为解决盾构穿越锚索群施工时锚索难处理的问题，以深圳地铁9号线西延线工程的4个盾构区间为例，通过尝试方案1（人工挖孔竖井+穿心千斤顶拔除）、方案2（人工挖孔竖井+套管钻机拔除）、方案3（人工挖孔竖井+旋挖钻拔除）、方案4（暗挖+空推处理）、方案5（旋挖钻拔除+地面加固强推）和方案6（地面直接加固+盾构强推），总结该线路锚索处理及盾构穿越的施工经验。研究结果表明： 1）方案5是最合适的处置方案； 2）人工挖孔竖井与其他方式结合的方案均不可靠； 3）方案4工期长、费用高、地面沉降难控制； 4）方案6使得盾构在锚索段掘进时转矩增大、掘进速度下降，且开舱换刀的频率和次数较高。故盾构施工穿越锚索群时，推荐首选旋挖钻拔除+地面加固强推的方案。

When shield tunneling through anchor cable group, anchor cables should be removed. In this paper, a case study is conducted on four shield sections of west extension line of Shenzhen metro line 9, and six schemes are studied, including manual excavated shaft + anchor cable removing by cavity jack(scheme 1), manual excavated shaft + anchor cable removing by casting pipe(scheme 2), manual excavated shaft + anchor cable removing by rotary drill(scheme 3), mining excavation + shield advancing without force(scheme 4), anchor cable removing by rotary drill + ground reinforcement and shield pushing(scheme 5), and direct ground reinforcement + shield pushing(scheme 6). The shield tunneling construction experience and the anchor cable treatment technology are summarized. The results show the following: (1) The scheme 5 is optimal. (2) The schemes with manual excavated shaft are not feasible. (3) The scheme 4 has disadvantages such as long construction period, high cost, and difficult control of ground settlement. (4) The scheme 6 will increase the shield torque and cutter replacing times and reduce the tunnel speed. Accordingly, the scheme 5 is recommended.