I have started a section on substation design and protection, and I would value your input on something. It is the Luton flashover and related matters.
The Luton flashover was interesting becuase what happened was that an arc from a HT conductor to earth occured. This short then caused circuit breakers to open becuase of the overcurrent. Too many protection devices were activated and then everything went to pot. The defense against such an overreaction in the event of such a fault which I was told about was that a substation has all 'earthed' metal work isolated from earth except for one cable which passes through a current transformer. If current is detected in the earth cable then the location of the fault is clear to the protection electronics. Hence with good design of the protection systems it is possible to open fewer circuit breakers then it would be otherwise. The problem is that I do not have the references to back up this design concept which I was told about some years ago by a substation expert. Cadmium 21:27, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
Sadly I do not have any links which mention the 'Luton flashover' and the rampant outage which followed it. I think that I have found an interesting topic but like you I am pushing myself to my limits. I think that WP will get better if it has a mixture of articles which are basic interoductions to things which people commonly think about and some articles about advanced topics which will make a person start to think for themselfs. As you know something about the priciples of power systems I think that you might be able to help out on the substation page. I have already added some links to a few web pages which give details of how some of the protection systems (ones which sense the dirrection of a fault) work. Cadmium 15:31, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Nice edit - it really needs categorisation as well - I don't know how to do this tho.
-- PeterMarkSmith 01:51, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm writing a paper that includes some information about Mylar, which you started the article on. However, I don't think writing "Heron, et al" in my Works Cited would go over too well. What's your actual name?
Zack Green 16:56, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
I was delighted to see your work on Charles Merz and the National Grid. Are you in a position to add any technical detail to the National Grid article on capacity and losses? I personally would like to know what kind of currents flow in the National Grid circuits, and what kind of resistances per mile there are in the transmission lines - it would be great to have this in an encyclopedia. Thanks for your latest contributions! - Crosbiesmith 18:23, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
Please consider joining the proposed History of Science Wikiproject.-- ragesoss 00:41, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Howdy... I've just noticed the family tree ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Cold-comfort-farm-genealogy.png) you produced for the movie/book, "Cold Comfort Farm", and I was wondering if you could provide a legend to understand the different symbols and markings. I've begun googling, but have so far come up cold.
~Heptarch
com dot heptarch at genealogy (reversed)
Hi Heron, thanks for the excellent grammatical and stylistic improvements you just did on the article on English language. It makes the article much more pleasant to read. Keep up doing this to other articles that suffer from loss of style, perhaps by contributers that are (just like me) not native English speakers − Woodstone 19:25, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
I find the suggestion of vandalism ridiculous. The edit was quite serious and a real improvement. It was not just replacing romance words by germanic ones. It improved precision of formulation, grammar and flow of the text. Please do not let the above criticism stop you from continuing similar work on other articles. − Woodstone
To avoid flip-flopping between 'degree Fahrenheit' and 'Fahrenheit' or 'degree Celsius' and 'Celsius', I propose that we have a discussion on which we want. I see you have contributed on units of measurement, please express your opinion at Talk:Units of measurement. Thanks. bobblewik 22:48, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
During the propagation of the Electro-magnetic field the energy is transferred between the electric and the magnetic components of the field. So, the resulting Electro-magnetic vector rotates in space with the propagation of the wave. The two projections of the electromagnetic vector at any moment matches the vector of the Electric field AND the vector of the Magnetic field.
In other words, on the chart Light-wave.png the sinusoid of the Electric field and the sinusoid of the Magnetic field should be shifted relatively by 90 degree in time.
Regards,
Boris Spasov,
(email address removed)
Thank you for moving 'Cubic Meter' to 'Cubic meter' to make it sentence case. It was previously 'Cubic metre'. You said you prefer 'Cubic metre' and you should move it to that spelling in line with Wikipedia policy. I reverted the content but I am not able to move the article itself, but you might be able too.
