See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/308989384

Influence of vibration on the performance of tunnel boring machines

Conference Paper · August 2016

DOI: 10.1109/MESA.2016.7587129

CITATIONS READS

3 362

4 authors, including:

Xiaoyang Zou Hui Zheng

Shanghai Jiao Tong University Shanghai Jiao Tong University
7 PUBLICATIONS   25 CITATIONS    35 PUBLICATIONS   220 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Tao Jianfeng
Shanghai Jiao Tong University
61 PUBLICATIONS   259 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Vibration mechanism and performance evaluation of hard rock TBMs View project

Precision Position Control of Unidirectional Speed-variable Proportional Pump Controlled Asymmetric hydraulic Cylinder View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Xiaoyang Zou on 18 March 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Influence of Vibration on the Performance of Tunnel
Boring Machines
Xiaoyang Zou, Yongzhen Mi, Hui Zheng and Jianfeng Tao
State Key Laboratory of Mechanical System and VIbration
Shanghai Jiao Tong University
Shanghai, China
Email: {zouxiaoyang, miyongzhen, huizheng, jftao}@sjtu.edu.cn
Abstract—Vibration in a hard rock tunnel boring
machine (TBM) during tunnel excavation has been
thought to have significant influence on TBM performance,
in particular its excavation efficiency. This paper presents
a study on this issue. A dynamic model of TBM is
established to derive its vibration response, considering
not only both of cutterhead driving system and thrust
system, but also the interaction between shield and tunnel
invert which is modeled by a 3D Winkler foundation with
uniformly distributed damping springs and sliders. Based
on the obtained vibration response of an opening TBM
under simulated rock breakage forces, the influence of
vibration on critical performance of TBM, including
energy efficiency of rock breakage, disc cutter wear rate
and interaction between shield and tunnel invert, is
investigated. The results show that energy efficiency of
rock breakage decreases with increasing of kinetic energy
and potential energy in TBM, especially with sharp rise of
dissipated energy due to friction occurrence under large
vibration circumstance. A large margin increment of disc
cutter wear rate is brought about by TBM vibration.
Different with the results in energy efficiency and disc
cutter wear rate, strong vibration induced axial force
between shield and tunnel invert could make the whole
TBM pushed forward more easily than in static contact.
This study provide a reference for comprehensive
evaluation of vibration of a TBM and its rock-breaking.
Keywords—TBM; vibration; influence; excavation efficiency;
dynamic modeling; Winkler foundation
I. INTRODUCTION
The opening tunnel boring machine (TBM) with a single
gripper clamping system and disc cutters has the capacity to cut
rock up to 300 MPa, which makes it widely applied in most
hard rock tunneling. Generally speaking, TBM tunneling has
much higher speed, less disturbance to ground and better safety
in comparison with conventional drilling and blasting [1].
Recently, more and more tunnels in hard rock ground have
been constructed with TBM, such as Dahuofang water tunnel,
Zhongtianshan railway tunnel, Xiqinling railway tunnel,
Qinling water tunnel and Liaoxibei water tunnel [2]. Although
TBMs perform excellently in most tunneling scenarios, an
unexpected phenomenon, severe vibration, is commonly seen
in hard rock tunneling. Many problems occurring on TBM, low
energy efficiency in rock breakage, disc cutter damage and
wear due to strong impulse shock, to name a few, are much
relevant to the serious vibration, which lead to high expense
beyond the planed project budget and are unfavorable for
expansion of TBM application.
Many efforts have been made to study the mechanism of
mechanized rock excavation with TBM in recent years. The
interaction between shield and rock mass has been revealed to
be a predominant factor affecting TBM dynamic behavior in
simulation of shield behavior during curved excavation and
evaluation the risk of shield jamming in squeezing conditions
[3, 4]. The thrust system has been optimized to achieve better
compliance of shield TBM to the sudden change of the load,
enhancement of force transmission and prevention of
resonance in composite strata, improving TBM excavation
performance [5, 6]. The time-varying excavation torque and
nonlinear time-varying dynamic characteristics have been
analyzed [7, 8]. Cutter forces have been measured in TBM
tunneling field in real-time and their variations are studied,
showing that the forces oscillate strongly and can be many
times of the average values, and unbalanced cutting behavior
occurs, which means that vibration is a major issue [9, 10].
The vibration characteristics of opening TBM have been
studied in several references [11-13]. However, influence of
vibration on the performance of TBM is seldom studied. A
comprehensive consideration of vibration on structural failure
and energy efficiency of rock breakage has so far not been
deeply investigated in the existing published works.
In this study, a dynamic model for an opening TBM
frequently used in hard rock tunneling is established,
considering the combination of cutterhead driving system and
thrust system, and also the nonlinear contact between shield
and tunnel invert. The dynamic response of TBM under
simulated rock breakage forces is derived and the influence of
vibration on TBM performance is analyzed and discussed.
II. DYNAMIC MODEL OF TBM
An opening TBM consists mainly of a cutterhead driving
system and a thrust system. Cutterhead, main bearing and
multiple pinions driving equipment constitute the cutterhead
driving system. Shield, main beam and thrust and clamping and rock mass is modeled as tangential uniformly distributed
equipment are the basic elements of the thrust system. The two sliders.
systems are connected by main bearing and gear-multiple
pinions meshing. During excavation operation, grippers are In the interaction between shield and tunnel invert, the
braced radially against the tunnel wall, then cutterhead is tunnel works as an elastic foundation. When axial force in Z
pushed forward by thrust cylinders, cutterhead driven by direction is less then static friction force between shield and
induction motors rotates and rock on the tunnel face is tunnel invert, shield and tunnel invert bond to each other.
continuously broken by disc cutters. The connections between When axial force exceeds static friction force, shield slide on
structure components, shield invert and tunnel, grippers and tunnel wall, and axial force is equal to friction force. The
tunnel are simplified with damping springs and sliders, then a interaction possibly including elastic action and friction action
dynamic model of opening TBM is established, as is shown in is highly nonlinear. In hard rock environment, the contact area
Fig.1, considering the rock breakage excitation. between shield and tunnel invert was considered to be lower
α=90° of the tunnel invert, as is illustrated in Fig.2. The
equivalent stiffness of the springs in Fig.2 can be determined as
ceqbz1
k gy1

