Author Archives: mike@standardsmichigan.com

  1. Home
  2. Articles posted by mike@standardsmichigan.com
    3. (Page 21)
Loading
loading...

Natural Gas Transmission & Distribution

Natural gas systems are deeply integrated into educational settlements: providing fuel to district energy plants, hospital backup power systems, hot water systems to residence halls and kitchens to name a few. The AGA catalog is fairly stable; reflected in the relative reliability of the US natural gas distribution network. Still, the door is open for discovering and promulgating best practice; driven largely by harmonization with other standards and inevitable “administrivia”. The current edition is dated 2024 and harmonizes with NFPA 54.

Poster showing benefits of gas lighting and heating (Italy, 1902)

 

 

 

 

Most school districts, colleges, universities and university-affiliated health care systems depend upon a safe and reliable supply of natural gas.  Owing to safety principles that have evolved over 100-odd years you hardly notice them.  When they fail you see serious drama and destruction.

One of the first names in standards setting for the natural gas industry in the United States is the American Gas Association (AGA) which represents companies delivering natural gas safely, reliably, and in an environmentally responsible way.  From the AGA vision statement:

“….(AGA) is committed to leveraging and utilizing America’s abundant, domestic, affordable and clean natural gas to help meet the nation’s energy and environmental needs….”

We do not advocate in natural gas standards at the moment but AGA standards do cross our radar because they assure energy security to the emergent #SmartCampus.  We find AGA standards referenced in natural gas service contracts (for large district energy plants, for example) or in construction contracts for new buildings.  As with all other energy technological developments we keep pace with, improvements are continual even though those improvements are known to only a small cadre of front line engineers and technicians.

AGA has released seventeen redlines containing proposed changes to one of its parent documents for natural gas delivery”  GPTC Z380.1 Guide for Gas Transmission, Distribution, and Gathering Piping Systems. The redlines are listed in the link below:

American Gas Association Standards Public Review Home Page

Public consultation on the 2027 National Fuel Gas Code closes June 4, 2024.

You may obtain an electronic copy from: https://www.aga.org/research/policy/ansi-public-reviews/.  Comments should be emailed to Betsy Tansey GPTC@aga.org, Secretary, ASC GPTC Z380. Any questions you may have concerning public reviews please contact Betsy Tansey (btansey@aga.org) as well.

University of Michigan Central Heating Plant

We meet online every day at 11 AM Eastern time to march through technical specifics of all technical consensus products open for public comment.  Feel free to click in.   Also, we meet with mechanical engineering experts from both the academic and business side of the global education community once per month.  See our CALENDAR for our next Mechanical Engineering monthly teleconference; open to everyone.

Issue: [19-27]

Category: Energy, Mechanical, Risk Management

Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Richard Robben, Larry Spielvogel

 

Interconnected Electric Power Production Sources “Microgrids”

“Landscape with a Farm House and Windmill” (1680) / Jacob Isaaksz van Ruisdael

We have always taken a forward-looking approach to the National Electrical Code (NEC) because there is sufficient supply of NEC instructors and inspectors and not enough subject matter experts driving user-interest ideas into it.  Today we approach the parts of the 2023 NEC that cover wiring safety for microgrid systems; a relatively new term of art that appropriates safety and sustainability concepts that have existed in electrotechnology energy systems for decades.

Turn to Part II of Article 705 Interconnected Electric Power Production Sources:

Free Access 2023 National Electrical Code

You will notice that microgrid wiring safety is a relatively small part of the much larger Article 705 Content.   There were relatively minor changes to the 2017 NEC in Section 705.50  — but a great deal of new content regarding Microgrid Interconnection Devices, load side connections, backfeeding practice and disconnecting means — as can be seen in the transcripts of Code-Making Panel 4 action last cycle:

Code‐Making Panel 4 Public Input Report (692 Pages)

Code-Making Panel 4 Public Comment Report (352 Pages)

Keep in mind that the NEC says nothing (or nearly very little, in its purpose stated in Section 90.2) about microgrid economics or the life cycle cost of any other electrical installation.  It is the claim about economic advantages of microgrids that drive education facility asset management and energy conservation units to conceive, finance, install, operate and — most of all — tell the world about them.

