TBM Station Transits

Crossrail Project: Infrastructure design and construction Volume 3
ISBN 978-0-7277-6129-3
ICE Publishing and Crossrail 2016: All Rights Reserved

doi: 10.1680/cpid.61293.531
TBM Station Transits

Christopher Chew BEng, MSc, DIC, MICE, CEng, C305 Lead Tunnel Engineer,
Atkins
David McIntyre MEng, C305 Assistant Engineering Manager, AECOM
Ross Cullen BA, BAI, MSc, MIEI, CEng, C305 Temporary Works Design Lead,
Dragados Sisk JV
Abstract
Providing parallel access into tunnels during its construction is a key factor for optimising
programme. However a tunnel is a linear work site where sharing of the space between
several contractors brings with it interfacing issues and associated risks that may in turn
negate the benefit gained from parallel working.
This paper considers the construction of station platform tunnels ahead of TBM constructed
tunnels to optimise the project construction programme. As a result the TBMs are required
to transit through the stations.
TBM transits can be summarised into three distinct phases; reception, transit and relaunch.
The paper discusses the requirements and considerations for each phase of the transit. It
looks at the designs of the reception and launch chambers. It discusses TBM transit
alignments and clash detection. The paper draws examples from the systems used for
transiting through bored tunnels stations with some comparison undertaken with a box
station.
1. Introduction
Metros are underground railways where the majority of its structures are tunnels. However
Metros are also comprised of other critical underground structures that allows it to function
as a commuter railway. They include stations, shafts, bifurcation caverns and cross over
tunnels. All these structures together with the running tunnels are constructed along a
common spine; which is the track alignment. The geometry of all these structures are very
different but they are all required to interface with one another seamlessly. It follows that the
method of constructing these various structures will also be different. The challenge on a
Metro project is therefore to coordinate the various construction methodologies where
possible in order to manage the interfaces, minimise programme risks and optimise access
in the underground space.
The excavation for the station platform tunnels can be undertaken either before or after a
TBM transits through the station. The question as to which transit strategy to adopt is
dependent on many considerations. Both strategies were used on Crossrail, with Contract
C305 and C310 TBMs transiting through completed station platform tunnels, whilst Contract
C300 TBMs bored pilot tunnels through the station alignment which were then expanded.
531
Downloaded by [ University College London] on [24/11/16]. Copyright ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
Fig 1.1 Underground Structures in a Metro
1.1 Tunnels, Caverns, Excavations and Shafts

The Crossrail running tunnels have been constructed by two types of Tunnel Boring
Machines (TBMs). The West (C300) and Central (C305) contracts used Earth Pressure
Balance TBMs whilst the East (C310) used slurry TBMs. The geometry of all the TBMs were
the same; a 12m long shield with mid shield articulation, 7.080m cutter head diameter
configured to construct 1.600m long, 6.800m OD precast concrete (PCC) segmental tunnel
rings. The TBM backup comprised a 20m long bridge behind the shield followed by 9
gantries, giving the TBM a total length of 120m. The TBM shield is in the region of
500Tonnes and backup gantries total approximately 1050Tonnes.
Fig 1.2(a) TBM Shield and Bridge Sections
532
Chew, McIntyre and Cullen
Fig 1.2(b) Typical TBM Gantry Configurations

Two methods were used to construct the underground station platforms. Stations were
either mined with permanent sprayed or insitu concrete linings, or excavated as open boxes.
Station platforms are typically 250m long and are set along a level and straight track
alignment. The cross sections of a mined platform tunnel is a series of curves forming a
horse shoe shaped cavern with an equivalent internal diameter of 12m. Structural lining
thickness range between 800mm to 1200mm incorporating waterproofing membrane and in
some cases bar reinforcement. The available cross section of box stations at platform level
during the TBM transit can be up to 30m wide before the platforms and escalator structures
are constructed. Shafts are either stand-alone structures or located at the end of the
stations and can be sited on the track alignment. The cross sectional configuration of these
shafts at track level where a TBM would transit vary depending on the internal structural
layouts.
Fig 1.3(a) Mined Station SCL Platform Tunnel
CRL Mined Stations
Whitechapel
Liverpool Street
Farringdon
Tottenham Court Road
Bond Street
CRL Box Stations

Woolwich
Canary Wharf
Paddington
533
Shafts on the track alignment are located at Limmo Peninsula and Stepney Green Junction
where they were used to facilitate the launch and retrieval of the TBMs. In the permanent
condition they are provided for ventilation and emergency egress / access.
Bifurcations accommodate the merger or splitting of the eastbound and westbound tracks.
On Crossrail there is an underground bifurcation at Stepney Green junction where the north-
east and south-east spurs meet. Crossovers on the other hand allow trains to switch
between the eastbound and westbound tracks (and vice versa). There are two single
crossovers on Crossrail, one located in the western section at Fisher street and the other on
the central section immediately west of Whitechapel station. They are typically 125m long
but have variable cross sections to accommodate the double track configurations. The
maximum diameter of the caverns is 19m at the headwall.
Fig 1.4 Whitechapel Crossover and Durward St Shaft
The summary above provides an insight to the type of structures that can be found on the
track alignment and therefore along the running tunnel and TBM path. During the
construction of the running tunnels, there is continuous stream of traffic within the completed
sections of the tunnels for supplies, personnel and muck removal. There is no access to
other Contractors along the running tunnels, including segregated sections of the station
platform tunnels, during this time. It can therefore be appreciated how obtaining parallel
access into the underground space can provide programme advantages.
The paper now discusses the design and planning of the particular operation of transiting
TBMs through partially completed station platform tunnels. The two main risk are:
Insufficient space for the TBM to transit through the station tunnels
The station tunnels being constructed out of the permanent track alignment tolerance
534
2. TBM Transit Alignment

There are 4 alignments that need to be considered when designing the TBM transit:
Permanent Track Alignment

Tunnel Alignment
TBM Transit Alignment
Station Platform Alignment
All permanent works are referenced to Permanent Track Alignment. This is the most
important principle to maintain. It is also a reminder that a Metro is primarily a railway which
is contained within underground structures such as tunnels. The alignment of the
underground structures must respect and satisfy the requirements of the railway. To
achieve this, the Designer must understand the relationship and hierarchy between the
various alignments.
2.1 Primary Alignment Relationship

The relationship between the Track and Running tunnel alignment is defined by a
geometrical equation related to the track cant and the offset from the emergency walkway.
The running tunnel axis (vertical alignment) remains at a constant offset to the track level
because the pivot point is the track centre. This results in the tunnel centre line (horizontal
alignment) being offset from the track centre line. This geometrical relationship can be seen
below.
Horizontal offset between Tunnel

and Track Alignments to account
for track cant
Constant vertical offset between

Tunnel and Track Alignments
Fig 2.1 Track / Running Tunnel Alignment Relationship
In a station, the primary relationship is between the track and the platform edge. Track
alignment in stations are normally straight and level, so the vertical and horizontal offset are
constant. The track alignment could be related to the platform tunnel alignment like the
running tunnel. However it should be noted that the cross sectional shapes of the station
tunnels can vary along with the length of the station platform. Therefore forming a direct
535
relationship between track and the station alignments in some areas is not straight forward.
Nevertheless keeping the track alignment visible as a primary reference is important
Running Tunnel Station
Non Public Public
Track Alignment
Tunnel alignment related to track Station tunnel alignment Station tunnel alignment at fixed
by cant varies to accommodate offset to track but relationship is
TBM transit. The different from the station non
relationship with track public area
alignment is variable
Fig 2.2 Track Alignment Relationships
2.2 Secondary Alignment TBM Transit

