SURVEY AND MONITORING OF

MILLERSDALE ASSETS
Assignment-1-7BU507-100601249
ASSIGNMENT-1-7BU507-100601249

Table of Content

List of tables……………………………………………………………………………………………..2
List of figures…………………………………………………………………………………………….3
1.0 Overview of Existing Situation ………………………………………………………………..4
Health and safety information………………………………………………………………………….5
Possible tunnel defects………………………………………………………………………...6
Consequences to risks…………………………………………………………………….......6
ALARP concept…………………………………………………………………………………7
Monsal trail assets monitoring risk register…………………………………………………..7
Data collection……………………………………………………………………………………………8
Sample photographs of defects in CHEE TOR 1 tunnel……………………………….......8
Scanning of CHEE TOR 2 tunnel using GLS2000 Scanner Machine……………………10
Global Positioning System (GPS)
surveying and mapping of CHEE TOR 1 and 2 tunnels link bridge………………………11
Benefits of using GPS surveying tool………………………………………………………..12
Sample GPR images indicating
possible underground defects in CHEE TOR 1 tunnel……………………………………12
Analysis of the data……………………………………………………………………………………13
CHEE TOR 1 tunnel defects…………………………………………………………………13
Scan-Master software editing………………………………………………………………..13
3D model profile of CHEE TOR 2 tunnel……………………………………………………13
Noise removal in 3D model profile of CHEE TOR 2 tunnel………………………………15
GPS survey map of CHEE TOR 1 and 2 tunnels link bridge…………………………….16
Inferences………………………………………………………………………………………17
Conclusion.……………………………………………………………………………………………..17
Recommendations…………………………………………………………………………………….18
References……………………………………………………………………………………………..19
Appendix……………………………………………………………………………………………….20
1. Method Statement for the Monitoring of Monsal Trail Assets……………………………20
2. Sample Photographs of Defects in CHEE TOR 1 Tunnel (chainage 200m -250m)…..25
3. Sample GPR Images Indicating Possible Underground Defects in
CHEE TOR 1 Tunnel (From 2m – 687 m distance and 5m deep)………………………26

1
ASSIGNMENT-1-7BU507-100601249

List of Tables

Table 1 Possible tunnel defects……………………………………………………………………....6

Table 2 Example of consequences to risks………………………………………………………….6

Table 3 Monsal Trail Assets monitoring risk register……………………………………………….7

Table 4 CHEE TOR 1 tunnel defects…………………………………………………………….…13

Table 5 Tie-point table for the 3-station scans of CHEE TOR 2 tunnel…………………………15

List of Figures

2
ASSIGNMENT-1-7BU507-100601249

Figure 1 The Monsal Trail of Derbyshire County……………………………………………............4

Figure 2 CHEE TOR Tunnel……………..…………………………………………………………….4

Figure 3 Link bridge of CHEE TOR 1 & 2 Tunnels ………………………………………………….4

Figure 4 GLS 2000 Scanner Machine……….………………………………………………………..5

Figure 5 Ground Penetration Radar (GPR)…………………………………………………………..5

Figure 6 Basic principles of the ALARP concept……………………………………………………..7

Figure 7 Over a 1000 falling bricks at all the chainages 200m – 250m..………………………….9

Figure 8 Water seepage in all the chainage 200m – 250m…………………………………………9

Figure 9 Soot on nearly every part of the tunnel wall in chainage 200m – 250m…………………9

Figure 10 Over 300 cavities/borrows in the tunnel walls measuring between 25mm – 200mm…
10

Figure 11 Falling debris along the tunnel

walls……………………………………………………….10

Figure 12 Scanner set up at

station…………………………………………………………………….11

Figure 13 Targets set

up………………………………………………………………………………..11

Figure 14 GPR image indicating possible underground

defects in 2 – 4 m distance and 0-5m depth) of CHEE TOR 1

tunnel……………………………..12

Figure 15 GPR image indicating possible underground

defects in 677 – 687 m distance and 2-4.4m depth of CHEE TOR 1 tunnel……………………..12

Figure 16 Side views of CHEE TOR 2 tunnel scan {approx. 91 yards (83 m)}…………………..13

Figure 17 Top width of the CHEE TOR 2 tunnel scan: 7.905m……………………………………14

Figure 18 Bottom width of the CHEE TOR 2 tunnel scan: 7.153m………………………………..14

Figure 19 Height of the CHEE TOR 2 tunnel scan (5.628m)………………………………………14

Figure 20 Noise (tripod stand) inside CHEE TOR 2 Tunnel……………………………………….15

Figure 21 Noise selected using polygon tool inside CHEE TOR 2 Tunnel……………………….16

Figure 22 Noise selected using polygon tool inside CHEE TOR 2 Tunnel……………………….16

Figure 23 Survey map of the link bridge connecting CHEE TOR 1 & 2 tunnels…………………16

3
ASSIGNMENT-1-7BU507-100601249

1.0 Overview of Existing Situation

Smith, Merna, & Jobling (2006) said “Change is inherent in construction work”. Therefore,
infrastructure assets are liable to change naturally overtime. The Monsal Trail (starting just north
of Bakewell, 10 miles north of Matlock and 8 miles west of Chesterfield in Derbyshire) is a
former railway line, converted and managed by the Peak District National Parks Authority of
Derbyshire County for use by walkers, cyclist, and horse riders.

