159

GPR Investigations to Assess the State of Damage of a Concrete Water Tunnel

1

Downloaded 12/15/12 to 95.159.85.216. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

Diego Arosio1, Stefano Munda1, Luigi Zanzi1, Laura Longoni2 and Monica Papini2 Dip. di Ing. Strutturale, Politecnico di Milano, Piazza Leonardo da Vinci 32, 20133 Milano, Italy 2 Dip. di Ing. Idraulica, Ambientale, Infrastrutture Viarie, Rilevamento, Politecnico di Milano, Piazza Leonardo da Vinci 32, 20133 Milano, Italy

ABSTRACT Erosional voids developing around concrete-lined tunnels can compromise the safety of the surrounding areas, as well as of the tunnels themselves. In this study, ground penetrating radar (GPR) was used to assess the condition of a water tunnel built to channel a river under a mountain road. The tunnel is lined with 6080 cm thick concrete and has a semicircular crosssection with a diameter that varies between 3 m and 4 m. The concrete structure has been damaged from erosion beneath the concrete floor, creating a sequence of pools and waterfalls, which further extend the erosive action below the floor and side walls.

After the collapse of a section of the tunnel running below a nearby parking lot, a GPR investigation was initiated to assess the extent of the erosive action behind the tunnel walls and below the concrete floor. Most GPR measurements were performed from inside the tunnel with a 200-MHz antenna, which was selected as the best trade-off between penetration and resolution. GPR results, integrated with a priori information and geological investigations, indicated a highly permeable soil consisting of a thin layer of alluvial sediments that covers an altered limestone layer strongly affected by erosion and karst phenomena. Fortunately, GPR inspections on the parking lot surface were able to exclude the presence of large cavities above the tunnel vault. On the contrary, GPR inspections performed inside the tunnel detected many voids forming behind the walls, especially near the concreterock contact. GPR inspections performed on the tunnel floor confirm that water erosion is active below the concrete paving. Overall, the survey was useful for identifying the damaged tunnel segments where repair interventions are most urgent. Introduction Tunnels are important underground structures used in the transportation of vehicles, water, electricity, and other items. Many of these structures have been built decades earlier, and it is of paramount importance to assess the integrity of these underground constructions to ensure safety and long-term viability. Towards this end, several empirical (Schmidt, 1974; Attwell, 1978), analytical (Verruijt and Booker, 1996; Bobet,
JEEG, September 2012, Volume 17, Issue 3, pp. 159169

2001) and numerical analyses (Leca and Clough, 1992; Augarde and Burd, 2001; Menguid and Dang, 2009) have been conducted to evaluate tunnel stability. In particular, Meguid and Dang (2009) used numerical models to evaluate the negative effect of erosional voids developing in close vicinity of tunnels. They studied the effects of voids on the circumferential stresses in the lining and the change in lining response caused by the introduction of voids behind lateral walls (i.e., at the springline) and below the paving (i.e., at the invert). While they assumed a homogeneous hosting medium and a theoretical 2-D geometry of the voids, their work helped to improve the knowledge of the stress state of these structures. In this work, we attempt to identify the erosional voids in a water-filled tunnel using geophysical methods, particularly ground penetrating radar (GPR). The geophysical investigation was part of a broader study focused on understanding the hydrogeological conditions that potentially could contribute to the deterioration of the water-carrying infrastructure along a national road that runs through a narrow valley. The road is periodically affected by service interruptions caused by small landslides or partial road collapses induced by water erosion and intense precipitation events. The risk of road collapses increases where the road runs close to the river or where the river crosses the road by flowing into concrete-lined tunnels. The concrete tunnels were built at the beginning of the 20th century and were not properly maintained over the past decades. Rapid deterioration induced by water erosion and lack of maintenance are a major safety concern. For example, a large sinkhole triggered by a partial collapse

