UNDERGROUND CONSTRUCTION

A Seminar Report Submitted to

SIDDHARTH INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY, PUTTUR
(AUTONOMOUS)
In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree of

BACHELOR OF TECHNOLOGY
In
CIVIL ENGINEERING
Submitted by
KASI MUNI JAGADEESH - 20F65A0115
Under the esteemed guidance of

Mrs. A.Brahmini , M .Tech

Assistant Professor of Civil Engineering

Department of Civil Engineering

SIDDHARTH INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING&TECHNOLOGY

(AUTONOMOUS)
(Approved by AICTE & Affiliated to JNTUA, Anantapuramu)
(Accredited by NBA for Civil, EEE, ECE, MECH, & CSE)
(Accredited by NAAC with ‘A+’ Grade)
Siddharth Nagar, Narayanavanam Road, Puttur - 517583, A.P

2020 - 2023
 DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

SIDDHARTH INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY

(AUTONOMOUS)
(Approved by AICTE & Affiliated to JNTUA, Anantapuramu)
(Accredited by NBA for Civil, EEE, ECE, MECH & CSE)
(Accredited by NAAC with ‘A+’ Grade)
Siddharth Nagar, Narayanavanam Road, Puttur-517583, A.P

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the seminar work entitled “UNERGROUND CONSTRUCTION” is being
submitted by KASI MUNI JAGADEESH (20F65A0115) in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the Award of
BACHELOR OF TECHNOLOGY in CIVIL ENGINEERING to SIDDHARTH INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING &
TECHNOLOGY, PUTTUR (AUTONOMOUS).

Head of the Department Seminar Incharge

Mr. C. SIVA KUMAR PRASAD, M. Tech. Mr. S. VENATRAMAN, M.Tech
Associate Professor & Head Assistant Professor
Department of Civil Engineering Department of Civil Engineering

Seminar presentation held on _

Internal Examiner External Examiner

i
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We wish to express our profound and sincere gratitude to Mr. S. Venkatraman, Assistant Professor of Civil

Engineering and Mrs. A. Brahmini, Assistant Professor of Civil Engineering, Siddharth Institute of

Engineering & Technology, Puttur, who guided us into the intricacies of this seminar report and

presentation with utmost clarity.

We would also like to extend our gratitude to Mr. C. Siva Kumar Prasad, Head of the Civil Engineering

Department for his encouragement and for providing the facilities to carry out the work in a successful

manner.

We are thankful to Dr. K. Chandrasekhar Reddy, Principal for his encouragement and support.

We wish to express our sincere thanks to Dr. K. Ashok Raju, Chairman, and Dr. K. Indiraveni, Vice-

Chairman, of Siddharth Group of Institutions, Puttur, for providing ample facilities to complete the seminar

report.

Very importantly, we would like to place on record our profound indebtedness to our parents and families

for their substantial moral support and encouragement throughout our studies.

KASI MUNI JAGADEESH

(20F65A0115)

ii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

SI.NO TITLE PAGE

NO.
1 Abstract i
2 Introduction 1-2
3 Underground Constructions In Soil 3
4 Mitigation Measures 4
5 Underground Construction Methods 5-6
6 Rock Tunnelling 7-8
7 Methodology 9-13
8 Case Study 14-15
9 Reference 16
 ABSTRACT

Land use optimization is a major concern as the world's population grows at an exponential
rate. Surface land is already being depleted at an alarming pace. As a result, buildings can
be constructed safely underground, allowing for more productive land use. The primary goal
of this paper is to perform a bibliometric review of the literature related to Underground
Construction in order to determine the growth of Underground Construction as a method of
energy or land optimization in recent years. Between 1975 and 2020 is the time span
considered for this survey. The results of the Scopus database are the primary subject of
bibliometric research in this article. External tools such as iMapBuilder and VOSviewer are
used to visualise data. The research is intended to show the need for Underground
Construction in the modern world. The study's findings highlight the scarcity of
underground construction research and the need for additional research. The findings of this
study are made possible by a method for systematic research in underground construction.

