Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Pure Technologies, 3420 State Route 22 West, Suite 130, Branchburg, NJ 08876, USA
Lebanese American University, Department of Civil Engineering, 211 E 46th St., New York, NY 10017, USA
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Received 7 October 2014
Received in revised form 13 September 2015
Accepted 8 October 2015
Available online 22 October 2015
Keywords:
Buried concrete pipes
Pipe joints
Prestressed concrete cylinder pipes
Numerical modeling
Earth pressure
Finite element analysis
a b s t r a c t
Broken prestressing wire wraps are the main cause of failure in buried prestressed concrete cylinder pipes
(PCCP), which form the backbone of water and wastewater infrastructure networks in North America.
Advanced numerical modeling using non-linear finite elements is used to model the effect of the number
and location of broken wire wraps on the structural performance of Class 125-14, 96-in. PCCP. The modeling technique used is unique in that it considers full interaction between adjacent pipes with harnessed
joints, as well as combined internal and external loading with full soilpipe interaction. Performance indicators in the various components of PCCP are monitored as internal pressure is increased. A sensitivity
analysis is presented for how manipulating the severity of the damage affects the failure pressure of
the pipe. The results show that the internal fluid pressure required to cause failure can be as much as
34% lower when the damage is at the barrel of the pipe, and that the internal pressure that causes yielding
of the wire wraps decreases by 66% as the damage worsens from 5 to 100 wire breaks.
2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Prestressed concrete cylinder pipe (PCCP) originally appeared in
1942 as Lined Cylinder Pipe (LCP). After a decade, Embedded Cylinder Pipe (ECP) was developed as another type of PCCP with concrete encasement of the steel cylinder on both sides and
prestressing wire wrapped around the outer concrete core. The
design and manufacturing standards of PCCP in the United States
are now published by the American Water Works Association
(AWWA) in the AWWA C301 Standard Specifications for Reinforced
Concrete Water Pipe Steel Cylinder Type, Prestressed (AWWA
C301-52), with the latest revision released in 2007 (AWWA
C304-2007). While PCCP is widely used nowadays in underground
water and wastewater transmission networks, the understanding
of its behavior under combined internal and external loading is still
being gradually developed.
PCCP consists of a concrete core, a steel cylinder, high tensile
prestressing wires, and an outer mortar coating layer. The concrete
core is the load-bearing component with the steel cylinder acting
as a water barrier between inner and outer core concrete layers. Prestressing wires produce a uniform circumferential compressive
pressure in the concrete core that balances tensile stresses
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: masood.hajali@puretechltd.com (M. Hajali), ali.alavinasab@
puretechltd.com (A. Alavinasab), caesar.abishdid@lau.edu.lb (C. Abi Shdid).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2015.10.016
0886-7798/ 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
developed in the pipe from internal fluid pressure. The mortar coating protects the prestressing wires from physical damage and external corrosion. Rupture of prestressing wires around the concrete core
is common in PCCP and can be the result of damage due to corrosion,
hydrogen embrittlement, overloading, or manufacturing defects. As
a result of this loss of circumferential compressive load around the
pipe, tensile stresses will develop that can lead to possible cracking
of the concrete core and cause leak or damage in the pipe.
While the structural condition of underground water and
wastewater mains can be assessed using ultrasonic tomography
methods (Abi Shdid and Hajali, 2014; Yang et al., 2010), satellite
detection of ground movement (Arsnio et al., 2014); direct inspections by remotely-controlled closed circuit television (CCTV), and
more recently sewer scanner and evaluation technology (SSET)
cameras, remains to be the most accurate and widely used method
to detect damage in buried infrastructure elements such as PCCP.
Such inspections need to be conducted on a regular and systematic
basis in order to monitor deterioration rates and perform on-time
replacement of pipes prior to their failure. However, the large size,
underground nature, and operating conditions of these facilities
make it prohibitively expensive to do so in a manner that mitigates
the serious effects of their failure. Owners have therefore resorted
to the use of risk curves that are developed based on numerical values assigned by inspectors that place any pipe in one of five internal condition grades (ICG) according to a subjective assessment of
12
13
end of the pipe, but also because of the relative displacement and
rotation between adjacent pipes. A Class 125-14, 244 cm (96-in.)
