Proceedings of the 19th Plastic Pipes Conference

PPXIX
September 24-26, 2018, Las Vegas, Nevada

ENGINEERING AND TESTING REQUIREMENTS FOR

INFRASTRUCTURE PIPELINE APPLICATIONS UTILIZING
HDPE RECYCLED MATERIALS

John Kurdziel, PE Michael Pluimer, PhD

Advanced Drainage Systems University of Minnesota - Duluth
Hilliard, OH, USA Breezy Point, MN, USA

SHORT SUMMARY

Corrugated HDPE pipes have been successfully used for decades for sewers, culverts
and land drainage applications and are advantageous due to their durability and service
life in a variety of installation conditions. Pipes used for highway and storm sewer
applications typically require stricter material standards than pipes used for agricultural
and other land drainage applications since the service life demand for highway and storm
sewer applications is generally greater than that for agricultural applications. The primary
service-life limiting factor for corrugated HDPE pipes is stress cracking via the slow-crack-
growth mechanism. Since stress cracking only occurs in tension, it is important to limit the
magnitude of tensile stress in the pipe wall. For highway and storm drainage applications,
this is done by installing the pipes with well-compacted structural backfill materials and
conducting post-installation inspections to ensure deflections are limited to 5% or less.
For agricultural and storm drainage applications, tensile stresses can be limited by using
shaped trenches that conform to the radius of the pipe and by ensuring the pipe is free
from rocks and large clumps of soil that may cause local impingements.

KEYWORDS

Service life, Corrugated pipe, Drainage, Recycled Materials, Agriculture

1 Copyright © 2018 by (John Kurdziel, PE, Advanced Drainage Systems)

 Proceedings of the 19th Plastic Pipes Conference
PPXIX
September 24-26, 2018, Las Vegas, Nevada

ABSTRACT

Contrary to most adopted perceptions on the use of recycled HDPE materials in pipe, it is
not necessarily the high-end applications – such as sanitary sewers, storm sewers and
highway culverts – that require the most engineering scrutiny. Pipes for these applications
are typically placed in extremely well-monitored installations with excellent backfill, which
results in relatively low stresses on the pipe wall. Land drainage applications, on the other
hand, are often placed in poor soils with little or no field inspection. Although this may not
be of much concern in a farm field with shallow installation of 100-mm (4-inch) pipe, it is
quite a different situation with agricultural trunk lines that can include up to 1500-mm (60-
inch) and are often installed in the same manner and with the same backfill materials as
small-diameter farm field drainage pipe. The pipe wall stresses in these applications can
greatly exceed those in sanitary and storm sewer applications. Since high tensile stresses
in the pipe wall can lead to stress cracking in corrugated HDPE pipes, it is important to
design the pipes with materials that are resistant to slow crack growth initiation and
propagation, both for pipes manufactured with virgin and recycled materials. This paper
examines the types and magnitude of stresses associated with various installations and
loading conditions and provides recommendations for material performance properties for
these pipes, both regards to mechanical properties as well as stress crack resistance.
Minimum performance requirements for the un-notched constant ligament stress (UCLS)
test are provided for pipes manufactured with recycled materials based on the desired
service life and service conditions for the pipes. It also offers suggestions for the required
testing protocols to achieve and validate these materials.

INTRODUCTION

The primary factors that limit the service life of corrugated HDPE pipe are stress cracking
via the slow-crack-growth (SCG) mechanism (also known as Stage II brittle cracking) and
Stage III cracking via oxidation or ultraviolet degradation. Figure 1 shows an illustration of
the failure mechanisms for polyethylene pipe materials (1). Note that Stage I failures are
generally not a concern for corrugated pipes, since the tensile stresses in non-pressure
drainage pipes are not typically high enough to generate these types of failures.

Figure 1: Failure modes for polyethylene pipe materials (1)

2 Copyright © 2018 by (John Kurdziel, PE, Advanced Drainage Systems)

 Proceedings of the 19th Plastic Pipes Conference
PPXIX
September 24-26, 2018, Las Vegas, Nevada

To ensure the service life of the product is not compromised, it is important to limit the
tensile stresses in the pipe wall so that the Stage II failure curve extends outside of the
desired service life window. For example, if a service life of tsvc years is desired, the tensile
stress must be below some critical level, crit, as illustrated in Figure 2. This figure takes
into account the lower confidence limit of the brittle failure curve, which can be obtained
experimentally via techniques described in ISO 9080 and ASTM D2837 for pressure pipe
grade materials and Annex A of AASHTO M 294 (2) for corrugated HDPE pipes
manufactured with recycled materials.