cgy1
F keqbz1 ceqt 2 cl g z

 R 1     k
m3 ceqjz
m2
 ksn  Es  ksn 3  ksz  ksn 3   
m1
keqr1

keqr 2
ceqr1
ceqbz 4

ceqr 2
keqt 2 kl g z keqjz st
ceqt1 m5 m4
keqbz 4
ceqgz1
keqby

ceqby

keqgy1

keqt1
ceqgy1

Y csz
keqgz1 where Es is Young’s modulus of the ground, R is tunnel radius,
ν is Poisson’s ratio which is 0.3 in this study [14]. Because of
ksn

O
csn

Z k sz
the ground’s compressibility, the normal springs only works
Y
k when compressed.
O (t )
8

p1
X
p
2b

2b
(t )


p1
8

c krgz
kp

crgn


8

p1
cp

cp 2
krgn

Z O
8
k s1

I p1 I p8
cs

crgz shield
c s1

c p7
ks

2bp Y k
2 I m1 I m8 (t ) m6 
kp 2 (t ) I p 2 I p7 k p7
eqt 3
T Tm8 I
ks 2 c I m 2 T m1 m7 c s 7 2b p 7 ceqbx ceqt 3
s2 m2 Tm 7 k s7
k
c3 T
k s 3 s I Tm 3 T m 6 I m 6 6 cs 6
s
3 keqbx m2 k sz
2b p m3 k
T I p 6 p 6 (t )
m5
I p3 k st
(3 t ) I m 4 m 4 I m5 ceqt 2

k sn
kp 2bp
k
s4

6
ks 4 c

c p3 I p4 s5
cs I p 5 cp 6 keqt 2 m5
5 c clgz
p5
4
cp

klgn

Fig. 2. The elastic bedding of shield in hard rock tunneling [15] (left) and (b)
(t )

m2 2b
clgn

m1
4

p5 klgz
kp

k
p5
(t )
3D Winkler foundation in hard rock tunneling (right).
p 4
2b

ceqby
keqby

cst The distributed normal force and tangential forces can be

calculated as follows.
k sn

csn

k st

klg Y cgx1 cgx 2

If xsn<－δ0,
n m2 k rgn
clg O
X c rgn
k gy1

k gy 2

cgy 2
cgy1

k rgt

n
k gx1 k gx 2
t
klg

keqr 2

c rgt
ceqr 3
ceqgy 2

 Fsn  ksn 0 , Fst  Fsz  Ff  0   

t
clg

m3
ceqgy1

m5 m6
keqgy 2
keqgy1

ceqr 2

keqr 3

keqjx ceqjx ceqgx 2

ceqgx1
m4
keqgx1 keqgx 2
If xsn>－δ0,
Fig. 1. Dynamic model of opening TBM.

The dynamic model shown in Fig.1 is actually a model of Fsn  ksn xsn , Ff  k sn  xsn  0 
rigid-flexible coupling multi-body system considering the  kst xst , kst xst  Ff
flexibility of substructures with low stiffness. The generalized  Fst     
degree of freedoms (DOFs) contains six rigid DOFs and a  sgn( xst ) Ff , kst xst  Ff
certain number of flexible DOFs which represent elastic  k sz xsz , k sz xsz  Ff
vibration of the corresponding substructure. In Fig.1, Z is Fsz  
tunneling direction, Y is vertical direction, and X is determined  sgn( xsz ) Ff , ksz xsz  Ff
by right-hand rule. Substructures includes cutterhead, shield-
main beam assembly, gripper carrier, gripper cylinder block, where Fsn is normal force, Fst and Fsz are tangential forces, δ0 is
the an initial compression value due to the effect of the TBM
left gripper and right gripper, denoted by m i (i=1,…,6),
weight on the invert, Ff is the magnitude of friction force, sgn(x)
respectively. The rotational DOFs of motors and pinions are is sign function, μ is friction coefficient. The friction
considered. In addition, the boundary conditions is modeled in coefficient μ between shield and rock mass is taken as μ=0.15-
detail, with uniformly distributed radial and tangential damping 0.30 for kinetic coefficient and μ=0.25-0.45 for static
springs describing the contact between shield and rock mass, coefficient [15].
gripper and rock mass. The friction behavior between shield
 According to Fig.1 and Newton’s second law, the dynamic Structure Parameters Other Parameters
equations of TBM can be obtained. For a number of N motors Cutter tip width (mm) 9.2 Friction coefficient 0.3
and pinions,

The excitation causing TBM’s strong vibration is rock

  
I mi mi  ksi  mi  Ii  pi   csi mi  Ii  pi  Tmi   
breakage 
forces The forces,
on disc cutters.  correlating with
geotechnical parameters, cutter radius and tip width, cutter
spacing and indentation, and cutterhead rotational speeds
which overlap each other, are considered dynamic, uncertain,
  
I pi  pi  ksi  Ii 2  pi  Ii mi   csi Ii 2  pi  Ii mi  Rpi Fpi  0  
complex, and 
nonlinear [9]. Numerical simulation of cutter
forces is considered, with the explicit FEM code, LS-DYNA, is
where θmi is torsional vibration displacement of the motors, θpi used in this study. The results of normal force on disc cutter is
shown in Fig. 3. As can be seen, the cutter forces oscillate
is torsional vibration displacement of the pinions, I i is speed
strongly with quite a lot of peak values, and the majority of the
reduction ratio of planetary gear reducer, Tmi is external torque. spectral energy lies in low frequency domain. Based on the
The expression of nonlinear meshing loads Fpi between pinions response derived from the dynamic equations of TBM, the
and inner gear ring can be seen in [11]. influences of vibration on TBM performance can be analyzed.
Similarly, the dynamic equations of cutterhead, shield-main 265 1.5
beam assembly, gripper carrier, gripper cylinder block, left

Normal force (kN)

gripper and right gripper can be obtained using Newton’s

Magnitude (kN)
260
1
second law, respectively. The displacement of each 255
substructure consists of rigid displacement and flexible 0.5
250
displacement. Flexible displacement is calculated by modal
superposition method, with elastic modal shape functions 245 0
obtained by analytical method, modal test or finite element 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 50 100
Time (s) Frequency (Hz)
analysis (FEA).
All the dynamic equations can be assembled in matrix form Fig. 3. Time history (left) and frequency spectrum (right) of simulated
as normal force on disc cutter.

