1. 3.

Construction
Eleven tunnel boring machines, working from both sides of the Channel, cut through chalk marl to construct two rail tunnels and a service tunnel. The vehicle shuttle terminals are at Cheriton (part of Folkestone) and Coquelles, and are connected to the British and French motorways (M20 and A16 respectively). Tunnelling commenced in 1988, and the tunnel began operating in 1994. [20] In 1985 prices, the total construction cost was 4650 million (equivalent to 10501 million today[when?]), an 80% cost overrun. At the peak of construction 15,000 people were employed with daily expenditure over 3 million. [21] Ten workers, eight of them British, were killed during construction between 1987 and 1993, most in the first few months of boring. [22] [23] [24]

2. Engineering
Surveying undertaken in the twenty years before tunnel construction confirmed earlier speculations that a tunnel route could be bored through a chalk marl stratum. The chalk marl was conducive to tunnelling, with impermeability, ease of excavation and strength. While on the English side the chalk marl ran along the entire length of the tunnel, on the French side a length of 5 kilometres (3 mi) had variable and difficult geology. The Channel Tunnel consists of three bores: two 7.6-metre (25 ft) diameter rail tunnels, 30 metres (98 ft) apart, 50 kilometres (31 mi) in length with a 4.8-metre (16 ft) diameter service tunnel in between. There are also cross-passages and piston relief ducts. The service tunnel was used as a pilot tunnel, boring ahead of the main tunnels to determine the conditions. English access was provided at Shakespeare Cliff, while French access came from a shaft at Sangatte. The French side used five tunnel boring machines (TBMs), the English side used six. The service tunnel uses Service Tunnel Transport System (STTS) and Light Service Tunnel Vehicles (LADOGS). Fire safety was a critical design issue. Environmental impact assessment did not identify any major risks for the project, and further studies into safety, noise, and air pollution were overall positive. However, environmental objections were raised over a high-speed link to London

2. 1. Geology

Geological profile along the tunnel as constructed. For the majority of its length the tunnel bores through a chalk marl stratum (layer) Successful tunnelling under the channel required a sound understanding of the topography and geology and the selection of the best rock strata through which to tunnel. The geology generally consists of northeasterly dipping Cretaceous strata, part of the northern limb of the Wealden-Boulonnais dome. Characteristics include:

Continuous chalk on the cliffs on either side of the Channel containing no major faulting, as observed by Verstegan in 1698 Four geological strata, marine sediments laid down 90-100 million years ago; pervious upper and middle chalk above slightly pervious lower chalk and finally impermeable Gault Clay. A sandy stratum, glauconitic marl (tortia), is in between the chalk marl and gault clay A 25-30-metre (82-98 ft) layer of chalk marl (French: craie bleue) in the lower third of the lower chalk appeared to present the best tunnelling medium. The chalk has a clay content of 30-40% providing impermeability to groundwater yet relatively easy excavation with strength allowing minimal support. Ideally the tunnel would be bored in the bottom 15 metres (49 ft) of the chalk marl, allowing water inflow from fractures and joints to be

minimised, but above the gault clay that would increase stress on the tunnel lining and swell and soften when wet.
[34]

On the English side of the channel, the strata dip less than 5, however, on the French side, this increases to 20. Jointing and faulting is present on both the English and French sides. On the English side, only minor faults of displacement less than 2 metres (7 ft) exist. On the French side, displacements of up to 15 metres (49 ft) are present owing to the Quenocs anticlinal fold. The faults are of limited width, filled with calcite, pyrite and remoulded clay. The increased dip and faulting restricted the selection of route on the French side. To avoid confusion microfossil assemblages were used to classify the chalk marl. On the French side, particularly near the coast, the chalk was harder, more brittle, and more fractured than on the English side. This led to the adoption of different tunnelling techniques on the French and English sides. [35] Geological hazards were identified during bore of the French coast side where heavy inundation of groundwater added severe cost to the project and delays;

