AFTES

GUIDELINES ON
WATERPROOFING AND DRAINAGE
OF UNDERGROUND STRUCTURES
Drafted by
J.L. MAHUET Chairman, GT9 on Waterproofing of Underground Structures
with the assistance of
P. HINGANT (SCETAUROUTE-DTTS) M. JERRAM & C.TRUFFANDIER (SNCF) J.L. REITH & B. CONSTANTIN (CETU)
J.P. BENNETON (LRPC, Lyon) Mlle BEORO (LRPC, Nancy) J.F. JABY (EOS) )
MM. MERLE & MOREAU (DORKEN France) MM. MANRY & AUMOITTE (WAVIN)
MM. SAFFAR & PORTAIL (COBLOND) - M. FAYOUX (ALKOR DRAKA)
M. JOLLY (PAVITEX) M. ROUGERIE (POLYFEUTRE)
M. LEBLAIS (SIMECSOL) M. ANDRE (SNCF) M. CHEZE (SIAAP)
kindly helped with the final editing
Version 1 approved by Technical Committee 3 May 2000
Pages Pages
1 - FIELD OF APPLICATION OF GUIDELINES . . . . . . . . . 116
2 - DEFINITIONS AND VOCABULARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
3 - PREPARATION AND ACCEPTANCE OF BACKING
SURFACES TO RECEIVE A GEOMEMBRANE
WATERPROOFING SYSTEM IN CUT-AND-COVER
TUNNELS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
3.1 - FIELD OF APPLICATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
3.2 - BACKING SURFACE PREPARATION AND ACCEPTANCE 117
3.2.1 - Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
3.2.2. - Acceptance of backing surfaces and corrective
measures for non-conformities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
3.2.3 - Summary table of backing surface acceptance operations . 119
4 - CHARACTERISTICS OF GEOTEXTILE AND
GEOCOMPOSITE PROTECTIVE BARRIERS . . . . . . . . . . . 119
4.1 - GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF PROTECTIVE
BARRIERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
4.2 - CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF GEOTEXTILE FIBRES . 119
4.3 - MINIMUM UNIT WEIGHT OF PROTECTIVE BARRIER . 119
4.4 - HYDRAULIC CHARACTERISTICS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
4.5 - PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PORPERTIES . . . . . . . . . . . 120
4.6 - RESISTANCE OF PROTECTIVE BARRIERS AGAINST
HEAT DAMAGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
5 - GEOSPACERS AND DRAINAGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
5.1 - DRAINAGE FUNDAMENTALS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
5.2 - DESIGN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
5.3 - REFERENCE STANDARDS AND TESTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
6 - INTERCEPTION OF LOCALISED LEAKS . . . . . . . . . . 122
6.1 - ROOF AND SIDEWALL INTERCEPTORS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
6.2 - TEMPORARY INTERCEPTION AND DRAINAGE OF
INVERT IN STRUCTURES RENDERED COMPLETELY
WATERTIGHT BY A GEOMEMBRANE WATERPROOFING
SYSTEM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
6.2.1 - Driven tunnels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
6.2.2 - Cut-and-cover tunnels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
7 - DRAINAGE SYSTEM ASSOCIATED WITH A
GEOMEMBRANE WATERPROOFING SYSTEM AT
BOTTOM OF TUNNEL ROOF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
7.1 - PURPOSE OF DRAINAGE SYSTEM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
7.2 - CHANGES IN DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESIGN . . . . . . . . 125
7.3 - DESIGN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
7.4 - ACCEPTATION OF DRAINAGE SYSTEM . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
8 - POROUS CONCRETE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
8.1 - POROUS CONCRETE MIX COMPOSITION . . . . . . . . 127
8.2 - POROUS CONCRETE SPECIFICATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . 128
8.3 - POROUS CONCRETE DRAINAGE SYSTEM . . . . . . . . . 128
9 - PERMANENT DRAINAGE SYSTEM FOR
SIDEWALL AND ROOF JOINTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
9.1 - DESCRIPTION OF CONTRACTION JOINT
DRAINAGE SYSTEMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
9.1.1 - Physical and chemical characteristics of seepage . . . . . . . 128
9.1.2 - Frost protection to drainage system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
9.1.3 - Drain discharge and hydrostatic pressure . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
9.2 - DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESIGN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
10 - BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
SUMMAR SUMMARY Y
TUNNELS ET OUVRAGES SOUTERRAINS HORS-SERIE N 2 2005
115
Guidelines on waterproofing and drainage of underground structures
1 FIELD OF APPLICATION
OF GUIDELINES
These Guidelines are applicable to the
waterproofing and drainage of under-
ground structures such as machine-bored,
cut-and-cover, partially-immersed and
other tunnels.
They provide additional details to be
i nserted i nto the CCTP Contract
Speci fi cati ons and CCAP Speci al
Conditions in Fascicule 67 Titre III of the CCTG
General Specifications on Waterproofing
of Underground Structures, which should
be amended accordi ngl y, unl ess the
Guidelines are made part of the contract
documents.
Since the official issue in January 1992 of
Titre III of this Fascicule, the use of, for
example, geosynthetics as a waterproo-
fing or drainage material in underground
structures has greatly expanded, leading
to the appearance on the market of inno-
vative techniques and products.
The appearance of such new products
soon reveal ed a l ack of detai l i n, or
absence from the specifications in Fascicule
67 Titre III relevant to these new products.
While, for example, synthetic geomem-
brane-type waterproofing products are
themselves generally adequately descri-
bed in the CCTG General Specifications,
there are gaps in the materials and proce-
dures specifications regarding the prepa-
ration of the backing surface to which
they are applied, and the physical, chemi-
cal and (most importantly) hydraulic pro-
perties of de-bonding geotextiles.
AFTES working group GT9, aware that
these omissions in the French regulations
might impede the development of these
new waterproofing and drainage tech-
niques, undertook in 1997 the task of
updating the CCTG General Specifications
in the following areas:
Preparation and acceptance of tunnel
backing surfaces destined to receive a
geomembrane waterproofing system.
The new AFTES Guidelines were publi-
shed in the journal Tunnels et Ouvrages
Souterrains No. 150, November/ December
1998. The present wordi ng of these
Guidelines extends the field of applica-
tion of Article 3 to backing surfaces of cut-
and-cover tunnels whose sidewalls consist
of diaphragm walls, Berlin walls, etc.
Formulation and publication of AFTES
expert opinions to add to the list of
waterproofing products and techniques
not currently covered by the text of or
commentary on Article 4 of Chapter III of
Fascicule 67 Titre III of the CCTG General
Specifications.
Updated lists of AFTES expert opinions
are published regularly in the journal
Tunnels et Ouvrages Souterrains.
2 - DEFINITIONS AND
VOCABULARY
Waterproofing and drainage of under-
ground structures now refers to com-
plexes or systems combining several
materials of sometimes widely differing
compositions and functions. New terms
have recently appeared, and the mea-
nings of some of them have been officially
defined at European level.
The definitions of the more important
terms in these Guidelines are as follows:
Waterproofing. Article 2.1 of CCTG
General Specifications in Fascicule 67 Titre III
property such that a product or combi-
nation of products prevents the passage
of a liquid such as water:
- Waterproofing may be partial, as with
umbrella waterproofing for example for
a tunnel roof, in which case it is not expo-
sed to hydrostatic pressure (in this case,
the pressure is not total but not necessa-
rily zero).
- Waterproofing may be total, meaning
that it may completely surround the struc-
ture, and in this case, it is subject to the
hydrostatic pressure.
Drainage. Interception at a point or
over an area of water flowing into an
underground structure. This water is col-
lected and disposed of by means of the
structures mai n drai nage system.
Drainage may be temporary, in order, for
example, to allow the waterproofing com-
plex to be installed in the correct manner,
or permanent and contri bute to the
waterproofing of the structure.
Geomembrane waterproofing sys-
tem. Independent extrados waterproo-
fing complex consisting of several mate-
rials, each fulfilling a precise function:
- protecti ve puncture barri er pl aced
against the backing, under the waterproof
geomembrane,
- translucid synthetic waterproofing geo-
membrane,
- protective mechanical barrier on top of
the geomembrane when the permanent
lining is reinforced. This barrier is also
used in the form of strips, 1.00m to 1.50m
wide, over each concrete joint in the tun-
nel roof.
Protective static puncture barrier pla-
ced in contact with the backing surface,
under the waterproofing geomembrane.
It is sometimes called the extrados pro-
tection in connection with a geomem-
brane waterproofing system to a driven
tunnel or cut-and-cover tunnel built within
a supported trench. It consists essentially
of a nonwoven geotextile, sometimes
associated with a PVCP or polyethylene
film such that, in the event of a major
inflow of water, it may act as a first water-
tight barrier to enable thermal seaming
of the geomembrane to proceed. The
physical and mechanical properties of the
protective barrier are specified in Article
7.4.2.3 of Fascicule 67 Titre III CCTG
General Specifications and tables 1 and 2
below.
