You are on page 1of 14

Pipelines 2009: Infrastructure's Hidden Assets © 2009 ASCE 970

White Paper on Thrust Restraint Design of Buried Pipelines


Part 1 – Current Practice
1,2
ASCE Task Committee on Thrust Restraint Design of Buried Pipelines
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of California, San Diego on 08/24/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

ABSTRACT

The practice of thrust restraint design within the water/wastewater pipeline industry has
continuously evolved over the years, benefiting from both theoretical and experimental research.
Many of these research activities have primarily been originated by the pipe manufacturing
industry, thus the research and the resulting practice changes have essentially been reflected in the
design practice of these pipe materials. Widely varying material properties and joint configurations
have made it difficult to have coordinated practice changes, which have resulted in a lack of
consensus on a common design approach amongst different pipe materials. This results in not only
significantly different guidance from AWWA design manuals for different pipe materials and
agency requirements, but also widely varying design practices and company specific best practice
approaches amongst the consulting engineering community.

Recognizing the need to develop consensus amongst practicing engineers, the members of the
ASCE Technical Committee on Pipeline Installation and Location have formed a special task
committee “Thrust Restraint Design of Buried Pipelines” to prepare a white paper on the subject.
The objective of this task committee in preparing this white paper is:
• To document current design practices of thrust restraint systems for various pipe
materials; and compare current practices with theory.
• To document the historical evolutions of the different design approaches, collect and
compile field tests completed for different pipe materials.
• To explore improvements to current practice, develop consensus, and propose
recommendations for the development of a manual of practice.

Preliminary findings of this white paper are presented in a series of three companion papers: Part 1,
Current Practice; Part 2, Historical Development (ASCE 2009b); and Part 3, Roadmap for Unified
Approach (ASCE 2009c). This is the first paper presenting current practice.

This paper documents the various methods currently used to calculate and mitigate thrust for
common pipeline materials including concrete, ductile iron, fiberglass, polyvinyl chloride (PVC),
polyethylene (PE), and Steel. Also, this paper utilizes the current design approaches to
quantitatively summarize the similarities and differences in the thrust calculations for each material
and provide tabular and graphical comparisons of each design approach.

1
Task Committee Members: Stephen Shumaker (Chair; Corresponding Author); Henry Bardakjian
(Vice Chair); Sri Rajah (Secretary); Sam Arnaout; Edward Barnhurst; Richard Bonds; Robert Card;
Ralph Carpenter; Randall Conner; Mike Fleury; Randall Hill, Brent Keil; Harold Kennedy Jr.; John
Luka; David McPherson; Martin McCabe; Souheil Nasr; Larry Petroff; George Ruchti; Walt Schwarz;
Dennis Shumard; Russell Snow; Richard Turkopp; Robert Walker; William Whidden.
2
Corresponding Author: Stephen Shumaker, P.E., CDM, 1925 Palomar Oaks Way, Suite 300,
Carlsbad, CA 92008, email: shumakersf@cdm.com, Tel: (760) 438-7755.

Pipelines 2009
Pipelines 2009: Infrastructure's Hidden Assets © 2009 ASCE 971

INTRODUCTION

The parallel historical development of design approaches for the various common pipeline
materials has resulted in approaches which in some cases significantly differ from each other.
Some of these differences can be attributed to the way the different materials behave within soil
under the influence of thrust forces.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of California, San Diego on 08/24/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

The axial force in a pipeline resulting from internal pressure is generally given by the term PA,
where P is the internal pressure and A is the internal cross-sectional area of the pipe. In an infinite
length of straight pipe, as there is no surface upon which this axial component can act, no
unbalanced thrust force is present. At bends, tees, dead ends, valves, reducers and other changes in
the pipe geometry, a portion or all of the cross-sectional area is presented to this axial component
which results in unbalanced thrust force. For purposes of brevity, this paper will focus on thrust at
horizontal bends.

THRUST BLOCKS

Unbalanced Force

There is general consensus amongst the AWWA design manuals M9 (2008); M11 (2004) M23
(2002) M41 (2009) M45 (2008) and M55 (2006) for different pipe materials with regard to the
unbalanced force calculation for the design of thrust blocks. All these design manuals neglect the
thrust from inertial thrust forces and consider only the thrust from the internal pressure, and present
the unbalanced force (resultant thrust) against the thrust block (or an anchor) at a pipe bend as:

T = 2 PASin(Δ 2 ) (1)

where: T = design unbalanced thrust force (lbf), P = design internal pressure (psi),
A = cross-sectional interior area of pipe (in2), and Δ = angular deflection at the bend (deg.)

