DESIGN INFORMATION BULLETIN NO.

83 - 04
CALTRANS SUPPLEMENT TO FHWA CULVERT REPAIR
PRACTICES MANUAL

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

This document establishes uniform procedures to carry out the highway design functions
of the California Department of Transportation. It is neither intended as, nor does it
establish, a legal standard for these functions. The procedures established herein are for
the information and guidance of the officers and employees of the Department.
This document is not a textbook or a substitute for engineering knowledge, experience or
judgment. Many of the instructions given herein are subject to amendment as conditions
and experience may warrant. Special situations may call for variation from the
procedures described, subject to the approval of the Division of Design, or such other
approval as may be specifically called for.

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 1
1.1.1 Objectives .............................................................................................................. 1
1.1.2 Organization........................................................................................................... 1
1.1.3 Overview of Problem ............................................................................................. 2
2.1 CULVERT STRUCTURES ....................................................................................... 3
2.1.1 Material .................................................................................................................. 3
2.1.1.1 Rigid

................................................................................................................ 3

2.1.1.1.1 General ........................................................................................................... 3

2.1.1.1.2 Concrete Pipe ................................................................................................. 4
2.1.1.1.3 Other Rigid Materials ..................................................................................... 4
2.1.1.1.3.1 Reinforced Polymer Mortar Pipe (RPMP) ....................................................... 4
2.1.1.1.3.2 Polymer Concrete Pipe..................................................................................... 5
2.1.1.1.3.3 Fiber Reinforced Concrete Pipe ....................................................................... 5
2.1.1.1.3.4 Ductile Iron ...................................................................................................... 5

2.1.1.2 Flexible

................................................................................................................ 5

2.1.1.2.1 Metal Pipe ...................................................................................................... 6

2.1.1.2.2 Plastic Pipe ..................................................................................................... 6
2.1.1.2.3 Fiberglass Fiber Reinforced Plastic (FRP) .................................................. 7
2.1.1.3 Culvert Coatings ...................................................................................................... 7
2.1.1.3.1 Coatings for Concrete and Other Culverts ..................................................... 7
2.1.1.3.2 Coatings for Metal Culverts ........................................................................... 9

2.1.2 Service Life for Culvert Rehabilitation; Geotechnical Factors............................ 10

2.1.2.1 Hydrogen-Ion Concentration (pH), Soil Resistivity, Chloride and Sulfate
Concentration of the Surrounding Soil and Water ............................................................ 10
2.1.2.2 Material Characteristics of the Culvert.................................................................. 10
2.1.2.3 Abrasion .............................................................................................................. 11

3.1 PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION AND ASSESSMENT ........................................ 13

3.1.1 Culvert Inspection Program (CIP) ....................................................................... 13
3.1.2 Office Review ...................................................................................................... 14
3.1.3 Site Visit and Inspection ...................................................................................... 14
3.1.3.1 Voids and Piping in the Backfill ........................................................................... 23

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

4.1 END TREATMENT AND OTHER APPURTENANT STRUCTURE REPAIRS

AND RETROFIT IMPROVEMENTS ......................................................................... 25
4.1.1 Headwalls, Endwalls and Wingwalls ................................................................... 25
4.1.2 Outfall Works....................................................................................................... 25
5.1 PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION AND ASSOCIATED REPAIR FOR
CULVERT BARRELS ................................................................................................... 27
5.1.1 Concrete Culverts................................................................................................. 27
5.1.1.1 Joint Repair............................................................................................................ 27
5.1.1.1.1 Misalignment................................................................................................ 27
5.1.1.1.2 Exfiltration ................................................................................................... 28
5.1.1.1.3 Infiltration .................................................................................................... 28
5.1.1.1.3.1 Chemical Grouting ..........................................................................................29
5.1.1.1.3.2 Internal Joint Sealing Systems ........................................................................32

5.1.1.1.4 Cracked and Separated Joints....................................................................... 33

5.1.1.2 Cracks

.............................................................................................................. 34

5.1.1.2.1 Longitudinal Cracks ..................................................................................... 35

5.1.1.2.2 Transverse Cracks ........................................................................................ 36
5.1.1.3 Spalls

.............................................................................................................. 36

5.1.1.4 Slabbing .............................................................................................................. 37

5.1.1.5 Invert Deterioration/Concrete Repairs ............................................................ 38
5.1.1.6 Crown Repair/Strengthening ........................................................................... 39

5.1.2 Corrugated Metal Pipes and Arches .................................................................... 39

5.1.2.1 Joint Repair............................................................................................................ 39
5.1.2.2 Abrasion and Invert Durability Repairs ................................................................ 41
5.1.2.2.1 Invert Paving ................................................................................................ 43
5.1.2.2.2 Invert Paving with Concreted Rock Slope Protection (CRSP) or Calcium
Aluminate Abrasion Resistant Concrete ..................................................................... 47
5.1.2.2.3 Steel Armor Plating ...................................................................................... 47
5.1.2.2.3.1 Welded Steel Pipeliners ..................................................................................49

5.1.2.3 Soil Migration........................................................................................................ 50

5.1.2.4 Corrosion .............................................................................................................. 51
5.1.2.4.1 Human Entry ................................................................................................ 52
5.1.2.4.1.1 Cathodically Protecting Metal Culverts ..........................................................53

5.1.2.4.2 Non-Human Entry ........................................................................................ 53

ii

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

5.1.2.5 Shape Distortion .................................................................................................... 53

5.1.3 Structural Plate Pipe............................................................................................. 55

5.1.3.1 Seam Defects ......................................................................................................... 55
5.1.3.2 Seam Repair, Invert Durability and Shape Distortion ........................................... 56

5.1.4 Aluminum Pipe .................................................................................................... 57

5.1.5 Plastic Pipe ........................................................................................................... 57
6.1 GENERAL CULVERT BARREL REHABILITATION TECHNIQUES .......... 59
6.1.1 Caltrans Host Pipe Structural Philosophy ............................................................ 59
6.1.2 Grouting Voids in Soil Envelope ......................................................................... 60
6.1.2.1 Voids Below the Invert.......................................................................................... 60
6.1.2.2 Voids Within the Backfill...................................................................................... 60

6.1.3 Rehabilitation Families ........................................................................................ 62

6.1.3.1 Sliplining (General) ............................................................................................... 62
6.1.3.1.1 Sliplining Using Plastic Pipe Liners............................................................. 65
6.1.3.1.1.1 Allowable Types of Plastic Liners ..................................................................65
6.1.3.1.1.2 Strength Requirements ....................................................................................66
6.1.3.1.1.3 Pipe Dimensions .............................................................................................67
6.1.3.1.1.4 Grouting ..........................................................................................................74
6.1.3.1.1.5 Joints ...............................................................................................................75
6.1.3.1.1.6 Installation.......................................................................................................76
6.1.3.1.1.7 Other Considerations.......................................................................................77

6.1.3.2 Lining with Cured-In-Place Pipes ......................................................................... 78

6.1.3.3 Lining with Folded and Re-Formed PVC Liner (Fold and Form)......................... 80
6.1.3.4 Lining with Deformed-Reformed HDPE Liner ..................................................... 81
6.1.3.5 Lining with Machine Wound Plastic Liner ........................................................... 83
6.1.3.6 Sprayed Coatings ................................................................................................... 86
6.1.3.6.1 Air Placed Concrete and Epoxy or Polyurethane Lining for Drainage
Structures .................................................................................................................... 86
6.1.3.6.2 Cement Mortar Lining.................................................................................. 87
6.1.3.7 Man-Entry Lining with Pipe Segments ................................................................. 88
6.1.3.7.1 Fiberglass Reinforced Cement (FRC) Liners ............................................... 89
6.1.3.7.2 Fiberglass Reinforced Plastic (FRP) Liners ................................................. 89
6.1.3.8 Other Techniques .................................................................................................. 91
6.1.3.9 IHS Server Link..................................................................................................... 91

iii

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

7.1 INFLUENCING FACTORS .................................................................................... 91

7.1.1 Hydrology ............................................................................................................ 91
7.1.2 Hydraulics ............................................................................................................ 91
7.1.3 Safety ................................................................................................................... 92
7.1.4 Environmental ...................................................................................................... 92
7.1.5 Host Pipe Dimensions and Irregularities ............................................................. 93
7.1.6 Coordination with Headquarters and Division of Engineering Services (DES) .. 94
7.1.6.1 Headquarters Concurrence for Large Diameter Liners ......................................... 94
7.1.6.2 Geotechnical Design Assistance/Approval for Pipe Replacement using Trenchless
Excavation Construction (TEC) Methods ......................................................................... 94
7.1.6.3 Coordination with Geotechnical Design ............................................................... 94

7.1.7 Maximum Push Distance for Large Diameter Flexible Pipe Liners .................... 96
8.1 GUIDELINES FOR COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVE REHABILITATION
TECHNIQUES ................................................................................................................ 97
8.1.1 Table of Alternative Repair Techniques .............................................................. 97
8.1.1.2 Failing Culvert Solutions Summary .................................................................... 104

8.1.2 Process Flow Charts ........................................................................................... 104

9.1 REPLACEMENT ................................................................................................... 105
9.1.1 Repair Verses Replacement ............................................................................... 105
9.1.2 Replacement Systems ........................................................................................ 105
9.1.2.1 Open Cut (Trench) Method ................................................................................. 106
9.1.2.2 Trenchless Excavation Construction (TEC) Methods ......................................... 106
9.1.2.2.1 Pipe Jacking ............................................................................................... 117
9.1.2.2.1.1 Auger Boring ................................................................................................119

9.1.2.2.2 Pipe Ramming ............................................................................................ 119

9.1.2.2.3 Microtunneling ........................................................................................... 120
9.1.2.2.4 Pipe Bursting and Pipe Splitting ................................................................ 122
9.1.2.2.5 Trenchless Replacement References .......................................................... 122
9.1.2.3 Other Considerations for TEC ............................................................................. 123

10.1 NEW PRODUCT APPROVAL PROCESS AND CONSTRUCTIONEVALUATED EXPERIMENTAL FEATURE PROGRAM ................................... 129
11.1 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS............................................................................. 130
11.1.1 Supporting Roadway and Traffic Loads .......................................................... 130
11.1.2 Compaction Grouting....................................................................................... 132

iv

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

11.1.3 Future Rehabilitation ....................................................................................... 133

12.1 APPENDIXES ....................................................................................................... 134
Appendix A Butt Fusion Procedures for Solid Wall HDPE Slipliner ..................... 135
Appendix B Flow Chart of the New Product Approval Process ............................. 141
Appendix C Typical Resistivity Values and Corrosiveness of Soils ....................... 142
Appendix D Crack Repair in Concrete Pipe Using a Maximum Strength, NonShrink, Portland Cement or Mortar (Refer to Index 5.1.1.2)...................................... 143
Appendix E Sources of Information and Industry Contacts .................................... 144
Appendix F CIPP Guidance for Resident Engineers ............................................... 152
Appendix G Case Studies ........................................................................................ 165
Example 1: Ed-50-PM 14.0 (4C9104) Culvert Repair Summer 2003............................ 165
Example 2: 03-Nevada-80 PM 4.0 Culvert Repair (Castle Creek) EA 03-4C3601
(Summer 2003) ............................................................................................................ 180
Example 3: 03-Yub-49 KP 9.5/PM 5.9 (3C3504) Emergency Repair of CMP (Summer
2003)
............................................................................................................ 188
Example 4: Compaction Grouting ................................................................................... 193

Appendix H Design Examples ................................................................................. 195

Design Example 1: (36 in. x 227 ft 10-ga CMP) ............................................................. 195
Design Example 2: 108 inch x 384 ft SSPP (10 gage) .................................................... 199
Design Example 3: (84 x 145 ft RCP) ........................................................................... 201

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

1.1 INTRODUCTION
1.1.1 Objectives
Numerous documents and publications have already been written on the issue of culvert
repair. The primary purpose of this Design Information Bulletin (D.I.B.) is to
supplement the 1995 Federal Highway Administration Publication Culvert Repair
Practices Manual-Volumes 1 and 2 (refer to on-line FHWA Hydraulics publications:
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/hydpub.htm), highlight areas of general concern, and
reference other appropriate documentation to provide information, guidelines and
alternatives for the cost-effective repair, rehabilitation, strengthening or retrofit upgrade
of culverts and storm drains as described in Indices 806.2 and 838.1 of the Highway
Design Manual (HDM). In addition, information contained in this D.I.B. supplements
Topic 853 - Pipe Liners and Linings for Culvert Rehabilitation of the HDM and Section
15-6 of the 2010 edition of the Standard Specifications.
This D.I.B. is intended to be of assistance to design, maintenance, hydraulic and
structural engineers who are responsible for decisions regarding maintenance, repair,
rehabilitation, retrofit upgrading, and replacing highway culverts.
Many new products and techniques have been developed that often make complete
replacement with open cut unnecessary. When used appropriately, these new products
and techniques can benefit the Department in terms of increased mobility, cost, and
safety to both the public and contractors. This D.I.B. is intended to build a collection of
procedures that are cost-effective for their location and that will meet the needs of their
particular area.

1.1.2 Organization
This D.I.B. is organized into twelve sections:

Index 1.1 provides an introduction, purpose, target audience, and a general

overview of problem.
Index 2.1 reviews the most common materials used in culvert conduits and
associated Highway Design Manual (HDM) references for material selection and
service life. It provides general discussions on the behavior of rigid and flexible
pipe and references the appropriate Caltrans standards for excavation, backfill and
installation. Service life for culvert rehabilitation is also discussed in conjunction
with various geotechnical factors, which include: pH, resistivity, chloride and
sulfate concentration of the surrounding soil and water, and abrasion potential.
Index 3.1 discusses problem identification and assessment through field
inspection.
Index 4.1 outlines culvert end treatment and other appurtenant structure repairs
and retrofit improvements for headwalls, endwalls, wingwalls and outfall works.
Index 5.1 outlines various types of problems that can be encountered in culvert
barrels and presents guidelines and information on procedures for the associated
repairs.

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Index 6.1 provides information on general culvert rehabilitation techniques. This

section discusses Caltrans host pipe structural philosophy, grouting voids and
provides a comprehensive outline of the various rehabilitation families and
techniques.
Index 7.1 discusses the following influencing factors that should be considered:
hydrology, hydraulics, safety, environmental, host pipe dimensions and
irregularities, and headquarters assistance/approval for large diameter plastic
liners and pipe replacement using Trenchless Excavation Construction (TEC)
methods.
Index 8.1 provides a summary table and references for comparison of the various
alternative rehabilitation techniques and guidance on the overall process.
Index 9.1 discusses replacement; the decision process used to determine whether
to repair or replace. Open cut and a comprehensive listing of the various
trenchless replacement systems are provided, along with other considerations for
TEC.
Index 10.1 discusses Caltrans New Product Approval Process and construction
evaluated experimental feature program and appropriate headquarters contacts.
Index 11.1 Identifies some other considerations that should be taken into account
when analyzing alternatives to repair and/or replace culverts.
Index 12.1 Appendixes provides supplemental information on; butt fusion
procedures, Caltrans New Product Approval Process, culvert inspection, corrosion
and crack repair in concrete pipe. Also provided are sources of repair information,
industry contacts, cured in place pipe (CIPP) guidance for resident engineers,
some large diameter metal pipe repair case studies, and design examples.

1.1.3 Overview of Problem

Culverts are an integral part of the highway system, and like other parts of the system
they are subject to deterioration. Currently, culverts functionally classified as bridges (see
Index 62.2 (2) of the HDM) are inspected at least every two years. In 2005 the
Department initiated a statewide culvert inspection program resourced through
maintenance. Camera equipped vehicles for culvert inspection are available in every
District. See Index 3.1.1. However, culvert repair work is frequently approached strictly
as a maintenance problem without consideration of the underlying structural or hydraulic
conditions from which the deterioration originates. Surveys performed recently have
shown relatively high percentages of culverts in need of at least some form of repair.
Because of the large number of aging culverts in use today, the Department is faced with
a major expense in repairing, rehabilitating, and replacing culverts as they reach the end
of their design service life.
To date, there has been limited written guidance available within the Department on the
topic of how to rehabilitate culverts without disrupting traffic.

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

2.1 CULVERT STRUCTURES

2.1.1 Material
The most common materials used in culvert conduits are reinforced concrete, corrugated
steel, and corrugated high-density polyethylene. Other materials that may be found in
culvert conduits are corrugated aluminum, non-reinforced concrete, ribbed polyvinyl
chloride (PVC), welded steel, timber, and masonry. Refer to HDM Chapter 850, Topics
851, 852, 855 and 857 for guidance on Material Selection, Design Service Life and Kinds
of Pipe Culverts. Refer to FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 1, pages 2-18
to 2-30 for a description of culvert materials and coatings for culvert materials. Refer to
Table 857.2 in the HDM for allowable alternative pipe materials for various types of
installations.
These various pipe materials will have differing types of response to applied load. Based
on this response, the pipe material can be categorized as either rigid or flexible, as
described in Indices 2.1.1.1 and 2.1.1.2. This distinction in behavior is important not only
in understanding how a pipe will perform under various soil and live load conditions, but
will also affect failure mechanisms and repair considerations.
HDM Index 857.2 provides general guidelines for alternative pipe culvert selection using
the AltPipe web-based program that is located on the Headquarters Office of Highway
Drainage Design (within the Division of Design Headquarters Division of Design)
website at the following web address: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/oppd/altpipe.htm
2.1.1.1 Rigid
2.1.1.1.1 General
If the culvert material is rigid (usually reinforced concrete), the load is carried primarily
by the structure walls. Refer to FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 1, pages
2-7 to 2-8, 2-11 and 2-31 to 2-35 for a description of pipe loading, rigid culvert behavior
and installation. As described on page 2-33 and in Figures 2.20 and 2.21 on pages 2-34
and 2-35, it is very important to have uniform bedding to distribute the load reaction
around the lower periphery of the pipe. Adequate support is critical in rigid pipe
installations, or shear stress may become a problem. Excavation, backfill and culvert
beddings shall conform to the details shown on the Standard Plans numbered A62D, RSP
A62DA, A62E and to the provisions in Section 19-3, Structure Excavation and Backfill
of the Standard Specifications. In addition, slurry cement backfill or controlled low
strength material (CLSM) may be used in lieu of structure backfill. Per Index 856.5 of the
HDM, a stress reducing slab may be used for culverts where it is necessary to have less
than 2 feet of cover below the top of a flexible pavement.

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

2.1.1.1.2 Concrete Pipe

Laying Circular Reinforced Concrete Pipe

Per Topic 855.1 of the HDM, for reinforced concrete pipe (RCP), box (RCB) and arch
(RCA) culverts maintenance free service life, with respect to corrosion and abrasion
and/or durability, is the number of years from installation until the deterioration reaches
the point of exposed reinforcement at any location on the culvert.
Refer to Standard Plan D88 for required minimum cover for construction loads on
reinforced concrete pipes and arches.
For non-reinforced concrete pipe culverts, per HDM Topic 855.1 maintenance free
service life, with respect to corrosion and abrasion and/or durability, is the number of
years from installation until the deterioration reaches the point of perforation or major
cracking with soil loss at any point of the culvert.
2.1.1.1.3 Other Rigid Materials
2.1.1.1.3.1 Reinforced Polymer Mortar Pipe (RPMP)
Reinforced Polymer Mortar (semi-rigid) pipes (RPMP) are made by mixing a high
strength thermosetting polyester resin, aggregate/sand and chopped glass fiber roving to
form a type of semi-rigid concrete. The resin within the mix provides for bonding the
aggregate much like Portland Cement does in traditional concrete pipes. Cement and
water are not used and this product may be used in corrosive applications. It is also
lightweight with less wall thickness compared to RCP and uses push-together joints
instead of a bell and spigot. RPMP is available in diameters from 18 inches to 102 inches
and section lengths of 5, 10 and 20 feet. See FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual
Volume 1, page 2-27 and refer to ASTM D3517.

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Currently, Caltrans does not contemplate developing new Standard Specifications for this
product; however, this product is approved for jacking and microtunneling for permit
installations. See Indices 9.1.2.2.1 and 9.1.2.2.3. There is a very limited use for RPMP in
typical direct burial culvert applications due to its relatively high cost. However, in
addition to jacking and microtunneling applications, there is potential usage for RPMP as
a slipliner if site conditions dictate a structural design. See Index 6.1.3.1. and ASTM
D3262. In large diameter human entry pipes the material may also be viable for use as a
segmental liner (see index 6.1.3.7.1).
Since RPMP is specially designed to fit specific site loading and hydraulic
characteristics, the Underground Structures Unit within Caltrans Division of Engineering
Services (DES) should be contacted for a project-by-project review. See Index 7.1.6.2.
Maintenance free service life, with respect to corrosion and abrasion and/or durability, is
the number of years from installation until the deterioration reaches the point of
perforation or major cracking with soil loss at any point of the culvert.
2.1.1.1.3.2 Polymer Concrete Pipe
Also known as Polyester Resin Concrete (PRC), this type of pipe is currently not
included in Caltrans. The materials used in polymer concrete include resin, sand, gravel,
and quartz powder mineral filler. Similar to RPMP pipes, Polymer concrete pipes are
lightweight compared to RCP and use push-together joints with gaskets. PRC pipes may
be viable for use in some specialized applications including corrosive environments (pH
ranges of 1 to 10) and pipe jacking or microtunneling (high compressive strengths of up
to 13,000 psi), see Indices 9.1.2.2.1 and 9.1.2.2.3.
2.1.1.1.3.3 Fiber Reinforced Concrete Pipe
The fiber cement industry has grown out of the asbestos cement industry. Fiber
reinforced concrete pipe consists of cellulose fiber, silica sand, cement, and water. Fiber
reinforced concrete pipe is potentially a durable, lightweight option to non-reinforced
concrete pipes. It is not approved or included in Caltrans Standards for use as a direct
burial alternative pipe. However, in large diameter man entry pipes the material may be
viable for use as a segmental liner. See Index 6.1.3.7.1.
2.1.1.1.3.4 Ductile Iron
Ductile iron is a strong, durable semi-rigid pipe. Even though ductile iron has been used
for culvert and storm drains, it is generally not a cost effective option and there are no
Caltrans Standards. Occasionally this material may be a consideration for use as a
slipliner.
2.1.1.2 Flexible
If the culvert material is flexible (usually metal or plastic), a soil-pipe interaction must be
present in order that the pipe is able to transfer the bulk of the load to the surrounding
soil. In other words, the soil, not the pipe, carries and supports most of the live and dead
load. Suitable backfill material and adequate compaction are of critical importance
especially below the springline. A well-compacted soil envelope of adequate width is
needed to develop the lateral pressures required to maintain the shape of the culvert. The
5

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

width of the soil envelope is a function of the strength of the surrounding in-situ soil and
the size of the pipe. This is achieved by meeting the requirements that are outlined in
Section 19-3 of the Standard Specifications for Structure Excavation and Backfill and
conforming to the details shown on Standard Plan A62F. Refer to FHWA Culvert Repair
Practices Manual Volume 1, pages 2-9 to 2-10 for a description of flexible culvert
behavior. Also, refer to Standard Plan D88 for required minimum cover for construction
loads on plastic pipes and metal culverts. See Index 2.1.1.1.1 for discussion of structure
backfill alternatives. See HDM Topic 856.5 and Table 856.5 for minimum thickness of
cover required for design purposes.
2.1.1.2.1 Metal Pipe
For all metal pipes and arches that are listed in Table 857.2 in the HDM, maintenance
free service life, with respect to corrosion and abrasion and/or durability, is the number of
years from installation until the deterioration reaches the point of perforation at any
location on the culvert. This is primarily a function of corrosivity and abrasiveness of the
environment into which the pipe is placed. See Figure 855.3A - Minimum Thickness of
Metal Pipe for 50 Year Maintenance Free Service Life and Figure 855.3B Chart for
Estimating Years to Perforation of Steel Culverts (California Test 643) in the HDM. Note
that the service life estimates referenced in Figures 855.3A and 855.3B, are for various
corrosive conditions only, and both these charts require, as a minimum, site-specific pH
and minimum resistivity data from District Materials in order to determine the pipes
corrosion resistant service life. For a detailed discussion of maintenance free service life
and durability of metal pipe, refer to Topic 852.3 and 852.3 (2) Durability, in the HDM.
For a detailed discussion of corrosion, see Index 5.1.2.4 of this document. For a detailed
discussion of metal pipe abrasion see Indices 2.1.4.1 and 5.1.2.2.
The following is a brief summary of the material design step considerations for metal
pipe:
1) Metal thickness adequate to support fill height (see HDM Tables 856. A-P).
2) Use Figures 855.3A and 855.3B to determine the minimum thickness and
limitation on the use of steel, aluminum or aluminized steel (corrugated or spiral
rib) pipe.
3) Consider Aluminized Steel or Aluminum if applicable.
4) Increase Metal thickness to offset corrosion and abrasion effects.
5) Consider Protective Coating or invert paving using Tables 855.2C and 855.2F
(knowing channel bedload material and stream velocity) if necessary.
6) Check material design meets design service life per Topic 855.1(1).
2.1.1.2.2 Plastic Pipe
Plastic pipe is as unspecified a term as is metal pipe. The two most commonly used
plastics are polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and high-density polyethylene (HDPE). The limited
data that is available regarding plastic pipe for culvert applications suggests that plastic
materials may provide equivalent service life in a potentially broader range of
environmental conditions than either metal or concrete. Both PVC and HDPE are
unaffected by the chemical and corrosive elements typically found in soils and water. In

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

addition, both types have exhibited excellent abrasive resistance. Plastic pipe materials
are also subject to some limiting conditions that often are not a consideration in selecting
other culvert types which include: extended exposure to sunlight (specifically ultra-violet
radiation) and a higher potential for damage from improper handling and installation. See
Index 5.1.4. Plastic is also flammable; PVC will melt/burn under high temperatures but is
inherently difficult to ignite and will self-extinguish once the heat source is removed.
PVC brittleness increases with decreased temperatures and/or long term exposure to
ultra-violet radiation. However, temperature considerations are most important if the pipe
is likely to be handled or impacted during periods of low temperatures, therefore,
situations where PVC pipe is placed where temperatures are regularly below freezing
should be avoided. HDPE will continue to burn as long as adequate oxygen supply is
present. Based on testing performed by Florida DOT, this rate of burning was fairly
slow, and often "burned itself out" if there wasn't sufficient airflow through the pipe. End
treatments using metal or concrete (flared end sections or headwalls) will limit the
possibility of fire damage.
Per Topic 855 of the HDM, maintenance free service life, with respect to corrosion and
abrasion and/or durability, is the number of years from installation until the deterioration
reaches the point of perforation at any location on the culvert or at the onset of wall
buckling. and/or for further discussion on durability and strength requirements. See
Section 64 of the Standard Specifications for pipe material, joints, earthwork and
concrete backfill requirements. See Index 2.1.1.2 for a general discussion on flexible pipe
behavior and excavation and backfill considerations. See Index 6.1.3.1.1 for sliplining
using plastic pipe liners. For further discussion on plastic pipe, see Index 5.1.4 and
FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 1, pages 2-25 and 2-26.
2.1.1.2.3 Fiberglass Fiber Reinforced Plastic (FRP)
FRP is not included in the Caltrans Allowable Alternative Materials Table 857.2 of the
HDM and is typically not economically competitive for use as a direct burial alternative
culvert material. FRP pipe is available in diameters from 12 inches to 144 inches. For
further discussion on FRP, see FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 1, page
2-26.
2.1.1.3 Culvert Coatings
2.1.1.3.1 Coatings for Concrete and Other Culverts
As discussed in FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 1, pages 2-28 to 2-30, a
variety of coating types may be used either singularly or in combination to protect
culverts from corrosion and or abrasion and meet design service life requirements.

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Caltrans Abrasion Test Panel Installation Showing Various Culvert Materials and Coatings

Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) Lined RCP is not listed in the FHWA Culvert Repair Practices
Manual. It is primarily used for protection from corrosion, but also provides some
sacrificial abrasion resistance to RCP in lieu of additional cover and/or admixtures. PVC
Lined RCP uses Polyvinyl Chloride sheet liners that cover three hundred sixty degrees
(360) of the interior surface of the pipe. It was originally designed specifically to protect
new concrete sewer pipe against hydrogen sulfide gas/sulfuric acid attack.

Example Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) Lined RCP Using T-Locktm Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC)
Sheet Liners Manufactured By Ameron Protective Linings Division

Designers need to be aware that both the cement in concrete as well as the reinforcing
steel in RCP are susceptible to chemical attack and will occasionally need to be
protected. For pH ranging between 7.0 and 3.0 and for sulfate concentrations between
1500 and 15,000 ppm, concrete mix designs conforming to the recommendations given in
Table 855.4A of the HDM should be followed. Higher sulfate concentrations or lower
pH values may preclude the use of concrete or would require the designer to develop and
8

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

specify the application of a complete physical barrier. Reinforcing steel can be expected
to respond to corrosive environments similarly to the steel in CSP. Referring to Figure
855.3A it is apparent that combinations of pH and minimum resistivity will lead to
corrosion of reinforcing steel if water can penetrate through the concrete. In a similar
fashion, waters with high chloride concentrations (e.g., marine environments) can also
lead to corrosion of reinforcing steel. However, properly designed and installed RCP
(i.e., minimal cracking due to handling/construction loading) will typically provide
adequate concrete coverage over the reinforcing steel to provide protection to the steel,
except under extreme conditions. Contact the District Materials unit or Corrosion
Technology in Engineering Services for design recommendations when in extremely
corrosive conditions. Non-Reinforced concrete pipe is not affected by chlorides or stray
currents and may be used in lieu of RCP (with additional concrete cover and/or protective
coatings) for sizes 36 inches in diameter and smaller. See Table A in Index 2.1.2.2, HDM
Table 855.4A, and HDM Index 852.1(4).
2.1.1.3.2 Coatings for Metal Culverts
Coatings for metal culverts are designed to provide either a corrosion barrier (generally
covering the entire periphery of the pipe) or a sacrificial layer of abrasive resistant
material (generally concentrated in the invert of the pipe). While increasing the pipes
metal thickness to offset corrosive or abrasive effects can also be specified, coatings are
typically more cost effective and should be given first consideration.
HDM Table 855.2C lists all of the plant-applied approved coatings for steel culverts and
constitutes a guide for estimating the added service life that can be achieved based upon
abrasion resistance characteristics only. Field application of a concrete invert lining or
even special abrasion resistant tiles or linings can also be specified to increase service life
due to abrasive conditions.
Under most conditions, plain galvanizing of steel pipe is all that need be specified.
However, the presence of corrosive or abrasive elements may require the use of various
coating products, used either individually or in combination. The Department of Fish and
Game (DFG) has approved the use of polymeric sheet coating; however, DFG will
restrict the use of bituminous coatings as discussed in the HDM. It should be noted that
polymeric sheet coating was originally developed as a corrosive barrier although it can
also provide additional protection from abrasion.
Where significant soil side corrosion and abrasion are present, a composite steel spiral rib
pipe, which is externally pre-coated with a polymeric sheet, and internally polyethylene
lined, may also provide additional service life. Index 852.3 (2) (a) of the HDM discusses
these approved protective coatings and their application to protect against corrosion,
abrasion, or both. Section 66-1.02C of the Standard Specifications outlines the
requirements for the approved coatings.
Determining when a coating is needed, and what type to call for will depend on the
results of the materials/geotechnical investigation and an assessment of the corrosive and
abrasive potential of the site by the designer. Minimum resistivity; pH; sulfate
concentration; type, size and hardness of bedload materials can affect both durability and
selection of appropriate coating. In many cases, multiple coating types may be effective

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

and as such the contractor should be given the option of selecting the most cost effective
of those that meet minimum service life requirements.
While generally perceived as an alternative pipe product as opposed to a coating, the
application of a thin layer of aluminum over steel (i.e., aluminizing) can often be a very
effective mechanism to enhance the durability of steel pipe. Per the material design
selection considerations listed in Index 2.1.1.2.1, if the channel bedload is non-abrasive,
the pH of the soil, backfill, and water is within the range of 5.5 to 8.5, inclusive, and the
minimum resistivity is 1500 ohm-centimeters or greater, the use of Aluminized Steel
(type 2) should be considered prior to considering alternative coatings or increasing the
thickness of the steel. See Index 852.3 (2) (b) of the HDM. Aluminized steel should be
considered to be equivalent to galvanized steel when abrasion is a factor. See Table
855.2D of the HDM.
Where soil side corrosion is the only concern, polymeric coated steel pipe service life
should be evaluated using Figure 855.3B (to determine steel thickness necessary to
achieve 10-year minimum life of base steel), with the assumption that the (exterior)
polymeric coating will provide additional protection to attain the 50-year service life
requirement.
For locations where water side corrosion and/or abrasion is of concern, recently
developed coating products like polymeric sheet, can provide superior abrasive resistant
qualities (as much as 10 or more times that of bituminous coatings of similar thickness).

2.1.2 Service Life for Culvert Rehabilitation; Geotechnical Factors

Generally, for culvert rehabilitation, the design service life basic concepts are the same as
those defined in Index 855.1 of the HDM. Plastic pipe liners should be considered the
same as plastic pipe with no additional service life added for annular space grouting. The
estimated design service life for rehabilitation projects should be the same as indicated in
Index 855.1(1) of the HDM.
Regardless of the method or material selected to repair, rehabilitate or replace the culvert,
the following influences must be assessed during any estimation of service life:
2.1.2.1 Hydrogen-Ion Concentration (pH), Soil Resistivity, Chloride and Sulfate
Concentration of the Surrounding Soil and Water
Both concrete and metal pipes can be subject to corrosion attack. In reinforced concrete
culverts, a high sulfate concentration will cause the cement to deteriorate whereas the
reinforcing steel can be corroded if there is a low pH or high chloride concentration. See
Indices 2.1.1.3.1 and 2.1.1.3.2, Table A in Index 2.1.2.2, Tables 855.4A, 855.4B and
Figure 855.3A of the HDM.
2.1.2.2 Material Characteristics of the Culvert
A careful determination of geotechnical factors at the Culvert site should be made to
assure proper material selection for any repair or restoration. Table A suggests limitations
and potentials for culvert materials.

10

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Table A
Material

Acceptable
pH range

Resistivity
Level
(ohm-cm)

Abrasion
Potential

Chloride/Sulfate
resistance

Steel

See HDM
Table 855.3 B

See HDM
Table 855.3 B

Low(3)

(5)

Aluminum

5.5-8.5(1)

>1500(1)

Varies(1)

(5)

Plastic

>4(6)

N/A

Generally Low(6)

Concrete

(2)

(4)

>3

N/A

Low to High

Polymer
Mortar

1-13

N/A

Generally Low

N/A
Sulfates(2)
N/A

(1) Aluminum corrodes differently than steel and is not susceptible to corrosion attack within the
acceptable pH range of 5.5-8.5 when considering abrasion potential. See HDM Index
852.4(2)(a) thru (e), abrasion potential dependent upon, velocity, size, shape and hardness of
bedload, i.e., velocities > 5 ft/s only allowable for a small, rounded bedload.
(2) See HDM Table 855.4A for recommended cement type and minimum cement factor when
pH range is 3 to 5.5.
(3) Assuming zinc galvanizing is present and base steel not exposed to corrosion attack.
(4) Abrasion potential for concrete is dependent upon the quality, strength, and hardness of the
aggregate and density of the concrete as well as the velocity of the water flow coupled with
abrasive sediment content. There is a correlation between decreasing water/cement ratio,
increasing compressive strength and increasing abrasion resistance.
(5) Chlorides and sulfates combined with moist conditions may create a hostile corrosive
environment. Minimum resistivity indicates the relative quantity of soluble chlorides and
sulfates present in the soil or water. See HDM Figure 855.3A.
(6) PVC may experience greater abrasive wear in an acidic environment.

