1st NO DIG BERLIN 2013

Conference and Exhibition

23 - 26. April 2013

Paper 4-3

German DWA Worksheet A 143, Part 2 whats new in structural

design of CIPP?
CEng Markus Maletz, EUR ING
KMG Pipe Technologies, Ursensollen, Germany

SUMMARY
Once in the early years of renovation with CIPP liners, many faults (especially
buckling damages) occurred. The first design attempts have been made in the 90's,
due to the existing Worksheet A 127 of the German DWA (design for pipes with
digging) the load cases hostpipe stable and hostpipe not safe have been
created.
Until the publishing in the year 2000 there has been worked on the advisory leaflet M
127, part 2, which have to be used only for the renovation of pipes. Three hostpipe
states were defined, which are specified by the client.
After over 10 years of successful application, now the leaflet has been revised and
published in November 2012 as a Worksheet A 143 part 2 (yellow print).

INTRODUCTION
The pipe relining or hose lining, as they will now be called for a long period, are the
most successful renovation systems in the non-pressure (= gravity) range. Reasons
for this are likely the duration of this processes - the eldest system has been placed
in 1971 - and thus the experience with this process and the diversity of this
applications. Liners are actually the only renovation process, which are - properly
installed tight to the host pipe, and therefore without a recognizable annular gap.
They are built in different profiles, such as circular-, egg-, oval- and rectangleprofiles, closed fit to the wall of the old pipe and the cross-sectional area of the
original profile will not decrease very much.
Also the possibilities of use - depending on the process - in sizes from DN 100 up to
> DN 2000 shows the universality of these technologies.
Liners are a so-called "locally produced and hardened pipes" (English: CIPP = Cured
In Place Pipe), at least consisting of a tube or hose carrier and a resin (due to EN
ISO 11296-4 and EN ISO 11295), optionally with an coated inner film, and/or outer
film (or Preliner) and - especially for the larger dimensions with "inert" (no influence to
the quality of resin, e.g. with respect to chemical or thermal resistance) additives in
the filled resin system. In most cases there are UP resins used for lining, in individual
cases EP or VE resins.

-1-

In the UP resin systems is the reaction or curing fundamentally distinguished in:

-

hot water curing, quick curing / cold curing

and
-

UV-light curing

The heat curing families include the "classical" methods using hot water or steam - in
rarer cases, using electric resistance heating too. They include also the long
introduced system on the market called "quick-hardening" for the heat curing family.
All systems above bring, depending on recipes on the basis of peroxides, with each
of user to user differently defined temperature-time-track (processing- or pot-time),
the resin mixture to the reaction and hardening over a defined time period
(tempering); the laminate completely to the finished product, in most cases a pipe-inpipe, sometimes to a pipe connected to the old liner.
The "quick curing" offers - as the name suggests - a much shorter processing time,
which makes it sometimes necessary that the work step "impregnation" is located on
the construction site.
The cold curing of UP and EP resins is a system which is shortening the curing
reaction time very much, so that an impregnation is only possible at the job-site.
Additionally, the liners to be processed are limited in diameter (max. up to ND 400)
and length (up to about 65.0 m), because the pot life of the resin is inversely
reciprocal to the volume of the mixed-resin behaves. The hardening grade, which is
reached immediately after the installation of the cold-hardening resin systems, is
below the final cure, which is only achieved within approximately 30 days.
Before UV-curing, the first step is the installation, usually by pulling in the liner over
existing manholes using a winch. By a defined air pressure, the liner is then
expanded and pressed against the old pipe. In this state, now a UV lamp (lightchain) with a defined speed is pulled through the liner. By the use of photo catalysts,
the resin reacts with the UV light, and hardens. There is usually no peroxide curing;
only with thicker laminates ( approx. 12 mm) there will be used a combination!
Requirements for the use of CIPP are:
-

hydraulic sufficient cross-section before renovation;

presence of the vault (circular or other profile);

deformations 6-8 % (ovality);

thermal and chemical resistance of the selected resin system;

