Comparison of GRP Pipes with Steel & Polyethylene Pipes

Farassan Manufacturing & Industrial Company

Comparison of GRP Pipes with Steel &

Polyethylene Pipes

Contact Us:

Address: No 249, 22 Ave ,Eram, Blvd, Shiraz, Iran

Phone: (+98)7132291918 – (+98)7132293350

Fax: (+98)7132272697

Email: info@farassan.org - bmr@farassan.org

Website: www.farassan.com
 Comparison of GRP Pipes with Steel & Polyethylene Pipes

Chapter 1: An introduction to GRP Pipes produced by Farassan Company under Faratec

Technology

1.1. Introduction
Pipe material selection is one of the most important issues in designing water delivery,
transmission and distribution systems. Different factories manufacture pipes with various
materials. In recent years, plastic and specially fiberglass pipes have been considered
significantly in water projects. The term “GRP” stands for Glass fiber Reinforced Plastic.
The GRP pipe was first introduced in 1948 in the oil industry. Choosing a GRP pipe as a cost-
effective, corrosion-resistant material is a better method than metal pipes. In the late 1950s,
high-diameter pipes entered the market, and GRP pipes were used in the chemical industry.
Because the pipe has good corrosion resistance, it was accepted in urban water and sewage
from 1960 to 1990. The efficiency of GRP pipe is related to its life time, strength and
corrosion resistance. Another advantage of GRP pipes is the lack of environmental problems.
The production and use of GRP pipes in various fields of industry, construction projects, etc.,
does not pose any environmental risk. This is because that all raw materials used for this
kind of pipes are neutralized after chemical reactions.

Also, in a water supply or sewage transmission network, various fittings such as Tee, Elbow,
Reducers, etc. are used as needed. Therefore, it should be said that in GRP pipes, it is
possible to produce fittings in different forms, which in addition to increasing their
installation capability, makes it possible to reduce the number of fittings used and also
produce fittings with the least pressure loss and friction against fluid passage.
Farassan Manufacturing & Industrial Company, a leader in the development of GRP pipe
technology, as a member of the country's industrial society, is proud to have been
continuously operating in the composite industry for more than 33 years since 1986. It
started in 1996 and during its activity in the mentioned fields, it has been able to transfer
and localize the production technology and equipment of GRP lines to establish its position
as one of the leaders in designing, producing and supplying GRP pipes at the international
level. The production of kilometers of GRP pipes in the range of 15 to 4000 mm with a
working pressure of 1 to 100 bar for use in hundreds of projects. Industrial in water and
sewage, industrial waste waters, irrigation, oil and gas, petrochemicals and other industries
is only a part of the company's record.
In Farassan Industrial Manufacturing Company, GRP products are made with a special type
of resin reinforced with glass fibers. Very high, long life, easy and fast installation as the top
generation of pipes and in comparison with other pipes has a special and worthy position
and is the most economical option compared to other pipes, so there are various
applications for them, most of which are :
 Water supply lines,
 Sewerage and wastewater collection and transmission lines
 Surface water collection lines
 Chemical, oil, gas and petrochemical industries.
 Comparison of GRP Pipes with Steel & Polyethylene Pipes

In this report, we have tried to consider the technical and economic issues regarding the use
of Faratec GRP pipes as an alternative for polyethylene or steel pipes. Farassan Company is
ready to hold technical briefing sessions in this regard and to answer the questions in
person. In general, the company can provide its services to customers in the following ways:
A) Providing all engineering services alongside and in line with esteemed customers
B) The company has the ability to carry out the project in the form of EPC and EPCF
C) Technical and complete training of the desired forces of the employer or the respected
consultant of the project
D) Sending consultants and technical inspectors to the site and reviewing any problems
in implementation and cooperation to solve it.

