Abd Al-Jalil, Y Q (1998) Analysis of performance of tunnel boring machine-based systems. PhD thesis, University of Texas at Austin, USA.
Abstract
Tunneling using tunnel boring machines (TBMs) in rock offers an attractive alternative to the conventional Drill-and-Blast method in many underground construction projects. However, the performance of TBM-based excavation systems has been less than expected in many tunneling projects. Maximizing the performance of such systems, and predicting such performance a priori, are important to both clients and contractors of underground construction projects. The main contribution of this work has been the systematic use of case history data to provide the construction industry with an evolutionary, predictive tool for prognosis of performance of TBM-based excavation systems. Components of a tunnel boring machine-based excavation system typically used in hard rock are described. Procedures were developed to aid engineers with prognosis of time and cost to complete a given tunnel. A data base from many tunneling projects has been assembled, and construction simulation programs have been developed and validated. Performance of the excavation system is tied to geology, equipment reliability, and duration of activities that comprise the excavation cycle. A new paradigm of analysis has been developed. It aims to understand the variability in time and cost to complete a given tunnel, by considering: (1) reliability and characteristics of machine and its back-up system, (2) geology variation along tunnel, and (3) quality of management. The quality of management includes competence of crew, competence of geotechnical engineers, degree of planning and preparation for contingencies, and maintenance programs adopted by the contractor. Since penetration rate is a critical factor to the performance of TBMs, rock cutting mechanics is therefore important to study of TBM-based excavation systems. The problem of rock cutting using disc cutters is studied. Indentation of rock by rigid indenters is reviewed, and the most important parameters affecting the indentation process are identified. Analytical and numerical modeling of the rock indentation problem is reviewed, and recommendations for future numerical modeling and experimental work are presented.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Nelson, P P and Stokoe II, K H |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction project; duration; equipment; geology; liability; reliability; tunnel; excavation; client; geotechnical engineer; competence; simulation; experiment |
| Index terms: | history, variation, construction project, program, competence, excavation, experiment, liability, tunnel, construction simulation, modelling, geotechnical engineer, underground construction, construction industry, duration, penetration, variability, paradigm, engineer, critical factor |
| Subjects: | contractual condition, production management, personnel development, education and knowledge transfer, software systems, industry analysis, infrastructure and transport systems, statistical analysis, liability law, project controls, market analysis, geotechnical engineering, risk assessment, profession, data collection methods, construction operations, architectural and construction history, analytical methods, modelling and simulation |
| Topics: | Legal Issues, Digital Applications, Human Resources, Contract Administration, Time Control, Site Management, Research Practice, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Risk Management, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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