This report documents laboratory test results performed on four brands of highway edge drains. The four brands included in this study are Hydraway (by Monsanto), Akwadrain (by International Construction Equipment, Inc.), Advantage (by Advanced Drainage Systems), and PDS 40 (by Pro Drain Systems)

Allen, David L.

Fleckenstein, L. John

English

University of Kentucky

Research Report UKTRP-88-12 LABORATORY EVALUATION OF EDGE DRAINS by L. J. Fleckenstein Engineering Geologist and David L. Allen Chief Research Engineer Kentucky Transportation Research Program College of Engineering University of Kentucky in cooperation with Transportation Cabinet Commonwealth of Kentucky The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors who are responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the University of Kentucky or the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. The inclusion of manufacturer names and tradenames are for identification purposes and are not to be considered as endorsements. June, 1988 INTRODUCTION This report documents laboratory test results performed on four brands of highway edge drains. The four brands included in this study are Hydraway (by Monsanto), Akwadrain (by International Construction Equipment, Inc.), Advantage (by Advanced Drainage Systems), and PDS 40 (by Pro Drain Systems). LABORATORY TEST The following tests were performed and are not ASTM standard test procedures. FABRIC PERMEABILITY The fabrics were removed from their cores and cut into 4-inch squares. The fabric was then clamped over the end of a plastic funnel that was attached . to a 4000-ml graduated cylinder (Figure 1). A falling-head permeability test was used. The cylinder was filled with water and the time required for the water to fall from one elevation (hl) to a second elevation (h2) was recorded. The following equation was used to calculate the coefficient of permeability. K=(aL/At) ln (hl/h2) where :a=area of plastic cylinder (cm2); :A=area of fabric sample ( cm2); :L=thickness of fabric sample (em); : t=elasped time of test (sec); :ln=natural logrithm; :hl=first elevation (em); :h2=second elevation (em); FABRIC PUNCTURE TEST The fabric was removed from the core and clamped over a hollow cylinder having an inside diameter 2.0 inches. The fabric was then punctured with a steel ram having a cross-sectional area of approximately 0.25 square inch (Figure 2). Tests were performed with the materials dry and the maximum loads were recorded. SLURRY FILTRATION TEST A falling-head permeability test was performed to determine the possibility of the fabric clogging. The same procedure was used as in the fabric permeability test except the clear water was replaced with a slurry solution. The solution consisted of 20 grams of minus 200 size particles per 4000-ml of water. The slurry solution was placed in the cylinder and allowed to flow through the fabric. Permeabilities were not calculated from this test. Rate of flow and time to clogging were recorded. CORE COMPRESSION TEST Compression tests were conducted on core material that was 11.5 inches square. The tests were performed at a uniform rate in which the load was increase at a rate of 35.7 pounds per second. Tests continued until the maximum load was reached. A second series of compression tests were conducted at a machine head speed of 0. 