Design of Reinforced Concrete Pipe

Author(s): R. E. Morris, Jr.

Source: Journal (Water Pollution Control Federation) , Apr., 1966, Vol. 38, No. 4 (Apr.,
1966), pp. 531-543
Published by: Wiley

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/25035529

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Wiley is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal (Water
Pollution Control Federation)

This content downloaded from

61.19.201.8 on Tue, 28 Sep 2021 07:30:54 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 DESIGN OF REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE
R. E. Morris, Jr.

The design of a cylindrical structure IV and V of ASTM C-76 Specifications

loaded internally is a relatively simple (1).
matter, since ring tension is the prin
cipal stress involved. When the cyl Loads and Supporting Strength of
inder is laid horizontally underground Rigid Pipe
and is subjected to earth loadings, the A full discussion of the loads on pipe
problem is magnified. A nonhomo and their supporting strength is not
geneous structure such as reinforced within the scope of this paper, but the
concrete pipe adds other problems of assumption will be made that the loads
analysis. An exact theoretical analy as determined by the use of theories
sis is still not possible, but a fairly developed by Marston (2) early in this
accurate determination of steel require century and further expanded by
ments and concrete strength can be Spangler (3) (4), Schlick(5) (6), and
made by three general methods. One others are basically accurate. The diffi
method is by "trial and error'' and culty is the selection of the proper
testing to determine the steel and con coefficients based on the degrees of
crete requirements. Another method flexibility of the foundation and the
consists of a theoretical analysis in type and weight of soil. A variety
which the laws of mechanics are used of loads must be taken into considera
to determine the values of stresses at tion?earth load, supporting strength
critical points in the pipe. - It is real of the foundation, pipe and water
ized that this approach is only as good weight, impact loads, internal pressure
as the assumptions on which it is based. (if a pressure pipe) and induced
The third system is a combination of stresses (if prestressed). Thorough dis
both methods. The design of rein cussions of this subject are available
forced concrete pipe usually is based elsewhere (7) (8).
on the load required to produce a 0.01
in. (0.025-cm) crack under a 3-edge Early Design
bearing load and the load to cause Early in 1900, about the same time
ultimate failure. The loading is ap that Marston began his studies of loads
plied by a testing machine as a concen on pipe, Talbot (9) began work on
trated test load along the line of the determining the stresses developed
crown of the pipe and the reaction is within a thin homogeneous pipe ring
provided by two closely spaced line due to loads applied horizontally.
loads at the invert. A method of de Talbot considered a pipe ring with a
sign of large-diameter reinforced con vertical load distributed uniformly
crete pipe is necessary since steel re over the horizontal projection of the
quirements are not listed in Classes ring and supported uniformly over 180
deg of the section. He considered w,
B. E. Morris, Jr. is Assistant Superintend the unit load, as being the load per
ent, Dallas City Water Works, Dallas, Texas. lineal unit of horizontal width for a
The paper was presented at the 38th
Annual Conference of the Water Pollution ring one unit long and R as being the
Control Federation, Atlantic City, N. J., Oct. mean radius of the ring (Figure 1?a,
10-14, 1965. b, and c).
531

This content downloaded from

61.19.201.8 on Tue, 28 Sep 2021 07:30:54 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
532
FIGURE 1.?Talbot ring analysis with uniform load at top and bottom
The moment at A or B easily can be
shown to be
-Ma = Mb = YqWDJ.1
where Dm is the mean diameter and
the minus sign indicates tension on
the outside face. A more complete
derivation of Talbot's formula may
be found elsewhere (10).
Equation 1 can be expressed:
M = j?WDm.2
where W, being equal to wDm, is the
total load on a ring of unit length.
This development, combined with
Marston 's theory of earth loads, gave
engineers their first tools to make a
theoretical analysis of the actual stress
in a pipe. Up to this time the railroad
specification for reinforced concrete
pipe had been based strictly on a
trial-and-error system.
Peckworth (10) reports that the
Joint Concrete Culvert Pipe Commit
tee formed in 1919 consisted of rep
resentatives of ASTM, the Bureau of
Public Roads, ASCE, AASHO, AREA,
ACI, and the American Concrete Pipe
Association. The Joint Committee pub
lished its first report in 1926, and in
this report the Talbot Formula was
used to determine steel requirements.
Many engineers felt that the steel re
quirements were too great, particu
larly in the smaller-size pipe.
This content downloaded from
61.19.201.8 on Tue, 28 Sep 2021 07:30:54 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
JOURNAL WPCF April 1966
Hcos0
IwRcos^
"# 4V
\ vf!
(b) (C)
of pipe.
The Talbot Formula as used was in
the form
0M25wDm2 =f8A8jd.3
where 0.0625 wDm2 = moment as de
rived by Talbot (9) (Equation 1) ; /,
= working stress of steel reinforce
ment, psi ; As = area of steel in each
cage, sq in. ; w = unit load per lineal
unit of horizontal width for a ring one
unit long ; Dm = mean diameter of the
ring, in units compatible with w; j =
ratio of the lever arm of the resistant
couple to d; and d = distance from ten
sile reinforcement to the face of the
compression concrete, in.
Equation 3 was derived from the
relationship of stresses in a simple
beam subject to bending whereby
M = fsAsjd.
Three inconsistencies are readily ap
parent. First, if w is in load per
square foot as the older tables for re
inforcement indicated, then the first Dm
of Dm2 would be in feet to obtain load
per linear foot of pipe, and the second
Dm would be in inches to obtain a
moment in inch-pounds. The first part
of the equation should have been in
the form of 0.0625 WDm (Equation 2)
to eliminate the possibility of erroneous
usage.
The second inconsistency is the use
of a formula based on a uniform load
on top of the pipe with a uniform
equal load of 180 deg under the pipe
 Vol. 38, No. 4 CONCRETE PIPE DESIGN 533
TABLE I.?Coefficients for Moment and
Thrust Caused by Earth Loading