-2-

(GERMAN) STRUCTURAL DESIGN ASPECTS

General
Before publication of the leaflet M127-2 static assessments have been carried out
according to the DWA worksheet A127, because of lack of a missing standard. This
approach was on the safe side, although this paper was meant only for new
installation of sewers and pipes. The calculations have been fundamentally
separated in "old pipe not safe" and "old pipe secure."
Under the assumption of a consolidated soil (E1 = E2 = E3 = E4) and simplifications,
such as the friction on the walls (in a trench fault), the liners were rated on water
pressure (buckling check) and otherwise also with earth-, traffic- and other static
surface loads (e.g. container, foundations, pools).
First thoughts of the DWA were in 1993 that there is a difference of the system
(which was generally used) of a damaged pipe impaired in the surrounding soil. In
September 1999, the (former) working group 1.2.3 of DWA had their last session
before the publication of the new leaflet handle only a few appeals by renovation
companies. In January 2000 the new leaflet 127-2 appeared and the "gray zone" of
the A 127 had been removed for calculation of liner renovations.
Through various research projects and theoretical assumptions, but also try to
practice, a calculation methodology was developed, which is now up-to-date and
verified by means of the FE (finite element) method.
Hostpipe states
In the (new) leaflet, it is no longer distinguished between the load case "stable" and
"not stable" according to ATV-M 143, part 3, and it defines three host pipe states that
correspond to all the "old" state "stable":
-

state I

state II

and
-

state III

In the state I, which is not different from the previous load case "stable", soil and
traffic loads are still taken completely by the old pipe. The liner is measured only on
groundwater pressure (identified over invert). In that case, if the wall thickness is too
low, it can cause a buckling of liners in the invert (circular profiles).
In state II is assumed that (even with a cracked pipe, which may also have slight
deformations) it is adapted the so-called "arch effect" of the surrounding soil.
An intact bedding activates a slight deformation - which follows a crack and the

-3-

reaction pressure. Now the so-called "pipe-soil-system" carries the soil and traffic
loads. As in state I, the liner is to be measured simply by water pressure and it is only
necessary to prevent the bedding from being damaged by exfiltration and/or
infiltration.
The state III is characterized by the fact that the existing pipe (or the pipe-soilsystem) is no longer stable for the future. Therefore the liner must additionally carry a
water column and the soil- and traffic loads. It may (or may not) lead to thicker liners,
as in the two cases above.
If there is no existing groundwater, it is to be considered a minimum load of d a + 0.1
m water column over invert ( 1.5 m) in state I and II.
In the relevant "main states" I and II, is now made a buckling check against
pressurized groundwater. The M 127-2 has now three reduction factors to be
introduced. These consider the following "disturbances" of the old pipe liner
geometry:
1. Reduction for a prestrain v (imperfection, pipe tolerances, etc.), which are
specified of 1 % of the liner radius (if there are exact measurements) of the
host pipe. If there is no calibration, the value must be 2 % (standard).
2. Reduction for ovality Ar,v (4-hinge-deformation, ovalisation), which is specified
with minimum 3 % of the liner radius (Standard).
3. Reduction for a surrounding gap s between Liner and host pipe of 0.5 % of
the liner radius (< DN 800) respectively 0.25 % ( DN 800), if there are no
greater values, maybe proofed by testing reports (recommendation).
All three reduction factors (in combination) mean that the minimum wall thickness increases with unfavorable geometry. Thus, a liner product is selected, which has
maybe a high gap, this unfavorable geometry must be compensated by a higher wall
thickness.
A direct comparison of a liner between the "old" calculation due to A 127 (buckling)
and the state I to M 127-2 has shown that for circular profiles, especially in the upper
diameter range (> ND 600) and at higher ground-water exercise, a reduction of the
minimum wall thickness can be achieved up to 14% - a positive aspect of the "new"
rule.

-4-

System sketches and examples

State I

The host pipe is stable possible damages, as leaky pipe connections are suitable,
except hairline cracks in the pipe wall are no cracks present. Likewise, even a slight
corrosion, such as for concrete pipes may be present.

-5-

State II

The host pipe-soil-system is stable as damage may occur e.g. longitudinal cracks,
in combination with a low deformation, proofed by a verified bedding which is
confirmed (for example by dynamic drop penetration testing or even long-term
observation).

-6-

State III

The host pipe-soil-system is not stable for the future there are greater deformations
and the liner gets additionally soil- and traffic loads.

-7-

Is the state III really critical?

It is important to see in the state III, that even after installation of the liner, the old
pipe can get further deformations under load. The liner must adapt to these
distortions of the old pipe, because his pipe stiffness is usually lower than the
stiffness of the old pipe. In this way, the liner of the old pipe-soil-system is affected
only marginally. The liner is loaded mainly by the close-fit component. A lower liner
stiffness (reduced wall thickness and/or E-Modulus) may be beneficial in this case.
This shows, that the slogan: "I calculate only in host pipe state III, then I get greater
wall thicknesses" turns out to be wrong. By a rise of groundwater and/or a change
in the existing pipe-soil-system, however, an increase of frictional effects is possible.
This would then apply the criteria for dimensioning by host pipe state II. For mixed
loads is a compromise between flexibility and stiffness of the liner to be found.
The calculation model for the host pipe state III consists of a spring system. The
longitudinal cracks in the old pipe will be idealized in the theoretical model of the old
pipe to be as eccentric joints. This can now be solved using Finite Element Analysis
(FEA), but there are only a few FEA models to calculate state III.
Further investigations
During unclear status, it is necessary to conduct soil tests. This may happen in
places that let suggest in the CCTV recording of the sewer, for example cavities, light
dynamic probing, or drilling in addition to the pipeline route will be carried out. It can
also identify some indication of the groundwater level.
There is also the possibility of long-term observations (if available, or possible) to
deter-mine, whether the damage profile has changed over time. With increasing
deformations certainly the choice of state III is preferable, because then the
assumption seems likely that the bedding is disturbed. The experience of the
evaluating engineer is very useful here. Thus, for example, in a very flat-lying sewer
with longitudinal cracks, have led to the influence of the traffic load due to increased
volume of heavy traffic to damage the line, while already such as very deep-lying
pipes the damage occurs during installation, and the dome-effect has set over the
years.
Redistribution of soil stresses
As an average over old sewers, the rigid pipes usually form after installation stress
concentrations over the pipe. The ground tensions are rearranged because of the
difference between soil and pipe (see ATV-DVWK A 127, clause 6.1 Redistribution of
Soil Stresses).

-8-

a) Rigid pipe

If now a pipe breaks, then the state II is build and the bedding-reaction-pressure is
activated. A slight deformation is associated with this process.
From the previously rigid system, a flexible soft system is made, which releases
tensions to the surrounding soil.
a) flexible pipe

By means of renovation, the flexural soft system will be kept.

Experiences / Damages
The experiences of renovations over the last years have shown that mostly all
damages of liners have been buckling losses.
The critical load for the liner is also buckling, which is triggered by levels of ground
water, generating a hydrostatic pressure. The distribution of pressure is triangular
situated, so you have an increasing water column towards the bottom; the buckling
pressure is greatest at the invert. In circular profiles at this point also occur the

-9-

damages. Egg-shaped sewers form the buckle in the spring line, because the largest
radius (= minimal resistance) is located there.

The reasons for buckling may firstly be a false assessment of the liner, coupled with
a not exactly known ground water level or other improper curing.
In the first case may be concerned, that groundwater, which is infiltrated into the
sewer for years, that was used as a type of drainage. After a successful
rehabilitation, experience has shown that the ground water level increases, providing
the water can find no other way.
In the second case, the construction management is required to identify the curing
procedures the liner strictly adhered to. Through a carefully planned strategy, quality
assurance, these errors can be avoided.

- 10 -

CHANGES FROM M 127-2 TO A 143-2 (yellow print)

With over 10 years of successful application the
advisory leaflet M 127 Part 2 has been revised in the
last four years and was published in November 2012 as
a yellow print.
The reasons for raising the status from a leaflet to a
worksheet were:
-

Probation of the leaflet M 127-2 in practice. The fact

sheet was published in 2000. It has proven itself in
practice, even in difficult renovation conditions. This
applies to Germany as well as many international
projects in which the leaflet 127-2 M was prescribed
for the structural design (see the English translation
of M 127-2).

