Tag Archives: July 4

Loading
loading..

“Mountain High Apple Pie”

North Carolina State University Facilities

 

Kitchens 300

Standards North Carolina

Free Speech Rankings 2024

A plausible explanation for Harvard’s rank as the least accommodating in free expression supports its institutional lust to remain the most iconoclastic educational settlement in the world.

Michigan Technology University ranks highest in free speech atmospherics in the United States (followed by Auburn University Alabama) according to the organization with the most experience in this domain.

Topics of this nature are generally outside our wheelhouse but since so many young people die in wars for freedom of speech, it seems appropriate for weekend reading when Veteran’s Day is observed around the world.

Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression

2024 College Free Speech Rankings

 

Flags

Flagpoles

University of Michigan

Hillsdale College Michigan

Western University Ontario

Universitetet i Oslo

Universitetet i Oslo

Northeastern University Massachusetts

University at Buffalo New York

UniversitĂ  Ca’ Foscari Venezia

Pepperdine University / California

Colby College Maine

Finley Public School New South Wales Australia

St. Olaf College Minnesota

College of the Ozarks Missouri

University of Alaska Fairbanks

 

Neuqua Valley High School Illinois

Hillsdale College Michigan

Abilene Christian University Texas

University of Southern Mississippi | Image: Courtland Wells

Québec

Queensborough Community College

Bucknell University Pennsylvania

Flagpoles

 

NB: “The flag stands for a set of principles, not the lack of adherence to them.” ― Craig D. Lounsbrough.  We are not sure about this source; nor the author.  We have adapted the sentiment for our home page excerpt.

Flagpoles

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

 

Baseball Lighting

“Baseball at Night” | Morris Kantor (1934)

 

 

 

“Baseball is ninety percent mental

and the other half is physical.”

– Yogi Berra

 

After athletic facility life safety obligations are met (governed legally by NFPA 70, NFPA 101, NFPA 110,  the International Building Code and possibly other state adaptations of those consensus documents incorporated by reference into public safety law) business objective standards may come into play.  For business purposes, the documents distributed by the National Collegiate Athletic Association inform the standard of care for individual athletic arenas so that swiftly moving media production companies have some consistency in power sources and illumination as they move from site to site.  Sometimes concepts to meet both life safety and business objectives merge.

 

During the spring baseball season the document linked below provides guidance for illumination designers, contractors and facility managers:

NCAA Best Lighting Practices

Athletic programs are a significant source of revenue and form a large part of the foundation of the brand identity of most educational institutions in the United States.   We focus primarily upon the technology standards that govern the safety, performance and sustainability of these enterprises.  We cover the objectives of the energy conservation advocates in separate posts; notably advocates using the International Code Council and the ASHRAE suite to advance their agenda to press boxes and the entire baseball experience (interior and exterior) site in separate posts.

We collaborate very closely with the IEEE Education & Healthcare Facilities Committee where subject matter experts in electrical power systems meet 4 times each month in the Americas and Europe.

See our CALENDAR for our next Sport colloquium.   We typically walk through the safety and sustainability concepts in play; identify commenting opportunities; and find user-interest “champions” on the technical committees who have a similar goal in lowering #TotalCostofOwnership.

Issue: [15-138]*

Category: Electrical, Energy Conservation, Energy,  Athletics & Recreation

Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Jim Harvey, Jose Meijer, Scott Gibbs, George Reiher


More

Comparison of MH and LED performance for sport lighting application

A novel smart energy management system in sports stadiums

Tracking pitches for broadcast television

Stadium Lights

Outdoor Lighting Design Guide

Sport Lighting

 

 

Hot Dog University

The iconic American “street food” traces its origin to 19th century German immigrants who brought frankfurters from their homeland.

In the 1860s, the term “hot dog” emerged in reference to these sausages being sold in buns at street carts. The popularity of hot dogs soared during the late 19th and early 20th centuries particularly at baseball games where the hot dog is virtually synonymous.at the sport.

In many college towns push cart hot dog vendors may be welcomed and even embraced as part of the local food scene. They can add variety and convenience for students, faculty, and staff by offering affordable and quick meal options. These towns may have regulations and policies in place to support and accommodate such vendors.

The case against hot dogs as a food primarily revolves around health concerns and potential risks associated with their consumption. Some of the key arguments include:

Processed meat and additives: Hot dogs are often made from processed meats that can contain additives, preservatives, and high levels of sodium. These additives, such as nitrates and nitrites, have been linked to increased risks of certain health issues, including cancer and heart disease.

High in unhealthy fats: Hot dogs are typically high in saturated and trans fats, which can contribute to elevated cholesterol levels and increase the risk of cardiovascular diseases.

Potential for contamination: There have been instances of foodborne illnesses associated with hot dogs, such as outbreaks of bacterial contamination, including E. coli or Listeria monocytogenes. Improper handling, storage, or undercooking can increase the risk of such contamination.

Allergens and dietary restrictions: Hot dogs often contain common allergens like wheat, soy, and dairy. Additionally, they may not be suitable for individuals with dietary restrictions or preferences, such as vegetarians, vegans, or those following specific religious or cultural dietary guidelines.

Environmental impact: The production and consumption of hot dogs contribute to environmental concerns. The meat industry, including processed meat production, is associated with greenhouse gas emissions, land degradation, and water pollution.

These arguments against hot dogs do not necessarily apply to all hot dogs or to every individual. Moderation, choosing healthier options, and considering individual dietary needs and preferences can help mitigate some of the concerns associated with hot dog consumption.

Paul Mitchell The School Tinley Park

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Relevant codes, standards and regulations:

Food Safety and Inspection Service: Federal Meat Inspection Act

U.S. Department of Agriculture: Hot Dogs and Food Safety

Codex Alimentarius

Nourriture Printemps

Layout mode
Predefined Skins
Custom Colors
Choose your skin color
Patterns Background
Images Background
Skip to content