Matronics Email Lists Forum Index Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
 
 Get Email Distribution Too!Get Email Distribution Too!    FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

any reason NOT to go Swagelok check valves?

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Yak-List
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
jonboede(at)hotmail.com
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2019 1:21 pm    Post subject: any reason NOT to go Swagelok check valves? Reply with quote

I'm a "stock" guy. I like to keep things the way the design bureau designed them.


That having been said, over the years I've replaced or overhauled enough Chinese check valves to fill a trick-or-treater's plastic pumpkin. It's getting old.



The Swagelok replacement check valves seem like a good idea, but I'm cautious, so:


Does anybody have a single experience, observation, or reason NOT to go with the Swagelok replacement one-way check valves?


The only thing I can think of is, "We don't have enough total hours as a community to know what the down-side of the Swagelok valves is going to be" -- but that argument is fading.


Jon


- The Matronics Yak-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
Back to top
hill(at)doctor-hill.com
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2019 3:01 pm    Post subject: any reason NOT to go Swagelok check valves? Reply with quote

Hello Jon,
It’s a simple thing to rebuild them. Doug Sapp provides the parts and all that’s needed are two 17 mm wrenches. For those check valves that are too far gone from internal corrosion, the replacements that Doug builds are excellent. Regardless, whether you rebuild or replace, they still need to be swapped out every few years. No way around that no matter who makes them.

Just me, but I like to replace the soft lead washer with a soft aluminum crush washer that’s been coated in WD40 to reduce deforming during tightening. Very solid seal. Attached is an image.

Personally, I’m not a big fan of the Swagelok check valves. They are not very robust. Have seen too many fail. On a flight to Oshkosh a few years ago one of the members of our group had several fail by the time we got to Nebraska from Arizona. Spent a long time on the tarmac at the Lincoln airport replacing them with Chinese ones, which kept working for the next three years.

Exceptions are the Swagelok main and emergency on-off valves. They are fantastic and seem to last forever. The 90 degree, 2-port one is SS-42GF2-A-WN2 with the black handle. Attached is an image of one configured for the main air.

Warren Hill
N464TW
Mesa, AZ

[img]cid:8A6EDB2E-8C4B-47DF-B406-C7DE81B0C538[/img]
[img]cid:F9CAE3B5-AB36-4D90-9BD2-A205EC5EA78A[/img]
Quote:
On Oct 16, 2019, at 2:21 PM, Jon Boede <jonboede(at)hotmail.com (jonboede(at)hotmail.com)> wrote:
I'm a "stock" guy. I like to keep things the way the design bureau designed them.

That having been said, over the years I've replaced or overhauled enough Chinese check valves to fill a trick-or-treater's plastic pumpkin. It's getting old.

The Swagelok replacement check valves seem like a good idea, but I'm cautious, so:

Does anybody have a single experience, observation, or reason NOT to go with the Swagelok replacement one-way check valves?

The only thing I can think of is, "We don't have enough total hours as a community to know what the down-side of the Swagelok valves is going to be" -- but that argument is fading.

Jon



- The Matronics Yak-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List



Crush_washer.png
 Description:
 Filesize:  501.81 KB
 Viewed:  3773 Time(s)

Crush_washer.png



on-off2.png
 Description:
 Filesize:  473.27 KB
 Viewed:  3773 Time(s)

on-off2.png


Back to top
pennington.construction.i
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2019 3:53 pm    Post subject: any reason NOT to go Swagelok check valves? Reply with quote

Warren

I agree the Chinese check valves.  
I use the lead seals and I also use WD40 while tightening.  
Do you have a part number for the aluminum seals. ?
Thanks
Mark
N621CJ
Richmond VA

On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 7:08 PM Warren Hill <hill(at)doctor-hill.com (hill(at)doctor-hill.com)> wrote:

