WATER POLLUTION CONTROL RESEARCH SERIES WP-2O-18 Improved Sealants for Infiltration Control U.S. DEPARTMENT OP THE INTERIOR FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ADMINISTRATION ------- WATER POLLUTION CONTROL RESEARCH SERIES The Water Pollution Control Research Reports describe the results and progress in the control and abatement of pollution of our Nation's Waters. They provide a central source of information on the research, develop- ment and demonstration activities of the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, Department of the Interior, through inhouse research and grants and contracts with Federal, State, and local agencies, research institutions, and industrial organizations. Triplicate tear-out abstract cards are placed inside the back cover to facilitate information retrieval. Space is provided on the card for the user's accession number and for additional keywords. The abstracts utilize the WRSIC system. Water Pollution Control Research Reports will be distributed to requesters as supplies permit. Requests should be sent to the Publications Office. Department of the Interior, Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, Washington, D. C. 20242. Previously issued reports on the Storm & Combined Sewer Pollution Control Program: WP-20-11 Problems of Combined Sewer Facilities and Overflows - 1967. WP 20-15 Water Pollution Aspects of Urban Runoff. WP-20-21 Selected Urban Storm Water Runoff Abstracts. ERRATA Page 16. Under System A2 in Table I: Base Bj should read Base J; System B should read System Bj. ~~ Page 21. Last Paragraph, last sentence: simce should read since. Page 37. Under Viscosity in Table IX: column labeled Sealant should be labeled Static. Page 44. Duplication copy, delete entire page. Page 63. First sentence: equigalent should read equivalent. ------- Improved Sealants for Infiltration Control THE DEVELOPMENT AND DEMONSTRATION OF MATERIALS TO REDUCE OR ELIMINATE WATER INFILTRATION INTO SEWERAGE FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR by The Western Company 2201 N. Waterview Parkway Richardson, Texas 75080 Program No. 11020 DIH Contract No. 14-12-146 June, 1969 ------- FWPCA Review Notice This report has been reviewed by the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration and approved for publication. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration. 11 ------- ABSTRACT The objective of this program was to develop new, more effective sealants for sewer line leaks (leaking joints, cracks and large holes). This purpose was achieved, and all equipments and materials investigated, tested or compared are presented, along with test results, supporting data, conclusions and recommendations. A wide range of candidate materials was surveyed, and weaknesses of rejected materials were noted. Mean- while, specific properties of acceptable materials were ascertained and materials having these properties were identified. These latter materials were subjected to tests designed to demonstrate their effectiveness as sealants. Cost/effectiveness of the new sealant materials was compared with that of present sealant materials. It was concluded that infiltration adversely influences sewer system operating costs and effectiveness, and that leakage repair systems are limited in their effectiveness. Several sealants developed during the program were demonstrated to be able to effect strong, permanent repairs. No significant cost increase beyond that experience with present sealers was indicated. Some present sealant application equipment can be modified for use with the new materials, but new equipment designs are described and recommended. Too, long-term field tests of the materials are recommended. This report is submitted in fulfillment of Contract 14-12-146, be- tween the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration and The Western Company of North America. iii ------- iv ------- CONTENTS Section Title Page I CONCLUSIONS 1 II RECOMMENDATIONS 3 III INTRODUCTION A. Problem Background 5 B. Problem Definition 7 C. Project Objectives 8 IV TECHNICAL DISCUSSION A. Literature Survey 9 B. Laboratory Testing of Materials 10 C. Adjustment of Sealant Formulations 21 D. Large-Scale Testing 26 E. Sealing Equipment Investigation 38 F. Cost Effectiveness Study 48 V REFERENCES 53 VI PUBLICATION AND PATENTS 55 VII GLOSSARY AND ABBREVIATIONS 63 APPENDICES , I CHEMICAL SUPPLIERS 67 II CERAMIC/CLAY AND CONCRETE TILE CORRELATION 73 III RESULTS OF INITIAL LABORATORY TESTS 77 IV PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF THE PROPERTIES OF GROUTING MATERIALS 95 v ------- TABLES Table Page I Formula Breakdown of Sealant Systems Subjected to Large- Scale Testing 16 II Properties of Systems Selected from Laboratory Testing 19 III Effects of Diluents and Solvents on DGEBA (Unmodified Viscosity = 16,000 Centipoise) 24 IV Repair of Clean 6-Inch Sewer Pipe Joint 31 V Repair of Crack in Barrel 33 VI Repair of Missing Bell Section 33 VII Repair of Hole in Barrel 34 VIII Repair of Sewer Pipe Soaked in Sewage 35 IX Sealant Properties Compared With Ideal 37 X Cost of Inspection and Repair by Using Acrylamid Gel 49 XI Results of Testing of Cement Blocks 75 vi ------- FIGURES Figure Page 1 Water Infiltrating Into Damaged Sewer Pipe 6 2 Specimen Tiles Bonded Together 12 3 Dillon Tester 12 4 Flexural Testing of Bonded Tiles 12 5 Tensile Testing of Bonded Tiles 13 6 Viscosity Curves 22 7 Tensile Strength and Elongation of DGEBA-DGEPG Blends Cured With Araldite 963 25 8 Joint Repair 26 9 Broken Bell 26 10 Barrel Crack 26 11 Hole in Barrel 26 12 Test Box .' 27 13 Mock Packer Z7 14 Large Scale Testing Apparatus - Schematic 28 15 Hot-Cold Pressure Box 29 16 Flexibility Test Rig 29 17 Acrylamid Sealant System - Schematic 40 18 Acrylamid Sealant System - Schematic 41 19 Packer-Sealer With Two Inflatable Sections 42 20 Packer-Sealer With Three Inflatable Sections 43 21 Packer-Sealer for New Sealant 45 22 In-Line Mixer for New Sealants 46 23 Improved Sealant System - Schematic 47 vii ------- SECTION I CONCLUSIONS 1. Excessive infiltration into sewer lines displaces valuable sewer capac- ity, increases collection system maintenance costs, increases sewer plant operating costs and increases the pollution in our streams and waterways. 2. A chemical blocking method employing acrylamid gels is currently being used to seal leaking sewers with its success limited by the sealant's lack of strength and other physical limitations. 3. Four epoxy-based sealants and two urethane-based sealants developed in the reported program can result in strong, permanent repairs. 4. The new sealants are suitable in conditions of erratic infiltration where the acrylamid gels fail due to repeated dehydration. 5. Equipment for applying the new sealants can be designed to cost about the same as existing equipment; however, existing equipment for applying sealant can be modified to accept the new sealants. 6. The new sealants do not significantly increase the cost of sealing sewers since the major cost of sealing leaks is in the mechanics of find- ing and sealing them, not in the cost of the sealants used. ------- ------- SECTION II RECOMMENDATIONS This program was limited to the laboratory study and development, and scaled-up testing, as described elsewhere in this report. It was not within the scope of the program to fully develop the new sealants through full-scale, long-term testing in sewers or under the exact chemical, bio- logical or physical conditions existent in sewers. It is recommended, how- ever, that such field testing be carried out. In such a program, specially designed equipment recommended and generally described elsewhere in this report should be designed and fab- ricated, utilized in the testing, and evaluated and redesigned as needed. Testing of the new sealants, implaced by the newly developed equipment in actual sewers, would permit long-term evaluation of repairs made, and a program to incorporate such testing is recommended. It should be noted, however, that by utilizing existent equipment, properly modified, the new sealants can be used now, and their use is recommended when 1) strength is needed to hold against high head pres- sures, 2) flexibility is needed to allow for shifting soils, 3) wide spaces or gaps need to be bridged, and 4) when ambient external conditions alter- nate frequently between wet and dry. It is suggested, however, that the new sealants be applied only under conditions of low or no infiltration until further testing can determine the effects of inflow on the sealing and curing process. ------- ------- SECTION III INTRODUCTION A. PROBLEM BACKGROUND Ground-water infiltration into sanitary sewerage causes an enor- mous burden to be placed on many communities (Reference 1), measured in terms of 1) pollution of waterways (caused by raw sewage being inade- quately treated due to hydraulic overload on the sewage treatment plant), 2) large increases in operating and capital investment costs to handle fluid flow, and 3) health hazards when infiltration flow blocks and backs up sanitary sewage flow. Reference 1 further states that in a typical town the average sewage flow was three times the average water used. In another example, a town with a relatively modern separated sewer system had yearly operating costs (just to process infiltration water) of $ 105, 862, or 32. 1 percent of the budget of $ 329, 787 went to process infiltration water (Reference 4). This annual expense includes plant operation, plant construction debt retire- ment and interest charges, but does not include maintenance of the col- lection system. The millions of miles of sewers presently in the ground in all states in the United States contain an enormous number of leaks caused by cracks, breaks and loose joints. These leaks allow a tremendous amount of ground water to flow into the sewerage (Figure 1). This excessive accidental flow of fluid into the system produces many undesirable effects: Increased hydraulic load on treatment plants are caused by infiltration. This additional load often means sanitary sewage is either inadequately treated or not treated at all because it either bypasses the treatment plant or passes through too rapidly and is passed into a waterway, pol- luting it (Reference 1). Increased sewage-treatment-plant operating costs are incurred in handling the infiltrated fluids. More capital investment is required to lay the larger sewers required to handle the infiltration flow. Reference 1 points out that sanitary sewers are designed three to five times larger than normal flow requirements to allow for infiltration. Also, treatment plants must be over- designed. This over-design increases initial cost of sewer systems by a significant amount. Increased load on sewerage caused by infiltration often results in overflow and backup in a system. Backup often causes considerable property damage and personal incon- venience, and poses a severe health hazard (Reference 1). ------- Infiltration in the sewer system of a growing community can cause the system to become inadequate much sooner than planned, which leads to more capital investment to increase the sewer's capacity sooner than would otherwise be needed, if ever. Fluid filtrating into sewerage often brings with it sand, silt and other materials that eventually block the sewer, requiring extensive maintenance expenditure. Figure 1. Water Infiltrating into Damaged Sewer Pipe. Reference 2 notes that the causes for cracks, breaks and bad joints in a sewer are numerous, suggesting a need for more than one type of so- lution. Listed below are major causes of pipe failure which can result in infiltration: Poor or improperly made joints. Inadequate bedding or foundation. Improper backfill. Shear of pipe when traversing from a firm soil to a yielding soil. Improper connection of house lateral to main collecting system. Inadequate material used for house laterals. Poor construction and inspection of house laterals. Blown joints or bursted pipes due to internal pressure. Pipe corrosion. Reference 3 states that excessive infiltration in both wet and dry periods occurs in every major U. S. river basin, often exceeding design standards and code regulations. This reference defines infiltration as "ground water which leaks or seeps into a sewer through defective joints, ruptured or porous pipes or manholes or other sewer system appurtenances. " ------- Until the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration recently initiated action in this area, infiltration was generally looked upon as an acceptable evil. Even now, in cases where leaks into a sewer reach an emergency condition, pipe is either removed and replaced or a hole is drilled in the earth down to the pipe and the cavity around the sewer is flooded with concrete. Replacing pipe is an excellent method of stopping infiltration at a point, but is much too expensive (costs averaged approx- imately $ 2. 25 per foot for a large section of 8-inch pipe to be replaced in 1964, and this cost has continued to increase). The second method (flooding a cavity around the pipe with concrete) is somewhat less expensive; however, its success is not noteworthy be- cause concrete does not necessarily go into the places where it is needed. In addition, sealing a crack on the bottom is extremely difficult due to inability to properly place the concrete. Also, for large holes or broken sections, concrete often flows through the opening and down into the sewer, thus sealing the wrong portions of the line. Recently, chemical blocking techniques have been used to block infiltration in sewers in Florida, Louisiana and other areas where the water table is up to or higher than the sewer. Here, a water-soluble chemical (acrylamid) and a water-soluble catalyst are pumped into the sewer under pressure and forced out through cracks or openings. The chemical examina- tion of this type of polymer, in the light of the stringent requirements for a good solution to the infiltration problem, reveals the following weaknesses: The polymer does not bond pipe segments together to provide structurally sound pipe. The polymer generally does not seal large holes. Repeated cycles of wet-to-dry-to-wet conditions reduces the effect of the seal. B. PROBLEM DEFINITION With the preceding background in mind, the problem definition is developed in terms of typical leaks to be dealt with in reducing or elimi- nating infiltration, and the type of service required by the repair. Types of failures which must be sealed include 1) leaking joints, 2) cracks and 3) large holes in the sewer. To provide a seal that is economically worthwhile, the seal must have the following properties: Permanence (i. e. , it should be expected to last the economic life of the pipe or be inex- pensive enough to warrant repeated application). Bonding ability (i. e. , bond edges of pipe break together). ------- High structural strength. Bridging ability (i. e. , bridge over holes and gaps). Adaptability (i. e. , withstand climatic extremes). C. PROJECT OBJECTIVES Analysis of the problem revealed the need for development of ma- terials for chemical blocking that can seal, bond, carry structural load, bridge gaps, and be implaced from the inside of a sewer (with appropriate equipment). Objectives of the program were to: Survey a wide range of materials. Point out weaknesses of rejected materials. Ascertain specific properties expected to selected materials. Identify materials possessing desired properties. Demonstrate methods of modifying nearly acceptable materials to make them acceptable. Demonstrate effectiveness of new and improved sealants developed under this program. Investigate and evaluate existing equipment for applying new sealants in the field. ------- SECTION IV TECHNICAL DISCUSSION A. LITERATURE SURVEY 1. Scope of Survey Suggestions for products to use as sewer repairing materials were taken from periodicals such as Chemical Abstracts, Engineering Index, Water and Waste Engineering, Public Works, Environmental Science, Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, Chemical Engineering, Chemical Engineering Progress, Modern Plastics, and the Water Pollution Control Federation Journal and from such other sources as raw material manufac- tures' literature, commercial sewer sealer operators' comments, consumer products manufacturers' literature, and clay pipe manufacturers' and con- sultants' comments. The Western Company and company experience were also gleaned. Results obtained from the literature survey (see Appendix I) showed that the most promising sources of material for sealing a leaking sewer came from technologies such as pipe sealing, soil stabilization, adhesives, petroleum formation plugs, water formation plucjs, and other sealing opera- tions involving tile, concrete and plastics. 