re 2: Fibre reinforced PSCL for rail (Thomas and Dimmock 2017) “The main factor was where the water pressure was acting. We were constrained by the standards of the time which required all the loads to act on the secondary lining. We are challenging that idea. “The other big issue was that when we started the design in the late 2000s we had very litle, if any, data on sprayed membranes and composite action,” continues Dimmack "There was not a lot of best practice around." In their paper, Dimmock and Thomas say if the waterproofing membrane is taken to be {uly bonded, “then whether the water pressure is assumed to act on the extrados of the primary lining or the water pressure is acting on the external face of the membrane, the structural effect isthe same.” Dimmock clarifies: “We are saying that the ‘water pressure is either acting on the membrane, and the membrane has the strength not to peel off because ithas a stronger bond that water pressure. Or the ‘membrane is working composite with the lining and the water pressure is acting at the back of that, wth or without cracks in the hones | Leng tions Short term loads wont wenne | 100% GL 100% Ho yr = ete nen a rerio onde | Long tm nde torvee woEKe | eo romain evn ng Pawnee Rachue gla ho : tschke highlights how important the all topic of racking is and wonders wy itis ‘only mentioned briefly atthe end of Dimmock and Ross’ paper. “They say that es the waterproofing membcane can bridge “The other ‘racks of up to 34mm. f you have actual mepedteartnne | oe ‘water pressure behind 3 3mm crack acting soarins big issue was dieciyon tre membrane, don't you have a sss that when we” Circaccat cits Alen wes ete 20 started the different concer: “There can be a problem epee ‘of sorinkage inthe Fre-pooting layer: it 100% ot design in the Syinis) aces and debonds from tne late 2000s we membrane,” he sas, a problem he has A witnessed fistchend Prac ing had very little, yh'does native tobe a problem Many date Moroso ee ong ising ayer vs thin layers, there are certain things you need Se scamey sprayed ‘to do properly and carefully otherwise you membranes _ wil encounter tis problem, People do spray 48: Typical Double Shell ining (OSL) thin lyers successfully without shrinkage ‘1b: Typical Composite Shell Lining —(CSL with partial composite | @NA COMpPOSite Norway has settled on 75mm as a suitable wh no shear or adhesive bond), action. There 07" 2 Sot Allen also flags up the need for fixings ear was not a lot of whics must extend moze than 75mm into 46: Typical Single Shell Uning (SSL) 5 the lining, Dimmock and Tho 3 lining, Dimmock and Thomas tackle this {GL = ground load: WL.orH,0 = water load best practice 1.207) hopper pointing out thot holes around.” ‘can be made and sealed in the primary lining beforehand. "For larger load fing, say for ventlation fans or internal structures, starter bars can be installed in the primary ling pre application of spray membranes," says Dimmock. Psomas points out that Stifing Loyd has standard details for ths, inked to its Intergntank product, While Bowers applauds the exploration of new processes, he also comments. “It's very very hard to anticipate exactly what you vant. In a perfect word, | would advocate doing things off site and assembiing off ste but the reality is that is very difficult to get the details early enough.” “14 TUNNELUNG JOURNAL