Protective dynamic puncture barrier,
on top of the waterproofing geomem-
brane, sometimes called intrados pro-
tection in connection with a geomem-
brane waterproofing system to a driven
(reinforced) tunnel or cut-and-cover tun-
nel within a supported trench. This barrier
must always consist of a membrane of
synthetic material (PVCP or polyethylene).
The physical and mechanical properties of
the protective barrier are also specified in
Article 7.4.2.3 and No. 7 of Annexe 4 of
Fasci cul e 67 Ti tre I I I CCTG General
Specifications.
Geospacers. Polymer structure consis-
ting of sheets of thermo-formed material
or monofilament or any other structure
whose purpose is to impart a high void
ratio promoting the free flow of water
under either temporary or permanent
conditions.
Mechanical protective geocomposite.
Combination of a nonwoven geotextile
and a thin sheet of generally PVCP or
polyethylene synthetics. The geotextile
ply is placed in contact with the backing
surface.
Supported tunnel. Structure built within
the confines of a supporting structure
(diaphragm walls, Berlin walls, etc.) which
acts as the backing for the waterproofing
and drainage systems.
Unsupported tunnel. Structure built
without temporary support (in excavation
with sloping sides), in which case the
waterproofing and drainage systems are
installed after building, directly on the
permanent concrete.
TUNNELS ET OUVRAGES SOUTERRAINS HORS-SERIE N 2 2005
116
Drainage geocomposite. A combina-
tion of geospacer and one or more geo-
texti l es provi di ng a fi l teri ng effect.
Drainage geocomposites are generally
used as permanent drainage to the side-
walls in cut-and-cover tunnels built in
unsupported trenches.
Drainage hoop. Strip drain consisting
either of a geospacer or drainage geo-
composite of variable width placed at
right angles to the tunnel centreline
whose main function is to facilitate the
discharge of water flowing in from the
backing towards the drainage system at
the bottom of the sidewall or roof.
Horizontal drainage strip.
Strip drain consisting either
of a geospacer or drainage
geocomposite of variable
width placed parallel to the
tunnel centrel i ne whose
main function is to facilitate
the discharge of water flo-
wing in from the backing
towards the drainage sys-
tem at the bottom of the
sidewall or roof.
Sidewall or roof bottom
drainage. Circular drains
made of synthetic material
or box-outs i n the ban-
quette to collect discharge
from a geomembrane
waterproofing system and
convey it to the main drai-
nage system.
Figure 1 illustrates the various compo-
nents associated with a geomembrane
waterproofing system.
3 - PREPARATION AND
ACCEPTANCE OF BACKING
SURFACES TO RECEIVE A
GEOMEMBRANE WATER-
PROOFING SYSTEM IN
CUT-AND-COVER TUNNELS
AFTES Guidelines on the preparation of
tunnel surfaces destined to receive a geo-
membrane waterproofing system publi-
shed in the November/December issue
(No. 150) of Tunnels et Ouvrages Souterrains
add important details on tunnel water-
proofing to Article 9 of Fascicule 67 Titre III
of CCTG General Specifications. However,
specifications regarding backing surface
preparation in cut-and-cover supported
tunnels, i.e. having temporary support in
the form of diaphragm walls, Berlin walls,
sheet piling and similar steel support,
etc. suffer from the same omissions in
Article 9.2.4 of Fascicule 67 Titre III. The
present text expands the recommenda-
tions applicable to tunnels to include ins-
tallation of a geomembrane waterproo-
fing system in cut-and-cover tunnels,
especially as, unlike the umbrella type
geomembrane waterproofing system
used in some tunnels, the geomembrane
waterproofing system in this case is
always exposed to hydrostatic pressure
under operational conditions.
3.1 - FIELD OF APPLICATION
These Guidelines apply to all tunnels built
in a shored trench using the following
types of support:
- diaphragm wall
- precast diaphragm wall
- slurry wall
- Berlin wall (steel soldiers with timber or
precast concrete lagging)
- nailed shotcrete
- sheet piling with concrete counterwall
- sheet piling with high density polysty-
rene filling the troughs.
3.2 - BACKING SURFACE
PREPARATION AND
ACCEPTANCE
3.2.1 - Characteristics
a) Diaphragm wall precast diaphragm
wall concrete counterwall
Specifications in Article 9.1.2.1. of Fascicule
67 Titre III are adequate.
b) Slurry wall
This type of support is not covered by
Fascicule 67. Working group GT9 suggest
the following specification: The slurry
shall have the mechanical strength requi-
red by the CCTP Contract Specifications
before i nstal l i ng the geomembrane
waterproofing system.
Guidelines on waterproofing and drainage of underground structures
TUNNELS ET OUVRAGES SOUTERRAINS HORS-SERIE N 2 2005
117
Figure 1 - Illustrates the various components associated with a
geomembrane waterproofing system.
Photo 1 - Mechanical protective geocomposite and hori-
zontal drainage strip
Photo 2 Geospacer on steel temporary support
Guidelines on waterproofing and drainage of underground structures
Dry, loose superficial slurry shall be
removed.
Length of intermediate fastening nails
for the geomembrane waterproofing sys-
tem shall be set with reference to the
mechanical strength of the slurry. Steel
sections shall be flush with the slurry wall
surface to within 5cm.
c) Berlin wall and sheet piling with poly-
styrene filling the troughs
- c1) Steel
The specification in Article 3.1.3. of the
gui del i nes publ i shed i n No. 150 of
Tunnels et Ouvrages Souterrains should
be added to those in Article 9.1.2.3. of
Fascicule 67 Titre II
- c2) Polystyrene
Add the following to Article 9.2.4b of
Fascicule 67 Titre III: The polystyrene
shall be a perfect fit in the sheet piling
troughs and shall be class EM as descri-
bed in French standard NFT 56 201 with
minimum compressive strength of not less
than 90 kPa.
d) Shotcrete
The specification in Article 3.1.1. of the
guidelines published in No. 150 of Tunnels
et Ouvrages Souterrains should be added to
those in Article 9.1.2.2. of Fascicule 67 Titre
III.
e) Fillet
A fillet should be formed where the verti-
cal surface meets the tunnel invert (appli-
cable to all surfaces mentioned above).
The fillet is generally mortar radiused to
more than 5cm radius.
3.2.2. - Acceptance of backing
surfaces and corrective measures
for non-conformities
Once special points have been dealt with
as described above, the acceptance pro-
cedure for the prepared backing surface
comprises the following operations:
a) Diaphragm wall precast diaphragm
wall concrete counterwall
- a1) diaphragm wall with trowelled mor-
tar finish as described in Article 9.2.4c of
Fascicule 67 Titre III Precast diaphragm
wall with concrete counterwall: Add to
Article 9.2. of Fascicule 67 Titre III: Surfaces
or panels shall be flush to within 5cm. Any
edges exceeding 5cm shall be feathered
to 45 with mortar or other type of incom-
pressible material.
- a2) Diaphragm wall ground down
without trowelled mortar
a2.1) Verification of general geo-
metry of backing surfaces: Article 3.2.1
of recommendations published in No. 150
of Tunnels et Ouvrages Souterrains applies.
The verification should be performed
according to the procedure in Appendix 1
of the recommendations.
a2.2) Verification of surface rough-
ness of diaphragm wall: Article 3.2.2 of
the recommendations published in No.
150 of Tunnel s et Ouvrages Souterrai ns
applies. The verification should be perfor-
med accordi ng to the procedure i n
Appendix 2 of the recommendations.
Characteristics of the geotextile protec-
tive barrier appear below in table 2, para.
4.1.4 below.
b) Slurry walls
The general geometry should raise no
problems, and the only verification nee-
ded is maximum misalignment between
the surface and the steel members, and
superficial cohesion of the slurry.
c) Berlin wall and sheet piling with
polystyrene filling
Ditto para. b above, the only verification
needed is misalignment between steel
members and plates, panels and polysty-
rene blocks.
d) Shotcrete
- d.1) Verification of general geometry
of shotcrete surface: Article 3.2.1 of
recommendations published in No. 150 of
Tunnels et Ouvrages Souterrains applies. The
verification should be performed accor-
ding to the procedure in Appendix 1 of
the recommendations.
- d2) Verification of backing surface
roughness of shotcrete: Article 3.2.2 of
the recommendations published in No.
150 of Tunnel s et Ouvrages Souterrai ns
applies. The verification should be perfor-
med accordi ng to the procedure i n
Appendix 2 of the recommendations.
TUNNELS ET OUVRAGES SOUTERRAINS HORS-SERIE N 2 2005
118
Photo 3 - Ground diaphragm wall support
Photo 5 - Hybrid support: Berlin wall and nailed shotcrete
Photo 4 - Sheet piling support with polystyrene filling troughs
3.2.3 - Summary table of backing
surface acceptance operations
The sequence of surface acceptance
operati ons descri bed i n Tabl e 1,
Appendix 1, of the recommendations
publ i shed i n Tunnel s et Ouvrages
Souterrains No. 150 is also applicable to
the acceptance of cut-and-cover tunnel
backing surfaces.
The only difference concerns the charac-
teristics of geotextile protective barriers;
the characteristics show in table 2 in
para. 4.4. apply to cut-and-cover tunnels.
4 - CHARACTERISTICS OF
GEOTEXTILE AND
GEOCOMPOSITE
PROTECTIVE BARRIERS
As stated in section 2 Definitions and
Vocabulary, geosynthetics form the first
component of a geomembrane water-
proofi ng system. Arti cl e 7.4.2.3. of
Fascicule 67 Titre III of the CCTG General
Specifications states that the principal
function of these geosynthetics is to pro-
vide mechanical protection against punc-
turing or tearing of the waterproof geo-
membrane. They are placed in contact
with the backing surface to accommodate
excessive surface roughness and provide
reliable, durable protection against static
puncture due to surface defects.
This protective barrier, also called extra-
dos protection on supported trench cut-
and-cover structures, may consist
- either of a geotextile made exclusively
of synthetic fibres of at least 700 g/mm
2
unit weight in cut-and-cover tunnels and
600 g/m
2
in driven tunnels,
- or a geocomposite consisting of a thin
PVCP or polyethylene geomembrane,
preferably light in colour, bonded in the
factory to a geotextile of the same nature
and physical and chemical characteristics
as the geotextile described above.
4.1 - GENERAL
CHARACTERISTICS OF
PROTECTIVE BARRIERS
Articles 7.4.3.2. and 13.02.2 of Annexe 3
and Article 7 of Annexe 4 of Fascicule 67
Titre III of CCTG General Specifications
issued in January 1992 describe the cha-
racteristics to be specified for the geotex-
tiles and geocomposites associated with
geomembrane waterproofing systems.
These characteristics concern chiefly
mechanical strength (static puncture
strength) ; the drai ni ng capaci ty for
example of the protective barrier under
both temporary and permanent condi-
tions is not considered in Fascicule 67
Titre III.
The present Guidelines therefore expand
the specifications in Fascicule 67 on the fol-
lowing points:
- Adaptation of the mechanical characte-
ristics of the protective barrier with refe-
rence to the recommendations on prepa-
ration and acceptance of tunnel backing
surfaces preparatory to installing a geo-
membrane waterproofing system publi-
shed in the November/December issue
(No. 150) of Tunnel s et Ouvrages
Souterrains. These adaptations are also
offered with reference to the recommen-
dations in Article 3 and apply more speci-
fically to cut-and-cover tunnels.
- Incorporation of a drainage function in
the protective barrier, more particularly in
the case of a geomembrane waterproo-
fing system in tunnels.
4.2 - CHEMICAL
COMPOSITION OF
GEOTEXTILE FIBRES
Much research has indicated a not incon-
siderable risk of hydrolysis of polyester
fibre in an alkaline environment and this
material must not be used in underground
structures where the material is usually in
contact with concrete; polypropylene or
similar materials must be used.
4.3 - MINIMUM UNIT
WEIGHT OF PROTECTIVE
BARRIER
There follows a summary of the relevant
parts of the Fascicule 67 Titre III CCTG
General Specifications (as regards mini-
mum permitted and not nominal unit
weights).
a) Driven tunnels
Article 13.02.3. of Annexe 3 specifies a
minimum unit weight of 600 g/m
2
. This
minimum remains unchanged in the speci-
fications to be included in a CCTP Contract
Specification.
The CCTP Contract Specification may
require a higher value, on the basis of
shotcrete roughness values (mean maxi-
mum depth at sidewall and roof of shot-
crete roughness) measured following the
suitability test performed on site, with
reference to acceptance conditions as
described in Table 1 of the recommenda-
tions published in Tunnels et Ouvrages
Souterrains No. 150.
As stated elsewhere in these recommen-
dations, and bearing in mind develop-
ments in tunnel support, minimum unit
weights for protective barrier materials
have been introduced for the following
types of surface:
- 800 g/m
2
for metal fibre reinforced shot-
crete
- 600 g/m
2
for concrete segments
(machine-bored tunnels)
- 1000 g/m
2
for steel support.
b) Cut-and-cover tunnels
Article 7 of Annexe 4 specifies a minimum
unit weight of 700 g/m
2
. This minimum
value remains unchanged for the follo-
wing types of surface:
- diaphragm walls precast diaphragm
walls concrete counterwalls slurry walls
sheet piling with polystyrene filling.
The unit weight for diaphragm walls not
finished with trowelled mortar and shot-
crete may be increased on the basis of
mean maximum depth of sidewall rough-
ness measured during suitability tests on
site. As in the case of driven tunnels, the
increase in unit weight should refer to the
different acceptance situations in Table 1
appended to the recommendations publi-
shed in Tunnels et Ouvrages Souterrains
No. 150.
The minimum unit weight for Berlin walls
is 1000 g/m
2
.
4.4 HYDRAULIC
CHARACTERISTICS
Working group GT9 recommends that a
drainage capability should be added to
the mechanical strength originally devol-
ved on protective barriers against static
puncture by Fascicule 67 Titre III. This will
make it possible to intercept and drain
small water flows during construction,
preventing water passing through the
geotextile with the possibility of interfe-
ring with thermal seaming of the strips of
synthetic waterproofing geomembrane.
Depending on seepage rates, the geotex-
tile might be replaced locally by a protec-
tive/draining geocomposite as described
below.
This draining function is even more impor-
tant on completion of the works, under
permanent operating conditions, because
Guidelines on waterproofing and drainage of underground structures
TUNNELS ET OUVRAGES SOUTERRAINS HORS-SERIE N 2 2005
119
Guidelines on waterproofing and drainage of underground structures
it must collect water flowing in from the
surrounding ground and convey it to the
drainage system generally installed at the
bottom of the sidewall or roof.
In order to ensure lasting performance of
the draining capability of the protective
barrier, GT9 will expand this recommen-
dation at a later date after examining
geotextile filtering properties, to prevent
fouling if for example the inflowing see-
page displays incrusting properties; ano-
ther factor considered will be permeabi-
lity to water (NFENISO 10319).
It might be noted that protective geo-
composites are commercially available
with the following properties:
- filtration with a layer of geotextile
- drainage with a thick layer of geogrid
- watertightness with a thin synthetic layer
(PVCP).
These protective geocomposites may
usefully be recommended if the seepage
water is highly incrusting or carries a
heavy load of fines from the surrounding
ground.
This hydraulic characteristic is not requi-
red for protective barriers in which the
geomembrane waterproofing system
does not provide permanent drainage (for
example, in cut-and-cover tunnels).
Proposed hydraulic characteristics
Following many comparative laboratory
tests of hydraulic transmissivity on several
types of geotextile, working group GT9
recommends the fol l owi ng mi ni mum
hydraulic values:
- minimum capacity 15 litres/metre/hour
- minimum transmissivity 4.6 x 10
-6
m
2
/s
These values were determined from a
transmissivity test performed by the
procedure described in French standard
NF EN 15012958 under the conditions
described in para. 5.3.
These values are proposed for water flows
habitually encountered in underground
structures; for higher flows, GT9 recom-
mend the following modifications to the
geomembrane waterproofing system.
Underground structures di spl ayi ng
locally high flows (more than 0.5 l/min): At
leakage sites, install hoops consisting of
geospacers of variable width to convey
the water to the drainage system at the
bottom of the sidewall or roof before ins-
talling the geotextile protective barrier. At
places where inflow is more than 30 l/min,
interception and drainage must be provi-
ded by drains, as described in section 6 of
these Guidelines. The drains must be
connected to the sidewall or roof drai-
nage system if designed as permanent
installations, or filled with grout if desi-
gned as temporary installations.
Underground structures with large areas
of support and diffuse seepage liable to
pass through the geotextile protective
barrier: Replace the geotextile protective
barrier with a geocomposite consisting of
a geotextile placed against the backing
surface having a unit weight of up to 600
to 1200 g/m
2
(to suit mean maximum
roughness depth at bottom of sidewall
and roof) and a transmissivity of not less
than 4.6 x 10
-6
m
2
/s. On the geomembrane
face, the geotextile is combined with a
synthetic film of the following thickness
(to sui t the rel evant geotexti l e uni t
weight):
- 600 g/m
2
: thickness 200 microns mini-
mum
- 800 g/m
2
: thickness 150 microns mini-
mum
- 1000 g/m
2
: thickness 100 microns mini-
mum
- 1200 g/m
2
: thickness 100 microns mini-
mum.
The geocomposite is fastened to the bac-
king surface by means of synthetic disks
as described in the GT9 recommenda-
tions on the use of PVC disk fasteners for
geomembrane waterproofing systems
publ i shed i n Tunnel s et Ouvrages
Souterrains No 138.
4.5 - PHYSICAL AND
CHEMICAL PROPERTIES
Working group GT9 recommend adapting
and amending the specifications concer-
ning
- tensile properties according to French
standard NFP 84.501 for synthetic mem-
brane protective barriers and NF EN ISO
10319 for geotextiles and similar pro-
ducts,
- static puncture strength according to
NFP 84.507.
These new speci fi cati ons are shown
against structures and backing surface
types in tables 1 and 2 below.
TUNNELS ET OUVRAGES SOUTERRAINS HORS-SERIE N 2 2005
120
Table 1 - Specifications for driven tunnels
(*) Minimum not nominal specification
Table 2 - Specifications for cut-and-cover tunnels
Steel arch
Minimum requirement
Shotcrete Concrete
and plate
support segments
support
w/o fibre w/fibr
600 80 600 1000
0.6 0.8 0.6 7
70 70 70 70
12 12 12 12
4.6 x 10
-6
4.6 x 10
-6
4.6 x 10
-6
4.6 x 10
-6
Support shuttered
Berlin or trowelled concrete, Ground
Minimum wall, sheet piling Shotcrete diaphragm
wall,
requirement (*) with polystyrene wall
hybrid
filling
w/o fibre
w/fibre
Geotextile unit weight
(g/m
2
)
700 700 800 800 1000
Static puncture (kN)
0.7 0.7 0.8 0.8 1
Elongation at
max force (%)
50 50 50 50 70
Tensile strength
(kN/m)
12 12 12 12 30
Unit weight (g/m
2
)
Static puncture 8mm
dia needle (kN)
Elongation at max force (%)
Tensile strength (kN)
Transmissivity at 150 kPa (m
2
/s)
NFEN 963
NFP 84507
NFEN ISO
10319
NFEN ISO
10319
NFEN ISO
12958
Standard
4.6 - RESISTANCE OF
PROTECTIVE BARRIERS
AGAINST HEAT DAMAGE
During thermal welding of special synthe-
tic disks to the geomembrane with hot air
at 200-300C, it often happens that the
protective barrier, usually a geotextile, is
accidentally burned superficially or more
deeply, considerably reducing it static
puncture strength locally. To control this
type of damage, GT9, following labora-
tory and field testing, recommends the
following practices to suit different types
of protective barrier:
- Geotextile protective barrier: use faste-
ning disks of the type described in the
recommendations published in Tunnels et
Ouvrages Souterrains No. 138 having a
skirt of substantially larger diameter than
the disk proper to provide greater protec-
ti on l ocal l y agai nst acci dental heat
damage.
- Protective geocomposite: partial protec-
tion against heat damage is provided by
the synthetic film on the geomembrane
side. Polyethylene film performs better
against accidental burning provided the
film is not less that 200 microns thick.
Fire resistance of protective barrier
In the absence of any tests and French or
European standards, the fire resistance of
protective barriers was not specifically
dealt with by GT9, but in view of the sen-
sitivity to fire of, in particular, geotextiles,
which are frequently the source of ignition
and sustain the subsequent fire in a geo-
membrane waterproofing system, the
working group realise the need to intro-
duce fire resistance specifications in the
medium term. Such specifications requi-
ring, among other things, a minimum fire
resistance of class MI or BI (DIN 4102) can
be expected in the near future, especially
as manufacturers already possess this
type of product in the laboratory; in the
meantime, preference should be given to
products of this type.
5 - GEOSPACERS
AND DRAINAGE
GEOCOMPOSITES
5.1 - DRAINAGE
FUNDAMENTALS
Synthetic materials basically providing
drainage performance as defined and
described in section 1 above are used.
These drainage materials can be used for
the following functions:
- Temporary interception of water flowing
into the driven or cut-and-cover tunnel, in
which case, they must always be used in
conjunction with a geomembrane water-
proofing system.
- Permanent seepage interception and
drainage in an underground structure, in
which case the drain material is generally
used al one wi thout a geomembrane
waterproofing system (except in a few
cases where it may for example be used in
combination with a partial geomembrane
waterproofing system installed only at the
roof or cover decking). In this configura-
tion, the drainage system provides the
main seepage control system for the
structure by intercepting and discharging
seepage from the surrounding ground
and preventing the build-up of hydrosta-
tic pressure.
These drain materials can be installed as
follows:
a) Localised drainage
Interception and drainage of inflow with
localised peaks in excess of 0.5 l/min. The
system described in section 1 above may
take the form of a hoop when installed as
vertical strips of variable width or in the
form of horizontal strips 1.50m to 2.00m
wide.
Localised drainage may be used in the fol-
lowing situations:
- Temporary drainage in which case, it is
usually conceived as preformed cellular
panels 8-20mm thick (thickness to suit
discharge required under 100-150 kPa
green concrete pressure). Hoops and hori-
zontal strip drains are simply pinned to
the backing and connected up to the geo-
membrane waterproofing system drai-
nage system.
- Permanent drainage in which case, it
generally consists of strips of geocompo-
site with a filter layer. The strips are gene-
rally pinned to the backing (in driven or
supported cut-and-cover tunnels),verti-
cally across joints in the linings to driven
tunnels or in open trench diaphragm
walls, and horizontally in driven tunnels at
the cold joint between invert and roof.
Strips of geospacer may also be used,
provided they are fitted at the edges with
a waterstop (precompressed type) to pre-
vent ingress of cement laitance when
concreting the permanent lining. Drain
strips must always be connected to a lon-
gitudinal drain, generally placed at the
bottom of the roof or sidewall.
b) Area drainage
As with localised drainage, two cases are
met with.
Guidelines on waterproofing and drainage of underground structures
TUNNELS ET OUVRAGES SOUTERRAINS HORS-SERIE N 2 2005
121
Photo 6 - Temporary localised drain using geospacer strip
Photo 7 - Vertical drainage geocomposite on
supported-trench cut-and-cover tunnel sidewalls
Guidelines on waterproofing and drainage of underground structures
- Temporary area drainage, used in
combination with a geomembrane water-
proofing system to drain areas in the roof
di schargi ng hi gh seepage fl ows, or
inflows at the invert as mentioned in sec-
tion 6.2 below. Preformed cellular panels
are generally used for this purpose. They
are pinned to the backing with overlaps,
depending on the system, of between
0.10m and 0.20m per layer, and connec-
ted to the temporary drainage or dewate-
ring system.
- Permanent area drainage, which
includes a waterproofing capability, is
used mainly in cut-and-cover tunnels built
in supported or unsupported trenches,
but never where exposed to hydrostatic
pressure. It is usually the sidewalls that are
so equipped, and sometimes the invert,
but this type of drain is quite rare in
France. For a permanent drainage system,
it is strongly advised to use drainage geo-
composites having a filter layer to ensure
durability of the drainage system. The
drain strips are unwound vertically with an
overlap (depending on the system) of
0.10m to 0.20m. The drain strips are pin-
ned to the backing at the top and, if
necessary, due to the height of the strip,
at intermediate levels. The vertical drai-
nage system must connect with a poly-
ethylene system with an inspection cover
at most every 50m for cleaning the sys-
tem.
5.2 - DESIGN
The designer must not specify the drai-
nage capacity of the material on the basis
of the capacity of the longitudinal drain,
but from the expected seepage flow from
the surrounding ground. The capacity of
the longitudinal drainage system will ulti-
mately be of course set on the basis of the
expected inflow rate, but must also refer
to operational requirements specified by
the owner (in particular, locations and
dimensions of inspection points).
a) Driven tunnels
Drainage geospacers and geocomposites
are ranked in table 3 below.
The diameters in table 3 show the cross
section theoretically needed to discharge
the flows considered but do not allow for
any fouling that might be expected with
reference to the chemistry of the water.
For localised major inflows, extra inter-
ceptors should be provided, and these
call for special longitudinal interception
and drainage systems.
b) Cut-and-cover tunnels
Inflow is usually less in cut-and-cover tun-
nels than in driven tunnels. Therefore, in
the absence of precise data on the flows
to be considered in designing the drai-
nage system, the first step will be to check
that the transmissivity of the drainage
material is compatible with the permeabi-
lity of the surrounding ground.
When designing the drainage system for
the invert or cover deck, the classification
in table 3 might apply. However, the desi-
gner will have to calculate the longitudinal
flow rate to check the drainage capacity
(under a low hydraulic gradient) of the
drain material specified and decide the
spacing of pumpage points.
5.3 - REFERENCE
STANDARDS AND TESTS
Working group GT9 recommends desi-
gners including the following tests and
standards in the Specification for drain
materials to be incorporated in under-
ground structures, without losing sight of
the fact that they must reflect the condi-
ti ons under whi ch the materi al s wi l l
actually be used.
Note that the designer might use experi-
mental standard G 38.061 (Feb. 1993) on
recommendations on the use of geotex-
tiles determination of hydraulic proper-
ties in drain and filter systems, and might
also begin to refer to draft European stan-
dard NF EN 13252 on characteristics of
geotextiles in drainage systems.
a) Driven tunnels
The transmissivity test should be perfor-
med by the procedure in NF EN ISO
12958 with a gradient i = 1, although it
should be modified with the test
specimen placed between a rigid
panel and a flexible membrane.
Test pressure should be 150 kPa for
6 hours (the ti me requi red for
concreting the roof).
b) Cut-and-cover tunnels
b1) Vertical drainage for open
trench tunnel
In this case, the vertical drain material is
subject to a permanent pressure whose
value depends on the height of the back-
fill. In the most common cases, it will be
between 50 kPa and 100 kPa.
The following tests should be specified:
- Transmissivity test with gradient i = 1
performed as described in para. 5.3.a)
Driven Tunnels above. A post-creep trans-
missivity test should also be required, by
the method described in XP ENV 1897 on
determination of creep properties under
compressi on cl assi fi cati on i ndex
(G38126) (this standard is as yet experi-
mental in France).
- Long term creep test under compressive
stress according to the standard in force.
B2) Horizontal drainage
A low-gradient (i = 0.02 or 0.05 or as a
default value 0.1) transmissivity test
should be specified under 50 kPa stress.
6 - INTERCEPTION OF
LOCALISED LEAKS
It may be necessary to intercept localised
inflows of water, for example, before
applying shotcrete or installing a geo-
membrane waterproofing system in order
to allow these works to proceed normally.
Two types of interceptor can be conside-
red:
- Localised interception, with hemispheri-
cal or cylindrical drains of suitable diame-
ter for the flow rates involved.
- Area interception, mainly under the
invert, using geospacers or geocompo-
sites whose characteristics are chosen
with reference to table 3.
6.1 - ROOF AND SIDEWALL
INTERCEPTORS
Temporary or permanent interception
may be considered, both in driven and
cut-and-cover tunnels, under the follo-
wing circumstances:
a) Before spraying shotcrete, to inter-
cept localised leaks where the water
might adversely affect the bond with the
surrounding ground or support. In this
case, semi-cylindrical flexible pipes are
used, general made of PVC, with a flow
section habitually ranging from 6 cm
2
to 20
cm
2
. The pipes are held in place at inter-
vals with pats of rapid hardening cement
or metal staples. They do not usually need
to be connected to the geomembrane
waterproofing system except if the lea-
TUNNELS ET OUVRAGES SOUTERRAINS HORS-SERIE N 2 2005
122
Category
Drainage Drain dia.
capacity at 2% slope
1 0.1 l/s/m 100 mm
2 0.1 0.25 l/s/m 125 mm
3 0.25 0.5 l/s/m 150 mm
Table 3 - Classification of drainage geospacers
and geocomposites
kage exceeds 1 l/m, in which case, it is
advisable to use cylindrical PVC drains for
temporary installations or cylindrical HDPE
drains for permanent systems.
When using very large diameters to per-
manentl y drai n l arge fl ows from, for
example, intermittently or permanently
flowing karsts under hydrostatic pressure,
it is recommended a drain of at least
100mm diameter, again in polyethylene,
with a compressive strength of not less
than 150 kPa.
As with any large permanent drainage
system, drains for localised inflows are
usually connected directly to the clean
water main drainage system.
The connection of this type of circular
drain with the geomembrane of a geo-
membrane waterproofing system must be
treated as a singular point in the contrac-
tors waterproofing detail design dra-
wings. The connection with the geomem-
brane is effected either by a metal system
(flange-to-flange type) or (the most com-
monly used arrangement) by a synthetic
stub collar as shown in sketch 3 on dra-
wing 1 below.
If a PVC drain provides the temporary leak
interception function, it must always be
filled with quick setting cement or poly-
mer resins after the permanent tunnel
lining has been concreted. If polymers are
used, it is recommended using two-part
water-reactive polyurethanes which are
much less pervious than single-compo-
nent polyurethanes. Whatever material is
used, the method of filling the drain (type
of filling material, grouting pressure,
length of filled portion) must be the sub-
ject of a specific operating procedure
submitted to the Engineer for approval.
b) After spraying shotcrete on verti-
cal surfaces: in this case, inflow is inter-
cepted and disposed of in the following
manner:
- The same PVC or polyurethane pipes are
generally used as before spraying shot-
crete. In cut-and-cover tunnels, it is better
to use strips of geospacer of the cellular
drainage panel type as shown in sketch 1
on drawing 1, because a 0.30m to 0.50m
width is more efficient in intercepting lea-
kage through a diaphragm wall joint.
The connection to the temporary or per-
manent longitudinal drainage system of
the geomembrane waterproofing system
can be made as follows:
- either directly into the horizontal strip
drain of the geomembrane waterproofing
system, for semi-cylindrical pipes and
geospacer strips,
- or directly (depending on drain diameter
and flow rate) into the permanent drai-
nage system of the geomembrane water-
proofing system or the clean water main
drainage system.
6.2 - TEMPORARY
INTERCEPTION AND
DRAINAGE OF INVERT IN
STRUCTURES RENDERED
COMPLETELY WATERTIGHT
BY A GEOMEMBRANE
WATERPROOFING SYSTEM
6.2.1. Driven tunnels
Generally, waterproofing is done in two
stages:
- Stage 1: waterproof invert and bottoms
of sidewalls
- Stage 2: waterproof roof.
The invert is usually concreted before ins-
talling the roof waterproofing system.
Temporary drainage problems very often
only concern intercepting and draining
water fl owi ng between the bl i ndi ng
concrete and floor geomembrane water-
proofi ng system duri ng the vari ous
construction phases.
Invert drainage can be provided in the fol-
lowing ways, to suit construction method:
Guidelines on waterproofing and drainage of underground structures
TUNNELS ET OUVRAGES SOUTERRAINS HORS-SERIE N 2 2005
123
Drawing 1
TEMPORARY SIDEWALL
AND ROOF INTERCEPTION
Figure 1 - Drain panel strip drainage
Figure 2 - Half-round drain
Figure 3 - Connection between drain intercepting localised
leakage and geomenbrane waterproofing system
M
M
M
Guidelines on waterproofing and drainage of underground structures
a) Top to bottom method
Geomembrane waterproofing system ins-
tallation and invert concreting proceed
from the highest point on the longitudinal
tunnel profile to the lowest.
There is a choice of three possibilities
from the arrangements shown in drawing
2 Invert drainage during construction.
Sketch 1: Cellular panel between blin-
ding concrete and geomembrane water-
proofing system. The width of the panel is
governed by the drainage capacity requi-
red. For example, a panel 20mm deep has
a capacity of 1.3 l/s per metre width. The
sketch shows the most commonly used
system because, apart from its good
hydraulic capacity, it has the advantage of
not interfering with the installation of the
waterproofing system and fixing steel
reinforcement.
Sketch 2: Flat gully drain at the lowest
point of the invert between the blinding
concrete and geomembrane waterproo-
fing system. Capacity is governed by the
fl ow to be di scharged (see tabl e 3).
Compared to the alternative in sketch 1,
this arrangement is mostly used where
high inflows are encountered. Its disad-
vantage is that it collects only part of the
flow from the invert and hampers the
work of i nstal l i ng the geomembrane
waterproofing system (at the transverse
seaming locations) and steel fixing.
Sketch 3: Cylindrical drain in drainage
trench. This arrangement appears the
most suitable for heavy inflows, firstly
because of the discharge capacity offered
by the 150mm circular drain commonly
used, and more importantly, because it
avoids all interference with geomembrane
waterproofing system installation and
steel fixing.
b) Bottom to top method
Geomembrane waterproofing sys-
tem installation and invert concre-
ting proceed from the lowest point
on the longitudinal tunnel profile to
the highest.
The three arrangements already
mentioned apply, although gene-
rally, preference is given to
- sketch 1 for low inflows rates
- sketch 3 for high inflow rates with
the risk of pockets of water lifting
the geomembrane waterproofing
system when pouri ng the i nvert
concrete.
6.2.2. Cut-and-cover tunnels
Temporary drainage problems only
arise with supported-trench tunnels,
where the sidewall support may
allow water to seep into the trench.
There are two possible situations:
a) Tunnel above water table
This is the simplest case because no
particular drainage system is needed
except perhaps for providing a man-
hole or sump at low points to pump
out rainwater.
b) Tunnel below water table
This is the commonest situation, with
inflow coming from the side support
and excavation bottom. After provi-
ding the localised drainage arrange-
ments described in para. 5.1. or
grouting the ground if inflows are too
heavy, the water col l ected i s
conveyed by a pair of lateral headers,
as shown in sketch 4, drawing 2.
Circular drain diameter is chosen
with reference to drainage capacity
shown in table 3.
The headers discharge into a sump
or manhole at the lowest point.
To avoi d water pockets formi ng
under the geomembrane waterproo-
fing system, it is important to pro-
vide for permanent or intermittent
pumping, as dictated by the rate at
which water collects in the sump or
manhole.
Where pump sumps are present, the
connection to the geomembrane water-
proofing system must be made as shown
in sketch 5, drawing 2.
The steel cover to the pump sump must
be watertight all the time the tunnel is
exposed to hydrostatic pressure.
TUNNELS ET OUVRAGES SOUTERRAINS HORS-SERIE N 2 2005
124
Photo 8 - TGV HST tunnel, Marseille.
Temporary interception and drainage at invert
under geomembrane waterproofing system
Sketch 5 - Junction between geomembrane waterproofing
system and temporary pump sump
Sketch 4 - Longitudinal drains in blinding concrete
in cut-and-cover tunnel
Sketch 3 - Drain embedded in blinding concrete
or invert base concrete
Sketch 2 - Flat gully drain
Sketch 1 - Cellular drain pannel
Drawing 2
TEMPORARY INVERT DRAINAGE
DURING CONSTRUCTION
7 - DRAINAGE SYSTEM
ASSOCIATED WITH A
GEOMEMBRANE WATER-
PROOFING SYSTEM AT
BOTTOM OF TUNNEL ROOF
7.1. PURPOSE OF
DRAINAGE SYSTEM
These arrangements at the bottom of
each roof arch collect seepage water flo-
wing in from the surrounding ground, col-
lected by the geomembrane waterproo-
fi ng system on the extrados of the
permanent tunnel lining.
The water is then conveyed either by a
combined or separate drainage system to
a natural discharge point.
7.2 - CHANGES IN
DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESIGN
The appearance of these seepage collec-
tion systems coincides with the use of the
first synthetic geomembranes employed
for providing a tunnel with umbrella type
seepage control.
The design of these systems subsequently
evolved over time to reflect the practices
and experience of engineers and respond
to emerging concerns of owners regar-
ding their maintenance.
This process was marked by the following
three stages, which have led to profound
changes in the design and function of
these drainage systems.
a) Use of agricultural-type circular
drains
These 80mm dia. circular drains (with or
without an outer covering of geotextile)
around which a waterproofing geomem-
brane is wrapped, were very widely used
in the nineteen-eighties.
The drainage system was simply suspen-
ded from the support, before concreting
the banquette, by means of PVC strips
pinned to the support.
Generally the water drained towards the
intrados of the lining was discharged
directly onto the footpath through plastic
tees at approximately ten metre intervals.
This type of drainage system quickly came
up against problems, such as the fact of
having to follow the often tortuous confi-
guration of the supports and the very
many places where head losses resulted
from the changes of direction of the drain.
In addition to this hydraulics problem,
there was the poor crushing strength of
the drain, especially when concreting the
tunnel lining when pressures of 100-150
kPa from the green concrete are common.
This frequently crushed the drain, sub-
stantially reducing discharge capacity of
the drain.
The first development of this type of drai-
nage system, shown in sketch 1 on dra-
wing 3 was to place the drain on top of
the banquette; this kept it straight and
the waterproof geomembrane was laid
over it before it was fixed in place on the
banquette. A shotcrete shell sprayed just
before concreti ng the roof provi ded
strength for the drain during this phase of
the works.
b) Generalisation of rigid straight
circular drains
These 100mm dia. circular drains are pla-
ced directly in a chase provided in the top
of the banquette. Layi ng the drai n
straight improved flow efficiency for the
drained water and reduced the risk of fou-
ling (depending on water chemistry). As
shown in sketch 2, drawing 3, the water-
proof geomembrane passes over the
drain to a point in the banquette where it
i s j oi ned to a steel angl e
embedded in the concrete or
a flat pinned to the concrete;
the steel angle and flat are
both co-rolled (galvanised
steel + PVC on top face).
Only the top half of the drain
has slots spaced 120 apart,
the lower half carrying away
the water; flow is improved by
placing a horizontal strip of
geospacer j ust above the
drainage system.
In this technique, the straight
drain connects every 40-50
metres to a header, generally
placed under the tunnel road-
way. This technique paved the
way for the first CCTV inspec-
tion and cleaning arrange-
ments, usually comprising a
bay in the sidewall of variable
dimensions, connected to the
drain by pipes inclined at an
angle of 45.
Despi te the undeni abl e
improvement from this type
of drainage system, it does
have disadvantages, such as
with the branch pipes connec-
ting to the under-road hea-
der, since they are in danger
of being distorted by the concreting
work.
c) Circular drains replaced by
gullies with rigid covers
In the nineteen-nineties, the trend in drai-
nage system design was to place the
whole system inside the banquette.
This new technique consists of boxing-out
the shape of the future gully in the top of
the banquette (so no drain pipe is nee-
ded) covered with rigid material which
allows water to pass. The gully has the
advantage of allowing the flow section to
be easily increased by increasing gully
depth, with no impact on the width of the
banquette.
In tunnels where this technique is now
used, the covering materials may be
metal, concrete, or even a synthetic mate-
rial capable of successfully withstanding
loads applied by the green concrete,
without any danger of crushing reducing
the fl ow secti on. The geomembrane
waterproofing system runs on top of the
gully cover and, as shown in sketch 3 of
drawing 3, the geomembrane is anchored
either on a co-rolled flat pinned to the
banquette, or (this was the case in some
Guidelines on waterproofing and drainage of underground structures
TUNNELS ET OUVRAGES SOUTERRAINS HORS-SERIE N 2 2005
125
Photo 9 - Puymorens tunnel
Rigid cover to drainage system using "metal tiles" withdrain strip
Guidelines on waterproofing and drainage of underground structures
of the A43 motorway tunnels in France) is
welded directly to synthetic grid material
forming the rigid gully cover. This type of
cover has the advantage of saving a few
centimetres in width at the lift surface bet-
ween the banquette and roof sidewall
concrete.
In nearly all road tunnels built or being
built over the last five years, drainage ins-
pection and maintenance bays are housed
in the lining at drain level, as illustrated in
sketch 4, drawing 3.
These inspection bays provide for mainte-
nance during operation of the structure.
They are spaced 25m to 200m apart, on
the basis of the following criteria:
- flow rate of water intercepted
- physical and chemical characteristics of
the water (see design section below)
- means available and frequency of drain
system cleaning during the operational
life of the structure.
TUNNELS ET OUVRAGES SOUTERRAINS HORS-SERIE N 2 2005
126
Sketch 1 - Agricultural drain on banquette
Sketch 2 - Straight drain in banquette concrete
Sketch 3
Gully with rigid cover
Sketch 4 - Inspection & cleaning bay
for geomembrane waterproofing
Drawing 3
DRAINS ASSOCIATED
WITH GEOMEMBRANE
WATERPROOFING SYSTEM
AT BOTTOM OF ROOF
M
M
M
M
Guidelines on waterproofing and drainage of underground structures
TUNNELS ET OUVRAGES SOUTERRAINS HORS-SERIE N 2 2005
127
7.3 - DESIGN
In the first place, the drainage system at
the bottom of the roof must fulfil the fol-
lowing functions:
Collect and drain seepage water, to
the following criteria:
a) Hydraulic criteria
- flow section between 150 cm
2
and
450 cm
2
- minimum absorption section (openings
allowing water to pass) of rigid gully cove-
ring material 400 cm
2
per metre tunnel
length.
b) Mechanical criteria
- rigid covering material and horizontal
strip drain to be strong and retain flow
characteristics under pressure from green
concrete (150 kPa)
c) Construction criteria
- laitance not to penetrate into drainage
system when placing roof concrete (the
waterproofi ng geomembrane must
always be anchored in a watertight man-
ner to the banquette and rigid covering)
- continuity of flow between tunnel sup-
port and gully by providing for example a
mortar transition curve
- bottom of horizontal strip drain to over-
lap rigid covering.
Maintenance of drainage system
As stated above, the spacing between the
inspection and maintenance bays is very
important for successful maintenance of
the structure.
Bay spacing should above all be specified
on the basis of the flow to be controlled
of course, but also with reference to the
physical and chemical characteristics of
the water. At the design stage, the follo-
wing analyses should be made on water
samples taken from the construction site:
- Concentration of aggressive substances
by the test procedure described in French
standard NFP 18.011, May 1985, for the
following substances:
- CO2 content
- Sulphate SO
4
2
_
content
- Magnesium Mg
2+
content
- Ammonia NH
4
+
content
- Determination of calco-carbonic aggres-
sivity calculation of water saturation
index
- Total suspended solids.
7.4 - ACCEPTANCE OF
DRAINAGE SYSTEM
The tunnel ci vi l works constructi on
contract should provide for checking the
successful future performance of the drai-
nage system at the bottom of the roof by
specifying that, after pouring all perma-
nent linings, the complete drainage sys-
tem must be inspected by CCTV, from
each inspection and maintenance bay. A
flow test might also be specified to sup-
plement this inspection.
8 - POROUS CONCRETE
Porous concrete is used mainly for hori-
zontal surfaces, usually under the invert,
and may be combined with the following
drainage or waterproofing systems:
- Mai n tunnel drai nage: The porous
concrete under the invert is additional to
the drainage system at sidewalls and roof,
of the drainage geocomposite or geospa-
cer type.
- Drainage to part only of the tunnel or
tunnel invert, for example, where sidewall
and roof are waterproofed with a geo-
membrane waterproofing system.
Porous concrete is sometimes call no-
fines concrete. It is never reinforced or
pumped.
Void ratio is greater than 15%. Porous
concrete is characterised by its crushing
strength and permeability.
8.1 - POROUS CONCRETE
MIX COMPOSITION
a) Aggregate
Aggregate must comply with the specifi-
cations in French standard NFP 18.541.
In order to obtain the desired permeabi-
lity, gap graded aggregate is strongly
recommended.
Porous concrete mixes are usually obtai-
ned either by using only gravel (5/10 and
10/20 or 10/20 alone for example), or by
using only sand with a coarse gravel (0/5
et 10/20 for example).
It is strongly recommended that only sili-
ceous aggregate should be used.
b) Cement
Cements must comply with French stan-
dard NFP 15.301 and display the NF
mark.
Photo 10 Foix tunnel Drainage system at bottom
of roof Precast concrete with rigid concrete covers
Photo 11 Hurtieres tunnel Drainage system
at bottom of roof Manufactured PVC units
with rigid PVC covers
Guidelines on waterproofing and drainage of underground structures
Cement content will not usually be less
than 350kg cement per m3 concrete.
Since porous concrete is intended to be
exposed to a permanent flow of water, it
is strongly recommended not to use even
C3A-poor ordinary (French designation
CPA) or slag (CPJ) cement, in order to
avoid any risk of the pores being partially
or completely blocked by calcium carbo-
nate precipitate.
Working group GT9 recommends avoi-
di ng any ri sk of cl oggi ng or l oss of
strength over time by preferably using
French designations CHF.CEMIII/B.ES or
CLK.CEM.III/C.ES cement.
If supplies are not readily available, other
cement types can be substituted by refer-
ri ng to French standard P 18.011.
Depending on the aggressivity of the
environment as determined from the
water analyses, it might also be possible
to use ei ther CLC.CEM.V/B cement,
whose CaCO content is less than 50%, or
CPJ.CEM.II/B containing less than 80%
clinker.
c) Aggregate cement
compatibility
The cement and aggregate must not pro-
duce disorders such as alkali aggregate
reacti on l i abl e to adversel y affect
concrete integrity (French standard NFP
18.541). In view of the permanent flow of
water in porous concrete, such concrete
must be classified as 'prevention class C'
according to the 'Recommendations for
the prevention of distress due to alkali
aggregate reaction' issued by LCPC.
For this reason, aggregate for porous
concrete must qualify as 'non-reactive'
(NR).
In the event of unavailability, 'potentially
reactive' (PR) or 'worst case potentially
reactive' (PRP) aggregate may be used,
subject to thorough investigation based
on experimental data acceptable to the
Engineer. These tests are referred to in
the LCPC recommendations mentioned
above.
8.2 - POROUS CONCRETE
SPECIFICATIONS
Because of their high void ratios, porous
concretes are relatively low-strength. It is
therefore necessary to find a compromise
between concrete strength and permea-
bility.
a) Compressive strength
Twenty-eight day characteristic strength
fc 28 is measured on 16 x 32cm cylinders.
It is recommended specifying
fc 28 8 MPa
b) Permeability
Permeability is determined by measuring
the flow of water passing through a 16 x
32cm cylinder.
The permeability coefficient is measured
with the Darcy formula
V = KJ = K
dh
ds
in which
K is the permeability coefficient
J =
dh is the hydraulic gradient
ds
V is the flow velocity or flow per unit area.
It is recommended specifying
V 0.02 m/s, or V 0.20 l/dm
2
/s
8.3 - POROUS CONCRETE
DRAINAGE SYSTEM
The porous concrete must be accompa-
nied by a drainage system to be able to
monitor, and if necessary, ensure the dura-
bility of its performance. The design and
density of this drainage system will of
course depend on the flow to be dischar-
ged to the main tunnel clear water drai-
nage system and the physical and chemi-
cal characteristics of the intercepted
water. The tests mentioned in para. 7.3.
above should be performed when desi-
gning the drainage system.
The minimum requirements are as follows:
- drains, preferably polyethylene, to be
100mm minimum diameter with provision
for CCTV inspection
- drainage system inspection chambers
every 25-50 metres at most (the actual
spacing is determined on the basis of the
chemical analyses mentioned above).
9 - PERMANENT DRAINAGE
SYSTEM FOR SIDEWALL
AND ROOF JOINTS
These drainage systems are mainly inten-
ded to intercept localised leaks through
the contraction joints in underground
structures. They are generally used in
structures not waterproofed by means of
a geomembrane waterproofing system on
the extrados or waterproofing system
bonded to the intrados.
They are most often employed to inter-
cept and discharge the seepage which
usually occurs through joints in the side-
walls of cut-and-cover tunnels in which
cast-in-place or prefabricated diaphragm
walls provide the permanent structural
support. Seepage is intercepted by these
systems, generally installed vertically,
discharging into open gullies at the side-
wall toe which themselves discharge into
the main tunnel drainage system.
These drainage systems are also used,
especially at tunnel roofs and cover dec-
king, to repair defective intrados and
extrados waterproofing systems. This sub-
ject will be dealt with at length in forthco-
ming guidelines on treatment of leaks into
underground structures to be issued by
working group GT9 in 2001.
9.1 - DESCRIPTION OF
CONTRACTION JOINT
DRAINAGE SYSTEMS
Drawing 4 shows sketches of the various
types of drainage systems currently used
in underground structures.
The appropriate drainage system is cho-
sen with reference to the following para-
meters:
- physical and chemical characteristics of
the water, which must be checked and
assessed by the procedure described in
section 7.3
- possible frost protection to drainage sys-
tem
- seepage flow rate and pressure.
9.1.1 - Physical and chemical cha-
racteristics of seepage
If required by the results of the physical
and chemical analyses of the water from
the surrounding ground, especially its
calco-carbonic aggressivity and total sus-
pended solids, the permanent drainage
system will have provision for inspection
and cleaning, or even removal and repla-
cement.
This requirement also applies to integra-
ted structure tunnels (e.g. diaphragm
walls with inner lining concealing the drai-
nage system). In such cases, it is recom-
mended providing manholes, for inspec-
ting and maintaining the drainage system.
TUNNELS ET OUVRAGES SOUTERRAINS HORS-SERIE N 2 2005
128
Seepage with low calco-carbonic
aggressivity or TSS content
If the seepage water is what is called
poorly 'incrusting' or poorly loaded, the
following 'non-dismantlable' drainage
systems can be used:
- Strip drain covered with mortar or
shotcrete (sketch 1, drawing 1)
This drainage system is preferably used in
the verti cal posi ti on. The stri p drai n
usually consists of a cellular-plate geospa-
cer as described in section 5 above. It is
0.30m to 0.50m wide (to suit joint width)
and pinned to the backing surface; if the
l eakage rate i s l ocal l y hi gh (0.1 to 1
litre/minute), a precompressed waterstop
is placed underneath it along each edge.
The strip drain is then covered with tro-
welled or sprayed mortar or concrete to
protect it from damage. A fire resistant
mortar can be used if fire resistance is
specifically required.
This type of system, by reason of its 'stiff-
ness,' is more applicable to joints in cast-
in-place and prefabricated diaphragm
walls and more generally, joints with little
or no movement.
- Manufactured strip heat-welded to co-
rolled anchor (sketch 2)
This type of drain is preferably used in
vertical configurations and, if leakage is
very slight (drips), for roof vaults and
cover decking. The manufactured strip
generally consists of a flexible polyethy-
lene or PVCP geomembrane, 0.20m to
0.30m wide, hot-air welded for its whole
length to a co-rolled anchor strip (galvani-
sed steel with a thin film of PVCP or poly-
ethylene on top face) pinned to the bac-
king surface.
For heavy leakage, especially from the
roof or cover deck, a precompressed
waterstop is recommended between the
backing and anchor strip.
This type of installation, by reason of its
elongation potential, can be used for
joints subject to large displacements, but
only for low to moderate leakage rates
(less than 0.2 litre/minute).
- Manufactured strip bonded with poly-
mer adhesive (sketch 3)
This drainage system is preferably used
with in situ concrete in vertical configura-
tions but more importantly, in horizontal
configurations, where there is heavy lea-
kage. The manufactured strip usually
consists of an elastomer geomembrane,
generally polyethylene chlorosulphonate
(Hypalon or equivalent). The 0.15m to
0.20m wide strip is bonded to the backing
over its whole length with polymer adhe-
sive (epoxy).
The elastomer properties of the strip
(more than 400% elongation) and the
watertight edge bond makes this type of
drain suitable for high-displacement roof
and deck joints where leakage is locally
high (between 0.1 and 0.5 litre/minute).
Its relatively high cost is offset by its dura-
bility.
- Internal drain and bonded thin film
cover strip (sketch 4)
This drainage system is used in vertical
and horizontal configurations on in situ
concrete in places where complete water-
tightness (and minimum dampness) is
required, in machine rooms for example.
It generally consists of an internal drain,
preferably 20-30mm dia. polyethylene,
inside the joint. The seal system is then
similar to a single or two-stage seal as
described in the AFTES Guidelines on
seals in underground structures published
in Tunnels et Ouvrages Souterrains No.
35, Sept/Oct 1979.
The composition and diameter of the
round strip allowing the joint to expand
and contract depend on expected joint
movements.
The strip of thin film polymer, usually rein-
forced to prevent it bulging if accidentally
exposed to hydrostatic pressure, is made
of polymer products which must comply
with the specifications in Article 7.2. of
Fascicule 67 Titre III of the CCTG General
Specifications.
Average thickness of this thin film is
usually 2mm.