2. Basis of Survey The objective of the literature survey was to locate materials with high tensile or flexural strength, appropriate set time, appropriate appli- cation properties, good water resistance, and sewage resistance. Companies in associated fields were contacted and solicited for the type of material being sought. 3. Selection of Materials Of the 170 companies solicited, 54 responded with positive answers and product literature for further screening. Samples were obtained from the following companies: (Epoxies) Ciba Tra-Con Epoxylite Adhesives Products Corp. Miller-Stephens on Chemical Co. Aba Products Co. Marblette Enjay Chemical Company Matcote Company, Inc. Amercoat Corp. ------- Dow Chemical Shell Chemical Union Carbide (Urethanes) Poly Resins Conap Inc. W. S. Dickey Spencer-Kellogg Baker Castor Oil Co. (Polyesters) Ashland Chemical Pittsburg Plate Glass Co. Dow Chemical (Miscellaneous) Paisley Products Oil Center Research Pennsalt Agricultural Chemicals Witco Eastman Chemical Products Thiokol Firestone Hooker Chemical Corp. Syntar Byereyte Co. B. F. Goodrich After samples were received, any candidates obviously lacking in any of the properties listed above (Basis of Survey) according to the manu- facturer's accompanying literature were discontinued from testing unless modifications could improve the failing properties. B. LABORATORY TESTING OF MATERIALS The materials selected as a result of the literature survey were subjected to laboratory tests designed to best provide a medium for com- parison of candidate materials, and to best simulate conditions encoun- tered by the sealants. Unglazed ceramic tiles (2" x 2" x 1/4") were used as test specimens to be bonded together by the sealant. These tiles were cleaned in a detergent solution, rinsed thoroughly and allowed to dry prior to application of the sealant. To first examine the feasibility of using this type of tile, a corre- lation study was made. An epoxy and a urethane sealant were first tested using ceramic tiles and then by using clay tiles. The tensile strengths measured by bonding ceramic-tiles were correlated to those strengths measured using clay-tiles. The clay tiles were of identical material to 10 ------- sewer pipes. In the case of the epoxies, values from clay tiles were 25. 5 percent higher than those from ceramic tiles. In the case of the urethanes, values from ceramic tiles were 15.8 percent higher than those from clay tiles (see Appendix II). Cement blocks were examined also. The majority of cases showed that for any material exhibiting a tensile strength greater than 199 pounds per square inch or a flexural strength greater than 699 pounds per square inch, the concrete would break (rather than cause the bonding material to delaminate or fail). Thus, the ceramic tiles provided a means for testing materials with higher strengths, since they were structurally stronger than clay or cement tiles. Test samples were prepared by applying the sealant along one of the 1/4-inch edges of each of two tiles. The two coated edges of the tiles were butted together (Figure 2) and the tiles were placed on flat polyethyl- ene sheets and allowed to air cure at 75°F for a minimum of 24 hours before testing or conditioning. Ten samples of each candidate sealant were prepared, five of which were tested under dry conditions. The remaining five were placed in a cir- culating water bath, controlled to 75°F, and allowed to remain for five days before testing. Sealants with good performance on clean, wet tiles were also tested on tiles soaked for a minimum of one month in a synthetic sewage made of the following ingredients: 12. 0 g dextrose. 180. 0 mg L M potassium phosphate. 6. 0 g ammonium sulfate. 2.4 g magnesium sulfate. 240.0 mg manganese sulfate. 180. 0 mg calcium chloride. 12.0 mg ferric chloride. 5. 0 ml SAE 30 motor oil. Tap Water to 12 liters. 50. 0 cc of 5 percent algae in 300 ppm AP-30 solution. Sealants tested under these conditions are noted in Appendix III. After conditioning, the bonded tiles were tested by using a Dillon Model LW Tester (Figure 3). For flexural testing, the loading rate was never to exceed N = 0.107d per minute, where N is the number of turns and d is the depth of the tile. For tensile testing, the loading rate range was adjusted from 2,400 to 2, 800 psi per minute. 11 ------- Figure 2. Specimen Tiles Bonded Together Figure 3. Dillon Tester Figure 4. Flexural Testing of Bonded Tiles. To measure flexural strength, the bonded tiles were placed in the Dillon Tester (Figure 4). (Precautions were taken to center the bond.) The following calculation was then made: S = 3 PL 4 bd where S = flexural strength (Ib/in ). P = gauge reading in pounds. b = width of joint. d = depth of joint. L = distance between tester supports. 12 ------- Type of failure was recorded as 1) breaking, 2) buckling or 3) delamination. Tensile strengths were measured by placing the bonded tiles in the Dillon Tester (Figure 5), and by calculating as follows: where T = T = tensile strength (Ib/in ). P = gauge reading in pounds at the breaking point. b = width of joint in inches. d = depth of joints in inches. Figure 5. Tensile Testing of Bonded Tiles. The type of failure was recorded as: 1) Percent cohesion failure = failure within the adhesive itself. 2) Percent contact failure = surface failure due to lack of adhesion wetting. 3) Percent adhesion failure = failure of the bond between the surface of the test specimen and the adhesive. 4) Percent adherent failure = failure where the adhesive actually breaks away part of the test specimen, the adhesive bond being stronger than the test speciment. The modulus of elasticity was determined by the following (by using the same procedures as for flexural testing): 13 ------- E = PL3 4Dbd3 where E = modulus of elasticity. D = deflection in inches of the middle of the sample (determined by the difference of movement between the lower and upper supports of the Dillon tester). The viscosity was measured at 75°F and reported in centipoises. In the case of multicomponent systems, the viscosity reported is represent- ative of the sealant after it was mixed and ready for application. Viscosities were measured (on a Brookfield Model LV viscosimeter by using appropri- ate speed and spindle), or the manufacturer's stated viscosity was listed when available. In the application encountered in this project, the best sealants were found to be highly thixotropic or non-Newtonian in their flow prop- erties. Many of the sealants were too thick or viscous to measure viscos- ity (noted in Appendix III as "paste" or "thixotropic") but, where possible the thixotropic effects were reported by the thixotropic index, determined on the Brookfield viscosimeter: Thixotropic Index = Viscosity at 2 rpm . Viscosity at 20 rpm The set time was measured as the time required for the sealant to become nontacky to the touch (ASTM-2471). In the case of exothermic reactions, the set time shortened considerably with larger volumes. The values reported on the charts are for 35 to 50 grams of material mixed at 75°F, unless otherwise stated. The set time is intended to give a relative indication of time required to cure, i. e. , comparison between sealants tested. The wide variety of thermally conductive materials, in this case, sewer pipes and their environments, makes it impractical to attempt to record a set time applicable to every condition. In the large-scale testing where three to five pounds of material were used, the distribution of this material about the pipe, and the large contact area between the sealant and the pipe, conducted the heat of reaction away from the sealants, thus lengthening the set time. In all cases, if a laboratory set time of 30 min- utes or less was reported, a thorough cure was established (during large- scale testing) between application of the sealant and disassembly of the test-application box some 24 hours later. Peak exotherms were recorded on a Sargent Model SR strip recorder coupled to a chromel-alumel thermocouple. Specified amounts of the com- ponents were mixed at 75°F and placed in a nine-ounce paper cup on a non- conductive surface in still air. This procedure is described in ASTM D2471- 66T. 14 ------- Testing of the candidate sealants1 resistances to sewage was con- ducted in the following manner. A specimen of the sealant was cured in a plastic breaker, then removed, weighed, and the volume measured by water displacement. The cured samples were soaked in the sewage system (de- scribed on page 9) for one month, then removed from the sewage, weighed and the volume measured. Initial test results (Appendix III Part F) were com- pared with raw material manufactueres1 data and both showed chemical and water resistance of the epoxy and urethane type sealants to be more then adequate (Reference 9 (p. 6-46 to 48), 10, 11, 12, (p. 117 and 168) and 13 (p. 780, 783). Values reported are mean values (average). Results that deviated from the mean value of all tests were rejected if the deviation of the doubt- ful value was more than five times the average deviation from the mean obtained by excluding the doubtful value (ASTM D-1184). 3. Materials Tested All materials submitted during the survey, and of which samples were available, were subjected to the laboratory tests above unless some property of a material rendered it inapplicable under the conditions of the tests. Tests showed very early the superiority of the thixotropic type materials over the water-thin systems in sealing breaks of clay sewer pipes. This superiority, along with the exceptional strength demonstrated by the high molecular-weight type materials, shifted the attention of lab- oratory tests toward the thixotropic polymer systems. General classes of materials tested included: Epoxy polyamide. Vinyl ester. Epoxy polysulfide. Vinyl chloride. Urethane (two component). Furfuryl alcohol resin. Ricinoleate urethane. Atactic polypropylene. Polyester. Acrylamid gel. Water-extended polyester. Gypsum cement. Polyester urethane. Asphaltic emulsion. Poly olefin. 4. Results of Testing The laboratory study resulted in ten basic sealant systems. The formula breakdown is listed in Table I. By using the methods and tests described above a systematic approach was taken to eliminate unsuitable candidates and to select those materials that would perform adequately. In the process, the affects of various conditions or modifications were determined. Appendix III contains all the information gained in the initial testing phase. The inherent limitations of the various classes of materials (noted above) necessitated modifications before data of any value could be obtain- ed. The data is presented in a categorized manner in Appendix III to permit study of the affects of various modifications. The categories used include: 15 ------- Sealant TABLE I. Formula Breakdown of Sealant Systems Subjected to Large Scale Testing Amount (parts) Constituent System m i Base A Base B dystem A2 Base A Base Bj System B Base A Base B System B2 Base A Base B System DI Base A Base B 100.0 DGEBA, W. P.E. =205 12.0 Butyl glycidyl ether 5. 6 Fumed silica 25. 0 Araldite 956 (Modified amine. Amine value of 23.5 to 27. 0) 100.0 DGEBA, W. P.E. 205 6.0 Butyl Glycidyl ether 7. 0 Fumed silica 1.4 Tween 80 (Polyoxyethylene (20) sorbitan monooleate) 25. 0 Araldite 956 (Modified amine. Amine value of 23. 5 to 27.0) 50.0 DGEBA, W. P. E. =205 50.0 DGEPG, W.P.E. = 175 5. 7 Fumed silica 17.0 Araldite 956 (Modified amine. Amine value of 23.5 to 27.0) 75.0 DGEBA, W.P.E. 205 25.0 DGEPG, W.P.E. 175 6. 0 Fumed silica 21.0 Araldite 956 (Modified amine. Amine value of 23.5 to 27.0) 91.0 DCUE 1072-31 Part A (Polyether urethane OH terminated) 2. 5 Fumed silica 0. 5 Tween 80 (Polyoxyethylene (20) sorbitan monooleate) 9. 0 DCUE 1072-31 Part B (Isocyanate - Termi- nated prepolymer) 16 ------- TABLE I. (Continued) Sealant Amount (parts) Constituent System D2 Base A Base B System E! Base A Base B System E2 Base A Base B System F! Base A Base B System Fz Base A Base B System Gj Base A Base B 91.0 DCUE 1072-31 Part A (Polyether urethane - OH terminated) 3.0 Fumed silica 0. 9 Polyoxyethylene (20) sorbitan monooleate 9.0 DCUE 1072-31 Part B (Isocyanate - Termi- nated prepolymer) (Low Viscosity) 91.2 B-430 ( Polyether urethane -OH terminated) 1. 7 Fumed silica 0.42 Tween 80 (Polyethylene (20) sorbitan monooleate) 8.2 DCAD 1024-1 (Isocyanate - Terminated prepolymer) (Low Viscosity) 91.2 B-430 (Polyether urethane - OH terminated) 1. 7 Fumed silica . 93 Tween 80 (Polyethylene (20) sorbitan monooleate) 8.2 DCAD 1024-1 Isocyanate - Terminated prepolymer) 50. 0 Matstick 24 (Pigmented epoxy - contained asbestos) 50. 0 Matstick 25 (Polyamide catalyst) 47.5 Matstick 1-LD-1146"A" (Epoxy pigmented) 2. 5 Fumed silica - substituted for asbestos 50.0 Matstick l-LD-1146 "B" (Polyamide catalyst 96. 0 Cital Aquacoat 2805T Base A (Epoxy Coating) 6. 0 Cital Aquacoat 2805T Catalyst 17 ------- TABLE I. (Continued) Sealant Amount (parts) Constituent System G2 Base A Base B System H Base A Base B System I Base A Base B System J Base A Base B System K Base A Base B 96. 0 Cital Aquacoat 2805 T - Base A (Epoxy- based coating) 1.46 Fumed silica 6. 0 Cital Aquacoat 2805T (Catalyst) 100.0 Selectron RS(5119 (Polyester resin contain- ing 35 percent styrene monomers) 4.5 . Fumed silica 0. 6 Lupersol 224 ( MEK peroxide) 100.0 Nuklad 105 "A" (Epoxy-based primer) 4.2 Fumed silica 2.1 Glycerin 20.0 Nuclad 105 "B" (Epoxy catalyst) 100.0 WEP-27 (Unsaturated water-extended polyester) 2. 5 Cobalt napthenate . 5 Dimethylaniline 125.0 H2O containing 400 ppm (by weight) hydroquinone 1.0 Luperso.l DDM (MEK peroxide) 50.0 DGEBA, W.P.E. 205 50.0 DGEPG, W.P.E. 425 5. 0 Fumed silica 13.0 Araldite 963 (Modified polyamide) 18 ------- TABLE II. Properties of Systems Selected from Laboratory Testing CO co rt- CD 3 2 o AI Fz G2 I H D! t\; Ł X) O T) W g* S-" ,. ><; 42, 200 cps #7 spindle thixotropic 37, 000 cps #7 spindle thixotropic 23, 000 cps #7 spindle thixotropic 154, SOOcps #7 spindle thixotropic 32, 200 cps 50, 400 cps (-3 3 | en X O M- o 8. 