Professional Documents
Culture Documents
discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/300376371
CITATIONS READS
3 68
4 authors, including:
Bert Schaedlich
GuD Geotechnik und Dynamik Consult GmbH
9 PUBLICATIONS 20 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Bert Schaedlich on 12 April 2016.
ABSTRACT: This paper presents the application of a novel constitutive model for shotcrete in a tunnelling
project. The shotcrete model is based on elastoplastic strain hardening/softening plasticity and can account for
time dependent strength and stiffness, creep and shrinkage. The tensile strength and fracture energy are cali-
brated with results from bending tests on steel fibre reinforced concrete. The tunnelling example is a NATM
tunnel with temporary side drift walls, which are subjected to significant bending and are critical to the safety
of the tunnel during excavation. Different approaches to model the shotcrete lining are employed and the im-
pact of the features of the shotcrete model is discussed.
As shotcrete linings are loaded at a very early age, The model formulation is explained in detail in
the influence of time dependent material properties Schaedlich & Schweiger (2014), therefore only a
on the deformation behaviour and bearing capacity brief summary of the model is given here. The mod-
is much more significant than in regular concrete el has been implemented in the finite element soft-
structures. Notably, shotcrete strength and stiffness ware PLAXIS 2D 2012 (Brinkgreve et al. 2012). A
increase rapidly within the first few hours after ap- compression negative notation is employed through-
plication, while ductility and creep effects decrease. out the paper.
Shotcrete also exhibits plastic material behaviour be-
fore reaching the maximum strength, and material
2.1 Model parameters
strength reduces after the maximum strength has
been mobilised. The parameters of the shotcrete model are summa-
The current engineering approach to model shot- rised in Table 1.
crete linings in numerical simulations assumes a lin-
ear elastic material with a stepwise increase of the Table 1. Parameters of the shotcrete model
__________________________________________________
(artificially low) Youngs modulus in subsequent Name Unit Remarks
__________________________________________________
excavation stages. While realistic lining defor- E28 [GPa] Youngs modulus after 28d
mations may be obtained with this method, lining [--] Poissons ratio
stresses are usually too high, in particular if the lin- fc,28 [MPa] uniaxial compressive strength after 28d
ing is subjected to significant bending. Furthermore, ft,28 [MPa] uniaxial tensile strength after 28d
[] angle of dilatancy
capturing the redistribution of forces after cracking E1/E28 [--] ratio of Youngs modulus after 1d and 28d
of the lining requires the manual introduction of fc,1/ fc,28 [--] ratio of fc after 1d and 28d
plastic hinges, which is a difficult and time- fc0n [--] normalized initial yield stress (compr.)
consuming task in more complex numerical models. fcfn [--] normalized failure strength (compr.)
Alternatively, the non-linearity of the material fcun [--] normalized residual strength (compr.)
behaviour can be taken into account directly by us- cpp [--] plastic peak strain in uniaxial compression
at shotcrete ages of 1h, 8h and 24h
ing an appropriate constitutive model for the shot- Gc,28 [kN/m] fracture energy in compression after 28d
crete in the numerical simulation. Such a material ftun [--] normalized residual tensile strength
model has been developed at TU Graz in coopera- Gt,28 [kN/m] fracture energy in tension after 28d
tion with Plaxis b.v. and ILF Consulting Engineers. cr [--] ratio of creep vs. elastic strains
The calibration of this model and its application in t50cr [--] time at 50% of creep
shr [--] final shrinkage strain
tunnelling simulations is demonstrated in this paper. 50
shr
t__________________________________________________
[--] time at 50% of shrinkage
2.2 Yield surfaces and strain hardening/softening ln E1 / E 28
s stiff (18)
Plastic strains are calculated according to strain 28 1
hardening/softening elastoplasticity. The model em-
ploys a Mohr-Coulomb yield surface Fc for devia- The same approach is followed for the evolution of
toric loading and a Rankine yield surface Ft in the shotcrete strength with time. The ratio of ft / fc and
tensile regime (Fig. 1). In this study constant values the values of fcfn, fcun and ftun are assumed to be con-
of max = 37 and = 0 are employed. stant.
Alternatively, strength evolution can also be
modelled according to the early strength classes of
EN 14487-1 (2006). Mean values of these classes
have been assumed in the model, with class J3 lying
50% above the boundary between classes J2 and J3.
Figure 3 compares the evolution of fc according
to the early strength classes with the CEB-FIP model
code formulation for fc,28 = 25 MPa.
4.4 Results
The shotcrete model can account for various aspects
of shotcrete behaviour, namely hardening/softening
plasticity, time dependent strength and stiffness,
creep and shrinkage. However, not all of these as-
pects of shotcrete are equally important in a given Figure 9. Vertical lining deformation - shotcrete model
project. Therefore the model features have been ac-
tivated separately and their influence is compared is representative for a steel fibre content of
with regard to a reference elastic calculation, in 30 kg/m3) results in failure during excavation of the
which a stepwise increase of E from 5 to 15 GPa in central pillar. This demonstrates that the tensile
subsequent excavation phases is assumed. strength of the shotcrete is essential for the tunnel
Figure 8 compares the vertical lining displace- stability, even though there is little influence of ten-
ments along the circumference after phase 15 (end sion softening on lining deformations.
of excavation) for 3 elastic cases. The largest defor- This becomes obvious if stresses in the side drift
mations occur at the tunnel crown (L = 19 m). Less walls are considered, which are subjected to signifi-
surprisingly, assuming a constant E = 30 GPa yields cant bending. Figure 10 shows the tensile principal
the smallest deformation, but also the model with stresses for different assumptions for the shotcrete
time dependent stiffness is stiffer than the approach after centre bench excavation. The elastic calcula-
with E = 5/15 GPa. tion with E = 5/15 GPa yields tensile stresses of ~15
MPa, which are far beyond the tensile strength of the
material. Applying the shotcrete model without the
softening part limits tensile stresses to the tensile
strength of 3.0 MPa, but only with the softening part
of the model the tension cracking and subsequent
strength reduction can be taken into account. As-
suming a lower tensile strength and fracture energy
facilitates an additional hinge forming at mid height
of the side drift walls, and leads to subsequent col-
lapse of the tunnel. Adding creep strains reduces
stresses slightly, but does not prevent the occurrence
of tensile cracks.
REFERENCES