Inception Stage ConceptThe inception stage is where the project is first conceptualized and its stages are thought out, hence the channel tunnel was first conceptualized in 1802, by a French mining engineer, Albert Mathieu-Favier, as way to facilitate trade and travel through horse drawn carriages. However interest for the project was established during the 20th century as in In 1958, geological survey by the Channel Tunnel Study Group, who then proceeded to conduct a more detailed geological survey in 1964.In 1974, both countries agreed to construct the tunnel, as joint inter governmental project, but this was short-lived as the new British labour government in 1975, decided to withdraw from the project due to the oil crisis, financial difficulties and uncertainty over EEC membership.ProposalsHowever, In 1981, the new British conservative government has agreed with their french counterparts that the undertaking shall be funded wholly by the private sector, as per the Channel Tunnel Treaty. In June 1982, the joint Franco-British study group, after conducting feasibility studies, have come to favour a twin tunnel system to accommodate both conventional trains and a vehicle shuttle service (Anderson & Roskrow 1994). In April 1985, private sector promoters were invited to submit their scheme proposals. Four submissions were shortlisted:A rail proposal based on the 1975 scheme presented by Channel Tunnel Group/France–Manche (CTG/F–M) (Anderson & Roskrow 1994) .Eurobridge: a 4.
5 km long suspension bridge with a roadway that is encased in an enclosed tube (Anderson & Roskrow 1994) .Euroroute: a 21 km long tunnel that passes in between artificial islands that is approached by bridges(Anderson & Roskrow 1994) .Channel Expressway: its is a large diameter road tunnels, which contains mid-channel ventilation towers (Anderson & Roskrow 1994) . IssuesHowever, due to concerns about ventilation issues, accident management and, driver mesmerisation, only rail based proposal was chosen.
In order to pay for the tunnel, Eurotunnel declared owner of 55-year concession for the link, which allow the group to recuperate its expenses and potentially make profit.The schedule aspect of the project required planning all activities related to building three tunnels (north, south, and the service tunnel). This was however, somewhat complicated due to the need to hire 46 different contractors to complete the design requirements.
As it turned out, the time estimate to complete the tunnelling itself was actually materially accurate, finishing three months ahead of schedule. However, ongoing safety requirement changes sought by ICG (inter-governmental commission) continued to create negative schedule variances and other problems( Barron) . During the inception phase, Eurotunnel entered into a construction contract with TML (Transmanche Link) in 1987. Eurotunnel was responsible for roughly 70% of cost overruns on the original contract and TML was responsible for the remaining 30%, capped at a maximum 60% of the total cost.Cost categoriesThe three cost categories were:Target cost for tunneling, done on a cost-plus fixed-fee basis, with a target cost above or below which there would be a sharing of the difference.Lump sum for the terminals and the mechanical and electrical works for the tunnel.The procurement contract for rolling stock and associated major equipment was procured on a cost-plus-percentage-fee basis. Developmental PhaseCoordinationThe development phase of the project is important part of the project lifecycle, as in this phase, team building, work allocation, communication chain and consolidation of the stakeholders take place in this stage.
With regards to this, the developmental phase is especially important due to the different contractors that have to coordinate the efforts. Communication is further compounded by the language barrier, thus in order increase level of coordination, the two partnerships were linked, which then formed TransManche Link (TML). To enhance their level of accountability, Maître d’Oeuvre, is an engineering supervisory firm that was employed by Eurotunnel to monitor the progress of the project and report back to the banks, the French and British governments. To simplify the command structure, Eurotunnel absorbed CTG/F-M, thus became the main sponsor of this project, however both the French and British government still controlled final decisions on engineering and safety, and hence created a joint governmental department known as the “Channel tunnel safety authority”, in order to make sure that all guidelines have been followed. Financing and security of loan commitments of loan commitments was delegated to 5 banks, of which, 2 of them are British, the rest are French. An initial equity of US$68 million was raised by CTG/F-M. The construction cost of the ChannelTunnel was estimated to be around US$5.5 billion as stipulated in the fixed price contract().
The most essential piece of equipment used on the project was the TBM (tunnel boring machines), as 11 were procured and used to cut through chalk marl, in order to construct the two rail tunnels and a service tunnel. . The IGC’s changed the specification design from 600 mmdoors to 700 mm doors which then caused a nine-month delay. This also increased the level of surveys needed, as tunnelling is considered the most dangerous aspect of the construction industry, hence more information is required to find out if the terrain can handle the change in the specifications.
