What is the relationship between tolerance specifications and the standards they refer to?
Thread Content
A question that has been bothering me: why do \"tolerance specifications\" exist? Since various containers have their own standards for design, manufacturing, inspection, and other aspects, why is there still a need for \"container regulations\"? This is how I understand it: the “regulatory standards” argue that “standard norms” are not strict enough and could pose a serious threat to people’s lives and property. So does the “regulatory framework” appear in the role of an “imperial envoy” to strictly supervise the “local officials”? “If a local official is unqualified, they can be replaced; replacement leads to better outcomes. Why can’t some of the requirements in the tolerance specifications be included in the corresponding standards? Wouldn’t it be better to put things like design, manufacturing, and inspection into corresponding standards? Perhaps some people would say it’s unnecessary to treat certain non-standard devices in accordance with safety regulations. Waste of resources. Does that mean, in other words, that many containers that fall under standards such as 150 and are subject to tolerance specifications within the same category are unqualified? Without wasting resources, the standards can be made more detailed, such as “steel pressure vessels that pose a threat to people’s property safety,” “steel pressure vessels used in conjunction with humans,” “home-use shell-and-tube heat exchangers.” The term “Qincha” derives from “local officials,” yet it holds a higher status than those local officials; it doesn’t seem like the successor surpasses the predecessor, but rather like the guest overshadowing the host. “Both the imperial envoys and local officials are sons of the people. Why not do something that complements each other? As for whether the host and guest are well-acquainted, shall history speak? In my opinion, the regulatory framework should be set at the \"central\" level, while the corresponding standards should be established at the \"local\" level. The central authorities formulate the policies, and it is the \"local\" authorities who are responsible for implementing the specific measures. The policies should be sent to the local authorities**; of course, it’s also fine for us ordinary people to take a look, so as to supervise those local authorities**. But the problem is that we can’t understand the “policies”; therefore, the explanations for those 28 pages of policies took 130 pages to explain to the public. Perhaps it is due to the limited knowledge level of the common people, or perhaps it is because Chinese characters have a weak expressive capacity (perhaps weaker than English). I remember Lang Xianping giving a speech on the theory of elites; I personally think this theory is evil – the common people generally cannot understand what the elites say, yet they still have to live within the boundaries set by those elites. When dealing with lawsuits, one has to focus on the wording of the law; when it comes to manufacturing containers, one has to pay attention to the terms \"standards\", but also to the relevant regulatory specifications and their interpretations. By the time you’ve finished modifying it, a new version comes out – with new ideas of course. They change the nominal pressure unit or the grade of the material, forcing you to keep modifying it. There are fewer prototype pieces needed, and the boss is happy; finally, there’s no need to spend money on shaping steel plates into various shapes. At least stacking \"warranty certificates\" seems a bit more comfortable, right? Capacity regulations—Oh my Lord, please help us. We are new to this field and lack knowledge; we simply got confused while trying to apply the standards. Hence, we are reaching out here – there are many knowledgeable people on this forum. If you can tolerate this post, please feel free to offer your criticism. If you feel dizzy just like me, then post and say something. Wang Feng has a song titled something like “---I want to cry, but no tears come.” ； I tried to shout, but no sound came out ； I am willing to give up everything I have ； If there could be no tolerance specifications. ”
You’re a “realized man” – and as for why? I want to know that too, so I can only ask the \"Evaluation Committee,\" those so-called elites!
The last edit to this post was made by Wen Bing on 2010-4-8 at 07:58. To give an example using legal concepts: the Regulations on the Safety Supervision of Special Equipment is like the constitution, the fundamental law; the specific regulations are akin to the criminal law. Standards such as 150 and 151 are similar to laws like the criminal law and the General Principles of Civil Law. Standards like HG and JB are equivalent to specific laws such as the Marriage Law and traffic regulations. Local standards are like the regional regulations issued by provinces and cities, while corporate standards are akin to the rules and regulations established by enterprises. :Lol, there’s a lack of coordination between some standards, just like the inconsistency between demolition regulations and property law.
