HH - Fast Förbindelse

Regensdorf, 3. Mai 2019

Seite 1 von 30

HH – Fast Förbindelse
Review of the project with regards on the TBM specific parts and challenges

1. Introduction
The project is in a very early phase and aims to connect Helsingborg (Sweden) to Helsingør (Den-
mark). The objective of this report is to assess the feasibility of the TBM tunnels stated in the
documents elaborated from other teams in the past couple of years.
The study bases on a railway tunnel, two single track tunnels, ~7 km long in the north, and two
tubes for the road tunnels with two lanes each, ~12 km long, further south.

General overview with both alignments

2. Validation project layout and tunnel geometry

For the validation the available information was used and the experience from previous tunnels
done with similar requirements around the world. See list of references In Appendix 1.

2.1. Reference projects rail tunnel

- Malmö City Tunnel, Sweden

- Channel Tunnel, England-France
- Follobanen, Oslo-Ski
- Hallandsas, Sweden
- Leipzig City Tunnel, Germany
- Liefkenshoek Tunnel, Belgium
- Botlekspoortunnel, The Netherlands

K00011 TJe/JT - W:\AERE\PROJECT\10K\SK\00009_HH Förbindelsen\04 Bericht\Report TBM_29.5.2019.docx

HH - Fast Förbindelse
Regensdorf, 3. Mai 2019
Seite 2 von 30

2.2. Reference projects road tunnel

- Bosphorous Highway Tunnel, Turkey

- Waterview Tunnel, New Zealand
- Port Said Road Tunnels, Egypt
- Tunnel Tuen Mun – Chek Lap Kok, Hong Kong
- A86 – Socatop, Paris
- Elbtunnel, Hamburg
- Miami Port Tunnel, USA
- SMART Tunnel, Kuala Lumpur
- Shantou Su Ai project, China
- Alaskan Way, USA
- Changjiam Under River Tunnel, China
- Westerschelde, Holland

2.3. Rail Tunnels

Overview
The bored tunnel is starting on the Danish side in the harbour of Helsingør (@ Chainage 46.300),
crosses the sea and connects to Helsingborg retrieval shaft (@ Chainage 53.300). This results in
a bored tunnel length of app. 7km (x2).

Overview alignment rail tunnels

Cross Section
The cross section of the rail tunnels was taken from Malmö City Tunnel. It consists of two parallel
tunnels linked by cross passages. The suggested inner diameter is 7,9 m which is also in the same
range than the references (Leipzig City Tunnel, Channel Tunnel, etc.).
K00011 TJe/JT - W:\AERE\PROJECT\10K\SK\00009_HH Förbindelsen\04 Bericht\Report TBM_29.5.2019.docx
HH - Fast Förbindelse
Regensdorf, 3. Mai 2019
Seite 3 von 30

This is considered to be sufficient, up to a design speed of 160 km/h. If higher speed is consid-
ered, detailed investigations are recommended. The reason is the free area that remains, when
the train is in the tunnel. At high speeds there is a lot of aerodynamic friction in the tunnel that
consumes a lot of the traction energy. This can easily limit the maximum possible speed in the
tunnel, when the cross section is too small.

Cross section Malmö City tunnel

Due to high water pressure, we suggest a segmental lining of 40 cm, which is more than Malmö
City Tunnel (35 cm), but less than Channel Tunnel (45 cm).
The minimal horizontal radius is approxi-
mately 800 m (not sure as the plan is very
difficult to read). This leads to a conicity of
the shield and an annular gap of max 15 cm
and a outer diameter of the TBM of 9.0 m.
This is similar to the cross section of Leipzig
City Tunnel.

Inner diameter 7.9 m

Segmental lining 40 cm
Outer diameter 8.7 m
Annular gap 15 cm
Outer diameter 9.0 m Cross section Leipzig City Tunnel
Calculation of TBM diameter

K00011 TJe/JT - W:\AERE\PROJECT\10K\SK\00009_HH Förbindelsen\04 Bericht\Report TBM_29.5.2019.docx

HH - Fast Förbindelse
Regensdorf, 3. Mai 2019
Seite 4 von 30

Longitudinal Profile

Longitudinal profile rail tunnel

The tunnel passes roughly 50 m below water level @chainage 50.250 (measured at tunnel
crown). As far as the picture above allow to see, the min. coverage is 5 m @chainage 46.590 with
23 m water pressure on top. This results in ca. 0.5 x D, which should be pointed out to be critical
under these circumstances.
The max. slope is app. 2,5%, but needs to be verified as the quality of the picture above is limited.
Slope
For different reasons the level of the stations on both sides are potentially not finally fixed yet.
This can have an impact on the slope of the tunnel. Depending on the final considerations the
slope can be steeper or less steep. The TBM itself does not limit the steepness of the slope in a
traffic tunnel. The design components of the railway track are more delicate and will be guiding
this issue. In St Petersburg an EPB TBM made a tunnel with a 30° slope.
More delicate is the logistic to supply the TBM. With a slurry TBM the mucking is not the prob-
lem, because this is done with the slurry circuit - no limit when it comes to the slope. For the EBP
TBM most likely a conveyor belt will be used. The horizontal radius should be limited to min. 500
m. The slope is usually not critical for the conveyor belt solution - though the conveyor belt itself
must be designed by an experienced supplier, as the availability must be high to insure the tar-
geted production rates and there are many details that needs to be considered.
For the rest of the transports such as lining segments, grout for the annular gap and other supply
goods there are generally two options: rail or MSV's (Multi Service Vehicles). For a rail driven
solution the slope should be limited to 2%. The tendency though goes towards MSV's. In the
meantime, MSV trains have been developed and successfully operated for example at the Bren-
ner Base tunnel. For this logistic system the slope again is not the limiting factor.

K00011 TJe/JT - W:\AERE\PROJECT\10K\SK\00009_HH Förbindelsen\04 Bericht\Report TBM_29.5.2019.docx

HH - Fast Förbindelse
Regensdorf, 3. Mai 2019
Seite 5 von 30

Multi Service Vehicles (MSV)

With these considerations, the TBM and its logistic will most probably not be limiting the choice
of the level of the stations or more generally the slope of the tunnel.

2.4. Road Tunnels

Overview
The bored tunnel is starting on the Danish side in the harbour of Helsingør (@ Chainage 2.200),
crosses the sea and connects to Helsingborg retrieval shaft (@ Chainage 14.000). This results in
a total length of app. 11,8 km (x2).

Overview alignment road tunnels

The road tunnel is the red line on picture below.

