Design and Fabrication Codes
Recently, I had a heated discussion regarding many items, one of them design codes.
Let me quote an example. There are many codes that govern fabrication of say, vessels. It can come from ASME (American Society of Mechanical Engineering), API (American Petroleum Institute), BS (British Standard), Shell DEP (Design and Engineering Practices), and many others.
One codes will definitely be different from other codes, if you go deep into details. API is usually more strict that ASME. There are simply more stringent criterias one has to follow, making it more safe and sound.
Can we conclude that life of those working in petroleum industry is more valuable than those working in say, agricultural industry? The answer is a definite NO NO. And it is so stupid if one comes to that conclusion.
And Shell DEP is even stricter. Does it mean that Shell employees are more valuable than, say Petronas? again.. a big NO NO. And it is so stupid if one comes to that conclusion.
There are different parameters in different industries, and because of that, the basis would be different. The risk will be different, the consequence of any major event would be different too.
IC is our National Standard, and Passport is the international standard. Similarly, when one travels inside the country, IC will be sufficient. However, when one travels abroad, Passport becomes the legal document. Why can't we simply standardise everything, making everyone carrying their passport inside and outside the country?
Regarding cars and airbags, don't be so shallow, judging that airbags will save lives. Statistics shows that there are people who died of suffocation due to airbags, when they lost consciousness right after impact.
In malaysia, we don't have the slippery road due to the frost, sleek or slosh. And maybe, i repeat, maybe, together with other parameters, the goverment decided not to make airbags compulsory in the country. However, this do not prevent anyone from choosing cars with airbags available in the market.
Let's not condemn, yet become rather supportive to our national brand whatsoever. A constructive criticism is more highly appreciated rather than a 'sembang kedai kopi' which will only lead nowhere.
Rgds
Z
Let me quote an example. There are many codes that govern fabrication of say, vessels. It can come from ASME (American Society of Mechanical Engineering), API (American Petroleum Institute), BS (British Standard), Shell DEP (Design and Engineering Practices), and many others.
One codes will definitely be different from other codes, if you go deep into details. API is usually more strict that ASME. There are simply more stringent criterias one has to follow, making it more safe and sound.
Can we conclude that life of those working in petroleum industry is more valuable than those working in say, agricultural industry? The answer is a definite NO NO. And it is so stupid if one comes to that conclusion.
And Shell DEP is even stricter. Does it mean that Shell employees are more valuable than, say Petronas? again.. a big NO NO. And it is so stupid if one comes to that conclusion.
There are different parameters in different industries, and because of that, the basis would be different. The risk will be different, the consequence of any major event would be different too.
IC is our National Standard, and Passport is the international standard. Similarly, when one travels inside the country, IC will be sufficient. However, when one travels abroad, Passport becomes the legal document. Why can't we simply standardise everything, making everyone carrying their passport inside and outside the country?
Regarding cars and airbags, don't be so shallow, judging that airbags will save lives. Statistics shows that there are people who died of suffocation due to airbags, when they lost consciousness right after impact.
In malaysia, we don't have the slippery road due to the frost, sleek or slosh. And maybe, i repeat, maybe, together with other parameters, the goverment decided not to make airbags compulsory in the country. However, this do not prevent anyone from choosing cars with airbags available in the market.
Let's not condemn, yet become rather supportive to our national brand whatsoever. A constructive criticism is more highly appreciated rather than a 'sembang kedai kopi' which will only lead nowhere.
Rgds
Z
posted by Zacharias at 11:14 PM
3 Comments:
"A constructive criticism is more highly appreciated rather than a 'sembang kedai kopi' which will only lead nowhere."
Improvement of national brand is relatively slow rather than accelerating fast
Hard to blame those laymen who have no power whatsoever to dictate
what they want enjoy
I guess we Professionals, those who have the power, can collectively get our job done to improve our national brand within their own specialty.
still a lot to learn (..aaaaaaa...)
i disagree about the airbag thingy. I believe people should be given choices, and once having it, they should be trusted to make the call.
I believe, the standard is sufficient at the moment. and more elaboration is optional.
You cannot do this and that, simply because other people may harm you. For example, you don't make your fence super strong, on the basis that if fire happens, it would not affect your neighbour. That is double jeopardy. In risk assessment and mitigation, that is a bad practice. It is going to blow up the impact.
so, just like one can choose to have powered window or manual transmission, maybe we can include all these flashy items in the wanted list, in case people are interested.
Post a Comment
<< Home