Irricad

It would be very beneficial to have a pipe reduction symbol (filled triangle as arrow preferrably) automatically generated at pipe reductions in mainlines, submains & laterals. This should be a selectable option for the printed design plan or on its own layer.

Based on feedback from installation contractors (and my own experience) the visual recognition of colour change points between sizes is very hard to pick out on printed plans depending on colours and line types leading to confusion and unneccessary/time wasting distractions.

The reduction arrow would be a positve obvious indication of pipe reductions.

This is a very good idea and everyone I speak to that uses Irricad (both Australia and NZ) thinks this would make reading plans a lot easier.

BUMP

BUMP

Happy to see action on this, thanks Dan.

In answer to your questions

1. I have found that a filled black triangle (slightly elongated in the pointing direction) is best.
2. No
3. Yes
4. I always reduce downstream of an elbow rather than upstream as this is a hydraulically superior method in regard to conservation of energy (minimising friction losses) within a system. Therefore the reduction symbol must go just downstream of the elbow.
5. Same principles apply, on any junctions that are reducing plave the reduction arrow on the downstream side.

Some thoughts you may like to consider & play around with
-Maybe have the reduction arrow size linked to the pipe line width for sizing.
-Have the ability to select or not select the reduction arrow to be displayed.
-Have the ability to delete individual reduction arrows if they are obscuring other symbols.

Regards,

Rob.

Dan Crosby wrote:

This has turned into my Friday afternoon job - I knocked something up that searches for junctions with two pipe connections, then draws an arrow symbol at the junction pointing it the direction of the smaller pipe.

It works nicely enough, but I'm not sure what installers want to see. So, some questions:

• Is the above sufficient?
• Should the arrow be on the junction?
• Should the arrow be on the smaller pipe, slightly away from the junction?
• Should pipe reduction at a corner be handled / indicated differently?
• What should be done at junctions of 3 or 4 pipes?

Thanks!

Hi Dan,
Great work, can't wait. My comments are as follows:
1.Not sure, I think the arrow/reducer should have optional symbols types (see my attachment below)
2. No not on the junction.
3. Yes on smaller pipe away from junction.
4. No reducer on elbow should be shown downstream (wether it is reducing coupling or bush)
5. Reducers only where pipe reduces ie if 2 of the 4 pipes reduce, then you should show 2 of the 4, see my example attached.

Hi Dan,

Another example for you to look at. This tee, which is 100, reduces to 80 on one side, hence the single reducer (coupling or bush to 80) and the reduction to 50 on the other (which shows, 100-80, then 80-50).

Another suggestion, is to look at the symbol recuction coming out of the valve. If we have an 80mm valve assembly, that has 80 manifolding (in database), the ability to recognise this, as can be seen from below, I have 100 in the submain, Irricad place a reducing symbol but backwards, from the 100 zone pipe pointing towards the valve, but in this case it would be shown on the upstream & pherhaps slightly smaller than the normal reducing symbol.

Note the pipe hope just after the valve, pherhaps your next friday afternoon job .

Hi Dan,

To add to the guys suggestions I believe 1 reducing triangle (filled in our outlined dependant on user preference) for each pipe reduction would be sufficuent. Multiple symbols or an additional symbol after the valve would be to cluttered on a plan in my opinion and valves that do not use a valve assembly, would not work out.

In addition, this symbol or similar would also be beneficial on the Hydraulic Gradeline screen to help improve the visibility of submain changes.

Matt, in response to you comments,

1.Irricad should, if the valve is not on an assembly, lets say its 80mm, then it would work out what sought of fitting it should have (shouldn't be to hard) either an 80 socket or an 80 flange, doesn't really matter, then it would know 80 should be coming out of the valve, sees 100, then puts the reducing symbol backwards towards the valve, slightly smaller (you could have an option, to ignore this, but I would always use it).

2. I agree about the clutter, I think that Rob L suggestion along the lines of ability to turn off which ones you need should be strongly considered. As there are two scenarios here:

a. For presentation purposes, 100% agree no reducers & reduce clutter as you suggest.
b. For installation and quoting purposes, definately important, that all reducers, wether after valve or if
two or three are shown are important. If you doubt me ask any installer or dealer that has to quote.

I think for Dan, what is important is for him to understand what is required, and I think a combination of both is important presentation & quoting/installation, which is what the reducing symbols are about.
Could be as simple as putting the reducer symbols on its own layer, so that you can simply turn them OFF.
That way he doens't have to spend too many Fridays on the reducing symbol and can start on the pipe hop.

Hi All

I agree with Matt's suggestion . No need for more than 1 symbol . In any other case of Tee or Cross - It is clear to the installer he should put something and the same if it is any other hydraulic Item .

Regards

Gilary

DAN, you are now worthy of legend status, with this feature. Simple but very effective!

Gents,

I think the reducer symbol is a great idea. Only problem was, I missed how to add it.

Dan, did you send them the files to get that working? Do I need to change a setting?

Thanks,

John

Thanks, Dan. I suspected that was the case, but wanted to make sure.