Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Evaluation of Tunnel Contour Quality Index on the Basis of Terrestrial Laser Scanning Data Cover

Evaluation of Tunnel Contour Quality Index on the Basis of Terrestrial Laser Scanning Data

Studia Geotechnica et Mechanica
Volume 43 (2021): Issue 3 (September 2021)
By: Piotr Dybeł,  Katarzyna Dybeł and  Jerzy Cieślik  
Open Access
|Sep 2021

Figures & Tables

Figure 1

Three elements characterizing a contour quality [1].
Three elements characterizing a contour quality [1].

Figure 2

Spacing of measurement sections within a single blasting round [1].
Spacing of measurement sections within a single blasting round [1].

Figure 3

A cross-section and a drill pattern for the studied niche.
A cross-section and a drill pattern for the studied niche.

Figure 4

(a) Scanner FARO Focus 3D S150. (b) Location of the measuring station.
(a) Scanner FARO Focus 3D S150. (b) Location of the measuring station.

Figure 5

Division of the acquired point cloud.
Division of the acquired point cloud.

Figure 6

Side 1 (a) and roof (b) models for the 2nd blasting round created in AutoCAD Civil 3D.
Side 1 (a) and roof (b) models for the 2nd blasting round created in AutoCAD Civil 3D.

Figure 7

Measurement points arrangement on the planned contour profile.
Measurement points arrangement on the planned contour profile.

Figure 8

Modeled and planned contour lines.
Modeled and planned contour lines.

Figure 9

Tunnel cross-section view of the measured point cloud.
Tunnel cross-section view of the measured point cloud.

Figure 10

Modeled tunnel contour surface determined for a single blasting round.
Modeled tunnel contour surface determined for a single blasting round.

Figure 11

Cross-sections 1 and 2 for each of the three blasting rounds, obtained on the basis of the TIN surface.
Cross-sections 1 and 2 for each of the three blasting rounds, obtained on the basis of the TIN surface.

Figure 12

Values of the overbreak depth (Od¯) \left( {\overline {{O_d}} } \right) for individual elements of each of the three blasting rounds.
Values of the overbreak depth (Od¯) \left( {\overline {{O_d}} } \right) for individual elements of each of the three blasting rounds.

Figure 13

Values of the contour roughness (RCL¯) \left( {\overline {RCL} } \right) for individual elements of each of the three blasting rounds.
Values of the contour roughness (RCL¯) \left( {\overline {RCL} } \right) for individual elements of each of the three blasting rounds.

Figure 14

Values of the overbreak depth (Osd¯) \left( {\overline {{O^s}_d} } \right) for individual elements of each of the three blasting rounds.
Values of the overbreak depth (Osd¯) \left( {\overline {{O^s}_d} } \right) for individual elements of each of the three blasting rounds.

Figure 15

Values of the contour roughness (RCLs¯) \left( {\overline {RC{L^s}} } \right) for individual elements of each of the three blasting rounds.
Values of the contour roughness (RCLs¯) \left( {\overline {RC{L^s}} } \right) for individual elements of each of the three blasting rounds.

Figure 16

Planned and modeled (TIN) contour surfaces and volume Va.
Planned and modeled (TIN) contour surfaces and volume Va.

Parameters of the FARO Focus 3D S150 scanner and scanning process [23]_

ParameterValue
Range0,6 m do 150 m
Precision+/−1 mm
Measurement speedUp to 976,000 points/s
LaserClass 1
Weight4.2 kg
Size230 × 183 × 103 mm
ControlTouch display and WLAN
ExtraGlobal Positioning System (GPS), compass, altimeter, two-axis compensator
Measurement rangeIndoor up to 10 m
Resolution [MPts]28.0 (1/5)
Quality4×
Horizontally0°do 360°
Perpendicularly−60°do 90°
Scanning time [mm:ss]05:28
Scan size [Pts]8192 ×3413

Summary of the results obtained by the laser profiling technique (according to [1])_

RoundElementCross-sectionParameterTCIR
Overbreak depth (Od) [cm]Contour roughness (RCL) [−]
Round 1Side 1111.6611.00171.657
212.3791.001
Side 2111.1021.003
26.3891.001
Roof114.2321.060
213.9061.055
Entire round113.0921.039
212.0971.035
Round 2Side 119.6121.00471.343
29.8251.002
Side 2112.8131.004
212.1621.004
Roof110.9301.045
217.3871.073
Entire round111.0461.030
214.7641.048
Round 3Side 1111.2411.00672.190
27.841.001
Side 217.4301.002
29.5931.002
Roof114.4581.058
212.7961.052
Entire round112.4091.039
211.1641.034

Summary of the results obtained by the TLS technique_

RoundElementParameterTCIsR
Overbreak depth Osd¯ \overline {{\boldsymbol {O}^\boldsymbol {s}}_\boldsymbol {d}} [cm]Contour roughness RCLs¯ \overline {\boldsymbol {RC}{\boldsymbol {L}^\boldsymbol {s}}} [−]
Round 1Side 18.6241.11664.232
Side 210.8931.155
Roof14.1111.192
Entire round12.6401.171
Round 2Side 19.1461.04267.943
Side 211.1491.069
Roof12.4161.140
Entire round11.7371.109
Round 3Side 112.0941.05568.578
Side 26.6951.072
Roof12.3351.123
Entire round11.3501.102
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/sgem-2021-0013 | Journal eISSN: 2083-831X | Journal ISSN: 0137-6365
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 255 - 269
Submitted on: Mar 26, 2021
Accepted on: May 13, 2021
Published on: Sep 30, 2021
Published by: Wroclaw University of Science and Technology
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year
Keywords:
TCI,
Tunnel,
Contour quality,
Terrestrial laser scanning (TLS),
Overbreak,
Contour roughness
Related subjects:
Geosciences,
Geosciences, other,
Materials sciences,
Composites,
Porous materials,
Physics,
Mechanics and fluid dynamics

© 2021 Piotr Dybeł, Katarzyna Dybeł, Jerzy Cieślik, published by Wroclaw University of Science and Technology
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Previous articleVolume 43 (2021): Issue 3 (September 2021)Next article