KobeGoBoom

I played BF4 for 8 years. After the first two years it was essentially limited to 1 or 2 full servers as long as it wasn’t 3:00 AM. I only play Rush in North America. This worked fine. Maybe you had to sit in a queue for a few minutes but that was acceptable to get into the match I wanted to be in.

BF6 has been out less than a year and it’s already harder to get into a match than BF4 was after 8 years. I will not play with bots since it destroys any semblance of competitive play and just isn’t satisfying. I joined 4 rush games this morning and each of them had 5-10 real people with the rest bots. WHY WERE THESE PEOPLE NOT COMBINED INTO A SINGLE SERVER?!

Add a server browser and remove

I have an IO rack that uses ET200iSP intrinsically safe IO. Most of the instruments are located in a hazardous area and they are rated Ex-i for that service.

However, i have one IO point coming from an auxiliary set of contacts on a 480V motor contactor in a non-hazardous area (indicating run status). Is it okay to connect the auxiliary contact directly to the same intrinsically safe IO card that has other intrinsically safe circuits connected to it?

I’m thinking that this could compromise the integrity of the other circuits on that same IO card thus I would need some kind of isolation relay to do this safely.

I am applying for a job as a process controls engineer at a refinery in Midwest USA and trying to figure out what kind of salary I should ask for.

experience:

3 years process engineering in the ammonia fertilizer industry

2 years of process controls in the ammonia fertilizer industry

3 years of process controls in specialty chemicals

I have also worked with several different DCS systems and APC. I would consider myself a very strong applicant.

My current salary at a specialty chemical plant is $135,000 with ~15% annual bonus.

I’m thinking I should ask for something in the $170K-180K range. Is that too little? Too much?

I’m attempting to hunt deer with a rifle for the first time this year on a 40 acre plot. Problem is, there are a few houses on the neighboring 40 acre plots. My concern is that a shot could potentially leave the property and put someone at risk. That being said, there are only a few particular angles that I would actually take a shot where the elevation change would require me to miss high by ~20 yards to actually send a bullet flying off the property. Which leaves the remaining risk being a ricochet.

Is this too risky? Would using a shotgun with slug rounds mitigate this risk? The bullet would need to carry ~500 yards to leave the property based on the angle I’d be shooting.

According to IEC61511, you are not allowed to take more than one IPL from the BPCS (zero IPLs if the initiating event is the BPCS). The only exception would be if you have 2 completely independent BPCS functions. This includes the BPCS controller. Just having a separate sensor and a separate valve is not good enough.

Every plant I’ve worked at has broken this rule. Some intentionally and some unintentionally. What is everyone else doing? Is this the norm? Is it reasonable to break this rule?

Personally I think requiring a separate controller is excessive especially if your plant has good administrative procedures around BPCS IPLs.

Choked flow occurs when a gas velocity reaches the speed of sound. Can anyone explain why a fluid won’t move faster than the speed of sound? Would an enormous amount of pressure allow a fluid to “break” through the sound barrier in the same way that a jet breaks through the sound barrier?

What is the longest range you’ve ever successfully killed a duck from? At what range would you not even bother to take the shot?

I killed one today at ~85 yards with a 3.5” shell and 2-shot. I kinda just stood there dumbfounded because I didn’t think it was possible.

I work in functional safety at a batch plant and have been working with Exida on some SIL calculations. Exida is widely considered to be the functional safety experts in North America. One of their presentations titled “Accounting for Batch Operation in SIL verification” (you can find this on YouTube) asserts that the probability of failure on demand(PFD) for a safety device is 0 when the process is down. Am I the only one who finds this assertion to be ridiculous? So devices cannot fail between batches?

The PFD equation comes from integrating the probability of failure over a time period for the purpose of capturing the accumulated failures over that time period. It has nothing to do

It’s common in LOPA for companies to use LOPA approach B which allows 2 IPLs to be taken from the BPCS as long as each IPL is sufficiently independent. This usually means that each IPL has its own sensor, logic solver(controller) and final elements.

I’ve encountered a scenario where there is a separate interlock that could be credited as an IPL because it is completely separate from the BPCS that causes the initiating event. The problem is that this separate system is an SIS but it technically doesn’t meet SIL requirements because the final elements being used are old and not SIL capable. Everything else that would be required to SIL rate something is met such as, regular proof tests, pr