Quote:
Hello Jon,

It’s a simple thing to rebuild them. Doug Sapp provides the parts and all that’s needed are two 17 mm wrenches. For those check valves that are too far gone from internal corrosion, the replacements that Doug builds are excellent. Regardless, whether you rebuild or replace, they still need to be swapped out every few years. No way around that no matter who makes them. 
Just me, but I like to replace the soft lead washer with a soft aluminum crush washer that’s been coated in WD40 to reduce deforming during tightening. Very solid seal. Attached is an image. 
Personally, I’m not a big fan of the Swagelok check valves. They are not very robust. Have seen too many fail. On a flight to Oshkosh a few years ago one of the members of our group had several fail by the time we got to Nebraska from Arizona. Spent a long time on the tarmac at the Lincoln airport replacing them with Chinese ones, which kept working for the next three years.
Exceptions are the Swagelok main and emergency on-off valves. They are fantastic and seem to last forever. The 90 degree, 2-port one is SS-42GF2-A-WN2 with the black handle. Attached is an image of one configured for the main air. 
Warren Hill
N464TW
Mesa, AZ

[img]cid:16dd6faf95b49f117711[/img]


[img]cid:16dd6faf95bdeaecbf52[/img]

Quote:
On Oct 16, 2019, at 2:21 PM, Jon Boede <jonboede(at)hotmail.com (jonboede(at)hotmail.com)> wrote:

I'm a "stock" guy.  I like to keep things the way the design bureau designed them.
That having been said, over the years I've replaced or overhauled enough Chinese check valves to fill a trick-or-treater's plastic pumpkin.  It's getting old.

The Swagelok replacement check valves seem like a good idea, but I'm cautious, so:
Does anybody have a single experience, observation, or reason NOT to go with the Swagelok replacement one-way check valves?
The only thing I can think of is, "We don't have enough total hours as a community to know what the down-side of the Swagelok valves is going to be" -- but that argument is fading.
Jon





- The Matronics Yak-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List



on-off2.png
 Description:
 Filesize:  473.27 KB
 Viewed:  3772 Time(s)

on-off2.png



Crush_washer.png
 Description:
 Filesize:  501.81 KB
 Viewed:  3772 Time(s)

Crush_washer.png


Back to top
hill(at)doctor-hill.com
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2019 6:39 pm    Post subject: any reason NOT to go Swagelok check valves? Reply with quote

Hello Mark,
The aluminum crush washers are generally available on Amazon, searching first by outer diameter in mm.

Warren

Quote:
On Oct 16, 2019, at 4:52 PM, Mark Pennington <pennington.construction.inc.1(at)gmail.com (pennington.construction.inc.1(at)gmail.com)> wrote:
Warren
I agree the Chinese check valves.
I use the lead seals and I also use WD40 while tightening.

Do you have a part number for the aluminum seals. ?

Thanks
Mark
N621CJ
Richmond VA
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 7:08 PM Warren Hill <hill(at)doctor-hill.com (hill(at)doctor-hill.com)> wrote:
Quote:
Hello Jon,
It’s a simple thing to rebuild them. Doug Sapp provides the parts and all that’s needed are two 17 mm wrenches. For those check valves that are too far gone from internal corrosion, the replacements that Doug builds are excellent. Regardless, whether you rebuild or replace, they still need to be swapped out every few years. No way around that no matter who makes them.

Just me, but I like to replace the soft lead washer with a soft aluminum crush washer that’s been coated in WD40 to reduce deforming during tightening. Very solid seal. Attached is an image.

Personally, I’m not a big fan of the Swagelok check valves. They are not very robust. Have seen too many fail. On a flight to Oshkosh a few years ago one of the members of our group had several fail by the time we got to Nebraska from Arizona. Spent a long time on the tarmac at the Lincoln airport replacing them with Chinese ones, which kept working for the next three years.

Exceptions are the Swagelok main and emergency on-off valves. They are fantastic and seem to last forever. The 90 degree, 2-port one is SS-42GF2-A-WN2 with the black handle. Attached is an image of one configured for the main air.

Warren Hill
N464TW
Mesa, AZ

<Crush_washer.png>
<on-off2.png>
Quote:
On Oct 16, 2019, at 2:21 PM, Jon Boede <jonboede(at)hotmail.com (jonboede(at)hotmail.com)> wrote:
I'm a "stock" guy. I like to keep things the way the design bureau designed them.

That having been said, over the years I've replaced or overhauled enough Chinese check valves to fill a trick-or-treater's plastic pumpkin. It's getting old.

