Construction Princes Highway ramp soft ground tunnel

A. Nancarrow
Baulderstone Hornibrook - Bilfinger Berger JV

M. Lechner
Baulderstone Hornibrook - Bilfinger Berger JV ABSTRACT: The Princes Highway exit ramp on the M5 East Freeway project in Sydney connects the eastbound carriageway to the surface at the Princes Highway. As part of this 420-metre exit ramp, the initial 65 metres at the surface were completed in particularly challenging conditions. The reasons for the selection of the construction metho dology were the geological conditions consisting of sandy and silty soils, the water table which was located two to three metres below the tunnel crown, physical constraints such as four local and intercity live train lines above the tunnel canopy and grou nd cover as low as 2.5 metres. Risks associated with geology and the consequence of surface settlements in excess of the railway requirements led to the selection of a shotcrete method of excavation and support. The purpose of this paper is to describe the design and operational issues which were required to be developed and followed to minimise the construction risks. The driven tunnels, the longest road tunnels in 1. INTRODUCTION Australia, form a major component of this $750M motorway project. The continuing growth of Sydney is making a major upgrade of its traffic infrastructure necessary. The M5 East Freeway project is the latest link in the growing Sydney orbital road network. In August 1998, the Roads & Traffic Authority (RTA) of New South Wales awarded the design, construction and 10-year operation and maintenance contract to the joint venture o f B a ulderstone Hornibrook and Bilfinger Berger. The total length of the M5 East Freeway project is 10km. Principal elements include 4km of surface two lane dual carriageway, 3.8km of twin two-lane driven tunnels with three driven ramp-tunnels connecting to th e surface road network, a 700m long river crossing constructed in cut and cover method and two viaduct structures, 300m and 700m in length.

Figure 1: Schematic of M5 East Motorway The Princes Highway exit ramp portals into deep alluvial soils, next to the Arncliffe railway station. The tunnel alignment crosses beneath the Illawarra railway line, a major Sydney commuter train line, with very little ground cover. The railway authorities were required to have this train line operational at all times, which made the choice of the driven method of

excavation under difficult conditions mandatory. 2. GEOLOGY The M5 east is underlain by rocks of the Triassic sedimentary basin common to the Sydney basin. The main tunnels are within the subhorizontal beds of the Hawkesbury sandstone formation. Hawkesbury sandstone comprises massive, laminated and cross bedded quartz sands tone in near horizontal beds with some siltstone layers generally less than 4 metres thick. The properties and behaviours of the Hawkesbury sandstone have been discussed widely and will not be further explained in this paper. T h e s u r f a c e p r o f i l e o f t h e Hawkesbury sandstone in the vicinity of the Princes Highway exit ramp is dominated by the development of two incised northeast trending paleovalleys. These paleovalleys are of Quaternary age and are infilled with alluvial soils. The first of the paleovalleys is over 22 metres deep at its centre and is infilled with a sequence of sands and clayey sands representing both alluvial and colluvial soils deposited during a period of sea level rise. It is into these soils that the Princes Highway exit ramp tunnel portals and proceeds for the initial 65 metres referred to as soft ground tunnel section. The second paleovalley is inferred to be of similar depth and age as the first. The Princes Highway exit ramp tunnel passes beneath the base of this second paleovalley with rock cover above the tunnel crown of locally about 15 metres. The alignment of the Princes Highway exit ramp tunnel runs approximately perpendicular

