1/8 m/m check valve suggestions

Kensho

Junior Poster
Jan 26, 2013
6
0
1
I have been reading the threads and researching online about check valve option for my first build.
So far I've been building all ss fittings but another $40 on ss check value is starting to sound extravagant
However a want something between my metering value and bubble counter. Suggestions?
 
Mar 20, 2013
1,007
44
48
US
We don't know what 1/8 m/m check valves are or it seems like you wrote 1/8 mm check valves, which don't exist.

You should be more careful (proofread, take time to phrase, spellcheck, etc.) how you ask questions. If you don't take the time to ask carefully, others may not want to answer you simply because they don't know what you mean or they don't want to spend their time and effort when you didn't do so.

Anyway, I think you meant 1/8" diameter check valve. What kind of BC? The JBL with the NPT port? Is it an fNPT or an mNPT?
 

ua hua

Guru Class Expert
Aug 6, 2011
120
0
16
44
Nebraska
You know Solcielo you don't have to be so condescending when answering a question especially if someone is new and doesn't know the correct terminology to use or if they happen to misspell something on a forum post. There is a way to ask somebody for more information and truly try to help them out without making them feel like their an idiot. As for the op's question if you spend all that money on a nice regulator what's another $40 to protect your investment. I used a Swagelok check valve attached to my regulator alng with some of those cheapo inline ones that I have already replaced 3 times. It may be a little redundant but it gives me piece of mind. Here is a link for a Swagelok that would work but you will need some tube adapters and the ferrules.

http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-5...0001&campid=5338187531&icep_item=281078337164

If you need to understand how these fittings work read through this thread.

http://www.barrreport.com/showthread.php/8226-How-to-use-Swagelok-tube-fittings

If you want to have it mounted on your regulator then I believe the model # you want is 2c-2-1/3 or you can use the one I linked but will use in inline unless you can get a tube-fitting to male thread adaptor but I don't know that part #. I hope that helps answer your question. I would get rid of the bubble counter all together and make things easier.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Matt F.

Lifetime Charter Member
Lifetime Member
May 30, 2009
2,319
4
38
California
I use either the Swagelok SS (or B) 2C2-1/3 (male 1/8" NPT) or the SS(or B)-2C4-1/3. The B-2C4-1/3 has a longer wait time and is a bit more expensive than the male counterpart. B= brass and SS= stainless steel. There are others out there, but these work and work well for a long long time. Downside is cost, but it's worth it, IMO.

You can go on Swagelok.com and set up an account to buy direct through them. Literally takes 5 minutes to register, and you'll be set to buy any NPT fittings you need. They are nuclear graded, too, not the crapola ace hardware fittings. Made from forged metal, not cast. better fit and finish. It makes a difference you know.
 
Mar 20, 2013
1,007
44
48
US
ua hua;123115 said:
You know Solcielo you don't have to be so condescending when answering a question especially if someone is new and doesn't know the correct terminology to use or if they happen to misspell something on a forum post. There is a way to ask somebody for more information and truly try to help them out without making them feel like their an idiot.

You are blaming me because the OP doesn't read carefully? You then accuse me of being condescending when I answered his questions? I could accuse you of being something just like you did me but you wouldn't like it.

Maybe you haven't noticed but a lot people aren't clear and concise when asking questions. This makes it difficult to know what is being asked. I was very nice to state the reasons why he didn't get responses when he said, "ouch nothing?" I could have just ignored it like I ignored it the first time but instead took the time to tell him why his feelings were hurt. Hopefully, knowing the reasons why they don't get responses, they would put in effort to be clear, concise, and explicit in their questions. The burden is not on the audience to try to understand what is being said. The burden lies with the speaker.

Further, the speaker has an extra burden: modern readers don't read carefully and lack the necessary comprehension to understand what is read. Because the audience's abilities and skills have worsened over the past decades, it's even more important to be clear, concise, and explicit when asking questions. Otherwise, the only people responding are either mind-readers or those who want to increase their post count.
 

ua hua

Guru Class Expert
Aug 6, 2011
120
0
16
44
Nebraska
Solcielo lawrencia;123119 said:
You are blaming me because the OP doesn't read carefully? You then accuse me of being condescending when I answered his questions? I could accuse you of being something just like you did me but you wouldn't like it.

Maybe you haven't noticed but a lot people aren't clear and concise when asking questions. This makes it difficult to know what is being asked. I was very nice to state the reasons why he didn't get responses when he said, "ouch nothing?" I could have just ignored it like I ignored it the first time but instead took the time to tell him why his feelings were hurt. Hopefully, knowing the reasons why they don't get responses, they would put in effort to be clear, concise, and explicit in their questions. The burden is not on the audience to try to understand what is being said. The burden lies with the speaker.

Further, the speaker has an extra burden: modern readers don't read carefully and lack the necessary comprehension to understand what is read. Because the audience's abilities and skills have worsened over the past decades, it's even more important to be clear, concise, and explicit when asking questions. Otherwise, the only people responding are either mind-readers or those who want to increase their post count.

No I'm not blaming you because the OP didn't word things to your liking, I'm blaming you for being condescending when responding to a question. It's funny that both Matt and myself were able to answer his question without all this information that you needed and do it without talking down to the person asking the question. I guess we read his mind and I added 1 more post to my huge number of posts that I have slowly been building up over the past couple of years. A couple of more and I will hit the century mark. So you can respond to this post with something snarky and I can quote it and get even closer to that magical number of posts that makes me more knowledgeable than someone with less posts.
 
Mar 20, 2013
1,007
44
48
US
ua hua;123127 said:
No I'm not blaming you because the OP didn't word things to your liking, I'm blaming you for being condescending when responding to a question. It's funny that both Matt and myself were able to answer his question without all this information that you needed and do it without talking down to the person asking the question. I guess we read his mind and I added 1 more post to my huge number of posts that I have slowly been building up over the past couple of years. A couple of more and I will hit the century mark. So you can respond to this post with something snarky and I can quote it and get even closer to that magical number of posts that makes me more knowledgeable than someone with less posts.

The irony is that you accuse me of being condescending when you actually are and don't even realize it.
 

ua hua

Guru Class Expert
Aug 6, 2011
120
0
16
44
Nebraska
Solcielo lawrencia;123133 said:
The irony is that you accuse me of being condescending when you actually are and don't even realize it.

Oh I realize it, that's for sure. That's funny how that works isn't it.

One post closer to that magic number, thanks
 
Mar 20, 2013
1,007
44
48
US
ua hua;123136 said:
Oh I realize it, that's for sure. That's funny how that works isn't it.

One post closer to that magic number, thanks

Let's just stop this so we don't clutter these threads. It's not helpful for anyone.
 

oldpunk

Guru Class Expert
Dec 1, 2009
427
4
18
Solcielo lawrencia;123139 said:
Let's just stop this so we don't clutter these threads. It's not helpful for anyone.

what's not helpful is replying when you yourself aren't certain of the answers. All theory and no practice doesn't really help anyone. It just spreads miss information.
 

Kensho

Junior Poster
Jan 26, 2013
6
0
1
@ ua hua I almost went for that one! Bought SWAGELOK SS-2C4-KZ-5 CHECK Instead. Bid on both and it came in cheaper even with having to purchase [email protected] ss 1/8 male male fittings.

What is the appropriate shorthand for male fittings on both ends?



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

Matt F.

Lifetime Charter Member
Lifetime Member
May 30, 2009
2,319
4
38
California
If you want male 1/8" NPT, which is what most of us use, you want this part number:

Stainless:
SS-2C2-1/3 (male 1/8" NPT)
SS-2C4-1/3 (female 1/8" NPT)

Brass:
B-2C2-1/3 (male 1/8" NPT)
B-2C4-1/3 (female 1/8" NPT)

Anything other than that, and you are getting exotic or into the experimental range.
 

Matt F.

Lifetime Charter Member
Lifetime Member
May 30, 2009
2,319
4
38
California
if the 5 at the end of that part number refers to PSIG, be prepared to use more working pressure to crack that valve.

Kensho;123146 said:
@ ua hua I almost went for that one! Bought SWAGELOK SS-2C4-KZ-5 CHECK Instead. Bid on both and it came in cheaper even with having to purchase [email protected] ss 1/8 male male fittings.

What is the appropriate shorthand for male fittings on both ends?



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

kevmo911

Member
Oct 19, 2010
67
0
6
44
Greensboro, NC
Hey, I'm curious. In the past month, I had a Swagelok valve fail on me. B-4C-1/3, which is the brass version, inline, with 1/4" compression fittings (connected to tubing with inserts). It'd been about a year, and while it's a good bit longer than other cv's I've used - cheapo LFS plastic guys, Clippards, and the "stainless" HK silver guys - it still failed in a much shorter time than I'd hoped an expensive cv would.

Anybody else have any experiences with the Swagelok/Parker/clone high-end check valves they could share? If my experience is anything resembling standard, then I would probably suggest to the OP that he invest in a bunch of cheap ones from USPlastic.

- - - Updated - - -

Hey, I'm curious. In the past month, I had a Swagelok valve fail on me. B-4C-1/3, which is the brass version, inline, with 1/4" compression fittings (connected to tubing with inserts). It'd been about a year, and while it's a good bit longer than other cv's I've used - cheapo LFS plastic guys, Clippards, and the "stainless" HK silver guys - it still failed in a much shorter time than I'd hoped an expensive cv would.

Anybody else have any experiences with the Swagelok/Parker/clone high-end check valves they could share? If my experience is anything resembling standard, then I would probably suggest to the OP that he invest in a bunch of cheap ones from USPlastic.
 

Matt F.

Lifetime Charter Member
Lifetime Member
May 30, 2009
2,319
4
38
California
How did you acquire your check valve? I've never had a problem with a swagelok check valve, and I've run them 4 times as many years as you did with yours. Dow what it's worth, the ADA check valve, which is 6$ is equally as durable as the swagelok. Both work, and combination is stellar. A new swagelok is only 26$.
kevmo911;123182 said:
Hey, I'm curious. In the past month, I had a Swagelok valve fail on me. B-4C-1/3, which is the brass version, inline, with 1/4" compression fittings (connected to tubing with inserts). It'd been about a year, and while it's a good bit longer than other cv's I've used - cheapo LFS plastic guys, Clippards, and the "stainless" HK silver guys - it still failed in a much shorter time than I'd hoped an expensive cv would.

Anybody else have any experiences with the Swagelok/Parker/clone high-end check valves they could share? If my experience is anything resembling standard, then I would probably suggest to the OP that he invest in a bunch of cheap ones from USPlastic.

- - - Updated - - -

Hey, I'm curious. In the past month, I had a Swagelok valve fail on me. B-4C-1/3, which is the brass version, inline, with 1/4" compression fittings (connected to tubing with inserts). It'd been about a year, and while it's a good bit longer than other cv's I've used - cheapo LFS plastic guys, Clippards, and the "stainless" HK silver guys - it still failed in a much shorter time than I'd hoped an expensive cv would.

Anybody else have any experiences with the Swagelok/Parker/clone high-end check valves they could share? If my experience is anything resembling standard, then I would probably suggest to the OP that he invest in a bunch of cheap ones from USPlastic.

- - - Updated - - -

How did you acquire your check valve? I've never had a problem with a swagelok check valve, and I've run them 4 times as many years as you did with yours. Dow what it's worth, the ADA check valve, which is 6$ is equally as durable as the swagelok. Both work, and combination is stellar. A new swagelok is only 26$.
kevmo911;123182 said:
Hey, I'm curious. In the past month, I had a Swagelok valve fail on me. B-4C-1/3, which is the brass version, inline, with 1/4" compression fittings (connected to tubing with inserts). It'd been about a year, and while it's a good bit longer than other cv's I've used - cheapo LFS plastic guys, Clippards, and the "stainless" HK silver guys - it still failed in a much shorter time than I'd hoped an expensive cv would.

Anybody else have any experiences with the Swagelok/Parker/clone high-end check valves they could share? If my experience is anything resembling standard, then I would probably suggest to the OP that he invest in a bunch of cheap ones from USPlastic.

- - - Updated - - -

Hey, I'm curious. In the past month, I had a Swagelok valve fail on me. B-4C-1/3, which is the brass version, inline, with 1/4" compression fittings (connected to tubing with inserts). It'd been about a year, and while it's a good bit longer than other cv's I've used - cheapo LFS plastic guys, Clippards, and the "stainless" HK silver guys - it still failed in a much shorter time than I'd hoped an expensive cv would.

Anybody else have any experiences with the Swagelok/Parker/clone high-end check valves they could share? If my experience is anything resembling standard, then I would probably suggest to the OP that he invest in a bunch of cheap ones from USPlastic.