10 5. 60 5. 85 7.45 6.40 6. 10 01 CD < o !_,. (-1. ><" H? f^ 1. 18 1.24 1. 68 1. 11 1. 15 1.25 g ť ° SM i**j *^ tj CD |-u Ł! Q) 3 O CD CD w a 238°C 22 min. 146°C 50 min. 119°C 50 min. 175°C 25 min. 52°C 5 min. Tl i < CD X ^_^ fv-4 cn -ti- 5560 5549 3733 3194 2301 317 CD 3 cn CD" 5* cn ^~ 1134 1694 1136 1168 1052 352 g a§- w d Ji ' 0 ^ H- W < o Ml 1. 01 x 107 1. 87 x 106 2. 02 x 106 1. 23 x 106 1. 12 x 107 1. 04 x 104 H CD fti ^ Łj CD C C C C A C Comments Very tacky. Added fumed silica to enhance thixotropic properties. Slow-curing. DMP-30 will accelerate cure but destroy thixotropic properties. Needs improved adhesion properties and is temperature sensitive. Needs a phenolic -nitro- rubber material for primer. Very flexible. C = Cohesion, A = Adhesion, CA = Combination of cohesion and adhesion. ------- TABLE II. (Continued) CO SJ w r* CD 2 o e Ei K B2 J Viscosity (20 RPM) 34, 000 cps 23, 800 cps Thixotropic Index 6.80 6. 30 not thixo- tropic Specific Gravity 1.25 1.16 Peak Exotherm and Minutes to Read 46°C 5 min. 199°C 13 min. 30 min. 12 min. TJ K CD X 5" en (- 292 1152 4856 2413 H3 CD 3 in M- ť ' CD xT in ť- 389 2631 1148 655 Modulus of Elasticity 2. 60 x 104 5. 0 x 105 4. 1 x 104 9. 61 x 105 Type Failure C CA C A Comments Fast cure, flexible. A flexibilized epoxy is added to increase flexibility. This system is an emulsion and was not thixo tropic. C = Cohesion, A = Adhesion, CA = Combination of cohesion and adhesion. ------- Page A - Performance of Sealants on Clean Tiles. If a material was believed to perform well on clean tiles (based on a judgment of chemical class or from manufacturer's data) then the clean tile test was dismissed and the material was subjected to the more strenuous sewage-soaked tile test. Part B - Performance of Sealants on Sewage-Soaked Tiles. Part C - Affects of Coupling Agents. The affects of coupling agents on the adhesion and physical properties of various chemical classes were observed. In many cases this modification was necessary before useful testing could be accomplished. Part D - Affects of Curing Agents and Reactive Diluents. Some of the basic epoxy systems were tested with various curing agents. Part E - Epoxy Polysulfide System. Data pertaining to use of poly- sulfide modifiers and various curing agents was recorded. C. ADJUSTMENT OF SEALANT FORMULATIONS Materials showing good tensile and flexural strength, good chemical resistance and good cure time were examined for proper application proper- ties. Feedback from large-scale testing showed a material was needed with the ability to stay positioned within the pipe until cured but also be easy to pump. The property of thixotropy proved to be the solution. Since acceptable application properties are indispensable, the problems of viscosity and thixotropy must be solved. The epoxy and ure- thane systems can be thixotroped by the addition of superfine, fumed silica. This filler has a true thixotropic effect--!, e. , high apparent viscosity at low shear rates (slow stirring) and low viscosity at high shear rates (fast stirring). Note: The sealant that applied best during large-scale testing was made from a lower viscosity material (500 to 1,000 centipoise) and thixotroped to a high apparent viscosity material with a high thixotropic index. Samples of typical viscosities and thixotropies are given in Figure 6. Because the viscosity is low at high shear rates, the sealant is easily applied or mixed. The high viscosity at low shear rates gives the sealant sufficient body to stay fixed, without sagging, until cured. Since the material thixotroped by the addition of fumed silica or other thixotropic modifiers can never have a viscosity lower than its orig- inal viscosity, diluents are useful in reducing the original viscosity to a suitable application range. The original viscosity of the sealant is ap- proached at high shear rates after the sealant has been thixotroped. Any advantage of combining with the system rather than behaving as a plasti- cizer. Simce the properties desired can be achieved by the use of reactive diluents, there is no need for using nonreactive diluents. 21 ------- 201- SYSTEM 15 10 o z OL I04 20 r- T. ). 8 2 345 6789,^8 10' VISCOSITY, CENTI POISE 3 4 5678 3456 789 VISCOSITY, CENTIPOISE T.I.-THIXOTROPIC INDEX Figure 6. Viscosity Curves. ------- Appendix III part D contains useful information on the application of diluent and curing agents. Table III illustrates the affects on viscosity of adding various diluents and solvents. Epoxy and urethane systems have the advantage of lending them- selves to easy physical property modifications. Typically, the epoxy systems tend to be more rigid while the urethane systems tend to be more elastic. The epoxy system shown in Figure 7 has a wide range of variation between tensile strength and percent elongation. By varying the blends between diglycidyl ether of bis phenol A (DGEBA) and a diglycidyl ether of propylene glycol (DGEPG), the flexibility can be modified. The aromatic ring structure, as in DGEBA, usually gives hard, rigid cures with a low percentage elongation and low impact strength due to brittleness (Refer- ence 11). By incorporating varying amounts of the polyglycol diepoxide, these properties can be changed. Better resistance to thermal shock is also obtained. Of course, the curing agent also affects these properties, but the important consideration in selecting a curing agent is the cure rate. Generally, the epoxies showed better adhesion than the urethanes after soaking in water; however, the adhesion of both systems was im- proved by priming the substrate with --or the addition of -- adhesion- promoting materials submitted by the manufacturers. Adhesion of the epoxies was benefitted either by priming with -- or by adding -- such silanes as gamma-aminopropylmethoxysilane or gamma-glycidoxypropyItrim- ethoxysilane. In most cases the addition of an adhesion promoting material was not required (see Tables IV through VIII and Appendix III, part B). In the case of the urethanes, the substrate must be primer. In the case of the epoxies, the silanes served as primers (see Appendix III, part B) and are also recommended as additives. Proprietary names are listed only where description of the compo- sition of a system would not be adequate otherwise. Although many prod- ucts are interchangeable, usually the type of materials delt with here are not. If no proprietary names are given, then it may be assumed that any reputable material will perform adequately. Materials for further testing and improvement were selected with the following parameters used as criteria with the order of importance (first to last) indicated: 1. Viscosity and thixotropy 2. Set or cure time 3. Chemical resistance 4. Tensile and flexural strength 5. Adhesion 6. Cost Table I summarizes these systems. Table II given the physical properties of one of each class (Ai and A2 are one class, etc. ) 23 ------- TABLE III. Effects of Diluents and Solvents (Unmodified Viscosity = 16,000 Diluent Dibutyl phthalate Dipropylene glyco-1 Dimethyl phthalate Decyl g lye idyl ether Diethylene glycol Ally I glycidyl ether Cyclohexanone Phenyl glycidyl ether Styrene Methylethyl ketone Gamma- butyrolactone Xylene Diacetone alcohol Cellos olve X air (alkylether) Butylglycidyl ether Amount Diluent phr 30 35 35 16 30 10 17 20 11.5 7 15 11.5 20 12 23 12 on DGEBA Centipoise) Final Viscosity (cps) 1, 230 1, 160 1, 155 1, 110 1, 110 1, 110 1, 040 1,040 1,005 960 960 f\ / f\ 960 920 860 860 860 24 ------- I2OO- -I6O -140 PERCENT ELONGATION TENSILE STRENGT IOO% DGEBA O% DGEPG 75-25 50:50 25=75 IOO% DGEPG 0% DGEBA Figure 7. Tensile Strength and Elongation of DGEBA-DGEPG Blends cured With Araldite 963. 25 ------- D. LARGE-SCALE TESTING Sealants that passed laboratory tests (listed in Table II) were sub- jected to actual sealing procedures. A series of tests was devised to simu- late conditions of repairs of failures on six-inch I. D. clay pipe. 1. Typical Failures Tested The first failure (open joint) simulated the condition encountered if the spigot end of a pipe barrel were inserted into the bell with no joint- ing material or gasket. The distance between the two sections of pipe was adjusted to 1/8 inch to simulate separating sections. Similar conditions were found where sewer-pipe cleaning operations or ground movements had separated pipe section. Figure 8 shows a joint repair with excess pipe broken away to show smooth interior. Figure 8. Joint Repair Figure 9. Broken Bell The second failure (broken bell) was set up in the same way as the open joint except that approximately one third of the bell section was broken away (Figure 9). Figure 10. Barrel Crack Figure 11. Hole in Barrel 26 ------- The third failure was a simulated crack in the barrel of a pipe. A slot was sawed through the barrel approximately 1/8 inch wide by 3 inches long. Figure 10 shows a repaired crack with excess sealant and loose dirt removed to show edge bonding. Any sealant successfully patching the first three failures was used to patch a fourth and more strenuous failure. This test was considered to be a supplement to the other tests rather than a criterion for passing or failing a candidate sealant. A square hole, 3-1/2 inches on each side, was cut through the barrel to be repaired (Figure 11). Here again the excess sealant and loose dirt was removed to show the edge bonding. 2. Methods of Testing The failures to be sealed were placed in a box (Figure 12). This box was constructed so that the pipe sections were supported and restrained by saddles in the box to prevent movement as the sealant was applied. The six- inch test pipe was soaked in water, then placed in the box such that the failure was between the saddles. The pipe was covered on all sides with chernozemic soil, leaving the ends exposed. Chernozemic soils are high in clay content, and are plastic and subject to great shrinking and swell- ing (Reference 8). This soil was selected because it is a type involved in several of the major causes of infiltration listed in Section I. A mock pack- er (Figure 13) was placed in the pipe so that the failure was between the rubber seal rings, which were then expanded mechanically. The sealant was then pressurized from the injector into the packer, out into the area between the sealing rubber rings and into the flaw, or sewer pipe failure. After five minutes, the packer was deflated and removed from the pipe. If no obvious visual flaws were found in the repair, then the repaired section Figure 12. Test Box. Figure 13. Mock Packer 27 ------- N 00 AIR PRESSURE REGULATOR PIPE SPECIMEN TEST BOX FILLED WITH SOIL PRIOR TO INJECTION v: SUPPORTS FOR PIPE -PACKER INJECTOR -0- t, UNION 1 f AIR FILTER FROM AIR SUPPLY V j- UNION -SEALANT RESERVOIR I'GATE VALVE -<§) FROM FLUSHING SYSTEM Figure 14. Large-Scale Testing Apparatus-Schematic ------- was tested. If a primer was required, it was applied before the sealant and in the same manner as the sealant. A 30-minute delay was then allowed before application of the sealant. Figure 14 is a schematic of the sealant application and the test box. Repairs that appeared to be sealed were tested by placing the repaired section in a hot-cold pressure box (Figure 15). This box was constructed so that a pressure of 13 psi, equivalent to a 30-foot head of water, could be applied to the exterior of the pipe. Infiltration or leakage could then be determined by a drop in pressure or by visual observation inside the pipe. If, at this point, the seal was inadequate, the repair was repeated to check against faulty procedure. If the repair again leaked or showed signs of poor adhesion, the candidate was eliminated from the remainder of the test schedule. If results of the leak test were good, the repaired section was tested for flexibility (this test applied only to joints). The flexibility test simulated the results of ground movements on the joint seal (Figure 16 shows the test rig). The test was accomplished by supporting the ends of the pipe sections and inducing slight repeated displacements at the joint. First, the pipe was pressurized internally to about 5 psi to indicate if or when the seal began to leak. The joint was deflected 0. 1-inch downward then 0. 1-inch upward from center. The results were reported as acceptable if no leak occurred. If a small leak occurred, the amount of leak was reported in milliliters per min- ute at 5 psi. If the bond ruptured during the test, the type of failure was determined (adhesive, cohesive, or adherent). This flexure test was design- ed specifically for this program and is not to be confused with ASTM Stand- ard Specification C-425 which covers resilient joints installed on the pipe at the factory. Figure 15. Hot-Cold Pressure Box. Figure 16. Flexibility Test Rig. After a selected sealant had undergone the above tests, the repair- ed pipe was again placed in the leak test box (Figure 15) and subjected to a series of hot and cold cycles under non-pressurized conditions. Both the pipe and the box were filled with water (heated to 90 F) and allowed to re- main for 10 minutes. After this time, the box was drained, leaving only the 29 ------- pipe filled with 90°F water. After 10 minutes in this condition, the pipe was drained and both the pipe and box were refilled with 34°F water, and this temperature maintained for JO minutes. Then the box was drained, leaving only the pipe filled with 34 F water, to be drained 10 minutes later. This completed the end of a cycle. Each repair was tested for 25 to 100 cycles, and visually inspected before beginning the high-pressure test. The repaired pipe was again placed in the leak test box and pressur- ized slowly to 5.0 psi and held for 10 minutes. The pressure at which rupture occurred was reported. Or, if no rupture occurred, the repaired pipe was pressurized internally to 13 psi and held for 10 minutes. The test rig was then dissassembled and the repaired section was visually examined for changes and stored for future reference. 3. Results of Large-Scale Testing By using the conditions and methods described above for large- scale testing, a series of tables were prepared that contained data from tests performed on systems described in Table II. Table IV. Repair of Clean 6-Inch Sewer Pipe Joint. Table V. Repair of Crack in Barrel. Table VI. Repair of Missing Bell Section. Table VII. Repair of Hole in Barrel. Table VIII. Repair of Sewer Pipe Soaked in Sewage. From these data the following acceptable systems were derived. System AI: A basic epoxy system (DGEBA) diluted with a reactive diluent. This system is very strong and has almost no flexibility, result- ing in a broken pipe if the sealed joint is strained. System A2 is a higher viscosity version of Aj. System B!: A basic epoxy blend of DGEBA and DGEPG. The viscos- ity and thixotropy of this system are nearly identical to System AI leading to nearly identical application properties. System Bj differs from System Aj in flexibility and tensile strength and is more suitable in applications where pipe movement is possible but with a compromise in tensile strength. System C2 is still a more flexible epoxy system of the same material obtained by increasing the DGEBG/DGEBA ratio (Figure 7). System DI*. Dickey's D-CUE 1072-31 (a polymer urethane) thixo- troped by the addition of Cabosil M-5 or Aerosil and Tween 80 (Polyoxyethy- lene (20) sorbitan mono-oleate).N System D2 is a more visous, more thixo- tropic version of Dj. A primer is necessary for maximum adhesion. System Ej: Dickey's B-430 (polyether urethane) thixotroped by the addition of Cabosil M-5 or Aerosil and Tween 80. System EI differs from 30 ------- Candidate System Gt G2 Fl F2 H I Di t-< CD DJ H CD cn i-t- F P F P P P P TABLE IV. Repair of Clean 6- Inch Sewer Pipe Joint. Leak Test with Pressure Failed at . 060 inch downward deflection Failed at .040 inch downward deflection Failed at . 025 inch downward deflection Failed at . 100 inch upward deflection P O K ŁS 03 Q o I ' a - - - - - P Final Pressure Test - - - - - - P Comments Thixotropic index was too low, material flowed to the bottom of the joint. Fumed silica increased thixotropic properties. Epoxy system needed more flexibility. (100% solids epoxy paint. ) Test rig blew an air hole in the epoxy and caused a water leak. Hard to pump, very sticky. Used fumed silica instead of asbestos because the silica system was easier to pump. (Epoxy-polyamide system. ) Material was found not to cure completely in soil and did not adhere to pipe. (Polyester, room-cured. ) Good flexibility, but slow to cure (48 hours), bonding was poor. (Epoxy based concrete sealer and primer. ) Practical use of primer. Must have primer used before it will adhere to pipe. Phenolic nitro-rubber compound needed as primer. (Urethane) P = Passed. F = Failed. ------- u> Nl TABLE IV. (Continued) .0 W QJ J,J ťJ ri ^ 2 a 3 at CD Ei J A i i (D 0) H CD W P F P Leak Test with Pressure P Failed . 007 inch downward deflection r^ U1 I-H Q Q 0 *"* CD M Q O i a P - P T) W T) c 5- -i 3 (> H CD CO !-Ť P - P Comments Low- viscosity version of DI, also needed primer as Dj. Too thin, unable to thixotrope (an emulsion). Epoxy failed, broke sewer pipe. For this reason, a second test was made to subject system to hot and cold cycling. Used epoxy-terminated silane to improve adhesion. P = Passed. F = Failed. ------- TABLE V. Repair of Crack in Barrel. uandidate System Pressure Test Comments Internal pressure of 13 psi at 10 minutes. No leakage. External pressure of 30 psi, crack began to leak. Passed internal and external pressure tests. Passed internal and external pressure tests. Phenolic nitro rubber must be applied before to obtain water-tight seal. Used epoxy silane to improve adhesion. Phenolic nitro rubber must be applied before to obtain water-tight seal. Oo 00 TABLE VI. Repair of Missing Bell Section. Candidate System Leak Test Pressure Test Comments A Passed Passed Passed Passed internal test of 10 psi for 10 minutes with no leaks. Passed external test of 50 psi. Internal test of 10 psi for 10 minutes, no leakage. External test of 50 psi for 10 minutes, small leak. Leaked at 3 psi. Phenolic nitro rubber primer required. Phenolic nitro rubber primer required. Silane coupler used. Reason for leakage was air bubble in bottom of joint. ------- TABLE VII. Repair of Hole in Barrel. Candidate System Leak Test Pressure Test Comments Passed Passed Failed Held at 50 psi for 7 minutes before leakage was observed. At 15 psi there was a leak of one drop per second, at 50 psi this rate remained unchanged. Phenolic nitro rubber primer was required. Phenolic nitro rubber primer was required. Very thick and hard to pump. Unable to make Epoxy system thixotropic enough to bridge hole in pipe barrel. OO ------- OO in TABLE VIII. Repair of Sewer Pipe Soaked in Sewage. Candidate System A! D! CD 01 (-3 CD W P P P Flex Test with Pressure Leaked when flexed down- ward . 1 inch, stopped when returned to 0 and flexed upward . 1 inch. tSJ O o Ł-8° 0 a P P P Final Pressure Test Small leak at 30 psi. Did not increase when raised to 50 psi. Some leakage at 50 psi. Failed. Leaked at 13 psi. Comments Did not run flex test be- cause epoxy and pipe had same approximate strength. Phenolic nitro -rubber primer required. Phenolic nitro -rubber primer required. P = Passed. ------- System Dj mainly in viscosity. System E2 was created by increasing the concentration of Tween 80 in System EI). A primer is necessary for maxi- mum adhesion.-H- System K: An epoxy-based system similar to System B except that the hardener was changed to Araldile 963 (modified polyamide), yielding a much more flexible system and also a faster curing system. All the systems mentioned above performed adequately as sewer pipe sealants. Adapting the above systems to actual field conditions is a problem which only field test experience can solve. All systems mentioned above are believed to perform adequately as sewer pipe sealants but it is possible that one system could be better than another under specified conditions. System AI and A2 (epoxies) are strongest (tensile and flexural strengths) but have low flexibility. Strain of a repair made with these systems would problaby result in a broken pipe before failure of the repair. Systems BI, C2 and K (epoxies) are more flexible systems but with a sacrifice in tensile strength. If soil shift occurred, these systems would allow pipe movement without rupture to a point and then failure at the re- pair would occur. Systems DI, D2, EI and E2 (urethanes) are more elastic than the epoxy systems and allow more freedom of pipe movement but are complicated by the rise of primers before good adhesion to the sewer pipes can be ob- tained. As for the type of repair to be mended (crack, hole, joint, etc. ) all systems compare similarly and favorably. A number of properties of the grouting materials were selected which were anticipated to be important in their evaluation. These properties are shown in Table DC. An arbitrary value of 100 was assigned to each ideal property. Prior to the initiation of the program an estimate was made of the probable approach to the ideal by making formula modifications. The table compares the properties of the best six materials to the ideal and probable achievable properties. This estimate is shown in Appendix IV. Prior to initiation of the program, it was believed that an ideal viscosity would be that of water. However it was found that a dynamic (pumping) and a static (placed) viscosity were important properties. The ideal for dynamic conditions is the viscosity of water while the static viscosity ideal would be that of a non-sagging or non-dripping putty. Certain materials have the property of shear thinning under dynamic con- ditions and thickening under a static condition. This property is commonly called thixotrophy. As explained previously additives were included in the sealant formulation to improve the thixotropic property. -H- W. S. Dickey recommends phenolic nitro rubber primer and suggests only good housekeeping procedures in regard to possible toxicity. 36 ------- TABLE IX. Sealant Properties Compared With Ideal Material IDEAL MATERIAL PROBABLE ACHIEVABLE System AI A2 BI C2 D, Dz Ez K Properties o O "o w w (D rt Z.O 01 >* --^ p- . 75 . 75 . 75 .75 .97 .97 .97 .97 .75 Viscosity d < s a o 100 85 25 15 Z5 25 12 9 15 10 25 w 8 ' 1 100 85 70 75 72 70 80 85 75 80 70 ft. 3- 01 S 100 100 90 90 85 80 70 70 70 70 80 co 3 3 if 100 100 100 100 100 100 90 90 90 90 100 r] S tr Ł 100 100 100 100 100 100 100+ 100+ 100 + 100+ 100 o s Eť Ql l-t. § 100 85 85 85 85 85 70 70 70 70 85 T) a c (C 100 90 90 90 90 90 85 85 85 85 90 Shrinkage O c *i 100 100 100+ 100+ 100+ 100+ 100+ 100+ 100+ 100+ 100+ w tr o 1 3 100 100 85 85 70 70 80 80 80 80 75 Remarks The ideal material will have a dynamic viscosity of water and static viscosity of putty, adhesions equiv- alent to breakage, strength equal to sewer pipe, flex- ible as the sewer pipe, contamination to not materially affect strength, a pot life which is adjustable and no leaks resulting from shrinkage. Estimate of probable achievable approach to the ideal properties prior to program initiation. The viscosity of the sealants while being pumped Is less than ideal. The other properties of the sealants are rated good to excellent. The environmental shrink- age was excellent but because of the lack of data over a period of time longer than a year the ratings were estimated to be 75 to 85. U) -0 ------- E. SEALING EQUIPMENT INVESTIGATION 1. Existing Equipment This section details the investigation and evaluation of existing equipment for applying sealants in the field and recommends improvements and developments for application of the new and improved sealants devel- oped under this contract. Figure 17 is a schematic flow diagram of one system of sealing sewer leaks with the acrylamid gels. Figure 18 is anoth- er system flow diagram for acrylamid gels. It should be noted that the prin- cipal difference in these systems is in the movement and metering of the gel components. All of the sealing contractors investigated used one or the other of these systems. Operation of the acrylamid gel sealing system is as follows. The acrylamid and catalyst are mixed with water in their respective mixing tanks. Each mixed solution is metered and moved through separate hoses to the packer-sealer. The two solutions are released into the pipe around the packer and forced into the leak. The joining of the chemicals allows them to react, making a gel within a few seconds. There are a number of sealing packers being used today. All exist- ing equipment is similar in sequence of operation and in function of the various parts. All have inflatable elements to isolate the leak, air lines for inflation, two pipes for delivering the chemical grout and catalyst to the packer, and necessary towing lugs. Some of the packers have protec- tive end shoes which are larger in diameter than the inflatable units and afford some protection to the inflatable unit from abrasion. These packers have either two or three inflatable sections. The majority of the packers have an open center which allows the sewage to continue to flow during a sealing operation. . Figure 19 shows a typical packer having two inflatable sections. It is also typical in that the chemical grout and catalyst are not allowed to mix until outside of the packer. This technique requires the major mix- ing to take place in the annulus (between packer and pipe) which has been isolated by the inflation sections. This method of mixing depends on the random collision of grout and catalyst molecules. It is evident that an ideal mixture could (except for a highly improbably random event) be expected to result only from a system- atic mixing process. Figure 20 shows a typical packer having three inflatable sections. The two inflatable end sections isolate the leak and, after injecting the grout, the center section is inflated to displace the grout from the annulus between the packer and the line. The chemical grout and the catalyst are discharged from the two supply pipes at a point under the center inflatable section. The mixing of sealant and catalyst is again a random event, occur- ing under the inflatable section or in the area between the packer and the pipe. 38 ------- 2. Recommended Equipment Changes The chemical sealants developed under this contract are mixtures of component chemicals which, on polymerization, form rigid or flexible materials. One packer-sealer design which could be used in applying the new sealants is shown in Figure 21. This packer will work similarly to the ones currently in use. It has air inflation tubes for leak isolation and an air in- flation tube for forcing sealant from the annulus. A single pipe will provide a travel path for the sealant from the adjacent mixer. If desired, a non- stick coating such as tetrafluorethylene could be applied to all surfaces coming in contact with the sealant. The center is open so that sewage can continue to flow during a sealing operation. The physical properties of these components and their reaction chemistry requires complete and thorough mixing before using the resulant blend in the sewer pipe. The mixing must be positive, with direct shearing action performing the best. Mixing power must be supplied from outside, not by movement of materials through the mixing chamber. It has been noted that there is no positive mixing system on any application equipment currently being used; therefore, before any existing equipment is used for applying the new sealant materials, a system for adequately mixing the components will be required on each application machine. Figure 22 shows a screw-type mixer which has a positive mixing action and could be attached to a suitable packer supply pipe. Further, since these sealants polymerize to a firm adherent plastic, the packer- sealer having three inflatable sections could not be used because the sealant could collect under the center section set up, and render the packer unusable. . Figure 23 is a schematic flow diagram of the system to use the new sealants developed under this contract to seal leaking sewers. The similar- ity between this system and the acrylamid system that uses the metering pumps is readily apparent; however, for the acrylamid system, a one-to- one ratio between catalyst and grout is used, while the new sealants re- quire a ratio of part A (sealant) to part B (hardner) of about five-to-one. Therefore, a pump modification will be necessary. In the event a primer is to be used, an additional line would need to be added to the packer- sealer (Figure 21). The primers are one component systems of water thin viscosity and require no additional mixing. The other acrylamid system uses air to transport the chemicals and meters them through rota meters. The new sealants are too viscous to be moved by air over long distances or to be metered through any area type meter; therefore, some modification will be necessary before this system can be made usable with the new sealants: e. g. , the air delivery system must be changed to positive-displacement pumps, and the rotameter elim- inated. 