Some Current

Developments in the
Australian Pipe Industry
Papers by:
Dr. Norwood L. Harrison
Mr. Allan Guger
Dr. Michael A. Peck

Concrete Pipe Association

www.cpaa.asn.au
of Australasia
 1987 Seminars

Concrete Pipe
Association
of Australia

,
,

Some Current
Developments in the iJ

Australian Pipe Industry

Papers by:
Dr. Norwood L. Harrison
Mr. Allan Guger
Dr. Michael A. Peck

The information contained in these notes has been prepared for the guidance of those attending the Seminar. It is
not to be regarded as complete within itself and should not therefore. be used without independent examination and
verification of its suitability for a particular project. Anyone making use of the information or material contained herein
does so at their own risk and assumes any and all liability from such use.
The notes shall not be reproduced without the consent of the CPAA and then only in full.
Dr. N. L. Harrison, B.Se., PhD,
Manager, Westall R&D, Humes Concrete.

After graduating from the University of Queensland in 1964, Dr. Harrison

worked at English Electric in the U.K. and subsequently obtained his PhD from
Monash University, in Materials Engineering. He joined Humes in 1971 and
has been Manager of the company's R&D Laboratories at Westall since 1975.

12th August, 1987

 ASPECTS OF BEDDING RIGID & FLEXIBLE PIPES

INTRODUCTION

Civil engineering structures inevitably depend on the

characteristics of earth materials as well as of the
manufactured components. To quote from Spangler (Ref. 1),
"All structures, regardless of the material of which they
are constructed, rest ultimately upon sailor rock ... In
the case of sewers, culverts, tunnels, and other types of
underground structures, .... soil is important not only
as the material upon which the structures are found~d, but
also as the major source of the loads to which they' are
sUbjected in service and which they must be designed to
carry." The aim of structural design of pipelines is to
create a stable interaction between the pipes and the
surrounding soil, in which the pipe shape remains at least
approximately circular. Australian Standards dealing with
pipeline installation contain a wealth of detail, but in
each case the design calculation is clearly targeted at
avoiding a specific unacceptable condition:

AS CA 33-1962, "Concrete Pipelaying Design" - the LOAD on

the pipe is limited to its proof load multiplied by a factor
corresponding to the type of bedding; i.e. the design
procedure guards against overloading the pipe.

AS 2042-1984, "Corrugated Steel Pipes, Pipe-arches, and

Arches - Design and Installation" - the design limits the
COMPRESSIVE STRESS IN THE PIPE WALL to a value which the
pipe is designed to carry.

AS 2566-1982, "Plastics Pipelaying Design" - the design

limits the DEFLECTION of the pipe (change in diameter) to 5%.
s ~

The first section of this paper deals with technology

development in the field of design, laying and bedding of
concrete pipe leading to the revision of the concrete pipe
laying code, CA 33. These established laying practices for
rigid (concrete) pipe are then compared and contrasted with
flexible pipe installation practices, where it appears that
codes are not specific, definitions are confusing,
technology is imprecise and laying procedures neither
standardised nor subject to long term verification.

RIGID PIPE

Design of concrete pipe installati~ns is at present covered

by Australian Standard CA 33-1962, Concrete Pipe Laying
Design. While this code is intended primarily for concrete
pipes, it "may also be used for the calculation of loads on
other rigid pipes".
 2

The revision of CA 33

CA 33 is based on the original work of Marston and Spangler.

It specifies how loads on buried pipes are to be calculated,
and defines a number of standard bedding conditions. A
"load factor" (in the revised Standard referred to as a
"bedding factor") is ascribed to each of the standard
beddings, determined by the extent to which the bedding
redistributes the stress in the pipe. The serviceability
of concrete pipes is established by a three-edge bearing
test ensuring that they are capable of meeting field
structural requirements - experience has shown that, because
concrete strength does not degrade, compliance with an
initial test requirement will ensure serviceability.

SinGe the original Spangler analysis, much research into

loads on buried concrete pipes has been performed in the
USA, Australia and elsewhere. This research has basically
been directed at studying field loads on pipes under a
variety of bedding conditions - the best known of these
probably being the "Mountainhouse Creek" tests conducted in
the 1970's by the Californian Department of Transportation,
where several bedding types were tested under fill heights
up to 41 metres. Best performances were obtained when the
pipes were laid in a trench excavated into the foundation
material beneath the embankment, the trench being later
backfilled with compacted fine crushed rock. This system
has become known as "CALTRANS" bedding (Ref. 2.). The
research also indicated that no benefit is galned by
shaping the bedding beneath the pipe to fit the pipe's
curvature.

Amer~can research is continuing, partly sponsored through

the American Concrete Pipe Association which, in conjunction
with Frank Heger and Associates is studying a design
analysis process known as SPIDA (Soil-Pipe-Interaction
Design Analysis). It is likely that the results of this
work, still some 12 months or more away from completion,
could further influence Australian Codes - preliminary
indications show our revision to be still reasonably
conservative.

During the revision of CA 33 it was decided by the CPAA and

SAA Committee WS/6 to obtain an independent Australian
verification of the American results using the more slender
Australian pipes. This work was carried out by Mr. S. Costin
on behalf of the CPAA, under the direction of Dr. Neil Kay
at the University of Adelaide (Ref. 3).
 3

Two aspects were studied:

a) In a simulated inground situation, the degree of

compaction of backfill achieved around the pipe was
measured by density tests. As is shown in Figs .. 1 and 2,
compaction was quite variable and tapered off below about
30 degrees under the haunch on each side, in spite of the
fact that every effort was made with a vibrating compactor
to push as much of the material as possible under the pipe.

b) An investigation by measurement and theoretical analysis

of maximum fill height was carried out in a test bin which
enabled simulation of embankment loads - see Fig. 3.
Concrete pipe was laid in a compacted quarry rubble trench,
bedded on quarry sand and finally covered with rained sand.
A rubber bag was used to apply uniform load. The bedding
factor calculated from this was 5.2, i.e. the bedde9 pipe
would support 5.2 times as much vertical load as the pipe
would under the three-edge bearing test. The new draft
Australian Standard has conservatively adopted a value of
4 for a similar type of bedding.

The major changes in the CA 33 revision, apart from editing,

metrication and the inclusion of an explanatory comment are:

- Deletion of references to shaped bedding.

- Introduction of a new series of standard beddings,

nominated as GS1, GS2, and GS3 - and superseding the old
alphabetical series. (GS3 is similar to the CALTRANS system).

- More details of compaction and material specifications.

- Modified live load approach in accordance with

recommendations of the American Concrete Pipe Association.

- Determination of jacking pipe loads.

- An increased emphasis on induced trench construction of

culverts under high fills. ~ I
~
- Increased bedding factors up to 4 for bedding for the
highest grade system - GS3 bedding - the 1962 maximum
being less than 3 for granular type beddings.

The significance of these changes is:

- It brings the code in line with modern technology and

practice.

- It formalises the ability of steel reinforced concrete

pipe to perform in significantly higher embankment
conditions than previously allowed.

- It offers designers a choice of bedding condition and

pipe class on a clearly understood and scientific basis,
thus enabling a proper consideration of economics.
 4

Determination of Test Loads

Clause 5 of CA 33 specified the method for calculating pipe

test loads. For reinforced concrete pipe, the test load,
meaning the proof or "cracking" load, is equal to the
imposed load divided by the bedding factor. Ultimate loads
(AS 1342) are of course 1.5 times the cracking loads. For
non-reinforced concrete pipe, the test (ultimate) load
is the imposed load divided by the bedding factor for the
particular class of bedding and then multiplied by 1.5.
The purpose of these provisions is to provide a safety
factor of 1.5 between the loads imposed in service and the
pipe strength.

Provisions are essentially the same in the CA 33 revision.

This method of calculation clearly makes no allowance for

any loss of pipe strength with time - indeed, for non-
reinforced concrete pipe, the factor of safety will increase
with time as the pipe becomes stronger with progressive
curing.

The safety factor of 1.5 is applied in the same way to

vitrified clay pipe installations.