Any known claims are mostly attributed on structural defects, inadequate curing
or misuse of this information sheet. If cases of damage have occurred, the
reasons could be revealed usually with the help of this information sheet.
The practicability of the leaflet can also be seen in many training courses for
Certified Sewer Rehabilitation Consultants, in which practicing engineers learn
to control simple CIPP statics due to M 127-2.

A new edition is required, especially due to the concept of partial

safety factors for actions (loads) and the resistances (strength
and deformation characteristics), which were introduced with the
Euro Codes (EC1).Calculation by partial safety factors
Table 1: partial safety factors for resistances
Pipe material
Plastic liner, cured in the sewer
Plastic liner, manufactured in a plant (extrusion or other methods)
Mortar-liner (regarding of possible notch effects in the materials testing)
Stainless steel
Resistance, with low effects (e. g. forced deformations of the liner in
hostpipe state III

- 11 -

M
1,35
1,25
1,50
1,15
1,00

Table 2: partial safety factors for loads

Load
Constant loads (G)
(Soil load, dead-weight, possibly surface load, concentrated area-load)
Changing loads (Q)
(traffic load, live-loads, groundwater, etc.)
Traffic loads with adequate coverage
High water (short-term)
Internal pressure (incl. pressure surge)
Test pressure
Changes of temperature
Forced deformations
1
2

F
1,35
1,50
1,35
1
1,10
2
1,50
1,20
1,10
1,10

Only allowed in hostpipe state III and coverages of h > 2 ND and h > 1,5 m
Valid only for approach of the long-term e-module, see also 6.4.1.1.

For some load combinations (e. g. groundwater in combination with a temperature

change) there are special combination safety factors (see A 143-2).
The characteristic material values of the liners (index: k) are divided by the value of
M (reduction) and the actions (loads) multiplied by the value of F (raise). The
resulting values are now the so-called design values (index: d) the structural
calculation is now be done with that items.
In contrast to the former method of calculation, the load will not be increased up to
the 2-times load (global safety factor = 2.0), but only up to the F-times load.
The calculated stresses and deformations are now also design values, and must be
compared with the (design-) strengths.
Thus, the evidences of the tensile and compressive stresses are as follows:

max d / fB,d 1,0

min d / C , d 1,0
The resulting deformations, calculated with F = M = 1.0, represent the proof of
usability.
The verification of stability results to:

pe, d / crit pe, d 1,0

A liner is optimal exploited when the ratios move as close to the 1.0 - in contrast to
the earlier statement, "... greater safety 2 ...".

- 12 -

Example
CIPP, Synthetic Fiber liner (felt), impregnated with UP resin, hostpipe state II,
hW,inv,k = 3.5 m groundwater lever over invert.
Characteristic values
EL,k = 1400 MPa
fB,k = 18.0 MPa
C,k = 50.0 MPa
Resistances: due to table 1 follows M = 1.35 the design values are:
EL,d = EL,k / M = 1400 / 1.35 = 1037 MPa
fB,d = fB,k / M = 18.0 / 1.35 = 13.3 MPa
C,d = C,k / M = 50.0 / 1.35 = 37.0 MPa
Loads: due to table 2 follows F = 1.50 the design value is:
pe,d = EL,k F = 3.50 m 1.50 = 5.25 m 10.0 kN/m = 52.5 kN/m (= 0.0525 MPa)
Note: most of the diagrams in the worksheet A 143-2 are created with design values.
Be care of reading!

Poissons Ratio
When a sample object is stretched (or squeezed), to an extension (or contraction) in
the direction of the applied load, it corresponds a contraction (or extension) in a
direction perpendicular to the applied load. The relation between these two values is
the Poisson's ratio.
If the quantity of the Poissons ratio is proofed by an external lab, its allowed using
this value in the stiffness equation:

em
EI

S L
12 1 d m

SL = Stiffness Liner
EI = Youngs modulus
= Poissons ratio
em = mean thickness of composite
dm = mean diameter liner

Typical values for glass fiber liners are 0.25 and for synthetic fiber liners 0.35
the symbol is (beside ) also known as and the unit is [-].

