See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/317933593

Performance Analysis of Different Radial Joint Shapes in Segmental Tunnel

Lining

Article · June 2017

CITATIONS READS

0 1,943

1 author:

Reza Osgoui
GEODATA Engineering SPA
16 PUBLICATIONS   100 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

SFRC Segmental Tunnel lining View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Reza Osgoui on 27 June 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Proceedings of the World Tunnel Congress 2017 – Surface challenges – Underground solutions. Bergen, Norway.

Performance Analysis of Different Radial Joint Shapes in

Segmental Tunnel Lining.
R. R. Osgoui, A. Poli, G. Quaglio
GEODATA Engineering SPA, Turin, Italy.

ABSTRACT: One of the main concerns regarding the performance of radial joints in segmental
tunnel lining has not well studied in spite of many researches and experiences. The radial
(longitudinal) joint of segmental lining, i.e. the contact joint between segment to segment in a
segmental ring, is chosen and designed in the form of either flat or curved shape. From technical and
economical points of view, applying design criteria for the most suitable shape of radial joint plays a
major role in dimensioning of segmental tunnel lining. This paper deals with the performance
analysis of different features of the radial joints to be applied for both RC and SFRC segmental
linings. In more details, the design criteria described in this paper mainly focuses on determining
bursting and splitting stresses resulted from radial joint action and on evaluating required traditional
steel or fiber characteristics to meet ULS requirements. Three distinct calculation methods are
suggested to help the design engineer evaluating and choosing the most effective radial joint shape.
All advantages and disadvantages of such radial joint shapes are well addressed in this paper.

1 INTRODUCTION design of segmental lining, none of these

The idea of application of curved radial joint, provides a technical justification to the criteria
instead of flat radial joint, in designing considered for the design of a suitable shape of
segmental tunnel lining could be attributed to radial joint in segment. This gap is more evident
the need for the joint optimization in terms of referring to the available international design
concentration of bearing stresses in concrete guidelines and codes for segmental tunnel lining
segment since it exceeds, in most cases, the (AFTES 1993, ITA 2000, JSCE 2006, BTS
allowable bearing compressive strength of 2010, DAUB 2013, ITAtech 2016, ACI 2016).
concrete in long term state. The definition of
radial (longitudinal) joint is presented in Figure TUNNEL SEGMENT
1.
Radial joint
Such a higher rate of bearing stress could be
accredited to the reduction of the effective
contact area on the radial joint which often takes
place for the flat radial joint shape in most
shield-tunnel cases in soft ground condition Radial (longitudinal)
joint (between
where the combination of the axial force- segments)
flexural moment causes a considerable effect of
“joint birdsmouthing” often on the radial flat
joint.
The invention of double-convex or concave-
convex joint helps keeping the radial joint Circumferential
contact width unchanged even after joint joint (between
rotation and possible joint off-set, considerably rings)

reducing, even eliminating the effect of joint

birdsmouthing.
Although there have been a number of
valuable simplified or complex approaches for Figure 1. Definition of joints in a segmental tunnel ring.

1
 Proceedings of the World Tunnel Congress 2017 – Surface challenges – Underground solutions. Bergen, Norway.

Hence, it is of paramount importance to the under compression) obtained by means of

