Excavationmethods

Rock Engineering
Practice & Design

Lecture 11:
Excavation Methods
1 of 45
Erik Eberhardt UBC Geological Engineering
ISRM Edition
Authors Note:
The lecture slides provided here are taken from the course
Geotechnical Engineering Practice, which is part of the 4th year
Geological Engineering program at the University of British Columbia
(V
(Vancouver,
Canada).
C
d ) The
Th course covers rock
k engineering
i
i and
d
geotechnical design methodologies, building on those already taken
by the students covering Introductory Rock Mechanics and Advanced
Rock Mechanics.
Mechanics
Although the slides have been modified in part to add context, they
of course are missing the detailed narrative that accompanies any
l
lecture.
It is also
l recognized
d that
h these
h
lectures
l
summarize,
reproduce and build on the work of others for which gratitude is
extended. Where possible, efforts have been made to acknowledge
th vvarious
the
ri us ssources,
urc s with
ith a list of
f references
r f r nc s being
b in provided
pr vid d att the
th
end of each lecture.
Errors, omissions, comments, etc., can be forwarded to the
author at: erik@eos.ubc.ca
2 of 45
ISRM Edition
The Excavation Process

It is instructive to consider the fundamental objective of the excavation
process which is to remove rock material (either to create an opening or
to obtain material for its inherent value). In order to remove part of a
rock mass,
mass it is necessary to induce additional fracturing and
fragmentation of the rock.
This introduces three critical aspects
p
of excavation:
The peak strength of the rock
must be exceeded.
The in situ block size
distribution must be changed
to the required fragment size
distribution.
distribution
By what means should the
required energy be introduced
into the rock?
3 of 45
ISRM Edition
In Situ Block and Fragmentation Distribution

Rock is naturally fractured and consists
of rock blocks of certain sizes. The
fracturing of rock during excavation
changes this natural block size
distribution to the fragment size
distribution. The engineer can consider
how best to move from one curve to the
other in the excavation process.
Hudson & Harrison (1997)

4 of 45
ISRM Edition
Energy and Excavation Process

Although the objective during excavation is large-scale fragmentation, at
the same time we wish to minimize any damage to the wall rock as this
would work towards weakening the rock mass which may result in ground
control problems.
problems Fragmentation and rock mass damage are both related
to the amount of energy used and whether its applied instantaneously or
continuously.
5 of 45
The tensile strength of rock is

about 1/10th the compressive
strength and the energy beneath
the
h stress-strain curve is roughly
hl
its square. Therefore, breaking
the rock in tension requires only
1/100th of the energy as that in
compression.
ISRM Edition
Energy and Excavation Process

One objective in the excavation process may be to optimize the use of
energy, i.e. the amount of energy required to remove a unit volume of
rock (specific energy = J/m3). There are two fundamental ways of
inputting energy into the rock for excavation:
Blasting: Energy is input in large
quantities over very short
h
durations (cyclical drill then
blast, drill then blast, etc.).
Machine Excavation: Energy is
input in smaller quantities
continuously.
6 of 45
ISRM Edition
Conventional Drill & Blast

The technique of rock breakage using explosives
involves drilling blastholes by percussion or rotarypercussive means, loading the boreholes with
explosives and then detonating the explosive in each
hole in sequence according to the blast design.
The explosion generates a
stress wave and significant
gas pressure. Following the
local fracturing at the
blasthole wall and the
spalling of the free face,
the subsequent gas
pressure then provides the
necessary energy to
disaggregate the broken
rock
rock.
7 of 45
ISRM Edition
Conventional Drill & Blast

Load
Drill
Survey
Blast
V
Ventilate
il
Bolt
Scoop
Scale
8 of 45
ISRM Edition
Drill & Blast - Drilling
water
flush
((chip
p
removal)
9 of 45
rotation
thrust
force
percussion
hammer
Thuro (1997)
ISRM Edition
Drill & Blast - Drilling