The secondary alignment as described here is simply the TBM transit alignment. The transit
alignment is used to position the TBM within the station from which space proofing checks
are undertaken. Through an iterative process, the TBM transit alignment is then adjusted to
develop the final alignment. The TBM transit alignment iterations are usually isolated to the
slew path locations where the TBM has to negotiate transit through sudden change of station
cross sectional shapes. This occurs at the station headwall or at the interface with shafts.
The following section will provide some guidance for designing the TBM transit alignment. To
begin with the following design principles should be incorporated where possible:
The vertical offset between track level and TBM centreline should be kept constant.
Horizontal TBM transit alignment is straight at the reception and launch locations
The TBM transit slew is an S curves which should not bend the TBM in opposite
directions at any one time
By keeping the vertical offset constant, the transit alignment also preserves the vertical offset
from the track. This ensures the TBM and hence the PCC tunnels are constructed to the
permanent track alignment. The TBM transit alignment iterations are then simplified by
confining adjustments to the horizontal alignment only. It should be noted that this may not
be possible if the running tunnels are constructed before the station tunnels. Here the
vertical offset may need to be changed to position the running tunnel (pilot) at a particular
level to facilitate the subsequent enlargement of the station platform tunnel.
536
Receiving and launching the TBM on straight horizontal alignments helps control TBM drive
tolerance. Although arriving and launching on shallow curves was not an issue on C305,
having straights simplified detailing for items such as the TBM launch brackets, transit rails
and setting of station reception & launch chambers.
A horizontal S bend in the transit alignment is required to slew the TBM into and out of
the station platform from the reception and launch chambers. The S bend is made up of
three components comprising a curve, a straight and an opposite curve. The length of each
component was matched to the TBM shield geometry as follows:
Minimum curve or straight length = 12m

Maximum curve radius = 400m
Minimum station tunnel diameter = 7380mm
The curves were designed with entry and exit transitions. With this S bend geometry the
TBM shield was not bent in opposite directions at any given time during the slewing. The
TBM mid shield articulation was not considered in the transit design although could have
been used if the tighter slew paths were required. Tighter radii and shorter lengths of curves
and straights could have been used, but this would potentially cause the TBM swept path
envelope to increase requiring larger diameter station tunnels. It should also be noted that
the curve radius can be limited by the space required to transit the gantries. There is a risk
that the bottom corners of the gantries frames clashing with the tunnel linings.
Left Curve Straight Right Curve
Lengths of curves and straight > TBM shield length
Fig 2.3 S Curve Alignment Geometry
537
Fig 2.4 Damage to PCC Segments from Gantry Clash (picture not from C305)
The relationship of the TBM transit alignment can be related to the permanent track
alignment by simply defining the horizontal offsets from the point where the two alignments
depart. This relationship is essential for designing the station tunnels as it allows both the
permanent and temporary space proofing to be checked simultaneously.
3. TBM Reception (phase 1)

The aim of reception chamber is to provide a controlled environment during the TBM break
through and its subsequent transit into the station. In addition, space should be provided to
facilitate the construction of the permanent connection between the Running tunnel and
Station.
3.1 Controlling TBM Entry

An Earth Pressure Balance (EPB) TBM works on the principle that pressures at the face of
the machine and around the cut annulus is maintained at a pressure equal to the pressure
from the surrounding ground and ground water. During tunnelling, TBM face pressure is
provided by ensuring the plenum (chamber between the cutter head and bulkhead) is kept
full of excavated material (muck). This is achieved by balancing the rate of advance
against the muck extraction rate. Similarly the annulus around the shield created by the over
cut from the cutter head, is supported by hydraulic pressure in the form of a drilling mud
(Bentonite). This is replaced by cement grout in the permanent case when the PCC tunnel
linings are installed.
Face pressure is lost as the TBM begins its breakthrough into a station. When the cutter
head daylights into the station, the annulus around the TBM shield is exposed to the
atmosphere and hydraulic support can no longer be maintained. If no provision is made for
alternative support, there will be a length of ground which is temporarily unsupported whilst
the full length of the TBM enters the reception chamber. Until the last permanent tunnel ring
538
is installed and sealed against the reception chamber, there remains a risk of the annulus
collapsing and the ground above settling.
Min position of headwall

Potential zone of ground instability Permanent Grout
Empty TBM Plenum
temporary loss of annulus

TBM Cut Annulus support around TBM shield
PCC Ring
Fig 3.1 Potential Loss of Support around TBM Shield at Reception
The station reception chambers on C305 were SCL tunnels that extended from the station
platform tunnel. The reception chamber headwall / softeye is a balanced design that
provides temporary stability before TBM breakthrough but structural weakness during the
breakthrough. This was achieved by using a dome shaped headwall constructed of a thin
SCL shell which was stabilised by a foam concrete plug (C2 to C5 concrete) behind it. The
SCL headwall is fractured by the applying tensile splitting forces on the concrete through the
TBM disc cutters. This was typically 100kN per disc of which there were 22No. The foam
concrete was a means of controlling the break through to avoid collapse of the headwall.
Once the TBM cutter head was buried into the reception chambers headwall, risk of ground
movement ahead of the TBM face is prevented as the chamber provides a protective
canopy. In stations such as Canary Wharf where the breakthrough was directly into a box,
there was no ground ahead of the TBM face and hence no risk of ground collapse once the
TBM was in the station. Collapse of the annulus around the TBM shield is caused by high
pore pressures or flowing water which in turn destroys any temporary soil shear strength.
The hydraulic support in the annulus during the normal TBM operation can be maintained
after break through by providing seals inside the reception chamber. This can be achieved
by having:
Entry Seals system (Bull-Flex)

Manual sealing of the annulus (fluffing)
Extended concrete foam plug equal to TBM length + 1 PCC ring
Further annulus stability can be achieved by stabilising the ground immediately outside the
reception chamber headwall for a minimum length of the TBM shield. This would include the
use of:
a grouted canopy
depressurisation / dewatering of the ground
539
3.2 Alignment and Geometry

The horizontal alignment of the reception chamber should be straight for a length of the TBM
shield plus 2 PCC rings. On C305 this was 15.2m (12m+1.6m+1.6m). A further length,
typically 1m was provided for constructing the permanent connection collar.
The minimum clear diameter for the reception chamber was 7380mm. This was based on:
current head diameter of 7080mm

50mm TBM alignment tolerance on radius
100mm shield to reception chamber clearance on radius
Further allowances locally would be required for accommodating seals and tolerances for
constructing the reception chamber.
7380 Min Clear dia of Reception Chamber
7080 TBM Cutterhead dia
50mm TBM alignment
Fig 3.2 Reception Chamber Clearances
3.3 Landing Platform

The TBM landing platform is essentially the invert of the foam concrete plug in the reception
chamber. This provides a stable base for the TBM shield whilst preparations are made to
transfer the TBM onto the transit rails in the stations. In box stations such as Canary Wharf
where there were no SCL reception chambers, a foam concrete bed was prepared onto
which the TBM bored into after breakthrough. There needs to be sufficient lateral support
provided to these landing platforms to ensure that they are not pushed away or rotated
during TBM entry.
From the time the TBM engages the station headwall, the reception chamber area became
an exclusion zone. Dust suppression systems were provided at the headwall in the form of;
water cannons, water sprinklers and additional ventilation. Control systems for the dust
suppression and ground stabilisation were protected during TBM arrival by positioning the
equipment outside the TBM envelope. Typically a gap of 1m was provided between the
540
foam headwall (end of landing platform) and the beginning of the TBM transit rails. This gap
has several functions including acting as a debris moat, sump and a transition zone to
transfer the TBM on to the transit rails.
4. Station Platform Transit (Phase 2)

The transit begins with slewing the TBM into the middle of the larger platform tunnels. This
is where the TBM departs from its tunnel design alignment. The TBM transit alignment
design was discussed earlier and the slewing through a S curve generally occurs within the
larger diameter station tunnels. Whilst it may appear that the station tunnels are much larger
than its reception chambers, the thicker station linings and interface between different station
cross sections results in pinch points. Here the TBM shield is close to the outer wall of the
station tunnel for lengths up to 25m long.
CL of TBM is offset 1110 from CL Platform Tunnel
7.2 dia TBM envelope clash with SCL

secondary and tight against primary lining
TBM axis +1935 above rail level

Rail Level
Reception Chamber Platform Tunnel
Fig 4.1 Example of Pinch Point where TBM Enters Larger Platform Tunnel
Once the TBM is in the main body of the station platform tunnels, there is little risk of clash.
The main consideration here is related to integration and logistic of the temporary works in
order to protect permanent works and optimise programme.
541
4.1 Space Proofing

