Have a personal or library account? Click to login

Tunnel support design by comparison of empirical and finite element analysis of the Nahakki tunnel in mohmand agency, pakistan

Studia Geotechnica et Mechanica
Volume 38 (2016): Issue 1 (March 2016)
By:
Open Access
|Apr 2016

References

  1. [1] Palmström A., Measurements of and correlations between block size and rock quality designation (RQD), Tunnels and Underground Space Technology, 2005, 20, 362–377.10.1016/j.tust.2005.01.005
    Search in Google Scholar
  2. [2] Barton N., Lien R., Lunde J., Engineering classification of rock masses for the design of rock support, Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering, 1974, 6(4), 189–236.10.1007/BF01239496
    Search in Google Scholar
  3. [3] Bieniawski Z.T., Engineering rock mass classifications, John Wiley & Sons, 1989.
    Search in Google Scholar
  4. [4] Hoek E., Carranza-Torres C., Corkum B., Hoek–Brown failure criterion, 2002 Edition, Proceedings of NARMSTAC Conference, Toronto 2002.
    Search in Google Scholar
  5. [5] Brown E.T., Rock Characterization, testing and monitoring: ISRM Suggested methods, E.T. Brown (ed.), Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1981.
    Search in Google Scholar
  6. [6] Kersten Lecture: Hoek E., Carranza-Torres C., Diederichs M.S., Corkum B., Integration of geotechnical and structure design in tunneling. Proceedings University of Minnesota 56th Annual Geotechnical Engineering Conference, Minneapolis 2008.
    Search in Google Scholar
  7. [7] Naghia T., Kristina J., Design consideration for an underground room in a hard rock subjected to a high horizontal stress field at Rana Gruber, Norway, Tunneling and Underground Space Technology, 2013, 38, 205–212.10.1016/j.tust.2013.07.006
    Search in Google Scholar
  8. [8] National Engineering Services Pakistan limited (NESPAK), Technical feasibility report Nahakki Road Tunnel 2013.
    Search in Google Scholar
  9. [9] Phase2, ver. 7.017, 2006, A two-dimensional elasto-plastic finite element program and its user’s manual, by RocScience Inc, Toronto-Canada, 2006.
    Search in Google Scholar
  10. [10] Goodman R.E., Engineering geology: rock in engineering construction, John Wiley & Sons, 1993.
    Search in Google Scholar
  11. [11] RocLab, ver. 1.031, 2007. A software program for determining rock mass strength parameters based on the generalized Hoek–Brown failure ctriterion, by RocScience Inc., Toronto-Canada 2007.
    Search in Google Scholar
  12. [12] Sonmez H., Ulusay R., A discussion on the Hoek–Brown failure criterion and suggested modification to the criterion verified by slope stability case studies, Yerbilimleri (Earth Sciences), 2002, 26, 77–99.
    Search in Google Scholar
  13. [13] Vlachopoulos N., Diederichs M.S., Appropriate uses and limitations of 2D numerical analysis of tunnels and tunnel support response, Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, 2014, Vol. 32, 2, 469–488.10.1007/s10706-014-9727-x
    Search in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/sgem-2016-0008 | Journal eISSN: 2083-831X | Journal ISSN: 0137-6365
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 75 - 84
Published on: Apr 18, 2016
Published by: Wroclaw University of Science and Technology
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 times per year
Keywords:
rock mass strength parameters,
rock mass classification,
FEM analysis,
Phase2,
tunnel support design
Related subjects:
Geosciences,
Geosciences, other,
Materials sciences,
Composites,
Porous materials,
Physics,
Mechanics and fluid dynamics

© 2016 Asif Riaz, Syed Muhammad Jamil, Muhammad Asif, Kamran Akhtar, published by Wroclaw University of Science and Technology
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Previous articleVolume 38 (2016): Issue 1 (March 2016)Next article