See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/267613865

Mechanical Behavior of Welded and Un-Welded Polyethylene Pipe Materials

Conference Paper  in  American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Pressure Vessels and Piping Division (Publication) PVP · July 2013
DOI: 10.1115/PVP2013-97743

CITATIONS READS
10 648

3 authors:

Tarek EL-Bagory Maher Younan

Majmaah University on sabbatical leave from Helwan University The American University in Cairo
22 PUBLICATIONS   87 CITATIONS    63 PUBLICATIONS   875 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Hossam E. M. Sallam
Zagazig University
209 PUBLICATIONS   1,317 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Material Strength View project

Fatigue Crack Strengthening Using Pre-Stressed Composite Patch View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Tarek EL-Bagory on 02 August 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Proceedings of the ASME 2013 Pressure Vessels & Piping Division / K-PVP Conference PVP 2013
July 14-18, 2013 Paris, France
Paper Number: PVP 2013-97743

Mechanical Behavior of Welded and Un-welded

Polyethylene Pipe Materials
Tarek M.A.A. EL- Bagory Maher Y.A. Younan Hossam E.M. Sallam
Mechanical Engineering Dept. Associate Dean for Undergraduate Civil Engineering Dept.
Majmaah University Studies School of Sciences and Jazan University
KSA, on sabbatical leave from Engineering KSA, on sabbatical leave from
Mataria, Helwan University, The American University in Cairo Zagazig University,
Cairo-Egypt AUC-Egypt Zagazig-Egypt
Tel 00966-590365439, Tel 00202-26153062, Tel 009665-35480211,
Fax 00966-64313370, Fax 00202-27964180, Fax 0096673-232900,
E-mail: E-mail: E-mail:
telbagory@yahoo.com myounan@aucegypt.edu hem_sallam@yahoo.com

Abstract fail = strain at failure [%]

The primary objective of the present paper is to depict the mechanical  = tensile strength [MPa]
behavior of high density polyethylene, HDPE, pipes to provide the y = yield strength [MPa]
designer with reliable design data relevant to practical applications.
Therefore, it is necessary to study the effect of strain rate and Abbreviations
specimen configuration on the mechanical behavior of welded and un- ASTM = American Society for Testing and Materials.
welded pipes made from HDPE. Tensile tests are conducted on BS = British Standard
specimens longitudinally cut from the pipe with thickness (10, and 30 HDPE = High Density Polyethylene
mm), at different crosshead speeds (5-500 mm/min), and different IPP = Isotactic homopolymer polypropylene
gauge lengths (20, 25, and 50 mm) to investigate the mechanical LDPE = Low-Density Polyethylene
properties of welded and un-welded specimens. Butt-fusion, BF, PE = Polyethylene
welding method is used to join the different parts of HDPE pipes. In PP = Polypropylene
the case of test specimens taken from un-welded pipe a necking PVC = Polyvinyl Chloride
phenomenon before failure appears at different locations along the SDR = Standard Dimensions Ratio
gauge section. On the other hand, the fracture of welded specimens TEB = Tensile Energy to Break
almost occurs at the fusion zone. At lower crosshead speeds the
fracture of welded specimen occurs in all specimen configurations at Introduction
the fusion zone. The present experimental work reveals that the The mechanical properties of polymeric materials are often obtained
crosshead speed has a significant effect on the mechanical behavior of using a uni-axial tensile test at a constant strain rate or head motion,
both welded and un-welded specimens. and environmental temperature similar to metals and other materials.
The deformation behavior and the shape of stress-strain curve of
Keywords polymeric materials during the tensile test are important in
Butt-fusion (BF) welding, High-density polyethylene (HDPE), engineering design. The mechanical properties and the deformation
Mechanical behavior, Strain rate. mechanisms of these materials are strongly dependent on various
parameters such as: i) types of polymeric materials (PVC, PE, PP…),
Nomenclature ii) molecular characteristics (linear chain, branched molecule, cross-
Di = internal diameter [mm] linked network, and molecular orientation), iii) microstructures
Do = external diameter [mm] (amorphous and semi-crystalline polymer), iv) strain rate, v)
E = apparent modulus of elasticity [MPa] environmental temperature and vi) configuration of tensile specimen.
F = applied load [N] These parameters are vital in design considerations and assist the
Fmax. = maximum load [N] designer with reliable data relevant to practical applications that can
G = gauge length [mm] be taken into account [1].
Lo = overall length of tensile specimen [mm]
Pi = internal pressure [MPa] Effect of crosshead Speed
T = tensile specimen thickness (pipe thickness) [mm] The crosshead speed is the first parameter that governs the rates of
Ta = ambient temperature [oC] deformation. Besides, the temperature at which the material
VC.H = crosshead speed [mm/min] deformation takes place represents a second governing criterion in the
Wo = width of tensile specimen [mm] material behavior. Hence, the study of deformation behavior should be
f = weld factor [-] carried out at different crosshead speeds, VC.H, and boundary
t = pipe thickness [mm] temperatures. Several experimental researches have used strain-rate as
L = maximum elongation [mm] a characterizing parameter to quantify this behavior. Popelar [2] has
 = dimensionless quality parameter [-] studied the effect of strain rate on the mechanical properties of two
polyethylene’s gas pipe materials, designated as PE2306IX and
 = strain [%]
PE3408IV at different ambient temperatures. The tensile tests were
y = strain at yield [%]
carried out at a temperature range (23 to 77oC) and at strain rate range
(10-5 to 10-1/s) for both polyethylene gas pipe materials. The
orientation of the tested specimens has been taken in the axial pipe
direction. The results show that the yield strength decreases with
decreasing strain-rates. In addition, the yield strength decreases as the
temperature increases. Thus, the yield strength, y, can be considered
as a function of strain-rate and temperature. Tang et al. [3,4] have
studied the effect of crosshead speed (0.01 to 500 mm/min) and
temperature (25 to 150oC) on the mechanical properties of two types
of polymers (HDPE and PP). The tensile tests were performed on
Dumb-bell-shaped specimens cut from the sheets by means of a
suitable hollow punch. The results revealed that the yield strength
increases with crosshead speed up to a speed of 100 mm/min and then
decreases with crosshead speed at higher speeds. The trend of the
apparent Young’s modulus, E, and yield strength for both polymers
decreased with increasing temperature at a specific crosshead speed of
50 mm/min.
Dassari and Misra [1] have investigated the effect of strain rate
sensitivity index on different types of thermoplastic materials namely;
-i) high-density polyethylene, HDPE, -ii) homopolymer
polypropylene, PP, and -iii) high isotactic homopolymer
polypropylene, iPP. The strain rate sensitivity index parameter of the
examined polymeric materials is consistent with the micro-
mechanisms of deformation and modes of fracture. The comparison is
conducted at selected displacement rates in the range of 0.25 to 380
mm/min. The study revealed that, the strain rate sensitivity index can
give a good indication on the nature of deformation process, and helps
in the comparison of deformation resistance of different polymeric
materials. HDPE has indicated higher strain rate sensitivity compared
to PP, and iPP. At low strain rates the deformation mode of HDPE is
defined by wedge and ridges deformation. On the other hand, by
increasing strain rate the deformation mode is converted to nucleation
of deformation bands that developed into crazes. In the high strain
rate, crazing and wedging progressed, with wedging being the
dominant mode of deformation. The fracture surface of HDPE was
characterized by extensive fibrillation at low strain rates, and a
combination fibrillated fracture and craze tearing at high strain rates.
Dusunceli and Cloak [5] have investigated the influence of
manufacturing techniques on the mechanical behavior of HDPE. The
test specimens are extracted from extruded HDPE pipe material and
compression molded sheet under three different strain rates (1e-3, 1e-4,
and 1e-5 /s) at room temperature. Extruded and press-molded
specimens are produced from the same raw materials. The tensile tests
results revealed that increasing strain rate increases the mechanical
properties for both specimens. However, the maximum stress, yield
strength, and modulus of elasticity of extruded specimen are much
higher than that of the press-molded specimens. This may be due to
the different manufacturing methods result in different molecular
morphologies and molecular structure at final product.
Effect of Welding
In order to assess the quality of gas pipelines and specially fused
polyethylene pipe joints, so-called weld factor, f, is often used. The
weld factor, f, can be defined from the mechanical properties gained
from the tensile test and may be expressed as [6, 7]:
Yieldstrengthof weldedmaterial
f 
Yieldstrengthof basicmaterial
A weld factor with the magnitude of unity or greater indicates that the
joint is stronger than the parent pipe. Many of the research work have
used a weld factor, f, to assess the welding quality of the welding
joint. Tensile yield strength [8], plastic deformation energy [9],
maximum strain [10], and tensile energy to break, TEB, [11] have all
been used for this purpose. Barber and Atkinson [6] have presented
the optimum conditions for butt fusion welding to certain grades of
polyethylene, polybutene-1 and polypropylene pipes on the basis of
tensile test results. They have studied the effect of the welding bead
removal on the welding quality of plastic pipes. The removal of the
welding bead gives a clear picture in order to be obtained of weld
performance since with the welding bead left the failure in a tensile
test is always initiated by the notch between the welding bead and the
gauge length.
Chen et al. [12, 13] have studied the welding technique influence on
the mechanical properties of HDPE comparing both butt-fusion, and
Electro-fusion methods. Besides, a comparison between welded and
unwelded pipe specimens has been described. For this purpose three
different specimens were machined from unwelded HDPE, butt-fusion
joined, and electro-fusion joined pipes, respectively. The specimens
were loaded until they failed in uni-axial tensile load at a relative
humidity of 55%, an ambient temperature 30oC, and a crosshead speed
50 mm/min. For test specimens taken out off the unwelded pipe a
neck was observed. The failure occurred at different locations along
the gauge section. On the other hand, the failure of specimens joined
with butt-fusion and electro-fusion methods occurred almost at the
fusion zone. The failure behavior of butt-fusion specimens is similar
to the unwelded counterpart. This conformity is based on the
similarity of the yield strength and elongation-to-failure of both
specimen types. However, there is a marginal difference in ultimate
tensile strength of both specimen types. In case of electro-fusion
specimens, however, the stress-strain response is distinctly different.
The yield strength, ultimate tensile strength, and elongation-to-failure
indicate smaller values in comparison to butt-fusion and unwelded
counterpart.
Daigle et al. [14,15] have presented an innovative approach for testing
the quality of fusion joints for HDPE pipe material. This innovative
concept has been validated using a dimensionless quality parameter,
( =TEB/y*y), based on tensile energy to break, TEB, values
obtained from tensile tests of both the bead and joint specimens.
Statistical analysis is carried out to determine the correlation between
the quality of the bead and joint specimens. The effect of dust type,
wind velocity, and pipe wall thickness are studied. Daigle et al. [27,
50] have observed that the yield strength, y, of HDPE pipe thickness
decreases with the reduction in specimen thickness, a phenomenon
also observed by Wilson [11].
Leskovics et al. [16] have contrasted the structure and the mechanical
properties of welded and unwelded LDPE pipe material at 23oC, and -
40oC at a crosshead speed 5-mm/min. Samples for tensile tests were
cut in axial direction from welded and unwelded pipes. The results
show that, the values of yield strength and strains softening of both
welded and unwelded PE pipe are almost the same at all
environmental temperature. However, the mechanism of plastic
deformation under constant load is strongly influenced by welding.
The difference is very significant at room temperature (Ta=23oC)
compared to lower temperature where the pipe material without
welding elongates more than 100% while the samples with a weld
zone fails on average at 36% extension. The main aim of the present
study is to investigate the effect of strain rate and specimen
configuration on the mechanical behavior of welded and un-welded
pipes made from HDPE. The results are combined and illustrated in a
set of limit curves.

