Re: Urgent Vent and Drain Issue!

Hi Mahavir and everyone else,

No I don't agree (just for the sake of not agreeing). From now on I'm going to instigate fights around here, I am growing bored of 6 or 7 people consistently answering questions with little or no input from the other 450 or so subscribers.

Which reminds me...I'm going to cull the list soon - this has been done before here. There are far too many people subscribed from anonymous accounts that are bouncing. I'd rather have 100 quality listmembers than 500 people who sign-up and then don't read.

I will let everyone know when the axe will fall and give a two week notice. I am seriously considering changing the subscription requirements.

Please don't email me about this, I will make a general announcement to all when I have decided how to manage the change.

Paul

• Original Message ----- From: "Prasad Mahavir/Piping"

> Hey Paul,
>
> Are you not forgetting another category?...guys who are not juniors, but
> have not yet reached the elder level. I guess that this set, and it
includes
> me :-)), feels equally comfortable with 'absorbing' specs and 'looking
these
> up on intranet'. However, since there are all types and all ages in most
of
> the teams, things usually work out. You agree?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Mahavir
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Bowers [mailto:pbowers@pipingdesign.com]
> Sent: 03 July, 2002 1:23 PM
> To: PipingDesign@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [PipingDesign] Urgent Vent and Drain Issue!
>
>
> Someone already mentioned that connections may be required for shop hydro
or
> pneumatic testing (not for draining or venting).
>
> Unless the designer is actually specifying spool lengths and knows exactly
> how the parts of the puzzle will be assembled prior to erection - heh-heh,
> he said "erection" - in the field, usually the fabricator dictates any
> supplementally needed connections. The cost of this is covered in the
> contract.
>
> PFDs should only show connections which are process-related or
> specially-required connections due to unusual fluids or processes. Adding
> this information at an early stage only confuses everything. P&IDs are
> similar; it is not required to show *every piping detail* on it. It's
always
> fun to see the newbies argue about what should and should not be on the
> P&ID.
>
> Then again, I'm assuming that even junior CAD guys are given
> project/process/piping specs the day they start and that they actually
read
> and absorb them. Maybe I'm wrong and juniors are too busy these days/are
not
> considered important enough to be given the documents.
>
> Or maybe the older guys that know all this stuff can't figure out how to
> access the project specs on the intranet, so they sit around all day
whining
> about the old days.
>
> Comments?
>
> Paul
>
>
> > If at all, It will be as per the process requirement only. Are you sure
> > it's not there in the P&ID?
>
>
> > > Recently one of our Piping subcontractor has asked for extra drain
> points
> > > in the GRP pipe lines.These would be in additional to the normal high
> > > point vents or low point drains. Is there any technical reason for the
> > > same? Should the same be provided?
Received on Wed Jul 03 04:33:00 2002