Geotechnical design of the St.

Mark tunnel
B. Stojkovi Civil Engineering Institute of Croatia B. Stani Civil Engineering Institute of Croatia M.S. Kovaevi Faculty of Civil Engineering, University of Zagreb ABSTRACT: The application of the integrated design method for the St. Mark tunnel in Croatia is presented. The integrated method combines the empirical, rational and observational approaches in designing the tunnel. The design can, thus, proceed in two phases, prior to and during the tunnel construct ion. The geotechnical structure was under full control at all construction stages, and the tunnel completion was possible 2.5 months ahead of schedule. The paper describes the project solutions, programme and the procedure of the second phase of design, the construction technology, the results of geotechnical monitoring and the back-analysis, and intervention during construction.

1 INTRODUCTION The St. Mark tunnel was constructed on the highway connecting the Croatian capital city Zagreb with the largest Croatian harbour at Rijeka. It is located 6.5 km to the west of the city of Karlovac. The two tunnel tubes are 243 m and 266 m long respectively, and their axes are 25 m apart. A typical feature of the tunnel is a relatively small overburden, the thickness of which does not exceed 22 m. The tunnel was s elected instead of a cutting, in order to preserve the local cemetery and a chapel situated on the ground surface above the tunnel (Fig.1).

greatly contributed to the success of tunnelling work is the full control over construction and behaviour of geotechnical structures which was realized through permanent geotechnical supervision and implementation of geotechnical observation and monitoring programme. 2 THE GEOLOGY The ground at the construction site consists of completely disintegrated clastic formations represented by clays and mixture of clay, sand, silt and sandstone fragments. Below these formations, which vary between 10 and 20 m in thickness, there is an irregular layer of fully disintegrated dolomites under which there is basic rock mass of dolomite. Properties of the geological structure in question can best be seen through results of geoelectrical profiling with the Lund Imaging System (LIS), as shown in Figure 2. The following layers can be detected: 1. predominantly sandy clay, 2. mixture of clay, sand, silt and sandstone lumps, 3. completely disintegrated dolomite, and 4. dolomite. 3 GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN

Figure 1. Construction site of the St. Mark tunnel Even though the tunnel construction started during unfavourable weather conditions with heavy winter rainfalls, the approach cuttings and the tunnel were completed in 4.5 months, which was 2.5 months ahead of schedule. One of the significant factors that

According to Eurocode 7 (CEN/TC 250/SC 7 1999), the St. Mark tunnel belongs to the 3rd geotechnical category, which includes the most complex geotechnical structures (Orr and Farrell 1999). The integrated design method (Stojkovi 1986) was used for designing the geotechnical structure of the St. Mark tunnel.

Figure 2. Results of geoelectric profiling with LIS This method combines the empirical, rational and observational approaches to tunnel design, which enables the designer to fully encompass the problem and minimise errors, which might occur due to shortcomings of each approach mentioned. The integrated method also enables continuous design. Two design phases can be carried out. The first phase takes place prior to the tunnel construction. The accuracy of this des ign phase depends on the number and quality of data acquired through soil and rock investigation. In the second phase, during the execution of the tunnel it is possible on the bases of an observational approach to verify or modify the original design. The empirical approach to tunnel design is based on the experience gained in previous geotechnical projects. The approach is based on the engineering rock mass classifications that enable systematization of previous experiences with respect to the relationship between rock mass quality, excavation method and required tunnel support. Within the framework of the integral design method, classifications represent the starting point for qualitative and quantitative determination of the tunnel support. The classifications are used again to determine the category of rock encountered during tunnel construction, and the corresponding support. The Austrian classification NORM B 2203 (1994) and the Q-system (Barton et al. 1974; Grimstad & Barton 1993) were used for the St. Mark tunnel design, because this tunnel belongs to the category of tunnels where stress states and their changes primarily control the behaviour of the underground opening during its excavation and stabilisation. The rational approach to tunnel design is based on numerical stress -strain analyses of the rock mass and soil around the underground opening, and also on stress-strain analyses of the whole system including the tunnel support. The support design results from these analyses. The computer program Final developed at the University of Innsbruck (Swoboda, 1997) was used for the St. Mark tunnel design. Based on classification results, numerical analyses and experience acquired on completed tunnels, tunnel support was defined which concluded the first phase of designing. The observational approach is based on observations and monitoring of the tunnel behaviour during construction. Back-analyses are performed to verify the adequacy of the tunnel support designed in the first phase, and the stability of the underground opening. It is then possible to correct the tunnel support design in the second design phase, if necessary. The extent of observing and monitoring is defined in the first design phase, with the intention to make the tunnel construction safe and economical. Such a design method is in accordance with the Guidelines for the design of tunnels of the International Tunnel Association (1988), and it was verified on several major underground projects (Stojkovi & Miri 1991; Stojkovi et al. 1987). 4 THE SELECTED DESIGN According to the Austrian classification, the rock mass along the whole tunnel belongs to the B2/B3 category, and according to the Q-system it was classified as extremely weak rock mass with Q = 0.017. The parameters for completely disintegrated clastic rock, with = 250, c = 40 kPa, a n d E = 80 MPa, were used for the numerical analysis. The selection of the excavation technology and tunnel support was determined by geotechnical characteristics of materials in the region of tunnel construction, on the height of the overburden, the extent of the underground excavation, and the tunnel length.

