An American National Standard

Designation: F 1759 – 97

Standard Practice for

Design of High-Density Polyethylene (HDPE) Manholes for
Subsurface Applications1
This standard is issued under the fixed designation F 1759; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year of
original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. A
superscript epsilon (e) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.
1. Scope Fluids2
1.1 This specification covers general and basic procedures D 1600 Terminology for Abbreviated Terms Relating to
related to the design of manholes and components Plastics3
manufactured from high-density polyethylene (HDPE) for use D 2321 Practice for Underground Installation of
in subsurface applications and applies to personnel access Thermoplastic Pipe for Sewers and Other Gravity-Flow
structures. The practice covers the material, the structural Applica-
design requirements of the manhole barrel (also called vertical tions4
riser or shaft), floor (bottom), and top, and joints between shaft D 2657 Practice for Heat Joining of Polyolefin Pipe and
sections. Fittings4
1.2 This practice offers the minimum requirements for the D 2837 Test Method for Obtaining Hydrostatic Design Basis
proper design of an HDPE manhole. Due to the variability in for Thermoplastic Pipe Materials4
manhole height, diameter, and the soil each manhole must be D 3035 Specification for Polyethylene (PE) Plastic Pipe
designed and detailed individually. When properly used and (DR-PR) Based on Controlled Outside Diameter4
implemented, this practice can help ensure a safe and reliable D 3212 Specification for Joints for Drain and Sewer Plastic
structure for the industry. Pipes Using Flexible Elastomeric Seals4
1.3 Disclaimer—The reader is cautioned that independent D 3350 Specification for Polyethylene Plastics Pipe and
professional judgment must be exercised when data or Fittings Materials4
recommendations set forth in this practice are applied. The
F 412 Terminology Relating to Plastic Piping Systems4
publication of the material contained herein is not intended as a
F 477 Specification for Elastomeric Seals (Gaskets) for
representation or warranty on the part of ASTM that this
Joining Plastic Pipe4
information is suitable for general or particular use, or freedom
from infringement of any patent or patents.Anyone making use F 714 Specification for Polyethylene (PE) Plastic Pipe (SDR-
of this information assumes all liability arising from such use. PR) Based on Outside Diameter4
The design of structures is within the scope of expertise of a F 894 Specification for Polyethylene (PE) Large Diameter
licensed architect, structural engineer, or other licensed Profile Wall Sewer and Drain Pipe4
professional for the application of principles to a particular
3. Terminology
structure.
1.4 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded 3.1 Definitions:
as the standard. The SI units given in parentheses are provided 3.1.1 Definitions used in this practice are in accordance with
for information only. Terminology F 412 and Terminology D 1600 unless otherwise
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety indicated.
concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility 3.2 Definitions of Terms Specific to This Standard:
of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and 3.2.1 anchor connection ring—an HDPE ring attached to the
health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory manhole riser on which to place an antiflotation device, such as
limitations prior to use. a concrete anchor ring.
3.2.2 arching—mobilization of internal shear resistance
2. Referenced Documents
within a soil mass that results in a change in soil pressure acting
2.1 ASTM Standards: on an underground structure.

D 653 Terminology Relating to Soil, Rock, and Contained

1 This specification is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee F-17 on Plastic Piping Systems and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee F17.26

on Olefin Based Pipe.

Current edition approved Jan. 10, 1997. Published September 1997.

1
 F 1759 – 97
2

Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol 04.08.

3

Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol 08.01.

4

Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol 08.04.

Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, United States.
3.2.3 benching—the internal floor of a manhole when it is in Practice D 2321, which has been compacted to a minimum
elevated above the manhole invert, usually provided as a place of 90 % standard proctor density. The designs are based on the
for personnel to stand. backfill extending at least 3.5 ft (1 m) from the perimeter of the
3.2.4 closed profile—a manhole barrel construction that manhole for the full height of the manhole and extending
presents an essentially smooth internal surface braced with laterally to undisturbed in situ soil. Manholes are assumed
projections or ribs which are joined by an essentially smooth placed on a stable base consisting of at least 12 in. (30.5 cm) of
outer wall. Solid wall construction is considered a special case Class I material compacted to at least 95 % standard proctor
of the closed profile.
3.2.5 downdrag—downward shear force acting on the shaft’s
external surface and resulting from settlement of the manhole
backfill.
3.2.6 extrusion welding—a joining technique that is
accomplished by extruding a molten polyethylene bead
between two prepared surface ends.
3.2.7 floor—the lowest internal surface of the manhole. The
floor and bottom are often the same.
3.2.8 inlet/outlet—pipe (conduit) passing through the wall of
the manhole.
3.2.9 invert—the flow channel in the floor of a manhole. This
may consist of the lower half of a pipe, thus the name
“invert”.
3.2.10 manhole—an underground service access structure
which can access pipelines, conduits, or subsurface equipment.
3.2.11 manhole bottom—the lowest external surface of the
manhole.
3.2.12 manhole cone—the top portion of the manhole
through which entrance to the manhole is made and where the
diameter may increase from the entrance way to the larger
manhole barrel. Sometimes referred to as the manway reducer.
3.2.13 open profile—a manhole barrel construction that
presents an essentially smooth internal surface with a ribbed or
FIG. 1 Manhole Terminology
corrugated external surface. Open profile barrel constructions
are normally not used for manholes.
3.2.14 performance limits—mechanisms by which the density or a concrete slab. The foundation soils under the base
function of a structure may become impaired. must provide adequate bearing strength to carry downdrag
3.2.15 riser—the vertical barrel or “shaft” section of a loads.
manhole. 4.2.1 Manholes installed in sanitary landfills or other fills
3.3 See Fig. 1 for illustration of manhole terminology. experiencing large settlements may require special designs
beyond the scope of this practice. The designer should evaluate
4. Significance and Use each specific site to determine the suitability for use of HDPE
4.1 Uses—The requirements of this practice are intended to manholes and the designer should prepare a written
provide manholes suitable for installation in pipeline or conduit specification for installation which is beyond the scope of this
trenches, landfill perimeters, and landfills with limited practice.
settlement characteristics. Direct installation in sanitary 5. Materials
landfills or other fills subject to large (in excess of 10 %) soil
settlements may require special designs outside the scope of this 5.1 HDPE Material—Manhole components, such as the riser,
practice. 4.1.1 Manholes are assumed to be subject to gravity base, and anchor connection ring, shall be made of HDPE
flow only. plastic compound having a cell classification of 334433C or
4.2 Design Assumption—The design methodology in this higher, in accordance with Specification D 3350.
practice applies only to manholes that are installed in backfill NOTE 1—Materials for use in manholes may be subjected to significant
consisting of Class I, Class II, or Class III material as defined tensile and compressive stresses. The material must have a proven capacity

