Ouvrages d'art - Antenne Rive-Sud

[ThomasH]

13 août 2020

Depuis le boulevard Milan, direction ouest

Depuis le boulevard Milan, direction est

Depuis le boulevard du Quartier, direction ouest

 

Modifié 13 août 2020 par ThomasH

[SameGuy]

8 hours ago, danny12345 said:

South shore aerial span is shorter: its only from the canal to the base of the Champlain Bridge.  Voussoir and launcher are only worth it on longer distances, similar to a tunnel boring machine vs other tunneling techniques.  The South shore also has trickier crossing such as the Canal, the CN tracks, the Ile-des-Sours channels... all of which might be too long for voussoir but are ok with custom-made steel beams.

It’s 4 km, pretty much the same as each of the two LGs are doing on the West Island. I’m not questioning the wisdom of those making the decisions, I’m just curious as to why it was decided so. The airport tunnel isn’t very long, but the TBM was chosen even with a six year schedule. 

[danny12345]

31 minutes ago, SameGuy said:

It’s 4 km, pretty much the same as each of the two LGs are doing on the West Island. I’m not questioning the wisdom of those making the decisions, I’m just curious as to why it was decided so. The airport tunnel isn’t very long, but the TBM was chosen even with a six year schedule. 

The elevated section of the West Island is more like 15km total, so almost 8 km per launcher.  Anyway, I've read that explanation before, but I don't rem,ember if it was from the RAM or someone else on this forum

[SameGuy]

Again, I said I’m curious. The speed with which it goes, they could have put one of them on the PSC segment and built it in half the time, and have it set up in the West Island - where there’s a six year deadline instead of four - already. It’s just significantly more efficient than solid beams and cranes and site-poured decking. In just seven months of actual run time, both Anne and Marie have each completed almost 3 km of aerial structure, while the 4 km structure in PSC isn’t nearly complete after almost 21 months non-stop. That’s all I’m saying.

[budgebandit]

10 hours ago, SameGuy said:

Again, I said I’m curious. The speed with which it goes, they could have put one of them on the PSC segment and built it in half the time, and have it set up in the West Island - where there’s a six year deadline instead of four - already. It’s just significantly more efficient than solid beams and cranes and site-poured decking. In just seven months of actual run time, both Anne and Marie have each completed almost 3 km of aerial structure, while the 4 km structure in PSC isn’t nearly complete after almost 21 months non-stop. That’s all I’m saying.

A good question for REM Info. I'm sure they would be able to give you an answer. Personally I think it's because of aerial space constraints. The Tour D'Aiguillage, bridge, building on Wellington with the Pharmaprix etc. would hinder the launcher. A lot more open space, and easier curves on the WI branch. 

[SameGuy]

I agree with space constraints at the canal end. Also the aspect of trucking the hundreds of voussoirs from off-island to that particular part of PSC would’ve been interesting. 😉

[WestAust]

Il y a 12 heures, SameGuy a dit :

It’s 4 km, pretty much the same as each of the two LGs are doing on the West Island. I’m not questioning the wisdom of those making the decisions, I’m just curious as to why it was decided so. The airport tunnel isn’t very long, but the TBM was chosen even with a six year schedule. 

For the airport tunnel, the TBM was the only possible solution in order to pass under the runways/taxiways and airport terminal, cut and cover was not doable.

[SameGuy]

Tunnels can also be excavated using traditional drilling and blasting (Edouard-Montpetit) or a roadheader (STM Côte-Vertu garage).

I’m not questioning the use of the more-efficient TBM or launching gantries, rather why the less-efficient crane-beam-casting system on the PSC segment.

[Né entre les rapides]

il y a 49 minutes, SameGuy a dit :

I’m not questioning the use of the more-efficient TBM or launching gantries, rather why the less-efficient crane-beam-casting system on the PSC segment.

Des explications plausibles ont déjà été fournies, bien qu'elles n'ont pas convaincu tout le monde.  Une autre explication possible serait que du matériel et des équipements  supplémentaires, nécessaires pour employer l'autre technique, n'étaient pas disponibles au même moment.

[SameGuy]

42 minutes ago, Né entre les rapides said:

Des explications plausibles ont déjà été fournies, bien qu'elles n'ont pas convaincu tout le monde.  Une autre explication possible serait que du matériel et des équipements  supplémentaires, nécessaires pour employer l'autre technique, n'étaient pas disponibles au même moment.

Encore, bien d’accord. Oui, bien sûr, il y a des questions auxquelles nous n'obtiendrons peut-être jamais de réponses.  Mais c'est toujours bon d'être curieux!