Professional Documents
Culture Documents
16 November 2016
Steigenberger Hotel, Maslak - Istanbul, Turkey
1
CAUTION
¾ In this report the remarks, evaluations made and conclusion drawn, that are under
progress, do not reflect the opinions of Yapı Merkezi Construction and Industry Inc. No
liability for negligence or otherwise can be accepted by Yapı Merkezi.
¾ © 2016 Yapı Merkezi Construction and Industry Inc. All Rights Reserved. Except as
otherwise permitted by Yapı Merkezi Construction and Industry Inc., this publication, or
parts thereof, may not be reproduced in any form, by any method, for any purpose.
¾ http://www.ym.com.tr/
2
CONTENT
¾ Project in Brief
¾ Seismicity
¾ Geology
Marmara Sea
¾ Geotechnics
¾ Advance Rates
¾ Standstills
¾ Excavation Parameters
¾ Conclusions
Trakya Formation
¾ Acknowledgements
Source: ATAŞ (2014)
3
PROJECT IN BRIEF
¾ Model: Build – Operate – Transfer ¾ Total Project Length: 14.6 km ¾ 1st and 2nd bridges (total 7x2 lanes)
¾ Total Investment: ~1,3 Billion $ • Part-1: Europe side (5,4 km) • 180.000 (1st) and 220.000 (2nd) crossings
¾ Construction Period: 55 Months per day
• Road and tunnel structures
• Part-2: Bosphorus Crossing (5,4 km) ¾ Eurasia Tunnel (2x2 lanes)
¾ Operation Period: ~ 26 Years • Part-3: Asia side (3,8 km) • 110.000 crossings per day (both directions)
4
PROJECT PARTIES
OWNER GUARANTOR
Republic of Turkey Prime Ministry
Ministry of Transportation Undersecretariat of Treasury
General Directorate of Infrastructure Investments
INVESTOR / CONTRACTOR SPECIAL PURPOSE COMPANY
Eurasia Tunnel Operation Const. & Invest. Inc.
Yapı Merkezi Construction Inc.
ADVISORS
SUBJECT SPONSORS’ ADVISORS LENDERS’ ADVISORS
TRAFFIC Jacobs Engineering Group Arup Group Ltd..
ENVIRONMENTAL ERM Environmental Resources Mangt. Arup Group Ltd.
& SOCIAL
INSURANCE Marsh Insurance Ltd.
JLT Jardine Lloyd Thompson Group
LEGAL Hergüner Attorney Partnership
Fidan & Fidan Law Firm
Skadden LLP
Clifford Chance LLP
FINANCE UniCredit Group
TAX PricewaterhouseCoopers PricewaterhouseCoopers
5
PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
,WP ,CP (GD &GE /CT ,WN #WI
` (GD (GD (GD ,CP ,WN 5GR #RT &GE &GE
6
SUCCESSFUL SUBSEA TUNNELLING UNDER BOSPHORUS: MELEN PROJECT
¾ Contractor: STFA + Mosmetrostoy ve Türk ALKE Sarıyer
Beykoz
¾ Project Cost: ~120 milyon US$
¾ Tunnel Length: 5,5 km
Avrupa
¾ EPB-TBM Diameter: 6,15 m -operated in open mode-
with "0" face pressure Yakası Anadolu
Yakası
¾ Minimum Rock Cover Thickness: 35 m
¾ Maximum Depth TBM Tunnel: 135 m (70m-sea)
Ölçeksiz
¾ Formasyon: Dolayoba/Kartal formation Source: Anagnostou (2010) and Bakır et al. (2011)
¾Clayey limestone, limestone-shale, sandstone, GSI: 45-64 (subsea section), several dykes (andesite/diabase) with 1-70 m thickness
¾ Started in March-2008 and finished in April-2009 (one month earlier than planned)
Alüvyon
7
MAIN CHANGES OF EURASIA TUNNEL AFTER FIELD INVES.&PRELIMINARY STUDIES
¾ Eurasia tunnel Project with actual parameters is an unique Project in the World tunnel literature.
