Reading Station improvements

[whole diary]

[stuving]

Using modern building materials and methods it should be possible to devise standard designs for platform canopies and even overall roofs that are cost-effective to build and maintain at busy stations. Much of the old Southern Region and the Great Western nearer Paddington has kept the Victorian originals.

Perhaps the straw sucking, smock wearing country folk who insist on catching trains outside of Zone 6 are considered to be content to wait in the wind and the rain, like the cattle in the fields.

It is a disgrace that the new Reading General, after a spend of ^850M will still have most of its platforms wind- and rain-swept, when its trains  will largely be electrically driven.

Go to Leeds City and see how a Yorkshireman builds a new station!

OTC

The canopies at Reading are an exact match to the platform width, so every section is custom-made. I imagine that the smaller ones, that do not reach the platform edge, are made of standard parts. I expect the ones at Wokingham will be like that.

What these new designs have in common is that they slope upwards, rather than downwards, towards the trains. That lets in more light, and more rain too. And the shape also catches the wind and directs it onto the passengers. Now that does not seem terribly clever, for use in Britain.

I fear we are seeing the result of the architect's very visual sensibility  - to do with light and space, and why we have glass walls everywhere - overruling past experience. In the past we had what railwaymen and local builders had worked out over the years They were usually also countrymen used to working outside all year and knowing how to protect people - and cattle.

[stuving]

I've been puzzled by last week's activity on camera 06/2: what is all that scaffolding for?

Assuming this is the east end of the Festival Lines box we're looking at, the drawings* show a solid reinforced concrete box structure continuing the viaduct, then tapering down to form the railway "box". The words of the drawing** for this phase are:
(v)  CONSTRUCT 900mm WALLS.
(vi) CONSTRUCT 850mm THK DECK SLAB.
so I expect to see the reinforcement for the support walls being tied to that extending from the pile caps, then shuttering put round it and the concrete poured, before going on to do the deck. Surely none of that needs full two-level scaffolding?

(*Drawings RSC1G-ECV-DRG-AKB-540004 and -540006, files 00261467 and 00261469 of planning submission 11/1885/FUL)
(**Drawing RSC1G-ECV-DRG-AKB-540002, file 00261465 of planning submission 11/1885/FUL)

[paul7575]

...so I expect to see the reinforcement for the support walls being tied to that extending from the pile caps, then shuttering put round it and the concrete poured, before going on to do the deck. Surely none of that needs full two-level scaffolding?

I noticed (from the train) a couple of weeks back that on the similar construction at the feeder lines box they had the same style of scaffolding, and I wondered if they need the 'middle level' just for the job of securing the formwork in position and dismantling it afterwards, but then realised they still have to build the rebar cage first before they rig the formwork.  I guess there will be many sections with bolted flanges between them?  Does seem a bit OTT^▸ (Open Train Times website), but then again modern construction rules might have a requirement for all or nothing...

Paul

[Sapperton Tunnel]

...so I expect to see the reinforcement for the support walls being tied to that extending from the pile caps, then shuttering put round it and the concrete poured, before going on to do the deck. Surely none of that needs full two-level scaffolding?

I noticed (from the train) a couple of weeks back that on the similar construction at the feeder lines box they had the same style of scaffolding, and I wondered if they need the 'middle level' just for the job of securing the formwork in position and dismantling it afterwards, but then realised they still have to build the rebar cage first before they rig the formwork.  I guess there will be many sections with bolted flanges between them?  Does seem a bit OTT^▸ (Open Train Times website), but then again modern construction rules might have a requirement for all or nothing...

Paul

There will be horizontal lengths of rebar to go in so as to make a proper self supporting cage. The purpose of the 'middle level' will be for the steel fixers to stand on when they attach the horizontal bars to the verticals that are attached to the ones coming out of the pile caps. Since you have the scaffolding there it doesn't take much to drop in extra boards for an intermediate walkway. The shuttering carpenters will also use it for bolting together shuttering sections. There are H&S^▸ (Health and Safety) regs on how high you can lift etc etc, plus its also good practice to keep that to a minimum as productivity will be higher. All very much as Paul7755 has said.