K00011 TJe/JT - W:\AERE\PROJECT\10K\SK\00009_HH Förbindelsen\04 Bericht\Report TBM_29.5.2019.docx

HH - Fast Förbindelse
Regensdorf, 3. Mai 2019
Seite 6 von 30

Cross Section
The cross section of the road tunnels is based on a 13-m inner diameter with a full concrete slab.
Based on the experience of other projects and the references in appendix 1 we consider to re-
evaluate the size and optimise the use of the space in the cross section. Two potential options
are mentioned below. This is mostly motivated on the fact, that the size of the TBM necessary
to gain a 13-m inner diameter goes towards the upper limit of feasibility in combination with the
geology predicted and the crossing of the sea.

Cross section road tunnel

Due to high water pressure, the size of the

tunnel and the given geological conditions,
we suggest a segmental lining of at 60 cm
and a conicity of 20 cm. This results in a
bored diameter of 14,6 m. This is similar to
the cross section of the Waterview tunnel in
Auckland

Inner diameter 13 m
Segmental lining 60 cm
Outer diameter 14.2 m
Annular gap 20 cm
Example Waterview tunnel Auckland
Outer diameter 14.6 m
Calculation of TBM diameter

K00011 TJe/JT - W:\AERE\PROJECT\10K\SK\00009_HH Förbindelsen\04 Bericht\Report TBM_29.5.2019.docx

HH - Fast Förbindelse
Regensdorf, 3. Mai 2019
Seite 7 von 30

Potential optimizations:
The cross section of the road tunnel showed above is not very detailed, but the use of the space
can potentially be optimized. As we couldn't find the basic requirements, the following questions
need to be answered:
- What kind of traffic passes through the tunnel, only cars or trucks as well?
- How large do the lanes need to be, same size for both or can the left ones be reduced in
combination with the obligation for trucks to stay on the right lane?
- Does the tunnel really need an emergency lane? If yes, which size?
- What kind of space is further needed for a walkway, or similar?
- How does the drift and maintenance concept work? Where are all the cable installations?
Where are the tubes for water and drainage?
- Is there a reason, why the invert is filled up with concrete?
We suggest to evaluate the following options:
Option "Service Space Elements":
Use of prefabricated service space elements underneath the road deck. This is very important
for drift and maintenance, as most cable systems and the water and drainage tubes can be in-
stalled there, and thus maintained without entering the tunnel itself. This enables to significantly
limit the disturbance of the traffic flow due to maintenance works as it is even possible to do
most of the maintenance works at daytime and get away from work during night shifts.
As a further benefit the amount of concrete
to fill up the space not needed under the
road deck can be reduced significantly.
As an example of recent project with a simi-
lar concept the Waterview Project in Auck-
land or TM-CLK project in Hong Kong can be
considered (Appendix 1).

Cross section CLK project Hong Kong

K00011 TJe/JT - W:\AERE\PROJECT\10K\SK\00009_HH Förbindelsen\04 Bericht\Report TBM_29.5.2019.docx

HH - Fast Förbindelse
Regensdorf, 3. Mai 2019
Seite 8 von 30

Option "Optimized lane concept":

As only 2 traffic lanes are actually planned for this project (+ a rescue lane) we see a potential
optimisation in the required width of the tunnel.
- The project Socatop in Paris had two 3 m-width light traffic lanes (no trucks) and one 2,5
m-width rescue lane - in one tunnel.
- The Elbtunnel in Hamburg consists of two 3,75 m-width traffic lane and one 2 m-width
rescue lane.

Cross section Sokatop tunnel Paris Cross section Elbe tunnel Hamburg

An optimisation would be to consider one 3 m-width light traffic lane (no trucks), one 3,75 m-
width "truck" lane and one 2,5 m-width rescue lane. This would result in an inner diameter of
approximately 12 m and a TBM diameter of approximately 13,6 m - one meter less than the
present design. The cross section of the Elbtunnel would be a good example of an optimized
cross section.
Longitudinal profile
The tunnel passes roughly 65 m below water level @chainage 8.500 (measured at tunnel axis).
As far as the picture above allow to see, the min. coverage under the sea is ~20 m @chainage
11.000 with ~30 m water pressure on top. The min. coverage under land is ~15 m (measured at
tunnel axis) @chainage 13.800. The max. slope is app. 2,5%, but needs to be verified as the qual-
ity of the picture above is limited.

K00011 TJe/JT - W:\AERE\PROJECT\10K\SK\00009_HH Förbindelsen\04 Bericht\Report TBM_29.5.2019.docx

HH - Fast Förbindelse
Regensdorf, 3. Mai 2019
Seite 9 von 30

Longitudinal profile road tunnel

Option "Optimization vertical profile":

Without any further explanation, it is not obvious why the tunnel must go down that deep
@chainage 8500. It seems that the standard grade from both sides have been continued until
the two tunnels met at the respective chainage. There might be a possible optimisation (see
picture below) to reduce the maximal depth of around 10 m. This will reduce the water pressure
of around one bar, which is not a game changer, but still gives the TBM more reserves to operate.

Option optimizes vertical profile road tunnel

K00011 TJe/JT - W:\AERE\PROJECT\10K\SK\00009_HH Förbindelsen\04 Bericht\Report TBM_29.5.2019.docx

HH - Fast Förbindelse
Regensdorf, 3. Mai 2019
Seite 10 von 30

3. Validation geology

3.1. General situation

The HH connection will pass over the most significant geological structure in the whole of South-
ern Scandinavia, namely the so-called Tornquist zone. This marks the limit between the Baltic
bedrock area in the east and northeast and the Danish sediment basin in the west.
The boundary itself has the character of a giant flexure (fold), which brings down the 135-190
million-year-old Jurassic deposits, so that they lie very superficially in the coastal area at Helsing-
borg and directly below approx. 20 m young (post-glacial) sea-deposited sand in the middle of
the Sound and at the Danish coastline. The jurassic layers are here covered by deposits from the
periods Cretaceous and Dania.

