PIPE ROOFING – FEATURES & APPLICATION

Hannes Gamsjäger1, Marcus Scholz2

1
Ed. Züblin, Tunneling Department, 70567 Stuttgart, Email: hannes.gamsjaeger@jvs-hb.se
2
Bernard Ingenieure ZT, 6200 Jenbach, Email: marcus.scholz@bernard-ing.com

Keywords: pipe roof support, tunneling in fault areas, pre-support

INTRODUCTION
Pipe roofing is nowadays often used in conventional tunnel drives following NATM principles in
weak ground, especially in urban areas with difficult boundaries such as low cover, adjacent
buildings or infrastructure facilities. The method is used partly as general measure – to improve the
overall safety of the tunnel – and partly as special measure in dealing with poor ground conditions
or to overcome hazard situations for example at a tunnel collapse, or when surface settlement is to
be limited.
The following paper contains a brief description of the method and describes a general approach
and a suitable way of creating safe tunnel driving conditions by using site geologist´s knowledge
together with parameter gained from drilling and grouting works. To be emphasized is the
relationship with the deformation behavior of the rock mass, especially the face stability. From
practical experiences at several projects finally the current limits of application can be highlighted.

DEFINITION OF A PIPE ROOFING SYSTEM

The question “What is a pipe roofing system?” cannot be easily answered, since we are lacking
recognized design standards. Different authors have called the system “pipe forepole umbrella”
(Hoek, 2003), “umbrella arch method” (Kim et al., 2004), pipe forepiling method (Miura, 2003),
“steel pipe canopy (Gibbs, 2002), or “pipe roof supports” (Volkmann et al, 2006).
All mentioned definitions describe a tunnel support system consisting of a special drilling and
casing system mostly in combination with grouting works and interaction with the steel pipes and
the adjacent ground. A further part of the support system is the application of face anchors as
described in this paper.

DESCRIPTION OF MAIN FEATURES

Pipe roofing systems can be installed both by using specialized equipment or common drilling
jumbos. Utilizing a drilling jumbo for installation of a pipe roof has obviously limitations compared
to specialized equipment due to different drilling technique (type and size of hammer, drilling /
casing systems, flushing media ...), but is more flexible.
In general, the method and its demands as well as its features have grown rapidly in the last decade,
with applications even at TBM drive´s in order to overcome severe conditions. Common pipe
roofing in Central Europe is done with steel pipes of 76, 89, 114 (most common) or 139 mm outer
diameter, with pipe wall thickness of 5-10 mm. Pipes are usually thread coupled or welded together.

1
 Figure 1- Installation of a pipe roof by using a drilling jumbo

The pipes are installed in the crown of a tunnel, drilling inclination is about 4-6°. Parts of coupled
drill bits, the so called ring bits, usually remain in the ground. In very soft ground, cheaper bits can
be left in the bottom. Pipes are installed at the same time as drilling using a device pushing the pipes
into the hole (pusher leg). Drilling is done by means of a hydraulic drill hammer, at specific
parameters of percussion and rotation. The length of application varies according to the needs of
each site, a common approach in Central Europe would be to use 15 m pipes with 114 mm
diameter, at an overlap of 5 m. This leads to a saw tooth profile in longitudinal direction, with
different geometries of steel ribs or lattice girders. At the starting point, slightly widening of the
profile is necessary. The number of pipes to be installed for example at common railway tunnel is
usually at 25-40 pieces per pipe roof, installed during the top heading activities. An economic
design of the pipe roof shall not be based solely on designer´s assumption`s, but should respect
actual face conditions. The next picture indicates a typical layout of a pipe roof geometry

Figure 2- Typical layout of a pipe roof

The round length when tunneling a pipe roof section shall be according to the response of the
ground, 1,00 m is most common. Attempts to use much bigger round lengths in order to save time

2
or costs without paying attention to the real rock mass behavior (standing time, free span,… without
support) can lead to a quick overload of the system.
Pipe roofing has proved its capacity in ground conditions, where common conventional techniques
(e.g. spiling) are on the limit. However, it requires detailed (experts-) knowledge in application,
especially through hazardous ground conditions.
A few details in applying pipe roofing need to be mentioned as being part of the system in addition
to a proper layout and proper installation, especially for severe conditions:
Face stability is mandatory, relying on principle function of face anchors (at the same time a
support core isn´t a proper alternative in very poor conditions). Usually the top heading is done by
using a temporary invert arch for the ring closure. Dewatering through pipes (or additional drainage
pipes) shall be permitted (and considered).
Strengthening the steel pipes e.g. at coupling- or welding points can be done through inserting long
steel bars as a core. Coupling of neighboring steel pipes shall not be done at the same depth. A
further row of pipes can be considered in case of uncertainties (tunnel drive through a collapse). A
proper grouting procedure needs to be applied at different steps. Ahead of doing the pipe roof,
grouting procedures may be necessary in some cases (grouting of collapse material). When water is
used as flushing media for drilling, the balance use/loss has to be checked.
Apart from that, when pipe roofing is used for increase of general safety levels in weak ground,
different types of layouts are required in special cases as:
Fault areas, low cover, reduction of settlement, surface buildings involved (Scholz, 2006), portals at
low cover, tunneling under railway lines/roads (underpinning) or tunneling by using compressed air.

GROUND REACTION – INFLUENCING PARAMETER

The geological settings where pipe roofing is a successful and economical method of pre-support
are various. Nearly all types of soil and soft rock as well as highly fractured and highly weathered
hard rock can be managed in tunneling using pipe roofing. Detailed engineering geological
investigation and documentation helps to design as well as to perform the method of pipe roofing.
The equipment and technique used is often not given the necessary priority for a proper application.
But the interface is maybe bigger than everyone acknowledges. The following figure indicates three
parameters, which are likely to have influence on the behavior of the ground:

Gap between bit and steel

Drill hole
pipe can be closed during
deformation drilling at poor conditions

Interface between machine

Energy impact and rock is the drill bit used.
The hydraulic hammer is the
source of the energy impact
Water or
Flushing media
air flushing

Figure 3 - Ground reaction, influencing parameter

Drill hole deformation:

From observations at the spot it is known that drill-holes can deform during drilling. The gap
between drilling diameter (initially approximately 3 mm) can be closed radially by deformations
from stresses or by rock pieces/loose gravels. It appears, that at a pipe becomes locked and drilling
has to be abandoned.

3
Energy impact:
Today´s common knowledge in drilling technique is that the hydraulic hammer (e.g. A.C. 1838, 18
kW) used for drilling, is the source of the energy impact and the drill-bit is the interface between
machine and rock mass (Thuro, 1996). For example at severe drill-hole deformation, a certain part
of energy is diverted to the rock mass surrounding the hole because of the friction between pipe and
deforming rock mass. Another point of interest is drilling of boulders with a strength > 80 MPa.
Very slow drilling rates need to be applied in order to match with the capability regarding wear and
tear of the system (drilling rods, couplings, adapters, bits), a drastic change to hard abrasive
conditions occurs. However, the danger of causing vibrations to the surrounding ground - and
subsequently additional deformations to the face is increasing.

Flushing media:
When open joints appear, water loss can occur which can then lead to blockage inside of the pipe at
drilling/flushing, unwanted vibrations can appear as well. When silty clay material appears, flushing
out with water is generally difficult at low inclinations of pipes. The drill-bits currently used, own
usually flushing channels for guiding the spill-water back into the pipe and to the borehole mouth.
Rock mass very sensitive to water requires air as flushing media instead (requires specialized
equipment).

