KeithL
Administrator 
Posts: 10,256
|
Post by KeithL on Jun 20, 2022 13:36:00 GMT -5
It looks to me like that gets the idea across just fine... A vector program like Illustrator really wouldn't make something like that much easier. What you would want to use would be a 3D CAD program... or a 3D rendering program... but the learning curve on those is MAJOR. It would be well worth it if you were going to draw one of these every week... Or if you expected a machinist to make one from the drawing and needed to include exact dimensions and such... (Or even if you were looking to impress a bunch of amateurs with a pretty picture in an advertising brochure.) But your picture makes it clear what we're looking at... and what the inside looks like... Which I suspect is what counts here. My hand-drawn equipment drawings may lack professionalism, but nobody can claim that I'm using their graphics without permission. These are (for better or worse) my own creations. |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,256
|
Post by KeithL on Jun 20, 2022 13:51:44 GMT -5
That's an interesting take... I would look at it the exact opposite way: - that the huge number of contradictory and essentially incoherent stories don't say much at all about what's really in the woods - and that, if ANY of those things was true, there would be more general agreement about which one it was - so either people are just making up stories about "the scary woods" (the way stories often grow in the telling) - or someone is deliberately spreading scary stories to keep people out of the woods I would also be interested in hearing the reasons, and maybe the evidence, behind those claims. Does anyone who I consider credible actually claim to have personal experience with any of those things? Are people actually going into the woods and not coming back? Or are these just stories "that they heard from some guy, who knew some guy, who went there once"? I MIGHT even suspect that there was something really nice, or even valuable, in those woods... and someone wanted to keep it for themselves. If 10 people tell me "don't go in the woods - there's a big alligator there," and another 10 people tell me "don't go in the woods - there's a pack of rabid dogs there," and another 10 people tell me "don't go in the woods - there are skunks all over the place," I may not be able to decide what's in the woods, but it's common sense not go in there. |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,256
|
Post by KeithL on Jun 20, 2022 14:08:15 GMT -5
Common sense is no fun... And it usually isn't news either... As many people have commented... "factory blows up... thousands feared dead" is news... "another day with no accidents" is not... And, likewise, "boring bureaucrats finish another term with the minimum amount of competency and no scandals" isn't news either... As you've no doubt noticed... the days when a news outlet could succeed by accurately and concisely telling us the actual news are long gone. I read an interesting book about exactly how bad things have gotten these days in that regard.... A news outlet who does proper research, checks their sources, and gets the details right, will get a certain number of views. But, since fact checking takes time and effort, they will never publish first, and their expenses will be higher. HOWEVER... their competitor... who "publishes first and corrects later - if ever"... - will get some views before everyone else when they publish first - will get MORE views when people write in or post to complain about their errors or inaccuracy - will get MORE views when others post to discuss or argue with the claims that their original post was wrong - then, if they actually bother to post a retraction, will get even MORE views when people read the retraction By that logic it is MUCH more profitable to publish first... and quite possibly even more profitable to be wrong. The problem is that nowadays there is no "punishment" for being wrong, or paranoid, or publishing inaccurate or unsubstantiated information. People read or watch the news because it's entertaining or interesting. They rarely, if ever, STOP watching or viewing a source, "merely" because it's inaccurate or just plain makes sh** up. Notice that, while many reputable newspapers are long gone, the National Enquirer is still around... And let's NOT discuss "reality shows"... Apropos whatever it seems to fit: Conspiracy theories sell well. Common sense is very difficult to merchandise. And someone is always ready and eager to manufacture something that will sell, no matter how meretricious. |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,256
|
Post by KeithL on Jun 20, 2022 14:19:01 GMT -5
You didn't even include the bigger questions like: - How many of those 30 people are really Bots? - Was that blurry blob in that picture a skunk, or an alligator, or Bigfoot (or just dirt on the lens)? - And how do we know that picture wasn't Photoshopped? - And did anyone run any blood tests on those witnesses - just to confirm what they were drinking or smoking? - And who said anything about an ancient Indian... err... Native American burial ground? - And what about that guy who swears he saw that gal from "Punk'd" sneaking around town the week before? - And wasn't that a black helicopter I saw a minute ago... really... I'm sure it was... and, no, I am NOT smoking anything! - And when do we film the first episode of: "Terror In the Woods - The True Story" If 10 people tell me "don't go in the woods - there's a big alligator there," and another 10 people tell me "don't go in the woods - there's a pack of rabid dogs there," and another 10 people tell me "don't go in the woods - there are skunks all over the place," I may not be able to decide what's in the woods, but it's common sense not go in there. Yet, the question remains.....or perhaps more than ONE question. First? How many of those 10 X3 people have actually SEEN anything or are just repeating what they've heard? Second? What eats or displaces WHAT in your scenario? Third? Are we talking 30 different people or in the 30x 'cautionary' types are there fewer, with duplication by group? It also kind of depends Where. In Florida? I could believe all 3! Toss in a SkunkApe for good measure and some hostile rednecks. Common sense tells me to go Into the woods, fairly well armed and install half a dozen trail cams. than go back in some period of time and look at the data. And I might add that with 30 people? It is unlikely all of them had NOT heard the 'tales' of the woods. And either went in anyway or made up another 'monster' to be afraid of...... |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jun 20, 2022 14:43:22 GMT -5
Risk / Reward. Teenagers in the back seats of cars around the world make those decisions daily. As do each of us about a wide variety of risks. Should I exceed the speed limit? Well, if I don't go so fast as to get a ticket, and if I don't have accidents, then the reward (getting where I want to go sooner) seems a good bet.
It's also an artifact of human nature that we think that things that have never happened to us will never happen, and that things that have happened to us before will happen again. The example I use when I teach my class on risk at a local university is this: A few decades ago, if I'd asked a person from New Orleans if the city would ever flood, the reply would have been "of course not - my parents, grandparents, and great grandparents all lived here and it's never flooded." But since hurricane Katrina, if you asked the same question, the answer is more likely to be "OF COURSE - if not this year, then probably next!"
But we make very poor risk decisions if the situation is one which we have never encountered and have no experience with. What if I get COVID? Well, it might just be like a case of the flu. Or else, I might have negative health symptoms for years. Or else I might die (over a million and counting have, not counting the rest of the world). So should I get vaccinated and / or consider wearing a mask?
Everyone will pick their own level of risk tolerance, no matter who tells them what. But on subjects like this, where there is no personal experience, and where there are conflicting public "informations," the average citizen has as much risk analysis ability as a squirrel in the middle of the road. If you don't understand science (most don't) then if often boils down to who yells the loudest. What a situation for a country like this one!
|
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Jun 20, 2022 14:50:51 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by marcl on Jun 20, 2022 14:52:20 GMT -5
Risk / Reward. Teenagers in the back seats of cars around the world make those decisions daily. As do each of us about a wide variety of risks. Should I exceed the speed limit? Well, if I don't go so fast as to get a ticket, and if I don't have accidents, then the reward (getting where I want to go sooner) seems a good bet. It's also an artifact of human nature that we think that things that have never happened to us will never happen, and that things that have happened to us before will happen again. The example I use when I teach my class on risk at a local university is this: If I'd asked a person from New Orleans if the city would ever flood, the reply would have been "of course not - my parents, grandparents, and great grandparents all lived here and it's never flooded." But since hurricane Katrina, if you asked the same question, the answer is more likely to be "OF COURSE - if not this year, then probably next!" But we make very poor risk decisions if the situation is one which we have never encountered and have no experience with. What if I get COVID? Well, it might just be like a case of the flu. Or else, I might have negative health symptoms for years. Or else I might die (over a million and counting have, not counting the rest of the world). So should I get vaccinated and / or consider wearing a mask? Everyone will pick their own level of risk tolerance, no matter who tells them what. But on subjects like this, where there is no personal experience, and where are conflicting public "informations," the average citizen has as much risk analysis ability as a squirrel in the middle of the road. If you don't understand science (most don't) then if often boils down to who yells the loudest. What a situation for a country like this one! Quite the range of ups and downs evaluating Covid risk past two years with it being such a moving target. I worked in and around pharma and clinical trials so I have science background and friends with good data and all that. I was very careful and got vaxed as soon as I could and boosted as soon as I could and went on a trip that required all participants to be vaccinated ... and I got infected! Symptoms so mild that if I was home I wouldn't have gotten a test and would have thought it was just a cold ... as I did then ... until I had to test to get on the plane home. So now I'm more nervous than I was for two years, even though between the vax, boost, Omicron immunity boost, and the second boost I'll get in a couple weeks ... I'm less likely to be infected than I ever was. But ...beginning of September I have to get a test within three days of getting on a ship to Arctic Canada and Greenland. And I'm more jittery now than ever. I know I'll wear my super N95 and avoid indoor crowds, etc. But I can't shake that risk vs the consequences. Not that I think I'll get terribly sick ... but that a VERY expensive trip could be blown. Meanwhile ... unvaccinated people ... no masks on airlines ... ignorance is bliss ... |
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Jun 20, 2022 14:58:46 GMT -5
