Lueke, J S and Ariaratnam, S T (2005) Surface heave mechanisms in horizontal directional drilling. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 131(5), pp. 540-547. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Damage resulting from directionally drilled crossings has become a concern for municipalities and contractors due to the increased popularity of this trenchless installation method. Surface heave is one mechanism through which directionally drilled installations may damage existing surface structures such as pavements and foundations. Several factors contribute to the development of surface heave including backream rate, borehole pressure, downhole tooling, depth of cover, annular space size, and geotechnical properties. This paper presents and discusses results of a detailed field experiment which monitored surface heave under various installation characteristics. Four borepaths were designed to implement a full factorial examination to determine the interaction of backream rate, depth of cover, drill mud flow, and reamer type have on the development of surface heave. With greater understanding of how drilling practices affect the development of surface heave, practitioners of this technology may better plan installations to minimize the impact of their operation.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction methods; damage; data collection; differential settlement; drilling |
| Index terms: | practitioner, experiment, interaction, borehole, construction method, municipality, foundations, drilling |
| Subjects: | practitioner, administrative law, data collection methods, structural engineering, water management, building construction, behavioral psychology |
| Topics: | Legal Issues, Site Management, Construction Technology, Roles and Professions, Sustainability, Engineering Principles, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here