CONTENTS

ExecutiveSummary__________________________________________________________1
Introduction________________________________________________________________2
1. SiteandSamplingInformation______________________________________________3
2. AsreceivedPipeSamples__________________________________________________5
3. AsReceivedLinerThickness ______________________________________________9
4. CutSIPPLinerFinishandCondition_________________________________________11
4.1 AdhesionBetweenLinerandHostPipeVisualInspection________________________11
4.2 ConditionofSIPPLineratPipeJoints_________________________________________15
4.3 ConditionofSIPPlineratServiceConnection___________________________________17
5. SIPPLinerThicknessMeasuredonCutPipeSections ___________________________22
6. ConditionofNonCleanedPipe ____________________________________________24
7. RemovalofSIPPLinerfromCutPipeSamples_________________________________27
8. QualityofPipeCleaning__________________________________________________29
9. AdhesionTest__________________________________________________________33
9.1 TestSpecificationandEquipment____________________________________________34
9.2 AdhesionTestResults_____________________________________________________34
10. FlexuralTest _________________________________________________________38
10.1 TestSpecificationandEquipment____________________________________________38
10.2 TestSpecimens__________________________________________________________38
10.3 FlexureTestResults_______________________________________________________40
11. TensileTest__________________________________________________________43
11.1 TestSpecificationandEquipment____________________________________________43
11.2 TestSpecimens__________________________________________________________43
11.3 TensileTestResults_______________________________________________________46


EXECUTIVESUMMARY
DuringtheweekofAugust21,2012theCityofCambridge,Ontario,completedapilotprojecton
150mm(6inch)diameterwaterpipetoevaluateSprayInPlacePipe(SIPP)fortherenovationof
watermainwithnobypassandsamedayreturnofservice.Uponcompletionofthispilotproject,
pipe samples were removed and transported to the Centre for Advancement of Trenchless
Technology (CATT) for testing. The objectives of CATTs testing were 1) to determine the
effectivenessofabrasivepipecleaningandpreparationtechnologytoremovecorrosiondeposits
andbitumen/coaltarcoatings,and2)toevaluatetheSIPPlining.

Pipesampleswerecutlengthwiseintoquarterpieces,andthequalityofpipecleaningwasvisually
evaluated after liner removal. Visual inspection of uncleaned/unlined pipe segments showed
tubercles and encrustation on the bitumen/coaltar coating and no internal or external pipe
graphitization(corrosion).RemovaloftheSIPPlinerfoundthattheabrasiverockcleaningremoved
thetubercles,encrustation,andthebitumen/coaltarcoatingwiththeexceptionofafewpatches.
Itshouldbenotedthattheobjectiveofthepilotprojectwastoevaluatethepotentialforsameday
returnandnottoremoveallencrustation,corrosionorcoatingproducts.Thus,forthisprojectonly
apreliminarylevelofabrasivecleaningwasperformed.Whenthelinedserviceconnectionwascut
into four pieces significant graphitization at the brasspipe wall service connection contact was
observed.

RemovalofSIPPlinerwithaflatnosescrewdrivershowedthatthelinerwasbondedtothepipe.
ASTM D4541 Standard Test Method for PullOff Strength of Coatings using Portable Adhesion
Testersshowedthelinertohaveapulloffstrengthgreaterthan650psiandashighas1100psi.
Thesevaluesaregreaterthanthe250psiformetalsurfacesrecommendedinASTMWorkingGroup
draftWK23937February7,2013.

Ridges and substantial undulations were observed in the lining along the pipe length, and the
thickness varied significantly along the pipe circumference with a minimum of 2.32 mm to a
maximum of 9.43 mm. The average lengthwise thickness measurements on cut pipe samples
exceed the minimum design thickness of 2.89 mm. In two samples the minimum thickness was
foundstobebelowASTMD5813StandardSpecificationforCuredinPlaceThermosettingResin
SewerPipingSystemsrecommend87.5%minimumofthedesignthickness.

Flexural test results found the mean flexural modulus of elasticity to range between 119,000 to
199,300psiandflexuralstrengthtorangebetween4982and8349psi.Mostofthesevaluesare
significantly lower than the Acuro reported values of 270,000 and 8,300psi. Similarly, tensile
testing found that mean tensile modulus of elasticity and strength were lower than the Acuro
reportedvalues.


INTRODUCTION
During the week of August 21, 2012, a pipe cleaning system that uses crushed stone with high
volume of low pressure air was used to clean and prepare City of Cambridge 150 mm (6 inch)
watermainsonSt.GeorgeandPineStreetsforcoatingwithapolyureasprayinplacepipe(SIPP)
lining.TheSIPPliningconsistedoffourcoatsofisocyanateandaminepolymerappliedtoatleast
2.89mmthick.TypicalAcuroreportedpropertiesfortheSIPPlinerareprovidedinTable1.

Table1:Acuroreportedthirdpartypolyureaproperties.

SIPPlinedanduncleanedpipesampleswereobtainedandshippedtotheCentreforAdvancement
of Trenchless Technologies (CATT) for testing to determine the pipe cleaning effectiveness to
removecoaltarbitumenandtoevaluatethesprayonlining.

InaccordancewithCATTsAugust30,2012proposal,thefollowingtestswerecompletedonlined
andunlinedsamples.

1) Liners thickness along the length of each cut pipe length and around the pipe
circumference.
2) LinersbondinaccordancewithASTMD4541.
3) Qualityofpipecleaning.
4) Qualityoflininginjoints,aswellas,aroundaserviceconnection.
5) LinerstensileflexuralmodulusandstrengthinaccordancewithASTMD638.
6) LinersflexuralmodulusandstrengthinaccordancewithASTMD790.
7) Qualityandthicknessoftheasphaltic/coaltarlining.
8) Evaluationofinternalpipecorrosion.

Detailsofourfindingsarereportedinthesubsequentsectionsofthisreport.


1. SITEANDSAMPLINGINFORMATION
Figures1and2providethelocationplan,andliningandsamplinginformationforthepipesamples.
Intotal,fivepipesampleswereprovidedtoCATT.Allsamplenumbersrefertothenumberingused
bytheContractor.NotestswereperformedonSample#7and#9.

Sample#1fromPineStreetconsistedofonepiecewithhydranttee.Pipewascleanedusingblown
stoneonlyandfourcoatsofpolyurealinerwereappliedonAugust20,2012.

Sample #4 from Pine Streetconsisted of one meter long pipe section with service connection in
the middle. Pipe was cleaned using blown stone only, and four coats of liner were applied on
August21,2012.

Sample#8fromPineStreetconsistedofonemeterlengthofpipewithnocleaningorlining.This
wasthebackgroundsample.

Sample#7fromSt.GeorgeSt.wascleanedusingblownstoneonlyandhadonepolyureacoaton
August21,2012andthreecoatsonAugust22,2012.

Sample #9 from Pine St. was cleaned using water jet followed by blown stone. Four coats of
polyurealinerwereappliedonAugust21,2012.

Table2alsoprovidessamplesinventoryinformationandtestsperformedoneachsamples.

Figure1:TestsampleLocationPlanprovidedtoCATT.


Figure7:Histogramsforlinerthicknessmeasurementstakenatpipe#1and4ends.

ForSample#1,thelinerthicknessvariedfrom2.32to9.43mmwithameanvalueof3.93mmand
standarddeviationof2.24mm.Threeoutofsixteenthicknessmeasurementswerebelowthe
2.89mmdesignthickness.ForSample#4thelinerthicknessrangedbetween2.63and7.87mm
withameanvalueof4.33mmwithstandarddeviationof2.09m.Oneoftheeightmeasurements
wasfoundtobelessthan2.89mm.

4. CUTSIPPLINERFINISHANDCONDITION
Sample #1was cut into three pieces marked S1A, S1B and S1C (see Figure 4). Sample A was cut
lengthwiseintofourpiecesmarkedasS1A1,S1A2,S1A3,andS1A4.SampleBwascutintotwo
half pipes marked S1B1 and S1B2. Sample S1B2 was cut lengthwise into three pieces marked
S1B21,S1B22,andS1B23.TheSample#4wascutlengthwiseintofourpiecesmarkedS4A,S4B,
S4CandS4D.

