flange uni 1629

[Exatem]

Greetings to everyone.
we hope to have centered the right section.
as usual they are struggling with old, if not historical, technical issues.
from an old installation table of a diesel cooling system, I was quoted a dn100 piping that brings at the end a defined uni1629 flange of an external diameter of 175mm and 10mm thick.
but for a dn100 tube, i.e. 4" - 114,3mm in diameter, the flange should be 210 - 220mm (depending on a pn6 or pn10 - pn16) i.e. one 2276 - 2277 - 2278.
Moreover the uni1629, it deals with all other arguments namely, "painting doors, windows, continuous facades, inferriate and obscuring closures".
not only, but 175mm diameter flanges for a dn100 tube, I can't find anywhere and any material.
Is there any planter who can explain where I'm wrong?
Thank you in advance.

 

[numero1]

What flunge are we talking about?
flats, slip on, wn or what......
Hi.

 

[numero1]

and what plant then?
Diesel's fine, but diesel means everything or nothing, I guess ship?
Hi.

 

[numero1]

So I didn't find them in my catalogues, but......
Yeah.http://www.difesa.it/secretary-sgd-...i gara107/documents/maggio2011/3 -annex 3.pdfare on page 3 bronze flanges according to uni1629.
Hi.

 

[numero1]

among other things in the first link you understand that it is something about the military.... .
while this is the university of roma: http://dma.dma.uniroma1.it/dma/fdma/bib/norme_uni.pdf"flange for light series naval piping" on page 46
I haven't found a table yet, sorry.
Hi.

 

[numero1]

ahhhh here are:http://www.difesa.it/segretario-sgd-dna/dg/navarm/pagine/default.aspxThat's where the first link comes from. You should know them well.
:d hi, if I find the table the place.

 

[Exatem]

What flunge are we talking about?
flats, slip on, wn or what......
Hi.

flat flanges to loose circular series pn10 - dn from 65 to 150

and what plant then?
Diesel's fine, but diesel means everything or nothing, I guess ship?
Hi.

is the cooling system of two d/a on board. sea water suction to be sent to heat exchangers.

So I didn't find them in my catalogues, but......
Yeah.http://www.difesa.it/secretary-sgd-...i gara107/documents/maggio2011/3 -annex 3.pdfare on page 3 bronze flanges according to uni1629.
Hi.

I know that pdf. also cites the uni1629 but from the site of the uni I get what I have already posted and that I still attach.

among other things in the first link you understand that it is something about the military.... .
while this is the university of roma: http://dma.dma.uniroma1.it/dma/fdma/bib/norme_uni.pdf"flange for light series naval piping" on page 46
I haven't found a table yet, sorry.
Hi.

I don't know.

ahhhh here are:http://www.difesa.it/segretario-sgd-dna/dg/navarm/pagine/default.aspxThat's where the first link comes from. You should know them well.
:d hi, if I find the table the place.

I know well...
I just came to the head that the same flanges, are unique body with the mouth of aspiration and sending of an old aturia pump out of production for a long time.
It's the reference to a completely different norm that sounds strange to me.

 

[numero1]

no a moment that could be wrong the reference to the norm in the pdf of the military is there....... but also at the University of Rome?
Besides, if the one's wrong would be worse you say...
mumble mumble there's something wrong:

 

[numero1]

I imagine you'll enjoy it as a cupboard when you see this old g.u.

in it reads:
"Unification of flanges for naval piping, light series (tables from n. 1609 to n. 1649)"

and therefore it is correct those flanges once they were made with 1629 :smile:
then wonder how, when and why there was a total revision of one and therefore the old 1629 was wiped out.

seems like a history investigation this.......
Hi.

 

[Exatem]

I guess you'll enjoy it like a cupboard when you see this old g.u.

in it reads:
"Unification of flanges for naval piping, light series (tables from n. 1609 to n. 1649)"

and therefore it is correct those flanges once they were made with 1629 :smile:
then wonder how, when and why there was a total revision of one and therefore the old 1629 was wiped out.

seems like a history investigation this.......
Hi.

I can't believe it....
we refer to repealed rules in 1942...
after the initial confusion, I get natural the question:
"Where the hell did you find her?"

But now you've put me in the hands of the lethal weapon, nothing but a locksmith!
I immediately start to rodere i maroni al dir. for the purchase of a little more recent norms.
Thank you very much. :finger:

 

[numero1]

Well where I found it you can't say otherwise I should kill you, eh?

and I am pleased to have put your lethal weapon in your hand but......

If I read well in that old g.u. It says that those rules are unified among them in 1942, but not repealed.

In fact, it is written that from 1942 onwards everyone will have to comply with these rules, except in particular cases indicated in the derogations provided for.

In my opinion, a reform of the rules, after the war, which led the 1629 to become the norm of the doors from that of the flanges it was.

presumably because the end of the aurarchy we had to/should put ourselves in pairs with the rest of the world.

This is my interpretation, I hope and think correct, but exactly when all this happened...... boh

Hi.

 

[numero1]

This is the answer:http://www.guritel.it/free-sum/arti/2011/01/26/sommario.htmland it is also quite recent of 2011, if you go to see at the bottom of everything there is the link that brings here: %returnche comunque porta a questo::mixed:http://www.gazzettaufficiale.biz/al...0g02499999002/20110126010g024999990020996.pdfan extract of the repealed rules, including yours.
I hope I've been clear and helpful.
Hi.

 

[Exatem]

...I hope I've been clear and useful.
Hi.

very clear and very useful.
Thank you again.
Bye.

 

[numero1]

Please, it's a pleasure.
but I still couldn't find a table ..... it seems absurd
Hi.

 

[Exatem]

Please, it's a pleasure.
but I still couldn't find a table ..... it seems absurd
Hi.

to me it seems also absurd that such norms do not appear on the site of one as rules withdrawn and replaced by "xyz" or repealed, given what they cost.. .

 

[Exatem]

...and I'm glad I put your lethal weapon in your hand but...

But nothing, now you've "spolettato". :biggrin:

 

[numero1]

to me it seems also absurd that such norms do not appear on the site of one as rules withdrawn and replaced by "xyz" or repealed, given what they cost.. .

effettivamente ......... :frown:

 

[numero1]

But nothing, now you've "spolettato". :biggrin:

but sorry to try on the sites of the rina, abs etc. etc. can be there something. :redface:
Hi.

 

[Exatem]

but sorry to try on the sites of the rina, abs etc. etc. can be there something. :redface:
Hi.

by habit before asking questions on the forum I do some research on the internet trying various options for the question to ask, but this time the network did not give me other answers except what you linked to me (and that I still knew already).
But he didn't go back to the 1942 gu and I keep wondering how you did it.
However, the problem is back. the pump that had been hypothesized to install and that had been set to me, I "discovered" not be suitable for the service, so... it will be distributed (maybe) later.

 

[numero1]

I also do this, first I always try.......... :smile:

Could you change your name to 3ad?
You know flange uni says everything and nothing, wouldn't it be better to flange uni 1629?
mine is only a suggestion of course, so one when looking finds something + precise :mixed:

happy to know that the problem has come back... and as far as the question is concerned...... look here:
http://augusto.digitpa.gov.it/Here's where I found him:biggrin:

thanks to google obviously.
Hi.