- 13 -

Note: in the German version of the stiffness equation there is the mean diameter
substituted by the mean radius. So, the values for the stiffnesss differ by factor 8!

Hostpipe state IIIa

Additionally to the hostpipe state III there is a suggestion for a new state: IIIa.

In this hostpipe condition there is a significant body formation. Furthermore, the

concrete quality of the old pipe is C8/10 (e.g. determined from drill cores) and the
masonry strength worse than II and / or there are unfavorable soil parameters. In the
springlines there is no pressure transfer possible the evidence of the pressure
zones in the old pipe must be passed.
There are great discussions in Germany at the moment, whether we need this state
or not. There are a lot of objections made by practical working engineers and we will
see, what happens.

New traffic load model

The traffic loads for calculations in
hostpipe state III are now made by
the EC1, due to DIN FB 101 for
heavy loads on bridges, of 2003.
The load system is called UDL & TS
(UDL = Uniformly Distributed Load,
TS = Tandem System).
The main situation is the LM1 (load

- 14 -

model 1) and the new A 143-2 delivers some diagrams to determine the soil-stresses
caused by the traffic on the surface. The usage of LM2 or 3 is only interesting for
exceptional loads. The classical German heavy truck SLW60 (and also SLW30 &
Lkw12) is now history!
Note: if there are soil coverages 1.5 m you have to do a fatigue-check for your
material! At the moment, no CIPP manufacturer made these tests
What else?
Beside the news described above, there are also some less interesting items in the
new worksheet:
-

a common reduction factor v,s in state II (incl. diagram)

egg shape profiles:
local prestrain v = 0,5 % + Ar,v /10 in state II
two different substitute radii in state II and III (proofed by FEA)
coefficient tables for normal egg shape profiles
annex D: realistic material properties for SF- and GF-liners
evidence of the hostpipe compression zones
changes in annex A6, regarding the determination of the critical vertical load in
state III (crit qv)
and much more.

DESIGN TABLES DUE TO DWA M 144, PART 3

Please do not confuse the A 143-2 with the new M 144-3 in Germany in this
advisory leaflet you will find design tables for a special load case:
-

hostpipe state II
local limited prestrain of 2 % of rL in the invert of a circular pipe (normal egg
shape profiles: 0.8 % of rLK)
four-hinge-deformation of 3 % of rL (normal egg shape profiles: in the crown)
annular gap of 0.5 % of rL (normal egg shape profiles: crown radius)
substitute circle for normal egg shape profiles: 0.6 H (stability proof)
In all other cases, there must be done a structural design due
to A 143-2!
Nearly all manufacturers of CIPP in Germany have agreed and
have formed so called Liner Design Groups, LDG. There are
now twenty groups for SF- and GF-liners (UP-, EP-resins) and
every group has its own table as input you need only the
diameter and the groundwater lever over invert and you will
get the cured thickness of every liner on the (German) market.

- 15 -

A great advantage for the contracting authority is, that they can compare the
products in very easy technical way.
In Germany, the M 144-3 has the state of Additional Technical Terms and
Conditions (ZTV) and is mandatory for new contracts.

SUMMARY
In the last 12 years of using the M 127-2 advisory leaflet, there have been made a lot
of experiences with this calculation method. It is proofed by FEA calculations and
there were almost no damages; caused by the design itself. The new A 143-2 is now
an actual standard for designing CIPP and other renovation methods but during the
yellow print phase there are also still a lot of discussions in details.
The usage of the rule did not become easier than the old one so its necessary that
only highly specialized engineers are working with this standard!
Please note, that the old ATV-DVWK M 127, part 2 is still valid for the structural
design of liners and the usage of the new DWA A 143, part 2 is desired. The
inclusion of the new worksheet in your personal renovation-contracts is possible.

- 16 -