Don’t assume the obvious

Advert

New Replies

Report Bug

Help/FAQs

Don’t assume the obvious

This topic has 62 replies, 26 voices, and was last updated 2 August 2011 at 09:43 by Chris Trice.

Viewing 25 posts - 1 through 25 (of 63 total)

1 2 3 →

Author

Posts
30 July 2011 at 09:54 #72645
Eric Cox
Participant
@ericcox50497
Can I ask that when writing articles, the author doesn’t assume that every knows what they mean.

In an article in ME 4409 states that pistons are made out of PB. A quick check on t’internet for the unknowing states that PB is the chemical symbol for Lead.
Advert

30 July 2011 at 09:54 #21910
Eric Cox
Participant
@ericcox50497
30 July 2011 at 11:02 #72649
Bogstandard
Participant
@bogstandard
You are quite correct Eric to bring up such a question.

It is very difficult for new members to model engineering to pick up the slang used by more experienced people.

On the other hand, a lot of people are very good at doing the machining thing, but do fail when it comes to writing about it, and tend to slip into shorthand methods at times, purely because they write as they would talk about it to a friend. It is much easier to write text that way.

It is a very difficult subject to correct, and maybe it should be corrected in the proof reading stage, rather than to educate old hands not to use such abbreviations.

John
30 July 2011 at 11:26 #72651
michael howarth 1
Participant
@michaelhowarth1
Just to be bloody minded and pedantic, Pb is the symbol for lead, not PB. It does tend to emphasise Eric,s point though.
30 July 2011 at 11:36 #72653
Nicholas Farr
Participant
@nicholasfarr14254
Hi, Mick you bet me to it. But I do agree with John, however the chemical symbol for Phosphorus is P so PB for Phosphor Bronze could well be argued, maybe it sould have been writtin as P/B.

Regards Nick.
30 July 2011 at 12:01 #72655
michael howarth 1
Participant
@michaelhowarth1
As with any form of communication it is important to know one’s audience. The problem with our hobby is that the audience is probably infinitely variable in terms of knowledge and experience. In the past, many articles have left me baffled and bemused (not difficult) but things do seem to become clearer with the passage of time. I have often thought that for some articles, an explanatory list of expressions used should be inserted down the side of the page, as they do in Computeractive magazine. Not everyone will need it but many might.
30 July 2011 at 12:43 #72656
John Stevenson 1
Participant
@johnstevenson1
Surely it’s more work to list the acronym than saying what it is in the first place, basically it’s BI [ bone Idleness ]

John S.

Which is an acronym for John Stevenson
30 July 2011 at 13:07 #72657
JasonB
Moderator
@jasonb
“Surely it’s more work to list the acronym than saying what it is in the first place“

I don’t know about that, the same author uses the acronym PTFE several times in the same text, use that a few times in full and thats an extra paragraph of text. Maybe thats a good idea as ME pay by the page

J

Edited By JasonB on 30/07/2011 13:08:49
30 July 2011 at 19:20 #72660
Gordon W
Participant
@gordonw
This is a good old topic. Always start with the full name before using abbreviations. An acronym must be a pronounceable word, else it’s just a bunch of capital letters.
30 July 2011 at 22:26 #72669
DMB
Participant
@dmb
Bogs, you must be having a laugh – do you seriously believe that any one in the print trade ever proof – reads anything these days? It certainly doesn`t look like it, judging by all the errors/spelling mistakes and words badly split mid-syllable betyween lines. This is not a dig at DavidClark1 – ME/MEW are pretty good but “the daily rags” are the worst culprits.
30 July 2011 at 22:50 #72672
Jim Nolan
Participant
@jimnolan76764
I guess every article could be annotated and explain every nuance to the nth degree. The articles would probably be so long winded they would be too boring to read. But if what you’re after is spoon feeding I am sure that would work

Then again and no disrespect intended but I would find it hard to believe someone could contribute a 107 post to this forum and not know was PB was short for. Given the use of this acronym in the hobby is so common.
30 July 2011 at 23:10 #72673
Bogstandard
Participant
@bogstandard
John C,

I can’t comment on the daily rags because I haven’t read one for years, they lie worse than politicians do.

We gave up using them in the toilet (their only good use) when rolls of tissue came along, so we didn’t buy any more after that.

But I can explain why maybe the spelling is so bad, the copyists have most probably been brought up with modern teaching where they can’t even count how many fingers they have, never mind trying to spell something correctly.

I think Robin has the best idea, and was one of the methods I used to use when writing long prose that would contain numerous references to the same word.

