Challenging the Status Quo -

An Innovative Approach to the Structural

Renewal of a Large Box Culvert Tara Manning

Brisbane City Council

Steve Latimer

Interflow

Abstract: Underneath the road surface, nestled services such as stormwater drainage are vital to the successful

operation of a city. The need to rehabilitate or replace structures without impact to traffic and the

community has forged innovation in engineering with a recent project completed by Brisbane City

Council, Interflow and SASTTI Joint Venture.

Inspection and Level 3 Structural Assessment of a large twin-cell reinforced concrete box culvert

beneath the Brisbane Corso found the southern cell was deteriorating and rapidly reaching the end of

its structural lifespan.

The deteriorated culvert runs beneath a high-volume traffic area on a bus route, also used extensively

by large groups of cyclists and families. Its outlet is in a small, environmentally sensitive section of

parkland alongside the Brisbane River.

Long term closure of the Corso, while a new reinforced concrete culvert was constructed, would have

been unacceptable. Consequently, rehabilitation with a structural lining within six months was

considered a potentially feasible alternative.

The liner would need to be structurally designed to take all load independent of the existing culvert.

Its location close to the Brisbane River meant that the liner installation process would have to manage

tidal effects as well as the passage of normal stormwater flows.

With these constraints in mind, Brisbane City Council requested innovative design and construction

options to minimise community and environmental impact while also reducing the time frame

compared with reinforced concrete solutions.

Interflow submitted a competitive tender that considered options available both nationally and

internationally to meet the technical design aspects of the project as well as the community and

environmental aspects. Brisbane City Council accepted Interflow’s innovative solution utilising a

product named Channeline; a bespoke manufactured Glass Reinforced Plastic (GRP) box-section

solution, that was able to meet all the project requirements.

This paper will provide details on the design process, the Channeline technology, installation, safety

practices, environmental controls and how this choice met the substantial challenges faced while

working beneath the Brisbane Corso.

Keywords: Trenchless Structure Stormwater Channeline Culvert

An existing reinforced concrete culvert (RCC) stormwater culvert passing below Brisbane Corso at

Fairfield between Stimpson and Turley Streets was constructed in circa 1947 (refer Figure 1). The

internal dimensions are 2.1m x 2.1m x 12.9m long and the bottom of the culvert has a semicircular

profile with straight walls and a slightly arched roof. In 1997, the culvert was extended with 2 cells of

precast reinforced concrete box culverts (RCBC) with dimensions of 2.7m x 2.7m x 6.1m long,

extending the overall length to 19m (refer Figure 2).

Figure 1 Project Location (reference: Brisbane City Council BrisMaps)

Figure 2 As constructed drawings of Circa 1947 culvert and 1997 RCBC extension (Brisbane City Council, 1947)

Brisbane City Council Engineers undertaking a routine asset condition assessment determined the

culvert had reached the end of its service life and recommended its replacement within six months.

A Level 2 inspection was undertaken in June 2019 which determined the overall condition state of the

southern culvert as Condition State 4 (Transport and Main Roads, 2020). In August 2019, a Level 3

inspection was undertaken with the structure showing signs of spalling, delamination, exposed,

corroded reinforcement and overall poor condition of the concrete (refer Figure 3). Notably, the lab

testing revealed that the chloride has reached its threshold. Owing to the extensive defects, poor

quality of the concrete, and the unknown age of the culvert, the culvert was considered to be at the

end of its service life. It was recommended to replace or structurally line the culvert at the earliest

opportunity (i.e. within a maximum of 6 months). The upgrade should be structurally independent, as

the existing culvert in its current state is considered as having no structural capacity. Meaning, that

the upgrade should have sufficient strength to carry the entirety of the loading from above.