ECP was considered and modeled for this purpose, and the stresses
and strains developed in the prestressing wire wraps, concrete
core, and mortar coating were compared for the cases of wire
breaks at the joint and in the middle of the pipe. The structural performance of the PCCP was evaluated using four (4) different measurements: micro cracking, visible cracking, yielding of wire wraps,
and rupture stress of wire wraps.
4.1. Finite element modeling
HARNESS CLAMP
RUBBER GASKET
placed on the inner side of the bell ring and on the external side of
the spigot end of the pipe. The exterior of the joints are subsequently grouted to protect the steel joint rings from deterioration.
Concrete thrust blocks were commonly used to carry the unbalanced thrust forces at the elbows and other fittings of concrete
pipes. These blocks derive the major part of their resistance to
movement from the soil wedge behind them. While concrete
thrust blocks provide an acceptable equilibrant for unbalanced
thrust forces, the possibility of disturbance to the soil wedge by
street excavationsrequired for the installation and maintenance
of other utilitieshave lead concrete pipe manufactures to develop
harnessed joints. Such joints are capable of transmitting forces
through the pipe wall, which are then dissipated by friction to
the surrounding soil. Although the joint is harnessed, it still retains
the flexibility to permit slight differential settlement.
3.2. Theoretical and practical motivation
Once in tension, cracks in the concrete initiate, and with additional strain, its load carrying capacity decreases further. At high
strains, the load carrying capacity of the concrete core becomes
negligible, and the loads are transferred to other components of
the PCCP. This load transformation differs at the joints due to the
interaction between the pipes spigot and bell rings. The interaction between adjacent pipes thus affects the performance of PCCP
and needs to be considered and carefully modeled.
The effects of the location and number of broken prestressing
wire wraps on the performance of damaged PCCP have not been
thoroughly investigated, and the few studies available in the literature have not considered the effect of the interaction at harnessed
joints between adjacent pipes. Broken wire wraps in PCCP can occur
near the joint or in the barrel (middle) of the pipe. The objective of
this study is to investigate how the location of broken prestressing
wire wraps affects the strength of the PCCP when full interaction
exists between the bell and spigot ends of the adjacent pipes. Such
understanding is critical to owners and inspectors in evaluating
both the short- and long-term performance of a pipeline system.
r Del : e epl
Del 1 dDel0
4. Modeling approach
Modeling the structural behavior of a damaged underground
PCCP at a joint is a complex nonlinear problem due to the interaction between not only the broken prestressing wire wraps and the
Bell End
Spigot End
Fig. 2a. Spigot and bell ends of the PCCP numerical model.
14
Fig. 2b. Finite element mesh model and the layers of the PCCP wall thickness.
Fig. 3. PCCP with 5, 35, 70, and 100 broken wire wraps.
Table 1
Damaged pipe length corresponding to number of wire breaks (WB).
ECP class
designation
Internal
pressure
rating
Backfill
height
rating
35 WB
70 WB
100
WB
Class 12514
0.86 MPa
(125 psi)
4.3 m
(14 ft)
5.5
(2.17)
38.6
(15.18)
77.2
(30.36)
110.2
(43.38)
e_ e_ el e_ pl
considered at the intact pipe side, thus allowing the damaged pipe
to move in longitudinal direction. In order to have a realistic behavior for the harnessed joint, interface elements are used at the joint
to allow small movement to occur. An efficient approach developed
by Mayer and Gaul (2005) is used to model the contact interfaces of
joints with segment-to-segment contact elements like thin layer or
zero thickness elements used between spigot and bell ends.
The model was subjected to loads corresponding to internal
fluid pressure, pipe and fluid weights, and external earth loads as
per the pipe dimensions and internal pressure and backfill ratings
defined by (AWWA C304-2007). The Soil was not directly modeled,
but rather the Marston Theory was used for calculating earth loads
on PCCP buried pipes. The formula is world-recognized as the Marston Load Equation for Rigid Pipes. The Marston Theory considers the
effect of vertical soil load and lateral soil support in its equations
(Moser and Folkman, 2001).