Figures 8 and 9 show the cut lined samples. Significant surface undulations and ridges were
observedalongthetopofthepipe.

Figure8:JetCutlinedsamples.

4.1 ADHESIONBETWEENLINERANDHOSTPIPEVISUALINSPECTION

11


Visualinspection,followingthesectioningof pipesamples,foundthatthelinertobebondedto
thecleanedandpreparedhostpipeasshowninFigure9.However,thelinerwasnotcontinuously
bondedtothehostpipeasshowninFigures10to12.

Figure9:Linerbondwithhostpipe.

12

Figure12:Annularspacebetweenliningandpipewall.

4.2 CONDITIONOFSIPPLINERATPIPEJOINTS
Figures 13 to 16 show the condition of the pipe at a pipe joint. Figure 13 shows that the liner
crackedatthejoint.Thereasonforthecrackisnotknownandcannotbeinferred.Thejointdid
havemovement.

Figure13:Liningcrackedatthejoint.

15

Figure14:Liningatthejoint.

Figure15:Linerridgingandundulationsatthetopofpipejoint.

16

Figure11:Liningatbottomofpipejoint.

4.3 CONDITIONOFSIPPLINERATSERVICECONNECTION
Figure 17 to 19 show the condition of a water jet cut SIPP lined service condition. This service
connectionwasfoundtohavesignificantcrosssectionalarealossduetothebuildupofpolyurea.
Furthermore, a portion of the area around the service connection was devoid of lining, and the
linerdidnotcompletelybondtothehostpipe.

17

Figure17:Serviceconnectionshowingareadevoidofliningandbuildofpolyuria.

Figure 18: Service connection showing gap between the liner and host pipe, and variable SIPP
thickness.

18

Figure19:Serviceconnectionshowinggapbetweenlinerandhostpipe,andvariableSIPPthickness.

Usingthewaterjetcutting,theserviceconnectionwascutintoquartersasshowninFigure20.

Figure20:Serviceconnectionwaterjetcutintofourpieces.

Figure 21 shows the liner bonded to the service connection and the pipe wall. The dark region
adjacenttothebrassserviceconnectionandthepipeindicatesgraphitizationoftheironpipedue

19


to differential metal corrosion. The extent of localized observed graphitization indicates that the
serviceconnectionswouldhaveahighprobabilityofleakingwaterinthenearfuture.

Figure21:Serviceconnectionshowingextensivegraphiticcorrosion.

20


Figure22showawaterjetcutcircularsectionofpipeSampleS4#2.Itshouldbenotedthatthe
pipe walls show minor external pipe corrosion. The liner is bonded to the pipe wall at some
sectionswhereasatothersthereisagapbetweenthelinerandpipewall.

Figure22:CircularwaterjetpipesectioncutoutofpipeSampleS4#2.

21

Figure23:Histogramforlinerthicknessmeasurementstakenat25mmalongthelengthofcutpipe
Sample#1.

Figure24:Histogramforlinerthicknessmeasurementstakenat25mmalongthelengthofcutpipe
Sample#4.

23


6. CONDITIONOFNONCLEANEDPIPE

Figures25to27showtheconditionofthecutnoncleanedpipe.Thenoncleanedpipewasfound
to have a thin internal coating of bitumen or asphaltic coating that could not be measured. The
pipewasfoundtohavelittletonographitizationandtobeinexcellentcondition.Figures28and
29 show some corrosion around the service connection likely place for water leakage in the
future.

Figure25:Sample#8uncleanedpipe.

24

Figure26:Sample#8uncleanedpipe.

Figure27:Corrosioninsidethejoint.

25

Figure28:Corrosionaroundserviceconnection.

Figure29:Serviceconnectioncutfromnoncleanedpipesection.Notethatthebitumencoatingis
notvisible.

