Victaulic Pipe Joints

It must have something to do with the piping materials.

Malleable iron cannot be welded, and forming a screw on it runs the risk of mechanical failure during or after. So a coupling is the better choice.

Malleable iron is one of a number of piping materials for potable water, though plastics are becoming commonplace these days. Other materials are better suited to other services in industrial circumstances.

Cost

The elbows, tees and such cost around 4 times as much.

The other issue is the availability of spare parts. Vitaulic pipe joints aren't as common, which means you have to keep the more expensive critical spares in inventory.

not to mention the amount of blocking required to keep the pipes stabilized on the elbows doing installation.

Especially on the larger pipes.

It appears that cost is the biggest drawback. Also, there is the exoerience issue with ccontractors. They hate to change.

You do save on man hours, however fittings can be three times as expensive. From my experience, it is not the mech. contractors that are old school - it comes down to a lot of the design engineers who spec. unreservedly s/40 welded connections. I suppose it boils down to the size of the project, public/private, and the design engineer. Some engineers close the spec. to vic connections on all pipe within the building, however expressly allow it on the roof for CWS/R and other misc. outdoor pipe. I know there were a number of damaging vic failures within large commercial buildings years ago - and since then the engineers that are still in the business are very reluctant to use vic despite the advancements in the coupling design/ pressure ratings.

I know from experience that vic, or sur joint are not well recieved in heating systems. They will not leak while the heat is on but if the heat shuts down to cool to ambient temps it shrinks and the rubber gaskets slip and leak. This has happened on many of my heating units and are worse with a gycol base liquid in them. changed mosy of them over to NPT and have not had any more problems with them. Although we could not change all of them as it would be to costly and the buildings would have to be pulled completly apart.

Hi sachin rastogi,

The principal reason for avoiding these things,besides costs of fittings, is the special forming/groove cutting dyes needed to prepare the pipe ends prior to claming the sections together.(without these 'lands' the system would be unable to withstand the linear forces arising from any hydraulic pressure within the pipework. These are special cutting/deforming machines and are only suitable for this product.

Certain contractors particularly in the sprinkler industry seem to like the product as they tend to have more freedom in terms of installation practice and under these conditions erection times are impressively quick as they tend to prefabricate before coming to site.

I've also seen this system used above ground to provide a temporary supply whilst the underground mains were under repair; again it is the speed of fixing prepared lengths together; plus some latitude for accommodatinf lateral distortions that justifies the choice.

I would not use it for say a hot water heating distribution system or in a plant room environment as the costs over a 'standard' pipework system would be a grear disadvantage.