5 inch per minute. Tests continued for 18 seconds and the maximum load was recorded. FLOW THROUGH CORE A specimen of each material (2 feet X 11.5 inches) was placed in a rectangular acrylic box (2 feet X 11.37 inches X 1. 75 inches). 2 The box was attached to the bottom of a graduated barrel that was fitted with a stopper valve and held in an upright position (Figure 3). The barrel was filled with water and the water was allowed to flow through the core. The time necessary for the barrel to empty was recorded. SUMMARY OF TEST RESULTS Results of the fabric permeability test indicate the Akwadrain had the highest average coefficient of permeability (0.070 em/sec). The coefficient of permeability for the Akwadrain was 19.9 percent greater than Hydraway, 60.6 percent greater than Pro Drain, than Advantage. Fabric permeabilities are listed in Figure 4. Flow rates are shown in Figures 5 through 9. and 70.6 greater Table 1 and in Results of the fabric puncture test indicate Hydraway fabric had the highest average puncture strength (479.9 psi). Puncture strength of the Hydraway was 42.1 percent greater than Pro Drain, 46.7 percent greater than Akwadrain, and 47.0 percent greater than Advantage. Puncture test data are contained in Table 2 and in Figures 10 through 14. Results of the slurry filtration test indicate the Hydraway fabric permitted flow for more time prior to (90 seconds). The Pro Drain clogged in 79 seconds and the Advantage clogged in approximately 48 seconds. The before clogging Hydraway fabric discharged 716.7 m1 of in 90 seconds. The Hydraway fabric slurry solution discharged 18.8 percent more than Advantage and 41.0 percent more than Pro Drain fabric in 90 seconds. The Akwadrain discharged 155.0 ml in 37.5 seconds. Data indicated there are variations in permeabilities of the fabrics due to the wide scatter in test data for each fabric. Slurry filtration test data are contained in Table 3 and in Figures 15 through 19. Compression tests conducted at a compression rate of 35.7 pounds per second indicate the Akwadrain had the highest compressive strength of 3 •· 54.72 psi. The compressive streng~h of the Akwadrain was 5.1 percent higher than Pro Drain, 6.0 percent higher than Hydraway, and 62.3 percent higher than Advantage. Compression test data are contained in Table 4 and Figures 20 through 24. Compression test performed at a head rate of .028 in./sec. indicate the Hydraway had the highest compressive strength of 64.91 psi. The compressive strength the Hydraway was 1.5 percent greater than Pro Drain, 10.8 percent greater than Akwadrain, and 72.3 percent greater than Advantage. Compression test data are contained in Table 5. The results of flow through the core indicate that the Pro Drain core emptied the 60.1 gallon container of water in 17.4 seconds. The Pro Drain emptied the barrel 30.1 percent faster than Hydraway, 34.6 percent faster than Advantage, and 60.4 percent faster than Akwadrain. Flow data are contained in Table 6, and Figure 25. CONCLUSIONS Test results indicate that the Akwadrain fabric had the highest coefficient of permeability. The Hydraway fabric was 19.86 percent less permeable. The Pro Drain and Advantage fabrics were less than half as permeable as Akwadrain. Puncture tests indicated the Hydraway had over 40 percent greater capacity for resisting puncture than the other three fabrics. The slurry filtration tests indicated that the Hydraway fabric was less susceptible to clogging and discharged a larger volume of water. Compression tests conducted on the cores indicated the Hydraway had the highest compressive strength. Pro Drain and Akwadrain had compressive strengths of 99.6 and 96.8 percent, respectively, of that of Hydraway. The compressive strength of the Advantage core was 66.8 percent less than Hydraway. 4 Flow test through the core indicated the Pro Drain core drained a 60.1-gallon container 30 percent more rapidly than Hydraway, 34.6 percent more rapidly than Advantage, and 60.4 percent more rapidly than Akwadrain. 5 Figure 1. Permeability Testing Apparatus 6 Figure 2. Puncture Test Apparatus 7 Figure 3. Apparatus Used for Testing Flow of Cores. 8 TABLE 1. FABRIC PERMEABILITY Sample Ill Sample 112 Sample 113 Sample 114 Average: (Coefficient of Permeability) (em/sec) HYDRAWAY PRODRAIN AKWADRAIN .0549736 .0234919 .0658833 .0599422 .0171176 .0941191 • 0490436 • 0285037 .0677065 • 0606204 .0287634 .0525572 .0402718 .0561450 .0276295 .0700665 ADVANTAGE .0217297 .0191247 .0209439 .0205994 ---------------------------------~---------------------------------TABLE 2. PUNCTURE STRENGTH OF FABRIC (psi) HYDRAWAY PRO DRAIN AKWADRAIN ADVANTAGE ------------------------------------------------------------------Sample Ill 512.00 273.60 255.88 276.40 Sample 112 517.60 302.40 251.60 253.20 Sample 113 410.00 257.60 257.60 233.20 Average: 4 79.88 277.88 258.40 254.28 9 ' TABLE 3. SLURRY FILTRATION TEST HYDRAWAY (Amount Discharged/Time to Clog) (ml/sec) PRO DRAIN AKWADRAIN ADVANTAGE -------------------------------------------------------------------Sample /11 613.33/90 510.00/90 173.33/36 539.99/75 Sample 112 963.32/90 250.00/48 210.00/42 539.99/75 Sample 113 753.33/90 460.00/90 30.00/24 666.66/90 Sample /14 536.66/90 550.00/90 206.66/48 Average: 716.66/90 442.50/79.5 155.00/37.50 582.21/80 -------------------------------------------------------------------TABLE 4. COMPRESSION STRENGTH OF CORE -------------------------------------------------------------------HYDRAWAY (At First Peak) (psi) PRO DRAIN AKWADRAIN ADVANTAGE -------------------------------------------------------------------Sample /11 52.02 53.91 58.18 20.98 Sample 112 50.76 49.91 51.25 19.39 Sample 113 21.46 Average: 51.39 51.91 54.72 20.61 * Load Increased at 35.7 lbs/sec TABLE 5. COMPRESSION STRENGTH OF CORE --------------------------------------------------------~----------HYDRAWAY Sample Ill 65.28 Sample 112 67.64 Sample 113 61.81 Average: 64.91 (At 18 Seconds) (psi) PRO DRAIN AKWADRAIN 65.84 55.49 62.00 58.35 59.72 63.92 57.85 * Machine Head Rate of .5 in./min TABLE 6. FLOW THROUGH THE CORE ADVANTAGE 18.62 17.97 17.26 17.95 -------------------------------------------------------------------HYDRAWAY Sample Ill 25.2 Sample 112 24.6 Sample 113 24.9 Average: 24.9 (Time to Empty) (sec) PRO DRAIN AKWADRAIN 17.4 44.4 17.4 43.8 17.4 43.8 17.4 44.0 ADVANTAGE 25.8 26.4 27.6 26.6 -------------------------------------------------------------------11 D D D D [) D D D D [) D D D D [) D D D D D g D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D IIIII A I! PERMEABILITY A~DRAIN HYDRAilAY ~ PRO DRAIN ADIJAH!ACE Figure 4. Average Coefficient of Pemeability. 