BNSF Memphis Intermodal Facility

Transcription

1 (Word Count 4,817 without figures) BNSF Memphis Intermodal Facility Trent Hudak, Director of Engineering BNSF Railway Company 4515 Kansas Ave., Kansas City, KS Phone Fax Ross Thomas, Manager of Engineering BNSF Railway Company 4515 Kansas Ave., Kansas City, KS Phone Fax John White, P.E., Civil Engineer Hanson Professional Services Inc. Hanson-Wilson Inc East 101 st Terrace, Suite 250 Kansas City, MO Phone , ext Fax Scott Lesovsky P.E., Resident Engineer Hanson Professional Services Inc. Hanson-Wilson Inc East 101 st Terrace, Suite 250 Kansas City, MO Phone , ext Fax

2 ABSTRACT Design of the BNSF Memphis Intermodal Facility expansion began in 2005, adding 185- acres and incorporating innovative European technology. This enabled BNSF to initially double the facility capacity with the ability to increase to over one million lifts annually in the future. To accomplish the increase, five 260-foot overhead production cranes and three 169-foot ground stacking cranes - nearly nine stories tall - are being used. A new state-of-the-art automated gate system (AGS), using high resolution cameras and automated kiosks to check containers into and out of the facility, also increases efficiency. The AGS system allows automatic processing and inspecting of the trucks, containers, chassis, trailers and drivers. There are six 7,500-foot-long intermodal tracks that are accessible by the production cranes. Good environmental stewardship was an objective of the project. The new crane technology at the site reduces the carbon footprint of this facility compared to similarsized facilities by using electrically-powered cranes instead of typical diesel-powered gantry cranes. Also, concrete foundations and asphalt were recycled in an effort to reuse resources available on site. Strict compliance with state erosion control guidelines posed several challenges. Eleven temporary sediment basins pre-treated storm water prior to its being discharged into three permanent detention ponds during construction. A 3,332-foot retaining wall minimized excavation quantities to 1,700,000 cy and reduced earthwork waste from 1,000,000 cy to 450,000 cy while retaining valuable space for parking.

3 Other notes of interest included coordinating among seven prime contractors, acquiring 31 permits, obtaining 39 parcels of land, relocating three major industries, modifying a major state route, designing and constructing a 3-span 104-foot x 570-foot arch structure under the proposed facility, and constructing six buildings. 1. INTRODUCTION With the accelerated growth of intermodal traffic in early 2001, BNSF Railway Company identified the Memphis area as a prime location for expansion and development of a new intermodal facility. BNSF reviewed multiple options from expansion of the existing facility, to moving the facility to other sites within the Memphis area. The preferred option was to expand the existing facility into the property located west of the existing yard. This area consisted of mixed use industrial parcels, bounded by the existing BNSF mainline track on the east side and major roadways on the north, west and south sides (Figure 1). 2. PLANNING AND OPTIONS 2.1 Growth Projections From 2001 to 2003 volume at Memphis increased 73%. Plans were made to expand the existing facility in the short term with a long term goal of providing facility capacity to accommodate one million lifts annually.

4 2.2 Site Location Several locations for a new facility in the Memphis area were looked at and evaluated based on accessibility, availability, functionality, efficiencies and cost. The existing facility was chosen over the other sites because it offered the best location for the existing customer base while meeting the other criteria listed above. 2.3 Crane Selection The new facility design started out as a typical intermodal facility that would utilize multiple rubber tired gantry (RTG) cranes over single tracks. It was apparent that this type of design would greatly increase the space needed to reach a design capacity of one million lifts per year. Wide-span cranes had already been under evaluation by BNSF and presented a solution to meet the capacity criteria within the proposed site. This concept allowed a much narrower footprint for the number of tracks needed to accommodate the desired capacity. The wide-span cranes also could be used for stacking containers, thus reducing the space required to accommodate a given number of containers (stacking vs. parking). This concept utilized a space two-thirds the size of an RTG concept and still provided the desired one million lifts per year capacity. 3. DESIGN 3.1 Yard layout The footprint of the proposed intermodal facility expansion was constrained both horizontally and vertically by the mainline track grade on the east, the existing