2
 F 1759 – 97

for sustaining long term stresses. There are no existing ASTM standards 𝑃𝑅 = 1.21𝐾𝐴 𝛾𝐻 (1)
that establish such a stress rating except for Test Method D 2837. Work is
currently in progress to develop an alternate method for stress rating where:
materials and when completed, this standard will be altered accordingly.
PR = applied radial pressure, psf (KPa),
5.2 Other Material—Manhole components such as tops and g = soil unit weight, lbs/ft3(kN/m3),
lids, may be fabricated from materials other than HDPE as long H = weight of fill, ft (m), and
as agreed to by the user and manufacturer. KA = active earth pressure coefficient as given by Eq 2.
∅
6. Subsurface Loading on Manhole Riser 𝐾𝐴 = tan2 (45 − 2) (2)
6.1 Performance Limits—The manhole riser’s performance
limits include ring deflection, ring (hoop) and axial stress (or
strain), and ring and axial buckling. Radially directed loads
acting on a manhole cause ring deformation and ring bending
stresses. The radial load varies along the length of the manhole.
See Fig. 2. In addition to radial stresses, considerable axial
stress may exist in the manhole wall as a result of “downdrag”.
Downdrag occurs as the backfill soil surrounding the manhole
consolidates and settles. Axial load is induced through the
frictional resistance of the manhole to the backfill settlement.
See Fig. 3. The manhole must also be checked for axial
compressive stress and axial buckling due to downdrag forces.
6.2 Earth Pressure Acting on Manhole Riser:
6.2.1 Radial Pressure—Radial pressure along the length of FIG. 3 Downdrag Force Acting on Manhole (Assumed for Design)
the manhole riser may be calculated using finite element
methods, field measurements or other suitable means. See
Hossain and Lytton (1). 2 In lieu of the preceding, the active where:
earth pressure modified for uneven soil compaction around the f = angle of internal friction of manhole embedment material, °.
perimeter of the riser can be used. 6.2.2 Downdrag (Axial Shear Stress)—The settlement of
NOTE 2—Use of the active pressure is based on measurements taken by
backfill material surrounding a manhole riser develops a shear
Gartung et al. (2) and on the ability of the material placed around the stress between the manhole and the fill, which acts as
manhole to accept tangential stresses and thus relieve some of the lateral “downdrag” along the outside of the manhole. The settling
pressure. It may actually understate the load on the manhole, however this process begins with the first lift of fill placed around the
appears to be offset by the stress relaxation that occurs in the HDPE manhole and continues until all the fill is placed and
manhole as shown by Hossain (3). Stress relaxation permits mobilization consolidated. As fill is placed around a manhole, the axial force
of horizontal arching, thus the active earth pressure can be assumed for
coupled into the manhole by downdrag shear will increase until
design purposes.
it equals the frictional force between the soil and manhole.
6.2.1.1 If the active earth pressure is modified to take into When this limit is reached, slippage of the fill immediately
account uneven compaction around the perimeter of the pipe as adjacent to the manhole occurs. This limits the axial force to the
described by Steinfeld and Partner (4), the radially-directed value of the frictional force.
design pressure is given by Eq 1. 6.2.2.1 Downdrag loads can be calculated using finite
element methods, field measurements or other procedures. In
lieu of these, the following method may be used. The average
shear stress is given by Eq 3, for an active earth pressure
distribution as shown in Fig. 2.

𝑃𝑅1 +𝑃𝑅2
𝑇𝐴 = 𝜇 [ 2
] (3)
where:
TA = average shear (frictional) stress, psf (kPa),
PR1 = radial earth pressure at top of manhole, psf (kPa),
PR2 = radial earth pressure at bottom of manhole, psf

2 The boldface numbers given in parentheses refer to a list of references at the end
FIG. 2 Radial Pressure Acting on Manhole (Assumed Distribution
of the text. for Design)

3
 F 1759 – 97

(kPa), and µ = coefficient of friction between 6.3.2 Radial Pressure with Groundwater—The radial
manhole and soil. pressure acting in a saturated soil can be calculated using finite
6.2.2.2 The coefficient of friction between a HDPE manhole element methods, field measurements or other procedures. In
with an essentially smooth outer surface and a granular or lieu of these, Eq 5 can be used to find the radial pressure in a
granular-cohesive soil can be taken as 0.4. See Swan et al. (5) fully saturated fill surrounding the manhole. (Fully saturated
and Martin et al. (6). In some applications the coefficient of means that the groundwater level is at the ground surface but
friction may be reduced by coating the exterior of the manhole not above it.)
with bentonite or some other lubricant. (5)
NOTE 3—The use of external stiffeners or open profiles to stiffen the riser where:
greatly increases the downdrag load due to their impeding the settlement PR8 = applied radial pressure, psf (kPa),
of soil beside the manhole. This has the effect of increasing the average
KA = active earth pressure coefficient, H
shear stress in Eq 3. Where open profiles are used, the coefficient of friction
may equal or exceed 1.0. = height of fill, ft (m), gW = unit weight of
water, pcf (kN/m3), and gS = unit weight of saturated
6.2.2.3 The downdrag creates an axial-directed load soil, pcf (kN/m3).
(downdrag load) in the manhole wall that increases with depth. 6.3.3 Where partial saturation of the soil exists, that is where
The axial force developed on the manhole can be found by the groundwater level is below the ground surface but above the
integrating the shear stress (or frictional stress) between the manhole invert, the radial pressure can be found by combining
manhole and soil over the height of the fill. This integration is the pressure due to the soil above the groundwater level and the
equal to the product of the surface area of the manhole times the pressure given in Eq 5 due to the groundwater and the
average shear stress acting on the surface. The maximum submerged soil. In this case, H8 as given in Eq 6 should be
downdrag force can be found using Eq 4. Whether or not to
substituted for H in Eq 5. See Appendix X2.
include surface vehicular loads in this term depends on the
H8 5 H 2 Z (6)
manhole top design. See 7.3.
𝐷0 (4) where:
𝑃𝐷 = 𝑇𝐴 𝜋 ( ) 𝐻
12 H = weight of manhole, ft (m), and Z =
where: distance to water from surface grade, ft (m).
PD = downdrag load, lb (kN), 6.3.4 Radial pressure obtained with Eq 5 should not be used
to calculate downdrag pressure as the groundwater does not
Do = outside diameter of manhole, in.
carry shear and thus does not contribute to downdrag. Calculate
(m), TA = average shear stress, psf (kPa), and downdrag forces assuming a dry installation using Eq 1 for
H = height of fill, ft (m). radial pressure as described in 6.2.1. Use either the dry weight
NOTE 4—When SI units are used, the 12 in the denominator of Eq 4 may
or the saturated weight of the soil. The saturated weight applies
be dropped.
where the groundwater might be drawn down rapidly.
NOTE 5—This equation can be used for HDPE manholes with the
recognition that the HDPE manhole is not unyielding. Axial deflection of 6.3.5 Where manholes are located beneath the groundwater
the HDPE manhole will lessen the downdrag load. The actual load will level, consideration should be given to restraining the manhole
depend on the relative stiffness between the manhole and the soil and on to prevent flotation. The groundwater exerts a force on the
the effect of stress relaxation properties on the relative stiffness. manhole equal to the weight of the water it displaces. Restraint
is provided by downward resisting forces, which include the
6.3 Groundwater Effects:
weight of the manhole and the downdrag load. However, the
6.3.1 The presence of groundwater around a manhole exerts full downdrag load given by Eq 4 may not develop, as this force
an external hydrostatic pressure on the riser as well as a buoyant may be reduced due to buoyancy. Therefore, it may be
uplift force on the bottom of the manhole. When soil is necessary to anchor the manhole to a concrete base or ring.
submerged beneath the groundwater level, the radial earth When a ring is used, the buoyant weight of the column of soil
pressure acting around the outside diameter of the riser is projecting above the ring can be added to the resisting force and
reduced because the buoyant force of the water reduces the downdrag is neglected.Axial loads in the manhole riser are
effective weight of the soil. In order to calculate the radial minimized by keeping the ring close to the manhole base.
pressure acting on the manhole, the groundwater pressure is
added to the radial soil pressure produced by the buoyant weight 7. Design Procedure for HDPE Manholes
of the soil. The resulting radial pressure is used when 7.1 The typical manhole consists of the vertical riser, a floor,
calculating ring performance limits. For axial performance a top, and outlets. Each of these components has unique design
limits that are controlled by downdrag forces, the radial requirements. The riser must resist groundwater pressure, radial
pressure should be calculated as though there was no earth pressure, and shear forces due to downdrag induced by
groundwater, since downdrag forces may occur during settlement of the surrounding soil. It also has to carry the live
construction or otherwise prior to submergence. and dead load weight. The floor has primarily to resist
groundwater pressure. The top must transmit live load to the

