TRANSATLANTIC TUNNEL

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 HISTORY

The first underwater tunnel was built over four thousand years ago, but floating tunnels
are much more recent. Certainly an engineer and builder of railways, S. Préault, proposed
but did not build an tunnel across the Bosphorus in 1860, an elegant underwater railway
viaduct with spans of about 150 m founded on piers, located some 20 m below the surf
ace. Per Hall proposed a the Bosphorus in 1976, but by 1977 his proposal had become a
buried immersed tunnel for environmental reasons (fish habitat). An immersed tunnel
is now in place beneath the Bosphorus awaiting the last of the TBMs to reach it. Going
back now to 1882, Edward Reed proposed a submerged railway tunnel across the English
Channel supported on caissons, but Parliament in England rejected it for fear of
invasion. It was patented and since then, many other patents have been taken out,
including some in the UK, USA, Norway, Sweden and Italy. Once the first immersed
tunnel had been successfully built in 1893, the way was open also for constructing
Transatlantic tunnel – initially at least those that would be pier supported. Since 1923, the
potential of an Transatlantic tunnel has been recognized in Norway as a way to create a
practical coastal highway across fjords that would otherwise be too deep even f or bored
tunnels to make sense; some of the existing bored tunnel connections even with 10%
grades are very, very long. This need for shorter shallower tunnels for a number of
fjord crossings has led to detailed investigations and field tests that still continue today.
The most wellknown crossing evaluated in some detail in Norway is for Hogs fjord but
the Transatlantic tunnel was a band on EDF or local political reasons. Private investors
have examined a number of other locations. Another serious contender is the Sula-
Hareld crossing. The first of a series of Strait Crossing Symposia in Norway began in
1986 (the fifth was in 2009) in which Transatlantic tunnel have played an increasingly
greater part.

1.2 GENERAL

Tunnels in water are by no means new in civil engineering. Since about 1900,

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING 1

 TRANSATLANTIC TUNNEL

more than 100 immersed tunnels have been constructed. Bridges are the most common
structures used f or crossing water bodies.

In some cases immersed tunnels also used which run beneath the sea or river bed. But
when the bed is too rocky, too deep or too undulating Transatlantic tunnel are used. The
Transatlantic tunnel concept was first conceived at the beginning of the century, but no
actual project was undertaken until recently. As the needs regional growth and the
protection of the environment have assumed increased importance, in this wider context
the Transatlantic tunnel offers new opportunities. The Transatlantic tunnel is an
innovative concept f or crossing waterways, utilizing the law of buoyancy to support the
structure at a moderate and convenient depth. The Transatlantic tunnel is a tube like
structure made of Steel and Concrete utilizing the law of buoyancy .It supported on
columns or held in place by tethers attached to the sea floor or by pontoons floating on
the surf ace. The Transatlantic tunnel utilizes lakes and waterways to carry traffic under
water and on to the other side, where it can be conveniently linked to the rural network
or to the underground infrastructure of modern cities.

1.3 REASON FOR CHOOSING FLOATINGTUNNEL

Floating tunnel is the totally new concept and never used before even for very small
length. It can be observed that the depth of bed varies from place to place on a great
extent. The maximum depth is up to 8 km. The average depth is 3.3 km. The two
alternatives are available for constructions are bridge above water level or tunnel below
ground level. Since the depth is up to 8km it is impossible to construct concrete columns
of such height for a bridge. And also the pressure below 8km.

From sea surface is nearly about 500 times than atmospheric pressure so one cannot
survive in such a high pressure zone. So the immersed tunnels also cannot be used.
Therefore, floating tunnel is finalized which is at a depth 30m from the sea level, where
there is no problem of high pressure. This is sufficient for any big ship to pass over it
without any obstruction.