The magnitude and direction of the above unbalanced force is found by considering the resultant of
equal internal pressure induced forces PA acting along each leg towards the point of inflection (PI)
as shown in Figure 1 (M11 2004, Figure 13-13).

Figure 1. Vector diagram of thrust forces at a bend.


Reprinted from M11: Steel Pipe - A Guide for Design and Installation, 4th edition, by permission. Copyright © 2004,
American Water Works Association.

Pipelines 2009
Pipelines 2009: Infrastructure's Hidden Assets © 2009 ASCE 972

While the unbalanced thrust force due to inertia could become significant for larger velocity flows
(usually greater than 10 feet per second) and low pressure applications, it is generally recognized
that for the most commonly encountered water/wastewater applications this is not significant.

Resistance

Conceptually, with the use of a thrust block, the unbalanced force is to be resisted primarily by the
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of California, San Diego on 08/24/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

passive pressure against the thrust block face and to a lesser extent by the frictional forces against
the thrust block and pipe surfaces in contact with soil. Almost all AWWA (2002; 2004; 2006;
2008; and 2009) design guidelines and the USACE’s (1986) technical manual conservatively
choose to not consider the frictional resistance, and estimate the bearing area required based on
“allowable lateral soil bearing pressures” published for different types of soils. From these
guidelines, the equation for the required bearing area of a thrust block for a horizontal bend is of
the form:

SfT
Ab = (2)
σa

Where: S f = factor of safety ( ≥ 1.0) σ a = allowable (lateral) bearing pressure (psf), Ab = required
bearing area of thrust block (ft2). Variances in factors of safety and allowable bearing pressures do
exist between the design guidelines for the different materials.

LONGITUDINAL THRUST RESTRAINT

In many instances, thrust blocks become impractical. Large diameter pipelines can require massive
thrust blocks that can interfere with adjacent structures and future construction. Unintended loss of
support for the thrust block, either through adjacent construction activities, or natural causes, can be
catastrophic. Longitudinal thrust restraint relies principally on restraining pipeline joints for a
sufficient length to allow friction between the pipe and surrounding soil to resist the thrust force.
The length of pipeline required to develop the resisting force is often long enough that the effects of
adjacent construction or other loss of soil are less likely to cause a failure in the thrust restraint
system.

The vector diagram at a pipeline bend (Figure 1) shows the axial thrust to be PA. However, the
effects of pipeline movement relative to the soil under the effects of thrust loading, the differing
joint designs from one pipeline material to another, and the degree to which each pipeline material
industry is willing to consider passive lateral resistance from the soil has led to design approaches
for determining longitudinal thrust restraint that differ significantly. The common pipeline
materials and their design approaches are discussed below.

Steel

The current widely used method for determining longitudinal thrust restraint in steel pipelines is
contained in M11 (AWWA 2004). This method relies on the pipe-soil friction to develop
resistance to thrust. Welded or harnessed joints may be used to develop a sufficient length of pipe
to resist the longitudinal component of thrust. If future excavation parallel to the pipe is
anticipated, the designer should consider its effect on reducing the frictional resistance. Lateral
effects due to passive resistance of the soil are assumed in the derivation of the restraint-length
equation, but passive resistance terms do not appear in the equation. The M11 method is
summarized below.

Pipelines 2009
Pipelines 2009: Infrastructure's Hidden Assets © 2009 ASCE 973

The total resultant thrust force at a bend is 2PAsin(Δ/2), as given by Equation (1). This total thrust
force can be resolved along either leg of a bend into an axial component, PA(1-cosΔ) and a
transverse component, PAsinΔ. Not discussed in the current 2004 edition of M11 is the
assumption that passive resistance by the soil is sufficient to resist this transverse component of the
thrust force. This assumption allows the restraint system design equation to be based solely on the
resultant axial component. An appropriate level of conservatism is introduced in practice by
restraining or harnessing joints along both legs of the bend. The frictional force developed
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of California, San Diego on 08/24/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

between the pipeline and the surrounding soil to restrain the thrust force is assumed by M11 to be
distributed uniformly along the restrained length of the pipeline. Equation 13-6 of M11 (AWWA
2004) therefore gives the required length of pipeline to be restrained on each side of a horizontal
bend as,
PA(1 − cos Δ )
L= (3)
μ (We + Wp + Ww )

Where: L = length of restrained or harnessed joints on each side of the bend or elbow (ft),
µ = coefficient of friction between the pipe and the soil, We (horizontal bends) = twice the weight
of the soil prism over the pipe (lb/ft of pipe length), Wp = weight of the pipe (lb/ft), and W w =
weight of the contained water (lb/ft)

M11 notes that all parameters except the value of µ, friction coefficient between the pipe and the
soil, can be readily determined. Tests and experience indicate that the value of µ is not only a
function of the type of soil, it is also greatly affected by the degree of compaction, moisture content
of the backfill, and type of coating. M11 notes that care must be exercised in the selection of µ,
with coefficients of friction generally in the range of 0.25 to 0.40. When a high water table or
submerged condition is anticipated, M11 states that the effects of buoyancy on soil weight must be
considered.

