Ductile iron pipe

1.1 North America

Ductile iron pipe is a pipe made of ductile iron

commonly used for potable water transmission and
distribution.[1] This type of pipe is a direct development
of earlier cast iron pipe, which it has superseded.[1] The
ductile iron used to manufacture the pipe is characterized by the spheroidal or nodular nature of the graphite
within the iron.[2] Typically, the pipe is manufactured using centrifugal casting in metal or resin lined moulds.[3]
Protective internal linings and external coatings are often applied to ductile iron pipes to inhibit corrosion: the
standard internal lining is cement mortar and standard
external coatings include bonded zinc, asphalt or waterbased paint. In highly corrosive environments loose
polyethylene sleeving (LPS) to encase the pipe may also
be used. Life expectancy of unprotected ductile iron
pipes depends on the corrosiveness of soil present and
tends to be shorter where soil is highly corrosive.[4] However, a lifespan in excess of 100 years has been estimated for ductile iron pipelines installed using evolved
laying practices, including use of properly installed LPS
(polyethylene encasement).[5][6] Studies of ductile iron
pipes environmental impact have diering ndings regarding emissions and energy consumed. Ductile iron
pipe manufactured in the United States has been certied as a sustainable product by the Institute for Market
Transformation to Sustainability.[7][8]

Pipe dimensions according to the American AWWA C151

1.2 Europe
European pipe is standardized to ISO 2531 and its descendent specications EN 545 (potable water) and EN
598 (sewage). European pipes are sized to approximately
match the internal diameter of the pipe, following internal lining, to the nominal diameter. ISO 2531 maintains dimensional compatibility with older German cast
iron pipes. Older British pipes, however, which used the
incompatible imperial standard, BS 78, require adapter
pieces when connecting to newly installed pipe. Coincidentally, the British harmonization with European pipe
standards occurred at approximately the same time as its
transition to ductile iron, so almost all cast iron pipe is
imperial and all ductile pipe is metric.
Other European Standards give specications on more
dedicated products:
EN 15655:2009 - Ductile iron pipes, ttings and accessories - Internal polyurethane lining for pipes and ttings
- Requirements and test methods
EN 877:1999/A1:2006 - Cast iron pipes and ttings, their
joints and accessories for the evacuation of water from
buildings - Requirements, test methods and quality assurance

Dimensions

CEN/TR 15545:2006 - Guide to the use of EN 545

Ductile iron pipe is sized according to a dimensionless term known as the Pipe Size or Nominal Diameter
(known by its French abbreviation, DN). This is roughly
equivalent to the pipes internal diameter in inches or millimeters. However, it is the external diameter of the pipe
that is kept constant between changes in wall thickness,
in order to maintain compatibility in joints and ttings.
Consequently, the internal diameter varies, sometimes
signicantly, from its nominal size. Nominal pipe sizes
vary from 3 inches up to 64 inches, in increments of at
least 1 inch, in the United States.

CEN/TR 16017:2010 - Guide to the use of EN 598

EN 877:1999 - Cast iron pipes and ttings, their joints
and accessories for the evacuation of water from buildings
- Requirements, test methods and quality assurance
EN 877:1999/A1:2006/AC:2008 - Cast iron pipes and
ttings, their joints and accessories for the evacuation of
water from buildings - Requirements, test methods and
quality assurance
EN 598:2007+A1:2009 - Ductile iron pipes, ttings, accessories and their joints for sewerage applications - Requirements and test methods

Pipe dimensions are standardised to the mutually incompatible AWWA C151 (U.S. Customary Units) in the
United States, ISO 2531 / EN 545/598 (metric) in Europe, and AS/NZS 2280 (metric) in Australia and New
Zealand. Although both metric, European and Australian
are not compatible and pipes of identical nominal diameters have quite dierent dimensions.

EN 12842:2012 - Ductile iron ttings for PVC-U or PE

piping systems - Requirements and test methods
CEN/TR 16470:2013 - Environmental aspects of ductile
iron pipe systems for water and sewerage applications
1

JOINTS

EN 14628:2005 - Ductile iron pipes, ttings and acces- ing held together by bolts usually passed through holes
sories - External polyethylene coating for pipes - Require- drilled through the anges. A deformable gasket, usually
ments and test methods
elastomeric, placed between raised faces on the mating
EN 15189:2006 - Ductile iron pipes, ttings and acces- anges provides the seal. Flanges are designed to a large
sories - External polyurethane coating for pipes - Re- number of specications that dier because of dimensional variations in pipes sizes and pressure requirements,
quirements and test methods
and because of independent standards development. In
EN 14901:2014 - Ductile iron pipes, ttings and acces- the U.S. anges are either threaded or welded onto the
sories - Epoxy coating (heavy duty) of ductile iron ttings pipe. In the European market anges are usually welded
and accessories - Requirements and test methods
onto the pipe. In the US anges are available in a stanEN 969:2009 - Ductile iron pipes, ttings, accessories dard 125 lb. bolt pattern as well as a 250 lb (and heavier)
and their joints for gas pipelines - Requirements and test bolt pattern (steel bolt pattern). Both are usually rated
at 250 psi (1,700 kPa). A anged joint is rigid and can
methods
bear both tension and compression as well as a limited
EN 15542:2008 - Ductile iron pipes, ttings and acces- degree of shear and bending. It also can be dismantled
sories - External cement mortar coating for pipes - Re- after assembly. Due to the rigid nature of the joint and
quirements and test methods
the risk of excessive bending moment being imposed, it
EN 545:2010 - Ductile iron pipes, ttings, accessories is advised that anged pipework is not buried.
and their joints for water pipelines - Requirements and Current ange standards used in the water industry are
test methods
ANSI B16.1 in the USA, EN 1092 in Europe, and
EN 14525:2004 - Ductile iron wide tolerance couplings AS/NZS 4087 in Australia and New Zealand.
and ange adaptors for use with pipes of dierent materials: ductile iron, Grey iron, Steel, PVC-U PE, Fibrecement
2.2 Spigot and socket

1.3

Australia

Spigot and sockets involve a normal pipe end, the spigot,

being inserted into the socket or bell of another pipe or
tting with a seal being made between the two within the
socket. Normal spigot and socket joints do not allow direct metal to metal contact with all forces being transmitted through the elastomeric seal. They can consequently
ex and allow some degree of rotation, allowing pipes
to shift and relieve stresses imposed by soil movement.
The corollary is that unrestrained spigot and socket joints
transmit essentially no compression or tension along the
axis of the pipe and little shear. Any bends, tees or valves
therefore require either a restrained joint or, more commonly, thrust blocks, which transmit the forces as compression into the surrounding soil.

Australian and New Zealand pipes are sized to an independent specication, AS/NZS[9] 2280, that is not
compatible with European pipes even though the same
nomenclature is used. Australia adopted at an early point
the imperial British cast iron pipe standard BS 78, and
when this was retired on British adoption of ISO 2531,
rather than similarly harmonizing with Europe, Australia
opted for a 'soft' conversion from imperial units to metric,
published as AS/NSZ 2280, with the physical outer diameters remaining unchanged, allowing continuity of manufacture and backwards compatibility. Therefore, the inner diameters of lined pipe dier widely from the nominal diameter, and hydraulic calculations require some A large number of dierent socket and seals exist. The
most modern is the 'push-joint' or 'slip-joint', whereby the
knowledge of the pipe standard.
socket and rubber seal is designed to allow the pipe spigot
to be, after lubrication, simply pushed into the socket.
Push joints remain proprietary designs. Also available
2 Joints
are locking gasket systems. These locking gasket systems
allow the pipe to be pushed together but do not allow the
joint to come apart without using a special tool or torch
Main article: Piping and plumbing ttings
on the gasket.

Individual lengths of ductile iron pipe are joined either The earliest spigot and socket cast iron pipes were jointed
by anges, couplings, or some form of spigot and socket by lling the socket with a mixture of water, sand, iron lings and sal-ammoniac (ammonium chloride.) A gaskin
arrangement.
ring was pushed into the socket round the spigot to contain the mixture which was pounded into the socket with
2.1 Flanges
a caulking tool and then pointed o. This took several
weeks to set and produced a completely rigid joint. Such
Flanges are at rings around the end of pipes which mate pipe systems are often to be seen in nineteenth century
with an equivalent ange from another pipe, the two be- churches in the heating system.

Lifespan and corrosion

rosive environment. The analysis found that a lifespan

of 37 years could be expected in these uniquely severe
[6]
In the late 1950s, ductile iron pipe was introduced to the environments.
marketplace, featuring higher strength and similar corro- Pipes manufactured under International Organization for
sion resistance compared to cast iron.[10] According to a Standardization (ISO) standards are typically coated with
2004 study, an expected lifespan of 100 years is likely for zinc, to provide protection against corrosion. In inductile iron pipe, based on test results, eld inspections stances of more aggressive soils, polyethylene sleeving
and in-service operations over 50 years.[11] In 2012, the is installed over the zinc coated pipe to provide added
American Water Works Association reported that ductile protection.[10][17]
iron pipes in benign soil or installed in more aggressive
Cathodic protection may also be used to prevent corrosoils using evolved laying practices had an estimated
sion and tends to be advocated by corrosion engineers for
life up to 110 years, based on a nationwide analysis of
pipes in corrosive soils as an addition to external dielectric
water pipes in the U.S.[5]
coatings.[10][18]
Like most ferrous materials, ductile iron is susceptible
Engineers and water authorities in the United States are
to corrosion, therefore its useful life depends on the imdivided on the use of dierent coatings or cathodic pro[1]
pact of corrosion. Corrosion can occur in two ways
tection. Mixed results have been found for all methods
in ductile iron pipes: graphitization, the leaching away
of protection. However, this may be due to the impact of
of iron content through corrosion leading to a generally
variations in local soil corrosiveness and temperature or
weakened pipe structure, and corrosion pitting, which is
by damage occurring during installation, which can ima more localized eect also causing weakening of the pipe
pact eectiveness of protective coatings.[10][18]
[10]
structure.
Over the last 100 years, the average thickness of iron
pipes has decreased due to increased metal strength,[12]
through metallurgical advancements as well as improved
casting technique.[13][14]

3.1

Methods for mitigating corrosion

4 Internal linings
Ductile iron pipe is somewhat resistant to internal corrosion in potable water and less aggressive forms of sewage.
However, even where pipe material loss and consequently
pipe wall reduction is slow, the deposition of corrosion
products on the internal pipe wall can reduce the eective internal diameter. A variety of linings are available to
reduce or eliminate corrosion, including cement mortar,
polyurethane and polyethylene. Of these, cement mortar
lining is by far the most common.

The potential for corrosion, leading to pipe failure, is signicantly impacted by the corrosivity of soil. Unprotected pipes in highly corrosive soil tend to have shorter
lifespans.[4] The lifespan of ductile iron pipe installed in
an aggressive environment without appropriate protection may be between 21 and 40 years.[6][15] The introduction of corrosion mitigation methods for ductile pipe,
including the use of polyethylene sleeving, can reduce 4.1 Polyurethane (PUR)
corrosion by controlling the eect of corrosive soil on
piping.[6]
Main article: Polyurethane
In the United States, the American National Standards
Institute and American Water Works Association have Polyurethane is an option oered as an internal lining
standardized the use of polyethylene sleeving to pro- for ductile iron pipes in lieu of cement mortar. Howtect ductile iron pipe from the eects of corrosion.[3][16] ever, as PUR provides only passive protection it becomes
A 2003 report by researchers from the National Re- vitally important that the coating is not damaged dursearch Council of Canada noted that both good and ing handling and installation. Manufacturers will specpoor performances of polyethylene sleeving had been ify strict handling, transport and installation procedures
reported.[10] However, a study in the Ductile Iron Pipe to ensure PUR coatings are protected. If pipes are deResearch Associations Florida test site found that, com- formed Polyurethanes elasticity, does in some situations
pared with uncoated pipes exposed to a corrosive en- allow the coating to remain intact. Corrosion Experts
vironment, pipes encased in loose polyethylene sleeving were in excellent condition.[6] Based on a 2005 Polyurethane coatings were rst used in 1972. In comparmeta analysis of 1,379 pipe specimens, loose polyethy- ison with other coatings, the internal polyurethane lining
lene sleeving was found to be highly eective at miti- exhibits a high resistance to various dierent media such
gating corrosion. The only environment for which the as drinking water, wastewater, de-mineralised water, inanalysis found the polyethylene sleeving did not provide dustrial water and gas, as well as to aggressive solutions
eective corrosion control was for uniquely severe en- such as sulphuric acid.
vironments, a classication of a rare but extremely cor- Polyurethane is a thermosetting plastic with no solvents,

EXTERNAL COATINGS

with a three-dimensionally linked molecular structure

giving it mechanical stability. The polyurethane lining
used for internal coating has the following standard properties is standardised by EN 15655:2009 (Ductile iron
pipes, ttings and accessories - Internal polyurethane lining for pipes and ttings - Requirements and test methods).

inhibits the diusion of oxygen to the ductile iron surface and limits the availability of electrolytes that would
accelerate corrosion. It provides a homogeneous environment along the pipe surface so that corrosion occurs
evenly over the pipe. The sleeve also restricts the availability of nutrients which could support sulfate-reducing
bacteria, inhibiting microbially induced corrosion. LPS
is not designed to be completely water-tight but rather to
greatly restrict the movement of water to and from the
4.2 Cement mortar
pipe surface.[19] Water present beneath the sleeve and in
contact with the pipe surface is rapidly deoxygenated and
Main article: Cement-mortar lined ductile iron pipe
depleted of nutrients and forms a stable environment in
which limited further corrosion occurs. An improperly
The predominant form of lining for water applications is installed sleeve that continues to allow the free ow of
cement mortar centrifugally applied during manufactur- ground water is not eective in inhibiting corrosion.
ing. The cement mortar comprises a mixture of cement Polyethylene sleeves are available in a number of mateand sand to a ratio of between 1:2 and 1:3.5. For potable rials. The most common contemporary compositions are
water, portland cement is used; for sewage it is common linear low-density polyethylene lm which requires an 8
to use sulfate resisting or high alumina cement.
mil or 200 m thickness and high-density cross-laminated
Cement mortar linings have been found to dramatically polyethylene lm which requires only a 4 mil or 100 m
reduce internal corrosion. A DIPRA survey has demon- thickness. The latter may or may not be reinforced with
strated that the Hazen-Williams factor of cement lining a scrim layer.
remains between 130 and 151 with only slight reduction Polyethylene sleeving does have limitations. In European
with age.
practice, its use in the absence of additional zinc and
epoxy protective coatings is discouraged where natural
soil resistivity is below 750 ohm/cm. Where resistivity is
below
1500 ohm/cm and where the pipe is installed at or
5 External coatings
below the water table, where there are additional articial
soil contaminants and particularly stray currents again it
Unprotected ductile iron, similarly to cast iron, is intrinis recommended for use in addition to zinc and epoxy
sically resistant to corrosion in most, although not all,
coating.[19] Because of the vulnerability of polyethylene
soils. Nonetheless, because of frequent lack of informato UV degradation, sleeving, or sleeved pipe should not
tion on soil aggressiveness and to extend the installed life
be stored in sunlight, although carbon pigments included
of buried pipe, ductile iron pipe is commonly protected
in the sleeving can provide some limited protection.
by one or more external coatings. In the U.S. and Australia, loose polyethylene sleeving is preferred. In Eu- Polyethylene sleeving is standardised according to ISO
rope, standards recommend a more sophisticated system 8180 internationally, AWWA C105 in the U.S., BS 6076
of directly bonded zinc coatings overlaid by a nishing in the UK and AS 3680 and AS 3681 in Australia.
layer be used in conjunction with polyethylene sleeving.

5.2 Zinc
5.1

Loose Polyethylene Sleeving (LPS)

Loose Polyethylene sleeving was rst developed by

CIPRA (since 1979, DIPRA) in the U.S. in 1951 for use
in highly corrosive soil in Birmingham, Alabama. It was
employed more widely in the U.S. in the late 1950s and
rst employed in the UK in 1965 and Australia in the mid1960s. Loose Polyethylene Sleeving (LPS) remains as
one of the most cost eective corrosion protection methods available today with a proven track record for reliability and eectiveness.

In Europe and Australia, ductile iron pipe is typically

manufactured with a zinc coating overlaid by either a
bituminous, polymeric, or epoxy nishing layer. EN
545/598 mandates a minimum zinc content of 200 g/m2
(at 99.99% purity) and a minimum average nishing layer
thickness of 70 m (with local minimum of 50 m).
AS/NZS 2280 mandates a minimum zinc content of 200
g/m2 (with a local minimum of 180 g/m2 at 99.99% purity) and a minimum average nishing layer thickness of
80 m.