It is recognised that strength properties of plastics

diminish with time and provision is made in the design and
testing of plastics pipes for these changes. The introduction
of cellulose FRC pipe, whose strength (like the strength of
plastics) diminishes with time, creates a situation among
rigid pipe materials for which CA 33 makes no provision.
FRC pipes have been classified by their manufacturer as
X, T, and Z, like concrete and vitrified clay pipes, but the
test loads set for these pipes (three times the design
loads) do not give equivalent long term strength. This is
illustrated in Fig. 4, showing that the long term strength
of FRC pipe resulting from the short-term testing requirement
is two thirds or less of the long term strengths of
reinforced concrete or vitrified clay pipe of the
corresponding classifications. It takes a Class Y or
Class Z FRC pipe (depending on the allowance made for
strength loss) to have equivalent long term strength to a
Class X reinforced concrete or vitrified clay pipe.

FLEXIBLE PIPE

Pipe Stiffness

Pipes described as "flexible" are (typically) unable to

support, by their own strength, more than a small fraction
of the imposed load - see Fig. 5.

The Australian Standards for concrete pipe and corrugated metal

pipe are explicit in their requirements relating to the
structural properties of the pipe itself. The formula given
in AS 2566 (Plastics Pipelaying Design) for calculating
deflection contains a term derived from pipe properties but
in many circumstances the size of this term affects the
calculated deflection only marginally, a situation which has
far-reaching consequences.
 5

The shape which a flexible pipe takes up when it is

installed is determined by the bedding and backfill and
also by a structural property of the pipe itself, referred
to as its "stiffness". The effect of pipe stiffness on the
deflection calculated from AS 2566 is illustrated, for two
typical situations, in Fig. 6. Curve A corresponds to weak
soil, and indicates clearly how stiff the pipe must be to
limit the deflection to 5%. Curve B corresponds to very
common situations of stiffer soils, in which THE DEFLECTION
IS LESS THAN 5% EVEN IF THE PIPE ITSELF HAS NEGLIGIBLE
STIFFNESS. In such situations, the Standard gives no
rationale for choosing the correct stiffness for the
conditions of installation. Pipes are being offered with a
wide range of stiffnesses (Fig. 7), and, as would be
expected, stiffer pipes tend to be more expensive.

To measure stiffness, pipe samples are loaded between

parallel plates (which produces a similar effect on the pipe
to the loading arrangement used for load testing cQhcrete
pipes). In the only current Australian Standard which
defines pipe stiffness (AS 2439-1981, Perforated Plastics
Drainage Pipes), the stiffness is the load per metre of pipe
length divided by the deflection.

Unfortunately, other measures are often used which are

defined in terms of the properties of the pipe wall rather
than the measured behaviour of the pipe as a whole. It is
important to understand which measure of pipe stiffness is
being used, as the measure might be different even though
the units (eg Newtons per metre per metre) are the same.
Figures 8 and 9 show how various measures of stiffness and
classifications based on them are related. Note that a
different measure of stiffness is used for GRP (Hobas) from
the ·measure used for spirally wound polyethylene (Bauku),
even though both types of pipe are supplied by the same
company. Both of these are different from the measure of
pipe stiffness in the Australian Standard.

Stiffness of plastic pipe in the long term is much less than

in the short term tests used for classifying the pipes.
Bauku ("Black Brute ll ) loses a greater proportion o~f its
I
initial stiffness in the long term than UPVC or Hobas pipe,
but this is offset by classifying Bauku accordihg t~
stiffness measured after 24 hours' loading, rather than
instantaneously. The long term stiffnesses of UPVC, Hobas
and Bauku pipes are all about a third of the stiffness
measurements used to classify them.

Practical difficulties in installing flexible pipe

The first problem to be confronted with a flexible pipe

installation is

THERE IS NO SINGLE RECOGNISED PROCEDURE FOR THE DESIGN

CALCULATIONS. AS 2566 is apparently not considered adequate
for either Hobas, where the recommended alternative is ATV,
or Bauku ("Black Brute"), where the laying instructions
make no reference to AS 2566, ATV or any other code.
 6

To quote from an Amerlcan source (K.K. Kienow) "The lack

of adequate design technique for low stiffness pipe is one
of the best kept secrets of the plastic pipe industry today".

There are severe penalties from selecting wrong combinations

of pipe stiffness and bedding conditions, apart from
excessive deflection:

- The pipe will deform into an irregular shape (Fig. 10).

- The pipe wall can crack or split (Fig. 11).

- Irregular deflections can cause joint leakage.

If the pipe is altogether too flimsy, rock or other hard

inclusions in the backfill can puncture the wall (Fig. 12).

It is not our contention that flexible pipe will not perform

satisfactorily if it is correctly designed and installed.
The purpose of our comments is to highlight the uncertainties
in these areas.

Installation Practices

As there is no comprehensive Australian Standard or Code for

laying flexible pipe it is not surprising that there is a
tremendous variation in the approach adopted by Authorities
using flexible pipe. However, it would appear that the
specifications issued by the N.S.W. P.W.D. cover most of
the essentials, including

- penetrometer tests of the soil along the route the pipeline

is to follow, to establish the soil stiffness,

- precautions to prevent the pipes floating before the

trench is backfilled,

- shading the pipes while they are above ground, to prevent

distortion,

- use of special material for backfill (NATA tested for

compliance) ,

- in some circumstances, lining the trench with geotextile,

- further penetrometer tests to monitor the degree of

compaction of backfilJ,

- monitoring pipe deflections at various stages during their

installation (this is particularly difficult with non-man-
entry sizes).

The other extreme is, quoting from a recent sewer tender

document;

"8.5.5 Information to be Supplied:

 7

The Tenderer shall supply, within 7 days of a request to do

so, in addition to the requirements outlined above, all
information necessary to fully describe the pipes being
offered. This information shall include but not be
limited to the following:

- chemical and physical properties,

- dimensions and tolerances,

- standards of manufacture,

- bedding and surround design for different trench conditions,

- methods of jointing,

- recommended laying, handling and jointing proced~res,

f

- proposed method of connection to pipes of other materials

and to manholes,

- evidence of a minimum 10 years of satisfactory service

of the material under similar site conditions (including
sub-surface and temperature) for diameters 375 NB to 600 NB.

The information provided shall consist of all calculations,

drawings, sketches and details that are necessary to prove
the adequacy and suitability of the design. This information
shall be provided at no cost to the Principal."

Neither specification contains a stiffness criterion, nor

is there a field joint test of any practical significance -
the -joint should not be evaluated until the pipe is fully
deformed under the total soil load, and the 'long term
deformation has been essentially complete.

Installation Costs

In any cost comparison between rigid and flexible pipe, the

basis must be the in-ground cost of the completed project, /
not just a comparison of pipe purchase costs. ~

Bedding flexible pipe is expensive.

Circumstances obviously will vary, but it may be of interest

that in a recent major sewer contract in which flexible pipe
was used the contract figures were:

Supply of flexible pipe, $137/metre,

Laying/construction contract, $460/metre.

 8

CONCLUSIONS

Concrete pipes manufactured, designed and installed in

accordance with Australian Standards covering every aspect
of the product system have a proven field performance.
The applicability of these pipes will be enhanced by the
new provisions of the CA 33 revision.

The classification of FRC pipe is inconsistent with the

classification of pipes made from concrete or vitrified clay.

There are inconsistencies in the classification of flexible

pipes which make it difficult for a specifier to compare
alternative types.

Flexible pipe of adequate stiffness, high material quality

and properly bedded could be expected to perform
satisfactorily except in unstable soils. However, the one
Australian Standard dealing with installation of flexible
(plastic) pipe is not considered to be adequate for all
types, and there is no single, universally accepted
alternative.

Economic comparisons between rigid and flexible pipes must

be made on the basis of in-ground costs.

REFERENCES

1. M.G. Spangler & R.L. Handy, "Soil Engineering", 4th

Edition, 1982 (Harper & Rowe).

2. "Modern Pipelaying Techniques - High Fill Embankments -

'The advantages of Low Projection and Induced Trend
Constructions". Concrete pipe Association of Australia,
October 1985.

3. S.A. Costin, "A Study of an Improved Installation Method

for Reinforced Concrete Pipes under High Embankments",
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Adelaide,
April 1986.
 Adelaide University Tests FIG. 1

Relative
densities

Sand

II
370 120 435 225
Fully Partially Loose
compacted compac ted

DENSITY HOLE LOCATIONS AND

MEASURED DENSITIES
 Adelaide University Tests FIG.2

End view of trial bedding after removal of pipe, note exposed strip of fine aggregate
base not covered by sidefall.

.. ..,.........
'
,-. .. ~.

