En`ineerin` Failure Analysis\ Vol[ 4\ No[ 2\ pp[ 136148\ 0887

0887 Elsevier Science Ltd[ All rights reserved

\
Pergamon
Printed in Great Britain
02495296:87 ,08[99 9[99
PII] S02495296"86#999166
FAILURE OF A FLEXIBLE PIPE WITH A CONCRETE
LINER
MARK TALESNICK and RAFAEL BAKER
Department of Civil Engineering\ Technion\ Israel Institute of Technology\ Haifa 21999\ Israel
"Received 04 September 0886#
Abstract*This study documents the functional failure of a concrete lined steel sewage pipe[ Symptoms of the
pipe failure are presented[ Failure of the pipe system can be attributed to incompatibility between the
mechanical behavior of the pipe and the methodology employed in its design[ The underlying cause of the
failure may be traced to a lack of su.cient back_ll sti}ness[ In situ testing was used to evaluate the sti}ness
of the side back_ll[ The existing pipetrench system condition was analysed numerically and a criterion
developed for the consideration of the structural integrity of the pipeline[ 0887 Elsevier Science Ltd[ All
rights reserved[
Keywords] Corrosion protection\ _tness for purpose\ pipeline failures[
0[ INTRODUCTION
The present paper documents a failure of a large diameter concrete lined steel sewage pipe\ buried
in a clay soil pro_le[ The project consisted of a 2[4 km long gravity pipe in central Israel which
failed before being placed in service[ The present contribution documents the failure of this pipe
trench system[ Field and laboratory testing provided signi_cant insight into the probable cause"s#
of failure[ The case study accentuates some basic design principles\ as well as the use of simple _eld
tests as an e}ective diagnostic tool to evaluate site conditions[
1[ DESIGN\ CONSTRUCTION AND SITE CONDITIONS
The sewage pipeline was designed and constructed in central Israel during 08810883[ The design
called for a steel pipe with an inner diameter of 019 cm and a wall thickness of 9[53 cm[ The inner
surface of the pipe was lined with an aluminum based cement of between 0[7 and 1[1 cm thickness[
The primary purpose of the inner liner was to provide protection of the steel pipe from the a}ects
of the corrosive sewage ~owing inside[ The outer surface of the pipe was covered by a 1[4 cm thick
concrete layer[
The design of the pipetrench system was based on a ~exible pipe criterion[ This implies that
the pipe maintains structural and functional integrity by mobilizing lateral resistance from the
surrounding soil[ The pipe was designed to withstand static soil loads alone[
A design section of the pipetrench system is shown schematically in Fig[ 0[ The pipe invert was
founded at a depth of between 3[4 and 4[4 m below the ground surface\ depending on the natural
topography[ The natural soil consists of a highly plastic clay "CH\ liquid limit] v
l
51)\ plasticity
index] I
p
25)#[ A perched water table "depths of as little as 12 m# exists in part of the project
area[ The design speci_ed the excavation of a 1[4 m wide trench "twice the pipe diameter#\ placement
of a 19 cm thick layer of poorly graded gravel "GP# with a particle size between 05 and 19 mm[ The
pipe was placed directly on the gravel layer[ Following placement of the pipe section the design
speci_ed that "a# dune sand "SP# with calcareous concretions "D
59
9[06 mm and D
09
9[01 mm#
be placed around the pipe to a height of 29 cm above the pipe crown elevation^ "b# above that
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed[
136
137 M[ TALESNICK and R[ BAKER
Fig[ 0[ Typical design section of the trenchpipe system[
height\ natural clay material should be returned to the excavation to the original ground elevation^
"c# the lower 89 cm of the sand back_ll be compacted in layers to a design dry density of 84) of
the maximum density according to ASTM standard D0446 "g
d max
06[0 kN:m
2
#^ and "d# all
materials placed above the compacted sand layers be dumped in without compaction[ Construction
of the pipeline was completed in mid 0883[ The pipeline was abandoned "before any sewage ~owed
along its length# in mid 0884 because of severe cracking of the inner concrete liner[
2[ OBSERVATION OF PIPE FAILURE
Upon observation of the internal liner cracks\ a survey of the pipe condition was initiated[ The
survey included measurement of vertical and horizontal pipe de~ections\ visual description of the
inner pipe surface and elevation of the pipe invert[ The survey was performed along most of the 2[4
km length[ The survey was carried out by the Technion Foundation for Research and Devel!
opment*Building Materials Testing Laboratory[
Results of the survey indicated that vertical pipe de~ections greater than 2)"of the pipe diameter#
were common over signi_cant sections of the pipeline length[ In places the de~ections reached more
than 7)[ Severe cracking of the inner pipe liner was noted over substantial sections of the pipeline[
Open cracks and peeling of the liner was observed at many locations[ Longitudinal cracks with
apertures greater than 9[24 mm were found in pipe sections which had undergone vertical de~ections
of 1[9) and less[ Cracking of the internal pipe liner resulted in a substantial reduction in the
protective capability of the concrete liner against corrosion of the steel pipe[ Typical results per!
taining to one 019 m pipe segment are shown in Fig[ 1[ The survey indicated signi_cant deviations
of the measured pipe invert level from the design elevation[ Over signi_cant portions of the pipeline
length\ the measured invert elevation was found to be as high as 14 cm below the design level[
However\ it must be noted that over several other segments along the pipeline length the surveyed
invert level was found to be above the design elevation[
138 Concrete lined ~exible pipe failure
Fig[ 1[ Typical data obtained from damage survey[
3[ GENERAL DESIGN PERSPECTIVE AND PURPOSE OF INVESTIGATION
It is common to de_ne two major categories of soil!pipe systems]
Flexible pipes[ In this case the pipe is prevented from collapsing through the mobilization of soil
reaction[ In order to mobilize the soil reaction the pipe must deform[ A successful design in this
case depends on the ability of the pipe to retain its functional and structural integrity under the
deformation required to mobilize soil resistance[ This case represents a typical soil structure inter!
action problem[
Ri`id pipes[ The common design assumption for this category of pipe is that their load carrying
capacity is independent of the reaction of the surrounding soil\ and pipe deformation is neglected[
It is not obvious to which of the above categories the present pipe belongs[ On one hand\ being
basically a thin!walled steel pipe its unrestrained load carrying capacity is rather low\ making it a
natural member of the ~exible pipe category[ On the other hand\ the brittle inner concrete liner may
be damaged "cracked# at deformations below those required to mobilize su.cient soil reaction[
It appears\ therefore\ that the pipe under consideration represents a borderline case which does
not obviously belong to either one of the common design categories[ Proper pipe design requires
analysis of the soil pipe system\ rather than use of standard design methodologies[
The objective of the present investigation was to determine the cause"s# of damage and the areas
responsible[ For this purpose it was necessary to determine mechanical properties of the pipe section\
and soil conditions in the _eld[ A secondary objective of the investigation was to study the suitability
of the pipe as a structural shell for a more ~exible insert which would act as a barrier between the
~owing corrosive sewage and the steel pipe[ For this purpose it was necessary to evaluate the
structural integrity of the pipe in its present\ damaged\ condition[
149 M[ TALESNICK and R[ BAKER
4[ EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM
The experimental program consisted of two components[ The _rst was laboratory testing of pipe
sections in order to determine their sti}ness "sti}ness factor EI#\ vertical de~ection or strain\
which induces cracking in the inner pipe liner and collapse loads[ The second was a _eld investigation
which included opening of test pits at several sections along the pipeline[ Excavation of the test pits
allowed for visual description of the soil!trench cross section\ and performance of dynamic cone
penetration "DCP# tests within the sand back_ll alongside the pipe[ The _eld investigation was
limited to a 229 m pipeline segment[
4[0[ Results of tests on pipe sections
Ring compression "bending# tests were carried out on three sections of pipe[ Each section was
placed in a hydraulic press and loaded across its vertical diameter by a line load along the full
segment length[ Throughout loading of each test section\ vertical and horizontal de~ections were
monitored[ Visual physical damage to the inner pipe lining "cracking# was also recorded[ Figure
2"a# presents the experimental load deformation curve of one of the pipe sections together with
observations with respect to crack development throughout the test[ Figure 2"b# shows that the
results for the three sections are fairly similar[
Based on the data presented in Fig[ 2 it is possible to obtain the following information]
"0# The collapse load of the pipe section is between 49 and 44 kN:m[ Collapse occurred at vertical
