When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Was the bolt loose on the terminal nearest where the failure occurred?
Nope. But about 4 years ago the area this equipment is located was sprayed down with a 13% sulfuric acid and deionized water mix for an unknown amount of time. What we do know is that it ended up being roughly 25,000 gallons based on what was lost. Since then this equipment and the surrounding equipment has been experiencing failures. We do know that corrosion was more than likely to blame. Now the story i got from the operator was a little different, something along the lines of "we were running it to hard(wrong load for the equipment), and it just stopped". There were(i don't know why i say were, there probably still isn't) no fuses / breakers inline to stop the equipment before the current draw got to high.
I assume this is in a location where, if it fails, it will in no way cause severe property damage and / or bodily harm.
You assume incorrectly. Thats a hamper dumper frame for up to 1 ton hampers of mail/packages. It would likely hurt the operator and probably crush your box and the ***** inside, as well as the conveyor is usually feeds.
Even when the operator does everything correctly it's risky with some of the specialty machines we sell.
And here I thought stability testing on our cranes was sketchy. We are way over the rated load capacity here, for science.
What was just on our "baby crane" model. Backwards stability testing will make your butt pucker though. Putting a crane at 15-20° up a pivot is scary. Especially when the engineer before you turned one over because he had a brain fart and pivoted the upper while at that angle.
Since this is the kindergarten class and you didn't post a picture I have no idea what the **** you're talking about.
okay.
typically to display an image in HTML code you use the <img> element tag. you give it a source attribute to link the image to display, and to be 508 compliant for people with special accessibility needs, it also must have an "alt/title" tag, which displays text when you hover over the image. A screen reader can read the text for them. This is standard web practices.
the image will display, at full w x h.
I just ran across code the other day, where the developer placed an image on the left and right side of a column. instead of using an image element tag, he used div with a background image. Basically a div is a container for element, that you can style directly and the elements within are relative to it.
as you can see here, there's no change to putting a img in a div.
but since you can style a div directly, you have the ability to add a background image to them -- sometimes this is useful -- especially on these new mobile websites that scroll for days. But some developers like to go overboard with it, and try to make divs display as an image.
as you can see here, I changed the IMG tag to be another DIV within the container DIV. I had to give the image DIV a classname [or id] of "fake-image" in order to find/select it later for styling. then in my css, you can see I set the background as the url for the mt logo. because the image is just a background image now, the div has no size, so I put inline styles on the div to force the width and height.this is incredibly sloppy coding to display an actual image element back to the user: A screen reader will ignore it, so you'll fail 508 testing. And mixing inline styles on the html code, AND a css file causes headaches if you need to make changes later, not to mention that it adds unnecessary lines of code.
The place I last saw this used was on a site banner, where the developer wanted to make the left and right edge "break" past the border for a graphic element. He mixed css and inline styles to do it and placed the images he wanted as divs as shown above and positioned them one either side of the containing div and used absolute positioning to have the beak the border of the div. It worked, but again sloppy code.
here's how I would have done it:
Now the HTML is not cluttered with design/styling elements and I've only applied styles to the container class itself. I'm using :before and :after pseudo-tags on the container to have the browser render the pink boxes before and after a container class -- and I've positioned them all within the css.
They make us wear cat IV gloves with leather over gloves to program VFDs for ***** sake, never mind the suit. Ever try operating tact switches like that? We have to use a pencil with eraser, and unfortunately they actually watch us from time to time, and we can be fired on the spot. Really sucks when on an RTU in summer. This is why I supervise now lol.
After a point, it stops mattering, and you get into the realm of "If I touch this, I'm going to be instantaneously killed to death, so what's an extra thousand amps?"
They make us wear cat IV gloves with leather over gloves to program VFDs for ***** sake, never mind the suit. Ever try operating tact switches like that? We have to use a pencil with eraser, and unfortunately they actually watch us from time to time, and we can be fired on the spot. Really sucks when on an RTU in summer. This is why I supervise now lol.
I've got a set of those gloves. If i was doing anymore than tidying up and calibrating the unit i'd put more PPE on. The problem with those gloves, other than you have zero dexterity is that your hands get unbelievably sweaty. To the point where it's rolling down your arms, which is totally safe...
Impossible job 3 or 4 of the day:
Doesn't look that far down, but it's 3.5" from that inner base.
I pride myself in having a decent outfit of tools. But even the snap ring pliers i have couldn't reach that bugger way down in there. Why wouldn't it just be flanged like the top. If i ever found the engineer who...
0