Keywords: Underground Space Utilization, Underground Construction, Urban

spaces.

i
 INTRODUCTION

GENERAL

The various underground construction methods discussed as options for the example facility
must be evaluated on a site-specific basis, since factors such as site geology will vary
significantly in different locales. The advantages and disadvantages of each option must be
weighed, and each alternative’s costs and energy use must -be evaluated. The most effective
options can .then be considered in terms of the various constraints posed by the individual site.
The article summarizes the challenges and considerations during planning, execution and
commissioning of underground sections of metro. The work of fixing the alignment starts with
fixing up the location of the station box, availability of the land in the close proximity of major
origin/destination points or nodes which are dense passenger traffic junction is important. There
are the instances when separate vacant land at these locations is not available, and in all such
cases stations are planned below roads. Consideration of buildings nearby, no. of trees affected,
possible traffic diversion, soil strata, utilities, access to the residents nearby are few points
which are kept in mind the location of the station. Suitability from point of view of traffic
integration is also a main criterion for fixing station locations. Stations are planned in such a
way so as to be near established traffic interchange nodes so that they fit in the existing transport
network and provide seamless intermodal transfer. Underground construction has been around
for thousands of years, mostly developed through mining and more recently through transport,
housing and commercial industries. The Channel Tunnel, London Underground, British
Library, and various shopping centre are all examples of underground construction.
Underground housing (sometimes called earth sheltered housing) refers specifically to homes
that have been built underground, either partially or completely. These subterranean homes
have grown increasingly popular over the last thirty years and are an important sector in the
green building movement.

A tunnel is an underground passageway, completely enclosed except for openings for egress,
commonly at each end. A tunnel may be for foot or vehicular road traffic, for rail traffic, or for
a canal. Some tunnels are aqueducts to supply water for consumption or for hydroelectric
stations or are sewers.

1
OBJECTIVE

The’ objective of this study was to obtain information on the costs, energy considerations, and
security and survivability potential provided by current underground construction technology.

APPROACH

Computer literature searches were performed to obtain information on underground buildings

and construction practices. Current procedures and problems in underground construction were
evaluated in the areas, of cut and cover methods, deep shafts, tunneling, ground water control,
security and survivability, costs, and energy savings. An example facility was then considered
for various forms of underground construction (cut and cover, deep shaft,’ and tunneling) to
illustrate application ‘of the information Obtained. Mode of Technology Transfer It.

2
 UNDERGROUND CONSTRUCTIONS IN SOIL

This topic gathered nine papers that had a general view about tunnels constructed in or
based on soil. Discussions about soft soil deposits, twin tunnel interaction, stress arching in
trenches, analytical stability methods, assessment of surface settlements, wearing of TBM
tools, cavity formation around underground structures and even immersed tunnels are
presented. Rangel-Núñez et al. in their paper “Performance of the tunnel lining subjected
to decompression effects on very soft clay deposits” present a case study of tunnel
excavated with a Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM) in the Mexico City soft clay. The study
evaluated the particular case of the Eastern Emitter Tunnel where a channel was dredged
above the tunnel alignment and the unloading reactivated pre-existent semivertical cracks
in the clay deposit. These cracks were identified visually during the construction of a shaft
near the channel and were an indication of the unloading of that zone. Piezocone tests
confirmed that, as the measured coefficient of earth pressure at rest was three times smaller
near the channel compared to the value at some distance from the channel. Instrumentation
of the tunnel revealed an increasing rate of lining displacement after a dredging procedure
at the channel above. A multistep Finite Element Analysis (FEA) was carried out to
evaluate if this anomalous behaviour could be attributed to the reactivation of the cracks.
The modelling methodology achieved great results with lining displacements of the same
order of magnitude to the in-situ observations. Figure 2 presents the convergence of a
lining section below the channel that was dredged, however the authors of the general
report believe that the division entitled “Beginning of the lining stability” was intended to
state instability. Figure 2. Ring 671 time evolution of deformation (after Rangel-Núñez et
al.). In their paper “Design of tunnel lining in consolidating soft soils”, Rodríguez-
Rebolledo et al. study the effects of consolidation on the lining by a series of FEA. The
Mexico City valley is affected by an on-going regional subsidence process associated to
intense pumping of water from the aquifer below the urban area. This process is locally
combined with the consolidation due to the excess of pore pressure generated by the
excavation of the tunnel and installation of the primary liner. A multistep FEA was
performed and several tools to account for plastic flow of lining, joints and interfaces were
applied. The results indicate a very unfavourable condition for the final lining, with
vertical loading and horizontal confinement loss.

3
 MITIGATION MEASURES

Seven papers were classified under this topic, the first three papers presented are about
controlling deformations and ensuring stability of tunnels in special conditions, the other four
papers are about surface settlements mitigation. The studies were based on real cases, numerical
modelling and full scale field trials.

