The tripping of the Hornsea wind generators was due to a command from
the control system programmer who did not have a full understanding of
the system. Easy solution for the plant designer, painful solution for
the British people. South Australia went Black for the same reason, a
few years before.
So far the performance of substitutes for coal fired electricity suggest
that we should lower our expectations of civilisation.
Even for those trains that were rebooted by the drivers, I find it hard
to fathom why this would take 10 minutes.
Sylvia.
On Sat, 14 Sep 2019 11:28:49 +1000, Sylvia Else wrote:
Even for those trains that were rebooted by the drivers, I find it hard
to fathom why this would take 10 minutes.
Safety checks. The system is booting from an unknown state; aka it has no idea of its operating history.
On 14/09/2019 11:55 am, news18 wrote:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2019 11:28:49 +1000, Sylvia Else wrote:
An industrial computer network in control of real hardware. I can fully imagine a 10-minute cycle to 'power off and reboot'. It's not a desktop PC. Things are VERY different in the industrial compute world.Even for those trains that were rebooted by the drivers, I find it hard
to fathom why this would take 10 minutes.
Safety checks. The system is booting from an unknown state; aka it has no idea of its operating history.
Yes, but this is a computer and electronics we're talking about. They
should be able to go through all the safety checks in a fraction of that time.
On Saturday, 14 September 2019 04:02:13 UTC+2, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 14/09/2019 11:55 am, news18 wrote:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2019 11:28:49 +1000, Sylvia Else wrote:
Even for those trains that were rebooted by the drivers, I find it hard >> >> to fathom why this would take 10 minutes.
Safety checks. The system is booting from an unknown state; aka it has no >> > idea of its operating history.
Yes, but this is a computer and electronics we're talking about. They
should be able to go through all the safety checks in a fraction of that
time.
An industrial computer network in control of real hardware. I can fully
imagine a 10-minute cycle to 'power off and reboot'. It's not a desktop PC.
Things are VERY different in the industrial compute world.
I've got a $40k ethernet switch in my server room at work that takes
nearly 5 minutes to boot from power on or 'reload' that does a 'cold start'. >It has to load the firmware out of ROM into RAM, uncompress,
then it starts scanning the bus and loads the ASIC program into multiple >line cards, runs various self-tests to ensure the ASIC chips all
came up properly, then brings up each card one by one,
doing more checks as it goes. It takes a LONG time.
I've been working on a 22-year-old tram. It's fully software controlled.
It doesn't take 10 minutes to boot, but from battery on to being able to >move, it wouldn't be much less than 10 minutes by the time you wait for
the computer then do the manual startup checks required before moving off. >This tram has something like 12 computers all networked
- all have to start up, check the hardware they control, and report state >back to the main computer. It isn't a simple process at all.
On Sat, 14 Sep 2019 09:40:31 -0700 (PDT), Matthew Geier <matthew@sleeper.apana.org.au> wrote:
On Saturday, 14 September 2019 04:02:13 UTC+2, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 14/09/2019 11:55 am, news18 wrote:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2019 11:28:49 +1000, Sylvia Else wrote:
Even for those trains that were rebooted by the drivers, I find it hard >>>>> to fathom why this would take 10 minutes.
Safety checks. The system is booting from an unknown state; aka it has no >>>> idea of its operating history.
Yes, but this is a computer and electronics we're talking about. They
should be able to go through all the safety checks in a fraction of that >>> time.
An industrial computer network in control of real hardware. I can fully
imagine a 10-minute cycle to 'power off and reboot'. It's not a desktop PC. >> Things are VERY different in the industrial compute world.
I've got a $40k ethernet switch in my server room at work that takes
nearly 5 minutes to boot from power on or 'reload' that does a 'cold start'. >> It has to load the firmware out of ROM into RAM, uncompress,
then it starts scanning the bus and loads the ASIC program into multiple
line cards, runs various self-tests to ensure the ASIC chips all
came up properly, then brings up each card one by one,
doing more checks as it goes. It takes a LONG time.
I've been working on a 22-year-old tram. It's fully software controlled.
It doesn't take 10 minutes to boot, but from battery on to being able to
move, it wouldn't be much less than 10 minutes by the time you wait for
the computer then do the manual startup checks required before moving off. >> This tram has something like 12 computers all networked
- all have to start up, check the hardware they control, and report state
back to the main computer. It isn't a simple process at all.
Would think nowadays computer controlled trains would have a
"Uninterruptible Power Supply" or UPS.
A short power failure would then not matter?