8
SEISMICALLY ACTIVE FAULT SEGMENTS IN THE MARMARA REGION
Eurasia Tunnel
9
SEISMIC JOINTS
Behav
Behavior
havviorr o
off th
the
hee tu
tunnel
unnne
ell unde
e underr an
u an earthquak
earthquake
e akke
wass des
designed
d essigne
ned d for
f r a mome
moment
m meent
ntt magnitude
m dee of
o
Mw = 7,2 ,25 and
,25 a d d design n off func
ffunctional
ncctional
all and
a
safetyy eva
evaluation
e va
aluation earearthquakes
e arrthqquakes s hhave e bee
been
b eeen
analyzed
ana lyz d ac
lyzed according
cc
cordi
rding to t rreturn
eturn period
periods
riodds of
5000 and d 2.500
. 0 years r s, respectively ly.
ly
Shearr ± 50 mm
10
TBM TUNNEL GEOLOGY OF EURASIA TUNNEL
¾ Asia Side Full face Trakya Formation with different joint, stiffness
and abrasiveness (sandstone, mudstone, dykes) ≈ 564 m
¾ Asia Mixed face (weak and weathered rock mass and marine sediments) ≈ 112 m
11
ROCK MASS CHARACTERIZATION IN TRAKYA FORMATION
Range of Block Volume -gravel sized-
¾Geological Strength Index (Cai et al. 2004)
Expected GSI Values
¾ Block Volume
ࡿଵ ൈ ࡿଶ ൈ ࡿଷ
ࢂ࢈ ൌ ൎ ࡿଷ
ࢽ ܖܑܛଵ ൈ ࢽ ܖܑܛଶ ൈ ࢽ ܖܑܛଷ
12
VARIATION OF UNIAXIAL COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH WITH DEPTH
ഥ = mean value
ࢄ
s = standard deviation
V = coefficient of variation (%),
V=s/ࢄ ഥ x100
Source:
Yapı Merkezi
R&D (2010)
13
GENERAL OUTLOOK ON MARINE SEDIMENTS
¾ Properties of marine sediments based on cone penetration test (CPT) and measured shear wave
velocity from P/S logging.
¾ Marine sediments (Holecene aged, 7400 ± 1300) varies from coarse-grained soils (gravels and sand) to fine
grained soils (silts and clays) and change both vertically and laterally as a result of sedimental regime.
¾ The coarse-grained soils (usually silty/clayey fine sand) are dense. The sands own high stiffness under high
confining pressure.
¾ Generally speaking, the marine sediments that are normally to lightly overconsolidated at the tunnel axis
depth and consist of inter-bedded sands, silts and clay. The soils appear to be normally consolidated i.e.
OCR≈1, many design properties (undrained shear strength -cohesion value-, stiffness) enhance with depth.
¾ As for the effective internal friction angle (ɐN) for sandy soils can be estimated from the modified equation
(Kulhawy and Mayne, 1990):
ɐNൌ ૠǤ ൈ ܗܔǤ ൈ ࢉ ൈ ࢠǤ (qc= measured cone tip resistance in MPa; z = depth from sea bottom surface in meters)
¾ Some carbonates due to shell of micro/macro organisms are observed throughout the depth of soils up
to 35% CaCO3 at (mean value 25%) Project site. These carbonates were believed in increase "liquefaction
resistance" of sandy soils during seismic loading owing to their roughness structure and reduce in
abrasion.
14
PREDICTED AND MEASURED EFFECTIVE INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE
Note: Robertson (2009) was used for predicted values. Xm = mean value, Xk(1) = characteristic
value based on student value method, , Xk(2) = characteristic value based on Schneider's method. Source: Yapı Merkezi R&D Department, 2010©
15
BOREHOLE BH1-5
16
SOME ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES OF BOREHOLES
BHJ-1 BH1-4 BHJ-5
17
EXISTENCE OF DYKE ZONES
In Trakya Formation, Sandstone/Mudstone layers cut through dykes (andesite and diabase).
Such a geological setting creates a different rock mass medium with variable stiffness.
Andesite/Diabase dykes have uniaxial compressive strengths more than 200 MPa.
Cherchar Abrasive Index (CAI) is an indication of cutter disc/tools wear rate and in the case
of dykes, this index increases up to 4.5 (extremely abrasive).
Pink
k color in geological profile below corresponds to dyke zones faced during excavation.
18
FACE SUPPORT PRESSURE
"Slurry Pressure: Under the expected conditions, up to 10 bar high slurry pressures
will be necessary for operation in soft ground. This figure is higher than the highest
slurry pressures applied ever worldwide (7 bar) and means "unexplored terrority"
with respect to TBM design and TBM operation."
