Another large leak at Fukushima - Contractor UK Bulletin Board

Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

OwlHoot replied

4 October 2013, 14:08
Originally posted by suityou01 View Post

<jedi mind hand sweep />

Man I'm on fire today.

Quick, if your brain's on fire, ask a colleague to piss in your ear
Leave a comment:
mudskipper replied

4 October 2013, 12:53
Originally posted by MaryPoppins View Post

Perhaps. I'm not piddling on him, though. I will leave that with MS.

S'OK, the flames didn't catch. His pants were already damp.
Leave a comment:
MaryPoppins replied

4 October 2013, 12:06
Originally posted by doodab View Post

We can hope.

Perhaps. I'm not piddling on him, though. I will leave that with MS.
Leave a comment:
doodab replied

4 October 2013, 12:04
Originally posted by MaryPoppins View Post

Not sure posting this repeatedly is going to make it true.

We can hope.
Leave a comment:
doodab replied

4 October 2013, 12:03
Originally posted by EternalOptimist View Post

You end up doing half their job, and they never realise it

They often don't do the other half of it either...
Leave a comment:
suityou01 replied

4 October 2013, 11:46
Originally posted by MaryPoppins View Post

Not sure posting this repeatedly is going to make it true.

<jedi mind hand sweep />

Man I'm on fire today.
Leave a comment:
mudskipper replied

4 October 2013, 11:46
Originally posted by MaryPoppins View Post

Not sure posting this repeatedly is going to make it true.

No-one pissed on him yet? Is this a job for a she-wee?
Leave a comment:
aoxomoxoa replied

4 October 2013, 11:37
Originally posted by d000hg View Post

How would you possibly know the size of the container to comment on their error margin? You do realise that 100 gallons is less than one cubic metre of water, i.e. only twice what my bath holds? That's a drop in the ocean!

It is now, unfortunately!
Leave a comment:
MaryPoppins replied

4 October 2013, 11:24
Originally posted by suityou01 View Post

Man I'm on fire today.

Not sure posting this repeatedly is going to make it true.
Leave a comment:
suityou01 replied

4 October 2013, 11:16
Originally posted by d000hg View Post

Ah this is you in PM mode is it... say something stupid, wait for the technically able people to work out a proper solution and then claim it as your own.

Maybe a career in management awaits after all.

Dude, ease up. I'm new to this trolling lark, ok?
Leave a comment:
d000hg replied

4 October 2013, 11:09
Ah this is you in PM mode is it... say something stupid, wait for the technically able people to work out a proper solution and then claim it as your own.

Maybe a career in management awaits after all.
Leave a comment:
suityou01 replied

4 October 2013, 11:07
Originally posted by d000hg View Post

You were the one who said you'd calculate the volume using GCSE maths Suity, which assumes a perfect cylinder. Which it wouldn't ever be even if it was cylindrical. Then there's the fact it probably is more capsule shaped, and I doubt you know how to integrate the volume of a capsule intersected by a plane.

I prefer to calculate the actual answer, taking into account sloppy workmanship used in the construction, than use theoretical maths and then stand about flapping "but my sums are correct" while everyone is poisoned.

Good so we're agreed.

Man I'm on fire today.
Leave a comment:
d000hg replied

4 October 2013, 10:59
You were the one who said you'd calculate the volume using GCSE maths Suity, which assumes a perfect cylinder. Which it wouldn't ever be even if it was cylindrical. Then there's the fact it probably is more capsule shaped, and I doubt you know how to integrate the volume of a capsule intersected by a plane.

I prefer to calculate the actual answer, taking into account sloppy workmanship used in the construction, than use theoretical maths and then stand about flapping "but my sums are correct" while everyone is poisoned.
Leave a comment:
suityou01 replied

4 October 2013, 10:44
Originally posted by d000hg View Post

So there is, thanks.

So anyone care to guess the capacity of that tank? I'd guess it's about 10m tall and 8m diameter which gives a volume of ~500 cubic meters. So 100 gallons is .1% of that capacity.

.1% could easily be the error you get using SY's crude maths, treating it as a perfect cylinder.

I am a perfectionist. 0.1% is a catastrophic fail for a perfectionist. I am not trial and error at all, I am a measure twice and cut once kind of chap.

Doogie OTOH seems quite content with sloppy workmanship and is precisely the kind of person who should not be involved with anything of this nature.

HTH
Leave a comment:
d000hg replied

4 October 2013, 09:53
Originally posted by Freamon View Post

There's a pic of it on the bbc news article.

So there is, thanks.

So anyone care to guess the capacity of that tank? I'd guess it's about 10m tall and 8m diameter which gives a volume of ~500 cubic meters. So 100 gallons is .1% of that capacity.

.1% could easily be the error you get using SY's crude maths, treating it as a perfect cylinder.
Leave a comment: