Impact case study database

The research outputs described above are a selection of those that underpin the development of the aforementioned up-to-date Limit State design guides for GFRP bridges and structures, i.e. C779 (2018) and JCR (2016), which replace outdated guides. Further evidence of the research’s impact is given by leading international civil engineering consultancies positively acknowledging the use and importance of these new design guides for the design and construction of GFRP footbridges and structures. They confirm that GFRP structures are: environmentally more sustainable, structurally more efficient, materially more durable, lighter to transport to site and quicker to erect than those made of more traditional materials.

The report was first presented to the engineering community in November 2018 in London, and again in June 2019 in Manchester. Turvey attended the London presentation and was impressed that the number of practicing civil/structural engineers, architects, and materials suppliers greatly outnumbered the academics in attendance. Following its announcement on CIRIA’s website, C779 has attracted significant worldwide attention. By July 2020 it had been downloaded more than 2,350 times by civil engineering design and construction companies, and individuals [5.1b, 5.4].

Atkins, a member of the SNC-Lavalin Group, is one of the world’s most respected design,

engineering and project management consultancies. Their Technical Authority (Transportation) Engineer confirms that C779 has had a “very positive impact” on the Engineering industry. As the use of FRP is still relatively new in bridge design, “the publication of this code allows us to reference the relevant parts of this industry standard, which gives further confidence to our clients”. The code has “therefore acted an enabler to get this new material applied into practice” and is being currently used by his company to design 20 FRP bridges over the UK’s new East- West railway [5.2a, 5.2b]. He also confirms that C779 has enabled the Highways Agency’s ‘Design Manual for Roads and Bridges BD 90/05 (2005)’ to be replaced by Highways England’s CD 368 (2020) [5.2a].

WSP are involved in numerous bridge design projects. Their Technical Director confirms that CIRIA C779 has been “a key advance in the documents available for FRP bridge design” as there “was no similar document available in the UK before this covering how to design FRP bridges and calculate structural resistance”.

WSP are currently using C779 in the in the design and construction of the following FRP bridges: [5.3]

1. Springkells (Aspatria, Cumbria): 9.5m span highway bridge over a railway.

2. Saxe Street (Teignmouth, Devon): 15m span footbridge over a railway.

3. Eatons (Poole, Dorset): 20m span footbridge.

4. Widewater (West Sussex): 20m span footbridge.

The Operations Manager for Composites UK (the trade association for the UK composites industry) has confirmed that Network Rail is using C779 to design 10 non-station and 2 station FRP footbridges over the Bicester to Bletchley line (part of the new East-West Rail project) [5.4]. These footbridges are part of the 20 FRP footbridges aforementioned under Atkins [5.2b]. The Standedge Aqueduct also forms part of this project and Composites UK confirm that C779 has also been used in this design. The steel aqueduct will be replaced by two 10.2m span FRP aqueducts, which allow the river Colne to flow over the railway. Network Rail’s involvement is due to the aqueduct crossing a railway. The use of twin FRP aqueducts facilitates maintenance by closing one aqueduct for inspection/maintenance whilst the river flows along the other aqueduct. [5.4]

North West Rail [part of Network Rail] also indicated to Composites UK that, following a “Whole Life Cost” exercise for different materials used in bridge construction, it was decided to use FRP footbridges for the East-West Rail project. Design and supply of the FRP decks is based on: 1. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Official’s prefabricated bridge specification, 2. Eurocomp Design Code and Handbook (Turvey was on the committee which developed and wrote this code, and contributed a Case Study) and 3. CIRIA’s C779: FRP Bridges – Guidance for Designers [5.4].

Figure 3 : Futura FRP Station Footbridge, reproduced with kind permission from Marks Barfield Architects and COWI

COWI is a multinational consultancy group and is among the leading consultants within complex infrastructure design. The Director of COWI (UK Bridge) highlights that C779 is “very useful” and provides industry practitioners with “much of the FRP design information they need in one place”. COWI is currently using C779 to develop the design of a new typology of FRP station footbridge “Futura” (see Figure 3, left) for Network Rail in conjunction with the National Composites Centre (NCC) [5.5a]. The Chief Executive of the NCC describes this bridge as “ground-breaking” and outlines the huge benefits the use of FRP materials offer, including the “cost-effective nature of their construction and installation”, that they are a “more sustainable solution” and that they are “intrinsically safer” than more traditional materials [5.5b]. The Principal Engineer for Network Rail also adds that these benefits and the corrosion resistant nature of composites will mean “less disruption and impact on passengers when we’re installing and maintaining our assets” [5.5b].The Project Director of Marks Barfield Architects, the originators of the Futura FRP station footbridge concept, indicates that from its inception the footbridge offers the benefits of large scale pre-fabrication and cutting-edge innovative use of GFRP composite materials [5.5b]. COWI also state that they are using JCR (2016), discussed subsequently, as a standard and design approach for their bridges [5.5a].

Jacobs is a multinational company with 52,000 employees worldwide. Their Associate Director of Bridges reports the use of C779 and CD 368 in the design of several FRP footbridges: (i) Lower Otter River Project (comprising three 25m spans), (ii) Raglan Road Footbridge in Lancashire (one 30m span over the railway), (iii) Level crossing replacement footbridge (Network Rail, Winstantow) (one 25m span over a railway) and (iv) Rowell Road Bridge (Essex) (5m span over a stream) [5.6].

In 2018, JCR (2016) underwent very minor updating and was re-named EuCIA (2018). In addition, in April 2020 a Technical Specification, (derived from JCR (2016) and EuCIA (2018)), was approved by WG4 of CEN TC 250 (the EU’s body for approving Eurocodes) and should become a new Eurocode for FRP structures within two to three years. As discussed above, COWI has confirmed that they are using JCR (2016) as a standard and design approach for their bridges [5.5a].

Prior to C779, only the Highways Agency’s outdated ‘Design Manual for Roads and Bridges BD90/05’ (2005) existed. No other UK design guides for FRP bridges were available. In February 2020, Highways England published CD 368. The importance of JCR (2016) and C779 (2018) in the development of CD 368 can be evidenced by [5.2a], [5.7] and page 3 of [5.9]. The General Manager of Lifespan Structures Ltd (London, UK) confirms that they have already used CD 368 in the design of several completed FRP footbridges, with spans ranging from 6m to 12m. Both Lifespan Structures and Jacobs have confirmed that they are also using this code in the design of several ongoing projects [5.7, 5.6].

The Pile Fuel Storage Pond (PFSP) is a water-filled, concrete structure at Sellafield (see Fig.1 below). It is 100m long, 7m deep and is open to the environment. It was built in 1948 to store the spent nuclear fuel from the UK’s first nuclear reactors that produced plutonium for the UK’s earliest nuclear weapons. It has housed a range of spent fuel from various reactors comprising approximately 1000 different forms of radioactive waste.

PFSP is the oldest and the largest, open-air, nuclear fuel storage pond in the world, and is one of the most hazardous legacies in Europe. It is a UK Government ‘Major Project’, i.e., with an anticipated lifetime cost of more than GBP100.0 million requiring HM Treasury approval. In 2017 and 2018, high-hazard ponds and silos accounted for 29% of GBP2.0 billion spent at Sellafield with PFSP costing GBP20.0 million in that year alone [5.1].

PFSP is deemed a ‘high-hazard’ meaning that it must be decommissioned in a way that will: ‘deliver an end state as soon as reasonably practicable with a progressive reduction in risk and hazard’ [5.2]. For PFSP, this comprises reducing the water level in the pond progressively from 2019 to 2029 (known as dewatering) and operations to place it in a safe state consistent with a subsequent 10-year period of control and maintenance. This will be followed by demolition of the concrete structure. The nature of the safe state referred to above is subject to extensive prescribed detail and analysis, and is particularly important in the context of this case. The detailed description of the state that results from this assessment is known as the defined interim state; for PFSP this is defined below under ‘Context’.