:- "',
\~.
..
'I'

4'~t#'"

.
\,

Note loose and irregular edge to fine crushed rick sidefill, imprint of plate load test
visible in centre of base.
 Adelaide University Tests FIG.3

Maximum 171·1 kPa att ai ned

,
,

Rained sand

170 432 432 170

Compacted
LO
fine crushed 0
<.D
rock
Compacted
~ quarry
Compacted sand rt.Jbble
I'
to ~
.-
(0

14 2000
-,--
2000 ./
POSITION OF PIPE AND BEDDIN§.
IN TEST BIN
 FIG. 4
LONG TERM STRENGTHS OF PIPES, FROM CURRENT TESTING REQUIREMENTS

Design .. Class Z ...

loads for Class Z --
concrete

Class Y T Class Y
Class Z Class Z
L 1 T I T
I
clay X Class Y I
Class Y Class X
I- ... ! I .L
II
T
I
Class X J.
I- l I I I I I Class X ,..,
....

•
Concrete Vitrified FRC
Clay ..

Notes: Upper and lower marks on the columns representing concrete

pipes are the ultimate and cracking loads respectively.
For FRC, upper mark is the claimed long term strength;
lower mark is the projected long term strength from
Amdel sustained load testing and SAA DR 87090.
 FIG. 5

STRENGTHS OF CONCRETE
AND PLASTICS DRAINAGE PIPES

METRES
HEIGHT
OF FILL
6 ,
,

METRES
HEIGHT
4 OF FILL
3

3
2

2
1

1
./
o

a
Concrete Perforated Concrete Spirally
Z-Class Plastics X-Class Welded
Class 1000 polyethylene
J Class 16
300tnril diameter
900nun diameter

The columns show the height of fill with a density of

1800 kg/m 3 which could be supported by each type of pipe
if the pipes and fill columns were free-standing.
(5\ deflection in plastic pipes, long term)
 FIG. 6
PIPE DEFLECTION
EFFECTS OF PIPE AND SOIL STIFFNESS

E'= MODULUS OF SOIL REACTION

6
~ ...................... •••••••••••••••
Curve A ••••••• ,"
E'= 2 MPa "," III~
5 ~
-.#~
~#
PERCENT #~
##~
DEFLECTION 4 ##
##
###
3

2
Curve B
E' = 10 MFa - -##

o
1 10 100 1000

PIPE STIFFNESS PER AS2439

(kN/m/m)

Curve B corresponds to a greater

burial depth than curve A
 FIGURE 7 COMPARISON OF PIPE STIFFNESSES

6000

1000

INITIAL
STIFFNESS
PER
AS 2439
(kN/m/m)

500

o
A B C D E F G H I J

A - UPVC DRAINCOIL
B - HOBAS CLASS SN 10 000
C - HDPE DRAINCOIL
D - UPVC SEWER HEAVY
E - HOBAS CLASS SN 2500
F - BAUKU CLASS 16
G - RIBLOC 240mm
H - BAUKU CLASS 4
I - RIBLOC 465mm
•
J - CONCRETE
 FIG. 8

RELATIVE STIFFNESSES OF FLEXIBLE PIPES

1CLASS 1 000

CLASS 10 000

CLASS 64

CLASS 400

BLACK BRUTE HOBAS

CLASS 5 000

CLASS 32
CU\SS 200

CLASS 2 500
CLASS 16
CLASS 100

CLASS B
CLASS 4

AS 2439
PERFORATED DRAINAGE PIPE
 FIG. 9

PIPE STIFFNESS
F(kN/m)
~
J6. y (m)
-r
,
,

kN/m/m

LOAD/DEFLECTION F S
(AS 2439) L::.y

PSEUDO ELASTIC EI SR
FORMULAE R3
Sn ~ II
El ,.,
D3
•

S = 6.71 SR = 53.7 Sn
•
 r..n
:::r
~
"C
t"D
C
t"D
~
t"D
n
......

~
0
......
t"D
n
:::r
~
~
()Q
_.
t"D
~

-
~

0 (j)
'U
:

~
-<
H
::0
0
t"D L'
H

-
t"D
•
~
l:Ij
:

.....C t-Ij
H
GJ
II
.", f-'
0
 I
iJ

•
~
-
~

"C
C
:::s
,..
t"')

C
'""I

~
0""
"<
'""I
ot"')
::r::-
o'""I
_.
.~

:::s
0""
~
t"')
::r::-
_.
--
-tt.

•
 ,,

Performance of Pipe Materials

by
Mr. Allan Guger

•
Mr. A. Guger,
Technical Services Manager,
Monier Rocla,
Pipe and Precast Division

Qualifications
Bachelor of Science, University of Saskatchewan, Canada.
Master of Science - Structural Engineering,
University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

Affiliations
- WS 10 Flexible Jointing Gaskets Committee.
- CPAA Technical Committee.
- Construction Materials Testing Group - NATA

Experience
Sixteen years with Monier Rocla in the development of products and testing of
materials. The last four years as the Manager of the Research Centre. For the
last one and one-half years he has been Technical Services Manager.
 PERFPIPE.HAG
Performance of Pipe Materia s

1. Introduction

The development of conduits for the transportation of water

had its beginning over 5000 years ago. The mater ials used
in the construction of the pipes were clay, stone and
cellulose type materials such as wooden logs and bamboo.
These three materials are still in current use but in a
slightly different form.

Today there are a number of materials availab~e from which

the designer can choose. Materials which are presently
being used are steel reinforced concrete, ductile iron,
vitrified clay, cellulose reinforced fibre, steel and
plastics. The plastic material is expanding and now covers
high density polyethylene, (HDPE) medium density
polyethylene (MDPE), unplasticized polyvinyl Chloride
(uPVC) . In addi tion, there is glass reinforced plastics
(GRP) which can be formed with chopped fibreglass strand or
f i lamen t wound strand. Two products which have not bee;n
mentioned are cast iron and asbestos reinforced pipe. The
manufacture of these pipes have been discontinued, even
though the products have had creditable field performance.

The accelerated development of pipes made with new materials

has made life more difficult for design engineers. to assess
the performance of the products. Today we will try to cover
a large number of important performance requirements which
need to be met for the spec i f iers to have conf idence that
the products will have a 100 year service life under normal
operating conditions.

,
2. Design Criteria tI

2.1 General

The first step in determining what type of material is

suitable as a pipeline material for your particular
case is to determine the performance requirements.
Some of these are

(a) Operating pressure (constant and surge)

- cyclic pressures can reduce the long term

strength of some materials.

- the internal pressure is required to determine

the maximum hoop stresses in the pipe wall.
 - 2 -

(b) volume of flow and velocity

this information is used in the calculation of

the pipe diameter.

(c) type of fluid and grade

In some cases addi tional p:-otection is required

for chemical or abrasion resistance.

(d) temperature conditions

The operating temperatures of the fluid and

temperature fluctuations need to be obtained
because of limi tations of some materials at high
temperatures or rapid changes in temperature.

Some materials such as plastics have lower

strengths at elevated temperatures while
unreinforced and reinforced concrete do not like
rapid temperature fluctuations. Ho....ever, knowing
the behaviour of the material, allowances can be
made to ensure long term performances.

Flexible pipes when subjected to stacking loads

and higher ambient temperatures can deform and
become permanently oval. The ovality can cause
jointing difficulty.

(e) external environment

an analysis of the soil is required to

determine if additional protection is
required. For some materials stray current
measurements are required fo:' pipelines near
DC power sources (tramway and other cathodically
protected installations).

(f) overburden

- the type of soil and the depth of permanent and

temporary overburden is needed to calculate the
dead load on the pipe.

( g) 1 i ve loads

- construction loads and normal and surge

operating conditions.
 - 3 -

(h) ground stability

- the stability of the supporting material for

the pipe will have a direct influence on the
pipe strength and joint requirement.

(i) toxici ty

- the stability of all materials used for the

transportation of potable water is unde~
critical review. The product which is receivi~g
the most attention at the moment is the
unplasticised PVC. The concern is the leaching
of lead from the plastic. Austral~a is one of
the few remaining countries which uses a lead
stabilizer in the manufacture of PVC pipe.
Other countries, such as the United States, use
tin.

(j) service requirement of the pipeline

- the life that the line has to function

efficiently.

(k) security required against failure

determi~e i f it is an essential service and the

danger to human life so that an approgriate
safety factor can be used.

