Special Construction

1. Show an illustration of Doorframe Slab Method and Caisson Method, then

relate their common and different features.

The Doorframe Slab Method is a

semi-cut-and-cover tunnel building
method. The other one, which is the
Caisson method, tries to build a
"caisson" by adding waterproof lateral
walls and a watertight roof slab (crown).
The roof slab is often made of cast-in-
place or precast concrete pieces. The
FIGURE 1: DOORFRAME
tunnel is then excavated beneath the roof
SLAB METHOD
slab using Hand Mining (NATM), with
the assistance of compressed air as needed to limit water infiltration. The
Caisson Approach is a cost-effective, quick, and environmentally friendly way
to tunnel through the ground. It can be used in a wide range of ground
conditions. While the first method does nothing more than significantly
minimize the environmental effect for a few weeks. Another is that the only
construction sequences visible to the public are the opening of the trench,
concreting of the roof slab, installation of the side wall piling support, and
backfilling of the trench to restore the surface. In a follow-up mining
operation, NATM components are used to do a lot of the work. On the other
hand, the Caisson Method is a new tunneling technique for underwater
tunneling that outperforms existing
approaches. But the main drawbacks of this
technology are the need for a deep trench,
the establishment of an expensive facility for
tunnel segment manufacture, and the
transportation of tunnel segments to the
building site. As a result, as compared to
submerged tunnels, the tunnel alignment
must be lowered, resulting in a longer
FIGURE 2: CAISSON METHOD tunnel and perhaps higher expenditures
than with the doorframe slab method.

2. Show also the Open and Close Waterproofing System and state their
advantages and disadvantages.
 The primary difference between the
two systems is that the membrane in the
open system is terminated at the invert
level. In contrast, the membrane is
installed circumferentially around the
structure in the closed system. The
advantage of the open system is that it
prevents the buildup of high hydrostatic
pressures and in case of minor damages
FIGURE 3: OPEN SYSTEM in the membrane water will be guided to
the drainage system rather than
penetrate through the membrane. Another advantage for an open system is
that it prevents the buildup of high hydrostatic pressures and in case of minor
damages in the membrane water will be guided to the drainage system rather
than penetrate through the membrane. And for disadvantage of an open
system is that it lies in the cost associated with the constant discharge of the
collected water.
While, for the closed system
advantages is that it eliminates the
continuous pumping of large ground
water volumes and restores the natural
ground water regime to practically pre-
construction levels. Thereby surface
settlements often associated with
groundwater drawdown are minimized.
FIGURE 4: CLOSED SYSTEM It also eliminates the need for treatment
costs of potentially contaminated
ground water that may be present at locations. Another advantage of the
closed system is that cost will not be incurred by choosing a closed system,
but it requires more skill and effort during installation, especially if ground
water pressure comes into play during the placement of the invert
waterproofing.