Newsgroup sci.engr.control 11583

Directory

"Six months ago, I couldn't spell engineer..........
Now I is one."
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Free Bearing Seminar
Learn what you need to know to about bearing selection and 
maintenance.  Reduce your costs.  Improve your uptime.
WHEN: December 5, 1996, 8:00 am until approximately noon.
WHERE: Horner Electric Company, 1200 Hutson Drive, Mobile, Alabama
COST: FREE
CALL TO REGISTER: Jerry Horner, 334-344-8496
EMAIL TO REGISTER: jhorner@hornerelec.com 
Your Name, Title, Company, Address, Office Phone
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This article was posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News:
http://www.dejanews.com/           [Search, Post, and Read Usenet News]

In article <328995b3.4119100@news.demon.co.uk>
          spug@intlog.demon.co.uk (Sparrow) wrote:
 > "Six months ago, I couldn't spell engineer..........
 > Now I is one."
No, no no...
It's "Now I *are* one". Sheesh! :-)
            Anthony
-- 
      |          Nobody Respects The Spammish Imposition!             |
      |      If they were anyone elses opinions, I'd be surprised.    |

Doug,
Please shut up.  You continue to put your foot in your mouth.
Doug McKean  wrote:
>J.Fix wrote:
>> Wow, you guys need to take a nap or something.  I know this is an
>> unmoderated discussion, but enough is enough.  This thread should end
>> now.  If there is still more to discuss about the PE / non-PE issue, take
>> a deep breath and start over.
>> 
>> J.C. Fix, P.E.  ( at this point I am almost afraid to use my title)
>Well put.  And you shouldn't be afraid.
>The truth is I don't know from where all the jealousy comes. 
>From both sides of the fence.  But, these few do not represent the whole. 
>At least not in my experience.   A simple posting in an ng for discussion 
>will not force the law to be enacted tomorrow.  Give me a break.  
>The ethics alone that are (supposed to be) at the bottom 
>of a licensed PE make them very accountable among by themselves 
>than among those protected by a corporate shield.
PEs are not protected by a corporate sheild.  Liability for a PE
follows you until death - an sometimes even beyond it (attaching to a
PEs estate for damages, if any).   The corporation may bankrupt or
disolve, but the PE remains liable for any damages his design may
cause.
> But, then again, 
>I know of no unlicensed engineer working for a company doing bridge 
>construction or the like that should be covered by a PE license. 
>That's already law.  Big deal. 
Many unlicensed engineers work in areas where registration is
required.  They are in training (hence the EIT status).  They work
under the direct supervision of a PE and at his direction.  That's the
law.
>If there's some beef over the test, then go study. 
>If there's some beef over words like 'engineer', 
>then go change the entire academia for using the word 'doctor' for Ph.D.
But then again, there aren't a bunch of silly college professors
walking around doing medical evaluations just because they are called
doctors, are there?  They certainly don't take the same tests.
>Both are pretty silly.  No one test makes an engineer. 
No, it's the 8+ years of experience that go into the making of a PE.
>But it sure leaves one with a good sense of confidence. 
>If the majority of the PE society regards current testing and licensing as 
>fair and just.  Done!  Discussion finished. 
Finally!
>On the other side of the coin, I don't see the PE license advantage 
>for someone that designs memory boards for a computer, either.
It's no advantage to you ... but it's required for me.  So, why don't
you regulate your industry and stay out of mine.
>This 'fear' almost promulgated to unlicensed engineers 
>has been around a long time.  And will continue. 
That's a personal problem for the unlicensed.  Why don't you get
counselling?
>*******************************************************
>Doug McKean
>doug_mckean@paragon-networks.com
>-------------------------------------------------------
>The comments and opinions stated herein are mine alone,
>and do not reflect those of my employer.
>-------------------------------------------------------
>*******************************************************
--
			M. H. Lyle, PE
			bryanteng@pipeline.com

Chris Hunter  wrote:
>I have been using Icom's "AI" series software for a little over 5 years
>now.  I am very pleased with it.  Once you learn the "dot commands",
>navigation is a breeze. We use this series of software for PLC5,PLC2,
>and SLC500 as well as the RS.  We purchased a copy of Winlogic5 (windows
>based PLC5 software), but I would not trade AI for it.  I think that
>Rockwell has come out with simular software for SLC500.
I have both the AI series and the WinLogic 5 stuff.  I just tossed the
Winlogic 5 ver 3.14 off my laptop and went back to using the  Dos
based AI series only.  The winlogic software was the buggiest piece of
crap I've ever used.  I've just heard from a friend at AB/Rockwell
that the Winlogic series dies by the end of this year.  They will be
releasing a new RSL5 software that was designed around win95 and NT
and will supposedly be very stable. But after this whole Winlogic
fiasco I'm not sure I want to spend the big bucks it will take to move
all my different packages over to the new stuff.  As for the AI series
of plc5 software; it is great. I've never had a problem with it and I
run it on my  win95 laptop  with the pcmk card.  The only pain I have
had is dealing with the everlock copy protection that Rockwell insists
on using.   

mevans@merrydown.nildram.co.uk (Mark Evans) wrote:
>Hello James,
>I recently read the following posting from you:
>> A customer of ours has a DH-485 network of 3 SLC5/01's which gather
>> analogue signals from a series of field instruments. They want to get
>> these values into their Rosemount SCADA system. One of the SLC's has a
>> KE card in which supposedly links the DH-485 network to the
>> DF1-capable RS3 card in the Rosemount system but despite much playing
>> around with the settings on everything we can find there's still been
>> no luck in getting the data up to the SCADA.
>> 
>> Has anyone else managed to get a Rosemount RS3 to talk to an A-B
>> network and if so would you mind letting us all know via the Usenet?
>> 
>I work for a company called Cytek Projects Limited.  One of their
>specialities is inter-connecting DCSs and PLCs from various vendors.
>Although they have not implemented this specific link type they have
>successfully connected the Rosemount RS3 to a Siemens system.  This was
>implemented via specially engineered driver software.
>If you would like further information on how Cytek can help you with
>this or similar problems please contact:
>Ivor New or Richard Long
>Cytek Projects Limited
>The Oast House
>5 Mead Lane
>Farnham
>Surrey
>GU9 7DY
>England 
>Tel: + 44 (0) 1252 715171,  Fax +44 (0) 1252 713271
>or you can send me an e-mail and I will arrange for an information pack
>to be sent to you.
>Hope that helps you.
>Very Best Regards,
>Mark Evans
>Manchester, England
>e-mail: mevans@merrydown.nildram.co.uk
>url: http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~mevans/index.htm
Hi, I have recently finished an job which utilised the RS3 as the main
control system. We had a number of different serial interfaces which
the RS3 handled very well. The secret was in specifying a common
interface from the outset. All the PLC's including Modicon, Allen
Bradley etc talked MODBUS on a RS 232 or 422 link. The RS3 has a PLC
interface card suitable for these applications. In a couple of
diffficult circumstances when we ran out of RS3 PLC interfaces the
Rosemont configuration engineer wrote specific routines within the RS3
RBL (Rosemount Basic Language) controller utilising MODBUS read and
write commands as necessary these all worked very well.
Clive Girdham  

Well, the date on thes letter says it all... right now it's Wednesday, Nov
13, about 2:20... but look when this letter was sent out...
I think we should listen to this guy!  :)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
On Thu, 14 Nov 1996, bruce varley wrote:
|Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 02:32:10 GMT
|From: bruce varley 
|Newsgroups: misc.industry.utilities.electric, sci.engr.control
|Subject: Re: Turbine Speed Control
|
|

M. H. Lyle, PE wrote:
< personal attacks snipped > 
Take your personal attacks off-line. 
This drivel is unacceptable in this newsgroup. 
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
"Marty" Richardson, Ph.D., P.E.
"To be or not to be" is not the question.  
"Which one costs more" is!
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

While not public domain, the book Numerical Recipes in [FORTRAN|C|Pascal]
is an excellent source of code for any sort of numerical work.  It is
available from most good book stores for about $50.00 US and will help you
with all sorts of numerical techniques.
> Does somebody knows about any pubblic domain/shareware program for
Fourier
> analysis ?

Looks like the flat earth society is alive and well :-)
Nabeel (nabeel@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu) wrote:
: Well, the date on thes letter says it all... right now it's Wednesday, Nov
: 13, about 2:20... but look when this letter was sent out...
: 
: I think we should listen to this guy!  :)
: 
: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: On Thu, 14 Nov 1996, bruce varley wrote:
: 
: |Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 02:32:10 GMT
: |From: bruce varley 
: |Newsgroups: misc.industry.utilities.electric, sci.engr.control
: |Subject: Re: Turbine Speed Control
: |
: |
: 

  2 Air Moniter Corp. Perfector series 660 3 mode PI controllers.  
  2 Air Moniter Corp Exactor 440I Air volume transmitters.  they have 
  	square root extractor with scaling multiplier and series 330 
  	differential (static, velocity) pressure transmitters
  1 Moore Products Co. pneumatic relay  2:1 RED
  reply by email

  2 Air Moniter Corp. Perfector series 660 3 mode PI controllers.  
  2 Air Moniter Corp Exactor 440I Air volume transmitters.  they have 
 	square root extractor with scaling multiplier and series 330 
  	differential (static, velocity) pressure transmitters
  1 Moore Products Co. pneumatic relay  2:1 RED
  reply by email

Dear Sirs,
            I'm  looking for a book that explains electrical 
diagrams(one-line diagrams,three-line diagrams,schematic diagrams,logic 
diagrams,wiring diagrams...etc)

In message <3287C711.57C@CONOCO.DUPONT.COM>
        Mark Leigh  writes: 
> Andy Davis wrote:
> > 
> > We have looked at many pipeline leak detection systems and there is a
> > new type available now which is quite different.
> > 
> > The system was developed for Shell and operates using only flow and
> > pressure at each end of the pipeline. The system is software only and
> > sits behind your SCADA / DCS system, which it uses as it's front end.
> > From pattern recognition theory, it can consistently determine a leak
> > down to 1% of flowrate and give you a better than 10% accurate
> > estimate of it's location along the pipeline, despite throughput
> > fluctuations and line packing issues.
> SNIP
> WE USE A SYSTEM ON OFFSHORE PIPELINES GIVING BLEND PREDICTION AND LEAK
> DETECTION. 
> HOWEVER, THE 1% ACCURACY IS INTRIGUING - 
> 1% OF WHAT ? fISCAL QUALITY GAS MEASUREMENT IS ONLY REQUIRED TO BE
> BETTER THAN +/- 1% UNCERTAINTY! I WOULD BE VERY SURPRISED IF THEY ARE
> ACHIEVING THAT KIND OF FIGURE, UNLESS THE PIPLINE IS SHORT, OR IS SINGLE
> PHASE. ANYONE OUT THERE LIKE TO COMMENT ?
> MARK LEIGH
The 1% figure I quoted is not 'accuracy' but is a detection ability 
of 1% of flowrate. This is purely a mathmatical system and as such, 
any errors on the measurements are ignored. The base (no leak) 
condition is assumded at a reset point, so any bias in mass balance 
due to measurement error is coped with. The repeatability of the 
measurement is very important however, and poor repeatability will 
mean that a deadband in the system will be needed, therefore the 1% 
figure will increase.
Andy