Quote:
Originally Posted by Frequitude
I’m not sure I agree with this 3-5 week proactive replacement plan.
Why can’t we just get the system up and running, excavate those weak spot location, and procure and stage new pipe in case it breaks. Then either just fix it if something actually breaks or planfully do it in the fall when water consumption is naturally lower?
Seems we’re taking a for sure outage during peak demand to avoid a maybe outage.
|
This is an interesting question.
It really depends on the probability of failure on this. Assuming the cause is the high tensioned cable snapping and you can have x number of cables snap per meter without catostophic failure and assuming you can reliably predict that failure point (which you likely can’t). What would be your replacement criteria?
If the line fails after you fill it you now need to locate the leak and drain the system again, and flush the system again before you start up. So if you don’t catch the future failure you add 10-14 days of unplanned outage.
Now if they are sitting waiting for parts I’d probably agree with you but if these are continuous work fronts then it likely makes sense to do them now if you think there is a 10% chance of failure in the next year.
It’s got to be an uncomfortable answer for the Engineer providing this information as they are being asked what is the minimum number we can repair and have reliable operation until the next planned outage.
You will also hydro test this system at or above design pressure which is going to put the legacy system under more stress than its seen since installation. So if you have marginal areas you may find out very quickly and have just wasted days filling and draining.
I think that we can be confident that these things are being considered