160 Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics of one of these underground infrastructures occurred in 2007 in a parking area near the road. No injuries were reported, but the incident could have been much worse if the concrete tunnel had collapsed a few meters ahead, where it passes under the road, or if the sinkhole had occurred during a weekend when that parking lot is often crowded. A team of geologists, geophysicists, hydrologists, and civil engineers from Politecnico di Milano were involved to assess the risk of similar events along two segments of the concrete tunnel responsible for the 2007 sinkhole. The most severely damaged section of the tunnel runs parallel to the valley for 300 m before intersecting the road, where the valley makes a pronounced left turn. No traces of regular maintenance operations or previous assessment studies were found in the archives of the local environmental agency in charge for the management of the water infrastructures. An exception was a partial visual inspection performed inside the tunnel in the year 2004, which reported a severe deterioration of the concrete structure and suggested further investigations to be performed with the georadar method. Although the archives do not report any repair operation, the visual inspection of the tunnel assessed the existence of some provisional reinforcements that were installed in two points of the tunnel where the concrete structure is highly fractured. These reinforcements, consisting of timber and metal elements, were likely installed in the 1990s and already had presented signs of deterioration. We mention these details because it is likely that other tunnels of similar vintage have incomplete inspection records or less-thaneffective maintenance. The team of Politecnico di Milano planned to perform a visual inspection of the entire tunnel to assess the present condition (concrete fracturing, water infiltrations, floor erosion, etc.) and to explore the feasibility of non-destructive investigations testing (NDT) of the tunnel. One of the more common NDT methods that have been used to perform investigations on concrete liners of tunnels, sewers, and railway or road tunnels is GPR. For example, Maekawa and Fenner (1994) reported the use of GPR to assess the extent of cavities behind concrete tunnel linings. Cardarelli et al. (2003) used GPR to evaluate the quality of the contact between concrete lining and massive rock from inside a potable water supply tunnel. Davis et al. (2005) reported the use of GPR to examine the efficiency of tunnel lining groutings and showed examples from investigations performed on water supply and sewer tunnels. Parkinson and Ekes (2008) showed the use of GPR to map tunnel lining condition, to locate concrete deterioration, and to detect voids developed between the concrete liner and rock surface caused by water flowing either in or out via defects in the liner. Zhang et al. (2008) used GPR to evaluate the lining quality of a railway tunnel and to detect the hidden flaws in the lining. The investigation results were used to direct subsequent grouting, with a follow-up survey to assess the quality of the grouting. Finally, Zhang et al. (2010) described a similar application where the use of GPR was proposed to detect the grout thickness behind the lining segments of metro lines in Shanghai, China. In the literature that focused on GPR investigations of underground and concrete-lined tunnels, most of the focus was on the inspection of the upper part of the tunnels, i.e., walls and vaults, where overburden stresses were the highest. However, in the case of water-filled tunnels, the floor has been given little attention, likely because of the difficulties of performing NDT without service interruptions. However, it is important to mention that the lower part of a water tunnel can be as critical or even more so than the upper part, depending on the geometry of the tunnel cross-section (circular or semicircular) and on flow regime and water pressure. GPR is a method that is often proposed to perform near-surface geophysical investigations on karst areas where the risk of sinkhole formation is high. Carpenter et al. (1998) and Batayneh et al. (2002) reported examples where GPR and other geophysical methods were tested to locate buried sinkholes as a means of inferring the existence of hydraulically-active karst features. Leucci et al. (2004) applied GPR and ERT for mapping karstified zones. Beres et al. (2001) combined GPR and microgravimetric methods to achieve the same objective. Conroy and Guy (2005) and Conroy and Daniels (2006) described GPR surveys conducted along a section of highway that had collapsed into underground coal mine workings to detect other locations of mine-related disruptions. Miller et al. (2008) showed GPR data collected at two Vermont highway sites exhibiting pavement subsidence. The GPR data were useful to study the soil properties and to understand the subsidence mechanism, in one case related with water erosion and resulting in fine particle migration. Pueyo-Anchuela et al. (2009) tested the GPR method to study the internal structure of sediments in search of indicators of active karst processes. They performed a classification of karst hazard problems in terms of cavities, evidences of subsidence and paleocollapses. In a following paper the same authors propose a combination of geophysical techniques that can be successfully applied in alluvial karst regions to locate areas of high sinkhole risk (PueyoAnchuela et al., 2010). From a summary of the collected works, it is clear that GPR is a robust method to effectively determine trouble spots along the water-filled tunnel at the test site. Therefore, this paper addresses the geophysical