Fig. 1: The Monsal Trail of Derbyshire County

The trail as shown in figure 1 contains a few assets that dates to a century and half (since
1863). Some of these assets include viaducts, tunnels, bridge, cuttings etc., as shown in figure
2 and 3 below.

4
ASSIGNMENT-1-7BU507-100601249

Fig. 2: CHEE TOR Tunnel Fig. 3: Link bridge of CHEE TOR 1 & 2 Tunnels

To provide engineering guidance on logging the current assets for the Peak Parks District
Authority who are trying to bid for funding to restore more of the Chee Tor Viaduct and Tunnels
at Millersdale section of the trail, a team of Civil Engineering and Construction Management
Students lead by their instructor, Dr. Derek Spalton, undertook a comprehensive surveying and
asset monitoring exercise between 8th – 10th of March 2022 to the Monsal Trial. The tools
employed by the team includes camera, history, laser scanner (GLS2000 Scanner machine),
Global Positioning System (GPS), Ground Penetration Radar (GPR) and several assets
monitoring tools (measuring tape, smith hammer, penetrator, etc.) as shown in figure 4 and 5
below.

Fig. 4: GLS 2000 Scanner Machine Fig. 5: Ground Penetration Radar (GPR)

The team analyzed the output data collected. The highlight of the report is a comprehensive list
of defects in CHEE TOR 1 tunnel (assessment of the existing failures and causation) and
remedial actions needed (outline for the implementation of ISO 55001), and recommendation to
the Peak District National Park Authority on methodology to managing the assets going forward.

5
ASSIGNMENT-1-7BU507-100601249

Assessment of the Existing Failures and Causation

The Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 emphasized the need for measures to be put in place
by employers for the protection (health, safety, and welfare) of workers, as well as others on
their premises, including temps, casual workers, the self-employed, clients, visitors, and the
public. Other regulations relevant to health and safety at construction/infrastructure sites include
Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999, Manual Handling Operations
Regulations 1992 (as amended 2002), and Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations.
Bergeson & Ernst (2015) opined that to better protect the public and to ensure dependable
levels of service, infrastructure (e.g., tunnels, bridges, roads etc.) must be sufficiently
maintained. Unfortunately, the alternative is a more costly consequences and extensive repairs.
The Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (2020, p. 14) defines safety inspections of tunnels as
“frequent periodic visual inspections to identify or investigate potential defects that can
endanger the public or staff or lead to significant maintenance costs or disruption to traffic”. The
manual further set a minimum weekly safety inspection of tunnel as standard which could be
less if risk assessment so specifies. It also itemizes possible defects that could trigger safety
inspections of tunnels as shown in table 1 below.

Possible Tunnel Defects

S/N Tunnel Defects

1 loose, missing, or defective equipment, panels, signals, and controls;
2 blockages in drainage and ducted ventilation systems;
3 oil spill or accumulation of dripped oil and/or debris posing a fire risk;
4 cross passage doors not closing/opening;
5 spalling concrete;
6 failed M&E equipment;
7 ice formation;
8 collision damage and debris; and
9 water seepage.
Table 1: Possible tunnel defects
Source: Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (2020, p. 14)

Consequences to Risks

Zafirovski et. al., (2019, p. 2) emphasized the ever present of hazards, accidents, uncertainties,
and risks (“probability of something negative happening, caused by an event or activity”) in

6
ASSIGNMENT-1-7BU507-100601249

tunnel infrastructure and therefore encouraged the implementation of appropriate measures to

mitigate it. Risk management is basically allowing risks that are quite negligible and specify
suitable procedures for dealing with risks that are high or intolerable (Zafirovski et. al., 2019). In
table 2 is presented an example of a classification of consequences of risk in terms of risk of
human injury and loss of life, and risk of economic loss.

