Piping Color Code 4

Far as I know it's users' choice.

There are ASTM colors for different material but there's no industry or code standard service specific color scheme that I'm aware of.

The most consistent color I've see used at different facilities is red for fire fighting systems. I've seen nitrogen lines painted blue one place and green in another. One facility painted lines yellow if they contained H2S bearing streams...

Ansi and ASME have had codes for years, I just Googled 'piping color codes' and got the following. These are great places for info and one has FREE color code chart

Pipe Marking Guide - FREE - Pipe Color Code
FREE pipe marking chart shows ASME & ANSI A13.1 code requirements. Pipe labeling requirements, including color codes and label sizes.
- 45k - Cached -

ANSI Pipe Marking Standards
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
Are particular shades of yellow, green, red and blue required for pipe labels? A. Yes, ANSI A13.1-1981 recommends the color code featured in the ANSI ...
-
hope this helps, don't forget Googling is a great rresource.

OSHA outlines the color code for marking physical hazards in 29 CFR 1910.144. In areas where OSHA does not cite specific requirements, the ANSI standard is followed.




BigInch-born in the trenches.

I took the question as relating more to color of paint lines could be given for particular services, not hazard labeling or marking.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of labeling and hazard identification but I think powerplantop is hunting different game.

Maybe not.

Thank you to all, but yes dtn6770 is right. We have a lot of new hires with little to no engineering background and feel that it would be safer as well as easier for everyone if you could look at a system and identify it as river water or fuel oil without having to trace it back to the origin. We have four plants all different but all interconnected so it makes for a difficult time for tracing, especially in a pinch. Thanks for all of the replies

Personal opinion; labels are much cheaper and require no maintenance. Even if painted you need to label all lines, and paint can't tell you which way the flow is. One of my clients (gov't agency) paints all piping over a certain size and it looks like crap, IMO. Condenser water is orange, chilled water is a baby blue. I get nauseous every time I'm in the central plant!

The companies that offer free colour charts are usually trying to sell a labelling system. I ordered one once and it wasn't that impressive or useful (the free chart, that is).

Colour-coding can be a problem for the colour-blind if the lines are not also properly labelled regarding transmitted fluid and flow direction.

Personal, off-topic anecdote: My transition to CAD was especially difficult due to having to visually interpret something other than shades of gray when "drawing". Thin yellow, green and red lines on a monitor all look the same to me.

Paul

Paint the lines according to OSHA (a CFR is not optional), or ANSI where OSHA regulations are not applicable, and stencil or label the lines with the product name.

BigInch-born in the trenches.

I believe the American Public Works Association (APWA) also encourages a color coding system of even buried lines per the codes mentioned at (I would suspect when lettered tapes and labels are used to mark lines, these are likely available in most or all of these stated colors as well).

As far as practicality, RossABQ is dead on about labels being much cheaper depending on how much painting is in question. The no maintenance of labels can be argued depending on the type of labels and how they’re applied. Identifying flow direction has got to be part of the gig no matter what. (Credit to RossABQ on that one too.) I’ve had a similar experience as Gator…expect a call shortly after place the online request for the free color chart. They sell label makers and want your business. That may not be a bad thing if they’ve got good stuff.

Googling 29 CRF1910.144 provided some insight into Big Inch’s position. Its title is Safety Color Code for Marking Physical Hazards. At least that’s what came up in OSHA’s site. 1910.144(a)(1) – Red shall be the basic color for the identification of: 1910.144(a)(1)(i) – fire protection equipment and apparatus. 1910.144(a)(1)(ii) – Danger. Safety cans or other portable containers of flammable liquids having a flash point at or below 80 deg. F, ….1910.144(a)(1)(iii) – Stop. Emergency stop bars on hazardous machines such as rubber mills, wire blocks……1910.144(a)(2) – [Reserved]… 1910.144(a)(3) – Yellow. Yellow shall be the basic color for designating caution and for marking physical hazards such as: Striking against, stumbling, falling, tripping, and “caught in between.” I’ll let ya’ll do what you want with that information.

Anyway, powerplantop I commend you on your cause. Good line identification by whatever means can make life better, and safer, for everyone. Vast expanses of piping would most probably be better addressed by strategically placed labels (w/flow direction). I suppose if the resources are available, localized systems can probably be addressed by paint: stuff like equipment lube and cooling systems that doesn’t usually have to be chased too far. I’ll be an effort to get everything clean enough to paint. If you do proceed with mass painting, make sure the right paint system is use for the temperature and material of pipe.

Back to labels, you shouldn’t have any trouble finding useful products. Some things to think about: 1) accuracy – the wrong label or direction can put someone in a world of hurt, 2) terminology – not tough with “utility” type services but can get sticky when you get into process streams that can be called different things by different people, 3) locations – obviously you want identifier where people can see them; I favor valves, above/below ground transitions, in/out of pipe rack transitions, and equipment ins and outs.

dtn6670
BULLS-EYE dead center
Nothing more to be said

Thank you to all. I think that you have definitley persuaded me to use labels as opposed to painting four different power plants.