Well Jake, of course Jeremiah will find a logical solution. I like the idea a lot. How would this help though if the laterals were sized prior to adding spot elevations such as the drawing that I'm working on now. We didn't know that the pressure (or lack of it) would prove to be so challenging at first. We had the laterals already designed and sized (without spots).
I still like the idea of somehow coding the valve with data representing the pipe sizing with spots or not. And then posting an alert if the user is sizing the main using spots and the worst case valve was not sized using spots.
But no matter what, I'm quite aware of the issue now. Too bad for those that don't and make the mistake that's not detected until after construction. The heads (or other emission device) does not operate. If it's gotten that far, the solution will be to add a pump. If known sooner, many options would be available like they are to us now (since we know about this potential ________). I don't know what word to use. Issue? Flaw in reporting due to omission? Lack of user knowledge? Whatever the word, it's not good.
Our workflow now will include resizing all of the laterals then mains using spot elevations before running a critical report. I suppose we'll have to use the valve schedule more often too. I consider these work-arounds though until the wizards add the alert pop-up. :)
Thanks to you and Jeremiah. - Seaweed