Remote control tunnel
| Remote control tunnel | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
 Driver's cab perspective when approaching the south portal
|
||||
| use | Railway tunnel | |||
| traffic connection | High-speed route Cologne – Rhine / Main | |||
| place | Neustadt | |||
| length | 1555 m | |||
| Number of tubes | 1 | |||
| Largest coverage | 20 m | |||
| construction | ||||
| start of building | 1999 | |||
| completion | 2001 | |||
| location | ||||
|
||||
| Coordinates | ||||
| North portal | 50 ° 36 '23 " N , 7 ° 25' 50" E | |||
| South portal | 50 ° 35 ′ 45 " N , 7 ° 26 ′ 39" E | |||
Map with all coordinates: The Fernthal Tunnel is a 1,555 m long railway - tunnel of the high-speed line Cologne-Rhine / Main . It crosses inter alia the district Fernthal the local church Neustadt (Wied) , whose name it bears.
In addition, together with the Ammerichtunnel following in a northerly direction, it passes under an arch of the federal motorway 3 . The tube also leads through the Wiedtal . The undercutting of the former garbage dump of the Neuwied district over a length of 400 m proved to be particularly difficult .
course
The north portal is 50 ° 36 '23.4 " N , 7 ° 25' 49.5" O , the south portal at 50 ° 35 '44.7 " N , 7 ° 26' 38.8" O . An emergency exit leads to the surface at 50 ° 35 ′ 54.8 ″ N , 7 ° 26 ′ 16.8 ″ E.
The route ascends in a southerly direction with a constant longitudinal gradient of 32 per thousand, from around 270 to around 300 meters in altitude. The cover is around 20 m.
The tunnel cuts the A 3 south of the Neustadt / Wied junction , near the south portal, at an acute angle .
To the north, after an approximately 100 m long open cut , the Ammerich tunnel follows . A tunnel-free stretch of around 20 km in length connects to the south. The next tunnel in this direction is the Deesen tunnel .
A round drainage tunnel with a diameter of 3.50 m runs around four meters below the tunnel.
geology
The tunnel passes continuously under layers of the Devonian . Below the landfill, which was built in a former basalt quarry, there is a layer of residual basalt, which in turn is on top of a three to four meter thick layer of adhesive sand . Underneath are silt and clay stones , alternating with shares of sandstone and greywacke . The weathering limit is about 60 m below the surface, with the tunnel lying in weakly weathered rock. The groundwater level is directly above the adhesive sand layer, the tunnel floor is about 30 m below the groundwater level.
history
planning
The need to build the tunnel resulted from the bundling of traffic routes with the A 3, as well as nature conservation requirements to protect the Wiedtal to be crossed. Against this background, it became necessary to go under the district landfill. An in-depth examination of the associated problems was not carried out as part of the regional planning procedure. Only in the further course of the planning were explorations carried out; the effects of this route - in particular possible groundwater and soil contamination - were examined in more detail as part of the planning approval procedure . Here, in particular, the fear showed in tailgating the tunnel possible contamination beneath the landfill could, by the lowering of the ground water, continue to fall down.
Between 1993 and 1995, test drillings were carried out outside the landfill. A detailed examination of the contamination at one point of the landfill, which revealed a low level of contamination, was only carried out as part of a geotechnical main investigation after the contract was awarded. The geological and hydrological conditions established at the beginning of 1996 were communicated to the bidders in the context of the functional tender. The plan approval procedure was initiated in mid-1994. As part of this, studies were carried out on how the subsidence of the base sealing of the landfill could be avoided. At the end of 1995 the planned length of the structure was 1525 m.
A process lasting several years followed. Consideration was given to driving the critical drive under the landfill while maintaining the surrounding groundwater pressure. In the water pressure-maintaining elm tunnel, the mountain water inlet should be limited to three liters per second. A concept presented in November 1997 provided for the water inflow - accompanied by numerous measures - to be limited to a new groundwater formation rate of 1.1 l / s. At the beginning of 1998, the railway and the district reached an agreement on the liability regime for undercutting the landfill. DB undertook to pay for all damage caused by the construction and operation of the tunnel. In return, the local authorities involved undertook not to appeal against the planning approval decisions concerned. Subsequently, the district government of Koblenz, as the upper state waste authority, approved this concept, combined with a total of 21 requirements to ensure the limit water quantity. It should u. a. the groundwater is lowered by a maximum of one meter and the area in which the measures were to be applied is expanded by a zone 100 meters in front of and behind the landfill. This concept was finally approved by the district. Also at the end of 1997 and 1998 the planned length of the tunnel was 1525 m.
In June 1998 the planning approval decision was issued, combined with further demands. Due to these additional requirements, which also go beyond the catalog of the previous award , there were fears that the construction period would be extended and that the completion date would be exceeded. It was u. a. the time required for the prescribed upstream and downstream sealing work is unclear, construction time and costs are therefore not determined. In an in-depth investigation of the groundwater as part of the hydrological preservation of evidence, contamination of the groundwater below the landfill was found before the construction work began .
