DSpace Repository

Ground uncertainty implications in the application of the observational method to underground works. Comparative examples.

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Bilé Serra, J. pt_BR
dc.contributor.author Miranda, L. pt_BR
dc.contributor.editor James L. Withiam pt_BR
dc.contributor.editor Kok-Kwang Phoon pt_BR
dc.contributor.editor Mohamad Hussein pt_BR
dc.date.accessioned 2020-06-09T17:33:51Z pt_BR
dc.date.accessioned 2020-06-22T09:53:15Z
dc.date.available 2020-06-09T17:33:51Z pt_BR
dc.date.available 2020-06-22T09:53:15Z
dc.date.issued 2013-03-03 pt_BR
dc.identifier.citation https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784412763 pt_BR
dc.identifier.isbn 9780784412763 pt_BR
dc.identifier.uri https://repositorio.lnec.pt/jspui/handle/123456789/1012731
dc.description.abstract The geotechnical risk of a tunnel is strongly dependent on ground properties and on the construction techniques and rate of advance. In the urban environment, design is often determined by serviceability limit states of adjacent structures and, to a lesser extent, of the tunnel itself. The observational method (OM) is an effective risk management tool in geotechnical engineering and particularly in tunnel construction. It helps with deciding in the presence of uncertainty in ground conditions. A fundamental prerequisite for its application is that only epistemic uncertainties are present, so that uncertainty reduction of the relevant parameters may be achieved by monitoring. Deterministic models are often used, limiting the versatility and significance of the OM. In this paper conceptual considerations about the implications of ground uncertainty with due account of spatial correlation are presented. A combined computational framework for random finite difference models based on MATLAB and FLAC is introduced. A case study of a tunnel in stiff clayey ground is presented to evaluate the relative importance of the magnitude, type of variability, and spatial correlation of both deformability and shear resistance parameters. A simulated application of the OM is presented with a comparative analysis of the decisions in an OM approach. pt_BR
dc.language.iso eng pt_BR
dc.publisher ASCE pt_BR
dc.rights restrictedAccess pt_BR
dc.subject ground uncertainty pt_BR
dc.subject observational method pt_BR
dc.subject underground works pt_BR
dc.subject tunnels pt_BR
dc.subject settlements pt_BR
dc.title Ground uncertainty implications in the application of the observational method to underground works. Comparative examples. pt_BR
dc.type workingPaper pt_BR
dc.description.pages 254-270 pt_BR
dc.identifier.local San Diego, California, United States pt_BR
dc.description.volume GSP 229 pt_BR
dc.description.sector DG/CHEFIA pt_BR
dc.description.magazine Foundation Engineering in the Face of Uncertainty: Honoring Fred H. Kulhawy pt_BR
dc.identifier.conftitle Geo-Congress 2013 pt_BR
dc.contributor.peer-reviewed SIM pt_BR
dc.contributor.academicresearchers NAO pt_BR
dc.contributor.arquivo SIM pt_BR


Files in this item

Files Size Format View

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search DSpace


Advanced Search

Browse

My Account