Comparison of NATM and umbrella arch method in terms of cost, completion time, and deformation

Abstract

In all kinds of tunnel excavations, especially those excavated in cities, it is important to control surface settlements and prevent damage to the surface and subsurface structures. For this purpose, in weak rocks and soils, the umbrella arch method (UAM) has been used in addition to the new Austrian tunneling method (NATM). NATM and UAM are the best-known classical methods used in tunnel excavation. In classical tunneling, NATM is usually preferred in normal rocks. However, in some cases, NATM may be insufficient. UAM is a very effective alternative especially in soils and weak rocks. In soil and weak rocks, UAM is especially necessary to prevent excessive deformations. Selection of UAM or NATM is based on the following factors: cost comparison of NATM and UAM, allowable deformations, quality of rock or soil, application time of NATM and UAM, availability of skilled workers, and qualification level of the workers. Therefore, selecting the excavation method in these kinds of grounds is vital in terms of achieving the project goals in time, managing the project costs effectively, and controlling the probable deformations on nearby structures. A critical issue in successful tunneling application is the ability to evaluate and predict the deformations, costs, and project time. In this paper, application times, costs, and deformation effects are compared between NATM and UAM in sensitive regions at the Uskudar-Umraniye-Cekmekoy metro project (UUCMP). Also, efficiency of the deformation control of UAM is demonstrated by using the 2D numerical analysis method. UUCMP is part of the Istanbul metro network. The tunnels have a cross section of 75.60 m(2) for NATM and 83.42 m(2) for UAM. Geology in this section is composed of weak sandstone. Diabase and andesite dykes are also rarely observed. This study shows that the construction cost of UAM are 1.7 times more expensive than NATM. Although application time of UAM is 2.5 times longer than NATM, it is 2.5 times more efficient in controlling the deformations. This efficiency in controlling the deformations is confirmed via two-dimensional numerical analyses.