MML Electrification: progress updates

[richieb1971]

Today. Sharnbrook tunnel. Nothing new here. Scaffolding is for temporary walk bridge whilst road is raised or elevated



Looking south.



Looking south again from West side.



Non sensical weak points here. If anyone can explain this design please?



A bridge renovated about two years ago and we have a problem. Look at the raised fast lines and the height of the gantry.


The temporary bridge.




Lower farm road looking north


Looking south.

 

[swt_passenger]

I think your ‘weak points’ are how the mast is adjusted to the vertical.

 

[The_Engineer]

Non sensical weak points here. If anyone can explain this design please?

Not a weak point at all!! Tried and trusted method of attaching the upright stanchion to the foundation, as the messages above message states allows for adjustment. Original electrification of the 60s and 70s does not have this adjustment; look at cab view videos between Northampton and Rugby for some extreme examples of leaning stanchions!!!

Furthermore, in modern times we have this massive computing power which allows detailed stress analysis of such design work, simulated under all extremes of wind loading, icing etc. Improved specification safety measures and verification by simulation and practical tests may lead to a more robust design, but they do minimise the risks of future problems...…..

 

[edwin_m]

View attachment 54036
A bridge renovated about two years ago and we have a problem. Look at the raised fast lines and the height of the gantry.

Not necessarily a problem. The actual wire height is well below the level of the boom and can go below the usual height if there is a low bridge. See photos taken from other bridges where the booms are at or above the level of the camera. Unlike the structures on the GWML, these all appear to be one type with no adjustment in the boom height.

 

[InTheEastMids]

Not necessarily a problem. The actual wire height is well below the level of the boom and can go below the usual height if there is a low bridge. See photos taken from other bridges where the booms are at or above the level of the camera. Unlike the structures on the GWML, these all appear to be one type with no adjustment in the boom height.

I do struggle with the idea that NR could recently rebuild a bridge on the MML and not provide adequate clearance for electrification, given that there's been a whole series of bridge interventions over the last few years from Ford End Road, Bedford at least up to Station Road, Sutton Bonington - mostly because of the pre-Grayling electrification plans

 

[The_Engineer]

I do struggle with the idea that NR could recently rebuild a bridge on the MML and not provide adequate clearance for electrification, given that there's been a whole series of bridge interventions over the last few years from Ford End Road, Bedford at least up to Station Road, Sutton Bonington - mostly because of the pre-Grayling electrification plans

Struggle no more! It is an opinion by one person on this thread which I am afraid is unfounded in fact. If you look at gantry height, yes they are a bit higher than the bridge parapet. All the supporting parts are suspended below the gantry, and the wire support cantilever mounted further below the end of these. Finally the conductor below the cantilever. Under the bridge the catenary support wire lowers to be close to the conductor wire, and there will be more than adequate distance (i.e. a good deal more than minimum electrical clearance) below the bottom of the bridge deck to the live wire.

It really pains me that some people think electrification projects are designed and managed by idiots. They are well qualified engineers, expert in these fields of work. Mistakes can be made, bur rarely on basic like stuff this….

Rant over......

 

[Flying Phil]

But it is one of the delights of this forum that we "non experts" can raise questions and express opinions that stimulate discussion and give us all a better informed viewpoint - so "many thanks" to all such contributors.
It is such a shame though, that our well qualified engineers are impeded sometimes by some, not so well qualified, political "experts!".......

 

[richieb1971]

Whilst I don't disagree with The_Engineer I am someone who likes a standard. The clearance on all the other bridges are better. So I only have one question regarding the Souldrop bridge. Can anything going on the slow lines ALSO go on the fast lines being that the bridge is designed this way? If so, then so be it, good job.

As for the gantry being designed the way it is, I find it hard to believe the rest of the design needs to be so thick when its structure is held down by (4 screws?) something much thinner. I get the bowing thing and I hope the weather doesn't rot these adjustable screw bits. So was something wrong with the OHLE south of Bedford? I don't see any bowing, because the design is such that there is nothing to bow.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

The Midland Mainline electrification seems like a missed opportunity. Why was it never considered to operate Pendolinos between London and Sheffield to increase the speed?

 

[swt_passenger]

The Midland Mainline electrification seems like a missed opportunity. Why was it never considered to operate Pendolinos between London and Sheffield to increase the speed?

Pendolinos wouldnt provide anything like the same overall benefits on a line where ordinary trains can already run at 115, or 125 mph over certain sections. It’s the same on the GW and ECML. The WCML is a bit of a one off, really.