Please also see my comment about the same user moving 'Square metre' to 'Square Meter' in Talk:Units_of_measurement#Somebody_moved_.27Square_metre.27_to_.27Square_Meter.27._Please_can_somebody_move_it_back.3F. Regards. bobblewik 19:31, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Heron, could I please ask what is your reason for the removal of the baby food entry to the list of the misleading food names? Surely, the fact that in itself it is called Baby Food means that as a generic product name it is misleading, since it contains no baby... As I cited the external reference for this as a genuine incident, I feel that it belongs on the list if only for historical purposes. Your thoughts would be welcomed. Regards, Thor Malmjursson 12:50, 9 March 2006 (UTC) Thor's Pet Yack
Heron, I'd like to really put some energy into the article on William Blake. You've been contributing for some time and seem to know your way around Blake... I'm relatively new. Any suggestions as to how I can help make that article the best it can be? KristoferM 19:49, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
physics discussion of polarity This is a complicated subject with polarity being relative to the voltage measurement points. The only sane way to discuss this subject is in terms of current flow and there is a lot of misunderstanding going around. M-W defining an anode as being positive in the case of a electrolytic cell and negative in the case of a galvanic cell is confusing at best. The electrolytic has an external applied voltage but again, you have to base polarity of the points of measurement. I don't want to start an edit war, I would like to have an accurate, understandable article. Thanks. Jonathan888 (talk) 20:46, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi!
There's a vote at Talk:Ohm (unit) to reinstate as the primary topic after a move from Ohm. Have an opinion to share? Femto 16:56, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Template:Branchlist has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Omegatron 14:12, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
And it's good night from him. -- GraemeL (talk) 21:36, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Hello, on Dutch Wikipedia there has been some discussion regarding proper English spelling of the word fool(-)proof. To resolve this issue, we require the opinion of an educated native English speaker. Could you please tell me which of the following variants of fool(-)proof you would consider proper, trusting only on your own intuitive, immediate 'feeling':
If you have an opinion about this at all, that is: perhaps such variants all feel acceptable to you. And what about bullet(-)proof, full(-)scale, hawk(-)nosed, brand(-)new, even(-)handed, fail(-)safe? Does the same apply to all? By the way, in which country do you live? Thank you very much for your co-operation, you could reply here or on my User Talk page. Cerberus™ 01:23, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi Heron, probably it's not such a household idiom in Britain, but I listed it as it's only found in British English; as its first recorded use is dated 1839, it's definitely a so-called "Briticism." If British grammars consider it incorrect or objectionable, you can add an appropriate tag. All the best, JackLumber 11:46, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
I replied on my page. Fresheneesz 19:50, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
I went through all your archives and looked through a great deal of your work. I honestly could not find ANY evidence of anyone thanking you for all the great work you do. Thank you. Kukini 22:28, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
You appear to be the original author of the article titled Pareto interpolation. A number of things in the article did not make sense (see talk:Pareto interpolation) but at the same time, it was clear that there was something worth keeping as an article. I have finally gotten around to working through the math carefully, and it was easy to figure out what must have been meant, and I have re-written the article accordingly. But a problem remains: searches on Google Scholar and the Current Index to Statistics data base failed to turn up any relevant published material. Can you add something like that? Michael Hardy 23:24, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. Michael Hardy 20:41, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
In the Thomas Savery you noted Savery obtained some of his ideas from the work of Denis Papin. Do you have a source for this?
I looked at the Denis Papin article, and at the diagrams it contained. They show a device that clearly works in a very different fashion than Savery's design. Nor does it seem possible that Savery could have ever known of Papin's work, considering he was located in the Midlands and Papin didn't move to London until some time after 1685 -- it appears the first publication of Papin's work wasn't until 1707, post-dating Savery's by some time.
In contrast, Edward Somerset's design that was built at Raglan uses the same operating cycle as Savery's, and differs primarily in having two cylinders instead of one. It long predates either Savery or Papin, and is located not far from Savery. If Savery did copy the design from somewhere, it appears much more plausible he did it from Somerset!
Do you have a source for this claim? Without further information on Papin's patents, or a direct linkage of the two men, I believe this claim is in error.
Maury 17:44, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
Well given that at least half of the "facts" stated in the Seymore Cray article in Britannica are laughably wrong, I no longer trust anything I read there. That said, it is entirely possible that all of the facts in this case are wrong, and what we are seeing is everyone copying older incorrect facts. I will try to track down your 2004 reference (I don't have access to it), I will try contacting the author.
To start with, this reference claims that the remains of the second engine are still visible in the walls of Raglan Castle -- or at least were in the late 1800's when he wrote it. The diagram shows an engine very similar in concept to Savery's.
