There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.

[Marvin Sebourn]

There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.

The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump will not work is because Duke thought he had designed it to fail, and thinks he did.

At its base there is only a Duke problem, with Duke trying to set up a situation where he is gloriously right, and his opponents are obviously wrong, and ignorant. But Duke fails to do this.

The “problem” is not that the pump supposedly will not work-that has not been determined-but that Duke, in a rush to prove others wrong, carelessly set up a situation where in his mind the pump would not operate. But in the real world, that is not necessarily so.

Duke refused to make any detail of his pump system design known, including information about the piping, the prime mover, or anything the piping valves. And information was requested several times. Yet he hid that information.

Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric motor as prime mover, the motor controls can be designed to soft-start the motor, and avoid over-current. This can be done in more than one way and is quite common. I believe AA or Ted mentioned using a synchronous motor with a variable frequency drive, VFD. Duke appears ignorant of motor starters and their function, which is to reduce starting loads on electric motors. This is a grievous oversight.

Duke neglected to say that on start-up, even with a single speed electric motor, that the pump could be started with the discharge valve partially closed to control the load on the electric motor, and avoid exceeding the maximum current usage. It is not uncommon to do this. It would result in a successful start. Even in Duke’s deliberately vague system.

Duke also gives his “I know, you don’t, “tee hee hee” boast by not specifying the driver or prime mover in the original problem, yet magically comes up with-voila-an electric motor as a driver. This is the height of deviousness and/or ignorance. Why would a graduate engineer select only an electric motor, and not consider other prime movers, when no detail of the problem says the pump must be powered by an electric motor? Why-because this fits his desired mode where he thinks only he can be right, and all others will be wrong.

Duke promised no tricks. I cautioned that Duke might result to that mode, saying there would be a factor where the pump could not operate. He did just that. Trucky-Ducky, Tricky Dukey.

Duke refused to consider a pump driver or prime mover of another sort. Are there any? What about a pump driven by an internal combustion engine fueled by diesel, gasoline, or natural gas? Why not drive the pump by a turbine, either a gas turbine or a steam turbine? How about driving the pump by a hydraulic motor, or an air motor? The answer is because Duke is dedicated to prove others wrong and for Duke to appear knowledgeable. In his duplicity, mixed with a generous dollop of ignorance, Duke later specified only an electric motor as driver, after the fact, but not mentioning that in his original package, and refusing to detail it. So Duke has modified his original unspecified design.

Duke claims to be a graduate mechanical engineer. His pump won’t work.

I was (loosely described) a technician. My pumps worked. Over one hundred pumps for over a third of a century.

The point here is that there is not some technical detail that Duke knew and we did not know. The point is that Duke dishonestly set up the problem to fail, refusing to give necessary details of his pump installation, and in ignorance or deceit showed no awareness of any other prime mover or driver type, or motor starter, or discharge restriction of the pump during start-up.

Duke's goal was to be considered all-wise, and the rest of us ignorant and foolish. Maybe gay. But Duke didn't consider the problem carefully enough.

So to return to Duke’s original question, where an honest and knowledgeable Duke would have asked: “How long will it take for a pump to fill the tank, if the pump won’t work?”

If Duke makes some tippy-toe, tap dancing reply to this post, for my reply you only need re-read this post of mine.

Special thanks to Ted and Atlatl for insights.

There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.

Marvin Sebourn
***@aol.com

[TheRealMccoy]

Post by Marvin Sebourn
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump will not work is because Duke thought he had designed it to fail, and thinks he did.
At its base there is only a Duke problem, with Duke trying to set up a situation where he is gloriously right, and his opponents are obviously wrong, and ignorant. But Duke fails to do this.
The “problem” is not that the pump supposedly will not work-that has not been determined-but that Duke, in a rush to prove others wrong, carelessly set up a situation where in his mind the pump would not operate. But in the real world, that is not necessarily so.
Duke refused to make any detail of his pump system design known, including information about the piping, the prime mover, or anything the piping valves. And information was requested several times. Yet he hid that information.
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric motor as prime mover, the motor controls can be designed to soft-start the motor, and avoid over-current. This can be done in more than one way and is quite common. I believe AA or Ted mentioned using a synchronous motor with a variable frequency drive, VFD. Duke appears ignorant of motor starters and their function, which is to reduce starting loads on electric motors. This is a grievous oversight.
Duke neglected to say that on start-up, even with a single speed electric motor, that the pump could be started with the discharge valve partially closed to control the load on the electric motor, and avoid exceeding the maximum current usage. It is not uncommon to do this. It would result in a successful start. Even in Duke’s deliberately vague system.
Duke also gives his “I know, you don’t, “tee hee hee” boast by not specifying the driver or prime mover in the original problem, yet magically comes up with-voila-an electric motor as a driver. This is the height of deviousness and/or ignorance. Why would a graduate engineer select only an electric motor, and not consider other prime movers, when no detail of the problem says the pump must be powered by an electric motor? Why-because this fits his desired mode where he thinks only he can be right, and all others will be wrong.
Duke promised no tricks. I cautioned that Duke might result to that mode, saying there would be a factor where the pump could not operate. He did just that. Trucky-Ducky, Tricky Dukey.
Duke refused to consider a pump driver or prime mover of another sort. Are there any? What about a pump driven by an internal combustion engine fueled by diesel, gasoline, or natural gas? Why not drive the pump by a turbine, either a gas turbine or a steam turbine? How about driving the pump by a hydraulic motor, or an air motor? The answer is because Duke is dedicated to prove others wrong and for Duke to appear knowledgeable. In his duplicity, mixed with a generous dollop of ignorance, Duke later specified only an electric motor as driver, after the fact, but not mentioning that in his original package, and refusing to detail it. So Duke has modified his original unspecified design.
Duke claims to be a graduate mechanical engineer. His pump won’t work.
I was (loosely described) a technician. My pumps worked. Over one hundred pumps for over a third of a century.
The point here is that there is not some technical detail that Duke knew and we did not know. The point is that Duke dishonestly set up the problem to fail, refusing to give necessary details of his pump installation, and in ignorance or deceit showed no awareness of any other prime mover or driver type, or motor starter, or discharge restriction of the pump during start-up.
Duke's goal was to be considered all-wise, and the rest of us ignorant and foolish. Maybe gay. But Duke didn't consider the problem carefully enough.
So to return to Duke’s original question, where an honest and knowledgeable Duke would have asked: “How long will it take for a pump to fill the tank, if the pump won’t work?”
If Duke makes some tippy-toe, tap dancing reply to this post, for my reply you only need re-read this post of mine.
Special thanks to Ted and Atlatl for insights.
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
Marvin Sebourn

you mean it is a you problem.

[Atlatl Axolotl]

Post by Marvin Sebourn
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump will not work is because Duke thought he had designed it to fail, and thinks he did.
At its base there is only a Duke problem, with Duke trying to set up a situation where he is gloriously right, and his opponents are obviously wrong, and ignorant. But Duke fails to do this.
The “problem” is not that the pump supposedly will not work-that has not been determined-but that Duke, in a rush to prove others wrong, carelessly set up a situation where in his mind the pump would not operate. But in the real world, that is not necessarily so.
Duke refused to make any detail of his pump system design known, including information about the piping, the prime mover, or anything the piping valves. And information was requested several times. Yet he hid that information.
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric motor as prime mover, the motor controls can be designed to soft-start the motor, and avoid over-current. This can be done in more than one way and is quite common. I believe AA or Ted mentioned using a synchronous motor with a variable frequency drive, VFD. Duke appears ignorant of motor starters and their function, which is to reduce starting loads on electric motors. This is a grievous oversight.
Duke neglected to say that on start-up, even with a single speed electric motor, that the pump could be started with the discharge valve partially closed to control the load on the electric motor, and avoid exceeding the maximum current usage. It is not uncommon to do this. It would result in a successful start. Even in Duke’s deliberately vague system.
Duke also gives his “I know, you don’t, “tee hee hee” boast by not specifying the driver or prime mover in the original problem, yet magically comes up with-voila-an electric motor as a driver. This is the height of deviousness and/or ignorance. Why would a graduate engineer select only an electric motor, and not consider other prime movers, when no detail of the problem says the pump must be powered by an electric motor? Why-because this fits his desired mode where he thinks only he can be right, and all others will be wrong.
Duke promised no tricks. I cautioned that Duke might result to that mode, saying there would be a factor where the pump could not operate. He did just that. Trucky-Ducky, Tricky Dukey.
Duke refused to consider a pump driver or prime mover of another sort. Are there any? What about a pump driven by an internal combustion engine fueled by diesel, gasoline, or natural gas? Why not drive the pump by a turbine, either a gas turbine or a steam turbine? How about driving the pump by a hydraulic motor, or an air motor? The answer is because Duke is dedicated to prove others wrong and for Duke to appear knowledgeable. In his duplicity, mixed with a generous dollop of ignorance, Duke later specified only an electric motor as driver, after the fact, but not mentioning that in his original package, and refusing to detail it. So Duke has modified his original unspecified design.
Duke claims to be a graduate mechanical engineer. His pump won’t work.
I was (loosely described) a technician. My pumps worked. Over one hundred pumps for over a third of a century.
The point here is that there is not some technical detail that Duke knew and we did not know. The point is that Duke dishonestly set up the problem to fail, refusing to give necessary details of his pump installation, and in ignorance or deceit showed no awareness of any other prime mover or driver type, or motor starter, or discharge restriction of the pump during start-up.
Duke's goal was to be considered all-wise, and the rest of us ignorant and foolish. Maybe gay. But Duke didn't consider the problem carefully enough.
So to return to Duke’s original question, where an honest and knowledgeable Duke would have asked: “How long will it take for a pump to fill the tank, if the pump won’t work?”
If Duke makes some tippy-toe, tap dancing reply to this post, for my reply you only need re-read this post of mine.
Special thanks to Ted and Atlatl for insights.
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
Marvin Sebourn

AA

[Ted]

Post by Atlatl Axolotl

Post by Marvin Sebourn
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump will not work
is because Duke thought he had designed it to fail, and thinks he did.
At its base there is only a Duke problem, with Duke trying to set up a
situation where he is gloriously right, and his opponents are obviously
wrong, and ignorant. But Duke fails to do this.
The “problem” is not that the pump supposedly will not work-that has not
been determined-but that Duke, in a rush to prove others wrong,
carelessly set up a situation where in his mind the pump would not
operate. But in the real world, that is not necessarily so.
Duke refused to make any detail of his pump system design known,
including information about the piping, the prime mover, or anything the
piping valves. And information was requested several times. Yet he hid that information.
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric motor as prime
mover, the motor controls can be designed to soft-start the motor, and
avoid over-current. This can be done in more than one way and is quite
common. I believe AA or Ted mentioned using a synchronous motor with a
variable frequency drive, VFD. Duke appears ignorant of motor starters
and their function, which is to reduce starting loads on electric
motors. This is a grievous oversight.
Duke neglected to say that on start-up, even with a single speed
electric motor, that the pump could be started with the discharge valve
partially closed to control the load on the electric motor, and avoid
exceeding the maximum current usage. It is not uncommon to do this. It
would result in a successful start. Even in Duke’s deliberately vague system.
Duke also gives his “I know, you don’t, “tee hee hee” boast by not
specifying the driver or prime mover in the original problem, yet
magically comes up with-voila-an electric motor as a driver. This is the
height of deviousness and/or ignorance. Why would a graduate engineer
select only an electric motor, and not consider other prime movers, when
no detail of the problem says the pump must be powered by an electric
motor? Why-because this fits his desired mode where he thinks only he
can be right, and all others will be wrong.
Duke promised no tricks. I cautioned that Duke might result to that
mode, saying there would be a factor where the pump could not operate.
He did just that. Trucky-Ducky, Tricky Dukey.
Duke refused to consider a pump driver or prime mover of another sort.
Are there any? What about a pump driven by an internal combustion engine
fueled by diesel, gasoline, or natural gas? Why not drive the pump by a
turbine, either a gas turbine or a steam turbine? How about driving the
pump by a hydraulic motor, or an air motor? The answer is because Duke
is dedicated to prove others wrong and for Duke to appear knowledgeable.
In his duplicity, mixed with a generous dollop of ignorance, Duke later
specified only an electric motor as driver, after the fact, but not
mentioning that in his original package, and refusing to detail it. So
Duke has modified his original unspecified design.
Duke claims to be a graduate mechanical engineer. His pump won’t work.
I was (loosely described) a technician. My pumps worked. Over one
hundred pumps for over a third of a century.
The point here is that there is not some technical detail that Duke knew
and we did not know. The point is that Duke dishonestly set up the
problem to fail, refusing to give necessary details of his pump
installation, and in ignorance or deceit showed no awareness of any
other prime mover or driver type, or motor starter, or discharge
restriction of the pump during start-up.
Duke's goal was to be considered all-wise, and the rest of us ignorant
and foolish. Maybe gay. But Duke didn't consider the problem carefully enough.
So to return to Duke’s original question, where an honest and
knowledgeable Duke would have asked: “How long will it take for a pump
to fill the tank, if the pump won’t work?”
If Duke makes some tippy-toe, tap dancing reply to this post, for my
reply you only need re-read this post of mine.
Special thanks to Ted and Atlatl for insights.
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
Marvin Sebourn

http://youtu.be/RaxVwD-HvNU
AA

Yes, definitely. To say that was awesome would be an understatement. Marvin
rox!

[Marvin Sebourn]

Post by Marvin Sebourn
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump will not work is because Duke thought he had designed it to fail, and thinks he did.
At its base there is only a Duke problem, with Duke trying to set up a situation where he is gloriously right, and his opponents are obviously wrong, and ignorant. But Duke fails to do this.
The “problem” is not that the pump supposedly will not work-that has not been determined-but that Duke, in a rush to prove others wrong, carelessly set up a situation where in his mind the pump would not operate. But in the real world, that is not necessarily so.
Duke refused to make any detail of his pump system design known, including information about the piping, the prime mover, or anything the piping valves. And information was requested several times. Yet he hid that information.
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric motor as prime mover, the motor controls can be designed to soft-start the motor, and avoid over-current. This can be done in more than one way and is quite common. I believe AA or Ted mentioned using a synchronous motor with a variable frequency drive, VFD. Duke appears ignorant of motor starters and their function, which is to reduce starting loads on electric motors. This is a grievous oversight.
Duke neglected to say that on start-up, even with a single speed electric motor, that the pump could be started with the discharge valve partially closed to control the load on the electric motor, and avoid exceeding the maximum current usage. It is not uncommon to do this. It would result in a successful start. Even in Duke’s deliberately vague system.
Duke also gives his “I know, you don’t, “tee hee hee” boast by not specifying the driver or prime mover in the original problem, yet magically comes up with-voila-an electric motor as a driver. This is the height of deviousness and/or ignorance. Why would a graduate engineer select only an electric motor, and not consider other prime movers, when no detail of the problem says the pump must be powered by an electric motor? Why-because this fits his desired mode where he thinks only he can be right, and all others will be wrong.
Duke promised no tricks. I cautioned that Duke might result to that mode, saying there would be a factor where the pump could not operate. He did just that. Trucky-Ducky, Tricky Dukey.
Duke refused to consider a pump driver or prime mover of another sort. Are there any? What about a pump driven by an internal combustion engine fueled by diesel, gasoline, or natural gas? Why not drive the pump by a turbine, either a gas turbine or a steam turbine? How about driving the pump by a hydraulic motor, or an air motor? The answer is because Duke is dedicated to prove others wrong and for Duke to appear knowledgeable. In his duplicity, mixed with a generous dollop of ignorance, Duke later specified only an electric motor as driver, after the fact, but not mentioning that in his original package, and refusing to detail it. So Duke has modified his original unspecified design.
Duke claims to be a graduate mechanical engineer. His pump won’t work.
I was (loosely described) a technician. My pumps worked. Over one hundred pumps for over a third of a century.
The point here is that there is not some technical detail that Duke knew and we did not know. The point is that Duke dishonestly set up the problem to fail, refusing to give necessary details of his pump installation, and in ignorance or deceit showed no awareness of any other prime mover or driver type, or motor starter, or discharge restriction of the pump during start-up.
Duke's goal was to be considered all-wise, and the rest of us ignorant and foolish. Maybe gay. But Duke didn't consider the problem carefully enough.
So to return to Duke’s original question, where an honest and knowledgeable Duke would have asked: “How long will it take for a pump to fill the tank, if the pump won’t work?”
If Duke makes some tippy-toe, tap dancing reply to this post, for my reply you only need re-read this post of mine.
Special thanks to Ted and Atlatl for insights.
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
Marvin Sebourn

XXXXX This copy is given as a courtesy to Duke, as he appears to have missed our posts here, preferring to hide in the deeper thickets of AA where he might not be seen. This is to be expected, as he, without truth, refers to my being worried at my inadequacy in discussing various pumps. The only hesitation I experienced was that if I had any embarrassment, it would be for Duke, as he in this thread has given up his personal integrity, displayed his lack of professional knowledge, and made an almost unbelievable display of his abysmal professional conduct.

Okay, continuing, I know I'm verbose. Apple polly loggies.

This is Duke responding to 3% of my post, and doing so poorly. The other 97% he snipped.

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Duke, in the simple arrangement you gave us, is tripping the current limiting device on the electric motor the only possible outcome?

Yes. Immediately on starting the pump against no back pressure, the flowrate
will quickly rise. Although there is "no" head being developed, the flowrate
rising would quickly exceed the motor rating for the intended design, and trip
off line. That's exactly what happened in an event I'm familiar with.

Not necessarily true, Duke.

1) You completely ignored that the prime mover need not be an electric motor.

2) You completely ignored the possibility of a soft start by the motor controller, or other current limiting device.

3) You completely ignored the likelihood that the pump operator would restrict the output flow by partially pinching off the discharge valve, making a successful start.

4) Overall here, you appear completely ignorant.

Duke: >That's exactly what happened in an event I'm familiar with.
Clearly a/some engineering correction would need to be made. Attaching a
vertical pipe from the pump outlet to the top of the tank and pre filling it
would provide the 500 ft tdh the pump is designed for to then flow at 1000 gpm
with the selected rated driver for the situation.

Duke: >I intended this for 2 clowns that had no idea of pumps. At least you tried, and I hope learned something.

Duke, it’s harsh, but I learned that you do not always tell the truth, that you change operating criteria after the initial declaration of such, that you are not very knowledgeable about pump start-up or motor control, that you may be quite ignorant of the use of other prime movers, that you try and pull off a simple victory while ignoring specifics, and that I cannot trust you.

Of the entirety of my post, you snipped 97%, leaving only 3% of what I wrote remaining. When you replied to this, or addressed it, you were wrong again.

Illustrating this-no, the pump driver or prime mover need not be an electric motor. You didn’t specify this at the start. To bring it up as the only alternative is dishonest and technically ignorant. And even if there is an electric motor as a driver, the breaker need not be tripped if a soft start is used, or if the operator restricts the pump discharge by partially closing the discharge valve on the pump.

And the 97% you clipped, that is, the number 97 reminds me of the old Weider(?) body building ads on the back of Superman comics. Duke, you are the 97 pound mental and ethical weakling, with sand kicked in you face by those mean old bullies who tell the truth, can form a logical argument, and who can reason. Looks like you are a three-percenter, Duke. Three-percent knowledgeable. Another denial of a Duke untruth. Duke, the three percenter, 3% right, 97% wrong.

Here is the 97% of my post that Duke snipped. I’ve left the 3% in that he didn’t snip, because I don’t want to bother with it. Killing a dead horse, etc.

BEGIN: "There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.

The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump will not work is because Duke thought he had designed it to fail, and thinks he did.

At its base there is only a Duke problem, with Duke trying to set up a situation where he is gloriously right, and his opponents are obviously wrong, and ignorant. But Duke fails to do this.

The “problem” is not that the pump supposedly will not work-that has not been determined-but that Duke, in a rush to prove others wrong, carelessly set up a situation where in his mind the pump would not operate. But in the real world, that is not necessarily so.

Duke refused to make any detail of his pump system design known, including information about the piping, the prime mover, or anything the piping valves. And information was requested several times. Yet he hid that information.

Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric motor as prime mover, the motor controls can be designed to soft-start the motor, and avoid over-current. This can be done in more than one way and is quite common. I believe AA or Ted mentioned using a synchronous motor with a variable frequency drive, VFD. Duke appears ignorant of motor starters and their function, which is to reduce starting loads on electric motors. This is a grievous oversight.

Duke neglected to say that on start-up, even with a single speed electric motor, that the pump could be started with the discharge valve partially closed to control the load on the electric motor, and avoid exceeding the maximum current usage. It is not uncommon to do this. It would result in a successful start. Even in Duke’s deliberately vague system.

Duke also gives his “I know, you don’t, “tee hee hee” boast by not specifying the driver or prime mover in the original problem, yet magically comes up with-voila-an electric motor as a driver. This is the height of deviousness and/or ignorance. Why would a graduate engineer select only an electric motor, and not consider other prime movers, when no detail of the problem says the pump must be powered by an electric motor? Why-because this fits his desired mode where he thinks only he can be right, and all others will be wrong.

Duke promised no tricks. I cautioned that Duke might result to that mode, saying there would be a factor where the pump could not operate. He did just that. Trucky-Ducky, Tricky Dukey.

Duke refused to consider a pump driver or prime mover of another sort. Are there any? What about a pump driven by an internal combustion engine fueled by diesel, gasoline, or natural gas? Why not drive the pump by a turbine, either a gas turbine or a steam turbine? How about driving the pump by a hydraulic motor, or an air motor? The answer is because Duke is dedicated to prove others wrong and for Duke to appear knowledgeable. In his duplicity, mixed with a generous dollop of ignorance, Duke later specified only an electric motor as driver, after the fact, but not mentioning that in his original package, and refusing to detail it. So Duke has modified his original unspecified design.

Duke claims to be a graduate mechanical engineer. His pump won’t work.

I was (loosely described) a technician. My pumps worked. Over one hundred pumps for over a third of a century.

The point here is that there is not some technical detail that Duke knew and we did not know. The point is that Duke dishonestly set up the problem to fail, refusing to give necessary details of his pump installation, and in ignorance or deceit showed no awareness of any other prime mover or driver type, or motor starter, or discharge restriction of the pump during start-up.

Duke's goal was to be considered all-wise, and the rest of us ignorant and foolish. Maybe gay. But Duke didn't consider the problem carefully enough.

So to return to Duke’s original question, where an honest and knowledgeable Duke would have asked: “How long will it take for a pump to fill the tank, if the pump won’t work?”

If Duke makes some tippy-toe, tap dancing reply to this post, for my reply you only need re-read this post of mine.

Special thanks to Ted and Atlatl for insights.

continued below

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Clearly a/some engineering correction would need to be made. Attaching a
vertical pipe from the pump outlet to the top of the tank and pre filling it
would provide the 500 ft tdh the pump is designed for to then flow at 1000 gpm
with the selected rated driver for the situation.
I intended this for 2 clowns that had no idea of pumps.

Duke: At least you tried, and I hope learned something.

I did, and it concerns your integrity and professional knowledge. Negative on both.

Too bad you couldn't enter into an honest discussion, Duke. I would have welcomed it.

There is no pump problem, only a Duke problem.
TINPPOADP.

Marvin Sebourn
***@aol.com

[unknown]

Marvin Sebourn <***@aol.com> wrote:

<more snippage>

Post by Marvin Sebourn
And the 97% you clipped, that is, the number 97 reminds
me of the old Weider(?) body building ads on the back of
Superman comics. Duke, you are the 97 pound mental and
ethical weakling, with sand kicked in you face by those
mean old bullies who tell the truth, can form a logical
argument, and who can reason. Looks like you are a
three-percenter, Duke. Three-percent knowledgeable.
Another denial of a Duke untruth. Duke, the three
percenter, 3% right, 97% wrong.

LOL. Duke is the 3 Percenter of Usenet.

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric
motor as prime mover, the motor controls can be designed
to soft-start the motor, and avoid over-current. This can
be done in more than one way and is quite common. I
believe AA or Ted mentioned using a synchronous motor
with a variable frequency drive, VFD. Duke appears
ignorant of motor starters and their function, which is
to reduce starting loads on electric motors. This is a
grievous oversight.

I had guessed that duke was trying to use a synchronous
motor with his pump. I suggested using a variable-speed
induction motor instead, thinking it could be controlled
easily like a dc motor. Some googling relieved me of
that misunderstanding, but an induction motor with VFD
could be made to work. A dc motor would work fine too.

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke neglected to say that on start-up, even with a
single speed electric motor, that the pump could be
started with the discharge valve partially closed to
control the load on the electric motor, and avoid
exceeding the maximum current usage. It is not uncommon
to do this. It would result in a successful start. Even
in Duke’s deliberately vague system.
Special thanks to Ted and Atlatl for insights.
continued below

<from the original thread:>

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Duke, in the simple arrangement you gave us, is tripping the current limiting
device on the electric motor the only possible outcome?

Yes. Immediately on starting the pump against no back pressure, the flowrate
will quickly rise. Although there is "no" head being developed, the flowrate
rising would quickly exceed the motor rating for the intended design, and trip
off line. That's exactly what happened in an event I'm familiar with.

That's duke... 'I don't know how to do it, so it can't
be done.'

What a maroon. What an ignoranimus.