1 2 D FALLING HEAD PERMEABILITY D 3009 D D /J. ADVANTAGE AUE. D D D D ! AKIIIlDRIIIH RUE. [) D ,.2599 D ..1 D E 0 PRO DRIIIH AUE. D OJ D D ill D ~IIIli! 0 HYDRIIIIAV AVE. D D « D : D u D Ill D .. D j:l1500 D D Jr. D 0 D D Ill D E D :I D stlllll! D D , D D D D D 500 D D D D D D D D D 36 42 48 54 611 66 7 D D TIHE <SEC) D Figure 5. Fabric Permeability. 13 D fALLING HEAD PEJIIIEABILITY D 35llll D D b ADVANTAGE 11 D D D D 3llllll A AOOAHTAGE IZ D D " D ~ D s: D " D ADVANTAGE 13 D D (1125llll D u D l D G: D : D ~llllll D D " D A D D lie D 0!5llll D D lo! D E D :I D ..l D 0 D :;)lllllll D D D D D D 5llll D D D D D D II D D 18 24 D 311 36 42 48 54 611 66 72 7 D D TillE <SEC> Figure 6. Fabric Permeability. 14 D FALLIHC HEAD PEIIMEABILITY D 35 D D h. AKIIADRill H Ill D D D D 30011 A AKIIADRiliN 112 D D "' D ..! D E D .. D 1\KIIADRiliN 13 D D (ll25118 D u D II: I AKIIADRillN 14 D c D : D ~IIIII! D D .. D D A D "' D 0!51111 D D Ill D E D :I D ..l D 0 D :)11191! D D D D D D D D D D D D D D 1 D D Tli!E CSECl D Figure 7. Fabric Permeability. 15 D FALLING HEAD PERMEABILITY D 351111 D D /:, HYDRAIIAY 11 D D D J D D 391111 A HYDRAIIAY IZ D A 7/' D ..1 D t D " 0 HYDI!IliiAY D (11251111 D D u D ~ 1! HYDRAIIAY 14 D ' D :t D ~91111 D D " p D A D D "' D 0151111 k D D "' D E D :I , D ..1 D 0 ~ D :a IIIli! D D D D D II D Sill! D D D D D D " D [) 12 18 24 311 36 42 48 54 611 6 [) D TillE <SEC> D Figure 8. Fabric Permeability. 16 D B D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D B D D B D D D D D D D D 351!0 3l!ill " .:1 E " (112SIIIl u II: « : ~1!1!0 .. A '" 0151!0 lal E :I .:1 0 ;)llll!ll FALLIIIG HEA]) PEI!IIEADILITY /:, l'ltO l>RA IN 11 4 PRO DRA 1H 12 [J PliO DRAIN 13 II PRO DRA Ill 14 111 211 311 41! 511 611 ?II 811 911 9 TIME (SEC) Figure 9. Fabric Permeability. 17 D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D B D D D D D D D D D PUNCTURE TEST 5i------------------------~ ~~·~ ~1~ ! A ~~B· : ~~ ~ . 3 PRODRAIH AKUADRAIK Figure 10. Average Puncture Strength. · ·a g g D D D D g D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D g D D [) D D D D D D g D D g D D D [) D D D PUHCTURE TEST (PRODIIAIHl SAMPLE 1 SAMPLE 2 SAMPLE 3 Figure 11. Pro Drain Puncture Test. D PllHCTDRE TEST (ADIJAHTAGE) D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D (\ D D ~ D D • D D ~ D D II D D D D M D D I D D w D D ~ D D ~ D D I D D D D D D D D D SAMPLE 1 SAMPLE 2 SAIIPLI 3 D D D Figure 12. Avantage Puncture Test. D D D D D B D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D B D D D D D D D D 525 PUNCTURE TEST (HYDRAHAY) SAMPLE 1 SAMPLE 2 SAMPLE 3 Figure 13. Hydraway Puncture Test. 21 D PUNCTURE TEST tA»MDIIAIH) D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D II D D '14 D D • D D l D D D 'J D D D e D D e D D ~ D D = D D ~ D D e D D D D D D D D D SAMPLE 1 SAMPLE 2 SANPLE 3 D D D Figure 14. Akwadrain Puncture Test. 22 D IDGE I>RAIHS D 225 D D D b. PROilRAIN D D 21111 D D A ADIIANTAGE D D D " 175 D .. !J AKIIADRAIH D I D v D (II 1511 D II HYDRAIIAY D (j D II: D 4 D : 125 D () D 01 D .. D A D "' 11111 D D 0 D D (II D (" 75 D « ~ D II: D \ D 511 D \ D D D D 25 D D D D D II D D 12 78 84 ' D D TillE (sec) D Figure 15. Average Slurry Filtration Test. 23 D HYDRAWAY D 275 D D /:,. SAMPLE ItO. 1 D D 2511 D D A SAMPLE ItO. 2 D D 225 D D 1J SAMPLE HO. 3 D D 21111 D ,. D .. D I I SAMPLE ItO. 4 D .. 