“How to translate “instrument point”?

If it is for DCS, an I/O point can be used

Give it a try: the instrument configuration is determined by the equipment manufacturers, and reconfirmation for each control point should be carried out after the equipment order is placed.

Based on the context, the instrument points referred to here are the control points, that is, the number of I/O points.

Instrument point: (1) control point, (2) I/O Point, (3) instrument point – which one is the best?

It depends on what context your sentence is in. If it is about the control loop, then what needs to be counted is the number of control points. If it is about DCS cabinets, then it refers to the number of I/O points. But what I see the most is the number of I/O points.

Used for annotations in the P&ID diagram of the process system.

In a P&I diagram, instrument points should refer to the location and quantity of instruments, including field instruments and control instruments. Before detailed design, only the number of instrument points can be determined; the specific locations and types of instruments are shown in the detailed design drawings.

If it is used for annotations in the P&ID diagram of a process system, it refers to the corresponding installation location of the instrument on the equipment.

What is meant here is that the type of instruments and the measurement points related to the equipment can only be determined after the equipment has been ordered, as different equipment suppliers have varying requirements regarding the instrumentation setup. I suggest translating it as follows: The equipment instruments will be supplied by the equipment vendors, and the instrument configuration should be reconfirmed after the equipment ordering is completed.

Equipment-related instruments should be included in the scope of supply provided by the equipment supplier, right?

“The instruments are configured uniformly by the equipment manufacturer, and the instrument locations will be confirmed again after the equipment is ordered. ” I understand once again that the meaning of this statement is: the instruments are included within the scope of supply provided by the equipment manufacturer; the number of instruments is determined by the control team, and once the number of instruments and their models have been decided, confirmation is sought again from the general contractor’s team.

If there is no definite answer for a word that is not understood, and it isn’t special jargon, one can consider translating it literally. Don’t think I’m being lazy – those who are familiar with the subject will understand it roughly :loveliness:. A tentative translation for your reference: The instruments are configured uniformly by the equipment manufacturer; the instrument locations will be confirmed again after the equipment is ordered. The instruments shall be fully provided by the equipment supplier, with the critical instrumentation points to be reconfirmed after the equipment order is placed.

The original poster only wanted to ask how to translate “instrument point,” but ended up getting a translation of the whole sentence. The key is the understanding of the \"instrumentation point\"; it’s impossible to translate it with just that one sentence without any context. There are many experts on the forum, and even more enthusiastic people. :handshake Last edited by echommm on 2008-1-29 19:27 ]

Echo mentioned that the original poster’s question concerned only a part of the sentence, yet a translation of the entire sentence was provided. I would like to use this topic to discuss two related issues with everyone: First, I believe this is a direction that deserves to be guided in the technical exchanges within this section. Whether the type of topic is a request for help, communication, sharing, or something else, it merely indicates a relative category; as people participate, the categories of topics can change at any time. Asking for help can turn into a discussion, and a discussion can turn into sharing. Because for the same topic, different people experience different difficulties; when participants raise various questions or discussion points based on the topic presented by the original poster, or share their own work experience, transformation takes place. Any topic that involves technical aspects is worth encouraging and guiding in terms of transformation. Secondly, let me clarify: I provided the translation of the entire sentence in #2 not for this purpose. Because the \"instrument points\" that the original poster suggested for discussion are redundant with the word \"instruments\" at the beginning of the sentence; this is normal in Chinese expression, but in English, since \"instruments\" has already been mentioned earlier, it would be better to use \"control points\" rather than \"instrument points\" (I didn’t consider using I/O points). Everyone is welcome to speak.

My understanding: The original text means that “the equipment supply information should include the number of input and output (I/O) points for the instruments and control systems connected to the DCS or SIS.” The common (I/O) types are: analog input (AI), digital input (DI), analog output (AO), digital output (DO), digital output with Relays (DOR), and digital input with Relays (DIR). The list of (I/O) points is generally as follows. If a translation is needed, please refer to Susan’s translation. List of I/O points for DCS and SIS: AI, AIR, AOR, DI, DO, DIR, DOR, PI. Total for DCS and SIS. By the way: There might be some misunderstanding regarding what I meant in my previous remarks; what I wanted to say was that it would be ideal if assistance (or discussions) could be provided in English along with detailed professional explanations. But I think many professionals don’t often visit the interpretation club forum. Therefore, from a problem-solving perspective, if one encounters uncertainties regarding the original text (such as Chinese) during translation, it might be more efficient to first seek help on other relevant professional forums to clarify its exact meaning, and only then come here to ask for help or discuss how to express it in English. This also helps avoid unnecessary detours. By the way, \"I only wanted a single green leaf, but you gave me an entire spring.\" It is the enthusiastic participation of so many netizens that keeps the Interpretation Club forum thriving, and this is perhaps one of its unique charms. :P :P :P Last edited by echommm on 2008-1-31 14:02 ]

I agree with Version K’s initiative that \"any topic transformation involving technical elements is worth encouraging and guiding.\" This is indeed the case in reality. From seeking help, to discussing, to sharing experiences, to drawing broader conclusions, it is highly beneficial for everyone to enhance their understanding of the topic, accumulate knowledge, and improve their awareness. An understanding of professional knowledge is the foundation for good translation; therefore, the Interpretation Club not only discusses translation but also should support and encourage discussions on related professional knowledge. Version K also discussed some of the adjustments we made during the translation process. However, we should adopt a cautious attitude when translating professional materials. For example, instrument points and control points have a significant difference in meaning, and they cannot be used interchangeably. Therefore, understanding the meaning of the original text is a prerequisite for a correct translation. In the discussion on this topic, figuring out the original intention of the topic became the focus of everyone’s efforts. This has also led to different interpretations and translations. Therefore, it is recommended that the original poster provide as comprehensive context as possible, or use as precise a descriptive language as possible, as this will help in resolving the issue. Echommm’s suggestion is good. I hope everyone can gain inspiration and improvement through participating in the discussions!

point is used here in a somewhat awkward way； Too much emphasis has been placed on hardware. In the initial design phase for control systems, it is necessary to determine the system scale, and there are also limits on the number of software components that can be developed or used ； For control systems, the number of variables is a common unit; tags or tagcount can be used to represent it.

What is AIR AOR?