39 ------- OPEN TOP MIXING TANKS XX SHOOTING TANK CATALYST t SHOOTING TANK GROUT ROTAMETERS AIR TANK H- HOSE STORAGE REEL MULTIPLE HOSE PACKER-SEALER, LEAKING UOINT Figure 17. Acrylamid Sealant System-Schematic. ------- OPEN TOP MIXING TANKS HOSE STORAGE REEL DOUBLE PISTON METERING PUMP < MULTIPLE HOSE PACKER-SEALER LEAKING JOINT nivmimii^Tfmi Figure 18. Acrylamid Sealant System-Schematic. ------- .1 t (T) INF1_ATION AIR (D INFLATABLE SECTION (3) SUPPLY PIPE-GROUT (4) SUPPLY PIPE-CATALYST (i) PROTECTIVE SHOE Figure 19. Packer-Sealer With Two Inflatable Sections. ------- i! ' (T) INFLATION AIR (2) INFLATABLE SECTION (5) SUPPLY PIPE-GROUT (4) SUPPLY PIPE-CATALYST (5) PROTECTIVE SHOE Figure 20. Packer-Sealer With Three Inflatable Sections. ------- grout, the center section is inflated to displace the grout from the annulus between the packer and the line. The chemical grout and the catalyst are discharged from the two supply pipes at a point under the center inflatable section. The mixing of sealant and catalyst is again a random event, occur- ing under the inflatable section or in the area between the packer and the pipe. 2. Recommended Equipment Changes The chemical sealants developed under this contract are mixtures of component chemicals which, on polymerization, form rigid or flexible materials. One packer-sealer design which could be used in applying the new sealants is shown in Figure 19. This packer will work similarly to the ones currently in use. It has air inflation tubes for leak isolation and an air infla- tion tube for forcing sealant from the annulus. A single pipe will provide a travel path for the sealant from the adjacent mixer. If desired, a non-stick coating such as tetrafluorethylene could be applied to all surfaces coming in contact with the sealant. The physical properties of these components and their reaction chemistry requires complete and thorough mixing before using the resultant blend in the sewer pipe. The mixing must be positive, with direct shearing action performing the best. Mixing power must be supplied from outside, not by movement of materials through the mixing chamber. It has been noted that there is no positive mixing system on any application equipment currently being used; therefore, before any existing equipment is used for applying the new sealant materials, a system for adequately mixing the components will be required on each application machine. Figure 20 shows a screw-type mixer which has a positive mixing action and could be attached to a suitable packer supply pipe. Further, since these sealants polymerize to a firm adherent plastic, the packer-sealer hav- ing three inflatable sections could not be used because the sealant could collect under the center section set up, and render the packer unusable, * Figure 21 is a schematic flow diagram of the system to use the new sealants developed under this contract to seal leaking sewers. The similar- ity between this system and the acrylamid system that uses the metering pumps is readily apparent; however, for the acrylamid system, a one-to- one ratio between catalyst and grout is used, while the new sealants re- quire a ratio of part A (sealant) to part B (hardner) of about five-to-one. Therefore, a pump modification will be necessary. The other acrylamid system uses air to transport the chemicals and meters them through rotameters. The new sealants are too viscous to be moved by air over long distances or to be metered through any area type meter; therefore, some modification will be necessary before this system can be made usable with the new sealants: e. g. , the air delivery system must be changed to positive-displacement pumps, and the rotameter elim- inated. 44 ------- .1- tfl (T) INFLATION AIR INFLATABLE SHELL SEALANT SUPPLY PIPE 4 SEALANT OUTLET (5) PROTECTIVE SKID (?) BANDS SEPARATING INFLATABLE SECTIONS Figure 21. Parker-Sealer for New Sealar.t. ------- PART A SUPPLY HOSE ~~ 0 AIR AIR EXHAUST MIXER DRIVE AIR MOTOR RIBBON FLIGHT SCREW CONVEYOR MINIMUM 12 INCHES ATTACH PACKER HERE Figure 22. In-Line Mixer for New Sealants ------- DOUBLE PISTON METERING PUMP MULTIPLE HOSE HOSE STORAGE REEL LEAKING JOINT -PACKER- SEALER MIXER Figure 23. Improved Sealant System-Schematic. ------- While some of the existing sealing equipment could be used with some modifications, it is believed that these new sealing materials could best be applied with a completely redesigned packer and surface equipment. F. COST EFFECTIVENESS STUDY 1. Basis of Cost A typical internal sewer sealing operation is begun by clearing the line of large or bulky debris. To do this, a "porcupine," or a ball or other device is pulled through each section. The crew then pulls the television camera through each section while an engineer monitors the television screen. All breaks, leaks, line and grade deviations, and other pertinent information are recorded along with the footage from the manhole to the trouble encountered. Analysis of the field data pinpoints each leak, ena- bling the sealing crew to easily locate the leaks discovered during the television inspection. The leak-locating operation is kept separate from the sealing operation because sealing is much slower. This segregation allows a better utilization of personnel and equipment. In the sealing process, a packer is pulled through the line to the leak. The packer is positioned at the fault and inflated, thus isolating the leakage from the rest of the pipe. Separate hoses to the packer carry the acrylamid grout and the catalyst, both in liquid form, to the packer under pressure. In the packer the two chemicals are mixed by jet action. The resulting mixture passes into the leak and out into the surrounding soil. As it solidifies into a gel it seals in the fault and around the outside of the opening. The packer is then deflated and a television re-inspection is made of the repair. With the new sealants, cleaning and leak locating are still neces- sary. The sealing process is one of pulling the packer to the faulty joint and inflating the end tubes to isolate the leak from the rest of the pipe. Separate hoses carry the part A (sealant) and part B (hardener) to the mix- ing chamber and then to the packer under pressure. The resulting mixture is forced from the pipe into the leak. Jhe center .tube is inflated and the sealant is further forced out of the pipe. All tubes are then partially deflated and the packer moved up and down the pipe to remove excess sealant. The packer is then deflated and the television camera is positioned for re-inspect- ion of the repair. If the period of time between leak-sealing operations is longer than the cure time of the mixed sealant, it will be necessary to flush the mix- ing chamber and packer with a suitable solvent. At the end of each day's operation, a thorough cleaning of the mixing chamber and internal portions of the packer with a suitable solvent will be necessary. Thus, the labor cost of sealing leaks in a sewer line breaks down into four basic operations: 1) cleaning the line for most efficient video observation, 2) television ex- amination of the interior of the sewer pipe, 3) sealing the leak, and 4) video re-inspection of the results. The equipment cost for sealing leaks in a sewer line will consist of depreciation, operating costs and maintenance 48 ------- costs. Since the underground and surface equipment are similar in both ex- isting sealant systems and the new sealant system, no significant differ- ence in acquisition cost is anticipated. The depreciation should then be about the same magnitude for both new and old systems. The operating and maintenance costs are expected to remain in the same range with both new and old systems since the unit operations and equipment are essentially the same. The materials cost for sealing sewer pipe will include the cost of chemicals, catalysts, accelerators retarders, flushing solvents, primers and solvents for equipment clean-up. 2. Costs of Existing Sealing System Operation. The published reports of four sewer sealing jobs and one letter re- port of a sealing operation were examined and costs extracted from the reports. Table X summarizes the pertinent data for each repair. TABLE X. Cost of Inspection And Repair By Using Acrylamid Gel. Item 1 2 3 4 5 1. 2. 3. Feet Pipe Inspected and Repaired i 2,070 5.6301 12,442* 52,800 10,5503 Reference 6 Reference 7 Correspondence from Western Company. Total Cost $ 5,015.00 7,095.00 15,440.00 151, 530.00 17,000.00 City of Billings, Number of Repairs 28 63 104 1,056 198 Montana, Cost Per Repair $ 179.00 112.00 148.00 143.00 86.00 to The The average cost from Table X is $ 133. 60 per repair. This cost includes 1) labor for cleaning, leak finding and leak repair, 2) equipment costs and 3) cost of chemicals. Since the labor and equipment costs are estimated to be the same with both the existing acrylamid gel system and with the new sealant, only the cost of chemicals will be compared. The acrylamid gel solutions, when prepared as a water solution which contains 10 percent solids on polymerization, costs $2.00 per gallon of gelled material. 49 ------- An acrylamid usage of three gallons per joint repair was reported by a leader in the business of inspecting and sealing sewer lines. This amount, confirmed by operating personnel of another company, is the average used for all size pipes from 6 inches to 24 inches in diameter. (A closer break- down, by pipe size for example, was not released by either company). This usage results in a chemical cost of $6. 00 per repair, including all chem- icals, catalysts, accelerators and retarders. Flushing solvents, primers and solvents for clean-up of equipment, are not necessary with the acrylamid gels. Epoxy sealant system usage, projected by pipe size, for joint re- pair is in pounds per repair: 6-inch 2.81b 15-inch 7. 4 Ib 8-inch 3.91b 18-inch 8.8 Ib 10-inch 4. 9 Ib 21-inch 10.21b 12-inch 5.81b 24-inch 11.7lb Current basic chemical costs for the epoxy sealant and hardener are $. 75 to $1. 05 per pound, with the lower price based on volume orders. It is estimated that flushing and clean-up solvent will amount to a maximum of 0. 25 gallon per repair, based on 20 repairs made per day. Almost any petroleum-base solvent will suffice for the reacted expoxies; e. g. , naptha, stoddard solvent, cellosolve and others. Naptha, at $.80 per gallon, is a mid-range cost solvent. By using these cost figures, the epoxy system chemical cost per repair, by pipe size is: 6-inch $3.12 15-inch $ 7.95 8-inch 4.30 18-inch 9.45 10-inch 5.35 21-inch 11.10 12-inch 6.30 24-inch 12.50 The urethane system use projected by pipe size for jointing repair is: 6-inch 3. 1 Ib 15-inch 8. 1 Ib 8-inch 4. 3 Ib 18-inch 9. 6 Ib 10-inch 5. 3 Ib 21-inch 11.41b 12-inch 6.41b . 24-inch 12. 9 Ib Current basic chemical costs for urethane sealant and hardener are $. 97 to $1. 65 per pound, with the lower price based on volume orders. It is estimated that flushing and clean-up solvent will amount to a maximum of $.20 per gallon per repair based on 20 repairs per day. Most ketones and aromatic hydrocarbons are suitable for flushing and clean-up of un- reacted urethanes. Methyl ethyl ketone, at $1. 00 per gallon, is a mid- range cost solvent. By using these cost figures the urethane system chem- ical costs, per repair by pipe size is: 6-inch $5.30 15-inch $13.55 8-inch 7.30 18-inch 16.05 10-inch 8.95 21-inch 19.00 12-inch 10.75 24-inch 21.50 50 ------- The additional cost of the new sealants at $ 3. 1 2 to $ 21. 50 per repair compared with the average acrylamid gel cost of $6.00 per repair (which could range from $2.00 to $ 12.00 per repair) is of very little consequence when compared with the job quality obtainable. It is also of little consequence since the chemical cost per repair is less than 10 percent of the cost of the total repair. 51 ------- 52 ------- SECTION V. REFERENCES 1. U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Public Health Service, Division of Water Supply and Pollution Control, Washington D. C. , November, 1964, Pollutional Effects of Stormwater and Overflows from Combined Sewer Systems. 2. Sanitary Sewer Seminar, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas, 1964, Sanitary Sewer Seminar Proceedings. 3. Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, Problems of Combined Sewer Facilities and Overflows 1967. 4. Santry, I.W. ; "A Report on Infiltration, Quantity, Cost and Results," For the City of Garland, Texas, July, 1964. 5. Nooe, Roger; "Seal Sewer Leaks from the Inside, " The American City. June, 1964. 6. Clapham, T. W. ; "The Modern Way to Inspect and Repair Sewers," Public Works Magazine, December, 1965. 7. Rhodes, Donald E.; "Rehabilitation of Sanitary Sewer Lines, " Journal Water Pollution Control Federation, February, 1966. 8. Simpson, R.W. ; What Soils Are, "Soil. 1957 Yearbook. U. S. Department of Agriculture, Government Printing Office, 1957. 9. Lee, Henry, and Neville, Kris; Handbook of Epoxy Resins. McGraw-Hill, 1967. 10. Ciba Technical Bulletin. Araldile 6010, " 1967. 11. Dow Technical Bulletin, "Dow Flexible Epoxy Resins, " 1966. 12. Damusis, Adolfas; Sealants, Reinhold Publishing Co. , 1967. 13. Saunders, J. H. , and Frisch, K. C. ; Polyurethanes:Chemistry and Technology. II. Technology; High Polymers Vol. XVI; Interscience Pub., 1964. 53 ------- 54 ------- SECTION VI. PUBLICATIONS AND PATENTS A. ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS SURVEYED 1. Anderson, Irving; "A Look at Polyurethanes for Clay Pipe Joints," Brick Clay Record 147 (5) 52, 53, 56-59, (1965). 2. Atlas Chemical Industries, Inc. , The Atlas HLB System, 4th Printing, 1963. 3. Ashland Chemical Co. , "Technical Data on Water-Extended Polyester," (WEP), February 1968. 4. Baldwin, F. P., Fusco, J. U. , and Gastwirt, I.E.; "Elastomeric Prepolymers for Adhesives and Sealants Provide Improved Strength and Versatility, " Adhesives Age, February 1967, V10 N2, Pages 22-29. 5. Cabot Corporation, "How to Increase the Efficiency of Cabosil," 1968. 6. Childers, R.W. ; "Epoxy-Mortar Ringings for Sewers Proved Best by Extensive Testings Program, " Material Protection 2, (1963) Vol. 3, Pages 18-21, 23-24, and 26-27. 7. Grain, G. W. ; "Contact Adhesive Bond Parts Quickly & Econom- ically, " Materials in Design Engineering, August, 1966, Vol. 64 N 2, Pages 76-78. 8. Dabney, M. J. , Slotterbeck, O. C. , and Koenecke, D. F. ; "Synthetic Coatings for Pipe Conduits, " 5th (Pyatyi) Mezhduna, Neft, Konges. 1959 (Moscow Gos. Izd. Neft. Lit.) Sb. 4, 372-381 (1961). 9. Damusis, A.; Ashe, W. ; and Frisch, K. C. ; "Relations between Chemical Structure & Properties of Polyether Urethane Sealants, " (1965), I Appl. Polymer Sc. 9 (9) 2965-2983. 10. Damusis, Adolfas, McClellan, J. M. , Wissman, H. G. , Hamilton, C. W. , and Frisch, K. C. ; "Polyether Urethane Elastic Sealants, " Industrial & Engineering Chemistry, December 1962, Vol 1, No. 4 11. Dow Chemical Company, The; Technical Data Report No. 3, Derakane 411-45 and Derakane 411-C-50 Corrosion Resistant Vinyl Ester Resins, February, 1968. 12. Dow Corning Corporation, Chemical Products Division, "Silane Coupling Agents, " 1967. 13 Duell, A. A. ; "Elastomers Development for Specialized Coat- ings & Sealants," Surface Coatings (1) 1965, Pages 9-11, 32. 55 ------- 14. Georgieva, D. , and Georgieva, Z. ; "Protection of Asbestos - Cement Pipes, " Slroitelstvo (Sofia) 9, No. 5 23-6 (1962). 15. Iskanderov, P.M., and Kosmaehevskii, B. P. ; Vestn. Tekhn. I Ekon. Infom. Mauchn-Issled Inst. Tekhn-Ekon. Issled. Gos. Kom Khim I Neft. Pron. Pri Gosplane SSR, 1963, (10) 46 (Russ). 16. Leitheiser, R. H. ; Hellmer, R. J. ; and Cloeker, E. T. ; "Water- Extended Polyester Resins, " American Chem. Soc. Div. Org. Coatings Plastic Chem., Prepoints, 27 (1) (1967) Pgs. 361-368. 17. Lewis, A. F. , and Ramsay, W. B. ; "Mechanical Behavior of Polymer & Adhesive Joint Strength with Amine Cured Epoxy Resins," Adhesives Age. V9, N2, February 1966, Pages 20-27. 18. Mantooth, W. A. , and Treadway, B. R. ; "New Stand-Consoli- dation Methods," Oil Gas J. 63(3) Pages 87-88, 90-91, 94 (1965). 19. Mendelsohn, M.A. , Block, R. G. , Runk, R. H. , and Minter, H. F.; "Dependence of Physical Properties on Composition in Series of High Loading Polyurethane Foams - 2," J Applied Polymer Science, Vol. 10, N3, March 1966, Pages 443-463. 20. Mittrop, F.; "Adhesion of Metals, New Low-Heat Joining Process," Tech. Mitt 57(8), Pages 387-393 (1964) German. 21. Muraki, Syoickiro; "Practical Aspects of Unsaturated Polyester Resin Putty, " Shikizai Kyokaishi. 36(6), 314-19 (1963), Japan. 22. Novokreshchenov, P. P., Zigem-Kom, V. N. , and Freidin, A. S. ; "Life of Joints Bound with Synthetic Adhesives, " Plast, Massy (11) Pages 57-59, 1966 (Russian). 23. Panek, Julian R. ; "Review of Characteristics of Sealing Mate- rials, "Nat'l. Acad. Sci. - Nat'l. Res. Council Publ. No. 1006, Page 159- 169 (1962-1963). 24. Rogers, L. C. ; "Here's a New Lost-Circulation Treatment, " Oil Gas J. 62 (10), Pages 84-85, March 9, 1964. 25. Rudenko, Nol.; "VI & EF-1, A New Polysulfide Sealant with Stable Adhesion, " Kauch Rogina 26(2), Pages 28-29 (1967) (Russian). 