Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Clif Kettle
Clif Kettle
134A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION
134
77B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
134
Page 1 of 66
Clif Kettle
Clif Kettle
134
134A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
INTRODUCTION
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Page 1 of 66
INTRODUCTION
134
Grouting and Deep Mixing 2012
Page 1 of 66
Page 1 of 66
135
Page 2 of 66
135
135
135A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Page 2 of 66
78A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
135
135A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 2 of 66
Page 2 of 66
136
78B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Page 3 of 66
Page 3 of 66
136
Grouting for Foundation Stabilisation, and Lifting and Levelling Heavy Concrete
Structures by John King and Eduardo Bindhoff, demonstrate that the practice of
using viscous mortars and grouts was well-established for improving the density,
stiffness, and bearing capacity of weak soils, whether for the purposes of improving
soil bearing capacities for new build structures, or as a remedial process for existing
structures. The increasing knowledge and understanding of soil behaviour was
enabling progressive contractors to find an increasing range of applications for this
technology.
Also in 1984, Francisco Gallavresi reported on the degree of precision that was
achievable by careful placement of medium to high viscosity cementitious slurries in
the very weak soils of the Venice lagoon. This paper indicated some of the advanced
thinking that was being applied to this process, including the careful use of
instrumentation such as water cells to monitor and control differential uplifts,
observations on the soil pre--conditioning effect of the early injections, and the
selective targeting with increased injection volumes and pressures below the ground
bearing elements of the foundation. In the late 80s and early 90s there were a
number of similar examples in northern Germany, again for re-levelling of individual
structures affected by shallow depth urban tunnelling.
As early as 1977 Henri Cambefort had published his seminal work the Principles
and Applications of Grouting. Although the use of rigid mortars occupies only a
small part of this paper, detailing the controlled re-levelling of a factory unit in
Rotterdam, it summarises concisely the levels of design and understanding which
were currently being applied to the design of grout properties, and the precise nature
in which particular grouts interact with soils and rocks during placement. His paper
sets out a firm technical understanding on which the development of future grouting
technology can be based, and highlights just how far grouting technology has
progressed since the turn off the 20thcentury.
Subsequent ground breaking work by specialists such as Dr.Tornaghi in Italy, and
the collaboration between Don Deere and Prof Lombardi have completely
revolutionised how we think about grouts and their application in the field, as well as
enormously enhancing the credibility of grouting technology, distancing it forever
from the black art label which it has often carried.
In parallel with all these developments in grouting technology, both in the
hardware and software, there has been an amazingly rapid advance in the level of
research and understanding of soil mechanics, particularly in relation to soil-structure
interaction, the engineering behaviour of soils, and our particular areas of interest for
the topic of this presentation, the response of soils and structures to tunnelling and
subsurface excavation. The paper by Y. Leblais for AFTES, published in 1995
summarises the then current understanding of the mechanisms for settlements
induced by tunnelling, based upon the work of many earlier advances in soil
mechanics theory by authors such as Glossop, Cording, Boscordin, Burland, Peck,
and Mair amongst many others. There is today a very wide understanding and
agreement on the mechanisms of soil deformation under a wide range of conditions,
and this combined with our advances in grouting technology has enabled the
development of the process which we now call compensation grouting.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
136
Grouting for Foundation Stabilisation, and Lifting and Levelling Heavy Concrete
Structures by John King and Eduardo Bindhoff, demonstrate that the practice of
using viscous mortars and grouts was well-established for improving the density,
stiffness, and bearing capacity of weak soils, whether for the purposes of improving
soil bearing capacities for new build structures, or as a remedial process for existing
structures. The increasing knowledge and understanding of soil behaviour was
enabling progressive contractors to find an increasing range of applications for this
technology.
Also in 1984, Francisco Gallavresi reported on the degree of precision that was
achievable by careful placement of medium to high viscosity cementitious slurries in
the very weak soils of the Venice lagoon. This paper indicated some of the advanced
thinking that was being applied to this process, including the careful use of
instrumentation such as water cells to monitor and control differential uplifts,
observations on the soil pre--conditioning effect of the early injections, and the
selective targeting with increased injection volumes and pressures below the ground
bearing elements of the foundation. In the late 80s and early 90s there were a
number of similar examples in northern Germany, again for re-levelling of individual
structures affected by shallow depth urban tunnelling.
As early as 1977 Henri Cambefort had published his seminal work the Principles
and Applications of Grouting. Although the use of rigid mortars occupies only a
small part of this paper, detailing the controlled re-levelling of a factory unit in
Rotterdam, it summarises concisely the levels of design and understanding which
were currently being applied to the design of grout properties, and the precise nature
in which particular grouts interact with soils and rocks during placement. His paper
sets out a firm technical understanding on which the development of future grouting
technology can be based, and highlights just how far grouting technology has
progressed since the turn off the 20thcentury.
Subsequent ground breaking work by specialists such as Dr.Tornaghi in Italy, and
the collaboration between Don Deere and Prof Lombardi have completely
revolutionised how we think about grouts and their application in the field, as well as
enormously enhancing the credibility of grouting technology, distancing it forever
from the black art label which it has often carried.
In parallel with all these developments in grouting technology, both in the
hardware and software, there has been an amazingly rapid advance in the level of
research and understanding of soil mechanics, particularly in relation to soil-structure
interaction, the engineering behaviour of soils, and our particular areas of interest for
the topic of this presentation, the response of soils and structures to tunnelling and
subsurface excavation. The paper by Y. Leblais for AFTES, published in 1995
summarises the then current understanding of the mechanisms for settlements
induced by tunnelling, based upon the work of many earlier advances in soil
mechanics theory by authors such as Glossop, Cording, Boscordin, Burland, Peck,
and Mair amongst many others. There is today a very wide understanding and
agreement on the mechanisms of soil deformation under a wide range of conditions,
and this combined with our advances in grouting technology has enabled the
development of the process which we now call compensation grouting.
136A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Grouting for Foundation Stabilisation, and Lifting and Levelling Heavy Concrete
Structures by John King and Eduardo Bindhoff, demonstrate that the practice of
using viscous mortars and grouts was well-established for improving the density,
stiffness, and bearing capacity of weak soils, whether for the purposes of improving
soil bearing capacities for new build structures, or as a remedial process for existing
structures. The increasing knowledge and understanding of soil behaviour was
enabling progressive contractors to find an increasing range of applications for this
technology.
Also in 1984, Francisco Gallavresi reported on the degree of precision that was
achievable by careful placement of medium to high viscosity cementitious slurries in
the very weak soils of the Venice lagoon. This paper indicated some of the advanced
thinking that was being applied to this process, including the careful use of
instrumentation such as water cells to monitor and control differential uplifts,
observations on the soil pre--conditioning effect of the early injections, and the
selective targeting with increased injection volumes and pressures below the ground
bearing elements of the foundation. In the late 80s and early 90s there were a
number of similar examples in northern Germany, again for re-levelling of individual
structures affected by shallow depth urban tunnelling.
As early as 1977 Henri Cambefort had published his seminal work the Principles
and Applications of Grouting. Although the use of rigid mortars occupies only a
small part of this paper, detailing the controlled re-levelling of a factory unit in
Rotterdam, it summarises concisely the levels of design and understanding which
were currently being applied to the design of grout properties, and the precise nature
in which particular grouts interact with soils and rocks during placement. His paper
sets out a firm technical understanding on which the development of future grouting
technology can be based, and highlights just how far grouting technology has
progressed since the turn off the 20thcentury.
Subsequent ground breaking work by specialists such as Dr.Tornaghi in Italy, and
the collaboration between Don Deere and Prof Lombardi have completely
revolutionised how we think about grouts and their application in the field, as well as
enormously enhancing the credibility of grouting technology, distancing it forever
from the black art label which it has often carried.
In parallel with all these developments in grouting technology, both in the
hardware and software, there has been an amazingly rapid advance in the level of
research and understanding of soil mechanics, particularly in relation to soil-structure
interaction, the engineering behaviour of soils, and our particular areas of interest for
the topic of this presentation, the response of soils and structures to tunnelling and
subsurface excavation. The paper by Y. Leblais for AFTES, published in 1995
summarises the then current understanding of the mechanisms for settlements
induced by tunnelling, based upon the work of many earlier advances in soil
mechanics theory by authors such as Glossop, Cording, Boscordin, Burland, Peck,
and Mair amongst many others. There is today a very wide understanding and
agreement on the mechanisms of soil deformation under a wide range of conditions,
and this combined with our advances in grouting technology has enabled the
development of the process which we now call compensation grouting.
Grouting for Foundation Stabilisation, and Lifting and Levelling Heavy Concrete
Structures by John King and Eduardo Bindhoff, demonstrate that the practice of
using viscous mortars and grouts was well-established for improving the density,
stiffness, and bearing capacity of weak soils, whether for the purposes of improving
soil bearing capacities for new build structures, or as a remedial process for existing
structures. The increasing knowledge and understanding of soil behaviour was
enabling progressive contractors to find an increasing range of applications for this
technology.
Also in 1984, Francisco Gallavresi reported on the degree of precision that was
achievable by careful placement of medium to high viscosity cementitious slurries in
the very weak soils of the Venice lagoon. This paper indicated some of the advanced
thinking that was being applied to this process, including the careful use of
instrumentation such as water cells to monitor and control differential uplifts,
observations on the soil pre--conditioning effect of the early injections, and the
selective targeting with increased injection volumes and pressures below the ground
bearing elements of the foundation. In the late 80s and early 90s there were a
number of similar examples in northern Germany, again for re-levelling of individual
structures affected by shallow depth urban tunnelling.
As early as 1977 Henri Cambefort had published his seminal work the Principles
and Applications of Grouting. Although the use of rigid mortars occupies only a
small part of this paper, detailing the controlled re-levelling of a factory unit in
Rotterdam, it summarises concisely the levels of design and understanding which
were currently being applied to the design of grout properties, and the precise nature
in which particular grouts interact with soils and rocks during placement. His paper
sets out a firm technical understanding on which the development of future grouting
technology can be based, and highlights just how far grouting technology has
progressed since the turn off the 20thcentury.
Subsequent ground breaking work by specialists such as Dr.Tornaghi in Italy, and
the collaboration between Don Deere and Prof Lombardi have completely
revolutionised how we think about grouts and their application in the field, as well as
enormously enhancing the credibility of grouting technology, distancing it forever
from the black art label which it has often carried.
In parallel with all these developments in grouting technology, both in the
hardware and software, there has been an amazingly rapid advance in the level of
research and understanding of soil mechanics, particularly in relation to soil-structure
interaction, the engineering behaviour of soils, and our particular areas of interest for
the topic of this presentation, the response of soils and structures to tunnelling and
subsurface excavation. The paper by Y. Leblais for AFTES, published in 1995
summarises the then current understanding of the mechanisms for settlements
induced by tunnelling, based upon the work of many earlier advances in soil
mechanics theory by authors such as Glossop, Cording, Boscordin, Burland, Peck,
and Mair amongst many others. There is today a very wide understanding and
agreement on the mechanisms of soil deformation under a wide range of conditions,
and this combined with our advances in grouting technology has enabled the
development of the process which we now call compensation grouting.
136A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
136
Page 3 of 66
Page 3 of 66
137
Of course, there are two important missing elements which serendipitously have
arrived at exactly the right time over the period of the last 20 years to enable
compensation grouting to develop as a true engineering process, capable of being
executed arguably with as much precision and control as any other branch of civil
engineering. These are firstly the rapid development in the science of geotechnical
and structural monitoring, using many new instruments which are available on the
market such as electro levels, in-place inclinometers, automatic total station
theodolites, piezometers, extensometers, and strain gauges, and a wide variety of
other instruments which can be read remotely and in real and semi-real-time.
Secondly, we cannot overlook the enormous contribution made by the advancement
in computing technology and power, in both the hardware and software, which
enables rapid assimilation, analysis, evaluation at site level of a huge volume of data
arising from the injection processes, structure and soil deformation measurements,
the strain and displacement in tunnel linings.
In respect of the grouting process, computers in particular have completely
revolutionised our understanding, recording, and control of the injection process,
enabling us to place grout with surgical precision in response to observed or
predicted movements of subsurface or surface structures, and soils. By enabling us to
control precisely the injection parameters of any injection throughout the entire
period of grout placement, by allowing us to examine the continuous record of these
parameters during each individual injection, and by providing the means of rapidly
assimilating the information from this huge stream of data into a visual graphical
format for rapid evaluation, our understanding of the interaction between grout
placement and the surrounding soil has given the modern grouting engineer a level of
understanding of the fundamentals and mechanics of grouting which would have
astonished their predecessors of 30 or 40 years ago.
The coming together of all these technologies is vital and timely. There has never
been more tunnelling activity around the world, particularly in urban areas, and there
is always an overarching drive for efficiency and cost effectiveness in tunnel
construction. The increasing congestion below established urban centres means that
the interaction of the tunnelling operations with existing surface and subsurface
infrastructure becomes critically important. Tunnel design and construction is
becoming increasingly adventurous, even audacious, both in terms of increased
tunnel diameters, and in the increasingly marginal and difficult ground conditions
through which tunnels are being driven, thereby increasing the risks to the tunnelling
operation and to third parties very significantly.
There have been many recorded incidents of tunnel failure over recent years,
generally during construction, and there has never been a more important time for the
development of compensation grouting processes in order to assist in the safe and
controlled subsurface excavation for tunnels and deep structures.
In the early 1990s compensation grouting was raised to the level of a significant
element of tunnelling design, planning, and construction by the construction of the
Jubilee Line Extension (JLE) project in central London. The route of the proposed
tunnels affected hundreds of structures, existing London Underground tunnels, major
utilities, and including many historic buildings of national importance. It was
recognised by the client that without compensation grouting the new Metro line
Of course, there are two important missing elements which serendipitously have
arrived at exactly the right time over the period of the last 20 years to enable
compensation grouting to develop as a true engineering process, capable of being
executed arguably with as much precision and control as any other branch of civil
engineering. These are firstly the rapid development in the science of geotechnical
and structural monitoring, using many new instruments which are available on the
market such as electro levels, in-place inclinometers, automatic total station
theodolites, piezometers, extensometers, and strain gauges, and a wide variety of
other instruments which can be read remotely and in real and semi-real-time.
Secondly, we cannot overlook the enormous contribution made by the advancement
in computing technology and power, in both the hardware and software, which
enables rapid assimilation, analysis, evaluation at site level of a huge volume of data
arising from the injection processes, structure and soil deformation measurements,
the strain and displacement in tunnel linings.
In respect of the grouting process, computers in particular have completely
revolutionised our understanding, recording, and control of the injection process,
enabling us to place grout with surgical precision in response to observed or
predicted movements of subsurface or surface structures, and soils. By enabling us to
control precisely the injection parameters of any injection throughout the entire
period of grout placement, by allowing us to examine the continuous record of these
parameters during each individual injection, and by providing the means of rapidly
assimilating the information from this huge stream of data into a visual graphical
format for rapid evaluation, our understanding of the interaction between grout
placement and the surrounding soil has given the modern grouting engineer a level of
understanding of the fundamentals and mechanics of grouting which would have
astonished their predecessors of 30 or 40 years ago.
The coming together of all these technologies is vital and timely. There has never
been more tunnelling activity around the world, particularly in urban areas, and there
is always an overarching drive for efficiency and cost effectiveness in tunnel
construction. The increasing congestion below established urban centres means that
the interaction of the tunnelling operations with existing surface and subsurface
infrastructure becomes critically important. Tunnel design and construction is
becoming increasingly adventurous, even audacious, both in terms of increased
tunnel diameters, and in the increasingly marginal and difficult ground conditions
through which tunnels are being driven, thereby increasing the risks to the tunnelling
operation and to third parties very significantly.
There have been many recorded incidents of tunnel failure over recent years,
generally during construction, and there has never been a more important time for the
development of compensation grouting processes in order to assist in the safe and
controlled subsurface excavation for tunnels and deep structures.
In the early 1990s compensation grouting was raised to the level of a significant
element of tunnelling design, planning, and construction by the construction of the
Jubilee Line Extension (JLE) project in central London. The route of the proposed
tunnels affected hundreds of structures, existing London Underground tunnels, major
utilities, and including many historic buildings of national importance. It was
recognised by the client that without compensation grouting the new Metro line
Page 4 of 66
137
Of course, there are two important missing elements which serendipitously have
arrived at exactly the right time over the period of the last 20 years to enable
compensation grouting to develop as a true engineering process, capable of being
executed arguably with as much precision and control as any other branch of civil
engineering. These are firstly the rapid development in the science of geotechnical
and structural monitoring, using many new instruments which are available on the
market such as electro levels, in-place inclinometers, automatic total station
theodolites, piezometers, extensometers, and strain gauges, and a wide variety of
other instruments which can be read remotely and in real and semi-real-time.
Secondly, we cannot overlook the enormous contribution made by the advancement
in computing technology and power, in both the hardware and software, which
enables rapid assimilation, analysis, evaluation at site level of a huge volume of data
arising from the injection processes, structure and soil deformation measurements,
the strain and displacement in tunnel linings.
In respect of the grouting process, computers in particular have completely
revolutionised our understanding, recording, and control of the injection process,
enabling us to place grout with surgical precision in response to observed or
predicted movements of subsurface or surface structures, and soils. By enabling us to
control precisely the injection parameters of any injection throughout the entire
period of grout placement, by allowing us to examine the continuous record of these
parameters during each individual injection, and by providing the means of rapidly
assimilating the information from this huge stream of data into a visual graphical
format for rapid evaluation, our understanding of the interaction between grout
placement and the surrounding soil has given the modern grouting engineer a level of
understanding of the fundamentals and mechanics of grouting which would have
astonished their predecessors of 30 or 40 years ago.
The coming together of all these technologies is vital and timely. There has never
been more tunnelling activity around the world, particularly in urban areas, and there
is always an overarching drive for efficiency and cost effectiveness in tunnel
construction. The increasing congestion below established urban centres means that
the interaction of the tunnelling operations with existing surface and subsurface
infrastructure becomes critically important. Tunnel design and construction is
becoming increasingly adventurous, even audacious, both in terms of increased
tunnel diameters, and in the increasingly marginal and difficult ground conditions
through which tunnels are being driven, thereby increasing the risks to the tunnelling
operation and to third parties very significantly.
There have been many recorded incidents of tunnel failure over recent years,
generally during construction, and there has never been a more important time for the
development of compensation grouting processes in order to assist in the safe and
controlled subsurface excavation for tunnels and deep structures.
In the early 1990s compensation grouting was raised to the level of a significant
element of tunnelling design, planning, and construction by the construction of the
Jubilee Line Extension (JLE) project in central London. The route of the proposed
tunnels affected hundreds of structures, existing London Underground tunnels, major
utilities, and including many historic buildings of national importance. It was
recognised by the client that without compensation grouting the new Metro line
137
Of course, there are two important missing elements which serendipitously have
arrived at exactly the right time over the period of the last 20 years to enable
compensation grouting to develop as a true engineering process, capable of being
executed arguably with as much precision and control as any other branch of civil
engineering. These are firstly the rapid development in the science of geotechnical
and structural monitoring, using many new instruments which are available on the
market such as electro levels, in-place inclinometers, automatic total station
theodolites, piezometers, extensometers, and strain gauges, and a wide variety of
other instruments which can be read remotely and in real and semi-real-time.
Secondly, we cannot overlook the enormous contribution made by the advancement
in computing technology and power, in both the hardware and software, which
enables rapid assimilation, analysis, evaluation at site level of a huge volume of data
arising from the injection processes, structure and soil deformation measurements,
the strain and displacement in tunnel linings.
In respect of the grouting process, computers in particular have completely
revolutionised our understanding, recording, and control of the injection process,
enabling us to place grout with surgical precision in response to observed or
predicted movements of subsurface or surface structures, and soils. By enabling us to
control precisely the injection parameters of any injection throughout the entire
period of grout placement, by allowing us to examine the continuous record of these
parameters during each individual injection, and by providing the means of rapidly
assimilating the information from this huge stream of data into a visual graphical
format for rapid evaluation, our understanding of the interaction between grout
placement and the surrounding soil has given the modern grouting engineer a level of
understanding of the fundamentals and mechanics of grouting which would have
astonished their predecessors of 30 or 40 years ago.
The coming together of all these technologies is vital and timely. There has never
been more tunnelling activity around the world, particularly in urban areas, and there
is always an overarching drive for efficiency and cost effectiveness in tunnel
construction. The increasing congestion below established urban centres means that
the interaction of the tunnelling operations with existing surface and subsurface
infrastructure becomes critically important. Tunnel design and construction is
becoming increasingly adventurous, even audacious, both in terms of increased
tunnel diameters, and in the increasingly marginal and difficult ground conditions
through which tunnels are being driven, thereby increasing the risks to the tunnelling
operation and to third parties very significantly.
There have been many recorded incidents of tunnel failure over recent years,
generally during construction, and there has never been a more important time for the
development of compensation grouting processes in order to assist in the safe and
controlled subsurface excavation for tunnels and deep structures.
In the early 1990s compensation grouting was raised to the level of a significant
element of tunnelling design, planning, and construction by the construction of the
Jubilee Line Extension (JLE) project in central London. The route of the proposed
tunnels affected hundreds of structures, existing London Underground tunnels, major
utilities, and including many historic buildings of national importance. It was
recognised by the client that without compensation grouting the new Metro line
137A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Page 4 of 66
79A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
137
137A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 4 of 66
Page 4 of 66
138
could not be constructed on its proposed alignment, or at least not without huge
additional cost.
The fact that the client was prepared to put so much confidence into this relatively
new technique was due to the experience of the preliminary work is carried out in
1992-3 at the historic Victory Arch entrance to Waterloo Station. For this project,
active compensation grouting was carried out in very close co-operation with the
Building Research Establishment (BRE) monitoring specialists, who were trying to
develop the level of understanding and control necessary for future projects. The
success of the Victory project led directly to the process being applied extensively
across the subsequent Jubilee Line Extension project, with approximately 70
million worth of specialist instrumentation and compensation grouting works being
carried out during the period 1994 to 1996.
138A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Victory Arch
Electrolevel
chains
Waterloo &
City Line
79B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Victory Arch
Electrolevel
chains
Waterloo &
City Line
Page 5 of 66
138
could not be constructed on its proposed alignment, or at least not without huge
additional cost.
The fact that the client was prepared to put so much confidence into this relatively
new technique was due to the experience of the preliminary work is carried out in
1992-3 at the historic Victory Arch entrance to Waterloo Station. For this project,
active compensation grouting was carried out in very close co-operation with the
Building Research Establishment (BRE) monitoring specialists, who were trying to
develop the level of understanding and control necessary for future projects. The
success of the Victory project led directly to the process being applied extensively
across the subsequent Jubilee Line Extension project, with approximately 70
million worth of specialist instrumentation and compensation grouting works being
carried out during the period 1994 to 1996.
Page 5 of 66
Electrolevel
chains
Waterloo &
City Line
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
138
could not be constructed on its proposed alignment, or at least not without huge
additional cost.
The fact that the client was prepared to put so much confidence into this relatively
new technique was due to the experience of the preliminary work is carried out in
1992-3 at the historic Victory Arch entrance to Waterloo Station. For this project,
active compensation grouting was carried out in very close co-operation with the
Building Research Establishment (BRE) monitoring specialists, who were trying to
develop the level of understanding and control necessary for future projects. The
success of the Victory project led directly to the process being applied extensively
across the subsequent Jubilee Line Extension project, with approximately 70
million worth of specialist instrumentation and compensation grouting works being
carried out during the period 1994 to 1996.
could not be constructed on its proposed alignment, or at least not without huge
additional cost.
The fact that the client was prepared to put so much confidence into this relatively
new technique was due to the experience of the preliminary work is carried out in
1992-3 at the historic Victory Arch entrance to Waterloo Station. For this project,
active compensation grouting was carried out in very close co-operation with the
Building Research Establishment (BRE) monitoring specialists, who were trying to
develop the level of understanding and control necessary for future projects. The
success of the Victory project led directly to the process being applied extensively
across the subsequent Jubilee Line Extension project, with approximately 70
million worth of specialist instrumentation and compensation grouting works being
carried out during the period 1994 to 1996.
138A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
138
Electrolevel
chains
Waterloo &
City Line
Page 5 of 66
Page 5 of 66
139
The Victory Arch project provided an excellent opportunity to experiment with the
injection methodology in both the River Terrace gravels and the London Clay. The
geometry of the site meant that compensation grouting had to take place in both
strata, and with an appropriate grout formulation injections in both were found to be
very effective. Experiments were made with differing grout types to which a dye was
added to facilitate later investigation. The project was extremely valuable in that it
offered the rare opportunity to exhume early in the project some of the injection
pipes, and valuable observations were made which influenced subsequent design and
practice on the project.
Fig. 2 above show the distribution of grout within the terrace gravels around a
manchette (grout sleeve) location. The grout was deliberately chosen to be unstable,
so that during injection the solids content would remain close to the point of
injection, whilst the water was extruded from the mix by pressure filtration. A very
weak formulation was selected, initially a bentonite cement slurry, but later a preblended material was used, comprising OPC and PFA in a ratio1:20, and with a
water/solids ratio of 0.5. This mix was selected so that the build-up of grout around
the manchette would not unduly inhibit the ability to break out through this material
for subsequent injections. Although injection in the gravels were successful, even
with a weak mix it became progressively more difficult to break out from the
manchette, due to the fact that injections were executed over a period of six months,
requiring up to 35 injections via some the individual sleeves. A notable feature
within the gravels, which has been observed on subsequent contracts, is the effect of
barrel expansion of the sleeve grout around the manchette. Whilst this expansion
must have assisted the re-compaction around the manchette, it clearly contributed
significantly to the increasing difficulty of breaking out through the sleeve grout.
One observed advantage of injecting within the gravels was that it generated a
progressive displacement of the soil akin to a ratcheting mechanism. In the London
Clay however, more frequent injections were required over a longer period to effect a
similar result because each individual injection elevated pore pressures locally, and
these would dissipate over the following weeks so that a repeated cycle of
displacement with partial relaxation evolved throughout the injection period.
The Victory Arch project provided an excellent opportunity to experiment with the
injection methodology in both the River Terrace gravels and the London Clay. The
geometry of the site meant that compensation grouting had to take place in both
strata, and with an appropriate grout formulation injections in both were found to be
very effective. Experiments were made with differing grout types to which a dye was
added to facilitate later investigation. The project was extremely valuable in that it
offered the rare opportunity to exhume early in the project some of the injection
pipes, and valuable observations were made which influenced subsequent design and
practice on the project.
Fig. 2 above show the distribution of grout within the terrace gravels around a
manchette (grout sleeve) location. The grout was deliberately chosen to be unstable,
so that during injection the solids content would remain close to the point of
injection, whilst the water was extruded from the mix by pressure filtration. A very
weak formulation was selected, initially a bentonite cement slurry, but later a preblended material was used, comprising OPC and PFA in a ratio1:20, and with a
water/solids ratio of 0.5. This mix was selected so that the build-up of grout around
the manchette would not unduly inhibit the ability to break out through this material
for subsequent injections. Although injection in the gravels were successful, even
with a weak mix it became progressively more difficult to break out from the
manchette, due to the fact that injections were executed over a period of six months,
requiring up to 35 injections via some the individual sleeves. A notable feature
within the gravels, which has been observed on subsequent contracts, is the effect of
barrel expansion of the sleeve grout around the manchette. Whilst this expansion
must have assisted the re-compaction around the manchette, it clearly contributed
significantly to the increasing difficulty of breaking out through the sleeve grout.
One observed advantage of injecting within the gravels was that it generated a
progressive displacement of the soil akin to a ratcheting mechanism. In the London
Clay however, more frequent injections were required over a longer period to effect a
similar result because each individual injection elevated pore pressures locally, and
these would dissipate over the following weeks so that a repeated cycle of
displacement with partial relaxation evolved throughout the injection period.
139A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 6 of 66
Page 6 of 66
80A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
139
139
The Victory Arch project provided an excellent opportunity to experiment with the
injection methodology in both the River Terrace gravels and the London Clay. The
geometry of the site meant that compensation grouting had to take place in both
strata, and with an appropriate grout formulation injections in both were found to be
very effective. Experiments were made with differing grout types to which a dye was
added to facilitate later investigation. The project was extremely valuable in that it
offered the rare opportunity to exhume early in the project some of the injection
pipes, and valuable observations were made which influenced subsequent design and
practice on the project.
Fig. 2 above show the distribution of grout within the terrace gravels around a
manchette (grout sleeve) location. The grout was deliberately chosen to be unstable,
so that during injection the solids content would remain close to the point of
injection, whilst the water was extruded from the mix by pressure filtration. A very
weak formulation was selected, initially a bentonite cement slurry, but later a preblended material was used, comprising OPC and PFA in a ratio1:20, and with a
water/solids ratio of 0.5. This mix was selected so that the build-up of grout around
the manchette would not unduly inhibit the ability to break out through this material
for subsequent injections. Although injection in the gravels were successful, even
with a weak mix it became progressively more difficult to break out from the
manchette, due to the fact that injections were executed over a period of six months,
requiring up to 35 injections via some the individual sleeves. A notable feature
within the gravels, which has been observed on subsequent contracts, is the effect of
barrel expansion of the sleeve grout around the manchette. Whilst this expansion
must have assisted the re-compaction around the manchette, it clearly contributed
significantly to the increasing difficulty of breaking out through the sleeve grout.
One observed advantage of injecting within the gravels was that it generated a
progressive displacement of the soil akin to a ratcheting mechanism. In the London
Clay however, more frequent injections were required over a longer period to effect a
similar result because each individual injection elevated pore pressures locally, and
these would dissipate over the following weeks so that a repeated cycle of
displacement with partial relaxation evolved throughout the injection period.
The Victory Arch project provided an excellent opportunity to experiment with the
injection methodology in both the River Terrace gravels and the London Clay. The
geometry of the site meant that compensation grouting had to take place in both
strata, and with an appropriate grout formulation injections in both were found to be
very effective. Experiments were made with differing grout types to which a dye was
added to facilitate later investigation. The project was extremely valuable in that it
offered the rare opportunity to exhume early in the project some of the injection
pipes, and valuable observations were made which influenced subsequent design and
practice on the project.
Fig. 2 above show the distribution of grout within the terrace gravels around a
manchette (grout sleeve) location. The grout was deliberately chosen to be unstable,
so that during injection the solids content would remain close to the point of
injection, whilst the water was extruded from the mix by pressure filtration. A very
weak formulation was selected, initially a bentonite cement slurry, but later a preblended material was used, comprising OPC and PFA in a ratio1:20, and with a
water/solids ratio of 0.5. This mix was selected so that the build-up of grout around
the manchette would not unduly inhibit the ability to break out through this material
for subsequent injections. Although injection in the gravels were successful, even
with a weak mix it became progressively more difficult to break out from the
manchette, due to the fact that injections were executed over a period of six months,
requiring up to 35 injections via some the individual sleeves. A notable feature
within the gravels, which has been observed on subsequent contracts, is the effect of
barrel expansion of the sleeve grout around the manchette. Whilst this expansion
must have assisted the re-compaction around the manchette, it clearly contributed
significantly to the increasing difficulty of breaking out through the sleeve grout.
One observed advantage of injecting within the gravels was that it generated a
progressive displacement of the soil akin to a ratcheting mechanism. In the London
Clay however, more frequent injections were required over a longer period to effect a
similar result because each individual injection elevated pore pressures locally, and
these would dissipate over the following weeks so that a repeated cycle of
displacement with partial relaxation evolved throughout the injection period.
139A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
139
Page 6 of 66
Page 6 of 66
140
80B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
This was an exciting perriod during which all the major consultants annd specialist
contractors were involvedd in trying to establish ground rules and technnology by
which this process could be
b firmly established as an accepted working method. In
this regard, we are all indeebted to Prof Robert Mair of the Geotechnicaal Consultancy
Group GCG for his keen interest
i
in the Victory Arch project, and the trremendous
level of constructive suppport on the part of the Engineer, BRE, and the Client,
London Underground Ltdd (LUL).
Also in the mid-late 19990s a number of contractors, software develoopers,
instrument manufacturers, and university soil mechanics departments collaborated
c
on
a European funded COSM
MUS project during the construction of the Riio Piedras in
Puerto Rico and Madrid Metro
M
projects. This research project focused on the
prediction and modelling of tunnelling induced settlements, and upon modelling
m
the
effects of active compensaation grouting - that is to say compensation grouting
g
carried
out in parallel with tunnellling operations in order to mitigate the effectts on surface
structures of those operatiions. The objective was to try to codify a systtematic design
approach to managing thee negative impact of tunnelling operations on surface
structures.
Over the past 18 years thhe process has been applied on many projectss
internationally including significant
s
projects in the USA, Canada, Puerrto Rico,
Page 7 of 66
Page 7 of 66
140
Nevertheless the net displlacement was positive and controllable and thhe nature of the
London Clay permitted innjections to be made more easily and at lowerr pressures than
within the gravels. These were all important observations which later informed
decisions on grout selectioon and compensation design for future projeccts.
Fig. 3 below indicates thhe typical pattern of grout penetration by hyddro-fracture
within the London Clay. Note
N that even very close to the gravel/clay innterface the
grout laminae remain sub-- horizontal, and of no more than 2 to 5 mm in
i thickness.
Given that the London claay is a compressible material, and that lower initial
i
injection
pressures are required to propagate
p
grout through the clay, means that the
t effect of
such injections is slower, more incremental, and generates much lowerr stresses over
a larger area than injectionns within the terrace gravels.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
140
Nevertheless the net displlacement was positive and controllable and thhe nature of the
London Clay permitted innjections to be made more easily and at lowerr pressures than
within the gravels. These were all important observations which later informed
decisions on grout selectioon and compensation design for future projeccts.
Fig. 3 below indicates thhe typical pattern of grout penetration by hyddro-fracture
within the London Clay. Note
N that even very close to the gravel/clay innterface the
grout laminae remain sub-- horizontal, and of no more than 2 to 5 mm in
i thickness.
Given that the London claay is a compressible material, and that lower initial
i
injection
pressures are required to propagate
p
grout through the clay, means that the
t effect of
such injections is slower, more incremental, and generates much lowerr stresses over
a larger area than injectionns within the terrace gravels.
140A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Nevertheless the net displlacement was positive and controllable and thhe nature of the
London Clay permitted innjections to be made more easily and at lowerr pressures than
within the gravels. These were all important observations which later informed
decisions on grout selectioon and compensation design for future projeccts.
Fig. 3 below indicates thhe typical pattern of grout penetration by hyddro-fracture
within the London Clay. Note
N that even very close to the gravel/clay innterface the
grout laminae remain sub-- horizontal, and of no more than 2 to 5 mm in
i thickness.
Given that the London claay is a compressible material, and that lower initial
i
injection
pressures are required to propagate
p
grout through the clay, means that the
t effect of
such injections is slower, more incremental, and generates much lowerr stresses over
a larger area than injectionns within the terrace gravels.
Nevertheless the net displlacement was positive and controllable and thhe nature of the
London Clay permitted innjections to be made more easily and at lowerr pressures than
within the gravels. These were all important observations which later informed
decisions on grout selectioon and compensation design for future projeccts.
Fig. 3 below indicates thhe typical pattern of grout penetration by hyddro-fracture
within the London Clay. Note
N that even very close to the gravel/clay innterface the
grout laminae remain sub-- horizontal, and of no more than 2 to 5 mm in
i thickness.
Given that the London claay is a compressible material, and that lower initial
i
injection
pressures are required to propagate
p
grout through the clay, means that the
t effect of
such injections is slower, more incremental, and generates much lowerr stresses over
a larger area than injectionns within the terrace gravels.
140A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
140
This was an exciting perriod during which all the major consultants annd specialist
contractors were involvedd in trying to establish ground rules and technnology by
which this process could be
b firmly established as an accepted working method. In
this regard, we are all indeebted to Prof Robert Mair of the Geotechnicaal Consultancy
Group GCG for his keen interest
i
in the Victory Arch project, and the trremendous
level of constructive suppport on the part of the Engineer, BRE, and the Client,
London Underground Ltdd (LUL).
Also in the mid-late 19990s a number of contractors, software develoopers,
instrument manufacturers, and university soil mechanics departments collaborated
c
on
a European funded COSM
MUS project during the construction of the Riio Piedras in
Puerto Rico and Madrid Metro
M
projects. This research project focused on the
prediction and modelling of tunnelling induced settlements, and upon modelling
m
the
effects of active compensaation grouting - that is to say compensation grouting
g
carried
out in parallel with tunnellling operations in order to mitigate the effectts on surface
structures of those operatiions. The objective was to try to codify a systtematic design
approach to managing thee negative impact of tunnelling operations on surface
structures.
Over the past 18 years thhe process has been applied on many projectss
internationally including significant
s
projects in the USA, Canada, Puerrto Rico,
Page 7 of 66
Page 7 of 66
141
France, Spain, Italy, Germany, Belgium and Russia. This is a process whose time has
come. Despite the prevalence of UK examples in the literature, it is today neither a
purely British technology, nor suited solely to excavations within London clay. The
process has been applied in many varying soil types and has consistently delivered
excellent results. Currently, there is the exciting prospect of compensation grouting
being applied to antique structures in Rome.
Currently, London is embarking upon the new Crossrail project, a five-year, 15
billion infrastructure project aimed at connecting full-sized rail tunnels across the
centre of London, and involving six new station complexes, and the upgrading of a
further seven existing railway stations. By the completion of this project over 150
million worth of compensation grouting and monitoring will have been executed.
Again, for many of the affected structures there would have been no viable
alternative protective measures had compensation grouting not been available, and
the project may never have received the Royal assent to proceed.
The remaining part of this paper will examine the principles and technology on
which much compensation grouting design and construction is based today, as well
as detailing some of the difficulties and potential limits of the technology.
3
France, Spain, Italy, Germany, Belgium and Russia. This is a process whose time has
come. Despite the prevalence of UK examples in the literature, it is today neither a
purely British technology, nor suited solely to excavations within London clay. The
process has been applied in many varying soil types and has consistently delivered
excellent results. Currently, there is the exciting prospect of compensation grouting
being applied to antique structures in Rome.
Currently, London is embarking upon the new Crossrail project, a five-year, 15
billion infrastructure project aimed at connecting full-sized rail tunnels across the
centre of London, and involving six new station complexes, and the upgrading of a
further seven existing railway stations. By the completion of this project over 150
million worth of compensation grouting and monitoring will have been executed.
Again, for many of the affected structures there would have been no viable
alternative protective measures had compensation grouting not been available, and
the project may never have received the Royal assent to proceed.
The remaining part of this paper will examine the principles and technology on
which much compensation grouting design and construction is based today, as well
as detailing some of the difficulties and potential limits of the technology.
3
Page 8 of 66
141
France, Spain, Italy, Germany, Belgium and Russia. This is a process whose time has
come. Despite the prevalence of UK examples in the literature, it is today neither a
purely British technology, nor suited solely to excavations within London clay. The
process has been applied in many varying soil types and has consistently delivered
excellent results. Currently, there is the exciting prospect of compensation grouting
being applied to antique structures in Rome.
Currently, London is embarking upon the new Crossrail project, a five-year, 15
billion infrastructure project aimed at connecting full-sized rail tunnels across the
centre of London, and involving six new station complexes, and the upgrading of a
further seven existing railway stations. By the completion of this project over 150
million worth of compensation grouting and monitoring will have been executed.
Again, for many of the affected structures there would have been no viable
alternative protective measures had compensation grouting not been available, and
the project may never have received the Royal assent to proceed.
The remaining part of this paper will examine the principles and technology on
which much compensation grouting design and construction is based today, as well
as detailing some of the difficulties and potential limits of the technology.
3
141
France, Spain, Italy, Germany, Belgium and Russia. This is a process whose time has
come. Despite the prevalence of UK examples in the literature, it is today neither a
purely British technology, nor suited solely to excavations within London clay. The
process has been applied in many varying soil types and has consistently delivered
excellent results. Currently, there is the exciting prospect of compensation grouting
being applied to antique structures in Rome.
Currently, London is embarking upon the new Crossrail project, a five-year, 15
billion infrastructure project aimed at connecting full-sized rail tunnels across the
centre of London, and involving six new station complexes, and the upgrading of a
further seven existing railway stations. By the completion of this project over 150
million worth of compensation grouting and monitoring will have been executed.
Again, for many of the affected structures there would have been no viable
alternative protective measures had compensation grouting not been available, and
the project may never have received the Royal assent to proceed.
The remaining part of this paper will examine the principles and technology on
which much compensation grouting design and construction is based today, as well
as detailing some of the difficulties and potential limits of the technology.
141A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Page 8 of 66
81A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
141
141A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 8 of 66
Page 8 of 66
142
81B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Page 9 of 66
Page 9 of 66
142
complex structural history. These structures do not normally tolerate hogging, and
their response to hogging, differential settlement, and/or repeated cycles of excessive
settlement and heave, can seldom be accurately predicted.
For these reasons we should not therefore advocate the approach of some designers
and contractors, of either pre-heaving of the ground, allowing the anticipated
settlement to return the structure close to its original position, or over reliance of
post-settlement jacking up of structures. In fact, these approaches tend to be
advocated in situations where there is either inadequate real-time monitoring of
structures, and/or an absence of real time control of their injection processes, and
both these scenarios involve a high degree of unnecessary risk. With compensation
grouting at its current level of development we have an internationally proven
technology, an industrial and highly effective process which can in appropriate
conditions, and with adequate control and management, mitigate many of the effects
of construction on surface and underground structures - e.g. total and differential
settlement, angular distortion, excessive strain.
It must be remembered that the specialist geotechnical contractor, however good or
efficient, cannot compensate for errors and omissions in design, construction, or
planning by the designer, client, principal contractor, or tunnelling contractor.
Compensation grouting is not a bolt-on technology which can be added at will - for
success and to maximise its efficiency, it must be integral to the design and planning
of the project from the outset, because it demands a significant amount of preparation
prior to the commencement of any excavation or tunnelling. It follows that the
specialist contractor cannot safely or effectively carry out compensation grouting
without a total, day by day, integration of the roles and operations of the various
parties to the project.
With these guiding principles in mind, the current preferred definition of
compensation grouting, applied almost universally in UK, would be
The injection, simultaneously with construction activity, of self-hardening grouts or
mortars to replace ground loss as it occurs and/or locally re-compact soils to their
original stiffness and density as they relax, in such a manner as to limit differential
and total settlement of a given structure, and thereby mitigate the adverse effects of
construction activity.
The desired effects may be summarised as:
limiting total and differential surface and subsurface settlements
reduction in induced stresses and cyclical movements, to minimise the
potential for damage
accelerate the re-consolidation of soils for long-term stability
The general characteristics of the process may be summarised as:
a rapidly developing technology, developed to an industrial process level the
Jubilee line extension, made possible via advances in computerised injection
techniques and in structural and geotechnical monitoring technology
active compensation grouting takes place in parallel with tunnelling and/or
deep excavation works
highly dependent upon efficient structural monitoring and analysis of
structural displacements
highly effective when applied correctly, but not appropriate everywhere
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
142
complex structural history. These structures do not normally tolerate hogging, and
their response to hogging, differential settlement, and/or repeated cycles of excessive
settlement and heave, can seldom be accurately predicted.
For these reasons we should not therefore advocate the approach of some designers
and contractors, of either pre-heaving of the ground, allowing the anticipated
settlement to return the structure close to its original position, or over reliance of
post-settlement jacking up of structures. In fact, these approaches tend to be
advocated in situations where there is either inadequate real-time monitoring of
structures, and/or an absence of real time control of their injection processes, and
both these scenarios involve a high degree of unnecessary risk. With compensation
grouting at its current level of development we have an internationally proven
technology, an industrial and highly effective process which can in appropriate
conditions, and with adequate control and management, mitigate many of the effects
of construction on surface and underground structures - e.g. total and differential
settlement, angular distortion, excessive strain.
It must be remembered that the specialist geotechnical contractor, however good or
efficient, cannot compensate for errors and omissions in design, construction, or
planning by the designer, client, principal contractor, or tunnelling contractor.
Compensation grouting is not a bolt-on technology which can be added at will - for
success and to maximise its efficiency, it must be integral to the design and planning
of the project from the outset, because it demands a significant amount of preparation
prior to the commencement of any excavation or tunnelling. It follows that the
specialist contractor cannot safely or effectively carry out compensation grouting
without a total, day by day, integration of the roles and operations of the various
parties to the project.
With these guiding principles in mind, the current preferred definition of
compensation grouting, applied almost universally in UK, would be
The injection, simultaneously with construction activity, of self-hardening grouts or
mortars to replace ground loss as it occurs and/or locally re-compact soils to their
original stiffness and density as they relax, in such a manner as to limit differential
and total settlement of a given structure, and thereby mitigate the adverse effects of
construction activity.
The desired effects may be summarised as:
limiting total and differential surface and subsurface settlements
reduction in induced stresses and cyclical movements, to minimise the
potential for damage
accelerate the re-consolidation of soils for long-term stability
The general characteristics of the process may be summarised as:
a rapidly developing technology, developed to an industrial process level the
Jubilee line extension, made possible via advances in computerised injection
techniques and in structural and geotechnical monitoring technology
active compensation grouting takes place in parallel with tunnelling and/or
deep excavation works
highly dependent upon efficient structural monitoring and analysis of
structural displacements
highly effective when applied correctly, but not appropriate everywhere
142A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
complex structural history. These structures do not normally tolerate hogging, and
their response to hogging, differential settlement, and/or repeated cycles of excessive
settlement and heave, can seldom be accurately predicted.
For these reasons we should not therefore advocate the approach of some designers
and contractors, of either pre-heaving of the ground, allowing the anticipated
settlement to return the structure close to its original position, or over reliance of
post-settlement jacking up of structures. In fact, these approaches tend to be
advocated in situations where there is either inadequate real-time monitoring of
structures, and/or an absence of real time control of their injection processes, and
both these scenarios involve a high degree of unnecessary risk. With compensation
grouting at its current level of development we have an internationally proven
technology, an industrial and highly effective process which can in appropriate
conditions, and with adequate control and management, mitigate many of the effects
of construction on surface and underground structures - e.g. total and differential
settlement, angular distortion, excessive strain.
It must be remembered that the specialist geotechnical contractor, however good or
efficient, cannot compensate for errors and omissions in design, construction, or
planning by the designer, client, principal contractor, or tunnelling contractor.
Compensation grouting is not a bolt-on technology which can be added at will - for
success and to maximise its efficiency, it must be integral to the design and planning
of the project from the outset, because it demands a significant amount of preparation
prior to the commencement of any excavation or tunnelling. It follows that the
specialist contractor cannot safely or effectively carry out compensation grouting
without a total, day by day, integration of the roles and operations of the various
parties to the project.
With these guiding principles in mind, the current preferred definition of
compensation grouting, applied almost universally in UK, would be
The injection, simultaneously with construction activity, of self-hardening grouts or
mortars to replace ground loss as it occurs and/or locally re-compact soils to their
original stiffness and density as they relax, in such a manner as to limit differential
and total settlement of a given structure, and thereby mitigate the adverse effects of
construction activity.
The desired effects may be summarised as:
limiting total and differential surface and subsurface settlements
reduction in induced stresses and cyclical movements, to minimise the
potential for damage
accelerate the re-consolidation of soils for long-term stability
The general characteristics of the process may be summarised as:
a rapidly developing technology, developed to an industrial process level the
Jubilee line extension, made possible via advances in computerised injection
techniques and in structural and geotechnical monitoring technology
active compensation grouting takes place in parallel with tunnelling and/or
deep excavation works
highly dependent upon efficient structural monitoring and analysis of
structural displacements
highly effective when applied correctly, but not appropriate everywhere
complex structural history. These structures do not normally tolerate hogging, and
their response to hogging, differential settlement, and/or repeated cycles of excessive
settlement and heave, can seldom be accurately predicted.
For these reasons we should not therefore advocate the approach of some designers
and contractors, of either pre-heaving of the ground, allowing the anticipated
settlement to return the structure close to its original position, or over reliance of
post-settlement jacking up of structures. In fact, these approaches tend to be
advocated in situations where there is either inadequate real-time monitoring of
structures, and/or an absence of real time control of their injection processes, and
both these scenarios involve a high degree of unnecessary risk. With compensation
grouting at its current level of development we have an internationally proven
technology, an industrial and highly effective process which can in appropriate
conditions, and with adequate control and management, mitigate many of the effects
of construction on surface and underground structures - e.g. total and differential
settlement, angular distortion, excessive strain.
It must be remembered that the specialist geotechnical contractor, however good or
efficient, cannot compensate for errors and omissions in design, construction, or
planning by the designer, client, principal contractor, or tunnelling contractor.
Compensation grouting is not a bolt-on technology which can be added at will - for
success and to maximise its efficiency, it must be integral to the design and planning
of the project from the outset, because it demands a significant amount of preparation
prior to the commencement of any excavation or tunnelling. It follows that the
specialist contractor cannot safely or effectively carry out compensation grouting
without a total, day by day, integration of the roles and operations of the various
parties to the project.
With these guiding principles in mind, the current preferred definition of
compensation grouting, applied almost universally in UK, would be
The injection, simultaneously with construction activity, of self-hardening grouts or
mortars to replace ground loss as it occurs and/or locally re-compact soils to their
original stiffness and density as they relax, in such a manner as to limit differential
and total settlement of a given structure, and thereby mitigate the adverse effects of
construction activity.
The desired effects may be summarised as:
limiting total and differential surface and subsurface settlements
reduction in induced stresses and cyclical movements, to minimise the
potential for damage
accelerate the re-consolidation of soils for long-term stability
The general characteristics of the process may be summarised as:
a rapidly developing technology, developed to an industrial process level the
Jubilee line extension, made possible via advances in computerised injection
techniques and in structural and geotechnical monitoring technology
active compensation grouting takes place in parallel with tunnelling and/or
deep excavation works
highly dependent upon efficient structural monitoring and analysis of
structural displacements
highly effective when applied correctly, but not appropriate everywhere
142A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
142
Page 9 of 66
Page 9 of 66
143
143A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
143A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
82A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Page 10 of 66
143
Page 10 of 66
143
143
Page 10 of 66
Page 10 of 66
144
144
For the case of a single tunnel in green field conditions, Peck2 has shown that the
surface settlement trough above and ahead of the advancing heading develops as
shown on Figure 4a. The transverse settlement immediately following construction is
well-described by a Gaussian bell as shown on Fig. 4b, given by;
For the case of a single tunnel in green field conditions, Peck2 has shown that the
surface settlement trough above and ahead of the advancing heading develops as
shown on Figure 4a. The transverse settlement immediately following construction is
well-described by a Gaussian bell as shown on Fig. 4b, given by;
S = S max exp( y 2 / 2i 2 )
S = S max exp( y 2 / 2i 2 )
(1)
(1)
Where S is the settlement at distance y from the tunnel centre line, and Smax is the
maximum settlement, at long distance from tunnel face. Parameter i (distance of
inflexion points to centre line) characterises the width of the trough. Volume of the
settlement trough per meter of tunnel is given by
Where S is the settlement at distance y from the tunnel centre line, and Smax is the
maximum settlement, at long distance from tunnel face. Parameter i (distance of
inflexion points to centre line) characterises the width of the trough. Volume of the
settlement trough per meter of tunnel is given by
V s = 2 iS max
V s = 2 iS max
(2)
Vl =
2 iS max
A
Vl =
(3)
i = KZ
i = KZ
ix =KxZ, iy= Ky Z
(4)
(5)
ix =KxZ, iy= Ky Z
Although it is very basic and takes no account of any soil characteristics, this
model has proved to be extremely efficient, and has been verified on a number of
projects. For instance, the following experimental values have been found on Jubilee
Line Extension, in London Clay: Ky = 0.55; Kx = 0.63 ; Vl = 2.5 %
(5)
Although it is very basic and takes no account of any soil characteristics, this
model has proved to be extremely efficient, and has been verified on a number of
projects. For instance, the following experimental values have been found on Jubilee
Line Extension, in London Clay: Ky = 0.55; Kx = 0.63 ; Vl = 2.5 %
4.2
144
(3)
The first level of refinement is to correlate the opening of the trough to the depth of
the tunnel centreline,
(4)
82B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
2 iS max
A
The first level of refinement is to correlate the opening of the trough to the depth of
the tunnel centreline,
4.2
(2)
The Volume Loss Factor Vl can be defined as the ratio of settlement trough volume
divided by excavated volume, or as:
144A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
The Volume Loss Factor Vl can be defined as the ratio of settlement trough volume
divided by excavated volume, or as:
Page 11 of 66
Page 11 of 66
144
For the case of a single tunnel in green field conditions, Peck2 has shown that the
surface settlement trough above and ahead of the advancing heading develops as
shown on Figure 4a. The transverse settlement immediately following construction is
well-described by a Gaussian bell as shown on Fig. 4b, given by;
S = S max exp( y 2 / 2i 2 )
S = S max exp( y 2 / 2i 2 )
Where S is the settlement at distance y from the tunnel centre line, and Smax is the
maximum settlement, at long distance from tunnel face. Parameter i (distance of
inflexion points to centre line) characterises the width of the trough. Volume of the
settlement trough per meter of tunnel is given by
V s = 2 iS max
(2)
The Volume Loss Factor Vl can be defined as the ratio of settlement trough volume
divided by excavated volume, or as:
Vl =
2 iS max
A
(3)
(4)
(5)
Although it is very basic and takes no account of any soil characteristics, this
model has proved to be extremely efficient, and has been verified on a number of
projects. For instance, the following experimental values have been found on Jubilee
Line Extension, in London Clay: Ky = 0.55; Kx = 0.63 ; Vl = 2.5 %
4.2
(1)
Where S is the settlement at distance y from the tunnel centre line, and Smax is the
maximum settlement, at long distance from tunnel face. Parameter i (distance of
inflexion points to centre line) characterises the width of the trough. Volume of the
settlement trough per meter of tunnel is given by
V s = 2 iS max
(2)
The Volume Loss Factor Vl can be defined as the ratio of settlement trough volume
divided by excavated volume, or as:
144A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
(1)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
For the case of a single tunnel in green field conditions, Peck2 has shown that the
surface settlement trough above and ahead of the advancing heading develops as
shown on Figure 4a. The transverse settlement immediately following construction is
well-described by a Gaussian bell as shown on Fig. 4b, given by;
Vl =
2 iS max
A
(3)
(4)
(5)
Although it is very basic and takes no account of any soil characteristics, this
model has proved to be extremely efficient, and has been verified on a number of
projects. For instance, the following experimental values have been found on Jubilee
Line Extension, in London Clay: Ky = 0.55; Kx = 0.63 ; Vl = 2.5 %
4.2
Page 11 of 66
Page 11 of 66
145
GEC * V grout
(7)
2i 2
GEC =
S ( r ) = S max exp( r 2 / 2i 2 )
(6)
V heave
V grout
S max =
(8)
i = KZ
145A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
S ( r ) = S max exp( r 2 / 2i 2 )
S max =
GEC * V grout
(7)
2i 2
GEC =
V heave
V grout
(8)
(4)
Where
The following experimental values have been found on Jubilee Line Extension, in
London Clay: GEC in the range 0.3 - 0.6 ; K=0.4 ;
More complex models have been developed using finite elements methods. The
figures below illustrate two basic models employed by the Cambridge University
Engineering Department to represent the expansion of a grout body.
Hydrofracture Model
The following experimental values have been found on Jubilee Line Extension, in
London Clay: GEC in the range 0.3 - 0.6 ; K=0.4 ;
More complex models have been developed using finite elements methods. The
figures below illustrate two basic models employed by the Cambridge University
Engineering Department to represent the expansion of a grout body.
Page 12 of 66
83A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
145
145
GEC * V grout
(7)
2i 2
V heave
V grout
(8)
i = KZ
(4)
Where
S ( r ) = S max exp( r 2 / 2i 2 )
145A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
S ( r ) = S max exp( r 2 / 2i 2 )
GEC =
Hydrofracture Model
Page 12 of 66
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
(6)
i = KZ
(4)
Where
S max =
145
S max =
(6)
GEC * V grout
GEC =
(7)
2i 2
V heave
V grout
(8)
i = KZ
(4)
Where
The following experimental values have been found on Jubilee Line Extension, in
London Clay: GEC in the range 0.3 - 0.6 ; K=0.4 ;
More complex models have been developed using finite elements methods. The
figures below illustrate two basic models employed by the Cambridge University
Engineering Department to represent the expansion of a grout body.
Hydrofracture Model
The following experimental values have been found on Jubilee Line Extension, in
London Clay: GEC in the range 0.3 - 0.6 ; K=0.4 ;
More complex models have been developed using finite elements methods. The
figures below illustrate two basic models employed by the Cambridge University
Engineering Department to represent the expansion of a grout body.
Hydrofracture Model
Page 12 of 66
Page 12 of 66
146
146A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
83B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Page 13 of 66
Page 13 of 66
146
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
146
The COSMUS project and subsequent research have tried to evaluate the rules of
application for both a hydro-fracture model injection, and a mortar or cavity
expansion model injection (Fig 6). In the COSMUS project also, an original model
was developed to calculate the evolution of the settlement trough and to evaluate the
response which might be generated by injection of varying volumes of grout at
several elevations above and ahead of advancing tunnel excavation. The majority of
these investigations were carried out during the compensation grouting works in
Puerto Rico, which has been fully reported elsewhere, but design development
continued thereafter, evaluating the theoretical and physical effects of various
patterns of injections at varying depths.
146A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
146
The COSMUS project and subsequent research have tried to evaluate the rules of
application for both a hydro-fracture model injection, and a mortar or cavity
expansion model injection (Fig 6). In the COSMUS project also, an original model
was developed to calculate the evolution of the settlement trough and to evaluate the
response which might be generated by injection of varying volumes of grout at
several elevations above and ahead of advancing tunnel excavation. The majority of
these investigations were carried out during the compensation grouting works in
Puerto Rico, which has been fully reported elsewhere, but design development
continued thereafter, evaluating the theoretical and physical effects of various
patterns of injections at varying depths.
Page 13 of 66
Page 13 of 66
147
Operational prerequisites:
Operational prerequisites:
Page 14 of 66
147A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
84A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Although the COSMUS project was completed over 10 years ago, the main
conclusions and recommendations of the research remain valid today:
Operational prerequisites:
147
Page 14 of 66
147
Although the COSMUS project was completed over 10 years ago, the main
conclusions and recommendations of the research remain valid today:
147A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
147
Although the COSMUS project was completed over 10 years ago, the main
conclusions and recommendations of the research remain valid today:
Core geotechnical objectives should be to:
Operational prerequisites:
Page 14 of 66
Page 14 of 66
4.3
148
Systems of Compensation
Observational / Responsive
4.3.1
148
148
Observational / Responsive
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
4.3
In the early 1990s, when compensation grouting was becoming more widely
accepted, the process was almost entirely observational, based upon repeated cycles
of injections executed in response to observed surface or subsurface displacements.
This was principally due to a lack of understanding of the relationship between the
amount and geometry of the soil displacement or heave induced by the placement of
a given volume of grout, in a given soil, at a given pressure.
Today we are not confined to a purely observational approach, thanks to the
extensive work carried out by many tunnelling and engineering designers, by
specialist grouting and tunnelling contractors, and because of the impact of programs
such as COSMUS and the huge amount of published research in the field of soil
mechanics and the effects of tunnelling induced settlements.
In an ideal world, with a perfectly responding compensation system there would be
no surface settlement at all. This is clearly an impossible goal. The ideal scenario
then becomes reducing the degree of settlement, and the rate of settlement, controlling it within predefined limits for a given structure, based on a detailed
analysis of the condition and characteristics of the individual structure being
protected.
Essentially there are three basic methods by which compensation grouting has
typically been executed - the observational method, the predictive method, and the
pressure method. Only the observational method has ever been used in isolation, but
it is now much more common to combine elements of these three methods, which
can be briefly summarised as follows
the lack of a real consensus on the extent and geometry of the relaxation
trough generated for a given tunnel geometry or excavation sequence
Page 15 of 66
Systems of Compensation
4.3.1
Page 15 of 66
4.3
Observational / Responsive
the lack of a real consensus on the extent and geometry of the relaxation
trough generated for a given tunnel geometry or excavation sequence
84B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Systems of Compensation
In the early 1990s, when compensation grouting was becoming more widely
accepted, the process was almost entirely observational, based upon repeated cycles
of injections executed in response to observed surface or subsurface displacements.
This was principally due to a lack of understanding of the relationship between the
amount and geometry of the soil displacement or heave induced by the placement of
a given volume of grout, in a given soil, at a given pressure.
Today we are not confined to a purely observational approach, thanks to the
extensive work carried out by many tunnelling and engineering designers, by
specialist grouting and tunnelling contractors, and because of the impact of programs
such as COSMUS and the huge amount of published research in the field of soil
mechanics and the effects of tunnelling induced settlements.
In an ideal world, with a perfectly responding compensation system there would be
no surface settlement at all. This is clearly an impossible goal. The ideal scenario
then becomes reducing the degree of settlement, and the rate of settlement, controlling it within predefined limits for a given structure, based on a detailed
analysis of the condition and characteristics of the individual structure being
protected.
Essentially there are three basic methods by which compensation grouting has
typically been executed - the observational method, the predictive method, and the
pressure method. Only the observational method has ever been used in isolation, but
it is now much more common to combine elements of these three methods, which
can be briefly summarised as follows
148A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
In the early 1990s, when compensation grouting was becoming more widely
accepted, the process was almost entirely observational, based upon repeated cycles
of injections executed in response to observed surface or subsurface displacements.
This was principally due to a lack of understanding of the relationship between the
amount and geometry of the soil displacement or heave induced by the placement of
a given volume of grout, in a given soil, at a given pressure.
Today we are not confined to a purely observational approach, thanks to the
extensive work carried out by many tunnelling and engineering designers, by
specialist grouting and tunnelling contractors, and because of the impact of programs
such as COSMUS and the huge amount of published research in the field of soil
mechanics and the effects of tunnelling induced settlements.
In an ideal world, with a perfectly responding compensation system there would be
no surface settlement at all. This is clearly an impossible goal. The ideal scenario
then becomes reducing the degree of settlement, and the rate of settlement, controlling it within predefined limits for a given structure, based on a detailed
analysis of the condition and characteristics of the individual structure being
protected.
