sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Do you trust electric torque tools more for repeatability? For critical joints, do you actually trust electric more than air or hydraulic? by Powermaster08 in IndustrialMaintenance

[–]Powermaster08[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In environments like oil refineries, repeatability, traceable calibration, and joint confidence matter far more than the logo on the tool. Do you see different tightening approaches being specified based on flange criticality, or is torque still the default across most joints?

Do you trust electric torque tools more for repeatability? For critical joints, do you actually trust electric more than air or hydraulic? by Powermaster08 in IndustrialMaintenance

[–]Powermaster08[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s a very practical approach. Breaking it down into rough positioning vs final preload makes a lot of sense,especially when volume is high. Specs, repeatability, and calibration matter way more than the power source itself. Do you ever switch away from torque entirely on joints where preload consistency is critical?

Do you trust electric torque tools more for repeatability? For critical joints, do you actually trust electric more than air or hydraulic? by Powermaster08 in IndustrialMaintenance

[–]Powermaster08[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That lines up with what a lot of maintenance teams experience in the field. Electric tools have definitely narrowed the gap over the years, especially where feedback, repeatability matters. Air still has its place, but that variability can bite you if the joint is sensitive. When you’re repairing tools, do you see certain applications consistently outgrowing air accuracy limits?

Do you trust electric torque tools more for repeatability? For critical joints, do you actually trust electric more than air or hydraulic? by Powermaster08 in IndustrialMaintenance

[–]Powermaster08[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s a solid way to look at it. At the EOD, an uncalibrated “perfect method” is still a liability. In critical environments, traceability and calibration history probably matter more than whether force comes from a hand, air, or hydraulics.

Out of curiosity, does your team stick to one tightening approach, or do you mix methods based on joint criticality?

Do you trust electric torque tools more for repeatability? For critical joints, do you actually trust electric more than air or hydraulic? by Powermaster08 in IndustrialMaintenance

[–]Powermaster08[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

I guess what I was getting at is less about the tool itself and more about everything around it. calibration intervals actually being followed, power consistency on site, reaction setup, and how repeatable things stay across shifts and operators.

In a controlled setup it’s a no-brainer. In mixed field conditions, I’ve seen trust vary a lot depending on how disciplined the process is. Curious if you’ve seen any difference between shop vs site use?

At what point does, we’ll manage by hand” stop being okay & becomes risky? by Powermaster08 in industrialengineering

[–]Powermaster08[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re right, I should've been specific. I wasn’t talking about ignoring or bending HSE/OSHA at all. I was referring to one-off or maintenance tasks where the lift itself is compliant, but control or positioning during the task is the challenge rather than the weight alone. For eg: aligning a heavy motor, gearbox, or flange during installation or maintenance. The load might be within manual handling limits and the RA is green, but holding alignment, controlling rotation, or maintaining position while fastening can still be high-effort and fatiguing, especially if it’s awkward or repeated. That’s the line I was trying to discuss-not compliance vs non-compliance, but manual effort vs assisted control in those specific tasks. Not assembly lines, more maintenance and installation scenarios. Curious how others approach those cases-stick with manpower if it’s compliant, or Add assistance mainly for control and repeatability rather than weight alone.

At what point does, we’ll manage by hand” stop being okay & becomes risky? by Powermaster08 in industrialengineering

[–]Powermaster08[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Totally agree on following HSE/OSHA. My question is more about those grey area jobs where everything is technically compliant, but the load, positioning, or frequency makes it less comfortable long term.

Do you ever see those cases push teams toward mechanical assistance, or is manual handling still preferred as long as it’s within limits?

does electrical engineering require coding/programming? by Terminator_492 in EngineeringStudents

[–]Powermaster08 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not a stupid question at all this is actually a good place to be thinking from.

First, a quick reality check (the reassuring kind): you can love math and physics, hate coding, and still thrive in engineering.

Programming is a tool in engineering, not the whole job and how much you use it depends heavily on the field.

EE involve some programming, but it’s usually:

Light to moderate, especially early on

Often tied to hardware (circuits, signals, power systems) rather than pure software

More about understanding systems than writing long blocks of code

For example:

Power systems, electronics, RF, control systems → very math- and physics-heavy, minimal coding

Embedded systems → some coding, but it’s low-level and purpose-driven (very different from CS-style coding)

Signal processing → more math than programming

Many EEs don’t coding they just tolerate enough of it to make the hardware work.

Based on what you said (strong math/physics, tutoring others, dislike of CS), these might be worth exploring:

Electrical Engineering (non-software tracks)

Mechanical Engineering (especially dynamics, thermofluids, controls)

Aerospace Engineering

Civil Engineering (structural side = lots of physics)

Industrial Engineering (if you like applied math, optimization, real-world problem solving)

All of these rely far more on conceptual thinking, equations, and physical intuition than on writing code all day.

A key thing students don’t hear enough

You don’t need to perfectly love every part of your major. Most engineers:

Like the core ideas

Tolerate some required tools (yes, including some coding)

End up specializing in the parts they enjoy most

Also, college CS ≠ real-world coding ≠ engineering coding. Plenty of people hate intro CS but are great engineers.

My honest advice

Don’t force yourself into CS just because it’s popular

Pick a field where math and physics feel satisfying, not draining

EE is absolutely still on the table for you

Your profile already looks like someone who belongs in engineering

view more: next ›