B. Influence of vibration on energy efficiency of rock

 MX  CX  KX  F      
breakage
Eq. (6) is MDOF nonlinear equation group, and the dynamic In TBM tunneling, one of the most important performance
response of TBM can be obtained by numerical solution. indexes is its energy efficiency. The less energy consumed in
breaking a unit volume of rock, the more excellent the
performance of TBM is. Energy efficiency is defined by the
III. ANALYSIS OF VIBRATION INFLUENCE ON TBM ratio of absorbed energy WL by rock breakage to loading
PERFORMANCE energy WB of rock breakage system by input source [16], i.e.,
A. Dynamic parameters of TBM tunneling and rock breakage
forces  = WL WB   
An opening TBM, which was used in a water tunnel project,
was taken as an application example. The parameters of The energy WL can be calculated as [16]
structure, of rock and of operation, are presented in Tab. Ⅰ.
 WL  WI  WR  WT  , or WL  WFD  WK   
TABLE I. PARAMETERS OF AN OPENING TBM TUNNELING

Structure Parameters
Mass of cutterhead (t)
Mass of main beam
assembly (t)
Mass of gripper carrier (t)
Mass of gripper cylinder
(t)
Mass of gripper (t)
Diameter of cutterhead
(m)
Length of main machine
(m)
Diameter of cutter (mm)
Other Parameters where WI, WR and WT are the energy of the incident stress wave,
44 Number of pinions 8 of the reflected stress wave, and of the transmitted stress wave,
respectively, WFD is the fracture and damage energy of rock,
46 Number of cutters 24
WK is the kinetic energy of flying rock fragments.
15 Cutterhead speed (r/min) 5.1
It is revealed that η can reach nearly 100% in static rock
Penetration per revolution
6
(mm/r)
10 fracture, but much lower in dynamic rock fracture and
6 Cutter spacing (mm) 84
decreases as the loading rate rises, though cracks in rock can
form more easily in dynamic rock fracture such as percussive
Young’s modulus of
4
ground (GPa)
6 penetration and point attack rock breakage. On one hand, more
Uniaxial compressive energy is needed in dynamic rock fracture because the dynamic
10 60
strength of rock (MPa) fracture toughness of rock is much more than its static fracture
432
Tensile strength of rock
4 toughness. On the other hand, most of WL is lost due to the
(MPa)
reflected stress wave and transmitted wave [16]. Therefore, However, the kinetic energy and the potential energy are in
static loading or low-rate loading is the best way to fracture the same order, and their varying trends with time are similar
rock in the viewpoint of energy efficiency. which can reveal TBM vibration severity. At the time points of
0.1 s and 0.48 s, a large margin of increments can be found in
As is also revealed, the ratio of WFD/WL decreases with the both kinetic energy and potential energy. At the same time,
increasing loading rate [16]. In TBM tunneling, WL can be sharp rises are shown in dissipation energy curve. It means that
calculated as when vibration of TBM becomes stronger, not only the kinetic
energy and the potential energy increase, but also much more
 WL  WFD  WK  WT  WV  WD   
increase 
occurs  The reason that the
in the energy dissipation.
sharp rises in dissipation energy is that friction occurs under
strong vibration and causes much more energy dissipated
where WT, WV and WD are the kinetic energy, the potential comparing with that consumed only by damping in weak
energy and the dissipated energy of TBM in vibration process vibration circumstances. Therefore, considering the kinetic
due to rock breakage excitation, respectively, which can be energy, the potential energy and the dissipated energy, the
calculated as vibration energy of TBM can be easily estimated, providing a
reference for evaluating energy efficiency from the perspective
of TBM vibration. As analyzed above, the vibration energy of
WT  v T Mv 2 TBM is expected low for improving energy efficiency in TBM
 WV  xT K  t  x 2   
tunneling.   