26


7. REMOVALOFSIPPLINERFROMCUTPIPESAMPLES
TheSIPPlinerwasremovedfromtheironpipebythecarefulinsertionofaflatscrewdriverand
carefullypryingthelinerfromthehostpipe(seeFigures30to33).Insomecasesthelinerwaswell
bonded to the host resulting in the liner to break (see Figure 32). In other cases the liner easily
disengagedfromthehostpipe.Ingeneralthelinerwasfoundtohaveaweaktomoderatebondto
theironpipeandthatsomeforcewiththescrewdriverwasrequiredtoreleasetheliner.

Figure30:Insertionofaflatscrewdrivertoprythelinerfromthehostpipe.

Figure31:Linerdebondedfromthehostpipe.

27

Figure32:ModeratelybondedLinerdebondedtothehostpiperesultinginlinertobreak.

Figure33:Weaklybondedlinerremovedfromhostpipe.

28

Figure35:Cleanedatthejoint.

30

Figure36:Undersideofthelinershowingclearingatthejoint.

Figure37:Cleanedpipesectionbitumen/coaltarisvisible.

31

Figure38:Cleanedpipesectioncoaltarisvisible.

Figure39:Cleanedpipesectionlinerisremoved.

32


9.1 TESTSPECIFICATIONANDEQUIPMENT
SIPP linerpipe adhesion tests were performed in accordance with ASTM D4541 Standard Test
Method for PullOff Strength of Coatings using Portable Adhesion Testers. Test Method E (Self
AligningAdhesionTesterTypeV)usingAutomaticPosiTestATAapparatuswasusedforadhesion
tests.

Dolliesofdiameters10mm,14mm,20mmwereattachedtothesprayoncoatingsurface.Afterthe
adhesive was cured, the PosiTest apparatus was attached to the dollies and the Automatic
hydraulicpumpappliedforceatthepullrateof100psi/secuntilthedollydetached.

9.2 ADHESIONTESTRESULTS
Figures42through44showthetestsetupandposttestpictures.Successfultestsoccurredwhen
theSIPPlinerpulledofftheironpipe.

Figure42:AdhesionTesterPosiTestATA.

34

Figure43:Loadingfixtures(dollies)gluedtothesample.

Figure44:FailuresofdollyatSIPPlinerandpipeinterface.

35


Table 5 provides a summary of all acceptable adhesion tests. It also presents qualitative
observationsofthepercentageofadhesiveandcohesivefailuresanddetailsontheinterfaceand
layerwherefailureoccurred.

Testresultsshowconsiderablevariationinadhesionstrengthvalues.ForSample#4indrystatethe
average pulloff strength was found to be 721 psi using the 14 mm dolly after discarding
problematicresults.ForSample4inthedrystate,using20mmdollies,theaveragemaximumand
minimum pulloff strengths were found to be 1185 psi and 672 psi, respectively. For Sample #4,
tests carried out on wet samples (the test pipes were submerged in water for three weeks) an
averagepulloffstrengthof1142psiusing14mmdollieswasobtained.Using20mmdolliesthe
pulloff strength on the same test samples varied from an average minimum of 658.5 psi to an
average maximum of 1135 psi. The tests results for Sample #1 were discarded because it was
suspectedthattheadhesionfixturewasdisturbedduringthetestingprocess.Alladhesionvalues
were greater than the 250psi for metal surfaces recommended in ASTM Working Group draft
WK23937February7,2013.

Due to large variability in test results attribute to particular factors that may include sample
preparation,loadingandtestfixture(e.g.,dollysize),andtestmethodprecision,theadhesiontest
resultsweredeterminedtobeinconclusive.Furtherinvestigationisneededtoquantifythebond
strengthbetweenthelinerandhostpipe.

36

10. FLEXURALTEST

10.1 TESTSPECIFICATIONANDEQUIPMENT
FlexuraltestswereperformedinaccordancewiththeASTMD790StandardTestMethodsforFlexural
PropertiesofUnreinforcedandReinforcedPlasticsandElectricalInsulationMaterials,TestProcedure
A(threepointloading).

Thetestconsistsofplacingarectangularcrosssectionspecimenflatwiseontwosupportsandloading
italongitsmiddlecrosssectionusingaloadingnoseofaspecifiedradius.Thespecimenwasloadedin
flexure,asabeam,untilitreachedfailureor5percentstraininitsouterfibres.