 

[Flying Phil]

The Midland Mainline electrification seems like a missed opportunity. Why was it never considered to operate Pendolinos between London and Sheffield to increase the speed?

I believe the tilting APT-E ran from London to Leicester in 59 mins in 1976 - the best current train does it in 64 mins......

 

[swt_passenger]

I believe the tilting APT-E ran from London to Leicester in 59 mins in 1976 - the best current train does it in 64 mins......

It wouldn’t have been running behind any Thameslink services back then either...

 

[edwin_m]

Whilst I don't disagree with The_Engineer I am someone who likes a standard. The clearance on all the other bridges are better. So I only have one question regarding the Souldrop bridge. Can anything going on the slow lines ALSO go on the fast lines being that the bridge is designed this way? If so, then so be it, good job.

As for the gantry being designed the way it is, I find it hard to believe the rest of the design needs to be so thick when its structure is held down by (4 screws?) something much thinner. I get the bowing thing and I hope the weather doesn't rot these adjustable screw bits. So was something wrong with the OHLE south of Bedford? I don't see any bowing, because the design is such that there is nothing to bow.

It would be a major dropoff if when re-designing the bridge they hadn't left enough clearance for all electric trains to use the fasts. I believe the GWML electrification has a constant overhead height (Steventon excepted) due to being an "interoperable route" but I don't think the MML has the same requirement. All previous UK electrification schemes vary the wire height, downward at low bridges and upward at level crossings.

As to the bolts I can only assume the structural work has been done to demonstrate these are adequate. It's possible a mistake was made - for example some of the piles on the GWML were a lot bigger than necessary - but that was on the side of greater strength but also of course greater cost. There are plenty of structures that are bolted down onto a concrete base using four similar bolts, the difference being that they usually sit directly on the base with no gap. So the structure looks more solid but in practical terms it doesn't make much difference as the bolts take the tension in either situation.

The reason for the gap on this scheme is probably that the masts sit on top of piles, which can sometimes go a bit out of line when being driven in. The gap and bolts allow this to be corrected when attaching the structure, as well as creating the possibility of adjusting again later if there is ground movement. I'm not sure why they weren't needed further south, but piles weren't used for OLE in the early 80s when this was done. Possibly the older method (concrete poured around polystyrene former?) gave a more accurate alignment for the support.

 

[edwin_m]

I believe the tilting APT-E ran from London to Leicester in 59 mins in 1976 - the best current train does it in 64 mins......

APT-E was an actual timing. 64min is a figure in the timetable, which includes some padding so as to be achievable routinely when there may be minor delays from temmporary speed restrictions etc. I suspect a Meridian could do 59min with a clear run.

 

[John Webb]

........... I'm not sure why they weren't needed further south, but piles weren't used for OLE in the early 80s when this was done. Possibly the older method (concrete poured around polystyrene former?) gave a more accurate alignment for the support.

I recollect that during the electrification south of Bedford (mostly using headspan wires of course!) the masts when erected were given a slight outward lean so that when loaded with headspan and catenary they became vertical. With the use of gantries rather than headspans, is it possible these adjustable bases are needed to get the gantry in just the right position for correct operation?

 

[Flying Phil]

APT-E was an actual timing. 64min is a figure in the timetable, which includes some padding so as to be achievable routinely when there may be minor delays from temmporary speed restrictions etc. I suspect a Meridian could do 59min with a clear run.

Thanks for that extra information Edwin_m ....as the APT was allowed to go faster than 125 mph, have there been track changes in the 1980's? which mean the current trains can go faster where the APT had to slow down?

 

[59CosG95]

A rushed picture but spotted this in a yard between Wellingborough and Bedford.

Not sure what they are but those (booms?) almost look Series 1 based? View attachment 54028

View attachment 54033 Today. Sharnbrook tunnel. Nothing new here. Scaffolding is for temporary walk bridge whilst road is raised or elevated

View attachment 54035

Looking south.

View attachment 54036

Looking south again from West side.

View attachment 54037

Non sensical weak points here. If anyone can explain this design please?


View attachment 54036
A bridge renovated about two years ago and we have a problem. Look at the raised fast lines and the height of the gantry.
View attachment 54040

The temporary bridge.


View attachment 54042

Lower farm road looking north

View attachment 54043
Looking south.

@londonmidland - the booms are derived from Series 1, but UKMS uses them as part & parcel of their design. They'll be going in wherever there's a 4-track section (e.g. Harrowden Jct) where wire runs terminate - Tensorex drums will be hung on them. Otherwise you'd need additional lineside structures with Balance Weight Anchors (the weights over a ratcheted pulley).

