Performance analysis for a double-shield TBM With the TBMs specification listed on Table 1 and the given data

in Table 2 and Figures 1 to 4 is possible to estimate the machine performance for the 3 disc different cutter types (V, CCS and Conical). This analysis was made by the calculation of the following parameters. 1. Specific Energy Using the graph shown in Figure 4, the optimum level of specific energy for V, CCS and Conical disc cutters is: DISC CUTTER TYPE V CCS Conical 2. Cutter Spacing To calculate cutter spacing we are ignoring the gauge cutters, as they only cut the perimeter. Furthermore, assuming that each cutter cuts the rock in a circular route and all of them are centred in the same point (the centre of TBMs face), is reasonable to assume that all the inner cutters can be aligned at the machines radius. Therefore is possible to calculate the cutter spacing by dividing the radius by the number of discs. s/d 11 10 4 OPTIMUM SE (KWh/m^3) 2.0 2.1 5.9

*To calculate the spacing it is also considered that the first 2 discs cut in a different arc, due the difficulty to cut in central area. By this arrangement, cutter spacing between these cutters is smaller improving their interaction to each other and then raising the cut efficiency in this area. 3. Cutting Depth Considering the TBM is operating in its optimum level, the cutting depth is given by the s/d ratio: For V disc cutters:

For CCS disc cutters:

For Conical disc cutters

4. Total Machine Thrust Assuming the machine is operating at optimum level and using the information on Table 2, the total machine thrust is given by the following equation:

Thus: For V disc cutters:

For CCS disc cutters:

For Conical disc cutters:

5. Torque of the machine Machine`s Torque is calculated by the following equation:

Assuming the average operating radius is equal to half of the TBM radius, which is 1.25m, Machine`s Torque for each disc type is given bellow: For V disc cutters: [ For CCS disc cutters: [ For Conical disc cutters: [ ] ] ]

6. Expected Power Assuming the power consumed on thrust is small and it can be ignored during calculation and also an efficiency of k=80%, machine expected power is calculated as the following:

For V disc cutters:

For CCS disc cutters:

For Conical disc cutters

7. Net Excavation Rate Considering that:

Thus:

For V disc cutters:

For CCS disc cutters:

For Conical disc cutters:

*It is assumed that the machine is operating at its optimum level of specific energy. 8. Daily Advance Rate Assuming an availability of 16hr/day and a utilization rate of 30%, the daily advance rate is calculated as follows:

For V disc cutters: ( )

For CCS disc cutters: ( )

For Conical disc cutters: ( )

9. Maximum Torque Power (using Fr maximum) For V disc cutters: * ( ) +

For CCS disc cutters: * ( ) +

For Conical disc cutters * ( ) +

Considering that the power available for rotation is 650hp (484.7kW), TBM with conical cutter discs would not be able to work in maximum rolling force.

Discs Comparison

Disc Type V CCS Conical

SE(KWh/m^3)

Daily Advance Rate (m/day) 13.5 22.70 15.46

Power Required

Maximum Power Required

2.0 2.1 5.9

< Machine capacity < Machine capacity < Machine capacity

< Machine capacity < Machine capacity > Machine capacity

Comparing the results for each disc, I would recommend the use of CCS disc cutters. Even though its specific energy is not the lowest, it is quite similar to V discs and it can achieve the highest daily advance. Besides, at the maximum rolling force, the power required is lower than the machine capacity, which does not happen with Conical cutters.