Pipelines 2018 163

Condition Assessment of Concrete Bar-Wrapped Cylinder Pipe, the Next Phase of San
Diego County Water Authority’s Asset Management Program
Martin R. Coghill, C.Eng1; Nathan D. Faber, P.E.2; Andi Corrao, P.E.3; and Chris Garrett4
1
San Diego County Water Authority, 610 West 5th Ave., Escondido, CA 92025. E-mail:
mcoghill@sdcwa.org
2
San Diego County Water Authority, 610 West 5th Ave., Escondido, CA 92025. E-mail:
nfaber@sdcwa.org
3
infrastructureMD, Inc. E-mail: ACorrao@infrastructureMD.com
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tufts University on 07/16/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

4
Pipeline Inspection and Condition Analysis Corporation (PICA). E-mail:
cgarrett@picacorp.com

ABSTRACT
The San Diego County Water Authority’s asset management activities commenced over 25
years ago and initially focused on the highest risk pipelines consisting of prestressed concrete
cylinder pipe (PCCP). With active acoustic monitoring and rehabilitation of the PCCP ongoing,
and scanning of the oldest portions of welded steel pipe complete, the next focus was concrete
bar-wrapped cylinder pipe. This paper will discuss a 5-mile comprehensive condition assessment
of concrete bar-wrapped cylinder pipe constructed in 1948, including the basis for the selection
of the technology used, the results of the assessment, and the actions taken by the San Diego
County Water Authority to verify the findings.

INTRODUCTION
The San Diego County Water Authority (Water Authority) provides a safe and reliable water
supply to the San Diego region through its aqueduct delivery system, which consists of
approximately 310 miles of large-diameter pipelines, more than 1,400 aqueduct-related
structures, and over 100 flow control facilities. These facilities occupy approximately 1,400
acres within the Water Authority's right-of-way and deliver water for over 3.3 million residents
via the Water Authority’s 24-member agencies.
With a significant proportion of its infrastructure approaching the end of its useful life, the
Water Authority embarked on an effort to strategically manage its assets over the long-term
through asset management activities that began over 25 years ago, now consolidated into an
Asset Management Program (Coghill et al 2014). Through this program, the following pipe types
were prioritized:
 Prestressed Concrete Cylinder Pipe (PCCP)
o 82 miles total
o Wire breaks electromagnetically assessed
o Active acoustic fiber optic monitoring since 2006
o Over 50% rehabilitated with steel liners (Stine and Stift 1998)
 Welded Steel Pipe (WSP)
o 140 miles total
o 40 miles assessed using magnetic flux leakage 2011–2016 (Faber et al 2013; Coghill
et al, 2015)
o 4 localized repairs performed
o Future localized repairs planned

© ASCE

Pipelines 2018
 Pipelines 2018 164
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tufts University on 07/16/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Figure 1. San Diego County Water Authority Aqueducts with LMSE highlighted
The next pipe type the Water Authority had planned to examine per a 5-year rolling
Condition Assessment Plan was concrete bar-wrapped cylinder pipe (BWP). Of the total 28
miles of BWP pipe, five miles were identified as a priority – the La Mesa Sweetwater Extension
(LMSE) pipeline.

© ASCE

Pipelines 2018
 Pipelines 2018 165
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tufts University on 07/16/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Figure 2. Typical Access Vaults

LMSE PIPELINE
The LMSE is a five-mile-long untreated water pipeline constructed in 1948. It consists
primarily of 39-inch concrete bar-wrapped cylinder pipe (pre-dating AWWA C303) with a short
section of 48-inch reinforced concrete cylinder pipe that was a later pipeline relocation. See
Figure 1 for the location of the LMSE within the Water Authority’s system. The LMSE pipeline
starts in an environmentally sensitive canyon with steep terrain. The pipe then parallels a
highway through residential and commercial properties where it culminates downstream of a
riverbed. Much of the pipeline is situated within an accessible right-of-way; however, a small
portion runs along a busy residential paved street.
Access points along the pipeline are 20-inch manways in concrete vaults spaced
approximately 1,500 to 3,500 feet apart – see Figure 2. These manways are the only available
access to the pipeline interior for personnel, carts, tools, or equipment needed to inspect the
pipeline.