Downloaded 12/15/12 to 95.159.85.216. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

161 Arosio et al.: GPR Assessment of a Water Tunnel

Downloaded 12/15/12 to 95.159.85.216. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

Figure 1. Location of the GPR investigations and map of the tunnel. The area is located in the Pre-alpine region, 60 km north of Milan (Italy). The drawing illustrates the section of the national S.S.233 road where the Olona River is forced to enter the first segment of a concrete-lined tunnel to underpass both the parking area of the Valganna Waterfalls and the road. A second segment of the tunnel runs parallel to the road before crossing it again. On top right, a drawing of the tunnel cross-section shows the position of the antenna for the GPR profiles undertaken inside the tunnel. investigation in three different areas to determine those needing further investigation: a) inside the tunnel, b) in the parking lot near the road, and c) along the segment of the road that runs close to or above the tunnel. Particularly, the investigations inside the tunnel were aimed to assess the extent of water erosion behind the tunnel walls and below the segments of the tunnel floor that are still preserved. Since the mechanism of collapse of the structure was likely triggered by the erosion of the wall foundations, the investigations on the preserved concrete floor, especially near the wall-floor contact, are particularly important (Meguid and Dang, 2009). Furthermore, these studies represent an interesting application that is not well documented in the GPR literature. To conduct these measurements, the GPR antennae were placed inside a PVC box and the surveying of the concrete floor was performed by preserving the contact between the antenna and the floor. Investigations in the parking lot and along the national road were aimed to detect GPR anomalies that could be related to cavity formation caused by erosional activity above the tunnel vault, whose depth varies from 1 m in the parking lot to about 8 m at the end of the second segment of the tunnel. Site Description The geophysical investigations were conducted in the area of the waterfalls located in the Valganna valley (Fig. 1), 60-km north of Milan (Italy). Geological mapping of the site was performed at the beginning of the study and it was determined that two different carbonate facies, pertaining to a dolomitic-limestone sedimentary succession of Mesozoic age, outcrop in the area of the Valganna waterfalls. The travertine is highly karstified, whereas the dolomite rock is heavily fractured with the presence of thick folds. The tunnel was built along the contact between alluvial deposits of the Olona River and the strongly karstified travertine. At shallow depth, close to the tunnel, alluvial deposits are characterized by loose, unconsolidated soil in a sandy matrix with centimeter-sized clasts. The deposit shows a

162 Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics

Downloaded 12/15/12 to 95.159.85.216. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

Figure 3. The construction site that followed the tunnel collapse in 2007. The tunnel section is semicircular (about 3-m across and 2-m high) with a concrete wall thickness of about 6080 cm. the study site effectively into two segments, the first segment ends on the south side of the parking area, highlighted in Fig. 1. Within 50 m, the river enters a second segment of the tunnel that runs parallel to the road for about 300 m. At the end of the second segment of the tunnel the road turns left in the direction of a brewery. The investigations were planned after the formation of the 2007 sinkhole. The sinkhole was caused by the collapse of the tunnel, which created a void 13-m long and 3.5-m high. Figure 3 shows the construction site during the repair of the tunnel. The picture shows that the internal section of the tunnel is semicircular with a diameter of about 3 m and a height of about 2 m. The thickness of the concrete wall varies from 60 to 80 cm and the vault is about 1 m below the parking level. The internal inspection of the tunnel revealed an extreme deterioration of the concrete structure. Figures 4(a)(b) show large areas where the concrete floor of the tunnel partially collapsed as a result of bedrock erosion. Bedrock erosion caused the most dangerous situations at the base of the lateral walls of the tunnel, as depicted on the right side of Fig. 4(b). As a result of the erosion action, the water flow was quite irregular with pools and waterfalls existing throughout (see Figs. 4(c)(d)), especially in the second segment of the tunnel. Temporary bridges were assembled to perform inspections and geophysical investigations. The second segment also showed evidence of water seeping through the concrete ceiling (Fig. 4(e)). Finally, Fig. 4(f) was taken near the end of the second segment and showed timber and metal reinforcements that were used in the past for repair. The internal inspection revealed a major consequence of water erosion and subsequent collapse of the concrete slabs that forms the tunnels pavement. That is, the erosional activity can progress laterally below the tunnel walls at a much higher rate than would be expected from water infiltration through secondary