26. Saenkoand, A. D., and Shakai, S. F. ; "Use of Epoxide Resins as Sealing and Impregnating Compounds, "Samoletnoe Elektrooborud (Moscow:Gosudarst. Izdatl. Ohoron. Prom) Shorrik, I960, No. 1, Pages 83 91. 27. Saunders, J. H. , and Frisch, K. C. ; Polyurethanes, Chemistry and Technology, Volume XVI, Interscience Publishers, 1965. 28. Skeist, Irving; Handbook of Adhesives, Reinhold Publishing Corporation, 1962. 56 ------- 29. Smela, N. , and Faldick, L. ; "Adhesive Bonding of Polypropylene Pipes, " Plasticke Hmoly a Kancuk Vol. 3 No. 8, August 1966. 30. Tauber, Guenter; "Bonding of Thermoplastics, " Adhesion 10, Page 17-19 (1966) German. 31. Umrikhina, E. N. , Blazhevich, V. A. , Stal'Nova, M.A. , Raevskoya, U. I. , Brodskii, G. S. , and Rabironick, A. B. ; "Application of Plastics to the Isolation of a Petroleum Well from the Inflow of Strata H2O, "Plasticheskie Massy, 1964, (8) Pages 36-40. 32. Union Carbide Corporation, Silanes, Adhesion Promoters, 1968. 33. Wittenwyler, C. V. ; "Epoxy Resin Sealing Materials, " Nat'l Acad. Sci-Nutt Res Council, Publ. No. 1006, Pages 131-140, 1962-1963. B. PATENTS 1. United States Patents No. 3,286,475, "Stabilized Soil Compositions." No. 3,152,641, "Polymerizing Resins in Subterranean Areas," 1964. No. 3,148,888, "Polyurethane Foam Sealing Composition for Pipe Joints," 1964. No. 3,213,173, "Polyurethane Potting & Bonding Composition." No. 3,219,516, "Bonded Multilayer Coating & Caulking Composition," No. 3,337,484, "Caulking Composition Comprising a Vicinal Acryloxy Glyceride, an Acrylic Acid Compound, and a Filler." No. 3,181,611, "Selective Prevention of Water & Brine Intrusion into Oil-Gas Producing Strata." 1965 No. 3,316,966, "Consolidation of Sand Particles." No. 3,303,163, "Room-Temperature Vulcanizing Silicone Compositions." No. 3,201,136, "Pipe Joint Cast-in-Place Polyurethane/1 1965. No. 3,014,530, "Well-Sealing Compositions," (Appl. 1957). 57 ------- No. 3,176,765, "Non-Resinous Urea-Formaldehyde Solution for Sealing Porous Underground Formations, " 1965. No. 3,242,986, "Sealing Formations. " No. 3,221,814, "Well-Formation Sand Consolidation. " No. 3,160,518, "Coating & Repairing Surfaces Submerged in Water, " 1964. No. 2,536,375, "Grouting Materials, " 1951. No. 3,182,032, "Cross-linked Triisocyanate-Coal Tar Coating and Sealing Reaction Product, "1965. No. 2,885,299, "Stopping Leaks in Water Systems with Glass Fiber-Resin Composition, " 1959. No. 2,867,278, "Sealing Porous Formations, " 1959. No. 3,289,704, "Foamed, Synthetic Resin Sectionalized Pipes. " No. 3,102,248, "Plugging Petroleum Formations with B'lactones, " 1963. No. 3,176,471, "Urea-Formaldehyde Resins to Consolidate Loose Sands," 1965. No. 2,976,176, "Resin Compositions for Sealing Porous Metal Castings," 1961. No. 3,258,452, "Curing Compositions for Carboxyl- Containing Polymers. " No. 2,940,729, "Control of Soil Stabilizer Polymerization at High Temperature, as in Oil Wells or Deep Mines, " I960. No. 3,227,572, "Reduction of Water Leakage in Under- ground Ceramic or Concrete Pipes. " No. 3,219,112, "Casing Well Cement. " No. 3,153,637, "Non-Aqueous Adhesive & Sealants," 1964. No. 2,662,019, "Pipe Jointing Composition, " 1953. No. 2,799,593, "Jointing Composition," 1957. No. 3,086,588, "Low Water-Loss Hydraulic Cement Com- position. " No. 2,902,388, "Hydraulic Cement-Polyurethane Composition Useful for Coating, Sealing, Patching, or Surfacing, " 1959. 58 ------- No. 28,834,745, "Cresol-Formaldehyde Polymer Coating Compositions/1 1958. 2. German Patents No. 1,127,022, "Coatings," 1962. No. 1,159,865, "Sealing & Solidifying Geological Formations," 1963. No. 1,025,806, "Sealing Compositions for Oilwells/1 1958. No. 1,151,377, "Water-Free Epoxy Resin Molding Compounds Containing Large Amounts of Filler," 1963. No. 1,113,080, "Application of Resistant Plastic Coating to the Inside Walls of Concrete Pipe," 1958. No. 36,061, "Inorganic Sealing Material." No. 1,150,808, "Indicators for Rate of Mixing of Epoxy Resins with Curing Agents," 1963. No. 1,109,294, "Bituminous Coating Compositions for Drain Pipes," Appl. 1958. No. 1,109,110, "Waterproof Adhesives," 1961. No. 1,116,168, "Plugging Permeable Earth Strata with Titanium Oxide Gel," 1961. No. 1,084,408, "Sealing Porous Surfaces with Easterners;1 1960. No. 1,003,379, "Putty or Filling Material," 1957. No. 885,762, "Process for Consolidating the Surafce of Permeable Mineral Material and Rendering it Impermeable," December 28, 1961. 3 . French Patents No. 1,303,542, "Polyester-Styrene Putty," 1962. No. 1,447,107, "Waterproof Putty." No. 1,462,477, "Joining the Same or Different Materials with Polyurethane Adhesives." 59 ------- No. 1,199,071, "Corrosion-Inhibiting Silicate Cement;11959. No. 1,457,544, "Urethane Resin Compositions." No. 1,352,302, "Concrete Pipe Coatings," 1964. No. 77,705, "Flexible Adhesives Containing Vinyl Resins and Tars," 1962. No. 1,345,810, "Sealing Compositions/1 1963. 4. British Patents No. 915,961, "Asphaltic Sealing & Coating Compositions," 1963, No. 1,083,490, "Seam Sealer for Plastic Parts." No. 947,586, "Polyurethane Pipe-Joint Adhesive," 1964.- No. 885,762, "Consolidating the Surface of Permeable Mineral Material;1 Appl. I960. No. 1,009,198, "Sealing & Lining Compositions." No. 1,021,715, "Bitumen-Rubber Joint-Sealing Compositions." No. 921,046,, "Organosiloxane Resin Compositions Curable at Room Temperature," 1963. 5. Belguim Patents No. 612,784, "Polyurethanes Modified with Polyethylene," 1962. No. 609,212, "Sealing Compound for Anaerobic Vulcanization Having Great Storage Stability," 1962. 6. Netherlands Patents No. 6,407,641, "Materials Curing with Exclusion of Air for Use as Sealant & Adhesive," 1965. No. 6,609,969, "Hardenable Composition and Shaped Articles Therefrom." 60 ------- 7. Russian Patents No. 187,595, "Water Impermeable Cements or Mortars," 1966. No. 127,347, "Luting Cement;1 1960. No. 141,623, "Polymers," 1961. 8. Polish Patents No. 50,088, "Sealing Putty." 61 ------- 62 ------- SECTION VII. GLOSSARY AND ABBREVIATIONS Amine value - the number of milligrams of KOH equigalent to the base content of one gram of fatty polyamide as determined by titration with HC1. DGEBA - Diglycedyl ether of bisphonol A. DGEPG - Diglycidyl ether or propylene glycol. Epoxy equivalent weight - the weight of resin in grams which contains one gram equivalent of epoxy. phr - parts per hundred parts by weight. ppm - part per million. Thixotropy - the property which enables a system to exhibit a time- dependent reversible and isothermal decrease of viscosity with shear in flow. T. I. - thixotropic index = Viscosity at Z rpm . Viscosity at 20 rpm W. P. E. - weight per equivalent; same as epoxy equivalent weight. 63 ------- 64 ------- APPENDICES 65 ------- 66 ------- APPENDIX! CHEMICAL SUPPLIERS ADM Chemicals, Division Ashland Oil and Refining Co. Minneapolis, Minn. A & S Corporation Verona, N.J. Abacus Polymer, Inc. Skokie, 111. Acco Polymers Brooklyn, N.Y. Adhesive Engineering Co. San Carlos, Calif. Airco Chemicals & Plastics New York, N.Y. Alcolac Chemical Corp. Baltimore, Md. Allied Chemical Corp. Morristown, N.J. American Chemical Corp. Long Beach, Calif. American Polymers, Inc. Pater son, N.J. American Resin Corp. Chicago, 111. Applied Plastics Co. , Inc. El Segundo, Calif. Armstrong Products Co., Inc. Warsaw, Ind. Atlas Minerals & Chemicals Div., The Electric Storage Battery Co. Mertztown, Pa. Axel Plastics Research Lab., Inc. Long Island City, N.Y. Baker Castor Oil Co. Bayonne, N.J. Borden Chemical Co. , Division The Borden Co. New York, N.Y. Brand Plastics Go. Chicago, 111. CIBA Products Co. , Division CIBA Corp. Summit, N.J. C P R Division, The Upjohn Company Torrance, California Cadillac Plastic Co., Division Dayco Corp. Detroit, Mich. Cardinal Chemical Co. Columbia, S.C. Catalin Corp., Division Ashland Oil and Refining Co. New York, N.Y. Celanese Coatings Co., Resins and Chemicals Division Louisville, Ky. Chemical Coatings & Engineering Co., Inc. Media, Pa. Chemical Industries Pasadena, Calif. Chevron Chemical Co. San Francisco, Calif. Columbian Carbon Co., Plastics Division New York, N.Y. 67 ------- Commercial Resins Division, Interplastic Corp. Minneapolis, Minn. Commercial Solvents Corp. New York, N.Y. Conap, Inc. Allegany, N.Y. Cook Paint and Varnish Co. Kansas City, Mo. Cosden Oil & Chemical Co., Sub. American Petrofina, Inc. New York, N.Y. Diamond Alkali Co. Cleveland, Ohio Dolph, John C., Co. Monmouth Junction, N.J. Dow Chemical Go. Midland, Mich. DuPont de Nemours, E.I., & Co., Inc. Wilmington, Del. Durez Division, Hooker Chemical Corp. Tonawanda, N.Y. East Coast Chemicals Co. Little Falls, N.J. Eastman Chemical Products, Inc., Sub. Eastman Kodak Co. King sport, Tenn. El Monte Chemical Co. Pasadena, Calif. Epoxylite Corp. El Monte, Calif. Eronel Industries Hawthorne, Calif. Escambia Chemical Corp. New York, N.Y. Ethyl Corp. New York, N.Y. Ethyl Corp., Polymers Division Baton Rouge, La. FMC Corp., Organic Chemicals Division New York, N.Y. Fenwal, Inc. Ashland, Mass. Fiberfil Division, Rexall Chemical Co. Evansville, Ind. Firestone Plastics Co., Division Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. Pottstown, Pa. Firestone Rubber & Latex Products Fall River, Mass. Fisher Melamine Corp., Division Ashland Oil & Refining Co. New York, N.Y. Foster Grant Co., Inc. Leominster, Mass. France Campbell & Darling, Inc. Kenilworth, N.J. Freeman Chemical Corp., Division H.H. Robertson Co. Port Washington, Wis. Furane Plastics, Inc. Los Angeles, Calif. Future Chemicals Group of Mfg.Cos. Chicago, 111. 68 ------- General Electric Co. , Chemical Materials Dept. Pittsfield, Mass. General Electric Co., Insulating Materials Dept. Schenectady, N.Y. General Foam Plastics Corp. Portsmouth, Va. General Latex & Chemical Corp. Cambridge, Mass. General Mills, Inc., Chemical Division Kankakee, 111. George, P.D., Co. St. Louis, Mo. Georgia-Pacific Corp., Resins Department Portland, Ore. Goodrich, B.F., Chemical Co. Cleveland, Ohio Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., Chemical Division Akron, Ohio Great American Plastics Co. Fitchburg, Mass. Houdry Process & Chemical Co., Division Air Products & Chemicals Philadelphia, Pa. Interchemical Corp., Finishes Division Detroit, Mich. International Coatings Co., Inc. Compton, Calif. Ironsides Resins, Inc. Columbus, Ohio Isochem Resins Co. Lincoln, R.I. Isocyanate Products, Inc. New Castle, Del. Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corp. Oakland, Calif. Key Polymer Corp. Lawrence, Mass. Klenk Chemical Corp. Detroit, Mich. Koppers Co. , Inc. , Tar & Chemical Division Pittsburgh, Pa. Hammond Plastics, Inc. Worcester, Mass. Harwick Standard Chemical Co. Akron, Ohio Hastings Plastics, Inc. Santa Monica, Calif. Hercules Incorporated Wilmington, Del. Hightemp Resins, Inc. Stamford, Conn. Lakeside Plastics Corp. Oshkosh, Wis. Leepoxy Plastics, Inc. Fort Wayne, Ind. Chemicals, Inc. Rahway, N.J. Marblette Corp. Long Island City, N.Y. 69 ------- Marbon Chemical Division, Borg-Warner Corp. Washington, W.Va. Marco Chemical Division, W.R. Grace & Co. Linden, N.J. Metachem Resins Corp., Mereco Products Corp. Div. Cranston, R.I. Miller-Stephenson Chemical Co., Inc. Danbury, Conn. Millmaster Onyx Corp. New York, N.Y. Mobay Chemical Co. Pittsburgh, Pa. Mobil Chemical Co., Plastics Division Macedon, N.Y. Mol-Rez Division, American Petrochemical Corp. Minneapolis, Minn. Monsanto Co. St. Louis, Mo. Morton Chemical Co. Chicago, 111. O.C. Adhesives Corp. Brooklyn, N.Y. Olin Mathieson Chemical Corp., Organic & Specialty Chemicals Div. New York, N.Y. Omni Division, C. Tennant, Sons & Co. of New York New York, N.Y. Osborn, C.J., Co. Linden, N.J. PPG Industries/Coatings & Resins Division Pittsburg, Pa. Pacific Resins & Chemicals, Inc. Seattle, Wash. Pelron Corp. Lyons, 111. Pennsalt Chemicals Corp. Philadelphia, Pa. Pennsylvania Industrial Chemical Clairton, Pa. Phelan's Resins & Plastics, Div. Phelan-Faust Paint Mfg. Co. Burlington, Iowa Phillips Petroleum Co. , Chemical Dept. Bartlesville, Okla. Plastic Engineering & Chemical Co. Fort Lauderdale, Fla. Poly Resins Sun Valley, Calif. Polyrez Co., Inc. Woodbury, N.J. Polyurethane Products Co., Inc. St. Louis, Mo. Polyvinyl Chemicals, Inc. Wilmington, Mass. Polyurthan Division, Easton R S Corp. Brooklyn, N.Y. Purethane Division, Easton R S Corp. Brooklyn, N.Y. Quaker Oats Co., Chemicals Division Chicago, 111. 70 ------- Reichhold Chemicals, Inc. White Plains, N.Y. Research Sales, Inc. Suffern, N.Y. Rezolin, Inc. Santa Monica, Calif. Richardson Co. Polymers Division West Haven, Conn. Ridgway Color & Chemical Co., Division Martin Marietta Corp. Ridgway, Pa. Rohm & Haas Co. Philadelphia, Pa. Rubba, Inc. Bronx, N.Y. Ruca Division Hooker Chemical Corp. Hicksville, N.Y. Sartomer Resins, Inc. Essington, Pa. Schenectady Chemicals, Inc. Schenectady, N.Y. Sealzit Division Flintkote Co. Riverside, Calif. Shanco Plastics & Chemicals, Inc. Tonawanda, N.Y. Shell Chemical Co., Industrial Chemicals Div. New York, N.Y. Sherwin-Williams Co., Pigment, Color & Chemical Dept. Cleveland, Ohio Silmar Division, Vistron Corporation Hawthorne, California Sinclair-Koppers Co. Pittsburg, Pa. Sinclair Petrochemicals, Inc. New York, N.Y. Spencer Kellogg Division, Textron Inc. Buffalo, N.Y. Stauffer Chemical Co. , Plastics Division New York, N.Y. Sterling Varnish Co. Sewickley, Pa. Sun Chemical Corp. Chemical Products Division Doylestown, Pa. Synco Resins, ADM chemicals, Archer Daniels Midland Co. Bethel, Conn. Synvar Corp. Wilmington, Del. Techform Laboratories, Inc. Venice, Calif. Tenneco Chemicals, Inc. Tenneco Plastics Division Piscataway, N.J. Thiokol Chemical Corp. Chemical Division Trenton, N.J. Tra-Con, Inc. Medford, Mass. Tylac Chemicals, Division International Latex & Chemical Dover, Del. Union Carbide Corp. Chemicals & Plastics Div. New York, N.Y. 71 ------- Uniroyal, Inc. Adhesives fa Coatings Department Mishawaka, Ind. Uniroyal, Inc. Uniroyal Plastic Products Chicago, 111. United States Gypsum Co. Chicago, 111. U. S. Industrial Chemicals Co., Div. National Distillers & Chemical New York, N.Y. Upjohn Co., Polymer Chemicals Div. Kalamazoo, Mich. Valite, Division Valentine Sugars, Inc. New Orleans, La. Valspar Industrial Div. Lyons, 111. Vanderbilt, R.T., Co. New York, N.Y. Wilson & Co., Inc. Wilson-Martin Division Philadelphia, Pa. Witco Chemical Co., Inc. New York, N.Y. Wyandotte Chemicals Corp., Industrial Chemicals Group Wyandotte, Mich. 72 ------- APPENDIX II CERAMIC, CLAY AND CONCRETE TILE CORRELATION Two groups of data were established to determine the relationship of ceramic tile (1/4-inch thick) to clay tile (3/4-inch thick) when used as substrates for testing strengths of various adhesive materials. First, eight bonds were made with epoxy, using only ceramic tiles. Then eight identi- cal bonds were made, using only clay tile. Similar sets of data were generated by using polyurethane as the adhesive. These data were analyzed for correlation of the variance in the following manner: r = D- where r = correlation coefficient. Results: 1. Epoxy. 1/4-inch ceramic tile (X) and 3/4-inch clay tile (Y) X Y 304 482 n = 8 330 507 2Y = 5102 376 510 Y = 637.7 (avg.) 471 661 ŁX = 4043 495 666 x = 505.3 (avg.) 593 725 2)X2= 2,254,745 677 729 ŁY2 = 3> 362,700 797 822 ŁXY = 2,725, 191 r = .97 Clay tile bondings by epoxy averaged 25.5 percent higher strength than ceramic tile bondings. 2. Polyurethane. 