MODES OF FAILURE
Previous internal visual inspections of the pipeline found minor mortar lining damage, but
there had been no indications of corrosion or defects in the steel cylinder or reinforcing bars.
Since the Water Authority had not experienced any failures of this pipe and it was thought to be
in good condition from the visual inspections, the expected mode of failure was not proven. This
presented a challenge when selecting the appropriate technology to perform the condition
assessment.
A Request for Proposals (RFP) was advertised in March of 2016 seeking a comprehensive
non-destructive condition assessment of the entire length and circumference of the pipeline. No
specific technology or method was prescribed in the RFP. Two proposals were received
containing differing strategies to assessing the condition of the pipe. The first proposal utilized a
robotic unit with an electromagnetic array capable of detecting the following:
 Broken (discontinuous) bars – minimum of 5
 Cylinder corrosion greater than 50% metal loss, minimum dimensions 5-inches by 10-
inches (for 39-inch pipe)
The second proposal, submitted by PICA Corporation, utilized an inflatable electromagnetic
tool capable of detecting the following:
 Cylinder corrosion greater than 30% metal loss, minimum dimensions 1.5-inches by 1.5
inches (for 39-inch pipe)

© ASCE

Pipelines 2018
 Pipelines 2018 166

 No information on bar corrosion or discontinuity would be provided

There were two different approaches that required careful consideration as to the detection of
an anticipated mode of failure. On one hand, was a technology capable of detecting major issues
with both the steel cylinder and the reinforcing bars, on the other hand, a higher-resolution
technology focused on cylinder corrosion alone. The Water Authority decided to use the higher-
resolution technology for the cylinder. The basis for this decision was that if reinforcing bars
were suffering from an external corrosive attack, the cylinder would also have corrosion decay
that would be detected. With the higher-resolution assessment, a localized corrosion issue would
be more likely to be detected. It should be noted that the resolutions of detection stated here are
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tufts University on 07/16/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

per the proposals received in 2016 and that developments to the technologies may have changed
the resolutions since.

PLANNING FOR FIELD INSPECTIONS

Upfront planning is important for the Water Authority due to the coordination of multiple
factors including water operations, contractor coordination, public outreach, and problem
identification. Starting well in advance of the inspection, the Water Authority and PICA project
managers and engineers met weekly to prepare for the inspection. To allow the PICA engineers
to focus on the technical objectives of the project, the services of infrastructureMD (iMD) were
employed by PICA to assist with the project planning stage and also field support. Dozens of
topics and details were discussed and addressed, all to ensure that:
1. There would be no tool downtime due to equipment breakdown or malfunction.
2. The inspection tool would collect accurate, high-resolution wall loss data.
3. Roles and responsibilities of Water Authority and PICA staff in the field were clearly
defined and understood by all parties.
4. Lessons learned by the Water Authority or PICA on previous projects would be
incorporated to improve the execution of this inspection project.
While PICA engineers focused on completing the development of the inspection tool, Water
Authority staff prepared for the pipeline shutdown and their responsibilities during the field
inspection. Water Authority responsibilities included pipeline dewatering, removal of access
flanges, visual inspection, removal of standing water and minor debris, traffic control, public
relations, equipment rental, tag-line (rope used to pull the winchline cable) purchase and
installation, design and fabrication of a cart and equipment for laying the tag-line, and crews on
site for crane and confined space entry support.

TOOL DEVELOPMENT
Six months before the field inspection, PICA began modifications and developments for an
inspection tool for the project. There were two important elements to the development:
1) The technology, and the science to collect accurate data on the type of pipe being
inspected
2) The tool or platform that is used to carry and transmit the technology through the pipe.
PICA utilized remote field technology, with some variations. This technology has been
successfully applied to the inspection of a wide variety of ferrous materials, including industrial
and municipal pipelines. However, prior to this project, it had not been specifically applied to the
inspection of BWP. PICA considered the five most critical factors affecting the tool development
for the LMSE pipeline to be:

© ASCE

Pipelines 2018
 Pipelines 2018 167

 In-line Obstructions: While the pipeline would be dewatered, the Water Authority’s
previous experience suggested that up to 10 inches of standing water may still be present,
as well as up to 2 inches of mud, muck, and debris. The inspection tool would need to be
able to traverse these conditions.
 Pipe Deflections: Over the five miles of pipe, many both horizontal and vertical bends
were present. The inspection tool would need to be able to traverse bends up to 60-
degrees.
 Pipeline Access: With access to the Water Authority’s pipeline limited to 20-inch
manways, tool components would need to be collapsible, and individual components
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tufts University on 07/16/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

would need to be assembled inside the pipe.

 Tool Durability: The shutdown availability was limited to 11 days, meaning delays would
be problematic. The inspection tool would need to be durable and dependable to avoid
costly field delays or compromised data quality.
 Electromagnetic Functionality: To successfully inspect concrete bar-wrapped cylinder
pipe, the tool’s mechanics would need to support the underlining remote field technology
platform. The tool design would require an exciter module to generate an alternative
current, a detector module outfitted with an array of receiver coils, and modules housing
electronics including power storage. The modules would need to be combined in a way
that would successfully capture changes in the concrete cylinder pipe’s wall thickness
and other anomalies.

Table 1. Summary of Challenges and Solutions

Challenge
10 inches of water, 2 inches of
muck
Vertical/horizontal bends
Access limitations
Rugged terrain/demanding
schedule
High-resolution detection
Solution
Wheel centralizers
Combination of pliable and rigid components
Inflatable skeletal structure
Rigid connectors, high quality materials, redundant
components
Abundance of detector coils and high output exciter

With these design requirements in mind, the PICA Research and Development team opted
for an inspection tool comprised of both rigid and inflatable components, all mounted on a
wheeled system to ensure smooth travel through the pipeline. Additionally, the tool would
incorporate shared components that could be modified in the field to accommodate changes in
pipe diameters from 39-inch to 48-inch. Table 1 summarizes the challenges considered and the
solutions developed by PICA during tool development.
The culmination of the design and fabrication work resulted in a tool named the Restricted
Access Flexible Tool, or ‘RAFT’ as shown in Figure 3.

CALIBRATION
Proper calibration of the RAFT was required. The calibration served two purposes: building
confidence for the Water Authority that the technology would perform; and saving field work
time by determining the acceptable inspection frequencies beforehand. In the months preceding
the fieldwork, PICA procured calibration pipe and had it delivered to their storage yard. Defects
of predetermined sizes were milled into the calibration pipe (See Figure 4). The defects would

© ASCE

Pipelines 2018
 Pipelines 2018 168

test two aspects; accuracy in sizing defect depth, and accuracy in sizing defect size. The
calibration pipe was also used for testing the tool and electronic component assembly.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tufts University on 07/16/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Figure 3. RAFT tool being checked in the field prior to its first inspection
INSPECTION
On January 6, 2017, the WA initiated the shutdown of the LMSE pipeline and PICA field
crews mobilized. Dewatering and lock-out/tag-out of the pipeline took 48 hours. During that
time, PICA unpacked equipment and coordinated inspection activities with Water Authority
support staff.

Figure 4. Calibration defects

Inspection work began on January 10, 2017, at the upstream end of the pipeline. PICA
technicians performed confined space manned-entry, and individual tool components were
lowered into the pipeline with the assistance of an overhead crane (See Figure 5).

© ASCE

Pipelines 2018
 Pipelines 2018 169
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tufts University on 07/16/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Figure 5. Crews preparing the RAFT tool for insertion.

Handheld electric air pumps were used to inflate tool components and technicians
reconfigured the RAFT from within the pipeline. As an added quality assurance measure, infield
calibration scans were performed to confirm that the tool data matched the calibration pipe data.
Over the course of the next 11 days, field crews inspected sequential sections of varying
distances between access structures. The longest section completed in one day was 3,533-feet.
While each section was unique, the general inspection approach adhered to the following steps:
1. Mobilize to Site: Crews would mobilize ancillary equipment to the site each morning.
While the tool would stay in the pipeline overnight, batteries and electronics would be
charged.
2. Pull Winchline into Place: A tag-line (polyester rope) that had been installed previously
by Water Authority staff was connected to PICA’s high-strength winch and a hydraulic
capstan was used to pull the winchline through the pipe section.
3. Inspect Section: A winchline would be connected to the RAFT at each end, the tool was
turned “on”, and winches pulled the inspection tool through the pipeline. After the
inspection, PICA technicians checked the data to make sure it was complete and properly
recorded.
4. Demobilize from Site: Crews would break down each site and either move onto the
afternoon’s section or demobilize for the day.
5. Data Reporting and Verification Work: Within 48 hours of each inspection, PICA
provided a preliminary report outlining any major “Areas of Interest.” Water Authority
personnel then performed verification work at these locations and remedied the pipeline
as required.
All inspection activities were successfully completed on schedule. The data was checked
after each inspection section and there was no need to re-scan any section.