Against this background, alternative options were sought to meet the construction time and costs. Was examined thereby u. a. the pre-pressing of an exploratory tunnel. A compressed air drive was ruled out due to the dangers of air penetration and air mixture formation. The decision was made in favor of a drainage tunnel to be built below the driving tunnel, through which the groundwater was lowered and cleaned at the same time during the construction phase. As a result of the lowering, the water that kept running during the construction phase could be limited, and construction time and costs could be better calculated. On February 23, 1999, the district and the client agreed to submit the modified concept to the approval authorities.
In mid-1999, the building was planned with a length of 1555 m, which was realized later.
construction
Together with the neighboring Ammerichtunnel was the building in early 1999 solemnly struck . The sponsorship was taken over by Barbara Bauckhage, the wife of the then Rhineland-Palatinate Minister of Economics, Hans-Artur Bauckhage .
The tube was part of the 42 km long construction lot A in the middle section of the new line and was broken through in April 2000 as the last of the six tunnels in this section. It is also the longest tunnel in this construction lot. The structure is considered to be one of the most complex tunnel structures on the new line.
A total of 1370 m (according to another source 1285 m) of the 1555 m long tube were built using mining methods. The landfill was driven under by mining, as was the Autobahn 3. To the south of the motorway crossing, an open construction method was used.
From August to the end of 1998, a back-anchored incision was built in the area of the future north portal, followed by a 62.5 m long cover . Tunneling began at the north portal in October 1998. After 400 m of tunneling, when the landfill had been reached, work was interrupted in February 1999 as planned. Two months later, work began on a drainage tunnel in the landfill area, below what will later be the driving tunnel. The groundwater was to be lowered via this tunnel during the construction phase of the driving tunnel and then rehabilitated.
In the summer of 1998 it became clear that without additional measures, the construction period planned for March 2001 would not be adhered to. After a four-month plan change procedure, an intermediate attack was set up in the area of the later emergency exit, south of the landfill, with an access ramp driven by miners in order to be able to complete the southern half of the tunnel as planned. From here, the tunneling was carried out from the summer of 1999 - in a northerly direction to the edge of the landfill, in a southerly direction to the south portal - using the dome tunneling. After 15 months of construction, the last breakthrough was celebrated at the end of June 2000.
The tunnel was built by the German-Austrian Working Group Tunnel Lot A and C ( ATAC ).
In March 2000, the tunnel served as the backdrop for an episode of the action series The Clown .
Underpassing the district garbage dump
The undercutting of the landfill over a length of 400 m, at a depth of around 25 to 30 m, required special measures. A separate drainage tunnel served to lower the groundwater during the construction phase and discharged contaminated water below the landfill.
The landfill, which was operated until 1995, is located in a former basalt quarry on a hilltop . The route crosses under a (until then) part of the landfill with building rubble that has not been sealed at the bottom and a household waste part with and without a seal against the surrounding soil. Another household garbage dump, which has not yet been sealed at the bottom, is located near the route.
A study to clarify the cause of the groundwater pollution underneath the landfill revealed that the adhesive sand layer below the facility was not sufficiently dense and therefore did not form a sufficient barrier to the groundwater. In order to prevent pollutants from seeping into deeper lying areas, a modified tunneling concept was developed in which the landfill was first completely sealed and then the groundwater below was to be cleaned using a drainage system. In addition, pumps on the surface should suck up the near-surface seepage water.
For this purpose, a 380 m long drainage tunnel with a diameter of 3.50 m was built below, parallel to the bottom of the later driving tunnel, at a clearance of 4.50 m, to lower and rehabilitate the groundwater. The drive was carried out using a temporary access ramp that was driven out of the tunnel. The weakly weathered clay and sandstone was excavated using conventional blasting. For this purpose, the groundwater was lowered to the level of the tunnel floor and examined for contamination ; until the respective chemical analyzes were available after several hours, two collecting basins, each with a volume of around 180 m³, collected the mountain water , which escaped from the mountain at up to 14 l per second; tank trucks should also be provided in the event of large seepage water leaks . At the same time, unpolluted water was fed into the tunneling area via separate pipes. A drainage tunnel with a diameter of 4.80 m and a depth of 70 m as well as a ventilation shaft with a diameter of one meter were also created in the blasting tunnel. Pollutant contamination of the water, but below the discharge limit values, could only be determined at the point where a test drilling had previously been carried out.
In order to protect the partially already existing basic sealing, blasting could only be carried out under conditions that were determined in an expert opinion using a geotechnical measurement program and vibration measurements during the tunneling. If contaminated material had accumulated during the outbreak, this should have been temporarily stored and examined on a sealed area of 2000 m²; however, no contamination of the rock material could be determined. During the construction of the tunnel, a surface seal was installed in the landfill to prevent further contaminated water from entering. Ten meters long, gently sloping drainage lances were then driven out of the completed drainage tunnel at an average distance of ten meters.
