Sinvac HDPE Physical

Properties
 1. Table of physical properties

The properties given below ae for HDPE grades used to manufacture pipe. It should be
noted that many of these properties are relative to temperature and the duration of stress
application.

Property Value Unit Test Method Test Specimen

o
Density at 23 C 0,958 g/cm3 ISO 1183 10mm x 10mm x 4mm
Viscosity Number
0.1% solution of
380 ml/g ISO 1628-3 granules in
decahydrophthalene

Melt Flow Rate MFR 190/5 0,23 g/10mm ISO 1133 granules sample wieght
MFR 190/2 6,5 g/10mm 3g to 6g
Tensile Properties Yield Stress 2 150 527, Test Rate ISO 3167, 4mm thick
26 N/mm
50mm/min (test specimen no. 3,
Elongation at Yield Stress ISO 527, Test Rate 4mm thick according to
10 %
50mm/min DIN 53 455
Tensile modulus of Elasticity (secant 2
900 N/mm ISO 527
between 0.05 & 0.25% strain)
Tensile Creep Modulus (1 hour value) 650 N/mm
2
ISO 899, Test Load
2
Tensile Creep Modulus (1000 hour value) 350 N/mm
2
2M/mm
Flexural Properties Flexural Creep Modulus (1 min value) 2 DIN 54852-Z4 110mm x 10mm x 4mm
1100 N/mm 2
ob=2N/mm loaded flat
Flexural Stress (3.5%deflection) 2 ISO 178, Test Rate
20 N/mm 80mm x 10mm x 4mm
2mm/min
Stiffness in Torsion 2
180 N/mm DIN 53447 60mm x 6.35mm x 3mm

Hardness Ball Indentation Hardness 2 ISO 2039 part 1

41 N/mm 4mm sheet
Test Load 132N
Shore Hardness D (3 sec value) 61 ~ ISO 868
6mm sheet
Shore Hardness D (15 sec value) 59 ~
Northed Impact o
at 23 C 20 2 ISO 179/1eA
kJ/m
Strength acN (test
o
specimen from at -30 C
80mm x 10mm x 4mm
compression moulded kJ/m
2
sheet)

Vicat softening Point o

67 C ISO 306 4mm sheet
VST/B/50
Oxidation Induction o
200 C in O 2 >=60 min ISO TR 10837 granules
Time
 2. Comparison with other plastics

No Property HDPE PP PVC

1 Surface Steel Waxy Waxy Smooth

2 Appearance (Water Pipes) black Pale Grey Beige Blue

Sound produced when
Medium clatter High clatter High clatter
3 dropped
Carbonized in flame,
Combustibility and Bright flame, drops continue Bright flame, drops continue
Extinguished away from
appearance of flame to burn while falling to burn while falling
4 flame
Odour of smoke after flame is Pungent like hydrochloric
Like candles Like resin
5 extinguished acid
Nail test impression made by Very slight impression
Impression possible Impression not possible
6 finger nail possible

Special features

1 Floats in water yes yes No

2 Notch sensitivity No slight yes

3 Weather resistant Stabilised good Stabilised good Stabilised good

Methods of permanent
Fusion fusion Solvent cement
4 jointing
Suitable for mechanical
yes yes yes
5 jointing
Stress crack sensitivity with
regard to joining with safe some Slight None
6 media e.g. water
7 Linear expansion mm/m/°c 0.2 0.15 0.08
Thermal conductivity
0.4 0.19 0.14
8 kcal/mh²c
9 Specific heat kcal/kg²c 0.42 0.4 1.23
10 Specific weight kg/cm² 0.955 0.905 1.42
Tensile strength at 20°C
240 320 550
11 (kp/cm²)
Modulus of elasticity at 20°C
8000 15000 30000
12 (kp/cm²)

3. The Stress Regression Line

The traditional method of portraying the primary mechanical property of HDPE, tensile
strength, is by means of a graph of log stress vs. log time to failure. This is known as the
stress regression line. It is a plot of the circumferential hoop stress in the wall of the pipe
(from internal pressure) against time to failure.

Numerous actual test results, measured at 20°C and 60°C, over a range of times up to
10 000 hours, are plotted on a log scale and a regression line is calculated to fit this data.
The resultant regression line is ten extrapolated to 50 years (438 000 hours). The method of
calculation is an internationally accepted procedure described in ISO / TR 9080. The
required values of stress and time are specified in SANS ISO 4427.
The internationally accepted method for calculating circumferential hoop stress is derived
from Barlow’s formula and is as follows:

σ = p (d – t)/2t

Where: p = internal pressure (MPa)

t = minimum wall thickness (mm)
d = mean external diameter (mm)
σ = circumferential hoop stress in wall of pipe (MPa)

The Stress Regression Line for HDPE is given below.

σ Burst Stress MPa

Time to failure in hours

Note: Principal stress/time curves for PE 80 and PE 100 pipes at 20˚C and 80˚C. The standard curve for HDPE Type 2 at 80˚C (acc. to DIN
8075) is shown in comparison. The minimum required strength (MRS) at 20˚C and 50 years is 10 MPa for PE 100 and 8 MPa for PE 80
giving the design stress 8 MPa and 6 MPa respectively.

4. Design stress and Safety Factor

Safety factors take into account handling conditions, service conditions and other
circumstances not directly considered in the design. In terms of SANS ISO 4427 the
minimum safety factor is 1.25. This factor, when applied to the Minimum Required Strength
(MRS), for the particular material classification (e.g. PE 100), gives the maximum allowable
hydrostatic design stress for the designated material.
 Maximum
allowable
Designation of MRS at 50 years
hydrostatic
material and 20°C Mpa
design stress σ
- MPa
PE 100 10 8
PE 80 8 6.3
PE 63 6.3 5

The table below illustrates the relationship between MRS and σ for various design
coefficients at 20°C.

MRS of material σ - Mpa

Hydrostatic
design stress
10 8 6.3
of pipe, - Mpa
Design coefficient, C
8 1.25
6.3 1.59 1.27
5 2 1.6 1.26

The design engineer may wish to apply a greater safety factor depending on operating
conditions and environmental considerations. Applying Barlow’s formula (below) it is
possible to calculate the minimum wall thickness for any given size and pressure class of
pipe.

T = p x d / (2σ + p)
Where: T = minimum wall thickness (mm)
p = internal pressure (MPa)
d = mean external diameter (mm)
σ = design stress (MPa)

For example, the minimum wall thickness for a 250mm Class 10 HDPE pipe made from PE 80
material is:
T = 1.0 x 250/ ((2x6.3) + 1.0)
= 18.38 mm
Round up to 18.4 mm for manufacture and / or the appropriate SDR for the Class and
Material designation.
 5. Abrasion Resistance

A number of international investigations to assess the abrasion resistance of various plastic

materials have been carried out. Generally, the results of such investigations are expressed
as a loss of volume in relating to the original wall thickness. The result to date have varied in
regard to the abrasion resistance of various pipe materials. However, what they all show is
that plastics possess superior abrasion resistance relative to other pipe materials.

For example, in one investigation, HDPE pipes suffered wear to the extent of 4mm after
1600 hours while the corresponding wear in steel pipes after 1000 hours.

The graph below provides a further indication of relative wear rates.

Note: Dry sliding abrasion of a number of PE 80, PE 100 and some other grades of thermoplastic materials.