Summary of the geological situation in the Öresund

The picture above matches with the more detailed one below:

K00011 TJe/JT - W:\AERE\PROJECT\10K\SK\00009_HH Förbindelsen\04 Bericht\Report TBM_29.5.2019.docx

HH - Fast Förbindelse
Regensdorf, 3. Mai 2019
Seite 11 von 30

Geological prognosis in the Öresund

The section of the geological profile corresponds to a section a bit more on the north and is not
precisely representative of the situation expected for the two alignments we are looking at. This
of course provokes some questions, probably not necessary about the feasibility, but definitively
when we talk about cost and schedule issues. We strongly recommend to ask the geologists:
- to establish a section each, best guess with the information available, in the alignment
of the two tunnels.
- to elaborate a rough 3D model of the whole area with sea bed level, rock level and geol-
ogy
- to put the real alignment data into that model, georeferenced to be able to really check
the status of the present design.
We are fully aware of that there are just limited information around, but if we don't put that
together into one common model, best guess, we cannot give recommendations to the client at
the state of the art level.

K00011 TJe/JT - W:\AERE\PROJECT\10K\SK\00009_HH Förbindelsen\04 Bericht\Report TBM_29.5.2019.docx

HH - Fast Förbindelse
Regensdorf, 3. Mai 2019
Seite 12 von 30

Geological section in comparison with the alignments

For the time being and until further information is available we base on the assumption of the
previous reports, where basically the layers that will/might be encountered (from Denmark to
Sweden) are:
- Quaternary: Postglacial sand deposits (3.2)
- Danish Period and Cretaceous: Limestone, upper Chalk (-)
- Jura: Sandstone, Claystone and Coal (3.5)

3.2. Additional information from Danish database

During the work with this report, we got an inside view in a Danish database with investigation
performed in the sea between Denmark and Sweden the last decades. Although there are not
many recent performed investigations and the ones available do not really cover the alignments
to use (see picture below) the data generally confirm what was used in the previous reports.
Unfortunately, the information is only descriptive, as shown in the table below. Parameters as
well as the rock surface are missing. Nevertheless, we can see, that the sands range quite deep
down and the proposed alignments will have to cross them as well for the rail tunnel in the north
as for the road tunnel further down south.

K00011 TJe/JT - W:\AERE\PROJECT\10K\SK\00009_HH Förbindelsen\04 Bericht\Report TBM_29.5.2019.docx

HH - Fast Förbindelse
Regensdorf, 3. Mai 2019
Seite 13 von 30

Overview of the investigations found in the Danish database

Again, we strongly recommend starting an investigation program along the two alignments to
get more detailed information about the geology to be expected, including a detailed description
of the formations that need to be crossed by the TBM's, the rock surface and even the most
important parameters both for the sands and the different rock formations.
Following parameters are of paramount importance for the TBM choice and the tunnel design:

Soil Rock
Density Density
Water content UCS
Cohesion BTS
Friction E Modulus
Atterberg limits (LL, PL, + PI, IC) CAI
Grain Size analysis RQD / Q / RMR
E modulus Permeabiliyt
K0 / OCR
Quartz content
Permeability
Parameters needed for the choice of the TBM

K00011 TJe/JT - W:\AERE\PROJECT\10K\SK\00009_HH Förbindelsen\04 Bericht\Report TBM_29.5.2019.docx

HH - Fast Förbindelse
Regensdorf, 3. Mai 2019
Seite 14 von 30

Example of details per investigation in the database

3.3. Quaternary: Postglacial sand deposits

Description
While the Jurassic deposits are taken almost directly under the seabed on the Swedish part of
the strait, there is a thick layer of young sand deposits on the Danish part. The layers are approx.
30 m thick on the Danish coast, while 20 m thick out in the sound. The upper part of the sand
must be assumed to be mobile. While the clean, sorted sand is found up to the seabed level out
in the Sound, the layer series in the coastal Danish part is covered with mud.

Analysis
No information is available concerning this
sand and there are high chances that both
tunnels will cross through it on the Danish
side. This is highly relevant for the assess-
ment of the feasibility of the tunnels in its
present design.
Grain size analysis, permeability, E modulus
are missing and will definitively be required Low sand cover, less than one diameter
in the next stage to make an assessment on
the TBM Choice.

K00011 TJe/JT - W:\AERE\PROJECT\10K\SK\00009_HH Förbindelsen\04 Bericht\Report TBM_29.5.2019.docx

HH - Fast Förbindelse
Regensdorf, 3. Mai 2019
Seite 15 von 30

- Rail Tunnel: Given the very low overburden below seabed there might be a real issue and
question the feasibility at acceptable risks. There are technical solutions with the TBM
such as grouting or high-density Bentonite => VD TBM to avoid blowout. But in the con-
text of crossing the sea in Sand, with less than one diameter coverage, we would defini-
tively recommend geologically investigating the area in detail and thereafter, eventually
to reassess the alignment.
- Road Tunnel: The diameter is larger, but the tunnel will be built deeper in those sedi-
ments. Therefore, the problem is considered to be smaller (E modulus should be higher).
As far as we could understand, the sands on the Swedish side are the same kind as the ones on
the Danish side. For the further considerations we consider the parameters from the sands on
the Swedish side.

Parameters of the sands on the Swedish side

With the information available at present, there doesn't seem to be an impermeable layer be-
tween seabed and tunnel, so full water pressure on the tunnel needs to be considered on the
Danish side.
- Rail Tunnel: High water pressure to be considered: ~4 bars (@crown). This is in the upper
range of the standard EPB application.
- Road Tunnel: High water pressure to be considered: ~5 bars (@crown). This is above the
application range of a standard EPB. Special features would be needed (Dickstoffpump,
extra-long screw conveyor) or Hydro shield.

K00011 TJe/JT - W:\AERE\PROJECT\10K\SK\00009_HH Förbindelsen\04 Bericht\Report TBM_29.5.2019.docx

HH - Fast Förbindelse
Regensdorf, 3. Mai 2019
Seite 16 von 30

3.4. Danish Period and Cretaceous: Limestone, upper Chalk (Sandstone?)

Description
Under the former seabed in the easternmost Helsingør and out to approx. 1 km from the coast,
limestone from the Danish period lies directly below 25-30 m of marine, sand-dominated depos-
its (see above). The limestone has probably the character of hardened chalk with flint layer cor-
responding to the lime in which Malmö Citytunnel is led and was excavated with an EPB machine.
Below the Limestone: presence of chalk with flints has to be expected.
Newer information gathered during the work with this report recommends not to look to close
to the geology of Citytunnel Malmö, even if it crosses the same geology. It seems that we will
rather meet a lot of sandstone, worse in Quality as the one encountered at Citytunneln Malmö,
but better than the sandstone that is present in the area of the Fernmanbelt Tunnel.
We strongly recommend performing investigation to get more precise information about the
geology in this part in the next design phase.
For the time being we use the parameters from the sandstone on the Swedish side.