5 Highway 78 (Lamar Avenue) on the west, the Perkins Street overpass on the north and the Shelby Drive at-grade crossing on the south (Figure 1). The initial layout included the incorporation of a 3,332-ft.-long retaining wall (Figure 2) separating crane loading/unloading operations from trailer parking to reduce earthwork waste. As design continued and further communication occurred with interested crane manufacturers, a wide-span crane was selected, consolidating the unloading operations over eight tracks (six current and 2 future) at 20-ft. track centers (Figure 3). The wide-span crane also increases the efficiency of the facility because the cranes operate at a higher speed than typical RTGs. The layout of the yard incorporated previous parking lot expansions (21 acres of additional parking was completed in 2004) at the midpoint of the proposed facility. Multiple bid packages were awarded in phases to reduce impacts to the existing intermodal operation and to commence construction while simultaneously acquiring property. One of the first challenges for the proposed layout of the yard was Johns Creek. The creek flowed across the south end of the proposed facility, crossing under a previously constructed truck bridge (2002 expansion project), through future parking expansion area and running transversely across the proposed tracks and crane rail foundations. The final design to cross Johns Creek incorporated a threecell arch structure with a 31 ft.-6 in. span and 10 ft.-10 in. rise. The total length of the structure was 570 ft., with an overall width of 104 ft. The arches were designed to accommodate the loading of the wide span crane live loads and Cooper E-80 railroad live loading.

6 Public funding sources were identified through the City of Memphis Economic Development Department for work that met their specific drainage improvement requirements. A drainage improvement project on the south end of the new facility, known as Lateral B, met the requirements. The existing drainage structure consisted of two 13 ft.-6 in. by 9 ft. double-arch structural-plate pipes and was extended 370 ft. to provide an access point from the existing intermodal facility to the proposed facility. This provided the space needed for the track lead off the main line into the new facility. It also met a funding requirement that the City of Memphis had to bid and monitor construction. The City was able to separately manage this remote portion of the project with minimal impacts on other construction activities. 3.2 Crane rail foundation design Three foundation designs were evaluated. They included a spread footing with a stem wall, a spread footing, and a concrete tie system. The initial concept of the crane rail foundations used a spread footing with a stem wall. This concept, initially supplied by the crane manufacturers, was modified to a rail-mounted spread footing, eliminating the stem wall due to reduced requirements for frost depth. Consideration was given to using a special 6 ft. concrete tie with a single crane rail fastened in the center of the tie, but this approach was ultimately discarded due to the expected higher maintenance cost of a tie structure compared with a fixed concrete footing structure.

7 3.3 Automated Gate System The Automated Gate System (AGS) provided proven efficiencies in other BNSF intermodal facilities. These efficiencies included the elimination of manual inspections at the checkpoint by utilizing high-resolution video cameras at both inbound and outbound portals to provide detailed photos of the inbound truck/container, which are reviewed by a gate technician before the vehicle enters or departs the facility. This reduces the time for each inspection from three to four minutes per unit to less than 90 seconds for inbound and less than 60 seconds for outbound inspections. The AGS photos are stored electronically to defend against possible future damage claims. The system also utilizes truck driver biometrics to provide added security for the site. With a limitation of inbound queuing length off of Highway 78, and projected inbound traffic of over 700,000 vehicles per year, an efficient system was required to reduce impact on the state route. Reducing the time spent in line for queuing has the added benefit of reducing emissions due to truck idling. Current configurations include eight inbound lanes and seven outbound lanes, with room to expand in the future for a second inbound and outbound portal, and three additional lanes for both the inbound and outbound gates. 3.4 Wheel-changing crane A first of its kind, the wheel-changing crane (WCC) (Figure 4) was custom built specifically for this site. The purpose of the WCC is to change bad-order wheels on a car without having to switch the car onto another track. The WCC can efficiently change out a wheel set on any of three tracks while driving over the center track.

8 The WCC also provides the ability to perform minor on-track repair of cars. The crane, traveling on 10 ft. wide concrete strips, allowed the track centers to be reduced to 20 ft., further minimizing the footprint of the rail side of the facility. 3.5 Power Distribution This project proved to be unique in that the wide-span cranes are powered entirely by electricity. The demand for electricity, along with the critical nature of continual operations, required the use of redundant power supplies. Two substations were placed in the yard, located a sufficient distance from each other so that in the event of a natural disaster or human error the probability of both substations being damaged simultaneously is minimal. The substations are fed by separate electrical circuits from the power company and contain automatic switching, with either substation able to carry the entire load of the facility. Electrical power is fed into the yard at 23,000V and stepped down to 12,470V for distribution through the yard. All buildings and telecommunication systems, including the AGS, have backup generator power in the event of total power loss. 3.6 Site Lighting The lighting supplier, in coordination with the design engineer, provided the layout for the high-mast lighting network. Their lighting method proved to be an economical system compared with conventional poles with lowering rings. The design uses 1500W metal halide lamps. In addition the lighting supplier provides 10 years of maintenance for the lights as part of the purchase price. Thirty-six high-

9 mast poles light the entire new facility and mainline track. The wide-span cranes provide supplemental lighting to the track unloading and container stacking areas, since no poles could be placed within the footprint of the area where the wide span cranes operate. Half of the poles in the new facility also accommodate video cameras and telecommunication equipment that support the inventory management system. 3.7 North Lead The layout of the facility required that any switching take place on the north end of the new yard to avoid switching across a heavily congested city street (Shelby Drive) on the south end. This required the addition of a new 8,000-ft. lead track called the North Lead. Work included using soil nail walls at two highway overpasses to allow the removal of the header banks as needed to place the lead track between the bridge abutment and the first pier. A through-plate-girder railroad bridge was also constructed over a major city street. This new lead allows switching of the new facility without interference with main line traffic. 4 PLANNING AND DESIGN CHALLENGES 4.1 Property Acquisition Part of the challenge with expanding the existing site included relocation of several existing businesses, over 30 property acquisitions, three city street vacations and the vacation of a portion of a former state highway. Each parcel acquired had its own unique challenges. The owners of an existing 12-story grain elevator had to

10 construct a new elevator off-site before demolition of the existing elevator could commence. Numerous small businesses were accommodated in their relocation efforts prior to the demolition of those facilities. Several property owners were allowed to salvage their own buildings as part of the acquisition process. The acquisition of property was coordinated with the construction process and was designed to proceed from the south end of the facility to the north. This allowed construction and property acquisition to occur simultaneously. 4.2 Environmental and Permitting Environmental assessments and permitting activities were initiated before or during the early stages of design so that construction could proceed on schedule. The site includes several streams that were required to be bridged or enclosed in culverts. These water bodies are regulated as waters of the United States and the State of Tennessee. The stream impacts required permits from the United States Army Corps of Engineers Memphis District (USACE) and the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC). Environmental assessments included wetland delineations, endangered species habitat assessments, and cultural resources investigations. Permits issued for the project included two individual permits and five nationwide permits, as well as corresponding TDEC Aquatic Resource Alteration Permits (ARAPs). Mitigation measures required by the USACE and TDEC permits included three payments to the Tennessee Stream Mitigation Program, riparian corridor tree plantings along Johns Creek, and bank stabilization.

11 Land-disturbing activities require coverage under storm-water discharge permits for construction activities and development and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Due to the size and phasing schedule of the Memphis Intermodal Facility project, TDEC agreed to cover the construction under nine separate storm-water permits. This proved to be a benefit to the project. TDEC rules limit the amount of land that can be disturbed at any one time to 50 acres, which would have seriously impaired the construction schedule. However, with the limit applied to each storm water permit issued, the large-scale earthmoving project could proceed. The SWPPP requires design and implementation of best management practices (BMPs) to prevent erosion and control sediment runoff. A variety of BMPs were utilized based on the specific needs of each area, including design and construction of 11 temporary sediment basins (varied in capacity between 0.78 ac-ft and 4.85 acft), sediment traps, silt fence, rock check dams, fiber filter tubes, flocculent application, applied liquid soil stabilization products, broadcast seeding, and hydraulically-applied seed/mulch materials. TDEC-certified construction observers conduct twice-weekly inspections of the project. In addition to these site development permits, certain facilities and equipment required environmental permits and pollution-prevention design criteria. The facility includes several diesel generators for emergency power generation. Air emissions estimates were prepared and concurrence was obtained from Shelby County that the generators were exempt from air-permitting requirements. Oilfilled transformers were designed with containment sumps and oil-retention

