EPA-600/2-78-025
March 1978
THE CONSTRUCTION, TECHNICAL EVALUATION,
AND
FRICTIONAL DETERMINATION OF AN
ALUMINUM STORM SEWER SYSTEM
by
James J. Giordano
Chamlin and Associates, Inc
Peru, Illinois 61354
Project 11032 DTI
Project Officers
Clifford Risley, Jr.
Office of Research and Development
Region V
Chicago, Illinois 60606
Richard P. Traver
Storm and Combined Sewer Section
Wastewater Research Division
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory (Cincinnati)
Edison, New Jersey 08817
MUNICIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CINCINNATI, OHIO 45268
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report has been reviewed by the Municipal Environmental
Research Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and
approved for publication. Approval does not signify that the
contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, nor does mention of trade names
or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation
for use.
11
-------
FOREWORD
The Environmental Protection Agency was created because of
increasing public and government concern about the dangers of
pollution to the health and welfare of the American people.
Noxious air foul water, and spoiled land are tragic testimony
to the detestation of our natural environment. The complexity
of that environment and the interplay between its components
require a concentrated and integrated attack on the problems.
Research and development is that necessary first step in
problem solution and it involves defining the problem, measur-
ing its impact, and search for solutions. The Municipal
Environmental Research Laboratory develops fw a^*1^0^ _
technology and systems for the prevention, treatment and manage
ment of wastewater and solid and hazardous waste P^-l^ant dis
charges from municipal and community sources, for the P^eserva
tion and treatment of public drinking water supplies, and to
minimize the adverse economic, social, health, and aesthetic
ejects of pollution. This publication is one of the products
of that research; a most vital communications link between the
researcher and the user community.
The need exists to establish answers to special needs such
as reduction of infiltration and improvement in sewer construction
materials and methods to control pollution from urban runoff
This report presents a comprehensive evaluation of aluminum pipe
as a storm sewer material.
Francis T. Mayo
Director
Municipal Environmental
Research Laboratory
111
-------
ABSTRACT
A Research and Development Program to technically evaluate the various
aspects of an aluminum storm sewer system was undertaken by the City of
LaSalle, Illinois, its; Consulting Engineering firm, Chamlin & Associates, Inc.,
and the Aluminum Association. The program was sponsored by the Federal Water
Pollution Control Administration (now the Environmental Protection Agency)
designated as Project No. 11032 DTI. The program consisted of analysis of the
effect upon the quantity of sewerage flows in a portion of the existing com-
bined system as a result of the construction of a demonstration aluminum storm
sewer system, laboratory testing of flow characteristics of aluminum pipe,
design and construction of a demonstration aluminum storm sewer system and
appurtenances and the technical evaluation of the demonstration aluminum storm
sewer system over a 10 year post-construction period.
The typical effects of sewer separation resulting from the construction
of the demonstration aluminum storm sewer system upon the quantity of the
wastewater in a selected portion of the existing combined sewer system were
observed by the use of a continuous recording flow measuring device installed
at a strategic location in the existing combined sewer system.
Laboratory testing of flow characteristics of aluminum pipe was performed
at the St. Anthony Falls Hydraulic Laboratory at the University of Minnesota
in Minneapolis, Minnesota.
The demonstration aluminum storm sewer system was designed by Chamlin &
Associates, Inc., of Peru, Illinois. The material contract was awarded to
Kaiser Aluminum and Chemical Sales, Inc., P.O. Box 599, Bedford, Indiana
47421. The contract for installation of the aluminum pipe was awarded to
Central Illinois Contracting Corporation, P.O. Box 140, Peru, Illinois.
Evaluation of the demonstration aluminum storm sewer system is being
accomplished by annual inspection tours consisting of collection of waste-
water samples for determination of heavy metal content, pH, and minimum
resistivity and aluminum sample coupons which are analyzed for corrosion and
abrasion wear in the laboratory. Also measurements of deflection are taken
at select locations to observe the structural performance of the completed
aluminum demonstration sewer.
This report was submitted in fulfillment of Project No. 11032 DTI by
Chamlin & Associates, Inc., under the sponsorship of the Environmental
Protection Agency. Construction work was completed as of June 30, 1973.
Evaluation work will continue through 1983.
IV
-------
CONTENTS
ii
Disclaimer * * m
Foreword ......... iv
Abstract *.".*.*.'. vi
Figures viii
Tables | * ix
Acknowledgments
Section A. Conclusions
4
B. Recommendations
C. Introduction
D. Observation of the Effects of Sewer
Separation Upon the Quality of the
Wastewater in the Existing Combined g
Sewer System
E Observation of Effects of Sewer Separation
Upon the Quantity of the Wastewater in the
Existing Combined Sewer System
30
F. Laboratory Testing of Aluminum Pipe ..........
G Design of an Integrated Aluminum Demonstration
Storm Sewer System and Appurtenances .......... J^
H Specifications and Construction of
Demonstration Storm Sewer and Appurtenances... 38
p q
I . Post-Construction Evaluation ..................
........... 110
j . References ..........................
K. Appendix A - St. Anthony Falls Project
Report No. 121 ................ H2
Appendix B - Kaiser Aluminum Report CSR74-2 . . 193
Appendix C - Kaiser Aluminum Report CSR75-1 . . 213
Appendix D - Kaiser Aluminum Report ZCFT75-61 . 233
v
-------
Number
D-l
E-l
E-2
Thru
E-17
H-l
H-2
H-3
H-4
H-5
H-6
H-7
H-8
H-9
H-10
H-ll
H-12
H-13
H-14
H-15
H-16
H-17
FIGURES
Page
Wastewater Quality Sampling Locations 10
Location of Continuous Recording Flow
Measuring Station - Location No. 3 13
Graphs Indicating Results of Wastewater
Quantity Determinations
March 1971 - April 1974 14
Location of Demonstration Aluminum
Storm Sewer 61
Typical Trench Detail -
Non-Hardsurfaced Areas 62
Typical Trench Detail -
Hard-Surfaced Areas 63
Typical Trench Detail - Structural
Plate Arch Construction 64
"Nested" Pipe Delivered on Railroad Cars 65
Delivered Pipe Being Unloaded and Stored 66
Name & Number Stampings on Delivered Pipe 67
Placing Aluminum Pipe in Excavated Trench 68
Parallel Aluminum Storm Sewer Placed in
Shallow Excavation 69
Placing Aluminum Coupling Band on 42"
Diameter Standard Corrugation Pipe 70
Structural Plate Arch Sections & Tapping
Saddles at Central Storage Area 71
Assembling Structural Plate Arch 72
Details of Plate Arch Construction 73
Interior View-Transition From Structural
Plate Arch Section to Circular Section at
Special Reinforced Concrete Structure 74
Connected Demonstration Aluminum Storm Sewer
Under CRI & P and CB & Q Railroads 75
Partially Completed Demonstration Aluminum
Storm Sewer Under CRI & P and CB & Q
Railroads 76
72" Aluminum Sewer Construction Through
Reinforced Concrete "Sleeve" Under
CB & Q Railroad 77
continued
VI
-------
FIGURES (continued)
Number
H-18
H-19
H-20
H-21
H-22
Thru
H-25
H-26
H-27
H-28
1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
1-5
1-6
1-7
1-8
Bitumastic Seal of Void Between Asphalt
Coated 72" Aluminum Sewer & Ribbed
Steel-Tunnel Under CRT & P Railroad /»
Distant View of Assembled 66" Diameter
Storm Sewer on Steep Slope • '
66" Diameter Storm Sewer on Steep Slope...... »u
Constructing Aluminum "Bin" Retaining Wall
Over Base of 66" Diameter Storm Sewer
on Steep Slope :"•'"*'•>"'"'
Sequence of Connection Utilizing Aluminum
Tapping Saddle and Joint Utilizing
Heat Shrinkable Coupling Band
Construction of Reinforced Concrete
Manhole Structures •
Cutting 18" Helical Corrugation Pipe ^
With Power Saw •
Cutting Standard Corrugation 72 Pipe gg
With Power Saw
Aluminum Storm Drain System
Comparative Photos of Steeply Declined
Portion of Standard 1" x 6" Corrugation
66" Diameter
Testing 72" Diameter Aluminum Pipe
Through Steel Tunnel Liner 0
Corrosive Attack on Structural Plate Arch.... 102
Alclad 3004 Storm Drain Pipe - 3rd
Inspection, 1975, Photo Micrographs 1UJ
Metal Test Coupons, Alclad 3004
60" Diameter
Typical LaSalle Wastewater Analyses
Typical Soil Analysis
vii
-------
TABLES
Number Pag<
H-l Chemical Composition Limits of
Aluminum Stock Materials t 43
H-2 Mechanical Properties of Alloy
Alclad 3004-H34 48
H-3 Dimension & Weights of Annular Riveted
6x1 Corrugation Aluminum Alloy Pipe 49
H-4 Dimensions & Weights of Helically
Corrugated Aluminum Alloy Pipe 50
H-5 Sheet Thickness f 51
H-6 Permissible Variations From Ordered Weight
For All of One Nominal Thickness & Size... 51
H-7 Chemical Composition Limits of Aluminum
Structural Plate Materials 52
H-8 Physical. Properties of Materials 52
H-9 Nominal Thicknesses, Thickness Tolerances
& Theoretical Weight for Flat Sheet
Aluminum Alloy 5052-H141 53
H-10 Mechanical Properties of Alloy 6063-T6 53
1-1 Typical Pipe Section List Prices 94
1-2 Freight Cost 95
1-3 Unloading Cost t 95
1-4 Installation Cost 95
1-5 Material Cost Comparison 97
1-6 Weight Loss Relationship to Service
Life Corrugated Aluminum Pipe 109
Vlll
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Appreciation is extended to Mr. Clifford Risley, Jr.,
Richard P. Traver, Project Officers, and Dr. David N. Rickles,
of the Environmental Protection Agency for their support,
technical guidance, and final report review.
The efforts of Professor Edward Silberman of the University
of Minnesota, St. Anthony Falls Hydraulic Laboratory, for his
work in scheduling and performing the laboratory flow tests on
the aluminum pipe is greatly appreciated.
Cooperation by all Officials of the City of LaSalle during
the period of time encompassed by the project, and especially
Mr. Quinto Pattelli, Superintendent of Public Works for the City
of LaSalle, is acknowledged.
The cooperation received from Mr. Melvin B. Larsen and Mr.
John F. Piggott of the State of Illinois Department of Transpor-
tation relative to their interest shown and their approval of
the use of Motor Fuel Tax Funds to partially finance the project
is appreciated.
The cooperation of the Aluminum Association through Mr.
Dave Thomas, Mr. Clifford DeGraff, and Mr. Len Hall of Kaiser
Aluminum and Chemical Sales, Inc., was excellent and is greatly
appreciated.
Laboratory evaluation of aluminum coupons and preparation
of evaluation reports by Mr. T. J. Summerson and Mr. R. J. Hogan
of the Kaiser Aluminum and Chemical Corporation Center for
Technology were performed in a very professional and cooperative
manner.
Major contributions to the design, construction staking,
resident inspection cind subsequent evaluation, were made by
various members of the staff of Chamlin & Associates, Inc..
A special note of appreciation is extended to Mr. Joseph
Marenda for the many hours of time expended by him in the taking
and processing of 35 mm color slides which were utilized
extensively to demonstrate the construction techniques employed
during the construction of the demonstration aluminum storm
sewer system.
IX
-------
-------
SECTION A
CONCLUSIONS
L One of the original objectives of the program was to deter-
mine the effects of sewer separation upon the quality of the
wastewater in the existing combined sewer system. This was
to be accomplished by collecting wastewater quality samples
prior to, during, and subsequent to construction of the
Demonstration Aluminum Storm Sewer. After initiation of
this project, it was determined that this objective could
not be accomplished within the scope of the plan originally
developed for this phase of the program. This was primarily
due to the fact that the scope of testing required would not
be justified from an economic standpoint, and could not be
accomplished within the program budget.
2 When direct connections in the form of street inlets are
eliminated by the construction of a separate storm sewer
system, the total daily flows during rainfall periods de-
crease substantially. However, noticeable increases con-
tinue to occur during rainfall periods. This is undoubtedly
the result of non-eliminated downspout connections, founda-
tion drains, infiltration of groundwater, and other unknown
sources of connection to the combined sewer system.
3. Complete information with regard to the friction factors to
be utilized for the design of corrugated aluminum pipes
flowing full may be obtained from a separate report pub-
lished as part of this project referred to as Project Report
No 121 entitled"Further Studies of Friction Factors for
Corrugated Aluminum Pipes Flowing Full"by Edward Silberman
and Warren Q. Dahlin of the University of Minnesota, St.
Anthony Falls Hydraulic Laboratory.
4 It was extremely difficult to maintain meaningful cost
records during construction because the method of construc-
tion utilized for the installation of aluminum pipe is
essentially identical to the method of construction utilized
for the installation of any other kind of material. There
was not available detailed cost records for any other pro-
ject utilizing material other than aluminum pipe which could
be used for comparison purposes. However, an evaluation of
aluminum pipe compared to other materials was prepared and
-------
is included in Section I of this report. It may be con-
cluded that the most significant cost advantages resulting
from the utilization of aluminum pipe are the first cost of
the material itself and the obvious cost advantage of being
able to install the aluminum pipe material in relatively
long lengths utilizing only two men with ropes to lower the
pipe into the trench rather than the necessity of having a
separate piece of equipment to lift and lower heavier pipe
into the trench. Observation of the construction procedures
in comparison with projects utilizing other storm sewer
material indicate that the degree of advantage to the use of
aluminum pipe from the standpoint of material weight is
somewhat proportional to the length of trench which can be
excavated on a per day basis. Obviously in congested urban
areas the amount of lineal footage of trench which can be
excavated is riot always controlled by the amount of pipe
which can be placed, but rather by the limitation imposed
by existing underground utilities and traffic conditions.
Utilization of 20-foot long sections of aluminum pipe was
generally an advantage from the standpoint of ease of
installation cind less joints. Utilization of lengths
shorter than the standard 20-foot lengths was accomplished
by simply using a power hand saw to cut the pipe to the
desired length. The sawing operation required only a
minimal time cind did not delay construction progress.
Slight alignment and grade changes could be accomplished by
the utilization of heat shrinkable coupling bands which
allowed as much as a 20 degree bend at the joints without
sacrificing strength or watertightness. General handling
of aluminum pipe from the time it arrives on the job site
until the timei it is installed in the ground is easier by
virtue of its light weight. An apparent disadvantage to the
use of aluminum pipe is the comparative weakness of the pipe
unit itself under a non-load condition which is more easily
damaged during construction procedures from general contact
with the pipe by construction equipment, vandalism and
caving trenchers. Aluminum manholes and inlets required
approximately the same amount of time and equipment to con-
struct as comparable concrete structures with the only
advantage to the aluminum being ease of handling due to its
light weight.
After three years of service the demonstration aluminum
storm sewer system utilizing aluminum alloys 3004 and 5052
appears to be in excellent condition. The extent of
corrosion observed has an apparent insignificant effect upon
the structural integrity of the standard corrugation, helical
corrugation circular pipe and the structural plate arch.
The extent of corrosion observed on the 3004 aluminum alloy
sampled during the first three years is limited to the
cladding material and no attack has been observed upon the
-------
core material. Corrosion attack from the water side
(interior of the pipe) is virtually non-existent. Corrosion
observed upon the soil side of the pipe has subsided sub-
stantially since the first annual inspection tour.
-------
SECTION B
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. It is recommended that work performed by the St. Anthony
Falls Hydraulic Laboratory of the University of Minnesota
published as Project Report No. 121 entitled "Further Studies
of Friction Factors for Corrugated Aluminum Pipes Flowing
Full" by Edward Silberman and Warren Q. Dahlin be utilized
for the selection of appropriate friction factors during the
design stages of storm sewers utilizing aluminum pipe.
2. It is recommended that aluminum pipe be seriously considered
for incorporation into Federal and State Specifications for
projects involving the construction of storm sewer systems.
Inclusion of aluminum material as an acceptable alternate
in proposals for storm sewer construction work will result
in the lowest obtainable project cost because of the com-
petitive situation posed by the use of alternate materials.
3. It is recommended that, evaluation work continue until 1983
at which time ten annual inspection tours will have been
completed.
-------
SECTION C
INTRODUCTION
The City of LaSalle, Illinois, had been experiencing diffi-
culties with its combined sewer system for many years. The
system had become increasingly inadequate to accommodate surface
runoff during moderate and high intensity rainfall periods.
This v/as due to inadequate foresight in the design of the com-
bined system in conjunction with deterioration of the sewer
system and increasing runoff as a result of increased develop-
ment throughout the City and surrounding areas. The system
became acutely inadequate in various areas of the City^with the
result being severe backup and flooding conditions during rain-
fall periods. In the late 1960's, the City was directed by the
then State Sanitary Water Board to achieve practical separation
of storm and sanitary sewers by the year 1978 in order to comply
with the then current water pollution regulations. That
requirement is no longer in effect since passage of Public Law
92-500 which is cited as the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
Amendments of 1972. However, at the time of application for
this grant, the City was legally obligated to provide practical
separation of storm and sanitary sewers and the City Admini-
stration considered this a high priority project not only be-
cause of the legal obligation, but just as importantly because
of the severe hardships being imposed upon the residents as a
result of backup and flooding conditions. The City had in its
possession a report on sewage and drainage prepared in 1967
which outlined a total separation project for the entire City.
The present sewer system is comprised of a system which was
originally a sanitary sewer system and has since developed into
a sanitary sewer system subjected to hydraulic overloading in
conjunction with a combined sewer system in the form of relief
sewers. Sewer sizes range from 8" to 54" with the most common
pipe size being 8". The larger diameter sewers are either
interceptor type or relief sewers. The oldest sewers in the
City were constructed in the late 1800's. The majority of the
sewers are of vitrified clay or concrete construction. Sometime
during the late 1800's or early 1900's, a relatively large
interceptor sewer was constructed along First Street from Crosat
Street westerly to Wright Street. This sewer was constructed
by mining out a tunnel in a clay seam in the rock strata and
lining it with bricks. In 1936, this interceptor was rebuilt
and extended westward to Creve Coeur Street and remains today as
-------
the major interceptor sewer collecting combined flows and direct-
ing them to the sewage treatment plant facility. Many of the
sewers throughout the City are in poor repair and the carrying
capacities have been substantially reduced as a result of
settlement, tree root growth and structural failure. The geo-
graphic area served by the demonstration aluminum storm
sewer is one which is presently subjected to rather severe back-
up and flooding conditions during light to moderate rainfall
periods. The report indicated at the time that the most cost-
effective method of achieving practical separation was to con-
struct separate storm sewer systems throughout the City allowing
the existing combined system to be maintained as a separate
sanitary sewer system. Conventional materials utilized for
recent storm sewer construction included essentially concrete
and some vitrified clay. The City was approached by represen-
tatives of the Aluminum Association through its consulting
engineer to consider the possibility of using aluminum pipe as
a storm sewer material for construction of storm sewers to
achieve separation. It was learned through EPA (then F.W.P.C.A.)
literature that research and development grants were available
and a follow up by a team consisting of the City Administration,
its consulting engineers, and the Aluminum Association resulted
in a grant in the amount of $454,000.00 to construct an Aluminum
Storm Sewer System and technically evaluate aluminum as a storm
sewer material. The scope of the project involved the construc-
tion of approximately 18,300 lineal feet of aluminum storm sewer
ranging in diameter from 12 inch to 72 inch in conjunction with
a technical evaluation of the construction procedures and the
effects of wastewater and various soils upon the aluminum
material and pertinent structures.
The project was essentially divided into three major phases.
The first phase involved the evaluation of the quantity and
quality of flows in the existing combined sewer system. The
second phase involved the design and construction of the
aluminum storm sewer system, and appurtenances in conjunction
with continued evaluation of the quantity and quality of
sewerage flow in the existing combined sewer system. The third
and most significant phase involved the technical evaluation of
the aluminum storm sewer material subsequent to construction in
conjunction with evaluation of the quality of sewerage flows
within the system over a ten year period. The detailed program
consisted of the following:
OBSERVATION OF EFFECTS OF SEWER SEPARATION UPON THE QUANTITY
OF THE WASTEWATER IN THE EXISTING COMBINED SEWER SYSTEM
The objectives of this phase of the program were to deter-
mine the effects upon the quantity of sewage flowing in the
combined sewer system prior to, during, and after removal of
surface water contributed by roof leaders and street inlets.
-------
LABORATORY TESTING OF FLOW CHARACTERISTICS
OF ALUMINUM PIPE
The obiective of this phase of the program was to determine
the £Z - ---rf:r^ruga^ ^—rpipeff^nc, full.
factors or "N values for corr uga Hydraulic
DESIGN OF AN INTEGRATED ALUMINUM DEMONSTRATION
STORM SEWER SYSTEM AND APPURTENANCES
- ™ »
in»rpor,t.d into
the plans.
CONSTRUCTION OF DEMONSTRATION STORM SEWER
SYSTEM AND APPURTENANCES
factors of aluminum pipe versus other materials
EVALUATION OF DEMONSTRATION STORM SEWER SYSTEM
AND APPURTENANCES
with the aluminum pipe, evaluation
from the pipe in place evauaion of
an locations throughout the
project.
-------
SECTION D
OBSERVATION OF THE EFFECTS OF SEWER SEPARATION
UPON THE QUALITY OF THE WASTEWATER IN THE
EXISTING COMBINED SEWER SYSTEM
The original objective of this phase of the project was to
determine the effects of separation of storm and sanitary flows
in the combined system upon the quality of those flows. This
was to be accomplished by taking wastewater quality samples at
strategic locations prior to, during, and subsequent to elimin-
ation of roof leaders and elimination of street inlets from the
existing combined system and directing them to the new aluminum
storm sewer system. This program was initiated and samples of
the combined sewage were taken at the three locations indicated
in Figure D-l. Observation of the results of the analyses of
these samples indicated that the practicality of achieving the
intended objective of this phase of the program was doubtful.
The quality of the wastewater in the combined sewer system was
obviously influenced by many factors such as temperature
variation, irregular industrial waste discharges, quantify of
flow and other factors which obviously had a much more profound
effect upon the parameter-f analyzed than did the variation of
the quantity of wastewater flowing in the combined sewer svstem
as the result of the elimination of downspouts and street inlets.
It was decided that, in order to undertake a meaningful program
to determine the effects of separation of street inlets and
downspouts upon the quality of the combined sewerage, it would
be necessary to monitor the combined sewer system on a continuous
and extensive basis far beyond the scope of what was originally
intended as part of this project. Construction of the aluminum
demonstration storm sewer affected the quantity of flow during
rainfall periods in a very extensive portion of the combined
sewer system within the City of LaSalle. This effect: was
achieved at a relatively slow rate over an extended period of
time (approximately two years) which did not allow for comparison
of wastewater quality results on a "combined sewer system" versus
a "separated system" within a reasonable period of time. The
sampling and analysis requirements for meaningful results undpr
those conditions would have been extremely expensive and it was
felt that that type of program would not be justified from an
economic standpoint because of the questionable validity of the
8
-------
results and the rather indirect relationship of those results
to the construction and technical evaluation of an a^^
storm sewer system. It was felt that a more meaningful approach
to wastewate/quality would be to place more emphasis upon waste-
water sampling in the demonstration aluminum storm sewer during
the 10 annual inspection tours.
-------
Ibdb^W^
W L1T=rrz:J
JJU
Ltr-:nni J
"^ i—i —w r- T-r" l i f
L_ ._J
n=T
FIGURE D-l
MAP INDICATING
WASTE WATER
QUALITY SAMPLING
LOCATIONS
VTMENT PLANT
G LOCATION NO. I
-------
SECTION E
OBSERVATION OF EFFECTS OF SEWER SEPARATION UPON
THE QUANTITY OF THE WASTEWATER IN THE EXISTING
COMBINED SEWER SYSTEM
PROCEDURE
A continuous recording flow measuring device was installed
in a specially constructed manhole in the existing combined
sewer system at the location indicated in Figure E-l. This
location was selected because the entire combined sewer system
tributary to this point would be subjected to removal of all
street inlets as a result of the demonstration storm sewer con-
struction. The purpose of the continuous recording flow measur-
ing device was to continuously record flows in the combined
sewer system prior to separation and subsequent to various
phases of separation during construction and to compare these
flows in order to determine the effects of the quantity of
sewerage flowing in the combined sewer system as a result of
separation. Also, in conjunction with this phase of the project,
records of the temperature and rainfall were maintained in order
to correlate the sewerage flows in the combined sewer system
with freeze-thaw cycles and amount of rainfall for the corres-
ponding periods of time.
RESULTS
The results of the rainfall records, temperature records,
and sewerage flows obtained at the continuous recording flow
measuring device are indicated in Figures E-2 through E-17.
These figures represent data collected relative to wastewater
quantity determinations in the portion of the combined sewer
system tributary to the continuous recording flow measuring
device.
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
Observation of the results indicates that total daily flows
in the combined sewer system increase somewhat proportionately
to the amount of recorded rainfall for the period March 15, 1971
through the latter part of April, 1973. This is the period of
11
-------
time when no demonstration storm sewers were constructed in the
geographic area tributary to the combined sewer being monitored
at the Northwest corner of 9th and Gooding Streets by the con-
tinuous recording flow measuring device. Since construction of
the demonstration aluminum storm sewer began at the outfall end
of the total system in the Southern portion of the City, the
aluminum storm sewers designed to remove surface water from the
area tributary to the continuous recording flow measuring device
were not begun until the total system progressed to this general
location. Construction of these sewers began in about the
latter part of April of 1973. (See Figure E-12). Observation
of Figures E-2 through E-17 indicates that after the latter part
of April 1973, the total daily flow recorded during rainfall
periods was significantly less as construction of the demonstra-
tion sewer in this area progressed. The demonstration aluminum
storm sewer construction to serve this area was completed during
the latter part of November of 1973. Observation of Figures
E-2 through E-17 indicates that during the month of January and
some periods during February and March of 1974 noticeable
increases in the volume of flow occurred. Investigation of this
situation indicated that a new house was constructed on Oak Road
between Bucklin Street and North Gooding Street. The existing
combined sewer in that area was excavated and utilized as an
area drain during the construction of the house. That situation
has since been corrected. Analysis of the data presented
indicates that the majority of flow increase during rainfall
periods is contributed by surface runoff collected by street
inlets. When these direct connections were eliminated by the
construction of the demonstration aluminum sewer, the total
daily flows during rainfall periods decreased substantially.
However, noticeable slight increases continue to occur during
rainfall periods. This is undoubtedly the result of non-
eliminated downspout connections and foundation drain connec-
tions which were not eliminated as part of this project.
Because of the high costs and necessity of entering private
property further detailed studies of the existing sewer system
in the City of LaSalle have been completed in the form of a
Sewer System Evaluation Survey funded in part by the State of
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency as part of a total
Facilities Plan relative to water pollution control. The pur-
pose of this study was to determine the most cost-effective
method of eliminating excessive infiltration/inflow in the exist-
ing combined sewer system. Conclusions drawn in the Infiltra-
tion/Inflow Analysis indicate that excessive infiltration/inflow
(primarily inflow in the form of surface runoff) exists in the
existing sewer system and that the most cost-effective method
of elimination at this location, is to provide practical separa-
tion of storm and sanitary sewers in conjunction with some addi-
tional treatment. This allows for the use of the existing
combined sewers to function as adequate sanitary sewers free of
excessive infiltration/inflow during rainfall periods.
12
-------
FIGURE E-l
EXISTING
t-c COMBINED SEWERS
MONITORED
PORTION OF
DRAINAGE AREA TRIBU-
TARY TO COMBINED
SEWERS MONITORED
13
-------
o
o
O
O
ro
O
O
CVJ
O
O
o
(SNcmvo QNvsnoHi)
Moid xniva nvioi
o o o o o o o
o oo u> ^r cj cj
S33H93C]
CM —
S3HONI
53
!*
fd
o
14
-------
(SNOTIVQ QNvsnoHi)
M01J A1IVQ IVIOI
15
-------
<5 j
/
\
1
s
\
f
/
^
h
H
H
s
/
/
f
i — i
*
^
1
h
r
s
^ "?
7 /
( j
^ \
) LI
f
r-J
X u:
f o
h ^
r f0
S
r1
)
4
I
( "!
/ 1
\ s
) _J
< cT
5 f
1 \
3
—
—
9Z
£Z
IE
61
Zl
^ tr
Ql uj
£1 ON MM
. O> W rJ
— II o " ^o
X «0 ^
-J 6 ° S c
n Q) -H G
— Z -P 4-> o
W G -H
Q ftJ 0 -P
a ^ u «d
— £ -M
H^H *n -P w
^H | 0 rfl
Cr>
— ^62 w en G
4J G -H
— 1 Z3 -H 0 M
J 3 -H 3
•^ C7 U) -P 0)
i *c (U fd rd
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
_l
—
—
~~
i
c? PC; G cu
t^ G
C) Q. — G -P -H
*•' LU H -H T!
I I (0 -P H
11 x: G o
c (^ rd 0
D rd ^3 Q)
; M O P<
L O
9
2 ^
1 u
w
0£ o
83 ^
07 tp
36 -H
-1 w ^
Tl 22 w_
H oz gfe
H 8' 3"
— 1 91
ii n frl
1 8 § 8 ° 8 8 S ? S ° S =~ =- =o "
ro c\J — ~
( SN011V9 QNVSriOHl ) 'd S33H93Q S3HON
MCTId A1IVQ 1V101
16
-------
ro
O
O
O
O
ro
o
o
CM
o
o
SN011V9 QNVSnOHl)
MOld AllVQ 1V.L01
o o o o o o o
O CO CD h-
Z 0)
< ~
-3
Vi to
Q) 3
-P 0
fd 3
£ C
Q- QJ-H
11 -P 4J
m W C
? - 5 °
, , Is- ^ U
^ 0)
o — m ^j
uJ o rd
Q
w en
-PCS
rH O O
^ -H -H
to -P -P
(U fd fd
« C 4->
-H CO
Cn g
C J-i tP
•H 0) C
-P -P-H
fd QJ ^
U Q 3
-H CO
TJ >i rd
C! -P 0)
H -H 21
-P
"a S o
2 o^
cr °
Ld
CD
S r in
UJ ^ 1
> - w
o
z: 0
en
•H
"— "O
S3HONI
HVJNIVd
cr
62 s
8
17
-------
L
rb
rD
o
o
sf
O
O
ro
O
O
C\J
O
o
QNvsnoHi)
MOld A1IVQ 1V101
o o o o o o o
O 00 CD ^- OJ CJ
S3HONI
llVJNIVd
18
-------
LJ
OJ
5^
32
83
93
33
03
81
91 _j
3! IS
01
8
9
it -j-
63 g
^ w
Q) 3
-P O
CO 3
(SNOT1V9 ONVSnOHl)
xiiva ivioi
o o o o o o o
O ao to ^- osi cj
S33H93Q
c\J
— o
S3HONI
0)
£
•H C
4J -P O
CO O -P
£ U CO
-P
O CO
CO CO C
-P C -H
rH O M
^J -H ^3
10 -P W
(D CO CO
K.si
t7> £
C ^ ^
-H 0) O
-P -P rH
cO (1) fa
O Q
•H tn
T3 >i C
C 4J -H
H -H TJ
-P J~l
45 C O
a. co o
cO 3
19
-------
o o o o o o o
(SNcmvo QNvsnoHD
MCTM A1IVQ 1VJ.01
S33H93Q
— O
S3HONI
20
-------
(SN011V9 QNVSnOHl)
M01J A1IVQ 1V101
S33H93Q
S3HONI
llVdNlVd
21
-------
91
£1
II
6
L
9
£
I
0£
83
93
33
03
81
91
frl
01
8
9
83
93
cr
< ro
CD
LU
Q
(U 3
-P O
G
, G
C -P -H
H -H no
-P M
.G G O
CU (0 U
ffl ^ QJ
H O tf
O
o
o
o
o
ro
O
O
(\J
O
O
(SN011V9 QNVSnOHl)
MOld A1IVQ 1V101
o o o o o o o
O 00 U)
-------
SN011V9 QNVSnOHl)
Moid xniva ivioi
S3HONI
HVdNIVH
23
-------
Ql
£1
I I
6
/
g
iu to
Z N
Z> 0>
"3
ti8
Q) OJ 0)
^ K U
5 w E>
Cn
o
-H
-P
U
P
C
s
C B O P
-H M U CO
Cn O fO
\
O O O O O O O
O 00 U? ^- OJ CM
(SN011V9 QNVSnOHi)
MOHJ A1IVQ 1V101
J — o
S3HDNI
llVJNIVd
02
83
93
frZ
23
03
81
91
t?l
31
01
8
9
fr
3
0£
83
93
t^3
33
>- ro
h w
(D P
-P O
rd p
^ C
OJ-H c
-P -P O
W C -H
13 O 4-J
& u rd
-P
*»-l -P CO
o rd
Cn
u) co c
4J C -H
•H O h
P -H p
W -M 03
cu rd fd
« c C
C 4J -H
H -H T3
•P M
x: c o
Oi 03 O
fd P Q)
>H O «
o
03
81
91 _j
— ro
t?l tc^
a. o
31 <~
01
8
9
t?
3
l£
rH
1
w
QJ
^
P
tr>
•H
fn
24
-------
O
O
-------
51
ei
u
I CD
O
O
2?
o:
CD
M C -H
03 O -P
O 03
w tn
0) td rri
pc: c (U
•H (U O
•P -P rH
ro
-------
o
o
-------
o o o o o o o
o oo a?
-------
^ CO
Q) 3
-P O
cd 3
c
-H
0)
-p -p
U) C
(d o -P
£ U fd
-P
U-l .p U3
o (d
0) w c
-P C -H
•H O ^
CO -P 10
0) fd td
« c: (u
•H a
c n ^
-H (D O
-P -P rH
fd QJ [j-i
U Q
•H tp
T5 >i C
C -P -H
H -H T3
-P V-l
^ c o
Cu fd u
fd 3 (D
H O PS
rH
I
O
o
o
o
ro
O
O
CJ
O
O
o o o o o o o
O 00 ID ^J- OJ C\J
OJ —
(SN011V9 QNVSnOHi)
MOU A1IVQ 1V101
S3HDNI
29
-------
SECTION F
LABORATORY TESTING OF ALUMINUM PIPE
This major phase of the project involved laboratory test-
ing of both helical and annular corrugated aluminum pipe flow-
ing full in a laboratory to determine the friction factors and
tics P^ono^f T 0bsrVati°nS °f the P1?6 ^oint characteris-
tics. Proposals to perform this work were sought from the St
Anthony Falls Hydraulic Laboratory at the University of
Minnesota in Minneapolis, Minnesota, the Department of the Army
Waterways Experiment Station Corps of Engineers, Vicksburg,
Mississippi, and the Department of the Army Division Hydraulic
Laboratory North Pacific Division Corps of Engineers,
Bonneville, Oregon. The 3t. Anthony Falls Hydraulic Laboratory
submitted the lowest bid to perform this work and was sub-
sequently employed for this purpose. The procedure, results and
conclusions of those tests are included in the appended Project
entitled"Further Studies of Friction Factors'for
U? t*eS Flowin9 Full«by Edward Silberman and
°f the University of Minnesota, St. Anthony
- Select protions °f that
CONCLUSIONS
The experiments described in this report have been
conducted using corrugated aluminum pipes flowing
full. The measurements were made following an entry
region of 20 or more pipe diameters, and although
this distance appears to be sufficient, it is not
known whether this is a minimum distance for fully
developed flow. Measurements were made under
laboratory conditions with pipe carefully aligned
and joints carefully made so as to avoid introducing
additional roughness. The water used in the tests
carried a light load of sand, mostly as suspended
load, from the Mississippi River. No significant
amount of sand was found in the pipes after the
flow was shut down; it is not believed that the sand
affected the results.
Under these conditions, the following statements
can be made regarding friction factors:
30
-------
(1) Aluminum annular riveted pipes with 6 in.
by 1 in. corrugations have the same
friction factors for fully rough flow as
do steel riveted pipes with 2-2/3 by 1/2
in. corrugations. Empirical formulas
including both are
f = 0.122 D~°-41
and n = 0.0257 D~°'042
where D is the inside diameter measured in
feet. Field assembled and bolted pipes
have materially greater friction factors
because of both the larger relative depth
of corrugations and the presence of bolt
heads and rougher joints within the pipes.
(2) Helical pipe has lesser friction factors
than similar annular pipe of the same
diameter; the smaller the helix angle, the
less the friction factor. Empirical
formulas including both annular and helical
pipes of both aluminum and steel are
f = 0.945 x 10
_(• fll-
and n = 0.713 x 10 -
where 3 is the helix angle (measured from
the pipe axis) in degrees and D is the
inside diameter measured in feet. These
formulas are limited to the range of the
data available, 52-1/2^3^90. There
appears to be little effect of relative
roughness on helical pipe friction factors.
3) The thermoplastic sealant provided for the
aluminum pipe tests makes a very effective
field seal at the pipe joints. However, in
the laboratory tests without earth backfill
around the pipes, it was found necessary to
reinforce the joint seals with corrugated
metal bands to prevent the seals from
opening due to pressure and vibration. The
bands materially increased the rigidity
of the pipe line. (Plain metal bands did not
protect the seal as well as corrugated bands)
31
-------
Using corrugated metal bands it was also
possible to seal the joints with bands
of rubber gasket material placed cold
but several trials were necessary at each
Doint before a tight seal could be made.
(4) I^B fa^y-assembled pipes, especially
the helical pipes which contained sealant
in the spiral joints, were reasonably
tight against leakage even without back-
fill. The field assembled, bolted pipe
leaked badly even though sealer strips
were used along the bolt rows.
(5) In factory assembled pipe, care should
be taken to avoid unnecessary joint
roughness. Extruding joint sealant
from spiral joints on helical pipe, which
can introduce roughness, should be avoided
PIPE CHARACTERISTICS
r^'i^^0^ FallS H^draulic Laboratory was engaged
by Chamlin and Associates, Inc., of Peru, Illinoif to
if L^l'sLe'f Cfi0n fr°rS f°r fUl1^ ^eloped 'flow
in several sizes of annular and helical corrugated
lions of°^ng full.and to make qualitative observa-
tions of the pipe joint characteristics. The pipes
which ranged in diameter from 12 to 66 inches arT '
being considered for use in a demonstration s^orm
sewer project located in LaSalle, Illinois? which is
d-in Part by the °ffice of Water Quality
Environmental Protection Agency. The
eriSt±CS are giVen in Pi*- 1- kf the
Pipe for the tests was provided by two suppliers
^aiser Aluminum and Chemical Sales, Inc., and the
Reynolds Metals Company. Except for the'66 in bolted
S P!i' ^n SlpeS Were shiPPed to the laboratory ^^^
mostly 40 ft. (a few 20 ft.) lengths to provide a
test pipe about 220 ft. in length for the 66 in. and
in and if? and.about 10° ft- in length for the 24
shipped in 4^ fiZe% ^ 66 in' b°lted P^ was
snipped in 4.5 ft. wide semi-circular pieces and
assembled into a 220 ft. length in the Laboratory • s
?ecei£8£ Channel- The PlpeS Were ^spected upon
receipt to insure against leakage and to get accurate
measurements for use in reducing test results The
seams of the factory-assembled pipes had been 'sealed
a^Srdinglo
32
-------
In some ol the helical pipes, Considerable sealant
had been forced inside the pipe and would have
affected 1 be friction factor measurements. The 48
in""and 24 in. helical pipes were thoroughly scraped
on the inside by Laboratory personnel. Since it
was impossible for a nan to enter the L2 in. PiPe
1-0 scrape it, the first shipment, of that size could
not be used. It was replaced by a second shipment
in which greater care had been taken during manu-
facture to prevent the sealant from getting inside
the pipe.
The helical pipe seams dj.d not leak Muring the
experiments, but some leakage occurred from the
annular riveted pipes and considerable leakage
occurred from the bolted pipe. Leakage from the
48 in. annular riveted pipes, illustrated in
Fig 4, (Of the Report.) was easily stopped by
application of silieone cement from outside the
pipe There was more leakage from the 66 in.
annular riveted pipe, especial!/ where the trans-
verse and longitudinal seams met, but this was
also sealed with silieone cement.
The greatest seam leakage problems occurred with
the bolted pipe. The assembly materials included
strips of 3M joint sealant tape which were applied
over every row of bolt holes, both longitudinally
arid transversely., rfotwithbt.andinq this tape,
leakage was severe until it was fi.nal.ly reduced
to manageable proportions by inserting a black_
permagum sealer with a putty knife into all points
from the inside of the pipe. The sealed loints
can be seen in the lower photograph of the front-
ispiece and in Fig. 5. (of the Report.) Figure 5
also shows, incidentally, the roughness of the
interior of the bolted pipe, 3t should be under-
stood that this pipe, Like all the pipes under
test, was unsupported on the outside; with com
pacted earth fill around the pipe, the leakage
would have been much less. The inside pipe _ _
diameter is an important, parameter i.n determining
the friction factor, and it war, measured carefully.
Personnel entered all. pipes 24 inches in diameter
or larger and measured the actual inside diameters
with two sliding bars equipped with verniers (front-
ispiece) . The inside diameter of each pipe was
measured every 2 ft. (every 1-1/2 ft. for the
bolted pipe) through the test section in both
vertical and horizontal directions. Corrugation
depths were measured with a depth gauge about
every 4 ft., four readings being made at each
every
33
-------
section. For the 12 in. pipe, the outside diameter
and corrugation depths were measured and the inside
diameter computed. The average measured values of
inside diameter, standard deviation, and corrugation
depth are reported in Fig. 1 (of the Report) over
the length of pipe used for determining hydraulic
grade lines. The helix angle was also measured and
is given in Fig. 1 (of the Report); it agreed closely
with factory specifications.
34
-------
SECTION G
DESIGN OF AN INTEGRATED ALUMINUM DEMONSTRATION
STORM SEWER SYSTEM AND APPURTENANCES
The entire drainage area tributary to the demonstration
storm sewer system was'included in a contour map prepared photo-
qrammetically to a horizontal scale of 1-inch equals 100 feet
?nH vertical contour interval of 2 feet. Exact drainage areas
were determined from this contour map and the total system was
designed on that basis. Required capacities of storm sewers
were determined by utilizing the rational formula for storm
sewer runoff. The aerial survey map also provided detailed
information with regard to the number of houses, buildings
Darkina lots, paved areas and all other items having a relatively
impervious surface. This allowed for maximum accuracy within
the limits of the rational method, Detailed plans and specifi-
cations were then prepared utilizing aerial survey strip maps
of the various streets along which the storm sewer was to be
constructed. The strip maps were prepared photographically to
a scale of 1-inch equals 20 feet and the profile of the existing
ground were obtained from field elevations, /ll existing under-
ground utilities of record were located in the field and shown
on the plans for location and elevation where available. Sizes
and slopes of storm sewer were selected utilizing friction
factors obtained from the University of Minnesota, St. Anthony
Falls Hydraulic Laboratory, Project Report No. 121 entitled
"Further Studies of Friction Factors for Corrugated Aluminum
PiDes Flowing Full" by Edward Silberman and Warren Q. Dahlin,
which reports prepared as part.of this project The project
was divided into a construction division and a materials
division with separate bids being taken for both divisions.
Aluminum pipe was specified exclusively. Detailed plans and
specirica?ions were prepared which plans and specifications
designated the trench detail construction, type of bedding and
backfill material to be utilized, details of special aluminum
structures and appurtenances and the alignment and elevation
profiles of the proposed storm sewer lines. A complete soil
profile was prepared utilizing soil borings taken along the
proposed rou?e of the entire storm sewer system. The soil work
was performed by Dr. Robert K. Morse, Engineering Geologist,
or El Paso? Illinois. This information was utilized to provide
information to prospective bidders with regard to the type of
35
-------
soil to be encountered a^ wf.li ^ « +-^ ^ 4-
-:";r.» ^— " ->—
" ,'?;; r -.' thL ?SSl -1"2™
Select granular mat-., i a I i COnst:r '"^ l°" "™ '
effis« S£7";'"',r;;; ; r "^f-"1-^""
1"
• -
' > ; «
p.™, Hiinoi,, ... „=, ,:,0"" In
,4'nS",'HiF'"¥ •" i
;ri r i r -" '"°";
selected locations whi-b wer" referencJ fo al™'in1Jm
fo
i./iivr ~
": ;- s,; -
considerations for those ,ro< s inas ' A re?u"ef sP'^ial design
was specified to be c-r,\'t,- ,, , , * plate tllnnel liner
Tracks because ?t was n^es^ry to maintlif ^ ' ^land Railr°ad
service Th^ Qf-o«i i- "ti3>Sciry to maintain uninterrupted
pavld with aspha! a v"^JlWaS r° nstructed a"d the invert was
material priof to ins^c',- ,qthf 72S, W%re,C°ated Wlth bitumas tic
through the steel p ^ I" ^ - ^ aluminvun
structed in direct contarh w?hh L aluminum pipe to be con-
"
.etals.
-------
tapping saddles, and reducers were also specified and bids were
taken on these items separate from the aluminum pipe and
aluminum structural plate arch materials as part of the same
contract. Methods of construction specified were standard
methods of construction utilized for this type of work where
materials other than aluminum pipe are incorporated into the
project.
37
-------
SECTION H
SPECIFICATIONS AND CONSTRUCTION OF DEMONSTRATION
STORM SEWER AND APPURTENANCES
PROSECUTION OF MATERIAL ACQUISITION AND INSTALLATION
The contract for the supply of material was executed on
June 16, 1971, between the City of LaSalle and Kaiser Aluminum
and Chemical Sales, Inc. The contract for installation and
incidental construction was executed on June 14, 1971, between
the City of LaSalle and Central Illinois Contracting Corporation
of Peru, Illinois. Construction of the demonstration aluminum
storm sewer began July 10, 1971, and was substantially completed
on June 30, 1973.
CONSTRUCTION PLANS
The detailed plans and specifications were utilized by the
Contractor and the project engineers to construct the demon-
stration aluminum storm sewer,. The construction plans consisted
of 88 sheets of plan and profile and detail sheets.
ALUMINUM PIPE SUPPLY, STORAGE AND DISTRIBUTION
Both standard and helical corrugated aluminum pipe was
supplied in 20-foot long sections and was shipped by railroad
car in a "nested" arrangement. The material was unloaded from
the railroad cars and transported to a central storage location
located at the Southeast area of the City of LaSalle. Material
was transported by the Contractor from the central storage
location when needed to the job site. The structural plate
material was delivered by truck in bundled sections and trans-
ported to the central storage area until required on the job
site. The structural plate arch was bolted to aluminum angles
anchored to a smooth concrete invert. The entire structural
plate arch was erected from the prefabricated sheets in the
field.
MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS - STANDARD AND HELICAL CORRUGATION PIPE
The specifications for the aluminum material utilized for
this project were as follows:
38
-------
Description
This work shall consist of furnishing and delivering to the
City of LaSalle, Illinois, aluminum helical or riveted round
aluminum corrugated pipe, accessories and fittings, in accord-
ance with the following requirements.
Materials
Corrugated aluminum alloy pipe shall be fabricated from
corrugated clad aluminum alloy sheets or coils conforming to
the chemical composition shown in Table H-l. The cladding
thickness on each side shall be five percent of the total com-
posite thickness. The mechanical properties given in ASTM
Specification B209 for alloy Alclad 3004 with Temper H34 as in
Table H-2 shall be met.
Rivets shall conform to the chemical composition shown in
Table I of ASTM Specification B316, for alloy 6053 heat treated
to the T4 temper with the following minimum mechanical
properties:
Tensile Strength 25,000 psi
Yield Strength 14,000 psi
Shear Strength 15,000 psi
Elongation 16 pet.
Coupling bands shall be of the same alloy as the pipe. Angles
or lugs shall conform to the chemical composition, shown in_
Table H-l, and the mechanical properties of ASTM Specification
B221, alloy 6063 with Temper T-6 as given in Table H-10.
Sampling (When Verification of Chemical Analysis Required) --
Chemical analysis of sheets before fabrication shall be
made from drillings or chips from samples of metal cut from
different sheets in a lot. When referred analysis is required,
samples for chemical analysis shall be taken from the core alloy
after removal of the cladding by etching or milling. A sample
shall be taken from each of three different sheets for lots
weighing five tons or less, from four sheets for lots weighing
more than five and less than ten tons, and from five sheets for
lots weighing ten tons or more. The drilling or chips from
these samples shall be thoroughly mixed for analysis.
Sheet Manufacturer's Guarantee —
The manufacturer of the sheets shall submit with the certi-
fied analysis a guarantee providing that all metal furnished
shall conform to the specification requirements, shall bear a
suitable identification brand or mark, and shall be replaced
without cost to the purchaser when not in conformity with the
specified analysis, thickness, or cladding; and the guarantee
39
-------
cones'
Sheet Manufacturer's Certified Analysis --
The manufacturer of each brand shall file with the Enaineer
a certificate setting forth the name or grade of metal to be
furnished and a statement that the material conforms to the
°°th
bind the coanr * PSrSOn haVing le*al authority to
Identification —
No pipe will be accepted unless the metal is identified bv
a stamp on each section showing: J-uentiriea by
(1) Name of sheet manufacturer
(2) Name of brand and kind of base metal
3) Manufacturer's standard thickness (See Table H-5)
(4) Manufacturer's date of processing by a six
(6) digit number indicating in order the year
month and days of the month. '
The identification brands shall be placed on the sheets bv
x,;; :- : s^sir '
..
nated independently of the brand or trade mark so as to cleLly
; nTS':s;.^LT^;;,s™,'i-,jshif %",%£?« •
sheets alloy number and temper. piecing on tt.o
bids w?nehal Wilf -be accepted under these specifications and no
bids will be considered for the materials above described until
racture^S±ra;rf r^:"'5 Certified ™W* and ,nal *
racturer s gjarantee have been passed upon by the Encrineer and
accepted. Misbranding or other misrepresentation, and non-
nated by the bidder. One brand, and one brand only
.^SllanSra^e^f^s
Inspection and Rejection --
40
-------
shall be under the direction of the Engineer. The Engineer or
his representative shall have free access to the mill or shop
for inspection, and every facility shall be extended to _ him for
this" purpose. Any material or pipe which has been previously
rejected at the mill or shop and included in a later lot will be
considered sufficient cause for the rejection of the entire lot.
The field inspection shall be made by the Engineer, who
shall be furnished by the seller with an itemized statement of
the sizes and lengths of pipe in each shipment. This inspection
shall include an examination of the pipe for deficiency in
nominal specified diameter, net length of furnished pipe, and
any evidence of poor workmanship as outlined above. The
inspection may include the taking of samples for chemical
analysis. The pipe making up the shipment shall fully meet the
requirements of these specifications; and if 25 percent of the
pipe in any shipment fails to meet these requirements, the entire
shipment may be rejected.
TSStlUnless otherwise provided, chemical analysis, when required,
shall be in accordance with Standard Method E-34 of the American
Society for Testing and Materials except that suitable specto-
graphic analysis likewise may be employed.
When the thickness of the cladding of finished sheet is to
be determined, a minimum of three transverse samples, represent-
ing the width of the sheet and approximately 3/4 inch in length,
shall be mounted to expose a plane perpendicular to the plane
of the sheet, and polished for microscopic examination. Alter
etching with a mixed acid etch to differentiate between core and
cladding, each specimen shall be examined at a magnification of
100 diameters and the maximum and minimum cladding thickness
shall be measured in each of five fields approximately 1/10 inch
apart along both sides of the exposed edge of each specimen.
The average of the ten measurements of thickness of each side
of the exposed edge of each mounted specimen will be used to
determine the cladding thickness of the material.
Fabrication
ipe furnished under this specification shall be full
circle or full circle 5% elongated pipe except that pipe with
6x1 corrugations shall be full circle only.
TYPe Pipe furnished under this specification shall be helically
corrugated lock seam or annular riveted with 6 x 1 corrugations
41
-------
(1) Riveted Annular Corrugated Pipe, 6x1 Corrugation Shape —
Pipe furnished shall be of the full circle type with lap joint
construction. ^ J
Dimensions and Weights — The widths of laps, nominal
thicknesses and computed weights per linear foot of furnished
pipe shall be as specified in Table H-3. The dimensions given
tor diameter of pipe are nominal inside diameters.
Rivets and Riveting -- Rivets shall be for following
diameters as specified:
Diameter, inch Diameter, inch
30" thru 42" 3/3"
42" and up 1/2"
Au\^etS Sha11 be driven cold in such a manner that the plates
shall be drawn tightly together throughout the entire lap The
center of a rivet shall not be closer than Uj times the diameter
°K ^\riVet r°m the edge of the metal. Longitudinal seams
shall be riveted with two rivets in each crest and valley of each
corrugation. All rivets shall have neat, workmanlike heads of a
form acceptable to the Engineer, shall be driven without bending,
and shall completely fill the hole. Circumferential, shop-
riveted seams shall have a maximum rivet spacing of 6 inches.
Corrugations — Corrugations shall be not less than 5-7/8"
nor more than 6-1/8" center to center of either crest or vallev
The corrugations shall have a depth of not less than one inch.
Coupling Bands_ — Field joints shall be made with bands
not less than 18 inches wide for pipe diameters of 30 inches to
60 inches, inclusive; and not less than 24 inches wide for pipe
culverts with diameters greater than 60 inches. The thickness
of such bands shall conform to Table H-3. They shall be
connected at the ends by aluminum alloy angles having minimum
fnov5^ °f™ ^'f^ K2 inCheS bY Vl6 inch' or b^ aluminum
allo> lugs. The 18-inch band shall have not less than three
and the 24-inch band shall have not less than four galvanized
steel 1/2-inch bolts. Other equally effective methods of
connecting the coupling bands may be used if approved by the
Engineer. Those heat-shrinkable bands supplied in accordance
with the requirements of the Special Provisions for all sizes
Zf i- u !" PlpG Sha11 be a heat-shrinkable type band constructed
of high density polyolefin with a minimum heat shrinking
capacity of not less than 25%, as manufactured by the Ray Chem
Corporation, 300 Constitution Drive, Menlo Park, California
For pipe diameters of 12-inch to 30-inch inclusive, the band
shall be a minimum of 8 inches wide prior to shrinking For
pipe diameters of 36-inch to 72-inch inclusive, the band shall
be a minimum of 12 inches wide prior to shrinking.
42
-------
(2) Helically Corrugated Pipe — .
Shape — Pipe furnished may be full circle or full circle
5% elected with continuous helical lock seam construction.
The minimum radius of curvature of any part of the pipe section
shall be three inches.
Dimensionsand__Wei3hts — Helically corrugated aluminum
alloy pipe shall have nominal thicknesses and nominal weights
per lineal foot as shown in Table H-4. The average weight per
lineal foot of finished pipe shall not underrun the weight given
in Table H-4 by more than five percent.
Helical Lock Seam — The lock seam shall be parallel to the
corrugation, extend continuously from end to end of the pipe and
shall be fabricated so as not to affect the shape or nominal
diameter of the pipe. Lock seam pipe, shall be mechanically
staked at approximately one inch (1") centers by a method which
will supply sufficient pressure to indent the outside layer ot
metal in the lock seam into the adjacent layer and thereby
provide insurance against seam slippage.
Corrugations ~ Helically corrugated pipe having a diameter
of 10 inches or less shall have corrugations not less than
1-3/8 inches nor more than 1-7/8 inches center to center,
measured at right angles to the direction of the corrugations
and shall have a depth of not less than 1/4 inch.
Helically corrugated pipe having a diameter of 12 inches or
greater shall have corrugations not less than 1-7/8 inches nor
more than 2-3/4 inches center to center, measured at right
angles to the direction of the corrugations. Pipe having
diameters of not less than 12 inches nor more than 21 J-nch|s
shall have corrugation depth of not less than 7/16 inch. Pipe
having diameters greater than 21 inches shall have corrugation
depth of not less than 1/2 inch.
The angle between the direction of the corrugations and the
longitudinal axis of the pipe shall not be less than 45 degrees.
Coupling Bands — Field joints in helically corrugated
aluminum alloy pipe shall be made with aluminum alloy band
couplers of the same base alloy as that used in the pipe. Band
couplers shall have corrugations that mesh with the corruga-
tions of the pipe. Bands shall be not less than 7 inches wide
for pipe diameters of 6 inches to 30 inches, inclusive; not
less than 12 inches wide for pipe with diameters of 36 inches to
60 inches, inclusive; not less than 24 inches wide for pipe with
diameters greater than 60 inches. The thickness of such bands
shall conform to Table H-4. All bands shall be constructed so
as to lap circumferentially. One piece band couplers_only may
be used. Pipe diameters of not less than 12 inches with the
43
-------
less than two cralv^ni vori
1~>V-V^^J- j-"-1-L u ;=> ur not !<=>c;c: ^Vov, i /o • i_ -, • <-«w y0.0.van_Lzea
pipe diameters of 36-inch to 7?-?n^h ? shrinking. For
Ss^~^s^>£ sar.s a^
MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS - ALUMINUM PLATE ARCH
arch wereSasCfollows?nS ^ aliuninum corrugated structural plate
Materials
General —
All plates shall be fabri r^-f-oH -F>-^m T
The chemical composition of"thrp^te'ri^rH^^1^'.0!2-1!141
B209 alloy 5052 and shall confer^ fn H V6 AS™ desig^t
shown on Table H-7 a?i ^onform to chemical compositions as
requirements of Table H- 8 conform to the physical
Plate Thickness Determination and Tolerance —
sheet alloy 5052^141 Tab-g? ^^ **
Sampling (When Verification of Chemical Analysis is Required) -
44
-------
The sample may be obtained from a piece approximately 3 square
cut from a corner of a plate. The coupon shall be of the same
nominal thickness and base metal as the plate to which it is
attached.
Sheet Manufacturer's Certified Analysis "
The manufacturer of the base metal shall file with the
Engineer a certificate setting forth the name or brand of metal
to be furnished, a typical analysis, and a statement _ that the
material conforms to the specified chemical composition limits
The certificate shall be sworn to for the manufacturer by a per
son having legal authority to bind the company.
Manufacturer's Guarantee --
The manufacturer of the sheets shall submit with the certi
fied analysis a guarantee providing that all me tal finished
shall conform to the specification requirements, shall bear a
suitable identification brand or mark and shall be replaced
without cost to the purchaser when not in conformity with the
specified analysis or thickness; the cost to be limited to the
replacement of structural plate material only. The guarantee
shall be so worded as to remain in effect so long as the manu-
facturer continues to furnish material.
will be accepted unless the metal is identified
by a stamp on each plate showing:
Name of base metal manufacturer.
Name of brand and kind of base metal or alloy designate.
Manufacturer's standard thickness.
Manufacturer's date of processing by a six (6) ai^t
number indicating in order the year, month and day
of month.
The identification stamps shall be so placed that when the
pipe or arch is erected the identification will appear on the
inside of the structure.
Field Inspection and Acceptance of Plates —
The field inspection shall be made by the Engineer, and he
shall be furnished by the manufacturer an itemized statement of
the number and length of the plates in each shipment. Each
plate^ncluded in the shipment shall meet fully the requirements
of these specifications. If 25% of the plates in any shipment
fail to meet the requirements, the entire shipment may be
rejected.
Meth°UnlessTotherwise provided, chemical analysis, when required,
shall be in accordance with Standard Method E 34 of the American
45
-------
Society for Testing and Materials, except that suitable spectro
graphic analysis likewise may be employed. spectro
Workmanship —
It is the essence of these specifications that in addition
to compliance with the details of construction, the completed
structure shall show careful finished workmanship in ^?1 parti-
Plates "but tor^U1Tent dPPlieS n0t °nly t0 ^individual
plates but to the shipment on any contract as a whole.
Fabrication
Shape --
arnh "Aerial furnished under this specification shall be pure
arch, conforming to the general shapes shown on the plan detail.
Type --
Pipe furnished under this specification shall consist of
curved corrugated structural units. When assembled? ?he
corrugations shall run at right angles to the longitudinal axis
°
oTuntf'or*
~oss-sectional area shown
Dimensions and Weights — Individual plates may be supplied
in widths from approximately 80 inches to 140 inches and shall
have a net length of not less than 45 inches or grater than
72 inches Individual plates shall not weigh more than 250
°
all plates having like dimensions, curvature, and thfsame
number of bolts per foot of seam shall be interchangeable^ Each
Plate shall be curved to the proper radius so that the cross-
sectional dimensions of the finished structure will be as
indicated on the drawings or as specified.
of thenp?ftefth^iSe1fPrifi?d' b0lt h°leS alo"5 those edges
structure shan £ I longitudinal seams in the finished
structure shall be in two rows, 1-3/4 inches apart, in the
valley and in the crest of the corrugations. Bolt holes along
those edges of the plates that will form circumferential seaml
in the finished structure shall provide for a Solt spacing ™
not more than 12 inches. The minimum distance from cent"? of
hole to edge of the plate shall not be less than 1-3/4 times
the diameter of the bolt. The diameter of the bolt holes in the
46
-------
longitudinal seams shall not exceed the diameter of the bolt by
more than 1/8 inch, with the following exception: for purposes
of ease in assembling plates, the two corner holes plus the two
adjacent holes along the longitudinal seam shall be increased
not to exceed the bolt diameter by more than 1/4 inch.
Plates for forming skewed or beveled ends shall be cut so
as to give the angle or skew or slope specified. Plates shall
be saw cut, not burned, and present a workmanlike finish.
Legible identification symbols shall be placed on each part
plate to designate its proper position in the finished structure.
Corrugations — Corrugations shall have a pitch of not less
than 8-5/8 inches or greater than 9-3/8 inches and a depth of
not less than 2-3/8 inches or greater than 2-5/8 inches. Each
corrugation shall have a minimum curved radius of 2 inches.
Plate Joining — Field joints shall be made with 3/4 inch
diameter aluminum or steel bolts as specified. Bolts shall be
American Standard Course Thread, Class 2, Free Fit with hexa-
gonal heads and nuts. Bolt heads and nuts shall be shaped to
provide improved bearing.
All bolts shall be torqued to a minimum of 100 foot pounds.
The maximum torque to be applied to aluminum bolts shall be
150 foot pounds and to steel bolts 250 foot pounds.
MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS - GRAVEL CRADLE
Gravel cradle, conforming to the details indicated on the
plans, shall be constructed prior to the placement of all sewers,
except when omission is ordered by the Engineer. Materials for
gravel cradle shall be dredged or bank run sand or gravel or
crushed stone and well graded within the limits stated below.
The type of gravel cradle to be used in specific locations will
be designated by the Engineer. Where the natural foundation
soil, on which the pipe is to be bedded, consists of granular
material suitable in its natural state for shaping and embedding
a sewer, no gravel cradle will be required. For reasonably
good, non-granular foundation conditions, Type A gravel cradle
will be designated. Where, in the opinion of the Engineer, the
foundation conditions are not suitable for the use of Type A
gravel cradle, then Type B gravel cradle may be used, the actual
selection to be made by the Engineer.
47
-------
03
EH
H
S
h3 03
h3
O H
H &
EH H
H EH
O S
5r* s/''
O U
U 0
[-t
r3 O3
0 S
H P
S *3
Wl 1
r— I
ffi g
U D
[1
rt^
rHfa
1 0
tu
H
CQ
EH
rH
fd
-M
ae
§•6
,3
•H
EH
fi
1X1
k
U
?
*
U
•H -H 3
O C_)
CJi J-|
^H M C O
'O CO CO
-P (D -P "U -M (D
(U J-l CD fd Q) rH
d) O (U rH > tJi
^ u ,c u .H e
W 03 K <
JIMI
S S S
^J 1 1
fd "3* ro ro
rH O m {£>
O 0 00
•H ro kD vo
_.
U3 -H
S j9
•H
Ln c
^t* ^~i
*~
•K -»«
«*
g-Sf
G CM -5
H •
t
•H
^J fX
CT1
0) 4J B
iS|
HH • H
3 o g
^(AO
•H CM
^0
O
CO §
CX-R
J3
^ fu
!>
c4
0)
i
03
OJ
CO S
S'a
^ ^
•
c
H
CO
CO
,2
o
j!
EH
•^ m
* *
o o
o o
o o
k. v
CM CM
O O
o o
0 0
r** i"*
ro ro
0 O
0 0
0 0
rH rH
ro ro
ro cri
rH ^*
rH CM
0 O
ss
p— i 1 ^J*
LO rH
0 rH
0 CD
T5
i| i
o
m
rrt
UJ
^r]
^
>i
C
O ^"i
if
E CU
H CO
cu fd
(L) U
«k
vU Mi
s °
-P
[1 (Tj
tr> h
S c
iJ8
CO
CU
rrt (— '
35
S-S
•K
48
-------
Pi
CM
>(
O
53
CM
O g
D
W S
EH H
ffi g
O D
H i-q
W <
H
2 ^
O <
H O
m CD
2 C<
w c<
g o
H U
Q
ro
I ^
ffi
Q
W W
J EH
ea w
< >
EH H
en
-H
en
JS
o
H
en
|
H
en
H
d) ooooooooommin
O oooooooooooo
£
H
rn IT) CN rH
r$ VO CO O
(T> CO 00
O m - -
CM
cy\ m o co r"~ CN r"-
m CN VD
Q roro^r^T'^inin
CM
9 en
5 en
o o m r-
ro oo ro rH
O CO CTl rH CN
CM
in m m in ^ *^* ^i1
ro ro ro n ^D vo *>o
rH rH rH rH rH rH rH
ooooooppcorororo
en
J8
OOOOOOOOOrHrHrH
O O O O O
O O O O O
rorororororororororororo
CNCNCNCN CNCNCNCN CN
rHrHrHrH rHrHrHrH rH
I I I I <^ fig JL) i o CO
rHrHrHrHrHrHCNCNCNCNCNrO
en
en
.g
1-1
&
O -H _
G M-l -H
en
•P MH Q
q O T3
49
-------
>H
d
U
H
| "1
H
ffi CM"
ft
CM H
O ft
EH O
W r-3
O t-q
H w
X EH
W <
§ O
H D
Q tf
rt
0
• U
1
ffi
H
>-q
CQ
H
tn
C rH CO
•H CO rd CO
-P T3 d CU
d PQ U O
fj |^X^ .pJ
8 fi
H .d
rd CO
o -H d
P -H
-p 5 fa
w d
£_| r^ rT-|
rd O
2 "ri ^
III
t i QJ ^\
ft 4^ CU
-P -H -H
^ O CO
rjS IH p
•H rH
cu cu u
£ ax
T3 "H ^
CU CO
-P T3 CO
P CU 0)
CM H
CO
CO
CU
•H *
£ -t-1
EH MH CU
O CD
rd c/3
|
rH CU
rd -P
G Q
§ -H
2 Q
CO
1
d
)—i
rH O
' ft
•S -P
LT d
ro 3
rH O
• ft
J-l
•H CO
UT "S
°s
•H CO
r-» p
c> g
°s
J-l
•H CO
T3
cc| d
o o
co
CU
•s
d
H
CO
g
H
oooooooooLOLOLnLnm
vn^ou3vDvo^ov£>kDV£>r^r^r-r^o
OOOOOOOOOOOOOrH
CO O rH CN in CN
^* ^2 ^Q CN 00 'sf
00 CN IT) (T\ CN VO
rH CN CN CN CO CO
rH CN CN
CO CO O^ *& O ^f IT)
cr» en oo oo co CN CN
ro "^ in
o CN
O CN
CN
LO ^
n vo
OOOOOOrHrHrHrHrH
-
OOOOOOOOOOrHrHrH
rH CO
•H -P
m
O
CO
4J
^
>1
cji gr1 • m TJ
•H (D rH rH «4H CD
0) JH rd rd rH 4^
£ . CO JS rd B
£
D.
. d -H O
d -H -P -H CU
O . rd -P £
rd 4J
&> T3 O
•H "
CO
«
•HO) " CJi p d
CO CO CO -H &>-H
"rH
S td
i—i O d O
•SJitt88-B
50
-------
TABLE H-5. SHEET THICKNESS
Nominal Thickness in Inches
Equivalent U.S. Gauge Number
.060
.075
.105
.135
.164
16
14
12
10
8
TABLE H-6. PERMISSIBLE VARIATIONS FROM ORDERED
WEIGHT FOR ALL OF ONE NOMINAL THICKNESS
AND SIZE
Alum Sheet
(nominal
thickness)
Weight of
Aluminum
Sheets**
Permissible Variations From
Special Weight, * Percentage
Over or Under
Inches
Lb.Sq.Ft.
