- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: What exactly is a plant “operator”?
Posted on 12/22/17 at 1:40 am to fightin tigers
Posted on 12/22/17 at 1:40 am to fightin tigers
quote:Hey... what can I say? It saves the world from catastrophe. A plant shutdown isn't a bad thing, if the LOPA calls for a shutdown when the newbie operator doesn't know what he is doing, why should you complain? Thank GOD for automation.
frickups automation causes.
This post was edited on 12/22/17 at 1:41 am
1
Posted on 12/22/17 at 1:42 am to fightin tigers
quote:It's amazing that people get offended when automation prevents dumbasses from causing catastrophic damage. They are like "OMG, this stupid DCS won't let me blow up the plant? OMG, what a stupid system!!! I'm so glad I can put this in MANUAL and destroy the plant. That interlock is completely worthless. Engineers don't know shite!"
frickups automation cause
I do respect operators, because many have a good eye for the process and understand it well. I also deal with dumasses like you that don't respect the LOPA. I have no respect for you.
This post was edited on 12/22/17 at 1:51 am
Posted on 12/22/17 at 1:50 am to Asharad
I more worry about automation calling for a shutdown because the automation doesn't know what it's doing. Failure of a minor hardware component is often the cause.
The most dangerous time for any process unit is startup and shutdown. A system that has a default setting to trip a unit put a lot more risk in the overall picture.
Is automation good, without a doubt. Automation without a human component is idiotic and dangerous.
The most dangerous time for any process unit is startup and shutdown. A system that has a default setting to trip a unit put a lot more risk in the overall picture.
Is automation good, without a doubt. Automation without a human component is idiotic and dangerous.
Posted on 12/22/17 at 1:56 am to fightin tigers
quote:You must not participate in the layers of protection analysis. Shame on your employer.
Automation without a human component
quote:It does depend on the process, but it depends on the hazard analysis. If the TEAM decides that a shutdown to a safe state is required, why would you argue with that? It seems like you are just lazy and want to avoid work.
A system that has a default setting to trip a unit put a lot more risk in the overall picture.
quote:WTF? People program automation based on a team's evaluation that something bad happens which should result in a shutdown before more damage can occur.
automation doesn't know what it's doing
This post was edited on 12/22/17 at 1:59 am
Posted on 12/22/17 at 2:00 am to fightin tigers
quote:This is what caused the Three Mile Island disaster. If left to engineering controls, it would have never happened.
human component
This post was edited on 12/22/17 at 2:03 am
Posted on 12/22/17 at 2:03 am to Asharad
quote:
. If the TEAM decides that a shutdown to a safe state is required, why would you argue with that?
Because despite the best intention of the engineers, designers, operations, management, not every scenario can be planned around or even conceived. If you have been around long enough you have heard someone say, "Not only have I never seen this, I have never heard of this."
I'm sure though you think of it all and cover all the angles on the first install. You seem like you have the type of attitude that lends itself to that rationale.
This post was edited on 12/22/17 at 2:03 am
Posted on 12/22/17 at 2:05 am to fightin tigers
quote:In these cases it is best to shut down to a safe state, then organize a team to figure out the best response. It's definitely not OK to let the operator to decide to "keep it running". I've seen this happen, and I've seen the CHLORINE cloud fly into the community because of the operator. Automation would have prevent gas from going to the community.
Not only have I never seen this, I have never heard of this
This post was edited on 12/22/17 at 2:09 am
Posted on 12/22/17 at 2:08 am to fightin tigers
quote:Nope. See my response above. It's scary that you think you can make the best decision when an unforeseen situation occurs. Let me give you some advice. SHUT THE frickER DOWN!
I'm sure though you think of it all and cover all the angles on the first install
Posted on 12/22/17 at 2:10 am to Asharad
quote:
In these cases it is best to shut down to a safe state, then organize a team to figure out the best response. It's definitely not OK to let the operator to decide to "keep it running".
I guess this is where we differ.
Each scenario is different and shutting down can really compound a problem.
Posted on 12/22/17 at 2:11 am to fightin tigers
If a shutting down your process causes a hazard, maybe it shouldn't be running.
Posted on 12/22/17 at 2:11 am to Asharad
Now I know you are speaking out your arse.
Posted on 12/22/17 at 2:13 am to fightin tigers
quote:Wow. Are you arguing that producing a highly hazardous chemical with manual operator control is a great idea? Wow.
Now I know you are speaking out your arse.
Posted on 12/22/17 at 2:14 am to fightin tigers
quote:Hey 23 years of experience behind me says that operator control of a process with zero automation will ultimately lead to frickup about every 12 months.
Now I know you are speaking out your arse.
This post was edited on 12/22/17 at 2:15 am
Posted on 12/22/17 at 2:14 am to Asharad
Great idea? Are you just making up things I have said to fit your narrative?
Posted on 12/22/17 at 2:15 am to fightin tigers
Posted on 12/22/17 at 2:22 am to fightin tigers
quote:A minor cause doesn't result in a plant shutdown. YOU might think it's minor. But it's not. For example a pressure transmitter fails, and this pressure transmitter is monitored by both the DCS and the operator. The DCS is programmed to trip on failure of this safety device, but the operator decides to keep it running. Kudos to you for keeping the plant running without a safety device!
I more worry about automation calling for a shutdown because the automation doesn't know what it's doing. Failure of a minor hardware component is often the cause.
This post was edited on 12/22/17 at 2:23 am
Posted on 12/22/17 at 2:24 am to fightin tigers
I've had operators tell me it's not their job to read and acknowledge alarms. Now tell me why we should not shutdown that process ANYTIME a critical failure occurs?
This post was edited on 12/22/17 at 2:26 am
Posted on 12/22/17 at 2:25 am to Asharad
quote:
This is what caused the Three Mile Island disaster. If left to engineering controls, it would have never happened.
You are not even close to being correct here.
Posted on 12/22/17 at 2:27 am to EA6B
quote:Oh really? Quote: "As alarms rang and warning lights flashed, the operators did not realize that the plant was experiencing a loss-of-coolant accident. They took a series of actions that made conditions worse."
You are not even close to being correct here.
Page 8 of 11
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News