The rehabilitation of the oldest transit tunnel in the United States

H. A. Russell, P.E.
Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas Inc., Boston Massachusetts USA

ABSTRACT: Parsons Brinckerhoff has been a leader in the rehabilitation of rail tunnels in th e United States and was retained by the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority to rehabilitate the systems Green Line. The Green Line is the oldest operating light rail system in the United States. The original construction began in 1895 and the line was opened to traffic in 1898. Today the Green Line tunnel is 4.9 miles (7.35 Km) long and has five lines that merge in the downtown area and is the major link between the western suburbs and downtown, with over 500 trips in each direction per day. The rehabilitation project consisted of structural repairs of the cut -and -cover tunnels and stations, upgrading of track and drainage systems and the improvement of the ventilation system. All work had to be performed in a limited work window of less than 5 hours /day, with no inte rruption to revenue service. A program was developed and implemented to identify the defects, provide pr ocedures for structural, track, and ventilation upgrading and rehabilitation. This paper will discuss the structural repairs require for the restoration of the tunnels to their original condition. 1 INTRODUCTION Built between 1897 and 1960 the Green Line tunnels are an integral part of public transportation in the Boston area. The original tunnels were build along Tremont Street from North Station to the Public Garden, as pa ssenger demand rose, the tunnels were extended in 1903, 1912, 1940, and completed in 1960. The Green line (Fig. 1) has ten underground stations and serves five lines which connect downtown Boston to the western subu rbs. The tunnels are 4.9 miles (7.35 km) in length and are double track tu nnels except for a portion of the line which was constructed under the Muddy river, which is twin si ngle track bores. All of the stations were constructed utilising cut -and-cover construction techniques with all of the tunnels constructed in a sim ilar manner except for a small section of tunnel between the Hines Convention Centre Station and Ke nmore Square Station. This area was a shield driven tunnel
Figure 1: Map of the Green Line

Subway

under compressed air to allow for the crossing of the Muddy River in the Back Bay. Over the years groundwater seepage, and concrete deterioration became a major problem The structural steel elements of the tunnel system were suffering from extreme corrosion at the invert area and in nume rous locations the reinforcing steel of the concrete was exposed due to severe delaminations and spalling (Fig 2, 3).

2 INSPECTION The tunnels were inspected using the tunnels track survey layout as the baseline for locating the tunnel defects. The tunnels were divided up into simple quadrants for ease in inspection, with the walls identified left and right as one looked up station (Fig 4). All tunnel structural defects were i dentified using specialised coding. This coding was a simple system of identifying each defect by a symbol and using a numerical rating for the degree of severity, (ACI Committee 201). Delaminations were identified only as a delamination and would not exhi bit a degree of severity. For example, a two square meter concrete delamination on the right wall of the tunnel looking up station, at station 121+11 would be recorded as follows: Station 121+11 Location Identification/Area R D/ 2 meters

Figure 2: Spall at Steel Framing

All inspection work was performed in a five hour work window between the hours of 12 midnight and 0500 in the morning. All information collected was placed in a database utilising Microsoft Excel.

Figure 3: Typical Wall Spall

Figure 4: Typical Cross Sections Boylsto Subway

n S t.

3 CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS The development of the construction documents was based on the detailed database that consisted of specifications, special provisions, which outline the time restraints of the project, and construction drawings. The C onstruction drawings (Fig 5) provided information as to the specific details of the repairs, types of repairs

and incorporated the data base information in a tabular format for the identification of quantities. The drawings also provided the Contractor wit h information as to stationing in the tunnel and clearances within the tunnel. Developed as part of the inspection of the tunnel facilities. The database was utilised to establish quantities and locations of the areas to be repaired.

Figure 5: Typical C onstruction Drawing

4 STRUCTURAL REPAIRS Based on the limited clearances and the extent of the delaminations and spalls in the tunnels it was decided to use a polymer shotcrete for the repair of the tunnel liner in the cut and cover sections of the tunn el. Shotcrete was selected since it is not necessary to construct forms for the work and its rapid cure time. Test sections were performed to select the proper mix for the

project and a polymer -modified shotcrete as manufactured by Thoroc in the USA (Chem ex 2001). The areas to be repaired were prepared by removing the unsound concrete with chipping hammers, additional reinforcing was applied, the existing reinforcing was coated with a zinc rich coating for corrosion protection and the shotcrete was applied . In order to limit the removal of unsound concrete the chipping hammers were limited in size to be less than 30

lbs (13.6kg.) This limiting of the size of the hammers prevented concrete in excess 4000 psi (27,579 kPa) from being removed, (Bickel 1996). Once the area was cleaned and all loose material was removed by air blasting the reinforcing steel was examined and if the loss of section was greater than 30 % the steel was replaced with new steel, (ACI Committee 318). All new reinforcing steel was repla ced in kind with epoxy coated steel. The existing steel was coated with a zinc -rich coating with a minimum of 9 lbs of zinc/gl, (1.2kg/l). The steel was prepared by hydro blasting and coated within 4 hours (Fig 6).

Shrinkage compensated 740 micro strains @ 7 days Low permeability l e s s t h a n 2 2 0 coulombs Excellent freeze thaw resistance Less than 10% RDM Low rebound Typically less than 15 % by volume Prepackaged and excellent quality control

The shotcrete was applied by first moistening the substrate concrete and then applying the material in a circular motion building the repair from the edge of the patch to the centre and in a uniform method up to t he top or side of the repair (Russell, 1987). The average depth of the r e p a i r s w a s i n t h e r a n g e o f 3 8 inches, (76.2mm 203mm). The depth was controlled by the use of guide wires across the surface of the area to be repaired (Brekke, 1976). The shotcrete wa s applied until the wires were covered and then the area was trowelled to finish the grading of the material. The shotcrete was workable for a period of approximately 30 minutes in which it was trowelled and levelled. During the trowelling operation the gu ide wires were removed and the shotcrete finished to a steel trowel finish. This process was used to repair the tunnel liner and the stations structural components. The shotcrete was applied at a rate of approximately 10 cubic meters in a five -hour shift . A total of 33,000 cubic feet (934m 3) shotcrete was applied to the tunnel structure the average cost of the concrete repairs was $275.00 per cubic foot, US (adjusted for 2001 US $) (Fig 7).

Figure 6: Typical Spall Repair

The application of the shotcrete was to be performed within 48 hours of the protection of the steel with the zinc -rich coating. The shotcrete chosen was a dry prepackaged polymer shotcrete with light -weight aggregate (Chemrex 2001). The shotcrete had the follow ing qualities: Early Strength @1 day - 4800 psi (33.1MPa)

limited area s of operation and low vertical clearances. The project was pre planned and was completed in a 36 hour weekend with the passenger traffic being rerouted over the surface via busses. The work was begun at 9 PM on a Friday night and completed early on the following Monday morning with revenue service starting at 0500 hours.

Figure 7: Shotcrete Installation

In the area of the Boy lston Street station (Fig 8) a track flyover existed, which was framed with structural steel in 1897. The flyover was actually a bridge constructed on the mainline, which allowed a branch line to turn to the south west to connect a portion of the citys So uth End to downtown. The bridge was further complicated in that is was located on a large curve within the tunnel, which necessitated the upgrading of the bridge steel to support he new light rail vehicles which were on order. During the rating of the stru cture for the new vehicle it was determined that the framing steel was in poor condition, and required replacement. A detailed inspection of the bridge was performed to evaluate the existing conditions and for the development of detailed construction docum ents. Since the replacement of the structural steel required the removal of the deck and track for a distance of over 300 feet, (91.4m) A detailed sequencing plan was developed to coordinate the removal of the track bridge deck steel framing and replacemen t of these elements over a long weekend. The steel fabrication plans were developed to allow for relatively short steel sections to be field bolted in the tunnel to allow for the final longer bridge spans (Fig 9). This was necessary due to the

Figure 8: Existing Steel Framing Station

Boylston St.

Fig 9:Installation of New Steel Framing

5. GROUNDWATER INTRUSION The Green Line tunnel had extensive cracking which i n m a n y l o c a t i o n s c a u s e d t h e delaminations and spalling of the concrete liner. In addition the presence of water in the tunnel environment caused operational problems for the Authority. As part of the structural repair work and prior to the installation o f any shotcrete the tunnel leaks were controlled by direct injection of a single component water reactive polyurethane chemical grout. In certain locations high -pressure injection ports were installed to allow for the injection of the grout. However, in so me locations of the original 1897 tunnels, it was determined that the tunnel liner was designed to leak and it was decided to control the leakage by keeping the water away from operational equipment and draining the water into specially designed drainage c onduits which would take the water to the invert drains.

often the result of thermal movements of the structure. Most of the leakage in the Green line occurred near stations, portals and ventilation shafts, where the climatic change over the year is as much as 80 o F (26 o C). This change in temperature causes the structure to move in a similar fashion as those exposed to the normal atmosphere. During our inspection of the Green Line it was determined that the majority of the cracks that leaked had approximately 1/4inch of movement (6.35mm), which would result in the failure of particle grouts. It was therefore determined that a flexible grout with elongation was desirable for use in the sealing of the cracks. The product selected was DeNeef Sealfoam, (DeNeef 1980), which illustrated the following properties: Viscosity - 250-300 cps Tensile Strength 380 psi, (2620kPa) Elongation - 400% Reaction Time 20 sec. Toxicity Non Toxic Shrinkage - < 10 % Activation - Water Reactive

Figure 10: Injection of Chemical Grout

The injection of chemical grout (Fig 10, 11) for the containment of leaks has been a common method for the sealing of groundwater intrusion in underground structures for many years. The most common grout used has been particle grouts, which are primarily made up of Portland cement and or flyash. However, over the years many of these leaks have returned due to the simple fact that the cracks that have leaked are

The Grout is installed by drilling 0.50 inch (12.7mm) diameter holes on either side of the crack to be injected at a 45 -degree angle to the face of the wall. The spacing of the wall is approximately that of the thickness of the wall and it offset 1/2 the depth of the wall. The hole is angled to the crack and is intended to intersect the crack at the mid point of the wall. Once drilled, injection ports are installed and the ports are flushed with potable water. This flushing ensures that the crack has been intersected and that the debris in the crack and drill hole has been removed. After flushing, the ports are injected moving along the crack. The injection procedure is moved form port to port once the grout has been observed flowing form the crack surface at the next port. This process was successfully performed on over 2,200LF -(670 m) of cracks in the Green Line. The average

cost for the sealing of leaking cracks as adjusted for 2001 in dollars is $60.00US/LF.

Figure 11: High Pressure Injection Ports

At specific locations in the Green Line particularly in the areas constructed in t he 1890s the construction joints were intended to leak. This is due to the high hydrostatic pressure surrounding the tunnel and the lack of expertise to develop strong concrete lining at the time. Based on our observations and calculations the tunnel line r was unable to withstand the hydrostatic pressure if these leaking joints were sealed (Kuesel 1983). Therefore, a design was developed that would allow the joints to leak but keep the water away from the operational equipment of the Green Line. The divers ion drains were constructed by routing out the concrete at the joint and placing a slotted pipe that would allow the water from the joint to enter and transfer the water to the track drain. The slotted pipes were then grouted into place to achieve a tight seal along the wall (Fig 12). The cost of these each of these drains is $ 1,200 US as adjusted for 2001 dollars.

Figure 12: Typical Diversion Drain

- Green Line

6 CONCLUSIONS The inspection and rehabilitation of transit tunnels requires detailed inspe ction of the facility and close coordination with the operator of the tunnels. The use of specialty materials is also required to allow for rapid installation and use of the tunnels after the repairs are made. The use of shotcrete for permanent repairs to the tunnel liner has extended the life of the Green Line tunnels for an additional 50 years at a cost of less than one third of the original cost of construction. The Structural rehabilitation of the Green Line tunnels cost approximately $250 US a linear foot or $800 US a meter, (price adjusted for 2001 dollars).

7 REFERENCES ACI Committee 2001 (1968) Guide for Making a Condition Surface Survey of Concrete ACI Journal Proceedings , 65,90 -912. ACI Committee 318, Building Code Requirements for Reinfor ced Concrete , American Concrete Institute, 1983 Bickel, J. O. (1996), The Tunnel Engineering Handbook, Second Edition , Chapman Hall New York. Brekke, T. L. et al, (1976), State-of-the Art Review of Shotcrete UMTA Contract DCDA 39 -0371. DeNeef Constructio n, Chemicals, Data Sheets, pp 101, SafeFoam Chemical Grout, DeNeef Construction Chemicals, Waller TX 1980. Kuesel, T.R. (1983) The Structural Behaviour of Tunnel Linings, Proceedings, American Society of Civil Engineers, Metropolitan Section Seminar on Tun nel Construction. Russell, Henry A. The Tunnel Engineering Handbook, Second Edition, Chapter 29, Tunnel Rehabilitation, Chapman Hall, New York, NY 1993. Russell, Henry A., The Rehabilitation of Transit Tunnels, W. B. Parsons Fellowship, Parsons Brinckerhof f, New York NY, 1987. Thoroc Construction Materials Catalogue, (2001), Chemrex Corporation, Cleveland Ohio,