BigInch,
My only problem with your equation was that I took it to imply that whatever dP was required to open the check valve would be present in the flowing system. My experience has been that dP builds up to initiate flow and drops off to a vanishingly small number. Adding a multi-psi cracking pressure to "less than measurable" dP would overstate system dP.
Robster1us,
"Check valves" are one of those ubiquitous pieces of equipment that we don't think about much. In my mind a "check valve" is a "swing check valve" and all my knowledge that says that is only one of many types doesn't stop me from thinking that a check is a check. I've seen the same blind spot about ball valves. We still don't know what the OP was asking about or if he has answers to his questions.
I've been kind of argumentative in this thread, primarily because the concept of "magnitude" keeps getting lost in fluids engineering. When I go through the methods in Crane 410 and add up the additional pipe lengths for fittings and valves, I get a number. If I take that pipe length into a gas flow equation like the AGA Fully Turbulent equation, I get about the same number as if I hadn't bothered to account for the fittings. It is different, but I've never had it lead me to a different decision. And that is what is important any any mathematical modeling. The magnitude of the effects just doesn't change my decision. It is useful to be as "rigorous" as possible, but once you've reached that point you get a number. Then you have to look at that number and see how it effects your decision. A microbar dP across a gravity check valve just doesn't push me to a different pipe size.
David