It also goes on to describe how a contemporary of Somerset, Samuel Morland, who was apparently familiar with Somerset's first engine at Vauxhaul, designed a number of pumps, including one based on raising a vacuume via gunpowder. A number of his pumps were installed, and he was later invited to the French court to build various designs for Charles. His writings show that he is very familiar with real-world steam pumps, not "paper models" that invariably used incorrect calculations copied from earlier works.
Anyway, the key feature here is the arrangement of the internal parts. Papin's drawing shows a chamber with water on the bottom being pushed out by steam pressure of a piston on top. This is completely different than Savery's design. Unless there is another part of the patent showing a different device using vacuume, I'm inclined to think they're wrong on this.
Maury 13:53, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
While the website for modern company De Havilland Aviation does spell it with a capital D, the company that built the aircraft was lower case. I'll leave it to you to restore the template. GraemeLeggett 08:53, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
Where did you get the info about da Vinci, on Grimaldi's page, re diffraction "(although Leonardo Da Vinci had earlier noted it)"? I can't find a source that mentions da Vinci. Dicklyon 00:22, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Can you please expand the DDC/CI section in Display Data Channel to explain (in brief) how it handles Auto Pivot in modern LCD displays? -- Yehuda 14:24, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
Please visit Types Of AM and clarify them. -- Electron Kid 12:14, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
Thanks but these terms still remain unclarified. In fact, these have not been mentioned anywhere. -- Electron Kid 02:01, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
I mean to ask, for example, in 'J3E', what does, 'J' stand for, what does '3' signify and what 'E' implies.-- Electron Kid 16:35, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
Hi, many thanks for all your architecture and planning edits. I was wondering if you might be interested in joining Wikipedia:WikiProject Architecture. It's currently the umbrella project for issues relating to planning (All though there is talk of establishing a unique planning wikiproject). Also we've been revamping the Architecture Portal and nominations to Portal:Architecture/Selected picture candidates and Portal:Architecture/Selected article candidates will always be welcome. -- Mcginnly 10:17, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
Rory096 07:03, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
I have started a section on substation design and protection, and I would value your input on something. It is the Luton flashover and related matters.
The Luton flashover was interesting becuase what happened was that an arc from a HT conductor to earth occured. This short then caused circuit breakers to open becuase of the overcurrent. Too many protection devices were activated and then everything went to pot. The defense against such an overreaction in the event of such a fault which I was told about was that a substation has all 'earthed' metal work isolated from earth except for one cable which passes through a current transformer. If current is detected in the earth cable then the location of the fault is clear to the protection electronics. Hence with good design of the protection systems it is possible to open fewer circuit breakers then it would be otherwise. The problem is that I do not have the references to back up this design concept which I was told about some years ago by a substation expert. Cadmium 21:27, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
Sadly I do not have any links which mention the 'Luton flashover' and the rampant outage which followed it. I think that I have found an interesting topic but like you I am pushing myself to my limits. I think that WP will get better if it has a mixture of articles which are basic interoductions to things which people commonly think about and some articles about advanced topics which will make a person start to think for themselfs. As you know something about the priciples of power systems I think that you might be able to help out on the substation page. I have already added some links to a few web pages which give details of how some of the protection systems (ones which sense the dirrection of a fault) work. Cadmium 15:31, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Nice edit - it really needs categorisation as well - I don't know how to do this tho.
-- PeterMarkSmith 01:51, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm writing a paper that includes some information about Mylar, which you started the article on. However, I don't think writing "Heron, et al" in my Works Cited would go over too well. What's your actual name?
Zack Green 16:56, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
I was delighted to see your work on Charles Merz and the National Grid. Are you in a position to add any technical detail to the National Grid article on capacity and losses? I personally would like to know what kind of currents flow in the National Grid circuits, and what kind of resistances per mile there are in the transmission lines - it would be great to have this in an encyclopedia. Thanks for your latest contributions! - Crosbiesmith 18:23, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
Please consider joining the proposed History of Science Wikiproject.-- ragesoss 00:41, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Howdy... I've just noticed the family tree ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Cold-comfort-farm-genealogy.png) you produced for the movie/book, "Cold Comfort Farm", and I was wondering if you could provide a legend to understand the different symbols and markings. I've begun googling, but have so far come up cold.
~Heptarch
com dot heptarch at genealogy (reversed)
Hi Heron, thanks for the excellent grammatical and stylistic improvements you just did on the article on English language. It makes the article much more pleasant to read. Keep up doing this to other articles that suffer from loss of style, perhaps by contributers that are (just like me) not native English speakers − Woodstone 19:25, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
I find the suggestion of vandalism ridiculous. The edit was quite serious and a real improvement. It was not just replacing romance words by germanic ones. It improved precision of formulation, grammar and flow of the text. Please do not let the above criticism stop you from continuing similar work on other articles. − Woodstone
To avoid flip-flopping between 'degree Fahrenheit' and 'Fahrenheit' or 'degree Celsius' and 'Celsius', I propose that we have a discussion on which we want. I see you have contributed on units of measurement, please express your opinion at Talk:Units of measurement. Thanks. bobblewik 22:48, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
During the propagation of the Electro-magnetic field the energy is transferred between the electric and the magnetic components of the field. So, the resulting Electro-magnetic vector rotates in space with the propagation of the wave. The two projections of the electromagnetic vector at any moment matches the vector of the Electric field AND the vector of the Magnetic field.
In other words, on the chart Light-wave.png the sinusoid of the Electric field and the sinusoid of the Magnetic field should be shifted relatively by 90 degree in time.
Regards,
Boris Spasov,
(email address removed)
Thank you for moving 'Cubic Meter' to 'Cubic meter' to make it sentence case. It was previously 'Cubic metre'. You said you prefer 'Cubic metre' and you should move it to that spelling in line with Wikipedia policy. I reverted the content but I am not able to move the article itself, but you might be able too.
Please also see my comment about the same user moving 'Square metre' to 'Square Meter' in Talk:Units_of_measurement#Somebody_moved_.27Square_metre.27_to_.27Square_Meter.27._Please_can_somebody_move_it_back.3F. Regards. bobblewik 19:31, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Heron, could I please ask what is your reason for the removal of the baby food entry to the list of the misleading food names? Surely, the fact that in itself it is called Baby Food means that as a generic product name it is misleading, since it contains no baby... As I cited the external reference for this as a genuine incident, I feel that it belongs on the list if only for historical purposes. Your thoughts would be welcomed. Regards, Thor Malmjursson 12:50, 9 March 2006 (UTC) Thor's Pet Yack
Heron, I'd like to really put some energy into the article on William Blake. You've been contributing for some time and seem to know your way around Blake... I'm relatively new. Any suggestions as to how I can help make that article the best it can be? KristoferM 19:49, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
physics discussion of polarity This is a complicated subject with polarity being relative to the voltage measurement points. The only sane way to discuss this subject is in terms of current flow and there is a lot of misunderstanding going around. M-W defining an anode as being positive in the case of a electrolytic cell and negative in the case of a galvanic cell is confusing at best. The electrolytic has an external applied voltage but again, you have to base polarity of the points of measurement. I don't want to start an edit war, I would like to have an accurate, understandable article. Thanks. Jonathan888 (talk) 20:46, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi!
There's a vote at Talk:Ohm (unit) to reinstate as the primary topic after a move from Ohm. Have an opinion to share? Femto 16:56, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Template:Branchlist has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Omegatron 14:12, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
And it's good night from him. -- GraemeL (talk) 21:36, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Hello, on Dutch Wikipedia there has been some discussion regarding proper English spelling of the word fool(-)proof. To resolve this issue, we require the opinion of an educated native English speaker. Could you please tell me which of the following variants of fool(-)proof you would consider proper, trusting only on your own intuitive, immediate 'feeling':
If you have an opinion about this at all, that is: perhaps such variants all feel acceptable to you. And what about bullet(-)proof, full(-)scale, hawk(-)nosed, brand(-)new, even(-)handed, fail(-)safe? Does the same apply to all? By the way, in which country do you live? Thank you very much for your co-operation, you could reply here or on my User Talk page. Cerberus™ 01:23, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi Heron, probably it's not such a household idiom in Britain, but I listed it as it's only found in British English; as its first recorded use is dated 1839, it's definitely a so-called "Briticism." If British grammars consider it incorrect or objectionable, you can add an appropriate tag. All the best, JackLumber 11:46, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
I replied on my page. Fresheneesz 19:50, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
I went through all your archives and looked through a great deal of your work. I honestly could not find ANY evidence of anyone thanking you for all the great work you do. Thank you. Kukini 22:28, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
You appear to be the original author of the article titled Pareto interpolation. A number of things in the article did not make sense (see talk:Pareto interpolation) but at the same time, it was clear that there was something worth keeping as an article. I have finally gotten around to working through the math carefully, and it was easy to figure out what must have been meant, and I have re-written the article accordingly. But a problem remains: searches on Google Scholar and the Current Index to Statistics data base failed to turn up any relevant published material. Can you add something like that? Michael Hardy 23:24, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. Michael Hardy 20:41, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
In the Thomas Savery you noted Savery obtained some of his ideas from the work of Denis Papin. Do you have a source for this?
