Discussion: View Thread

My organization is contemplating if/when it is appropriate to show profiles versus plan-only on water main construction plans. Our projects are predominately urban in nature (alignment within roadway with numerous utility crossings), are 3,000-5,000 linear feet in length, and are both distribution system extension or replacement in nature. Pipe diameters are generally 8" and 12". We also have rural projects that are generally extensions along the shoulder of roadways. 

I am wondering if others have a decision framework to support the concept of omitting profiling water lines in similar circumstances. The argument is that omitting profiles on relatively smaller and less complex projects allows for more rapid plan development and construction. 



------------------------------
Will Bulloss
Blacksburg VA
(540) 207-2323
------------------------------

​We recently began working with the city of Quincy, MA and pushed out a package exactly as you are describing, water main replacement and improvements of approximately 11,000LF with plan view only. The city has done these types of packages in the past and expressed no concerns not having profiles, the main difference is all of the proposed pipe is intended to be replaced at the same line and grade of the old pipe, which theoretically will take care of any utility crossings and in the case of this city, minimize the amount of rock excavation. Past projects of new pipe in new trench in dense urban settings we have always shown profiles.

You can see several of the city's previous packages on their purchasing site, Quincy, MA - Current Bids

Quincyma		remove preview
Quincy, MA - Current Bids Please note: We have added a new feature; "CONTRACT AWARD" It is only the front page of the contract, but contains the amount and the terms. If you need a copy of the complete contract, please put in a FOIA request to purchasing@... View this on Quincyma >

------------------------------
Joshua Chabot P.E.
Tetra Tech
Marlborough MA
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 04-04-2019 21:07
From: Will Bulloss
Subject: Omitting Profiles from Waterline Construction Plans?

My organization is contemplating if/when it is appropriate to show profiles versus plan-only on water main construction plans. Our projects are predominately urban in nature (alignment within roadway with numerous utility crossings), are 3,000-5,000 linear feet in length, and are both distribution system extension or replacement in nature. Pipe diameters are generally 8" and 12". We also have rural projects that are generally extensions along the shoulder of roadways.

I am wondering if others have a decision framework to support the concept of omitting profiling water lines in similar circumstances. The argument is that omitting profiles on relatively smaller and less complex projects allows for more rapid plan development and construction.

I would appreciate any insight you all may have. 

------------------------------
Will Bulloss
Blacksburg VA
(540) 207-2323
------------------------------

The approach you outline is interesting, and I could see how a profile may not be needed if pipes are truly replaced at the same line and grade, because you would presumably already have some sort of record data. For more context on our applications, we typically design a new water main on a new alignment and grade (typically on the opposite side of the road) and keep the existing main in service until the new main is completed. In our application, new utility conflicts are present that have not been mitigated.



------------------------------
Will Bulloss
Blacksburg VA(540) 207-2323
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 04-05-2019 07:38
From: Joshua Chabot
Subject: Omitting Profiles from Waterline Construction Plans?

​We recently began working with the city of Quincy, MA and pushed out a package exactly as you are describing, water main replacement and improvements of approximately 11,000LF with plan view only. The city has done these types of packages in the past and expressed no concerns not having profiles, the main difference is all of the proposed pipe is intended to be replaced at the same line and grade of the old pipe, which theoretically will take care of any utility crossings and in the case of this city, minimize the amount of rock excavation. Past projects of new pipe in new trench in dense urban settings we have always shown profiles.

You can see several of the city's previous packages on their purchasing site, Quincy, MA - Current Bids

Quincyma		remove preview
Quincy, MA - Current Bids Please note: We have added a new feature; "CONTRACT AWARD" It is only the front page of the contract, but contains the amount and the terms. If you need a copy of the complete contract, please put in a FOIA request to <maskemail>purchasing@...</maskemail> View this on Quincyma >

------------------------------
Joshua Chabot P.E.
Tetra Tech
Marlborough MA

Original Message:
Sent: 04-04-2019 21:07
From: Will Bulloss
Subject: Omitting Profiles from Waterline Construction Plans?

