Abstract
Estimation of advance rate and utilization of tunnel boring machines (TBM) are some of the important steps in planning a TBM tunneling project. Estimation of the utilization factor depends on realistic analysis of downtime components. Among the different parameters influencing TBM downtime, tunnel support is the most influential factor, which can take up to 50% of the total excavation time in some cases. Although, there are some rock mass classification systems specifically developed to link ground conditions with the type and amount of support installed in TBM tunneling, the related downtime for support installation has not been studied in detail. Unit supporting time (UST) is the time required for the installation of ground support per unit length of tunnel. Support installation time (SIT) is the time required for installation of a single ground support element. In this paper, approximate ranges of UST and SIT are discussed and analyzed on the basis of recorded ground SIT from a number of TBM tunneling projects. The primary goal of this paper is to link UST with rock mass classifications that have been specifically developed to assess ground support requirements for different tunnel sections using open-type TBM. An accurate estimate of UST and SIT allows for realistic determination of the related downtime and TBM utilization rate.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Atlas Copco 2005. Rapid support behind the tbm, rock and soil reinforcement, 3rd edn. pp 61–64
Bieniawski ZT (1989) Engineering rock mass classifications. Wiley, New York
GEOTEST (1993). Job site report on Alassio tunnel, Italy
Grimstad E, Barton N (1993) Updating the Q-System for NMT. Proceedings of international symposium on sprayed concrete: modern use of wet mix sprayed concrete for underground support, Fagernes. Norwegian Concrete Assn, Oslo, pp 46–66
Herrenknecht web (2010) Gripper TBM. http://www.herrenknecht.com (visited 15 Oct 2010)
Home L (2010) TBM tunneling in difficult rock, latest developments, ITACET Foundation short course on Tunneling, Vancouver, BC, May 14–15
Laughton C (1998) Evaluation and prediction of tunnel boring machine performance in variable rock masses. Ph.D dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin
Laughton C (2005) Geotechnical problems encountered by hard rock tunnel boring machines. MPES
Maidl B, Schmid L, Ritz W, Herrenknecht M (2008) Hard rock tunnel boring machines
Martin D (1988) TBM tunnelling in poor and very poor rock conditions. Tunn Tunn. 20(3):22–27
Robbins Co. Website (2010) http://www.robbinstbm.com/blog/insights-in-the-industry/ground-support-for-high-cover-tunnels-what-is-the-best-method (visited 15 Jan 2011)
Schmid L (2004) The development of the methodology of the shield tunneling in Switzerland. Geotechnique 27(2):193–200
Scolari F (1995) Open-face borers in Italian Alps. World Tunn 8:361–366
Swiss Engineers and Architects (SIA) (1993). Norm 198: underground construction
Tunneltalk web (2008) Gotthard TBM safely across the Piora Mulda. http://www.tunneltalk.com (visited 15 Oct 2010)
Wallis S (1993) Old Marathon at Alassio, World Tunneling, May, 47–51
Wallis S (2009) McConnell Dowell securing hard-won and award winning successes in New Zealand and Australia. http://www.tunneltalk.com (visited 15 Oct 2010)
WBI-PRINT 6 (2007). Stability analysis and design for mechanized tunneling, Prof. Dr.-Ing. W. Wittke Consulting Engineers for Foundation Engineering and Construction in Rock Ltd
Youtube web (2010) Tunnel Boring Machine. http://www.youtube.com (visited 15 Oct 2010)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Farrokh, E., Rostami, J. & Laughton, C. Analysis of Unit Supporting Time and Support Installation Time for Open TBMs. Rock Mech Rock Eng 44, 431–445 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-011-0135-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-011-0135-8