Parameters Sandstone on the Swedish side

Analysis
The parameters known so far indicate that the rock is well suitable for the use of a TBM. Unfor-
tunately, there is no information about discontinuities. This is not that bad for this phase of the
project, as the face will be stabilized with either slurry or earth paste.
An important open question is the abrasivity of the rock, as this has a major impact on the cutter
head wear and the effort for maintenance of the TBM generally (slurry circuit or screw con-
veyor).
Further the presence of flints might have an impact on the TBM design / choice, if the amount
of flint is high, which is also unknown.
For the next phase we recommend to run additional ground investigations to learn more about
the geology in general, the parameters of the rock near the planned tunnels, the discontinuities
(joint sets) and the abrasivity.

K00011 TJe/JT - W:\AERE\PROJECT\10K\SK\00009_HH Förbindelsen\04 Bericht\Report TBM_29.5.2019.docx

HH - Fast Förbindelse
Regensdorf, 3. Mai 2019
Seite 17 von 30

3.5. Jura: Sandstone, Claystone and Coal

Description
To the east of the sound there are deposits from the Jurassic period directly or locally almost
directly below the young sea-deposited sand.
These are hardened sandstone, siltstone and claystone with a degree of hardening varying be-
tween H.2 and H.4. The deposits grow older from west to east, and almost the entire jurassic
period is represented. The westernmost lies predominantly massive sandstone from the upper
Jurassic, while the layer series from middle Jurassic further east is made up of much more alter-
nating layers of sandstone, siltstone and claystone / clay. Local coal layers are included in the
layer series from the older Jurassic which lies easterly below the Sound and in the Swedish
coastal area.
Sandstone, sandstone shale, iron sandstone
The sandstone is mostly fine grained. The sand fraction is dominated by quartz (85-100%). The
rock is to a varying degree cemented. Usually there is a thin layer of precipitated silicon cement
around the grains which creates weak bridges between the grains and which easily breaks. This
cement is in the harder sandstone variants supplemented with precipitated iron carbonate, cal-
cium carbonate and in situ formed clay minerals (kaolinite).

Examples of the Danish Period and Cretaceous: Limestone, upper Chalk

The consolidated variants exhibit a high degree of sub vertical cracking. The cracks are usually
open, durable and the fracture planes relatively flat. They are partially filled with clay and pre-
cipitated iron oxides. The sandstone layers have a varying thickness. Common is a sandstone
type which consists of meter thick layer packs with 5–10 cm thick layers of grey sandstone that
show a high degree of “slickness”. Between those layers there are thin layers with clay that cause
the rock to split up along these. Older descriptions from the area often indicate the term sand-
stone slate for this rock type. Deformations in the sandstone are mostly of brittle character.
K00011 TJe/JT - W:\AERE\PROJECT\10K\SK\00009_HH Förbindelsen\04 Bericht\Report TBM_29.5.2019.docx
HH - Fast Förbindelse
Regensdorf, 3. Mai 2019
Seite 18 von 30

The strength is variable. All variants are found, from loose to very hard but generally medium
hard. Often shreds when struck (sign for low UCS, BTS). Good to excavate with TBM.
The sandstone exhibits a high permeability (through pores and fractures) and therefore at least
in parts a lot of water needs to be expected.
Claystone, siltstone
The rock is dominated by clay and silt fractions and cemented to a varying degree. Most often
the more cemented sections consist of more silty layers with precipitated microcrystalline sider-
ite (iron carbonate) and calcite. Lens-shaped, locally decimetric thick very hard siderite ce-
mented sandstone layers often appear scattered in the clay / silt-dominated sequences.
The claystone is usually layered and thin-bedded, while the clay sections show less degree of
slickness. The silt units are often several meters thick, while the clays are usually thinner smaller
than the meter-thick layers. Cracks that are present are usually dense and filled with clay. Wa-
tering is mostly done along the beddings plan. Deformations in clay and claystone are often of a
plastic nature. Failure pattern of the clay is probably a sliding plan.
Usually medium-hard - loose. Hard thinner layers occur. The clay is usually plastic and soft. Good
to excavate with TBM.
Alternation of sandstone, siltstone and claystone
Muddy sandstone shale, sandy shale clay, sandstone shale clay.
Structure: The rock is clearly geared with silt / sand and clay. When the clay content predomi-
nates, silt / sand occurs as lenticular bedding, and when silt and sand dominate, the clay occurs
as irregular thin clay layers ("flask bedding"). Wave ripples are common. Thin sandstone layers
(dm thick) occur frequently. Local more powerful lens-shaped sandstone lenses (<1 m thick) of-
ten occur. The sandstone lenses often cemented with iron carbonate.
Similar structure as the claystone but much clearer layered and thin layer. The layers are usually
1–5 m powerful. Feature with <1 m of strong, lenticular sandstone lenses occurs.
Most often loose and good to excavate with TBM. Medium-hard thin layers with cemented fine-
grained sandstone occur. Not excluded to find very hard, meter-thick lenses with iron carbonate
cemented sandstones. One must pay attention to the latter, while designing the TBM. Therefore
it is very important to correctly describe this in the GBR.
Coal / Carbon
Coal is often associated with very black columnar clays. Pyrite occurs frequently. Similarly, larger
wood fragments and plant material. The coal consists of massive layers that are often heavily
cracked. Carbonaceous clays are layered.

K00011 TJe/JT - W:\AERE\PROJECT\10K\SK\00009_HH Förbindelsen\04 Bericht\Report TBM_29.5.2019.docx

HH - Fast Förbindelse
Regensdorf, 3. Mai 2019
Seite 19 von 30

Carbon occurs mostly as cm-thin layers, but fluxes up to about 0.5 m thickness and occur at 2-5
levels in the bearing series. The carbon is generally brittle and soft when clay is involved in the
carbon.
The connecting clays are often soft and plastic.
In other places in the world, methane is an issue in this kind of geology. We recommend to assess
this, as the presence of methane will have an impact on the design of the TBM.
Geotechnical parameters Jurassic series:

Geotechnical parameters Jurassic series

K00011 TJe/JT - W:\AERE\PROJECT\10K\SK\00009_HH Förbindelsen\04 Bericht\Report TBM_29.5.2019.docx

HH - Fast Förbindelse
Regensdorf, 3. Mai 2019
Seite 20 von 30

Analysis
The Jurassic layers are well known and well described. Parameters show a soft rock (UCS up to
30 MPa and E up to 15.000MPa). The rock is known to be fractured and thus of poor to medium
quality. This rock will be easily excavable.
Given the project layout (undergoing the sea) a TBM with active face support is recommended.
From the geology, it seems a EPB would be suited. Attention should be paid to the high-water
level/pressure and the large tunnel diameter and long TBM sections to be excavated. Mainte-
nance might become a problem.