Essentially there are three basic methods by which compensation grouting has
typically been executed - the observational method, the predictive method, and the
pressure method. Only the observational method has ever been used in isolation, but
it is now much more common to combine elements of these three methods, which
can be briefly summarised as follows
4.3.1
4.3
Systems of Compensation
In the early 1990s, when compensation grouting was becoming more widely
accepted, the process was almost entirely observational, based upon repeated cycles
of injections executed in response to observed surface or subsurface displacements.
This was principally due to a lack of understanding of the relationship between the
amount and geometry of the soil displacement or heave induced by the placement of
a given volume of grout, in a given soil, at a given pressure.
Today we are not confined to a purely observational approach, thanks to the
extensive work carried out by many tunnelling and engineering designers, by
specialist grouting and tunnelling contractors, and because of the impact of programs
such as COSMUS and the huge amount of published research in the field of soil
mechanics and the effects of tunnelling induced settlements.
In an ideal world, with a perfectly responding compensation system there would be
no surface settlement at all. This is clearly an impossible goal. The ideal scenario
then becomes reducing the degree of settlement, and the rate of settlement, controlling it within predefined limits for a given structure, based on a detailed
analysis of the condition and characteristics of the individual structure being
protected.
Essentially there are three basic methods by which compensation grouting has
typically been executed - the observational method, the predictive method, and the
pressure method. Only the observational method has ever been used in isolation, but
it is now much more common to combine elements of these three methods, which
can be briefly summarised as follows
148A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
148
4.3.1
Observational / Responsive
the lack of a real consensus on the extent and geometry of the relaxation
trough generated for a given tunnel geometry or excavation sequence
Page 15 of 66
Page 15 of 66
Predictive Method
149
4.3.2
Predictive Method
149
The risk with a purely observational system, particularly if the borehole array is at
considerable depth and supported only by surface monitoring, is that it allows the
majority of the relaxation to migrate above the borehole array before any surface
settlement becomes evident. This builds up a significant amount of settlement inertia
and necessitates an increased work content in the injection program because the
grouting is now required not only to re-compact soil but to lift the structure and the
entire body of soil above the borehole array in order to effect any correction in the
rate and amount of settlement. More critically, it builds unnecessary delay into the
response time, resulting in greater settlement, and/or a greater amplitude to the cycle
of settlement and recovery.
The observational method will be adequate for certain sites, but where there are
sensitive underground structures/utilities, or very demanding limits on differential
and total settlement, it would be preferable to combine the observational and
predictive methods.
4.3.2
The risk with a purely observational system, particularly if the borehole array is at
considerable depth and supported only by surface monitoring, is that it allows the
majority of the relaxation to migrate above the borehole array before any surface
settlement becomes evident. This builds up a significant amount of settlement inertia
and necessitates an increased work content in the injection program because the
grouting is now required not only to re-compact soil but to lift the structure and the
entire body of soil above the borehole array in order to effect any correction in the
rate and amount of settlement. More critically, it builds unnecessary delay into the
response time, resulting in greater settlement, and/or a greater amplitude to the cycle
of settlement and recovery.
The observational method will be adequate for certain sites, but where there are
sensitive underground structures/utilities, or very demanding limits on differential
and total settlement, it would be preferable to combine the observational and
predictive methods.
Page 16 of 66
149A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Predictive Method
85A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Page 16 of 66
149
The risk with a purely observational system, particularly if the borehole array is at
considerable depth and supported only by surface monitoring, is that it allows the
majority of the relaxation to migrate above the borehole array before any surface
settlement becomes evident. This builds up a significant amount of settlement inertia
and necessitates an increased work content in the injection program because the
grouting is now required not only to re-compact soil but to lift the structure and the
entire body of soil above the borehole array in order to effect any correction in the
rate and amount of settlement. More critically, it builds unnecessary delay into the
response time, resulting in greater settlement, and/or a greater amplitude to the cycle
of settlement and recovery.
The observational method will be adequate for certain sites, but where there are
sensitive underground structures/utilities, or very demanding limits on differential
and total settlement, it would be preferable to combine the observational and
predictive methods.
4.3.2
The risk with a purely observational system, particularly if the borehole array is at
considerable depth and supported only by surface monitoring, is that it allows the
majority of the relaxation to migrate above the borehole array before any surface
settlement becomes evident. This builds up a significant amount of settlement inertia
and necessitates an increased work content in the injection program because the
grouting is now required not only to re-compact soil but to lift the structure and the
entire body of soil above the borehole array in order to effect any correction in the
rate and amount of settlement. More critically, it builds unnecessary delay into the
response time, resulting in greater settlement, and/or a greater amplitude to the cycle
of settlement and recovery.
The observational method will be adequate for certain sites, but where there are
sensitive underground structures/utilities, or very demanding limits on differential
and total settlement, it would be preferable to combine the observational and
predictive methods.
4.3.2
149A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
149
Predictive Method
Page 16 of 66
Page 16 of 66
150
Page 17 of 66
Page 17 of 66
150
Depending upon the soil type, it also permits a proportion of the grout required to
be injected ahead of the tunnel face and its associated exclusion zone, the balance of
the grout being injected after the exclusion zone has passed. The predictive method
should always be used in conjunction with the observational method because the %
face loss, the GEC, and the anticipated building response to differential settlement
are all predictions. For this reason the full volume of grout predicted is never injected
in a continuous phase,to avoid the possibility of over-injecting and thereby
unnecessarily stressing subsurface structures and utilities.
Pressure Method
In this method the effective stresses within the soil are assessed by carrying out an
extensive phase of grouting prior to the onset of tunnelling, when the soil is at an at-
Pressure Method
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
150
4.3.3
In this method the effective stresses within the soil are assessed by carrying out an
extensive phase of grouting prior to the onset of tunnelling, when the soil is at an at-
85B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Depending upon the soil type, it also permits a proportion of the grout required to
be injected ahead of the tunnel face and its associated exclusion zone, the balance of
the grout being injected after the exclusion zone has passed. The predictive method
should always be used in conjunction with the observational method because the %
face loss, the GEC, and the anticipated building response to differential settlement
are all predictions. For this reason the full volume of grout predicted is never injected
in a continuous phase,to avoid the possibility of over-injecting and thereby
unnecessarily stressing subsurface structures and utilities.
150A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Depending upon the soil type, it also permits a proportion of the grout required to
be injected ahead of the tunnel face and its associated exclusion zone, the balance of
the grout being injected after the exclusion zone has passed. The predictive method
should always be used in conjunction with the observational method because the %
face loss, the GEC, and the anticipated building response to differential settlement
are all predictions. For this reason the full volume of grout predicted is never injected
in a continuous phase,to avoid the possibility of over-injecting and thereby
unnecessarily stressing subsurface structures and utilities.
4.3.3
4.3.3
In this method the effective stresses within the soil are assessed by carrying out an
extensive phase of grouting prior to the onset of tunnelling, when the soil is at an at-
Depending upon the soil type, it also permits a proportion of the grout required to
be injected ahead of the tunnel face and its associated exclusion zone, the balance of
the grout being injected after the exclusion zone has passed. The predictive method
should always be used in conjunction with the observational method because the %
face loss, the GEC, and the anticipated building response to differential settlement
are all predictions. For this reason the full volume of grout predicted is never injected
in a continuous phase,to avoid the possibility of over-injecting and thereby
unnecessarily stressing subsurface structures and utilities.
150A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
150
Pressure Method
In this method the effective stresses within the soil are assessed by carrying out an
extensive phase of grouting prior to the onset of tunnelling, when the soil is at an at-
Page 17 of 66
Page 17 of 66
151
rest natural state, in order to assess the pressure of injection required to initiate soil
displacements at each injection port. This value, the signature pressure, becomes the
limiting injection pressure. Thereafter, all subsequent injections are limited by this
established limiting pressure, the objective being purely to re-compact soil to its
initial condition prior to tunnelling. The pressure method has been used with
considerable success, but on a very limited number of contracts because it requires
Surface movement
Time
Summary
The objective with the pressure method is simply to locally restore the ground
stresses to the conditions which existed prior to any excavation work or relaxation. It
has been used principally on the Jubilee line extension project 101 below the Ritz
Hotel in London, where the specified maximum differential settlement across the
structure was set at an extremely onerous value of 1: 3000. It was successful because
the rate of excavation was very slow, with the tunnel being advanced by backhoe
excavator or hand-dig methods. It is unlikely that this method could ever cope
effectively with rapid rates of excavation generated by a TBM.
Surface movement
For all three methods there are a number of absolutely fundamental requirements in
order to enable the system to respond in a timely and control manner to the effects of
tunnelling:
Page 18 of 66
Surface movement
Time
The objective with the pressure method is simply to locally restore the ground
stresses to the conditions which existed prior to any excavation work or relaxation. It
has been used principally on the Jubilee line extension project 101 below the Ritz
Hotel in London, where the specified maximum differential settlement across the
structure was set at an extremely onerous value of 1: 3000. It was successful because
the rate of excavation was very slow, with the tunnel being advanced by backhoe
excavator or hand-dig methods. It is unlikely that this method could ever cope
effectively with rapid rates of excavation generated by a TBM.
Surface movement
Time
4.3.4
For all three methods there are a number of absolutely fundamental requirements in
order to enable the system to respond in a timely and control manner to the effects of
tunnelling:
151
rest natural state, in order to assess the pressure of injection required to initiate soil
displacements at each injection port. This value, the signature pressure, becomes the
limiting injection pressure. Thereafter, all subsequent injections are limited by this
established limiting pressure, the objective being purely to re-compact soil to its
initial condition prior to tunnelling. The pressure method has been used with
considerable success, but on a very limited number of contracts because it requires
The objective with the pressure method is simply to locally restore the ground
stresses to the conditions which existed prior to any excavation work or relaxation. It
has been used principally on the Jubilee line extension project 101 below the Ritz
Hotel in London, where the specified maximum differential settlement across the
structure was set at an extremely onerous value of 1: 3000. It was successful because
the rate of excavation was very slow, with the tunnel being advanced by backhoe
excavator or hand-dig methods. It is unlikely that this method could ever cope
effectively with rapid rates of excavation generated by a TBM.
4.3.4
151A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
151
rest natural state, in order to assess the pressure of injection required to initiate soil
displacements at each injection port. This value, the signature pressure, becomes the
limiting injection pressure. Thereafter, all subsequent injections are limited by this
established limiting pressure, the objective being purely to re-compact soil to its
initial condition prior to tunnelling. The pressure method has been used with
considerable success, but on a very limited number of contracts because it requires
Page 18 of 66
86A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Time
4.3.4
For all three methods there are a number of absolutely fundamental requirements in
order to enable the system to respond in a timely and control manner to the effects of
tunnelling:
The objective with the pressure method is simply to locally restore the ground
stresses to the conditions which existed prior to any excavation work or relaxation. It
has been used principally on the Jubilee line extension project 101 below the Ritz
Hotel in London, where the specified maximum differential settlement across the
structure was set at an extremely onerous value of 1: 3000. It was successful because
the rate of excavation was very slow, with the tunnel being advanced by backhoe
excavator or hand-dig methods. It is unlikely that this method could ever cope
effectively with rapid rates of excavation generated by a TBM.
151
rest natural state, in order to assess the pressure of injection required to initiate soil
displacements at each injection port. This value, the signature pressure, becomes the
limiting injection pressure. Thereafter, all subsequent injections are limited by this
established limiting pressure, the objective being purely to re-compact soil to its
initial condition prior to tunnelling. The pressure method has been used with
considerable success, but on a very limited number of contracts because it requires
151A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Summary
For all three methods there are a number of absolutely fundamental requirements in
order to enable the system to respond in a timely and control manner to the effects of
tunnelling:
Page 18 of 66
Page 18 of 66
4.4
time to install injection plant and the grout injection pipes in required
locations.
Prior to the onset of any tunnelling, a period of injection is required in all
areas in order to pre- condition the ground. This is effected by injecting grout
until there is the slightest visible (1mm 2mm) response of adjacent
structures. This process primes the natural undisturbed ground prior to the
start of tunnelling, so that any grout subsequently injected during or after
tunnelling is purely addressing the problem of ground relaxation due to the
tunnelling or excavation. In this way significant delays can be avoided at
critical stages of construction by eliminating the time necessary to compact
the natural soil sufficiently so that it can efficiently transfer the effects of
grouting to adjacent structures or soil.
Accurate, timely monitoring of any structures or soil likely to be affected by
the construction works. Where either the buildings are sensitive, the
construction sequence complex or critical, or where adjacent structures are
expected to respond rapidly to the construction works, it is essential that the
compensation grouting team have access to accurate, real-time, data
concerning movement of structures and the ground around structures. Data
collection for background signature movements of structures likely to be
affected by the works must commence sufficiently in advance of the works to
enable normal movements induced by normal cyclical daily temperature
variations and usage, to be assessed and understood.
It is essential that the practical implementation of the compensation grouting
is done in an absolutely controlled manner. To achieve this, the site practical
procedures and equipment must permit total control of the injection process.
The requisite safety and management systems must be in place, including not
only the measures and procedures necessary to record the process and effects
of compensation grouting, but to analyse the data and to respond in a timely
and controlled manner.
Detailed condition surveys for affected structures to enable a prediction of the
response to any induced settlements
Active Compensation
4.4
time to install injection plant and the grout injection pipes in required
locations.
Prior to the onset of any tunnelling, a period of injection is required in all
areas in order to pre- condition the ground. This is effected by injecting grout
until there is the slightest visible (1mm 2mm) response of adjacent
structures. This process primes the natural undisturbed ground prior to the
start of tunnelling, so that any grout subsequently injected during or after
tunnelling is purely addressing the problem of ground relaxation due to the
tunnelling or excavation. In this way significant delays can be avoided at
critical stages of construction by eliminating the time necessary to compact
the natural soil sufficiently so that it can efficiently transfer the effects of
grouting to adjacent structures or soil.
Accurate, timely monitoring of any structures or soil likely to be affected by
the construction works. Where either the buildings are sensitive, the
construction sequence complex or critical, or where adjacent structures are
expected to respond rapidly to the construction works, it is essential that the
compensation grouting team have access to accurate, real-time, data
concerning movement of structures and the ground around structures. Data
collection for background signature movements of structures likely to be
affected by the works must commence sufficiently in advance of the works to
enable normal movements induced by normal cyclical daily temperature
variations and usage, to be assessed and understood.
It is essential that the practical implementation of the compensation grouting
is done in an absolutely controlled manner. To achieve this, the site practical
procedures and equipment must permit total control of the injection process.
The requisite safety and management systems must be in place, including not
only the measures and procedures necessary to record the process and effects
of compensation grouting, but to analyse the data and to respond in a timely
and controlled manner.
Detailed condition surveys for affected structures to enable a prediction of the
response to any induced settlements
Active Compensation
152
Active Compensation
Page 19 of 66
Page 19 of 66
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
152
time to install injection plant and the grout injection pipes in required
locations.
Prior to the onset of any tunnelling, a period of injection is required in all
areas in order to pre- condition the ground. This is effected by injecting grout
until there is the slightest visible (1mm 2mm) response of adjacent
structures. This process primes the natural undisturbed ground prior to the
start of tunnelling, so that any grout subsequently injected during or after
tunnelling is purely addressing the problem of ground relaxation due to the
tunnelling or excavation. In this way significant delays can be avoided at
critical stages of construction by eliminating the time necessary to compact
the natural soil sufficiently so that it can efficiently transfer the effects of
grouting to adjacent structures or soil.
Accurate, timely monitoring of any structures or soil likely to be affected by
the construction works. Where either the buildings are sensitive, the
construction sequence complex or critical, or where adjacent structures are
expected to respond rapidly to the construction works, it is essential that the
compensation grouting team have access to accurate, real-time, data
concerning movement of structures and the ground around structures. Data
collection for background signature movements of structures likely to be
affected by the works must commence sufficiently in advance of the works to
enable normal movements induced by normal cyclical daily temperature
variations and usage, to be assessed and understood.
It is essential that the practical implementation of the compensation grouting
is done in an absolutely controlled manner. To achieve this, the site practical
procedures and equipment must permit total control of the injection process.
The requisite safety and management systems must be in place, including not
only the measures and procedures necessary to record the process and effects
of compensation grouting, but to analyse the data and to respond in a timely
and controlled manner.
Detailed condition surveys for affected structures to enable a prediction of the
response to any induced settlements
86B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
4.4
152A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
152
152A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
152
4.4
time to install injection plant and the grout injection pipes in required
locations.
Prior to the onset of any tunnelling, a period of injection is required in all
areas in order to pre- condition the ground. This is effected by injecting grout
until there is the slightest visible (1mm 2mm) response of adjacent
structures. This process primes the natural undisturbed ground prior to the
start of tunnelling, so that any grout subsequently injected during or after
tunnelling is purely addressing the problem of ground relaxation due to the
tunnelling or excavation. In this way significant delays can be avoided at
critical stages of construction by eliminating the time necessary to compact
the natural soil sufficiently so that it can efficiently transfer the effects of
grouting to adjacent structures or soil.
Accurate, timely monitoring of any structures or soil likely to be affected by
the construction works. Where either the buildings are sensitive, the
construction sequence complex or critical, or where adjacent structures are
expected to respond rapidly to the construction works, it is essential that the
compensation grouting team have access to accurate, real-time, data
concerning movement of structures and the ground around structures. Data
collection for background signature movements of structures likely to be
affected by the works must commence sufficiently in advance of the works to
enable normal movements induced by normal cyclical daily temperature
variations and usage, to be assessed and understood.
It is essential that the practical implementation of the compensation grouting
is done in an absolutely controlled manner. To achieve this, the site practical
procedures and equipment must permit total control of the injection process.
The requisite safety and management systems must be in place, including not
only the measures and procedures necessary to record the process and effects
of compensation grouting, but to analyse the data and to respond in a timely
and controlled manner.
Detailed condition surveys for affected structures to enable a prediction of the
response to any induced settlements
Active Compensation
Page 19 of 66
Page 19 of 66
153
153
153A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Page 20 of 66
87A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Page 20 of 66
153
153A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
153
Page 20 of 66
Page 20 of 66
154
87B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Page 21 of 66
Page 21 of 66
154
King's Cross station in London during the excavation of very shallow tunnels as part
of the station redevelopment. The design was intended to mobilise not only the
stiffness of the structural steel array with the possibility of compensation grouting
once the exclusion zone had been removed, but also to provide support by the array
acting in a similar manner to tension piles, bridging the area of maximum settlement
to produce a protective vault below the live track.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
154
King's Cross station in London during the excavation of very shallow tunnels as part
of the station redevelopment. The design was intended to mobilise not only the
stiffness of the structural steel array with the possibility of compensation grouting
once the exclusion zone had been removed, but also to provide support by the array
acting in a similar manner to tension piles, bridging the area of maximum settlement
to produce a protective vault below the live track.
154A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
King's Cross station in London during the excavation of very shallow tunnels as part
of the station redevelopment. The design was intended to mobilise not only the
stiffness of the structural steel array with the possibility of compensation grouting
once the exclusion zone had been removed, but also to provide support by the array
acting in a similar manner to tension piles, bridging the area of maximum settlement
to produce a protective vault below the live track.
King's Cross station in London during the excavation of very shallow tunnels as part
of the station redevelopment. The design was intended to mobilise not only the
stiffness of the structural steel array with the possibility of compensation grouting
once the exclusion zone had been removed, but also to provide support by the array
acting in a similar manner to tension piles, bridging the area of maximum settlement
to produce a protective vault below the live track.
154A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
154
Page 21 of 66
Page 21 of 66
155
the designer may have many options in trying to provide coverage which will allow
controlled compensation grouting.
By liaising carefully with the tunnelling contractor at daily review meetings, the
geotechnical contractor can understand the programme of excavation for the
following 24 hours, and schedule a programme of injection specifically targeted at
the relaxation generated within that period. It can be seen that this information could
equally be used to provide an element of predictive grouting ahead of the tunnel face,
for example by injecting 10 to 15% of the anticipated grout volume, leaving the
balance to be injected after the exclusion zone has passed thereby carrying out the
maximum amount of work at the earliest possible time. Fig.12 below indicates the
detailed geometry of the face exclusion zone specified for a Crossrail tunnel advance.
Managing injections around this advancing face is critical to ensuring the minimum
response time of the operation. It should be noted however that great care is required
when injecting outside an exclusion zone not to increase the slope of the settlement
trough and the resulting differential displacement of the structure above.
88A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
155
the designer may have many options in trying to provide coverage which will allow
controlled compensation grouting.
By liaising carefully with the tunnelling contractor at daily review meetings, the
geotechnical contractor can understand the programme of excavation for the
following 24 hours, and schedule a programme of injection specifically targeted at
the relaxation generated within that period. It can be seen that this information could
equally be used to provide an element of predictive grouting ahead of the tunnel face,
for example by injecting 10 to 15% of the anticipated grout volume, leaving the
balance to be injected after the exclusion zone has passed thereby carrying out the
maximum amount of work at the earliest possible time. Fig.12 below indicates the
detailed geometry of the face exclusion zone specified for a Crossrail tunnel advance.
Managing injections around this advancing face is critical to ensuring the minimum
response time of the operation. It should be noted however that great care is required
when injecting outside an exclusion zone not to increase the slope of the settlement
trough and the resulting differential displacement of the structure above.
155A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Page 22 of 66
155
the designer may have many options in trying to provide coverage which will allow
controlled compensation grouting.
By liaising carefully with the tunnelling contractor at daily review meetings, the
geotechnical contractor can understand the programme of excavation for the
following 24 hours, and schedule a programme of injection specifically targeted at
the relaxation generated within that period. It can be seen that this information could
equally be used to provide an element of predictive grouting ahead of the tunnel face,
for example by injecting 10 to 15% of the anticipated grout volume, leaving the
balance to be injected after the exclusion zone has passed thereby carrying out the
maximum amount of work at the earliest possible time. Fig.12 below indicates the
detailed geometry of the face exclusion zone specified for a Crossrail tunnel advance.
Managing injections around this advancing face is critical to ensuring the minimum
response time of the operation. It should be noted however that great care is required
when injecting outside an exclusion zone not to increase the slope of the settlement
trough and the resulting differential displacement of the structure above.
Exclusion zones are often imposed to avoid grouting in close proximity to the
tunnel face a) to avoid risk to the stability of the face, and b) prevent excessive
pressures on the new-build tunnel lining. This is an important issue, as the exclusion
zone necessitates complex adjustments to the injection programme design, and
generally prohibits injection at the precise location and time where it is most needed.
There are numerous cases where compensation grouting was rendered impossible for
several critical weeks due to the exclusion zone geometry. Often the design of the
geometry of the exclusion zone is highly empirical, and much more research is
required to assess the necessity for, and optimum geometry of, this zone.
Page 22 of 66
155
the designer may have many options in trying to provide coverage which will allow
controlled compensation grouting.
By liaising carefully with the tunnelling contractor at daily review meetings, the
geotechnical contractor can understand the programme of excavation for the
following 24 hours, and schedule a programme of injection specifically targeted at
the relaxation generated within that period. It can be seen that this information could
equally be used to provide an element of predictive grouting ahead of the tunnel face,
for example by injecting 10 to 15% of the anticipated grout volume, leaving the
balance to be injected after the exclusion zone has passed thereby carrying out the
maximum amount of work at the earliest possible time. Fig.12 below indicates the
detailed geometry of the face exclusion zone specified for a Crossrail tunnel advance.
Managing injections around this advancing face is critical to ensuring the minimum
response time of the operation. It should be noted however that great care is required
when injecting outside an exclusion zone not to increase the slope of the settlement
trough and the resulting differential displacement of the structure above.
155A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Exclusion zones are often imposed to avoid grouting in close proximity to the
tunnel face a) to avoid risk to the stability of the face, and b) prevent excessive
pressures on the new-build tunnel lining. This is an important issue, as the exclusion
zone necessitates complex adjustments to the injection programme design, and
generally prohibits injection at the precise location and time where it is most needed.
There are numerous cases where compensation grouting was rendered impossible for
several critical weeks due to the exclusion zone geometry. Often the design of the
geometry of the exclusion zone is highly empirical, and much more research is
required to assess the necessity for, and optimum geometry of, this zone.
Page 22 of 66
Page 22 of 66
156
156A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Borehole Geometry
4.5
A key constraint and challenge for any compensation grouting exercise is to find
the optimum location in which to inject. The elevation at which arrays are installed
may often be dictated by subsurface congestion of utilities and existing
infrastructure, and the sensitivity of the tunnel linings under construction, the
presence of basements, and access to the target areas for drilling. Many infrastructure
and utility companies impose a permanent exclusion zone around their assets, in the
range of 3 to 12 m depending on the sensitivity of the asset, within which no
compensation grouting is allowed to take place.
The subsurface limitations are often compounded by the lack of surface access to
install enough shafts for manageable drilling, leading in some cases to a requirement
for exceptionally long boreholes of up to 80 m to be drilled sub horizontally from
small specially constructed shafts of diameter 4 to 5 m. It is often specified that the
maximum distance between the injection boreholes at the edge of the array is no
greater than 3 to 5 m. For very extensive arrays of boreholes, this leads to a very high
congestion of injection pipes and boreholes in the 30 meters surrounding the shaft,
and, particularly when steel injection pipes installed designers should give careful
consideration to any future works which may require excavations through this forest
of steel pipes.
88B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Page 23 of 66
Page 23 of 66
156
Borehole Geometry
A key constraint and challenge for any compensation grouting exercise is to find
the optimum location in which to inject. The elevation at which arrays are installed
may often be dictated by subsurface congestion of utilities and existing
infrastructure, and the sensitivity of the tunnel linings under construction, the
presence of basements, and access to the target areas for drilling. Many infrastructure
and utility companies impose a permanent exclusion zone around their assets, in the
range of 3 to 12 m depending on the sensitivity of the asset, within which no
compensation grouting is allowed to take place.
The subsurface limitations are often compounded by the lack of surface access to
install enough shafts for manageable drilling, leading in some cases to a requirement
for exceptionally long boreholes of up to 80 m to be drilled sub horizontally from
small specially constructed shafts of diameter 4 to 5 m. It is often specified that the
maximum distance between the injection boreholes at the edge of the array is no
greater than 3 to 5 m. For very extensive arrays of boreholes, this leads to a very high
congestion of injection pipes and boreholes in the 30 meters surrounding the shaft,
and, particularly when steel injection pipes installed designers should give careful
consideration to any future works which may require excavations through this forest
of steel pipes.
Borehole Geometry
A key constraint and challenge for any compensation grouting exercise is to find
the optimum location in which to inject. The elevation at which arrays are installed
may often be dictated by subsurface congestion of utilities and existing
infrastructure, and the sensitivity of the tunnel linings under construction, the
presence of basements, and access to the target areas for drilling. Many infrastructure
and utility companies impose a permanent exclusion zone around their assets, in the
range of 3 to 12 m depending on the sensitivity of the asset, within which no
compensation grouting is allowed to take place.
The subsurface limitations are often compounded by the lack of surface access to
install enough shafts for manageable drilling, leading in some cases to a requirement
for exceptionally long boreholes of up to 80 m to be drilled sub horizontally from
small specially constructed shafts of diameter 4 to 5 m. It is often specified that the
maximum distance between the injection boreholes at the edge of the array is no
greater than 3 to 5 m. For very extensive arrays of boreholes, this leads to a very high
congestion of injection pipes and boreholes in the 30 meters surrounding the shaft,
and, particularly when steel injection pipes installed designers should give careful
consideration to any future works which may require excavations through this forest
of steel pipes.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
156
156A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
156
4.5
Borehole Geometry
A key constraint and challenge for any compensation grouting exercise is to find
the optimum location in which to inject. The elevation at which arrays are installed
may often be dictated by subsurface congestion of utilities and existing
infrastructure, and the sensitivity of the tunnel linings under construction, the
presence of basements, and access to the target areas for drilling. Many infrastructure
and utility companies impose a permanent exclusion zone around their assets, in the
range of 3 to 12 m depending on the sensitivity of the asset, within which no
compensation grouting is allowed to take place.
The subsurface limitations are often compounded by the lack of surface access to
install enough shafts for manageable drilling, leading in some cases to a requirement
for exceptionally long boreholes of up to 80 m to be drilled sub horizontally from
small specially constructed shafts of diameter 4 to 5 m. It is often specified that the
maximum distance between the injection boreholes at the edge of the array is no
greater than 3 to 5 m. For very extensive arrays of boreholes, this leads to a very high
congestion of injection pipes and boreholes in the 30 meters surrounding the shaft,
and, particularly when steel injection pipes installed designers should give careful
consideration to any future works which may require excavations through this forest
of steel pipes.
Page 23 of 66
Page 23 of 66
157
The maximum vertical settlements and gradients induced by tunnel excavations are
located above the excavation itself. The settlement trough increases in width towards
the surface, and correspondingly the vertical displacements and gradients reduce. In
general, therefore, where tunnels are deep, it is often considered more efficient to
carry out compensation grouting at depth where the settlement trough is narrowest.
Where tunnels are at relatively shallow depths, there is often very little choice of
the horizon into which the injection pipes must be installed, and in these situations
careful consideration should be given as to whether the strata at this horizon is
suitable for compensation grouting. Where space is limited it is limited necessary to
strike a balance between maintaining a safe distance from both the tunnel excavation
and from any adjacent or overlying structures, infrastructure, and utilities. This
dilemma is often managed by the imposition of exclusion zones around the tunnel
face as it advances. Fig. 14 indicates various elevations within the trough where
arrays might be installed.
Depends upon
structure condition
ground conditions
predicted settlements
damage risk
tunnelling method
access constraints
time constraints
157
The maximum vertical settlements and gradients induced by tunnel excavations are
located above the excavation itself. The settlement trough increases in width towards
the surface, and correspondingly the vertical displacements and gradients reduce. In
general, therefore, where tunnels are deep, it is often considered more efficient to
carry out compensation grouting at depth where the settlement trough is narrowest.
Where tunnels are at relatively shallow depths, there is often very little choice of
the horizon into which the injection pipes must be installed, and in these situations
careful consideration should be given as to whether the strata at this horizon is
suitable for compensation grouting. Where space is limited it is limited necessary to
strike a balance between maintaining a safe distance from both the tunnel excavation
and from any adjacent or overlying structures, infrastructure, and utilities. This
dilemma is often managed by the imposition of exclusion zones around the tunnel
face as it advances. Fig. 14 indicates various elevations within the trough where
arrays might be installed.
157A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Depends upon
structure condition
ground conditions
predicted settlements
damage risk
tunnelling method
access constraints
time constraints
89A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Page 24 of 66
157
The maximum vertical settlements and gradients induced by tunnel excavations are
located above the excavation itself. The settlement trough increases in width towards
the surface, and correspondingly the vertical displacements and gradients reduce. In
general, therefore, where tunnels are deep, it is often considered more efficient to
carry out compensation grouting at depth where the settlement trough is narrowest.
Where tunnels are at relatively shallow depths, there is often very little choice of
the horizon into which the injection pipes must be installed, and in these situations
careful consideration should be given as to whether the strata at this horizon is
suitable for compensation grouting. Where space is limited it is limited necessary to
strike a balance between maintaining a safe distance from both the tunnel excavation
and from any adjacent or overlying structures, infrastructure, and utilities. This
dilemma is often managed by the imposition of exclusion zones around the tunnel
face as it advances. Fig. 14 indicates various elevations within the trough where
arrays might be installed.