Aguilar et al. in their paper “Diametric deformations in the concrete segment lining of a tunnel
excavated in soft soils. Criteria for their evaluation and mitigation actions for their control”
present a graph (Figure 8) divided in five different zones based on the relation of the percentage
of horizontal diameter increase to the time after the lining installation as a criterion for the
mitigation measures recommended to ensure stability of the pre-cast reinforced concrete
segmented rings that compose an 8.7 m diameter tunnel. Each zone has specific
recommendations for mitigation actions. For example, if the measurements reach zone 3 it is
recommended that the ring’s annular space is re-injected. Figure 8 shows the five different
zones of intervention and three sets of measurements of horizontal diameter increase on
different tunnel sections, the numbers at the end of the lines denote the section number of the
tunnel lining. Note that one of the measurements resembles the measurement presented by
RangelNúñez et al. There the consolidation caused the deformation, see Section 2, and
reinjection is probably not the solution. The authors of the GR expect that for the situation of
consolidation it is better to use the metallic frames in an earlier state.

“Application of ductile segments to tunnels in close proximity” analyse the mechanical

behaviour of twin tunnels and the use of ductile segments to sustain the unfavourable stress
conditions. The case of the Taipei MRT project, where a distance of 1.5 m occurred between
twin tunnels, is presented. From 2D numerical analyses a vertical and lateral stress increase, as
high as 50%, was calculated for the first tunnel during the excavation of the second one. This
sort of behaviour was also observed with the automatic monitoring systems during the tunnel
construction. The first tunnel lining went through a 70% increase in the bending moments and
a 30% increase in the axial forces. The ductile segments are described as lining systems of
favourable ductility and anticorrosion features. The analysis revealed that the ductile segments
were able to resist the final stress conditions, where a precast reinforced concrete segment
would have failed.

4
 UNERGROUND CONSTRUCTION METHODS

GENERAL

The underground construction standard covers many topics of concern to those who work in
the challenging environment of underground construction. A sampling of items covered by the
standard includes requirements for safe access and egress routes, employee training in hazard
recognition, a “check-in or check-out” procedure, and emergency procedures. This booklet
summarizes all requirements of the standard. The standard provides some flexibility in methods
to control workplace hazards in underground construction as long as appropriate precautions
are taken to protect workers in a variety of situations. OSHA requires that a “competent person”
be responsible for carrying out several requirements of the underground construction
regulations. Situations that require intervention by a “competent person” are identified in the
following sections.

TRAINING REQUIREMENTS

All employees involved in underground construction must be trained to recognize and respond
to hazards associated with this type of work. Training should be tailored to the specific
requirements of the jobsite and include any unique issues or requirements. The following topics
should be part of an underground construction employee training program: • Air monitoring
and ventilation

• Illumination • Communications

• Flood control

• Personal protective equipment

• Emergency procedures, including evacuation plans

• Check-in/check-out procedures

• Explosives

• Fire prevention and protection

• Mechanical equipment

5
CONSTRUCTION METHODS

Useful references on underground construction technology were identified from journals and
government reports. Report subjects included methods of excavation, tunneling, underground
structure lining, waterproofing practices, security, survivability, and cost and energy
considerations. Much of the literature presented application of different construction methods
to specific structures, such as civil’ defence shelters, subways, tunnels, schools, and libraries.
The papers surveyed discuss underground construction methods used in the United States and
11 other countries.. Each article is designated by country and reference number. This reference
number corresponds to the complete list of references found in the appendix. Many other type
of construction methods listed below

I. Cut –and –cover method

II. Wall-cover construction method
III. Conventional underground tunneling
IV. Machine driving
V. Open cut methods
VI. Underground driving methods
VII. Immersed tube method
VIII. Box jacking

6
 ROCK TUNNELLING

This topic gathered three papers of underground structures excavated in different types of rock.
Stability of underground structures with different geometries and with account for postpeak
strength degradation is presented. An empirical method for the prediction of TBM penetration
rate is also presented.

Görög et al. perform several numerical analyses with four different codes of underground
cellars beneath the city of Budapest, in their paper “Stability analyses of underground
structures cut into porous limestone”. The results focus on admissible surface loads, grouting
and enlargement of a tunnel and interaction of different cellar systems, as in Figure 15. The
restrictions and capabilities of each modelling tool are depicted and analysed in the results
and conclusion.

Hsiao and Chi in their paper “Effect of brittle failure on deep underground excavation in
eastern Taiwan” investigate how post-peak strength degradation of metamorphic hard rock in
Taiwan can affect deep tunnelling behaviour. The case study of a twin-hole tunnel with an
excavation span of 12.5 m was studied with a finite difference package.