to the axis of both paleovalleys whereas the Illawarra rail lines run approximately parallel to and along the buried Western slope of the first paleovalley. The total thickness of soils beneath the 4 affected rail lines ranges from 7 to 16 metres deepening west to east towards the centre of the paleovalley. The Princes Highway exit ramp tunnel was driv e n t h r o u g h t h e s e s o i l s a n d i n t o t h e weathered rock of the buried valley slope. The soils encountered by the Princes Highway exit ramp tunnel generally comprise 3 well defined units, as follows, the upper being an old fill layer. Unit F Fill: Comprising a mix of clayey sand with angular rock gravel, brick, glass, ash and asphalt. Adjacent to the railway tracks the upper 500 mm comprises predominantly old ballast and rail base. Unit 1 Sand: Generally light yellow grey brown with an upper dark brown old organic rich topsoil zone horizon. Predominantly fine to medium grained quartz sand with < 5% fines, loose, dry to slightly moist. Unit 2 Clayey Sand: Mottled yellow brown and light grey with local dark orange brown stain and mild cementing. Predominantly medium to coarse grained quartz sand with clay content ranging from <20% up to 40-50%. Becoming moist from about 3 metres below surface. The sandstone on the paleovalley slope ranges from Class III to V over a depth of about 4 to 5 metres. The Class IV to V sandstone is typically yellow to orange and red brown with purple brown and light grey.

The unconfined compressive strength of the Class IV to V sandstone ranges from <1 to < 5 Mpa, but locally is up to 15 MPa as a result of cementing. The bedding in the rock dips gently (2 to 5 deg.) towards the Northeast. The permeability of the sandstone is controlled predominantly by open (< 20 mm) subvertical interbed joints and by partially opened subhorizontal bedding defects. The standing groundwater level within the soils prior to the commencement of the dewatering was around 6 to 8 metres below the surface. Recharge to the soils is supplied from general run-off and also from the sandstone beneath.

Geological Investigations The geological investigation in the vicinity of this area was far in excess of that of the mainline tunnels. Due to the limited accessibility of the railway land directly above the tunnel, a series of borelogs in the vicinity of the tunnels was used to assess the geology within the tunnel alignment. In order to evaluate the free stand -up time of the ground with the groundwater present, a 7-metre deep test pit was excavated. The analysis of the ground conditions in the test pit revealed the following geotechnical parameters (on dry samples) Sand Unit 1: E = 45,000 kN/m2 (re-charge modulus) C = 2 kN/m2 (cohesion) Y = 18 kN/m3 (specific weight) Sand Unit 2: E = 90,000 kN/m2 (re-charge modulus) C = 5 kN/m2 (cohesion) Y = 19 kN/m3 (specific weight) Groundwater The effect of the moisture content on the geological parameters is of critical importance. As a result the identification of the water table level was necessary for the geotechnical assessment of the tunnel. In a pre-drained state the level was 2-3 metres below the tunnel crown.

Figure 2: Schematic Long Section of Tunnel 3. TUNNEL DESIGN The Princes Highway Soft Ground design was performed and delivered by the team of Hyder Consulting Australia (principal designer), Mller & Hereth (specialist soft ground tunnel designer), Sinclair Knight Merz (principal design verifier), Pells Sullivan Meynink (specialist tunnel design verifier) and the Baulderstone Hornibrook Bilfinger Berger JV design staff. In order to take on the challenges of the demands to the 100 years design life of this project the team has in close cooperation developed the design based on the following stages:

Tunnel Profile and Numerical Modelling Selection of the tunnel profile was based on the minimum traffic envelope, required services and emergency egress requirements. Shape of the tunnel was based primarily on the known ground conditions, tolerable settlements, groundwater level and surcharge from freight rail. Numerical modelling was performed to a s s e s s p r i m a r y a n d s e c o n d a r y support requirements and to predict ground

displacements. A sample of the analyses is as indicated below. Maximum predicted settlements were in the order of 125 mm.

Groundwater lowering prior to excavation to improve the geotechnical parameters of the sands Chemical pre-g r o u t i n g t o e n s u r e s t a b i l i t y o f t h e s e n s i t i v e r ailway services at the lowest cover section Canopy tubes as pre-support for the whole length of the soft ground part of the ramp Staged excavation to limit settlements and ensure overall stability Excavation face support to further enhance face stability Temporary support only used to take the load during construction. Groundwater drainage for a controlled flow of the groundwater to the tunnel drainage system Permanent inner lining to meet the 100 year design life

Figure 3: Numerical modelling of top heading Settlement Criteria In close cooperation with the railway authorities the allowable movements on ground surface were identified. The predicted settlements based on the design showed that the effects due to the tunnelling operations were in excess of the allowable limits. This made necessary, a strict monitoring programme and a management plan to be able to re-ballast and raise the railway lines during the excavation. Selection of Design A variety of options were investigated to fulfil the requirements described above, the choice was made for a shotcrete method with partial heading with the following key design elements:

Figure 4: Selected Schematic Profile 4. RISK MANAGEMENT Risk Identification Within the overall risk management systems incorporated on the M5 East project, the Princes Highway exit ramp tunnel has been considered as bearing the highest construction risk. The primary reason for this was the close vicinity to major railway lines under soft ground conditions. This rating was further

aggravated by the timing of the project which put the excavation of this tunnel into the period of the 2000 Sydney Olympic Games, a period of extended public transport demands.

Risk Workshops In order to find right solutions to mitigate the risk and minimise the impact on both the rail operations and construction, several risk assessment workshops were conducted b e t w e e n t h e R T A , R a i l I n f r a s t ructure Corporation (RIC), Rail Services Australia (RSA) as well as AGL and Sydney Water. The initial risk workshops were followed by technical studies and the development of the design (as previously discussed). Before the construction works could commenc e t h e following key risk mitigation methods were identified and addressed. The primary concern of the risk assessments was for the safety of the commuters and as a result, the nonconstruction measures recommended were as follows: 24 hr monitoring of the railways levels and analysis of the data Emergency response plan for the immediate closure of rail lines if necessary Constant readiness for emergency support

To allow this, three critical construction elements were identified. The first, the need for pre-excavation support in the form of canopy tubes, second, the need to minimise the excavation size and create an immediate support structure, and thirdly to minimise the excavated round length to ensure a rigid support was installed on and as close to the face as possible. On this basis, a multiple pass shotcrete method was adopted for tunnel excavation. The construction methodology in chronological order is as indicated in the following sections. Access To gain access to the tunnel portal it was necessary to construct a face by surface methods. Due to the low strength of the material, the necessity to create a waterproof structure and the need for cut and cover to allow re-establishment of local streets, a diaphragm wall method was selected. The location of the portal was selected by offsetting the cost of reinstatement works of Arncliffe Street and minimizing tunnel length in addition to reducing the amount of excavation in Unit 1 Sands. The diaphragm wall box was designed and constructed to allow sufficient room for storage of all tunnelling and ancillary e q u i p m e n t t o a l l o w 2 4-hour operations. Initially, the 24 m x 12 m box structure was of minimum size and some operational difficulties were encountered. As tunnelling progressed and space within the tunnel increased, these issues became less relevant. Diamond drilling of the diaphragm wall through the concrete and reinforcing was necessary to allow installation of ground consolidation tubes and canopy tubes. Excavation

5. CONSTRUCTION At the completion of the risk assessment workshop and design phases, the app roval from the relative authorities was gained and construction permitted to commence. Overview - Construction Methodology The basic principle in the tunnel construction was to ensure, as far as possible, minimization of the disturbance of the surrounding soils.

commenced with the removal of diaphragm wall by water cutting and excavation by hammer. Survey Monitoring Due to the sensitive nature of the rail infrastructure located on the surface above the tunnel and the proximity of properties to the alignment, an extensive surface monitoring system was developed. A dilpidation survey was carried out on all surface rail lines, overhead catenary posts, switch room, Arncliffe train station and all residential and commercial properties along the alignment. In addition to the continuous monitoring system discussed in the proceeding section, all points were monitored on a daily, weekly or monthly basis during the c o n s t r u c t i o n p h a s e . The most critically assessed risk associated with the Princes Highway ramp construction was that of the consequence of movement of the railway line to an extent which would result in a train derailment. As an imperative check to ensure the safety of rail commuters, a n automated rail monitoring system was installed that monitored the rail track on a 24 hour 7day per week basis. Due to RSAs and RICs understanding of train responses to rail movements, it was a relative simple exercise to identify the most appropriate prism locations and spacing over the critical areas. Requirements were for various deformation analyses based on train carriage lengths and separations. A survey was carried out on the tracks and track design data acquired in order to perform the analyses. Analysing of the data and applying it to the RSA and RIC criteria was also well defined. The system for gathering and analysing the data was selected on the basis of reliability. An automated robotic survey system was