Page 24 of 66
157
The maximum vertical settlements and gradients induced by tunnel excavations are
located above the excavation itself. The settlement trough increases in width towards
the surface, and correspondingly the vertical displacements and gradients reduce. In
general, therefore, where tunnels are deep, it is often considered more efficient to
carry out compensation grouting at depth where the settlement trough is narrowest.
Where tunnels are at relatively shallow depths, there is often very little choice of
the horizon into which the injection pipes must be installed, and in these situations
careful consideration should be given as to whether the strata at this horizon is
suitable for compensation grouting. Where space is limited it is limited necessary to
strike a balance between maintaining a safe distance from both the tunnel excavation
and from any adjacent or overlying structures, infrastructure, and utilities. This
dilemma is often managed by the imposition of exclusion zones around the tunnel
face as it advances. Fig. 14 indicates various elevations within the trough where
arrays might be installed.
157A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 24 of 66
Page 24 of 66
158
FIG. 15a & 15b Compensation of structures with areas of variable loading
Because of the complexity of many urban underground developments, it is
becoming standard practice to design the installation of the borehole array using a
full 3-D modelling capability which is capable of handling the geometry of all newbuild tunnels, existing utilities infrastructure, exclusion zones, and borehole arrays.
Without such a model the compensation grouting could be rendered ineffective and
the source of very considerable risk to both the tunnelling operations and structures
which are to be protected.
The borehole geometry must also take into account all possible sources of
relaxation during the works, and there are a number of projects where the
compensation grouting contractor was charged by the client with protecting the
structures specified in his contract, even if those structures are subject to relaxation
coming from adjacent worksites or external activities with which the contractor has
no commercial and contractual contact. This may mean including boreholes to
address, for example, an adjacent deep excavation which might give rise to the lateral
relaxation due to the deflection of a diaphragm wall or pile wall. (Refer to Fig. 16
below)
89B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
FIG. 15a & 15b Compensation of structures with areas of variable loading
Page 25 of 66
Page 25 of 66
158
possibility, care must be taken in targeting the location of grout injection and in
controlling the rate and volume of injected material. Consideration should also be
given to some pre-injection to limit grout migration during active compensation. In
Figure 15a below, the right-hand arch indicates an example of this problem which
has occurred in practice, and the left-hand arch indicates how this could be managed
by stiffening the soil below the arch to prevent the lateral displacement of soil.
Figure 15b indicates an example on the Jubilee line project where the compensation
grouting within the London clay was confined by the formation of a slab within the
overlying gravels by permeation grouting, thereby confining the compensation
grouting and distributing its effect to avoid grout punching towards the surface below
the arch as shown in Fig. 15 below:
FIG. 15a & 15b Compensation of structures with areas of variable loading
Because of the complexity of many urban underground developments, it is
becoming standard practice to design the installation of the borehole array using a
full 3-D modelling capability which is capable of handling the geometry of all newbuild tunnels, existing utilities infrastructure, exclusion zones, and borehole arrays.
Without such a model the compensation grouting could be rendered ineffective and
the source of very considerable risk to both the tunnelling operations and structures
which are to be protected.
The borehole geometry must also take into account all possible sources of
relaxation during the works, and there are a number of projects where the
compensation grouting contractor was charged by the client with protecting the
structures specified in his contract, even if those structures are subject to relaxation
coming from adjacent worksites or external activities with which the contractor has
no commercial and contractual contact. This may mean including boreholes to
address, for example, an adjacent deep excavation which might give rise to the lateral
relaxation due to the deflection of a diaphragm wall or pile wall. (Refer to Fig. 16
below)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
158
possibility, care must be taken in targeting the location of grout injection and in
controlling the rate and volume of injected material. Consideration should also be
given to some pre-injection to limit grout migration during active compensation. In
Figure 15a below, the right-hand arch indicates an example of this problem which
has occurred in practice, and the left-hand arch indicates how this could be managed
by stiffening the soil below the arch to prevent the lateral displacement of soil.
Figure 15b indicates an example on the Jubilee line project where the compensation
grouting within the London clay was confined by the formation of a slab within the
overlying gravels by permeation grouting, thereby confining the compensation
grouting and distributing its effect to avoid grout punching towards the surface below
the arch as shown in Fig. 15 below:
158A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
possibility, care must be taken in targeting the location of grout injection and in
controlling the rate and volume of injected material. Consideration should also be
given to some pre-injection to limit grout migration during active compensation. In
Figure 15a below, the right-hand arch indicates an example of this problem which
has occurred in practice, and the left-hand arch indicates how this could be managed
by stiffening the soil below the arch to prevent the lateral displacement of soil.
Figure 15b indicates an example on the Jubilee line project where the compensation
grouting within the London clay was confined by the formation of a slab within the
overlying gravels by permeation grouting, thereby confining the compensation
grouting and distributing its effect to avoid grout punching towards the surface below
the arch as shown in Fig. 15 below:
possibility, care must be taken in targeting the location of grout injection and in
controlling the rate and volume of injected material. Consideration should also be
given to some pre-injection to limit grout migration during active compensation. In
Figure 15a below, the right-hand arch indicates an example of this problem which
has occurred in practice, and the left-hand arch indicates how this could be managed
by stiffening the soil below the arch to prevent the lateral displacement of soil.
Figure 15b indicates an example on the Jubilee line project where the compensation
grouting within the London clay was confined by the formation of a slab within the
overlying gravels by permeation grouting, thereby confining the compensation
grouting and distributing its effect to avoid grout punching towards the surface below
the arch as shown in Fig. 15 below:
158A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
158
FIG. 15a & 15b Compensation of structures with areas of variable loading
Page 25 of 66
Page 25 of 66
159
159A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
It is not uncommon, due to the lack of access, for the installation of dedicated
shafts for compensation grouting, to install arrays of boreholes from deep
excavations which form part of the permanent works, or from existing structures
which are used for temporary access to the duration of the project. In these
circumstances it may be necessary on compilation of the compensation grouting
works to provide the means for decoupling the steel injection pipes from the
permanent structure in order to isolate it from the drag effect of any long-term
settlement within the area of the borehole array.
System Of Injection
4.6
In the early days of compensation grouting there was much debate over whether a
viscous slurry or mortar, injected as a compaction grouting exercise was preferable to
the injection of a fluid slurry injected via manchette pipes. Each method has its
advantageous and disadvantages. Compensation grouting is essentially a type of
displacement grouting, of which there are many varieties. Figure 17 below indicates
a general classification of grout mechanisms based upon the type of grout selected,
and the method of placement.
Compensation grouting would normally be confined to the processes included
within the intrusion grouting area in Fig. 17 below.
System Of Injection
159A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
90A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
It is not uncommon, due to the lack of access, for the installation of dedicated
shafts for compensation grouting, to install arrays of boreholes from deep
excavations which form part of the permanent works, or from existing structures
which are used for temporary access to the duration of the project. In these
circumstances it may be necessary on compilation of the compensation grouting
works to provide the means for decoupling the steel injection pipes from the
permanent structure in order to isolate it from the drag effect of any long-term
settlement within the area of the borehole array.
4.6
Page 26 of 66
159
159
It is not uncommon, due to the lack of access, for the installation of dedicated
shafts for compensation grouting, to install arrays of boreholes from deep
excavations which form part of the permanent works, or from existing structures
which are used for temporary access to the duration of the project. In these
circumstances it may be necessary on compilation of the compensation grouting
works to provide the means for decoupling the steel injection pipes from the
permanent structure in order to isolate it from the drag effect of any long-term
settlement within the area of the borehole array.
4.6
In the early days of compensation grouting there was much debate over whether a
viscous slurry or mortar, injected as a compaction grouting exercise was preferable to
the injection of a fluid slurry injected via manchette pipes. Each method has its
advantageous and disadvantages. Compensation grouting is essentially a type of
displacement grouting, of which there are many varieties. Figure 17 below indicates
a general classification of grout mechanisms based upon the type of grout selected,
and the method of placement.
Compensation grouting would normally be confined to the processes included
within the intrusion grouting area in Fig. 17 below.
System Of Injection
In the early days of compensation grouting there was much debate over whether a
viscous slurry or mortar, injected as a compaction grouting exercise was preferable to
the injection of a fluid slurry injected via manchette pipes. Each method has its
advantageous and disadvantages. Compensation grouting is essentially a type of
displacement grouting, of which there are many varieties. Figure 17 below indicates
a general classification of grout mechanisms based upon the type of grout selected,
and the method of placement.
Compensation grouting would normally be confined to the processes included
within the intrusion grouting area in Fig. 17 below.
Page 26 of 66
159
System Of Injection
In the early days of compensation grouting there was much debate over whether a
viscous slurry or mortar, injected as a compaction grouting exercise was preferable to
the injection of a fluid slurry injected via manchette pipes. Each method has its
advantageous and disadvantages. Compensation grouting is essentially a type of
displacement grouting, of which there are many varieties. Figure 17 below indicates
a general classification of grout mechanisms based upon the type of grout selected,
and the method of placement.
Compensation grouting would normally be confined to the processes included
within the intrusion grouting area in Fig. 17 below.
Page 26 of 66
Page 26 of 66
160
160
Slab
jacking
Displacement
grouting
Intrusion
grouting
Compaction
Permeation
grouting
Fluid slurry
Intrusion
grouting
Claquage
Fracture
Compaction
Hydrofracture
Repeated small
injections
Repeated small
injections
4.6.1
Mortar
Zone of
compaction
Zone of plastic
deformation
90B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Stiff Mortars
The problem with the compaction grouting approach is that in essence it is a single
phase operation. If the operations were a pre-heaving exercise, or a remedial grouting
exercise after the building had settled, there would be no particular time constraint
other than cost. However, for most compensation grouting projects this is not the
situation in which we find ourselves, because we are dealing with a dynamic
situation where buildings are in the process of settling as the ground relaxes. Timely
controlled placement of grout is therefore of the essence.
Typically,
combined drill
and grout pipe
progressively
withdrawn
Mortar
Compaction
grouted body
can be columnar
lenticular
elliptical or
spherical
Depends upon
ground structure &
compressibility,
grout properties
injection sequence
& volume
160
Grout
jacking
Claquage
Fracture
Soilfrac
Hydrofracture
Fluid slurry
Repeated small
injections
The problem with the compaction grouting approach is that in essence it is a single
phase operation. If the operations were a pre-heaving exercise, or a remedial grouting
exercise after the building had settled, there would be no particular time constraint
other than cost. However, for most compensation grouting projects this is not the
situation in which we find ourselves, because we are dealing with a dynamic
situation where buildings are in the process of settling as the ground relaxes. Timely
controlled placement of grout is therefore of the essence.
Mortar
Depends upon
ground structure &
compressibility,
grout properties
injection sequence
& volume
Typically,
combined drill
and grout pipe
progressively
withdrawn
Zone of
compaction
Zone of plastic
deformation
Permeation
grouting
Slab
jacking
Displacement
grouting
Intrusion
grouting
Compaction
160A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Intrusion
grouting
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Slab
jacking
Displacement
grouting
Compaction
grouted body
can be columnar
lenticular
elliptical or
spherical
Zone of plastic
deformation
Page 27 of 66
4.6.1
Zone of
compaction
Page 27 of 66
Compaction
Typically,
combined drill
and grout pipe
progressively
withdrawn
Permeation
grouting
Hydrofracture
160
Soilfrac
Fluid slurry
Stiff Mortars
Depends upon
ground structure &
compressibility,
grout properties
injection sequence
& volume
Claquage
The problem with the compaction grouting approach is that in essence it is a single
phase operation. If the operations were a pre-heaving exercise, or a remedial grouting
exercise after the building had settled, there would be no particular time constraint
other than cost. However, for most compensation grouting projects this is not the
situation in which we find ourselves, because we are dealing with a dynamic
situation where buildings are in the process of settling as the ground relaxes. Timely
controlled placement of grout is therefore of the essence.
Compaction
grouted body
can be columnar
lenticular
elliptical or
spherical
Grout
jacking
Fracture
Soilfrac
Slab
jacking
Displacement
grouting
Grout
jacking
160A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Permeation
grouting
Grout
jacking
Claquage
Fracture
Soilfrac
Hydrofracture
Fluid slurry
Repeated small
injections
4.6.1
Stiff Mortars
The problem with the compaction grouting approach is that in essence it is a single
phase operation. If the operations were a pre-heaving exercise, or a remedial grouting
exercise after the building had settled, there would be no particular time constraint
other than cost. However, for most compensation grouting projects this is not the
situation in which we find ourselves, because we are dealing with a dynamic
situation where buildings are in the process of settling as the ground relaxes. Timely
controlled placement of grout is therefore of the essence.
Mortar
Compaction
grouted body
can be columnar
lenticular
elliptical or
spherical
Depends upon
ground structure &
compressibility,
grout properties
injection sequence
& volume
Typically,
combined drill
and grout pipe
progressively
withdrawn
Zone of
compaction
Zone of plastic
deformation
Page 27 of 66
Page 27 of 66
161
4.6.2
4.6.2
161
161A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
91A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
4.6.2
Page 28 of 66
161
Page 28 of 66
161
161A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 28 of 66
Page 28 of 66
162
91B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Page 29 of 66
Page 29 of 66
162
surveyed for alignment using an instrument such as the Maxibor. This allows a
precise location with X, Y, Z coordinates can be defined for each injection port along
the length of the borehole. This means the grout can be placed repeatedly at a precise
location within the soil. This is a critical advantage where structures have a ground
bearing foundation since it allows placement in a very surgical manner below a key
foundation element, depending upon the degree of settlement being observed in
recorded.
A secondary but important advantage of using a manchette system is that it dictates
the nature of the grout which may be employed. The grout of course is required to be
fluid, non-shrink, self-hardening, but of relatively low strength. In fact excessive
strength is a disadvantage. It is sufficient for the grout to be self-hardening within a
reasonable period of time, and the grout is required to be solid but sufficiently weak
to be fissile over the duration of the excavation works, so that the strength of the
grout does not become an impediment to repeated injections at a precise location.
A major advantage of the use of a fluid grout is that it can be placed at very
significantly lower pressures than a viscous mortar. Typically injection pressures,
after the initial breakout from the manchette, may be as low as 3-10 bars. Further,
because the injection tends to be in the form of a narrow lens or filament of grout, the
localised displacement generated by each injection may be only of the order of
several millimetres. Given that most soils are compressible to a lesser or greater
degree this means that volume replacement with a fluid grout is characterised by
repeated successive injections of small quantities of grout at relatively low pressure,
making it a very much more cautious and incremental approach to replacing volume
and re-establishing stresses in the ground, not least by allowing greater time for pore
pressures to dissipate in cohesive soils. This is a huge advantage when trying to
control the impact of grouting-induced stresses on structures and utilities in close
proximity.
Fig. 18 below indicates the nature and extent of fissures generated by hydro
fracture with a cement slurry in stiff over-consolidated London clay. Note that the
fissures are generally somewhat horizontal, and this is to be expected since they
ought naturally to propagate at right angles to the direction of principal stress.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
162
surveyed for alignment using an instrument such as the Maxibor. This allows a
precise location with X, Y, Z coordinates can be defined for each injection port along
the length of the borehole. This means the grout can be placed repeatedly at a precise
location within the soil. This is a critical advantage where structures have a ground
bearing foundation since it allows placement in a very surgical manner below a key
foundation element, depending upon the degree of settlement being observed in
recorded.
A secondary but important advantage of using a manchette system is that it dictates
the nature of the grout which may be employed. The grout of course is required to be
fluid, non-shrink, self-hardening, but of relatively low strength. In fact excessive
strength is a disadvantage. It is sufficient for the grout to be self-hardening within a
reasonable period of time, and the grout is required to be solid but sufficiently weak
to be fissile over the duration of the excavation works, so that the strength of the
grout does not become an impediment to repeated injections at a precise location.
A major advantage of the use of a fluid grout is that it can be placed at very
significantly lower pressures than a viscous mortar. Typically injection pressures,
after the initial breakout from the manchette, may be as low as 3-10 bars. Further,
because the injection tends to be in the form of a narrow lens or filament of grout, the
localised displacement generated by each injection may be only of the order of
several millimetres. Given that most soils are compressible to a lesser or greater
degree this means that volume replacement with a fluid grout is characterised by
repeated successive injections of small quantities of grout at relatively low pressure,
making it a very much more cautious and incremental approach to replacing volume
and re-establishing stresses in the ground, not least by allowing greater time for pore
pressures to dissipate in cohesive soils. This is a huge advantage when trying to
control the impact of grouting-induced stresses on structures and utilities in close
proximity.
Fig. 18 below indicates the nature and extent of fissures generated by hydro
fracture with a cement slurry in stiff over-consolidated London clay. Note that the
fissures are generally somewhat horizontal, and this is to be expected since they
ought naturally to propagate at right angles to the direction of principal stress.
162A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
surveyed for alignment using an instrument such as the Maxibor. This allows a
precise location with X, Y, Z coordinates can be defined for each injection port along
the length of the borehole. This means the grout can be placed repeatedly at a precise
location within the soil. This is a critical advantage where structures have a ground
bearing foundation since it allows placement in a very surgical manner below a key
foundation element, depending upon the degree of settlement being observed in
recorded.
A secondary but important advantage of using a manchette system is that it dictates
the nature of the grout which may be employed. The grout of course is required to be
fluid, non-shrink, self-hardening, but of relatively low strength. In fact excessive
strength is a disadvantage. It is sufficient for the grout to be self-hardening within a
reasonable period of time, and the grout is required to be solid but sufficiently weak
to be fissile over the duration of the excavation works, so that the strength of the
grout does not become an impediment to repeated injections at a precise location.
A major advantage of the use of a fluid grout is that it can be placed at very
significantly lower pressures than a viscous mortar. Typically injection pressures,
after the initial breakout from the manchette, may be as low as 3-10 bars. Further,
because the injection tends to be in the form of a narrow lens or filament of grout, the
localised displacement generated by each injection may be only of the order of
several millimetres. Given that most soils are compressible to a lesser or greater
degree this means that volume replacement with a fluid grout is characterised by
repeated successive injections of small quantities of grout at relatively low pressure,
making it a very much more cautious and incremental approach to replacing volume
and re-establishing stresses in the ground, not least by allowing greater time for pore
pressures to dissipate in cohesive soils. This is a huge advantage when trying to
control the impact of grouting-induced stresses on structures and utilities in close
proximity.
Fig. 18 below indicates the nature and extent of fissures generated by hydro
fracture with a cement slurry in stiff over-consolidated London clay. Note that the
fissures are generally somewhat horizontal, and this is to be expected since they
ought naturally to propagate at right angles to the direction of principal stress.
surveyed for alignment using an instrument such as the Maxibor. This allows a
precise location with X, Y, Z coordinates can be defined for each injection port along
the length of the borehole. This means the grout can be placed repeatedly at a precise
location within the soil. This is a critical advantage where structures have a ground
bearing foundation since it allows placement in a very surgical manner below a key
foundation element, depending upon the degree of settlement being observed in
recorded.
A secondary but important advantage of using a manchette system is that it dictates
the nature of the grout which may be employed. The grout of course is required to be
fluid, non-shrink, self-hardening, but of relatively low strength. In fact excessive
strength is a disadvantage. It is sufficient for the grout to be self-hardening within a
reasonable period of time, and the grout is required to be solid but sufficiently weak
to be fissile over the duration of the excavation works, so that the strength of the
grout does not become an impediment to repeated injections at a precise location.
A major advantage of the use of a fluid grout is that it can be placed at very
significantly lower pressures than a viscous mortar. Typically injection pressures,
after the initial breakout from the manchette, may be as low as 3-10 bars. Further,
because the injection tends to be in the form of a narrow lens or filament of grout, the
localised displacement generated by each injection may be only of the order of
several millimetres. Given that most soils are compressible to a lesser or greater
degree this means that volume replacement with a fluid grout is characterised by
repeated successive injections of small quantities of grout at relatively low pressure,
making it a very much more cautious and incremental approach to replacing volume
and re-establishing stresses in the ground, not least by allowing greater time for pore
pressures to dissipate in cohesive soils. This is a huge advantage when trying to
control the impact of grouting-induced stresses on structures and utilities in close
proximity.
Fig. 18 below indicates the nature and extent of fissures generated by hydro
fracture with a cement slurry in stiff over-consolidated London clay. Note that the
fissures are generally somewhat horizontal, and this is to be expected since they
ought naturally to propagate at right angles to the direction of principal stress.
162A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
162
Page 29 of 66
Page 29 of 66
163
Page 30 of 66
Page 30 of 66
92A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
163
4.7
163
163A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
4.7
Grout Mix
163A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
4.7
163
Page 30 of 66
Page 30 of 66
164
164
Fluid Grouts since the primary objective is to replace a volume loss, there is no
requirement for a high-performance grout mix. In fact, the set grout need not be any
stronger than the strata into which it is being injected. Most grouts selected for
compensation grouting are therefore relatively weak, with a 28 day strength of the
order of 3 to 5 N, and with a very low bleed capacity. The latter is essential in
cohesive or unstable soils because in these conditions we do not want to introduce
free water into the soil, and we do not want to lose the efficiency and advantage of
the volume of grout already placed. Typically these grouts may consist of
cementitious slurries of low water solids ratio, in the range 0.4 -1.0, although stable
low bleed slurries with a water cement ratio of up to 2 have been reported.
Fluid Grouts since the primary objective is to replace a volume loss, there is no
requirement for a high-performance grout mix. In fact, the set grout need not be any
stronger than the strata into which it is being injected. Most grouts selected for
compensation grouting are therefore relatively weak, with a 28 day strength of the
order of 3 to 5 N, and with a very low bleed capacity. The latter is essential in
cohesive or unstable soils because in these conditions we do not want to introduce
free water into the soil, and we do not want to lose the efficiency and advantage of
the volume of grout already placed. Typically these grouts may consist of
cementitious slurries of low water solids ratio, in the range 0.4 -1.0, although stable
low bleed slurries with a water cement ratio of up to 2 have been reported.
4.8
Injection parameters will vary greatly from location to location, depending upon
the nature of the compensation grouting, the depth of injection, the proximity of
sensitive structures, and any limits imposed by the tunnelling contractor and
utilities/infrastructure operations.
Since the settlement mitigation process cannot be effective unless grout is placed in
a timely manner, tunnel designers must consider carefully the design of the primary
lining, and the tunnel construction procedures in order to allow the grouting
contractor to intervene as early as this is practicably possible.
For SCL (sprayed concrete lining) tunnelling operations, contractors tend to design
their linings for at the very least for full overburden pressure plus a factor of safety to
protect the excavation face from the effects of compensation grouting. Clearly, a
compromise has to be made between the extent of the exclusion zone, the efficiency
of the grouting operation, and the cost of the tunnel lining.
Whatever the injection parameters selected, it is of critical importance to ensure
that these are adhered to, and that there is no risk of human error or oversight in
allowing excessive pressures, flow rates, or volumes to be placed at any time during
individual injection. The safest and most efficient way to manage this risk is to
Page 31 of 66
164
Fluid Grouts since the primary objective is to replace a volume loss, there is no
requirement for a high-performance grout mix. In fact, the set grout need not be any
stronger than the strata into which it is being injected. Most grouts selected for
compensation grouting are therefore relatively weak, with a 28 day strength of the
order of 3 to 5 N, and with a very low bleed capacity. The latter is essential in
cohesive or unstable soils because in these conditions we do not want to introduce
free water into the soil, and we do not want to lose the efficiency and advantage of
the volume of grout already placed. Typically these grouts may consist of
cementitious slurries of low water solids ratio, in the range 0.4 -1.0, although stable
low bleed slurries with a water cement ratio of up to 2 have been reported.
Primary decisions which need to be made at the outset are therefore
Page 31 of 66
Injection Parameters
Injection parameters will vary greatly from location to location, depending upon
the nature of the compensation grouting, the depth of injection, the proximity of
sensitive structures, and any limits imposed by the tunnelling contractor and
utilities/infrastructure operations.
Since the settlement mitigation process cannot be effective unless grout is placed in
a timely manner, tunnel designers must consider carefully the design of the primary
lining, and the tunnel construction procedures in order to allow the grouting
contractor to intervene as early as this is practicably possible.
For SCL (sprayed concrete lining) tunnelling operations, contractors tend to design
their linings for at the very least for full overburden pressure plus a factor of safety to
protect the excavation face from the effects of compensation grouting. Clearly, a
compromise has to be made between the extent of the exclusion zone, the efficiency
of the grouting operation, and the cost of the tunnel lining.
Whatever the injection parameters selected, it is of critical importance to ensure
that these are adhered to, and that there is no risk of human error or oversight in
allowing excessive pressures, flow rates, or volumes to be placed at any time during
individual injection. The safest and most efficient way to manage this risk is to
Injection Parameters
Injection parameters will vary greatly from location to location, depending upon
the nature of the compensation grouting, the depth of injection, the proximity of
sensitive structures, and any limits imposed by the tunnelling contractor and
utilities/infrastructure operations.
Since the settlement mitigation process cannot be effective unless grout is placed in
a timely manner, tunnel designers must consider carefully the design of the primary
lining, and the tunnel construction procedures in order to allow the grouting
contractor to intervene as early as this is practicably possible.
For SCL (sprayed concrete lining) tunnelling operations, contractors tend to design
their linings for at the very least for full overburden pressure plus a factor of safety to
protect the excavation face from the effects of compensation grouting. Clearly, a
compromise has to be made between the extent of the exclusion zone, the efficiency
of the grouting operation, and the cost of the tunnel lining.
Whatever the injection parameters selected, it is of critical importance to ensure
that these are adhered to, and that there is no risk of human error or oversight in
allowing excessive pressures, flow rates, or volumes to be placed at any time during
individual injection. The safest and most efficient way to manage this risk is to
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
164
Injection Parameters
92B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
164A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Fluid Grouts since the primary objective is to replace a volume loss, there is no
requirement for a high-performance grout mix. In fact, the set grout need not be any
stronger than the strata into which it is being injected. Most grouts selected for
compensation grouting are therefore relatively weak, with a 28 day strength of the
order of 3 to 5 N, and with a very low bleed capacity. The latter is essential in
cohesive or unstable soils because in these conditions we do not want to introduce
free water into the soil, and we do not want to lose the efficiency and advantage of
the volume of grout already placed. Typically these grouts may consist of
cementitious slurries of low water solids ratio, in the range 0.4 -1.0, although stable
low bleed slurries with a water cement ratio of up to 2 have been reported.
Primary decisions which need to be made at the outset are therefore
164A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Injection Parameters
Injection parameters will vary greatly from location to location, depending upon
the nature of the compensation grouting, the depth of injection, the proximity of
sensitive structures, and any limits imposed by the tunnelling contractor and
utilities/infrastructure operations.
Since the settlement mitigation process cannot be effective unless grout is placed in
a timely manner, tunnel designers must consider carefully the design of the primary
lining, and the tunnel construction procedures in order to allow the grouting
contractor to intervene as early as this is practicably possible.
For SCL (sprayed concrete lining) tunnelling operations, contractors tend to design
their linings for at the very least for full overburden pressure plus a factor of safety to
protect the excavation face from the effects of compensation grouting. Clearly, a
compromise has to be made between the extent of the exclusion zone, the efficiency
of the grouting operation, and the cost of the tunnel lining.
Whatever the injection parameters selected, it is of critical importance to ensure
that these are adhered to, and that there is no risk of human error or oversight in
allowing excessive pressures, flow rates, or volumes to be placed at any time during
individual injection. The safest and most efficient way to manage this risk is to
Page 31 of 66
Page 31 of 66
165
employ computer piloted grouting equipment with the facility to automatically stop
the pump when limiting injection pressures or volumes are reached.
It goes without saying that the ideal is to place the grout at the minimum
practicable volume in a controlled measured approach which allows observation of
the response. A predictive approach, with early and timely intervention, will
minimize the necessity of placing grout rapidly under duress in order to try and
rapidly arrest a high rate of settlement.
employ computer piloted grouting equipment with the facility to automatically stop
the pump when limiting injection pressures or volumes are reached.
It goes without saying that the ideal is to place the grout at the minimum
practicable volume in a controlled measured approach which allows observation of
the response. A predictive approach, with early and timely intervention, will
minimize the necessity of placing grout rapidly under duress in order to try and
rapidly arrest a high rate of settlement.
4.9
4.9
Many individual strands of research have come together to help designers establish
the principles and guidelines upon which the current specification criteria for
compensation grouting in particular, and settlement mitigation in general, are based.
Much detailed analysis has been carried out by Burland, Standing, and Jardine and
others on behalf of CIRIA (UK governmental agency - Construction Industry
Research &Information Association) and research by the building research
establishment (BRE) into the strain effects on structures of tunnelling induced
sagging and hogging.
There has been a gradual movement away from the establishment of settlement
limits for individual structures, towards criteria such as the differential settlement
and deflection ratio for individual structures. Depending upon the nature and
condition of the structure the performance criteria may be specified for the project as
a whole, or may vary to suit the requirements and sensitivity of individual structures.
Clearly the geotechnical contractor is dependent upon the adequacy of the
structural monitoring systems installed. Often the monitoring system is specified by
the client and installed under a separate contract, and this has the benefit of being an
independent check. It is therefore essential for the specialist contractor to understand
what information he requires in order to manage his responsibilities under the
contract, and to insist upon the level of monitoring, the frequency of monitoring, the
mode of data presentation and the arrangements for access to the interpreted
settlement data. Failure to insist on these points, which can be overlooked if they are
not a part of the geotechnical package, could place the project, the client and
specialist contractor at considerable risk.
Page 32 of 66
Page 32 of 66
93A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
165A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Many individual strands of research have come together to help designers establish
the principles and guidelines upon which the current specification criteria for
compensation grouting in particular, and settlement mitigation in general, are based.
Much detailed analysis has been carried out by Burland, Standing, and Jardine and
others on behalf of CIRIA (UK governmental agency - Construction Industry
Research &Information Association) and research by the building research
establishment (BRE) into the strain effects on structures of tunnelling induced
sagging and hogging.
There has been a gradual movement away from the establishment of settlement
limits for individual structures, towards criteria such as the differential settlement
and deflection ratio for individual structures. Depending upon the nature and
condition of the structure the performance criteria may be specified for the project as
a whole, or may vary to suit the requirements and sensitivity of individual structures.
Clearly the geotechnical contractor is dependent upon the adequacy of the
structural monitoring systems installed. Often the monitoring system is specified by
the client and installed under a separate contract, and this has the benefit of being an
independent check. It is therefore essential for the specialist contractor to understand
what information he requires in order to manage his responsibilities under the
contract, and to insist upon the level of monitoring, the frequency of monitoring, the
mode of data presentation and the arrangements for access to the interpreted
settlement data. Failure to insist on these points, which can be overlooked if they are
not a part of the geotechnical package, could place the project, the client and
specialist contractor at considerable risk.
165
165
employ computer piloted grouting equipment with the facility to automatically stop
the pump when limiting injection pressures or volumes are reached.
It goes without saying that the ideal is to place the grout at the minimum
practicable volume in a controlled measured approach which allows observation of
the response. A predictive approach, with early and timely intervention, will
minimize the necessity of placing grout rapidly under duress in order to try and
rapidly arrest a high rate of settlement.
employ computer piloted grouting equipment with the facility to automatically stop
the pump when limiting injection pressures or volumes are reached.