4
 F 1759 – 97

riser. For manholes subjected to vehicular loading special NT

consideration must be given. See 7.3. Consideration must be eT 5 E A S (8)
given to the attachment of outlets above the invert of the
manhole so that they do not induce unduly high bending
where: eT = ring compressive strain,
moments or shear stresses into the riser wall. The load on outlets
in./in. (cm/cm), NT = ring load, lb/in.
due to fill settlement increases with the distance the outlets are
located above the manhole base. (N/cm),
7.1.1 The manhole riser, floor (bottom), and cone can be E = stress relaxation modulus, psi (N/cm2), and
designed using finite element analysis, empirical testing, or AS = manhole cross-sectional area, in.2/in. (cm2/cm). (For
other means. In lieu of these methods, the methodology given solid wall risers, AS equals the wall thickness.)
in 7.1 through 7.3 may be used. This methodology is based on 7.1.1.5 Ring Bending—The ring strain calculated by Eq 8 will
practical experience and field observations and it accounts for be combined with the bending strain to determine the design
arching and viscoelastic effects empirically. Further adequacy of a proposed wall section.
refinements of this methodology could be made by the
7.1.1.6 The radial pressures applied to a manhole varies
following; accounting in a direct way for the earth load
around the circumference due to variability in the fill material
reductions due to radial and axial deformations in the manhole
and its placement as demonstrated by the 1.21 factor in Eq 1.
structure as a result of the viscoelasticity of the HDPE and the
This eccentricity introduces bending strain in the riser wall. The
surrounding soil, accounting directly for the benefits of stress
bending strain can be found either by using an equation that
relaxation in the HDPE, considering the interaction between
relates the deflection in the riser to the strain (such as Molin’s
axial and ring buckling, and directly determining the soil’s
Equation) or by the following method which considers the
enhancement of the riser’s axial buckling resistance.
bending moment induced by the eccentricity of the thrust load.
7.1.1.1 Manhole Riser Design—Design of the manhole riser The eccentricity factor, e, can be calculated from Eq 9. It can be
consists primarily of assuming a trial wall section and checking assumed that the ring bending deflections will be low and
its performance limits for the radial and downdrag loads. generally on the order of one or two percent of the manhole
Usually, the maximum loads occur near the deepest buried diameter.
portion of the manhole. Because loads are lower near the
surface, the riser wall thickness can be tapered from bottom to e 5 Co ~DM/2! (9)
top.
where:
7.1.1.2 Radial Loads—The performance limits under radial
e = eccentricity, in. (cm),
loads consist of ring compressive thrust, ring bending, and ring
Co = 0.02 ovality correction factor for 2 % deflection, and DM =
buckling. Ring compression and ring bending create a
mean diameter of manhole, in. (cm).
combined strain in the manhole wall that must be within a
limiting strain value. 7.1.1.7 The resulting bending moment due to the ring thrust
acting over the eccentricity can be found from Eq 10.
7.1.1.3 Ring Compressive Thrust—Radial loads acting on the
manhole create a compressive hoop thrust. For a vertical riser ME 5 e ~NT!~0.5! (10)
the maximum thrust occurs at the deepest section. (Due to
the presence of the manhole floor, the maximum thrust actually where:
occurs slightly above the floor.) Eq 7 gives the ring thrust. ME = bending load, in.-lb/in. (N-cm/cm), e =
eccentricity in. (cm), and NT = ring thrust,
PR
lb/in.
NT 5 144 ~RM! (7)
7.1.1.8 The bending strain, eB, for a given section is given in
Eq 11.
where:
ME
NT = ring thrust, lb/in. (N/cm),
eB 5 E S X (11)
PR = applied radial pressure, psf (N/cm2) (1N/cm2 = 10 kPa),
and
RM = mean radius of manhole, in. (cm). where: eB = bending strain, in./in.
For applied radial pressure use Eq 1, if dry, and Eq 5 if (cm/cm), SX = section modulus, in.3/in. = I/c
3
groundwater is present. (cm /cm),
I = moment of inertia of manhole wall, in.4/in. (cm4/cm), c =
NOTE 6—When SI units are used the 144 in the denominator of Eq 7 may
be dropped. distance from riser centroid to surface, in. (cm), and E = stress
relaxation modulus of HDPE, psi (N/cm2).
7.1.1.4 The ring compressive strain due to the ring thrust is
NOTE 7—If the stress relaxation modulus for bending is different than the
given by Eq 8. In order to calculate the ring compressive strain, stress relaxation modulus for compression the respective values should be
a wall section must be assumed.