The bit'
Th
bit's ability
bilit tto penetrate
t t th
the rock
k efficiently
ffi i tl d
depends
d on th
the contact
t t
surface of the buttons, their shape and number, the bits' flushing
characteristics and the brittleness, or drillability, of the rock.
Button Shape
Spherical
SemiBallistic
Conical
(Ballistic)
Characteristics
Application
"non aggressive" shape

minimum drilling rates
low bit wear
excavation mainly by
impact
Rock with high UCS

and high abrasivity
(e.g. quartzite,
granite, gneiss,
amphibolite)
"aggressive"
gg
shape
p
moderate drilling rates
moderate bit wear
shearing/cutting
Rock with mid UCS

and less abrasivity
(e.g. slate,
sandstone, limestone,
weathered rock)
"very aggressive" shape

maximum drilling rates
high bit wear
shearing/cutting
Rock with low UCS

and low abrasivity
(e.g. shale, weak
sandstone, phyllite)
Thuro (1997)
10 of 45
ISRM Edition
Plin
nninger et al.
l. (2002)
Drill & Blast Drill Bit Buttons
11 of 45
ISRM Edition
Drill & Blast Blast Pattern Design

One of the basic principles of designing the configuration and sequential
detonation of blastholes in a one blast, is the presence of a free face
parallel or sub-parallel to the blast holes, as detonation occurs. In some
cases these free faces may already be present (benches in an open pit
cases,
mine), but in other cases may need to be created by the blast itself (a
tunnel face).

12 of 45
Practical application of the

free-face
free
face concept using one
form of the burn cut.
ISRM Edition
Drill & Blast Burn Cut

The correctt d
Th
design
i of
f a blast
bl t starts
t t with
ith the
th first
fi t h
hole
l to
t b
be detonated.
d t
t d
In the case of a tunnel blast, the first requirement is to create a void into
which rock broken by the blast can expand. This is generally achieved by a
wedge
g or burn cut which is designed
g
to create a clean void and to eject
j
the
rock originally contained in this void clear of the tunnel face.
Burn cut designs using

y
millisecond delays.
13 of 45
ISRM Edition
Drill & Blast Blast Pattern Design
14 of 45
ISRM Edition
Specialized Blasting Techniques
Hud
dson & Harrison (1997)
During
D
i blasting,
bl ti
the
th explosive
l i d
damage may nott only
l occur according
di
to the blasting round design, but there may also be extra rock
damage behind the excavation boundary. To minimize damage to the
rock a pre-split
rock,
pre split blast (surface excavation) or smooth-wall
smooth wall blast
(underground) may be used to create the final excavation surface.
Pre-split blast: First a

series of small-diameter,
parallel boreholes are
drilled along the plane of
the required final
excavation boundary (i.e.
rock cut slope).
slope)
15 of 45
ISRM Edition
PrePre
-Split & Smooth
Smooth-Wall Blasting
The principle is then to tailor
the explosive parameters such
that detonation of the
explosives
l i
iin these
h
initial
i i i l
holes will primarily create a
plane of intersecting holes
through the coalescence of
several induced fractures.
The smooth-wall blast follows a similar

process to the pre-split blast, except
in the reverse order. First a rough
opening is formed using a large bulk
blast, and then the smooth-wall blast
follows along a series of closely spaced
and lightly charged parallel holes.
16 of 45
ISRM Edition
PrePre
-Split Blasting
When, subsequently, the main body of rock is blasted to form the
cutting, the pre-split reflects the stress waves back into the rock
being excavated and dissipates excess gas pressure, such that the bulk
blast has little effect of the rock behind the pre-split plane.
plane
pre-split
bl t d
blasted
17 of 45
normal bulk
bl
blasted
d
ISRM Edition
Drill & Blast Explosives

Commercial explosives are mixtures of chemical compounds in solid or
liquid form. Detonation transforms the compounds into other products,
mostly gaseous.
The following are the main criteria
applied to select an explosive for a
given type of blasting:
available energy per unit weight

of explosive (i.e. strength)
density of the explosive
detonation velocity
sensitivity (ease of ignition)
reaction
ti rate
t
temperature and pressure
stability
y (chemical
(
and storage)
g )
18 of 45
ISRM Edition
Drill & Blast Explosives

The following are the more common explosives used in hard rock excavation:
dynamites (nitroglycerin made stable by dissolving it in an inert
bulking agent moderate bulk strength)
ANFO (Ammonium Nitrate & diesel Fuel Oil low bulk strength)
slurries (water gels high bulk strength for wet conditions)
emulsions
ANFO is the most prevalent explosive used in

mining because it is the least expensive and the
safest to transport and handle. ANFO type
explosives are susceptible to water and,
and
therefore, are not suitable for wet blastholes.
19 of 45
ISRM Edition
Drill & Blast Stemming

Stemming materials (e.g. pea-sized
gravel), are used to top-off the
blastholes. The stemming material
acts to provide confinement,
confinement
preventing the explosive gases and
energy from travelling (venting) up
through the drill hole, and instead are
contained
i d within
i hi the
h rock
k mass.
Effects of poor
stemming.
20 of 45
ISRM Edition
Drill & Blast Blasting Caps & Delays

A blasting cap is a small explosive device generally
used to detonate a larger, more powerful
explosive. Most blasting caps contain what is
c ll d a primary
called
p im
explosive.
xpl si
A primary
p im
explosive
xpl si is
a high explosive compound that will explode from
flame, heat or shock.
Word to the wise: Do not crimp fuses
to blasting caps using your teeth.
Few blasts are fired instantaneously.