The Swagelok replacement check valves seem like a good idea, but I'm cautious, so:

Does anybody have a single experience, observation, or reason NOT to go with the Swagelok replacement one-way check valves?

The only thing I can think of is, "We don't have enough total hours as a community to know what the down-side of the Swagelok valves is going to be" -- but that argument is fading.

Jon







- The Matronics Yak-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
Back to top
wlannon(at)shaw.ca
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2019 7:01 pm    Post subject: any reason NOT to go Swagelok check valves? Reply with quote

Hi Mark;

You will find a large selection of both copper and alum. Metric crush washers at McMaster Carr. They are listed by ID, OD and thickness.  I could give you a part number now but not in the hangar so may guess wrong.

I have been using the alum. ones for years for all the check valves and numerous other locations like rocker shafts and various plumbing fittings, etc.

Cheers;
Walt


From: Mark Pennington (pennington.construction.inc.1(at)gmail.com)
Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2019 4:52 PM
To: yak-list(at)matronics.com (yak-list(at)matronics.com)
Subject: Re: any reason NOT to go Swagelok check valves?


Warren


I agree the Chinese check valves.
I use the lead seals and I also use WD40 while tightening.

Do you have a part number for the aluminum seals. ?

Thanks
Mark
N621CJ
Richmond VA

On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 7:08 PM Warren Hill <hill(at)doctor-hill.com (hill(at)doctor-hill.com)> wrote:

Quote:
Hello Jon,
It’s a simple thing to rebuild them. Doug Sapp provides the parts and all that’s needed are two 17 mm wrenches. For those check valves that are too far gone from internal corrosion, the replacements that Doug builds are excellent. Regardless, whether you rebuild or replace, they still need to be swapped out every few years. No way around that no matter who makes them.

Just me, but I like to replace the soft lead washer with a soft aluminum crush washer that’s been coated in WD40 to reduce deforming during tightening. Very solid seal. Attached is an image.

Personally, I’m not a big fan of the Swagelok check valves. They are not very robust. Have seen too many fail. On a flight to Oshkosh a few years ago one of the members of our group had several fail by the time we got to Nebraska from Arizona. Spent a long time on the tarmac at the Lincoln airport replacing them with Chinese ones, which kept working for the next three years.

Exceptions are the Swagelok main and emergency on-off valves. They are fantastic and seem to last forever. The 90 degree, 2-port one is SS-42GF2-A-WN2 with the black handle. Attached is an image of one configured for the main air.

Warren Hill
N464TW
Mesa, AZ




[img]cid:FD652E6ED19944EF85DDFE4671BDCCAD(at)WalterHP[/img]


[img]cid:A47D95B845DE44A8AA1CD1DCAEFB6970(at)WalterHP[/img]



Quote:
On Oct 16, 2019, at 2:21 PM, Jon Boede <jonboede(at)hotmail.com (jonboede(at)hotmail.com)> wrote:

I'm a "stock" guy. I like to keep things the way the design bureau designed them.

That having been said, over the years I've replaced or overhauled enough Chinese check valves to fill a trick-or-treater's plastic pumpkin. It's getting old.


The Swagelok replacement check valves seem like a good idea, but I'm cautious, so:

Does anybody have a single experience, observation, or reason NOT to go with the Swagelok replacement one-way check valves?

The only thing I can think of is, "We don't have enough total hours as a community to know what the down-side of the Swagelok valves is going to be" -- but that argument is fading.

Jon






Virus-free. www.avast.com [url=#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2] [/url]


- The Matronics Yak-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List



Crush_washer.png
 Description:
 Filesize:  501.81 KB
 Viewed:  3767 Time(s)

Crush_washer.png



on-off2.png
 Description:
 Filesize:  473.27 KB
 Viewed:  3767 Time(s)

on-off2.png


Back to top
pennington.construction.i
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2019 9:34 pm    Post subject: any reason NOT to go Swagelok check valves? Reply with quote

Thank you Walt and Warren
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 11:07 PM Walter Lannon <wlannon(at)shaw.ca> wrote:

[quote] Hi Mark;

You will find a large selection of both copper and alum. Metric crush
washers at McMaster Carr. They are listed by ID, OD and thickness. I
could give you a part number now but not in the hangar so may guess wrong


- The Matronics Yak-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Yak-List All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group