4. Choice of TBM / Feasibility

With the limited information available it is not possible to decide on the type of TBM. It will defin-
itively be a TBM with a closed mode to support the front. From today's view it could be either a
slurry machine or an EBP TBM or eventually even a multimode or crossover TBM. The decision
will be taken in a later stage, potentially only as late as from the contractor.

The table below shows the advantages and disadvantages for both soft ground tunnelling sys-
tems, slurry-supported Shields and EPB Shields. A multimode TBM presents both the ad-
vantages of the EPB and Slurry machines but presents a higher cost and a higher technological
complexity.

K00011 TJe/JT - W:\AERE\PROJECT\10K\SK\00009_HH Förbindelsen\04 Bericht\Report TBM_29.5.2019.docx

HH - Fast Förbindelse
Regensdorf, 3. Mai 2019
Seite 21 von 30

Criteria Slurry-supported shield EPB-shield

Control of support + Support pressure control more ac- - Support pressure is less accurate
pressure curate - Fluctuation of face support pres-
+ Possibility to react very fast sure
Settlement control + No need to inject slurry + Slurry has to be injected (standard
along the shield + Uniform distribution of the confin- in modern EPB)
ing pressure in steering gap - Non uniform distribution of the
confining pressure
High fines content - High separation effort + Better for soil with high fines con-
- Risk of clogging if non-appropriate tent
design
Sticky material - Stops have to be planned to clean + Use of additives allows to mini-
cutter head, etc. mise impact of sticky ground

High wear soil condi- + Less secondary wear, the material - High secondary wear
tions is surrounded by bentonite - Use of additives allows to reduce
wear on cutting wheel
Coarse grained, highly + Better face control face support - Face control becomes very difficult
permeable soil with + Less wear - More wear
ground water
+ Easier compressed air chamber - Compressed air interventions with-
interventions out bentonite mud substitution not
advisable
Accessibility to tunnel + Use of an accessible cutter head - Access difficult because face con-
face under high pres- for access and maintenance under trol becomes very difficult.
sures atmospheric conditions (for diame-
ter >12m)
Accessibility to tunnel + Faster emptying of chamber - Longer preparation time
face under adverse + Compressed air application easier - Compressed air application more
conditions difficult
+ Low temperature
+ Restart mining with full face pres- - Higher temperature (friction)
sure conditions - Restart mining could be difficult
- Necessity to plan the production
and transport of big quantity of
bentonite (depends which D) on
the TBM
Face control during + Continuous uninterrupted face - Desegregation of foam and soil in
long downtime support excavation chamber
- Dessication of the filter cake
Advantages and disadvantages of Slurry and EPB TBM

K00011 TJe/JT - W:\AERE\PROJECT\10K\SK\00009_HH Förbindelsen\04 Bericht\Report TBM_29.5.2019.docx

HH - Fast Förbindelse
Regensdorf, 3. Mai 2019
Seite 22 von 30

5. Cost estimation
Based on our experience with similar TBM projects we have performed a cost estimation. In this
very early stage of the project we use only two parameters, the length of the tunnel and the
number of cross passages. This is enough when we consider the level of information that is
available today.

The elements that we have considered to evaluate the cost per meter tunnel are:

- Use of one TBM per tunnel

- Job site installations, incl. TBM
- Tunnelling works
- Segmental lining
- Internal structure
For the cross passages the following parameters:

- Length 20 m
- Cross section 33 m2 (road) resp. 23 m2 (rail)
- Ground freezing
- Job site installations
- Tunnelling works
- Rock support
- Membrane
- Cast in situ concrete lining
- Internal structures
With these elements and the level of details available for this report an accuracy of +/- 30% must
be accepted. The costs in showed below cover only the civil part of the tunnel, no installation, no
design or client cost, no cost for financing etc.

The two rail tunnels with cross passages sum up to 4.5 billion SEK or 5.4 billion SEK with an
additional 20% mark-up for unforeseen.

The respective costs for the longer and much larger road tunnel are considerably higher. For
two tunnels, including corss passages they sum up to 14 billion SEK ore 16.8 billion SEK with
an additional 20% mark-up for unforeseen.

As shown in the chapters before and after there is though some room for optimization, that can
be mobilized in the next stages of the project as more detailed information about the geology is
available and if the client is ready to enter a discussion about alignment and size of the tunnels.

K00011 TJe/JT - W:\AERE\PROJECT\10K\SK\00009_HH Förbindelsen\04 Bericht\Report TBM_29.5.2019.docx

HH - Fast Förbindelse
Regensdorf, 3. Mai 2019
Seite 23 von 30

Length 7'000 m
14'000 m
Costs SEK 271'714 /m

SEK 3'804'000'000

Cross passages 250 CP/xm

28 #
Costs SEK 25'200'000 /#
SEK 705'600'000

Total Cost SEK 4'509'600'000

Cost estimation rail tunnel, 9.0 m

Length 11'800 m
23'600 m
Costs SEK 512'542 /m

SEK 12'096'000'000

Cross passages 250 CP/xm

48 #
Costs SEK 39'600'000 /#
SEK 1'900'800'000

Total Cost SEK 13'996'800'000

Cost estimation road tunnel, 13.6 m

K00011 TJe/JT - W:\AERE\PROJECT\10K\SK\00009_HH Förbindelsen\04 Bericht\Report TBM_29.5.2019.docx

HH - Fast Förbindelse
Regensdorf, 3. Mai 2019
Seite 24 von 30

6. Time schedule
The time schedule showed within this report is based on many assumptions and can only show
a rough general estimation as there is no detailed planning available so far.

All tunnels are excavated with one TBM each. The rail tunnel will need two TBM's and so will the
road tunnel. Due to the different size of the tunnels, a total of 4 TBM's will be necessary.

From our experience a delivery time of 12 months is sufficient to design and produce a TBM.
During this period the contractor must prepare the launching pit and make the site ready for the
reception of the TBM.

To launch two TBMs it is preferable, when this is not done simultaneously. This allows to separate
many of the processes and that is the reason, why the TBM start with a difference of three
months.

The excavation of the cross passages is done with ground freezing and starts in parallel with the
TBM work. The last cross passage can though only be done, after the disassembly of the second
TBM due to logistics reasons.

