Retrospective Evaluation of Cured-in-Place Pipe - (NEPIS)(EPA ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The water and sewer utilities are managed on a municipality basis, i.e., the local town or city government takes responsibility for the sewers and water mains. It has recourse to the prefecture and to the central government to obtain funds to supplement locally raised revenue for capital expenditure, but it funds maintenance work from its own budgets. With the economy at a low ebb, tax revenues which fund this expenditure are stressed, and this is in part responsible for the downturn in pipeline construction and maintenance. The development of a piped sewer system in Japan commenced in the latter half of the 19 th century – prompted by major cholera outbreaks in Nagasaki and Yokohama in 1877. Piped sewers were constructed in the foreigners’ settlements in Yokohama and Kobe. Tokyo Metropolitan Government began public sewer construction in 1884. Thereafter, other major cities began sewer construction, but the pace of development lagged somewhat behind Europe and the United States. Sewerage was generally managed with an efficient system of collection and transportation of night soil for disposal as agricultural fertilizer. The system collapsed during World War II due to fuel shortages caused by the Allied blockade of shipping. The development of a modern sewerage system was a priority in post-war recovery and sewer construction became an important source of employment for unskilled labor. However, network growth was slow and sewerage services were only available to 7% of the population in 1963, until it was accelerated by a series of Five Year Plans for Sewerage Construction. Thereafter, a network of public sewers was rapidly developed to collect and deliver sewage to treatment facilities. Sewer pipe construction peaked at 68,000 km per annum in 1986. As of 2007, 72% of the population had connected to the public sewer system and construction continues at about 10,000 km per annum. The traditional night soil collection system was progressively abandoned, but is still practiced for about 25 million people living in small towns and in country districts. In those communities with fewer than 50,000 population, the connection rate to a public sewer is still only about 29%. Over time, the night soil collectors have evolved into small local sewer construction and maintenance contractors and some have entered the growing rehabilitation business to exploit their important connections with local government. The Japanese sewer network currently comprises about 380,000 km of pipeline. It is funded by a combination of local and central government support in equal measure at a cost of about ¥ 2,392 billion (U.S. $29.17 billion) per annum. The Tokyo Metropolitan budget is ¥ 120 billion (U.S. $1.46 billion) to provide for repair, rehabilitation, and new construction of its 15,000 km network and treatment facilities. At the present time, this work involves rehabilitation of about 80 km of sewer per annum. In common with many countries, the life of a sewer pipe in Japan is designated as 50 years. However, in contrast to other countries where the actual life is often substantially longer, the life cycle of pipes installed in Japan is often compromised by a combination of aggressive corrosion and frequent earthquakes. Whilst European and U.S. cities benefit from a legacy of soundly built 19 th century underground infrastructure, much of Japan’s sewer network was built in a post-war boom by day labor using basic pipe products. Much of the network is reinforced concrete pipeline constructed until the mid 1980s from plain ended (Type A) centrifugally spun concrete pipe with cement mortar joints. According to the Japan Sewerage Works Agency (JSWA), sewer pipe reconstruction commenced around 1946 and continued through the 1970s by open cut methods at a rate of 15 to 40 km per annum. From about 1975, the rate of replacement increased steadily from 40 to 90 km per annum. The Agency has analyzed the age of pipe at reconstruction finding two peaks of activity, 10 to 20 and 50 to 60 years after installation. The Agency has concluded that the first major peak (at 10 to 20 years) is associated with construction faults and that the latter peak is associated with aging of the fabric of the pipe. JSWA estimates that 6,000 km of the network is more than 50 years old and 50,000 km is over 30 years old. For these reasons, Japan experiences an unusually high and increasing level of sewer collapse. In 2005, there were 6,600 collapses (see Figure 8-1). Thirty-year-old pipes are exhibiting about 40 collapses per 1,000 118
km of pipe and 50-year-old pipes are collapsing at the rate of about 130 collapses per annum per 1,000 km of pipe (see Figure 8-2). 箇所数 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 1975 1980 1985 1990 年度 Year 1995 2000 2005 Source: Nematsu Journal of Japan Sewage Works Association Vol. 44, No 538 Collapse Rate Number of Collapses 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Figure 8-1. Total Number of Sewer Collapses per Annum 2005年度に発生した約6,600箇所の道路陥没を対象布設後30年を経過 Source: Nematsu, Journal of Japan Sewage Works Agency Vol. 44, No 538 Figure 8-2. Rate of Collapses by Pipe Age 119 2005 6600 0 10 20 30 40 50 Age at Collapse
Page 1 and 2:
EPA/600/R-12/004 | January 2012 | w
Page 3 and 4:
DISCLAIMER The work reported in thi
Page 5 and 6:
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This report has bee
Page 7 and 8:
samples had a flexural modulus valu
Page 9 and 10:
CONTENTS DISCLAIMER ...............
