|
 |
 |
 |
 |
CONQUEST® Flangeless Piping
Testing and Verification Data for CONQUEST Flangeless Piping Systems
1" to 4" Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) Lined Systems
To verify the integrity of the CONQUEST
flangeless connection,
Resistoflex conducted tests on three separate components of the
connection:
- The mechanical coupling, which has been developed by LOKRINGTM
for use with RESISTOFLEX Plastic-Lined Piping.
- The liner butt weld.
- The CONQUEST flangeless connection as a whole.
A summary of these tests and results are contained in this technical
data sheet.
Testing of the RESISTOFLEX/LOKRINGTM Mechanical Coupling
A. Coupling Bend Test
Test Procedure - Mechanical couplings were used to join two sections of
plastic-lined pipe from RESISTOFLEX Plastic-Lined Piping Products.
These newly created sections of joined pipe were then subjected to a
full reverse bend test.
These tests were performed by the Lokring Corporation at their facility in
Foster City, California. The load applied to the bend was the equivalent
to subjecting the pipe to a minimum stress of 30 psi (2070 bar). The
minimum number of cycles required to pass the test was set at 7,000
cycles. The test was carried out until either 7,000 cycles were
completed or coupling failure was observed.
Results - All four pipe sizes tested passes the minimum
requirement of 7,000 cycles. The test on the 1" (25 mm) size was
allowed to continue in order to determine approximately how many full
reversing cycles the pipe could actually withstand. The test terminated
after 71,089 cycles and still no failure was observed.
|
|
Table 1 - Bend Test Results |
Pipe Size inches (mm) |
Number of Cycles |
Result |
| 1 (25) |
71,089 |
Pass |
| 1-1/2 (40) |
7,399 |
Pass |
| 2 (50) |
7,251 |
Pass |
| 3 (80) |
7,500 |
Pass |
|
|
B. Coupling Burst Test
Test Procedure - Test samples were produced by connecting two
sections of plastic-lined pipe from RESISTOFLEX Plastic-Lined Piping
Products with a mechanical coupling. Each end was then capped. The cap
at one end was equipped with a connection that permitted internal
hydraulic pressure to be applied. The requirement to pass the test was
set at having the pipe fail before the coupling. Internal pressure was
then applied and steadily increased. These tests were performed by the
Lokring Corporation at their facility in Foster City, California.
Results - The internal pressure was increased until the coupling
failed or the pipe burst. Testing was completed for three different
sizes of plastic-lined pipe and is summarized in Table 2. Note that in
each case the pipe burst, which demonstrates that the coupling is
actually stronger than the steel pipe.
|
|
Table 2 - Coupling Burst Test Results |
Pipe Size inches (mm) |
Burst Pressure psi (Bar) |
Result |
| 2 (50) |
7,500 (518) |
Pipe Rupture |
| 3 (80) |
10,000 (690) |
Pipe Rupture |
| 4 (100) |
5,200 (360) |
Pipe Rupture |
|
|
C. Coupling Torsion Test
Test Procedure - Pipe samples were produced by connecting two
sections of plastic-lined pipe from RESISTOFLEX Plastic-Lined Piping
Products with mechanical couplings. Three samples of each size were
produced and testing was performed by Lokring Corporation in Foster
City, California. The minimum torques required to pass the test were
set at 450 ft-lbs (610 N-m), 750 ft-lbs (1017 N-m) and 1,000 ft-lbs
(1356 N-m) for each pipe size, respectively. Lokring Corporation
conducted initial torque testing up to 600 ft-lbs (813 N-m), which is
the maximum torque Capability of their apparatus. Torque was then
applied until either the maximum torque capability of 600 ft-lbs
(813 N-m) was reached or movement of the pipe in the coupling was
detected. The test samples were then shipped to E.J. Daiber Company,
Inc. in Cleveland, Ohio in order to complete the testing at torques
greater than 600 ft-lbs (813 N-m). Here, the samples were fixed between
a torque transducer and pneumatic torque generator. Torque was increased
until movement was detected. The average torque at which movement was
detected for the three test specimens of each size was then recorded.
Results - All samples passed torque tests up to 600 ft-lbs
(813 N-m) conducted by Lokring Corporation. In torque tests conducted
by E.J. Daiber Company, Inc., all samples exceeded the minimum torque
requirements before movement of the pipe in the coupling was detected.
The average torque size is shown in Table 3. The 3" was also tested
by Lokring Corporation and passed the 600 ft-lbs (813 N-m) requirement.
|
|
Table 3 - Torsion Test Results |
Pipe Size inches (mm) |
Min. Torque Requirement ft-lbs (N-m) |
Average Torque Test Results ft-lbs (N-m) |
Result |
| 1 (25) |
450 (610) |
848 (1150) |
Pass |
| 1-1/2 (40) |
750 (1017) |
942 (1277) |
Pass |
| 2 (50) |
1,000 (1356) |
1,159 (1571) |
Pass |
|
|
Testing of the Liner Butt Weld
To test the integrity of the liner butt weld, it was subjected to tests
in two separate categories: burst and pressure fatigue. Testing was
performed on Resistoflex pipe in a test lab by RESISTOFLEX Plastic-Lined
Piping Products at their Bay City, Michigan facility. These tests were
conducted on 1", 2", and 4" diameter PTFE welded pipe.
All test samples were 36" (914 mm) long and were butt welded at their
mid-point using the PFA Film method with coupling and PTFE adhesive
tape. The ends of each sample were flanged and blanked, and equipped
with connections that permitted internal hydraulic pressure to be
applied. The coupling prevents the butt weld from being subjected to
tensile stress produced by the internal pressure on the flanged ends.