1.2. Introduction of GRP pipes produced by Farassan company under Faratec technology
Fiberglass pipes were first used in the United States by Perault Fiber Cast Company to deal
with extreme corrosion in the oil extraction industry. In the production of the mentioned
pipes, manual production method was used on wooden molds.
One of the first experiences of using high-quality GRP pipes (1600 and 1700 mm) in the
world is the water transmission line from Karun River to Imam Khomeini Port (Khuzestan
Province, Iran) to supply water to the region's petrochemical facilities, which was started in
1976 by the American company Owens-Corning. This line is now in service with a maximum
capacity after 45 years of operation. It is worth mentioning that in 2008, in order to increase
the water supply capacity in this project, due to the increase in water demand in
petrochemical projects in the special economic zone of Mahshahr (parallel to the previous
line), a new GRP pipeline has been supplied and installed by Farassan Company and is in
operation.
Faratec Company now offers technological services for GRP pipes to companies in South
Korea, Turkey, Romania, etc. GRP pipes are commonly referred to as engineered pipes. In
other words, according to the need of the project and its specifications, GRP pipe is designed
and produced. In other words, the application of engineering principles in all stages of the
project, including the production, supply and implementation of these pipes will play a
direct role in the final efficiency of the project. The choice of Faratec pipes depends on the
conditions and type of application.
Since the Faratec pipes are composed of a combination of fibers and resins with special
ratios, choosing the right ingredients and the accurate amount of materials and choosing the
right process and arrangement, can results in pipes with the desired properties. Also, in each
type of produced pipes, by changing the composition and amount of resin and fibers,
products with different resistance and specifications can be produced. Here are some of the
features and benefits of Faratec GRP pipes:
 High resistance against corrosions caused by fluid and soil around the pipe
 Suitable friction coefficient for fluid flow (highly polished the inner surface)
 Fittings suitable for high execution speed and sealing.
 Very light weight of GRP pipe compared to steel, concrete and polyethylene pipes
 Very long service life (service life of Faratec pipes is about 50 years)
 Comparison of GRP Pipes with Steel & Polyethylene Pipes

 Very low operating costs

 High mechanical resistance in the axial and hoo direction (in the circular direction
even more than steel)
 Ability to run on a steep slope
 Ability to run in mountainous areas, earthquake-prone areas, loose soils and ...
 High corrosion resistance due to fluid and soil around the pipe
 Aboveground installation capability

In Fig. 1.1, different applications of GRP Pipes are presented. Also, in tables 1.1 and 1.2,
technical specifications and advantages of GRP Pipes are presented.

Fig. 1.1. different applications of GRP Pipes

Table: 1.1: GRP Pipes Technical Specifications

Pipe Material GRP
Maximum axial tensile strength (Mpa) 56 - 125
Maximum Hoop tensile strength (Mpa) 342 - 394
Poisson's ratio 0.22 – 0.3
Axial modulus of elasticity (GPa) 9.4 – 11.7
Hoop modulus of elasticity (GPa) 9.2 – 32.9
Hazen-Williams friction coefficient 150-165
Specific Weight 1.7 - 2
 Comparison of GRP Pipes with Steel & Polyethylene Pipes

Table 1.2.: GRP Pipes Aspects and Advantages

Aspects Advantages
- Long service life
- No need for internal and external coatings, cathodic protection or any other
Resistant against corrosion
common methods
- Hydraulic specifications remain constant over time
Service life 50 years - Maximum economical effectiveness
Low weight ( lower than ½ of - Reduce the cost of loading and unloading
polyethylene pipes ) - No need for heavy equipment and finally lower installation and operation costs
- Reduce the number of connections and installation time
12 m branches
- Ability to carry more pipes in one trailer and reduce shipping costs
- Low coefficient of friction reduces pumping costs and operating costs
Very smooth inner side
- Reducing the accumulation of sediments on the inner surface of the pipe
- Secure and effective connection of pipes in order to seal as best as possible
- Ease of connection and thus reduce installation time
Two-washer reka couplings
- The possibility of partial angular deviations along the line of connection and thus
the possibility of removing the elbows at a low angle direction changes.
- Ability to supply pipes along the length and diameter required by the customer.
Flexibility in production
- Ability to produce any fittings based on customer order
- Possibility of using pipes with lower working pressure than other pipes due to
Leading technology
lower wave velocity in the pipe wall
Manufactured based on advanced - High quality and stable products in the world that ensure customer confidence
international standard and trust in product performance