20 Tons & Over
Under 20 Tons
to 3 Tons Inc.
Under 3 Tons
.164
.135
.105
.075
.060
2.47
2.02
1.57
1.11
0.88
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
5
5
5
5
5
7.5
7.5
7.5
7.5
7.5
* The tonnage ordered for shipment to one place at one time determines
the permissible variation for that tonnage, though any partial shipment
may have the greater permissible variation of its tonnage classification.
** Weights shown are for flat sheets. Nominal weights for flattened
sheets may be reduced 7 percent.
51
-------
TABLE H-7. CHEMICAL COMPOSITION LIMITS OF ALUMINUM
STRUCTURAL PLATE MATERIALS
Chemical
Content
Si
Fe
Cu
Mn
Mg
Cr
Zn
Ti
Each
Others
Total
Plate
Alloy
5052-H141
(0.45 Si + Fe)
.10
.10
2.2 - 2.8
.15 - .35
.10
.05
.15
Bolts & Nuts
Alloy
6061-T6
.40 - .8
.7
.15 - .40
.15
.8 - 1.2
.15 - .35
95
. 15
.05
.15
* All steel bolts when specified on drawings shall be either ASTM
designation A-325 or A-307 and shall be hot, double-dipped
galvanized.
** Minimum mechanical properites of all materials shall be shown
on Table H-8.
***
Units in percent maximum unless shown as range
TABLE H-8. PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF MATERIALS
Aluminum
5052-H141
6061-T6
Thickness
Range (Inches)
0.090 - 0.175
0.175 thru .250
Win. Tensile Strength
(Psi)
35,500
34,000
42,000
Min. Elongation
in % Per 2 in.
6
10
* Aluminized steel bolts or other equally effective methods of
connecting plates may be used if approved by the Engineer.
52
-------
TABLE H-9. NOMINAL THICKNESSES, THICKNESS TOLERANCES
AND THEORETICAL WEIGHT FOR FLAT SHEET
ALUMINUM ALLOY 5052-H141
Nan. Thickness Theoretical Wt. Permissible Variation
Inches Of Flat Sheet #/Sq. Ft. in Inches
0.100
0.125
0.150
0.175
0.200
0.225
0.250
1.39
1.74
2.09
2.44
2.79
3.13
3.48
.014
.014
.024
.030
.030
.032
.036
TABLE H-10. MECHANICAL PROPERTIES
OF ALLOY 6063-T6
Yield Strength Elongation in
Thickness,* Area Tensile Strength 0.2% Offset 2" or 4 x Dia,
Inches Sq. In. Min., psi Min., psi Min.%**
Up thru 0.124 All 30,000 25,000 8
0.125 to 1.000 All 30,000 25,000 10
* The thickness of cross-section from which the tension test specimen is
taken determines the applicable mechanical properties. For material
1-1/2 in. or less in thickness when not tested in full section, the
tension test specimen is taken from the center of the section. Specimens
are taken parallel to the direction of extrusion.
** For material of such dimensions that a standard test specimen cannot
be taken, or for material thinner than 0.062 in., the test for elongation
is not required.
53
-------
SIEVE SIZE FOR TYPE A GRAVEL CRADLE
SIEVE SI^E % PASSING
1Y 100%
1 90 - 100%
L/2" 60 - 100%
#4 40-80%
#8 25-60%
#16 20 - 45%
*200 Max. 15%
SIEVE SIZE FOR TYPE B GRAVEL CRADLE
SIEVE SIZE % PASSING
J-^" 100%
]-" 60 - 95%
V2" 10 - 30%
#4 0 - 5%
PH ofonrf fe Sha11 haVG a minimum PH of 4.0 and a maximum
PH of 9.0 and a minimum resistivity of 1000 ohm-cm or greater.
9ravel cradle shall be placed so that at least the lower
a *>* uniformly supported for its entire
u"nder ^ ^ Sha11 be taken tO COmPact the material
width at %h T %°5 KthG- Pipe* Where a trench is required! the
width at the top ot the pipe shall be sufficient to permit
thorough tamping of the foundation and backfill material
If the foundation has been made deeper than necessary th^
foundation shall be brought to the proper grade by ^additional
material specified for gravel cradle. additional
MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS - SELECTED GRANULAR BACKFILL
ing to^his ^^f136 °rde£ed b^ the Engineer, material conform-
b. g,,«L ? i P 6f lflcatlon for selected granular backfill shall
be used in locations indicated on the plan details where the
aluminum storm sewer is constructed under permanent type pave-
ment, driveways or sidewalks. Selected granular backfill shall
be compacted by jetting before the permanent type surface is
reconstructed, unless such compaction is waived by the Engineer
Material for selected granular backfill shall consist of dredged
br ^aded within^
54
-------
SIEVE SIZE j PASSING
iy 100%
1" 90 - 100%
1/21" 60 - 100%
#4 40 - 80%
#8 25 - 60%
#16 20 - 45%
#20 Max. 15%
Material used shall have a minimum pH of 4.0 and a maximum
pH of 9.0 and a minimum resistivity of 1000 ohm-cm or greater.
The contractor shall notify the Engineer of the source of
material he proposes to use for selected granular backfill and
arrange for samples to be taken prior to the time such material
is ordered to the site. Material graded to sizes other than
those specified may be substituted for that specified, providing
the gradation and samples are first submitted and approved for
the intended purpose by the Engineer.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF CONSTRUCTION WORK
The aluminum pipe was delivered from the central storage
area as needed to the job site. The first section of aluminum
storm sewer to be constructed was on Second Street from Wright
Street eastward. This section involved 21" and 30" helically
corrugated aluminum pipe. The aluminum storm sewer pipe was
installed throughout the entire project as follows.
The existing pavement was saw-cut in order to remove the
necessary width of pavement along the route of the proposed
trench. After the pavement was removed, the trench was
excavated to a depth of 3 inches lower than the proposed flow
line grade of the aluminum storm sewer. A 3 inch thick gravel
cradle was constructed prior to placing of the aluminum pipe.
The aluminum pipe was then lowered into the trench by two men
utilizing either ropes or simply passing the 20-foot lengths of
pipe to workmen in the trench. The aluminum pipe was then
placed to proper line and grade and select granular backfill
was placed and compacted to an elevation of one foot above the
top of the aluminum pipe. Samples from various stockpiled
gravel cradle and select granular backfill material were
analyzed prior to being approved for use. These samples were
analyzed for pH and minimum resistivity in order to determine
in advance whether or not this material would be compatible with
the aluminum pipe from the standpoint of corrosive effects.
Samples from four different sources were analyzed. These
samples were determined to have a pH range of 7.2 to 8.9 and a
minimum resistivity of 7,142 ohm-cm to 58,333 ohm-cm. The
material selected was a sand material derived from dredging
55
-------
"»'• '--
N.tiv, baokfin „, pl,,,ed above lh
0
action problem between two dissimilar metall? However it was
-
The steel tunnel liner was constructed to
F
tne stee
the
<*
vast ma3ority of aluminum pipe installed was placed tn 2 0-foo^
signlflcant exception of the aluminum pipe being much easier to
56
-------
handle and lower into the trench and because of the 20-foot
length of the pipe, a significantly lesser number of joints were
required which allowed for a greater production rate in areas
where existing underground utilities were not the controlling
factor in the length of trench which could be opened to
accommodate the pipe. The structural plate arch was bolted to
aluminum angles embedded in a concrete base in a^ordance with
the typical trench detail shown in Figure H-4. Select granular
backfill was utilized around the entire perimeter of the
structural plate arch material to an elevation of at least 1
foot above the top of the plate arch material. Similar_pre-
cautions taken for circular pipe were taken during the install-
ation of the aluminum plate arch in order to avoid an ^adver-
tent electrical connection between two dissimilar metals. All
sections of aluminum corrugated pipe and aluminum structural
plate arch pipe which were constructed in direct contact with
concrete were coated with a bitumastic material prior to being
exposed directly to the concrete., This was done as an
"insurance" measure since there has been no previous indication
of any detrimental action between concrete and aluminum. The
general construction procedures such as excavation, utilization
of gravel cradle, and select granular backfill are similar to
those specified for projects utilizing other materials such as
corrugated steel pipe, and reinforced concrete pipe However,
it was recognized that a greater degree of care would be re-
quired during the placing and backfilling operations of metal
pipe versus concrete pipe because of the lesser resistance to
"egg shelling" possessed by the thinner walled metal pipe as
opposed to the thicker walled reinforced concrete pipe.
A complete 35 mm slide pictorial record was kept of all
construction phases of the project and the highlights of that
record is presented in Figures H-5 through H-26.
Construction of Aluminum Outfall Sewer on Steep Slope
It was necessary to provide an outfall storm sewer from
First Street to Canal Street - a length of approximat^ 20°
feet and an elevation difference of approximately 36 feet. The
66-inch diameter standard corrugation aluminum pipe was utilized
in conjunction with specially fabricated bends to effect the
necessary vertical and horizontal alignment to connect the upper
elevation sewer to the lower elevation outfall. The coupling
bands for this section of pipe were bolted together and also
bolted directly to the entire perimeter of the ends of the pipe
being connected. Also the lower bend was completely encased in
concrete to prevent any horizontal or vertical movement caused
by hydraulic forces in the steep-slope pipe or the weight of
the pipe and backfill above the lower bend.
57
-------
Construction of Sgeciaj^Railroad Crossings
s " '<
s .
Quincy Railroaded therefor^ the concrete^?' Burlin9ton< and
in the open trench and backfilled C°"crete sleeve was placed
utilized in order ' to carrvWi; ? concrete sleeve was
trains. Permission coulno ^0^^^ 1O3dS P^ced by
Chicago, Rock islinri a^ D « obtained to open cut the
" lr
necesry t tunn i uner th. \r°a and U was' therefore,
Plate was selected t^be ut??!zeS"n tAi-^61 Kibbed llner
tole^^ L-Lct^on-fL11^ ° ^ involveTLS^lt^ ltS
72-inch alli^mtLdard Corrugation °?eration Progressed. The
concrete pipe liner and the steel tunned? • lnserted through the
bitumastic material and the Invert oTlL ^^ C°3ted with
with bituminous concrete lnvert of the steel tunnel was paved
Construction of
urtgnant_Structure3
'"
ncreetrcture withthe . -n-pac
stration manholes cons trurt^ TP 1°" °f the aluminum demon-
purpose of monitoring oveftheainSvleCted locations f°* the
evaluation period ?t w^ ^ f 10~year P°st construction
'6
of the acncretemhl
Place reinforced concrete structures wnnfrfh 3n cast-in-
due to the relatively hiah ro^ ^ * u be m°re Poetical
structures to be
"*** ^comllshed by
coupling band or a heat
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
58
-------
available detailed cost records for any other project utilizing
material other than aluminum pipe which could be used for com-
parison purposes. It may be concluded that the most significant
cost advantages resulting from the utilization of aluminum pipe
are the first cost of the material itself and the obvious cost
advantage of being able to install the aluminum pipe material in
relatively long lengths utilizing minimum effort resulting in
minimum cost to lower the pipe into the trench rather than the
necessity of having a separate piece of machinery to lift and
lower heavier pipe into the trench.
Observation of construction procedures and comparison with
projects utilizing other storm sewer material indicate that the
degree of advantage to the use of aluminum pipe from the stand-
point of the material weight is somewhat proportional to the
length of trench which can be excavated on a per day basis.
Obviously in congested urban areas the amount of lineal footage
of trench which can be excavated is not always controlled by the
amount of pipe which can be placed but rather by the limitation
imposed by existing underground utilities and traffic conditions.
Some difficulty was encountered by workmen in placing and
coupling bands on the helically corrugated pipe. However, these
difficulties primarily involved use of insufficient length of
bolts and difficulty aligning the coupling band to properly
mesh with the helical corrugations on the pipe. An apparent
disadvantage to the use of aluminum pipe is the comparative
weakness of the pipe unit itself which is more easily_damaged
during construction procedures from general contact with the
pipe by construction equipment, vandalism and caving trenches.
It was observed that in certain areas the 20-foot long sections
were a disadvantage because it was impossible to maintain a
section of open trench of sufficient length to install the
20-foot long section due to poor soil conditions. However, this
was the exception rather than the rule and occurred at locations
where the excavation was deep and the soil was very unstable.
All surfaces of the aluminum pipe which were constructed in
contact with concrete manholes, inlets and other concrete
appurtenances were coated with bitumastic material in order to
eliminate any possible reaction between the concrete and
aluminum.
Favorable comment was made by workmen relative to the ease
of installing the longer length sections of aluminum pipe
utilizing only two workmen with ropes to lower the pipes into
the trench. Utilization of lengths shorter than the standard
20 foot length was accomplished by simply using a gasoline
engine powered metal cutting blade hand saw to cut the pipe to
the desired length. The sawing operation required only a mini-
mal time and did not delay construction progress. This proved
to be an advantage over other materials such as concrete or
vitrified clay because of the difficulty and time required to
cut those materials. Another obvious advantage to the use of
59
-------
shrinkage coupling bandTwhich allowed as muchfs aSo^T
60
-------
FIGURE H-l
!..-=:!'. MAP INDICATING
LOCATION OF DEMON-
STRATION ALUMINUM
STORM SEWER
LEGEND
LIMIT OF DRAINAGE
AREA
^__STORM SEWER LINES
*~~ CONSTRUCTED
61
-------
SEED OR SOD COMPLETE
6" APPROVED
TO? SOIL
BACKFILL WITH APPROVED
EXCAVATED MATERIAL
SELECTED
GRANULAR
BACKFILL
(See Material Specifica-
tions for Selected
Granular Backfill Page
ALUIINIJM STORM
SEWER
GRAVEL CRADLE
(See Material Specifica-
tions for Gravel Cradle
Page 47)
FIGURE H-2. TYPICAL TRENCH DETAIL -
STANDARD 1X6 CORRUGATION OR 1/2 X 2 2/3
HELICAL CORRUGATION ALUMINUM PIPE
CONSTRUCTION
Non-Hardsurfaced Areas
62
-------
^-P.C.C. SIDEWALK OR DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT
AGGREGATE .,
BASE COURSE
SELECTED
GRANULAR .
BACKFILL
(See Material Specifica-
tions for Selected
Granular Backfill -
Page 54)
ALUMINUM STORM
SEWER
GRAVEL CRADLE
(See Material Specifica-
tions for Gravel Cradle
Page 47)
FIGURE H-3. TYPICAL TRENCH DETAIL -
STANDARD 1X6 CORRUGATION OR 1/2 X 2 2/3
HELICAL CORRUGATION ALUMINUM PIPE
CONSTRUCTION
Hard-Surfaced Areas
63
-------
S3
O
H
EH
U
D
o
u
EH
U
D
«
EH
CO
Q
ffi
U
U
H
I
ffi
D
O
H
CM
64
-------
FIGURE H-5. "NESTED" PIPE DELIVERED ON RAILROAD CARS
65
-------
FIGURE H-6. DELIVERED PIPE
BEING UNLOADED AND STORED
66
-------
FIGURE H-7. NAME AND NUMBER
STAMPINGS ON DELIVERED PIPE
67
-------
FIGURE H-8. PLACING ALUMINUM
PIPE IN EXCAVATED TRENCH
68
-------
FIGURE H-9. PARALLEL ALUMINUM STORM
SEWER PLACED IN SHALLOW EXCAVATION
69
-------
FIGURE H-10. PLACING ALUMINUM COUPLING
BAND ON 42 INCH DIAMETER STANDARD
CORRUGATION PIPE
70
-------
FIGURE H-ll. STRUCTURAL PLATE ARCH SECTIONS
AND TAPPING SADDLES AT
CENTRAL STORAGE AREA
71
-------
FIGURE H-12. ASSEMBLING STRUCTURAL PLATE ARCH
72
-------
\
FIGURE H-13. DETAILS OF PLATE ARCH CONSTRUCTION
Upper Photo-Sealing of Corrugations with Bitumastic
Material Between Aluminum Angle and
Structural Plate Arch
Lower Photo-Connection of Structural Plate Arch to
Reinforced Concrete Manhole Structure
73
-------
FIGURE H-14. INTERIOR VIEW-TRANSITION
FROM STRUCTURAL PLATE ARCH SECTION TO
CIRCULAR SECTION AT SPECIAL REINFORCED
CONCRETE STRUCTURE
74
-------
FIGURE H-15. CONNECTED DEMONSTRATION ALUMINUM
STORM SEWER UNDER CRI & P
AND CB & Q RAILROADS
75
-------
FIGURE H-16. PARTIALLY COMPLETED DEMONSTRATION
ALUMINUM STORM SEWER UNDER CRI & P
AND CB & Q RAILROADS
76
-------
FIGURE H-17. 72" ALUMINUM SEWER CONSTRUCTED
THROUGH REINFORCED CONCRETE "SLEEVE"
UNDER CB & Q RAILROAD
77
-------
^ 18> BITUMASTIC SEAL OF VOID BETWEEN
ASPHALT COATED 72" ALUMINUM SEWER AND
RIBBED STEEL-TUNNEL UNDER CRI & P RAILROAD
78
-------
FIGURE H-19. DYSTANT VIEW OF ASSEMBLED 66"
DIAMETER STOP.M SEWER ON STEEP SLOPE
79
-------
FIGURE H 20, 66" DIAMETER STORM
SEWER ON STEEP SLOPE
Upper Photo-As se-mb led Section Looking From Top
(North) to Bottom (South)
Lower Photo-Base Elbow Prior to Placing Concrete
"Collar" to Resist Horizontal &
Vert iccil Forces
80
-------
FIGURE H-21. CONSTRUCTING ALUMINUM "BIN" RETAINING
WALL OVER BASE OF 66" DIAMETER
STORM SEWER ON STEEP SLOPE
81
-------
FIGURE H-22. SEQUENCE OF CONNECTION UTILIZING
ALUMINUM TAPPING SADDLE AND JOINT UTILIZING
HEAT SHRINKABLE COUPLING BAND
82
-------
FIGURE H-23. SEQUENCE OF CONNECTION UTILIZING
ALUMINUM TAPPING SADDLE AND JOINT UTILIZING
HEAT SHRINKABLE COUPLING BAND
83
-------
FIGURE H-24. SEQUENCE OF CONNECTION UTILIZINC
ALUMINUM TAPPING SADDLE AND JOINT UTILIZING
HEAT SHRINKABLE COUPLING BAND
84
-------
FIGURE H-25. SEQUENCE OF CONNECTION UTILIZING
ALUMINUM TAPPING SADDLE AND JOINT UTILIZING
HEAT SHRINKABLE COUPLING -RAND
-------
FIGURE H-26. CONSTRUCTION OF REINFORCED
CONCRETE MANHOLE STRUCTURES
-------
FIGURE H-27. CUTTING 18" HELICAL
CORRUGATION PIPE WITH POWER SAW
87
-------
FIGURE H-28 CUTTING STANDARD CORRUGATION
72" PIPE WITH POWER SAW
-------
SECTION I
POST-CONSTRUCTION EVALUATION
BACKGROUND
After completion of the LaSalle aluminum storm drain system
-
Va s^s?1 :si
representative^ ?rom Illinois State Highway Department and City
of LaSalle.
After each of the annual inspections, reports were prepared
iointly by Kaiser Center for Technology and Chamlin & Associates,
inc. describing visual inspection and laboratory evaluation of
samples removed.
The following summarizes significant points included in
these reports.
SUMMARY
After three years of service the aluminum storm drain
system (alloys clad 3004 and 5052) is in excellent condition.
The extent of corrosion found has an insignificant affect on
the structural integrity of the arch and pipe structures.
All clad 3004 alloy sampled throughout the storm drain
orron,
from wa?e; side (interior of pipe) is virtually non-existent.
Corrosion from soil side has subsided since first inspection.
Other areas of specific interest are as follows:
Mechanical - Buckling Inclined, Portion of 66 Inch .
1x6 Below 1st and Wright Streets
The initial inspection revealed several buckled areas in a
sharply inclined portion of 66 inch 1 x 6 pipe. This occurred
during construction and concern was expressed regarding its
continuing movement when subjected to subsequent external loads
89
-------
and extreme water velocities. Close visual inspection as well
no movement f ^rative Ph°tos indicate that^here has been
no movement in the section after t~hp> •Fi-ra-j- •
(See Figure 1-2 for comparative photos^ **** * lnSPection-
Corrosion - Dissimilar Materials
SPf-i™= f ^e.se°ond lnsPection corrosion was observed in
?nnn ? ?• ^Ch 1 x 6 pipe that Passed through a steel
tunnel liner under CRI & P railroad tracks. Although the two
aa^n^6 th°Ught t0 bS ^^lated from one anothe? to prevent
galvanic corrosion, it was surmised that the two structures
anf iq7sC°ntaCt;- P°tential readings were taken during ^1974
Isolated Pit Blisters in 5052 Alloy
n t^o) insPfction revealed an unusual phenomenon
T" *h«i arSaS ° the 5°52 alloy structural plate arch.
In these areas, numerous pinhole perforations were exuding a
gelatinous corrosion product. This was noted and ear marled for
careful observation during the second inspection. As expected
very few changes occurred during the following year Much ol '
the "weeping" seen during the first (1973) inspection seemed to
***0**** that Perhap£ ' an
ga
3 area, counting and circling the corrosion blisters?
The third annual inspection conducted in August of 1975
VirtUallv°alirofdthhe0rT ?Ut f°rth dUring the 19^ inspectioA.
virtually all of the gelatinous corrosion product had dried UD
indicating cessation of corrosion activity. No new blisters
"Ved and '
Rust Colored Scale Deposit^
^™^nit?:?1_i?Spe(:tion reP°rted extensive presence of a
along
— "
(Fe203) with calcining. There was no evidence of corrosion
underneath these scale deposits. The 1974 inspection
. nspecon epo
substantially less presence of this material and except for
inspection Catl°nS ^ had Virtua11^ disappeared by the 19?5
90
-------
EVALUATION OF ALUMINUM PIPE COMPARED TO OTHER MATERIALS
The post construction evaluation based upon a comparison
of corrugated aluminum pipe (CAP) , corrugated steel pipe (CSP) ,
and reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) with regard to material cost
and operational expenses was made utilizing available published
information regarding list prices of the various materials as
follows:
Items Included in Total Cost of Storm Sewer Pipe
(1) Material cost at producing location.
(2) Freight to job site.
(3) Labor and equipment (if necessary ) to unload
at trench site.
(4) Labor and equipment to dig trench.
(5) Labor and equipment (if necessary) to install
pipe in trench.
(6) Backfill and/or bedding material.
(7) Labor and equipment to place backfill and/or
bedding material.
Assumptions required to compare installed costs of various
storm sewer materials.
(1) Material suppli .ormally discount from list
price, particu' if the design engineer
specifies alter v materials. Assume all
materials listed . a Table 1-1 are quoted at
35% discount, FOB plant.
(2) Assume corrugated steel pipe is furnished in 20'
lengths and all bands cost same as 1^ Lin.Ft.
of pipe. Therefore, band cost adds 7^% to pipe
cost. Assume corrugated aluminum pipe is
furnished in 40' lengths and all bands cost same
as 1% feet of pipe. Therefore, band cost adds
3-3/4% to pipe cost. Assume concrete pipe fur-
nished in 8' lengths. No bands required.
(3) Freight to job site depends on distance and
quantity of pipe that can be carried as determined
by legal weight and size. Assume all producing
locations are 100 miles from job site and cost
per loaded mile is $1.50 per mile or $150 per
91
-------
(4)
(6)
o trucklo*d is considered 8'
x 8' high x 40' long. Legal pay load
is considered 42,000 pounds.
Although bare aluminum pipe is normally nested
for shipment if a variety of sizes are required
'
cos nf°3e S savin^'will be ignored on
cost of freight computed in Table 1-2 Con-
versely this results in savings in cost to
unload truck of aluminum pipe at job site if
and this is considered
(5) Assume pipes up to 400 pounds each can be "man-
handled into trench without equipment. Pipe
with weight per piece 400# to 4,000# can be
o c nn^ Wlth light duty equipment @ cost of
^15.00/hour, and pipe weighing 4,000# to 20,000#
of%^ nn/H1Sd Wlth heaVY duty equiPment @ cost
of $25.00/hour. These rates do not include
manpower (See Table 1-4) .
Assume items (5), (6), and (7) of items included
tL «™ costs of storm sewer pipe (above) remain
the same for all materials. This assumption is
valid for the following reasons:
a. Because of more favorable hydraulic "friction"
factors in concrete pipe, the resulting
diameter of concrete pipe is normally less
than the diameter of corrugated metal pipe
for a given hydraulic carrying capacity.
b. The difference in diameter indicated above
is essentially offset by the fact that
concrete pipe has a greater wall thickness.
Due to the additional wall thickness of concrete
the trench must be slightly deeper to maintain '
the same flow line. Although concrete does not
require as much care in backfilling as corrugated
^o ^ !-1P^ Xt ?°eS recfuire more care in bedding
so that _ short lengths and heavy weight do not
result in "joint tipping" thus reducing hydraulic
capacity. Longer pipe length and the lighter
weight result in more effective "bridging" of
soft spots in the bedding. Also lighter pipe
that can be placed in the trench faster allows
for less open trench time reducing the danger
of trench wall collapse prior to backfill which
results in savings in both excavating and back-
rilling .
92
-------
(7) Cost of items (5), (6), and (7) are not included
in Cost Summary Table 5 since these are considered
equal for various pipe materials. Also it varies
considerably from site to site depending on trench
depth, stability of trench walls, etc.
FIELD INSPECTION AND LABORATORY EVALUATIONS
Inspection procedures have been standardized to enable com-
parisons to be made from one year to the next.
Each year metal samples consisting of 2V diameter coupon
and soil are removed in the proximity of those taken during the
previous inspection as well as selecting new locations. The
holes are covered with mastic sealer and aluminum patch and _
fastened with stainless steel screws. Locations are identified
with different color for each year - blue - 1975, red - 1974,
and orange - 1973.
Pipe to soil and pipe to water potentials are measured
with a Cu/Cu S04 reference electrode (Miller Potential Meter 1A).
Soil samples are removed and placed in a quart size plastic
container. Figure I-L identifies samples taken during each
inspection.
Laboratory evaluation consisted of the following procedure:
Determining soil pH and minimum resistivity using
State of California Division of Highways Method 643 B.
Chemical analyses of representative soil and water
samples.
All metal samples photographed both sides before and
after cleaning. They are then sectioned at deepest
appearing attack and mounted for metallographic
cross section. Figure 1-5 shows 5 x photo
micrographs of samples taken in most recent
inspection.
EXPECTED SERVICE LIFE
The expected service life of a storm drain system, regard-
less of material used is naturally a key consideration and of
vital concern among engineers involved in design of drainage
systems. The aluminum industry last addressed this question in
a jointly sponsored paper which was presented to the then
Highway Research Board in 1969. At this point in time an
additional 7 years of data from field inspections are available
to draw upon which results in a total of 17 years in place
service at many sites.
93
-------
Size
Ga.
18"
24"
30"
36"
48"
60"
72"
84
16
14
14
12
12
10
10
8
$ 6.85
10.70
13.00
21.75
29.90
51.05
63.90
90.35
— i .1— —
$ 7.80
12.02
14.69
23.80
32.77
54.87
68.48
96.17
15"
21"
27"
33"
46"
54"
66"
78"
$ 4.95
6.80
10.50
15.90
24.10
39.15
54.60
84.65
* Cost in dollars per lineal foot.
NOTES: 1. List price not available for asbestos cement pi
producers of that product " • •
2. Price shown for concrete pipe is next smaller
commercially available size than corrugated pipe
due to hydraulic considerations. ^Ugatecl plpe
3. Corrugated steel pipe price includes asphalt coating
(a)
(b)
(c)
CAP prices obtained from published list prices
by Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Sales (Illinois
Indiana, Kentucky, and Michigan prices) effective
CSP prices obtained from published list prices
by Reeling Corrugating Company of Louisville
Kentucky and Clark County Metal Product^of
Marshall, Illinois (identical prices) effective
Sfjf i?S obtained fron published list prices
by the Cincinnati Concrete Pipe Company of
Cincinnati, Ohio effective 10-75.
94
-------
Size
18
24
30
36
48
60
72
84
Corrugated
TABLE 1-2. FREIGHT
Pipe
Ft. per Load Fgt. Cost/Ft.
1120
640
360
160
160
80
40
40
$ .13
.23
.42
.94
.94
1.88
3.75
3.75
Size
15
21
27
33
42
54
66
78
COST
Concrete
Ft. per Load
272
176
128
88
56
32
24
16
Pipe
Fgt. Cost/Ft.
$ .55
.85
1.17
1.71
2.69
4.70
6.26
9.38
In all cases total quantity of pipe available per load is determined
by cube for metal pipe and by weight for concrete pipe.
TABLE 1-3. UNLOADING COST
CAP
Size
18
24
30
36
48
60
72
84
Ft/Ld
1120
640
360
160
160
80
40
40
Cost/Ft.
$.02
.03
.06
.13
.13
.25
.50
.50
CSP
Size
18
24
30
36
48
60
72
84
Ft/Ld
1120
640
360
160
160
80
40
40
Cost/Ft.
$ .04
.07
.13
.28
.28
.56
1.13
1.13
RCP
Size
15
21
27
33
42
54
66
78
Ft/Ld
272
176
128
88
56
32
24
16
Cost/Ft.
$ .20
.31
.43
.63
.98
1.72
2.29
3.43
NOTES: 1. For corrugated aluminum pipe, assume 2 men @ $10.00/hour rate
will unload txuck in 1 hour per average load without equipment.
2. For corrugated steel pipe assume 3 men @ $10.00/hour rate plus
light duty crane @ $15.00/hour will unload truck in 1 hour per
average load.
3. For reinforce*} concrete pipe assume 3 men @ $10.00/hour rate
plus heavy duty crane @ $25.00/hour will unload truck in 1 hour
per average load.
95
-------
CAP
Size
18
24
30
36
48
60
72
84
Wgt/Pc
(40 ' long)
187
308
384
639
848
1393
1666
2310
Cost/Ft
$.17
.17
.17
.69
.69
.69
.69
.69
CSP
Size
18
24
30
36
48
60
72
84
Wgt/Pc
(20' long)
380
480
720
860
1500
2280
3260
3800
Cost/Ft
$1.38
1.38
1.38
1.38
1.38
3.25
3.25
3.25
RCP
Size
15
21
27
33
42
54
66
78
Wgt/Pc
(81 long)
1224
1864
2640
3680
5880
9040
12912
16800
Cost/Ft
$3.44
3.44
3.44
3.44
8.13
8.13
8.13
8.13
NOTES: 1.
2.
For pieces weighing up to 400# assume 2 men @ rate of $10 007
hour can install each piece in 20 minutes without equipment
3.
4.
Wetghing 400# to 4'000# ass^e 4 men @ rate of
1 man hooks up lift - 1 operates crane and
in \ <***: can insta11 each Piece in 30 minutes
light duty equipment @ cost of $15.00/hour.
For pieces weighing over 4,000# assume 4 men at rate of $10. OO/
hour 1 man hooks up lift - 1 operates crane and 2 men work
in ditch, can install each piece in 60 minutes with heavy
duty equipment @ cost of $25.00/hour.
Above costs include labor and equipment to install pipe in
trench only. ^
96
-------
TABLE 1-5. MATERIAL
Item
Material (List- 3 5%)
Connecting Bands
Freight
Unloading
Installation
Material (List- 35%)
Connecting Bands
Freight
Unloading
Installation
Material (List- 35%)
Connecting Bands
Freight
Unloading
Installation
Material (List- 35%)
Connecting Bands
Freight
Unloading
Instal lation
Material (List- 35%)
Connecting Bands
Freight
Unloading
Installation
continued
CAP r£"
S ize Cos t/F l . S i » . C< >s t/Ft .
18 $ 4.45 L8 $ 5.07
. 17 . 38
.13 .13
. 02 . 04
.17 1.38
$ 4.94 $ 7.00
24 $ 6.95 24 $ 7.83
.26 -59
.23 .23
.03 .07
.17 1.38
$ 7.64 $10.10
30 $ 8.45 i 30 $ 9.55
.32 i .72
.42 .42
.06 .13
.17 1-38
$ 9.42 $12.20
36 $14.14 36 :-:. 15.47
.53 1.16
.94 .94
.1.3 -28
.69 1.38
$16.43 $19.23
48 $19.44 48 c !L.30
.73 1.60
.94 .94
.13 .28
.69 1.38
$21.93 $25.50
RCP
Size Cost/Ft.
15 $ 3.22
.55
.20
3.44
$ 7.41
21 $ 4.42
.85
.31
3.44
$ 9.02
27 $ 6.83
1.17
.43
3.44
$11.87
33 $10.34
1.71
.63
3.49
$16.17
42 $15.67
2.69
.98
8.13
$27.47
97
-------
TABLE 1-5 (continued)
Item
Material (List- 35%)
Connecting Bands
Freight
Unloading
Installation
Material (List- 35%)
Connecting Bands
Freight
Unloading
Installation
Material (List- 35%)
Connecting Bands
Freight
Unloading
Installation
Grand Total
Ave. Higher Cost
than CAP
CAP
Size Cost/Ft.
60 $33.18
1.24
1.88
.25
.69
$37.24
72 $41.54
1.5(5
3.75
.50
.69
$48.04
84 $58.73
2.20
3.75
.50
.69
?65.87
$211.51
CSP
Size Cost/Ft.
60 $35.66
2.67
1.88
.56
3.25
$44.02
72 $44.51
3.34
3.75
1.13
3.25
$55.98
84 $62.51
4.69
3.75
1.13
3.25
$75.33
$249.36
18%
RCP
Size Cost/Ft.
54 $24.45
4.70
1.72
8.13
$39.00
66 $35.49
6.26
2.29
8.13
$52.17
78 $55.08
9.38
3.43
8.13
$76.02
$239.13
13%
Notes:
1. For pieces weighing up to 400# assume 2 men @ rate of
hour can install each piece in 20 minutes without
2.