Class Description Example from serious Class Description Economic Loss (Million €)
injury
1 Insignificant No 1 Insignificant < 0.003
2 Considerable No, in general 2 Considerable 0.003 to 0.03
3 Serious 1 3 Serious 0.03 to 0.3
4 Severe 1 to 10 4 Severe 0.3 to 3
5 Disastrous > 10 5 Disastrous >3
Table 2: Example of consequences to risks
Source: Eskesen D. S. et al., (2004 cited in Zafirovski et. al., 2019, p. 2)
ALARP Concept

Zafirovski et. al., (2019, p. 3) advocated the use of ALARP concept that reduces all risks to a
tolerable level as shown in figure 6 in dealing with economic risks.

Fig. 6: Basic principles of the ALARP concept.

Source: Zafirovski et. al., (2019, p. 3)

Monsal Trail Assets Monitoring Risk Register

For the monitoring exercise conducted on CHEE TOR 1 & 2 tunnels and the linked bridge, the
risk register shown in table 3 was generated and substantially observed.

Area Hazard Causes Consequences Initial Mitigation Residual Contingencie

risk measures risks s Measures
For the Ice Weather Sickness High Winter jackets Very low 1)Maintain a
survey first aid box

7
ASSIGNMENT-1-7BU507-100601249

team formation/ on site

monitorin freezing 2)Locate the
g the temperature nearest clinic
tunnel on to the site in
foot and case of
public emergency
users of Trip and fall Wet floor/ 1)Injury to third High 1)Good friction Low 1)Maintain a
the tunnel ground party boots first aid box
2)Injury to 2)First aid box on site
team members 3)Barrier’s fence 2)Locate the
4)Signage nearest clinic
to the site in
case of
emergency
Collision 1)Falling 1)Accident High 1)Work in Medium 1)Maintain a
damage bricks 2)Injury to third progress first aid box
and debris 2)Poor party signages on site
lighting/ 3)Injury to 2)Helmets 2)Locate the
light off team members 3)Reflective vest nearest clinic
3)Cyclist 4)Real-time to the site in
monitoring case of
5)Continuous emergency
repair work
water Fractured Cracks in the High 1)Raincoats High Periodic
seepage rocks tunnel 2)Helmet monitoring of
that allow 3)Good friction the tunnel
water boots
4)Concrete grout
to fill-in the
fracture
Table 3: Monsal Trail assets monitoring risk register
Source: Zafirovski et. al., (2019, p. 3)

Although, the four major hazards identified above from our assessment are at different level of
likelihood of occurrence after the mitigation measures, we still adjure them to be unacceptable
risk in our assessment (Lance & Anderson, 2006). And therefore, special attention was given to
each one of them to prevent the high consequences in the event they occur (see Method
Statement for the Monitoring of Monsal Trail Assets – Appendix 3).

DATA COLLECTION

8
ASSIGNMENT-1-7BU507-100601249

The tools employed by the team in the monitoring of CHEE TOR 1 & 2 tunnels, and the link
bridge includes camera, history, laser scanner (GLS2000 Scanner machine), Global Positioning
System (GPS), Ground Penetration Radar (GPR) and several assets monitoring tools
(measuring tape, smith hammer, penetrator, etc.). Some of the outputs are highlighted below.

Sample Photographs of Defects in CHEE TOR 1 Tunnel

Approximately 50m length of CHEE TOR 1 tunnel was monitored at regular interval of 10m from
chainage 200m to 250m using assets monitoring tools such as camera, measuring tape, smith
hammer, penetrator, etc.

Fig. 7: Over a 1000 falling bricks at all the chainages (200m – 250m)

Fig. 8: Water seepage in all the chainage 200m – 250m

9
ASSIGNMENT-1-7BU507-100601249

Fig. 9: Soot on nearly every part of the tunnel wall (chainage 200m – 250m)

Fig. 10: Over 300 cavities/borrows in the tunnel walls measuring between 25mm – 200mm

Fig. 11: Falling debris along the tunnel walls

10
ASSIGNMENT-1-7BU507-100601249

Scanning of CHEE TOR 2 Tunnel using GLS2000 Scanner Machine

The purpose of the scan was to produce a 3D model profile of the tunnel capturing the junction
joints, curves, and complex surfaces. This will enable us monitor deformation occurring at any
location of the tunnel and prevent deformation leading to discomfort or possible collapse of the
tunnel.

The scanning procedure used was as follows:

1. The GLS 2000 Scanner was set-up on a tripod stand and levelled
2. Tie-point registration method was adopted
3. The instrument specification was set to measure at 6.3mm@10m resolution and high-
speed mode
4. Three station points were established with one inside the tunnel and two outside (one
each at the opposite entrances of the tunnel).
5. A total of eight target points were set up within and outside of the tunnel
6. Three different scans were conducted using the targets as reference points
7. Each of the station scans were made to reference minimum of 3 targets common to the
preceding or succeeding station scan. This was meant to facilitate tying of the scans
8. The target points were eventually used in tying the scans to produce a 3D model profile
of the tunnel with the aid of a software called SCANMASTER.