The tests were performed using a Materials Testing System (MTS Model 810). The main hardware
components of the system consist of MTS 810 load frame, adjustable crosshead, load transducers,
grips,andcontrols.TheASTMD790testprocedurewasimplementedintheMultiPurposeTestware
(MPT)environment.

10.2 TESTSPECIMENS
Rectangular crosssection test specimens for flexural tests were waterjet cut parallel to the pipes
longitudinal axis from removed sections of the SIPP liner. Sample dimensions were measured using
digitalcaliperstoanaccuracyof0.005mm.Figure45showstestspecimenspriortotestingandTable6
presentsaveragespecimendimensions.Meantestspecimenwidthanddepth(thickness)wereusedin
allcalculationsforflexuralmodulusandstrength.

Asupportspantodepthratioof16:1isrecommendedintheASTMspecification.Largerspantodepth
ratiosmayalsoberequiredincertainlaminatematerialsasspecifiedinSection7andNote8.Forthis
study,aspansupporttodepthratioofatleast20wasused.

Figure46showsthetestequipmentandsetup.Theradiusoftheloadingnosewas4.9mmandthe
rateofcrossheadmotionwassetat2.0mm/min.Toensureuniformspecimenloadingthecurvatureof
thesupportsandtheloadingnoseweresettomatchthetestspecimencurvature.

38

Table 7 shows that the flexural strength and flexural modulus determined from this study show
considerablevariabilityandaresignificantlylowerthanthevaluesreportedbyAcuro.

Table 7: Flexure test results from 30 specimens from Sample #1 and 10 specimens from
Sample #4
Standard
Sample S1a-1 Average Maximum Minimum
Deviation
Average Depth (mm) 2.93 0.30 3.45 2.53
Span to Depth Ratio 25.17 3.44 30.00 19.38
Flexural Stress (Yield) (MPa) 24.5 7.3 35.1 14.3
Flexural Stress (Yield) (psi) 3,552 1,057 5,086 2,070
Flexural Strain (Yield) (%) 1.76% 0.74% 2.86% 0.64%
Ultimate Flexural Strength (MPa) 49.0 12.4 72.8 35.6
Ultimate Flexural Strength (psi) 7,338 1,723 10,554 5,165
Ultimate Flexural Strain (% ) 4.70% 0.63% 5.00% 3.04%
Initial Tangent Modulus of Elasticity (MPa) 1,243 291 1,761 964
Initial Tangent Modulus of Elasticity (psi) 184,319 39,762 255,469 139,812
Acuro Reported Values
Ultimate Flexural Strength (MPa) 57 NA NA NA
Ultimate Flexural Strength (psi) 8,300 NA NA NA
Initial Tangent Modulus of Elasticity (MPa) 1,882 NA NA NA
Initial Tangent Modulus of Elasticity (psi) 273,000 NA NA NA

Standard
Sample S1a-2 Average Maximum Minimum
Deviation
Average Depth (mm) 3.22 0.51 3.85 2.43
Span to Depth Ratio 24.16 4.23 31.23 19.71
Flexural Stress (Yield) (MPa) 36.10 14.13 63.10 22.47
Flexural Stress (Yield) (psi) 5,235 2,049 9,152 3,259
Flexural Strain (Yield) (%) 2.45% 0.45% 3.07% 1.79%
Ultimate Flexural Strength (MPa) 57.56 26.62 113.27 34.06
Ultimate Flexural Strength (psi) 8,349 3,861 16,429 4,940
Ultimate Flexural Strain (% ) 4.88% 0.25% 5.00% 4.36%
Initial Tangent Modulus of Elasticity (MPa) 1,375 747 2,992 619
Initial Tangent Modulus of Elasticity (psi) 199,355 108,343 433,984 89,717
Acuro Reported Values
Ultimate Flexural Strength (MPa) 57 NA NA NA
Ultimate Flexural Strength (psi) 8,300 NA NA NA
Initial Tangent Modulus of Elasticity (MPa) 1,882 NA NA NA
Initial Tangent Modulus of Elasticity (psi) 273,000 NA NA NA