SPECIFIC USE OF A PIPE ROOFING SYSTEM

The first question in application of Pipe Roofing is mainly the one for existing geological
documentation resulting from a tender phase. A geological long-section is usually partly based on
core drilling, therefore core logs may be available of specific locations. In case not, and facing
already very poor ground conditions, additional horizontal coring can be carried out in order to be
able to evaluate the conditions in front of the face. Simple drilling with SDA (self drilling anchors)
is a suitable solution for checking what´s ahead of the face in order to avoid any surprise at the
tunnel drive itself (Water inrush, running soil, …). Geologists mapping and interpretation shall
allow further detailed prognosis.
Another question to be raised is about what data can be gained at the pipe roofing works and which
ranking do they have. According to the experience made on several construction sites using pipe
roofing, it is important to draw the attention on following parameter:

Drilling works: Advance rate / Exactness / Abrasiveness at drilling

Geologists attending at the drilling process can monitor advance rates, changes in formations or
entering areas with different behavior, fault lines or boulder´s by checking the back-flushing water
in its color and the particles coming flushed back from the drilling face. Besides that, today´s
computerized generation of drill-jumbos can catch the drilling advance rate easily. Breaks at
coupling drilling rods, or due to system failure need to be considered. Typical advance rates
(including all breaks, extension of pipes, but excluding drilling problems,..) are in a range of 0,25 -
0,5 m/min. When solid boulders are encountered as shown in the next picture , the advance rates
can drop down below 0,1 m/min, or drilling has to be abandoned as in this case.

4
 Figure 4 - Boulders hindering drilling works, ucs measured = 168 MPa

Exquisite documentation and parallel checks with modern tunnel driving tools as mentioned above
brought to the surface, that pipe roofing is sometimes lacking the required accuracy, especially in its
length, for following reasons: Problems at drilling equipment can appear (worn out or broken drill
steel, lost drill bit or buttons, boulder with very high compressive strength, etc.) or the design length
does not fit to the actual conditions encountered (holes closing during drilling,..). It has been
recorded, that single pipes, of approximately 3-5 % of total quantity do not reach the final drilling
depth, at very special ground conditions up to 10 % have to be expected for the reasons given
above. Inexactness in alignment has been encountered too, but more rarely. It can occur, if the
drilling rig is based on unstable ground including improper setup at poor ground. Vibrations from
the machine can cause deviations from planned drilling. Problems can further result if at a laser
guiding system a reference point is deforming. Possibly, single pipes need to be cut out.
It shall be noted, that full bearing capacity at very poor ground only evolves with all pipes drilled to
full length. Compensations at a gap can be done locally by spiling or by drilling a further pipe
besides the pipe with did not meet its full length.
Abrasiveness in drilling a pipe roof e.g. with a drill bit diameter of 121 mm is something to be
looked into in detail because of the cost component. A site monitoring program on above subject
gave full details and even allowed to figure out the additional costs on each Rock Class. With this,
also the limits regarding capability in drilling boulders with the used pipe roofing system were
derived in connection with existing Rock characterization according to ISRM standard as indicated
in the next figure.
The figure indicates the uniaxial compressive strength together with the tensile strength respectively
relation of compressive strength to the tensile strength (called “toughness” (Thuro, 1996), and it´s
limits in the field. The optimal range for drilling is indicated with the bold red line (Class I and II
only). The additional wear and tear costs in this case resulting out of single sandstone boulders were
at a range of additional 100 % of the costs calculated.

5
 Figure 5 – Drillability, limits of a pipe roofing system, derived on empirical basis (30 pipe roofs)

Ground water: Water inflow / Water loss / Content of back flushing water
Following picture indicates a considerable water inflow at H5 site at Brenner link in Tyrol, Terfens
drive.

Figure 6 - Ground water inflow at soft rock with stable grain size distribution

6
Water inflow or ingress during pipe roofing activities is not unusual, it can even be used to lower a
water table present in the ground as the picture indicates (through an additional pipe in the corner of
the crown), but this requires the presence of a “stable grain size distribution”, respectively inflow
through joints. In case of a danger that too much material is spilled out, pipes can be equipped with
geotextile filter. Drainage function of the pipes can be kept when the drive underneath is started
(single pipes can run dry later).
Whenever a huge water loss is occurring during drilling works, full attention has to be drawn on that
since water loss is synonym for open structures (open joint system, or joints opening up), indicating
possibly extraordinary geological features as for example presence of a slide (slope instability), fill,
karst, fault or deposit area. The drive itself shall be watched very careful then. Additional drainage
pipes have to be installed at the face. Core drilling can be conducted at presence of further
uncertainties. Grouting the pipe roof meets an absolute priority in this case.
Discussions about the presence of young faults in soft rock (Scholz, 2006) with different “pockets”
of groundwater present at postglacial gravel deposits from the Weichselian ice age show how
inhomogenities in the ground (mixed face conditions in soft ground) can influence a tunnel drive
(Stacherl, 2006). Similar experiences have been made in the flysch ground of the Wienerwaldtunnel
(Egger, 2007).