Figure 2. The lapideous rock layer consists of weathered limestone highly affected by karst phenomena. variable thickness across the area, with a maximum depth of 1.5 m. Beneath the alluvial deposits, the bioconstructed limestone bedrock is heavily weathered because of karst processes in the first 2 m (Fig. 2), while its mechanical properties tend to improve at greater depth. From a hydrogeological point of view, this site is subjected to a double erosion process: the first is directly related to water flowing inside the tunnel and a second is caused by water infiltration in the heavily fractured and karstified hosting rock mass. The Mesozoic sedimentary succession shows a significant secondary permeability (i.e., permeability developed in a rock after its deposition), mostly because of karst processes, giving rise to the second erosional process. However, it is worth noting that permeability of dolomites is mainly related to extensive fracturing, while limestones are heavily affected by karst phenomena that give rise to subsurface water flow. As shown in Fig. 1, the Olona River was diverted into an underground concrete chamber below the hotel of the Valganna Waterfalls, after which it enters a concrete-lined tunnel to underpass the parking area of the waterfalls and the national road (S.S.233). Splitting

163 Arosio et al.: GPR Assessment of a Water Tunnel

Downloaded 12/15/12 to 95.159.85.216. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

Figure 4. Inspection of the tunnel. a) and b) Examples of damages of the concrete paving created by water erosion below the tunnel floor. Note also the very dangerous erosive actions of the water below the lateral walls of the tunnel. c) and d) Examples of waterfalls and water pools caused by collapsed portions of the concrete floor induced by water erosion. Temporary bridges were needed to bypass the larger pools with the GPR equipment. e) Signs of water seeping through the concrete vault in the second segment of the tunnel. f) Remains of an old repair intervention in the second segment of the tunnel.

164 Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics permeability features (fractures and karst) alone. This creates a very dangerous situation, with the potential to trigger new tunnel collapses. Thus, the results of the internal inspections underline the importance of further diagnostic investigations to assess the extent of water erosion activity beyond the tunnel walls and especially below the still preserved slabs of the concrete floor. Data Acquisition Despite the adverse conditions created by floor collapses and water pools, an extensive GPR survey was undertaken from inside the tunnel. The late summer (September 2008) was chosen for operation inside the tunnel because of the reduced rate of water flow. After some preliminary testing performed with two different antennae frequencies (200 MHz and 600 MHz), the lower frequency was selected as the best tradeoff between resolution and penetration. Both the antennas were able to detect areas of detachment between the concrete liner and the rock, but the 200 MHz antenna was offering higher penetration thus extending the ability to detect cavities and karst features a few meters beyond the tunnel wall. The 200 MHz antenna was also selected for the radar survey of the parking lot and for the radar profiles along the national road to ensure a penetration of several meters. Thus, the equipment for all the investigations consists of a 200 MHz shielded antenna with a TX-RX separation of 19 cm controlled by a radar unit from IDS S.p.A. GPR data were initially collected on the surface by exploring the parking area of the hotel near the waterfalls and the road that runs close to the river. The aim of these surface measurements was to evaluate GPR penetration in the specific area and to assess the ground properties above the tunnel with special attention to detect karst features and cavities. The parking area was explored by selecting seven zones above the tunnel route that were scanned in 3-D mode by executing parallel profiles spaced 50-cm apart. Several long profiles were collected along the national road, which runs near the underground tunnel. GPR data acquisition was particularly focused on the road segments that cross over the tunnel. GPR measurements were also collected inside the tunnel, which took several days to complete, and were performed to achieve the following goals: a) detect possible voids excavated by water behind the lateral walls of the tunnel either proximal to the concrete-rock contact area or within a 3-m distance from the wall; and b) explore the apparently undamaged segments of the tunnel floor to assess the extent of the water erosion below the concrete paving. Profiles were collected along both tunnel walls by walking Figure 5. Example of a 40-m GPR profile along the national road. Penetration down to 80 ns (i.e., about 5 m) is observed. Alluvial sediments (1- or 2-m thick) overlay a layer of altered limestone. Reflection A comes from the base of the paved road. Reflection B comes from the interface that separates the sediments from the limestone, while reflection C comes from a change of compaction within the alluvial sediments. Many diffractions and short discontinuous reflections are observed in the image as a result of karst phenomena. Some diffractions within the alluvial sediments might be caused by pipes crossing the road (e.g., diffraction D). in the tunnel direction, except for those segments where the tunnel floor had collapsed creating large and deep water pools. We were forced to collect profiles at a height of about 45u on both sides of the tunnel section (top right in Fig. 1) because at lower angles from the floor metal reinforcements protrude from the concrete. Floor profiles were also collected where possible, i.e., on the preserved concrete slabs, by walking in the tunnel direction with the GPR antenna placed inside a waterproof PVC box. A large wheel with encoder was attached to the box to trigger the radar unit to help with geo-referencing. The floor profiles run close to the walls rather than in the tunnel center (top right in Fig. 1) because the erosive action of the water is particularly dangerous for the stability of the tunnel when it creates large voids below the lateral walls, as visible in Fig. 4(b). Data Processing and Interpretation Data processing was performed with 2-D and 3-D software developed at Politecnico di Milano. The data were bandpass filtered and time calibrated before applying a gain function to compensate for signal loss caused by divergence and absorption. A function for background subtraction was applied where needed to enhance very shallow targets. Some data were also migrated to focus the diffractions produced by cavities or other scattering targets. On the whole, all the surface profiles collected in the parking area or along the national road show good penetration. Reflections or diffractions from targets 5-m deep (about 80 ns) are often observed (Fig. 5). This suggests that the subsoil contains little to no clay and is