Figure 1: A schematic representation of the PFSP from 'Priority Programmes and Major Projects' (NDA 24102622, 2015)

Unlike similar facilities elsewhere (cf., the KW basin at Hanford, USA), the internal surfaces of PFSP were not coated to prevent ingress by contaminated water into its constituent concrete. Consequently, radioactivity has pervaded its structure, severely complicating the ease with which it is dismantled. For example, as the water level is reduced, by way of dewatering, the shielding influence of the water on radiation emitted from radioactivity in its walls will also reduce, increasing radiation exposure. This makes it difficult to estimate the degree of hazard workers will be exposed to after dewatering and increases the uncertainty on how much of the pond structure will need to be removed to achieve the defined interim state, prior to demolition.

This case study concerns impact that comprises: i) a formal revision of the accepted decommissioning process; ii) a revision of the defined interim state; iii) the benefit of non-destructive characterisation evidence supporting these revisions, and iv) the economic benefits to the third parties that have exploited the underpinning research.

Prior to this impact, the 2015 defined interim state (see above) for PFSP was (quoted from [5.2, p.6]): ‘Pond dewatered, concrete liner removed (waste route to be determined), walls without a liner sealed / shielded and R2/C2 radiological conditions achieved. All…debris, …sludge and (radio)activity contained within the pond wall/floor concrete liner will have to be removed from the pond at which time the Interim State will be achieved, and a period of Care & Maintenance commenced prior to Final Decommissioning and Demolition *.*’ Note: ‘R2/C2’ refers to the category of engineered precautions and controls necessary in areas contaminated with radioactivity, where R2/C2 the lowest category of controlled area.

Achieving the 2015 interim state would have required: total removal of the water and removal of the spent fuel, sludge and other wastes from the pond; diamond sawing of the concrete walls into blocks; prizing these blocks off the 20mm-thick bitumen layer beneath them; creation of a new walkway external to the building (thus avoiding increased radiation exposure inside the building due to dewatering) and relocation of the services attached to the old one. With the pond empty, and the shielding effect of the water thus removed, removal of the walls would need to have been done entirely remotely due to the high radiation levels. Further, a dedicated disposal route (i.e., to somewhere proven fit-for-purpose) would need to have been established to store the contaminated concrete blocks. The merit of the 2015 interim state was that removing the concrete liner completely would have reduced the in-situ radioactivity quickly, offering a relatively fast means by which to achieve the interim state. However, the drawbacks were: high dose rates, enhanced engineering complexity, limited characterisation data and the need for significant [levels of] remote operations. [5.2, p.5]. Workshops in April 2017 concluded that the risk with the 2015 scheme was unlikely to be as low as reasonably practicable (ALARP), as required by law.

Subsequent to being KTP Associate (see Section 2), Shippen secured a full-time position with Createc Ltd. As a result, the company won a number of industry-based contracts (detailed under Technology transfer etc., below) by which the knowledge and the capability developed in the underpinning Lancaster research was transferred and exploited, including the relationship between photon spectra, attenuation and depth, and knowledge of the apparatus. In March 2014, Createc and Costain sponsored and conducted extensive in-situ trials [5.3] at Sellafield based on the underpinning Lancaster research [5.4, 5.5. 5.6], termed the D:EEP (Estimating Entrained Product) trials. These provided (quoting [5.7] section 7.2) ‘…crucial information because it can be used to determine the minimum amount of wall material that needs to be removed for bulk decontamination’. This assessment supported a change in the strategy to remove the radioactivity by shaving the top layer away from the concrete liner, rather than removing the entire liner itself. The distinction between these approaches is illustrated in Figs. 2a and 2b.

1. Strategy prior to impact b) Strategy after impact

Figure. 2: Cutaway illustrations of PFSP showing the back wall, bitumen liner and pond floor part-way through preparations to place it in a safe state for long-term maintenance: a) The strategy prior to this impact - pond empty, its wall being cut into blocks placed on the pond floor, for which there was no disposal route. b) Strategy after this impact - water level reduced incrementally (lower dose hence less risk) and wall shaved according to assessment by depth profiling (yielding less radioactive waste of a form compatible with an existing disposal route).

As a result of the application of the underpinning research in the D:EEP trials, the interim state definition was changed in 2017 to require the concrete walls to be shaved to a depth of approximately 10mm, as the water level is lowered at 70-cm intervals (see [5.3, p.45]: ‘The project supported a revised dewatering strategy for PFSP…’) and found [5.8] ‘shaving to 3mm reduced surface activities by more than 90% with no significant reduction with further shaving to 6 and 9mm’, with the benefit that the shavings (being intermediate level radioactive waste, ILW) will be compatible with an existing disposal route. As a result, the revised interim state definition:

1. Carries significantly reduced risk (both in terms of safety and implementation).

2. Generates significantly less radioactive waste, i.e., given two walls, 2-m thick, shaved to 10mm and a conservative ILW disposal cost of GBP50,000 / m³, the revised strategy affords a 99.5% reduction in both waste volume ( from 2800m³ to 14m³) and disposal cost ( GBP140.0 million to GBP0.7 million, i.e., packaged volume ILW £9k/m³ + £40k/m³ container, see: NDA Technical note 16518861, conservative since estimates as of February 2012).

3. The expensive and onerous task of establishing a new disposal route, required for the blocks arising via the original 2015 strategy, is avoided.

4. The ‘very significant’ cost of operating the facility longer than anticipated in the absence of sufficient characterisation data (‘hotel’ costs) [5.2] and,

5. The impact of this on future generations, are both avoided [5.6, 5.9, 5.10].

The definition of the interim state, revised due to the Lancaster impact, is [5.2, p.5]: ‘Pond dewatered, walls shaved and/or shielded (when not reasonably practicable to remove the radiological source term) and R2/C2 radiological conditions achieved at the surface of the remaining structure. Residual pond sludge/debris will have been minimised (subject to ALARP) and any residual material immobilised. Shaved/shielded surfaces will be sealed to prevent leaching/carbonation and encast steels will remain in situ. ILW concrete waste generation will be minimised and exported to downstream plants.’. As corroborated by Sellafield [5.9], the resulting change in strategy ‘ …is an important step and cannot be underestimated’, and further by the NDA [5.10], this research ‘had a significant and positive impact on helping to define the strategy for dealing with one of the UK’s highest hazard legacy nuclear fuel storage ponds’.

Consequently, the revised approach removes most of the radioactivity while minimising waste volumes and yields waste in a form for which there is an existing disposal pathway. It does not implicate the pond structure, it is easier to automate than concrete block cutting, it reduces the risk of exposure to operators (as the dewatering is incremental and the shielding effect of the water is retained) and it is also achievable more easily on a remote basis than block removal.

Beyond PFSP, the technique has also [5.3, p.45] been ‘tested on a contaminated wall in the FGRP (First Generation Reprocessing Plant))’ and has influenced future plans, i.e., [5.7, sect. 7.2] ‘ …underpin the dewatering strategy for the tanks and other legacy ponds at Sellafield’ via trials in the Residual Sludge Tanks (RST) where the benefit of underwater deployment [5.3, p. 45] ‘...means that future expensive dewatering trials may be avoided’.

Shippen, the KTP Associate [5.11] at REACT Engineering and researcher on the underpinning research, is now Nuclear Instruments Chief Scientist with the REACT spin-out, Createc Ltd. Fellow former researcher, Adams, is now Senior Radiometric Specialist with Sellafield Ltd. Createc and Costain (combined revenue of more than GBP1.5 billion) formed the D:EEP partnership to commercialise the underpinning research, winning a 5-year, Innovate UK project (GBP350,000 between April 2015 and June 2018) [5.12] (one of a series of related Createc technology development contracts). The D:EEP technology was highly commended in the NDA Group Supply Chain Awards collaboration category and achieved a Sellafield Business Excellence Gold Award relating to its use in the PFSP trials [5.4].