The number of broken wire wraps was varied over a broad range
of distress levels as shown in Fig. 3 in order to evaluate the cracking
of the concrete core and mortar coating, and the yielding of the prestressing wires with increasing internal fluid pressure as the number of broken wire wraps increases. The lengths of damaged ECP
sections corresponding to the various numbers of wire breaks considered for the joint and the barrel are shown in Table 1. Three (3)
different broken wire wrap scenarios were modeled: starting from
the spigot end and continuing along the pipe length, starting from
the bell end and continuing along the pipe length, and in the barrel
of the pipe. The scenario of broken wire wraps starting at the spigot
end of the PCCP is shown in Fig. 4a, and the scenario of broken wire
wraps at the barrel of the PCCP is shown in Fig. 4b.
A bilinear stressstrain relationship is used for modeling the
steel material. The values used to represent the performance of
the steel components are based on the yield and ultimate strengths
15
Fig. 4a. PCCP with broken wire wraps at the spigot end.
Table 2
Material properties of PCCP based on AWWA C304 standard.
Component
Youngs Modulus
(GPa)/(psi)
Density
(kg/m3)/(lb/ft3)
Poissons
Ratio
Concrete
Mortar coating
Prestressing wires
Steel cylinder
27.17/3.94E+06
25.1/3.64E+06
193.05/28E+06
206.84/3E+07
2322.61/145
2242.58/140
7832.8/489
7832.8/489
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.3
0 0:3
Ec 0:074c1:51
fc
c
0
fm
Ec 0:074c1:51
m
0:3
5
3
f sg 0:75f su
16
f sy 0:85f su
f s e s Es
es 6 f sg =Es
for es > f sg =Es
for
f s f su 1 1 0:6133es Es =f su
2:25
1.60E-03
pipe occurs at 1379 kPa (200 psi), while the visible cracking at
the spigot end and bell ends of the pipe occur at 1393 kPa
(202 psi) and 1482 (215 psi), respectively.
The results show that, under the same level of damage, the hoop
strain inside the concrete core at the invert of a Class 125-14 PCCP
reaches the limits of micro cracking (initiation of deterioration) at
lower internal fluid pressures when the damage occurs at the spigot end, compared with pipes having wire breaks at the barrel and
bell end of the pipe. However, the model shows a faster rate of
deterioration at the barrel of the pipe as the internal fluid pressure
increases, thus resulting in visible cracks occurring at the barrel of
the pipe prior to appearing at the joint. A possible explanation of
this behavior is the confining effect that the harness clamp imposes
on the hoop strain at the joints, thus preventing the rapid rate of
hoop strain increase.
5.2. Cracking of mortar coating
Similarly, the onset of visible cracking in the mortar coating in
the barrel, spigot end, and bell end of the PCCP with five (5) broken
wire wraps occurred at 1517 kPa (220 psi), 1593 kPa (231 psi), and
1655 kPa (240 psi) internal fluid pressure, respectively as shown in
Fig. 6. Also, the onset of micro cracking in mortar coating in the
barrel, spigot end, and bell end of the pipe with five (5) broken wire
wraps occurred at 1437 kPa (208 psi), 1530 kPa (221 psi), and
1600 kPa (232 psi) internal fluid pressure, respectively. The results
of this second failure indicator show thatunder the same level of
damage in PCCPboth micro and visible cracks would occur at the
barrel of the pipe sooner (at lower internal pressure) when compared to the spigot and bell ends of the same PCCP. This difference
from the behavior of the hoop strain in the concrete core can be
attributed to the fact that the harness does not provide the same
confinement effect at the joint on the mortar coating that it does
on the concrete core.
5.3. Yield and rupture of prestressing wires
As the internal fluid pressure increases inside a damaged PCCP
with broken prestressed wire wraps from corrosion or other causes
listed earlier, the stress level in undamaged wires increases beyond
the yield limit. Additional internal pressure will eventually cause
the stress level in the remaining prestressed wire wraps to go over
the ultimate strength limit, thus leading to fracture of additional
wires. This third failure indicator is studied by monitoring the
stresses in the prestressing wires and determining the internal
fluid pressures which will cause them to reach their yield and ultimate strength limits. The impact of increased damage through a
growing number of broken prestressing wire wraps on these failure stresses is also analyzed, and the results are summarized in
Table 3. Figs. 7 and 8 show the stresses in the prestressing wires
Visible Cracking
1.40E-03
1.60E-03
Barrel
1.20E-03
1.40E-03
6.00E-04
Strain
Strain
Spigot
8.00E-04
Bell
4.00E-04
Visible Cracking
1.00E-03
Micro Cracking
8.00E-04
Spigot
6.00E-04
Bell
4.00E-04
Micro Cracking
2.00E-04
0.00E+00
Barrel
1.20E-03
1.00E-03
2.00E-04
0.00E+00
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
200
400
600
800
17
1900
1320
920
720
Rupture
Spigot
2110
1410
970
730
Bell
2218
1850
1135
895
Barrel
19%
1.60E+06
Spigot
2300
1490
1000
755
1.70E+06
2380
1650
1120
900
2500
2150
1500
1100
1.50E+06
Bell
Stress (kPa)
1.80E+06
1.40E+06
1.30E+06
Spigot
Bell
1.20E+06
1.10E+06
Barrel
1.00E+06
9.00E+05
8.00E+05
200
400
15%
600
800
1000
1200
1400
Barrel
Bell
Stress (kPa)
Spigot
Fig. 7. Stress in prestressing wires with five (5) broken wire wraps.