It goes without saying that the ideal is to place the grout at the minimum
practicable volume in a controlled measured approach which allows observation of
the response. A predictive approach, with early and timely intervention, will
minimize the necessity of placing grout rapidly under duress in order to try and
rapidly arrest a high rate of settlement.
4.9
4.9
Many individual strands of research have come together to help designers establish
the principles and guidelines upon which the current specification criteria for
compensation grouting in particular, and settlement mitigation in general, are based.
Much detailed analysis has been carried out by Burland, Standing, and Jardine and
others on behalf of CIRIA (UK governmental agency - Construction Industry
Research &Information Association) and research by the building research
establishment (BRE) into the strain effects on structures of tunnelling induced
sagging and hogging.
There has been a gradual movement away from the establishment of settlement
limits for individual structures, towards criteria such as the differential settlement
and deflection ratio for individual structures. Depending upon the nature and
condition of the structure the performance criteria may be specified for the project as
a whole, or may vary to suit the requirements and sensitivity of individual structures.
Clearly the geotechnical contractor is dependent upon the adequacy of the
structural monitoring systems installed. Often the monitoring system is specified by
the client and installed under a separate contract, and this has the benefit of being an
independent check. It is therefore essential for the specialist contractor to understand
what information he requires in order to manage his responsibilities under the
contract, and to insist upon the level of monitoring, the frequency of monitoring, the
mode of data presentation and the arrangements for access to the interpreted
settlement data. Failure to insist on these points, which can be overlooked if they are
not a part of the geotechnical package, could place the project, the client and
specialist contractor at considerable risk.
Many individual strands of research have come together to help designers establish
the principles and guidelines upon which the current specification criteria for
compensation grouting in particular, and settlement mitigation in general, are based.
Much detailed analysis has been carried out by Burland, Standing, and Jardine and
others on behalf of CIRIA (UK governmental agency - Construction Industry
Research &Information Association) and research by the building research
establishment (BRE) into the strain effects on structures of tunnelling induced
sagging and hogging.
There has been a gradual movement away from the establishment of settlement
limits for individual structures, towards criteria such as the differential settlement
and deflection ratio for individual structures. Depending upon the nature and
condition of the structure the performance criteria may be specified for the project as
a whole, or may vary to suit the requirements and sensitivity of individual structures.
Clearly the geotechnical contractor is dependent upon the adequacy of the
structural monitoring systems installed. Often the monitoring system is specified by
the client and installed under a separate contract, and this has the benefit of being an
independent check. It is therefore essential for the specialist contractor to understand
what information he requires in order to manage his responsibilities under the
contract, and to insist upon the level of monitoring, the frequency of monitoring, the
mode of data presentation and the arrangements for access to the interpreted
settlement data. Failure to insist on these points, which can be overlooked if they are
not a part of the geotechnical package, could place the project, the client and
specialist contractor at considerable risk.
165A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
165
Page 32 of 66
Page 32 of 66
166
166A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
start from a base prediction of the green field settlement, based on the
excavation geometry and a specified target value for the % face loss.
carry out a detailed damage assessment analysis for individual structures,
based upon the anticipated differential settlements and angular deflections
suggested by the green field settlement analysis. Various damage
classification levels been established by Burland et al., and these are typically
93B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
166
start from a base prediction of the green field settlement, based on the
excavation geometry and a specified target value for the % face loss.
carry out a detailed damage assessment analysis for individual structures,
based upon the anticipated differential settlements and angular deflections
suggested by the green field settlement analysis. Various damage
classification levels been established by Burland et al., and these are typically
Page 33 of 66
Page 33 of 66
start from a base prediction of the green field settlement, based on the
excavation geometry and a specified target value for the % face loss.
carry out a detailed damage assessment analysis for individual structures,
based upon the anticipated differential settlements and angular deflections
suggested by the green field settlement analysis. Various damage
classification levels been established by Burland et al., and these are typically
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
166
On the basis of this CIRIA and BRE research, in the UK the approach to
establishing a functional and realistic specification has been to:
166A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
166
On the basis of this CIRIA and BRE research, in the UK the approach to
establishing a functional and realistic specification has been to:
start from a base prediction of the green field settlement, based on the
excavation geometry and a specified target value for the % face loss.
carry out a detailed damage assessment analysis for individual structures,
based upon the anticipated differential settlements and angular deflections
suggested by the green field settlement analysis. Various damage
classification levels been established by Burland et al., and these are typically
Page 33 of 66
Page 33 of 66
167
used by the client to identify individual structures which are a risk. These
structures are then specified as requiring mandatory protection. Other
structures at lower risk of damage are specified as requiring mandatory
monitoring during the excavation of the project
undertake a further level of sensitivity analysis upon the proposed method of
construction of the building, with further levels of consideration including the
historical importance of the structure, the impact on public safety of a failure,
etc
carry out, prior to commencement of the excavation works either as a
requirement on the part of the Client or on the part of the contractor, a
detailed structural condition survey for building is considered to be a risk, in
order to identify any particular structural elements or defects requiring special
consideration. Because of various practical and contractual constraints, these
structural damage assessments are rarely carried out prior to the award of
contract.
based upon all of the foregoing analysis, define acceptable performance limits
limits, including total and differential settlement, allowable deflection across
consecutive monitoring points, allowable strain, and damage.
define a series of trigger values for each of the control criteria, together with a
schedule appropriate responses and/or hold points in the event of any breach
of trigger value.
define the nature and extent of mandatory structural and ground monitoring to
ensure adequate control of the excavation and settlement mitigation works
define the minimum levels of management and supervision, including levels
of experience and competency for key individuals
Currently in UK for the Crossrail project, the Client has specified very
precisely just such performance criteria in respect of compensation grouting,
in terms of settlement limits, differential settlement and angular deflection,
with some discretion left to the contractor for specifying additional measures
establishing the ground conditions, and augmenting the monitoring regime.
167A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 34 of 66
167A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Page 34 of 66
167
used by the client to identify individual structures which are a risk. These
structures are then specified as requiring mandatory protection. Other
structures at lower risk of damage are specified as requiring mandatory
monitoring during the excavation of the project
undertake a further level of sensitivity analysis upon the proposed method of
construction of the building, with further levels of consideration including the
historical importance of the structure, the impact on public safety of a failure,
etc
carry out, prior to commencement of the excavation works either as a
requirement on the part of the Client or on the part of the contractor, a
detailed structural condition survey for building is considered to be a risk, in
order to identify any particular structural elements or defects requiring special
consideration. Because of various practical and contractual constraints, these
structural damage assessments are rarely carried out prior to the award of
contract.
based upon all of the foregoing analysis, define acceptable performance limits
limits, including total and differential settlement, allowable deflection across
consecutive monitoring points, allowable strain, and damage.
define a series of trigger values for each of the control criteria, together with a
schedule appropriate responses and/or hold points in the event of any breach
of trigger value.
define the nature and extent of mandatory structural and ground monitoring to
ensure adequate control of the excavation and settlement mitigation works
define the minimum levels of management and supervision, including levels
of experience and competency for key individuals
Currently in UK for the Crossrail project, the Client has specified very
precisely just such performance criteria in respect of compensation grouting,
in terms of settlement limits, differential settlement and angular deflection,
with some discretion left to the contractor for specifying additional measures
establishing the ground conditions, and augmenting the monitoring regime.
used by the client to identify individual structures which are a risk. These
structures are then specified as requiring mandatory protection. Other
structures at lower risk of damage are specified as requiring mandatory
monitoring during the excavation of the project
undertake a further level of sensitivity analysis upon the proposed method of
construction of the building, with further levels of consideration including the
historical importance of the structure, the impact on public safety of a failure,
etc
carry out, prior to commencement of the excavation works either as a
requirement on the part of the Client or on the part of the contractor, a
detailed structural condition survey for building is considered to be a risk, in
order to identify any particular structural elements or defects requiring special
consideration. Because of various practical and contractual constraints, these
structural damage assessments are rarely carried out prior to the award of
contract.
based upon all of the foregoing analysis, define acceptable performance limits
limits, including total and differential settlement, allowable deflection across
consecutive monitoring points, allowable strain, and damage.
define a series of trigger values for each of the control criteria, together with a
schedule appropriate responses and/or hold points in the event of any breach
of trigger value.
define the nature and extent of mandatory structural and ground monitoring to
ensure adequate control of the excavation and settlement mitigation works
define the minimum levels of management and supervision, including levels
of experience and competency for key individuals
Currently in UK for the Crossrail project, the Client has specified very
precisely just such performance criteria in respect of compensation grouting,
in terms of settlement limits, differential settlement and angular deflection,
with some discretion left to the contractor for specifying additional measures
establishing the ground conditions, and augmenting the monitoring regime.
94A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
167
167
used by the client to identify individual structures which are a risk. These
structures are then specified as requiring mandatory protection. Other
structures at lower risk of damage are specified as requiring mandatory
monitoring during the excavation of the project
undertake a further level of sensitivity analysis upon the proposed method of
construction of the building, with further levels of consideration including the
historical importance of the structure, the impact on public safety of a failure,
etc
carry out, prior to commencement of the excavation works either as a
requirement on the part of the Client or on the part of the contractor, a
detailed structural condition survey for building is considered to be a risk, in
order to identify any particular structural elements or defects requiring special
consideration. Because of various practical and contractual constraints, these
structural damage assessments are rarely carried out prior to the award of
contract.
based upon all of the foregoing analysis, define acceptable performance limits
limits, including total and differential settlement, allowable deflection across
consecutive monitoring points, allowable strain, and damage.
define a series of trigger values for each of the control criteria, together with a
schedule appropriate responses and/or hold points in the event of any breach
of trigger value.
define the nature and extent of mandatory structural and ground monitoring to
ensure adequate control of the excavation and settlement mitigation works
define the minimum levels of management and supervision, including levels
of experience and competency for key individuals
Currently in UK for the Crossrail project, the Client has specified very
precisely just such performance criteria in respect of compensation grouting,
in terms of settlement limits, differential settlement and angular deflection,
with some discretion left to the contractor for specifying additional measures
establishing the ground conditions, and augmenting the monitoring regime.
Page 34 of 66
Page 34 of 66
168
168
Risk
Category
Max
Tensile
Strain %
Description
of Degree of
Damage
Approx2 Crack
Width (mm)
0.05 or
less
Negligible
Hairline Cracks
More than
0.05 and
not
exceeding
0.075
Very Slight
More than
0.075 and
not
exceeding
0.15
Slight
1 to 5
More than
0.15 and
not
exceeding
0.3
Moderate
5 to 15 or a
number of
cracks greater
than 3
More than
0.3
Severe
15 to 25 but
also depends on
number of
cracks
Very severe
Usually greater
than 25 but
depends on
number of
cracks
Approx Crack
Width (mm)
Risk
Category
Max
Tensile
Strain %
Description
of Degree of
Damage
0.05 or
less
Negligible
Hairline Cracks
More than
0.05 and
not
exceeding
0.075
Very Slight
More than
0.075 and
not
exceeding
0.15
Slight
1 to 5
More than
0.15 and
not
exceeding
0.3
Moderate
5 to 15 or a
number of
cracks greater
than 3
More than
0.3
Severe
15 to 25 but
also depends on
number of
cracks
Very severe
Usually greater
than 25 but
depends on
number of
cracks
94B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
168
0.1 to 1
168A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 35 of 66
Page 35 of 66
168
Approx Crack
Width (mm)
Risk
Category
Max
Tensile
Strain %
Description
of Degree of
Damage
0.05 or
less
Negligible
Hairline Cracks
More than
0.05 and
not
exceeding
0.075
Very Slight
More than
0.075 and
not
exceeding
0.15
Slight
1 to 5
More than
0.15 and
not
exceeding
0.3
Moderate
5 to 15 or a
number of
cracks greater
than 3
More than
0.3
Severe
15 to 25 but
also depends on
number of
cracks
Very severe
Usually greater
than 25 but
depends on
number of
cracks
0.1 to 1
168A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
0.1 to 1
Risk
Category
Max
Tensile
Strain %
Description
of Degree of
Damage
Approx2 Crack
Width (mm)
0.05 or
less
Negligible
Hairline Cracks
More than
0.05 and
not
exceeding
0.075
Very Slight
More than
0.075 and
not
exceeding
0.15
Slight
1 to 5
More than
0.15 and
not
exceeding
0.3
Moderate
5 to 15 or a
number of
cracks greater
than 3
More than
0.3
Severe
15 to 25 but
also depends on
number of
cracks
Very severe
Usually greater
than 25 but
depends on
number of
cracks
0.1 to 1
Page 35 of 66
Page 35 of 66
169
TABLE No. 2 Extracts from the BRE classification for Sensitivity Assessment of
Listed Buildings
TABLE No. 2 Extracts from the BRE classification for Sensitivity Assessment of
Listed Buildings
Criteria
Page 36 of 66
95A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Score
Sensitivity to movement of particular
features within the building
Criteria
Sensitivity of the structure to ground
movements and interaction with adjacent
buildings
169A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Criteria
Sensitivity of the structure to ground
movements and interaction with adjacent
buildings
169
TABLE No. 2 Extracts from the BRE classification for Sensitivity Assessment of
Listed Buildings
169
TABLE No. 2 Extracts from the BRE classification for Sensitivity Assessment of
Listed Buildings
Page 36 of 66
Criteria
Sensitivity of the structure to ground
movements and interaction with adjacent
buildings
169A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Score
169
Page 36 of 66
Page 36 of 66
170
170
KC21.1302
Principle of Implementation
KC21.1302
Principle of Implementation
3.2.5.1
3.2.5.1
170A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
3.2.3.5
Green, amber and red trigger values shall be set at volume losses equal to 80%,
100% and 125% of the specified volume loss limit respectively. A trigger will
be deemed to be exceeded if more than 2 of the settlement points record
settlement of 2mm or more greater than the calculated settlement trend for that
specific trigger at any stage of construction. These trigger levels are for
Construction Control and Design Verification; trigger levels for Asset
Protection will be given in the Employers I&M Plans.
3.3.2.3
Green, amber and red trigger values shall be set at volume losses equal to 80%,
100% and 125% of the specified volume loss limit respectively. A trigger will
be deemed to be exceeded if more than 2 of the settlement points record
settlement of 2mm or more greater than the calculated settlement trend for that
specific trigger at any stage of construction. These trigger levels are for
Construction Control and Design Verification; trigger levels for Asset
Protection will be given in the Employers I&M Plans.
3.3.2.3
FIG. 21 Extracts from Crossrails Works Information and Specification for the
Control of Ground Movements
It order to effectively manage the compensation grouting operations and
compliance with this specification, it is necessary for the contractor to generate
contour plots of the predicted settlement for each individual phase of tunnelling
excavation - for example the pilot tunnel, and for each successive stage of tunnel
enlargement. This is vital because for a given structure the differential settlement
generated, whether hogging or sagging, may be worse for the partial settlement
generated by a single phase of excavation than may be suggested by an analysis of
FIG. 21 Extracts from Crossrails Works Information and Specification for the
Control of Ground Movements
Page 37 of 66
Page 37 of 66
170
KC21.1302
Principle of Implementation
FIG. 21 Extracts from Crossrails Works Information and Specification for the
Control of Ground Movements
It order to effectively manage the compensation grouting operations and
compliance with this specification, it is necessary for the contractor to generate
contour plots of the predicted settlement for each individual phase of tunnelling
excavation - for example the pilot tunnel, and for each successive stage of tunnel
enlargement. This is vital because for a given structure the differential settlement
generated, whether hogging or sagging, may be worse for the partial settlement
generated by a single phase of excavation than may be suggested by an analysis of
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
KC21.1302
Principle of Implementation
170A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
95B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
170
3.2.3.5
Green, amber and red trigger values shall be set at volume losses equal to 80%,
100% and 125% of the specified volume loss limit respectively. A trigger will
be deemed to be exceeded if more than 2 of the settlement points record
settlement of 2mm or more greater than the calculated settlement trend for that
specific trigger at any stage of construction. These trigger levels are for
Construction Control and Design Verification; trigger levels for Asset
Protection will be given in the Employers I&M Plans.
3.3.2.3
The Contractor shall continue to undertake settlement monitoring after the
completion of excavation until it can be reliably demonstrated that the rate of
settlement has reduced to less than 2mm/year by a minimum of four readings
over a period of 12 months.
FIG. 21 Extracts from Crossrails Works Information and Specification for the
Control of Ground Movements
Page 37 of 66
Page 37 of 66
171
the settlements generated by the whole of the works. This can be particularly evident
where a structure lies within the settlement trough of two or more tunnels which are
excavated different times.
It will be evident that the management of settlement mitigation is a complex and
time-consuming activity which cannot be managed by one party in isolation. It
requires the full participation and co-operation of all parties to the contract. It is also
evident that it order to meet the performance criteria, for a dynamic process such as
compensation grouting, it is impossible to consider the design and execution of the
works without a total integration of the monitoring system.
In addition to the performance criteria established for the compensation grouting,
tunnelling specifications typically set a limit on the allowable percentage face loss
for different elements of the works. On the face of it, this is clearly a sensible
approach since it targets the primary activity giving rise to face loss or relaxation,
and hence impacts directly upon the choice of tunnelling method and work
procedures adopted by the contractor.
The difficulty is that it is almost impossible, when compensation grouting is taking
place above, to verify the actual face loss, and whether or not the tunnelling
contractor has complied with the specified limit. This is because the percentage face
loss, the degree of surface settlement generated by this face loss, and the efficiency
factor for the grouting, are all assumptions, and it is very difficult if not impossible to
separate out these three activities. It is this reason that the various parties involved in
the works need to be bound together so that they work together as a single team with
a common goal.
Whatever the performance criteria specified, it is essential that the implication of
these criteria, and the trigger values associated with them are clearly understood by
and communicated to everyone associated with the works. In this regard it is always
beneficial to try to summarise the performance criteria in a graphical, visual manner
so that there is no confusion. The same benefit derives from ensuring that the
monitoring data presentation is focused upon the performance criteria and not just on
absolute values.
A visual representation of the trigger values established on a recent UK project
(Figure 22). Note that in order to allow more time to place grout in a controlled
manner, the contractor imposed on his operations more onerous trigger values than
had been set by the specification. The plan requires that as each trigger value is
approached, a deeper level of scrutiny is required on the data, with more senior
engineers and management notified and participating in the review of progress and
procedures.
the settlements generated by the whole of the works. This can be particularly evident
where a structure lies within the settlement trough of two or more tunnels which are
excavated different times.
It will be evident that the management of settlement mitigation is a complex and
time-consuming activity which cannot be managed by one party in isolation. It
requires the full participation and co-operation of all parties to the contract. It is also
evident that it order to meet the performance criteria, for a dynamic process such as
compensation grouting, it is impossible to consider the design and execution of the
works without a total integration of the monitoring system.
In addition to the performance criteria established for the compensation grouting,
tunnelling specifications typically set a limit on the allowable percentage face loss
for different elements of the works. On the face of it, this is clearly a sensible
approach since it targets the primary activity giving rise to face loss or relaxation,
and hence impacts directly upon the choice of tunnelling method and work
procedures adopted by the contractor.
The difficulty is that it is almost impossible, when compensation grouting is taking
place above, to verify the actual face loss, and whether or not the tunnelling
contractor has complied with the specified limit. This is because the percentage face
loss, the degree of surface settlement generated by this face loss, and the efficiency
factor for the grouting, are all assumptions, and it is very difficult if not impossible to
separate out these three activities. It is this reason that the various parties involved in
the works need to be bound together so that they work together as a single team with
a common goal.
Whatever the performance criteria specified, it is essential that the implication of
these criteria, and the trigger values associated with them are clearly understood by
and communicated to everyone associated with the works. In this regard it is always
beneficial to try to summarise the performance criteria in a graphical, visual manner
so that there is no confusion. The same benefit derives from ensuring that the
monitoring data presentation is focused upon the performance criteria and not just on
absolute values.
A visual representation of the trigger values established on a recent UK project
(Figure 22). Note that in order to allow more time to place grout in a controlled
manner, the contractor imposed on his operations more onerous trigger values than
had been set by the specification. The plan requires that as each trigger value is
approached, a deeper level of scrutiny is required on the data, with more senior
engineers and management notified and participating in the review of progress and
procedures.
Page 38 of 66
171
the settlements generated by the whole of the works. This can be particularly evident
where a structure lies within the settlement trough of two or more tunnels which are
excavated different times.
It will be evident that the management of settlement mitigation is a complex and
time-consuming activity which cannot be managed by one party in isolation. It
requires the full participation and co-operation of all parties to the contract. It is also
evident that it order to meet the performance criteria, for a dynamic process such as
compensation grouting, it is impossible to consider the design and execution of the
works without a total integration of the monitoring system.
In addition to the performance criteria established for the compensation grouting,
tunnelling specifications typically set a limit on the allowable percentage face loss
for different elements of the works. On the face of it, this is clearly a sensible
approach since it targets the primary activity giving rise to face loss or relaxation,
and hence impacts directly upon the choice of tunnelling method and work
procedures adopted by the contractor.
The difficulty is that it is almost impossible, when compensation grouting is taking
place above, to verify the actual face loss, and whether or not the tunnelling
contractor has complied with the specified limit. This is because the percentage face
loss, the degree of surface settlement generated by this face loss, and the efficiency
factor for the grouting, are all assumptions, and it is very difficult if not impossible to
separate out these three activities. It is this reason that the various parties involved in
the works need to be bound together so that they work together as a single team with
a common goal.
Whatever the performance criteria specified, it is essential that the implication of
these criteria, and the trigger values associated with them are clearly understood by
and communicated to everyone associated with the works. In this regard it is always
beneficial to try to summarise the performance criteria in a graphical, visual manner
so that there is no confusion. The same benefit derives from ensuring that the
monitoring data presentation is focused upon the performance criteria and not just on
absolute values.
A visual representation of the trigger values established on a recent UK project
(Figure 22). Note that in order to allow more time to place grout in a controlled
manner, the contractor imposed on his operations more onerous trigger values than
had been set by the specification. The plan requires that as each trigger value is
approached, a deeper level of scrutiny is required on the data, with more senior
engineers and management notified and participating in the review of progress and
procedures.
171
the settlements generated by the whole of the works. This can be particularly evident
where a structure lies within the settlement trough of two or more tunnels which are
excavated different times.
It will be evident that the management of settlement mitigation is a complex and
time-consuming activity which cannot be managed by one party in isolation. It
requires the full participation and co-operation of all parties to the contract. It is also
evident that it order to meet the performance criteria, for a dynamic process such as
compensation grouting, it is impossible to consider the design and execution of the
works without a total integration of the monitoring system.
In addition to the performance criteria established for the compensation grouting,
tunnelling specifications typically set a limit on the allowable percentage face loss
for different elements of the works. On the face of it, this is clearly a sensible
approach since it targets the primary activity giving rise to face loss or relaxation,
and hence impacts directly upon the choice of tunnelling method and work
procedures adopted by the contractor.
The difficulty is that it is almost impossible, when compensation grouting is taking
place above, to verify the actual face loss, and whether or not the tunnelling
contractor has complied with the specified limit. This is because the percentage face
loss, the degree of surface settlement generated by this face loss, and the efficiency
factor for the grouting, are all assumptions, and it is very difficult if not impossible to
separate out these three activities. It is this reason that the various parties involved in
the works need to be bound together so that they work together as a single team with
a common goal.
Whatever the performance criteria specified, it is essential that the implication of
these criteria, and the trigger values associated with them are clearly understood by
and communicated to everyone associated with the works. In this regard it is always
beneficial to try to summarise the performance criteria in a graphical, visual manner
so that there is no confusion. The same benefit derives from ensuring that the
monitoring data presentation is focused upon the performance criteria and not just on
absolute values.
A visual representation of the trigger values established on a recent UK project
(Figure 22). Note that in order to allow more time to place grout in a controlled
manner, the contractor imposed on his operations more onerous trigger values than
had been set by the specification. The plan requires that as each trigger value is
approached, a deeper level of scrutiny is required on the data, with more senior
engineers and management notified and participating in the review of progress and
procedures.
171A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Page 38 of 66
96A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
171
171A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 38 of 66
Page 38 of 66
172
172A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
96B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
It is normal for the Client or Engineer to specify a basic level of monitoring, and
establish the principles for the monitoring regime. However, it is frequently the
responsibility of the contractor to ensure that the scope, design, sensitivity, and
management system of the monitoring proposals are adequate to allow the works to
be properly controlled, and to specify and/or provide any additional monitoring
which he thinks may be required in order to allow to him comply with the
specification.
If the monitoring is being provided by others, it is essential for the specialist subcontractor to have direct access to the monitoring database on a real-time basis for
the automatic monitoring, and on a daily basis for precise levelling.
The availability of accurate real-time information is of vital importance to
compensation grouting in closed proximity to adjacent structures, and it is essential
that a daily review meeting be convened between Engineer, Principal Contractor,
monitoring sub-contractor, and specialist contractor to jointly evaluate the latest
monitoring data prior to the specialist sub-contractor preparing a detailed programme
of injection for the following shift. Part of this evaluation will require a detailed
analysis of the progress of tunnel excavation, and the compensation grouting
programme.
Page 39 of 66
Page 39 of 66
172
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
172
4.10 Monitoring
172A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
172
4.10 Monitoring
It is normal for the Client or Engineer to specify a basic level of monitoring, and
establish the principles for the monitoring regime. However, it is frequently the
responsibility of the contractor to ensure that the scope, design, sensitivity, and
management system of the monitoring proposals are adequate to allow the works to
be properly controlled, and to specify and/or provide any additional monitoring
which he thinks may be required in order to allow to him comply with the
specification.
If the monitoring is being provided by others, it is essential for the specialist subcontractor to have direct access to the monitoring database on a real-time basis for
the automatic monitoring, and on a daily basis for precise levelling.
The availability of accurate real-time information is of vital importance to
compensation grouting in closed proximity to adjacent structures, and it is essential
that a daily review meeting be convened between Engineer, Principal Contractor,
monitoring sub-contractor, and specialist contractor to jointly evaluate the latest
monitoring data prior to the specialist sub-contractor preparing a detailed programme
of injection for the following shift. Part of this evaluation will require a detailed
analysis of the progress of tunnel excavation, and the compensation grouting
programme.
Page 39 of 66
Page 39 of 66
173
Page 40 of 66
173
173
173A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Page 40 of 66
97A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
173
173A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 40 of 66
Page 40 of 66
174
174A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
EXECUTION
For most compensation grouting operations there are a number of discrete phases
of work which need to be respected. The following chart is a very simplified
indication of the cadence of activities on a typical site, for a single shaft. Of key
importance to the planning of the works are the essential activities which need to be
fully completed prior to commencement of any excavation which might generate
relaxation. It should be noted that clients are increasingly looking for baseline
monitoring data to be collected for periods of the order of 3 to 12 months prior to any
construction activity, so that seasonal variations in the natural climate-induced
97B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
EXECUTION
Page 41 of 66
174
Page 41 of 66
EXECUTION
For most compensation grouting operations there are a number of discrete phases
of work which need to be respected. The following chart is a very simplified
indication of the cadence of activities on a typical site, for a single shaft. Of key
importance to the planning of the works are the essential activities which need to be
fully completed prior to commencement of any excavation which might generate
relaxation. It should be noted that clients are increasingly looking for baseline
monitoring data to be collected for periods of the order of 3 to 12 months prior to any
construction activity, so that seasonal variations in the natural climate-induced
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
174
For most compensation grouting operations there are a number of discrete phases
of work which need to be respected. The following chart is a very simplified
indication of the cadence of activities on a typical site, for a single shaft. Of key
importance to the planning of the works are the essential activities which need to be
fully completed prior to commencement of any excavation which might generate
relaxation. It should be noted that clients are increasingly looking for baseline
monitoring data to be collected for periods of the order of 3 to 12 months prior to any
construction activity, so that seasonal variations in the natural climate-induced
174A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
174
For most compensation grouting operations there are a number of discrete phases
of work which need to be respected. The following chart is a very simplified
indication of the cadence of activities on a typical site, for a single shaft. Of key
importance to the planning of the works are the essential activities which need to be
fully completed prior to commencement of any excavation which might generate
relaxation. It should be noted that clients are increasingly looking for baseline
monitoring data to be collected for periods of the order of 3 to 12 months prior to any
construction activity, so that seasonal variations in the natural climate-induced
Page 41 of 66
Page 41 of 66
175
Monitoring
Monitoring
3-4 weeks
TaM Installation
n weeks
1-3 weeks
5.1
Although very much a secondary operation there are several issues to consider
when planning and executing the drilling operation.
Access to the target area for compensation grouting is often at distances of up to
60m to 80m. The Clients scheme for Crossrail envisages horizontal drilling with a
high degree of accuracy, 1/80 over distances of up to 80m. This onerous criteria is
intended to ensure an adequate density of injection ports at the distal end of the
borehole array. Directional drilling is expensive and difficult to execute from shafts
where the diameter is often a small as 4 to 4.5m. The drilling design and
methodology therefore has to be very carefully considered in order to allow the
accuracy of grout placement required beneath individual foundation elements. These
drilling distances frequently mean the use of high flow and pressure in the flushing
medium. There have been several occasions where these pressures have led to
unwanted heave in the very structures which the contractor was trying to protect. For
accuracy, and to enable drilling to be executed with the minimum flush pressure and
volume, every effort should be made to facilitate the task of drilling wherever
possible by installing and carefully locating sufficient shafts so that the drilling
distances can be kept to a moderate length - ideally not more than 40 to 50m
maximum.
Active compensation
Although very much a secondary operation there are several issues to consider
when planning and executing the drilling operation.
Access to the target area for compensation grouting is often at distances of up to
60m to 80m. The Clients scheme for Crossrail envisages horizontal drilling with a
high degree of accuracy, 1/80 over distances of up to 80m. This onerous criteria is
intended to ensure an adequate density of injection ports at the distal end of the
borehole array. Directional drilling is expensive and difficult to execute from shafts
where the diameter is often a small as 4 to 4.5m. The drilling design and
methodology therefore has to be very carefully considered in order to allow the
accuracy of grout placement required beneath individual foundation elements. These
drilling distances frequently mean the use of high flow and pressure in the flushing
medium. There have been several occasions where these pressures have led to
unwanted heave in the very structures which the contractor was trying to protect. For
accuracy, and to enable drilling to be executed with the minimum flush pressure and
volume, every effort should be made to facilitate the task of drilling wherever
possible by installing and carefully locating sufficient shafts so that the drilling
distances can be kept to a moderate length - ideally not more than 40 to 50m
maximum.
Page 42 of 66
98A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
175
Monitoring
Monitoring
3-4 weeks
TaM Installation
TaM Installation
1-2 weeks
Pre consolidation
Pre consolidation
< 1 weeks
Predictive injection
Predictive injection
n weeks
Tunnelling / Excavation
Active compensation
n weeks
1-3 weeks
Site presence
Tunnelling / Excavation
175A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
1-3 weeks
Site presence
175
n weeks
Page 42 of 66
n weeks
Tunnelling / Excavation
175A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Active compensation
< 1 weeks
Predictive injection
n weeks
Tunnelling / Excavation
1-2 weeks
Pre consolidation
< 1 weeks
Predictive injection
5.1
3-4 weeks
TaM Installation
1-2 weeks
Pre consolidation
5.1
175
5.1
Although very much a secondary operation there are several issues to consider
when planning and executing the drilling operation.
