SITE REPORT

WE’RE NOT BIG...

...but we are clever. Challenging traditional wisdom that says existing
tunnels must be internally propped before connecting into them,
Taylor Woodrow BAM Nuttall JV has come up with new solutions at
London Underground’s Victoria Station Upgrade which are already
attracting attention. Kristina Smith visited site to find out why.

Figure 1: The schematic layout of the Victoria Station scheme

PAL 22 PAL 10
connection (PAL 16/18
directly beneath)

PAL 7
connection

IN A WORLD WHERE TBMS just keep getting
bigger, and in a City where Crossrail will soon
have completed 42km of tunnel, the team at
the Victoria Station Upgrade sometimes feel a
little inadequate. Their project to increase ca-
pacity and improve journey times for people
using the underground station can boast only
306m of 6m-diameter tunnel; and four years
in, they’ve completed just 198m.
“We find ourselves regularly compared with
adjacent sites, such as Land Securities’ £2.2bn
Nova development,” says Ian Heath, tunnel
manager for the Taylor Woodrow BAM Nuttall
(TWBN) JV which is delivering the £300M up-
grade for London Underground. “Here, the
scheme is more like a Rubik’s cube: every time
you need to move something, you have to
move something else to accommodate it. That
is the constant theme.”
TWBN’s works include a new ticket hall and
entrance to the North of the station, doubling
the size of the existing southern ticket hall,
nine new escalators and eight lifts and pedes-
trian tunnels to connect the two stations and
various other passages. The tunnelling, includ-
ing £37M-worth of jet grouting, accounts for
around £64M
Heath and his team can hold their heads
high though. Because, by the time those 306m
have been constructed, TWBN will have several
very useful lessons to share with the industry.
One such lesson, which is already attracting
interest, is the innovative prop-free solutions
that TWBN has developed with its designer
Mott MacDonald, for the connections into ex-
isting tunnels. No less impressive is Keller’s un-
precedented jet grouting programme involving
over 2000 columns. Finally, creating the under-
pass beneath the existing District and Circle
Line, which will see the rails literally sitting on
top of the new tunnel, will be a technical feat
worth hearing about.

10 TUNNELLING JOURNAL
 SITE REPORT

Far left: The

method of
propping as
used at King’s
Cross, and (left)
the much less
intrusive
propless
method as
seen at Victoria

“We are not big, but it is clever,” says Glen
Keelan, London Underground’s programme
manager.
Heath’s desire to do away with props comes
from his time spent on the upgrade of Kings
Cross underground station, where he was
working for Morgan Sindall, his employer of
13 years before he joined BAM Nuttall to
tackle this project.
“I just started asking the question,” he says.
“At Kings Cross, we propped all the cross pas-
sages. There was massive disruption and it cost
a fortune.”
On the Victoria Station Upgrade pro-
gramme, there are six points at which tunnels
must break into existing ones. To tackle these
TWBN and Motts have developed – essentially
– three different solutions.
Working side-by-side with Heath to break
with the ‘doing things the way we’ve always
done them’ tradition is Anmol Bedi, senior SCL
engineer for Motts who is on site all the time.
Wielding his 3D model, he is ready to revisit
the design to find the best solutions as the
tunnels advance, while maintaining a watchful
eye on the installed ‘real time’ instrumentation
and monitoring to ensure the works are per-
forming as expected.
The differences the prop-free solutions have
made are significant. To illustrate his point,
Heath shows a photo from the Kings Cross Up-
grade with a possession work site within the
existing platform tunnel, thick with props,
alongside a shot of one of the platforms at
Victoria where the only sign of an impending
break through is a hoarding which protrudes
just 450mm onto the walkway.
Heath reckons TWBN has made substantial
savings by avoiding the use of props. It has also
saved several logistics headaches: much of the
plant and equipment for propping would have
had to come in by train or escalator. And there
have been savings on the time and paperwork
involved in gaining approvals from London Un-
derground operational staff, technical staff and
the emergency services.
The most important thing for London Under-
ground is that the station’s staff and the travel-

fermacell AESTUVER
Tailor-made solutions specifically for underground and overground transport systems.
Q Reliable protection for concrete against effects of fire loads of up to 1 350 °C
Download our
Q Frost and water resistant PDF brochure.
Q Painting and coating options for customized finishes

www.aestuver.de Fermacell GmbH | fermacell AESTUVER | Düsseldorfer Landstr. 395 | 47259 Duisburg | E-Mail: info@aestuver.de | fermacell® is a registered trademark and a company of the XELLA Group.
 SITE REPORT

Figure 2: Top - PAL 7: Providing a link between the new main pedestrian tunnel and an existing interchange concourse,
props in the existing pedestrian area were considered unfeasible as they would have reduced circulation space and
impinged on the area for an escalator’s upper machine chamber. Constructed in a mixed face of London Clay and water
bearing River Terrace Gravels, the designers increased the jet grouting in this area to form a hood over the cross passage
location. This reduced the ground loading and distortional tendency of the lining. TWBN constructed the SCL shell right up
to the connection point, using multiple benches while installing a sectional opening frame, bolted to the back of the
existing liner. Temporary props within the new tunnel reduced deformation as the lower SCL benches were excavated.
Bottom - PAL 22 - Linking from the main tunnel into an existing passage, the approach for this connection was similar [to
the one above], with internal propping and additional jet grout over the existing passageway.

Permanent support Temporary support

Existing Zone of ground Zone of ground
concrete improvement improvement
headwall Existing passage 4202 250 SFR B 263 x 293 x 109 UC 250 SFR
to Westbound D & C line primary lining temporary prop primary lining
610 x 229 x 140 UB
temporary beam

Top
Timber packing Top
A lintel
lintel
PAL #7 PAL #7 F.F.L. 5026
Top 91318
Existing 32´ 6˝ LD
lintel interchange
Area of primary 610 x 229 x 140 UB
concourse tunnel temporary beam
lining thickening
200 x 203 x 100 UC for the temporary
B
A temporary prop Area of primary prop and beam
lining thickening 600
for the temporary
Timber Existing concrete prop and beam
packing collar (to be cut 610 x 229 x 140 UB Existing 32´ 6˝ LD
out locally) temporary beam interchange
concourse tunnel
PLAN Section A-A Section B-B
(Scale 1:100) (scale 1:50) (scale 1:50)

Permanent support Temporary support Existing 4500 Zone of ground

LD SGI lining improvement

Jamb SFR primary lining B 250 SFR Top

Top
lintel primary lining lintel

Top PAL #22 PAL #22

lintel Existing
passageway
Jamb 3203 Jamb
Lower F.F.L. 91318
A A
lintel
Existing
passageway
3203
Lower Lower
Existing 4500 B lintel lintel
LD SGI lining
PLAN Section A-A Section B-B
(Scale 1:100) (scale 1:50) (scale 1:50)

ling public can go about their business unhin-
dered. “From our perspective, minimising dis-
ruption was the priority,” says Keelan.
“Victoria is so busy, that any disruption could
have meant that there was a genuine risk that
we might have to alter the Victoria Line serv-
ice... which we would never want to do.”
Busier than Heathrow
A journey through Victoria underground sta-
tion at rush hour will explain why this station
is in need of an upgrade. It is close to burst-
ing. One of the busiest stations in London,
84.6 million people passed through it last
year. That’s more than Heathrow Airport
which saw a mere 72.3m people in 2013.
But it’s not so much numbers as space and
flows which interest London Underground. Its
modellers look at a measure called Fruin levels
which run from A to E, with E being the most
congested.
“When we looked at Victoria Station to de-
velop the planning of the solution, Fruin levels
tended to be around D and E in peak hours,”
says Keelan. “The station staff frequently have
to apply control measures; they have to hold
peoples’ journey through station because of
the sheer number of people moving in and
out. That was a key element of the business
case for doing something at Victoria.”
With an exit point to the South of the sta-
tion – a common feature of most stations on
the Victoria line – busy periods see huge flows
of people trying to head out through the adja-
cent mainline rail station, meeting a similar
flow heading in. And carrying them in and
out are just three escalators.
“Our origin and destination surveys showed
that a large proportion of people wanted to
be to the North and North East of the station,
to carry on their journey towards Westmin-
ster,” says Keelan. Hence the new Northern
ticket hall and the new entrance in
Bressenden Place.
TWBN beat off competition from JVs of Bal-
four Beatty/ Morgan Est and Costain Laing
O’Rourke to be awarded the contract in May
2010. This was the second success for the
newly-formed joint venture which had se-
cured the Tottenham Court Road upgrade
project in late 2009.

12 TUNNELLING JOURNAL
 SITE REPORT

Figure 3: PAL10 - This inclined shaft for escalators 10-12 runs directly above the Though every tunnelling project conducted
hand-dug tunnel and envelopes the concourse tunnel. It cuts through two existing in a busy city area has the challenge of multi-
cross passages which will no longer be used, with two new cross passages towards ple stakeholders, the variety and vicinity of
its end to provide access to platform tunnels on either side. Had the inclined SCL those for the Victoria Station Upgrade is quite
tunnel been constructed, followed by the cross passages, the deformation would mind-boggling. A major transport hub, with
have been too great. In order to limit deformation, TWBN constructed the cross the inner circle ring road linking the North and
passages first from the existing concourse tunnel. This provided rigidity, locking the South of the city running through it, Victoria is
platform tunnels against further deformation while the main tunnel was built. also on multiple bus routes and has a national
coach station, as well as the underground
lines and mainline station.
Neighbours include government depart-
ments, businesses, shops, restaurants and two
theatres – the Grade II* listed Victoria Palace
Theatre and the Grade II* listed Apollo with
the Victoria Palace Theatre so close to the tun-
nelling works that some operations must stop
when a performance is on. Add into the pic-
ture the construction of the 897,000 sq ft
(83,300 sq m) mixed-use development that is
Nova, and you begin to see the constraints
under which TWBN is working.
“The main challenges for us at Victoria con-
cern customers and stakeholders,” says David
Waboso, London Underground’s head of capi-
tal projects. “We have to do this incredibly
complicated job in the middle of all this.
“We have to communicate with our surface
transport colleagues, communications and
stakeholder relations people and attend meet-
ings with local stakeholders. Glen is the mid-
field general in all of that.”

Tackling buildability
Several designers have been involved in this
scheme, as is often the case. Projects such as
these can be on the drawing board for years
or decades. Victoria Station was delayed due

Figure 4: PAL16/PAL 18 - traditional hand dug tunnel - This access tunnel connects the new emergency services shaft to
the existing Victoria Line platform tunnels via two cross passages. It runs between and parallel to the existing platform
tunnels which would have normally have required extensive propping. TWBN built the tunnel within a large-scale
traditional timber and steel square works opening, exposing the platform tunnel lining on both sides with large steel
frames spanning between the linings, bracing the rings against each other to reduce deformation. At the cross passages,
timber adits were driven in stages with large frames installed around the opening along with a series of temporary
props. Once the concrete around the openings was complete, the props and tunnel rings were removed and the cross
passage completed.

TUNNELLING JOURNAL 13
 SITE REPORT
to funding issues, as the downturn started bit-
ing in 2008.
Arup was the first practice to work on the
upgrade, back at the feasibility phases in
2004. Scott Wilson took it further in 2005
and 2006, before the design package had to
be retendered due to a significant increase in
scope and Mott MacDonald won and took
over the baton.
When TWBN inherited the design, it was
reasonably advanced: at RIBA stage E (now
known as RIBA Stage 3 or 4), having been ad-
vanced to that level in order to gain planning
approval through the Transport Works Act
Order (TWAO). In moving the design forward
for construction, TWBN was able to bring in a
number of changes which improved its build-
ability.
The most dramatic change was the method
of constructing the tunnels which connect the
new ticket hall to a new escalator shaft down
to the Victoria Line platforms, the main tunnel
taking passengers from
North to South and a shaft
which will provide access for
the emergency services.
Rather than tunnel these
sections using SCL, TWBN
elected to build the whole
structure in open cut .
“We wanted to do top
down but pile embedment
issues due to the Victoria
Line meant we had to prop
and build bottom up,” says
Heath. “In reality it was a lot
easier to build.”
This was a good solution,
too, for minimising the risk
of disruption to the Kings
Scholar Pond Sewer, a storm
sewer for several areas of
London. The open cut solu-
tion meant that the sewer
could be diverted safely into
pipes. The downside was
that the excavation took up
all of TWBN’s site compound
area.
Another change came at
the junction between the
main North–South passen-
ger tunnel and a tunnel which branches off
towards a passage running to the District and
Circle Line eastbound platform. Motts’ origi-
nal design called for a trouser-leg or ‘Y’
shaped junction, TWBN wanted a 90 degree
junction.
TWBN has also brought construction effi-
ciencies to the design by standardising the di-
ameter of the main tunnels, which in the
original design varied many times, with the
thickness of the SCL and the secondary lining
changing too.
“It’s all about trying to make it simple,” says
Heath. “Now the secondary lining is roughly
the same shape and size all the way between
14 TUNNELLING JOURNAL
North and South apart from where we go
under the District and Circle line.”
Curves, too, have been eliminated where
possible, replaced by kinks. This allows for
standardisation of the formwork, a travelling
shutter supplied by CIFA, for the secondary
lining.
Though determined to innovate in his tem-
porary works, Heath has taken the opposite
approach with the materials being used for
the permanent works. It’s ‘tried and tested’ all
the way.
“We did not want to do anything revolu-
tionary here,” he says. “There is a much
higher long-term risk of water ingress here
than in most London projects due to the
water bearing nature of the ground.
“This is also a self-assuring design and build
contract so we want to use materials which
we know will work.”
The SCL here, in contrast to Crossrail, is
classed as temporary works only, so that it is
not assumed to take any of the permanent
loads. TWBN is using the inclined face method
of SCL, designed to keep men away from the
dangers of green concrete falling from over-
head.
Waterproofing is sheet membrane from
Flag Soprema installed by Austrian firm IAT,
topped by a reinforced permanent concrete
lining. The permanent lining reinforcement
was originally designed as traditional rebar,
but the team are now looking at steel fibres.
“We are now in the
process of switching from
Above: The rebar to steel fibre rein-
PAL 4 and PAL forced concrete,” says
22 Junction Heath. “We have been
able to take advantage of
Left: Pal 7 some of the innovations
excavation on Crossrail and this is
complete one of them.” TWBN has
commissioned a series of
pre-production lab and
field tests to verify the fibre reinforced second-
ary lining will perform acceptability over its de-
sign life in terms of both strength and
serviceability.
One technique which helps with both qual-
ity and congestion issues for traffic around
Victoria is the use of pre-blended sprayed con-
crete from CPI. This is delivered to site, blown
into a silo and produced to order from the
screw mixer which is part of the silo system.
“It’s more expensive per cubic metre but
you have a lot less wastage,” says Heath. “All
the specs say you have to have shotcrete on
site before you break ground but it can’t be
used once it’s over three hours old. Here we

