{"id":6181,"date":"2020-08-31T06:06:00","date_gmt":"2020-08-30T20:06:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/nuflow.net\/specialised-solution-for-high-security-building-case-study\/"},"modified":"2023-08-10T11:39:04","modified_gmt":"2023-08-10T01:39:04","slug":"specialised-solution-for-high-security-building","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nuflow.net\/specialised-solution-for-high-security-building\/","title":{"rendered":"Specialised Solution for High-Security Building (Case Study)"},"content":{"rendered":"
Nuflow Otago repaired a high-security building in New Zealand. New imported prefabricated buildings had issues with leaking shower wastes in some bathrooms, but needed to be installed on site in the next few days. The dilemma was a months’ worth of rectifications needed to be performed first.<\/p>\n
New Zealand top-secret – floor wastes: 100x50mm<\/p>\n
Metal Trap: Total of 180<\/p>\n
180 relines in a 30-day window.<\/p>\n
To resolve the issue using traditional repair methods, the floor would need to be removed and all new piping installed. It was a major cost and time factor that the builder could not afford if the project was to remain on time and on budget.<\/p>\n
If the builder went with a traditional repair it could have taken three months. Nuflow executed the repair in a third of the time without any lost days of construction to the building site.<\/p>\n
Nuflow’s pipe relining system did not stop any work from progressing on the building site as it had the ability to be done offsite prior to the buildings being installed at the high-security facility.<\/p>\n
The buildings were basic portable buildings which were brought in from overseas. They were relined in batches at an offsite location and then transported to the construction site for installation. This pipe relining process ensured the builder lost no time keeping within the project timeline.<\/p>\n
It also meant no loss of resources for them. They didn’t have to take workers off jobs to rip up the floors and replace them, which would have had to occur in a traditional repair method.<\/p>\n
It’s hard to factor all costs into the saving made by the builder but if you just look at materials and time it’s estimated to be around 60% saving. This is quite normal when you use pipe relining over traditional replacement of pipe as it’s not just the cost of replacing the pipe but the cost associated to rectifying the site after pipework is replaced. Walls need to be fixed, concrete relayed, waste removed from site and the environmental footprint is far less.<\/p>\n
The only other option was to pull the floor waste out and renew it. This meant the builder would have to replace the entirety of the floor, the floor waste and piping.<\/p>\n
As discussed earlier the cost-saving was huge compared with the costs of the traditional ‘dig and replace’ method, especially when you’re talking about 180 floor wastes.<\/p>\n