Access to the target area for compensation grouting is often at distances of up to
60m to 80m. The Clients scheme for Crossrail envisages horizontal drilling with a
high degree of accuracy, 1/80 over distances of up to 80m. This onerous criteria is
intended to ensure an adequate density of injection ports at the distal end of the
borehole array. Directional drilling is expensive and difficult to execute from shafts
where the diameter is often a small as 4 to 4.5m. The drilling design and
methodology therefore has to be very carefully considered in order to allow the
accuracy of grout placement required beneath individual foundation elements. These
drilling distances frequently mean the use of high flow and pressure in the flushing
medium. There have been several occasions where these pressures have led to
unwanted heave in the very structures which the contractor was trying to protect. For
accuracy, and to enable drilling to be executed with the minimum flush pressure and
volume, every effort should be made to facilitate the task of drilling wherever
possible by installing and carefully locating sufficient shafts so that the drilling
distances can be kept to a moderate length - ideally not more than 40 to 50m
maximum.
Active compensation
Soil recompaction / stabilisation
3-4 weeks
1-2 weeks
< 1 weeks
n weeks
n weeks
1-3 weeks
Site presence
Although very much a secondary operation there are several issues to consider
when planning and executing the drilling operation.
Access to the target area for compensation grouting is often at distances of up to
60m to 80m. The Clients scheme for Crossrail envisages horizontal drilling with a
high degree of accuracy, 1/80 over distances of up to 80m. This onerous criteria is
intended to ensure an adequate density of injection ports at the distal end of the
borehole array. Directional drilling is expensive and difficult to execute from shafts
where the diameter is often a small as 4 to 4.5m. The drilling design and
methodology therefore has to be very carefully considered in order to allow the
accuracy of grout placement required beneath individual foundation elements. These
drilling distances frequently mean the use of high flow and pressure in the flushing
medium. There have been several occasions where these pressures have led to
unwanted heave in the very structures which the contractor was trying to protect. For
accuracy, and to enable drilling to be executed with the minimum flush pressure and
volume, every effort should be made to facilitate the task of drilling wherever
possible by installing and carefully locating sufficient shafts so that the drilling
distances can be kept to a moderate length - ideally not more than 40 to 50m
maximum.
Page 42 of 66
Page 42 of 66
176
5.2
5.2
In the area of any given tunnel excavation face, provided the tunnelling operations
are executed to minimise face loss, the volume of grout required to be injected within
a 24-hour period is usually small, of the order of a few m3. However, with the
boreholes radiating out to length of up to 60 to 80 m from a single shaft, the area
covered can be enormous, involving very many structures and utilities. On a complex
project it is therefore possible that several excavation faces may generate a
requirement for compensation grouting simultaneously from within the same shaft.
Since compensation grouting is a dynamic exercise, carried out when excavations
are progressing and structures are subject to continuous displacement, it is therefore
vital to ensure that the grouting facilities at each shaft location are adequate to meet
the mixing and injection capacities required for all the tunnel faces, and sufficient to
provide backup capacity in the event of a breakdown. It should be remembered also
that settlement may continue in an area long after a given tunnel face has passed, so
that the number of areas requiring compensation may exceed the number of working
faces in the tunnel.
Cleaning manchette pipes at lengths of up to 60 to 80 m is a very onerous and
backbreaking task. Upto 60% of a 24-hour cycle can be required to be spent just in
cleaning the manchettes, and contractors are strongly advised to have on hand a highpressure jetting pump with a rotating head in order to thoroughly scour the manchette
after each phase of grouting. Failure to do this may lead to blockage or nonaccessibility of a critical group of manchettes when a given foundation starts to
settle.
98B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Page 43 of 66
Page 43 of 66
176
Where there is a risk of encountering granular material along the length of the
borehole, any method employing augers should be avoided at all costs as this may
lead to the over excavation during drilling, thereby removing ground support in the
short-term, and potentially leading to an excessive thickness of sleeve grout around
the manchette which could impede future operations.
In weak soils, or even in stiff cohesively soils where drilling in close proximity to
foundation bearing elements, it may be necessary to consider the use of a polymer as
the flushing medium to avoid softening or erosion of the soil with water. In close
proximity to utilities, air flush should be avoided.
There is always the risk that an intensive drilling operation may in itself generate
settlement in the short-term, and it is therefore necessary to have on hand the means
to carry out localized compensation to address this issue. The risk can be greatly
alleviated by phasing the works such that drilling is not concentrated within any
given area, but sequenced so that the sleeve grout around an individual borehole is
fully rigid before another borehole is installed within a radius of 4 to 5 m.
Finally, it is often not so critical if a borehole deviates from its planned alignment,
provided this is not excessive. However to execute targeted grouting below
individual foundation elements it is essential to understand exactly where the
injection ports are located, and for this reason boreholes over a length of 30 to 35 m
should in every case the surveyed, their as-built alignment plotted accurately on a
foundation plan of the structure, and the location of each injection port indicated in
relation to the building footings.
5.2
In the area of any given tunnel excavation face, provided the tunnelling operations
are executed to minimise face loss, the volume of grout required to be injected within
a 24-hour period is usually small, of the order of a few m3. However, with the
boreholes radiating out to length of up to 60 to 80 m from a single shaft, the area
covered can be enormous, involving very many structures and utilities. On a complex
project it is therefore possible that several excavation faces may generate a
requirement for compensation grouting simultaneously from within the same shaft.
Since compensation grouting is a dynamic exercise, carried out when excavations
are progressing and structures are subject to continuous displacement, it is therefore
vital to ensure that the grouting facilities at each shaft location are adequate to meet
the mixing and injection capacities required for all the tunnel faces, and sufficient to
provide backup capacity in the event of a breakdown. It should be remembered also
that settlement may continue in an area long after a given tunnel face has passed, so
that the number of areas requiring compensation may exceed the number of working
faces in the tunnel.
Cleaning manchette pipes at lengths of up to 60 to 80 m is a very onerous and
backbreaking task. Upto 60% of a 24-hour cycle can be required to be spent just in
cleaning the manchettes, and contractors are strongly advised to have on hand a highpressure jetting pump with a rotating head in order to thoroughly scour the manchette
after each phase of grouting. Failure to do this may lead to blockage or nonaccessibility of a critical group of manchettes when a given foundation starts to
settle.
In the area of any given tunnel excavation face, provided the tunnelling operations
are executed to minimise face loss, the volume of grout required to be injected within
a 24-hour period is usually small, of the order of a few m3. However, with the
boreholes radiating out to length of up to 60 to 80 m from a single shaft, the area
covered can be enormous, involving very many structures and utilities. On a complex
project it is therefore possible that several excavation faces may generate a
requirement for compensation grouting simultaneously from within the same shaft.
Since compensation grouting is a dynamic exercise, carried out when excavations
are progressing and structures are subject to continuous displacement, it is therefore
vital to ensure that the grouting facilities at each shaft location are adequate to meet
the mixing and injection capacities required for all the tunnel faces, and sufficient to
provide backup capacity in the event of a breakdown. It should be remembered also
that settlement may continue in an area long after a given tunnel face has passed, so
that the number of areas requiring compensation may exceed the number of working
faces in the tunnel.
Cleaning manchette pipes at lengths of up to 60 to 80 m is a very onerous and
backbreaking task. Upto 60% of a 24-hour cycle can be required to be spent just in
cleaning the manchettes, and contractors are strongly advised to have on hand a highpressure jetting pump with a rotating head in order to thoroughly scour the manchette
after each phase of grouting. Failure to do this may lead to blockage or nonaccessibility of a critical group of manchettes when a given foundation starts to
settle.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
176
Where there is a risk of encountering granular material along the length of the
borehole, any method employing augers should be avoided at all costs as this may
lead to the over excavation during drilling, thereby removing ground support in the
short-term, and potentially leading to an excessive thickness of sleeve grout around
the manchette which could impede future operations.
In weak soils, or even in stiff cohesively soils where drilling in close proximity to
foundation bearing elements, it may be necessary to consider the use of a polymer as
the flushing medium to avoid softening or erosion of the soil with water. In close
proximity to utilities, air flush should be avoided.
There is always the risk that an intensive drilling operation may in itself generate
settlement in the short-term, and it is therefore necessary to have on hand the means
to carry out localized compensation to address this issue. The risk can be greatly
alleviated by phasing the works such that drilling is not concentrated within any
given area, but sequenced so that the sleeve grout around an individual borehole is
fully rigid before another borehole is installed within a radius of 4 to 5 m.
Finally, it is often not so critical if a borehole deviates from its planned alignment,
provided this is not excessive. However to execute targeted grouting below
individual foundation elements it is essential to understand exactly where the
injection ports are located, and for this reason boreholes over a length of 30 to 35 m
should in every case the surveyed, their as-built alignment plotted accurately on a
foundation plan of the structure, and the location of each injection port indicated in
relation to the building footings.
176A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Where there is a risk of encountering granular material along the length of the
borehole, any method employing augers should be avoided at all costs as this may
lead to the over excavation during drilling, thereby removing ground support in the
short-term, and potentially leading to an excessive thickness of sleeve grout around
the manchette which could impede future operations.
In weak soils, or even in stiff cohesively soils where drilling in close proximity to
foundation bearing elements, it may be necessary to consider the use of a polymer as
the flushing medium to avoid softening or erosion of the soil with water. In close
proximity to utilities, air flush should be avoided.
There is always the risk that an intensive drilling operation may in itself generate
settlement in the short-term, and it is therefore necessary to have on hand the means
to carry out localized compensation to address this issue. The risk can be greatly
alleviated by phasing the works such that drilling is not concentrated within any
given area, but sequenced so that the sleeve grout around an individual borehole is
fully rigid before another borehole is installed within a radius of 4 to 5 m.
Finally, it is often not so critical if a borehole deviates from its planned alignment,
provided this is not excessive. However to execute targeted grouting below
individual foundation elements it is essential to understand exactly where the
injection ports are located, and for this reason boreholes over a length of 30 to 35 m
should in every case the surveyed, their as-built alignment plotted accurately on a
foundation plan of the structure, and the location of each injection port indicated in
relation to the building footings.
Where there is a risk of encountering granular material along the length of the
borehole, any method employing augers should be avoided at all costs as this may
lead to the over excavation during drilling, thereby removing ground support in the
short-term, and potentially leading to an excessive thickness of sleeve grout around
the manchette which could impede future operations.
In weak soils, or even in stiff cohesively soils where drilling in close proximity to
foundation bearing elements, it may be necessary to consider the use of a polymer as
the flushing medium to avoid softening or erosion of the soil with water. In close
proximity to utilities, air flush should be avoided.
There is always the risk that an intensive drilling operation may in itself generate
settlement in the short-term, and it is therefore necessary to have on hand the means
to carry out localized compensation to address this issue. The risk can be greatly
alleviated by phasing the works such that drilling is not concentrated within any
given area, but sequenced so that the sleeve grout around an individual borehole is
fully rigid before another borehole is installed within a radius of 4 to 5 m.
Finally, it is often not so critical if a borehole deviates from its planned alignment,
provided this is not excessive. However to execute targeted grouting below
individual foundation elements it is essential to understand exactly where the
injection ports are located, and for this reason boreholes over a length of 30 to 35 m
should in every case the surveyed, their as-built alignment plotted accurately on a
foundation plan of the structure, and the location of each injection port indicated in
relation to the building footings.
176A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
176
5.2
In the area of any given tunnel excavation face, provided the tunnelling operations
are executed to minimise face loss, the volume of grout required to be injected within
a 24-hour period is usually small, of the order of a few m3. However, with the
boreholes radiating out to length of up to 60 to 80 m from a single shaft, the area
covered can be enormous, involving very many structures and utilities. On a complex
project it is therefore possible that several excavation faces may generate a
requirement for compensation grouting simultaneously from within the same shaft.
Since compensation grouting is a dynamic exercise, carried out when excavations
are progressing and structures are subject to continuous displacement, it is therefore
vital to ensure that the grouting facilities at each shaft location are adequate to meet
the mixing and injection capacities required for all the tunnel faces, and sufficient to
provide backup capacity in the event of a breakdown. It should be remembered also
that settlement may continue in an area long after a given tunnel face has passed, so
that the number of areas requiring compensation may exceed the number of working
faces in the tunnel.
Cleaning manchette pipes at lengths of up to 60 to 80 m is a very onerous and
backbreaking task. Upto 60% of a 24-hour cycle can be required to be spent just in
cleaning the manchettes, and contractors are strongly advised to have on hand a highpressure jetting pump with a rotating head in order to thoroughly scour the manchette
after each phase of grouting. Failure to do this may lead to blockage or nonaccessibility of a critical group of manchettes when a given foundation starts to
settle.
Page 43 of 66
Page 43 of 66
177
It should be remembered also that the manchette pipes themselves are subject to
distortion of alignment as a result of the tunnelling induced settlements, and even the
compensation grouting itself. Where the injection work is likely to be intensive, or of
long duration, designers should specify the use of steel manchette pipes as this will
give increased durability and facilitate the cleaning operations.
In areas where high ground bearing pressures are foreseen, where active
compensation grouting may be prevented for considerable periods due to the
presence of an exclusion zone, designers should consider the use of steel manchettes
which have the ability to serve both for injection, and at the same time act as a rigid
passive strengthening element, similar to pipe roofing.
Finally, where there are intermittent phases of compensation grouting over a long
duration it is important to ensure the functionality of the system at all times by
regularly re-visiting the manchettes and cracking the sleeve grout with water or
bentonite, so that there is no delay in the event of any requirement for rapid
intervention.
5.3
5.3
Pre-Conditioning Phase
5.4
177A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
It should be remembered also that the manchette pipes themselves are subject to
distortion of alignment as a result of the tunnelling induced settlements, and even the
compensation grouting itself. Where the injection work is likely to be intensive, or of
long duration, designers should specify the use of steel manchette pipes as this will
give increased durability and facilitate the cleaning operations.
In areas where high ground bearing pressures are foreseen, where active
compensation grouting may be prevented for considerable periods due to the
presence of an exclusion zone, designers should consider the use of steel manchettes
which have the ability to serve both for injection, and at the same time act as a rigid
passive strengthening element, similar to pipe roofing.
Finally, where there are intermittent phases of compensation grouting over a long
duration it is important to ensure the functionality of the system at all times by
regularly re-visiting the manchettes and cracking the sleeve grout with water or
bentonite, so that there is no delay in the event of any requirement for rapid
intervention.
This phase of injection is carried out in parallel with the tunnelling operation and is
aimed at protecting the structure in real-time from settlements induced by the tunnel
excavation. The extent and timing of injection during this phase relies upon
information received from the real-time and other monitoring data provided by the
Clients instrumentation sub-contractor.
Where the system is purely observational, active compensation grouting may be
characterised by a relatively continuous programme for a short duration, in the form
of regular daily injections. It is extremely rare that injections need to take place for
more than a few hours in each 24-hour cycle. In fact, it is often considered
Page 44 of 66
Page 44 of 66
99A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Pre-Conditioning Phase
This phase of injection is carried out in parallel with the tunnelling operation and is
aimed at protecting the structure in real-time from settlements induced by the tunnel
excavation. The extent and timing of injection during this phase relies upon
information received from the real-time and other monitoring data provided by the
Clients instrumentation sub-contractor.
Where the system is purely observational, active compensation grouting may be
characterised by a relatively continuous programme for a short duration, in the form
of regular daily injections. It is extremely rare that injections need to take place for
more than a few hours in each 24-hour cycle. In fact, it is often considered
177
177
It should be remembered also that the manchette pipes themselves are subject to
distortion of alignment as a result of the tunnelling induced settlements, and even the
compensation grouting itself. Where the injection work is likely to be intensive, or of
long duration, designers should specify the use of steel manchette pipes as this will
give increased durability and facilitate the cleaning operations.
In areas where high ground bearing pressures are foreseen, where active
compensation grouting may be prevented for considerable periods due to the
presence of an exclusion zone, designers should consider the use of steel manchettes
which have the ability to serve both for injection, and at the same time act as a rigid
passive strengthening element, similar to pipe roofing.
Finally, where there are intermittent phases of compensation grouting over a long
duration it is important to ensure the functionality of the system at all times by
regularly re-visiting the manchettes and cracking the sleeve grout with water or
bentonite, so that there is no delay in the event of any requirement for rapid
intervention.
It should be remembered also that the manchette pipes themselves are subject to
distortion of alignment as a result of the tunnelling induced settlements, and even the
compensation grouting itself. Where the injection work is likely to be intensive, or of
long duration, designers should specify the use of steel manchette pipes as this will
give increased durability and facilitate the cleaning operations.
In areas where high ground bearing pressures are foreseen, where active
compensation grouting may be prevented for considerable periods due to the
presence of an exclusion zone, designers should consider the use of steel manchettes
which have the ability to serve both for injection, and at the same time act as a rigid
passive strengthening element, similar to pipe roofing.
Finally, where there are intermittent phases of compensation grouting over a long
duration it is important to ensure the functionality of the system at all times by
regularly re-visiting the manchettes and cracking the sleeve grout with water or
bentonite, so that there is no delay in the event of any requirement for rapid
intervention.
5.3
5.3
Pre-Conditioning Phase
177A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
177
This phase of injection is carried out in parallel with the tunnelling operation and is
aimed at protecting the structure in real-time from settlements induced by the tunnel
excavation. The extent and timing of injection during this phase relies upon
information received from the real-time and other monitoring data provided by the
Clients instrumentation sub-contractor.
Where the system is purely observational, active compensation grouting may be
characterised by a relatively continuous programme for a short duration, in the form
of regular daily injections. It is extremely rare that injections need to take place for
more than a few hours in each 24-hour cycle. In fact, it is often considered
Pre-Conditioning Phase
This phase of injection is carried out in parallel with the tunnelling operation and is
aimed at protecting the structure in real-time from settlements induced by the tunnel
excavation. The extent and timing of injection during this phase relies upon
information received from the real-time and other monitoring data provided by the
Clients instrumentation sub-contractor.
Where the system is purely observational, active compensation grouting may be
characterised by a relatively continuous programme for a short duration, in the form
of regular daily injections. It is extremely rare that injections need to take place for
more than a few hours in each 24-hour cycle. In fact, it is often considered
Page 44 of 66
Page 44 of 66
178
5.5
5.5
This phase is carried out after completion of the tunnel excavation and the
construction of the permanent lining. The general aim is to re-compact the ground in
areas of residual relaxation, to prevent further settlements in the long-term. This long
term relaxation is generally a function of both the slow dissipation of the elevated
pore pressures generated by the grouting activity, and by the geometry of the
borehole array, which may be at some distance from the source of relaxation. For the
current Crossrail works in London the Client has specified that the specialist
contractor must remain on site with full capability for a minimum of three months
after cessation of tunnelling work, unless the contractor is able to demonstrate to the
client that the long-term relaxation has levelled off to an acceptable level. Only at
this point may the contractor de-commission and backfill the manchette pipes and
demobilize.
99B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Page 45 of 66
Page 45 of 66
178
This phase is carried out after completion of the tunnel excavation and the
construction of the permanent lining. The general aim is to re-compact the ground in
areas of residual relaxation, to prevent further settlements in the long-term. This long
term relaxation is generally a function of both the slow dissipation of the elevated
pore pressures generated by the grouting activity, and by the geometry of the
borehole array, which may be at some distance from the source of relaxation. For the
current Crossrail works in London the Client has specified that the specialist
contractor must remain on site with full capability for a minimum of three months
after cessation of tunnelling work, unless the contractor is able to demonstrate to the
client that the long-term relaxation has levelled off to an acceptable level. Only at
this point may the contractor de-commission and backfill the manchette pipes and
demobilize.
This phase is carried out after completion of the tunnel excavation and the
construction of the permanent lining. The general aim is to re-compact the ground in
areas of residual relaxation, to prevent further settlements in the long-term. This long
term relaxation is generally a function of both the slow dissipation of the elevated
pore pressures generated by the grouting activity, and by the geometry of the
borehole array, which may be at some distance from the source of relaxation. For the
current Crossrail works in London the Client has specified that the specialist
contractor must remain on site with full capability for a minimum of three months
after cessation of tunnelling work, unless the contractor is able to demonstrate to the
client that the long-term relaxation has levelled off to an acceptable level. Only at
this point may the contractor de-commission and backfill the manchette pipes and
demobilize.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
178
178A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
178A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
178
5.5
This phase is carried out after completion of the tunnel excavation and the
construction of the permanent lining. The general aim is to re-compact the ground in
areas of residual relaxation, to prevent further settlements in the long-term. This long
term relaxation is generally a function of both the slow dissipation of the elevated
pore pressures generated by the grouting activity, and by the geometry of the
borehole array, which may be at some distance from the source of relaxation. For the
current Crossrail works in London the Client has specified that the specialist
contractor must remain on site with full capability for a minimum of three months
after cessation of tunnelling work, unless the contractor is able to demonstrate to the
client that the long-term relaxation has levelled off to an acceptable level. Only at
this point may the contractor de-commission and backfill the manchette pipes and
demobilize.
Page 45 of 66
Page 45 of 66
5.6
179
5.6
Every contractor will have their own procedures, equipment, and analytical
methods for managing their injection programs. Over the last 30 years, therefore, and
in particular over the last 15 years with the advent of powerful desktop computers,
contractors and equipment manufacturers have been developing operational control
measures for grouting operations from the point of view of practicing geotechnical
engineers. With their understanding of the principles of both geotechnical design
and practical grouting technology, contractors have sought to develop processes and
equipment which allow their grouting engineers and designers total control over the
injection processes. The key element of this development has been the development
of an unrivalled capacity for the handling and analysis of processing and
geotechnical data, and the presentation of such data in a manner which can be readily
understood and utilised by site operatives and engineers.
The core elements of such systems are :
Since all company systems vary, in order to provide some understanding of how far
these developments have taken the industry, included below is a brief summary of
the various software packages employed within my own Group. Within my own
Group, the combination of the two areas of development outlined above have
resulted in a series of technical modules which are used in various combinations
depending upon the requirements of individual work sites. For compensation
grouting, a number of these modules provide essential tools for controlling the
process :-
5.6
Every contractor will have their own procedures, equipment, and analytical
methods for managing their injection programs. Over the last 30 years, therefore, and
in particular over the last 15 years with the advent of powerful desktop computers,
contractors and equipment manufacturers have been developing operational control
measures for grouting operations from the point of view of practicing geotechnical
engineers. With their understanding of the principles of both geotechnical design
and practical grouting technology, contractors have sought to develop processes and
equipment which allow their grouting engineers and designers total control over the
injection processes. The key element of this development has been the development
of an unrivalled capacity for the handling and analysis of processing and
geotechnical data, and the presentation of such data in a manner which can be readily
understood and utilised by site operatives and engineers.
The core elements of such systems are :-
Since all company systems vary, in order to provide some understanding of how far
these developments have taken the industry, included below is a brief summary of
the various software packages employed within my own Group. Within my own
Group, the combination of the two areas of development outlined above have
resulted in a series of technical modules which are used in various combinations
depending upon the requirements of individual work sites. For compensation
grouting, a number of these modules provide essential tools for controlling the
process :-
179
Every contractor will have their own procedures, equipment, and analytical
methods for managing their injection programs. Over the last 30 years, therefore, and
in particular over the last 15 years with the advent of powerful desktop computers,
contractors and equipment manufacturers have been developing operational control
measures for grouting operations from the point of view of practicing geotechnical
engineers. With their understanding of the principles of both geotechnical design
and practical grouting technology, contractors have sought to develop processes and
equipment which allow their grouting engineers and designers total control over the
injection processes. The key element of this development has been the development
of an unrivalled capacity for the handling and analysis of processing and
geotechnical data, and the presentation of such data in a manner which can be readily
understood and utilised by site operatives and engineers.
The core elements of such systems are :179A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
179
Page 46 of 66
100A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
5.6
Since all company systems vary, in order to provide some understanding of how far
these developments have taken the industry, included below is a brief summary of
the various software packages employed within my own Group. Within my own
Group, the combination of the two areas of development outlined above have
resulted in a series of technical modules which are used in various combinations
depending upon the requirements of individual work sites. For compensation
grouting, a number of these modules provide essential tools for controlling the
process :-
Page 46 of 66
179
Every contractor will have their own procedures, equipment, and analytical
methods for managing their injection programs. Over the last 30 years, therefore, and
in particular over the last 15 years with the advent of powerful desktop computers,
contractors and equipment manufacturers have been developing operational control
measures for grouting operations from the point of view of practicing geotechnical
engineers. With their understanding of the principles of both geotechnical design
and practical grouting technology, contractors have sought to develop processes and
equipment which allow their grouting engineers and designers total control over the
injection processes. The key element of this development has been the development
of an unrivalled capacity for the handling and analysis of processing and
geotechnical data, and the presentation of such data in a manner which can be readily
understood and utilised by site operatives and engineers.
The core elements of such systems are :179A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Since all company systems vary, in order to provide some understanding of how far
these developments have taken the industry, included below is a brief summary of
the various software packages employed within my own Group. Within my own
Group, the combination of the two areas of development outlined above have
resulted in a series of technical modules which are used in various combinations
depending upon the requirements of individual work sites. For compensation
grouting, a number of these modules provide essential tools for controlling the
process :-
Page 46 of 66
Page 46 of 66
180
180
Activity
Function
Module
Activity
Function
Enpasol
Drilling
Enpasol
Drilling
Castaur
Drilling &
Grouting
Castaur
Drilling &
Grouting
Sphinx
Drilling &
Grouting
Sphinx
Drilling &
Grouting
Spice
Grouting
Spice
Grouting
Cognac
Grouting
Cognac
Grouting
Scan 3D
Grouting
Scan 3D
Grouting
Visu Spice
Grouting
Visu Spice
Grouting
Geoscope
Web
Monitoring
Geoscope
Web
Monitoring
180A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Module
Whilst the process control procedures may vary from company to company, the
core elements are common to most companies working in this field as they are
essential elements to safely managing settlement mitigation works.
5.7
Whilst the process control procedures may vary from company to company, the
core elements are common to most companies working in this field as they are
essential elements to safely managing settlement mitigation works.
Reporting
5.7
Even for a simple project involving a single structure, but especially for a major
project involving different contractors working on different Lots, it is essential to
establish a common, and commonly understood system of reporting for all parties.
100B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
180
Page 47 of 66
Page 47 of 66
180
Activity
Function
Enpasol
Drilling
Castaur
Drilling &
Grouting
Sphinx
Drilling &
Grouting
Spice
Grouting
Cognac
Grouting
Scan 3D
Grouting
Visu Spice
Grouting
Geoscope
Web
Monitoring
Whilst the process control procedures may vary from company to company, the
core elements are common to most companies working in this field as they are
essential elements to safely managing settlement mitigation works.
Reporting
Module
Activity
Function
Enpasol
Drilling
Castaur
Drilling &
Grouting
Sphinx
Drilling &
Grouting
Spice
Grouting
Cognac
Grouting
Scan 3D
Grouting
Visu Spice
Grouting
Geoscope
Web
Monitoring
180A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Module
Whilst the process control procedures may vary from company to company, the
core elements are common to most companies working in this field as they are
essential elements to safely managing settlement mitigation works.
5.7
Even for a simple project involving a single structure, but especially for a major
project involving different contractors working on different Lots, it is essential to
establish a common, and commonly understood system of reporting for all parties.
5.7
Reporting
Even for a simple project involving a single structure, but especially for a major
project involving different contractors working on different Lots, it is essential to
establish a common, and commonly understood system of reporting for all parties.
Reporting
Even for a simple project involving a single structure, but especially for a major
project involving different contractors working on different Lots, it is essential to
establish a common, and commonly understood system of reporting for all parties.
Page 47 of 66
Page 47 of 66
181
Particularly for the client, it would be extremely difficult and extremely risky
undertaking to try to manage a project if different contractors had their own
proprietary monitoring and reporting system, because under these circumstances it
could lead to significant data being overlooked because a particular settlement trend
or feature was presented with different emphasis from one part of the project to
another.
Information should be freely available to all parties associated with the works if
full and open co-operation is to be guaranteed. In particular the output from the daily
all-party review meeting should be immediately available not only for individuals
attending the meeting, but for the engineers and operatives in the field carrying out
works. A system of daily briefings, with an adequate handover package to the
following shift must be established from the outset. If the reporting system is not in
place and fully formed at the start of the project it could lead to considerable
difficulties if any significant changes to the system have to be made on stream during
the works, and it is very easy to lose continuity in terms of a feel for the project and
the developing conditions for each structure.
FIG. 25 Example of a daily synopsis report prepared for the all-party daily
review meeting
Page 48 of 66
FIG. 25 Example of a daily synopsis report prepared for the all-party daily
review meeting
181
Particularly for the client, it would be extremely difficult and extremely risky
undertaking to try to manage a project if different contractors had their own
proprietary monitoring and reporting system, because under these circumstances it
could lead to significant data being overlooked because a particular settlement trend
or feature was presented with different emphasis from one part of the project to
another.
Information should be freely available to all parties associated with the works if
full and open co-operation is to be guaranteed. In particular the output from the daily
all-party review meeting should be immediately available not only for individuals
attending the meeting, but for the engineers and operatives in the field carrying out
works. A system of daily briefings, with an adequate handover package to the
following shift must be established from the outset. If the reporting system is not in
place and fully formed at the start of the project it could lead to considerable
difficulties if any significant changes to the system have to be made on stream during
the works, and it is very easy to lose continuity in terms of a feel for the project and
the developing conditions for each structure.
181A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Page 48 of 66
181
Particularly for the client, it would be extremely difficult and extremely risky
undertaking to try to manage a project if different contractors had their own
proprietary monitoring and reporting system, because under these circumstances it
could lead to significant data being overlooked because a particular settlement trend
or feature was presented with different emphasis from one part of the project to
another.
Information should be freely available to all parties associated with the works if
full and open co-operation is to be guaranteed. In particular the output from the daily
all-party review meeting should be immediately available not only for individuals
attending the meeting, but for the engineers and operatives in the field carrying out
works. A system of daily briefings, with an adequate handover package to the
following shift must be established from the outset. If the reporting system is not in
place and fully formed at the start of the project it could lead to considerable
difficulties if any significant changes to the system have to be made on stream during
the works, and it is very easy to lose continuity in terms of a feel for the project and
the developing conditions for each structure.
FIG. 25 Example of a daily synopsis report prepared for the all-party daily
review meeting
101A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
181
Particularly for the client, it would be extremely difficult and extremely risky
undertaking to try to manage a project if different contractors had their own
proprietary monitoring and reporting system, because under these circumstances it
could lead to significant data being overlooked because a particular settlement trend
or feature was presented with different emphasis from one part of the project to
another.
Information should be freely available to all parties associated with the works if
full and open co-operation is to be guaranteed. In particular the output from the daily
all-party review meeting should be immediately available not only for individuals
attending the meeting, but for the engineers and operatives in the field carrying out
works. A system of daily briefings, with an adequate handover package to the
following shift must be established from the outset. If the reporting system is not in
place and fully formed at the start of the project it could lead to considerable
difficulties if any significant changes to the system have to be made on stream during
the works, and it is very easy to lose continuity in terms of a feel for the project and
the developing conditions for each structure.
181A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
FIG. 25 Example of a daily synopsis report prepared for the all-party daily
review meeting
Page 48 of 66
Page 48 of 66
182
FIG. 26 Graphical plot of injection volumes and pressures for each injection
port, which were targeted below ground bearing footings
At daily progress meetings it is common for the all of the contracting teams tunnelling and civil engineering monitoring, and geotechnical / settlement mitigation,
to report their activities and obtain clearance to proceed. There is often a huge
amount of base data particularly for the monitoring, to be collected, synthesised,
analysed, and summarised prior to the review meeting.