2. 2. Surveying
Marine soundings and samplings by Thom de Gamond were carried out during 1833-67, establishing the seabed depth at a maximum of 55 metres (180 ft) and the continuity of geological strata (layers). Surveying continued over many years, with 166 marine and 70 land-deep boreholes being drilled and over 4000 line kilometres of marine geophysical survey completed. [37] Surveys were undertaken in 1958-59, 1964-65, 1972-74 and 1986-88. The surveying in 1958-59 catered for immersed tube and bridge designs as well as a bored tunnel, and thus a wide area was investigated. At this time marine geophysics surveying for engineering projects was in its infancy, with poor positioning and resolution from seismic profiling. The 1964-65 surveys concentrated on a northerly route that left the English coast at Dover harbour; using 70 boreholes, an area of deeply weathered rock with high permeability was located just south of Dover harbour. [37] Given the previous survey results and access constraints, a more southerly route was investigated in the 1972-73 survey and the route was confirmed to be feasible. Information for the tunnelling project also came from work before the 1975 cancellation. On the French side at Sangatte a deep shaft with adits was made. On the English side at Shakespeare Cliff, the government allowed 250 metres (820 ft) of 4.5 metres (15 ft) diameter tunnel to be driven. The actual tunnel alignment, method of excavation and support were essentially the same as the 1975 attempt. In the 1986-97 survey, previous findings were reinforced and the nature of the gault clay and tunnelling medium, chalk marl that made up 85% of the route, were investigated. Geophysical techniques from the oil industry were employed.

2. 3. Tunnelling

Typical tunnel cross section, with a service tunnel between twin rail tunnels. Shown linking the rail tunnels is a piston relief duct, necessary to manage pressure changes due to the movement of trains Tunnelling between England and France was a major engineering challenge, with the only precedent being the undersea Seikan Tunnel in Japan. A serious risk with underwater tunnels is major water inflow due to the water pressure from the

sea above under weak ground conditions. The Channel Tunnel also had the challenge of timebeing privately funded, early financial return was paramount. The objective was to construct: two 7.6-metre (25 ft) diameter rail tunnels, 30 metres (98 ft) apart, 50 kilometres (31 mi) in length; a 4.8-metre (16 ft) diameter service tunnel between the two main tunnels; pairs of 3.3-metre (11 ft) diameter cross-passages linking the rail tunnels to the service tunnel at 375-metre (1,230 ft) spacing; piston relief ducts 2-metre (7 ft) diameter connecting the rail tunnels at 250-metre (820 ft) spacing; two undersea crossover caverns to connect the rail tunnels. [38] The service tunnel always preceded the main tunnels by at least 1 kilometre (0.6 mi) to ascertain the ground conditions. There was plenty of experience with tunnelling through chalk in the mining industry. The undersea crossover caverns were a complex engineering problem. The French cavern was based on the Mount Baker Ridge freeway tunnel in the USA. The UK cavern was dug from the service tunnel ahead of the main tunnels to avoid delay. Precast segmental linings in the main TBM drives were used, but different solutions were used on the English and French sides. On the French side, neoprene and grout sealed bolted linings made of cast iron or high-strength reinforced concrete were used. On the English side, the main requirement was for speed and bolting of cast-iron lining segments was only carried out in areas of poor geology. In the UK rail tunnels, eight lining segments plus a key segment were used; on the French side, five segments plus a key segment. [39] On the French side, a 55-metre (180 ft) diameter 75-metre (246 ft) deep grout-curtained shaft at Sangatte was used for access. On the English side, a marshalling area was 140 metres (459 ft) below the top of Shakespeare Cliff, and the New Austrian Tunnelling method (NATM) was first applied in the chalk marl here. On the English side, the land tunnels were driven from Shakespeare Cliff, the same place as the marine tunnels, not from Folkestone. The platform at the base of the cliff was not large enough for all of the drives and, despite environmental objections, tunnel spoil was placed behind a reinforced concrete seawall, on condition of placing the chalk in an enclosed lagoon to avoid wide dispersal of chalk fines. Owing to limited space, the precast lining factory was on the Isle of Grain in the Thames estuary. [38] On the French side, owing to the greater permeability to water, earth pressure balance TBMs with open and closed modes were used. The TBMs were of a closed nature during the initial 5 kilometres (3 mi), but then operated as open, boring through the chalk marl stratum. [38] This minimised the impact to the ground and allowed high water pressures to be withstood, and it also alleviated the need to grout ahead of the tunnel. The French effort required five TBMs: two main marine machines, one main land machine (the short land drives of 3 km allowed one TBM to complete the first drive then reverse direction and complete the other), and two service tunnel machines. On the English side, the simpler geology allowed faster open-faced TBMs. [40] Six machines were used, all commenced digging from Shakespeare Cliff, three marine-bound and three for the land tunnels. [38] Towards the completion of the undersea drives, the UK TBMs we driven steeply downwards and buried clear of the tunnel. The French TBMs then completed the tunnel and were dismantled. [41] A 900 mm gauge railway was used on the English side during construction.