In previous posts we have done our level best to reduce the expectations of business and finance leaders of dramatic net energy savings with microgrids — especially on campuses with district energy systems.  Microgrids do, however, provide a power security advantage during major regional contingencies — but that advantage involves a different set of numbers.

Note also that there is no user-interest from the education facility industry — the largest non-residential building construction market in the the United States — on Panel 4.   This is not the fault of the NFPA, as we explain in our ABOUT.

The 2023 NEC was released late last year.

 

The 2026 revision cycle is in full swing with public comment on the First Draft receivable until August 24, 2024.  Let’s start formulating our ideas using the 2023 CMP-4 transcripts.   The link below contains a record of work on the 2023 NEC:

2026 National Electrical Code Workspace

We collaborate with the IEEE Education & Healthcare Facility Committee which meets online 4 times per month in European and American time zones.  Since a great deal of the technical basis for the NEC originates with the IEEE we will also collaborate with other IEEE professional societies.

Mike Anthony’s father-in-law and son maintaining the electrical interactive system installed in the windmill that provides electricity to drive a pump that keeps the canal water at an appropriate level on the family farm near Leeuwarden, The Netherlands.

Issue: [19-151]

Category: Electrical, Energy

Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Jim Harvey, Kane Howard, Jose Meijer

Archive / Microgrids

 

Exploration of the Theory of Electric Shock Drowning

Exploration of the Theory of Electric Shock Drowning

Jesse Kotsch – Brandon Prussak – Michael Morse – James Kohl

University of San Diego

Abstract:  Drowning due to electric shock is theorized to occur when a current that is greater than the “let go” current passes through a body of water and conducts with the human body. Drowning would occur when the skeletal muscles contract and the victim can no longer swim. It is theorized that the likelihood of receiving a deadly shock in a freshwater environment (such as a lake) is higher than the likelihood in a saltwater environment (such as a marina). It is possible that due to the high conductivity of salt water, the current shunts around the individual, while in freshwater, where the conductivity of the water is lower than that of the human; a majority of the current will travel through the individual. The purpose of this research is to either validate or disprove these claims. To address this, we used Finite Element analysis in order to simulate a human swimming in a large body of water in which electric current has leaked from a 120V source. The conductivity of the water was varied from .005 S/m (pure water) up to 4.8 S/m (salt water) and the current density through a cross sectional area of the human was measured. With this research, we hope to educate swimmers on the best action to take if caught in such a situation.

CLICK HERE to order complete paper.

Marina & Boatyard Electrical Safety

Facilities Management

Swimming Pool Dimensions and Construction

University of Michigan | Washtenaw County

About Last Night: #Paris2024

A standard Olympic-sized swimming pool is defined by the following dimensions:

  • Length: 50 meters
  • Width: 25 meters
  • Depth: A minimum of 2 meters
  • Lanes: 10 lanes, each 2.5 meters wide

The total area of the pool is therefore 1,250 square meters, and it holds approximately 2,500 cubic meters (or 2.5 million liters) of water.

https://standardsmichigan.com/australia/

The organization that sets the standards for Olympic-sized pools is the Fédération Internationale de Natation (FINA) — now World Aquatics — the governing body for swimming, diving, water polo, synchronized swimming, and open water swimming. FINA establishes the regulations for the dimensions and equipment of competition pools used in international events, including the Olympic Games.

The top ten universities that have produced Olympic champion:

  1. University of Southern California (USC)
  2. Stanford University
  3. University of California, Berkeley (UC Berkeley)
  4. University of Florida
  5. University of Texas at Austin
  6. University of Michigan – Michael Phelps, the most decorated Olympian of all time.
  7. Indiana University
  8. Auburn University
  9. University of Georgia
  10. University of Arizona

News:

Swim Swam: 2024 Pool “Slow” and not setting records

Paris Olympics swimmers noticing pool is ‘slow’ 

Pool, Spa & Recreational Waters

Swimming, Water Polo and Diving Lighting

Uniform Swimming Pool, Spa & Hot Tub Code

Rewind: District Energy

University of California Merced

Lucas Hyman is the co-author of “Sustainable On Site CHP Systems:  Design, Construction and Operations” published by McGraw-Hill 2010 ISBN 978-0-07-160317-1, Co-Editor Martin Meckler is a graduate of the University of Michigan.  Mike Anthony contributed Chapter 23 — Government Mission Critical – A combined FMECA and time value of money study on Critical Operations Power Systems.

Goss Engineering was one of the engineers for the University of California Merced; the first university campus with an energy infrastructure begun from “scratch”.  Here, Lucas offers his insight into the subtle energy economic trade-offs between centralized and de-centralized systems.

LEARN MORE:

Backgrounder from 2007 ASHRAE conference presentation by Goss Engineering: Designing Sustainable CHP Systems

Space Force Academy

 

United States Space Force

Servicemen’s Readjustment Act

MIL-STD

Today at the usual hour we take will take a broad view of the technical standards catalog of all military branches as they apply to the educational settings of each of the US military branches. Use the login credentials at the upper right of our home page.

“Overgrown military establishments are under any form of government inauspicious to liberty, and are to be regarded as particularly hostile to republican liberty.” Farewell Address, September 19, 1796.

United States defense standards are used to help achieve standardization objectives by the U.S. Department of Defense. Standardization is beneficial in achieving interoperability, ensuring products meet certain requirements, commonality, reliability, total cost of ownership, compatibility with logistics systems, and similar defense-related objectives. Defense standards are also used by other non-defense government organizations, technical organizations, and industry.

Military technical standards and public sector technical standards differ primarily in their purposes, scope, and requirements. Military standards — such as MIL-STD and MIL-SPEC — are designed to ensure high reliability, durability, and performance under extreme conditions, as they often pertain to defense systems, weaponry, and other critical applications. These standards prioritize security, robustness, and interoperability in challenging environments, and typically involve stringent testing and certification processes.

In contrast, public sector technical standards, like those developed by the International Organization for Standardization  or the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, are geared towards broader civilian applications. They focus on safety, quality, efficiency, and compatibility for a wide range of industries, including manufacturing, technology, and services. These standards aim to facilitate trade, ensure consumer safety, and promote innovation and best practices. While public sector standards also emphasize reliability and performance, they are generally less rigid than military standards, reflecting a broader range of use cases and operational conditions.

United States Defense Logistics Agency

 

Allied Trade Specialist

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The MIL-SPEC catalog and its evolution have had a significant impact on various industries beyond the military sector. Many civilian industries have adopted military standards as a benchmark for quality, reliability, and compatibility in their products and processes.

World War II Era:

The MIL-SPEC system traces its roots back to the World War II era when the U.S. military faced challenges in coordinating manufacturing efforts across multiple suppliers.  To address these challenges, the military began developing specifications and standards that detailed the requirements for various equipment and materials, including dimensions, materials, performance criteria, and testing procedures.

Post-World War II:

After World War II, the MIL-SPEC catalog expanded significantly to cover a wide range of military equipment, ranging from electronics and aircraft components to clothing and food supplies.  The standards were continuously updated and revised based on technological advancements, lessons learned, and evolving military needs.

Evolution into MIL-STD:

In the 1950s and 1960s, the MIL-SPEC system evolved into the Military Standard (MIL-STD) system to provide even more comprehensive and detailed specifications.  MIL-STD documents incorporated a broader scope of requirements, including design criteria, quality control processes, and test methodologies.  The MIL-STD system aimed to ensure consistent design and manufacturing practices across contractors and suppliers.

MIL-STD Transition to Commercial Standards:

Over time, the reliance on MIL-STDs started to decline, and there was a shift towards adopting commercial standards whenever possible.  This transition allowed the military to benefit from the advancements and cost efficiencies of commercial technologies.  However, certain critical military-specific standards, such as those related to security and specialized equipment, continued to be maintained within the MIL-STD framework.

DoD’s Transition to Performance-Based Specifications:

In recent years, the DoD has been moving away from prescriptive specifications (MIL-STDs) towards performance-based specifications. Performance-based specifications focus on defining the desired outcomes and performance requirements while allowing contractors greater flexibility in meeting those requirements. This approach encourages innovation, cost-effectiveness, and broader industry participation in military contracts.

