"Process control in mechanized urban tunnelling"

By Vittorio Guglielmetti

1. Introduction.

Tunnelling is a complex process, and tunnelling in urban areas is even more complex and
needs special care for disturbing as little as possible the integrity of the ground surface and
the built-up environment above.
Nowadays we have a powerful method for excavating tunnels in urban environment: the use
of Tunnel Boring Machines (TBMs) or “mechanized tunnelling”, due to the low disturb of the
daily activities of the cities, assuring at the same time quality, safety, and the project’s target
in term of time & cost.
Furthermore, tunnelling by using Closed-face Machines (which is necessary in urban
environment) is “factory” like, not the “mining” type. This means a safer work environment
for the workers, but also a more industrialized process, which is based on standard
operations during working cycle, being thus possible or even let say “easy” to control.
A robust control system for the excavation process is necessary for being ready to react in
time to anomalies situations, based on the analysis of various parameters, but of course not
on the direct analysis of the ground conditions, because excavation face is not visible, when
tunnelling with Closed-face Machines, except during maintenance interventions into the
working chamber.
The operating control system is so important, that the British Tunnelling Society in its book
“Closed-face Tunnelling Machines and Ground Stability – a Guideline for Best Practice”
(Thomas Telford Publishing, 2005), has written:

“The correct choice of machine

operated without
the correct management and operating controls
is as bad as choosing the wrong type of machine for the project”
(BTS/ICE, 2005)

2. Why to control?

All existing guidelines for underground works require:

• A Solid Design based on site investigations, geotechnical interpretation, design
calculations and necessary studies
• The choice of the most appropriate excavation method
• A Monitoring Plan with definition of threshold values for the key parameters to be
checked during construction
• Detailed Technical Specifications & Method Statements for construction
In addition to all this, for assuring the necessary performance to the project it is needed:
• An Experienced Contractor
• A Designer Representative on site to follow the implementation of his design
• A Resident Engineer responsible for construction supervision
Clearly, all of the above elements are necessary, but they are not enough.
Too much incidents have been experienced, when excavating in urban environment, and
collapses can heavily injure third parties and/or cause serious damages to people and private
properties.
We shall wonder ourselves why do accidents occur, despite we are following correct rules
and guidelines, and we are using the right methods?
The causes can be many and various like, among others:
• Variability & uncertainty in geological, geotechnical and hydrological conditions,
• Deviation of ground behavior from predicted
• Lack of excavation process control, due to:

Lack of timely interpretation of monitoring data;

Lack of (adequate) counter-measures;
• Human factors.
Due to the first two points, a probabilistic approach is necessary, based on a rigorous risk
analysis, which, starting from a Robust Design not based on deterministic parameters values,
lead to identify and evaluate all the possible hazards and their relevant probabilities and
consequences.
After that, for facing the other points, a complete and effective process control system shall
be implemented, which include:
• Design a Monitoring Plan, with definition of Thresholds for the key parameters to be
measured and controlled;
• Predefine the counter-measures, necessary in case of anomalies should occur or
thresholds should be trespassed; and prepare an appropriate mechanism for their
activation;
• Collect in real time the monitoring data and share them among all people involved, in
order to:
• Take the Right Decision at the Right Time.
The theory states that in a control system, the output of a process is fed back through the
measurement of the output parameters which have to be compared with reference values;
the result of comparison shall be to verify that the output parameter values are included
into the operational ranges (between the minimum – maximum thresholds).
The controller then takes the error (i.e. the difference between the output and the
reference) for changing, if and when necessary, the inputs to the system under control, with
the aim to get back the output values into the correct range.
Of course, when the process is complex like Tunnel Construction, things get harder, but let
say, even more necessary.
So, for measuring the output data, we need a monitoring system, which is generally made by
two parts: one for surface monitoring, and one for underground monitoring.