6. Incidents 6. 1. Fires
Main articles: 1996 Channel Tunnel fire and 2008 Channel Tunnel fire There have been three fires in the Channel Tunnel that were significant enough to close the tunnelall on the heavy goods vehicle (HGV) shuttlesand other more minor incidents. During an "invitation only" testing phase on 9 December 1994 a fire broke out in a Ford Escort car whilst its owner had been loading it on to the upper deck of a tourist shuttle. The fire started at approximately 10:00 with the shuttle train stationary in the Folkestone terminal and was extinguished around 40 minutes later with no passenger injuries. [81] On 18 November 1996 a fire broke out on a heavy goods vehicle shuttle wagon in the tunnel but nobody was seriously hurt. The exact cause is unknown, [82] although it was not a Eurotunnel equipment or rolling stock problem; it may have been due to arson of a heavy goods vehicle. It is estimated that the heart of the fire reached 1,000 C (1,800 F), with the

tunnel severely damaged over 46 metres (151 ft), with some 500 metres (1,640 ft) affected to some extent. Full operation recommenced six months after the fire. [83] The tunnel was closed for several hours on 21 August 2006, when a truck on an HGV shuttle train caught fire. [84] [85] On 11 September 2008 a fire occurred in the Channel Tunnel at 13:57 GMT. The incident started on a freight-carrying vehicle train travelling towards France. [86] The event occurred 11 kilometres (6.8 mi) from the French entrance to the tunnel. No one was killed but several people were taken to hospitals suffering from smoke inhalation, and minor cuts and bruises. The tunnel was closed to all traffic, with the undamaged South Tunnel reopening for limited services two days later. [87] Full service resumed on 9 February 2009 [88] after repairs costing 60 million.