Types of Restrained Joints

Relative to thrust restraint, there are two types of restrained joints in steel pipe: (1) continuous,
wherein the joints offer no angular flexibility, and (2) segmented, wherein the joints allow angular
flexibility. Both welded and flanged joints are considered continuous. Harnessed joints, such as
the configuration shown in Figure 2 (AWWA M11 Figure 13-18) are considered segmented.

Figure 2. Harnessed joint (other configurations are also available)


Reprinted from M11: Steel Pipe - A Guide for Design and Installation, 4th edition, by permission. Copyright © 2004, American
Water Works Association.

Pipelines 2009
Pipelines 2009: Infrastructure's Hidden Assets © 2009 ASCE 974

Ductile Iron Pipe


A current common means for restraining thrust in buried Ductile Iron pipelines is to utilize special
push-on joint pipes that offer joint flexibility while remaining fully restrained.

The length, “L”, of such restrained pipe joints that must be installed on each side of a bend is
generally a function of pipe size, the internal pressure, depth of cover, the characteristics of the
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of California, San Diego on 08/24/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

backfill and trench soil surrounding the pipe, and whether the pipe is polyethylene encased.

Figure 3 (DIPRA 2006, Figure 7) is a free body diagram of a restrained pipe unit where L is the
length of the restrained pipe on each side of the bend. The frictional resistance is shown as a
distributed force, Ff, assumed to be effective only on a projected length, Lcos(θ/2), which is
perpendicular to the resultant thrust. The total frictional resistance on each side of the bend is then
FfLcos(θ/2).

Figure 3. Free-body diagram of horizontal bend for Ductile Iron pipe


Reprinted from Thrust Restraint Design,6th edition, by permission. (DIPRA 2006)

The bearing resistance is shown as a distributed force, with maximum value of Rs at the bend,
diminishing linearly to 0 at L. This assumption is based on the fact that the bearing resistance
(passive resistance in the soil) opposes the resultant of thrust and is proportional to deformation or
movement. Maximum movement will occur at the bend. The total assumed bearing resistance on
each side of the bend is assumed to be of the magnitude, (1/2)RsLcos(θ/2).

Solving the resulting equation for L and employing a safety factor,


S .F .PA(Tanθ / 2 )
L= (4)
F f + 1 / 2 Rs

Where: S.F. = Safety Factor (Usually 1.5), Ff = Unit Frictional Force = Fs for standard asphaltic
coated pipe, or 0.7 Fs for polyethylene encased pipe (lbf/ft), Rs = Unit Bearing Resistance (lbf/ft),
θ = angular deflection at the bend (deg.)

Pipelines 2009
Pipelines 2009: Infrastructure's Hidden Assets © 2009 ASCE 975

It is recognized that the above figure and equation do not necessarily represent the actual pipe-soil
behavior with all trench types and the various restrained joint designs available. Variations exist in
the way different restrained joints from different manufacturers respond to loadings, along with soil
and installation variables. However, this approach has proven to be a practical and conservative
general thrust restraint design that has been verified by available test data and numerous installed
systems.

Unit Frictional Force, Fs


Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of California, San Diego on 08/24/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Empirical work (Potyondy 1961) indicates that for friction between pipe and soils, the force is also
dependent upon the cohesion of the soil. Thus,
Fs = A p C + W tan δ (5)

Where: C = fcCs,(psf) Ap = surface area of the pipe bearing on the soil (ft2), W = the unit normal
force (lbf), δ = effective friction angle between the pipe and soil = φfφ (deg.), Ap= πD/2 for bends
(assume only one-half the pipe circumference bears against the soil)

Values of soil cohesion (Cs ) and internal friction angle of the soil (φ) must be known or
conservatively estimated for the soil at a particular installation. fc and fφ are modification factors
for Cs and Φ, respectively, and are related to soil/trench types and pipe material. DIPRA (2006)
presents a table of conservative values of these parameters for Ductile Iron pipe in seven general
classifications of saturated soils.

