Standardisation can be a vexed question for manufacturers who, in most cases, would like to keep to themselves features of their products that may give them a commercial edge in a competitive market. ■

Referring to a previous recent thread concerning "The boy stood on the burning deck." shouldn't you also be asking for all belts to be fire resistant, chemical resistant and frost resistant? What holds good for belts also holds good for e.g. pipes; Should all piping then be SuperDuplex?

If the belt construction details are not known by the Owner then it is the fault of the Owner. ■

If you take the time to ask the manufacturers, you will find differences in how they select the cords, the splice design, the fatigue strength ratings, belt safety factors, et al.

Mfgrs. keep on hand, in the factory, a set of cord diameters. These vary between belt suppliers, between cord providers and even the strength rating of the cords.

You do not seem to understand there is a difference in supplier knowledge, amount of product they keep on hand, and how they meet the market.

Now if a client wishes to obtain the best price, how do they achieve all the wishes of the supplier, owner, common sense, and advance knowledge of mfgrs. product superiorities. It won't happen. There is too much money on the table.

This notion of standard sizes always begs the day when someone invents a better widget. Are you going to ignore it, or not purchase it? Most will bend to the better products.

DIN already tried such an approach with the 22129, 22131, and other design selection processes. Now DIN is obsolete, although some still practice it without knowing there are better ways. Is this the practice you advocate? ■