View Single Post
  #4   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-02-2014, 00:30
Steven Smith Steven Smith is offline
Registered User
FRC #3005 (RoboChargers)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Rookie Year: 2013
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 215
Steven Smith has a reputation beyond reputeSteven Smith has a reputation beyond reputeSteven Smith has a reputation beyond reputeSteven Smith has a reputation beyond reputeSteven Smith has a reputation beyond reputeSteven Smith has a reputation beyond reputeSteven Smith has a reputation beyond reputeSteven Smith has a reputation beyond reputeSteven Smith has a reputation beyond reputeSteven Smith has a reputation beyond reputeSteven Smith has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Q&A 365 - important pneumatic ruling

I'm not sure if I follow the logic that because other components would fail first, the ruling does not relate to safety.

Regardless of whether the tubing or the tanks would fail first, the sole purpose of including a safety relief valve is to ensure that the entire system stays below the rated working pressure of the components. Connecting the safety relief to the system with flexible tubing that could potentially be kinked by a robot mechanism or any other number of things would render the safety relief worthless, therefore the rule is that it must be connected with rigid fittings.

Seems pretty cut and dry to me?
__________________
2013 - 2017 - Mentor - Robochargers 3005
2014 - 2017 - Mentor - FLL 5817 / 7913
2013 - Day I Die - Robot Fanatic
Reply With Quote