ko = 0.5, 1, and 2. The increase of the normalized thrust
ratio was also highly dependent on the irregularity height
and the earth pressure coefficient, and the increase of the
ratio was more evident for the larger irregularity height
and earth pressure coefficient. For all the cases of the earth
pressure coefficients, the normalized thrust ratio increased
around twice when the irregularity height varied from
I = 0 cm to I = 30 cm. As the flexibility ratio increases,
the normalized thrust ratio also experienced a significant
drop at F = 192,400 (E = 21 GPa, fair to good rock with
RMR  60–80), when compared with the ratio at
F = 19,240 (E = 2.1 GPa, poor to fair rock with
RMR  40–60), and then it was gradually decreasing and
finally became close to zero with the high increase of the
flexibility ratio. The increase of the normalized thrust ratio
was also more evident with the lower flexibility ratio. The
investigation also implies that if a shotcrete tunnel liner
becomes relatively flexible compared with the surrounding
ground, the induced thrust in the shotcrete is less affected
by the tunnel excavation surface and earth pressure
conditions.
Fig. 8 shows the relationship between the flexibility ratio
and the normalized thrust ratio at the tunnel springline for
Ko = 0.5, 1, and 2. With decreasing of the coefficient of
earth pressure at rest, the normalized thrust ratio
increased. The increase of the normalized thrust ratio was
also highly dependent on the irregularity height, but the
change of the ratio was relatively smaller than that at the
tunnel crown. Similar trends as at the tunnel crown were
found for the relationship between the flexibility ratios
and the normalized thrust ratios.
 M. Son, E.J. Cording / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 22 (2007) 1–9
Fig. 6. Relationship between flexibility ratios and normalized moment ratios at tunnel springline.
3.3. Analysis of test results
Table 2 summarizes the normalized moment and thrust
ratios obtained from the numerical tests with varying the
irregularity and the earth pressure coefficient for a given
condition (E = 2.1 GPa and F = 19,240). The results indi-
cate that the normalized thrust ratios increased around
1.5–2 times when the irregularity height increased from
0 cm to 30 cm and the earth pressure coefficient varied
from 0.5 to 2.0. The normalized moment ratio was also
affected significantly with the variation of the irregularity
and the earth pressure coefficient. The results of the numer-
ical tests show that both the induced moment and thrust in
a shotcrete tunnel liner were significantly dependent on the
irregularity of tunnel excavation surface and the earth pres-
sure coefficients at rest.
Besides that the result provides a fact that when one
makes tunnel design and construction, the effect of the tun-
nel surface irregularity and the earth pressure coefficient at
rest should be taken into consideration, together with the
relative stiffness between the tunnel liner and the surround-
ing ground. It is always true that a better understanding of
the interaction between a liner and a surrounding ground
can only make tunnel design and construction more eco-
nomically and safely.
7
4. Conclusions
The structural behavior of a shotcrete liner was investi-
gated numerically with the controlled parameters including
ground stiffness, irregularity, and coefficient of earth pres-
sure at rest, and the following conclusions are drawn from
the test results with the conditions and assumptions given
in this study.
(1) The investigations indicated that the response of a
shotcrete tunnel liner is highly dependent of the
irregularity of tunnel excavation surface, the stiffness
of surrounding ground, and the state of earth
pressure.
(2) The increase of the normalized moment and thrust
ratios was highly dependent on the irregularity height
and the earth pressure coefficient at rest, and the lar-
ger the irregularity height and earth pressure coeffi-
cient, the bigger the increase of the normalized
moment and thrust ratios at the tunnel crown.
(3) Irregularity of tunnel excavation surface can increase
the moment and thrust in a shotcrete tunnel liner.
The increase was more evident as the irregularity
height to liner thickness ratio increases to 1.5 and
3.0, and it became relatively slight when the ratio
8 M. Son, E.J. Cording / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 22 (2007) 1–9

Fig. 7. Relationship between flexibility ratios and normalized thrust ratios at tunnel crown.