The unit normal force W is given by,


W = 2We + W p + Ww (6)

Where the earth load (We) is taken as the prism load on the pipe. The earth load is doubled to
account for frictional resistance acting on both the top and the bottom of the pipe. The unit weight
of the pipe and water (Wp + Ww) are effective at only the bottom of the pipe. Then for bends:
Fs = (πD / 2)C + (2We + W p + Ww ) tan δ (7)

Unit Bearing Resistance, Rs

The maximum unit lateral resistance, Rs, at the bend is limited so as not to exceed a rectangular
distribution of the passive soil pressure, Pp, which is generally much less than the ultimate capacity
of the soil to resist pipe movement. The passive soil pressure for a particular soil is given by the
Rankine formula:
Pp = γH C Nφ + 2C S ( N φ ) 0.5 (8)

Where: Pp = passive soil pressure (psf), γ = backfill soil density (pcf), HC = mean depth from
surface to the plane of resistance (centerline of a pipe or center of bearing area of a thrust block)
(ft), CS = soil cohesion (psf), Nφ = tan2 (45° + φ/2), φ = internal friction angle of the soil (deg.)

As discussed above, the full Rankine passive soil pressure, Pp, can be developed with insignificant
movement in well-compacted soils. For some of the standard laying conditions, the DIPRA (2006)
method provides a modification factor Kn, for the design value of passive soil pressure to assure
that excessive movement will not occur. Therefore,

Pipelines 2009
Pipelines 2009: Infrastructure's Hidden Assets © 2009 ASCE 976

Rs = K n Pp D (9)

A table of empirically determined values for Kn, based on compaction achieved in the trench,
backfill materials, and properties of the undisturbed earth is provided in DIPRA (2006).

Concrete Pressure Pipe (CCP) - AWWA M9


Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of California, San Diego on 08/24/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

This new procedure, which was initially developed through finite element modeling, followed by a
simplified analysis and design procedure, was developed based on semi-infinite beam-on-an-elastic
foundation equations to solve force, moment, and deformations compatibility. The soil stiffness is
very important since it provides resistance against transverse motion of the pipe; soil stiffness
depends on soil type and compaction and accounts for both lateral stiffness and lateral friction.
There are five types of soil included in the new thrust procedure.

The frictional resistance of the soil against axial movement of the pipe gives rise to the axial force,
and the passive resistance of the soil to the transverse movement of the pipe gives rise to shear and
bending in the pipe. The true axial force and the shear in the pipe must satisfy both equilibrium of
forces and compatibility of deformations.

Figure 4 (Figure 9-10 AWWA M9 2008) shows the free body diagram of forces and deformations
at horizontal bend.

Figure 4. (AWWA M9 2008, Figure 9-10)


Reprinted from M9: Concrete Pressure Pipe – Manual of Water Supply Practices, 3rd edition, by permission. Copyright ©
2008, American Water Works Association.

The equilibrium equation is:


T = 2 PA sin( Δ / 2) = 2 FO sin(Δ / 2) + 2VO cos(Δ / 2) + 2klbδ cos(Δ / 2) (10)

Compatibility of Deformation Equations are:

Pipelines 2009
Pipelines 2009: Infrastructure's Hidden Assets © 2009 ASCE 977

ƒ Lateral Deflection. δ b = δ cos(Δ / 2) = VO λ / k (11)


ƒ Axial deflection. δ a = δ sin( Δ / 2) = FO L ft / E c At (12)

Where, Lft = length of restrained pipe, Δ = bend angle, Fo = axial force at fittings, Vo = shear at
fitting (lbf), k = soil stiffness, lb = distance from point of inflection of the bend to the first pipe
joint, δ = out ward movement of fitting, At = transformed area of pipe, and λ = beam on elastic
foundation parameter = [k/ 4 Ec Ieff]1/4 with Ec = modulus of elasticity of concrete and Ieff = effective
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of California, San Diego on 08/24/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

moment of inertia of pipe.

The restraint length equation is:


L ft = FO / f u (13)

Where: fu is the frictional resistance of buried pipe such that fu = μ[(1+β)We + Wp + Wf ], with β =
shallow cover factor = Ko tanφ(12H/Do + 0.50)2/μ(12H/Do + 0.107) ≤ 1, Wp = weight of soil prism
directly above the pipe (From the Springline), Wp = weight of pipe, Wf = weight of fluid inside the
pipe, μ = friction coefficient, Ko = 1 - sinφ, φ = angle of internal friction.

