||Battelle Memorial Inst., Columbus, OH.; Alsa Tech, LLC., Powell, OH.; Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. Office of Research and Development.; National Risk Management Research Lab., Edison, NJ. Water Supply and Water Resources Div.
This report presents the results of the following nine pipe wall integrity assessment technologies: Three technologies for average wall thickness screening are discussed including Sahara Wall Thickness Testing (WTT), SmartBallTMPipe Wall Assessment (PWA), and ThicknessFinder. These inspection technologies acquire pipe condition data in the form of general pipeline condition or average wall loss over a specified interval. Three technologies are discussed that use inline inspection of the entire pipeline length including Sahara VideoÃ‚Â®, PipeDiverÃ‚Â® remote field eddy current (RFEC), and See SnakeÃ‚Â® RFT. These inspection technologies can acquire pipe condition data, such as metal loss, size of defects, and/or cracks. Three technologies are discussed that use external inspection at selected excavation points including External Condition Assessment Tool (ECAT), Hand Scanning Kit (HSK) and Crown Assessment Probe (CAP). These inspection technologies can acquire pipe condition data within an excavation and use models to predict the condition of portions of the pipeline that remain buried. Upon completion of the field demonstration effort, the 24-in. diameter test pipe was removed by Louisville Water Company (LWC) to prepare for installation of a 30-in. diameter replacement line. As the 24-in. line was being removed, the EPAÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s contractor selected 12 pipe lengths for post-demonstration confirmation of the reported condition assessment technology results. Pipe segments were selected using the inspection results reported by each technology vendor and visual assessment of the pipe condition as it was removed. The pipes were grit blasted to remove coating, corrosion and graphitization and the amount of metal loss was quantified manually and with a laser scanner. For each technology, inspection results were compared to the dimensions and locations of machined defects and/or of naturally-occurring defects found after excavation to evaluate the performance of the pipe wall integrity assessment technologies. Each company provided a written report on the condition of the test pipe, with some reporting anomalous pipe segments and others reporting the size, depth, and location of specific defects along the test pipe. This report covers acoustic pipe wall assessment, internal inspection, and external inspection. Volume II includes assessment data for excavated pipe and vendor reports. A companion report (Nestleroth et al., 2012) provides information on the leak detection and location portion of the technology demonstration. The field demonstration phase was conducted in 2009. The post-demonstration ex situ pipe characterization, and report preparation and review was conducted in 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013.