ST   

[stuving]

If you are interested in the vertical profile of the viaduct and tracks under, I suggest looking at the files 00263637-40 of planning submission 11/1885/FUL. File 00263640 has as plan and some sections, and there are full-length elevations in 00263638-39. There are all vector-coded so can be blown up as far as you like (in the right application). Unfortunately, the vertical dimensions lack a common datum, though they should be measurable off a single print. I'm still pondering how to print them - the paper size indicated on the easy-west elevation drawings is "A1+20 594 x 5041"!

Anyway, I've taken off estimates of the spacings under the viaduct where the three crossings are:

Line under:	West Curve	Festival Line	Feeder Lines
Box width:	14.0	5.8	11.0
Box height:	5.5	5.2	5.4
Track-track:	7.3	6.8	7.2

(The widths will be a bit high as the section is normal to the viaduct and the boxes are skewed.)

[insider]

The work will also have to be illuminated.

Talking of illumination, does anyone know if that's the reason for that gargantuan fence that's being fitted at the new depot ? Given it was installed after the site was opened, and only appears to be along the section that has residential buildings along side, that they seem to be backing it with black plastic (I assume to keep the light from the lights that are being fitted from bleeding through the gaps), it seemed the most logical reason, but I am curious to know none the less!

My understanding (not sure how much truth in it)
Has been erected due to noise complaints, originally residents were asked about a fence and they declined as they believed it would possibly block out sunlight, however once the depot went live in the summer and they realised how noisy turbos were especially in the morning when drivers use compressor speed up to build air, they changed there minds.

My source has also stated that when the depot converts to majority emu operation the fence may come back down if residents want it to?

[stuving]

As I came into the station tonight, one of Ainscough's yellow beasties was settling in between the car park and platform 15. Should reach P10 OK, so it could be the canopy that's being taken for a joyride the weekend. I don't think it will reach where the sections are now stacked, though. 

[4064ReadingAbbey]

Using modern building materials and methods it should be possible to devise standard designs for platform canopies and even overall roofs that are cost-effective to build and maintain at busy stations. Much of the old Southern Region and the Great Western nearer Paddington has kept the Victorian originals.

Perhaps the straw sucking, smock wearing country folk who insist on catching trains outside of Zone 6 are considered to be content to wait in the wind and the rain, like the cattle in the fields.

It is a disgrace that the new Reading General, after a spend of ^850M will still have most of its platforms wind- and rain-swept, when its trains  will largely be electrically driven.

Go to Leeds City and see how a Yorkshireman builds a new station!

OTC

The canopies at Reading are an exact match to the platform width, so every section is custom-made. I imagine that the smaller ones, that do not reach the platform edge, are made of standard parts. I expect the ones at Wokingham will be like that.

What these new designs have in common is that they slope upwards, rather than downwards, towards the trains. That lets in more light, and more rain too. And the shape also catches the wind and directs it onto the passengers. Now that does not seem terribly clever, for use in Britain.

I fear we are seeing the result of the architect's very visual sensibility  - to do with light and space, and why we have glass walls everywhere - overruling past experience. In the past we had what railwaymen and local builders had worked out over the years They were usually also countrymen used to working outside all year and knowing how to protect people - and cattle.

The main reason that the platform canopies slope upwards at the platform edges is to give electrical clearance for the 25kV overhead electrification when it arrives. The architects have then tried to make the canopy visually appealing. There has to be sufficient clearance between the ends of the pantographs and anything which is earthed under worst case conditions - in days gone by canopies were often cut back so they didn't reach the edge of the platform or simply removed completely.

Because of effects like these, I sometimes wonder why overhead electrification of railways is seen to be so wonderful...

[ironstone11]

As I came into the station tonight, one of Ainscough's yellow beasties was settling in between the car park and platform 15. Should reach P10 OK, so it could be the canopy that's being taken for a joyride the weekend. I don't think it will reach where the sections are now stacked, though. 

Whatever it was doing, it wasn't lifting canopies as they remain in north yard.

[ellendune]

I think it would have to be one of their larger models, with the extension pieces, to move those panels.  Alternatively they could give them a platform ticket and they could take the same route as the P8/9 panels - through the ticket barriers.