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Not necessarily true, Duke.
1) You completely ignored that the prime mover need not be an electric motor.
2) You completely ignored the possibility of a soft start by the motor controller, or
other current limiting device.
3) You completely ignored the likelihood that the pump operator would restrict the output
flow by partially pinching off the discharge valve, making a successful start.
4) Overall here, you appear completely ignorant.

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Clearly a/some engineering correction would need to be made. Attaching a
vertical pipe from the pump outlet to the top of the tank and pre filling it
would provide the 500 ft tdh the pump is designed for to then flow at 1000 gpm
with the selected rated driver for the situation.
I intended this for 2 clowns that had no idea of pumps.

Duke: At least you tried, and I hope learned something.
I did, and it concerns your integrity and professional knowledge. Negative on both.
Too bad you couldn't enter into an honest discussion, Duke. I would have welcomed it.
There is no pump problem, only a Duke problem.
TINPPOADP.

LOL. I bet his Duke Problem has followed him like a
plague for his entire life.

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Marvin Sebourn

[Ted]

Post by unknown
<more snippage>

Post by Marvin Sebourn
And the 97% you clipped, that is, the number 97 reminds
me of the old Weider(?) body building ads on the back of
Superman comics. Duke, you are the 97 pound mental and
ethical weakling, with sand kicked in you face by those
mean old bullies who tell the truth, can form a logical
argument, and who can reason. Looks like you are a
three-percenter, Duke. Three-percent knowledgeable.
Another denial of a Duke untruth. Duke, the three
percenter, 3% right, 97% wrong.

LOL. Duke is the 3 Percenter of Usenet.

LOL.

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric
motor as prime mover, the motor controls can be designed
to soft-start the motor, and avoid over-current. This can
be done in more than one way and is quite common. I
believe AA or Ted mentioned using a synchronous motor
with a variable frequency drive, VFD. Duke appears
ignorant of motor starters and their function, which is
to reduce starting loads on electric motors. This is a
grievous oversight.

I had guessed that duke was trying to use a synchronous
motor with his pump. I suggested using a variable-speed
induction motor instead, thinking it could be controlled
easily like a dc motor. Some googling relieved me of
that misunderstanding, but an induction motor with VFD
could be made to work. A dc motor would work fine too.

You and Marvin know much more about motors than I do.

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke neglected to say that on start-up, even with a
single speed electric motor, that the pump could be
started with the discharge valve partially closed to
control the load on the electric motor, and avoid
exceeding the maximum current usage. It is not uncommon
to do this. It would result in a successful start. Even
in Duke’s deliberately vague system.
Special thanks to Ted and Atlatl for insights.
continued below

<from the original thread:>

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Duke, in the simple arrangement you gave us, is tripping the current limiting
device on the electric motor the only possible outcome?

Yes. Immediately on starting the pump against no back pressure, the flowrate
will quickly rise. Although there is "no" head being developed, the flowrate
rising would quickly exceed the motor rating for the intended design, and trip
off line. That's exactly what happened in an event I'm familiar with.

That's duke... 'I don't know how to do it, so it can't
be done.'
What a maroon. What an ignoranimus.

LOLOL! :)

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Not necessarily true, Duke.
1) You completely ignored that the prime mover need not be an electric motor.
2) You completely ignored the possibility of a soft start by the motor controller, or
other current limiting device.
3) You completely ignored the likelihood that the pump operator would restrict the output
flow by partially pinching off the discharge valve, making a successful start.
4) Overall here, you appear completely ignorant.

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Clearly a/some engineering correction would need to be made. Attaching a
vertical pipe from the pump outlet to the top of the tank and pre filling it
would provide the 500 ft tdh the pump is designed for to then flow at 1000 gpm
with the selected rated driver for the situation.
I intended this for 2 clowns that had no idea of pumps.

Duke: At least you tried, and I hope learned something.
I did, and it concerns your integrity and professional knowledge. Negative on both.
Too bad you couldn't enter into an honest discussion, Duke. I would have welcomed it.
There is no pump problem, only a Duke problem.
TINPPOADP.

LOL. I bet his Duke Problem has followed him like a
plague for his entire life.

No question about it. According to my Theory of Duke, it began at
least as far back as his adolescence.

[duke]

Post by Ted

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Yes. Immediately on starting the pump against no back pressure, the flowrate
will quickly rise. Although there is "no" head being developed, the flowrate
rising would quickly exceed the motor rating for the intended design, and trip
off line. That's exactly what happened in an event I'm familiar with.

That's duke... 'I don't know how to do it, so it can't
be done.'
What a maroon. What an ignoranimus.

No question about it. According to my Theory of Duke, it began at
least as far back as his adolescence.

How come you fled the problem immediately.

the dukester, American-American


*****
The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine
and a good cigar.

G.K. Chesterton
*****

[Ted]

Post by duke

Post by Ted

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Yes. Immediately on starting the pump against no back pressure, the flowrate
will quickly rise. Although there is "no" head being developed, the flowrate
rising would quickly exceed the motor rating for the intended design, and trip
off line. That's exactly what happened in an event I'm familiar with.

That's duke... 'I don't know how to do it, so it can't
be done.'
What a maroon. What an ignoranimus.

No question about it. According to my Theory of Duke, it began at
least as far back as his adolescence.

How come you fled the problem immediately.
the dukester, American-American

What problem?

[TheRealMccoy]

Post by Ted
What problem?

See?

Comprehension problems.

[unknown]

Post by Ted

Post by unknown
<more snippage>

Post by Marvin Sebourn
And the 97% you clipped, that is, the number 97 reminds
me of the old Weider(?) body building ads on the back of
Superman comics. Duke, you are the 97 pound mental and
ethical weakling, with sand kicked in you face by those
mean old bullies who tell the truth, can form a logical
argument, and who can reason. Looks like you are a
three-percenter, Duke. Three-percent knowledgeable.
Another denial of a Duke untruth. Duke, the three
percenter, 3% right, 97% wrong.

LOL. Duke is the 3 Percenter of Usenet.

LOL.

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric
motor as prime mover, the motor controls can be designed
to soft-start the motor, and avoid over-current. This can
be done in more than one way and is quite common. I
believe AA or Ted mentioned using a synchronous motor
with a variable frequency drive, VFD. Duke appears
ignorant of motor starters and their function, which is
to reduce starting loads on electric motors. This is a
grievous oversight.

I had guessed that duke was trying to use a synchronous
motor with his pump. I suggested using a variable-speed
induction motor instead, thinking it could be controlled
easily like a dc motor. Some googling relieved me of
that misunderstanding, but an induction motor with VFD
could be made to work. A dc motor would work fine too.

You and Marvin know much more about motors than I do.

Marvin knows his motors. I obviously don't, since i got
the induction motor thing wrong. But that's still more
than duke knows.

[Ted]

Post by unknown

Post by Ted

Post by unknown
<more snippage>

Post by Marvin Sebourn
And the 97% you clipped, that is, the number 97 reminds
me of the old Weider(?) body building ads on the back of
Superman comics. Duke, you are the 97 pound mental and
ethical weakling, with sand kicked in you face by those
mean old bullies who tell the truth, can form a logical
argument, and who can reason. Looks like you are a
three-percenter, Duke. Three-percent knowledgeable.
Another denial of a Duke untruth. Duke, the three
percenter, 3% right, 97% wrong.

LOL. Duke is the 3 Percenter of Usenet.

LOL.

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric
motor as prime mover, the motor controls can be designed
to soft-start the motor, and avoid over-current. This can
be done in more than one way and is quite common. I
believe AA or Ted mentioned using a synchronous motor
with a variable frequency drive, VFD. Duke appears
ignorant of motor starters and their function, which is
to reduce starting loads on electric motors. This is a
grievous oversight.

I had guessed that duke was trying to use a synchronous
motor with his pump. I suggested using a variable-speed
induction motor instead, thinking it could be controlled
easily like a dc motor. Some googling relieved me of
that misunderstanding, but an induction motor with VFD
could be made to work. A dc motor would work fine too.

You and Marvin know much more about motors than I do.

Marvin knows his motors. I obviously don't, since i got
the induction motor thing wrong. But that's still more
than duke knows.

Indeed. Duke doesn't know much of anything at all. He must have had a tough
time trying to pass himself off as an engineer. No wonder he became such a
habitual liar.

[duke]

Post by unknown

Post by Ted

Post by unknown
<more snippage>

Post by Marvin Sebourn
And the 97% you clipped, that is, the number 97 reminds
me of the old Weider(?) body building ads on the back of
Superman comics. Duke, you are the 97 pound mental and
ethical weakling, with sand kicked in you face by those
mean old bullies who tell the truth, can form a logical
argument, and who can reason. Looks like you are a
three-percenter, Duke. Three-percent knowledgeable.
Another denial of a Duke untruth. Duke, the three
percenter, 3% right, 97% wrong.

LOL. Duke is the 3 Percenter of Usenet.

LOL.

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric
motor as prime mover, the motor controls can be designed
to soft-start the motor, and avoid over-current. This can
be done in more than one way and is quite common. I
believe AA or Ted mentioned using a synchronous motor
with a variable frequency drive, VFD. Duke appears
ignorant of motor starters and their function, which is
to reduce starting loads on electric motors. This is a
grievous oversight.

I had guessed that duke was trying to use a synchronous
motor with his pump. I suggested using a variable-speed
induction motor instead, thinking it could be controlled
easily like a dc motor. Some googling relieved me of
that misunderstanding, but an induction motor with VFD
could be made to work. A dc motor would work fine too.

You and Marvin know much more about motors than I do.

Marvin knows his motors. I obviously don't, since i got
the induction motor thing wrong. But that's still more
than duke knows.

There's a lot of things that you don't know. And the biggest was "how long
would it take to fill the tank". Heeheehee.

the dukester, American-American


*****
The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine
and a good cigar.

G.K. Chesterton
*****

[Ted]

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Ted

Post by unknown
<more snippage>

Post by Marvin Sebourn
And the 97% you clipped, that is, the number 97 reminds
me of the old Weider(?) body building ads on the back of
Superman comics. Duke, you are the 97 pound mental and
ethical weakling, with sand kicked in you face by those
mean old bullies who tell the truth, can form a logical
argument, and who can reason. Looks like you are a
three-percenter, Duke. Three-percent knowledgeable.
Another denial of a Duke untruth. Duke, the three
percenter, 3% right, 97% wrong.

LOL. Duke is the 3 Percenter of Usenet.

LOL.

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric
motor as prime mover, the motor controls can be designed
to soft-start the motor, and avoid over-current. This can
be done in more than one way and is quite common. I
believe AA or Ted mentioned using a synchronous motor
with a variable frequency drive, VFD. Duke appears
ignorant of motor starters and their function, which is
to reduce starting loads on electric motors. This is a
grievous oversight.

I had guessed that duke was trying to use a synchronous
motor with his pump. I suggested using a variable-speed
induction motor instead, thinking it could be controlled
easily like a dc motor. Some googling relieved me of
that misunderstanding, but an induction motor with VFD
could be made to work. A dc motor would work fine too.

You and Marvin know much more about motors than I do.

Marvin knows his motors. I obviously don't, since i got
the induction motor thing wrong. But that's still more
than duke knows.

There's a lot of things that you don't know. And the biggest was "how long
would it take to fill the tank". Heeheehee.
the dukester, American-American

Peter and I both figured out the answer. You didn't.

[unknown]

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Ted

Post by unknown
<more snippage>

Post by Marvin Sebourn
And the 97% you clipped, that is, the number 97 reminds
me of the old Weider(?) body building ads on the back of
Superman comics. Duke, you are the 97 pound mental and
ethical weakling, with sand kicked in you face by those
mean old bullies who tell the truth, can form a logical
argument, and who can reason. Looks like you are a
three-percenter, Duke. Three-percent knowledgeable.
Another denial of a Duke untruth. Duke, the three
percenter, 3% right, 97% wrong.

LOL. Duke is the 3 Percenter of Usenet.

LOL.

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric
motor as prime mover, the motor controls can be designed
to soft-start the motor, and avoid over-current. This can
be done in more than one way and is quite common. I
believe AA or Ted mentioned using a synchronous motor
with a variable frequency drive, VFD. Duke appears
ignorant of motor starters and their function, which is
to reduce starting loads on electric motors. This is a
grievous oversight.

I had guessed that duke was trying to use a synchronous
motor with his pump. I suggested using a variable-speed
induction motor instead, thinking it could be controlled
easily like a dc motor. Some googling relieved me of
that misunderstanding, but an induction motor with VFD
could be made to work. A dc motor would work fine too.

You and Marvin know much more about motors than I do.

Marvin knows his motors. I obviously don't, since i got
the induction motor thing wrong. But that's still more
than duke knows.

There's a lot of things that you don't know. And the biggest was "how long
would it take to fill the tank". Heeheehee.

Still trying to wheedle the answer for your pump problem
out of someone? If you can't give us your solution, i
guess you'll never know, will you?

Why don't you ask your ex-customer?

[duke]

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Ted

Post by unknown
<more snippage>

Post by Marvin Sebourn
And the 97% you clipped, that is, the number 97 reminds
me of the old Weider(?) body building ads on the back of
Superman comics. Duke, you are the 97 pound mental and
ethical weakling, with sand kicked in you face by those
mean old bullies who tell the truth, can form a logical
argument, and who can reason. Looks like you are a
three-percenter, Duke. Three-percent knowledgeable.
Another denial of a Duke untruth. Duke, the three
percenter, 3% right, 97% wrong.

LOL. Duke is the 3 Percenter of Usenet.

LOL.

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric
motor as prime mover, the motor controls can be designed
to soft-start the motor, and avoid over-current. This can
be done in more than one way and is quite common. I
believe AA or Ted mentioned using a synchronous motor
with a variable frequency drive, VFD. Duke appears
ignorant of motor starters and their function, which is
to reduce starting loads on electric motors. This is a
grievous oversight.

I had guessed that duke was trying to use a synchronous
motor with his pump. I suggested using a variable-speed
induction motor instead, thinking it could be controlled
easily like a dc motor. Some googling relieved me of
that misunderstanding, but an induction motor with VFD
could be made to work. A dc motor would work fine too.

You and Marvin know much more about motors than I do.

Marvin knows his motors. I obviously don't, since i got
the induction motor thing wrong. But that's still more
than duke knows.

There's a lot of things that you don't know. And the biggest was "how long
would it take to fill the tank". Heeheehee.

Still trying to wheedle the answer for your pump problem
out of someone? If you can't give us your solution, i
guess you'll never know, will you?

I'm the ONLY one that knew the problem.

Post by unknown
Why don't you ask your ex-customer?

the dukester, American-American


*****
The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine
and a good cigar.

G.K. Chesterton
*****

[unknown]

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Ted

Post by unknown
<more snippage>

Post by Marvin Sebourn
And the 97% you clipped, that is, the number 97 reminds
me of the old Weider(?) body building ads on the back of
Superman comics. Duke, you are the 97 pound mental and
ethical weakling, with sand kicked in you face by those
mean old bullies who tell the truth, can form a logical
argument, and who can reason. Looks like you are a
three-percenter, Duke. Three-percent knowledgeable.
Another denial of a Duke untruth. Duke, the three
percenter, 3% right, 97% wrong.

LOL. Duke is the 3 Percenter of Usenet.

LOL.

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric
motor as prime mover, the motor controls can be designed
to soft-start the motor, and avoid over-current. This can
be done in more than one way and is quite common. I
believe AA or Ted mentioned using a synchronous motor
with a variable frequency drive, VFD. Duke appears
ignorant of motor starters and their function, which is
to reduce starting loads on electric motors. This is a
grievous oversight.

I had guessed that duke was trying to use a synchronous
motor with his pump. I suggested using a variable-speed
induction motor instead, thinking it could be controlled
easily like a dc motor. Some googling relieved me of
that misunderstanding, but an induction motor with VFD
could be made to work. A dc motor would work fine too.

You and Marvin know much more about motors than I do.

Marvin knows his motors. I obviously don't, since i got
the induction motor thing wrong. But that's still more
than duke knows.

There's a lot of things that you don't know. And the biggest was "how long
would it take to fill the tank". Heeheehee.

Still trying to wheedle the answer for your pump problem
out of someone? If you can't give us your solution, i
guess you'll never know, will you?

I'm the ONLY one that knew the problem.

Right... your ex-customer eventually got their water
pumped into the tank, didn't they. They were able to
solve your problem too.

Everyone solved your pump problem but you.

Post by duke

Post by unknown
Why don't you ask your ex-customer?

Go on, ask them. Surely you aren't embarrassed over it.

[Ted]

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Ted

Post by unknown
<more snippage>

Post by Marvin Sebourn
And the 97% you clipped, that is, the number 97 reminds
me of the old Weider(?) body building ads on the back of
Superman comics. Duke, you are the 97 pound mental and
ethical weakling, with sand kicked in you face by those
mean old bullies who tell the truth, can form a logical
argument, and who can reason. Looks like you are a
three-percenter, Duke. Three-percent knowledgeable.
Another denial of a Duke untruth. Duke, the three
percenter, 3% right, 97% wrong.

LOL. Duke is the 3 Percenter of Usenet.

LOL.

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric
motor as prime mover, the motor controls can be designed
to soft-start the motor, and avoid over-current. This can
be done in more than one way and is quite common. I
believe AA or Ted mentioned using a synchronous motor
with a variable frequency drive, VFD. Duke appears
ignorant of motor starters and their function, which is
to reduce starting loads on electric motors. This is a
grievous oversight.

I had guessed that duke was trying to use a synchronous
motor with his pump. I suggested using a variable-speed
induction motor instead, thinking it could be controlled
easily like a dc motor. Some googling relieved me of
that misunderstanding, but an induction motor with VFD
could be made to work. A dc motor would work fine too.

You and Marvin know much more about motors than I do.

Marvin knows his motors. I obviously don't, since i got
the induction motor thing wrong. But that's still more
than duke knows.

There's a lot of things that you don't know. And the biggest was "how long
would it take to fill the tank". Heeheehee.

Still trying to wheedle the answer for your pump problem
out of someone? If you can't give us your solution, i
guess you'll never know, will you?

I'm the ONLY one that knew the problem.

Right... your ex-customer eventually got their water
pumped into the tank, didn't they. They were able to
solve your problem too.
Everyone solved your pump problem but you.

Exactly.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
Why don't you ask your ex-customer?

Go on, ask them. Surely you aren't embarrassed over it.

LOL.

[duke]

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Ted

Post by unknown
<more snippage>

Post by Marvin Sebourn
And the 97% you clipped, that is, the number 97 reminds
me of the old Weider(?) body building ads on the back of
Superman comics. Duke, you are the 97 pound mental and
ethical weakling, with sand kicked in you face by those
mean old bullies who tell the truth, can form a logical
argument, and who can reason. Looks like you are a
three-percenter, Duke. Three-percent knowledgeable.
Another denial of a Duke untruth. Duke, the three
percenter, 3% right, 97% wrong.

LOL. Duke is the 3 Percenter of Usenet.

LOL.

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric
motor as prime mover, the motor controls can be designed
to soft-start the motor, and avoid over-current. This can
be done in more than one way and is quite common. I
believe AA or Ted mentioned using a synchronous motor
with a variable frequency drive, VFD. Duke appears
ignorant of motor starters and their function, which is
to reduce starting loads on electric motors. This is a
grievous oversight.

I had guessed that duke was trying to use a synchronous
motor with his pump. I suggested using a variable-speed
induction motor instead, thinking it could be controlled
easily like a dc motor. Some googling relieved me of
that misunderstanding, but an induction motor with VFD
could be made to work. A dc motor would work fine too.

You and Marvin know much more about motors than I do.

Marvin knows his motors. I obviously don't, since i got
the induction motor thing wrong. But that's still more
than duke knows.

There's a lot of things that you don't know. And the biggest was "how long
would it take to fill the tank". Heeheehee.

Still trying to wheedle the answer for your pump problem
out of someone? If you can't give us your solution, i
guess you'll never know, will you?

I'm the ONLY one that knew the problem.

Right... your ex-customer eventually got their water
pumped into the tank, didn't they. They were able to
solve your problem too.
Everyone solved your pump problem but you.

Nobody came even close to the correct answer.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
Why don't you ask your ex-customer?

Go on, ask them. Surely you aren't embarrassed over it.

My ex-customer is teddie the fairy, aa, peter pan and marvin - all of which who
knew exactly nothing about pumps.

the dukester, American-American


*****
The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine
and a good cigar.

G.K. Chesterton
*****

[unknown]

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Ted

Post by unknown
<more snippage>

Post by Marvin Sebourn
And the 97% you clipped, that is, the number 97 reminds
me of the old Weider(?) body building ads on the back of
Superman comics. Duke, you are the 97 pound mental and
ethical weakling, with sand kicked in you face by those
mean old bullies who tell the truth, can form a logical
argument, and who can reason. Looks like you are a
three-percenter, Duke. Three-percent knowledgeable.
Another denial of a Duke untruth. Duke, the three
percenter, 3% right, 97% wrong.

LOL. Duke is the 3 Percenter of Usenet.

LOL.

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric
motor as prime mover, the motor controls can be designed
to soft-start the motor, and avoid over-current. This can
be done in more than one way and is quite common. I
believe AA or Ted mentioned using a synchronous motor
with a variable frequency drive, VFD. Duke appears
ignorant of motor starters and their function, which is
to reduce starting loads on electric motors. This is a
grievous oversight.

I had guessed that duke was trying to use a synchronous
motor with his pump. I suggested using a variable-speed
induction motor instead, thinking it could be controlled
easily like a dc motor. Some googling relieved me of
that misunderstanding, but an induction motor with VFD
could be made to work. A dc motor would work fine too.

You and Marvin know much more about motors than I do.

Marvin knows his motors. I obviously don't, since i got
the induction motor thing wrong. But that's still more
than duke knows.

There's a lot of things that you don't know. And the biggest was "how long
would it take to fill the tank". Heeheehee.

Still trying to wheedle the answer for your pump problem
out of someone? If you can't give us your solution, i
guess you'll never know, will you?

I'm the ONLY one that knew the problem.

Right... your ex-customer eventually got their water
pumped into the tank, didn't they. They were able to
solve your problem too.
Everyone solved your pump problem but you.

Nobody came even close to the correct answer.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
Why don't you ask your ex-customer?

Go on, ask them. Surely you aren't embarrassed over it.

My ex-customer is teddie the fairy, aa, peter pan and marvin - all of which who
knew exactly nothing about pumps.

That's odd, duke... Since we're all such know-nothings
about pumps, and you're the consummate expert, i wonder
why it was that the ex-customer fired you and not us.

I guess he just didn't understand the situation either.

[Ted]

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Ted

Post by unknown
<more snippage>

Post by Marvin Sebourn
And the 97% you clipped, that is, the number 97 reminds
me of the old Weider(?) body building ads on the back of
Superman comics. Duke, you are the 97 pound mental and
ethical weakling, with sand kicked in you face by those
mean old bullies who tell the truth, can form a logical
argument, and who can reason. Looks like you are a
three-percenter, Duke. Three-percent knowledgeable.
Another denial of a Duke untruth. Duke, the three
percenter, 3% right, 97% wrong.

LOL. Duke is the 3 Percenter of Usenet.

LOL.

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric
motor as prime mover, the motor controls can be designed
to soft-start the motor, and avoid over-current. This can
be done in more than one way and is quite common. I
believe AA or Ted mentioned using a synchronous motor
with a variable frequency drive, VFD. Duke appears
ignorant of motor starters and their function, which is
to reduce starting loads on electric motors. This is a
grievous oversight.

I had guessed that duke was trying to use a synchronous
motor with his pump. I suggested using a variable-speed
induction motor instead, thinking it could be controlled
easily like a dc motor. Some googling relieved me of
that misunderstanding, but an induction motor with VFD
could be made to work. A dc motor would work fine too.

You and Marvin know much more about motors than I do.

Marvin knows his motors. I obviously don't, since i got
the induction motor thing wrong. But that's still more
than duke knows.

There's a lot of things that you don't know. And the biggest was "how long
would it take to fill the tank". Heeheehee.

Still trying to wheedle the answer for your pump problem
out of someone? If you can't give us your solution, i
guess you'll never know, will you?

I'm the ONLY one that knew the problem.
the dukester, American-American

You're the only one who couldn't solve it, so you made up an idiotic
excuse.

[duke]

Post by Ted

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Ted

Post by unknown
<more snippage>

Post by Marvin Sebourn
And the 97% you clipped, that is, the number 97 reminds
me of the old Weider(?) body building ads on the back of
Superman comics. Duke, you are the 97 pound mental and
ethical weakling, with sand kicked in you face by those
mean old bullies who tell the truth, can form a logical
argument, and who can reason. Looks like you are a
three-percenter, Duke. Three-percent knowledgeable.
Another denial of a Duke untruth. Duke, the three
percenter, 3% right, 97% wrong.

LOL. Duke is the 3 Percenter of Usenet.

LOL.

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric
motor as prime mover, the motor controls can be designed
to soft-start the motor, and avoid over-current. This can
be done in more than one way and is quite common. I
believe AA or Ted mentioned using a synchronous motor
with a variable frequency drive, VFD. Duke appears
ignorant of motor starters and their function, which is
to reduce starting loads on electric motors. This is a
grievous oversight.

