Design of Composite Tunnel Linings Workshop, September 2019

DETAILED DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

Hyuk-il Jung
Associate, UKIMEA Tunnel Skills Leader, Arup
1 of 23
 Introduction
Lab tests using water proof membrane
sandwiched cores and beams
Obtain bond interface input parameters
Input

Core Test Model calibration

LS-DYNA

New theoretical design approach

“Notched” Beam Test Model
calibration From the use of laminate beam theory

Tunnel section analysis

Verification of the new design approach
from the use of the developed
numerical model

LS-DYNA results interpretation

Composite action and load sharing
This presentation
conclusions

2 of 23 Previous presentation
 Agenda
1. Composite Shell Lining Design Concept
2. Theoretical Approach - Laminate Glass Theory
3. Verification Analysis
4. Proposed New Design Approach

3 of 23
 Composite Shell Lining Design Concept

4 of 23
 Composite Shell Lining Design Concept
Double shell (sheets membrane) Composite shell (Sprayed membrane)

Primary lining t1 t1
Primary lining
Sheet membrane
t2 Sprayed membrane
Secondary lining Potential lining Secondary lining t2*
thickness reduction

No load transfer Load transfer

Primary lining : temporary support. No Primary lining : temporary support,

contribution to long term load AND share long term load

Secondary lining : permanent support Secondary lining : permanent support

with load share with primary lining

5 of 23
 Composite Shell Lining Design Concept
What are the potential benefits of lining thickness reduction?

• less excavation
• faster advance
• time saving
• labour saving
• less material
• less logistics
• less carbon…..

6 of 23
 Composite Shell Lining Design Concept
Then, any available design tools that allow designers to estimate
composite lining thickness?
Or
Are there any projects sprayed WP membrane was used?

 Crossrail, London Underground Stations used sprayed

waterproof membrane. The lining was designed by
assuming the load is shared between the primary and
secondary lining in a certain portion

 No available design tool

7 of 23
 Composite Shell Lining Design Concept

The only unknown

8 of 23
 Theoretical Approach - Laminate Glass Theory

9 of 23
 Theoretical Approach - Laminate Glass Theory
Equations from Bennison (2008)

E heq

10 of 23
 Theoretical Approach - Laminate Glass Theory
Based on a theory from laminated glass industry – similar to composite tunnel linings
in that there is a ‘glue’ type material in between two much stiffer layers
Equations from Bennison (2008)

In the laminated glass industry, the equations proposed by Bennison (2008) are
widely used to evaluate the equivalent monolithic thickness of laminated glass.

This approach is adopted in ASTM E1300 (2016), thus this should be considered as a
verified theory.

Similar to laminated glass, composite shell linings use the same material for both
layers (i.e. concrete) to make a sandwiched beam with the use of a bond material (i.e.
sprayed membrane) between the concrete layers.

Thus, the application of Bennison’s theory to composite shell lining design is

considered feasible (for deformation equivalent), and its applicability to composite
shell lining design has been investigated.

11 of 23
 Theoretical Approach - Laminate Glass Theory
Modification of the equation for tunnel lining design ; Beam span ℓ and a constant β

ℓ is span of the beam. In tunnels, by assuming the tunnel is deforming in an elliptical

shape, ℓ can be considered approximately equal to the ¼ of the perimeter length of a
circular tunnel

12 of 23
 Theoretical Approach - Laminate Glass Theory
Modification of the equation for tunnel lining design ; Beam span ℓ and a constant β

β is calculated from a bending moment and shear stress

equilibrium condition in a simply supported composite
beam by applying virtual work theory for a given loading
condition.

In particular, β = 9.6 for uniformly distributed load, and β

= 12 for a concentrated force at mid span.

For tunnels, it can be assumed that the tunnel lining is

loaded close to the uniformly distributed load, thus β = 9.6
can be adopted.

13 of 23
 Verification analysis

14 of 23
 Primary lining thickness is
Verification analysis determined from the temporary
load case, thus it is not affected
from the composite action.
FEM analysis
Load (fix) Load (fix)

fix Bennison’s equation LS-DYNA

Var.
thickness-deflection
curve of composite lining
Var.
with the use of the
bond interface
parameters
thickness-deflection
curve of monolithic lining

Obtain thickness relationship between the

composite and monolithic lining that Bennison’s equation
provides equal deflection of lining

15 of 23
 Verification analysis
Verification analyses cases:
Parameters Values
Tunnel dia. 6m (external)
hprimary 250mm (fixed)
Composite

hsecondary 125mm to 375mm (50mm interval)

Interface G=7MPa
Thickness = 5mm 250mm (fixed)

Concrete E = 35GPA
Mono

heq 300mm to 500mm (50mm interval)

16 of 23
 Verification analysis

17 of 23
 Verification analysis

18 of 23
 Proposed New Design Approach

19 of 23
 Laminate theory design chart
5MPa

20 of 23
 Laminate theory design chart

Example design chart use: 225mm

• 6m diameter circular tunnel
• C40/50 concrete 160mm
325mm
• 5mm thick interface layer
• 5MPa shear modulus
• Temporary ULS condition - 225mm required primary lining thickness h primary
• Permanent ULS condition – 325mm required permanent lining thickness h eq

h eq = 325mm thus h eq /h primary = 325/225 = 1.44

On the design chart:

h secondary /h primary is read as 0.71, giving h secondary= 0.71 x 22 = 159.75mm

Composite lining – 160+225 = 385mm

Traditional double shell – 225+325 = 550mm  30% reduction

21 of 23
 Conclusions and Limitations
By making simple assumptions such as the beam span and parameter β, laminate glass
theory is found applicable to the tunnel lining design.

A design chart can be easily developed by designers using the laminate glass theory
equations to suit the characteristics of the each tunnel projects. The design chart will allow
tunnel designers to estimate the secondary lining thickness of a composite shell lining.

Since the initial stress condition of the primary lining is different from what is assumed in
laminate glass theory, further research is required to verify whether the design approach
presented in this presentation gives conservative results. Also, the influence from the
change of primary lining stiffness over time (both short and long term) should be looked at.

It is suggested that designers carry out a verification analysis using the estimated primary
lining thickness of composite shell lining. The proposed design chart should not be
considered as a sole complete solution for the composite lining design.

From the proposed design chart, approximately 20%-30% reduction of the total thickness
of the lining is expected feasible for a typical circular tunnel condition.

22 of 23
 Thank you for your attention

23 of 23