TrenchlessTechnol. Res., Vol. 15, No. 1, pp.

2541, 2000
Pergamon 0 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved
Printed in Great Britain
PII: SOS86-7798(00)00064-X 0886-7798/GO/ $ - see front matter
www.elsevier.com/locate/ttr

A new design method for non-circular sewer

linings
Olivier ThCpot
Socie’te’Anonyme de Gestion des Eaux de Paris (SAGEP), 9-11 rue Berthollet, F-91100 Corbeil-Essonnes,
France

This article presents a new design method for non-circular sewer linings, which
has been developed within the framework of the French National Project of
research and experimentation named RERAU (Rehabilitation of Urban Network
Sewers). The method examines the effect of external long-term hydrostatic press-
ure but does not extend to the short-term effect of filling injections (for linings
with annular space). It takes into consideration the exact geometry of the lining
(curve radii) and the beneficial interaction with the existing host that may be
attenuated by an annular void. The method puts linings into two categories: critical
linings that are liable to buckle but whose deflection lobe remains localized and
sub-critical linings that do not buckle but whose deflection lobe may extend to
the entire lining. If the lining is critical, the method gives formulas for the buck-
ling pressure, the bending moment and the axial force. The method gives safety
factors with respect to buckling and material breakdown. If the lining is sub-
critical, non-linear finite element analysis with appropriate formulation of the
boundary condition may be used. Calculation examples are given together with
comparisons with the WRc structural design of type II linings. 0 2001 Elsevier
Science Ltd. All rights reserved

NOTATION Z area moment of inertia (for a unit

A cross-sectional area (for a unit longitudinal length of lining)
longitudinal length of lining)
k deformation mode (k = 1 for one blister,
d CT maximum deflection just before buckling k = 2 for two blisters)

dL permissible long-term deflection maximum bending moment just before

buckling
ds maximum deflection (at the centre of the
blister) maximum bending moment

Young’s modulus of elasticity axial force just before buckling

long-term modulus (creep modulus) axial force

initial annular gap between the liner and perimeter of lining

the host
radius of the arc where the blister
height of the centre of the blister above develops
the invert
thickness of the lining wall
head of water above the invert
half arc angle where the blister develops
26
half blister angle just before buckling
6 reduced annular gap
3/F global safety factor for stability
3/M safety factor for material strength
YW unit weight of water
r d.g amplification factor of the critical
deflection due to the initial gap g
r M.g amplification factor of the critical
moment due to the initial gap g
r PG reduction factor of the critical pressure
due to the initial gap g
r
P*O
reduction factor of the critical pressure
due to ovality
rQ.g amplification factor of the critical angle
due to the initial gap g
OR stress strength of the material (lower
95% confidence limit)
maximum stress
u u,b maximum bending stress
u u.d maximum direct stress
1 INTRODUCTION
Linings are being used more and more widely for
the trenchless rehabilitation of sewers to restore
hydraulic integrity and extend structural life dur-
ation. Cure-in-place linings match the inside shape
of the sewers whereas preformed linings leave gaps
that must be filled with grout. From the mechanical
standpoint, a lining is affected by imposed defor-
mations and by hydrostatic pressures when the
sewer is under the groundwater. Deformations of
buried structures are generally small and, in the
linings, produce stresses that are almost negligible.
Conversely, external pressure due to groundwater
can easily cause lining failure by geometric insta-
bility or material breakdown. Therefore, a lining
must be designed to resist the action of external
Olivier Tht!pot
hydrostatic pressure and this is the only loading
case having any major probability of occurring.’
The partial transfer of static loads (due to the sur-
rounding soil) from the host to the lining presup-
poses major movements, which can only occur in
very special circumstances:
if the material of the existing sewer is degraded
after installation of the lining. However, the
decrease in mechanical properties (because of
damage or macro fracture) is generally
accompanied by deformation inducing a favour-
able redistribution of the stresses at me host-soil
interface (this mechanism is the basis of frac-
tured pipe stability);
if a major excavation takes place near the sewer,
the damage, if any, will be the responsibility of
the excavator;
if the sewer is obviously in an unstable state, in
particular if a rupture mechanism is identified
(plastic hinges with compression fractures).
But, in most cases, the existing structure continues
to sustain loading from the earth and traffic because
the stability of a buried structure in balance with
the surrounding soil is generally preserved or even
improved by installing a lining which re-establishes
water-proofing and decreases soil erosion at the
soil-host interface.
For circular linings there are many design
methods and an equal number of experimental
results, for instance see Refs. 2 and 3. Conversely
there is far less information both in terms of theor-
etical and experimental results for non-circular
linings (especially egg-shaped linings). At present,
only the recommendations of wRc4 offer a method
for non-circular linings. The French National Pro-
ject of research and experimentation named
RERAU (Rehabilitation of Urban Network Sewers)
has the purpose to develop a limit state design
method (including partial safety factor on loads and
on material properties) for a wide range of lining
systems.5 RERAU have focused on non-circular
linings and an analytical method based on a second-
order analysis has recently been developed for the
design of linings subject to external water pressure.6
This paper presents the design equations and
explains the use of the equations with examples.
2 THE BEHAVIOUR OF A CLOSE-FIT
LINING SUBJECT TO EXTERNAL
PRESSURE
A close-fit lining can restore hydraulic integrity of
the sewer. However, groundwater may percolate
 A new design method for non-circular sewer linings
through the cracks and act at the interface between
the lining and the host. Since the bond between the
lining and the host cannot be relied on in the long
term, it is necessary to consider the effect of exter-
nal water pressure acting on the lining. When a
lining is subjected to external pressure, circumfer-
ential compression develops and the lining’s per-
imeter shortens. Then a gap opens between the
lining and the host and a blister develops at the
location of maximum radius of curvature where the
circumferential compression is maximum. Pressure
in the blister blows the rest of the lining into a tight
fit against the host pipe.’ In the case of an egg-
shaped lining, two blisters can develop at each
straight section (the straight section is the portion
between the invert and springings). This configur-
ation is referred as the two-blister mode [see Fig.
l(a)]. In the case of a horseshoe-shaped lining, one
blister can develop at the middle of the invert where
the radius and the water pressure are maximum [see
Fig. l(b)]. This configuration is referred as the sin-
gle-blister mode. For elliptic linings, two blisters
are generally observed at the bottom and at the top.
When the pressure grows up, two opposite
behaviours of the blister can be observed.* If the
curvature and the extension angle of the arc where
the blister develops are sufficient, the deflection at
the centre of the blister increases but the blister
angle decreases [see Fig. 2(a)]. Otherwise, for
instance in the case of an oval shape or an egg
shape with straight sides, the blister may extend
continuously over the entire lining [see Fig. 2(b)].
In the first case, inversion of the blister occurs by
arch buckling, and there is a critical pressure. In the
second case, inversion of the blister occurs by beam
failure and there is not a critical pressure. The first
behaviour is named “critical” and the second “sub-
(a) (b)
Fig. 1. Deformation modes of a lining: (a) two-blister mode,
(b) one-blister mode.
27
(a) 04
Fig. 2. (a) Critical lining: the blister is localized, (b) sub-criti-
cal lining: the blister extends over the entire lining.
critical”. Deflections of sub-critical linings under
external pressure are much larger than those of
critical linings. Critical linings can buckle under
external pressure but deflections are small.
Many analytical models have been proposed for
the analysis of close-fit linings. Analysis of data
from buckling tests indicates that the model pro-
posed by Glockg more accurately predicts the buck-
ling behaviour of encased liners. BootlO has pro-
posed some mathematical adjustments to Glock’s
equation to accommodate the initial gap. Recently,
Thepot* has extended Glock’s analysis to non-cir-
cular linings and done many comparisons by means
of finite element analysis for different non-circular
shapes. Appendix A gives the calculation of the
buckling pressure of an egg-shaped lining subject
to an external pressure.
3 PRESENTATION OF THE
CALCULATION METHOD
3.1 Generality
The design method described in this article applies
to non-circular linings used for the rehabilitation of
sewers. However, the method also deals with circu-
lar linings that are not really a specific case. The
method examines only the effect of external long-
term hydrostatic pressure acting on a lining encased
in a sewer. The design equations presented in this
paper have been published in RERAU external
reports R4A2-1P and they will be part of the future
RERAU Guide for the design of structural rehabili-
tation of man-entry sewers.
The following materials are concerned:
28 Olivier The’pot

0 polyethylene;
l glass-reinforced plastic (GRP);
0 polypropylene;
l poly(viny1 chloride);
0 polyester resins (for cure-in-place linings).

3.2 Assumptions

The shape of the lining must be convex, comprising

a succession of circle arcs tangent at their points of
contact. Most of the lining shapes comply with
these geometrical conditions. Fig. 3 shows
examples of shapes that can be calculated by the
method. To account for the long-term effects of
material creep and the resulting decrease in buck-
ling resistance, the flexural modulus of elasticity is
reduced by a creep factor (0.3-0.5). Elastic analysis
is performed with a virtual long-term modulus, usu- I
ally extrapolated to 50 years. It is possible to take
I
into consideration a general annular void (initial Fig. 4. Geometrical parameters needed for calculation.
gap). The initial annular void may be due to poly-
merization shrinkage (for cure-in-place linings) or
to shrinkage of the filling grout (for preformed P: perimeter of the lining (measured at the
linings). The design procedure is not suitable for average fibre level of the lining)
multipiece lining systems. The other assumptions R: radius of the arc where the blister
are: develops (measured at the average fibre
l there is no bond or frictional resistance at the level of the lining)
host interface; t: thickness of the lining or total height
l there is no pressure inside the lining; beam
a it is a plane strain analysis, longitudinal bending A: cross-sectional area (for a unit
is neglected; and longitudinal length of lining)
l third-dimensional resistance to the formation of I: area moment of inertia (for a unit
a blister is neglected. longitudinal length of lining).

