Well- thought out, Olin.

--Bob

On 1/9/09, Olin Lathrop <olin_piclist@embedinc.com> wrote:
> Dr Skip wrote:
>> Always consider the remote possibilities (and losing comm isn't so
>> remote), and ask what-if, then when you've got it covered, ask what
>> if that fails... ;)
>
> Exactly.  The real design flaw was not that the system was susceptible to
> lightning, but that there was no backup or independent monitoring.
>
> Stuff fails.  That will always happen.  Better designed systems may fail
> less, but anything can fail.  Given the cost of failure, both monetarily
> and
> morally, why the heck wasn't there at the very least some independent
> monitoring that would alarm if the temperature, pressure, or amonia
> concentration got past some level?  This would be completely battery
> operated and send a RF message to various alarm stations, or call on a cell
> phone or something.  What would have happened if the power went out?  What
> about a redundant system controlling every other fan and louver?  If one
> system failed, the other would try to compensate, and a alarm would go off
> in the mean time so that a human would show up and run things manually in
> the short term if needed.
>
>
> ********************************************************************
> Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products
> (978) 742-9014.  Gold level PIC consultants since 2000.
> --
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
>
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist