Any release of that much pressure will cause some serious damage to anything nearby.
The problem isnt the cylinder moving, the problem is that if the structural integrity of said cylinder is compromised even a little it will fail catastrophically and spray shrapnel..
People dont think of pressure as a "bomb", but it really is...
That works until one ISP sees that there is a demand for non NATed access.
They provide that and gets piles of customers.
In norway all owners of copper need to let other companies rent said copper at a reasonable price. So on the copper pair entering my apartment I have an option of at least 20 different DSL providers. Works wonders for competition;)
Using my real name my address and phone number can be found using a simple search in.....
The fecking phone book. (Even mobile phone number as those are listed by default in norway:p)
Do I worry? No.
The only bad thing that has happened in the 10 years it has been available that way was a "secret admirer" sending me a "seventh heaven vibrating buttplug" in the mail... That was an amusing package to open... But no harm done. Just amusement...
Assuming you can use any sort of GPL or the like software on company machines.
I cant. Anything named "open software" is specifically banned due to "legal reasons" as the licenses "cant" be "free". The legal types insist there is some sort of legal catch and wont allow it.
So we have retarded IT security people making decisions for 120000 people based on shoddy advice about the legality of open software...
Then there is the issue of having people to run such a system. Personally I prefer the system of cisco ip phones on every desk (they recently replaced quite a nasty piece of switchboard in the building with a brand new ip based system).
And of course due ot the joy of having to "buy" it services form the IT department even free soft-phones have a rather steep cost:p
I'm not saying it makes sense, but the technical aspect of it all is the least of the work when it comes to getting stuff done in any corporate system:(
Organizing the update to the controller in the field? - Requires a look into what could be influenced by the change - Requires in some cases an 'offline' load of the controller which can only be done at a time of a maintenance downtime (once a year at most, sometimes every 2-4 years)
Documentation: - Documentation of what functionality changes for operators - Update of system configuration diagrams - Update of various tag info in the plant documentation system
Install: - A job package must be written detailing every change made to the system. - A test package must be written with a full test suite to check that nothing broke during the change. People make mistakes and this is important.
Now... How much will all this cost?
When I'm working on jobs like this the company I work for charges about 170 bucks an hour...
4*3 hours (The change, verification and signoff, various overhead) 5*2 hours (Field work, included travel time etc, x2 for 2 people) 8*3 hours (documentation, x3 due to document controllers, various overhead) 6*2 hours (job/test package) 5*5 hours (testing)
83 hours, 170 bucks an hour, 14110 USD.
This is a fairly average estimate of what something would cost on -our- side of a very small change. If hardware is involved it rapidly skyrockets in cost.
In addition there is a myriad of people that need to check and verify the change on the -other- side of the fence. Namely the owner and/or operator of the plant.
All these time-consuming road-blocks put in place are barriers against making changes that could breach safety. They look arcane and silly to quite a lot of people but they are there for a reason.
Most of the accidents where I work happen when someone do a quick tiny change. One that "wont cause any issues" except that it turns out it does.
I'm sadly not allowed to disclose the company name due to an NDA, but it is one of the largest in norther europe.
At the particular company where I work we fucking HATE the shoddy work and failed procedures of this disaster. It makes us all look like asshats.
The people in charge of the technical things here are actually not the people who are trying to get bonuses. The government oversight on the security of such sites and rigs is so strong as to be borderline anal. And personally I am fine with that. I would hate if some fuckup in our code caused a disaster.
A B C 1 ->-0-->--| | | | 0 2 ->-0 | | 3 ->-0-->--0-->--| | | 0
A, B and C are various barriers. A = Automation (automatic shutdown on severe alarms etc) B = Procedures (Check X before doing Y) C = Operator Training
As you can see here an accident can only happen if -all- the barriers fail. One is enough to stop the incident.
That is the theory anyway. We dont want to replace anyone but we -do- want to add more barriers!:)
Operator: "I cant do that, that has to be run through the PCDA office and certified by the technical staff first."
Manager: "Ok, I'll submit the paperwork"
PCDA: "This is a bad idea, lets fix it instead..."
Or something like that is how it goes here:p If it even passes the manager. Most of the time the technical staff handles the alarms without telling any 'manager'. The operator responsible for the shift has authority over the day to day operation without any manager interference.
You cant operate if non-techies have more control than the techies over tech questions. It has been tried and abandoned;)
Unfortunately, a single alarm configuration on a "tag" could cost anywhere from 10k to 100k dollars.
The configuration isnt all that hard or time consuming but the testing of the system after the modification is brutal. At least here where it has to be certified to be allowed into operation;)
The norwegian petroleum oversight is something... The regulators are ruthless when it comes to compliance and better yet... they are not directly controlled by politicians;)
The cost of one fuckup is too much to allow people to cut corners.
I sure as hell dont in my job... and I do it for a living. When we have the option of doing it right, or doing it fast.. we pick right. Every time. I dont care if the customer is pissed at things being delayed. We do it -right-.
Indeed. Alarm suppression is a complex thing to set up in many cases. I personally work in the business and know how much thought goes into the alarm handling of the plants operating in Norwegian waters.
One example of a "simple" suppression case is that if Controller A goes down, you do not need to tell the operator that ALL signals on this controller is in "bad quality" or out of bounds. What you need to tell them is that the controller is down, and which systems are affected (which they will see on their displays as valves change color or somesuch. Our system uses white asterisks and white color to indicate that something is 'dead')
More complex cases are things like not throwing alarms for low flow rates in pipes where the valves are closed, or not throw electric alarms on equipment set to maintenance mode.
Regardless of all this, there should be an alarm system that has priorities.
Pri 1 alarms are such that they require IMMEDIATE attention. Such as a dangerous triple-high alarm (HHH or 3H) of a tank, pressure or temperature or a controller going down. Pri 2 would be alarms that could develop into Pri 1 if not handled within a few minutes (H/HH) alarms etc. Pri 3 would be what we call "pre-alarms". Things that could cause process upset or issues down the line. Like a low flow of coolant even though the temperature of the equipment being cooled hasnt started raising yet. Or a low level in a fuel tank. Pri 4 we usually assign as maintenance issues. Like two redundant sensors having more than 0.5% deviation between them (But not enough to cause a real alarm). Things that should be looked at but within a day or so.
Being able to filter alarms like this helps immensely during an emergency. This is an old system with a limited number of 'alarm groups' and 'priority levels' but it still works fairly well. Operators can see what happens even with several hundred alarms going off at the same time. On our simulator we did a fun test where we tripped 70% of the plant (about 18000 distinct 'tags' or io points went into Bad quality and several thousand in alarm). The operators were able to stop the cascade failure and no pipe burst in the simulator:)
Shit -will- hit the fan. It is always nice to be able to filter it so that only the important shit actually hits the wall:p
I've yet to have any issue with my Android phone, but I do not trust -any- device to work in 100% of cases.
I work with control systems for oil rigs for christ sake, I know a little about failure rates... even of multi-million dollar systems.
I use my phone as a gentle wake-up noise at T-20 min, then a clock radio for T-18 (2x snooze:p) and Finally my server goes batshit at T-3 if I am not yet up and have hit the magic CGI page in firefox for the day.
It works, and I have yet to have any triple-failure of my system ^.^
Overly complex? Probably. Do I like it as I have it now? Yup, which is really the only thing that matters.
Slashdot Mirror
The union is there to organize and protect the teacher, not the students.
While I agree that the perverted "unions" of the US are not by default a good thing, I am pretty sure the alternative is worse.
(The alternative being teachers having no rights or anyone to negotiate for them as a group)
Lensmoor.org port 3500
Shameless plug. Fun place to hang ;)
Any release of that much pressure will cause some serious damage to anything nearby.
The problem isnt the cylinder moving, the problem is that if the structural integrity of said cylinder is compromised even a little it will fail catastrophically and spray shrapnel..
People dont think of pressure as a "bomb", but it really is...
And likewise our common joke is that Danish is just speaking bokmål with a potato stuck in your throat ;)
It is oddly fitting... I have a Danish boss and it hurts mah bwaaaain :p
That works until one ISP sees that there is a demand for non NATed access.
They provide that and gets piles of customers.
In norway all owners of copper need to let other companies rent said copper at a reasonable price. So on the copper pair entering my apartment I have an option of at least 20 different DSL providers. Works wonders for competition ;)
It already has my real name.
Using my real name my address and phone number can be found using a simple search in.....