It is absolutely necessary to integrate all the data in one data-base, which collect and record
1. Monitoring data of surface and utilities;
2. Monitoring data of buildings;
3. Environmental monitoring (air, noise and vibrations);
4. Hydrological data (piezometers reading)
5. extenso-inclinometers measurements
6. Underground data, i.e. TBM parameters
 Design specifications

Tu n n e l + Tu n n e l YES Output
Monitoring
Design - Construction System

NO

Counter-
measures

There are usually a huge quantity of data to be examined in real time, plus a quantity of
recorded data to review and compare for understand what has happened and what to do for
obtaining the desired results.
What is important is to have in mind that the data logger with all its recorded data is working
like a flight recorder (the black-box of the airplanes), but we shall have the presumption to
use these data not only to understand the causes of an incident, but for avoiding it.
The purpose of our control system is to prevent accidents, not to explain them “a
posteriori”, looking for a possible guilty (too often identified in the “unforeseen and
unforeseeable” behaviour of the ground).

Apply and/or modify

Design and countermeasures
• What/If S=S1/S2?
Construction control • What/If L=L1/L2
Define critical Define threshold values
parameters • Settlement: S1=alert,
• Settlement S2=warning Y ES
• Load, etc • Load: L1=alert, L2=warning
are
S>S1?
L>L1
• Measure Compare with
• Analyze/Valida threshold values.

N OT
Ok
excavation continues

The control system activation gives real-time warnings to the process controllers, even
before the threshold values are being exceeded, when their trend is showing a tendency to
the limits, thus allowing the prompt adoption of counter measures.
 3. What and How to control?

Urban Tunnelling means to use Closed-face-Machines, i.e. Slurry or EPB TBM.

Let us look at which parameters and in which way we can control the excavation process in
the two types of machine.

SLURRY SHIELD CONTROL

The following are the key excavation-parameter values to be measured on the Hydroshield
(or Slurry Shield, like it is called generally today)

Parameters Control system

Pressure at the face:

Compressed air pressure and TBM automatic system plus slurry level control
slurry pressure
Slurry level in the chamber Automatic (or manual) control system for feeding and
extraction pumps
Quality of the slurry:
Viscosity, Yield value, density, On site laboratory
cake thickness
Quantity and quality of Calculations derived from double measurement system
mucked material (density and flow) as well observations at the treatment
plant
Segment mortar grouting Injection pumps, manometers and automatic control system

It would be interesting to examine some activities to be done when “anomalies” occur

during excavation.
 - i - The pressure in the chamber decreases.

This implies a loss of bentonite slurry. The regulating system increase inflows of compressed
air. The level of bentonite has to be corrected to the previous value, operating by means of
the feeding pump and/or the discharge pump.

- The pressure in the chamber suddenly increases.

This means that there is a possible inflow of excavated ground into the plenum. The system
reacts by discharging compressed air. The bentonite level must be immediately recovered
and kept under control. The volume of mucked material shall be checked: it must be the
same or less than the theoretical value.

- iii - The slurry level in the chamber decreases. (1)

Loss of slurry – and consequently loss of the relevant pressure – could be caused by ground
fissures, ancient wells, open piezometers, and unsealed boreholes. In this case, the slurry
level could drop below the bottom of the “front bulkhead”, and the air flow into the upper
front section, just against the excavation face and the support of slurry cake could be
eliminated. This condition could be manageable in case the compressed air pressure is kept
constant (no escapes) due to the low permeability of the encountered soils. Excavation can
go ahead by taking special precautions: reducing muck flows and feeding the chamber with
bentonite slurry with higher Yield value and density. On the other hand, when sandy soils or
soils with higher permeability are encountered, air could escape through the ground and the
front becomes unstable
Additional air is pushed into the chamber by the automatic compressed-air regulating
system. The slurry level must be increased to the correct figure; otherwise, the confinement
pressure will give an insufficient value (see Figure). Therefore, the corrective measures shall
be implemented: increasing the inflow through the feeding pump and, if necessary,
decreasing the flow of the return pump).

- iv - The slurry level in the chamber increases.

The automatic regulating system discharges air. The slurry level must return to the correct
value, otherwise the pressure will increase.
This could be a very dangerous situation as consequence of material entering into the
chamber due to a face collapse. Another possible cause could be some difficulty into the
discharge line (see next point).

