Sie sind auf Seite 1von 6

Gordon Bruce Military Road Isle of Wight Presentation

Introduction Good morning /afternoon. My name is Gordon Bruce and today I am going to talk about the Military Rd on the Isle of Wight. The A3055 (known as the Military Road) runs along the south-west coast of the island. It passes over cliffs, which are up to 90 m high and forms an important infrastructure link between the south and the west of the island, it is also the high point of the Round the Island tour on account of the spectacular coastal scenery. However, these cliffs are retreating as a result of coastal erosion at the toe, although the rates of recession and the modes of cliff failure vary because of the different geological and topographical conditions along the coastline. Despite having been constructed only 150 years ago there are a number of locations along the coast where the Military Road has been severed from its original alignment by coastal recession. In the 1970s it was recognised that continuing coastal erosion would pose a threat to the Military Road at a number of locations, and at Afton Down in particular. In addition to observations of failures of the chalk cliffs, instability of the cliff top had also led to the formation of fissures in the down land slope below the road. These extended into the seaward edge of the road, and repairs to the carriageway surfacing were regularly required. As the integrity of the road could be compromised should further recession of the cliff top occur, an early warning system (EWS) was installed in 1981 to safeguard users of the road following discovery of the surface fissures. This consisted of a series of tiltmeters connected to automatic traffic signals, which closed the road in the event of trigger levels being breached. These were supplemented in 1997 by the addition of a series of extensometers and a settlement cell installed seaward of the road to identify movement of the upper layers of weathered chalk material. The instruments were connected to the emergency services and to a data logger, from which the information could be reviewed remotely by the Isle of Wight Council. In 1985 the former Isle of Wight County Council submitted a proposal for a diversion of this section of road, which involved a new cutting further up-slope through the adjacent downland. This area was recognised as being of international environmental sign ifi can ce , and a public inquiry recommended that planning permission for the realignment should not be granted. Therefore consideration has subsequently been given to extending the life of the road by reducing the risk of cliff instability affecting the road and endangering its users. Cost-effective measures to stabilise the existing cliff profile were unlikely to be practical given the

height of the cliffs (.70 m) and were not developed further. Consideration was given to providing a form of coastal defence to prevent continuing erosion at the toe. However, the present cliff top position would continue to recede without additional stabilising measures, as the upper sections of the cliffs would naturally regrade through weathering processes towards a more stable angle. Furthermore, owing to the high-level environmental designations, it would not be acceptable to build defences on the foreshore at the foot of the cliffs, and this option was discounted. Hence any measures to support the road needed to be based on stabilising the highway itself along its present alignment. Highway stabilisation at Afton Down was not considered at the time of the 1988 public inquiry. However, during the review of the failure mechanisms of the cliff in 1997, and considering advances in engineering technology, this option was considered feasible.

PROPOSED STRUCTURE The objective of the proposed stabilising structure was to support the existing 6 m wide road while minimising environmental impact and allowing the natural processes of coastal erosion to continue to remove material from in front of the structure. Prior to considering the range of engineering options available and selecting the preferred scheme, the constraints needed to be defined. These were primarily environmental, safety and financial, and included: (a) minimising visual, ecological and other potential adverse environmental impacts (b) minimising damage and restrictions on access to the coastal amenities during construction
(c)

managing health and safety issues relating to constructing and decommissioning the works adjacent to unstable cliffs as well as public safety during service (d) working within financial limits for the investigations and works to be undertaken.

A number of alternative forms of retaining structure were considered during initial concept design. These included a pile- supported slab using two rows of bored concrete piles and an insitu reinforced concrete deck, a reticulated mini-pile solution supporting the road on a series of small-diameter piles, and a tied retaining wall. Preliminary design proposals for all three forms of structure were costed, and the tied retaining wall was indicated to be the most economic solution. Furthermore, it was felt to be the most appropriate in view of the limited access available to the site, the need to limit disturbance to the cliff, and the requirement that the structure be decommissioned at the end of its service life. Further development of this form of retaining wall led to the choice of a wall comprising closely spaced bored piles. The bored piles would initially be buried and would then be progressively exposed as cliff recession continues. Based on the rates of recession assumed and practical and cost constraints, the structure was designed for a maximum retained height ofup to 10 m, corresponding to the assumed worst case for the geometry of the cliff, and a nominal 50-year life. The structure

extends for a total length of 285 m in two sections at Areas A1 and A2. This aimed to provide a suitable buffer distancebeyond the extent of the structure to ensure that the road is adequately protected against cliff top recession. Owing to the variability in the localised rate and form of the recession of the cliffs, the whole length of the structure was constructed to a design based on the worst assumed case for the geometry of the cliff. The location of the structure was determined by identification of the area most at risk, and the length constructed was governed by financial limits. When continuing cliff recession results in the structure at any location becoming unserviceable with consequent closure of the road, the structure will be decommissioned. However, additional sections of the structure could be added to the lengths of the present structure to prevent the structure being outflanked by erosion of the cliff adjacent to the structure Geotechnical Design/Ground Engineering Issues