don’t throw away lots and lots of wagon
loads because we are out of time. And our
silos take up less space than a batching plant.
It is also available when you need it, not when
the batcher is open.”
Producing the concrete this way is around
twice as expensive as ready-mixed concrete.
TWBN did consider it for the secondary lining
concrete, some of which is now being cast,
but there were technical difficulties in deliver-
ing self-compacting concrete this way – as
well as the issue of cost to consider.
Fragmented programme
Tunnelling work on the contract began in
2012 with the sinking of the emergency ac-
cess and lift shaft at the North end of the ex-
isting Victoria Line tunnels. Following a break
to allow the London 2012 Olympics to run
unhindered, TWBN began hand-digging a
tunnel from the shaft, which was to connect
via new cross passages into the Victoria Line
platform tunnels, finishing with a small equip-
ment room beyond the cross passages. This
18m of tunnel took six months to build.
The temporary works solution here, de-
signed by Alun Auld Engineering, sub-de-
signer to Motts, used traditional London Clay
hand mining methods. Excavating to expose
the backs of the existing iron linings, the face
of the excavation was supported with timbers
while large steel frames with curved shoes to
push off the linings braced the excavation
every 700mm. The final concrete lining fol-
lowed on as the tunnel advanced.
The frames, all installed with winches, effec-
tively braced the rings against each other, re-
ducing deformation to acceptable levels.
Using the usual approach, extensive propping
along both platform tunnels would have been
required.
PAL 10 concourse cross passage propping
SITE REPORT
Right: PAL 16 invert
excavation
At the cross-passages,
timber adits were driven in
stages with much larger
steel frames installed
around the opening in
combination with a series
of temporary props. Once
the concrete around the
openings was complete,
the props and tunnel rings
could be removed.
TWBN’s tunnelling team
then handed over to the
civils team who con-
structed the open cut box
directly above the hand
mined tunnel, which con-
nected the Northern ticket
hall to the start of the main
North-South route and the
escalator.
It wasn’t until October
2013 that the main North-
South tunnel launched.
This was the moment of
truth for the jet grouting.
At this higher level, only the invert of the tun- “We had lots of mitigation in place if the
nel is in the London Clay, with the majority in grouting was not as good as we hoped,”
water-bearing River Terrace Gravels. says Heath. “Keller was on hand to do re-
Detailed and meticulous records of the jet medial permeation grouting and we had our
grout column installation has been added to own grouting capability within the mining
Bedi’s 3D model, so that the miners have in- gangs too.”
formation on what they can expect to en- The treated ground was better than any-
counter each shift as they excavated. But no one could have been hoping for. “When we
one knew until the ground was attacked broke the piles down, the face was rock
whether reality would match theoretical. solid,” says Heath. “The grouted ground
was so dense, we could not
break it.”
An excavator-mounted pecker
just produced holes, rather than
shearing the material. The solu-
tion was to put a roadheader on
the Schaeff excavator.
“We had a variety of equip-
ment because we didn’t know
exactly what would be needed,”
says Heath. “No one has grouted
to this scale in the UK before.
Because you’re mixing the exist-
ing ground with grout, you don’t
know what you have until you
try and mine through it.”
Two tunnels branch off the
North-South tunnel on the
Northern side of the District and
Circle Lines. One connects into
the interchange concourse link-
ing the Victoria Line escalators to
the District and Circle Line link
passages. The other connects
into a passageway between the
Victoria Line escalators and the
TUNNELLING JOURNAL 17
 SITE REPORT

More people, more tunnels

The Victoria Station Upgrade is
part of London Underground’s
capital works programme. With
an annual budget of £1.5bn,
capital works encompasses train
systems, infrastructure and
stations.
Work on stations happen for a
number of reasons:
refurbishments to ensure they are
fit for purpose and in a
reasonable state of repair;
alterations, such as incorporating
lifts to provide step-free access
from pavement to platform; and
‘capacity schemes’, adding to the
underground space so that
people can move through the
station more efficiently.
“Victoria is a classic capacity
scheme,” says David Waboso,
London Underground’s director of
capital projects. “They frequently
have to close the station.”
With London’s living and
working populations on the rise,
Victoria is not the only station
which needs more capacity.
Similar schemes at Tottenham
Court Road, Bond Street and
Vauxhall are all on site, with
plans for similar projects at Bank
and Holborn on the drawing
board, and an upgrade at
Camden possible too, depending
on planning issues and the
Northern Line Upgrade.
The order in which projects are
delivered is not necessarily
determined by the level of
crowding. “Life is complex,” says
Waboso. “In some cases we have
inherited planning applications. In
others, it links into other work
that is going on. With Crossrail,
for example, it made sense to do
Tottenham Court Road at the
same time as Crossrail was
coming through.”
Though every station
programme is “absolutely
unique” in its history, structure
and usage, says Waboso, lessons
are passed on from one to
another, often through the
contracting community. “There
are not many contractors who
can attempt this sort of work,” he
says. “It’s a global village.”
One area where London
Underground is trying to learn
lessons is in procurement.
Following experiences at
Tottenham Court Road and
Victoria, where good ideas
emerged from the contractor
post-tender, London Underground
introduced its Innovative
Contractor Engagement (ICE)
process for Bank which sees a
contractor appointed pre-
planning to develop a design
which meets operational
performance targets (see TJ
February 2014).
Sharing safety lessons is also
important for London
Underground: “We can make sure
that if there are safer ways of
doing things, everybody knows
about it. That’s the main
advantage of having one
overarching capital works
programme,” says Waboso.

