바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

ISSN : 2233-8292

논문 상세

이전 다음
논문 투고

Vol.17 No.5
Citation Share

쉴드 TBM 터널의 구조물 성능 평가 기준 개발

Development of performance assessment criterion for structures of shield TBM tunnel

(사)한국터널지하공간학회 / (사)한국터널지하공간학회, (P)2233-8292; (E)2287-4747
2015, v.17 no.5, pp.553-561
성주현 (한국시설안전공단)
이유석 (한국시설안전기술공단)
홍은수 (한국과학기술원)
변요셉 (한국시설안전공단)
성주현, 이유석, 홍은수, & 변요셉. (2015). 쉴드 TBM 터널의 구조물 성능 평가 기준 개발. (사)한국터널지하공간학회, 17(5), 553-561.
  • 다운로드 수
  • 조회수
PDF 다운로드

초록

본 연구에서는 국내에 활발히 적용되기 시작한 쉴드 TBM 터널의 합리적인 유지관리를 위한 성능평가 기준을 제시하였다. 이를 위해 국내･외 성능평가 기준을 분석하였고, 국내 시공된 쉴드 TBM 터널에 대한 현장조사 및 정밀안전진단 보고서 분석을 통한 변상사례를 조사하여 성능평가 항목을 균열, 누수, 파손, 박리, 층분리 및 박락, 백태, 품질상태, 철근노출, 탄산화, 단차, 볼트상태, 배수상태, 지반상태, 접속부상태, 공동구 상태로 선정하였다. 또한 다중의사결정기법인 AHP 기법을 활용하여 선정된 성능평가에 대한 합리적인 가중치를 산정하였다.

keywords
쉴드TBM, 유지관리, 성능평가 기준, AHP 기법, Shield TBM, Maintenance, Performance assessment criterion, AHP method

Abstract

In this study, the performance assessment criterion for reasonable maintenance of shield TBM tunnel was presented. The performance assessment items such as crack, leakage, breakage, spalling, exfoliation/detachment, efflorescence, quality condition, exposure of steel, carbonation, faulting step, bolts condition, drainage condition, ground condition, contact section condition and conduit condition were selected by analyzing domestic and foreign performance assessment criterions and investigating segment lining deterioration cases through the site investigation and in-depth inspection analysis result on the shield TBM tunnel. In addition, the reasonable weight using AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) were estimated.

keywords
쉴드TBM, 유지관리, 성능평가 기준, AHP 기법, Shield TBM, Maintenance, Performance assessment criterion, AHP method

참고문헌

1.

1. Georg, J.H., Davorin, K. (2004), Selection of segmental lining system and repairclassification. In: Proceedings of the CSSE Symposium DAMOCS. Dubrovnik, pp. 179-186.

2.

2. Federal Highway Administration (2009), Technical Manual for Design and Construction of Road Tunnels-Civil Elements, pp. 4-1-4.6

3.

3. JSCE (2005), Interim report on construction loads on segment, JSCE, Japan. (in Japanese)

4.

4. Jung, B.D, Park, Y.J. (2002), “A study of determining priorities of ITS services using analytic hierarchy process”, Journal of Korea Planning Association, Korea Planning Association, Vol. 37, No. 6, pp. 138-139.

5.

5. Korea Infrastructure Safety Corporation (2004), Tunnel Management & Maintenance Manual.

6.

6. Korea Infrastructure Safety Corporation (2010), Guidelines for Safety Inspection and indepthinspection safety. (Tunnel)

7.

7. Korea Infrastructure Safety Corporation (2012), Safety Inspection & In-depth Safety Inspection Guidelines. (Tunnel)

8.

8. Saaty, T.L. (1980), The Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw-Hill, New York.

9.

9. Saaty, T.L. (1996), Multicriteria Decision Making:The Analytic Hierarchy Process, RWS Publications.

(사)한국터널지하공간학회

논문 투고 OA 정책