1.3. Experiments performed on GRP pipes in Farassan company

Given that GRP pipes specifications are based on the Manufacturer Standard, their ultimate
efficiency depends on compliance with the requirements of international standards
regarding the required performance characteristics. These performance characteristics are
in the form of production quality control tests, qualification tests and competency control,
which should be considered in the production and supply of GRP pipes.
Generally, Quality control tests are applied at the time of production to the raw materials,
the final product and production process and include chemical and mechanical tests. The
first step in quality control of GRP pipes is to control the quality of raw materials. Certainly,
the quality of raw materials (including matrix and reinforcement) will have a major impact
on the long-term behavior and longevity of GRP pipes.
Qualification tests are long-term tests that aim to study the long-term behavior of GRP pipes.
It is worth mentioning based on International and national standards for GRP pipe only
long-term test results can be used for pipeline system design data and related calculations,
and short-term test results have only a quality control aspect. Unlike metal pipes, these
pipes do not corrode and react chemically with the surrounding environment, but they are
affected over time by phenomena such as creep and Aging
On the other hand, the useful life of pipes that do not fail due to these phenomena is
generally considered to be 50 years. As a result, a series of experiments are performed to
investigate long-term mechanical and chemical behavior (useful life of 50 years) is
necessary. Due to the cases in which GRP pipes may fail, tests have been proposed in
international standards, most of which are as follows:

A: Hydrostatic Design Basis (HDB) test: Using this test (Figure 1-2), the samples are
subjected to hydrostatic pressure by using different strain gauges in the samples under test
 Comparison of GRP Pipes with Steel & Polyethylene Pipes

and obtaining failure time and strain-time regression diagram. The tests are performed for
up to 10,000 hours (more than 1.5 years), then the logarithmic diagram is extrapolated to
438,000 hours (50 years of useful life). In this experiment, the goal is to study the long-term
behavior of GRP pipes in order to determine their pressure class.

Fig.1.2. HDB Test performed in Farassan Co.

B: Long-Term Ring Bending Strain (sb): In this test, the goal is to study the long-term
behavior of the pipes due to bending and ovality of the pipe. It should be noted that when
the pipe is subjected to external loading (in underground pipes due to the weight of the
topsoil and traffic load), the cross section of the pipe changes. Over time, this increase in
deflection because of creep will eventually cause the pipe to fail. In this experiment, the goal
is to find a strain that the pipe fails over a period of 50 years due to oval creep.

A: Strain Corrosion test: This test (Figure 1-3) is to determine the chemical resistance of
pipes in a section of deflected pipe. In GRP pipes that are subject to bending, due to the
presence of a strain in the deflected pipe wall, strain-induced corrosion occurs, which can
cause the pipe to fail in the long term. The severity of this phenomenon is directly related to
the severity of the corrosion of the environment and the amount of deflection and, of course,
the strain in the pipe wall.

Fig.1.3. Strain Corrosion Test performed in Farassan Co.

 Comparison of GRP Pipes with Steel & Polyethylene Pipes

D: Long Term Specific ring Stiffness: In this test, the goal is to estimate the pipe stiffness
reduction over time and under the effect of loading and finally to calculate the factor of pipe
creep factor. The creep factor, which is one of the important parameters of structral analysis
in GRP pipes, is calculated as the result of dividing the 50-year stiffness of the pipe by its
initial stiffness.

1.4. GRP pipe connection system

GRP pipes can be connected in two ways: rigid (often for aboveground pipes) or flexible
(often for burial pipes). In the flexible connection of pipes, a joint connection piece called
Reka coupling is used. Inside the coupling there are three grooves inside which the rubber
washers are placed (Figure 1-4), which is why the pipes in this type of connection can allow
some longitudinal and lateral movement inside the coupling without coming out of the seal.
These features, if the pipe is installed in loose soils with a subsidence potential, can easily
match the pipeline with substrate deposits.

Fig.1.4: location of the pipe inside the coupling of the Reka (right)
and Angle change, horizontal movement and axis change at Reka coupling location (left)
 Comparison of GRP Pipes with Steel & Polyethylene Pipes

Chapter 2: Technical Comparison of Faratec GRP Pipes & Polyethylene and Steel pipes
Considering the variety of pipes with different materials (steel, ductile iron, concrete,
asbestos, polyethylene and fiberglass) in the market for water and sewage as well as
industrial applications, and the resulting intense competition in this field, owners should
choose the best option based on technical and economic aspects. The increasing use of GRP
pipes forces managers to carry out large-scale research on the advantages and
disadvantages of this type of pipe. Therefore, in this chapter of the report, the technical
comparison of Faratec GRP pipes with polyethylene and steel pipes is presented.

2.1. Comparison of Faratec GRP pipes & Steel Pipes

 Technical comparison of steel and GRP pipes - Engineering point of view
Table 2-1 presents the mechanical specifications of GRP and steel pipes with explanations
for each parameter. It is noteworthy that the low quality of the soils in the design area (due
to high salinity and the presence of high corrosive chemical compounds) can lead to severe
corrosion of metal pipes, which shows the importance of using corrosion-resistant pipes. For
this purpose, a sample of high corrosion rate in steel pipes used in a project in Khuzestan
province, Iran is shown in Fig.2.1.
Another important note is that the overloading of steel pipes may results in deformation to
ellipse form due to low elastic coefficient.