Eastbound platform of the District and Circle
Lines.
The approach for making both these two
connections was similar: a combination of
bracing on the back of the existing tunnel,
rather than inside it; installing a jet grouting
canopy over the top of the area to reduce the
ground and water loading; and digging the
last section between new tunnel and connect-
ing point as speedily as possible.
“The traditional way would have been to
hand dig the last section. We didn’t do that
here because it all adds to the time taken
which increases the deformation,” explains
Heath. “We had two principles: we are not
going to use any props and we will go as fast
as possible before the ground has time to
move.”
“We developed a sequence that allowed
the SCL shell to be constructed using multiple
benches in order to install a sectional opening
frame that was bolted to the back of the ex-
isting lining,” says Bedi. “Temporary props
were installed within the new tunnel that re-
duced deformation as the lower SCL benches
were excavated. This approach resulted in less
deformation than the traditional ‘stop short –
timber up’ method.”
The excavation of the 9m-diameter inclined
escalator shaft began in November 2013 and
at the time when TJ visited site in early Octo-
ber was two-thirds complete. “This is a very
complicated sequence of works, some within
the operational station, some with SCL, some
hand work. It’s a very long process,” says
Heath.
TWBN is employing some specialist equip-
ment to create the inclined tunnel: a Menzi
Muck M540 walking excavator designed spe-
cially to work on slopes; a mountain-climbing
Riwal cherry picker; and a Putzmeister shot-
crete robot adapted by Shotcrete Services to
work on a downhill slope.
Constructed in the 1960s, initial survey
work showed that the existing cast iron plat-
form tunnel rings had already experienced sig-
nificant deformation over time. With no
propping, driving the large escalator shafts
and then the cross passages would have
caused a level of deformation beyond the limit
set down in the Predicted Damage Assess-
ment.
The solution was to drive the cross passages
first, accessing them from the existing con-
course tunnel. The new steel and concrete
cross passages then ‘lock’ the platforms, prop-
ping them against each other to prevent fur-
ther damage.
TWBN built the cross passages traditionally
using opening sets, concrete and rebar, in-
stalled within a large-scale timber opening.
The escalator tunnel will then remove the
temporary parts of the new cross passage as it
envelopes the existing concourse.
“Numerical modelling showed that this se-
quence resulted in significantly less deforma-
tion,” says Bedi. “It’s counter-intuitive, but it
works.”
Fun at Christmas
Many of the challenges of this small but beau-
tifully complex tunnelling project have been
conquered: the prop-free connections, the
hand-dug tunnels, the unprecedented
amounts of jet-grouting, which itself took two
years to complete, finishing mid-September
this year. However, the fun is not over yet. The
main tunnel has yet to pass underneath the
District and Circle Line.
Austrian contractor Strabag AG is currently
permeation grouting underneath the tracks of
the District and Circle Line. A slab will then be
constructed within the existing cut and cover
brick arch tunnel, which will support the
tracks and form the roof of the underpass.
This operation will be carried out during a six
day blockade over Christmas.
“Come January, that will all be done, and
we can tick off a major issue from the risk reg-
ister” says Heath.
The extension to the Southern ticket hall
was nearing structural completion in October,
with the southern sections of tunnelling due
to begin. These will connect the ticket hall to
the District and Circle underpass section.
The design of the tunnels on this side of the
project will benefit from knowledge gained so
far. “We were able to redesign this due to our
experiences on the Northern section,” says
Heath. “We took out a lot of rebar from
openings and junctions and made the design
more efficient.”
By April next year, all tunnelling bar a shaft
in Victoria Street for the Disrict & Circle line
should be complete. By late 2016 the new en-
trance on Bressenden Street and the new
Northern ticket hall will be in action, with the
whole scheme expected to finish in 2018.
At that point the station’s capacity will have
been boosted by 110%. And if London Un-
derground’s predictions on future passenger
volumes are realised, Victoria underground
station should be running smoothly for the
next 75 years.

18 TUNNELLING JOURNAL