Quoted from "Istanbul Strait Road Crossing - Expert Panel Opinions on TBM
Type and Operation Report", page 1, 7 September 2009.
by
Prof. Dr. George ANAGNOSTOU
Prof. Dr. Nuh BILGIN
Prof. Dr. Levent OZDEMIR
Prof. Dr. Markus THEWES
19
ESTIMATION OF FACE SUPPORT PRESSURE
¾ Face support pressure -at tunnel axis- based on soil/rock
mechanic principles: 0m
ࡰ ࡰ Marmara
ࡼࢌ ൌ ࡼᇱ࢜ǡࢇ࢞ ࢽᇱ ൈ ഥ ࢽ࢝ ࡴ࢝ ࡴ
ൈࡷ 10 m Sea
Hydrostatic water pressure 20 m
Horizontal earth pressure
¾ Expected maximum effective vertical load on shield 30 m
-neglecting arching effect-:
ࡼᇱ࢜ǡࢇ࢞ ൌ ࡰ ൈ ࢽᇱ ൌ ൈ Ǥ ૠ ൈ Ǥ ૢ െ Ǥ ࢚Ȁ ൌ Ǥ ࢚Ȁ 40 m
20
DISCUSSIONS ON "SAFE HEAVENS" BY MEANS OF GROUND IMPROVEMENT OR
HPERBARIC OPERATIONS IN SUBSEA TUNNEL
¾ Relationship between face support pressure and cohesion of geomaterial for subsea tunnel
conditions for given critical geometric and working conditions, the following relationship
shown in figure can be set up:
¾ Undrained cohesion value of weak, heavily jointed,
Hw weathered geomaterial can be estimated from the
following semi-empirical equation: σ
cm
Ho
Tunnel െ ࣐ ܖܑܛ Ǥ ൈ ࡾࡽࡰ Ǥ ൈ ࡶࢊૡૢ
ࢉ ൌ Ǥ ൈ ൈ Ǥ ൈ ࣌ࢉ ൈ ࢋ࢞
D Pf ࣐ ܛܗ܋
when ground
If c < com; cohesion
improvement ି࣐ ܖܑܛ
Hyperbaric
Operation
¾TBM will work in close mode for the stability of excavation face.
¾To eliminate hyperbaric operations, the long standstill for repair/maintenance of TBM is
needed "safe heavens" by means of ground improvements (deep mix method from sea water
surface, chemical/cementitious injections from inside of TBM, excavation of small diameter of pilot
tunnel from land side, freezing, jet grouting, etc.) can be applied.
¾No example Project for ground improvement is present under very high pressure such as
11 bar -unmanagable pressure-
¾Hyperbaric diving is a preferable solution. Hence, the hyperbaric operations with mixed
gas for short term standstills (inspection) and saturation for long term standstills
(unplanned/planned maintenance + repair works) were adopted in the Project.
Source: Yapı Merkezi R&D (2013)
22
TUNNEL AND TBM
TUNNEL
TBM Tunnel Length 3,340 m
TBM Tunnel Grade ± 5%
24
COMPARISON OF TBM TUNNEL PROJECTS (FACE PRESSURES AND DIAMETERS)
Lake Mead, USA ɐ=7.2 m HIGHEST DESIGN PRESSURE Pf-design = 17.0 bar
Eurasia, TURKEY
ɐ=13.7 m
Hallandsas, SWEDEN ɐ=10.6 m
Pf-design = 12.0 bar
Shanghai Chongming, ɐ=15.4 m
CHINA
Nanjing, CHINA ɐ=14.9 m
¾ Eurasia Tunnel TBM (ɐ = 13.7 m) is leading the investigated group of 10 projects when the
“Diameter2 x Pressure” parameter is considered. Source: Untreated data from Anagnostou
(2014) and Holzhauser et al. (2006)
25
ADVANCE RATES BASED ON VARIOUS UNITS
Coefficient of variation 72 % 54 % 31 %
¾ As expected, the coefficient of variation value i.e. magnitude of variability in advance rate
was obtained highest in daily advance rate.
¾ The ratio of (maximum value / average value) was varying between 1.5 and 2.6.
26
DAILY ADVANCE RATE & SHIELD DIAMETER
27
COMPARISON OF EURASIA / SHANGAI-I / SHANGAI-II MIXSHIELD TBM PROJECTS
28
COMPARISON OF EURASIA / SHANGAI-I / SHANGAI-II MIXSHIELD TBM PROJECTS
¾ At first glance, weekly advance rate in Shangai-I and Shangai-II TBM Projects are markedly
higher than Eurasia Tunnel.