OO/
. nn/K Wetghlng 400# to 4'000# assume 4 men @ rate of
>.00/hour, 1 man hooks up lift - 1 operates crane and
2 men work in ditch, can install each piece in 30 minutes
with light duty equipment @ cost of $15.00/hour.
3. For pieces weighing over 4,000# assume 4 men at rate of $10 OO/
hour, 1 nan hooks up lift - 1 operates crane a^d 2 Ln work
in ditch, can install each piece in 60
duty equipnent (a cost of $25.00/hour.
to
n
98
-------
fc
tw
u
y i _ii' /'
H
O
2
H
H
W
w
X
w
2
H
S
Q
O
EH
W
§
2
H
s
D
I
H
10
(0
Q)
-P
•H
CO
O
•H
-P
U
0)
CU
CO
c
•H
m
r-
cr>
rH
O
-H
4J
•* U
M r-
•H O\
•H **
^»=
I
*.
-P m
•H r^
ro
ro
TJ
C!
C
CN
•H rH
TJ II
ro
•H
-P M
03 (d
O 0)
•H >i
m
•H -P
-P -H
C tn
QJ -H
-P c;
CO O
M u
•H Q)
W -P
O
H
C!
O
•H
4J
«TJ
O
O
-------
FIGURE 1-2. COMPARATIVE PHOTOS OF STEEPLY DECLINED
PORTION OF STANDAFT) !' X 6" CORRUGATION 66" DIAMETER ON
WRIGHT STREET LOOKING UP TOWARDS FIRST STREET
F.HOM CANAL STREET
Upper Photo-Taken During 1973 Inspection Tour
Lower Photo Taken During 1975 Inspection Tour
.1 00
-------
FIGURE 1-3. TESTING 72" DIAMETER ALUMINUM
PIPE THROUGH STEEL TUNNEL LINER
Photo of Rusted Steel Tunnel Liner Exposed to
Moist Air Behind the Aluminum Pipe - Viewed
Through Coupon Taken From 72" Standard 1X6
Corrugated Aluminum Pipe Under CRI & P Railroad
101
-------
FIGURE 1-4. CORROSIVE ATTACK ON STRUCTURAL PLATE ARCH
Upper Photo-Taken During 1974 Annual Inspection Tour.
Pit Blistering Corrosion and Pinhole
Perforations in 5052 Structural Plate Arch
(0.125 Inch)
Lower Photo-Comparative Photo Taken During 1975
Inspection Tour, Same Location as Upper
Photo
102
-------
Sample Pipe
No. Size
1,
10.
11.
72" diam.
1x6
72" diam.
1x6
72" diam.
1x6
42" diam.
1x6
60" diam.
1x6
60" diam.
1x6
60" diam.
1x6
42" diam.
1x6
Location
125' S. of
Canal St., in
tunnel liner
(invert)
185' S. of
Canal St.
17' N. of
Canal St.
7.5' from elbow
of the west
side culvert,
3rd & Bucklin
St.
24' E. 6th &
Bucklin St.
40' S. 6th &
Bucklin St.
86' S. 6th &
Bucklin St.
65' S. 4th &
Bucklin St.
5x (etched HF/H2S04)
FIGURE 1-5.
LASALLE, ILLINOIS ALCLAD 3004 STORM DRAIN
PIPE - 3RD INSPECTION - 1975
PHOTO MICROGRAPHS
(Soil Side Up arid Water Side Down in These Photos.)
The deepest appearing attack on the metal coupons was sectioned
and mounted for a metallographic cross section. The corrosion
is generally limited to the thin cladding layer.
103
-------
SAMPLED IN 1973
(2 years' service)
SAMPLED IN 1974
(3 years' service)
SAMPLED IN 1975
(4 years' service)
Soil side of the pipe showing
corrosion of the thin cladding
has subsided after the initial
attack. All three samples
were removed from adjacent
areas.
METAL TEST COUPONS
FIGURE 1-6. ALCLAD 3004 60" DIAMETER - 1 X 6 PIPE
6th St. Between Buckliri and Wright, LaSalle, Illinois (Cleaned)
104
-------
FIGURE 1-7. TYPICAL LASALLE WASTE WATER ANALYSES
STORM DRAIN WATER ANALYSIS
BY KAISER ALUMINUM CENTER FOR TECHNOLOGY
Sample Taken and Analyzed as Part of Third Annual Inspection
ELEMENT Quantity (ppm)
Chloride 220
Sulfate (S04) 550
Nitrate (N03) 16.3
Phosphate 1.7
Ca 360
Mg 75
Na 107
Fe <0.0^
Pb < 0.1
Cu <0.06
Ni <0.1
Total Solids 1,426
Total dissolved 1,397
Solids
Suspended Solids 0.3
pH 7.5
Conductivity 1,786 /ttmho (560Ocm resistivity)
105
-------
FIGURE 1-8. TYPICAL SOIL ANALYSIS
QUANTITY (ppm)
ELEMENT
Chloride
Sulfate (S04)
Nitrate (N03)
Phosphate
Suspended Solids
Ca
Mg
Na
PH
Conductivity
#11 (NATIVE SOIL)
500
150
100
15
1.0
280*
44*
175*
8.3
l/OOO^ho (1,000 Dem)
#8 (SANDY FLUID
136
1,175
1.8
0.5
10.7
400*
92*
92*
7.6
435jomho (2,300
FILL)
Dem)
* determined by the atomic absorption method
In addition, a semi-quantitative spectrographic analysis of
elements in the native soil was conducted (Location #11). The
results are as follows:
(in % by weight)
AlSiFe_CuMn.Mg;Ti V PbNaCaK
3.5 15. 3.8 0.01 0.10 2.0 0.23 0.01 0.001 0.42 5.0 1.0
Note: Numbers 11 and 8, Nature Soil and Sandy Fluid Fill as indicated above
refer to samples extracted during 1975 inspection. See Figure 1-1
for location.
106
-------
The 1969 paper titled "Corrosion Evaluation of Aluminum
Culvert Based on Field Performance" approached the question from
two viewpoints with respect to service life, namely: (1) years
to perforation and (2) metal loss to safety factor of one.
Based on observation and analysis of nearly 1,000 sites over a
broad spectrum of environments the predicted service lives based
on the above conditions were 74 arid 128 years respectively.
In view of the extensive data obtained from this project
during the annual inspections since 1973 supported by numerous
other investigations during the past seven years, a fresh
approach to aluminum service life is in order. Of greatest
single importance is a thorough appreciation of the difference
in the corrosion mechanism between aluminum and steel. Prior to
1970, there appeared to be moderate support that the estimated
years to perforation parameter represented the limit of aluminum
pipe usefulness. Therefore, although not in total agreement with
this approach, aluminum industry authors utilized this parameter
in their 1969 paper. However, the aluminum industry now takes
the position that any further reference to the "years to perfor-
ation" approach clearly exhibits complete ignorance and misun-
derstanding of the aluminum corrosion mechanism. This position
can be supported by facts at hand,.
After the galvanizing coating on steel culvert has been
expended, the base metal undergoes a general progressive thinning
process. When the first perforation is reached, the percent of
remaining metal is quite small. Therefore, when evaluating
steel pipe, occurrence of the first perforation is a good indi-
cation that the pipe is no longer adequate to support the
surrounding soil medium. Conversely, although evidence of per-
foration of aluminum has been extremely limited, in each instance
where such perforation has occurred in aluminum pipe, the pattern
is typical random pin hole perforations. However, metal
immediately adjacent to area under attack is completely intact.
It is, thus, important to understand that total metal loss in
these isolated incidences is extremely small. An excellent
example of this may be found in the storm sewer system con-
structed as part of this project. During the first year after
installation it was obvious from inspections that an aggressive
element had leached through the pervious backfill material and
attacked the exterior of the pipe in several isolated locations.
During the second annual inspection (1974) an area of plate
18" x 36" which was thought to contain the most corrosion per
unit area, was outlined and the perforations were circled and
counted (see Figure 1-4). The numbers and size of perforations
have not increased during the past two years. However, it is
interesting to use this example for calculation of metal loss
and service life prediction. If we conservatively assume that
corrosion will continue at the same rate, analysis is as follows:
107
-------
Area outlined in August 1974 (Fig. 1-4) -
18" x 36" = 648 in2
Perforations counted - 60
Assume average diameter of perforation - 1/8"
The total area of perforation in four years of service
60 ( 7i) (.125)2 = .74 in.2
_,~-
Total metal loss = .11% or .03% per year assuming straight line
corrosion attack, metal loss in 100 years will be 3%.
If we choose to use a far more conservative size of .25
inch perforation diameter - the analysis is as follows:
Total area of perforation in 4 years = 60 n (.25)2 = 2.95 in.2
4
Total metal loss = .46% or .114% per year. Again, assuming a
straight corrosion attack, metal loss in 100 years will be 11%.
The figure is still not enough to cause any great concern
with regard to the structural integrity of the pipe.
The validity of this approach may be further substantiated
by results of numerous metal coupon burials in Canadian, British
and U.S. soils. These are reported by H.I. Godard's in his book
titled "The Corrosion of Light Metals". The significance of
Godard's figures is that while several alloys exhibited deep
pitting in aggressive soils, the total metal loss in each
instance was extremely small. Examples are as follows:
108
-------
w
PM
H
Hi
W
U
H
PS
W
CO
O PM
EH H
CM
PM
H S
K D
co jz;
!Z H
0 S
H D
EH nl
< <
Hi
W P
PS W
EH
CO <
CO O
O D
PS
EH O
ffi U
O
H
H
£
1
H
H
m
EH
co q
CO -H
35
£ °
•Sfo
•i
CO
•H
ij «9
•H
o, c
k/* f-«
r"S r^-1
55 -P
S1
rH
•H
O
UH
o
a
EH
CO M
H 3
fd co
^ Q
* H
CO
W
4J 0)
rC U
...
o
s
o\o o\° o\° o\° cft° o\° o\° o\° o\° o\° o\° o\° o\° o\° o\°
rH rH ^ PO CM
voroooro^oocMrocMCM ro rH
•s -s
m S 4-1
's S -P 4J q q
rH U rH rH |— ! CT1 ;
fd fd rd O fd
'rtrH tHT3fdfdfd-P ^^K,^
•H C! -H C -H CO -d (U
rd O fe O fd ^i £>i M— i K*I K^I "y co c p~i
i-H 'O 3 rC3 iH T3 'U M-l ^i rt3 rt3 0 2. f-U H^
ucii — i ^ u q q-Hfd q G'TJ r^TJ ^
r>^S^r'5fY'rnrnrnr)cnto^f2cnK
P-lHI'^HlPHUJUJJW <(
cococococococococococococococo
(UO)S(UCU(DCUCL)(D(1)(1JCU(U(U(1)
pHpHpHpHpH^H^HpHpHpH^^^lK^r^1
rH rH rH rH
rHrHrHrHrHrHrHOOOOOOOO
oooooorororororororororo
ooooooooooooooo
(Hl_i1HrH(_lrHOOOooooo •-_.;.
U
}H
&
Q.I
-
CO OJ
CO -4-i
o fd
r—X
"S §
-H
rn ,--,
3 -H
O
0 CO
p
tJ1 O
. ,J ^
O -H
•H -H*
Td Q-i
"r~' _
TH R
> c
'd
(D
W CO
CO tJi
O tr>
.
109
-------
SECTION J
REFERENCES
1. American Society of Civil Engineers and WPCF, Design and
Construction of Sanitary and Storm Sewers, WPCF Manual
J.N <->. iu, iy/u.
2. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway
Pin^*"™' *"?!? °f.^°Cal R°ads' CorrugatedYMetal
stalation
3. State of New York Department of Transportation, Durability
of Corrugated Metal Culverts, Physical Research Series,
Research Report 66-5 (1967) . oej.j.fc>b,
-•* and Lawrence,
Evaluation of Aluminum Culvert Based on
FP!H se on
Field Performance, (Highway Research Record 262) Highway
Research Board, Washington, D.C. (1969). "J-ynwdy
5. Koepf Almont H., The Mechanisms of Abrasion of Aluminum
PredL^rT^^1^ FieM E^riences, and a MethodTo
9^9 S ^Ulvert Performance, Highway Research Record
2b2, Highway Research Board, Washington, D.C. (1969).
6. Highway Research Board of the National Academy of Sciences-
National Research Council, Field and Laboratory Testing of
Aluminum, Highway Research Record No. 95, Publication ill?
7. Corps of Engineers, U.S. Army Portland District,
corrugated
110
-------
10. Silberman, Edward, Dahlin, Warren Q., Friction Factors for
Helical Corrugated Aluminum Pipe, University of Minnesota
St. Anthony Falls Hydraulic Laboratory, Project Report No
112 (Dec., 1969).
11. Berg, Vernon E., P.E., Culvert Performance Evaluation,
Materials Division Washington State Highway Commission
Department of Highways, Research Project No. HPR-1-2
(April, 1965).
12. Raychem Corporation, Thermofit Heat-Shrinkable Couplers
(Technical Bulletin-Heat Shrinkable Coupling Devices for
Corrugated Aluminum Pipe) (April, 1969).
13. Environmental Protection Agency Water Quality Office,
Heat Shrinkable Tubing as Sewer Pipe Joints, Water
Pollution Control Research Series 11024 FLY, U.S.
Government Printing Office (June, 1971).
Ill
-------
SECTION K
APPENDIX A
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
ST. ANTHONY FALLS HYDRAULIC LABORATORY
Project Report No. 121
FURTHER STUDIES OF FRICTION FACTORS FOR
CORRUGATED ALUMINUM PIPES FLOWING FULL
by
Edward Silberman
and
Warren Q. Dahlin
Prepared for
Department of Public Works
CITY OF LA SALLE, ILLINOIS
and
CHAM LIN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
Peru, Illinois
112
-------
Measuring a 300 cfs flow in the Volumetric Tanks
Inside View of the 66 in. Annular Bolted Pipe
113
-------
CONTENTS
Page
FRONTISPIECE -
To£ - Measuring a 300 cfs now in the Volumetric Tanks
Bottom - Inside View of the 66 in. Annular Bolted Pipe
List of Tables ^
List of Illustrations
•••••••••.........,,. ±16
List of Symbols ,
I. PIPE CHARACTERISTICS 120
II. TEST PREPARATIONS AND PROCEDURES ln
III. FRICTION FACTORS 125
IV. DISCUSSION OF FRICTION FACTOR RESULTS 123
V. CONCLUSIONS
132
List of References -, 0/
134
Tables I thru VIII
Figures 1 thru 31 145
Appendix A - POSITION OF HYDRAULIC GRADE LINE AT THE
PIPE OUTLET 171
Table A-l 1?2
Figures A-l thru A-8 174
Appendix B - VELOCITY PROFILES 182
Tables B-l thru B-3 184
Figures B-l thru B-6 137
114
-------
LIST OP TABLES
Page
Table I. SUMMARY OP FRICTION MEASUREMENTS FOR 66-INCH ANNULAR
RIVETED PIPE WITH 6-INCH BY 1-INCH CORRUGATIONS 135
Table II. SUMMARY OP FRICTION MEASUREMENTS FOR 66-INCH ANNULAR
BOLTED PIPE WITH 9-INCH BY 2-1/2-INCH CORRUGATIONS 136
Table III. SUMMARY OP FRICTION MEASUREMENTS FOR U8-INCH ANNULAR
RIVETED PIPE WITB 6-INCH BY 1-INCH CORRUGATIONS 137
Table IV. SUMMARY OP FBICTION MEASUREMENTS FOR U8-INCH HELICAL
PIPE WITH 2-INCH BY 1/2-INCH CORRUGATIONS 138
Table V. SUMMARY OP FACTION MEASUREMENTS FOR U8-INCH HELICAL
PIPE WITH 2-2/3-INCH BY 1/2-INCH CORRUGATIONS 139
Table VI. SUMMARY OP FACTION MEASUREMENTS FOR 2l|-INCH HELICAL
PIPE WITH 2-2/3-INCH BY 1/2-INCH CORRUGATIONS 140
Table VII. SUMMARY OP FACTION MEASUREMENTS FOR 12-INCH HELICAL
PIPE WITH 2-2/3-INCH BY 1/2-INCH CORRUGATIONS 141
Table VIII. FRICTION FACTORS AT HIGH REYNOLDS NUMBERS AND
OTHER DATJ 143
Table A-l. POSITION OP HYDRAULIC GRADE LINE AT THE PIPE OUTLET 172
Table B^l. VELOCITY PROFILE DATA FOR 2k IN. PIPE - 2-2/3 in. by
1/2 in. Corrugations • 184
Table B-2. VELOCITY PROFILE DATA FOR 12 IN. PIPE - RUN 1 - 2-2/3 in.
by 1/2 in. Corrugations 185
Table B-3. VELOCITY PROFILE DATA FOR 12 IN. PIPE - RUN 2 - 2-2/3 in.
by 1/2 in. Corrugations 186
115
-------
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
FRONTISPIECE - Page
Top (Ser. No. 200-5!?) Measuring a 300 cfs now in the Volumetric Tanks
Bottom (Ser. No. 200-62) Inside View of the 66 in. Annular Bolted Pipe
Fig. 1 Pipe Details 145
Fig. 2 (Ser. No. 200-1) Unloading the U8 in. Pipe 146
Fig. 3 (Ser. No. 200-59) Assembly of the 66 in. Bolted Pipe 146
Fig. k (Ser. No. 200-11*) A Typical Leak in a Riveted Joint of the
U8 in. Annular Pipe (Dye colors the leaking water) ......... 147
Fig. 5 (Ser. No. 200-66) Joint Detail inside the 66 in.
Bolted Pipe 147
Fig. 6 Test Arrangement in Main Test Channel for U8 in. and
66 in. Pipe 148
Fig. 7 Test Arrangement for 2k in. and 12 in. Pipe 149
Fig. 8 (Ser. No. 200-U7) The 66 in. Annular Riveted Pipe
Installed in the Main Channel with 2k in. Helical Pipe
along the Side ., 150
Fig. 9 (Ser. No. 2CO-72) Flow at the Exit of the 66 in. Bolted
Pipe (2UO cfs) 150
Fig. 10 (Ser. No. 200-78) Flow at the Exit of the 2k in. Helical
Pipe (38 cfs)j 66 in. Bolted Pipe Installed in Main
Channel along Side 151
Fig. 11 (Ser. No. 200-26) Piezometer Tap Arrangement (U8 in.
Helical Pipe) 151
Fig. 12 (Ser. No. 200-5) The Inlet for the U8 in. Pipes 152
Fig. 13 (Ser. No. 200-37) The Inlet for the 66 in. Pipes 152
Fig. 11* 'Typical Hydraulic Grade Lines for 66 in. Annular Riveted
Pipe with 6 in. by 1 in. Corrugations 153
Fig. 15 Typical Hydraulic Grade Lines for 66 in. Annular Bolted
Pipe with 9 in. by 2-1/2 in. Corrugations 154
Fig. 16 Typical Hydraulic Grade Lines for U8 in. Annular Riveted
Pipe with 6 in. by 1 in. Corrugations 155
Fig. 17 Typical Hydraulic Grade Lines for 1±8 in. Helical Lock Seam
Pipe with 2 in. by 1/2 in. Corrugations 156
116
-------
Fig. 18 Typical Hydraulic Grade Lines for 1*8 in. Helical Lock Seam
Pipe with 2-2/3 in. by 1/2 in. Corrugations 157
Fig. 19 Typical Hydraulic Grade Lines for 2k in. Helical Lock Seam
Pipe with 2-2/3 in. by 1/2 in. Corrugations
Fig. 20 laical Hydraulic Grade Lines for 12 in. Helical Lock Seam
Pipe with 2-2/3 in. by 1/2 in. Corrugations 159
Fig. 21 Variation of Darcy Friction Factor f with Reynolds
Number - 66 Inch Corrugated Pipe 16C
Fig. 22 Variation of Darcy Friction Factor f with Reynolds
Number - i|8 Inch Corrugated Pipe 161
Fig. 23 Variation of Darcy Friction Factor f with Reynolds
Number - 12 Inch and 2k Inch Corrugated Pipe 162
Fig. 2k Variation of Manning n with Reynolds Number - 66 Inch
Corrugated Pipe „ 163
Fig. 25 Variation of Manning n with Reynolds Number - L8 Inch
Corrugated Pipe % f 164
Fig. 26 Variation of Manning n with Reynolds Number - 12 Inch
and 2k Inch Corrugated Pipe 16 c
Fig. 2? Variation of Darcy Friction Factor f with Wall Reynolds
Number - Annular Corrugated Pipe 166
Fig. 28 Darcy Friction Factor f as a Function of Pipe Diameter
at High Reynolds Numbers 167
Fig. 29 Manning Roughness Coefficient n as a Function of Pipe
Diameter at High Reynolds Numbers 16g
Fig. 30 Friction Factor as a Function of Helix Angle at High
Reynolds Numbers 16
Fig. 31 Friction Factor as a Function of Relative Roughness for
Helical Pipes at High Reynolds Numbers 170
Fig. A-l Typical Hydraulic Grade Lines without Tailwater for 66 in
Annular Riveted Pipe with 6 in. by 1 in. Corrugations ..'.. 174
Fig. A-2 Typical Hydraulic Grade Lines without Tailwater for 66 in
Annular Bolted Pipe with 9 in. by 2-1/2 in. Corrugations . 175
Fig. A-3 Typical Hydraulic Grade Lines without Tailwater for 1*8 In
Annular Riveted Pipe with 6 in. by 1 in. Corrugations .... 176
117
-------
Page
Fig. A-U Typical Hydraulic Grade Lines without Tailwater for U8 in.
Helical Lock Seam Pipe with 2 in. by 1/2 in.
Corrugations 177
Fig. A-5 Typical Hydraulic Grade Lines without Tailwater for 1$ in.
Helical Lock Seam Pipe with 2-2/3 in. by 1/2 in.
Corrugations 178
Fig. A-6 Typical Hydraulic Grade Lines without Downstream Valve for
2k in. Helical Lock Seam Pipe with 2-2/3 in. by 1/2 in.
Corrugations 179
Fig. A-7 Typical ^draulic Grade Lines without Downstream Valve for
12 in. Helical Lock Seam Pipe with 2-2/3 in. by 1/2 in.
Corrugations 180
Fig. A-8 Position of Hydraulic Grade Line at the Pipe Outlet 181
Fig. B-l Velocity Distribution in 2k In. Helical Lock Seam Pipe with
2-2/3 in. by 1/2 in. Corrugations 187
Fig. B-2 Velocity Distribution in 12 In. Helical Lock Seam Pipe with
2-2/3 in. by 1/2 in. Corrugations 188
Fig. B-3 Velocity Vectors, Top Halves of Pipes for 2k in. and 12 in.
Helical Lock Seam Pipe with 2-2/3 in. by 1/2 in.
Corrugations 189
Fig. ~B-k Flow Direction at 1*8 in. Pipe Outlets
a. (Ser. No. 200-18) Annular Pipe, 6 in. by 1 in.
Corrugations 199
b. (Ser. No. 200-32) Helical Pipe, 2-2/3 in. by 1/2 in.
Corrugations 190
Fig. B-5 Velocity Profiles in Defect-Law Form 191
Fig. B-6 Velocity Profiles in Law-of-the-Wall Form 192
118
-------
LIST OF STMBOLS
p
A = area, ft
d = corrugation depth, ft
D = inside diameter of test pipe, ft
f = Darcy friction factor
g = acceleration due to gravity, ft/sec2
h = head loss in pipe, ft
L = length of pipe, ft
n = Manning roughness coefficient
p = corrugation pitch, in.
P = perimeter, ft
Q = discharge, cfs
Rk = hydraulic radius = A/P, ft
R = radius, ft
Re = Reynolds number = VD/v
Rew = Wall Reynolds number = Re -^ v£
S = slope of hydraulic grade line = h/L
t = pipe wall thickness, in.
9
U = local velocity component parallel to axis of pipe = V Cos a, fps
Umax = maximum iocal velocity component parallel to axis of pipe, fps
V = magnitude of local velocity, fps
V = average axial velocity = Q/A, fps
V^ = shear velocity == VTQ/P = V^/fTB", fps
Y = vertical distance from pipe invert to hydraulic grade line at
exit, ft
y = vertical distance from wall of pipe, ft
a = angle between velocity vector and axis of pipe, deg
9 = helix angle of corrugation measured from axial direction, deg
£ = kinematic eddy viscosity, ft2/sec
o
v = kinematic viscosity, ft /sec
p = density, Ib sec2/ft^
r\
T = shear stress, Ib/ft
119
-------
STUDIES OF FRICTION FACTORS FOft
CORRUGATED ALUMINUM PIPES FLOWING FULL
I. PIPE CHARACTERISTICS
The St. Anthony Falls Hydraulic Laboratory was engaged by Chamlin and
Associates, Inc., of Peru, Illinois, to determine the friction factors for
fully developed flow in several sizes of annular and helical corrugated pipes
flowing full and to make qualitative observations of the pipe joint charac-
teristics. The pipes, which ranged in diameter from 12 to 66 inches, are
being considered for use in a demonstration storm sewer project located in
La Salle, Illinois, which is being supported in part by the Office of Water
Quality of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The pipe characteristics
are given in Fig. 1.
Pipe for the tests was provided by two suppliers, Kaiser Aluminum and
Chemical Sales, Inc., and the Reynolds Metals Company. Except for the 66 in.
bolted pipe, the pipes were shipped to the laboratory in mostly 1+0 ft (a few
20 ft) lengths (Fig. 2) to provide a test pipe about 220 ft in length for the
66 in. and 1^8 in. sizes and about 100 ft in length for the 2k in. and 12 in.
sizes. The 66 in. bolted pipe was shipped in k*5 ft wide semi-circular pieces
and assembled into a 220 ft length in the Laboratory's main test channel (Fig.
3)« The pipes were inspected upon receipt to insure against leakage and to
get accurate measurements for use in reducing test results. The seams of
the factory-assembled pipes had been sealed with sealing compound during
fabrication according to standard factory methods.
In some of the helical pipes, considerable sealant had been forced in-
side the pipe and would have affected the friction factor measurements. The
U8 in. and 2k in. helical pipes were thoroughly scraped on the inside by
Laboratory personnel. Since it was impossible for a man to enter the 12 in.
pipe to scrape it, the first shipment of that size could not be used. It
was replaced by a second shipment in which greater care had been taken during
manufacture to prevent the sealant from getting inside the pipe.
The helical pipe seams did not leak during the experiments, but some
leakage occurred from the annular riveted pipes and considerable leakage
occurred from the bolted pipe. Leakage from the 1*8 in. annular riveted pipes,
120
-------
illustrated in Fig. i|, was easily stopped by application of silicons cement
from outside the pipe. There was more leakage from the 66 in. annular
riveted pipe, especially where the transverse and longitudinal seams met,
but this was also sealed with eilicone cement.
The greatest seam leakage problems occurred with the bolted pipe. The
assembly materials included strips of 3M joint sealant tape which were applied
over every row of bolt holes, both longitudinally and transversely. Notwith-
standing this tape, leakage was severe until it was finally reduced to
manageable proportions by inserting a black permagum sealer with a putty
knife into all joints from the inside of the pipe. The sealed joints can
be seen in the lower photograph of the frontispiece and in Pig. 5. Figure 5
also shows, incidentally, the roughness of the interior of the bolted pipe.
It should be understood that this pipe, like all the pipes under test, was
unsupported on the outside; with compacted earth fill around the pipe, the
leakage would have been much less.
The inside pipe diameter is an important parameter in determining the
friction factor, and it was measured carefully. Personnel entered all pipes
2k inches in diameter or larger and measured the actual inside diameters
with two sliding bars equipped with verniers (frontispiece). The inside
diameter of each pipe was measured every 2 ft (every 1-1/2 ft for the bolted
pipe) through the test section in both vertical and horizontal directions.
Corrugation depths were measured with a depth gage about every k ft, four
readings being made at each section. For the 12 in. pipe, the outside diam-
eter and corrugation depths were measured and the inside diameter computed.
The average measured values of inside diameter, standard deviation, and cor-
rugation depth are reported in Fig. 1 over the length of pipe used for deter-
mining hydraulic grade lines. The helix angle was also measured and is given
in Fig. 1; it agreed closely with factory specifications.
II. TEST PREPARATIONS AND PROCEDURES
The pipes were installed in the laboratory flow system in two separate
experimental set-ups as indicated in Figs. 6 and 7 and shown in the photographs
of Figs. 8 through 10. Figure 6 shows the test arrangement for the 66 in. and
i|8 in. pipes in the 9-ft-wide-by-6-ft-deep-by-225-ft-long main test channel.
Water from the Mississippi River enters the facility through a traveling
121
-------
mechanical screen, drops vertically down a dropshaft about 20 ft to the level
of the main channel, and passes through a flow control baffle and under a
sluice gate into the main channel. A head gate at the upstream end controls
the inflow and a tailgate at the downstream end controls the tailwater level.
The flow passes over the tailgate and out to the Laboratory's twin volumetric
tanks (frontispiece). These tanks have a flow rate capacity up to 300 cfs
and are calibrated to produce measurements which have an accuracy of 0.5 per
cent.
Figure 7 shows the test arrangement for the 2k in. and 12 in. helical
.£.
pipes, which is similar to the set-up used in earlier tests on helical pipe [l] .
Water for this facility is taken from the Mississippi River via a laboratory
supply channel and drops about 18 ft through a 2k in. pipe. Water passes
through a shut-off valve and three right-angled guide vane bends and enters
the test pipe. A plate with a 12 in. hole was centered over the outlet of
the 2k in. supply pipe to provide an entrance for the 12 in. pipe. At the
downstream end a butterfly control valve of 2k in. or 12 in. size, as appro-
priate, was installed to control the discharge. The test pipe discharges into
a channel from which the flow can be diverted to the laboratory volumetric
tanks mentioned earlier or to the laboratory weighing tanks, which have a
flow rate capacity up to 15 cfs with an accuracy of measurements of 0.1 per
cent.
To measure the hydraulic grade lines, the downstream sections of all
pipes were provided with 11 pairs of interconnected flush-mounted wall taps
(Figs. 6, 7, and 11) spaced about 10 ft apart for the 66 in. and i|8 in. pipes
and 5 ft apart for the 2k in. and 12 in. pipes. This provided test section
lengths of 100 ft and 50 ft, respectively, with the downstream tap 7.5 ft from
the end of the pipe. These dimensions varied slightly depending on the type
of pipe. The entry length was thus over 110 ft for the larger pipes and 1+0 ft
for the smaller pipes. Hydraulic grade line measurements indicated that these
were adequate to produce fully developed flow.
The flush-mounted wall taps were carefully located at the crests of the
corrugations (as seen from inside) with a dial indicator. A 1/8 in. hole was
drilled through the pipe wall and a rod was inserted in the hole. A mold was
centered around the rod and plastic filler material was cast in the mold, and
after it had set the rod was withdrawn. Pipe connectors were threaded into
*
Numbers in brackets refer to references listed on page 134.
122
-------
the holes to provide a means of connecting the piezometer lines to the pipe
as shown in Fig. 11. The 11 piezometers were connected to a central manom-
eter board. In the earlier study [l] a second piezometric system consisting
of static tubes inserted 2-1/1* inches into the 2k in. pipe was used. The
pressure drop recorded in the interior of the pipe by these tubes was nearly
the same as the pressure drop measured by the wall taps. It was concluded in
the earlier study that since the flow was fully developed, the wall taps would
give reliable results; therefore, only the wall taps were used in the current
study.
Since the main channel entrance is rectangular in cross-sectional shape,
special transitions had to be made for the pipes. For the i$ in. pipes a bulk-
head was installed under the sluice gate with an opening U8 inches high. A 20
ft section of U8 in. annular corrugated pipe was cemented into the bulkhead as
shown in Fig. 12 and served as the inlet for all 1$ in. pipes. For the 66 in.
pipes, the end of a 20 ft section of 66 in. annular riveted pipe was compressed
to U8 in., forced into the bulkhead, and cemented in place (Fig. 13). This pro-
vided a gradual transition from an elliptical inlet to the circular 66 in. pipe.
During the laying of the pipe, care was taken at the joints so that no
unnecessary roughness would be introduced. The corrugations and crimps were
carefully aligned and the joint taped with a fiber tape to prevent the intrusion
of joint-sealing material. The joints were sealed using a heat-shrinkable coupler
consisting of a thermoplastic sealant or asphalt-like material on a polyolefin
sheet backing, applied with heat. While the coupler was still warm, a metal
collar was placed over it to insure against leakage.
Without the metal collars, the heat-shrinkable couplings tended to start
leaking during the tests. The 15 to 20 ft of head on the pipe, the cold water
flowing through the pipe, vibrations, and the pipe's not being buried in the
ground as it would be in a field installation to give it support probably con-
tributed to this leakage problem at the joints. When a metal collar with cor-
rugations to match the pipe corrugations was installed over the heat-shrinkable
coupling, practically no leakage occurred. Non-corrugated collars were used on
some pipe joints and were not as effective in preventing leakage.
In the main channel installations, the pipes were laid directly on the
channel floor at an approximate slope of 0.00133 ft/ft. No attempts were made to
adjust the slope of the large pipes, as the variation in pipe diameter was far
123
-------
greater than the irregularities in the channel floor. The pipe was aligned
and horizontal braces to the channel sides were placed every 20 ft; in ad-
dition, several cables were placed over the pipe and anchored to the floor,
A watertight bulkhead was installed near the downstream ends of the pipes.
Before tests were run, the joints, taps, and alignment were checked inside
the pipe. The 2k in. and 12 Jn. pipes were laid on wooden sleepers placed
about every 5 ft with horizontal side braces placed about every 10 ft. These
smaller pipes were set to a grade of 0.002 ft/ft with the pipe filled with
water. Levels were recorded for all pipes, both filled with water and empty,
and the measurements showed that the pipes flattened out slightly when filled
(on the order of 1/61* in. for the 12 in. pipe and 1-1A in. for the 66 in.
riveted pipe).
Provisions were also made for installation of a 3/8-inch-diameter
pitot cylinder in the 2k in. and 12 in. pipes (Fig. ?) to measure velocity
direction and magnitude [2]. Glands similar to those used for pressure taps
were cast on the top and bottom of the pipe through which the pitot cylinder
was inserted to measure the total head along a vertical diameter. In the
same section, on the side of the pipe, a special gland was cast for the in-
sertion of a static tube to measure the static pressure for use with the
total head readings from the pitot cylinder.
A test run involved establishing a given discharge through the test
pipe, measuring the discharge and water temperature, and reading the wall
tap pressures on the manometer board. The discharge was regulated for the
smaller pipes by the downstream valve; in the main channel the flow was
regulated using the tailgate and a head loss baffle in the channel entrance
structure. All discharges from the main channel and those above 15 cfs for
the smaller pipes were measured in the volumetric tanks; flows up to 15 cfs
were measured in the weighing tanks. The usual procedure was to make two
discharge measurements durmg the reading of the manometer board. As some
manometer tubes fluctuated considerably for some runs, each tube was observed
for a period of time and a visual average was determined. It took from 30
to U5 minutes to make a run in the smaller pipes and about twice as long" in
the larger pipes. A number of runs were made for each pipe to establish the
friction-factor-versus-Reynolds-number curve. Most runs for the 12 and 2k in.
pipes were made with the downstream valve in place. For the larger pipes, the
tailwater was raised to the top of the pipe for most tests. To obtain maximum
124
-------
discharge, however, several runs for each pipe were made with the downstream
valve removed or with no tailwater. These latter results were also used to
determine the tailwater depth at exit. In addition, velocity profiles were
measured for one discharge in the 2k in. pipe and one in the 12 in. pipe.
The remainder of the body of this paper is devoted to a report on the
friction factor measurements. The measurements of tailwater depth at exit
are discussed in Appendix A and the velocity measurements in Appendix B.
III. FRICTION FACTORS
The Darcy friction factor f, the Manning roughness coefficient n, and
the Reynolds number Re were computed from the test data for each run. The
Darcy friction factor f was determined from
with S = h/L where h is the head loss over the length of pipe L, both in
feet, and g is the acceleration of gravity in ft /sec2. The Manning roughness
coefficient n was determined from
or
where 1^ is the hydraulic radius of the cross section, area divided by the
wetted perimeter, both based on measured inside diameter. The Reynolds number
Re was computed from
*> = ? (3)
In all the equations the mean velocity V was computed from V = Q/A, where
Q is the measured discharge and A is the area based on the average measured
inside diameter D. Kinematic viscosity v was obtained from standard tables
using the measured water temperature.
Typical hydraulic grade lines observed on the manometer board for the
seven pipes tested are plotted in Figs. Ik through 20. For convenience, the
hydraulic grade lines for each pipe are shown together on one plot and to the
125
-------
same vertical scale. Individual plots were made for determining the slope
S from the hydraulic grade lines, and for lower discharges the vertical
scale was expanded to obtain more accuracy in the results.
Most of the grade lines plotted as straight lines, indicating that
the flow was fully developed through the test section, although deviations
occurred for some pipes. Particularly noticeable are the variations for
the 1*8 in. helical pipe with 2 in. by 1/2 in. corrugations (Fig. 17) from
stations 120 through 170 (taps 1 through 7). Investigation showed an al-
most perfect correlation between these pressure variations and variations
in the measured inside diameter of the pipe. The last 1*0 ft of the pipe
had a fairly uniform inside diameter, the average being 1*8.1*7 in. with a
standard deviation of 0.20/42 in. based on measurements every 2 ft; this is
the length for which the data are shown in Fig. 1 and on which the slope
measurement was based. Measurements at taps 5 (station 151.6 ft) and 6
(station 161.5 ft) indicated the inside diameters to be 50.1*6 in. and
1*9.82 in., respectively. The inside diameter at tap 3 (station 131.1* ft)
was found to be 1*8-3 in. The standard deviation from taps 1 through 11 was
0.7655 in., and this is why the hydraulic grade line was not drawn throu^i
all points. When the individual pressure readings were corrected for the
change in velocity head caused by the variations in diameter, the points
were found to plot considerably closer to the grade lines shown in Fig. 17.
Some variations in hydraulic grade lines are thus attributed to varia-
tions in the inside diameter of the pipe; another factor which could have
affected the readings is the closeness to one of the wall taps of a helical
lock seam on the helical pipe or an overlapping seam on the annular pipe.
Summaries of the friction measurements for the seven pipes tested are
presented in Tables I through VII. The variations of Darcy friction factor
f with Reynolds number Re are shown in Fig. 21 for the 66 in. pipes, Fig.
22 for the U8 in. pipes, and Fig. 23 for the 21* in. and 12 in. pipes. The
variations of the Manning roughness coefficient n with Reynolds number are
shown in Fig. 2k for the 66 in. pipes, Fig. 25 for the 1*8 in. pipes, and Fig.
26 for the 21* in. and 12 in. pipes. The data appear to plot in a reasonably
consistent manner.
For the annular pipe, the wall Reynolds number defined by
126
-------
"w ~ i/ ~ "~ D f 8 (^)
where d is the corrugation depth and V^ the friction velocity, was also
computed. Values of f versus Re are plotted in Pig. 27.
There is some scatter in the plots of friction factor, especially for
the larger pipe sizes. Discharge remained quite constant during each run and
was measured quite accurately. Since diameter was fixed for each pipe size,
whether or not it was measured correctly, the probable cause of the scatter
was the difficulty in reading the fluctuating manometer tubes. The fluctua-
tions occurred as rather short-term pulses and longer-term surges, neither of
which could be damped out completely. The difficulty in reading increased at
lower Reynolds numbers because of the smaller head loss.
For the 66 in. pipes, friction factors are essentially constant above a
Reynolds number of about 1.5 million. The average f values from Pig. 21 are
0.137 for the annular bolted pipe with 9 in. by 2-1/2 in. corrugations and
0.0617 for the annular riveted pipe with 6 in. by 1 in. corrugations. The cor-
responding n values are 0.0360 and 0.021*2, respectively. Below a Reynolds
number of about 1.5 million, the friction factors for the bolted pipe increase
with Reynolds number, while for the riveted pipe they decrease.
For the 1*8 in. annular pipes, friction factor is approximately constant
above a Reynolds number of about 2 million. For the helical pipes, the constant
regime may extend through all of the data. The average f values from Fig. 22
are 0.0681* for the annular riveted pipe with 6 in. by 1 in. corrugations, 0.0533
for the helical pipe with 2 in. by 1/2 in. corrugations, and 0.01*81* for the
helical pipe with 2-2/3 in. by 1/2 in. corrugations. The corresponding n values
from Fig. 25 are 0.021*2, 0.0211*, and 0.0201*, respectively. For the annular pipe
below a Reynolds number of about 2 million, the friction factors appear to be
falling with increasing Reynolds number as was the case with the 66 in. annular
riveted pipe.
For the 21* in. helical pipe with 2-2/3 by 1/2 in. corrugations, friction
factors are constant above a Reynolds number of about 250,000. In this region
the average f is about 0.01*22 and n about 0.0169. For the 12 in. helical
pipe with 2-2/3 by 1/2 in. corrugations, the constant friction factor regime lies
above a Reynolds number of about 600,000 with f about 0.0229 and n about
0.0111. In both cases, friction factor decreases as Reynolds number increases.
127
-------
The friction factor data for all these tests at large Reynolds numbers
have been tabulated in Table Villa,,
IV. DISCUSSION OF FRICTION FACTOR RESULTS
All the present data, as well as the previous data obtained at the St.
Anthony Falls Hydraulic Laboratory for helical pipes [l], show a region of
more or less constant friction factor at large Reynolds numbers. This is
true for both helical and annular corrugated pipe, as can be seen in Figs.
21 through 27 and in Figs. 10 and 11 of the earlier report. The region of
constant friction factor can be termed the region of fully rough now in
accordance with the usual practice.
The measured friction factors from the present tests in the fully rough
flow regime are summarized in Table Villa along with other information.
They are plotted in Fig. 28 as log f versus log pipe diameter and in Fig. 29
as n versus log pipe diameter. The points can be identified by the symbols
shown in the table. Comparable data from the earlier work at the St. Anthony
Falls ^draulic Laboratory and from the work of others are tabulated in
Table VTIIb and are also plotted in. Figs. 28 and 29.
Referring first to Figs. 21 through 2?, the helical pipe data obtained
by others [3,J4J are in general agreement with the present data as regards
trends of friction factor versus Reynolds number. The annular pipe data ob-
tained by others [6,7], and even those obtained earlier at the St. Anthony Fall
Hydraulic Laboratory [5], show some notable differences in trends from those
of the present data. For example, all the previous data for annular pipe show
a rising friction factor characteristic with increasing Reynolds number at
smaller Reynolds numbers, whereas the present data for riveted annular pipe
show a falling characteristic (Figs. 21, 22, 21;, and 25). Perhaps the oppo-
site trends can be explained by the relative spacing of the corrugations, the
present riveted pipe corrugations being 6 by 1 in. whereas all the previous
tests on annular pipe were for 2-2/3 by 1/2 in. corrugations as shown in
Table VIII. The present bolted pipe results for shorter relative pitch do
show a rising friction factor with increasing Reynolds number (Figs. 21 and
2k). Another difference occurs for the Webster and Metcalf data [6]. Appar-
ently these data fail to show a region of constant friction factor (fully
rough flow) at large Reynolds numbers, but rather seem to peak and fall
12;
-------
back again; this trend is not confirmed with certainty by any other data.
One explanation given for the latter phenomenon has been that at higher
Reynolds numbers the waviness or corrugation spacing becomes more important
than the depth of the corrugations. Nevertheless, on the present riveted
annular pipes, pitch over corrugation depth and pitch over pipe diameter
are both larger than for the Webster and Metcalf tests, while for the bolted pipe
they are both less and the tests show no such peaking. For further analysis, the
annular pipe friction factors given in Table Vlllb and plotted in Pigs. 28
and 29 have been taken as the peak values at large Reynolds number.
In Pig. 28, all data for riveted pipe with annular corrugations fall
approximately on a straight line as is suggested by Neill [7] independently
of relative rouginess or relative pitch (if the 7 ft diameter pipe data of
Webster and Metcalf are not weighted too heavily). The equation for this
line can be written
f = 0.122 If0'^1 (5)
where D is the pipe diameter in feet. The line is plotted on the figure.
The corresponding equation for n,
n = 0.0257 D "'^ (6)
has been plotted in Fig. 29; it is not quite a straight line there because
of the semi-logarithmic plotting. It is apparent that for annular riveted
pipe, n decreases very slowly with diameter at large Reynolds numbers.
The annular aluminum pipe data fall in nicely with the annular steel
pipe data taken by others even though the relative roughness as shown in
Table VIII is greater for the aluminum pipe than for the steel pipe at any
given diameter. The explanation for this may lie in the greater pitch of
the aluminum pipe as just discussed. It is likely that a combination of
relative roughness and waviness determines friction factor as a function of
diameter for fully rough now in annular corrugated pipe.
The plotted points for bolted steel and aluminum pipe seem to substan-
tiate this argument. Both plotted points for bolted pipe represent pipes
with greater relative roughness and more abrupt waviness than the riveted
pipes, and the friction factors are correspondingly larger. The aluminum
129
-------
bolted pipe has greater relative roughness, but less abrupt waviness than
the steel pipe, and this may explain why the two data points fall close to
each other. Much more work is necessary to determine the relative contribu-
tions of roughness and waviness to friction factors for annular corrugated
pipe. (Some of the increase in friction factor for the bolted pipes over
that of the riveted pipes is also due to bolt heads in the flow and to the
rougher joints associated with field assembly, as shown in Pig. 5. Computa-
tions for the bolt head contributions are given by Bossy in Appendix A of
Ref. [8].)
For the helical pipe it appears from Figs. 28 and 29 that friction
factor increases with diameter for pipe of a given manufacture (i.e., fixed
width of sheet from which the pipe is rolled). However, it was observed in
an earlier paper by one of the authors [9] that if helical corrugated pipe
could be manufactured with helix angle kept constant while the diameter (width
of sheet) was increased, the friction factor would actually decrease as diam-
eter increased, much as in the case of annular pipe. To explore this hypo-
thesis further, it was proposed to draw lines parallel to the annular pipe
data line in Fig. 28 representing the various helix angles. To this end the
f values in Table VIII have been converted to fD°*l*1/0.122 and plotted
versus helix angle in Fig. 30. The straight line in Fig. 30 fits most of
the data well and tends to substantiate the hypothesis. It has the equation
-8 -3-61*
f = Q.9U5 x 10 *
where 0, the helix angle, is in degrees and D, the pipe diameter, is
in feet. Straight lines representing this equation have been drawn in
Fig. 28 for 60, ?0, and 80 degree helix angles. These are of the form
(8)
where C has the values 0.282, 0.101, and 0.805 for 60, ?0, and 80 degree
helix angles, respectively. Figure 28 now replaces Fig. 1 of Ref. [9].
The corresponding equation for n is
6 a1-82
10 J^2 (9)
130
-------
and if this is written in the form
n . C, D-
C1 has the values 0.0122, 0.0160, and 0.0206 for 60, 70, and 80 degree
helix angles, respectively. Corresponding lines have been drawn in Fig. 29.
Again, the lines are not quite straight because this is a semi-logarithmic
plot.
It seems that if helical corrugated pipe of, say, ?0 degree helix angle
could be fabricated at larger diameters, there would be every reason to
expect n values near 0.015 for 3 and k ft diameter pipes. A sheet width
of about 1*0 in. would be required for a 3 ft pipe.
In analyzing the effect of helix angle in Fig. 30, no attention has
been given to relative roughness or waviness. In fact, inspection of Table
VIII shows that relative roughness generally increases with decreasing helix
angle and decreasing friction factor, which is the opposite trend from that
found in annular pipe. Waviness varies throughout the data. In order to
determine whether there is a consistent effect of relative roughness on
friction factor for helical pipes, a plot of
versus d/D was made (Fig. 31). This form of plotting removes the influence
of helix angle. The plot shows that there may be a trend for increasing fric-
tion factor with increasing relative roughness which has previously been masked
by the overriding effect of helix angle. Some of the scatter in Fig. 30 may be
due to this effect. No trend attributable to waviness could be detected on a
similar graph.
The empirical formulas quoted for f and n as functions of Q should
not be extended to smaller helix angles. The data point for the 52-1/2 degree
helix angle in Fig. 30 already looks suspicious, although its deviation from
the empirical correlation line may be due to relative roughness. The problem
is that the mechanism by which spiral flow reduces friction is not known, and
until it is, the empirical formulas quoted can be used only within the limits
in which they appear to fit the datr. it was suggested in Ref. [9] that flow
131
-------
rotation imparted by the spiral corrugations is responsible for friction de-
crease through reduction in turbulence. Even if this suggestion is valid,
it is still necessary to connect the helix angle with the turbulent mixing
parameter in the interior of the pipe, and this cannot be done at present.
V. CONCLUSIONS
The experiments described in this report have been conducted using
corrugated aluminum pipes flowing full. The measurements were made follow-
ing an entry region of 20 or more pipe diameters, and although this distance
appears to be sufficient, it is not known whether this is a minimum distance
for fully developed flow. Measurements were made under laboratory conditions
with pipe carefully aligned and joints carefully made so as to avoid intro-
ducing additional roughness. The water used in the tests carried a light
load of sand, mostly as suspended load, from the Mississippi River. No sig-
nificant amount of sand was found in the pipes after the now was shut down;
it is not believed that the sand affected the results.
Under these conditions, the following statements can be made regarding
friction factors:
1. Aluminum annular riveted pipes with 6 in. by 1 in. corrugations
have the same friction factors for fully rough flow as do steel
riveted pipes with 2-2/3 by 1/2 in. corrugations. Empirical
formulas including both are
f = 0.122 D'0-^1
and n = 0.0257 D*0'01*2
where D is the inside diameter measured in feet. Field assem-
bled and bolted pipes have materially greater friction factors
because of both the larger relative depth of corrugations and the
presence of bolt heads and rougher joints within the pipes.
2. Helical pipe has lesser friction factors than similar annular
pipe of the same diameter; the smaller the helix angle, the
less the friction factor. Bnpirical formulas including both
annular and helical pipes of both aluminum and steel are
132
-------
f =
£ a1-82
n = 0.713 x 10~b 2?
where 9 is the helix angle (measured from the pipe axis) in
degrees and D is the inside diameter measured in feet. These
formulas are limited to the range of the data available,
52-1/2 £ 0 <: 90. There appears to be little effect of relative
roughness on helical pipe friction factors.
3, The thermoplastic sealant provided for the aluminum pipe tests
makes a very effective field seal at the pipe joints. However,
in the laboratory tests without earth backfill around the pipes,
it was found necessary to reinforce the joint seals with corru-
gated metal bands to prevent the seals from opening due to pres-
sure and vibration. The bands materially increased the rigidity
of the pipe line,, (Plain metal bands did not protect the seal as
well as corrugated bands.) Using corrugated metal bands It was
also possible to seal the joints with bands of rubber gasket
material placed cold, but several trials were necessary at each
joint before a tight seal could be made.
k. The factory-assembled pipes, especially the helical pipes which
contained sealant in the spiral joints, were reasonably tight
against leakage even without backfill. The field assembled,
bolted pipe leaked badly even though sealer strips were used
along the bolt rows.
5, In factory assembled pipe, care should be taken to avoid unneces-
sary joint roughness. Extruding joint sealant from spiral joints
on helical pipe, which can introduce roughness, should be avoided,
133
-------
LIST OF REFERMCES
[l] Silberman, E. and Dahlin, W. Q. , Friction Factors for Helical Corrugated
Aluminum Pipe, Project Report No. 112, St. Anthony Falls Hydraulic
Laboratory, University of Minnesota, December 1969.
[2] Silberman, E., The Pitot Cylinder. Circular No. 2, St. Anthony Falls
Hydraulic Laboratory, University of Minnesota, October
[3] Rice, C. E. , Friction Factors for Helical Corrugated Pipe, ARS Ul-119,
Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture,
February 1966.
[k] Chamberlain, A. R., Discussion of [6], Journal of the Hydraulics Division,
ASCE, Vol. 86, No. HY3, Proc. Paper 211*8, March I960, pp. 67-7*4.
[5] Straub, L. G. and Morris, H. M., Hydraulic Tests on Corrugated Metal
Culvert Pipes. Technical Paper No. 5-B, St. Anthony Falls Hydraulic
Laboratory, University of Minnesota, 1950.
[6] Webster, M. J. and Metcalf, L. R. , "Friction Factors in Corrugated
Metal Pipes," Journal of the Hydraulics Division, ASCE, Vol. 85,
No. HY9, September 1959, pp. 35-67.
[7] Neill, C. R. , "Hydraulic Roughness of Corrugated Pipes," Journal of the
Hydraulics Division. ASCE. Vol. 88, No. HY3, May 1962, pp. 23-14;,
and Closure of Discussion, Vol. 89, No. HYU, July 1963, pp. 205-
208.
[8] Grace, J. L., Jr., Resistance Coefficients for Structural Plate Corru-
gated Pipe. Technical Report No. 2-715, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways
Experiment Station, February 1966.
[9] Silberman, E., "Effect of Helix Angle on Flow in Corrugated Pipes,"
Journal of the Hydraulics Division, ASCE. Vol. 96, No. HY11,
November 1970, pp. 2253-2263.
134
-------
TABLE I. SUMMARY OF FRICTION MEASUREMENTS FOR 66-INCH ANNULAR
RIVETED PIPE WITH 6-INCH BY 1-INCH CORRUGATIONS
Average measured diameter - 5.4517 ft
V
Q
cfs
302.81*
299.81
285.84
282.78*
279.82
277.94*
253.33
253.31*
249.92*
246.90
246.45*
246.04*
245.84*
223.08
213.16
213.06
212.75*
211.80
201.32
179.64
165.99
154.66
138.64
124.06
109.31
93.52
77.40
58.23
39.70
22.96
V
fps
12.972
12.844
12.245
12.114
11.988
11.907
10.853
10.852
10.707
10.577
10.558
10.540
10.532
9.557
9.132
9.128
9.114
9.074
8.625
7.696
7.111
6.626
5.939
5.315
4.683
4.006
3-316
2.495
1.701
0.984
S
per
cent
2.9537
2.9537
2.7152
2.4546
2.5883
2.5248
2.1146
1.9032
2.0191
1.9709
1.9454
2.0115
1.7678
1.5690
1.4396
1.3745
1.3728
1.3787
1.2375
1.0675
0.8899
0.7884
0.6555
0.5050
0.4238
0.3324
0.2:415
0.1269
0.0846
0.0212
Water
Temp.
Deg. F
33.0
33.0
34.0
33.0
33.0
33.0
33.0
33.0
33.0
33.0
33.0
33.0
33.0
34.0
34.0
33.0
33.0
33.0
33.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
33.0
33.0
33.0
33.0
33.0
33.0
33.0
33.0
,, , 2 /
ft /sec
x 10
1.895
1.895
1.859
1.895
1.895
1.895
1.895
1.895
1.895
1.895
1.895
1.895
1.895
1.859
1.859
1.895
1.895
1.895
1.895
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.895
1.895
1.895
1.895
1.895
1.895
1.895
1.895
Re
x 10
3.7320
3.6950
3-5911
3.4852
3.4487
3.4255
3.1222
3.1220
3.0802
3.0430
3.0374
3.0323
3.0299
2.8026
2.6780
2.6259
2.6221
2.6104
2.4812
2.2569
2.0854
1.9430
1.7087
1.5290
1.3472
1.1526
0.9539
0.7177
0.4893
0.2830
*No tailwater
Darcy
f
0.0616
0.0628
0.0635
0.0587
0.0632
0.0625
0.0630
0.0567
0.0618
0.0618
0.0612
0.0635
0.0559
0.0603
0.0606
0.0579
0.0580
0.0588
0.0584
0.0632
0.0617
0.0630
0.0652
0.0627
0.0678
0.0726
0.0770
0.0715
0.1025
0.0769
Manning
n
0.0242
0.0244
0.0246
0.0236
0.0245
0.0244
0.0245
0.0232
0.0242
0.0242
0.0241
0.0246
0.0231
0.0239
0.0240
0.0235
0.0235
0.0236
0.0236
0.0245
0.0242
0.0245
0.0249
0.0244
0.0254
0.0263
0.0271
0.0261
0.0312
0.0270
135
-------
TABLE II. SUMMARY OF FRICTION MEASUREMENTS FOR 66-INCH ANNULAR
BOLTED PIPE WITH 9-INCH BY" 2-1/2-INCH CORRUGATIONS
Average measured diameter = 5.38083 ft
u
Q
cfs
248.64
246.09*
237.68
230.1/1
226.49
219.66*
216.95*
215.99
210.31
208.49*
198.9^*
187.50
180.50*
175.79
170.58
150.96
141.91
131.88
119.61
106.72
89.84
75.18
58.55
39.72
23.27
V
fps
10.934
10.822
10.452
10.121
9.960
9.660
9.540
9.498
9.248
9.168
8.748
8.245
7.938
7.730
7.501
6.639
6.241
5.800
5.260
^.693
3.951
3.306
2.575
1.747
1.023
S
per
cent
4.8451
4.5901
4.374Q
4.0084
4.0243
3.7852
3.5860
3.2114
3.4027
3.4067
2.9485
2.7413
2.4624
2.3349
2.2154
1.7332
1.5436
1.2846
1.0543
0.8296
0.5778
0.3985
0.2207
0.0797
0.0281
Water
Temp.
Deg. F
34.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
,, . 2 /
it /sec
c
x 10-5
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.859
Re
£
x 10"5
3.1648
3.1324
3.0254
2.9293
2.8829
2.7960
2.7614
2.7492
^2.6769
2.6538
2.5323
2.3866
2.2975
2.2376
2.1713
1.9215
1.8063
1.6787
1.5224
1.3584
1.1436
0.9569
0.7453
0.5056
0.2962
Darcy
f
0.1403
0.1357
0.1387
0.1355
0.1405
0.1405
0.1364
0.1232
0.1377
0.1403
0.1334
0.1396
0.1353
0.1353
0.1363
0.1362
0.1372
0.1322
0.1319
0.1304
0.1282
0.1262
0.1153
0.0904
0.0930
Manning
n
0.0364
0.0358
0.0362
0.0358
0.0365
0.0365
0.0359
0.0342
0.0361
0.0364
0.0355
0.0364
0.0358
0,0358
0.0359
0.0359
0.0360
0.0354
0.0354
0.0351
0.0348
0.0346
0.0330
0.0292
0.0297
*No tailwater
136
-------
TABLE HI. SUMMARY OF FRICTION MEASUREMENTS FOR 48-INCH ANNQLAR
RIVETED PIPE WITH 6-INCH BY 1-INCH CORRUGATIONS
Average measured diameter = 3.9683 ft
Q
cfs
181.73*
175.22
175.05
164.62
164.15
157.43
147.15*
147.14*
136.28
125.62
124.70
105.49
91.37*
91.34
86.32
75.37
59.04
58.29
55.47
39.10
21.71
V
fps
14.694
14.167
14.153
13.310
13.272
12.729
11.898
11.897
11.019
10.157
10.082
8.529
7.388
7.385
6.979
6.094
4.774
4.713
4.485
3.161
1.755
S
per
cent
5.6809
5.2446
5.3302
4.7484
4.6714
4.3634
3.7987
3.9958
3.2426
2.8148
2.7122
1.9422
1.4160
1.4930
1.2492
1.0241
0.6306
0.6194
0.5758
0.3011
0.0864
Water
Temp.
De*. F
56.0
58.0
58.0
58.0
58.0
59.0
56.0
56.0
62.0
60.0
60.0
60.0
56.0
60.0
64.0
59.0
59.0
63.0
64.0
56.0
56.0
V
ft /sec
x 10"^
1.289
1.253
1.253
1.253
1.253
1.235
1.289
1.289
1.183
1.217
1.217
1.217
1.289
1.217
1.151
1.235
1.235
1.167
1.151
1.289
1.289
Re
x 10"6
4.5235
4.4868
4.4825
4.2154
4.2033
4.0900
3.6628
3.6625
3.6962
3.3119
3.2876
2.7812
2.2743
2.4081
2.4062
1.9581
1.5339
1.6026
1.5463
0.9733
0.5404
Darcy
f
0.0672
0.0667
0.0680
0.0684
0.0677
0.0688
0.0685
0.0721
0.0682
0.0697
0.0681
0.0682
0.0662
0.0699
0.0655
0.0704
0.0707
0.0712
0.0731
0.0769
0.0716
Manning
n
0.0240
0.0239
0.0241
0.0242
0.0241
0.0243
0.0242
0.0248
0.0242
0.0244
0.0241
0.0242
0.0238
0.0245
).023?
J.0246
).0246
).0247
>.0?.r,0
'.0?77
>.0?48
*No tailwater
137
-------
TABLE IV. SUMMARY OF FRICTION
PIPE WITH 2-INCH BY
Average measured
Q
cfs
189.74*
185.17*
179.94
173.12*
177.01
171.23
171.01*
168.74
155.92
148.09
135.01
130.94
122.54
116.21
104.02
91.83
89.28
80.91
70.97
54.89
37.94
21.12
U »T _ -L » ^
V
14.807
14.451
14.043
13.901
13.814
13.363
13.346
13.169
12.168
11.557
10.536
10.219
9.563
9.069
8.118
7.166
6.967
6.314
5.539
4.284
2.961
1.648
S
per
cent
4.3271
4.2106
4.0858
4.0025
3.9027
3.6947
3.5366
3.6530
3.1205
2.8916
2.4548
2.0528
1.8391
1.7100
1.3381
1.0302
0.9903
0.8321
0.5875
0.3349
0.1885
0.0468
Water
Temp.
Peg. F
54.0
54.0
56.0
54.0
56.0
55.0
54.0
56.0
56.0
54.0
54.0
54.0
54.0
56.0
56.0
56.0
56.0
56.0
56.0
57.0
56.0
55.0
MEASUREMENTS FOR 48-INCH HELICAL
1/2-INCH CORRUGATIONS
diameter = 4.0392 ft
V
^2,
ft /sec
x 105
1.328
1.328
1.289
1.328
1.289
1.307
1.328
1.289
1.289
1.328
1.328
1.328
1.328
1.289
1.289
1.289
1.289
1.289
1.289
1.271
1.289
1.307
Re
x lO'6
4.5038
4.3953
4.4004
4.2279
4.3287
4.1297
4.0592
4.1265
3.8130
3.5151
3.2047
3.1080
2.9087
2.8419
2.5438
2.2457
2.1833
1.9736
1.7356
1.3613
0.9278
0.5094
Darcy
f
0.0513
0.0524
0.0538
0.0538
0.0532
O.OS38
0.0516
0.0548
0.0548
0.0563
0.0575
0.0511
0.0523
0.0540
0.0528
0.0521
0.0530
0.0542
0.0498
0.0474
0.0559
0.0*448
Manning
n
0.0210
0.0212
0.0215
0.0215
0*0214
0.0^1'j
0.0211
0.0217
0.0217
0.0220
0.0222
0.0210
0.0212
Oe02l6
0.0213
0.0212
0.0214
O.OP16
0.0^07
0.0202
0.0219
0.0196
138
-------
TABLE V. SUMMARY OF FRICTION MEASUREMENTS FOR 48-INCH HELICAL
PIPE WITH 2-2/3-INCH BY 1/2-INCH CORRUGATIONS
Average measured diameter = 3.9760 ft
u
Q
cfs
193.90*
189.40*
184.89*
181.23
178.02*
174.57*
170.88
169.24*
163.89*
158.58
149.42
148.59*
140.66
132.60
126.77
124.34
113.73
101.52
88.68
73.39
55.20
35.46
21.60
V
fps
15.617
15.254
14.891
14.596
14.338
14.060
13.763
13.631
13.200
12.772
12.034
11.968
11.329
10.630
10.210
10.014
9.160
8.176
7.142
5.911
4.446
2.856
1.740
S
per
cent
4.5358
4.3027
4.1779
3.9365
3.8700
3.6952
3.5953
3.5037
3.2957
3.1002
2.8854
2.8296
2.4161
2.1389
2.0282
1.8850
1.5563
1.2983
0.9695
0.6774
0.3970
0.1540
0.0600
Water
Temp.
Deg. F
41.0
44.0
44.0
42.0
44.0
42.0
42.0
^4.0
42.0
43.0
43.0
44.0
42.0
42.0
43.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
42.0
40.0
o
_ , f 1
it /sec
x 105
1.637
1.555
1.555
1.610
1.555
1.610
1.610
1.555
1.610
1.582
1.582
1.555
1.610
1.610
1.582
1.610
1.610
1.610
1.610
1.610
1,610
1.610
1.664
Re
x 10-6
3.7931
3.9004
3.8075
3.6047
3.6661
3.4722
3.3988
3.4852
3.2598
3.2100
3.0246
3.0600
2.7978
2.6374
2.5661
2.4731
2.2621
2 e 0192
1.7638
1.4597
1.0979
0.7053
0.4157
Darcy
f
0.0476
0.0473
0.0482
0.0473
0.0482
0.0478
0.0486
0.0482
0.0484
0.0486
0.0510
0.0506
0.0482
0.0480
0.0498
0.0481
0.0475
0.0497
0.0486
0.0496
0.0514
0.0483
0.0507
Manning
ft
0.0202
0.0201
0.0203
0.0201
0.0203
0.0202
0.0204
0.0203
0.0204
0.0204
0.0209
0.0208
0.0203
0.0203
0.0206
0.0203
0.0202
0.0206
0.0204
0.0206
0.0210
0.0203
0.0208
*No tailwater
139
-------
TABLE VI. SUMMARY OF FRICTION MEASUREMENTS FOR 24-INCH HELICAL
PIPE WITH 2-2/3-INCH BY 1/2-INCH CORRUGATIONS
Average measured diameter = 1.9950 ft
17
_ S Water _ 2 ,
cfs
38.41?*
37.84?
36.425*
36.068
33.661
31.3H*
30.590
28.242
26.198
26.102*
24.896
21.101
19.932*
17.558
15.304
13.688
12.226
10.594
9.168
7.606
6.348
4.820
4.546
2.649
v
V
fps
12.290
12.108
11.653
11.538
10.768
10.01?
9.786
9.035
8.381
8.350
7.964
6.750
6.392
5.61?
4.896
^.379
3.911
3.389
2.933
2.433
2.031
1.542
1.454
0.84?
per
cent
4.9598
4.7344
4.4422
4.3837
3.35'76
3.2815
3.0977
2.6969
2.1877
2.28?9
2.070?
1.5196
1.3443
1.0236
0.7932
0.6397
0.5010
0.370?
0.2356
0.1970
0.1252
0.0836
0.0836
0.02?4
rn
iemp.
Des;, F
33*0
34.0
33.0
33.0
34.0
33.0
34.0
.34.0
33-0
33.0
34.0
34.0
33.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
it /sec
r
x 10^
1.895
1.859
1.895
1.895
1.859
1.895
1.859
1.859
1.895
1.895
1.859
1.859
1.895
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.859
Re
x 10-6
1.2938
1.2993
1.2268
1.214?
1.1556
1.0545
1.0502
0.9696
0.8823
0.8791
0.854?
0.7244
0.6730
0.6028
0.5254
0.4699
0.419?
0.3637
0.3148
0.2611
0.2179
0.1655
0.1561
0.0909
Darcy
f
0.0422
0.0415
0.0420
0.0423
0.042?
0.0420
0.0415
0.0424
0.0400
0.0421
0.0419
0.0428
0.0422
0.0416
0.0425
0.0428
0.0420
0.0414
0.0426
0.04-2?
0.0390
0.0451
0.050?
0.0491
Manning
0.0169
0.0168
0.0169
0.0170
0.0171
0.0169
0.0168
0.0170
0.0165
0.0169
0.0169
0.0171
0.0170
0.0168
0.0170
O.Ol?!
0.0169
0.0168
0.0170
0.0170
0.0163
0.0175
0,0186
0.0183
*Dowristream valve removed
140
-------
TABLE
Q
cfs
11.662*
11.310
11.194
10.88?