5
 F 1759 – 97

used in Eq 8 and Eq 11. (Stress relaxation values may be obtained from the ES = Young’s modulus of the soil, psi (N/cm2).
manhole manufacturer or HDPE resin supplier.) The geometry factor is dependent on the depth of burial and
7.1.1.9 Combined Ring Compression and Ring Bending the relative stiffness between the embedment soil and in situ
Strain—The total ring strain occurring in the manhole riser wall soil. Where the width of the circular zone of fill equals the
is given by Eq 12. manhole riser radius, the value of RH approaches unity as the
relative stiffness between the manhole and the soil approaches
eC 5eT 1eB (12)
0.005. Relative stiffness is defined as:
where: eC = combined ring strain, in./in. 2.6 EI
(cm/cm), eT = compressive thrust strain, Relative Stiffness 5 3 (14) ESr
in./in. (cm/cm), eB = bending strain, in./in.
where: r = radius of manhole riser, in.
(cm/cm).
(cm).
7.1.1.10 The wall thickness should be designed so that the For almost all HDPE manholes installed in a granular or
combined ring strain in Eq 12 is less than the material’s compacted, cohesive-granular embedment, the relative stiffness
permissible strain limit (capacity). Strain capacity of HDPE can will be less than 0.005 and RH equals 1.0. Moore (9) also
vary depending on the particular resin, its molecular weight, showed that for deep burial in uniform fills RH equals 1.0.
and its molecular weight distribution. Because of the variations
7.1.1.14 For design purposes, the ring thrust as given by Eq 7
in HDPE resins and blends, the strain limit should be
should not exceed one-half the critical ring thrust, NCR.
established for each particular material. The strain limit may be
determined by accelerated laboratory testing. Test data for the 7.1.1.15 Manhole Section Below Groundwater Level—The
critical thrust for buckling beneath the groundwater level can be
end-user should be available from the manufacturer.
determined using Eq 15. See Ref (8).
7.1.1.11 An alternate design approach is to design for stress
rather than strain and use an allowable compressive stress value.
This method can be used by converting the strain in Eq 12 to a
combined stress value.
ΠRB8 E8 EI

NOTE 8—The limiting stress approach is usually applied to pressure pipe NCRW 5 2.825 DM (15)
where the pipe is subjected to long-term hoop stress that must be kept
below the threshold for developing slow crack growth within the design where:
life. For several years, it was customary to design non-pressure rated HDPE
pipes using an allowable compressive stress approximately equal to the NCRW = critical ring thrust (groundwater), lb/in. (N/cm),
hydrostatic design stress. However, it has recently been shown that the DM = mean diameter, in. (cm),
long-term, compressive design stress is higher than the hydrostatic design R = 1-.33 H8/H, buoyancy reduction factor,
stress, primarily due to a difference in failure mechanisms.
H8 = height of groundwater above invert, ft (m),
7.1.1.12 Ring Buckling—If the ring compressive thrust stress H = height of fill, ft (m),
exceeds a critical value, the manhole can lose its ability to resist E8 = modulus of soil reaction, psi (N/cm2),
flexural deformation and undergo ring buckling. Moore and E = stress relaxation modulus, psi (N/cm2), and
Selig have used continuum theory to develop design equations I = moment of inertia of manhole wall, in.4/in. (cm4/
for buckling (7). The continuum theory addresses buckling of cm).
cylindrical structures surrounded by soil. The presence of and:
groundwater tends to lower the critical buckling value as fluid
pressure is not relieved by small deformations that would
promote arching in soil. A solution for hydrostatic pressure
1 S 1 D
effects has not yet been published using the continuum theory. B8 5 ~20.065H!B8 5 ~20.213H! ~SI

At present the most commonly used solution for groundwater units! (16)
effects is Luscher’s equation as given in AWWA C-950 (8). 1 1 4e 1 1 4e

7.1.1.13 Manhole Section Above Groundwater Level—The 7.1.1.16 For design purposes, the ring thrust as given by Eq 7
critical ring thrust at which buckling occurs is given by Eq 13. should not exceed one-half the critical ring thrust, NCRW.
See Moore et al. (9). 7.1.1.17 When radial stiffeners are provided in the manhole
wall, the average moment of inertia of the wall can be used in
NCR 5 0.7 RH ~EI!1 / 3 ~ES!2 / 3 (13)
the above equations. But, a check should be made to ensure that
where: the spacing between stiffeners does not permit local buckling.
NCR = critical ring thrust (no groundwater), lb/in. (N/cm), 7.1.2 Axial Load Performance Limits—In the above section
RH = geometry factor, on earth loading, the axial load due to downdrag was given. In
E = stress relaxation modulus, psi (N/cm2), addition to the downdrag, other axial loads include the weight
of the manhole and its appurtenances and the weight of any live
I = moment of inertia of manhole wall, in.4/in. (cm4/ cm), and

6
 F 1759 – 97

loads such as equipment or vehicles. These loads create an SE 5 3=12I (19)

axial, compressive strain in the manhole wall. The strain is
limited by the compressive strain capacity of the material and where:
by the strain limit at axial buckling. Both limits are calculated I = wall cross-section moment of inertia, in.4/in.
and the smallest allowable strain controls design. 7.1.2.5 For the design of buried manholes this equation can
7.1.2.1 Axial Strain—The maximum axial strain induced by be applied without a safety factor as the soil support will
the downdrag shear occurs at the riser’s lowest point. Assuming provide sufficient safety factor and the axial loads on a
uniform downdrag the strain in a solid wall riser is constant viscoelastic manhole are believed to be considerably lower than
around the perimeter of the riser. For profile walls, the axial predicted by the method given herein. (Where soil support is
strain will vary along the length of the profile and possibly minimal, such as in saturated loose or saturated fine grain
around the perimeter depending on the wall thickness at a given material, an appropriate safety factor should be applied to Eq
section. The wall thickness at the thinnest point is usually 18.)
referred to as the “net section” and it equals the manhole wall 7.1.2.6 Wall buckling due to axial downdrag usually occurs
thickness minus the height of any hollow geometric cores. For over a large length of wall. On profile wall risers, the shape of
solid wall risers, the net wall equals the riser wall thickness. the profile determines whether buckling is initiated by the
The maximum axial strain occurs at the net section. The average wall strain or by the maximum net strain. For profiles
maximum axial, compressive strain, eA, resulting from the with circular cores, the average wall strain usually controls
downdrag force acting in the net section of the riser wall is buckling. The average wall strain can be found by substituting
given by Eq 17. the cross-sectional area of the profile wall for the net wall strain
PD 1 Pl 1 PW value in Eq 17.
eA 5 EpDMtn (17) 7.1.2.7 Methods used for calculating buckling resistance of
where: buried horizontal cylinders subject to axial loads may be
applied to the vertical manhole riser. See Chau et al. (11) and
eA = axial compressive strain, in./in. (cm/cm),
PD = downdrag force from Eq 4, lb (N), Chau (12).
Pl = live load, lb (N), 7.1.2.8 Practical experience has shown that uneven
PW = dead load including riser weight, lb (N), = placement of fill around a manhole and non-uniform settlement
E stress relaxation modulus, psi (N/cm2), of the fill can induce bending in the manhole riser. This bending
DM = mean diameter of manhole, in. (cm), and leads to tensile strains occurring in the axial direction in the
en = net wall thickness, in. (cm). manhole. Insufficient information exists for quantifying these
7.1.2.2 For design, the maximum axial strain must be less strains, however, field experience has indicated that manholes
than the allowable strain for the manhole material. constructed from HDPE with a high resistance to slow crack
growth can sustain these strains.
7.1.2.3 Axial Buckling—As the axial strain is increased in a
cylindrical tube, supported by soil, the tube is subject to local 7.1.2.9 Interaction of Axial and Radial Buckling—The
buckling rather than column buckling. In the lowest (local) critical stress at which radial buckling occurs is reduced by axial
buckling modes, the tube will deflect outward slightly and loading. Normally, this interaction is ignored. This is supported
dimple inward. For a buried manhole, the resistance to buckling by elastic stability methods given in Timoshenko and Gere (10).
in this manner is increased by the surrounding soil, which acts However, Chau et al. have published a biaxial buckling
to restrain outward deflection. Buckling equations for a equation (12).
cylindrical tube with no soil support are given in the literature. 7.2 Manhole Bottom/Floor Design Considerations—For
These equations can be used for manhole design but give a manholes installed with bases meeting the requirements of 4.2,
conservative value in cases where the surrounding soil is a the downdrag load carried by the manhole riser wall is
stable, well-compacted granular material. transferred directly into the base at the contact surface between
7.1.2.4 One such equation is given by Timoshenko and Gere riser wall and soil without need of a manhole bottom. Where
(10). It can be restated in terms of the critical strain as given manholes are located beneath the groundwater table and a
below: manhole bottom is provided, the critical load acting on the
bottom is groundwater pressure. The bottom is usually a flat
2SE circular plate with or without gussetting. In many cases, it also
serves as the floor of the manhole. For bottoms located above
eCR 5 DM =3~1 2 µ 2! (18)
the groundwater level and where runoff cannot saturate the
where: manhole trench, creating a perched water level, the bottom
eCR = critical axial strain, in./in. (cm/cm), thickness can be nominal. However, where uplift pressures act
DM = mean diameter of manhole, in. (cm), on the bottom from water, the bottom must be sized to limit
µ = Poisson’s ratio of HDPE, and bending stress and deflection. Manhole floors are generally
SE = equivalent solid wall thickness, in. (cm). limited to a deflection not greater than two percent for 60 in.
(150 cm) and smaller diameter and not greater than one percent
7
 F 1759 – 97