Figure 2: Illustration of using LCL to determine service life

The majority of gravity-flow buried pipe installations result in a condition where

compressive stresses in the pipe wall dominate the tensile stresses. This is due to the
effects of hoop compression as the backfill materials are compacted around the
thermoplastic pipe. The deeper the pipe is buried, the greater the circumferential hoop
compression stress. However, there are some conditions in which high tensile stresses
can be attained. For example, in shallow-cover applications where the pipe is highly
deflected, the pipe may experience high tensile stresses at the outer springline of the pipe
and the inner crown and invert. This condition is not real common but can occur in very
soft soils. Another condition which may lead to high tensile stresses is one in which the
pipe experiences longitudinal bending, either due to line and grade issues or the presence
of large lumps or rocks in the bedding.

These installation conditions that can result in high tensile strains are not real common in
most engineered installations such as pipes installed for highway and storm drainage
applications. However, if proper care is not taken, these conditions could be present for
smaller diameter pipes used for agricultural drainage applications. The primary focus of
this paper is on pipes used in these applications.

3 Copyright © 2018 by (John Kurdziel, PE, Advanced Drainage Systems)

 Proceedings of the 19th Plastic Pipes Conference
PPXIX
September 24-26, 2018, Las Vegas, Nevada

DISCUSSION

The engineering community has conducted research and investigated the impact of
various installation types on pipe performance since the development of the first conduit
for transmission of fluids. Even with the benefits of all our three-dimensional modeling,
finite element computer analysis and numerous field research instrumentation and data
collection, we do not seem to be any closer to the perfect soil-structure interaction
evaluation than we were over 100 years ago. Perhaps it is time to revisit one of these
original studies.

In 1913, Marston and Anderson of the Iowa State College of Agriculture and Mechanical
Arts published the report, The Theory of Loads on Pipes in Ditches and Tests of Cement
and Clay Drain Tile and Sewer Pipe (3). Of interest in this report was the impact of very
narrow trenches on the loading and performance of buried pipe. The pipe material in this
case did not matter as the thrust of the analysis was the impact on a very narrow trench,
one that matched the outside diameter of the pipe, on the loads applied to the pipe. The
authors found that the weight of the ditch filling materials will arch over from the sides of
the ditch to the pipe at about the height of the 45-degree points on the circumference of
the pipe (on either side of the center of the crown for a total angle of 90 degrees). Outside
of the 45-degree points, the ditch filling is of less depth and will settle less in the process
of compaction than the material nearer the center of the ditch. The frictional resistance
will be developed along the lines corresponding to the outside diameter of the pipe. The
amount of this frictional resistance is determined by the value of the coefficient of internal
friction of the ditch filling material and not that of the coefficient of side friction. Based on
this observation of the authors one can theorize that the best pipe installation would be
one with a trench width equivalent to the outside diameter of the pipe. Although a wider
trench allows for the opportunity to compact materials around the pipe, it can also result
in greater loads on the pipe and consequentially an overall poor installation if the material
or compaction level is of poor performance quality with respect to the insitu material. The
narrow trench condition is what is typically used for small diameter [100-mm (4-inch)]
agricultural drainage or land drainage applications utilizing trenchers for direct burial of
pipe. Ironically, however, we design these installations as embankment conditions, totally
ignoring the benefits of the very narrow trenching construction practices that Marston and
Anderson theorized over 100-years ago.

M. G. Spangler in his 1941 study, The Structural Design of Flexible Culvert (4), noted that
until this time no successful attempt was made to develop a rational means for designing
this type of structure (flexible pipe) according to the principles of mechanics. It was in this
report where the “Iowa Deflection Equation” was first described and introduced. The key
analysis associated with the Iowa Equation is flexible pipe react with passive pressures to
support the overburden of soil above the pipe not with active pressures typically
associated with rigid pipe. These passive pressures develop as the pipe deflects outward
at the springline and pushes against the earth sidefill. The amount of deflection is therefore
directly related to the stability of this sidefill material. If this material is very stiff, the amount
of pipe deflection will be minimal. Conversely, poor, low density sidefill materials will result

4 Copyright © 2018 by (John Kurdziel, PE, Advanced Drainage Systems)

 Proceedings of the 19th Plastic Pipes Conference
PPXIX
September 24-26, 2018, Las Vegas, Nevada
in greater deflection. A good insitu soil in a very narrow trench will therefore be much more
desirable than an installation with placed material with insufficient levels of compaction.

