Eine Plattform für die Wissenschaft: Bauingenieurwesen, Architektur und Urbanistik
Eine Plattform für die Wissenschaft: Bauingenieurwesen, Architektur und Urbanistik
Risk evaluation in tunneling excavation methods
Abstract Risk management is of paramount importance for the success of tunneling works and it is linked to the main excavation methods used: the Conventional Excavation Method (CEM) and the Tunnel Boring Machine Method (TBM). Considering the importance of the “Safety and Health” criterion for the choice of the excavation method, the fact that this criterion is usually mostly focused on the structural component, and taking in account that there is no research showing the advantages of one of the methods over the other, this research intends to conduct a comparative risk analysis between both methods, taking into consideration the different constraints that might appear. In order for this comparison to hold true, a risk evaluation is presented, analysing 12 risks and 4 risk factors in 3 phases, so that the impact of the different variables can really be appraised. This research is made in a scenario of the construction of a 3.5 km-long tunnel in a non-urban area, with an unproblematic rock mass. The final result will be a detailed analysis of the influence of “Safety and Health” criteria, useful for both the technical and the scientific community, something that has never been done before.
Risk evaluation in tunneling excavation methods
Abstract Risk management is of paramount importance for the success of tunneling works and it is linked to the main excavation methods used: the Conventional Excavation Method (CEM) and the Tunnel Boring Machine Method (TBM). Considering the importance of the “Safety and Health” criterion for the choice of the excavation method, the fact that this criterion is usually mostly focused on the structural component, and taking in account that there is no research showing the advantages of one of the methods over the other, this research intends to conduct a comparative risk analysis between both methods, taking into consideration the different constraints that might appear. In order for this comparison to hold true, a risk evaluation is presented, analysing 12 risks and 4 risk factors in 3 phases, so that the impact of the different variables can really be appraised. This research is made in a scenario of the construction of a 3.5 km-long tunnel in a non-urban area, with an unproblematic rock mass. The final result will be a detailed analysis of the influence of “Safety and Health” criteria, useful for both the technical and the scientific community, something that has never been done before.
Risk evaluation in tunneling excavation methods
João Pedro Couto (Autor:in) / Aires Camões (Autor:in) / Manuel Luis Tender (Autor:in)
Aufsatz (Zeitschrift)
Elektronische Ressource
Unbekannt
Metadata by DOAJ is licensed under CC BY-SA 1.0
Underground excavation and tunneling
| British Library Conference Proceedings | 1999
Rapid excavation and tunneling conference
Elsevier | 1986
Machanical Excavation for Tunneling Works
| British Library Online Contents | 2006
Rapid excavation and tunneling conference
Elsevier | 1986