Experimental Work

Material
The investigated material is the commercially available semi-
crystalline thermoplastic HDPE (PE 100). It is used to produce pipes
used for gas and water transmission and pipelines. The investigated
pipes are manufactured in PPP1. Table 1 shows the main geometrical
specifications of the pipes; outer diameter, Do, thickness, T, internal a. Type I [18]
working pressure, Pi, and standard dimension ratio, SDR. All the pipe
dimensions and working internal pressure (Pi) according to ASTM-
D2122 standard [17].

Table 1 Pipe Specifications

Pi Do T SDR
[MPa] [mm] [mm] [-]
1.6 90 8.2 (10) 11
1.6 315 28.8 )30( 11
() Actual thickness
b. Type II [18]
Tensile Test Specimen
The tensile test specimens are prepared by cutting several slabs from
the pipe in longitudinal direction. The slabs are cut as complete
segments of the pipe with its original whole thickness as shown in Fig.
1. Care has been taken to ensure that all specimens are prepared in
exactly the same way to have exactly identical dimensions. The shape
of tensile test specimen depends mainly on the thickness. Since the
pipe thickness is greater than 12.7 mm, the standard test specimen
used is shown in Fig. 2.a, T=30mm, and gauge length, G =25mm
(Type I). For thicknesses lower than 12.7 mm the standard test
specimen is used as shown in Fig. 2.b, BS 2782-98 [18], T=10mm,
and G =25 mm (Type II). In Fig. 2.c for tensile test specimen T=10 c. Type III [19]
mm, and G= 50 mm (Type III) [19]. The standard welded tensile test
specimens are used according to international standard specification Fig. 2 Tensile test specimen for thick 30, and 10 mm
on tensile testing for plastics DIN 53455-81 [20]. Tensile specimens
are cut across the welded region in axial or longitudinal direction as
illustrated in Fig. 3. These specimens are machined specifically to
have the fused joint in the middle of the gauge length according to
Ref. [20]. The test procedure is based on carrying the test without
removal of the welding bead.

Longitudinal Longitudinal
Direction Longitudinal
Direction
Direction
c. Welded tensile test b. Welded tensile test a. Welded tensile test
specimen for thick 10 mm specimen for thick 10 mm specimen for thick 30 mm
and gauge length 50 mm and gauge length 25 mm and gauge length 20 mm

Fig. 3 Preparation of welded tensile test specimen

Longitudinal Longitudinal
The effect of specimen geometry, and loading rate of welded and un-
Longitudinal
Direction Direction
Direction
welded HDPE were examined at room temperature and at crosshead
speed, VC.H, ranging from 5 to 500 mm/min. For the sake of accuracy
c. Unwelded tensile test b. Unwelded tensile test a. Unwelded tensile test
specimen for thick 10 mm specimen for thick 10 mm specimen for thick 30 mm five specimens are prepared for testing at every test speed. All tests
and gauge length 50 mm and gauge length 25 mm and gauge length 20 mm are performed at room temperature (Ta = 23oC). The experimental
input data are summarized in Table 2. A computerized Lloyd
Fig. 1 Preparation of unwelded tensile test specimen Universal tensile testing machine is used to carry out all tensile tests.
The maximum load is Fmax = 50 kN, and a maximum crosshead speed,
VC.H =500mm/min.