With rigid pipe the vertical reaction on the bottom of the pipe is distributed over a very
narrow width of the pipe diameter resulting in the highest stresses at the invert. Spangler
observed this condition was different with flexible pipe and stated, “In flexible pipe this
tendency is counteracted by the relatively large deflection of the pipe, which flattens the
bottom segment, increases the reaction near the edges of the bedding, and brings about
a more nearly uniform distribution of the pressure of the width of the bedding.” Spangler
would later go on to define the benefits of shape beddings and their consequential
relationship to what we now consider the standard ASTM D2321 (5) thermoplastic trench
installation details.

Spangler’s flexible pipe work was conducted mainly on corrugated metal pipe, and as long
as deflection was controlled, essentially not allowing flattening of the arch, the metal had
significant capacity to prevent any rupture or buckling of the “metal ring.” The capacity of
thermoplastics’ material mechanical properties, however, are not as substantial as metal.
With lower modulus and tensile capacity, the thrust capacity of a thermoplastic profile must
be analyzed differently than that of steel. The first major work to address these differences
between metal and thermoplastics was undertaken by Simpson, Gumpertz and Heger and
published as the Structural Plastics Design Manual (FHWA–TS-82-216) in 1982 (6). This
publication was the basis of much of the work later conducted under contract with the
Transportation Research Board and adopted into the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design
Specifications (7).

One of the most significant studies to define the design methodologies and limits for
thermoplastic pipe was done by McGrath, Moore and Hsuan, “Updated Test and Design
Methods for Thermoplastic Drainage Pipe”, published in NCHRP Research Report 631
(8). This research report provided the necessary compressive limits, local and global
buckling limits and bending strain limits for thermoplastic profile geometries. It completed
the missing link to tie the work by Marston and Spangler into a unified design methodology
for plastic materials.

Based on the overall design implications of these previous efforts, one can take this
analysis a step further, if the loads on the pipe are greatly reduced by installing a pipe in
a very narrow trench condition bounded by stable insitu soil, the stresses on the pipe are
greatly reduced. Bedding the pipe with a shaped bedding also allows the pipe to deflect
to create a more uniform distribution of loads on the invert of the pipe, thereby, also
reducing the applied stress in the pipe wall. If the material and profile geometry is now
known, the thermoplastic pipe capacity can be determined, and as such, a general fill
height can be estimated for the type of installation. The last remaining issue that must
then be assessed is the durability of the pipe with regards to stress cracking, the governing
failure mechanism regarding the service life of corrugated HDPE pipes for drainage
applications. As discussed above, stress cracking is directly related to the amount of
deformation or stress the pipe experiences.

5 Copyright © 2018 by (John Kurdziel, PE, Advanced Drainage Systems)

 Proceedings of the 19th Plastic Pipes Conference
PPXIX
September 24-26, 2018, Las Vegas, Nevada
AGRICULTURAL DRAINAGE PIPE INSTALLATION AND DESIGN
CONSIDERATIONS

Thermoplastic pipe structural design is determined by analyzing installation conditions for

both short and long-term loadings with their respective material mechanical properties.
Field performance and laboratory research has shown that thermoplastic pipe reacts to
instantaneous loads with its initial short-term properties. For the most part, these
conditions seldom govern thermoplastic pipe design as live load, fatigue and impact loads
are well within the design limits of the product’s capabilities. Long-term loads and
environmental stress cracking are the main issues which govern design, especially for
polyethylene pipe.

