Steel and Ductile Iron Flexible Pipe Products 301

TABLE 6.1 6 x 2 Shear Modulus and Poisson's Ratio

Thickness, in
0.1345
0.1644
0.1838
0.2145
0.2451
0.2758
0.1875
0.2500
0.3125
0.3750
Shear modulus G, lb/in
2
120,682
174,828
211,916
277,500
348,123
423,364
219,326
359,892
512,500
676,142
V12
8.47E-04
1.26E-03
1.58E-03
2.15E-03
2.80E-03
3.54E-03
1.64E-03
2.91E-03
4.53E-03
6.49E-03
^21
0.273
0.274
0.274
0.274
0.275
0.275
0.274
0.274
0.274
0.274
TABLE 6.2 6 x 2 Extensional Modulus and Elastic Limit
Thickness, in Extensional modulus E, lb/in
2
Elastic limit, lb/in
2
0.1345 89,818 1004
0.1644 133,523 1204
0.1838 167,406 1518
0.2145 227,184 1608
0.2451 295,729 1854
0.2758 372,941 1946
0.1875 174,018 1520
0.2500 308,021 1848
0.3125 480,000 2211
0.3750 686,695 2636
Tests on spiral ribbed steel pipe
Introduction. Tests were conducted on a ribbed steel pipe (approxi-
mately 29.4-in inside diameter). The pipe has a rib profile wall with a
smooth bore. It is a helical pipe with an interlocking helical joint. The
tests were conducted at Utah State University in the small soil load
cell (see Figs. 6.9 and 6.10).
The soil used for the tests was a silty sand. It was selected because
of the wide range of possible densities, which makes it ideal for pipe
testing. The soil gradation curve and the Proctor density curve for this
soil are given in Figs. 6.11 and 6.12, respectively.
Pipe material properties are as follows:
The Steel Sheet
Gauge
16
Thickness
0.064 in
Modulus,
lb/in
2
29.5 X 10
6
Yield, lb/in
2
Minimum
33,000
Actual
40,800-
44,000
Tensile strength, lb/in
2
Minimum
45,000
Actual
51,100-
53,500
Click for previous page
302 Chapter Six
Figure 6.9 Placement of ribbed steel pipe in test cell.
Sectional properties of the pipe are as follows:
Area per length:
Moment of inertia: I = 2.390 in4/ft X
Radius of gyration:
A = 0.364 in2/ft
r = 0.281 in
Steel and Ductile Iron Flexible Pipe Products 303
Figure 6.10 Test cell in operation-pistons of cylinders extended.
Description of pipes tested. The pipe is ribbed and is formed by helical
winding. The closed rib is 1 in tall and is spaced on 10.25-in centers.
The lockseam is spaced midway between the ribs.
Three tests were conducted by installing the test pipe in the small
soil load cell. The test data are reported in terms of height of cover.
Height of cover is calculated from measured vertical soil pressure
using a soil unit weight of 120 lb/ft3 as follows:
vertical soil pressure (lb/ft2)
120 lb/ft3
Height of cover (ft) =
In each test vertical loading was increased until plastic hinging was
observed. At that point, the load was held constant. The pipe did not
304 Chapter Six
100 T-
10'
2
10'
1
10 10
1
GRAIN DIAMETER (mm)
Figure 6.11 Gradation curve and classification for the silty-sand soil
used in the tests. Atterberg limits: liquid limit, NA; plastic limit, NA.
Soil classification: SM. Specific gravity: 2.72.
126
124
122
55 120
LU
Q
>- 118
116
114
6 7 8 9 1 0 - 1 1
WATER CONTENT (w %)
12
Figure 6.12 Compaction (standard Proctor) curve for silty-sand soil used in
tests. Maximum dry density: 124.7 lb/ft
3
. Optimum moisture: 9.5 percent.
Steel and Ductile Iron Flexible Pipe Products 305
Figure 6.13 Inside the pipe at 35 ft of cover.
collapse or continue to deflect under that load. An increase in load was
required for the deflection to continue. Therefore, even after plastic
hinging, the pipe-soil system is still under stable equilibrium.
Test 1. The test pipe was installed in silty-sand soil compacted to 76
percent standard Proctor density. This type of installation would be
considered a poor installation and would normally not be recommend-
ed. At about 35 ft of cover, the top began to flatten, and signs of local-
ized buckling began to appear at the sides of the pipe (see Fig. 6.13).