Due to the low soil strength and negligible initial stability of the underground opening, its stability was improved in the area of the tunnel roof by constructing an injected steel pipe roof. The designed pipe length was 15 m, with an overlap of 3 m. In the portal zone of the tunnel 42 pipes, 0.4 m apart, were designed, and in the other parts of the tunnel 29 pipes, also 0.4 m apart. The inclination of the pipes was about 40. Due to the short length of the tunnel and the fact that secondary stresses exceed the soil strength, even for partial excavation of underground opening, the tunnel excavation was designed in three phases, with a short-length progress in each phase and a quick
LONGITUDINAL SECTION A-A
Shotcrete C25, 30cm +two reinforcement meshes Q283

closing of the tunnel support ring and protection of the tunnel face. The need to stabilise the first excavation phase by additional measures, such as construction of elephants feet or construction of temporary invert arch, was thus avoided. Due to the small overburden and the poor quality of the soil, a stiff tunnel support was selected. The chosen primary tunnel support consisted of 30 cm of shotcrete C 25 with two steel reinforced meshes Q 238, steel lattice girders Pantex 95/20/30 at a distance of 1 m, and the walls were anchored by IBO anchors R 32/20, 6 m long, at a distance of 2 m. Figure 3 shows the primary tunnel support and the construction technology.
DETA IL 1

Detail 1 Protective pipe dia.114.3mm, l=15m 3.91 +8.00 Grouted pipe

Reinforcement mesh Q283 Steel lattice girder PS 95/20/30

2
3.91
1 5 Pipe-roof O 114.3mm

12.00

12.00

30cm

7.18

8.00

+2.50

0.00 -1.95

-0.20
7

1.0 - 1.5m

Face protection Shotcrete 10cm (+1 reinforcement mesh Q188 if required)

30cm

2
Face protection Shotcrete 10cm (+1 reinforcement mesh Q188 if required) Steel lattice girder PS 95/20/30 Shotcrete 24cm

Steel lattice girder PS 95/20/30

Outside line of inside vault

CROSS-SECTION B-B
Pipe roof 100-114

Face protection core Face protection Shotcrete 10cm (+1 renforcement mesh Q188 if required)

DETAIL 2

Detail 2

A
+8.00

Shotcrete C25, 30cm, two reinforcement meshes Q283, steel lattice girder PS 95/20/30

grouted pipes Shotcrete C25, 30cm, two reinforcement meshes Q283, steel lattice girder PS 95/20/30

30
Elephant foot if required Kalota +2.80 +2.50

4980
IBO anchors l=6m

40

40

35

30

16000
3 0 0.00 Invert -0.20 -1.95

30 17

9530

30

30

Figure 3. Primary tunnel support and construction technology

5 THE SECOND DESIGN PHASE The whole programme for the second design phase was defined in detail and it included: - the determination of the real quality of soils and rocks encountered along the tunnel, - geotechnical observation and monitoring, - procedure for the second design phase.