12 manholes to prevent discharges of oil spills. Fuel and oil tanks and the intermodal equipment maintenance area were designed with multiple layers of containment to prevent discharges of oil spills. 5 CONSTRUCTION 5.1 Past Projects The construction of the Memphis Intermodal Facility started as a series of smaller projects going back to 2001, with all of these projects eventually being incorporated into the final effort. The first project involved a truck bridge crossing Johns creek. The truck bridge connected a leased parking lot with existing parking while allowing the hostler traffic to remain on-site. In 2003, the original 3,000-ft. strip tracks were lengthened to 7,000 ft. and 20 acres of additional parking was added. In 2005 and acres of additional parking was added west of the main line, which required a main-line track underpass for access to the existing yard. These parking lots allowed the existing facility to expand and the underpass allowed hostler traffic to travel safely between the intermodal facility to the east of the main line and the parking to the west of the main line. All of these projects have been incorporated into the final yard layout in some manner. 5.2 Demolition Demolition started in September of 2006 and was completed in November of 2008 and consisted of 44 structures located throughout the site and removal of 252,000 sq. yards of asphalt and concrete. The structures ranged from 126 sq. ft. to 190,000

13 sq. ft. The most notable structure was the demolition of a 12-story grain elevator. The grain elevator was demolished by crane and wrecking ball and demolition was successfully accomplished next to the BNSF main line without interruption to train traffic (Figure 5). All the concrete and asphalt accumulated by the demolition was transported to two locations onsite and crushed to provide 78,000 cy of reclaimed aggregate base for the project. 5.3 Grading and Drainage The grading and drainage began in April 2007 and was completed in February Facts on the grading and drainage project: 1.7 million cy of dirt moved with tractors and pans and dump trucks 34,000 ft. of reinforced concrete pipe installed with sizes ranging from 18 inches to 72 inches in diameter 50,800 ft. of under drain 34,000 ft. of electrical and telecommunication duct bank 3,332 ft. soldier pile retaining wall consisting of 1,447-2 ft. x 8 ft. panels and 391 piles ranging from 10 ft. to 46 ft. in length (Figure 4). 21,000 ft. of silt fence All areas under pavement were stabilized to a depth of 9 inches with cement at 9% by weight. This equated to over 15,500 tons of cement used for stabilization efforts.

14 Due to Memphis wet climate and the 21% average soil moisture content at the site, 18,200 tons of lime was used to dry and treat the soil to keep the project on schedule. 5.4 Arches Construction of the arches began in December of 2006 and finished in January of The project included a three-span 104 ft. by 570 ft.-long arch structure constructed at the southern end of the facility (Figure 6). This enabled Johns Creek to be covered to provide an additional 700 ft. of strip tracks and crane rail foundations. Bridge 496.0, immediately downstream from the new arch structure, required an additional 33-ft. span on both ends of the existing three-span bridge while raising the existing structure almost two ft. This was done to add capacity to the structure and to reduce erosion at the abutments due to the discharging flow at the arches. Facts on the arch project: 11,000 cy of concrete were used in the floor slab and walls 198 precast arch units 11,500 lineal ft. of piling driven 5.5 Paving Notice to proceed on the paving package was given in April of 2008 and paving was completed in June of The work included over 456,000 square yards

15 (255,000 tons) of asphalt paving ranging from 4 to 12 inches thick. In addition, 37,000 square yards of 18- to 21.5-inch-thick Portland cement concrete pavement was placed to accommodate the wheel-changing crane. The contractor placed concrete through the winter months to keep the project on schedule. The asphalt paving took a break in January and February due to temperature constraints but ramped back up in March to involve as many as three crews to recover the lost production from the winter months and get back on schedule. 5.6 Crane Rail Foundations and Crane Rail The bid package for this portion of the project consisted of forming and casting the concrete for the crane rail foundation and the installation of the crane rail on to the foundation. The crane rail construction started in April 2008 and was completed in June The four crane foundations were each over 7,500 ft. long, varying from 7 ft. to 9 ft. 6 in. wide and from 2 ft. 6 in. to 2 ft. 9 in. thick. Variations on the width and thickness depended on which leg of the crane was being supported and which type of crane, either production or stacking. Facts on crane rail construction: 24,000 cy of structural concrete 2,580 tons of reinforcing steel 10,800 sole rail plates grouted 21,600 anchor bolts 52 expansion joints 450 GPS transponders

16 The contractor chose to construct the foundations utilizing a slip-form method, which greatly increased production over conventional cast-in-place concrete utilizing reusable forms. In order to keep up with the required production rates and to provide a consistent concrete mix the contractor installed a portable concrete batch plant onsite. Crane manufacturer guidelines required the rail to be installed within a tolerance of 10 mm, both vertically (cross level) and horizontally (gage). In order to meet the specification on both cross level and gage the contractor established a highprecision base line meeting first order of accuracy. Each base plate supporting the rail was shot for elevation a minimum of nine times to establish the correct elevation prior to placing grout for final alignment. The contractor then proceeded with lining the rail, again using the baseline to establish the correct line (gage). 5.7 Cranes The first two production cranes arrived on the site in June of Parts for the cranes arrived from all over the world. The majority of the structural steel was shipped from overseas to the Port of Houston. The parts for the two cranes were transloaded onto 24 railcars for shipping to Memphis. Once in Memphis they were unloaded in the existing intermodal yard and using extendable trailers moved to the erection site in a 30-hour around-the-clock operation. The crane erection team spent the next 60 days preparing the cranes for erection. The cranes were then stood up over a span of seven days using two, 500-ton cranes. Once erected two

17 additional cranes were scheduled to arrive and the cycle was repeated until all eight cranes were on site (Figure 7). 5.8 Track Construction Material for the track structure began arriving on site in July Switches were welded in place in August and the leads were constructed in the fall of All eleven turnouts are No. 11 self-guarded frogs and use solar-powered switch stands to reduce the risk of back injuries while lining the switch. The track construction included over 51,000 track ft. of 136-lb. continuously welded rail (CWR) for six unloading tracks and one bad-order track. The tangent portions of the unloading tracks used second-hand rail on second-hand concrete ties. Sliding point derails were installed at the clearance points and are also solar-powered. A modular precast-concrete platform grade-crossing type system was selected for use at each end of the yard across all six tracks to allow access for the wheel-changing crane. 6 CONSTRUCTION CHALLENGES 6.1 Phasing The greatest challenge during construction involved phasing and multiple contractors with specific projects on site at the same time. Each portion of the project was issued in a separate bid package and separate contract beginning in early 2007 to the last package in mid In the height of construction there were as many as 16 separate projects and contractors on site, which with all of the subcontractors proved to be a logistical challenge. In the middle of 2008 there were

18 in excess of 200 people per day working on site. Given all the different work activities going on, the contractors worked well and safely together towards final completion. Job briefings were held with multiple contractors at the beginning of each work day. Each contractor was aware of the others work for the day, which made coordination much easier. Contractors also held individual job briefings as the work progressed during the day. Weekly progress meetings were attended by all contractor superintendents. Safety items were discussed openly and safety information was passed between contractors, which contributed to a safer work environment. The weekly meetings were used to coordinate and schedule future work to avoid any issues and delays among work groups. 6.2 TLM Construction BNSF s Track Laying Machine (TLM) was used to construct approximately 95% of the track. The biggest challenge with laying the track was that the TLM needed to work within a 10 ft. slot, with an 18 in. concrete wheel-changing slab or a crane rail foundation on either side. This left about four inches on either side of the track loader pulling the machine to navigate through the track slot. Rail had to be positioned on the concrete pavement, which is considerably higher than normal for the TLM process. Adjustments were made to position the rail on the concrete and to keep the ties from dropping farther than normal. Everything ran smoothly, with production running from ¾ to 1 mile of track per day.