If the wall cross-section of the lining is homo-

geneous, A = t and Z = P/12.
3.3 Geometrical and mechanical parameters
The mechanical parameters are:
needed for calculation

The geometrical parameters needed for calculation EL: long-term modulus (creep modulus)
are (see also Fig. 4): 3/F: global safety factor for stability

(d)

Fig. 3. Examples of shapes: (a) 3 X 2egg shape, (b) 2 X 1 egg shape, (c) horseshoe shape, (d) elliptical shape.
 A new design method for non-circular sewer linings 29

ffR: stress strength of the material (lower
95% confidence limit)
YM: safety factor for yield strength
dL: permissible long-term deflection.
3.4 Calculation of the design pressure pw
The design pressure pw equals the pressure of the
groundwater at the centre of the blister (see Fig. 5):
PW = YWmv - I-4).
If there is no groundwater, or if the sewer is par-
tially in the groundwater, we shall consider a virtual
water table standing 0.3 m above the top of the
liner.
1.5 times the arc angle, the blister will not extend
and the lining is critical; otherwise the blister may
extend to the entire lining and the lining is sub-
critical. If the lining is critical, the buckling press-
ure per, the critical bending moment M,, and the
critical axial force NC, are calculated (steps 3 and
4). After calculating the design pressure pw, the
maximum bending moment MU, the maximum axial
force N,, and the maximum deflection d, are calcu-
lated (step 5). Then stability, material strength and
deflection checks can be carried out (steps 6 to 8).
If the lining is sub-critical, finite element analysis
(1) with appropriate formulation of the boundary con-
dition may be used.
3.6 Calculation of the critical angle aer and the
critical deflection d,,

The critical angle (Y,, equals half the blister angle

3.5 The design procedure just before buckling (see Fig. 7). General case:

The steps of the design procedure are summarized l/3

in Fig. 6. First the lining deformation mode is ana- a CT= 2.54r,,g & . (24

lysed to determine where the blister can develop

and the number of blisters (one or two). Then, the
Homogeneous material:
critical angle of the blister (Y,, is calculated and
compared with the angle of the arc where the blis-
1 tuSP5
ters develop (step 2). If the critical angle is less than a,, = 1.55r,,g k1/5___ (2b)
R3” ’

where k is the deformation mode, k = 1 for the

--___
one-blister mode and k = 2 for the two-blister mode
(see Fig. l), and r_ is the amplification factor of
the critical angle due to the initial gap g:

I_ = 1 + 0.178 - 0.007S2 for 6 I 10.

(3)

6 is the reduced annular gap. General case:

(44
I
Homogeneous material:
i
I

(4b)
e
Pw> -
Pw=yw(Hw-Hd For a lining with annular grout it is assumed that g
ywHw
* ? = 0 and then S = 0.
Fig. 5. Calculation of the design pressure. The critical deflection d,, equals the maximum
30 Olivier Thdpot

I RI
M,s1.2.r.,.~ N, =1.26.&R

I M.(P.) K(P.) dh.)

Fig. 6. Flow chart of the design method.

deflection at the middle of the blister just before

buckling (see Fig. 7). General case:

Homogeneous material:

.:,z “” .
~. ._
where I’,,,gis the amplification factor of the critical
Fig. 7. Critical angle and critical deflection. deflection due to the initial gap g:
 A new design method for non-circular sewer linings 31

I& = 1 + 0.536 - o.012a2 for s 5 10. General case:

(6)
M,, = 1.2rh,lg ; * (114
3.7 Check the condition for critical lining
Homogeneous material:
A lining is critical if the blister remains localized
in its extension and if the blister angle decreases
with the pressure. The following condition must M, = o.irM,g R , (lib)
be verified:

where I’M,gis the amplification factor of the critical

5 I 1.5,
ar moment due to the initial gap:

where (Yis the half angle of the arc where the blis-
rM,g r
ter develops. = -riz - (12)
If Eqn (7) is not verified, the lining is sub-critical
(the blister may extend continuously over the entire The critical axial force is the circumferential
lining) and another calculation method may be used force just before buckling. General case and
like finite element analysis. homogeneous material:

3.8 Calculation of the buckling pressure pEr NC, = 1.26p,& (13)

The buckling pressure of a critical lining is given

by the following equations. General case (Glock- 3.10 Calculation of the maximum bending
ThCpot formula): moment MU, the axial force N, and the
maximum deflection d,