2.1.2.3 Abrasion
Abrasion is the wearing of pipe material by water carrying sands, gravels and rocks (bed
load). There are multiple factors that should be considered when attempting to estimate
the abrasion potential of a site and associated service life of a culvert and/or lining
material including size, shape, hardness and volume of bed load in conjunction with
volume, velocity, duration and frequency of stream flow in the culvert. For example, at
independent sites with a similar velocity range, bedloads consisting of small and round
particles will have a lower abrasion potential than those with large and angular particles
such as shattered or crushed rocks. Given different sites with similar flow velocities and
particle size, studies have shown the angularity of the material may have a significant
impact to the abrasion potential of the site. All types of pipe material are subject to
abrasion and can experience structural failure around the pipe invert if not adequately
protected. Four abrasion levels have been developed by FHWA to assist the designer in
quantifying the abrasion potential of a site. The abrasion levels and recommended
pipe/invert materials that are presented in HDM Table 855.2A are similar to the four
abrasion levels that have been developed by FHWA, however, some modifications have
11

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

been made based on research data. The descriptions of abrasion levels are intended to
serve as general guidance only, and not all of the criteria listed for a particular abrasion
level need to be present to justify defining a site at that level. Included with each abrasion
level description are guidelines for providing an abrasive resistant pipe, coating or invert
lining material. The designer is encouraged to use those guidelines in conjunction with
the abrasion history of a site to achieve the required service life (see Index 2.1.2) for a
pipe, coating or invert lining material. See HDM Index 855.2 Abrasion.
Sampling of the streambed materials is generally not necessary, but visual examination
and documentation of the type, size and shape of the materials in the streambed and the
average stream slopes will provide the designer with the general site characteristics
needed to determine the expected level of abrasion from HDM Table 855.2A. Where an
existing culvert is in place, the wear rate of the invert should also be estimated and
compared with HDM Tables 852.2D F to determine the expected level of abrasion.
The stream flow velocity in the culvert should be based on typical intermittent flows and
not a 10 or 50-year event. This is because most of the total abrasion will occur during
these more frequent smaller events. For velocity determination of typical intermittent
flow, the velocities in Tables 855.2A D and 855.2F of the HDM should be compared to
those generated by the 2-5 year return frequency flood.
Corrugated steel pipes are typically the most susceptible to the combined actions of
abrasion in conjunction with corrosion this has led to a wide range of protective
coatings being offered. However, steel plate and welded steel pipeliners are viable
alternatives for use as an invert lining. See Index 5.1.2.2 for abrasion and invert durability
repairs of corrugated metal culverts.
Aluminum may display inferior abrasion characteristics than steel in non-corrosive
environments, however, Aluminized Steel (Type 2) can be considered equivalent to
galvanized steel for abrasion resistance. Furthermore, in some cases, Aluminum may
display less abrasive wear than steel in a corrosive environment depending on the
volume, velocity, size, shape, hardness and rock impact energy of the bed load.
Polymer Mortar, fiber reinforced plastic and other resin-based products such as Cured in
Place Pipeliner (CIPP) offer good abrasion resistance and are not subject to corrosion
effects. The same can be said for PVC and HDPE; however, PVC may experience greater
abrasive wear in an acidic environment (pH < 4).
Concrete pipes will counter abrasion through increased minimum thickness over the steel
reinforcement, i.e., by adding additional sacrificial material. In RCP it is possible to
specify an additional 0.5 inches of cover, however, RCP is generally not recommended as
an alternative in abrasive environments. Abrasion potential for any concrete lining is
dependent upon the thickness, quality, strength, and hardness of the aggregate as well as
the velocity of the water flow coupled with abrasive sediment content. There is a
correlation between decreasing water/cement ratio, increasing compressive strength and
increasing abrasion resistance. For further discussion on concrete invert paving, see Index
5.1.2.2.1 and HDM Index 853.6.

12

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Various Culvert Material Test Panels Shown Above After 1 Year Of Wear At Site With
Moderate To Severe Abrasion (Velocities Generally Exceed 10 ft/s, See Table Next Page).
Note: the significant wear to abrasive resistant protective coatings, which, would typically
not be recommended under these conditions (see table next page). The bed load material
composed of 90% quartz sand. Also note the wear on the leading edges (right) of the steel
nuts.

3.1 PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION AND ASSESSMENT

Over the years, culverts have traditionally received less attention than bridges. Since
culverts are less visible it is easy to put them out of mind, particularly when they appear
to be performing adequately. Safety is the most important reason why culverts should be
inspected.

3.1.1 Culvert Inspection Program (CIP)

Under the CIP, the physical characteristics and condition of Caltrans culverts and related
drainage system assets are inventoried and assessed by state forces. The purpose of the
CIP is to identify and address drainage system deficiencies before they become a serious
problem.
The CIP was established in 2005 by a $2.5 million Budget Change Proposal (BCP) and
implemented in all twelve districts during FY 2006/07. All districts maintain a functional
database, into which drainage asset inspection information is entered (i.e., photos/video,
condition summary), to manage statewide culvert inventory and prioritize state fiscal and
other resources for protecting, maintaining, restoring and improving drainage facilities in
Caltrans right of way.

13

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

A rating system was developed by Caltrans Division of Maintenance in lieu of the

FHWA rating system and is compatible with the Caltrans Culvert Inventory database. For
more information see attached link to the Culvert Inspection Manual:
http://onramp.dot.ca.gov/hq/maint/OMSWEC/Drainage/CIP/Docs/Inspection_Manual_10
-31-08.pdf

3.1.2 Office Review

Prior to heading out to the field, the first step is to review the as-built plans to establish a
baseline for service life from the construction date and to better understand the design
parameters of the culvert facility including type, size, physical and geographical
locations. In addition, the designer should review the drainage files (if available) for the
hydrological and hydraulic parameters of the culvert to determine a preliminary
understanding of outlet velocity, design headwater and abrasion level and perform
supplemental calculations as needed.
When available, at a minimum, the following information sources and references
generally should be included as part of the office review prior to heading out to the field:

As-built plans (Construction date, pipe material, thickness, coating etc.)

Materials/Geotechnical Report (pH, resistivity, chlorides, sulfates, groundwater
etc.)
Culvert database (Maintenance Culvert Inspection Program)
Hydraulic Report/Hydrology Study (Q100 Headwater/Velocity & flow regime)
Google Earth (Aerial and street view of watershed and topography)
Photo Log
HDM Abrasion Tables 855.2A, 855.2B, 855.2D and 855.2F

3.1.3 Site Visit and Inspection

The goal of the site visit to a deteriorated culvert is to establish the underlying cause of
the problem by observing all of the symptoms which may be present and performing
additional tests, explorations and measurements as required.
There are several key activities that must always be performed during a culvert inspection
to ensure that a culvert is functioning adequately. The inspection should evaluate
structural integrity, hydraulic performance and roadside compatibility. It is important to
determine the underlying cause of a problem so that it will not recur or become more
serious.
In most instances, District Maintenance will have already conducted an initial inspection
- either as part of the culvert inspection program, or as a result of a problem being
discovered by Maintenance forces. When inspection information within Maintenance
does not already exist, the designer may contact District Maintenance to schedule an
inspection of all culverts that are suspected of needing repair as part of a pavement
rehabilitation or highway reconstruction project to existing facilities. This information,
either pre-existing or via specifically scheduled inspection, needs to occur early in the

14

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

PID phase of the project in order to generate appropriate repair strategies and their
associated cost estimates. See HDM Index 803.3.
For non-human entry culvert inspections (generally less than 36), it will be necessary for
the designer to request the culvert inspection crew within Maintenance to perform an
inspection of the barrel using a remote controlled video camera. All Districts have remote
cameras.
Only staff with confined space training and proper equipment may enter confined spaces.
The District or Headquarters Safety and Health Officers are responsible to ensure
standardized training is given on a regular basis and that qualified trainers and instructors
are available.
Per Caltrans safety manual, a confined space is any location that meets the following
definition:
1) An employee can physically enter, and
2) Has limited or restricted means of entry or exit, and
3) Is not designed for continuous employee occupancy.
Confined spaces include structures or facilities such as tanks, bridge cells, shafts, pits,
bins, tubes, pipelines, deep trenches, vaults, vats, pump houses or compartments, sewage
lift stations, culverts, cofferdams, elevator pits, or similar locations.
For more detailed information on confined spaces, see Chapter 14 of the Safety Manual.
Work activities that include human entry into regulatory defined tunnels or shafts to
conduct construction activities must address the requirements of the California Code of
Regulations (CCR), Title 8, Subchapter 20 - Tunnel Safety Orders (TSO). The
regulations apply to underground structures of 30 inches or greater diameter or shaft
excavations of 20 feet or more in depth. However, inspection for design purposes or
inspection as a part of construction close-out of tunnels, shafts or other underground
facilities are not affected by these regulations.
For more detailed information on Tunnel Safety Orders, see HDM Index 110.12.
For safety, the assessment team should consist of at least two people.
Recommended field safety and inspection gear to have available for conducting field
assessments of culverts includes:

Traffic Safety Vests and Hardhat (mandatory)

Safety goggles (mandatory)
Waterproof boots
Work gloves
Geologist pick hammer
Clipboard
25-foot Measuring Tape or Folding Carpenters Ruler
Digital camera (shock-resistant and waterproof)
Flashlight (500k to 1M candle) and/or head lamp

15

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Personal Air Monitoring Device

Tool Belt or backpack for Hands-Free Carrying of Inspection Equipment
Cell phones and/or Field Radios
CTL Crack comparator card (concrete pipes)
Folding Shovel, Machete and Pry-Bar
Inclinometer
Paint spray can(s)

There are several key activities that should be performed during a culvert inspection to
ensure that a culvert is functioning adequately. The following general elements are
recommended to consistently determine cause, type, and extent of culvert problems:
a) Evaluate the roadway for cracks or depressions:

b) Evaluate the embankment and median for depressions, sinkholes, scour or piping:

16

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Further investigations by Geotechnical Design may be needed. Refer to Index

7.1.6.3 for coordinating with Geotechnical Design.
c) Evaluate the stream for bedload type, debris load type, high water marks, profile,
waterway, watershed (organic or inorganic, major changes since original
construction), upstream storage, downstream erosion, fish and aquatic species:

17

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

d) Evaluate the culvert barrel for changes in shape (metal and plastic pipe), loss of
backfill (by using hammer soundings), signs of corrosion, abrasive wear and
existing thickness (for metal pipe, contact the Corrosion Technology Branch
within DES):

18

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

e) Evaluate the culvert barrel for joint integrity, soil loss, alignment, cracks (concrete
pipe - check location and crack width) and structural integrity:

19

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

f) Evaluate the inlet and culvert barrel functionality for piping and passing debris:

20

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

g) Evaluate the inlet and roadway for signs of overtopping or high water:

h) Evaluate the inlet and roadway for available headwater:

i) Evaluate the outlet for piping

21

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

j) Evaluate the outlet for slope, or downstream channel erosion:

For long pipes 24 inches or smaller in diameter, it will probably be necessary to perform
an inspection of the barrel with a remote controlled video camera. All Districts have a
remote camera.

22

DIB 83-04

Remote Controlled Camera Vehicle

August 1, 2014

District 3 Video Inspection Vehicle

The camera system is also used to respond to Maintenance requests for investigation,
which may lead to Capital Projects. If available, this unit may be utilized during project
construction for investigating the quality of joints, backfill operations, or other needs.
The uses may vary from district to district.
The following references discuss problem identification and assessment:

FHWA Culvert Inspection Manual (refer to on-line FHWA Hydraulics

publications: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/hydpub.htm) provides guidelines
for the inspection and evaluation of existing culverts. Although it is a stand-alone
supplement to the bridge inspectors training manual, the guidelines are generally
applicable to culverts of all sizes and it is recommended as the primary inspection
reference by Caltrans staff for all culvert inspection.

Chapter 3, FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 1, and Table 7.1 on
page 7-5. See Figures 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 on pages 3-9, 3-10 and 3-12 for flow charts
outlining the overall process for analysis of problems and solutions.

3.1.3.1 Voids and Piping in the Backfill

When the water table is higher than the culvert invert, water may seep into the culvert
between storms. Infiltration can occur during flood events by suction from pressure
differentials in inlet control culverts. If voids in the backfill are discovered during the
field review, the most likely cause of soil loss is the migration of soil fines from
infiltration - either through a worn invert or leaking joints. It is important to investigate
the full extent of the voids. In human entry culverts this may simply involve performing
hammer soundings (if metal pipe) along with a thorough evaluation of the roadway and
the embankment for cracks, depressions, sinkholes, scour or piping. In non-human entry
culverts that are inspected by camera, if symptoms such as a worn invert or open joints
are present, the same thorough evaluation of the roadway and the embankment must be
performed. However, if the full extent of the voids or their cause (e.g. groundwater) is
still unknown, further investigations by Geotechnical Services may be needed. See
below.

23

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Void Detection in the Roadway Prism by Geotechnical Services with Cone Penetrometer

Exfiltration is the opposite of infiltration and occurs when leaking joints allow water
flowing through the pipe to leak into the supporting material. It is not as common as
infiltration because many culverts are empty except during peak flows and operate under
open channel flow with the hydraulic grade line below the top of the pipe. Examples of
where exfiltration may occur include inverted siphons, storm drains and pipes that are
designed with the hydraulic grade line above the top of the pipe. Minor leakage may not
be a significant problem unless soils are quite erosive.
Piping is a phenomenon caused by seepage along a culvert barrel which removes fill
material, forming a hollow similar to a pipe. Fine soil particles are washed out freely
along the hollow and the erosion inside the fill may ultimately cause failure of the culvert
or the embankment. Besides open joints or a worn invert, the source of seepage may be at
the inlet if no headwall or impervious materials were placed. See Index 5.1.2.3.
Voids that develop around culverts which have been in place for a long time are similar
to voids around newly installed jacked pipes and tunnels; They may go undetected until
the overlying ground collapses into the void loosening this material. This loosened
material, which supports the roadway, may immediately cause a depression or sinkhole at
the surface, or it may occur at a later date when the loosened material re-densifies with
the help of water, traffic vibrations, earthquake shaking, etc. It is not possible to predict
when a pipe and/or the roadway prism will collapse.
Therefore, because of the risk and potential of numerous problems associated with voids,
the importance of early communication with the Geotechnical Services specialist from
the Division of Engineering Services (DES) and coordination with headquarters cannot
be over-emphasized. See Index 7.1.6.3.

24

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

4.1 END TREATMENT AND OTHER APPURTENANT STRUCTURE

REPAIRS AND RETROFIT IMPROVEMENTS
4.1.1 Headwalls, Endwalls and Wingwalls
Selecting an appropriate end treatment for a specific type of culvert and location requires
the application of sound engineering judgment. Design guidance for culvert entrances and
exits is given in Topics 826 and 827 of the HDM. If bank erosion is evident, or if the
proposed repairs reduce capacity, a review of the original design may be warranted,
particularly if the original selection was the same standardized type for both the headwall
on the upstream end and the endwall on the downstream end. Straight headwalls and
endwalls should be limited to locations with low approach and exit velocity not requiring
inlet or outlet protection against eddy action. However, at the outlet to some cross
culverts in narrow riverine canyons where there is a free outfall, it may be necessary to
consider using a straight endwall to prevent erosion.

Improved Entrance to Increase Capacity (Inlet Control)

4.1.2 Outfall Works

If needed, either because the original design was incomplete or the proposed culvert
repairs will significantly increase velocity, outfall works should provide a transition for
the 100-year flood or design event from the culvert outlet to a section in the natural
channel where natural stage, width, and velocity will be restored. Often, some
economical and effective armoring in the form of riprap may be applied to the threatened
area or appurtenance. Refer to Hydraulic Design of Energy Dissipaters for Culverts and
Channels, HEC 14 Chapter 5, for more information on estimating scour at culvert
outlets and the FHWA sponsored HY-8 Culvert Hydraulic Analysis Program.

25

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

HEC-14 describes procedures that can be used to compute scour hole sizes and design
internal and external dissipaters and HY-8 incorporates these procedures. The following
link provides a design guide for riprap basins level with the stream:
http://onramp.dot.ca.gov/hq/design/drainage/index.php
If an outfall structure is required for transition, it will not typically be a counterpart of
that required at the entrance. Wingwalls, if intended for an outfall transition, should not
flare at an angle (in degrees from the stream axis) greater than 150 divided by the outlet
velocity in feet per second (ft/s). For the 100-year flood or design event, warped endwalls
can be designed economically to fit trapezoidal or U-shaped channels, as transitions for
moderate to high velocity (10-18 ft/s). For extreme velocity (exceeding 18 ft/s) the
transition can be shortened by use of an energy-dissipating structure. At large culverts
where stream channel degradation is present, countermeasures may be needed to prevent
embankment failures and loss of pipe support at the outlet where the high-energy
waterfall can undermine the embankment toe quickly in heavy runoff. HY-8, the FHWA
culvert software program provides designs for energy dissipators and follows the FHWA
Hydraulic Engineering Circular No.14 method for design.

Energy Dissipator Plunge Pool and Bank Protection at Large Diameter Culvert Outlet

26

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Energy Dissipator with Flared Wingwalls and Bank Protection

Refer to FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 1, Chapter 5, and Volume 2,
Appendices B-16 through B-22.
For bank protection design, see Chapter 870 of the HDM.

5.1 PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION AND ASSOCIATED REPAIR

FOR CULVERT BARRELS
5.1.1 Concrete Culverts
5.1.1.1 Joint Repair
A discussion on joint requirements and performance is given in Topic 854.1(1) and (2) of
the HDM. Table 854.1 provides information to help the designer select the proper joint
under most conditions. See Chapter 5- 8.1(a) and (b), FHWA Culvert Inspection Manual
for a discussion on misalignment and joint defects. The joint repair strategy should be
dependent on the specific type of problem associated with the defect present i.e.,
misalignment, exfiltration, infiltration, cracks, or joint separation. In addition, pipe
diameter will be an important factor to be considered because human entry is usually
limited to pipes 30 inches or larger.
5.1.1.1.1 Misalignment
See FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume I, pages 3-32, 3-37 and 3-44.
Misalignment may indicate the presence of serious problems in the supporting soil. If
progressive settlement is present, joint repair should not be performed until a solution to
stabilize the surrounding soil has been found. In some cases, reconstruction may be the
only option. If so, where there is a need to withstand soil movements or resist disjointing
forces, positive joints should be specified. Refer to Standard Specifications, Section 61
and Table 854.1 in the HDM.

27

DIB 83-04

78 in. RCP with Misalignment

August 1, 2014

Failed 36 RCP

If the misalignment is a result of leaking joints and undermining, a determination should

be made whether the undermining is due to piping, water exfiltration or infiltration of
backfill material and a combination of grouting the external voids and sealing the culvert
joints may be warranted using chemical grouting or other joint repair methods that are
described in index 5.1.1.1.3. In addition the joint should be specified watertight per
Section 61 of the Standard Specifications. Further discussion on watertight joints is given
in Topic 854.1(2) of the HDM. Further discussion on piping is given in Topics 829.3 and
829.4 of the HDM.
5.1.1.1.2 Exfiltration
Minor leakage may not be a significant problem unless soils are quite erosive. Where
exfiltration has resulted in piping, measures should be taken for sealing culvert joints and
making them watertight in addition to grouting for filling voids in the soil behind the
joint as discussed in the previous section. The same techniques used to stop infiltration
will also stop exfiltration. For RCP storm drain systems with pipes less than 30 inches or
less in diameter, grouting as described in 5.1.1.1.3, or some of the lining methods
described under Index 6.1.3, such as cured in place, can be used to stop exfiltration. For
larger diameters, internal grouting, PVC repair sleeves, grouting sleeves, internal steel
expansion ring gasket joint sealing systems as described in 5.1.1.1.3, or other lining
methods described in Index 6.1.3 such as sliplining or lining with CIPP will stop
exfiltration.
5.1.1.1.3 Infiltration
Infiltration can cause settlement and misalignment problems if it carries fine-grained soil
particles from the surrounding backfill. See Index 5.1.2.3, Soil Migration. In such cases,
measures should be taken to seal the joints to make them watertight. It may be possible to
use an internal steel expansion ring gasket joint sealing system (see Index 5.1.1.1.3.2) in
conjunction with pressure grouting to fill voids in the soil behind the joint. Internal
grouting or some of the lining methods described in Index 6.1.3 such as sliplining, or
lining with CIPP will also stop infiltration. In general, for culvert repair work, Portland

28

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

cement based grout, with and without special admixtures, is usually adequate and much
less expensive than the foaming and chemical grouts that are used to resist high external
and internal fluid pressures. Internal grouting can be specifically designed to stop
infiltration at deteriorated, continuously leaking or open joints. See FHWA Culvert
Repair Practices Manual Volume 1, pages 5-37, 6-11, 6-14, and Volume 2, Appendices
B-30 and B-26 for procedures on grouting voids and sealing culvert joints. Also see
Index 11.1.1.
5.1.1.1.3.1 Chemical Grouting

Internal Chemical Grouted Joint (RCP)

Chemical grouting is a commonly used method for sealing leaking joints in structurally
sound, sewer pipes that are under the groundwater table. It will not provide structural
repair, and it is inappropriate for longitudinal or circumferential cracks, broken or
crushed pipes. However, other methods such as using repair sleeves in combination with
chemical grouting are appropriate for such repairs (see discussion towards end of this
section). Attempting to seal joints that are not leaking or infiltrating during the sealing
process has produced questionable results. Some types of chemical grouts have failed in
arid regions where the grout has dried up during periods of low groundwater and in
coastal regions where the ground is subject to tidal fluctuations. The long-term service
life for chemical grouting is unknown. One study concluded the life expectancy for
chemically grouted joints was no more than 15 years, other references indicate a 20 year
service life, and it is known to last even longer in other applications such as sealing
tunnels and dams.

29

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

In non-human entry RCP, chemical grouting is generally accomplished using a sealing

packer and a closed circuit television (CCTV) camera. The sealing packer and CCTV
camera are pulled through the pipe with cables. Concurrently, air or water testing
equipment is used to test the joint and determine the effectiveness of the sealing.

In pipes with large enough for human entry, pressure grouting is accomplished using
manually placed inflatable pipe grout sealing rings or predrilled injection holes and a
hand-held probe (see figure below):

30

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Illustration of Gel Grout Penetrating Outside the Pipe Joint

The two basic groups of chemical grouting materials are gels and polyurethane foams.
Polyurethane foam grout forms in place as a gasket and cures to a hard consistency but
retains a rubber-like flexibility. The seal takes place in the joint and there is only
minimum penetration outside the pipe. The service life of polyurethane foam is not
moisture-dependent and therefore it can be considered for use in locations with wet-dry
cycles. Gel grouts penetrate outside the pipe and infiltrate the soil surrounding the joint.
The mixture cures to an impermeable condition around the joint area.
The service life of the non-urethane type gels discussed below is moisture-dependent, and
therefore these types should not be considered for use in locations with wet-dry cycles.
Urethane gel however, is different from the acrylamide, or acrylate gels in that water is
the catalyst and they may be used in locations with wet-dry cycles to form either an
elastomeric collar within the pipe joint as well as filling the voids in the soil outside the
joint.
Generally the foam grouts are more expensive and difficult to install.
The most commonly used gel grouts are of the acrylamide, acrylic, acrylate and urethane
base types. Acrylamide base gel is significantly more toxic in its pre-gelled form than the
others but grout toxicities are of concern only during handling and placement or
installation and EPA has now withdrawn a long standing proposal that sought to ban the
use of acrylamide grouts. Due to its very low viscosity, acrylamide has long been the
material of choice to repair underground structures in the sanitary sewer industry. The
non-toxic urethane base gels are EPA approved for potable water pipelines because they
31

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

use water as the catalyst rather than other chemicals. Because of soil and moisture
variability, formulating the correct mixture is largely dependent on trial and error on a
case-by-case basis, and is difficult to accurately specify in design.
As of this writing, there are no Caltrans specifications for internal chemical grouting.
It is a good idea to contact a chemical grouting manufacturer and/or contractor for further
information. See Appendix E.
5.1.1.1.3.2 Internal Joint Sealing Systems
To seal leaking culvert joints with excessive infiltration and exfiltration, if the pipe is
round and large enough for human entry and the external hydraulic head pressure
(groundwater) is low (i.e., external head pressure does not exceed 15' above pipe invert at
any point) and the internal head pressure (hydraulic grade line) does not exceed 20' above
the invert at any point, it may be possible to use an internal EPDM rubber pipe joint
sealing system comprising an EDPM rubber membrane, backing plates, spacers, shims,
clips, and set screws for the securing rubber membrane across pipe joints. Depending on
each individual situation, supplemental grouting may also be needed to fill any voids in
the soil behind the joint. Section 15-6.05 includes specifications for installing EPDM
rubber pipe joint seals for mechanically sealing internal pipe joints in culverts 24 to 108
inches in diameter. See FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 2, pages B-111
to B-116.
Any joint gaps, low areas and deep imperfections of the pipe periphery are filled with
cement mortar or epoxy and on each side of the joint where the seating surface band
location of the seal is to be located and rendered flush with the surrounding joint surface
in compliance with the manufacturer's recommendations.
If abrasion protection is needed, it may be necessary to cover the steel expansion ring
with concrete, shotcrete or other authorized material.
Manufacturers claims regarding the range of application for internal joint seals varies
widely. For the purposes of design, the following recommendations are suggested for
Caltrans facilities. Situations beyond these suggested ranges may be discussed with the
District Hydraulic Unit or Headquarters Office of Highway Drainage.
Internal mechanical pipe joint seals should not to be used where the joint gap exceeds 2"
for tongue and groove RCP (i.e., physical separation of pipe ends). However, the
maximum allowable gap may be increased by 1-1/2" for both indicated situations if a
back-up plate used. Furthermore, internal mechanical pipe joint seals should not to be
used where the joint offset exceeds 1/2" for pipe 36" diameter and below, or 3/4" for pipe
larger than 36" diameter.

32

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

AMEX-10/WEKO-SEAL Internal Joint Sealing System Examples Above.

(Courtesy Of Miller Pipeline).

One method for sealing joints uses a jacked-in-place PVC repair sleeve combined with
O-rings and annular space chemical or cementitious grouting. PVC repair sleeves range
from 36 inches to 100 inches in diameter.
A third option may be to use grouting sleeves ranging from 12 inches to 54 inches in
diameter. Grouting Sleeves have a stainless steel core surrounded by an absorbent gasket
which is soaked in an expanding Polyurethane foam grout which bonds the repair sleeve
to the host pipe upon contact with water or air by filing the annular space between the
structural stainless steel core and the host pipe. At each end is a closed cell Polyethylene
End Sealer. Both of these repair sleeves are discussed in FHWA Culvert Repair Practices
Manual Volume 2, pages B-155 to B-159, however, the information above supercedes the
size range and grouting information presented. For manufacture contact information, see
Appendix E.
Examples of Internal Joint Sealing Systems include: the HYDRA-Tight Seal by HydraStop, In-Weg Internal Seals by J. Fletcher Creamer and Son, Depend-O-Lok by Brico
Industries, Link-Pipe PVC Sleeve and Link-Pipe Grouting Sleeve. All of these systems
are non-structural. Also see Index 6.1.2 for grouting voids in the soil envelope.
5.1.1.1.4 Cracked and Separated Joints
Cracked joints are more than likely not watertight even if gaskets were used. However, if
no other problems are evident, such as misalignment, and the cracks are not open or
spalling, they may be considered a minor problem to only be noted in inspection. Severe
joint cracks are similar in significance to separated joints. Separated joints are often
found when severe misalignment is found. In fact either problem may cause or aggravate
33

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

the other. Embankment slippage may also cause separations to occur. An attempt should
be made to determine whether the separations are caused by improper installation,
undermining, or uneven settlement of fill. If undermining is determined, an attempt
should be made to determine whether the undermining is due to piping, water exfiltration,
or infiltration of backfill material. It may also be necessary to test the density of the
surrounding soil.

RCP Examples With Joint Separation, Missing Seal and Backfill Loss

Refer to the previous discussion under misalignment, exfiltration and infiltration for joint
repair considerations. See Indices 5.1.1.1.1, 5.1.1.1.2, 5.1.1.1.3 and 5.1.1.1.3.2.
5.1.1.2 Cracks
For culverts that have been newly installed and backfilled, cracks should not exceed 0.01
inch in width in severely corrosive environments (pH of 5.6 or less, water containing
vegetal or animal wastes, seawater, or other water with high concentration of chlorides).
Conversely, for culverts installed in a non-corrosive environment (neutral pH close to 7,
low concentrations of salt, vegetal or animal wastes), cracks of up to 0.1 inch in width of
the installed pipe are acceptable if they are not excessive in number.
For all culverts cracks less than 0.01 inch in width are minor and only need to be noted.
Cracks greater than 0.01 inch in width but less than 0.1 inch should be noted as possible
candidates for routing a 0.25 inch wide minimum by 0.5 inch deep maximum V-Grind,
then patching or sealing (see Appendix D). Cracks greater than 0.1 inch in width may
indicate a serious condition and the Underground Structures Unit within the Division of
Engineering Services should be contacted.
Circumferential Cracking

Longitudinal Cracking

34

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Typical Locations for Longitudinal Cracking can be Found in the Crown and Invert.

5.1.1.2.1 Longitudinal Cracks

See FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 1, page 3-45.
Longitudinal cracking in excess of 0.1 inch in width may indicate overloading or poor
bedding. If there is no soil loss associated with cracking in excess of 0.1 inch,
rehabilitation may be considered.
See Figures 3.16 and 3.17 in FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 1 for the
results of poor and good side support, the deformation of cracked pipes, the cause of the
deformation and the visible effects. It should be noted that reinforced concrete pipe may
fail (see Index 2.1.1.1.1) but will rarely collapse.
There is a choice of materials that may be used to repair cracks. The materials generally
may be categorized as either flexible crack fillers or rigid materials that are more
permanent that may create a structural repair. The latter group includes both Portland
cement-based mortar (for cracks greater than 0.01 inch which must first be routed out)
and structural adhesives that provide tensile and shear strength including epoxy systems
that may be filled with a powder or unfilled. See Appendix D, and FHWA Culvert Repair
Practices Manual Volume 2, Appendix B-25 for information on crack sealing with
cement mortar or epoxy adhesive. Other options for repair may be to use one of the repair
sleeves or chemical grouting using a hand held probe as described in Index 5.1.1.1.3.
See Caltrans Standard Specification Section 95: Epoxy, in conjunction with Repair by
Injection of Epoxy Adhesive guidelines given in above-referenced Appendix B-25.
Pipe diameter will be an important factor to be considered when repairing individual
cracks because human entry is usually limited to pipes 30 inches or larger. For smaller
diameter, non human-entry pipes, consideration should be made for the use of a slip liner.

35

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

See FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 1, page 6-24 and Volume 2,
Appendix B-39, B-40, Index 6.1.3.1 of this D.I.B. for general sliplining procedures and
Caltrans Standard Special Provision No. 15-6.10 for sliplining using Plastic PipeLiners.
If diameter reduction is a concern, lining options may include use of a cured in place
resin-impregnated pipeliner (pipes 12 inches to 108 inches diameter). See Index 6.1.3.2.
It should be noted that regardless of the lining method chosen, the lining itself does not
need to provide load carrying ability or independent structural support; if the host pipe is
not capable of doing this, it should be replaced. See Index 6.1.1, Caltrans host pipe
structural philosophy. Replacement due longitudinal cracking should be considered as a
final option and will be dependent on consultation with the Division of Underground
Structures within the Division of Engineering Services. See Indices 5.1.1.2 and 11.1.1.
5.1.1.2.2 Transverse Cracks
Poor bedding and/or poor installation may cause transverse cracks. Cracks may occur
across the top of pipe when settlement occurs and rocks or other areas of hard foundation
material near the midpoint of a pipe section are not adequately covered with suitable
bedding material. Section 19-3.03D (Foundation Treatment) of the Standard
Specifications addresses situations when solid rock or other unyielding material is
encountered. For repairs of transverse cracks, the same discussion of crack sealing and
lining and other options for repairs as outlined under longitudinal cracks in Index
5.1.1.2.1 apply to repairing transverse cracks.
See FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 1, page 3-47.
5.1.1.3 Spalls
Spalls (fractures) often occur along the edges of either longitudinal or transverse cracks
when the crack is associated with overloading or poor support rather than tension
cracking. For Spalls associated with cracks, the cause of cracking should first be
determined.
If the cause is construction overloading, clean around the spall and apply a mortar patch.
See FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 2, Appendix B-28 for more
information on patching concrete. Also rout out the crack (if over 0.01 inch) to a depth of
at least 0.5 inch and grout the crack. If the cracking is due to post construction loading,
either the loading must be reduced, or the pipe should be replaced by another, which is
capable of supporting the applied load.
Spalling can also be caused by corrosion of the steel reinforcing when corrosive water is
able to reach the steel through cracks or shallow cover. As the steel corrodes, the
oxidized steel expands and causes the concrete covering the steel to spall. It must be
determined where the corrosive material is coming from (i.e., interior or exterior or both).
If it is coming from the interior only, chip back around the spall and sandblast steel to
remove the rust and apply mortar patch. In strongly acidic environments, such as
drainage from mines or caustic water, various applied coatings (thermoplastic flame
sprays, for example) or full-length sliplining may be warranted. See Index 5.1.1.2.1 for
pipe liner references.

36

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

If the corrosive material is coming from both the interior and exterior, patch as indicated
for the interior, but monitor the culvert to determine the rate of degradation for timing of
future replacement.
If the spalls are caused by debris (logs, boulders, etc.), it is recommended to clean around
the spalled area and apply a mortar patch, assuming no other damage is present.
See FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 1, page 3-47.
5.1.1.4 Slabbing
The terms slabbing, shear slabbing, or slab shear refer to a radial failure of concrete that
occurs from straightening of the reinforcement cage. It is characterized by large slabs of
concrete peeling away from the sides of the pipe and a straightening of the
reinforcement due to excessive deflection or shear cracks. Slabbing is a serious problem
that may occur under high fills with reinforced concrete pipe of inadequate D-load
strength and/or an inadequate depth of bedding on a rock foundation.
It may also occur under poor consolidation/backfill conditions with a high water table.
If it is determined that the culvert is structurally stable, the primary concern is protection
of the inner (and exposed) layer of steel reinforcing against corrosion.
Clean around the damaged area, chip back and sandblast steel to remove the rust and
apply mortar patch. In strongly acidic environments, such as drainage from mines or
caustic water, various applied coatings (thermoplastic flame sprays, for example) or fulllength sliplining may be warranted. See Index 5.1.1.2.1 for pipe liner references. See
FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 2, Appendix B-28 for more information
on patching concrete.
If the slabbing is due to post construction loading, either the loading must be reduced, or
the pipe should be replaced with one capable of supporting the applied load. Refer to
Standard Plans A62D and A62DA for the allowable minimum classes of RCP and D-load
verses cover, and Section 19-3.03D (Foundation Treatment) of the Standard
Specifications when solid rock or other unyielding material is encountered. See FHWA
Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 1, page 3-47.

37

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

5.1.1.5 Invert Deterioration/Concrete Repairs

Worn RCP Invert with First Exposure of Reinforcing Steel and Severely Worn RC Arch
Invert

The inverts of precast concrete culverts are normally quite durable to damage. However,
abrasion can be a serious problem in mountain areas where moderate-to-large sized rock
is carried by fast moving water. When the water velocity that is generated by the 2-5 year
return frequency flood is greater than 8 ft/s, and the upstream channel has an abrasive bed
load, abrasion related problems can be expected. See HDM Table 855.2A (abrasion
levels 4 - 6).
Deteriorated inverts in precast concrete culverts generally require paving to restore them
to an acceptable functional condition. In order to accomplish this, and to dry the invert, it
will be necessary to divert any flows present and/or perform the work during the summer
for non-perennial streams and channels. For human entry pipes, guidelines for
shotcrete/gunite paving, lining, and repairs, and invert paving are provided in appendices
B-11 and B-29 of FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 2. Also, see HDM
Indices 853.5 and 853.6, Table 855.2F and Sections 15-6.04 and 15-6.14 of the Standard
Specifications for concrete invert paving and cementitious pipeliners . For smaller
diameter RCP with invert deterioration, trenchless robotic applicators for cement mortars
indicated in HDM Table 855.2F may be considered. See Authorized Materials List for
Cementitious Pipeliners and Concrete Invert Paving:
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/esc/approved_products_list/
Standard Mortar (Section 51-1.02F of the Standard Specifications) is not recommended
for Abrasion Level 4 or higher. See Appendix H for a concrete invert paving design
example (RCP).

38

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

5.1.1.6 Crown Repair/Strengthening

Failed Crown in Reinforced Concrete Box Culvert

Precast concrete culverts may sustain damage in their crown section due to the depth of
cover being too shallow to adequately support and distribute vehicle live loads. The result
may be cracking, spalling and distortion in the crown area. Some information on
procedures that may be used to repair such problems is provided in Appendix B-37 of
FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 2. For severe cases of crown
deterioration (see photo), replacement may be necessary.
5.1.2 Corrugated Metal Pipes and Arches
The primary factors that affect corrugated metal pipe (CMP) and pipe arch culverts are
corrosion, and abrasion which in turn may lead to: (1) joint defects, (2) invert
deterioration, (3) shape distortion, and (4) soil migration. See Indices 2.1.1.2.1, 2.1.1.3.2,
2.1.2, and 2.1.2.1-3 for material characteristics, coatings and service life discussion
relative to the deteriorating factors to metal pipe.
At steel pipe sites where abrasion is present, once the galvanizing layer has been worn
away, corrosion will occur, followed by eventual perforation of the invert and loss of
surrounding backfill soil. This in turn may lead to shape distortion depending on the
compromise to the soil-pipe interaction resulting from the migration of backfill fines.
Aluminum corrodes differently than steel and is not susceptible to corrosion attack within
the acceptable pH range of 5.5-8.5. Abrasion potential is dependent upon, volume,
velocity, size, shape and hardness of bedload. Culvert flow velocities that frequently
exceed 5 ft/s are only allowable for low volumes of smaller, rounded bedload. In noncorrosive environments, Aluminum pipes may abrade quicker than steel and are not
recommended in an environment where the velocity frequently exceeds 5 ft/s and if
angular or large sized bedload material is present. See Indices 2.1.2.2, 2.1.2.3 and HDM
Index 852.4(2)(a) through (e), prior to selecting aluminum as an allowable alternative.
5.1.2.1 Joint Repair
A discussion on joint requirements and performance is given in Topic 854.1(1) and (2) of
the Highway Design Manual. Table 854.1 provides information to help the designer
select the proper joint under most conditions. See Chapter 5- 4.2 (b), FHWA Culvert
Inspection Manual for a discussion on joint defects. The joint repair strategy should be
dependent on the specific type of problem associated with the defect present i.e.,
misalignment, exfiltration, infiltration, and joint separation. Most of the concerns and
39

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

repairs that are outlined in this D.I.B. under the joint repair section for precast concrete
pipe also hold true for flexible pipe (i.e., misalignment, exfiltration, infiltration, and joint
separation). Joint defects and associated repairs specifically for CMP and pipe arches are
discussed in FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 1, pages 6-14 and 6-15.
Also see Indices 5.1.1.1.2, and 5.1.1.1.3. Once again, pipe diameter will be an important
factor to be considered because human entry is usually limited to pipes 30 inches or
larger. If the pipe is still round (i.e., less than 10% deflected), the same EDPM seals
described in Index 5.1.1.1.3.2 for RCP may be used in CMP. When the host pipe is
corrugated metal, the EPDM seal must have a smooth surface on both sides with no
extrusions. See detail below.

If abrasion protection is needed, it may be necessary to cover the steel expansion ring
with concrete, shotcrete or other authorized material. Section 15-6.05 includes
specifications for installing EPDM rubber pipe joint seals onto the interior of an existing
pipe or culvert 24 to 108 inches in diameter, creating a circumferential leak resistant seal
at the joints.

Separated Joint CMP with Physical Separation of Pipe Ends

40

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

A variety of external loads and changing soil conditions may cause joints to open
allowing backfill infiltration and water exfiltration, however, this is unlikely if the proper
bands are used. Key factors in the inspection of joints are indications of backfill
infiltration and water exfiltration causing erosion of surrounding soil resulting in surface
holes or pavement deflections. See Index 11.1.1.

Sink Hole Damage (Location Unknown)

Loss of Backfill Fines

5.1.2.2 Abrasion and Invert Durability Repairs

Abrasion of the pipe wall occurs through the action of materials carried in flow (bedload)
impacting on the pipe wall. It is affected by the frequency of abrasive loads in the flow
and velocity of the flow (5 ft/s or greater). Obviously the amount, type and size of
material carried and frequency of the flow have a significant impact on the life
expectancy of the pipe, as does the material composition of the pipe itself.

Examples of Abrasive Bedload Types

One of the most common problems with corrugated metal culverts is deterioration of the
invert, usually due to a combination of corrosion and abrasion once the galvanizing layer
has been worn away. It is for this reason that corrugated steel culverts are frequently
coated with an asphaltic or other type of protective coating. However, in HDM Table
855.2C, with the exception of polyethylene (CSSRP), towards the upper end of the flow
velocity range for moderate abrasion, these coatings are generally ineffective and
alternative invert materials are recommended. See HDM Index 855.2 Abrasion, and
Indices 2.1.2.1, 2.1.2.2, and 2.1.2.3, for corrosion and abrasion influences that must be
included in any estimation of service life. If these influences have been overlooked or

41

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

inadequately addressed during the original design, eventually the coatings are abraded or
broken away, and corrosion that attacks the bare steel is accelerated by abrasion that
constantly removes the somewhat protective oxide layer formed by corrosion.
Continuation of this action, if unchecked, will ultimately lead to loss of the invert and the
creation of voids under and around the culvert (see pictures below and Appendix G
Example 1).

Corrosion Accelerated by Abrasion Causing Invert Loss and Void Below

Worn Invert on Leading Edge (To Flow) of Corrugations Caused by Abrasion

Since a corrugated metal pipe is classified as a flexible structure that requires interaction
with soil for stability, loss of the invert may result in severe distortion and collapse of the
culvert (see Index 11.1.1).

42

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Thus, repairs for severely deteriorated inverts in large diameter metal culverts must
include:

Structural repairs that restore the structural capacity of the culvert to resist
circumferential thrust loads
Re-establishing the connection between the soil and the pipe by filling voids
immediately on the backside of culverts with low strength pressure grout mix.
This will tend to crack rather than build an undesirable block. Refer to Index
6.1.2 and page B-135 of FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 2, for
procedures for grouting voids behind and under culverts.

See Appendix G for case studies of structural repairs and filling voids on the backside.
Many types of repairs and corrective action may be taken to alleviate or minimize future
invert durability problems. In most cases, the material selection should be both abrasion
and corrosion resistant. Plastic slipliners are an effective rehabilitation method primarily
for smaller pipe sizes in both abrasive and corrosive environments; they are available in a
broad range of dimensions and joint type selections. See Index 6.1.3.1.1. and Appendix H
for a design example.
If access is limited, or the reduction of pipe cross sectional area resulting from sliplining
is unacceptable, it may be necessary to use an alternative lining method such as
cementitious pipeliners or CIPP. See Indices 6.1.3.6.2, 6.1.3.2, and HDM Table 855.2F.
In general, for pipes large enough for human entry with invert durability problems,
sliplining should not be the first choice. Instead, invert paving should be the first choice
to restore or replace weakened inverts. See Index 5.1.2.2.1 below. As an alternative in
situations where the abrasion level is high, steel armor plating can provide increased
resistance to abrasion and impact damage. See HDM Table 855.2F and Index 5.1.2.2.3.
5.1.2.2.1 Invert Paving
One of the most effective ways to rehabilitate corroded and severely deteriorated inverts
of CMP and SSPP is by paving with reinforced concrete, shotcrete or other approved
materials from the authorized materials list posted on METS website:

43

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/esc/approved_products_list/pdf/cementitious_culvert_linings.p
df
See HDM index 853.6 and Appendix H for a design example. If abrasion is present, and
if concrete is selected within SSP 15-6.04, a compressive strength of 6000 psi at 28 days
should also be selected. For non-human entry CMP with invert deterioration, trenchless
robotic applicators for cement mortars indicated in HDM Table 855.2F may be
considered for a 360 degree application. Standard Mortar (Section 51-1.02F of the
Standard Specifications) is not recommended for Abrasion Level 4 or higher, however, a
geopolymer mortar has approximately the same abrasion resistance as concrete and
calcium aluminate mortar is significantly more resistant to abrasion than concrete. See
HDM Tables 855.2 E-F. See Index 6.1.3.6.2.
The maximum grading indicated (1.5 inch) for coarse aggregate may need to be modified
if the concrete must be pumped. The abrasion resistance of cementitious materials is
affected by both its compressive strength and hardness of the aggregate. There is a
correlation between decreasing the water/cement ratio, increasing compressive strength
and increasing abrasion resistance. Therefore, where abrasion is a significant factor, the
lowest practicable water/cement ratios and the hardest available aggregates should be
used.
A typical design detail for concrete invert paving is shown below for situations with
minimal loss of the invert (i.e., some perforations, but not complete invert loss) that do
not require an extensive structural connection between the invert paving and the host
pipe. Paving thickness may range from 2 inches to 13 inches depending on the
abrasiveness of site.
For extremely abrasive conditions (i.e., Level 6 in HDM Tables 855.2A and 855.2F)
alternative materials are recommended to reduce the significant paving thickness required
for concrete to achieve a 50-year maintenance free service life. HDM Table 855.2F
provides guidance on minimum material thickness to achieve a 50-year maintenance free
service life. See photo below for an example of abrasion level 6 where insufficient
concrete invert paving thickness was placed. Per HDM Table 855.2F, abrasion levels 5
and 6 require over 12 inches of concrete to achieve a 50-year maintenance free service
life, however, 3-5 inches of calcium aluminate abrasion resistant concrete (or mortar) is
equivalent. For composite sections, a "raked" finish is preferred to provide a good
mechanical bond area for calcium aluminate concrete to mechanically key into the
concrete. See photo. When applied directly to the invert, WWM should be tack welded to
the host pipe for improved bonding.
Invert paving sections typically vary from 90 to 180 degrees for the internal angle
depending on the extent of the deterioration on both sides of the pipe. In the detail below,
the designer opted to provide a flattened invert for additional thickness and to spread the
abrasive stream bedload.

44

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

(Above) Example of Insufficient Concrete Invert Paving Design Thickness for Abrasion
Level 6

Concrete Section

Composite Section with Calcium Aluminate

For situations where there is significant loss of the pipe invert (see picture on page 49), it
will be necessary to tie the concrete to the more structurally sound portions of the pipe

45

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

wall in order to transfer compressive thrust of culvert walls into the invert slab using the
general procedures outlined in HDM Index 853.6. See detail under Index 6.1.2.1, and
Appendix H, Design Example 2.
See Appendix B-11, FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 2, for procedures
for shotcrete/gunite paving, lining, and repairs (all human entry). See Appendix B-29,
FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 2, SSP 15-6.04 Invert Paving and HDM
Index 853.6 for specifications and procedures for invert paving.
When using the general procedures outlined in HDM Index 853.6, consultation with the
Headquarters Office of Highway Drainage Design within the Division of Design, the
Corrosion Technology Branch within Materials Engineering and Testing Services
(METS) to determine the more structurally sound portions of the pipe wall, and the
Underground Structures unit in the Division of Structures within the Division of
Engineering Services (DES) is advised.
See Appendix G for some large diameter invert paving case studies. Because every site is
unique, no one size fits all for determining the thickness, paving limits and geometry of
concrete invert linings. See HDM table 855.2F. The procedures outlined in Appendix H,
Design Example 2, should be followed and the following details and standard special
provision (SSP) references should be reviewed for inclusion in the bid package:
15-6.04 Concrete Invert Paving
15-6.02 Fill Culvert Voids
15-6.03 Contact Grouting (if host pipe is metal)
XS-17-060-1 Corrugated Metal Culvert: General Procedures for Invert Repair
XS-17-060-2 Corrugated Metal Culvert: Details for Invert Repair
For cement slurry and contact grout materials, host pipe cleaning, inspection and
numerous contractor submittal requirements, review Section 15-6 of the Standard
Specifications.
For human entry pipes that are determined to be in abrasion level 6 (or higher), consult
with District Hydraulics to consider using concreted RSP or other abrasion resistant layer
special designs with, or in lieu of, concrete to achieve 50 years of maintenance free
service life.

46

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

5.1.2.2.2 Invert Paving with Concreted Rock Slope Protection (CRSP) or

Calcium Aluminate Abrasion Resistant Concrete

Concreted Rock Slope Protection (CRSP)

Calcium Aluminate Abrasion Resistant Concrete

These methods are generally limited to large diameter culverts with Q2-5 velocity greater
than 14 ft/sec and an abrasion level of 6. Lining the culvert barrel invert with concreted
RSP can provide an effective countermeasure to abrasion and increase barrel roughness
thus decreasing velocity within the barrel. A nominal strength of 4500 psi may be used in
the concrete. The rock size may vary. However, it is imperative to achieve adequate rock
embedment (i.e., 75% min.) into the concrete. At the culvert ends, a smooth transition
back to the channel bed profile should be provided with adequate embedment to prevent
undermining.
5.1.2.2.3 Steel Armor Plating
In locations with severe abrasion (see Index 2.1.2.3) a viable option to invert paving with
concrete may be to armor plate the invert with steel plates (thickness between 0.25 inch
and 0.50 inch). See HDM Table 855.2F. This method is used in large diameter pipes that
can accommodate a reduction in waterway area. The smooth, wide invert spreads wear
over a greater area and is less of an impediment to flow than corrugated metal. It is
important to securely attach steel armor plates to the host pipe. See 03-Nev-49 pictures
below of 0.375 inch thick steel armor plate example at Shady Creek that replaced a
concrete invert lining.

Finished 0.375-inch Thick Steel Plate Invert

Workers Placing Steel Plates (See Detail Below)

47

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Example Steel Armor Plating Detail. To prevent piping under the steel plate, it is important
to provide end treatment details particularly at the upstream end. See details below and
post-construction photo of 120 inch SPP on Sbd 330 where end treatment was not part of
the design.

Insufficient Anchorage with No End Treatment

48

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Steel Plate and Concrete Apron End Treatment (Inlet)

Several other materials that have been successfully used to plate inverts subject to
abrasion include guardrail elements, railroad rails and bridge deck grating.
5.1.2.2.3.1 Welded Steel Pipeliners
Welded steel pipeliners are available in round, arch and elliptical shapes and can be
custom made for special shapes. The custom design sizes range from 26" to 180" and
larger in diameter and up to 1" thick. Standard sizes 24" and smaller are available from
stock, however, more commonly this repair method is used as a structural repair solution
for large diameter (human-entry) metal pipes that are corroded on the backside
throughout the circumference and where invert paving within the lower 180 degrees is
insufficient. These installations are considered to be part of the sliplining family,
however, unlike plastic pipeliners, in all sizes they may be considered for structural
repairs. Per Index 6.1.1, if the host pipe cannot be made capable of sustaining design
loads, it should be replaced rather than rehabilitated. Per Index 7.1.6.1, any re-lining
project that proposes to utilize large diameters should be treated as a special design and
consultation with the Headquarters Office of Highway Drainage Design within the
Division of Design and the Underground Structures unit in the Division of Structures
within the Division of Engineering Services (DES) is advised. See Index 6.1.3.1 and SSP
15-6.06 and examples below.

49

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Various Welded Steel Pipeliner Structural Repair Installations

(InfraSteel. Courtesy of Precision Pipe & Products, Inc.)

5.1.2.3 Soil Migration

Backfill Fines Infiltrating Through CMP Joint

When the pipe is located beneath the ground water level, consideration must be given to
the possibility of loss of side support through soil migration (the conveying by
groundwater of finer particle soils into void spaces of coarser soils). Generally, migration
can occur where the void spaces in the pipe backfill are sufficiently large enough to allow
the intrusion of eroded fines from the trench sidewalls. For migration to occur, the in-situ
soil must be erodible, and there must be a flow path for the water. Normally, erodible
soils are fine sands and silts and special clays. This situation is exacerbated where a
significant gradient exists in the ground water from the outside of the trench towards the
inside, i.e., the trench must act as a drain, and/or the pipe joints are not watertight (see
Highway Design Manual 854.1(2) Joint Performance Watertight Joint).

50

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

As a remedial measure for such anticipated conditions, depending on the amount of shape
distortion, cementitious grouting, or a combination of expansion rings (refer to previous
discussion for sealing culvert joints with expansion ring gaskets or repair sleeves under
Index 5.1.1.1.3.2), and Slurry Cement pressure grouted backfill in lieu of Structure
Backfill, or a combination of Structure Backfill with Filter Fabric (only if external access
is feasible) is recommended. See Index 6.1.2. Grouting Voids in Soil Envelope. Also see
appendices B-26 and B-34, FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 2 for
procedures for sealing culvert joints and repair at a distorted section.
5.1.2.4 Corrosion
In a study conducted during the mid 1950s in District 1 where approximately 7000
culverts were inspected, the majority of the metal corrosion in culverts throughout the
District occurred in the invert and was usually due to acidic water. In most cases of
accelerated failure of the culvert metal, corrosion was found to be the primary factor
caused by groundwater flowing on a continuous basis and emanating from poorly
drained, waterlogged soil with anaerobic bacteria present.
Corroded inverts in metal pipe will visually appear much differently than those worn by
abrasion. Corrosion will first manifest itself inside the culvert as rust with nodules and
pitting. See first photo below. The first perforations may appear in a much wider area
related to the flow-line compared to when abrasion is the primary wear factor. For
example, in the middle photo below, the first perforations are occurring on either side at
the outer edge of the darker wear zone. The wear pattern of a severely corroded CMP
invert will appear to have rough edges and often has strands of metal remaining at 6
oclock. See third photo below.

Progressively Corroded CMP Inverts

The dark, stained, wear zone present in most worn metal pipes usually indicates the limit
of exposed steel where the galvanizing layer has worn away. Even in nonabrasive flows,
most galvanizing exposed to frequent flow generally lasts a maximum of 10 years.
Corrosion on the backside may be present if rust stains inside the pipe are present around
joints and seams outside (i.e., above) the general flow zone. See third photo above.
A quick, approximate method for evaluating metal loss is to strike a geologists pick
hammer and compare the penetration or rebound with a nearby location that is close to
the original gage thickness (usually in the upper section above mid-point of the culvert).
Contact the Corrosion Technology Branch within DES for a detailed investigation.

51

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

There are several types of corrosion leading to failure in pipes atmospheric,

microbiological and galvanic corrosion. Any of these types of corrosion are influenced
by the structure of the soil, but the most commonly used criteria to indicate relative
corrosivity to steel are the pH or hydrogen iron concentration, the specific electrical
resistance, and the chloride and sulfate content of both soil and water. Other factors that
can influence the corrosion rates are the effects of industrial effluents from either
commercial or residential sources or stray electrical currents in close proximity to the
pipe. Stray current sources include electricity transmission lines, electrified rail lines and
the like.
In general, in areas of high rainfall, the soils tend to be acidic and of high electrical
resistivity. Acid soils are generally regarded to be corrosive, while a high electrical
resistivity is indicative of low corrosivity. Some typical values of the resistivity of soils
and waters are shown in Appendix C (Table 5-1). Table 5-2 in Appendix C shows a
rating of the soils corrosivity as determined by specific electrical resistance. Visual
indications of the relative corrosivity of various soil types are shown Table 5-3 of
Appendix C.

Corroded Steel Pipes

Refer to Indices 2.1.1.2.1 and 2.1.1.3.2 for a discussion on how service life is estimated
relative to pH and coatings for metal culverts.
5.1.2.4.1 Human Entry
One of the most effective ways to rehabilitate corroded and severely deteriorated inverts
of human entry CMP (i.e., 42-48 in. or larger) is by paving them with reinforced concrete
or shotcrete. Refer to Index 5.1.2.2.1.
Where invert paving within the lower 180 degrees is insufficient for large diameter metal
pipes that are corroded on the backside throughout the circumference, welded steel
pipeliners may be a viable replacement alternative to open trench construction. See Index
5.1.2.2.4.

52

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

5.1.2.4.1.1 Cathodically Protecting Metal Culverts

Refer to FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 1, pages 2-12 to 2-14, 6-13 and
Volume 2, Appendix B-31, for a discussion on the corrosion process and procedures for
cathodically protecting metal culverts.
5.1.2.4.2 Non-Human Entry
In corroded smaller diameter CMP where abrasion is not a factor, designing a pipeliner
for corrosion resistance is completely different to designing for abrasion resistance. If the
bedload at the site non-abrasive, almost any liner thickness will provide a 50 year service
life once the pipe is adequately sealed by the pipeliner and annular space grout forming a
composite structure and a corrosion barrier on the inside of the host metal pipe. See Index
6.3.1.1.7 (6).
This concept applies to close fitting (i.e. no annular space grouting) liners which include
machine spiral wound PVC (expandable diameter), cured in place pipe or cementitious
lining. Each one of these methods provides additional hydraulic capacity (if needed)
compared to sliplining. For detailed information on these methods, see HDM Index
853.5, and Indices:
6.1.3.5 Lining with Machine Wound PVC Liner,
6.1.3.2 Lining with Cured-In-Place Pipes, and
6.1.3.6 Sprayed Coatings
SSP 15-6.14 Cementitious Pipeliners includes concrete, shotcrete, mortar, and several
proprietary cementitious lining products that are listed on METSs Authorized Materials
List for Cementitious Pipeliners and Concrete Invert Paving. In most cases, cement
mortar will meet service life requirements - providing abrasion is not a factor.
5.1.2.5 Shape Distortion
The single most important feature to observe and measure when inspecting corrugated
metal culverts is the cross-sectional shape of the culvert barrel. The corrugated metal
culvert barrel depends on the backfill or embankment to maintain its proper shape and
stability. The culvert will deflect, settle or distort when the backfill does not provide the
required support. See Index 2.1.1.2, for a general discussion on flexible pipe behavior.
Flexible piping must utilize the soil to construct an envelope of supporting material
around the pipe so that the deflection is maintained at an acceptable level. The extent to
which the pipe depends on this enveloping soil is a function of the depth of cover, surface
loading and the ring stiffness of the pipe. The deflection of flexible pipe is the sum total
of two major components: the "installation deflection", which reflects the technique and
care by which the pipe was handled and installed, and the "service deflection", which
reflects the accommodation of the constructed pipe-soil system (pipe and compacted
backfill) to the subsequent earth loading and other loadings. Overloading or soil
movement may cause distortion.
It is quite common to have at least some symmetrical or unsymmetrical distortion in
corrugated metal culverts. A flexible pipe has been defined as one that will deflect at least
2 percent without structural distress. It is also common that the culvert is stable in that

53

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

distorted shape; that is, it is not continuing to distort. Therefore, it is important to

determine by measurement and monitoring whether the culvert is stable in its distorted
shape or whether it is continuing to become distorted. Usually 85-90% of deflection
occurs within the first month of construction. This is the time that it takes for the soil to
settle and stabilize. However, if there is instability in the backfill, the pipe will continue
to change shape. In general, deflections of more than 7-8% (either horizontal or vertical)
should be noted and may lead to structural problems. Beyond 10%, even joints designed
to be watertight will be prone to leakage and the associated potential for soil
migration/piping. Seam separation and/or buckling may occur for deflections greater
than 15%. If deflection is identified, the location, by distance from the inlet and degrees
from invert, should be noted and the length of the horizontal and vertical axes of the
culvert barrel should also be recorded. Unless water-tightness is an issue, monitoring
deflections below 10 - 12% is typically the appropriate course of action so that a
determination can be made of whether the conditions are worsening. Beyond 10 - 12%, it
is recommended that plans for rehabilitation/replacement be undertaken.
The overall condition of the culvert should be assessed, as well as the soil-pipe conditions
that caused the deformation to occur (e.g., corrosion, abrasion, poor compaction, open
joints, etc). Symmetrical deflection of the crown may be indicative of problems with
support of the bottom of the culvert or insufficient backfill/cover over the top of the
culvert. Unsymmetrical deformation of the top of the culvert may be the result of loss of
soil support on one side of the bottom (potentially from problems due to infiltration,
infiltration and piping at joint(s) or perforated invert) or improper compaction of the
backfill on one side of the culvert. Thus the shape may not be symmetrical for either the
entire length of the culvert or individual sections of it. Therefore, the conditions that
caused the deformation must be assessed and the rehabilitation plan must include
correcting the underlying problem. See Appendix B-34, FHWA Culvert Repair Practices
Manual Volume 2, for procedures for repair at a distorted section.

Shape Distortion Caused by Backfill Soil Loss

The decision to repair (re-compact embedment material, grout voids, repair joints or line
invert) verses replace the culvert by trenching and cover or by other trenchless methods
such as jacking or pipe-ramming, is dependent in part on the structural integrity of the
culvert. If the culvert must be replaced, the decision to replace by trench and cover versus
other trenchless methods will be influenced by cost, the need to maintain traffic during

54

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

construction and possibly other environmental concerns. Relining by sliplining or other

methods that are outlined in this D.I.B. should not be used on host culverts with excessive
(generally greater than 15-20 %) deflection because the host pipe must be structurally
sound and capable of withstanding all loads. See Index 6.1.1 for Caltrans host pipe
structural philosophy. However, if the host pipe can be adequately stabilized, stopping
further distortion, and the soil-pipe interaction re-established, it may be feasible to
rehabilitate pipes with deflections beyond 10-12% using semi rigid pipe such as welded
steel or fiber reinforced polymer concrete pipe. See Indices 2.1.1.1.3.1, 5.1.2.2.3.1,
7.1.6.1, and 11.1.1.

5.1.3 Structural Plate Pipe

Since they too are flexible structures that are made from metal, they suffer from the same
types of problems, as do corrugated metal and pipe arch culverts. In addition, they also
suffer from problems that are unique to their style of construction, which is assembly
with individual pieces of metal that are fastened together with bolts. See pictures below.

5.1.3.1 Seam Defects

The longitudinal seams of structural steel plate culverts are subject to displacement and
cracking due to incorrect assembly of the plates and differential soil pressures or most
commonly, if there is instability in the backfill caused by infiltration.
Repairs are made by splicing, re-bolting (see pictures below) or welding with reinforcing
steel to the inside corrugation valleys at the location of seam distress. See Appendix B38, FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 2.

55

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Longitudinal or transverse seams in structural plate assemblies may deteriorate due to

sheared or corroded connector bolts, lost or corroded nuts, or plate tears.
Whatever repair is made must be structurally sufficient to accommodate the load thrust,
which will be present in the shell of the conduit. Contact Underground Structures within
DES for all structural repair recommendations.
If the seams are to be repaired using shotcrete or gunite, brackets, firmly attached to the
structural plates, must be incorporated to anchor the concrete mix to the plates. Because
of the inherent low thrust resistance in such repair, this type of seam repair may be useful
only for transverse seams.
Again, the conditions that caused the seam defects must be assessed and the rehabilitation
plan must include repairing the seams and correcting the underlying problem (e.g. invert
paving see below) and/or stabilizing the soil envelope if necessary.
5.1.3.2 Seam Repair, Invert Durability and Shape Distortion
The same discussions outlined under invert durability and shape distortion for corrugated
metal pipe also apply to structural steel plate. There are ordinarily no joints in structural
plate culverts, only seams. Distress in circumferential seams is rare and can result from
severe differential deflection caused by a foundation or soil failure usually as a result of
invert failure (see photos in Index 5.1.2.2). Depending upon the degree of deflection, it
may be possible to rehabilitate the invert, however, contrary to the recommendation
under Joint Defects on page 6-19 of FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume
1, and Appendix B-26 of Volume 2, internal steel expansion ring gasket joint sealing
systems are not recommended for circumferential seam repairs. If it is not possible to
rehabilitate the invert, and there is severe differential deflection present, replacement is
recommended. However, if the host pipe can be adequately stabilized, stopping further
distortion, and the soil-pipe interaction re-established, it may be feasible to rehabilitate
SSPP with deflections beyond 10-12% using semi rigid pipe such as welded steel (all
sizes) or fiber reinforced polymer concrete pipe (available up to 126 in. nominal
diameter). See Indices 2.1.1.1.3.1, 5.1.2.2.3.1, 7.1.6.1., and 11.1.1.

56

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

SSPP with Deflection Beyond 10-12%

5.1.4 Aluminum Pipe

Aluminum corrodes differently than steel and is not susceptible to corrosion attack within
the acceptable pH range of 5.5-8.5. See Indices 2.1.2.2 and 2.1.2.3 when considering
abrasion potential. Aluminum reacts with the alkalis (OH) found in portland cement
concrete. Because of potential problems with bonding at the connection where there will
be a build-up of gas leaving a gap with no bond, concrete invert paving is not
recommended. Aluminum culverts are not recommended where abrasive materials are
present, and where flow velocities would encourage abrasion to occur (i.e., culvert flow
velocities that frequently exceed 5 feet per second where abrasive materials are present)
In a corrosive environment, Aluminum may display less abrasive wear than steel
depending on the volume, velocity, size, shape, hardness and rock impact energy of the
bed load. If it is deemed necessary to place aluminum pipe in abrasion levels 4 through 6
in Table 855.2C, contact Headquarters Office of State Highway Drainage Design for
assistance.

5.1.5 Plastic Pipe

Plastic pipe culverts are a relatively new form of culvert in sizes ranging from 12 inches
to 60 inches for new pipe and potentially up to 120 inches for use as a liner. It is advised
that designers confer with the District Hydraulics Unit and/or the Office of Highway
Drainage in Headquarters prior to using plastic pipe larger than 60 inches in diameter.
Refer to Indices 2.1.1.2.2, and 2.1.2 for discussion of material and service life factors.
Although plastics are not subject to common corrosive agents (e.g., chlorides, acids,
sulfates) and show good resistance in abrasive environments, they are still part of the
flexible pipe materials family and therefore most of the discussion and repair
procedures that are outlined under the joint repair, shape distortion and soil migration for
metal pipe will also apply to plastic. See Indices 5.1.2.1, 5.1.2.2.4 and 5.1.2.3. The same

57

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

EDPM seals described in Index 5.1.1.1.3.2 for RCP and Section 15-6.05 may be used in
plastic pipes. Internal mechanical pipe joint seals should not to be used where the joint
gap exceeds 2" (i.e., physical separation of pipe ends) or where the joint gap exceeds 3"
for bell/spigot plastic. However, the maximum allowable gap may be increased by 1-1/2"
for both indicated situations if a back-up plate used.
The Standard Specifications state plastic pipe must be Type C or Type S corrugated
polyethylene pipe, or corrugated PVC pipe with smooth interior. If the site is abrasive,
the standard wall thickness for plastic pipe may not meet the minimum material thickness
required to achieve 50 years of maintenance-free service life. See HDM Tables 855.2F
and 853.1B for plastic pipeliner alternatives if repairs are needed.
Other issues that are unique to plastic include oxidation, stress cracking and problems
associated with exposure to ultraviolet rays at the ends and being flammable. Cracks in
high-density polyethylene (HDPE) pipes are most typically going to occur at a seam. In
reference to HDPE, it is worth noting that since it is a relatively new culvert product, both
the material qualities and physical design are undergoing continuous change. Pipe made
today has a different profile, different corrugation (annular instead of helical or spiral)
and is made with revised resin compounds as the industry upgrades its products. Given
that our standards for placement have been relatively constant, we are more likely to see
cracking and other problems in older pipes.

Splitting of 60 inch Diameter Pipe. This Pipe was Installed in 1996 by Another State

58

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Profile of pipe: Note wall buckling and obvious oval shape. This 42 inch diameter
pipe was installed in 1994. The pipe is 82 feet long and has a maximum cover of
about 10 feet. Separations of the joints ranged from 1 to 3 inches. Rippling of the
sidewalls is apparent throughout the length of the pipe (see below).

Small Crack and Wall Rippling

Compared to other pipe materials, plastic may have a higher potential for damage from
improper handling, and a higher potential for damage from improper backfilling
procedures including wall cracks, excessive deflection, bulges, joint separation, excessive
joint overlap caused by longitudinal expansion and wall rippling and buckling.
Some of the problems that have been outlined for plastic pipe may be monitored, such as
deflection (see Index 5.1.2.2.4). However, pipes with excessive deflection will need to be
replaced or lined with a rigid material that is capable of supporting all ground and traffic
loads. See Index 11.1.1.
Depending on the problem, excluding excessive deflection, other possible choices for
repair not discussed in the previously referenced indices include, lining with cured in
place pipe, machine wound PVC or replacement. See Index 6.1 and 9.1. If lining plastic
pipe with cured in place pipe, UV curing must be specified in lieu of any heat curing
methods which may cause damage to the host pipe. See Index 6.1.3.2.

6.1
GENERAL
TECHNIQUES

CULVERT

BARREL

REHABILITATION

6.1.1 Caltrans Host Pipe Structural Philosophy

In general, if the host pipe cannot be made capable of sustaining design loads, it should
be replaced rather than rehabilitated. This is a conservative approach and when followed
eliminates the need to make detailed evaluations of the liners ability to effectively accept
and support dead and live loads. Prior to making the decision whether or not to
rehabilitate the culvert and/or which method to choose, a determination of the structural
integrity of the host pipe must be made. See Index 2.1 of this D.I.B. for a discussion on
loading, bedding and behavior of flexible and rigid pipe. Existing voids in the base
material under the existing culvert should be filled with cement slurry prior to
rehabilitating any type of culvert. In human entry pipe, existing voids within the culvert

59

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

backfill should be filled with grout to re-establish its load carrying capability after invert
lining (see Index 6.1.2 below).
Also, see Index 11.1.1 for a discussion on supporting the roadway and traffic loads.
Other entities have adopted procedures for assigning structural capacity to liners. While
this is presently not Caltrans practice, under unique circumstances, or where
extraordinary costs for rehabilitation are likely, it is recommended that the designer
consult with the Headquarters Office of Highway Drainage Design within the Division of
Design to determine if consideration of these alternative analysis methods is justified.

6.1.2 Grouting Voids in Soil Envelope

External grouting is the introduction of a chemical or Portland cement based grout into
void space or areas of loose soil directly behind or beneath a culvert. This discussion will
focus on grouting, see Indices 3.1.3.1, 5.1.2.3 and 11.1.1 for a more detailed discussion
on voids and soil migration. The Geotechnical Engineer should always be contacted
when voids not immediately adjacent to the culvert (i.e., beyond 12 inches) are
discovered or if there are sinkholes or significant depressions. See Index 7.1.6.3.
6.1.2.1 Voids Below the Invert
For pipes of all sizes, it is quite common for voids to appear below a worn invert.
Typically they should be filled with slurry cement backfill as described in Section 156.01C(5)(a) of the Standard Specifications.
SSP 15-6.02 includes specifications for filling voids below with cement slurry and
around a culvert with contact grout (see Index 6.1.2.1) that have been found during
cleaning and inspection and were not described in the bid package. It specifies wherever
there are voids in the materials below the invert of the culvert and they are greater than 3
inches deep for non-human entry culverts, or 6 inches deep for culverts 60 inches in
diameter or larger, they should be filled with slurry cement backfill. In smaller host pipes
being lined, voids less than these indicated thresholds will be filled by the grout used for
grouting the annulus between a plastic pipeliner and the host pipe. Filling voids below the
invert found during field review or by Maintenance Inspection must be described
separately and in lieu of using SSP 15-6.02.
6.1.2.2 Voids Within the Backfill
If voids in the backfill are discovered during the field review they must be backfilled with
cement based grout into the void space or areas of loose soil around the culvert. In human
entry pipe, grouting may be accomplished from the inside of the culvert through prepared
grout holes in the culvert wall. See Section 15-6.01B(2) Contact Grout of the Standard
Specifications and SSP 15-6.03 - Contact Grouting and Appendix G, Example 1. When
concrete invert paving is included, typically the order of work is:

Drill grout ports and probe

Place slurry cement in voids below invert
Place grout ports, WWM and welded stud connectors
Pave invert
Place additional slurry cement (large voids)
60

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Place grout through ports

Occasionally, external grouting for human entry facilities may also be needed. Extremely
large voids on the back side of a culvert or surface voids may first be filled with slurry
cement backfill independently of grouting. In non-human entry pipe external grouting is
uncommon but if needed, may still be accomplished from grout tubes drilled through the
pavement or embankment.
Filling voids above the invert found during field review or by Maintenance Inspection
must be specified separately and in lieu of using SSP 15-6.02.
Three alternative procedures for grouting voids behind the culvert are described in
FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 2, Appendix B-30, page B-135:

Gravity flow from above the void

Gravity flow through a tremie pipe or tube (from bottom up)
Pressure grouting (see below)

The above-referenced description for Pressure Grouting refers to a low-pressure method

for grouting voids directly behind the sides of culvert and is the same as the Caltrans
method called Contact Grouting. Voids or loose soils not immediately adjacent to the
culvert (i.e., beyond about 12 inches) that developed through infiltration of fines into the
culvert may indicate more serious problems affecting the roadway prism that will need to
be addressed with other grouting methods. See Indices 11.1.1 and 11.1.2, for discussions
on supporting roadway and traffic loads and compaction grouting.
For bidding purposes, contract plans should include these details:
General site conditions, access, end treatments, (profiles and grade), staging, voids,
special situations, restrictions, etc.

61

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Large diameter (human entry) pipe repairs for voids below the invert and in the backfill.
See pipe photo under Index 5.1.2.2.4. for example prior to repairs.

6.1.3 Rehabilitation Families

6.1.3.1 Sliplining (General)
Refer to HDM Topic 853, HDM Index 855.2 and FHWA Culvert Repair Practices
Manual Volume 1, pages 6-23 through 6-29.
Note: Caltrans host pipe structural philosophy in Index 6.1.1 and HDM Index 853.2 is
intended to supersede any discussion by FHWA for restoring structural strength with
slipliners. A major deficiency in sliplining may be an ultimate lack of soil-structure
interaction. For flexible pipe, this is a crucial physical characteristic, which directly
relates to the structural integrity of the pipe. Therefore, thorough grouting of the
(annular) space between the culverts should typically be specified for construction.
Rehabilitation of culverts with slipliners is one of several methods available for extending
the life of an existing culvert. Sliplining is a common method and most viable for smaller
diameter non-human entry pipes 36 inches or less in diameter that are too small for invert
paving. Considering the resulting reduction in capacity, sliplining is not suitable for all
situations. Prior to any proposal to rehabilitate a culvert with a pipe liner a thorough
examination of the existing culvert and consultation with the District Hydraulics Unit to
discuss possible alternatives and cost effective solutions must be performed.
Sliplining consists of sliding a plastic pipeliner or a new culvert inside an existing
distressed culvert and then grouting the annulus as an alternative to total replacement.
This method is much faster to complete than a remove and replace option and often will

62

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

yield a significant extension of service life at less cost than complete replacement,
particularly where there are deep fills or where trenching would cause extensive traffic
disruptions.
When choosing the material for a slipliner, consideration should be given to the
environment and the physical needs of the installation including handling and weight of
the liner and construction footprint. For culverts operating under outlet control, a
smoother liner material may offset the reduction in culvert diameter. The adequacy of
outfall protection should be evaluated when the culvert liner results in higher discharge
velocities.
Selection of the appropriate liner material should take into account the reasons and mode
of failure of the existing pipe. High-density polyethylene and polyvinyl chloride pipes in
both solid wall and ribbed profiles have become common materials for sliplining
culverts. One product - polyethylene (PE) large diameter profile wall sewer and drain
pipe as specified in ASTM F 894) is available in diameters up to 120 inches. However,
for any plastic liner or slipliner, if the diameter exceeds 60 inches, it is recommended the
designer confer with headquarters for alternative more cost effective repair methods. See
Index 7.1.6.1. See Index 6.1.3.1.1 for sliplining using plastic pipeliners and Appendix H
for a design example.
Corrugated metal pipes are sometimes used for larger diameter sliplining projects. See
Index 7.1.7 for maximum push distance for large diameter flexible pipe liners and
Appendix H, which includes a large diameter CMP sliplining example. Liner pipes with
smooth exteriors usually will allow for easier insertion, particularly if the culvert being
rehabilitated has a corrugated profile. For structural repairs/replacement, viable
alternatives may include welded steel pipeliners (see Index 5.1.2.2.4) and fiber reinforced
polymer mortar (RPMP), or fiber reinforced polymer concrete (FRPC), which is about a
third of the weight per foot of precast RCP. FRPC can be manufactured in "short
sections" (2-3 foot lengths) for use in curves that can accommodate a 1-1.5 degree
deflection angle at each joint. Alternatively, if needed, beveled sections can be
customized. Either way, at curves the short sections are placed by bobcat or pulled
through the curves and then installed with a winch. See FHWA Culvert Repair Practices
Manual Volume 1, page 2-27 and Index 2.1.1.1.3.1.

Inserting a RPMP Slipliner

63

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Prior to sliplining, the existing culvert must be surveyed carefully to determine the
maximum diameter of culvert that can be inserted through the entire length of the host
pipe. Any deflections in the culvert walls will become control points and any alignment
changes coupled with deflections can reduce the slipliner diameter significantly. Major
deflections may indicate the need for other rehabilitation techniques. It may be necessary
to install rails on which to slide the liner culvert.
Once stream diversion methods are in place and the work area is stabilized, the liner pipe
is moved into the culvert either one section at a time or as an entire unit. All water and
debris must be removed from the existing pipe prior to grouting. The liner is pushed with
jacks or machinery such as a backhoe. When the liner is in place, the space between the
culverts generally must be grouted to prevent seepage and soil migration and to establish
a connection between the liner, the host pipe and the soil thus providing uniform support
and eliminating point loads. Grout may be either gravity fed into the annular space
between the liner and the existing culvert or pumped through a hose or small diameter
pipe (1-1/2- 2 inch PVC) laid in the annular space. When the lining is fairly long (100
feet or more), gravity feeding of grout will be difficult unless additional openings in the
top of the existing culvert are made for intermediate insertion of the grout. When grout is
pumped, the small pipe or hose is typically removed as the space is gradually filled.
When this is difficult due to field conditions, the small pipe or hose may be banded to the
liner with "tees" placed a 5 ft intervals.
To avoid floating of the liner and ensure a uniform grout thickness around the liner pipe,
the grout should be placed in lifts. Each lift of grout should be allowed to set before
continuing further up the culvert walls. Alternatively, the liner can be plugged at the ends
and filled with water to prevent floating during the grouting operation, or blocks can be
used (at least two sets per pipe section) to effectively rest between the liner and the
existing culvert.

PVC Lined Storm Drain with Grout Tube at Upper Right and Drain Tube at Bottom

The grouting process will apply pressure to the liner pipe. Minimum liner pipe stiffness
must be selected by the contractor such that the pipe strength exceeds the maximum
specified grouting pressure. See Index 6.1.3.1.1.4 for grouting plastic slipliners.
In accordance with Section 15-6.01A(3)(e) of the Standard Specifications, the contractor
will be required to perform a test on each type of grout and grout system proposed and
shall submit a grouting plan to the Engineer.

64

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Each project will have its own unique site-specific conditions that will require a unique
grouting plan for that site. The pipe length and slope are directly related to grouting
pressure and the plan must outline the proposed grouting method and procedures to stay
below the maximum grouting pressure. Most grouting work will be sub-contacted and the
quality of grouting contractors can vary considerably. For quality assurance purposes see
Section 15-6.01A(3)(e) of the Standard Specifications for a list of submittals and
calculations required by the grouting sub-contractor.
The Contractor may obtain approval from the Engineer for any changes to be made in
grout mix, grouting procedure, or installation prior to commencement of grouting
operations. Grout for annular space grouting is described in Section 15-6.01B(3) of the
Standard Specifications.
For further general information on the procedures for sliplining culverts, refer to FHWA
Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 2, Appendix B-39, page B-174.
6.1.3.1.1 Sliplining Using Plastic Pipe Liners
The following information is intended to provide design guidance regarding the
rehabilitation of existing pipe culverts with plastic pipe liners. Indices 6.1.3.1.1.1
through 6.1.3.1.1.7 below, supersede DIB No. 76 dated January 1, 1995.
6.1.3.1.1.1 Allowable Types of Plastic Liners
Plastic pipe made of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and high-density polyethylene (HDPE) is
commercially available in a variety of diameters and styles that are adequate for the
purpose of relining existing culverts. Any plastic culvert that is discussed in Section 64
of the Caltrans Standard Specifications will perform adequately as a corrosion barrier. In
addition, many types of solid wall, profile wall PVC and HDPE are manufactured that are
also capable of performing the necessary function depending whether abrasion, corrosion
or both are the underlying cause of the problem. No attempt is made to list every type of
plastic pipe that could be used. The following information describes some of the most
likely alternatives that comply with SSP 15-6.10 and are listed in HDM Table 853.1B.
The most economical types currently manufactured are PVC solid wall (ASTM D3034,
ATTM F 679, AWWA C900, AWWA C905 or ASTM D 2241, PVC closed-profile wall
pipe (ASTM F1803), corrugated PVC (smooth interior - ASTM F 794 & F 949), Type S
(smooth interior) corrugated HDPE (AASHTO M-294), HDPE solid wall (AASHTO M
326 and ASTM Designation F 714) and Polyethylene large-diameter-profile wall sewer
and drain pipe (ASTM F894). HDPE solid wall fusion welded or Snap-TiteTM (ASTM F714) is relatively expensive but has a variety of diameters and wall thicknesses. HDPE
solid wall pipe is listed by Standard Dimension Ratio (SDR) classification (Standard
Dimension Ratio given by the ratio of outside diameter to wall thickness with the lower
SDR's having thicker walls). Also available is PVC profile wall sewer pipe (ASTM F794 and F-949). Also relatively expensive, this smooth interior and smooth exterior pipe
(closed profile) with an internal rib can be easier to install than other types and does not
require couplers, belling, or other connectors that would increase the pipe diameter at the
joints. Several pipe products are made specifically for sliplining with joint systems
designed to maintain a constant outside and inside diameter. Some examples of these are

65

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

the Contech A2 Liner PipeTM (PVC), the Vylon PVC Slipliner PipeTM, and the
WeholiteTM Culvert Reline System (HDPE).
6.1.3.1.1.2 Strength Requirements
Pipe used as a liner will not typically be subjected to the degree of loading experienced
by the original culvert (see Caltrans host pipe structural philosophy). In most cases,
although the invert of the original culvert has deteriorated, the load carrying capacity has
not been significantly diminished. As a result, strength requirements of liner pipe are
more dependent on a determination of potential grouting pressures and the need for the
liner pipe to withstand handling and installation stresses.
Pipe stiffness is a common term used in describing plastic pipe's resistance to deflection
prior to placing any backfill. The higher the number, the stiffer the pipe, and the better
the pipe's resistance to grouting pressure and handling.
The following table lists minimum pipe stiffness in PSI. Testing for pipe stiffness is
performed in accordance with ASTM D-2412:

66

DIB 83-04

Nominal PVC*
PVC*
HDPE
Dia. (in) SDR-35 Profile Type S

August 1, 2014
HDPE Solid Wall (SDR)

15.5

17

21

26

32.5

15

46

46

42

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

16

46

N/A

N/A

86

71

22

11

18

46

46

40

86

71

22

11

20

N/A

N/A

N/A

86

71

22

11

21

46

46

N/A

86

71

22

11

21.2

N/A

N/A

N/A

86

71

22

11

24

46

46

34

86

71

22

11

27

46

46

31

86

71

22

11

30

N/A

46

28

86

71

22

11

33

N/A

N/A

25

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

34

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

71

22

11

36

N/A

46

22

N/A

71

22

11

39

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

42

N/A

46

20

N/A

N/A

N/A

11

45

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

48

N/A

46

18

N/A

N/A

N/A

11

54

N/A

46

N/A

55

N/A

N/A

N/A

60

N/A

46

14

63

N/A

N/A

N/A

No Caltrans Standards

For stiffness of Polyethylene (PE) large diameter (10 to 120 in. ID) profile wall sewer
and drain pipe as specified in ASTM F 894, see tables under Index 6.1.3.1.1.3 below.
6.1.3.1.1.3 Pipe Dimensions
When determining the appropriateness of relining an existing culvert, an assessment of
the discharge capacity of the liner must be made to verify that the liner pipe, due to its
smaller diameter than the existing culvert, will allow the design discharge to be passed.
To make this assessment, selection of the liner must consider the effect on the liner
diameter due to liner wall thickness and, in particular, the space requirements of the liner
joints. This maximum exterior dimension of the liner must be able to be inserted through
the existing culvert, while also considering deformations in the existing culvert, minor
culvert bends, and any other disturbances in the bore of the existing pipe. These
considerations make it imperative that the designer obtains accurate field measurements
of the existing culvert to determine the minimum available clearance prior to selecting
liner types and diameters. A good rule of thumb for sizing the liner is to select a liner
diameter that is 20% less than the diameter of the host pipe. Be aware that manufacturers
67

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

occasionally delete existing products and often bring new products to the market.
Contact with industry representatives is encouraged to verify the availability of any
products that will be specified.
The following tables provide industry-supplied pipe inside and outside diameters.
Dimensions will vary somewhat between different manufacturers and must be verified
prior to being specified. Also see FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 2,
pages A-40 to A-47.
PVC SDR 35 PIPE DIMENSIONS (AASHTO M 278* and ASTM F 679)
Nominal Dia.
(in)

Min. Average Inside

Dia.
(in)

Average Outside Dia.

(w/o bell)**
(in)

15*

14.42

15.30

18

17.63

18.70

21

20.78

22.05

24

23.38

24.80

27

26.35

27.95

30

29.69

31.50

33

33.40

35.43

36

37.11

39.37

42

41.95

44.50

48

47.89

50.80

* AASTO M278 applies to nominal sizes of 15 or smaller

** Tolerance on Average Outside Diameter varies from 0.028 in to 0.075 in
PVC DR PIPE DIMENSIONS (AWWA C905)
Minimum Wall Thickness (in)
Nominal
Dia.

Avg. OD

DR 18

DR 21

DR 25

DR 32.5

DR 41

14

15.3

0.85

0.73

0.61

16

17.4

0.97

0.83

0.70

18

19.5

1.08

0.93

0.78

20

21.6

1.20

1.03

0.86

24

25.8

1.43

1.23

1.03

30

32.0

1.28

0.99

0.78

36

38.3

1.53

1.18

0.93

68

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

HDPE TYPE S PIPE DIMENSIONS (AASHTO M 294)

Nominal Dia.
(in)

Average Inside Dia.*

(in)

Average Outside Dia.

(in)

15

14.98

17.57

18

18.07

21.20

24

24.08

27.80

30

30.00

35.10

36

36.00

41.70

42

41.40

47.70

48

47.60

53.60

60

59.50

66.30

Tolerance on inside diameter is + 4.5 (but not more than 1.5 inches) and 1.5 percent
HDPE SDR PIPE DIMENSIONS (ASTM F 714)
Minimum Wall Thickness (in)

Nominal Average
Dia.
OD

SDR
32.5

SDR
26

SDR
21

SDR
17

SDR
15.5

SDR
13.5

SDR
11

16

16

0.492

0.615

0.762

0.941

1.032

1.185

1.455

18

18

0.554

0.692

0.857

1.059

1.161

1.333

1.636

20

20

0.615

0.769

0.952

1.176

1.290

1.481

1.818

22

22

0.677

0.846

1.048

1.294

1.416

1.630

2.000

24

24

0.738

0.923

1.143

1.412

1.548

1.778

2.182

26

26

0.800

1.000

1.238

1.529

1.677

1.926

2.364

28

28

0.862

1.077

1.333

1.647

1.806

2.074

2.545

30

30

0.923

1.154

1.429

1.765

1.938

2.222

2.727

32M

31.594

0.969

1.213

1.500

1.854

2.031

32

32

0.985

1.23

1.524

1.882

2.065

2.370

2.909

34

34

1.046

1.308

1.619

2.000

2.194

2.519

3.091

36

36

1.108

1.385

1.714

2.117

2.323

2.667

3.273

40M

39.469

1.213

1.516

1.874

2.315

2.710

3.111

42

42

1.292

1.615

2.000

2.471

3.097

48M

47.382

1.456

1.819

2.248

2.780

48

48

1.477

1.846

2.286

2.824

54

54

1.662

2.077

2.571

3.176

55M

55.295

1.697

2.118

2.626

3.244

63M

63.209

1.937

2.421

3.000

69

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

PVC CLOSED PROFILE WALL PIPE DIMENSIONS

(ASTM F 1803 and ASTM F 794 (Series 46))
Nominal Dia.
(in)

Min. Inside Dia.*

(in)

Outside Dia. **
(in)

18

17.60

N/A

21

20.69

22.68

24

23.43

25.43

27

26.42

28.43

30

29.41

31.43

32

32.41

33.43

36

35.40

37.93

39

38.39

N/A

42

41.38

44.38

45

44.37

N/A

48

47.36

50.78

54

55.35

57.13

Tolerance on Minimum Inside Diameter varies from + 0.11 in to + 0.32 in per ASTM
F 1803
** Vylon Slipliner outside diameter example shown, dimensions may vary from
manufacture example shown

70

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

PVC CORRUGATED - SMOOTH INTERIOR PROFILE WALL PIPE

DIMENSIONS (ASTM F 949 and ASTM F 794 (Series 46))
Nominal Dia.
(in)

Average. Inside Dia.*

(in)

Outside Dia. **
(in)

12

11.72

12.80

15

14.34

15.66

18

17.55

19.15

21

20.71

22.63

24

23.47

25.58

27

26.44

28.86

30

29.47

32.15

36

35.48

38.74

42 ***

41.97

45 ***

44.37

48 ***

47.36

* Tolerance on Average Inside Diameter varies from to 0.028 in to 0.105 in

** For slipliners without bell, tolerance on Average Outside Diameter varies from to
0.018 in to 0.079 in from dimensions shown per ASTM F 949
*** Minimum inside tolerance varies from + 0.255 in. to + 0.285 in per ASTM F 794.
Minimum outside diameter controlled by bell not shown.
The following tables list the average inside diameter, the minimum wall thickness of the
waterway, the minimum wall thickness in the bell and ring stiffness constant (RSC) for
Polyethylene (PE) large diameter (10 to 120 in. ID) profile wall sewer and drain pipe as
specified in ASTM F 894:

71

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

OPEN PROFILE PIPE DIMENSIONS AND TOLERANCES

Nominal
Pipe
Size
in
(mm)

Avg.
Inside
Dia.
in
(mm)

Tolerance
on Avg.
Inside
Dia.
in
(mm)

14
(460)

18.00
(457.2)

21
(530)

Min. Wall Thickness in Pipe Waterway, W

Min. Bell
Thickness,
Tb
in
(mm)

RSC 40
in
(mm)

RSC 63
in
(mm)

RSC 100
in
(mm)

RSC 160
& higher
in
(mm)

0.38
(9.65)

0.18
(4.57)

0.18
(4.57)

0.18
(4.57)

0.22
(5.59)

0.70
(17.78)

21.00
(533.4)

0.38
(9.65)

0.18
(4.57)

0.18
(4.57)

0.18
(4.57)

0.24
(6.10)

0.70
(17.78)

24
(610)

24.00
(609.6)

0.38
(9.65)

0.18
(4.57)

0.18
(4.57)

0.22
(5.59)

0.24
(6.10)

0.70
(17.78)

27
(690)

27.00
(685.8)

0.38
(9.65)

0.18
(4.57)

0.18
(4.57)

0.24
(6.10)

0.24
(6.10)

0.70
(17.78)

30
(760)

30.00
(762.0)

0.38
(9.65)

0.18
(4.57)

0.22
(5.59)

0.24
(6.10)

0.26
(6.60)

0.70
(17.78)

33
(840)

33.00
(838.2)

0.38
(9.65)

0.18
(4.57)

0.24
(6.10)

0.24
(6.10)

0.30
(7.62)

0.95
(24.13)

36
(910)

36.00
(914.4)

0.38
(9.65)

0.18
(4.57)

0.24
(6.10)

0.26
(6.60)

0.30
(7.62)

1.05
(26.67)

42
(1070)

42.00
(1066.8)

0.42
(10.67)

0.24
(6.10)

0.24
(6.10)

0.30
(7.62)

0.38
(9.65)

1.15
(26.21)

48
(1220)

48.00
(1219.2)

0.48
(12.19)

0.24
(6.10)

0.26
(6.60)

0.30
(7.62)

0.38
(9.65)

1.25
(31.75)

54
(1370)

54.00
(1371.6)

0.54
(13.75)

0.24
(6.10)

0.30
(7.62)

0.38
(9.65)

0.42
(10.67)

1.25
(31.75)

60
(1520)

60.00
(1524.0)

0.60
(15.24)

0.26
(6.60)

0.30
(7.62)

0.38
(9.65)

0.52
(13.21)

1.30
(33.02)

66
(1680)

66.00
(1676.4)

0.66
(16.76)

0.30
(7.62)

0.38
(9.65)

0.42
(10.67)

0.67
(17.02)

1.30
(33.02)

72
(1830)

72.00
(1828.8)

0.72
(18.29)

0.30
(7.62)

0.38
(9.65)

0.42
(10.67)

0.90
(22.68)

1.30
(33.02)

78
(1830)

78.00
(1981.2)

0.78
(19.81)

0.30
(7.62)

0.38
(9.65)

0.52
(13.21)

0.90
(22.68)

1.35
(34.29)

84
(2130)

84.00
(2133.6)

0.84
(21.34)

0.38
(9.65)

0.42
(10.67)

0.67
(17.02)

0.90
(22.68)

1.35
(34.29)

90
(2290)

90.00
(2286.0)

0.90
(22.86)

0.38
(9.65)

0.42
(10.67)

0.90
(22.68)

0.95
(24.13)

1.35
(34.29)

96
(2440)

96.00
(2438.4)

0.96
(24.38)

0.38
(9.65)

0.52
(13.21)

0.90
(22.68)

0.95
(24.13)

1.35
(34.29)

108
(2740)

108.00
(2743.2)

1.08
(27.43)

0.42
(10.67)

0.67
(17.02)

0.90
(22.68)

0.95
(24.13)

1.35
(34.29)

120
(3050)

120.00
(3048.0)

1.20
(30.48)

0.52
(13.21)

0.67
(17.02)

0.90
(22.68)

0.95
(24.13)

1.35
(34.29)

72

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

CLOSED PROFILE PIPE DIMENSIONS AND TOLERANCES

Nominal Pipe
Size
in (mm)

Avg. Inside Dia.

in (mm)

Tolerance on
Avg. Inside Dia.
in (mm)

Min. Wall
Thickness in
Pipe Waterway,
W, All RSC
in (mm)

Min. Bell
Thickness, Tb
in (mm)

10 (250)

10.0 (254.0)

0.38 (9.65)

0.18 (4.57)

0.5 (12.7)

12 (300)

12.0 (304.8)

0.38 (9.65)

0.18 (4.57)

0.5 (12.7)

15 (380)

15.0 (381.0)

0.38 (9.65)

0.18 (4.57)

0.5 (12.7)

18 (460)

18.0 (457.2)

0.38 (9.65)

0.18 (4.57)

0.5 (12.7)

21 (530)

21.00 (533.4)

0.38 (9.65)

0.18 (4.57)

0.5 (12.7)

24 (610)

24.00 (609.6)

0.38 (9.65)

0.18 (4.57)

0.5 (12.7)

27 (690)

27.00 (685.8)

0.38 (9.65)

0.18 (4.57)

0.5 (12.7)

30 (760)

30.00 (762.0)

0.38 (9.65)

0.18 (4.57)

0.5 (12.7)

33 (840)

33.00 (838.2)

0.38 (9.65)

0.18 (4.57)

0.5 (12.7)

36 (910)

36.00 (914.4)

0.38 (9.65)

0.18 (4.57)

0.5 (12.7)

40(1020)

40.00 (1016.0)

0.38 (9.65)

0.18 (4.57)

0.5 (12.7)

42 (1070)

42.00 (1066.8)

0.42 (10.67)

0.18 (4.57)

0.5 (12.7)

48 (1220)

48.00 (1219.2)

0.48 (12.19)

0.18 (4.57)

0.5 (12.7)

54 (1370)

54.00 (1371.6)

0.54 (13.75)

0.18 (4.57)

0.5 (12.7)

60 (1520)

60.00 (1524.0)

0.60 (15.24)

0.18 (4.57)

0.6 (15.2)

66 (1680)

66.00 (1676.4)

0.66 (16.76)

0.18 (4.57)

0.6 (15.2)

72 (1830)

72.00 (1828.8)

0.72 (18.29)

0.18 (4.57)

0.6 (15.2)

78 (1830)

78.00 (1981.2)

0.78 (19.81)

0.18 (4.57)

0.6 (15.2)

84 (2130)

84.00 (2133.6)

0.84 (21.34)

0.18 (4.57)

0.7 (17.8)

90 (2290)

90.00 (2286.0)

0.90 (22.86)

0.18 (4.57)

0.7 (17.8)

96 (2440)

96.00 (2438.4)

0.96 (24.38)

0.18 (4.57)

0.7 (17.8)

108 (2740)

108.00 (2743.2)

1.08 (27.43)

0.18 (4.57)

0.7 (17.8)

120 (3050)

120.00 (3048.0)

1.20 (30.48)

0.18 (4.57)

0.8 (20.3)

MINIMUM RING STIFFNESS CONSTANT (RSC) VALUES

Nominal Pipe Classification

RSC (lb/ft of Length)

40

36

63

56

100

90

160

144

250

225

400

360

73

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

6.1.3.1.1.4 Grouting
See Index 6.1.3.1 for general grouting considerations, contractor submittals, grouting
plan, and quality control. Specifications are provided in Sections 15-6.01A(3)(e), 156.01A(4)(f), 15-6.01B(3) and 15-6.01C(5)(b) of the Standard Specifications.
Unless site constraints make it infeasible, full length grouting of the liner is always
recommended. This not only provides a more secure attachment to the existing culvert,
but also reduces the potential for joint leakage to create piping problems. Although
generally not a concern, it also provides additional strength if there is deterioration of the
existing culvert, particularly where fill heights exceed currently recommended values for
plastic culverts.
The grout should be a low-density foam concrete consisting of Portland cement, fly ash
and additives conforming to Section 15-6.01B(3) of the Standard Specifications. This
type of mix should allow the grout to flow easily and completely fill the entire annular
space around the liner pipe (see below).

Grouting of Annular Space Between Inserted Pipe and Culvert.

Grouting pressure resistance of the liner varies with pipe stiffness. The gauged pumping
pressure shall not exceed the liner pipe manufacturer's approved recommendations or the
values shown below:
HDPE Solid-Wall
SDR

Maximum Safe Annular Grouting Pressure (psi)

32.5

26

21

16

19

21

15.5

36

Maximum safe annular grouting pressure (psi) for other materials:

Divide minimum pipe stiffness shown in Index 6.1.3.1.1.2 by 4.5

74

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Centrifugally cast glass fiber reinforced polymer mortar (RPMP): 6 psi or pipe
stiffness divided by 3
Divide minimum pipe stiffness by 4.5 for CMP and Fiber Reinforced Plastic

Verification must be made that the joint type specified is also able to withstand
anticipated grouting pressures.
It should be understood that the above criteria differs from Section 15-6.01C(5)(b) of the
Standard Specifications which provides both a factor of safety and allowance for various
types of pipe material response to application of pressure: For pipeliners with a stiffness
less than 29 psi, the grout pumps pressure measured at the point of injection must not
exceed either of the following:
1) 5 psi
2) Manufacturers instruction
For pipeliners with a stiffness of at least 29 psi, the grout pumps pressure measured at
the point of injection must not exceed 7.25 psi.
After grouting Section 15-6.01A(4)(h) of the Standard Specifications specifies allowable
deflection thresholds of the pipeliner.
6.1.3.1.1.5 Joints
In general, joints in pipes used for slipliners will not be subjected to the same
performance requirements, as are joints in direct burial applications. The encasement
provided by both the host pipe and the annular space grouting will typically isolate
slipliner pipe joints from problems associated with infiltration/exfiltration, separation or
misalignment. What is important is an understanding of the physical dimensions of
various pipe joints (see tables in Index 6.1.3.1.1.3) to ensure that there is adequate space
to both insert the liner pipe and feed in the annular space grout (at least 1 inch of space on
all sides is desirable), and to ensure that the joint is sufficiently tight to preclude
migration of grout through the joint during the annular space grouting operation (which
may have operating pressures of several psi). At a minimum, joints or couplers must
comply with the manufacturer's instructions and be compatible with the installation
method for the corresponding plastic pipeliner as well as complying with the
specifications for standard shear strength in Section 61-1.01D(1)(b) of the Standard
Specifications.
Where it is anticipated that grouting pressures are likely to exceed 4 psi, joints meeting
watertight requirements should also be specified in SSP 15-6.10.
Several manufacturers have developed modified joints for their pipes specifically for
sliplining applications. This generally is accomplished by routing out male and female
ends of the pipes and eliminating the bell end. As such, the increased external dimension
of the bell is eliminated, minimizing the loss of host pipe cross sectional area. Several of
these specially modified pipes are available in both PVC and HDPE. Some examples are
given in Index 6.1.3.1.1.1. To date, however, one of the most commonly used plastic
slipliners is solid wall HDPE. The sections of this pipe are most typically "joined" via a
fusion-welding machine, which results in a continuous pipe structure with no change in

75

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

inside or outside dimension at the locations where pipe segments are fused. Butt fusion
procedures for solid wall HDPE are described in Appendix A and in SSP 15-6.10.
Also to be considered in specifying the type of pipe, and its attendant type of joint, is the
likely method of insertion of the liner into the host pipe being rehabilitated. Most plastic
joints used in sliplining applications have little to no ability to resist tensile forces. As
such, they must be pushed, or jacked through the pipe being rehabilitated. Only fusion
welded joints and some of the types with routed ends with overlapping tabs will allow a
combination of pushing and pulling the liner through the host pipe. The need to also be
able to pull as well as push can be important where very long (or heavy) segments are
being inserted, or where deflections, discontinuities or angle points in the host pipe
increase the force needed to bring the liner into place.
6.1.3.1.1.6 Installation
Prior to insertion of the liner pipe, the existing culvert must be cleaned of all debris either
by flushing or manual removal. Any rust or spalls must be cleaned and removed as well
as protrusions into the pipe.
A jacking pit must be constructed with adequate size to contain lengths of pipe to be
inserted, grouting equipment and any other equipment necessary to perform the insertion.
The liner is normally pushed into the existing culvert, but occasionally it is pulled, or a
combination of pulling and pushing is used. Due to the often-large pressure load needed
to push the last sections of a long or heavy liner into place, pulling may be the preferred
method as long as adequate provisions have been made to avoid joint separation.

Inserting PVC and HDPE Slipliners

76

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Inserting HDPE Slipliner into a Storm Drain

The difficulty encountered in inserting the liner will be primarily dependent upon the
roughness of the existing culvert (either corrugations, other protrusions, or minor
displacements) and the type of exterior on the liner. Corrugated or ribbed liners will be
the most difficult to insert, particularly if the existing culvert is also corrugated, corroded,
and/or distorted.
6.1.3.1.1.7 Other Considerations
1) For any plastic slipliner, if the liner diameter exceeds 60 inches, confer with
headquarters for alternative methods. See Index 7.1.6.1. For human entry host
pipes, consider invert paving instead of sliplining.
2) PVC pipe as typically manufactured will become brittle and experience a
significant reduction in impact resistance due to freezing temperatures and/or
long-term exposure to ultra-violet radiation. Therefore, ends of completed
installations should not be exposed if they would be subject to very low
temperatures or direct sunlight. Temperature considerations are only important if
the pipe is likely to be handled or impacted (falling rocks/debris or maintenance
equipment) during periods of low temperatures.
3) Design discharge for the liner must be evaluated with consideration of conditions
that may have changed since the original culvert was placed. It is incorrect to
assume that if a liner will pass the discharge for which the existing culvert was
designed that all design requirements have been met.
4) The nominal pipe diameters given in the tables in Index 6.1.3.1.1.3 reflect
nominal U.S. customary unit designations for current round pipe sizes. It is
imperative that designers use the most current information available from
manufacturers when specifying products in order to know the exact dimensions of
pipe products that will be delivered to the job site.
5) See HDM Tables 853.1B and 855.2F for required thickness of plastic pipeliners in
abrasive conditions to achieve 50 years service life. The alternatives listed in
HDM Table 853.1B are included in SSP 15-6.10 for plastic pipeliners. The same

77

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

basic approach for invert paving design will apply to all liners and linings, that is,
selecting an appropriate material thickness based on abrasion level of the site,
determining the wear rate of the host pipe, and by following the procedures that
are outlined under HDM Index 855.2. Caltrans web-based tool AltPipe (see link
below) will estimate the loss due to abrasion for PVC and HDPE, but care must
be taken defining the correct abrasion level. In addition to Q2-5 velocities being
greater than 8 fps, there must be a 'significant' volume of bedload to use any of the
three 'abrasive levels' 4-6. If the volumes are fairly minor as is the case in smaller
pipes draining small watersheds, abrasion level 3 may be used. The best indicator
is to estimate the wear rate of the existing pipe and/or other pipes placed nearby
with similar abrasion factors. See Appendix H for Design Example and
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/oppd/altpipe.htm
For corrosion resistance only, including grouting, any of the plastic pipes and
liners listed under SSP 15-6.10 is suitable to form a corrosion barrier suitable to
meet a 50 year design service life for abrasion levels 1 through 3 in HDM Table
855.2A.
6.1.3.2 Lining with Cured-In-Place Pipes
Cured-in-place-pipe (CIPP) is a method of complete culvert relining employing a
thermosetting or UV cured, resin-impregnated flexible felt or fiberglass tube either;
a) Inverted in place using water or compressed air, or
b) Pulled in place with a winch.
The lining does not come in standard sizes, but is designed specifically for the individual
pipeline to be rehabilitated, with variable diameters/shapes (i.e., round, elliptical, oval,
etc.) and wall thickness. When necessary, a minimum thickness of the liner can be
specified to provide additional service life for abrasive conditions. See HDM Table
855.2F and SSP 15-6.11.No grouting is required, and there is no annular space between
the host pipe and liner. Historically, the most common application of this method has
been in small diameter (less than 48 inches) storm drains and sanitary sewers when
construction access precludes the use of a plastic slipliner and/or more hydraulic capacity
is needed.

Pulled-In-Place Steam Cured CIPP Installation on ED-50 in the Sierra Nevada Mountains

78

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Concrete culverts subject to sulfate attack are especially good candidates for this repair
method or metal pipes where the reduction in diameter using other lining methods is not
acceptable.
For the pulled in place installation method, a winched cable is placed inside the existing
pipe. The resin-impregnated liner is connected to the free end of the cable and then pulled
into place between drainage structures or culvert ends. The cable is disconnected, the
ends are plugged and the liner is inflated and cured with hot water, mixed air and steam
or by use of ultraviolet light. For resin control, the specifications (SSP 15-6.11) require
an impermeable layer on both the inside and outside of the tube which may be achieved
by a pre-manufactured inner and outer film, or a single outer film and an inflatable pipe
lining bladder called a calibration hose or inversion bladder. The bladders function is to
provide pressure against the inner wall of the outer membrane during curing and to
provide a pathway for the curing agent which can be hot water, steam or U V.
For the inversion process, manufacturers may use a number of different systems to insert
the tube. This method generally consists of inserting a polyester felt tube, saturated with a
liquid thermosetting resin material, into the culvert. The tube is inserted inside out
(inverted) and filled with water or compressed air. During inversion the lining tube turns
inside out and travels down the pipeline resulting in the plastic outer sleeve surface
becoming the inner surface of the repaired pipe with the resin system being in contact
with the pipeline. Pressure inside the inverted tube, due to the water or compressed air,
presses the resin-impregnated tube against the carrier pipe wall. Once the tube has
reached the far end of the pipe section under repair, either heated water or steam is fed
into the inverted tube to cure the thermosetting resin. For all inversion installations, the
specifications require a preliner for resin control and to isolate the resin-impregnated felt
from the host pipe. The preliner tube is composed of a 3-ply laminate sheet combining
two layers of polyethylene film and high-strength-nylon cord grid formed into a tube.

Inserting Polyester Felt Tube, Saturated with a Liquid Thermosetting Resin Material, into
Manhole

79

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

If water is used for curing, it must be heated continually and circulated during the curing
process. The application of heat hardens the resin after a few hours, forming a jointless
pipe-within-a-pipe. Once set, remote controlled cutters are used to reinstate junctions and
laterals. Any stream flow must be diverted during construction. Additionally a water
source to fill the tube must be accessible to the site when water is used for inversion and
curing.
The maximum length of pipe run that can be rehabilitated in this manner will vary with
diameter, but over 400 feet is not uncommon. Due to potential environmental concerns
including the capture and disposal of hot process water, using this lining method with
heated water for curing should generally be limited to urban drainage systems that
discharge to treatment plants, otherwise all residual water will need to be captured for
proper disposal.
When curing using steam the concerns are similar to water cure except for a slightly
increased cure time and much less water to transport and dispose of.

Steam Curing and Finished Product Inside Metal Host Pipe

When curing using of ultraviolet light a fiberglass tube is used and no refrigeration is
necessary. Cure times are quicker than the other methods; however, there is a thickness
limitation of one inch since the maximum thickness for light curing limited to 0.5 inches
per run.
Site set up is a high proportion of costs on small projects. The site footprint is relatively
large compared with some lining methods, but it is also somewhat flexible. In general,
trained personnel with specialized equipment are required. When lining metal culverts
with bituminous coatings containing high sulfur grades, if the specifications are not
followed for inversion installations, and a pre-liner is not placed, there may be a problem
with the resins used for CIPP.
For additional information on CIPP, see Appendix F and SSP 15-6.11.
6.1.3.3 Lining with Folded and Re-Formed PVC Liner (Fold and Form)
This method (per ASTM F 1504) involves the insertion of a continuously extruded,
folded PVC pipe into the existing pipeline or conduit and the reformation of the pipe to
conform to the shape of the existing pipeline or conduit without excavation. In order to

80

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

allow the deforming and reforming process to take place without damaging the liner, it is
manufactured from PVC compounds that are modified from those used in standard ribbed
PVC pipe or other PVC pipes used for direct burial. At present, there is no definitive
information available on the long-term durability or abrasion resistant properties of PVC
compounds of this type. As of this writing, the availability of this product is limited to
pipes 24 inches in diameter or smaller.

Fold and Form PVC Liner

6.1.3.4 Lining with Deformed-Reformed HDPE Liner

As of this writing, because the availability of this product in the U.S.A. is extremely
limited, the Caltrans specification has been withdrawn.
This repair method uses HDPE solid wall pipe with Standard Dimension Ratios (SDR
pipe diameter/wall thickness ratio) adequately flexible to be folded for insertion into
existing pipes. Lengths of individual pipe runs that can be rehabilitated by this method
vary depending on pipe diameter larger diameters require sections that need to be buttfused together on site.
Larger diameters (greater than 18 inches) are brought to the jobsite in individual sections
and then butt-fused and deformed on site by means of thermo-mechanical deforming
equipment into a U shape (see pictures below).

On-Site Mechanical Deforming Equipment Required for Large Diameter HDPE Liner

81

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

This technique is generally applicable to rehabilitating pipes of 18 inches diameter or

less. Caltrans has tested this method with pipe sizes up to 30 inches.
After the liner is pulled through the pipe to be rehabilitated, heat is introduced into the
folded liner using pressurized steam to force it out to shape. A remote controlled cutter
reconnects connections and laterals without excavation.
The advantages of this method compared to sliplining include, no joints, no grouting and
insignificant annular space thus providing increased hydraulic capacity if the reduction in
diameter was a concern.

Smaller Diameter Liner (18 in.) Being Installed through a Drainage Inlet from a Spool

The main limitations of this method are that the range of available pipe diameters is
limited and this method cannot accommodate oval or odd shapes of the old pipe, diameter
variations, possible joint settlement and pipe bends for liners over 18 inches in diameter.
Smaller diameter liner (18 inches) is delivered to the job site on a spool and has a
significantly improved bending radius than the larger diameters that may require digging
a jacking pit (see picture below).

82

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Steam Being Introduced into 30 Inch HDPE Liner

6.1.3.5 Lining with Machine Wound Plastic Liner

Standard Specifications Section 15-6.13 describes machine spiral wound PVC pipeliners
along with two individual SSPs for fixed and expandable diameter (15-6.13B and 156.13C). This method is primarily used to address corrosion and infiltration/exfiltration.
Per HDM Table 855.2A it is not recommended for use in abrasive environments.
This method involves the insertion of a machine made field fabricated spiral wound PVC
liner pipe into an existing pipe (either flexible or rigid). After insertion, the spiral wound
PVC liner pipe is either:
a) Inserted at a fixed diameter and then expanded until it presses against the interior
surface of the existing pipe; or,
b) Inserted at a fixed diameter or dimensions (if non-circular) into the existing pipe
and is not expanded, and the annular space between the spiral wound PVC liner
pipe is grouted; or,
c) Wound against the host pipe walls by a machine that travels down the pipe.
The primary advantages of using this method include:
83

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

1) Smaller construction footprint than sliplining (see pictures below)

2) No annular space grout for small diameters (30 inches or less), and
3) Can be used in multiple shapes (i.e., box, arch etc)
As with any plastic liner or slipliner, if the liner diameter of any of the above systems
exceeds 60 inches, headquarters concurrence is recommended. See Index 7.1.6.1.
The expanding system is used in smaller diameter host pipes 42 inches or smaller and
consists of a continuous plastic strip that is spirally wound into the existing deteriorated
host pipe. The male and female edges of the strip are securely locked together via the
winding machine. Once a section is installed, it is expanded against the wall of the host
pipe, creating a watertight seal. Both flexible and rigid pipes can be rehabilitated with this
system. This lining system is similar to the fixed diameter process except that the
continuous spiral joint utilizes a water activated polyurethane adhesive for sealing, no
annular space grouting is required (but the pipe ends are usually grouted) and the range of
diameters given above is for smaller non-human entry pipes.

