Corrections

Roughly twenty-five errors turned up across thirteen publishers while this data was compiled — two of them in the source our own ASME B36.10M-2015 rows are parsed from.

Errors Found in Published Sources

Sizes below are given as nominal pipe size (NPS) or DN; the figures at issue are outside diameters (OD), wall thicknesses and masses per unit length. Publishers are described rather than named: the claim is about a number, not about a company.

Some of these are errors inside standards documents, not in charts copying them. That is the whole case for checking arithmetic rather than counting how many sources agree.

Errors found in published pipe charts and standards, and what is published here instead
What was wrongWhereHow it was caughtWhat we publish now
Outside diameter of NPS ⅜ given as 15.9 mmA chart headed ASME B36.10M, on a site ranking on the first page of Google for the head termIt disagreed with five independent publishers17.1 mm
Outside diameter of NPS 5 given as 139.7 mmThe same chart139.7 mm is the EN 10220 value — a European figure printed in a table labelled American. Five publishers give the ASME one141.3 mm
Schedule columns shifted one place right at NPS 4 and NPS 5A piping-materials referenceASME publishes no schedule 140 at NPS 4 at all. Adjudicated two to one against the source by two other publishersSchedule 120 = 0.438 in, schedule 160 = 0.531 in, XXS = 0.674 in
Wall thickness of 2.70 mm at NPS 26, schedule 20The source the ASME rows here are parsed fromThe mass formula: the row’s own 136.30 lb/ft resolves at 0.500 in, which is 12.70 mm12.70 mm, carried in the data with a correction note
Wall thickness of 1.1250 in at NPS 18The same sourceThe mass formula: 31.75 mm is 1.2500 in, and the row’s 223.82 lb/ft matches 1.25001.2500 in. NPS 18 also has a legitimate 1.125 in wall at 28.58 mm, so the fix was keyed on both units — a blanket find-and-replace would have corrupted a real row
A published mass of 233.72 kg/m for a 402 mm outside diameter with a 24 mm wallGB/T 17395 itselfThe formula and both neighbouring rows give 223.72 kg/m223.72 kg/m, with the misprint recorded against the row
The bracketed imperial cross-reference read as the Chinese nominal size — 60.3 mm where the standard means 60English-language reproductions of GB/T 173952,485 published mass cells re-derived: 2,462 of them, 99.07%, match the un-bracketed integer. The standard’s own text says the imperial size is not recommendedThe un-bracketed value as the Chinese nominal size, with the ISO figure shown as the cross-reference it is
EN 10255 DN 150 given as 168.3 mmAn engineering reference back-filling the EN 10220 valueFive sources give 165.1 mm, and the GOST 3262 series independently lands in the same place165.1 mm
Superseded BS 1387:1985 and DIN 2440 walls — 2.65, 3.25, 4.05, 4.85 mm — printed under an EN 10255 headingSeveral UK stockistsMass arithmetic: a DN 25 medium tube published at 2.41 kg/m resolves at a 3.2 mm wall (2.407), not at 3.25 mm (2.440)The current EN 10255 walls. Legacy walls are not republished under a current name
Every wall thickness in one GOST 10704 table attributed to the neighbouring columnAn online copy of the standardThe mass formula. Read cell by cell the shifted output looked entirely plausibleThe corrected pairing
An outside diameter printed as 88 mmA GOST tableEvery mass in the row resolves at 83 mm — optical character recognition damage, not a real sizeNothing. There is no 88 mm size here
Eight single-digit typos in GOST 8734 and GOST 10704Online copies of both standardsThe mass formulaThe rows, with a visible “could not be verified” label. No upstream correction exists
A wall thickness of 45.3 mm where the table’s own ratio gives 400 ÷ 26 = 15.3 mmAn engineering referenceRecomputing the wall from the ratio that same table publishesNothing. The figure was rejected rather than reconciled
US HDPE DIPS walls for DR 17 to 32.5 that fail the source’s own wall-from-diameter relationshipThe only source found for that seriesRecomputing wall thickness from outside diameter and dimension ratioNothing. The series stays out until a second source exists

The GOST typos are the ones that cannot be closed by looking again. Every accessible copy of GOST 8734 online is the same scan, so re-checking returns the same typo and reads like confirmation. GOST 8732, by contrast, was reissued in 2025 with all eleven of its deviations corrected; 8734 has had no such reissue. Those rows stay labelled rather than quietly changed to a value no source supports.