- v - The extracted soil quantity is smaller than the theoretical.

It is necessary to check whether less dense in-situ soil is encountered or obstructions (like
boulders or plugging) appear in the chamber suction zone or along the return circuit. In the
latter case, the obstruction must be localised and the relevant pipeline section cleaned (and
the TBM temporarily stopped). Otherwise, high-pressure water jets, installed close to the
chamber suction point, could be used for cleaning the obstruction. In some cases, the slurry
flow could be inverted as well, using the circuit by-pass. But the crusher (potentially present
inside the chamber) could be an obstacle to this jetting operation and, furthermore, specific
combination of the size of boulders and the soil consistency could make this measure
inefficient. Therefore, access to the chamber could be required.

The extracted soil quantities are higher than the theoretical values.

A cross-check between the pressure and the slurry levels in the chamber is mandatory to
verify the face stability. In fact, such an event could provide a warning about the potential
existence of a chimney. It could even create or increase the effect of chimney. Advance
speed must be immediately reduced and the return pump-flow reduced, eventually
increasing the feeding flow as well.
A significant change of inclination of the graph showing the dry quantity of extracted
material, can signify two equally dangerous things: (a) the beginning of a loss of slurry out of
the face into the surrounding ground, with consequent loss of extracted material, or (b) the
start of a blockage on the out-pumping system due, for instance, to boulders at the
aspiration point, or the formation of blockages along the first stretch of the pipeline.
Conversely, a sudden increase of slope of the curve, which is less frequent but even more
worrying, would signify a sudden unexpected “ingress” of solid material in the chamber, i.e.
the possible beginning of face instability with the danger of collapse, or at least the
beginning of an over-excavation.
The most adequate control consists in verifying the successive mortar grouting parameters
in the affected area.
EPB Machine CONTROL

The following are the fundamental parameters that are necessary for monitoring the process
and controlling the excavation (in the form of graphs and tables).

• Pressure in the excavation chamber and along the screw conveyor.

• Extracted quantity of material (in volume and/or in weight).
• Apparent density of the material into the chamber
• Volume and pressure of injected grout in the annular gap.
• Torque, stroke, rotating speed of the cutterhead, and TBM advancement speed.
 Head chainage (m)

631,6

637,2

642,8

648,4

654,0

659,6

665,2

670,8

676,4

682,0

687,6

693,2

698,8

704,4

710,0

715,6

721,2

726,8

732,4

738,0

743,6

749,2

754,8

760,4

766,0

771,6

777,2

782,8

788,4

794,0

799,6

805,2

810,8

816,4

822,0

827,6

833,2

838,8

844,4

850,0

855,6

861,2

866,8

872,4

878,0

883,6

889,2

894,8

900,4

906,0
4,0 4,0
NOTE: Lower and upper limits are the ones
defined in the "Folha da Escavaçâo".
3,5 3,5

3,0
recorded pressure operational range 3,0
r)

r)
a

a
res(b

res(b
2,5 2,5
ssu

ssu
re

re
2,0 2,0
ep

ep
7averag

7averag
1,5 1,5
P

P
1,0 1,0

0,5 0,5

0,0 0,0
6

2
33

34

34

34

35

35

36

36

36

37

37

38

38

38

39

39

40

40

40

41

41

42

42

42

43

43

44

44

44

45

45

46

46

46

47

47

48

48

48

49

49

50

50

50

51

51

52

52

52

53
Mounted ring number
H e a d c h a in a g e ( m )
631,6

637,2

642,8

648,4

654,0

659,6

665,2

670,8

676,4

682,0

687,6

693,2

698,8

704,4

710,0

715,6

721,2

726,8

732,4

738,0

743,6

749,2

754,8

760,4

766,0

771,6

777,2

782,8

788,4

794,0

799,6

805,2

810,8

816,4

822,0

827,6

833,2

838,8

844,4

850,0

855,6

861,2

866,8

872,4

878,0

883,6

889,2

894,8

900,4

906,0
300 300
N O T E : L o w e r a n d u p p e r lim its a r e d e f in e d
u s i n g t h e i n - s i tu d e n s i t i e s a f te r th e f a c e
su rve ys.
250 250