My organization is contemplating if/when it is appropriate to show profiles versus plan-only on water main construction plans. Our projects are predominately urban in nature (alignment within roadway with numerous utility crossings), are 3,000-5,000 linear feet in length, and are both distribution system extension or replacement in nature. Pipe diameters are generally 8" and 12". We also have rural projects that are generally extensions along the shoulder of roadways.

I am wondering if others have a decision framework to support the concept of omitting profiling water lines in similar circumstances. The argument is that omitting profiles on relatively smaller and less complex projects allows for more rapid plan development and construction.

I would appreciate any insight you all may have. 

------------------------------
Will Bulloss
Blacksburg VA
(540) 207-2323
------------------------------

Having designed water main projects for nearly 50 years, I can state that we seldom used profiles. Several reasons are that most watermains are shallow bury - 5-feet here in Boston Area.  If a utility is located during construction and is in conflict with the proposed path of the water main, the main can be lowered or raised  (and insulated) to pass over or under the conflicting utility line.  Now, there are times when a profile may assist in the construction of a water line. If you have an area that contains large utility lines, a large number of utility lines, etc., a localized profile may be warranted.  Unlike sewer lines, water has more freedom of movement thus reducing the need of providing profiles. We do use profiles for specialized projects such as Horizontal Directional Drills and railroad crossings.  One other thing - the design engineer should walk the proposed water main route to identify possible areas of conflict and to make sure the main can be installed as planned.  After design is completed, another walk through should be done to backcheck the initial assumptions made early on during design. Too many young Engineers see this a below heir professional dignity and they are placing their firms at risk not to mention risk loss of clients.

------------------------------
Timothy Stinson P.E.
Holbrook MA
(781) 767-3163
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 04-09-2019 20:12
From: Will Bulloss
Subject: Omitting Profiles from Waterline Construction Plans?

The approach you outline is interesting, and I could see how a profile may not be needed if pipes are truly replaced at the same line and grade, because you would presumably already have some sort of record data. For more context on our applications, we typically design a new water main on a new alignment and grade (typically on the opposite side of the road) and keep the existing main in service until the new main is completed. In our application, new utility conflicts are present that have not been mitigated.



------------------------------
Will Bulloss
Blacksburg VA(540) 207-2323

Original Message:
Sent: 04-05-2019 07:38
From: Joshua Chabot
Subject: Omitting Profiles from Waterline Construction Plans?

​We recently began working with the city of Quincy, MA and pushed out a package exactly as you are describing, water main replacement and improvements of approximately 11,000LF with plan view only. The city has done these types of packages in the past and expressed no concerns not having profiles, the main difference is all of the proposed pipe is intended to be replaced at the same line and grade of the old pipe, which theoretically will take care of any utility crossings and in the case of this city, minimize the amount of rock excavation. Past projects of new pipe in new trench in dense urban settings we have always shown profiles.

You can see several of the city's previous packages on their purchasing site, Quincy, MA - Current Bids

Quincyma		remove preview
Quincy, MA - Current Bids Please note: We have added a new feature; "CONTRACT AWARD" It is only the front page of the contract, but contains the amount and the terms. If you need a copy of the complete contract, please put in a FOIA request to <maskemail>purchasing@...</maskemail> View this on Quincyma >

------------------------------
Joshua Chabot P.E.
Tetra Tech
Marlborough MA

Original Message:
Sent: 04-04-2019 21:07
From: Will Bulloss
Subject: Omitting Profiles from Waterline Construction Plans?

My organization is contemplating if/when it is appropriate to show profiles versus plan-only on water main construction plans. Our projects are predominately urban in nature (alignment within roadway with numerous utility crossings), are 3,000-5,000 linear feet in length, and are both distribution system extension or replacement in nature. Pipe diameters are generally 8" and 12". We also have rural projects that are generally extensions along the shoulder of roadways.