Most work of the invert, such as the cable conduct, the refill of the lower parts and a temporary
concrete layer for the logistic is done in parallel with the TBM, under the back up system of the
TBM. This allows an efficient logistic to supply the TBM.

The rest of the interior works is done after the break through, in parallel with the disassembly of
the TBM.

Preliminary time schedule rail tunnel

K00011 TJe/JT - W:\AERE\PROJECT\10K\SK\00009_HH Förbindelsen\04 Bericht\Report TBM_29.5.2019.docx

HH - Fast Förbindelse
Regensdorf, 3. Mai 2019
Seite 25 von 30

Preliminary time schedule road tunnel

7. Construction sites and logistic

The general concept is to start all TBM's form the Danish side. This means, that most of the
logistic needed will be on the Danish side as well. The muck will come out on the Danish side
and all supply goods for the TBM's will enter the tunnel also from the Danish side. In consequence
the needed area is much larger on the Danish side than on the Swedish side.

For the early stage and within this report the following assumptions are made:

- TBM start on the Danish side

- Slurry TBM will be used, need for separation plant
- The separation plant is located on the site
- The muck is transported to a temporary port near the site by conveyor belt and loaded
into a boat.
- The boat takes the muck to wherever the Danish want to create new land for develop-
ment
- The segmental lining will come to the site either by train or by boat
- The storage on site is limited to the need for one week of production
- The TBM for the rail tunnel is delivered by boat to the temporary port just beside the site
and the starting point of the TBM
- The TBM for the road tunnel is delivered by truck on the nearby highway.

K00011 TJe/JT - W:\AERE\PROJECT\10K\SK\00009_HH Förbindelsen\04 Bericht\Report TBM_29.5.2019.docx

HH - Fast Förbindelse
Regensdorf, 3. Mai 2019
Seite 26 von 30

Within these circumstances the following area is needed to smoothly organize the site:

Danish side Swedish side

Assembly TBM 12'000 m2 -
Paved areas 10'000 m2 5'000 m2
Separation plant 2'000 m2 -
Handling muck 5'000 m2 -
Bentonite tanks 2'000 m2 -
Segmental lining 3'000 m2 -
Workshop 1'000 m2 500 m2
Storage other materials 3'000 m2 1'000 m2
Water treatment plant 1'000 m2 500 m2
Container, parking 6'000 m2 2'000 m2
Concrete / grout storage 1'500 m2 -
Other 13'500 m2 6'000 m2
Total: 60'000 m2 15'000 m2
Space needed for the road tunnel.

Danish side Swedish side

Assembly TBM 8'000 m2 -
Paved areas 5'000 m2 5'000 m2
Separation plant 2'000 m2 -
Handling muck 5'000 m2 -
Bentonite tanks 2'000 m2 -
Segmental lining 2'000 m2 -
Workshop 1'000 m2 500 m2
Storage other materials 2'000 m2 1'000 m2
Water treatment plant 1'000 m2 500 m2
Container, parking 4'000 m2 2'000 m2
Concrete / grout storage 1'500 m2 -
Other 3'500 m2 3'000 m2
Total: 37'000 m2 12'000 m2
Space needed for the rail tunnel.

K00011 TJe/JT - W:\AERE\PROJECT\10K\SK\00009_HH Förbindelsen\04 Bericht\Report TBM_29.5.2019.docx

HH - Fast Förbindelse
Regensdorf, 3. Mai 2019
Seite 27 von 30

As a basic rule for site installation one could say "the larger, the better". If there is some space
available logistic processes can be optimized and generally the work can be organized more
efficiently. If less space is available, the contractor will organize himself and live with it. He will
most likely find a solution for almost every size of installation area offered to him. This will of
course have an influence on costs and time schedule and probably more important also on the
resilience of the respective organisation. If the area has a certain size, even unpredictable events
can be handled easier and better.

We have focussed very much on the Danish side, as the four TBM will start there and the need
of space is much larger than on the Swedish side. A rough evaluation of the situation near the
foreseen sites show that there is quite some agricultural area where the road tunnel will start and
a heavily used port area where the site for the rail tunnel will be installed. As a consequence, the
above-mentioned area for the road tunnel can be considered rather large and optimized for the
contractor's work, whereas the size for the rail tunnel is rather minimized.

Installation area Folloline, NO

In general, one needs to understand, that the required site at the surface is not very much de-
pendent on the size of the TBM. So, in fact both tunnels would need more or less the same size,
and the differences mentioned above come more from the existing use of the areas next to the
portals.

K00011 TJe/JT - W:\AERE\PROJECT\10K\SK\00009_HH Förbindelsen\04 Bericht\Report TBM_29.5.2019.docx

HH - Fast Förbindelse
Regensdorf, 3. Mai 2019
Seite 28 von 30

8. Recommendations
Due to the work done for this report and based on the existing documents available for us we
sum up the following recommendations for further investigations respectively additional work in
the next step:

Profile road tunnel:

From our point of view the profile for the road tunnel is not enough specified for an optimized
evaluation of the size needed. The variation within road tunnels is much higher as in rail tunnels
and the space needed should be defined in detail with the client.

- What kind of traffic passes through the tunnel, only cars or trucks as well?
- How large do the lanes need to be, same size for both or can the left ones be reduced in
combination with the obligation for trucks to stay on the right lane?
- Does the tunnel really need an emergency lane? If yes, which size?
- What kind of space is further needed for a walkway, or similar?
- How does the drift and maintenance concept work? Where are all the cable installations?
Where are the tubes for water and drainage?
- Is there a reason, why the invert is filled up with concrete?
Road Tunnel, Option "Service Space Elements"
Instead of filling the space under the road deck with concrete or other material it could be used
as space for cables and water conducts. For this prefabricated service space elements can be
used. This could be very important for drift and maintenance, as most cable systems and the
water and drainage tubes can be installed there, and thus maintained without entering the tun-
nel itself. This enables to significantly limit the disturbance of the traffic flow due to maintenance
works as it is even possible to do most of the maintenance works at daytime and get away from
work during night shifts.
Road Tunnel, Option "Optimized lane concept"
As only 2 traffic lanes are actually planned for this project (+ a rescue lane) we see a potential
optimisation in the required width of the tunnel.
- The project Socatop in Paris had two 3 m-width light traffic lanes (no trucks) and one 2,5
m-width rescue lane - in one tunnel.
- The Elbtunnel in Hamburg consists of two 3,75 m-width traffic lane and one 2 m-width
rescue lane.
An optimisation would be to consider one 3 m-width light traffic lane (no trucks), one 3,75 m-
width "truck" lane and one 2,5 m-width rescue lane. This would result in an inner diameter of
approximately 12 m and a TBM diameter of approximately 13,6 m - one meter less than the
present design. The cross section of the Elbtunnel would be a good example of an optimized
cross section.
K00011 TJe/JT - W:\AERE\PROJECT\10K\SK\00009_HH Förbindelsen\04 Bericht\Report TBM_29.5.2019.docx
HH - Fast Förbindelse
Regensdorf, 3. Mai 2019
Seite 29 von 30

Road Tunnel, Option "Optimization vertical profile"

There might be a possible optimisation (see picture below) to reduce the maximal depth of
around 10 m. This will reduce the water pressure of around one bar, which is not a game
changer, but still gives the TB; more reserves to operate.