design engineer of the segmental lining, who is middle-third rule (Hearn, 2000):
liable for dimensioning segmental lining for
both geometric and strength-durability aspects, N ×h
M critical = (1)
to consider the most suitable shape for radial 6
joint as long as the instructions provided in where N and h are the acting normal force and
project design specifications is in agreement. the effective contact length of the radial flat
This paper is, therefore, indented to provide joint, respectively.
profoundly design engineer with mechanical The occurrence of birdsmouthing has a very
mechanism of flat and curved radial joints, significant impact on the concentration of
suggested three design methods, and finally pros bearing compressive stress in concrete segment.
and cons of both flat and curved joints. The The greater the joint birdsmouthing, the less the
main message of this paper, from technical contact joint area, the higher the compressive
point of view, is to help design engineer, stress in segment. To reduce the effect of the
considering different design criteria of an joint birdsmouthing, the curved joint could be
individual segmental lining project, being able substituted for flat joint.
to choose the most appropriate joint solution, The simple way for the determination of joint
taking into account even the economical rotation “α” is that of applying simplified
aspects. geometrical relations (Osgoui et al. 2016),
commonly used in design stage. However, the
2 RADIAL JOINT ROTATION more precise and sophisticated ways are the
When subjected to the ground and water load, application of analytical formulations. i.e those
the segmental ring is ovalized (a deformed form of Janβen Joint Model (1983) or to apply a 3D
of a circular ring being shorter diameter at sophisticated numerical model, but the latter it
vertical and longer diameter at horizontal axes). is very complex and time-consuming. Normally
Due to the shape of the rhomboidal and the radial joint rotation is described in terms of
trapezoidal segment shapes the segmental ring bending curvature of the section (M-ϕ).
ovalization will solely be limited to deformation
due to ground loading. 3 FEATURES OF THE RADIAL JOINTS IN
The occurrence radial joint ovalization SEGMENTS
causes the joint rotation. The joint rotation has a The ground and water load, which act on
very significant impact on the joint performance segmental lining, is transferred on radial joints
in such a way that the rotation gives rise to the between segments. Such loads bring about the
geometry eccentricity in addition to the
tensile stress within segments causing bursting
resulting load eccentricities; finally, leading to and splitting in both circumferential and
the birdsmouthing of the joint. transversal directions. The bursting tensile
Hence, the design of joint must consider the splitting reinforcements should be properly
effect of the eccentricities created in the radial quantified and arranged to act against tensile
joint due to rotation. splitting stresses in circumferential and
transversal directions. However, in case of
2.1 Mechanism of radial joint Birdsmouthing SFRC segments, the replacement of steel rebars
are waved in circumferential direction rather
When a jointed segmental tunnel lining is they are placed only at transversal direction in
subjected to the ground/water load, it results in the form of lateral chords.
ring ovalization due to deflection / distortion of Regardless of type of radial joint shape, the
the ring. Such ring deflection/distortion is quantity of such reinforcements should be
manifested at the adjacent segment joints giving determined such that all necessary structural
rise to radial joint rotation because of presence verifications in ultimate state are satisfied.
of load eccentricities at radial joint. The rotation Radial joints are either designed as curved or
of radial joint in presence of eccentricities can flat. Curved joints are considered in design to
lead to possible joint opening or so-called “joint overcome the problems of flat joints in specific
birdsmouthing”. This phenomenon is likely to conditions and to optimize the performance of
take place if the acting bending moment on radial joints.
radial joint exceeds the critical bending moment
Mcritical (the limit in which the joint is fully
2
 Proceedings of the World Tunnel Congress 2017 – Surface challenges – Underground solutions. Bergen, Norway.

Although curved joints reduce eccentricity segment to be easily guided into its position
and improve articulation, flat joints sustain a during the assembly stage and it functions as a
higher load at failure, assuming the flat joints shear pin. Moreover, the radial flat joint can be
are in full contact (Woods 2003). However with even tightened by means of straight spear or
joint rotation the maximum sustainable load for curved steel bolts, even though the latter has not
flat joints reduces rapidly while rotation has recently been used. A scheme of a typical radial
little impact on the capacity of curved joints. flat joint is shown in Figure 3.
The resulting rotation causes a change in The long-term ground and water loads acting
stress concentration at radial joint reducing the on the segmental lining are transmitted into the
joint contact area at radial flat joint (see Figure segments by means of mainly radial joints and
2). Further a joint rotation would cause the partially circumferential joints (JSCE, 2006;
lips/steps at radial joint resulting in a Osgoui & Pescara, 2014). The distribution of
considerable reduction of the joint contact width such a load on radial flat joint is best described
and also influence the centre line of the stress in Figure 4. To calculate the effective and re-
line. On the contrary, the curved joint is to some assigned contact areas of a radial flat joint, it is
extent independent of effect of rotation on essential that the load eccentricities (M/N) be
reducing contact area. known as given in details in Figure 4.

Figure 3. Geometry of a radial flat joint.