I am wondering if others have a decision framework to support the concept of omitting profiling water lines in similar circumstances. The argument is that omitting profiles on relatively smaller and less complex projects allows for more rapid plan development and construction.

I would appreciate any insight you all may have. 

------------------------------
Will Bulloss
Blacksburg VA
(540) 207-2323
------------------------------

Couldn't agree more with you regarding the value of walking the job before, during, and after construction. Thanks for your feedback.

------------------------------
Will Bulloss
Principal Engineer - Civil
Blacksburg VA
(540) 207-2323
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 04-10-2019 16:13
From: Timothy Stinson
Subject: Omitting Profiles from Waterline Construction Plans?

Having designed water main projects for nearly 50 years, I can state that we seldom used profiles. Several reasons are that most watermains are shallow bury - 5-feet here in Boston Area.  If a utility is located during construction and is in conflict with the proposed path of the water main, the main can be lowered or raised  (and insulated) to pass over or under the conflicting utility line.  Now, there are times when a profile may assist in the construction of a water line. If you have an area that contains large utility lines, a large number of utility lines, etc., a localized profile may be warranted.  Unlike sewer lines, water has more freedom of movement thus reducing the need of providing profiles. We do use profiles for specialized projects such as Horizontal Directional Drills and railroad crossings.  One other thing - the design engineer should walk the proposed water main route to identify possible areas of conflict and to make sure the main can be installed as planned.  After design is completed, another walk through should be done to backcheck the initial assumptions made early on during design. Too many young Engineers see this a below heir professional dignity and they are placing their firms at risk not to mention risk loss of clients.

------------------------------
Timothy Stinson P.E.
Holbrook MA
(781) 767-3163

Original Message:
Sent: 04-09-2019 20:12
From: Will Bulloss
Subject: Omitting Profiles from Waterline Construction Plans?

The approach you outline is interesting, and I could see how a profile may not be needed if pipes are truly replaced at the same line and grade, because you would presumably already have some sort of record data. For more context on our applications, we typically design a new water main on a new alignment and grade (typically on the opposite side of the road) and keep the existing main in service until the new main is completed. In our application, new utility conflicts are present that have not been mitigated.



------------------------------
Will Bulloss
Blacksburg VA(540) 207-2323

Original Message:
Sent: 04-05-2019 07:38
From: Joshua Chabot
Subject: Omitting Profiles from Waterline Construction Plans?

​We recently began working with the city of Quincy, MA and pushed out a package exactly as you are describing, water main replacement and improvements of approximately 11,000LF with plan view only. The city has done these types of packages in the past and expressed no concerns not having profiles, the main difference is all of the proposed pipe is intended to be replaced at the same line and grade of the old pipe, which theoretically will take care of any utility crossings and in the case of this city, minimize the amount of rock excavation. Past projects of new pipe in new trench in dense urban settings we have always shown profiles.

You can see several of the city's previous packages on their purchasing site, Quincy, MA - Current Bids

Quincyma		remove preview
Quincy, MA - Current Bids Please note: We have added a new feature; "CONTRACT AWARD" It is only the front page of the contract, but contains the amount and the terms. If you need a copy of the complete contract, please put in a FOIA request to <maskemail>purchasing@...</maskemail> View this on Quincyma >

------------------------------
Joshua Chabot P.E.
Tetra Tech
Marlborough MA

Original Message:
Sent: 04-04-2019 21:07
From: Will Bulloss
Subject: Omitting Profiles from Waterline Construction Plans?

My organization is contemplating if/when it is appropriate to show profiles versus plan-only on water main construction plans. Our projects are predominately urban in nature (alignment within roadway with numerous utility crossings), are 3,000-5,000 linear feet in length, and are both distribution system extension or replacement in nature. Pipe diameters are generally 8" and 12". We also have rural projects that are generally extensions along the shoulder of roadways.