Instead, delays are used to sequence
giving
g better fragmentation,
g
the blast g
more efficient use of the explosive,
reduced vibration, and better control
of the fly rock. Generally, delay
detonators are produced in measures
of milliseconds or seconds.
21 of 45
ISRM Edition
Drill & Blast Fly Rock

Fly rock
Fl
k iis a constant
t t concern to
t blasters
bl t
and
d their
th i
co-workers. It can be controlled if proper
preparation, blasting techniques and safety
procedures are followed. Four of the major
p
j causes
of excessive fly rock are:
Geology conditions.
Inaccurate drilling
g and loading.
g
Poor hole design.
Poor pattern timing.
Incidents have been

recorded where flyrock
has travelled in excess
of 1 km and resulted in
significant damage,
injury and/or death.
22 of 45
ISRM Edition
Drill & Blast Fragmentation

How efficiently muck from a working tunnel or surface excavation can be
removed is a function of the blast fragmentation. Broken rock by volume
is usually 50% greater than the in situ material. In mining, both the ore
and
nd waste
t h
has to
t be
b moved
m
d to
t surface
f
for
f milling
millin or disposal.
di p
l Some
S m waste
t
material can be used underground to backfill mined voids. In tunnelling,
everything has to be removed and dumped in fills or if the material is
g , may
y be removed and used for road ballast or concrete aggregate
gg g
right,
(which can sometimes then be re-used in the tunnel itself).
23 of 45
ISRM Edition
NT
TNU (1995)
Drill & Blast Summary
24 of 45
ISRM Edition
Mechanical Excavation
Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM)
25 of 45
ISRM Edition
There are two basic types of machine for underground excavation:
Partial-face
Partial
face machines: use a
cutting head on the end of a
movable boom (that itself may be
track mounted).
26 of 45
Full-face
Full
face machines: use a rotating head
armed with cutters, which fills the tunnel
cross-section completely, and thus almost
always excavates circular tunnels.
ISRM Edition
Partial-face
P
ti l f
m
machines
hin
are cheaper, smaller
and much more flexible
in operation.
p
cut
muck
out
scoop
27 of 45
ISRM Edition
Full-face machines when used for relatively
straight and long tunnels (>2 km) permit high
rates of advance in a smooth, automated
construction operation.
operation
scoop
muck
out
cut
28 of 45
ISRM Edition
The advance rate at which the excavation proceeds is a function of the
cutting rate and utilization factor (which is the amount of time that the
machine is cutting rock). Factors contributing to low utilization rates are
difficulties with ground support and steering,
steering the need to frequently
replace cutters, blocked scoops, broken conveyors, etc.
The cutters may jam if the
TBM is
i pushed
h d forwards
f
d
with too much force. Then
they might scrape against
the rock and become
fl tt
flattened
d on one side.
id
Broken conveyor
29 of 45
ISRM Edition
Mechanical Excavation Tool Wear

Delays: When the tunnel boring machine is inside the tunnel
tunnel, the cutters
must be changed from the inside the cutting head.
30 of 45
ISRM Edition
Mechanics of Rock Cutting Tool Wear

The primary
Th
i
impact
i
t of
f tool
t l wear on costs
t can be
b so severe that
th t cutter
tt
costs are often considered as a separate item in bid preparation. For TBM
cutters, 1.5 hours are required for a single cutter change, and if several
cutters are changed
g
at one time,
m , each may
m y require
q
30-40 m
minutes. Even
higher downtimes can be expected with large water inflows, which make
cutter change activities more difficult and time-consuming.
uneven
wear
new
normal
wear
heavy
wear
Thuro & Plinninger (2003)