DEFORMATION MONITORING
Deformations at the face during drilling and grouting stage:
The “influencing parameters”, here described above for a single borehole raise the question, which
consequences these observed “modes of ground reaction” have at a bigger scale, which means the
the face at the time of drilling and grouting stage? Actually, only a few authors have referred to face
movements resulting from drilling works in weak ground, The authors of this paper have measured
values at pipe roofing (including face anchors installation) on four different sites with a result that
in average a 50 m² face can give easily 3-5 cm deformations (of the face against driving direction)
and a grouting stage can result into further 2-3 cm. It shall be noted, that 3 cm deformation cannot
be recognized by human eyes. At low overburden the deformations will go through immediately to
the surface. Egger (2007) for example has proven at Wienerwald Tunnel Eastern drive with the
newly developed face monitoring system, that in sensitive ground face movements are already
likely to appear during drilling.
Deformations at the face in the range described could cause instabilities, which nobody needs at
critical conditions. Being at such a point, many things can be done: Shotcrete and mesh at the face,
stiffer lining, direct ring closure, excavation and support in smaller sections / driving speed, round
lengths and last but not least face anchors. On all sites the authors can refer to, face anchors played
the major role in connection with the pipe roof itself. Face anchors principle function includes
limiting the deformation of the face, avoiding shear failures, avoiding wedge failures caused by
unlucky joint orientation, being part of the dewatering system and also part of exploration drilling
ahead of the face.
Therefore before any pipe is drilled /installed, face anchors have to be installed in sufficient amount
and they shall have an overlapping in a similar way as the pipe roof does. At very poor conditions
preferably by using cement suspension for flushing since bond can be improved and pullout danger
is lower – anchor type mentioned also by Holzleitner (2004).

7
 Figure 7 - Fully grouted face anchor, installed with injection adapter
(cement flushing, SDA 38mm, w/c ratio 0,6)

Deformations when tunneling a pipe roof section

State of the art measurements and investigations done by Volkmann (2004), by using horizontal
inclinometers, give a clear picture of what is happening with the pipe roof when tunneling
underneath.
It appears that lining deformation measured a few meters behind the face is less than when using
spiles for example. Nevertheless the main focus is the face itself during driving and at installation
time.

Deformations at the surface.

Pipe roof support is often proposed when surface settlements need to be kept in a very low range at
at presence of low cover. It is common knowledge that surface settlements are connected to face
and lining deformations. Therefore, when the face can be kept with low deformations, surface
settlements will be similar low. Draining effects can lead to surface settlements when face
deformations are low as well.
A first cause of settlements is the mentioned overcut drilling compared to the casing, a second cause
is the disturbance of the ground in between of the drilling points if the distance is too narrow. In
weak ground usually deformations are occurring at stress redistribution, which is deemed to be the
main reason for surface settlements. Surface settlements are appearing ahead of the face - the
weaker the ground, the more ahead of the face.
By using fully grouted face anchors (e.g. SDA 38 mm, using an injection adapter) of 20 m length
with 10 m overlap these settlements can be reduced by far. Critical inclinations of settlement
troughs may then be in the limits prescribed, avoiding for example damages to buildings situated
above.

