Compression Fittings VS. Weld Fittings

In summary: The equations I used are from the Crane Technical Paper 410, specifically equations 3-17 and 3-18 for calculating the friction factor and friction loss in a pipe.
  • #1
ameeno97
34
0
I need to install 4 bar stainless steel piping system (40 meters length, 20 Tee, 40 Elbow) . do you recommend using compression fittings or welded fittings.

I know that compression fittings is easy to assemble but they have leakage problems.

Butt-Welded fittings on the other hand would make leakage-free pipeline but it need precise TIG (GTAW) welding (to have high quality welding orbital TIG welding is used) and if the welding is performed manually (by welder) it I may end-up with fittings been misaligned to the pipeline.

So what do you recommend?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #2
Is your material toxic or flammable? If so, go with the welded connections.

If not, compression should be fine, especially at only 4 bar pressure.

Carefully follow manufacturer recommendations for compression fittings (e.g. hand tighten then tighten another 1.25 turns, ensure the tube is fully installed in the fitting, and so on).

I would stick with name brand compression fittings. Some of the other stuff on the market has poor hardening coatings on the ferrules and degraded chemical resistance.
 
  • #3
You haven't mentioned what the particular application is for this stainless piping system. There might be code requirements which must be satisfied.
 
  • #4
The stainless steel pipeline is carrying CO2 for Incubators (In-Vitro Fertilization) through roughly 50 meters with approximately 30 bends. The flow rate is about max 70 Lpm, Is there any code for this?

Would using compression fittings be a hazard if any leakage occurs?

Does Socket-Weld fittings perform well? I hope so as they are easier to weld than Butt-Weld fittings?


Also, Could you advise the tube diameter to be used (fluid: CO2 , Piping material : stainless steel tubes 316L, equivalent length:40 meters , Flow Rate : 70 Liters)
 
  • #5
Compression fittings should work - install per manufacturers guidelines as I mentioned above.

Socket weld performs good and is faster than butt weld.

For diameter, check pressure drop at your flow. Start with a line size that gives a velocity around 60 to 120 ft/sec.

Dual rated 316/316L is a good choice and easy to buy.
 
  • #6
ameeno97 said:
Is there any code for this?
If in the US, use ASME B31.3.

I'd agree that compression fittings are fine, socket weld is even better but not required.
 
  • #7
Thank you all for assistance

I have estimated the pressure drop through the pipeline and it is within the acceptable loss range and it was about 36 Kpa loss (less than 10% for 400 KPa).

I have used Darcy equation since I stated that the pressure drop would not exceed 10% of the inlet pressure (400 KPa) and I guess this would give a good estimation

I need someone that could enhance these results so I could proceed. could you please estimate the pressure loss for this system:

Gas : Carbon Dioxide
Inlet Pressure : 430 KPa (4.3 Bar)
Total equivalent length : 70 meters
Flow Rate : about 70 Lpm (2.47 scfm)
Temp. : 25 C
Pipe material: Stainless steel 316L
Pipe Outer Diameter : 12.7 mm
Pipe Wall Thickness : 0.89 mmPlease advise, Is this or I should use bigger size?
 
Last edited:
  • #8
I calculated a value close to your number of 36 kPa. Your velocities are reasonable also.
 
  • #9
edgepflow said:
I calculated a value close to your number of 36 KPa. Your velocities are reasonable also.
I was wrong my results for OD=12.7mm and thickness=0.89 was Pressure loss= 6.8 KPa

36KPa pressure loss is for OD=9.53mm and thickness=0.89Could I know how did you calculate it? do you use software, or you just calculated it manually?

I am using pipe flow expert v5.12 , Is there another better software that has more functions?
 
Last edited:
  • #10
ameeno97 said:
I was wrong my results for OD=12.7mm and thickness=0.89 was Pressure loss= 6.8 KPa

36KPa pressure loss is for OD=9.53mm and thickness=0.89


Could I know how did you calculate it? do you use software, or you just calculated it manually?

I am using pipe flow expert v5.12 , Is there another better software that has more functions?
I use formulas from Crane Technical Paper 410 and the Cameron Hydraulic Data Handbook.

For OD = 12.7mm, t = 0.89 mm, what velocity did you get? What density did you use?
 
  • #11
edgepflow said:
I use formulas from Crane Technical Paper 410 and the Cameron Hydraulic Data Handbook.