Option optimizes vertical profile road tunnel

3D geological model
We strongly recommend to ask the geologists
- to establish a section each, best guess with the information available, in the alignment
of the two tunnels.
- to elaborate a rough 3D model of the whole area with sea bed level, rock level and geol-
ogy
- to put the real alignment data into that model, georeferenced to be able to really check
the status of the present design.
Investigation program

We recommend starting an investigation program along the two alignments to get more detailed
information about the geology to be expected, including a detailed description of the formations
that need to be crossed by the TBM's, the rock surface and even the most important parameters
both for the sands and the different rock formations.
Parameters Sans Danish side
Grain size analysis, permeability, E modulus are missing and will definitively be required in the
next stage to make an assessment on the TBM Choice.
- Rail Tunnel: Given the very low overburden below seabed there might be a real issue and
question the feasibility at acceptable risks.

K00011 TJe/JT - W:\AERE\PROJECT\10K\SK\00009_HH Förbindelsen\04 Bericht\Report TBM_29.5.2019.docx

HH - Fast Förbindelse
Regensdorf, 3. Mai 2019
Seite 30 von 30

Rail Tunnel, low cover Danish side

On the Danish side the cover in the sand lowers down to less than one diameter. This is very
critical for the use of any TBM. There are technical solutions with the TBM such as grouting or
high-density Bentonite => VD TBM to avoid blowout. But in the context of crossing the sea in
Sand, with less than one diameter coverage, we would definitively recommend geologically in-
vestigating the area in detail and thereafter, eventually to reassess the alignment.

9. Appendix

9.1. List of references

Appendix one shows a list of 19 references that were considered for the present report.

K00011 TJe/JT - W:\AERE\PROJECT\10K\SK\00009_HH Förbindelsen\04 Bericht\Report TBM_29.5.2019.docx

24.4.2019 HH – Fast Förbindelse

1. Bosphorous Highway Tunnel / Eurasia Tunnel, Istanbul

Length: 3.340 m
Inner D: 12,00m
Bore D: 13,66m
Segmental Lining: 60cm (8+1)
Radius: 1200m
Geology: Sandstone, claystone, volcanic rocks
+ active fault zone
Max W. Pressure: 9.2 bars (at crown)
TBM: MixShield
Charachteristics: Designed to support 12 bars
Single tube with two levels
2 x 2 traffic lanes
No safety/stop lane
24.4.2019 HH – Fast Förbindelse

1. Bosphorous Highway Tunnel / Eurasia Tunnel, Istanbul

 Sandstone/mudstone of Trakya Formation: 67%

 Dyke inclusions of Trakya Formation: 3%
 Transition zone with rock and soil: 10%
 Sandy soils: 13%
 Clayey/Silty soils: 6%
 Coarser grained soils/cobbles: <1%
24.4.2019 HH – Fast Förbindelse

2. Waterview Tunnel Auckland

Length: 2 x 2.400 m
Inner D: 13,10m
Bore D: 14,41m
Segmental Lining: 45cm (9+1)
Radius: 500m
Geology: Clay, Silt, Sand, Sandstone
Max Depth: 45 m
Max W. Pressure: 5.3 bars (at invert)
TBM: EPB
Charachteristics: 3 lanes per tunnel
Designed to support 5.3 bars
Two tubes with 3 lanes
No safety/stop lane
24.4.2019 HH – Fast Förbindelse

2. Waterview Tunnel, Auckland

 Very weak sandstone with interbedded laminated

silstone: 76%
 Clay, Silt and sand: 7%
 Deposits from volcanic flow, comprising sand to
boulder sized breccia and conglomerate: 17%
24.4.2019 HH – Fast Förbindelse

3. Port Said Road Tunnels, Egypt

Length: 2 x 2.800 m
Inner D: 11,40m
Bore D: 13,05m
Segmental Lining: 60cm
Gradient: 3,3%
Geology: very soft to soft Clay, Sand, Silt
Max Depth: 49 m
Max W. Pressure: 5 bars (at invert)
TBM: MixShields
Charachteristics: 2 lanes per tunnel
Designed to support 6 bars
Two tubes with 3 lanes
No safety/stop lane
24.4.2019 HH – Fast Förbindelse

4. Tunnel Tuen Mun ‐ Chek Lap Kok, Hong Kong

Length: 2 x 4.200 m
Inner D: ~13,00m
Bore D: ~14,5m
Segmental Lining: 60cm
Geology: Sand, Gravel, weathered granite, Granite
Max Depth: 40 m
Max W. Pressure: 5.5 bars (at crown)
TBM: MixShields
Charachteristics: 2 lanes per tunnel
Designed to support 6 bars
No safety/stop lane
24.4.2019 HH – Fast Förbindelse

5. A 86 – SOCATOP, Paris

Length: 10.500 m
Inner D: 10,40m
Bore D: 11,58m
Segmental Lining: 40cm
Gradient: ‐
Geology: Limestone, Sand, Clay, Marl, Chalk
Max Depth: ~75m
Max W. Pressure: ‐
TBM: Convertible
Charachteristics: Dubble Deck
2 lanes per level + Safety lane
Access to tunnel strictly limited to light weight vehicles
(W<3,5to, H<2 m)
24.4.2019 HH – Fast Förbindelse

6. Elbtunnel, Hamburg

Length: 2.560 m
Inner D: 12,35m
Bore D: 14,22m
Segmental Lining: 70cm
Radius: 800m
Geology: glacial drift, silt and gravel, sand, boulders
Max Depth: 40 m
Max W. Pressure: 3 bars (at crown)
TBM: MixShield
Charachteristics: 2 lanes per tunnel
Designed to support 4,5 bars
Two tubes with 2 lanes
with safety/stop lane
24.4.2019 HH – Fast Förbindelse