Downloaded 12/15/12 to 95.159.85.216. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

165 Arosio et al.: GPR Assessment of a Water Tunnel

Downloaded 12/15/12 to 95.159.85.216. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

Figure 6. Example of another 44-m GPR profile along the national road. Reflection A comes from the base of the paved road. Diffractions B and C are superficial pipes crossing the road. Many other diffractions are observed as a result of small voids created by water erosion and karst phenomena. rather coarse so that minimal water is retained. This observation is also consistent with the relatively high velocity obtained from diffraction analysis: a stable value of about 12 cm/ns, not compatible with saturated sediments, was found in all the GPR records. The sediments are typified by alluvial deposits in a sandy matrix with centimetric clasts, overlaying a travertine layer characterized by high permeability caused by both karst phenomena and significant fracturing. The transition between alluvial deposits and limestone is visible in Fig. 3 at about 1 m below the parking level (see the color change of the exposed rock). In Fig. 5, this transition generates reflection B, gently dipping from right to left in the 1040 ns range corresponding to a depth range of 0.52.5 m. Reflection C comes from a change of compaction within the alluvial deposits. The profiles collected on the parking lot and along the national road generally present images with a greater number of diffractions than the tunnel profiles. Figure 6 is an example where the diffraction density is particularly evident. Some diffractions also show strong reverberations that suggest the possibility of metal pipes or open voids (e.g., Radzevicius et al., 2000; Kofman et al., 2006). Given that no buildings exist along this section of the road to justify a great number of lateral connections to sewer or other utilities, it is likely that most of these diffractions are associated with small voids resulting from intense karst activity. The voids are also visible on the trench sides in Fig. 3. The tunnel vault is observed by the surface radar measurements, but only where the tunnel depth is less than 45 m, i.e., in the parking area and below the road at the first road/tunnel intersection. Here the vault is often well depicted and both the reflections from the outer and the inner sides of the concrete ceiling are distinguished (Fig. 7). The tunnel floor appears with a non-flat reflection because of the expected image distortion caused by the circular vault, enhanced by Figure 7. Example of a vertical section extracted from a 3-D survey in the parking area. Note the reflection from the upper (U) and lower (L) sides of the concrete vault of the tunnel. The time difference, about 11 ns, indicates a concrete thickness of 55 cm assuming a concrete velocity of 10 cm/ns. Note also the distorted reflection from the tunnel floor (F). This arrives with a delay from L (measured at the center of the tunnel) of about 13 ns, which gives a tunnel height of 195 cm assuming a velocity of 30 cm/ns (air velocity) within the tunnel. the much higher velocity of the radar wave within the air-filled tunnel. The GPR data collected on the lateral walls were processed to enhance diffractions and reflections coming from the concrete-rock discontinuity and from the voids in the limestone rock created by both erosion and karst phenomena. All the radar signals that were attributed to voids very close to the concrete tunnel (within 1 m) were mapped on the radar images with a solid box, whereas a dash-dot box was used to map signals attributed to voids at a distance greater than 1 m from the tunnel. To separate erosional features from metallic infrastructure, a dashed box was used to highlight the possibility of pipes. As an example, Fig. 8 shows a 13-m long section of a wall profile where voids were detected near the rock-concrete contact and also far from the contact, at a distance of about 160 cm. The features are particularly evident in the migrated section, shown in Fig. 8(b). An accurate report was produced during the GPR survey to monitor the existence of any construction elements that could disturb the radar data. This was important to ensure a correct interpretation of signals like the artifacts shown in Fig. 8 resulting from two pairs of lateral intake pipes. The radar image in Fig. 9 illustrates another 13-m long section of a wall profile. Most of this section is affected by a persistent detachment of the concrete wall from the rock. In addition, a strong reflection indicates a suspected cavity