I had guessed that duke was trying to use a synchronous
motor with his pump. I suggested using a variable-speed
induction motor instead, thinking it could be controlled
easily like a dc motor. Some googling relieved me of
that misunderstanding, but an induction motor with VFD
could be made to work. A dc motor would work fine too.

You and Marvin know much more about motors than I do.

Marvin knows his motors. I obviously don't, since i got
the induction motor thing wrong. But that's still more
than duke knows.

There's a lot of things that you don't know. And the biggest was "how long
would it take to fill the tank". Heeheehee.

Still trying to wheedle the answer for your pump problem
out of someone? If you can't give us your solution, i
guess you'll never know, will you?

I'm the ONLY one that knew the problem.

You're the only one who couldn't solve it, so you made up an idiotic
excuse.

The answer is that the pump would immediately trip off line on startup. It
would never fill the tank, dimwit.

the dukester, American-American


*****
The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine
and a good cigar.

G.K. Chesterton
*****

[Ted]

Post by duke

Post by Ted

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Ted

Post by unknown
<more snippage>

Post by Marvin Sebourn
And the 97% you clipped, that is, the number 97 reminds
me of the old Weider(?) body building ads on the back of
Superman comics. Duke, you are the 97 pound mental and
ethical weakling, with sand kicked in you face by those
mean old bullies who tell the truth, can form a logical
argument, and who can reason. Looks like you are a
three-percenter, Duke. Three-percent knowledgeable.
Another denial of a Duke untruth. Duke, the three
percenter, 3% right, 97% wrong.

LOL. Duke is the 3 Percenter of Usenet.

LOL.

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric
motor as prime mover, the motor controls can be designed
to soft-start the motor, and avoid over-current. This can
be done in more than one way and is quite common. I
believe AA or Ted mentioned using a synchronous motor
with a variable frequency drive, VFD. Duke appears
ignorant of motor starters and their function, which is
to reduce starting loads on electric motors. This is a
grievous oversight.

I had guessed that duke was trying to use a synchronous
motor with his pump. I suggested using a variable-speed
induction motor instead, thinking it could be controlled
easily like a dc motor. Some googling relieved me of
that misunderstanding, but an induction motor with VFD
could be made to work. A dc motor would work fine too.

You and Marvin know much more about motors than I do.

Marvin knows his motors. I obviously don't, since i got
the induction motor thing wrong. But that's still more
than duke knows.

There's a lot of things that you don't know. And the biggest was "how long
would it take to fill the tank". Heeheehee.

Still trying to wheedle the answer for your pump problem
out of someone? If you can't give us your solution, i
guess you'll never know, will you?

I'm the ONLY one that knew the problem.

You're the only one who couldn't solve it, so you made up an idiotic
excuse.

The answer is that the pump would immediately trip off line on startup. It
would never fill the tank, dimwit.
the dukester, American-American

Why can't you see how idiotic that is? Do you remember your original
problem?

[duke]

Post by Ted

Post by duke

Post by Ted

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Ted

Post by unknown
<more snippage>

Post by Marvin Sebourn
And the 97% you clipped, that is, the number 97 reminds
me of the old Weider(?) body building ads on the back of
Superman comics. Duke, you are the 97 pound mental and
ethical weakling, with sand kicked in you face by those
mean old bullies who tell the truth, can form a logical
argument, and who can reason. Looks like you are a
three-percenter, Duke. Three-percent knowledgeable.
Another denial of a Duke untruth. Duke, the three
percenter, 3% right, 97% wrong.

LOL. Duke is the 3 Percenter of Usenet.

LOL.

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric
motor as prime mover, the motor controls can be designed
to soft-start the motor, and avoid over-current. This can
be done in more than one way and is quite common. I
believe AA or Ted mentioned using a synchronous motor
with a variable frequency drive, VFD. Duke appears
ignorant of motor starters and their function, which is
to reduce starting loads on electric motors. This is a
grievous oversight.

I had guessed that duke was trying to use a synchronous
motor with his pump. I suggested using a variable-speed
induction motor instead, thinking it could be controlled
easily like a dc motor. Some googling relieved me of
that misunderstanding, but an induction motor with VFD
could be made to work. A dc motor would work fine too.

You and Marvin know much more about motors than I do.

Marvin knows his motors. I obviously don't, since i got
the induction motor thing wrong. But that's still more
than duke knows.

There's a lot of things that you don't know. And the biggest was "how long
would it take to fill the tank". Heeheehee.

Still trying to wheedle the answer for your pump problem
out of someone? If you can't give us your solution, i
guess you'll never know, will you?

I'm the ONLY one that knew the problem.

You're the only one who couldn't solve it, so you made up an idiotic
excuse.

The answer is that the pump would immediately trip off line on startup. It
would never fill the tank, dimwit.

Why can't you see how idiotic that is? Do you remember your original
problem?

Yep, and that's still the correct answer to filling the tank.

the dukester, American-American


*****
The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine
and a good cigar.

G.K. Chesterton
*****

[duke]

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric
motor as prime mover, the motor controls can be designed
to soft-start the motor, and avoid over-current.

I had guessed that duke was trying to use a synchronous
motor with his pump. I suggested using a variable-speed
induction motor instead, thinking it could be controlled
easily like a dc motor. Some googling relieved me of
that misunderstanding, but an induction motor with VFD
could be made to work. A dc motor would work fine too.

How far down can you reduce rpm and still get the pump to do more than just stir
water? And would it be more effective than a shovel.

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke neglected to say that on start-up, even with a
single speed electric motor, that the pump could be
started with the discharge valve partially closed to
control the load on the electric motor

Maybe a shovel would be just as good.

Post by unknown
That's duke... 'I don't know how to do it, so it can't
be done.'
What a maroon. What an ignoranimus.

Waiting on your answers.

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Not necessarily true, Duke.
1) You completely ignored that the prime mover need not be an electric motor.

Don't you understand yet that we were reviewing water flow with a motor driver.
No points.

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
2) You completely ignored the possibility of a soft start by the motor controller, or
other current limiting device.

Would you get more than a dribble

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
3) You completely ignored the likelihood that the pump operator would restrict the output
flow by partially pinching off the discharge valve, making a successful start.

To a trickle.

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
4) Overall here, you appear completely ignorant.

What am I missing here? That you are missing everything

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Clearly a/some engineering correction would need to be made. Attaching a
vertical pipe from the pump outlet to the top of the tank and pre filling it
would provide the 500 ft tdh the pump is designed for to then flow at 1000 gpm
with the selected rated driver for the situation.
I intended this for 2 clowns that had no idea of pumps.

Duke: At least you tried, and I hope learned something.
I did, and it concerns your integrity and professional knowledge. Negative on both.
Too bad you couldn't enter into an honest discussion, Duke. I would have welcomed it.
There is no pump problem, only a Duke problem.
TINPPOADP.

LOL. I bet his Duke Problem has followed him like a
plague for his entire life.

You quotation readers don't understand pumps.

the dukester, American-American


*****
The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine
and a good cigar.

G.K. Chesterton
*****

[unknown]

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric
motor as prime mover, the motor controls can be designed
to soft-start the motor, and avoid over-current.

I had guessed that duke was trying to use a synchronous
motor with his pump. I suggested using a variable-speed
induction motor instead, thinking it could be controlled
easily like a dc motor. Some googling relieved me of
that misunderstanding, but an induction motor with VFD
could be made to work. A dc motor would work fine too.

How far down can you reduce rpm and still get the pump to do more than just stir
water? And would it be more effective than a shovel.

Pretty low, if you have to. You're only moving water
between 2 reservoirs of equal level. You claimed
yourself you could move an infinite amount of water with
zero hp, at 0 TDH. Your motor, after all, could move
1000 GPM at 500 ft head, so with a 126 hp motor, you'd
expect to be able to move a lot more with 0 external
head.

At 0 TDH, flow "resistance" amounts to the size of the
pump's input and output ports, the pipes, and the energy
needed to accelerate the water to the flow speed. Your
problem as presented said we could ignore all that, but
in the real world those would be the factors.

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke neglected to say that on start-up, even with a
single speed electric motor, that the pump could be
started with the discharge valve partially closed to
control the load on the electric motor

Maybe a shovel would be just as good.

Nope, that's actually a really good idea. Even if you
close off the valve enough to get 500 ft equivalent TDH,
you still get 1000 gpm. Can you shovel that fast?

Post by duke

Post by unknown
That's duke... 'I don't know how to do it, so it can't
be done.'
What a maroon. What an ignoranimus.

Waiting on your answers.

As I told you, i already solved your problem. Won't you
at least try before you admit total failure?

BTW, incidental to the solution, i checked your HP
formula. It is valid. 126 hp.

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Not necessarily true, Duke.
1) You completely ignored that the prime mover need not be an electric motor.

Don't you understand yet that we were reviewing water flow with a motor driver.
No points.

You didn't specify anything about the motor. You did say
there are no issues with the motor. That was a lie,
wasn't it.

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
2) You completely ignored the possibility of a soft start by the motor controller, or
other current limiting device.

Would you get more than a dribble

Up to a 126 hp dribble.

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
3) You completely ignored the likelihood that the pump operator would restrict the output
flow by partially pinching off the discharge valve, making a successful start.

To a trickle.

Up to a 126 hp trickle.

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
4) Overall here, you appear completely ignorant.

What am I missing here? That you are missing everything

You are missing everything.

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Clearly a/some engineering correction would need to be made. Attaching a
vertical pipe from the pump outlet to the top of the tank and pre filling it
would provide the 500 ft tdh the pump is designed for to then flow at 1000 gpm
with the selected rated driver for the situation.
I intended this for 2 clowns that had no idea of pumps.

Duke: At least you tried, and I hope learned something.
I did, and it concerns your integrity and professional knowledge. Negative on both.
Too bad you couldn't enter into an honest discussion, Duke. I would have welcomed it.
There is no pump problem, only a Duke problem.
TINPPOADP.

LOL. I bet his Duke Problem has followed him like a
plague for his entire life.

You quotation readers don't understand pumps.

Who was the salesman who sold a pump that wouldn't work?

Who couldn't solve his own pump problem, and had to
pretend instead it couldn't be done?

Who is the buffoon with a congenital Duke Problem?

Who is keeping these threads going by prevaricating and
refusing to admit that he fubared royally?

[Ted]

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric
motor as prime mover, the motor controls can be designed
to soft-start the motor, and avoid over-current.

I had guessed that duke was trying to use a synchronous
motor with his pump. I suggested using a variable-speed
induction motor instead, thinking it could be controlled
easily like a dc motor. Some googling relieved me of
that misunderstanding, but an induction motor with VFD
could be made to work. A dc motor would work fine too.

How far down can you reduce rpm and still get the pump to do more than just stir
water? And would it be more effective than a shovel.

Pretty low, if you have to. You're only moving water
between 2 reservoirs of equal level. You claimed
yourself you could move an infinite amount of water with
zero hp, at 0 TDH. Your motor, after all, could move
1000 GPM at 500 ft head, so with a 126 hp motor, you'd
expect to be able to move a lot more with 0 external
head.
At 0 TDH, flow "resistance" amounts to the size of the
pump's input and output ports, the pipes, and the energy
needed to accelerate the water to the flow speed. Your
problem as presented said we could ignore all that, but
in the real world those would be the factors.

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke neglected to say that on start-up, even with a
single speed electric motor, that the pump could be
started with the discharge valve partially closed to
control the load on the electric motor

Maybe a shovel would be just as good.

Nope, that's actually a really good idea. Even if you
close off the valve enough to get 500 ft equivalent TDH,
you still get 1000 gpm. Can you shovel that fast?

Post by duke

Post by unknown
That's duke... 'I don't know how to do it, so it can't
be done.'
What a maroon. What an ignoranimus.

Waiting on your answers.

As I told you, i already solved your problem. Won't you
at least try before you admit total failure?
BTW, incidental to the solution, i checked your HP
formula. It is valid. 126 hp.

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Not necessarily true, Duke.
1) You completely ignored that the prime mover need not be an electric motor.

Don't you understand yet that we were reviewing water flow with a motor driver.
No points.

You didn't specify anything about the motor. You did say
there are no issues with the motor. That was a lie,
wasn't it.

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
2) You completely ignored the possibility of a soft start by the motor controller, or
other current limiting device.

Would you get more than a dribble

Up to a 126 hp dribble.

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
3) You completely ignored the likelihood that the pump operator would
restrict the output
flow by partially pinching off the discharge valve, making a successful start.

To a trickle.

Up to a 126 hp trickle.

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
4) Overall here, you appear completely ignorant.

What am I missing here? That you are missing everything

You are missing everything.

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Clearly a/some engineering correction would need to be made. Attaching a
vertical pipe from the pump outlet to the top of the tank and pre filling it
would provide the 500 ft tdh the pump is designed for to then flow at 1000 gpm
with the selected rated driver for the situation.
I intended this for 2 clowns that had no idea of pumps.

Duke: At least you tried, and I hope learned something.
I did, and it concerns your integrity and professional knowledge. Negative on both.
Too bad you couldn't enter into an honest discussion, Duke. I would have welcomed it.
There is no pump problem, only a Duke problem.
TINPPOADP.

LOL. I bet his Duke Problem has followed him like a
plague for his entire life.

You quotation readers don't understand pumps.

Who was the salesman who sold a pump that wouldn't work?
Who couldn't solve his own pump problem, and had to
pretend instead it couldn't be done?
Who is the buffoon with a congenital Duke Problem?
Who is keeping these threads going by prevaricating and
refusing to admit that he fubared royally?

You just demonstrated more practical knowledge about pumps than Duke's ever
been capable of even understanding. First Marvin ripped him a new one, and
now you did. :)

[duke]

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric
motor as prime mover, the motor controls can be designed
to soft-start the motor, and avoid over-current.

I had guessed that duke was trying to use a synchronous
motor with his pump. I suggested using a variable-speed
induction motor instead, thinking it could be controlled
easily like a dc motor. Some googling relieved me of
that misunderstanding, but an induction motor with VFD
could be made to work. A dc motor would work fine too.

How far down can you reduce rpm and still get the pump to do more than just stir
water? And would it be more effective than a shovel.

Pretty low, if you have to. You're only moving water
between 2 reservoirs of equal level.

Nope, suction side was exempt form consideration for a "simple pump" problem.
Heeheehee.

Post by unknown
You claimed
yourself you could move an infinite amount of water with
zero hp, at 0 TDH

Not me. You buffoon. You're making that up like the cheese whiz you are.

Post by unknown
Your motor, after all, could move
1000 GPM at 500 ft head, so with a 126 hp motor, you'd
expect to be able to move a lot more with 0 external
head.

It would rush to overload the pump until the driver tripped. Heeheehee.

Post by unknown
At 0 TDH, flow "resistance" amounts to the size of the
pump's input and output ports, the pipes, and the energy
needed to accelerate the water to the flow speed. Your
problem as presented said we could ignore all that, but
in the real world those would be the factors.

Nope. I openly said to disregard suction conditions.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke neglected to say that on start-up, even with a
single speed electric motor, that the pump could be
started with the discharge valve partially closed to
control the load on the electric motor

Maybe a shovel would be just as good.

Nope, that's actually a really good idea. Even if you
close off the valve enough to get 500 ft equivalent TDH,
you still get 1000 gpm. Can you shovel that fast?

Never.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
That's duke... 'I don't know how to do it, so it can't
be done.'
What a maroon. What an ignoranimus.

Waiting on your answers.

As I told you, i already solved your problem. Won't you
at least try before you admit total failure?

With your discussion above, you're a fool.

Post by unknown
BTW, incidental to the solution, i checked your HP
formula. It is valid. 126 hp.

And what would it be at very low head and rushing to thousands of gpm?

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Not necessarily true, Duke.
1) You completely ignored that the prime mover need not be an electric motor.

Don't you understand yet that we were reviewing water flow with a motor driver.
No points.

You didn't specify anything about the motor. You did say
there are no issues with the motor. That was a lie,
wasn't it.

The driver performed as installed.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
2) You completely ignored the possibility of a soft start by the motor controller, or
other current limiting device.

Would you get more than a dribble

Up to a 126 hp dribble.

And that would be when before the driver tripped.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
3) You completely ignored the likelihood that the pump operator would restrict the output
flow by partially pinching off the discharge valve, making a successful start.

To a trickle.

Up to a 126 hp trickle.

And with a deadheaded pump running at shutoff with a trickle of flow, how many
centuries would it take to fill the tank even if it didn't burn out shortly
after startup.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
4) Overall here, you appear completely ignorant.

What am I missing here? That you are missing everything

You are missing everything.

Your utter ignorance.

Post by unknown

Post by duke
You quotation readers don't understand pumps.

Who was the salesman who sold a pump that wouldn't work?

It worked exactly as a pump does.

Post by unknown
Who couldn't solve his own pump problem, and had to
pretend instead it couldn't be done?
Who is the buffoon with a congenital Duke Problem?
Who is keeping these threads going by prevaricating and
refusing to admit that he fubared royally?

You poor fools.

the dukester, American-American


*****
The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine
and a good cigar.

G.K. Chesterton
*****

[Ted]

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric
motor as prime mover, the motor controls can be designed
to soft-start the motor, and avoid over-current.

I had guessed that duke was trying to use a synchronous
motor with his pump. I suggested using a variable-speed
induction motor instead, thinking it could be controlled
easily like a dc motor. Some googling relieved me of
that misunderstanding, but an induction motor with VFD
could be made to work. A dc motor would work fine too.

How far down can you reduce rpm and still get the pump to do more than just stir
water? And would it be more effective than a shovel.

Pretty low, if you have to. You're only moving water
between 2 reservoirs of equal level.

Nope, suction side was exempt form consideration for a "simple pump" problem.
Heeheehee.

Post by unknown
You claimed
yourself you could move an infinite amount of water with
zero hp, at 0 TDH

Not me. You buffoon. You're making that up like the cheese whiz you are.

Post by unknown
Your motor, after all, could move
1000 GPM at 500 ft head, so with a 126 hp motor, you'd
expect to be able to move a lot more with 0 external
head.

It would rush to overload the pump until the driver tripped. Heeheehee.

Post by unknown
At 0 TDH, flow "resistance" amounts to the size of the
pump's input and output ports, the pipes, and the energy
needed to accelerate the water to the flow speed. Your
problem as presented said we could ignore all that, but
in the real world those would be the factors.

Nope. I openly said to disregard suction conditions.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke neglected to say that on start-up, even with a
single speed electric motor, that the pump could be
started with the discharge valve partially closed to
control the load on the electric motor

Maybe a shovel would be just as good.

Nope, that's actually a really good idea. Even if you
close off the valve enough to get 500 ft equivalent TDH,
you still get 1000 gpm. Can you shovel that fast?

Never.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
That's duke... 'I don't know how to do it, so it can't
be done.'
What a maroon. What an ignoranimus.

Waiting on your answers.

As I told you, i already solved your problem. Won't you
at least try before you admit total failure?

With your discussion above, you're a fool.

Post by unknown
BTW, incidental to the solution, i checked your HP
formula. It is valid. 126 hp.

And what would it be at very low head and rushing to thousands of gpm?

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Not necessarily true, Duke.
1) You completely ignored that the prime mover need not be an electric motor.

Don't you understand yet that we were reviewing water flow with a motor driver.
No points.

You didn't specify anything about the motor. You did say
there are no issues with the motor. That was a lie,
wasn't it.

The driver performed as installed.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
2) You completely ignored the possibility of a soft start by the motor controller, or
other current limiting device.

Would you get more than a dribble

Up to a 126 hp dribble.

And that would be when before the driver tripped.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
3) You completely ignored the likelihood that the pump operator would
restrict the output
flow by partially pinching off the discharge valve, making a successful start.

To a trickle.

Up to a 126 hp trickle.

And with a deadheaded pump running at shutoff with a trickle of flow, how many
centuries would it take to fill the tank even if it didn't burn out shortly
after startup.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
4) Overall here, you appear completely ignorant.

What am I missing here? That you are missing everything

You are missing everything.

Your utter ignorance.

Post by unknown

Post by duke
You quotation readers don't understand pumps.

Who was the salesman who sold a pump that wouldn't work?

It worked exactly as a pump does.

Post by unknown
Who couldn't solve his own pump problem, and had to
pretend instead it couldn't be done?
Who is the buffoon with a congenital Duke Problem?
Who is keeping these threads going by prevaricating and
refusing to admit that he fubared royally?

You poor fools.
the dukester, American-American

You proved you have no grasp on the mechanics of pumps, Duke. You're just a
bumbling buffoon. We know that. We predicted you'd make an ass of yourself
over your pump problem and you did. Now you're flailing about as though you
think there's still a chance to fool somebody, but the only one you can
fool is yourself.

[unknown]

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric
motor as prime mover, the motor controls can be designed
to soft-start the motor, and avoid over-current.

I had guessed that duke was trying to use a synchronous
motor with his pump. I suggested using a variable-speed
induction motor instead, thinking it could be controlled
easily like a dc motor. Some googling relieved me of
that misunderstanding, but an induction motor with VFD
could be made to work. A dc motor would work fine too.

How far down can you reduce rpm and still get the pump to do more than just stir
water? And would it be more effective than a shovel.

Pretty low, if you have to. You're only moving water
between 2 reservoirs of equal level.

Nope, suction side was exempt form consideration for a "simple pump" problem.
Heeheehee.

No need for that, since it's a simple work & power
problem.

Post by duke

Post by unknown
You claimed
yourself you could move an infinite amount of water with
zero hp, at 0 TDH

Not me. You buffoon. You're making that up like the cheese whiz you are.

Yes, you, you maroon buffoon. It's right there in your
pump formula.

Post by duke

Post by unknown
Your motor, after all, could move
1000 GPM at 500 ft head, so with a 126 hp motor, you'd
expect to be able to move a lot more with 0 external
head.

It would rush to overload the pump until the driver tripped. Heeheehee.

Only if the "engineer" ignored the operating
requirements.

Post by duke

Post by unknown
At 0 TDH, flow "resistance" amounts to the size of the
pump's input and output ports, the pipes, and the energy
needed to accelerate the water to the flow speed. Your
problem as presented said we could ignore all that, but
in the real world those would be the factors.

Nope. I openly said to disregard suction conditions.

No need for that, since it's a simple work & power
problem.

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke neglected to say that on start-up, even with a
single speed electric motor, that the pump could be
started with the discharge valve partially closed to
control the load on the electric motor

Maybe a shovel would be just as good.

Nope, that's actually a really good idea. Even if you
close off the valve enough to get 500 ft equivalent TDH,
you still get 1000 gpm. Can you shovel that fast?

Never.

Can you explain why not?

Didn't think so.

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
That's duke... 'I don't know how to do it, so it can't
be done.'
What a maroon. What an ignoranimus.

Waiting on your answers.

As I told you, i already solved your problem. Won't you
at least try before you admit total failure?

With your discussion above, you're a fool.

I'm obviously a smarter fool than you, duke.

Post by duke

Post by unknown
BTW, incidental to the solution, i checked your HP
formula. It is valid. 126 hp.

And what would it be at very low head and rushing to thousands of gpm?

It's your formula. Don't you know what it's telling us?

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Not necessarily true, Duke.
1) You completely ignored that the prime mover need not be an electric motor.

Don't you understand yet that we were reviewing water flow with a motor driver.
No points.

You didn't specify anything about the motor. You did say
there are no issues with the motor. That was a lie,
wasn't it.

The driver performed as installed.

You mean your system was designed to fail?
You didn't include a discharge valve?
You didn't match the motor & pump to the application?

There's a fitting epitaph for your project...
"This job was duked."

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
2) You completely ignored the possibility of a soft start by the motor controller, or
other current limiting device.

Would you get more than a dribble

Up to a 126 hp dribble.

And that would be when before the driver tripped.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
3) You completely ignored the likelihood that the pump operator would restrict the output
flow by partially pinching off the discharge valve, making a successful start.

To a trickle.

Up to a 126 hp trickle.

And with a deadheaded pump running at shutoff with a trickle of flow, how many
centuries would it take to fill the tank even if it didn't burn out shortly
after startup.

Why are you claiming a 126 hp motor can only move water
between 2 equal-level reservoirs in trickles & dribbles?

Don't you think that's pretty stupid?

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
4) Overall here, you appear completely ignorant.

What am I missing here? That you are missing everything

You are missing everything.

Your utter ignorance.

Says the buffoon who can't make his pump work.

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke
You quotation readers don't understand pumps.

Who was the salesman who sold a pump that wouldn't work?

It worked exactly as a pump does.

Post by unknown
Who couldn't solve his own pump problem, and had to
pretend instead it couldn't be done?
Who is the buffoon with a congenital Duke Problem?
Who is keeping these threads going by prevaricating and
refusing to admit that he fubared royally?

You poor fools.

[Ted]

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric
motor as prime mover, the motor controls can be designed
to soft-start the motor, and avoid over-current.

I had guessed that duke was trying to use a synchronous
motor with his pump. I suggested using a variable-speed
induction motor instead, thinking it could be controlled
easily like a dc motor. Some googling relieved me of
that misunderstanding, but an induction motor with VFD
could be made to work. A dc motor would work fine too.

How far down can you reduce rpm and still get the pump to do more than just stir
water? And would it be more effective than a shovel.

Pretty low, if you have to. You're only moving water
between 2 reservoirs of equal level.

Nope, suction side was exempt form consideration for a "simple pump" problem.
Heeheehee.