1.4 BASIC PRICIPAL:

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING 2

 TRANSATLANTIC TUNNEL

Transatlantic tunnel is a buoyant structure which moves in water. The relation between
buoyancy and self-weight is very important, since it controls the static behavior of the
tunnel and to some extent, also the response to dynamic forces. Minimum internal
dimension often result in a near optimum design. There are two ways in which
Transatlantic tunnel can be floated. That is positive and negative buoyancy.

Positive buoyancy: In this the Transatlantic tunnel is fixed in position by anchoring either
by means of tension legs to the bottom or by means of pontoons on the surf ace. Here
Transatlantic tunnel is mainly 30 meters below the water surf ace.

Negative buoyancy: Here the foundations would be piers or columns to the sea or lake.
This method is limited to 100 meters water depth

Transatlantic tunnel is subjected to all environmental actions typical in the water

environment: wave, current, vibration of water level, earthquake, corrosion, ice and
marine growth. It should be designed to with stand all actions, operational and accidental
loads, with enough strength and stiffness. Transverse stiffness is provided by bottom
anchoring.

1.5 CONSTRUCTION:

The concept of Transatlantic tunnels is based on well- known technology applied to

floating bridges and off shore structures, but the construction is mostly similar to that of
immersed tunnels: One way is to build the tube in sections in a dry dock; then float these
to the construction site and sink them into place, while sealed; and, when the sections
are fixed to each other, the seals are broken. Another possibility is to build the sections
unsealed, and after welding them together, pump the water out. The ballast used is
calculated so that the structure has approximate hydrostatic equilibrium (that is, the tunnel
is roughly the same overall density as water), whereas immersed tube tunnels are
ballasted more to weight them down to the sea bed. This, of course, means that a
Transatlantic tunnel must be anchored to the ground or to the water surf ace to keep it in

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING 3

 TRANSATLANTIC TUNNEL

place (which of these depends on which side of the equilibrium point the tunnel is).

1.6 DESIGN PRINCIPLE AND PROCESS OF TRANSATLANTIC

TUBE:

Transatlantic tunnel tube provides space for traffic and buoyancy for carrying different
dead and live loads. The design of Transatlantic tunnel tube relates to oneself safety
and applicability. The design load, buoyancy to weight ratio, f low resistance
performance, durable performance and other factors are considered comprehensively
during the tube design process. By alternatives comparison from technique, economy
and environmental protection, the optimal plan should extremely utilize the space to
satisfy the traffic headroom and meet the demand of ventilation and escape according
to the requirements of safety applicability, reliable quality, economical rationality and
advanced technology.

The principles of tube design are as follows:

 The buoyancy to weight ratio is less than 1.0, related researches show that the
ratio should be between 0.5and 0.8.
 Tube should meet the demand of strength, stiffness and stability during
construction and operation stages.
 The variation of surf ace curvature should be gentle to resist the hydrodynamic.
 Meet the standard f or classification of seismic protection of buildings.

1.7 STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING 4

 TRANSATLANTIC TUNNEL

Transatlantic tunnel consists of many structural components. These

components should provide strength and stiffness against the various forces
acting under the water surface.

The three basic structural components are:

 Tube
 Anchoring
 Shore connections

1.7.1 TUBE:
It should accommodate the traffic lanes and the equipment. External shape can be
circular, elliptical or polygonal. It may be constructed of steel or concrete. Corrosion
protection is the main issue. Tube is composed of elements of length varying from
one hundred meters to half a kilometer.

1.7.2 ANCHORING:
There are basically four types of anchoring:

 Transatlantic tunnel with pontoons

 Transatlantic tunnel supported on columns
 Transatlantic tunnel with tethers to the bottom
 Transatlantic tunnel unanchored

1.7.2.1 TRANSATLANTIC TUNNEL WITH PONTOONS

It is independent of water depth, the system is sensitive to wind, waves, currents and
possible ships collision. Design should be such that if one pontoon is lost, then also the
structure will survive.