166 Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics

Downloaded 12/15/12 to 95.159.85.216. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

Figure 8. Example of a wall profile: a) before migration, b) after migration. Voids were detected behind the concrete wall near the rock-concrete contact (solid boxes) and at a distance of about 160 cm (dash-dot box). The dashed boxes indicate artifacts, followed by reverberations, created by metal water pipes that enter the concrete tunnel from the side of the GPR profile. 2-m long located at a distance of about 180 cm from the tunnel. Similarly, the data from the investigations on the tunnel floor were interpreted by mapping with solid boxes all the signals that were attributed to water pools created by erosion and karst phenomena below the concrete paving. An example is given in Fig. 10, where four water-filled cavities were detected in a 7-m long segment of the tunnel floor. Since the radar velocity in water is very low (about 3.3 cm/ns), the thickness of the suspected pools observed in Fig. 10 varies from 8 cm to 3540 cm. The signals associated with these phenomena sometimes appear as diffractions (small cavities filled by water), while at other times they appear as reflections (wider water pools). In some cases, the reflection reverberates indicating that the horizontal size of the water pool is not much larger than its thickness (Kofman et al., 2006). The radar velocity resulting from the diffraction analysis on floor profiles (generally lower than 6 cm/ns) validate the presence of water below the concrete paving. To create a synthetic map of the deterioration progress that might be used by the engineers to evaluate the residual risk and to plan the most urgent actions, all the voids that were observed behind the concrete walls and all the water pools that were detected below the concrete paving were transferred on a CAD map, as shown in Fig. 11. According to the synthetic map, moving from right to left by following the direction of the river, we note the following results. The parking area (section C in Fig. 11), before the first river-road intersection, shows an average density of radar events with a number of them generated by suspected cavities located about 2 m behind the tunnel wall. The short section where no events are reported corresponds to the area of the 2007 collapse that was under repair during the GPR investigations. The second segment of the tunnel apparently shows two safe sections where no radar events are reported. Actually, they correspond to areas affected by large and extended pools that prevented the possibility to walk and investigate the walls. Thus, they are the most damaged sections of the tunnel where the concrete floor has been almost totally eroded. From the entrance of the second segment to the first unexplorable area (section B in Fig. 11), we note a higher density of events compared to the parking area, especially related with detachments between the concrete wall and the hosting rock. In between the two unexplorable areas, we note a section (section A in Fig. 11) affected by a very high density of events of various types (detachments, cavities, water pools). This section and the two neighboring unexplorable areas, especially at the intersection with the road, define the most damaged stretch of the tunnel where local authorities and engineers should plan renovation works with the highest priority. The last section of the tunnel before the final exit shows an average density of events;