1
Pipes & Plastic Products Company (PPP) in the 10th of Ramadan City-Egypt
 Table 2 Experimental programs of the tensile tests case of the highest compared to the lowest crosshead speed. From Fig.
Crosshead Speed Gauge Length Pipe Thickness External Diameter 4 it can be seen that at a crosshead speed range, VC.H = 10-100
VC.H [mm/min] G [mm] T [mm] Do (mm) mm/min, the cold drawing region is relatively larger compared with
5-500 25,50 10 90 other crosshead speeds. It is evident that the behavior of stress-strain
10-500 20 30 315
curve and in turn the mechanical properties change are significantly
affected by the crosshead speed.
Results and Discussion
Figure 5 illustrates the stress-strain relationship for welded HDPE for
Specimen Configuration I-BS 2782 specimens cut in the longitudinal direction at different crosshead
The study of the specimen geometry influence under practice-near speeds, VC.H =10-500 mm/min. The specimen thickness is taken as
circumstances on the mechanical properties of the used pipelines T=30 mm, and gauge length, G = 20 mm. To obtain an accurate
material represents an essential objective to provide the designers with picture of the mechanical properties five test specimens have been cut
the required design data. The behavior of tensile engineering stress– at different locations from the welded HDPE pipe. The yield strength,
strain curves for high-density polyethylene, HDPE, pipe materials at y  22.8 MPa at a crosshead speed, VC.H = 10 mm/min and y  27.6
different crosshead speeds, VC.H = 10-500 mm/min show the five MPa at VC.H = 500 mm/min. This means that the percentage increase
characteristic intervals of polyethylene deformation: - i) elastic region, in the yield strength is  21 % in case of the highest compared to the
-ii) yielding (intrinsic, extrinsic), -iii) strain softening, -iv) cold lowest crosshead speed. From Fig. 4 and 5 it can be seen that the yield
drawing, and -v) fracture. strength, and apparent Young’s modulus for both welded and un-
welded specimen increase with the increase of crosshead speed.
Figure 4 illustrates the typical engineering tensile stress-strain curves
for un-welded HDPE longitudinal extrusion specimens, Type I, at 30
crosshead speeds, VC.H =10-500 mm/min for a specimen thickness, Configuration Type
28 I: T=30mm, G=20mm 10 [mm/min]
T=30 mm, and gauge length, G=20 mm. For the sake of accuracy five 26 Welded 50 [mm/min]
test specimens have been cut at different locations from the HDPE 24 100 [mm/min]
200 [mm/min]
pipe. The test has been carried out on all specimens to predict average Stress ,  [MPa]
22 300 [mm/min]
values of the mechanical properties for un-welded HDPE pipe 20 400 [mm/min]
500 [mm/min]
material. 18
16
30 14
28 Configuration Type 10 [mm/min] 12
I: T=30mm, G=20mm 50 [mm/min]
26 Unwelded 100 [mm/min] 10
24 200 [mm/min] 8
300 [mm/min]
6
Stress ,  [MPa]

22 400 [mm/min]
20 500 [mm/min] 4
18 2
16 0
14 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300
12 Strain,  [%]
10
8 Fig. 5 Engineering stress-strain diagram for
6 welded specimen, type I
4
2 The plastic deformation region is larger in case of un-welded
0 specimens compared with the welded specimens at all crosshead
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 speeds. At a crosshead speed, VC.H = 10 mm/min the strain to failure,
Strain,  [%] fail, reaches a value of 740% for un-welded specimen. On the other
hand, the corresponding strain to failure, fail, for a welded specimen is
Fig. 4 Engineering stress-strain diagram for about  295 %. The percentage change in the strain to failure between
un-welded specimen, type I welded and un-welded is about  60 %. The cold drawing region is
much larger at lower crosshead speeds for un-welded compared with
From the stress-strain curve, Fig. 4, it is evident that both yield welded specimens. The fracture of unwelded pipe specimens is shown
strength, y, and apparent modulus of elasticity, E, increase with in Fig. 6a for crosshead speed range, VC.H = 10-500 mm/min, with a
increasing crosshead speed, VC.H. On the other hand, the percentage of specimen thickness, T = 30 mm, and gauge length, G = 20 mm. The
strain to failure, fail, decreases with increasing crosshead speed. This fracture is distinguished by a necking phenomenon before failure.
is due the decrease of the tensile energy to break, TEB (modulus of From Fig. 6a it can be seen that the location of necking changes from
toughness) of the material. The yield strength at a crosshead speed, one crosshead speed to another. In case of welded pipe specimens the
VC.H =10 mm/min is found to be y  23MPa. However, at a crosshead fracture occurs in the vicinity of the fusion zone for all crosshead
speed, VC.H =500 mm/min the yield strength is y  29MPa. This speeds as shown in Fig. 6b.
means that the percentage increase in the yield strength is  24 % in
 increase in the yield strength is about  59 % in case of the highest
compared to the lowest crosshead speed. From Fig. 7 and 8 it can be
10 mm/min
seen that the yield strength, y, and apparent Young’s modulus, E, for
both welded and unwelded specimen increase with the increase of
crosshead speed.
50 mm/min

100 mm/min
Configuration Type
II: T=10mm, G=25mm

,  [MPa]
Unwelded

200 mm/min

300 mm/min

400 mm/min

500 mm/min

,  [%]
(a) (b)
Fig. 7 Engineering stress-strain diagram for unwelded specimen,
Fig. 6 Failure shape at various crosshead speed range (10-500 type II
mm/min) for a) un-welded specimen b) welded, and, type I

Specimen Configuration II – BS 2782

Figure 7 illustrates the typical tensile stress-strain curves for unwelded
HDPE longitudinal extrusion specimens, type II, at crosshead speeds,
VC.H = 5-500 mm/min, for T=10 mm, and G = 25 mm. From the Configuration Type
stress-strain curve, Fig. 7, it is evident that both yield strength, y and II: T=10mm, G=25mm
,  [MPa]

Welded
apparent Young’s modulus, E, increase with increasing crosshead
speed, VC.H. On the other hand, the percentage of strain at failure, fail,
decreases with increasing crosshead speed. The yield strength, y, at a
crosshead speed, VC.H =5 mm/min is found to be y  19.2 MPa.
However, at a crosshead speed, VC.H =500 mm/min the yield strength,
y, is  27.7 MPa. This means that the percentage increase in the yield
strength is about  44 % in case of highest compared to the lowest
crosshead speed. From Fig. 7 it can be seen that at a crosshead speed
range, VC.H = 5-100 mm/min, the cold drawing region is relatively
larger compared with other crosshead speeds. It is evident that the
behavior of the stress-strain curve and in turn the mechanical
properties change are significantly affected by the crosshead speed. At
crosshead speeds, VC.H = 5 and 10 mm/min the strain hardening is a
relatively large compared with other speeds. At a crosshead speeds, ,  [%]
VC.H = 5, and 500 mm/min the percentage of strain to failure, fail, is 
Fig. 8 Engineering stress-strain diagram for welded specimen,
1108 %, and  242% respectively. The percentage decrease in fail
type II
between VC.H= 5 and 500 mm/min is about 78%.
At a crosshead speed, VC.H = 5 mm/min the strain to failure reaches a
Figure 8 shows the stress-strain curves for welded HDPE for
value of fail  1108 % for unwelded specimen. On the other hand the
specimens cut in longitudinal direction at different crosshead speeds,
corresponding strain to failure, fail, for a welded specimen is about 
VC.H = 5-500 mm/min. The specimen thickness is taken as T =10 mm,
527%. This means that the percentage change in the strain to failure
and gauge length, G = 25 mm. The yield strength, y, is about  16.8
between welded and unwelded specimen is about  53 %. The cold
MPa at a crosshead speed, VC.H = 5 mm/min, and y  26.71 MPa at a
drawing region is much larger at lower crosshead speeds for unwelded
crosshead speed, VC.H = 500mm/min. This means that the percentage
compared with welded specimens. Figures 9a,b illustrate the fracture
shape of unwelded and welded tensile specimens with T =10 mm, and testing machine (422 mm) doesn’t allow the drawing of the specimen
G = 25 mm at crosshead speeds range, VC.H = 5-500 mm/min, until breakage. Thus, the maximum measurable strain is ≈ 845%.
respectively. In the case of welded specimens, the fracture occurs at
crosshead speeds, VC.H = 5-100 mm/min, in the vicinity of the weld
fusion zone. This may be referred to the existing necking at the
vicinity of the weld bead. At higher crosshead speeds, VC.H = 200-500
mm/min the failure takes place a little bit away from the fusion zone
but close to the ligament gauge length of the specimen. This indicates

,  [MPa]
a higher strength of the welded zone compared to the raw material at
higher crosshead speed ≥200 mm/min.

5 mm/min

10 mm/min
Configuration Type
50 mm/min III: T=10mm, G=50mm
Unwelded
100 mm/min

200 mm/min

300 mm/min
,  [%]
400 mm/min
Fig. 10 Engineering stress-strain diagram for unwelded specimen,
500 mm/min
type III

(a) From Fig. 10 it is evident that both yield strength, y, and apparent
modulus of elasticity, E, increase monotonically with increasing
5 mm/min crosshead speed, VC.H. The yield strength, y, is  19.6 and  27.2
MPa at crosshead speeds, VC.H = 5 and 500 mm/min, respectively.
10 mm/min
This means that at higher crosshead speeds the yield strength increases
by  39 %. If a comparison is done between this specific unwelded
geometry III with the other configurations I, and II, it is can be seen
50 mm/min that at all crosshead speed range, the cold drawing region is relatively
longer in case of configuration III.
100 mm/min

200 mm/min

300 mm/min
,  [MPa]

400 mm/min

500 mm/min
(b)
Fig. 9 Failure shape at various crosshead speed range (5-500 Configuration Type
III: T=10mm, G=50mm
mm/min) for a)un-welded specimen b) welded, and, type II Welded

