What is the difference between the two functions of a pressure gauge, “monitoring” and “observation”?
Thread Content
Currently, safety requirements in the hazardous chemicals industry are extremely stringent; some outdated regulations are being imposed as mandatory standards. For example, regarding pressure gauges used on-site, the 1988 Regulations on the Classification and Management of Measuring Instruments in the Chemical Industry apply. The calibration intervals for pressure gauges classified as Category C are also specified in two ways: those used for monitoring need to be calibrated every 1 to 2 years, while those used for surveillance must be replaced immediately in case of a failure. So the question arises: what is “monitoring” and what is “surveillance”? For pressure cookers, these two terms seem to mean the same thing!
Can it be understood in this way that testing refers to instruments that are used indirectly under human control, just as using a thermometer to measure body temperature is considered testing? Monitoring involves seeing indicator data in real time on online instruments, such as pressure gauges and thermometers. As for the standards and specifications, they must be followed unless it is stated that the former are invalid. (My personal understanding, for reference only)
A measuring instrument is a component that directly measures data, while a monitoring instrument is one that has converted the data into an output; examples include DCS and PLC
The above is my personal understanding; as for the standards, as long as they haven’t been abolished, they must be followed.
That’s how I understand it: monitoring means checking from time to time; for example, a parent watches their child do homework and then goes over after a while to see if the child is distracted； Monitoring means keeping an eye on things 24/7 without any gaps; you hold a broom in your hand, and if someone gets distracted, you hit them with the broom.
In surveillance and detection, the key lies in the difference between the words “see” and “measure”. Obviously, “monitoring” is a bit more important than “surveillance”.
Rules are rules; as for how to implement them and how to define them, it depends on your company – just ensure proper explanation is provided. Taken literally, it is possible to keep an internal ledger of the pressure gauges in the enterprise, noting which ones are used for testing and which ones for monitoring. The inspectors come to examine your management system; they won’t focus on just one or two instruments.
Here are some personal opinions; feedback is welcome: 1. This issue can be analyzed from the perspective of the outcomes: Monitoring requires calibration every 1–2 years, while surveillance does not require any calibration – a replacement is needed only when it becomes faulty. It can therefore be concluded that monitoring is more important than surveillance; hence, it is required to conduct calibrations within a specified time frame, while pressure gauges used for surveillance do not require calibration, and if they prove to be inaccurate, they should be replaced immediately. 2. How to distinguish between the concepts of “monitoring” and “surveillance”: From the perspective of detection, ‘measuring’ refers to taking measurements, and measurement entails providing results with a certain level of accuracy; it requires precision. Therefore, such pressure points should require regular observation and recording, such as the pressures that need to be checked during inspections. Vision does not belong to the concept of accuracy in measurement; it can be regarded as a simple ‘look’, serving only as a reference. It is sufficient to take a look when needed, and recording is generally not required during routine inspections.
A pressure gauge – it doesn’t participate in any automated control processes, and no one watches it on a daily basis. What’s the point of monitoring just a few seedlings? Monitoring something like a hammer or a dog hanging there...... The person who writes these standards really doesn’t even have a good command of the Chinese language; their logical thinking is poor, and their word choice is chaotic......
Old thing, there aren’t many good things about it .............. ....
A broken pressure gauge, right? I remember that I would take a look at it; when I can’t remember, it’s just a piece of trash. It can’t be considered a standard measuring instrument either – what’s the use of it even if it’s accurate to 1% or 2%? Who would dare to adjust the pressure transformer based on the readings of a pressure gauge? Whoever dares, step forward – watch me spit old phlegm all over them. Then I’ll blow my nose and smear it on their faces. {:2_43:}. {:2_32:} . {:2_36:} On truly important occasions, three pressure transducers are used with a two-out-of-three voting system, and the reading on the pressure gauge is nothing more than dust on some plants; it serves no purpose other than to dirty your clothes and your eyes.