Infrastrutture: Qualità sotto controllo Il Valore delle Verifiche Indipendenti
description
Transcript of Infrastrutture: Qualità sotto controllo Il Valore delle Verifiche Indipendenti
Infrastrutture:Qualità sotto controllo
Il Valore delle Verifiche Indipendenti
Ing. Matteo BuzzettiCopenhagen Metro TeamCMT Design Coordinator
31-01-2013
Copenhagen Cityringen Metro Project
Agenda
1. Introduction to Cityringen Project
2. Design Process – Check, Validation & Approval
3. Design Structure
4. Conteco Review Process
5. Special Stations
6. Optimized Construction Sequence
1. Introduction to Cityringen Project
Contract- Copenhagen Cityringen Project Civil Works (signed on 7 January 2011)- Design & Build Contract- Value: approx. 1.500 mln Euro
Joint Venture:- Salini S.p.A.- Tecnimont Civil Construction S.p.A.- Seli
Client: Metroselskabet I/S
Metroselskabet I/S is owned by:•Municipality of Copenhagen (approx. 50%)
•Danish State (approx. 42%)
•Municipality of Frederiksberg (approx. 8%)
Cityringen shall operate 24 hours/7 days a week with a planned operational headway of approximately 100 sec. during rush hours, in the first years of operation
Cityringen is expected to serve up to 240.000 passengers per day or 72 million passengers per year
The tunnel construction will be done by means of three methods: • Approximately 16 km of twin tunnel using TBM (tunnel boring
machines) EPB type (Earth Pressure Balance) Type Diameter 5.78 m to ensure an internal minimum diameter of 4.9 m.
• Variable diameter twin tunnel and caverns using sprayed concrete lining and steel ribs temporary supports (SCL)
• Cut and Cover Tunnel
Description of the works
•Two single track tunnels each approximately 16 km in length
•17 underground Stations
•3 Construction and Ventilation Shafts
•1 Ramp and Cut & Cover structure for TBM launch and access to the Control and Maintenance Center
•M&E Installations
The TBM construction shall be primarily through the Copenhagen limestone.The tunnel depth varies from approximately 15 m to 35 m
2. Process – Check, Validation & Approval
Metroselskabet (Employer), ISA (Independent Safety Assessor) and SRA (Safety Regulatory Authority)
Copenhagen Metro Team (CMT) - Contractor
Tecnimont Civil Construction / EKJ (TCC/EKJ) - Designers
PARTIES INVOLVED IN DESIGN & APPROVAL PROCESS
Conteco – Independent Verification Body
Design Team Organization
CMTCONTECODESIGN TEAM
DESIGN MANAGERPROJECT LEADERS
Design package Kick-off meetingDesign package Kick-off meeting
Definition of WBS for design and design package
Definition of WBS for design and design package
TECHNICAL DIRECTORDESIGN COORDINATOR
Assessment of laws and regulations Assessment of laws and regulations
RESPONSIBILITY FLOW CHARTPhase
List of Laws and Regulations
Start up meeting
Design Quality PlanDesign schedule
List of documents
Working Site LayoutWorking Site Layout
Preliminary GIR & Groundwater ConditionsPreliminary GIR & Groundwater Conditions
Risk AssessmentRisk Assessment
Specific Environmental IssuesSpecific Environmental Issues
Interface Main Issues (ICDD to be opened and followed up)Interface Main Issues (ICDD to be opened and followed up)
ConstructabilityConstructability
Construction SequencesConstruction Sequences
Existing Building / MonitoringExisting Building / Monitoring
CONTECOINDIPENDENT BODY
DESIGN MANAGER
Conteco Calculations
DESIGN TEAM
First Design AssessmentFirst Design AssessmentDESIGN TEAM
Input to Conteco forAlternative CalculationInput to Conteco for
Alternative Calculation