Table 2.1: Quantitative Comparison of GRP & Steel Pipes Specifications

(LeBlanc and Palsson, 2013)
Material/ Technical Steel
GRP Pipes Notes
Specifications Pipes
Maximum Axial Tensile The hoop mechanical resistance of GRP pipes is higher than
207 56 - 125
Strength (Mpa) that of steel. The axial strength of GRP pipes is sufficient and
Maximum Radial about 60% of steel pipes, which can be provided if
207 342 - 394
Tensile Strength (Mpa) necessary .
Manning Roughness Lower roughness of GRP pipes and their greater resistance
0.012 0.009
Coefficients to corrosion cause more durability, lower energy loss and
Hazen-Williams thus reduces the cost of coating and protection, pumping
110 150-165
Roughness Coefficients and operation in the project compared to steel pipes.
About 20 At Least The longer service life of GRP pipes is the lower the cost of
Service Life
Years 50 Years operation and maintenance costs than steel pipes.
The weight of GRP pipes is a quarter of steel, which, in
addition to the variety of pipe connection methods, in
Relative Specific
7.8 1.7 - 2 addition to facilitating transportation and loading, makes it
Weight
easier to implement GRP pipes and thus reduces project
cost.
The lateral strain of the GRP pipe against the applied loads
Poisson’s Coefficient 0.3 0.22 – 0.3
is equal to Steel pipes.
 Comparison of GRP Pipes with Steel & Polyethylene Pipes

Fig.2.1. Sample of Steel Pipes High Corrosion (Khuzestan Province)

As also shown in Table 2-1, lower roughness of GRP pipes and their high resistance and
durability against corrosion (stability of roughness during useful life) will require less
primary energy and less energy loss over time. For steel pipes, not only is the initial
roughness higher than that of GRP pipes (the coefficient of friction of Hazen-Williams is 110
while for GRP pipes it is 150), but also over time the amount of pipe roughness increases
due to sedimentation and corrosion of the passing fluid. Considering the relationship
between Hazen-William (eq.1) and considering the same length, diameter and flow rate for
both steel and GRP lines, it can be said that the use of GRP pipes reduces energy loss by 77%,
which in turn reduces total pump head and reducing the pumping cost.
Eq.1:
 Comparison of GRP Pipes with Steel & Polyethylene Pipes

Figure 2-2 shows an estimate of the amount of energy consumed during the operation of
GRP and steel pipes in a given water transmission line project. In this figure, the energy
stability required for pumping in GRP pipes compared to steel pipes is determined.

Fig.2.2. Estimation of consumed energy rate for GRP and Steel pipes

 Technical comparison of steel and GRP pipes - environmental point of view

Due to the high durability of GRP pipes and their non-corrosion property, it is clear that
there is no change in physical quality of the passing fluid. Also, the existence of the health
certificate of the Ministry of Health and WRAS of Frassan GRP pipes (Figure 2-3) indicates
that there is no change in the chemical quality of the passing fluid (even for drinking
purposes). In addition, unlike steel, GRP pipes can be recovered and used in other fields after
their service life.

Fig.2.3. Health ministry (Iran) and WRAS (UK) Certificate of Faratec GRP Pipes
 Comparison of GRP Pipes with Steel & Polyethylene Pipes

In general, the positive environmental effects of GRP pipes compared to steel pipes can be
expressed as follows:
 Sealing of GRP pipe connections
 Non-emission of industrial and sanitary effluents into the environment
 Ability to perform pipe repair operations on site in the shortest time and minimum
cost and prevent the spread of fluid in the environment.
 Impossibility of contamination to enter the flow inside the pipe
 Possibility of easy washing of the pipeline and abrasion resistance in sewage
networks
 Productivity of the pipeline after its useful life
 Possibility to sell pipes after the expiration date and reuse with change of use
 Possibility of using pipes as a powder as a concrete additive (filler)
 Resistance of GRP pipes to various types of erosion such as corrosion due to fluid and
surrounding environment
 Lack of chemical reaction between the pipe and the fluid passing through it
 No change in the characteristics of the pipe due to decreasing and increasing the
ambient temperature
 Resistance to sunlight (UV) and no change in the mechanical properties of the pipe
 No change in the characteristics of the fluid passing through the pipe
 No effect on the quality of drinking water

