Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

  • Congratulations waross on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

Septic Tank Installation 1

Status
Not open for further replies.

freddmann

Civil/Environmental
Dec 16, 2021
1
0
0
ZA
Greetings to all the hydraulic engineering gurus on the forum. My question refers to a situation where two adjacent septic tanks were installed underground in a high water-table area. The bottoms and sides of the tanks are now bulging inwards, somewhat dislodging the interconnecting pipes thus allowing groundwater to stream into the tanks. (The cause of the tanks bulging is my assumption based on a visual inspection) Each HDPE tank has a capacity of 12500 litre and weighs 450kg, has a diameter 2.8m, its height is 2.2m with a manhole of 450mm. See They were connected together with a 110mm PVC pipe at its side connector, some 200mm from its bottom. It also only has a 110mm breather pipe connected onto the inlet sewer line.

It was installed in compliance to a technical drawing by my employer. This drawing asks for a concrete footing onto which the tanks strapped with stainless steel cable, attached to eyebolts, embedded in the footing with chemical anchors. Backfilling around the sides of the tanks is a 5% cement sand mix compacted at 300mm wide to the top of the tanks. However I later discovered this process conflicts with the manufacturers design and method by far.
The manufacturer specifies that the tanks should be encapsulated (bottom and side) in a shell of soil-crete mix of 1:6 ratio (about 16%) but adds "for excavated holes deeper than 2150mm or where a high water table is anticipated, backfill material must consist of a concrete mix of 5% cement and 95% selected granular material" So the question is why would they specify "16% cement" for regular ground type and a mere 5% cement mix for deep/waterlogged ground type? (Again I assume this 5% may be a misprint that should have read 15%). These tanks are used for conservancy to be emptied regularly by means of honey suckers, implying that they must be able to “move or breath” since cold and hot as well as full and empty does make a difference in measurement or movement of the tanks. Hence all pipes joined to tank must have a degree of flexibility. Not the case with the drawing, which specified rigid interconnection pipe 300mm long.

The drawing allows water to seep in-between the concrete footing and tanks thus creating an up-thrust under tanks which caused them to deform as it pushes up against the strength of the anchors and the weight of the backfilling holding them down. As such I deemed the design/ drawing to be flawed. Since the tanks were emptied a few times, sucking water from one tank only while the other tank doesn't have a breather. Can the suction cause a lower atmospheric pressure in the tank causeing it to bulge inwards? Aided by the out higher outside atmospheric pressure and the groundwater pressure. Would you say the tanks deformed due to the 5% cement which I gauge aught to have been 15% or the due to buoyant force getting in under the tanks. Please disregard my assumptions give a detailed explanation as what would cause these tanks to deform/collapse. Thank you.
 
Replies continue below

Recommended for you

Well we can't see the drawing you can so difficult to comment.

Emptying water out MAY result in lower pressure which could create issues, but leaving such tanks empty is not a recommended practice.

The wording in the installation instruction keeps changing in terms of what it means by the back fill.

The base is "1:6 river sand/cement mix (dry mix – Slightly Moist)"
The normal backfill is: " 1:6 concrete/sand mix" -
The backfill for deep holes is "soil Crete mix of 5% cement and 95% selected granular material"

So might be three very different concrete mixes....

Getting water under the base and then emptying it could easily bend the base. How long were they left empty?



Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.
 
freddmann,

There are known knowns, things we know that we know; and there are known unknowns, things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns, things we do not know we don't know.

Without knowing the design strength of the tank, every comment is just speculation.

One would think that the design strength would be adequate for submergence in water. That information should come from the tank manufacturer.

The same applies for the tank suction issue. You need to know the suction pressure. With the suction pressure, you can ask the tank manufacturer if the tank can handle the suction.

The normal practice here in the U.S. is to place a concrete pad underneath the tank to counteract the buoyancy of the tank. The tank is then fastened with cables to the concrete.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top