Just as the effective contact width is

considerably influenced by the amount of the
eccentricity, so is the compressive bearing
capacity of the flat joint. Hence, in some worse
load combinations, the possibility that flat joint
shape would not be an applicable solution is
high. In this case, the solution of curved joint
would be thought. Osgoui et al. (2016) have
developed a geometric method to calculate the
effective joint area associated with the
Figure 2. Illustrative sketches for the comparison between
radial flat and curved joints in terms of contact width and
calculated eccentricity as well shown in Figure
stress distribution change with joint rotation (PAS 8810. 4. The suggested geometric solution let
2016). determining the intact and redistributed contact
areas subjected to axial force (hoop) on radial
joint.
3.1 Radial flat joint A probabilistic calculation has been carried
The radial flat joint is the ordinary shape of joint out for different distribution of flat joint shapes,
and it is used for a common joint design. It is varying dimensions of gasket groove, guiding
also called as block joint. Unless otherwise bar, chamfers, and eccentricity, to evaluate the
instructed, this type of radial joint must be correlation between concrete bearing capacity
considered during geometric design of a and eccentricity.
segment. This kind of radial joint is often
accompanied with guiding rod allowing the
3
 Proceedings of the World Tunnel Congress 2017 – Surface challenges – Underground solutions. Bergen, Norway.

Figure 4. Distribution of load on radial flat joint and the calculation of initially effective and re-assigned contact width
and length, considering load eccentricity and geometrical relations to be used in determining the effective contact area of
the joint (left: radial direction , right: circumferential direction).

evaluated the primary results in terms of

As can be seen from Figure 5, the bearing inducing eccentricity, joint rotation, and the
capacity of the concrete “Frdu” has dramatically extent of the compressive bearing stress on the
been decreased with increasing the eccentricity radial joint compared with flat joint. The
to such an extent that the acting force “Nsd” geometries of double-convex and concave-
exceeds the bearing capacity of the concrete, convex joint shapes are shown in Figure 6.
resulting in segment damage. As explained The design of curved joint must consider the
earlier, this case is more likely to happen when effects of stress concentrations created at radial
the load eccentricity exceeds the critical joints. For curved joints the bearing stresses
eccentricity of the section (h/6) due to “σcmax” and joint contact width “ac” must firstly
birdsmouthing effect. This is, in fact, the main be calculated.
drawback of the radial flat joint that demand a One of the main advantages of both the
practically alternative solution to keep the radial convex-convex and concave-convex radial
joint performance optimized. joints is that load is transferred through the
middle third of the segment, eliminating stress
2
b=1600mm concentrations on either the intrados or extrados
1.8
h=300mm of the segment. Another main advantage is that
1.6
1.4 Radial joint
e=0.0-80mm
d=26-36mm joint rotation is approximately half of the
1.2
dimensions f=20-35mm
b=30-50mm amount that occurs with a flat joint and the
c=25-40mm
equal joint effective contact area before and
Frdu / Nsd

1
0.8 after joint rotation, considerably reducing
0.6 birdsmouthing.
0.4
e critical /h However, the lipping due to effect of rotation
0.2
0
is disregarded for the concave-convex pined
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 e/h [-]
joint. This special kind of joint should carefully
be designed due to very high stress
Figure 5 Probabilistic demonstration of the main
concentration at joint.
drawback of the radial flat joint in terms of reduction of The induced compressive stress of the
bearing capacity with increasing joint eccentricity. concrete, the width of stress contact between
either two convex or concave-convex surfaces
are dependent on only elastic properties of the
3.2 Curved joint concrete and the radii of the curves. They are
This solution, on the contrary, should be applied simply calculated through the theory of
when either the project prescription obligates to elasticity (Timoshenko & Goodier, 1970):
use such a joint shape or the design engineer
acknowledges for such a joint shape, having
4
 Proceedings of the World Tunnel Congress 2017 – Surface challenges – Underground solutions. Bergen, Norway.

Double-convex joint Concave-convex joint Concave-convex pined joint

Figure 6. Geometry of curved radial joints, contact length (ac), and stress concentration zone deduced (σcmax).

