Professional Documents
Culture Documents
SUMMARY
When a tunnel is driven, particularly using a TBM, alignment problems can arise, and, with high-speed tunnelling, can get worse very quickly, and so need swift resolution. Changes to the alignment, where possible, are always cheaper and quicker than breaking out newly-built lining. A wriggle survey of the out-of-tolerance lining is the first step, followed by processing and analysis, followed in turn by judicious re-design of the alignment. The wriggle survey data then needs to be processed again using the new alignment, in an iterative process. This Paper presents some incidents, one from the 1960s, one from the 1980s and some more recent, so that others may learn from the experience.
Keywords
Computer-aided design, Design methods and aids, Land surveying, Mathematical modelling, Rail track design, Rehabilitation reclamation and renovation, Roads and highways, Tunnels and tunnelling, Wriggle survey
increase their construction tolerance. This proposal was rejected by the Client, as a close fit was required for ventilation purposes (see below). After the straight section through Highbury Station, the alignment started on a 56 chains (1126.5m) radius clockwise curve. The Setting-out process Survey stations were established at one hundred foot (30m) centres in the crown of the tunnel at the intersection point (IP) of two tangents to the curve. Each IP comprised a screw-eye fixed into the concrete lining, with a small hole drilled vertically through the bottom part of the eye. A piece of string was threaded through this hole, with a knot above to retain it, and a weight on the other end usually a lump of tunnel spoil to form a plumb-line. The theodolite was placed beneath this (the weight being replaced by a plumb-bob), and a back-sight taken to the previous station. Plumb-lines were then established at twenty-foot (7m) centres, fixed on the tangent to the curve, with three in use at a time, checked against each other. The location of the TBM in plan was established by lining up two plumb-lines onto a target plate fixed to the TBM, and measuring the offset. The direction in which the TBM was facing was checked by comparing the lead at axis level of the left hand side of the TBM against the right hand side, measured from square marks inscribed on the tunnel walls perpendicular to the alignment. For level, inverted-T adjustable boning rods were suspended from the tunnel roof in threes at ten-foot (3m) centres, and adjusted so that the top of the horizontal arm was in the design location. Three were always used, so that any mis-alignment would show up immediately. Readings were taken by sighting across the boning rods onto the target fixed to the TBM, and measuring the vertical distance from the target centre; this was then compared with the design offset. Overhang or look-up was measured with a plumb-bob. At the start of each shift, the Contractors Site Engineer calculated the required offsets for each of the next ten rings, and gave these to the Shift Boss. The incident The calculations of the offsets were all carefully checked, as were the setting-out points and the measurements of the offsets to the TBM, but the HIPs (Horizontal Intersection Points) were checked only every three hundred feet, as a follow-up survey and as luck would have it, the follow-up survey fell behind schedule. Thus the TBM had travelled over seven hundred feet along the curve before it was discovered that it was in the wrong place some 7-6 (2286mm) off line. It is easy to imagine the consternation that ensued. The TBM was stopped, and the length of tunnel very carefully surveyed to establish where it actually was. This survey and subsequent investigation showed that the deflection angles had been set out ten minutes less than they should have been. The error had arisen because the Contractors setting-out Engineer had started to use a new theodolite with which he was not familiar.
8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 100 200 300 400 Chainage 500 600 700 800
Error in feet
The tunnel cross-section was circular. The first step was to check and re-check the HIPs that had been established at 300-ft (90m) spacing. From these, the lining was surveyed at fivering (ten foot, 3m) intervals, by setting up the theodolite under one HIP and sighting the next. Using a levelling staff held horizontally, the offset of each tunnel wall at axis level was measured, at the leading edge of the ring. The level of the crown of the tunnel was also checked, but the invert level was only very rarely checked, for the invert was full of tunnel spoil and water. Also, there was more space at the bottom of the tunnel, and it did not impinge on clearances. Processing the wriggle survey From these horizontal offsets, the versines at each surveyed ring were calculated on a twenty-foot (7m) chord, and these versines were plotted on squared paper against chainage. The design line of these versines would have been along the zero intercept where the alignment was straight, then an inclined straight line where the alignment passed through the transition (radius, and hence versine, being proportional to distance), and then a straight horizontal line (constant versine) where the alignment ran along the circular curve (constant radius). The as-built versines formed a series of arcs (created by the offsets that were correct for a 56 chain curve) along a straight line lower than intended (created by deflection angles being too small, i.e. a larger radius curve). A best-fit line was drawn on the squared paper, and the radius of this was deduced. The process was then repeated using this radius as the new design radius, to check the clearances. The results Having established the alignment of the as-built tunnel, a second new curve was designed to join this first new curve to the original alignment; due to the large radii, no transition between them was necessary. Fortunately, the design radius was very large, and the new alignment lay within the limits of deviation, and the as-built tunnel was within tolerance, so no remedial work was necessary.
320
300
280
260
Northings
240
220
200
180
Design alignment As-built alignment Design HIPs As-built HIPs New alignment
160 1 2 3 4 Eastings 5 6 7 8
Figure 2: Victoria Line - Design, As-built and New Alignments (feet)
210
205
200
Northings
195
190
185
Design alignment As-built alignment Design HIPs As-built HIPs New alignment
2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 3
180 Eastings
Figure 3: Victoria Line - Design, As-built and New Alignments (feet) (enlargement of part of previous figure) An intermediate curve was then introduced to get the TBM back to the original alignment before the next obstacle, a chamber at Gibson Square that had already been built to accommodate the TBM for servicing before it completed the drive to Kings Cross.
0.000 -0.005 -0.010 -0.015 Error in -0.020 feet -0.025 -0.030 -0.035 -0.040 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375 400 425 Chainage
Figure 4: Victoria Line - As-built errors from new alignment (compare with Figure 1) From the above graph, Figure 4, it can be seen that the maximum error was changed from some 11 feet (3.5m) at the eventual worst point to some 0.035 feet (11mm), less than half an inch, and so within tolerance. No lining needed to be modified; the only penalty was a lot of extra work for the site engineers and the design engineers.
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000 19 2000
20
2 3
1000 17 0 16 15 -1000 14 13 12 11 10 9 6 7 8 18 4 5
-2000
-3000
-4000
-5000
-6000
-7000 -7000
-6000
-5000
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 17 0 -1000 -2000 -3000 -4000
Secondary Lining
20 19
2 3
18
5 6 7
16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9
-5000
Wriggle
-6000
-5000
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
7000
6000
5000
20
2 3
1000 17 0 16 15 -1000 14 13 12 11 10 9 6 7 8 18 4 5
-2000
-3000 -4000
Secondary Lining Wriggle Rotated Traffic Envelope:
-5000
-6000
-7000 -7000
-6000
-5000
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
6000
5000
20
2 3
1000 17 0 16 15 -1000 14 13 12 11 10 9 6 7 8 18 4 5
-2000
-3000 -4000
Secondary Lining Wriggle
-5000
-6000
-7000 -7000
-6000
-5000
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
Tunnel Line
Shutter Line
Tunnel Level
Shutter Level
Crown Thickness
900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 -100 -200 -300 -400 -500 -600 -700 -800
Up from Alignment
Crown Thickness is shown by a solid green line with round black blobs; this line SHOULD always be above the dotted green line at 225, and below the solid green line at 400, and MUST always be above the dotted black line at 200 (Right hand axis) Tunnel Level is shown by a Solid red line with square blobs; this line should be close to the red Zero line (Right hand axis) Shutter Level is shown by a dotted red line with round blobs; this line should be between the red Tunnel Level line and the red Zero line (Right hand axis) These criteria are only met over the first seven metres of the tunnel drive. Tunnel Line is shown by a solid blue line with diamond blobs; this line should be close to the blue Zero line (Left hand axis) Shutter Line is shown by a dotted blue line with round blobs; this line should be between the blue Tunnel Line line and the blue Zero line (Left hand axis)
-200 -100 0 100 200 300 2278 2280 2282 2284 2286 2288 2290 2292 2294 2296 2298 2300 2302 2304 2306 2308 2310 2312 2314 2316 2318 2320 2322 2324 2326 2328 2330 2332 2334 2336 2338 2340 2342 400
Tunnel Line
Shutter Line
Tunnel Level
Shutter Level
Crown Thickness
Minimum Thickness
Maximum Thickness
Up from Alignment
-100 -200 -300 2289 2299 2309 2319 2329 2339 2349 2359 2369 2379 2389 2399 2409 2419 2429 2439 2449 2459 2469 2479 2489 2499 -400 -500 -600
The re-alignment has lifted the line, but kept it at 4%. There has also been some slight adjustment in the horizontal alignment, to keep the line central to the as-built tunnel at the worst points. The improvements achieved in the crown of the tunnel by adjusting both the alignment and the shutter means that the concrete thickness is very rarely more than 400mm (isolated spots), very rarely less than 200mm (isolated spots), and mostly more than 225mm.
-1100 -1000 -900 -800 -700 -600 -500 -400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Left Shoulder Clearance is shown by a dotted blue line with square blobs; this line MUST always be above the blue Zero line Left Shoulder Thickness is shown by a solid blue line with triangular blobs; this line SHOULD always be above the blue line at 225, and MUST always be above the blue line at 200. Right Shoulder Clearance is shown by a dotted red line with diamond blobs; this line MUST always be below the red Zero line Right Shoulder Thickness is shown by a solid red line with round blobs; this line SHOULD always be below the red line at 225, and MUST always be below the red line at 200. These criteria are only met over the first 20 metres of the tunnel drive.