*-H7 Coefficient
Load Portion
of Pipe (deg)
Moment Thrust

We, earth 60 +0.072

load ; uniform 75 +0.071
load, 180 deg 90 +0.069
on top of pipe 120 +0.066
side 60 -0.073
75 -0.072
90 -0.070
120 -0.066
invert 60 +0.094
75 +0.086
90 +0.078
FIGURE 2.?Paris ring analysis for any 120 +0.069
balanced load supported as a point.
W8) pipe crown 60 +0.037
weight 75 +0.035
to determine a steel area for pipe that 90 +0.033
was to be tested under three-edge bear 120 +0.030
side 60 -0.042
ing loads. 75 -0.041
The third inconsistency is the fail 90 -0.039
ure to take the weight of the pipe into 120 -0.035
consideration. invert 60 +0.067
The first inconsistency was rectified
75 +0.058
90 +0.051
by the adoption of the so-called Modi 120 +0.041
fied Talbot Formula in the Second Re
port of the Joint Committee as pub Ww, water 60 +0.037
lished in 1928. It was in this form : weight, pipe 75 +0.035
full 90 +0.033
0.0625wP(P + d)
120 +0.030
= fsAsjd-4 side 60 -0.042
12 75 -0.041
90 -0.039
where w = load per square foot top 120 -0.035
and bottom of pipe, and D = internal invert 60 +0.067
75 +0.058
diameter, in. 90 +0.051
120 +0.041
Actually, Equations 3 and 4 will
give approximately the same answer Hhj earth crown any 0 -0.125
for small pipe if the Talbot Formula load, uniform side any 6 +0.125
is used properly. Peckworth (10) fur load, 180 deg, invert any 0 -0.125
on sides
ther reports that in 1930 the steel areas
in the old ASTM C-75 (11) and ASTM
C-76 (12) were determined by using Note: Sign convention is M positive on
the so-called Modified Talbot Formula inside face, N positive in compression.

and were published as ASTM Stand

ards. Two lines of steel of equal area
were used in each specification for
pipe size 36 in. (91 cm) in diameter
and larger. A working stress for cold
drawn steel wire (13) of 27,500 psi
(1,933 kg/sq cm) was used to deter
mine the steel requirements for these

This content downloaded from

61.19.201.8 on Tue, 28 Sep 2021 07:30:54 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 534 JOURNAL WPCF April 1966
Standards, which remained in use forand shear at any point. A pipe uni
a quarter of a century. However, both
formly loaded and supported on a line
was assumed. One half the circle was
the original and modified formulas un
derestimate the amount of steel considered
re with one end fixed and then
was treated as a cantilevered beam;
quired because of the second and third
inconsistencies noted above and the the free end may be imagined to de
flect and then be brought back to its
lack of provision for the water weight
under field conditions. They were original direction by an applied
moment, MT, and then back to its
actually nontheoretical designs which
would pass certain three-edge bearing
original position by a horizontal force,
test loads. HT (Figure 2). From the elastic arch
theory and Maxwell's Theory of Re
Development of Stress Coefficients ciprocal Deflections, coefficients were
In 1921, Paris (14) developed genobtained for all types of loadings for
eral formulas for any combination moment,
of thrust, and shear. Combined
loading then can be obtained by the
loading to determine moments, thrust,

TABLE II.?Coefficients of Moment, Thrust, and Shear due to

Three-Edge Bearing Loading

Coefficients
Quantity Portion of Pipe
Pipe Weight, Wa Test Uniform Line Load, Pi

Moment* (M) crown +0.0396 +0.159

side -0.045 -0.0906
13? from invert +0.067 +0.104
point of support +0.1028 +0.1422
invert +0.1025 +0.1423
Thrustf (N) crown -0.0788 +0.0008
side +0.250 +0.500
13? from invert +0.180 +0.112
point of support +0.1027 +0.0341
invert +0.1137 +0.0341
Sheart (V) crown 0 +0.500
side +0.0788 -0.0008
13? from invert -0.434 -0.487
point of support -0.4822 -0.4988
invert 0 0

* M ? coefficient X load X Dm. Positive M = tension on inside face.

t N or V = coefficient X load. Positive N = compression ; positive V is downward.
Note : Loading conditions are as indicated in diagrams.

This content downloaded from

61.19.201.8 on Tue, 28 Sep 2021 07:30:54 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Vol. 38, No. 4 CONCRETE PIPE DESIGN

(JAARSTON'S CLASS 8
EMBEDMENT

We s w
FIGURE 3.?Normal earth loads on a pipe ring filled with water.
We represents earth load, W8 shell weight, Ww water weight, Hh uniform
lateral earth load, Ht triangular lateral earth load, and We + s + w the
soil reaction due to earth, shell, and water loads.

backfill can be considered. Figure 3

principle of superposition. The formu
las used for combined loading are of
illustrates normal field loading.
the general forms M = a1 Wi Dm +The a% three-edge loading coefficients
W2 Dm . . . + ak Wk Dm; F=b1W1 were obtained by considering that the
+ b2 W2 . . . + bk Wk where : M = a supports act radially.
lower
moment, F ? a thrust or shear force,These coefficients also can be ob
W ? a load, Dm = mean ring diam, a,
tained by using Roark's formulas (15)
b = coefiScients. These formulasbutcan the signs for thrust will be re
be found in other references (10)versed
(14). since in his analysis minus was
Tables I and II list the most used
com for tension while in the Paris
analysis
mon coefiScients that normally are re a plus sign was used.
quired to design a rigid pipe on Marston
the and Associates (2) (3) (4)
basis of either the three-edge bearing
(5) (6) had developed by field testing
load or actual ditch conditions. On
a relationship between the three-edge
bearing load and the actual field con
large-diameter pipe, the field loading
should be used since water weight dition
and based on the class of embedment
the passive resistance pressure fromorthe
degree of support under the pipe.

This content downloaded from

61.19.201.8 onf:ffff:ffff on Thu, 01 Jan 1976 12:34:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 536 JOURNAL WPCF April 1966
These coefficients provided a meansactual
to theoretical calculations were
made to determine the steel areas. The
make a theoretical comparison which
confirmed their findings. working stress of steel was assumed
Olander (16) developed another tosetbe 40,000 psi (2,812 kg/sq cm) re
gardless of type of steel used. The
of coefficients that are used extensively
ACPA Technical Memoranda (18)
in the western area of the United
States, especially by the Bureaustated
of that the decision to use this
Reclamation. The same theoretical value
ap was a difficult one to make. Sev
proach used by Paris was applied to eral factors influenced this choice.
Tests on 15 each of 48- 60- and 72
a half circle. The distribution of earth
pressure and soil reaction were in. as (122-, 152-, and 183-cm) diam pipe
sumed to take the form of bulbs, one indicated a tensile strain in the inter
cage steel at the .01-in. (.025-cm) crack
at the top and one below the pipe,
from a low of 33,400 psi (2,348 kg/
when rigid pipe was placed on com
sq cm) to a high of 78,600 psi (5,521
pacted backfill under fill or in a wide
trench. These forms were expressed kg/sq cm). All the pipe was manu
mathematically to conform closelyfactured
to with welded steel wire fabric
the intensities of pressure found by(20).
Marston (2) and Spangler (3) (4).Also, the value of 40,000 psi is ap
Pipe design with these coefficientsproximately
re % the yield strength of
the steel in welded steel wire fabric and
sults in the use of less steel since some
effect of lateral side pressure is con is the approximate yield point for hot
rolled rods (19).
sidered, while no allowance is made
In applying the laws of mechanics
normally for side pressure, except in
large-diameter sections. of a beam to a concrete pipe the
ACPA realized that some inaccuracies
Present Specifications were present. If it was assumed that
the traverse sections just prior to the
Babcock (17) published a paper0.01-in.
in (0.025-cm) crack were origi
1956 in which he classified concrete
nally plane and remained plane and
pipe according to its ultimate D-load
perpendicular to the longitudinal fibers
strength. This is the ultimate strength
of the member after bending, and that
in three-edge bearing in lb/lin ft/ftthe material obeyed Hooke's Law, then
diam (gm/cm/cm diam). This concept
a reasonable result was obtainable.
and other factors led the American A similar check was made on the
Concrete Pipe Association to publish
ultimate strength of the pipe, except
a Technical Memorandum (18) setting
that in this case the steel stress was
out in detail the new steel area re
70,000 psi (4,920 kg/sq cm) and it
quirements for five classes of rein
was assumed that the bending moments
forced concrete pipe to supersede the
developed by the laws of mechanics
existing C-75 and C-76 (11) (12) assuming a uniform homogeneous ring
specifications. This new specification
would apply. The ACPA staff realized
(1) was adopted tentatively in 1957
that this assumption probably was not
and is in use today with certain
correct, but curves plotted on test
changes. The steel area requirementspoints correspond fairly well with the
were determined on the basis of three
theoretical curve.
edge test loads to produce a 0.01-in.Tests on 31 samples of 84-in. (213.4
(0.025-cm) crack and to cause ultimate
cm) diam, some of which were rein
failure. In many cases the steel areas
forced with stirrups for shear, indi
were determined by actual experi cated that pipe over 72 in. (182.9 cm)
mental test loads, but in the caseinof diameter in Classes IV and V should
be of a special design with thicker
larger pipe and high-strength classes

This content downloaded from

61.19.201.8 on Tue, 28 Sep 2021 07:30:54 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Vol. 38, No. 4 CONCRETE PIPE DESIGN 537
walls, higher-strength concrete, and in (24) for the use of deformed steel wire
most cases shear reinforcement. fabric (25).
Recent Design Developments Design of Pipes
In 1962, Heger (21) studied the Calculated-Stress Method
structural behavior of reinforced con
crete pipe under various conditions of In design by the calculated-stress
loading. This approach to design was method, the first step is to determine
based on the development and exten the loads on the pipe and to perform
sion of modern concepts of ultimate the ring analysis for moment and
strength, cracking behavior, and de thrust, as described previously. Next,
formation of reinforced concrete struc a trial value of steel area may be de
tures as applied to circular pipe rings. termined by assuming that the com
An extensive test program was under pression steel would have very little
taken to compare theoretical design to effect on the steel requirements for
actual three-edge test loadings. Test the inner cage at the invert, that the
ing to ultimate strength established concrete carries no tension, and that
three types of pipe failure: flexural, the thrust is negligible. This trial
diagonal tension, and a combination of value for the steel area can be deter
both. mined by the equation:
By using analysis and design meth
ods established for ultimate flexural
strength of reinforced concrete sec
tions, for limit load capacity of in
determinate concrete forms, and for derived from Equation 3, with the
diagonal tension strength of beams more accurate value of M substituted
without web reinforcing, Heger (22) for 0.0625 w Dm2. The principles of
developed formulas to determine the statics are applied to the condition
steel requirements in a larger rein shown in Figure 4 to determine the
forced concrete pipe over 60 in. (152 area of steel required for the inner
cm) in diam with welded wire fabric. cage. Requirements for the outer cage
Test data were obtained on pipe are approximately 75 percent of those
manufactured with steel requirements for the inner cage.
determined by the theoretical analysis Determination of Steel Require
and on curved beams reinforced to ments:?It is assumed that the tensile
conform to pipe sections. The results section of the concrete will crack and
were compared and design variability that the tensile steel is to take all the
factors were obtained. This yielded load. The point of zero compression
a group of semiempirical formulas is located by the usual methods of
specifically for the use of welded wire statics as applied to reinforced con
fabric. Welded wire fabric was chosen
crete design. By expressing the loads
since it had a high ultimate strength, in terms of the fiber stresses indicated
provided more transverse wire spacing on the stress diagram, taking summa
which controlled cracking, and pos tion of moments about Tsi, and replac
sessed a moderate ductility beyond the
ing fc with known factors and the term
elastic range. Since the ductility is not
k, the following formula can be de
excessive, the full ultimate strength can rived :
be obtained without excess distortion
of the concrete at flexural failure of
the pipe.
? - 3P + [- (Q + T)]k

+ [o + (^)']
Similar semiempirical formulas were
developed by Heger and his associates

This content downloaded from

61.19.201.8 on Tue, 28 Sep 2021 07:30:54 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 538 JOURNAL WPCF April 1966

r
r?
tt-r, JtSEL Tsi

NEGUTECT/
'/AREA/
7/in/ ,
TENSION/

m
l-*Cc

i
12"
(a)
OUTSIDE FACE (b) (c) + -JL
-(n-l) A0

I in. = 2.54 cm.

SECTION TRANSFORMED AREA STRESS DIAGRAM

FIGURE 4.?Unit section of pipe ring showing typical dimensions, transformed are
and loading and stress diagram for a 96 in., Class IV, wall B pipe.

where : where :
M + Nd"
Q fkd + 8 - d\
n C80=[?Yd-j/.(n-l)A.
Cc = 6fckd
T s(n - 1)A0
2d2 and
and
Ai = area of steel in inner ring, sq. in.

A variability factor of 10-12 percent

where dl', d, and s are relative steel
locations indicated in Figure 4, in.;
n ? ratio of modulus of elasticity of
steel to compressive modulus of elastic
ity of concrete ; A0 = area of steel in
outer ring, sq in. ; and k = ratio of
depth of neutral axis to d, elastic
conditions. If the effect of compres
sion steel is ignored, the point of zero
compression may be found from a
curve such as Figure 5. Once this
point has been located, the determina
tion of steel area follows by a
relatively simple computation since
A Cso
Ai ? ? +f.
Ce-N
.7
Js
probably should be added as a safety
factor to allow for variability in pipe
fabrication and material quality.
Shear :?It is necessary to check for
shear to determine the need of diagonal
tension reinforcement. Use of the cal
culated stress method, in which the
assumption is made that a section from
the wall of the pipe acts similarly to a
beam, is reasonably accurate in de
termining steel requirements. But use
of the same assumption to determine
shear is subject to a greater error since,
as shown by testing of large-diameter
pipe, curvature of the tensile steel at
the crown and invert significantly re
duces the nominal shear strength of
pipe. Since large-diameter pipe usu

This content downloaded from

61.19.201.8 on Tue, 28 Sep 2021 07:30:54 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Vol. 38, No. 4 CONCRETE PIPE DESIGN 539

OZ 04 0.6 O S lO /.2 A4 J 18

FIGURE 5.?Graph showing appro

ally fails in velop between longitudinals;

diagonal tension, there an
this shear failure
fore, welded wireis
fabricusually
has better
top or bottomcrack of control
thesince thepipe
longitudinalsveer
ward from the invert
are closely spaced. or crow
tance of about If 30 deformedto bars are40
used, thedeg,
longi st
should be placed tudinal steel
inshould the consist top
of a mini and
of pipe on about mum of No. 4 6-in.
bars on a spacingcente
not
point about 35 to exceed
deg about from
30 in. (76.2 cm). the v
centerline.
The ACI-ASCE Committee 326 Design Using Heger's Theory
Formula (27), for beams subject to Heger (21) (22) (23) developed
shear, flexure, and axial load, is used formulas for the determinations of
to determine the nominal shear in a steel requirements in large-diameter
unit section of the pipe. pipe using welded steel wire fabric.
This shear is subtracted from the Formulas were derived for the 0.01-in.
allowable shear to be taken by the crack strength based on theories of
concrete to determine the amount to crack formation in reinforced concrete
be taken by the stirrups. Since this and moments due to test loadings from
gives only a rough approximation of an elastic ring analysis. Adjustments
the actual shearing stress, a margin of then were made for a design variability
safety should be provided in choice of factor to allow for variability between
stirrup area. design and test results and a pipe
Longitudinal Steel :?Longitudinal fabrication and materials quality vari
steel is necessary to maintain proper ability factor. This factor is to be
spacing and rigidity during manufac determined by ASTM Committee 13
ture, to develop bond, to reinforce on Concrete Pipe. The tentative value
against beam action, and to control established is 0.85 but this is subject
crack distribution. Cracks usually de to change. A similar formula was de

This content downloaded from

61.19.201.8 on Tue, 28 Sep 2021 07:30:54 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 540 JOURNAL WPCF April 1966
diagonal tension strength of a pipe un
rived for the ultimate flexural strength
based on the redistribution of moments
der the ultimate three-edge bearing
load. A formula developed by the
during "plastic hinge'' rotation of the
crown and invert. Heger 's formulas ACI-ASCE Committee 326 (26) for a
are as follows: steel requirements atbeam subject to shear, flexure, and
0.01-in. (.025-cm) crack strength: axial load, was corrected for radial ten
sion due to curvature of the main steel
and empirical factors were added for