utilized to provide real time analysis of any movement on the rail lines. The automatic prism recognition system could perform an assessment cycle on the 121 mini prisms located on the rail sleepers in approximately 13 minutes. The automatic theodolite was placed on top of a nearby building in a position where all prisms could be monitored. Information on prism locations was relayed using a radio link to the site office where the data could be processed on a PC using software developed for this system. The processing of the data provided an analysis of movements on the railway lines in relation to the RSA requirements. The information is provided in the form of track alignment, surface levels over varying distances, twist over varying distances and variation in the super-elevation according to design. The system has been setup to trigger a warning siren and flashing strobe light if the deformation limits have been exceeded. If the system detects a limit trigger, and investigation of the data in the field proves to be an actual deformation alarm then the authorized person would take the action appropriate to the level of settlement. The categories of deformation were defined as listed below: Table 1: Case A Settlements Criteria Settlement Alignment 10m 28 mm Top Surface 1.8 m 15 mm Top Surface 10 m 26 mm Twist 2.7 m 16 mm Twist 13.2 m 28 mm S u p e r ( d i f f t o 28 mm design) In the event of case A settlements, the RSA is to be notified within 24 hrs of occurrence with the type of alert, the level of deformation and the track involved. In this event the track is to

be re-ballasted prior to recommencement of works and as soon as possible. Table 2: Case B Settlements Criteria Settlement Alignment 10m 60 mm Top Surface 1.8 m 26 mm Top Surface 10 m 45 mm Twist 2.7 m 27 mm Twist 13.2 m 60 mm S u p e r ( d i f f t o 75 mm design) In the event of case B settlements the controlling signal box was to be notified immediately to stop all trains on the affected track. Dewatering System Early geotechnical assessment of the ground conditions indicated that the Unit 1 and Unit 2 Sands both have poor cohesional properties in their in-situ saturated state. The location of the water table was known to be at 2-3 metres below the tunnel crown and thus some difficulties with face stability w e r e t o b e expected if no improvement measures were adopted. This early assessment later proved to be accurate and the resulting selection of dewatering to lower the water table was very important in the safe completion of the excavation. The dewatering s y s t e m c o n s i s t e d o f a combination of borehole pumps and downhole eductors. The system was supplied and installed three months prior to the commencement of the tunnelling operations. The level of the water table and the groundwater flows were monitored on a daily basis to ensure that the system was operating effectively and the conditions within the tunnel did not deteriorate. At times of high rainfall and rapid recharge, difficulties were encountered in maintaining the water level. All

w a t e r f r o m d e wa t e r i n g w a s t r e a t e d a n d disposed of in the stormwater system. The system was successful at lowering the water table from RL 8.2 to RL 1m to +1m (depending on position) which allowed the top heading of the tunnel (which was most critical) to be completed in conditions of improved geotechnical parameters. Selection of major plant and materials Tunnel design and selection of primary plant were performed concurrently. It was known that the material properties did not require any form of breakage or cutting for liberation and that the machine would be required to have significant reach given the high arched profile. On this basis, a 913 Liebherr Tunnel Excavator was selected as the primary excavation machine. Shotcrete installation was performed using a Meyco Spraymec with a Meyco Suprema Pump. The rig proved to be efficient and reliable, with consistent additive supply. This was essential given the critical nature of the requirement for consistent and rapid shotcrete strength development using this me thod. Atlas Copco 322 Rocket Boomer was used for installation of canopy tubes. This method was selected due to the limited tunnel space, flexibility of installation, speed of installation and cost effectiveness. After initial issues associated with feed pressure and rotation in soft ground conditions it proved very effective for the required task. Atlas Copco Craelius Unigrout pump was used for ground injection of Microfine and Chemical Grouts. Giulini Gecedral F2000 ST used as the shotcrete accelerato r . R a p i d s t r e n g t h development was a key to the excavation

methodology. After extensive trials and field tests, Giulini was selected as the preferred shotcrete accelerator. Grouting Materials. Extensive trials were carried out to determine the grouts t h a t provided the greatest soil penetration and consolidation. Where penetration was most important as in stabilization tubes at the portal, a sodium silicate grout was adopted. Similarly, where soil consolidation and strength was most important, Microfine Rheochem 900 was used. The two primary functions of the canopy tubes were to provide a rigid canopy to the tunnel and to provide a medium to allow grout injection. Alwag canopy tubes with silicone non-return valves at 750 mm centres were adopted for the project. Drilling and pipe installation took place concurrently with the use of a specialized drill bit and sacrificial reaming bits. Pre-support and Chemical Grouting

At the portal location, it was known that the top metre of material in the crown was a fill. In addition to this it was discovered in the diaphragm wall construction that significant bentonite losses had been incurred due to a high void ratio or voids of considerable size. As a result of this and the location of sensitive control facilities (owned by the rail service providers) less than 3.5 metres above the tunnel canopy, it was necessary to perform consolidation grouting. Grouting of the fill material and Unit 1 sands was performed to create a consolidated soil beam above the tun n e l c a n o p y t h a t w o u l d a s s i s t ( i n conjunction with canopy tubes) in maintaining stability of the tunnel crown and ensure that the deformation of the floating slab of the control facility was not disturbed. The tubes installed were similar to those used for the canopy tubes. They were installed through the diaphragm wall on level out to 21 metres from the portal. Chemical grout was injected over the tube length through silicone non-return valves located at 750 mm centres. A double packer was used to facilitate the isolation of particular valves. Sodium Silicate grout was injected at very low pressures, less than 1 bar, and controlled volumes that related to the voids ratio of the material along the tube length. Monitoring pressures at this low level was difficult due to the fact that pressure losses in the circuit usually exceed the injecting pressure. Control was maintained through accurately calibrated pressure monitoring equipment and testing of line losses. Canopy Tubes At the commencement of each o f t h e 7 sections a set of canopy tubes was installed. 15 metres long, 114 mm tubes were installed at 450 mm spacings using a 322 Atlas Copco

Rocket Boomer. Tubes overlapped by 6 metres to provide additional support to the least supported areas around the spiling planes. The system developed to control the accuracy of drilling ensured that the end position of the tubes was always within 50 mm of design and in general far better. In general, due to the speed of installation of the tubes, only one boom was required for installation. The canopy tubes used in the excavation method provided for isolated injection grouting through the one-way valves at 750 mm intervals along the tubes. Trials prior to the commencement of excavation indicated that the most effective grouts in these sitespecific conditions were sodium silicate for penetration and microfine for strength improvement. Grouting of canopy tubes was performed using Microfine 900 cement proved initially to be successful in the Unit 1 sands. Where the clay content and fineness of the material increased, the penetration of the grouts reduced dramatically. As for the ground stabilization tubes, the grouting pressures were strictly controlled and surface uplifts were continuously monitored. Excavation and Temporary Support Excavation of the tunnel was separated into three sections in cross section and 7 canopy tubes sections along the alignment. In cross section, the three sections comprised of two top headings and a bench / invert excavation. Top Headings Drift 1 on the left hand side of the face was the first to be excavated within each canopy tube section. This face, representing 35 m2 of the 84-m2 profile would be excavated to 9 metres from the start of the canopy tube spiling plane. Following this excavation the same process would follow for the excavation of Drift 2. Bench excavation would not be performed until completion of the top heading over the length

of the soft ground tunnel. It should be noted that only the first 42 metres of th is tunnel required the bench to be excavated and ring enclosure completed. At chainage 42, the Type 5 and then 4 sandstone commenced rising through the floor permitting the installed support to be founded in solid material.