(1) future development

- will new lines be installed parallel to existing

lines. If so, a gene~ous spacing is required so
the bedding is not disturbed around pipelines ,
constructed from flexible pipes. > I

I,;
Once the pipeline requirements have been determined the
design engineer can choose the pipe materials which
will be suitable. Knowing the materials and the
roughness coefficients of the inside surface of the
. pipe, the pipeline design can be completed. There may
still be a culling of the useful materials for your
application if the manufacturer does not supply that
par t i cular pipe diameter and strength. Please check
with the manufacturer as your trade literature may be
out of date.
 - 4 -

3. Technical Information

In most cases the designs are straight forward and

information on the traditional materials can be found in
text books. Wi th the development of new materials, the
information may only be available through technical
publications, from conference papers, Associations or from
the manufacturers themselves Advances made in the use of
0

the materials are usually only obtained through the

manufacturer. In todays competitive world, you may best be
served by not only obtaining the information from the
manufacturer but also from a competitor.

Some of the difficulties currently being encountered by many

engineers is the lack of technical information on the long
term performance on some of the new materials and just
keeping up wi th the developments on the traditional
products. A large amount of the information is based on
accelerated testing and/or early test information from long
term test programmes.

The high cost of product assessment cannot be justified by

the user, therefore the technical information is normally
supplied by the manufacture along with the basis for the
assessment. In some cases this method of assessment can run
into unantic:pated problems which will result in either high
maintenance costs or at worst abandonment of the pipeline.
An interim method adopted by some users is to put in a trial
line and monitor its performance for a number of years.

The present main areas of concern are

(a) Difficulty in ascertaining cost effectiveness of new

materials because of a lack of long term performance
information.

(b) Bedding and installation procedures.

(c) Installation costs.

(d) Need for specifications because of additional

requirements for the material or because the product is
not covered by a standard.

(e) The need for information on the chemical resistance of

the material and if necessary the method of corrosion
protection.

(f) Maintenance reqUirements and repair methods.

 - 5 -

High~y publicised failures of various pipes cast doubt on

the performance of new products from all pipe manufacturers.
Therefore, it is essential that manufacturers take immediate
steps to improve their product when deficiencies are
uncovered.

4. Life Assessment

The initial selection of a pipeline material should take

into consideration the physical and chemical requirements
demanded by the internal and external environment of the
pipeline. If the pipe and joints have been selected,
designed and installed as per the performance pecification
for the pipeline, which in most cases is ~ow based on
obtaining a 100 year life, then there is no technical
justification for ascribing asset lives to different
materials for present day designs.

Different asset values may be assigned to different

materials if the design parameters change - such as an
increase in temperature of the effluent in a plastic
pipeline, the bedding is disturbed by the installation of
adjacent services! aggressive agents increased above the
threshold level for the material! and so on.

5. Long Term Pipe Performance Criteria

5.1 Flexible Pipes

(a) Drainage

One of the main criteria for ensuring flexible

pipes will perform, apart from having the product
ins tall e d cor r e c t 1 y , i s t 0 1 i mi t,_ t he i nit i a1
deflection. This deflection should be measured in
the field after a suitable settlin~ in period.
Since creep is a continuing process which reduces
the modulus of elasticity! the long term pipe
stiffness should be used. Some values which have
been suggested are:

- HD?E - 16% of initial modulus

- PVC - 33% of initial modulus
- GRP - 50% of initial modulus (overseas)
- 33% of initial modulus (Australian
Hobas)
II

- 6 -

Allowances need to be made for the temperature and

the correct pipe stiffness chosen to suit the soil
conditions. Table 1.

(b) Pressure

In the case of pressure pipe, there is a long term

loss in strain under constant load. In the case
of uPVC each material must have a one hour minimum
strength of 39.6 MPa and a long term 50 year
strength of 23.6 MPa as per AS 1477, Unplasticized
PVC (uPVC) Pipes and Fittings for Pressure
Applications. The attached Graph 1 shows a safety
factor of 2.6 for a class 12 pipe (100 m head) a~d
a factor of safety of 4.2 for the blue brute at a
100 m Melbourne Board of Worl(s working stress.
The 100 diameter pipe has been approved by the
MMBW and it has been used for almost 10 years.

The higher factor of safety by the MMBW is in

agreement with some investigators which suggest a
maximum working stress of 6 MPa because of the
affect of cyclic pressure variations and the
reduction in strength due to scratches and nicks
in the material.

A similar procedure is suggested for calcu.lating

the limiting strain for glass reinforced products.
The Draft Standard DR 87071 Plastics-Glass-Fibre
Reinforced Plastics (GRP) Methods of Test suggests
how to de~ermine the long term (50 year) pressure
resistance and the hydrostatic regression ratio of
glass-fibre reinforced plastic pipe. In addition,
in the Draft Australian Standard - Glass-Fibre
Reinforced Thermosetting Plastics - Polyester
Based Water Supply, Sewage and Drainage
Applications it is proposed that on the 50 year
long term strength, a factor of safety of 1.8
should be used for high pressure pipes reducing to
2.1 on the lowest pressure.
 - 7 -

The Draft Standard is in agreement with the paper

by Schlehofer and Carlstrom (Ref. 1) which
provides test data on external pressure and cyclic
loads on GRP pipe. In the conclusions they state
"The long-term tests described are directly
oriented towards practical conditions: and
"Knowledge of these long term values is of greater
importance for the calculation and design of all
organic materials as a result of the effect that
these materials have no real long-term strength as
usual with metallic materials (e.g. Wohler-line).

5.2 Rigid Pipe

,
,
(a) Vitrified Clay Pipe

Rigid load bearing pipes have been used with

various factors of safety depending on the type of
material. No long term stress reduction or
relaxation is taken into account for the
traditional materials such as concrete or vitrified
clay primarily because these products were
developed prior to this method of examination.

Vitrified clay pipe has a similar ultimate load

requirement as that for concrete pipe. Namely - a
factor of safety of 1.5 on the design load. These
pipes are to conform to AS 1741 Vitrified Clay
Pipes and they are also required to pass a two or
three edge bearing test load (ultimate load only).

(b) Cellulose Fibre Reinforced Pipe

The new cellulose fibre reinforced pipe is not

covered by an Australian or Overseas Standard. The
technical information which is available is frpm
the Australian manufacturer and othe~ Associations.
'"
He f (1) Long Term Testing of Centrifugally Cast Glass
Fibre Reinforced Plastic Pipes - Advances in
Underground Pipeline Engineering - Edited by Jey K
Jeyapalan, Published by the American Society of
Engineers.
 - 8 -

T~is product consists of a mortar containing

approximately 46% cement, 46% silica anc 8%
cellulose by mass. The volume of organic material
is substantial and warrants long term sustained
load testing similar to that conducted on the glass
reinforced plastic pipe. The CPAA have provided a
Technical Bulletin 01/87 and 02/87 covering the
"Sustained Load Testing of Pipes" for your
information.

The Bulletin provides background information on how

the tests are to be condacted and provides a method
by which the results can be interpreted. T~e test
is very simple. The dry strength of the product is
determined by the two or three edge beari~g method.
Then samples of the p~oduct are placed in water and
a constant load applied to the product again in the
form of the two or three ec.ge bear ing test. The
t:ne to failure of t~e product is recorced. Loads
are chosen so that failures will ocur up to 10 000
hours. These failure points are used to calculate
the regression line, using the least mean sqaare
method of analysis. The extrapolated st~ength of a
product can be calculated for 100 years service.

In the case of the cellulose fibre reinforced pipe

the retained strength ratio is 0.26 to 0.32. If
for example a strength equivalent to that for other
load bearing pipes is required (F. S of 1. 5 for
concrete) then the minimum ultimate test load
should be 1.0/(0.26 to 0.32) x 1.5 or 4.7 to 5.8
I
tir:les the design load. The design practice a
number of months ago was to prov:'de a pipe which
I
has a strength 3.0 times the design load. This is
confirmed by a specification put o~t by the
Department of Main Roads in NSW in which they state
the creep strength at 50 years is expected to be
equal to the initial design load.

The question arises, does the same strength loss

occur wi th other materials such as concrete pipe.
If so, should a higher factor of safety be
considered.
 - 9 -

( c) Concrete Pipe

Concrete pipe is desigDed to meet two requirements

- a minimum cracking load and an ultimate load.
The minimum cracking load is in effect the maximum
working load for t:"e product. The ultimate
strength of the product is required by AS 1342 to
be 1.5 times greater than the cracking load. These
test load requirements are usually imposed on the
concrete pipe 7 to 14 days after manufacture. At
this period in time, the concrete strength and the
bond strength to the reinforcement has only
achieved 70 to 80 percent of its potential. This
testing procedure provides an additional factor of
safety to the customer because the' product will
continue to gain in strength in time.

