american concrete pipe association ° 8300 boone boulevard » vienna, virginia 22182 ASTM C76 reinforcement design changes and related research Major changes in the ASTM speciticar ‘dons for reiniorced concrete pipe were made last year. Provisions were added in ASTM C76.70 which provide for (1) posi- tioning and proportioning of reinforce ment on a “quadrant design” basis, and (2) increased usage ofthe positioning and proportioning of reinforcement using an inner circular cage in conjunction with an elliptical cage. (Note: The manner in which these new provisions are included in ASTM (76.70 are given in Appendix A, Fig. Al. Proposed revisions to Fig, Al, being considered by ASTM Committee (C13, are shown in Fig. A2 Significant as these changes are, an event of greater longeterm impact for the concrete pipe industry was the issuance of the acceptance type specification ASTM C635-70 "Reinforced Concrete D- Load Culvert, Storm Drain, and Sewer Pipe.” Purchasers, engineers and concrete pe producers will have to evaluate the changes and determine their usage. This article will aid that evaluation. 12,1287, member companies of the Ohio Concrete Pipe Manu facturers Association (OCPMA) were given the opportunity to submit to the Ohio State Highway Department pipe designs for sizes 114 to 144-inch diameter, in Classes 11 to V. It was also neces- sary to develop a test program to substantiate the designs. In pre- paring designs, however, recog nition would have to be made of the need to fully utilize any re- inforcement placed in the pipe After extensive analysis, utiliz~ ing all available pipe structural data, and aided by electronic computers, the designs w formulated. The designs as sub- tted are shown in Tables 2 through 5. A test program, as submitted, is outlined 2s follows: —Pive of four diameters would be tested: 114 inches, 120 inches, 132 inches, and 144 inches. — Eight pipe of each size would be tested: two for each of the ASTM C76 strength classes — 111, IV, and V. —The minimum number of pipe to be tested was set at 32 All pipe were to be tested in three-edge bearing to forma- tion of a 0.01-inch crack and ultimate load. —All pipe were to be cored, and the core tested for concrete compressive strength —No one manufacturer was to make both pipe of 2 given strength class. Personnel at the Ohio State Highway Depart- ment, (OSHO) Materials Test ing Laboratory were to inspect all fabricated reinforcement cages prior to casting of con- crete. They were also to attend all three-edge bearing tests to observe procedures and record results, Upon successful completion of the test program, it was antici- pated that the tested designs would be incorporated in the OSHD Construction and Material Specifications. The test program started in 1967 and was completed in 1968. A feature of the test program was the inclusion of “quadrant” reinforcement design. Proof of this concept would permit greater utilization of the reinforcement used in the pipe. Prior to under taking the test program, the pipe wall stcesses resulting from load- ings and the altemate means of positioning and proportioning re- inforcement, were reviewed by the OCPMA and OSHD. A brief presentation of this re- view is shown in Fig. 1 with an accompanying discussion. To aid evaluation and relative usage of reinforcing resulting from many alternate methods of positioning and proportioning reinforcement, an ASTM C76-70 design for an 84- nich, Class Ill, wall B pipe is pre- sented in Fig. 2 and Table 7 Highlights of the test program with a discussion are presented in Tables 2 through 5 and Graphs 1 through 4, All D-loads indicated 2 pounds are pounds per linear foot per foot of inside diameter. Upon completion of this test program, the designs given in Appendix B were incorporated in the Januaty 1, 1969 edition of the State of Ohio Department of High- ways Construction and Material Specifications. Fig. 81. and 82, llustrated in Appendix B, indicate the type of stirrup used and the manner in which provision was made for “quadrant” reinforce: ment. The two methods of pro- portioning quadrant seinforc ments, as illustrated in Appendix A and Fig. 82, should be consid ered equal alternatives.a. Depicts three-edge bearing test Pipe has tendency to take oval shape {dotted lines} under loads, Tension stresses (T) are developed in the wall con the inside at the crown and invert and on the outside at the spzingline. Compressive stresses (C) are devel- oped in the wall on the inside at the springline and on the outside at the crown and invert b. Depicts the zones within the