Figure 5: Drift 2 Excavation Each drift was excavated in two passes with the top of the drift excavated and supported fully prior to the installation of the leg girders and shotcrete invert. The primary reason for the selection of this methodology was to provide stability to the face (by providing a footing to the face) and to minimize the excavated surface area, which assisted in minimizing surface settlements. This method proved to be the most technically sound solution but required more time in preparation of multiple sets of footings and required innovative ways of achieving the minimum reinforcement overlap. The support of each drift in general consisted of steel fibre reinforced shotcrete (SFRS), mesh and lattice girders installed at an 800 mm girder spacing. The first step consisted of a flashcoat of 50 mm on the face, crown and walls of the excavation to ensure stability of the excavation and to provide cover to the steelwork installations. Steel work in the form

of mesh and lattice girders were installed with overlapping of the mesh and the girder joints connected in-situ. Note that the central (sacrificial) girder was only installed in the excavation of Drift 1. The second shotcrete layer of 250 mm followed and included the spraying of the temporary invert to provide a full ring enclosure. At this point, the second mesh layer was installed followed by the final 50 mm of shotcrete. Tunnel profile at this point was controlled by the accurate placement of lattice girders that controlled the level of shotcrete installed and the excavation profile of the next round. The method adopted, later proved to be effective and the additional care taken for placement of the girder was rewarded in the savings in the final lining. The most critical time in the excavation process with respect to tunnel stability was when the face was fully exposed and as the initial flashcoat was applied. At this point, it was critical that water was not in contact with the sands. Shotcrete was applied to the face as soon after excavation was possible and that shotcrete strength development was as rapid as possible. The face being in contact with minor groundwater inflows was likely to cause minor face failures and hence was avoided at all times. As part of the procedure for excavation of Drift 2, the central girder was removed to within 6 metres of the face. The removal was facilitated with the use of a concrete crusher attachment for the tunnel excavator. Girder removal was restricted (by design) to 2.5m and was further reduced when large tunnel movements and convergence were detected. Bench Excavation After the completion of top heading excavation bench excavation was commenced using

similar methods. Caution was necessary at all times during this part of the operation, as it was necessary to undercut the existing support foundations in the tunnel walls. This exercise was performed whilst strictly monitoring the convergence movements and the surface settlements. The excavation sequence in general was to excavate the bench to allow for the installation of 2 3 sets of lattice girders. At this point the area around the footing of the crown girders was cleaned thoroughly of all loose material prior to the installation of the invert girders. The reinforcing on the soil side of the support could then be exposed for connection to the invert steelwork. Similarly, it was important during the top heading excavation that the reinforcing on the inside of the lining was never covered with shotcrete as it would have prevented the effective connection of the top heading reinforcing to the invert. Bulk excavation was performed using the Tunnel Excavator; final trimming was performed using a mini excavator for accuracy and convenience. Drainage Installation Following the excavation, the sub invert drains were installed over the entire width of the invert. The drainage system under the invert consisted of 200 mm of coarse gravel with drainage fabric on both sides. A 300-mm invert pipe sat at the centre of the invert in a trench approximately 600 mm in depth that sat beneath the layer of gravel. Care was essential in this process so that the previously installed pipe was not disturbed. Geofabrics consolidated all drainage materials to ensure that there was no contamina tion of the gravels from fine particles in the soils. Invert Support An initial layer of shotcrete was placed over the drainage fabrics to provide cover for the

installation of the reinforcing. The initial layer of reinforcing mesh was placed and connected to the top heading reinforcement. The girder is then installed and connected to the footing of the top heading installations. At this point, the girder was surveyed to ensure that level is correct. Shotcrete and the second layer of reinforcing mesh f o l l o w e d . W h e r e convergences in the tunnel were rapid, reduced numbers of invert girders were exposed or alternatively one side was excavated at a time. Under the Illawarra Up line, the surface settlements were approaching the lower limits before reballasting and as result it was decided that best method was to excavate two girders one side at a time. Settlements and Methods of Settlement Control Critical to the successful completion of the tunnel excavation was the ability to monitor and control the movements within the tunnel and therefore the induced surface settlements. The construction critical elements which impacted on these movements were as follows: Quality of workmanship was of critical importance. Of particular note was the r e q u i r e m e n t t o e n su r e t h a t reinforcement was correctly installed with required overlapping to ensure a uniform structural ring member. Removal of the correct number of central girders at the correct time allowed control and prediction of settlements. Allowing girders to remain in place would allow development of tunnel rigidity and stress distribution. Shotcrete strength development allowed rapid acceptance of ground loading and minimized shell deformations. Survey Monitoring Convergence arrays were installed every 5m at predetermined positions around the Tunnel