30

Pipe-roof O114.3mm

Shotcrete C25, 30cm, two reinforcement meshes Q283, steel lattice girder PS 95/20/30 Concrete lining 30cm

The actual quality of material (rock mass and soil) encountered along the tunnel was determined based on geology and engineering geology mapping of the tunnel during excavation, on the class ification of the material, testing soil samples taken from the excavation, i.e. defining all the relevant parameters of the material.

Geotechnical observation and monitoring were used in order to verify the stability of the underground opening in all construction stages and to optimise all stabilisation measures taken at the opening. Geotechnical observations are made in order to assess the behaviour of the rock mass and soil at the tunnel face. The construction process and the constructed tunnel support behaviour are registered on the daily basis. The excavation progress lengths are compared to the designed ones, the time during which the unsupported spans are stable is registered, as well as the time and sequence of undertaking the required stabilisation measures for the underground opening, and the effect of tunnel construction on the excavation stability. The daily inspection of the constructed tunnel support is necessary in order to detect possible unstable regions of the geotechnical structure, which are manifested as deformations and destruction of the tunnel support elements. The results from observations and monitoring form the basis for the assessment and analysis of the tunnel structure stability. Geotechnical in situ monitoring is not only used to verify the selected design and the structure stability, but also to verify the basic concept of rock mass and soil reaction to the underground excavation, the efficiency of the tunnel support, and the stabilisation measures. Therefore, the monitoring makes an integral part of the project. Monitoring programme on the St. Mark tunnel defines the following geotechnical measurements: - Control monitoring for measuring the deformations of the underground excavation in order to secure the workers and the geotechnical structure. - Tunnel support monitoring for measuring the displacements around the excavation and stresses in the tunnel support elements, in order to verify the applied excavation and support methods, to optimise the primary support, and verify the stability of the geotechnical structure. - Monitoring of the settlement on the surface of the terrain in the cemetery and the chapel region. O n e c o n t r o l m o n i t o r i n g s e c ti o n w i t h 5 measurement points located at the edge of the underground excavation was planned for each pipe roof section of the St. Mark tunnel (Fig. 7). The displacement measurements at test locations were carried out by an electronic theodolite. The system of integrated tunnel monitoring also included the measurements of settlements and the verification of positions of the tunnel cross-sections. The monitoring results were processed daily by the use of a computer program for data interpretation and delivered to the geotechnical supervisor. In order to perform the tunnel support monitoring, one monitoring section was made at each tunnel

tube, and an integral monitoring section for both tubes in the region of the chapel and cemetery. The monitoring sections wer e l o c a t e d a t t h e geologically representative sites. They were determined by the geotechnical engineer, who d e s i g n e d t h e t unn e l , a n d t h e g e o l o g i s t . Measurements of soil displacements around the underground excavation, done from the tunnel and from the soil surface, as well as measurements of stresses in the tunnel support elements, were taken at each monitoring section. The tunnel support monitoring section for measuring displacements around the underground excavation is shown in Figure 4. Measuring pipes, with benchmarks at intervals of 1 m, were inserted in drilled boreholes. A sliding deformeter measured displacements in the direction of the borehole. Three vertical boreholes, located in the region of the walls and tunnel axis, were drilled for displacement measurements from the soil surface. Measuring pipes were also used for horizontal displacements measured by an inclinometer. Surveying was performed for the determination of absolute displacements of the top of every borehole. The monitoring sections in the tunnels had to be located as close to the tunnel face as possible. The measurements from the soil surface started when the tunnel face was about 20 m away from the monitoring section. They were then taken at short time intervals during and after the tunnel face was passing through the region of the monitoring section, until displacements could no longer be detected. The same procedure was applied at the integral monitoring section in the region of surface structures. Seven boreholes were drilled there, and measurements of displacements for both tunnel tubes were taken (Fig. 10). Stresses in the tunnel support elements were det e r m i n e d b y m e a s u r i n g s t r e s s e s a n d deformations in anchors, as well as stresses in the shotcrete, and at the contact between the support and the surrounding material. Six test anchors, 6 m long each, were installed for stress and deformation measurements in anchors. For radial stress measurements at the contact between the primary tunnel support and the surrounding ground and for measurements of tangential stresses in the shotcrete seven measuring locations with two pressure cells were defined in each monitoring section. The test section for monitoring stresses in the tunnel support elements is also shown in Figure 4. The measurements in the tunnel were also taken at short time intervals until displacements could no longer be detected, depending on the construction in the region of the monitoring section.