6. 2. Train failures
On the night of 19/20 February 1996, approximately 1,000 passengers became trapped in the Channel Tunnel when two British Rail Class 373 trains on continent-bound Eurostar service broke down owing to electronic failures caused by snow and ice. [89] On 3 August 2007 an electrical failure lasting six hours caused passengers to be trapped in the tunnel on a Eurotunnelshuttle crossing. [90] On the evening of 18 December 2009, during the December 2009 European snowfall, five London-bound trains operating Eurostar services failed inside the tunnel, trapping 2,000 passengers in the tunnel overnight. The large number of failed trains meant that both running tunnels were blocked. Five Class 373 trains had departed from Brussels and Paris and encountered cold temperatures in Northern France, the coldest for eight years. [91] A Eurotunnel spokesperson explained that the problem had arisen because of 'fluffy snow' in France, [92] which had evaded the 'winterisation' shields designed to stop snow getting into the electrics. [93] Electrical failure was then caused by the transition from the cold air in France to the warm atmosphere inside the tunnel. [94] Four of the failed trains had been carrying passengers, with the fifth being empty; one train from Brussels had been turned back to Brussels before reaching the tunnel. Two trains were hauled out of the tunnel using diesel-powered Eurotunnel Class 0001. The blocking of the Channel Tunnel led to the implementation of Operation Stack, the transformation of the M20 motorway into a linear car park. [95] Problems started at around 21:00, with Kent fire brigade being alerted at 21:46. [96] The journeys of those involved took between eleven and sixteen hours. [91] Snow that had built up on the trains then melted in the heat of the tunnel, the water causing electrical faults. Of the five Class 373 trains and two turned back: [96] [97] [98] [99] 1. 18:59 Brussels-London (9157); towed to London St Pancras by a Eurotunnel diesel locomotive. [96] Delay of 3 hours 49 minutes. [97] [98] 2. 18:43 Paris-London (9053); 700 passengers evacuated via service tunnel to an empty Eurotunnel shuttle train in opposite running tunnel. [96] Passengers taken to Ashford International railway station, for conventional trains to London. [100] Late into London by 12 hours, [97] arriving at 08:00 the next morning. [98] 3. 19:13 Paris-London (9055); Coupled to adjacent 20:13 Eurostar train behind and dragged out by diesel locomotive, then continued to London. [96] Hauled to Folkestone [97] and picked up passengers from 20:13 Paris service behind it. [98] 4. 19:37 Disneyland-London (9057); 664 passengers evacuated via service tunnel to an empty Eurotunnel shuttle train in opposite running tunnel [96] and taken via France. [99] 5. 20:13 Paris-London (9059); Coupled to adjacent 19:13 Eurostar train in front, passengers transferred to the earlier 19:13 train for journey to London [96] or taken via Folkestone and transported in five coaches by road to London.
[97] [98]

6. 20:29 Brussels-London (9163), held at Calais [98] then turned back to Brussels before reaching the Channel Tunnel.
[97]

7. 21:13 Paris-London (9063), held at Calais [98] then turned back to Paris before reaching the Channel Tunnel. [97] The occasion was the first time during the fifteen years that a Eurostar train had to be evacuated inside the tunnel itself; the failing of four at once being described as "unprecedented". [101] The Channel Tunnel reopened at 05:40 CET the following morning. [102]

The following evening, on 19 December 2009, an extra Eurostar service from Paris broke down. The train successfully negotiated the Channel Tunnel itself, then broke down outside. A second train was sent to tow the first to London, but failed at 18:25 while trying to haul it up a steep incline crossing Thurrock Viaduct on the outskirts of London. [91] [103] [104] Eurostar passenger services restarted on 22 December 2009. [105] Nirj Deva, Member of the European Parliament for South East England, has called on Eurostar chief executive Richard Brown to resign over the incidents. [106] A further Class 373 unit on Brussels-London service broke down in the tunnel on 7 January 2010. The train had 236 passengers on board and was towed to Ashford; other trains that had not yet reached the tunnel were turned back. [107] [108] An independent report on the 18/19 December 2009 incidents was issued on 12 February 2010. The report was compiled by Christopher Garnett (former CEO of Great North Eastern Railway) and Claude Gressier (a French transport expert) and made 21 recommendation

1. Construction

Two types of Submerged Floating tunnels The concept of submerged floating tunnels is based on well-known technology applied to floating bridges and offshore structures, but the construction is mostly similar to that of immersed tunnels: One way is to build the tube in sections in a dry dock; then float these to the construction site and sink them into place, while sealed; and, when the sections are fixed to each other, the seals are broken. Another possibility is to build the sections unsealed, and after welding them together, pump the water out. The ballast used is calculated so that the structure has approximate hydrostatic equilibrium (that is, the tunnel is roughly the same overall density as water), whereas immersed tube tunnels are ballasted more to weight them down to the sea bed. This, of course, means that a submerged floating tunnel must be anchored to the ground or to the water surface to keep it in place (which of these depends on which side of the equilibrium point the tunnel is).