Page 11 and 12:
4.3.10.2 Upstream Sample ..........
Page 13 and 14:
9.2.2 Recommendations for Developme
Page 15 and 16:
Figure 5-27. Raman Spectra for the
Page 17 and 18:
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS AMP Asse
Page 19 and 20:
1.0: INTRODUCTION This report forms
Page 21 and 22:
1.2 Organization of the Report Foll
Page 23 and 24:
Some sections of a sewer system may
Page 25 and 26:
• The depth of the pipe below the
Page 27 and 28:
Figure 2-3 highlights the main diff
Page 29 and 30:
The most commonly used resins are i
Page 31 and 32:
the glass fiber. The tube, which is
Page 33 and 34:
3.0: DEVELOPMENT OF CIPP EVALUATION
Page 35 and 36:
• The municipality would be willi
Page 37 and 38:
• Measurements and/or physical sa
Page 39 and 40:
Table 3-3. Laboratory Evaluation an
Page 41 and 42:
4.1 Introduction 4.0: CITY OF DENVE
Page 43 and 44:
Figure 4-1. Images of the Recovered
Page 45 and 46:
Sample ID Figure 4-4. Soil Grain Si
Page 47 and 48:
Location Table 4-5. Denver 8-in. Li
Page 49 and 50:
Profile Plot Red - Steel tube Green
Page 51 and 52:
Table 4-7. Results from Flexural Te
Page 53 and 54:
35 Table 4-9. Comparison of Test Da
Page 55 and 56:
4.2.12 Buckling Test. A steel mecha
Page 57 and 58:
Figure 4-18. Pressure Gage and Pres
Page 59 and 60:
4.2.13 Shore D Hardness. Durometer
Page 61 and 62:
Figure 4-24. Barcol Hardness Readin
Page 63 and 64:
increases and the heat of cure decr
Page 65 and 66:
In summary, CCTV inspection of thre
Page 67 and 68:
Figure 4-28. Thickness for Denver 4
Page 69 and 70:
4.3.6.2 Downstream Sample. Seven sp
Page 71 and 72:
Figure 4-34. Flexural Stress-Strain
Page 73 and 74:
Table 4-18. Flexural Test Results f
Page 75 and 76:
4.3.8.2 Upstream Sample. Specimens
Page 77 and 78:
4.3.10 Barcol Hardness 4.3.10.1 Dow
Page 79 and 80:
4.3.11.2 Downstream Sample. The Ram
Page 81 and 82:
5.1 Introduction 5.0: CITY OF COLUM
Page 83 and 84:
April 16, 2010 The specimen was rec
Page 85 and 86: The resulting gradation curves are
Page 87 and 88: Table 5-4. Soil pH at Designated Lo
Page 89 and 90: Figure 5-8. Average Thickness at Di
Page 91 and 92: 5.2.12 Flexural Testing. Specimens
Page 93 and 94: Figure 5-14. Flexural Stress-Strain
Page 95 and 96: Figure 5-16. Tensile Stress-Strain
Page 97 and 98: 5.2.15 Buckling Test. A mechanical
Page 99 and 100: Figure 5-24. Localized Leak on the
Page 101 and 102: Figure 5-26. Barcol Hardness Readin
Page 103 and 104: 5.3.3 Visual Inspection of Liner. I
Page 105 and 106: Figure 5-32. Ultrasonic Testing for
Page 107 and 108: Table 5-13. Geometric Data for Flex
Page 109 and 110: Figure 5-38. Shore D Hardness of Co
Page 111 and 112: 6.1 Introduction 6.0: REVIEW AND CO
Page 113 and 114: Overall, the liners appear to be ho
Page 115 and 116: age difference between the liners i
Page 117 and 118: Looking for correlations to the low
Page 119 and 120: A significantly lower range of Shor
Page 121 and 122: 7.0: RECOMMENDED TEST PROTOCOL FOR
Page 123 and 124: combining this broadly available in
Page 125 and 126: Table 7-3. Overall Structure for a
Page 127 and 128: Table 8-2. CIPP and Other Rehabilit
Page 129 and 130: Table 8-5. Rehabilitation Specifica
Page 131 and 132: 113 Table 8-9. Process Verification
Page 133 and 134: Göttingen Stadtentwässerung: Göt
Page 135: experience and quality, and do not
Page 139 and 140: methods are detailed in the Guide t
Page 141 and 142: The business of pipeline rehabilita
Page 143 and 144: • Destructive testing (but will n
Page 145 and 146: In Denver, in CCTV inspections of n
Page 147 and 148: 9.2 Recommendations for Future Work
Page 149 and 150: Falter, B. 1996. “Structural Anal
Page 151 and 152: Lehmann, M.A, J.P. Schroeder and C.
Page 153 and 154: APPENDIX A LIST OF TEST STANDARDS R
Page 155 and 156: The following table lists the non-A
Page 157 and 158: B.1 Introduction This study was con
Page 159 and 160: Mean thickness values for each cont
Page 161 and 162: APPENDIX C INTERNATIONAL STUDY INTE
Page 163 and 164: The original Insituform liner insta
Page 165 and 166: However, the figures published by O
Page 167 and 168: exfiltration and infiltration. Any
Page 169 and 170: STW uses CIPP for virtually all of
Page 171 and 172: method. Top hat repairs to junction
Page 173 and 174: All design and construction supervi
Page 175 and 176: Process verification test samples a
Page 177 and 178: consultant born out of the corporat
Page 179 and 180: BW continues to use CIPP, mainly in
Page 181 and 182: East, but has not yet had marked su
Page 183 and 184: D-1
Page 185 and 186: D-3
Page 187 and 188:
D-5
Page 189 and 190:
D-7
Page 191 and 192:
D-9
Page 193 and 194:
D-11
Page 195 and 196:
D-13
Page 197 and 198:
D-15
Page 199 and 200:
D-17
Page 201 and 202:
D-19
Page 203 and 204:
D-21
Page 205 and 206:
D-23
Page 207 and 208:
D-25
Page 209 and 210:
D-27
Page 211 and 212:
D-29
Page 213 and 214:
D-31
Page 215 and 216:
D-33
Page 217 and 218:
D-35
Page 219 and 220:
D-37
Page 221 and 222:
D-39
Page 223 and 224:
D-41
Page 225 and 226:
D-43
Page 227 and 228:
D-45
Page 229 and 230:
D-47
Page 231 and 232:
D-49
show all

Retrospective Evaluation of Cured-in-Place Pipe - (NEPIS)(EPA ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?