The collection and presentation of this data is a key role on all compensation
grouting works, demanding a high level of skill and experience, and the level of time
and resource required for this task should not be underestimated, particularly when
tunnelling operations are running 24/7 or 24/5, and settlement mitigation works are
responding in real time to a dynamic and developing source of relaxation at depth.
101B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
FIG. 26 Graphical plot of injection volumes and pressures for each injection
port, which were targeted below ground bearing footings
At daily progress meetings it is common for the all of the contracting teams tunnelling and civil engineering monitoring, and geotechnical / settlement mitigation,
to report their activities and obtain clearance to proceed. There is often a huge
amount of base data particularly for the monitoring, to be collected, synthesised,
analysed, and summarised prior to the review meeting.
The collection and presentation of this data is a key role on all compensation
grouting works, demanding a high level of skill and experience, and the level of time
and resource required for this task should not be underestimated, particularly when
tunnelling operations are running 24/7 or 24/5, and settlement mitigation works are
responding in real time to a dynamic and developing source of relaxation at depth.
Page 49 of 66
Page 49 of 66
182
All reporting needs to be concise, clear, and unambiguous. With a dynamic process
engineers and operatives in the field do not have the time to waste in trying to
independently interpret lengthy or tabulated daily reports. The daily executive
summary report, produced after the review meeting need not be more than one two
pages for each activity , and should wherever possible contain visual/graphic
presentation of just the essential data.
FIG. 26 Graphical plot of injection volumes and pressures for each injection
port, which were targeted below ground bearing footings
At daily progress meetings it is common for the all of the contracting teams tunnelling and civil engineering monitoring, and geotechnical / settlement mitigation,
to report their activities and obtain clearance to proceed. There is often a huge
amount of base data particularly for the monitoring, to be collected, synthesised,
analysed, and summarised prior to the review meeting.
The collection and presentation of this data is a key role on all compensation
grouting works, demanding a high level of skill and experience, and the level of time
and resource required for this task should not be underestimated, particularly when
tunnelling operations are running 24/7 or 24/5, and settlement mitigation works are
responding in real time to a dynamic and developing source of relaxation at depth.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
182
All reporting needs to be concise, clear, and unambiguous. With a dynamic process
engineers and operatives in the field do not have the time to waste in trying to
independently interpret lengthy or tabulated daily reports. The daily executive
summary report, produced after the review meeting need not be more than one two
pages for each activity , and should wherever possible contain visual/graphic
presentation of just the essential data.
182A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
All reporting needs to be concise, clear, and unambiguous. With a dynamic process
engineers and operatives in the field do not have the time to waste in trying to
independently interpret lengthy or tabulated daily reports. The daily executive
summary report, produced after the review meeting need not be more than one two
pages for each activity , and should wherever possible contain visual/graphic
presentation of just the essential data.
All reporting needs to be concise, clear, and unambiguous. With a dynamic process
engineers and operatives in the field do not have the time to waste in trying to
independently interpret lengthy or tabulated daily reports. The daily executive
summary report, produced after the review meeting need not be more than one two
pages for each activity , and should wherever possible contain visual/graphic
presentation of just the essential data.
182A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
182
FIG. 26 Graphical plot of injection volumes and pressures for each injection
port, which were targeted below ground bearing footings
At daily progress meetings it is common for the all of the contracting teams tunnelling and civil engineering monitoring, and geotechnical / settlement mitigation,
to report their activities and obtain clearance to proceed. There is often a huge
amount of base data particularly for the monitoring, to be collected, synthesised,
analysed, and summarised prior to the review meeting.
The collection and presentation of this data is a key role on all compensation
grouting works, demanding a high level of skill and experience, and the level of time
and resource required for this task should not be underestimated, particularly when
tunnelling operations are running 24/7 or 24/5, and settlement mitigation works are
responding in real time to a dynamic and developing source of relaxation at depth.
Page 49 of 66
Page 49 of 66
183
FIG. 27 Daily reports visually displaying latest real time data as typically
recorded at start of shift. Both are screen plots of active screens which can be
interrogated to display time -settlement data for trend and anomaly analysis.
183A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 50 of 66
Page 50 of 66
183A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
183
FIG. 27 Daily reports visually displaying latest real time data as typically
recorded at start of shift. Both are screen plots of active screens which can be
interrogated to display time -settlement data for trend and anomaly analysis.
FIG. 27 Daily reports visually displaying latest real time data as typically
recorded at start of shift. Both are screen plots of active screens which can be
interrogated to display time -settlement data for trend and anomaly analysis.
102A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
183
183
FIG. 27 Daily reports visually displaying latest real time data as typically
recorded at start of shift. Both are screen plots of active screens which can be
interrogated to display time -settlement data for trend and anomaly analysis.
Page 50 of 66
Page 50 of 66
184
184A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
102B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Page 51 of 66
Page 51 of 66
184
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
184
184A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
184
Page 51 of 66
Page 51 of 66
6.1
185
Bologna Tunnels
6.1
60.1
60.1
1.5m
Treatmentt zone
4.4m
3.0m
yers of
Two lay
curved TAMs
T
42.0
10m
Scale
3.0m
42.0
10m
185A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Tunnel 1
Page 52 of 66
103A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
185
Bologna Tunnels
6.1
60.1
60.1
59.4
57.7
1.5m
yers of
Two lay
curved TAMs
T
1.5m
Treatmentt zone
4.4m
Existing Naples-Milan
onry
rail link on maso
viaduct
Temporary
pit
59.4
57.7
3.0m
yers of
Two lay
curved TAMs
T
42.0
10m
Scale
185
Bologna Tunnels
Existing Naples-Milan
onry
rail link on maso
viaduct
Temporary
pit
Tunnel 2
Page 52 of 66
Treatmentt zone
4.4m
3.0m
42.0
10m
Scale
Tunnel 1
Tunnel 2
Tunnel 1
185A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
4.4m
Tunnel 2
Treatmentt zone
Scale
Tunnel 1
6.1
59.4
57.7
1.5m
yers of
Two lay
curved TAMs
T
Existing Naples-Milan
onry
rail link on maso
viaduct
Temporary
pit
59.4
57.7
185
Bologna Tunnels
Existing Naples-Milan
onry
rail link on maso
viaduct
Temporary
pit
Tunnel 2
Page 52 of 66
Page 52 of 66
186
6.2
186A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
6.2
FIG. 31 Complex geometry of new-build tunnels below existing piiers and piles.
Structural settlemen
nts were corrected by a combination of und
derpinning,
ground consolidation
n by grouting, flat jacks incorporated into piers, and
compensatioon grouting in a highly complex constructioon
Toulon
103B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
186
6.2
Toulon
Page 53 of 66
Page 53 of 66
186
6.2
FIG. 31 Complex geometry of new-build tunnels below existing piiers and piles.
Structural settlemen
nts were corrected by a combination of und
derpinning,
ground consolidation
n by grouting, flat jacks incorporated into piers, and
compensatioon grouting in a highly complex constructioon
6.3
FIG. 31 Complex geometry of new-build tunnels below existing piiers and piles.
Structural settlemen
nts were corrected by a combination of und
derpinning,
ground consolidation
n by grouting, flat jacks incorporated into piers, and
compensatioon grouting in a highly complex constructioon
6.3
Toulon
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
6.3
186A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
186
FIG. 31 Complex geometry of new-build tunnels below existing piiers and piles.
Structural settlemen
nts were corrected by a combination of und
derpinning,
ground consolidation
n by grouting, flat jacks incorporated into piers, and
compensatioon grouting in a highly complex constructioon
6.3
Toulon
Page 53 of 66
Page 53 of 66
187
FIG. 32a & b Multiple borehole arrays drilled through highly variable strata
below a ground-bearing residential structure. The injections to control
differential settlement were controlled by electro-levels installed in the
basement, within the specified limits of 1/833 for heave and 1/2000 for
settlement.
6.4
187A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
FIG. 32a & b Multiple borehole arrays drilled through highly variable strata
below a ground-bearing residential structure. The injections to control
differential settlement were controlled by electro-levels installed in the
basement, within the specified limits of 1/833 for heave and 1/2000 for
settlement.
6.4
187A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
104A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
6.4
Page 54 of 66
187
FIG. 32a & b Multiple borehole arrays drilled through highly variable strata
below a ground-bearing residential structure. The injections to control
differential settlement were controlled by electro-levels installed in the
basement, within the specified limits of 1/833 for heave and 1/2000 for
settlement.
187
FIG. 32a & b Multiple borehole arrays drilled through highly variable strata
below a ground-bearing residential structure. The injections to control
differential settlement were controlled by electro-levels installed in the
basement, within the specified limits of 1/833 for heave and 1/2000 for
settlement.
6.4
Page 54 of 66
187
Page 54 of 66
Page 54 of 66
188
188A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Madrid Metro
Madrid
-3.000
-6.000
-9.000
-12.000
-15.000
-18.000
Deformed Mesh
Extreme total displacement 1,41 m
(displacements scaled up 2,00 times)
-3.000
-6.000
-9.000
-12.000
-15.000
-18.000
Deformed Mesh
Extreme total displacement 1,41 m
(displacements scaled up 2,00 times)
188
Madrid Metro
Use of rigid elements designed to absorb stress and to isolate structures from
displacements. Plaxis was used to design a rigid element as an alternative or
supplement to active compensation grouting.
Madrid
Page 55 of 66
Madrid
0.000
Page 55 of 66
0.000
-3.000
-6.000
-9.000
-12.000
-15.000
-18.000
Deformed Mesh
Extreme total displacement 1,41 m
(displacements scaled up 2,00 times)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
188
Madrid Metro
Use of rigid elements designed to absorb stress and to isolate structures from
displacements. Plaxis was used to design a rigid element as an alternative or
supplement to active compensation grouting.
0.000
104B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
6.5
Use of rigid elements designed to absorb stress and to isolate structures from
displacements. Plaxis was used to design a rigid element as an alternative or
supplement to active compensation grouting.
188A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
188
6.5
Madrid Metro
Use of rigid elements designed to absorb stress and to isolate structures from
displacements. Plaxis was used to design a rigid element as an alternative or
supplement to active compensation grouting.
Madrid
0.000
-3.000
-6.000
-9.000
-12.000
-15.000
-18.000
Deformed Mesh
Extreme total displacement 1,41 m
(displacements scaled up 2,00 times)
Page 55 of 66
Page 55 of 66
6.6
189
6.6
189A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
6.6
189A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
189
Page 56 of 66
105A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
6.6
189
6.7
For the current works at Bond Street Station in London, extensive preliminary
design is being undertaken to examine the feasibility of installing borehole arrays
through a highly complex network of major utilities and existing infrastructure to
compensate below pad foundations, some of which merge with the utilities,
demonstrating the absolute necessity of 3-D modelling and detailed foundation
surveys. Borehole modelling is required to accommodate the allowable envelope of
borehole deviation. The complexity of the juxtaposition and interaction of
underground and surface structures to be protected, each with their own individual
specification for settlement limits and allowable damage, will entail a complex
design incorporating compensation grouting at various elevations, installed from
dedicated drilling shafts and galleries, passive support from heavy duty
compensation grouting boreholes, pipe roofing, and ground treatment. It is likely that
directional drilling will be required for many holes where sub-surface geometry
requires high precision drilling over distances of up to 70m.
For the current works at Bond Street Station in London, extensive preliminary
design is being undertaken to examine the feasibility of installing borehole arrays
through a highly complex network of major utilities and existing infrastructure to
compensate below pad foundations, some of which merge with the utilities,
demonstrating the absolute necessity of 3-D modelling and detailed foundation
surveys. Borehole modelling is required to accommodate the allowable envelope of
borehole deviation. The complexity of the juxtaposition and interaction of
underground and surface structures to be protected, each with their own individual
specification for settlement limits and allowable damage, will entail a complex
design incorporating compensation grouting at various elevations, installed from
dedicated drilling shafts and galleries, passive support from heavy duty
compensation grouting boreholes, pipe roofing, and ground treatment. It is likely that
directional drilling will be required for many holes where sub-surface geometry
requires high precision drilling over distances of up to 70m.
Page 56 of 66
6.7
For the current works at Bond Street Station in London, extensive preliminary
design is being undertaken to examine the feasibility of installing borehole arrays
through a highly complex network of major utilities and existing infrastructure to
compensate below pad foundations, some of which merge with the utilities,
demonstrating the absolute necessity of 3-D modelling and detailed foundation
surveys. Borehole modelling is required to accommodate the allowable envelope of
borehole deviation. The complexity of the juxtaposition and interaction of
underground and surface structures to be protected, each with their own individual
specification for settlement limits and allowable damage, will entail a complex
design incorporating compensation grouting at various elevations, installed from
dedicated drilling shafts and galleries, passive support from heavy duty
compensation grouting boreholes, pipe roofing, and ground treatment. It is likely that
directional drilling will be required for many holes where sub-surface geometry
requires high precision drilling over distances of up to 70m.
189
For the current works at Bond Street Station in London, extensive preliminary
design is being undertaken to examine the feasibility of installing borehole arrays
through a highly complex network of major utilities and existing infrastructure to
compensate below pad foundations, some of which merge with the utilities,
demonstrating the absolute necessity of 3-D modelling and detailed foundation
surveys. Borehole modelling is required to accommodate the allowable envelope of
borehole deviation. The complexity of the juxtaposition and interaction of
underground and surface structures to be protected, each with their own individual
specification for settlement limits and allowable damage, will entail a complex
design incorporating compensation grouting at various elevations, installed from
dedicated drilling shafts and galleries, passive support from heavy duty
compensation grouting boreholes, pipe roofing, and ground treatment. It is likely that
directional drilling will be required for many holes where sub-surface geometry
requires high precision drilling over distances of up to 70m.
Page 56 of 66
Page 56 of 66
190
190A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
6.8
105B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Page 57 of 66
190
Page 57 of 66
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
190
190A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
190
6.8
Page 57 of 66
Page 57 of 66
191
191A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
191A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
106A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Figure 38b above is a case where settlement limitation measures will require highly
detailed design and analysis. The specified zone of sub-horizontal drilling for the
injection pipe installation (highlighted in red) is required to serve for protection of a
highly sensitive and relatively light Victorian era brick tunnel (part of the London
Underground network) which is surrounded by utilities, and the very heavy stone
facade of a prestigious office structure, the ground bearing facade of which is
retained by stainless steel dowels from the more recently stripped-out and piled
interior. The new station tunnels passing below the LUL and Post Office tunnels will
be constructed first, followed by a new passenger walkway tunnel way located only
9m below the foundations of the facade and LUL tunnel. The solution will require a
high attention to face loss control during tunnelling, with the Client seeking to limit
face loss to 1% . Further protection will probably require both passive stiffening by
pipe roofing, active compensation grouting, and structural support to the light well.
6.9
Page 58 of 66
191
191
Figure 38b above is a case where settlement limitation measures will require highly
detailed design and analysis. The specified zone of sub-horizontal drilling for the
injection pipe installation (highlighted in red) is required to serve for protection of a
highly sensitive and relatively light Victorian era brick tunnel (part of the London
Underground network) which is surrounded by utilities, and the very heavy stone
facade of a prestigious office structure, the ground bearing facade of which is
retained by stainless steel dowels from the more recently stripped-out and piled
interior. The new station tunnels passing below the LUL and Post Office tunnels will
be constructed first, followed by a new passenger walkway tunnel way located only
9m below the foundations of the facade and LUL tunnel. The solution will require a
high attention to face loss control during tunnelling, with the Client seeking to limit
face loss to 1% . Further protection will probably require both passive stiffening by
pipe roofing, active compensation grouting, and structural support to the light well.
6.9
Page 58 of 66
Figure 38b above is a case where settlement limitation measures will require highly
detailed design and analysis. The specified zone of sub-horizontal drilling for the
injection pipe installation (highlighted in red) is required to serve for protection of a
highly sensitive and relatively light Victorian era brick tunnel (part of the London
Underground network) which is surrounded by utilities, and the very heavy stone
facade of a prestigious office structure, the ground bearing facade of which is
retained by stainless steel dowels from the more recently stripped-out and piled
interior. The new station tunnels passing below the LUL and Post Office tunnels will
be constructed first, followed by a new passenger walkway tunnel way located only
9m below the foundations of the facade and LUL tunnel. The solution will require a
high attention to face loss control during tunnelling, with the Client seeking to limit
face loss to 1% . Further protection will probably require both passive stiffening by
pipe roofing, active compensation grouting, and structural support to the light well.
6.9
191
Page 58 of 66
Page 58 of 66
192
106B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
192
the box, and equipped witth jacks to allow for lateral expansion, large diameter
d
jacked
pipe arch, and extensive active
a
compensation grouting.
192A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
the box, and equipped witth jacks to allow for lateral expansion, large diameter
d
jacked
pipe arch, and extensive active
a
compensation grouting.
Page 59 of 66
Page 59 of 66
192
the box, and equipped witth jacks to allow for lateral expansion, large diameter
d
jacked
pipe arch, and extensive active
a
compensation grouting.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
the box, and equipped witth jacks to allow for lateral expansion, large diameter
d
jacked
pipe arch, and extensive active
a
compensation grouting.
192A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
192
Page 59 of 66
Page 59 of 66
193
FUTURE DEVELOPMENT
FUTURE DEVELOPMENT
In the future we may confidently expect
FIG. 40 Modern grout injection station with computer controlled pumps and a
project monitoring database terminal for trigger alarm notification and
automatic pump arrest
We must however be wary of trying to push the technology too far, or too fast. We
must always consider alternative processes wherever possible which might deliver
either increases in safety, or deliver the same level of safety and protection more cost
effectively.
The industry must not be tempted to consider compensation grouting as the
primary means of protection of structures. The primary means of protecting
193A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
We must however be wary of trying to push the technology too far, or too fast. We
must always consider alternative processes wherever possible which might deliver
either increases in safety, or deliver the same level of safety and protection more cost
effectively.
The industry must not be tempted to consider compensation grouting as the
primary means of protection of structures. The primary means of protecting
Page 60 of 66
107A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
193
FUTURE DEVELOPMENT
193
FUTURE DEVELOPMENT
In the future we may confidently expect
FIG. 40 Modern grout injection station with computer controlled pumps and a
project monitoring database terminal for trigger alarm notification and
automatic pump arrest
We must however be wary of trying to push the technology too far, or too fast. We
must always consider alternative processes wherever possible which might deliver
either increases in safety, or deliver the same level of safety and protection more cost
effectively.
The industry must not be tempted to consider compensation grouting as the
primary means of protection of structures. The primary means of protecting
193A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
FIG. 40 Modern grout injection station with computer controlled pumps and a
project monitoring database terminal for trigger alarm notification and
automatic pump arrest
Page 60 of 66
193
FIG. 40 Modern grout injection station with computer controlled pumps and a
project monitoring database terminal for trigger alarm notification and
automatic pump arrest
We must however be wary of trying to push the technology too far, or too fast. We
must always consider alternative processes wherever possible which might deliver
either increases in safety, or deliver the same level of safety and protection more cost
effectively.
The industry must not be tempted to consider compensation grouting as the
primary means of protection of structures. The primary means of protecting
Page 60 of 66
Page 60 of 66
194
194
structures must always be the selection of tunnelling method, and the quality of the
personnel, equipment, and work procedures employed. Compensation grouting
should be considered is a valuable and important secondary protective measure, to be
employed where physical constraints on the tunnelling and the civil engineering
works may require an additional level of safeguard to ensure the safety of the works
and the public
structures must always be the selection of tunnelling method, and the quality of the
personnel, equipment, and work procedures employed. Compensation grouting
should be considered is a valuable and important secondary protective measure, to be
employed where physical constraints on the tunnelling and the civil engineering
works may require an additional level of safeguard to ensure the safety of the works
and the public
We must also not consider this technology as the easy option to be wish dreamed
in-place, solving all potential problems by transferring the construction and safety
risks to the specialist geotechnical contractor alone. On a given project the safest,
most appropriate, but not necessarily least expensive, solution may lie within realms
of the structural or tunnelling design and construction.
We must also not consider this technology as the easy option to be wish dreamed
in-place, solving all potential problems by transferring the construction and safety
risks to the specialist geotechnical contractor alone. On a given project the safest,
most appropriate, but not necessarily least expensive, solution may lie within realms
of the structural or tunnelling design and construction.
REFERENCES
Allard, A.J., sand Goldney R.,P(1998) Jubilee Line Extension: Waterloo Station
ticket hall construction, Proceedings of the ICE Structures and Buildings,
Volume 128, Issue3, pages 274-281
Attewell, P.B., Yeates, J. & Selby, A.R. (1986). Soil movements induced by
tunnelling and their effects on pipelines and structures. Blackie and Son Ltd,
UK.
Baker, W.H., McPherson, H.H., Cording, E.J. (1980). Compaction routing to limit
ground movements: instrumented case history evaluation of the Bolton Hill
Subway Tunnels, Baltimore, MD. Technical Report, U.S. Dept. of
Transportation.
Bernatzik, W. Anheben des Kraftwerkes Hessigheim am Neckar mit Hilfe van
Zementunterpressungen, Der Bauingenieur, Heft 4, 1951.
Boeck, T.H. and Scheller, P. 4. RohreElbtunnel Sicherung der Bebauung am
Nordhang der Elbe. Baugrundtagung in Hannover, 2000, Deutsche Gesellschaft
fur Geotechnike.V.
Boone, S.J., Artigiani, E., Shirlaw, J.N., Ginanneschi, R., Leinala, T. &
Kochmanova, N. (2005). Use of ground conditioning agents for earth pressure
balance machine tunnelling. Proc. AFTES International Congress, Cambery.
107B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Page 61 of 66
194
structures must always be the selection of tunnelling method, and the quality of the
personnel, equipment, and work procedures employed. Compensation grouting
should be considered is a valuable and important secondary protective measure, to be
employed where physical constraints on the tunnelling and the civil engineering
works may require an additional level of safeguard to ensure the safety of the works
and the public
We must also not consider this technology as the easy option to be wish dreamed
in-place, solving all potential problems by transferring the construction and safety
risks to the specialist geotechnical contractor alone. On a given project the safest,
most appropriate, but not necessarily least expensive, solution may lie within realms
of the structural or tunnelling design and construction.
8
Page 61 of 66
REFERENCES
Allard, A.J., sand Goldney R.,P(1998) Jubilee Line Extension: Waterloo Station
ticket hall construction, Proceedings of the ICE Structures and Buildings,
Volume 128, Issue3, pages 274-281
Attewell, P.B., Yeates, J. & Selby, A.R. (1986). Soil movements induced by
tunnelling and their effects on pipelines and structures. Blackie and Son Ltd,
UK.
Baker, W.H., McPherson, H.H., Cording, E.J. (1980). Compaction routing to limit
ground movements: instrumented case history evaluation of the Bolton Hill
Subway Tunnels, Baltimore, MD. Technical Report, U.S. Dept. of
Transportation.
Bernatzik, W. Anheben des Kraftwerkes Hessigheim am Neckar mit Hilfe van
Zementunterpressungen, Der Bauingenieur, Heft 4, 1951.
Boeck, T.H. and Scheller, P. 4. RohreElbtunnel Sicherung der Bebauung am
Nordhang der Elbe. Baugrundtagung in Hannover, 2000, Deutsche Gesellschaft
fur Geotechnike.V.
Boone, S.J., Artigiani, E., Shirlaw, J.N., Ginanneschi, R., Leinala, T. &
Kochmanova, N. (2005). Use of ground conditioning agents for earth pressure
balance machine tunnelling. Proc. AFTES International Congress, Cambery.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
194
REFERENCES
Allard, A.J., sand Goldney R.,P(1998) Jubilee Line Extension: Waterloo Station
ticket hall construction, Proceedings of the ICE Structures and Buildings,
Volume 128, Issue3, pages 274-281
Attewell, P.B., Yeates, J. & Selby, A.R. (1986). Soil movements induced by
tunnelling and their effects on pipelines and structures. Blackie and Son Ltd,
UK.
Baker, W.H., McPherson, H.H., Cording, E.J. (1980). Compaction routing to limit
ground movements: instrumented case history evaluation of the Bolton Hill
Subway Tunnels, Baltimore, MD. Technical Report, U.S. Dept. of
Transportation.
Bernatzik, W. Anheben des Kraftwerkes Hessigheim am Neckar mit Hilfe van
Zementunterpressungen, Der Bauingenieur, Heft 4, 1951.
Boeck, T.H. and Scheller, P. 4. RohreElbtunnel Sicherung der Bebauung am
Nordhang der Elbe. Baugrundtagung in Hannover, 2000, Deutsche Gesellschaft
fur Geotechnike.V.
Boone, S.J., Artigiani, E., Shirlaw, J.N., Ginanneschi, R., Leinala, T. &
Kochmanova, N. (2005). Use of ground conditioning agents for earth pressure
balance machine tunnelling. Proc. AFTES International Congress, Cambery.
structures must always be the selection of tunnelling method, and the quality of the
personnel, equipment, and work procedures employed. Compensation grouting
should be considered is a valuable and important secondary protective measure, to be
employed where physical constraints on the tunnelling and the civil engineering
works may require an additional level of safeguard to ensure the safety of the works
and the public
We must also not consider this technology as the easy option to be wish dreamed
in-place, solving all potential problems by transferring the construction and safety
risks to the specialist geotechnical contractor alone. On a given project the safest,
most appropriate, but not necessarily least expensive, solution may lie within realms
of the structural or tunnelling design and construction.
8
194A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
194A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
REFERENCES
Allard, A.J., sand Goldney R.,P(1998) Jubilee Line Extension: Waterloo Station
ticket hall construction, Proceedings of the ICE Structures and Buildings,
Volume 128, Issue3, pages 274-281
Attewell, P.B., Yeates, J. & Selby, A.R. (1986). Soil movements induced by
tunnelling and their effects on pipelines and structures. Blackie and Son Ltd,
UK.
Baker, W.H., McPherson, H.H., Cording, E.J. (1980). Compaction routing to limit
ground movements: instrumented case history evaluation of the Bolton Hill
Subway Tunnels, Baltimore, MD. Technical Report, U.S. Dept. of
Transportation.
Bernatzik, W. Anheben des Kraftwerkes Hessigheim am Neckar mit Hilfe van
Zementunterpressungen, Der Bauingenieur, Heft 4, 1951.
Boeck, T.H. and Scheller, P. 4. RohreElbtunnel Sicherung der Bebauung am
Nordhang der Elbe. Baugrundtagung in Hannover, 2000, Deutsche Gesellschaft
fur Geotechnike.V.
Boone, S.J., Artigiani, E., Shirlaw, J.N., Ginanneschi, R., Leinala, T. &
Kochmanova, N. (2005). Use of ground conditioning agents for earth pressure
balance machine tunnelling. Proc. AFTES International Congress, Cambery.
Page 61 of 66
Page 61 of 66
195
Borghi, F.X. (2006). Lubrication and Soil conditioning in pipe jacking and
tunnelling.PhD Thesis, Cambridge University.
Borghi, F.X. &Mair, R.J. (2006) Soil Conditioning for EPB tunnelling machines in
London ground conditions. Tunnels and Tunnelling International. September
2006, 18-20.
Burland, J., B., Simpson, B. and St John, H., D. (1979) Movements around
excavations in London Clay. Invited National Paper. Proc 7th European Conf.
on SMFE, Brighton, I, pp 13-29.
Burland, J.B. (1995). Assessment of risk damage to buildings due to tunnelling and
excavation. Proc. 1st Int. Conf. Earthquake Geot. Eng., IS-Tokyo 95
Burland, J.B. (2001). Results of the research. Ch. 21 of Building Response to
tunnelling 0 case studies from construction of the Jubilee Line Extension,
London. Volume 1: Projects and methods. Burland, J.B., Standing, J.R., and
F.M. Jardine eds. (CIRIA Special Publication 200, CIRIA and Thomas Telford),
pp 315-344.
Carayol, S. (1998).Linjection de compensation assistee par ordinateur.Travaux No.
748, pp. 49-53.
Carayol, S (1997) Settlement Monitoring and Compensation Grouting (1997),
Tunnels et Ouvrages Souterrains No. 140, March/Apr 1997.
Chambosse, G. and Otterbein, R. Central Station Antwerp Compensation Grouting
under high loaded foundations.
Chen, X.L., Liu, Y.H., Cao, W.H., HE, Z.F. (1998). Protection of the former
observatory during construction of the Yan An Dong Lu Tunnel. Tunnels and
Metropolises. Negro Jr. & Ferreira (eds), 1083-1088.
Dimmock, P. and Mair, R.J. (2006b) Estimating volume loss for open face tunnels in
London Clay. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, Geotechnical
Engineering, Vol 160(1) pp 13-22
1
European Research Project COSMUS (1996-2000), led by Soletanche Bachy,;
Tractebel, Gltzl, Cea-Leti, Cambridge University, EPFL
Gabener, Raabe and Wilms.Einstatz van Soilfracturing zur Setzungsminderungbeim
Tunnelvortrieb, Taschenbuch fur den Tunnelbau, 1989, Deutsche Gesellsschaft
fur Erd- und Grundbau, Verlag Gluckauk GmbH, Essen
Gay M., Rippentrop, G., Hansmire, W., Romero, V. (1999). Tunnelling on the Tren
Urano Project, San Juan, Puerto Rico ; 1999 Rapid Excavation and Tunnelling
Conference Proceedings.
Gens, A., Di Mariano, A., Gesto, J.M. & Schwartz, H (2006). Ground movement
control in the construction of a new metro line in Barcelona. In Geotechnical
aspects of underground construction in soft ground ) eds Bakker, K.J., Bezuijen,
A., Broere, W. and Kwast, E.A.) pp 389-395. Leiden: Taylor &
Francis/Balkema.
Hamelin, J.P., Lavene, L., La Fonta, J.G. (2000), Compensation Grouting Under
Real-Time Monitoring, Rio Piedras Project, San Juan, Puerto Rico, Proceedings
og the 25th Annual Members Conference and Eighth International Conference
and Exposition,2000, New York NY DFI 2000 International Conference.
Harris, D.I., Mair, R.J., Love, J.P., Taylor, R.N. and Henderson, T.O. (1994)
Observations of ground and structure movements for compensation grouting
Borghi, F.X. (2006). Lubrication and Soil conditioning in pipe jacking and
tunnelling.PhD Thesis, Cambridge University.
Borghi, F.X. &Mair, R.J. (2006) Soil Conditioning for EPB tunnelling machines in
London ground conditions. Tunnels and Tunnelling International. September
2006, 18-20.
Burland, J., B., Simpson, B. and St John, H., D. (1979) Movements around
excavations in London Clay. Invited National Paper. Proc 7th European Conf.
on SMFE, Brighton, I, pp 13-29.
Burland, J.B. (1995). Assessment of risk damage to buildings due to tunnelling and
excavation. Proc. 1st Int. Conf. Earthquake Geot. Eng., IS-Tokyo 95
Burland, J.B. (2001). Results of the research. Ch. 21 of Building Response to
tunnelling 0 case studies from construction of the Jubilee Line Extension,
London. Volume 1: Projects and methods. Burland, J.B., Standing, J.R., and
F.M. Jardine eds. (CIRIA Special Publication 200, CIRIA and Thomas Telford),
pp 315-344.