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING 5

 TRANSATLANTIC TUNNEL

Fig 1.7.2.1: TRANSATLANTIC TUNNEL WITH PONTOONS

It is an “underwater bridge” with foundations on the bottom, in principle the columns

are in compression but they may also be a tension type alternative. Water depth will play
an important role in this case and a few hundred meters depth is considered a limit at
the present time. However, much deeper foundations are at present under investigation.

Fig 1.7.2.2 Transatlantic tunnel with supported on columns

1.7.2.3 TRANSATLANTIC TUNNEL WITH TETHERS TO THE

BOTTOM

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING 6

 TRANSATLANTIC TUNNEL

It is based on tethers being in tension in all future situations, no slack in these tethers may
be accepted in any future load cases. The present practical depths for this type of crossing
may be several hundred meters, whether the tethers are vertical or a combination of
vertical and inclined.

Fig. 1.7.2.3 Transatlantic tunnel with tethers to the bottom

1.7.2.4 TRANSATLANTIC TUNNEL WITH UNANCHORED

It is interesting as it has no anchoring at all except at landfalls and is then independent of

depth. There is obviously a limit to the length but only further development will answer
this.

Perhaps an alternative f or light traffic should be designed, possibly a 100 or 200 meter long.

Fig. 1.7.2.4 Transatlantic tunnel with unanchored

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING 7

 TRANSATLANTIC TUNNEL

Waves in a fiord basin may have different origins. Firstly, the wind induced waves
generated in the basin itself will depend on several factors, for instance the fetch length.
In Norwegian fiords significant wave heights of a 100 year storm would typically be in
the range of Hs = 1.5-2.5 m with spectral peak periods of Tp= 4-6seconds.

If the crossing is located not too far from the inlet of the fiord and the fiord is not well
protected from the storm waves coming from the open sea by islands and alike, large,
longperiodic waves can hit the structure. In a case on the north-west coast of Norway
between Hareid and Sulasundet, see Fig. 4, waves with significant wave heights of Hs =
5.7m

with a spectral peak period of Tp= 15.5 s were analytically estimated at the crossing site
for a 100 year storm situation out in the nearby North Sea of Hs= 15.0 m and Tp = 15.8s.

It is not so much the difference in wave heights that causes higher wave loads on the
structure from the sea waves, but more the difference in wave periods. Fig. 5 illustrates
the effect of different wave periods on the wave force as a function of the depth at which
the tube is located. The effect of the “fiord-waves” can effectively be reduced by locating
the crossing on a larger depth. As seen, to achieve the same effect for the sea waves the
crossing must be located at very large depths. This is even more so if very long-periodic
swell waves, say with periods of some 20-30 seconds can penetrate in to the site. In the
Hareid-Sula-crossing the tube had to be located at a water depth of 80 m to reduce the
wave forces to manageable forces.

It is not likely that swell waves have amplitudes higher than some few decimeters in a
fiord, so the wave loading as such would be very moderate. However, since the
Transatlantic tunnel system is generally very flexible it consequently also has very high
dynamic Eigen periods. One thus has to be aware that detrimental resonance for such
long-periodic waves should be avoided.

Non-linear effects in the waves create small unbalanced wave drift forces of which the
socalled difference frequency loads will be long-periodic and may also cause resonances
for the lower Eigen modes.

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING 8

 TRANSATLANTIC TUNNEL

Another source for such possible long-periodic resonances are the so-called internal
waves. These are effects that generate from potential layering of water with different
densities due to salinity variations. In fiords with significant supply of fresh water, a
lighter layer of breakwater can exist on top of a denser layer of sea water with higher
salinity. The most important effect of this layering is the free internal waves which can
give rise to wave forces on an object in the vicinity of a boundary between two layers.
It has been estimated that such waves can occur at periods higher than 40 seconds. These
phenomena were subject to serious investigations during the Høgs fjord- project, but it
was never confirmed that they occurred in reality. However, until it has been verified that
they are not real phenomena and since they can cause dangerous resonance, ,they have
to be taken seriously and be designed for.

(a)Map of the area with the North Sea tothenorth-west (b) Detail of the sound with estimated waveheights

Crossing at Highway no. 61

Fig 1.7.2.5: Crossing Site At Inlet Of An Exposed Fjord

1.8 CURRENTLOADS:

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING 9

 TRANSATLANTIC TUNNEL

A maximum current speed at the surface of a Norwegian fiord is typically up to1.5 m/s.
It can vary very much across the fiord, so both symmetrical as well as ant metrical current
profiles have to be considered in the design. On the tube the current gives rise to a
constant in-line force which is proportional to the square of the current velocity. For a
horizontal arch-shaped tube the symmetrical current profile is very well resisted by the
axial forces in the arch, and the capacity of the arch is largely governed by its buckling
capacity. An ant metrical current profile will not create significant axial forces in the
arch, and the current forces have to be resisted by the bending moment capacity of the
tube unless some supporting tendon systems or similar are introduced.

The current speed may also have some slowly varying velocity components, which should
be kept in mind when evaluating the potential for resonance phenomena induced by
slowly varying forces.

Current will give rise to vortex shedding when passing an obstacle. When passing a
cylinder the vortex shedding occurs at a frequency that is proportional to the current
velocity. When this frequency approaches the natural frequencies of the cylinder Vortex
Induced Vibrations (VIV) occur. For a circular cylinder in-line vibrations typically start
at a reduced velocity of Ur = 1-2 (Ur = Uc/(fn·D) where UC is the current speed, fn the
natural frequency of the tube and D is its diameter) and cross-flow oscillations at a
reduced velocity of typically 3-4. These oscillations are self-limiting in the sense that
the in-line oscillations stabilize at amplitude of some 0.15D while the cross-flow
oscillations stabilize at amplitudes up to about 1.3D. It is interesting to note that
simultaneous wave loading tend to reduce the amplitudes of vortex induced motions.
These phenomena are closer discussed in a paper by Professor T. Søreide at this
symposium.

For the tube such cross-flow oscillations should be avoided. With an outer diameter of
a tube of some 16 m and a maximum current velocity of 1.5 m/s the fundamental period
of the vertical vibration modes should then be lower than about 30 seconds. In-line
vibrations are relatively small and present mostly a fatigue issue. For the tethers and
tendon stiffening systems, however, it may be difficult to avoid cross-flow vibrations.
Say the diameter of these members is 1m, and then their fundamental period has to be

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING 10

 TRANSATLANTIC TUNNEL

lower than 3-4 seconds to avoid cross- flow vibrations when assuming that the governing
current velocity is reduced to 1m/s at the relevant water depth .

Fig. 1.8: Wave Force As A Function Of Wave Period And Depth

1.9 ARTIFICIAL DAMPING

As discussed above, there are many various sources of slowly varying environmental
forces of low magnitude. As such, they would normally not do any harm to the
Transatlantic tunnel and its components if it had not been for the danger of resonance
with major vibration modes of the tunnel tube.
One safe way of dealing with this challenge is to design the tube and its supports such
that the lower fundamental Eigen periods are safely below the periods of these forces.
In the more recent studies in Norway the first Eigen-period has thus been kept below
56 seconds to also limit the dynamic effects of the larger first order wave forces. This
however may have a big cost penalty since it generally would require a relatively large
number of anchoring points, either through tethers or as pontoons. For recent

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING 11

 TRANSATLANTIC TUNNEL

Norwegian case studies with two-lane traffic and an outer diameter of the tube of some
12 m this has called for anchoring points every 250m.

If it had been possible to design reliable artificial damping systems that could limit the
resonance phenomena to tolerable levels, the number of such anchoring points and then
also the cost could probably be significantly reduced. For the 4200 m long and 450 m
deep Hareid-Sula crossing the cost associated with the tethers and their foundation was
estimated to approximately 30% of the total cost. There are thus significant saving
potentials by reducing the number of anchoring points.