[stuving]

The main reason that the platform canopies slope upwards at the platform edges is to give electrical clearance for the 25kV overhead electrification when it arrives. The architects have then tried to make the canopy visually appealing. There has to be sufficient clearance between the ends of the pantographs and anything which is earthed under worst case conditions - in days gone by canopies were often cut back so they didn't reach the edge of the platform or simply removed completely.

The picture below is of Reading station design* and shows a sectional view of a train at platform 15. It's an architect's drawing, but the design obviously had to be based on accurate train and OHLE dimensions. The pantograph is shown at operating height, touching the contact wire. So I don't think the clearance from the canopy was an issue in choosing the canopy height.

Fitting in the OHLE supports and various other bits and pieces is always going to mean a lot of hacking off parts of an existing canopy, and there will be some cases where the edge has to be cut back. So I suspect that explanation has got generalised into a bit of an urban - or railway - myth.

(*See RBC^‡(resolve) planning submission 12/0577 - File 267231 "Proposed Elevations Sections 7.1 and 8.1 and 10.1".)

[SandTEngineer]

The Platform No.7 new supporting wall seems to have progressed very well over the past few weeks:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wirewiping/10643597435/in/pool-1945836@N21/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wirewiping/10643632706/in/pool-1945836@N21/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wirewiping/10643840093/in/pool-1945836@N21/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wirewiping/10643839863/in/pool-1945836@N21/

[Electric train]

The main reason that the platform canopies slope upwards at the platform edges is to give electrical clearance for the 25kV overhead electrification when it arrives. The architects have then tried to make the canopy visually appealing. There has to be sufficient clearance between the ends of the pantographs and anything which is earthed under worst case conditions - in days gone by canopies were often cut back so they didn't reach the edge of the platform or simply removed completely.

The picture below is of Reading station design* and shows a sectional view of a train at platform 15. It's an architect's drawing, but the design obviously had to be based on accurate train and OHLE dimensions. The pantograph is shown at operating height, touching the contact wire. So I don't think the clearance from the canopy was an issue in choosing the canopy height.

Fitting in the OHLE supports and various other bits and pieces is always going to mean a lot of hacking off parts of an existing canopy, and there will be some cases where the edge has to be cut back. So I suspect that explanation has got generalised into a bit of an urban - or railway - myth.

(*See RBC^‡(resolve) planning submission 12/0577 - File 267231 "Proposed Elevations Sections 7.1 and 8.1 and 10.1".)

Electrical clearances for OLE^▸ (Overhead Line Equipment, more often "OHLE") to structures are actually quite small, the minimum safety distance for staff and public is 2.75 meters which is taken usually from the nearest component that has live parts e.g. the base of an insulator to typical top of head height, where it is unavoidable to have OLE support arms over platforms the parts over the platforms must be earthed that's not live parts over the platform no matter how high they are.

The normal electrical clearance to structures is 600mm this can in special circumstance go down 200mm and on some very rare occurrences 150mm.

The clearance is not just from the wire or OLE fittings it is from the edge of the pantograph where the cant of the rail has to be taken into account there is also a difference if the clearance is a passing clearance or a static clearance.

[paul7575]

As I came into the station tonight, one of Ainscough's yellow beasties was settling in between the car park and platform 15. Should reach P10 OK, so it could be the canopy that's being taken for a joyride the weekend. I don't think it will reach where the sections are now stacked, though. 

Whatever it was doing, it wasn't lifting canopies as they remain in north yard.

I think you may have been incorrect in assuming that the stockpile adjacent to the north entrance was the next batch to be fitted, because 8 canopy sections have appeared on P10/11 over the weekend...

Edited to add pic of a couple of the new sections, they are not in a continuous length.

Paul

[paul7575]

And finally ... I see they haven't plucked up courage to deal with that yellow mushroom. Do you think it's going to be immured for eternity along with the old track? I hope it's reliable...

I think stuving was getting a bit worried about the position of the above mushroom so I'm pleased to report it is safe now...   

The picture also shows a pretty secure looking fence along the edge of the P7 blockwork, which I suggest allows for work to proceed more normally alongside normal train movements?

The second picture shows the blockwork progressing at the country end of P10,  with the foundation strip completed up to the existing 'square end' of P11.

Paul