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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

ABSTRACT Pipe rehabilitation and trenchless replacement technologies have seen a steadily increasing use and represent an increasing proportion of the annual expenditure on operations and maintenance of the nation’s water and wastewater infrastructure. Despite public investment in use of these technologies, there has been little quantitative evaluation of how these technologies are performing. The major reasons for retrospective evaluation of rehabilitation systems are needed include: data gaps in predicting remaining asset life of pipes and how long rehabilitation techniques can extend that life; and to assess whether the originally planned lifetime is reasonable based on current condition. The goals of this project were to draw attention to the need for this type of evaluation and to develop evaluation protocols that are technically and financially feasible for carrying out these evaluations. The initial project focuses on cured-in-place pipe (CIPP) liners because they were the first trenchless liners (other than conventional slipliners) to be used in pipe rehabilitation and they hold the largest market share. The pilot testing used CIPP samples from both large and small diameter sewers in two cities that were in excellent condition after being in use for 25, 23, 21, and 5 years, respectively. Testing on the liners included thickness, annular gap, ovality, density, specific gravity, porosity, flexural strength, flexural modulus, tensile strength, tensile modulus, surface hardness, glass transition temperature, and Raman spectroscopy. In addition, environmental data was gathered as appropriate including: external soil conditions and pH, and internal waste stream pH. Three of the liners had already been in service for nearly half of their originally expected service life, but overall, there is no reason to anticipate that the liners evaluated will not last for their intended lifetime of 50 years and perhaps beyond. Given the insights provided by the pilot studies, an expansion of the retrospective study is recommended to create a broader database to better define the expected life of sewer rehabilitation technologies. Specifically, it is recommended that the retrospective program be extended to: cover additional CIPP sample retrieval in other cities, pilot studies of other rehabilitation technologies; capture locally interpreted data from other cities; encourage sewer agencies to keep as-installed material test data for later comparison with follow-up testing; and adapt, develop, and/or calibrate non-destructive testing (NDT) methods that could use small physical samples that are easily retrieved robotically from inside the pipe. iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This report has been prepared with input from the research team, which includes Battelle, the Trenchless Technology Center (TTC) at Louisiana Tech University, and Jason Consultants. The technical direction and coordination for this project was provided by Dr. Ariamalar Selvakumar of the Urban Watershed Management Branch. The project team would like to acknowledge several key contributors to this report in addition to the authors listed on the title page. The project would not have been possible without the cooperation of the representatives of the City and County of Denver (Lesley Thomas, Wayne Querry, and Randy Schnicker) and the City of Columbus (James Gross II, Mike Griffith, and Dave Canup) for seeing the value of the proposed study and working with the research team to find ways to cover the costs of the sample retrieval and repair of the host pipe and/or liner at each sample site. Thanks also go to Joe Barsoom, former Director of the Sewer Division for the City and County of Denver, who assisted greatly in all aspects of the evaluations in Denver. The city and contractor crews who carefully excavated and/or cut samples are also to be thanked – excellent samples were retrieved that safely made the journey to the Trenchless Technology Center (TTC) and Battelle laboratories for further study. In Denver, Wildcat Construction contributed in-kind support to the retrieval of a liner sample from the brick sewer. The authors would like to thank the stakeholder group members for review of the report (Joe Barsoom, Tom Iseley, Walter Graf, and James Gross II). iv
Page 1 and 2: EPA/600/R-12/004 | January 2012 | w
Page 3: DISCLAIMER The work reported in thi
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 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 ...

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

Delete template?

Save as template?