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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

2009 Installations categorised by method Spiral Wound 98.4km , 20.0% Other 0.2km 0% Pull in & Inflate 285.8km, 58.0% Inversion 108.2km, 22.0% Figure 8-4. Installations Categorized by Method and Diameter for 2009 The rehabilitation systems available in Japan are licensed to contractors by domestic and international system developers. Groups of licensees, installers, and companies in the materials supply chain for given systems are usually organized together as rehabilitation system associations. Such associations in Japan may have as many as 500 members and contractors may belong to a number of associations depending on the systems they offer. The associations provide a platform for technical and commercial activity for the members who may be relatively small local companies providing sewer maintenance capability to their municipalities. The JIWET was established by the Ministry of Construction in 1992 to undertake the research and development for new sewer construction and rehabilitation technologies and sewage treatment. It has had a particularly important role in evaluating and certifying technologies in the rehabilitation field. JIWET provides teams of engineers to undertake the investigative work and organizes committees for evaluation of new construction and rehabilitation under the chairmanship of leading academics. Activity has grown substantially. In 2009, JIWET certified or renewed 52 new or improved technologies, including eight for pipe and manhole rehabilitation and three for pipe repair methods. Products and processes are reevaluated and certified after five years, subject to performance in use. The JPRQAA was launched in August 2006 and represents the interest of the system providers and associations in connection with a variety of government agencies to have rehabilitation recognized as equivalent to replacement. The organization collects data on the activities of the system associations and is a technical resource for monitoring industry quality and performance The Japan Sewer Collection Maintenance Association (JASCOMA) was set up in 1987 as an organization of 467 firms and 24 associations involved in sewer cleaning, assessment, and rehabilitation. It has provided examination and certification for technicians involved in pipe maintenance since 1998 and, in 2003, it set up a scheme to inspect and certify contractors. 122 301-800m m, 136.0km , 27.6% 2009 Installations categorised by diameter >800mm 63.4km, 12.9% < 300mm, 293.2km, 59.5%
The business of pipeline rehabilitation in Japan is rigorously organized by these and other organizations such as the Japan Sewage Works Association, which regulates the design process and works closely with the Japan Industrial Standards Organization. Japan currently provides the Chairman and Secretariat for the International Standards Organization Technical Committees and Working Groups in the field of water and wastewater pipe rehabilitation. At a site level, CCTV examination, measurement and sampling, and testing are required on all installations in accordance with JSWA regulations and many sites are reexamined after one year. Regarding quality controlled testing of liner materials after curing, most municipalities are requesting a test of the actual cured liner. However, their requirement varies municipality by municipality. In the case of Osaka City, they require all installers to conduct a QC test of each span of the project. However, conduct of the testing is not limited to authorized laboratories and a test by the supplier is acceptable. In other cities, such as Tokyo, the independent laboratory is utilized, but one sample from each project is sufficient. 8.8 Approach to Retrospective Evaluation in Quebec As a complement to the international scan information collected and described above, the research team also contacted the Centre de Recherche des Infrastructures Urbains (CERIU) in Montreal, Canada (www.ceriu.qc.ca) to gather information about a retrospective evaluation study that was underway in the Province of Quebec. This summary has been prepared on the basis of discussions with Isabel Tardiff, Technologies Director at CERIU on January 5, 2010. The purpose of the discussions was to establish the type of retrospective evaluation that was underway in Quebec, how far it had progressed, and to share information on the types of evaluation procedures that were being used in Quebec and in the EPA study. The Quebec study is looking at the entire spectrum of rehabilitation efforts in the province including water main rehabilitation (which has been active since 2001) and sewer main rehabilitation (which has been active for significantly longer). The purpose of the study is to see how the prior rehabilitation work is holding up now and to see if the information will allow the rate of degradation to be assessed. The project is being managed through the municipal entities in the Province with CERIU as a consultant to the study. A study group involving the interested cities, CERIU, and others was formed, but does not involve many small cities since they are not much involved in rehabilitation efforts yet. Target cities for the retrospective evaluation effort were identified. The management of the project has a “Director” committee composed only of municipal members plus two other committees covering potable water and sewers/manholes. Contractors and consultants are not involved in the Director committee, but are involved as appropriate on the other committees. The universities of Concordia (sewer rehabilitation) and Ecole Polytechnique (water) are supporting the study. The City of Montreal has been doing water rehabilitation since 2001. In total, 10 municipalities were named for the study and key participants and volunteers had been identified at the time of the conference call. It had been important to orient everyone as to the goals and scope of the study and to clarify the types of deliverables anticipated. Risks affecting the outcome of the study were considered to include: non-participation by cities and inadequate administrative support or manpower to collect and analyze the required data. Senior city administrators were called if necessary to bolster support for the study and a communication plan was prepared – laying out when data would be released, etc. Budget aspects of the study were further explored to establish the practical extent of in-service testing and the costs of specific tests that might be used. Milestones for the project were established and the specific team members that would do the analyses had been identified. The Directors committee was active in encouraging the participating municipalities to contribute in-kind help to the data collection and study efforts. 123
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 and 136: experience and quality, and do not
Page 137 and 138: km of pipe and 50-year-old pipes ar
Page 139: methods are detailed in the Guide t
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 ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?