19 6.3 Slip-Form Pouring Crane Rails The crane-rail foundation contractor chose to slip form these foundations due to the aggressive schedule. Given the amount of reinforcing steel within the foundations and the fact that the foundations are 2 ft. 6 in. tall, with about half of that distance below grade, this was a challenging operation. The contractor constructed a concrete form on both sides of the foundation location, about one foot wide by three to four ft deep, by using a trencher to remove the material and then back filling the slot with concrete. The soil was excavated between the new forms to about four inches below the bottom elevation of the crane rail foundation and a mud seal was cast to provide a dry bottom that allowed the reinforcing steel to be installed without significant weather delays (See Figures 8, 9). The contractor poured the bottom portion with a slightly higher slump to ensure the concrete consolidated around the reinforcing steel and the slip form portion with a lower slump. This process was coordinated tightly to make sure a cold joint did not develop. The contractor managed this effort with little difficulty. This type of value engineering contributed toward the project staying within budget. 6.4 Utility Relocations Relocation of utilities provided quite a challenge. The final layout required relocation of a major city water main, four sanitary sewer mains, overhead power distribution lines, phone lines, gas mains, and cable lines. Each utility had to remain in service until it was time to cut over to the new relocated utility, which required planning weeks in advance of the cutover dates. The largest and most

20 complicated relocation involved five major natural gas distribution lines and a transfer station. The five gas lines ranged in size from 26 inches in diameter to 42 inches in diameter and had to be relocated and lowered across the new yard. The gas company suggested, and BNSF approved, directionally boring the new lines under the proposed facility and the existing BNSF main line, as opposed to a traditional trenching-and-shoring method. The bore for each line was over 1200 ft. long. Pulling the new lines back through the bore, which required tremendous effort by their contractor, was accomplished without incident. The new lines are now more than 30 ft below the surface of the new yard. 7 Conclusion The facility was completed in June of 2009 with the AGS being the first portion of the facility to go into service (See Figure 10). The cranes were to be completed in August with plans to begin loading and unloading operations in September. Utility relocations were a major obstacle in progressing the schedule, as many different work activities had to be adjusted to accommodate the utilities until relocation was completed. Due to the large number of contractors, working side-by-side, tremendous time and effort was required by all to manage their respective work schedules effectively and efficiently to meet the project schedule. Looking back, it would have been beneficial had property acquisitions and utility relocations been able to start earlier in the project. Construction time and complexities could have been reduced significantly had negotiations with land owners and utility companies been able to start earlier. If an earlier start on these items had been possible, the

21 entire project could have been combined into fewer construction packages, or even one package, eliminating multiple contracts and the inherent coordination challenges. Acknowledgments Hanson-Wilson, Inc. BNSF Engineering, BNSF Telecommunications, BNSF Marketing Ames Construction, Burnsville, MN Chris Hill Construction Company, Memphis, TN APAC Tennessee, Memphis, TN Kinley Construction Company, Arlington, TX Haines Electric Co. Inc., Memphis, TN Tri-state Armature & Electric Works, Inc, Memphis, TN Nascent, Charlotte, NC Konecranes, Finland Texas Gas Memphis Light, Gas, and Water City of Memphis Tennessee Department of Transportation AT&T

22 FIGURES Figure 1 Site Location

23 Figure 2 Retaining Wall

24 Figure 3 Site Cross Section

25 Figure 4 Wheel Changing Crane

26 Figure 5 Elevator Demolition

27 Figure 6 Arches

28 Figure 7 Cranes

29 Figure 8 Crane Rail Foundation Slip Forming Figure 9 Crane Rail Slip Form Paving Detail

30 Figure 10 - Site Aerial from June 2009

31 FIGURES Figure 1 Site Location Figure 2 Retaining Wall Figure 3 Site Cross Section Figure 4 Wheel Changing Crane Figure 5 Elevator Demolition Figure 6 Arches Figure 7 Cranes Figure 8 Crane Rail Foundation Slip Forming Figure 9 Crane Rail Slip Form Paving Detail Figure 10 Site Aerial from June 2009