Double-convex R1 ¹ R2 Depending on the desirable reinforcing

elements to be used in concrete segment and
æ 8 N R1 × R2 1 - n 2 ö kind of analysis, one can alternatively choose
ac = 2 çç ´ ´ ÷ (2) one of the following simplified methods in
è p R1 + R2 E ÷ø design.
Concave-convex R1 > R2
4.1 Calculation method 1
æ 8 N R1 × R2 1 - n 2
ö These calculation methods rely on two separate
ac = 2 çç ´ ´ ÷÷ (3)
è p R1 - R2 E ø analyses. The first analysis is to determine the
ultimate bearing capacity of the concrete in
where N is the axial (hoop) force on radial joint, compression and the second is to calculate the
R is the radii of curved joints, E is the elastic tensile splitting stress by means of one of the
modulus of the concrete in long-term condition practical methods such as analytical approach
with creep effect (~E/2), and ν is the Poisson’s (based on theory of elasticity, Iyangar 1962 and
ratio of concrete segment. The bearing contact Leonhardt 1977), numerical models by means of
width should then be used to check both existing suitable software (based on both elastic
compressive bearing and bursting tensile theorem and plastic analysis in modelling the
stresses given in follow. post-peak behaviour of the concrete after crack
In the next sections, we will show how to propagation).
calculate the bearing compressive stress and Nevertheless, during design stage and
bursting tensile stresses for both radial flat and considering the time limitation, the complexity
curved joints which provide us with the of the numerical modelling, the usage of the
performance of joint action. analytical elastic solutions gives also reliable
and realistic results. Of course, due to
4 PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF importance of design the use of 3D calculation
CURVED AND FLAT RADIAL JOINTS software is often indispensable.

The performance of radial joint, flat and curved, 4.1.1 Bearing compressive stress due to actions
is best analyzed in terms of compressive bearing of radial flat joint
capacity and bursting/splitting stresses induced The criteria to be respected in this verification is
in segment. Irrespective of shape of the radial based on the fact that the compressive force
joint (flat vs curved), three distinct methods are deduced in segment normal to the radial joint
suggested for the design of the radial joint. axis (Nsd) should be lower than that resistant
5
 Proceedings of the World Tunnel Congress 2017 – Surface challenges – Underground solutions. Bergen, Norway.

ULS capacity of the concrete under to flat joint design. However, the latter case is
compression action (Frdu) and ultimate load quite unlikely to happen.
capacity of the concrete (Fmax) (EN 1992-1-
1:2004), point 6.7 reference to punctual loads: 4.1.3 Bursting tensile splitting stresses
In order to calculate the bursting-tensile
N sd £ Frdu £ Fmax (4) splitting stresses resulting from the action of
where radial joint, the theory of the concentrated force,
based on elasticity solution, is used.
N sd = N ´ b ´ g f (5) The analytical methods developed by Iyengar
(1962) and Leonharddt (1977) might
Ac1 alternatively be used to determine the peak
Frdu = AC0 ´ f cd ´ (6) transverse tensile stress and the magnitude of
Ac0 the tensile splitting for concentrated forces
acting on a prismatic member. These methods
Fmax = 3.0 ´ f cd ´ Ac 0 (7) are quite quick and precise and are safely
where N is the normal force acting on radial applied in preliminary and detail design stages.
(longitudinal) joint surface calculated by means Nevertheless, thanks to available 2D and 3D
of either analytical or numerical methods, b is structural software that makes it possible to
the width of the segment, and γf is the load calculate the tensile stresses at radial joints more
factor in accordance with the used codes, Ac0 is precisely but rather time-consuming and often
the effective contact area of the radial joint, Ac1 difficult to define boundary conditions
is the re-distributed surface area below radial correctly. However, the results of mentioned
joint face, and fcd is the long-term design method are found to be relatively comparable.
compressive strength of the concrete (EN 1992- In terms of stress, the bursting tensile
1-1:2004). splitting stress “σy” is suggested to be
determined by means of diagrams developed by
4.1.2 Bearing compressive stress due to actions Iyengar (1962) or Leonharddt (1977). The
of radial curved joint former is presented in Figure 7.
The maximum bearing compressive stress Having been calculated the bursting tensile
“σcmax” for radial curved joint is obtained as splitting force “Z” explicitly by integration of
(Figure 6): stress (Equation 11) or implicitly by Equation
12, the quantity of the required reinforcements
Double-convex R1 ¹ R2 for both circumferential and transversal
directions are simply obtained. In this solution,
æN R +R E ö it is assumed not considering any contribution
s c max = çç ´ 1 2
´ ÷
2 ÷
(8) of the concrete in terms of its tensile splitting
è 2p R1 × R2 1 - n ø strength (fctd) and all tensile splitting capacity
should be withstood through tensile splitting
Concave-convex R1 > R2 capacity of the reinforcements. The bursting
tensile splitting force is obtained as:
æN R -R E ö
s c max = çç ´ 1 2
´ ÷
2 ÷
(9) x=d
è 2p R1 × R2 1 - n ø Z= òs y dx (11)
And the criterion for verification is:
or
s c max £ 2 f ck (10)
æ l ,b ö
which is considered as the first structural Z = 0.25 N sd çç1 - 0 0 ÷÷ (12)
verification for the curved joint. The Equation è l1 , b1 ø
10 is expressed in terms of maximum stress and
it is similar to Equation 7 stated in terms of where l0 and l1 are the effective contact and re-
maximum force. In case of problem in this distributed lengths of the radial joint on
verification, one should increase the class of circumferential (tangential) direction ,
concrete and/or the segment thickness or switch respectively while b0 and b1 are the effective
contact and redistributed widths of the radial
joint in transversal (radial) direction (Figure 4).
6
 Proceedings of the World Tunnel Congress 2017 – Surface challenges – Underground solutions. Bergen, Norway.