GROUTING AS PART OF A PIPE ROOFING SYSTEM:

Most authors and most construction contracts do not contribute much to the grouting works for a
pipe roof. Having in mind the disturbance of the rock mass due to the percussion/rotation drilling,
grouting is considered to reinforce the “bridge” between the pipes in a way that stresses can be
transferred, that there is no open gaps or holes from flushing or open joints left behind and that
overbreaks between the pipes are limited or avoided when driving the tunnel underneath. Today´s
state of the art for grouting a pipe roof fulfills following criteria:

8
Full grout is expected to be inside of the casing and in the gap between casing and hole (bond /
improvement of stiffness / increase of bearing capacity). Grouting the adjacent rock mass /soil is
considered as well. Grouting steps as deemed to be required (hole sequence), alterations in drilling
and grouting are a further possibility. A design criterion on grouting has to be adapted to the actual
conditions (pressure, time, refusal criterion). Setting time of grout has to be considered. Grouting
shall be fast and reliable, a full record is expected as well.

Effect of grouting:
Indeed often very little grout can be found during tunneling the pipe roof section. Especially when
open joint patterns are present, it is often impossible to follow the way the grout goes. Since a full
grouting sequence at “normal conditions” takes approximately 20–30 % of the total time for
installation of a pipe roofing system, the use of the grout itself is therefore often under discussion,
but maybe wrongly. For that reason data have been collected of various sites in order to get a
picture about use and take of grout at pipe roofing. Assuming that the pipe itself and the gap
between the pipe and the rock is finally filled 100 % (pipes are equipped with a certain number of
holes) when a grout pressure of 10 bars is applied, the grout take of the surrounding area can be
calculated. Possibly some loss of 10 % loss has to be considered when grout is running out at gaps
or cracks of the face. The situation requires often several grouting steps or changes to the w/c ratio
in order to be sure of its success. The records of three sites in Austria show an average ratio of 50 /
50 (grout in the pipe and grout in the ground), elsewhere at highly jointed ground a ratio of 20 / 80
could be observed as well (Gamsjäger, 2006). Effective grouting requires decent setting time. Fresh
grout simply doesn’t have the effect of any improvement on the surrounding rocks or doesn´t
increase the stiffness of the pipe itself. Grouting can be done with single packer or in special cases
with double packer.

FAILURE MODES OF PIPE ROOF SUPPORTED TUNNELS:

Based on the discussion above, following failure modes of a pipe roof supported tunnel can be
described:

Chimney type failure

A chimney type failure can be caused entering a geological weakened zone where insufficient shear
strength either of the material itself or of the joint patterns is present (open joints, blocks with point
contact only). An unlucky joint orientation is most of the time involved, too. It occurs in very soft
ground and at highly sheared/fracture zones. The great danger is that the face has already passed
this area and the collapse is a few meters behind. Overloading usually bends the pipes and finally at
connectors or at slip planes few steel pipes can be deformed giving way for the rock mass inrush.
Important is to control ground water and avoid pressure on the primary lining (lining deformation,
crack monitoring). Pipe roofing is often used to overcome chimney type failures (Gamsjäger, 2006).
In this case the ground is disturbed already heavily and initial grouting stages are likely before pipe
roofing. For the pipe roofing system itself, increase of pipe lengths and overlaps (e.g. Vomp East,
10 m overlap) as well as further rows of pipes (Gilgel Gibe, Lot 4) shall be part of considerations.

Loose ground, sand lenses in connection with presence of ground water or at pore pressure problem
There is a certain limit in dealing with very loose ground. On the one hand material can grease in
between pipes, or in case of insufficient span the material between pipes and side wall can get loose
and start to run into the tunnel. It can be locally or of expanding character. Dewatering vacuum
wells may be a solution to lower water tables ahead of the face to avoid material running out caused
by excess pore pressure. In case of too much ingress of water through many pipes or drainage holes,
driving the tunnel underneath is too risky. Drainage must be kept until water table is lowered. Pipes
with ingress of mud need to be carefully watched and later on properly grouted.

9
Young shear zone / shear planes
Resulting out of former landsliding- active or inactive, from tension zones in the ground, or most
likely with involvement of faults, a collapse starts usually at the face where a wedge failure or
bulbing occurs – causing a too long unsupported stretch of the tunnel, the pipe roof fails
subsequently as indicated in figure 8.

Figure 8 – Example, collapse of a pipe roof (landsliding material involved)

Worst cases of joint orientations (affiliation with faults) can lead to a massive pressure on the pipe
roof or on parts of the pipe roof caused by moving wedges / shear bodies. Joint water pressure is
often involved and needs to be released immediately (Schenk, 2000). Anchoring between the pipes
isn´t common, but should be considered in special cases.