2. Applications

Water spanning structures: 1: Suspension bridge 2: Archimedes bridge 3: Immersed tube 4: Undersea tunnel Submerged floating tubes allow construction of a tunnel in extremely deep water, where conventional bridges or tunnels are technically difficult or prohibitively expensive. They would be able to deal with seismic disturbances and weather events easily (as they have some degree of freedom in regards to movement), and their structural performance is independent of length (that is, it can be very long without compromising its stability and resistance). On the other hand, they may be vulnerable in regards to anchors or submarine traffic, which therefore has to be taken in consideration when building one. Likely applications include fjords, deep, narrow sea channels, and deep lakes. [3]

1. Advantages of an undersea tunnel 1. 1. Compared to Bridges

One such advantage would be that a tunnel would still allow shipping to pass, as a low bridge would not do this (the public may feel a high bridge would be unsightly). Also, a low bridge would need to be an opening or swing bridge to allow shipping to pass and this can cause congestion on the traffic that would pass over the bridge. Tunnels also do not need such huge access ramps to gain the high needed to pass over the expanse of water. Although they may still need to descend deep underground, the tunnel would be able to start inland, without causing too much damage to the area above the tunnel's path. Bridges may also be closed during periods of high winds and this can also affect the traffic able to use the connection. Tunnelling will generate soil that has been excavated and this can be used to create new land, as was done with the soil of the Channel Tunnel. The most obvious advantage, is of course the fact that bridges cannot be used over very large expanses of water, such as the English Channel.

1. 2. Compared to Ferry Links

As with bridges, albeit with more chance, ferry links will also be closed during adverse weather. Strong winds, or the tidal limits may also affect the workings of a ferry crossing. Travelling through a tunnel is significantly quicker than travelling using a ferry link, shown by the times for travelling through the Channel Tunnel (75-90 minutes for Ferry [1] and 21 minutes on the Eurostar [2] ).

2. Disadvantages of an undersea tunnel

2. 1. Compared to Bridges
Tunnels require far higher costs of security and construction than bridges. This may mean that over short distances bridges may be preferred rather than tunnels (for example Dartford Crossing). As stated earlier, bridges may not allow shipping to pass, so solutions such as the Oresund Bridge have been constructed.

2. 2. Compared to Ferry Links

As with Bridges, ferry links are far cheaper to construct and operate than tunnels.

1. Advantages and disadvantages

The main advantage of an immersed tube is that they can be considerably more cost effective than alternative options i.e. a bored tunnel beneath the water being crossed (if indeed this is possible at all due to other factors such as the geology and seismic activity) or a bridge. Other advantages relative to these alternatives include:

Their speed of construction Minimal disruption to the river/channel, if crossing a shipping route Resistance to seismic activity Safety of construction (for example, work in a dry dock as opposed to boring beneath a river) Flexibility of profile (although this often partly dictated by what is possible for the connecting tunnel types)

Disadvantages include:

Immersed tube type B, built under the seabed level.

Vulnerability to sabotage as it is arguably easier to damage and breach their walls or roof than to achieve the same to a bored tunnel.[citation needed]

The tunnel is partly exposed (usually with some rock armour and natural siltation) on the river/sea bed, risking a sunken ship/anchor strike Both of these disadvantages should be considered and designed for, although by the nature of these risks are hard to quantify and assess using a risk analysis Direct contact with water necessitates careful waterproofing design around the joints The segmental approach requires careful design of the connections, where longitudinal effects and forces must be transferred across Environmental impact of tube and underwater embankment on existing channel/sea bed.