The tensile splitting reinforcements In case of exceeding calculated eccentricity

(traditional steel rebars) provide the total from the critical eccentricity 0.05h, the reduced
ultimate steel capacity of: ultimate splitting capacity of the concrete
segment should be considered as:
Fst = Ast × f yd (13)
æ3ö
where fyd is the design yield strength of the steel N usc1 = ç ÷ × f ctd × h × a jo int (15)
reinforcement. è4ø

sy
where αjoint is the reduction factor for
s0 a
=0
N
s 0 = sd
eccentricity > 0.05h. The criterion for the
d bd
sy
verification of splitting capacity, therefore, is:
N sd a d
N usc1 £ N sd
a
sy (16)
a d
d
= 0.3
If such verification is not satisfied the radial
joint needs to be reinforced by means of
traditional steel rebars. In this case the ultimate
splitting capacity is calculated as (Swartz et al.
2002):

x
N ucs 2 = 4.45 × f ctd × h × b + 4 × Fst (17)
d

Fst = Ast × f yd (18)

Figure 7. Normograph for the determination of bursting
tensile splitting stress (Iyangar 1962) where b is the width of segment, Fst is the
ultimate capacity provided by steel rebars, Ast is
the steel area within a distance from the joint
4.2 Calculation method 2 surface equal to 0.8 times the segment
Compared with method 1, this method is based thickness.
on the concept of pre-stressed concrete end As can be inferred from Equation 17,
blocks (BS 8110, 1997). The calculation method contrary to method 1, the ultimate splitting
2 can alternatively be used for both flat and capacity is a function of mutual contribution of
curved radial joint shapes. This solution allows both concrete and steels. Based on large-scale
for the benefit of the tensile strength of the tests, Equation 17 has been found to be a lower-
concrete itself in addition to complementary bound to ultimate capacities for segments within
action of reinforcements. Compared with the reinforcement ratio (Astfyd / Acfctd) range of
method 1, this method is quite optimistic in 0.375 to 1.2 (Swartz et al.2002).
design and this concept is also used for SFRC For tensile splitting, reinforcements should
design. be through-thickness ties that are adequately
The design is based on a contact width of anchored at each side of the joint, and are
approximately 0.45 times the thickness of the located within a distance of about 80-85% of the
segment. The basis of this theory is to calculate thickness of the segment from the face of the
the ultimate splitting capacity against acting joint. Finally, the verification of splitting
tensile splitting force (ultimate splitting capacity in presence of steel bars is satisfied
capacity, Nusc) taking into account that the only if:
tensile splitting is typically the more critical N usc 2 ³ N sd (19)
mode of failure for the radial joints (i.e. rather
than low-angle shearing): If no, the amount of the splitting reinforcement
should be incremented so that this criterion is
æ 1.9 ö fulfilled. As regards ULS, the splitting
N usc0 = ç ÷ × f ctd × b × h for plain concrete (14)
èp ø reinforcement to sustain the bursting tensile
stress is assumed to act at its design strength of
where fctd is the design direct tensile strength of 0.87fyk. However, as for SLS, the same
concrete (fctd=fctk0.05/γc) ,h is the thickness of the calculation should be done but the
segment, b is the width of the segment. reinforcement stress must be limited to 200MPa
as also stipulated in some design specifications
7
 Proceedings of the World Tunnel Congress 2017 – Surface challenges – Underground solutions. Bergen, Norway.