The effect that these two factors will have on the

concrete pipe will be to increase the long term
strength of the product. Tests on concrete pipe
after 30 or more years of service in fact confirm
this strength increase.

All this proves is that pipes made 30 to 50 years

ago still have a satisfQctory performance. It does
not prove that current production using
cementatious materials manufactured from modern
plants will perform in a similar manner.

To ensure current materials and manufacturing

techniques are as good or better than they were 30
or eveD 50 years ago, sustained load tests have
been started on 600 mm diameter X Class, steel
reinforced concrete pipes by Humes and independant
tests started at AMDEL in South Australia. As of
today test samples under 90% of t~e actual dry
strength of the pipe, which happens to be 104% of
the specified ultimate stre:1gth in ks 1342 have
sustained this load for 139 days. At AMDEL, tests
at 8596 of the ultimate dry strength on the same
type of pipe, but from a different factory has
reached 60 days wi thout incident. The test
conditions were identical to that for the cellulose
pipe. A copy of the Humes report is available.
 - 10 -

Based on a minimum 20% to 30% gain in strength in

time, I would now not expect the product to fai I
because of creep in the materials. We can now be
confident that the products that are supplied today
are as good or better than the products supplied 50
years ago.

6. Abrasion Resistance

Another important physical property of a material is its

abrasion resistance. The abrasion resistance of a product
must suit the environment to which it will be SUbjected.

Abrasion resistance for a drainage pipe is becoming more of a

concern to specif:'ers because of t!1e expansion of housing
estates into hil:y terrain. This type of subdivision
requires more engineering expertise to cope with the steeper
grades and potentially higher velocities of the water in the
drains.

The change to providing building si tes completely serviced

prior to construct:on has had an influence on the amount of
abrasion which nOvl occurs in pipelines. It is during the
construction period on the site that the large quantities of
debris in the form of aggregate, soil and even bric~-{s find
their way into the drainage system. These constituents will
in time, abrade t~e invert of the pipeline. The extent of
the abrasion will depend on the veloci ty of the water, the
quantity and type of debris and the type of material used in
the manufacture of the pipe.

Some test data is available on the relative abrasion

resistance of concrete, asbestos ceme;'lt, vitrified c:"ay,
glass reinforced plastic, PVC and high density polyethylene
plastic from an investigation carried out at the Darmstadt
Technical University in West Germany over fifteen years ago.
This information is provided in Graph 2.

Recently the Concrete Pipe Association of Australia

commissioned the Australian Mineral Development and
Engineering Laboratories (AMDEL) to carry out abrasion trials
on reinforced concrete pipe, asbestos cement pipe and
cellulose cement pipe to determine the relative performance
of products made with Australian materials. The resu.lts
appear to be in very close agreement to the Darmstadt
resul ts. The loss in wall thickness after 1 400 000 cycles
for reinforced concrete pipe, asbestos cement pipe and
cellulose cement pipe was 2, 7, 19 mm respectively.
 - 12 -

In hindsight, I now believe the wear rates for the asbestos

and cellulose pipe are low because of the long period between
c!1?nging the surcharge. The abrasive charge is usually
changed on the completion of 100 000 cycles, however, at
10 000 to 20 000 cycles, the abraded fibre material is of
sufficient volume to act as a buffer. Wear is reduced. This
is not the case with other materials such as PVC, HDPE,
concrete, GRP and vitrified clay.

It is much easier for the designe~ to sit down with a set of

formulae to calculate the load strength of a pipe than to
assess the abrasion resistance required for the pipeline. If
the designer expects some abrasion in the line, a good
abrasion resistant material should be used and tMe roughness
coe f f icien t for the mater ial increased. The Concrete Pipe
Association of Australia adopts a conservative approach in
this area. In its Technical Manual, Hydraulics of Precast
Concrete Conduits, Section 4.2.1 the recommendation is to use
a Colebrook White K value of 0.15 and state "having regard to
the effect of the deb~is a value 0: 0.6 seems reasonable, but
it must be realized that no tests under these conditions are
known to exist".

This conservative approach should be taken for all pipe

materials, especially those which have a lower abrasion
resistance than concrete.

7. Durability

In addition to determining the physical requirements of the

product, the durabi I i ty of the rna te~ ial must be assessed to
ensure compatibility with the environment.

There is a large amount of information available on the

theoretical resistance of materials to chemi~al attack.
Short term tests have been developed to simulate... long term
exposure conditions, however, the only unchallengable
technical information is proven long term field performance.

Recently, the Concrete Pipe Association of Australia has

investigated the long term performance of concrete pipe and
published information on the limits on aggressive agents in
the soil. The internal and external exposure conditions for
the pipe has been assessed. This information is attached as
Table 2.
 - 12 -

This Table covers the allowable limits for acid, carbon

dioxide, sulphate, chlorides and magnesium in relation to
various soil and terrain conditions. These limits are based
on low water cement ratio concrete found in pipes made by the
roller suspension or the centrifugally spun processes.

It should be noted that these aggressive conditions do not

occur very often. They are the exception rather than the
rule. However, exceptions do occur and where the aggressive
limits are exceeded there are protection methods available to
prevent the aggressive ions from reacting or penetrating the
concrete. These methods range from a simple increase in
concrete cover to provide a sacrificial layer, to the use of
coatings to prevent the aggressive ions reac~ing the
reinforcement. The aggressive condi tion which occurs most
often is the placement of steel reinforced concrete in a
marine environment. When this environment is encountered,
the manufacturer should be consulted.

It is suggested that when soil tests indicate aggressive

condi tions exist, the manufacturer's recommendations should
be obtained for their product.

The steel reinforced concrete pipe is not the only product

which requires protection if placed in an aggressive
environment. The manufacturers of other pipe products can
also supply tables containing allowable limits to ensure that
the i r protducts will perform when subjected to chenmicals,
heat and high strains.

8. Flammability of Pipe Materials

Fires in concrete pipe do not affect the structural strength,

flow capacity, corrosion and abrasion resistance.
Information is available through the CPAA in the form of a
paper entitled "Buried Facts - Fires in sewers and culverts".
This brochure, which is an American Concrete Pipe Association
publication, provides technical information on the
performance of concrete pipe, corrugated steel pipe wi th an
asphalt or polymeric coating, corrugated aluminium pipe,
ribbed and solid wall PVC pipe, ABS composite and ribbed
polyethylene pipe.

The incidence of fires can be of major concern. This design

requirement should be taken into consideration where flamable
liquids are stored near the pipeline or in some cases where
there is frequent traffic by petroleum loaded tankers.
 - 13 -

The flammability of some pipe materials has been highlighted

by a fire in a 450 mm diameter high density polyethylene pipe
in South Austral ia (handouts are available). The cause of
the fire was put down to vandalism.

9. Freeze Thaw Protection

The water absorption of a cement matrix is related to the

ability of the product to resist frost action or the cyclic
freezing and thawing of the water in the wall of a pipe. The
rate of water absorption is very critical to the freeze thaw
resistance of a material. ,
,
Some typical water absorption values for the products that
were tested for abrasion resistance at the Darmstadt
Technical University in Germany are:

TABLE 3

TESTED WATER
METHOD ABSORPTION

(a) high density polyethylene ASTM D570* < 0.1

(b) polyvinyl chloride ASTM D570 0.2 to 1.0
( c ) polyester (glass reinforced ASTM D570 0.12 to 2.5
plastic)
(d) concrete (spun and roller AS 1342 3.0 to 6.0
suspension)
(e) asbestos cement AS 1342 11.0 to 14.0
( f) cellulose cement AS 1342 23.0 to 26.0

* The ASTM water absorption test is not as seve~e as the 1

1/
AS 1342 test.

In the case of concrete, it should be dense, sound,

adequately cured and compacted. Graph 3 from the "Properties
of Concrete by A M Neville p 467 shows the resistance of
concrete to frost action.

Concrete made by the centrifugally spun and roller suspension

processes have water cement ratios below 0.38 and in some
instances below 0.30.