@richieb1971 - thanks for a very informative set of images there. I see that most steelwork has now gone up between Sharnbrook Jct & Irchester/Irthlingborough/"14 Arches" Viaduct on the Fasts then - still waiting for the track areound Wymington to be altered.

 

[Bald Rick]

I believe the tilting APT-E ran from London to Leicester in 59 mins in 1976 - the best current train does it in 64 mins......

The first train I looked at in tomorrow’s timetable (1102) does it in 61mins. And it seems it is not alone.

 

[38Cto15E]

I did a return Leicester to Kettering via Manton trip today, HST both ways. There was track relaying going on, on the up (Fast) line between Kettering Jct (North) and the overbridge, whether this included any replacement pointwork I am not sure. Probably there was other work going on between Glendon and Leicester as well, maybe Market Harborough.

 

[Flying Phil]

The first train I looked at in tomorrow’s timetable (1102) does it in 61mins. And it seems it is not alone.

Thanks for the correction - with the Market Harborough track straightening, will they take the golden PR opportunity to improve the timetable and advertise Leicester to London in "Under an Hour"?

 

[John Webb]

Thanks for that extra information Edwin_m ....as the APT was allowed to go faster than 125 mph, have there been track changes in the 1980's? which mean the current trains can go faster where the APT had to slow down?

Yes, various works were done during the late 1970s electrification which improved line speed, and again more recently around 2015.
Main problem for testing the ATP was the semaphore signalling along much of the MML in the 1970s - special instructions had to be issued to signal boxes to ensure that, generally, there were two clear sections ahead of the APT rather that the usual one for most trains.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

Thanks for that extra information Edwin_m ....as the APT was allowed to go faster than 125 mph, have there been track changes in the 1980's? which mean the current trains can go faster where the APT had to slow down?

Yes, I believe track upgrades in the 1980s were used as the basis for research for Intercity 250.

 

[w1bbl3]

Non sensical weak points here. If anyone can explain this design please?

As others have explained bolts are common way of attaching things.

This looks to me like a sensible way of attaching the stanchion to the steel pile. The only slightly surprising element is the adapter on top of the top pile to provide vertical bolt locations, GWR piles have the pile and bolt sockets (bosses) integrated into a single component rather than two pieces. I guess the civils team specifying didn't have confidence of driving the pile spot on so have opted for a high tolerance solution.
The bolts provide an opportunity to position and plumb initially and later on over the life readjust should the ground move significantly. The stanchion base is actually slotted to allow for horizontal adjustment and bolts/washers allow for vertical adjustment.
The nuts/bolts will be inspection items to checked on an agreed schedule much like the bolted stanchion clamp being used to hold the mast
When the bolt/nut/washers become end of life you just need to change them, nothing particular major in terms of work complexity.

The method used for previous BR era mass concrete pads could best be summed up as 1. dig a hole 2. insert anchor bolts in cones 3. fill hole with concrete 4. "crack" the bolt from concrete whilst it's still green. 5. offer up stanchion 6. shim/level stanchion from base with steel shim plates. 7. tighten nuts 8. fill the cone with grout (and possibly the complete stanchion base) 9. Hope the ground does move later.
This was and is a very cheap way of forming bases but has the significant drawback of only working in good ground conditions and when the ground moves later has no simple way of readjusting to level and plumb. The bolts having been "set" and thus lost horizontal tolerance.
Sorting out for example lean later after many years is a major civils project requiring a new base to be formed and all the associated to the OLE works.

One of those situations where you spend more up front to have lower costs later (and possibly a longer life).

 

[twpsaesneg]

The only slightly surprising element is the adapter on top of the top pile to provide vertical bolt locations, GWR piles have the pile and bolt sockets (bosses) integrated into a single component rather than two pieces.

The design shown in the picture is the "pile cap" design which enables you to exceed the maximum load allowed with the integrated bosses (bolt attachments) in the normal piles. The cap fits over the plain pile and then bolts to the side of it instead, and there are different styles of caps available for TTCs, Self Supporting Anchors and the Monoboom Anchors.

This enables a pile to be used where a concrete would have been used due to high loading.

 

[59CosG95]

MML Wiring Progressometer 16.0 (as of 29th of October 2018)
Mileages are from St. Pancras.