for larger diameters. Larger deflections may be tolerable but designed to withstand the weight of H-20 loads, repeated traffic
pumps or other equipment located on the floor can become loads can cause significant deflection of the top and the riser.
unstable. The deflection may not damage the PE, but it may lead to severe
7.2.1 In lieu of finite element analysis, empirical results, or cracking of pavement. Before accepting a PE top for installation
analytical equations, the following equations taken from Sealy under traffic loading without a concrete cap or encasement, the
and Smith (13) may be used. It is usually assumed that yielding designer is advised to seek test data from the manufacturer
occurs around the outer perimeter and that the maximum showing its acceptability for vehicular loading.
stresses are at the center of the bottom. 7.3.2 When designing a manhole for vehicular loads,
3 r2 consideration should be given to whether or not the live-load
s5 4 p t 2 (20)
force is transmitted into the manhole barrel. Where a concrete
cap is set directly onto the manhole riser, the live-load force will
be transmitted into the riser and, for design, it should be added
where: directly to PD in Eq 4. Where the cap rests on the soil so that
s = maximum stress, psi (N/cm2), p there is no direct load transfer into the HDPE riser, the amount
= groundwater pressure, psi of live-load force transmitted to the riser will depend on the
(N/cm2), r = radius of bottom, in. radial pressure at the top of the manhole. In lieu of a direct
(cm), and t = plate thickness, in. determination of this value, an approximate method is to
(cm). convert the wheel load to an equivalent surcharge load applied
over the entire area of the concrete slab. Then multiply this
value by KA to obtain the radial pressure at the top of the
d5 16 3 ~1 2 µ 2! Et pr 34 (21) manhole (PR1 in Eq 3). For manholes more than 10 ft (3.05 m)
deep this is usually a negligible value, and therefore the live-
load force is ignored.
where: 7.3.3 Ring compression in the manhole barrel resulting from
d = maximum deflection, in. (cm), µ = Poisson’s radial pressure due to a vehicular live-load acting on the
ratio, p = groundwater pressure, psi (N/cm2), r = manhole should be considered. This pressure is significantly
radius of bottom, in. (cm), t = plate thickness, in. reduced by a properly designed concrete manhole cap. (An
(cm), and E = stress relaxation modulus, psi example of this would be a cap that extends downward below
(N/cm3). the manhole top a few inches to encompass the very top of the
7.2.1.1 Stiffening gussets can be added to the manhole bottom manhole riser.) Where concrete caps are not used, an analysis
to reduce stress and deflection. An analysis should be made to should be made to determine if the manhole barrel is of
prove that these stiffeners are adequate and that the shear stress sufficient stiffness to resist this radial pressure.
in the weld between the stiffeners and the bottom is acceptable. 7.4 Manhole Riser Section Joints—Riser sections should be
7.2.1.2 Manhole bottoms that are not flat plates such as an joined by thermal fusion or gasket joints. Where riser sections
invert and bench construction may be considered on the basis are joined by a gasket joint, the joint should meet the
of more sophisticated analysis or physical testing. Since these requirements of Specification D 3212.
features are normally not embedded in soil, they should be 7.4.1 Manhole Cone Joint—Where gasket joints are required
designed for an unsupported buckling resistance capable of to seal the connection between a manhole cone or top, the
handling the design groundwater pressure. gasket joint should be demonstrated by testing to provide an
7.3 Manhole Top/Cone Design Considerations— adequate seal for the maximum water-head expected for the
Polyethylene flat-plate tops and cones can be designed to carry intended service.
light live-loads, such as personnel and light equipment. The top
design should be proven sufficient by either testing or by design 8. Keywords
calculations.
8.1 downdrag; earth loads; manholes; PE pipe; polyethylene;
7.3.1 For applications subject to vehicular loading, a concrete
profile pipe
cap is normally placed over the manhole or the polyethylene
manhole top is cast in concrete. Although PE tops can be
APPENDIXES

(Nonmandatory Information)

X1. PRESUMPTIVE SOIL VALUES FOR DESIGN

X1.1 Presumptive values for the Young’s Modulus of Soil used in

Eq 13 are given in Table X1.1 and Table X1.2.

8
 F 1759 – 97

TABLE X1.1 Typical Range of Values for Modulus EsA

Clay ksf Mpa

Clay Very
soft 50 to 250 2 to 15
Soft 100 to 500 5 to 25
Medium 300 to 1000 15 to 50
Hard 1000 to 2000 50 to 100
Sand
Silty 150 to 450 7 to 21
Loose 200 to 500 10 to 24
Dense 1000 to 1700 48 to 81
Sand and Gravel
Loose 1000 to 3000 48 to 144
Dense 2000 to 4000 96 to 192
A Taken from Ref (13), p. 67.

