Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Investigation of the Ida-Raisinville sanitary sewer pipe distress
|United States. Army. Corps of Engineers. Detroit District.
Leach, Roy E.
Wong, G. Sam.
Mitchell, Gerald B.
|Geotechnical Laboratory (U.S.)
Engineer Research and Development Center (U.S.)
|Miscellaneous paper (U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station) ; GL-89-21.
Abstract: The US Army Engineer District, Detroit, oversees grants for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). However, with little inspection authority, the Corps is forced to conduct only limited inspection and sometimes only forensic study of potential problems. The Ida-Raisinville sanitary sewer project, funded as an EPA grant, was determined to be unacceptable only after the project was essentially complete and acceptance pressure tests were conducted. After failing pressure specifications, a TV camera survey was conducted and it was determined that there were a minimum of 100 cracks (mostly circumferential) in a section of the project comprising about half the total footage of installed sewer line. To put the sewer in service, it had to be determined whether the pipe failure was continuous, what the probable cause of failure was, and what would be a reasonable and economical repair scheme. A second TV camera survey conducted 5 months later determined that there were no new cracks. This meant that the crack problem had occurred by the end of construction, The pipes had been certified by the manufacturer as passing both the pressure and strength specifications of a class of pipe better than the specified pipe, and post-construction tests on contractor-discarded pipe again passed these same specifications. However, a visual inspection of the discarded cracked pipe did not show evidence that the visible cracks extended completely through to the inside of the pipe. The visual inspection seemed to indicate a handling problem by the manufacturer or the contractor. Inspection reports indicated that compaction in the trench was neglible and that in areas with a high water table, dewatering in the trench was not satisfactory. The failure to adhere to good construction practices for compaction and dewatering, outlined in the job specifications, could have aggravated an existing cracking problem or could have caused new cracking during placement. A more extensive forensic study was not recommended for the owner because of the time and money that would be expended and because the sewer line was obviously not satisfactory and the burden of proof of fault would lie with the contractor or pipe manufacturer. Several repair methods were recommended to the owner and it was left to the owner's discretion to balance the time and economics involved.
|Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.
|Appears in Collections: