Effect of Bentonite Slurry Pressure on Interface

Friction of Pipe Jacking

Mucahit Namli, Ph.D., P.E. 1; and Erol Guler, Ph.D. 2
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Militar Nueva Granada on 02/06/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Abstract: Pipe jacking is a technique used to construct tunnels by pushing prefabricated pipes through the ground from an entrance shaft to
an exit shaft. This technique is referred as microtunneling in U.S. terminology, therefore, in the rest of the text, pipejacking and micro-
tunneling will be used as having the same meaning. Pipe jacking is a more economical alternative to segmental lined tunnels. However,
the main limitation of pipe jacking is the jacking distance, which is directly dependent on the friction between the pipe and the soil. Therefore,
reducing the friction between the pipe and soil is a critical issue in terms of economy and construction speed. In pipe jacking, in order to
reduce the friction between pipe and soil, a bentonite injection is applied. In this paper, a new laboratory test setup was prepared to simulate
pipe jacking. The main aim of this test setup was to find the effects of bentonite pressure on the lubrication efficiency, which has not been
clarified in the literature yet. In order to verify the test method, results of laboratory tests were compared with measurements of the friction
between jacked pipe and soil in several real life projects. The measurements were compared with the coefficient of friction values obtained
from three different field measurements conducted in different projects. According to the results, it can be stated that by applying continuous
bentonite injection even under very low pressure, an interface can be created between bentonite slurry and a concrete pipe, and this bentonite
interface is able to reduce the friction coefficient tremendously to approximately 10% of the sand–concrete pipe interface friction coefficient.
But when the injection is not applied continuously, the application of bentonite slurry injection decreases the coefficient of friction to half of
that in the case of no bentonite injection. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)PS.1949-1204.0000255. © 2016 American Society of Civil Engineers.
Author keywords: Pipe jacking; Bentonite injection; Coefficient of interface friction; Jacking force.

Introduction
Pipe jacking is a technique used to form mostly small-diameter tun-
nels by pushing prefabricated pipes through the ground from a
starting shaft to an exit shaft. Powerful hydraulic jacks are used
to push specially designed pipes through the ground behind a shield
at the same time as excavation is taking place within the shield. The
method provides a flexible, structural, watertight, finished pipeline
as the tunnel is excavated (Fig. 1). In this method, cut-and-cover
excavation, which must be performed with conventional tech-
niques, is not necessary. The excavation is usually performed using
slurry-type machines so that environmental damage such as low-
ering the underground water level is prevented. In highly populated
cities that have dense infrastructure and heavy traffic flow, con-
struction work can be carried out by this method without disrup-
tion. For either construction or production of pipes, the pipe jacking
method does not require a large jobsite area. However, segmental
lining tunnel construction does require both a huge segment plant
and a large jobsite area for the mobilization of the tunnel boring
machine (TBM) and its backup system. In the case of a small work-
ing area, the pipe jacking method is an important advantegous
alternative to segmental lining tunnel applications of up to 3.5 m
inner diameter. The main limitation of the pipe jacking method is
the restriction in jacking distance.
1
Assistant Professor, Istanbul Medeniyet Univ., Istanbul 34700, Turkey
(corresponding author). E-mail: munamli@akated.com
2
Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Bogazici Univ., Bebek, Istanbul
34342, Turkey.
Note. This manuscript was submitted on November 24, 2014; approved
on July 7, 2016; published online on August 22, 2016. Discussion period
open until January 22, 2017; separate discussions must be submitted for
individual papers. This paper is part of the Journal of Pipeline Systems
Engineering and Practice, © ASCE, ISSN 1949-1190.
Jacking forces are comprised of two components: the face pres-
sure force and frictional force (Fig. 2). The face pressure force is
made up of the earth and fluid pressures acting on the face of the
machine. In general, field experience shows that face pressure
forces represent a very low percentage of the overall jacking force.
They are also the primary indicator used by the machine operator to
determine advance rates. As such, the operator has the ability, by
adjusting the machine speed, to control the face pressure force.
Therefore, it may not be worthwhile to further refine these predic-
tions. Therefore, most operators tend to drive the machine as fast as
possible without pushing the machine beyond the reasonable limits
of the torque capacity, causing the machine to stall. As a result, the
face pressure acting on the face of the machine is closer to the active
earth pressure than the passive (Staheli 2006).
The main component of the jacking load is due to frictional re-
sistance. Hence, friction forces usually constitute the main compo-
nent of jacking loads (Pellet and Kastner 2002). Frictional forces on
the pipe jacking machine and pipeline have been much less under-
stood than face pressure forces, although there is general agreement
that the frictional component of the jacking forces should follow
the general friction formula.
The coefficient of friction between pipes and soil has been in-
vestigated by many researchers. Uesugi and Kishida conducted re-
search on the friction between steel and sand and also between
concrete and sand. According to them, the characteristics of
sand–concrete friction are similar to those of the friction between
sand and rough steel surfaces (Kishida and Uesugi 1987). Uesugi
and Kishida stated that the maximum coefficient of friction depends
on concrete roughness and mean diameter of sand, and the upper
limit of maximum coefficient of friction is the maximum shear
stress ratio of the sand dependent on the relative density. As a result,
the influential factors of sand–concrete friction are concrete rough-
ness and mean diameter of sand. Neither concrete strength nor sand

© ASCE 04016016-1 J. Pipeline Syst. Eng. Pract.

J. Pipeline Syst. Eng. Pract., 2017, 8(2): 04016016

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Militar Nueva Granada on 02/06/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 1. Schematic of pipe jacking operation (image courtesy of Herrenknecht AG)
Fig. 2. Pipe jacking operation illustrating the components of jacking
forces (reprinted from Staheli 2006, with permission)
type affects yielding (peak) friction coefficient (Kishida and
Uesugi 1990).
Also, Norris (1992) and Marshall (1998) have conducted studies
on normal stress distribution around jacking pipes during pipe jack-
ing operations at the University of Oxford under the direction of
Dr. George Milligan. Milligan and Norris determined the soil–pipe
interface friction angle at each of the sites by measuring the normal
loads on the pipes from the contact stress transducers. As a result,
Norris concluded that bentonite injection into the annular space
around the pipe caused the concrete pipe to float, resulting in equal
normal stresses on the top and bottom of the pipeline (Norris 1992).
Marshall continued the work by Norris by completing four addi-
tional field studies. These included one test in London clay, one
in glacial till, one in soft peaty clay, and a fourth test in sandy
gravel. The test in sandy gravel was conducted on a 100-cm spun
concrete pipe that was jacked 160 m approximately 5.5 m deep in
dense silty sand. Marshall found that all pore pressure plots re-
vealed excellent agreement with calculated pressures and indicated
that hydrostatic pore pressure generally existed during jacking in
the fine sand. Pore pressures increased above hydrostatic pressures
on the whole, corresponding with the pumping of lubrication. Pore
pressure data, considered together with total radial stress data,
provided very useful information on effective stress behavior
(Marshall 1998). Based on the results, Marshall concluded that
© ASCE 04016016-2
J. Pipeline Syst. Eng. Pract., 2017, 8(2): 04016016
the pipeline was buoyant in the bentonite lubricant and that the
pipe–soil contact was shown to be nonuniform along and around
the instrumented pipe. He also concluded that the reason for the
nonuniform contact between the pipe and the soil was due to
the arrangement of the lubrication injection sockets and position
of the instrumented pipe relative to the pipe jacking machine
(inserted as the second pipe behind the shield) (Marshall 1998).
The technical viability and the cost-effectiveness of pipe jacking
predominantly depend on the magnitude of the jacking forces. They
determine the required capacity of the jacking rig and design of the
thrust wall reacting to the jacking forces and stresses in the pipes.
When jacking forces exceed the capacity of one of these elements,
the distance between the launch and reception shafts has to be re-
duced, or intermediate jacking stations have to be inserted at regu-
lar intervals in the pipe string to overcome excessive jacking forces.
Excavating additional shafts may not only be expensive, but also
causes surface disruption, which may not be acceptable in certain
environments. Intermediate jacking stations carry operational com-
plications that also result in a significant increase in the overall
project cost, as well as a significant increase in construction time.
Effective lubrication could greatly reduce jacking forces, allowing
significantly longer drives to be achieved. In addition, overcut ra-
tios around the pipes could be decreased by bentonite injection,
thus reducing the impact of pipe jacking in terms of ground and
structure settlements around the pipes (Borghi 2006).
The use of bentonite suspensions as the lubricant in pipe jacking
is now common practice. Lubrication can only work effectively if a
discrete layer of the lubricant is maintained between the sliding
surfaces of the pipe and the excavated soil surface. If the ground
collapses onto the pipe, the effect of lubrication would be greatly
reduced. The most important function of bentonite suspensions, or
for that matter, any other lubricant, is therefore to provide sufficient
internal pressure to stabilize the tunnel bore. The slurry must be
designed to form a filter cake in the surrounding soil without ex-
cessive bleeding of material and it must be pressurized to the nec-
essary level to overcome groundwater pressures and stabilize the
tunnel bore; it must fill the complete overexcavation void (Marshall
1998).
In practice, there are three types of bentonite injections (Namli
2011); the first one is controlled injection, which uses a limited
amount of bentonite without continuous pressure. Controlled injec-
tion refers to the use of smaller volumes of lubrication throughout
J. Pipeline Syst. Eng. Pract.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Militar Nueva Granada on 02/06/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 3. Automatic lubrication system (image courtesy of Herrenknecht AG)
tunneling operations, often from only a single lubrication port that
serves to keep jacking forces within a lower range. The second type
of injection is mass application, which uses a large amount of ben-
tonite. Mass application of lubrication refers to implementation
when jacking forces are allowed to increase without the use of lu-
brication and then lubrication is applied in large volumes along the
pipe string throughout areas that had previously been tunneled.
During mass application lubrication, bentonite is pumped from
many ports fed from the same pump simultaneously with the same
pressure and the volumes of lubrication pumped often far exceed-
ing the volume of the annular space. The third method is automatic
bentonite lubrication, which keeps the pressure of injected benton-
ite constant without considering the amount of bentonite (Fig. 3).
The automatic bentonite injection system is fully programmable
to allow the operator to inject bentonite of a predetermined amount
into all or specific areas of the void without the need for a human to
enter the tunnel. A programmable logic controller (PLC) unit is
connected to a number of injection stations in the tunnel bentonite
line; the injection stations are normally installed at 15-m intervals.
Each injection station consists of a control box and a triple spool
electropneumatically operated valve block assembly. The injection
stations are numbered and assigned a unique address code, which
means each station must be installed in the pipeline in the correct
sequence. Three bentonite lines from the injection station distribute
bentonite to the injection ports as in any conventional or manual
pipe jacking lubrication system (Herrenknecht AG, Germany).
The use of automatic lubrication systems from the very begin-
ning of the jacking operation has been reported to create remark-
ably small jacking forces, as indicated in Table 1. However, the
© ASCE 04016016-3
J. Pipeline Syst. Eng. Pract., 2017, 8(2): 04016016
cases given in Table 1 are all for cohesive soils. Field observations
made on granular soils are given in Table 2. From Table 2, it can be
seen that in projects where a mass lubrication technique is imple-
mented, the coefficient of friction also decreases to 10% of the fric-
tion coefficient relative to the case where there is no bentonite
injection. However, it is not clear if the low jacking forces result
from (1) the early introduction of lubrication, (2) the automatic lu-
brication system, or (c) from a lubricant composition of superior
quality (Staheli 2006). Based on past studies (Staheli 2006) on lu-
brication and from the observations and measurements on jacking
forces at the jobsite applications, a 90% reduction in the coefficient
of friction was obtained with the application of mass bentonite
slurry injection, which means application of large volumes of ben-
tonite slurry during microtunneling. This means that for efficient
lubrication, it is recommended to make a bentonite slurry injection
wherever possible (Staheli 2006).
The main aim of this study is to find out the main reason for the
decrease in the coefficient of friction and to improve both the
knowledge of the mechanism of lubrication at the pipe–soil inter-
face and overcut stability in pipe jacking in order to upgrade jack-
ing distance by ensuring that lubricants are properly and effectively
used. In other words, an optimization of bentonite injection is
sought.
A new test setup was devised to measure the coefficient of fric-
tion between sand and a concrete pipe. Here, the concrete pipe was
pulled out from a sand sample. The test was repeated with and with-
out bentonite slurry around the concrete pipe sample and the re-
searchers tried to simulate the bentonite slurry injection methods
that are commonly used in practice for lubrication. In order to
J. Pipeline Syst. Eng. Pract.
 Table 1. Effects of Automatic Lubrication (Reprinted from Borghi 2006, with Permission)
Pipe OD/
excavation Lubrication Unit jacking
Reference/project Ground conditions diameter Depth to axis (m) system Lubrication force (kN=m)
Alexanderson (2001) Medium hard 3.04 12–14 Automatic, 3 Water 19–48
Vibhavadi, Bangkok marine, clay 3.20 ports, every 15 m Bentonite 19–29
Polymer 4.8
Broomfield (2004) Soft Bangkok clay 1.625 Approximately 5 Automatic, 3 Bentonite 2.0–3.7
Minburi water pipeline, Bangkok, N/A ports, every 18 m
Thailand
Milligan and Marshall (1998) Soft to very soft 1.5 5.5–6.0 Second half of None 25
Thurrock sewer system, United Silty/peaty clay N/A Drive only Bentonite 14
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Militar Nueva Granada on 02/06/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Kingdom
Milligan and Marshall (1998) Unweathered highly 1.8 m 8.5 After 20 m drive, None 12.7
Leytonstone sewer system, United plastic firm to stiff, but only on three Bentonite
Kingdom London clay occasions
Milligan and Marshall (1998) Stiff glacial till 1.8 7 N/A None 48
Scham sewer system, United (or clay) Bentonite 15
Kingdom
Norris (1992) Stiff 2.27 11–21 None None 54.4
overconsolidated
Note: OD = out diameter.

Table 2. Summary of Lubricated Segments and Interface Friction Coefficients (Reprinted from Staheli 2006, with Permission)
Interface friction
Project Ground conditions Segment (m) Description Type of lubrication coefficient
South Lake Tahoe highway 50 crossing (Istanbul, Turkey) Dense sand 0–45 Nonlubricated None 0.6
45–74 Lubricated Mass application 0.06
Eastside interceptor Houser Way (Istanbul, Turkey) Silty sand 0–37 Nonlubricated None 0.053
37–168 Lubricated Mass application 0.05
Snohomish River crossing 2002 (Istanbul, Turkey) Sand with gravel 15–33 Lubricated Controlled 0.5
33–247 Lubricated Mass application 0.05
Lowell Snohomish River road–BNRR (Istanbul, Turkey) Silty sand 0–37 Lubricated Controlled 0.2
37–73 Lubricated Mass application 0.02
Note: BNRR = burlington northern railroad.

validate the experimental results, the jacking forces and interface
friction values of three real cases were recorded in the field (Namli
and Guler 2011). The interface coefficient of friction results which
were obtained from both laboratory tests and field jacking data
were evaluated together.
Laboratory Test Setup of Sand–Concrete Interface
Friction Test
A laboratory test setup was prepared to represent the friction
between sand and a concrete sample (pipe). To measure friction
force between sand and concrete, a plexiglass cell of 32 cm height
and 23 cm diameter was filled with Sile sand to a height of 10 cm
(approximately 7.5 kg sand). Then a cylindrical concrete sample
representing a jacking pipe of 20 cm height and 2 cm diameter
was put on the sand vertically in a plastic tube that has a 2.1-cm
inner and 2.2-cm outer diameter. The void around the plastic tube
was then filled with 15 kg of the same Sile sand [Figs. 4(a and b)].
The test cell was subjected to vibration for 1 min and the relative
density of the sand was measured as 89% [ASTM D4253
(ASTM 2010)].
The concrete sample (pipe) was held straight in place after
vibration and pulling out of the plastic tube manually. To prevent
soil collapse when pulling out the plastic tube and to fill the ben-
tonite slurry between the concrete sample and the borehole homo-
genously, the bentonite level was kept higher than the sand level
when pulling the plastic tube. The sand used in the lab tests
was dry sand. The plastic tube was pulled out before the pullout
test for Test 1, to ensure that pipe came in contact with sand.
In the first test (Test 1), friction without bentonite was measured.
For this purpose, the plexiglass cell was filled with Sile sand. Then
the cylindrical concrete sample representing the jacking pipe was
put on the sand vertically in the plastic tube. The void around
the plastic tube was then filled with 15 kg of the same Sile sand
[Figs. 4(a and b)]. The test cell was subjected to vibration for 1 min.
After pulling off the plastic tube, the concrete sample was pulled
from the sand with 50 mm=min velocity to represent the actual job-
site mean progress velocity (Namli 2011).
To simulate the different injection techniques used in practice,
slight modifications were made in the described model construction
procedure. The plexiglass cell was filled with Sile sand. Then the
cylindrical concrete sample representing the jacking pipe was
put on the sand vertically in the plastic tube. The void around
the plastic tube was then filled with 15 kg of the same Sile sand
[Figs. 4(a and b)]. The test cell was subjected to vibration for 1 min
as in Test 1. In order to allow the facilitation of the bentonite lu-
bricant, the space between the 2.1-cm-diameter plastic tube and the
cylindrical concrete sample representing the jacking pipe was than
filled with bentonite in Tests 2 and 3.
In Test 2, before the pullout operation of concrete sample
started, the tube was pulled off and the sand and bentonite were
allowed to come into contact. This condition was assumed to re-
present the field application named as controlled lubrication.