7. Miami Port Tunnel, Miami

Length: 2.338 m
Inner D: 11,30m
Bore D: 12,86m
Segmental Lining: 60cm
Curve: 250m
Gradient: 5,1%
Geology: Silty Sand, Weak Limestone
Max Depth: 36m
Max W. Pressure: 2.0 bars (at crown)
TBM: EPB
Charachteristics: 2 lanes per tunnel
Designed to support 4 bars
Two tubes with 3 lanes
with safety/stop lane
24.4.2019 HH – Fast Förbindelse

8. SMART TUNNEL, Kuala Lumpur

Length: 5.400 m
Inner D: 11,83m
Bore D: 13,21m
Segmental Lining: 55cm
Curve: 250m
Gradient: 3%
Geology: 70% karstic limestone and sections in compact and fresh
marble, 30% quaternary alluvial deposits (silty, gravely
sand) and mine tailings
Max Depth: ‐
Max W. Pressure: ‐
TBM: Mixshield
Charachteristics: Dubble deck tunnel
2 lanes per level (no safety lane)
Designed to support 3 bars
24.4.2019 HH – Fast Förbindelse

9. Shantou Su Ai Project, China

Length: 3.050 m
Inner D: 13,3m
Bore D: 14,90m
Segmental Lining: 60cm
Geology: Sandy and clayey soils, section of very hard granite (UCS up
to 200MPa)
Max Depth: 17.2m (crown)
Max W. Pressure: 2.5 bars (at crown)
TBM: Mixshield
Charachteristics: Dubble deck tunnel
3 lanes per tunnel level (no safety lane)
Designed to support 4 bars
Accessible CW
24.4.2019 HH – Fast Förbindelse

10. Alaskan Way, Seattle

Length: 2.830 m
Inner D: ~15,70m
Bore D: 17,48m
Segmental Lining: ~70cm
Geology: 65% Cohesionless sands and gravels
35% Cohesive material
Max Depth: 66m (crown)
Max W. Pressure: 3,6 bars (at crown)
TBM: EPB
Charachteristics: Double deck tunnel
2 lanes per tunnel level (+ safety lane)
24.4.2019 HH – Fast Förbindelse

11. Changjiam Under River Tunnels, Shangai

Length: 7.170 m
Inner D: 13,70m
Bore D: 15,43m
Segmental Lining: ~65cm
Radius: 4000m
Gradient: 2,9%
Geology: Sand, Clay and Rubble
Max Depth: 60m (crown)
Max W. Pressure: 6 bars (at crown)
TBM: Mixshields
Charachteristics: 2 lanes + rescue lane (upper level)
Service and safety tunnel (lower level)
Accessible CW
24.4.2019 HH – Fast Förbindelse

12. Westerschelde,

Length: 6.600 m
Inner D: 10,10m
Bore D: 11,36m
Segmental Lining: ~45cm
Radius: ‐
Gradient: ‐
Geology: Sand, Clay
Max Depth: 52m (crown)
Max W. Pressure: 7 bars (at crown)
TBM: Mixshields
Charachteristics: 2 lanes, no rescue lane
24.4.2019 HH – Fast Förbindelse

RAIL TUNNELS
24.4.2019 HH – Fast Förbindelse

13. Malmö City Tunnel, Malmö

Length: 4.623 m
Inner D: 7,90m
Bore D: 8,89m
Segmental Lining: 35cm
Radius: 400m
Gradient: 2,2%
Geology: 93% Limestone (anisotrop, strongly weathered),
4% Limestone (strong risses), 3% alluviums
Max Depth: 22m (crown)
Max W. Pressure: 1,8 bars (at crown)
TBM: EPB
Charachteristics:
24.4.2019 HH – Fast Förbindelse

14. Channel Tunnel, England‐France

Length: 50.500 m
Inner D: 7,60m
Bore D: 8,8m
Segmental Lining: 45cm
Geology: Chalk Marl
Max Depth: 75m (crown)
Max W. Pressure: 107 m below water level
TBM: EPB
Charachteristics: Service Tunnel D4,8m
(TBM 5,6m ‐ 30cm)
Piston relief duct
24.4.2019 HH – Fast Förbindelse

15. Follobanen, Oslo ‐ Ski

Length: 20.000 m
Inner D: 8,75m
Bore D: 9,96m
Segmental Lining: 40cm
Radius: ‐
Gradient: ‐
Geology: Precambrian gneiss, Amphybolite dykes and rhomb
porphyry intrusions
Max Depth: 170 m
Max W. Pressure: High ground water level
TBM: Double Shield
Charachteristics:
24.4.2019 HH – Fast Förbindelse

16. Hallandsas, Sweden

Length: 5.500 m
Inner D: 9,04m
Bore D: 10,53m
Segmental Lining: 54cm
Radius: 2.500m
Gradient: 0,3%
Geology: Gneiss, Amphibolite, Diabase dykes
Max Depth: ‐
Max W. Pressure: High ground water level
TBM: Convertible (MixShield – Hard Rock)
Charachteristics: Design for 15 bar
24.4.2019 HH – Fast Förbindelse

17. Leipzig City Tunnel, Leipzig

Length: 1.780 m
Inner D: 7,90m
Bore D: 9,00m
Segmental Lining: 40cm
Radius: 360m
Gradient: 3,5%
Geology: Sand, Silt, Gravel, lenses of Sandstone
Max Depth: 20 m
Max W. Pressure: 1,8 bar (tunnel invert)
TBM: MixShield
Charachteristics:
24.4.2019 HH – Fast Förbindelse

18. Liefkenshoek Tunnel, Antwerpen

Length: 6.000 m
Inner D: 7,30m
Bore D: 8,39m
Segmental Lining: 40cm
Radius: 500m
Gradient: 2,0%
Geology: Sand, locally Boomse Clay
Max Depth: 28 m (at crown)
Max W. Pressure: 2,8 bar 8at crown)
TBM: MixShield
Charachteristics: Designed for 4,5bar
24.4.2019 HH – Fast Förbindelse

19. Botlekspoortunnel, The Netherland

Length: 1.835 m
Inner D: 8,650m
Bore D: 9,755m
Segmental Lining: 40cm
Radius: ‐
Gradient: ‐
Geology: Clay, Coarse and gravelly sand
Max Depth: ~20 m
Max W. Pressure: ~1,8 bar (at crown)
TBM: EPB
Charachteristics: Piston Pump
Designed for 3bar