Boreholes dia.48mm, L=10m, with measuring pipes dia.27/42mm

Pressure cell Test anchors L=6 m Test anchors L=6 m

Pressure cell

Pressure cell

Pressure cell

Pressure cell

Pressure cell

Pressure cell

Figure 4. The tunnel support monitoring section The numerical modelling results formed the basis for the interpretation of measurements. The normal behaviour of the geotechnical structure was defined from these results, and warning levels were determined. Warning levels can be related to expected displacements or stresses, depending on the results of numerical analyses and measured variables. Overstepping a warning level leads to potential structure instability, and requires an urgent intervention with additional tunnel support measures. These measures were defined in the geotechnical project. Figure 5 shows total vertical displacements of the St. Mark tunnel obtained from the numerical model used in the first design phase. Displacements and stresses in the tunnel support are also shown for each excavation and tunnel support construction stage (Marene, 1997). The procedure of the second design phase for the St. Mark tunnel consists of the following steps: - The tunnel construction started according to the geotechnical design. - Geology and engineering geology mapping of the excavated opening are done after each excavation stage. - The geologist defines the geotechnical unit in the region of the excavation based on mapping results. Based on the classification results and the estimation of the characteristics of the excavated

material a geotechnical engineer compares the quality of that material with the quality predicted i n t h e g eotechnical project, and if necessary samples are taken for laboratory testing. - If the material characteristics determined during excavation are similar enough to those used in the project, the geotechnical engineer gives instru ctions to proceed with the tunnel support construction and stabilisation of the underground opening according to the design. If, on the other h a n d , s ubstantial deviations from expected materials emerge, urgent changes are needed in the support constru ction. - Geotechnical observation is used to verify or modify suggested excavation progress lengths, estimated period of time during which unsupported spans are stable, as well as time and sequence of undertaking stabilis ation measures. - By using the results of geotechnical observation and monitoring it is possible to determine whether the excavation is stable and behaving according to design predictions. - If it is determined that the excavation behaviour substantially deviates from the anticipated one, the stabilisation measures are modified based on additional testing, back-analyses and correction of input parameters for numerical modelling. - When the numerical model is in accordance with the observed behaviour, it is possible to optimise the tunnel support construction for longer sections with uniform rock mass characteristics. The optimisation is carried out by gradual reduction of the support with continuous verification of the underground openings stability. The stabilisation programme for the underground opening in the second design phase has to contain all the above mentioned results and analyses, which is particularly important if any stability problems occur, as well as for future maintenance of the structure.
-9.6 -8.8 -8.3 -7.8 -7.4 -6.9 -6.3 -5.6 -5.0 -3.8 -2.4 -1.7 -0.9 -0.2 0.2 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.0 -9.9 -6.8 -3.0 -1.1 -23.7 -23.7 -23.3 -22.8 -20.6 -18.1 -33.0 -34.1 -35.4 -36.8 -40.8 -47.2 -52.4 -35.4 -35.7 -35.7 -35.4 -32.7 -29.3 -25.3 -18.7 -11.4 -7.4 -3.6 10.0 0.0 -0.7 5.9 0.8 4.0 0.9 0.3 1.3 -0.1 0.2 -9.3 -8.1 -6.5 -4.5 -2.4 -1.1 -0.6 -32.9 -34.1 -35.4 -16.5 -38.7 -43.7 -52.8 -15.0 -12.8 -11.2 -18.0 -17.4 -9.6 -8.9 -8.3 -7.9 -7.5 -7.1 -6.4 -5.6 -5.0 -3.7 -2.4 -1.7 -0.9 -0.2

