Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me

TOPIC: Reducer description on P&ID

Reducer description on P&ID 11 months 4 weeks ago #9315

  • Crashtested
  • Crashtested's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 49
  • Thank you received: 2
  • Karma: 0
I've been doing this for a minute or so but we have a young man who has risen to a position of management and always has a new way of doing things, never the same but always new.

Reducer call outs should be shows as; industry (accepted) standard, the way this company has always done it, or my favorite - "because I said so"?

Large X Small?
Direction of flow?

Starting in O&G it was taught to me as LGxSm, regardless of flow. That carried over to Acid & Chemicals but the last few years in Mining it's never the same way 2x.

PSV's were the only exception being SmXLg.

Does it really matter, probably not but I'm sick of doing it 2-3x.
Reality is a trigger word and we're quickly losing touch...
Last Edit: 11 months 4 days ago by Crashtested. Reason: I can't lleps...

Reducer description on P&ID 11 months 4 weeks ago #9316

  • Jop
  • Jop's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Moderator
  • Posts: 1052
  • Thank you received: 14
  • Karma: 11
Crashtested,
I am sorry you are burdened with the "young man" who maybe needs his diaper changed. :unsure:

My recommendation is as follows:
1st. The smart, well trained and experienced people from Piping and Process need to put their heads together look at what you are doing in this situation, what the ISA Standard offers and what your Client population wants and then make it your Company Standard.

2nd. Take the "young Man" aside and let him know where the line is between the technical side of the business and the Management side of the business. :angry:
Do it once and Do it Right

Reducer description on P&ID 11 months 4 weeks ago #9317

  • DGrayPPD
  • DGrayPPD's Avatar
  • Offline
  • New Member
  • Posts: 4
  • Karma: 0
In my opinion, your thinking is correct. Reducers, swages, reducing fittings, olets, etc. should always be called out as Large Size x Small Size. This is how it is always done in the piping world. Shouldn't matter what industry you are in. I had some issues with my current organization when I first started as they wanted to go by flow direction, or they wanted to copy how it was done for PSV's/PRV's. With most of them being Process and none of them being a Piper. They also frequently called them expanders and not reducers which also bugged me.

Sounds like you are having some trouble with non-pipers telling you how to do piper related duties. Glad to see I'm not the only one who has had this issue haha.

Regards,
DGrayPPD
Last Edit: 11 months 4 weeks ago by DGrayPPD.

Reducer description on P&ID 4 months 3 weeks ago #9325

  • yeosu1081
  • yeosu1081's Avatar
  • Offline
  • New Member
  • Posts: 11
  • Karma: 0
I've encountered that too with the newbie engineer commenting on my P&ID work. I've been in different industries and companies and all were consistent with Large Size X Small size...whatever the flow direction.

Reducer description on P&ID 4 months 3 weeks ago #9329

  • DGrayPPD
  • DGrayPPD's Avatar
  • Offline
  • New Member
  • Posts: 4
  • Karma: 0
Also, if you actually refer to ASME B16.9, MSS SP-75, or any other butt welded fitting standard, all tables show reducers as Large End x Small End.

MSS SP-95 even specifies in "Marking " Section 4.1 that "Each fitting shall have the prescribed information stamped or otherwise suitably marked with the following:...... d) Size - Nominal pipe size (NPS) - Large end X small end of swaged nipples"
Last Edit: 4 months 3 weeks ago by DGrayPPD.
Moderators: Jop
Time to create page: 0.468 seconds

 

 

Latest Jobs Feed

Feed not found.

Company News Feeds

Company News Feeds

Login Form

You are not logged in.

Search

}());