John
31 July 2011 at 00:14 #72674
Steve Garnett
Participant
@stevegarnett62550
I agree with Bogs and Robin – I’ve been doing it that way for years. Also, the pedant in me says that for Phosphor Bronze you can’t really abbreviate it as P/B, because that would indicate that these initials might represent alternatives, like +/-. So PB or even P-B might be okay for this, but P/B wouldn’t be.

I remember looking at an exhibition where there were a load of press cuttings bemoaning the fact that standards of English education in this country were dropping fast – and these came from the 1930s. Since people have been moaning about it ever since, and probably were before as well, I can only conclude that the standard of English is dropping continually, and will continue to do so for ever. The only real differences are that at some periods, like the 1970s for instance, the drop rate accelerated somewhat. This was caused then by two not unrelated things; ‘new’ teaching methods, and the growing influx of America on our TV watching habits. There are now several generations of people who seem to think that the last letter in the alphabet is pronounced ‘zee’, whereas those of us who weren’t bought up on Sesame Street know that it’s ‘zed’…

Whilst we’re on the subject, I haven’t mentioned this before, but at the risk of embarrassing him slightly, I have noticed in the past that Bogstandard’s explanations for mechanical processes (madmodders, etc) are, IMHO, models of clarity along the lines which others should aspire to. Right number of words, sensible use of paragraphs and lists, and appropriate use of photographs. Magazine contributors would be well advised to study the form here, I’d say.
31 July 2011 at 01:56 #72677
Gone Away
Participant
@goneaway
Posted by Steve Garnett on 31/07/2011 00:14:18:

There are now several generations of people who seem to think that the last letter in the alphabet is pronounced ‘zee’, whereas those of us who weren’t bought up on Sesame Street know that it’s ‘zed’…

I’m in Canada (where we use ‘zed’) and talk to people in the US quite frequently. They are often very disappointed if I use the the ‘zee’ form (so that they might understand). They like and expect to hear ‘zed’ from up here.

Has anyone questioned why acronyms such as PB are used. Certainly, years ago, if such a term was used frequently in a document it would save the writer and typesetter some time, but in these days of word-processing, it’s trivial to write PB in the draft and then do a search-and-replace to change it to ‘phosphor-bronze’ and the same with many other acronyms.

Certainly, some long-winded phrases might get tedious if repeated in full each time but I don’t think that really applies to something like phosphor-bronze. If anything I think it would speed up reading for me.
31 July 2011 at 02:42 #72678
Chris Trice
Participant
@christrice43267
I got the PB ref as soon as I read it but of course the message would get across more easily for the confused if a little more information were provided, for example Ph Brz. Not necessarily good english writing practice but you’d have to be pretty dense not to get that.
31 July 2011 at 08:27 #72680
Clive Hartland
Participant
@clivehartland94829
Grammar! Who learnt it?

Phospho Bronze is correct and in the first instance of use in full, ‘ PB’ from then on.

Uninitiated engineers will just have to learn the basics as nowadays all young people expect instant satisfaction or boredom will set in! We cannot have that can we!

When they ask a question (If they can formulate a question from what they do not know, then it gets an answer here)

There are so many things in engineering that are common knowledge, learnt through experience and ability.

Intimate knowledge of different threads and forms. K factor for tapping metric threads and angles for cutting tools.

Even down to recognising and naming different types of wood are all essentials in the game.

Since the last Gobment changed Education so much and did away with all the hands on lessons like metal work and woodwork and let them do painting instead we have at least a generation of numbskulls in the ‘Hand to brain interface’ with no skills other than button pushing!

Yes, before you jump we had an Apprentice who had to be pushed all the way and could not remember what he was told from one day to the next. He did get a certificate and it felt as if I was doing it for him. He then immediately left to work on the Signalling equipment on the railway! All that wasted effort, never again.

Clive
31 July 2011 at 10:17 #72683
Andrew Evans
Participant
@andrewevans67134
I feel that modern standards of journalism are not being followed in ME and MEW. The editor should be employing a PI (private investigator) to hack the phone (telephone) of the model designer to investigate what PB means and then print a PB Means Phosphor Bronze Revelation story in the next issue. Model engineering needs to move with the times.