The axial force is constant all around the perimeter

of the lining. The bending moment is maximum at
Homogeneous material:
the middle of the blister and at the two points of
contact to the encasement:
E L p2/5R9/5
pCr = 0.455P51’ &‘& t”” 9 @b)
Mu =
mb(PJp&L
M-0
where rP,g is the reduction factor of the critical ’
1 - (1 - mb>(PJpd2
pressure due to the initial gap:
where
1
Lg = 1 + 0.416 _ ()m(jS2
for’ 5 15’(9)
(14b)
mb = 1 + 4.35(cwla,,)5 ’
If the initial gap equals 0 and in the case of the two-
blister mode, Eqn (8b) can be simplified as follows:

(10) (15)

3.9 Calculation of the critical bending moment

M,, and the critical axial force N,,
d, =d,[l - (1 -Er]. (16)
The critical bending moment is the maximal
moment at the middle of the blister just before
buckling. For the three following equations, it is assumed that
32 Olivier Thkpot

the design pressure pw is less that the critical press-
ure per (see Fig. 8).
3.11 Check for the limit state of stability
The following condition must be verified:
p+.
Except for different arrangements, yF is considered
equal to 2.
3.13 Check for the limit state of deflection
The maximum long-term deflection must be less
than the permissible long-term deflection:
d, I dL. (20)
This is a serviceability requirement and no safety
factor is required. For an egg shape, it is suggested
(17) that the permissible deflection is less than 2% of
the straight section. However, a different value may
be used at the engineer’s discretion.
3.14 Calculation of quasi-circular linings

3.12 Check for the limit state of strength
First calculate the maximal bending stress o,,b and
the maximal direct stress a,,:
Quasi-circular linings are circular linings with oval
imperfection. It is assumed that the circle is
deformed into an ellipse. The perimeter of the
lining and the radius of the arc where the blister
develops are given by:

P = vD, (21)

Then calculate the maximum stress a, = o,,b + and

u “,d and check:
R = (1 + 0,)’ Qn
l-0, 2’
(22)
UR
f&s--, (19)
YM
where D, is the mean diameter and 0, is the ovality
factor (see Fig. 9).
where uR is the stress strength of the material corre-
Eqns (2)-(16) are calculated by substituting for
sponding to the 95% lower confidence limit as
P and R from Eqns (21) and (22). For instance, the
obtained from a standardized flexural test (e.g.,
critical pressure of a quasi-circular lining in two-
three-point flexural test). Coefficient y&.,takes into
blister mode is given by:
consideration the acceptable probability of there
being strength less than the 95% lower limit. With-
out any experimental results, it is possible to con- per = 1.32&,,,&,,& 2.2, (23)
sider that yM = 1.5.

Pw Pa rJw Pa Pw Fb

Fig. 8. Curves of the maximal bending moment, the axial force and the maximal deflection.
 A new design method for non-circular sewer linings 33

03

Fig. 10. Calculation examples: (a) egg-shaped 2 X 1 GRP

lining, (b) egg-shaped 3 X 2 CIP lining.

Annular gap: g = 0 mm (for a GRP

Fig. 9. Elliptical shape. lining with annular
grout, it is assumed that
where r, is the reduction factor due to oval imper- g = 0)
fection: Height of the centre of H,, = 700 mm.
the straight section

1
above the invert:
1 - 0” g1s
(24) Mechanical parameters:
r” = [ (1 + 0,)2 *
Long-term Young’s EL = 4500 MPa
For the calculation of the bending moment [Eqns modulus:
(14a), (14b)], it is assumed that the arc angle cr Safety factor for YF = 2.0
equals 45”. stability:
Stress strength of the oR = 60 MPa (95%
material: lower confidence limit)
4 CALCULATION EXAMPLES Safety factor for YM = 2.0
material strength:
To illustrate the design method, two examples will Permissible long-term 20 mm.
be dealt with in full. The first is a preformed GRP deflection:
lining (with annular grouting) and the second is a
cure-in-place (CIP) lining. The design check is carried as follows.
(1) Calculation of the design pressure pW [Eqn (l)]:
4.1 Example no. l-2 X 1 egg-shaped GRP
lining pW = lO(3.2 - 0.7) = 25 kPa.