No need for that, since it's a simple work & power
problem.

Exactly.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
You claimed
yourself you could move an infinite amount of water with
zero hp, at 0 TDH

Not me. You buffoon. You're making that up like the cheese whiz you are.

Yes, you, you maroon buffoon. It's right there in your
pump formula.

Post by duke

Post by unknown
Your motor, after all, could move
1000 GPM at 500 ft head, so with a 126 hp motor, you'd
expect to be able to move a lot more with 0 external
head.

It would rush to overload the pump until the driver tripped. Heeheehee.

Only if the "engineer" ignored the operating
requirements.

Post by duke

Post by unknown
At 0 TDH, flow "resistance" amounts to the size of the
pump's input and output ports, the pipes, and the energy
needed to accelerate the water to the flow speed. Your
problem as presented said we could ignore all that, but
in the real world those would be the factors.

Nope. I openly said to disregard suction conditions.

No need for that, since it's a simple work & power
problem.

Duke has no clue what work and power are. In fact, he knows nothing
about any mechanics at all.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke neglected to say that on start-up, even with a
single speed electric motor, that the pump could be
started with the discharge valve partially closed to
control the load on the electric motor

Maybe a shovel would be just as good.

Nope, that's actually a really good idea. Even if you
close off the valve enough to get 500 ft equivalent TDH,
you still get 1000 gpm. Can you shovel that fast?

Never.

Can you explain why not?
Didn't think so.

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
That's duke... 'I don't know how to do it, so it can't
be done.'
What a maroon. What an ignoranimus.

Waiting on your answers.

As I told you, i already solved your problem. Won't you
at least try before you admit total failure?

With your discussion above, you're a fool.

I'm obviously a smarter fool than you, duke.

Post by duke

Post by unknown
BTW, incidental to the solution, i checked your HP
formula. It is valid. 126 hp.

And what would it be at very low head and rushing to thousands of gpm?

It's your formula. Don't you know what it's telling us?

Of course he doesn't. He's just a button pushing monkey who used
formulas that he never understood. What a retard.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Not necessarily true, Duke.
1) You completely ignored that the prime mover need not be an electric motor.

Don't you understand yet that we were reviewing water flow with a motor driver.
No points.

You didn't specify anything about the motor. You did say
there are no issues with the motor. That was a lie,
wasn't it.

The driver performed as installed.

You mean your system was designed to fail?
You didn't include a discharge valve?
You didn't match the motor & pump to the application?
There's a fitting epitaph for your project...
"This job was duked."

LOLOL! Perfect! :)

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
2) You completely ignored the possibility of a soft start by the motor controller, or
other current limiting device.

Would you get more than a dribble

Up to a 126 hp dribble.

And that would be when before the driver tripped.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
3) You completely ignored the likelihood that the pump operator would restrict the output
flow by partially pinching off the discharge valve, making a successful start.

To a trickle.

Up to a 126 hp trickle.

And with a deadheaded pump running at shutoff with a trickle of flow, how many
centuries would it take to fill the tank even if it didn't burn out shortly
after startup.

Why are you claiming a 126 hp motor can only move water
between 2 equal-level reservoirs in trickles & dribbles?

Because he's an idiot?

Post by unknown
Don't you think that's pretty stupid?

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
4) Overall here, you appear completely ignorant.

What am I missing here? That you are missing everything

You are missing everything.

Your utter ignorance.

Says the buffoon who can't make his pump work.

Marvin asked him if what he told us was the only possible outcome for
his original pump problem and he answered "yes".

[duke]

Post by unknown

Post by duke
Nope, suction side was exempt form consideration for a "simple pump" problem.
Heeheehee.

No need for that, since it's a simple work & power
problem.

Well, say something. Speak up, kid.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
You claimed
yourself you could move an infinite amount of water with
zero hp, at 0 TDH

Not me. You buffoon. You're making that up like the cheese whiz you are.

Yes, you, you maroon buffoon. It's right there in your
pump formula.

You don't understand it.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
Your motor, after all, could move
1000 GPM at 500 ft head, so with a 126 hp motor, you'd
expect to be able to move a lot more with 0 external
head.

It would rush to overload the pump until the driver tripped. Heeheehee.

Only if the "engineer" ignored the operating
requirements.

The driver trip is set up around the electrical requirements of the pump.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
At 0 TDH, flow "resistance" amounts to the size of the
pump's input and output ports, the pipes, and the energy
needed to accelerate the water to the flow speed. Your
problem as presented said we could ignore all that, but
in the real world those would be the factors.

Nope. I openly said to disregard suction conditions.

No need for that, since it's a simple work & power
problem.

I made it simple for you and you still can't come to grips with it.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke neglected to say that on start-up, even with a
single speed electric motor, that the pump could be
started with the discharge valve partially closed to
control the load on the electric motor

Maybe a shovel would be just as good.

Nope, that's actually a really good idea. Even if you
close off the valve enough to get 500 ft equivalent TDH,
you still get 1000 gpm. Can you shovel that fast?

Never.

Can you explain why not?
Didn't think so.

Can YOU shovel 1000 gpm against zero head.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
That's duke... 'I don't know how to do it, so it can't
be done.'
What a maroon. What an ignoranimus.

Waiting on your answers.

As I told you, i already solved your problem. Won't you
at least try before you admit total failure?

With your discussion above, you're a fool.

I'm obviously a smarter fool than you, duke.

You don't know pumps.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
BTW, incidental to the solution, i checked your HP
formula. It is valid. 126 hp.

Is that with or without sg and pump/motor efficiency considerations?

Post by unknown

Post by duke
And what would it be at very low head and rushing to thousands of gpm?

It's your formula. Don't you know what it's telling us?

Yes, I know. But you don't.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Not necessarily true, Duke.
1) You completely ignored that the prime mover need not be an electric motor.

Don't you understand yet that we were reviewing water flow with a motor driver.
No points.

No points.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
You didn't specify anything about the motor. You did say
there are no issues with the motor. That was a lie,
wasn't it.

The driver performed as installed.

You mean your system was designed to fail?
You didn't include a discharge valve?
You didn't match the motor & pump to the application?

A simple pump problem to stymie the dumbest of people, and dat be u.

Post by unknown
There's a fitting epitaph for your project...
"This job was duked."

You sure can't solve it.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
2) You completely ignored the possibility of a soft start by the motor controller, or
other current limiting device.

Would you get more than a dribble

Up to a 126 hp dribble.

But the correct answer is time to fill the tank. Why would you elect to install
such a stupid arrangement for the solution. Goose/gander. You were given a
pump although I could grant you a hand valve.

Post by unknown

Post by duke
And that would be when before the driver tripped.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
3) You completely ignored the likelihood that the pump operator would restrict the output
flow by partially pinching off the discharge valve, making a successful start.

To a trickle.

Up to a 126 hp trickle.

And with a deadheaded pump running at shutoff with a trickle of flow, how many
centuries would it take to fill the tank even if it didn't burn out shortly
after startup.

Why are you claiming a 126 hp motor can only move water
between 2 equal-level reservoirs in trickles & dribbles?

No 2 reservoirs. Inlet conditions not an issue. Remember.

Post by unknown
Don't you think that's pretty stupid?

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
4) Overall here, you appear completely ignorant.

What am I missing here? That you are missing everything

You are missing everything.

Your utter ignorance.

Says the buffoon who can't make his pump work.

All I need is some pipe.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke
You quotation readers don't understand pumps.

Who was the salesman who sold a pump that wouldn't work?

It worked exactly as a pump does.

Post by unknown
Who couldn't solve his own pump problem, and had to
pretend instead it couldn't be done?
Who is the buffoon with a congenital Duke Problem?
Who is keeping these threads going by prevaricating and
refusing to admit that he fubared royally?

You poor fools.

Heeheehee.

the dukester, American-American


*****
The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine
and a good cigar.

G.K. Chesterton
*****

[unknown]

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke
Nope, suction side was exempt form consideration for a "simple pump" problem.
Heeheehee.

No need for that, since it's a simple work & power
problem.

Well, say something. Speak up, kid.

I already spoke up. I solved your problem. You can't do
that.

I told you to fix whatever it is that makes you think the
tank can't be filled. Put the tank up on stilts,
pre-fill the tank with 100 ft of water, do whatever you
like, then solve your problem.

You still can't solve it, can you, duke?

You never had any intention of solving it, because you
have no clue where to even start. Your whole plan was to
cop out with "it can't be done".

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
You claimed
yourself you could move an infinite amount of water with
zero hp, at 0 TDH

Not me. You buffoon. You're making that up like the cheese whiz you are.

Yes, you, you maroon buffoon. It's right there in your
pump formula.

You don't understand it.

I understand your equation says you can move infinite
water at 0 head. You don't understand it, do you?

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
Your motor, after all, could move
1000 GPM at 500 ft head, so with a 126 hp motor, you'd
expect to be able to move a lot more with 0 external
head.

It would rush to overload the pump until the driver tripped. Heeheehee.

Only if the "engineer" ignored the operating
requirements.

The driver trip is set up around the electrical requirements of the pump.

So what? The motor would work fine if you designed it
properly for the intended job. Even with your fucked up
design, it could easily be made to work if you had a
competent pump engineer.

Easily, duke!

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
At 0 TDH, flow "resistance" amounts to the size of the
pump's input and output ports, the pipes, and the energy
needed to accelerate the water to the flow speed. Your
problem as presented said we could ignore all that, but
in the real world those would be the factors.

Nope. I openly said to disregard suction conditions.

No need for that, since it's a simple work & power
problem.

I made it simple for you and you still can't come to grips with it.

You don't seem to understand. I didn't consider suction.
I solved the problem for the info you gave.

Why can't you?

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
As I told you, i already solved your problem. Won't you
at least try before you admit total failure?

With your discussion above, you're a fool.

I'm obviously a smarter fool than you, duke.

You don't know pumps.

Is that all you can say?

Is that what you told your ex-customer when your pump
design duked, duke?... that failure was really success,
because he didn't know pumps?

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
BTW, incidental to the solution, i checked your HP
formula. It is valid. 126 hp.

Is that with or without sg and pump/motor efficiency considerations?

It's based on the problem you presented, which had none
of that shit, did it?

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke
And what would it be at very low head and rushing to thousands of gpm?

It's your formula. Don't you know what it's telling us?

Yes, I know. But you don't.

Then why do you have to ask me?

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
You didn't specify anything about the motor. You did say
there are no issues with the motor. That was a lie,
wasn't it.

The driver performed as installed.

You mean your system was designed to fail?
You didn't include a discharge valve?
You didn't match the motor & pump to the application?

A simple pump problem to stymie the dumbest of people, and dat be u.

Duke translation: "I'm totally stymied!"

Post by duke

Post by unknown
There's a fitting epitaph for your project...
"This job was duked."

You sure can't solve it.

I solved it, duke.
Your turn. Or just admit that you're a failure.

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn
2) You completely ignored the possibility of a soft start by the motor controller, or
other current limiting device.

Would you get more than a dribble

Up to a 126 hp dribble.

But the correct answer is time to fill the tank.

And i figured out how long it would take. Why can't you?

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke
And that would be when before the driver tripped.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn
3) You completely ignored the likelihood that the pump operator would restrict the output
flow by partially pinching off the discharge valve, making a successful start.

To a trickle.

Up to a 126 hp trickle.

And with a deadheaded pump running at shutoff with a trickle of flow, how many
centuries would it take to fill the tank even if it didn't burn out shortly
after startup.

Why are you claiming a 126 hp motor can only move water
between 2 equal-level reservoirs in trickles & dribbles?

No 2 reservoirs. Inlet conditions not an issue. Remember.

Really? Where does the source water come from? Does it
just appear from the sky by magic? Then why can't you
just make it magically appear inside the tank, so you
don't even need all this pump blither-blather?

Post by duke

Post by unknown
Don't you think that's pretty stupid?

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn
4) Overall here, you appear completely ignorant.

What am I missing here? That you are missing everything

You are missing everything.

Your utter ignorance.

Says the buffoon who can't make his pump work.

All I need is some pipe.

All you need is a pump engineer.

But all you got is a broken pump and 3% of a normal
noggin.

[Ted]

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke
Nope, suction side was exempt form consideration for a "simple pump" problem.
Heeheehee.

No need for that, since it's a simple work & power
problem.

Well, say something. Speak up, kid.

I already spoke up. I solved your problem. You can't do
that.
I told you to fix whatever it is that makes you think the
tank can't be filled. Put the tank up on stilts,
pre-fill the tank with 100 ft of water, do whatever you
like, then solve your problem.
You still can't solve it, can you, duke?
You never had any intention of solving it, because you
have no clue where to even start. Your whole plan was to
cop out with "it can't be done".

Obviously.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
You claimed
yourself you could move an infinite amount of water with
zero hp, at 0 TDH

Not me. You buffoon. You're making that up like the cheese whiz you are.

Yes, you, you maroon buffoon. It's right there in your
pump formula.

You don't understand it.

I understand your equation says you can move infinite
water at 0 head. You don't understand it, do you?

No, he doesn't understand his equation at all. He's demonstrated that. He
doesn't know where it comes from and he can't use it to calculate anything
but HP. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if he's so dumb that he couldn't use
it to calculate Watts.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
Your motor, after all, could move
1000 GPM at 500 ft head, so with a 126 hp motor, you'd
expect to be able to move a lot more with 0 external
head.

It would rush to overload the pump until the driver tripped. Heeheehee.

Only if the "engineer" ignored the operating
requirements.

The driver trip is set up around the electrical requirements of the pump.

So what? The motor would work fine if you designed it
properly for the intended job. Even with your fucked up
design, it could easily be made to work if you had a
competent pump engineer.
Easily, duke!

Exactly, and you and I both told him how.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
At 0 TDH, flow "resistance" amounts to the size of the
pump's input and output ports, the pipes, and the energy
needed to accelerate the water to the flow speed. Your
problem as presented said we could ignore all that, but
in the real world those would be the factors.

Nope. I openly said to disregard suction conditions.

No need for that, since it's a simple work & power
problem.

I made it simple for you and you still can't come to grips with it.

You don't seem to understand. I didn't consider suction.
I solved the problem for the info you gave.
Why can't you?

Because he's an incompetent fraud.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
As I told you, i already solved your problem. Won't you
at least try before you admit total failure?

With your discussion above, you're a fool.

I'm obviously a smarter fool than you, duke.

You don't know pumps.

Is that all you can say?
Is that what you told your ex-customer when your pump
design duked, duke?... that failure was really success,
because he didn't know pumps?

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
BTW, incidental to the solution, i checked your HP
formula. It is valid. 126 hp.

Is that with or without sg and pump/motor efficiency considerations?

It's based on the problem you presented, which had none
of that shit, did it?

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke
And what would it be at very low head and rushing to thousands of gpm?

It's your formula. Don't you know what it's telling us?

Yes, I know. But you don't.

Then why do you have to ask me?

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
You didn't specify anything about the motor. You did say
there are no issues with the motor. That was a lie,
wasn't it.

The driver performed as installed.

You mean your system was designed to fail?
You didn't include a discharge valve?
You didn't match the motor & pump to the application?

A simple pump problem to stymie the dumbest of people, and dat be u.

Duke translation: "I'm totally stymied!"

Post by duke

Post by unknown
There's a fitting epitaph for your project...
"This job was duked."

You sure can't solve it.

I solved it, duke.
Your turn. Or just admit that you're a failure.

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn
2) You completely ignored the possibility of a soft start by the
motor controller, or
other current limiting device.

Would you get more than a dribble

Up to a 126 hp dribble.

But the correct answer is time to fill the tank.

And i figured out how long it would take. Why can't you?

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke
And that would be when before the driver tripped.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn
3) You completely ignored the likelihood that the pump operator
would restrict the output
flow by partially pinching off the discharge valve, making a successful start.

To a trickle.

Up to a 126 hp trickle.

And with a deadheaded pump running at shutoff with a trickle of flow, how many
centuries would it take to fill the tank even if it didn't burn out shortly
after startup.

Why are you claiming a 126 hp motor can only move water
between 2 equal-level reservoirs in trickles & dribbles?

No 2 reservoirs. Inlet conditions not an issue. Remember.

Really? Where does the source water come from? Does it
just appear from the sky by magic? Then why can't you
just make it magically appear inside the tank, so you
don't even need all this pump blither-blather?

Post by duke

Post by unknown
Don't you think that's pretty stupid?

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn
4) Overall here, you appear completely ignorant.

What am I missing here? That you are missing everything

You are missing everything.

Your utter ignorance.

Says the buffoon who can't make his pump work.

All I need is some pipe.

All you need is a pump engineer.

Duke plans to rephrase the solution we already gave.

Post by unknown
But all you got is a broken pump and 3% of a normal
noggin.

[unknown]

Post by Ted

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke
Nope, suction side was exempt form consideration for a "simple pump" problem.
Heeheehee.

No need for that, since it's a simple work & power
problem.

Well, say something. Speak up, kid.

I already spoke up. I solved your problem. You can't do
that.
I told you to fix whatever it is that makes you think the
tank can't be filled. Put the tank up on stilts,
pre-fill the tank with 100 ft of water, do whatever you
like, then solve your problem.
You still can't solve it, can you, duke?
You never had any intention of solving it, because you
have no clue where to even start. Your whole plan was to
cop out with "it can't be done".

Obviously.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
You claimed
yourself you could move an infinite amount of water with
zero hp, at 0 TDH

Not me. You buffoon. You're making that up like the cheese whiz you are.

Yes, you, you maroon buffoon. It's right there in your
pump formula.

You don't understand it.

I understand your equation says you can move infinite
water at 0 head. You don't understand it, do you?

No, he doesn't understand his equation at all. He's demonstrated that. He
doesn't know where it comes from and he can't use it to calculate anything
but HP. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if he's so dumb that he couldn't use
it to calculate Watts.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
Your motor, after all, could move
1000 GPM at 500 ft head, so with a 126 hp motor, you'd
expect to be able to move a lot more with 0 external
head.

It would rush to overload the pump until the driver tripped. Heeheehee.

Only if the "engineer" ignored the operating
requirements.

The driver trip is set up around the electrical requirements of the pump.

So what? The motor would work fine if you designed it
properly for the intended job. Even with your fucked up
design, it could easily be made to work if you had a
competent pump engineer.
Easily, duke!

Exactly, and you and I both told him how.

Marvin had the best solution, about closing the discharge
valve. Duke seems to realize that would work, because he
started making up some shit about blowing bearings and
gaskets.

Post by Ted

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn
4) Overall here, you appear completely ignorant.

What am I missing here? That you are missing everything

You are missing everything.

Your utter ignorance.

Says the buffoon who can't make his pump work.

All I need is some pipe.

All you need is a pump engineer.

Duke plans to rephrase the solution we already gave.

Kind of like the way he thinks plagiarism is ok when he
does it. I kinda get the impression that one thing Duke
has learned in life is that it's more effective to take
credit for things he didn't do, than to take the blame
for things he did.

Post by Ted

Post by unknown
But all you got is a broken pump and 3% of a normal
noggin.

[Ted]

Post by unknown

Post by Ted

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke
Nope, suction side was exempt form consideration for a "simple pump" problem.
Heeheehee.

No need for that, since it's a simple work & power
problem.

Well, say something. Speak up, kid.

I already spoke up. I solved your problem. You can't do
that.
I told you to fix whatever it is that makes you think the
tank can't be filled. Put the tank up on stilts,
pre-fill the tank with 100 ft of water, do whatever you
like, then solve your problem.
You still can't solve it, can you, duke?
You never had any intention of solving it, because you
have no clue where to even start. Your whole plan was to
cop out with "it can't be done".

Obviously.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
You claimed
yourself you could move an infinite amount of water with
zero hp, at 0 TDH

Not me. You buffoon. You're making that up like the cheese whiz you are.

Yes, you, you maroon buffoon. It's right there in your
pump formula.

You don't understand it.

I understand your equation says you can move infinite
water at 0 head. You don't understand it, do you?

No, he doesn't understand his equation at all. He's demonstrated that. He
doesn't know where it comes from and he can't use it to calculate anything
but HP. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if he's so dumb that he couldn't use
it to calculate Watts.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
Your motor, after all, could move
1000 GPM at 500 ft head, so with a 126 hp motor, you'd
expect to be able to move a lot more with 0 external
head.

It would rush to overload the pump until the driver tripped. Heeheehee.

Only if the "engineer" ignored the operating
requirements.

The driver trip is set up around the electrical requirements of the pump.

So what? The motor would work fine if you designed it
properly for the intended job. Even with your fucked up
design, it could easily be made to work if you had a
competent pump engineer.
Easily, duke!

Exactly, and you and I both told him how.

Marvin had the best solution, about closing the discharge
valve. Duke seems to realize that would work, because he
started making up some shit about blowing bearings and
gaskets.

Good catch. I hadn't noticed, but you're right.

Post by unknown

Post by Ted

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn
4) Overall here, you appear completely ignorant.

What am I missing here? That you are missing everything

You are missing everything.

Your utter ignorance.

Says the buffoon who can't make his pump work.

All I need is some pipe.

All you need is a pump engineer.

Duke plans to rephrase the solution we already gave.

Kind of like the way he thinks plagiarism is ok when he
does it. I kinda get the impression that one thing Duke
has learned in life is that it's more effective to take
credit for things he didn't do, than to take the blame
for things he did.

Frauds do that.

[duke]

Post by unknown

Post by Ted

Post by unknown
So what? The motor would work fine if you designed it
properly for the intended job. Even with your fucked up
design, it could easily be made to work if you had a
competent pump engineer.
Easily, duke!

Exactly, and you and I both told him how.

Marvin had the best solution, about closing the discharge
valve. Duke seems to realize that would work, because he
started making up some shit about blowing bearings and
gaskets.

How little you know about pumps.


the dukester, American-American


*****
The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine
and a good cigar.

G.K. Chesterton
*****

[unknown]

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Ted

Post by unknown
So what? The motor would work fine if you designed it
properly for the intended job. Even with your fucked up
design, it could easily be made to work if you had a
competent pump engineer.
Easily, duke!

Exactly, and you and I both told him how.

Marvin had the best solution, about closing the discharge
valve. Duke seems to realize that would work, because he
started making up some shit about blowing bearings and
gaskets.

How little you know about pumps.

Yeah, duke, i guess you must be right. Only idiots like
me would ever try to pump water into a water tank.

Smart people like you know it's impossible to get water
into a tank, because pumps don't work any more.

The authorities have been alerted so they can begin
decommissioning all municipal water tanks.

[duke]

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke
Nope, suction side was exempt form consideration for a "simple pump" problem.
Heeheehee.

No need for that, since it's a simple work & power
problem.

Well, say something. Speak up, kid.

I already spoke up. I solved your problem. You can't do
that.

I have seen exactly nothing from you that would even remotely reveal that you
understood.

Slow starts is a loser.

Post by unknown
I told you to fix whatever it is that makes you think the
tank can't be filled. Put the tank up on stilts,
pre-fill the tank with 100 ft of water, do whatever you
like, then solve your problem.
You still can't solve it, can you, duke?

That's the answer.

Post by unknown
You never had any intention of solving it, because you
have no clue where to even start. Your whole plan was to
cop out with "it can't be done".

With the arrangement shown, it can't. That's why your claim to an answer to a
joke.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
You claimed
yourself you could move an infinite amount of water with
zero hp, at 0 TDH

Not me. You buffoon. You're making that up like the cheese whiz you are.

Yes, you, you maroon buffoon. It's right there in your
pump formula.

You don't understand it.

I understand your equation says you can move infinite
water at 0 head. You don't understand it, do you?

The very moment it starts, the driver will trip on electrical overload.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
Your motor, after all, could move
1000 GPM at 500 ft head, so with a 126 hp motor, you'd
expect to be able to move a lot more with 0 external
head.

It would rush to overload the pump until the driver tripped. Heeheehee.

Only if the "engineer" ignored the operating
requirements.

The driver trip is set up around the electrical requirements of the pump.

So what? The motor would work fine if you designed it
properly for the intended job. Even with your fucked up
design, it could easily be made to work if you had a
competent pump engineer.

The driver was selected to pump 1000 gpm at 500 ft tdh with 126hp (your value).
With the 126 hp driver taking on (small head) but flows of thousands of gpm and
increasing, hp will immediately exceed 126 and trip. It's real world.

Post by unknown
Easily, duke!

You forgot the massive rush to flows greatly exceeding design.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
At 0 TDH, flow "resistance" amounts to the size of the
pump's input and output ports, the pipes, and the energy
needed to accelerate the water to the flow speed. Your
problem as presented said we could ignore all that, but
in the real world those would be the factors.

Nope. I openly said to disregard suction conditions.

No need for that, since it's a simple work & power
problem.

I made it simple for you and you still can't come to grips with it.

You don't seem to understand. I didn't consider suction.
I solved the problem for the info you gave.

You clearly don't seem to understand.

Firstly, the pump internals are a limited flow path, becoming as an orifice if
anything. Nobody can say to what extent, so only a lab test could make sense of
it..

We can reasonably assume 1000 ft tdh at with the "orifice effect".

The pump, by design, will seek to push 1000 gpm thru the orifice.

Nobody can say for sure where the gpm and head will seek to go, but at these
possible conditions, the hp draw on the motor would be 500hp. It's sized at
126, and will quickly trip on electrical overload.