Fig. 12: Scanner set up at station Fig. 13: Targets set up

Global Positioning System (GPS) surveying and mapping of CHEE TOR 1 and 2 tunnels link
bridge

11
ASSIGNMENT-1-7BU507-100601249

The Global Positioning System (GPS) survey equipment was used in surveying and mapping
the link bridge connecting CHEE TOR 1 and 2 tunnels. The GPS survey equipment records
distance, height, and location measurements instantly with the only requirement of the
instrument having a clear view of the sky to receive signals from GPS satellites (Baseline
Equipment Company, 2022). The static GPS baseline method was employed to determine the
coordinates for the survey points along both edges of the bridge and the centre line of the road
(Baseline Equipment Company, 2022). The GPS surveying and mapping instrument was
set to determine coordinates within 5mm accuracy. Equal distances of 1m were adopted
from one station to another, starting from the face of CHEE TOR 1 tunnel to the face of CHEE
TOR 2 tunnel. Both edge of the bridge and the centre line were surveyed. The geographically
referenced data collected from the field was stored, manipulated, and displayed on map using
computer software.

Benefits of using GPS surveying tool

Using the GPS surveying tool removed constraints such as line-of-sight visibility between survey
stations (GPS.Gov, 2022). Due to this flexibility, the stations were deployed at convenience so
long we had a good view of the sky.

Sample GPR Images Indicating Possible Underground Defects in CHEE TOR 1 Tunnel

Ground penetrating radar (GPR) is a real-time non-destructive testing (NDT) technique that
uses electromagnetic waves for shallow and high-resolution investigations of the subsurface
(Daniels, 2000). It is used to investigate the shallow sub surfaces of the earth, roads, bridges
etc. In figure 20 and 21 below are shown sample GPR images indicating possible underground
defects in CHEE TOR 1 Tunnel (from 2m – 687 m distance and 0-5m depth).

Fig. 14: GPR image indicating possible underground defects in 2 – 4 m distance and 0-5m
depth) of CHEE TOR 1 tunnel.

12
ASSIGNMENT-1-7BU507-100601249

Fig. 15: GPR image indicating possible underground defects in 677 – 687 m distance and 2-
4.4m depth of CHEE TOR 1 tunnel.

ANALYSIS OF THE DATA

The team analyzed the output data collected from CHEE TOR 1 and 2 tunnels, and the link
bridge between both tunnels. Below are the highlights of the analysis outputs.

CHEE TOR 1 Tunnel Defects

The major defects found in CHEE TOR 1 tunnel are as shown in table 4 below. These defects
are over a 1000 in repetitive forms.

S/N CHEE TOR 1 Tunnel Defects

1 accumulation of soot on tunnel posing serious environmental pollution risk;
2 falling bricks;
3 cavities/borrows on tunnel walls;
4 collision damage and debris; and
5 water seepage.
Table 4: CHEE TOR 1 tunnel defects

Scan-Master Software Editing

The editing process for the scan data was as follows:

1. The raw data was imported into the scan-master software from the storage disc used to
save it on the field.
2. Tie-points were created for each of the common targets to the three different scans
3. Tie-point registration was now created to enable all the three scans to align into one
scan

13
ASSIGNMENT-1-7BU507-100601249

4. Seven target points were successfully aligned to the tie-points except the 8 th targets
because it was not common to the minimum of two stations
5. Finally, the 3 station scans were imported into the tie-point registration portal to produce
a single 3D model scan of CHEE TOR 2 tunnel as shown below.

3D Model Profile of CHEE TOR 2 Tunnel

Fig. 16: Side views of CHEE TOR 2 tunnel scan {approx. 91 yards (83 m)}

Fig. 17: Top width of the CHEE TOR 2 tunnel scan: 7.905m

14
ASSIGNMENT-1-7BU507-100601249

Fig. 18: Bottom width of the CHEE TOR 2 tunnel scan: 7.153m

Fig. 19: Height of the CHEE TOR 2 tunnel scan (5.628m)

In table 5 is shown the tie-point table for the 3-station scans and the targets with the highest
constraint error of -/+0.002.

Table 5: Tie-point table for the 3-station scans of CHEE TOR 2 tunnel

15
ASSIGNMENT-1-7BU507-100601249

Noise Removal in 3D Model Profile of CHEE TOR 2 Tunnel

There are some situations that would warrant the removal of unwanted object (known as noise)
from the 3D model scan. The procedure adopted for the removal of noise in the 3D model scan
of CHEE TOR 2 tunnel using scan-master software was as follows:

1. In figure 20 is shown the 3D model scan of the tunnel with a tripod stand in it, this is
known as noise in the tunnel
2. Using the polygon tool in the scan-master software, the tripod feature is selected as
shown in figure 21.
3. This feature is then deleted using the delete tool in the scan-master software to produce
a clean and clear 3D model scan of the CHEE TOR 2 tunnel as shown in figure 22.