1.80E+06
1.70E+06
1.60E+06
1.50E+06
1.40E+06
1.30E+06
1.20E+06
1.10E+06
1.00E+06
9.00E+05
8.00E+05
20%
Bell
Barrel
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
Fig. 10. Stress in prestressing wires with one hundred (100) broken wire wraps.
29%
1.70E+06
1.60E+06
Yield Limit State
1.40E+06
62%
Barrel
1.30E+06
1.60E+06
Spigot
1.20E+06
1.10E+06
Stress (kPa)
Stress (kPa)
1.50E+06
Bell
1.00E+06
9.00E+05
8.00E+05
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
Yield Limit
70WB
1.40E+06
100WB
35WB
1.20E+06
5WB
1.00E+06
8.00E+05
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
Fig. 11. Stress in the prestressing wirebroken wire wraps at the barrel.
the middle of the pipe than when the defect is near the spigot
end. When considering the complete rupture of the prestressing
wires, this same difference becomes 8.0%. It can also be argued
here that the confinement effect that the harness provides at the
joint is the main reason for this delayed yielding of the prestressing
wires near the joint when compared to those at the barrel of the
pipe.
Fig. 8 shows that the prestressing wire wraps of a PCCP with 35
wire breaks reach their yield stress limit state at an internal fluid
pressure that is as much as 29% lower when the defect is in the barrel
than when it is at the spigot end of the pipe. This difference in internal pressure continues to diverge due to a higher rate of deterioration at the barrel, until it reaches about 31% at the ultimate
(rupture) stress. The same can be said about PCCP with 70 and 100
wire breaks where the yield-inducing internal pressures are 19%
and 20% lower at the barrel, respectively, and the rupture-causing
18
1.80E+06
Strength Limit
60%
1.60E+06
Stress (kPa)
Yield Limit
1.40E+06
100WB
70WB
5WB
1.20E+06
35WB
1.00E+06
8.00E+05
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
1.60E+06
Stress (kPa)
Yield Limit
1.40E+06
100WB
70WB
5WB
1.20E+06
35WB
1.00E+06
8.00E+05
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
internal pressures are 34% and 32% lower at the barrel, as shown in
Figs. 9 and 10. For 35 broken wire wraps, as can be seen from Fig. 8
and Table 3, the yielding of the wires occurs at 1320 kPa (191 psi)
for the barrel location, 1490 kPa (216 psi) for the spigot location
and 1850 kPa for the bell location, which is 29% lower when the
defect is at the barrel but only 6% when the defect is at the spigot.
For 35, 70 and 100 broken wire wraps, the barrel location and the
spigot location give quite the same internal pressure at yield.
It can also be seen from the numbers of Table 3 and plots of
Figs. 710 that these internal pressures that cause yielding and
the eventual rupture of the wire wraps drop as the damage in
the PCCP worsens and the number of respective wire breaks
increase from 5 to 100. Figs. 1113 therefore, comparefor each
location of defecthow the internal pressure that causes failure
of the prestressing wires varies with the length of the defect, which
corresponds to a different number of broken wire wraps. When the
wire breaks occur at the barrel of a PCCP, the prestressing wire
wraps reach their yield stress limit at internal fluid pressures of
1900 kPa (276 psi), 1320 kPa (191 psi), 920 kPa (133 psi), and
720 kPa (100 psi) for 5, 35, 70, and 100 wire breaks, respectively.
