Metrika članka

  • citati u SCindeksu: 0
  • citati u CrossRef-u:0
  • citati u Google Scholaru:[=>]
  • posete u poslednjih 30 dana:2
  • preuzimanja u poslednjih 30 dana:0
članak: 10 od 220  
Back povratak na rezultate
Podzemni radovi
2019, br. 34, str. 27-41
jezik rada: engleski
vrsta rada: izvorni naučni članak
objavljeno: 12/07/2019
doi: 10.5937/PodRad1934027T
Creative Commons License 4.0
Sensitivity analysis of rock mass parameters estimate influence on decline support design using NATM
(naslov ne postoji na srpskom)
aUniverzitet u Beogradu, Rudarsko-geološki fakultet
bRakita Exploration d.o.o. Bor, Bor

e-adresa: torbica@rgf.bg.ac.rs, veljko.lapcevic@rgf.bg.ac.rs, wang.gang@rakita.net, nemanja.djokic@rgf.rs, miodrag.duranovic@rgf.rs

Sažetak

(ne postoji na srpskom)
Capital mine development is often faced with limited geotechnical databases and designers are faced with more or less accurate estimates of missing parameters. GSI classification if often used with numerical modelling and its rounding unit is ±5 as suggested by its creators. In situ stresses are usually estimated in such manner that vertical component is equal to the weight of the rocks above, while horizontal components may vary in wide range, starting with ratio to vertical component of 0.3 and even be several times higher than vertical component. Influence of estimate error of GSI and horizontal stress is analyzed for the Cukaru Peki location near Bor in Serbia. Zone in the rock mass valued with GSI of 40 at depth 160m is analyzed for the change of GSI value of ±5 and horizontal stress ratio between 0.5-1.5. Change of the unsupported length of decline and shotcrete layer thickness is tracked for different values of input parameters. Finally, best case and worst case scenarios are analyzed with results showing that shotcrete layer thickness could vary in range between 4-33cm, and unsupported lengths between 0.6-2m.

Ključne reči

Rock mass; Tunneling; NATM; GSI; Stress; Cukaru Peki; Bor

Reference

Barton, N., Lien, R., Lunde, J. (1974) Engineering classification of rock masses for the design of tunnel support. Rock mechanics, 6(4): 189-236
Bieniawski, Z.T. (1993) Classification of Rock Masses for Engineering: The RMR System and Future Trends. u: Rock Testing and Site Characterization, Pergamon, 553-573
Heidbach, O., et al. (2008) The 2008 release of the World Stress Map. [Online] Available from: http://www.world-stress-map.org. [Accessed 5/5/2019]
Hoek, E., Diederichs, M.S. (2006) Empirical estimation of rock mass modulus. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 43(2): 203-215
Hoek, E. (1994) Strength of rock and rock masses. ISRM News Journal, 4-16
Hoek, E. (2007) Practical Rock Engineering. Rocscience Inc
Rocscience Inc (2019) Phase2 Version 9.0: Finite Element Analysis for Excavations and Slopes. Toronto, Ontario
Teraghi, K., Richart, F.E. (1952) Stresses in Rock About Cavities. Géotechnique, 3(2): 57-90
Torbica, S., Lapčević, V. (2016) Model for estimation of stress field in the earth's crust. Podzemni radovi, vol. , br. 28, str. 9-17
Vlachopoulos, N., Diederichs, M.S. (2009) Improved Longitudinal Displacement Profiles for Convergence Confinement Analysis of Deep Tunnels. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering, 42(2): 131-146
Zang, A., Stephansson, O., Heidbach, O., Janouschkowetz, S. (2012) World Stress Map Database as a Resource for Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering. Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, 30(3): 625-646