Re: [PipingDesign] Urgent Vent and Drain Issue!

From: <Thomas>
Date: Wed Jul 03 2002 - 10:57:00 EDT

don't cull me......

(i love this stuff)

At 01:33 AM 7/3/2002 -0700, you wrote:
>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?
>
>
>
>_____________________________________________________
>Unsubscribe: PipingDesign-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Thomas G Laupa PE
Senior Engineer - Ondeo Nalco Applied Services Office Address: 1001 Frontenac Rd, Naperville, IL, 60566 Courier Address: 1003 Remington, Fort Collins, CO, 80524 800-944-6252 x5745
800-493-5009 fax Received on Wed Jul 03 10:57:00 2002

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Mar 09 2010 - 00:20:35 EST