Specimen Configuration III –ASTM D 638

A sufficient number of test specimens have been prepared according
the standards ASTM – D638 to underlie the experimental tests. Figure
10 illustrates the typical engineering tensile stress-strain curves for
HDPE unwelded longitudinal extrusion specimens, type III, at the
crosshead speeds, VC.H =5-500 mm/min, with T = 10 mm, and G = 50
mm. Since at all crosshead speeds the gauge length of specimens, type
III, is relatively long (G=50mm), the maximum stroke of the tensile
,  [%]
Fig. 11 Engineering stress-strain diagram for welded specimen,
type III
Figure 11 shows typical tensile stress-strain curves for welded HDPE
longitudinal extrusion specimens at all crosshead speed range, VC.H
=5-500 mm/min, with a thickness, T= 10 mm, and gauge length, G =
50 mm. The yield strength is y 18.4 and y  25.9 MPa, at
crosshead speeds, VC.H = 5 and 500 mm/min, respectively. This means
that in the case of welded specimens the yield strength increases by
about  41% compared with unwelded specimens. The percentage
strain to failure is fail.  346 %, and  218%, at crosshead speeds,
VC.H = 5 and 500 mm/min, respectively. This means that welded
specimens indicate a percentage reduction in the strain to failure of 
37% compared to unwelded specimens.
Figures12a,b show, respectively, the shape of unwelded and welded
tensile specimens with T = 10 mm thick, and G = 50 mm at a
crosshead speed range, VC.H =5-500 mm/min. From Fig.12a it is
evident that for unwelded specimen the tensile test specimen pulled to
≈ 845% strain without fracture. Welded specimens, however, indicate
as shown in Fig. 12b that the fracture occurs, at all crosshead speeds,
VC.H = 5-300 mm/min, in the vicinity of the weld fusion zone. This
may be referred to the existing notch at the vicinity of the weld bead.
At higher crosshead speeds, VC.H = 400-500 mm/min the failure takes
place a little bit away from the fusion zone but close to the ligament
gauge length of the specimen. This indicates a higher strength of the
welded zone compared to the raw material at higher crosshead speed ≥
300 mm/min.
5 mm/min
10 mm/min
50 mm/min
100 mm/min
200 mm/min
300 mm/min
400 mm/min
(a) 500 mm/min
5 mm/min
10 mm/min
50 mm/min
100 mm/min
200 mm/min
300 mm/min
400 mm/min
500 mm/min
(b)
Fig. 12 Elongation shape at various crosshead speed range (5-500
mm/min) for a) un-welded, and b) welded specimen, type III
Effect of Crosshead Speed on the Mechanical Properties
The deformation mechanisms and the mechanical properties of HDPE
pipe material are strain rate dependent. Figure 13 illustrates the
predicted yield strength values as a function of the crosshead speed for
both welded and un-welded pipe specimens with variable specimen
configurations; (T=10, 30 mm, G = 20, 25, and 50mm). For all welded
and un-welded specimen configurations the yield strength, y,
increases with the increase in the crosshead speed. At lower crosshead
speeds the percentage deviation in the yield strength is relatively
small, while at higher speeds the percentage deviation increases
monotonically as the crosshead speed increases. At lower crosshead
speeds e.g. VC.H = 10 mm/min the percentage deviation in the yield
strength between un-welded specimens of type I and welded of type
III is  17 % and  12 % at VC.H = 10 and 500 mm/min, respectively.
As can be seen from Fig. 13 it is clear that the yield strength has got
approximately a similar trend for both welded specimen of type I and
un-welded specimen of type II at VC.H = 400 to 500 mm/min. On the
other hand at VC.H = 250 to 400 mm/min the same trend of y is
observed between both welded specimen of type II and un-welded
specimen of type III.
30
29
28
Yield Strength, y [MPa]
27
26
25
24 Unwelded - Type I
23 Welded - Type I
Unwelded - Type II
22 Welded - Type II
Unwelded - Type III
21 Welded - Type III
20 Power (Unwelded - Type I)
Configuration Types Power (Welded - Type I)
19 I: T=30mm, G=20mm Power (Unwelded - Type II)
II: T=10mm, G=25mm
18 III: T=10mm, G=50mm
Power (Welded - Type II)
Power (Unwelded - Type III)
17 Power (Welded - Type III)
16
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550
Crosshead Speed , VC.H [mm/min]
Fig. 13 Yield strength as a function of crosshead speed for
welded and un-welded specimen configurations, types I, II, and III
Figure 14 shows the apparent modulus of elasticity, E as a function of
the crosshead speed for both welded and un-welded specimens with
variable configurations (T=10, 30mm, G = 20, 25, and 50mm). For all
welded and un-welded specimen configurations the apparent modulus
of elasticity, E, increases with increasing crosshead speed. Un-welded
specimen of type III indicates a higher apparent modulus of elasticity
at all crosshead speed compared with all other configurations (I, and
II). As can be seen from Fig.14 it is clear that the apparent modulus of
elasticity has got approximately a similar trend for both welded, and
un-welded specimens of type I at VC.H ranging from 50 to 500
mm/min. On the other hand, welded specimens of type I indicate a
lower modulus of elasticity at all crosshead speeds.
This means that the effect of crosshead speed on the yield strength,
and apparent modulus of elasticity is more pronounced at all
crosshead speeds for both welded and un-welded specimen; a
phenomenon also reported by Ref. [21,22]. Figure 15 shows the
apparent percentage of strain as a function in the crosshead speed,
VC.H, for different welded and un-welded specimen configurations. It
can be stated that the apparent percentage of strain decreases with
increasing crosshead speed for both welded and un-welded specimens,
respectively. The effect of crosshead speed on the percentage of strain
is more evident at lower speeds. Un-welded specimen of type II has stress-strain curves for unwelded tensile test specimen for different
got a higher apparent percentage strain at all crosshead speeds specimen configurations types (I (T=30mm, G=20mm), II (T=10mm,
compared with other configurations. On the other hand, the welded G=25mm), and III (T=10mm, G=50mm)) and different crosshead
specimen of type I indicates a lower percentage of strain at all speeds (VC.H = 10, 100, and 500) respectively.
crosshead speeds.

600
550
Apparent Modulus of Elasticity, E [MPa]

,  [MPa]
500
Unwelded - Type I
450 Welded - Type I
Unwelded - Type II
400 Welded - Type II
Configuration Types
Unwelded - Type III
350 I: T=30mm, G=20mm
Welded - Type III
II: T=10mm, G=25mm
300 III: T=10mm, G=50mm Power (Unwelded - Type I)
Power (Welded - Type I)
250 Power (Unwelded - Type II)
Power (Welded - Type II)
200 Power (Unwelded - Type III)
Power (Welded - Type III)
150
100
50
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000
,  [%]
Crosshead speed, VC.H [mm/min]

Fig. 14 Apparent modulus of elasticity as a function of crosshead Fig. 16 Engineering stress-strain diagram for unwelded specimens
speed for welded and un-welded specimen configurations, types I, configurations, types I, II, and III at VC.H = 10 mm/min
II, and II
28
Type I: T=30mm, G=20mm
1200 26 Type II: T=10mm, G=25mm
1100 Unwelded - Type I 24 Type III: T=10mm, G=50mm
Configuration Types
Strain to Failure, fail [%]