de~ections of 5276 mm which correspond to diametrical strains of 46)[ It is noted that these
values characterize the unsupported behavior of pipe sections[
"1# The maximum moment acting in the pipe section at the collapse load may be determined by
eqn "0#\ after Timoshenko and Gere 0[ For the pipes tested the maximum moments at collapse
varied between 4[55[9 kN m:m\
M
max

P= R
1
=
$
p
1
0
%
\ "0#
where P is the collapse load per unit length as noted above\ and R is the pipe radius[
"2# The sti}ness factor of the pipe "EI# can be determined based on the linear section of the force
de~ection curve using eqn "1# 0[
EI
PR
2
3 = Dy0
p
7
p1
\ "1#
where Dy is the vertical pipe de~ection under load per unit length P[
The calculated sti}ness of the three pipe sections was found to be approximately 02[4 kN m[ It
is noted that the EI is an inherent property of the pipe section which is independent of
lateral support conditions[ This experimentally determined pipe sti}ness is representative of the
composite pipe cross section\ which includes both concrete layers and the steel core[
"3# Severe cracking of the inner liner wall "de_ned as a crack opening of 9[2 mm 1# occurred at a
vertical diametric strain of approximately 0[1)[ The working assumption used throughout the
investigation has been that cracking occurs at the same strain value irrespective of the support
conditions[ Obviously the load required to impose this strain level is dependent upon lateral
support conditions[
4[1[ Results of _eld investi`ation
Dynamic cone penetration testing was performed at several stations along the investigated portion
of the pipeline[ Technical details of the testing procedure and interpretation of results may be found
in 2[ The testing was performed following excavation of the _ll material down to the pipe crown[
Two or three DCP soundings were performed within each excavation to a depth of approximately
0[50[7 m[ The end point of the sounding was located at a depth of approximately 9[4 m below the
pipe invert[ The plots shown in Fig[ 3 are typical results found at six stations[ It is noted that\ in
140 Concrete lined ~exible pipe failure
Fig[ 2[ Pipe loaddeformation tests] "a# including damage observations\ "b# comparison of results for three
sections tested[
general\ ~atter portions of depthblowcount curves represent material more resistant to penetration[
The slope of the depthblow count curve is called the DCP number "mm:blow# which characterizes
the sti}ness of the material at a particular depth[ In general a lower DCP number would indicate
141 M[ TALESNICK and R[ BAKER
Fig[ 3[ DCP sounding data[
142 Concrete lined ~exible pipe failure
sti}er material[ In homogeneous soils low DCP numbers infer dense materials[ Figure 4 shows the
distribution with depth of the DCP numbers as inferred from the results shown in Fig[ 3[
At three locations along the pipeline segment considered\ test excavations were opened to depths
of 9[49[5 m below the pipe invert[ The excavations were made at locations where DCP soundings
had been performed[ Groundwater was encountered in each of the excavations[ In order to enable
visual examination\ water in the excavations was pumped out[ The examination revealed the
following qualitative features in each of the test pits "see Fig[ 5#[
"0# Sand back_ll of thickness between 0924 cm was found below the pipe invert[ It is noted that
the design called for the pipe to be placed directly on the gravel layer[ The best available
information indicates that the pipe was laid out according to the design speci_cations[
"1# Below the sand back_ll a layer of natural clay subgrade approximately 414 cm in thickness
was found[ The thickness of this intermediate layer increases from the invert of the pipe towards
the trench wall "see Fig[ 5"a##[
"2# Below the intermediate clay layer the gravel base was found\ and below it\ the natural clay
subgrade[
The sand back_ll in the zone of the pipe haunches was found to be very loose\ signi_cantly less
dense than the sand _ll in the upper part of the trench[ The gravel layer was seen to be completely
impregnated by a mixture of the natural clay subgrade and the sand back_ll[
Figure 6 shows very good correlation between the actual soil pro_le revealed by the visual
examination "Fig[ 5# and the results of the corresponding DCP sounding shown in Fig 3[ The
location of the discontinuities in the distribution of DCP numbers shown in Fig[ 4 are generally
consistent with the layer boundaries in the lower portion of the trench pro_le[ Breakpoint A shown
in Fig[ 6 implies that the sand below mid pipe elevation "haunch zone# is considerably looser than
the sand above this level[ Breakpoint A is a common feature of all the plots shown in Fig[ 3 and
Fig[ 4[
Despite variations in the absolute value of the DCP numbers\ each of the sounding pro_les shown
