[Dustin Gray]

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”

[Dustin Gray]

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

[Dustin Gray]

I’m sorry that I can’t help too much further because the only steam systems I’ve designed where all designed to be free of pockets and included drip legs every so often to catch condensate. Which, as far as I am aware, is the standard piping design for steam systems.

I am curious though, what type of process steam is this? Wet steam? Superheated steam? What is the purpose of this steam line? Perhaps that would make a difference. Hopefully more experienced individuals will be along soon.

[Dustin Gray]

Why will it be “running underground a short distance”? What will you do when the steam condenses and settles to that low pocket and a slug of liquid builds up? IMO this routing should be avoided.

Regards,
DGrayPPD

[Author]

Posts