Left Shoulder
400 300 200 100 0 2278 2280 2282 2284 2286 2288 2290 2292 2294 2296 2298 2300 2302 2304 2306 2308 2310 2312 2314 2316 2318 2320 2322 2324 2326 2328 2330 2332 2334 2336 2338 2340 2342 -100 -200 -300 -400 -500 -600 -700 -800 -900 -1000 -1100
Right Shoulder
400 300 200 100 0 -100 -200 -300 -400 -500 -600 -700 -800 -900 -1000 -1100
-200
Right Shoulder
Figure 12: Shoulder clearances to Option 104 alignment The re-alignment has lifted the line, but kept it at 4%. There has also been some slight adjustment in the horizontal alignment, to keep the line central to the as-built tunnel at the worst points. The improvements achieved in the shoulders of the tunnel by adjusting both the alignment and the shutter means that the concrete thickness is rarely more than 400mm, and never less than 200mm. At no point does the lining impinge on the Traffic Envelope (clearance always more than zero).
-1100 -1000 -900 -800 -700 -600 -500 -400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Left Knee Clearance is shown by a dotted blue line with square blobs; this line MUST always be above the blue Zero line Left Knee Thickness is shown by a solid blue line with triangular blobs; this line SHOULD always be above the blue line at 225, and MUST always be above the blue line at 200. Right Knee Clearance is shown by a dotted red line with diamond blobs; this line MUST always be below the red Zero line Right Knee Thickness is shown by a solid red line with round blobs; this line SHOULD always be below the red line at 225, and MUST always be below the red line at 200. These criteria are met, but the alignment is not acceptable on account of the encroachments in the top half of the tunnel.
Left Knee
200 100 0 2278 2280 2282 2284 2286 2288 2290 2292 2294 2296 2298 2300 2302 2304 2306 2308 2310 2312 2314 2316 2318 2320 2322 2324 2326 2328 2330 2332 2334 2336 2338 2340 2342 -100 -200 -300 -400 -500 -600 -700 -800 -900 -1000 -1100
Right Knee
100 0 -100 -200 -300 -400 -500 -600 -700 -800 -900 -1000 -1100
2279 2289 2299 2309 2319 2329 2339 2349 2359 2369 2379 2389 2399 2409 2419 2429 2439 2449 2459 2469 2479 2489 2499
-200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Right Knee
Figure 14: Knee clearances to Option 104 alignment The re-alignment has lifted the line, but kept it at 4%. There has also been some slight adjustment in the horizontal alignment, to keep the line central to the as-built tunnel at the worst points. The improvements achieved in the knees of the tunnel by adjusting both the alignment and the shutter means that the concrete thickness is rarely more than 400mm, and never less than 200mm. Over the first 30m or so at the start of the tunnel, the lining would impinge on the Traffic Envelope (clearance less than zero). Over this length, special measures had to be employed, using a thinner lining of a different material to maintain the fire-protection to the primary lining.
Incident No 2 In another incident, the TBM wandered 240mm off-line. Following a wriggle survey, a new horizontal alignment was produced that enabled tunnel-driving to continue, and the secondary lining to be completed without modification, maintaining both the minimum thickness of the secondary lining and the specified clearances. Incident No 3 In a third incident, the TBM wandered 80mm off-line and 100mm off-level. Unfortunately, matters were exacerbated by the operator bringing the TBM back on line as rapidly as he could. This produced a kink in the as-built alignment. However, following the wriggle survey a new alignment was produced that enabled the as-built tunnel to be accepted, but the secondary lining shutter alignment had to be adjusted significantly relative to the primary lining in order to maintain clearance and concrete thickness. Results The results obtained in all three incidents allowed the secondary lining to be placed without any need to break out any primary lining, thus saving a considerable amount of time and money. This was achieved by the use of wriggle survey and bespoke VBA routines written by the Author and running in MicroSofts Excel.
Conclusions
For both road and railway tunnels, where alignment and clearances are important, wriggle survey is an essential tool in the tunnellers armoury. Equally important is the facility to process the results not just in cross-section, but longitudinally as well, and is to appreciate that a re-design of the alignment should be regarded as the first option to solve any problem with clearances. It is important, too, to realise that things can always go wrong.
Acknowledgements
The Author acknowledges his debt to those organisations that have enabled him to gather the experiences outlined above. These include Sir William Halcrow & Partners, Mott, Hay & Anderson, Charles Haswell & Partners, Rail Link Engineering and the HK MTRC.
References
(1) Morgan and Bartlett The Victoria Line: planning and design ICE Proceedings Paper 7270S Suppl. 1969 pp.377-395 (2) Clay and Takacs Tunnel collapses - case study Tunnelling 97, The Institution of Mining and Metallurgy, ISBN 1 870706 34 X, 1997 (3) Takacs and Clay Lessons from a NATM (SCL) breakthrough in difficult geological conditions; 8th Congress of the International Association of Engineering Geology and Environment, Balkema, 1998