Full Text:   <71>

Summary:  <0>

CLC number: 

On-line Access: 2022-11-28

Received: 2022-03-15

Revision Accepted: 2022-07-14

Crosschecked: 2022-11-28

Cited: 0

Clicked: 160

Citations:  Bibtex RefMan EndNote GB/T7714

 ORCID:

Zhi-qiang ZHANG

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0051-8745

-   Go to

Article info.
Open peer comments

Journal of Zhejiang University SCIENCE A 2022 Vol.23 No.11 P.882-899

http://doi.org/10.1631/jzus.A2200134


Model test of the mechanism underpinning water-and-mud inrush disasters during tunnel excavation in sandstone and slate interbedded Presinian strata


Author(s):  Peng XU, Peng PENG, Rong-hua WEI, Zhi-qiang ZHANG

Affiliation(s):  School of Civil Engineering, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu, 610031, China; more

Corresponding email(s):   clark@swjtu.edu.cn

Key Words:  Water-and-mud inrush, Sandstone and slate interbedded Presinian strata, Model test, Evolution law, Thickness of water-resistant stratum, Inducing mechanism


Peng XU, Peng PENG, Rong-hua WEI, Zhi-qiang ZHANG. Model test of the mechanism underpinning water-and-mud inrush disasters during tunnel excavation in sandstone and slate interbedded Presinian strata[J]. Journal of Zhejiang University Science A, 2022, 23(11): 882-899.

@article{title="Model test of the mechanism underpinning water-and-mud inrush disasters during tunnel excavation in sandstone and slate interbedded Presinian strata",
author="Peng XU, Peng PENG, Rong-hua WEI, Zhi-qiang ZHANG",
journal="Journal of Zhejiang University Science A",
volume="23",
number="11",
pages="882-899",
year="2022",
publisher="Zhejiang University Press & Springer",
doi="10.1631/jzus.A2200134"
}

%0 Journal Article
%T Model test of the mechanism underpinning water-and-mud inrush disasters during tunnel excavation in sandstone and slate interbedded Presinian strata
%A Peng XU
%A Peng PENG
%A Rong-hua WEI
%A Zhi-qiang ZHANG
%J Journal of Zhejiang University SCIENCE A
%V 23
%N 11
%P 882-899
%@ 1673-565X
%D 2022
%I Zhejiang University Press & Springer
%DOI 10.1631/jzus.A2200134

TY - JOUR
T1 - Model test of the mechanism underpinning water-and-mud inrush disasters during tunnel excavation in sandstone and slate interbedded Presinian strata
A1 - Peng XU
A1 - Peng PENG
A1 - Rong-hua WEI
A1 - Zhi-qiang ZHANG
J0 - Journal of Zhejiang University Science A
VL - 23
IS - 11
SP - 882
EP - 899
%@ 1673-565X
Y1 - 2022
PB - Zhejiang University Press & Springer
ER -
DOI - 10.1631/jzus.A2200134


Abstract: 
water-and-mud inrush disasters have become a major challenge in underground engineering for the construction of tunnels in sandstone and slate interbedded Presinian strata. Disaster prediction and prevention rely in part on realistic modeling and observation of the disaster process, as well as the identification and examination of the underlying mechanisms. Based on the geological conditions and the historical records of the Xinping Tunnel on the China‍–‍Laos Railway, an engineering geological model of the water-and-mud inrush was established. A physical model test that accurately reproduced water-and-mud inrush during tunnel excavation in sandstone and slate interbedded strata was also carried out. Then, testing was conducted that examined the stress and strain, seepage pressure, and high-leakage flow of the surrounding rock. The results indicated that the water-and-mud inrush proceeded through three stages: seepage stage, high-leakage flow stage, and attenuation stage. In essence, the disaster was a catastrophic process, during which the water-resistant stratum was reduced to a critical safety thickness, a water-inrush channel formed, and the water-resistant stratum gradually failed under the influence of excavation unloading and in situ stress–seepage coupling. Parameters such as the stress and strain, seepage pressure, and flow of the surrounding rock had evident stage-related features during water-and-mud inrush, and their variation indicated the formation, development, and evolution of the disaster. As the tunnel face advanced, the trend of the stress‍–‍strain curve of the surrounding rock shifted from sluggish to rapid in its speed of increase. The characteristics of strain energy density revealed the erosion and weakening effect of groundwater on the surrounding rock. The seepage pressure and the thickness of the water-resistant stratum had a positive linear relationship, and the flow and thickness a negative linear relationship. There was a pivotal point at which the seepage pressure changed from high to low and the flow shifted from low to high. The thickness of the water-resistant stratum corresponding to the pivotal point was deemed the critical safety thickness.

