Sugimoto, M and Asanprakit, A (2010) Stack pipe model for pipe jacking method. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(6), pp. 683-692. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
The pipe jacking method pushes a tunneling machine through concrete pipes ahead of the jacks. The main factors influencing the thrust force are friction around the pipe and face resistance. Both of these forces can be estimated by the analytical or empirical calculation models established by various researchers. So far, most of the models do not consider the overcutting distance; thus, the pipe behavior is still not clarified. Therefore, this paper introduces a developed stack pipe model with the overcutting effect to describe pipe behavior and evaluate the thrust force using the surrounding ground spring model and pipe positioning model with phase analysis in the finite-element method. A simulation of the pipe behavior was carried out to examine the model's validity and performance. As a result, it was found that the developed model can simulate the soil-pipe interaction behavior and the thrust force reasonably well. Furthermore, it can be pointed out that the thrust force is greatly influenced by the developed friction around the pipe and the moment distribution at the cushion.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | finite-element method; jacking; pipes; thrust; tunneling |
| Index terms: | validity, interaction, cushion, face |
| Subjects: | psychology, evaluation and assessment methods, building materials, behavioral psychology |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Organizational Design, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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