The equilibrium and compatibility equations and restraint length are solved simultaneously to
compute Fo , Vo , Lft , and δ. The bending moment M is calculated from the shear Vo using the beam
on elastic foundation equation:
M = VO [e λx (cos λx − sin λx)] / 2λ (14)

Where: x is the distance from the first joint of the elbow. These values are used to determine the
stress resultants along the pipeline with welded joints. The values of k and μ, γ, and φ are chosen
from Table 9-1 “Soil type selection guide” of AWWA (2008)l. The thickness of the steel cylinder
and restrained length depends on the whether the joint has mechanical or welded restraint. The
moment at the first joint of welded restraint system becomes:
M O = FO kL ft / 4λ2 At E c tan Δ / 2 (15)

The simplified design procedure is based on using beam on elastic foundation for welded joints and
segmented beam on elastic foundation for mechanically harnessed joints to account for joint slack.
The procedure also requires computing the pipe wall capacity and designing for the combined
effects of axial force and bending moment using the interaction diagram approach.

The design criteria used for pipe sections subjected to the combined effects of axial force and
bending moment are:

Design Criteria 1:

At 1.3 times the effective field test pressure, 1.3Pfteff , where Pfteff = 1.25Pweff, and Pweff = Pw, Pft
/1.25, or Pw + Pt /1.4, whichever is the greatest, the strain in the steel cylinder may not exceed the
yield strain, εy = fy /Es.

In calculating the cylinder strain, the tensile strength of the concrete or mortar inside the steel
cylinder and at the joint is neglected because the pipe may have circumferential or helical cracks in
its inner core. Therefore the minimum load factor applied to Pw is 1.63 to reach the onset of
cylinder yield.

Pipelines 2009
Pipelines 2009: Infrastructure's Hidden Assets © 2009 ASCE 978

Design Criteria 2:

At 1.56 times the effective field test pressure, the axial force and bending moment may not exceed
the ultimate strength of the pipe under combined loads. The minimum loads factor applied to Pw to
reach the ultimate compressive strength of the concrete is 1.95.

Due to the iterative nature of the design process for restraining buried horizontal bends with welded
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of California, San Diego on 08/24/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

or mechanically harnessed joints, computer software is virtually mandatory. A computer program


named Thrust Restraint Design Program (TRDP) has been developed through the American
Concrete Pressure Pipe Association (ACPPA) to facilitate the use of the new 2008 M9 procedure.

Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC)

There are three primary types of thrust restraint used for PVC pressure pipe, excluding solvent
weld or glued joints, which are not typically used for underground construction of mainline
pipelines in the water and wastewater industries:

1. Concrete thrust blocks or anchors

2. Manufacturer’s proprietary restrained joints

3. Pipe after-market mechanical joint restraints

The design of thrust restraining mechanisms for the most part to have been developed from the
basic research and design development work performed in the CI and DI pipe industry, the primary
difference being adjustments in the manner of gripping the pipe. Most of the work performed by
the pipe and component manufacturers, has been with respect to the development of proprietary
restrained joints such as the IPEX Terra-Brute pin joint, the Certainteed Certa-lok spline type joint,
or the S&B Technical Products Bulldog. The same appears to be true for manufacturers of
mechanical restraint products for use with PVC pipe where the research documents the
performance of the product system to meet the thrust restraint requirements. Mechanical restraints
developed for use with PVC typically conform to the requirements to ASTM F1674. The use of
any of these devices must consider both the pressure rating of the pipe and the device such that the
maximum pressure used in the pipeline (usually the test pressure) does not exceed the maximum
pressure recommended by either the PVC pipe manufacturer or the restraint manufacturer.

Research (Kennedy, Shumard, and Meeks 1989 and 1990) was used for the development of testing
methods for PVC restrained joints and also forms the basis of ASTM F1674. Engineers from
Romac (Lemke) and IPEX (Battistan) confirmed that they initially used DIPRA guidelines and
research as the basis of design for their joint restraints with refinements based on these studies for
PVC pipe applications.