As the load was increased, the localized buckling became more pro-
nounced, and at about 40 ft of cover, plastic hinges began to form. (See
Fig. 6.14.) The results of this test are shown in the graph of Fig. 6.15.
Test 2. This pipe was installed in silty-sand soil compacted to 84 per-
cent standard Proctor density. This type of installation would be con-
sidered good and is typically what is achieved in normal practice. At
about 50 R of cover, the top began to flatten, and the seams started to
show some signs of distress. As the load was increased, localized buck-
ling started at the sides of the pipe. As the load increased further, this
buckling became more pronounced, and at 68 ft of cover, plastic hinges
began to form. The results of this test are shown in Fig. 6.16.
Test 3. The test pipe was installed in silty-sand soil compacted to 95
percent standard Proctor density. This type of installation would be
considered excellent and would normally be the very best installation
306 Chapter Six
Figure 6.14 Inside the pipe after completion of test (40 ft of cover).
Percent Deflection
Figure 6.15 Test 1, silty-sand soil at 76 percent standard Proctor density,
Steel and Ductile Iron Flexible Pipe Products 307
0 2 4 6 8 1 0
Percent Deflection
Figure 6.16 Test 2, silty-sand soil at 84 percent standard Proctor density.
that could be expected. At about 86 ft of cover, slight local buckling
began at the sides of the pipe. At about 100 ft of cover, the top began
to flatten and started to show signs of localized buckling. At 105 ft of
cover, small local buckles were visible at some seams. At 110 ft of cov-
er, plastic hinges were definite at the sides of the pipe. Some bulging
also occurred at the bottom of the pipe. (See Fig. 6.17.) The results of
this test are shown in Fig. 6.18.
Overall results. The vertical deflections of the three tests are shown in
Fig. 6.19. This graph shows the importance of soil density in the per-
formance of buried pipes. The response to soil pressure was excellent.
The resulting deflections were reasonable and about what would be
expected. No seams opened or failed during the tests, even at extreme
heights of cover. Because the rib height is properly designed, the rib
acts as an integral part of the pipe wall. This allows the rib to stiffen
the wall and resist buckling.
Tests on low-stiffness ribbed steel pipe
Introduction. Tests were performed on a ribbed steel pipe which has
been designed for use in the small-diameter drainage pipe market. The
pipe is a smooth bore, helically ribbed pipe with essentially closed ribs.
Pipes tested are 18-, 24-, and 30-in diameters. A total of 10 tests were
308 Chapter Six
Figure 6.17 Inside pipe at completion of test 3. The cover height is 110 ft.
120
110
100
90
80
!5
70
8 60
A U
+
50
E
.F 40
I
30
20
10
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Percent Deflection
Figure 6.18 Test 3, silty-sand soil at 95 percent standard Proctor density.
Steel and Ductile Iron Flexible Pipe Products 309
120
95% Density
84% Density
76% Density
Beginning of Localized
Buckling
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Deflection (Percent)
Figure 6.19 Vertical deflection for the three tests in silty-sand soil at various densities.
conducted. The tests were run at Utah State University in the small soil
load cell (see Figs. 6.20 and 6.21). The pipe properties are as follows:
The Steel Sheet
Measured Modulus,
Gage thickness, in lb/in
2
Yield, lb/in
2
Tensile strength, lb/in
2
Minimum Actual Minimum Actual
26 0.023 29.5 X 10
6
33,000 48,700 45,000 56,100
Description of pipes tested
1. The pipe is ribbed and is formed by helical winding with a lock-
seam.
2. The closed rib is 0.375 in tall for the 18- and 24-in pipes and 0.50 in
tall for the 30-in pipe. Three ribs are spaced over 5.43 in.
Sectional properties of the pipe are as follows:
30-in pipe 18- and 24-in pipes
Area per length
Moment of inertia
Radius of gyration
A = 0.230 in
2
/ft
/ - 0.550 in
4
/ft X 10~
3
r = 0.169 in
A = 0.200 in
2
/ft
I = 0.261 in
4
/ft X 10~
3
r = 0.125 in
Figure 6.20 An 18-in ribbed pipe is being installed in small soil load cell at Utah State
University.
Figure 6.21
University.
An 18-in ribbed pipe is being installed in small soil load cell at Utah State
31 0
Steel and Ductile Iron Flexible Pipe Products 311
The soil used for the tests was a silty sand. It was selected because of
the wide range of possible densities, which makes it ideal for pipe test-
ing. The soil gradation curve and the Proctor density curve for this soil
are given in Figs. 6.11 and 6.12, respectively.