10.704
10.454*
10.^4-9
10.113
9.226
9.193*
8.754
7.930
7.716
7.246*
6.856
6.566
5.396
4.937*
3.801
3.128
2.606
2.100
1.784
1.680
1.452
1.254
1.193
0.966
0.948
0.660
0.626
*Downstream
VII.
V
fps
15.521
15.052
14.898
14.489
14.246
13.913
13.906
13.459
12.279
12.235
11.651
11.554
10.269
9.644
9.125
8.739
7.181
6.571
5.059
4.163
3.468
2.795
2.37^
2.236
1.932
1.669
1.588
1.286
1.262
0.878
0.833
valve
SUMMARY OF FRICTION MEASUREMENTS FOR 12-INCH HELICAL
PIPE WITH 2.2/3-INCH BY 1/2-INCH CORRUGATIONS
Average measured diameter = 0.9781 ft
u
S
per
cent
8.6161
8.1385
7.9242
7.6276
7,4135
6.9357
6., 9851
6.1449
5.4202
5.4860
^.975^
4.1021
3.9209
3.^513
3.1054
2.7677
1.9226
1.6507
0.9786
0.6836
0.4909
0.3296
0.2194
0.2072
0.1645
0.1071
0.1020
0.0656
0.0656
0.0329
0.0371
removed
Water
Temp.
Deg. F
34.0
34.0
35.0
35.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
3^.0
3^.0
3^.0
35.0
35.0
3^.0
3^.0
35.0
35.0
34.0
35.0
35.0
35.0
36.0
35.0
36.0
36.0
35.0
36.0
35.0
36.0
35.0
36.0
^ 2/
ft /sec
x 105
1.859
1.859
1.823
1.823
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.859
1.823
1.823
1.859
1.859
1.823
1.823
1.859
1.823
1.823
1.823
1.791
1.823
1.791
1.791
1.823
1.791
1.823
1.791
1.823
1.791
Re
x 10-6
0.8166
0.7920
0.7993
0.7774
0.7495
0.7320
0.7317
0.7081
0.6460
0.6437
0.6130
0.5662
0.5510
0.5074
0.4801
0.4689
0.3853
0.3^57
0.2714
0.2234
0.1861
0.1526
0.1274
0.1211
0.1055
0.0895
0.0867
0.0690
0.0689
0.0471
0.0455
Darcy
f
0.0225
0.0226
0.0225
0.0229
0.0230
0.0226
0.0227
0.0214
0.0226
0.0231
0.0231
0.0232
0.0234
0.0234
0.0235
0.0228
0.0235
0.0241
0.0241
0.0248
0.0257
0.0265
0.0245
0.0261
0.0277
0.0243
0.0255
0.0250
0.0260
0.0269
0.0336
Manning
0.0110
0.0110
0.0110
0.0111
0.0111
0.0110
0.0110
0.0107
0.0110
0.0111
0.0111
0.0112
0.0112
0.0112
0.0112
0.0111
0.0112
0.0114
0.0114
0.0115
0.0117
0.0119
0.0115
0.0118
0.0122
0.0114
0.0117
0.0116
0.0118
0.0120
0.0134
141
-------
TABLE
Q
cfs
11.718*
ll.Jj.22*
11.166*
10.512*
9.982*
VII. [Continued] SUMMARY OF FRICTION MEASUREMENTS FOR 12-INCH
HELICAL PIPE WITH 2-2/3-INCH BY 1/2-INCH CORRUGATIONS
Average measured diameter = 0.9781 ft
V
fps
15.595
15.201
14.861
13.990
13.285
S
per
cent
8.9620
8.4678
8.0724
7.2817
6.4909
Water
Temp.
De*. F
53.0
53.0
53.0
53.0
53.0
V
ft /sec
x 105
1.348
1.348
1.348
1.348
1.348
Re
x 10-6
1.1316
1.1030
1.0783
1.0151
0.9639
Darcy
f
0.0232
0.0231
0.0230
0.0234
0.0232
Manning
n
0.0112
0.0111
0.0111
0.0112
0.0111
*Downstream valve removed
142
-------
1 1
1 2
c
Q c_
< t
1
§
o
z
a
t*
«
o
5
fc,
o
p
C
>H E-
£ g
CM MH
2
oo
o
rH
.i*-
S| ^
O VO
a *
o
5 ~
o *";
e*
o
E
V.
2 i?
,_4
<«
-<-4
J
• O -»-> •
§0) tJ C
£ f-l -H
Z W >
1
*tzl
•rfl
1
^
^
K * I
•H rH bd
® c Q|
a •< 1
i
SBC "0 .
i^ o.1^
0
•
CM
&
0
ro
rH
VO
OD
00
rH
O
rH
a
0
O
CO
O
O
I
a
rjrj e
10 C
f_ e
4-' rH
a>
(0
£
OJ
a
3
u
o
r>
vo
UT
vo
o
0
K
CM^ro
CD
0
CN)
CM
O
rH
VO
O
ON
NO
rH
O
O
CM
£
O
D
CM
S
O
0
rQ
VO
•Hl-d-
CM
(H
O
K
CMJCOC
CM
^
rH
CM
O
rH
1
O
1
O
CO
"S
o
D
CM
8
,_i
o
o
rH
VO
CD
r-
rH
O
X
M|CO
CN-
CO
S
0
rH
O
CN-
O
CM
O
O
CO
0
o
o
o
CM
p^
o
o
8
•*
rH|CM
&
O
0
K
CM
ON
S1
^»-
1
1
OO
0
CM
O
CO
NO
0
o
*
!
CO
o
o
NO
NO
o
rH
O
K
NO
CN-
ON
CO
1 1
1 1
00
rH
O 1
rH
CM O
^ NO
CM CO
0 0
0 0
CM r>-
NO CO
O rH
0 0
© ®
%3
« W
n
g
t
o
^
t i a.
i i
•
1 §
o o
O 0
NO CM
CM NO
NO CO
0 0
ON ON
CO Jf
O CM
K K
NO ON
VO CO
-* CO
VO vo
O CO OO
rH O 0
CO CO NO
CM vo .a-
CM CO 3
O 0 CD
CM rv
CM VO NO
0 0 0
O CD (D
CM
IN- NO rH
CM CO .d;
O O O
CD 0 CD
O O O
•H
I ' '
O O 0
CM CM CM
oo .d* oo
000
O O CD
VO vo VO
co vo .d-
-dr 4t J?
(y\ ^5 vr\
*o r- c^
f ^ |
O O CD
K K K
CM CM CM
CO CO 00
§ ? ?
O H H
( i r"~i r~"~v
rH rH rH
143
-------
ro
ON
O
CM
VO
CM
O
0
CO
rH
O
O
VO
O
a
O
r-l
K e
vo vo
rH rH
CO CO
vo vo
ro co
o 6*
lO vo
VO vo
"* •*
» *
$ $
ro ^
o d
X X
CM CM
8 g
rH rH
i — i i — i
CO ^
I — 1 1 — 1
Hill
tit!
00 CO O O
O>. ON O O
0 0 rH rH
•c£ O O vo
VO vo vo Jt
CM CM CM CM
O O O O
o o" d d
^fc- St- :fe.
S 3 £ £
rH rH O O
O O O O
O <3
.
1
ON
CO
H
O
o
CO
vo
o
ON
«
VO
d
X
CM|CO
VO
£
CM
r— i
vo
|
0
0
rH
CM
CM
O
•
O
=tfc
00
ro
O
d
0>
I
1
o
d
CO
CO
VO
o
ON
*
vo
d
K
CM|CO
CM
VO
O
_^
1— i
VO
1
ON
d
VO
co
CM
O
d
Its
CO
ro
VO
o
•
o
!>
1
1
ON
1
O
CO
ro
vo
O
ON
*
vo
•
o
X
tvjlco
£
P^
t— t
vo
I
I
CM
CM
O
rH
VO
CM
O
d
g
d
-$•
\
i
ro
ro
ro
o
d
CO
CO
vo
&
vo
d
X
CMJ^CO
*
vo
CM
,_4
1— 1
1
1
1
1
O
VO
CO
O
d
tfc
CO
H
d
-:fe
-•HO
§0 g
H T) 0)
8 t" 4J
j £ »
H « ^
2 ^
.rl
4 VO 4
^ * £4
"5-*
•* CH S»
> o £
J
t • •»
> o co
"^ 0 .
c •
« c
^
§ t~ ,
o w :
v^»- VTSV
VO
\ 3-
< « i
•Is
>j .
'^r
ii5
•i »
t-JK
e •< •
» TJ
n • a>
fi. ^ J-
gH S W
_j ,* •
• •o E
1i> « ®"
S w
•o»! "S
•i-*
L«
> 0
•o
1 "S
X rH
a o
144
-------
CO .— O fx O -O
• OK — — O
10
to
O CN O O O O O
_
o> o»
c 4>
4)
X
O "Z
"^0 O •
c •- c
o > —
O (N
— °
oo co
O O O CN — c> c>
O« CM CN ^ CO O O
R Ti- rocs CN o 8
O O O O O O O
4) O
> 4>
CN tx CN hx —
TJ- 10 -o Tf ix
hx
R
«o
oo
co —
CN ~-
IO O
o
«O IT) «O
o o
o o rx o
O O O OO O O
•O
) C
o>
CM CN CN CN —
0000 00 — O
CN lO 10 lO .if
O O O O 4)
CNO^O _C
oo oo rx 10 (j
-5.2
*.
O Q.
ZoZ
E M
3-=
4)
Q
4)
Q.
oZ
I
O)
-O >O OO OO 00
CN
CN^ J±
4) . 4)
c
•- x
O u
X X
_Q_Q
^^^"o"o"o"o .2.2
= § g.^.if.y.« -Q.-Q.
C C C 4)^^^ g-g-
145
-------
Fig. 2 - Unloading the 48 in. Pipe
Fig. 3 - Assembly of the 66 in. Bolted Pipe
146
-------
Fig. 4 - A Typical Leak in a Riveted Joint of the 48 in,
Annular Pipe (Dye colors the leaking water)
r^e 66 in. Bolted Pipe
-------
CO
£
£§>
o_
^ 8
5s
o
•
0.
i'5-
— o
c "
*1
c§\
o
^o
"5
1-"
*}
oj
?g
si
U^
^
f
•
^o
^
o
^c
^
M
8-
H~
s
3
a
S
o.
•
«
a.
148
-------
149
-------
150
-------
CO
c .± _
*~ O D
.)
_c
-1—
^
U —
I
O
-------
Fig. 12 - The Inlet for the 48 in» Pipes
Fig. 13 - The Inlet- for the 66 in« Pipe
152
-------
j Fig. 14 - Typical Hydraulic Grade
Lines for 66 in. Annular
—I i Riveted Pipe with 6 in.
by 1 in. Corrugations
Curves are displaced vertically for
clarity,,
r)213.06
)211.80
)201.32
)179.64
)165»99
)154.66
)138.64
)124.06
)109.31
93.52
77.40
58.23
39.70
22.96
30
140 160 180 200
Stations along Test Pipe in Feet
153
-------
Typical Hydraulic Grade
Lines for 66 in. Annular
Bolted Pipe with 9 in.
by 2-1/2 in. Corrugations
Curves are displaced vertically for
clarity.
20
Discharge
cfs
248.64
237.68
230.14
226.49
210.31
187-.50
175,79
170.58
150.96
141.91
131.88
119.61
106.72
89*. 84
75.18
58,55
39,72
23.27
160 180 200
Stations along Test Pipe in Feet
154
240
-------
Fig. 16 - Typical Hydraulic Grade
Lines for 48 in. Annular
Riveted Pipe with 6 in.
by 1 in. Corrugations
Curves are displaced vertically for
clarity.
Discharge
cfs
175,05
175,22
164,62
164,15
157.43
136.28
125.62
124.70
105.49
91.34
86.32
75.37
59.04
58.29
55.47
39.10
21.71
20
120 140 160 '180
Stations along Test Pipe in Feet
155
-------
120-
2-1
110
100
Fig. 17 - Typical Hydraulic Grade
Lines for 48 in. Helical
Lock Seam Pipe with
2 in. by 1/2 in.
Corrugations
Curves are displaced vertically for
clarity.
30 -
20
I6° 180 200
Stations along Test Pipe in Feet
156
-------
120
Fig. 18 - Typical Hydraulic Grade
Lines for 48 in. Helical
Lock Seam Pipe wirh
2-2/3 in. by 1/2 in.
Corrugations
Curves are displaced vertically for
clarity.
0 181.23
170.88
3 132.60
126.77
20 •— —>-
120
140
Stations along Test Pipe in Feet
157
-------
Fig. 19 - Typical Hydraulic Grade
Lines for z4 in. Helical
Lock Seam Pipe with 2-2/3
in. by 1/2 in. Corrugations
Curves are displaced vertically for
clarity,,
Discharge
cfs
ND37.845
3 33.661
D 30.590
D 28.242
^26.198
24.896
521.101
17.558
E> 15.304
D 13.668
€)12.226
D 10.594
9.396
9.168
D 6.348
4.820
30s—C^=
60 70 80
Stations olong Test Pipe in Feet
-------
no
Fig. 20 - Typical Hydraulic Grade
Lines for 12 in. Helical
Lock Seam Pipe with 2-2/3
in. by 1/2 in. Corrugations
Curves are displaced vertically for
clarity.
Discharge
cfs
11.310
10.704
10.113
9.226
60 70 80
Stations along Test Pipe in Feet
159
-------
0
QL
O
U
_c
u
c
«
_Q
O
X
T*
4>
1 "
Z fc
•« 8
X
U
o>
X>4DDJ UOJ43UJ
160
-------
.
-° • ^ o
. t ^?U
CO o>
— U i c*
-------
0
a
is
u
CM
CM
i
z
o
X
X
o
&
CO
CM
162
-------
CO
1
a.
o
9
*
u
V
1
1 £
11
•s §
o
u-
o
§
O
163
-------
V
^0.
ol
"D
O
?
U
00
0)
i
o
c
X
4)
Of.
CD
*C
I
O
>
CM
O
O)
164
-------
O
X
.0.
a!
«
*
t
o
O
_c
o
>o
CN
0>
u -
165
-------
0)
Q.
TJ
0)
O)
O
U
0)
_o
I
Z
o
X
4)
D
X
o
l_
o
Q
o
>
rx
CN
O)
CO
J - J040DJ UOJ43UJ XDJDQ
166
-------
CM
CM
O
e-
o
o
o
•
IT)
CD
C
0)
X
ntr
o
N.
O
•
CO
o
CM
o
0
I
i_
0)
o
O
0)
-Q
&
TIT
o
c
X
&
_c
O)
0)
a.
^_ a.
« M_
i2 °
10
u
XoQ
o ^
QZ
00
CM
O)
o
CM
10 ^
^D C^
• o
o o
XDJDQ
CO
a
O
o
CM
O
167
-------
z
o
X
4)
a:
g>
X
o
l_
V
E
o
a>
a
a>
c
O)
o>
c
*E
c
o
CN
O)
u -
6umuoyy
168
-------
fD°-41
0.122
fD = 7.75 x 10-8 03'64
60 70 80
Helix Angle 0 - Degrees
Fig. 30 - Friction Factor as a Function of Helix Angle at High
Reynolds Numbers
169
-------
fP°'41 a
x 10
009450
1.01
Oo02 0.03 0.04
Relative Roughness - d/D
0.05
Fig. 31 - Friction Factor as a Function of Relative Roughness
for Hehcal Pipes at High Reynolds Numbers
170
-------
Appendix A
POSITION OP HYDRAULIC GRADE LINE AT THE PIPE OUTLET
Following the test runs in the main channel on the larger pipes with
raised tailwater and on the smaller pipes with the downstream valve in place,
test runs were made with the tailwater control gate down in the main channel
and the downstream valve removed from the smaller pipes. In this manner the
maximum discharge was obtained, along with several lower flows, by controlling
the inflow at the upstream end. The procedure described earlier was used to
measure the discharge, hydraulic grade lines, and water temperature. Typical
hydraulic grade lines for the seven pipes tested are shown in Pigs. A-l through
A-7 in actual relationship to the test pipe.
The friction factors computed from these data are consistent with the
results found with raised tailwater or with the valve in place and are in-
cluded in Tables I through VII as well as in the graphs of Pigs. 21 throutfi
27.
Also computed from these data were the values of y/D and Q/D"''2,
where y is the vertical distance between the pipe invert and the hydraulic
grade line at the end of the pipe. These values are presented in Table A-l
and are plotted in Pig. A-8 along with the results presented in the authors»
earlier study [l]. In Pig. A-8, the line drawn through the data points repre-
sents the results reported in the earlier study. The plots of data points
for all pipes appear reasonable with the noticeable exception of the 12 in.
helical pipe with 2-2/3 in. by 1/2 in. corrugations. The point with values
of 0.735 for y/D and 5.22 for Q/D5/2 plots near the curve drawn through
the earlier data, but then with increasing values of Q/D5'2, y/D changes
from a decreasing to an increasing characteristic. A second series of tests
was run to verify this at a later date, and similar results were obtained.
Without further detailed study it is difficult to explain this phenomenon,
although it might be attributable to the stronger rotations associated with
the helix angle, which is 52-1/2 degrees for the 12 in. pipe tested currently
and 59-1/2 degrees for the 12 in. pipe tested earlier.
171
-------
TABLE A-l. POSITION OP HYDRAULIC GRADE LINE AT THE PIPE OUTLET
Q D y y/D
ft ft
66 in. Annular Riveted Pipe with 6 in. by 1 in. Corrugations
302.81
282.78
277.91*
253-31
21*9.92
21*6.1*5
21*6.01*
21*5.81*
212.75
.1*517
.1*517
.1*517
.1*517
• 1*517
.1*517
.1*517
1*517
5.1*517
3-820
3-970
3-967
I*.l3l*
1*.058
1*.102
3-985
1*.080
1*.103
0.701
0.728
0.728
0.758
0.71*1*
0.753
0.731
0.71*8
0.753
l*-36
1*.07
1*.00
.65
,60
.55
55
3-51*
3-07
66 in. Annular Bolted Pipe with 9 in. by 2-1/2 in. Corrugations
21*6.09
219.66
216.95
208.1*9
198.91*
180.50
.3808
,3808
,3808
,3808
,3808
5.3808
3-910
3.852
3-91*8
3-858
3-939
3.806
0.727
0.716
0.731*
0.717
0.732
0.707
,66
.27
•23
,10
2.96
2.69
1*8 in. Annular Riveted Pipe with 6 in. by 1 in. Corrugations
181.73
11*7.15
11*7.11*
91.37
3.9683
3.9683
3.9683
3-9683
1.1*19
2.519
2.531
3.01*0
0.358
0.635
0.638
0.766
5.79
1*.69
1*.69
2.91
1*8 in. Helical Lock Seam Pipe with 2 in. by 1/2 in. Corrugations
189.71*
185.17
178.12
171.01
1*.0392
U.0392
1*.0392
1*.0392
2.583
2.681*
2.716
2.875
0.61*0
0.661*
0.672
0.712
5.79
5.65
5.1*3
5.21
1*8 in. Helical Lock Seam Pipe with 2-2/3 in. by 1/2 in. Corrugations
193-90
189.1*0
181*. 89
178.02
171*. 57
169.21*
163.89
.9760
.9760
• 9760
• 9760
.9760
.9760
2.013
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
3-9760
.097
115
305
518
607
2.673
0.506
0.528
0.532
0.580
0.633
0.656
0.672
6.15
6.01
87
65
51*
37
5.20
172
-------
TABLE A-l. [Continued]
,5/2
Q D y y/D Q/D'
cfs ft ft ft1/2/sec
in. Helical Lock Seam Pipe with 2-2/3 in- by 1/2 in. Corrugations
38.1*17
36.U25
31-311
26.102
19.982
1.9950
1.9950
1.9950
1.9950
1.9950
0.901*
0.993
1.288
1.505
1.718
0.1*53
0.1*98
0.61*6
0.751*
0.861
6.83
6.1*8
5.57
l*.6i*
3-55
12 in. Helical Lock Seam Pipe with 2-2/3 in. by 1/2 in. Corrugations
11.662
10.1*51*
9.193
7.21*6
1*.937
0.9781
0.9781
0.9781
0.9781
0.9781
0.81*3
0.785
0.685
0.61*5
0.719
0.862
0.803
0.700
0.660
0.735
12.33
11.05
9.72
7.66
5.22
173
-------
rig. A-l - Typical Hydraulic Grade
Lines without Tailwater for
66 in. Annular Riveted
Pipe with 6 in. by 1 in.
Corrugations
O 302.81 cfs
Q 277.94 cfs
A 249.92 cfs
O 246.04 cfs
212.75 cfs
End of Pipe
Invert of Pipe
40
30
120
1440 160 180
Stations along Test Pipe in Feet
174
-------
Fig.A-2- Typical Hydraulic Grade
Lines without Tailwater for
66 in. Annular Bolted Pipe
with 9 in. by 2-1/2 in.
Corrugations
O 246.09 cfs
219.66 cfs
A 216.95 cfs
C> 208.49 cfs
-f 198.94 cfs
€ 180.50 cfs
Crown of Pipe
End of Pipe
30
140 160 180 200
Stations along Test Pipe in Feet
175
-------
Fig0A-3- Typical Hydraulic Grade
Lines without Tailwater
for 48 in. Annular Riveted
Pipe with 6 in» by 1 in0
Corrugations
G 181.73cfs
Q 147.15 eft
A 147J4cfs
O 91.37cfs
Invert of Pipe
Stations along Test Pipe in Feet
176
-------
Typical Hydraulic Grade
Lines without Tailwater for
48 in. Helical Lock Seam
Pipe with 2 in. by 1/2 in.
Corrugations
O 189.74 cfs
185.17 cfs
A 178.12 cfs
O 171.01 cfs
Invert of Pipe
140 160 180 200
Stations along Test Pipe in Feet
177
-------
Fig. A-5- Typical Hydraulic Grade
Lines without Tailwater for
48 in. Helical Lock Seam
Pipe wifh 2-2/3 in. by
1/2 in. Corrugations
O 193.90 cfs
Q 184.89 cfs
A 174.57 cfs
O 163.89 cfs
Invert of Pipe
Stations along Test Pipe in Feet
178
-------
Fig.A-6 - Typical Hydraulic Grade
Lines without Downstream
Valve for 24 in. Helical
Lock Seam Pipe with
2-2/3 in. by 1/2 in.
Corrugations
O 38.417 cfs
36.425 cfs
31.311 cfs
26.102 cfs
Invert of Pipe
60 70 80
Stations along Test Pipe in Feet
179
-------
FigoA-7- Typical Hydraulic Grade
Lines without Downstream
Valve for 12 in. Helical
Lock Seam Pipe with 2-2/3
in. by 1/2 in. Corrugations
O 11.662 cfs
0 10.454 cfs
A 9.193 cfs
O 7.246 cfs
+ 4.937 cfs
10
60 70 80
Stations along Test Pipe in Feet
180
-------
1.0
0.8
0.6
Y/D
0.4
0.2
I
••n
1J\
^^^f^f
~]
m
^l
*»j^
*z»
<*^
o
^
r
\ .
3
a
^
N
,
•X
32468
Pipe Dia. Corrugations
Type of Pipe in. in.
O Helical 24 2 x 1/2
Q Helical 18 2 x 1/2
A Helical 12 2 x 1/2
O Annular Riveted 66 6 x. \ ,
€ Annular Bolted 66 9 x 2-1/2
E Annular Riveted 48 6x1
A Helical 48 2 x 1/2
O Helical 48 2-2/3x1/2
3 Helical 24 2-2/3x1/2
3 Helical 12 2-2/3x1/2 '
[
,
r
--A
a
10 12
1969 Study
This Work
These tests were made with no tail water.
Fig.A-8- Position of Hydraulic Grade Line at the Pipe Outlet
181
-------
Appendix B
VELOCITY PROFILES
Velocity profiles were obtained along the vertical diameter at 10 ft
from the end for the 21; in. and 12 in. pipes. The velocity direction and
magnitude were measured with a 3/8 in. diameter pitot cylinder [2] used in
conjunction with a static tube. The location of these measurements was shown
in Pig. 7. As the flow is not parallel to the pipe axis, the static probe
had to be directed into the flow. To accomplish this, the direction of flow
was determined first with the pitot cylinder at a distance of 2.13 in. from
the top and bottom of the pipe, this being the distance the static tube pro-
truded into the pipe. The direction of the static tube was set to the aver-
age of these two directions. The tube reading served as a reference against
which to measure total heads with the pitot cylinder. Traverses of the
static tube from the 2.13 in. position toward the wall with the pitot cylin-
der held at a fixed position as reference showed that there was practically
no static pressure variation over this distance.
Velocity profiles were obtained for the following runs:
RUNS FOR WHICH VELOCITY PROFILES WERE OBTAINED
Pipe
size
in.
2k
12
Q
Me as.
cfs
26.198
8.258
D
ft
1.9950
0.9781
V
fps
8.380
10.990
i/ x 105
ft2 /sec
1.895
1.859
Re
x 10"6
0.8822
0.5782
f
(Fig.
23)
0.01422
0.0229
Q
Inte-
grated
cfs
26.10
8.35
12 8.1148 0.9781 10.8104 1.859 0.5705 0.0229 8.20
Tables B-l, B-2, and B-3 contain the basic measured data along with
some computations based thereon. Figures B-l and B-2 show the velocity
magnitude plotted along the vertical diameter for the two pipes. Velocity
readings above +11.90 inches in the 2k in. pipe (Fig. B-l) and above +5.85
inches in the 12 in. pipe (Fig. B-2) were measured within the corrugation
at the top of the pipe.
Figure B-3 shows the velocity magnitude and direction in the top halves
of the pipes. The center flow was axial for the 12 in. pipe and 2 degrees
from axial in the 2k in. pipe, the latter direction being used as the
182
-------
reference or zero angle. Figure B-3 shows that close to the wall the flow
approaches the helical direction and that in the corrugation it is essen-
tially in the helical direction. The photographs in Pig. B-U show the flow
directions at the outlet for the two U8 in. pipes, one annular and the other
helical. The spiral nature of the flow along the wall of a helical pipe is
clearly shown by a comparison of the two photos.
The velocity profiles have been plotted in the form of the velocity
defect law in Fig. B-5 and in law-of-the-wall form in Fig. B-6. For com-
parison, similar plots from the earlier work [l] have also been placed on
these graphs. The results are quite comparable, although the new data indi-
cate, from Fig. B-5» that the reduction in turbulence may not be quite so
great for the new pipes as it was in the earlier tests. The reason for the
slight difference is not readily apparent.
The law-of-the-wall plot in Fig. B-6 shows that the roughness of the
2i4. in. helical pipe in the present tests should be somewhat less than in the
previous tests. This was not borne out by the friction factor measurements
displayed in Figs. 28 and 29. Figure B-6 also seems to indicate that the
present 12 in. pipe has about the same roughness as the previous 12 in. pipe
of larger helix angle. Again, the friction factor measurements displayed in
Figs. 28 and 29 show a different result, the smaller helix angle pipe showing
a lesser friction factor. The discrepancies are not large, and certainly the
direct measurements of friction factor should be given precedence.
183
-------
«n
c
o
•H
-*-1
0>
hO
g
O
O
•
c
•H
O
PQ
0
O
ON
w
a,
o
cc; II
0
a
g
o
3
pi
W
PQ
<
a
co
P-i
o a
0
o
ON.
•
O
O OO 0- U A
Jh r> o r
CO - J- OO C
r ^ c\l CM rH
O O ON ON OO CO CO
a\
rH rH O Q\ ON OO OO C^ - {>- O-
\O VO VO
Pi
I
£1
CO
OO
O O
O- OO CO OO ON ON O
rH
OU^OOOOu^OOOOOOiAOOO
rH rH rH rH
OO VO C^\
d
II to to
t«J O ^*H
a*
O
IN
•
CN
O O O u> O
CM! rH rH O
j O O- UN. C^ C~\ rH O OO V0»
co co ao oo o- {>• r*- r>- f>- o- vo vo
-f-^cn
3- 3- c^,
rH \O
• • • •
•^ O
* rH
>> X
" \ r-i CNO^i-H ONO-U^C^rH ONO-VDWP\votr\(\l rH rH
OOOVQU~A_-t O^C^CvlCxlOJrHrHpHrHrHOOOOOOOOOO
r-IOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOC3OOOOOC5O
CMOO U^(\JU^\OO ^ArHOOrHjHhCOrHj^-O-rHjj- r—IONCOVOrHOOU>,crA
C°\ CN- t-T\ C^ ^}- rH O ON O- O- VO Vjp\ U^ 3" C*~A C"\ C\J CXJrHf—I r—IrHOOO
r>OJ
-------
08
hO
O
O
cx,
"^ ON
I 00
&
ON
CM
fe
EH
a
o
H
II
O
§
3
II (0 10
o p
CD O CM
OOCMr>-CMr-lO-tr\OONOOMDCMOO.3-r-IMDON ON
• «••••••••%•••«•••• •
3 OO OO
vr\
ON
OOOO^OOOOOOOOOQOOOO O
D OO OO
• • •
JN OO OO
'3
dl
oo
ON
&
OC'OOr-l\O4tOC7N(NjN£)\OcrN,OVOO»OOOinOOOu^OOOO
(MC\JOrH^vOj±-^C\iC^t>- ONVO C^A ON O C^-^J- Or-l u^\MDONONC^-OOOO
O O O O O O
r—I -d- OO vPvVO VO
U^ OO OO NO H r-l
• % • • • •
OO
-I r-< r-l r-l r-4 ,-<
r-l rH r-4
00
ON
ON
O CV -df VO 00 O C\i ^ CM O C^- fA ON VT\ CM C^ C°\ r—l O ON 0
r-4oooooooooooo ooooooooooooo
^
j O C^- vr\ CM
r-ir-ilr-ir-ir-if-ioOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
(D
I O
CO £
•H r-l I VTN. -31
gq) •! • «>
> H o o
O
oooooooooooooooooooooooo
(D
I O
CO £
•H *
OO'OOOOOO
O O r-l r-l CM CM r
CNJ
185
-------
CM
o
r-l
X
CM
Z5 ~
B
PcJ
I
a
M
O
a
">
0 00 0
OOOOrHCMCMC^
"A O NO -dh u^
NO tv c^- 00 co co
II to tO
o p|
CD o
• ••••••
-3-CMCMONOcMONU^CMOON C^-
• ••••%••••« ,
0 v>» 0
0 0 0
10
> H ON MD Io C^ r-l
CM
CM
H O O O<
O 0 0 0 r-4 CM CM 0^ O- r-4 O^ VT>
v CNJ-^!c\!9c^c^axu^cvit^ ^^ o bsoo
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^-^ •* •* -* f*^ <*^ W CNl CVJ r-» H H H 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOCDOOO
^ \
%» X
r-l ON CM
PQ
^ § B$3
-H « £ a 'i
Q 43 £ g g
W CM CVJ H i-4 iH H H 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0% 0 0 0 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% 0
0 0 0 0
(D
I O E
-------
O)
S9lpU| Uj 9UI|J94U93 UJOJJ
187
-------
o
O M
>^
4) CD
<
/
-U
, ,-
4- 4-
n CN
4- 4-
u
T ^ CO
_0
00 >
(N
.8-
ol
«o
«
C
.58
£• .
"3.5
o
IS-
i
CN
CO
C»
188
-------
Axpal Direction
Axial Direction
Helical
Direction
12 Inch Pipe
Velocity in fps
012345
Fig. B-3 - Velocity Vectors, Top Halves of Pipes for 24 in. and
12 in. Helical Lock Seam Pipe witn 2-2/3 in. by
1/2 in. Corrugations
189
-------
d
c
00
I
CO
O)
190
-------
2
Q_
U
_0
9)
CO
d>
n - XDU1n
SS»|UOJSUaiUIQ
191
-------
Q©
\
So—r~^
I A
o \
*f>
>^
"O
u-»
II
>*
X33:
o
J \
o
o
o
CO
Or
E>
^dl
oo
»o
D-
>\
••-o
CO
•o
0.-GD-
-o
\
u-
o
^. , 0>
^12
\
n-
ro
O
O *~
— x
00
Q ^
u
_o
V
X)
CO
0>
o
o
o
CO
*A/D - ^4po|»/\ ssa|uo;suoLui(]
192
-------
APPENDIX B
CORROSION SECTION MEMO REPORT CSR 74-2
PERFORMANCE OF LaSALLE ILLINOIS ALUMINUM STORM DRAIN SYSTEM
FIRST YEAR INSPECTION
by
T. J. Summerson
Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corporation
April 24, 1974
BACKGROUND
In 1972, with Federal aid (EPA), the City of LaSalle,
Illinois, replaced an old storm drain system with an aluminum
(Alclad 3004 and 5052) storm sewer system.
Annual inspections were planned for the first 10 years
service. Representatives of Kaiser Aluminum and Chamlin &
Associates (engineering consultants for the City of LaSalle)
are to inspect and to take samples for laboratory study on
durability of the aluminum drain system.
SUMMARY
Aluminum storrn drain system is in excellent condition
after one year service. All of the Alclad 3004 samples show
corrosion is confined to the thin cladding layer. While there
have been some pinhole perforations found in the crown section
of the 5052 alloy arched pipe, this structure is still sound.
Orange-red-brown (rust-like) discolorations were found
on concrete catch basins as well as on the aluminum pipe. Analysis
showed this to be amorphous iron oxides which convert to
hematite (Fe2O3) with calcining.
Yellow-brown discolored deposits removed from the invert
areas of the aluminum pipe were found to be predominantly calcium
193
-------
carbonate, i.e., typical scale from the water. (The yellow-
brown color was due to traces of iron oxide, i.e., rust).
STATUS
Annual inspections and laboratory analyses of samples
removed will continue, as planned.
FIELD INSPECTION
The one year inspection was made on August 16, 1973. The
inspection party consisted of
Chamlin & Associates: Jim Giordano
Al Witzeman
Kaiser Aluminum: D. C. Thomas
Len Hall
T. J. Summerson
Inspection of the storm drain system interior was started
at the outfall end of the 72 inch diameter Alclad 3004-1 x 6
pipe. Figure 1 shows the entire system and points of inspection.