© ASCE 04016016-4 J. Pipeline Syst. Eng. Pract.

J. Pipeline Syst. Eng. Pract., 2017, 8(2): 04016016

 Table 3. Rheological Parameters of Resadiye Bentonite (Reprinted from
Namli 2011, with Permission)
Property Value
Type of bentonite Sodium bentonite
Cation exchange capacity 70 mg=100 g
pH 9.9
Moisture 10%
Apparent fan viscosity (600 rpm) 54 cP
Plastic viscosity (600–300 rpm) 4 cP
Filtration volume 14 mL
Swelling volume (for 2 g bentonite after 24 h) 29 mL
Unit weight of bentonite slurry (60 g bentonite in 11.4 kN=m3
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Militar Nueva Granada on 02/06/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

1 L of water)
Note: cP = centipoise; rpm = round per minute.

Table 4. Properties of Sile Sea Sand (Reprinted from Namli 2011, with
Permission)
Property Value
Unit weight γ ¼ 16.7 (kN=m3 )
Uniformity coefficient Cu ¼ 2
Effective grain size D10 ¼ 0.2 mm
Coefficient of curvature Cc ¼ 1.13

(a)

(b)

Fig. 4. Sand–concrete interface friction force measurement test setup:

(a) before pulling; (b) during pulling

Fig. 5. Grain-size diagram of Sile sea sand

In Test 3, the sample preparation was the same. The level of

bentonite was kept 5 cm higher than the surface of sand. During
the pulling of the tube, bentonite was fed continuously to ensure
that the level of bentonite remained at least 5 cm over the surface
of sand to represent fully pressurized injection application. This
procedure was considered to simulate the automatic lubrication sys-
tem used in practice. Also, to represent mass application, Test 3 was
repeated with bentonite heights of 10 and 20 cm instead of 5 cm
bentonite height over the surface of the sample.
To be sure of the repeatability of the tests, each test was repeated
at least three times.
The rheological parameters of bentonite used during the tests are
summarized in Table 3. Some of the technical properties of Sile
sand are given in Table 4 and its grain-size diagram is given
in Fig. 5.
Fig. 6. Optical microscope photograph of concrete surface after Test 1
The optical microscope photographs of the surface of concrete
(image by Mucahit Namli)
sample after the pullout test are given for each test in Figs. 6–8.

© ASCE 04016016-5 J. Pipeline Syst. Eng. Pract.

J. Pipeline Syst. Eng. Pract., 2017, 8(2): 04016016

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Militar Nueva Granada on 02/06/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 9. Dense sand and concrete interface friction force without

bentonite (Test 1)
Fig. 7. Optical microscope photograph of concrete pipe–bentonite
interface after Test 2 (image by Mucahit Namli)

Fig. 10. Concrete is submerged into bentonite before the pullout test
(Test 2)

Fig. 8. The optical microscope photograph of concrete–bentonite inter-

face after Test 3 (image by Mucahit Namli)

Experimental Results and Discussions

The results of the tests are presented in the form of force versus
displacement graphics. The results obtained from Tests 1, 2, and
3, which were repeated three times, are presented as Tests 1.1,
1.2, and 1.3 in Fig. 9, Tests 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3 in Fig. 10, and Tests
3.1, 3.2, and 3.3 in Fig. 11 Also, to make comparison, selected
results of Tests 1–3 are presented in Fig. 12 together.
From the measured load values, the interface friction between
the concrete pipe and sand (μint ) can be calculated. In these calcu- Fig. 11. Fully pressurized injection application (Test 3)
lations, the peak load value was used. The method of calculation of
μint from Figs. 9–11 is summarized as
• W = weight of concrete pipe sample = 2.9 N;
• γ sand = total unit weight of sand sample = 17.2 kN=m3 ; • τ = shear stress at midheight of concrete pipe sample;
• Øsand = angle of internal friction of sand sample = 36°; • μint = coefficient of friction;
• K 0 = coefficient of lateral earth pressure at rest = 1-sin • σ = γ · ðLc =2Þ · K o ;
Ø ¼ 0.41; • τ ¼ ðFTensile − WÞ=ðLc · π · Dc Þ; and
• Dc = diameter of concrete pipe sample = 2 cm; • μint = τ =σ.
• Lc = length of concrete pipe sample = 20 cm; As can be seen from Figs. 9–11, the maximum forces (FTensile )
• σ = normal stress at midheight of concrete pipe sample; were measured as 7, 5, and 3.5 N. Therefore, the corresponding