Ai=fl{(M),.,.+0.7sf-^]
14,000^0.0!?* *8
and
steel requirements for ultimate D-load
capacity :
1.65Dl(DL)uD + 0.5TTJ
fsu(d - 0.5a)<l>f<t>x
where :
Ai = area of steel in inner cage, sq in. ;
D = diameter of pipe, ft; DL = D
load, lb/ft length/ft ;diam;TF8 = shell
weight of unit length of pipe, lb;
h = wall thickness of pipe, in. ;// = ul
timate compressive strength of con
crete, psi; d = (thickness of pipe wall)
?(thickness *of cover)?(0.5 X diam
of steel), in.; 0o.oi = variability factor
between design theory and test results
for 0.01-in. (0.025-cm) crack; #* = pipe
fabrication and materials quality vari
ability factor; fsu = ultimate tensile
strength of inside reinforcement, psi;
a = 0.1 (fsu/tt) A?; and </>/ = vari
ability factor between design theory
and test results for ultimate strength.
The suggested values of variability
factors are:
00.01 = 0.91
4>x = 0.85
<t>f = 0.95
The larger areas of steel as determined
by Equations 8 and 9 should be used
for the inner ring and 75 percent of
that area for the outer ring.
Shear Reinforcement:?In order to
determine the need for stirrup rein
forcement Heger (21) (22) (23) de
veloped a formula to determine the
minimum concrete strength that would
be required based on the ultimate
numerous test results on 6-ft (1.83-m)
diam pipe (23). However, the writer
has been informed by Heger in a re
cent communication that test results
on 9-ft (2.74-m) pipe show that there
is a size effect which reduces the
diagonal tension strength of pipe with
diameters greater than 6 ft (1.83 m)
and increases the diagonal tension
strength of the pipe with diameters
less than 6 ft (1.83 m). The reason
for the size effect is not fully under
stood and a test program is under way
to evaluate this size effect more fully.
Utilizing this revised formula, the
designer determines the minimum con
crete strength required, based on the
ultimate diagonal tension strength.
The revised formula for minimum con
crete strength required is :
Min/;
D(DL)U+0.9WS _208Aj .10
Le 3/6~ D
37 .?fafady-^j^ * d
where: fa = material, fabrication, and
design variability factor; <?>xd = vari
?e
ability factor for manufacturing; Ln
?
= ratio of length of full thickness of
pipe barrel to the nominal length of
pipe barrel; and yjjz = correction fac
tor for size effect. The suggested values
of the variability factors are :
fa = 0.90
<t>xd = 0.95.
Since this value is too high to achieve
in most instances, it will be necessary
to increase the wall thickness, provide
stirrup reinforcing, or increase the

This content downloaded from

61.19.201.8 on Tue, 28 Sep 2021 07:30:54 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Vol. 38, No. 4 CONCRETE PIPE DESIGN 541
inner cage steel. Increase of steel ing, in. " Comb "-type welded wi
would not be effective since it has been fabric stirrups would be used.
determined from test programs by the Deformed Welded Steel "Wir
ACPA (27) that for large-diameter Fabric :?Similar formulas were deve
pipes (Classes IV and V), increasing oped by Heger (24) for determini
steel areas provides very little in the steel requirements where deforme
crease in the strength of the pipe. welded steel wire fabric (28) is to b
Since increasing wall thickness usually used. This type of steel, in additi
imposes a fabrication problem on the to having high tensile strength fo
manufacturer, the use of stirrups prob ultimate load capacity, has a high-bon
ably would be the most economical ap surface for crack-width control. It
proach. Heger (21) (23) also devel a more efficient reinforcement th
oped a formula to determine the area either smooth welded wire fabri
of stirrup reinforcing based on crack smooth cold-drawn wire, or intermed
ing behavior, shearing forces, and ate-grade hot-rolled rods, smooth o
stresses to be carried by the stirrups deformed. The formulas are as f
as follows:
lows: required steel area for ultimat
. l(DL)u - 25V/7]/)* tl D-load capacity:
Av~ l.lfyd 'U 1MDZ(DL)UD + 0.5TFJ
where : Av = area of stirrup reinforce fsu(d - 0.5a)4>f<l>x
ment, sq in./ft ; fy = yield strength
and requirements
(0.2 percent offset stress) of stirrup re based on 0.01-in
inforcement, psi ; and 5 = stirrup spac
(0.025-cm) crack strength :

W, ioaV/71
D*?Act f(Z)L)o.oi + 0.75
D ^f D
Ai .13
25,000^0.1^?

where Acs is symmetrical area of con Min//

crete surrounding each circumferential
\ D(DL)U+0.9WS 20SAjl2
wire, sq in., and other symbols are as
previously defined. To use Equations
3/6 D "U
37.5<t>dFdyj
12 and 13 the designer must first as
sume a value for /</ and Ai and deter where :
mine a in Equation 12. If At is deter F = 1.15-0.075 s.
mined to be sufficiently different from
The formula to determine the area
the assumption, then a new assumption
of stirrup reinforcement would be the
must be made. The larger area of
same as Equation 11.
steel as determined by Equations 12
and 13 should be used for the inner
Comparison of Methods
ring and 75 percent of that area for
The results obtained by the calcu
the outer ring.
Shear Reinforcement:?The formula lated-stress methods and Heger's
method apparently are about the same.
as revised to determine the minimum
A recent test program indicates that
concrete strength based on the ulti the variability factor due to pipe fabri
mate diagonal tension strength of a cation and material quality should be
pipe under the ultimate three-edge about 0.85. Apparently there are cer
bearing load is: tain compensatory errors in the calcu

This content downloaded from

61.19.201.8 on Tue, 28 Sep 2021 07:30:54 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 542 JOURNAL WPCF April 1966
lated stress method. Actually, Heger inforced
's concrete pipe to be sure that
method is more accurate and reason
overloading does not occur. Failures
have occurred that have been embar
able, since adjustments are made for
curvature, rotation of moments, rassing
and and costly to municipalities,
radial tension. Also, it provides a
contractors, and consulting engineers.
method for the determination of Further
the test programs and analysis
diagonal tension strength and the stirneeded to determine the steel re
are
rup steel requirements. quirements more accurately and to find
Because of the added effectiveness the
of best placement of the steel to pre
wire fabric to control cracking, itventis diagonal tensile failures due to
recommended that either welded steel shear. Another point must not be
wire fabric (20) or deformed welded overlooked. Regardless of the accuracy
of design and the exactness and skill
steel wire fabric (28) be used in large
diameter pipe if it can be purchased of manufacturer, an improperly in
economically. Also, consideration stalled pipe without proper support
should be given to the possibilityunder
of the haunches and thorough com
using a higher-strength steel bar, paction of the side fill can result in
ASTM A-431 (29) to decrease further ultimate failure.
the steel requirements under certain
high-strength requirements. This steel Acknowledgment
has a yield strength of 75,000 psi
The author expresses his apprecia
(5,272.5 kg/sq cm). tion to Howard Peckworth and John
Force Mains Hendrickson, formerly of American
Concrete Pipe Association, Frank J.
The analysis of force mains canHeger,
be of Massachusetts Institute of
carried out similarly by the use of the
Technology, E. L. Wright of United
calculated stress method since all that
Concrete Pipe Corporation, and J. W.
is necessary is to add to the thrustPorter, Jr., of Gifford-Hill Pipe Com
the ring tension developed. Heger pany for their valuable discussions and
(21) also has developed formulassupply
to of materials and documents that
include internal pressure related to this review of design of rein
made
three-edge bearing tests. If theforced
de concrete pipe possible.
signer wishes to use prestressed con
crete, the resultant stresses due to References
prestressing are determined by calcu
1. (( Tentative Specifications for Reinforced
lation of the stresses in the concrete Concrete Culvert, Storm Drain, and
and steel by standard procedures. The Sewer Pipe." Amer. Soc. Testing Ma
final stress is determined by superpo terials Designation C-76-64T (1965).
2. Marston, A., " The Theory of Loads on
sition after stresses due to earth load, Pipe in Ditches and Tests of Cement
pipe and water weight, and internal and Clay Drain Tile and Sewer Pipe."
pressure have been determined. Sepa Bull. No. 31, Iowa Eng. Exp. Sta.
rate laboratory tests should be made (1913) ; subsequent publications on
same subject in Bull. No. 47 and 96.
to determine the true bursting pressure
3. Spangler, M. G., "The Supporting
and load to produce a 0.01-in. (0.025 Strength of Rigid Pipe Culverts."
cm) crack, since the calculations of Bull. No. 112, Iowa Eng. Exp. Sta.
prestressed loads are subject to varia (1933).
4. Spangler, M. G., "Analysis of Loads
tion due to creep and plastic flow. and Supporting Strengths, and Prin
ciples of Design for Highway Cul
Summary verts." Proc. 26th Annual Meeting
of the Highway Res. Bd. (1946).
It is of extreme importance that a 5. Schlick, W. J., "Supporting Strength of
careful analysis be made of steel re Drain Tile and Sewer Pipe Under
quirements of any large-diameter re Different Pipe Laying Conditions."

This content downloaded from

61.19.201.8 on Tue, 28 Sep 2021 07:30:54 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Vol. 38, No. 4 CONCRETE PIPE DESIGN 543
Bull. No. 57, Iowa Eng. Exp. Sta.
(1920).
6. Schlick, W. J., " Tests of Clay and Con
crete Load Bearing Pipe." Proc.
Amer. Soc. Testing Materials, 28, Part
2 (1928).
7. Spangler, M. G., "Soil Engineering."
International Textbook Co., Scranton,
Pa. (1951).
8. "Design and Construction of Sanitary
and Storm Sewers." Manual of Prac
tice No. 9, Water Pollution Control
Federation, Washington, D. C. (1960).
9. Talbot, A. N., "Tests of Cast Iron and
Reinforced Concrete Culvert Pipe."
Bull. No. 22, University of Illinois
(1908).
10. Peckworth, H. P., "Preliminary Report
to the Technical Problems Committee,
American Concrete Pipe Association,
Regarding Design of Reinforced Con
crete Pipe to Resist External Load
ing." (1954); "Concrete Pipe De
sign Manual." Amer. Concrete Pipe
Assn. (1949).
11. "Tentative Specifications for Reinforced
Concrete Sewer Pipe." Amer. Soc.
Testing Materials Designation C-75
30 (1935).
12. "Tentative Specifications for Reinforced
Concrete Sewer Pipe." Amer. Soc.
Testing Materials Designation C-76
30 (1937).
13. "Standard Specifications for Cold-drawn
Steel Wire for Concrete Reinforce
ment." Amer. Soc. Testing Materials
Designation A-82.
14. Paris, J. M., "Stress Coefficients for
Large Horizontal Pipes." Eng. News
Rec, 87, 19, 768 (1921).
15. Roark, R. S., "Formulas for Stress and
Strain." McGraw Hill Book Co., New
York (1954).
16. Olander, H. C, "Stress Analysis of
Concrete Pipes." U. S. Bur. Reclama
tion, Eng. Monograph No. 6 (1950).
17. Babcock, D. P., "Simplified Design
Method for Reinforced Concrete Pipes
Under Earth Fills." Proc. of High
way Ees. Bd. (1956).
18. "D-Load Design and Tests of Concrete
Pipe." Technical Memorandum, Amer.
Concrete Pipe Assn. (1957).
This content downloaded from
61.19.201.8 on Tue, 28 Sep 2021 07:30:54 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
19. "Specifications for Billet-Steel Bars for
Concrete Reinforcement." Amer. Soc.
Testing Materials Designation A 15.
20. "Tentative Specifications for Welded
Steel Wire Fabric for Concrete Rein
forcement." Amer. Soc. Testing Ma
terials Designation A 185.
21. Heger, F. J., "A Theory for the Struc
tural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Pipe." Thesis, Mass. Inst. Technol.
(1962).
22. Heger, F. J., "The Strength of Precast
Concrete Pipe Reinforced With Welded
Wire Fabric." Presented at 53rd An
nual Convention of Amer. Concrete
Pipe Assn. (1961).
23. Heger, F. J., "Circular Concrete Pipe
With Welded Wire Fabric Reinforce
ment, Suggested Design Procedure/
Recommended Steel Areas." Sub
mitted to the Amer. Iron and Steel
Institute (1963).
24. Simpson, Gumpertz & Heger, Inc., Con
sulting Engineers, "Circular Concrete
Pipe Reinforced With Deformed
Welded Wire Fabric, Suggested Design
Procedure/Recommended Steel Areas."
Submitted to Wire Reinforcement Inst.
(1963).
25. "Standard Specifications for High
Strength Deformed Billet-Steel Bars
for Concrete Reinforcement with 60,000
psi Minimum Yield Strength." Amer.
Soc. Testing Materials Designation
A-432-64.
26. "Report by ACI-ASCE Committee 326
on Shear and Diagonal Tension."
Parts 1 and 2, Amer. Concrete Inst.
and Amer. Soc. Civil Engr. (1960).
27. "D-load Design and Tests of Concrete
Pipe." Amer. Concrete Pipe Assn.
(1956).
28. "Standard Specifications for Welded De
formed Steel Wire Fabric." Amer.
Soe. Testing Materials Designation
A-497-64.
29. "Standard Specifications for High
Strength Deformed Billet-Steel Bars
for Concrete Reinforcement with
75,000 Psi Minimum Yield Strength.''
Amer. Soc. Testing Materials Designa
tion 431-64.