TY  - BOOK
AU  - Hsieh,Yu-shan
AU  - Rantucci,Giovanni
AU  - Chandra,Sarvesh
AU  - Balasubramaniam,A.S.
ED  - Ret-Ser Engineering Agency, R.O.C., 
TI  - Design and construction aspects of the central tunnel in Taiwan, Republic of China
T2  - Thesis
PY  - 1987///
CY  - Bangkok
PB  - Asian Institute of Technology
KW  - Tunnels
KW  - Taiwan
KW  - Design
N1  - A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Engineering, School of Engineering and Technology; Thesis (M.Eng.) - Asian Institute of Technology, 1987
N2  - The support requirements of a section of the Central tunnel (Part  of the South Link Railway Project in Taiwan, R.O.C.) are evaluated using  the New Austrian tunneling method. The analysis is firstly conducted  using four empirical methods the Geomechanics Classification (RMR  method), BIENIAWSKI (1973), the NGI-Q system, BARTON et al., (1974), Rock  Structure Rating (RSR concept), WICKHAM et. al. (1974) and Rock Quality  Designation (RQD), DEERE et al. (1969). Then the carrying capacity of a  modified support system based on an observational approach in the tunnel  is checked by the s hear failure theory of the NAHL An analytical method,  rock-support interaction analysis, is used to determine support requirements for induced stress conditions. These predictions are compared in  order to investigate the applicability and flexibility of the modified  support systems to the rock conditions encountered. A valuation, comparison and correlation of design methods, recommend support works and  geological parameters involved is carried out. A cost analysis of the  support systems provides a comparative evaluation of the predicted support in terms of economy.  The results of the analysis indicate that the rock mass qualities  investigated range from fair to very poor and the corresponding actual  supports used can be reduced to 28% and 8% in cost for fair and poor rock  condition, but should be increased to 10% for very poor rock condition.  The modified support systems are generally more conservative than those  recommended by the four empirical methods; however, t:hey are less conservative than those of a rock-support interaction analysis
UR  - http://203.159.5.9/ait-thesis/detail.php?q=B19289
ER  -