Tensile stresses govern both the structural performance and durability of HDPE profile
wall pipe. As noted earlier, if one can control deflection, the applied stress and related
strain are within the design limits of the materials. It is therefore not so much as issue of
the status or importance of a facility that matters but how much deflection the pipe will
experience. A sanitary sewer installation must guarantee a 100-year service life for both
structural performance and durability. It is also typically under the deepest fills of any pipe
installation since it is a gravity flow system that must be placed below gas, water, and
storm sewer lines. One would assume based on these conditions, it has the highest
stresses, but that is not necessarily the case. Sanitary sewer installations must be totally
watertight and typically have a very flat slope, so joint integrity, line and grade are all
critical and heavily monitored and inspected during installation; henceforth, deflection is
well-controlled and the associated stresses very predictable. Furthermore, the deep fills
tend to impart more hoop compressive strains on the pipe wall. This limits the amount of
tensile stress in the pipe, which is the critical factor affecting the service life relative to
stress cracking.

Agricultural drainage applications on the other hand are very shallow. However, the
installations are not as well-controlled so the deflections are typically greater; and although
the applied load from the earth overburden may not be as high as in a sanitary installation,
the overall stresses and strains resulting from deflection and localized buckling of the
profiles may be greater. Because of this, stress cracking can be of even greater concern
for these pipes than in more well-controlled installations such as sanitary sewer
applications. The significance of stress cracking is made more acute by the fact that most
agricultural drainage pipe is manufactured with lower quality resins than those used in
sanitary sewer applications.

For agricultural drainage applications, a narrow trench and shaped bedding will
significantly decrease these stresses in the pipe wall and provide a necessary cushion for
the possible variation associated with the lack of inspection on these installations. The
question facing designers is what’s the appropriate amount of testing for these lower tiered
installations in comparison to the 100-year service life requirements for sanitary sewers.
Some level of prudence mandates a greater proportional safety factor for analysis of their
long-term stress crack performance, but this does not necessarily mean having higher
levels of resistance. One must assess the service life desired for the project and properly
evaluate the maximum amount of deformation expected on the installation.

6 Copyright © 2018 by (John Kurdziel, PE, Advanced Drainage Systems)

 Proceedings of the 19th Plastic Pipes Conference
PPXIX
September 24-26, 2018, Las Vegas, Nevada

DETERMINING STRESS CRACK RESISTANCE CRITERIA FOR AGRICULTURAL

DRAINAGE PIPES

In his PhD dissertation, the author outlined a method for determining the minimum stress
crack resistance of a pipe manufactured with recycled materials to ensure a given service
life in the field for a variety of installation conditions and pipe wall stresses (1). Since
corrugated HDPE pipes used in agricultural drainage applications typically contain
recycled content, the method outlined is appropriate for these pipes. The method
establishes criteria for the Un-Notched Constant Ligament Stress (UCLS) test, published
as ASTM F3181 (9), to ensure long-term performance for finished pipes relative to stress
cracking. Based on this work, it is shown that the minimum UCLS performance can be
calculated as shown in Equations 1 and 2:
𝐶
𝑡𝑇 = 10 ⁄𝑆𝐹 (Eqn. 1)
𝑡

log(𝑆𝐹𝜎 ∗𝜎𝑇 )−log(𝜎𝑆𝑉𝐶 )

𝐶=[ ] + log(𝑡𝑆𝑉𝐶 ) (Eqn. 2)
𝑚

where

tT = Minimum average UCLS failure time at test condition, hrs.

m= Slope of brittle failure curve
SF = Popelar stress shift factor from Eqn. 6.1
SFt = Popelar time shift factor from Eqn. 6.2
T = Stress at test condition, psi
SVC = Tensile stress at service condition, psi
tSVC = Required service life at service conditions, hrs.

Given the inherent scatter in the data of UCLS test, the minimum required average UCLS
failure time should be statistically adjusted to ensure 95% confidence. This is done as
shown in Equation 3:
𝑡𝑇
𝑋̅95% = 𝑡(𝑛−1) ∗𝐶𝑂𝑉 = 1.911𝑡𝑇 (Eqn. 3)
[1−( ⁄ )]
√𝑛
where

LCL95% = Lower 95% Confidence Limit

𝑋̅95%= Average failure time needed for 95% confidence, hrs.
tT = Minimum required average failure time from Eqn. 6.6, hrs.
t(n-1) = Student’s t value at (n-1) degrees of freedom = 2.132
COV = Typical coefficient of variation of test data = 0.5
n= Number of test specimens at each condition = 5

7 Copyright © 2018 by (John Kurdziel, PE, Advanced Drainage Systems)

 Proceedings of the 19th Plastic Pipes Conference
PPXIX
September 24-26, 2018, Las Vegas, Nevada