Welded - Type I
1000 I: T=30mm, G=20mm Unwelded - Type II 22
Stress ,  [MPa]

II: T=10mm, G=25mm

900 III: T=10mm, G=50mm
Welded - Type II 20
Welded - Type III
800 Power (Unwelded - Type I) 18
Power (Welded - Type I)
700 Power (Unwelded - Type II)
16
600 Power (Welded - Type II) 14
Power (Welded - Type III)
500 12
400 10
300 8
200 6
100 4
0 2
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
Crosshead Speed , VC.H [mm/min] Strain ,  [%]

Fig. 17 Engineering stress-strain diagram for unwelded specimens

Fig. 15 Percentage of strain as a function of crosshead speed for
welded and un-welded specimen configurations, types I , II, and
III
Effect of specimen configuration on the Mechanical
Properties
In this section on the influence of the specimen configuration of the
test specimens on the mechanical properties for welded and unwelded
specimens are discussed. It can be stated that the specimen
configuration has an obvious effect on the behavior of stress-strain
curve of HDPE pipe material. Figures 16 to 18 show the engineering
configurations, types I, II, and III, at VC.H = 100 mm/min
From these curves, it is evident that the specimen configuration of
type I have a higher yield strength and lower stiffness compared with
types II, and III. The percentage increase in yield strength, y, at VC.H
= 10 mm/min is equal  15%. On the other hand, at VC.H = 500
mm/min the percentage increase from type III to I is about  6%.
From this percentage change it can be stated that as the crosshead
speed increases the yield strength difference decreases. The specimen
stiffness of type I configuration increase by increasing crosshead
speeds. While the specimen of type III has a lower yield stress, and
largest stiffness at all crosshead speeds. From this Figs. 16 to 18 it can stated that the geometric configuration has a large influence on the
be shown that the drawing process is significantly affected by behavior of the stress strain curve for both welded and un-welded pipe
specimen configuration. The specimen configuration of type III specimen configurations.
indicates a higher cold drawing region at all crosshead speeds
compared with other configurations. This indicated the significance of
the gauge length, G on the behavior of stress-strain curve. At VC.H =
10mm/min the percentage of strain in case of type II, and III is larger
than that to type I cmf. Fig.16. On the other hand, at VC.H = 500
mm/min the specimen configuration of type III indicates the largest

,  [MPa]
value of percentage strain.
,  [MPa]

,  [%]
Fig. 19 Engineering stress-strain diagram for welded specimens
configurations, types I, II, and III, at VC.H = 10 mm/min

,  [%]

Fig. 18 Engineering stress-strain diagram for unwelded specimens

configurations, types I, II, and III, at VC.H = 500 mm/min
,  [MPa]

Figures 19 to 21 show the engineering stress-strain curve for welded

tensile test specimens of different configuration namely I: (T=30mm.
G=25mm), II: (T=10mm, G= 25 mm), and III: (T=10mm, G=50mm)
at 3 different crosshead speeds (10, 100, and 500mm/min,
respectively). From these curves, it is evident that the behavior of type
I in case of welded specimen is similar to the corresponding unwelded
specimen. At all crosshead speeds the specimen configuration of type
I exhibited a higher yield strength and lower stiffness compared to
types II, and III. The percentage of strain of type I, is lower at
crosshead speeds, VC.H. = 10, and 100 mm/min compared with type II,
and III at the same crosshead speeds. The percentage increase in the
yield strength, y, for welded specimen at VC.H = 10 mm/min is 
14%. On the other hand, at VC.H = 500 mm/min the percentage
increase in yield strength, y, for configuration types III to I is  7%. ,  [%]
It can be stated that as the crosshead speed increases the yield strength Fig. 20 Engineering stress-strain diagram for welded specimens
difference decreases. The specimen of type III indicates a shorter cold configurations, types I, II, and III, at VC.H = 100 mm/min
drawing region at all crosshead speeds compared to with other
configurations. On the other hand, the specimen of type II Conclusions
configuration undergoes a relatively longer drawing process at Based on the present experimental results of tested HDPE pipes under
crosshead speeds 10, and 100 mm/min. At crosshead speed, VC.H= 500 tensile test, some conclusions were drawn as follows:
mm/min the specimen of type III configuration indicates a longer  Increasing the crosshead speed causes an increase in the apparent
drawing process. The elastic part of the - curve for specimen of type modulus of elasticity and yield strength.
III shows the same trend for unwelded specimen at all crosshead  The un-welded specimens indicate higher mechanical properties
speeds. It is clear that the yield strength of welded and unwelded than welded specimen at all crosshead speeds.
HDPE pipe decreases with the decrease in specimen thickness, a  The percentage strain to failure decreases with increasing
phenomenon also observed by Refs. [11,14]. Therefore, it can be crosshead speed for both welded, and un-welded specimen.