Fig. 20: Noise (tripod stand) inside CHEE TOR 2 Tunnel

Fig. 21: Noise selected using polygon tool inside CHEE TOR 2 Tunnel

16
ASSIGNMENT-1-7BU507-100601249

Fig. 22: Noise selected using polygon tool inside CHEE TOR 2 Tunnel

GPS Survey Map of CHEE TOR 1 and 2 tunnels link bridge

Fig. 23: Survey map of the link bridge connecting CHEE TOR 1 & 2 tunnels

Inferences

In my opinion, I believe that the below inferences may be drawn from a broad analysis of the
data contained within this document.

1. The high number of defects (over a 1000) observed in the tunnels exposed visitors to
significant level of risk of falling bricks, trip and fall, possible collision etc.
a. Falling bricks causing body injuries
b. Accumulation of soot on tunnel posing serious environmental pollution risk
c. Cavities/borrows on tunnel walls providing haven for dangerous animals like
snakes

17
ASSIGNMENT-1-7BU507-100601249

d. Debris causing collision and accident

e. Continuous water seepage resulting in discomfort and possible trip and fall
2. The number of tunnel accidents, and the rate of occurrence might increase due to the
defects observed in the tunnels.
3. The high number of defects indicate lack of regular monitoring and repair work taking
place at the tunnels.
4. The dimension of the tunnels (top width - 7.905m, bottom width - 7.153m & height –
5.628m) and age (over 150 years) justifies the restricted use.
5. The significant possible stress/defects signals in the GPR readings would necessitate
further investigation to ascertain the primary cause and the remote and immediate
danger to the public. This would also help in proffering solutions in the event of high risk
to users.

Observed Defects with required Remedial Action

Headstone has some shattered copings above its western portal; it is also wet at both ends.
Large sections of lining in Chee Tor No.1 have succumbed to spalling, with brick faces lost.
Water ingress, deteriorating brickwork and perished mortar are all to be expected, though an
ongoing repair programme has kept a lid on these. The portals are sealed by full-height walls
and doors which have driven up humidity levels, preventing problems from freeze-thaw.
Settlement is not a live issue - it is rare for any movement to be recorded.

In Chee Dale towards the trail’s western end, two more tunnels - both of around 100 yards –
remain open, allowing icicles to form when temperatures plummet. But vegetation growth is the
greatest threat to public safety, with saplings constantly threatening to dislodge lumps of
fragmented limestone in the many sheer-sided cuttings. This can be addressed with a ‘rock-
pick’. A huge revetment between Cressbrook and Litton tunnels could benefit from similar
attention.

Despite many stress and shrinkage cracks, Julian found the structure to be in fair condition for
its size and age, with no significant defects. A mystery bulge had appeared above the western-
most arch on the northern side, which was not mentioned in previous reports, but it did not look
new.

18
ASSIGNMENT-1-7BU507-100601249

Repointing the viaduct would involve disproportionate cost due to the needs of access. Parapets
and spandrels can be reached from the deck by cherry picker; other isolated cracks can be
tended to using rope access. But significant maintenance on the arch soffits would be difficult to
justify – and probably unnecessary - unless the structure was being brought back into use for
rail.

Prospect for Future Use

Fig……..: Viaducts at Millers Dale

Source: Bickerdike (2009, p. 5)

And that is a prospect which continues to raise its head. In 1975, a group of enthusiasts formed
the Peak Railway Society with the aim of relaying the line. Steam services are now running
between Matlock and Rowsley. Rail track proposed its reinstatement for freight in the mid-
Nineties. Then Derbyshire County Council and a dozen funding partners published a 101-page
study in 2004, concluding that there were no engineering showstoppers to the route’s reopening
but “a clear deficit in benefits”.

Of course, the climate has changed since then. Last September, Network Rail published its draft
Route Utilization Strategy for Yorkshire & Humber which put forward Buxton-Matlock as a
means of relieving pressure caused by aggregate traffic on the Hope Valley line. The East
Midlands RUS will examine this further.

Whether bearing the load from feet or steel wheels, the viaducts of the Midland Railway’s Peak
District incursion can be confident of a cared-for and functional future. Few non-operational
structures can look forward with that degree of certainty.

