• Journal of Korean Tunnelling and Underground Space Association
• /
• v.11 no.1
• /
• pp.57-70
• /
• 2009

Considerable advance has been made on research on effect of steel pipe Umbrella Arch Method (UAM) and mechanical reinforcement mechanism through numerical analyses and experiments. Due to long analysis time of three-dimensional analysis and its complexity, un-quantitative two-dimensional analysis is dominantly used in the design and application, where equivalent material properties of UAM reinforced area and ground are used, For this reason, development of reasonable, theoretical, quantitative and easy to use design and analysis method is required. In this study, both field UAM tests and laboratory tests were performed in the residual soil to highly weathered rock; field tests to observe the range of reinforcement, and laboratory tests to investigate the change of material properties between prior to and after UAM reinforcement. It has been observed that the increase in material property of neighboring ground is negligible, and that only stiffness of steel pipe and cement column formed inside the steel pipe and the gap between steel pipe and borehole contributes to ground reinforcement. Based on these results and concept of Convergence Confinement Method (CCM), two dimensional axisymmetric analyses have been performed to obtain the longitudinal displacement profile (LDP) corresponding to arching effect of tunnel face, UAM effect and effect of supports. In addition, modified load distribution method in two dimensional plane-strain analysis has been suggested, in which effect of UAM is transformed to internal pressure and modified load distribution ratios are suggested. Comparison between the modified method and conventional method shows that larger displacement occur in the conventional method than that in the modified method although it may be different depending on ground condition, depth and size of tunnel, types of steel pipe and initial stress state. Consequently, it can be concluded that the effect of UAM as a beam in a longitudinal direction is not considered properly in the conventional method.