,  [MPa]
,  [%]
Fig. 21 Engineering stress-strain diagram for welded specimens
configurations, types I, II, and III, at VC.H = 500 mm/min
 The effect of geometric parameters on the mechanical properties is
more pronounced at higher specimen thickness and longer gauge
length.
 The apparent modulus of elasticity, and percentage strain to
failure, decrease with increasing specimen thickness.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank (the late) Prof. Lotfi A. Abdel- Latif,
formerly Emeritus Professor of Mechanical Design Department
Faculty of Engineering Mataria, Helwan University, Cairo-Egypt, for
his helpful advice in the analysis of the experimental results and for
careful reading and revision of this manuscript. The authors gratefully
acknowledge the stuff in Plastic Pipe Product Company (PPP) in the
10th of Ramadan city, and I would like to express my deep thanks and
gratitude to Dr. Ahmed Elrazzaz for financial support of this
research.
References
[1] Dasari, A., and Misra, R.D.K., "On the Strain Rate Sensitivity of
High Density Polyethylene and Polypropylenes" Materials
Science and Engineering A, 2003, Vol. 358, pp. 356 – 371.
[2] Popelar, C.F., “Characterization of Mechanical Properties for
Polyethylene Gas Pipe Materials” M.Sc. Thesis, Graduate School
of the Ohio State University, 1989.
[3] Greco, R., Muccarello, G., Ragosta, G., and Martuscell, E.,
“Properties of Polyethylene–Propylene Blends Part 1 Thermal
Swelling and Mechanical Characterization of Extruded
Unoriented Specimens” Journal of Materials Science, 1980, Vol.
15, pp. 845–853.
[4] Tang, M., Greco, R., Ragosta, G., and Cimmino, S., “Properties of
Polyethylene-Propylene Blends Part 3 Mechanical Characteriz-
ation of Ultradrawn Fibres” Journal of Materials Science, 1983,
Vol. 18, No. 4, pp. 1031–1038.
[5] Dusunceli, N., and Colak, O. U., “The Effects of Manufacturing
Techniques on Viscoelastic and Viscoplastic Behavior of High
Density Polyethylene (HDPE)” Materials and Design, 2008, Vol.
29, pp. 1117–1124.
View publication stats
[6] Barber, P., and Atkinson, J.R., “The Use of Tensile Tests to
Determine the Optimum Conditions for Butt Fusion Welding
Certain Grades of Polyethylene, Polybutene–1 and Polypropylene
Pipes” Journal of Materials Science, 1974, Vol. 9, pp. 1456–1466
[7] Menges, G., and Zohren, J. Plastverarbeiter 1976, Vol. 18, pp. 165
[8] Bowman, J., “Butt Fusion Joining Polyethylene Pipes and
Assessing the Resultant Joint Strength” Welding and Metal
Fabrication, 1996, Vol. 64, No. 2, pp. 62– 65.
[9] Nishimura, H., and Narisawa, I., “Evaluation of Impact Properties
of Butt Fusion–Jointed Medium–Density Polyethylene Pipes for
Gas Distribution” Polymer, 1991, Vol. 32, No.12, pp. 2199 – 2204
[10] Decourcy, D.R., and Atkinson, J.R., “The Use of Tensile Tests to
Determine the Optimum Conditions for Butt Welding
Polyethylene Pipes of Different Melt Flow Index” Journal of
Materials Science, 1977, Vol. 12, pp. 1535–1551.
[11] Wilson, K.A., “Verification of Butt Fusion Weld Quality in Large
Diameter PE100 Water Pipes” Proc. 9th International Conference
on Plastics Pipes” 18-21 September 1995, Edinburgh, UK, Heriot
-Watt University, pp. 168–180.
[12] Chen, H., Scavuzzo, R. J., and Srivatsan, T. S., "Influence of
Joining on the Tensile Behavior of High Density Polyethylene
Pipe" Journal of Materials Science, 1997, Vol. 16, pp. 897– 898.
[13] Chen, H., Scavuzzo, R. J., and Srivatsan, T. S., "Influence of
Joining on the Fatigue and Fracture Behavior of High Density
Polyethylene Pipe" Journal of Materials Science and
Performance, August 1997, Vol. 6, No. 4, pp. 473– 480.
[14] Daigle, L., Zhao, J.Q., and Beaulieu, D., "Innovative Approach to
Testing the Quality of Fusion Joints", Plastics, Rubber and
Composites, 2003, Vol. 32, No. 8/9, pp. 385–395.
[15] Zhao, J.Q., Daigle, L., and Beaulieu, D., "Effect of Joint
Contamination on the Quality of Butt–Fused High–Density
Polyethylene (HDPE) Pipe Joints", Canadian Journal of Civil
Engineering, 2002, Vol. 29, pp. 787–798.
[16] Leskovics, K., Kollar, M., and Barczy, P., "A Study of Structure
and Mechanical Properties of Welded Joints in Polyethylene
Pipes" Materials Science and Engineering A, 2006, Vol. 419,
pp. 138–143.
[17]ASTM Standard D2122–98(2010), “Standard Test Method for
Determining Dimensions of Thermoplastic Pipe and Fittings”
Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Part 08.04, Plastic Pipe and
Building Products
[18] British Standard, 1998, “Methods of Testing Plastics” BS 2782.
[19] ASTM Standard D638M–10, “Standard Test Method for Tensile
Properties of Plastics (Metric)” Annual Book of ASTM Standards,
Part 08.01, Plastics-General Test Method; pp. 59 – 67.
[20] DIN 53455– 1981, “Testing of Plastics –Tensile Test” pp. 1–7.
[21] Arridge, R.G.C., “Mechanics of Polymers” London: Clarendon
Press, 1975
[22] Che, M., Grellmann, W., and Seidler, S., “Crack Resistance
Behavior of Polyvinyl Chloride” Journal of Applied Polymer
Science, USA, May 1997, Vol. 64, No. 6, pp. 1079 –1090.