Similarly, when the damage is at the barrel, the onset of rupture
for the prestressing wire wraps occurs at internal fluid pressures
of 2300 kPa (334 psi), 1490 kPa (216 psi), 1000 kPa (145 psi), and
755 kPa (110 psi) for 5, 35, 70, and 100 wire breaks, respectively.
These translate to a 62.2% and 67.2% drop in the internal fluid pressures required to both yield and rupture the prestressing wires, as
the defect worsens from 5 to 100 wire breaks at the barrel of a
PCCP. Similar numbers are obtained for when the wire breaks
occur at the bell end and the spigot end of the PCCP, as shown in
Figs. 11 and 12, respectively.
Fig. 14 shows, as an example, the stress developed in the prestressing wire for a PCCP with thirty-five (35) broken wire wraps
at the spigot end of the pipe. Von Mises stress is used since it is
a good representative of the hoop stress developed circumferentially around the pipe (rH) and longitudinal or axial stress in the
pipe (rL). The color gradient indicates the calculated range of stress
for each element in the pipe model. Note that in Fig. 14 the stress is
reported in imperial units. It is interesting to observe from the
results that the highest amount of stress occurs near the location
of the damage. This is expected since the breakage of wire wraps
in a particular region of the pipe will result in more stress concentration on the remaining undamaged wire wraps in the vicinity of
the damage.
The external load was considered, based on a real case study, to
consist of 4.3 m (14 feet) of soil. Changing the height of earth cover
will change the internal pressure required to: (a) yield or rupture
the steel cylinder and prestressing wires, and (b) cause visible
cracking and micro cracking in the concrete core and mortar coating; but will not significantly change the difference between the
results of the bell, the spigot, and the barrel.
Fig. 14. Von Mises stress (psi) in prestressing wires for PCCP with 35 WB at spigot end.
wire breaks located at the joints. The results indicate over 30%
strength reduction for a low to medium number of wire wrap
breaks occurring at the barrel when compared to the bell joint. This
strength reduction increases over 33% for medium to high number
of wire breaks. Additionally, the model results showed that if wire
wrap breaks occur at the barrel, it is anticipated that cracking in
the pipe will occur at lower internal pressures than if the breaks
occurred at the joints. These internal pressure limits can also drop
by as much as 65% with increased number of wire breaks. It is
therefore argued that the location and not just the extent of damage have a significant effect on the structural performance of PCCP.
The conclusions arrived at are significant for owners, operators,
and inspectors of underground PCCP pipeline systems alike. The
results presented will help these stakeholders develop risk models
to better access the risk of failure that certain pipe defects pose.
This in-turn will serve the purpose of more efficient and on-time
replacement of these facilities. While the conclusions arrived at
in this study can be expected to remain valid for other classes of
PCCP, the results remain specific to Class 125-14 96-in. PCCP and
would not extend to cover the entire range of PCCP classes without
proper validation studies. Furthermore, while several issues
regarding the structural performance of damaged PCCP with harnessed joints were discussed in this paper, there are many open
questions and issues that need to be researched. Future research
into the structural performance and monitoring of PCCP should
include full-scale experimental models of PCCP as well as developing risk curves for these infrastructure systems. Comparing risk
models developed based on numerical simulation as the one presented here to ones based on ANN.
References
Abi Shdid, C., Hajali, M., 2014. Detecting location of construction defects in drilled
shafts using frequency tomography analysis of cross-hole sonic logging. In:
Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference of Computing in Civil and
Building Engineering (ICCCBE), ASCE, Orlando, FL, pp. 17231730.
Alavinasab, A., Hajali, M., 2014. Do broken prestressing wire wraps at the joint affect
the safe operation of a pipe? In: Pipelines 2014, pp. 13791391.
Alavinasab, A., Padewski, E., Holley, M., Jha, R., Ahmadi, G., 2010. Damage
identification based on vibration response of prestressed concrete pipes. In:
Proceedings of Pipelines Conference: Climbing New Peaks to Infrastructure
ReliabilityRenew, Rehab, and Reinvest, ASCE, Keystone, CO, pp. 909919.
Alavinasab, A., Padewski, E., Higgins, M., Holley, M., Jha, R., Ahmadi, G., 2011. Crack
propagation in prestressed concrete noncylinder pipe using finite element
method. In: Proceedings Pipelines 2011: A Sound Conduit for Sharing Solutions,
ASCE, Seattle, WA, pp. 5564.