10.1 6.0 4.0 1.4 0.2

Figure 5. Total vertical displacements from the numerical analysis

6 CONSTRUCTION The method of using an injected steel pipe roof was used for the first time in Croatia for the St. Mark tunnel construction. The system AlwagTechmo was selected, because of its advantages in using the standard tunnel drilling equipment for the construction of the protective roof, and because of its speed and precision of construction. The latter is important because lattice girders are installed immediately under the pipes, and their geometry follows the designed pipe inclination. The pipes are installed by drilling a borehole with a drill bit, which has a slightly larger diameter than the pipe. The drill bit carries the pipe along during the drilling. It consists of the central drill bit, which is taken out through the pipe along with the other drilling equipment after the installation, and of a ring bit having a diameter of 120 mm, which remains at the front of the installed pipe. The pipes are 114.3 mm in diameter, with the wall thickness of 3 mm. Their length is 3 m each, and they can be interconnected if a greater length is required. The pipes are injected after installation by a normally bonding cement injecting mixture under the pressure of 5 bars. The purpose of injecting the pipes is to have a better contact between the pipes and the surrounding rock mass, as well as to inject cohesionless and compact cohesive soils in the region of pipe installation. The construction of the pipe roof was done consecutively in both tunnel tubes with the same drilling equipment. The average time required for the installation of 29 injected steel pipes in the roof was about 36 hours. While the pipe roof was constructed in one tunnel tube, the excavation and tunnel support were made under the protection of the already constructed pipe roof in the other tunnel tube. This method resulted in an average advancement of excavation and tunnel support construction of about 3.5 m per day in total for both tunnel tubes. The maximum advancement was 8 m per day. Figure 6 shows the advancement of excavation and tunnel support construction for each tunnel tube. In order to stabilise the underground opening in the weak material, a quick construction of a quality stiff tunnel support was necessary. The shotcrete, which is the main bearing element of the stiff tunnel support, was designed according to Austrian guidelines for shotcrete (sterreichischer Betonverein 1998). The wet procedure was adopted. The shotcrete was placed in layers with the maximum thickness of 15 cm. The one-day compressive strength was between 10 and 15 MPa depending on the initial shotcrete temperature. The mean value of the 28-day strength was 45.27 MPa (Schubert & Potonjak 1999). Because of poor soil characteristics, the excavation of some tunnel

segments was done only after the shotcrete truck mixer was brought to the construction site. Owing to technology applied, it was possible to keep fresh concrete in the mixer up to 24 hours prior to construction. By constructing the tunnel support immediately after the excavation, the possible problems of excavation instability were avoided.
1200 L EF T TUNNE L TUB E -5 1+893, 7 - 52+1 36,7 RI GHT T UNNE L T UB E- 51+92 9 - 52+160

1100

km 51 +
1000 900 Jan 18, 1999 Feb 17, 1999 Mar 19, 1999 Apr 18, 1999 May 18, 1999 Jun 17, 1999 Jul 17, 1999

Figure 6. Advancement of excavation and tunnel support construction for each tunnel tube Pantex steel lattice girders were used as passive tunnel support elements for the first time in Croatia. They were used in several major projects worldwide (Duddek & Stding 1990; Myers et al. 1991) owing to their indisputable quality. They have many advantages over TH and I arches, such as better bond with the shotcrete, smaller weight and easier construction. The girders are designed and installed in such a way that they can follow the shape of the constructed pipe roof by alterations of their geometry. From active tunnel support elements for the stabilisation for the St. Mark tunnel underground excavation IBO anchors R 32/60, 6 m long were used. These anchors are generally used in weak materials, where the problem of borehole stability and passability is present. Before the tunnel excavation started IBO anchors were tested at the tunnel entrance cut. The anchor testing was carried out according to ISRM guidelines (1974). The maximum force of 200 kN applied to test anchors did not cause failure of any one of the anchors. The full control over the behaviour of the geotechnical structure was achieved through daily monitoring and the analysis of control monitoring results. Control monitoring sections were installed immediately after the second phase excavation, at the average distance of 6 m from the first phase tunnel face. The results of daily surveying of

absolute displacements of 5 measurement points at the edge of the underground opening were processed by the computer program Dedalos (Geodata) and delivered to the geotechnical supervisor for interpretation. The construction of additional tunnel support in order to stabilise the portal region of the left tunnel tube is a typical example of intervention based on the control monitoring results. Displacements of all measurement points in the direction of the right tunnel tube entrance cut were registered at the first

two monitoring sections in the portal region of the left tunnel tube during the advancement of excavation (Fig. 7). Additional IBI anchors were then installed in the left tunnel wall. These anchors were installed in pairs at intervals of 1.5 m, so that the bond length was at least 2 m in the disintegrated dolomite. The anchor length was between 9 and 12 m. The displacements could no longer be detected after the installation of these anchors, and the excavation was stabilised.

Figure 7. Control monitoring results in the portal region of the left tunnel tube According to results of the numerical modelling, it was predicted that the settlements of the soil su rface in the region of the integral monitoring section, would be between 3.3 and 3.5 cm above and between tunnel tubes, and that the vertical displacements of the tunnel tube roof would be 5.2 cm. The deformation modulus E = 80 MPa, determined by pressuremeter measurements, was used in the analysis to be on the safe side. The displacement measurements made by the sliding deformeter at the integral tunnel support monitoring section (Figs 8, 9), as well as surveying results of the measurement points situated on the top of every borehole, have shown that the settlements of the soil surface above and between the two tunnel tubes was about 1 cm (Fig. 10), whereas vertical displacements of the tunnel tube roof was about 2 cm (Fig. 9). Displacement measurements on the control monitoring section inside the tunnel, in the region of the integral monitoring section, have shown that only 50% of total displacement occurred in this region was registered. (Fig. 11).

Figure 8. Vertical displacements - deformeter I10LTC

Figure 10. Integral monitoring section with settlement measurements at the soil surface Figure 9. Vertical displacements - deformeter I10LTC

Figure 11. Results of control monitoring in the left tunnel tube in the region of the integral monitoring section The deformation modulus E of about 300 MPa for the completely disintegrated clastic layers was obtained in the back-analysis by matching vertical displacements from the numerical model (Fig. 12) with those measured at the integral monitoring section (Fig. 10). The absolute horizontal displacements determined in the inclinometer borehole located 6.5 m from the axis of the left tunnel tube are shown in Figure 13. The maximum horizontal displacement of about 6 mm was registered in the region where the tunnel roof and wall converge, and this result is in accordance with the back-analysis. In general, it can be concluded that measurements of displacements around an underground opening taken from the soil surface have multiple advantages over displacement measurements executed from the tunnel, such as: - Possibility of registering displacements prior to and during the tunnel advancement across the region of the monitoring section (about 30% of total displacements at the St. Mark tunnel occurred before the tunnel face passed across the region of the monitoring section). - Possibility of measuring absolute displacements. - Measurement s c a n b e m a d e a t a n y t i m e , irrespective of the construction process. - Monitoring equipment is less susceptible to damage.

The results of monitoring stresses in tunnel support elements (by pressure cells and test anchors) could not be interpreted. This happened mainly because the monitoring equipment was not installed by the monitoring specialists, but by the constructor, and also because the installation was performed simultaneously with the construction of the primary tu nnel support.

7 CONCLUSIONS Tunnels are primarily geotechnical structures because the basic structural material in tunnelling is soil or a rock mass. According to Eurocode 7, the St. Mark tunnel belongs to the 3rd geotechnical category, which includes the most complex geotechnical structures. The design of underground structures is a special area of geotechnical engineering which in order to be successful requires both the theoretical knowledge and experience. The design solutions in tunnelling, due to the complex and sometimes unpredictable nature of geotechnical material, require the designing process to be continued during the execution of the tunnel. It has to be emphasised that most failures or serious incidents in tunnel construction usually occur during the excavation and stabilisation of the underground opening, or afterwards, as a result of inadequate stabilisation measures. Additionally, decisions relevant for the structure stability have to be made without any delay during tunnel construction. Therefore, the tunnel design and construction require solving tasks, which are not usually encountered in other civil engineering structures. Keeping in mind the above statements, it can be concluded that the following circumstances have contributed to successful design and construction of the St. Mark tunnel: - The application of the integrated design method, which combines the empirical, rational a n d observational approaches, and allows for continuing design. - Carrying out the second design phase during the tunnel construction by the use of continuing geotechnical supervision, which provided full control of the construction and behaviour of the geotechnical structure during each construction stage. - Carrying out geotechnical observation and monitoring. - Selecting the optimal construction technology and high quality tunnel support elements. - Professional client, who was able to assess the importance of new design procedures and construction technologies, and willing to implement them. - Disciplined constructor, who has the skills and experience necessary for the successful construction of this type of tunnel.