200 200
Weight (t)

Weight (t)
150 150

100 100

Extracted weight
50 50

0 0
336

340

344

348

352

356

360

364

368

372

376

380

384

388

392

396

400

404

408

412

416

420

424

428

432

436

440

444

448

452

456

460

464

468

472

476

480

484

488

492

496

500

504

508

512

516

520

524

528

532
M o u n te d r i n g n u m b e r

The control of “face support pressure” is necessary to ensure that the face stability is
maintained during the EPBS advance but also during the stoppages. The support pressure is
applied, within the excavation chamber (plenum), via the excavated and appropriately
conditioned muck, by the pushing of the thrust jacks.
During the design stage, the reference value, at the crown level or at tunnel centreline (to be
measured through the relevant sensors in the excavation chamber), and the relevant
operational range (high and low threshold limits) are defined.
First of all, the chamber shall be maintained full of muck mixed with conditioning additives
(typically foam and polymers). If the chamber is not full of “stiff” material, all the actions
here described are not effective, and even the face support cannot be assured. Maybe “stiff”
is not the correct word; the muck shall have a “paste” consistency, like a tooth-paste.
During excavation, if the pressure decreases below the threshold value, the operator
reduces the screw conveyor rotation speed (i.e. reduces the outgoing volume), thus
favouring the material accumulation into the chamber, and, therefore, the increase of the
pressure until the safe value is re-established. The opposite action would be necessary in
case of increasing of the pressure value.
The final purpose is to maintain the “earth pressure” value within a ‘safe operating’ range.
The following is what has to be done for controlling face support pressure:

During excavation:

• Verification of pressure variations in relation to the varying operating conditions:

- rotation speed of the screw conveyor at the corresponding rate of advance and
vice-versa;
- pressure variation as a function of the total thrust, under a steady rotation speed of
the screw conveyor;
- and verification of the torque values as a function of the thrust and plenum
pressure.
• Control that the pressure in the excavation chamber (e.g. average value measured at
the crown sensors) is always within the range established at the design stage.
During standstill:

The thrust is now reduced to the minimum and the muck in the chamber will tend to
consolidate due to the effect of gravity, thus separating the solids from the aerial and lighter
components (e.g. the air contained in the foams). In this case, the pressure should be
controlled so that it does not fall excessively and, if needed, bentonite injections should be
used to re-establish the design levels.
For this purpose, the Secondary Face Support System (SFSS) has been demonstrated to be
useful. If possible, the air present in the chamber should also be eliminated via an exhaust
valve, located close to the crown of the front shield.
One pressurized tank filled with bentonite slurry is installed on the TBM back-up and one
pump can inject it into the chamber through a pipe and a valve.
When the pressure into the chamber should decrease below the lower threshold, the
pressure sensor opens the valve and the slurry is pushed into the chamber. Under condition
that the chamber be full of “stiff” material, injecting a small quantity of bentonite slurry is
enough to restore the pressure (see the following figure, where the red line represents the
pressure and the black one the slurry quantity).

P7 bulkhead pressure bentonite total volume

Date
18.09.2001

18.09.2001

18.09.2001

19.09.2001

19.09.2001

19.09.2001
18.09.2001

18.09.2001

18.09.2001

18.0 9.2001

18.09.2001

18.09.2001

18.09.2001

18.09.2001

18.09.2001

18.09.2001

18.09.2001

18.09.2001

18.09.2001

19.09.2001

19.09.2001

19.09.2001

19.09.2001

19.09.2001

19.09.2001

19.09.2001

19.09.2001

19.09.2001

19.09.2001

19.09.2001

19.09.2001

19.09.2001

19.09.2001
2,5 2,5

2,0 2,0
Bentonite total volume (m )

P7 bulkhead pressure (bar)