The space proofing checks were undertaken using a range of TBM envelopes up to 7480m
diameter. The review was first undertaken in plan and then specific clash checks done in
cross section at critical points, paying particular attention to the curvatures of the station
tunnels above axis. On C305, clash analysis was also undertaken in 3 dimensions by the
TBM manufacturer, Herrenknecht, and by the C305 Contractor DSJV.
The Herrenknecht check was a review of the station temporary space proofing. It used the
TBM design transit alignment and a range of TBM envelopes which were checked against
the station 3D design models. However the station model initially, did not represent the
intermediate configuration during the TBM transit phase. The station models were modified
but specific details such as interface connections were difficult to model accurately. There
was still tremendous value in undertaking this 3D modelling as it provided an independent
check on the temporary space proofing, but more importantly a strong visual aid to focus
minds on the specific issues at pinch points.
Fig 4.2 Strong Visualisation Aid in 3D
The DSJV 3D check was undertaken using built survey information of the SCL tunnel linings.
With a clear understanding of where the pinch points were, targeted surveys and checks
could be undertaken. As discussed previously, understanding the track, station and transit
relationship here allowed the TBM envelope to be positioned correctly relative to the as built
station lining survey. Thereafter this could be evaluated for clash and adjustment identified
accordingly.
Localised clash can be addressed in several ways including:
Detailing the curvature / geometry of the platform tunnel above axis

Not constructing the secondary lining before TBM transit
Increasing the diameter of the platform tunnel locally
542
The majority of the TBM transit occurs through main length of the station platform. Once the
TBM has been slewed into the middle of the station platform tunnel and the transit alignment
set straight and level, the risk of the TBM shield clashing with the station lining is minimal.
Although there are still areas where particular clash checks are required including:
interface junction between the platform tunnel and shafts

tunnel sections with passage openings
non public area tunnels where there is a change in cross section
Fig 4.3 (a) Local Clash at Shaft Tunnel Interface (b) Detailed Setting Out for Shaft
Aperture
Whilst positioning the transit alignment in the middle of the platform tunnel may present the
lowest risk option for preventing clash, it may not necessarily be the optimum location when
considering provisions for:
Station platform construction programme

TBM temporary works instillation (conveyors)
TBM dismantling and removal of temporary works
Construction of station first stage concrete
4.2 TBM Transit Plinths

The TBM shield and gantries have very different geometries and therefore requires two
different types of support platforms. The TBM shield is supported on two outer rail plinths.
The space left in between these plinths is then used for cradles that support the TBM
gantries and temporary railway.
The initial sections of the transit rails were adjustable so that it can be aligned with the final
position of the TBM shield when it breaks into the station. On C305 the adjustable transit
rails were formed of prefabricated 50 x 50 mm flat bars tack welded onto a hollow steel
sections filled with grout. These hollow steel section were welded onto a 12 mm plate with
links at 250 mm centres, then cast into reinforced concrete plinth. After TBM breakthrough
the tack welds could be removed to allow final adjustments to be made. The temporary
543
plinths were separated from the station lining with a debonding membrane but dowels were
provided at the interface to provide shear resistance.
Beyond the adjustable rails were the fixed transit rails which were formed of MRS 87A Rail
or an 80 x 30 mm flat bar welded onto the 12 mm plate. The 80 x 30mm flat bar was used
where clearance to the station tunnel lining was tight. All the transit rails were installed using
a jig that was set out to the TBM transit alignment.
Fig 4.4 Transit Rail Jig
4.3 TBM Jacking

The weight of the Crossrail TBM shield including its cutter head is just over 500T. The
bridge and gantries were on average 50T each. The total weight of the complete TBM
assembly is in the region of 1050T. The TBM shield is slid along greased transit rails and
designed for a friction factor of 0.3 resulting in a horizontal force of 150T. The gantries run
on wheeled boggies where additional horizontal forces of between 30T to 50T are estimated.
Two jacking systems were used on C305 to advance the TBM across the station which
include using:
TBM Rams to push off temporary invert segment

