Risk evaluation in tunneling excavation methods

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Couto,João Pedro
Data de Publicação: 2018
Outros Autores: Camões,Aires, Tender,Manuel Luis
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: REM - International Engineering Journal
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2448-167X2018000300361
Resumo: 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.
id FG-1_44cd69a4d70ddd950cc40619c89ffcc1
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S2448-167X2018000300361
network_acronym_str FG-1
network_name_str REM - International Engineering Journal
repository_id_str
spelling Risk evaluation in tunneling excavation methodsCEMTBMriskshealth and safetypreventionAbstract 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.Fundação Gorceix2018-07-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2448-167X2018000300361REM - International Engineering Journal v.71 n.3 2018reponame:REM - International Engineering Journalinstname:Fundação Gorceix (FG)instacron:FG10.1590/0370-44672017710115info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessCouto,João PedroCamões,AiresTender,Manuel Luiseng2018-06-14T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S2448-167X2018000300361Revistahttps://www.rem.com.br/?lang=pt-brPRIhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||editor@rem.com.br2448-167X2448-167Xopendoar:2018-06-14T00:00REM - International Engineering Journal - Fundação Gorceix (FG)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Risk evaluation in tunneling excavation methods
title Risk evaluation in tunneling excavation methods
spellingShingle Risk evaluation in tunneling excavation methods
Couto,João Pedro
CEM
TBM
risks
health and safety
prevention
title_short Risk evaluation in tunneling excavation methods
title_full Risk evaluation in tunneling excavation methods
title_fullStr Risk evaluation in tunneling excavation methods
title_full_unstemmed Risk evaluation in tunneling excavation methods
title_sort Risk evaluation in tunneling excavation methods
author Couto,João Pedro
author_facet Couto,João Pedro
Camões,Aires
Tender,Manuel Luis
author_role author
author2 Camões,Aires
Tender,Manuel Luis
author2_role author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Couto,João Pedro
Camões,Aires
Tender,Manuel Luis
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv CEM
TBM
risks
health and safety
prevention
topic CEM
TBM
risks
health and safety
prevention
description 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.
publishDate 2018
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2018-07-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2448-167X2018000300361
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2448-167X2018000300361
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/0370-44672017710115
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Fundação Gorceix
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Fundação Gorceix
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv REM - International Engineering Journal v.71 n.3 2018
reponame:REM - International Engineering Journal
instname:Fundação Gorceix (FG)
instacron:FG
instname_str Fundação Gorceix (FG)
instacron_str FG
institution FG
reponame_str REM - International Engineering Journal
collection REM - International Engineering Journal
repository.name.fl_str_mv REM - International Engineering Journal - Fundação Gorceix (FG)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||editor@rem.com.br
_version_ 1754734690960408576