Bedford (49m 65ch) - Wellingborough (65m 09ch)

• Work to raise Ford End Rd bridge is now complete.
• On the Down side south of Bromham Rd Bridge, Bedford, at least 9 masts are now up. These masts stretch northwards from Bromham Rd as far as the eye can see, towards the Great Ouse Bridge. A number of masts now have TTC booms - many booms have stovepipes.
• 8-9 piles are now in on the Up side north of Bromham Rd Bridge; none are fully down yet.
• Two masts are up on the Up side, immediately south of the Great Ouse Box Girder Bridge (nr Bedford North Jct); one of them has a boom, the other doesn't.
• At Bromham, between the A6 (Great Ouse Way) & Lower Farm Rd (https://goo.gl/maps/rSPFrDAZQ362), 13 Twin Track Cantilevers/TTCs (with booms) are up over the Slow Lines, and about 6/7 over the Fast Lines. This includes the Box Girder bridge over the river Great Ouse.
• At least 9 boomed and dressed (aka. bedanglied) TTC masts have now gone up north of Lower Farm Rd, adjacent to the Down Fast; 2 similar structures are now up adjacent to the Up Slow here too.
• To the south of Oakley, all the TTCs that are up appear to have sprouted their registration arms (https://flic.kr/p/NuS8uw). The extent of these running southwards is not yet clear.
• At Oakley, on the site of the old station (just south of Station Rd Bridge), all visible piles over both lines now carry TTC booms. Between Station Rd & Highfield Rd bridges, all TTCS over the Slows and Fasts are now boomed.
• Another upright has gone up to the north of Highfield Rd bridge, adjacent to the Down Fast.
• 2 piles are in just south of Oakley Viaduct (https://goo.gl/maps/r5oXUSSPSAo); one next to the DF, another next to the US. These seem to have been in for a while.
• Lots of TTCs also up over both pairs of lines around Milton Ernest (between Radwell Rd & East End; https://goo.gl/maps/V5afGGQEZiE2).
• Between Radwell Rd & New Rd, a TTC mast has been placed between the Up Fast & Down Slow, as the embankment adjacent to the Up Slow had to be replaced with a gabion retaining wall.
• About 6 TTCs are up immediately to the north of Radwell Viaduct, over the Slow lines (https://goo.gl/maps/r5oXUSSPSAo); 3 more TTCs are up accompanying them over the Fast lines (positioned between the pairs of lines). Another 2 are now up over the Slows south of the viaduct. Masts for 2 portal booms are up at the southern end of the viaduct; both pairs of masts now have booms, completing the portals.
• Roughly 3 or 4 piles (now with boomless TTC masts) are in next to the Down Fast, and another 4 (3 of which have boomed TTC masts) next to the Up Slow just north of Moor End Lane, Radwell (https://goo.gl/maps/cmgWsgyYAo62). South of Moor End Lane (but north of the next bridge to the south), about 5 TTC masts are up (2 of which have booms) adjacent to the Up Slow, with a similar number in adjacent to the Down Fast. South of that bridge, another 2 piles have masts (possibly w/ booms).
• 2 parallel piles are in place (no masts) adjacent to the Fast lines at Radwell; possibly for a portal frame?
• A couple of piles (no masts) have now gone in around Sharnbrook Jct.
• Almost all masts are now up over the Slow lines, from just north of Park Ln, Sharnbrook (https://goo.gl/maps/df2As431FDr) to Sharnbrook Rd overbridge (southern end of Souldrop bank); the 4-tracking here is not yet complete as signals "WH378" and “LR 8” sit right in the path of the restored Up Slow. Some TTCs have now gone up on the Fasts between these bridges too.
• At Souldrop (between Sharnbrook Rd & Back Lane overbridges) 3 masts (1 with a TTC boom) are in next to the future Down Slow at Souldrop, at the southern end of the bank. All the TTCs for the Fasts are up between the two bridges.
• Between Wymington (https://goo.gl/maps/apZ6wwj9StR2) and Wellingboro', intensive 4-tracking is underway, with the reversible Slow Line now reopened. Near the Google Maps link posted for Wymington, the car park used for the 4-tracking works is due to house a National Grid substation for the electrification; the concrete base has now been laid for the substation. Link to application to Beds Council: http://www.publicaccess.bedford.gov...ils.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=ONBIS8CUMMJ00
• In the southern area of the Wymington Deviation, around 9 masts are now up on the Fasts (single cantilever type). North of Souldrop Tunnel, 3 piles are up near the footbridge at 60m56ch, and approx 5 are further down near the tunnel.
• Near the centre of the "deviation", there are now many more masts up (with cantilevers too) on the Fasts.[/COLOR]
• On the Slows at the northern end of the "deviation", a number of STCs and TTCs have gone up, with at least two twin track portals also up.
• Station Rd Bridge, Irchester is closed from 9/4 to 22/11 to allow reconstruction for OLE; the replacement deck over the Relief Lines is now complete.
• Masts have now sprung up in large numbers north and south of Station Rd Bridge, Irchester. North of Station Rd, all masts seem to be up over the Fast lines as far as the first footbridge north of there.[/COLOR]
• Mast-wise, not much up around Kangaroo Spinney (https://goo.gl/maps/K8C8gkgvNaD2).
• 2 piles now in between the Up Fast & Down Slow north of Station Rd Bridge, Irchester; 9 piles have also gone in adjacent to the Down Fast on this stretch.

