Wall thickness and materials estimated from crossing data, not assumptions

An engineering firm used Pivvot's crossing and impact reports to determine wall thickness along a new natural gas pipeline route, producing a materials list early enough to actually inform the cost estimate.

The challenge

On a project for a new natural gas pipeline, the materials list drives the cost estimate, and the cost estimate is what the client plans and commits against.

When that list is built late, or built on assumptions about the route rather than measurements of it, the gap shows up as unforeseen construction costs and delays. By then the numbers have already been given to the client.

What they did

The engineering firm used Pivvot's crossing and impact reports across the route:

• Roads, rivers, wetlands and other crossings identified along the full alignment
• The length of each crossing measured as a derivative of the Pivvot geospatial analysis
• Wall thickness requirements determined from those lengths feeding a materials list built on data rather than assumption

With the materials list available much earlier in the natural gas pipeline project and one that used data to more accurately inform the anticipated building costs, the engineering firm provided a cost estimate that better reflected the anticipated conditions.

Pivvot use story, materials list development

The result

The materials list was available much earlier in the gas pipeline project, and it reflected the actual route rather than an assumption about it.

The firm gave its client a cost estimate that better matched the conditions the natural gas pipeline would actually encounter, and went into construction prepared rather than surprised.