I am wondering if others have a decision framework to support the concept of omitting profiling water lines in similar circumstances. The argument is that omitting profiles on relatively smaller and less complex projects allows for more rapid plan development and construction.

I would appreciate any insight you all may have. 

------------------------------
Will Bulloss
Blacksburg VA
(540) 207-2323
------------------------------

The issue with replacing a water main, with a new water main at the same elevation is when you need to make connections to perpendicular mains. 

1) In the future when the Utility needs to tap the new water main they now have to cut through the old main.

2) We require the old main to stay in service until the new main has been tested and approved for use.  They make all perpendicular connections while the existing main is live.  This isn't possible if the new main is still live.

I can understand the same elevation when it is just a large diameter transmission main, but for small diameter mains (12-inch and under) there is no reason not to install the water main at a different elevation.

------------------------------
James Konigsfeld P.E., M.ASCE
Principal Engineer
Seattle WA
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 04-05-2019 07:38
From: Joshua Chabot
Subject: Omitting Profiles from Waterline Construction Plans?

​We recently began working with the city of Quincy, MA and pushed out a package exactly as you are describing, water main replacement and improvements of approximately 11,000LF with plan view only. The city has done these types of packages in the past and expressed no concerns not having profiles, the main difference is all of the proposed pipe is intended to be replaced at the same line and grade of the old pipe, which theoretically will take care of any utility crossings and in the case of this city, minimize the amount of rock excavation. Past projects of new pipe in new trench in dense urban settings we have always shown profiles.

You can see several of the city's previous packages on their purchasing site, Quincy, MA - Current Bids

Quincyma		remove preview
Quincy, MA - Current Bids Please note: We have added a new feature; "CONTRACT AWARD" It is only the front page of the contract, but contains the amount and the terms. If you need a copy of the complete contract, please put in a FOIA request to <maskemail>purchasing@...</maskemail> View this on Quincyma >

------------------------------
Joshua Chabot P.E.
Tetra Tech
Marlborough MA

Original Message:
Sent: 04-04-2019 21:07
From: Will Bulloss
Subject: Omitting Profiles from Waterline Construction Plans?

My organization is contemplating if/when it is appropriate to show profiles versus plan-only on water main construction plans. Our projects are predominately urban in nature (alignment within roadway with numerous utility crossings), are 3,000-5,000 linear feet in length, and are both distribution system extension or replacement in nature. Pipe diameters are generally 8" and 12". We also have rural projects that are generally extensions along the shoulder of roadways.

I am wondering if others have a decision framework to support the concept of omitting profiling water lines in similar circumstances. The argument is that omitting profiles on relatively smaller and less complex projects allows for more rapid plan development and construction.

I would appreciate any insight you all may have. 

------------------------------
Will Bulloss
Blacksburg VA
(540) 207-2323
------------------------------

Original Message------

The issue with replacing a water main, with a new water main at the same elevation is when you need to make connections to perpendicular mains. 

1) In the future when the Utility needs to tap the new water main they now have to cut through the old main.

2) We require the old main to stay in service until the new main has been tested and approved for use.  They make all perpendicular connections while the existing main is live.  This isn't possible if the new main is still live.

I can understand the same elevation when it is just a large diameter transmission main, but for small diameter mains (12-inch and under) there is no reason not to install the water main at a different elevation.

------------------------------
James Konigsfeld P.E., M.ASCE
Principal Engineer
Seattle WA
------------------------------

Original Message------

Without taking the time to prepare a profile:

How will the agency know where to locate blowoffs and if there is fisical conflicts or political opposition to the locations, accessibility issues at ground level etc.?

If there are conflicts with a desirable pipe profile, there will be delays figuring out what the best solution is.  Does the agency care if the pipes are touching, if there are large changes in profile causing join pulls or jogs in vertical profile? Who pays for construction delays?