provided by clients. In this case, as long as the lsp is the span length
maximum tensile stress exceeds the b is the specimen width
characteristic tensile strength of the concrete hsp is the distance between the notch tip and the
(fctk,0.05), all the transverse splitting forces must top of the specimen (125mm)
be carried by reinforcement (like calculation
method 1), remaining the maximum allowable
stress of 200MPa.

4.3 Calculation method 3 suggested for SFRC

This calculation method is proposed for the
SFRC application to evaluate the tensile
strength capacity of concrete at radial joint
action. The check for the compressive bearing
capacity of the concrete at radial joint must Figure 8. Typical Load F-CMOD curve for SFRC (EN
followed by means of one of two methods 14651,2003)
detailed earlier where the plain concrete itself
should withstand the acting compressive Having been determined the design tensile
stresses. However, to evaluate the splitting strength of SFRC “fFtu,d”, the design check
tensile stress, an integrated analytical method is should be carried out as follows:
proposed. 1. Calculation of maximum tensile stress ”σy”
The suggested method relies on the analytical through applying Iyengar or Leonhardt tensile
tensile stress formulations studied by Iyengar stress diagram
(1962) or Leonhardt (1976) in combination with 2. The application of fibre reinforcements is
fib Model Code (2010), which is a superior applicable only if both conditions are satisfied
International Code. as:
In order to determine the design tensile s y < f ctk ,005 and s y < f Ftu ,d (24)
strength of SFRC, the following relations are
used (fib Model Code, 2010). Since the radial Otherwise, the splitting tensile steel
joint action is associated with the long-term reinforcements should be replaced in concrete
condition, consequently the ULS is to be segments. In this case, to estimate the quantity
allowed for by means of simplified rigid-plastic of the steel reinforcements, the relations of
post-peak behaviour model. method 1 is used, but taking into account the
favourable effect of SFRC as:
f R 3,k = 0.7 f R 3 (20)
Fst = As f yd + f Ftu,d w × b (25)
f R 3, k
f Ftu,k = (21) where ω is the distribution depth of the tensile
3
splitting stress and b is the width of the
f Ftu ,k segment.
f Ftu ,d = (22)
gf
5 CONCLUSION
fFtu,k is the characteristic residual flexural tensile Unless otherwise instructed, the preferred radial
strength of the SFRC at CMOD3, fFtu,k is the joint shape for a bolted gasketted segmental
design residual flexural tensile strength of the lining which sits within a grout annulus is flat.
SFRC in ULS, γf is partial safety factor, to be The recent trend in designing radial joint shape
considered 1.5, fR3 is the residual flexural tensile is flat. However, some other important design
strength corresponding to CMOD3, obtained by aspects of curved joint should be taken into
3-point bending test based on EN 14651, which account.
is calculated as: The results of this study have revealed that the
contact length of a curved joint shape is
3F3l sp independent from geometrical load eccentricity
f R3 = (23) whereas the contact length of a flat joint
2bhsp2
decrease considerably due to load eccentricity.
F3 is the load related to CMOD=CMOD3 Therefore, for a given condition, the ultimate
8
 Proceedings of the World Tunnel Congress 2017 – Surface challenges – Underground solutions. Bergen, Norway.