19
ASSIGNMENT-1-7BU507-100601249

Fig. ……: Classic view of Monsal Head Viaduct

Source: Bickerdike (2009, p. 6)

3.0 Outline for the implementation of ISO 55001

On March 8 -10, Dr. Derek’s team, spent 3 days examining, recording, and identifying defects
and good conditions to produce a plan indicating low, medium, and high priority works,
something which the Peak District Park Authority will then handle.

Although, Chee Tor 1 and 2 tunnels remain sound except for a few non-severe defects, as
confirmed from our inspection, there is need for serious maintenance exercise so as not to
distress users and the public.

Therefore, a very good practice (internationally accepted standard - ISO 55001 Standards for
Asset Management) for asset management is required for the maintenance of the Monsal Trail
assets.

Adopting the ISO 55001 Standards for Asset Management will allow the Peak District Park
Authority to coordinate their activity in such a way that will help them gain value from the Monsal
Trail assets. This is so because ISO 55001 pays more attention to organization and
stakeholders’ requirements and prospects, along with enhanced emphasis on leadership as
shown in figure … (Woodhouse, 2013). They will be able to do the following in the management
of Monsal Trail assets:

1. Alignment (‘line of sight’) of organizational objectives and feeding them directly into asset
management strategies, objectives, plans and day-to-day activities.

20
ASSIGNMENT-1-7BU507-100601249

Fig………ISO 55001 elements of an asset management system

Source: Woodhouse (2013)

2. Whole life cycle asset management planning and cross-disciplinary collaboration to

achieve the best value combined outcome. The authority will be able to come up with
clear and documented ‘methods and criteria for decision making and prioritizing’ to
reflect stakeholder needs and define ‘value’, and which are then applied consistently to
determine the best balance in achieving conflicting objectives.
3. Risk management and risk-based decision-making. Enhanced asset management-
specific requirements for risk management, such as the management of risks that
change with time.
4. The provision of clear requirements for audit and documentation will promote integration
and sustainability: particularly leadership, consultation, communication, competency
development and information management.

21
ASSIGNMENT-1-7BU507-100601249

Suggested Strategic Plan for the Management of Monsal Trail Assets

The following is a suggested framework for the management of the Monsal Trail assets:

1. The Peak District National Park Authority (custodian of the Monal Trail’s assets) should
put out a contract for the wholistic inspection of Monsal Trail assets. The services of the
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Derby or any other professional service
provider with requisite qualification and experience for such jobs should be engaged for
this purpose.
2. The contract will examine, record, and consider the Monsal Trail assets strengths and
flaws and produce a strategic assets management plan in line with the National Park
Authority plans and objectives.
3. The strategic assets management plan will identify the low, medium, and high priority
works that the National Park Authority will manage.
4. The Peak District National Park Authority should now engage the services of a full-time
Project Engineer (Preferably a chartered civil engineer) and a team of qualified
inspectors (approximately 7 persons with civil, geotechnic and survey background). This
team would see to the implementation of the Monsal Trail strategic assets management
plan as produced by the service provider.
5. Major repair works and subsequent management of the assets for the realization of
Peak District National Park Authority strategic objectives will be carried out by this team.
6. Periodic monitoring and evaluation that will review performance and improvement will be
jointly implemented by the Peak District National Park Authority and the management
team.

Conclusion

The management of Peak Parks of Derbyshire County needs to improve on regular and
continual monitoring of the CHEE TOR 1 and 2 tunnels, creating a model to compare the asset
against. This is evident from over 1000 defects observed and recorded on the tunnel which
ranges from falling bricks from the soffit, debris on the floor, visible cracks on the walls, ingress
of water through the walls and roof causing water seepage into the tunnels, cavities/borrows on
tunnel walls, and accumulation of soot on tunnel walls.

22
ASSIGNMENT-1-7BU507-100601249

Even though there is no conspicuous deformation of the assets that significantly impact its use,
the following major risks of the asset have been identified: ice formation/ freezing temperature,
trip and fall, collision damage and debris and water seepage.

RECOMMENDATIONS

A major recommendation is that if the risks associated with the assets are to be eliminated or
drastically reduced, a risks management strategy should be implemented by the management
of Peak Parks of Derbyshire County. This program should ensure a continuous weekly (Design
Manual for Roads and Bridges, 2020, p. 14) safety inspection and regular biannual major asset
monitoring of the tunnels and the linked bridge that will inform maintenance input and achieve
the desired outcome for the assets.

Therefore, the management of Peak Parks of Derbyshire County need to put in place risk
management strategy that will (1) identify risk, (2) analyze risk, (3) respond to risk and (4)
review risk. This will help forestall circumstances that might impact negatively on the CHEE
TOR 1 and 2 tunnels and the linked bridge assets.