Expanda PipeTM Expandable Diameter Lining System Example Shown Above

The fixed diameter machine spiral wound liner process produces a renovated pipe, arch,
or box with a maximum dimension/diameter of 120 inches consisting of a layered
composite of PVC Liner, cementitous grout, and the original pipe. The combination of
the ribbed profile on the PVC liner and the grout produces an integrated structure with
the PVC liner "tied" to the original pipe through the grout similar to a slipliner. Unlike

84

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

the expanding system, after insertion, the annular space between the liner and the existing
pipe is filled with grout as described in Indices 6.1.3.1 and 6.1.3.1.1.4. The composite
structure also may provide a watertight system.

RibsteelTM Lining System Shown Above

There are variations to PVC profiles that are used by the different manufacturers for the
fixed diameter machine spiral wound liner process. Some manufacturers use a lining
system that is capable of being steel reinforced for much larger diameters (up to 120 in.)
than the expanding system however, as with any plastic liner or slipliner, if the liner
diameter exceeds 60 inches, headquarters concurrence is recommended. See Index
7.1.6.1. For many smaller applications the steel reinforcing is not required as the plastic
strip has sufficient stiffness to withstand the grouting pressure. The steel reinforced PVC
lining system consists of a continuous plastic strip, which is spirally wound directly into
the existing deteriorated host pipe at fixed diameter. The male and female edges of the
strip are securely locked together via the winding machine. The plastic strip is designed
with ribs on its outer surface to engage a continuous strip of profiled reinforcing steel,
which is added to the outside of the plastic pipe during installation. The resulting liner
has a smooth plastic internal surface with increased stiffness from the steel reinforcing
profile. The liner is annular space grouted as described in Indices 6.1.3.1 and 6.1.3.1.1.4.
A watertight seal is achieved through sealing elements pre-applied to the male and female
edges of the profile during manufacture.
There is also a steel reinforced, HDPE fixed diameter machine spiral wound lining
system available with pre-manufactured, fully encapsulated continuous profiled steel
strips capable of lining larger diameters from 36 inches through 120 inches. As of this
writing, there are no Caltrans specifications available for the HDPE alternative.
Both flexible and rigid pipes can be rehabilitated with this system primarily to form a
corrosion barrier suitable to meet a 50 year design service life for abrasion levels 1
through 3 in HDM Table 855.2A due to the limited profile thickness available.

85

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Full Bore, Traveling Machine System: RotalocTM Lining System Shown Above

6.1.3.6 Sprayed Coatings

Sprayed lining systems can be used to repair drainage structures or to form a continuous
lining within an existing pipe. Lining materials may include concrete, concrete sealers,
silicone, vinyl ester, and polyurethane. The primary goals of the non-cementitious
systems are improved watertightness and corrosion resistance for concrete structures. See
below.

The application of any coating or lining requires correct surface preparation and cleaning
in advance of application.
6.1.3.6.1 Air Placed Concrete and Epoxy or Polyurethane Lining for
Drainage Structures
Placing a spray-applied Polyurethane protective lining on air-placed concrete is an
effective method to rehabilitate concrete inlets and manholes; after the concrete has

86

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

cured, a thin layer of moisture tolerant epoxy primer is applied by spray, followed by a
thicker outer layer of polyurethane lining material.
Epoxies can also be used alone or as a topcoat to a cementitious product to provide a
chemical barrier.
6.1.3.6.2 Cement Mortar Lining

This alternative may be used to line small diameter corroded and/or abraded corrugated
steel pipes ranging from 12 inches to 36 inches in diameter. Prior to performing this
technique, any voids below the pipe must first be pressure grouted as described Index
6.1.2.1. In addition to being an effective invert lining method, this method will also create
a zone of alkalinity for the entire circumference of the pipe. Corrosion Engineers
maintain that the cement in concrete prevents or significantly retards the oxidation of the
interior base metal (rust). Construction thicknesses from 1/8 to 3/4 per pass are
attainable. Typically, two passes are made resulting in a 1 inch minimum thickness over
the crests of the corrugation pattern. If moderate abrasion is present (abrasion level 4), a 2
inch minimum thickness of calcium aluminate mortar is needed. See Authorized
Materials List for Cementitious Pipeliners below. For higher abrasion levels, other
methods such as CIPP should be considered. See HDM Table 855.2F, SSP 15-6.14 and
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/esc/approved_products_list/
Any grade (steepness) of pipe can be lined by this method and most bends do not present
a problem. For non-abrasive applications, the mortar is made of one part cement, to one
part sand and must comply with section 51-1.02F of the Standard Specifications, except
the ratio of cement to sand when measured by volume must be 1 to 1. As with other
liners, the pipes must first be thoroughly cleaned and dried. The cement mortar is applied
by robot. The mortar is pumped to a head, which rotates at high speed using centrifugal
force to place the mortar on the walls. A conical-shaped trowel attached to the end of the
machine is used to smooth the walls. See picture below.

87

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

The maximum recommended length of small-diameter pipe that can be lined using this
method is approximately 650 feet.
6.1.3.7 Man-Entry Lining with Pipe Segments

For the rehabilitation of corroded large (42 inches and larger) diameter culvert or storm
drain systems, fiberglass reinforced segmental liners can be manufactured in virtually any
shape and length from a number of different types of materials, discussed below. The
installation process is very labor intensive, largely due to the joining and grouting. These
liners can be installed in single, short, circumferential sheets joined together
longitudinally, or in multiple segments (usually invert and crown sections joined together
longitudinally and circumferentially). The joints may be tongue and groove. Additional
joint protection can be provided by the application of resin-based sealants following the
installation of the units. This work generally needs to be accomplished in dry conditions;

88

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

therefore, bypassing of flow may be required. Segmental liners can be installed with or
without annular space grouting which is usually incorporated with mortar placement
(shotcrete) or by pressure grouting applied after installation.
6.1.3.7.1 Fiberglass Reinforced Cement (FRC) Liners
Fiberglass reinforced cement (FRC) liners are prefabricated thin panels designed for large
diameter (42 inches and larger) and odd shaped pipes. After the existing pipeline is
thoroughly cleaned and dewatered the segments are provided in 4 to 8 foot lengths, which
overlap at each end. The segment ends may be pre-drilled to accommodate screws or
impact nails. The segmented rings are anchored on spacers and, upon final assembly; the
section(s) are cement pressure grouted in the annulus provided. Laterals are cut in and
grouted.
This method provides flexibility to be made specially to fit any portion (e.g., invert only),
shape or size of host pipe and to accommodate variations in grade, slopes, cross-sections
and deterioration. The linings are not designed to support earth loads, therefore, the host
pipe must be structurally sound. Although the segmented sections are lightweight and
easy to handle, the installation is labor intensive and slow.
The FRC liners are normally three eighth inches thick, but can vary. They are composed
of Portland cement, fine sand and chopped, fiberglass rovings. They have high
mechanical and impact strengths and also a high strength to weight ratio. FRC is more
abrasion resistant than the concrete mix used in standard reinforced concrete pipe (RCP).
See Index 2.1.1.1.3.3.
6.1.3.7.2 Fiberglass Reinforced Plastic (FRP) Liners

Irregular Shape Examples Using FRP

89

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Invert Lining with FRP

Fiberglass reinforced plastic (FRP) liners are similar in most respects to FRC liners,
however, they are lighter weight and more resistant to chemical attack (e.g. sulfate) and
therefore provide a better corrosion barrier (when used to line steel pipes) than FRC
liners. They are also abrasion resistant with negligible absorption and permeability.
The FRP liners are normally one half inch thick, but can vary. They are composed of
thermosetting plastic resin (polyester or vinylester) and chopped, fiberglass rovings and
mostly constructed with the same materials that are used to make fiber-reinforced
polymer concrete. See Index 2.1.1.1.3.1. However, however, a sand free inner surface
made of pure resin is provided for resistance to chemical attack and abrasion resistance.
The fiberglass inner surface has a finish that is compatible with the type of resin
employed. The outer surface is treated with bonded inert sand aggregate to enhance the
adhesion to the annular space grout.
Channeline Sewer Systems (North America) Inc. offers a range of FRP segments up to 15
feet in diameter available in any shape or size.

Existing Multi-Plate Arch Before Lining

After Lining with FRP

90

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

6.1.3.8 Other Techniques

The following references summarize several important repair techniques described under
Index 5.1 . They are also included in the table of alternative repair techniques in Index
8.1.1:

5.1.1.1.3.1 Internal chemical grouting

5.1.1.1.3.2 Internal joint sealing systems and repair sleeves
5.1.1.2 & 5.1.1.2.1 Crack repairs
5.1.2.2.1 & 5.1.2.2.2 Invert paving
5.1.2.2.3 & 5.1.2.2.3.1 Steel armor plating and welded steel pipeliners

6.1.3.9 IHS Server Link

A link is available on the DES home page to search for and download various ASTM and
AASHTO specifications. The DES home page link is:
http://onramp.dot.ca.gov/hq/des/spi/

7.1 INFLUENCING FACTORS

7.1.1 Hydrology
Urbanization is the most dominant factor in modifying the calculated runoff of a
watershed. Other factors include logging and cultivation, hydraulic roughness (natural
and man-made channels), and updated rainfall data. All of these factors should be
reviewed for changes and accounted for when replacing or rehabilitating a culvert. Refer
to Topics 803 and 812 through 815 in the HDM and FHWA Culvert Repair Practices
Manual Volume 1, pages 2-1 and 2-2 for factors affecting runoff, and for Departmental
procedures for upgrading existing drainage facilities.

7.1.2 Hydraulics
Debris, if allowed to accumulate either within a culvert or at its entrance, can adversely
affect the hydraulic performance of the facility. Refer to Index 813.8, and Topic 822 in
the HDM for a discussion on Debris Control and Bulking. Vegetation, if allowed to
accumulate at the downstream end of a culvert will raise the tail water. If the culvert is
operating under inlet control, it may be better not to remove the vegetation since it will
not significantly affect the capacity and may serve to create a lower outlet velocity.
Under inlet control, the cross sectional area of the culvert, inlet geometry and elevation of
the headwater at the entrance are of primary importance. However, even though the
roughness of the culvert barrel has minimal impact to the headwater elevation, increasing
the roughness will serve to reduce velocity. On the other hand, if the culvert is operating
under outlet control, the vegetation may need to be removed since it resists flow to the
point of affecting the culvert capacity. Other factors affecting tail water include
backwater in the vicinity of a confluence downstream, and tidal influences. At these
locations, aggradation or deposited sediments may lessen channel and culvert capacity
and increase headwater depth and flood heights. Outlet control involves the additional
consideration of tail water elevation, and the slope, roughness and length of the culvert
barrel. These two types of control are important hydraulic concepts to be considered

91

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

when choosing the type of lining method or impacting entrance and/or exit conditions.
Refer to Index 825.2 in the HDM and FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume
1, pages 2-3 to 2-6 for a discussion on Culvert Flow. Outlet velocity is another factor to
be considered when relining or changing the roughness of the culvert barrel. Refer to
Topic 827 in the HDM for a discussion on Outlet Design.

7.1.3 Safety
Refer to Index 110.12 in the HDM for a discussion on safety for jacking and tunneling
and tunnel classifications in relation to potential flammable gas or vapor. Refer to Topic
309.1 in the HDM for a discussion on horizontal clearances (e.g. existing headwall and
end wall location on rural 2-lane highways). Other safety considerations will be
dependent on the scope of the rehabilitation and ADT of the highway. For example, using
a trenchless technology method to replace a culvert may result in a reduced number of
construction related traffic accidents. Workers are less exposed to traffic and there is
usually less disruption to traffic. In addition, there are fewer (but more specialized)
workers needed for most trenchless technology jobs that should enhance overall project
safety. Consideration should always be made for safety to the traveling public when
considering the ability of a deteriorated pipe to support roadway and traffic loads. See
example below and Index 11.1.1.

Sawcut CMP Invert Triggering Failure During Invert Repair

7.1.4 Environmental
Repair, rehabilitation, or retrofit projects must be developed that will balance biological,
engineering, and hydraulic considerations. Examples of this may include but not limited
to;
a) Water quality considerations for compaction grouting where groundwater may be
present.
b) Omission of certain pipe lining methods (such as water heated cured in place) in
biologically sensitive areas.
c) Chemical grouting in lieu of cementitious grouting either in large diameter pipes
to fill voids or to stop infiltration at deteriorated, leaking or open joints in small

92

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

diameter (24 inches or less) pipes. The most commonly used gel grouts for this
are of the acrylamide, acrylic, acrylate and urethane base types. Acrylamide base
gel is significantly more toxic than the others. Grout toxicities are of concern only
during handling and placement or installation, however, EPA has now withdrawn
a long-standing proposal that sought to ban the use of acrylamide grouts.
The modification of an existing culvert to facilitate the movement of fish to spawn can
introduce several problems in the operation of an installation. Culverts are generally
designed to operate under inlet control, which can be detrimental to fish passage. See the
picture below for an example where the outlet scour hole created a jump too high for fish
passage.

If a culvert is modified to operate under outlet control, or modifications are made to the
barrel, there may be a decrease in efficiency, and related increase in water depth and
sedimentation. Refer to FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 1, pages 3-58 to
3-61, 5-39 to 5-50 and Volume 2, Appendix B-23, for a discussion on fish passage and
fish passage devices. Developed in conformance with both state (California Department
of Fish and Game) and Federal (NOAA Fisheries Service, Southwest Region) criteria,
"Fish Passage Design for Road Crossings" provides worksheets, flow charts, design
examples and other design aids to assist the designer in achieving permit achievable
projects;
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/oppd/fishPassage/index.htm

7.1.5 Host Pipe Dimensions and Irregularities

When using tight fitting rehabilitation methods (i.e., no annular space between the host
pipe and the liner, e.g., cured in place or expandable machine wound PVC) in small
diameter host pipes, it is essential to inspect the existing pipe by physically entering the
pipe or with a remote controlled camera. See Index 3.1.1. It may also be necessary prior
to construction to verify dimensions and remove protrusions with the use of a proofing
pig. A pig is a bullet shaped device made of hard rubber or similar material that is pulled

93

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

through the host pipe. This technique has low mobilization costs and low to moderate
overall costs.

7.1.6 Coordination with Headquarters and Division of Engineering

Services (DES)
7.1.6.1 Headquarters Concurrence for Large Diameter Liners
Although plastic pipe and other types of liner sizes in excess of 60 inches are available
(not in all styles), any re-lining project that proposes to utilize such large diameters
should be treated as a special design and consultation with the Headquarters Office of
Highway Drainage Design within the Division of Design and the Underground Structures
unit in the Division of Structures within the Division of Engineering Services (DES) is
advised. For any plastic liner or slipliner, if the diameter exceeds 60 inches, the designer
is advised to confer with the District Hydraulics Unit and/or the Office of Highway
Drainage in Headquarters to discuss alternatives.
7.1.6.2 Geotechnical Design Assistance/Approval for Pipe Replacement using
Trenchless Excavation Construction (TEC) Methods
No proposal for the placement of a trenchless culvert installation should be made without
obtaining a recommendation from Geotechnical Design within the Division of
Engineering Services (DES) that supports the feasibility of the concept and provides
input on the type(s) of TEC method that can be considered. Recommendations must be
based on comprehensive geotechnical investigations that are summarized in the
Geotechnical Design Report.
7.1.6.3 Coordination with Geotechnical Design
Upon discovery of a problem by Maintenance or as part of a programmatic
upgrade/rehabilitation to existing facilities, an initial inspection will be conducted by
Maintenance or Design in order to identify the basic problem. For smaller diameter
pipes, as outlined under Index 3.1.1, it may be necessary to perform an inspection with a
remote controlled video camera. An inspection report will be generated which should
include any previous history of the site, if available, from Maintenance.
After the initial inspection and problem identification has been performed, a more
detailed investigation will be necessary if any of the following factors are present or
suspected:

Soil infiltration
Obvious piping
Sinkholes or significant depressions
Voids or loose soils not immediately adjacent to the culvert (i.e., beyond 12
inches)

If none of the above factors are present or suspected, the Designer should coordinate with
District Hydraulics for repair or replacement options to the culvert.
If a more detailed investigation is necessary, the Regional Geotechnical Engineer should
be contacted to determine the extent of any voids or loose soils that may exist in the

94

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

backfill material adjacent to the culvert (either via Cone Penetrometer Testing (CPT),
Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) or probing with a steel rod from inside the culvert) and
to provide a recommendation if needed.
For open sinkholes, voids over the top of the pipe, or voids beyond 12 inches from the
culvert, full detailed guidance and specifications should be requested from the
Geotechnical Engineer.
Refer to the process flow chart on the next page for a summary of coordination with
Geotechnical Design:

95

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

In cases where it is not possible to coordinate Geotechnical Investigations as outlined

above, SSP 15-6.02 includes specifications for filling voids below and around a culvert
that have been found during cleaning and inspection.

7.1.7 Maximum Push Distance for Large Diameter Flexible Pipe Liners
Any proposal to insert a liner by pushing must also consider the issue of stresses on the
face of the pipe being pushed. Pipes typically used as liners are not typically used for
jacking and as such are not designed to have large compressive force applied to the end
of the pipe. The maximum push distance is a function of weight, strength of the material,
coefficient of friction between the liner and the host pipe and area of the pushing face.
Most relatively short lengths (200-300 ft) of smooth wall liner in smaller diameters will
rarely pose a problem. It is recommended that the designer consult with a manufacturers
representative to obtain input on maximum push distance for various liner pipe diameters.
Metal Pipe
For example, using a coefficient of sliding friction equal to 1, (which is conservative) to
line an existing 96 inch diameter CMP with a 14 Gage spiral ribbed pipe, the maximum
push distance is approximately 270 feet, whereas for 12 Gage, it is approximately 400
feet. Skids are typically used to reduce the sliding friction during insertion when CMP is
used as a liner for another CMP. For metal pipe, re-rolled ends with an external band,
usually works best along with a bolt bar and strap connectors with the pieces of the
"extra" bolt cut off after first being tightened to avoid catching the host pipe during
insertion.
Another option is to use no-rolled ends with alignment tabs. If no-rolled ends are used, it
is recommended to use alignment tabs on the exterior and a flat band with flat gasket on
the interior for grouting (this should be removed after the line is grouted). This option has
the advantage of not having to jack the full length of pipe all at one time; instead each
piece (say a 20 ft length), or the maximum that can be can be inserted from one end and
slid into place (there may not be access from both ends). In addition, using shorter
individual pieces allows the flexibility of using a lighter gage. Once the pipes are in
place the internal bands are removed after grouting the annular space.
Plastic Pipe
Similar concerns would be raised with plastic pipe liners, depending upon type, size, etc.,
and can be an issue requiring either pushing the liner in from both ends of very long host
pipes and then using an internal coupling to hold the pipe ends together until the annular
space grout has cured, or using a combination of both pulling and pushing on the liner. If
it is anticipated that pulling will be used, the designer must only specify liner pipes that
have tensile strength at the joint sufficient to withstand the force of the pull. Where
tension resistance is needed, plastic pipe will be limited to types with solvent or thermally
fused joints. Generally the installation method using a backhoe shown in Index
6.1.3.1.1.6. is applicable for smaller diameter plastic pipe and does not apply to larger
diameter plastic liners.

96

DIB 83-04

8.1 GUIDELINES FOR COMPARISON

REHABILITATION TECHNIQUES

August 1, 2014

OF

ALTERNATIVE

8.1.1 Table of Alternative Repair Techniques

Following problem identification, the Engineer must determine which of the multiple
potential options for rehabilitation should be selected. There is no specific methodology
for making this determination, and in many cases several repair options will be viable. In
all cases, the key element is to first understand the conditions leading to the
failure/deterioration of the existing pipe. Unless there have been significant changes in
the upstream watershed, these conditions will likely persist and the selected repair
strategy must be able to effectively counteract these conditions.
When designing and installing any of the various techniques, it is recommended that
contact be made with suppliers, fabricators, or specialists to clearly ascertain the
probability of success. Individual techniques, different fabricators, different chemical
formulations, varying geotechnical conditions, condition of the host conduit, and
installation techniques and procedures all are influential in the ultimate outcome of the
repair technique.
Ultimately, only experience in varying situations and conditions will tell accurately what
methods have the best potential for meeting the design objectives. Caltrans continues to
evaluate new repair methods with the ultimate objective of augmenting the existing
installation specifications listed in Section 15-6 of the Standard Specifications. Refer to
Index 10.1 for a discussion on Caltrans New Product Approval process and ConstructionEvaluated Experimental Feature Program.
The following table was developed as a general guide for a comparison of alternative
repair techniques.

97

DIB 83-04

Technique
Const. Size
&
Cost Range
Materials

August 1, 2014

Problem Resolution and Advantages

Invert Repair for non-human entry pipes,
Corrosion, Abrasion, Infiltation/Exfiltration.

Sliplining
with
continuous
or discreet
pipe
lengths

Quick insertion; simple method requiring

minimal investment in installation equipment
and relatively little technical skill.
Multiple materials.
Med.

HDPE,
PVC, CSP,
RCP,
RPMP
PRC, FRC,
WSP

18
120

Provides a virtually new culvert comparable to

replacement.
Continuous HDPE pipe has very few joints and
is capable of accommodating large radius
bends.
Large range of diameters can be repaired
depending on material used.
Specialty liners are available in short lengths
and constant O.D. (no bell or coupler).
Invert Repair for non-human entry pipes,
Corrosion, Abrasion, Infiltration/Exfiltration.

Fold and
Form
PVC

Med.
to
High

< 24

Smaller construction footprint than sliplining

Easy to transport and handle.

Limitations

Need fairly large area for liner insertion/jacking

pit.
Reduces cross section area because the
annular space between the old and the new
pipe must be grouted which may reduce
hydraulic capacity
May increase velocity of flow.
The environmental concern with this technique
is the control of the low-density grout.
Labor intensive jointing for fusion welded
HDPE.
Difficult to reconnect laterals.

PVC may become brittle in freezing

temperatures.
Specialized equipment and trained personnel
needed.

Viable technique for storm drains and culverts in

Cannot accommodate diameter variations and
non-abrasive urban settings.
joint settlement.
No annular space grouting required.
Only circular shapes possible.
Capacity maximized.

98

DIB 83-04

Technique &
Materials

Const.
Size
Cost Range

No annular space grouting required.

Very smooth interior surface may improve
hydraulic- capacity. Capacity maximized.
Designer may increase thickness for abrasion.
High

12
96

Non-circular shapes can be accommodated.

No jacking pit required.
Eliminates pipe joints/seams and bridges all
joints and irregularities on the interior surface
of the host pipe.

Thermosetting
ResinImpregnated
Flexible
Fabric Tube

Crack Sealing
(RCP)
Mortar/Epoxy

Problem Resolution and Advantages

Limitations

Invert Repair for non-human entry pipes,

Corrosion, Abrasion,
Infiltration/Exfiltration.

Cured in
Place Pipe
(CIPP)

External
Grouting
voids
(Index 6.1.2)

August 1, 2014

Easy to transport and handle.

Good technique for storm drains; can access
through MH or DI and can accommodate
variations in cross section, minor pipe
deformations and bends of up to 90 degrees.

Specialized equipment and trained personnel

needed.
Site setup high proportion of cost on smaller
projects.
Resource Agency concerns for disposal of
process water:
Process water must be recaptured and
trucked off site to a prearranged disposal site
or held to allow for styrene volitization.
Lateral connections are easily handled but
may require sealing after they have been cut.

Voids Behind Culvert

Low

All
sizes

Prevents further distortion or collapse of

culvert by re-establishing soil-pipe interaction.
Cracks in RCP

Low

> 36

Void detection methods are limited

Difficult to judge completeness of repair.

Low resource commitment.

May be only a cosmetic repair if basic cause

of the cracking is not determined and treated.

Protects reinforcing.

Requires human entry.

99

DIB 83-04

Technique
& Materials
Invert
Lining:
with PCC,
Calcium
Aluminate
Concrete/
Mortar or
Geopolymer
Mortar
CRSP
Internal
Joint
Sealing
Steel
Expansion
Rings and
Rubber
Gaskets

Deform Reform
HDPE

Const. Size
Cost Range
Med.
to
High

August 1, 2014

Problem Resolution and Advantages

Invert Repair for Concrete and Metal Pipe

> 42

Abrasion resistant concrete and/or hard

aggregate/or steel plate provides abrasion
resistance.
Can easily modify thickness to meet needs.

> 72
High

Limited to bottom third of pipe

Simple method requiring minimal investment in
installation equipment and relatively little
technical skill. If invert perforation is present,
same equipment can be used for invert paving.

Limitations
Human entry only.
Cement is subject to break down if runoff is
acidic and concrete mix design is not modified.
May be difficult to attach wire mesh
reinforcement or provide mechanical tie to host
pipe.
Ventilation needed for welding
Concrete pump limitations (i.e., max aggregate
size and pumping distance)

Infiltration/Exfiltration at Joints

Low

Med.
to
High

24
108

18
30

Low resource commitment.

Prevents further deterioration due to infiltration
or exfiltration and loss of backfill.

More applicable to RCP than flexible pipe. If

used on CMP or plastic, pipe must not be
deflected beyond 10%.
Generally, pipe must be large enough for
human entry.

Invert Repair for non-human entry pipes,

Corrosion, Abrasion, Infiltration/Exfiltration.

As of this writing, the availability of this product

in the U.S.A. is extremely limited.

Smaller construction footprint than sliplining.

Specialized equipment and trained personnel

needed.

Easy to transport and handle.

Viable technique for storm drains and culverts.
No annular space grouting required.
Capacity maximized

Only circular shapes possible. Cannot

accommodate diameter variations and joint
settlement.
Range of available pipe diameters is limited.

100

DIB 83-04

Technique
& Materials

Const.
Cost

Size
Range

August 1, 2014

Problem Resolution and Advantages

Invert Repair for non-human entry pipes,
Corrosion, Infiltration/Exfiltration.

<108
Machine
Spiral
Wound PVC

Air Placed
Concrete
and Sprayed
Epoxy or
Polyurethane
Lining

High

(< 42 for
radially
expanded
method)

Smaller construction footprint than sliplining

and other methods because liner is formed
on site and no pipe storage is necessary.
Easy to transport and handle.
Viable technique for storm drains and most
culverts.
Can access through MH or DI.
Annular space grouting not needed for
radially expanded method.
Large range of diameters and shapes can be
selected within the range of the winding
machine including boxes and arches.

Limitations

May become brittle upon freezing.

Continuous interlocking joint system can be
problematic if the host pipe diameter
fluctuates.
Specialized equipment and trained personnel
needed.
Reduction in hydraulic capacity can be
significant for smaller diameter host pipes.
Annular space grouting required for some
spiral wound methods.
Not recommended in abrasive environments.

Drainage Structure Rehabilitation

High

N/A

Will provide a corrosion barrier to reinforcing

steel for concrete drainage inlets and
manholes.
May be used to make concrete drainage
structures watertight.

Epoxy and polyurethane limited to concrete

drainage structures.
Specialized equipment and trained personnel
needed.

101

DIB 83-04

Technique
& Materials
Cementitious
Pipeliners

Cementitious
Mortar,
Calcium
Aluminate or
Geopolymer
Mortar

Const. Size
Cost Range
Med.

12
36

August 1, 2014

Problem Resolution and Advantages

Limitations

Invert Repair for non-human entry pipes,

Corrosion, Abrasion, Infiltration/Exfiltration.

Specialized equipment and trained personnel

needed.

Cement in concrete prevents or significantly

retards the oxidation of the interior base metal
(rust) of CSP

Cement is subject to break down if runoff is

acidic and/or contains sulfates and mix design
is not appropriate. See HDM Table 854.1A.

Can accommodate bends and imperfections in

host pipe

Cement mortar lining is not abrasion resistant.

Smooth interior surface may improve hydraulic

characteristics by reducing roughness
coefficient.

High

Lateral connections are easily handled

Man-Entry
Lining with
Pipe
Segments
FRP, FRC,
HDPE, PVC

Invert Repair for Large Diameter Pipes,

Corrosion, Infiltration/Exfiltration.
High

42
198

Can be manufactured in virtually any shape

and length.

Installation is labor intensive and slow.

Restraint system may be required during
grouting.

Lightweight and easy to handle.

Option for invert lining only.
Sections easily cut to form connections.

102

DIB 83-04

Technique
& Materials

Const.
Cost

Size
Range

Problem Resolution and Advantages

Infiltration/Exfiltration at Joints

Internal
Chemical
Grouting
(joints)
Acrylamide
Gel,
Polyurethane
Foam,
Urethane
Gel, Acrylic
Gel, and
Acrylate Gel

August 1, 2014

Robotic sealing packer used to access small

diameter pipes.
Can be used to stop severe infiltration prior to
other repairs.
High

< 24

Limitations
20 years or less service life. Quality control
difficult.
Acrylic gels limited for use in systems under
the groundwater table. Success may depend
on soil and moisture variability. Formulating
the correct mixture may be dependent on trial
and error on a case-by-case basis, rather
than scientific principles. If conditions
change, the grout may shrink. Grouting
cannot be used for joints that are severely
offset. It is also inappropriate for longitudinal
cracks and severe circular cracks.
Specialized equipment and trained personnel
needed.

Invert Repair for Concrete and Metal Pipe

Invert steel
Armor
Plating

High

> 48

Provides abrasion resistance.

Can easily modify thickness to meet needs.

Difficult to attach to RCP or plastic.

Limited to bottom third of pipe.

Infiltration at Joints
Stainless
Steel or PVC
Repair
Sleeve with
Expanding
Polyurethane
Grout

Low

1854 Remote installation for small diameter pipes.

(Stainless Can be used to stop severe infiltration prior to
other repairs.
Steel)
Large range of diameters can be repaired.
18108 Available in 18, 24 and 36 individual
(PVC)
lengths, which may be connected if, needed.

Local repairs only

Can be used to repair deformed flexible pipe.

103

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

8.1.1.2 Failing Culvert Solutions Summary

The following table is a summary of failing culvert solutions based on host pipe size,
ADT and cover. When there is a combination of low ADT and shallow cover, open cut
dig-and-replace should always be the first option considered. The opposite is true for high
ADT (i.e., freeways) and/or deep fill.

The following references provide some additional guidelines for comparison of

alternative techniques:
FHWA Culvert Restoration Techniques Report No. FHWA/CA/TL-93-14, Part I (7)
Guidelines for Comparison of Alternative Techniques.
FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 1, Chapter 6, pages 6-3 and 6-4 and
Chapter 7, page 7-24.

8.1.2 Process Flow Charts

For guidance on the overall process for analyzing problems and solutions in conjunction
with the Table of alternative repair techniques that are summarized in Index 8.1.1, see
FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 1, Chapter 3, Figures 3.2, 3.3, 3.4 and
Table 3.1 on pages 3-9, 3-10, 3-12 and 3-15:

Analysis of problems and solutions. Overall process

104

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Determining the Cause and the Type of Problem

Process for Analysis of Potential Solutions

Summary of Information on Alternatives

9.1 REPLACEMENT
9.1.1 Repair Verses Replacement
Refer to FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 1, Chapter 7, pages 7-27.
Choosing whether to repair or replace the deficient culvert depends upon several
considerations:

The condition of the culvert and its suitability to repair or rehabilitation

Current and future loading conditions in the area and for the roadway served by
the culvert.
Alignment and other physical factors related to the culvert. Significantly changed
(or planned) roadway geometry or embankment depths may indicate a culvert
replacement rather than a simple repair. Conversely, for relatively short culverts
with smaller diameters under shallow cover on rural highways with low ADT, it
may be more cost-effective to replace.
Ability to conform to current standards.
Availability of funding, fabrication, construction expertise of local contractors, or
construction capabilities of maintenance forces.
User costs and out-of-service costs during either repair or replacement.
Environmental demands or aesthetic considerations.

Certainly, the choice between repair and replacement should be based upon a
consideration of all of the factors. A simple, arbitrary, and un-researched blanket
decision should be avoided. The costs of repair and continued operation versus the costs
and ultimate operation of a replacement culvert may be significant and the alternative
should be chosen with this significance in mind. A worksheet similar to Table 7.6 in
FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 1, Chapter 7, page 7-27 is suggested as
a systematic approach to deciding whether to repair or replace. As previously discussed
under the Caltrans host pipe structural philosophy (see Index 6.1.1), if the host pipe is
not capable, or being made capable of sustaining design loads, it should be replaced
rather than repaired.

9.1.2 Replacement Systems

If the decision has been made that replacement will provide the most satisfactory solution
to the problems being encountered at the culvert site, various replacement methods can be
considered.
For some large culvert replacements, options may include consideration of bridge
construction. However, for most locations replacement will consist of installing a new
culvert.
Generally, the culvert replacement will fall under the categories of

105

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

open trench construction, or

trenchless construction.

9.1.2.1 Open Cut (Trench) Method

The open cut trench method is the most commonly used method for replacing a culvert.
The general procedure is to excavate a trench and remove the existing culvert, prepare the
appropriate bedding for the new culvert, install the new culvert and fill the trench around
the pipe with either slurry/flowable type material or with compacted lifts of soil. The
pavement is then patched to reasonable limits beyond the edge of the pipe trench. For
detailed guidelines for installing culverts in a trench, see Caltrans Standard Plans A62D,
A62DA, A62E, A62F, Sections 19 and 61 through 67 of the Standard Specifications,
Chapter 850 of the HDM, and Section 2 of this D.I.B. for physical standards. Also see
appropriate Standard Special Provisions (SSPs). Controlled low-strength material
(CLSM) is described Section 19-3.03I of the Standard Specifications and in FHWA
Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 1, Chapter 7, page 7-34 and Slurry Cement
backfill is described in Section 19-3.03F of the Standard Specifications. A memo dated
9/27/01 by Caltrans Corrosion Technology Unit recommended allowance of placing both
slurry and CLSM as backfills with both aluminum and aluminized (type 2) pipe.

Open Trench Construction Mrn-1 PM 11.0 Webb Creek

The flow chart under Index 2.1.1 outlines the general thought process and factors
involved in determining which type of material to select for replacement using the open
cut (trench) method.
HDM Index 857.2 provides general guidelines for alternative pipe culvert selection using
the AltPipe web based tool that is located on the Headquarters Division of Design
alternative pipe culvert selection website at the following web address:
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/oppd/altpipe.htm.
9.1.2.2 Trenchless Excavation Construction (TEC) Methods
Trenchless excavation construction (TEC) methods include all methods of installing
culverts below grade without direct installation into an open-cut trench. To date, the
majority of trenchless work for the department has been accomplished by utility owners
through the permit process with the design and construction responsibilities and liability
placed on the utility owner. However, for culvert replacement, trenchless excavation is
usually a preferred option over open trench construction when very high roadway fills

106

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

and/or high traffic volumes exist without the availability of a reasonable detour route. No
one method is suitable for all types of soil and site conditions. The selection of
compatible methods is site specific and highly dependent on subsurface conditions. In
addition to adequate specifications and guidelines for contractors to follow, a thorough
soils investigation and an accurate underground utility location plan are critical for
minimizing subsequent construction problems and claims. At the present time, there are
no standard specifications or standard special provisions developed for most of the TEC
methods presented herein. The following link provides non-standard special provisions
(nSSPs) for pipe jacking, RCB jacking, augur boring and pipe ramming:
http://onramp.dot.ca.gov/hq/design/drainage/index.php
When used in a PS & E and submitting to Office Engineer, the designer must request
approval/sponsorship from the Chief, Office of Highway Drainage Design within the
Division of Design.
Per Index 7.1.6.2, no proposal for the placement of a trenchless culvert installation should
be made without obtaining a recommendation from Geotechnical Design based on
comprehensive geotechnical investigations that are summarized in the Geotechnical
Design Report. The importance of early communication with the Geotechnical Design
specialist from the Division of Engineering Services (DES) cannot be over-emphasized.
In summary, prior to including any of the above-referenced nSSPs in a project, the
designer must:

Request a geotechnical Design Report with a minimum of two borings for pipe
jacking and recommendation for type of pipe jacking (pipe jacking, auger boring
or pipe ramming)
Select pipe materials based on fill height (coordinate with underground structures
within DES if needed and use Standard Plans for RCP)
Use and edit the above-referenced nSSPs accordingly
Request approval/sponsorship for nSSP(s) from the Chief, Office of Highway
Drainage Design within the Division of Design prior to O.E. submittal.

Occasionally, for major projects involving trenchless technology, depending on

complexity, it may be more efficient to use a consultant where in-house expertise is not
available for planning and design.
These guidelines go beyond the Encroachment Permit Manual tunneling requirements,
which the designer should also be familiar with.
For a description of the various trenchless excavation construction (TEC) techniques, see
FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual Volume 1, Chapter 7, pages 7-38 through 7-45.
The following tables were copied with permission from NCHRP Synthesis of Highway
Practice 242 (Iseley, T. and S.B. Gokhale):Trenchless Installation of Conduits Beneath
Roadways, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington,
D.C., 1997, and supplement the TEC information given in FHWA Culvert Repair
Practices Manual Volume 1, Chapter 7, pages 7-38 through 7-45:

107

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

* New Austrian tunneling method is shotcrete-supported tunneling

108

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

DESCRIPTION OF TRENCHLESS CONSTRUCTION METHODS

Method Type

Method Description

I. Techniques Not Requiring Personnel EntryHorizontal Earth Boring (HEB)

Auger Boring (AB)

A technique that forms a borehole from a drive shaft to a reception shaft

by means of a rotating cutting head. Spoil is transported back to the drive
shaft by helical wound auger flights rotating inside of steel casing that is
being jacked in place simultaneously. AB may provide limited tracking
and steering capability. It does not provide continuous support to the
excavation face. AB is typically a 2-stage process (i.e. casing installation
and product pipe installation).

Slurry Boring (SB)

A technique that forms a borehole from a drive shaft to a reception shaft

by means of a drill bit and drill tubing (stem). A drilling fluid (i.e.
bentonite slurry, water, or air pressure) is used to facilitate the drilling
process by keeping the drill bit clean and aiding with spoils removal. It
is a 2-stage process. Typically, an unsupported horizontal hole is
produced in the first stage. The pipe is installed in the second stage.

Microtunneling (MT)

A remotely controlled, guided pipe-jacking process that provides

continuous support to the excavation face. The guidance system usually
consists of a laser mounted in the drive shaft communicating a reference
line to a target mounted inside the MT machines articulated steering
head. The MT process provides ability to control excavation fact
stability by applying mechanical or fluid pressure to counterbalance the
earth and hydrostatic pressures.

Pipe Ramming (PR)

A technique for installing steel casings from a drive shaft to a reception

shaft utilizing the dynamic energy from a percussion hammer attached to
the end of the pipe. A continuous casing support is provided and over
excavation or water is not required. This is a 2-stage process.

Soil Compaction (SC)

This method consists of several techniques for forming a borehole by insitu soil displacement using a compacting device. The compacting
device is forced through the soil, typically from a drive shaft to a
reception shaft, by applying a static thrust force, rotary force and/or
dynamic impact energy. The soil along the alignment is simply
displaced rather than being removed. This is a 2-stage process.

II. Techniques Requiring Personnel Entry

Pipe Jacking (PJ)

A pipe is jacked horizontally through the ground from the drive shaft to
the reception shaft. People are required inside the pipe to perform the
excavation and./or spoil removal. The excavation can be accomplished
manually or mechanically.

Utility Tunneling
(UT)

A 2-stage process in which a temporary ground support system is

constructed to permit the installation of a product pipe. The temporary
tunnel liner is installed as the tunnel is constructed. The temporary
ground support system can be steel or concrete tunnel liner plates, steel
ribs with wood lagging, or an all-wood box culvert. People are required
inside the tunnel to perform the excavation and/or spoil removal. The
excavation can be accomplished manually or mechanically.

109

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

CHARACTERISTICS OF TRENCHLESS CONSTRUCTION METHODS

Typea

Pipe/Casing
Installation
Mode

Suitableb
Pipe/casing

Soil
Excavation
Mode

Soil Removal
Mode

AB

Jacking

Steel

Mechanical

Auguring

SB

Pulling/Pushing

All types

Mechanical
and Hydraulic

Hydraulic,
Mechanical Reaming
and Compaction

MT

Jacking

Steel, RCP,
GFRP, PCP,
VCP, DIP

Mechanical

Auguring or Hydraulic
(Slurry)

PR

Hammering /
Driving

Steel

Mechanical

Auguring, Hydraulic,
Compressed Air, or
Compaction

SC

Pulling

Steel, PVC,
HDPE

Pushing

Displacement (in-situ)

PJ

Jacking

Steel, RCP,
GFRP

Manual or
Mechanical

Augers, Conveyors,
Manual Carts, Power
Carts, or Hydraulic

Lining

Steel or Concrete
Liner Plates, Ribs
w/Wood Lagging,
Wood Box

Manual or
Mechanical

Augers, Conveyors,
Manual Carts, Power
Carts, or Hydraulic

UT

ABAuger Boring; SBSlurry Boring; MTMicrotunneling; PRPipe Ramming; SC

Soil Compaction;PJPipe Jacking; UTUtility Tunneling.

SteelSteel Casing Pipe, RCPReinforced Concrete Pipe, GFRPGlass-Fiber

Reinforced Plastic Pipe, PCPPolymer Concrete Pipe, VCPVitrified Clay Pipe,
DIPDuctile Iron Pipe, PVCPolyvinyl Chloride Pipe, HDPEHigh Density
Polyethylene Pipe.
FACTORS AFFECTING THE SELECTION AND USE OF TRENCHLESS
TECHNOLOGY (TT) ALTERNATIVES
Factors

Description

Diameter of
Drive

Need to identify which methods are suitable to install the pipe required
for the drive from project scope. As the diameter increases, the
complexity and risks associated with the project also increase. Some
methods are unsuitable for some diameters.

Length of
Drive

Need to identify which methods are suitable for installing the pipe for
the drive lengths required by the project scope. As the length increases,
the complexity and risks associated with the project also increases.
Length of drive may rule out certain methods or result in cost penalties
for mobilization for short distances.

110

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

FACTORS AFFECTING THE SELECTION AND USE OF TRENCHLESS

TECHNOLOGY (TT) ALTERNATIVES - CONTINUED
Factors
Abandonment

Description
Under what conditions should the work be stopped and the line
abandoned. What will be the abandonment procedures?

Need to determine location of all existing underground utilities

and underground structures so that the likelihood of obstruction
Existing Underground
or damage can be addressed for each TT alternative. Actions
Utilities
need to avoid obstruction should be identified for each
prospective method.
The likelihood of ground movement caused by the proposed TT
alternatives should be evaluated. A possibility of heaving the
Existing Above Ground
roadway of causing ground subsidence should be evaluated. The
Structures
parameters to be monitored to ensure minimum effect on
adjoining structures must be identified.

Obstructions

The likelihood of encountering obstructions (either naturally

occurring or manmade) should be evaluated. The proposed
equipment must be able to handle the anticipated obstruction.
For example, some techniques might permit steering around or
crushing obstacles up to a certain size.

Casing

Is a casing pipe required? Or can a product pipe be installed

directly? If a casing pipe is required, does the annular space
between the product pipe and the casing pipes need to be filled?
If so, with what materials? Does the casing pipe need to have
internal and/or external coatings? What distance should the
casing extend beyond the pavement edge?

Soil Conditions

Need to accurately determine the actual soil conditions at the

site. Is the proposed TT equipment compatible with the
anticipated soil conditions? Where is the water table? Can the
equipment function in unstable ground conditions? Or, will the
soil conditions need to be stabilized prior to the trenchless
process being employed? If so, how? For example, will the soil
need to be dewatered? Is dewatering reasonable at the specified
project site? Are contaminated soils or groundwater anticipated?
What is the likelihood of ground heaving or settlement? Need to
establish allowable limits for ground movement and need to
determine how ground movement will be measured.

111

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

FACTORS AFFECTING THE SELECTION AND USE OF TRENCHLESS

TECHNOLOGY (TT) ALTERNATIVES - CONTINUED
Factors

Description

Drive/Reception
Shafts

Need to make sure adequate space is available at the project site

to provide the required space for the shafts. The working room
available may limit the length of pipe segments that can be
handled. For example, 40 ft steel pipe segments will minimize
field-welding time and may be desirable from a construction
perspective, but may not be achievable due to site constraints.
These constraints need to be identified early in the process.

Accuracy

Need to determine alignment and grade tolerance desired for the

installation. Typically, the tighter the tolerance, the higher the
cost of installation will be. How will this level of accuracy be
measured?

Steer ability

What level of sophistication is needed to track the leading edge

of the cutting head and being able to steer it? If the system gets
off line and grade, what limits need to be placed on corrections
to prevent overstressing the drill stem or pipe.

Bulkheads

Bulkheads are used to provide end seals between the casing and
product pipe. Need to determine if they should be required. If
so, what should they be made of?

Materials

Need to determine what materials the casing and product pipe

should be (i.e., Steel, RCP, PVC, GFRP, HDPE, etc.) and joint
requirements. Selection must be based on use, environmental
conditions, and compatibility with the trenchless method.

Ventilation/Lighting

Under what conditions will ventilation and/or lighting be

required. How will adequate ventilation and/or lighting be
determined?

How and who will determine the measurement by which the

Measurement/Payment contractor will be compensated? What are the conditions of
payment?

Submittals

What information is going to be required for the contractor to

supply? Who will receive the submittal information? What are
the qualifications of the reviewers? What are the construction
risks and who will accept these risks (contractor or owner)?

112

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

OVERVIEW OF TRENCHLESS METHODS

Method

Primary
Applications

Range of Applications
Depth

Length

Diameter

Type of Pipe

Accuracy

Auger Boring (AB)

Crossings (All types)

Varies

40-500 ft

8-60 in

Steel

Medium

Microtunneling (MT)

Sewer Installations

Varies

80-750+ ft

10 in-10+ft

Steel. RCP,
Fiberglass, GFRP,
DI, VCP, PVC

High

Maxi & Midi

Horizontal
Directional Drilling

Pressure lines, water,

gas, cable

<160 ft

400-6000 ft

3-54 in

Steel, HDPE

Medium

Mini-Horizontal
Directional Drilling
(Mini-HDD)

Pressure lines, water,

gas, cable

<50 ft with
walkover
system

40-600 ft

2-14 in

Small diameter
steel pipe, HDPE,
DI, PVC, Copper
service lines,
cable

Medium

Pipe Ramming

Crossings

Varies

40->300 ft

4-138 in

Steel

Low

Pipe Jacking (PJ)

Sewers, Pressure
Lines, Crossings

Varies

No theoretical
limit - 1600 ft
spans
achieved

42-120 in

RCP, Steel, Fiber

glass

High

Utility Tunneling

Sewers, Pressure
lines, Crossings

Varies

No theoretical
limit

> 42 in

Cold formed steel

plates, pre-cast
concrete
segments

High

113

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

OVERVIEW OF TRENCHLESS METHODS (cont.)

Method

Working Space
Required

Compatible Soil
Type

Augur
Boring (AB)

Entry & Exit bore

pits. Length 26-36 ft
Width 8-12 ft. Room
for storing augers,
casing etc.

Horizontal
Directional
Drilling
(HDD)
MiniHorizontal
Directional
Drilling
(Mini-HDD)

Pipe
Ramming

Operator Skill
Requirements

Chief Limitations

Variety of soils
conditions (see Table 9)

High

High capital cost for equipment, high

set-up cost (bore pits); cannot be
used in wet runny sands, soil with
large boulders.

Access pits not

required. Space for
set up of rig and
drilling fluid tank:
400 ft x 200 ft

Clay is ideal.
Cohesionless sand and
silt require bentonite.
Gravel and cobbles are
unsuitable.

High degree of knowledge

of downhole drilling,
sensing and recording.
Training essential.

Requires very high degree of

operator skill. Not suitable for high
degree of accuracy such as gravity
sewer application. Can install only
pipes with high tensile strength e.g.,
steel, HDPE.

Equipment is
portable and selfcontained. Requires
minimal area.

Soft soils, clay and

sand. Unsuitable for
rocks and gravel.

Same as HDD

Accuracy dependent on range of the

electromagnetic receiver < 50 ft

Fair skill & knowledge

required to determine
initial alignment, make
decisions on open or
close faced bore,
lubrication requirements,
etc.

Limited control over line and grade. A

large piece of rock or boulder can
easily deflect pipe from design path.
Pipe has tendency to drop and/or
come up to the surface. For larger
pipe diameters equipment cost
increases substantially. Specialized
operation requiring great deal of
planning and coordination. High
capital cost.

Function of pipe
size. Pit sizes vary
from 10-35 ft

Almost all soil types.

Earthen plug formed at
the leading edge of
casing preventing soil
flowing into pipe.

114

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

OVERVIEW OF TRENCHLESS METHODS (cont.)

Method

Working Space
Required

Compatible Soil
Type

Operator Skill
Requirements

Chief Limitations

Microtunneling
(MT)

Primary Jacking
Pit: 13 ft long, 10 ft
wide, smaller
retrieval pit, room
for slurry tanks,
pipe storage.

Variety of soil
conditions including
full-face rock and high
groundwater head.

High to operate
sophisticated equipment

High capital cost and set-up

costs, obstructions.

Pipe Jacking

Jacking pit is a
function of pipe
size. Pit sizes vary
from 10-30 ft

Stable granular and

cohesive soils are
best. Unstable sand is
least favorable. Large
boulders cause
frequent work
stoppage. Method can
be executed with any
ground condition with
adequate precautions.

This is a specialized
operation requiring a
great deal of skill and
training. Line & grade
tolerances are usually
very tight and corrective
actions can be very
expensive.

Specialized operation requiring

great deal of planning and
coordination. High capital cost.

Utility
Tunneling

Smaller surface
area as compared
to PJ due to
compactness of
the liner system.
Access pit size
varies from 9 to 25
ft.

Same as PJ

High capital and set-up cost.

Carrier pipe is required to carry
the utility and the space between
the carrier pipe and liner has to be
grouted to provide adequate
support unless a permanent lining
system is used.

Same as PJ

115

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

APPLICABILITY OF TRENCHLESS TECHNIQUES IN VARIOUS SOIL CONDITIONS

Soil Type
Soil and
Groundwater

N Value (Standard Penetration

Value as per ASTMD 1452)

Applications

Auger Boring (AB)

Cohesive Soils (Clay)

N<5
(soft)

N<10-30
(loose)

N=10-30
(medium)

N>30
(dense)

High
Ground
Water

Boulders

Full-Face
Rock

<33%1

<12ksi

N=5-15
N>15
(firm) (stiff-hard)

Cohesionless Soils (sand/silt)

Microtunneling (MT)

<33%

<30ksi

Maxi/Midi-Horizontal Directional
Drilling (HDD)

<15ksi

Mini-Horizontal Directional
Drilling (Mini-HDD)

Impact Moling/Soil Displacement

Pipe Ramming

<90%

<30ksi

<95%

W/ TBM

<30ksi

W/ Hand Mining (HM)

<95%

Pipe Jacking (PJ)

W/ TBM
W/ Hand Mining (HM)
Utility Tunneling (UT)

*: Recommended

: Possible

x: Unsuitable

(This table is based on the assumption that experienced operators using proper equipment perform work)
1

Size of largest boulder versus minimum casing diameter ()

Ground conditions may require either a closed face, earth pressure balance, or slurry shield.

116

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

9.1.2.2.1 Pipe Jacking

Pipe jacking is a trenchless method for installing a pipe through the ground from a drive
shaft to a reception shaft. The pipe is propelled by jacks located in the drive shaft. The
jacking force is transmitted through the pipe to the face of the pipe jacking excavation.
The pipe jacking method may be used to install reinforced concrete or steel pipe with
diameters ranging from as low as 18 inches to as great as 132 inches. However, both
excavation and spoil removal processes usually require workers inside the pipe during the
jacking operation. Therefore the minimum recommended diameter is 42 inches in order
for workers to have access through the pipe to the leading end. This method is widely
used, particularly where deep excavations are necessary or where conventional open
excavation and backfill methods may not be feasible.
During the jacking process, soil is removed either mechanically or manually from the
leading end of the pipe. Either an auger or conveyor can be used to transport the
excavated material back to the jacking pit. See pictures below:

Once the jacking process is started, it typically is specified that the process be continued
uninterrupted until completion so as to keep the pipe from "freezing" in place. Lubricants
often are applied to the exterior of the pipe to be jacked to reduce frictional resistance.
Two types of loads are imposed on pipe installed by the jacking method:

the axial load due to the hydraulic jacks,

and earth loading due to overburden. This vertical load generally becomes
effective only after the installation is complete.

117

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

The axial or thrust jacking loads are transmitted from one pipe section to another through
the joint surfaces. It is essential that the pipe ends are parallel so that there will be a
relatively uniform distribution of forces around the periphery of the pipe. Specifying a
higher class of pipe provides little or no gain in axial crushing resistance.
As with any trenchless excavation construction method, the feasibility of pipe jacking for
a given site must be established before construction through exploratory soil borings or
other information relating to the composition of the soil likely to be encountered. Pipe
jacking requires that the soil be relatively uniform in composition and free from large
boulders or rock outcroppings.
The local variations in pressure on the leading section can result in damage to the culvert
sections, misalignment, and voids in the fill. Similarly, jacking through groundwater
bearing strata may present difficulties, especially in sandy soils as the saturated soil may
flow into the pipe. This can lead to reduced soil densities above and around the pipe.

RCP Pipe Jacking Example

For long pipelines and culverts, it may be necessary to establish intermediate-jacking

stations, so that predetermined jacking force limitations will not be exceeded. The
location of intermediate jacking pits is decided after consideration of several factors.
Since a primary advantage of this method is the elimination of traffic impacts,
intermediate jacking pits also should be located to minimize traffic disturbance. Storage
of materials and equipment is also a concern and may require temporary guardrail or
traffic barrier to shield traffic from the site. Diversion of stream or overland flow will
also be necessary to prevent flooding of the jacking pit.
During the jacking procedure, care should be given to personnel safety. Hydraulic jacks
that can cause breakage of materials exert heavy pressures. Hydraulic hose lines also
may rupture and cause injury.

118

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

A typical equipment setup for jacking concrete pipe is as shown schematically above.
9.1.2.2.1.1 Auger Boring
Smaller diameter bores than pipe jacking may be accomplished using auger boring (8 in.
to 60in.). This method involves simultaneously jacking a welded steel pipe casing while
removing the spoil inside with a continuous rotating flight auger. The major components
include a track system, jacking machine, casing pipe, cutting head and augers. Besides
using the casing itself as a trenchless culvert replacement, this method is used when
encasements are required for utility crossings by others. The annular space between the
carrier pipe and casing may or may not be grouted. More information is provided in
Chapter 600, Index 623.1A of Caltrans Permits Manual:
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/traffops/developserv/permits/pdf/manual/Chapter_6.pdf

Auger Boring 24 in. x 130 LF (0.5 in. Casing) Under Sut-99-PM 26.6/37.4
Jacking Pit 36 LF x 12 LF, Receiving Pit 12 LF x 8 LF (Approx 3 ft Deep)

9.1.2.2.2 Pipe Ramming

A variation on pipe jacking is noted in a process called pipe ramming involving a steampowered hammer (much like a pile driver) instead of a pneumatic jack. Because of the
energy involved with each blow, a mandrel must precede the driven pipe. Similar to the
jacking process, the hammering process requires the removal of displaced soil and
material as the pipe moves into the embankment.

119

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Pipe Ramming Under U.S. 50 Near Rancho Cordova, CA

A viable alternative to using RCP or steel pipe for pipe jacking is fiber reinforced
polymer concrete pipe (FRPC) or reinforced polymer mortar (RPMP), which is about a
third of the weight per foot of precast RCP. See FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual
Volume 1, page 2-27 and Index 2.1.1.1.3.1 of this D.I.B.
It should be noted that jacking flexible pipes such as Corrugated Metal Pipe usually
requires a larger diameter and stiffer pipe material (casing) to be jacked. Other reasons
for requiring encasement may include:

To avoid future roadway excavation for repair, and

To ensure the structural integrity of the roadbed and pipe.
9.1.2.2.3 Microtunneling

No universally accepted definition for microtunneling (MT) exists. However, MT can be

described as a remotely controlled, guided pipe jacking process that provides continuous
support to the excavation face. MT is a trenchless construction method for installing
culverts beneath roadways in a wide range of soil conditions while maintaining close
tolerances to line and grade from the drive shaft to a reception shaft. The most common
way to categorize MT is by the spoil removal system (i.e., slurry or auger). A slurry
system is more capable of handling wet, unstable ground conditions. Both augur and
slurry MT systems have five independent systems:

Microtunneling boring machine

120

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Jacking or propulsion system

Spoil removal system
Laser guidance and remote control system; and
Pipe lubrication system

The most common materials used for MT are RCP, ductile iron, welded steel, and fiber
reinforced polymer concrete pipe (FRPC) or reinforced polymer mortar (RPMP). The
range in diameter experienced in the U.S. is from 12 inches to 144 inches, however, the
most common range is from 24 inches to 48 inches.
Settlements typically associated with microtunneling, or other tunnel construction
methods, include two types: large settlements and systematic settlements. Large
settlements occur primarily as a result of over excavation by the tunneling or
microtunneling machine leading to the loss of stability at the face and the creation of
voids above the installed pipe or tunnel. Large settlements are almost always the result of
improper operation of the machine, or sudden unexpected changes in ground conditions.
Large settlements must be avoided through geotechnical investigation and good
workmanship by the Contractor. The importance of a skilled and experienced machine
operator cannot be over-emphasized.
Systematic settlements are primarily caused by the collapse of the overcut, or annular
space, between the jacking pipe and the excavation, and to a lesser extent by elastic
deformations of the soil ahead of the advancing tunnel. The overcut is necessary in
microtunneling and pipe jacking to allow lubrication to be injected, to decrease jacking
forces to reasonable levels, and to facilitate steering of the microtunnel boring machine
(MTBM). During tunneling, or after the tunnel is completed, the soil may collapse or
squeeze onto the pipe, resulting in settlements at the surface. Systematic settlements can
be controlled by limiting the radial overcut the contractor is allowed to use, as well as
filling the annulus with bentonite lubricant during tunneling, and with cement grout after
tunneling is completed. Systematic settlements generally decrease with distance above
the crown of the pipe and with lateral distance from the centerline of the pipe. Systematic
settlements decrease as the annular overcut decreases, and as soil consistency (density,
stiffness) increases. Systematic settlements also decrease as pipe diameter decreases. See
Index 9.1.2.3, settlement monitoring, under other consideration for TEC.
For machine tunneling with steel or concrete segments used as temporary supports, an
overcut or gap is created between the excavated bore and the support ring outside
diameter as the supports are erected and bolted into place inside the tail of the shield.
The tunnel boring machine (TBM) is propelled off the previously installed supports, and
as the support ring exits the shield, a gap is created. For segmental steel or concrete
rings, the ring can be expanded against the soil surrounding the bore as the rings exit the
shield. In this case, a special spacer segment is used to fill the gap in the circumference
created by the expansion of the rings against the soil. The remaining gap is then grouted.

121

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Jacking Pit for 48 inches RCP Microtunneling Project Under American River, Sacramento

9.1.2.2.4 Pipe Bursting and Pipe Splitting

Pipe Bursting (for brittle materials) and Pipe Splitting (for ductile materials) are
processes in which the trenchless pipe replacement is carried out by pulling a new pipe
(typically fusion welded HDPE) behind a cone ended bursting tool. The bursting tool is
pneumatically or hydraulically driven and effectively hammers its way through the host
pipe, displacing the fragments into the surrounding soil, while simultaneously pulling the
new pipe into place behind it. Pipe Bursting is the only trenchless method that allows for
the upsizing of the original pipe
Pipe bursting can be used on almost any type of existing pipe except ductile iron or
heavily reinforced concrete. Segmental replacement pipe can be used in lieu of fused
pipe, but requires jacking equipment to force it in behind the bursting unit. Currently the
applicable size range is limited to between 2-54 inches, with larger units becoming
available. The typical length of pipe replaced by pipe bursting is slightly over 330 feet,
but greater lengths have been done. In addition, depth, soil conditions, peripheral utilities
and service connections will dictate whether pipe bursting is appropriate.
9.1.2.2.5 Trenchless Replacement References
Caltrans non-standard special provisions for pipe jacking, augur boring and pipe ramming
(see Index 9.1.2.2):
http://onramp.dot.ca.gov/hq/design/drainage/index.php

122

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

NCRHP Synthesis 242 Trenchless Installation of Conduits Beneath Roadways.

http://www.usroads.com/journals/rmej/9804/rm980403.htm
AASHTO Highway Drainage Guidelines/Volume XIV, 5.1.4.4 Pipe Bursting (Existing
pipe material must be clay, RCP, cast iron or PVC).
ASCE Standard Construction Guidelines for Microtunneling, December 28, 1998.
So.Cal. APWA and the AGC of California in their STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS
FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION-MICROTUNNELING 2000 EDITION.
No-Dig Engineering Journal, published by Trenchless Technology Incorporated.
Guidelines for Pipe Ramming TTC Technical Report #2001.04 December 2001
9.1.2.3 Other Considerations for TEC
The following guidelines are for trenchless projects where the potential for subsidence
(loss of ground) and risk is high.
High-tech methods do not necessarily mean safer methods. The amount of risk depends
on the contractor's experience in addition to a number of factors that require engineering
judgment such as: depth of cover, diameter of tunnel, proposed methods, tunnelman's
classification of materials to be tunneled (cohesionless sands, gravels, and cobbles or
boulders below groundwater surface are probably the worst) and potential obstructions.
In house designs should consider the following four categories. Depending on
complexity, it may be necessary to hire a consultant to perform the design:
1)
2)
3)
4)

Geotechnical Investigation
Settlement Monitoring
Contractor Submittals
Contract Inspection

Items 2 and 3 should be addressed in the Plans and Specifications and should be based on
the results of Item 1. Geotechnical Design within the Division of Engineering Services
(DES) should review the Geotechnical Reports and the Plans and Specifications prior to
bid. If cohesion less materials below the ground water table or "running or flowing
ground" conditions are identified, special precaution should be taken in the permit
review. The Contractor Submittals to the Engineer required in the Contract Documents
should be provided for Caltrans review prior to starting work. The Contract Inspection
should depend on the proposed trenchless methods, project complexity, and risk to the
public.
1. Geotechnical Investigation
A minimum of two borings, one on each side the highway crossing is recommended. An
additional boring should be made in the median if practical. This can be increased or
reduced depending on risk and variability of tunneled materials.
2. Settlement Monitoring
The ground movements caused by trenchless pipe installation techniques can have a
significant effect on adjacent services and road structures.

123

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Surface settlement is mainly a result of loss of ground during tunneling and dewatering
operations that cause subsidence. During microtunneling, loss of ground may be
associated with soil squeezing, running, or flowing into the heading; losses due to the size
of overcut; and steering adjustments. The actual magnitudes of these losses are largely
dependent on the type and strength of the ground, groundwater conditions, size and depth
of the pipe, equipment capabilities, and the skill of the contractor in operating and
steering the machine. Sophisticated microtunneling equipment that has the capability to
exert a stabilizing pressure at the tunnel face, equal to that of the insitu soil and
groundwater pressures, will minimize loss of ground and surface settlement without the
need for dewatering.
In general, the subsurface monitoring points should be installed at 5 ft and 10 ft above the
crown of the proposed tunnel near the jacking shaft, above utilities, and on shoulders of
roadways, to evaluate the Contractors operations before proceeding under critical
locations. Additional points at non-critical locations should be monitored to gain an early
indication of Contractor workmanship.
Simple subsurface monitoring points (see below) that consist of a length of steel rebar
installed inside a cased borehole that extends to the desired height above the tunnel crown
are recommended.

124

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

The materials needed are 1/2- to 3/4- inch diameter rebar and 2-inch diameter, Schedule
40, PVC pipe installed in a vertical borehole drilled to the desired depth of the settlement
point. The casing should be covered with a cap to protect it from the weather and a road
box can be used if the point is installed inside a traffic area. The casing is installed at 5
feet or 10 feet above the proposed tunnel crown, and the rebar is inserted into the casing
and driven 6 inches to 12 inches below the bottom of the casing, into undisturbed soil. In
this way, the response of the ground can be monitored very closely as the microtunneling
or tunneling machine passes beneath the point. These simple settlement points have been
shown to perform more reliably than surface points and more complicated and expensive
125

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

multiple-point borehole extensometers, which may tend to bridge over settlements until
heavy loads pass over the affected areas.
Surface settlement monitoring points may be used to supplement the subsurface points.
However, surface points only indicate gross settlements at the surface after subsurface
ground loss has occurred. Due to the shear strength of soils, and the rigidity of pavement
and other structures, voids created at depth may not appear at the ground surface for days,
weeks, or even months after the tunnel has been completed. By monitoring ground
movements much closer to the tunneling operations, at strategic locations before passing
beneath the critical features, ground losses, if any, can be detected in time to fill voids
quickly before surface facilities are affected, and more importantly, to alert the contractor
to alter their procedures to prevent further ground loss.
Once installed, the monitoring points should be surveyed prior to tunneling to establish
the baseline. Surveying should then proceed at least once a day, or every 50 feet of
advancement, whichever is more frequent. In addition to daily monitoring by survey, the
points should be checked at more frequent intervals by the onsite inspector using a tape
measure as the tunneling machine or MTBM approaches and passes beneath the points.
SETTLE MONITORING
POINTS

FREQUENCY

ACTION
LEVEL*

MAXIMUM
ALLOWED**

Surface

Hourly when heading is

within 23 feet, otherwise
daily

1/4 inch

1/2 inch

Surface (in traffic lanes)

Before and after

tunneling

1/4 inch

Subsurface

Hourly when heading is

within 23 feet, otherwise
daily

1.5 inches

2.5 inches

Corrective action taken (filling voids and alerting contractor to alter their procedures:
Systematic settlements can be controlled by limiting the radial overcut the contractor
is allowed to use, as well as filling the annulus with bentonite lubricant during
tunneling)

** Mitigation such as grouting required

An independent Instrumentation Specialist should install and monitor the settlement
monitoring points. The survey accuracy of the settlement monitoring points should be to
0.005 foot.
Calculations of expected systematic settlements can be made to determine whether
changes in pipe depth and spacing of multiple pipes are needed, or whether changes to
construction methods or ground improvement are necessary to prevent damage to
existing surface facilities. Settlements may be evaluated using methods developed by
Birger Schimdt and Peck (1969). This approach models systematic settlements as an
inverted normal probability curve, or settlement trough, with maximum settlements
occurring directly above the centerline of the tunnel, and with settlements decreasing
with distance from the tunnel centerline. The approach actually has no theoretical basis in

126

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

soil mechanics, but has been adopted based on empirical correlations with observed
settlement magnitudes and distributions. The equations and diagram for the calculations
are shown in Figure 1.

3. Contractor Submittals
The following submittal requirements are presented below as an example and are
specifically for microtunneling (see Index 9.1.2.2.2), however, similar information is
required for other types of boring.
1) Manufacturers' data sheets and specifications describing in detail the
microtunneling system to be used.
2) Detailed description of similar projects with references on which the proposed
system had been successfully used by contractor/operator.
3) Description of method to remove and dispose of spoil.
4) Maximum anticipated jacking loads and supporting calculations.
5) Description of methods to control and dispose of ground water, spoil, temporary
shoring, and other materials encountered in the maintenance and construction of
pits and shafts.
6) Shaft dimensions, locations, surface construction, profile, depth, method of
excavation, shoring, bracing, and thrust block design.
7) Pipe design data and specifications.
8) A description of the grade and alignment control system.
9) Intermediate jacking station locations and design.

127

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

10) Description of lubrication and/or grouting system.

11) Layout plans and description of operational sequence.
12) A detailed plan for monitoring ground surface movement (settlement or heave)
due to microtunneling operation. The plan shall address the method and frequency
of survey measurement. At minimum, the plan shall measure the ground
movement of all structures, roadways, parking lots, and any other areas of
concern within the calculated settlement trough of all microtunneling pipelines. A
description of how settlements will be monitored and excessive settlements will
be avoided and contingency plan should also be required to establish how the
Contractor will mitigate any excessive settlements. A pre-construction survey
should also be required in the Contract Documents and conducted by the
Contractor, accompanied by the Engineer and Owner representatives, to
document pre-construction conditions and protect against frivolous claims.
13) Contingency plans for approval for the following potential conditions: damage to
pipeline structural integrity and repair; loss and return to line and grade; and loss
of ground.
14) Procedures to meet all applicable OSHA requirements. These procedures shall be
submitted for a record purpose only and will not be subject to approval by the
Engineer. At a minimum, the Contractor shall provide the following:
a. Protection against soil instability and ground water inflow.
b. Safety for shaft access and exit, including ladders, stairs, walkways, and
hoists.
c. Protection against mechanical and hydraulic equipment operations, and for
lifting and hoisting equipment and material.
d. Ventilation and lighting.
e. Monitoring for hazardous gases.
f. Protection against flooding and means for emergency evacuation.
g. Protection of shaft, including traffic barriers, accidental or unauthorized
entry, and falling objects.
h. Emergency protection equipment.
i. Safety supervising responsibilities.
15) Annular space grouting plans if required by Contract Documents.
4. Contract Inspection
If in house expertise is not available, it may be necessary to have full time inspection
performed by an underground construction-engineering firm specializing in the tunneling
methods to be used. This covers other possible methods, which can be evaluated from
the Contractor Submittals.

128

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

10.1
NEW
PRODUCT
APPROVAL
PROCESS
AND
CONSTRUCTION-EVALUATED
EXPERIMENTAL
FEATURE
PROGRAM
A significant number of the rehabilitation techniques that have been identified in this
D.I.B. include new products, which have not yet been formally approved for use by
Caltrans as such; specifications have not been developed or adopted. In 1995, the
Department issued Deputy Directive DD-45, which established Caltrans policy on new
product evaluations, defined a new product, and instituted the position of New Product
Coordinator appointed by the Engineering Services Division Chief. See Appendix B for a
flow chart of the New Product Approval Process. New Product Evaluation Guidelines are
available on-line at the following web site address:
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/esc/approved_products_list/NPGuidelines.html
The intent of the Construction-Evaluated (C-E) Experimental Feature Program is to field
test the constructability and performance of promising new products, techniques and
methods relating to highway facilities. A feature is considered experimental whenever it
involves a non-standard item or process, or a proprietary (brand-name) product.
The C-E Program is not a method for approving a non-standard item or process, or a
proprietary construction feature without proper evaluation and reporting (federal funds
can be rescinded during the audit process if this is determined). However, the C-E
Program may be a useful tool for using some of the non-approved products described in
this D.I.B. and may help justify their ultimate approval for use within the new product
process described above.
After a C-E project is approved, Caltrans typically evaluates how the feature is
performing over a three to five year period. Under federal guidelines, Caltrans is
generally limited to five projects exhibiting the same experimental feature.
The Resource Conservation Branch within Headquarters Division of Design is assigned
the responsibility to act as Caltrans liaison with FHWA and is their delegated authority
for State authorized projects concerning all C-E projects. Although the C-E Project
Program is a federal effort, it is important that experimental projects involving state
only funds also be reported and monitored by the Resource Conservation Branch. To
obtain approval for an experimental feature, a work plan should be submitted to Resource
Conservation Branch no later than three (3) weeks prior to project advertisement. The
Office of Highway Drainage Design within Headquarters Division of Design should also
review all work plans involving drainage features. Furthermore, Office Engineer requires
approval from the Office of Highway Drainage Design for all non-standard drainage
features.
If a proprietary item is involved, approval must be obtained from the District Director or
Deputy Director for Project Development. Copy of the approval letters should be sent to
Resource Conservation Branch. See HDM Index 601.5(3) or Caltrans RTL Guide, for
procedures for obtaining approval of proprietary items.

129

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

11.1 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

11.1.1 Supporting Roadway and Traffic Loads
Our understanding of the final stages that lead to pipe or roadway prism collapse is still
limited. Collapse/catastrophic failure normally originates where an initial, often minor,
defect allows further deterioration to occur. Such defects may include:

Cracking or deflection caused by excessive vertical load or bad bedding,

Poor construction practice,
Leaking joints or perforated invert,
Damage caused by third parties;

Therefore it is not possible to predict when a pipe and/or the roadway prism will collapse.
However it is possible to judge whether a pipe has deteriorated sufficiently beyond its
maintenance free service life (see HDM Topic 852) for collapse of the pipe and/or the
roadway prism to be likely. As previously discussed (see Index 5.1.1.2.1) it should be
noted Reinforced Concrete Pipe will fail but rarely collapse.
Collapse is often triggered by some random event that may not be related to the cause of
deterioration, perhaps a storm or an excavation nearby. Serious defects do not always
lead quickly to collapse; in one study of pipe collapses there were many minor defects
compared to the number of collapses that occurred.
Soils
The following general discussion on risk of ground loss and voids on cohesionless and
cohesive soils should be considered in context with the assumption that an existing pipe
(either rigid or flexible) has been placed in accordance with the Standard Plans and
Standard Specifications as referenced in Indices 2.1.1.1.1 and 2.1.1.2.
When evaluating the potential for soil loss or soil arching, the engineer must understand
that imported material placed as either structure backfill or roadway embankment may
differ significantly from native soils. The following discussion on soil behavior must be
viewed within the context of the various soil properties which may exist in close
proximity to the culvert - i.e., perforations or other discontinuities which might allow for
soil migration may lead to soil reactions that vary significantly from the reaction of native
soils depending upon the specific nature of structure backfill material and any other soil
material placed above the pipe.
Risk of ground loss from subsurface erosion during storm flows is generally low for most
soil types except cohesionless soils (silts and silty fine sands). However, for pipes with
defects larger than 3/8th inch, any soil type can be affected by severe ground loss. If
infiltration occurs, even if there is no hydraulic surcharging, almost all silts and sands
will be highly susceptible to ground loss through large defects. Only well graded sandy
gravels whose coarser part includes gravel particles of at least medium size will not be
susceptible to ground loss. For smaller defect sizes well-graded sandy fine gravels would
also be resistant. Silts and sands without gravel in the grading are likely to migrate even
through minor defects.