31 of 45
ISRM Edition
Mechanics of Rock Cutting
Hud
dson & Harrisson (1997)
During
D
i the
th cutting
tti process, both
b th thrust
th t (Fn) and
d torque
t
(Ft) are applied.
li d I
In
selecting the proper cutting tool, the engineer wishes to know how the
tools should be configured on a machine cutting head, how to minimize the
need to replace
p
cutters,, how to avoid damaging
m g g the cutter mounts,
m
, and
how to minimize vibration.
32 of 45
ISRM Edition
Mechanics of Rock Cutting
NTNU
U-Anleggsdrrift (1998)
Cutting
C
tti iinvolves
l
a complex
l
mixture
i t
of
f tensile,
t
il
shear and compressive modes of failure. With
thrust, the cutting disc penetrates the rock and
generates extensive
extens ve crack propagat
propagation
on to the
free surface. Further strain relief occurs as the
disc edge rolls out of its cut, inducing further
tensile cracking and slabbing at the rock surface.
33 of 45
ISRM Edition
The two main factors that will stop

tunnel boring machines are either
the rock is too hard to cut or that
the rock is too soft to sustain the
reactionary force necessary to
push the machine forward. TBMs
will operate within certain ranges
of
f rock
k deformability
d f
bili and
d strength,
h
where the machine can be tailored
to a specific range to achieve
maximum efficiency (the risk being
if rock conditions diverge from
those the TBM is designed for) .
Instability problems at the tunnel

face, encountered during excavation of
g Pinglin
g
tunnel in
the 12.9km long
Taiwan.
34 of 45
Barla & Pelizza (2

2000)
TBM Excavation & Design
ISRM Edition
Barla
a & Pelizza (2000)
35 of 45
ISRM Edition

Single & Double Shield TBMs Single-shield TBMs are cheaper and are the
preferred machine for hard rock tunnelling. Double shielded TBMs are normally
used in unstable geology (as they offer more worker protection), or where a high
rate of advancement is required.
Double shield
TBM
Single shield
TBM
36 of 45
ISRM Edition

Open- & Closed-Face
O
Cl
d F
Shields
Shi ld When
Wh
th
the tunnel
t
l face
f
does
d
nott require
i a continuous
ti
and pressure balanced support, the TBM is operated in Open Mode. The face is
mechanically supported by the cuttinghead while the flood control doors regulate
muck flow from the face to the cuttinghead chamber. The excavated muck is
rapidly
idl extracted
t
t d by
b the
th conveyor. With a closed-face,
l
d f
an airlock
i l k and
d bulkhead
b lkh d
are used to allow the excavation chamber to be pressurized with compressed air
to aid face support.
Open-face
shields
Closed-face
shields
37 of 45
ISRM Edition

Earth Pressure Balance (Closed-Face Shield) This method provides continuous
support to the tunnel face by balancing earth pressure against machine thrust. As
the cutterhead rotates and the shield advances, the excavated earth is mixed with
foams in the cutterhead chamber to control its viscosity. The pressure is then
adjusted by means of the rate of its extraction (by screw conveyor) to balance the
pressure exerted by the ground at the tunnel face. This enables near surface
tunnelling in bad ground conditions with minimal surface settlement.
clay
y foam injector
j
38 of 45
ISRM Edition
U S Army Corps of Engineers (1997)

U.S.
39 of 45
ISRM Edition
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1997)
40 of 45
ISRM Edition
TBM Selection & Geological Risk

The Yacamb-Quibor
Th
Y
b Q ib Tunnel
T
l iis a prime
i
example
l of
f
tunnelling blind the geology was largely unfamiliar
and unpredictable. With little previous experience,
it was unknown how the rock would react, especially
under the high stresses of the Andes.
Geology: Weak, tectonically sheared graphitic phyllites were
encountered giving rise to serious squeezing problems, which without
adequate support would result in complete closure of the tunnel.
1975: Excavation begins on the 24 km tunnel, for which the
use of a full-face TBM is specified (for rapid excavation).
1979: During a holiday

h ld
shutdown,
h d
squeezing rock
k conditions
d
were left unchecked, resulting in the converging ground
effectively swallowing one of the TBMs.
1980s: A decision is made to p
permit the tunnel to be
excavated by drill & blast. Recently completed, it took
more than 33 years to tunnel the full 24 km.
41 of 45
Mining out the remains of

the trapped TBM.
Hoe
ek (2001)
1977: The weak phyllites fail to provide the TBM grippers

with enough of a foundation to push off of. Supporting
squeezing ground was another defeating problem.
ISRM Edition

TBM insertion
i
ti
through
th
h
vertical shaft.
TBM gripper used to provide

reactionary force for forward thrust
by gripping onto sidewalls of tunnel.
TBM working platform for

installing support (e
(e.g.
g rock
bolts, meshing, shotcrete).
42 of 45
ISRM Edition
TBM Excavation & Design - Pre

