Structural Testing of GeoPolymer Pipe/Culvert Lining

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Structural Testing of GeoPolymer Pipe/Culvert Lining"

Dominic Matthews
8 years ago
Views:

1 Structural Testing of GeoPolymer Pipe/Culvert Lining Joseph Royer, Ph.D. October 27 th, 2015

2 What is a GeoPolymer? Not a Plastic Not HDPE/PVC/Epoxy Looks and feels like cement Workability Material Properties Service Life Chemical structure like natural stone Monolithic Durable Corrosion Resistant 2014 Milliken Infrastructure Solutions, LLC

3 Geopolymer Liner Typical GeoPolymer Chemistry Geopolymers or alkali cements consist predominantly alumino-silicates or polymer Si-O-Al bonds and are similar in chemical make-up to natural Zeolites. Traditional starting materials for geopolymers cements are fumed silica, fly ash & metal slag. Geopolymers can be produced from commercially available industrial waste streams, creating a highly environmentally friendly product. The chemical reactions of geopolymer create only a fraction of the CO 2 emissions of standard cementitious materials. Geopolymers have excellent chemical and thermal resistance and can essentially be considered engineered stone. Typical Geopolymer Structure Source J. Davidovits - Geopolymer Chemistry and Applications, 3rd ed.

$The chemical reactions of geopolymer create only a fraction of the CO 2 emissions of standard cementitious materials.$

4 Geopolymer Liner Generations of Cast Mortars Geopolymer material solutions offer significant chemical, physical, environmental, and economic advantages over traditional materials. Portland Cement GeoSpray Specific Strength Variable Excellent Early Strength Variable Excellent Acid Resistance Poor Very Good Self-Adhesion Low High % Recycled Content <10% >50% CO 2 Emissions High Low Single Pass Thickness X 2X-3X Total Installed Cost $$ $

Portland Cement GeoSpray Specific Strength Variable Excellent Early Strength Variable Excellent Acid

5 Geopolymer Liners Application Process

6 Geopolymer Liner ODOT I-75 Project Details?

7 Queen s University Testing GeoSpray geopolymer liner applied to CMP Testing Completed November, 2013

8 Queens Testing Installed in the Lab Assembled and instrumented culverts prior to burial and testing

9 Queens Testing Buried and Tested Time lapsed view of culvert burial to 1200 mm depth

10 Queens Testing Results 50.8 mm (~2 inch) liner thickness (Actual 1.7 inch): Initial signs of damage to the culvert under load were first observed at 650 kn (146,000 lbs-force) or 18% higher than the fully factored design load of 552 kn (~124,000 lbs-force) 76.2 mm (~3 inch) liner thickness (Actual 2.6 inch): Initial signs of damage to the culvert under load were first observed at 800 kn (~180,000 lbs-force) or 45% higher than the fully factored design load of 552 kn (~124,000 lbs-force) Source - D. Garcia, I. Moore; Performance of deteriorated corrugated steel culverts rehabilitated with sprayed-on cementitious liners subjected to surface loads ; Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 47 (2015)

lbs-force) 76.2 mm (~3 inch) liner thickness (Actual 2.

11 Engineering Models

12 Engineering Models Design Thickness Roark s Equation Model Where: t = thickness q t = Design Load (Live and Dead Loads) L = Length held at constant radius (24 ft for standard road conditions) μ = The Poisson ratio of GeoSpray E L = Long term elastic modulus of GeoSpray N = Safety Factor C = Ovality Reduction Factor Source: Roark s Equations, Table 15.2 case 19b

radius (24 ft for standard road conditions) μ = The Poisson ratio of GeoSpray E L = Long term

13 Engineering Models Design Thickness Distributed Load Arch Using the fact that S F = Mc/I ; where I = t 3 /12 and c = t/ Source: Structural Mechanics of Buried Pipes, Watkins & Anderson, 1999

14 Engineering Models Design Thickness Crack Propagation Where w is crack width and c=t/ Where w is crack width and c=t/2 w is typically set to Some have suggested for storm pipes. Source: Structural Mechanics of Buried Pipes, Watkins & Anderson, 1999

0464 Where w is crack width and c=t/2 w is typically set to 0.01.

15 Engineering Models Design Thickness Bazant - Cao 6 1 λ Where B & λ are regression constants and d a is the size of the largest aggregate. Source: Size Effects in Brittle Failure of Unreinforced Pipes, Bazant & Cao, ACI Journal V.83, No.3, 1986

16 La Tech University (TTC) Joint Testing Geopolymer liners applied to RCP, CMP & Cardboard Testing Completed November, 2014

17 La Tech Testing June 5 th 2014

18 La Tech Testing June 9 11, 2014 Not too sure whose bright idea it was to let me use the 16 saw?

19 La Tech Testing June 22, 2014

20 La Tech Testing June 22, 2014

21 La Tech Testing June 25, 2014

22 La Tech Testing ASTM C (D-Load)

23 La Tech Testing June 15, 2014

24 La Tech Testing 48 ID RCP 2.66 Geopolymer Liner

25 La Tech Testing July 23, 2014 The Land of Destruction

26 La Tech Testing D-Loading of RCP Pipe The first crack

27 La Tech Testing D-Loading of RCP Pipe What happens next.

28 La Tech Testing D-Loading of RCP Pipe What that looks like.

29 La Tech Testing New vs Rehabilitated Pipe Shift in Deflection at D-Load

30 La Tech Testing Comparing RCP, CMP & Cardboard

31 La Tech Testing Comparing Tests to Models 48 ID RCP

32 La Tech Testing Comparing Tests to Models 36 ID RCP

33 La Tech Testing Comparing Tests to Models 24 ID RCP

34 La Tech Testing Typical Design Pressures

35 La Tech Testing Predicted Thickness vs Depth of Bury

36 Queens Testing What do these models predict. The actual design load was 124,000 lbs. But the applied load in a 1.2 m (~48 inch) pipe with 1.2 m (~48 inch) of cover was 146,000 lbs. That results in a design pressure of ~ 35.6 psi The actual installed thickness was ~ 1.65 The distributed load arch model suggest ~ 1.38 The crack propagation model suggests ~ 1.20 The Bazant & Cao Model suggest ~ 1.35 All 3 of these models are within the likely experimental error of the actual measurements.

37 Conclusions & Future Work Testing of Geopolymer liners in RCP, CMP and Cardboard have been conducted. The data for RCP pipes suggest that several models are relevant to the design of such pipe systems. Repaired Pipes have significantly more deflection prior to cracking making them more semi-rigid than rigid. The models correlate both with the data generated by Milliken & La Tech, but also with that of CMP work by Queens. Additional work on the analysis of the CMP data and the likely effects of soils and soil structures on the designs is continuing.

38 Questions

Demonstration of an Innovative Large-Diameter Sewer Rehabilitation Technology in Houston, Texas

North American Society for Trenchless Technology (NASTT) NASTT s 2014 No-Dig Show Orlando, Florida April 13-17, 2014 Paper TA-T3-03 Demonstration of an Innovative Large-Diameter Sewer Rehabilitation Technology