Frost or freeze thaw damage can be averted by burying the

pipeline below the ground frost line. In most cases, in cold
climates, a depth of two metres would be necessary.
 - 14 -

10. Rubber Rings

The rubber ring is an integral part of the pipeline. Serious

consideration must also be given to the stability of the
rubber ring when subjected to the effluent in the pipeline
and the surrounding environment.

I do not have sufficient time to deal in depth with the

various materials which are available. However, this matter
needs to be assessed with the same amount of diligence as the
materials for the pipe.

11. Summary

The preceeding informat~on is not a~ exha~stive treatment on

the requirements for a pipe material, but it gives an ins:~ht
into· some of the factors which should be considered in the
design. If you have a need for further information on the
performance of pipe materials please contact the Concrete
Pipe Association or the affiliated companies.
 ~ABLE 1 - EFFECT OF PIPE SOIL INT~RACTION ON PIPE PERFORMANCE

Pipe Type of High Soil Low

Stiffness Pe!'formance Soil Stiffness Soil
(1) (2 ) Stiffness Medium Stiffness
(3 ) Soil (5)
Stiffness
(4 )

Low pipe stiffness Pipe deflection Average Very high

(0 to 173 kPa) Pipe elongation Very high High
(0 to 25 psi) Pipe squaring Very high ,
, Average
Pipe wal_ Very high Very high
strains
Medium pipe Pipe deflection Average High
stiffness
(173 to 517 kPa) Pipe elongation Average Average
(25 to 75 psi) Pipe squaring Average Low
Pipe wall Average High
strains
High pipe Pipe deflection Low Average
stiffness
(517 to 1,378 kPa) Pipe elongation Low Low
(75 to 200 psi). Pipe squaring Low Very low
Pipe wall Low Average
strains
Rigid pipe Pipe deflection No
deflection
Pipe elongation No
elongation
Pipe squaring No
squaring
Pipe wall No change
in wall. )
strains ;/
strain \0
 TPBLE L

AGGRESSIVE CONSTITUENTS - LIMITS FOR U~~ROTE~!ED R.S. OR SPUN

CONCRETE PIPES -.Ehtracted from a CPA Paper by D~. J.T. Gourley and
Dr. N.L. Harrison on liThe Resistance of Buried COncrete Pipe" to COrrosion.

SOIL/TERRAIN CLASSIFICATIO~l' CLAY/ MEDIUM SANDY/

STAGNANT FLOWING

1. ACID
pH * { 4-.5 { 5.0 t 5.5
Exchangeable soil acid t 70 t 50 t 30
(ml of O.l"M NcOR
consumed by 100 g of
air dried soil)

2. AGGRESSIVE CO
2
(ppm) *" t 150 t 50 t 15

3. SULPHATE
c:
(ppm S04 ) *
TYPE A PORTLAND CEMENT t 1000 * 1000 t 1000
TYPE C OR D *10000 *10000 tl0000

4. CHLORIDE
(Z Cl-) *
UNP£INFORCED CONCP£TE - - - - - - NO LIMIT - - - - - -
3
REINFORCED CONCRETE t 2 *2 *2
5. MAGNESIUM
.L.I..
NO LIMIT NO LIMIT * 2000
(ppm Mg' .) *
2
* in ground water or soil extract

NOTES:

1. Soil/Terrain Classification

Clay/Stagnant: Heavy soil such as clay with little or no

ground water movement.
Sandy/Flowing: Permeable soil combined with a significant
flow rate of ground ~ater.
Medium: Inte~ediate betvee~ the above.

2. Soil Extract: 2:1 ~ater to soil by weight.

3. Continuously submerged in sea or ground water. Tidal or fluctuating

saline ground water conditions must be treated as separate individual
cases, often requiring additional protective measures.
 GRAPH I
DUCTILE BURST REGRESSION LINE FOR uPVC
20 DEGREES [ElSIUS
WATER SUPPLY RETICULATION
WALL STRESS IMPa)
100-,-----------------------------------------,
-
-
-
-
-
,
H.S-f- -
_
- -
- - - - - - - -
DUCT
_ _ IlE BURST REGRESSION L
---- ~~DR UPV[
- - - - --- ---
,
II
23.6
-- -----1--7
. I
AS 1m· [900 DESIGN STRESS IIS.F. 2.15
I
I'
10- AS 1m CLASS 12 HEAD 1I00ml 5.F. 2.6
-
-
BLUE BRUTE DESIGN STRESS HEAD 1I201ll • 251 surge allowancel I :S.F. 2.8

- BLUE BRUTE M.M.B.\.I. WORKING STilESS HEAD 11001111 S.F. U I

-
- I !
- ~I ~i
~I ~:
-
I !
I-I--------r-,------I.-----------".-----------rl--------:-'-,I----..t...--'r,f,
i ~
10 100 1000 10000 100000 1000000
j,
TIME (hoursl
 GRAPH 2

COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT PIPE ~I1ATERIALS

ABRASION RESISTANCE

S ESTOS CEMENT PIPE

3.0

z
0 GRP
-
(f)
2.5
<
0:
en
<:
lL. 2.0
0
-t-
. J-

O-
w 1.5
0

1.0

200000 400000 600000

o
LOAD CYCLES N
 GRAPH 3

4000 r - - - . - - - - . - - - - - , - - - - - - . - - - - . - - .
,
,
<lJ
U'l
:J~
0.c 3000~'r----t----+-----i------+------1
Urn
o CJ
~3
U'l
<lJ .-
c
u U') 2 000 r-t---r-----+----~---+----J---~
>JU'l
Uo
__ -1
o 0
L --
0

~~ 1000r--T---t---==:::.....c:--+-----+----+---~
E
:J I
Z
Non-Air-Entrcined_.....,. -...,..-..--~
oL-_-L:::::::::1=====±::=~=±:===~
0·35 0'L,5 0·55 0·65 0·B5
\voter/ Cement Ratio I
J
Competitive Elements in the
Australian Pipe Scene!
by
Dr. Michael A. Peck

J
~ I
Dr. Michael Arthur Peck

Qualifications
• B.Sc. (Eng.) in Chemical Engineering from London University.
• Ph.D. from University of New South Wales (completed in 1970).

In 1973 he joined Humes Limited, and the concrete industry, working in

precast concrete pipe production in both Regional and Head Office
management positions for 7 years, moving on to the position of Manager
Concrete R&D (4 years), until taking up his current position - Marketing
Manager Concrete - which includes a continuing responsibililty for product/
market/strategic research and development.

Michael is a past Chairman of the CPAA Marketing Committee.

CPAA24

CPAA - NATIOOAL SEMINAR 1987

Carpetitive Elements in the Australian Pipe Scene

by

Dr. Michael A. Peck

snlPSIS

The structure of the presentation is as follows:

a general introduction to describe the background to the current highly
competitive market place.

an overview of the dynamics of the Australian pipe market, the key players,
basic market statistics, the competitive materials on offer.
threats and opportunities.

marketing strategies of same of the key players - illustrated through their

promotional material.
Because of the sensitive nature of some of the material shown during the
presentation only that sourced fran the CPM is attached to these notes.

For my purpose "pipe" is taken to be pipes lOOnrn and greater in diameter - we are
not talking about tubing, small diameter conduits, e.g. soil, waste, vent
plastic is excluded, etc.
Your first perception of the pipe market is probably of a relatively stable and
orderly situation: but a highly structured market where each of the companies
and each pipe material maintains a somewhat stable market share.
Up until about 2 - 3 years ago that was indeed the position. However, since then
it has become increasingly hostile and today is essentially outright warfare. ;
p
What has caused the change?
The central and essential reason was the decision by James Hardie Industries
Ltmited to phase out ASBESTOS pipe - JH discontinued their asbestos pipe
manufacture on 31 March 1987, although they remain in the supply of asbestos
products for a limited time.

One should not accept that the cessation of manufacture of asbestos products in
Australia will mean a decline in the interest of pressure groups, or those
affected by asbestos related diseases.

Asbestos is an issue that will be around for a long time.

 Page 2

This decision by Hardies created the situation of a substantial market, across

many market segments, which may be considered as "up for grabs". I say this for
three reasons:
1. JHI cannot replace asbestos by a single substitute product - they have
adopted a portfolio approach.

2. The JHI portfolio has led to their penetration into areas considered by
others to be "their" market. The plant investment has led to an increase
in pipe industry capacity at a time of slackening demand.
3. Other players see a unique opportuni ty to increase market share by
occupation of old asbestos markets.
Essentially - we are involved in a material substitution battle.