RESPONSIBILITY FLOW CHARTPhase
VC1INTERNAL
VERIFICATION
VC1INTERNAL
VERIFICATION
- Geotechnical- Parameters- Formwork Drawings- M&E input
Preliminary ReportsSketches
Documents and reports
DESIGN MANAGER DESIGN TEAM
Design package development
Design package development
Periodical design review
Periodical design review
Document and reports update if
necessary
TECHNICAL DIRECTORDESIGN COORDINATOR
RESPONSIBILITY FLOW CHARTPhase
DESIGNERDOCUMENT CONTROL
Distribution to CMT for reviewDistribution to CMT for review
CMT CHECKCMT CHECK
CONTECOINDIPENDENT BODY
INTERFACES ASSESSMENT
SAFETY ASSESSMENT
RISK ASSESSMENT
CONSTRUCTABILITY ASSESSMENT
INTERFACES ASSESSMENT
SAFETY ASSESSMENT
RISK ASSESSMENT
CONSTRUCTABILITY ASSESSMENT
VC2/VC3 CHECK
Review Sheets Check and Homogenization
DESIGN COORDINATOR CommentsTransmission to
Designers
CommentsTransmission to
Designers
RESPONSIBILITY FLOW CHARTPhase
DESIGN TEAM
DESIGN MANAGER
Distribution to Design LeadersDistribution to Design Leaders
DESIGN UPDATEDESIGN UPDATE
ANSWERS TO CMT/CONTECO COMMENTSANSWERS TO CMT/CONTECO COMMENTS
V1 CHECKV1 CHECK
DesignDocument Package
Approval
DesignDocument Package
ApprovalDESIGN MANAGER
DESIGNERDOCUMENT CONTROL
Submission to CMT for issueSubmission to CMT for issue
Design Certificates
DESIGNERSDOCUMENT CONTROL
DESIGN COORDINATOR
RESPONSIBILITY FLOW CHARTPhase
CMT/CONTECO FINAL CHECK
CMT/CONTECO FINAL CHECK
CHECK OF UPDATED DOCUMENT AND ANSWERS TO COMMENTS
CHECK OF UPDATED DOCUMENT AND ANSWERS TO COMMENTS
CHECK OF UPDATED DOCUMENT AND ANSWERS TO COMMENTS
CHECK OF UPDATED DOCUMENT AND ANSWERS TO COMMENTS
VC2/VC3INDIPENDENT BODY
Check Certificate by
Conteco
DesignDocument Package
Approval
DesignDocument Package
Approval
TECHNICAL DIRECTORVC2/VC3INDIPENDENT BODY
DESIGN ISSUE TO MS
DESIGN ISSUE TO MS
CMTDOCUMENT CONTROL
DESIGN COORDINATORTECHNICAL DIRECTOR
Monitoring status of design documents
Monitoring status of design documents
Monthly report
BUILDING PERMITBUILDING PERMIT
MS REVIEWMS REVIEW ISA/SRA REVIEWISA/SRA REVIEWMETROSELSKABET
3. Design Structure
Station/Shafts-Preliminary Design 21 Packages
-Detailed Design 192 Packages (Civil Works only)
Tunnel Stretches-Preliminary Design 21 Packages
-Detailed Design 21 Packages
Total Number of Design Packages 272
-Average number of revisions considering all the involved actors 4
-Total Number of Design Packages considering 4 Revision 936
Approximate Design Duration ≈ 3 years ≈ 780 working days
Design Packages to be managed per day 1.2
Design Packages to be managed per week 6
Design Packages
4. Conteco Review Process
Verification Scope of Works as per Main Contract Requirements
4. Conteco Review Process
1st Phase – Revision on Internal Submission (Rev. 0.1)
2nd Phase – Documents Update (Rev. 1.0) and Answers to Conteco Remarks by Designers
If the Documents have been correctly updated and the answers to remarks are satisfactory Conteco issues the Final Verification Report and the Check Certificates
3rd Phase – Conteco Final Check of Revision 1.0
5. Special Stations
Marmorkirken
Gammel Strand
Marmorkirken Station – Tender Design• During the Tendering phase of the Project, CMT proposed a concept design of the station which was
modelled on the recently constructed Station Piazza Bologna of Rome Line 3 Metro. The conceptual design of the station consisted of a narrow station box, providing the space for a concourse area as well as escalators with a stacked platform solution requiring the tunnels to run one above the other.
