Jump to content
Ventilation & Flow Simulation Forums

Nathan Wineinger

Members
  • Posts

    12
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Nathan Wineinger's Achievements

Apprentice

Apprentice (3/14)

  • Collaborator Rare
  • Conversation Starter
  • First Post
  • Week One Done
  • One Month Later

Recent Badges

  1. Just had a little follow up thought on this. If there was the following option located somewhere within the add record creation tool: [checkbox] link record area to station area [text box with cross sectional area shown] [Update Area button (link to height and width data entry tool) ] My thought with this was if the box is checked, the text box and Update Area button are greyed out because it just pulls the area from the station (station area could be shown in greyed out text box). If the box is not checked the text box is modifiable and the update area button is clickable. The default for this could be to have the box checked.
  2. If I create a new Jet Fan under Presets > Fans and I choose to "Enter as Velocity" under the drop down, the Outlet Velocity doesn't save correctly after clicking "Ok" at the bottom of the dialogue window. This only seems to happen the first time when I create the fan for instance. If the first time I create the fan I type in 4000 ft/min in this location (and type in other cell values including: Diameter, absorbed power, fan to ceiling, air density, and give it a fan name and type in some notes) click OK, if I go back into the fan, the Outlet velocity will now say 3800 ft/min. If I change 3800 back to 4000 again and click OK, this seems to fix the problem as it always shows the correct velocity thereafter. It seems I always have to enter in the velocity twice to get the right settings to save correctly.
  3. Hello Martin, I realize this may not be the appropriate location for this topic. Should this be moved to a different discussion group?
  4. Hi Martin et. al., I have a couple more thoughts regarding how Ventlog tracks the area of a given station/record and the functionality of updating these. Updating an area in my opinion should only update the area for unique records. Such as if you update the area for a new record, it shouldn't retroactively go back to previous records and change that area as well. The area should be tied to the record and not the station. For salt mines for instance where you have "salt creep" of the entries, airway areas will always be changing and you may only want the area to apply to specific records. It seems that previously entered record's volume calculations do not change with updated areas. Which is maybe an accidental benefit such that previous volumes aren't changing each time areas are updated. However if an old record is viewed it does show the updated area and not the original area that was entered when that record was created. When updating an area (while creating a new record), why do you have to enter 3 heights and 3 widths? It seems this functionality should allow the user to determine how many of each is needed to properly define the airway being measured. Sometimes I only have one of each, or two of each or some combination of each. Average heights are for instance only calculated if and only if I type in 3 heights. If I only type in 2 heights, I have to make up a 3rd height (average the first 2) to get "correct height". There is also not a way to just type in an overide update area without updating the original station area. This is important because sometimes one measures irregular shaped airways and averaging heights and widths is not really appropriate, such as can be the case across the face of a longwall in coal mining. Thanks for the help and I look forward to the new version of Ventlog later this year.
  5. I would like to see an override option added to the airflow velocity record entry tool when entering new records such that more that just the last 2 entries are able to be averaged into the corrected velocity for select instances. There are several instances where this might be relevant. The most common I can see is when measuring an air velocity in a less than ideal location where the air velocity is moving faster on one side of the drift than the other. Sometimes these are in the only locations to take these readings (such as on a vent transfer level between raises). In these locations often I'll take 4 readings with consecutive airflow traverses going across the area in a different direction. What I would therefore be looking for is agreement (<10% error) between every other reading. If the 1st and 3rd measurements and the 2nd and 4th readings have good agreement then typically I would average all 4 readings and apply the correction factor to the average even if consecutive readings differed by greater than 10%.
  6. In the area calculator tool for entering field data for setting up a station, I would like to see another area calculation type for round entries such as for ventilation shafts or TBMs where you enter in a diameter and it calculates the area from that. I would also like to see a round area calculator for subtractions such as for ducts or pipes in the airway that I want to subtract from the station area. Right now I can just enter a custom overall area for these calculations, but it would be more convenient to have a similar option available in the area calculator.
  7. If I select an airway with a fixed quantity, edit the airway, go to the fan tab, and select the "Search Internet for fans Icon" (green colored fan icon next to the fan type) it lists a whole series of different fans which may work for the operating point of the fixed quantity. If I select any of the recommended options however and then click the "See Fan Information" button at the bottom of the window. It always takes me to the exact same screen "Model: 3600-VAX-2100" showing an operating point of ~0.5kPa at 4.8m3/s. I tried changing the fixed q setting and while the recommended fan list does change, the "see fan information" button always takes you to the 3600-VAX-2100 fan.
  8. I used the tool: Tools>Utilities>Scale Airway Coordinates to modify the size of a model since all the coordinates were too large by approximately factor of 3 (feet to meters conversion issue). After doing this I needed to move the model from the mine grid (+10,000' mine grid = 0' absolute): Tools>Utilities>Move Airways. I should be able to type in -10,000ft for the z coordinate to get the elevations to be 10,000ft lower in elevation, however the move doesn't seem to reset from the original scale of the model. I had to type -3048ft in the z coordinate move window to get it to translate by -10,000ft in the model. If the coordinates on a branch say it's at a certain elevation, when you move the branch it should be based on what the model says at that time and not based on a previously used scaling factor.
  9. When I select the Interpolate Points tool in Edit Fan Curve > Estimate > Interpolate Points I either get an unhandled exception error, or nothing happens when I select it. I also could not find any information regarding use of this tool in the User Guide. If this tool is to work how I think it should (such as in helping generate fan curves from measured operating points), I would likely use it frequently. Thanks
  10. Hello Martin, Sorry I never got back to you on this issue. I accidentally wasn't subscribed to this channel and so never received an email. Regarding the issue above, the problem occurs when using the stages function starting in early stages and expanding development to later stages. Typically, when doing a Feasibility (or similar) level study for a ventilation system we'll start with building a model for the last stage of the mine life and work back. This strategy works well with locking each stage working back and excluding dead-end branches on the fringes of the network. When building a staged model starting from the first stage and moving forward, excluded branches at the fringes of Stage 1 for instance, may be flow-through branches in Stage 2. This means that excluded branches for subsequent models may be located in the middle of airways that are connected. I understand that for if you have a long line of dead-end branches, it is definitely faster and more convenient to just exclude or close the last branch instead of have to worry about doing that for all branches down the line. Possibly a solution would be an error showing open ends adjacent to excluded branches? Not sure if that would be possible. Thanks, Nathan
  11. If working in a model and I exclude a branch that is connected to another branch that I do not label as excluded or close end, when I execute an airflow simulation, the non-excluded branch should be flagged with a "no entry" or "no exit warning. I do not get this error. The problem with this is that it hides potential errors within my model if I accidentally excluded the wrong branches. One work around is that I can simply delete the excluded branches so that it flags connected branches again, but this is not ideal if I decide I want those excluded branches back in the model.
×
×
  • Create New...