The original poster has not yet understood the relationship between terms such as regulations, standards, technical standards, laws, procedures, specifications, and ordinances. Generally speaking, standards or specifications are merely technical in nature; they exist simply to ensure that things are manufactured to meet the required technical criteria. Regulations, on the other hand, imply a layer of legal requirements; they are more about setting rules and standards. Generally speaking, they represent the most basic and minimum requirements, and all other standards or regulations must comply with them. For example, tolerance specifications take safety into account, among other things. The legal provisions emphasized in the regulations basically do not involve technology. Standards are usually industry-specific standards; once they are referenced in regulatory requirements, they become rules that must be complied with.
LS has basically outlined the logical flow; I’ll add a few more words. Previous standards were mandatory, such as GB150, but the international trend is that both standards and specifications are advisory in nature; that is, you can manufacture products in accordance with a certain standard, but you have to pay royalties for that standard. This is why top-tier companies develop their own standards. Laws and regulations, such as the ‘Regulations’ and ‘Standards’, are mandatory requirements established for public safety or societal needs; they are not subject to copyright, but all professionals in the relevant field must comply with them without exception. If laws and regulations adopt standard provisions in a certain field due to technical constraints, then such referenced content becomes part of the laws and regulations and is mandatory; however, the standards in question lose their patent status by becoming mandatory requirements. Since laws and regulations are mandatory, every modification must go through the processes of public announcement, discussion, revision, and finalization. Especially after joining the WTO, World Trade Organization scrutiny is also required to determine whether there are any administrative barriers. However, technological progress is rapid, and legal regulations often fail to keep up with technical requirements; therefore, referencing standards is the best option. The wording of legal regulations may remain unchanged, but the actual requirements might have changed as a result of revisions to the standards. If one examines the relevant regulations carefully, it will be noticed that some application standards are dated while others are not. Those interested can discuss this further.
It should be understood that the legal hierarchy consists of five levels, in order from highest to lowest: laws, regulations, departmental rules, safety technical specifications, and standards. The \"Regulations on the Safety Supervision of Special Equipment\" are regulations, the \"Container Regulations\" are safety technical specifications, while 150 represents a standard.
I won’t say much else; the people up above are indeed industry elites. They should give more support to the container version and help guide and assist other users.
I recently took a look at the draft of the new version 150, and I suddenly felt that 150 is being forced by regulatory requirements. Many more standards are set to have new versions released, and changes to steel grades will be another major innovation. GB 24510-2009: 9%Ni steel plates for low-temperature pressure vessels. What are these steel plates used for in this standard?
I think some domestic standards could be similar to ASME – forming a systematic set of standards that cover everything from materials to design to manufacturing inspections. These standards should be revised annually based on new materials and technologies, so that individual standards don’t remain unchanged while the referenced standards and material grades have been updated. Additionally, things like letter codes, units, pressure ranges, and labeling methods should also be standardized, rather than remaining in a chaotic state. Often, I don’t know what to do……
Eight years after the issuance of the \"1990 Edition of Pressure Vessel Regulations\" on May 9, 1990, GB150 was revised in 1998. Thus, the “1999 version of the electrical code” was created. During this period, which comes first: the chicken or the egg? In other words, eggs are not laid by chickens, and chickens are not hatched from eggs either! The awkward relationship between GB150 and the \"tolerance standards\" persists to this day. 2008 was an unforgettable year – the people were making progress and thriving. “The 2009 version of the safety regulations has also kept up with the times; after 10 years of isolation, its anxious expression was evident as soon as it appeared (8 corrections, not including explanations). “What is the difference between the \"Regulations on Safety Technical Inspection of Fixed Pressure Vessels\" and the \"Safety Technical Specifications for Fixed Pressure Vessels\"? “Does the \"Regulations on Safety Technical Inspection of Fixed Pressure Vessels\" emphasize inspection work? Why supervise, what to supervise, how to supervise, and who will supervise? The supervision office aims to reduce serious accidents and protect people’s property safety. How can something made in accordance with technical standards result in a catastrophic accident? How could it pose a threat to the lives and property of people? Is it the standard that is unreasonable, or is the enforcement of the standard inadequate? It should be the implementation of standards that is monitored, right? Monitoring in accordance with technical standards covers too wide a range; monitoring within the boundaries defined by the tolerance specifications can save a lot of hassle. Such surveillance? If not through supervision, then how can it be supervised? Oversight activities have severely interfered with technical standards.