The study evaluated the tunnel at two different depths, 500 and 1000 m, and the rock mass by
two different models, the Hoek-Brown model and the Hoek-Brown with the post peak
degradation model of Cundall et al. (2003). A subroutine was created to account for the
strength loss parameter

7
8
 METHODOLOGY

GENERAL

Many Department of Defence hardened structures such as those found at munitions storage
facilities are constructed above ground, some with earth cover. An example of such a structure
is the standard storage igloo. These facilities are often quite old, and the set of requirements on
which they were designed and built differ from those considered important today. These
facilities were based mainly on safety, with less attention given to security, Survivability, and
operational and environmental considerations. In Europe, where security and survivability are
important in facility design and construction, many NATO military facilities are built either
underground or in the sides of mountains. Many of the installations are tunneled into rock in
the mountainsides which is relatively fault-free and is not prone to flooding during
construction., Often, the rock is so strong that the tunnel walls do not have to be lined. The
Scandinavian countries have built many underground or mountainside structures for civil
defence. The mountainous terrain provides a very hardened personnel shelter compared to what
could be built above ground. In the United States, under the direction of the Federal Emergency
Management Agency, much work, including a great deal by the Corps of Engineers, has been
done recently to design underground or earth-covered key worker shelters. The earth covering
provides both over pressure hardening and radiation and thermal protection. Several options are
available for hardened facility construction. Typically, above ground structures are made of
thick reinforced concrete and can provide only limited protection. The structure can be shallow-
buried, using the cut and cover construction method. This removes the structure from the
surface, so it is not directly exposed to threats; however, it is still vulnerable to penetrating
weapons and bombs. Tunnelling, down. (shaft) or into mountainsides can provide a very safe
environment, but multiple entrances must be provided. Also, the local geology is an important
factor. Deep excavation, another option, which has excellent security and survivability
potential, but which requires multiple entrances. Problems encountered with deep excavations
include shoring, water table, and bedrock level.

9
Cut and cover method

Cut and cover is the most commonly used underground, construction method. This is essentially
an open excavation in which the structure is supported by retaining walls while it is built and
then backfill placed above the completed facility. Raja gopalan provides an excellent discussion
of the basis for designing a cut and cover excavation His paper cites extensive use of the cut
and cover technique -for underground railway construction n India. Structures butt d at
relatively shallow depths are generally well suited for cut and cover techniques, off ring a fairly
low-cost. excavation approach . The major drawback of cut and cover meth Ids is the large work
area it required. The designer must’ make a decision based not only on construction costs, but
also on the relative merits of other types of construction, such as tunneling , which are greatly
reduce surface traffic interference. Conventionally braced excavation support systems consist
of a web of walkers, rakers, posts, and lateral support lacing. The walker is a horizontal member
used to support formwork stds and a raker is a sloping area. A major problem with this system
is that the support structure often conflicts with the excavation and placement of the permanent
structure Excavations which use tieback.

Underground Blasting

10
Box jacking method

Box jacking is similar to pipe jacking, but instead of jacking tubes, a box shaped tunnel is used.
Jacked boxes can be a much larger span than a pipe jack with the span of some box jacks in
excess of 20m. A cutting head is normally used at the front of the box being jacked and
excavation is normally by excavator from within the box.

Pipe jacking method

Pipe Jacking is a method of tunnel construction where hydraulic jacks are used to push specially
made pipes through the ground behind a tunnel boring machine or shield. This technique is
commonly used to create tunnels under existing structures, such as roads or railways. Tunnels
constructed by pipe jacking are normally small diameter tunnels with a maximum size of around
2.4m.

Conventional underground tunnelling

After the trench has been backfilled, but before any surface construction begins, certain plastic
conduits can become oval-shaped, pierced or broken. Accordingly, it is necessary to check for
duct deflection before any cable installation. Each duct should allow the passage of a test
mandrel consisting of a rod carrying a solid disc. The test mandrel is sized to be smaller than
the inside diameter of the duct so that some deflection of the ducts is allowable. The test mandrel
can be attached to a pneumatic duct cleaner as shown in Figure 1a. It is possible to perform this
operation by simply blowing it inside the duct; it will reach the other end of the duct if no
restrictions or obstructions are present. Ducts may also be examined by test mandrels as shown
in Figure 1b. A test mandrel is pulled through the duct by means of a rope or cable. If the
mandrel can be pulled through the tested section, then the section is considered acceptable. If
deformations are present and the mandrel gets stuck, the blocked area of conduit can be
repaired. The mandrel, however, would have difficulties in checking multiple defective parts if
it became stuck as a result of the first defect and could not continue its passage through the duct.
In this case, the mandrel is pulled out, and the test is repeated using a smaller one. If the mandrel
cannot be pulled through the entire length of the duct, there are several possible reasons.

Firstly, the duct may have deflected beyond what the mandrel will tolerate. Secondly, the
mandrel may have become caught in the sleeve due to a tight radius.

