Two issues we commonly face:
1) Grade Elevation not coinciding with Global Coordinate Elevation of 0 (i.e. Project datum point).
2) Differing topology in CAESAR.

1) is typically addressed in 1 of 2 ways. A) Ignoring Global Elevation and inputting the elevation such that Global Coordinate Elevation of 0 coincides with grade. B) Modifying wind parameters so that loads work out.

The limitations of A) is we can't compare coordinates to coordinates when reviewing for accuracy. Or rather, we can, but then we might have to move the pipe up and down, based on what we're checking at a given moment.

The limitation of B) is that we're limited to pressure / velocity vs elevation profiles.

It would be beneficial to have an additional entry on global coordinates or special execution parameters to alter these values prior to sending it to the solver.

2) Uneven topology would ideally be handled as a carry-down input property of each element as a "grade level" value. However, I understand that this might not be easily done with wind loads normally handled within the processor.

Perhaps a separate solution might be to include grade values as an input, wind properties also as an input, and then preprocess in the input editor and calculate equivalent U1, U2, etc loads.

It's messy, but might be an alternative.

Bonus Suggestion:

Inputting grade levels on the pipe could also provide the opportunity for CAESAR to display a fancy terrain under/above/around the pipe model, which would provide a self-evident way of checking the input of these grade levels.

Thoughts?

Michael, good suggestion, thank you.