Alavinasab, A., Jha, R., Ahmadi, G., 2011. Damage identification based on modal
analysis of prestressed concrete pipes. In: Proceedings of Pipelines 2011: A
Sound Conduit for Sharing Solutions, ASCE, Seattle, WA, pp. 1223.
19
Alavinasab, A., Padewski, E., Higgins, M., 2013. Effects of the location of broken
prestressing wires wraps in structural integrity of a damaged PCCP. In:
Proceedings of Pipelines 2013, ASCE, Fort Worth, TX, pp. 767774.
Allouche, E., Alam, S., Simicevic, J., Sterling, R., Condit, W., Matthews, J., Selvakumar,
A., 2014. A pilot study for retrospective evaluation of cured-in-place pipe (CIPP)
rehabilitation of municipal gravity sewers. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 39,
8293.
Amaitik, Nasser M., Amaitik, Saleh M., 2008. Development of PCCP wire breaks
prediction model using artificial neural networks. In: Proceedings of Pipelines
2008, ASCE, Atlanta, GA, pp. 111.
Arsnio, A.M., Dheenathayalan, P., Hanssen, R., Vreeburg, J., Rietveld, L., 2014. Pipe
failure predictions in drinking water systems using satellite observations.
Struct. Inf. Eng., 110 (ahead-of-print)
American Water Works Association (AWWA), 2007. AWWA C301 Standard for
Prestressed Concrete Pressure Pipe, Steel-Cylinder Type, Denver, CO.
American Water Works Association (AWWA), 2007. AWWA C304 Design of
Prestressed Concrete Cylinder Pipe, Denver, CO.
AWWA, 2007. AWWA C-304 Standard for Design of Prestressed Concrete Cylinder
Pipe, Denver, CO.
AWWA Research Foundation, 2007. Failure of Prestressed Concrete Cylinder Pipe,
Denver, CO.
Hajali, M., Abi Shdid, C., 2013. Determination of the two-dimensional plastic zone
shape and SIF at the crack tip using RKPM. J. Iron Steel Res. 20 (12), 103114,
Elsevier.
Hewayde, E., Nehdi, M., Allouche, E., Nakhla, G., 2007. Neural network prediction of
concrete degradation by sulphuric acid attack. Struct. Inf. Eng. 3 (1), 1727.
Jung, J.K., Koo, D.H., Zhang, K., 2014. Verification of the pipe depth dependent model
using a finite element analysis. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 39, 3440.
Kang, J.S., Davidson, J.S., 2013. Structural effects of concrete lining for concrete-lined
corrugated steel pipes. Struct. Inf. Eng. 9 (2), 130140.
Kleiner, Y., Sadiq, R., Rajani, B., 2004. Modeling failure risk in buried pipes using
fuzzy Markov deterioration process. In: Proceedings of International Conference
on Pipeline Engineering and Construction, ASCE, San Diego, CA, pp. 112.
Mahendran, M., 2007. Applications of finite element analysis in structural
engineering. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Computer Aided
Engineering, Chennai, India, pp. 3846.
Mayer, M.H., Gaul, L., 2005. Segment-to-segment contact elements for modelling
joint interfaces in finite element analysis. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 21 (2),
724734.
Moser, Alma P., Folkman, Steven L., 2001. Buried Pipe Design. McGraw-Hill, New
York.
Ovesy, H.R., Asghari, M.M., Kharazi, M., 2015. Post-buckling analysis of delaminated
composite plates using a novel layerwise theory. Thin-Walled Struct. 94, 98
106.
Rauniyar, S., 2013. Development of Finite Element Model for Analysis of Prestressed
Concrete Cylinder Pipe-embedded Cylinder Pipe with Experimental
Comparison. M.S. thesis. The University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX.
Xiong, H., Li, P., Lia, Q., 2010. FE model for simulating wire-wrapping during
prestressing of an embedded prestressed concrete cylinder pipe. Simul. Model.
Pract. Theor. 18 (5), 624636.
Yang, Y., Polak, M.A., Cascante, G., 2010. Nondestructive evaluation of the depth of
surface-breaking cracks in concrete pipes. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 25 (6),
736744.
Younis, R., Knight, M.A., 2010. A probability model for investigating the trend of
structural deterioration of wastewater pipelines. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol.
25 (6), 670680.