resistance of concrete against bursting force (in lower dosage. Taking into consideration of
compression) for a curved joint is higher than above-mentioned critical comparison and
that for a flat joint. However, splitting tensile technical-economical requirements of a given
stresses in concrete of radial joints are higher in project, a more practical radial joint feature
curved joints; consequently, a more steel ratio is might be chosen.
needed for the curved radial joint configuration. The key conclusions extracted from this
In practice, curved joint may allow for reduced study as regards the critical comparison between
segmental lining thickness, while flat joints, the curved and flat radial joints types are well
generally, requires a lower steel reinforcement. presented in Table 1 that might be used as a
In contrast to curved joint, the flat joint needs practical guideline in defining joint shape.
lower strength parameter of steel fibre and
Table 1. Design comparison between the curved and flat radial joints shapes.
Radial
(longitudinal) Advantages Disadvantages
joint shape
§ Simple design shape
§ Risk of joint rotation and resulting plasticization of
§ Best performance in stiff ground with low pos-
joint
sible of ring rotation using of full contact joint
§ Risk of birdsmouthing due to high possibility of
area
joint rotation
§ Presence of grove and spring offers a good
§ High degree of joint lipping and reducing segment
guidance for the installation and improve the
gasket performance
possibility of the transferring transverse forces
§ Considerable decrease in joint contact area after
§ Lower rate of splitting reinforcement along ra-
joint rotation and occurring eccentricity
Flat joint dial joint
§ Higher bursting stress due to increasing of
§ Recommend application for the ground that
birdsmouthing and load eccentricities
cause minor joint rotation and consequent mi-
§ Risk of insufficient concrete compressive bearing
nor eccentricities in resulting solicitations in
capacity
lining as a consequence of internal forces in
§ More risk of segment damage, particularly at cor-
segmental lining
ners
§ Need for lower dosage of steel fibre and lower
§ Need for higher concrete class in presence of ec-
steel fibre strength class of fR3k / fR1k (fib Model
centricities
Code 2010 classification)

§ Need for very precise design

§ Insufficient sealing possibility, but it can be inte-
§ Joint rotation is approximately half of the grated with double-sealing system
amount that occurs with a conventional flat § Need for higher splitting reinforcement along radi-
joint, considerably reducing birdsmouthing al joint
§ To some extent independent from load eccen- § Requiring extremely high tolerances steel moulds
tricities for casting the segments
§ Bending free behaviour for very curved shape § Difficulty in providing segment moulds
(hinge action) § Need always for bolt system to connect the adja-
§ Load transfer through the middle third of the cent segments in a ring
Curved joints segment, eliminating stress concentrations on § Often accompanied with double-gasket system at
(double-convex, either the intrados or extrados joint
concave- § Lower bursting stress due to reduction of § Need for higher dosage of steel fibre and higher
convex) birdsmouthing steel fibre strength class of fR3k / fR1k (fib Model
§ Constant joint contact area regardless of Code 2010 classification)
amount of joint rotation § Satisfactorily results in case of use of old design
§ Applicable in difficult soft soil where the flex- methods like Muir Wood and Curtis analytical so-
ural moment rate in lining is high lutions
§ Possibility in application of lower concrete § Difficulty in segment mould preparation and cast-
class ing
§ No need for guiding rod § Need for skilful and experienced staff for mould
§ Lip free at concave-convex pined shape fabrication
§ Difficulty in ring building