-2.7 -2.5 -2.3 -2.2 -2.1 -2.0 -1.9 -1.8 -1.7 -1.6 -1.4 -1.3 -1.1 -0.9 -0.7 -0.4 -0.2 0.0

-7.2 -7.2 -7.1 -6.9 -6.7 -6.2 -5.5 -4.8 -4.2 -3.3 -2.4 -1.8 11.9 -1.4 8.6 -0.7 5.5 -0.2 4.1 3.1 2.4 0.1 1.9 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 1.3 0.4 0.1

-10.2 -10.6 -10.9 -11.4 -11.9 -12.5 -13.2 -14.2 -15.5

-11.0 -11.2 -11.2 -11.1 -10.8 -10.2 -9.1 -7.8 -6.8 -5.7 -4.9 -4.2 -3.4 11.9 8.6 -2.2 5.5 -1.0 4.0 -0.2 3.0 0.0 2.3 1.8 0.2 0.3 0.1 1.2 0.4 0.1

-10.2 -10.6 -10.9 -11.4 -11.9 -12.5 -13.2 -14.2 -15.5

-5.4 -5.2 -4.9 -4.7 -4.4 -4.0 -3.8 -3.3 -3.1 -2.7 -2.4 -1.9 -1.3 -0.7 -0.3 -0.1 -0.1 0.0

-2.7 -2.5 -2.3 -2.2 -2.1 -2.0 -1.9 -1.8 -1.8 -1.6 -1.4 -1.3 -1.1 -0.9 -0.7 -0.4 -0.2 0.0

Figure 12. Results of the back-analysis

Figure 13. Horizontal displacements - inclinometer I10LTC

8 REFERENCES Barton, N., Lien, R., Lunde, J: Engineering classification of rock masses for the design of tunnel support. Rock Mechanics, Vol. 6, No. 4, 183-236 (1974). CEN/TC 250/SC 7 Preliminary draft EN 1997-1 Eurocode 7 Geotechnical design Part 1 General rules. Document nr. CEN/TC 250/SC 7 N 301 (1999). Duddek, H., Stding, A: Tunnelling in Soft Ground and Sedimentary Rock for HighSpeed Double-Track Railway Lines in Germany. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, Vol. 5, No. 3, 257-263 (1990). Grimstad, E., Barton, N: Updating of the Q-sistem for NMT. Proc. Int. Symp. on Sprayed Concrete-Modern use of wet mix sprayed concrete for underground support, Fagernes, Oslo (1993). ISRM: Suggested methods for rockbolt testing. In Rock characterization, testing and monitoring. ISRM Suggested Methods, ed E. T. Brown, Pergamon Press 1981, 161-168 (1974). ITA: Guidelines for the design of tunnels. ITA Working Group on General Approaches to the Design of Tunnels, Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, Vol. 3, No. 3, 237-249 (1988). Marene, M: Numerical analysis of the excavation and primary tunnel stabilisation of the St. Mark tunnel. IGH A rchives, (1997) (In Croatian). Myers, A., John, M., Fugeman, D., Lafford, M., Purrer, W: Planung und Ausfhrung der britischen berleitstelle im Kanaltunnel. Felsbau, Jg. 9, Nr. 1, 27-36 (1991). NORM B 2203 Untertagebuarbeiten. Werkvertragsnorm (1994). Orr, T.L.L., Farrell, E.R Geotechnical Design to Eurocode 7. Springer Verlag, London (1999). sterreichischer Betonverein: Richtlinie spritzbeton Anwendung und prfung (1998). Schubert P., Potonjak : Performance requirements of sprayed concrete in tunnelling. Proc. MESTU, Zagreb, 281-286 (1999). Stojkovi, B: Design of highway tunnels in rock masses by the integrated method. Master Thesis, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Univers ity of Zagreb (1986) (In Croatian). Stojkovi, B., Ortolan, ., Lisac, Z: Sidi Yacoub Dam vertical shaft and spillway tunnel. In Underground Hydropower Plants, Proc. Int. Conference on Hydropower in Oslo, Norway, June, Vol. 2, 989-1000 (1987). Stojkovi, B., Miri, N: Integral design method at the Bekhme Dam Project. Proc. Seventh Int. Congress on Rock Mechanics, Aachen, Germany, Vol. 2, 1369-1373 (1991).

Swoboda, G. Programsystem FINAL. University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria (1997).