TABLE X1.2 Typical Range of Values for Poisson’s Ratio µA

Soil µ

Clay, saturated 0.4 to 0.5

Clay, unsaturated 0.1 to 0.3
Sand (dense) 0.2 to 0.4
A Taken from Ref (13), p. 67.

X2. MANHOLE APPURTENANCES

X2.1 Manhole Ladders—Ladders used in HDPE manholes and cause the manhole to move upward and off-grade. against
may be made from HDPE or other corrosion resistant materials. this flotation. The designer should make an analysis as to
Ladders may be permanently attached to the manhole, if the whether or not anchoring is required. This analysis should
ladder and its placement within the manhole meet all applicable include determining the uplift force and comparing it to the
OSHA standards for ladders and their use and if the method of frictional resistance of the soil. For this determination, a low
attachment has been proven sufficient by calculations or testing. estimate of the coefficient of friction between soil and riser is
Manholes should be entered only by qualified personnel conservative. Where an antiflotation device is employed, the
wearing proper safety equipment including proper gas detection designer should perform calculations to determine not only that
equipment, and cable and harness or a similar restraining device the manhole will not float but that the device will not be
to protect from falls. overstressed. Conservative devices include: anchoring the
manhole to a concrete base slab, extending the base of the
X2.2 Manhole Lifting Lugs—Where lifting lugs or other manhole beyond the manhole riser outer diameter and placing a
external devices are provided to ease handling and placement concrete anchor ring over it, welding a circular ring to the riser
of manholes, the design of such lugs should be verified by and placing a concrete anchor ring over it. For this case, shear
calculations or testing. The end-user is advised to thoroughly stress between the HDPE ring and manhole barrel must be
acquaint himself with all manufacturer’s literature on handling below the allowable. In the second and third case, the concrete
of manholes. Most manhole manufacturers require that all anchor ring uses the soil weight for resistance. HDPE rings
lifting lugs be utilized simultaneously when lifting. alone may provide sufficient resistance, however, the designer
should check to determine they do not undergo excessive
X2.3 Antiflotation Devices—Where manhole risers extend
bending and allow small upward movements. HDPE anchor
beneath the groundwater level, considerable uplift force may
rings or HDPE shelves on which to place concrete anchor rings,
act on the manhole bottom. This force may be sufficient to
must be kept near the bottom of the manhole, otherwise
overcome the frictional resistance between the manhole and soil

Several approaches have been used to anchor the manhole

X3. SAMPLE CALCULATIONS

9
 F 1759 – 97

considerable downdrag load is added and may overload the

riser.
X3.1 Given Information:
X3.1.1 Minimum Manhole Dimensions and Geometric Modulus of soil reaction (psi)
E8 5 1000 psi S 689 2 D
N
Properties—For this example, consider a manhole shaft wall Manhole design temperature (°F) cm
manufactured from a closed profile wall with a single layer of (Usually 73.4 to 140°F) T = 73 (23°C)
Coefficient of friction for HDPE to soil µf = 0.4
circular hollow cores (coretubes) centered on the centroid of the
shaft wall and having the following dimensions and geometric
properties:
Young’s modulus of soil S S N
D
E 5 7000 · psi 4826 2
Manhole inside diameter (in.) D = 48 in. (122 cm) cm
Moment of inertia (in. 4/in.)
I 5 0.367 in.4 in. / factor formation Moore’s eq RH = 1.0
~SeeX1 fortypicalvalues.! Geometry

~6.01 cm /cm! 4

Cross sectional area (in. 2/in.)

A 5 0.752 in.2 in. / X3.2 Calculation:
X3.2.1 Radial Earth Pressure (see 6.2.1 and 6.3.1):
~1.91 cm /cm! 2

Centroid (in.) ZC= 0.913 in. (2.32 cm)

X3.2.1.1 Section 6.2.1 gives the equation for the radial
Wall Height (in.) h= 1.83 in. (4.65 cm) pressure acting on a manhole in dry soil. This equation is
Net wall thickness (in.) tn = 0.38 in. (0.97 cm) tn equals h modified in 6.3.2 for manholes subjected to external water
minus coretube diameter
pressure.
Manhole base plate thickness (in.) tp = 2.0 in. (5.08 cm)
X3.2.1.2 In the sample calculation, the groundwater is
X3.1.2 Material Properties for Selected HDPE: assumed to be 10 ft (3.05 m) below the surface. Therefore, the
Long-term stress relaxation modulus at E= 28 250 psi (19 478 N/cm2) radial pressure at the manhole invert has two components;
73°F (23°C), (psi)
Long-term Poisson’s Ratio of HDPE µ = 0.48
pressure due to the embedment soil above the groundwater level
Long-term Allowable Compressive Cs = 1000 psi (689 N/cm2) and pressure due to the embedment soil below the groundwater
Stress at 73°F (23°C) (psi) level. The radial pressure acting on the manhole is found by
NOTE X3.1—The typical value for the allowable compressive stress for taking the sum of Eq 1 (acting from 0 to 10 ft (0 to 3 m)) and
materials meeting the requirements of 5.1 and having a HDB of 1600 psi Eq 5 (acting from 10 to 20 ft (3 to 5.5 m)).
(1100 N/cm2) is 1000 psi (689 N/cm2). X3.2.1.3 In order to calculate the radial pressure in Eq 1
NOTE X3.2—The axial compressive strain is limited to 3.5 % to prevent and Eq 5, the active earth pressure coefficient must be found:
the long-term stress in the HDPE from exceeding 1000 psi.
Ka − Active Earth Pressure Coeffıcient (6.2.1 Eq
ecal 5 0.035 in. S0.035 cm D (X3.1) in.
2): SS u
DD 2
cm
Long-term allowable ring bending ebal = 0.05 in./in.(0.05 cm/cm) strain at 73°F, Ka 5 tan 45° 2 2 (X3.2)
(°C)

NOTE X3.3—The typical value for the allowable ring bending strain for Ka 5 0.333 (X3.3)
materials meeting the requirements of 5.1 is 5 %.
Long-term allowable tensile stress at stal = 800 psi (550 N/cm2)
X3.2.1.4 The radial pressure component due to the soil
73°F, (°C), psi (KPa) above the groundwater level is found using Eq 1 (see 6.2.1):
NOTE X3.4—The long-term allowable tensile stress for materials meeting Hd 5 Z Hd 5 10 ft ~3.05 m! (X3.4)
the requirements of 5.1 and having a HDB of 1600 psi (1100 N/cm2) is 800 lbf
psi (550 N/cm2).
Prd 5 1.21 Ka Dw Hd Prd 5 484 2 ~23.2
X3.1.3 Soil and Installation Information: kPa! (X3.5) ft