DYNAMICS OF THE PIPE MARKET

A series of overheads will be shown to cover the following points:

Major Players Individual Companies

Industry Associations
Market Statistics - Total Market by End Use
Total Market by Material
Concrete National Pipe Market and End Use
National Stormwater Market
Materials Offered - Storrnwater Products Offered in Market
These products are examined using "degrees of threat" to the concrete industry,
as follCMs:

*** a substantial threat to the industry - requires definite action

** moderate threat - requires defensive measures
* no real threat
In the storrnwater market the two largest threats to concrete are cellulose FRC
and Ribloc pipes.
The other materials in the JHI portfolio are more threatening in other markets,
Le.
Sewer - Bauku
Water Stg>ly - lbbas

TBRFATS AND OPPORTUNITIES

The composite threat posed by the JHI product portfolio will be examined in terms
of
End Use
Diameter
Capacity
 Page 3.

Key points to be made are:

1. Asbestos is a remarkable, unique material with characteristics not able to
be reproduced by any currently known substitute fibre - and it's cheap.

2. Capacity - all asbestos plant can be converted to make cellulose pipe.

Effectively, a capacity expansion in the stormwater market.
3. The introduction of Hobas and Bauku has led to an expansion of effective
capacity in the sewer market segment.
4. Product range has led to the enlargement of diameter competition.
JHI have substantial disadvantages with their new product portfolio.
The obvious one is product "ETl'NESS FCR PURPalE", Le. will the product do what
is claimed in the longer term? That is performance over time where we must
consider the period of acceptable life to be 100 years.
Product acceptance notwithstanding there are a number of strategic problems that
arise in moving from a single product to a multi-product portfolio.
If one examines the various products one finds a distinctive lack of synergy
between them - exacerbated by the JHI Divisional organisation, and the adoption
of individual rather than collective product strategies.

The concrete industry has not had to SELL steel reinforced concrete p~pe for the
last 50 years or so. However, the realisation of the competitive forces in the
market place in the last two years has resulted in the industry, through its
Association, having to learn about MARKETING itself and its product - Steel
Reinforced Concrete Pipe.
The Association has followed a strategic programme aimed at education of the end
user - not only in the benefits of using concrete pipe but also in providing
information about competitors' products: information that is not, being made I
available by the various manufacturers but 'N'hich is, we would su'aniJ:, desired by
specifying and design engineers and by Authorities themselves.

All sorts of claims are being made by JH about the performance of their
replacement materials.

It is the policy of our Association to inform its custaners and potential

customers, on the technical characteristics of all pipe products - but to do so
with integrity. This has been achieved by substantiation of its own information
through the use of an external, independent and reputable scientific
organisation. In our case AMDEL.
Our modus operandi is:
"If it is not right, don't do it; if it is not true, don't say it.·

Marcus Aurelius
<121-180)
 Page 4.

The objectives of the Association in its marketing programme include:

1. Protection of its own standards and specifications from attack and from
misapplication by other materials.
2. Research into competitive pipe materials.
3. Submission of technical argument to Authorities, specifiers and design
engineers.

4. Both defensive and offensive promotion - with the effort involving

advertising, seminars, in-house training, case history data and public
relations activities.
Let us look in some detail at the advertising that has taken place - to see its
development, to see how the issues have changed, and to illustrate some elements
of the strategies of the various players.
Taking events chronologically we have
Cellulose FRC - ad is evidence of JHI desire to join the "concrete community"
but with a superior product. Ad replaced by publicity of "New
Product" type.

CPM - the above was answered by two advertisements with the copy
emphasizing durability and coverage by Australian Standards.
The CPM response was reactive and defensive in nature - we are a passive
industry! What was needed was an offensive strategy - to ~ert the leadership
role ourselves.
We had to understand what purchasers of pipe really wanted from a product. In
short they seek permanence - DURABILITY - in terms of

* load carrying capacity

hydraulic capacity

resistance to attack (chemical)

* abrasion resistance
In depth in-house evaluations of * have taken place and both evidenced
significant technical weaknesses ln cellulose FRC.
We further had to appreciate the key strength, and any weakness in that strength,
of JHI. The Association determined:
strength - technical credibility

weakness - supporting/promoting a sub-standard product compared with

asbestos and steel reinforced concrete
 Page 5.

and decided on a strategy to concentrate on

firstly, abrasion resistance - results quicker to achieve and able to be

presented powerfully

secondly, load carrying capacity - a harder message to get across but of

more fundamental importance.

One should not forget that both these features will occur simultaneously.
The result is ......•..•. !!!

Abrasion Resistance

The Association had early research results from Monier-Rocla and Amdel. These
were used to develop a 1/2 page ad, targetted at the readership of Engineers
Australia, with a creative use of media.
r
,
The opening of the campaign was folla.ved by what we termed the "Buck Rogers" ad,
which linked abrasion resistance to durability, ffi3.intained the exposure of the
abraded pipe cross-sections, was educational, mentioned the carmunity
responsibility of engineers, and was positive of our a-m product.

In other words we were moving ta.vards adopting a leadership role ourselves:

positioning our product and cellulose with increased authority.

JHI has not answered the CPAA ads openly. Let's say there has been an exchange
of correspondence and that they have stepped up their social and psychological
marketing directly with end users. There is little doubt, in our opinion, that
JHI has developed over the years, and ffi3.intains, a significant advantage in the
special treatment by, and access to, Government instrumentalities. This
advantage is especially useful to them nON.

(There have been two developments of significance in the abrasion debate since the
ad campaign finished:

1. Release of the CPAA docurrent "Abrasion Resistance of Concrete Pipes".

2. The results from a longitudinal abrasion test conducted by Humes Concrete.

t" I
Both advance the debate and help to correct the misinformation in the market
place). ",

JHI Institutional Ad - Fibre Cement Division

In April 1987 it was interesting to see .JHI attempting to regain a leadership

position. They have linked together cellulose PRC and Hobas for the first time.
There are a number of claims which the Association would dispute - the most
outrageous one being that Hobas is somehON an Australian technology, rather than
a successful European development licensed to JHI.

Durability

The current CPAA campaign will have come to your attention, Perhaps with some
impact. This achievement of "impact" was a significant part of the creative
brief.
 Page 6.

The issue being addressed is the sustained load perforrrance of cellulose mc

ccrnpared with steel reinforced concrete pipe. As you have already heard, the
results we have access to - both in-house and independent - suggest that you need
to specify a test load 4.5 times that of an equivalent concrete pipe I S proof
load, to have some assurance of long term performance. Another way of looking
at the issue (since JHI tacitly acknowledge a factor of 3 - but no allowance for
a safety margin) is that if you specify, say a 600mrn Class X concrete pipe, you
would need to specify at least Class Y cellulose FRC pipe, if not Class Z.
The present campaign will run for a number of weeks. It is supported by
publicity and an extensive data base - the preparation of a number of CPAA and
Humes Technical Bulletins being a feature. The evidence of the educational
component of our programme is before you - this is just one of many seminars
being held around the country to inform Engineers of the Association's strong
cpinions.
The intrcduction of a "new" material places a special responsibility on the
manufacturer involved. OUr approach to sustained load testing and the use of
the data to derive short term test levels was develoPed by Humes for its Resinag
pipe intrcduction. Thus, we are not asking others to recognise principles we
did not apply to ourselves.
It is of interest that the development of cellulose pipe seems to be continuing
there has been a number of changes noted in the prcduct literature, e.g. wall
thickness increases, joint profile additions, internal diameter changes, etc.
There is also a degree of misleading information, e.g. pertaining to pipe
hydraulics.
Bauku
Enough of PRC - let's take a quick look at Bauku advertising.
This prcduct is manufactured by Hardie Iplex and different strategic positioning
is evident.
Iplex has used the approach of "implied" endorsement by Authorities of
unquestioned reputation.
The Bauku advertising history is as follows:
Sydney Water Board - ad withdrawn after substantial problems with
Bungaribee sewer became evident.
Port of Melbourne Authority - we are aware the PMA has a policy of no
prcduct endorsement. Ad withdrawn after a matter of weeks.
This form of strategy has problems:
if prcduct does not perform
if Authority objects to use of its name
leaves opening for canpetitors with longer history to strike back very
meaningfully (the latest Clay Pipe Manufacturer Association ad is
a classic example).
 Page 7.