 Technical comparison of steel and GRP pipes - in terms of labor

Construction and installation of pipes is one of the most important parts related to labor in a
water transmission line project. Due to the high speed of installation of GRP pipes using
coupling connections and low weight of pipes, it can be clearly stated that the use of GRP
pipes causes less time and manpower in the implementation of the project.
In this regard, research shows that the average construction and installation time ratio of
one meter of GRP to steel pipe with the same manpower in different projects is 28/58, which
accelerates the implementation of the project with GRP pipes in less than half a time. (Shah
Khan and Jordaan, 2004).

 Technical comparison of steel and GRP pipes - in terms of installation and operation
If installed underground, steel pipes are less durable than GRP pipes. Also, as a result of steel
pipe protection methods (protection by coating and cathodic protection), it increases the
costs of using it.
The welding of steel pipe (especially in diameters less than 800 mm) eliminates the epoxy
paint coating on the inside surface of the pipes, which cannot be repaired due to the low
diameter. This causes the pipes to corrode and damage more than the weld points.
The wave propagation speed of steel pipes (C = 1150-1300 m / s) is much higher than GRP
pipes (C = 300-500 m / s), which in turn increases the risks of water hammer. Therefore, in
order to control the water hammer, we have to use protective equipment in the project line,
and as a result, we incur high costs in the project.
 Comparison of GRP Pipes with Steel & Polyethylene Pipes

The low number of repairs as well as the higher speed of repairs in GRP pipes can lead to
lower operating costs (in addition to lower energy costs) than steel pipes. For example,
comparing the number of repairs performed on steel and GRP lines between the Ghadir
(Khuzestan) water supply project (Table 2-2) between 1989 and 1993 shows that the
percentage of elbow repairs and joints in GRP pipes was much lower than steel pipes.

Table 2-2: Repair of steel and GRP pipe fittings in Ghadir water supply project from 1989 to 1993

Description Total Repairs Repairs (%)

GRP Coupling 9207 11 0.12
Steel Mechanical joints 873 13 1.5
GRP elbow 70 1 1.4
Steel elbow 72 2 2.8

Comparing the report of repairs of old and new GRP and steel pipelines related to Southeast
Khuzestan water supply project provided by Southeast Water Operation Company shows
that the old GRP pipes (with 115 km and 29 years of operation) From 2012 to 2014, they
had only 15 repairs (0.013% of the total length of the GRP pipe), which is only 4.21% of the
total steel and GRP repairs in these three years. Meanwhile, steel pipes (with 325 km and 29
years of operation) during the years 2012 to 2014 had 340 repairs (0.104% of the total
length of steel pipes), which is 95.51% of the total repairs in three years.
Also, the hours spent for repairing the GRP line in these three years are equal to 66.5 hours,
which is on average equal to 4.43 hours for each repair, while the hours spent for repairing
the steel line in these three years are equal to 2280 hours. It averages 6.71 hours per repair,
which is approximately 1.5 times the average time spent on each GRP repair.
Finally, it is enough to mention the following two examples in the implementation of the
project with GRP pipe as a replacement for steel pipe:
According to a report from a Canadian hydroelectric power plant project, comparing the cost
of implementing and operating a 1400-foot water intake using GRP and steel pipes reduces
the cost of building and installing a transmission line by 34 and 30 percent, respectively,
when using GRP pipes. (LeBlanc and Palsson, 2013).
Also on a 32-kilometer water transfer route in southern Australia, after comparing all the
costs of preparing, executing, operating and maintaining the options for using GRP and steel
pipes, it was suggested that the use of GRP pipes would reduce up to 2.8 million dollar
(Lawson and Hobart, 2012).