LPS comprises a loose sleeve of polyethylene that completely wraps the pipe, including the bells of any joints.
The sleeving inhibits corrosion by a number of mechanisms. It physically separates the pipe from soil particles, preventing direct galvanic corrosion. By providing
an impermeable barrier to ground water, the sleeve also

No current AWWA standards are available for bonded

coatings (zinc, coal tar epoxy, tape-wrap systems as seen
on steel pipe) for ductile iron pipe, DIPRA does not endorse bonded coatings, and AWWA M41 generally views
them unfavourably, recommending they be used only in
conjunction with cathodic protection.[20]

5.3

Bituminous coatings

Zinc coatings are generally not employed in the U.S. In

order to protect ductile iron pipe prior to installation, pipe
is instead supplied with a temporary 1 mil or 25 m thick
bituminous coating. This coating is not intended to provide protection once the pipe is installed.

Water based pipe coatings

Main article: Water based pipe coating

Water based pipe coatings, are an environmentally
friendly coating that is applied to the inner & outer diameter of ductile iron pipe. They protect against corrosion
from the outside and inside, and also protect the product
from contamination. The coating is an emulsion manufactured using asphaltene and water primarily, with other
raw materials according to the manufacturers specications.
They came in use in the early 1990s, replacing coatings
based on dangerous and environmental harmful solvents,
such as benzenes, toluenes, hexanes and other volatile organic compounds.

Industry associations and market

In the United States, the Ductile Iron Pipe Research Association represents manufacturers of ductile iron pipe.
The association provides research on and promotes the
use of ductile iron piping in utility projects (water and
sewer), focusing on its strength, recyclability and life
cycle cost compared with alternative products such as
PVC.[21][22] The U.S. industry is also represented by the
National Association of Pipe Fabricators.[23] Outside of
the U.S., the ductile iron pipe industry is supported by
associations including the European Association for Ductile Iron Pipe Systems.[24]
Following the nancial crisis of 2008, the pipe industry as
a whole, experienced a decrease in sales in the U.S. due
to municipalities deferring replacement of water mains
and reduction in new home construction.[25] According
to a report published by The Freedonia Group in 2011,
economic recovery from the 2008 crisis is likely to expand ductile irons market share in the large diameter pipe
market.[26]

Environmental

Ductile iron pipe in the developed world is normally manufactured exclusively from recycled material including

scrap steel and recycled iron.[27][28] The pipe can be recycled after use.[29] In terms of environmental impact, several studies have compared ductile iron pipes impact on
the environment with that of other pipe materials.[30] A
study by Jeschar et al. in 1995 compared the energy use
and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions produced in manufacturing pipes of various materials including concrete,
ductile iron, cast iron and PVC, based on pipes with nominal diameter of 100mm to 500mm. The energy consumed in manufacturing ductile iron pipe was 19.55 MJ
per kg and volume of emissions released during manufacture was 1.430 kg CO2 per kg, compared to 68.30
MJ per kg of energy and 4.860 kg CO2 per kg emissions
for PVC pipes, and 1.24 MJ per kg and 0.148 kg CO2
per kg for concrete pipes of the same diameter.[31] Another study the following year, by the Forschungsinstitut
fr Chemie und Umwelt, had similar ndings. However,
it also took the lifetime of pipes into account. This study
found improved environmental performance for ductile
iron pipe in terms of energy consumed and emissions produced during manufacture due to its longer life span.[30]
A more recent study, published August 2012, by Du et
al., carried out a life cycle analysis on six types materials
used for water and waste water pipes, including ductile
iron, PVC, high density polyethylene (HDPE) and concrete. They found that at diameters of 24 in, ductile iron pipe had the highest global warming potential
based on emissions from manufacturing, transportation
and installation. At larger diameters, 30 in, ductile iron
pipe had a lower global warming potential, while PVC
had the highest.[32] According to a 2008 study by Koo
et al., ductile iron pipe had the lowest impact on natural
resource depletion, compared to HDPE pipe and PVC
pipe.[29] In November 2012, ductile iron pipe manufactured in the United States received certication as a sustainable product from the Institute for Market Transformation to Sustainability.[7][8]