Would think nowadays computer controlled trains would have a
"Uninterruptible Power Supply" or UPS.
A short power failure would then not matter?
On 14/09/2019 11:55 am, news18 wrote:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2019 11:28:49 +1000, Sylvia Else wrote:
Even for those trains that were rebooted by the drivers, I find it
hard to fathom why this would take 10 minutes.
Safety checks. The system is booting from an unknown state; aka it has
no idea of its operating history.
Yes, but this is a computer and electronics we're talking about. They
should be able to go through all the safety checks in a fraction of that time.
On Sat, 14 Sep 2019 12:02:11 +1000, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 14/09/2019 11:55 am, news18 wrote:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2019 11:28:49 +1000, Sylvia Else wrote:
Even for those trains that were rebooted by the drivers, I find it
hard to fathom why this would take 10 minutes.
Safety checks. The system is booting from an unknown state; aka it has
no idea of its operating history.
Yes, but this is a computer and electronics we're talking about. They
should be able to go through all the safety checks in a fraction of that
time.
No, you are talkng about a lot of inductive stuff, like motors. The logic might be able to run throught its programm in u-seconds, but in a real
world there are real compnents to be measured.
Simpple stuff like disengaging the drive before powering a moter and checking that it responds "normally".
Then there are thermal checks to be run It is going to want to do
somethigk to indicate if it can at least crawl to a siding or does it
require a tow from the gitgo.
Should take seconds at most.The train computer I've been working on waits 5 seconds from the application of power to even begin booting. This is hard-wired into the power supply. The reason is to ensure the incoming supply is stable before starting to boot. It also has to boot within 30 seconds, otherwise, it can't supply a keep-alive and the power control contactor drops out. But that's just the start of the main program loop. That doesn't mean the train is ready.
On Fri, 13 Sep 2019 22:39:02 +0000, johnsuth wrote:
The tripping of the Hornsea wind generators was due to a command from
the control system programmer who did not have a full understanding of
the system. Easy solution for the plant designer, painful solution for
the British people. South Australia went Black for the same reason, a
few years before.
See below.
So far the performance of substitutes for coal fired electricity suggest
that we should lower our expectations of civilisation.
Early days for the roll out of new tech, or rather a major new use.
Thin back to the early days when steam power was first rolled out. They >still had to learn that boilers needed pressure relief valves, unless you >wanted them to explode off course.
On 16/09/2019 6:37 pm, news18 wrote:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2019 12:02:11 +1000, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 14/09/2019 11:55 am, news18 wrote:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2019 11:28:49 +1000, Sylvia Else wrote:
Even for those trains that were rebooted by the drivers, I find it
hard to fathom why this would take 10 minutes.
Safety checks. The system is booting from an unknown state; aka it
has no idea of its operating history.
Yes, but this is a computer and electronics we're talking about. They
should be able to go through all the safety checks in a fraction of
that time.
No, you are talkng about a lot of inductive stuff, like motors. The
logic might be able to run throught its programm in u-seconds, but in a
real world there are real compnents to be measured.
Simpple stuff like disengaging the drive before powering a moter and
checking that it responds "normally".
Should take seconds at most.
Then there are thermal checks to be run It is going to want to do
somethigk to indicate if it can at least crawl to a siding or does it
require a tow from the gitgo.
There's only so much that can be done without applying traction current,
and those parts that handle traction current are not going to heat up measurably otherwise.
I've seen the way people work. It's probably a long sequence of
unreasonably high timeouts. They didn't know what was a sensible value
to use, and rather than try to find out, they just stuck in something
that was bound to be enough.
Sylvia.
In <qlhh72$cga$5@dont-email.me>, news18 <news18@woa.com.au> writes:
On Fri, 13 Sep 2019 22:39:02 +0000, johnsuth wrote:
The tripping of the Hornsea wind generators was due to a command from
the control system programmer who did not have a full understanding of
the system. Easy solution for the plant designer, painful solution
for the British people. South Australia went Black for the same
reason, a few years before.
See below.
So far the performance of substitutes for coal fired electricity
suggest that we should lower our expectations of civilisation.
Early days for the roll out of new tech, or rather a major new use.
Thin back to the early days when steam power was first rolled out. They >>still had to learn that boilers needed pressure relief valves, unless
you wanted them to explode off course.
We have put a man on the Moon since then.
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 63 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 492972:49:58 |
| Calls: | 840 |
| Files: | 1,301 |
| D/L today: |
14 files (28,374K bytes) |
| Messages: | 264,597 |