That's an interesting take... I would look at it the exact opposite way: - that the huge number of contradictory and essentially incoherent stories don't say much at all about what's really in the woods - and that, if ANY of those things was true, there would be more general agreement about which one it was - so either people are just making up stories about "the scary woods" (the way stories often grow in the telling) - or someone is deliberately spreading scary stories to keep people out of the woods I would also be interested in hearing the reasons, and maybe the evidence, behind those claims. Does anyone who I consider credible actually claim to have personal experience with any of those things? Are people actually going into the woods and not coming back? Or are these just stories "that they heard from some guy, who knew some guy, who went there once"? I MIGHT even suspect that there was something really nice, or even valuable, in those woods... and someone wanted to keep it for themselves. If 10 people tell me "don't go in the woods - there's a big alligator there," and another 10 people tell me "don't go in the woods - there's a pack of rabid dogs there," and another 10 people tell me "don't go in the woods - there are skunks all over the place," I may not be able to decide what's in the woods, but it's common sense not go in there. Yep. Just imagine you are a MoonShiner. You sure as heck don't want ANYBODY wandering around looking for whatever. The locals know and to the extent it 'isn't there isssue', will support the fellow-local. you can bet, I'd put on my camo, have a night vision scope AND InfraRed along with a substantial bit of 'hardware' and go have a look........ And for sure, how could ANY bit of woods have such a collection of 'keep away' animals? While I'm not a fan of Florida? The whole operation terrifies me. ALL venomous reptiles in North America are found there. Rattler? Coral Snake? CottonMouth? Crocs / Gators? Skunk Ape? And now? Boa / Python and whatever ELSE has escaped from some lunatics petting zoo. The only missing piece? A Gila Monster, which while awful, I understand is NOT fatal.....get to a doctor! Boom must be VERY patient to get that good a drawing........And it's a kind of complicated machine...... |
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Jun 20, 2022 15:04:18 GMT -5
Risk / Reward. Teenagers in the back seats of cars around the world make those decisions daily. As do each of us about a wide variety of risks. Should I exceed the speed limit? Well, if I don't go so fast as to get a ticket, and if I don't have accidents, then the reward (getting where I want to go sooner) seems a good bet. It's also an artifact of human nature that we think that things that have never happened to us will never happen, and that things that have happened to us before will happen again. The example I use when I teach my class on risk at a local university is this: A few decades ago, if I'd asked a person from New Orleans if the city would ever flood, the reply would have been "of course not - my parents, grandparents, and great grandparents all lived here and it's never flooded." But since hurricane Katrina, if you asked the same question, the answer is more likely to be "OF COURSE - if not this year, then probably next!" But we make very poor risk decisions if the situation is one which we have never encountered and have no experience with. What if I get COVID? Well, it might just be like a case of the flu. Or else, I might have negative health symptoms for years. Or else I might die (over a million and counting have, not counting the rest of the world). So should I get vaccinated and / or consider wearing a mask? Everyone will pick their own level of risk tolerance, no matter who tells them what. But on subjects like this, where there is no personal experience, and where there are conflicting public "informations," the average citizen has as much risk analysis ability as a squirrel in the middle of the road. If you don't understand science (most don't) then if often boils down to who yells the loudest. What a situation for a country like this one! Good post. But one minor point? I'll NEVER get eaten by a shark. I will NEVER go in the Ocean. Well......and it's a REAL long shot, get bitten by a Bull Shark which can travel great distances UP freshwater rivers. But If i stick to a swimming pool? Near-Zero chance. Likewise? We have so little Lightning associated weather here in SoCal? I don't see the big issue. And I'm down a slope, which helps more....... Now? If I go to Arizona for lightning season? I'll be sure to bring a volunteer to hold up a 9-Iron and stand 50 feet away from me while I take some lightning photos..... But there ARE plenty of Lunatics who think they can drive, decline insurance and drive on BALD tires all thru the rainy season, that I'm thinking of getting a DASH CAM. Any Suggestions? |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,256
|
Post by KeithL on Jun 20, 2022 17:04:09 GMT -5