As with applications for other pipe materials, the installation and testing of PVC piping systems
depend significantly on the design parameters and installation practices, some of which may not be
controllable, including:
• Design pressure: operating, sustained, test
• Trench preparation and soil variations
• Pipe handling: shipping, storage and installation
• Backfill compaction and installation of bedding: trench type

Pipelines 2009
Pipelines 2009: Infrastructure's Hidden Assets © 2009 ASCE 979

• Joint assembly including joint lubricant: constructability concerns


• Pipeline curvature (deflection) and assembly to fittings and valves

Current thrust restraint practice for PVC pipe is relatively unified in approach, consisting of
industry, manufacturer and designer influenced preferences. Experience suggests that the current
approaches may be adequate but may not the optimally efficient with respect to design outcome.
With the trend away from static restraints such as thrust blocks, there is a greater reliance on the
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of California, San Diego on 08/24/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

tools and references developed by the product manufacturers for their specific products.
High Density Polyethylene (HDPE)
HDPE pipe joints are almost universally restrained. Joints between lengths of HDPE pipe are
either heat-fusion butt-welded or made with stub-end flange adapters. In both cases, the pipe joints
are fully restrained. Consequently, calculations of thrust forces and required length of restrained
joints is not required.

The exception to this is where HDPE pipe is joined to other pipe materials. If the end of the HDPE
pipe is not securely anchored (as with an adequate fused collar embedded in a reinforced concrete
thrust wall) to withstand all forces and movements generated in the HDPE pipe section, joints in
the other pipe materials must be evaluated for thrust restraint capabilities. Another concern with
joints in adjacent pipeline materials is related to HDPE’s high coefficient of thermal expansion, as
well as pronounced “Poisson” effect. Cooling and pressurization of the HDPE pipe can cause it to
shorten sufficiently to cause unrestrained joints in the adjacent pipeline material to pull apart.

Fiber Reinforced Plastic (FRP or Fiberglass)

Although FRP pipe material typically has the strength characteristics necessary to withstand
longitudinal stresses due to thrust, widely accepted pipe jointing systems have not been developed
for the purpose of longitudinally restraining thrust. Currently accepted practice for restraint of
thrust in FRP pipelines has therefore been to use thrust blocks.

COMPARISON OF CURRENT APPROACHES

This section presents a brief comparison of the methods used by category and then by pipe
material.

Table 1 provides a summary of some of the restraint systems used for each Standard, and pipe
material. As can be seen, not all systems are available on each pipe material, due to design
limitations, materials limitations and manufacturing capabilities.

Pipelines 2009
Pipelines 2009: Infrastructure's Hidden Assets © 2009 ASCE 980

Table 1
Summary of Restraint Systems
PIPE MATERIAL

Description/ CCP STEEL PVC DIP HDPE


AWWA Standard M-9 M-11 M-23 M-41 M-55
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of California, San Diego on 08/24/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Thrust Blocks
Blocks for Fittings/Valves X X X X X
Concrete Anchors X X X X
Concrete Anchors with Rods X X X
Internal Pipe Restraint
Joint Welding X X X1 X
Inter-Locking Joint Rings X X
2
Flange Joints X X X X X2
Locking Gasket Joints X
Gripper Wedges at Joints X
Gripper Rings at Joint X X
Plastic Insertion spines at Joint X
Notes:
1. Fusible PVC or glued joint
2. Requires a steel backer ring
3. Butt Fusion

Thrust Block Restraint Systems

As can be seen in Table 2 the same equation is used for calculation of the thrust resultant force by
all of the pipe material types. It should be noted that the resultant force used does not consider the
dynamic thrust imposed by the momentum flux (impulse). The only variation between methods
would be the area of the pipe internal diameter (ID). By deduction, Since the pipe ID’s are
relatively similar then the resultant thrust force calculated would also be similar.
Table 2
Equations Used for Thrust Block Size Calculation

PIPE MATERIAL THRUST BLOCK SIZE EQUATION FACTOR OF SAFETY


FORCE

CCP, M-9 2PA Sin(θ/2) LB x HB = T σ 1.0


(See Note 1)
Steel, M-11 2PA Sin(θ/2) LB x HB = T σ 1.0
(See Note 1)
PVC, M-23 2PA Sin(θ/2) T ( SF ) 1.5
A =
λ H t N d + 2C s N d

DIP, M-41 2PA Sin(θ/2) Ab = hb = SfT/SB 1.5

FRP, M-45 2PA Sin(θ/2) Ab = HbLb = (T x FS)/σ 1.5

HDPE, M-55 NA NA NA
(See Note 2) (See Note 2) (See Note 2)
1. A FS in not shown in the equation – use appropriate FS for Design
2. HDPE Pipe relies on the internal restraint capacity of the pipe – Butt fused joints
.

Pipelines 2009
Pipelines 2009: Infrastructure's Hidden Assets © 2009 ASCE 981

Thrust restraint for HDPE pipe as defined in the AWWA M-55 manual is limited to discussions on
connection of HDPE to other pipe types; the document is silent on thrust restraint requirements for
bends and fittings. Thrust restraint for the pipe in general is assumed to be taken care of by the butt
fused joint system used by this pipe type.