The fecking phone book. (Even mobile phone number as those are listed by default in norway :p)
Do I worry? No.
The only bad thing that has happened in the 10 years it has been available that way was a "secret admirer" sending me a "seventh heaven vibrating buttplug" in the mail... That was an amusing package to open... But no harm done. Just amusement...
It might be stupid, but sadly it is easier to do it that way than to spell out which types of machines are exempt.
What "antivirus software" means is usually not defined though which leaves plenty of wiggle-room for any competent admin to avoid the whole issue ;)
Or demand for such discs and burners will increase and finally make them semi-affordable ;)
He didnt say they did, he said it could cost -google- that much.
Office space, benefits and the likes cost quite a lot. Salary is not the only thing an employee costs ;)
*Clink*
*chug*
*chug*
*chug*
(at least I'm paid well and can drown my tech sorrows in spiffy hardware at home and expensive food and drink!)
Yup.
Assuming you can use any sort of GPL or the like software on company machines.
I cant. Anything named "open software" is specifically banned due to "legal reasons" as the licenses "cant" be "free". The legal types insist there is some sort of legal catch and wont allow it.
So we have retarded IT security people making decisions for 120000 people based on shoddy advice about the legality of open software...
Then there is the issue of having people to run such a system. Personally I prefer the system of cisco ip phones on every desk (they recently replaced quite a nasty piece of switchboard in the building with a brand new ip based system).
And of course due ot the joy of having to "buy" it services form the IT department even free soft-phones have a rather steep cost :p
I'm not saying it makes sense, but the technical aspect of it all is the least of the work when it comes to getting stuff done in any corporate system :(
What makes you think the corporate firewall allows skype traffic?
And do you think P2P applications are allowed on a corporate network?
Doing the change: 3-4 hours of work.
Organizing the update to the controller in the field?
- Requires a look into what could be influenced by the change
- Requires in some cases an 'offline' load of the controller which can only be done at a time of a maintenance downtime (once a year at most, sometimes every 2-4 years)
Documentation:
- Documentation of what functionality changes for operators
- Update of system configuration diagrams
- Update of various tag info in the plant documentation system
Install:
- A job package must be written detailing every change made to the system.
- A test package must be written with a full test suite to check that nothing broke during the change. People make mistakes and this is important.
Now... How much will all this cost?
When I'm working on jobs like this the company I work for charges about 170 bucks an hour...
4*3 hours (The change, verification and signoff, various overhead)
5*2 hours (Field work, included travel time etc, x2 for 2 people)
8*3 hours (documentation, x3 due to document controllers, various overhead)
6*2 hours (job/test package)
5*5 hours (testing)
83 hours, 170 bucks an hour, 14110 USD.
This is a fairly average estimate of what something would cost on -our- side of a very small change. If hardware is involved it rapidly skyrockets in cost.
In addition there is a myriad of people that need to check and verify the change on the -other- side of the fence. Namely the owner and/or operator of the plant.
All these time-consuming road-blocks put in place are barriers against making changes that could breach safety. They look arcane and silly to quite a lot of people but they are there for a reason.
Most of the accidents where I work happen when someone do a quick tiny change. One that "wont cause any issues" except that it turns out it does.
To see why small changes can have huge impacts have a look at this book: http://www.amazon.com/What-Went-Wrong-Histories-Disasters/dp/0884150275
I realize it would be horribly boring reading for anyone not interested in it :p
I'm sadly not allowed to disclose the company name due to an NDA, but it is one of the largest in norther europe.
At the particular company where I work we fucking HATE the shoddy work and failed procedures of this disaster. It makes us all look like asshats.
The people in charge of the technical things here are actually not the people who are trying to get bonuses. The government oversight on the security of such sites and rigs is so strong as to be borderline anal. And personally I am fine with that. I would hate if some fuckup in our code caused a disaster.
Yep.
Both are bad.. Together they are absolutely cataclysmic.
Complete failure of barriers here. Have a gander at my other comment about the idea behind those barriers.
http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1942186&cid=34807134
It all comes down to redundant barriers.
:)
A B C
1 ->-0-->--| |
| | 0
2 ->-0 | |
3 ->-0-->--0-->--|
| | 0
A, B and C are various barriers.
A = Automation (automatic shutdown on severe alarms etc)
B = Procedures (Check X before doing Y)
C = Operator Training
As you can see here an accident can only happen if -all- the barriers fail. One is enough to stop the incident.
That is the theory anyway. We dont want to replace anyone but we -do- want to add more barriers!
Operator: "I cant do that, that has to be run through the PCDA office and certified by the technical staff first."
Manager: "Ok, I'll submit the paperwork"
PCDA: "This is a bad idea, lets fix it instead..."
Or something like that is how it goes here :p
If it even passes the manager. Most of the time the technical staff handles the alarms without telling any 'manager'. The operator responsible for the shift has authority over the day to day operation without any manager interference.
You cant operate if non-techies have more control than the techies over tech questions. It has been tried and abandoned ;)
Unfortunately, a single alarm configuration on a "tag" could cost anywhere from 10k to 100k dollars.
The configuration isnt all that hard or time consuming but the testing of the system after the modification is brutal. At least here where it has to be certified to be allowed into operation ;)
Have a peek at the Norwegian sector. We've been doing this shit since the 70s and try damn hard to not have another Alexander Kielland...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_L._Kielland_(platform)
The norwegian petroleum oversight is something... The regulators are ruthless when it comes to compliance and better yet... they are not directly controlled by politicians ;)
The cost of one fuckup is too much to allow people to cut corners.
I sure as hell dont in my job... and I do it for a living. When we have the option of doing it right, or doing it fast.. we pick right. Every time. I dont care if the customer is pissed at things being delayed. We do it -right-.
Indeed. Alarm suppression is a complex thing to set up in many cases. I personally work in the business and know how much thought goes into the alarm handling of the plants operating in Norwegian waters.
One example of a "simple" suppression case is that if Controller A goes down, you do not need to tell the operator that ALL signals on this controller is in "bad quality" or out of bounds. What you need to tell them is that the controller is down, and which systems are affected (which they will see on their displays as valves change color or somesuch. Our system uses white asterisks and white color to indicate that something is 'dead')
More complex cases are things like not throwing alarms for low flow rates in pipes where the valves are closed, or not throw electric alarms on equipment set to maintenance mode.
Regardless of all this, there should be an alarm system that has priorities.
Pri 1 alarms are such that they require IMMEDIATE attention. Such as a dangerous triple-high alarm (HHH or 3H) of a tank, pressure or temperature or a controller going down.
Pri 2 would be alarms that could develop into Pri 1 if not handled within a few minutes (H/HH) alarms etc.
Pri 3 would be what we call "pre-alarms". Things that could cause process upset or issues down the line. Like a low flow of coolant even though the temperature of the equipment being cooled hasnt started raising yet. Or a low level in a fuel tank.
Pri 4 we usually assign as maintenance issues. Like two redundant sensors having more than 0.5% deviation between them (But not enough to cause a real alarm). Things that should be looked at but within a day or so.
Being able to filter alarms like this helps immensely during an emergency. This is an old system with a limited number of 'alarm groups' and 'priority levels' but it still works fairly well. Operators can see what happens even with several hundred alarms going off at the same time. On our simulator we did a fun test where we tripped 70% of the plant (about 18000 distinct 'tags' or io points went into Bad quality and several thousand in alarm). :)
The operators were able to stop the cascade failure and no pipe burst in the simulator
Shit -will- hit the fan. It is always nice to be able to filter it so that only the important shit actually hits the wall :p
Aaaah, the snooze button.
My nemesis....
I've yet to have any issue with my Android phone, but I do not trust -any- device to work in 100% of cases.
I work with control systems for oil rigs for christ sake, I know a little about failure rates... even of multi-million dollar systems.
I use my phone as a gentle wake-up noise at T-20 min, then a clock radio for T-18 (2x snooze :p) and Finally my server goes batshit at T-3 if I am not yet up and have hit the magic CGI page in firefox for the day.
It works, and I have yet to have any triple-failure of my system ^.^
Overly complex? Probably.
Do I like it as I have it now? Yup, which is really the only thing that matters.
And it is a decent idea compared to have another crappy connector on the same device.
It works too.
Mine also handles the job of being my home router behind the isp router :p
Got to love iptables and such
Determining if something is stupidity or sarcasm on slashdot can be surprisingly hard sometimes :p
Being sleep deprived doesnt help *cough*