Rock Slope Stability Coastal Processes Fissures Diverse Geology/ Possibility for inaccurate data collection Soil stability under high loadings (plant etc.) Chalk Rock mass different than expected

The geotechnical risk register


The Geotechnical Risk Register is the key in the geotechnical risk management process. It systematically records and considers all of the risk identified in a structured fashion and ensures that they are dealt with. Each hazard is considered as 4 steps:

The identification of the hazard Assessing the probability of it occurring and its impact if it did Managing the risk identified Allocating responsibility and action

Risk = Probability x Impact Good communication between client, designer and contractor is essential for this process to work. When all parties are working together openly on the project there is a better chance of any risks being identified and considered early enough to offer solutions, or put contingency plans in place.

Degree of risk (Probability Effect * Severity) 1-4 3-8 Trivial Significant

Action required

None Consider more cost effective solutions or alternatives at no additional cost. Work must not start until risk has been reduced. More resources are required. Work must not start until risk has been reduced. Project should not proceed if risk cannot be reduced.

9-12

Substantial

13-16

Intolerable

Interaction Matrix

Sustainability Sustainability was defined by the 1987 Brundtland Report as meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs A twofold strategy could be implemented in the Highway project in order to promote sustainability. These include: Mitigation to the environment Sustainable Construction Methods and Building Materials

Mitgation To Environment Environmental mitigation is a term used to describe projects or programs intended to offset known impacts to an existing natural resource such as a stream, wetland, or endangered species. To mitigate means to make less harsh or hostile. This means that in order to prevent negative impact upon the Environment during the construction of the retaining wall and also during the structures lifetime, a number of factors must be considered and a number of measures implemented. The first impact I wanted to consider was one that each and every person on the planet has a part to play in mitigating: -

Climate Change There is a general consensus within the scientific community that Climate Change is occurring due to carbon emissions. What cannot be agreed, however, if this increase is due to human activity or is due to a natural cycle? While there is uncertainty regarding this issue it had been deemed prudent to everything possible to reduce carbon emissions through policy on transport and energy, and legislative controls such as planning and building regulations. This is collectively known as Sustainability. As the built environment is a huge consumer of resources and source of pollution, the construction industry has a significant role to play. It is estimated that building constructions use and demolition account for nearly half of the UKs carbon emissions. Carbon emissions are generally used as a simplified or key indicator, of environment sustainability. More sophisticated systems include Ecopoint system or Eco-footprinting. Eco-footprinting states that: The earths renewable resources are currently being consumed faster than they can be regenerated

Three planets worth of resources would be required if all of the worlds population had a westernized lifestyle. The onset of climate change has serious implications for the UK building design. Below is a list of these implications and the measures I have undertaken taken to mitigate against this: . Minimizing soil movements around and off site. Avoidance of synthetics chemicals, PVC, etc. Designing material dimensions in order to limit off cuts and waste. Specifying to reduce construction and package waste. Using higher design loadings in order to maximize the life of the office building and car park. Recycling of construction waste

Other issues which I want to mitigate against during the Construction phase include : Noise Pollution Noise pollution during construction phase derives primarily from the mechanical plant employed in construction and from the vehicles that transport materials to, from and within the site. Obviously, this would be difficult to mitigate against, as noise during construction is inevitable. However, construction can be terminated at specified time in order to be less antisocial in evening hours.

Water Pollution Construction site activity produces considerable potential for water pollution. Construction involves the use of chemical agents, the storage of vehicles fuels, generation of solid waste and major disturbance to soil. The avoidance of chemical pollution can be achieved through procedure good practice in the storage, transport and use of materials, and also proper risk assessments been carried out and plan emergency immediate actions in event of spillage. Equally important is the proper management of portable toilets on site. Often, the most noticeable effect of construction is a potential large quantity of silt to enter nearby water courses. Such potential must be taken into consideration in the excavation and filling operations of the project, and also the management of water used on site. For example, in the washing of vehicles and the cleaning of mud from the road surfaces, some form of settlement trapping or filter arrangement would need to be put in place. It is common for road surfaces to accumulate quantities of grit and chemical deposit from vehicles during drive spills, which would be washed off in heavy rain. A Porus Asphalt material could be used for the road in order to mitigate against these potential effects.