Every three months, a hefty status report was prepared for all the investors involved in this project, which contributed to keeping the project on track. Implementation Phase Implementation phase is when all plans about the project is implemented and construction gets underway, with Regards to this, the Tunnelling operations commenced in 1988. The objective of this phase was to construct two 7.6-metre-diameter wide rail tunnels, 30 metres apart, 50 kilometres long in length; a 4.
8-metre-diameter wide service tunnel between the two main train tunnels ones. Tunneling experience is well in hand for this project as there was plenty of experience with excavating or mining chalk due to the presence of a well developed mining industry in both these nations. However, the undersea crossover caverns posed a very complex engineering problem (Anderson & Roskrow 1994).while the French side experienced delays due to this issue, the UK cavern was dug from the service tunnel ahead of the main ones, to avoid delay. To get around this issue, but two different solutions were used. On the French side, neoprene and grout sealed bolted linings made of cast iron or high-strength reinforced concrete were used to reinforce the weak crusted areas (Anderson & Roskrow 1994).
Since the English’s main requirement was speed so bolting of cast-iron lining segments was only carried out only, in areas of poor geology (Anderson & Roskrow 1994). In the UK rail tunnels, eight lining segments plus a key segment were used, while the French side, only used five segments and a key. For access to the tunnel, the French side contains a 55-metre diameter, 75-metre deep grout-curtained shaft at Sangatte was used for access. While, the English side contains a assembly area of about 140 metres below the top of Shakespeare Cliff(Anderson & Roskrow 1994). This is also the first project New Austrian Tunnelling method (NATM), as it was used in the English side of the tunnel.
NATM entails minimization to the deformations caused to the rock surface, which enables the formation to support the itself, hence construction of support beams can be minimized, hence time and resources can be saved.Due to the greater permeability to water and pressure balance in the French side of the Tunnel, they were forced to the use of TBMs of both open and closed types. The TBMs were of a closed nature during the initial 5 kilometres (3 mi), but then they operated as open mode during the boring operations. The machines used in the French side were two main marine machines, one main land machine and two service tunnel machines(Anderson & Roskrow 1994) . This in turn minimised the impact to the ground, allowed high water pressures to be withstood and it also alleviated the need to grout ahead of the tunnel. The English side however, possess a much simpler geology, which allows the usage of faster open-mode TBMs (Anderson & Roskrow 1994) .
Six machines were used, all commenced digging from Shakespeare Cliff, three marine-bound and three for the land tunnels (Anderson & Roskrow 1994). Towards the completion of the undersea tunnelling operations, the UK TBMs were driven steeply downwards and buried clear of the tunnel(Anderson & Roskrow 1994). These buried TBMs were then used to provide an electrical earth (Anderson & Roskrow 1994). While, the French TBMs that completed the tunnel and were simply dismantled.
Ten workers, eight of them British, were killed during construction between 1987 and 1993, most in the first few months of boring. On 1 December 1990, Englishman Graham Fagg met with Frenchman Phillippe Cozette, after they broke through the last barrier of the service tunnel , as this received with the media fanfare. Eurotunnel completed the tunnel on time, hence Tunneling operations were completed.
The rail tracks used in this project is Sonneville International Corporation’s Low Vibration Track (LVT), LVT is of the free floating type that was chosen because of its reliability, cost-effectiveness and good performance particularly in the Swiss tunnels.The Eurotunnel Class 9 is a one of a kind electric locomotive custom built by the Euroshuttle Locomotive Consortium (ESCL). This class was specifically designed and used for haul Le Shuttle road vehicle services through the Channel Tunnel.The much requested ventilation system is installed makes sure that the air pressure inside the service tunnel is always higher than one found in the rail tunnels, so that in the event of a fire, smoke does not enter the service tunnel from the rail tunnels. Additionally,Two cooling water pipes are installed to remove any excess heat generated by the ongoing rail traffic.
Pumping stations are also installed so as to pump out water caused by bad weather or leakages. The Closeout Phase In the closeout phase, final touches on the project is done and ownership is handed to the project sponsor, and then project ends, and the asset begins normal operation. Also all information, including mistakes made in the project are documented so With Regards to this, The project was officially completed in 6 May 1994, in which a ceremony was organized by both Queen Elizabeth II and the French president François Mitterrand, in Calais to signify its completion. As per the Canterbury treaty, Eurotunnel shall be granted ownership of operations for 55 years, in order recuperate its expenses and make profit.
Normal operations began several months later.