For OD = 12.7mm, t = 0.89 mm, what velocity did you get? What density did you use?


Density of CO2 at T=25C and P=420 KPa is 9.25 Kg/m3

calculated velocity = 2.52 m/s

pressure loss=6.8 KPa
 
  • #12
I think your velocity of 2.52 m/s is low. You listed your flows as 70 Lpm (2.47 scfm). These volume flows are equal, so your value of 70 Lpm is standard conditions? If so, use the density at standard conditions to figure your velocity from mass flow.
 
  • #13
edgepflow said:
I think your velocity of 2.52 m/s is low. You listed your flows as 70 Lpm (2.47 scfm). These volume flows are equal, so your value of 70 Lpm is standard conditions? If so, use the density at standard conditions to figure your velocity from mass flow.

Here is what I did :

Firstly I converted the 70 Lpm to scfm (@1 Bar T=20C) to acfm (actual flow @4.2 Bar T=25C) these results in :

70 Lpm = 2.47 scfm

2.47 scfm@1 Bar = 0.52 acfm@4.2 Bar

Density using Ideal gas equation : P=rho*R*T

CO2:

P=4.2 Bar
T=25C = 298 Kelvin
R=189.9

==> rho = 9.25 Kg/m3

then I used Pipe Flow Expert solver (using Darcy equation) then I have got:

ID = 12.7 -(2*0.89) =10.92 mm
rho=9.25 Kg/m3
Inlet Pressure = 4.2 Bar
stainless steel surface roughness=0.045mm
length = 70m

==> velocity = 2.52 m/sec
mass flow = 0.0022 Kg/sec
friction loss= 6.38 KPa
 
  • #14
Using an actual flow of 0.52 acfm and flowing conditons of 4.2 bar @ 25C, I was able to match your numbers. In my first calc, I fouled up the denisty.
 
  • #15
edgepflow said:
Using an actual flow of 0.52 acfm and flowing conditons of 4.2 bar @ 25C, I was able to match your numbers. In my first calc, I fouled up the denisty.


Could you please attach the equation that you are using (do not write it as it will appear as talisman) or just type of the page number (Crane Technical Paper / Cameron Hydraulic Data Handbook).
 
  • #16
ameeno97 said:
Could you please attach the equation that you are using (do not write it as it will appear as talisman) or just type of the page number (Crane Technical Paper / Cameron Hydraulic Data Handbook).
See Equation 1-4 in Crane TP 410, 25th Printing or Page 3-3 of Cameron Hydraulic Data 19th Edition. They are both the Darcy-Weisbach equation.
 

1. What are compression fittings and weld fittings?

Compression fittings and weld fittings are two types of connections used in piping systems. Compression fittings are made up of two pieces - a compression nut and a compression ring - that are used to secure pipes together without the need for soldering or welding. Weld fittings, on the other hand, involve welding two pieces of pipe together to create a strong and permanent connection.

2. What are the main differences between compression fittings and weld fittings?

The main difference between these two types of fittings lies in the method of connection. Compression fittings use a compressive force to hold pipes together, while weld fittings use heat and pressure to fuse two pieces of pipe together. Additionally, compression fittings can be disassembled and reassembled, whereas weld fittings are a permanent connection.

3. Which type of fitting is more commonly used?

The type of fitting used will depend on the specific application and the materials being used. However, in general, compression fittings are more commonly used in residential and commercial plumbing systems due to their ease of installation and ability to be disassembled. Weld fittings are often used in more heavy-duty and industrial applications where a stronger and more permanent connection is needed.

4. Are there any advantages of using compression fittings over weld fittings?

Yes, there are several advantages of using compression fittings over weld fittings. First, compression fittings do not require any special tools or equipment for installation, making them easier and quicker to install. Additionally, they can be easily disassembled and reassembled, making them a more flexible option. Compression fittings also do not require any heat, which can be a safety concern in certain applications.

5. Are there any disadvantages of using compression fittings?

One potential disadvantage of compression fittings is that they may not be as strong or durable as weld fittings. This is because they rely on the compression force to hold the pipes together, which may not be as secure as a welded connection. Additionally, compression fittings may not be suitable for use with certain types of pipes, such as thin-walled or plastic pipes, as they may be prone to leaking or slipping.

Similar threads

  • Mechanical Engineering
Replies
6
Views
16K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • DIY Projects
2
Replies
36
Views
8K
Replies
2
Views
7K
Back
Top