Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - any reason NOT to go Swagelok check valves?

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

any reason NOT to go Swagelok check valves?

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Yak-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

jonboede(at)hotmail.com
Guest

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

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

hill(at)doctor-hill.com
Guest

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

Hello Jon,

Itâ€™s a simple thing to rebuild them. Doug Sapp provides the parts and all thatâ€™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 thatâ€™s been coated in WD40 to reduce deforming during tightening. Very solid seal. Attached is an image. 



Personally, Iâ€™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:

4163 Time(s)

on-off2.png

Description:

Filesize:

473.27 KB

Viewed:

4163 Time(s)

pennington.construction.i
Guest

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

Warren



I agree the Chinese check valves. Â 

I use the lead seals and I also use WD40 while tightening. Â 

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,



Itâ€™s a simple thing to rebuild them. Doug Sapp provides the parts and all thatâ€™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.Â 

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

Personally, Iâ€™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.Â 

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.Â  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.Â  It's getting old.



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

Does anybody have a single experience, observation, or reasonÂ NOTÂ 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:

4162 Time(s)

Crush_washer.png

Description:

Filesize:

501.81 KB

Viewed:

4162 Time(s)

hill(at)doctor-hill.com
Guest

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

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,

Itâ€™s a simple thing to rebuild them. Doug Sapp provides the parts and all thatâ€™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 thatâ€™s been coated in WD40 to reduce deforming during tightening. Very solid seal. Attached is an image. 



Personally, Iâ€™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

wlannon(at)shaw.ca
Guest

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

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,     

   Itâ€™s a simple thing to rebuild them. Doug Sapp provides the parts and all    thatâ€™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 thatâ€™s been coated in WD40 to reduce deforming during tightening.    Very solid seal. Attached is an image. 

    

   Personally, Iâ€™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:

4157 Time(s)

on-off2.png

Description:

Filesize:

473.27 KB

Viewed:

4157 Time(s)

pennington.construction.i
Guest

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

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

Display posts from previous:

	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