© ASCE 04016016-6 J. Pipeline Syst. Eng. Pract.

J. Pipeline Syst. Eng. Pract., 2017, 8(2): 04016016

 Cases 1 and 2, and from the Tuzla River Sewage Collection Project,
named Case 3.

Jacking Forces between Shafts 5 and 6 of Goksu River

Sewage Collection Project (Case 1)
Between Shafts 5 and 6, the average depth of cover was 3 m. No
bentonite was used for lubrication and the 63-m-long drive was fin-
ished at about 4,000 kN of total jacking forces (Fig. 13), and the
interface coefficient of friction μint was estimated to be 0.50.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Militar Nueva Granada on 02/06/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Jacking Forces between Shafts 6 and 8 of the Goksu

Fig. 12. Comparison of laboratory tests (Tests 1–3)
coefficient of friction values (μint ), were estimated as 0.46
(δ ¼ 24.7°), 0.24 (δ ¼ 13.5° ), and 0.06 (δ ¼ 3.4°) for Tests 1, 2,
and 3, respectively. Each test was repeated three times to see
whether they were reproducible. Individual measurements for
Test 1 gave friction coefficient values of μint ¼ 0.5, 0.44, and
0.46. For Test 2, the individual values were μint ¼ 0.28, 0.22,
and 0.24. For Test 3, the values were μint ¼ 0.07, 0.08, and 0.06.
In order to simulate mass application, Test 3 was repeated with
bentonite heights of 10 and 20 cm instead of 5-cm bentonite height
River Sewage Collection Project (Case 2)
In the second drive of the Goksu River Sewage Collection Project
between Shafts 6 and 8, the first 22 m were jacked without any
bentonite injection and bentonite injection started to be applied
after this point until the end of the drive (Fig. 14). The coefficient
of friction measured before bentonite injection was μint ¼ 0.5 and
this was reduced to μint ¼ 0.25 after bentonite injection. As a result,
after bentonite injection, the 55-m-long drive was finished at about
2,000 kN of total jacking forces.
4500
4000
3500
Jacking Force ( kN )

over the surface of the sample. However, these changes did not af- 3000
fect the results meaningfully, as the maximum forces (FTensile ) were 2500
measured as 3.4 and 3.38 N and the friction coefficient values were
2000
determined as μint ¼ 0.056 and 0.054.
From the optical microscope photographs of the surface of 1500
concrete sample after the pullout test, it was observed that after 1000
Test 2, the surface was partially covered with bentonite and parti- 500
ally with sand (Fig. 7), but after Test 3, it was observed that the
whole surface was covered with bentonite and even some sand par- 0
0.20

10.20

20.20

30.20

40.20

50.20

60.20
ticles were surrounded by bentonite (Fig. 8).

Jacking Distance (m)

Verification by Field Measurements
Fig. 13. Goksu River sewage collector project pipe jacking data
Laboratory test results were compared with field measurements ob- between Shafts 5 and 6
tained from the Goksu River Sewage Collection Project (Istanbul,
Turkey) and Tuzla River Sewage Collection Project (Istanbul,
Turkey) (Namli and Guler 2011) in order to verify the validity of
the lab tests. Brief information of these projects are given here. 2500
The Goksu River Sewage Collection Project is a wastewater col-
lecting project aiming to collect and transfer sewage to the Kucuksu
2000
Wastewater Treatment Plant. The project was carried out alongside
Jacking Force ( kN )

the Istanbul Bosphorus in very dense sand which has standart pen-
etration test (spt) values N > 50. The depth of cover was between 1500
3–4 m, and 1,400-mm inner diameter concrete pipes were used in
this project. 1000
The aim of Tuzla River Sewage Collection Project was to collect
the sewage from the Tuzla River and transfer it to the Tuzla Waste- 500
water Treatment Plant. The length of the project was 5,000 m, and
1,400-mm inner diameter concrete pipes were used in this project.
The duration of the project was planned as 36 months in the con- 0
0.20