167 Arosio et al.: GPR Assessment of a Water Tunnel

Downloaded 12/15/12 to 95.159.85.216. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

Figure 9. Example of a wall profile: a) before migration, b) after migration. A long detachment of the concrete wall from the rock is observed in the solid box. A strong reflection from a suspected cavity was also detected at a distance of about 180 cm (dash-dot box). this is where the remains of old repair interventions are still present so that the tunnel is partially protected. Conclusions The GPR method contributed successfully to the characterization of damaged sections around a waterfilled tunnel. Surface profiles showed good penetration (up to 45 m) and high velocity (12 cm/ns) suggesting a rather coarsely textured soil and excluding the presence of significant clay content. The GPR data indicated a pseudo-horizontal reflection at about 1 m and a large number of diffractions commensurate with a thin layer of alluvial sediments that covers an altered limestone layer strongly affected by erosion and karst phenomena. This suggests that water erosion and karst phenomena represent the main hazards associated with this concrete tunnel and a collapse in 2007 was most probably caused by water excavation at the tunnels base. As further revealed by internal inspections, water erosion tends to create variably-sized voids below the tunnel paving, especially where the semicircular concrete structure is expected to rest on the bedrock, i.e., below the lateral walls. The 3-D GPR inspections performed on the parking lot surface along the trajectory of the tunnel did not locate any large anomaly that could be related with the formation of a large cavity above the tunnel vault. On the contrary, the GPR inspections performed inside the tunnel detected many voids forming behind the walls, especially near the concrete-rock contact. Although less frequently, some voids were also detected inside the limestone layers at distances of 1 or 2 m from the concrete wall. The amount of these events is remarkably higher along the second segment of the tunnel, parallel to the national road, indicating that this area is much more deteriorated. The GPR inspections performed on the apparently undamaged segments of the tunnel floor validated the hypothesis that water erosion is particularly active below the concrete paving. Where this paving has not collapsed yet, the radar often detected water pools where the signal propagates at lower velocity with reverberations (or ringing). The results of the GPR investigations were reported on a synthetic CAD map of the tunnel to facilitate local authorities and engineers in defining the areas where renovation works are required with higher priority.

Figure 10. Example of a floor profile. Reflections from water pools created by erosion below the concrete paving were observed and are marked with solid boxes.

168 Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics

Downloaded 12/15/12 to 95.159.85.216. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

Figure 11. Compiled map of the GPR results, created by reporting all the voids detected outside the tunnel and all the water pools detected below the tunnel floor. The distribution of the radar events helps the engineers to evaluate the hazard level and to plan the repair activities.

The information gained by means of the GPR surveys could also be employed in numerical simulations to improve the knowledge on the state of stress of the tunnel and to estimate the risk of collapse. This approach would allow producing a risk erosion map, which may be an additional tool for evaluating tunnel safety. Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful to Alberto Bonaldi, Alessia Thevenet and Eva Zattera that were part of the GPR team during the acquisition days. The GPR equipment was kindly supplied by IDS S.p.A.. The authors gratefully acknowledge Dr. Dale Rucker for the extensive recommendations and comments which have contributed to making this manuscript acceptable for publication.

References
Attwell, P.B., 1978, Ground movements caused by tunneling in soil: in Proceedings: Large Ground Movements and Structures Conference, University of Wales, Cardiff, Wales, 812948.