Fig. 8. Relationship between flexibility ratios and normalized thrust ratios at tunnel springline.
 M. Son, E.J. Cording / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 22 (2007) 1–9 9

Table 2a
Normalized moment ratios at tunnel crown (TC) and springline (TS) for various irregularity (I) and earth pressure coefficient (Ko) conditions (for the case
of F = 19,240 and E = 2.1 GPa)
Ko I = 0 cm I = 5 cm I = 15 cm I = 30 cm
TC TS TC TS TC TS TC TS
0.5 0.01e  3 0.03e  3 0.01e  3 0.23e  3 0.36e  3 1.20e  3 0.54e  3 1.84e  3
1.0 0.01e  3 0.01e  3 0.22e  3 0.22e  3 1.04e  3 1.04e  3 1.58e  3 1.58e  3
2.0 0.05e  3 0.02e  3 0.47e  3 0.19e  3 2.75e  3 0.71e  3 3.97e  3 1.09e  3

Table 2b
Normalized thrust ratios at tunnel crown (TC) and springline (TS) for various irregularity (I) and earth pressure coefficient (Ko) conditions (for the case of
F = 19,240 and E = 2.1 GPa)
Ko I = 0 cm I = 5 cm I = 15 cm I = 30 cm
TC TS TC TS TC TS TC TS
0.5 0.08 0.40 0.11 0.47 0.15 0.60 0.17 0.68
1.0 0.32 0.32 0.36 0.36 0.50 0.50 0.57 0.57
2.0 0.80 0.17 0.95 0.22 1.24 0.29 1.40 0.34

decreases to 0.5. The result implies that the moment
and thrust in a shotcrete liner is highly dependent
on the irregularity height to liner thickness ratio.
(4) The normalized moment and thrust ratios were
highly dependent on the flexibility ratio. As the flexi-
bility ratio increases, the normalized moment and
thrust ratios experienced a significant drop at
F = 192,400 (E = 21 GPa, fair to good rock with
RMR  60–80) for all the cases of the irregularity
and the earth pressure coefficient, when compared
with the ratio at F = 19,240 (E = 2.1 GPa, poor to
fair rock with RMR  40–60), and then it was grad-
ually decreasing and finally became close to zero with
the high increase of the flexibility ratio.
(5) From the relationship between the flexibility ratios
and the normalized moment and thrust ratios, it
was found that if a shotcrete tunnel liner becomes rel-
atively flexible compared with the surrounding
ground, the induced moment and thrust in the shot-
crete liner may be less affected by the tunnel excava-
tion surface and earth pressure conditions. For a
given shotcrete liner condition, the effect of the irreg-
ularity on the response of the shotcrete liner could be
more significant of the poor rock condition than the
good condition in rock quality.
(6) The moment and thrust induced in a shotcrete tunnel
liner are dependent on both the level of tunnel exca-
vation surface irregularity and the flexibility ratio
between a liner and a surrounding ground. The
increase of the thickness of the tunnel liner may
reduce the effect of the surface irregularity, but it
may induce the liner stiffer, decreasing the flexibility
ratio of the liner and increasing the moment and
thrust in the tunnel liner.
(7) For tunnel design and construction, both the level of
tunnel surface irregularity and the flexibility ratio
between a shotcrete tunnel liner and a surrounding
ground should be taken into consideration, together
with the earth pressure conditions.
References
Burns, J.Q., Richard, R.M., 1964. Attenuation of stresses for buried
cylinders. In: Proceedings, Symposium on Soil–Structure Interaction,
Tucson, pp. 833–858.
Fernandez, G., Mahar, J., Cording, E.J., 1975. Shotcrete: Structural
Testing of Thin Liners. Technical Research Report, University of
Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Hoeg, K., 1968. Stresses against underground structural cylinders. Journal
of the Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division 94 (4), 833–858.
Hoek, E., Brown, E.T., 1980. Underground Excavations in Rock. The
Institution of Mining and Metallurgy, London, England.
Peck, R.B., 1969. Deep excavations and tunneling in soft ground. In:
Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Soil Mechan-
ics and Foundation Engineering, Mexico City, State-of-the-Art, pp.
225–290.
Peck, R.B., Hendron, A.J., Mohraz, B., 1972. State of the art of
soft-ground tunneling. In: Proceedings of the North American
Rapid Excavation and Tunneling Conference, Chicago, IL, pp.
259–286.
UDEC 3.1 Theory and Manual, 2000. Itasca Consulting Group Inc., MN.