Location #1
Only the 40 foot length of pipe under the railroad tracks
shows any corrosion. The section of 72 inch aluminum drain
underneath the CRI & P railroad tracks is encased in a steel
tunnel liner. (The tunnel liner was installed to assist in
support of heavy loads of railroad rolling stock.) There is
a 3 - 4 inch dead air space between the steel outer liner and
the aluminum. The outside surface of the aluminum pipe, facing
the steel liner, was coated with a bitumastic.
Corrosion is a. superficial, general etch type of attack which
has given the metal a dark gray - black soot coloration which
194
-------
rubs off. Corrosion of this 40 foot section seems unusual because
corrosion is confined to the upper half of the inside diameter.
It also seems to be more apparent on the upstream side of the
corrugation.
The first metal sample (3x4 inches) was taken from the
crown area of the 72 inch diameter pipe, encased in the steel tunnel
liner. The steel liner showed scattered small rust modules when
seen through the hole where the aluminum sample had been removed.
(The outside surface of the aluminum was coated with some type of
bituminous paint.) The hole in the aluminum pipe was covered
with a patch, using self tapping electrogalvanized steel fasteners.
Elsewhere along the pipe to the first man-hole at Canal
Street, there is little evidence of corrosion. Occasionally, there
is exudation of white corrosion products and dissolved salts
from ground waters at the seams, but nothing of any consequence.
Location #2
At the first man-hole (Canal Street) we find evidence of
yellow-red flocculate precipitate in residual water, standing
in the corners of the concrete catch basin. It appears the water
comes in through leaks in the concrete. The red colored
flocculate is probably oxides of iron.
The pH of the water flowing through the pipe is 6.5 according
to pH paper measurements made at the first man-hole.
The second metal sample (one inch dia.) was taken from the
66 inch diameter pipe, about 25 feet further back from the first
man-hole towards the steep sloping pipe. The sample position
is 2/3 up the side, towards the crown. The soil side of the
sample shows etch-like attack and the inside surface is unaffected.
The backfill is
195
-------
More yellow-brown scale deposits were collected from the
surface of the aluminum pipe near the base of ths steep slope
section. (Previous XRD analyses revealed this to be calcium
carbonate.) The aluminum underneath shows no attack where
scale existed.
Intensive inspection of the steep slope portion of the
pipe was made in order to determine whether there had been any
accordian effect (compaction of corrugations) caused by excessive
loads on the pipe. A 15 foot ladder was used to facilitate the
inspection. Figures 2 and 3 show the pipe interior. There
appeared to be no structural problems or corrosion. The rust
discolored calcium carbonate scale is obvious. A water sample
was obtained.
Location #3
Entrance to the storm drain system was next made through a
manhole at the top of the steep slope section (1st and Wright.)
Upstream is the half round, arched metal pipe (5052) with a flat
concrete floor. The width of the main drain is about 11 feet
and height is about 5 feet.
The concrete floor has fine, longitudinal cracks in it
with occasional white-gray colored product exudating from the
cracks.
The 0.125 inch thick 5052 structural plate (Bedford lot
710719) shows scattered blistering and pin hole perforations
at many points from 1st to 3rd street (See Figure 4). These
occur randomly along the crown and side walls. Usually, there
is a buildup of WCP (white corrosion product) around each
pinhole with some bleeding of the white CP down the metal surface.
Also, typically, larger areas (up to one inch in diameter) are
found where the metal has lifted or blistered due to internal
pressure from the formation of sub-surface corrosion products.
196
-------
A 3-1/2 x 4-1/2 inch metal sample (3rd sample) was taken from
the crown-side wall area. This sample contained a typical pinhole
perforation—blistering corrosion (Intersection of 1st and Wright
Streets). A sample of the selective backfill (sand) was also
obtained. A patch was placed over the hole and held in place
with metal self tapping fasteners. Close visual examination
of the metal sample revealed mounds of sand firmly attached to
those points where pinhole perforations were found. This is
probably due to the cement-like affect of WCP and moist backfill).
Elsewhere, the soil side was in good condition. In other words,
about 99 percent of the 5052 surface is unaffected.
The occurrence of red-orange rust colored, gelatinous
deposits was seen at bolt holes along the bottom of the half-round
arched pipe. See Figure 5. (This is the same amorphous iron
oxide material as previously mentioned.) The galvanized steel
bolts and the aluminum appear to be relatively unaffected by
the presence of these deposits.
At this point, inspection was delayed for 2 hours by a
rain storm which increased markedly the water flow through the
drain system.
Location #4
Bucklin between 8th and 9th. The 30 inch diameter pipe
looked good. Metal and soil samples were taken.
Location #5
Bucklin and 10th Street. The 44-inch pipe flows into
18 inch and 15 or 12 inch diameter pipes. All look good. (Sample
taken from the 18 inch diameter pipe and soil.)
197
-------
Locations #6 & 7
9th and Marquette. Pipes examined at intersection. All
four pipes in good appearance. Soil and metal sample #6 were
taken from 36-inch diameter pipe, north of manhole. Soil and
metal sample #7 were taken from the 18-inch diameter pipe, west
of manhole.
Location #8
6th Street, between Wright and Bucklin. Red-orange flocculate
deposits were noted exuding out of cracks and pores of a concrete
catch basin, away from the aluminum pipes. Walking up the pipe
towards Wright Street, same red-orange deposits noted exuding
out of side wall laps of aluminum pipe. Picking away the orange
top layer, reveals a shiny black underlayer. Behind this black
layer is bright, unaffected aluminum. There is a slight odor
of H2S present.
Most of the red-orange deposits are observed in the lower
portions of the drain, towards Bucklin, and in the catch basin.
Ground waters (high water table) are prevalent, forcing water
into the aluminum pipe and concrete catch basin. As you walk
"up hill" towards Wright Street, the presence of red-orange
exudation and scale disappears. The pipe is bright and clean.
The orange colored deposits had been submitted earlier by
Cliff DeGraff from this area. X-ray diffraction analysis identified
these as a hydrated iron oxide (hematite). The underlying
black deposits are believed to be less highly oxidized iron
oxide (magnetite), which will convert to the red-orange oxide
when sufficient exposure to air (oxygen) allows complete oxidation
to occur.
A soil, water and metal (Sample #8) were taken from the
60-inch pipe, west of the manhole on Wright.
198
-------
Location #9
7th Place and Marquette. Some nodules of corrosion products
were noted in the invert area of the 48-inch diameter pipe. Soil,
water and metal samples (#9) were taken.
LABORATORY EVALUATION
Soil and metal samples were tested by Kaiser Aluminum at
the Center for Technology (CFT), in Pleasanton, California.
The water samples were sent out for analysis by Chamlin &
Associates.
At CFT, pH and minimum resistivity of the soil samples were
measured in accordance with the State of California, Department
of Highway method 643 B. The results are shown below.
Sample # & Type pH Minimum Resistivity, ohm-cm
3 - sand 8.3 2,200
4 - brown sand 8.5 3,900
5 - dark brown sand 8.4 8,200
6 - sand 8.7 2,600
7 - brown sand 8.1 1,000
8 - sand 7.9 2,700
9 - gravel 8.7 2,900
The metal samples were photographed on soil and inside
surfaces, before and after removing dirt and any corrosion products
The dirt was washed off and corrosion products removed by ASTM
method 67-1 (hot chromic-phosphoric acid cleaner).
Sections were cut out of the metal samples which contain
the deepest appearing corrosion on both the soil and the inside
surfaces. These sections were mounted in epoxy and polished,
prior to microscopic examination. The maximum depth of corrosion
and the predominant forms of corrosion were photographed.
199
-------
A typical metal sample for Alclad 3004 pipe is shown in
Figure 6, after the dirt and corrosion products have been
are 2* ^^^^^ "'"-sections for all Alclad 3004 samples
are sho«n in Flgure 7. In all ^^^ ^^ ^ J
to the thin cladding. On the soil side of sample 7, all of the
claddxng appears to have been consumed. Examination of Fxgure
shows, however, that better than 60 percent of the cladHino
is still apparent on the soil side of this sample.*
The appearance of the pit-blisters, perforated 5052
alloy arched pipe is shown in Figure 8 (before cleaning) and
Figure 9 (after cleaning, . when the sample was first taken
damp sand and corrosion product formed mounds over the three
corroded areas on the soil side. (The black circles indicate
the extent of these mounds., On drying, the sand and most Qf
WCP sloughed off. when cleaned, the blister-up lift appearance
of corrosion becomes obvious. (Figure 9).
is sh of the pinhole perforations
is shown ln Figure 10. The uplifting reflects the directionality
of the grain structure and the corrosion.
The three water samples (locations 2, 8 6 9) were analyzed
-suit! are
Result: mg/1 except as noted
Sampl
Analysis:
Parameters
Alkalinity
Copper
Nickel
Iron
Sample
285
<0.02
0.07
<0.05
#1
<0.02
n n^
n n,
^"
-------
The scale and rust colored gelatinous deposits taken from
the aluminum pipes and from concrete catch basins were examined
by X-ray diffraction (XRD), emission spectrography and by energy
dispersive spectrographic analysis. As indicated earlier, the
scale consisted mainly of CaC03 (calcium carbonate). Also
found was Ca(OH)2 and silicon in the form of silica. None of
these compounds is corrosive towards aluminum.
Emission spectrographic analyses of the rust colored
gelatinous deposits showed major elements present to be iron,
calcium and silicon. XRD showed the calcium present as calcium
carbonate and the silicon as silica (quartz). On calcining at
300°C, a crystalline iron compound, Fe203, was detected. (Until
calcining, the iron was probably in an amorphous, hydrated
iron oxide form.)
The calcium carbonate probably originates from dissolved
salts in ground waters. The iron oxide is probably the product
of anaerobic decomposition of iron compounds in the soils.
The good performance of the ALclad 3004 pipe is typical and
follows the experiences of literally thousands of other Alclad
3004 pipe samples examined under similar conditions of service
for periods as long as 15 years.
The pit-blisters and pinhole perforations noted occasionally
in the crown area of the 5052 alloy arched pipe is unusual in
its occurrence. At this inspection, its presence is of nuisance
value because there has been no loss in strength or structural
integrity. While it is unlikely,further inspections will determine
if pin hole perforations will increase in sufficient frequency
to become a factor of concern. Moreover, it should be remembered
that large sections and areas of the 5052 structural plate arch
did not exhibit any evidence of corrosion.
201
-------
The presence of the red-rust colored deposits on the aluminum
pipe, while unsightly, has been no concern. It has been noted
in the concrete catch basins and it appears to be oxide of iron.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Most of the colored photographs used in the first year's
report were taken by Len Hall during the inspection. Handling
the yeomen duty during the inspection were Al Witzman and Len
Hall.
202
-------
IV
,'>'J
/
-?. 5
—:' , U_
\ I I ,
•• / ----;*
A: ARTHUR
3Ak.
J
J031 IKJ K&M K.J] *
££.. (
«. : :,'-,
•-rfl) ,ib 5-n
'-f »B
^•fei '"B
Q
^a
" \UWiHa
sQ
rx.v,.
.^*ccy
-><£>"• c
ft H
L§I—J
"I
C^)fe
— a-r,>aVr,^
psTsa t^> ij
••""1, x-^- ;
H
W
L~.
I Sj U ',t»'>'^.^'
• *- ' " " ^\ \
M 9p •***•
1
c^
fa
L
\
r
—i
s
w
EH
«
W
W
CO
O
EH
a
6
CO
TI
C
fC
W
0)
-M
•H
CO
C
O
-H
O
0)
a
c
H
V-i
CD
CU
C
O
S O
fcl
H
s
D
C
O
•H
4^
03
O
O
i--- v "^ :"*\-5*"
r ..... ft
l V , ,,
1 --- _...-, ., f
n '..
ir
fc.
203
-------
Figure 2
72-inch diameter Alclad 3004 pipe, looking up
towards 1st & Wright Streets from Canal—One
year inspection (8/16/73)
Brownish discoloration is the calcium carbonate
scale formed with the passage of storm waters.
204
-------
Figure 3
72-inch diameter Alclad 3004 pipe at the bend in steep sloped section below 1st
and Wright - One Year Inspection (8/16/73).
Top shows roof section of pipe. Bottom photos show rust discolored calcium
carbonate scale in invert area of pipe (Deformations or buckles made in pipe
at time of installation).
205
-------
Figure 4
Pinhole perforations in 0.125-inch 5052 arched
pipe—One year inspection (1st to 3rd Streets
on Wright.)
Observed randomly in the crown and upper side
walls. The buildup of white corrosion products
(WCP) forms a nodule. Some bleeding of the WCP
has occurred down the side from the nodules
206
-------
Figure 5
LaSALLE ILLINOIS - ONE YEAR INSPECTION
Gelatinous red-orange (rust colored) deposits exuding from
bolt holes at the base of the aluminum, adjacent to the
concrete floor. (1st & Wright). These have been identified
as iron oxide.
The same deposits were noted in concrete catch basins elsewhere.
When deposits are removed, underlying aluminum shows no evidence
of corrosion. 2n7
-------
CM
O
(N
I
PO
•H
CO
•H
O
CO
in
CN
o
CM
1
n
f-
—
Q)
O
rd
M-l
^
3
CO
0)
TJ
•H
CO
C
t— i
Q)
U
CO
M
O
2
M
i_3
t-3 *-^»
M ro
[**•
W \
t-1 UD
h^) r-\
i-q "
1
0) 1
^_l ^j
P 2 0)
Cn O |5
•H H Q)
En H CO
U
w e
CO O
2 -P
H CO
« |
3 C
JH -H
e
W 3
2 rH
O <
rd oo
M-l C rH
^( -H
3 0)
co en &
rd -P
M-l 0)
0 H g •
rd O 0)
;V }_| | 1
U T3 4-1 -P
rd QJ 0)
-P >-i en P
-P O -H tr1
O r- rd
TJ U S
Q) 0
VH i * rH rri
CD x: a c
-P Cn g rd
-P -H rd
rd rH CO X<
U -P
en QJ cr.
x< •
+. ±> (A 4J
•H O rd
rd cn -P
•H rd O d)
u x: a
•H cn CVH
>-i rd (1)
a)
-------
Q
o
4-J
OJ
C
-H
M_l
G
O
U
attack noted
cladding on
ONE "EAR SAMPLING, 1973
i and inside surface up in these ohotos
j.-,
0
rd
0)
•H
in
r-H
•H
o
CO
e
0
4J
P
0
CQ
0
4-1
ft
O
EH
*.
O
4-1
O
OH
4-1
M-4
CD
pits on inside surface (top) only.
it Street) .
ttered
rd
u
CO
x;
4-1
•H
£
M
QJ
C
•H
rH
rH
QJ
c
G
D
EH
1
rH
QJ
rH
ft
X,
Oi
-H
^4
!S
£
O
rH
QJ
2.
iameter
*d
X!
o
d
-H
{£)
(Q
1
CM
Between 8th and 9th Streets.
.cklin. Etch attack on the soil side •';
5.
X} P
CQ
•H 13
rH
0 4->
P O
PQ rH
C G
O 0
iameter
iameter
'd *d
X! X!
O U
G C
•H -H
O 00
ro rH
1 1
•^ LT)
(N
CO
QJ
rH
£
CO
c
o
Q)
^1
fd
rH
'd
rd
rH
O
Bottom:
o
4-1
ft
0
EH
«.
o
o
p^
4-1
x:
Oi
•H
a/
4-'
4-'
Ql
$
t<5
X
4-5
CT
iameter
*d
x;
u
c
•H
l£)
ro
1
VD
OJ
rH
a,
e
rd
0)
4->
4-1
QJ
1 Cr
rd
S
eg
x;
4-1
CTi
iameter
•d
_c\
O
•H
00
rH
1
o
cklin.
D
, m
M-l
O
x;
4-1
i
iameter
"d
x:
u
c
•H
O
{£)
1
CO
uette.
d^
rd
X!
1
iameter
rj-J
X!
U
•H
O
ro
1
CTi
W
^ QJ
o x;
S -P
iw
• o
CO
CD rH
rH rH
a fd
£
rd -
co r^
rH QJ
rH rH
rd ft T3
6 OJ
G rd E
O co 3
CO
S-4 G G
Q) O O
>i 0
rd
rH • G
QJ QJ
tn T3 Q)
G -H X)
•H CO
T! G QJ
•d -H >
rd rd
rH C X!
O rd
x: o
O 4-) -M
4->
ifined
o
u
c
o
-r-t
Corros.
^-x CO
C to
£ rd
O QJ
•d ft
~ &
QJ
T3 QJ
•H rH
CO £1|
rH fd
•H CO
O
CO CO
•H
G X!
O 4->
CO
& CO
209
-------
(73-1311)
Inside
Pinhole-blister
perforations
noted in crown
area after one
year. Top photo
shows blister
area with a
slight amount of
white corrosion
products.
Lower photo shows
the soil side with
three distinct
mounds of WCP.
The black circles
indicate area
originally
encompassed by
sand backfill and
gelatinous cor-
rosion, deposits,
prior to drying
out.
(73-1310)
Soil Side
Figure 8
LaSALi.fi ILlINOiS STORM DRAIN-ARCHED 5052 PIPE
210
-------
Pit-blister
and pinhole.
perforations
observed.
At tack
initiated
from soil
s ide where
selective
backfill
(sand) was
found. Much
of the pit-
ting occurs
aJong lines
and scratches
formed during
corrugating
process.
're 9
DRAIN - 1 YEAR SAMPLE //3
'.R'.;PFT) PIPE
-------
So:i 1 Side
Inside
10X, anodized-sensitive tint (M52491)
Soil Side
40X, anodized-sensitive tine (M52489)
Figure (0
5052 ARCHED PLATE • LaSALLR ILLINOIS
One Year Sample (Sample /M - 1973)
Pit blistering occurs from soil side in a highly
elongated grain structure,
212
-------
APPENDIX C
MEMO REPORT
C S ° 7 5 — 1
PERFORMANCE OF LaSAIJ.E ILLINOIS ALUMINUM
STORM DRAIN SYSTEM AFTER TWO YEARS' SERVICE
May 7, .1975
By
R . J . HOGAN
Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corporation
An aluminum storm drain system was installed by the City of
LaSalle, Illinois, with Federal Aid (EPA), in 1972. The system
includes Alclad 3004 culvert, and 5052 structural plate.
Annual inspections are planned for the first 10 years' ser-
vice. Representatives of Kaiser Aluminum, the City of LaSalle,
Illinois State Highway Department, and Chamlin & Associates (con-
sultants for the City of LaSaLle) are to inspect the aluminum storm
drain system for durability and performance.
The first annual inspection Ref. 1 (1973) revealed aluminum
pipe was in structurally sound condition.
a. Corrosion was confined to the thin cladding layer on
all Alclad aluminum samples.
b. Some pinhole perforations were found in the crown sec-
tions of a few sections of 5052 alloy arched pipe.
c. Orange-reddish brown discolorations on aluminum pipe
and concrete were found to be amorphous iron oxides.
d. Deformation or buckling of a sharply inclined 72-inch
diameter culvert below 1st and Wright Streets was noted.
SUMMARY
The aluminum storm drain system remains in excellent condi-
tion after two years' service with no evidence of structural dam-
age.
In Alclad 3004 pipe samples, eight of the nine samples showed
corrosion, if any, is limited to the thin cladding layer. The
ninth Alclad 3004 sample lu.s perforations which appear to be the
result of dissimilar metal corrosion. This sample was taken adjacent
to the end of a bare steel tunnel liner over the culvert. (The tunnel
213
-------
liner was installed under railroad tracks due to existing AREA
specifications. Pipe to soil potentials indicated the steel
liner must not have been isolated from the aluminum at the time
of installation. Cathodic protection should be used to protect
the steel and the adjacent aluminum.
With 5052 alloy structural plate, the pit-blister and pin-
hole perforation activity appears to have subsided.
There has been no further "accordioning", i.e. mechanical
deformation of the steeply inclined 72 inch Alclad 3004 corru-
gated pipe located below 1st and Wright Streets.
STATUS
Annual inspections and laboratory analysis of samples
removed will continue.
FIELD INSPECTION
The second annual inspection party, made on September 19,
1974, consisted of:
Chamlin & Associates Jim Giordano
Al Witzeman
Illinois State Highway Jon Bourne
Department
City of LaSalle, Illinois Bill Mallie
Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Len Hall
Corporation Cliff DeGraff
Bob Vaterlaus
Dave Thomas
Dick Hogan
The storm drain inspection was started at the outfall end of the
72" dia. Alclad 3004 -1x6 pipe, below Canal Street and the rail-
road tracks. Figure 1 shows the entire aluminum storm drain system
and points out location of the 1973 and 1974 metal samples.
A 40-foot length of pipe under the CRI&P Railroad, encased
in a steel liner, is coated with a dark oxide film (very light
aluminum oxide), which most likely is due to condensate collect-
ing on the inside of the pipe. This darkening was noted during
the 1973 inspection. Sections on each end of this 40-foot length
show relatively heavy corrosion (See discussion p.4 on Loca-
tion 11) .
Eleven aluminum samples, eleven soil and three water
samples were removed during the inspection. The metal samples
214
-------
were removed with a two-inch hole saw. An aluminum cover patch,
with a mastic sealer, was placed over the hole and attached with
stainless steel metal screws. See Fig. 2. In addition, pipe to
soil and pipe to water potentials were measured, using a Cu-CuSOu
reference electrode. (Miller Potential Meter RE-5). Inspection
notes of the eleven sites follow:
Location 1 - 20 feet south of manhole on Canal Street - Alclad
3004, 72" dia. -1x6. No pitting or staining of
culvert on water side. A 2-inch metal sample was removed
with a hole saw. Pitting of the cladding on the soil
side is evident. The soil is a granular backfill
(brown sand).
The steep anglod (sloping) 72" dia. -1x6 pipe,
one block north of Canal Street, shows no further
evidence of movement or deformation, i.e. "accordioning".
Initial movement and deformation of the 45° angled
pipe is believed due to earth compaction or settling
during the first year of service.
Location 2 - 175 feet north of manhole on 1st and Wright Streets,
Alloy 5052 arch. pipe. (This location corresponds
with sample #3 of the 1973 inspection). Red-orange
rust-colored deposits (amorphous iron oxide) noted
during the 1973 inspection are now less evident and
also drier. The frequency of the scattered pit-
blistering and perforations of the 0.125-inch thick
5052 structural plate,, does not appear to have
increased during the year. In fact, the exudation
of gelatinous corrosion product, noted in 1973, is
almost dry and appears inactive. A 1.5 x 3-foot area
of the structural plate (Figure 3) containing 60
corrosion sites (200 feet north of the manhole) was
marked off to be inspected again next year, in 1975.
A second 1.5 x 3 foot area was identified and etch
cleaned, using NaOH, to remove staining caused by
corrosion product run-down. This area will also be
inspected in 1975 for evidence of further activity
(Figure 4) ,
Location 3 - 40 feet east of manhole, 3rd and Bucklin. Alloy
5052 arch pipe. There was no evidence of pit-blisters
or perforations in this area. A sample was removed
at random. Superficial corrosion is evident on the
soil side; no pit-blistering, however.
Location 4 -
24 feet east of manhole on 6th Street between Bucklin
and Wright. Alclad 3004, 60" dia. -1x6.
Heavy deposits of hydrated iron oxide (hematite) as
215
-------
Location 5 -
Location 6 -
Location 7 -
identified by x-ray diffraction, are still present
in this area; both on the concrete catch basin and
the water side (inside) of the pipe. The high water
table in this area probably creates pressure for
heavy flow of fluid in the backfill to exude into
the pipe and concrete. This was also noted while
removing a 2-inch diameter metal sample (Figure 5).
3 feet south of manhole on 6th between Bucklin and
Wright - Alclad 3004, 60" dia. -1x6.
Similar deposits of hematite are present on the pipe
in this location. Etching of the cladding layer on
both the soil and water side of the pipe is present
A high water table is also present at this location!
Manhole, S.W. corner, 7th and Gooding - Alclad 3004
Corlix vertical catch basin.
The fill behind the metal sample at this location was
dry. Neither side (soil or water) of the pipe
experienced etching or staining.
83 feet north of manhole, 4th and Bucklin - Alclad
3004 66" dia. -1x6. A slight staining of the
cladding was noted on the sample removed from this
area.
oLfeet S°Uth °f manh°le, 4th and Bucklin - Alclad
3003, 42' dia. -1x6. The water side of the pipe
shows minor staining. Soil side of the sample removed
shows some etching of the cladding.
45 feet south of manhole, 7th Place and Marquette -
Alclad 3004, 48" dia. -1x6. Inside of the pipe
is clean, no deposits or staining. The soil side of
the sample indicates some pitting of the thin clad-
ding layer.
Location 10- 1 foot west of manhole on Linburg Road and Marquette -
Alclad 3004 15" dia. Corlix.
The wa^er and soil sides of this pipe are clean and
show no corrosion.
Location 11- 185 feet south of manhole on Canal Street - Alclad
3004, 72" dia. -1x6. During the morning inspec-
tion of this section of pipe, we noticed several
areas of white corrosion product on the inside of the
Location 8 -
Location 9 -
216
-------
pipe at two locations. These locations correspond
to the ends of a bare steel tunnel liner which
encases the culvert in an area where the CRI&P rail
spur runs overhead. A metal sample was taken. We
found several perforations in these two areas which
extended approximately 15 feet out from the ends of
the tunnel liner. The pipe to soil potential in
this area was -0.50 volts as compared to -0.72
volts in other areas not showing perforations. See
Table 1 and Figure 6.
LABORATORY EVALUATION
Eleven soil and metal samples plus one water sample were
tested by Kaiser Aluminum at the Center for Technology in Pleasanton,
(Ref. 2). (Two water samples were given to Chamlin & Associates
for testing locally.)
A. Soils.
Resistivity and pH of the soil samples (Table 1) were measured
in accordance with the State of California, Department of Highways
Method 643B. Soil resistivities and pH data were comparable with
the 1973 results.
B. Water.
Analysis of the one water sample sent to CFT is given below:
(Sample removed near the outfall end of the system.)
Element Quantity
(mg/1)
Chloride 170.
Sulfates 600.
Nitrate(N03) 17.6
Total phosphate (ortho 0.20) 0.33
Total solids @ 105° 1,368.
Ca 185.
Mg 71.
Na 96.
pH - 7.8
Conductivity - 1,670 y mho (600 fl cm)
(No heavy metals detectable)
C_. Metal Samples.
The aluminum samples were photographed on both the soil and
inside surfaces before and after cleaning. The dirt was washed
off and the corrosion products were removed by ASTM method 67-1
217
-------
(hot chromic-phosphoric acid cleaner). Figures 7 and 8 show
Samples 4 and 7 before and after cleaning of soil and water sides
Representative sections were removed from the eleven metal samples
mounted in epoxy and polished prior to metallographic examination!
Cross sections of the nine Alclad 3004 samples are shown in
Figure 9 at 5X. Corrosion, if any, is confined to the protective
cladding layer, except where galvanic corrosion with steel caused
perforation at one location (location 11).
Pit-blisters and pin-hole perforations (Figure 10) found
on the 5052 arch pipe after one year (1973) do not appear to have
increased in size or frequency and they are not detrimental to
the structural integrity of the pipe.
Cross sections of the 5052 arch pipe samples are shown in
ngure 11. Ihe bottom sample shows the normal type of pittinq
corrosion in 5052 alloy. The top sample contains the lamellar
pit-blister form of corrosion which is relatively rare.
DISCUSSION
Very few changes have occurred over the past year's service
as was expected. The pit-blistering of some sections of the 5052
arch pipe, in fact, seems to have subsided. The corrosion products
seem drier and inactive. Two 1.5 x 3-foot areas on the 5052 arch
plate were mapped, pits were counted in one area and will be
recounted, u--on subsequent inspections, to determine further activ-
ity. The otner area was etch cleaned for evidence of continuing
"weeping" in future years.
There is no significant difference between 1973 and 1974
inspections as far as attack of the cladding on Alclad 3004 pipe
is concerned. Less exudation of the flocculent reddish-brown
compound was also evident during the 1974 inspection.
Action should be taken to prevent further attack of the
aluminum pipe at opposite ends of a bare steel culvert liner
beneath the CRI&P Railroad tracks south of Canal Street (Loca-
tion 11). The aluminum appears to be unintentionally grounded
or shorted to the steel liner. Cathodic protection is suggested.
The steel liner should also be inspected to be sure it has
adequate protection. Information on cathodic protection methods
is being provided separately.
REFERENCES
1. Memo Report CSR 74-2 Performance of LaSalle, Illinois Aluminum
Storm Drain System First Year Inspection by T. J. Summerson,
'^P*• -Lx x£ ft, i y / _} •
2. LRB 727, pages 95 and 96. Larry Wong - 10/8/74.
218
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Photographs (colored) D. C. Thomas
Sample removal Cliff DeGraff
Preparations for inspection and Len Hall
operations of topside equipment
219
-------
«~t^ *;
CO CU 01
4-* D. 4-1
£k
Olj CJ rH
4-i a. IH
o T, o
cu a. co
i—i i-t
•H >
7
W
C
iH (U
»-»rH
i- Q.C.
O l-i TO
tn uco
M
Cv U
Q<
•o
C
re
CO
c
M
rC
4J
10
-H
O
2
0) y^
re •
JD
E re
u *H
C? 4-1
re
O
o •
- 0
rH O/
rH r4
•u
re in
cn re
C E
3 u
O
1-1 c:
js
o
4J O
cn tvi
O m
Z ^~
^-^
jO
re
rH
4-1
re
•o
u
0)
(-1
t)
C
C3
W
C
3
o
r<
O
4-J
M
•H
O
z:
cn
re
e
:j
a
C
c
o
ao
0*1
"-'
/*s
r>
re
i— i
4-1
re
"O
o
01
*•"
c
3
0
^r\
V4-I
O
Ol
I-l
3
4J
X
•H
!£
re
3
*T3
c in
3 re
ii E
oc u
T3 c;
re o
c
-a rsi
c -
C rsi
0) s-^
^-^
.
JD
re
rH
t i
re
,
o
o
u
^ *^3
01 C
oo o
u
(4-4 OC
o
•0
01 c
3
u ^
x c
•H re
& CO
a
B
5
^^^
cs •
_c
o w
O iH
rH 4->
M •
QJ -O
4-J O
nj -. O U
}-4 r^ QJ
C
o
iH
4J
3 x
O
PO rH
•a i
ce
rH •
cj re
rH iH
< -a
rH
i— 1
QJ 1
OH ••?
iH
CM X
re
•H
re
iH
o -
rH O
^ \J5
re
T) -H
re -o vo
CJ U ti .CO
•H o cu re
< O > .0
C CN
re
B csi
u-i o Jw o ^r
re Q.
•-I cu e
Z TO
re p.
cu E
z re
220
-------
4J 3
O W
2 TO
O i-l E
CO 4J tj
• 05 r^>
C -H G
•H O)
X 0>
e
O t3
•H 0)
U i-l
r-j o. a
•HI-IE
O l-i CO
1/3 o t/5
CO
01 to
o <
c
o
•H
4J
oi a
a. T-I
•H M
CL, U
CO
0)
Q
c
o
•H
4-)
10
u
o
>J
TJ
c n
CO CO *— N
co
B JO
P 0 03
3 o <8
o
10 « 73
•H r~- o
O CN Oi
^
§ '
CO
•O i-l
to -a so
or x
iH vO
< vO iH
«
O
JZ
c
i
(4^ ^
0 r-l
• o
55 3
PQ
4-1 «4)
14_I
J=
CO 4-t
OO -*
•o
o
Q.
E ^
CO f*\
•g .
tO fO y— ^
CO
E Xi
p o to
o c: ^
X) O «
0
AJ \£) *
0) * "O
•H O 0
O t-4 0)
Z >-* U
•>*
0 1
o
to
•a 1-1
CO *O vO
o : x
fM IN
•< - to
o
j_> O •
W VT 73
•H •• U
O 0s 0)
sg-
o
0 1
c"l •
to
T> -H
to "O vD
u r x
r-( oo
*
o
"c
to
°
U-i
• O 0)
S/3 U 4J
4-i Cu 3
vu rj-
m 4j B
0)
"5 I"
>-i re
O 10
z
C 05
CO B
B X>
u to
05 •• -
•H U~i
O »-l
o r
ft m
< -i
0 C3
M 4J
US O CO
O
4J CO .
V. - tJ
•H ON U
O CM (XI
Z N-- w
to 73 vO
U = X
4J T3
CO C
3 n
0) O.
0 I- E
•— <
-------
222
-------
Figure 2
TYPICAL SAMPLE REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT PROCEDURE
LASALLE, ILLINOIS ALUMINUM STORM DRAIN
Two-inch diameter metal sample is removed and
covered with a 6-inch rectangular patch attached
with stainless steel metal screws. 1974 locations
are identified by spray paint.
(Alclad 3004 - 66 inch dia. 1 x 6 at Location 7,
83 ft. North of manhole, 4th and Buckeye.)
223
-------
Figure 3
5052 STRUCTURAL PLATE ARCH (0.125-inch)
TWO YEAR INSPECTION (1974)
(First to Third Streets on Wright)
Pit-blistering corrosion and perforations are shown
above. Frequency of pitting did not appear to be
anymore severe than observed last year in 1973. In
order to verify, an area of arch pipe, 1.5 x 3 foot,
containing 60 corrosion sites, was identified by
marking corners with a center punch and marking each
pit site with red ink.
Pit sites will be counted in subsequent inspections.
Location - 200 ft. north of manhole on 1st and Wright
224
-------
200
Figure 4
5052 STRUCTURAL PLATE ARCH
North of 1st and Wright (1974)
A second 1.5 x 3-foot area of pit-blister corrosion
was cleaned with NaOH and water to remove stains
and corrosion products. This area will be inspected
in 1975 for evidence of further activity.
225
-------
Figure 5
ALCLAD 3004 CULVERT 60" DIA. -1x6
2:4 ft. East of manhole on 6th St.
between Bucklin and Wright (Location 4)
Black fluid mixture of backfill and ground water
flowed out of the hole made when metal sample was
taken. (lower left)
Heavy red-brown deposits have been identified as
a mixture of hydrated iron oxide (hematite) and
calcium carbonate which leach out of the ground
water.