With the pump physically being totally unable to handle the flows and orifice
effect, the waters in the pump would be churned up raising the temperature and
flashing the water in the casing, causing shaft seals to burn out and destroying
lab seals and bearings.

Post by unknown

Post by duke
You don't know pumps.

Is that all you can say?

It's enough.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
BTW, incidental to the solution, i checked your HP
formula. It is valid. 126 hp.

Is that with or without sg and pump/motor efficiency considerations?

It's based on the problem you presented, which had none
of that shit, did it?

But your shit is guesswork as to what the pump/driver will try to seek before
tripping out.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke
And what would it be at very low head and rushing to thousands of gpm?

It's your formula. Don't you know what it's telling us?

Yes, I know. But you don't.

Then why do you have to ask me?

Because you don't know pumps.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
You mean your system was designed to fail?
You didn't include a discharge valve?
You didn't match the motor & pump to the application?

A simple pump problem to stymie the dumbest of people, and dat be u.

Duke translation: "I'm totally stymied!"

No, nobody in his right mind could see that arrangement being valid.

Post by unknown

Post by duke
No 2 reservoirs. Inlet conditions not an issue. Remember.

Really? Where does the source water come from? Does it
just appear from the sky by magic? Then why can't you
just make it magically appear inside the tank, so you
don't even need all this pump blither-blather?

Disregard inlet conditions - REMEMBER!!!

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
Says the buffoon who can't make his pump work.

All I need is some pipe.

All you need is a pump engineer.

Done.

Post by unknown
But all you got is a broken pump and 3% of a normal
noggin.

Not me, You're the one that just tried to make 126 hp work thru an orifice.

the dukester, American-American


*****
The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine
and a good cigar.

G.K. Chesterton
*****

[Smiler]

<snip>

Post by unknown

Post by duke
All I need is some pipe.

All you need is a pump engineer.
But all you got is a broken pump and 3% of a normal noggin.

You greatly overestimate his capacity.

[duke]

Post by Smiler
<snip>

Post by unknown

Post by duke
All I need is some pipe.

All you need is a pump engineer.
But all you got is a broken pump and 3% of a normal noggin.

You greatly overestimate his capacity.

He can't handle the problem I put forth, and you can't keep up with him.

the dukester, American-American


*****
The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine
and a good cigar.

G.K. Chesterton
*****

[Ted]

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke
Nope, suction side was exempt form consideration for a "simple pump" problem.
Heeheehee.

No need for that, since it's a simple work & power
problem.

Well, say something. Speak up, kid.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
You claimed
yourself you could move an infinite amount of water with
zero hp, at 0 TDH

Not me. You buffoon. You're making that up like the cheese whiz you are.

Yes, you, you maroon buffoon. It's right there in your
pump formula.

You don't understand it.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
Your motor, after all, could move
1000 GPM at 500 ft head, so with a 126 hp motor, you'd
expect to be able to move a lot more with 0 external
head.

It would rush to overload the pump until the driver tripped. Heeheehee.

Only if the "engineer" ignored the operating
requirements.

The driver trip is set up around the electrical requirements of the pump.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
At 0 TDH, flow "resistance" amounts to the size of the
pump's input and output ports, the pipes, and the energy
needed to accelerate the water to the flow speed. Your
problem as presented said we could ignore all that, but
in the real world those would be the factors.

Nope. I openly said to disregard suction conditions.

No need for that, since it's a simple work & power
problem.

I made it simple for you and you still can't come to grips with it.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke neglected to say that on start-up, even with a
single speed electric motor, that the pump could be
started with the discharge valve partially closed to
control the load on the electric motor

Maybe a shovel would be just as good.

Nope, that's actually a really good idea. Even if you
close off the valve enough to get 500 ft equivalent TDH,
you still get 1000 gpm. Can you shovel that fast?

Never.

Can you explain why not?
Didn't think so.

Can YOU shovel 1000 gpm against zero head.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
That's duke... 'I don't know how to do it, so it can't
be done.'
What a maroon. What an ignoranimus.

Waiting on your answers.

As I told you, i already solved your problem. Won't you
at least try before you admit total failure?

With your discussion above, you're a fool.

I'm obviously a smarter fool than you, duke.

You don't know pumps.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
BTW, incidental to the solution, i checked your HP
formula. It is valid. 126 hp.

Is that with or without sg and pump/motor efficiency considerations?

Post by unknown

Post by duke
And what would it be at very low head and rushing to thousands of gpm?

It's your formula. Don't you know what it's telling us?

Yes, I know. But you don't.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Not necessarily true, Duke.
1) You completely ignored that the prime mover need not be an electric motor.

Don't you understand yet that we were reviewing water flow with a motor driver.
No points.

No points.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown
You didn't specify anything about the motor. You did say
there are no issues with the motor. That was a lie,
wasn't it.

The driver performed as installed.

You mean your system was designed to fail?
You didn't include a discharge valve?
You didn't match the motor & pump to the application?

A simple pump problem to stymie the dumbest of people, and dat be u.

Post by unknown
There's a fitting epitaph for your project...
"This job was duked."

You sure can't solve it.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
2) You completely ignored the possibility of a soft start by the motor controller, or
other current limiting device.

Would you get more than a dribble

Up to a 126 hp dribble.

But the correct answer is time to fill the tank.

And Peter and I showed you how to calculate it because you didn't know.

Post by duke
Why would you elect to install
such a stupid arrangement for the solution. Goose/gander. You were given a
pump although I could grant you a hand valve.

Post by unknown

Post by duke
And that would be when before the driver tripped.

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
3) You completely ignored the likelihood that the pump operator
would restrict the output
flow by partially pinching off the discharge valve, making a successful start.

To a trickle.

Up to a 126 hp trickle.

And with a deadheaded pump running at shutoff with a trickle of flow, how many
centuries would it take to fill the tank even if it didn't burn out shortly
after startup.

Why are you claiming a 126 hp motor can only move water
between 2 equal-level reservoirs in trickles & dribbles?

No 2 reservoirs. Inlet conditions not an issue. Remember.

Post by unknown
Don't you think that's pretty stupid?

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by duke

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn
4) Overall here, you appear completely ignorant.

What am I missing here? That you are missing everything

You are missing everything.

Your utter ignorance.

Says the buffoon who can't make his pump work.

All I need is some pipe.

Employing the solution that I'd already mentioned or you wouldn't even have
thought about it.

[unknown]

Post by Ted

Post by duke
All I need is some pipe.

Employing the solution that I'd already mentioned or you wouldn't even have
thought about it.

Yup. Duke thinks everyone has forgotten your solution
already.

But of course, when it was still your idea, it would have
blown gaskets and seals.

[Ted]

Post by unknown

Post by Ted

Post by duke
All I need is some pipe.

Employing the solution that I'd already mentioned or you wouldn't even have
thought about it.

Yup. Duke thinks everyone has forgotten your solution
already.
But of course, when it was still your idea, it would have
blown gaskets and seals.

It was your idea too, sorry I failed to mention that. I suspect he'll
eventually copy most of the solutions we all presented him, pretending that
they're his own ideas. It may be why he wanted to drag the pump problem
discussion out for so long.

[duke]

Post by unknown

Post by Ted

Post by duke
All I need is some pipe.

Employing the solution that I'd already mentioned or you wouldn't even have
thought about it.

Yup. Duke thinks everyone has forgotten your solution
already.

Customers don't take secants for an answer.

Post by unknown
But of course, when it was still your idea, it would have
blown gaskets and seals.

How much does an orifice pass? Think in terms of 505 hp needed. Why did you
install such a small driver for doing a man's work.

Smile - the embarrassment only lasts for a few years until everybody forgets.

the dukester, American-American


*****
The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine
and a good cigar.

G.K. Chesterton
*****

[Smiler]

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric motor as prime
mover, the motor controls can be designed to soft-start the motor,
and avoid over-current.

I had guessed that duke was trying to use a synchronous motor with his
pump. I suggested using a variable-speed induction motor instead,
thinking it could be controlled easily like a dc motor. Some googling
relieved me of that misunderstanding, but an induction motor with VFD
could be made to work. A dc motor would work fine too.

How far down can you reduce rpm and still get the pump to do more than
just stir water? And would it be more effective than a shovel.

Pretty low, if you have to. You're only moving water between 2
reservoirs of equal level. You claimed yourself you could move an
infinite amount of water with zero hp, at 0 TDH. Your motor, after all,
could move 1000 GPM at 500 ft head, so with a 126 hp motor, you'd expect
to be able to move a lot more with 0 external head.
At 0 TDH, flow "resistance" amounts to the size of the pump's input and
output ports, the pipes, and the energy needed to accelerate the water
to the flow speed. Your problem as presented said we could ignore all
that, but in the real world those would be the factors.

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Duke neglected to say that on start-up, even with a single speed
electric motor, that the pump could be started with the discharge
valve partially closed to control the load on the electric motor

Maybe a shovel would be just as good.

Nope, that's actually a really good idea. Even if you close off the
valve enough to get 500 ft equivalent TDH, you still get 1000 gpm. Can
you shovel that fast?

We know from experience that he can rapidly shovel shit.

[duke]

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Yes. Immediately on starting the pump against no back pressure, the flowrate
will quickly rise. Although there is "no" head being developed, the flowrate
rising would quickly exceed the motor rating for the intended design, and trip
off line. That's exactly what happened in an event I'm familiar with.

Not necessarily true, Duke.

Guaranteed.

the dukester, American-American


*****
The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine
and a good cigar.

G.K. Chesterton
*****

[Ted]

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Yes. Immediately on starting the pump against no back pressure, the flowrate
will quickly rise. Although there is "no" head being developed, the flowrate
rising would quickly exceed the motor rating for the intended design, and trip
off line. That's exactly what happened in an event I'm familiar with.

Not necessarily true, Duke.

Guaranteed.
the dukester, American-American

Even those of us who never worked with pumps know it isn't true, and
especially now after Marvin's explanations.

[duke]

Post by Ted

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Yes. Immediately on starting the pump against no back pressure, the flowrate
will quickly rise. Although there is "no" head being developed, the flowrate
rising would quickly exceed the motor rating for the intended design, and trip
off line. That's exactly what happened in an event I'm familiar with.

Not necessarily true, Duke.

Guaranteed.
the dukester, American-American

Even those of us who never worked with pumps know it isn't true, and
especially now after Marvin's explanations.

Marvin tried but didn't know the answer.

the dukester, American-American


*****
The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine
and a good cigar.

G.K. Chesterton
*****

[duke]

Post by Marvin Sebourn
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump will not work is because Duke thought he had designed it to fail, and thinks he did.

Poor crybaby. Proposal readers don't know how pumps work.

the dukester, American-American


*****
The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine
and a good cigar.

G.K. Chesterton
*****

[Ted]

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump will not work
is because Duke thought he had designed it to fail, and thinks he did.

Poor crybaby. Proposal readers don't know how pumps work.
the dukester, American-American

Marvin's proved his knowledge and competence with pumps while you proved
you're the one who doesn't know how pumps work. You couldn't solve a
practical problem and you don't even understand the equations you used for
11 years. You don't know how utterly pathetic that is, Duke. You spent your
career as an incompetent buffoon trying to convince people you were an
engineer. I'm sure we're not the first to call 'fraud'.

[duke]

Post by Ted

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump will not work
is because Duke thought he had designed it to fail, and thinks he did.

Poor crybaby. Proposal readers don't know how pumps work.
the dukester, American-American

Marvin's proved his knowledge and competence with pumps while you proved
you're the one who doesn't know how pumps work.

I gather you haven't been evaluating the frustration marvin feels about how
little he understands about pumps.

Post by Ted
You couldn't solve a
practical problem and you don't even understand the equations you used for
11 years. You don't know how utterly pathetic that is, Duke. You spent your
career as an incompetent buffoon trying to convince people you were an
engineer. I'm sure we're not the first to call 'fraud'.

Haahaahaa. How the faux mighty are falling.

the dukester, American-American


*****
The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine
and a good cigar.

G.K. Chesterton
*****

[Marvin Sebourn]

Post by duke

Post by Ted

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump will not work
is because Duke thought he had designed it to fail, and thinks he did.

Poor crybaby. Proposal readers don't know how pumps work.
the dukester, American-American

Marvin's proved his knowledge and competence with pumps while you proved
you're the one who doesn't know how pumps work.

I gather you haven't been evaluating the frustration marvin feels about how
little he understands about pumps.

Be consistent, Duke. At one time you said I was 98% of the way to the answer.

Earlier, before I had spoken to the problem, you ignorantly said I knew nothing of pumps.

But then you said, effectively, that engineers don't read proposals. Not true.

And you said that I wasn't a tech. Not true. In truth (Danger-Duke, an alien concept to you) I started my job as an Electronic Technician, was promoted to an Electronic Technician class A Supervisor, and on to a Station, then District Superintendent, and on to a spell in the compressor services group, where I performed engine and compressor analysis, Air Quality Emissions Tests for state and federal standards, wrote sections of our technical operations manual, mostly electronics and large engine crankshaft alignment, tested for Op-Qual., etc.

And all you have for your CV is one failed pump, that you could have started using a simple procedure.

Remember how you laughed at my description of pinching the discharge valve at startup? Here are a few quotes from pump manufacturers and service companies:

http://www.travaini.nl/Manual/Centrifugaal/ManualeCentrifughe.pdf

Post by duke

Post by Ted

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn

For centrifugal pumps (types) motor must be started with the discharge valve closed.
When the motor has reached full speed, the discharge valve can be opened until the required differential pressure is reached (CAUTION) do not operate the pump with closed discharge piping for an extended period of time, to avoid overheating problems previously discussed.

http://www.enggcyclopedia.com/2011/10/centrifugal-pump-start-up-procedure/

General centrifugal pump start up procedure:
Before pump start-up you must perform these tasks:-
1. Open the suction valve.
2. Open any recirculation or cooling lines.

Post by duke

Post by Ted

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn

3. Fully close or partially open the discharge valve, depending on system conditions.

4. Start the driver.

Post by duke

Post by Ted

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn

5. Slowly open the discharge valve until the pump reaches the desired flow.

6. Check the pressure gauge to ensure that the pump quickly reaches the correct discharge pressure.

another:

http://articles.compressionjobs.com/articles/oilfield-101/3242-pumps-oil-gas-field-rotor-casing?start=7

CENTRIFUGAL PUMP OPERATION
Pump Start-up Procedure
Line up the pump valves.
Ensure that the drain valve is closed.
Open the suction valve.
Open the vent valve to bleed off gases - when liquid comes from the vent valve - close it again. (This is called 'Priming the pump').
Open the gland-seal valve (if fitted).
Commission the bearing and oil cooling systems (if fitted).
if an oil bottle or 'slinger-ring' reservoir is used for the bearings, ensure it is full and functioning properly.
Check by hand that the pump shaft is freely rotating - (power is OFF at this point).
Energise or, if the rule applies, have the electrician energise, the power supply.

Post by duke

Post by Ted

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn

The discharge valve, at this point, should still be closed.

Start the pump motor. Check that the pump is rotating in the correct direction.

another:
http://www.mcnallyinstitute.com/13-html/13-03.htm

Post by duke

Post by Ted

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Here is the proper way to vent a centrifugal pump after it has been initially installed, or the system has been opened.
I am assuming the pump is empty of liquid and both the suction and discharge valves are shut.

Open the suction valve. The pump fills part way.
Close the suction valve.

Post by duke

Post by Ted

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Open the discharge valve part way. Once the pressure equalizes the air will rise in the discharge piping.

Open the suction valve.
Start the pump.

Post by duke

Post by Ted

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn

When the pump hits its operating speed open the discharge valve to its proper setting to operate close to the BEP. (best efficiency point) .

So that's it, Duke. Another failure of your lack of knowledge, or maybe just telling untruths. Lies, if you know they are not true.

To bad, you just made your best (and only) quip I have read from you, in four years or so. Shell(ey) game. Very good.

But I guess you can be excused for trying to operate in a much older era, where a jackass was the only prime mover available. Must have been very tiring.

Sorry you couldn't admit that other people tell the truth.

Sorry you couldn't admit you didn't.

Sorry you can't avoid calling other people gay, and making anal references.

Sorry you can't back up what you say.

Don't try to get above your knowledge and experience class next time.

Ditto for the physics and math, of which I did not understand all. But apparently you didn't either.

You're a loser and are often mendacious (I'm being courteous). I'm nearing the end of my participation in this thread concerning the pump problem. In you fabrications, sexual accusations, obfuscations and general off-topic meanderings, I wonder-why would anyone debase themselves so much for attention? I'm embarrassed to see you verbally cut up by the multitude.

TINPPOADP

Marvin Sebourn

Post by duke

Post by Ted
You couldn't solve a
practical problem and you don't even understand the equations you used for
11 years. You don't know how utterly pathetic that is, Duke. You spent your
career as an incompetent buffoon trying to convince people you were an
engineer. I'm sure we're not the first to call 'fraud'.

Haahaahaa. How the faux mighty are falling.
the dukester, American-American
*****
The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine
and a good cigar.
G.K. Chesterton
*****

[TheRealMccoy]

Post by Marvin Sebourn
And you said that I wasn't a tech. Not true. In truth (Danger-Duke, an alien concept to you) I started my job as an Electronic Technician, was promoted to an Electronic Technician class A Supervisor, and on to a Station, then District Superintendent

How did you learn electronics math since you do not know trig?

[Marvin Sebourn]

Post by TheRealMccoy

Post by Marvin Sebourn
And you said that I wasn't a tech. Not true. In truth (Danger-Duke, an alien concept to you) I started my job as an Electronic Technician, was promoted to an Electronic Technician class A Supervisor, and on to a Station, then District Superintendent

How did you learn electronics math since you do not know trig?

I should have been clearer. My fault. Calculus was mentioned and I am ignorant there, etc. I do know trig-but you're right, it is essential.

Marvin Sebourn
***@aol.com

[TheRealMccoy]

Post by Marvin Sebourn
I do know trig

So at some point you wont mind a test of your knowledge there?

[Marvin Sebourn]

Post by TheRealMccoy

Post by Marvin Sebourn
I do know trig

So at some point you wont mind a test of your knowledge there?

Maybe, but you must agree to an enabling test, or tests, in some (not all) of these areas: celestial navigation, geology especially plate tectonics, optical mineralogy, volcanology, glaciation, 5000 / 6000 level geography, antique watch restoration repair and adjustment, metal lathe operation and techniques-history of nuclear weapon development and delivery systems, the Antikythera mechanism, cryptography, extreme waves-rogue wave types and occurrence, nautical fiction by the three most well-known authors of the 20th century, causes of the tides, square rigged ships particularly American and British clipper ships, builders and history, crystal radio history and techniques, the history of the wireless telegraph and submarine cable, the development and technology of amateur radio (N5CL), the Galapagos from Darwin to the present, asteroid and comet threats, time through the ages and the development of the calendar, the Rhea County Courthouse in history, frauds in science and research, D-Day history, ancient Roman aqueducts, etc., and...

I'm about half way through my list, do you want a few questions to begin the preliminary qualification of requirements necessary to test my trig knowledge?

Marvin Sebourn
***@aolcom

[TheRealMccoy]

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by TheRealMccoy

Post by Marvin Sebourn
I do know trig

So at some point you wont mind a test of your knowledge there?

Maybe, but you must agree to an enabling test, or tests, in some (not all) of these areas: celestial navigation, geology especially plate tectonics, optical mineralogy, volcanology, glaciation, 5000 / 6000 level geography, antique watch restoration repair and adjustment, metal lathe operation and techniques-history of nuclear weapon development and delivery systems, the Antikythera mechanism, cryptography, extreme waves-rogue wave types and occurrence, nautical fiction by the three most well-known authors of the 20th century, causes of the tides, square rigged ships particularly American and British clipper ships, builders and history, crystal radio history and techniques, the history of the wireless telegraph and submarine cable, the development and technology of amateur radio (N5CL), the Galapagos from Darwin to the present, asteroid and comet threats, time through the ages and the development of the calendar, the Rhea County Courthouse in history, frauds in science and research, D-Day history, ancient Roman aqueducts, etc., and...
I'm about half way through my list, do you want a few questions to begin the preliminary qualification of requirements necessary to test my trig knowledge?
Marvin Sebourn

since you claimed trig first, you will be tested first.
i dont need to be tested on any of those things you listed, as i didnt claim on usenet to know all of those as you did about trig.

now get ready for the math test, robbie

[Ted]

Post by TheRealMccoy

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by TheRealMccoy

Post by Marvin Sebourn
I do know trig

So at some point you wont mind a test of your knowledge there?

Maybe, but you must agree to an enabling test, or tests, in some (not all) of these areas: celestial navigation, geology especially plate tectonics, optical mineralogy, volcanology, glaciation, 5000 / 6000 level geography, antique watch restoration repair and adjustment, metal lathe operation and techniques-history of nuclear weapon development and delivery systems, the Antikythera mechanism, cryptography, extreme waves-rogue wave types and occurrence, nautical fiction by the three most well-known authors of the 20th century, causes of the tides, square rigged ships particularly American and British clipper ships, builders and history, crystal radio history and techniques, the history of the wireless telegraph and submarine cable, the development and technology of amateur radio (N5CL), the Galapagos from Darwin to the present, asteroid and comet threats, time through the ages and the development of the calendar, the Rhea County Courthouse in history, frauds in science and research, D-Day history, ancient Roman aqueducts, etc., and...
I'm about half way through my list, do you want a few questions to begin the preliminary qualification of requirements necessary to test my trig knowledge?
Marvin Sebourn

since you claimed trig first, you will be tested first.
i dont need to be tested on any of those things you listed, as i didnt claim on usenet to know all of those as you did about trig.
now get ready for the math test, robbie

"Trig"? What's that? Did you mean to sa

[TheRealMccoy]

Post by Ted

Post by TheRealMccoy

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by TheRealMccoy

Post by Marvin Sebourn
I do know trig

So at some point you wont mind a test of your knowledge there?

Maybe, but you must agree to an enabling test, or tests, in some (not all) of these areas: celestial navigation, geology especially plate tectonics, optical mineralogy, volcanology, glaciation, 5000 / 6000 level geography, antique watch restoration repair and adjustment, metal lathe operation and techniques-history of nuclear weapon development and delivery systems, the Antikythera mechanism, cryptography, extreme waves-rogue wave types and occurrence, nautical fiction by the three most well-known authors of the 20th century, causes of the tides, square rigged ships particularly American and British clipper ships, builders and history, crystal radio history and techniques, the history of the wireless telegraph and submarine cable, the development and technology of amateur radio (N5CL), the Galapagos from Darwin to the present, asteroid and comet threats, time through the ages and the development of the calendar, the Rhea County Courthouse in history, frauds in science and research, D-Day history, ancient Roman aqueducts, etc., and...
I'm about half way through my list, do you want a few questions to begin the preliminary qualification of requirements necessary to test my trig knowledge?
Marvin Sebourn

since you claimed trig first, you will be tested first.
i dont need to be tested on any of those things you listed, as i didnt claim on usenet to know all of those as you did about trig.
now get ready for the math test, robbie

"Trig"? What's that?

Exactly my point about you.

[Smiler]

Post by TheRealMccoy

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by TheRealMccoy

Post by Marvin Sebourn
I do know trig

So at some point you wont mind a test of your knowledge there?

Maybe, but you must agree to an enabling test, or tests, in some (not
all) of these areas: celestial navigation, geology especially plate
tectonics, optical mineralogy, volcanology, glaciation, 5000 / 6000
level geography, antique watch restoration repair and adjustment,
metal lathe operation and techniques-history of nuclear weapon
development and delivery systems, the Antikythera mechanism,
cryptography, extreme waves-rogue wave types and occurrence, nautical
fiction by the three most well-known authors of the 20th century,
causes of the tides, square rigged ships particularly American and
British clipper ships, builders and history, crystal radio history and
techniques, the history of the wireless telegraph and submarine cable,
the development and technology of amateur radio (N5CL), the Galapagos
from Darwin to the present, asteroid and comet threats, time through
the ages and the development of the calendar, the Rhea County
Courthouse in history, frauds in science and research, D-Day history,
ancient Roman aqueducts, etc., and...
I'm about half way through my list, do you want a few questions to
begin the preliminary qualification of requirements necessary to test
my trig knowledge?

since you claimed trig first, you will be tested first.
i dont need to be tested on any of those things you listed, as i didnt
claim on usenet to know all of those as you did about trig.
now get ready for the math test, robbie

"Trig"? What's that? Did you mean to say "trigger"?

'Trigger', the road sweeper in 'Only Fools and Horses.'?
<talking about his roadsweeper's brush>
"I've had the same one for five year. It's had tree new handles an eight
new heads, but it's still the same brush!"

[Marvin Sebourn]

Post by Smiler

Post by TheRealMccoy

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by TheRealMccoy

Post by Marvin Sebourn
I do know trig

So at some point you wont mind a test of your knowledge there?

