Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Analysis reveals that excess slurry pressure increases blowout failure risk, affecting tunnel stability due to hydraulic gradients and filter cake dynamics.
Conventional tunnel face stability models are constrained by idealized steady-state seepage assumptions, one-dimensional formulations for inherently three-dimensional flow, and the neglect of transient filter-cake effects. To address these limitations, this study focuses on blowout failure triggered by excess slurry pressure in slurry pressure balance shield tunneling. We establish a limit-analysis framework that couples slurry infiltration with transient seepage, developing a work rate-balance formulation and a three-dimensional rotational failure mechanism. This framework incorporates heterogeneous, time-dependent filter-cake pressure transfer and the spatiotemporal evolution of pore pressure—key factors overlooked in traditional models. Transient seepage simulations demonstrate that the spatiotemporal heterogeneity of the dynamic filter cake provides the fundamental pressure basis for blowout failure. A prominent hydraulic gradient within the potential core failure zone (Z/R ≤ 2.0, Y/R ≤ 2.0) drives failure initiation and propagation, with the vertical hydraulic gradient in the high-risk subregion (Z/R < 0.5) reaching values as high as 12. Results indicate that passive failure risk increases markedly when excess slurry pressure exceeds 200 kPa, accompanied by a sharp decline in the safety factor. Validation against the Heinenoord No. 2 Tunnel case confirms that the proposed three-dimensional model more accurately captures 3D seepage characteristics and critical failure pressures compared to traditional wedge–prism approaches. By overcoming steady-state and one-dimensional simplifications, this framework deepens the understanding of blowout evolution and provides theoretical guidance for the rational control of slurry pressure and improved tunnel-face stability assessment under complex transient conditions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Xia et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: