LONDON TRANSPORT OVERVIEW
Ideas off the beaten track
London Bridge station, one of the oldest and busiest railway stations in London, is currently undergoing a full refurbishment programme – a fi ve-year, £600m project that will last until 2018. Phil Royle, writing on behalf of Xervon Palmers, explains how the company has been providing assistance – developing sophisticated, innovative access and scaffolding solutions, and deconstructing and removing the old steel crescent shaped roof – crucially, without the use of a crane and with railway operations carrying on as normal.
X
ervon Palmers is in the fi nal stages of the deconstruction of the London Bridge
station train shed roof, part of a £600m, fi ve- year refurbishment programme aiming to successfully redevelop the historic station, in partnership with main contractor Costain and Network Rail.
The London Bridge project adds to Xervon Palmers’ transport CV,
with recent jobs
including St Pancras, Paddington, Waterloo and King’s Cross.
Ian McFarlane, director for business & project development at Xervon Palmers, said: “This has been an exciting and challenging task. We are very happy to take it on and have succeeded in developing an excellent solution.”
The 100,000-plus passengers using London Bridge station every day will have noticed big changes on their daily commute over the past 12 months, as 250-plus Xervon Palmers skilled operators constructed over 10,000 aluminium special access bridge panels and components, along with 20,000m2
of steel decking, to create
a safe environment while the roof was being removed.
Around 350 tonnes of temporary works steel structure was also installed to stabilise and support the deconstruction of the roof, opening the station up to the sky for the fi rst time in over 100 years. Generally, work has been conducted without the use of cranes and with all railway operations continuing as normal.
Recently, more dramatic change can be seen with the removal of the protection decking to
74 | rail technology magazine Apr/May 13
“We wanted to create a safe working environment for everyone. The design provided has delivered a cost-effective solution for the whole project, allowing railway and passenger movements to continue as normal.”
Early engagement with the client ensured that a successful passenger protection and access solution was developed months before the works commenced on site in April 2012. Works progressed rapidly after an enforced break during the Olympic Games.
Passengers must have noticed the crescent shaped roof trusses disappearing, as the protection deck was rolled into place overnight, using sophisticated ‘cassette’ techniques.
McFarlane explained: “We used all of our experiences from the past to develop this excellent solution. Our learning from jobs such as St Pancras, Paddington, Waterloo and King’s Cross helped, as well as works on major bridge structures such as the iconic Forth Rail Bridge and Tay Rail Bridge in Scotland.”
This unique access solution allowed the
majority of the scaffolding to be constructed, without possession of the track, on a gantry
reveal open skies where once the train shed roof protected the railway and passengers from the elements.
David
Crabtree, who headed the Xervon Palmers team throughout the project, said: “Essential requirements for the project were the safety of the general public, railway operatives and protection of the operating railways.
and then rolled into place during 3.5-hour possessions at night and at weekends.
The creation of this protection deck has allowed the work above to continue whilst the station operates as normally as possible at ground level.
Thanks to Xervon Palmers’ design and execution, commuters would know nothing of the comprehensive work plan which allowed the roof to be deconstructed into manageable sizes and weights.
The deconstruction sequence ensured each piece removed was compliant with the detailed loadings allowed.
Each piece was manually removed from site via loading paths created within the protection deck. Planning and coordinating the works – managing the logistics and transport to remove and safely dispose of the waste – has been a signifi cant success for Xervon Palmers.
As the fi nal parts of the protection deck are dismantled, Donald Morrison, CEO of Xervon Palmers, said: “This contract is a good example of the company’s expertise in the provision of high-end design-led protection decks.
“This solution has allowed us to carry out the signifi cant deconstruction works safely whilst maintaining 100% passenger throughput at the railway station.”
FOR MORE INFORMATION
E:
ian.mcfarlane@
xervonpalmers.com W:
www.xervonpalmers.com
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180 |
Page 181 |
Page 182 |
Page 183 |
Page 184 |
Page 185 |
Page 186 |
Page 187 |
Page 188 |
Page 189 |
Page 190 |
Page 191 |
Page 192 |
Page 193 |
Page 194 |
Page 195 |
Page 196 |
Page 197 |
Page 198 |
Page 199 |
Page 200 |
Page 201 |
Page 202 |
Page 203 |
Page 204 |
Page 205 |
Page 206 |
Page 207 |
Page 208 |
Page 209 |
Page 210 |
Page 211 |
Page 212 |
Page 213 |
Page 214 |
Page 215 |
Page 216 |
Page 217 |
Page 218 |
Page 219 |
Page 220 |
Page 221 |
Page 222 |
Page 223 |
Page 224 |
Page 225 |
Page 226 |
Page 227 |
Page 228 |
Page 229 |
Page 230 |
Page 231 |
Page 232 |
Page 233 |
Page 234 |
Page 235 |
Page 236 |
Page 237 |
Page 238 |
Page 239 |
Page 240 |
Page 241 |
Page 242 |
Page 243 |
Page 244