Allowable soil bearing pressures used to resist the imposed thrust are the main difference in the
computation method proposed by each of the standards. An overview summary of the allowable
bearing pressures by soils type is presented in Table 3, below. Some of the allowable bearing
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of California, San Diego on 08/24/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

pressures differ by a factor of 4 or more between methods.

Table 3
Soil Pressure Variations
Allowable Soil Bearing Pressures - lbs/sf
PIPE MATERIAL
CCP STEEL PVC DIP HDPE
SOIL MATERIAL M-9 M-11 M-23 M-41 M-55
Muck, Peat, tc (1) (2) 0 0 (3)
Soft Clay (1) (2) 500 1,000 (3)
Silt (1) (2) 1,500 (3)
Sandy Silt (1) (2) 3,000 (3)
Sand (1) (2) 1,000 4,000 (3)
Sand and Gravel (1) (2) 1,500 (3)
Sandy Clay (1) (2) 6,000 (3)
Sand and Gravel with Clay (1) (2) 2,000 (3)
Sand and Gravel Cemented with Clay (1) (2) 4,000 (3)
Hard Pan (clay) (1) (2) 5,000 9,000 (3)
Notes:
1. M-9: "Allowable bearing pressure values vary from less than 1000 lb/sf for soft soils to
several tons/sf for solid rock. Knowledge of local soil conditions is necessary for proper
sizing of thrust blocks".
2. M-11: “The value of safe horizontal bearing capacity of the native soil should be determined from field
tests
by qualified soils engineers".
3. M-41 “Allowable” bearing pressures are in effect reduced markedly from the above tabular values
when the safety factor suggested by the ductile iron manual is employed.
4. M55: "Thrust blocks do not provide restraint against pullout and are not a substitute
for external mechanical restraint".

As can be seen in Note 3 of Table 3, HDPE thrust blocks do not take care of the thermal
expansion/contraction characteristic of the pipe. Therefore, additional evaluation is required to
properly anchor this pipe material and avoid pullout at structures.

Longitudinal Restraint Systems

This comparison only considers thrust conditions at horizontal bends. Each design standard
referenced herein discusses additional methods for restraint of vertical bends. Table 4 provides a
summary of the equations and general input parameters required for each method. As can be seen
from this table, there are a number of differences between the methods used and calculations
required.

Pipelines 2009
Pipelines 2009: Infrastructure's Hidden Assets © 2009 ASCE 982

Table 4
Comparison of Thrust Parameters for Horizontal Bends

PIPE MATERIAL

DESIGN
METHOD/ CCP STEEL PVC DIP FRP PE
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of California, San Diego on 08/24/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

PARAMETER
M9 M11 M23 M41 M45 M55
Design 2PA Sin (θ /2)’= PA (1-Cos θ) 2PA Sin (θ /2) PA tan(θ /2) 2PA Sin (θ /2) NA
unbalanced = 2FoSin(θ /2) +
force (Tr) at 2VoCos(θ /2) +
bends 2kd*lbCos(θ /2)

Restrained Lft = Fo / fu L=PA1Cosθ_ Lr = ( SF ) PA( Tan (θ/2)


L = PA sin (θ / 2) HDPE uses
Where , μWe+Ww+Wp L = S.F.PA[Tan(θ/2)] f butt fused
Length Fs + 1 / 2 Rs [F + 1/2R ]
f s (2We+Wp+Ww) joints (all
fu = μ [(1+β) We internally
+ Wp + Wf ] (See note 1) restrained)

Factor of 1.0 1.0 Not defined 1.5 1.0 NA


Safety (Sf)
Friction μ - 0.3 or 0.5 μ - 0.25 to 0.40. Fs = Ap(fcC) Ff = Fs, for Asph- 0.25 to 0.50 NA
Factor depending on +Wtan(fFF) altic Coating
soil type and
compaction (See Note 3) Ff = 0.7 Fs
level Polythylene
encased pipe
Shallow cover Ko tan (12 H/
2
NA NA NA NA NA
factor Do + 0.50) / μ
(12H/Do +
0.107) ≤ 1
Soil Weight 2We+Wp+W 2We+Ww+Wp 2 We+Wp+Ww 2 We+Wp+Ww We = (Cd)* (W)* NA
(Bd)* (Bc)
Unit Bearing 2Vo Cos(θ /2) NA Pp = KnPpD Pp = γHcNФ + NA NA
Pressure (See note 2) 2 Cs √NФ
Unit bearing Not defined NA Rs=KnPpD Rs=KnPpD NA NA
Resistance,
Rs
Kn 1.0 1.0 Varies by soil 0.2 to 1.0 1.0 NA
type
(See Note 4)
Notes:
1. Pipe joints require restraint system to resist thrust load
2. For steel pipe passive resistance by the soil is assumed sufficient to resist the transverse component of the
thrust force. This assumption allows the restraint system design equation to be based solely on the
resultant axial component.
3. See Table 4-12 in AWWA M-23 for Fs factors
4. See Table 4-13 in AWWA M-23 for Rs factors
Table 4 shows a lot of variation in approach to thrust restraint design between the various
pipe materials and associated standards. Not only do the methods vary by the way they
approach the calculations (Sin – vs Cos – vs Tan) but the use of passive soil pressure (or not)
is also a factor.