Fig. 10(a) shows an egg-shaped GRP lining with (2) Calculation of the critical angle (Y,, and the
annulus grout (not shown) designed for a man-entry critical deflection d,, [Eqn (2b), (5b)]:
sewer. The head of groundwater above the invert
equals 3.2 m.
Geometrical parameters:
Radius of the straight R = 3315 mm = 0.204 rad = 11.7”
section:
Half angle of the cr = 11.84” and
straight section:
Perimeter: P=464Omm
Thickness: t=25mm
34 Olivier Thkpot

(7) Verification of the limit state of stability [Eqn

= 22.8 mm.
(17)l:
(3) Verification of the conditions for critical lining
50.5
[Eqn (7)l: - = 2.02 1 2.0.
25
%
-
(Y
= s = 0.99 5 1.5. The safety factor for the stability is greater
than 2.0.
(8) Verification of the limit state of strength [Eqns
Then the blister is localized and the lining is
(18) and (19)]. First calculate the bending stress
critical.
a,,, and the direct stress o,,d:
(4) Calculation of the buckling pressure per [Eqn
(8b)l: 6 X 567
CT = = 5.44 MPa and
u,b 252
252.2
Per = 0.6 X 4500 X 4640°.4 x 33W8 104
cTu,d =-= 4.2 MPa.
= 0.0505 MPa = 50.5 kPa. 24

(5) Calculation of the critical bending moment h4,, Then calculate the maximum stress a,:
and the critical axial force IV, [Eqns (1 l)-( 13)]:
a, = 5.44 + 4.16 = 9.6 MPa.
4500 X 253
M,, = 0.1 x = 2121 N mm/mm The safety factor for the stress strength is:
3315

and 8 = 6.25 L 2.0.

N,, = 1.26 X 0.0505 X 3315 = 211 N/mm.

(9) Verification of the limit state of deflection:
(6) Calculation of the maximal bending moment
MU, the axial force N, and the maximal deflec- d, = 8.3 mm I 20 mm = dL.
tion d, at the centre of the blister [Eqns (14)-
(1611:
The calculation can be considered successful.
2.56 X (11.84/11.7)2 = 047
mb = 1 + 4.35 X (11.84/11.7)5 - ’
4.2 Example no. 2-egg-shaped CIP lining
type 3 X 2
M = 0.47 X (25/50.5) X 2121
” Fig. 10(b) shows a standard 3 X 2 egg-shaped
1 - 0.53 X (25/50.5)2
cured-in-place lining (the radius of the straight sec-
= 567 N mm/mm,
tion equals the height of the lining). The initial gap
due to shrinkage of the resin is equal to 1 mm. The
head of groundwater above the invert equals 2.2 m.
Geometrical parameters:
Radius of the straight R = 825 mm
and section:
Half angle of the (Y= 18.43”
straight section:
ds=28.8X [l - (1 -$“] Perimeter: P = 2181 mm
Thickness: t= 14mm
= 8.3 mm. Annular gap: g=lmm
 A new design method for non-circular sewer linings 35

Height of the centre of H,, = 290 mm. (3) Verification of the conditions for critical lining
the straight section [Eqn (711:
above the invert:
Mechanical parameters: a,, 20.8
- = - = 1.13 = 1.5.
(Y 18.43
Long-term Young’s EL = 1000 MPa
modulus: Then the blister is localized and the lining is
Safety factor for YF = 2.0 critical.
stability:
(4) Calculation of the buckling pressure pCr [Eqn
Stress strength of the = 30 MPa (95% (8b)]. The reduction factor for the gap is
material: $ver confidence limit) given by:
Safety factor for ‘YM = 2.0
material strength:
1
Permissible long-term no serviceability Lg =
deflection: requirement. 1 + 0.41 X 0.8 - 0.006 X 0.8*
= 0.755
The design check is carried as follows.
and then the buckling pressure is:
(1) Calculation of the design pressure pW [Eqn (l)]:
pCr = 0.6 x 0.755 X 1000
pw = lO(2.2 - 0.29) = 19.1 k.Pa.
14*.*
= 0.039 MPa = 39 kPa.
(2) Calculation of the critical angle (Y,, and the ’ 2181°.4 X 825l.*
critical deflection d,, [Eqns (2b), (3), (4b), (5b)
and (6)]: (5) Calculation of the critical bending moment M,,
and the critical axial force N,, [Eqns (1 la)-
825°.8 (13)l:
6 = 11.65 x g x
2181°.6 X 14l.*
1.43
= 0.8 (reduced gap), r M.g= - = 1.12,
1.13*

r,_ = 1 + 0.17 x 0.8 - 0.007 x 0.8* 1000 x 143

M,, = 0.1 x 1.12 x
= 1.13, 825
= 373 N mm/mm

and
o! CT = 1.55 x 1.13 x&x (218;;Z142)0.2
N,, = 1.26 X 0.039 X 825 = 40.5 N/mm.
= 0.363 rad = 20.8”.
(6) Calculate the maximum bending moment MU,
the axial force N,, and the maximal deflection
I& = 1 + 0.53 x 0.8 - 0.012 X 0.82 d, at the centre of the blister [Eqns (14)-( 16)]:

= 1.43 2.56 X (18.43/20.8)*

mb = 1 + 4.35 x (18.43/20.8)5 = “”
and

M = 0.6 x (19.1/39) x 373

”
1 - 0.4 X (19.1/39)2
= 25.3 mm. = 121 N mm/mm,
36 Olivier Thkpot

bond, so the lining act as a flexible pipe with the

A$ = 40.5 X old sewer; and
l type III design is for very flexible linings, that
act as permanent formwork.
and
The three design methods are applicable to both cir-
cular and non-circular linings. The design methods
~&=25.3x [I - (1 -y”‘] =7.2mm. illustrated in this paper and the WRc type II design
have the same assumptions and can be compared.
For the check on long-term buckling of non-cir-
(7) Check the limit state of stability [Eqn (17)]:
cular linings, the type II design use a simplified pro-
cedure based on bending formulae. The mechanical
39
- = 2.04 L 2.0. parameters are the permissible long-term bending
19.1 stress sL and the long-term bending modulus EL.
Incorporated in sL is a factor of safety of 2 except
The safety factor for the stability is greater in the case of GRP. The geometrical parameters are
than 2.0. the thickness of the lining t and the “critical length”
(8) Check the limit state of strength [Eqns (18) and I, which is the length of the straight section
(19)]. First calculate the bending stress o,,b and included between the invert and the springings
the direct stress a,,$ where the blister can develops. For an egg-shaped
sewer it is suggested that the critical length be set
= 6 X 121 20 equal to two-thirds of the vertical diameter. Two
0 u.b = 3.7 MPa and o,,d = jj
14* heads of water are calculated:
= 1.4 MPa. Hr, the head of water limited by the permiss-
ible stress:
Then calculate the maximum stress a,:
Hr = 340sL(t/z)*;
ou = 3.7 + 1.4 = 5.1 MPa.
H2, the head of water limited by the permissible
The safety factor for the stress is: long-term deflection equal to 3% of the critical
length:
30
_ = 5.9 1 2.0. H2 = R X 236EL(t/Z)3;
5.1

where R = 1 for a curved critical length and R =

(9) Check the limit state of deflection: no require-
ment.
The calculation can be considered successful.
0.5 for a straight critical length.
The following condition must be verified:
Min(H,, H2) > H,

5 COMPARISONS WITH THE WRC

METHOD
The Sewerage Rehabilitation Manual published in
1984 by the UK Water Research Centre (WRc)
gives three methods for the design of linings
depending upon their function and interaction with
the host pipe:4
l type I design is for linings that form a bond to
the grout and/or the sewer wall, so the renovated
sewer acts as a composite section;
l type II design is for linings that form no such
where H is the design head of water.
Direct comparison between the WRc type II
design and Eqns (8)-(19) is not possible in the gen-
eral case because the parameters used are different.
The critical length I cannot be connected to the
radius R and the perimeter P. However, comparison
is possible for special shapes. For example, in the
case of the 3 X 2 egg shape of the Fig. 1 l(a), para-
meters I, R and P are linked by the two following
relations:
R= 1.5 X Z
 A new design method for non-circular sewer linings 37

(a) (b) In the WRc type II design, safety factors are

H/2 included in the mechanical parameters.
Fig. 12(a) and (b) and Fig. 13(a) and (b) show
head of water curves that have been established for
the two egg shapes (3 X 2 and 2 X 1) and the
two materials (CIPP and GRP). The two shapes are
parameterized by the t/Z ratio. For each figure, three
curves are plotted:
the buckling head of water that is given by eqn
(25) or eqn (26);
the WRc type II permissible head of water that
is equal to Min(H,, H2); and
Fig. 11. Comparisons with the WRc type II design: (a) 3 X 2
the new design head of water [Eqns (2~(20)].
egg shape, (b) 2 X 1 egg shape.
In the case of the 3 X 2 egg shape [see Fig. 12(a),
(b)], the WRc curves are under the curves of the
and new design method (for the two materials). In the
case of the 2 X 1 egg shape, the WRc curves are
P = 2.6433 X R.

In the case of the 2 X 1 egg shape of Fig. 11(b), (4

the preceding relations become: 16

Egg shape lining 3X2 WRc” :

14 . . _*_ .
R = 2.625 X 1
- -WRctypeIIstructuraldesign
and A Bucklinghead (&ck-Thbpoteqn)

------Nt3WdesigtlflMtlOd
P = 2.461 X R.

For these two special shapes, Eqn (8b) can be

rewritten as a function of t and 1 (it is assumed that
g = 0).
For the 3 X 2 egg shape:
01 7: I

0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035 0.04

M
pCr = O.l67E, f 2’2. (25) @I
0
22
1
For the 2 X 1 egg shape: 20 . . . . Eggshapellning 3X3’WRc” - - - -. - -i
t . t
15

16
pCr = O.O627E, f 2’2. (26) %I4
0
ii 12
C
Two materials are used for the comparison:
0 CIP lining: EL = 1000 MPa, oR = 30 MPa, sL
= 15 MPa.
0 GRP lining: EL = 4500 MPa, oR = 60 MPa, sL
= 30MPa.
For the two materials, the safety factors used by the O.OQ5 0.01 0.015 0.02 O.C25
tn
new design method are as follows:
Fig. 12. Comparisons with the WRc type II design. Curves of
Safety factor for stability: yp = 2.0 permissible and buckling head of water for the 3 X 2 egg
Safety factor for material strength: 3/M= 2.0. shape: (a) CIF’ lining, (b) GRP lining.
38 Olivier Thepot

(a) (2) sub-critical linings which do not buckle, but

whose deformation lobe may extend to the
9
entire lining.
Critical linings can be calculated by means of
analytical results [Eqns (2)-(10)]. Thus the engineer
can easily perform stability, stress and deflection
checks. For sub-critical linings such as oval shape,
other approaches may be used like non-linear finite
element methods with appropriate formulation of
the boundary conditions. Comparisons with the
WRc type II design show some divergence
ELrlOOOMPa especially for non-standard egg shapes.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
(b)
The author wishes to thank the members of the
working group “design” of the French National Pro-
ject RERAU. Special thanks to Mr E. Vandame and
Mr J. Gumbel for their encouragement.

REFERENCES

1. Trenchless Technology Research Colloquium,

Rehabilitation Group Communique, Structural Per-
formance of Close-fit Non-bonded Flexible Linings
for Nominally Circular Gravity Systems: Agreed
o.w5 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 Basis for a Rational Design Methodology
t/l (http://www.latech.edu), 1998.
Fig. 13. Comparisons with the WRc type II design. Curves of 2. Gumbel, J. E., Structural design of pipe linings-
permissible and buckling head of water for the 2 X 1 egg review of principles, practice and current develop-
shape: (a) CIP lining, (b) GRP lining. ments worldwide, Proceedings of the International
No-Dig 97, Taipei, 1997, China Society for Trench-
above the new design curves and even above the less Technology.
buckling curve for the CIP material. In this case, 3. Falter, B., Structural analysis of sewer linings.
the WRc method gives a permissible water head Trenchless Technology Research, 1996, 11(2), 27-
exceeding the buckling pressures. 41.
4. Sewerage Rehabilitation Manual, UK Water
Research CentreWater Authorities Association
(WRcnVAA), 1994.
6 CONCLUSIONS
5. RERAU, Projet National: RChabilitation des rkseaux
d’assainissement urbains, Ministbre de l’Equipe-
This article describes a design method based on ment, des Transports et du Logement DRAST, 1994.
second-order analysis for non-circular linings sub- 6. Thkpot, O., Calcul des tubages et chemisages a la
ject to external pressure. This method is a way of pression hydrostatique ext&ieure, RERAU External
calculating the safety factor of a non-circular lining Reports R4A2/18, 2000.
with respect to buckling, which is the most probable 7. Watkins, K. R. and Anderson, L. R., Structural
mode of failure. The method puts the linings into Mechanics of Buried Pipes, CRC Press, New
two categories: York, 2000.
8. Thepot, O., Flambement d’une coque non circulaire
(1) critical linings that may buckle, but whose plaquke contre une paroi. Revue FranGuise de G&rie
deflection lobes do not extend (most egg shapes Civil, 2000, 4(l), 81-107.
and quasi-circular linings are critical); and 9. Glock, D., iiberkritisches verhalten eines starr
 A new design method for non-circular sewer linings 39

u~~telten kreisrohres bei w~se~~k von aussen Then the total energy is:
und temperaturerhiihung. Der Stahlbau, 1977,46(7),
212-217. II=U-W. (A7)
10. Boot, J. C., Elastic buckling of cylindrical pipe
linings with small imperfections subject to external It is possible to generate an approximate solution by
pressure. Trenchless Technology research, 1998, assuming the following shape function:
12( l-2), 3-15.
11. Sathyatnoorthy, M., Nonlinear Analysis of Struc-
tures, CRC Press, New York, 1998.

where f is the maximal deflection at the centre of the blister

and & is half the blister angle (see Fig. Al).
APPENDIX A-CALCULATION OF THE Since the contact between the lining and the host is perfectly
BUCKLING PRESSURE OF AN EGG- slicing, the axial force N is constant. Substituting for E from
SHAPED LINING EZqn (Al), Eqn (AS) can be integrated over the length of the
half perimeter:
The lining is considered to be the egg shape of Fig. l(a) and
PC!
it is assumed that two blisters develop at the centre of the arcs
included between the invert and the springings, the invert and NP
--= &r_
the crown stick on against the support. This deformation mode (A%
EA 2
is referred to as the “two-blister” mode. The support lining 0
interface is assumed to be sliding perfectly (the friction coef-
ficient is zero). The tangential displacement is referred to as It is not necessary to know the expression of the tangential
u and the radial displacement as w, for a point of the middle Pa

fibre identified by its curvilinear abscissa s. It is assumed that displacement (u) because the integral (duldr) d.r equals
the arc is initi~ly lifted away from its support by a value equal I
to g. For a curved beam of radius R undergoing large defor- zero by symmetry and N is obtained in te’rms of W.
mation, the axial strain is given by:*’ Substituting for w from’Eqn (A8) in Eqn (A2), (A4), (A@,
(A9) gives:

N+ (A101
The bending strain is given by:

*+X+5?. EI
M = B244 ~-2g)#~+~-~ (Al 1)
[

The axial force and bending moment are given by:

N=EAe (A3)

and

M = EIx, CW

where E is the Young’s modulus of the beam, A the cross-

section and I the inertia.
The expression for the strain energy is obtained by integrat-
ing the strain energy density over -tie half perimeter of the
egg shape:

U=;~(~+$s,_ (A5)
0

where P is the lining perimeter (developed length).

The work done by the external pressure that is uniformly
applied over the perimeter of the lining is given by:

P/2

w= pwds. W)
I Fig. Al. Parameterization of the deformation lobe.
0
40 Olivier The’pol

Expression of the critical deflection:

( 11
+ 41) cos -4
40
2(3 -
and &=
(A19)
R 3
Z.5
W = pR&,f - pPg. 6412)
IP 2J5
Substituting from Eqns (AlO), (All), (A12) into Eqn (A5) HrAR3 .
and observing that & is far smaller than r, the total energy
can be expressed as follows:
Expression of the critical pressure:

l-I= (Al3)
per
-_= (A20a)
E 9
?J5
plSA2JS
Applying the stationary principle, XI = 0, gives the two fol-
lowing equations: p2q/5 .

f=~[l-&j&g.q (A14)
In numerical form:

PCr
- = 2.667 z. (A20b)
E
and
For a homogeneous material, the inertia and the cross-sec-
r 1 tional area can be expressed as functions of the thickness of
the lining:

I=; and A=t

with y = ?r/&.
The maximum value of p compatible with the equilibrium Then, Eqn (A20b) simplifies to:
equals the critical buckling pressure. Therefore, it is a simple
matter of calculating the value of y which maximizes Eqn
(A15). Assuming dpldy = 0 gives the following equation: !+L = 0.6 2 . (A211
E

For a circular lining, P = nD and R = D/2, and Eqn (A21)

16 - 14; r’ - 15 $& y
simplifies to:

t 1115
+24/m=o. PCr
-=1.323D . 6422)
E 0

If g = 0 (no gap), Eqn (A16) accepts the following solution: This is exactly the expression established by Glock9 for the
critical pressure of a circular encased lining in two-lobe mode.
l/S Eqn (A21) is therefore a generalization to non-circular linings
,rAR3 ‘I5 of the Glock solution.
(A17) The critical bending moment is given by:
C-1IP *

M,,=;(3- 7-26);. (~23)

Substituting for y from Eqn (A17) in Eqn (A14), (A15), (A16) J-
gives the following expressions.
Expression of the critical angle: The critical axial force is given by:

l/S NC, = 1.26p,,R. (~24)

A,r =
-i 1
j&$-q (&y. (‘418) In the case of a single-lobe buckling mode, which can occur,
for instance, in a horseshoe-shaped lining [see Fig. 4(b)], the
 A new design method for non-circular sewer linings 41

perimeter of the lining for one lobe is doubled (compared with where 6 is the reduced gap:
that of the two-lobe buckling mode). Therefore, in Eqn (A17)
and the following, it is a simple matter of replacing P by
2P, giving:

f3l5AU5
PCr
- = 2.021 p2/5R9/5 (A25a)
E

and for a homogeneous material:

!+L = 0.455
E
& . (A25b)

For a circular lining, P = VD and R = D/2, and Eqn (A25b) Then the a-dimensionalized Eqn (A27) can be resolved by
simplifies to: the Newton-Raphson method for 6 between 0 and 15 for
instance. Adjusting by the least-squares method, a polynomial
function regarding the results gives an approximate expression
of the critical pressure as follows:
(A261
PCF
- = 2.667r,, g , 642%
This is exactly the expression established by Glockg for the E
critical pressure of a circular encased lining in single-lobe
mode. The critical pressure in the single-lobe mode is therefore
less than the dual-lobe mode by a factor of 22/5 = 1.32. where I& is the reduction factor of the critical pressure due
If g #O, Eqn (A16) can be rewriting in the following a- to the mitral gap:
dimensionalized form:
1
rP.8= for 6 5 15. (A30)
16 - 148x” - 15X (~27) 1 + 0.416 - 0.006s*

s 5 Comparisons between analytical results and finite element

+24 1--p’5--X=0
J 2 12 ’ analysis are given in Thepot.*