3

1,5 1,5

1,0 1,0

0,5 0,5

0,0 0,0
18:48:00

19:21:20

22:41:20

02:34:31

03:07:51

06:27:51
15:28:00

16:01:20

16:34:40

17:0 8:00

17:41:20

18:14:40

19:54:40

20:28:00

21:01:20

21:34:40

22:08:00

23:14:40

23:48:00

00:21:11

00:54:31

01:27:51

02:01:11

03:41:11

04:14:31

04:47:51

05:21:11

05:54:31

07:01:11

07:34:31

08:07:51

08:41:11

09:14:31

Time

For controlling the “extracted weight”, the most efficient method so far tested is to install a
scale on the EPBS belt, which transfers the muck from the screw conveyor to the tunnel
mucking system, be it a continuous belt or muck wagons. In this manner, it is possible to
measure the extracted material weight and to have a continuous measurement. By time-
integrating the instantaneous extracted weight, the cumulative value of the extracted
weight is obtained. Through an evaluation of the in-situ density of the material, its volume
can be derived and compared with the theoretical value, which represents the quantity of
material that can be effectively excavated.
This type of control avoids excavating beyond the theoretical volume (over-excavation),
which can be the most dangerous condition, leading to increase ground-loss and
consequently to induce surface settlements or even face collapse.
The controls to be implemented are:
• Calibration of the scales, both statically and dynamically using a known weight.
• Verification of the relationship between the weight of the extracted material and
rotation speed of the screw conveyor for the same penetration rate (during
excavation), and vice versa.
• In situ material density evaluation with regular observation and controls of the face
condition and controlling the muck.
• Water flow-meter calibration for the quantity of water loaded with the conditioning
additives; instrument calibration of the cumulative water pumped at the face during
the whole excavation cycle.

The “apparent density” provides an indication of the consistency of the material in the
excavation chamber (in relation to the conditioning effect characterised by liquid and aerial
components), as well as its capacity to supply adequate face support pressure. It also gives
an effective indication of the filling rate of the plenum.
The apparent density (γapp) can be easily calculated as the ratio between the differences of
the pressure values (∆P) measured by two sensors at two adjacent levels and their vertical
distance (∆h).

γapp = ∆P / ∆h
Remember this is not a real “physical parameter”, it is only a good “marker” of what
happens into the excavation chamber.
 AVERAGE APPARENT DENSITY INSIDE THE CHAMBER
(= Difference between pressure of sensors n.7 and 1,6 divided for 2m)

during standstill during advance Lower limit

30 30

25 25
Average apparent density (kN/m3)

Average apparent density (kN/m3)

20 20

15 15

10 10

5 5

0 0
3 92

52 4
336
340
344
348
352
356
360
364
368
372
376
380
384
388

396
400
404
408
412
416
420
424
428
432
436
440
444
448
452
456
460
464
468
472
476
480
484
488
492
496
500
504
508
512
516
520

528
532
Mounted ring number

The control of grouting behind the lining segment is made by controlling pressure and
volume of injection, which shall be implemented during the excavation
The following controls are necessary:
• - Control that the grouting operation is carried out concurrently with the excavation
and accordingly to the foreseen procedures;
• - Control that the final injected-grout volumes correspond to the design range.
• - Execute systematically boring-sample tests to check the effectiveness of the filling.
• - Make laboratory tests on site on the backfill grout to evaluate its consistency and
deformability.
• - Verify the adequate greasing of the shield’s tail brushes (and of the gaps between
the brush rings) to avoid grout inflow during the backfill operations.

4. Lessons learned:

All urban underground projects shall be based on a rigorous Risk Analysis, which leads to
identify, evaluate, and minimize all the potential hazards.

- ‘No construction project is risk free. Risk can be managed, minimized, shared,
transferred, or simply accepted, but it cannot be ignored’. (Sir Michael Latham,
1994).

The correct choice of the machine should be considered as one of the “primary risk-
mitigation measures” for controlling the effects of tunnelling in urban areas.
The design of a rigorous system for controlling the excavation represents a true and proper
“secondary counter measure” aimed at further containing the residual risks.

- Be wise ‘a priori’: nowadays the “unexpected” is no longer acceptable from a risk

management point of view.