Determining When You Can Get Away With a Thinner Liner

Some material costs can be saved by using a thinner liner on a pipe rehab job. But how do you figure out when it’s worth taking that route?

Recently, I received this question:

“I took your advice and read the ASTM F-1216 that pertains to CIPP inversion lining. I noticed that there is a lot of detail about determining thickness of liner based on whether or not the line is fully deteriorated or only partially deteriorated. I’m confused on when a pipe is ‘partially deteriorated’ and when it’s ‘fully deteriorated.’ Can you clarify the difference? Can I line pipe that is only partially deteriorated with a thinner liner and save some costs for tube and resin by going thinner?”

I commend this person for reading the ASTM. There is a lot of good information in that document, as well as the documents that accompany it, but that’s another blog post.

When I was learning plumbing practices, I was taught that the difference between a broken pipe that’s considered partially deteriorated versus one that’s fully deteriorated is the condition of the breaks in the pipe. A pipe with a circumferential break in the pipe is considered partially deteriorated. In other words, the pipe will support the loading around it — both dead load and live loads — with the exception of the direct area that is broken.

On the other hand, a longitudinal break indicates that the pipe is fully deteriorated. A crack or break that travels in the alignment of the pipe section means the pipe can no longer support the loading factors and is in fact beginning to fail. A clay pipe with a crack in the length or a cast iron pipe with the bottom eroded away indicates the pipe’s life is over or close to over.

Here’s where a decision needs to be made. The decision has to take into account how long the partially deteriorated pipe’s life will be if a partially deteriorated lining solution is applied. Most likely not the 50 years that you could achieve if you applied a fully deteriorated design to the fix. The few dollars saved on the installation process usually doesn’t justify this approach on a 30- or 40-year-old existing pipe.

Now if the pipe you are trying to rehab has only been in the ground a couple of years and a defect was found that didn’t threaten the structural integrity of the pipe, a thinner liner would be appropriate. If you have the host pipe in a fully deteriorated mode, you don’t have a choice on which method to pick. A fully deteriorated pipe that demands a full structural liner will give the owner the peace of mind that he’s getting solution with a 50-year design life if the old host pipe disappears.

With the little amount of money saved going with a thinner liner, most customers would rather start a rehab job with the equivalent of new pipe as opposed to a Band-Aid fix that will extend the life of an old line a few years.

About the author
John Heisler is the owner of Pipe Lining Supply and Quik-Lining Systems Inc. He has 20 years of experience in the CIPP lining industry and over 40 years in the underground construction industry.



Discussion

Comments on this site are submitted by users and are not endorsed by nor do they reflect the views or opinions of COLE Publishing, Inc. Comments are moderated before being posted.