Such damping systems could be in the form of tuned mechanical dampers; i.e. internal
mechanical systems that have Eigen periods tuned to the frequencies that should be
damped out. The space below the roadway could be utilized for this matter. Also, heavy
concrete blocks hanging in e.g. chains underneath the tunnel might have the same
effect. This latter system could furthermore increase the hydrodynamic damping.

Another possibility is, still under the roadway, to install water basins on each side of the
cross-section and connect these basins with a tube. Water flow from one basin to the other
induced by the motions of the tube could then create viscous damping.

To our knowledge the challenge with these tuned damper systems is that they have not
yet been designed for periods above some 20 seconds. Due to the long periodic
movements in question and the limitations on the acceptable amplitudes imposed by the
psychological reactions of the passing drivers the accelerations that would activate these
systems are very low.
In Norway up till now, there has not been made any development work on this issue, and
it may be a challenge for the international community interested in Transatlantic tunnel’s
to develop such systems.

1.10 COMPETITIVE FEATURES OF TRANSATLANTIC TUNNEL

1.10.1 INVISIBLE
Crossing waterways, whether being from main land to islands in the sea or maybe more
important crossing an inland lake, perhaps the one we are at now will in many

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING 12

 TRANSATLANTIC TUNNEL

cases meet protests both from tourist interests and also from the public in general.
Lakes of special beauty or perhaps historical value should be preserved f or the future,
the crossing of such areas and lakes with Transatlantic tunnel may make this possible. An
illustration of this may be seen in Fig.6.1

1.10.2 LENGTH ONLY FROM SHORE TO SHORE

The actual Transatlantic tunnel structure is only as long as the distance between the
shores.

• Fig. 1.10.2 TRANSATLANTIC TUNNEL Crossing of Lakes

10.1.3 VERY LOWGRADIENT

Crossings with undersea tunnels or bridges will f frequently mean longer structures with
consequently higher costs and this may offset the higher cost per meter f or an alternative
Transatlantic tunnel. An Transatlantic tunnel crossing may have a very gentle gradient or being
nearly horizontal giving considerable savings in energy used by traffic.

1.10.4 ACCESS TO UNDERGROUND SERVICE-PARKING SPACE AT

ENDS

As the Transatlantic tunnel may continue in tunnels having crossed the waterway, it is possible
to arrange parking places or service areas under ground and provide access to the

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING 13

 TRANSATLANTIC TUNNEL

surf ace by lifts directly into cities or recreational areas as shown in Fig. 6.2. These possibilities
may be one of big advantages in future, in fact for all types of tunnels.

Fig.1.10.4 Parking and service

1.10.5 MAY SURFACE JUST ABOVE SHORELINE

As an Transatlantic tunnel may be positioned at any depth below the surf ace
arrangements may be made that the Transatlantic tunnel surf aces at or very near the
shoreline. This may be an advantage f or connections to new or existing road systems and
gives the planners freedom to locate connections in a very flexible way.

1.10.6 CONSTRUCTED AWAY FROM DENSELY POPULATED

AREAS
Construction of infrastructure is a major everyday problem in many cities; traffic is piling
up, new one way streets daily and generally great f frustrations by millions of people.
One very interesting feature with Transatlantic tunnel is that the actual construction
may be done away from the densely or highly populated areas, a feature also for immersed
tunnel construction. After the sections of the tunnel are finished they may be towed to
the actual site and there joined together and installed at the desired depth.
In some instances the whole length of the Transatlantic tunnel may be assembled at the
construction site and the complete structure towed to the actual site and installed. This
would ensure minimum disturbances to the local area and perhaps the whole operation
may only take months instead of years.