I agree entirely on your last point... it must take an awful lot of patience to draw that "the hard way". (I'm a big fan of 3D CAD and rendering - so I would probably have taken it as an excuse to climb that learning curve.) There are also other options these days that can make sense.... like places that sell royalty free images.... and some aren't all that expensive. You may have to do a lot of looking - but there are a lot out there these days. (Sometimes you can find something that someone else already did that you can license for a few bucks... depending on how specific your requirements are.) (Likewise, if a manufacturer has a nice illustration in their ads, they might be willing to license you to use it - as long as you mention the name of their product.) But, again, his illustration gets the idea across just fine, so that works fine too. That's an interesting take... I would look at it the exact opposite way: - that the huge number of contradictory and essentially incoherent stories don't say much at all about what's really in the woods - and that, if ANY of those things was true, there would be more general agreement about which one it was - so either people are just making up stories about "the scary woods" (the way stories often grow in the telling) - or someone is deliberately spreading scary stories to keep people out of the woods I would also be interested in hearing the reasons, and maybe the evidence, behind those claims. Does anyone who I consider credible actually claim to have personal experience with any of those things? Are people actually going into the woods and not coming back? Or are these just stories "that they heard from some guy, who knew some guy, who went there once"? I MIGHT even suspect that there was something really nice, or even valuable, in those woods... and someone wanted to keep it for themselves. Yep. Just imagine you are a MoonShiner. You sure as heck don't want ANYBODY wandering around looking for whatever. The locals know and to the extent it 'isn't there isssue', will support the fellow-local. you can bet, I'd put on my camo, have a night vision scope AND InfraRed along with a substantial bit of 'hardware' and go have a look........ And for sure, how could ANY bit of woods have such a collection of 'keep away' animals? While I'm not a fan of Florida? The whole operation terrifies me. ALL venomous reptiles in North America are found there. Rattler? Coral Snake? CottonMouth? Crocs / Gators? Skunk Ape? And now? Boa / Python and whatever ELSE has escaped from some lunatics petting zoo. The only missing piece? A Gila Monster, which while awful, I understand is NOT fatal.....get to a doctor! Boom must be VERY patient to get that good a drawing........And it's a kind of complicated machine...... |
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Jun 20, 2022 18:25:13 GMT -5
I've done some 'stock image' work.
Some deals you pay for usage (magazine or sales brochure)and maybe number of impressions......
It is tough to make $$ in this line since you may actually need several thousand images. And the Catagories are nearly limitless....
As many different 'deals' as stock agencies.
|
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,256
|
Post by KeithL on Jun 21, 2022 16:13:29 GMT -5
To be fair, if you're going to need several thousand CAD-type images, then it's probably worth the effort to climb that learning curve, and draw them yourself. And do it in a real object oriented 3D program (there's a lot of overlap but a 3D drawing and rendering program will be easier to use than a full-on CAD program). The really major benefits come when you need a lot of pictures of similar things, or things comprised of similar parts. A 3D rendering program lets you treat items in the drawing as if they were physical parts in a model - but with far more flexibility. For example, it may take a while to draw a really nice fan blade. But, once you have one, you can simply make a dozen copies, and line them up around a hub... Then you can link all those parts together into a fan. And now you can make that fan larger, or smaller, or longer, or shorter, with one or two mouse clicks. Or make ten identical copies of it in a second or two. And, once you have a bolt head, or a screw thread, you can just click as many as you want wherever you want them. Or, more importantly, use that bolt or fan in other drawings. And, just like a real model, you can set the lights where you want, and put cameras wherever you want. It also makes it a breeze to show things like exploded drawings and assembly sequences... Since you can basically rearrange each piece and turn it on and off at will... Not only does this prevent you from having to duplicate labor... but it automatically makes your illustrations consistent. (Since they all use the same bolt head or fan blade.) The big dog programs like Solidworks and 3DS Max are quite powerful... but really complicated... and very expensive. But there are some really impressive alternatives that are amazingly powerful... and low cost or even free (check out Blender.... ) You'll also find big collections of "free and donated parts" in the more popular formats. I've done some 'stock image' work. Some deals you pay for usage (magazine or sales brochure)and maybe number of impressions...... It is tough to make $$ in this line since you may actually need several thousand images. And the Catagories are nearly limitless.... As many different 'deals' as stock agencies. |
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Jun 22, 2022 0:14:31 GMT -5
Here's an exploded view I did of a table leg / brace.
This is for the table for my Big Green Egg....which goes over 220lb
I spec'd the table with a 32mm grantie piece Under the egg but the egg still has a 'shorty' stand so it
doesn't sit flat. I wanted to use 1/4" BRASS carriage bolts and hardware, but the cost is wacky these days.
Won't let me add file!
|
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jul 4, 2022 14:25:51 GMT -5
Liquid ring vacuum pump... |
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Jul 4, 2022 14:58:03 GMT -5
How good a vacuum? I've used many rotary vane pumps in the past, mainly from Leybold Herayus.
Hig vac pumping can be done in two or three states. The highest level of vacuum will be either......Turbomolecular. Very clean but not huge thrust. OR Diffusion. How, good thruput and if clean goes to a good ultimate pressure
OR some form of getter pump.....
'Rough' vacuum is either stuff like pistons or rotary vanne or if you REALL need fast pump down? A roots type.
All sorts of add-ons and 'gilding' but the essentials are pretty known.
The Laybold pumps would bottom out about 50mt or so.... they were 3 vane. I'd rebuild 'em to new spec with a rebuild kit and a cylinder hone used for brake jobs.......
|
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jul 4, 2022 15:36:55 GMT -5
Liquid ring pumps can pull a pretty hard vacuum. They are picky though - you must have clean water to supply the liquid seal and any solids or acids in the gas will be deposited in the water layer. Most liquid ring pumps are set to periodically swap themselves offline and do a (fully automatic) clean and flush cycle.
|
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Jul 4, 2022 17:58:10 GMT -5
Vapor Pressure of water would appear to limit the ultimate pressure possible.....'Pretty Hard Vacuum' doesn't tell me much.
Would DeIonized water be OK or did it require distilled? Or just really well filtered / treated Tap Water?
I'm used to a mechanical pump going to maybe the 50militorr to 100militorr range. than cross over to the High Vacuum pump which
will go much, much lower. Down to 1x10-7 torr is comfortably 'high vacuum'......And I"ve seen 8 range vacuum after I did a major clean / PM....
that's a personal best.
We used special rotating seals on some feedthrues. They'd use ferrofluid. Same stuff, I think in high end tweeters!
The Laybold pumps? 3 vane types with the vanes floaed in the center so they'd go in and out and stay in contact with the walls of the chamber.
And like YOUR drawing, there was in input port at chamber pressure and an output to the Hi Vacuum pump which would be very low, indeed. Pumping rate
is very dependent on the difference in pressure, with zero difference also being zero flow. So Called 'ultimate' pressure. Anti-Suckback was featured as was something
called a 'balast' valve to allow oil to outgas to the high vacuum side and improve pumping performanc.
The stuff in our pumps was potentially VERY toxic, having an organic pump oil while pumping all sorts of AWFUL stuff......I'd wear Eye Protection, a thick apron AND
gloves (depeind on WHAT was in oil nad PH) for initial disassembly and cleaning.
I could have started an aftermarket business rebuilding these pumps. the 'kit' was maybe 600$ or more, while I'd have charged 2 1/2 X the kit price at least. I'd probably be DEAD
by now, though. Pumps from implanters could have all sorts of really BAD Boron, Arsine and Phos compounds saturated in the oil....which NEVER got changed often enough, IMO....
|
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jul 4, 2022 20:34:44 GMT -5
WAY more information than I really needed...  The pumps I'm familiar with work on polymer systems and aren't too toxic. |
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Jul 4, 2022 21:22:30 GMT -5
WAY more information than I really needed...  The pumps I'm familiar with work on polymer systems and aren't too toxic. What ultimate vacuum do they require? In semiconductor processing? Rough pump only and controlled with a CLP (closed loop pressure) to maybe 300mt to 400mt. Many films are deposited with this type of system. Sputter systems run with a constant 'bleed' of Argon (inert) but will pump to 6 range or better Evaporators run best at the lowest pressure you can get, but production sets a limit somewhat higher for thruput reasons...... What are such 'polymer' systems used for? Your illustration is good. And gets the point across.... |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jul 4, 2022 22:51:55 GMT -5
In chemical processing, vacuum pumps are used to assist in the drying of powders.
|
|
My hand-drawn equipment drawings may lack professionalism, but nobody can claim that I'm using their graphics without permission. These are (for better or worse) my own creations.