226
-------
FIGURE 6
PERFORATIONS OF ALCLAD 3004 PIPE CAUSED BY
INADVERTENT COUPLE TO STEEL TUNNEL LINER. (location 11)
Several perforations were found in the areas of Alclad
3004 adjacent to the ends of a 40-foot-long bare steel
tunnel liner. Pipe to soil potential measurement indi-
cates an apparent unintentional ground between aluminum
and steel.
-------
SOIL SIDE, Cleaned
High water table, fluid
backfill.
Corrosion limited to cladding
IX
WATER SIDE, as Sampled
Heavy buildup of CaC03
deposits.
IX
WATER SIDE, cleaned
Corrosion (lower part of
sample) limited to cladding,
IX
Figure 7
LOCATION-4, EAST OF MANHOLE ON 6TH ST
BETWEEN BUGKLIN AND WRIGHT
Alclad :U)04 60" dia. 1x6
228
-------
H27871
SOIL SIDE, as Sampled
IX
SOIL SIDE, cleaned
IX
WATER SIDE, as Sampled
IX
Figure 8
LOCATION-7 NORTH OF 4/>MHOLE, 4TH AND BUCKLIN
Alclad 3004 66" dia. 1x6
229
-------
Sample Size
10
11
72" dia,
1x6
60" dia,
1x6
60" dia,
1x6
Corlix
Catch
Basin
66" dia,
1x6
42" dia,
1x6
48" dia,
1x6
15" dia,
Corlix
72" dia.
1x6
Location
20 ft. S. of man-
hole on Canal St,
24 ft. E. of man-
hole on 6th St.
between Bucklin
and Wright.
3 ft. S. of man-
hole on 6th St.
between Bucklin
and Wright.
Manhole, S.W.
corner 7th and
Gooding.
83 ft. N. of man-
hole, 4th and
Bucklin.
65 ft. S. of man-
hole, 4th and
Bucklin.
45 ft. S. of man-
hole, 7th Place
and Marquette.
1 ft. W. of man-
hole, Linburg
Road and Marquette
185 ft. S. of man-
hole on Canal St.,
15' S. of steel
tunnel liner.
5X, HF-HzSCH Etch 45 sec.
Figure 9
LASALLE, ILLINOIS ALCLAD 3004 STORM DRAIN
TWO YEAR SAMPLING, 1974
(Soil side up and water side down in these photos)
The corrosion is confined to the cladding layer on all samples
except #11 which is perforated due to galvanic action between
the aluminum arid the steel tunnel liner.
230
-------
INSIDE - Cleaned
The metal surface is deformed
upwards due to the pressure
of internal corrosion products
SOIL SIDE, as Sampled
White corrosion products in
a mound over the pit and fine
granular sand are observed out
from the affected area.
SOIL SIDE, Cleaned
The lamellar nature of the pit-
blister can be easily seen.
Figure 10
LASALLE, ILLINOIS STORM DRAIN ARCH 5052 PIPE - SAMPLE 2
Pit-blister perforations found in 1973 after one year do
not appear to have increased in size or frequency.
231
-------
5X (unetched)
Figure 11
LASALLE, ILLINOIS 5052 ARCH PIPE (11-0 x 4-11)
TWO YEAR SAMPLING 1974
Soilside, up.
Upper - Location 2
and Wright.
175' N. of manhole, 1st St.
Cross section of pit-blister
Lower - Location 3 - 40' E. of manhole, 3rd and
Bucklin. General pitting type corrosion
.020" depth.
232
-------
APPENDIX D
PERFORMANCE OF LA SALLE, ILLINOIS,
ALUMINUM STORM DRAIN SYSTEM
THIRD ANNUAL INSPECTION, 1975
November 7, 1975
2CFT-75-61-RJH
by
R. J. Hogan
Applications Research
THIS DATA OR DESIGN IS SUBMITTED AS A
SUGGESTION FOR CONSIDERATION. KAISER
CAN ASSUME NO RESPONSIBILITY OR LIABILITY
FOR USE. ANY PROPOSED USE OF THIS DATA
OR DESIGN REQUIRES THOROUGH TESTING AND
APPROVAL BY THE RECIPIENT BEFORE USE.
NO WARRANTIES BY KAISER ACCOMPANY THIS
INFORMATION OR DATA.
Unrestricted. This report and the information
disclosed in it may be distributed to any interested
party, including parties not employed by Kaiser
Aluminium.
KAISER ALUMINUM & CHEMICAL CORPORATION
CENTER FOR TECHNOLOGY
Pleasanton, California
233
-------
PERFORMANCE OF LA SALLE, ILLINOIS,
ALUMINUM STORM DRAIN SYSTEM
THIRD ANNUAL INSPECTION, 1975
by
R. J. Hogan
BACKGROUND
In 1971 an aluminum storm drain system was installed by
the City of La Salle, Illinois, with Federal Aid (EPA).
Alclad 3004 culvert and 5052 alloy structural plate were
used.
Three annual inspections have been conducted by repre-
sentatives of the City of La Salle, Illinois State Highway
Department, Kaiser Aluminum, and Chamlin & Associates
(consultants for the City of La Salle). These inspections
and the remaining annual inspections are being carried out
to inspect the aluminum storm drain system for durability
and performance during the first ten years' service.
The first and second annual inspections—1973 and 1974
revealed the aluminum pipe was in structurally sound condi-
tion (Ref. 1 and 2). Last year, 1974, performance was
described as:
a) Corrosion of the aluminum storm drains was superficial
with no loss in structural integrity.
b) Corrosion was confined to the thin cladding layer on all
Alclad aluminum samples, with the exception of an area
of pipe adjacent to an uncoated steel tunnel liner
and believed coupled to the liner.
c) Very few, if any, new pinhole perforations had occurred
in the 5052 alloy arched pipe during the past year,
234
-------
in fact, corrosion product from existing perforations
was dry—indicative of inactivity.
d) Exudation of orange-reddish brown discolorations
(amorphous iron oxides) found earlier on the aluminum
pipe and concrete catch basins had subsided and most of
the iron oxides had been washed away. Only in one area
were the discolorations still present.
e) No further buckling of a sharply inclined 72-inch
diameter pipe below 1st and Wright Streets.
SUMMARY
The aluminum storm drain system remains in excellent
condition after four years' service with no evidence of
structural damage.
Six of the eight Alclad 3004 pipe samples showed super-
ficial corrosion, if any, is limited to the thin cladding
layer. Sampling at two other locations showed some slight
attack of the core, although most corrosion was confined
to the cladding.
In the area of the bare steel tunnel liner, several new
corrosion sites were noted in the aluminum pipe. Cathodic
protection will be installed to protect the steel liner,
thereby preventing galvanic corrosion of the adjacent
aluminum storm drain.
No new pinhole perforations have occurred in the 5052
structural plate (as proven by actual count in a given area)
during the past year's service. In fact, corrosion remains
active at only very few of the existing perforations.
There has been no further mechanical deformation
(accordioning) of the steeply inclined 72-inch Alclad 3004
pipe, located below 1st and Wright Streets.
235
-------
STATUS
Annual inspections and laboratory analysis of samples
removed will continue.
The third annual inspection party, made on August 28,
1975, consisted of:
Chamlin & Associates: Jim Giordano
Al Witzeman
Illinois State Highway Cliff Adams
Department:
City of La Salle, 111.: Bill Mallie
Kaiser Aluminum &
Chemical Corporation: Cliff DeGraff
Len Hall
Bob Vaterlaus
Joe Warrenfells
Dick Hogan
The storm drain inspection was started at the outfall
end of the 72-inch diameter Alclad 3004 -1x6 pipe below
the railroad tracks. Locations of the metal samples removed
in 1975 (as well as those removed in 1973 and 1974) are
shown on the map of the entire storm drain system, Figure 1.
Eleven aluminum samples, one water and eleven soil
samples were removed during the inspection. The metal
samples were taken with a 2-1/2" hole saw. An aluminum
cover patch, with a mastic sealer, was placed over the hole
and attached with stainless steel metal screws. See Fig-
ure 2. -Blue spray paint was sprayed on the 1975 patches
for yearly identification. The sample number and date was
also spray painted in blue. (The color identification of
1973 sampling was in orange and the 1974 sampling in red.)
236
-------
Pipe-to-soil and pipe-to-water potentials were measured,
using a Cu/CuSOi» reference electrode. (Miller Potential
Meter RE-5.) The soils were extracted from behind the pipe
and placed in quart-sized plastic containers. Water samples
were taken from the outfall end of the system. Inspection
notes of the eleven sites follow:
Location 1: Alclad 3004, 72-inch diam. -1x6, 2-1/2 feet
inside, from the south end, of the steel tunnel
liner. Liner goes underneath the CRI & P
Railroad tracks.
The soil side (steel liner side) of the aluminum
pipe was coated with a bituminous coating at the
time of installation. Behind the metal sample
(invert) we found wet sand and approximately
3" of asphalt paving separating the aluminum
from the steel liner. No pitting corrosion was
evident on the soil side of the aluminum sample
taken. Only a small amount of gravel was
obtainable.
The cover patch of Sample #1, taken in 1973, was
loosened to inspect the steel tunnel liner.
Figure 3 displays the rusted appearance of the
bare steel liner behind the aluminum pipe.
A pipe-to-soil potential survey was conducted on
the Alclad 3004, 72-inch diam. pipe, beginning
25 feet from the south end of the bare steel
tunnel liner. Potentials were recorded as
follows:
Potential
Location
A -
B -
C -
D -
25
50
75
100
ft.
ft.
ft.
ft.
S.
S.
S.
S.
(Volts)
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
59
50
70
71
*Cu/CuSOt, - reference electrode
237
-------
Location 2
Location 3
Location 4
Alclad 3004, 72-inch diam. - 1 x 6, 50 feet south
of the steel tunnel liner.
A pipe-to-soil potential measurement at this
position confirmed the low (0.50 volt) potential
found last year during the 1974 inspection.
Metal and soil samples were taken.
Alclad 3004, 72-inch diam. - 1 x 6, 17 feet north
of the Canal St. catch-basin.
A random side-wall cut was made to observe the
soil side of the pipe. The pipe appears to be
in excellent condition. A metal sample and soil
sample were taken.
The steeply inclined 72-inch diameter -1x6
pipe, on Wright, between Canal and 1st Streets,
was examined. There has been no further deform-
ation (accordioning) in the past three years
(Figure 4).
Alloy 5052 structural plate (arch pipe), 165 feet
north of the 1st and Wright Street catch-basin.
A metal sample, containing a pit-perforation was
removed for examination. A soil sample was also
taken. The white streaking of corrosion pro-
ducts, first noted during the first annual
inspection, is shown in Figure 5. All streaking
has ceased. Only a few pits remain slightly
active. A metal sample and a sample of the
brown granular soil backfill were removed.
200 feet north of the 1st and Wright Street
catch-basin. A 1.5 x 3 foot area containing
60 pit perforations, counted in the 1974 inspec-
tion, was re-examined. Figure 6 shows no new
pits have developed. The 60 original pinhole
238
-------
Location 5
Location 6
Location 7
Location 8
Location 9
pits remain. Furthermore, only three of the 60
pits remained active, as evidenced by slight
exudation of corrosion products.
An adjacent 1.5 x 3 foot area, cleaned with
NaOH and water in 1974, was also examined. Only
nine pinhole pit sites in this area remain slightly
active one year later.
Alloy 5052 arch pipe, 80 feet south of the 3rd
and Wright Street cath-basin.
A small pit is visible on the soil side of sample.
Alloy 5052 arch pipe, 45 feet E. of the 3rd and
Bucklin Street catch basin.
A few pit-perforations were present at this loca-
tion. Some pitting is present on the sample
removed for laboratory evaluation.
Alclad 3004 twin 42-inch diameter -1x6, 7-1/2
feet from the inside elbow of the west side twin
culvert, 3rd and Bucklin Streets.
No corrosion is present on sample.
Alclad 3004, 60-inch diameter -1x6, 24 feet E.
of the 6th and Bucklin Street catch basin.
Deposits of hydrated iron oxide (hematite) are
still present on both the concrete catch basin
and the metal pipe in this area. See Figure 7.
A heavy calcium-rich scale deposit is also
present on the water side of the pipe. This
deposit acts as a protective coating.
Alclad 3004, 60-inch diameter - 1 x 6, 40 feet S.
of 6th and Bucklin Streets.
Scattered corrosion of the thin cladding layer
is noted.
239
-------
Location 10: Alclad 3004, 60-inch diam. - 1 x 6, 86 feet S.
of 6th and Bucklin Streets.
Corrosion of the thin cladding layer is noted.
Location 11: Twin 42-inch diam. Alclad 3004 culverts (west
culvert) 65 feet S. of 4th and Bucklin.
Etching of the thin cladding layer was noted.
A metal sample was removed from the crown area.
The backfill is native soil (reddish in color).
Two pipes near 7th Place and Marquette were inspected.
No samples were removed from these areas: (1) 50 feet south,
Alclad 3004, 48-inch diameter -1x6 (location of Sample
No. 9 of the 1973 inspection). The pipe appears to be in
excellent condition. (2) 30 feet N., Alclad 3004 Corlix.
This pipe also appears to be in excellent condition.
LABORATORY EVALUATIONS
Eleven soil and metal samples plus one water sample were
evaluated at Kaiser Aluminum's Center for Technology (Ref. 3).
(Chamlin & Associates has had one water sample tested
locally.)
A. Soils
Resistivity and pH of the soil samples (Table I) were
measured in accordance with the State of California, Depart-
ment of Highways Method 643B. Soil resistivity and pH data
were comparable with the 1973 and 1974 results.
All soils previously taken have been a brown sandy selec-
tive backfill. The soil removed from Location #11 was a
reddish-brown clay-like soil, reported to be the native soil.
A complete analysis was performed on this sample as well as
the fluid fill taken from Location 8. Results are as follows:
240
-------
Quantity (ppm)
Element #11 (Native Soil) #8 (Sandy Fluid Fill)
Chloride 500 136
Sulfate (SC\) 150 1,175
Nitrate (NO3) 100 • 1.8
Phosphate 15 0.5
Suspended solids 1.0 10.7
Ca 280* 400*
Mg 4 4 * 92*
Na 175* 92*
PH 8.3 7.6
Conductivity 1,OOOymho(1,OOOftcm) 435ymho(2,300ftcm)
* determined by the atomic absorption method
In addition, a. semi-quantitative spectrographic analysis
of elements in the native soil was conducted (Location #11). The
results are as follows: (in % by weight)
AL_ JLL_ Fe Cu Mn Me Ti V Pb Na Ca K
3.5 15. 3.8 OoOl 0.10 2.0 0.23 0.01 0.001 0.42 5.0 1.0
B. Water
Analysis of the one water sample sent to CFT is on page 9.
(The sample was removed at the outfall end of the system.) A
water analysis made by ArRo Laboratories in the Illinois area,
at Chamlin and Associates' request, is in the Appendix.
241
-------
CFT Analysis of Water in Drain System - La Salle
Element Quantity (ppm)
Chloride - 220
Sulfate(SOO - 550
Nitrate(N03) - 16.3
Phosphate - 1.7
Ca - 360
Mg - 75
Na - 107
Fe " <0.05
Pb - <0.1
Cu ~ <0.06
Ni - <0.1
Total solids - 1,426
Total dissolved
Solids - 1,397
Suspended solids 0.3
PH - 7.5
Conductivity l,786umho (560flcm resistivity)
C. Metal Samples
The eleven aluminum samples (eight Alclad 3004 and three
5052 alloy) were photographed on both the soil and water sides
before and after cleaning. The soil was washed off with water
and the corrosion products were removed by ASTM Method 67-1
(hot chromic-phosphoric acid cleaner). The soil side surface
of the 2-1/2" diam. coupons (Figure 8) shows varying degrees
of corrosion, generally confined to the thin cladding layer.
A composite photo of 1973, 1974 and 1975 companion samples
removed from adjacent areas on an Alclad 3004 pipe on 6th
Street between Bucklin and Wright, Figure 9, indicates most of
the corrosion occurred during the first two years1 service.
The relative amount of uncorroded cladding surface has not
242
-------
changed noticeably in the past two annual inspections.
Representative sections from the eleven metal coupons
were mounted in epoxy and polished for metallographic examina-
tion. Cross-sections of the eight Alclad 3004 samples are
shown in Figure 10 at 5X. Corrosion, if any, is generally con-
fined to the thin protective cladding layer.
Pit-blistering and pinhole perforations found in the
5052 alloy arch pipe during the first; inspection (1973) do not
appear to have increased in size or frequency over the past
two years (as determined by actual pit count in a given area).
These small pits (Figure 11) do not affect the structural
integrity of the pipe.
DISCUSSION
Very little change has occurred during the past two years'
service. The initial pit-blistering corrosion of the 5052 arch
pipe has subsided (as determined by actual pit count of a speci-
fic area in both 1974 and 1975). Only a few pits remain
slightly active.
No differences between 1974 and 1975 inspections were
evident as far as the attack of the cladding on Alclad 3004
pipe is concerned.
The installation of anodes to protect the bare steel
tunnel liner beneath the CRI&P Railroad is planned for the Fall
of 1975. A pipe-to-soil potential survey was taken during the
1975 inspection and will be taken again after the anode
installation.
243
-------
REFERENCES
1. Memo Report CSR 74-2, "Performance of La Salle, Illinois
Aluminum Storm Drain System, First Year Inspection",
by T. J. Summerson, dated 4/24/74.
2. Memo Report CSR 75-1, "Performance of La Salle, Illinois
Aluminum Storm Drain System, Second Year Inspection",
R. J. Hogan,, dated 5/7/75.
3. Lab Record Book 1059, Pages 30-31, Larry J. Wong,
September 12, 1975.
244
-------
"o7
0.
•H
A.
,^
M
0)
4->
«
4-J
1 O
2
*
*
0> rH
.&^
•H
PL.
S»,
4J
•H
>
•H
4J
O
co
r- o
r»» m
0 0
I i
0
co
! -1
•o
o>
v*
3
CD
CO
0)
X
vC
I-.
O
1
m
r~
0
1
o
o
m
OO
t»»
o
i
oo
r-«
O
1
o
in
-*
4J
O
z
CM
eo
o
1
o
0
m
•o
01
w
CO
co
0)
S
^J
£
en
00
o
i
o
o
vO
•O
01
3
id
01
as
I *°
?(»:
s
p-i
to
fw
W
Z
i— i
2
Q r-l
§ 3
o eg
H <3
OT H
|
H
3
to
M
o
z
M
_J
J
M
a
3
to
3
B
O -O
iH 01
4J i-4
-H a a
IH IH a
o w 8
to o to
co
o ^
4J 0>
i-l 4J
0) CO
j: v 9
CXrH
Cfl O A
< f. u
•H
vo -a >
0)
r-l <-t -O
0)0.41
>• § -H
10 S -H
I-l 03 -H
O "^ n-i
1
B
01 4J
D. a
•H iH
P- M
U
to
<$
"* •
O g
o 8
ro ^H
•o
(0 B so
rH -rl
U 1 X
H CM
g
•H
4J
<0
U
5
4J
to
H
CO
a j.
CJ 0)
*,5
O r-l
• rH
co oi
. B ^*
•U 3 W
M-l 4J )-l
01
m B >
CM -H B
rH ^ f<
CO -*"v
01
^^ •
tO
85
to
f» CM
OI «tk
^
01
rl rH
iH « Q.
£ 1
•"^ CO
C CD J2
CO CO CO
CO rH
BUM
9 CO
o a
^ -a
JS O 01
0 >
*j m -H
09 > 01
•H m o
Q (S 0)
z -^ m
i
O -rH
CO -rj
•o •
CO C vO
rH -H
U 1 X
H CM
4J O -H
03 •
D
H rH
co co a,
a> S
z to
v_> LO
•o •
B 43
CO 00 CO
CO CO rH
§e u
5 ca
8 c: -a
,£) 0)
0 >
JJ O -H
to m 01
•rl • O
Q |^ QJ
£ <-' n
01
a.
•H
PL, rH
o <•
^K
CM O
*n I
0 H
m rH
•e
m J=
rH O
U
tH CO
0 U
• •
Z 4J
CO
4-1 4J
00 -H
m iH co
\O M CO
rH * J>
•0
B
CO 0)
CO rH
r- co a.
0 «t B
•J m
r^ 10
0> CO
M rH
0) B r» /-N
Z Q ON CM
>^ tO tH •««
B «0 ,0
CO CO 10
CD rH
B g«
? co
o c:
h
4J vO -H
O « 4)
^rl O U
:§Ci2
&
TH
CU rH
rH
•s^
h
< X
CM O
m i
0 rH
in rH
t£
M U
CO 4J
CO
*o
• 4-1
co to
• 4J
4j r! g
U-l 60 iH
•H a
oo 2 fO
•a
0)
rH h
a, D
CO
ao r^
in *J rH ^-
geg
C to jo
0) *H
g§-
5 co
oa
J3 O 41
o >
4-1 CM IH
05 • 4)
•H CM O
O rH 0>
0)
a
•H
PH rH
,_(
X 1
y -3-
M
< X
CM O
m i
0 rH
in rH
«4
•a
M
CO
VM
O •
4J B
• CO lH
H 01
B CO
• tH jO
W rH S
U-J »/ f 1
O 4J
>O 3 CO
"4 ro u
•* <-s
r«> co
tr> *k
rH
01
M rH
ve to a.
a> §•
2 CO
^^ eo
245
-------
ce
4-1
r-4
O
>
tH
5
§
4J
O
0,
-v»
01
a
0-
1*
0
1
ON
f*
O
1
01 <-<
tX-H
•H 0
tv,
»N
•H iH
O >
CO i-l
4J
• co
B i-t <
CO
6
«••
M*
ro
00
O
O
0
NO
«
«»
U
o
z
NO
CO
o
o
o
m
A
CM
T3
01
V*
00
(0
01
X
4J
O
NO
r-
0
O
o
CM
CM
•a
01
(j
n
cO
0>
T>
Ot
O S
Z 00
(0
x
vO
r>»
O
0
m
CM
CM
•o
01
O 3
Z «)
CO
a?
1-4
co
o
§
.-T
«H CO
•H BB
O pJ 00
CO H
Pip
scrip
De
•O 03 .
B CO 43
CO (0
B T3 f-l
01
e 1-1 i:
S 9 f K
O CO
U « TJ
43 g«
T< O
0 Z
ac —•
iM1
O «H 31
fn "o 4.1
•o •
CO B NO
f-l ft
° CM K
< •» r-l
V 0)
•o •«
a IH
5 to •«
t-l tJ
4J B
OJ t-l -H
45 OJ H
4J > 3
iH O
OJ
S
I
iH
fH "
c:
o
o
Mix
and
•
§§
NW CJ
O 4J
CO
-o e
S a
CO O
0
B h CM
O 4J CM
M (0
43 S 1
u-i *o tj
0 C 0)
9 tJ
01 0 CO
»- M M
3 60 9
4-1 4J
K -0 C8
£§^
1
<• B
§1
m -o
•a .
i-H *H
e
CO
«
** is
£ O
NO «0
U
U-l
o •
4J
to
^ g
B p*
CO O
m
p h CM
0 * CM*
£S .
'S'S'S
9 4J
01 O CO
l-l |M fc
9 60 9
4J 4J
K t3 CO
•H B a
Z co N^
1
«* a
§ J
en T3
<0 B NO
OIK
«
CO
•a ^a
2
43 U
NO a
u
U-l
0 •
CO
.
q o
• -fl H
•H a
M-B!
co co co
°°^co^ *
cd iH
i-l iH T3
•CJ N-» 0)
•H 0)
O OJ
CO U
•» a
o a
0 -rl
•O •
eo a NO
iH -H
g.0
to in
to r^
O o r>-
-------
CO
CO
H
0
2
H
i_3
i_3
H
«.
w
.-H1
HH1
rt3
CO
5
I
SI
H
EH
CO
jx
CO
2
H
c
fd
en
Q)
-P
-rH
tn
c
o
•H
-P
U
0
P)
cn
C
•H
s—^
in
r-
o^>
rH
13
C
fd
J_4
-H
TJ
CJ
•H
1
-P
•H
Cn
c
o
•H
4J
U
cn
IT)
Q
O ro
EH r-
co cr>
rH
§ ~
H
s
D
S-l
m
TJ
C
fd
•O
C
CN
•H rH
T5 II
ro
O —
•H
-P JH
fd fd
U 0)
*rH ^*^
HH
•H 4J
-P -H
0) -H
•P C
cn o
SH U
•H d)
^ I
cn
C
O
•H
-p
fd
u
o
247
-------
Figure 2. TYPICAL SAMPLE REPLACEMENT PATCH AND BLUE
COLOR IDENTIFICATION OF THE 1975 LASALLE '
ILLINOIS ALUMINUM STORM DRAIN INSPECTION.
A two and one-half inch diameter metal sample i«
removed. A mastic gasket is fitted over the hole and
a rectangular aluminum patch is set into place with
stainless steel screws.
(Sample No. 9, Alclaci 3004, 60-inch diameter 1 * 6
pipe located 40 feet S. of 6th & Bucklin.)
,.48
-------
Figure 3. UNPAINTED STEEL TUNNEL LINER EXPOSED TO
MOIST AIR BEHIND THE ALUMINUM PIPE.
Inside of the steel liner beneath the CRI & P Railroad
displays a rusted appearance from the moist air.
249
-------
Figure 4. LASALLE, ILLINOIS ALUMINUM STORM DRAIN
SYSTEM—1975, 72-INCH DIAMETER ALCLAD
3004 - 1 x 6 - PIPE
There has been no further deformation (accordioning)
of the steeply inclined pipe located below 1st &
Wright Streets in the past two years.
(The area corresponds with area photographed in
Figure 2 of the 1973 LaSalle Inspection Report.)
250
-------
Figure 5. 5052 STRUCTURAL PLATE, 165 FEET NORTH
1st & WRIGHT STREETS. LOCATION 4, 1975
Corrosion products (streaks) from pinhole perfora-
tions after the first year service have been dry and
inactive for two years. Sample No. 4 with a pinhole
perforation was removed, exposing the brown granular
selective backfill.
251
-------
Figure 6. 5052 STRUCTURAL PLATE ARCH (0.125-INCHO
THIRD INSPECTION (1975)
(200 feet N. of 1st & Wright Streets)
A 1.5 x 3 foot area of arch pipe, containing 60 pin-
hole perforations was identified and photographed during
the 1974 inspection. The pit count remains the same in
1975. Furthermore only three of the 60 pits remain
active, as evidenced by slight exudation of corrosion
products.
252
-------
Figure 7. LASALLE, ILLINOIS STORM DRAIN SYSTEM —
1975 INSPECTION. (6th & Bucklin Streets,
Location 18)
Hydrated iron oxide rich solution(hematite as
identified by X~Ray Diffraction) is still exuding
from the concrete catchbasin arid is also present on
the aluminum pipe. A flow of fluid backfill (lower
photo) is shown as after the metal sample is removed
253
-------
Location
#2
Location
#3
Location
#7
Location
#9
Location
#10
Location
#11
IX
Figure 8
LASALLE, ILLINOIS ALUMINUM STORM DRAIN - 1975 - 3rd
INSPECTION - ALCLAD 3004 ALLOY PIPE - SOIL SIDE (Cleaned)
2-1/2-inch metal coupons, show most surface is unaffected
Corrosion is limited to the thin cladding layer. (Sample"#ll
shows a light surface etch of the entire cladding layer.)
254
-------
SAMPLED IN 1973
(2 years1 service)
SAMPLED IN 1974
(3 years1 service)
SAMPLED IN 1975
(4 years1 service)
Figure 9. ALCLAD 3004 60-INCH DIAMETER -1x6 PIPE
6th Street between Bucklin and Wright,
LaSalle, Illinois (Cleaned)
Soil side of the pipe showing corrosion of the thin
cladding has subsided after the initial attack. All
three samples were removed from adjacent areas.
255
-------
Sample Pipe
No. Size
Location
lo
20
3.
7.
8.
72
1
72
1
72
1
42
1
u
X
ti
X
II
X
tl
X
60"
1
X
dianio
6
dianio
6
diam.
6
diam.
6
dianio
6
125
in
185
17
7o5
the
3rd
24
ft
o S. of
Canal St.
tunnel liner (invert
ft
ft.
ft
. S. of
N. of
. from
west side
&
ft.
Bucklin
E. 6th
Canal St.
Canal St.
elbow of
culvert,
St.
& Bucklin
9. 60" diam. 40 ft. S. 6th & Bucklin
1x6
10. 60" diam. 86 ft. S. 6th & Bucklin
1x6
11. 42" diam. 65 ft. S. 4th & Bucklin
1x6
5X (etched HF/H2SC%)
Figure 10. LASALLE, ILLINOIS ALCLAD 3004 STORM DRAIN
PIPE - 3rd INSPECTION - 1975
(Soil side up and water side down in these photos.)
The deepest appearing attack on the metal coupons was sectioned
and mounted for a metallographic cross section. The corrosion
is generally limited to the thin cladding layer.
256
-------
Figure 11.
IX
LASALLE, ILLINOIS STORM DRAIN
5052 ALLOY STRUCTURAL PLATE
Sample 4 - 1975
Soil (upper photo) and water (lower photo) sides of a
pit-blister perforation removed from the arch pipe near
1st and Wright Streets (after cleaning.) The size or
frequency of pits do not appear to have increased in the
past two years.
257
-------
ArRo Laboratories Inc. Water Analysis
Three water Scimples were removed from the outfall of the
LaSalle, Illinois storm drain system. One sample was analyzed
at CFT and two samples were submitted for analysis to ArRo
Laboratories in Joliet, Illinois by Chamlin & Associates.
258
-------
X S,
ARRo
lASOftATOftlES, INC.
TELEPHONE 815 - 727-5436
P. O. BOX 686 - CATON FARM ROAD
JOLIET ILLINOIS 60434
Completed
P. O. Number
Comments
ived 9-17-75
I 10-8-75
iber
Attention
Company
Address
Mr. Miko Rauh
CHAM LIN k ASSOCIATE
3017 W. 5th Street
City, State, ZIP Peru.
A 1
ArRo No.
2-413E
2-414E
Sample Description
Samples # 1
Samples # 2
Date
9-17
9-17
Cartage
ArRo
ArRo
Temp °C
pH
WASTE WATER ANALYSIS
2-413 2-414
A&S Surfactant
Acids, Volatile
Acidity (as CaCO^)
Algicides
Alkalinity, KKX. M.O.
Alkalinity (as CaCO^tph
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Bicarbonates
BOD, 5 -Day
BOD, Soluble
BOD, Ultimate
Bismuth
Boron
Bromide
Cadmium
Calcium
CO2, Free
Carbon, Total
Carbon. Total Org, (TOC)
Chem. Oxygen Dem.(COD).
Chlorides
Chlorinated Hydrocarbons
a) Gas Chromatography
b) Sodium Reduction
Chlorine, Res. (Comb.)
Chlorine, Res. (Free)
Chlorine, Total Res.
Chromium, Hex
Chromium, Tri
Chromium, Total
Cobalt
Color - Co Pt. Units
Conduc. , Spec, -u/nho/cm
Copper
Cyanide, Free
Cyanide, Total
Dissolved Oxygen (DO)
Fluorides
Hardn., Tot. (as CaCO-j)
Iron, Total
Iron, Total Dissolved
Lanthanum
Lead
Lithium
MBAS Surfactant
254
0.0
4
174
1670
<0.05
0.09
<0. 00?
262
0.0
187
1700
<0.05
0.13
<0. 00
3
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury - )4g/l
Nickel
Nitrogen. Total as N
Nitrogen, Ammonia as N
Nitrogen, 0r^.,nic as N
Nitrate as N
Nitrite as N
Odor - O. [
a) Description
b) Threshold
Oils & Grease.
Oxygen Demand Index
PH
Phenols
Phosphate; Ortho (»s PC>4)
Phosphate, Toiaf (as PO4 I ""
Phosphorus (as P)
Platinum
Potassium
Selenium
Silicon
Silver
Sodium
So'idB, Total
Solids, Fixc
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-600/2-78-025
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
THE CONSTRUCTION, TECHNICAL
FRICTIONAL DETERMINATION OF
SEWER SYSTEM
EVALUATION, AND
AN ALUMINUM STORM
March 1978 (Issuing Date)
7. AUTHOR(S)
James J.
Giordano
9. PERFORMING ORG -\NIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Chamlin and Associates, Inc.
3017 Fifth Street
Peru, Illinois 61354
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS Cin . , OH
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory--
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION-NO.
5. REPORT DATE
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO. 1BC6 11
ROAP: SOS 1; Task 10
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
11032 DTI
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final 1973-1976
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/600/14
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
P.O. Clifford Risley Jr., (312)-353-2200, FTS 353-2200;
Richard P. Traver, (201)- 321-6677, FTS 340-6677
16. ABSTRACT
The program consisted of analysis of the effect upon the quantity
of sewerage flows in a portion of the existing combined system as a
result of the construction of a demonstration aluminum storm sewer
system, laboratory testing of flow characteristics of aluminum pipe,
design and construction of a demonstration aluminum storm sewer system
and appurtenances and the techni ca.l evaluation of the demonstration
aluminum storm sewer system over a 10 year post-construction period.
Laboratory testing of flow characteristics of aluminum pipe was
performed at the St. Anthony Falls Hydraulic Laboratory at the Universit
of Minnesota in Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Evaluation of the demonstration aluminum storm sewer system is
being accomplished by annual inspection tours consisting of collection
of wastewater samples for determination of heavy metal content, pH, and
minimum resistivity and aluminum sample coupons which are analyzed for
corrosion and abrasion wear in the laboratory. Also measurements of
deflection are taken at select locations to observe the structural
performance of the completed aluminum demonstration sewer.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
Aluminum alloys, Sewer pipes, Storm
sewers, Combined sewers, Pipe flow,
Corrosion environments, Surface wate
runoff
b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
Aluminum storm pipe,
Corrugated aluminum
r pipes
c. COSATI Field/Group
13B
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
RELEASE UNLIMITED
19. SECURITY CLASS (Thin Report)
UNCLASSIFIED
21 NO. OF PAGES
270
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
J.
260
22. PRICE
UNCLASSIFIED
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1978— 757- 140 /682L>
------- |