Discussion Overview
The discussion revolves around the categorization of bends in piping systems, specifically focusing on the terminology of "1.5D" and "3D" bends versus the ratio of bend diameter (D) to pipe bore (d). Participants explore the definitions and implications of these categorizations, as well as their applications in different types of piping, including pneumatic and fluid systems.
Discussion Character
- Exploratory
- Technical explanation
- Debate/contested
Main Points Raised
- Some participants clarify that "1.5D" and "3D" refer to the radius of the bend relative to the nominal diameter D of the fitting, while noting that D is not the bend diameter.
- There is a suggestion that D represents the outside or nominal diameter, while d may refer to the inside diameter in certain contexts.
- One participant points out that most piping catalogs provide diagrams to clarify the dimensions of fittings, using OD and ID to avoid ambiguity.
- A reference is made to a source discussing pneumatic design bend geometry, indicating that the bend radius can be significantly larger in pneumatic systems compared to traditional fluid piping.
- It is mentioned that in pneumatic systems, the ratio D/d can be as large as 24:1, which is necessary to prevent materials from getting stuck in the piping.
- Participants express uncertainty about how to interpret the D/d ratio in relation to specific elbow types, such as 3D elbows.
- There is a distinction made between pneumatic piping and fluid piping, with the former typically using lighter materials and different sizing conventions.
Areas of Agreement / Disagreement
Participants express confusion and differing interpretations regarding the categorization of bends and the relationship between D and d. No consensus is reached on how to convert between the two systems or the implications of the D/d ratio in various contexts.
Contextual Notes
Participants note that the definitions and applications of D and d may vary between pneumatic and fluid piping systems, and that the discussion is complicated by the lack of clear standards across different types of piping.