REFERENCES

Baseline Equipment Company (2022). How to Use GPS for Land Surveying. Available at:
https://www.baselineequipment.com/gps-land-surveying-equipment. Retrieved on 2nd
April 2022.
Bergeson, William & Ernst, Steve (2015). Maintenance, Inspection, and Evaluation (TOMIE)
Manual. July 2015 Publication No. FHWA-HIF-15-005. U.S. Department of Transportation
Available at: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/inspection/tunnel/tomie/hif15005.pdf
Bickerdike, Graeme (2009). The Story of Structures on the Monsal Trail: A week in the Peak.
Rail Engineer magazine. www.forgottenrelics.co.uk/bridges/monsal.html

23
ASSIGNMENT-1-7BU507-100601249

Daniels, Jeffrey. (2000). Ground Penetrating Radar Fundamentals. 10.4133/1.2921864.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/237508286_Ground_Penetrating_Radar_Funda
mentals/link/540ed41a0cf2f2b29a3b51a3/download
Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (2020). CS 452 Inspection and records for road tunnel
Systems (formerly BD 53/95). Available at: file:///C:/Users/Jayeola/Downloads/CS
%20452%20Inspection%20and%20records%20for%20road%20tunnel%20systems-
web.pdf
Fire and Rescue Service (2012). Operational Guidance – Incidents in Tunnels and
Underground Structures. TSO (The Stationery Office) Available at: www.tsoshop.co.uk
GPS.Gov (2022). Surveying & Mapping. February 10, 2022. Available at:
https://www.gps.gov/applications/survey/. Retrieved on 2nd April 2022.
Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. 1974 c. 37. Available at:
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1974/37/contents. (Downloaded on 6 April 2022).
Lance G. A. & Anderson J. M. (2006). The risk to third parties from bored tunnelling in soft
ground. Research Report 453. Available at:
https://www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrpdf/rr453.pdf
Smith N. J., Merna T., & Jobling P. (2006). Managing Risk in Construction Projects. 2nd Edition
Blackwell Publishing.
The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999. 29 December 1999. No.
3242. Available at: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1999/3242/contents/made.
(Downloaded on 6 April 2022)
Woodhouse, John (2013). ISO 55000. The Woodhouse Partnership Ltd.
Zafirovski, Zlatko & Gacevski, Vasko & Lazarevska, Marijana & Ognjenovic, Slobodan (2019).
Procedures for risk analysis and management in tunnelling projects. E3S Web of
Conferences. 135. 01001. 10.1051/e3sconf/201913501001.

APPENDIX

1. Method Statement for the Monitoring of Monsal Trail Assets

Project Summary
Project Name Survey and Monitoring of Monsal Trail Assets

24
ASSIGNMENT-1-7BU507-100601249

Project Summary Comprehensive surveying and monitoring of CHEE TOR 1 & 2 and
the link bridge between them for the purpose of establishing the
integrity of the assets and the safe use by the public.
Site Address The Monsal Trail section (starting just north of Bakewell, 10 miles
north of Matlock and 8 miles west of Chesterfield in Derbyshire)
passing through the Peak District National Parks of Derbyshire
County.
Issue Date 07/03/2022 Start Date 08/03/2022
The Author of this 100601249 Finish Date 10/03/2022
Method Statement is:

Health and Safety Contact Details

Name Dr. Derek Spalton
Phone 01332 593185
Email [email protected]

Introduction

This method statement is an outline of how a team of Civil Engineering and Construction
Management Students lead by their instructor, Dr. Derek Spalton, will carry out a
comprehensive surveying and asset monitoring of CHEE TOR 1 & 2 and the link bridge
between them in the Monsal Trail section of the Peak District National Parks of Derbyshire
County.

All work will be executed in accordance with the agreed itinerary and standard health and safety
procedure. This method statement covers the carefully controlled survey and assets monitoring
at the above-mentioned site.

Time Scale/ Resources

The field visit is expected to be for 3 days from 8th -10th of March 2022. We will have an average
of 22 people on the team: 3 - 4 instructors and 18 students.

Preparation

25
ASSIGNMENT-1-7BU507-100601249

As part of the preparation for the field trip, briefings were given to all the students by Dr. Derek
Spalton on risk assessments and health and safety.

The University Derby through Dr. Derek Spalton will be entirely responsible for organizing
travels, accommodation and feeding for the entire team members. He will also oversee
mobilizing equipment and materials for the field work; and give instructions on technique and
chronological sequence of the works to be carried out.

Control Measures

The following are the control measures put in place:

 Method of work.
 Risk assessment.
 Personal Protective Equipment (PPE).
 Barricade of work area and signage
 Cyclist and walker control
 Adherence to legislations on health and safety

Field Work Description

Comprehensive surveying and asset monitoring of CHEE TOR 1 & 2 tunnels and the link bridge
between them using camera, history, laser scanner, GPS, GPR, and several assets monitoring
tools (measuring tape, smith hammer, penetrator, etc.).

