When the mid-point of each range (25 GPM for the highest range) is multiplied by the percentage of leaks within each range as shown in the table on the right and then summed, one finds that the AVERAGE LEAK/DEFECT is 11.07 GPM after a pipe is lined with CIPP.
What does that mean? If one takes the fact that the leaks on average are 8’ apart as Electro Scans data shows, that means that when one mile of average pipe is lined with an average level of CIPP defects, there is 7,260 GPM of continuing I&I during an infiltration period or 10 Mil GPD of infiltration in a 24-hour day. If the average cost of treating wastewater at a WWTP is $500/MG, then the cost for a day of that infiltration would be about $5,000. And as the Electro Scan webinar pointed out, that I&I flow rate increases with time.
Also, note that the Electro Scan data is typically the result of inspecting smaller diameter CIPP lined pipes. It is reasonable to assume that as the diameter of the pipe increases, the number of defects and the resulting infiltration flow will increase in line with the increase in the surface area of the CIPP liner. Ongoing infiltration after a pipe is lined with CIPP can be very costly.
And, of course, this continuing infiltration over time leads to the CIPP liner being increasing damaged and separating from the substrate. Testimony to this is that there are products that are specifically designed and marketed to remove failed CIPP liners. Resinating Fiberglass Expansion Liners installed using EIPI Technology do not fail. They are warrantied not to fail for 20 years and likely won’t fail for more than 100 years if ever. That’s why we refer to EIPI Technology as “the ‘forever’ rehabilitation solution.”
How do these CIPP results compare to the results one will get when achieve when using Resinating’s EIPI Technology? With EIPI Technology, Resinating Fiberglass Expansion Liners are bonded to the existing walls of the pipe (or manhole) using Resinating’s Proprietary Bonding Agent to rehabilitate the pipe or manhole?
- Resinating’s EIPI Technology has a 20-year Warranty against leakage, such that if any leakage occurs that materially and substantially adversely affects the performance of a pipe or manhole, Resinating LLC will repair or replace its Liner. You can review the 20-Year Warranty on the Warranty Tab. You will note that the Warranty covers both materials and workmanship.
- Resinating’s EIPI Technology has a likely useful life of 100 years or more. This long useful is life is due to the fact that:
- Resinating Fiberglass Expansion Liners are solid, indestructible fiberglass…there are no fillers in Resinating Fiberglass.
- Resinating’s Fiberglass Expansion Liners provide new strength to existing pipes and manholes so they can carry increased loads…the structural integrity of pipes and manholes rehabilitated with EIPI Technology is far greater than when they were new.
- RESINATING Fiberglass Expansion Liners are impervious to any chemical or biological agents found in waste water, storm water or fresh water systems.
From a cost perspective, there is no question that over the short- to medium-term, and probably on Day 1 in many, many cases, the cost of using Resinating’s EIPI Technology to rehabilitate a pipe is far less than the cost of CIPP, particularly when one considers the substantial additional cost of treating the ongoing infiltration and the cost of rehabilitating the pipe again, not to far down the road, this time presumably with Resinating’s EIPI Technology. Money spent on lining a pipe with CIPP is essentially wasted money.
And one must not ignore the structural integrity provided by EIPI Ptechnology and Resinating Liners. CIPP does not provide any measureable structural integrity, especially as the CIPP delaminates!
See the Technical Data Page on the Specifications and Tech Data Tab for ASTM C497 test results on the strength and structural integrity delivered by Resinating Liners vs RCP and FRP. No C497 tests have been conducted ever on CIPP, at least not that we are aware of. Pipes rehabilitated with Resinating’s EIPI Techniology create an integrated structure that is stronger than when the failing pipes were new.
In addition to the cost comparison developed above, additional factors comparing the use of EIPI Technology vs CIPP are in the table below. These comparisons reflect Resinating LLC’s assessment of using Resinating’s EIPI Technology vs. CIPP and are believed to be appropriate characterizations of EIPI vs CIPP. The links in the table provide very important information that should be reviewed.