6. 4. Safety
The service tunnel is used for access to technical equipment in cross-passages and equipment rooms, to provide fresh-air ventilation, and for emergency evacuation. The Service Tunnel Transport System (STTS) allows fast access to all areas of the tunnel. The service vehicles are rubber-tyred with a buried guidance wire system. Twenty-four STTS vehicles were made, and are used mainly for maintenance but also for firefighting and in emergencies. "Pods" with different purposes, up to a payload of 2.5-5 t (2.8-5.5 tons), are inserted into the side of the vehicles. The STTS vehicles cannot turn around within the tunnel, and are driven from either end. The maximum speed is 80 km/h (50 mph) when the steering is locked. A smaller fleet of fifteen Light Service Tunnel Vehicles (LADOGS) were introduced to supplement the STTSs. The LADOGS have a short wheelbase with a 3.4 m (11 ft) turning circle allowing two-point turns within the service tunnel. Steering cannot be locked like the STTS vehicles, and maximum speed is 50 km/h (31 mph). Pods up to 1 tonne can be loaded onto the rear of the vehicles. Drivers in the tunnel sit on the right, and the vehicles drive on the left. Owing to the risk of French personnel driving on their native right side of the road, sensors in the road vehicles alert the driver if the vehicle strays to the right side of the tunnel. [121] The three tunnels contain 6,000 tonnes (6,600 tons) of air that needs to be conditioned for comfort and safety. Air is supplied from ventilation buildings at Shakespeare Cliff and Sangatte, with each building capable of full duty providing 100% standby capacity. Supplementary ventilation also exists on either side of the tunnel. In the event of a fire, ventilation is used to keep smoke out of the service tunnel and move smoke in one direction in the main tunnel to give passengers clean air. The Channel Tunnel was the first mainline railway tunnel to have special cooling equipment. Heat is generated from traction equipment and drag. The design limit was set at 30 C (86 F), using a mechanical cooling system with refrigeration plants on both the English and French sides that run chilled water circulating in pipes within the tunnel. [122] Trains travelling at high speed create piston-effect pressure changes that can affect passenger comfort, ventilation systems, tunnel doors, fans and the structure of the trains, and drag on the trains. [122] Piston relief ducts of 2-metre (7 ft) diameter were chosen to solve the problem, with 4 ducts per kilometre to give close to optimum results. Unfortunately this design led to unacceptable lateral forces on the trains so a reduction in train speed was required and restrictors were installed in the ducts. [123] The safety issue of a fire on a passenger-vehicle shuttle garnered much attention, with Eurotunnel itself noting that fire was the risk gathering the most attention in a 1994 Safety Case for three reasons: ferry companies opposed to passengers being allowed to remain with their cars; Home Office statistics indicating that car fires had doubled in ten years; and the long length of the tunnel. Eurotunnel commissioned the UK Fire Research Station to give reports of vehicle fires, as well as liaising with Kent Fire Brigade to gather vehicle fire statistics over one year. Fire tests took place at the French Mines Research Establishment with a mock wagon used to investigate how cars burned. [124] The wagon door systems are designed to withstand fire inside the wagon for 30 minutes, longer than the transit time of 27 minutes. Wagon air conditioning units help to purge dangerous fumes from inside the wagon before travel. Each wagon has a fire detection and extinguishing system, with sensing of ions or ultraviolet radiation, smoke and gases that can trigger halon gas to quench a fire. Since the Heavy Goods Vehicle (HGV) wagons are not covered, fire sensors are located on the loading wagon and in the tunnel itself. A 10-inch (250 mm) water main in the service tunnel provides water to the main tunnels at

125-metre (410 ft) intervals. [125] The ventilation system can control smoke movement. Special arrival sidings exist to accept a train that is on fire, as the train is not allowed to stop whilst on fire in the tunnel. Eurotunnel has banned a wide range of hazardous goods from travelling in the tunnel. Two STTS vehicles with firefighting pods are on duty at all times, with a maximum delay of 10 minutes before they reach a burning train.