WD   v T C  t vdt   v Tf F f  t dt
t2 t2

t1 t1
C. Influence of vibration on disc cutter wear rate
Structure damage and parts failure easily occur in TBM
where M, K, C is mass matrix, stiffness matrix and damping tunneling and thus cause a large amount of increased cost. Lots
matrix of TBM, respectively, the latter two are time-varying of attention focuses on disc cutter failure. In extremely hard
and nonlinear considering the complex interactions such as rock environment, the cutter expenditure can be at an
those in cutterhead driving system, x is displacement vector, v approximation of one third of the project cost [17]. Disc cutter
is velocity vector, Ff is friction force, and vf is velocity vector wear is the major one among cutter failure forms, which is
corresponding to the friction force. determined by the amount of cutter wear. If the amount of disc
cutter wear increases slowly, the cutter will be long-life. To
If the amount of vibration energy of TBM is large, energy estimate the increase rate of the amount of cutter wear, disc
consumed on rock fracture will be small relatively, and the cutter wear rate is used. It is valuable to study the influence of
energy efficiency is low. For the studied opening TBM, the vibration on disc cutter wear as vibration is severe in TBM
vibration energy is calculated and shown in Fig. 4. tunneling.
2000
1400 Base on the Colorado School of Mines (CSM) model for
cutter forces, disc cutter wear rate can be calculated by [17]
Potential energy (J)

1200
Kinetic energy (J)

1500
1000
800 1000
600

400 500 dQ  k  
200  Tr  p ' 1   
0 dt 0 H
c  
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
   
2
 2 
Time (s) Time (s)
h
0  2 R sin   + sin     r sin   d
7 2


x 10
6   2  2 
Dissipated energy (J)

2
c2 t S
p '  C 3
0  RT
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5    
Time (s) rh
  arccos  
Fig. 4. The kinetic energy (top left), the potential energy (top right) and the  r 
dissipated energy (bottom) of TBM in vibration process.
where T is cutter tip width, r is radius of cutter, R is the radius
As can be seen in Fig. 4, the vibration energy of TBM where disc cutter mounted on the cutterhead, h is penetration
varies with time, and its variation is not regular due to the per revolution, ω0 is angular velocity of cutterhead, k is wear
uncertain excitations. The kinetic energy and the potential coefficient usually of 10-1 to 10-6, Hc is surface hardness of
energy are not similar in time-history profile, which may be cutter, C is a constant coefficient of 2.12, ψ is a constant of
contributed to the complex and nonlinear interaction in TBM. typically 0.2 to -0.2,  is contact angle between rock and disc
Owing to this interaction, the stiffness matrix varies with time, cutter, S is cutter spacing, σc is uniaxial compressive strength
while the mass matrix keeps constant.
of rock, σc is tensile strength of rock, θ is an angle which can Therefore, affected by vibration, the working condition of disc
be seen in [17]. cutter become worse, and the cutter wear is more serious with a
large margin of increase of disc cutter wear rare. Excessive
Considering TBM vibration, disc cutter wear rate is derived vibration should be avoided as far as possible and vibration
as reduction is needed to protect cutters from wear too fast.

 D. Influence of vibration on axial force between shield and

dQ  k
  Tr  p ' 1   vd 
dt 0 Hc   
v  v12  v22
   h
 v1  20 R sin 2     0  vz  sin   vt cos  
 2   2
v2  0 r sin   vR
where vz, vR, vt are axial, radial and tangential velocity of the
point with cutter’s position on cutterhead, respectively.
Disc cutter wear is closely related to cutting speed. When
cutterhead rotates, the cutting speed of a cutter is proportional
to the radius where the cutter is mounted on cutterhead, thus
the cutting speed of gauge cutter is larger than that of the
normal cutter which is larger than the central cutter. Gauge
cutter wear is more serious than normal cutter wear, which is in
accord with project practice. To evaluate the influence of
vibration on disc cutter wear rate, three cutters are selected in
the positions with radius of 0.5 m, 1.0 m and 2.0 m. And the
results, named as dynamic rate which varies with time, and the
mean value of the dynamic rate in 0.5 seconds, are shown in
Fig. 5, where the results without considering vibration, named
as static rate, are also shown.
-11
x 10
dynamic rate
Cutter wear rate (m /s)
 