2.2. Comparison of Faratec GRP pipes & polyethylene Pipes

According to research and experiments performed on GRP and polyethylene pipes, some
mechanical characteristics of these pipes are presented in Table 2-3 (LeBlanc and Palsson,
2013).
 Comparison of GRP Pipes with Steel & Polyethylene Pipes

Table 2-3: Comparison of some mechanical characteristics of GRP and polyethylene pipes

(LeBlanc and Palsson, 2013

GRP Pipes HDPE Pipes

Maximum nominal pressure (bar) 50 25

Maximum fluid temperature °c 160 80

Maximum axial strength Mpa 125 32

Maximum hoop strength Mpa 394 32

Thermal expansion coefficient 10^-6/ᵒC 30 180

Maximum produced diameter mm 4000 2500

Maximum axial elasticity Gpa 13.1 1.03

Maximum radial elasticity Gpa 39.30 1.03

Maximum Hazen-Williams Friction Coefficient 165 150

Maximum long term hoop strength Mpa 144.8 8.274

Maximum long term axial strength Mpa 60.0 8.27

The results presented in this table show that:

The radial and axial tensile modulus of the GRP pipe is more than the polyethylene pipe,
which causes less strain due to the loads.
Also short-term and long-term radial and axial resistance of GRP pipes is much higher than
polyethylene.
There is a limit to the production of diameter and pressure in polyethylene pipes.
The maximum fluid temperature that can be passed through polyethylene pipes is much
lower than GRP and also the coefficient of thermal expansion in polyethylene pipes is much
higher than GRP which causes more strains of these pipes than GRP pipes at high
temperatures.

 Disadvantages of polyethylene pipes

In this section, the issues that cause problems with the use of polyethylene pipes are briefly
mentioned:
1- The method of installing polyethylene pipes is such that it slows down the execution
speed. This is especially difficult when using high diameter polyethylene pipes.
2. The hardness of polyethylene pipes is lower than other pipes, which causes a lot of
damage during operation and operation.
3. These pipes are vulnerable to vermin such as mice.
4- The resistance of polyethylene pipes with large diameter is low against incoming loads.
 Comparison of GRP Pipes with Steel & Polyethylene Pipes

5. The inner surface of the polyethylene pipes protrudes during installation and welding,
which increases the hydraulic drop.
6. Due to the fact that the structure of polyethylene pipes is in the category of thermoplastic
polymer pipes, the mechanical and chemical properties of this pipe are highly dependent on
temperature. Researchers have shown that increasing the temperature from -10 to -70C in
polyethylene pipes reduces the maximum resistance of the pipes from 32 to 7 MPa (Figure
2-4.

Figure 2-4. stress-strain curves of polyethylene pipes at different temperatures (Merah et.al, 2006)

7. The service life of polyethylene pipes at very low or very high temperatures is lower than
GRP pipes.
8- The coefficient of thermal expansion of polyethylene pipes is 6.5 times that of GRP pipes,
where causing the pipe to separate at the connection point. It should be noted that this
coefficient for GRP pipes has no effect on the connection of GRP pipes due to coupling
connection.
9- Polyethylene pipes are limited in the production of different diameters and are produced
only in diameters of 16 to 2500 mm.
10. Polyethylene pipes are limited in production at high working pressures.
11- The weight of polyethylene pipes is about 2 to 2.5 times that of GRP pipes, which
includes transportation and execution problems, and as a result, increasing the time and cost
of execution for polyethylene pipes.
 Technical specifications of Fratech GRP pipes vs PE
1- Corrosion resistance
GRP pipes are resistant to corrosion caused by a variety of sulfate and destructive soils from
the external side as well as internal oxidation and do not require any internal or external
coating. This saves a lot of time and money on the project. The service life of GRP pipes is at
least 50 years.
 Comparison of GRP Pipes with Steel & Polyethylene Pipes

2- Roughness coefficient
The roughness coefficient of GRP pipes is superior to polyethylene pipes. Also, this
coefficient for GRP pipes remains constant over time. According to the AWWA M45
standard, this coefficient in the Hazwn-Williams pressure loss equation for GRP pipes is
between 165-150 but for polyethylene pipes it is about 145 to 140 and this reduces the
diameter of the GRP pipe for equal flow rates. As a result, the cost per cubic meter of water
transferred decreases.
3- Connections and fittings
Pipe connections are made of GRP pipe and are equipped with a special rubber washer. This
type of joint is done with a hand jack and 2 clamps around the pipe. This connection
significantly increases the installation speed compared to other types of pipes and greatly
reduces installation costs.
Other fittings such as Elbow, Tee, Reducer, etc. are produced in any shape and size of GRP
based on ISO, AWWA, ASTM standards. According to the production process of these fittings,
it is possible to produce any type of standard or non-standard connection according to the
design needs.
4- Weight
GRP pipes weigh up to 45% of the weight of the corresponding polyethylene pipes
(especially in high pressure classes and large diameters) and this eliminates the need for
heavy cranes for loading, unloading and installation, which will reduce costs. At the same
time, the cost of transporting, which accounts for a significant percentage of the total cost of
the project, is reduced.
5- Service life
Due to its numerous advantages, especially corrosion resistance and easy maintenance, the
service life of GRP pipes is at least 50 years.
6. Installation
GRP pipes are very easy and economical to install. These pipes can be buried in the ground
up to a depth of 16 meters or are installed above ground. Also, if buried at a depth of at least
1.5 meters, they can withstand live loads such as traffic load.
7- Mechanical resistance and impact tolerance
Due to the fact that GRP pipes are composite, it is possible to design the pipe based on the
required mechanical strength against the incoming loads. Therefore, the pipe is designed
based on the type of use with a very high safety factor. The mechanical strength of GRP pipes
is greater than that of polyethylene pipes, and polyethylene pipes are highly vulnerable to
impact. It is worth noting that it is possible to design semi-steel (GRP) pipes with hoop
resistance (up to 800 MPa) even higher than steel pipes.
 Comparison of GRP Pipes with Steel & Polyethylene Pipes

8. Burial depth
The maximum allowable depth of burial of GRP pipes (2500 stiffness class) is between 7 and
16 meters according to the conditions of native soil and
substitute soil. In addition, if the pipes are buried at a depth of more than 1 meter, it is
possible to bear any traffic load.
9- Operating costs
Due to its resistance to corrosion and impact, as well as its long service life, GRP pipes have
no maintenance costs during operation. Also, the energy required to pump water over time
is less than that of polyethylene pipes.
In addition to reducing the direct costs of the project, the use of GRP pipes is a very
important factor in economic estimates of project time. This means that the faster the
operation of the transmission line, the better the investment will be made and the speed of
implementation of this project with GRP pipes will be a maximum of half the time required
for polyethylene pipes.
10. Elasticity and flexibility
If loaded into polyethylene pipes more than usual, they deform quickly, which is usually not
reversible. In the case of GRP pipes, due to the appropriate elasticity coefficient, they change
against transient loads and return to their original state again.
12. High pressure tolerance
Another advantage of GRP pipes is their ability to withstand relatively high pressures, which
makes these pipes a good choice for transmission lines and high pressure process lines. It is
worth noting that polyethylene pipes can only produce up to 25 bar the working pressure
(in small diameters), which is a major limitation for them.
13. Operating temperature
The maximum operating temperature of GRP pipes is up to 160 degrees Celsius, which is
completely superior to polyethylene pipes.
14- Proper adaptation to the environment
Due to the high durability of GRP pipes and their non-corrosion, it is quite clear that there is
no change in physical quality in the passing fluid. Also, the existence of the health certificate
of the Ministry of Health (Iran) and WRAS (UK) of Farassan GRP pipes indicates that there is
no change in the chemical quality of the passing fluid (even for drinking purposes). In
addition, after their useful life, GRP pipes will be able to be recovered and used in other
fields.

2.3. Comparison of polyethylene, steel and Faratec GRP pipes

Based on all the above and according to the standards of production and installation of steel,
polyethylene and GRP pipes, the technical comparison of these pipes has been done in the
form of the following table:
 Comparison of GRP Pipes with Steel & Polyethylene Pipes

Table 2-4: General comparison of polyethylene, steel and GRP pipes

Row Effective Factors GRP Pipes Steel Pipes PE Pipes

Physical strength of the pipe and external
1 Good Excellent Medium
load resistance
The roughness of the interior wall and its
2 Excellent weak Excellent
stability during the design period
3 Abrasion resistance Excellent Medium Good
4 Maximum working temperature medium Excellent Weak
5 Impact resistance Good Excellent Weak
6 Useful life Excellent Medium Good
7 Production in all required diameters Excellent Excellent Good
8 Production Speed Excellent Excellent Good
9 Speed and ease of installation Excellent Medium Medium
10 Ease of branching medium Excellent Good
11 Ease of operation Excellent Excellent Excellent
12 Ease of maintenance Good Excellent Excellent
13 Transfer and transportation speed Excellent Medium Good
14 Hydraulic pressure drop per 1000 meters Excellent Weak Good
15 Existence of access to raw materials medium Excellent Excellent
16 No need for external insulation Excellent Weak Excellent
No need for internal coating and corrosion
17 Excellent Weak Excellent
resistance
Existence of experience, skills and
18 Excellent Excellent Excellent
equipment needed to run
19 Outdoors storable Good Good Weak
20 High pressures application Good Excellent Weak
21 Weight in large diameters Excellent Weak Good
22 Ease of connection Excellent Excellent Excellent