VERIFICATION AND REPAIR

One requirement of the contract was that PICA provide preliminary data reports within 48
hours of inspection for each section. This would allow the Water Authority to validate reported

© ASCE

Pipelines 2018
 Pipelines 2018 170

anomalies and, if necessary, rehabilitate the pipeline during the scheduled shutdown. The process
for validating defects consisted of the following steps:
1. Properly locate the pipe segment and mark up a 3-foot by 3-foot grid
2. Chip away the cement mortar lining
3. Visually assess the internal cylinder
4. Perform ultrasonic thickness testing of the area
Ultrasonic testing was performed by Water Authority staff using a UT flaw detector, which
was a recent purchase that has proven valuable in verifying defects.
The review of preliminary data of one pipe section (Mk #623) indicated clear signs of the
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tufts University on 07/16/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

existence of defects. Internal visual inspection revealed no signs of distress, however the
verification procedure confirmed the findings presented by PICA. In one location, the removal of
the cement mortar lining revealed a leaking ‘pinhole’ defect. The Water Authority decided to
excavate the pipe and externally examine Mk #623 and verify the level of corrosion. Figure 6
shows images of two of the three defects found on Mk #623. The first shows the ‘pinhole’
corrosion in the steel cylinder (hole enlarged due to chipping out the corrosion bi-product). The
second image shows a similar active corrosion cell that has disintegrated the reinforcement bars
and has attacked the steel cylinder. Three reinforcing bars were affected by the corrosion cell,
with only 1 bar being discontinuous. The Water Authority believes this evidence supports the
decision to examine the condition of the steel cylinder with the higher-resolution technology.

Figure 6. Significant defects located using the RAFT tool

After the examination, Mk #623 was removed and replaced by Water Authority crews with a
welded steel replacement pipe section purchased before the field investigations in anticipation of
required pipeline repairs.

CONCLUSION
The Water Authority completed a successful non-destructive, high-resolution scan of the
LMSE which is a concrete bar-wrapped cylinder pipeline. The Water Authority used an
electromagnetic inspection technology designed and implemented by PICA Corp. Preliminary
inspection results were reported on-site within 48 hours, providing actionable data. These data
allowed the Water Authority to verify defects and perform a pipe section replacement within a
compressed pipeline shutdown timeline. The Water Authority believes the successful location of

© ASCE

Pipelines 2018
 Pipelines 2018 171

three verified corrosion defects (one pinhole leak) justified the decision to use a higher-
resolution technology focused on the cylinder. More importantly, the location of the defects
justified the entire project and prevented a potential pipeline failure. Overall, this proactive repair
helped the Water Authority meet its mission to deliver a safe and reliable supply of water to its
member agencies serving the San Diego region.

REFERENCES
Coghill, Martin R., Eaton, Gary A., Faber, Nathan D., (2014) “A Long Term Commitment to
Pipeline Infrastructure: Implementing, Funding and Delivering the San Diego County Water
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tufts University on 07/16/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Authority’s Asset Management Program.” Proceedings of the Pipelines 2014 Conference,

ASCE, Portland, OR.
Coghill, Martin R, Kyea, Christopher, (2015) “Comprehensive Condition Assessment of Large
Diameter Steel Pipe - The Next Chapter in San Diego County Water Authority’s Asset
Management Program.” Proceedings of the Pipelines 2014 Conference, ASCE, Baltimore,
MD.: pp. 911–922
Faber, Nathan D, Galleher, John J., Kenny, Michael K., (2013) “Case Study: Magnetic Flux
Leakage Condition Assessment of a Mortar-Lined Steel Pipeline.” Proceedings of the
Pipelines 2013 Conference, ASCE, Fort Worth, TX pp. 647–659
Stine, Gary P. and Stift, Michael T. (1998). “Rehabilitation of 183 cm PCCP with Steel Plate
Liners.” Proceedings of the 1998 Pipelines Division Conference, ASCE, San Diego, CA.

© ASCE

Pipelines 2018