【24h】

A Quantitative Comparison between Trenchless Technology and Open-Cut Method

机译:非开挖技术与开挖方法的定量比较

获取原文

摘要

For years open cut excavation has remained the primary method of utility installation across the world. The technical complexity and high capital costs associated with specialized tunneling equipment primarily limited tunneling efforts to large diameter transportation projects and mining efforts. Recent advances in trenchless methods have shown trenchless techniques, such as horizontal directional drilling and micro-tunneling, to be economically advantageous to traditional open cut methods.Risks associated with open cut utility installation have traditionally been considered easier to manage than those associated with trenchless options. Open cut operations are easier to adapt to unanticipated subsurface conditions and the industry’s experience with traditional bypass, cut and repair of crossing and conflicting utilities is well established. Trenchless methods however, require additional subsurface exploration and geotechnical monitoring to mitigate risks associated with utility/structure settlement, soil blow out, clogging of spoil return lines, unanticipated subsurface conditions and the avoidance of unpassable obstructions.
机译:多年以来,明挖一直是全世界公用事业安装的主要方法。专用隧道设备带来的技术复杂性和高昂的资金成本,主要将隧道工作限制在大直径运输项目和采矿工作上。非开挖方法的最新进展表明,非开挖技术(例如水平定向钻孔和微隧道技术)在经济上优于传统的露天开采方法。 传统上,与非开挖选项相比,与开放式公用事业安装相关的风险被认为更易于管理。露天开采的作业更容易适应意料之外的地下条件,并且业界在传统的旁路,切割和维修交叉及冲突的公用设施方面的经验已广为人知。然而,非开挖方法需要额外的地下勘探和岩土工程监测,以减轻与公用设施/结构沉降,土壤爆破,弃土回线堵塞,不可预见的地下条件以及避免不可逾越的障碍物相关的风险。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号