Strength Characteristics and In Situ Stress Measurement of Rock Cores from a Large Section Underground Station: A Case Study
Source abstract
Abstract
Chongqing is a mountain city in western China with a complex geological environment, which brings many difficulties to the construction of large sections of underground projects. In order to avoid serious problems in the construction of Guobo Station with large sections, intensive coring and laboratory tests were carried out to obtain the rock mass properties in detail. The boreholes reveal that the lithology of the rock mass in the project area consists mainly of mudstone and a small area of sandstone. The uniaxial compressive strength (UCS) and the Brazilian tensile strength (BTS) of mudstone are highly scattered, which are 4.43~42.43 MPa and 0.66~4.30 Mpa, respectively, but they all show a lognormal distribution. The average UCS of sandstone is 65.31 MPa, and the BTS is 3.06 MPa. Meanwhile, the softening coefficients of mudstone and sandstone are 0.33 and 0.73, which indicate that the water content has a great influence on the mechanical properties of the rock. For the in situ stress field, the relationship between the three principal stresses is as follows: the maximum horizontal principal stress > minimum horizontal principal stress > vertical principal stress, and the lateral pressure coefficient is 2.11~5.71. Based on the present experimental results, it is proposed that the potential risks of excavation include: (1) bias pressure (2) high in situ stress; (3) surrounding rock deterioration.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Rock Mechanics and Modeling · Geomechanics and Mining Engineering · Grouting, Rheology, and Soil Mechanics
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
School of Resources and Safety Engineering, Central South University, Changsha 410083, China
School of Civil Engineering, Central South University, Changsha 410075, China
China Railway 18th Bureau Group Co., Ltd., Tianjin 300222, China
Funding
National Natural Science Foundation of China
References (42)
Show source-provided references
1. Impact of passive fire protection on heat release rates in road tunnel fire: A review10.1016/j.tust.2018.12.018 ↗
2. A 3D Multi–scale geology modeling method for tunnel engineering risk assessment10.1016/j.tust.2017.12.003 ↗
3. Shear Strength of a Crushed Sandstone–Mudstone Particle Mixture10.15377/2409-9821.2014.01.01.4 ↗
4. Experimental Study on the Mechanical Properties of Rock Slope Collapse
5. Mechanisms of large deformation in soft rock tunnels: A case study of Huangjiazhai Tunnel10.1007/s10064-017-1155-8 ↗
6. Extension prediction model of soft rock tunnel deformation grade based on entropy weight method and rough set10.1007/s12665-021-10139-1 ↗
7. A critical review on the performance of yielding supports in squeezing tunnels10.1016/j.tust.2021.103815 ↗
8. Overcoming Squeezing in the Yacambú–Quibor Tunnel, Venezuela10.1007/s00603-009-0175-5 ↗
9. Tunnelling in squeezing rocks: Case histories10.1007/BF01042534 ↗
10. Case studies of groundwater flow into tunnels and an innovative water–gathering system for water drainage10.1016/j.tust.2008.08.006 ↗
11. An Analytical Model for Assessing Soft Rock Tunnel Collapse Risk and its Engineering Application
12. Displacement analysis of tunnel support in soft rock around a shallow highway tunnel at Golovec10.1016/j.enggeo.2004.05.003 ↗
13. Mechanism Analysis of Floor Heave in Taoshuya Tunnel and its Prevention Techniques
14. Małkowski, P., Ostrowski, Ł., and Bednarek, Ł. (2020). The Effect of Selected Factors on Floor Upheaval in Roadways—In Situ Testing. Energies, 13.10.3390/en13215686 ↗
15. Małkowski, P., Ostrowski, Ł., and Stasica, J. (2022). Modeling of Floor Heave in Underground Roadways in Dry and Waterlogged Conditions. Energies, 15.10.3390/en15124340 ↗
16. Rehman, H., Naji, A.M., Nam, K., Ahmad, S., Muhammad, K., and Yoo, H.-K. (2021). Impact of Construction Method and Ground Composition on Headrace Tunnel Stability in the Neelum–Jhelum Hydroelectric Project: A Case Study Review from Pakistan. Appl. Sci., 11.10.3390/app11041655 ↗
17. Li, D. (2006). Analysis of Coupling Effect of Stress Field and Seepage Field in Surrounding Rock of Expressway Multi Arch Tunnel. [Master’s Thesis, Central South University].
18. He, W. (2018). Features and Formation Mechanism of the Eastern–Sichuan—Western–Hunan–Hubei Fold–Thrust Belt in South China. [Ph.D. Thesis, China University Of Petroleum (Beijing)].
19. Physical Modeling of the Jura–Type Folds in Eastern Sichuan
20. Sandbox physical modelling with multiple detachment layers and its implication on structural evolution of East Sichuan Fold Belt
21. Origin and tectonic significance of a Mesozoic multi–layer over–thrust system within the Yangtze Block (South China)10.1016/S0040-1951(02)00646-7 ↗
22. Mechanisms of rainfall–induced landslides in gently inclined red beds in the eastern Sichuan Basin, SW China10.1007/s10346-015-0611-4 ↗
23. Xu, R., and Zhou, J. (2010). Red Bed and Dam, China University of Geosciences Press.
24. (2009). General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine of the People’s Republic of China; Standardization Administration of the People’s Republic of China. Methods for Determining the Physical and Mechanical Properties of Coal and Rock (Standard No. GB/T 23561.10–2010).
25. A novel in–situ stress measurement method incorporating non–oriented core ground re–orientation and acoustic emission: A case study of a deep borehole10.1016/j.ijrmms.2022.105079 ↗
26. Hoek, E., Wood, D., and Shah, S. (1992, January 14–17). A Modified Hoek–Brown Failure Criterion for Jointed Rock Masses. Proceedings of the Rock Characterization: ISRM Symposium, Eurock’92, Chester, UK.
27. Empirical Strength Criterion for Rock Masses
28. The Hoek–Brown Failure Criterion and GSI–2018 Edition10.1016/j.jrmge.2018.08.001 ↗
29. Marinos, P., and Hoek, E. (2000, January 19–24). GSI–A Geologically Friendly Tool for Rock Mass Strength Estimation. Proceedings of the ISRM International Symposium, Melbourne, Australia.
30. Wu, S. (2021). Rock Mechanics, Higher Education Press.
31. Analytical solutions for rock stress around square tunnels using complex variable theory10.1016/j.ijrmms.2015.09.018 ↗
32. Mechanical Analysis of Secondary Lining of High–Speed Railway Tunnel10.1007/s12205-017-1524-7 ↗
33. State Railway Administration (2017). Code for Design of Railway Tunnel, China Railway Press.
34. Model test to investigate the failure mechanisms and lining stress characteristics of shallow buried tunnels under unsymmetrical loading10.1016/j.tust.2014.11.003 ↗
35. Comparison and Selection of Advanced Supporting Methods and Asymmetric Optimization Analysis for Shallowly Buried Biased Tunnel
36. Stability Analysis and Construction Mechanics of Shallow Buried Bias Tunnel Openings
37. Concept of High Geostress and its Qualitative and Quantitative Definitions
38. Key Technologies for Controlling Large Deformation of Soft Rock Tunnels with High Geostress
39. Study on Mechanism of Circumferential Yielding Support for Soft Rock Tunnel with Large Deformation
40. Numerical evaluation of a yielding tunnel lining support system used in limiting large deformation in squeezing rock10.1007/s12665-018-7614-0 ↗
41. Guo, Q., Su, H., Jing, H., and Zhu, W. (2020). Effect of Wetting–Drying Cycle on the Deformation and Seepage Behaviors of Rock Masses around a Tunnel. Geofluids, 4237163.10.1155/2020/4237163 ↗
42. Cause Analysis of Longitudinal Cracks of Secondary Lining in railway Soft Rock Tunnel