Assuming an average slope of the brittle failure curve of -0.20 and a typical COV of 0.5 of
the data, in accordance with test data published in his dissertation (1), Equations 1 – 3
can be combined and the average UCLS failure time necessary to ensure 95% confidence
in the service life calculations as shown in Equation 4:

8760∙𝑡𝑆𝑉𝐶 𝜎 5
𝑈𝐶𝐿𝑆 = 1.911 ∗ ( 𝑆𝑉𝐶
) ∗ (650∙𝑆𝐹 ) (Eqn. 4)
𝑆𝐹𝑡 𝜎

where

UCLS = Req’d. UCLS failure time at 80 deg. C 650 psi condition, hrs.
SFt = Popelar time shift factor = e0.109(80-T)
SF = Popelar stress shift factor = e0.0116(80-T)
T= Service temperature, deg. C
SVC = Design service stress, psi
tSVC = Required service life at service conditions, yrs.

To determine the minimum UCLS requirement to ensure a given service life for a typical
service condition, one needs to determine the peak tensile stress in the pipe wall. The
total stress in a flexible pipe wall can be represented as a combination of hoop
compression stress from soil loads and bending stress due to deflection. This is illustrated
in Equation 5.
𝑃 𝑀𝑐
𝜎 =𝐴+ (Eqn. 5)
𝐼

where

= Stress in the pipe wall, psi

P= Hoop thrust in the pipe wall, lb/in.
A= Cross-sectional area of pipe wall, in2/in.
M= Moment in pipe wall, in-lb/in.
c= Distance from centroid to extreme fiber of wall, in.
I= Moment of intertia of pipe profile, in4/in.

As discussed earlier, deep fills generally induce a net compressive strain in the pipe wall
due to the effects of hoop compression (P/A in Eqn. 4) due to soil pressure. For material
design purposes, a very conservative assumption to determine the peak circumferential
tensile stress in the pipe wall is to ignore the hoop compressive stress and base the design
on only bending (i.e. deflection). Such an assumption adds a significant factor of safety to
the calculations, as it greatly over-estimates the tensile stress in the pipe wall. If a more
precise determination of the stress in the pipe is desired, a full engineering analysis should
be conducted. According to the AASHTO design method for flexible pipe, the bending
strain in the pipe wall can be estimated in accordance with Equation 6.

8 Copyright © 2018 by (John Kurdziel, PE, Advanced Drainage Systems)

 Proceedings of the 19th Plastic Pipes Conference
PPXIX
September 24-26, 2018, Las Vegas, Nevada

Δ 𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑡
𝜀𝑏 = 𝐷𝑓 (𝐷) ( ) (Eqn. 6)
𝑅

where

b = Bending strain in the pipe wall, in./in.

Df = Shape factor
/D = Vertical deflection of pipe
cout = Distance from centroid of pipe profile to extreme fiber, in.
R= Centroidal radius of pipe

As discussed above, a good agricultural pipe installation requires that the trench is narrow
and the invert properly shaped to match the radius of a deflected pipe. Such an installation
should result in an elliptically deflected pipe, corresponding to a shape factor of 3.0. For
typical corrugated HDPE drainage pipes used in these applications, cout/R is around 0.08
on average, depending on the shape of the profile. Assuming a deflection of 10%, the
bending strain in the pipe wall can be calculated to be around 2.4%. Using a long-term
modulus of 20,000 psi (typical for agricultural drainage pipes), the peak tensile stress in
the pipe wall (ignoring hoop compression stress) is calculated to be 480 psi. Again, this is
a very conservative estimate since it completely ignores hoop compression stress from
the soils, which will greatly offset the tensile stress in the pipe and may even result in a
condition where the pipe is purely in compression. However, for a conservative material
design approach, it is reasonable. It should be noted that this calculation is profile-
dependent, and some manufacturers may have a lower tensile stress in the extreme fiber
of the wall, depending on the design of their profile.

The final step is to determine the UCLS stress crack resistance required to ensure a given
service life in this installation condition. This can be done using Equation 4, which requires
the average annual service temperature in which the pipe will be installed. A conservative
assumption for the average temperature for a buried agricultural drainage pipe in most
Midwestern states in North America can be assumed to be 18 deg. C (65 deg. F). In these
conditions, for a desired service life of 50 years, the minimum average UCLS (conducted
at the 80 deg. C, 650 psi stress test condition) for this pipe is calculated to be 6 hours to
ensure long-term performance relative to stress cracking for this application, as illustrated
in Equation 7.