Corrections to Our Own Data

A corrections page that only lists other people’s mistakes is marketing. These are ours. Most of them produced output that looked entirely plausible: the missing sizes were invisible until the data was checked against the standard itself, and eight publishers agreed with us about rows we had never loaded. That is why arithmetic, not agreement, is treated as the test.

Faults found in this site’s own compilation, and how each was caught
What was wrongWhereHow it was caughtWhat we publish now
Four nominal sizes missing entirely — NPS 1¼, 1½, 2½ and 3½, forty rowsOur own parserChecking coverage against the standard itself. The source writes 1-1/2 (40) with a hyphen and our size pattern had none, so those rows were dropped silentlyAll four sizes. DN 65 — 2½ inch — carries the largest JIS-versus-ASME divergence of any size, so the hole would have been conspicuous
Every wall thickness from one source parsed a thousand times too large — .109 read as 109.0Our own parserA 0% agreement rate against every other source. The number pattern demanded a digit before the decimal point, and that source omits leading zerosCorrect values. This bug announced itself; the missing-sizes bug above did not, which is the argument for checking arithmetic rather than agreement
732 rows silently collapsed to 223Our own row keysRows were keyed on nominal size and schedule, but 530 ASME walls carry no schedule number at all, so they overwrote one anotherRows keyed on the wall thickness. Every row survives
Table figures read by a language modelOur earlier methodThree separate failures: rows returned for sizes the page did not contain; schedule columns mis-mapped; and the ASME PDF read down its wall-thickness column instead of across the schedule row, returning 0.5 in for NPS 24 schedule 40 where the standard says 0.688Nothing from that method survives. Every table is parsed deterministically and no language model reads a number
21 conflicts with a cross-check source that were not conflictsOur own comparisonEvery difference was exactly 0.001 in, and every value an exact thirty-second of an inch: one side rounds half up, the other truncatesThe exact fraction — 7/16 in (0.4375) — rather than either party’s lossy three-decimal figure
10 of 16 rows appeared to conflict with a two-decimal sourceOur own comparison toleranceComparing at three decimals against a source that publishes at two manufactures false conflicts. At its own precision all 16 agreeSources compared at their own published precision
Schedule 40 and STD treated as one columnA cross-check source’s combined heading, and our reading of itEleven apparent conflicts resolved to a single cause: above NPS 10 the STD wall is not schedule 40. At NPS 12, STD is 0.375 in and schedule 40 is 0.406 inThe two listed separately. STD equals schedule 40 through NPS 10 and XS equals schedule 80 through NPS 8; above those they diverge permanently

Every Row Carries a Publication Status

Corrections are only half of the policy. The other half is that no row is allowed to appear without saying how far it has been checked. Every row in the dataset carries a publish_as value, and that value governs how the row may be shown. The rule and the standing list of known-unverifiable items travel inside the data files themselves, not in a document beside them.

verified
Confirmed against the primary standard, or against two genuinely independent publishers, and it passes the mass formula. Published plainly.
computed
The dimensions are verified but the published mass failed the formula. Our computed value is shown and the published mass is never quoted.
single_source
One publisher, arithmetically self-consistent. Usable, and labelled as such.
unverified
Could not be confirmed. Shown with a visible “could not be verified” label, or omitted. Never stated as fact.

In the main chart, 766 of 772 rows are verified against ASME B36.10M-2015 itself and 6 could not be. The full accounting, including the figures across every other standard that could not be confirmed, is in how this data was verified.

How to Report an Error

Reports are welcome and they are how this page grows. A usable one names the standard and its edition, the table or clause, the size, and the value you believe it should be — what makes a report checkable is stated on what this reference is and who builds it.

Send it to info@pipesizechart.com. Every report is tested the way the original data was: against the standard’s own mass formula, and against the standard’s text where it can be obtained. If it holds, the row changes and the change appears on this page with a date. Nothing is edited silently, and no correction is removed once published. Data revision: .

PDF chart