in Fig[ 4 have the following common features]
"0# There is a marked increase in DCP number at depths between 64034 cm below the pipe crown
which corresponds to the bottom part "haunches# of the pipe section[
"1# There is a marked decrease in DCP number at elevations corresponding to the visually observed
gravel layer below the pipe invert\ followed by an increase in DCP numbers as the sounding
entered the natural clay subgrade[
5[ INTERPRETATION AND ANALYSIS OF FAILURE
The vast majority of _eld measured pipe de~ections "as shown for example in Fig[ 1# exceed the
0[1) limit found to induce severe liner cracking of pipe sections in the laboratory[ As a result the
extensive damage observed in the internal pipe liner in the _eld this is not surprising[
Steel pipes are usually considered to be ~exible and they are designed in accordance with {{~exible
design methodologies||[ However\ in the present case the deformations associated with such a design
far exceed the limiting capability of the inner pipe liner to withstand cracking[ As a result\ although
the pipe section may remain structurally sound\ it loses its functionality due to cracking of the liner[
Although it is impossible to specify a sharp criterion de_ning a ~exible pipe\ the value of 1)
vertical de~ection is often noted in the literature as the boundary between ~exible and rigid pipes
3\ 4^ i[e[ a ~exible pipe should be capable to withstand 1) de~ection without damage[ According
to this criterion the present pipe does not belong to the ~exible pipe category and should not have
been design based on this methodology[
It is worthwhile to note that design standards of ~exible pipes allow vertical pipe de~ections to
be as high as 4[96[4) 5\ 6[
The large vertical deformation of the pipe and cracking of the pipe liner appear to be related to
insu.cient back_ll sti}ness as observed in the _eld investigation[ The existing sti}ness of the sand
back_ll may be inferred on the basis of the DCP tests performed alongside the pipe[ Using empirical
143 M[ TALESNICK and R[ BAKER
Fig[ 4[ DCP number versus depth pro_les[
144 Concrete lined ~exible pipe failure
Fig[ 5[ Schematic of visual observations in test excavation] "a# cross!section\ "b# longitudinal section[
Fig[ 6[ DCP sounding pro_le\ excavation pro_le composite[
relations between DCP numbers\ laboratory CBR values "California Bearing Ratio# and elastic
moduli it is possible to establish the following relation 2\ 7]
E
015\399
DCP
9[60zlog DCP
\ "2#
where E is the elastic modulus "in kPa# and the DCP number is in mm:blow[
Applying eqn "2# to the DCP numbers established below breakpoint A "Fig[ 4# the elastic moduli
shown in Table 0 were inferred[
The data in Table 0 show good inverse correlation between moduli inferred on the basis of DCP
results and measured pipe de~ection in the _eld\ that is\ lower moduli result in larger pipe de~ections[
Such a relation should be expected on the basis of the Spangler equation 8 "eqn "3## which forms
the basis of standard design procedures for ~exible pipe 5\ 09[
Dy
K= W= D
l
= R
2
EI9[950 = E? = R
2
\ "3#
145 M[ TALESNICK and R[ BAKER
Table 0[ Field measured pipe de~ection\ DCP\ moduli values
Depth DCP no[ Elastic modulus Pipe de~ection
Station no[ "cm# "mm:blow# E "kPa# d "cm#
8 39039 054 464 5[8
0929 89029 51 1499 2[7
0016 64049 24 4499 0[3
0014 74034 024 674 2[8
01 84039 35 2799 1[4
0149 54 49 2399 2[9
where Dy pipe de~ection "m#\ Wsoil cover loads\ taken as average prismload "kN:m#\ Kbed!
ding constant "non!dimensional#\ D
l
de~ection lag factor "non!dimensional#\ Rpipe radius "m#\
EI pipe sti}ness factor "kN m#\ E? soil reaction modulus "kPa#[
Equation "3# was utilized with W79 kN:m "corresponding to a depth of 34 m of soil cover#
and a bedding constant K of 9[00[ The choice of the bedding constant was based on the visual
examination and it corresponds to poor bedding conditions below the pipe invert[ The de~ection
lag factor D
l
\ which accounts for pipe creep and dynamic loading\ was taken as unity[ The pipe
sti}ness factor\ EI\ was taken to be 02[4 kN m based on the results from laboratory tests[
Figure 7 shows a comparison between the predicted de~ections based on Spangler|s equation and
the data shown in Table 0[ The open symbols shown in the plot will be referred to at a later stage[
The _gure shows good correspondence between the predicted and measured results\ thus supporting
the assumption that the large _eld de~ections were due to insu.cient sti}ness of the soil back_ll[
More signi_cant however is the fact that use of a very simple and cost e}ective _eld tool "DCP#
coupled with empirical correlations "DCPE relation and the Spangler formula# make it possible to
predict reasonably well\ the expected de~ections of the pipe[ In the particular case under con!