130

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

If hydraulic surcharge does occur all cohesionless soils apart from well-graded sandy,
medium to coarse gravels are likely to be highly susceptible to migration through minor
defects.
Cohesive Soils: If infiltration occurs, then clay (invisible particles less than 0.0002 inch
in diameter) backfills with a plasticity index (PI - an indicator of the clayeyness of a
soil determined by the difference between the liquid limit and plastic limit per AASTHO
T-90-00) lower than about 15 are susceptible to migration through severe and large
defects irrespective of whether hydraulic surcharging takes place. If the PI exceeds about
15 then it is probable that ground loss will only occur through severe defects; ground loss
in these circumstances is sensitive to the head of ground water present.
Water flow through the voids in clay backfill tends to erode the soil and high heads of
water due to high ground water tables accelerate this process. Clays containing coarse
particles (such as fill and many glacial tills) are more prone to erosion because the soil
particles tend to induce more turbulent conditions. Undisturbed clays normally have a
low percentage of voids, which reduces the risk of erosion even if the plasticity is low.
Thus pipes constructed by tunnelling in clay are unlikely to suffer ground loss from the
virgin ground but the material around the pipe will behave like trench fill.
Voids above the water table can remain stable, through capillary suction in cohesionless
soils and through tensile strength in cohesive soils. Below the water table large voids can
only be stable in cohesive soils. If a large void exists in a cohesionless soil above the
water table, any wetting of the surface caused by hydraulic surcharge will destroy the
capillary suction and the void will tend to collapse. This will produce a zone of loosened
soil next to the pipe, which may be lost through defects. The void may migrate upwards
away from the pipe. In a cohesive soil above the water table surcharge can cause
progressive softening of the soil around the void, which can lead to further loss of soil
and to the void increasing in size. Below the water table a void in a cohesive material will
act as a drainage path and softening and erosion can also lead to an increase in size.
Voids in cohesive soils both above and below the water table can also collapse and
migrate away from the pipe leaving a zone of loose soft ground. In the fieldwork
undertaken by others, voids or evidence of them was found at a number of the collapse
sites studied.
Voids that develop around culverts which have been in place for a long time are similar
to voids around newly installed jacked pipes and tunnels; They may go undetected until
the overlying ground collapses into the void loosening this material. This loosened
material, which supports the roadway, may immediately cause a depression or sinkhole at
the surface, or it may occur at a later date when the loosened material re-densifies with
the help of water, traffic vibrations, earthquake shaking, etc. For jacked pipes and
tunnels, probing is often done from within the pipes and grouting is performed to fill the
voids. See Index 6.1.2. Probing for voids may be performed within any large diameter
pipe.
Stresses and Deformation
Deteriorated pipes in granular soils often experienced low vertical stresses from the
overburden due to the very efficient arching capability of the circular or near circular
shape in frictional soil materials. However vertical stresses on pipes in clays are closer to
131

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

the full overburden stress and large deformations are required to mobilize the full soil
strength to support the structure laterally.
Deformation of flexible pipes will occur when the soil at the sides no longer provides
adequate support. This is clear evidence that deterioration is taking place. Final collapse
is unlikely to occur until deformation exceeds 20% but typically only if other issues are
present (sinkholes/depressions, etc. which show the fact that there has been loss of
support) however, this final stage could occur quickly in response to an external
influence.
With no other signs of distress, a flexible pipe deflected at 10% due to excessive load or
improper compaction that is not perforated or is not experiencing soil loss, is not
necessarily something to be alarmed about, and may need only monitoring. However,
other pipes experiencing the same 10% deflection where;
a) The invert is fully perforated and, cohesionless soils are present, or,
b) Surface subsidence is present
are far more susceptible to collapse/catastrophic failure at 10% deflection due to some
triggering mechanism. Therefore, depending on what conditions are present, our response
to it may be to take immediate action or to monitor. It should be noted that the severity of
impacts resulting from collapse would typically increase with pipe diameter.
Lining
When considering the viability of lining a deteriorated pipe with a flexible lining,
calculations for ground and traffic loadings can be made but are very approximate due to
the difficulty of assessing the equivalent stiffness of the old pipe, soil, and grout (if used)
supporting the flexible lining. (See Index 6.1.1). For shallow pipes, traffic loading
accounts for approximately half of the total loading. For pipes deeper than 6 feet, traffic
loading accounts for approximately 25% of the total loading or less. Good ground support
is present around most existing pipes. If the pipe to be renovated is in a reasonably sound
condition and loadings on the pipe are not expected to increase (e.g. changes to highway
profile grade), then the surrounding ground will normally provide enough support to
carry existing ground and traffic loads and to ensure structural stability, particularly if
soil voids are filled with grout as recommended.
Flexible pipes with excessive deflection (15% or more) will typically need to be replaced.
If hydraulically possible (i.e., adequate cross sectional area can be maintained without a
significant increase in headwater), heavily deflected flexible pipe may be lined with a
rigid or semi-rigid material (typically RCP, WSP or RPMP) that is capable of supporting
all ground and traffic loads.

11.1.2 Compaction Grouting

Compaction grouting is the injection of very stiff, low-slump, mortar-type Portland
cement based grout (possibly with special admixtures including polymer resins) that is
designed to stay in a homogeneous mass under relatively high pressure to displace and
compact soils in place by acting as a radial hydraulic jack to strengthen loose or soft soils
thus supporting roadway and traffic loads. Compaction grouting is used primarily on
large pipelines applied through prepared grout holes in the pipe wall into the surrounding

132

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

soil or from grout tubes drilled through the fill. Compaction grouting may also be
achieved with chemicals and foaming grout; however, chemical grouts should only be
used in cohesionless soil for conditions requiring resistance to high fluid pressures. The
material should not shrink, segregate or otherwise create additional problems. Portland
cement based grout is adequate for most culvert grouting.
Because of the risk and potential of numerous problems associated with compaction
grouting, the importance of early communication with the Geotechnical Design specialist
from the Division of Engineering Services (DES) and coordination with headquarters
cannot be over-emphasized.
See Appendix H for a compaction grouting case study on the Century Freeway in Los
Angeles.

11.1.3 Future Rehabilitation

Regardless of the rehabilitation method chosen, at some point in the future, the pipe will
need to either be rehabilitated again or replaced. Therefore, consideration should be given
to the projected service life of the rehabilitation materials and their future repair or
removal when developing any rehabilitation strategy.

133

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

12.1 APPENDIXES
Page
Appendix A Butt Fusion Procedures for Solid Wall HDPE Slipliner

134

Appendix B Flow Chart of the New Product Approval Process

140

Appendix C Typical Resistivity Values and Corrosiveness of Soils

141

Appendix D Crack Repair in Concrete Pipe Using a Maximum Strength, Non- Shrink,
Portland Cement or Mortar (Refer to Index 5.1.1.2)
142
Appendix E Sources of Information and Industry Contacts

143

Appendix F CIPP Guidance for Resident Engineers

151

Appendix G Case Studies

164

Appendix H Design Examples

194

134

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Appendix A Butt Fusion Procedures for Solid Wall HDPE Slipliner

Source:
http://www.cpchem.com/performancepipe/literature/GeneralPurpose/PP750.pdf
Copied with permission from Chevron Phillips Chemical Company LP

135

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

136

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

137

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

138

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

139

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

140

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Appendix B Flow Chart of the New Product Approval Process

141

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Appendix C Typical Resistivity Values and Corrosiveness of Soils

See Index 5.2.5

142

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Appendix D Crack Repair in Concrete Pipe Using a Maximum

Strength, Non- Shrink, Portland Cement or Mortar (Refer to Index
5.1.1.2)
Dimensions of "V" Grind shall be 0.25 inch wide minimum and approximately 0.5 inch
deep. 1 inch deep Grinds may damage reinforcement. The Grind shall be cleaned of any
grinding dust and surface thoroughly moistened before filling with non- shrink Portland
cement or Mortar (e.g. Jet PlugTM by Jet Set California Inc, see Appendix E) to ensure a
good bond.
The mortar mix should be mixed to a low-slump consistency with only enough water
added to gain a consistency of heavy glazing putty. Allow repair to become firm to touch
6 to 10 minutes after installation. Then shave to grade with a trowel edge. Do not
overwork
If the new patch is not under water, a curing agent shall be used to cover the new patch
plus 1 inch on either side of the new patch immediately after patch is firm. It should be
noted that when longitudinal cracks are found at the crown of the pipe, usually the invert
of the pipe is also cracked.

143

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Appendix E Sources of Information and Industry Contacts

In addition, to the following web sites, see FHWA Culvert Repair Practices Manual
Volume 2, Appendix D, for Sources of information and assistance. A comprehensive
index of trenchless contractors and services is provided in the Directory published
annually by the Trenchless Technology magazine. See http://www.trenchlessonline.com/
for buyers guide link. Caltrans does not endorse any of the firms referenced below or
listed in the Trenchless Technology magazine annual Directory and there may be many
other firms not listed equally capable of performing specific services.
Internal Joint Seals:
CREAMER In-Weg internal joint seals
http://www.jfcson.com/services/pipeline-rehabilitation
AMEX-10 /WEKO-SEAL by Miller Pipeline Corp.
http://millerpipeline.com/markets_gasdistribution_weko.html
Victaulic Depend-O-Lok, Inc.
http://www.victaulic.com/en/search/?keyword=depend+o+lok
Internal Repair Sleeves
Link-Pipe
905-886-0335 ext 302
http://www.linkpipe.com
Chemical Grouting
Avanti International
822 Bay Star Blvd.
Webster, TX 77598
(281) 486-5600
(800) 877-2570 United States & Canada
www.AvantiGrout.com
Concrete Pipe Crack Repair
Jet Set California, Inc.
2144 Edison Avenue, San Leandro, CA 94577
(510) 632-7800

144

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Cement-Mortar Lining
Spiniello's SpinCo.
http://www.spiniello.com/CML.php
Spirally Wound PVC companies:
Danby Pipe Renovation
http://www.danbyrehab.com/technicaldata.aspx
Sekisui SPR Americas, LLC
http://www.sekisui-spr.com/
Plastic Pipe Manufacturers:
ADS Pipe
http://www.ads-pipe.com/en/
KWH Pipe
http://www.kwhpipe.ca/
J-M Manufacturing
http://www.jmeagle.com/products/
Metal Pipe Manufacturers:
Contech
http://www.conteches.com/
Pacific Corrugated Pipe Company
http://www.pac-corr-pipe.com/
Welded Steel Pipeliners:
Precision Pipe & Products, Inc.
PO Box 102046
Birmingham, AL 35210
[email protected]
General Pipe Rehabilitation:
Michels Pipe Services
http://michels.us/
145

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

146

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

147

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

148

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

149

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

150

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

151

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Appendix F CIPP Guidance for Resident Engineers

The following information should be included with the R.E. file when CIPP is included
as a contract item:
Overview
Cured-in-place pipe (CIPP) lining is a resin-saturated, flexible fabric that is inverted
(turned inside out by water or air pressure) or winched into the host pipe. Water or
air/steam pressure is introduced to invert the tube into the host pipe (or inflate the already
winched-in tube) and hold the tube tight against the existing pipe wall. Next a suitable
heat source (water, steam or UV) is introduced which activates a catalyst, causing the
resin to begin to harden.
With water inversion, the lining is inverted under water pressure from a hydrostatic head
and cured by circulating hot water. With air inversion, the lining is inverted under air
pressure and cured by introducing steam.
With winched (i.e., pulled in place) installations, the liner is inflated against the existing
pipe wall either by air or water or by use of another internal liner (so-called calibration
hose) which is either inverted on site into the liner under air/steam or water pressure or
pre-installed off site and then inflated with air or water. When a calibration hose is not
used, Caltrans specification requires an impermeable inner membrane for resin control.
Both liners carry resin. The pulled in place liner can be cured by circulating hot water,
steam or by UV light.
After 3 to 6 hours of curing, the hardened resin gives the new pipe liner its strength.
After the resin sets, the downstream closed end is carefully cut and removed and a final
video inspection is performed. A remote controlled cutting device may be used to open
lateral connections after dimples are visually located with the camera or by referring to
previously recorded information.
In general, the following steps are performed:
1) Install diversion (if needed)
2) Clean, inspect and prepare host pipe for lining (voids in backfill may need
grouting, remove protrusions greater 0.5 inch, record exact locations of lateral
pipes)
3) Prepare liner: The tube is vacuum impregnated with resin (on or off site
depending on length and size of liner) and may be stored in ice for transportation
to the site.
4) Install preliner (if inversion installation)
5) Install liner
6) Cure liner
7) Take test samples
8) Final inspection
9) Repair as needed
10) Remove diversion (if needed)

152

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Basic Equipment and Materials

Liner
In the pre-lining state, the liner typically consists of reinforced 3 mm layers of non woven
needled polyester fiber felt formed into a seamed tube of the required diameter with an
impermeable plastic (polyethylene) inner membrane. The purpose of the plastic
membrane is to keep water/steam separate from the resin impregnated felt during the
cure.
For inversion installations the liner will be delivered to the job site plastic side out prior
to inversion. However, for all Caltrans projects, when the inversion installation method
is selected by the contractor, an additional plastic preliner is required in the host pipe. For
pulled in place installations, a sandwich-like combination of two liners will be delivered
with plastic on the outside and inside. The pulled in place ASTM also allows an onsite
inversion installation option for the inner liner (calibration hose) for pulled in place
installations.
The Caltrans specifications allow ASTM F 2019 Conduits by the Pulled in Place
Installation of Glass Reinforced Plastic (GRP) Cured-in-Place which is for a pulled in
place fiberglass and felt composite tube that has higher physical property values and can
be UV cured .
Preliners
For all inversion installations, a preliner will be needed. Polyester resin is most
commonly used in CIPP, which wont stick to anything damp. Therefore an outer
impermeable pre-liner acts as both a barrier and mold to span voids, open joints and
damaged pipe etc. Once an industry standard(but no longer), it is installed by first
folding the ends 45 degrees, then it is attached to a cable or camera and pulled in flat.
Once pulled through, the end is slit and attached to a fan. The fan inflates the preliner and
inversion through the opposite open end is possible. See Griffolyn Type-55 FR by Reef
Industries, Inc (Houston, TX) 800-231-6074 or 713-507-4251
http://www.reefindustries.com/griffolyn.php
For pulled in place installations, a reinforced plastic preliner is not used because the
liner itself will have a polyethylene outer layer. However, Caltrans specification requires
an impermeable inner layer as well which may be accomplished in the factory or on site
via an inflatable bladder called a calibration hose
Resin
Three types of resin are allowed and will cure readily when heated with air, steam or hot
water; polyester, vinylester or epoxy. Epoxy is difficult to use for liners greater than 15
in diameter and is less commonly used than the other two. Recycled resins are excluded.
See resin fingerprint analysis below.
The curable thermosetting resin is impregnated into the resin absorbent layers of the liner
by a process referred to as the "wet out." This can occur on or off site at a plant,
depending on the length and pipe diameter. Pipes over 400 feet long, 48 inches or larger
in diameter, and tube thickness of 24 mm or more will typically be wet out on site. The
wet-out process generally involves injecting resin into resin absorbent layers through an
153

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

end or an opening formed in the outer impermeable film, drawing a vacuum and passing
the impregnated liner through rollers. It is important during the impregnation process that
air be excluded from the resin absorbent material to the maximum possible extent. This,
in itself, gives a test as to the soundness of the liner since in a damaged bag, it would be
impossible to draw and maintain a vacuum within the system.
Care should be taken to keep the resin material away from direct exposure to sunlight;
ultraviolet rays tend to deteriorate the composition of the material. Prolonged exposure in
the presence of heat can cause a thermosetting reaction. The saturated liner temperature
should be kept at or below 70 degrees Fahrenheit during transportation and storage
which may be several weeks depending on the type of resin system. A refrigerated truck
may be needed to maintain temperature level. After wet out the impregnated liner is
laid into a truck for transport to the job site. This is done by folding the liner in layers
stacked one above the other (see picture below). In between each layer of liner is a layer
of ice to retard the resin from curing. This situation creates a great deal of weight bearing
down on the lower layers of liner. The weight on top of the lower layers can cause resin
to be squeezed out, leading to a thin wall in those layers of liner.

Once a catalyst (commonly used systems consist of a low temperature and high
temperature peroxide) is added to the resin, the resin is considered to be in the promoted
or reactive state.
Inversion Installations
See overview above.
For water cures, typically an inversion platform, reinforced polyester tube, and 90 degree
steel elbow are the three pieces of equipment unique to inversion installations if water is
used for inversion and cure.
The scaffold height for the platform varies with the depth below grade and the diameter
of the host pipe being lined as well as the thickness of the liner. The larger the diameter,
the smaller the head needed for inversion.

154

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

For air/steam inversions and cure, an air compressor and a steam source of sufficient
capacity equipped with monitoring and control equipment for adjustment of air/steam
temperature and pressure in accordance with the manufacturers instructions submitted.
The liner is first inverted with air pressure and then cured using steam.

155

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Thermocouples
Thermocouples are temperature-sensing devices placed between the liner and the preliner
to read the temperature during the cure and post-cure periods; these give accurate
indications of the cure status of the material.
UV Cure Installations
All UV cures are pulled-in-place. End gates are placed at each end of the culvert to
inflate the liner (approximately 8 psi).
A light train is then inserted through one end and pressure is restored. A light train
camera is activated and the train is manually pulled through the liner in order to visually
inspect it for any potential problems.
After the liner inspection is complete, the light train is once again pulled through the
liner, this time via computer. The computer controls the speed, temperature and pressure
of the process which are all carefully monitored via laptop computer during the curing of
the pipe liner.
When the CIPP process is complete, the ends of the liner are trimmed, a cutter is inserted
and precision cuts are made at each lateral to restore service to the main. Typical UV
light train systems cure at speeds in the 4 to 8 foot per minute range. For example, a
length of 300 feet of 8 inch UV CIPP liner can be cured in 50 minutes.
Field sampling and testing procedures must comply with ASTM F 2019, Section 7:
Recommended Inspection Practices.
Potential Problems
Pinholes or tears in the polyethylene coating
One of the first and ongoing procedures throughout the entire installation is the visual
inspection of the bag for any obvious flaws such as pinholes or tears in the polyethylene
coating. Occasionally defects may have been caused in manufacturing the bag, but more
often occur during job site handling or shipping. If there is a defect in the liner, it is much
better to detect it before the liner is installed into the host pipe than to realize the
recirculating water (or steam) is leaking.
After the liner is unpacked from its shipping container, a vacuum pump is attached to the
bag to evacuate the entrapped air from the felt liner material. This, in itself gives a test as
to the soundness of the liner since in a damaged bag it would be impossible to draw and
maintain a vacuum. Typically, this will occur offsite at a plant. See resin above.

156

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Example of Liner Tear During Installation and Subsequent Repairs

Heat sink of ground

Monitoring of the thermocouple temperature shows the actual increase in temperature of
the liner bag. The heat sink ability of the ground around a pipe can greatly vary with
groundwater, backfill and host pipe material. Therefore, the temperature of recirculating
water (or steam) verses liner bag outer surface temperature may vary. For this reason, the
temperature of the circulating water should never be used as the only indication of the
extent to which the process has proceeded.

157

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Examples of Delamination, Bubbling and Rippling in Lined CMP Host Pipes

Styrene boils
If the amount of heat given off (i.e., the temperature of the exotherm) is not controlled
properly the styrene in the resin may boil, forming microscopic air bubbles in the wall of
the liner. The formation of these bubbles can reduce the physical properties of the
finished liner by as much as 75%.
Fillers in resin
The Caltrans specification states the resin shall not contain fillers, except those required
for viscosity control, fire retardance, air release or extension of pot life.
Poor dispersion of fillers during mixing into the resin can result in areas of high filler
concentration in sections of the liner wall
High levels of fillers will make the liner more brittle and more susceptible to damage by
impact.
Banding liner (inversion installations)
The proper banding to the inversion shoe (reinforced polyester tube see inversion
installations and photo) is critical. If the bag comes loose from the shoe, or a leak
develops at the connection, the inversion may have to be stopped because curing could
not proceed. If the problem cannot be corrected quickly, the entire insertion might have to
be abandoned; this most likely would result in the loss of the liner bag, resin, and all
preparatory work.
Termination points
If the CIPP liner does not fit tightly against the host pipe at its termination point(s), the
space between the liner and host pipe shall be filled with a quick-set epoxy mortar or high
viscosity epoxy such as Neopoxy NPR-3501 or equivalent, or a hydrophilic vulcanized
expansive rubber strip such as Swellseal 8 by De Neef Construction Chemicals or
equivalent.
Neopoxy NPR-3501:
Phone: 510-782-1290 Web address: http://www.neopoxy.com/
De Neef Construction Chemicals:
158

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Phone: 936-372-9185 Web address: http://www.deneef.com/

Cool down time
The Caltrans specification states: Curing temperatures and schedule shall comply with
submitted data and shall include an adequate "cool down" in accordance with these
special provisions.
According to one source, the minimum cool down time should be no less than the boiler
start time to end of the high temperature cure.
Safety
Special consideration should be given to safety factors during installation and curing.
Care to protect workers, spectators, and equipment from hot water or steam should be
observed by the use of rubber wear and protective shrouds. Any time workers enter the
drainage structures and pipes; all confined space procedures must be strictly followed.
Strong volatile styrene fumes are created by this process to which prolonged exposure
must be avoided. Also, because most polyester resins are water soluble, the uncured resin
may pollute ground water. For this reason, all curing water must be captured.
Testing
It should be recognized the Caltrans specification was developed as a performancebased specification of the finished product. One necessary aspect in successful
implementation of the performance specification is testing. Attention is directed to the
Submittals and Quality Control sections of the specification for in-house pre-testing,
quality assurance requirements, and independent laboratory testing, as well as a field
thickness test.
For testing physical properties of thermosetting cures, aluminum plate clamped molds
containing flat plate samples are placed inside the installed liner during the curing period
of the CIPP tube. Each flat plate sample is sealed in a heavy-duty plastic envelope inside
the molds. Enclosing the sample in plastic keeps the resin and water separated during
cure (similar to the inner plastic coating of the liner). A sample transmittal form is
included with this document.
For UV cures, a minimum of 3 cured samples are required which must comply with
sampling and testing procedures under ASTM F 2019, Section 7: Recommended
Inspection Practices.
For testing liner thickness over corrugated metal host pipes, it is important to measure the
thickness over a corrugation crest in the pipe invert which is usually the place with the
least resin and experiences the most wear. Note there may be a minimum thickness
provided by the designer in the specifications. The thickness calculated by the contractor
and provided in the submittals must not be less than the minimum thickness (if specified).
A sample form is included with this document.
To verify the type of resin used, a liquid resin sample (114 g min. of unreacted resin)
shall be shipped to the Transportation Laboratory for infrared fingerprint analysis as part
of the pre-job submittals.

159

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Also, for the first test performed, and for at least one, randomly selected by the Engineer,
of every 5 subsequent tests, the Contractor shall concurrently prepare an additional resin
sample for quality assurance infrared fingerprint analysis, which shall be shipped to the
Transportation Laboratory in Sacramento, 5900 Folsom Blvd., Sacramento, CA 95819
(Attention: Chemical Laboratory).
Thickness sampling and repair
If Contractor chooses the alternative method allowed in the specifications for thickness
sampling - using a 10 feet long like diameter pipe extension butted up against the host
pipe (in place of coring the host pipe 10 feet from the ends), it is important that the
temporary pipe extension is made of the same combination of materials (i.e., CMP and
insulating preliner). This is the only way to replicate what is happening in the host pipe
during the lining process regarding temperature, resin flow, exotherm heat dissipation,
and thickness over corrugation crests. The sample should be taken within 1 ft or so of the
temporary joint where like pipe/insulating material extension is butted up against the host
pipe. This ensures the specified sample location of approximately 10 ft. from the
termination point of the liner, avoiding any thinning.
Figure 1 on the next page depicts core sampling and repair to host pipe.

160

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

161

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

C.I.P.P. LINER
FIELD THICKNESS TEST DOCUMENTATION
Project No. ___________________________
Project Title ___________________________
Segment No. __________________________
on Map No. ___________________________
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*Sample No. _______________

*Sample No. ___________________

Location: ____________________________

______________________________

Sample Date: _________________________

______________________________

Sample tested by: _________________________________________________________

Measurements: ____________________ mm

__________________________ mm

_______________________ mm

_____________________________ mm

_______________________ mm

_____________________________ mm

Sub-Total =

_______________________(A)______________________________ (B)

Average Thickness (A+B/6) = ___ + ___/6 =_________________________ mm

Required Thickness (Bid Form) = ____________________________ mm
Results (Pass/Fail) _______________________________________________________
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Contractor Representative Present ___________________________________________
Engineer Representative Present ____________________________________________
Date ___________________ Time ___________________
*Sample Number is Segment Number with a -1 or -2 added for Sample Designators.

162

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

TRANSMITTAL FORM
C.I.P.P. LINER SAMPLES DOCUMENTATION
Project No. ___________________________
Project Title ___________________________
Sequential Submittal No. __________________________
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Segment No. _____________________ on Map No. ____________________________
Location: _______________________________________________________________
Requirements: Modulus _______________________ PSI (250,000 PSI Minimum)
Flexural Strength ________________ PSI (4,500 PSI Minimum)
Thickness (this segment, minimum) ______________________
Sample No. _______________________
Sample by ______________________________
Sample on _______________________
Total no. Samples ________________________
Test for:
Modulus (ASTM D-79)
Flexural Strength (ASTM D-790)
Thickness
I.R. Fingerprint
Other: _______________
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Independent Lab _________________
Phone: ____________________
_____________________

Submitted to: _____________________

Fax: ___________________

_____________________
Translab Contact (Random Q/A samples only):
________________________________________

Phone: _________________

Fax: ___________________

163

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Caltrans Intranet website to access ASTMs:

http://projdel.dot.ca.gov/des/business.asp
Then click on the following IHS Specs and Standards search link:
http://www.ihserc.com/specs3/controller/controller;jsessionid=www.ihserc.com3f75%3A4362aa76%3A5b6f4b5619f5928e?event=NAV_CONTROLLER&wl=1&n=10
05&PROD=SPECS3&sess=49962212

164

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Appendix G Case Studies

Example 1: Ed-50-PM 14.0 (4C9104) Culvert Repair Summer 2003

Approximate Pipe Location Shown in Blue

In June 2003, a sinkhole was identified by maintenance adjacent to the number one lane
of the westbound traveled way on Highway 50 in El Dorado County at Post Mile 14.0
just east of El Dorado Road Overcrossing (Br. No 25-76) in the vicinity of a 96 inch
Structural Steel Plate Pipe (SSPP). This section of Highway 50 was constructed 35 years
prior. The 820 foot long SSPP was constructed as a cross drain for Indian Creek which
was realigned from its original location to the east and uphill. A 230 foot long 36-inch
diameter bitumen coated CMP connects into the SSPP at the center in the median and a
56 foot long 18-inch diameter CMP connects into the SSPP approximately 150 feet from
the outlet. Both pipes collect drainage from the north side of the freeway and outlet into
the SSPP.

Measuring the Sinkhole

165

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

INITIAL INVESTIGATION AND PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION

The District Hydraulics and Maintenance Branches and Headquarters Offices of
Roadway Drainage Design and Maintenance made initial investigations. Subsequently a
team was assembled consisting of representatives from these units and also from
Geotechnical Design, the Corrosion Technology Unit and Underground Structures from
within the Division of Engineering Services (DES).
In the interim, District Maintenance attempted to backfill the initial large void/sinkhole at
the surface with approximately 9 cubic yards of concrete slurry after an earlier attempt to
backfill the void with aggregate base.
From the initial site investigations and problem identification the following factors were
identified:

Corrosion of the lower 180 degrees throughout the pipe

Deformation of up to 1 foot squeezing inward in the x-axis
Invert perforations throughout pipe with significant loss of invert in the vicinity of
the sinkhole
Abrasion negligible most nuts showing little sign of wear
Rock hammer blows to the side of the culvert made hollow sound at multiple
locations in lower portions of the pipe indicating potential for voids or loose soil
throughout much of the length
The 3 foot diameter bitumen coated pipe was perforated in the invert

DETAILED INVESTIGATION
After initial investigations were made it was determined that more detailed investigations
would be needed to provide the following information:

Soil and Water samples to obtain pH and Minimum Resistivity

Thickness measurements of metal
Survey of dimensions within pipe
Detailed hydraulic investigation to determine hydraulic parameters of existing
pipe and potential rehabilitation alternatives
Geotechnical investigation using Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) and Cone
Penetrometer (CPT) to determine location and extent of the voids

Using the original metal gage (thickness) as input for Culvert 4, the corrosion samples
from the soil and water indicated that the site was corrosive (soil: pH=5.6-6.3, Minimum
Resistivity =10,000 ohm-cm, water: pH=7.5-7.8, Minimum Resistivity = 3400-3500
ohm-cm, Sulfate content = 12 mg/kg ,Chloride content = 12 mg/kg ) but as designed, the
pipe should have met the 50-year design service life based on our existing predictive
method. From Figure 854.3C in the HDM using a pH of 5.6 and minimum resistivity of
10,000 ohm-cm for the soil, a service life of 22 years for an 18-gage is obtained which is
equivalent to 48 years for the 12 gage portion and 62 years for the 10 gage portion.
However, groundwater is present at the site year round and the Indian Creek realignment
has resulted in the backside of the pipe often being in a state of saturation from the invert

166

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

up to mid point (springline) where the groundwater could leach in. Due to the condition
of the pipe, it was assumed that higher corrosion levels than the test results indicated
must be present.
Thickness measurements using an ultrasonic thickness gage indicated that the upper 180
degrees (above the springline) showed minimal to no loss, while the lower 180 degrees
indicated varying conditions of rust stain, pitting, perforation and total loss (in the invert).
There was total loss of the invert starting at 350 feet and extending to about 500 feet of
the 820 foot long pipe and perforations for the entire invert. See pictures and table of
results the on following pages.

Taking Thickness Measurements. Note Evidence of Leaking Horizontal Seam at Springline

Total Loss of Invert and Existing Nuts Showing Minimal Wear

167

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Typical Local Corrosion Cells. Note that the corrosion is coming in from the backside, thus
the pipe is in worse condition than it appears. See picture of void found from probing
during construction.

36 Inch Bitumen Coated CMP Tie-In. Note rust stain below from perforated invert.
Perforations in invert to 36 inch CMP allowed water to leak behind 96 inch culvert

168

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Culvert Thickness Readings (in)

Position

Clock Position

(ft)

3:00

5:00

7:00

9:00

12:00

10

0.112

0.109

0.109

0.115

0.113

50

0.108

0.110

0.105

0.118

0.115

100

0.113

0.111

0.110

0.108

0.110

150

0.110

0.106

0.107

0.108

0.114

200

0.103

0.104

0.106

0.110

0.112

250

0.111

0.101

0.105

0.112

0.112

300

0.112

0.101

0.106

0.112

0.113

350

0.114

0.089

0.115

0.113

0.108

400

0.112

0.093

0.107

0.110

0.109

450

0.117

0.069

0.090

0.107

0.109

500

0.114

0.054

0.058

0.118

0.148

550

0.112

0.083

0.095

0.109

0.112

600

0.110

0.085

0.113

0.106

0.112

650

0.108

0.096

0.093

0.108

0.109

700

0.136

0.132

0.122

0.131

0.144

750

0.145

0.140

0.128

0.141

0.135

Culvert Ga. 12 = 0.109 inches from 0-660 ft*

Culvert Ga. 10 = 0.138 inches from 660-840 ft*
Position is measured from inlet side. Mouth of inlet side is 0 ft. Clock positions were
assigned assuming standing at the inlet, and facing the outlet.
* Culvert thickness change due to fill height.
The CPT and GPR test results did not indicate the presence of any additional major voids
other than the sinkhole. However, below the springline and beyond the limits the freeway
pavement and median, further information was still needed.
Using the measurements of the original pipe to size a circular liner, hydraulic
investigations indicated that the resulting increase in headwater from the reduced cross
section would be unacceptable to adjacent property owners. The alternatives selected for
consideration were all first analyzed to be hydraulically viable.
ALTERNATIVE SELECTION AND DESIGN
The following alternatives were studied and discussed in a meeting consisting of
members from the previously referenced units and Construction:

169

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

1) Total replacement with a combination of jacking under deeper fills and trenching
at the shallow section of the pipe under the freeway
2) A combination of full-lining and jacking a parallel pipe to supplement the reduced
cross section
3) Full-lining using a custom sized Fiber Reinforced Segmental liner system
(Channel Line)
4) Paving invert with concrete
As an emergency project, there were significant scheduling constraints for both the plans
preparation and construction window, i.e., number of working days available. Alternative
number 4 above was deemed to be the most viable for completion within the narrow time
frame and preliminary plans had already been initiated by Maintenance.
The initial invert-paving plan proposed by Maintenance was further developed to pave
the entire lower 180 degrees of the pipe and a thrust connection was incorporated in the
design to transfer thrust from the upper half of the pipe to the new concrete lining. The
thrust transfer design comprised of tack welding L3.5 x 3.5 x 5/16 Bearing Angles to
each side of the culvert longitudinally with each Bearing Angle connected to transverse
L2 x 2 x 1/8 x 7.75" long Attachment Angles welded with 1/16 fillet welds at every
corrugation (see detail on next page).
As outlined above, the GPR and CPT testing was incomplete relative to the voids below
the springline directly behind the pipe and outside the limits of testing (i.e., ramps).
Therefore, Geotechnical Design recommended exploratory probing for voids at 2, 4, 8
and 10 o clock positions every 6 feet along culvert using a inch (No. 4), 4 foot long
rebar. Any voids found, were to be filled by low-pressure contact grouting with a
maximum injection pressure not to exceed 5psi measured at the nozzle. The exploratory
work and subsequent contact grouting was included into the contract and paid for by
Extra Work (see detail on next page).

170

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

171

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

An 32 inch plastic slip liner was also included into the contract to rehabilitate the 230
foot long, 36 inch diameter, and bitumen coated CMP connecting into the SSPP at the
center in the median.
172

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

CONSTRUCTION
Since the environmental permits would take too long to obtain under normal project
process, Maintenance Engineering proceeded with a Directors Order Informal Bid
contract.
Initially construction was delayed until Cal-OSHA approved the Contractors ventilation
plan on site for welding operations inside a confined space. Prior to bidding, the
Underground Classification of Nongassy had been assigned by the Mining and
Tunneling Unit within the Division of Occupational Safety and Health.

Bulkhead and Fan at Culvert Outlet to Facilitate Venting During Welding

In general, the order of work performed was as follows:

Cleaning (by hand)

Welding angle iron
Placing and tack welding WWM
Exploratory probing for voids at 2,4,8 and 10 o clock positions at 6 feet centers
Grout port installation
Shotcrete application (including voids below invert)
3-sack sand slurry filling of large voids
Slipliner installation (for lateral 36 inch CMP)
Annular space grouting for slipliner
Contact grouting remaining voids in large pipe

The shotcrete and 3-sack sand slurry were performed as change orders (CCOs) to the
original contract.
Probing revealed the presence of a large, long void in the backfill between the sinkhole
beginning near the midpoint and ending approximately 620 feet from the inlet at the 4

173

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

oclock position. After shotcreting was completed it was decided to core some additional
ports and fill the large void with a 3-sack sand slurry prior to contact grouting work
previously described. In addition, the long void that was found through probing extended
to the surface near the original sinkhole and was also filled with slurry placed from the
surface. See below.

Large, Long Void That Was Located By Probing. Note corroded back side of culvert on
right side of picture.

Freshly Placed Slurry where Void Migrated to Surface

No (contact) grout was pumped through any of the holes at 10:00 & 2:00 because no
voids were found above the springline except for the original sinkhole and the large void
described above, both of which were filled from the surface. Only the lower holes were
pumped in the vicinity of a long void found in the backfill between the sinkhole
beginning near the midpoint and ending approximately 620 feet from the inlet.

174

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

The following is a summary of the various grout and slurry volumes that were placed to
fill voids:

cubic yards of slurry in original sinkhole (right side of pipe facing downstream) at
edge of shoulder, under the traveled way and a portion of median by District
Maintenance
19 cubic yards of 3-sack sand/slurry in large void adjacent to pipe at 4:00 and
8:00 (between sinkhole and almost 200 feet downstream)
cubic yards of slurry where large void described above day-lighted at surface on
left side of pipe in the vicinity of the original sinkhole
23.5 cubic yards of contact grout in vicinity of large void described above.
The volume placed of shotcrete included filling the voids below the invert and
was very close to the volume of 202 cubic yards for Minor Concrete that was
shown on the plans.

Tack Welding WWM

Placing Shotcrete

Contact Grouting Through Grout Port

175

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

LESSONS LEARNED

Thrust transfer design was labor intensive and vertical angle iron design needed
modifying in the field to make better contact with pipe (see pictures above); the
original design did not work for the field conditions because the deformed host
pipe resulted in several areas of poor contact with the longitudinal angle iron (see
picture with hand). Therefore, it is incumbent for the designer to make sure their
design will meet field conditions.
A possibly more efficient rehabilitation alternative for similar metal pipes in need
urgent need of repair (i.e., large enough for human entry, relatively minor
deformation, invert failure with concerns about future structural degradation due
to soil side corrosion and ability to support roadway and traffic loads etc)
suggested by Geotech may be to shotcrete with reinforcement the entire 360
degrees (different to cement mortar lining), and, in effect, creating a custom sized
new pipe inside the existing pipe. If fiber reinforced shotcrete is used (either
synthetic or steel), the need for steel WWM can be eliminated entirely. On
another concrete invert lining project constructed this summer, shear connector
welding studs (Nelson Studs) were used as a thrust connector at the outer edges
of the invert lining.
California Test 643 can have environmental conditions that can vary dramatically
depending upon the time of year the soil and water samples were taken. If
available, use condition of existing metal culverts to determine if corrosion is
present to supplement soil and water testing.
CPT and GPR testing is limited for finding voids directly behind the pipe below
the springline and should be supplemented by probing from inside the pipe.
Repairs from CPT testing damage should be included in contract (see picture next
page):

176

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Design changes made in field by Construction without communication to other

units: 3- sack sand slurry in lieu of contact grout design used to fill largest void
and decision to introduce weepholes in invert that were not shown on the plans
(see pictures on following page):

Cored Grout Hole in Shotcrete Used to Fill Large Void with 3-Sack Sand Slurry Leaking
Groundwater During Contact Grouting. Note capped contact grout port.