Independent jacks attached to the TBM shield pushing off the transit guide rails
The first system of jacking off temporary invert ring (shove iron) was used in all the transits
apart from Canary Wharf station. This was a simple systems that placed two invert PCC
segments behind the TBM which provided a reaction point for the jacks to advance the
shield forward. The invert segments were supported off the station tunnel invert on timber
544
blocks positioned in between the transit rail plinths. These timber blocks were placed
adjacent to the transit rail plinths outside the envelope of the TBM shield. Once the TBM
shield had passed, the timber blocks were pulled into position by a system of ropes and
wedged under the PCC segment. These invert segments then provided the temporary
platform to support the TBM gantries and temporary railway as per the normal configuration
in the running tunnel. Where the station tunnel invert or shaft inverts were deep, additional
concrete was poured to build up a temporary invert. Where possible rectangular hollow
sections were incorporated so that telehandlers could be used to remove the temporary
invert after completion of the tunnelling works.
Fig 4.5 TBM Shoving Off Temporary Invert Segments During Transit
Fig 4.6 TBM Gantries Supported on Temporary Invert Segment During Transit
545
As a note, on C300 Western Running Tunnels, 1m long temporary segments where installed
through the station platform to match the maximum advance length of SCL excavation for
the subsequent enlargement of the station platform tunnels.
The second system used cradles on rail

bogies to carry the TBM shield and its
gantries across the station. Hydraulic
jacks were welded to the body of the TBM
shield and clamped to the transit rail.
These jacks were then extended,
unclamped from the transit rail, retracted
and clamped again in sequence to
advance the TBM. These temporary
works were specially fabricated
mechanical and steel components. The
temporary railway was initially supported
on a series of steel plinths along the TBM
transit alignment but was later realigned
to the outer edge of the station to
segregate the station from the tunnel so
that works on the platform could continue
in parallel
Fig 4.7 Temp Hydraulic Jacks Advancing TBM
4.4 Tunnelling and Station Interface

The first jacking system where the TBM Rams were used to advance the TBM was simple.
The temporary railway and TBM services could also be installed behind the TBM as it
advanced in the usual way. The temporary works components in the station were standard
items of steel rails, rebar, timber and insitu concrete. By contrast the use of cradles to move
the individual TBM components in the second system was arguably more complicated but it
allowed the station works to recommence earlier and continue in parallel with the tunnelling
thereafter thus returning benefit to the project programme.
Planning the interface between the station and tunnelling works is important to allow both
programmes to be optimised. However the various underground spaces should always be
clear defined and controlled by the respective Principal Contractors. These work spaces
would have its own arrangement for welfare, access routes, entry and emergency egress.
The boundaries of the underground sites is dynamic so it was important that daily liaison
between the Contractors Person in Charge were undertaken to confirm changes to the
work areas and corresponding emergency arrangements. During tunnelling, the station
space where the temporary railway is located is under the control of the tunnelling
Contractor. No station works can be undertaken in this area until is it handed back to the
station Contractor. Where possible the aim was to have the structural lining completed in
the platform tunnels so that only internal works such as that for the platform structures and
track bed would need to be undertaken after the platform tunnel is handed back.
546
Temporary services are required through the station to support the TBM. Lighting was
positioned next to walkways by the transit rail plinths. Other services including pipework,
electrical cables, communications, muck conveyors and ventilation were fixed to the station
tunnel lining. Installation of the conveyors and ventilation bagging could not be undertaken
from the TBM gantries without additional provisions in the form of extension chains being
provided to account for the large diameter platform tunnels. Consideration could be given to
using steel frames erected around the TBM on which these services could supported,
keeping it independent of the station lining. Constraints such as temporary loads and drilling
depth into the station linings were defined in Interface Control Documents to allow the
tunnelling Contractor to design the temporary works whilst protecting the permanent works in
the station. Items of particular concern to the station was preventing damage to the
permanent structural lining and waterproofing membrane (if installed).
Upon breakthrough the ventilation through the completed tunnel needs to be preserved.
This could be provided by venting through the stations, but in the case of C305 the system
was sealed so that air circulation was contained within the running tunnels. This approach
therefore required bulkheads to be erected across station openings, such as adits and
shafts. In some cases where the station was not ready for TBM transit, temporary
bulkheads were erected across the platform tunnel itself.
Fig 4.8 Temporary Bulkheads for Ventilation Tunnel Ventilation
Further programme optimisation can be achieved by integrating the tunnelling temporary