10.20

20.20

30.20

40.20

50.20

tract but it was finished in 18 months after 6 months for machine

production and delivery. The soil condition was very dense sand,
which has spt values N > 50, and the depth of cover was between Jacking Distance (m)
4.5–15 m.
Fig. 14. Goksu River sewage collector project pipe jacking data
The effect of bentonite injection was measured during two dif-
between Shafts 6 and 8
ferent pushes of the Goksu River Sewage Collection Project, named

© ASCE 04016016-7 J. Pipeline Syst. Eng. Pract.

J. Pipeline Syst. Eng. Pract., 2017, 8(2): 04016016

 2000
1800
Jacking Force ( kN)
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0 and concrete pipe.
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Jacking Distance (m)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Militar Nueva Granada on 02/06/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 15. Tuzla River sewage collector project pipe jacking data be-
tween Shafts 7 and 8
Jacking Forces between Shafts 7 and 8 in Tuzla River
Sewage Collection Project (Case 3)
The effect of in time bentonite injection (such as automatic injection)
was used in the Tuzla Project between Shafts 7 and 8. Bentonite
injection application started from the beginning and was applied un-
til the end of the drive. The average depth of cover was 5 m and the
soil was very dense sand. Average daily progress was 20 m. A total of
4 t of bentonite was used for a distance of 122 m. The interface
coefficient of friction μint was measured as 0.05 (Fig. 15).
Comparison of Field Measurements with
Laboratory Tests
The coefficient of friction results obtained from laboratory tests and
real-case field measurements are compared in this section. In Test
1, where no bentonite lubrication was applied, the coefficient of
friction μint was measured as 0.46. The real-case field measurement
where no bentonite lubrication was used either is Case 1, and the
coefficient of friction μint measured here was 0.50. As can be seen,
the simple laboratory model is able to predict the friction angle
measured from a real case very well.
For the case of bentonite injection without constant pressure,
which was simulated in Test 2, the coefficient of friction was mea-
sured as 0.24. This result fits very well with the field measurement
corresponding to the bentonite application, namely Case 2, where
the final coefficient of friction was measured as 0.25. During the
measurement of Case 2, initially no bentonite lubrication was used
and the measured interface coefficient of friction was 0.5. This
value is also highly congruent with the result of Test 1. In field
measurements of Case 2, after the bentonite injection, the interface
coefficient of friction μint , decreased from 0.5 to 0.25.
In Case 2, the injection was not applied under a constant pressure,
i.e., a controlled bentonite injection procedure was used. After the
application of bentonite injection, the coefficient of friction forces
and jacking forces fell to half of the value compared to the condition
where no bentonite injection was applied. As stated earlier, this
value is in good agreement with the result obtained from Test 2.
For the case of bentonite injection under constant pressure, the co-
efficient of friction in Test 3 was measured as μint ¼ 0.06 and the
coefficient of friction measured in the field for Case 3 was μint ¼ 0.05.
This shows that when continuous bentonite injection is applied
under constant pressure as in Test 3, the interface coefficient of
friction decreases from 0.46 to 0.06, which means that no contact
exists between the sand and concrete; therefore, the interface
friction is purely controlled by bentonite and the pipe. The most
important result that can be drawn from Test 3 is that in order
© ASCE
J. Pipeline Syst. Eng. Pract., 2017, 8(2): 04016016
to achieve sufficient lubrication, the pressure in the lubricating
bentonite does not need to be high. Even minimal pressure in
the bentonite is sufficient to provide a full lubrication effect. This
fact was also observed in the model test result, where doubling the
minimal pressure did not have a major effect. Similar observations
can be made for field measurements where the coefficient of
friction decreased from 0.5 to 0.05. Hence, by applying steady ben-
tonite injection, the friction coefficient can be reduced to approx-
imately 10% of the coefficient of interface friction between soil
90 100 110 120
As mentioned in the introduction, Staheli (2006) states that
based on past studies on lubrication and from the observations
and measurements on jacking forces at jobsite applications, a 90%