Shear failure in very weak, deformable ground

At a very weak, deformable ground one conclusion may be not to have very long pipes installed,
but instead staggered shorter pipes with more inclination, say the range of 9-12 m with an overlap
of 3 m – but, considering much longer face anchors. This measure avoids damages of sensitive rock
at the perimeter far ahead of the face, avoids troubles during installation and saves therefore cycle-
and standup time. Most important is again to limit the face movements, extensometer measurements
performed showed deformations at very poor ground > 30 m ahead of the face. With decimeters of
deformation involved, shears are likely to appear. At a 9-12 m long pipe roof in the mentioned poor
conditions, face anchors of approximately 20 m length can do a good job. At that length, a
considerable stiff face anchor has to be applied. It has been furthermore monitored, that from a
certain drilling depth of the face anchors, it becomes quite difficult at described poor conditions to
flush back drilling material. In that case, rotating the anchors and using cement grout for flushing by
using a device called injection adapter is an effective method to achieve the full capacity of the face
anchors and proceed safely during excavation. Misunderstandings, e.g. to use the face anchors
similar as pre-stressed anchors with a defined anchoring length only, are definitely not contributing
any further positive effects. Pre-stressing fully bonded face anchors at every round is on the
contrary a necessity to limit deformations.

10
CONCLUSIONS
Pipe roofing systems today have a wide variety at applications according to the demands given.
Often misunderstood or misinterpreted, pipe roofing systems are a valuable contribution allowing
conventional drives (and TBM drives) to stretch their limits to very poor ground conditions or at
special occasions whenever used at a reasonable basis.
The conjunction with the face movements has to be understood for final design considerations in
order to achieve a trustful result at the application.

REFERENCES
Egger, M. & Schukoff, B., 2007), “Kontinuierliche reflektorlose Ortsbrustdeformationsmessung”, In proceedings of the
56th Geomechanical Colloquium 2007.
Gamsjäger H., Rath A., Schrei Ch., Schmalek R. & Bernert R., (2006), “Optimierungansätze zur
Rohrschirmverpressung”, Proposal for Innovation price, Tunnelday Salzburg 2006.
Gamsjäger H. & Höfle H., (2006), Gilgel Gibe HEPP Lot 4-Äthiopien, Störungszonen beim Vortrieb des Tailrace
Tunnel. In proceedings of the 55th Geomechanical Colloquium 2006.
Holzleitner W., Deisl F., Holzer W. & Knapp M., (2004), “Voraussicherung mit Rohrschirm oder Spiessen”? In
proceedings of the 53rd Geomechanical Colloquy and EUROCK 2004,
Schenk V. & Lienig B. (2000), „Beherrschung von Wassereinbrüchen beim Bau des Eggetunnels, ABS Paderborn –
Kassel“, Bull angew Geol. Vol 5, Nr 2 Page 191-204.
Scholz, M. & Köhler M., (2006), Fault zones in Quaternary soft rock in the Inn valley causing difficulties in dewatering
ahead of a tunnel, In proceedings of IAEG 2006, paper no. 467, Geological Society of London.
Scholz, M. & Scharrer S., (2006), Subway construction in the city of Munich - different conditions and different
methods, In proceedings of IAEG 2006, Paper no. 494, Geological Society of London
Stacherl B., Jedlitschka G. & Scholz M., (2006), BEG Lot H5 – An example of interaction between geological
knowledge and tunnel design in difficult ground conditions, In proceedings of WTC 2006.
Thuro, K., (1996), Bohrbarkeit beim konventionellen Sprengbetrieb, Münchner Geologische Hefte.
Volkmann G.M., (2006), “Contribution to the design of tunnels with pipe roof support”. In proceedings of the 4th Asian
Rock Mechanic Symposium Singapore.
Volkmann G.M., (2004), “A contribution to the effect and behavior of Pipe roof supports”. In proceedings of the 53rd
Geomechanical Colloquy and EUROCK 2004.

11