Foreign Sources

The issue of foreign produced pipe outside of the United States has transformed in significance and importance over the last few decades.  Beginning in the early 1980s foreign sources from China and Korea began showing up at construction sites due to its significantly lower cost.  That lower cost was quickly recognized as having a consequence given soon appearing experiences with noticeably low quality, difficulty in cutting and welding, ERW seems that would split during pressure testing, and much greater vulnerability to corrosion – all of which combined to provide significantly lower service life.

For galvanized steel pipe, the zinc finish would flake off during rolling the groove or threading.  Of the many piping systems common to any building property, condenser water, chilled water, hot water heating systems, and domestic water were the most often impacted given their larger size and extent.  Older experienced steam fitters would object to its use, yet rarely succeed in having it replaced.

The high incidence of problems associated with foreign produced pipe quickly resulted in some consulting engineering firms excluding foreign pipe products; specifying that all pipe materials must originate within the U.S.  Such restrictive specifications benefited many new construction projects when enforced, although foreign produced pipe was still commonly installed even though prohibited.

• Evidence Abounds

In our now more than 1,050 building investigations, we have firmly documented some of the largest piping failures being related to foreign sources.  In one such investigation, our photographic documentation of pipe stamps from 28 different countries easily explained a widespread chilled water piping failure after only 5 years of service.

For another, it was the straight line lawn sprinkler simulation for the domestic water pipe at a luxury condominium after only 4 years; a post award “value engineered” change order from copper pipe to Chinese galvanized steel.  Yet in another investigation, it was a mixture of pipe from Turkey, China, Thailand, Oman, Canada, and Yugoslavia that resulted in the destruction of an entire condenser water heat pump system in only 6 years.  A “dry” fire sprinkler system made of galvanized steel from Thailand lasted under 2 years at one university dorm before requiring replacement; a chiseled in stone prohibition against the use of foreign produced pipe for state run properties ignored.

Of course, most ASTM, FM, UL, or other pipe stamps can be easily removed using acetone.  For one client having spent over $350,000 for new pipe to replace the Chinese pipe that failed after 5 years, closer inspection found the new installation made using counterfeit U.S. pipe – evidenced by partially erased Korean pipe stamps over which new U.S. stamps were poorly spray painted.

In fact, counterfeit pipe is a major issue not only accomplished by changing pipe stamps, but by counterfeiting production documents, ERW heat certifications, chemical assays, and other elements of manufacture.  The net result – sub quality pipe having far lower strength and other physical characteristics.

• Cost Overrides Quality

Over time, the lower cost of foreign produced pipe products seems to have won out over the interest for higher quality.  Lower costs vs. longer service.  Also occurring, U.S. piping manufacturers  seem to have lowered the quality of their piping products.  Whether due to environmental regulations, recycling, green interests, cost cutting, or simply the need to meet the import threat – a lower quality American product has minimized the benefit which once existed.

• Cutting Corners

One common issue to both U.S. and foreign produced pipe is the exploitation of an extremely wide 25% manufacturing tolerance as allowed by ASTM.

Going back 50 years, virtually all steel pipe was manufactured either at or above ASTM specifications.  Our earlier investigations beginning in 1992 would consistently identify still high wall thickness measurements exceeding ASTM specifications for buildings constructed in the 1950s.  In order to produce the most accurate report possible, our early reports were modified to allow us to factor in an oversized allowance in order to more accurately estimate wall loss and therefore corrosion rate.

The exact opposite exists today.  Evidenced by dozens of evaluations of new pipe not yet even installed has shown a current wall thickness at or extremely close to its 12.5% lower minimum tolerance.  This is a consistent finding for any new pipe manufactured, whether foreign or U.S. produced.  Regardless of its vulnerability to corrosion, beginning service at 12.5% below ASTM specifications means 12.5% lower service life.  While less of a impact for a large diameter schedule 40 pipe, thinwall schedule 10 and even ultra thinwall schedule 7 pipe is often manufactured to this same 125% minimum permissible limit.

• Further Influences

Another common issue relates to “Value Engineering,” and the review of a piping design for opportunities to reduce cost.  This may be in the form of equipment changes, deleting equipment as unnecessary, or changes in pipe material, and of course, an allowance of always lower cost foreign pipe products is one of the first recommendations.

The once exclusive specification of seamless only pipe for HVAC applications has also changed to allow lower cost ERW seamed pipe which immediately introduces new vulnerabilities caused by poor manufacturing and either incomplete or defective weld seams.  It also allowed various forms of corrosion such as cell corrosion and MIC to focus at the weld seam – an area of greatest vulnerability.  For many examples of pipe failure that we present in our Photo Gallery section, defects at weld seams are common.  In that regard, American pipe products seem to provide much higher quality ERW seamed pipe over foreign sources.

Today, the installation and use of foreign produced pipe is widespread.  No longer are issues raised to its lower quality and greater vulnerability to corrosion, and concern due to its more limited lifespan seem to have been eclipsed by the need to cut costs.  Political correctness also rules in a now global marketplace where such facts can no longer be discussed.  “Green” credits are even realized by purchasing pipe from some foreign sources; the credit value now listed next to its other ASTM specifications.  When the issue of lower cost foreign produced pipe is raised as a potential contributor to a high corrosion condition, that argument is typically dismissed.  Even metallurgists will argue that foreign pipe meets ASTM specifications and is therefore chemically equal, when reality, guided by hundreds of ultrasonic investigations, proves different.

The net result is that corrosion problems will continue to increase in frequency and severity as more recently constructed building properties using foreign pipe products continue to age.  For many, the application of the best maintenance and corrosion control practices will have unavoidably failed.   More photos on this subject are available Here.

© Copyright 2023 – William P. Duncan, CorrView International, LLC