I have been doing piping for over 10 years and have never used a sweepolet. Weldolets are pretty much the standard. Another thread has a good explanation of the differences.
http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=369098
The reason for the perforations is due to structural integrity considerations.
I was considering doing each hole from an orifice approach as well.
Thank you all for your time, input, and expertise.
Because of nondisclosure restrictions, I am unable to attach a sketch of the system. I realize that makes it a bit challenging for you all.
There are multiple vessels in series and the system uses the same perforation pattern and flow rate for various inlet and outlet points along the line...
36 holes (3 rows of 12) at 1.375" diameter each. Flow rate is 853 gpm. At this point in the design, we are working on what discharge pressure is possible with a 500 psi pressure vessel. If it turns out to be too low (the client hasn't provided this to date), we will have to work the calculations...
I am pulling water out of a 500 psi pressure vessel with a 12" perforated pipe. I need to calculate the pressure drop across the perforated holes. Essentially, it is a sparge tube flowing in the reverse direction. Would a sparge tube pressure drop calculation still be accurate with the reverse flow?
The weld method is specifically what I was curious about. I should have been more specific. I would assume both fusion and resistance welds would be comparable in strength.
A client specified Sch 40, CS, ERW, ASTM A53-B, type E piping for a low pressure steam piping system we are going to fabricate. They provided the material requisition for what they are purchasing and the material description is EFW piping. I believe EFW piping is ASTM A671. Ignoring the fact...