Who is checking to make sure future developers can make connections to storm drains, sewers, etc.  Who will be liable.  In some states the use of the public right-of-way can't exclude others from using the street for the common good.  My staff approved plans for a large fiber optic utility bank.  When the contractor decided to do his own thing with respect to the alignment I enforced that they had to poke holes through their facilities and provide sleeves for any customer that needed to pass through to reach the sewer and water mains.  They had basically built a wall down the street precluding any reasonable utility crossings instead of the box shaped duct structure we had approved.   

    In my opinion a responsible agency manages the public right-of-way for the benefit of all.  The contractor will have to figure out the vertical alignment or risk conflicts having to relay pipe or order different components.  This will mean project delays that can eliminate profits.  The agency is just passing risk along with control to the contractor. The best a reputable contractor can hope for is a well thought out project that has no delays or change orders.   When that is not the norm you will attract parasitic contractors that  are good at manipulation.  That will mean higher bids and more change orders. There is no gain here for the public in the long run.  

    

Sorry Will, I don't have a framework but want to emphasize that profiles provide benefits in identifying potential underground conflicts (e.g. sewer crossings), and are invaluable in the future, especially when accurate as-built plans are prepared. I understand the short term cost vs. benefit issue, and it would seem to me for larger projects they should be included, if possible.

------------------------------
David Kennicutt
Delta Engineers, Architects & L. S., PC
Endwell NY
(607) 648-9341
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 04-04-2019 21:07
From: Will Bulloss
Subject: Omitting Profiles from Waterline Construction Plans?

My organization is contemplating if/when it is appropriate to show profiles versus plan-only on water main construction plans. Our projects are predominately urban in nature (alignment within roadway with numerous utility crossings), are 3,000-5,000 linear feet in length, and are both distribution system extension or replacement in nature. Pipe diameters are generally 8" and 12". We also have rural projects that are generally extensions along the shoulder of roadways.

I am wondering if others have a decision framework to support the concept of omitting profiling water lines in similar circumstances. The argument is that omitting profiles on relatively smaller and less complex projects allows for more rapid plan development and construction.

I would appreciate any insight you all may have. 

------------------------------
Will Bulloss
Blacksburg VA
(540) 207-2323
------------------------------

David, I agree with you regarding the value of accurate as-built information being captured on plan and profile projects. This is certainly one of the arguments for keeping profiles in plan sets, particularly as the utility and transportation industry move toward three dimensional modeling. Thanks for your insight.

------------------------------
Will Bulloss
Blacksburg VA
(540) 207-2323
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 04-05-2019 07:57
From: David Kennicutt
Subject: Omitting Profiles from Waterline Construction Plans?

Sorry Will, I don't have a framework but want to emphasize that profiles provide benefits in identifying potential underground conflicts (e.g. sewer crossings), and are invaluable in the future, especially when accurate as-built plans are prepared. I understand the short term cost vs. benefit issue, and it would seem to me for larger projects they should be included, if possible.

------------------------------
David Kennicutt
Delta Engineers, Architects & L. S., PC
Endwell NY
(607) 648-9341

Original Message:
Sent: 04-04-2019 21:07
From: Will Bulloss
Subject: Omitting Profiles from Waterline Construction Plans?

My organization is contemplating if/when it is appropriate to show profiles versus plan-only on water main construction plans. Our projects are predominately urban in nature (alignment within roadway with numerous utility crossings), are 3,000-5,000 linear feet in length, and are both distribution system extension or replacement in nature. Pipe diameters are generally 8" and 12". We also have rural projects that are generally extensions along the shoulder of roadways.

I am wondering if others have a decision framework to support the concept of omitting profiling water lines in similar circumstances. The argument is that omitting profiles on relatively smaller and less complex projects allows for more rapid plan development and construction.

I would appreciate any insight you all may have. 

------------------------------
Will Bulloss
Blacksburg VA
(540) 207-2323
------------------------------