sideration such an approach provides an excellent diagnostic tool to assess the pipe condition
"cracking# along the length of the pipeline[
6[ STRUCTURAL STABILITY OF PIPELINE
The secondary objective of the present work was to investigate the possibility of using the existing
pipeline as a structural shell to an extremely ~exible insert which would provide protection from
Fig[ 7[ Pipe de~ection vs side back_ll sti}ness[
146 Concrete lined ~exible pipe failure
the corrosive e}ect of the sewage[ The insert would in e}ect functionally replace the damaged
internal concrete liner[
Design of engineering structures is frequently based on the notion of safety factors with respect
to strength[ In the case of a pipe section it is reasonable to de_ne a safety factor as]
FS
Mom

M
ult
M
max
\ "4#
where FS
Mom
is a safety factor with respect to moments\ M
ult
is the yield moment of the pipe cross
section\ as determined on the basis of the laboratory testing and\ M
max
is the maximum moment
existing in a pipe section as loaded in the _eld[ Essentially the basic engineering question to be
answered is whether the pipe in its existing deformed state\ has a su.ciently high safety factor
allowing it to be utilized as structural element protecting the ~exible insert[
In general the load distribution acting on a pipe section in the _eld is unknown\ therefore\ there
is no straightforward approach to estimate the moments "M
max
#[ To overcome this di.culty it was
decided to analyze the pipetrench system numerically using the commercially available software
called FLAC "Fast Lagrangian Analysis of Continua 00#[ FLAC is a two!dimensional explicit
_nite di}erence program for the computation of engineering mechanics[ The program simulates the
behavior of structures built of soil\ rock and other materials which may undergo plastic ~ow when
their yield limits are reached[ It allows for the presence of structural members which may be modeled
as beams or cables[ The pipe was represented as a series of beam elements having a total thickness
equal to the composite pipe section thickness[ An equivalent section modulus "EI# as determined in
the laboratory tests was used "i[e[ no attempt was made to model the internal composite structure
of the pipe section#[ The di}erent soil layers were modeled as elasto!plastic MohrCoulomb media
each assigned representative soil deformation and strength parameters[ The discretization scheme
and chosen material properties are shown in Fig[ 8[ A plane strain problem with a single axis of
symmetry "AA?# was considered[ One half of the soiltrench system was represented by 873 two!
dimensional solid elements\ and the other by 02 one!dimensional beam elements[
Since soil behavior is stress history dependent\ we found it important to follow\ in a numerical
sense\ the _eld construction sequence[ Toward this end the following three numerical steps were
taken]
"0# Establishment of the initial\ at rest\ state of stress in an homogeneous half space of the clay
pro_le[
"1# Establishment of stresses and strains in each element resulting from {{excavation|| of the trench
pro_le "ABCD*Fig[ 8#[
"2# Establishment of the stresses and strains resulting from placement of the pipe and back_lling of
the trench[ It is noted that the initial conditions for this step are the stresses and strains
established in the previous stage[
In order to test the suitability of the numerical system as a predictive tool a parametric study
relating vertical pipe de~ection to the sti}ness of the sand back_ll was performed[ The results of
these calculations are shown as the open symbols in Fig[ 7[ The numerical results compare very well
with the _eld values[ Both the numerical computations and the _eld values fall below the curve
representing the Spangler model[ Such an outcome is reasonable considering the fact that the
Spangler formula is a design tool rather than a predicitive one[ It should be noted that the data
shown in Fig[ 7 involves three di}erent {{types|| of elastic moduli\ namely] modulus of soil reaction
labeled as E? in the Spangler equation^ conventional modulus of elasticity E as used in FLAC^ and
a sti}ness modulus based on the DCP results[
Despite these di}erences in de_nition of the sand back_ll sti}ness\ the correspondence of the data