The author’s REF2014 case study detailed the economic impact, of the research described in Section 2, on the ability of ST Microelectronics to secure contracts for their inertial devices from multinational companies including Nintendo (Wii). This continuing case study details the ongoing economic impact on ST Microelectronics, specifically through sales revenue associated with inertial MEMS products that totals USD3.5 billion since 2014. These devices have had a specific impact on a number of industry sectors including consumer and automotive electronics. Significant contributors to this overall impact [5.4] include the LIS331DLH accelerometer and the L3G4200D gyroscope in the iPhone 4 and 4S (included in 15 million units sold between January and September 2014) [5.2], the gyroscope in the iPhone 5C (totalling 22 million units sold in 2014 and 2015) [5.2], the Nintendo Wii and Wii U (included in 11.9 million units sold between 2014 and 2017) [5.7] and the 6-axis inertial sensors in the Nintendo Switch (totalling 70 million sales between 2017-2020) [5.1]. In the automotive market, the release of products including the AIS328DQ 3 axis accelerometer, the A3G4250D 3 axis gyroscope and the ASM330LHH inertial measurement unit has built on the ability of ST Microelectronics to deploy design for reliability and reliability evaluation methodologies to deliver very low field failure rates at low cost. Here, the work described in section 2 has assisted ST Microelectronics to establish a solid platform for success in the airbag market with growing applications in roll detection and advanced driver assistance systems [5.3].

The application of the research described in [3.1], [3.2] and later in [3.3] supported ST Microelectronics in commercialising new products and processes. The research reported in [3.1] and [3.2] was used to provide reliability data associated with materials, the fabrication process and moving structures within MEMS test devices that was essential to the uptake of ST Microelectronics MEMS accelerometers and gyroscopes. The characterisation technology developed through this research, together with further work with ST Microelectronics on the gyroscope [3.3] also delivered an optimised design and provided ST Microelectronics with enabling reliability analysis tools. The enabling research [3.1-3.3] also provided ST Microelectronics with a means to validate, through simulation, the effectiveness of several reliability characterisation methods in revealing potential reliability hazards within manufactured structures. It also supported research that validated the shock resistance of the original 3D accelerometers and gyroscope sensor to 10,000g, essential for robustness requirements in consumer applications. The penetration of ST Microelectronics inertial sensors into the automotive market has been supported by all the work described above with collaborative research associated with embedded test [for example 3.5 where ST Microelectronics where advisers] providing an important contribution to the methodology associated with “Aerospace Quality at Automotive Prices”.

Benedetto Vigna, President of the Analog, MEMS and Sensor Group and member of the executive group for ST Microelectronics confirmed that the “research collaboration started in 2002 through the MACROS EU project (IST-2001-34714) and extended into the PATENT DfMM Network of Excellence (507255) [outputs include 3.2- 3.5] and beyond during which time your team carried out the modelling and characterisation work associated with the reliability evaluation of our MEMS inertial sensing technology. This work had a significant contribution to ST Microelectronics in both our ability to prove the reliability of this technology and hence achieve market penetration that included the Nintendo Wii and subsequently the Apple iPhone. The modelling and reliability evaluation methodologies that are used today still find their roots in the work that you and your extended team led within these two European projects carried out in collaboration with the MEMS team in ST Microelectronics .” [5.4]

Of significance in the context of market retention is the ease in which reliability evaluation methodologies can be ported between product generations. The 45% footprint reduction achieved within the gyroscope in the iPhone 5 [5.5] relative to the iPhone 4 required both a reduction in the critical dimensions in the MEMS structure and advances in the packing process whilst maintaining competitive levels of reliability. As [5.4] and the extract above from ST Microelectronics indicate, the methodologies delivered have also contributed to this capability and supported the evolution of existing markets with Nintendo [5.6].

In conclusion, the impact of the research detailed in sections 2 and 3 on the ability of ST Microelectronics to penetrate key consumer markets, including the Apple iPhone and Nintendo Switch, in addition to the growing automotive market, is highly significant. As of September 2012, ST Microelectronics had shipped 2 billion MEMS sensors that confirmed its leading global position in MEMS technology for consumer and portable application (Market Analyst IHS iSupply). By August 2020 this had grown significantly to 17 billion parts sold [5.3] with USD3.5 billion in revenue between January 2014 and August 2020 being associated with Inertial MEMS devices alone.