Parallel Tanks

[Daniel_LaFleur]

Originally Posted by dtengineering

Thanks for the tip on the code tags for the ascii art, Daniel.

I do have a couple of clarifications to make, however. Each of the diagrams numbered 1-4 should have effectively the same volume of stored air, two tanks at 120 psi each. Note that each system can be expanded up to the number of storage tanks allowed, I have just shown two tanks here as an example, and have not accounted for any "extra" high pressure air stored in the longer tubing runs.

Secondly while theory may predict different flow rates downstream of the regulator, I have not done any tests to show whether there is a practical difference in flow and pressure downstream of the regulator between setups #1-4. Perhaps others have? There is probably at least as much difference in flow rates due to tubing lengths and connectors (Y vs. T, as pointed out) and bends in the tubing as there is due to tank arrangement, but even then I don't know just "how much" it takes in order to be significant. I just posted the sketches to show different ways of hooking up the storage tanks on the high pressure side of the system.

The fifth (un-numbered) diagram will store less air, as one tank will be at 120 psi and the other, downstream of the regulator, will be at 60 psi.

Jason

I may have misinterpreted your ascii art. I assumed (I know ) that the tank(s) in figures 2-4 were downstream of the regulator.

The small regulators that FIRST has used in the past give ~ 50-60 SLPM flow at 60 PSI output and 120 PSI input. Most applications in FIRST do not need anywhere near that, and if you did (for a short burst) then moving 1 tank downstream of the regulator would give you the added flow (for a very short burst) with the total volume being lower.

[dtengineering]

Originally Posted by Daniel_LaFleur

I may have misinterpreted your ascii art. I assumed (I know ) that the tank(s) in figures 2-4 were downstream of the regulator.

It would have been easy to misinterpret. Thanks to your tip, and Kevin's, I've gone back and tidied it up a bit.

Jason

[FourPenguins]

Unfortunately, your electrical analogy doesn't work, and the reason is this:
In electricity, the force (emf/voltage) is being "pulled" by the difference in charge. It has a bias, one terminal to the other, and it cannot leak (generally, anyway). In pneumatic systems, force is applied equally in all directions, so when one direction is open, this is the path of least resistance. If a leak opens, this path has very little resistance and the air follows this path. The only way your series design would work would be if there were some way to isolate the ruptured tubing once a leak was detected.
Sorry