Maybe, but you must agree to an enabling test, or tests, in some (not
all) of these areas: celestial navigation, geology especially plate
tectonics, optical mineralogy, volcanology, glaciation, 5000 / 6000
level geography, antique watch restoration repair and adjustment,
metal lathe operation and techniques-history of nuclear weapon
development and delivery systems, the Antikythera mechanism,
cryptography, extreme waves-rogue wave types and occurrence, nautical
fiction by the three most well-known authors of the 20th century,
causes of the tides, square rigged ships particularly American and
British clipper ships, builders and history, crystal radio history and
techniques, the history of the wireless telegraph and submarine cable,
the development and technology of amateur radio (N5CL), the Galapagos
from Darwin to the present, asteroid and comet threats, time through
the ages and the development of the calendar, the Rhea County
Courthouse in history, frauds in science and research, D-Day history,
ancient Roman aqueducts, etc., and...
I'm about half way through my list, do you want a few questions to
begin the preliminary qualification of requirements necessary to test
my trig knowledge?

since you claimed trig first, you will be tested first.
i dont need to be tested on any of those things you listed, as i didnt
claim on usenet to know all of those as you did about trig.
now get ready for the math test, robbie

"Trig"? What's that? Did you mean to say "trigger"?

'Trigger', the road sweeper in 'Only Fools and Horses.'?
<talking about his roadsweeper's brush>
"I've had the same one for five year. It's had tree new handles an eight
new heads, but it's still the same brush!"

Cool, Smiler.

Way off-topic, new brushes. On fountain pens:

Way, way deep in dreamy memory, 1963/1964, likely. Herman Wouke's "Youngblood Hawke". Hawke was a young writer who exclusively used a fountain pen. Like Trigger's roadsweeper's brush, Hawke's fountain pen had so many parts replaced over the years that although the parts were entirely different, Hawke still considered it to be the same fountain pen.

My imagination?

Can't find Y.H. in Kindle. Can anyone speak to the accuracy of this?

Thanks

Marvin Sebourn

Post by Smiler
Smiler,
The godless one. a.a.# 2279
All gods are tailored to order. They're made to
exactly fit the prejudices of their believers.
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[Smiler]

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by Smiler

Post by TheRealMccoy

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by TheRealMccoy

Post by Marvin Sebourn
I do know trig

So at some point you wont mind a test of your knowledge there?

Maybe, but you must agree to an enabling test, or tests, in some
(not all) of these areas: celestial navigation, geology especially
plate tectonics, optical mineralogy, volcanology, glaciation, 5000
/ 6000 level geography, antique watch restoration repair and
adjustment, metal lathe operation and techniques-history of nuclear
weapon development and delivery systems, the Antikythera mechanism,
cryptography, extreme waves-rogue wave types and occurrence,
nautical fiction by the three most well-known authors of the 20th
century, causes of the tides, square rigged ships particularly
American and British clipper ships, builders and history, crystal
radio history and techniques, the history of the wireless telegraph
and submarine cable,
the development and technology of amateur radio (N5CL), the
Galapagos from Darwin to the present, asteroid and comet threats,
time through the ages and the development of the calendar, the Rhea
County Courthouse in history, frauds in science and research, D-Day
history, ancient Roman aqueducts, etc., and...
I'm about half way through my list, do you want a few questions to
begin the preliminary qualification of requirements necessary to
test my trig knowledge?

since you claimed trig first, you will be tested first.
i dont need to be tested on any of those things you listed, as i
didnt claim on usenet to know all of those as you did about trig.
now get ready for the math test, robbie

"Trig"? What's that? Did you mean to say "trigger"?

'Trigger', the road sweeper in 'Only Fools and Horses.'?
<talking about his roadsweeper's brush>
"I've had the same one for five year. It's had three new handles an
eight new heads, but it's still the same brush!"

Cool, Smiler.
Way, way deep in dreamy memory, 1963/1964, likely. Herman Wouke's
"Youngblood Hawke". Hawke was a young writer who exclusively used a
fountain pen. Like Trigger's roadsweeper's brush, Hawke's fountain pen
had so many parts replaced over the years that although the parts were
entirely different, Hawke still considered it to be the same fountain
pen.
My imagination?
Can't find Y.H. in Kindle. Can anyone speak to the accuracy of this?
Thanks

I found the original clip for "Trigger's broom".
23 seconds of sublime comedy.

[Atlatl Axolotl]

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by TheRealMccoy

Post by Marvin Sebourn
I do know trig

So at some point you wont mind a test of your knowledge there?

Maybe, but you must agree to an enabling test, or tests, in some (not all) of these areas: celestial navigation, geology especially plate tectonics, optical mineralogy, volcanology, glaciation, 5000 / 6000 level geography, antique watch restoration repair and adjustment, metal lathe operation and techniques-history of nuclear weapon development and delivery systems, the Antikythera mechanism, cryptography, extreme waves-rogue wave types and occurrence, nautical fiction by the three most well-known authors of the 20th century, causes of the tides, square rigged ships particularly American and British clipper ships, builders and history, crystal radio history and techniques, the history of the wireless telegraph and submarine cable, the development and technology of amateur radio (N5CL), the Galapagos from Darwin to the present, asteroid and comet threats, time through the ages and the development of the calendar, the Rhea County Courthouse in history, frauds in science and research, D-Day history, ancient Roman aqueducts, etc., and...
I'm about half way through my list, do you want a few questions to begin the preliminary qualification of requirements necessary to test my trig knowledge?
Marvin Sebourn

http://tinyurl.com/ybh8wkpu



aa

[Ted]

Post by Atlatl Axolotl

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by TheRealMccoy

Post by Marvin Sebourn
I do know trig

So at some point you wont mind a test of your knowledge there?

Maybe, but you must agree to an enabling test, or tests, in some (not all) of these areas: celestial navigation, geology especially plate tectonics, optical mineralogy, volcanology, glaciation, 5000 / 6000 level geography, antique watch restoration repair and adjustment, metal lathe operation and techniques-history of nuclear weapon development and delivery systems, the Antikythera mechanism, cryptography, extreme waves-rogue wave types and occurrence, nautical fiction by the three most well-known authors of the 20th century, causes of the tides, square rigged ships particularly American and British clipper ships, builders and history, crystal radio history and techniques, the history of the wireless telegraph and submarine cable, the development and technology of amateur radio (N5CL), the Galapagos from Darwin to the present, asteroid and comet threats, time through the ages and the development of the calendar, the Rhea County Courthouse in history, frauds in science and research, D-Day history, ancient Roman aqueducts, etc., and...
I'm about half way through my list, do you want a few questions to begin the preliminary qualification of requirements necessary to test my trig knowledge?
Marvin Sebourn

http://tinyurl.com/ybh8wkpu
aa

I agree.

[unknown]

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by Atlatl Axolotl

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by TheRealMccoy

Post by Marvin Sebourn
I do know trig

So at some point you wont mind a test of your knowledge there?

Maybe, but you must agree to an enabling test, or tests, in some (not all) of these areas: celestial navigation, geology especially plate tectonics, optical mineralogy, volcanology, glaciation, 5000 / 6000 level geography, antique watch restoration repair and adjustment, metal lathe operation and techniques-history of nuclear weapon development and delivery systems, the Antikythera mechanism, cryptography, extreme waves-rogue wave types and occurrence, nautical fiction by the three most well-known authors of the 20th century, causes of the tides, square rigged ships particularly American and British clipper ships, builders and history, crystal radio history and techniques, the history of the wireless telegraph and submarine cable, the development and technology of amateur radio (N5CL), the Galapagos from Darwin to the present, asteroid and comet threats, time through the ages and the development of the calendar, the Rhea County Courthouse in history, frauds in science and

research, D-Day history, ancient Roman aqueducts, etc., and...

Post by Atlatl Axolotl

Post by Marvin Sebourn
I'm about half way through my list, do you want a few questions to begin the preliminary qualification of requirements necessary to test my trig knowledge?
Marvin Sebourn

http://tinyurl.com/ybh8wkpu
aa

I agree. Marvin's CV is *very* impressive!

I want to hear the one about "frauds in science and
research". That should be a good one.

[Ted]

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by Atlatl Axolotl

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by TheRealMccoy

Post by Marvin Sebourn
I do know trig

So at some point you wont mind a test of your knowledge there?

Maybe, but you must agree to an enabling test, or tests, in some (not
all) of these areas: celestial navigation, geology especially plate
tectonics, optical mineralogy, volcanology, glaciation, 5000 / 6000
level geography, antique watch restoration repair and adjustment,
metal lathe operation and techniques-history of nuclear weapon
development and delivery systems, the Antikythera mechanism,
cryptography, extreme waves-rogue wave types and occurrence, nautical
fiction by the three most well-known authors of the 20th century,
causes of the tides, square rigged ships particularly American and
British clipper ships, builders and history, crystal radio history and
techniques, the history of the wireless telegraph and submarine cable,
the development and technology of amateur radio (N5CL), the Galapagos
from Darwin to the present, asteroid and comet threats, time through
the ages and the development of the calendar, the Rhea County
Courthouse in history, frauds in science and

research, D-Day history, ancient Roman aqueducts, etc., and...

Post by Atlatl Axolotl

Post by Marvin Sebourn
I'm about half way through my list, do you want a few questions to
begin the preliminary qualification of requirements necessary to test my trig knowledge?
Marvin Sebourn

http://tinyurl.com/ybh8wkpu
aa

I agree. Marvin's CV is *very* impressive!

I want to hear the one about "frauds in science and
research". That should be a good one.

I've worked with two frauds. Duke's behavior is very similar to theirs.

[duke]

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by Atlatl Axolotl

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by TheRealMccoy

Post by Marvin Sebourn
I do know trig

So at some point you wont mind a test of your knowledge there?

Maybe, but you must agree to an enabling test, or tests, in some (not all) of these areas: celestial navigation, geology especially plate tectonics, optical mineralogy, volcanology, glaciation, 5000 / 6000 level geography, antique watch restoration repair and adjustment, metal lathe operation and techniques-history of nuclear weapon development and delivery systems, the Antikythera mechanism, cryptography, extreme waves-rogue wave types and occurrence, nautical fiction by the three most well-known authors of the 20th century, causes of the tides, square rigged ships particularly American and British clipper ships, builders and history, crystal radio history and techniques, the history of the wireless telegraph and submarine cable, the development and technology of amateur radio (N5CL), the Galapagos from Darwin to the present, asteroid and comet threats, time through the ages and the development of the calendar, the Rhea County Courthouse in history, frauds in science and

research, D-Day history, ancient Roman aqueducts, etc., and...

Post by Atlatl Axolotl

Post by Marvin Sebourn
I'm about half way through my list, do you want a few questions to begin the preliminary qualification of requirements necessary to test my trig knowledge?
Marvin Sebourn

http://tinyurl.com/ybh8wkpu
aa

I agree. Marvin's CV is *very* impressive!

What a bird without a brain.

the dukester, American-American


*****
The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine
and a good cigar.

G.K. Chesterton
*****

[Ted]

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by Atlatl Axolotl

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by TheRealMccoy

Post by Marvin Sebourn
I do know trig

So at some point you wont mind a test of your knowledge there?

Maybe, but you must agree to an enabling test, or tests, in some (not
all) of these areas: celestial navigation, geology especially plate
tectonics, optical mineralogy, volcanology, glaciation, 5000 / 6000
level geography, antique watch restoration repair and adjustment,
metal lathe operation and techniques-history of nuclear weapon
development and delivery systems, the Antikythera mechanism,
cryptography, extreme waves-rogue wave types and occurrence, nautical
fiction by the three most well-known authors of the 20th century,
causes of the tides, square rigged ships particularly American and
British clipper ships, builders and history, crystal radio history and
techniques, the history of the wireless telegraph and submarine cable,
the development and technology of amateur radio (N5CL), the Galapagos
from Darwin to the present, asteroid and comet threats, time through
the ages and the development of the calendar, the Rhea County
Courthouse in history, frauds in science and

research, D-Day history, ancient Roman aqueducts, etc., and...

Post by Atlatl Axolotl

Post by Marvin Sebourn
I'm about half way through my list, do you want a few questions to
begin the preliminary qualification of requirements necessary to test my trig knowledge?
Marvin Sebourn

http://tinyurl.com/ybh8wkpu
aa

I agree. Marvin's CV is *very* impressive!

What a bird without a brain.
the dukester, American-American

Do you remember when you said you're an expert on trig? Yost posted a few
trig problems. Did you see them?

[duke]

Post by Ted

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by Atlatl Axolotl

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by TheRealMccoy

Post by Marvin Sebourn
I do know trig

So at some point you wont mind a test of your knowledge there?

Maybe, but you must agree to an enabling test, or tests, in some (not
all) of these areas: celestial navigation, geology especially plate
tectonics, optical mineralogy, volcanology, glaciation, 5000 / 6000
level geography, antique watch restoration repair and adjustment,
metal lathe operation and techniques-history of nuclear weapon
development and delivery systems, the Antikythera mechanism,
cryptography, extreme waves-rogue wave types and occurrence, nautical
fiction by the three most well-known authors of the 20th century,
causes of the tides, square rigged ships particularly American and
British clipper ships, builders and history, crystal radio history and
techniques, the history of the wireless telegraph and submarine cable,
the development and technology of amateur radio (N5CL), the Galapagos
from Darwin to the present, asteroid and comet threats, time through
the ages and the development of the calendar, the Rhea County
Courthouse in history, frauds in science and

research, D-Day history, ancient Roman aqueducts, etc., and...

Post by Atlatl Axolotl

Post by Marvin Sebourn
I'm about half way through my list, do you want a few questions to
begin the preliminary qualification of requirements necessary to test my trig knowledge?
Marvin Sebourn

http://tinyurl.com/ybh8wkpu
aa

I agree. Marvin's CV is *very* impressive!

What a bird without a brain.
the dukester, American-American

Do you remember when you said you're an expert on trig? Yost posted a few
trig problems. Did you see them?

No, I never made such a comment. I don't even know who yost is. I think you
hit the bottle too much and then try to post.

the dukester, American-American


*****
The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine
and a good cigar.

G.K. Chesterton
*****

[duke]

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by duke

Post by Ted

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump will not work
is because Duke thought he had designed it to fail, and thinks he did.

Poor crybaby. Proposal readers don't know how pumps work.
the dukester, American-American

Marvin's proved his knowledge and competence with pumps while you proved
you're the one who doesn't know how pumps work.

I gather you haven't been evaluating the frustration marvin feels about how
little he understands about pumps.

Be consistent, Duke. At one time you said I was 98% of the way to the answer.

You were. I told you that if you could handle the equation, I would openly
provide the final answer I was looking for (driver trip) which I doubt that many
people understood that.

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Earlier, before I had spoken to the problem, you ignorantly said I knew nothing of pumps.

You talked about pumps and parameters that a proposal reader (your words) would
read. This does NOT give opportunity to think "driver trip".

Post by Marvin Sebourn
But then you said, effectively, that engineers don't read proposals. Not true.

Never said that. As a specification engineer and technical buyer of pumps, I
had to know something about pumps and read proposals.

Post by Marvin Sebourn
And you said that I wasn't a tech. Not true. In truth (Danger-Duke, an alien concept to you) I started my job as an Electronic Technician, was promoted to an Electronic Technician class A Supervisor, and on to a Station, then District Superintendent, and on to a spell in the compressor services group, where I performed engine and compressor analysis, Air Quality Emissions Tests for state and federal standards, wrote sections of our technical operations manual, mostly electronics and large engine crankshaft alignment, tested for Op-Qual., etc.

Hey, your words was "read proposal documents" for general interest, or something
to that effect.

Post by Marvin Sebourn
And all you have for your CV is one failed pump, that you could have started using a simple procedure.

Slow starts and block valves could take centuries to fill the tank.

Post by Marvin Sebourn
http://www.travaini.nl/Manual/Centrifugaal/ManualeCentrifughe.pdf

Why do you guys continue to modify the arrangement. General application pumps
are always valved in. I keep telling you the arrangement is simplified and at
every attempt, you want to change everything. The problem is simply driver
trip, but you never got it. I gave you a change to use the equation, and you
still avoided response.

So I gave you the answer anyway.

the dukester, American-American


*****
The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine
and a good cigar.

G.K. Chesterton
*****

[unknown]

Post by duke
As a specification engineer and technical buyer of pumps, I
had to know something about pumps and read proposals.

There you go again, claiming to be an engineer when
you're not.

Did you tell that lie on your resume?
Did you tell your ex-customer that too?

[Ted]

Post by unknown

Post by duke
As a specification engineer and technical buyer of pumps, I
had to know something about pumps and read proposals.

There you go again, claiming to be an engineer when
you're not.
Did you tell that lie on your resume?
Did you tell your ex-customer that too?

Of course he did. He was a fraud throughout his career.

[duke]

Post by unknown

Post by duke
As a specification engineer and technical buyer of pumps, I
had to know something about pumps and read proposals.

There you go again, claiming to be an engineer when
you're not.

Your 126 hp driver is a failure.

Post by unknown
Did you tell that lie on your resume?
Did you tell your ex-customer that too?

the dukester, American-American


*****
The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine
and a good cigar.

G.K. Chesterton
*****

[Marvin Sebourn]

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by duke

Post by Ted

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump will not work
is because Duke thought he had designed it to fail, and thinks he did.

Poor crybaby. Proposal readers don't know how pumps work.
the dukester, American-American

Marvin's proved his knowledge and competence with pumps while you proved
you're the one who doesn't know how pumps work.

I gather you haven't been evaluating the frustration marvin feels about how
little he understands about pumps.

Be consistent, Duke. At one time you said I was 98% of the way to the answer.

You were. I told you that if you could handle the equation, I would openly
provide the final answer I was looking for (driver trip) which I doubt that many
people understood that.

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Earlier, before I had spoken to the problem, you ignorantly said I knew nothing of pumps.

You talked about pumps and parameters that a proposal reader (your words) would
read. This does NOT give opportunity to think "driver trip".

Post by Marvin Sebourn
But then you said, effectively, that engineers don't read proposals. Not true.

Never said that. As a specification engineer and technical buyer of pumps, I
had to know something about pumps and read proposals.

Post by Marvin Sebourn
And you said that I wasn't a tech. Not true. In truth (Danger-Duke, an alien concept to you) I started my job as an Electronic Technician, was promoted to an Electronic Technician class A Supervisor, and on to a Station, then District Superintendent, and on to a spell in the compressor services group, where I performed engine and compressor analysis, Air Quality Emissions Tests for state and federal standards, wrote sections of our technical operations manual, mostly electronics and large engine crankshaft alignment, tested for Op-Qual., etc.

Hey, your words was "read proposal documents" for general interest, or something
to that effect.

Post by Marvin Sebourn
And all you have for your CV is one failed pump, that you could have started using a simple procedure.

Slow starts and block valves could take centuries to fill the tank.

Post by Marvin Sebourn
http://www.travaini.nl/Manual/Centrifugaal/ManualeCentrifughe.pdf

Why do you guys continue to modify the arrangement. General application pumps
are always valved in. I keep telling you the arrangement is simplified and at
every attempt, you want to change everything. The problem is simply driver
trip, but you never got it. I gave you a change to use the equation, and you
still avoided response.
So I gave you the answer anyway.
the dukester, American-American
*****
The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine
and a good cigar.
G.K. Chesterton
*****

So many lies, so little time.

You must do this to attract attention. But at what price to your dignity? Are you this lonely? It doesn't seem rational.

At least ten lies.

97% snip of my post.

Of course that is handy for you because it shows many pump manufacturers and sealers DO use pinching the discharge valve.

No mention of check valves in the system, which can in several cases be mandatory.

Your ignorance of throttling discharge at start, in spite of your being shown that four of the first four technical pump sites I visited specify that discharge valves should be pinched on startup with zero head.

Your foolish claim that it would take millions (?) of years to fill the tank, which ignorantly disregards that the only real concern is to fill the discharge pipe to where the pump can be operated within the normal operating range. Somehow you imagine that the tank must be filled under less than ideal conditions, where only a portion of the filling pipe is filled under ideal conditions.

You foolishly meant to try and teach us something about pumps, and gloat.

But all you do is bloat.

Don't bother replying. Your answers grow more and more strange and removed rom reality.

TINPPOADP

Marvin Sebourn
***@aol.com

[duke]

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn
http://www.travaini.nl/Manual/Centrifugaal/ManualeCentrifughe.pdf

Why do you guys continue to modify the arrangement. General application pumps
are always valved in. I keep telling you the arrangement is simplified and at
every attempt, you want to change everything. The problem is simply driver
trip, but you never got it. I gave you a change to use the equation, and you
still avoided response.
So I gave you the answer anyway.

So many lies, so little time.
You must do this to attract attention. But at what price to your dignity? Are you this lonely? It doesn't seem rational.
At least ten lies.
97% snip of my post.

It was of no value.

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Of course that is handy for you because it shows many pump manufacturers and sealers DO use pinching the discharge valve.

Especially starting up.

Post by Marvin Sebourn
No mention of check valves in the system, which can in several cases be mandatory.
Your ignorance of throttling discharge at start, in spite of your being shown that four of the first four technical pump sites I visited specify that discharge valves should be pinched on startup with zero head.

Standard startup procedures.

However, it's clear you didn't understand that the tdh was established for **max
tank height**. You "pinch" the discharge and you trickle flow the pump means
it would take a few generations before sufficient back pressure would be
established for the pump to operate correctly.

Of course, a "pinch" is like an orifice. Get it yet?

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Your foolish claim that it would take millions (?) of years to fill the tank, which ignorantly disregards that the only real concern is to fill the discharge pipe to where the pump can be operated within the normal operating range. Somehow you imagine that the tank must be filled under less than ideal conditions, where only a portion of the filling pipe is filled under ideal conditions.

You're still trying to bullshit me, and instead bullshitting yourself. Neither
you nor peanut nor teddie or atl has ever come close to correcting the
situation.

The pump as installed would NEVER work. And you never figured it out, mr.
proposal reader.

Post by Marvin Sebourn
You foolishly meant to try and teach us something about pumps, and gloat.
But all you do is bloat.

And I am gloating and gloating and gloating.

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Don't bother replying. Your answers grow more and more strange and removed rom reality.

Heeheehee.

the dukester, American-American


*****
The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine
and a good cigar.

G.K. Chesterton
*****

[Marvin Sebourn]

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump will not work is because Duke thought he had designed it to fail, and thinks he did.

Poor crybaby.

Duke: >Proposal readers don't know how pumps work.

How foolish. How stupid. How ignorant. But that's Duke.

Engineers read and evaluate proposals.

My point regarding reading proposals is that I was familiar with the structure of the proposals. Precise and complete. No hiding of necessary information. I know how engineers, that is, real engineers approach a problem. Not like your silly

"Look at me, I'm a graduate engineer!...

My name is Duckamandias, Engineer of Engineers, look upon my works ye mighty, and despair!"

And all around was the wreck of broken pumps and the stuff of lies.

More lies, no surprise. Duke, show that no proposal reader understands a proposal, particularly in their field of education and experience. And don't forget, many are engineers.

TINPPOADP

Marvin Sebourn

Post by duke
the dukester, American-American
*****
The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine
and a good cigar.
G.K. Chesterton
*****

[Atlatl Axolotl]

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump will not work is because Duke thought he had designed it to fail, and thinks he did.

Poor crybaby.

Duke: >Proposal readers don't know how pumps work.
How foolish. How stupid. How ignorant. But that's Duke.
Engineers read and evaluate proposals.
My point regarding reading proposals is that I was familiar with the structure of the proposals. Precise and complete. No hiding of necessary information. I know how engineers, that is, real engineers approach a problem. Not like your silly
"Look at me, I'm a graduate engineer!...

.> My name is Duckamandias, Engineer of Engineers, look upon my works ye mighty, and despair!"
.> And all around was the wreck of broken pumps and the stuff of lies.

I'm predicting yet another <WHOOOSH> here.

aa

Post by Marvin Sebourn
More lies, no surprise. Duke, show that no proposal reader understands a proposal, particularly in their field of education and experience. And don't forget, many are engineers.
TINPPOADP
Marvin Sebourn

Post by duke
the dukester, American-American
*****
The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine
and a good cigar.
G.K. Chesterton
*****

[Don Martin]

On Sun, 15 Oct 2017 16:42:56 -0700 (PDT), Atlatl Axolotl

Post by Atlatl Axolotl

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump will not work is because Duke thought he had designed it to fail, and thinks he did.

Poor crybaby.

Duke: >Proposal readers don't know how pumps work.
How foolish. How stupid. How ignorant. But that's Duke.
Engineers read and evaluate proposals.
My point regarding reading proposals is that I was familiar with the structure of the proposals. Precise and complete. No hiding of necessary information. I know how engineers, that is, real engineers approach a problem. Not like your silly
"Look at me, I'm a graduate engineer!...

.> My name is Duckamandias, Engineer of Engineers, look upon my works ye mighty, and despair!"
.> And all around was the wreck of broken pumps and the stuff of lies.
I'm predicting yet another <WHOOOSH> here.

Just because Marvin is playing a Shelley game?

[Atlatl Axolotl]

Post by Don Martin
On Sun, 15 Oct 2017 16:42:56 -0700 (PDT), Atlatl Axolotl

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump will not work is because Duke thought he had designed it to fail, and thinks he did.

Poor crybaby.

Duke: >Proposal readers don't know how pumps work.
How foolish. How stupid. How ignorant. But that's Duke.
Engineers read and evaluate proposals.
My point regarding reading proposals is that I was familiar with the structure of the proposals. Precise and complete. No hiding of necessary information. I know how engineers, that is, real engineers approach a problem. Not like your silly
"Look at me, I'm a graduate engineer!...