177

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

PVC Pipe Weep Placed in Rock Below Invert. Later, larger weeps were cored in
addition in addition to these.

Cored Weep in Shotcrete Invert

Non-Woven Polypropylene Geotextile Material and 3/8 3/4 inch Diameter Gravel from
Gravel Bag Headwall Used to Make Filters

178

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Installed Gravel Filter Bag in Invert Weep

Outlet of 96-inch Pipe After Repair

Inlet of 96-Inch Pipe After Repair

Costs: Engineers estimate---$407,000. Low bid---$472,420. Not including

$100,000 for grouting around the pipe (force account). Actual completed
construction cost: $480,500.

179

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Example 2: 03-Nevada-80 PM 4.0 Culvert Repair (Castle Creek) EA 03-4C3601

(Summer 2003)
BACKGROUND
This section of Interstate 80 in Nevada County at Post Mile 4.0 was constructed over 40
years ago in 1961. At this location there are two, 144 inch diameter, Structural Steel Plate
Pipes (SSPP), one under each direction of traveled way, which were constructed with the
freeway as cross drainage for Upper Castle Creek. The lengths of the pipes are 169 feet
(eastbound) and 179 feet (westbound).
Since 2001, under service contract, maintenance had been repairing depressions in the
pavement in the vicinity of the culverts by slab jacking or slab replacement with asphalt.
During the summer of 2002, depressions in the pavement were identified by maintenance
adjacent to the number one lane of the eastbound traveled way and under the entire
westbound pavement in the vicinity of each culvert. See pictures below.

Dip in Number 1 EB Lane. Summer 2002 Dip in entire WB freeway Section. Summer 2002

PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION
Due to high flows, inspection of the culverts was not feasible in 2001; however,
inspections conducted the following year (2002) revealed a corroded invert and
deflection in each pipe.

Corroded and Overlapping Invert. Note oval shape of pipe

180

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Due to the deterioration of the invert plate and the subsequent loss of hoop strength, these
culverts were deforming at the invert as revealed by a wide variation in cord length
measurements (eastbound: 0-15 inches, westbound 0-13 inches) between the edges of the
two plates (one edge on either side of the bottom or invert plate) that overlap the invert
plate. The loss of chord length represented the amount of deformation in the bottom of
the culvert due to external pressures that were no longer resisted by the hoop strength of
the culvert at the invert.
Over the years the bottom of the culvert had deteriorated - possibly due to corrosion from
de-icing salts placed on the roadway above during winter. Once the pipe had perforated,
stream flows could then pass beneath the pipe carrying away soil fines (either within the
stream flow or by moving outward into the voids of the courser graded surrounding
highway fill material). The as-built plans indicated the freeway fill was constructed with
shot rock consisting of larger diameter material than the finer grained and potentially
erodible backfill adjacent to the pipes.
As the fine material from beneath the pipe was evacuated, fill from the midline of the
pipe could then settle down to fill the void left by the lower evacuated material.
Surrounding and surface fill material would then begin to settle into the voids left by the
fill that used to surround the midline of the pipe. The structural section beneath the PCC
slabs began to fail and settle in and fill the voids of the settled fill material. The PCC
slabs were left bridging the void left by the failed structural section. Ultimately, the slabs
began to settle unevenly and created the surface dip.
This process may have been accentuated from the vibrations of truck traffic on the
relatively shallow cover of 10 15 feet above the pipes.
At the time of inspection in 2002, a 4 to 6-inch void existed beneath the invert throughout
most of the length of each culvert. 2-inch sized aggregate from the original bedding/fill
could be seen below the pipe. There were also some large voids present at the endwalls
where some stream flow was seeping out.
It was concluded that corrosion was far more problematic than abrasion as a contributor
to the invert perforation. Invariably, the corrugation valleys were what was perforated
and not the corrugation crests. In addition, while there was some wear apparent on the
connecting nuts/bolts that were in the invert, the extent of upstream side wear was very
slight - again indicating that while there is/was enough abrasion to remove the zinc
coating, it was not severe and some chemical action is attacking the steel.
As is typical, there were a number of small spot locations on the culvert barrels where
excessive compaction (or poor handling) during construction caused the zinc coating to
chip off or delaminate. In all of those locations rust had formed - most of which were
well above the area where water had ever flowed. This was another indicator of the
corrosive environment.
In August 2003, at the request of the District Maintenance Engineer, the corrosion
technology staff conducted a corrosion investigation; this included taking culvert
thickness measurements using an ultrasonic thickness gage and visual observations.
The measurements indicated that corrosion damage was limited to the lower 90 degrees.

181

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

There were perforations along the flow line for the entire length of both pipes and
corrosion stains were present throughout the lower 90 degrees.
There was no corrosion present in the upper 270 degrees along both pipes.
REPAIR
Because a bid contract was not possible due to environmental lead-time, work was done
under Emergency Force Account.
The original plan by Maintenance Engineering was to place a reinforced concrete invert
lining in each of the culverts with no thrust connection. However, District Hydraulics
expressed concerns that the loss of hoop strength may continue to allow these pipes to
collapse even farther, therefore, a structural stiffening system was considered in the invert
to regain the lost hoop strength.

Eastbound Pipe Prior to Concrete Placement with Temporary HDPE By-Pass, WWM and
Nelson Studs

The Contech Construction Products Co. repair method employing bearing angles as used
on another emergency culvert invert retrofit repair in District 3 under Highway 50 (03ED-50-14.0) was initially chosen by the District as the thrust connection design.
However, the Construction Resident Engineer requested the Underground Structures
Branch within the Division of Engineering Services to provide additional alternatives for
thrust transfer.
The Underground Structures Branch provided the District with the following three
alternatives:

182

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Alternative I.
1) Attach longitudinal bearing angles to culvert wall (normal to corrugations) with
Nelson Studs.
2) Install (2) 1/2" dia. x 1-1/4" long CPL Spec 1 Threaded Nelson Studs at each
corrugation peak (6" o/c).
3) Attach L5 x 3 x (LLV) longitudinal Bearing Angles to Nelson Studs. Holes
in angles can be shop punched.
4) Fasten L5 x 3 angles onto wall with Nelson Studs using 1/2" dia. hex nut and
flat washer.
5) Nelson Studs should be attached to only non-corroded portions of culvert wall.
6) Tack weld 4 x 4 6 x 6 WWF mesh to culvert invert at 12" o/c ea way, in
order to provide composite action.
7) Pour 4" thick (minimum thickness above crest) concrete invert slab (f'c = 2500
psi).
8) Extend concrete paving above the bearing angles. Slope concrete to provide for
drainage.
Alternative II
1) Attach longitudinal bearing angles to culvert wall (normal to corrugations) with
plug welds.
2) Initially tack weld L5 x 3 x (LLV) longitudinal Bearing Angles to culvert
wall. Holes in angles can be shop punched.
3) Fasten L5 x 3 angles onto wall with (2) 1/2" dia. plug welds at each corrugation
peak (6" o/c).
4) Plug welds should be placed at only non-corroded portions of culvert wall.
5) Tack weld 4 x 4 6 x 6 WWF mesh to culvert invert at 12" o/c ea way, in
order to provide composite action.
6) Pour 4" thick (minimum thickness above crest) concrete invert slab (f'c = 2500
psi) to cover bearing angles.
7) Extend concrete paving above the bearing angles. Slope concrete to provide for
drainage.
Alternative III (selected)
Observations were made that the Route 80 culverts have severe out-of-plane sidewalls
due to invert buckling and overlapping. Due to the undulations in the culvert invert and
walls, the pre-fabricated longitudinal Bearing Angles would have to be cut into many
shorter lengths in order to obtain a flush fit with the culvert walls. Also the corrugation
spacing varies between the original 6" o/c to 5" o/c due to the culvert invert/wall
undulations. This would prevent shop punching of holes in the longitudinal support
angles due to varying spacing requirements. Consequently, a simpler repair method
employing only Nelson Studs for locations with severe out-of-plane sidewalls was
requested. While not as desirable as Alternatives I or II, Alternative III entails the
following:

183

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

1) This procedure does not employ longitudinal Bearing Angles.

2) This repair method should only be used for culvert repairs where sidewalls are
still in excellent structural condition.
3) Nelson Studs are used as shear anchors to transfer culvert wall thrust into the new
concrete invert slab.
4) Weld (3) 1/2" dia. x 3-1/8" long H4L Headed Nelson Studs, spaced 3" apart
vertically, at each corrugation peak (6" o/c). Nelson Studs to be attached to only
non-corroded portions of culvert wall.
5) Tack weld 4 x 4 6 x 6 WWF mesh to bottom 90 degrees of culvert invert at
12" o/c ea way, in order to provide composite action.
6) Pour 4" thick (minimum thickness above crest) concrete invert slab (f'c = 4000
psi) to cover Nelson Studs.
7) Concrete lining to cover lower 90-degree internal angle. Slope top portions of
concrete to provide for drainage.
A structural bond to the host pipes can be achieved by using shear connector welding
studs (Nelson Studs) attached with a stud welding gun as shown below:

Shear connector welding studs (Trade name Nelson Headed Anchors and Nelson
Threaded Studs are acceptable structural fasteners. Nelson studs are regularly used in
bridge superstructure construction. They are relatively inexpensive (roughly 25 cents
each) and depending upon the overfill height and culvert pipe thrust, Nelson Headed
Anchors can function to anchor and transfer the culvert thrust load from the wall into the
concrete invert lining through shear transfer. In addition, they are welded electrically
which avoids the gaseous fumes resulting from normal structural welding. Six
longitudinal rows of studs (3 running left of center and 3 running right of center) 6 inches
apart on each corrugation were installed. Approximately, 4300 studs were installed in a
few days at a cost of about $7,000.
PAVING INVERT
The concrete design for the invert included a 4000 psi compressive strength and 3/8 inch
aggregate along with air entraining for the freeze-thaw conditions. The 4-inch thick
minor concrete invert lining was limited to the lower quadrant of the culvert (i.e., 90
degrees coverage from the 4:30 to 7:30 clock positions).

184

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

The voids directly below the invert were filled with the same concrete.

View of Both Pipes After Concrete Invert Paving

FILLING VOIDS BEHIND THE CULVERT

Before paving the invert, coupons were cut into the culvert wall in order to probe for
voids. Most of the voids found were below the springline, however, a significant void
was discovered near the outlet of the eastbound pipe above the springline at the 10 o
clock position. In both pipes the most significant voids were found at the inlet.

Coupons Cut in Sidewall of Culvert for Probing and Grouting

185

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

A decision was made to use polyurethane foam grout rather than cementitious grout to fill
the voids behind the culvert. The decision to use polyurethane grout was based primarily
on the fact that an agreement with the cementitious grouting contractor regarding Force
Account rates could not be reached. Furthermore, the District already had a Maintenance
service contract with a company called Uretek for slab jacking and had some success
with the material for jacking operations (including this site in January 2003). Although
the foam has been used in PCC slab raising work for several years on many California
State Highways, there were concerns that the Uretek foam may have environmental
impacts and durability issues, since it had not been used for this type of application. The
Resident Engineer explained the environmental concerns with cementitious grout
migrating into the creek during placement and stated that Uretek had provided data
showing the foam to be inert and that it would not leach into the creek. This material is
supposed to be inert in a live stream environment and will not absorb water. When first
placed, high-density polyurethane rigid closed cell hydro-insensitive grout is supposed to
form a mechanical seal by expanding twelve times its liquid volume in 8-12 seconds.
During grouting operations approximately 110 cubic yards of expanding grout were used.
Laser and string-line monitoring of the culvert were performed to monitor deflection.
The Engineers estimate for repairs was $400,000. The Resident Engineer estimated final
costs to be closer to $380,000.
LESSONS LEARNED

Use of Nelson studs can expedite repair procedures, although preliminary

investigation is required to verify that plate thickness and conditions (minimal
loss due to corrosion) are satisfactory for their use. In this case, the decision to
solely use Nelson Studs and totally omit using welded longitudinal bearing angles
proved to be a major time saver for the District during construction.
Use of polyurethane foam grout rather than cementitious grout to fill the voids
behind the culvert or any other material that has not been tested by the
Department requires approval from HQ before being shown on plans or
recommended in emergency or any other repair strategies. Communication and
collaboration between functional areas is key when addressing any changes that
occur in the field. Polyurethane foam grout has not been tested or approved by
Geotechnical Design to determine applicability and use for culvert repairs. The
main issues are whether material is inert and whether it develops strength
comparable to compaction grouting. This material cannot be pumped to a
specified density. Its durability in this application also needs to be monitored for
longevity.
However, it should be noted that the Uretek grout, while not approved, provided
some features that cementitious grouts could not provide and thus made void
filling viable in this location. These include:
1) Environmentally friendly in a live stream environment.
2) Potentially higher percentage of void space sealed from mechanical seal
and short expansion time of expanding polyurethane foam grout.
3) Hydro-insensitive

186

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Corrosion Investigation was limited to wall thickness measurements. No soil or

water samples were taken, therefore, no recommendations were provided for the
concrete mix design placed in the invert.

Prior to jacking or repairing subsiding pavements, an initial check to locate drainage

structures (culverts) below should first be undertaken. In this case, roadway slabs were
either jacked or replaced prior to inspection, problem identification and subsequent
repairs had been completed in the culverts below.

187

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Example 3: 03-Yub-49 KP 9.5/PM 5.9 (3C3504) Emergency Repair of CMP

(Summer 2003)

BACKGROUND
In 2002, Area Maintenance reported that the soffit of a 108-inch x 262 feet Structural
Steel Plate Pipe (SSPP) culvert was collapsing causing the pavement above the pipe to
crack. This culvert was originally constructed in 1940 as cross drainage for Campbell
Creek on Highway 49 near Camptonville (see map above).
Inside the culvert, corrosion, a perforated invert (up to 0.5 inch perforations) and missing
nuts and bolts from the steel plating were observed as a result of the corrosion. Also, the
bolt pattern of the steel plates were originally constructed in-line with each adjacent
plate instead of being offset, which might have contributed to structural weakness.

Inlet of Original Pipe

Outlet of Original Pipe

Initially Maintenance Engineering proceeded with a regular rehabilitation/repair contract

and an environmental document that restricted the start of work to August (water levels,
etc). However, since the rehabilitation work needed to be done before the coming winter,
188

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

an Informal Bid contract by Directors Order was executed in order to complete the repair
work on time.
A study was performed by the District Hydraulics Branch to identify the condition of the
existing pipe and make recommendations for pipe lining or replacement. Due to distress
in both the invert and the soffit, complete lining of the pipe was selected.
Based on velocity concerns for smooth-bore pipe, the recommendation made was to use a
liner pipe using the largest corrugated steel pipe that could be inserted.
Internal measurements of the failing original pipe were taken and hydraulic analysis
verified that the diameter could be reduced to 84-inch with a CSP liner without
detrimental impact. A 0.168-inch thick (8 gage) CSP liner was selected from the
Alternative Pipe Culvert recommendation prepared by the District Materials Branch to
provide 50 years of service life based on a soil pH of 5.85 and soil Minimum Resistivity
of 2900 and assuming non-abrasive flow conditions.
CONSTRUCTION
The insertion process consisted of sliding individual 20 foot segments one at a time,
coupling them and then pushing the combined pieces into the host pipe - initially using
one excavator at the upstream end. After the liner was inserted to approximately the
midpoint of the host pipe, a second excavator was added to pull from the outlet end.
While the jacking operation was aided by the welded skids on the bottom of the CMP
liner (see detail on next page), the existing bolts in the host pipe were problematic.
Once all of the liner was in place, continuous grouting of the annular space was
performed.
The resulting hydrostatic pressure at the downstream end from continuous grouting of the
annular space between the existing culvert and the 84-inch CSP liner placed inside
caused the liner to float and buckle with grout leaking out of the liners joints which had
been specified as watertight with gaskets. The grouting operation was immediately
stopped and a Contract Change Order (CCO) was developed.

189

DIB 83-04

Grouting Through Grout Port in Soffit of Liner

August 1, 2014

Grout from Leaking Joints in Invert

The CCO modified the design to welded joints for the CSP liner and the grouting from
continuous to grouting in 3 sections (lifts). The continuous grouting was originally
anticipated to take 2 days. The sectional grouting took 6 days. The installation of 8
welded skids as shown on the plans (see end view) was omitted to avoid additional
welding.
The total completed construction cost was $340,000.
LESSONS LEARNED

Preliminary Investigations
To more completely determine the reasons for the culverts failure the following
studies were warranted but not performed prior to selecting a repair strategy:
1)
2)
3)
4)

Wall thickness measurements in host pipe

Waterside pH and resistivity
Structural analysis of host pipe and proposed repair
Void detection and geotechnical investigation

At the time of repair, it was still unclear what the failure mechanism for the host
pipe was. In general, coordination with Underground Structures and Geotechnical
Design from within the Division of Engineering Services (DES), and
Headquarters Hydraulics should be made for any liner larger than 60 inches

190

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

diameter. The repair work performed may well provide an effective solution,
however, because several unknowns still exist there is a potential for reduced
service life if all of the underlying mechanisms that led to failure of the original
pipe have not been addressed by the repair.

Material Selection

Because the upper half of the culvert was failing, based on the Materials Report
and hydraulic analysis, it was determined that lining with a full circumferential
84-inch diameter CSP liner was the appropriate repair strategy. With the
information that was gathered, i.e., from visual inspection (flexible and deformed
host pipe, crack in roadway above pipe), the as-builts (profile/grade), the
Alternative Pipe Recommendation (based on a soil pH of 5.85 and soil Minimum
Resistivity of 2900 and assuming non-abrasive flow conditions with velocities
ranging from 5 ft/s to 6.5 ft/s (see paragraph following alternative repair strategies
below), and known host pipe dimensions and profile, a number of alternative
repair strategies could also have been considered. Some of these include:
1) A Rigid liner design; This may have been preferable for the given design
parameters to account for loading, resulting grouting pressures during
construction and potential abrasive flow condition that was not identified
in the Materials Report: RCP, welded pipeliners or Reinforced Polymer
Mortar are all viable rigid (or semi-rigid) liner material options.
2) A flexible sliplining system with a modified high compressive strength
structural concrete mix placed in stages in lieu of annular space grout with
adequate consideration for bracing and joint type to handle pumping
pressures. In effect, this is another rigid liner design to independently
handle loading and assumes the host pipe no longer can. For CSP steel

191

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

pipe, usually an abrasive and corrosion resistant lining is preferred, such

as PVC or HDPE.
3) A 360 degree shotcrete lining with welded wire mesh or synthetic fibers.
Synthetic fiber reinforced shotcrete or shotcrete lining with welded wire
mesh are preferred if ground movement is present. In tests conducted by
others, at larger deformations (with consequent greater crack widths) the
mesh and certain fiber reinforced shotcretes displayed exceptional residual
load carrying capacity. This is another pipe within a pipe concept that is
fairly easy to construct.
It should be noted that the Culvert Recommendation Report prepared by District
Hydraulics identified the flow velocity to be 22 ft/s for the Design Storm
discharge. The same report specifically recommended not using smooth-bore
pipe. Therefore, most of the alternative repair strategies described above would
also require consideration of an energy dissipator at the outlet.
If any voids behind the existing culvert had been detected, they usually require
grouting before lining or other repair can proceed.
If the host pipe is deformed, any liner may be subjected to stress concentrations
where host culvert is failing and soil loads are transferred. It is imperative that the
host pipe can adequately handle loads by transferring stresses to the surrounding
soil. For any liner placed inside of another flexible pipe, which is already under
distress, some loads will be applied directly to the liner. Therefore, if it is not
possible to make the host pipe capable of sustaining design loads, it should be
either replaced, or lined with a structural system independently capable of
handling loads.

Construction
A preferable alternative to the welded skids to aid the liner insertion process may
have been to weld steel plate to the invert of the host pipe.
Particular attention to the contractors grouting plan for long, large diameter,
flexible liners is needed for pipes on a steep grade where there is a potential for
significant hydrostatic pressure. Both the specified gasketed water tight joints and
method for continuous grouting needed modifying in the field to welded joints
and grouting in separate lifts.
As previously discussed, the resulting hydrostatic pressure at the downstream end
from continuous grouting of the annular space between the existing culvert and
the 84-inch CSP liner placed inside caused the liner to float and buckle with grout
leaking out of the liners joints. In this instance, the invert elevation difference
between the inlet and outlet was 24 feet.

192

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Example 4: Compaction Grouting

Project location: Century Freeway, Los Angeles, California.
Construction period: August 1996 - August 1997
General contractor: Denver Grouting Services, Inc.
Scope of work: Approximately 6500 cubic yards compaction grouting
Contract value: $7,700,000
Background:
In March of 1995, major sinkholes occurred along a new 4-mile section of the I-105
freeway between the San Gabriel and Los Angeles Rivers in Los Angeles, CA. The
sinkholes were attributed to infiltration of soil into the storm-drain system through
insufficiently sealed pipe joints. Caltrans issued a multi-phased contract to Denver
Grouting Services, Inc. (DGS) to: (1) stabilize the sub-soils and fill voids along
alignments of Corrugated Metal (CMP) and Reinforced Concrete (RCP) storm-drain
pipes beneath the freeway pavement, (2) repair leaking pipe joints, (3) mitigate
liquefaction-potential along the pipe alignment under one of the pump-station structures,
and (5) install water and observation wells for subsequent ground water draw-down
testing.
This freeway was built as much as 40 feet below surrounding ground levels, which
required a major water-pumping system to be installed at the time of construction (1993).
The storm drains were installed 15 to 20 feet below the road surface, which meant the
storm drain pipes were as much as 60 feet below the original ground level. The
groundwater table was less than 5 feet below the freeway pavement in some areas.
Solution:
Compaction Grouting was the method chosen to support the roadway and traffic loads by
stabilizing the soils surrounding 14,500 feet of RCP and CMP storm drains, and to
densify liquefiable sands beneath one of the pump structures. Storm-drain sizes included
24, 30, 36, 42, 48, and 54 inch diameters. It should be emphasized that compaction
grouting primarily applies to voids not immediately adjacent to the culvert (i.e., beyond
12 inches) to support the roadway and traffic loads. See Index 6.1.2 for grouting voids in
the soil envelope immediately adjacent to the culvert.
Geotechnical Conditions:
The storm drains were installed through alluvial deposits consisting of medium sand, silty
sand, silt and clayey silt layers which varied in thickness along the alignment. A mixture
of these native soils had been used as storm-drain "trench" backfill at the time of
construction. In general, very low densities and voids existed around storm drains where
they were below the groundwater table, and soil infiltration was maximized. Fluctuating
water tables had also affected the remaining alignments to varying degrees, creating
unacceptable densities and created some localized voiding. Because depths of the CMP
and RCP drains varied between 15 to 20 feet. (below the road surface), it was determined
that the ground improvement program should extend from a minimum of 5 feet below the

193

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

storm drains invert up to within 5 feet of the road surface. The work was to be performed
with minimal disruption of traffic.
Cut-off Criteria:
The grout injection cutoff criteria included:
Maximum 0.5-inch allowable pavement uplift or 0.5-inch storm-drain deflection. A
predetermined volume of grout per foot stage.
Maximum grout pressure "at the header" of 450 psi, or a sudden 50 psi drop in pressure,
indicating soil shear or grout travel was occurring.
Equipment:
The Compaction Grout equipment employed met the requirements of Caltrans to
minimize its operational "effects on traffic" and involved "The Denver System" as
developed by DGS, including:
Mobile Grout Batch Plants
DGS 2015 Mobile Grout Pumps
DGS 2" I.D. Grout Casing, 3 to 5 foot lengths
DGS Grout Casing Retrieval Systems
Specialized Casing Driving Systems

194

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Appendix H Design Examples

Design Example 1: (36 in. x 227 ft 10-ga CMP)

Video Inspection Photo

Originally installed in 1974, a 10 gage CMP has a maximum cover of approximately 50

feet, and a slope of 12.3%. Inspection photos taken in 2004 indicate a stained invert but
no perforations. The culvert barrel shape and joints were deemed in good condition. In
2007 a video inspection was performed and the inspection report indicated:
Small holes exist in the invert throughout the pipe with the outlet side of the pipe
having the most perforations. At the inlet, we did not see any perforations. Small
to medium rock bed loads exist at this location. The low flow is mostly going
through the pipe rather than underneath or elsewhere.
The original Materials Report stated both the pH and resistivity for the site were neutral
(7.2 and 10,000 ohm-cm) and the stream materials were described abrasive. The report
recommended using additional gage thickness for design. The District determined that
abrasion was the primary cause of premature degradation at the site. The estimated outlet
velocity based on the Q2-5 discharge of the original CMP was 16 fps.
The District decided to evaluate the feasibility of sliplining using plastic pipe liner (see
Index 6.1.3.1.1) since a large enough construction footprint was available within the right
of way and the 36 inch diameter host pipe was too small for human entry invert paving.
The first step was to survey the existing culvert carefully by personnel with confined
space training (see Index 3.1.3) to determine the maximum diameter of pipe liner that
could be inserted through the entire length of the host pipe depending on the control
points. Since no major deflections were found, a 32 inch maximum OD was established
as a design parameter.
Next, the minimum liner thickness for a 50 year design was determined from the
following steps:

195

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

1) Theoretical metal loss due to corrosion:

From HDM Figure 855.3B (pH=7.2, min. resistivity = 10,000 ohm cm), for an
original metal thickness of 0.138 inches (10 gage) the estimated number of years
to first perforation is 90 years. Therefore, the corrosive wear rate to the pipe is
estimated at 1.53 mils/year or 51 mils after 33 years.
2) Estimated metal loss due to abrasion:
From the video inspection, the pipe was already beginning to perforate after 33
years, therefore, the additional wear rate for abrasion = 138 mils (original metal
thickness) - 51 mils (metal loss due to corrosion) = 87 mils
87 mils/33 years = 2.6 mils/year
3) Abrasion level:
The estimated outlet velocity based on the Q2-5 discharge of the original CMP is
16 fps. With a 2.6 mils/year metal loss for abrasion, HDM Tables 855.2A and
855.2D indicated the abrasion level using engineering judgment was between
level 5 and level 6. The velocity component was in the level 6 range, but the bed
load volume was not (small to medium bed loads exist at this location).
4) Minimum liner thickness from HDM Table 855.2F:
The minimum plastic liner thickness needed for a 50 year design from HDM
855.2F for level 6 using 16 fps was 0.6 inches (PVC) and 1.2 inches (HDPE). For
the upper range of level 5, the minimum plastic liner thickness needed was 0.35
inches (PVC) and 0.875 inches (HDPE) respectively. Using engineering
judgment it was determined to use minimum plastic liner thicknesses of 0.5
inches (PVC) and 1 inch (HDPE). From HDM Table 853.1B, the following
material choices were potential candidates:
o DR 41 PVC (AWWA C905) 32 inch OD
o SDR 35 PVC (46 psi) 27 inch OD, and
o SDR 32.5 HDPE (ASTM Designation F 714) 32 inch OD
From Index 6.1.3.1.1.3, HDPE solid wall slipliner: a 32" OD SDR 32.5 liner has a
wall thickness of 0.985 inches and an ID of 30.2 inches. This type of pipe can be
fusion welded or connected with joints that have no bell. 30 inch DR 41 PVC
(AWWA C905) is manufactured with an OD of 32 inches, a 0.78 inch minimum
wall thickness and an ID of 30.44 inches and is also fusion welded. However, for
the SDR 35 PVC pipe to fit into the 36 inch diameter host pipe with annular space
grout, a pipe OD of 27 inches and a bell OD dimension of 32.5 inches is required.
With a 0.75 inch minimum wall thickness the ID is reduced 25.5 inches. See
below:

196

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

27 in. OD SDR 35 PVC Pipe with 32.5 in. Diameter Bell

For a 25.5 inch ID, hydraulic calculations indicated overtopping nearby at the design
discharge for the diameter reduction needed to fit the bell into the host pipe:

Headwater Analysis for SDR 35 PVC

For the two fusion welded options, the calculated headwater elevation increased by 4.8
feet for the design discharge and did not exceed the available headwater (i.e., no
overtopping):

Headwater Comparison of Existing CMP and 30 in. ID Liner

197

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

The estimated design (Q100 outlet) velocity of the original CMP was 19 fps. For an
assumed 30 inch (32 inch OD) smooth walled liner in place, the estimated peak (outlet)
velocity was 29 fps which occurred at a discharge below the 100-year design discharge.
The 100-year design discharge flowed full which reduced the velocity by almost 50
percent due to friction losses. However, because the existing material was worn to
bedrock at the outlet there was no consideration for energy dissipation.
Two contract bid items were established - each with a pay quantity of 227 LF and SSP
no. 15-6.10 was edited to include two alternatives, i.e., SDR 32.5 HDPE 32 inch OD
HDPE solid wall pipe (AASHTO M 326 and ASTM F 714), and 30 inch SDR 41 PVC
(AWWA C905).
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
From the survey of the existing culvert by personnel with confined space training, no
voids in the invert were noted. However, a significant period of time may pass from the
video inspection used for design to construction. Typically, wherever there are voids in
the materials below the invert of a small diameter culvert and these voids are greater than
3 inches deep, they should be filled with slurry cement backfill. Therefore, SSP no. 156.02 was included and bid item number 066139 was added to be paid for as change order
work.
To maintain maximum hydraulic efficiency in inlet control, a worn flared end section at
the inlet was replaced; however, if the design headwater was greater than the available
headwater, a 4 foot headwater reduction was deemed possible using a 1 inch thick cured
in place pipe (CIPP) with no annular space grout. HDM Table 855.2F indicates the
abrasion resistance of CIPP to be slightly higher than HDPE. Therefore, the designer
added 1 inch thick CIPP as a third liner alternative in the bid package. See HDM Index
853.4.
A 0.25 inch thick welded steel pipeliner (with annular space grout - see Index 5.1.2.2.4)
was also considered and met all of the design parameters, however, because structural
repairs were not required it was discarded.
Calcium aluminate mortar was not considered due to an excessive design thickness of 5
inches which would have resulted in a 10 inch reduction in diameter.

198

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Design Example 2: 108 inch x 384 ft SSPP (10 gage)

From the as-builts, the SSPP was placed in 1978. From Maintenance inspection records it
was determined the first perforation in the invert occurred within approximately 25 years.
The pH and resistivity for the site is 7.1 and 1,000 ohm-cm. The Q2-5 year velocity in the
pipe is estimated to be 15-16 fps and the channel materials are abrasive (from field
review, HDM Table 855.2A and Table 855.2B, the abrasion level is 6).

Abrasive Channel Materials and Worn Invert

Design an invert repair for a 50 year maintenance free service life.

Solution:
1) Original thickness = 0.140 inches (10 gage)
2) From HDM Figure 855.3B, with pH= 7.1 and R=1000 ohm-cm, years to
perforation (corrosion) = 19 years x 2.8 (gage factor) = 53 years. Therefore,
expected annual wear rate (corrosion) = 140/53 = 2.6 mils/year
2.6 mils/year x 25 (years to 1st perf.) = 65 mils
3) 140 mils 65 mils =75 mils total abrasive wear
4) 75 mils/25 (years to 1st perf.) = 3 mils/year abrasive wear
5) Compare wear rate with HDM Table 855.2D for a Q2-5 year flow velocity of 15.5
fps = 3.25 mils/year abrasive wear
6) Use 3 mils/year since years to first perforation were known in this case
7) See HDM Table 855.2E. Multiply estimated metal wear rate by a factor of 75-100
and then multiply by number of years design service life (50) for total design
thickness (inches) of concrete: 3 mils/year x 50 years x 75 to 100 = 11.2 to 15
inches
Note HDM Table 855.2F provides thickness guidance for concrete for abrasion levels
between 4 and 5 but not for level 6. AltPipe will estimate concrete loss due to abrasion
regardless of abrasion level. However, it is recommended to use the above procedure
when years to first perforation are known and the abrasion wear rate can be estimated
since each culvert site is unique.
The designer must now determine if there is enough available headwater elevation at the
site to accommodate a concrete lining thickness of 11 - 15 inches. HDM Table 855.2F
199

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

provides thickness guidance for alternative materials at various abrasion levels. This site
is within the lower range of abrasion level 6. From Table 855.2F, alternative invert
linings include: paving a 3 inch thick layer of calcium aluminate abrasion resistant
concrete (see footnote 5), placing 0.3 inch minimum thick steel plate, or concreted rock
slope protection (see footnote 1 for abrasion level 6).

Worn Invert (Abrasion) Before and After Repairs

In this case there was enough available headwater elevation at the site to accommodate a
concrete invert lining thickness of up to 15 inches and concreted rock slope protection
with facing selected for the concreted rock grading from Section 72 of the Standard
Specifications because it compared well with the maximum bedload size (see photos).
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
In addition to determining the feasibility and design of paving the invert, a site
investigation by the designer and the corrosion unit within DES was performed which
determined:

A large void was present below the invert

Voids existed as high as 10 o clock (from hammer soundings)
Minimal deflection (6%) from measurements taken inside
The original metal thickness (0.138 in) existed at 5 & 7 o clock and higher

Since a significant section of the invert was missing Underground Structures within DES
was consulted regarding input parameters for the following standard details:

XS-17-060-1 Corrugated Metal Culvert: General Procedures for Invert Repair

XS-17-060-2 Corrugated Metal Culvert: Details for Invert Repair

Bid items were established separately for filling the invert void with slurry cement
backfill and for contact grouting the remaining voids. Section 15-6.03 includes
specifications for contact grouting. Section 15-6.02 (fill culvert voids) was not used in
this example because of the separate bid items already established.
Supplemental funds were added to the project for the unknown quantities of slurry
cement backfill and grout described in payment Sections 15-6.01D and 15-6.03D.

200

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

Design Example 3: (84 x 145 ft RCP)

Originally an 84" 10 gage SSPP (L=145 feet) was placed in 1971 and subsequently
replaced with an RCP in 2006 after the invert failed and a large depression appeared on
the roadway. See photos below.

Failed Original 84" - 10-gage SSPP

By 2011 the new pipe barrel was prematurely experiencing excessive invert wear and
some of the steel reinforcement was exposed immediately downstream of the last joint.
Therefore the RCP had already reached the end of its 'maintenance free' service life after
just 5 years and the concrete had worn at least an inch and was in need of repairs. See
photo below.

Exposed Steel Reinforcement

Hydraulic analysis of the RCP indicated the Q2-5 velocity in the pipe ranged from 12 fps
at the inlet to 22 fps at the outlet. To determine the wear rate of the site, both the failed
original SSPP and the worn RCP were examined. Using the estimated wear rate based on
assuming 30 years until first perforation of the 10-gage (0.140 in.) original SSPP, the
combined abrasion/corrosion wear for steel at the site was approximately 5 mils (0.0046
in.) per year. Based on HDM Figure 855.3B (site pH = 6.8 and the min. resistivity =
1,100 ohm-cm) the abrasive wear component of the steel was estimated at 1.9 mils/year:

201

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

1) Original thickness = 0.140 inches (10 gage)

2) From HDM Figure 855.3B, with pH= 6.8 and R=1,100 ohm-cm, years to
perforation (corrosion) = 18 years x 2.8 (gage factor) = 50.4 years. Therefore,
expected annual wear rate (corrosion) = 140/50.4 = 2.78 mils/year
2.78 mils/year x 30 (years to 1st perf.) = 83 mils (theoretical corrosion wear after
30 years)
3) 140 mils 83 mils =57 mils total abrasive wear after 30 years
57 mils/30 (years to 1st perf.) = 1.9 mils/year abrasive wear rate (approximately
abrasion level 5 in HDM Tables 855.2D and 855.2F)
At this site, to obtain 50 years or more maintenance free service life, a 3 gage structural
steel plate pipe was required.
For the existing RCP (see photo below), the estimated wear rate of the 1-inch concrete
cover was a simple calculation based on 5 years until first exposure of the steel
reinforcement. The estimated wear of the concrete is 1-inch/5 years or 200 mils/year (0.2
in/year).
In this case, the site data compared quite favorably with HDM Table 855.2B which
indicates the relative wear between concrete and steel ranges from 75 to 100.

Existing 84 inch RCP Replacement at 5 years

From HDM Tables 855.2D and 855.2A, 1.9 mils/year anticipated wear for the steel
indicates the abrasion level was 5 and RCP is generally not recommended. Therefore, to
provide the required 50 year service life for repairs to the RCP invert, the following
options were recommended:

Pave lower 90 degrees of invert with 10 inches (7 sack 6000 psi) concrete shaped
with a flat bottom to spread flow concentration, or
Pave lower 90 degrees of invert with 3 inches abrasion resistant (calcium
aluminate based) concrete or mortar, or
Anchor 3 gage or 1 gage SSP sections to invert (lots of drilling & epoxy work!)

202

DIB 83-04

August 1, 2014

The concrete invert paving repair option was selected by the District. At the inlet where
the Q2-5 velocity in the pipe was lower (12 fps compared to 22 fps at the outlet), the
paving transitioned to a 6 inch section. All other hydraulic parameters for allowable
headwater were satisfied.

Concrete Invert Repairs with Trapezoidal Section

203