Taking rockwell classes. Need something explained

[locotumbler]

When I calculate a "rate" it is the amount of time it took to fill a certain amount of something. Please look at this image and explain to me how adding two values together is a "rate"

 

[Ken Roach]

You are absolutely correct that any "rate" calculation must involve time.

What you're seeing is an error in the question generator data set or algorithm, whatever generated the question element "calculate a fill rate".

 

[drbitboy]

If you think it's a poorly formed question, then you won't get an argument here. That said,

When I calculate a "rate" it is the amount of time it took to fill a certain amount of something

That is the reciprocal of "rate"

Rate is quantity per time, not time per quantity.

So the units are

quantity**1 time**-1
​

Where quantity could be [number of items produced], or [kg (weight) of product], or [m**3 (volume) of product].

I think the example they are giving calculates the number of items produced in the DIVide:

(Total_weight / time*) divided by (weight / load)
​

yields (loads / time)

* The time period is implied in that is the duration over which the [Total_Weight] value is accumulated.
...

 

[Ken Roach]

Story time !

Don't get mad about it or conclude that it's evidence of incompetence. Every single automated curriculum generation system I have ever seen has these anomalies, including the ones Rockwell uses.

You do have my permission to get mad about it or conclude that it is evidence of incompetence if it's not removed from your grading or taken seriously by your instructor and used as an opportunity to briefly discuss "rate" versus "percentage" or "limit".

15 or so years ago when RA was experimenting with computerized training courseware they asked me to do the industrial networking module and give them feedback.

I failed the module on industrial networking. You guys have met me, right ?

Because it only generated grades, not individual results, I did it a few more times and found where the answer keys were simply wrong, or the questions it composed included errors or non-sequiturs. At least 30% of the correct answers were marked wrong, evidence of a badly corrupted database or just a garbage-in/garbage-out subject matter set.

I detailed those and fed them back to the training manager, including my opinion that this product wasn't ready for release and I would be happy to work with the subject matter editors if they needed.

A week later was a big annual meeting, and the training manager proudly announced that the online computerized training system was going live right away.

I objected. "But it was still in beta testing last week. I did the industrial networking module and it generated a failing score."

Again, he's known me for a decade. Instead of "we're definitely going to continue to do development and internal testing", he said:

"Well, Ken, maybe you just need more training."

 

[andrewwei]

When I calculate a "rate" it is the amount of time it took to fill a certain amount of something. Please look at this image and explain to me how adding two values together is a "rate"

FYI. When you use DIV, the tag value at B should be >0, You cannot divide by 0. Some processor just crash. I've seen it in the real world. So have a logic to make sure the tag at B is always not equal to 0. You should know how to do that.

 

[Engineerj22]

Older ABs will definitely crash. Seen it done. Accidentally done it. Oops. It's one of those mistakes you learn to not do quickly

 

[Operaghost]

These just kill me I swear. Like Ken, I was involved in several attempts at these online training programs with Rockwell. And Ken, I am DYING to know who that training manager was. You gotta PM me with that. As someone that worked with Ken for several years, even way back then, we all knew Ken's technical prowess.

As an instructor at the time, I had to beg to get involved in some of this stuff and I was always appalled at how bad the questions were, and how wrong the answers frequently were. Vague wording of the questions often meant multiple answers (or even no answers) could be considered as correct. I don't know who wrote those questions, but it definitely wasn't our instructor community. Once all the instructors were outsourced to a contractor (back in 2007), the instructors were treated as outsiders by the higher ups. They did not use us for these types of things because they had to pay our company for our time.

Later on they did finally contract one of our instructors to write questions and answers. He frequently would ask me to review what he had written. It was harder than I thought to write them. But I think they only used those as pre/post course assessments. I don't think they made it to any online courses.

It's funny looking at the logic that the OP posted. That is straight from a course I used to teach and this was from a Math (or Maths for those so inclined) lesson. For the Divide instruction the Source A and Source B values were static values that the student had to type in. They would type in something like 20,000 for the Weight_Total and then 4,000 for the Weight_Load. Then apparently they were supposed to be amazed that the Number_of_Loads value would calculate the correct result. They could then type in other Weight_Total values and see the destination update. That was just embarrassing. Students would try to figure out how it tied in to the work they had been doing all week, and it didn't tie in at all.

As for the divide by zero, for that example they never divided by zero. There was a value there. Just a very poorly chosen screen capture. Which again goes to show that the people putting this together don't know what they are doing. Everyone here would have caught that.

OG

 

[TheWaterboy]

A week later was a big annual meeting, and the training manager proudly announced that the online computerized training system was going live right away.

Replace the underlined part with "AB website" and I had the same conversation with GUI team at least twice as part of a panel... with the same response ... and its still pretty terrible.

 

[Operaghost]

I've found that these occasions were they solicit your feedback are usually just them explaining what they are going to do regardless of the comments.

OG

 

[TheWaterboy]

That fits - working on the new forum design started well enough but was eventually similar as well. I don't know why they bother asking.

 

[Steve Bailey]

I've found that these occasions were they solicit your feedback are usually just them explaining what they are going to do regardless of the comments.

That has been my experience as well. They typically schedule sessions like that so late in the development process that there's too much inertia behind the current design to permit significant changes.

 

[andrewwei]

Older ABs will definitely crash. Seen it done. Accidentally done it. Oops. It's one of those mistakes you learn to not do quickly

Yeah, I seen it done by a guy. He updated HMI, allow operator to put in values. The crashed stopped production at least for 15 minutes, the production manager went nuts, but the guy's father was plant manager. LOL.

 

[Phil Buchanan]

ken, maybe you just need more training."

ROTFL now that's funny.

 

[locotumbler]

I definitely got a chuckle reading some of these response. Thank you for letting me know it's not just me. I'm sure none of you will be shocked by the astonishing length of the response I got when pointing out that error and a couple other issues where I cannot complete a section of module because I can't move to the last slide after the video place.


" Hello Levi,

Thank you for your input. We will look into both of these issues when the course is updated.





Thanks,
*name redacted as I don't want to flag the robot who auto generated this response*

I did reply back, because why not when i'm already on the petty squad, "how often are they actually updated?" =)

 

[saultgeorge]

I've found that these occasions were they solicit your feedback are usually just them explaining what they are going to do regardless of the comments.

OG

Man, +1 on that. That also bleeds into what the plant folks or OEM folks do when they want input on a new server system that continuously crashes like the one at my last job. They just drive on, head down, without regard to the user feedback they just requested. Hmmm.