.> >.> My name is Duckamandias, Engineer of Engineers, look upon my works ye mighty, and despair!"
.> >.> And all around was the wreck of broken pumps and the stuff of lies.
.> >I'm predicting yet another <WHOOOSH> here.
.> Just because Marvin is playing a Shelley game?

Whoosh and re-whoosh.


AA

Post by Don Martin
--
aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
Je pense, donc je suis Charlie.

[Marvin Sebourn]

Post by Atlatl Axolotl

Post by Don Martin
On Sun, 15 Oct 2017 16:42:56 -0700 (PDT), Atlatl Axolotl

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump will not work is because Duke thought he had designed it to fail, and thinks he did.

Poor crybaby.

Duke: >Proposal readers don't know how pumps work.
How foolish. How stupid. How ignorant. But that's Duke.
Engineers read and evaluate proposals.
My point regarding reading proposals is that I was familiar with the structure of the proposals. Precise and complete. No hiding of necessary information. I know how engineers, that is, real engineers approach a problem. Not like your silly
"Look at me, I'm a graduate engineer!...

.> >.> My name is Duckamandias, Engineer of Engineers, look upon my works ye mighty, and despair!"
.> >.> And all around was the wreck of broken pumps and the stuff of lies.
.> >I'm predicting yet another <WHOOOSH> here.
.> Just because Marvin is playing a Shelley game?

AA

Post by Atlatl Axolotl
Whoosh and re-whoosh.

Could a re-whoosh (I like that, never heard before) also be considered a deja-whoosh, Atlatl? A deja-vu whoosh?

Marvin

Marvin Sebourn

Post by Atlatl Axolotl
AA

Post by Don Martin
--
aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
Je pense, donc je suis Charlie.

[Smiler]

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by Atlatl Axolotl

Post by Don Martin
On Sun, 15 Oct 2017 16:42:56 -0700 (PDT), Atlatl Axolotl

Post by Marvin Sebourn

On Sat, 14 Oct 2017 10:34:23 -0700 (PDT), Marvin Sebourn

Post by Marvin Sebourn
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump will
not work is because Duke thought he had designed it to fail,
and thinks he did.

Poor crybaby.

Duke: >Proposal readers don't know how pumps work.
How foolish. How stupid. How ignorant. But that's Duke.
Engineers read and evaluate proposals.
My point regarding reading proposals is that I was familiar with
the structure of the proposals. Precise and complete. No hiding of
necessary information. I know how engineers, that is, real
engineers approach a problem. Not like your silly
"Look at me, I'm a graduate engineer!...

.> >.> My name is Duckamandias, Engineer of Engineers, look upon my
works ye mighty, and despair!"
.> >.> And all around was the wreck of broken pumps and the stuff of lies.
.> >I'm predicting yet another <WHOOOSH> here.
.> Just because Marvin is playing a Shelley game?

AA

Post by Atlatl Axolotl
Whoosh and re-whoosh.

Could a re-whoosh (I like that, never heard before) also be considered a
deja-whoosh, Atlatl? A deja-vu whoosh?
Marvin

Is that whooshful thinking?

[Marvin Sebourn]

Post by Smiler

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by Atlatl Axolotl

Post by Don Martin
On Sun, 15 Oct 2017 16:42:56 -0700 (PDT), Atlatl Axolotl

Post by Marvin Sebourn

On Sat, 14 Oct 2017 10:34:23 -0700 (PDT), Marvin Sebourn

Post by Marvin Sebourn
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump will
not work is because Duke thought he had designed it to fail,
and thinks he did.

Poor crybaby.

Duke: >Proposal readers don't know how pumps work.
How foolish. How stupid. How ignorant. But that's Duke.
Engineers read and evaluate proposals.
My point regarding reading proposals is that I was familiar with
the structure of the proposals. Precise and complete. No hiding of
necessary information. I know how engineers, that is, real
engineers approach a problem. Not like your silly
"Look at me, I'm a graduate engineer!...

.> >.> My name is Duckamandias, Engineer of Engineers, look upon my
works ye mighty, and despair!"
.> >.> And all around was the wreck of broken pumps and the stuff of lies.
.> >I'm predicting yet another <WHOOOSH> here.
.> Just because Marvin is playing a Shelley game?

AA

Post by Atlatl Axolotl
Whoosh and re-whoosh.

Could a re-whoosh (I like that, never heard before) also be considered a
deja-whoosh, Atlatl? A deja-vu whoosh?
Marvin

Is that whooshful thinking?

When you whoosh upon a star...

Three whooshes

We whoosh you a Merry Christmas...

Marvin Sebourn

Post by Smiler
Smiler,
The godless one. a.a.# 2279
All gods are tailored to order. They're made to
exactly fit the prejudices of their believers.
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[Smiler]

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by Smiler

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by Atlatl Axolotl

Post by Don Martin
On Sun, 15 Oct 2017 16:42:56 -0700 (PDT), Atlatl Axolotl

Post by Marvin Sebourn

On Sat, 14 Oct 2017 10:34:23 -0700 (PDT), Marvin Sebourn

Post by Marvin Sebourn
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump
will not work is because Duke thought he had designed it to
fail, and thinks he did.

Poor crybaby.

Duke: >Proposal readers don't know how pumps work.
How foolish. How stupid. How ignorant. But that's Duke.
Engineers read and evaluate proposals.
My point regarding reading proposals is that I was familiar
with the structure of the proposals. Precise and complete. No
hiding of necessary information. I know how engineers, that is,
real engineers approach a problem. Not like your silly
"Look at me, I'm a graduate engineer!...

.> >.> My name is Duckamandias, Engineer of Engineers, look upon my
works ye mighty, and despair!"
.> >.> And all around was the wreck of broken pumps and the stuff of lies.
.> >I'm predicting yet another <WHOOOSH> here.
.> Just because Marvin is playing a Shelley game?

AA

Post by Atlatl Axolotl
Whoosh and re-whoosh.

Could a re-whoosh (I like that, never heard before) also be
considered a deja-whoosh, Atlatl? A deja-vu whoosh?
Marvin

Is that whooshful thinking?

When you whoosh upon a star...
Three whooshes
We whoosh you a Merry Christmas...

Whooshing well.

Whoosh you were here.

"Blow the candles out and make a whoosh."

[Marvin Sebourn]

Post by Atlatl Axolotl

Post by Don Martin
On Sun, 15 Oct 2017 16:42:56 -0700 (PDT), Atlatl Axolotl

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump will not work is because Duke thought he had designed it to fail, and thinks he did.

Poor crybaby.

Duke: >Proposal readers don't know how pumps work.
How foolish. How stupid. How ignorant. But that's Duke.
Engineers read and evaluate proposals.
My point regarding reading proposals is that I was familiar with the structure of the proposals. Precise and complete. No hiding of necessary information. I know how engineers, that is, real engineers approach a problem. Not like your silly
"Look at me, I'm a graduate engineer!...

.> >.> My name is Duckamandias, Engineer of Engineers, look upon my works ye mighty, and despair!"
.> >.> And all around was the wreck of broken pumps and the stuff of lies.
.> >I'm predicting yet another <WHOOOSH> here.
.> Just because Marvin is playing a Shelley game?
Whoosh and re-whoosh.

I think he refers to Percy B., AA.

Marvin Sebourn

Post by Atlatl Axolotl
AA

Post by Don Martin
--
aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
Je pense, donc je suis Charlie.

[TheRealMccoy]

Post by Marvin Sebourn
I think he refers to Percy B., AA.
Marvin Sebourn

okay perry mason

[Atlatl Axolotl]

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by Atlatl Axolotl

Post by Don Martin
On Sun, 15 Oct 2017 16:42:56 -0700 (PDT), Atlatl Axolotl

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump will not work is because Duke thought he had designed it to fail, and thinks he did.

Poor crybaby.

Duke: >Proposal readers don't know how pumps work.
How foolish. How stupid. How ignorant. But that's Duke.
Engineers read and evaluate proposals.
My point regarding reading proposals is that I was familiar with the structure of the proposals. Precise and complete. No hiding of necessary information. I know how engineers, that is, real engineers approach a problem. Not like your silly
"Look at me, I'm a graduate engineer!...

.> >.> My name is Duckamandias, Engineer of Engineers, look upon my works ye mighty, and despair!"
.> >.> And all around was the wreck of broken pumps and the stuff of lies.
.> >I'm predicting yet another <WHOOOSH> here.

.> > .> Just because Marvin is playing a Shelley game?
.> > Whoosh and re-whoosh.
.> I think he refers to Percy B., AA.

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Marvin Sebourn

Oh, he was. That's why I was saying that Earl will be a double whooshee now.


aa

[duke]

On Sun, 15 Oct 2017 16:42:56 -0700 (PDT), Atlatl Axolotl

Post by Atlatl Axolotl

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump will not work is because Duke thought he had designed it to fail, and thinks he did.

Poor crybaby.

Duke: >Proposal readers don't know how pumps work.
How foolish. How stupid. How ignorant. But that's Duke.
Engineers read and evaluate proposals.
My point regarding reading proposals is that I was familiar with the structure of the proposals. Precise and complete. No hiding of necessary information. I know how engineers, that is, real engineers approach a problem. Not like your silly
"Look at me, I'm a graduate engineer!...

.> My name is Duckamandias, Engineer of Engineers, look upon my works ye mighty, and despair!"
.> And all around was the wreck of broken pumps and the stuff of lies.
I'm predicting yet another <WHOOOSH> here.

Yep, right over your <POINTED HEAD>.

the dukester, American-American


*****
The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine
and a good cigar.

G.K. Chesterton
*****

[Ted]

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump will not work
is because Duke thought he had designed it to fail, and thinks he did.

Poor crybaby.

Duke: >Proposal readers don't know how pumps work.
How foolish. How stupid. How ignorant. But that's Duke.

Typical Duke. It's the kind of stupid crap he often says.

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Engineers read and evaluate proposals.
My point regarding reading proposals is that I was familiar with the
structure of the proposals. Precise and complete. No hiding of necessary
information. I know how engineers, that is, real engineers approach a
problem. Not like your silly
"Look at me, I'm a graduate engineer!...
My name is Duckamandias, Engineer of Engineers, look upon my works ye mighty, and despair!"
And all around was the wreck of broken pumps and the stuff of lies.
More lies, no surprise. Duke, show that no proposal reader understands a
proposal, particularly in their field of education and experience. And
don't forget, many are engineers.
TINPPOADP
Marvin Sebourn

[duke]

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by duke

Post by Marvin Sebourn
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump will not work is because Duke thought he had designed it to fail, and thinks he did.

Poor crybaby.

Duke: >Proposal readers don't know how pumps work.
How foolish. How stupid. How ignorant. But that's Duke.

You didn't know the driver would trip. That wouldn't be discussed typically in
a proposal.

Post by Marvin Sebourn
Engineers read and evaluate proposals.

Yep. But best offering is the key at proposal evaluations.

Post by Marvin Sebourn
My point regarding reading proposals is that I was familiar with the structure of the proposals. Precise and complete. No hiding of necessary information. I know how engineers, that is, real engineers approach a problem. Not like your silly

Structure?? There's nothing hidden re driver trips. All drivers have excess
condition trips. It would be provided during driver requirements review and not
proposal evaluation.

Post by Marvin Sebourn
"Look at me, I'm a graduate engineer!...
My name is Duckamandias, Engineer of Engineers, look upon my works ye mighty, and despair!"
And all around was the wreck of broken pumps and the stuff of lies.

How about that. Never had a pump failure.

Post by Marvin Sebourn
More lies, no surprise. Duke, show that no proposal reader understands a proposal, particularly in their field of education and experience. And don't forget, many are engineers.
TINPPOADP

What a bunch of uneducated crybabies.

the dukester, American-American


*****
The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine
and a good cigar.

G.K. Chesterton
*****

[v***@gmail.com]

Post by Marvin Sebourn
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump will not work is because Duke thought he had designed it to fail, and thinks he did.
At its base there is only a Duke problem, with Duke trying to set up a situation where he is gloriously right, and his opponents are obviously wrong, and ignorant. But Duke fails to do this.
The “problem” is not that the pump supposedly will not work-that has not been determined-but that Duke, in a rush to prove others wrong, carelessly set up a situation where in his mind the pump would not operate. But in the real world, that is not necessarily so.
Duke refused to make any detail of his pump system design known, including information about the piping, the prime mover, or anything the piping valves. And information was requested several times. Yet he hid that information.
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric motor as prime mover, the motor controls can be designed to soft-start the motor, and avoid over-current. This can be done in more than one way and is quite common. I believe AA or Ted mentioned using a synchronous motor with a variable frequency drive, VFD. Duke appears ignorant of motor starters and their function, which is to reduce starting loads on electric motors. This is a grievous oversight.
Duke neglected to say that on start-up, even with a single speed electric motor, that the pump could be started with the discharge valve partially closed to control the load on the electric motor, and avoid exceeding the maximum current usage. It is not uncommon to do this. It would result in a successful start. Even in Duke’s deliberately vague system.
Duke also gives his “I know, you don’t, “tee hee hee” boast by not specifying the driver or prime mover in the original problem, yet magically comes up with-voila-an electric motor as a driver. This is the height of deviousness and/or ignorance. Why would a graduate engineer select only an electric motor, and not consider other prime movers, when no detail of the problem says the pump must be powered by an electric motor? Why-because this fits his desired mode where he thinks only he can be right, and all others will be wrong.
Duke promised no tricks. I cautioned that Duke might result to that mode, saying there would be a factor where the pump could not operate. He did just that. Trucky-Ducky, Tricky Dukey.
Duke refused to consider a pump driver or prime mover of another sort. Are there any? What about a pump driven by an internal combustion engine fueled by diesel, gasoline, or natural gas? Why not drive the pump by a turbine, either a gas turbine or a steam turbine? How about driving the pump by a hydraulic motor, or an air motor? The answer is because Duke is dedicated to prove others wrong and for Duke to appear knowledgeable. In his duplicity, mixed with a generous dollop of ignorance, Duke later specified only an electric motor as driver, after the fact, but not mentioning that in his original package, and refusing to detail it. So Duke has modified his original unspecified design.
Duke claims to be a graduate mechanical engineer. His pump won’t work.
I was (loosely described) a technician. My pumps worked. Over one hundred pumps for over a third of a century.
The point here is that there is not some technical detail that Duke knew and we did not know. The point is that Duke dishonestly set up the problem to fail, refusing to give necessary details of his pump installation, and in ignorance or deceit showed no awareness of any other prime mover or driver type, or motor starter, or discharge restriction of the pump during start-up.
Duke's goal was to be considered all-wise, and the rest of us ignorant and foolish. Maybe gay. But Duke didn't consider the problem carefully enough.
So to return to Duke’s original question, where an honest and knowledgeable Duke would have asked: “How long will it take for a pump to fill the tank, if the pump won’t work?”
If Duke makes some tippy-toe, tap dancing reply to this post, for my reply you only need re-read this post of mine.
Special thanks to Ted and Atlatl for insights.
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
Marvin Sebourn

That is the most convoluted bunch of amateur Psychology bullshit I have seen in years. You are a FRAUD.

[Ted]

Post by Marvin Sebourn
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump will not work
is because Duke thought he had designed it to fail, and thinks he did.
At its base there is only a Duke problem, with Duke trying to set up a
situation where he is gloriously right, and his opponents are obviously
wrong, and ignorant. But Duke fails to do this.
The “problem” is not that the pump supposedly will not work-that has not
been determined-but that Duke, in a rush to prove others wrong,
carelessly set up a situation where in his mind the pump would not
operate. But in the real world, that is not necessarily so.
Duke refused to make any detail of his pump system design known,
including information about the piping, the prime mover, or anything the
piping valves. And information was requested several times. Yet he hid that information.
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric motor as prime
mover, the motor controls can be designed to soft-start the motor, and
avoid over-current. This can be done in more than one way and is quite
common. I believe AA or Ted mentioned using a synchronous motor with a
variable frequency drive, VFD. Duke appears ignorant of motor starters
and their function, which is to reduce starting loads on electric
motors. This is a grievous oversight.
Duke neglected to say that on start-up, even with a single speed
electric motor, that the pump could be started with the discharge valve
partially closed to control the load on the electric motor, and avoid
exceeding the maximum current usage. It is not uncommon to do this. It
would result in a successful start. Even in Duke’s deliberately vague system.
Duke also gives his “I know, you don’t, “tee hee hee” boast by not
specifying the driver or prime mover in the original problem, yet
magically comes up with-voila-an electric motor as a driver. This is the
height of deviousness and/or ignorance. Why would a graduate engineer
select only an electric motor, and not consider other prime movers, when
no detail of the problem says the pump must be powered by an electric
motor? Why-because this fits his desired mode where he thinks only he
can be right, and all others will be wrong.
Duke promised no tricks. I cautioned that Duke might result to that
mode, saying there would be a factor where the pump could not operate.
He did just that. Trucky-Ducky, Tricky Dukey.
Duke refused to consider a pump driver or prime mover of another sort.
Are there any? What about a pump driven by an internal combustion engine
fueled by diesel, gasoline, or natural gas? Why not drive the pump by a
turbine, either a gas turbine or a steam turbine? How about driving the
pump by a hydraulic motor, or an air motor? The answer is because Duke
is dedicated to prove others wrong and for Duke to appear knowledgeable.
In his duplicity, mixed with a generous dollop of ignorance, Duke later
specified only an electric motor as driver, after the fact, but not
mentioning that in his original package, and refusing to detail it. So
Duke has modified his original unspecified design.
Duke claims to be a graduate mechanical engineer. His pump won’t work.
I was (loosely described) a technician. My pumps worked. Over one
hundred pumps for over a third of a century.
The point here is that there is not some technical detail that Duke knew
and we did not know. The point is that Duke dishonestly set up the
problem to fail, refusing to give necessary details of his pump
installation, and in ignorance or deceit showed no awareness of any
other prime mover or driver type, or motor starter, or discharge
restriction of the pump during start-up.
Duke's goal was to be considered all-wise, and the rest of us ignorant
and foolish. Maybe gay. But Duke didn't consider the problem carefully enough.
So to return to Duke’s original question, where an honest and
knowledgeable Duke would have asked: “How long will it take for a pump
to fill the tank, if the pump won’t work?”
If Duke makes some tippy-toe, tap dancing reply to this post, for my
reply you only need re-read this post of mine.
Special thanks to Ted and Atlatl for insights.
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
Marvin Sebourn

I just ate the most convoluted bunch of shit I have eaten in years. I am a SHIT-EATER.

Ewww! You're disgusting, ArtyJoe! Keep it to yourself!

[v***@gmail.com]

Post by Ted

Post by Marvin Sebourn
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump will not work
is because Duke thought he had designed it to fail, and thinks he did.
At its base there is only a Duke problem, with Duke trying to set up a
situation where he is gloriously right, and his opponents are obviously
wrong, and ignorant. But Duke fails to do this.
The “problem” is not that the pump supposedly will not work-that has not
been determined-but that Duke, in a rush to prove others wrong,
carelessly set up a situation where in his mind the pump would not
operate. But in the real world, that is not necessarily so.
Duke refused to make any detail of his pump system design known,
including information about the piping, the prime mover, or anything the
piping valves. And information was requested several times. Yet he hid that information.
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric motor as prime
mover, the motor controls can be designed to soft-start the motor, and
avoid over-current. This can be done in more than one way and is quite
common. I believe AA or Ted mentioned using a synchronous motor with a
variable frequency drive, VFD. Duke appears ignorant of motor starters
and their function, which is to reduce starting loads on electric
motors. This is a grievous oversight.
Duke neglected to say that on start-up, even with a single speed
electric motor, that the pump could be started with the discharge valve
partially closed to control the load on the electric motor, and avoid
exceeding the maximum current usage. It is not uncommon to do this. It
would result in a successful start. Even in Duke’s deliberately vague system.
Duke also gives his “I know, you don’t, “tee hee hee” boast by not
specifying the driver or prime mover in the original problem, yet
magically comes up with-voila-an electric motor as a driver. This is the
height of deviousness and/or ignorance. Why would a graduate engineer
select only an electric motor, and not consider other prime movers, when
no detail of the problem says the pump must be powered by an electric
motor? Why-because this fits his desired mode where he thinks only he
can be right, and all others will be wrong.
Duke promised no tricks. I cautioned that Duke might result to that
mode, saying there would be a factor where the pump could not operate.
He did just that. Trucky-Ducky, Tricky Dukey.
Duke refused to consider a pump driver or prime mover of another sort.
Are there any? What about a pump driven by an internal combustion engine
fueled by diesel, gasoline, or natural gas? Why not drive the pump by a
turbine, either a gas turbine or a steam turbine? How about driving the
pump by a hydraulic motor, or an air motor? The answer is because Duke
is dedicated to prove others wrong and for Duke to appear knowledgeable.
In his duplicity, mixed with a generous dollop of ignorance, Duke later
specified only an electric motor as driver, after the fact, but not
mentioning that in his original package, and refusing to detail it. So
Duke has modified his original unspecified design.
Duke claims to be a graduate mechanical engineer. His pump won’t work.
I was (loosely described) a technician. My pumps worked. Over one
hundred pumps for over a third of a century.
The point here is that there is not some technical detail that Duke knew
and we did not know. The point is that Duke dishonestly set up the
problem to fail, refusing to give necessary details of his pump
installation, and in ignorance or deceit showed no awareness of any
other prime mover or driver type, or motor starter, or discharge
restriction of the pump during start-up.
Duke's goal was to be considered all-wise, and the rest of us ignorant
and foolish. Maybe gay. But Duke didn't consider the problem carefully enough.
So to return to Duke’s original question, where an honest and
knowledgeable Duke would have asked: “How long will it take for a pump
to fill the tank, if the pump won’t work?”
If Duke makes some tippy-toe, tap dancing reply to this post, for my
reply you only need re-read this post of mine.
Special thanks to Ted and Atlatl for insights.
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
Marvin Sebourn

I just ate the most convoluted bunch of shit I have eaten in years. I am a SHIT-EATER.

Ewww! You're disgusting, ArtyJoe! Keep it to yourself!

FORGERY

[Ted]

Post by Ted

Post by Marvin Sebourn
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump will not work
is because Duke thought he had designed it to fail, and thinks he did.
At its base there is only a Duke problem, with Duke trying to set up a
situation where he is gloriously right, and his opponents are obviously
wrong, and ignorant. But Duke fails to do this.
The “problem” is not that the pump supposedly will not work-that has not
been determined-but that Duke, in a rush to prove others wrong,
carelessly set up a situation where in his mind the pump would not
operate. But in the real world, that is not necessarily so.
Duke refused to make any detail of his pump system design known,
including information about the piping, the prime mover, or anything the
piping valves. And information was requested several times. Yet he hid that information.
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric motor as prime
mover, the motor controls can be designed to soft-start the motor, and
avoid over-current. This can be done in more than one way and is quite
common. I believe AA or Ted mentioned using a synchronous motor with a
variable frequency drive, VFD. Duke appears ignorant of motor starters
and their function, which is to reduce starting loads on electric
motors. This is a grievous oversight.
Duke neglected to say that on start-up, even with a single speed
electric motor, that the pump could be started with the discharge valve
partially closed to control the load on the electric motor, and avoid
exceeding the maximum current usage. It is not uncommon to do this. It
would result in a successful start. Even in Duke’s deliberately vague system.
Duke also gives his “I know, you don’t, “tee hee hee” boast by not
specifying the driver or prime mover in the original problem, yet
magically comes up with-voila-an electric motor as a driver. This is the
height of deviousness and/or ignorance. Why would a graduate engineer
select only an electric motor, and not consider other prime movers, when
no detail of the problem says the pump must be powered by an electric
motor? Why-because this fits his desired mode where he thinks only he
can be right, and all others will be wrong.
Duke promised no tricks. I cautioned that Duke might result to that
mode, saying there would be a factor where the pump could not operate.
He did just that. Trucky-Ducky, Tricky Dukey.
Duke refused to consider a pump driver or prime mover of another sort.
Are there any? What about a pump driven by an internal combustion engine
fueled by diesel, gasoline, or natural gas? Why not drive the pump by a
turbine, either a gas turbine or a steam turbine? How about driving the
pump by a hydraulic motor, or an air motor? The answer is because Duke
is dedicated to prove others wrong and for Duke to appear knowledgeable.
In his duplicity, mixed with a generous dollop of ignorance, Duke later
specified only an electric motor as driver, after the fact, but not
mentioning that in his original package, and refusing to detail it. So
Duke has modified his original unspecified design.
Duke claims to be a graduate mechanical engineer. His pump won’t work.
I was (loosely described) a technician. My pumps worked. Over one
hundred pumps for over a third of a century.
The point here is that there is not some technical detail that Duke knew
and we did not know. The point is that Duke dishonestly set up the
problem to fail, refusing to give necessary details of his pump
installation, and in ignorance or deceit showed no awareness of any
other prime mover or driver type, or motor starter, or discharge
restriction of the pump during start-up.
Duke's goal was to be considered all-wise, and the rest of us ignorant
and foolish. Maybe gay. But Duke didn't consider the problem carefully enough.
So to return to Duke’s original question, where an honest and
knowledgeable Duke would have asked: “How long will it take for a pump
to fill the tank, if the pump won’t work?”
If Duke makes some tippy-toe, tap dancing reply to this post, for my
reply you only need re-read this post of mine.
Special thanks to Ted and Atlatl for insights.
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
Marvin Sebourn

I just ate the most convoluted bunch of shit I have eaten in years. I am a SHIT-EATER.