Pre-Cast Linings
43 of 45
ISRM Edition
Tunnelling Breakthroughs
44 of 45
ISRM Edition
Lecture References
Barla, G & Pelizza, S (2000). TBM Tunneling in difficult conditions. In GeoEng2000 - Proceedings of
the International Conference on Geotechnical & Geological Engineering, Melbourne. Technomic
Publishing Company: Lancaster, pp. 329-354.
Hoek, E (2001). Big tunnels in bad rock (the Thirty-Sixth Karl Terzaghi Lecture). Journal of
Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering 127(9): 726-740.
Hudson, JA & Harrison, JP (1997). Engineering Rock Mechanics An Introduction to the Principles .
Elsevier Science: Oxford.
NTNU (1995).
(1995) Tunnel: Blast Design.
Design Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU):
Trondheim, Project Report 2A-95.
NTNU-Anleggsdrift (1998). Hard Rock Tunnel Boring: The Boring Process. Norwegian University of
Science and Technology (NTNU): Trondheim, Project Report 1F-98.
Plinninger, RJ, Spaun, G & Thuro, K (2003). Prediction and classification of tool wear in drill and
blast tunnelling. In Proc., 9th Congress of the IAEG, Durban. CD-ROM, paper #395, pp. 2226-2236.
Thuro, K (1997). Drillability prediction: Geological influences in hard rock drill and blast tunnelling.
g
Rundschau 86(2):
( ) 426-438.
Geologische
Thuro, K & Plinninger, RJ (2003). Hard rock tunnel boring, cutting, drilling and blasting: Rock
parameters for excavatability. In Proc., 10th ISRM Congress, Johannesburg. SAIMM: Johannesburg,
pp. 1227-1234.
U.S.
U
S Army
A
C
Corps
of
f Engineers
E i
(1997) Engineering
(1997).
E i
i
and
d Design
D i
- Tunnels
T
l and
d Shafts
Sh ft in
i Rock.
R k
Publication EM 1110-2-2901.
45 of 45
ISRM Edition

Excavationmethods

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Excavationmethods

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Rock Engineering

Practice & Design

Erik Eberhardt UBC Geological Engineering

Erik Eberhardt UBC Geological Engineering

The Excavation Process

Erik Eberhardt UBC Geological Engineering

In Situ Block and Fragmentation Distribution

Hudson & Harrison (1997)

Erik Eberhardt UBC Geological Engineering

Energy and Excavation Process

Hudson & Harrison (1997)

The tensile strength of rock is

Energy and Excavation Process

Erik Eberhardt UBC Geological Engineering

Conventional Drill & Blast

Hudson & Harrison (1997)

Erik Eberhardt UBC Geological Engineering

Conventional Drill & Blast

Erik Eberhardt UBC Geological Engineering

Drill & Blast - Drilling

Erik Eberhardt UBC Geological Engineering

Drill & Blast - Drilling

"non aggressive" shape

Rock with high UCS

Rock with mid UCS

"very aggressive" shape

Rock with low UCS

Erik Eberhardt UBC Geological Engineering

Drill & Blast Drill Bit Buttons

Erik Eberhardt UBC Geological Engineering

Drill & Blast Blast Pattern Design

Hudson & Harrison (1997)

Practical application of the

Drill & Blast Burn Cut

Burn cut designs using

Erik Eberhardt UBC Geological Engineering

Drill & Blast Blast Pattern Design

Erik Eberhardt UBC Geological Engineering

Specialized Blasting Techniques

Pre-split blast: First a

Erik Eberhardt UBC Geological Engineering

The smooth-wall blast follows a similar

Erik Eberhardt UBC Geological Engineering

Erik Eberhardt UBC Geological Engineering

Drill & Blast Explosives

available energy per unit weight

density of the explosive

sensitivity (ease of ignition)

temperature and pressure

Erik Eberhardt UBC Geological Engineering

Drill & Blast Explosives

bulking agent moderate bulk strength)

ANFO is the most prevalent explosive used in

Erik Eberhardt UBC Geological Engineering

Drill & Blast Stemming

Erik Eberhardt UBC Geological Engineering

Drill & Blast Blasting Caps & Delays

Few blasts are fired instantaneously.

Erik Eberhardt UBC Geological Engineering

Drill & Blast Fly Rock

Incidents have been

Erik Eberhardt UBC Geological Engineering

Drill & Blast Fragmentation

Erik Eberhardt UBC Geological Engineering