¾ Taking consideration into magnitude of "face support pressure x cross section area of
cutterhead", one obtains the following figures:
¾ The horizontal force resulting from face support pressure at Eurasia Tunnel is about 1.58
times higher than Shangai Tunnels.
¾ There is no section with highly fractured rock mass in route of Shangai tunnels. Hence, it is
expected to experience higher penetration rate leading to ultimately higher weekly advance
rate. As for the borability of TBM in Eurasia Tunnel Project, ground is extremely variable
from one point to other point due to different stiffness and jointing degree.
29
FACE SUPPORT PRESSURE & TOTAL THRUST FORCE
required
10.8 bar 239000 kN
(90 % of design capacity) (97 % of design capacity)
eq
ivingg iss re
irr operations
3rd Hyperbaric Maintenance
diving
for "Suction
tion Grid Repair"
Re
at 9.8 bar
aturraation
saturationonnd
e/repair
4th Hyperbaric Maintenance
for "Boulder
er Crusher Repair"
atur
or manintenance ce/
ce
at 8.5 bar
bovve
Above
Abov e4 barr, sa
.5 bar,
4.5
1st Hyperbaric Maintenance
or
for
for "Suction
ction Grid Repair"
Re
at 10.8 bar
2nd Hyperbaric Maintenance
for "Cutterhead
erhead Inspection"
Inspe
at 10.3 bar
Excavation
n Direction
30
DETAILED OVERVIEW OF STANDSTILLS
Ring Completed Face Support Duration
No
(distance) Tunnel (%) Pressure (bar) (days)
Description of Standstill
Cutterhead repair by compressed air diving (Cutterhead
126
1 7.5 4.2 20 damaged due to failure of disc cutter sensors thereby failure of gauge
(252 m)
cutters. Some buckets replaced, composite plates and pins welded)
195
2 11.7 5.2 9 Disc cutter replacement under athmospheric pressure
(390 m)
270
3 16.2 6.0 9 Disc cutter replacement under athmospheric pressure
(540 m)
430
4 25.7 8.2 6 Asian side seismic joint installation
(860 m)
568
5 34.0 9.0 4 Religious holiday
(1136 m)
587 Cutting tool and brush replacement under athmospheric
6 35.1 9.7 6
(1174 m) pressure
690
7 41.3 10.1 7 European side seismic joint installation
(1380 m)
875
8 52.4 10.8 15 Suction grid repair by saturation diving
(1750 m)
933 Cutterhead inspection by saturation diving (6 cm x 75 cm x
9 55.9 10.5 8
(1866 m) 200 cm metal pieces were taken out from jaw crusher area)
1003 Suction grid repair by saturation diving (Middle section of the
10 60.1 10.1 5
(2006 m) old suction grid was removed and the new one was installed)
1146
11 68.6 8.9 19 Boulder crusher repair by saturation diving
(2292 m)
1499
12 89.8 4.2 4 Religious holiday
(2998 m)
Note that 8 days holiday and 13 days seismic joint installations were
Total Standstills 112 mandatory.
Source: Yapı Merkezi R&D Department, 2016©
31
SUMMARY OF HYPERBARIC WORKS UNDER APPROXIMATELY 11 BAR PRESSURE
¾ Starting from excavation of Ring-870 (1740 m), some
blockage issues in suction line was observed and in
consecutive 5 days daily advance rate is approximately
1.7 m/day due to same issue (5 days period average
cutterhead speed, penetration, total thrust force and torque
values are 1.8 rpm, 6.7 mm/revolution, 162 MN and 6.2 MNm, Technical
Drawing of
respectively). Operational parameters indicate anomally. Grid
32
CUTTERHEAD TORQUE
Asia – Trakya Formation Marine Sediments and Transition Zones Europe – Trakya Formation
¾ Average cutterhead torque values in Asia side Trakya formation, marine sediments and Europe side
Trakya formation are 10.0 MNm, 4.5 MNm and 6.0 MNm, respectively.