and measured twice daily. Analysis was performed based on convergence target movement over time in three directions; across tunnel, along tunnel and vertically. Changes in the relative distance between targets in the array were also monitored. Underground convergence monitoring was a very useful tool in the determination and control of surface settlements. Direct correlations between movement of the tunnel and surface settlements could be witnessed through comparison with the rail monitoring system. This was useful in understanding the effect of excavation rate and removal of the central girder on surface settlements.

Figure 6: Settlement Correlation to Tunnel Activities In addition to this the structural response of the tunnel could be monitored which assisted, by way of assessing shotcrete shell movement and therefore the acceptance of load, in the determination of appropriate time and number of central girders to be removed or, the rate at which the bench excavation can be performed. Permanent inner lining The final lining of the Princes Highway Soft G r o u n d T u n n e l c o n s i s t e d o f a n i n-situ reinforced concrete invert and drained reinforced shotcrete crown. The use of formwork was ru led out for the final lining given the length of the tunnel and the varying cross section.

Installations of drainage, reinforcing and concrete (or shotcrete) were installed in discrete sections of 9 metres. The block length w a s s e l e c t e d o n t h e b a s i s o f s hrinkage prevention and operational convenience. Invert concrete lining was completed over the length of the tunnel prior to the commencement of the crown operations. The crown drainage system consisted of an installed geotextile that provided a void flow path of approximately 6 mm. This layer also acted as a debonding layer between the primary and secondary linings. The flow of water was directed to side drains installed at the construction joint between the concrete invert and shotcrete crown. Leakage through the construction joint was prevented with the aid of waterstops on airside of the installed drain. Due to the previously installed sub invert drains, no drainage layer under the permanent invert was required.

These wires were installed during each shotcreting period to ensure adequate fixings were available.

Figure 8: Invert Reinforcing Invert concrete was installed using a boom pump and finished using an invert screed designed and built in house to suit the specific profile. Crown shotcrete as installed in three layers of 50 mm, 250 mm and final 50 mm to allow the installation of the mesh with the designed cover. Depth of shotcrete was controlled using depth indicators installed at every shotcreting stage. The most critical element of the shotcrete installation was to ensure that a complete ring was installed across the tunnel. This was done to ensure that the shotcrete member was acting uniformly in the principal stress direction. 6. CONCLUSION The Princes Highway exit ramp tunnel as part of the M5 East Freeway project has been completed successfully within time and without imposing any disruptio ns to the rail services. With the chosen methodology a high quality structure has been constructed which is low maintenance and fit for the requirement of the projects 100 years design life. Canopy tubes in combination with the partial heading in shotcrete method has proven to be

Figure 7: Crown Lining Reinforcement consisted of dual layers of mesh around the entire perimeter of the tunnel. Invert mesh was fixed at the required positions prior to concrete installation. The crown mesh was later lapped to the invert mesh at the tunnel hau nch. Mesh was fixed to the crown using previously installed wires in the roof.

an effective method for ensuring a safe and controllable tunnelling method under difficult ground conditions with low overburden to major railway lines. Using shotcrete for the permanent inner lining had the required flexibility to respond to the varying cross sections and demonstrated its success as a final structural lining. The success of the Princes Highway exit ramp has been one of the elements to make an opening of the M 5 East Freeway Project 7 months ahead of schedule possible. The M 5 E a s t F r e e w a y h a s b e e n o p e n e d o n 1 0th December 2001. 7. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Roads and Traffic Authority NSW. Rail Infrastructure Corporation and Rail Services Australia for co-operation during construction. Isabelle Lamb for Geological assessments Peter Hooker & Lynton Surveys for survey.

8. REFERENCES Report on M5 east Motorway Geotechnical Investigations Driven Tunnels. Hyder Consulting. March 1999. Golder Associates. Design Documentation: Hyder and Mller & Hereth.