I looked at the Denis Papin article, and at the diagrams it contained. They show a device that clearly works in a very different fashion than Savery's design. Nor does it seem possible that Savery could have ever known of Papin's work, considering he was located in the Midlands and Papin didn't move to London until some time after 1685 -- it appears the first publication of Papin's work wasn't until 1707, post-dating Savery's by some time.
In contrast, Edward Somerset's design that was built at Raglan uses the same operating cycle as Savery's, and differs primarily in having two cylinders instead of one. It long predates either Savery or Papin, and is located not far from Savery. If Savery did copy the design from somewhere, it appears much more plausible he did it from Somerset!
Do you have a source for this claim? Without further information on Papin's patents, or a direct linkage of the two men, I believe this claim is in error.
Maury 17:44, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
Well given that at least half of the "facts" stated in the Seymore Cray article in Britannica are laughably wrong, I no longer trust anything I read there. That said, it is entirely possible that all of the facts in this case are wrong, and what we are seeing is everyone copying older incorrect facts. I will try to track down your 2004 reference (I don't have access to it), I will try contacting the author.
To start with, this reference claims that the remains of the second engine are still visible in the walls of Raglan Castle -- or at least were in the late 1800's when he wrote it. The diagram shows an engine very similar in concept to Savery's.
It also goes on to describe how a contemporary of Somerset, Samuel Morland, who was apparently familiar with Somerset's first engine at Vauxhaul, designed a number of pumps, including one based on raising a vacuume via gunpowder. A number of his pumps were installed, and he was later invited to the French court to build various designs for Charles. His writings show that he is very familiar with real-world steam pumps, not "paper models" that invariably used incorrect calculations copied from earlier works.
Anyway, the key feature here is the arrangement of the internal parts. Papin's drawing shows a chamber with water on the bottom being pushed out by steam pressure of a piston on top. This is completely different than Savery's design. Unless there is another part of the patent showing a different device using vacuume, I'm inclined to think they're wrong on this.
Maury 13:53, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
While the website for modern company De Havilland Aviation does spell it with a capital D, the company that built the aircraft was lower case. I'll leave it to you to restore the template. GraemeLeggett 08:53, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
Where did you get the info about da Vinci, on Grimaldi's page, re diffraction "(although Leonardo Da Vinci had earlier noted it)"? I can't find a source that mentions da Vinci. Dicklyon 00:22, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Can you please expand the DDC/CI section in Display Data Channel to explain (in brief) how it handles Auto Pivot in modern LCD displays? -- Yehuda 14:24, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
Please visit Types Of AM and clarify them. -- Electron Kid 12:14, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
Thanks but these terms still remain unclarified. In fact, these have not been mentioned anywhere. -- Electron Kid 02:01, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
I mean to ask, for example, in 'J3E', what does, 'J' stand for, what does '3' signify and what 'E' implies.-- Electron Kid 16:35, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
Hi, many thanks for all your architecture and planning edits. I was wondering if you might be interested in joining Wikipedia:WikiProject Architecture. It's currently the umbrella project for issues relating to planning (All though there is talk of establishing a unique planning wikiproject). Also we've been revamping the Architecture Portal and nominations to Portal:Architecture/Selected picture candidates and Portal:Architecture/Selected article candidates will always be welcome. -- Mcginnly 10:17, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
Rory096 07:03, 23 June 2006 (UTC)