11
Conventional tunneling often called incremental or cyclic tunneling, is the alternative to
continuous tunnelling

• small advance steps (longitudinally and transversely)

• the step length and the surface of excavation face are important design parameters: the freshly
excavated space has to remain stable until the support has been installed.

• can be executed in full face or partial face.

BENEFIT

One benefit of locating a structure underground is the increased protection provided from
threats of force as compared with an above ground sitting. This has been the driving
consideration behind the use of underground construction for many military facilities. Threats
of force can come in many forms, including, but not limited to, the following:

• Terrorists or subversives

• Chemical-biological weapons

• Air-delivered munitions

• Artillery fire

• Fuel-air explosions

• Well-armed military troops.

12
Subsurface Site 3D Geo-Model

13
 CASE STUDY

London Transport

In 1933 the Combine, the Metropolitan and all the municipal and independent bus and tram
undertakings were merged into the London Passenger Transport Board (LPTB), a self-
supporting and unsubsidised public corporation which came into being on 1 July 1933. The
LPTB soon became known as London Transport (LT).

Shortly after it was created, London Transport began the process of integrating the underground
railways of London into one network. All the separate railways were renamed as “lines” within
the system: the first LT version of Beck’s map featured the District Line, the Bakerloo Line,
the Piccadilly Line, the Edgware, High gate and Morden Line, the Metropolitan Line, the
Metropolitan Line (Great Northern & City Section), the East London Line, and the Central
London Line. The shorter names Central Line and Northern Line were adopted for two lines in
1937. The Waterloo & City line was not originally included in this map as it was still owned by
a main line railway and not part of LT, but was added in a less prominent style, also in 1937.

Londoners sheltering from The Blitz in a tube station

London Transport announced a scheme for the expansion and modernization of the network
entitled the new work program, which had followed the announcement of improvement
proposals for the Metropolitan Line. This consisted of plans to extend some lines, to take over
the operation of others from mainline railway companies, and to electrify the entire network.
During the 1930s and 1940s, several sections of main-line railways were converted into surface
lines of the Underground system. The oldest part of today’s Underground network is the Central
line between Leyton and Loughton, which opened as a railway seven years before the
Underground itself.

London Transport also sought to abandon routes which made a significant financial loss. Soon
after the LPTB started operating, services to Verney Junction and Brill on the Metropolitan
Railway were stopped. The renamed Metropolitan Line terminus was moved to Aylesbury.

14
The outbreak of World War II delayed all the expansion schemes. From mid-1940, the Blitz led
to the use of many Underground stations as shelters during air raids and overnight. The
Underground helped over 200,000 children escape to the countryside and sheltered another
177,500 people. The authorities initially tried to discourage and prevent people from sleeping
in the tube, but later supplied 22,000 bunks, latrines, and catering facilities. After a time there
were even special stations with libraries and classrooms for night classes. Later in the war, eight
London deep-level shelters were constructed under stations, ostensibly to be used as shelters
(each deep-level shelter could hold 8,000 people) though plans were in place to convert them
for a new express line parallel to the Northern line after the war. Some stations (now mostly
disused) were converted into government offices: for example, Down Street was used for the
headquarters of the Railway Executive Committee and was also used for meetings of the War
Cabinet before the Cabinet War Rooms were completed; Brompton Road was used as a control
room for anti-aircraft guns and the remains of the surface building are still used by London’s
University Royal Naval Unit (URNU) and University London Air Squadron (ULAS).

15
 REFERENCE

1) U.S. Department of Labor Elaine L. Chao, Secretary Occupational Safety and Health
Administration John L. Henshaw, Assistant Secretary “Underground Construction
(Tunneling)”

2) Paulo Henrique Tsingos, Civil Engineer, UFPr “Guidelines for injection in underground
construction and tunneling”

3) Training Notes by Prof. Bancy Mati “Underground Tanks”

4) K. Hiromoto, H. Hashiguchi, Y. Arai Tokyo Metro Co.,Ltd, Renovation & Construction

Department, Tokyo, Japan “Large-Scale Improvement of Converting a Japan’s First Subway
Station Constructed by the Shield Tunneling Method into that of an Open-Cut Method”

5) H. Hendarto, J.R. Standing Imperial College London, London, UK “Ground response to

tunnel construction for Jakarta Mass Rapid Transit Project”

6) David A Dixon Atomic Energy of Canada Limited “Backfilling Techniques and Materials
in Underground Excavations”

7) Dr Ákos Tóth “Tunneling and Underground Construction Technology”

8) International Telecommunication Union Telecommunication Standardization Sector Of Itu

“Methods for inspecting and repairing underground plastic ducts”

16