SUMMARY

Considerable variation exists in the approaches to thrust restraint design for differing pipe
materials, as practiced today. This variation is evident in the different guidance for restraining
horizontal bends provided by AWWA design manuals for the different pipe materials. Approaches

Pipelines 2009
Pipelines 2009: Infrastructure's Hidden Assets © 2009 ASCE 983

for thrust block design are fairly consistent, with variations occurring primarily in the assumed
allowable soil bearing pressures and factors of safety. Longitudinal thrust restraint approaches vary
considerably, with most determining the required length of restrained-joint pipe using relatively
simple solutions. The latest approach for concrete pressure pipe (AWWA 2008), however
employs the simultaneous solution of 4 equations for equilibrium of forces and compatibility of
deformations.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of California, San Diego on 08/24/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

REFERENCES

American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) “Designation F1674 Standard Test
Method for Joint Restraint Products for Use with PVC Pipe” (2005).
American Water Works Association (AWWA) “PVC Pipe – Design and Installation”,
Manual of Water Supply Practices M23, Second Edition, AWWA, Denver, Colorado,
2002.
American Water Works Association (AWWA) “Steel Pipe – A Guide for Design and
Installation”, Manual of Water Supply Practices M11, Fourth Edition, AWWA,
Denver, Colorado, 2004.
American Water Works Association (AWWA) “PE Pipe - Design and Installation”, Manual
of Water Supply Practices M55, First Edition, AWWA, Denver, Colorado, 2006.
American Water Works Association (AWWA) “Fiberglass Pipe Design Manual”, Manual of
Water Supply Practices M45, Second Edition, AWWA, Denver, Colorado, 2008a.
American Water Works Association (AWWA) “Concrete Pressure Pipe”, Manual of Water
Supply Practices M9, Third Edition, AWWA, Denver, Colorado, 2008b.
American Water Works Association (AWWA) “Ductile Iron Pipe and Fittings”, Manual of
Water Supply Practices M41, Third Edition, AWWA, Denver, Colorado, 2009.
Andre’ Battistin; personal communication
Andy Lemke; personal communication
ASCE Task Committee on Thrust Restraint Design of Buried Pipelines (2009b) “White Paper
on Thrust Restraint Design of Buried Pipelines, Part 2 – Historical Development”, In
‘Proceedings of the 2009 Pipeline Division Specialty Conference –Infrastructure’s
Hidden Assets’, ASCE, San Diego, California”, August.
ASCE Task Committee on Thrust Restraint Design of Buried Pipelines (2009c) “White Paper
on Thrust Restraint Design of Buried Pipelines, Part 3 – Roadmap for Unified
Approach”, In ‘Proceedings of the 2009 Pipeline Division Specialty Conference –
Infrastructure’s Hidden Assets’, ASCE, San Diego, California”, August.
Ductile Iron Pipe Research Association (DIPRA), “Thrust Restraint Design for Ductile Iron
Pipe,” Sixth Edition, 2006.
Kennedy, Harold, Jr., Shumard, Dennis D., and Meeks, Cary M; “Investigation of Pipe-to-
Soil friction and Its Affect on Thrust Restraint for PVC and Ductile-Iron Pipe,”
Proceeds of the AWWA Distribution Systems Symposium, September 1989.
Kennedy, Harold, Jr., Shumard, Dennis D., and Meeks, C.M.; “The Design of Underground
Thrust Restrained Systems for Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) Pipe,” Buried Plastic Pipe
Technology, ASTM STP 1093; George S. Buczala and Michael J. Cassady, Eds.,
American Society for Testing Materials, Philadelphia, 1990.
Potyondy, J.G., “Skin Friction Between Various Soils and Construction Materials.”
Geotechnique,Volume II No. 4, London, England (December, 1961)

Pipelines 2009

You might also like