Welding Standards

Unified Facilities Criteria

Memorandum

Our interest lies in the built environment for higher education students seeking careers in the military.   Many marquee colleges and universities are, at best, ambivalent about the presence of the military in their educational settlements.  Alas, that is a discussion for another organization; not ours.

 We list a few pros and five cons regarding how the National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS) may support our primary mission this industry, based on its alignment with the National Clearinghouse for Educational Facilities (NCEF) and the National Center on School Infrastructure (NCSI).

Pros

  • Comprehensive Resource Hub via NCEF: NIBS manages the National Clearinghouse for Educational Facilities (NCEF), established by the U.S. Department of Education in 1997, which serves as a vital resource for school administrators, facility managers, designers, and researchers. It provides free access to news, events, data, and statistics on school facilities planning, design, funding, construction, and maintenance, enabling stakeholders to make informed decisions for safe, healthy, and high-performing educational environments.

  • Advocacy for Safe and Sustainable Schools: Through the National Center on School Infrastructure (NCSI), NIBS collaborates with partners to provide technical assistance and training to state and local educational agencies. This initiative focuses on improving public school infrastructure to ensure health, safety, sustainability, and equity, helping schools address challenges like aging facilities and climate resilience.

  • Development of Standards and Guidelines: NIBS develops criteria, guidelines, and best practices recognized by organizations like the American Institute of Architects (AIA) and the International Code Council (ICC). These resources can guide the construction and renovation of educational facilities to meet high-performance standards, ensuring durability, energy efficiency, and safety.

  • Promotion of Digital Transformation: NIBS supports initiatives like the U.S. National BIM Program, which promotes digital transformation in designing, constructing, and operating educational facilities. Building Information Modeling (BIM) can streamline project management, reduce costs, and improve facility maintenance in schools.

  • Stakeholder Collaboration: NIBS brings together experts from government, industry, labor, and academia to address challenges in the built environment. This collaborative approach fosters innovative solutions tailored to educational facilities, such as resilient design to mitigate natural hazards, which is critical for protecting students and staff.

Cons

  • Dependence on Funding and Membership: NIBS relies on a mix of public and private financing, including membership dues and grants. Budget constraints or shifts in funding priorities could limit the resources available for educational facility-specific programs like NCEF or NCSI, reducing their effectiveness.

  • Complexity of Implementation: The technical standards and guidelines developed by NIBS, such as those for BIM or resilience, may be complex and require significant expertise to implement. Smaller school districts with limited resources or technical know-how may struggle to adopt these advanced practices.

  • Potential for Slow Consensus-Building: NIBS emphasizes collaboration and consensus among diverse stakeholders, which can be time-consuming. This process may delay the development or implementation of solutions critical for addressing urgent needs in educational facilities, such as rapid repairs for aging infrastructure.

  • Limited Public Awareness: Despite its contributions, NIBS may not be widely known among local school administrators or facility managers. This lack of awareness could hinder the adoption of its resources, such as NCEF’s database or NCSI’s technical assistance, limiting their impact on the educational facilities industry.

NIBS offers significant benefits to the educational facilities industry through its resources, technical assistance, and collaborative approach, particularly via programs like NCEF and NCSI. However, its broad focus, funding dependencies, and the complexity of its solutions may pose challenges for widespread adoption, especially in under-resourced school districts. For more information on NIBS’s initiatives, visit nibs.org or explore specific programs like the NCSI at ed.gov.


Comment (MAA):  A snarky slide title that implies that current policy is working.  Uncertain policy means the American people are asking for change given US Debt; some of it accelerated by partisans of a large government and its handmaidens in academia.

 

 

Welcome

Standards Michigan Group, LLC

2723 South State Street | Suite 150
Ann Arbor, MI 48104 USA

888-746-3670

DIRECTIONS

icon icon
icon icon
icon icon  
Layout mode
Predefined Skins
Custom Colors
Choose your skin color
Patterns Background
Images Background
error: Content is protected !!
Skip to content