Figure 3 Existing condition of culvert

Conventional open trench excavation construction methods to replace with new precast concrete

culverts are costly and disruptive to residents and traffic. Brisbane Corso is a residential area, has high

traffic volumes, a public transport route and has a high volume of cyclists in peak hour on this

designated cyclist route. Council decided to explore alternative methods for constructing a new pipe

inside the existing culvert to reduce disruption at surface level during construction. However, the

irregular profile of the existing culvert, daily tidal inundation, environmentally sensitive area, close

proximity to high risk underground services (110kV electricity and high pressure gas) presented

significant challenges (refer Figure 4). Access restrictions included working in a confined space (the

outlet was the only entry and exit) and a minimal working area on site with works restricted to the

culvert apron and small working platform adjacent to the structure.

Figure 4 Culvert outlet in Brisbane Corso Park / Brisbane River (left) and Culvert outlet at RCBC extension (right)

Structural relining methods with circular precast pipes are widely used however in this case there

would be a considerable loss of hydraulic capacity. Other alternatives considered in the trenchless

applications included shotcreting over steel reinforcement, shotcreting with fibre reinforced concrete,

sliplining with reinforced concrete sections and sliplining with glass reinforced plastic (refer Figure 5).

Figure 5 Alternative trenchless applications: (from left) shotcreting over steel reinforcement, shotcreting with fibre reinforced concrete, sliplining with reinforced concrete sections, and sliplining with glass reinforced plastic

A reference design and performance specification was developed by Brisbane City Council and an open

market procurement process was established to seek innovation from the industry for a design and

construct AS4902 contract (Standards Australia, 2000). Key concerns with traditional approaches were

the ability to maintain traffic flow while reaching the seven day early loading requirements for

concrete to ensure the appropriate strength was reached before opening the structure to the traffic,

the effects of bonding and degradation between the existing culvert and new concrete repair and

safety concerns with a live stormwater outlet and tidal area.

The request for proposal was broken into innovation opportunities and non-negotiable terms.

Innovations opportunities included:

• Alternatives to the typical concrete and reinforcement installation, if possible, that are more

cost or time effective (as opposed to the 7 days early loading requirements in Main Roads

Technical Specification for Concrete, MRTS70 [TMR, 2018]).

• Use of alternative made to order pre-fabricated culvert linings such as glass-reinforced-plastic

(GRP) solutions.

• Use of alternative materials such as fibre reinforced polymer mix designs, impregnated metals

suitable in a tidal environment and other proven ‘fit for purpose’ alternatives.

• Use of admixtures to increase setting time of materials to allow for opening of road as soon

as possible.

• Shotcreting vs pumping of concrete or alternative.

• Manufacture all components off site to allow modular installation on site and reduce on site

presence and costs.

• Exploring other cost and time saving options to drive efficiency.

• Exploring options to use composite structures.

• Mitigating key risks:

o Road closures, lane closures and/or reduced speed limits over the culvert during

construction and after construction until the culvert has reached the required

strength.

o Reduced time on site which limits disruption to road users and neighbouring

properties.

o Service relocations or protection under or around the culverts.

o Completion of construction that involves a coffer dam within 21 days (note

requirements of tidal permit [DAF, 2018]).

The non-negotiable tender requirements were:

• Limitation on traffic lane closures and detour routes to maintain traffic flow.

• Structural lining shall be independent of the existing culvert, not rely on the bond with the

existing culvert for its structural capacity and shall ignore any contribution from the original

culvert.

• Lining wall thickness to be kept to a minimum to reduce impact on flow area (no greater than

150mm).

• The lining is to bear the full load from the ground and traffic above and shall be designed to

SM1600 traffic loading (Standards Australia, 2017).

• The lining shall be designed to resist hydrostatic pressures due to a Highest Water Level (HWL)

at the road surface.

• The design loading shall be the maximum load produced from the combination of soil loadings

and traffic surcharge loadings.

• Design life of the structural lining is to be 100 years.

• Any conditions in the environmental permits that are legislative requirements.

• Clearing or trimming of any trees or vegetation as per Environmental permits.

• Excavation per as Environmental permits (note Acid Sulfate Soils).

• Any opportunities that breach legislative requirements or codes of practice.

The design standard requirements for the structure was:

• AS5100 Bridge Design Code (Standards Australia, 2017)

• AS1170 Structural Design Actions (Standards Australia, 2002)

• Transport and Main Roads Design Criteria for Bridges & Other Structures (TMR, 2016)

All tenderers were required to attend a mandatory tender meeting on site where key risks and

opportunities were discussed and to ensure the tenderers were familiar with the site restrictions.

Through a competitive tendering process, Interflow was awarded the design and construct contract

for the structural relining with their option of Channeline selected. Their tender submission outlined

an innovative design solution using Channeline meeting all the mandatory design criteria; presented

a construction methodology that limited the risk of environmental harm and provided a short

construction duration minimising impact to traffic. The key features of the Channeline product was it

could be made to any shape, was a complete structural rehabilitation system, the smooth surface was

deemed to increase hydraulic performance, impact and abrasion as well as corrosion resistant and

achieved a design life of 100 years. The Channeline also boasted a thin wall thickness of 42mm out of

the 150mm maximum thickness outlined the in the reference design and performance specification

from Brisbane City Council (refer Figure 6).

Figure 6 Proposed Channeline Liner

The Channeline structural reline properties consisted of three layers. An inner layer of Isophthalic

Resin and Fibreglass Fabric, a central core of Silca and Resin then an outer layer of Isophthalic Resin

and Fibreglass Fabric with Graded Silica Sand Grit (Channeline, 2016). Key features of the product are

high mechanical properties for design purposes, flexural strength and reduced surface roughness for

increased hydraulic performance when comparing to concrete related alternatives.

Figure 7 Channeline Sections and Material Properties (Channeline International, 2020)

Figure 8 Material Properties (Channeline International, 2016)

The tender submission from Interflow outlined that after completion of the design the Channeline was

manufactured off site in Dubai the lead time to Australia was approximately ten weeks by sea freight.

Due to the long lead time and the reduced residual life of the culvert, the existing culvert would be

required to be temporarily propped until construction could commence to ensure the safety of the

public. During the tender process Interflow was requested to provide two extra/over rates: one for

installation of the propping and another for the weekly installation and monitoring of the propping.

This would allow for ease of installation and agreement upfront on the scope of works and associated

costs. Requested to be included in the rate for the installation was design of temporary supports

including RPEQ certification, Traffic Guidance Scheme/s, confined space permit, mobilisation,

installation, monitoring and removal. Assumptions requested of Interflow for temporary propping

included:

• The entire structure will require support.

• Support will need to be designed to withstand flow through the culvert including impact from

debris (tidal or within culvert).

• Working area cannot change for environmental reasons (limited to apron and working

platform inside Brisbane Corso Park).

• No community consultation is required (Council will perform this).

• Council will escalate and obtain traffic permits under emergency conditions after TGS/s are

provided by Interflow.

• Removal includes disruptions or delays to methodology for installation of Channeline design

proposal (extra/over to the contract).

• Assume installation to commence one month prior to anticipated end of residual life of

culvert.

• Sensors and remote monitoring were not included.

• Provide a weekly rate for installation and monitoring including any adjustments to the

supports.

Until the ordering of the temporary propping was directed, the culvert was under routine inspection

by Brisbane City Council to ensure safety of road users.

As part of the Design and Construct contract, Interflow engaged Sewer Assessment & Trenchless

Technology Specialist Consulting Engineers SASTTI Joint Venture (JV) who developed a design from

first principles. Additional design criteria in the design assessment included AS3571 Plastic Piping

System GRP (Standards Australia, 2009) and the Sewerage Rehabilitation Manual (Water Research

Centre, 2001).

A finite element model was created that used beam elements that equate to liner material properties

(refer Figure 10) (Horlyck, 2020).