 
tunnel 
invert  
The contact between shield and tunnel invert is a critical
boundary condition for TBM tunneling. It supports most of the
weight of TBM, stabilizes the cutterhead during excavation,
and works as a pivot point for attitude positioning system. The
friction force between shield and tunnel invert should be
 overcome by thrust force. If more thrust force acts on
  
the friction force,the thrust
 efficiency will be
 counteracting
lower, which is unfavorable in TBM tunneling. Therefore,
decreasing the friction force can improve TBM performance.
The state of the interaction between shield and tunnel invert
varies with vibration, which may loosen the shield-tunnel
contact and reduce the friction force, thus leading to an
improved thrusting efficiency.
The interaction forces induced by vibration between shield
and tunnel invert are calculated by using the derived Eqs. (1-3)
in Sec. 2. Among them, the axial force between shield and
tunnel invert, i.e., shield tangential force in Z direction, can be
expressed as
 Fvt    Fsz Rddz   
where α is the polar angle from X axis to the point of the
contact between shield and tunnel invert shown in Fig.2, Ω
denotes the contact area. The axial force between shield and
-11
x 10 tunnel invert induced by TBM vibration is obtained. The
dynamic rate
results are shown in Fig. 6.

Cutter wear rate (m /s)

static rate static rate

3

6 R=0.5m 6 R=1m
mean dynamic rate mean dynamic rate

4 4
1000
Force (kN)

2 2 500
0
-500
0 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 -1000
Time (s) Time (s)
-11
x 10
dynamic rate 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Cutter wear rate (m /s)