9
 Proceedings of the World Tunnel Congress 2017 – Surface challenges – Underground solutions. Bergen, Norway.

One of the mentioned design methods let Fib Model Code. 2010. Bulletin 65 Final Draft. Volume
engineer analyze the performance of the desired 1.
Guglielmetti, V. Grasso.P, Mahtab, A and Xu, S. 2007.
radial joint shape. However, there are Mechanized Tunnelling in Urban Areas- design
significant differences in the results especially methodology and construction control. Taylor &
in terms of steel ratio given by suggested three Francis Group.
methods. In contrast to the method 1, the Hearn E. J. 2000. Mechanics of Materials I .An
calculations methods 2 and 3 takes into account Introduction to the Mechanics of Elastic and Plastic
Deformation of Solids and Structural Materials. 3rd
the tensile resistance of the concrete. The Edition. Butterworth-Heinemann.
selection of the most suitable design method is International Tunnelling Association (ITA). 2000.
on the responsibility of designer. Guidelines for the design of shielded tunnel lining.
Working group 2. Tunnelling and Underground Space
Technology. 15 (3): 303-331
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Iyengar, K.T. 1962. Two-dimensional theories of
anchorage zone stresses in post-tensioned beams.
Journal of the American Concrete Institute (ACI).
Authors express appreciation to Moreno Pescara 59(10), 1443–1466.
for his valuable suggestions, Mohammad ITAtech Guidance fore Precast Fibre Reinforced Concrete
Bohlouli for his kind assistance and useful Segments. 2016. Vol.1. Design Aspects. ITAtech
recommendations, and finally Piergiorgio Activity Group Support. ITAtech Report N°7.
Grasso for his continuous encouragement to Janßen, P. 1983. Load capacity of segment joints. Ph.D.
dissertation, Braunschweigh University of technology.
fulfil this research study. Japan Society of Civil Engineers (JSCE). 2006. Standard
Specifications for Tunnelling: Shield Tunnels, Tokyo.
Leonhardt, F. 1977. Calcolo di progetto & tecniche
NOMENCLATURE costruttive. Vol II. Edizioni tecniche ET Milano.
Maidl, B, Herrenknecht.M, Maidl.U, Wehrmeyer.G.
2012. Mechanized Shield Tunnelling. 2nd Edition.
CMOD=Crack Mount Opening Displacement Ernst & Sohn. Berlin.
RC=Reinforced Concrete Osgoui, R & Pescara, M. 2014. An integrated design
SFRC=Steel Fibre Reinforced Concrete approach for the design of segmental tunnel lining in
SLS=Serviceability Limit State an EPB-Shield driven tunnel-A case study in Iran:
ULS=Ultimate Limit State Ahwaz Metro Project. Proceedings of the World
Tunnel Congress– Tunnels for a better Life. Foz do
Iguaçu, Brazil.
Osgoui, R. Poli, A.& Pescara, M. 2016. Critical
REFERENCES comparison between the double-convex and flat radial
joints features in segmental tunnel lining. Eurock
ACI Committee 544, 2016. Report on Design and 2016. Cappadocia. Turkey.
Construction of Fibre Reinforced Precast Concrete PAS 8810. 2016. Tunnel Design-Design of concrete
Tunnel Segments, ACI 544.7R-16, American Concrete segmental tunnel linings. British Tunnelling Society.
Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, pp. 36. Specification for Tunnelling. 2010. The British Tunnelling
AFTES. 1993. Les Joints d’étanchéité entre voussoirs. Society (BTS) and The Institution of Civil Engineers.
Tunnels et Ouvrages Souterrains, 155 164-166. Thomas Telford. 3rd Edition.
Bakhshi, M., and Nasri, V., 2014. Review of International Swartz S, Lum H, McRae M, Curtis D J, Shamma, J.
Practice on Critical Aspects of Segmental Tunnel 2002. Structural design and testing of a bolted and
Lining Design. Proceedings of the 2014 North gasketed pre-cast concrete segmental lining for high
American Tunnelling (NAT) Conference, Los external hydrostatic pressure. North American
Angeles, CA, pp. 274-282. Tunnelling. Ed. Ozdemir.
BS 8180. 1997. Part 1. Structural use of concrete. Code of Timoshenko, S.P & Goodier, J.N. 1970. Theory of
practice for design and construction. British Standard. elasticity. Tokyo: McGraw-Hill Kogakusha Ltd, -
BSI. Engineering societies monographs, 567.
DAUB (German Tunnelling Committee) Working Group Vimalanthan Y.K. 2007. Development in pre-cast
“Lining Segment Design” 2013. Recommendations for concrete segmental circular tunnel linings.
the Design, Production, and Installation of Segmental Underground Space,4th Dimension of Metropolises-
Rings. Bartak, Hrdina, Romancov & Zlamal eds. Taylor &
EN 14651. 2003. Precast Concrete Products—Test Francis Group.
method for metallic fiber concrete—Measuring the Woods, E. 2003. Design decisions for CTRL 2’s bored
flexural tensile strength. European Standards, tunnels. Tunnels & Tunnelling international
Brussels, Belgium. supplement September 2003.
European Standard EN 1992-1-1. 2004. Eurocode 2:
Design of Concrete Structures: Part 1-1: General
Rules and Rules for Buildings. European Committee
for Standardization.
10

View publication stats