Depth of manhole, ft H= 18 ft (5.49 m) X3.2.1.5 The radial pressure component due to the combined
Depth from surface to groundwater (ft) Z= 10 ft (3.05 m) earth pressure and water pressure beneath the groundwater level
Saturated soil weight (lb/ft3) / ~
Sw 5 135 lbf ft3 21.21 kN m3 / ! is found using Eq 5 (6.3.2):
lbf
lbf kN
H 5 H 2 Z g 5 62.4 ~9.8 kN/m 3! sat w (X3.6)
3
Dry soil weight (lb/ft3)
Dw 5 120 3 S 18.85 3 D ft
Prsat 5gw Hsat 1 1.21 Ka ~Sw 2gw! Hsat (X3.7)
ft m
Angle of internal friction (degrees) u = 30° lbf
(X3.8)

10
 F 1759 – 97
Nt 5 Pr Rm Nt 5 210.628 in. 369 cm (X3.17)
P 5 733.456 ~35.1 kPa! rsat
2
ft X3.2.3.3 The ring compressive strain can be found using Eq
X3.2.1.6 The radial pressure acting at the invert of the 8:
manhole shaft equals:
N in. cm
lbf
Pr 5 Prd 1 Prsat Pr 5 1217 2 ~58.3 kPa! (X3.9)
ft et 5 E A t
et 5 0.01 in. S 0.01 cm D (X3.18)

X3.2.2 Downdrag Load (see 6.2.2): X3.2.3.4 The ring compressive strain should be less than the
X3.2.2.1 The downdrag load is found by summing the allowable compressive strain.
average shear stress over the surface area of the manhole. The
shear stress is equal to the product of the average radial pressure et 5 0.01 in.S 0.01 cm D ,ecal 5 0.035 in. S 0.035
and the coefficient of friction. See Eq 3 (6.2.2.1).
X3.2.2.2 The radial pressure used in Eq 3 is the pressure due cm D in. cm in. cm
to the dry or saturated (but not buoyant) unit weight of the (X3.19)
manhole embedment soil taken over the full depth of the
X3.2.3.5 The bending strain can be found from the manhole
manhole, whether the manhole is below the groundwater table
eccentricity. Some eccentricity is assumed to occur because of
or not, as given in Eq 1:
installation and handling forces. For manhole shafts, this is
lbf
typically 2 % of the diameter. However, since the shaft is
Prd 5 1.21 Ka Sw H Prd 5 980 2 ~46.9 kPa! (X3.10) reinforced against ring deflection by the manhole bottom, the
ft maximum eccentricity will not occur at the point of maximum
X3.2.2.3 The average shear stress is found using Eq 3 (see radial pressure.
6.2.2.1). X3.2.3.6 The eccentricity is given by Eq 9:
lbf Co 5 0.02 (X3.20)
Pr1 5 0.0 2 ~0 kPa! Pr2 5 Prd (X3.11)
ft e 5 Co Rm e 5 0.498 in. ~1.27 cm! (X3.21)
Pr1 1 Pr2 X3.2.3.7 The resulting bending moment due to ring thrust is
Ta 5 µf (X3.12) given by Eq 10:
2
lbf N2cm
(Eq 3, 6.2.2.1)
Prd lbf
Ta 5 0.4 2 Ta 5 196.02 ft 2 ~9.4 kPa! (X3.13) ME 5 e Nt 0.5 ME 5 52.47 in. in. S 233.7 cm D (X3.22)
X3.2.3.8 Eq 11 gives the bending strain:
X3.2.2.4 The downdrag load can be found using Eq 4 (see 1
6.2.2.3): SX 5(X3.23)
Dod 5 D 1 2 h Dod 5 4.305 ft ~1.31 m! (X3.14) M ZC
PD 5 Ta p Dod H PD 5 47 720 lbf ~212.4 kN! (X3.15) in. cm

X3.2.3 Manhole Shaft Design: Radial Loads: 5

eb E S E
X eb 5 0.005
in. cm
0.005 D
X3.2.3.1 The performance limits under radial loads consist of (X3.24)
ring compression, ring bending, and ring buckling. X3.2.3.9 The combined bending and compressive strain can
X3.2.3.2 The ring compressive thrust can be found using Eq be found from Eq 12:
7 (see 7.1.1.1) where Pr is converted to units of psi by dividing
the value of Pr in psf by 144 (where Pr is converted to units of ec 5et 1eb ec in.
N/cm2 by dividing the value of Pr in kPa by 10). 5 0.015 in. ~0.015 cm/cm!,e bal

5 0.05 S D 0.05 (X3.25) in. cm in.

D 1 2 ZC S cm

N D Both the ring compressive stress criterion given in X3.2.3.4

above and the allowable combined strain criterion must be met.
X3.2.3.10 Two equations are given in the standard for checking
Rm 5 2 Pr 5 8.455 psi 5.83 cm 2 (X3.16) lbf S D N buckling. Eq 13 is for use in dry ground applications or above
the groundwater level. Eq 15 is for shafts located below the

11
 F 1759 – 97
groundwater level. Both the “dry” and “wet” PD 5 47 720 lbf ~212 400 N! (X3.37)
portions of the shaft in this example are checked. Pl 5 0 lbf ~0 N! (X3.38)
X3.2.3.11 Eq 13 is used for checking radial buckling of where:
manholes above the groundwater level and would apply to the Pl = live load
upper 10 ft (3 m) of this manhole:
Pw 5 900 lbf ~4 000 N! (X3.39)

where:
Ncr 5 0.7 RH ~EI!1 / 3 Es2 / 3Ncr 5 5585 lbfin. S 9779 cmN D Pw = weight of manhole shaft
(X3.26) P1P1P in. cm

Applied radial load on upper 10 ft (3 m) of manhole shaft

equals: ea 5 DE p Dl m tn w ea 5 0.029 in. S 0.029 cm D (X3.40)
Hd 5 10 ft ~3 m! (X3.27)
X3.2.4.2 The net wall axial strain should be less than the
lbf allowable axial compressive strain based on the long term
5 5 strength rating of the material. See X3.1:
Prd8 Ka Dw Hd 1.21 Prd8 484 2 ~23.2 kPa! (X3.28)
ft ea 5 0.029 S D
0.029 ,e cal 5 0.035 S D
0.035 in.
lbf N cm in. cm in. cm in.
cm
Ntd Prd8 Rm Ntd 83.74 in. 146.8 cm (X3.29)
(X3.41)
N
cr X3.2.4.3 The critical strain at axial buckling of the shaft can
SF 5 SF 5 66.7 . 2 (X3.30)
5 5 5
be determined from Eq 18:
SE 5 ~12 I! 1 / 3 SE 5 1.639 in. ~4.16 cm! (X3.42)