1/4-inch ceramic tile (X) and 3/4-inch clay tile (Y) 73 ------- 102 62 n-= 8 114 81 2y = 993 116 104 y = 124 (avg.) 129 HI 2X = 1143 140 142 x = 143 (avg.) 144 157 2x2= 173,037 178 165 SYZ= 13,882 200 171 ŁXY = 151,299 r = .77 Ceramic tile bondings by polyurethane averaged 15.8 percent higher strength than clay tile bonding. Attempts were made to test sealants on concrete tiles made by the following formula: 1000 gms Portland cement 400 gms sand 400 gms water These tiles were cured for from two to three weeks at room temperature, then tested with the materials listed in Table II. Most failures occurred within the cement, and the cement blocks were regarded as having insufficient strength to effectively test the high-strength bonding materials. An average of all data (noted by "3-failure within the cement, " Table XI), yields the following: Tensile strength -- 199 psi (low of 155, high of 237). Flexural strength -- 666 psi (low of 410, high of 984). It may. be concluded that testing of any material showing sufficient ad- hesion and demonstrating the strengths listed above would result in failure of the concrete rather than within the tested material. 74 ------- TABLE XI. Results of Material Escoweld 7502 Escoweld 7505 Matstick No. 24 and No. 25 Matstick No. 26 and No. 27 Scotchweld 2216 NuKlad No. 105 Baker System No. 65 Cital 2805 (T) Trabond 2143 Trabond 2133 Araldite 6005 and 508 Selectron RS-5119 U.C. 8698 Urabond 836-S Syncore 600 andA-1-37 W.S. Dickey DCUE 1072-31 H 705 A205 Derakane 411-45 Type failure 1 = Failure 2 = Failure 3 = Failure Testing of Cement Blocks. Type Tensile Failure 237 206 219 202 204 177 159 155 198 235 208 155 196 118 104 117 69 61 194 within at the within 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 2 1 2 2 3 Flexural 410 442 736 684 831 661 622 664 756 599 494 157 733 428 133 289 105 140 984 the adhesive. interface between sealant the cement. Type Failure 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 3 3 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 3 and cement. 75 ------- 76 ------- A. Initial Screening Tests of Sealant Candidates. Name of Compound M6354 Pioneer 301 (Summer Grade) Pioneer 301 (Winter Grade) Exon 470 Megaplug Conap DP-Z351B Witmer No. 86 Epoxy Adhesive 907 Isopox No. 661 Pond Sealant 14MR Tra-Bond 2116 Eastobond No. 7682 -19 Eastobond No. 768Z-17 Type Synthetic Elastomer Plastic Bituminous Sealer Plastic Bituminous Sealer Vinyl Chloride Copolymer - Urethane Thermos et- ting Elas- tomer Epoxy Epoxy /Rub- ber Base Catiosonic Asphaltlc Emulsion Epoxy Poly Olefln Poly Olefin Source U.S. Rubber Co. Witco Chemical Co. Witco Chemical Co. Firestone Oil Center Research Conap Inc. Witco Chemical Co. Miller- Stephenson Chemical Co. Adhesive Products Pennsalt Chemical Corp. Tra-Con Inc Eastman Chemical Eastman Chemical Viscosity Thlxotropic Paste Paste Z10 cps 1 cp Paste 900 cps Thixotropic Paste 80 cps Thixotropic 2,900 cps Paste Set Time o Cure Time 16 hours Remains soft Remains soft Solvent evaporation 15 minutes 5 to 7 days moisture core ^-24 hours 24 hours * 4 hours Does not cure 16 hours Does not cure. Hot- melt Does not cure. Hot- melt Cost 0.59 0.45 to 0. 50 0.45 to 0. 50 0.48 - 20.00 /qt. 0. 37 1.60 /kit 0.85 0.75 /gal 25.00 /gal 0. 15 0. 18 Tensile Strength Dry (psl) 41 0 0 39 0 24 72 Z.396 271 0 -1,135 0 2 Wet (psl) 0 0 0 0 0 41 0 1,074 25 - 702 0 0 Flexural Strength Dry 0 - - 0 - 0 0 5, 386 0 - 3, 570 - 0 Wet (psl 0 - - 0 - 0 0 4, 727 0 - 3, 120 - 0 Modulus of Elasticity Dry (psl 0 - - 0 - 0 0 2.48 x 106 0 - 2.29 x 10* - 0 Wet (psl) 0 - - 0 - 0 0 1. 51 xlO7 0 - 2. 34 XlO6 - 0 Remarks Affected by water. Did not run flexural test because of tensile values. Same as Summer Grade. Affected by water. Did not run flexural test because of tensile values. Very long cure time. Affected by water. No flexibility. Poor adhesion, affected by water. Is not an adhesive sealant, more like a grout. Expensive and water affected tensile strength. No adhesive strength. No adhesive strength JO w en cj O T) M > Dd O O H M O> H cn TJ ^ W 3 d ------- A. (Continued) Name of Compound Eastobond No. 7682-13 Araldite 509 Fast- Fix 40% Spenkel M90-80X QX3923 Byerlyte No. 635 Nu Klad No. 110 AM- 9 Grout Cital 2805 Polymer No. 63- 7501-0 Fast-Fix W. P. Nu Klad No. 165 XC6-203 Type Poly Oiefin Epoxy Gypsum Cement Urethane Vinyl Ester Resin Asphalt Petroleum Solvents and Fibers Epoxy Based Acrylosuid Gel Epoxy Based Atacttc Polypropy- lene Gypsum Cement Epoxy Based Epoxy Source Eastman Chemical Ciba Products Western Company Spencer- Kellogg Dow Chemical Byerlyte Co Div. of Koppers and Co. Amercoat Corp. American Cyanamid Cltrey Corp. Paisley Products Western Company Amercost Corporation Ren Plastics Viscosity Paste 500-700 cps 3, 760 cps 1 , 800 cps Paste Thixotropic 1 cp 5,450 cps Dependent on solvent concentra- tion 4,800 cps 850 13,000 cps Set Time or Cure Time Does not cure. Hot melt ^-18 hours ^2 hours 24 hours Does not cure. .^.4 hours 3 to 5 minutes set in 4 to 5 hours Air cure 24 hours Set in 4- 30 minutes ^-18 hours 6 hours, tack- free Cost 0. 16 0.555 0.333 0.52 5.50 23.90 1.05 15.65 0. 20 0.05 0.467 186. /gal Tensile Strenath Dry pst) 8 904 327 143 Was 0 42 0 836 0 73 816 778 Wet (psi) 0 764 0 0 replac 12 154 - 972 0 23 753 930 Flexural Strenath Dry (psi) 0 1,562 253 121 ed by - 40 - 2,041 0 579 2, 702 2, 187 Wet (psi) 0 453 0 0 Dura! - 41 - I, 518 0 40 2, 319 1,909 Modulus of __EJLa_sticitv Dry (psi) 0 3.66 x 106 1.32 x 105 6. 15 x 103 ane 4 - 8.79 x 102 - 5.67 x 106 0 x'lO6 6. 12 x 106 1.16 x 106 Wet (psi) 0 3.27 x 10s - 1-45- - 8.87 x 103 - 1.79 x 106 0 - 1.04 x 107 2.07 x 106 Remarks No adhesive strength. Affected by water. Affected by water. Affected by water. Similar to Pioneer 301 Very flexible. No strength used as a grout. 2805 thlxotrope has greater strength. No strength. Affected by water. 3-component system. Epoxy seems brittle. ------- -J sO A. (Continued) Urabond 835 Selection RS-5119 rlscourield 7502 Trabond 2143D Trabond 2133 Urabond 836 Urabond 835-S Urabond 836-S Araldite 6005 and 508 Syncore 600 and A-l-37 ThiokolH 705 Type Urethane Polyester Epoxy Epoxy Epoxy Urethane Urethane Urethane Epoxy Polyester Urethane Polysulfide Source 3oly Resins 'ittsburgh Plate Glass Enjay Chemical Tra-Conlnc Tra-Conlnc Poly Resins Poly Resins Poly Resins Ciba Products Synvar Corporation Thiokol Chemical Viscosity Thixotropic 650 cps a)900 cps b)5000cps a)39000cps b)48000cps 2, 200 cps Thixotropic 30-60 poises 50-100 poises a)9500 cps b)2000- 5000 cps 2,600 cps 500 poises Set Time or Cure Time 48-96 hours 1 hour 24 hours 18 hours 18 hours 48-96 hours 48-96 hours 48-96 hours ^18 hours 1 hour Set in 24 hours Cost ($/lb) 0.58 0.23 1.50 25.00 /gal 2.31 0.61 0.61 0.61 0. 555 0. 715 0.26 0. 36 0. 84 Tensile Strength Dry (psi) 81 288 1,151 1, 296 1,159 33 96 103 975 428 45 Wet (psi) 4 321 1,156 1,122 781 165 95 125 577 68 47 Flexural Strength Dry (psi' 82 1, 191 2,112 3,411 2,553 0 41 78 1,486 416 81 Wet (psi) 0 972 1, 780 2,801 1,872 32 0 209 937 81 41 Modulus of Elasticity Dry (psi) 1.24 x 103 4. 12 x 105 1.95 x 106 7.64 x 106 4.11 x 106 0 1.45 x 103 1.41 x 10 2.24 x 105 5.35 x 103 1.26 x 103 Wet (psi) - 1.75 x 106 - 2. 16 x 106 3.02 x 106 8. 1 x 101 0 1.59 x 102 4.00 x 10 6.87 x 103 9. 38 x 102 Remarks Water affected bond between adhesive and tile. Expensive. Expensive. Did not bond well to tile. Did not bond well to tile. Good bonding to tile. Component epoxy system. Flexible and foams. Very flexible. ------- 00 o A. (Continued) Name of Compound Thlokol A205 Syncore 24-P- 100 and A-l-37 Durez 16470 NuKlad No. 105 Primer Escoweld 7505 Baker Castor Oil System No. 65 U.C. 8698 Cttal 2805 Thixotrope Matstlck No 26 and 27 Scotch- weld 2Z16 Type Polysulfide Polyester Urethane Furfuryl Alcohol Resin Epoxy Based Epoxy Rlcinoleate Urethane Epoxy Epoxy Epoxy Polysulftde Epoxy Source Thlokol Chemical Synvar Corporattor Hooker Chemical Amercoat Corp. En jay Chemical Baker Cas- tor Oil Co. Pittsburgh Plate Glass C ttrey Corp. Matcote Company 3-M Viscosity 500 poise! 4000 cps 200 cps Resin280cps CA 400 cps 1100-1300 cps(blended) 400 poises Paste Thixotropic Putty a)80000cps bjlOOOOOcps Set Time or Cure Time 3 hours 30 minutes 18 hours in small quantities 24 hours 24 hours 7 days 3 hours Set In 4- 5 hours 72 hours 24 hours Cost ($/lb) 0.915 - 0. 322 1. 51 1.59 0. 79 0.65 9.50 15.65 1.43 24.45 Tensile Strength Dry (psi) 36 353 81 406 876 174 1,165 1,136 430 805 Wet (psi) 42 8 40 229 733 58 1,502 752 664 1,531 Flexural Strength Dry (psi) 41 722 73 657 1, 728 67 4,969 3, 373 573 3,816 Wet (psi; 41 42 177 104 1,190 0 4,492 2,017 1,753 3,573 Modulus of Elasticity Dry (psi) 1.02 x 103 1.04 x 10' 3.01 x 104 1.77 x 10* 4. 23 x 106 1.54 x 10 8.93 x 106 2.02 x 106 5.27 x 10* 2.26 x 105 Wet (psi) 6.77 x 103 4.55 x 103 3.69 x 10" 1. 31 x 105 1.25 x 106 - 2.21 x 107 1. 22 x 106 9.65 x 106 1.97 x 106 Remarks Very flexible. Bond affected by water. Hard to cure, mass critical. Slow curing, with good flexibility. Low viscosity. Very high viscosity. Slow cure. Very good strength. Good resistance to water. Expensive, good bonding. Slow curing and high viscosity. Experience and slow curing. ------- A. (Continued) Name of Compound Matstick No. 24 and 25 WEP 26 WEP 42 WEP 21 WEP 27 Laminae 126-3 Derahave 411-45 Type Epoxy Polyenide Water Extended Polyester Water Extended Polyester Water Extended Polyester Water Extended Polyester Polyester Vinyl Ester Resin Source Matcote Company Ashland Chemical Company Ashland Chemical Company Ashland Chemical Company Ashland Chemical Company American Cyanamide Dow Chemical Viscosity Thixotropic 2, 750 cps 55%water 500 cps 55%water 12, 750cps 75%water 1,400 cps 55%water 880 cps 500 cps Set Time or Cure Time 18 hours Gel in 7 minutes Gel in 6 minutes Gel in 25 minutes Gel in 6 minutes 1 hour Gel in 12 minutes Cost ($/lb) 1.55 0. 32 0.21 - 0.21 - - Tensile Strength Dry (psi) 1,694 17 2 6 23 275 897 Wet (psi) 848 - - - - 2 858 Flexural Strength Dry (psi) 5,549 20 0 0 21 425 2,045 Wet (psi) 3,971 - - - - 59 1,927 Modulus of Elasticity Dry (psi) 1.87 x 106 9.4 x 10 0 0 9.33 x 10 3.82 x 105 7.3 x 105 Wet (psi) 1.35 x 106 - - - - 2'84 x 10 1.33 x 106 Remarks Strong adhesion. Coating polyester. Not suitable. Coating polyester. Not suitable Coating polyester. Not suitable . Slightly better adhesive properties than other WEP. Cannot be used by itself, never fully cures. Good strength. ------- B. Performance of Sealants on Sewage Soaked Tiles . Name of Compound Escoweld 7502 Tra Bond 2143 Tra Bond 2133 Urabond 836-S Araldite 6005 and 508 Syncore 600 andA-1-37 Thiokol H705 Thiokol A205 Durez 16470 NuKlad No. 105 Primer Escoweld 7505 Type Epoxy Epoxy Epoxy Urethane Epoxy Polyester Urethane Poly- sulfide Poly- sulfide Furfuryl Alcohol Resin Epoxy Based Epoxy Source Enjay Chemical Tra -Con Inc. Tra-Con Inc Poly Resins Clba Products Company Synvar Corporation Thiokol Chemical Thiokol Chemical Hooker Chemical Amercoat Corporation Enjay Chemical Viscosity a)900cps b)5000cps a)39000cps b)48000cps 2200 cps 50-100polses a)9500 cps b)2000- 50000 cps (blended) 2600 cps 500 poises 500 poises 200 cps a)200 cps b)400 cps 1100-1300 cps (blended) Set Time or Cure Time 24 hours 18 hours 18 hours 48-96 hours 18 hours 1 hour 24 hours 3 hours 18 hours In small quantities 24 hours 24 hours Cost ($/lb) 1.59 25.00 2. 31 0.61 0. 555 0.715 0.26 0. 36 0.84 0.915 0. 322 1.51 1.59 Tensile Strength Dry (psi) -> 1, 164 .> 1, 158 -> 1 , 1 54 194 -> 1,094 144 42 14 125 898 870 Flexural Strength Dry (psl) 2,700 2,403 2,493 179 2,257 0 0 40 99 729 2, 134 Modulus of Elasticity Dry (psi) 1.04 x 107 1.73 x 106 1.75 x 106 1.86 x 103 1.41 x 106 0 0 5.92 x 10Z 4. 54 x 103 3.09 x 105 2.48 x 106 ------- B. (Continued) Name of Compound Baker Castor Oil System No. 65 U.C. 8698 Cital 2805 Thixotrope Matstick No. Z6 and 27 Scotch- Weld 2216 Matstick No. 24 and 25 Derakane 411-45 DCUE-1072-31 Selectron RS-5119 Type Ricinoleate Urethane Epoxy Epoxy Epoxy Polysulfide Epoxy Epoxy Polyamide Vinyl Ester Resin Urethane Polyester Source Baker Castor Oil Company Pittsburgh Plate Glass Critex Corporation Matcote Company 3-M Matcote Company Dow Chemical W.S. Dickey Clay Mfg. Pittsburgh Plate Glass Viscosity 400 poise Paste Thixotropic Putty a)80000cps b) 100000 cps Thixotropic 500 cps 4000 cps 650 cps Set Time or Cure Time 7 days 3 hours Set in 4- 5 hours 72 hours 24 hours ^18 hours Gel in 12 minutes <Ł- 30 minutes 1 hour Cost ($/lb) 0. 79 0.65 9. 50 /gal 15.65 1.43 24.43 /gal 1.55 - 0.50 0.23 Tensile Strength Dry (psi) 174 ^1, 154 -M, 165 573 982 1,075 381 346 96 Flexural Strength Dry (psi) 0 4,232 3,215 916 2, 146 3, 113 1,648 573 584 Mudulus of Elasticity Dry (psi) 0 2.05 x 106 1. 19 x 106 2. 75 x 105 6.35 x 105 5.27 x 106 1.56 x 105 1. 53 x 104 2.73 x 105 ------- C . Affects of Sllanes . Name of Compound Selectron RS-5119 Tra-Bond 2133 Syncore 600 and A-l-37 Syncore 24-P-100 and A-l-37 Type Polyester Epoxy Polyester Urethane Polyester Urethane Source Pittsburgh Plate Glass Tra- Conine Synvar Corporation Synvar Corporation Viscosity 650 cps CabosllM-5 Thixotroplc 2200 cps 2600 cps 4000 cps Set Time or Cure Time 1 hour 18 hours 50 minutes 1 hour 30 minutes Cost ($/lb) 0.23 2.31 0. 26 0. 36 . Tensile Strength Dry (psi) 288 . - 615 - . 1,159 _ _ 428 _ 353 _ Wet (psi) 321 608 483 354 626 1,052 781 >1,166 >1,167 68 217 8 180 Flexural Strength Dry (psi) 1, 191 - - 1, 754 - _ 2, 553 _ _ 416 _ 722 - Wet (psi) 972 1,914 1,534 1,966 2,784 Z, 301 1,872 2,606 3,816 81 192 42 163 Modulus of Elasticity Dry (psi) 4.12 x 10s - 1.39 x 106 - _ 4.72 x 106 _ . 5. 35 X 103 - 1.04 X 105 - Wet (psi) 1.75 x 106 8.3 x 105 5.65 X 10 l-5\ x 106 6.7} x 106 1.12 x 107 3.02 x 10 7. 1 x 105 1.39 x 106 6.87 x 103 7.89 x 103 4. 55 x 103 5.54 x 103 Remarks Room temperature curing polyester. Tile pretreated with A 186 (Epoxy-terminated) . Tile pretreated with A187 (Epoxy-terminated) . Tile not pretreated. Tile pretreated with A186. Tile pretreated with A187. Tile not pretreated. DMP-30 accelerator. Tile pretreated with A186. DMP-30 accelerator. Tile pretreated with A187. Flexible and foams. Tile pretreated with W.S. Dickey DC 5010. Bond affected by water. Tile pretreated with W.S. Dickey DC 5010. ------- C. (Continued) Name of Compound NuKlad No. 105 Primer Escoweld 7505 Baker Castor Oil System No. 65 WEP 27 Type Bpoxy Based Epoxy Rictnoleate Urethane Water Extended Polyester Source Amercoat Corporation Enjay Chemical Baker Cas- tor Oil Company Ashland Chemical Viscosity Restn- Z80 cps C.A. - 400 cps 1100-1300 cps (blended) 400 poises 1400cps 55%water Set Time or Cure Time 24 hours l-l/2hours 24 hours 7 days 2 hours Gel in 6 minutes Cost ($/lb) 1.51 1. 59 Vorite- 0. 79 Poly- cin 0.65 0.21 Tensile Strength Dry (psi) 406 _ 876 - _ 174 203 23 563 94 655 99 156 Wet (psi) 229 628 M,168 733 515 690 58 120 - 512 110 545 139 119 Flexible Strength Dry (psi) 657 . 1, 728 - _ 67 21 1,922 - _ - _ Wet (psi) 104 2,288 3, 194 1, 190 1,404 2, 246 0 - 2,413 . _ . _ Modulus of Elasticity Dry (psi 1. 77 x 105 _ 4. 23 x 106 - _ 1. 54 x 103 9. 3 x 103 6.77 x 105 - _ _ _ Wet (psi) 1. 31 x 105 1.11 x 106 1.23 x 106 1. 25 i rtA x 10b 7.75 x 105 1.84 x 106 0 - 9.61 x 105 - _ - - Remarks Slow curing, but good flexibility . Tile pretreated with A186. DMP 30 accelerator. Tile pretreated with A186 DMP 30 accelerator. Low viscosity. Tile pretreated with A186. Tile pretreated with A187. Very high viscosity, slow curing. A1100 added to urethane system to improve adhesion, Stannous octoate as an accelerator. Poor adhesion properties. Tile pretreated with A 174 (0.1%). Tile pretreated with A 172 (0. 