Augarde, C.E., and Burd, H.J., 2001, Three-dimensional finite element analysis of lined tunnels: International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 25, 243262. Batayneh, A.T., Abueladas, A.A., and Moumani, K.A., 2002, Use of ground-penetrating radar for assessment of potential sinkhole conditions: An Example from Ghor al Haditha area, Jordan: Environmental Geology, 41, 977983. Beres, M., Luetscher, M., and Olivier, R., 2001, Integration of ground-penetrating radar and microgravimetric methods to map shallow caves: Journal of Applied Geophysics, 46, 249262. Bobet, A., 2001, Analytical solutions for shallow tunnels in saturated ground: Journal of Engineering MechanicsASCE, 127(12) 12581266. Cardarelli, E., Marrone, C., and Orlando, L., 2003, Evaluation of tunnel stability using integrated geophysical methods: Journal of Applied Geophysics, 52, 93102. Carpenter, P.J., Doll, W.E., and Kaufmann, R.D., 1998, Geophysical character of buried sinkholes on the Oak Ridge Reservation, Tennessee: Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics, 3, 133145. Conroy, J.P., and Daniels, J.J., 2006, Improved mine subsidence detection and roadway evaluation using a 3D GPR and

169 Arosio et al.: GPR Assessment of a Water Tunnel

statistical correlation of data by cross-plotting approach: in Proceedings: 11th International Conference on GPR, June 1922, Columbus, Ohio. Conroy, J.P., and Guy, E.D., 2005, Borehole tomography and surface 3D radar for coal mine subsidence detection: Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 10, bundle F. Davis, A.G., Lim, M.K., and Petersen, C.G., 2005, Rapid and economical evaluation of concrete tunnel linings with impulse response and impulse radar non-destructive methods: NDT&E International, 38, 181186. Kofman, L., Ronen, A., and Frydman, S., 2006, Detection of model voids by identifying reverberation phenomena in GPR records: Journal of Applied Geophysics, 59, 284299. Leca, E., and Clough, W., 1992, Preliminary design for NATM tunnel support in soil: Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 118(4) 558575. Leucci, G., Margiotta, S., and Negri, S., 2004, Geophysical and geological investigations in a karstic environment (Salice Salentino, Lecce, Italy): Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics, 9, 2534. Maekawa, S., and Fenner, T.J., 1994, Study of cavity depth estimation behind concrete tunnel lining using G.P.R.: in Proceedings: International Conference of G.P.R., Waterloo Center for Ground Research, Waterloo, Ontario, 895905. Meguid, M.A., and Dang, H.K., 2009, The effect of erosion voids on existing tunnel linings: Tunneling and Underground Space Technology, 24, 278286. Miller, J., Schultz, G., Calkins, D., and Benda, C., 2008, Assessing nondestructive geophysical methods for investigating roadway structural health: in Proceedings: 21st Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental Problems, April 610, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Parkinson, G., and Ekes, C., 2008, Ground penetrating radar evaluation of concrete tunnel linings: in Proceedings: 12th International Conference on GPR, June 1619, Birmingham, UK. Pueyo-Anchuela, O., Casas-Sainz, A.M., Soriano, M.A., and Pocov `-Juan, A., 2010, A geophysical survey routine for the detection of doline areas in the surroundings of Zaragoza (NE Spain): Engineering Geology, 114, 382396. Pueyo-Anchuela, O., Pocov `-Juan, A., Soriano, M.A., and Casas-Sainz, A.M., 2009, Characterization of karst hazards from the perspective of the doline triangle using GPR Examples from Central Ebro Basin (Spain): Engineering Geology, 108, 225236. Radzevicius, S.J., Guy, E.D., and Daniels, J.J., 2000, Pitfalls in GPR data interpretation: Differentiating stratigraphy and buried objects from periodic antenna and target effects: Geophysical Research Letters, 27, 33933396. Schmidt, B., 1974, Prediction of settlements due to tunneling in soil: Three case histories: in Proceedings: 2nd Rapid Excavation and Tunneling Conference, San Francisco, vol. 2, 11791199. Verruijt, A., and Booker, J.R., 1996, Surface settlements due to deformation of a tunnel in an elastic half plane: Geotechnique, 46(4) 753754. Zhang, L., Liu, Z., and Gong, C., 2008, The lining quality detection and grouting effect evaluation of the Kunlun Mountain railway tunnel using ground-penetrating radar: Near Surface Geophysics, 6, 175180. Zhang, F., Xie, X., and Huang, H., 2010, Application of ground penetrating radar in grouting evaluation for shield tunnel construction: Tunneling and Underground Space Technology, 25, 99107.

Downloaded 12/15/12 to 95.159.85.216. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/