In order to provide a comparison of the above table quantitatively to each of the

descriptions provided, a score is given as follows, and finally the score of each pipe type is
determined based on this and is presented in the form of Table 2-5.
Excellent (4 points), Good (3 points), Medium (2 points), Poor (1 point)

Table 2-5: Technical score of polyethylene and GRP pipes based on table 2.4 comparison

Material Score
GRP 77
PE 65
CS 64

Given the advantages shown in Table 2-5, it is clear that GRP pipes are technically better
than polyethylene and carbon steel pipes.
 Comparison of GRP Pipes with Steel & Polyethylene Pipes

Chapter 3: Economic comparison of GRP pipes With polyethylene and steel pipes
3.1. Economic comparison
Comparison of GRP pipes with each of the other pipes is provided below.

 Economic comparison of Faratec GRP pipes with polyethylene

The difference between the cost of supply and implementation of polyethylene pipes
compared to GRP increases with larger diameters, so that the cost of supplying polyethylene
pipes from 17% (for diameter 400 mm) to 65% (for diameter 1600 mm) is higher than GRP
pipes. Also, the cost of implementing polyethylene pipes is from 1% to 16% more than GRP
pipes.
 Economic comparison of Faratec GRP pipes with steel
The difference between the cost of supply and implementation of steel pipes compared to
GRP increases with increasing diameter, so that the cost of supplying steel pipes from 5% to
67% more than GRP pipes. Also, the cost of implementing steel pipes is from 28% to 158%
more than GRP pipes.

It should be noted that the above costs are only related to the initial investment costs of
pipes and the operating costs as well as the return time of the investment are not taken into
account. Involving these values in comparisons will increase the differences

3.2. Conclusion
In general, it can be concluded that the use of GRP pipes as a replacement for steel and
polyethylene pipes for each group of employer, contractor and operator will have the
following benefits:

 The benefits of using GRP pipes for contractors

 The low weight of GRP pipes compared to polyethylene pipes (about 45%) and steel pipes
(30 to 60%) not only speeds up transportation and implementation, but also reduces the
manpower spent on construction and installation. The pipes of a project become a water
transmission line. As a result, the return on investment will happen much faster, which will
lead to greater satisfaction and peace of mind for investors to enter into such projects for
investment.
 Connecting GRP pipes faster than welding steel and polyethylene pipes reduces project
execution time, less manpower in GRP pipes and thus much faster project return on
investment.

 The benefits of using GRP pipes for employers

 The longer service life of GRP pipes than polyethylene pipes will not require re-investment
and thus save costs.
 Less manpower required for installation and also faster project execution with GRP pipes in
less than half the time of steel and polyethylene pipes will cost less for employers.
 Also, the return on investment will happen much faster, which will lead to greater
satisfaction and peace of mind for investors to enter into such projects for investment.
 Comparison of GRP Pipes with Steel & Polyethylene Pipes

 The benefits of using GRP pipes for operators.

 Low number of repairs and also higher speed of repairs in GRP pipes can reduce the
operating cost compared to PE and CS pipes.
 The high ease of maintenance of GRP pipes compared to PE and CS pipes will not lead to
long-term cut-off in the network.
 Proper flexibility of GRP pipe coupling prevents them from failing during earthquakes and
Land subsidence during operation.

References

1- Daniel RA, Nagtegaal G (2001) Pedestrian bridge of pultruded sections as result of ecological
design. In: Proceedings of the EPTA seminar, Roermond, Oct 2001.
2- Jain, R and Lee, L. (2012). Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) Composites for infrastructure
Applications. Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
3- Lawson, A. and Hobart, L. (2012). Glass reinforced plastic (GRP) in the design of a bore
water transfer system. . Parsons Brinckerhoff, Adelaide, SA.
4- LeBlanc, J. and Palsson, G. (2013). Large Diameter Fiberglass Pipes in Pressure Applications.
ASCE Pipeline, vol2.
5- Merah. M, Saghir. F, Khan. Z and Bazoune. A (2006). Effect of temperature on tensile
properties of HDPE pipe material. Journal of Plastics rubber and composites.
6- Shah Khan, M.Z. and Jordaan, M. (2004). Assessment of filament-wound glass-reinforced
plastic (GRP) pipe technology for RAN surface ship application. Defense Science and
Technology Organization. DSTO-GD-0375.