9 Notes
[1] Moser, A. P. and Folkman, Steven L. (2008) Buried Pipe
Design (3rd edition) McGraw-Hill, New York, p. 336337, ISBN 978-0-07-147689-8
[2] Romano, Melvin (1968). Performance of ductile-iron
pipe in soils. Journal (American Water Works Association) (American Water Works Association) 60 (6): 645
655. JSTOR 41265349.
[3] Public Works April 15, 1995 Ductile iron mains; Water Supply and Treatment SECTION: Pg. pC34(4) Vol.
V126 No. N5 ISSN 0033-3840
[4] Deb, Arun K.; Grablutz, Frank M.; Hasit, Yakir (2002).
Prioritizing Water Main Replacement and Rehabilitation.
American Water Works Association. p. 54. ISBN
1583212167. Retrieved 18 October 2012.
[5] American Water Works Association (2012). Buried
No Longer: Confronting Americas Water Infrastructure

10

Challenge (PDF) (Report). American Water Works Association. p. 8. Retrieved 19 October 2012.
[6] Bonds, Richard W.; Barnard, Lyle M.; Horton, A.
Michael; Oliver, Gene L. (2005). Corrosion and corrosion control of iron pipe: 75 years of research. Journal (American Water Works Association) (American Water Works Association) 97 (6): 8898. JSTOR 41312605.
[7] Ductile Iron Pipe (PDF). mts.sustainableproducts.com.
Institute for Market Transformation to Sustainability. Retrieved 8 January 2013.
[8] Ductile iron deemed sustainable pipe material (Press
release). Public Works. 27 November 2012. Retrieved 8
January 2013.
[9] Standards Australia
[10] Rajani, Balvant; Kleiner, Yehuda (2003). Protecting
ductile-iron Water Mains: What protection method works
best for what soil condition?". Journal (American Water
Works Association) (American Water Works Association)
95 (11): 110125. JSTOR 41311262.
[11] Kroon, David H.; Linemuth, Dale Donald; Sampson,
Sheri L.; Vincenzo, Terry (2004). Corrosion Protection of Ductile Iron Pipe. Corrosion (2004) - conference.
doi:10.1061/40745(146)75. Retrieved 18 October 2012.
[12] Roberge, Pierre R. (2007). Corrosion Inspection and Monitoring. Wiley. p. 173. ISBN 0471742481. Retrieved 17
October 2012.
[13] Ductile Iron Metallurgy. NAPF.com. National Association of Pipe Fabricators. 2012. Retrieved 28 January
2013.
[14] Campbell, Flake C. (2008). Elements of Metallurgy and
Engineering Alloys. ASM International. pp. 464465.
ISBN 0871708671. Retrieved 29 January 2013.
[15] Folkman, Steven (17 April 2012). Water Main Break
Rates in the USA and Canada: A Comprehensive Study
(PDF). Utah State University Buried Structures Laboratory. Utah State University. Retrieved 16 October 2012.
[16] American water Works Association and American National Standards Institute (1 October 2010).
ANSI/AWWA C105/A21.5-10 Polyethylene Encasement for Ductile-Iron Pipe Systems (Report). AWWA.
[17] Technical Committee ISO/TC 5 (2009). International
Standard ISO/FDIS 2531: Ductile iron pipes, ttings, accessories and their joints for water applications (Report).
International Organization for Standardization. p. 59.
[18] Burstall, Tim (1997). Bulk Water Pipelines. Thomas
Telford Ltd. p. 200. ISBN 0727726099. Retrieved 18
October 2012.
[19] IGN 4-50-03 - Operating Guidelines for the Use of SiteApplied, Factory Applied and Reinforced Factory Applied
Polyethylene Sleeving on Ductile Iron Pipeline Systems