static rate
3

6 R=2m Time (s)

mean dynamic rate

4 Fig. 6. The axial force between shield and tunnel invert induced by vibration.

2
0 complex interaction between shield and tunnel invert during
0 0.1
Fig. 5. Wear rate of disc cutter mounted at R=0.5 m (top left), R=1 m (top
right) and R=2 m (bottom) on cutterhead.
As is illustrated in Fig. 5, the dynamic rate oscillates
strongly with time, and its peaks are several times of the static
rate. Comparing with the corresponding static rate, the mean
dynamic rate of the cutter with radius of 0.5 m increases by
69%, that of the cutter with radius of 1.0 m increases by 52%,
and that of the cutter with radius of 1.0 m increases by 39%.
The irregular profile of the axial force in Fig. 6 reveals the
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Time (s) TBM vibration. When the vibration of TBM is small, the
interaction between shield and tunnel invert is elastic, and the
amplitude of axial force is about 500 kN. When the vibration of
TBM becomes stronger, friction sliding occurs between shield
and tunnel invert, and the axial force oscillates more seriously.
The amplitude of axial force reaches 1000 kN, which is larger
than that in the elastic interaction circumstance. The friction
sliding behavior induced by vibration means that the whole
TBM can be pushed forward with smaller thrust force as the
friction coefficient is much less in sliding friction than in static
friction, therefore more thrust force can be used in rock
breakage [4].
IV. CONCLUSION
This paper presents an investigation of influence of
vibration on TBM performance. First, the response of TBM
during excavation is obtained based on an established dynamic
model of TBM main machine where cutterhead driving system,
thrust system, and shield-tunnel invert contact are considered.
Then, the influence of vibration on TBM performance is
analyzed from three aspects of energy efficiency of rock
breakage, disc cutter wear rate and axial force between shield
and tunnel invert which are closely related to TBM excavation.
The analysis is performed by taking an opening TBM used
in an actual water tunnel construction as the example. The
results show that the energy efficiency of rock breakage
decrease with increased vibration strength. Strong vibration can
be revealed by large values of kinetic energy and potential
energy of TBM, especially by steep rise of the dissipated
energy. Vibration can increase disc cutter wear rate by a large
margin, which should be avoided in actual tunneling project.
The axial force between shield and tunnel invert is small when
no friction occurs and becomes large when friction occurs. The
axial force could loosen the shield-tunnel invert contact, thus is
helpful in thrust forward of the whole TBM. However, much
more vibration energy is consumed during frictional sliding
process, making energy efficiency of rock breakage lower.
These results provide a reference for further vibration control
of TBM.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This work is financially supported by the Basic Research
Program of China (973 Program) (Grant no. 2013CB035403).
REFERENCES
[1] B. Maidl, L. Schmid, W. Rits, and M. Herrenknecht, Hardrock Tunnel
Boring Machines. Berlin: Ernst & Sohn, 2008, pp. 15-19.
[2] M. S. Wang, “Tunneling by TBM/shield in China: state-of-art, problems
and proposals,” Tunnel Construction, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 179-187, 2014
(Chinese).
[3] M. Sugimoto, A. Sramoon, S. Konishi and Y. Sato, “Simulation of
shield tunneling behavior along a curved alignment in a multilayered
View publication stats
ground,” Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering,
vol. 133, no. 6, p. 684-694, 2007.
[4] M. Ramoni and G. Anagnostou, “The interaction between shield, ground
and tunnel support in TBM tunnelling through squeezing ground,” Rock
Mechanics and Rock Engineering, vol. 44, pp. 37-61, 2011.
[5] Y. Zhao, H. Wang, H. D. Yu, X. M. Lai and Z. Q. Lin, “A stiffness-
matching based evaluation approach for compliance of mechanical
systems in shield tunneling machines,” Science China Technological
Science, vol. 55, pp: 2926-2935, 2012.
[6] X. Q. Tang, K. S. Deng and L. P. Wang, “Research on natural frequency
characteristics of thrust system for EPB machines,” Automation in
Construction, vol. 22, pp: 491-497, 2012.
[7] K. Z. Zhang, H. D. Yu, Z. P. Liu and X. M. Lai, “Dynamic characteristic
analysis of TBM tunnelling in mixed-face conditions,” Simulation
Modelling Practice and Theory, vol. 18, pp: 1019-1031, 2010.
[8] X. H. Li, H. B. Yu, M. Z. Yuan and Y. Zhao, “Research on dynamic
models and performances of shield tunnel boring machine cutterhead
driving system,” Advances in Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 2013,
Article ID 359757.
[9] M. Entacher, K. Lassnig and R. Galler, “Analysis of force diagrams of
linear cutting machine-tests regarding geotechnical parameters,” in
ASCE Proceedings of the GeoCongress 2012, Oakland, USA, pp: 3258-
3267, 2012.
[10] M. Entacher, G. Winter and R. Galler, “Cutter force measurement on
tunnel boring machines-implementation at Koralm tunnel,” Tunnelling
and Underground Space Technology, vol. 38, pp: 487-496, 2013.
[11] W. Sun, J. X. Ling, J. Z. Huo, L. Guo, X. Zhang and L. Y. Deng,
“Dynamic characteristics study with multidegree-of-freedom coupling in
TBM cutterhead system based on complex factors,” Mathematical
Problems in Engineering, Vol. 2013, Article ID 635809.
[12] J. Z. Huo, H. Y. Wu, G. Q. Li, W. Sun and J. Chen, “The coupling
dynamic analysis and field test of TBM main system under multipoint
impact excitation,” Shock and Vibration, Vol. 2015, Article ID 313259.
[13] X. Y. Zou, H. D. Yu, Y. Zhao and Hui. Zheng, “A study on natural
dynamic characteristics of thrust system for a tunnel boring machine,” in
Abstract of ICVE 2015, Shanghai, China, pp: 65, 2015.
[14] O. Arnau and C. Molins, “Three dimensional structural response of
segmental tunnel linings,” Engineering Structures, vol. 44, pp: 210-221,
2012.
[15] R. Hasanpour, “Advance numerical simulation of tunneling by using a
double shield TBM,” Computers and Geotechnics, vol: 57, pp: 37-52,
2014.
[16] Z. X. Zhang, S. Q. Kou, L. G. Jiang and P.-A. Lindqvist, “Effects of
loading rate on rock fracture: fracture characteristics and energy
partitioning,” International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining
Sciences, vol. 37, pp: 745-762, 2000.
[17] Q. Tan, L. J. Xie, Y. M. Xia, Z. H. Zhu, X. J. Sun and Y. Y. Wang,
“Analysis of wear rate of TBM disc cutter,” Journal of Central South
University (Science and Technology), vol. 46, no. 3, PP: 843-848, 2015.