1%) and dried at 110 C for 3 hours before applying WEP. Same as above, using A174 instead of Al 72. Same as above, using A186 instead of A172. Same as above, using A187 instead of A172. ------- C. (Continued) Name of Compound Kerakane 411-45 W.S. Dickey DCUE-107Z-31 W.S. Dickey B 430 Epon 828 with Phenyl glycidyl Ether Type Vinyl Ester Resin Urethane Urethane Epoxy Source Dow Chemical W.S. Dickey Clay Mfg. W.S.Dickey Clay Mfg. Shell Chemical Viscosity 500 cps 4000 cps lOOOcps Used Cabosil M-5 Thixotropic Set Time or Cure Time Gel in 12 minutes ^ 30 minuted ^ 30 minutes 1 hour, 40 minutes Cost ($/lb) _ 0. 50 _ _ Tensile Strength Dry (psi) 897 - _ - . 93 352 286 292 _ - _ Wet (psi) 858 960 769 674 909 2 136 _ 98 M.140 M.144 ť1,165 Flexural Strength Dry (psi) 2,045 - - - _ 63 317 141 389 _ . . Wet (psi) 1,927 3,819 2, 193 1,309 2,068 0 132 _ 142 3,600 4,954 5,074 Modulus of Elasticitv Dry (psi) 7. 3 X 105 - - - - 4.84 x 103 1.07 x 10* 6.92 x 103 2.60 x 104 _ - . Wet (psi) 1. 33 x 106 6.39 x 10* 5. 75 x 10* 2.52 x 106 2.44 x 10* 0 2. 75 x 103 . 1.61 x 104 6. 50 x 10* 6.32 x 106 6.80 x 10* Remarks Good strength. Tile pretreated with A 174 (0.1%). A174 added to resin system (0. 2%). Tile pretreated with A187 (0.1%). A 187 added to resin system (0. 2%). Good flexibility, fair to poor bonding. Tile pretreated with DC 5010. Lower viscosity than DCUE- 1072-31, same base material. Tile pretreated with DC 5010. Tile untreated . C.A.- Araldite No. 956. Tile pretreated with A186. C.A.- Araldite No. 956. Tile pretreated with A187 . C.A.- Araldire No. 956. ------- CO -0 C. (Continued) Name of Compound Epon 828 with Butyl Glycidyl Ether Epon 828 with Dectyl Glycidyl Ether Epon 828 and LP 3 Epon 828 and LP 33 Type Epoxy Epoxy Epoxy Polysul- fide Epoxy Polysul- fide Source Shell Chemical Shell Chemical Shell Chemical Thiokol Chemical Shell Chemical Thiokol Chemical Viscosity Used Cabosil M-5 Thixotropic Used Cabosil M-5 Thixotropic Thixotropic Thixotropic Set Time or Cure Time 40 minutes 50 minutes 30 minutes 30 minutes Cost ($/lb) _ _ _ . Tensile Strength Dry (psi) . - _ M,182 . - _ 781 1,099 1, 108 830 Wet (psi) ť1,143 M.143 M.134 *1,207 M,136 *1,144 >1,140 1,144 620 ť1,138 801 Flexural Strength Dry (psi) _ - - 5, 768 _ - _ 1, 186 1,984 1,866 1,809 Wet (psi) 5,014 5, 192 5, 560 6, 341 5, 749 5,022 6,079 2,081 1, 543 3,081 1,443 Modulus of Elasticity Dry (psi) _ - - 2.58 x 107 _ - _ 1. 05 x 105 2. 7 x 105 3.63 x 10 1.74 x 105 Wet (psi) 1.12 x 107 6.4 x 106 1.01 x 107 1.72 x 107 5.08 x 106 8.75 x 106 4.79 x 106 2.48 x 105 2.39 x 105 6. 13 x 105 2.40 x 105 Remarks Tile untreated. C.A. - Araldite 956. Tile pretreated with A 186. C.A. - Araldite No. 956 . Tile pretreated with A187. C.A. - Araldite No. 956. A1100 blended in epoxy system (1.0%). C.A. - Araldite No. 956. Tile untreated. C.A. - Araldite No. 956. Tile pretreated with A186. C.A. - Araldite No. 956. Tile pretreated with A187. C.A. - Araldite No. 956. 50% epoxy, 50% poly- sulfide. C.A. -Araldite No. 956. (20 pks of epoxy) Tile pretreated with A187. Same as above, except tile pretreated with XZ-8-5411A 50% epoxy, 50% polysulfide. C.A. - Araldite No. 956. pks epoxy). Tile pretreated with A187. Same as above, except tile pretreated with XZ-8-5114A ------- C. (Continued) Union Carbide Products A-151 vlnyltrlcoxysilane A-172 vinyl-tris (2-methoxyethoxy) silane A-174 gamma-methacryloxypropyltrimethoxy silane A-186 beta-(3,4-epoxycyclohexyl) ethyltrlmethoxysilane A-187 gamma glycidoxypropyltrimethoxysilane A- 1100 gamma-amlnopropyltrtethoxysilane Dow Corning Products C-600 X2-8-5114 70% solution in methanol of a mercaptosilane salt 00 00 ------- D. Effects of Various Curing Agents and Reactive Diluents. Name of Compound Epon 828 with Jutyl g lye idyl ether Epon 828 with Phenyl glycidyl ether Epon 828 with Alhyl glycidyl Ether Type Epoxy Epoxy Epoxy Source Shell Chemical Shell Chemical Shell Chemical Viscosity 880 cps 1040 cps 1120 cps Set Time or Cure Time 1 hour, 20 3 hours, 10 minutes 1 hour, 5 minutes 1 hour, 30 minutes 55 minutes 35 minutes 40 minutes 3 hours 3 hours, 15 minutes 40 minutes 1 hour, 40 minutes 2 hours , 30 minutes 1 hour, 40 minutes 1 hour, 5 minutes 1 hour, 45 minutes 35 minutes 1 hour , 35 minutes Cost ($/lb) _ _ _ Tensile Strength Dry (pal) 710 229 259 317 135 _ ^1,165 685 227 328 1,077 577 191 303 259 68 1,145 Wet (psi) _ . _ - _ _ 984 _ _ 1,097 _ - _ _ - 588 Flexural Strength Dry (psi) 1, 714 107 41 917 107 398 2, 274 846 1,257 0 3,370 1, 371 2,210 246 326 298 2,667 Wet (psi) _ _ - - _ 2,2H _ . - 2, 73! _ - _ - - 2,019 Modulus of Elasticity Dry (psi) 5.8 x 105 5.0 x 104 4.0 x 104 1.0^ x 10 1.96 x 105 7.36 x 105 2. 17 x 106 9. 50 x 10s 1.61 x 106 0 4. 11 x 106 3"95 x 10 8.84 x 106 3.83 x 105 3.85 x l6* 2.90 x 105 4. 36 x 106 Wet (psi) _ - - - - _ 1.91 x 106 _ . - 3.48 x 106 _ - _ - _ 2. 65 x 106 Remarks C.A. - Araldite No. 955 C .A. - Lubrizol CA 23 . C .A.- Triethylenetetramine C .A.-Tetraethylene- pentamine . C .A.-Diethylenetriamine. C.A. -Araldite No. 963 . C.A. -Araldite No. 956. C .A. -Triethylenetetramine C .A.-Tetraethylene- pentamine . C .A.-Diethylenetriamine . C .A. -Araldite No. 956. C.A. -Araldite No. 955. C .A. -Triethylenetetramine C .A.-Tetraethylene- pentamine . C .A.-Diethylenetriamine . C.A. -Araldite No. 963. C.A. -Araldite No. 956. ------- D. (Continued) Name of Compound Epon 828 with Dectyl glycidyl ether Epon 828 Type Epoxy Epoxy Source Shell Chemical Shell Chemical Viscosity 1120 cps IbOOOcps Set Time or Cure Time 3 hours , 30 minutes 1 hour 1 hour, 15 minutes 1 hour 50 minutes 1 hour, 15 minutes 1 hour, 15 minutes 1 hour 35 minutes 30 minutes 30 minutes 1 hour, 30 minutes Cost ($/lb) . _ Tensile Strength Dry (psi) 281 Z67 644 119 M.142 M.166 ť1,175 ^1,168 994 ^1,161 589 1,043 Wet (psi) . - - - 852 _ _ - _ - - - Flexural Strength Dry (psi) 547 82 - 503 2,006 2,694 2,951 2,579 3,439 1,496 1,598 3,444 Wet (psi) . . - - I, 784 _ _ - - - - - Modi Elas Dry (psi) 1.25 x 105 l'°t x 10 - 6.26 x 10 7.71 x 106 1.44 x 10* 1. 15 x 106 6.27 x 10* 6.34 x 106 6.73 X 105 2.58^ x 10* 4-2i x 10 ilus of ticitv Wet (psi) . - - - U916 x 106 _ - - - - - Remarks C.A.-Lubrlzol C.A. C.A.-Triethylenete- tramine. C.A.-Tetraethylene- pentamine. Sample did not fully cure for flex. C .A. -Diethylenetriamine . C.A.-Araldite No. 956 C.A.-Araldite No. 955. C.A.-Lubrizol C .A. C .A . -Triethylenete- tramine. C.A. -Tetraethylene- pentamine C .A. -Diethylenetriamine . C.A.-Araldite No. 963. C.A.-Araldite No. 956. ------- E. Polysulfide System Used With Various Curing Agents. Name of Compound Epon 8ZB/LP 3 Epon 828/LP 33 Type Epoxy Polysulfide Epoxy Polusulfide Source Shell Thiokol Shell Thiokol Viscosity Thixo tropic Thixotropic Set Time or Cure Time 15 minutes 30 minutes 15 minutes 30 minutes 20 minutes Tensile Strength Dry (psi) M.146 933 333 1, 115 914 397 781 M,153 536 668 M.141 Wet (psi) M.153 971 0 1,061 846 878 1,144 M.149 562 1,142 *1,136 Flexural Strength Dry (psi) 2,742 1, 170 245 Z, 367 1,363 357 1, 186 2,880 698 743 3, 735 Wet (psi) 3,273 2,264 0 3, 593 1,940 1, 570 2,081 2,810 450 2,696 4, 182 Vtodulus of Elasticity Dry (psi) 1.16 x 106 3.33 x 10s 2. 72 x 10 6.77 x 105 1.72 x 105 7.55 x 10 1.05 x 105 7.36 X 105 6. 59 x 104 1. 31 x 105 9.71 x 105 Wet (psi) 1.25 x 106 6.97 x 105 0 1. 04 x 106 1. 64 x 105 2. 55 x 105 2.48 x 105 4.90 x 105 5.36 x 104 5. 19 x 105 1.48 x 106 Remarks 50% epoxy, 50% polysulfide. C .A.-Diethylenetriamine . Tile pretreated with A187. 10-phr epoxy. Same as above. C .A.-Tetraethylenepentamine (10-phr epoxy) . Same as above. C .A.-Tetraethylenepentamine (20-phr epoxy) . Same as above. C .A.-Triethylenetetramine (10-phr epoxy) . Same as above. G .A.-Triethylenetetramine (20-phr epoxy) . Same as above. C .A.-Araldite No. 956 (10-phr epoxy). Same as above. C .A.-Araldite No. 956 (20-phr epoxy). 50% epoxy, 50% polysulfide. C .A-Diethylenetriamine (10-phr epoxy) . Tile pretreated with A 187. Same as above. C .A.-Diethyl- enetriamine (20-phr epoxy) . Same as above. C. A.-Tetra- ethylenepentamine (10-phr epoxy), Same as above. C. A.-Tetra- ethylenepentamine (20-phr epoxy), ------- E. (Continued) Name of Compound Epon 828/LP 33 Type Epoxy Polysulfide Source Shell Thiokol Viscosity Thixotropic Set Time or Cure Time 30 minutes 20 minutes 30 minutes 40 minutes Tensile Strenc Dry (psi) A1.186 959 232 1, 108 th Wet (psi) f 1,141 926 581 1,138 Flexural Strength Dry (psl) 3,266 1,985 259 1,866 Wet (psi) 3,478 1,25! 81' 3,081 Modulus of Elast Dry (psi) 7-41< x 10 2.52 x 10s 2.70 x 104 3.63, x 10 ;citv Wet (psi) 6.64 x 10s 1.72 x 105 1.07 x 105 6. 13 x 105 Remarks 50% epoxy, 50% polysulfide C .A.-Triethylenetetramine (10-phr epoxy) . Same as above. C. A.-Triethylene- tetramine (20-phr epoxy) . Same as above. C .A.-Araldite No 956 (10-phr epoxy). Same as above. C .A.-Araldite No. 956 (20-phr epoxy). LP- 3 = low viscosity polysulfide LP-33 - differs from LP-3 in percent crosslink and percent mercaptan. Produced by Thiokol Chemical. ------- F. Resistance to Sewage Tests. Name of Compound Selectron RS-549 U. C. 8698 Urabond 836-S W. S. Dickey Urethane Thiokol No. 705 Thiokol No. 205 Durakane 411-45 Escoweld 7502 Escoweld 7505 Matstick No. 24 and No. 25 Matstick No. 26 and No. 27 Type Polyester Epoxy Urethane Urethane Epoxy polysulfide Epoxy polysulfide Vinyl ester resin Epoxy polyamide Epoxy polyamide Epoxy polyamide Epoxy polysulfide Before Soaking Weight (gm) 100.46 32.89 39.80 18.81 52.28 49.38 64.31 35. 17 37.97 38. 17 34.26 Volume (cc) 83 28 28 15 28 39 57 31 36 32 25 After Soakina Weight (gm) 100.62 33. 05 40. 31 19.84 51.86 49.25 64.41 35.78 38.18 39.85 34.56 Volume (cc) 80 27 32 17 37 38 59 33 32 32 27 Comments Slight discoloration, probably due to absorb- ance of H2O. No apparent change No apparent change No apparent change No apparent change No apparent change Discoloration, probably due to absorbance of H20 Discoloration, probably due to absorbance of H2O No apparent change No apparent change Pale yellow color ------- F. (Continued) Name of Compounc Scotchweld 2166 NuKlad No. 105 Cital 2805 (T) Tru-Bond 2143 Baker System 63 Tru-Bond 2133 Araldite 6005 and 508 Durez 16470 Type Epoxy Epoxy-based primer Epoxy coating Epoxy polyamide Urethane Epoxy polysulfide Epoxy Turfuryl alcohol resin Before Soaking Weight (gm) 24.58 48. 36 25. 58 32.80 39.12 41. 57 44.96 37. 12 Volume (cc) 19 40 15 28 44 36 40 30 After Soaking Weight (gm) 24.96 48.70 25.70 33.74 39.21 41.96 46.58 37. 10 Volume (cc) 18 40 13 33 47 32 40 29 Comments No apparent change No apparent change No apparent change No apparent change Floats. No apparent change. No apparent change Discoloration due to absorbance of H2O No apparent change. ------- PAGE NOT AVAILABLE DIGITALLY ------- BIBLIOGRAPHIC: The Western'Company of North America. Improved Sealants for Infiltration Control FWPCA Publication No. WP-20- 18, 1969. ABSTRACT: The objective of this program was to develop new, more effective sealants for sewer line leaks (leaking joints, cracks and large holes). This purpose was achieved, and all equipments and materials investigated, tested or compared are presented, along with test results, supporting data, conclusions and rec- ommendations. A wide range of candidate materials was survey- ed, and weaknesses of rejected materials were noted. Mean- while, specific properties of acceptable materials were ascer- tained and materials having these properties were identified. These latter materials were subjected to tests designed to dem- onstrate their effectiveness as sealants. Cost/effectiveness of the new sealant materials were compared with that of present sealant materials. It was concluded that infiltration adversely influences sewer system operating costs and effectiveness, and that leakage repair systems are limited in their effectiveness. Several sealants developed during the program were demonstrated to be able to effect strong, permanent repairs. No significant cost increase beyond that experience with present sealers was Indicated. Some present sealant application equipment can be modified for use with the new materials, but new equipment designs are described and recommended. Too, long-term field tests of the materials are recommended. ACCESSION NO: KEY WORDS Infiltration Control Sewer Lines Leaking Joints Sealants Polymers Ground Water Repair BIBLIOGRAPHIC: The Western Company of North America. Improved Sealants for Infiltration Control FWPCA Publication No. WP-ZO- 18, 1969. ABSTRACT: The objective of this program was to develop new, more effective sealants for sewer line leaks (leaking joints, cracks and large holes). This purpose was achieved, and all equipments and materials investigated, tested or compared are presented, along with test results, supporting data, conclusions and rec- ommendations. A wide range of candidate materials was survey- ed, and weaknesses of rejected materials were noted. Mean- while, specific properties of acceptable materials were ascer- tained and materials having these properties were identified. These latter materials were subjected to tests designed to dem- onstrate their effectiveness as sealants. Cost/effectiveness of the new sealant materials were compared with that of present sealant materials. It was concluded that infiltration adversely influences sewer system operating costs and effectiveness, and that leakage repair systems are limited in their effectiveness. Several sealants developed during the program were demonstrated to be able to effect strong, permanent repairs. No significant cost increase beyond that experience with present sealers'was indicated. Some present sealant application equipment can be modified for use with the new materials, but new equipment designs are described and recommended. Too, long-term field tests of the materials are recommended. ACCESSION NO: KEYWORDS Infiltration Control Sewer Lines Leaking Joints Sealants Polymers Ground Water Repair BIBLIOGRAPHIC: The Western Company of North America. Improved Sealants for Infiltration Control FWPCA Publication No. WP-20- 18, 1969. ABSTRACT: The objective of this program was to develop new, more effective sealants for sewer line leaks (leaking joints, cracks and large holes). This purpose was achieved, and all equipments and materials investigated, tested or compared are presented, along with test results, supporting data, conclusions and rec- ommendations. A wide range of candidate materials was survey- ed, and weaknesses of rejected materials were noted. Mean- while, specific properties of acceptable materials were ascer- tained and materials having these properties were identified. These latter materials were subjected to tests designed to dem- onstrate their effectiveness as sealants. Cost/effectiveness of the new sealant materials were compared with that of present sealant materials. It was concluded that infiltration adversely influences sewer system operating costs and effectiveness, and that leakage repair systems are limited in their effectiveness. Several sealants developed during the program were demonstrated to be able to effect strong, permanent repairs. No significant cost increase beyond that experience with present sealers was indicated. Some present sealant application equipment can be modified for use with the new materials, but new equipment designs are described and recommended. Too, long-term field tests of the materials are recommended. ACCESSION NO: KEY WORDS Infiltration Control Sewer Lines Leaking Joints Sealants Polymers Ground Water Repair ------- |