EXTERNAL LINKS

[22] Study Brings Water Infrastructure Challenges to Surface. american-usa.com. American Cast Iron Pipe Company. 15 June 2012. Retrieved 30 January 2013.
[23] Home Page. napf.com. The National Association of
Pipe Fabricators. Retrieved 30 January 2013.
[24] Fachgemeinschaft Guss-Rohrsysteme (FGR) e. V. /
European Association for Ductile Iron Pipe Systems.
environmental-expert.com. Environmental Expert.com.
Retrieved 30 January 2013.
[25] What to do with U. S. Pipe?". American Water Intelligence. June 2011. Retrieved 30 January 2013.
[26] Plastics Today Sta (21 April 2011). Plastic pipe demand to rise, but ductile iron and concrete do better.
Plastics Today. Retrieved 30 January 2013.
[27] AWWA Manual M41: Ductile-Iron Pipe and Fittings.
American Water Works Association. 2002. p. 13. ISBN
1583212183. Retrieved 9 October 2012.
[28] Manufacturing Ductile Iron Pipe. PSCIPCO.com. Pacic States Cast Iron Pipe Company. Retrieved 9 October
2012.
[29] Koo, Dae-Hyun; Ariaratnam, Samuel T. (August 2008).
Application of a Sustainability Model for Assessing Water Main Replacement Options. Journal of
Construction Engineering and Management 134 (8).
doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2008)134:8(563).
[30] Friedrich, E; Pillay, S; Buckley, CA (July 2007). The use
of LCA in the water industry and the case for an environmental performance indicator. Water SA 33 (4): 443
452. ISSN 0378-4738. Retrieved 5 October 2012.
[31] Jeschar, R; Specht, E; Steinbrck, A (April 1995).
Energieverbrauch und CO2-Emission bei der Herstellung
und Entsorgung von Abwasserrohren aus verschiedenen
Werkstoen [Energy consumption and CO2 emissions
during the manufacturing and disposal of sewers of dierent materials]. Korrespondenz Abwasser (in German) 42
(4): 53740, 5424, 5469. Retrieved 8 October 2012.
[32] Du, F; Woods, G; Kang, D; Lansey, K; Arnold, A (August
2012). Life Cycle Analysis for Water and Wastewater
Pipe Materials. Journal of Environmental Engineering.
doi:10.1061/(ASCE)EE.1943-7870.0000638. Retrieved
8 October 2012.

10 External links
Ocial Web Site of the Ductile Iron Pipe Research
Association
Ocial Web Site of the Jindal Saw - Global Ductile
Iron Manufacturer

[20] AWWA Manual M41 - Ductile-Iron Pipe and Fittings

Ocial Web Site of Water Services Association

Australia

[21] Who we are. dipra.org. Ductile Iron Pipe Research Association. Retrieved 30 January 2013.

Ocial Web Site of PENTAIR WATER SOLUTIONS

7
Ductile Iron Pipe and Fittings Range
Ocial Web Site of SAINT-GOBAIN PAM
Ocial Web Site of the vonRoll hydro AG - Swiss
supplier for Ductile Iron Pipe & Fittings
Ocial Web Site of Electrosteel Castings Ltd. - Indian supplier for Ductile Iron Pipe & Fittings
Ocial Web Site of China National Building Group
Corporation(CNBM). - Chinese supplier for Ductile
Iron Pipe & Fittings

11

11
11.1

TEXT AND IMAGE SOURCES, CONTRIBUTORS, AND LICENSES

Text and image sources, contributors, and licenses

Text

Ductile iron pipe Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ductile_iron_pipe?oldid=705964500 Contributors: Fred Bauder, Smalljim, Wtshymanski, Cphi, Graham87, Rjwilmsi, GnniX, Cafe Nervosa, Chris the speller, Frap, Bejnar, Ohconfucius, Peter Horn, Civil Engineer III,
Jonathan A Jones, Marcusyoder, Utilitysupplies, Fabrictramp, Navneet.bithra, DGG, Kilmer-san, Lamro, Smellsofbikes, CorenSearchBot,
Auntof6, Sun Creator, Arjayay, Ark25, EastTN, Dthomsen8, Man, Addbot, Yobot, FrescoBot, JohnSmithbubba, DrilBot, Jonesey95,
Bursh69, John of Reading, Dewritech, Antsheehan, Rocketrod1960, Astatine211, Kmjaleel68, Baja jon, Municipal.asset.management,
Underground.pipe.assets, Cnbmductile, George8211, Monkbot, HMSLavender, Omthavertch, Ductile IronMan, Eddy Editorial, ASavantDude, CENTC203 and Anonymous: 44

11.2

Images

11.3

Content license

Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0