A. Liner Butt Weld Burst Test
Test Procedure - Liner butt welds were fabricated using standard
fabrication techniques described in Resistoflex's PTFE Technical Data
Sheet "Joint Fabrication Procedures for CONQUEST® Flangeless Piping
Systems with PTFE Liners". Two samples of each size and liner
type were produced. Samples were filled with water and connected to a
hand pump with a 10,000 psi (690 bar) capability. A 5,000 psi (345 bar)
pressure gauge was attached to the pump outlet. The requirement to
pass the test was set at a minimum of 1,100 psi (76 bar). Samples
were pressurized to 500 psi (34.5 bar) and held there for three
minutes, then increased in 1000 psi (69 bar) increments and held at each
increment for a minimum of three minutes. The burst pressure in which
failure occurred for the two test specimens of each size was recorded.
Results - All samples exceeded the minimum burst pressure
requirement of 1,100 psi (76 bar). Pressure was ultimately released
when the gaskets failed on the flared ends. The samples were sectioned
for visual inspection after each test. The inspection revealed that all
welds were 100% intact and were not compromised in any way by the
burst testing.
|
|
Table 4 - Burst Test Results |
Pipe Size inches (mm) |
Liner Type |
Minimum Burst Pressure Requirement psi (bar) |
Burst Pressure Range, psi (bar) |
| 1 (25) |
PTFE |
1,100 (76) |
4,500 (310)† |
| 2 (50) |
PTFE |
1,100 (76) |
4,500 (310)† |
| 4 (100) |
PTFE |
1,100 (76) |
4,500 (310)† |
†Gaskets on flared ends failed without compromising the weld integrity. |
|
B. Liner Butt Weld Pressure Fatigue Test
Test Procedure - Test samples were 36" (914 mm) long and were
butt-welded together at their mid-point. The samples were connected to
a high-pressure piston pump capable of producing 1,400 psi (97 bar).
Description of pressure fatigue test cycle: increase internal pressure
to 550 psi (38 bar), hold for 10 seconds, reduce pressure to 50 psi
(3.4 bar), hold for 5 seconds, then increase to 550 psi (38 bar) to
repeat the cycle. The minimum requirement to pass the test was set at
7,000 cycles.
Results - All samples withstood the minimum 7,000 cycles without
displaying any evidence of failure. All tests were allowed to continue
in order to determine approximately how many pressure fatigue cycles
the butt weld could actually withstand. The test was terminated after
100,000 cycles and still no failure was observed. The samples were
sectioned for a visual inspection after each test. The inspection
revealed that all welds were 100% intact and were not compromised in
any way by the fatigue testing.
|
|
Table 5 - Pressure Fatigue Test Results |
|
Pipe Size, Inches (mm) |
Liner Type |
Minimum Number of Cycles Required |
Actual Number of Cycles Required |
| 1 (25) |
PTFE |
7,000 |
100,000 |
| 2 (50) |
PTFE |
7,000 |
100,000 |
| 4 (100) |
PTFE |
7,000 |
100,000 |
|
C. Testing of CONQUEST® connection
To test the integrity of the CONQUEST® connection, it was subjected
to tests in two separate categories: ASTM Steam/Cold Water and Cold
Temperature.
1. ASTM Steam/Cold Water
Test Procedure - Testing was performed on RESISTOFLEX Plastic-Lined
Pipe in a test lab by RESISTOFLEX Plastic-Lined Piping Products at
their Bay City, Michigan facility. Tests were conducted on two sets
of 1", 1-1/2", 2", 3", and 4" welded diameter PTFE-lined pipe spools.
Plastic-lined pipe spools were subjected to the appropriate ASTM
Steam/Cold Water test for lined pipe. Each spool was 20 feet (12.2 m)
long, consisting of two 10-foot (6.1 m) lengths joined by CONQUEST®
flangeless connection at the mid-point. The test spools contained the
standard flanged connection at each end. The test involved subjecting
the spool to 100 alternating cycles of heating with steam, then
cooling with water.
Results - All spools passed the requirements of the ASTM
Steam/Cold Water test. These samples were sectioned for a visual
inspection after each test. The inspection revealed that all welds
were 100% intact and were not compromised in any way by the
Steam/Cold Water testing.
2. Cold Temperature Test
Test Procedure - Testing was performed on RESISTOFLEX Plastic-Lined
Pipe in a test lab by RESISTOFLEX Plastic-Lined Piping Products at
their Bay City, Michigan facility. Spools were fabricated by joining
two 10-foot (3 m) sections with a CONQUEST® flangeless connection at
the mid-point. Testing included 1", 1-1/2", 2", 3", and 4" diameter
welded PTFE-lined pipe spools. The test involved inserting a sample
into a freezer with a -40°F (-40°C) capability and cooling it
until either the liner failed or the maximum low temperature was
reached. Description of test procedure: Insert sample into freezer
with temperature set at 20°F (-7°C) and hold for a minimum of
8 hours. Visually inspect each sample and, if no liner failure has
occurred, reduce the temperature in 10°F (6°C) increments and
hold at each increment for a minimum of 8 hours. Visually inspect each
sample after each 8-hour interval.
Results - All spools withstood a low freezer temperature of
-20°F (-29°C). The samples were sectioned for a visual inspection
after each test. The inspection revealed that all welds were 100%
intact and were not compromised in any way by the freeze testing.
|
"This page is a machine translation of the source page, which is written in
English. This translation is intended to provide a general idea of the
page's content, and is not guaranteed for accuracy."
|
|
|
|