Demand for underground space is greater than ever before with basements on new developments going to greater depths and transport infrastructure and utilities being increasingly placed in tunnels. Construction of these record-breaking excavations is challenging the construction industry but while the underground trend is the world over, how do the methods of construction compare?<\/p>\n
The techniques of forming retaining structures \u2013 sheet piles, diaphragm walls and secant or contiguous piled walls \u2013 appear to be similar globally, however, the approach to temporary support for bottom up excavation is not. While the design for top down excavations is comparable the use of temporary support is more driven by local practice and market forces.
\n\u201cBottom up sometimes has programme advantages for fit out and, while top down avoids temporary works, it has disadvantages for excavation as smaller equipment slows it down,\u201d explains Arup director Dinesh Patel.<\/p>\n
\u201cTop down also has less ground movement risk but the bottom up approach means that the risk is over a shorter period.\u00a0Bottom up pushes the boundaries of wall and prop design to get the building out of the ground quickly.\u00a0There are believers in both approaches.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Demand for underground space is greater than ever before with basements on new developments going to greater depths and transport infrastructure and utilities being increasingly placed in tunnels. Construction of these record-breaking excavations is challenging the...<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":13884,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"content-type":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[50],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-6793","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-whitepapers"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n