Since the above problems Iplex apPear to have dropped the association with
Authorities. In their place they have used
product ad - same photograph as PMA ad
Corporate ad featuring Bauku as only one of a number of products: use of
rredia similar to previous CPAA use.

Again claims are misleading - for instance we would reject the nature of the
reference to "Australian Standard".
The use of Authority names seems to hold an attraction within JHI. The latest
FRC leaflet has been over-printed with "Approved by the DMR (MR Form 861)" and
makes another reference inside to the DMR. We understand the DMR has taken
action to have such literature withdrawn.
,,
Sunmary
I have shawn by illustration some examples of the advertising, and related this
to the fundamental marketing strategies of the key players. Most of the battle
is fought out in Engineers Australia and you may care to follow it by keeping
copies of the ads as they apPear and examining them for details of the strategic
roves being made.

We know steel reinforced concrete pipe best - as, in fact, do you. It is

reliable and proven by an unchallenged record of Performance over many, many
years. We want to continue to supply quality information on SRCP and other
materials to protect ourselves, the engineering profession and the community at
~r~. '
The CPAA has published and has available technical literature to support the use
of SRCP and it is freely available to you. If we can help with any other
information then simply request it of us.
I have attempted in my presentation to counter any suggestion that the Australian
pipe industry is dull and boring. It really is a hot-bed of ingigue and
political and marketing manoeuvres. My objective will have been achieved if you
are able now to appreciate m::>re broadly what is at stake, how the ompetitors
rate in their product offerings, and how strategic marketing is being used to
influence you in the placement of your next pipe order.

* * * * * * *
 Thearguments
infavour of
steel-reinforced
•
concrete pipes are
verystrongindeed.
Right now, steel reinforced concrete pipe i being challenged in the market by a type of pipe
that claims to break new ground in reinforcement technology.
As a sub titute for steel, it features cellulose fibre that seems to offer comparable strength
on paper, but in the ground, who knows?
Only time will tell. And in the meantime, you take the ri k.
When specifying concrete pipe, keep in mind that steel reinforced concrete pipe is subjected
to the severe tests laid down by the long established and accepted Australian Standards.
Not only that, but all individual raw materials used in manufacture, including the steel
reinforcement, are also covered by Australian Standards.
And as for the test of time, thousands of kilometres of steel reinforced concrete pipe laid
in the 1920s are still working like they were laid yesterday.
So if anybody tries to sell you anything les , offer them a few concrete arguments in favour
of steel rei nforcement.
For more information on the strengths of steel rei nforced concrete pipe, contact the Concrete
Pipe Association of Australia, 276 Glen Eira Road El ternwick, Vic. 3185. Phone (03) 528 2107.

•-. • • Concrete Pipe Association of Australia

CPA 1887A
 When _au bury a pipe, and you don't demand the strength of steel reinforcement,
you might find yourself burying a mistake.
I
Because a concrete pipe has got to last underground for a lifetime. So you won't
,yant to experiment with ideas in reinforcement when theyre unproven in the one test
that reall matters.
The test over time.So no matter how cellulose fibre looks on paper, it makes a
lot more sense to specify a pipe with a proven track record under the groupd. And that's I

a steel rei nforced concrete pipe. "

ot only is it tough (it has to be to meet the Australian Standards of manufacture),
it actually gets stronger with age. And unlike most other pipes on the market, it has a
long, long history of proven success.
So, in many respect choosing the right pipe isn't such a tough decision after all.
);<or more information on the benefits of steel reinforced concrete pipe, contact the
Concrete Pipe Association of Australia, 276 Glen Eira Road, Elstern",ick, Vic. 3IHS.
Phone: (03) 528 2107.

•
CPA 18878
Concrete Pipe Association of Australia
 APOLOGY
Due to the overwhelming response to previous
advertisements highlighting the abrasion resistance
of steel reinforced concrete over cellulose pipe, and
subsequent strength loss ratio, the Association wishes
to apologise for any delay you may have experienced
in receiving your copy of the AM DEL Report
substantiating those weaknesses.
Additional copies are currently being printed and
wi II be despatched posthaste.
CONCRETE PIPE
ASSOCIATION 276 Glen Elra Road.
Eislernwick, VictOria 3185
OF AUSTRALIA ~§~ Telephone (03) 528 2107
Circl. 5 on r••de, service coupon on page 62

/8 Engineers Australia November 28 /986

 , .
~~~
~~~--'
,vo~
~ ~Q~~
REDUCE -----~~~ •.
Rif,f ~
STORM WAr; C4T4slRo -.-: ()~'{()'Uv. NEXT
PIA PHIC ABRAS\ON
PIPE GETs 'E PRoJEcr. ONLY STm R£llIfOR(E\) CONCRErf
A~ STRoNGEk WITH AGE. 11IOEPEl\OENl LABOR-
DRY TBTS SHOW STEEL REINfORCED CONCRETE PIPE "
TO BE SUPERIOR TO CElLULOSE (FRC) PIPE FOR ABRASION
RESISTANCE BY AFAGOR OF OVER NINE TIMES~THE CON-
SEQUENT STRENGTH LOSS RATIO FOR CELLULOSE (FRC)
PIPE IS CONSIDERABLY HIGHER. STEEl REINFORCED
CONCRETE PIPE PROVIDES APROVEN TOUGHNESS AND
RELIABILITY ON WHICH YOU CAN CONFIDENTLY PRO-
TEa YOUR REPUTATION AND COMMUNITY INVESTMENT.
Compara lVe pro les after less than 6weeks abrasIon.••

----._--~~ - ---

THINK AHEAD. PIPE ABRASION ~~

COULD COST TOO MUCH.
For comparalive data phone (03) 5282107 or
fill In, dip and post the coupon
To the Concrete Pipe AssOCIalion of Please send me comparatIVe data on
Austraha, 276 Glen Eira Road, ElstemwlCk, steel reinforced concrete pipe
VIC 3185 over cellulose

ame

Address

Co and Address

Phone No.

CONCRETE PIPE cPAA104

• • ASSOCIATION
• • • OF AUSTRALIA IncSWIn "The Australian Mineral Development
Laboratones (AMDEL) Report M7293/86
 ?(;i:~~

HOW lONG Will NEXT

STEEL REINFORCED QUESTION?
CONCRETE PIPE
lAST?

Australian concrete pipes laid 70 years ago are still in service. Concrete
improves with age.
Not all pipe materials however, have the performance and proven
durability of steel reinforced concrete pipe.

For abrasion data fill in, clip and post the coupon.
To the Concrete Pipe Association of Australia (inc. in NSW)
276 Glen Eira Road, Elsternwick, Victoria. 3185. Phone: (03) 528 2107
Please send me your abrasion resistance information kit on steel reinforced
concrete compared with other pipeline materials.

Name:
THINK AHEAD. PIPE ABRASION COULD COST Address:
TOO MUCH.
CONCRETE PIPE
Co. &Address:
• • ASSOCIATION
• • • OF AUSTRALIA ~~~ Phone CPM102
KEY PLAYERS
,
,
JAMES HARDIE
HUMES
MONIER
TUBEMAKERS
VINIDEX
I
/}

P.I.A.
C,P,A.A.
C.P.M.A.
 AUSTRALIAN PIPE MARKET

SEGMENTATION - BY MATERIAL (CPAA ESTIMATE)

CONCRETE
NATIONAL CONCRETE PIPE MARKET

BY END USE

STORMWATER I
II
 COMPETITIVE PRODUCTS AGAINST CONCRETE
(NON-TRADITIONAL PRODUCTS)

DEGREE OF THREAT IN MARKET SEGMENT

OPPOSITION OFFER
STORMWATER SEWERAGE WATER SUPPLY

I, FRC (CELLULOSE) *** *(*) *(*)

100-750 MM

2, CORRUGATED ** * *
METAL PIPE
300-5000 MM

3. UPvc * ** ***
100-375 MM

4, RIBLOC ** * *
100-1200 MM

5, BAUKU (HOPE) *(*) *** *(*)

300-3000 MM
6, HOBAS (GRP) * * *
450-1200 MM

7.
 JAMES HARDIE - NEW PRODUCT PORTFOLIO

ASBESTOS
100 750

S/W SEWER W,S,

CELLULOSE
100 750

S/W

I
HOBAS <; II
450 1200"
' 1
SEWER W, S,

BLACK BRUTE
300 3000
S/W SEWER W,S,