Wellingborough (65m 09ch) - Kettering (72m 01ch)

• Extensive 4-tracking laid (except at points where existing infrastructure has to be moved).
• Finedon Rd Bridge is closed from 22/3 to 28/9 to allow reconstruction for OLE.
• At least 6 TTC masts (with booms) are now in position between Finedon Rd Bridge and the curve to the south of Harrowden Junction. These are mainly on the Down side; work has yet to commence on the Up side equivalents.
• TTCs stretch north from Wellingborough Yards over the Fast lines as far north as the Weetabix factory (north of Burton Latimer). A couple of gaps remain where old equipment has to be removed e.g. the signal gantry at Harrowden Jct. Progress on the Slows is...slower.
• Burton Latimer (south of the Weetabix factory) now has a number of TTCs up over the Slow lines to the south, to join the 2 TTCs up to the north of it (over the Fasts).

Kettering (72m 01ch) - Glendon Jct (74m 00ch) - Corby (79m 40ch)

• At Glendon Jct/Kettering North Jct, all piles on the Slow side have now grown TTCs with booms; at least 5 are now bedanglied ("dressed"). A few signal gantries from the BR days have been (or are due to be) removed. Unclear of progress with piling/masts on the Main line north of Glendon Junction.
• Pile now in on the Down side near Kettering North Jct.
• 2nd track now in operation, and linespeed raised to 90mph where it was previously 60mph.
• Largest piling gap around here is between the A14 & A43 bridges.
• A handful of masts (~10) are now up in the Great Oakley area, halfway between Glendon Jct & Corby. All are single track cantilevers.

North of Glendon Jct (74m 00ch)

• Braybrooke Substation approved. To be located here: (https://goo.gl/maps/fuy1uZeDjdQ2).
• The extent of wiring towards Market Harboro' has been all but decided to reach the station itself.

Any updates would be greatly appreciated.

 

[WymoWanderer]

Had a wander today around the village (Wymington, North Bedfordshire) to see what progress has been going on. I can report:

• increased amount of road traffic - specifically low loaders removing and delivering various pieces of road/rail and rail equipment.
• the slow line to the south of the village has 17 piles between the footbridge WYM-3 at 60m 56ch and the Souldrop tunnel. All piles appear to be installed on the West side of the track.
• no new track appears to have been laid for the slow line doubling
• a number of masts and cantilevers have been installed on the slow line around the substation area - pictures below
• the fast line to the west of the village appear to have more masts and cantilevers than previous seen - specific number unknown

Slow line near substation area, looking South. Original

Slow line looking North with substation area on the right. Original

Fast lines looking South. Original

Masts and piles on the fast line, looking East. Original

Fast line in the foreground, slow line just visible in the background. Looking North East. Original

Slow line in the foreground, fast line behind at the start of the deviation to the North West of the village. Looking South West. Original

 

[uxm]

Could someone explain to me what is going on? I heard that the MML electrification was cancelled ?

 

[Flying Phil]

Could someone explain to me what is going on? I heard that the MML electrification was cancelled ?

What you are seeing is the MML electrification from Bedford to Corby. The section from Glendon junction to Market Harborough is a bit uncertain as there is an electrical feeder station to be installed at Braybrooke which is near Market Harborough.
But essentially, it was the main MML from Kettering to Sheffield that was deferred, reinstated then cancelled.

 

[themiller]

It’s not been cancelled as such. The full electrification to Sheffield and Nottingham has been removed from Network Rail’s scope. This leaves NR electrifying to Corby and probably Market Harborough (although the latter remains to be confirmed). This is a similar situation to the lines to Bristol Temple Meads. All further electrification will be authorised separately from NR’s maintenance grant by the DfT. If any of the above is an incorrect interpretation of government intent, someone on here will correct me.

 

[Hairy Bear]

Line being electrified between Bedford - Kettering - Corby, due to open Dec '19.