reduction in the coefficient of friction was obtained as the applica-
tion of mass bentonite slurry injection, which means application of
large volumes of bentonite slurry during microtunneling. However
in this study, based on results obtained from the evaluation of lab-
oratory tests and field measurement data, it can be concluded that
with efficient lubrication such that approximately a 90% reduction
in the interface coefficient of friction can be achieved, applying
bentonite with minimal injection pressure is enough.
Conclusions
A simple laboratory test setup was used to determine the interface
friction between a jacked pipe and soil. First, the interface friction
between sand and a concrete pipe simulating the jacked pipe was
tested. Since in practice the interface friction is reduced by benton-
ite injection, tests were also conducted where bentonite was used
on the interface. To simulate the two most common bentonite in-
jection methods in the industry, namely controlled injection and
automatic lubrication, two different procedures were used in the
laboratory tests.
To verify that the simple device could thoroughly simulate the
friction condition in the field, the results were compared with mea-
surements obtained on similar types of soils in real projects. For
this purpose, three different sets of field measurement data were
compared with the laboratory measurements. As a result of the
comparison, it was shown that the very simple model test was able
to successfully simulate the friction in the real case.
When controlled bentonite was injected without constant injec-
tion pressure, the interface coefficient of friction μint decreased to
half of the value when compared to the case of no bentonite appli-
cation. When bentonite was applied under constant pressure, the
interface friction coefficient decreased to approximately 10% of
the coefficient of interface friction between soil and concrete pipe.
These values are in agreement with previous studies.
The most important conclusion of this study is that in order to
obtain the benefit of bentonite application under constant pressure,
the injection pressure does not need to be high and can be as small
as possible. This is because it is not the amount of pressure that
reduces the friction to only 10% of the pipe–soil friction, but rather
the mere presence of the pressure that ensures that the interface is
constituted purely of bentonite.
References
Alexanderson, M. (2001). “Construction of a Cable Tunnel ID 2.6 Vibhavadi.”
Proc., 5th Int. Symp. on Microtunneling, Messe Munchen International,
Munich, Germany, 139–147.
ASTM. (2010). “Standard test methods for maximum index density and
unit weight of soils using a vibratory table.” ASTM D4253, West
Conshohocken, PA.
04016016-8 J. Pipeline Syst. Eng. Pract.
 Borghi, F. X. (2006). “Soil conditioning for pipe-jacking and tunneling.”
Ph.D. thesis, Univ. of Cambridge, Cambridge, U.K.
Broomfield, J. (2004). “Long distance pipe jacking in Asia.” Tunnels
Tunnelling Int., 36(7), 40–42.
Kishida, H., and Uesugi, M. (1987). “Tests of the interface between sand
and steel in the simple shear apparatus.” Géotechnique, 37(1), 45–52.
Kishida, H., and Uesugi, M. (1990). “Friction between dry sand and
concrete under monotonic and repeated loading.” Soil Found., 30(1),
115–128.
Marshall, M. (1998). “Jacking loads and ground movements.” Ph.D. thesis,
Univ. of Oxford, Oxford, U.K.
Milligan, G. W. E., and Marshall, M. A. (1998). “Geotechnical aspects of
pipe-jacked tunneling.” Proc., Int. Conf. on Urban Ground Engineer-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Militar Nueva Granada on 02/06/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
ing, ICE, London.
© ASCE 04016016-9
J. Pipeline Syst. Eng. Pract., 2017, 8(2): 04016016
Namli, M. (2011). “Effect of bentonite slurry injection on pipe jacking
forces.” Ph.D. thesis, Boğaziçi Univ., Istanbul, Turkey.
Namli, M., and Guler, E. (2011). “Pipe jacking method as an alternative
method of trenchless technology and some applications in Istanbul.”
Int. No-Dig 2011 29th Int. Conf. and Exhibition, Iternational Society
of Trenchless Technology (ISTT), London.
Norris, P. (1992). “The behavior of jacked concrete pipes during site in-
stallation.” Ph.D. thesis, Univ. of Oxford, Oxford, U.K.
Pellet, B. A. L., and Kastner, R. (2002). “Experimental and analytical study
of friction forces during microtunnelling operations.” Tunnelling
Underground Space Technol., 17(1), 83–97.
Staheli, K. (2006). “Jacking force prediction: An interface friction approach
based on pipe surface roughness.” Ph.D. thesis, Georgia Institute of
Technology, Atlanta.
J. Pipeline Syst. Eng. Pract.