is quite remarkable[ It is not clear whether this is a general phenomenon^ or true only in this
particular case[
For each assumed value of soil modulus the numerical scheme yields not only the vertical
shortening of the pipe diameter "used in Fig[ 7#\ but also the distribution of the beam moments
around the pipe circumference[ It is possible therefore to plot the maximum moment developed in
the pipe section as a function of the vertical shortening of the pipe diameter as shown in Fig[ 09[
The dashed line in the _gure represents the maximummoment de~ection relation for an unrestrained
147 M[ TALESNICK and R[ BAKER
Fig[ 8[ FLAC input] "a# grid\ "b# system pro_le and parameters[
pipe section "laboratory conditions#[ The plot illustrates that for any given pipe de~ection the
maximum moment in an unrestrained pipe is greater than the maximum moment in a buried one[
Including within Fig[ 09 the de_nition of the safety factor "eqn "4##\ it is possible to construct a
safety factor!de~ection relation\ shown as the curve through the triangular points in the _gure[ This
curve can be used to assess which pipe segments are su.ciently safe to be used as a structural shell[
For example\ assuming a required safety factor of 1\ all pipe segments which have undergone
de~ections greater than approximately 4 cm would be considered unsuitable[ The advantage of this
approach is its simplicity[ Pipe de~ection is a simple parameter to measure\ whereas moments in the
pipe section are not[
7[ CONCLUSIONS
The following conclusions can be drawn from the present investigation into the failure of this
pipeline]
"0# {{Flexible|| pipes with rigid liners must be designed with care[ Flexible pipe design methodologies
may be applicable\ however\ the deformation limitations of the liner must be carefully
148 Concrete lined ~exible pipe failure
Fig[ 09[ Maximum moment\ safety factor\ de~ection plot[
considered[ Careful control over the sti}ness of the trench back_ll material is of the utmost
importance[ In the particular case considered\ de~ection of the pipe was in places 56 times the
deformation initiating severe damage[
"1# DCP sounding has proven to be a simple _eld tool capable of estimating soil sti}ness moduli
of the trench back_ll materials[ Field measured de~ections\ predicted de~ections based on
standard design procedures and de~ections predicted by use of a sophisticated numerical tech!
nique\ correspond remarkably well[
"2# A criterion for the structural stability of the pipeline in terms of moments has been presented[
This criterion makes it possible to utilize the measured de~ections in a decision process aimed
at establishing which parts of the pipeline are suitable for use as a protective structural shell[
The advantage of the criterion is due to the fact that it directly relates safety factor to the
measurable quantity of de~ection[
REFERENCES
0[ Timoshenko\ S[ and Gere\ J[ M[\ Theory of Elastic Stability\ 1nd edn[ McGraw!Hill\ New York\ 0850[
1[ AASHTO Designation T179] Standard practice for concrete pipe\ sections or tile[
2[ Livneh\ M[ and Ishai\ I[\ Pavement and material evaluation by a dynamic cone penetrometer[ Proceedin`s of the 5th
International Conference on Structural Desi`n of Asphalt Pavements[ Ann Arbor\ MI\ 0876[
3[ Moser\ A[ P[\ Buried Pipe Desi`n[ McGraw!Hill\ 0889[
4[ Howard\ A[ K[\ Pipe bedding and back_ll[ Geotechnical Branch\ Division of Research\ Bureau of Reclamation\ United
States Department of the Interior\ Engineering Research Center\ Denver\ Colorado\ 0870[
5[ AWWA "American Water Works Association#\ Steel pipe*a guide for design and installation\ AWWA Manual M00\
1nd edn[
6[ ASTM Standard F568] Standard practice for Poly"Vinyl Chloride# "PVC# large!diameter plastic gravity sewer pipe and
_ttings[ ASTM Standards\ Vol[ 97[93 Plastic pipe and building products[
7[ Yoder\ E[ J[\ Principles of Pavement Desi`n[ Chapman and Hall\ 0848[
8[ Spangler\ M[ G[\ The structural design of ~exible pipe culverts[ Bulletin 042\ Engineering Experiment Station\ Iowa
State University\ 0830[
09[ ASTM Standard D2728] Standard practice for the underground installation of {{Fiberglass|| "glass!_ber reinforced
thermosetting resin# pipe[ ASTM\ Vol[ 97[93 Plastic pipe and building products[
00[ Itasca\ FLAC "Fast Lagrangian Analysis of Continua#\ Itasca Consulting Engineers\ Minneapolis\ Minnessota\ 0881[