Carayol, S. (1998).Linjection de compensation assistee par ordinateur.Travaux No.
748, pp. 49-53.
Carayol, S (1997) Settlement Monitoring and Compensation Grouting (1997),
Tunnels et Ouvrages Souterrains No. 140, March/Apr 1997.
Chambosse, G. and Otterbein, R. Central Station Antwerp Compensation Grouting
under high loaded foundations.
Chen, X.L., Liu, Y.H., Cao, W.H., HE, Z.F. (1998). Protection of the former
observatory during construction of the Yan An Dong Lu Tunnel. Tunnels and
Metropolises. Negro Jr. & Ferreira (eds), 1083-1088.
Dimmock, P. and Mair, R.J. (2006b) Estimating volume loss for open face tunnels in
London Clay. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, Geotechnical
Engineering, Vol 160(1) pp 13-22
1
European Research Project COSMUS (1996-2000), led by Soletanche Bachy,;
Tractebel, Gltzl, Cea-Leti, Cambridge University, EPFL
Gabener, Raabe and Wilms.Einstatz van Soilfracturing zur Setzungsminderungbeim
Tunnelvortrieb, Taschenbuch fur den Tunnelbau, 1989, Deutsche Gesellsschaft
fur Erd- und Grundbau, Verlag Gluckauk GmbH, Essen
Gay M., Rippentrop, G., Hansmire, W., Romero, V. (1999). Tunnelling on the Tren
Urano Project, San Juan, Puerto Rico ; 1999 Rapid Excavation and Tunnelling
Conference Proceedings.
Gens, A., Di Mariano, A., Gesto, J.M. & Schwartz, H (2006). Ground movement
control in the construction of a new metro line in Barcelona. In Geotechnical
aspects of underground construction in soft ground ) eds Bakker, K.J., Bezuijen,
A., Broere, W. and Kwast, E.A.) pp 389-395. Leiden: Taylor &
Francis/Balkema.
Hamelin, J.P., Lavene, L., La Fonta, J.G. (2000), Compensation Grouting Under
Real-Time Monitoring, Rio Piedras Project, San Juan, Puerto Rico, Proceedings
og the 25th Annual Members Conference and Eighth International Conference
and Exposition,2000, New York NY DFI 2000 International Conference.
Harris, D.I., Mair, R.J., Love, J.P., Taylor, R.N. and Henderson, T.O. (1994)
Observations of ground and structure movements for compensation grouting
Page 62 of 66
195
Borghi, F.X. (2006). Lubrication and Soil conditioning in pipe jacking and
tunnelling.PhD Thesis, Cambridge University.
Borghi, F.X. &Mair, R.J. (2006) Soil Conditioning for EPB tunnelling machines in
London ground conditions. Tunnels and Tunnelling International. September
2006, 18-20.
Burland, J., B., Simpson, B. and St John, H., D. (1979) Movements around
excavations in London Clay. Invited National Paper. Proc 7th European Conf.
on SMFE, Brighton, I, pp 13-29.
Burland, J.B. (1995). Assessment of risk damage to buildings due to tunnelling and
excavation. Proc. 1st Int. Conf. Earthquake Geot. Eng., IS-Tokyo 95
Burland, J.B. (2001). Results of the research. Ch. 21 of Building Response to
tunnelling 0 case studies from construction of the Jubilee Line Extension,
London. Volume 1: Projects and methods. Burland, J.B., Standing, J.R., and
F.M. Jardine eds. (CIRIA Special Publication 200, CIRIA and Thomas Telford),
pp 315-344.
Carayol, S. (1998).Linjection de compensation assistee par ordinateur.Travaux No.
748, pp. 49-53.
Carayol, S (1997) Settlement Monitoring and Compensation Grouting (1997),
Tunnels et Ouvrages Souterrains No. 140, March/Apr 1997.
Chambosse, G. and Otterbein, R. Central Station Antwerp Compensation Grouting
under high loaded foundations.
Chen, X.L., Liu, Y.H., Cao, W.H., HE, Z.F. (1998). Protection of the former
observatory during construction of the Yan An Dong Lu Tunnel. Tunnels and
Metropolises. Negro Jr. & Ferreira (eds), 1083-1088.
Dimmock, P. and Mair, R.J. (2006b) Estimating volume loss for open face tunnels in
London Clay. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, Geotechnical
Engineering, Vol 160(1) pp 13-22
1
European Research Project COSMUS (1996-2000), led by Soletanche Bachy,;
Tractebel, Gltzl, Cea-Leti, Cambridge University, EPFL
Gabener, Raabe and Wilms.Einstatz van Soilfracturing zur Setzungsminderungbeim
Tunnelvortrieb, Taschenbuch fur den Tunnelbau, 1989, Deutsche Gesellsschaft
fur Erd- und Grundbau, Verlag Gluckauk GmbH, Essen
Gay M., Rippentrop, G., Hansmire, W., Romero, V. (1999). Tunnelling on the Tren
Urano Project, San Juan, Puerto Rico ; 1999 Rapid Excavation and Tunnelling
Conference Proceedings.
Gens, A., Di Mariano, A., Gesto, J.M. & Schwartz, H (2006). Ground movement
control in the construction of a new metro line in Barcelona. In Geotechnical
aspects of underground construction in soft ground ) eds Bakker, K.J., Bezuijen,
A., Broere, W. and Kwast, E.A.) pp 389-395. Leiden: Taylor &
Francis/Balkema.
Hamelin, J.P., Lavene, L., La Fonta, J.G. (2000), Compensation Grouting Under
Real-Time Monitoring, Rio Piedras Project, San Juan, Puerto Rico, Proceedings
og the 25th Annual Members Conference and Eighth International Conference
and Exposition,2000, New York NY DFI 2000 International Conference.
Harris, D.I., Mair, R.J., Love, J.P., Taylor, R.N. and Henderson, T.O. (1994)
Observations of ground and structure movements for compensation grouting
195
Borghi, F.X. (2006). Lubrication and Soil conditioning in pipe jacking and
tunnelling.PhD Thesis, Cambridge University.
Borghi, F.X. &Mair, R.J. (2006) Soil Conditioning for EPB tunnelling machines in
London ground conditions. Tunnels and Tunnelling International. September
2006, 18-20.
Burland, J., B., Simpson, B. and St John, H., D. (1979) Movements around
excavations in London Clay. Invited National Paper. Proc 7th European Conf.
on SMFE, Brighton, I, pp 13-29.
Burland, J.B. (1995). Assessment of risk damage to buildings due to tunnelling and
excavation. Proc. 1st Int. Conf. Earthquake Geot. Eng., IS-Tokyo 95
Burland, J.B. (2001). Results of the research. Ch. 21 of Building Response to
tunnelling 0 case studies from construction of the Jubilee Line Extension,
London. Volume 1: Projects and methods. Burland, J.B., Standing, J.R., and
F.M. Jardine eds. (CIRIA Special Publication 200, CIRIA and Thomas Telford),
pp 315-344.
Carayol, S. (1998).Linjection de compensation assistee par ordinateur.Travaux No.
748, pp. 49-53.
Carayol, S (1997) Settlement Monitoring and Compensation Grouting (1997),
Tunnels et Ouvrages Souterrains No. 140, March/Apr 1997.
Chambosse, G. and Otterbein, R. Central Station Antwerp Compensation Grouting
under high loaded foundations.
Chen, X.L., Liu, Y.H., Cao, W.H., HE, Z.F. (1998). Protection of the former
observatory during construction of the Yan An Dong Lu Tunnel. Tunnels and
Metropolises. Negro Jr. & Ferreira (eds), 1083-1088.
Dimmock, P. and Mair, R.J. (2006b) Estimating volume loss for open face tunnels in
London Clay. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, Geotechnical
Engineering, Vol 160(1) pp 13-22
1
European Research Project COSMUS (1996-2000), led by Soletanche Bachy,;
Tractebel, Gltzl, Cea-Leti, Cambridge University, EPFL
Gabener, Raabe and Wilms.Einstatz van Soilfracturing zur Setzungsminderungbeim
Tunnelvortrieb, Taschenbuch fur den Tunnelbau, 1989, Deutsche Gesellsschaft
fur Erd- und Grundbau, Verlag Gluckauk GmbH, Essen
Gay M., Rippentrop, G., Hansmire, W., Romero, V. (1999). Tunnelling on the Tren
Urano Project, San Juan, Puerto Rico ; 1999 Rapid Excavation and Tunnelling
Conference Proceedings.
Gens, A., Di Mariano, A., Gesto, J.M. & Schwartz, H (2006). Ground movement
control in the construction of a new metro line in Barcelona. In Geotechnical
aspects of underground construction in soft ground ) eds Bakker, K.J., Bezuijen,
A., Broere, W. and Kwast, E.A.) pp 389-395. Leiden: Taylor &
Francis/Balkema.
Hamelin, J.P., Lavene, L., La Fonta, J.G. (2000), Compensation Grouting Under
Real-Time Monitoring, Rio Piedras Project, San Juan, Puerto Rico, Proceedings
og the 25th Annual Members Conference and Eighth International Conference
and Exposition,2000, New York NY DFI 2000 International Conference.
Harris, D.I., Mair, R.J., Love, J.P., Taylor, R.N. and Henderson, T.O. (1994)
Observations of ground and structure movements for compensation grouting
195A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Page 62 of 66
108A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
195
195A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 62 of 66
Page 62 of 66
196
108B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Page 63 of 66
Page 63 of 66
196
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
196
196A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
196A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
196
Page 63 of 66
Page 63 of 66
197
Lee, K.M. & Rowe, R.K. (1991). An analysis of three dimensional ground
movements: Thunder Bay tunnel. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol 28, pp2541
Leinala, T., Grabinsky, M., Delmar, R. & Collins, J.R. (2000). Effects of foam soil
conditioning on EPBM performance. Proc. North American Tunnelling 00,
Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 514-524.
Le Project Cosmus:Une Methode observationnelle pour les injections de
compensation, ABTUS Study day on 08.12.2000 in Antwerp on compensation
grouting and visit of the works.
Maidl, U. (1995). Erweiterung der Einsatzbereiche der Erddruckschildedurch
Bodenkonditionierungmit Schaum. PhD thesis, Ruhr University, Bochum.
Maiorano, R.M.S., Viggiani, G.M.B. (2003). Observed movements above a tunnel on
pyroclastic ground. Proc. Int. Conf. on Response of buildings to excavationinduced ground movements, London. Jardine F.M. ed., CIRIA Special
Publication 201, pp 375-386.
Mair, R.J., Taylor, R.N. & Bracegirdle, A. (1993). Sub-surface settlement profiles
above tunnels in clays. Geotechnique.43 No.2, 315-320.
Mair, R.J. &Hight, D.W., (1994). Compensation grouting. World Tunnelling.
November 1994, 361-367.
Mair, R.J. (1994). Report on Session 4: Displacement Grouting. Proc. Conf.
Grouting in the Ground, ICE, Nov. 1992, 375-383. London: Thomas Telford.
Mair, R.J., Viggiani, G., Menkiti, C.O. Reduction and control of surface settlement
induced by shallow and deep excavations.
Mair, R.J., Harris, D.I., Love, J.P., Blakey, D. & Kettle, C. (1994). Compensation
grouting to limit settlements during tunnelling at Waterloo Station. Proceedings
of Conference Tunnelling 94, London, Institution of Mining and Metallurgy,
279-300, Chapman and Hall.
2
Mair, R.J. & Taylor R.N. (1997). Bored tunnelling in the urban environment. Stateof-the-art Report and Theme Lecture. Proceedings of the 14th International
Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Hamburg,
Balkema, Vol. 4., 2353-2385.
Mair, R.J. (2008). Tunnelling and geotechnics: new horizons. 46th Rankine Lecture,
Geotechnique 58, No, 9, 695-736
Martak, L. and Liebsch, H. Soil-fracturing in silt and clay New applications in the
Vienna Underground, Internationale Konferenzbetreffend Injektionen in Fels
und Beton, Salzburg, 1993. Osterreichische Gesellschaft fur Geomahanik.
Merritt, A.S., Borghi, F.X. &Mair, R.J. (2003). Conditioning of Clay soils for earth
pressure balance tunnelling machines. Proc. Underground Construction, London
Dockland, UK:455-466.
Merritt, A.S. (2004). Soil conditioning for earth pressure balance amchines.PhD
Thesis, Cambridge University.
Merritt, A.S. &Mair, R.J. (2006). Mechanics of tunnelling machine screw conveyors:
model tests. Geotechnique 56 (9) 605-615
Merritt, A.S. &Mair, R.J. (2008). Mechanics of tunnelling machine screw conveyors:
a theoretical model. Geotechnique 58, No.2, 79-94.
Lee, K.M. & Rowe, R.K. (1991). An analysis of three dimensional ground
movements: Thunder Bay tunnel. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol 28, pp2541
Leinala, T., Grabinsky, M., Delmar, R. & Collins, J.R. (2000). Effects of foam soil
conditioning on EPBM performance. Proc. North American Tunnelling 00,
Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 514-524.
Le Project Cosmus:Une Methode observationnelle pour les injections de
compensation, ABTUS Study day on 08.12.2000 in Antwerp on compensation
grouting and visit of the works.
Maidl, U. (1995). Erweiterung der Einsatzbereiche der Erddruckschildedurch
Bodenkonditionierungmit Schaum. PhD thesis, Ruhr University, Bochum.
Maiorano, R.M.S., Viggiani, G.M.B. (2003). Observed movements above a tunnel on
pyroclastic ground. Proc. Int. Conf. on Response of buildings to excavationinduced ground movements, London. Jardine F.M. ed., CIRIA Special
Publication 201, pp 375-386.
Mair, R.J., Taylor, R.N. & Bracegirdle, A. (1993). Sub-surface settlement profiles
above tunnels in clays. Geotechnique.43 No.2, 315-320.
Mair, R.J. &Hight, D.W., (1994). Compensation grouting. World Tunnelling.
November 1994, 361-367.
Mair, R.J. (1994). Report on Session 4: Displacement Grouting. Proc. Conf.
Grouting in the Ground, ICE, Nov. 1992, 375-383. London: Thomas Telford.
Mair, R.J., Viggiani, G., Menkiti, C.O. Reduction and control of surface settlement
induced by shallow and deep excavations.
Mair, R.J., Harris, D.I., Love, J.P., Blakey, D. & Kettle, C. (1994). Compensation
grouting to limit settlements during tunnelling at Waterloo Station. Proceedings
of Conference Tunnelling 94, London, Institution of Mining and Metallurgy,
279-300, Chapman and Hall.
2
Mair, R.J. & Taylor R.N. (1997). Bored tunnelling in the urban environment. Stateof-the-art Report and Theme Lecture. Proceedings of the 14th International
Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Hamburg,
Balkema, Vol. 4., 2353-2385.
Mair, R.J. (2008). Tunnelling and geotechnics: new horizons. 46th Rankine Lecture,
Geotechnique 58, No, 9, 695-736
Martak, L. and Liebsch, H. Soil-fracturing in silt and clay New applications in the
Vienna Underground, Internationale Konferenzbetreffend Injektionen in Fels
und Beton, Salzburg, 1993. Osterreichische Gesellschaft fur Geomahanik.
Merritt, A.S., Borghi, F.X. &Mair, R.J. (2003). Conditioning of Clay soils for earth
pressure balance tunnelling machines. Proc. Underground Construction, London
Dockland, UK:455-466.
Merritt, A.S. (2004). Soil conditioning for earth pressure balance amchines.PhD
Thesis, Cambridge University.
Merritt, A.S. &Mair, R.J. (2006). Mechanics of tunnelling machine screw conveyors:
model tests. Geotechnique 56 (9) 605-615
Merritt, A.S. &Mair, R.J. (2008). Mechanics of tunnelling machine screw conveyors:
a theoretical model. Geotechnique 58, No.2, 79-94.
Page 64 of 66
197
Lee, K.M. & Rowe, R.K. (1991). An analysis of three dimensional ground
movements: Thunder Bay tunnel. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol 28, pp2541
Leinala, T., Grabinsky, M., Delmar, R. & Collins, J.R. (2000). Effects of foam soil
conditioning on EPBM performance. Proc. North American Tunnelling 00,
Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 514-524.
Le Project Cosmus:Une Methode observationnelle pour les injections de
compensation, ABTUS Study day on 08.12.2000 in Antwerp on compensation
grouting and visit of the works.
Maidl, U. (1995). Erweiterung der Einsatzbereiche der Erddruckschildedurch
Bodenkonditionierungmit Schaum. PhD thesis, Ruhr University, Bochum.
Maiorano, R.M.S., Viggiani, G.M.B. (2003). Observed movements above a tunnel on
pyroclastic ground. Proc. Int. Conf. on Response of buildings to excavationinduced ground movements, London. Jardine F.M. ed., CIRIA Special
Publication 201, pp 375-386.
Mair, R.J., Taylor, R.N. & Bracegirdle, A. (1993). Sub-surface settlement profiles
above tunnels in clays. Geotechnique.43 No.2, 315-320.
Mair, R.J. &Hight, D.W., (1994). Compensation grouting. World Tunnelling.
November 1994, 361-367.
Mair, R.J. (1994). Report on Session 4: Displacement Grouting. Proc. Conf.
Grouting in the Ground, ICE, Nov. 1992, 375-383. London: Thomas Telford.
Mair, R.J., Viggiani, G., Menkiti, C.O. Reduction and control of surface settlement
induced by shallow and deep excavations.
Mair, R.J., Harris, D.I., Love, J.P., Blakey, D. & Kettle, C. (1994). Compensation
grouting to limit settlements during tunnelling at Waterloo Station. Proceedings
of Conference Tunnelling 94, London, Institution of Mining and Metallurgy,
279-300, Chapman and Hall.
2
Mair, R.J. & Taylor R.N. (1997). Bored tunnelling in the urban environment. Stateof-the-art Report and Theme Lecture. Proceedings of the 14th International
Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Hamburg,
Balkema, Vol. 4., 2353-2385.
Mair, R.J. (2008). Tunnelling and geotechnics: new horizons. 46th Rankine Lecture,
Geotechnique 58, No, 9, 695-736
Martak, L. and Liebsch, H. Soil-fracturing in silt and clay New applications in the
Vienna Underground, Internationale Konferenzbetreffend Injektionen in Fels
und Beton, Salzburg, 1993. Osterreichische Gesellschaft fur Geomahanik.
Merritt, A.S., Borghi, F.X. &Mair, R.J. (2003). Conditioning of Clay soils for earth
pressure balance tunnelling machines. Proc. Underground Construction, London
Dockland, UK:455-466.
Merritt, A.S. (2004). Soil conditioning for earth pressure balance amchines.PhD
Thesis, Cambridge University.
Merritt, A.S. &Mair, R.J. (2006). Mechanics of tunnelling machine screw conveyors:
model tests. Geotechnique 56 (9) 605-615
Merritt, A.S. &Mair, R.J. (2008). Mechanics of tunnelling machine screw conveyors:
a theoretical model. Geotechnique 58, No.2, 79-94.
197
Lee, K.M. & Rowe, R.K. (1991). An analysis of three dimensional ground
movements: Thunder Bay tunnel. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol 28, pp2541
Leinala, T., Grabinsky, M., Delmar, R. & Collins, J.R. (2000). Effects of foam soil
conditioning on EPBM performance. Proc. North American Tunnelling 00,
Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 514-524.
Le Project Cosmus:Une Methode observationnelle pour les injections de
compensation, ABTUS Study day on 08.12.2000 in Antwerp on compensation
grouting and visit of the works.
Maidl, U. (1995). Erweiterung der Einsatzbereiche der Erddruckschildedurch
Bodenkonditionierungmit Schaum. PhD thesis, Ruhr University, Bochum.
Maiorano, R.M.S., Viggiani, G.M.B. (2003). Observed movements above a tunnel on
pyroclastic ground. Proc. Int. Conf. on Response of buildings to excavationinduced ground movements, London. Jardine F.M. ed., CIRIA Special
Publication 201, pp 375-386.
Mair, R.J., Taylor, R.N. & Bracegirdle, A. (1993). Sub-surface settlement profiles
above tunnels in clays. Geotechnique.43 No.2, 315-320.
Mair, R.J. &Hight, D.W., (1994). Compensation grouting. World Tunnelling.
November 1994, 361-367.
Mair, R.J. (1994). Report on Session 4: Displacement Grouting. Proc. Conf.
Grouting in the Ground, ICE, Nov. 1992, 375-383. London: Thomas Telford.
Mair, R.J., Viggiani, G., Menkiti, C.O. Reduction and control of surface settlement
induced by shallow and deep excavations.
Mair, R.J., Harris, D.I., Love, J.P., Blakey, D. & Kettle, C. (1994). Compensation
grouting to limit settlements during tunnelling at Waterloo Station. Proceedings
of Conference Tunnelling 94, London, Institution of Mining and Metallurgy,
279-300, Chapman and Hall.
2
Mair, R.J. & Taylor R.N. (1997). Bored tunnelling in the urban environment. Stateof-the-art Report and Theme Lecture. Proceedings of the 14th International
Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Hamburg,
Balkema, Vol. 4., 2353-2385.
Mair, R.J. (2008). Tunnelling and geotechnics: new horizons. 46th Rankine Lecture,
Geotechnique 58, No, 9, 695-736
Martak, L. and Liebsch, H. Soil-fracturing in silt and clay New applications in the
Vienna Underground, Internationale Konferenzbetreffend Injektionen in Fels
und Beton, Salzburg, 1993. Osterreichische Gesellschaft fur Geomahanik.
Merritt, A.S., Borghi, F.X. &Mair, R.J. (2003). Conditioning of Clay soils for earth
pressure balance tunnelling machines. Proc. Underground Construction, London
Dockland, UK:455-466.
Merritt, A.S. (2004). Soil conditioning for earth pressure balance amchines.PhD
Thesis, Cambridge University.
Merritt, A.S. &Mair, R.J. (2006). Mechanics of tunnelling machine screw conveyors:
model tests. Geotechnique 56 (9) 605-615
Merritt, A.S. &Mair, R.J. (2008). Mechanics of tunnelling machine screw conveyors:
a theoretical model. Geotechnique 58, No.2, 79-94.
197A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Page 64 of 66
109A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
197
197A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 64 of 66
Page 64 of 66
198
109B_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Page 65 of 66
Page 65 of 66
198
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
198
198A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
198A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
198
Page 65 of 66
Page 65 of 66
199
Conf. on Grouting and Ground Treatment 1, (eds Johnsen, L.F., Bruce, D.A. and
Byle, M.J.) New Orleans, 1518-1533.
Standing J.R. and Burland, J.B. (2006). Unexpected tunnelling volume losses in the
Westminster area, London, Geotechnique, Vol 56 pages 11-26
Viggiani, G.M.B. (2001). Grout intensities. Ch 20 of Building response to tunnelling
case studies from construction of the Jubilee Line Extension, London. Volume
1: Projects and methods. Burland, J.B., Standing, J.R. and F.M. Jardine eds.
(CIRIA Special Publication 200, CIRIA and Thomas Telford), pp 311-314.
Viggiani, G.M.B., de Sanctis, L., Mandolini, A. (2007). Monitoraggio di
scavi :lesperienzadella Linea 1 dellaMetropilitana di Napoli. Proc XXIII
ConvegnoNazionale di Geotecnica previsione e controlle del
comportamentodellaopere - AbanoTerme
Viggiani, G.M.B., Standing, J.R. (2001) The treasury. Ch 26 of Building response to
tunnelling case studies from construction of the Jubilee Line Extension,
London.Volume 2, Case Studies.Burland, J.B., Standing, J.R. and F.M. Jardine
eds. (CIRIA Special Publication 200, CIRIA and Thomas Telford), pp 401-432
Woods, E., Battye, G., Bowers, K. and Mimnagh, F. (2007). Channel Tunnel Rail
Link Section 2: London Tunnels. Proc ICE. Civil Engineering, 160, November
2007, 24-28, paper 700008.
Wongsaroj. J. Borghi, F.X., Soga, K., Mair, R.J., Sugiyama, T., Hagiwara, T. &
Bowers, K.J. (2005). Effect of TBM driving parameters on ground surface
movements: Channel Tunnel Rail Link Contract 220. Geotechnical Aspects of
Underground Construction in Soft Ground. Bakker et al. (eds) 2006 Taylor &
Francis Group, London, ISBN 0 415 39124 5, pp 335-341
World Tunnelling (2008) Another fine mesh, World Tunnelling, Nov 2008,
www.world-tunnelling.com/features/another-fine-mesh
Conf. on Grouting and Ground Treatment 1, (eds Johnsen, L.F., Bruce, D.A. and
Byle, M.J.) New Orleans, 1518-1533.
Standing J.R. and Burland, J.B. (2006). Unexpected tunnelling volume losses in the
Westminster area, London, Geotechnique, Vol 56 pages 11-26
Viggiani, G.M.B. (2001). Grout intensities. Ch 20 of Building response to tunnelling
case studies from construction of the Jubilee Line Extension, London. Volume
1: Projects and methods. Burland, J.B., Standing, J.R. and F.M. Jardine eds.
(CIRIA Special Publication 200, CIRIA and Thomas Telford), pp 311-314.
Viggiani, G.M.B., de Sanctis, L., Mandolini, A. (2007). Monitoraggio di
scavi :lesperienzadella Linea 1 dellaMetropilitana di Napoli. Proc XXIII
ConvegnoNazionale di Geotecnica previsione e controlle del
comportamentodellaopere - AbanoTerme
Viggiani, G.M.B., Standing, J.R. (2001) The treasury. Ch 26 of Building response to
tunnelling case studies from construction of the Jubilee Line Extension,
London.Volume 2, Case Studies.Burland, J.B., Standing, J.R. and F.M. Jardine
eds. (CIRIA Special Publication 200, CIRIA and Thomas Telford), pp 401-432
Woods, E., Battye, G., Bowers, K. and Mimnagh, F. (2007). Channel Tunnel Rail
Link Section 2: London Tunnels. Proc ICE. Civil Engineering, 160, November
2007, 24-28, paper 700008.
Wongsaroj. J. Borghi, F.X., Soga, K., Mair, R.J., Sugiyama, T., Hagiwara, T. &
Bowers, K.J. (2005). Effect of TBM driving parameters on ground surface
movements: Channel Tunnel Rail Link Contract 220. Geotechnical Aspects of
Underground Construction in Soft Ground. Bakker et al. (eds) 2006 Taylor &
Francis Group, London, ISBN 0 415 39124 5, pp 335-341
World Tunnelling (2008) Another fine mesh, World Tunnelling, Nov 2008,
www.world-tunnelling.com/features/another-fine-mesh
Page 66 of 66
199
Conf. on Grouting and Ground Treatment 1, (eds Johnsen, L.F., Bruce, D.A. and
Byle, M.J.) New Orleans, 1518-1533.
Standing J.R. and Burland, J.B. (2006). Unexpected tunnelling volume losses in the
Westminster area, London, Geotechnique, Vol 56 pages 11-26
Viggiani, G.M.B. (2001). Grout intensities. Ch 20 of Building response to tunnelling
case studies from construction of the Jubilee Line Extension, London. Volume
1: Projects and methods. Burland, J.B., Standing, J.R. and F.M. Jardine eds.
(CIRIA Special Publication 200, CIRIA and Thomas Telford), pp 311-314.
Viggiani, G.M.B., de Sanctis, L., Mandolini, A. (2007). Monitoraggio di
scavi :lesperienzadella Linea 1 dellaMetropilitana di Napoli. Proc XXIII
ConvegnoNazionale di Geotecnica previsione e controlle del
comportamentodellaopere - AbanoTerme
Viggiani, G.M.B., Standing, J.R. (2001) The treasury. Ch 26 of Building response to
tunnelling case studies from construction of the Jubilee Line Extension,
London.Volume 2, Case Studies.Burland, J.B., Standing, J.R. and F.M. Jardine
eds. (CIRIA Special Publication 200, CIRIA and Thomas Telford), pp 401-432
Woods, E., Battye, G., Bowers, K. and Mimnagh, F. (2007). Channel Tunnel Rail
Link Section 2: London Tunnels. Proc ICE. Civil Engineering, 160, November
2007, 24-28, paper 700008.
Wongsaroj. J. Borghi, F.X., Soga, K., Mair, R.J., Sugiyama, T., Hagiwara, T. &
Bowers, K.J. (2005). Effect of TBM driving parameters on ground surface
movements: Channel Tunnel Rail Link Contract 220. Geotechnical Aspects of
Underground Construction in Soft Ground. Bakker et al. (eds) 2006 Taylor &
Francis Group, London, ISBN 0 415 39124 5, pp 335-341
World Tunnelling (2008) Another fine mesh, World Tunnelling, Nov 2008,
www.world-tunnelling.com/features/another-fine-mesh
199
Conf. on Grouting and Ground Treatment 1, (eds Johnsen, L.F., Bruce, D.A. and
Byle, M.J.) New Orleans, 1518-1533.
Standing J.R. and Burland, J.B. (2006). Unexpected tunnelling volume losses in the
Westminster area, London, Geotechnique, Vol 56 pages 11-26
Viggiani, G.M.B. (2001). Grout intensities. Ch 20 of Building response to tunnelling
case studies from construction of the Jubilee Line Extension, London. Volume
1: Projects and methods. Burland, J.B., Standing, J.R. and F.M. Jardine eds.
(CIRIA Special Publication 200, CIRIA and Thomas Telford), pp 311-314.
Viggiani, G.M.B., de Sanctis, L., Mandolini, A. (2007). Monitoraggio di
scavi :lesperienzadella Linea 1 dellaMetropilitana di Napoli. Proc XXIII
ConvegnoNazionale di Geotecnica previsione e controlle del
comportamentodellaopere - AbanoTerme
Viggiani, G.M.B., Standing, J.R. (2001) The treasury. Ch 26 of Building response to
tunnelling case studies from construction of the Jubilee Line Extension,
London.Volume 2, Case Studies.Burland, J.B., Standing, J.R. and F.M. Jardine
eds. (CIRIA Special Publication 200, CIRIA and Thomas Telford), pp 401-432
Woods, E., Battye, G., Bowers, K. and Mimnagh, F. (2007). Channel Tunnel Rail
Link Section 2: London Tunnels. Proc ICE. Civil Engineering, 160, November
2007, 24-28, paper 700008.
Wongsaroj. J. Borghi, F.X., Soga, K., Mair, R.J., Sugiyama, T., Hagiwara, T. &
Bowers, K.J. (2005). Effect of TBM driving parameters on ground surface
movements: Channel Tunnel Rail Link Contract 220. Geotechnical Aspects of
Underground Construction in Soft Ground. Bakker et al. (eds) 2006 Taylor &
Francis Group, London, ISBN 0 415 39124 5, pp 335-341
World Tunnelling (2008) Another fine mesh, World Tunnelling, Nov 2008,
www.world-tunnelling.com/features/another-fine-mesh
199A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by dml u on 12/29/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Page 66 of 66
110A_PB_4out_Same_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Final.job_Process Black_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Cyan_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Magenta_08/07/2012_05:31:52
Yellow_08/07/2012_05:31:52
199
199A_50835_ASCE_Vol_01_Txt_Resize_AA.job_Process Black_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Cyan_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Magenta_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Yellow_08/01/2012_10:49:40
Page 66 of 66
Page 66 of 66