Test results
Live load tests. The purpose of these tests was to simulate a loaded
truck passing over the pipe. The standard AASHTO H-20 load repre-
sents a 16,000-lb load on a single dual-wheel assembly and distributed
over a 10-in X 20-in area, as shown in Fig. 6.22.
For low cover heights over the pipe, this test is very severe. These
test pipes were buried in silty-sand soil compacted to 90 percent stan-
dard Proctor density. From the level of the top of the pipe to the upper-
soil surface, the soil was compacted to achieve as high a density as
possible to provide a compacted bearing surface for the 10-in X 20-in
plate.
The 18-in-diameter live load test. This test was conducted with
only 1 ft of cover over the pipe to simulate a minimum cover applica-
tion. The load was first applied to the surface of the soil, but directly
to the side of the pipe. This simulates an approaching truck. At 16,000
Ib the 10-in X 20-in plate penetrated the soil about 2 in. The pipe reac-
tion was a small inversion at the side of the pipe, as seen in Fig. 6.23.
This inversion is a precursor to the buckling seen in Fig. 6.24.
16,000Ib
X X
CO
coo
T
1.67 ft (20in)
Figure 6.22 H-20 live load schematic.
Figure 6.23 Small inversion in sidewall due to 16,000-lb live load adjacent to pipe. Pipe
installed with 1 ft of cover.
Figure 6.24 Buckling due to 14,000-lb live load over one-half of pipe.
31 2
Steel and Ductile Iron Flexible Pipe Products 313
The loading plate was then positioned on the soil surface, just off the
centerline of the pipe, so the load is over one-half of the pipe. This is
the most critical position for a live load. The load was increased toward
the required 16,000 Ib. At 14,000 Ib, a soil failure wedge formed, the
plate began to penetrate the soil, and the pipe could not support the
resulting load. At this load, there was a catastrophic failure (buckling)
of the pipe (see Fig. 6.24). It is evident from the figure that the pipe
does not have enough longitudinal stiffness to transfer the load longi-
tudinally along the pipe.
The 24-in-diameter live load test This test was also conducted with
only 1 ft of cover over the pipe to simulate a minimum cover applica-
tion. The load was first applied to the surface of the soil, but directly
to the side of the pipe. For this test, the loading plate was increased to
10 in X 40 intwice the area of the previous 18-in pipe. The decision
was made in view of the poor performance observed in that test and
because similar-sized plates had been used in the evaluation of other
types of pipe. In general, the larger plate is justified because the lon-
gitudinal distribution of pressure through the soil in this test is more
severe than in the case of an actual pavement. Also, penetration into
the soil does not occur in a typical application. The loading plate pen-
etrated the soil about 1 in. The pipe showed no adverse reaction. This
pipe was more flexible than intended (see footnote to Table 6.3).
The loading plate was then positioned on the soil surface just off the
centerline of the pipe so the load is over one-half of the pipe. Again,
this is the most critical position for a live load. The load was increased
toward the required 16,000 Ib. A soil failure wedge formed at 16,000 Ib,
the plate began to penetrate the soil, and the pipe could not support
the resulting load. At this load, there was a catastrophic failure (buck-
ling) of the pipe (see Figs. 6.25 and 6.26).
30-in-diameter live load test. This test was also conducted with
only 1 ft of cover over the pipe to simulate a minimum cover applica-
tion. The load was first applied to the surface of the soil but directly to
TABLE 6.3 Summary of Soil Cell Results
Diameter, in
Rib depth, in
Wall thickness, intended, in
Wall thickness, measured, in
Fill height performance limit test
at 95 percent minimum density, ft
Fill height performance limit test
at 90 percent minimum density, ft
30
%
0.022
0.023
52
30
24*
3/
7
8
0.028
0.023
27
24
18
3/
7
8
0.022
0.023
64
30
* According to the manufacturer, the steel sheet used for the 24-in pipe
was thinner than intended (0.023 in instead of 0.028 in); hence, the pipe was
more flexible than would be permitted in practice.
314 Chapter Six
Figure 6.25 Photograph showing soil surface, plate penetration, and resulting soil rise
due to buckling of the pipe.
Figure 6.26 Buckled 24-in pipe resulting from a 16,000-lb live load.
Steel and Ductile Iron Flexible Pipe Products 315
the side of the pipe. Again, because of the catastrophic failure of the
18-in pipe, the 16,000 lb was distributed over a 10-in X 40-in area-
twice the area of the 18-in test. The loading plate penetrated the soil
about 1 in. The pipe showed no adverse reaction.
The loading plate was then positioned on the soil surface just off the
centerline of the pipe (the most critical position for a live load), so the
load is over one-half of the pipe. The load was increased toward the
required 16,000 lb. At 16,000 lb, the plate penetrated the soil about 4
in and otherwise was in equilibrium (see Fig. 6.27). The load was held
for several minutes, and there was no adverse reaction of the pipe (see
Fig. 6.28). This pipe, when properly installed with cover heights of 1 ft
or greater, will withstand an H-20 loading.
The load was gradually increased to determine what load would
cause failure. At 18,853 lb, a soil failure wedge formed, the plate began
to penetrate the soil, and the pipe could not support the resulting load.
At this load, there was a catastrophic failure (buckling) of the pipe (see
Figs. 6.29 and 6.30).
Based on the experience
with the previous tests, this test was run with 2 ft of cover instead of
the 1 ft used for the other tests. Also, because of the 2 R of cover, the
Rerun of the 18-in-diameter live load test.
Figure 6.27 Application of 16,000 Ib.
Figure 6.28 A 30-in pipe showing no negative reaction to a 16,000-lb live load.
Figure 6.29 Application of an 18,853-113 load.
316
Steel and Ductile Iron Flexible Pipe Products 317
Figure 6.30 A 304x1 pipe with buckled wall due to an 18,853-1b live load.
10-in X 20-in plate was used to distribute the load. The load was first
applied to the surface of the soil, but directly to the side of the pipe. At
16,000 lb, the 10-in X 20-in plate penetrated the soil about 3 in. The
pipe had no adverse reaction to the load.
The loading plate was then positioned on the soil surface just off the
centerline of the pipe (the most critical position for a live load), so the
load is over one-half of the pipe. The load was increased toward the
required 16,000 Ib. At 16,000 Ib, the plate penetrated the soil about 4
in and otherwise was in equilibrium. The load was held for several
minutes, and there was no adverse reaction of the pipe (see Figs. 6.31
and 6.32). This pipe, when properly installed with 2 ft of cover, will
withstand an H-20 loading.
Load-deflection tests. Six load-deflection tests were run on test pipes
buried in the small soil cell. There were three diameters (18-in, 24-in,
and 30-in) and two soil densities (90 and 95 percent standard Proctor).
In each test, vertical loading was increased until plastic hinging or
wall crushing was observed.
The tests were conducted by installing the test pipe
in the small soil load cell. The test data are reported in terms of height
Height ofcouer.
Figure 6.31 Photograph showing 16,000-lb load being applied to a 10-in X 20-in plate
over one-half of the pipe.
Figure 6.32 A 24-in pipe, with 2 ft of cover, showing no adverse reaction to a 16,000-lb
live load.
31 8
Steel and Ductile Iron Flexible Pipe Products 319
of cover. Height of cover is calculated from measured vertical soil pres-
sure by using a soil unit weight of 120 lb/ft3 as follows:
vertical soil pressure (lb/ft2)
120 lb/ft3
Height of cover (ft) =
Load-deflection test 1. The 18-in test pipe was installed in silty-
sand soil compacted to 95 percent standard Proctor density. This type
of installation is considered excellent and is difficult to achieve in field
conditions. At about 64 ft of cover and 5.7 percent deflection, the top of
the pipe began to buckle (see Fig. 6.33). A buckling failure is a stiffness
failure and takes place because of low ring stiffness. As the load was
increased the buckling became more pronounced, and at 75 ft of cover
the test was terminated. The results of this test are shown in Fig. 6.34.
This 18-in test pipe was installed in silty-
sand soil compacted to 90 percent standard Proctor density. This type
of installation would be considered very good and is typically the best
that is achieved in normal practice. At about 30 ft of cover and 8 per-
cent deflection, the top began to buckle, and the seams started to
show some signs of distress (see Fig. 6.35). As the load was increased,
Load-deflection test 2.
Figure 6.33 Steel-ribbed pipe (18-in diameter) at 75 ft of cover in silty-sand soil at 95
percent density.
320 Chapter Six
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Percent Deflection
Figure 6.34 Load-deflection curves for 18-in ribbed steel pipe, silty-
sand soil compacted to 95 percent standard Proctor density.
buckling became more pronounced. The test was stopped at 35 ft of
cover. The results of this test are shown in Fig. 6.36.
Load-deflection test 3. This test pipe had 24-in diameter and was
installed in silty-sand soil compacted to 95 percent standard Proctor
density. Again, this type of installation would be considered excellent
and is difficult to achieve in actual field conditions. At about 27 ft of cov-
er and 3.5 percent deflection, the sidewalls began to crush (see Fig.
6.37). A wall-crushing failure is a strength failure and takes place
because the wall area is inadequate to support the ring compression
stress induced by the soil load. As the load was increased, wall crushing
became more pronounced. The test was stopped at about 45 ft of cover.
The results of this test are shown in Fig. 6.38. (See footnote to Table 6.3.)
Load-deflection test 4. This 24-in test pipe was installed in silty-
sand soil compacted to 91 percent standard Proctor density. This type
of installation would be considered very good and is typically the best
that is achieved in normal practice. At about 24 ft of cover and 4 per-
cent deflection, the sidewalls began to crush (see Fig. 6.39). As the load
was increased, wall crushing became more pronounced. The test was
stopped at 50 ft of cover. The results of this test are shown in Fig. 6.40.
(See footnote to Table 6.3.)
Load-deflection test 5. This test pipe had 30-in diameter and was
installed in silty-sand soil compacted to 97 percent standard Proctor
density. Again, this type of installation would be considered excel-
lent and is difficult to achieve in actual field conditions. At about 52
'I
Figure 6.35 Steel-ribbed pipe (18-in diameter) at 30 ft of cover in silty-sand soil at 90
percent density.
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Percent Deflection
Figure 6.36 Load-deflection curves for 18-in ribbed steel pipe, silty-
sand soil compacted to 90 percent standard Proctor density.
321
322 Chapter Six
Figure 6.37 Steel-ribbed pipe (24-in diameter) at 43 ft of cover in silty-sand soil at 95
percent density.
50
45
+
C
2 20
= 10
.% 15
5
0 2 4 6 8
Percent Deflection
Figure 6.38 Load deflection curves for 24-in ribbed steel pipe, silty-
sand soil compacted to 95 percent standard Proctor density.
Steel and Ductile Iron Flexible Pipe Products 323
Figure 6.39 Steel-ribbed pipe (24411 diameter) at 49 ft of cover in silty-sand soil at 91
percent density.
0 2 4 6 a 10 12
Percent Deflection
Figure 6.40 Load-deflection curves for 24-in ribbed steel pipe, silty-
sand soil compacted to 91 percent standard Proctor density.
324 Chapter Six
Figure 6.41 Steel-ribbed pipe (30-in diameter) at 60 ft of cover in silty-sand soil at 97
percent density.
ft of cover and 3 percent deflection, the sidewalls began to crush (see
Fig. 6.41). Again, a wall-crushing failure is a strength failure and
takes place because the wall area is inadequate to support the ring
compression stress induced by the soil load. As the load was
increased, wall crushing became more pronounced. The test was
stopped at about 65 ft of cover. The results of this test are shown in
Fig. 6.42.
This 30-in test pipe was installed in silty-
sand soil compacted to 90 percent standard Proctor density. This type
of installation would be considered very good and is typically the best
that is achieved in normal practice. At about 30 ft of cover and 3.4 per-
cent deflection, the sidewalls began to crush. As the load was
increased, wall crushing became more pronounced, and simultaneous-
ly wall buckling took place (see Fig. 6.43). I t is interesting to note that
in this test, the stiffness and the strength performance limits occur
almost simultaneously. The test was stopped at about 47 ft of cover.
The results of this test are shown in Fig. 6.44.
The vertical deflections of the six tests are
shown in Fig. 6.45. This graph shows the importance of soil density in
Load-deflection test 6.
Comparison of results.
Steel and Ductile Iron Flexible Pipe Products 325
I I I I I
60
$ 50
A
U
tf
L
40
0
u
3 30
General Wall Crushing
I I
+VERTICAL
.It HORIZONTAL -
10
- ~ _ _
I I I ! I
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Percent Deflection
Figure 6.42 Load-deflection curves for 30-in ribbed steel pipe, silty-
sand soil compacted to 97 percent standard Proctor density.
Figure 6.43 Steel-ribbed pipe (30-in diameter) at 42 ft of cover in silty-sand soil at 90
percent density.
326 Chapter Six
Percent Deflection
Figure 6.44 Load-deflection curves for 30-in ribbed steel pipe, silty-
sand soil compacted to 90 percent standard Proctor density.
BU CKLING
CRU SHING
0 2 4 6 8
VERTICAL DEFLECTION (PERCENT)
Figure 6.45 Vertical deflections for the six load deflection tests. Start of wall
buckling and crushing are noted by B and C, respectively.
Click for next page