works with the station permanent works. Reducing the amount of temporary works removals
brings benefit to the project programme, reduced access requirements and risk of damage to
547
the station permanent works. Apart from the interface with the station tunnel lining, the other
interface between the tunnel temporary railway is the platform structure and the track bed
concrete. Positioning of the temporary works would need to take into consideration position
of reinforcement, undertrack crossings, track drainage and so on. Furthermore the
construction of cast in items would require the works to be adopted by the permanent works
Designer who in doing so needs to ensure that track and platform setting out are preserved.
This is where maintaining an understanding between the permanent track alignment and the
other temporary alignments is key to ensuring the permanent railway requirements are
achieved.
Whilst undertaking tunnelling and station works in parallel may bring programme benefits to
the project, there must be a clear understanding of how the TBM will be retrieved at the end
of the drive. The construction of the platform structure in the station reduces the available
space if large TBM components have to be retrieved back through the station.
Consideration should then be given to the configuration of the temporary works such as the
use of steel vs concrete, insitu vs precast, in order to understand which approach optimises
the time required for temporary works removal and hand back of the station space.
81.000m ATD (rail level)
80.480m ATD (First stage concrete interface)

80.250m ATD (top of Contruction railway plinth)
80.230m ATD (invert of drainage channel at ends of station)
clash with plinth requires adjustment to channel detail
700 700
A393 Mesh
Fig 4.9 Example of Integrating Temporary Railway Plinth into Station First Stage Concrete
5. TBM Launch (Phase 3)

The aim of launch chamber is the same as that of the reception chamber but in reverse. It
provides a transition length to reset the TBM on the permanent tunnel alignment and a
stable environment thereafter to break out of the station. The design of the launch chamber
must therefore have provision for:
transition the TBM from the platform tunnel back onto the design tunnel alignment
housing the launch brackets against which the permanent tunnel rings are
constructed
Sealing the tunnel allowing full face pressure to be established before break out
constructing the permanent connection between the Running tunnel and Station
Although the TBM can launch on a horizontal curve the preference is always to have a
straight alignment wherever possible. On C305 launch chambers were constructed at the
end of the bored stations for a length of the TBM shield plus 1m for a foam concrete plug.
Behind the shield a further length is required to accommodate the launch brackets and
548
provision for constructing the permanent connection between the PCC rings and the station
lining.
The minimum clear diameter for the launch chamber was 7280mm. This was based on:
current head diameter of 7080mm

50mm alignment tolerance on radius
50mm shield to launch chamber clearance on radius
Annulus backgilled with Pea Gravel which

Foam Concrete Plug
is backgrouted in the permanent conditon
TBM Launch Brackets
Temporary Steel Ring Former
PCC Ring
Space for forming permanent connection

between PCC and SCL linings
Fig 5.1 TBM Launch Chamber Reaction Frame
The diameter of the launch chamber is smaller than the reception chamber to minimise the
size of the annulus grouting required around the permanent rings. This is to ensure a seal
can be formed during the launch and the PCC rings are stabilised thereafter. On C305,
reaction brackets aligned with the 22No TBM RAMs, were bolted around the launch
chamber lining. Local thickening of the launch chamber lining was required to accommodate
these brackets and to dissipate the launch loads. The launch loads were typically 200T from
the dead weight of the TBM and a further 220T for the forced required to fracture the head
wall. Further allowance were made to account for unevenly distributed RAM loads. Each
launch bracket was made up of two steel components, a seat and a reaction frame, which
were assembled together once the TBM shield was in position.
549
Fig 5.2 (a)Launch Brackets Seats (b) Fully Assembled Reaction Frames
A 250mm wide steel ring former was bolted to the first PCC ring which acted as a template
to aid assembly of the first permanent ring. As the PCC rings were built, a grout bag was
installed at the trailing edge of the first ring in the annulus. This was inflated which formed a
stop end against which the annulus could be backfilled. The annuls back fill within the
launch chamber was initially pea gravel which was then grouted once the TBM broke out
and tail skin grouting could begin. The configuration of the foam plug and the shape of
headwall had a bearing on how easy it was to breakout. The preference was:
No steel fibres in the headwall concrete to avoid concrete breaking into clumps
making it difficult to remove through the muck screw.
A benched rather than domed headwall to minimise concrete clumps during break
out.
550
6. Conclusion
Developing the relationship between the TBM
transit alignment and the track alignment is
key to ensuring the permanent works are not
compromised. The transit alignment should
be kept simple by maintaining the vertical
alignment at a constant offset from the
permanent track alignment thus confining to
design of the transit to the horizontal
alignment. Where possible, allow the TBM to
be received on a straight alignment. During
the transit avoid short S curves as this would
require the TBM to bend in opposite directions
simultaneously.
Clash detection can be done very accurately