This type of system is also used to repair
operational tunnels suffering from water-
tightness problems. In this particular case,
the multi-stage seal is installed after
controlling the leak by grouting, as will be
described in forthcoming AFTES guide-
lines.
In the event of high hydrostatic pressure,
the multi-stage seal must be designed in
accordance with the typical sketches in
the recommendati ons publ i shed i n
Tunnels et Ouvrages Souterrains No. 35.
Leakage water with high calco-carbo-
nic aggressivity or heavy TSS load
If the seepage water is qualified as highly
'incrusting' or heavily loaded, the follo-
wing 'dismantlable' drainage systems
must be specified:
- Manufactured strip with bolted flanges
(sketch 5)
The manufactured strip consists of a
flexible polyethylene or PVCP synthetic
geomembrane clamped at its edges bet-
ween a pair of 'flanges', which can be
unmade. This drainage system is recom-
mended for l eakage of 0.1 to 0.5
litre/minute at low hydrostatic pressure.
- Formed elastomer strip pinned to
backing (sketch 6)
These factory pre-formed stri ps are
usually made of synthetic rubber such as
EPDM or SBR, formed to an 'omega'
shape allowing the joint to open quite
wide under high hydrostatic pressures,
Guidelines on waterproofing and drainage of underground structures
TUNNELS ET OUVRAGES SOUTERRAINS HORS-SERIE N 2 2005
129
Photo 12 Manufactured strip drain heat-welded to co-rolled anchor
Guidelines on waterproofing and drainage of underground structures
with leakage rates of less than 0.5 0.6
litre-minute.
The strip is fastened to the backing with
stainless steel screws and wall plugs,
generally spaced 0.25m to 0.30m apart,
and 80 x 8mm E26 galvanised mild steel
clamping strips.
9.1.2 - Frost protection to drainage
system
In some situations, the drainage system
may be exposed to sub-zero tempera-
tures in winter months with consequences
which may have a disastrous effect on
operation of the structure.
This problem is influenced by the duration
of freezing weather and the length of the
tunnel. It may be confined to the portals
or cut-and-cover sections, or affect the
whole length of the tunnel.
Apart from their frost protection function,
the drainage systems must have provision
for dismantling or cleaning, depending on
the physical and chemical characteristics
of the seepage water mentioned above.
The following drainage systems may be
specified, depending on the intensity of
the cold and seepage rates:
Temperature between 0 and 3C for
not more than 5 days, leakage less than
0.5 litre/minute
- Manufactured strip with internal frost
protection layer and bolted flanges
Generally speaking, the arrangement
shown in sketch 5 is adopted with, bet-
ween the backing and the synthetic geo-
membrane strip, another strip of thermal
insulation, commonly consisting of a 15-
20mm thickness of closed-pore polyethy-
lene foam weighing more than 30 kg/m
3
,
whose thermal conductivity at 0C is less
than 0.045 W/m/C.
The maintenance capability of this arran-
gement comes from the fact that the
flange-type fixing system can be unmade.
- Prefabricated elastomer hollow strip
(sketch 8)
This type of drainage system is made as
follows:
- Cut a chase with double-blade saw,
usually 80mm deep and 100mm wide.
- Drill drain holes in bottom of chase, spa-
ced approximately 2.00m c/c to suit lea-
kage rates observed.
- Force-fit an EPDM or equivalent hollow
formed strip into the chase, usually 3mm
narrower than the strip.
In order to prevent the strip being forced
out of the chase by accidental hydrostatic
pressure from the ground or sucked out
by the slipstream from lorries in road and
motorway tunnels, it is advisable to hold it
in place with 5cm wide stainless steel
tabs, usually spaced 0.33m apart at side-
walls and 0.25m apart at roof.
The hollow strip can be removed for drain
maintenance after removing these tabs.
Temperature between 3C and 15C
for not more than 5 days, leakage bet-
ween 0.5 and 1 litre/minute
- Drainage with chase and rigid thermal
insulant (sketch 9)
Thi s type of drai nage arrangement
requires prior study of thermal conditions
in order to determine the dimensions of
the chase and shape of the polystyrene or
polyethylene foam strip acting as both
drain and thermal insulant.
This high thermal capacity drain is gene-
rally formed as follows:
- Cut a chase with a three-blade saw,
usually 200mm deep and 150mm wide.
- Drill drain holes in bottom of chase, 30-
50mm diameter, 1.00m to 1.50m long,
spaced approximately 2.00m c/c.
- Possibly, finish chase sides with polymer
resin-based mortar.
- Insert factory-formed closed-pore poly-
ethylene or polystyrene foam strips, glued
in place with adhesive. Strip specifications
are as follows:
*Polystyrene foam to be class EM as
described in French standard NFT 56.201,
minimum compressive strength not less
than 90 kPa, thermal conductivity at 0C
less than 0.05 W/m/C.
*Wet-process cross-linked polyethy-
lene compressive strength to be not less
than 90 kPa, thermal conductivity at 0C
to be less than 0.035 W/m/C.
To provide mechanical protection to the
drain strip in urban tunnels and prevent it
being forced out of the slot by accidental
hydrostatic pressure, a 0.6mm stainless
steel cover strip is recommended.
This type of drainage system usually has
an opening at the top for periodically flu-
shing out the drain with low or medium
pressure water.
9.1.3 Drain discharge and
hydrostatic pressure
If seepage water drain discharge and
pressures are high, reference should be
made to the engineering arrangements
recommended in section 6.1 of these
Guidelines.
The drainage arrangements illustrated in
figure 7. are routinely used for this type of
leakage intercepted or draining to the
dam drain system. The dimensions of the
polyethylene half-round gutter and chase
should be commensurate with the flow
rate to be controlled.
The possibility of reinforcing with steel
mesh the mortar or shotcrete backfill may
be considered with reference to (i) the
dimensions of the chase and (ii) the maxi-
mum pressure if the drain might acciden-
tally run full.
If the water is very 'incrusting' or carries a
high solid load, it is expressly recommen-
ded to fit this type of drain with an orifice
for periodically flushing it out with low or
medium pressure water.
TUNNELS ET OUVRAGES SOUTERRAINS HORS-SERIE N 2 2005
130
Photo 14 Strasbourg Drain strips with rigid
polystyrene foam thermal insulant
Photo 13 Frejus ventilation shaft Drainage with cellular
plate geospacers and polyethylene foam frost protection
9.2 - DRAINAGE SYSTEM
DESIGN
Dimensions and capacities of the perma-
nent drainage systems are based on the
following parameters:
- leakage rates to be intercepted and
discharged
- stresses which may or may not occur,
due to the amplitude of joint movements
(generally related to thermal gradient)
- physical and chemical characteristics of
the leakage water, determined as descri-
bed in section 7.3. above. For example,
with highly 'incrusting' or heavily loaded
water, it is recommended that the free
drain section should not be less than 120
cm
2
, and must always be accessible at the
top to monitor and periodically clean the
drain.
- thermal insulation which may or may not
be necessary, as dictated by a thermal
study lasting not less than 5 consecutive
days to determine the lowest tempera-
tures recorded at the site.
Guidelines on waterproofing and drainage of underground structures
TUNNELS ET OUVRAGES SOUTERRAINS HORS-SERIE N 2 2005
131
Drawing 4
PERMANENT SIDEWALL
AND ROOF DRAINAGE SYSTEMS
Sketch 1 - Drain strip with
sprayed concrete or mortar over
Sketch 2 - Manufactured strip
drain heat-welded to co-rolled
steel anchorage
Sketch 3 - Manufacture strip drain
with polymer adhesive
M
M
M
Guidelines on waterproofing and drainage of underground structures
TUNNELS ET OUVRAGES SOUTERRAINS HORS-SERIE N 2 2005
132
Drawing 4
PERMANENT SIDEWALL
AND ROOF DRAINAGE SYSTEMS
Sketch 4 - Internal drain with thin film cover bonded to
backing
Sketch 5 - Manufactured strip drain bolted along edges
Sketch 6 - Pre-formed drain pinned to backing
Sketch 7 - Half-round drain in chase
Sketch 8 - Formed hollow elastomer strip in chase
Sketch 9 - Drainage with chase and frost protection
M
M
M
M
M
M
Guidelines on waterproofing and drainage of underground structures
TUNNELS ET OUVRAGES SOUTERRAINS HORS-SERIE N 2 2005
133
BIBLIOGRAPHIE BIBLIOGRAPHIE
Fascicule 67 - Titre III du C.C.T.G. "Etanchit des ouvrages souterrains"
Recommandations de l'AFTES :
T.O.S. n 35 : Recommandations relatives aux joints d'tanchit dans les ouvrages souterrains
T.O.S. n 82 : Recommandation sur les rparations d'tanchit en souterrains
T.O.S. n 121 : Essais de poinonnement dynamique sur un D.E.G.
T.O.S. n 138 : Recommandations pour l'emploi de rondelles PVC pour les fixations d'un D.E.G.
T.O.S. n 150 : Recommandations pour la prparation des supports de tunnels recevant un dispositif d'tanchit par gomembrane.
k