con- crete pipe wall where tension and compression stresses exist under three-edge bearing load The reinforcing of a concrete pipe basically consists of the placement of steel reinforcement in those zones of the pipe wall where tension stresses exist. Reinforcernent in the pipe wall zones where compression stresses exist is not required. There are several ways of positioning and proportioning the reinforcement to attain the desired placement. ¢. Two full circular cages inner and outer}. Reinforcement is placed in tension zones of wall. Much rein- forcement is placed in compression zones where it is not needed. d. Use of elliptical cage where re- inforcement is positioned to be in tension zones of wall where needed, Usilizes reinforcement in economical manner. e. Use of elliptical cage plus full inner circular. Modification of use of elliptical cage alone, Used in larger pipe where full inner circular cage is positioned to resist tension stresses (on the inside wall due to pipe weight where pipe may be oriented in any direction prior to final installation Utilizes reinforcement in economical f.Idealized positioning and propor tioning of reinforcement. Unlikely t0 be attained with existing methods of pipe manufacture. Positive position ing of reinforcement hard to secure Would utilize reinforcement in eco- nomical manner. & Modification of ideslized method of reinforcing. Known as “quadrant design’. Uses full circular inner and outer cages to which reinforcement mats are secured in the tension zones of the pipe wall, Utilizes reinforce- ‘ment in economical manner. ‘Use of stirrups at crown and invert with “quadrant design” reintorce- ment eer ae ee pee acon, eee iarers od EE See me Smee 2h Gm ab 2a 28m 2° ae es ma mat14 tel t eau Hil PETE eth Mids es Ci iis ge ge aia aut pi eena eee a iieh ga ES Teer yi Kcobsbadne 1 EA 8 taend i Pete assy He ani Fareed it eat Shee SSESLILE ie ese aizi elias 2233 gies gee Sis guia a S74 C76-59,8,C76 Petes 33 SaEsea te in: a eet ai al OPP as wu Ree s ane Bia as Sc bet seta fae % etna a: gaaa Ae eee z HESS Bees Hi aaad eeeRi alk eels giz 22483 eee eins Sta Gidea Seen i ese ates biaaaes SNE CT6=70 (NEW: 5 Bagee Se et ei Bie ace eye 2ba2 aise ade ae finda: pera ie pie shai 48 oe ule a Saat Ssaeae Abas: fang santas REe aii lisa id #1 at ee bia ace Baas a ee gaaaial epeht nis . Beet ke 4 % Rigaae A apaise see ily ae 20.32% ASO" euae SHEE ¢ Mea sanscons feral ee hbeig GP Deemacoo8 Pictoed : Blbieere ELST T NE eal Bia ag ete Pi @glesede ernie ae ay EGE the Biane cis CS re See se si aik as asa agg ttt Pereyeee Ott STE TTELiis Et ieita it Sis aeaig STE Sit tueea te ce tis sianey E12 12 9 Teohissiril Galak Se netroeceved st debire 11] ; agi 4 4 LFORDESIGNSIN FIGURE: | | ae Se Ee ET EEE: [enn Stel Ra basin | Sta fator ft baie gg | ra20 7.000 Fig. 26) ose ft fags 22 | rea cee Fa 26) oro (Se eel cig ac 0.628 Fig. 218) oso ip ipa ; i “Based on assiinptionienatah elipcal cag@ is'equaltlaVeragoiot nver ‘ang, outer ie, 1 eae Perens a ES 5 GRE ISG teas ean pons ep see Sunes ipo ae re igbieais setbiig yu seals peeedse ge PA ‘S92 a8 £480 80R RES i? he SS O23 $2S Ge Ss This figure provides data to aid in the evaluation of relative reinforce- ment usage resulting from the choice ‘of reinforcement positioning and proportioning used. For purposes of ‘comparison an 84-inch, Class Ill, wall pipe is used. 2. Required inner and outer full cir- cular cage reinforcement areas as specified in Table Ill in ASTM C76-70, . Required elliptical cage reinforce- ment area as specified in Table til in ASTM 76-70. . One of the means of providing the “quadrant design” reinforcement areas permitted under the provisions of the “quadrant design” note be- neath Table INI in ASTM C76-70 and ‘the provisions of Figure 7 in ASTM 76-70, 4d. Required elliptical and full inner circular cage reinforcement areas re- quired to satisfy the provisions of the “elliptical plus inner circular cage’ note beneath Table Ill in ASTM. 76-70. e. An alternate method of providing reinforcement areas that meet the provisions of the “quadrant design” note beneath Table tll in ASTM 76-70 and the provisions of Figure Tin ASTM C76-70. f. Another alternate method of pro- viding reinforcement areas that meet the provisions of the “quadrant de- sign" note beneath Table III in ASTM C76-70 and the provisions of Figure 7 in ASTM (76-70. TABLET ‘A quantitative comparison of the reinforcement usage by weight of the reinforcement resulting from each of the methods of positioning and pro- portioning a given in Figure 2 ‘a to 2 (fis presented in Table 1. The reinforcement usage cesulting from the use of full inner and outer cir- cular cages as shown in Figure 2 (a) was chosen as the base and requires the maximum amount of seinforce- ment, All other methods of ceinfore- ing the pipe require the use of less reinforcement by weight. The relative amount required is given in Table 1. (ample: The amount of reinforce- ment required in Figure 2 (eis 625 percent of that required in Figure 2.i cerry HL of circular cages and quadrant mats meat al oo a HLA eh are also given, Total reinforcement isan [oe | oar | 057 | osm | aarr | arse | azes | 0230 [casa | 0 | i906 | a6 Ba areas shown are equal to the sum of Teas [foe est [oar [ean [ene [ome [ecw loom] Poet a BYE circular cages plus quadrant mats st vwan | [er | ox [ooa [oats ere [ost loam les |e aw fw [hh 2 Bh the inside crown and invert, and the vaszs [ve [or | os [ear ‘ern [oa [eam [ess) 0 | wo lao |¥S Eo ouside springline, The calculated wean | ov [ene | aoa | ose [osse [anu foams [ones [oes | e [ae lee la @ AE. o three-edge bearing tests are shown veer | [oot | cms [eam [oars [am [oats [eas [aem| eo | ee lee |g BSS for both the O.0t-inch crack and °"S' sean | a [ow Lor Lose oe [oca [ose [arm | owe [ae | $B ultimate test loadings. No stirrups wen [or tow [or [oar lese fame [oar fer tom etme La] Sak ‘ware used in Class I! cest pipe “Sw fr ho 384 ned ot mer roo eel 'At the conclusion of the test pro- i F7 ee oe ates ea Li rine tet pipe are reviewed. AN ut : eepreee Sk £8 OT 1 a |e standing feature of the test results steam | an | ose | ow | one] oss: | o4e7 care | one | 908 ze [ow ee & Ye ‘was the consistently high test results: ‘san | 0 [ ont [ave] cam [oan [own [eae] oat [oor wae foe fea Be infact each of the seven pipe tested tam [em fom| ame oea fam osm | oxofome |e pwr fae ip et In proper orenation exceeded the {Cwm [wr [om [om ]sam [ore ere] com[onm [oer] + [om] ra]g EB Diload requirements for Class tN, [a } q t g ie 4% Es pipe, An analysis of the test results 4 E 4 ge : indicted tht 917 percent reduction Eres in the originally proposed designs asa [| ome | oat] one [om [cn [one [oa could be made, The OSHD con reat] wx | om [ore eam [oa [ero [ane [oom sented based on further testing. of case | wore Lome ame] [ar ea pipe with the lesser reinforcement we [o> | oat [oar [car [ers [oa [a Reinforcement designs as modified [em [ese vam [osm [oan [one [oan for Class It pipe are given in Table Tr eer eoel sas [or [ean [os | ws 218) Reinforcement areas as provided = [ear [ore oa [oe [sn [oar Pear in the test pipe and the calculated car [or] ame | [ase [are three-edge bearing test D-loads are i i thovhown Ath evel of Att Tait phase of the test program the test nes 4 resulis were eeviewed. Once more vee [7 | ea [ear | oe | oar [oar the results were found to be con: ae [or [ var or [oom [ao [1a [ooo [esa 4 sistent high with only one pipe not exe | 0 | ve | ove taniccener dss sspopond [sre ae ela See ortiierced ae Reece pp pasar eta ets mre] te Bi Ce ee Laer elses oem eet ae met wn pode sre Bear a aa [ae eons ee were not reinforced on a quadrant design basis (120-3A and 144-38). Eleven lines of stirrups were used at the crown and invert in all Class | IL test pipe. (For details of the type Of stirrup used see Fig. BL) A ceview of the test results of Class I pipe showed excelfent results with =e] ale rmnlsly Pell anneal nee all est pipe passing the lass I D- one fiee [a Tol oe ip load recuirements. An analysis of the corse fn | ae se Lem ee rr ara ore [aes [nea | ere ays test results for Class II and Class mf see [vf et ieee sof oe fe | | re pine indiated that no strrups were ewe [ot Tam [or 2 ve [Ton [ae Teauired. Note was made that the jg erm [ef em [on [oe] co] eae fo we [oT ow | desiens, a orginally proposed and | A—SoeTaa]va ome] ome si oew ome oe me a tested for Class lt pipe (Table 2), all posed the Cle tex requements pe Seep fe ee ae ate a Lineney AY A wy ea a even though they had less reinforce- mest than the Class Ill designs and used no stircups. The designs, a8 pro- posed and tested, were accepted with 8 modification that only five tines of stirrups would be required. Reinforcement designs as proposed for Class IV pipe and the seiniorce- ment areas provided are given in Table 4. The first eight pipe presented in Table 4 constitutes the test pro- © | gram as originally proposed with three of them not reinforced on a quadrant design basis (120-84, 120 48, and 744-4). Eleven lines oF stir- ups were used at the crown and invert in all Class IV test pipe. Al test pipe passed the Class 1V D-load requirements. However, the ultimate D-load