in 3D and its results serves as a very powerful
visual aid. However it relies on having equally
accurate information about the station lining
configuration in the intermediate state. The
primary clash checks should be undertaken
using discrete sections at critical locations.
This is more precise and allows setting out of
the station tunnels and apertures to be
defined accurately.
The TBM station transit can be described in three parts; reception, transit and launch. The
main risk during TBM reception is ground instability. The TBM face and annulus pressures
that are lost during entry can be mitigated by providing seals in the reception chamber and
undertaking ground stabilisation. During the TBM transit, areas of risk to TBM clash include
locations where the station cross section changes and where the TBM transit path slews
away from the track alignment. There are several ways of optimising the tunnelling and
station programmes such as integrating the tunnelling temporary works with the station
permanent works and using segregated work areas to allow parallel working to continue
safely. However this has to be balanced against the potential impact on access required for
other works such as TBM removal. Access into the underground space is always limited
and therefore the use of a simple light weight launching system was ideal.
C305 under took four TBM transit through stations and crossover chambers. A simple and
repeatable system was used which allowed all the transits to be completed without major
issues. Design, planning and execution of the works required extensive interfacing to
achieve a balanced outcome for all parties. Successful transits of the TBMs through the
stations was a key component for maintaining the critical path activity of constructing the
running tunnels.
551

TBM Station Transits

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

TBM Station Transits

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Crossrail Project: Infrastructure design and construction Volume 3

ICE Publishing and Crossrail 2016: All Rights Reserved

TBM Station Transits

Fig 1.1 Underground Structures in a Metro

1.1 Tunnels, Caverns, Excavations and Shafts

Fig 1.2(a) TBM Shield and Bridge Sections

Fig 1.2(b) Typical TBM Gantry Configurations

CRL Box Stations

Fig 1.4 Whitechapel Crossover and Durward St Shaft

2. TBM Transit Alignment

Permanent Track Alignment

2.1 Primary Alignment Relationship

Horizontal offset between Tunnel

Constant vertical offset between

Fig 2.1 Track / Running Tunnel Alignment Relationship

Running Tunnel Station

Non Public Public

Fig 2.2 Track Alignment Relationships

2.2 Secondary Alignment TBM Transit

Minimum curve or straight length = 12m

Left Curve Straight Right Curve

Lengths of curves and straight > TBM shield length

Fig 2.3 S Curve Alignment Geometry

3. TBM Reception (phase 1)

3.1 Controlling TBM Entry

Min position of headwall

Empty TBM Plenum

temporary loss of annulus

Entry Seals system (Bull-Flex)

3.2 Alignment and Geometry

current head diameter of 7080mm

7380 Min Clear dia of Reception Chamber

7080 TBM Cutterhead dia

50mm TBM alignment

Fig 3.2 Reception Chamber Clearances

3.3 Landing Platform

4. Station Platform Transit (Phase 2)

CL of TBM is offset 1110 from CL Platform Tunnel

7.2 dia TBM envelope clash with SCL

TBM axis +1935 above rail level

Reception Chamber Platform Tunnel

4.1 Space Proofing

Fig 4.2 Strong Visualisation Aid in 3D

Localised clash can be addressed in several ways including:

Detailing the curvature / geometry of the platform tunnel above axis

interface junction between the platform tunnel and shafts

Station platform construction programme

4.2 TBM Transit Plinths

Fig 4.4 Transit Rail Jig

4.3 TBM Jacking

TBM Rams to push off temporary invert segment

The second system used cradles on rail

Fig 4.7 Temp Hydraulic Jacks Advancing TBM

4.4 Tunnelling and Station Interface

Fig 4.8 Temporary Bulkheads for Ventilation Tunnel Ventilation

Further programme optimisation can be achieved by integrating the tunnelling temporary

81.000m ATD (rail level)

80.480m ATD (First stage concrete interface)

5. TBM Launch (Phase 3)

current head diameter of 7080mm

Annulus backgilled with Pea Gravel which

TBM Launch Brackets

Temporary Steel Ring Former

Space for forming permanent connection