Page 34 - Gi_April2021

igem news – yppc

hardener would perform in a sachet FIGURE 5 INDICATION OF MINIMUM FILL LENGTH INTO ANNULAR SPACE
design. This began by finding a volume
of resin and hardener mix that gave a
suitable fill length of foam.
Once the volume had been
determined, several design iterations
were made to find the safest and most
user-friendly shape with the best
output. These were tested to capture the
output as shown in Table 1.
With the different pipe sizes used
during pipeline replacement, it is not
possible to have a one-size-fits-all FIGURE 6 DIFFERENT DESIGN TESTS
approach. Therefore, three different
sizes were produced, as shown in Table
2 and in Figure 8, which depicts the OUTPUT
different pipe sizes and fills.

In-house testing
In-house testing was carried out in
conjunction with the design and
development of the Burstpack. Testing
was initially carried out using a
perspex pipe to visually understand
the usability and performance within
the annular space. This also allowed for
direct inspection to confirm the annular
space had been successfully filled. DESIGN TESTS
Once this was achieved, simulation
testing was carried out on metallic pipe
with debris inserted to replicate the
conditions of the metallic mains. Cross TABLE 2 FINAL DEVELOPED SIZES
sections were cut to determine if the
annular space had been fully sealed.
The product was able to successfully Design No. Pipe size Volume
demonstrate the complete seal of the
annular space. Design 1 75mm PE within 4in metallic 200ml
90mm PE within 6in metallic
Live field trials
Following in-house testing and gaining Design 2 125mm PE within 6in metallic 300ml
product confidence, we embarked on live 180mm PE within 8in metallic
field trials in SGN’s network. I worked
closely with the SGN working group to Design 3 140mm PE within 8in metallic 600ml
ensure site availability and to comply
with approved processes and standards.
To comply and meet with expected
standards, I created several documents FIGURE 7 EXAMPLE OF THE TEST CARRIED OUT INHOUSE BY SVI
including SGN/PM/G/23 field trial
procedures, risk and COSHH assessments,
and method statements for operating the kit.
Overall, the different sizes shown
in Table 2 were tested from inside and
outside the excavation as shown in
Figures 9 and 10.
All trials were successfully carried
out and captured under the field trial
procedures. Feedback highlighted
that the Burstpack was safer when
compared to other methods and easier
to mix, with a reduction in time of 20-40
minutes per application.

Conclusion
The success criteria for this project
required a method of closing the
annular space between the inserted

34

11/03/2021 08:19
IGEMNews_YPPC.indd 3
IGEMNews_YPPC.indd 3 11/03/2021 08:19