Ntd 2S in. cm

X3.2.3.12 Radial buckling of the portion of the manhole shaft

submerged beneath the groundwater table is given by Eq 15. ecr 5 E
ecr 5 0.043 S D 0.043
H2Z
Dm [3 ~1 2 µ 2!#1 / 2 in. cm
Rw 5 1 2 0.33 H Rw 5 0.853 (X3.31)
(X3.43)
e 5 2.71828 (X3.32)
X3.2.4.4 For the closed profile shapes in Specification F 894,
where: e = natural log base number 1
the average wall strain controls axial buckling, rather than the

B8 51
DS 1 D
B8 5~SI!
1
net wall strain as calculated in X3.2.4.2. The average axial
compressive strain can be found from Eq 17 by substituting the
m cross-sectional area for the net wall thickness:
1 1 4 e20.065 • H • ft 1 1 4·e20.213 • H •
P1P1P in. cm
(X3.33)
Dm 5 D 1 2 ZC (X3.34)
ea 5 D l w
ea 5 0.015 S D
0.015 (X3.44)

E Dm A in. cm
Ncrw 5 2.825 Rw B8DEm8 E ~I! G 1/
2
Ncrw 5 ecr
e SF 5 SF 5 2.87
(X3.45)
795 lbfin. S 139 cmN D a

(X3.35) NOTE X3.5—A SF of 1 is considered sufficient since the support provided

Determine the SF using Nt from X3.2.3.2: by the soil in restraining axial buckling is not included in Eq 18.

N X3.2.5 Manhole Base/Bottom Design:

SF 5 crw
SF 5 3.77 . 2 (X3.36) X3.2.5.1 The primary load acting on the manhole bottom is
Nt due to groundwater.
lbf
X3.2.4 Manhole Shaft Design: Axial Loads: pgw 5 62.4 3 Hsat pgw 5 3.47 psi (X3.46)
X3.2.4.1 The axial strain in the net wall section can be found ft
using Eq 17:

12
 F 1759 – 97
gw sat 100 (2) Gartung, E., Prühs, H., and Hoch, A., “Design of Vertical Shafts in
Landfills,” Second International Landfill Symposium, Sardinia, 1989.
cm gw N2D (3) Hossain, M. K., “Finite Element Analysis and Design of Large
Diameter Flexible Vertical Pipes Subjected to Incremental
p 5 W Hp 5 2.39 (X3.47) m cm Compacted Backfill Loads and Creep Effects,” Master Thesis, Texas
A&M
X3.2.5.2 Where the manhole base is constructed from a flat University, 1990.
plate with thickness tp and without gussets, the maximum base (4) Report to Bauku, Wiehl, Germany from Grundbauingeniure Steinfeld
stress can be determined using Eq 20: und Partner, Erobaulaboratium Hamburg, 1991.
(5) Swan Jr., R. H., Bonaparte, R., Bachus, R. C., Rivette, C. A., and
Spikula, D. R., “Effect of Soil Compaction Conditions on
Geomembrane-Soil Interface Strength,” Geotextiles and
Geomembranes, 10, 1991, pp. 523–529.
(6) Martin, J. P., Koerner, R. M., and Whitty, J. E., “Experimental
bp S D
gw
D
p2
2
bp S D 2 Friction Evaluation of Slippage Between Geomembranes, Geotextiles
3 2 N and Soils,” International Conference on Geomembranes, Denver.
s5p s 5 374 psi 258 (X3.48) (7) Moore, I. D. and Selig, E. T., “Use of Continuum Buckling Theory
4 t cm for Evaluation of Buried Plastic Pipe Stability,” Buried Plastic Pipe
Technology, ASTM STP 1093, ASTM, Philadelphia, 1990.
X3.2.5.3 The maximum stress in the base should be less than (8) Cagle, L. L. and Glassock, B., “Recommendations for Elastic
the allowable stress for the base plate material. Buckling Design Requirements for Buried Flexible Pipe,”
Proceedings: Better Water for the Americas, Part 1, AWWA, 1982.
N N
(9) Moore, I. D., Selig, E. T., and Haggag, A., “Elastic Buckling Strength
of Buried Flexible Culverts,” TRB Session 143, Transportation

sbp 5 374 psi 258 2D ,s tal 5 800 psi S 550 2D Research Board, Washington, 1988.
(10) Timoshenko, S. P. and Gere, J. M., Theory of Elastic Stability,
cm cm McGraw-Hill Company, 1961.
(X3.49) (11) Chau, M. T., Chua, K. M., and Lytton, R. L., “Stability Analysis of
Flexible Pipes:ASimplified Biaxial Buckling Equation,” 68thAnnual
X3.2.5.4 The upward deflection that occurs in the base plate Meeting, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1989.
(manhole floor) should be limited to 2 % of the manhole (12) Chau, M. T., “Stability Analysis of Buried Flexible Pipes: A Biaxial
diameter. Buckling Equation,” Master Thesis, Texas A&M University, 1990.
D4 d

2!
pgw S D 23 dbp 5 0.734 in. ~1.87 cm! D % 5 Dbp 100 D % 5 1.53, 2 % (X3.51)
3
5
dbp 16 ~1 2 µ E tp
(X3.50)

REFERENCES
(1) Hossain, M. K. and Lytton, R. L., “Analysis of Large Diameter High- (13) Sealy, F. B. and Smith, J. O., Advanced Mechanics of Materials, John
Density Polyethylene Plastic Pipes as Vertical Shafts in Landfills,” Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1952.
Journal of Testing and Evaluation, ASTM, Vol 19, No. 6, Nov. 1991, (14) Bowles, J. E., Foundation Analysis and Design, 3rd Ed., McGrawHill
pp. 475–484. Book Company, New York, 1982.
ASTMInternationaltakesnopositionrespectingthevalidityofanypatentrightsassertedinconnectionwithanyitemmentioned
inthisstandard.Usersofthisstandardareexpresslyadvisedthatdeterminationofthevalidityofanysuchpatentrights,andtherisk
ofinfringementofsuchrights,areentirelytheirownresponsibility.

Thisstandardissubjecttorevisionatanytimebytheresponsibletechnicalcommitteeandmustbereviewedeveryfiveyearsand
ifnotrevised,eitherreapprovedorwithdrawn.Yourcommentsareinvitedeitherforrevisionofthisstandardorforadditionalstandards
andshouldbeaddressedtoASTMInternationalHeadquarters.Yourcommentswillreceivecarefulconsiderationatameetingofthe
responsibletechnicalcommittee,whichyoumayattend.Ifyoufeelthatyourcommentshavenotreceivedafairhearingyoushould
makeyourviewsknowntotheASTMCommitteeonStandards,attheaddressshownbelow.

ThisstandardiscopyrightedbyASTMInternational,100BarrHarborDrive,POBoxC700,WestConshohocken,PA19428-2959,
UnitedStates.Individualreprints(singleormultiplecopies)ofthisstandardmaybeobtainedbycontactingASTMattheabove address or at
610-832-9585 (phone), 610-832-9555 (fax), or [email protected] (e-mail); or through the ASTM website (www.astm.org).

13