Current design procedures for steel-lined pressure tunnels

A. N r c o ~ o ~ o u ~ o s
85 St. CoAeritie St. W . . Mot~trc'trl,QLIC.,Cnt~nrlnH2X 3P4
ABBDL-TECSULT Cot~.sl~lmtzts.
Rcceivcd February 25, I982
Revised manuscript acceptcd Novcmbcr 2. 1982

A systematic procedure for the design of steel liners for penstock tunncls is prcsentcd in this article. Useful hints and other
relevant information are also provided to help in decision-making. Special attention has bcen paid to factors of safcty and
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by San Diego (UCSD) on 12/28/14

allowable stress, areas where a certain amount of controvcrsy exists.

The application of the procedure is facilitated by the development of computerized design graphs. Thcse graphs are presented
using a common notation and an appropriate scale, which makes it possible to evaluatc the diffcrent theories by direct
comparison. Finally, a detailed design example is given for a better understanding of the proposed procedure.
Keywords: hydroelectric structures, structural steel, linings, tunnels, state-of-the-art review.

Une procedure systimatique, pour la conception des blindages en acier des galcries de conduites forcCes est presentee dans
cet article; y sont prCscntCes des informations et indications utiles la prise de decision. Une attention particuli6rc a etC apportCe
aux facteurs de stcurit6 et aux contraintes permises, ces deux points soulevant certaines controvcrscs.
L'application de la procedure est facilitee par le dCveloppement de graphiqucs dc conception a I'aide de l'ordinateur. Ces
graphiqucs sont prCsentCs avec une notation communc et a une &chelle appropriee permettant, par cornparaison dirccte,
1'Cvaluation des diffkrentes theories. Enfin, un example de conception detaillCc aide a unc meillcure cornprkhension de la
procedure proposie.
Mots-clCs: structures hydroelectriques, acier structural, revktements du tunnel, tunnels, compte rendu dc la recherche de
pointe.
For personal use only.

Can. 1. Civ. Eng. 10, 150-161 (1983)

1. Introduction
In the design of steel liners for penstock tunnels a
variety of information, theories, and procedures have to
be collected, reviewed, and evaluated.
In order to ease this rather complex task, design
information is presented here with the aim of con-
tributing to a systematic working procedure. This pro-
cedure is based on simplifications by means of gener-
alized assumptions and computerized design aids.
For the development of this topic, current theories for
the structural analysis and design of steel liners for
various critical loading conditions are reviewed and
the formulae and notation are elaborated further as
required.
The presentation in the form of graphs of the final
conclusions reached using the various theories reveals
the relative importance of the parameters involved and
their range of application. Comparison among graphs
representing similar theories demonstrates the degree to
which conservative assumptions have been incorpo-
rated in each theoretical model.
2. Design criteria
2.1 Material properties
In order to choose the appropriate grade of steel to be
used in the construction of liners, a variety of physical
and chemical properties of the plate steels available
have to b e considered. A large number of steels, having
yield stresses ranging between 200 and 700 MPa, are
available as plates in structural or pressure vessel qual-
ity. Generally, more mechanical tests and additional
steps during manufacture are required for improved
steel plate quality. The problem of brittle fracture must
also be considered for structures in northern climates.
Several melting and heat treatment processes can lower
the ductility transition temperature by reducing the
grain size of the steel. These techniques can also
improve notch toughness and formability. A low carbon
content gives increased corrosion resistance, good
welding characteristics, and high ductility. Good weld-
ability can be evaluated on the basis of a carbon equiv-
alent number less than 0.46.
Although some of the factors mentioned above
can be considered as positive attributes when selecting
the strength grade of steel to be used, the material prices
are usually a major factor in the choice. A convenient
parameter for the assessment of the relative cost
involved is the yield-stress-to-price ratio for the various
grades of steel. Only steel grades available in the
required range of plate thicknesses should be compared.
A similar parameter usually given by steel producers is
the relative cost index, expressing the net mill price
divided by the maximum allowable stress. The allow-
able stress in this case is specified according to the
standard pertinent to the particular application. When
the choice has been narrowed down to two or three
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by San Diego (UCSD) on 12/28/14
For personal use only.
H s = 102 P uf = Fy E =200000MPa
FIG. 1 . Buckling strength of steel liner subjected to external pressure (Arnstutz theory).
types of steel, a final cost comparison should include
production, testing, welding, and manipulation.
Another item of equal importance in the design of
steel liners for pressure tunnels is the quality of the
rock. The economical design of the liner depends upon
a reliable determination of the properties of the sur-
rounding rock and its state of stress. Useful information
about this can be obtained from a geological profile
indicating the type and quality of rock, the fissured and
fragmented zones, and the stratification around the
lined tunnel. Some of the physical properties of the rock
that need to be determined are the static modulus of
elasticity for loads acting perpendicular or parallel to
the stratification, Pcisson's ratio, the specific density,
the lateral pressure coefficent (ratio of the horizontal to
vertical stresses in the rock before tunnel excavation),
u = 0.25
and the compressive strength of the fractured rock.
Finally, the embedding concrete must have the com-
pressive (bearing) strength required to safely transfer a
portion of the internal pressure to the rock.
2.2 Loacis
Usually two critical loadings are used as a basis for
the design of the steel liners: the maximum external and
the maximum internal pressure. The maximum external
pressure is defined as the hydrostatic head of ground-
water that is equal to the hydraulic seepage gradient,
with an allowance for drainage if provided. It is often
taken as equal to the average rock cover above the axis
of the liner for liners of small length, but no more than
the maximum water level of the reservoir. The internal
pressure, on the other hand, is defined as the sum of the
 152 CAN J . CIV. ENG. VOL. 10. 1983
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by San Diego (UCSD) on 12/28/14
For personal use only.
H s = 102 P cf = Fy
FIG.2. Buckling strength of steel liner subjected to cxternal pressure (Jacobsen thcory).
maximum hydrostatic pressure plus the dynamic over-
pressure due to water hammer. The maximum external
pressure is assumed to occur when the penstock is emp-
ty and the maximum internal pressure during operation.
Another external pressure is the grouting pressure.
If it is higher than the anticipated external water pres-
sure, the steel liner should be designed for this load as
well. A grouting pressure ( P , ) equal to or lower than
twice the internal pressure transmitted to the rock is
usually assumed. If a higher pressure is to be used, the
capacity of the rock to sustain this pressure without
becoming loose has to be checked. Usually a value
lower than half of the vertical rock pressure is consid-
ered safe (Mosonyi 1965):These two conditions can be
expressed as follows:
P i 5 2(P, - P,) P, 5 P,,/2
E = 200000 MPa v = 0.30
sin a E0= -
E
2
sin b I - v
where P, is the internal water pressure, P , is the part of
the internal pressure taken by the liner, and PI, is the
vertical rock pressure.
2.3 Safety factors and allowable stresses
The safety of penstock liners depends upon many
factors such as the construction details, inspection
methods for quality control, supervision, and the uncer-
tainties is design considerations and analytical proce-
dures. In general, a rational definition of the safety fac-
tor can be expressed in terms of the ratio of the
computed strength to the corresponding computed
load. Safety factors should be specified such that the
designed structure or member will have sufficient
strength, stability, and durability. The allowable design
stresses should reflect the above safety concerns.
For the design of penstock liners, various loading
conditions are considered and the corresponding alIow-
 NICOLOPOULOS
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by San Diego (UCSD) on 12/28/14
For personal use only.
FIG.3. Buckling strength according to Jacobsen's theory, using logarithmic scale.
able stresses are specified for each case. The basic
loading conditions mentioned in various standards are
the normal, the intermittent, the emergency, and the
exceptional or catastrophic, each standard defining
them differently. However, regular design practices for
liners of penstock tunnels in many projects are based on
the normal condition. Other loading conditions should
be examined too in special cases.
For the design of liners under maximum internal
pressure, the author considers the most acceptable value
for the allowable stress to be 60% of yield point, as
suggested by Jacobsen (1977), or 38% of the minimum
tensile strength, whichever is less. This value should be
based on the choice of first-class material, especially
with respect to the toughness characteristics (notch
impact test), and a high standard of welding (100%
weld joint efficiency). Higher values (up to 80% of
yield point or 50% of the minimum tensile strength,
whichever is less), have been suggested by others
(Corns 1971) for penstocks encased in concrete tunnel
linings.
If the internal pressure becomes the governing factor
for estimating the thickness of the steel shell and the
presence of the rock allows a reduction of this thick-
ness, then the latter should be sufficient to withstand
hoop stresses equal to the yield stress of steel in the
absence of the rock.
The downstream portion of the liner, in the immedi-
153
ate vicinity of the powerhouse, is usually free (i.e., not
embedded), to allow installation of various instruments
and to permit free movement due to temperature, if an
expansion joint is provided, between the liner and the
scroll case. Since the rock in this area is too weak from
blasting to take any load, the liner in this zone has to be
designed according to criteria for exposed penstocks. In
this case, the suggested value of allowable stress is 60%
of yield point or 38% of the minimum tensile strength,
whichever is less (Gordon 1978); this is the same allow-
able stress as the one considered for liners surrounded
by sound rock.
Steel liners are usually designed against buckling due
to external pressure, using a load factor from 1.3 to 1.5,
when no initial gap between the liner and the concrete
embedment is considered (Jacobsen 1974). The load
factor may be reduced when considering an initial gap.
Where a drainage arrangement is provided around the
liner, the load factor may be further reduced to 1.0. By
considering the grouting pressure as an exceptional
loading condition, a load factor of 2 for critical buckling
may be used according to the Italian code (Eberhardt
1966). The grouting may be chosen as equal to
or less than the external hydrostatic pressure multiplied
by the ratio of the load factors of the above two loading
cases (i.e., P, i PC,x 1.512); in this way, the design
of the steel liner will be governed by the hydrostatic
pressure.
 CAN. J. CIV. ENG. VOL. 10. 1983
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by San Diego (UCSD) on 12/28/14
For personal use only.
FIG.4. Buckling strength considering shape defects (Montel's formula).
3. Method of analysis and design procedure
3.1 General requirements
The length of the steel liner at the downstream end of
an unlined penstock tunnel is calculated as the sum of
a free portion and a fixed portion, and it may be roughly
estimated in an average situation as 3-4 diameters of
the conduit cross-section. The minimum length of the
free portion may be considered equal to the width of
the rock block between adjacent parallel penstocks,
assuming that the rock in the region of the tunnel exit
is fissured and thus not capable of carrying any substan-
tial load. The length of the fixed portion is calculated
assuming that the total longitudinal force is transmitted
from the liner to the rock by the shear-friction resistance
of the concrete-rock interface. The shear-friction
resistance can conservatively be assumed equal to the
shear capacity of plain concrete, with a safety factor of
1.5. The total longitudinal force is due to the water
pressure on the converging part of the liner and the
valve, and also to the effects of temperature and
Poisson's ratio, when an expansion joint is not pro-
vided. For underground power plants, the length of the
liner must also be sufficient to ensure that water
escaping from the unlined portion of the penstock does
not reach the powerhouse.
The minimum thickness of the concrete embed-
ment is determined by the working space required for
installing and, possibly, for welding the segments of the
liner in place. This concrete embedment also has to be
thick enough to resist in bearing and to transfer by
shear-friction the longitudinal forces from the liner to
the rock. For this reason, the liner is usually equipped
with anchor rings at its upstream end. It is preferable for
the concrete embedment to be prestressed, by grouting
between the rock and the concrete, with a pressure
sufficient to eliminate the possibility of gaps (void
grouting and concrete-rock contact grouting).
3.2 Radial gap between steel and concrete
The width of the gap depends on the site condi-
tions as well as the construction schedule and tech-
niques employed. The size of the initial gap, due to
 NICOLOPOULOS
U ( T E M P L A T E DEVIATION1
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by San Diego (UCSD) on 12/28/14
TEMPLATE LENGTH: S = 2 r sin ( 5 0 ° / 2 ) = 0 . 8 4 5 2 r
DEVIATION FROM ROUNDNESS :A, = 2 0 - 2 b = 4u
DIAMETER DEVIATION :A2= 2 a - 2 r = 2 r - 2 b = 2 u
r (sin 25")'+(cos 25"): 1 mentioned, though, that different Poisson's ratios are
For personal use only.
02 b2 rZ
FIG. 5. Measurements of deviation from roundness.
shrinkage of the concrete, and the pressurizing and
depressurizing of the conduit, can be limited by
grouting around the liner (steel-concrete contact
grouting). Furthermore, by using pressure grouting and
thus effectively prestressing the liner, the possibility of
gaps due to elastic or thermal deformations of the liner
and the surrounding media can be eliminated. When
pressure grouting is not undertaken, a gap will result
due to thermal variations that will cause expansion or
contraction of the steel, concrete, and rock in the same
direction. Since the coefficients of thermal expansion of
these materials vary very little, a small gap due to
temperature is not likely to occur permanently. Only a
sudden cooling of the steel liner could temporarily
create a larger gap until the surrounding envelope
reaches the lower temperature.
Such a gap is calculated as:
where W , is the coefficient of thermal expansion or
contraction of steel, AT the temperature differential,
and r the radius of the liner.
3.3 External pressure resistance (buckling strength)
The plate thickness required to resist the maximum
external pressure can be calculated on the basis of the
buckling strength of a cylindrical steel tube. In prin-
155
ciple, buckling theories used to treat this problem are
divided into two categories: the rotary symmetric
theories (e.g., Vaughan 1956); and the asymmetric
theories (e.g., Amscutz 1970). The asymmetric theories
are gaining in popularity today because they are more
conservative and safety has top priority in power-plant
development. An alternative asymmetric theory based
on design practice in Switzerland and Germany has
been presented recently by Jacobsen ( 1974).
For the two main asymmetric theories, of Amstutz
and Jacobsen, computerized design graphs have been
developed by the author and are presented in Figs. I and
2 for gap-to-radius ratios ( g l r ) up to 10 x lo-' and for
prestresses in the liner due to grouting (a,.) divided by
E Oup to -5 x lo-" All the pertinent formulae used
for the development of these graphs are also shown in
the figures. In addition, the graph in Fig. 3 shows the
buckling strength according to Jacobsen's theory using
a logarithmic scale. A comparison of the graphs devel-
oped for steels having different yield strengths shows
that the theory of Jacobsen is generally more conser-
vative, especially for higher water heads. It should be
used by Amstutz and Jacobsen. Using a given steel
yield strength (u~), as well as an assumed ratio of radial
gap to radius of the liner ( g / r ) and a waterhead
H , = 102P (in metres), the ratio r/t can be obtained
from the graphs and the required thickness of the liner
can be calculated.
3.4 Effect of slzape defects on the bi~ckliizgstrength of
the liner
The buckling strength of the liner, having a thickness
calculated by Jacobsen's theory, can be further checked
by Montel's semiempirical formula (Monte1 1960).
This formula includes the effects of both shape defects
and the gap, based on an arc deviation (ovality) corre-
sponding to a radial template (chord gage) of 50".
A design graph based on this formula is presented in
Fig. 4 for a given gap-to-radius ratio ( g l r = 3 x lo-'),
and it gives the allowable template deviation-to-
thickness ratio (lilt) for a given H , and ).It. The tem-
plate deviation thus obtained can also be used for calcu-
lating the allowable deviation from roundness.
By assuming an elliptically deformed shape for the
liner (see Fig. 5), it can be shown that the difference
between the two major axes of the ellipse is approxi-
mately equal to four times the maximum radial devi-
ation between the circle and the ellipse, or 2(a - b )
= 4u. Therefore, the allowable deviation from round-
ness is approximately equal to four times the allowable
template deviation. (Note: the areas of the circle and the
ellipse are equal but the ellipse does not pass through
those points where the 50" radial template intersects the
circle.)
 CAN. J . CIV. ENG. VOL. 10. 1983
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by San Diego (UCSD) on 12/28/14
For personal use only.
FIG.6. Allowable tensilc capacity of stccl lincr subjected to internal pressure (Kruse method)
Comparing the graph based on Montel's formula
with the one based on Jacobsen's theory for the same
gap and zero template deviation, we can see that the
Jacobsen theory gives more conservative values. The
values of Jacobsen's theory correspond to the values
of Montel's formula based on an equivalent tem-
plate deviation-to-thickness ratio of u/r = 0.2-0.3,
with the higher value corresponding to higher strength
steel. This difference increases when an initial gap is
considered.
3.5 Iilternal pressure distributioil and liizer resistnilce
Tiche ( 1974, 1975) presented an in-depth theoretical
study for proportioning the internal pressure between
the steel liner and the rock, assuming that the rock
is able to sustain circumferential tensile stresses.
Vaughan's theory, on the other hand, offers the basis
for a detaiIed design procedure (Vaughan 1956). In his
theory, he proposed separate treatment of the defor-
mation of the concrete embedment and allowed for the
beneficial effect of pressure grouting. Kruse (1970)
presented a procedure based on Vaughan's theory but
with the difference that the radius of the inner boundary
of tension-resisting rock ( R ) is estimated analytically by
superposition of two stress systems: one is due to distri-
bution of the internal pressure transferred to the rock
and the other is the primary stress field in the rock mass.
The analytical formulation of the problem was further
explored by Jacobsen ( 1977) who also treated some of
the practical aspects of the problem.
Computerized design graphs for the procedures of
Kmse and Jacobsen have also been developed by the
author and are presented in Figs. 6 and 7 together with
all the formulae used for their development. Similar
 NICOLOPOULOS
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by San Diego (UCSD) on 12/28/14
For personal use only.
FIG.7 . Allowable tensile capacity of steel liner subjected to internal pressure (Jacobsen method).
graphs have been developed for various steel and rock
properties. The formulae presented by Kruse were mod-
ified slightly to account for Poisson's effect in the steel;
thus E became EOand the formula that gives the stress
distribution in the rock due to the internal water pres-
sure was modified to include that part of the internal
pressure (P,) required to close the gap, i.e., the formula
became
where uI.is the allowable circumferential stress in the
liner and R the outer radius of the fissured rock tube
around the liner.
By making these modifications, a direct comparison
between the graphs, based o n the procedures of Kruse
and Jacobsen, is possible. This comparison shows that
the results of the two procedures are almost identical,
the Kruse method being slightly on the conservative
side. However, this conclusion may be affected by the
assumed properties of concrete, which is treated sepa-
rately in the Kruse method, and by the ratio of the
thickness of the concrete embedment to the radius of the
steel tube. In the graphs different Poisson's ratios for
the rock as well as the waterhead resisted by the liner
alone at the allowable stress limit of 0 . 6 F Y are also
shown. T h e allowable tensile stress of the rock, the
value of which is 0.5 M P a in the given graphs, can be
calculated using the following formula, the practical
values being between 0.0 and 1.0 MPa.
 CAN. J . CIV. ENG. VOL. 10. 1983
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by San Diego (UCSD) on 12/28/14

FIG.8. Proportion of internal pressure taken by steel liner (Jacobsen).

For personal use only.

FIG. 9. Allowable bearing capacity of ernbedd~ngconcrete (Jacobsen).

where v, is Poisson's ratio of the rock, y, is the unit the liner can be obtained for a given waterhead and gap.
weight of the rock, and I1 is the depth of the rock This ratio should be compared with that found from the
overburden. external pressure calculation, and the smallest ratio cor-
From the graphs, the ratio of radius to thickness of responding to the governing pressure should be retained
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by San Diego (UCSD) on 12/28/14
For personal use only.
FIG. 10. Required rock overburden (Jacobsen).
to calculate the maximum required thickness of the
liner.
The proportion of the internal pressure, a, taken by
the steel liner alone can be obtained by using the graph
of Fig. 8. For given values of waterhead and r/t ratio,
the value of a can be estimated by interpolation between
the curves. The a , known otherwise as the load distribu-
tion factor, can also be calculated by using the formula:
The graphs of the radial stresses in the concrete tube
for various rock qualities and concrete compressive
strengths (Fig. 9) show that a waterhead of over 1000 m
can be resisted easily by considering an allowable con-
crete bearing capacity of 0.35FL, and an average-
~ -
strength concrete.
The ability of the rock overburden to share the
internal pressure may be checked by using the graphs of
Fig. 10 which are based on the formula for thick-walled
tubes given by Jacobsen. For a given waterhead and r/t
ratio, h/r can be found by interpolating between the
curves. The critical height, h , obtained by use of the
graphs must be less than the actual height of the rock
overburden.
A corrosion allowance of 1-2 mm should be added
to the late thickness obtained at the end of the
described design procedure.
To conclude the design, the longitudinal stresses
developed in the liner should also be investigated.
An additional series of graphs has been plotted to
study the importance of the effect of the various param-
eters on the internal pressure distribution between
the rock tunnel and the steel liner. The variables studied
were the gap and the modulus of elasticity, allow-
able tensile strength, and Poisson's ratio of rock. By
giving constant values to the gap (g/r = 3 x 10-7, t o
Poisson's ratio, and to one of the remaining variables,
the influences of the other is isolated and can be
presented more clearly. It was found that the various
parameters can be classified in the following order of
increasing importance: Poisson's ratio of rock, gap,
allowable tensile strength of rock, and modulus of elas-
ticity of rock. Therefore, great emphasis should b e
given to a precise estimation of the modulus of elas-
ticity and the allowable tensile strength of rock. Site
measurements are thus justified for any important pro-
ject where the structural requirements of the liner are
critical.
4. Fabrication a n d erection tolerances
Although tolerances generally form part of the spec-
ification, a close relationship exists between the choice
of some of the tolerances and the corresponding design
assumptions. It is therefore the responsibility of the
design engineer to provide the appropriate information
concerning these tolerances.
The tolerance requirements directly related to the
design are the following.
 160 CAN. J . CIV. ENG . VOL. 10. 1983

-The final curvature in the plates should be such List of symbols

that the maximum differences between the profile of the a = Proportion of the internal pressure taken by the
liner, when installed and concreted, and the arc of the steel liner
template should not be more than the template deviation b = Thickness of the concrete tube (m)
calculated. The template should be equal to the chord E = Modulus of elasticity of steel (MPa)
length corresponding to a central angle of 50". E" = Modified modulus of elasticity of steel
-At any point along the liner after concreting, the E, = Modulus of elasticity of rock
difference between the maximum and the minimum E, = Modulus of elasticity of concrete
diameter due to ovality should not exceed four times the F, = Yield strength of steel (MPa)
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by San Diego (UCSD) on 12/28/14

template deviation. F, = Ultimate strength of steel

-The length of any diameter of a deformed section FA = Compressive strength of concrete
of the liner should not be different from the theoretical Fb = Bearing strength of concrete
diameter by more than twice the template deviation. g = Assumed gap between liner and concrete (-g
Of course, if desired, lower tolerances can be speci- would mean prestressing caused by pressure
fied to impose stricter construction requirements; for grouting) (mm)
example, a deviation from roundness equal to twice the H, = Waterhead corresponding to PC,o r P, (m)
template deviation may be considered. H , = Waterhead corresponding to P ,
Hb = Waterhead corresponding to P,,
Acknowledgement Hh = Waterhead corresponding to PI,
The author wishes to express his gratitude for the I? = Outer radius of rock tube or depth from surface
valuable contribution of Mr. Hercule Kyritsis, who to the axis of conduit (m)
made possible the development of the design graphs on N = Lateral pressure coefficient
his computer system HP-9845-B. PC = External pressure at yield point of steel (MPa)
PC, = Critical external pressure at the buckling
For personal use only.

AMSTUTZ,E. 1970. Buckling of pressure-shaft and tunnel strength of the liner

linings. Water Powcr, 22, pp. 391 -399.
CORNS.C. F. 1971. New design criteria for USBR penstocks.
Discussion. ASCE Journal of the Power Division. 97(P01).
pp. 248-250.
EBERHARDT, A. 1966. Pcnstock codes - U.S. and foreign
practice. ASCE Journal of the Power Division, 92(P02),
pp. 137-155.
GORDON.J. L. 1978. Design criteria for exposed hydro
penstocks. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 5,
pp. 340-351.
JACOBSEN, S. 1974. Buckling of circular rings and cylin-
drical tubes under external prcssurc. Water Powcr, 26,
pp. 400-407.
1977. Pressure distribution in stcel-lined rock tunnels
and shafts. Water Power and Dam Construction, 29,
pp. 47-51.
KRUSE, G. H. 1970. Rock properties and steel tunnel
liners. ASCE Journal of the Power Division, 96(P03).
pp. 415-435.
MONTEL,R. 1960. Formule semi-empirique, pour la dCtcr-
mination dc la pression extkrieurc limite d'instabilitk
des conduites mCtalliqucs lisses noyCes dans du bCton.
(In French.) Houille Blanche, 15, pp. 560-568.
MOSONYI.E. 1965. High-heat1 power plants. 2nd ed.
(In English.) Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Budapest.
Hungary, p. 1 146.
TACHE,J. 1974. 1975. Contribution i la thkorie et au calcul
du blindage d'une galerie circulairc. (In French.) Col-
lection of articles published by Julcs Triche in 1948. Bulle-
tin technique Vevey, 34, pp. 206-214.
VAUGHAN, E. W. 1956. Steel linings for pressure shafts in
solid rock. ASCE Journal of the Powcr Division, 82(P02),
pp. 949(I -40).
P = Hydrostatic pressure (internal or external)
P, = Internal pressure shared by steel liner and rock
tube
P, = Part of the internal pressure required to close the
gap
P, = Part of the internal pressure taken by the liner
P, = Internal pressure expressed as a function of a
Pb = Internal pressure corresponding to the required
concrete strength
Ph = Internal pressure corresponding to the required
rock overburden ( h ) , or the vertical rock
pressure
Pi = Grouting pressure (external)
r = Inner radius of the steel liner (m)
R = Outer radius of fissured rock tube (m)
S, = Allowable tensile stress of rock (MPa)
t = Wall thickness of the steel liner
u = Geometrical imperfection of the liner (template
deviation) (mm)
W , = Coefficient of thermal expansion or contraction
of steel
y = Distribution number according to Jacobsen's
method
= Unit weight of rock (kN/m3)
y,
AT = Temperature differential ("C)
= Coefficient for the supporting effect according to
Amstutz's theory
v = Poisson's ratio for steel
v, = Poisson's ratio for rock
cr" = Modified extreme fibre stress reaching the yield
 point (MPa)
a, = Normal stress (circumferential) in the steel liner
u, = Tensile stress required to close the gap
(-a, = possible prestress)
u r = Allowable normal stress (circumferential) in the
steel liner
Appendix - design example
General data
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by San Diego (UCSD) on 12/28/14
r = 3.00 m, b = 0.75 m, h = 125 m, PC, (exter-
nal pressure) = 2.0 MPa, P, (internal pressure) =
4.5 MPa
Steel properties
E = 200 x lo3 MPa, v = 0.30, F, = 260 MPa, F,
= 410 MPa ( a , = 0.60Fy = 0.38FU= 156 MPa)
Rock properties
E, = 10 x 10' MPa, v, = 0.20, y, = 2.6 Mg/m3
x 9.807 m/s2 = 25.50 k ~ / m N~ ,= 0.6
Concrete properties
Fi = 20 MPa, E, = 5000 = 22 X 10' MPa
Corrosion allowatzce
1.5 mm
For personal use only.
1. Radial gap bemeen steel liner and concrete
W, = 11.7 x I O - ~ / " C ,AT = 25"C, g = W,ATr
= 11.7 X x 25(3 x 10') = 0.878 mm, g/r =
0.878/(3 x 103) = 2.9 x 10-4 = 3 x lo-"
2. Thickness of steel plate - external pressure (drnin-
age provided)
H , = 102PCr= 102 x 2 = 204 m (load factor = 1)
According to Amstutz (Fig. I), H , = 204, g/r
= 3 x 10-4 + ~ / = t 72
According to Jacobsen (Fig. 2), H, = 204, g/r
= 3 x lo-'- r/t = 67, t,,, = 3000/67 = 44.8 mm
3. Allowable slznpe defects (rleviatiorzporn rourzdzess
tolerarzces)
According to Montel (Fig. 4), H, = 204, r/t
= 67 + u/t = 0.1; template deviation 11 = 0.1
x 44.8 = 4.48 = 4 mm; deviation from roundness
2(a - b ) = 414 = 4 X 4 = 16 mm
4. Thickrzess of steel plate - irzternal pressure
H, = 102Ps = 102 X 4.5 = 459 m, max. S, =
vr 0.20
-&A= x 25.50 x 125 = 797 kN/n12
1 - v, 1 - 0.20
= 0.8 MPa. Since N < l .O, S, = (max. S,)N = 0.8
-
X 0.6 = 0.48 = 0.5 MPa.
According to Kruse (Fig. 6), H , = 459, g/r
= 3 x lo-', v, = 0.20 r/t = 52 < 67.
According to Jacobsen (Fig. 7), H , = 459, g / r
= 3 x v, = 0 . 2 0 + r / t = 54 < 67, t,,, =
3000/52 = 57.7 mm.
Since the internal pressure governs, the hoop stresses
for free conduit should be checked: t = P,(r/F,)
= 4.5 x 3 X 10'/260 = 51.9 < 57.7
5 . Proportiotz of irzternal pressure taken by steel lirzer
According to Jacobsen (Fig. 8), H;, = 459, r/t
= 52 + a = 0.67
6. Adequacy of rock overburderz
According to Jacobsen (Fig. lo), H , = 459, r/t
= 52- h / r = 19, h = 19 X 3 = 57 < 125
7. Proposed plate thickness
t = 57.7 -t 1.5 = 59.2 = 59 mm
8. Re-estimation of allowable tolerarzces
According to Montel (Fig. 4), H , = 204, r/t
= 52 + u/t > 0.5 + u/t = 0.5.
Template deviation u = 0.5 x 57.7 = 28.85
29 mm*
-
Deviation from roundness 4u = 4 x 29 = 116 rnrn
Diameter deviation 211 = 2 X 29 = 58 mrn
Template length 0.8452r = 0.8452 X 3.00 X lo3
= 2536 mm