¾ Torque values were representing a high variation (38 %) in Asia side Trakya formation due to varying
formation characteristics. When the marine sediment excavation started, torque values were decreased
and the variations were decreased to (22 %). Source: Yapı Merkezi R&D Department, 2015©
33
CUTTERHEAD TORQUE AND SPEED
Limit Torque
Cutterhead Torque (MNm)
Nominal Torque
Marine Sediments
34
SPECIFIC ENERGY CONSUMPTION
Asia – Trakya Formation Marine Sediments and Transition Zones Europe – Trakya Formation
¾ The lowest cutterhead electricity consumption was observed during excavation of marine sediments with
an average specific energy value of 3.1 kWh/m3. Spent average specific energy in Asia and Europe side
Trakya formation were 15.9 kWh/m3 and 14.3 kWh/m3, respectively.
¾ At some rings, it was observed that the specific energies were jumped due to existance of dyke zones.
Source: Yapı Merkezi R&D Department, 2015©
35
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SPECIFIC ENERGY AND PENETRATION
36
RINGBUILD DURATION
Eurasia
Tunnel
(φ13.7 m)
Learning Period
37
TBM EXCAVATION PARAMETERS
Excavation Dates 5/5/14 - 6/8/14 7/8/14 - 15/8/14 16/8/14 - 22/11/14 23/11/14 - 9/12/14 10/12/14-23/8/15 5/5/14-23/8/14
Average Advance Speed (mm/minute) 20.2 28.6 24.4 14.9 13.9 17.8
Average Cutterhead Speed (rev. per minute) 2.2 2.9 1.5 2.2 2.4 2.2
Minimum Total Thrust Force (kN) 57,841 94,406 106,920 154,476 21,679 21,679
Maximum Total Thrust Force (kN) 113,240 122,683 238,935 210,517 199,412 238,935
Max. Pressure -TOP- (bar) 5.4 6.3 9.6 9.7 9.8 9.8
(*) Higher advance durations (tadvance > 300 minutes/ring) are excluded.
(**) Higher ringbuild durations (tringbuild > 120 minutes/ring) are excluded.
(***) Major stop durations (tdowntime > 1,000 minutes/ring) are excluded. Source: Yapı Merkezi R&D Department, 2015©
38
REPLACED DISC CUTTERS, SCRAPERS AND BRUSHES
Scraper 16 17 52 85
39
MAJOR CHALLENGES - I
Geometric Restrictions:
¾ Tunnel diameter (two-deck road tunnel)
¾ Gradients (±5%)
¾ Transition zones
¾ Marine sediments
40
MAJOR CHALLENGES - II
Hyperbaric and Operational Conditions:
¾ Risky project since face support pressures were above 4.5 bar for 79% of the alignment with respect of
saturation diving by nitrox/trimix gas mixture
¾ Saturation diving with nitrox/trimix gas mixture where face support pressures are above 4.5 bar
¾ First application of hyperbaric operation under 11 bar in worldwide TBM projects.
¾ 4 times hyperbaric maintenance/repairs
Aggressive Medium:
¾ Volcanic dykes of andesite and diabase.
¾ 28 dyke intrusions
¾ Total length of 413 m (12 % of tunnel)
¾ Frequency of about 90 m
¾ Thicknesses between 1 m and 120 m
¾ UCS more than 200 MPa
¾ CAI values are reaching up to 4.5 (“abrasive” and “very abrasive” classes)
High Capacity Demands:
¾ Face support pressure of 10.8 bar (90% of capacity)
¾ Thrust force of 239 MN (97% of installed capacity)
¾ Torque of 20 MNm (86% of nominal capacity)
¾ Separation plant usage for 18.0 m/day (90% of capacity which is 2800 m3/day)
41
CONCLUSION
¾ Responses to Challenges
Preliminary studies (literature/desk studies and
detailed site/laboratory investigations)
Latest Mixshield TBM technology (advanced
monitoring systems, atmospherically changeable cutting
tools, special pressure equipment)
Seismic Joints (innovated, designed, localized, tested,
implemented)
Continuous monitoring and utilization of gained
knowledge (excavation parameters and downtime root
causes) on upcoming excavation phases
Best experts for all aspects of the project
Utilizing and developing technology
Effective learning (cutting tool replacement duration,
ringbuild duration, interaction between rockmass/soil and
TBM, practical solutions at site)
Experienced TBM crew (average 2.8 TBM projects /
personnel and average 15.0 km TBM tunnel / personnel)
Breakthrough: 22/08/2016 - 17:00
Collaborative and succesful Project Management Average Daily Advance Rate: 7.0 m/day
and Yapı Merkezi Prefabrication Factory Utilization Ratio: 31%
42
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
44