41

Standard
Sample S1a-4 Average Maximum Minimum
Deviation
Average Depth (mm) 2.90 0.41 3.62 2.06
Span to Depth Ratio 26.72 4.19 36.84 20.96
Flexural Stress (Yield) (MPa) 28.67 10.27 55.07 19.13
Flexural Stress (Yield) (psi) 4,158 1,489 7,987 2,775
Flexural Strain (Yield) (%) 2.69% 0.46% 3.39% 1.93%
Ultimate Flexural Strength (MPa) 40.48 13.79 74.70 24.17
Ultimate Flexural Strength (psi) 5,872 2,000 10,835 3,506
Ultimate Flexural Strain (% ) 4.76% 0.43% 5.00% 3.94%
Initial Tangent Modulus of Elasticity (MPa) 1,021 564 2,487 479
Initial Tangent Modulus of Elasticity (psi) 148,030 81,833 360,638 69,468
Acuro Reported Values
Ultimate Flexural Strength (MPa) 57 NA NA NA
Ultimate Flexural Strength (psi) 8,300 NA NA NA
Initial Tangent Modulus of Elasticity (MPa) 1,882 NA NA NA
Initial Tangent Modulus of Elasticity (psi) 273,000 NA NA NA
Standard
Sample S4B Average Maximum Minimum
Deviation
Average Depth (mm) 6.59 1.27 8.22 5.11
Span to Depth Ratio 13.08 2.65 16.64 9.23
Flexural Stress (Yield) (MPa) 21.30 4.55 28.70 16.15
Flexural Stress (Yield) (psi) 3,089 661 4,162 2,343
Flexural Strain (Yield) (%) 2.54% 0.45% 3.10% 1.88%
Ultimate Flexural Strength (MPa) 34.35 6.50 45.19 23.10
Ultimate Flexural Strength (psi) 4,982 943 6,555 3,350
Ultimate Flexural Strain (% ) 5.00% 0.00% 5.00% 5.00%
Initial Tangent Modulus of Elasticity (MPa) 821 164 1,021 533
Initial Tangent Modulus of Elasticity (psi) 119,051 23,834 148,045 77,321
Acuro Reported Values
Ultimate Flexural Strength (MPa) 57 NA NA NA
Ultimate Flexural Strength (psi) 8,300 NA NA NA
Initial Tangent Modulus of Elasticity (MPa) 1,882 NA NA NA
Initial Tangent Modulus of Elasticity (psi) 273,000 NA NA NA

42

11. TENSILETEST

11.1 TESTSPECIFICATIONANDEQUIPMENT
TensiletestswereperformedinaccordancewiththeASTMD638,StandardTestMethodsforTensile
PropertiesofPlastics.TestingconsistedofplacingadumbbellshapedspecimenintheMTS810testing
frame and applying a constant rate of tensile strain until the specimen fails in tension. An Instron
Extensometerhavingagaugelengthof12.5mmwasusedtomeasureelongation.Figure47showsthe
testsetup.

Figure47:Tensiletestsetup.

11.2 TESTSPECIMENS
ASTM D638 Section 6.1.1 states that a Type V specimen shall be used where only limited material
havingathicknessof 4 mm[0.16in.] orlessis availableforevaluation.Anumber ofspecimenshad
nonuniform thickness or excessive undulations (see Figure 49). This created significant testing
challenges e.g., grip pressure alteration, machinespecimen alignment, and problems in grip and
extensometer adjustments. Type V test specimens were used in this study. A significant number of
tensile tests results were deemed unacceptable due excessive thickness variation. These tests were
excludedfromallanalysispresentedinthisreport.Specimendimensionsweremeasuredusingdigital
caliperstoanaccuracyof0.005mm.Averagewidthanddepthforremaining/representativespecimens
were recorded and used in area calculations. All test specimens were cut parallel to the cylinders
longitudinal axis from the SIPP liner removed from the host pipe. Figures 48 to 50 present test
specimensandtheirdimensions.

43