Field Work Sequence

 Site set up and demarcation of work area including delivery of materials and work
equipment.
 Assembly of materials, tools, and equipment.
 Conduct the survey and asset monitoring
 Remove tools, and equipment
 Leave site in a clean and tidy condition.

Surveying and Asset Monitoring Method

 Arrive on site; liaise with Peak District National Park representative

 Give briefs to students on the task and step-by-step approach accomplishing it

26
ASSIGNMENT-1-7BU507-100601249

 Conduct equipment and tools talk where necessary (Topcon GLS 2000 scanner, GPS,
etc.)
 Install fencing and suitable signage in select areas of the site
 Set up the instruments
 Conduct the surveys and asset monitoring
 Record observations and findings
 Remove tools, equipment, signage, and fencing
 Tidy up the site.

In addition, equipment and tools would be checked for safety and correct operation before and
after use.

Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)

All students and instructors working on this surveying and monitoring exercise must put on PPE
which include:

 Safety boat
 Hat (hard)
 Thermal gloves
 Hi-visibility Jacket

Dr. Derek together with other instructors will check the fitness of all PPE. University of Derby
through Dr. Derek will provide most of the personal protective equipment to students.

Surveying and Asset Monitoring Equipment

A variety of equipment and tools would be deployed throughout the asset monitoring and
surveying. These including:

Selection of hand tools (measuring tape, smith hammer, penetrator, etc.).

camera
laser scanner (GLS2000 Scanner machine)
Global Positioning System (GPS)
Ground Penetration Radar (GPR)

27
ASSIGNMENT-1-7BU507-100601249

General Health and Rules

i. Instruction and supervision

Dr. Derek Spalton will ensure that all students on the surveying and asset monitoring exercise
are:

 trained and competent to carry out the survey and asset monitoring.
 given detail information on the risks to health and safety on site.
 trained on the use of PPE
 briefed on all matters relating to the field work that may impact their health and safety

Also, health and safety issues will be monitored and updated as necessary throughout the field
visit by Dr. Derek Spalton and other instructors.

ii. Supervision

The field visit will be under the direct supervision of Dr. Derek Spalton.

iii. Communication

Dr. Derek Spalton will communicate data collection methodology to all students and follow-up
on supervision of safe collection of data. All students will be briefed on health and safety, prior
to the commencement of work each day.

iv. Manual handling

All students will be re-trained on manual handling of equipment and tools prior to the
commencement of work as a reminder to training that has done in the laboratory.

v. Inspection of equipment

All equipment and tools would be checked for safety and good working condition before being
deployed. Defective equipment will not be used.

vi. Daily checks

After each day’s work, equipment and tools would be checked to ensure that non is left on site
as being lost or constitute risk to other site users.

28
ASSIGNMENT-1-7BU507-100601249

vii. Work in progress signs

Work in progress signs would be displayed where necessary to notify other park users of our
activities.

viii. First aid box

First aid box would be made available on site for the treatment of minor injuries.

ix. Health and safety briefs

All students will be given a health and safety briefs covering general risks, controls, safe
procedures, and emergency procedures. Failure to comply with health and safety guidance will
result in the offender being penalized according to University of Derby disciplinary rules.

x. Safety of the public and other third parties

Since it is an open site that cannot be locked, equipment and materials sections would be
fenced out and some select students would be on the look out to prevent accident to public and
other third parties.

xi. Traffic Management

Since the area is prone to cyclist movement, some select students would be assigned as
shouter to alert the team of cyclist approaching. Where possible, fencing and signs would be
deployed to restrict work areas.

Modifications

Adjustment would be made to this method statement as the need arises. However, if this would
impede the progress of the survey and asset monitoring exercise, the work will stop until steps
are taken to eliminate or reduce the risk.

Prepared by: 100601249

Position: Student

Date: 07/03/2022

29
ASSIGNMENT-1-7BU507-100601249

2. Sample Photographs of Defects in CHEE TOR 1 Tunnel (chainage 200m -250m)

Falling bricks at all the chainages (200m – 250m)

Water seepage in all the chainage 200m – 250m

Soot on nearly every part of the tunnel wall (chainage 200m – 250m)

Over 300 cavities/borrows in the tunnel walls

30
ASSIGNMENT-1-7BU507-100601249

Falling debris in along the tunnel walls

3. Sample GPR Images Indicating Possible Underground Defects in CHEE TOR 1 Tunnel
(From 2m – 687 m distance and 5m deep)

31
ASSIGNMENT-1-7BU507-100601249

32