8760∙50 480 5
𝑈𝐶𝐿𝑆 = 1.911 ∗ ( ) ∗ (650∙2.053) = 5.9 ℎ𝑟𝑠. (Eqn. 7)
860.9

If the service conditions (i.e. buried pipe temperature and pipe deflection) or the desired
service life is different from that assumed, Equation 4 can be applied accordingly to
determine the minimum UCLS performance criteria for that application.

9 Copyright © 2018 by (John Kurdziel, PE, Advanced Drainage Systems)

 Proceedings of the 19th Plastic Pipes Conference
PPXIX
September 24-26, 2018, Las Vegas, Nevada
CONCLUSIONS

As illustrated, a corrugated HDPE pipe’s long-term structural performance and durability

is directly related to the integrity of the installation. A reduction of the load and its related
deformation or deflection increases both the structural integrity of the installation and its
long-term performance relative to stress cracking.

The amount of on-site inspection for agricultural drainage installations is generally

negligible. In acknowledging this situation, however, we can diminish the risk by specifying
an installation technique that is easier, cheaper and quicker for the contractor while
minimizing the load and stress on the pipe. A narrow trench with a shaped bedding
provides the means of achieving these goals. Consequently, by reducing the applied
stress on the pipe, we can better control deflection and reduce the risk of premature brittle
failure.

REFERENCES

1. Pluimer, Michael Lee. Evaluation of Corrugated HDPE Pipes Manufactured with

Recycled Content in Commuter Rail Applications. Dissertation. Villanova, PA : Proquest ,
2016.

2. AASHTO. AASHTO M294-18: Standard Specification for Corrugated Polyethylene

Pipe, 300- to 1500-mm Diameter. AASHTO State Materials Specifications. Washington,
DC, USA : AASHTO, 2015.

3. Marston, A. and Anderson, A. O. The Theory of Loads on Pipes in Ditches, and Tests
of Cement and Clay Drain Tile and Sewer Pipe.: Iowa State Colege of Agriculture and
Mechanical Arts, February 1913, Vol. Bulletin 31.

4. Spangler, M.G. The Structural Design of Flexible Pipe Culverts. s.l. : Iowa Engineering
Experiment Station, 1941, Vol. Bulletin 153.

5. ASTM International. Standard Practice for Underground Installation of Thermoplastic

Pipe for Sewers and Other Gravity-Flow Applications. ASTM D2321-18. Conshohocken,
PA : ASTM International, 2018. D2321-18.

6. Heger, F., Chambers, R. and Dietz, A. Structural Plastics Design Manual – Volume 2.
FHWA-TS-82-216. Washington, DC : U.S. Department of Transportation, 1982. Vol. 2.

7. American Association of State and Highway Transportation Officials. AASHTO

LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, Seventh Edition. Washington : AASHTO, 2016.

8. Hsuan, Grace and McGrath, Tim. NCHRP Report 631. Washington : National
Cooperative Highway Research Program, 2009.

10 Copyright © 2018 by (John Kurdziel, PE, Advanced Drainage Systems)

 Proceedings of the 19th Plastic Pipes Conference
PPXIX
September 24-26, 2018, Las Vegas, Nevada
9. ASTM International. ASTM F3181: Standard Test Method for The Un-notched,
Constant Ligament Stress Crack Test (UCLS) for HDPE Materials Containing Post-
Consumer Recycled HDPE. ASTM Standard Test Method. Conshohocken, PA, USA :
ASTM International, 02 01, 2016.

10. ASTM International. ASTM F2306: Standard Specification for 12 to 60 in. [300 to
1500 mm] Annular Corrugated Profile- Wall Polyethylene (PE) Pipe and Fittings for
Gravity-Flow Storm Sewer and Subsurface Drainage Applications. ASTM International.
Conshohocken, PA : ASTM International, 2014.

11 Copyright © 2018 by (John Kurdziel, PE, Advanced Drainage Systems)

 Proceedings of the 19th Plastic Pipes Conference
PPXIX
September 24-26, 2018, Las Vegas, Nevada

12 Copyright © 2018 by (John Kurdziel, PE, Advanced Drainage Systems)