Considerations for a District-Level, Tunnel-Risk, Screening Tool

Society for Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration
Ehsan Moradabadi Debra F. Laefer
Organization:
Society for Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration
Pages:
8
File Size:
528 KB
Publication Date:
Jan 1, 2016

Abstract

"To more rigorously address tunneling risks to above-ground structures, vulnerability evaluation of all structures along a tunnel route is required. This multi-block area along the route can be considered a district. To fully assess each structure within a tunnel’s zone of influence, a multi-block or district-level model may provide new insights as to risk evaluation and mitigation strategies. However populating such a model with the existing geometry of the built environment poses a major challenge as measured drawings are not readily available for all structures along a tunnel’s route. Cost-effective population of such a model could arguably involve remote sensing data in the form of laser scanning or photogramme-try. However even for unreinforced masonry structures, where external, above-ground geometries can be captured, without a prohibitively expensive building-by-building, in person survey many factors would remain unknown. To consider these uncertainties in an automatic way, a performance assess-ment framework is proposed. Such a framework allows a more rigorous, initial, risk quantification than is currently possible within the simple empirical models generally being used in industry when tunneling risk is initially assessed. This paper introduces (within the allowable space limits of this format) consider-ations for auto-population and application of a district-level, tunnel-risk screening tool. INTRODUCTION Challenging topography, intense urbanization and infrastructure development, combined with limited land availability and a growing awareness of environmental issues have lead to increasing usage of un-derground spaces to control aboveground traffic and provide essential services in metropolitan areas. Tunneling, however, is not without its own risks, especially with respect to aboveground structures whether it be widespread minor damage (Burland et al. 2001) or the more notable, although less fre-quent, large-scale collapses such as the 2003 Shanghai (Allianz 2015) or 2004 Singapore (Magnus et al. 2005) events."
Citation

APA: Ehsan Moradabadi Debra F. Laefer  (2016)  Considerations for a District-Level, Tunnel-Risk, Screening Tool

MLA: Ehsan Moradabadi Debra F. Laefer Considerations for a District-Level, Tunnel-Risk, Screening Tool. Society for Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration, 2016.

Export
Purchase this Article for $25.00

Create a Guest account to purchase this file
- or -
Log in to your existing Guest account