On 04/12/2013 02:50 PM, m6onz5a wrote:
> On Apr 12, 2:30 pm, Nate Nagel > wrote:
>> Does anyone have a link to any law or standard that allows or prohibits
>> their use?
>>
>> Was having a discussion with a mechanic yesterday and the wrench was
>> saying that it was easier to use a compression fitting than double
>> flaring and he didn't have a problem using them; my position was that if
>> I needed to replace a hard line where it was easier to cut and splice in
>> the middle than rerun the whole thing that I would always use a double
>> flare and a union, because of the impossibility of the fitting blowing
>> apart under pressure save for a failure of the tubing itself. the
>> discussion was prompted because he was looking at a repair I'd done on a
>> friend's vehicle when the rear brakes had failed; the hose to the rear
>> axle had failed and replacement required replacement of both the axle
>> lines and the back half of the rear body line due to rust, and he'd
>> noticed that the one splice that I'd done was a double flare union.
>>
>> However when I went to research the issue I see a lot of opinions that
>> "it's illegal" to use compression fittings but no links to actual
>> references nor could I find anything in the pertinent safety inspection
>> standards (NB: I'm not a vehicle inspector nor have I ever been, so I
>> don't know if there is an "unwritten rule" that compression fittings =
>> failure.) If anyone has any knowledge of this issue I'd appreciate your
>> input esp. if it is specific to VA, MD, or DC.
>>
>> I also certainly hope that the mechanic was referring to a good steel
>> Swagelok fitting (which is at least rated for the pressures used in an
>> automotive brake application) and not the brass ones like you'd use to
>> hook up an icemaker!
>>
>> nate
>>
>> --
>> replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.http://members.cox.net/njnagel
>
> I know here in Maryland compression fittings will fail on Maryland
> inspections. But I also have customers that use them too. As far as I
> know they haven't had any issues with them. I know I wouldn't want
> them on my car. I'll only use unions, or replace the whole line.
>
> Chas
>

is there a publicly available document that explicitly states that
compression fittings should fail a safety inspection? This is actually
pertinent as the guy to whom I was talking is in MD but not an inspector
and I'm sure he'd appreciate a correction if it saves him from potential
future liability down the road.

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel