Lecture8A (Flow&Seepage)

1
Lecture 8A
Flow and Seepage Around Tunnel
2
3
Steady State Flow Condition follow the Laplaces Equation (2-D):
head total H where
0
y
H
x
H
2
2
2
2
=
=
Solution is sought by two families of curves intersecting at right angles such

that:
Equipotential function (x,y)=constant (equipotential lines)
Stream function (x,y)=constant (flow lines)
Hydraulic Gradient, i is given as:
l
h
i =
e
f
n
n
kH q =
Darcys law, flow quantity q is given as:
k=coefficient of permeability
H=total head change
n
f
=number of flow channels
n
e
=number of equipotential drops
4
n
f
=10
n
e
=4.8
H=9m
k=10
-8
m/sec
q=1.9x10
-7
m
3
/sec/m length of tunnel
Fitzpatrick et. al. (1981)
5
Drawdown
(consolidation) and
Recharge
6
Effect of Lining Permeability
k
s
=permeability of soil
k
L
=permeability of
lining
d=18m
No lining
7
Effect of Layered Soil
(Tunnel intersecting sand layer)
8
9
Allowable
Infiltration Rate
ORourke (1984)
10
Allowable
Infiltration Rate
11
Spectacular Water Problems Experienced elsewhere:
Tanna Tunnel Japan (1925) 2000 l/s inflows
Eklutna Tunnel Alaska (1951) 1200 l/s in a fault zone
Kurobe Tunnel Japan (1965) 700 l/s in a fault zone
Seikan Tunnel Japan (1980) 1200 l/s in a fault zone
SSDS Tunnel C Hong Kong (1999) ??? l/s in a fault zone
12
Strategic Sewage Disposal Scheme Stage 1
DC/96/17 - Completion works for Transfer System from CW to KT and from TKO to KT
Water Inflow in Tunnel C
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
2
3
-
J
a
n
-
9
9
1
4
-
M
a
r
-
9
9
0
3
-
M
a
y
-
9
9
2
2
-
J
u
n
-
9
9
1
1
-
A
u
g
-
9
9
3
0
-
S
e
p
-
9
9
1
9
-
N
o
v
-
9
9
0
8
-
J
a
n
-
0
0
2
7
-
F
e
b
-
0
0
1
7
-
A
p
r
-
0
0
0
6
-
J
u
n
-
0
0
2
6
-
J
u
l
-
0
0
1
4
-
S
e
p
-
0
0
0
3
-
N
o
v
-
0
0
2
3
-
D
e
c
-
0
0
1
1
-
F
e
b
-
0
1
0
2
-
A
p
r
-
0
1
2
2
-
M
a
y
-
0
1
1
1
-
J
u
l
-
0
1
Date
W
a
t
e
r

p
u
m
p
e
d

o
u
t

t
o

s
u
r
f
a
c
e

(
L
i
t
e
r
/
m
i
n
)
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
C
h
a
i
n
a
g
e

(
m
)
Water Inflow Reading Tunnel Excavation In-situ concrete lining construction
Tunnel Excavation
1st stage
Lining
Invert
concrete
Final stage in-situ
concrete lining
Grouting and repairing of the
in-situ concrete lining
Crossing water
features at Ch. 1440
Crossing Rennie's
Mill Fault
13
Drawdown (consolidation) modelling
14
Prediction of Inflow of Rock Tunnel under Sea (Freeze and Cherry, 1979):
For homogenous, isotropic and steady
state condition where,
k=hydraulic conductivity
h=depth of tunnel
h
r
=thickness of rock cover
r= tunnel radius
Q=inflow rate per unit length of
tunnel
=
r
2h
log
kh
7318 . 2 Q
r
15
Prediction of Inflow (Goodman, 1965):
16
Prediction of Inflow (Goodman, 1965):
For Homogeneous Isotropic Aquifer with
constant head:
Q=Flow per unit length of excavation
K=hydraulic conductivity of jointed rock
mass
D=average depth of excavation below ground
level
H=hydraulic head (depth below groundwater
table)
r= tunnel radius
=
r
2D
ln
KH 2
Q

This equation predicts that inflow (Q) into the
excavation is proportional to H/ln(D)
(increases with depth) if K is constant
17
Observations show
that hydraulic
conductivity
decreases with depth
due to joint closing
under higher
confining stresses
18
Prediction of Inflow (Zhao, J.): Inflow decreases with depth due to joint
closing with increase in effective normal stress (waste depository design)
where,
g=acceleration due to gravity
B=ratio of conductive joints to total joint
number (0.1-0.3 for jointed crystalline rock
mass)
=joint frequency (fracture index) of rock
mass
e
i
=joint aperture (estimate from core logging,
varies from 10 to 100 m) at shallow depth
D
i
=kinematic viscosity of fluid (0.0101
cm
2
/sec for pure water at 20
0
C)
A=0.14-0.22, a parameter indicating the
decrease of joint permeability with an
increase in effective stresses
2
i
2
i
D
D
Aln 1
r
2D
l 6
H gB
Q

=
n
e
This equation takes into account of the
variation of hydraulic conductivity with
stress (or depth) and the effect of
decreasing hydraulic conductivity may
counterweigh the effect of increasing
hydraulic head
19
2
i
2
i
D
D
Aln 1
r
2D
l 6
H gB
Q

=
n
e
=
r
2D
ln
KH 2
Q

K=1.0x10
-7
m/s
H=D
i
=50m
20
Artificial
Recharge to
reduce
Groundwater
Lowering
due to
Dewatering
by Tunnel
21
Zone of Influence
( )
( )
( )
( )
( ) trench or flow line 2000 to 1500
flow radial 3000 factor empirical C
m/s ty permeabili k
m drawdown h
k Ch R Influence of Radius
0
=
= =
=
=
=
Somerville (1986)
22
Types of Aquifers affecting quantity of flow
23
Measurement of Discharge
By meter
By estimation
(V-notch or pipe flowing)
Somerville (1986)
24
Non-
symmetrical
drawdown
Symmetrical
drawdown
Rock
Soil
Impermeable Layer
Uniform
Rock Mass
Conductive
Joints
Soil
25
Impermeable Layer
For the same rock
mass joint
distribution, inflow
control by tunnel
intersecting discrete
conductive joints
26
Recharge is
reliable in
homogenous soil
Recharge is unreliable
in fractured rock,
depending on
intersecting correct
flow path
27
Water Control Specification:
During tunnelling In Settlement Sensitive
Area, groundwater inflow to be reduced if:
Any probe hole recording more than 20
l/min, or
Inflow recorded more than 50 litre/min at
the tunnel face and within 25m of the
tunnel face or over any 50m length of
tunnel
Water tightness of permanent linings Inflow
of water shall not exceed 5 litres per 24 hours
per square metre of internal surface of lining
measured over any 100m length of completed
tunnel or shaft (SSDS Stage I tunnels contract)
28
Limitations of Probe Holes
29
30

Lecture8A (Flow&Seepage)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lecture8A (Flow&Seepage)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lecture8A (Flow&Seepage)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1

Solution is sought by two families of curves intersecting at right angles such

You might also like