After the drainage tunnel had been built, the access ramp was filled with concrete and the tunnel was then driven south. The groundwater was lowered via the drainage system and fed to the drainage shaft or a cleaning system, separated according to quality levels, via pipes. A total of 31 boreholes were connected to 14 pipelines that led to a sampling station - with flow meters , valve and sampling for each of the 14 lines. After the completion of the groundwater restoration, the facilities in the drainage tunnel were dismantled, a bulkhead was drawn in between the tunnel and the shaft and the tunnel was then filled. At the beginning of 2002 the shaft with the sampling device was handed over to the landfill operator for further sampling of the landfill leachate.
Driving under the Autobahn 3
The tender for the structure envisaged the construction of the Autobahn 3 crossing using the cut-and-cover method over a length of 315 m due to the only 5 m high cover. At the suggestion of the executing company, the excavation was carried out using a mining method, using a double pipe umbrella, face anchoring and a temporary roof bottom . A large area scanner was used to monitor settlement in this area , which permanently checked the highway for compliance with the limit values and would have triggered an alarm if necessary.
Installation
On April 4, 2002, pressure measurements were taken in the tunnel.
On April 10, 2002, before the line went into operation, a large-scale exercise with several hundred helpers took place in the remote tunnel.
Web links
Individual evidence
- ↑ a b c d e f g h i j k Ludwig Martin: Tunnel passes under garbage dump - the Fernthal tunnel . In: DB ProjektBau GmbH, Frankfurt (ed.): New Cologne – Rhine / Main line. Bridges and tunnels . Without ISBN, pp. 66–69.
- ↑ a b DBProjekt GmbH Cologne – Rhein / Main, project management (publisher): New Cologne – Rhein / Main line: construction section middle, Lot A: Königswinter – Dierdorf , brochure (20 pages), Frankfurt am Main, June 1999, p. 5.
- ↑ a b double baptism; Punch; Bridge displacement; Drainage tunnel; Long-distance train station . In: On the subject , ZDB -ID 2115698-0 , issue 2/99, April 1999, pp. 8-9.
- ↑ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s Karl Heinrich Hosang: Landfill underrun during the construction of the Fernthal tunnel . In: ICE new line Cologne – Rhine / Main . Hestra-Verlag, Darmstadt 2002, ISBN 3-7771-0303-9 , pp. 62-67.
- ^ Deutsche Bahn AG, network division, project management for the Cologne – Rhein / Main line (publisher): route map for the new Cologne-Rhein / Main line . Map from November 1995, Frankfurt 1995.
- ^ Agreement between DB AG and the Neuwied district . In: On the subject , ZDB -ID 2115698-0 , issue April 1998, p. 8.
- ↑ DBProjekt GmbH Cologne – Rhein / Main (Ed.): Route map: New Cologne-Rhein / Main line , Frankfurt am Main, November 1997.
- ↑ DBProjekt GmbH Cologne-Rhein / Main, project management (ed.): Reprint from On topic 2/98: Safe through the mountain - basics of tunneling . Folded brochure, six A4 pages, Frankfurt am Main 1998.
- ↑ DBProjekt GmbH Cologne – Rhine / Main: New Cologne-Rhine / Main line: route map , Frankfurt, June 1999.
- ↑ a b c d e G. Blaasch: The new line between Cologne and Frankfurt ( Memento of the original from June 8, 2015 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. . In: Tiefbau , 2000, issue 7, pp. 396–406
- ↑ a b c Caring for nature - the construction of the Fernthal tunnel . In: On the subject , ZDB -ID 2115698-0 , edition 4/2000, August 2000, p. 10 f.
- ↑ tunnel breakthroughs; Full closure of the A 3; New alluvial forest; TV thriller in the Fernthal tunnel; Primary school builds biotope . In: On the subject , ZDB -ID 2115698-0 , edition 2/2000, April 2000, pp. 6-8.
- ↑ Without author: The project for the new Cologne – Rhine / Main line . In: Eisenbahn JOURNAL: Tempo 300 - The new Cologne – Frankfurt line . In: Eisenbahn Journal , special edition 3/2002, ISBN 3-89610-095-5 , pp. 34–63.
- ↑ Hans-Joachim Wormstall-Reitschuster, Michael Hieke, Peter Deeg: Aerodynamic aspects of modern railway tunnels . In: ZEVrail, Glaser's Annalen . No. 9 , September 2019, ISSN 1618-8330 , ZDB -ID 2072587-5 , p. 352-357 .
- ↑ Arguments and views . In: On the subject , ZDB -ID 2115698-0 , edition 2/2002, April 2002, p. 12.