175 D D (II D " D II: 1511 D G: D % D () D 11 125 D " D A D ~o11111 D D 0 D D Ill 75 D " D (I D II: D 511 D D D D 25 D D D D D D 72 78 84 9 D D TillE (sec) D Figure 16. Hydraway Slurry Filtration Test. 24 D AKIIADilAIN D Hll D D /:; SAMPLE 110, 1 D D 11111 D D J. SAMPLE 110. 2 D D 911 D D " [] SAMPLE 110. 3 D " D ' 89 D v D I SAMPLE 110. 4 D (II D ll 71! D II: D 4 D : D u 611 D II D .. D A D 511 D "' D 0 D 41! D Ill D .. D c D II: 311 D D D D 211 D D D D 111 D D D D II D D 611 66 72 78 84 9 D D tiME (sec> D Figure 17. Akwadrain Slurry Filtration Test. 25 D ADS AWAIITAGE D 199 D D D 1811 1!. SAMPLE 110. 1 D D 1711 D A SAMPLE 110. 2 D 16 D D " 1511 D D 'i1• 0 SAMPLE 110. 3 D D \1 D 138 D lot D " 1211 D II D 4: 1111 D : D ~1911 D D .. D D A D "' 811 D 0 D 711 D Jrl D " D 4: 6 D II D 511 D D 411 D D 311 D D 211 D D D 111 D D II D D D D YIIII (S@C) D Figure 18. Advantage Slurry Filtration Test. 26 D D D D D D D D D D D B B D g D D B D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D B D D PRODRAIN 1581~_.----------------------------------------, 148 138 128 118 :188 I v 9 "' u 88 II: « : I) 0 .. 68 A t 58 "' " 1 au 21! 18 /:;. SAIIPLE 110. 1 A SAIIPLE NO. 2 0 SAIIPLE 110. 3 I SAIIPLE 110. 41 81~~--r~~~~~~=;~~~ 18 24 38 36 42 48 54 611 66 72 78 84 9 tiME (sec) Figure 19. Pro Drain 'Slurry Filtration Test. 27 D COMPRESSION TEST <Average) D 811 D D A ADIIAHTAGI D 75 D D D 70 A PRODRAJII D D 65 D D D 611 0 AKIIADRAIN D D D 55 D II HYDRAIIAY D D 511 D D 45 D D D D D 35 D D D 311 D D D 25 D D " 211 D .. D • D ~ 15 D " D D 0 10 D ll D '" D p; D " D 0 D D D D DEFLEctiON <in) D Figure 20. Average Core Compression Test. 28 B COMPRESSIOit TEST <AKIIADHAIII> D 61! D 1J. SAIIPLE NO. 1 D D 55 D D A SAIIPLE NO. 2 D 511 D D D D 45 D D D 411 D \ D D D 35 D '\. D A D " D ~ 311 D ~ D " D 25 D II D II D Jol D p; 28 D .. D Ill D 15 D D D D 111 D D D 5 D D D D II D D .1 D .2 .3 .4 D DEFLECT lOll (in) D Figure 21. Akwadrain Core Compression Test. 29 D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D 1\ D .. D •• D ~ D " D D II D II D "' D p; D !< D II D D D D D D D D D ·o D D D D D D D 55 58 45 48 35 38 25 28 15 .1 COIIPIIESSIOII TEST <HYDBAWAV> !:. SAMPLE NO. 1 A SAMPLE NO. 2 .3 DEFLECYIOtl <in) Figure 22. Hydraway Core Compression Test. 3 B 611 D COMPRESSIOII TEST <PRODRAIIO D D /:; SAMPLE 1 D 55 D D D 511 D A SAMPLE NO. 2 D D D 45 D D D 411 D D D D 35 D D " D ..D • 311 D " D y D 25 D II D II D Ill D II: 211 D " D II D 15 D D D D lll D D D D 5 D D D 0 D D .9 D D IIKFLECTIOII (in) D Figure 23, Pro Drain Core Compression Test. 31 D COMPRESSIOH <RDUAHJAGE> D 2 D D D D 211 D D D D 18 D D D D 16 D D D D 14 A SAIIPLE HO. 1 D D " II D ...1. D ~ 12 A SAIIPLE HO. 2 D llo D v D D "' 1 D II 0 SAIIPLE HO. 3 D IIi D p; 8 D !< D II D D 6 D D D D 4 D D D D D D D D D D ·' D D D DEFLECT lOft <in> Figure 24. Advantage Core Compression Test. 32 B COP.E rLOII RATE D 65 D D D 611 '1 D D D 55 D /# D D 511 D D D " 45 D I D c II D 0 D .. 411 D .. D • D ~ 35 D " D / D (II D E D :I D ,J D 0 25 A PRODIIA I H D ::l D D D A HYDRAWAY D D D D 0 AKWADIIAIH D D D D Ill ADUAHTAGE D 5 D D D D D D 111 1 211 2 311 5 D TIME (sec) D Figure 25. Average Core Flow Rates. 33 

Laboratory Evaluation of Edge Drains

https://uknowledge.uky.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1548&amp;context=ktc_researchreports

Laboratory Evaluation of Edge Drains

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

University of Kentucky