Ewww! You're disgusting, ArtyJoe! Keep it to yourself!

YES I EAT SHIT

Ewww! :(

[Marvin Sebourn]

Post by v***@gmail.com

Post by Marvin Sebourn
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump will not work is because Duke thought he had designed it to fail, and thinks he did.
At its base there is only a Duke problem, with Duke trying to set up a situation where he is gloriously right, and his opponents are obviously wrong, and ignorant. But Duke fails to do this.
The “problem” is not that the pump supposedly will not work-that has not been determined-but that Duke, in a rush to prove others wrong, carelessly set up a situation where in his mind the pump would not operate. But in the real world, that is not necessarily so.
Duke refused to make any detail of his pump system design known, including information about the piping, the prime mover, or anything the piping valves. And information was requested several times. Yet he hid that information.
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric motor as prime mover, the motor controls can be designed to soft-start the motor, and avoid over-current. This can be done in more than one way and is quite common. I believe AA or Ted mentioned using a synchronous motor with a variable frequency drive, VFD. Duke appears ignorant of motor starters and their function, which is to reduce starting loads on electric motors. This is a grievous oversight.
Duke neglected to say that on start-up, even with a single speed electric motor, that the pump could be started with the discharge valve partially closed to control the load on the electric motor, and avoid exceeding the maximum current usage. It is not uncommon to do this. It would result in a successful start. Even in Duke’s deliberately vague system.
Duke also gives his “I know, you don’t, “tee hee hee” boast by not specifying the driver or prime mover in the original problem, yet magically comes up with-voila-an electric motor as a driver. This is the height of deviousness and/or ignorance. Why would a graduate engineer select only an electric motor, and not consider other prime movers, when no detail of the problem says the pump must be powered by an electric motor? Why-because this fits his desired mode where he thinks only he can be right, and all others will be wrong.
Duke promised no tricks. I cautioned that Duke might result to that mode, saying there would be a factor where the pump could not operate. He did just that. Trucky-Ducky, Tricky Dukey.
Duke refused to consider a pump driver or prime mover of another sort. Are there any? What about a pump driven by an internal combustion engine fueled by diesel, gasoline, or natural gas? Why not drive the pump by a turbine, either a gas turbine or a steam turbine? How about driving the pump by a hydraulic motor, or an air motor? The answer is because Duke is dedicated to prove others wrong and for Duke to appear knowledgeable. In his duplicity, mixed with a generous dollop of ignorance, Duke later specified only an electric motor as driver, after the fact, but not mentioning that in his original package, and refusing to detail it. So Duke has modified his original unspecified design.
Duke claims to be a graduate mechanical engineer. His pump won’t work.
I was (loosely described) a technician. My pumps worked. Over one hundred pumps for over a third of a century.
The point here is that there is not some technical detail that Duke knew and we did not know. The point is that Duke dishonestly set up the problem to fail, refusing to give necessary details of his pump installation, and in ignorance or deceit showed no awareness of any other prime mover or driver type, or motor starter, or discharge restriction of the pump during start-up.
Duke's goal was to be considered all-wise, and the rest of us ignorant and foolish. Maybe gay. But Duke didn't consider the problem carefully enough.
So to return to Duke’s original question, where an honest and knowledgeable Duke would have asked: “How long will it take for a pump to fill the tank, if the pump won’t work?”
If Duke makes some tippy-toe, tap dancing reply to this post, for my reply you only need re-read this post of mine.
Special thanks to Ted and Atlatl for insights.
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
Marvin Sebourn

That is the most convoluted bunch of amateur Psychology bullshit I have seen in years. You are a FRAUD.

Dear Art-so nice to hear from you again. We-at least I-appreciate your effort to grace and uplift this newsgroup with your wit and wisdom. I hope you are doing well.

Please exercise your normal and customary forbearance here in making decisions and commenting, but concerning your claim of "amateur Psychology bullshit", I wish to point out to the fact that the material you commented on was not an evaluation of what some loosely term mental health, specifically Dukes, but only contained supported comments bearing upon Duke's professional competence, i.e., that is his ability to function as a graduate mechanical engineer in the area he claims specific working experience in, to wit, as a ***Pump Engineer*** (note stars) with a degree in Mechanical Engineering.

In spite of this oversight of yours, we look forward to hearing from you again, as we value your insightful, well-reasoned, and tempered critiques.

With a warm handshake,
Marvin

Marvin Sebourn
***@aol.com

[unknown]

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by v***@gmail.com

Post by Marvin Sebourn
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump will not work is because Duke thought he had designed it to fail, and thinks he did.
At its base there is only a Duke problem, with Duke trying to set up a situation where he is gloriously right, and his opponents are obviously wrong, and ignorant. But Duke fails to do this.
The “problem” is not that the pump supposedly will not work-that has not been determined-but that Duke, in a rush to prove others wrong, carelessly set up a situation where in his mind the pump would not operate. But in the real world, that is not necessarily so.
Duke refused to make any detail of his pump system design known, including information about the piping, the prime mover, or anything the piping valves. And information was requested several times. Yet he hid that information.
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric motor as prime mover, the motor controls can be designed to soft-start the motor, and avoid over-current. This can be done in more than one way and is quite common. I believe AA or Ted mentioned using a synchronous motor with a variable frequency drive, VFD. Duke appears ignorant of motor starters and their function, which is to reduce starting loads on electric motors. This is a grievous oversight.
Duke neglected to say that on start-up, even with a single speed electric motor, that the pump could be started with the discharge valve partially closed to control the load on the electric motor, and avoid exceeding the maximum current usage. It is not uncommon to do this. It would result in a successful start. Even in Duke’s deliberately vague system.
Duke also gives his “I know, you don’t, “tee hee hee” boast by not specifying the driver or prime mover in the original problem, yet magically comes up with-voila-an electric motor as a driver. This is the height of deviousness and/or ignorance. Why would a graduate engineer select only an electric motor, and not consider other prime movers, when no detail of the problem says the pump must be powered by an electric motor? Why-because this fits his desired mode where he thinks only he can be right, and all others will be wrong.
Duke promised no tricks. I cautioned that Duke might result to that mode, saying there would be a factor where the pump could not operate. He did just that. Trucky-Ducky, Tricky Dukey.
Duke refused to consider a pump driver or prime mover of another sort. Are there any? What about a pump driven by an internal combustion engine fueled by diesel, gasoline, or natural gas? Why not drive the pump by a turbine, either a gas turbine or a steam turbine? How about driving the pump by a hydraulic motor, or an air motor? The answer is because Duke is dedicated to prove others wrong and for Duke to appear knowledgeable. In his duplicity, mixed with a generous dollop of ignorance, Duke later specified only an electric motor as driver, after the fact, but not mentioning that in his original package, and refusing to detail it. So Duke has modified his original unspecified design.
Duke claims to be a graduate mechanical engineer. His pump won’t work.
I was (loosely described) a technician. My pumps worked. Over one hundred pumps for over a third of a century.
The point here is that there is not some technical detail that Duke knew and we did not know. The point is that Duke dishonestly set up the problem to fail, refusing to give necessary details of his pump installation, and in ignorance or deceit showed no awareness of any other prime mover or driver type, or motor starter, or discharge restriction of the pump during start-up.
Duke's goal was to be considered all-wise, and the rest of us ignorant and foolish. Maybe gay. But Duke didn't consider the problem carefully enough.
So to return to Duke’s original question, where an honest and knowledgeable Duke would have asked: “How long will it take for a pump to fill the tank, if the pump won’t work?”
If Duke makes some tippy-toe, tap dancing reply to this post, for my reply you only need re-read this post of mine.
Special thanks to Ted and Atlatl for insights.
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
Marvin Sebourn

That is the most convoluted bunch of amateur Psychology bullshit I have seen in years. You are a FRAUD.

Dear Art-so nice to hear from you again. We-at least I-appreciate your effort to grace and uplift this newsgroup with your wit and wisdom. I hope you are doing well.
Please exercise your normal and customary forbearance here in making decisions and commenting, but concerning your claim of "amateur Psychology bullshit", I wish to point out to the fact that the material you commented on was not an evaluation of what some loosely term mental health, specifically Dukes, but only contained supported comments bearing upon Duke's professional competence, i.e., that is his ability to function as a graduate mechanical engineer in the area he claims specific working experience in, to wit, as a ***Pump Engineer*** (note stars) with a degree in Mechanical Engineering.
In spite of this oversight of yours, we look forward to hearing from you again, as we value your insightful, well-reasoned, and tempered critiques.
With a warm handshake,
Marvin
Marvin Sebourn

Artie, you've just been duked by a master.
I hope the honor is not lost upon you.

[Ted]

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by v***@gmail.com

Post by Marvin Sebourn
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump will not
work is because Duke thought he had designed it to fail, and thinks he did.
At its base there is only a Duke problem, with Duke trying to set up a
situation where he is gloriously right, and his opponents are
obviously wrong, and ignorant. But Duke fails to do this.
The “problem” is not that the pump supposedly will not work-that has
not been determined-but that Duke, in a rush to prove others wrong,
carelessly set up a situation where in his mind the pump would not
operate. But in the real world, that is not necessarily so.
Duke refused to make any detail of his pump system design known,
including information about the piping, the prime mover, or anything
the piping valves. And information was requested several times. Yet he
hid that information.
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric motor as prime
mover, the motor controls can be designed to soft-start the motor, and
avoid over-current. This can be done in more than one way and is quite
common. I believe AA or Ted mentioned using a synchronous motor with a
variable frequency drive, VFD. Duke appears ignorant of motor starters
and their function, which is to reduce starting loads on electric
motors. This is a grievous oversight.
Duke neglected to say that on start-up, even with a single speed
electric motor, that the pump could be started with the discharge
valve partially closed to control the load on the electric motor, and
avoid exceeding the maximum current usage. It is not uncommon to do
this. It would result in a successful start. Even in Duke’s deliberately vague system.
Duke also gives his “I know, you don’t, “tee hee hee” boast by not
specifying the driver or prime mover in the original problem, yet
magically comes up with-voila-an electric motor as a driver. This is
the height of deviousness and/or ignorance. Why would a graduate
engineer select only an electric motor, and not consider other prime
movers, when no detail of the problem says the pump must be powered by
an electric motor? Why-because this fits his desired mode where he
thinks only he can be right, and all others will be wrong.
Duke promised no tricks. I cautioned that Duke might result to that
mode, saying there would be a factor where the pump could not operate.
He did just that. Trucky-Ducky, Tricky Dukey.
Duke refused to consider a pump driver or prime mover of another sort.
Are there any? What about a pump driven by an internal combustion
engine fueled by diesel, gasoline, or natural gas? Why not drive the
pump by a turbine, either a gas turbine or a steam turbine? How about
driving the pump by a hydraulic motor, or an air motor? The answer is
because Duke is dedicated to prove others wrong and for Duke to appear
knowledgeable. In his duplicity, mixed with a generous dollop of
ignorance, Duke later specified only an electric motor as driver,
after the fact, but not mentioning that in his original package, and
refusing to detail it. So Duke has modified his original unspecified design.
Duke claims to be a graduate mechanical engineer. His pump won’t work.
I was (loosely described) a technician. My pumps worked. Over one
hundred pumps for over a third of a century.
The point here is that there is not some technical detail that Duke
knew and we did not know. The point is that Duke dishonestly set up
the problem to fail, refusing to give necessary details of his pump
installation, and in ignorance or deceit showed no awareness of any
other prime mover or driver type, or motor starter, or discharge
restriction of the pump during start-up.
Duke's goal was to be considered all-wise, and the rest of us ignorant
and foolish. Maybe gay. But Duke didn't consider the problem carefully enough.
So to return to Duke’s original question, where an honest and
knowledgeable Duke would have asked: “How long will it take for a pump
to fill the tank, if the pump won’t work?”
If Duke makes some tippy-toe, tap dancing reply to this post, for my
reply you only need re-read this post of mine.
Special thanks to Ted and Atlatl for insights.
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
Marvin Sebourn

That is the most convoluted bunch of amateur Psychology bullshit I have
seen in years. You are a FRAUD.

Dear Art-so nice to hear from you again. We-at least I-appreciate your
effort to grace and uplift this newsgroup with your wit and wisdom. I
hope you are doing well.
Please exercise your normal and customary forbearance here in making
decisions and commenting, but concerning your claim of "amateur
Psychology bullshit", I wish to point out to the fact that the material
you commented on was not an evaluation of what some loosely term mental
health, specifically Dukes, but only contained supported comments
bearing upon Duke's professional competence, i.e., that is his ability
to function as a graduate mechanical engineer in the area he claims
specific working experience in, to wit, as a ***Pump Engineer*** (note
stars) with a degree in Mechanical Engineering.
In spite of this oversight of yours, we look forward to hearing from you
again, as we value your insightful, well-reasoned, and tempered critiques.
With a warm handshake,
Marvin
Marvin Sebourn

Artie, you've just been duked by a master.
I hope the honor is not lost upon you.

Well stated. Marvin rox.

[duke]

Post by unknown

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by v***@gmail.com

Post by Marvin Sebourn
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump will not work is because Duke thought he had designed it to fail, and thinks he did.
At its base there is only a Duke problem, with Duke trying to set up a situation where he is gloriously right, and his opponents are obviously wrong, and ignorant. But Duke fails to do this.
The “problem” is not that the pump supposedly will not work-that has not been determined-but that Duke, in a rush to prove others wrong, carelessly set up a situation where in his mind the pump would not operate. But in the real world, that is not necessarily so.
Duke refused to make any detail of his pump system design known, including information about the piping, the prime mover, or anything the piping valves. And information was requested several times. Yet he hid that information.
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric motor as prime mover, the motor controls can be designed to soft-start the motor, and avoid over-current. This can be done in more than one way and is quite common. I believe AA or Ted mentioned using a synchronous motor with a variable frequency drive, VFD. Duke appears ignorant of motor starters and their function, which is to reduce starting loads on electric motors. This is a grievous oversight.
Duke neglected to say that on start-up, even with a single speed electric motor, that the pump could be started with the discharge valve partially closed to control the load on the electric motor, and avoid exceeding the maximum current usage. It is not uncommon to do this. It would result in a successful start. Even in Duke’s deliberately vague system.
Duke also gives his “I know, you don’t, “tee hee hee” boast by not specifying the driver or prime mover in the original problem, yet magically comes up with-voila-an electric motor as a driver. This is the height of deviousness and/or ignorance. Why would a graduate engineer select only an electric motor, and not consider other prime movers, when no detail of the problem says the pump must be powered by an electric motor? Why-because this fits his desired mode where he thinks only he can be right, and all others will be wrong.
Duke promised no tricks. I cautioned that Duke might result to that mode, saying there would be a factor where the pump could not operate. He did just that. Trucky-Ducky, Tricky Dukey.
Duke refused to consider a pump driver or prime mover of another sort. Are there any? What about a pump driven by an internal combustion engine fueled by diesel, gasoline, or natural gas? Why not drive the pump by a turbine, either a gas turbine or a steam turbine? How about driving the pump by a hydraulic motor, or an air motor? The answer is because Duke is dedicated to prove others wrong and for Duke to appear knowledgeable. In his duplicity, mixed with a generous dollop of ignorance, Duke later specified only an electric motor as driver, after the fact, but not mentioning that in his original package, and refusing to detail it. So Duke has modified his original unspecified design.
Duke claims to be a graduate mechanical engineer. His pump won’t work.
I was (loosely described) a technician. My pumps worked. Over one hundred pumps for over a third of a century.
The point here is that there is not some technical detail that Duke knew and we did not know. The point is that Duke dishonestly set up the problem to fail, refusing to give necessary details of his pump installation, and in ignorance or deceit showed no awareness of any other prime mover or driver type, or motor starter, or discharge restriction of the pump during start-up.
Duke's goal was to be considered all-wise, and the rest of us ignorant and foolish. Maybe gay. But Duke didn't consider the problem carefully enough.
So to return to Duke’s original question, where an honest and knowledgeable Duke would have asked: “How long will it take for a pump to fill the tank, if the pump won’t work?”
If Duke makes some tippy-toe, tap dancing reply to this post, for my reply you only need re-read this post of mine.
Special thanks to Ted and Atlatl for insights.
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
Marvin Sebourn

That is the most convoluted bunch of amateur Psychology bullshit I have seen in years. You are a FRAUD.

Dear Art-so nice to hear from you again. We-at least I-appreciate your effort to grace and uplift this newsgroup with your wit and wisdom. I hope you are doing well.
Please exercise your normal and customary forbearance here in making decisions and commenting, but concerning your claim of "amateur Psychology bullshit", I wish to point out to the fact that the material you commented on was not an evaluation of what some loosely term mental health, specifically Dukes, but only contained supported comments bearing upon Duke's professional competence, i.e., that is his ability to function as a graduate mechanical engineer in the area he claims specific working experience in, to wit, as a ***Pump Engineer*** (note stars) with a degree in Mechanical Engineering.
In spite of this oversight of yours, we look forward to hearing from you again, as we value your insightful, well-reasoned, and tempered critiques.
With a warm handshake,
Marvin
Marvin Sebourn

Artie, you've just been duked by a master.
I hope the honor is not lost upon you.

Haahaahaa.

the dukester, American-American


*****
The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine
and a good cigar.

G.K. Chesterton
*****

[Ted]

Post by Marvin Sebourn

Post by v***@gmail.com

Post by Marvin Sebourn
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump will not work
is because Duke thought he had designed it to fail, and thinks he did.
At its base there is only a Duke problem, with Duke trying to set up a
situation where he is gloriously right, and his opponents are obviously
wrong, and ignorant. But Duke fails to do this.
The “problem” is not that the pump supposedly will not work-that has
not been determined-but that Duke, in a rush to prove others wrong,
carelessly set up a situation where in his mind the pump would not
operate. But in the real world, that is not necessarily so.
Duke refused to make any detail of his pump system design known,
including information about the piping, the prime mover, or anything
the piping valves. And information was requested several times. Yet he
hid that information.
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric motor as prime
mover, the motor controls can be designed to soft-start the motor, and
avoid over-current. This can be done in more than one way and is quite
common. I believe AA or Ted mentioned using a synchronous motor with a
variable frequency drive, VFD. Duke appears ignorant of motor starters
and their function, which is to reduce starting loads on electric
motors. This is a grievous oversight.
Duke neglected to say that on start-up, even with a single speed
electric motor, that the pump could be started with the discharge valve
partially closed to control the load on the electric motor, and avoid
exceeding the maximum current usage. It is not uncommon to do this. It
would result in a successful start. Even in Duke’s deliberately vague system.
Duke also gives his “I know, you don’t, “tee hee hee” boast by not
specifying the driver or prime mover in the original problem, yet
magically comes up with-voila-an electric motor as a driver. This is
the height of deviousness and/or ignorance. Why would a graduate
engineer select only an electric motor, and not consider other prime
movers, when no detail of the problem says the pump must be powered by
an electric motor? Why-because this fits his desired mode where he
thinks only he can be right, and all others will be wrong.
Duke promised no tricks. I cautioned that Duke might result to that
mode, saying there would be a factor where the pump could not operate.
He did just that. Trucky-Ducky, Tricky Dukey.
Duke refused to consider a pump driver or prime mover of another sort.
Are there any? What about a pump driven by an internal combustion
engine fueled by diesel, gasoline, or natural gas? Why not drive the
pump by a turbine, either a gas turbine or a steam turbine? How about
driving the pump by a hydraulic motor, or an air motor? The answer is
because Duke is dedicated to prove others wrong and for Duke to appear
knowledgeable. In his duplicity, mixed with a generous dollop of
ignorance, Duke later specified only an electric motor as driver, after
the fact, but not mentioning that in his original package, and refusing
to detail it. So Duke has modified his original unspecified design.
Duke claims to be a graduate mechanical engineer. His pump won’t work.
I was (loosely described) a technician. My pumps worked. Over one
hundred pumps for over a third of a century.
The point here is that there is not some technical detail that Duke
knew and we did not know. The point is that Duke dishonestly set up the
problem to fail, refusing to give necessary details of his pump
installation, and in ignorance or deceit showed no awareness of any
other prime mover or driver type, or motor starter, or discharge
restriction of the pump during start-up.
Duke's goal was to be considered all-wise, and the rest of us ignorant
and foolish. Maybe gay. But Duke didn't consider the problem carefully enough.
So to return to Duke’s original question, where an honest and
knowledgeable Duke would have asked: “How long will it take for a pump
to fill the tank, if the pump won’t work?”
If Duke makes some tippy-toe, tap dancing reply to this post, for my
reply you only need re-read this post of mine.
Special thanks to Ted and Atlatl for insights.
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
Marvin Sebourn

That is the most convoluted bunch of amateur Psychology bullshit I have
seen in years. You are a FRAUD.

Dear Art-so nice to hear from you again. We-at least I-appreciate your
effort to grace and uplift this newsgroup with your wit and wisdom. I
hope you are doing well.
Please exercise your normal and customary forbearance here in making
decisions and commenting, but concerning your claim of "amateur
Psychology bullshit", I wish to point out to the fact that the material
you commented on was not an evaluation of what some loosely term mental
health, specifically Dukes, but only contained supported comments bearing
upon Duke's professional competence, i.e., that is his ability to
function as a graduate mechanical engineer in the area he claims specific
working experience in, to wit, as a ***Pump Engineer*** (note stars) with
a degree in Mechanical Engineering.
In spite of this oversight of yours, we look forward to hearing from you
again, as we value your insightful, well-reasoned, and tempered critiques.

And mostly because the silly bumbling clown can be hilarious. :)

Post by Marvin Sebourn
With a warm handshake,
Marvin
Marvin Sebourn

[duke]

Post by v***@gmail.com

Post by Marvin Sebourn
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
The only reason Duke can claim that his hypothetical pump will not work is because Duke thought he had designed it to fail, and thinks he did.
At its base there is only a Duke problem, with Duke trying to set up a situation where he is gloriously right, and his opponents are obviously wrong, and ignorant. But Duke fails to do this.
The “problem” is not that the pump supposedly will not work-that has not been determined-but that Duke, in a rush to prove others wrong, carelessly set up a situation where in his mind the pump would not operate. But in the real world, that is not necessarily so.
Duke refused to make any detail of his pump system design known, including information about the piping, the prime mover, or anything the piping valves. And information was requested several times. Yet he hid that information.
Duke refused to consider that if there is an electric motor as prime mover, the motor controls can be designed to soft-start the motor, and avoid over-current. This can be done in more than one way and is quite common. I believe AA or Ted mentioned using a synchronous motor with a variable frequency drive, VFD. Duke appears ignorant of motor starters and their function, which is to reduce starting loads on electric motors. This is a grievous oversight.
Duke neglected to say that on start-up, even with a single speed electric motor, that the pump could be started with the discharge valve partially closed to control the load on the electric motor, and avoid exceeding the maximum current usage. It is not uncommon to do this. It would result in a successful start. Even in Duke’s deliberately vague system.
Duke also gives his “I know, you don’t, “tee hee hee” boast by not specifying the driver or prime mover in the original problem, yet magically comes up with-voila-an electric motor as a driver. This is the height of deviousness and/or ignorance. Why would a graduate engineer select only an electric motor, and not consider other prime movers, when no detail of the problem says the pump must be powered by an electric motor? Why-because this fits his desired mode where he thinks only he can be right, and all others will be wrong.
Duke promised no tricks. I cautioned that Duke might result to that mode, saying there would be a factor where the pump could not operate. He did just that. Trucky-Ducky, Tricky Dukey.
Duke refused to consider a pump driver or prime mover of another sort. Are there any? What about a pump driven by an internal combustion engine fueled by diesel, gasoline, or natural gas? Why not drive the pump by a turbine, either a gas turbine or a steam turbine? How about driving the pump by a hydraulic motor, or an air motor? The answer is because Duke is dedicated to prove others wrong and for Duke to appear knowledgeable. In his duplicity, mixed with a generous dollop of ignorance, Duke later specified only an electric motor as driver, after the fact, but not mentioning that in his original package, and refusing to detail it. So Duke has modified his original unspecified design.
Duke claims to be a graduate mechanical engineer. His pump won’t work.
I was (loosely described) a technician. My pumps worked. Over one hundred pumps for over a third of a century.
The point here is that there is not some technical detail that Duke knew and we did not know. The point is that Duke dishonestly set up the problem to fail, refusing to give necessary details of his pump installation, and in ignorance or deceit showed no awareness of any other prime mover or driver type, or motor starter, or discharge restriction of the pump during start-up.
Duke's goal was to be considered all-wise, and the rest of us ignorant and foolish. Maybe gay. But Duke didn't consider the problem carefully enough.
So to return to Duke’s original question, where an honest and knowledgeable Duke would have asked: “How long will it take for a pump to fill the tank, if the pump won’t work?”
If Duke makes some tippy-toe, tap dancing reply to this post, for my reply you only need re-read this post of mine.
Special thanks to Ted and Atlatl for insights.
There is no pump problem, there is only a Duke problem.
Marvin Sebourn

That is the most convoluted bunch of amateur Psychology bullshit I have seen in years. You are a FRAUD.

Yep, these cry babies are really showing their butts now.

the dukester, American-American


*****
The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine
and a good cigar.

G.K. Chesterton
*****