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
------- |