Marmorkirken Station – Design Optimization proposed by CMT during the Tender• The concept of the stacked solution required a deepening of the station box but limited all works from
course level downwards to be contained within the diaphragm wall retaining structure thus avoiding the necessity of cavern works or additional ground treatment such as freezing
Marmorkirken Station – Design Optimization proposed by CMT during the Tender
Additional Mitigation Measures to avoid Volume Loss under the Church and the Ancient Buildings
Gammel Strand Station – Tender Design
• The station is a special station located at Gammel Strand partly below Slotsholmskanalen.
• Gammel Strand station is classed as a “special” station due to its unique location and layout.
• All station elements at street level, including the emergency exit stair and ventilation openings are located close to and along the quay wall. Also the lift is located close to the quay wall behind the main stair.
• Due to the station being located partly below the Slotsholmskanalen the station box has been lowered
so that the roof of the technical level, which is equivalent to the normal station roof level, is below the bottom of the canal.
Gammel Strand Station – Construction SequencesTemporary Works – Phase 1
Diversion of navigation within canal / Installation of navigation buoys / Installation of silt curtain
Gammel Strand Station – Construction Sequences
Temporary Works – Phase 2
Mobilization of pontoon / Placing of drill rigs on pontoon / Installation of micro- piles for temporary bridge deck
Gammel Strand Station – Construction Sequences
Temporary Works – Phase 3
Installation of precast bridge decking / Concreting of bridge decking /Installation of micro- piles for tie back of bridge
Gammel Strand Station – Construction Sequences
Temporary Works – Phase 4
Installation of sheet pile wall / Installation of gabions / Backfilling to create job site area
Gammel Strand Station – Construction Sequences
Permanent Works – Stage 2
Construction of Top Slab
Excavation within station with the installation of struts at specific levels
Installation of water proofing membrane and Concreting of Bottom Slab
Permanent Works – Stage 1
Construction of Guide Walls and DW
Installation of Strut on DW Head
Start of Archaeological Excavations
Gammel Strand Station – Construction Sequences
Permanent Works – Stage 3
Construction of Inner Lining& Intermediate Slabs
Completion of Waterproofing
Removal of Backfill within canal anddemolishing of DW above top slab
Reinstatement of quay wall
6. Optimized Construction Sequence
Secant Piles Secant Piles
King Post Piles
Top Slab Top Slab
Optimised Construction Sequence - Typical Station - Phase 1
Excavation Excavation
Demolition of King Post piles
1st level of strut
Optimised Construction Sequence - Typical Station - Phase 2
Installation of waterproofing and connection to retaining wall
Connection to King Post Piles
Intermediate Slab Construction
Excavation Resumes Excavation Resumes
Installation of 2nd Strut level
Optimised Construction Sequence - Typical Station - Phase 3
2nd Strut Level 3rd Strut Level
Excavation Resumes with King Post Piles Intact
Excavation Resumes
Optimised Construction Sequence - Typical Station - Phase 4
Construction of Slab in presence of King Post Piles
Construction of Slab. Subsequent placing of
metallic King Post
Optimised Construction Sequence - Typical Station - Phase 5
ADVANTAGES OF OPTIMISED CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCES
Excavation methodology remains unchanged from start to end. No requirement to excavated under intermediate slab with alternative equipment and lower rates of production No execution of King Post Piles No pre-installation and of waterproofing membrane at intermediate slab level No predisposition of connection of intermediate slab to retaining wall and king post piles to permit excavation to resume below intermediate slab Concreting of structure performed in a traditional bottom up method without complications for waterproofing membrane and coupler connections Reduced risk for delays in construction due to simplified construction sequences No secondary concreting of bottom slab at location of king post locations with complications in sealing of waterproofing membrane
DISADVANTAGES OF OPTIMISED CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCES
Additional installation of 1 level of struts Installation of scaffolding for the construction of intermediate slab
Optimised Construction Sequence - Typical Station – Advantages/Disadvantages
Thank you for your attention
Special Thanks to Sergio Notarianni – CMT Technical DirectorAll CMT Technical Office