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING 14

 TRANSATLANTIC TUNNEL

1.10.7 EASY REMOVAL AT END OF LIFE

All structures will have to be removed or replaced sooner or later and as the amount
of structures increase it is important to prepare f or these operations already at the
planning and design stage. Removal, recycling or reuse of materials or parts of the
structures will become increasingly necessary in the f future, f or both economic and
environmental reasons.

Transatlantic tunnel is in most cases a floating structure as a whole and may Therefore be
towed away to some place where parts of the Transatlantic tunnel may be reused. One
may imagine such an operation by f or instance placing bulkheads in the original elements
and then separating the Transatlantic tunnel in suitable lengths to be perhaps towed to
different locations f or reuse or destruction.

1.10.8 SOME POSSIBILITIES OF REUSE OR RECYCLING OF

TRANSATLANTIC TUNNEL

Sections of a tunnel may be used f or many purposes, depending on its size and condition.
One obvious possibility is f or various types of storage facilities, whether in the sea or
on dry land, a section of tunnel, say 12 meters in diameter cut to a length of 10 to 15
meters would not present
any difficulty to get up on dry land if that was desired. To cut a concrete tunnel into
sections would not present big difficulties either; it’s more a question of overall economy
than technology.

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING 15

 TRANSATLANTIC TUNNEL

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE SURVEY
GENERAL
In the previous chapter the brief information about Transatlantic tunnel is summarized in
this chapter the studies and practice about many researches are reviewed also research
gaps in these studies are summarized which are leads to decide methodology of the
dissertation work.
REVIEW OF PREVIOUS STUDIES:
There is little available published data on Transatlantic tunnel. Some of the previous
studies or Literature data is presented as below:

Bernt Jakobsen (2010)

Design of Transatlantic tunnel operating under various conditions. It includes Accidental
Scenarios, Methodologies of construction, Artificial Damping, Dynamic Effects and their
challenges and Design Issues.

Christian Ingerslev (2010)

The similarities and differences between immersed tunnels and Transatlantic tunnel, also
known as Archimedes Bridge, are explored. It follows the development of Transatlantic
tunnel through ITA Working Group 11 “Immersed and Floating Tunnels” that has
resulted in proposed designs for tunnels in Europe and where Transatlantic tunnel might
be used world-wide.

Ravi Chopra (2018)

This paper presents analysis on Transatlantic tunnel with working loads considered on
the tunnel are current and wave loads. The tunnel structure is assumed of steel tube with
150 m length and 5 m of diameter. Several crossings with a variety of different conditions
under which a Transatlantic tunnel or Archimedes Bridge, may be used.

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING 16

 TRANSATLANTIC TUNNEL

CHAPTER 3
SUMMARY

 The Transatlantic tunnel will set up new trends in transportation engineering and
which shows with the advances in technology that will reduce the time required
for travelling. And make the transportation more effective by hiding the traffic
under water by which the beauty of landscape is maintained and valuable land is
available f or other purposes.
 Benefits can be obtained with respect to less energy consumption, air pollution
and reduced noise emission .For wide and deep crossings, the Transatlantic tunnel
may be the only feasible f ix link, replacing present day ferries and providing local
communities with new opportunities f or improved communication and regional
development.
 The tunnel will set new trends in transportation engineering and which shows
with the advances in technology we can reduce the time required for travelling
and make the transportation more effective.
 By hiding the traffic under water, the beauty of landscape is maintained and
valuable land is available for other purposes. Benefits can be obtained with
respect to energy consumption, air pollution and reduced noise emission.

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING 17

 TRANSATLANTIC TUNNEL

REFERENCES

1. Bernt Jakobsen “Design of the Transatlantic Tunnel operating under various

conditions” Science Direct VOL. 4 2010 ,PP:71-7.

2. Christian Ingerslev “Immersed and floating tunnels” Science Direct VOL. 4 ,2010
PP:51- 59.

3. Ravi Chopra, “Review Paper on Transatlantic Tunnels”,ISSN 2394 – 3386

Volume 5, Issue 4 April 2018.

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING 18