test results for test Pipe 120-48 and 132-44 were such that it was deciced to make and test Ta ee ta oi z ater ee additional pipe in the 120 inch and "132 inch sizes. Test pipe 120-4C, 120 4D, and 132-4C were then mace and tested. The test results of the three additional pipe exceeded the Class IV test requirements, and served to supplement acceptance of the pro- posed designs. Reinforcement designs as proposed for Class V pipe and the ‘einforce- ment areas provided, are given in Table 5, The first eight pipe presented In Table 5 constitutes the test program 25 originally proposed, with two of ae tg ot a them not reinforced on the quadrant design basis (120-5 and 144-54) “ gat? Sane es a oe Ereven lines of siicrups were used at the crowa and invert in all Class V test pipe, A review of test results for Class V pipe shows that the first failures were experienced, Test pipe 114-53 failed t0 meet the 0,01-inch crack O- load requirement. At the completion Of the test it was found that the top test beam was tipped, indicating faulty application of load to pipe. The bot tom of the pipe was fourd to be TWe-inch off center on the bottom eee - et AS ain iO S. oe cS a ela iors EVE) or cen or erence utima BL D-load. It was decided to test twoay the outer cage plus the quadrant mat in Quads rants 8 and # shall not be less than that speci- feed for the outer cage in Tables | to V. 2 Note 1— The total reinforcement ares (Asi ‘of the inner cage plus the Quadrant mat in Guacrants £1 and #2 shall bo not ess than {hat specified for the Inner cago In Tables | tev. 1 relnforcoment area jue the Quadrant reinforcement area (A’si) of ie | ‘in Duadrans =3 and =4 shal bo rot lass than 2554 of that epeciiec for te puter cage in tabies | to V.ee ‘Greular Reinforcement in Circular Pipe ewer sth ‘sons Minimum Walt Thickness in on ‘089 0 ora t0-1/2 079 " os 2 097 2 e178 2 en 2 ers 2 a 2 e te sabi inaicatee me numberof lnetusinel ne rear n each top ana battom gation ofthe aig. The area ofeach ee de sewer Bi ey gen me Retario the omats for Came so a ee ann ait two i ARR porate SKtrigth SOOM A a eo oe gat gO aa oe 51 10 62 roe 175 u 18s 208 g a os re footers for Gee Relr toate or Cis I ues ® NN eee e eset oar a ah 8APPENDIX B. A 8 Minimum Amplitude jrOulside Cage Members vin) SL le vain, ne 2" Longitudinal malitude Spocrg on inside edge Inside gti tf : pais gside \S-Stirup Loo 6/2" Circumferential Members Spacing Setween Enlarged Section OF Wall Seat Note: The " 96 shell extend from the ner Cage. Inner cage toward he cuter aurace ot The ! pipe for © distance not less than the minimum Srpttoce, unere more thon ne langn o ‘Stup materials used per the op, curd {ne ercumferentia| member of fe Inver age Bottom Shall be ase The ence of "8 saped Midpoint Section A-A Fig. BI llustratve example of $-Stirup supper eystom for Glass IV, 120inch dtameter pipe. lines spaced @ ev inches. Inner Chewor Cage Inner Quodran See Inner Quastent Ste! (0) Not Less Than 45° Fis 82 ~ Strruge of spices shal incluoe on outer bend. Minimum area por support 0.081 89. in 11 (1) Not Less Than 45° Inner Giovlar Cage = 0975 x. ‘Acea required tor lanier Cat Inner Quadrant Steel shall be = the aiference between the required inner ‘cage area and the inner circular cage area used. In no case shall the clr ‘cumferential wire in the Inner cuad= rant be less than 0.162" diameter. 0.50 x Ares Outer circu required for Outer Cage. ‘Outer Quecrant stest shall be = tho aiiforence Between the requires tutor cage area and the outer circu lar cage area used. In no case shall ‘the elroumferental wire In the outer ‘quadrant be less than 0.162" diameter. Members of the Ohio Concrete Pipe Manufacturers Association* hope that the results and information gat>- ered from the test programs can ad- vance the use of reinforced concrete Pipe. Successful completion of the Test programs was based in large measure on the cooperation of many ‘Ohio State Highway Department plant CoSafe we inspectors, directed by Frank M, Wil- liams, engineer of tests, Ohio Depart- ment of Highways, and Thomas M4, Murtaugh, assistant engineer, Ohio Department of Highways Testing Lab- oratory. Floyd C, Redick, managing irector, Ohio Cancete Pipe Manu- facturers Association, coordinated the test programs. + Participating Companies: Buckeye Concrete tise Company, Centurlal Prod Lets Corporation; Cincinnat Concrete Pipe Company; Hivay Concrete Pize Com- any; Price Brothers Company, Reliance Universal ine: Superior Products. Com- pany; Toleds” Concrete Pipe Company: Union Concrete Pipe Company, United States Concrete Pipe Company.