On a serious note I second the praise of Bogstandard’s descriptions – I am in the middle of making his paddleducks piston valve engine and the text and sketches are excellent, really clear and easy to follow – thanks very much for going to the trouble.
31 July 2011 at 10:23 #72684
Dusty
Participant
@dusty
I think the worst example is SS or S/S. Now is this silver steel or stainless steel. With experience it is possible to work out what the material is the designer intended, but for a beginer? I agree with a lot of the comments made but for this particular instance write it as st/ s or sil/s then there can be no mistake, or can there?
31 July 2011 at 12:18 #72687
Steve Garnett
Participant
@stevegarnett62550
Posted by Dusty on 31/07/2011 10:23:45:

I think the worst example is SS or S/S. Now is this silver steel or stainless steel. With experience it is possible to work out what the material is the designer intended, but for a beginer? I agree with a lot of the comments made but for this particular instance write it as st/ s or sil/s then there can be no mistake, or can there?

Oh no, not with / in it, please!

For a start, you could (once you’ve revealed what it means) call it AgS for the silvery stuff. And with stainless – well, what other material do you ever find that’s referred to as such except steel? Which makes the steel bit redundant, as far as I’m concerned; if you come across an exception, then you refer to it specifically. The other thing about stainless is that there are heaven knows how many variants of it with significant working differences, so really if this material is specified, you shouldn’t just refer to it as ‘stainless’ anyway.
31 July 2011 at 12:59 #72689
Dusty
Participant
@dusty
Good point Steve, but it brings us back to the start of the discussion, say what it is right from the start. It is a bit like the common saying use a bit of brass for the bearings, whilst the material is not brass at all but a form of bronze (brass will not make good bearings).
31 July 2011 at 13:51 #72690
Bogstandard
Participant
@bogstandard
I think the worst example is SS or S/S. Now is this silver steel or stainless steel

Or even Silver Solder. Very doubtful, but to a complete beginner, it could just be so.

If people would just use the full words, it only takes a few seconds extra typing, or as mentioned before, some sort of key before the abbreviation, everyone would be more enlightened and maybe start to follow suit.

I myself don’t have a massive command of the English language, and sometimes I just can’t think of the correct word. In that case I tend to put down a description like ‘sticky up bit’ or ‘the curly bit on the end’. Anything, as long as the reader can understand it in it’s correct context.

Another point to note, punctuation, a thing sadly lacking nowadays.

I use very little of the huge selection available that should be used, just commas, full stops, brackets and paragraphs, occasionally, a few others as well.

It doesn’t take much to put them in, but it does make prose a lot easier to understand.

John
31 July 2011 at 14:11 #72691
chris stephens
Participant
@chrisstephens63393
Hi Guys,

While we are on the subjects of “bronze”, as there are several different types, can the publishers of the various magazines actually say which one is required in any article?

This is not quite the case with “stainless” as, for most purposes, 303 is the usual one but clearly when any special property stainless requirements are needed they should be specified.

On the original topic, I am minded of a quote from Mr Spock , when Bones asked Spock, what it was like to be dead, and Spock would not tell him, saying “you have no frame of reference”. Any author should bear in mind the above, when they are writing for a mixed audience, give the reader a “frame of reference”.

Live long and prosper,

chriStephens
31 July 2011 at 14:51 #72693
Steambuff
Participant
@steambuff
Following on from Chris … I have seen “Steel” specified, a person with experience will know which to use … but the beginner would be totally lost … Stainless, Silver, Mild, BMS, etc

Please be specific

Dave
31 July 2011 at 18:47 #72695
Chris Trice
Participant
@christrice43267
The manner by which the information is offered is not at all important as long as the information is clearly communicated to the reader. As long as there’s no room for confusion, it doesn’t matter.
31 July 2011 at 19:14 #72697
Clive Hartland
Participant
@clivehartland94829
Drawings usually tell what metal or materiel is to be used when making something and if it is supplied then the supplier will send the right materiel!

Given that instructions or the written word describe the sequence of operations for the skilled and the novice.

Matching the material to the component is then up to the engineer skilled or not.

Apart from that the skill level of the person is the level that he will work at and if it is poor he will ask questions and that is what this Forum is for.

Some of the questions this last week are very basic and maybe the person asking should not at that point be doing what he is asking about until his skill rating is upped a bit!

Letting a novice loose on a machine of any sort without supervision is criminal and if an injury occurs then watch out.

Nomenclature can catch the most wary person out particularly with shortened names and ambigous instructions.

I would never expect a layman to go into a forge and make a Horse Shoe but after watching and helping the Blacksmith and over time could start making horse shoes.

Only little ones at first of course.

So, clear and unambigous instructions or descriptions are a must. Clear and helpful tutoring will then give experience over time and then an Engineer is born!

Clive
Author

Posts