Figure 9 Finite Element Analysis (left) Figure of the FEA Model; (right) Combined Stress due to Soil, Hydrostatic and Vehicular Loads (SASTTI JV, 2020)

The model was provided with supports which simulate surrounding ground support conditions

ignoring any contribution from the grout or the existing concrete culvert. The soil support is modelled

using spring supports at nodes determined based on the subgrade modulus selected for the soil. The

spring supports will be compression only elements that are activated where the lining experiences

resistance from deflection into the ground. The loads were determined in accordance with AS1170

(Standards Australia, 2002) and AS5100 (Standards Australia, 2017) and combined to establish load

case combinations that are applied to the model. The loads were not factored as limiting material

properties are based on allowable stresses with a minimum Factor of Safety of 2. The various load

combinations were applied to the model to check stability against buckling and determine design

actions including maximum shear forces, axial loadings and flexural bending moments. Maximum

stresses determined for the cross-sectional profile are compared to the maximum allowable values

provided by the lining manufacturer verified by accredited testing of the material.

A sensitivity analysis is used to assess the impact of the assumption for the ground support conditions

as outlined in the Geotechnical Report provided by Brisbane City Council (extract, refer Figure 10).

Two values are used for the subgrade modulus to represent soil conditions for a silty clay varying from

soft to stiff. Two conditions are assumed for the location of the ground water table. The first is located

at the invert of the culvert which represents maximum vertical loading conditions while the second is

for the water table located at the surface which represents maximum horizontal loading conditions.

Maximum stresses were determined for the cross-section profile and compared to maximum

allowable values of the liner verified by accredited material testing provided by Channeline.

Figure 10 Geotechnical Borehole Logs (Brisbane City Council)

As Channeline could be made to any shape, the lenth of the segments was determined by the

transport impacts and construction methodology which proved advantageous in a Design and

Construction contract. The design of the sections consisted of a total of 11 cells: 10 x 1200mm and 1

x 900mm cells with each section weighing approximately 550kg (refer Figure 11).

During the design process SASTTI JV noted a 250mm ‘step’ inside the cuvlert between the host culvert

outlet and the extension apron which was not originally shown on the as constructed drawings. The

Channeline design was modifed to be installed on a predtermined grade to overcome the difference

in invert height at the outlet (refer Figure 11).

Figure 11 Channeline Relining Design (Long Section) (SASTTI JV, 2020)

Surrounding the Channeline, the anulus was tempoarily supported by timber packers to each end of

segment to account for the differing site conditions of the degraded culvert (refer Figure 12). As a non

structural layer the mix design for the anulus consisted of a fly ash and cement grout mix (CS350-BS)

made off site at Boral (Boral Concrete Qld & NT, 2017) with a specific gravity of 1.6 and plasticisers

and curing additives. The mix was chosen due to the high flow properties.

Figure 12 Channeline Relining Design (Cross Section) (SASTTI JV, 2020)

After completion of the design and prior to ordering of the Channeline from Dubai, a prototype section

was made out of Styrofoam to confirm measurements on site. A cost effective measure, the Styrofoam

section was pushed through the entire length of the host culvert.

The design phase also included design of the temporary propping as a conservative approach to

ensure the safety of road users. The provisional items were ordered one month prior to remaining

residual life of the culvert although the structure was not showing any significant signs of immediate

failure. SASTTI JV inspected the host culvert and noted the culvert was most at risk due to flexural

loading and the walls were deemed satisfactory. Multiprop MP250 (Peri, 2015) with a minimum

capacity of 65kN were chosen as the support product. The props were designed to support the full

overburden loads applied to the centre of the roof including road loadings (SM1600). Along the roof

of the culvert, timber beams with lengths equal to the Channeline segment lengths were installed to

allow for progressive removal of the propping as the Channeline was installed for increased safety. To

mitigate flood loading from potential debris impact, diagonal bracing was included at each end.

Scaffold tubes at the top and bottom of props were also noted in the design (refer Figure 13 and Figure

14).

Figure 13 Temporary Propping Design (Long Section View) (SASTTI JV, 2020)

Figure 14 Temporary Propping Design (Section View) (SASTTI JV, 2020)

The props were installed from the outlet/upstream end of the host structure firstly in the locations

where the roof had spalled ensuring the timber beams were a snug fit against the roof of the culvert.

Any loose or drummy material on the roof soffit was then removed from a safe distance prior to the

installation of the remining props. Any gaps between the top of the timber beams and roof soffit were

packed with timber wedges to ensure the distance between the contact point did not exceed 300mm

(refer Figure 15).

Figure 15 Temporary Propping Installed on site

Since the culvert relied on the continued integrity of the walls the monitoring included condition

assessments of the walls for signs of any movement or deterioration throughout the works. A

measurement was taken of the horizontal distance between the walls at mid-height at five equally

spaced locations along the existing culvert length weekly. Once in place the props were also inspected

weekly until the commencement of lining work or immediately following a wet weather event in which

case the props were cleared of any debris build up. Should any movement in the walls or defects in

the propping system be detected the culvert was inspected by a structural engineer.

Once manufacture of the Channeline segments was completed the segments were assembled above

ground at the Channeline factory to ensure correct fit and measurement prior to packing into the

40ft container for transportation to Australia.

The Channeline sections are packed and braced into the container to ensure the segments are not

damaged during transportation ensuring the structural integrity of the product as noted in Figure 16.

Figure 16 Channeline bracing for sea transportation

Construction mobilisation commenced on site with a small footprint for the works. The construction

traffic configuration consisted of a single lane closure over the length of the works at a width suitable

to maintain the shared zone with traffic and cyclists (refer Figure 17). Traffic controllers were situated

at each to give priority to buses to maintain traffic flow as per the Queensland Manual of Uniform

Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD, 2019) as well as manage deliveries. The commencement date of the

construction was scheduled to occur during low tide intervals as the culvert outlets directly into the

Brisbane River and high tide inundates the culvert with a water level of up to 1.5m. Key activities such

as silt and debris removal, end sealing of Channeline and annulus grouting was scheduled for the

lowest tide heights only.

Figure 17 Traffic Configuration during construction

The construction process consisted of the following overarching activities:

1. Culvert cleaning

2. Installation of the rails and Pneumatic winch

3. Installation of the Channeline sections

4. Sealing of the ends

5. Grouting

6. Rendering the ends

Culvert Cleaning

Before the Channeline installation works could commence, a layer of marine mud and silt

approximately 200mm deep needed to be removed from the culvert invert.

A temporary low-rise coffer dam made of sandbags, silt cloth and silt socks was first set up at low tide

across the apron at the culvert outlet to capture any silt runoff during the cleaning procedure to

prevent contamination of the local marine environment Large pieces of concrete and debris were

shovelled up and put into totes for disposal off-site and a vacuum truck was used to suck up the

remaining marine mud and debris from the culvert invert. All silt and debris removed from the culvert

was disposed of at a licensed waste facility.

Throughout the construction period, the temporary sandbag bund was set up and removed each shift

to prevent any contamination of the creek. The bund provided the added benefit of extending working

time on an incoming tide for portions of works that could only be completed during low tide.

Rail Installation & Pneumatic Winch

The rails were made from timber and cut on a taper from 250mm to 0 to match the length of the

section being rehabilitated. Steel flat bar was then attached to the top of the wooden rails to provide

a slick surface for the Channeline sections to slide along when being pulled into place (refer Figure 18).

Figure 18 Installation of Tapered Rails

During low tide, the rails were fastened to the concrete invert at the 5 and 7 o’clock position with

countersunk DynaBolts.

To aid the installation of the Channeline sections a Pneumatic Winch was setup upstream of the

culvert section being rehabilitated. The Pneumatic Winch was anchored to an upstream section of

concrete culvert using Chemset bolts and a purpose-built steel frame. The winch was left in place until

all Channeline sections were installed (refer Figure 19).

Figure 19 Installation of Pneumatic Winch

Channeline Sections Installation

Following inspection and measuring of the host culvert structure at the control points, to ensure the

host structure had not deteriorated any further, the temporary propping was carefully removed

starting at the inlet end of the culvert and working towards the outlet.

During the prop removal sequence the winch cable was brought through the culvert to the outlet in

readiness for installation of the Channeline sections.

The Channeline sections were delivered to site on a flatbed truck. A slewing crane was parked behind

the flat deck truck and each section of Channeline was lifted from the truck, orientated into its correct

installation position and then lowered onto a sheet of construction plywood located on the concrete

apron at the culvert outlet (refer Figure 20).

Figure 20 Unloading Channeline on site orientating into install position

The sheet of construction plywood aided floatation of the Channeline section allowing it to be pushed

by hand along the apron to the culvert outlet.

Figure 21 Lowering Channeline to plywood sheet on concrete apron, pushing by hand to culvert outlet

Once at the culvert outlet a timber beam which had been cut to fit snugly within the socket of the

Channeline profile was set in place. A strop was wrapped around the centre of the timber beam and

connected to the wire of the pulling winch.

Figure 22 Winching Channeline through host culvert and into position

The Channeline section was winched along the rails, through the host culvert towards the inlet and its

final installation location. Once the section of Channeline was in the correct position at the inlet end

of the culvert, the timber beam was removed from the socket end of the Channeline and wooden

packers were installed at predetermined locations as per the construction drawings to centre the

profile in the correct position and prevent movement and floating during tidal movements and final

grouting.

Figure 23 Packing Channeline Profile in place

The next section of Channeline was lowered into position on the apron, and a rubber gasket was fitted

over the spigot end of the profile. The Channeline section was winched into place with the spigot

pushed home into the socket of the previous section of profile to provide a watertight seal.

This process was repeated until all 11 sections of Channeline were in place completing the installation

process.

Figure 24 All Channeline profiles in place awaiting end seal

End Sealing

Due to the tidal environment and limited time on site to grout, the design included a layer at each end

of the sections to seal the ends and allow grouting during tides without environmental impact. During

the next low tide, the annulus gap between the Channeline profile and the host culvert was sealed at

the inlet and outlet using Quadex Hyperform; a rapid set, high strength non-shrink patching material

in readiness for grout application. During the end seal process air bleed tubes and grout ports were

also installed (refer Figure 25).

Figure 25 Installing End Seal, Grout Ports and Air Bleed Tubes

Grouting of Annulus

The grouting procedure was completed in 3 lifts or stages during low tide intervals.

Figure 26 Grout Profile

The grout used was a super flowable mix of Fly Ash and Cement combined with plasticisers and curing

additives. The grout was mixed off-site at a commercial batching plant to ensure quality compliance

and delivered to site in agitator trucks.

The grout was fed from the truck into a hopper at street level and gravity-fed through a flexible hose

connected to the grout ports filling one third of the culvert height per shift.

Figure 27 Grout Installation Figure 28 Grout and Air Bleed Ports at Completion of Grouting

The final air bleed tubes which were installed in the top corners of the host culvert extended above

the soffit level of the host culvert were monitored during the last stage of grouting ensuring that all

air was removed and a solid flow of grout was witnessed flowing out of these tubes.

Once the final grout stage had cured, the grout and air bleed ports were cut flush with the end seal

and the inlet and outlet headwalls were rendered smooth to match the existing profile, completing

the project.

Figure 26 Ends Rendered Project Complete

The Channeline installation was the first in Queensland, proved to be a cost effective alternative to

open trench excavation methods, was less disruptive to residents, traffic and the environment and is

confined space suitable.

Construction was completed over six days, spread over four weeks due to the tidal environment and

allowance for grout setting.

• Day 1 - Install rails and Winch, remove Propping, install first section of Channeline and packing,

reinstate propping

• Day 2 – Remove propping, install 8 sections of Channeline and packing, reinstate propping

• Day 3 - Remove propping, install last Channeline section, seal ends and install grout and air

bleed tubes

• 3 Days for grout installation and final rendering of culvert ends and demobilisation

Figure 29 Before and after inside the culvert

Figure 30 Before and after – Outlet of culvert to river (note wet concrete)

Figure 31 Before and after – Inside the culvert facing the outlet to the river

Acknowledgements Lance Horlyck, SASTTI JV, Specialist Consulting Engineers

SASTTI JV, Specialist Consulting Engineers Design Team

Brisbane City Council Design and Construction Team

Interflow Construction and Management Team

References Horlyck, Lance. 2020. Brisbane Corso Fairfield Internal Lining of Stormwater Culvert Design Criteria

Report. SASTTI JV

Horlyck, Lance. 2020. Drainage Rehabilitation 45-49 Brisbane Corso Fairfield Drawing Number 8624

P1 General Notes and Drawing List. SASTTI JV

Horlyck, Lance. 2020. Drainage Rehabilitation 45-49 Brisbane Corso Fairfield Drawing Number 8624

P2 General Arrangement. SASTTI JV

Horlyck, Lance. 2020. Drainage Rehabilitation 45-49 Brisbane Corso Fairfield Drawing Number 8624

P3 Culvert Liner Details – Sheet 1. SASTTI JV

Horlyck, Lance. 2020. Drainage Rehabilitation 45-49 Brisbane Corso Fairfield Drawing Number 8624

P4 Culvert Liner Details – Sheet 2. SASTTI JV

Horlyck, Lance. 2020. Drainage Rehabilitation 45-49 Brisbane Corso Fairfield Drawing Number 8624

P5 Temporary Propping Details. SASTTI JV

Unknown Author. Circa 1947. Drawing H-10-47 Fairfield Drainage Princess Street Fairfield Road

Victoria Street to River Details of Deviation and Sewer Sections. Brisbane City Council

Unknown Author. 1997. Drawing W9935 Sheets 1-3 Culvert Extension at Brisbane Corso Near Turley

Street Fairfield. Brisbane City Council

Channeline International. 2016. Channeline GRP Structural Lining Systems, Channeline International

Fibreglass Manufacturing, https://channeline-international.com/index.html

Channeline International. 2016. Channeline Technical Specification CHNL/TS/01. Channeline

International Fibreglass Manufacturing.

Standards Australia. 2000. AS4902 General Conditions of Contract for Design and Construct. SAI

Global

Standards Australia. 2017. AS5100 Bridge Design. SAI Global

Standards Australia. 2002. AS1170 Structural Design Actions. SAI Global

Standards Australia. AS3571 Plastics piping systems - Glass-reinforced thermoplastics (GRP) systems

based on unsaturated polyester (UP) resin. SAI Global

Department of Transport and Main Roads. September 2016. Structures Inspection Manual. Brisbane:

Queensland Government.

Department of Transport and Main Roads. March 2020. Design Criteria for Bridges and Other

Structures. Brisbane: Queensland Government.

Department of Transport and Main Roads. 2020. Main Roads Technical Specification MRTS70

Concrete. Brisbane: Queensland Government.

Department of Agriculture and Fisheries. October 208. Accepted development requirements for operational work that is constructing or raising waterway barrier works. Queensland Government

Water Research Centre. 2001. Sewerage Rehabilitation Manual Volume 2 Edition 4. WRc

Boral Concrete Qld & NT. 2017. Mix Design CS350-BS. Brisbane: Boral.

Peri Australia. 2015. Multiprop Slab Prop MP 120, 250, 350, 480, 625 Instruction for Assembly and

Use Standard Configuration. Peri Australia