前震旦系砂岩与板岩互层地层隧道开挖突水突泥灾害机理模型试验

作者:许芃1,2,彭鹏1,2,魏荣华1,2,张志强1,2
机构:1西南交通大学,土木工程学院,中国成都,610031;2西南交通大学,交通隧道工程教育部重点实验室,中国成都,610031
目的:前震旦系砂板岩互层地层突水突泥灾害给隧道工程建设带来了巨大的困难。本文旨在通过室内模型试验,再现前震旦系砂板岩互层隧道突水突泥灾害的灾变演化过程,分析围岩应力应变、渗透压力与流量随隔水层厚度减小的变化规律,揭示砂板岩互层隧道隔水层渗透失稳突水突泥的灾变诱发机制,为突水突泥灾害的防控提供重要参考。
创新点:1.建立了前震旦系砂板岩互层隧道突水突泥工程地质模型;2.通过模型试验再现了前震旦系砂板岩互层隧道突水突泥灾变演化过程;3.揭示了隔水层厚度减小过程中隧道围岩应力应变、渗流压力与流量等特征参数的变化规律。
方法:1.通过突水突泥灾害统计(图3和6)和地质结构特征(图4和5)分析,构建前震旦系砂板岩互层隧道突水突泥工程地质模型(图7);2.通过正交试验设计和材料配比试验,研制板岩和砂岩的流固耦合相似材料(图12和13);3.通过模型试验,再现前震旦系砂板岩互层隧道突水突泥灾变演化过程(图16)。
结论:1.前震旦系砂板岩互层隧道突水突泥灾变演化过程可划分为渗流阶段、高涌流阶段和衰减阶段3个阶段,围岩应力应变、渗流压力与流量的变化具有阶段性特征;2.围岩应变能密度特征揭示了地下水对围岩的侵蚀弱化作用。随着应变能密度的增大,围岩稳定性减弱,而拱顶在渗流阶段的应变能密度比拱肩高20.7%;3.渗流压力与隔水层厚度呈线性正相关关系,流量与隔水层厚度呈线性负相关关系。特征参数突变点为隔水层劣化特征点,该点对应的隔水层厚度为临界安全厚度;4.突水突泥本质上是在开挖卸荷和应力-渗流耦合作用下突水突泥通道的形成、隔水层厚度减小到临界厚度、隔水层逐渐丧失阻水能力的灾变过程。

关键词:突水突泥;砂板岩互层地层;模型试验;演变规律;隔水层厚度;诱发机制

Darkslateblue:Affiliate; Royal Blue:Author; Turquoise:Article

Reference

[1]ChooCS, OngDEL, 2020. Assessment of non-linear rock strength parameters for the estimation of pipe-jacking forces. Part 2. Numerical modeling. Engineering Geology, 265:105405.

[2]FanHB, ZhangYH, HeSY, et al., 2018. Hazards and treatment of karst tunneling in Qinling-Daba mountainous area: overview and lessons learnt from Yichang-Wanzhou Railway system. Environmental Earth Sciences, 77(19):679.

[3]JiangHM, LiL, RongXL, et al., 2017. Model test to investigate waterproof-resistant slab minimum safety thickness for water inrush geohazards. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 62:35-42.

[4]LiG, MaWB, TianSM, et al., 2021. Groundwater inrush control and parameters optimization of curtain grouting reinforcement for the Jingzhai Tunnel. Geofluids, 2021:6634513.

[5]LiLP, TuWF, ShiSS, et al., 2016. Mechanism of water inrush in tunnel construction in karst area. Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk, 7(S1):35-46.

[6]LiLP, SunSQ, WangJ, et al., 2020. Experimental study of the precursor information of the water inrush in shield tunnels due to the proximity of a water-filled cave. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 130:104320.

[7]LiSC, LiuHL, LiLP, et al., 2016. Large scale three-dimensional seepage analysis model test and numerical simulation research on undersea tunnel. Applied Ocean Research, 59:510-520.

[8]LiSC, GaoCL, ZhouZQ, et al., 2019. Analysis on the precursor information of water inrush in karst tunnels: a true triaxial model test study. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering, 52(2):373-384.

[9]LiangDX, JiangZQ, ZhuSY, et al., 2016. Experimental research on water inrush in tunnel construction. Natural Hazards, 81(1):467-480.

[10]MaD, BaiHB, MiaoXX, et al., 2016. Compaction and seepage properties of crushed limestone particle mixture: an experimental investigation for Ordovician karst collapse pillar groundwater inrush. Environmental Earth Sciences, 75(1):11.

[11]OngDEL, JongSC, ChengWC, 2022. Ground and groundwater responses due to shaft excavation in organic soils. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 148(8):05022003.

[12]PanDD, LiSC, XuZH, et al., 2019. Experimental and numerical study of the water inrush mechanisms of underground tunnels due to the proximity of a water-filled karst cavern. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, 78(8):6207-6219.

[13]WangJ, LiSC, LiLP, et al., 2020. Mechanism of water inrush in fractures and block collapse under hydraulic pressure. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, 177:625-642.

[14]WangXT, LiSC, XuZH, et al., 2019. Risk assessment of water inrush in karst tunnels excavation based on normal cloud model. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, 78(5):3783-3798.

[15]WuJ, LiSC, XuZH, et al., 2017. Flow characteristics and escape-route optimization after water inrush in a backward-excavated karst tunnel. International Journal of Geomechanics, 17(4):04016096.

[16]XuZL, LuoYB, ChenJX, et al., 2021. Mechanical properties and reasonable proportioning of similar materials in physical model test of tunnel lining cracking. Construction and Building Materials, 300:123960.

[17]XueYG, KongFM, LiSC, et al., 2021. Water and mud inrush hazard in underground engineering: genesis, evolution and prevention. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 114:103987.

[18]YangJ, YinZY, LaouafaF, et al., 2019a. Internal erosion in dike-on-foundation modeled by a coupled hydromechanical approach. International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 43(3):663-683.

[19]YangJ, YinZY, LaouafaF, et al., 2019b. Modeling coupled erosion and filtration of fine particles in granular media. Acta Geotechnica, 14(6):1615-1627.

[20]YangJ, YinZY, LaouafaF, et al., 2020a. Hydromechanical modeling of granular soils considering internal erosion. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 57(2):157-172.

[21]YangJ, YinZY, LaouafaF, et al., 2020b. Three-dimensional hydromechanical modeling of internal erosion in dike-on-foundation. International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 44(8):1200-1218.

[22]YangJ, YinZY, LiuYJ, et al., 2022. Multiphysics modelling of backfill grouting in sandy soils during TBM tunnelling. Acta Geotechnica, in press.

[23]YangWM, FangZD, WangH, et al., 2019a. Analysis on water inrush process of tunnel with large buried depth and high water pressure. Processes, 7(3):134.

[24]YangWM, YangX, FangZD, et al., 2019b. Model test for water inrush caused by karst caves filled with confined water in tunnels. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 12(24):749.

[25]YangWM, WangMX, ZhouZQ, et al., 2019c. A true triaxial geomechanical model test apparatus for studying the precursory information of water inrush from impermeable rock mass failure. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 93:103078.

[26]ZhangSC, GuoWJ, LiYY, et al., 2017. Experimental simulation of fault water inrush channel evolution in a coal mine floor. Mine Water and the Environment, 36(3):443-451.

[27]ZhaoN, WangYC, MengB, et al., 2018. Numerical simulation on the seepage properties of soil-rock mixture. Advances in Materials Science and Engineering, 2018:1859319.

Open peer comments: Debate/Discuss/Question/Opinion

<1>

Please provide your name, email address and a comment





Journal of Zhejiang University-SCIENCE, 38 Zheda Road, Hangzhou 310027, China
Tel: +86-571-87952783; E-mail: cjzhang@zju.edu.cn
Copyright © 2000 - 2022 Journal of Zhejiang University-SCIENCE